新聞是民眾獲取資訊的重要來源。隨著社群網站的興起與普及，社群網站便成為新聞媒體傳播線上新聞的主要方式之一。「互動」被視為社群媒體的主要優勢和特徵（Ksiazek et al., 2016; Morris & Ogan, 1996）。新聞編者在其新聞粉絲專頁上發佈新聞時所呈現的「新聞分享引言」與「新聞標題」對於提高互動性扮演重要角色。然而探討相關互動策略的研究仍不多見。因此，本研究採用Hyland（2005）後設論述架構中的七類標記作為分析互動策略的框架，對比分析中英軟、硬新聞分享引言和標題的互動策略，並將結果應用於華語教學中。
本研究之語料取自2017年台灣與美國臉書新聞粉絲專頁上的新聞分享引言與新聞標題各300筆。對比結果發現，中英新聞分享引言與標題之互動策略有相似亦有相異處。相似處如：中英皆使用大量且豐富的態度標記詞彙。相異處諸如：中文整體互動策略標記的使用頻率高於英文、中文比起英文更常使用態度標記和推進標記、態度標記與推進標記之詞彙也較英文更為豐富，而英文比起中文常使用內指標記和規避標記。
研究結果顯示，中英相似處反映出兩者皆傾向於新聞分享引言和標題中展示作者立場和態度以提升互動性。但其中相異處也顯示語言文化對中英互動策略的語言形式與使用頻率之影響。本文將研究結果應用於中文新聞之新聞分享引言與標題的閱讀教學設計上。

For the general public, news is an important source of information. With the emergence and increasing prevalence of social networking websites, social networking websites have become one of the main platforms where online news is delivered. “Interaction” is viewed as a major advantage and characteristic of social media (Ksiazek et al., 2016; Morris & Ogan, 1996). “News introduction” and “news headlines” posted by social media editors for news articles published on their fan pages play an important role in increasing the interactivity of social media. As research of interaction strategies is rare, this study employed the seven markers in Hyland’s (2005) model of metadiscourse as a framework for analyzing interaction strategies. Based on this framework, this study compared the interaction strategies used in introduction and headlines for hard news and soft news on Chinese and English Facebook fan pages, and then applied the results to teaching Chinese as a second language.
The corpus used in this study was obtained from Taiwanese and American news media’s Facebook fan pages during 2017. 300 pieces of news introduction and news headlines in each language were collected. The comparison showed numerous similarities and differences in the interaction strategies between Chinese and English news. The similarities include, for instance, frequent use of a large amount of and diverse attitude markers. The differences include, for instance, the overall use of interaction strategy markers in Chinese news is higher than that of English news, attitude markers and boosters are utilized more frequently and with more diversity in Chinese news compared to English news, and endophoric markers and hedges are more common in English news compared to Chinese news.
The results of this study on Chinese and English news interaction strategies showed that similarly, they both demonstrate a tendency to display the author’s stance and attitude in news introduction and headlines in order to increase interactivity, while the differences reveal the influence of language and culture disparities on the form and frequency of interaction strategies. This study also applied the results to design instructions on reading Chinese news introduction and news headlines.

Althaus, S. L., Edy, J. A., & Phalen, P. F. (2001). Using substitutes for full-text news stories in content analysis: Which text is best? American Journal of Political Science, 45(3), 707-723.
Andrew, B. C. (2007). Media-generated shortcuts: Do newspaper headlines present another roadblock for low-information rationality? Harvard International Journal of Press/Politics, 12(2), 24-43.
Ariel, M. (1988). Referring and accessibility. Journal of Linguistics, 24(1), 65-87.
Ariel, M. (1990). Accessing NP antecedents. London, England: Routledge.
Ariel, M. (1991). The function of accessibility in a theory of grammar. Journal of Pragmatics, 16(5), 443-463.
Baicchi, A. (2004). The cataphoric indexicality of titles. Pragmatics and Beyond New Series, 120, 17-38.
Baum, M. A. (2003). Soft news and political knowledge: Evidence of absence or absence of evidence? Political Communication, 20(2), 173-190.
Baum, M. A. (2005). Soft news goes to war: Public opinion and American foreign policy in the new media age. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Bell, Allan. (1991). The language of news media. Oxford, England: Blackwell.
Blom, J. N., & Hansen, K. R. (2015). Click bait: Forward-reference as lure in online news headlines. Journal of Pragmatics, 76, 87-100.
Bowman, S., & Willis, C. (2003). We media. How audiences are shaping the future of news and information. Reston, VA: The Media Center at the American Press Institute.
Caleffi, P. M. (2015). The ‘hashtag’: A new word or a new rule. Skase Journal of Theoretical Linguistics, 12(2), 46-69.
Chung, D. S., & Yoo, C. Y. (2008) Audience motivations for using interactive features: Distinguishing use of different types of interactivity on an online newspaper. Mass Communication & Society, 11(4), 375-397.
Crismore, A., Markkanen, R., & Steffensen, M. S. (1993). Metadiscourse in persuasive writing: A study of texts written by American and Finnish university students. Written Communication, 10(1), 39-71.
Curran, J., Iyengar, S., Brink Lund, A., & Salovaara-Moring, I. (2009). Media system, public knowledge and democracy: A comparative study. European Journal of Communication, 24(1), 5-26.
Dafouz-Milne, E. (2008). The pragmatic role of textual and interpersonal metadiscourse markers in the construction and attainment of persuasion: A cross-linguistic study of newspaper discourse. Journal of Pragmatics, 40(1), 95-113.
Davis, R., & Owen, D. M. (1998). New media and American politics. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
Emmett, A. (2008). Traditional news outlets turn into social networking web sites in an effort to build their online audiences. American Journalism Review, December 2008/January 2009, 40-43.
Fu, X., & Hyland, K. (2014). Interaction in two journalistic genres: A study of interactional metadiscourse. English Text Construction, 7(1), 122-144.
Golman, R., & Loewenstein, G. (2013). Curiosity, information gaps, and the utility of knowledge. Unpublished manuscript, Department of Social and Decision Sciences, Carnegie Mellon University. Pittsburgh, PA.
Greer, J. D., & Yan, Y. (2010). New ways of connecting with readers: How community newspapers are using Facebook, Twitter and other tools to deliver the news. Grassroots Editor, 51(4), 1-7.
Gunter, B. (2003). News and the net. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Hamilton, J. (2003). All the news that’s fit to sell: How the market transforms information into news. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Hayes, T. (2008). Jump point: How network culture is revolutionizing business. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
Herbert, J., & Thurman, N. (2007). Paid content strategies for news websites: An empirical study of British newspapers’ online business models. Journalism Practice, 1(2), 208-226.
Hermida, A. (2012). Social journalism: Exploring how social media is shaping journalism. In E. Siapera & A. Veglis (Eds.), The handbook of global online journalism (pp. 309-328). New York, NY: Wiley-Blackwell Press.
Hyland, K. (1998). Persuasion and context: The pragmatics of academic metadiscourse. Journal of Pragmatics, 30(4), 437-455.
Hyland, K. (2005). Metadiscourse: Exploring interaction in writing. London, England: Continuum.
Hyland, K. (2010). Constructing proximity: Relating to readers in popular and professional science. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 9(2), 116-127.
Ifantidou, E. (2009). Newspaper headlines and relevance: Ad hoc concepts in ad hoc contexts. Journal of Pragmatics, 41(4), 699-720.
Jurkowitz, M. (2000). Marry a multimillionaire: Soft news for the new millennium. Harvard International Journal of Press/Politics, 5(3), 108-110.
Khedri, M., Heng, C. S., & Ebrahimi, S. F. (2013). An exploration of interactive metadiscourse markers in academic research article abstracts in two disciplines. Discourse Studies, 15(3), 319-331.
Ko, H., Cho, C. H., & Roberts, M. S. (2005). Internet uses and gratifications: A structural equation model of interactive advertising. Journal of Advertising, 34(2), 57-70.
Kronrod, A., & Engel, O. (2001). Accessibility theory and referring expressions in newspaper headlines. Journal of Pragmatics, 33(5), 683-699.
Ksiazek, T. B., Peer, L., & Lessard, K. (2016). User engagement with online news: Conceptualizing interactivity and exploring the relationship between online news videos and user comments. New Media & Society, 18(3), 502-520.
Kuhi, D., & Mojood, M. (2014). Metadiscourse in newspaper genre: A cross-linguistic study of English and Persian editorials. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 98, 1046-1055.
Le, E. (2003). Active participation within written argumentation: Metadiscourse and editorialist's authority. Journal of Pragmatics, 36(4), 687-714.
Lerman, K., Ghosh, R., & Surachawala, T. (2012, May). Social contagion: An empirical study of information spread on Digg and Twitter follower graphs. Paper presented at the meeting of 4th International Conference on Weblogs and Social Media, Washington, D. C.
Liu, C. D. (2015). Facebook journalism: The influences of social media on journalistic work in Taiwan. E-Proceedings, 14, 107-118.
Loewenstein, G. (1994). The psychology of curiosity: A review and reinterpretation. Psychological Bulletin, 116(1), 75-98.
Loewenstein, G. (2003). Curiosity. Encyclopedia of Psychology. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
Martha, V., Zhao, W., & Xu, X. (2013, August). A study on Twitter user-follower network a network based analysis. Paper presented at the meeting of International Conference on Advances in Social Networks Analysis and Mining, Niagar Falls, Ontario, Canada.
Masip, P., Guallar, J., Suau, J., Ruiz-Caballero, C., & Peralta, M. (2015). News and social networks: Audience behavior. El Profesional de la Información, 24(4), 363-370.
Morris, M., & Ogan, C. (1996). The internet as mass medium. Journal of Computer‐Mediated Communication, 1(4), 39-50.
Napoli, P. M. (2011). Audience evolution: New technologies and the transformation of media audiences. New York, NY: Columbia University Press.
Newman, N., Levy, D. A., & Nielsen, R. K. (2015). Reuters institute digital news report 2015 newspaper website. The International Journal of Press/Politics, 14, 477-496.
Oeldorf-Hirsch, A., & Sundar, S. S. (2015). Posting, commenting, and tagging: Effects of sharing news stories on Facebook. Computers in Human Behavior, 44, 240-249.
Paletz, D. L. (2002). The media in American politics. New York, NY: Longman.
Patterson, T. E. (2000). Doing well and doing good: How soft news are shrinking the news audience and weaking democracy-and what news outlets can do about it. Cambridge, MA: Joan Shorenstein Center on the Press, Politics and Public Policy.
Peterson, E. T., & Carrabis, J. (2008). Measuring the immeasurable: Visitor engagement. (Report). Retrieved from Web Analytics Demystified website: http://bit.ly/hvFuio
Prior, M. (2003). Any good news in soft news? The impact of soft news preference on political knowledge. Political Communication, 20(2), 149-171.
Reich, Z. (2011). User comments. In J. B. Singer, D. Domingo, A. Heinonen, A. Hermida, S. Paulussen, T. Quandt, & M. Vujnovic (Eds.), Participatory journalism: Guarding open gates at online newspapers (pp. 96-117). Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.
Reinemann, C., Stanyer, J., Scherr, S., & Legnante, G. (2012). Hard and soft news: A review of concepts, operationalizations and key findings. Journalism, 13(2), 221-239.
Ruiz, C., Domingo, D., Micó, J. L., Díaz-Noci, J., Meso, K., & Masip, P. (2011). Public sphere 2.0? The democratic qualities of citizen debates in online newspapers. The International Journal of Press/Politics, 16(4), 463-487.
Schramm, W. (1949). The nature of news. Journalism Bulletin, 26(3), 259-269.
Scott, D. K., & Gobetz, R. H. (1992). Hard news/soft news content of the national broadcast networks, 1972–1987. Journalism quarterly, 69(2), 406-412.
Shirky, C. (2010). Cognitive surplus: Creativity and generosity in a connected age. New York, NY: Penguin.
Shoemaker, P. J., & Cohen, A. A. (2006). News around the world: Content, practitioners, and the public. New York, NY: Routledge.
Singer, J. B. (2009). Separate spaces: Discourse about the 2007 Scottish elections on a national newspaper web site. The International Journal of Press/Politics, 14(4), 477-496.
Sivek, S. C. (2013). City magazines and social media: Moving beyond the monthly. Journal of Magazine & New Media Research, 14(2), 1-17.
Tatar, A., Leguay, J., Antoniadis, P., Limbourg, A., de Amorim, M. D., & Fdida, S. (2011, May). Predicting the popularity of online articles based on user comments. Paper presented at the meeting of the International Conference on Web Intelligence, Mining and Semantics, New York, NY.
Tuchman, G. (1973). Making news by doing work: Routinizing the unexpected. American Journal of Sociology, 79(1), 110-131.
Vande Kopple, W. J. (1985). Some explanatory discourse on metadiscourse. College Composition and Communication, 36(1), 82-93.
Wang, L., & Zhang, Y. (2016). A study of metadiscourse features in English news reports. International Journal of Arts and Commerce, 5(6), 75-83.
Weber, P. (2014). Discussions in the comments section: Factors influencing participation and interactivity in online newspapers’ reader comments. New Media & Society, 16(6), 941-957.
Webster, J. G. (2011). The duality of media: A structurational theory of public attention. Communication Theory, 21(1), 43-66.
Williams, J. M. (1981). Style: Ten lessons in clarity and grace. New York, NY: Harper Collins Publishers.
Yazdani, A., & Salehi, H. (2016). Metadiscourse markers of online texts: English and Persian online headlines use of metadiscourse markers. International Journal of Education and Literacy Studies, 4(3), 41-46.
Yoo, C. Y. (2011). Modeling audience interactivity as the gratification‐seeking process in online newspapers. Communication Theory, 21(1), 67-89.

李茂政（2005）。新聞學新論。台北市：風雲論壇有限公司。
周芬（2011）。VOA時事新聞語篇的元話語特徵探析。台州學院學報，33(5)，47-50.
段瑞雲、黃瑩（2009）。互動元話語視角下的中美報紙社論對比分析。中國礦業大學學報（社會科學版），11(4)，135-139。
張慧美（2004）。新聞標題之音韻風格研究。中山大學中文系《文與哲》，5，513-534。
黃勤、熊瑤（2012）。英漢新聞評論中的元話語使用對比分析。外語學刊，164(1)，99-103。
葉德明（主編）（2011）。對外華語課程設計。台北市：文鶴出版有限公司。
謝佳玲（2006）。華語廣義與狹義情態詞的分析。華語文教學研究，3(1)，1-25。
謝佳玲（2006）。漢語情態詞的語意界定：語料庫為本的研究。中國語文研究，21，45-63。
謝佳玲、李家豪（2011）。臺灣電視新聞標題研究與教學啟示。華語文教學研究，8(3)，79-114。
謝佳玲、吳欣儒（2018）。以華語電視新聞為材料的語篇研究及聽力教學應用。台灣華語教學研究，16，（排印中）。
許余龍（2000）。英漢指稱詞語表達的可及性。外國語文雙月刊，32(5)，321-328。
許雅晴（2014）。華法網路新聞之語篇標記研究與教學應用（未出版之碩士論文）。國立台灣師範大學，台北市。