Metadiscourse Markers in Greta Thunberg’s Speeches
(1) Universitas Trunojoyo Madura
(2) Universitas Trunojoyo Madura
(*) Corresponding Author
Abstract
This study aims at discussing the type of metadiscourse markers and explain the metadiscourse used in Thunberg’s speeches. This study used qualitative method to describe the types and the function of metadiscourse markers in Greta Thunberg’s speeches. The result shows that there are interactive and interactional metadiscourse in the speeches. Interactive metadiscourse markers in the speech are transition, frame marker, endophoric marker and code gloss. Transition became the highest marker, because transition is conjunction that functions to coherent and to relate between argument with another argument. Meanwhile, interactional metadiscourse markers in the speech are hedges, booster, attitude marker, engagement marker, and self-mention. In the interactional category, engagement and self-mention are dominant, because the engagement marker helps Thunberg to build a relationship with the audience and address the audience into the discourse, while when to express her opinion and to emphasize herself as a speaker in personal responsibility for the argument, Thunberg used self-mention marker.
Keywords
Full Text:
PDFReferences
Adel, A. (2006). Metadiscourse in L1 and L2 English. Amsterdam/Philadelphia : John Benjamins Publishing Company
Agarwal, S. & Garg, A. (2012). The Importance of Communication Within Organizations: A Research on Two Hotels in Uttarakhand. Journal of Business and Management. 3(2), 40-49. www.iosrjournals.org
Bogdan, R. C., & Biklen, S. K. (2007). Qualitative research for Education: An Introduction to Theory and Methods,(5th.ed.). Boston, United States: Pearson
Connect4Climate. (2018, December 15). Greta Thunberg full speech at UN Climate Change COP24 Conference [Video file]. Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VFkQSGyeCWg
Connect4Climate. (2019, December 18). Gretha Thunberg full speech at UN Climate Change COP25 – Climate Emergency Event [Video file]. Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Eo_-mxvGnq8&t=44s
Davoodi, Kobra. (2016). On the Use of Interpersonal Metadiscourse Markers in Conclusion Section of Language Testing Articles. Journal of Applied Linguistics and Language Research.3 (4), 211-216.
Hyland, K. (2005). Metadiscourse: Exploring Interaction in Writing. London:Contiuum.
Intraprawat, P., & Steffensen, M. S. (1995). The use of metadiscourse in good and poor ESL essays. Journal of Second Language Writing, 4(3), 253-272. https://doi.org/10.1016/1060-3743(95)90012-8
Kusumawati, A. J. (2011). A discourse analysis of SBY’s interactional speech text: A study on critical Linguistics. Journal of English and Education, 5(1).
Mai, H. (2016). An intercultural analysis of meta-discourse markers as persuasive power in Chinese and American political speeches. International Journal of Language and Linguistics, 4(6), 207-21, 10.11648/j.ijll.20160406.13
Martin, J. and Rose, D. (2003) Working with Discourse: Meaning Beyond the Clause. London: Continuum.
Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative Data Analysis: A Coursebook of new method. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage
Milne, E. D. (2008). The pragmatic role of textual and interpersonal metadiscourse markers in the construction and attainment of persuasuion: A cross-linguictic study of newspaper discourse. Journal of Pragmatics. 40(1), 95-113. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2007.10.003
Mohammed, A. F., & Rashid, R. (2017). The metadiscourse markers in good undergraduate writers’ essays corpus. Journal of English Linguistics, 7(6), 1923-8703. http://doi.org/10.5539/ijel.v7n6p213
Moleong, L. J. (2009). Metodology Penelitian Kualitatif. Bandung: Remaja Rosdakarya.
Murray, N., & Beglar, D. (2009). Inside track: writing dissertations and theses. Pearson Education.
Nasiri, S. (2013).Exploring the significant role of meta-discourse in academic writing for a discourse community by academic members. International Journal of Research Studies in Education, 2(1), 67-74.
Pasaribu, T. A. (2017). Domains of Political Metaphors in Presidential Speeches. Journal on Languange and Language Teaching, 19(2).
Pasaribu, T. A. (2017). Male and female students’ use of textual discourse markers in writing academic essays. Journal of Language and Literature, 17(1).
Rustipa, Katharina. (2014). Metadiscourse in Indonesian EFL Learners’ Persuasive Texts: A Case Study at English Department, UNISBANK. International Journal of English Linguistics; 4 (1).
Suhono & Haikal. (2018). Interactive metadiscourse and interactional metadiscourse categories of students’ international program school based on gender. Indonesian Journal of English Education, 5(1), 81-91, http://dx.doi.org/10.15408/ijee.v5i1.5505
Susanti, Y., Kurnia, FD and Suharsono (2017). Interactional Metadiscourse Markers in the Introduction of Dissertations: Differences across English Proficiency Level. A Journal of Culture, English Language, Teaching and Literature. 17 (2).
Tutuarima, Nuraeningsih, & Rusiana. (2018). An Analysis of speech Act Used in London Has Fallen Movie. Journal for Language and Foreign Language Learning, 7(2), 160-169. http:dx.doi.org/10.21580/vjv/7i23022
Yazdani, A. (2016). Metadiscourse markers of online texts: English and Persian online headlines use of metadiscourse markers. International Journal of Education & Literacy Studies, 4(3), http://dx.doi.org/10.7575/aiac.ijels.v.4n.3p.41
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.30998/deiksis.v16i3.17480
Article Metrics
Metrics powered by PLOS ALM
Refbacks
- There are currently no refbacks.
Copyright (c) 2024 Sona Kholifah, Rosyida Ekawati
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
| Publisher: Lembaga Penelitian dan Pengabdian Kepada Masyarakat Universitas Indraprasta PGRI Address: Jl. Nangka No. 58 C (TB. Simatupang), Kel. Tanjung Barat, Kec. Jagakarsa, Jakarta Selatan 12530, Jakarta, Indonesia. |
|
 Deiksis is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. |