METADISCOURSE IN THE DIGITAL ACADEMIC POSTER: EXAMINING THE TEXTUAL AND VISUAL METADISCOURSE IN THE CONSTRUCTION OF PERSUASION
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.33736/ils.5739.2024Keywords:
Textual metadiscourse; visual metadiscourse; digital academic poster; persuasionAbstract
The demand for 21st-century skills has transformed the education landscape, altering how we teach, learn, and assess, integrating digital platforms into these processes. This study analyses the use of metadiscourse devices in digital academic posters, with the primary objective of identifying both textual and visual metadiscourse devices employed in academic posters to construct persuasive messages. A corpus of 10 academic posters was extracted from virtual academic presentations by diploma students and analysed with a mixed-method research approach. Metadiscourse elements were analysed quantitatively to investigate the presence of visual metadiscourse. Drawing from Hyland's (2006) model of metadiscourse and Kumpf's (2000) visual metadiscourse, this study compared the use of these two distinct elements in academic posters and their combined effect on persuasion. The results revealed that interactive resources were more frequently used than interactional resources. Additionally, students frequently employed visual metadiscourse to enhance persuasiveness, albeit at varying levels of frequency and effectiveness. This study highlights the importance of incorporating both textual and visual metadiscourse knowledge into academic curricula for effective organisation, engagement, and persuasion of readers.
References
Akoto, O. Y. (2020). Metadiscourse within a discipline: A study of introduction and literature review chapters of sociology masters' theses. Indonesian Journal of Applied Linguistics, 10(2), 471-480.
Albalat-Mascarell, A., & Carrió-Pastor, M. L. (2019). Self-representation in political campaign talk: A functional metadiscourse approach to self-mentions in televised presidential debates. Journal of Pragmatics, 147, 86-99.
Alley, M. (2003). The craft of scientific presentations. Springer Verlag.
Al-Subhi, A. S. (2022). Metadiscourse in online advertising: Exploring linguistic and visual metadiscourse in social media advertisements. Journal of Pragmatics, 187, 24-40.
Anthony, L. (2022). Antconc (Version 4.1.1) [Computer Software]. Waseda University. http://www.antlab.sci.waseda.ac.jp/
Azar, A. S., & Hashim, A. (2019). The impact of attitude markers on enhancing evaluation in the review article genre. Gema Online Journal of Language Studies, 19(1), 153-173.
Barthes, R. (1994). Selected works: Semiotics, poetics. Moscow
Crismore, A., Markkanen, R., & Steffensen, M. (1993). Metadiscourse in persuasive writing: A study of texts written by American and Finnish university students. Written Communication, 10, 39-71.
D'Angelo, L. (2010). Creating a framework for the analysis of academic posters. Language Studies Working Papers, 2, 38-50.
D'Angelo, L. (2011). Academic posters across disciplines: A preliminary study. Language Studies Working Papers, 3, 15-28.
D'Angelo, L. (2016a). Academic posters: A textual and visual metadiscourse analysis. Peter Lang.
D'Angelo, L. (2016b). The academic poster genre: Friend or foe. In K. Hyland, & F. Shaw (Eds.), The Routledge handbook of English for academic purposes (pp. 394-404). Routledge.
De Groot, E., Nickerson, C., Korzilius, H., & Gerritsen, M. (2015). Picture this: Developing a model for the analysis of visual metadiscourse. Journal of Business and Technical Communication, 30(2), 165-201.
Esfandiari, R., & Allaf-Akbary, O. (2022). Metadiscursive features in research articles: The role of stimulated recall. Journal of English Language Teaching and Learning, 14(29), 245-263.
́Džanic ́, N. D., & Berberović, S. (2021). Lemons and watermelons: Visual Advertising and Conceptual Blending. In L. D'Angelo, A. Mauranen, & S. Maci (Eds.), Metadiscourse in digital communication: New research, approaches and methodologies (pp. 115-132). Springer Nature.
Fouad, N. I. (2021). Multimodal writing of university students: The case of academic posters [Master's Thesis, The American University in Cairo].
Hu, G., & Cao, F. (2015). Disciplinary and paradigmatic influences on interactional metadiscourse in research articles. English for Specific Purposes, 39, 12-25.
Hunston, S. (1985). Text in world and world in text: Goals and models of scientific writing. Nottingham Linguistic Circular, 25-40.
Hunston, S., & Thompson, G. (2001). Evaluation in text: Authorial stance and the construction of discourses. Oxford University Press.
Hyland, K. (2005). Metadiscourse: Exploring interaction in writing. Continuum.
Hyland, K. (2007). Applying a gloss: Exemplifying and reformulating in academic discourse. Applied Linguistics, 28(2), 266-285.
Kashiha, H. (2022). Academic lectures versus political speeches: Metadiscourse functions affected by the role of the audience. Journal of Pragmatics, 190, 60-72.
Koutsantoni, D. (2004). Attitude, certainty and allusions to common knowledge in scientific research articles. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 3(2), 163-182.
Kumpf, E. P. (2000). Visual metadiscourse: Designing the considerate text. Technical Communication Quarterly, 9(4), 401-424.
Kuswoyo, H., & Siregar, R. A. (2019). Interpersonal metadiscourse markers as persuasive strategies in oral business presentation. Lingua Cultura, 13(4), 297-304.
Lakoff, G. (1972). Hedges: A study in meaning criteria and the logic of fuzzy concepts. Chicago Linguistic Society Papers, 8, 183-228.
Liu, S., & Zhang, J. (2021). Using metadiscourse to enhance persuasiveness in corporate press releases: A corpus-based study. SAGE Open, 11(3), 1-11. https://doi.org/10.1177/21582440211032165
Mancini, C. (2005). Cinematic hypertext: Investigating a new paradigm. IOS Press.
Mohamed, A. F., & Ab Rashid, R. (2017). The metadiscourse markers in good undergraduate writers' essays corpus. International Journal of English Linguistics, 7(6), 213-220.
Navarro, F. M., & Álvarez, M. (2022). How do students write in engineering and the humanities? Intertextuality and metadiscourse in undergraduate dissertations written in Spanish. CÍRCULO de Linguística Aplicada a la Comunicación, 90, 35-46.
Swales, J. M., & Feak, C. (2000). English in today's research world: A writer's guide. Michigan University Press.
Tan, H., & Wong, B. E. (2014). Metadiscourse use in the persuasive writing of Malaysian undergraduate students. English Language Teaching, 7(7), 26-39.
UNESCO. (2020, March 4). Education: From disruption to recovery. UNESCO. https://en.unesco.org/covid19/educationresponse
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2024 UNIMAS Publisher
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Copyright Transfer Statement for Journal
1) In signing this statement, the author(s) grant UNIMAS Publisher an exclusive license to publish their original research papers. The author(s) also grant UNIMAS Publisher permission to reproduce, recreate, translate, extract or summarize, and to distribute and display in any forms, formats, and media. The author(s) can reuse their papers in their future printed work without first requiring permission from UNIMAS Publisher, provided that the author(s) acknowledge and reference publication in the Journal.
2) For open access articles, the author(s) agree that their articles published under UNIMAS Publisher are distributed under the terms of the CC-BY-NC-SA (Creative Commons Attribution-Non Commercial-Share Alike 4.0 International License) which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, for non-commercial purposes, provided the original work of the author(s) is properly cited.
3) For subscription articles, the author(s) agree that UNIMAS Publisher holds copyright, or an exclusive license to publish. Readers or users may view, download, print, and copy the content, for academic purposes, subject to the following conditions of use: (a) any reuse of materials is subject to permission from UNIMAS Publisher; (b) archived materials may only be used for academic research; (c) archived materials may not be used for commercial purposes, which include but not limited to monetary compensation by means of sale, resale, license, transfer of copyright, loan, etc.; and (d) archived materials may not be re-published in any part, either in print or online.
4) The author(s) is/are responsible to ensure his or her or their submitted work is original and does not infringe any existing copyright, trademark, patent, statutory right, or propriety right of others. Corresponding author(s) has (have) obtained permission from all co-authors prior to submission to the journal. Upon submission of the manuscript, the author(s) agree that no similar work has been or will be submitted or published elsewhere in any language. If submitted manuscript includes materials from others, the authors have obtained the permission from the copyright owners.
5) In signing this statement, the author(s) declare(s) that the researches in which they have conducted are in compliance with the current laws of the respective country and UNIMAS Journal Publication Ethics Policy. Any experimentation or research involving human or the use of animal samples must obtain approval from Human or Animal Ethics Committee in their respective institutions. The author(s) agree and understand that UNIMAS Publisher is not responsible for any compensational claims or failure caused by the author(s) in fulfilling the above-mentioned requirements. The author(s) must accept the responsibility for releasing their materials upon request by Chief Editor or UNIMAS Publisher.
6) The author(s) should have participated sufficiently in the work and ensured the appropriateness of the content of the article. The author(s) should also agree that he or she has no commercial attachments (e.g. patent or license arrangement, equity interest, consultancies, etc.) that might pose any conflict of interest with the submitted manuscript. The author(s) also agree to make any relevant materials and data available upon request by the editor or UNIMAS Publisher.
