Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://hdl.handle.net/10397/106172
PIRA download icon_1.1View/Download Full Text
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributorDepartment of Chinese and Bilingual Studiesen_US
dc.creatorChou, Ien_US
dc.creatorLi, WYen_US
dc.creatorLiu, KLen_US
dc.date.accessioned2024-05-03T00:45:36Z-
dc.date.available2024-05-03T00:45:36Z-
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10397/106172-
dc.language.isoenen_US
dc.publisherPublic Library of Scienceen_US
dc.rights© 2023 Chou et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.en_US
dc.rightsThe following publication Chou I, Li W, Liu K (2023) Representation of interactional metadiscourse in translated and native English: A corpus-assisted study. PLoS ONE 18(7): e0284849 is available at https://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0284849.en_US
dc.titleRepresentation of interactional metadiscourse in translated and native English : a corpus-assisted studyen_US
dc.typeJournal/Magazine Articleen_US
dc.identifier.volume18en_US
dc.identifier.issue7en_US
dc.identifier.doi10.1371/journal.pone.0284849en_US
dcterms.abstractThe present study aimed to investigate the differences between translated and non-translated English texts with regard to interactional metadiscourse features, which are crucial in engaging readers in the reasoning process and establishing the credibility of a proposition. Despite numerous studies investigating lexical and syntactic differences between translated and non-translated language, little research has been conducted on the textual level in terms of metadiscourse use. To address this gap, we conducted a comparative analysis of six interactional markers across two comparable multi-genre corpora, namely, FLOB (Freiburg-LOB Corpus of British English) comprising native English and the English subset of COCE (Corpus of Chinese-English) containing translated English. Our ANOVA analyses revealed that translated English exhibited a tendency to underuse stance features, such as hedges, boosters, and attitude markers, compared to native English. Furthermore, our post-hoc analysis revealed that genre modulated the use of metadiscourse features in both translated and native texts. Importantly, we found that there was greater cross-genre variation in the use of interactional metadiscourse in translated English than in native English. Our study highlights the unique characteristics of translation and emphasizes the importance of taking into account metadiscourse in the field of translation studies.en_US
dcterms.accessRightsopen accessen_US
dcterms.bibliographicCitationPLoS one, 2023, v. 18, no. 7, e0284849en_US
dcterms.isPartOfPLoS oneen_US
dcterms.issued2023-
dc.identifier.isiWOS:001066222400019-
dc.identifier.eissn1932-6203en_US
dc.identifier.artne0284849en_US
dc.description.validate202405 bcrcen_US
dc.description.oaVersion of Recorden_US
dc.identifier.FolderNumberOA_Scopus/WOS-
dc.description.pubStatusPublisheden_US
dc.description.oaCategoryCCen_US
Appears in Collections:Journal/Magazine Article
Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat 
journal.pone.0284849.pdf865.02 kBAdobe PDFView/Open
Open Access Information
Status open access
File Version Version of Record
Access
View full-text via PolyU eLinks SFX Query
Show simple item record

Page views

5
Citations as of Jun 30, 2024

Downloads

1
Citations as of Jun 30, 2024

SCOPUSTM   
Citations

4
Citations as of Jun 21, 2024

WEB OF SCIENCETM
Citations

2
Citations as of Jul 4, 2024

Google ScholarTM

Check

Altmetric


Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.