元話語的分類

2元話語的分類迄今為止，元話語已有系(迄今為止，元話語已有系(參,1989;Crismoreet幾種不同的分類體Williams,1981;Lautamatti,1978;Vande,1985;Crismore:Kopple(1985)、Crismoreal:Kopple(1985)、Crismoreetal(1993)以及Hyland(2004)。VandeKopple(1985)基于Lautamatti和Williams對(duì)元話語的研究，概括了7種元話語并將其分為語篇元話語和人際元話語兩大類型。其中，語篇元話語指的是在語篇中連接語篇各層次的主要成分，組詞成篇的詞和短語。人際元話語主要是體現(xiàn)作者和讀者關(guān)系的詞和短語，見表1。表1VandeKopple的元話語分類CategoryFunctionExamplesTextualmetadiscourseTextconnectivesShowhowpartsofatextareconnectedtooneanothersequencers(first,next),reminders(asImentionedinChapter2),topicalizers(withregardto)CodeglossesHelpreadersgraspthewriter?sintendedmeaningmean,suchasValiditymarkersExpressthewriter?scommitmenttoastatementhedges(perhaps,might),emphatics(undoubtedly),attributors(accordingto)NarratorsInformreadersofthesourceofinformationaccordingtoSmith,InterpersonalmetadiscourseIllocutionmarkersMakethediscourseactexplicitatcertainpointtoconclude,Ihypothesize,tosumup,wepredictAttitudemarkersExpressthewriter?sattitudesunfortunately,interestingly,IwishthatCommentariesaddressreadersdirectly,drawingthemintoanimplicitdialogueyouwillcertainlyagreethat,youmightwanttoreadthethirdchapterfirst不難看出,VandeKopple的分類存在問題,如，同樣是"accordingto"，既屬于歸屬語又屬于敘說詞。Oneprobleminidentifyingmetadiscourseisitsmultifunctionality,thatis,thefunctionsarenotperformedinisolationandonemetadiscoursemayachieveseveralpurposessimultaneously.Therefore,inordertosolvethisproblem,Crismore,Markkanen,andSteffensen(1993)intheirclassificationtrytouseafunctionalanalysis:metadiscourseisdefinedaccordingtoitsprimaryfunctioninthecontext.Crismoreetal(1993)在VandeKopple(1985)的分類基礎(chǔ)上，也將元話語分為兩大類：語篇元話語和人際元話語。Crismoreetal的分類中去掉了敘說詞一項(xiàng)，將邏輯連接詞、序列詞、提醒詞和主題詞概括為語篇標(biāo)記語，同時(shí)將語碼注釋詞和施事標(biāo)記詞納入解釋標(biāo)記語。語篇標(biāo)記語和解釋標(biāo)記語這一全新分法說明了元話語的語篇功能：語篇標(biāo)記語幫助組織語篇，解釋標(biāo)記語幫助讀者解釋和更好地理解作者的意圖及寫作策略。Forinterpersonalmetadiscourse,validitymarkers,whichisasubcategoryoftextualmetadiscourse,isnowundertheclassificationofinterpersonalmetadiscourseandthreeseparatesubcategories---hedges,certaintymarkers,andattributorsareincluded.Attributorsarecombinedwithnarratorsbecausebothareusedtoinformthereadersofthesourceofideas.見表2不過，Crismoreetal的這一分法也存在一些問題，如，將語篇元話語分為語篇標(biāo)記語和解釋標(biāo)記語的依據(jù)不明確，另外，用來指稱語篇前部分所提內(nèi)容的提醒詞屬于語篇標(biāo)記語，而用于指稱語篇后部分所提內(nèi)容的宣告詞卻又屬于解釋標(biāo)記語，這似乎有點(diǎn)牽強(qiáng)附會(huì)。CategoryFunctionExamplesTextualmetadiscourseTextualMarkersLogicalConnectiveswenotedearlierHelpshowconnectionsbetweenideasand,but,thereforeSequencersHelpshowsequenceofmaterialfirst,secondRemindersRefertoearliertextmaterialAswesawinChapter1TopicalizersIndicatetopicshiftoranewtopicWell;nowIwilldiscuss,inregardtoInterpretiveMarkersCodeGlossesExplaintextmaterialWhatImeanis,thatis,forexampleIllocutionMarkersNametheactperformedToconclude;insum;IpredictAnnouncementsAnnouncingupcomingmaterialInthenextsectionInterpersonalmetadiscourseHedgesShowlackofcommitmenttothetruth-valueofpropositionmay,mightCertaintyMarkersShowfullcommitmenttoIabsolutelysureIknow

thetruth-valueofpropositionAttributorsRefertoauthoritiesusedforpersuasiveforceEinsteinclaimedthatAttitudeMarkersExpresswriter?saffectivevaluesIagree,unfortunatelyCommentaryBuildwriter-readerrelationshipsMyfriend,youmaynotagreethatHyland(2004)認(rèn)為，將元話語分為語篇元話語和人際元話語不太確切，應(yīng)將元話語分為指引讀者讀完整個(gè)語篇的交互式元話語和幫助讀者掌握論點(diǎn)的互動(dòng)式元話。其中，交互式元話語涉及作者對(duì)讀者的意識(shí)，以及作者對(duì)讀者的知識(shí)、興趣、修辭期望和語篇處理能力的調(diào)解它反映了作者組織語篇的方法，在一定程度上體現(xiàn)出作者在創(chuàng)作語篇的過程中考慮到了讀者的需求。而互動(dòng)式元話語是作者通過入侵語篇和對(duì)語篇信息加以評(píng)論來引領(lǐng)互動(dòng)展開交際的方法，它在一定程度上體現(xiàn)了語篇是由作者和讀者一起構(gòu)建的。關(guān)于Hyland的分類模式，本文將會(huì)在theoreticalbasis里詳細(xì)解釋。CategoryFunctionExamplesInteractivemetadiscourseHelptoguidethereaderthroughthetextTransitionsexpressrelationsbetweenmainclauseinaddition;but;thus;andFramemarkersrefertodiscourseacts,sequencesorstagesfinally;toconclude;mypurposeisEndophoricmarkersrefertoinformationinotherpartsofthetextnotedabove;seeFig;insection2EvidentialsrefertoinformationinotherpartsofthetextaccordingtoX;ZstatesCodeglosseselaboratepropositionalmeaningsnamely;e.g.;suchas;inotherwordsInteractionalmetadiscourseInvolvethereaderinthetextHedgeswithholdcommitmentandopendialoguemight;perhaps;possible;aboutBoostersemphasizecertaintyorclosedialogueinfact;definitely;itisclearthatAttitudemarkersexpresswriter?sattitudetopropositionunfortunately;Iagree;surprisinglySelfmentionsexplicitreferencetoauthor(s)I;we;my;me;ourEngagementmarkersexplicitlybuildrelationshipwithreaderconsider;note;youcanseethatClass2metadiscourseRecognizingthedifferencesinthenatureandfunctionofmetadiscourse,thediscourseofthedollarclassificationarealsodifferent.Todate,thereareseveraldifferentmetadiscourseclassificationsystem(seeWilliams,1981;Lautamatti,1978;Vande,1985;Crismore,1989;Crismoreetal,1993;Hyland,1998,2005).XuJiujiu(2006)summarizefindingsanddiscusstheclassificationofmetadiscoursemainlyinvocabularyclasses.Fromthecurrentresearchpointofview,therearethreemainpointsoflaw:chapterKopple(1988)proposedandinterpersonalmetadiscourse,HylandandTse(2004)proposedaguidedandinteractivemetadiscourse,andIfantidou(2005)proposedinternaldiscourseandExternalchaptermetadiscourse.ThefirstclassificationismadeVande(1985)made,heputmetadiscoursedividedintotwocategories:Textmetadiscoursemeansconnectingthemaincomponentofalllevelsofdiscourseinchapters,achapterofthewordofwordsandphrases,includingTextConnective(textconnectives),languagecodeannotationwords(codeglosses),validitySigns(validitymarkers),thenarrator(narrator).Interpersonalmetadiscoursemainlyreflectedwordsandphrasesrelationshipauthorsandreaders,includingillocutionaryforcemarkedwords(illocutionmarkers),attitudeidentifieswords(attitudemarkers)andauthor-readercommunicationidentifieswords(commentaries).Hyland(2005)認(rèn)為元話語是用來協(xié)商語篇互動(dòng)意義的自我反省(reflexive)表達(dá)形式，有助于表現(xiàn)作者對(duì)讀者的意識(shí)，強(qiáng)調(diào)社交成員的交際。因此,不管是篇章元話語還是人際元話語都具有評(píng)價(jià)、態(tài)度和參與等人際意義。在此基礎(chǔ)上，他把元話語分為交際和互動(dòng)兩大類。交際類元話語有助于引導(dǎo)讀者，注重組織話語的方式，包括過渡標(biāo)記(transitionmarkers)、框架標(biāo)記(framemarkers)、回指標(biāo)記(endophoricmarkers)、言據(jù)標(biāo)記(evidentials)、語碼注釋語(codeglosses)?；?dòng)類元話語包括模糊語(hedges)、增強(qiáng)語(boosters)、態(tài)度標(biāo)t己(attitudemarkers)、自稱語(selfmention)和介入標(biāo)t己(engagementmarkers)。內(nèi)部外部篇章元話語的分類是由Ifantidou(2005)提出的。內(nèi)部篇章元話語是指同一個(gè)篇章中的內(nèi)部不同部分之間的一種關(guān)系；外部篇章元話語指的是不同的篇章、不同的作者，或同一作者不同時(shí)期的篇章的所指關(guān)系。他對(duì)每一類都列舉了一些具體的語言表達(dá)手段，但同時(shí)指出，所列語言表達(dá)式并不是窮盡的。此外，以上關(guān)于元話語的研究中，研究者大多依照Halliday語言功能理論，把元話語劃分為“篇章元話語”和"人際元話語”兩大范疇(VandeKopple1985;Crismore,etal.1993)。Adel(2006:18)突破了以Halliday功能理論為基礎(chǔ)的元話語研究范式，以Jakobson(1998)的語言功能理論為依據(jù)，提出了“反身元話語”的概念。她從Jakobson提出的六種語言功能中提取了元語言、表達(dá)和指示這三種功能來論述元話語現(xiàn)象。這三個(gè)功能的焦點(diǎn)分別是篇章/語碼、作者和讀者。Hyland(2005)consideredmetadiscourseinteractivediscourseisusedtonegotiatethemeaningofself-reflection(reflexive)formsofexpression,theauthorofconsciousnesscontributetotheperformanceofthereaders,emphasizingthecommunicativesocialmembers.Therefore,whetherorinterpersonaldiscoursemetadiscoursemetadiscoursehaveevaluatedattitudesandparticipationinterpersonalsignificance.Onthisbasis,hemetadiscoursedividedintotwomajorcategoriesofcommunicationandinteraction.Communicationclassmetadiscoursehelpguidereaderstopayattentiontotheorganizationofdiscourse,includingthetransitiontag(transitionmarkers),theframemarker(framemarkers),backtotheindexrecord(endophoricmarkers),Evidentialitymark(evidentials),code-languagecomments(codeglosses).Interactiveclassmetadiscourseincludeblurredlanguage(hedges),enhancesthelanguage(boosters),attitudesmark(attitudemarkers),claiminglanguage(selfmention)andinterventionalmark(engagementmarkers).Internal\externalchaptermetadiscourseclassificationbyIfantidou(2005)raised.Internalchaptermetadiscoursereferstoarelationshipbetweenthedifferentpartsofthesamechapterbetweeninternal;externalchaptermetadiscourserefertodifferentchapters,relationswithinthemeaningofdifferentauthors,oratdifferenttimesinthesamechapterauthor.Foreachclass,helistedsomespecificlanguagemeansofexpression,butalsopointedoutthatlinguisticexpressionisnotexhaustivelist.Inaddition,Adel(2006)fromtheperspectiveof"Discourseworld"toMetadiscoursedividedintotwomainforms:Metadiscourseandauthor-readerinteraction.Yuandiscourseroleistoguidethereaderandthetextinthelanguageoftheevaluation;author-readerinteractionistoestablishandmaintainrelationshipswithreaders.Inadditiontometadiscourseclassification,someresearchersfocusonmetadiscourseaspecificexpression,suchashedgesandmodalitymarkersandthelike.AsVande(1985,2002)fromafunctionalperspectivemetadiscourseresearch,analysismetadiscoursechapterfunctionandinterpersonalfunction;Hyand(1998,1999,2000,2005)manytimesinrecentyearstoexplore,suchasfuzzylanguage,enhancesthelanguage,etc.metadiscoursefunctioninscienceandtechnologydiscourseandacademicdiscourse;Hyland&Tse(2004)alsodevotedtopunctuation,etc.playmetadiscoursefunction;Kumpf(2000)fromavisualpointofview,suchasthelayoutoftypography,colors,etc.todiscussyuandiscourse;Thompson(2003)investigatedthetoneofacademiclecturesasmetadiscoursegroupchapterfunction.3元話語研究綜述國內(nèi)外不少學(xué)者從各個(gè)角度對(duì)元話語進(jìn)行了研究，并取得了令人矚目的成果。國外研究方面，大致圍繞以下兩方面進(jìn)行：(1)研究文化差異對(duì)元話語使用的影響；(2)研究元話語的使用對(duì)寫作質(zhì)量的影響。就第一個(gè)方面開展的實(shí)證研究如Crismore,Markkanen和Steffensen(1993)、Bloch和Chi(1995)、Valero-Garces(1996)、Moreno(1997,2004)、Dahl(2004)等。其中，Crismore,Markkanen和Steffensen(1993)比較了美國大學(xué)生和芬蘭大學(xué)生在使用元話語手段方面的文化和性別的差異。他們發(fā)現(xiàn)芬蘭學(xué)生比美國學(xué)生使用的元話語要多，男學(xué)生比女學(xué)生使用的元話語要多，兩國學(xué)生使用的人際元話語都比篇章元話語多；其中，芬蘭男生用的最多，美國男生用的最少。這說明在使用元話語手段的過程中確實(shí)存在著文化和性別差異。就第二個(gè)方面開展的實(shí)證研究如Intaraprawat(1988)、Barton(1993)、Longo(1994)、Intaraprawat和Steffensen(1995)、Cheng和Steffensen(1997)、Shaw和Liu(1998)、Hewings和Hewings(2002)等。其中，Intaraprawat和Steffensen(1995)分析了12名把英語作為二語的美國留學(xué)生的議論文發(fā)現(xiàn)，質(zhì)量好的作文比質(zhì)量差的作文使用更多類型的互動(dòng)型元話語手段。他們認(rèn)為，寫作技能高的學(xué)生意識(shí)到了讀者的需要，因此使用了一些元話語特征使文章更為讀者接受。Cheng和Steffensen(1997)在美國一所大學(xué)選擇了兩個(gè)班的學(xué)生為研究對(duì)象，來考察能否通過給學(xué)生傳授元話語知識(shí)，使其在寫作中學(xué)會(huì)使用元話語。研究發(fā)現(xiàn)，實(shí)驗(yàn)班學(xué)生作文的得分更高，因此他們認(rèn)為，元話語的使用對(duì)提高作文質(zhì)量起著很大的作用。國內(nèi)元話語相關(guān)的實(shí)證研究主要由徐海銘(2001)、成曉光和姜暉(2004)、徐海銘和龔世蓮(2006)、于建平(2007)李書倉和孫一鳳等人開展。這類實(shí)證研究把中國學(xué)生作為研究對(duì)象。中國學(xué)生是在非自然環(huán)境下學(xué)習(xí)英語，并把英語作為一門外語來學(xué)習(xí)的。這就區(qū)別于母語為英語的本族學(xué)生。其中，成曉光和姜暉(2004)通過對(duì)一所師范大學(xué)英語專業(yè)三年級(jí)學(xué)生進(jìn)行實(shí)驗(yàn)，研究元話語在英語寫作中的作用。研究結(jié)果證明，講授元話語是提高學(xué)生寫作水平的一個(gè)有效方法。于建平(2007)統(tǒng)計(jì)了元話語在科技論文語料庫中的分布情況，通過分析元話語在實(shí)現(xiàn)科技論文的語體特征，實(shí)現(xiàn)論文與作者、讀者之間的互動(dòng)中所發(fā)揮的作用，揭示了元話語在科技論文中的功能和應(yīng)用規(guī)律，用以提高科技論文作者在英語論文寫作時(shí)正確使用元話語的意識(shí)和能力，提高英語科技論文的寫作和翻譯質(zhì)量。曹鳳龍、王曉紅通過對(duì)比研究中美兩國大學(xué)生三十篇議論文，揭示中美兩國學(xué)生寫作中元話語實(shí)用的異同。中美兩國學(xué)生的議論文中頻繁使用元話語，以篇章標(biāo)記詞最多，但是中國學(xué)生由于語言水平有限，目標(biāo)語輸入質(zhì)量不高，作文評(píng)價(jià)標(biāo)準(zhǔn)不完善等問題，在英語寫作中存在過度使用“語篇連接詞”的現(xiàn)象，而委婉語和態(tài)度標(biāo)記詞的使用量卻少于美國學(xué)生。這在很大程度上反映了中國英語寫作教學(xué)缺乏對(duì)學(xué)生建立“作者-讀者”關(guān)系意識(shí)的培養(yǎng)，沒有將讀者的需求納入到寫作過程中。此外李書倉和孫一鳳也指出掌握元話語和使用元話語在口語教學(xué)中應(yīng)同時(shí)進(jìn)行。ReviewofEmpiricalStudymetadiscourseManyscholarsathomeandabroadfromallanglesmetadiscoursewerestudied,andachievedremarkableresults.Foreignresearch,roughlyaroundthefollowingtwoaspects:Impact(1)studyofculturaldifferencesonmetadiscourseuse;affect(2)studymetadiscoursequalityofwriting.OnempiricalresearchcarriedoutinthefirstaspectasCrismore,MarkkanenandSteffensen(1993),BlochandChi(1995),Valero-Garces(1996),Moreno(1997,2004),Dahl(2004)andsoon.Wherein,Crismore,MarkkanenandSteffensen(1993)comparedthedifferencesbetweenAmericancultureandgenderofstudentsanduniversitystudentsinFinlandmeansuseofmetadiscourseaspects.TheyfoundthatFinnishstudentsthanmetadiscourseAmericanstudentstobemoremalestudentsthantofemalestudentsmetadiscourse,interpersonalmetadiscoursetwostudentsmorethanthechaptersMetadiscourse;whereinFinnishboyswiththemost,theUnitedStatesBoyswiththeleast.Thisshowsthattheuseofmetadiscourseprocessmeanstheexistenceofculturalandgenderdifferences.ThesecondaspectonempiricalresearchconductedasIntaraprawat(1988),Barton(1993),Longo(1994),IntaraprawatandSteffensen(1995),ChengandSteffensen(1997),ShawandLiu(1998),HewingsandHewings(2002).Wherein,IntaraprawatandSteffensen(1995)analyzed12EnglishasaSecondLanguagestudentsargumentativeAmericandiscovery,poorqualityofgoodqualityessaywritingthantousemoretypesofinteractiveelementsmeanswords.Theybelievethatwritingskillsofstudentstorealizetheneedforhigh-readers,souseanumberoffeaturestomakethearticlemoremetadiscoursereadertoaccept.ChengandSteffensen(1997)atauniversityintheUnitedStatesselectedtwoclassesofstudentsforthestudy,toexaminewhetherbymetadiscourseknowledgetoteachstudentstolearntouseinwritingMetadiscourse.Thestudyfoundthathighertestscorestudentwritingclass,sotheythink,usingmetadiscoursetoimprovethequalityofwritingplaysabigrole.EmpiricalresearchrelevantdomesticMetadiscoursemainlyby徐海銘(2001),asJiangXiaoguangandHui(2004),徐海銘and龔世蓮(2006),inJianping(2007)Shuwarehouseand孫一鳳,whocarriedout.SuchempiricalstudyoftheChinesestudentsstudy.ChinesestudentsarelearningEnglishinanon-naturalenvironment,andEnglishasaforeignlanguagetolearn.ThisisdifferentfromnativeEnglishspeakingstudentsthefamily.Amongthem,aXiaoguangandKangHui(2004)throughathird-yearEnglishmajorstudentNormalexperimenttostudytherolemetadiscourseinEnglishWriting.Researchresultsshowthatteachingistoimprovestudents'writingmetadiscourselevelofaneffectiveway.InJianping(2007)statisticsmetadiscoursecorpusofscientificpapersinthedistribution,byanalyzingmetadiscourseachievingstylisticcharacteristicsofscientificpapers,papersrealizetheroleinteractionwiththeauthor,thereaderplayedinbetween,revealsmetadiscoursefunctionsandapplicationsinscientificpapersinthelawtoimprovethetechnologyusedcorrectlymetadiscourseauthorsatthetimeofwritingEnglishpapersawarenessandabilitytoimprovethequalityofEnglishwritingandtranslationofscientificpapers.CaofengLong,WangXiaohongcomparativestudybyChineseandAmericanCollegeStudentsthirtyarguments,thetwocountriesrevealstudents'writingmetadiscoursepracticalsimilaritiesanddifferences.ChineseandAmericanstudentsargumentativefrequentlyusedmetadiscoursetochapterMarkermost,butChinesestudentsduetolimitedlanguageskills,thetargetlanguageinputquality,andcompositionevaluationcriteriaimperfect,existsinEnglishwritingoveruse"languageArticlesconjunctions"phenomenon,andtheamountofuseeuphemismsandwordmarkattitudebutlessthanAmericanstudentsinlargepartreflectsthelackofChineseEnglishTeachingstudentstobuild."Author-Trainingreader"relationshipofconsciousness,nowillincorporatetheneedsofreaderstothewritingprocess.FurtherShu-binand孫一鳳alsopointedtograspandusemetadiscoursemetadiscourseshouldbecarriedoutsimultaneouslyinthespokenlanguageteaching.PreviousStudiesonMetadiscourseMetadiscourseisahottopicindiscourseanalysisandgreatachievementshavebeenmadebothathomeandabroad.元話語在學(xué)術(shù)語篇中尤其重要，它是勸說性、報(bào)道性語篇的重要構(gòu)篇機(jī)制。因?yàn)樵捳Z手段“反映了作者對(duì)讀者的理解能力、語境資源和語篇經(jīng)歷的認(rèn)識(shí)”。(楊信彰,2008:xi)Besides,metadiscourseisavitalcomponentinacademicdiscoursesandpersuasivereportsbecauseitreflectstheauthor'sunderstandingofthereader?comprehensivecapability,thecontextandexperienceofdiscourse."(YangxinZhang,2008:xi)Significanceofthestudy1959年Harris提出“元話語”這個(gè)術(shù)語，指理解語言使用、表示作者或說話人引導(dǎo)受眾理解語篇的一種方法。此后，Williams、VandeKopple、Crismore>Hyland等多名學(xué)者對(duì)元話語做出研究并對(duì)元話語的定義和分類提出不同的觀點(diǎn)。同時(shí)在此基礎(chǔ)上，還有許多學(xué)者對(duì)元話語進(jìn)行實(shí)證研究。但這些研究大多數(shù)只關(guān)注元話語與寫作的關(guān)系，很少關(guān)注元話語的修辭功能。1989年Crismore提出話語包括兩個(gè)層面，基本話語和元話語?；驹捳Z表達(dá)關(guān)于話題的命題信息，元話語告訴讀者如何理解、評(píng)述關(guān)于話題的命題信息?；驹捳Z實(shí)現(xiàn)了語言的概念功能，元話語實(shí)現(xiàn)了語言的人際及語篇功能。元話語是說話人作者用于構(gòu)建連貫語篇、投射自己對(duì)命題內(nèi)容或受眾的態(tài)度、協(xié)調(diào)與受眾之間關(guān)系的一種重要手段。同時(shí)也是連接語篇與語境的重要紐帶。在交際中，說話人作者除了傳遞信息、表達(dá)思想外，往往還會(huì)嵌入自己的觀點(diǎn).元話語同樣也有修辭功能。本質(zhì)上，修辭就是說服的藝術(shù)，是一種對(duì)沒有正式、絕對(duì)證據(jù)的問題進(jìn)行說理的活動(dòng)。Aristotle在《修辭》一書中提出三種說服手段，即氣質(zhì)、動(dòng)情、說理。氣質(zhì)關(guān)注的是說話人作者的品質(zhì)與可信度；動(dòng)情關(guān)注的是情感方面，聚焦在受眾而不是說話人作者的特點(diǎn)；而說理則與文章本身相關(guān)，如文章結(jié)構(gòu)安排、長度、復(fù)雜度、論點(diǎn)及論據(jù)等。In1959,Harrisproposedthetermmetadiscoursetorefertothewayofunderstandinglanguageinuse,representingthatauthorsorspeakersguidereceiverstoperceiveatext.Sincethen,Williams,VandeKopple,Crismore,Hylandandmanyotherscholarshavemadeplentyofresearchesonmetadiscourseandputforwarddifferentviewsondefinitionsandclassificationsofmetadiscourse.Atthesametime,therearemanyscholarswhomademanyempiricalresearchesonit.Butmostofthesestudiesfocusonrelationshipbetweenmetadiscourseandwriting,withlittleattentiontotherhetoricalfunctionofmetadiscourse.In1989,Crismoreproposeddiscourseconsistsoftwolevels,primarydiscourseandmetadiscourse.Primarydiscourseexpressesthepropositioninformationofthetopicofatext,andmetadiscoursetellsthereadershowtounderstand,reviewthepropositioninformationonatopic.Intheotherwords,theformerimplementstheconceptualfunctionoflanguage,andmetadiscourseachievesinterpersonalandtextualfunctionsoflanguage.Metadiscoursealsohaverhetoricalfunctionandtherhetoricistheartofpersuasion,isareasoningactivityforthosequestionsthathavenoformalandpersuasiveevidence.In"Rhetoric,"Aristotleputsforwardthreeapproachesofpersuasion,ethos,pathos,andlogos.Ethosisconcernedwiththespeaker\author'squalityandreliability;pathosisconcernedwithemotion,focusingonthecharacteristicsofaudienceratherthanthespeaker\author;andlogosisassociatedwiththearticleitself,suchasthestructurearrangement,length,degreeofcomplexity,argumentsofarticle,etc.Thisthesiswillanalyzethepoliticalnewsopinionbecauseithasalwaysbeenanimportantcolumntoattractpeople,sattentionanditinfluencespeople&lifeinastateorcountry.Besides,itismoreofgivingconceptionsandcommentsthanintroducingfactstoreadersanditispersuasiveinthatauthortriestoletthemthinkinthesamewayashe\shethinksandevenpushthemtotakeactions.Sothepresentstudywillexploretheuseofmetadiscourseinthepoliticalnewsopinionandanalyzehowmetadiscourserealizethepersuasionthroughachievinglogicalappeals,credibleappealsandaffectiveappeals.Finally,thepresentstudyhopestoletwritersandreaderspayattentiontothemetadicourseinthewritingsandimprovetheirwritingability.PreviousstudiesonMetadiscourseandNewsOpinionabroadandathomeReviewsonthedefinitionofmetadiscourse元話語歷來被認(rèn)為是一個(gè)“模糊的”概念，人們簡單地把元話語定義為“關(guān)于話語的話語”。(Hyland,2005:16)作為引導(dǎo)讀者理解語篇和作者態(tài)度的各種語言手段，元話語到底有沒有命題意義成為研究爭論的焦點(diǎn)。Lautamatti(1978)把元話語看作是與語篇主題發(fā)展無關(guān)的“非話題的材料"(non-topicalmaterial);Williams(1981:226)認(rèn)為它“不指向任何主題“。與他們的觀點(diǎn)相似,Vande(1985)把元話語定義為“不增加命題信息，只是表明作者存在的語言材料"；Crismoreetal.(1993)發(fā)表觀點(diǎn)，認(rèn)為元話語是命題意義之外的意義，沒有增加命題信息。這些觀點(diǎn)都表明，元話語并不承載命題內(nèi)容或者不給主題增加新的內(nèi)容。Metadiscoursehaslongbeenconsideredavagueconcept,andpeoplesimplydefineitas"discourseaboutdiscourse."(Hyland,2005:16)Asalinguisticmeanofguidingreadertounderstandthewholediscourseandtheauthor'sattitude,whethermetadiscoursehaspropositionalmeaningbecomesthefocusoftheresearchdebate.Lautamatti(1978)seesmetadiscourseas"non-topicallinguisticmaterial",whichhasnothingtodowiththediscoursedevelopmentbutisimportanttocomprehendthewholediscourse;Williams(1981:226)considersthatitdoesnotrefertoanysubject.Similartotheirviews,Vande(1985)definesmetadiscoursethatitdoesn?taddanypropositionalinformation,butpresentstheinformationaboutsubject;Crismoreetal(1993)holdstheviewalinguisticmaterialintexts,writtenorspoken,whichdoesnotaddanythingtothepropositionalcontentbutthatisintendedtohelpthelistenerorreaderorganize,interpretandevaluatetheinformationgiven”.Theseviewsallinsistthatmetadiscoursedoesnotcarrypropositionalcontentoraddnewcontenttosubject.Ifantidou(2005)對(duì)此發(fā)表不同意見，他認(rèn)為元話語在語義層面上增加話語的命題內(nèi)容，在語用層面上對(duì)于學(xué)術(shù)語篇的理解是必要的。不考慮元話語的語義和語用意義是對(duì)它的曲解。為了說明這一點(diǎn)，他提出了一個(gè)基于關(guān)聯(lián)理論的語義-語用的描寫框架，區(qū)分了關(guān)聯(lián)理論中的三對(duì)概念：(1)真值條件-非真值條件,(2)顯義-隱義，(3)概念意義-程序意義。通過這種區(qū)分，借助大量的例句表明不同種類的元話語表達(dá)不同的意義和功能，如表達(dá)“證言”的副詞allegedly,reportedly,admittedly等等這些詞都是跟話語的真值有關(guān)，也就是說這些詞是表命題的。Hyland(2005:23)也不同意將元話語視為獨(dú)立分開的意義層，他指出:語篇是交際行為，而不是命題的羅列。語篇的意義依賴于命題成分和元話語成分的融合”。對(duì)此爭議，成曉光(2008:47)進(jìn)行了這本的評(píng)論：metadiscourse雖不提供主要的命題信息，但它和命題信息共處同一語篇環(huán)境下，構(gòu)成了語篇的修辭環(huán)境，它所關(guān)注的是作者的寫作過程和讀者的闡釋過程。它的存在雖不增加命題內(nèi)容，但對(duì)意義的構(gòu)建卻是必不可少的。因此我們說它是語用構(gòu)件、修辭行為。However,Ifantidou(2005)holdstheoppositeview,andbelievesthatmetadiscourseaddsthepropositionalcontentinthesemanticlevelofdiscourseanditisnecessaryforunderstandingthediscourseinthepragmaticlevel.Inotherwords,itisakindofmisinterpretationwithoutconsideringsemanticandpragmaticmeaningofmetadiscourse.Toillustratethispoint,heproposesadescriptionframeworkbasedonRelevanceTheoryanddistinguishesthreepairsofconcepts:(1)truthconditions-non-truthconditions,(2)explicature-implicature,(3)conceptualmeaning-proceduralmeaning.Withthisdistinctionandalotofdifferenttypesofexamples,hefindsthatmetadiscourseexpressdifferentmeaningsandfunctions,suchasthemodificationsoftestimony,theadverballegedly,reportedly,admittedly,whicharerelatedwiththerealvalueofdiscourse,thatis,thesewordspresentproposition.Hyland(2005:23)alsobelievesthatthosemetadiscoursemarkerscannotbeseparatedfromthepropositionalcontentandhenotesthatdiscourseisacommunicativeactratherthanalistofpropositionsanddiscoursemeaningdependsontheintegrationofpropositioningredientandmetadiscoursecomponent."Therefore,hedefinesthatmetadiscourseisthecovertermfortheself-reflectiveexpressionsusedtonegotiateinteractionalmeaningsinatext,assistingthewriter(orspeaker)toexpressaviewpointandengagewithreadersasmembersofaparticularcommunity.Reviewsontheclassificationofmetadiscourse由于對(duì)元話語的性質(zhì)和功能的認(rèn)識(shí)差異，對(duì)元話語的分類也存在不同。迄今為止，元話語已有幾種不同的分類體系(參Williams,1981;Lautamatti,1978;Vande,1985;Crismore,1989;Crismoreetal,1993;Hyland,1998,2005)。本研究將會(huì)主要討論三種分法：Kopple(1985)>Crismoreetal(1993)以及Hyland(2004)。VandeKopple(1985)基于Lautamatti和Williams對(duì)元話語的研究，概括了7種元話語并將其分為語篇元話語和人際元話語兩大類型。其中，語篇元話語指的是在語篇中連接語篇各層次的主要成分，組詞成篇的詞和短語。人際元話語主要是體現(xiàn)作者和讀者關(guān)系的詞和短語.Owingtocognitivedifferencesinthefeaturesandfunctionsofmetadiscourse,therearevariousclassifications.Todate,thereareseveraldifferentmetadiscourseclassificationsystems(Williams,1981;Lautamatti,1978;Vande,1985;Crismore,1989;Crismoreetal,1993;Hyland,1998,2005).However,mostofthemareconductedundertheinfluenceofHalliday?stheoryofmetafunctionsoflanguage.ThepresentstudywillmainlydiscussthreeclassificationofKopple(1985),Crismoreetal(1993)andHyland(2004).BasedonWilliamsandLautamattistudiesofmetadiscourse,VandeKopple(1985)sumsupsevenkindsmetadiscourse,whicharefinallydividedintotwocategories,textualmetadiscourseandinterpersonalmetadiscourse.Textualmetadiscoursereferstothosewordsandphrasestohelptoorganizethemaincomponentsofalllevelsofdiscoursetoformadiscourse;interpersonalmetadiscoursereferstothosewordsandphraseswhichmainlyreflectedtherelationshipsbetweenauthorandreader.Table2.1VandeKopple'sclassificationsystemformetadiscourse(citedfromHyland(2005:32))CategoryFunctionExamplesTextualmetadiscourseTextconnectivesShowhowpartsofatextareconnectedtooneanothersequencers(first,next),reminders(asImentionedinChapter2),topicalizers(withregardto)CodeglossesHelpreadersgraspthewriter?sintendedmeaningmean,suchasValiditymarkersExpressthewriter?scommitmenttoastatementhedges(perhaps,might),emphatics(undoubtedly),attributors(accordingto)NarratorsInformreadersofthesourceofinformationaccordingtoSmith,InterpersonalmetadiscourseIllocutionmarkersMakethediscourseactexplicitatcertainpointtoconclude,Ihypothesize,tosumup,wepredictAttitudemarkersExpressthewriter?sattitudesunfortunately,interestingly,IwishthatCommentariesaddressreadersdirectly,drawingthemintoanimplicitdialogueyouwillcertainlyagreethat,youmightwanttoreadthethirdchapterfirst不難看出,VandeKopple的分類存在問題,如，同樣是"accordingto"，既屬于歸屬語又屬于敘說，ItisnotdifficulttoseethattherearearesomeproblemsinVandeKopple&classification.Oneproblemisitsmultifunctionality,thatis,thefunctionsarenotperformedinisolationandonemetadiscoursemayachieveseveralpurposessimultaneously,suchas"accordingto",bothbelongingtotheattributorsandnarrators..Therefore,inordertosolvethisproblem,Crismore.etal(1993)intheirclassificationtrytouseafunctionalanalysis:metadiscourseisdefinedaccordingtoitsprimaryfunctioninthecontext.Crismore.etal(1993)在VandeKopple(1985)的分類基礎(chǔ)上，也將元話語分為兩大類：語篇元話語和人際元話語。Crismoreetal的分類中去掉了敘說詞一項(xiàng)，將邏輯連接詞、序列詞、提醒詞和主題詞概括為語篇標(biāo)記語，同時(shí)將語碼注釋詞和施事標(biāo)記詞納入解釋標(biāo)記語。語篇標(biāo)記語和解釋標(biāo)記語這一全新分法說明了元話語的語篇功能：語篇標(biāo)記語幫助組織語篇，解釋標(biāo)記語幫助讀者解釋和更好地理解作者的意圖及寫作策略。OnthebasisofVandeKopple^classification(1985),Crismoreetal(1993)dividesmetadiscourseintotwocategories:textualmetadiscourseandinterpersonalmetadiscoursetoo.However,Kopple&classificationismodifiedheavilybyhim.Crismoreetal?sclassificationremovednarratorandreplacethetextconnectiveswithlogicalconnectives.Besides,hedividesthetextualmetadiscourseintotextualmarkers(logicalconnectives,reminders,sequencersandtopicalizers)andinterpretivemarkers(codesglosses,illocutionmarkersandannouncements).serialwordsremindwordsandkeywordssummarizedasdiscoursemarkers,whilethecode-wordsandagentMarkercommentsincludedexplainmarkers.Thisnewdivisionmakesaclearerexplanationofthetextualfunctionofmetadiscourse:textualmarkershelporganizediscourse,andinterpretivemarkershelpreadersinterpretandbetterunderstandtheauthor'sintentionandwritingstrategies.Forinterpersonalmetadiscourse,validitymarkers,whichisasubcategoryoftextualmetadiscourse,isnowundertheclassificationofinterpersonalmetadiscourseandthreeseparatesubcategories---hedges,certaintymarkers,andattributorsareincluded.Attributorsarecombinedwithnarratorsbecausebothareusedtoinformthereadersofthesourceofideas.不過，Crismoreetal的這一分法也存在一些問題，如，將語篇元話語分為語篇標(biāo)記語和解釋標(biāo)

記語的依據(jù)不明確，另外，用來指稱語篇前部分所提內(nèi)容的提醒詞屬于語篇標(biāo)記語，而用于指稱語篇后部分所提內(nèi)容的宣告詞卻又屬于解釋標(biāo)記語，這似乎有點(diǎn)牽強(qiáng)附會(huì)。However,someproblemsalsoexistinCrismoreetal&classification.Forexample,itlackstheoreticalfoundationtomakeadivisionofthetextualmetadiscourseintotextualmarkersandinterpretive.Inaddition,itseemsabitfar-fetchedthatreminders,whichareusedtorefertotheearliertextmaterial,belongtotextualmarkers,butannouncements,whichareusedtorefertotheupcomingmaterial,belongtointerpretivemarkers.CategoryFunctionExamplesTextualmetadiscourseTextualMarkersLogicalConnectivesHelpshowconnectionsbetweenideasand,but,thereforeSequencersHelpshowsequenceofmaterialfirst,secondRemindersRefertoearliertextmaterialAswesawinChapter1TopicalizersIndicatetopicshiftoranewtopicWell;nowIwilldiscuss;inregardtoInterpretiveMarkersCodeGlossesExplaintextmaterialWhatImeanis,thatis,forexampleIllocutionMarkersNametheactperformedToconclude;insum;IpredictAnnouncementsAnnouncingupcomingmaterialInthenextsectionInterpersonalmetadiscourseHedgesShowlackofcommitmenttothetruth-valueofpropositionmay,mightCertaintyMarkersShowfullcommitmenttothetruth-valueofpropositionIabsolutelysureIknowAttributorsRefertoauthoritiesusedforpersuasiveforceEinsteinclaimedthatAttitudeMarkersExpresswriter?saffectivevaluesIagree,unfortunatelyCommentaryBuildwriter-readerrelationshipsMyfriend,youmaynotagreethat應(yīng)將元話語分為指引Hyland(2004)認(rèn)為，將元話語分為語篇元話語和人際元話語不太確切應(yīng)將元話語分為指引讀者讀完整個(gè)語篇的交互式元話語和幫助讀者掌握論點(diǎn)的互動(dòng)式元話。其中，交互式元話語涉及作者對(duì)讀者的意識(shí)，以及作者對(duì)讀者的知識(shí)、興趣、修辭期望和語篇處理能力的調(diào)解，它反映了作者組織語篇的方法，在一定程度上體現(xiàn)出作者在創(chuàng)作語篇的過程中考慮到了讀者的需求。而互動(dòng)式元話語是作者通過入侵語篇和對(duì)語篇信息加以評(píng)論來引領(lǐng)互動(dòng)展開交際的方法，它在一定程度上體現(xiàn)了語篇是由作者和讀者一起構(gòu)建的。關(guān)于Hyland的分類模式，本文將會(huì)在theoreticalbasis里詳細(xì)解釋。Hyland(2004)believesthatdividingmetadiscourseintotextualmetadiscourseandinterpersonalmetadiscoursearenotveryprecise,andhecategorizesmetadiscourseintointeractivemetadiscourse,whichhelpsreaderstoreadtheentiretext,andinteractionalmetadiscourse,whichinvolvesthereaderinthetext.Fromtheperspectiveofauthor,interactivemetadiscourseembodiesauthors?awarenessofreadersandtheiradjustmentofthediscourseaccordingtothereaders?knowledge,interests,anddiscourseprocessingcapabilities.Inaword,itreflectsthemethodoforganizingdiscourse,andtoacertainextent,itreflectsthattheauthorstakeintoaccounttheneedsofreaderswhenwriting.Forinteractionalmetadiscourse,authorsusethemtoinvolvetheirselvesinthediscourseandtocommentonthediscoursetoleadinteractionbetweenauthorsandreaders,whichtosomeextent,reflectsthediscourseisconstructedbytheauthorsandreaderstogether.AboutHyland'sclassification,thepresentstudywillexplainindetailinthetheoreticalbasis.Previousstudiesonmetadiscourseabroadandathome隨著對(duì)元話語認(rèn)識(shí)的加深，人們開始考察元話語在各種語篇體裁中的使用情況，并將研究得出的啟示用于指導(dǎo)寫作教學(xué)。這些研究大多集中于對(duì)勸說性語篇中元話語的量化研究、學(xué)生寫作與元話語使用情況的調(diào)查，以及不同語言的使用者對(duì)元話語的使用情況的對(duì)比研究。Withthebetterunderstandingofmetadiscourse,peoplestartstoinvestigatetheusageofmetadiscourseinvariousgenresofdiscourse,andtheresearchresultsareusedtoguidetheteachingofwriting.Mostofthesestudiesfocusonquantitativeresearchonmetadiscourseinthepersuasiondiscourses,investigationofstudents?writingandusageofmetadiscourse,aswellascomparativestudiesonmetadiscourseusageofdifferentlanguagesusers.鑒于元話語的功能，研究人員將元話語理論用于指導(dǎo)學(xué)生寫作。較早進(jìn)行這方面研究的有Intaraprawat&Steffensen(1995)和Cheng&Steffensen(1996)，這一研究是通過向?qū)W生介紹有關(guān)元話語的知識(shí)，讓其理解它們的功能，培養(yǎng)學(xué)生在寫作中建立讀者意識(shí)，從而學(xué)會(huì)在寫作中使用元話語。Crismoreetal(1993)通過分析美國大學(xué)生的議論文研究發(fā)現(xiàn)，不同的語言體系中，元話語的使用在密度和類型上有所不同，