話語》清晰地話語這一概念，通過分析商務寫作，新聞報道、學術寫作和學生論文等文庫，提出話語模式，並以嶄新視角審視了語篇生產者和語篇之間、語篇生產者和受眾之間的關繫話語對我們理解交際，研究學術寫作和寫作教學的重要性，並繫統話語與修辭、語類、文化和話語社區的關繫。
話語》話語研究領域的專家Ken Hyland之手，例證翔實，深入淺出，書中話語概念對語篇分析和寫作教學很有借鋻意義，對從事應用語言學研究的高校師生和學者具有重要參考價值。

Acknowledgements
Preface
Section 1: What is metadiscourse?
Chapter 1First impressions
1.1 A brief overview of metadiscourse
1.2 A context of emergence: information and interaction
1.3 Metadiscourse and audience awareness
1.4 Metadiscourse, interaction and audience
1.5 Summary and conclusion

Chapter 2Definitions, issues and classifications
2.1 Definitions of metadiscourse
2.2 Propositional and metadiscourse meanings
2.3 Levels of meaning
2.4 Functional analyses
2.5 Textual and interpersonal functions
2.6 Metadiscourse signals
2.7 Categorizations of metadiscourse
2.8 Summary and conclusions

Chapter 3A metadiscourse model
3.1 Key principles of metadiscourse
3.2 A classification of metadiscourse
3.3 Metadiscourse resources
3.4 An illustration: metadiscourse in postgraduate writing
3.5 The limits of description
3.6 Summary and conclusions Section 2: Metadiscourse in practice
Chapter 4Metadiscourse and rhetoric
4.1 The concept of rhetoric
4.2 Academic discourse and rhetoric
4.3 Metadiscourse, ethos and The Origin of Species
4.4 Business discourse and metadiscourse
4.5 Metadiscourse and rhetoric in company annual reports
4.6 Summary and conclusions

Chapter 5Metadiscourse and genre
5.1 The concept of genre
5.2 Metadiscourse and genre
5.3 Metadiscourse in academic research articles
5.4 Metadiscourse in popular science articles
5.5 Metadiscourse in introductory textbooks
5.6 Summary and conclusions
Chapter 6Metadiscourse and culture
6.1 Culture and language
6.2 Metadiscourse across languages
6.3 Metadiscourse and writing in English
6.4 Interactive metadiscourse in English
6.5 Interactional metadiscourse in English
6.6 Summary and conclusions

Chapter 7Metadiscourse and community
7.1 The concept of community
7.2 Community, academic writing and metadiscourse
7.3 Metadiscourse variation in articles across disciplines
7.4 Interactional metadiscourse in articles across disciplines
7.5 Interactive metadiscourse in articles across disciplines
7.6 Metadiscourse variation in textbooks across disciplines.
7.7 Interactional metadiscourse in textbooks across disciplines
7.8 Interactive metadiscourse in textbooks across disciplines
7.9 Summary and conclusions
Section 3：Issues and implications

Chapter 8 Metadiscourse in the classroom
8.1 Students writing and audience awareness
8.2 Advantages of teaching metadiscourse features
8.3 Some teaching principles
8.4 Some teaching strategies
8.5 Summary and conclusions

Chapter 9 Issues and directions
9.1 Metadiscourse and the socially situated writer
9.2 Metadiscourse and interpersonal engagement
9.3 Metadiscourse and discourse variation
9.4 Metadiscourse and classroom practice
9.5 Methodological issues
9.6 Some implications and remaining issues
9.7 Further research
References
Appendix：Metadiscourse items investigated
Subject Index
Author Index

In other words，language is not simply used to convey informa． tion about the world．It also acts to present this information through the organization of the text itself(on the autonomous planel and engage readers as to how they should understand it(on the interactive plane)．Statements thus，simultaneously，have an orientation to the world outside the text and an orientation to the readers understandin of that world through the text itselL This is a very different model to the transactional-interactional distinction and，as we shall see in Chapter 3，the fact that writers can refer to。evaluate and otherwise comment on both discourse entities and real-world entities is a defining feature of metadiscourse．
But in the early 1980s，Sinclair was almost alone in emphasizing the importance of interactional aspects of language．At that time．And until recently，research into the ways language is used to negotiate relationships and scaffold interaction was largely 1eft to sociologists and sociolinguists．In fact，work by the sociologists Bateson【1972】and Goffman【1974】on‘frameswas an important early development leading to linguistic conceptions of metadiscourse．The notion of frames reters to our cognitive or conceptual views of particular situations，including the ways we name or characterize what is being said·Of particular interest is what MacLachlan and Reid(1 994）call ‘intratextual framing。which occurs when we pay attention to the way in which the flow of words within the text is affected by internal organizational devices which guide interpretation．Such framing devices are seen as an effort to limit the readers interpretive licence and control understandings of a text in competition with alternative Iraming brought to the text by the reader．Frames are tllerefore aspects ot discourse which allow us to orient to messages and understand the world in particular ways．
Ragan and Hoppers(1981)discussion of‘alignmentsimilarly helped to bring interactional aspects of discourse into focus。Showing how language allows users to promote a positive impression of themselves and to negotiate participant roles with the hearer．But it was another sociolinguist working on casual conversation。Debbie Schiffrin(1980)，who perhaps struck the biggest blow for metadis ．course in these early days．She helped move the notion of metadiscourse forward by showing howmeta-talksuch as Tim telling you thatandlet me give you on exampleallows speakers to change their role in the discourse by projecting themselves as an animator．1bus conversationalists commonly move from presenting information to becoming a conscious and explicit producer of the discourse itself by re／erring to organizationaJ or evaluative aspects of the talk．