| Metadiscourse is a common language phenomenon, and its function of organizing discourse and directing the interaction between the writer/speaker and the reader/listener is accepted by the majority of the researchers. Previous researches primarily approached metadiscourse from functional, cognitive, pragmatic and rhetorical perspectives. To date, few studies have investigated metadiscourse from the perspective of communicative action theory under the framework of philosophy of language.In order to further broaden the theoretical domains of metadiscourse study, based on communicative action theory proposed by Habermas as well as Hyland’s classification model of interpersonal metadiscourse, combining with the theory of intersubjectivity and the interactional feature of the genre of academic discourse, the present study attempts to construct an analytical framework that contains the four universal validity claims(appercetion,authenticity, sincerity, correctness) of communicative action theory to explore how metadiscourse constructs intersubjectivity, promotes effective delivery of information and sheds some light on the nature of metadiscourse in academic discourses.The three research questions in this study are as follows:(1) What is the overall and local distribution of the metadiscourse in the Englishacademic discourse?(2) How can interactive metadiscourse construct intersubjectivity by meeting universalvalidity claims in academic discourse?(3) How can interactional metadiscourse construct intersubjectivity by meeting universalvalidity claims in academic discourse?To explore these research questions, this study selects fifty academic discourses from five core journals in linguistics and constructed a mini self-contained corpus. Drawing on Hyland’s classification model of interpersonal metadiscourse, labeling is made of ten types of metadiscourse markers within the two major categories of metadiscourse, namely, interactive and interactional. Labeling is conducted via software query in combination with manual work.By using qualitative analysis as the main approach, in combination with quantitative analysis,this study conducts a detailed analysis and description with regards to the overall and local distribution of the major categories of metadiscourse markers(interactive and interactional)ten sub-categories in the corpus and reveals the rule of distribution of metadiscourse. On that basis, further analysis and discussion is made of the relation between metadiscourse and four universal validity claims of communication action theory to explore how metadiscourse constructs intersubjectivity.The following research findings are made:First, there are some differences in the overall distribution as well as the local distribution of various types of metadiscourse in the English academic discourse. Overall, interactivemetadiscourse appears far more frequently than interactional metadiscourse. Among others,transitions of interactive metadiscourse occurs most frequently and engagement markers of interactional metadiscourse occurs least frequently. Regarding the local distribution,differences exist among the occurrence of metadsicourse in abstracts, introduction, body and conclusion in the academic discourses under investigation. These differences can show the occurrence of the different kinds of metadiscourses is different in the same part of a discourse or the occurrence of the same metadiscourse in different parts of the discourse is different.These differences have do to with the functions different metadiscourse play and the characteristics of English academic discourse at overall and local levels.Second, the basic function of interactive metadiscourse in English academic discourse is to establish textual organization and guide readers to follow the thinking of writers. As a type of linguistic resource, interactive metadiscourse including transitional markers, code glosses,evidentials, endophoric markers, frame markers, can meet four universal validity claims of communicative action theory, i.e., appercetion, authenticity, sincerity, correctness, by play specific roles, i.e., guiding logical relation, introducing explanation, providing evidence,establishing convention and so on, so as to construct intersbujectivity and achieve effective delivery of information.Third, the basic function of interactional metadiscourse in English academic discourse is to show the attitude of writers toward discourse and readers and achieve the interaction between writers and readers. Interactional metadiscourse including hedges, boosters, attitude markers, self mentions, engagement markers, can meet four universal validity claims of communicative action theory by play specific roles, i.e., evaluating information, easing tone,establishing convention, positioning and guiding and so on, so as to construct intersubjectivity.This study has both theoretical and practical significance. In theory, the present study investigates metadiscourse from the perspective of communication function theory within the framework of language of philosophy, which can help people understand the essence of metadiscourse deeply and find theoretical support for metadiscourse from philosophy so that theory of metadiscourse is enriched. Meantime, the present study constructs an analytical frame for analyzing metadiscourse in English academic discourses by combining communication action theory, intersubjectivity and interactional feature of academic discourse so that operability and explanatory power of communication action theory is enhanced and the essence of intersubjectivity and the genre of academic discourse is revealed. In practice,the findings of this study would have some implications on the English academic writing and reading. The distribution of metadiscourse in academic discourse and the function of metadiscourse in constructing intersubjectivity by meeting the four universal validity claims of communication action theory can be helpful for both construction of discourse by writer and understanding of discourse by reader. Besides, the research findings of this study can be further applied in English academic lecture, academic seminar and English class teaching and so on to direct speaker, discusser and teacher to use metadiscourse properly to meeting four universal validity claims of communicative action theory so that the effective interaction withothers can be achieved. As for research method, qualitative study should be used mainly with quantitative study as assistance to deal with complicated and abstract language phenomenon like metadiscourse. We should make full use of deep analysis and powerful explanation of qualitative study with the aid of the data of quantitative study to reveal the essence of the research object. |
PDF Full Text Request