議題與日常生活息息相關，在這個網路為主流、人人都可以是自媒體的社會中，人們經常自發性地發起議題討論，讓議題討論變得十分熱絡（李宜玲，2020；陳韋博，2018）。教育領域學者意識到其重要性，積極提倡將議題討論融入課堂中（Cates, 2022；Hanvey, 1975；Merryfield, 1994；Tye & Kniep, 1991）。然而華語領域學者卻指出，學習者語言程度上的不足是議題學習過程中最大的阻礙（陳毅，2018；黃子純，2019）。因此，為了協助華語學習者提升處理真實議題語篇的能力，本文蒐集YouTube中環境、社會和性別三類獨白式議題型影片，共60部影片，從宏觀的互動式後設論述使用分布，到微觀的常用互動式後設論述標記詞，以說服語用的角度探查不同類型議題語篇中互動式後設論述標記的使用異同。
研究結果顯示，不論議題類型，發話者最重視的皆為與接收對象的參與互動；語篇呈現的說服強度而言，環境議題最為強勢，接著為社會議題，最後則是性別議題；建構環境議題時，發話者經常使用集合指稱代詞，如「我們」創造雙方親密感和間接呼籲；建構社會議題和性別議題時，發話者常使用「你」和「大家」建構議題相關的假設情境，提高接收者的議題涉入程度；也經常使用「我」分享經驗和發起互動，突顯發話者議題涉入程度的同時也貼近接收者展現親和力，提高論述被接受的可能性。
綜上所述，本文從說服語用的角度帶領學習者認識華語議題語篇的語用特性，亦提供實際的語言框架和教學應用，有助於華語學習者未來自由地篩選、掌握第一手資訊，進而使用目標語達成更多的交流可能。

Issues are intimately associated with daily life. In this Internet-based society of easily generated self-media, people frequently initiate discussions on various issues (Lee, 2020; Chen,2018). Consequently, researchers in the educational field have recognized the importance of “issues” and have actively advocated to include issues in the classroom (Cates, 2022; Hanvey, 1975; Merryfield, 1994; Tye & Kniep, 1991). However, scholars in Teaching Chinese as a Foreign Language have indicated that poor language proficiency is the greatest stumbling block in issue learning (Chen, 2018; Huang, 2019). To assist Chinese L2 learners in improving their ability to process authentic issue discourses, this study collected 60 Chinese YouTube issue-oriented monologue videos from three categories (environment, society, and gender). This corpus was analyzed from the macro aspect and considered the interactional metadiscourse distribution, and from the micro aspect, the usage of interactional metadiscourse markers. This study further explores the similarities and differences in the use of interactional metadiscourse markers in discourse on different issue types.
Th results reveal that regardless of the issue type, speakers prioritize participation and interaction with recipients. Regarding persuasive speech styles, environmental issues were found to utilize the most powerful speech style, followed by social issues, and then gender issues. Speakers use collective pronouns when initiating environmental issue discourses, such as using “us” to create intimacy between interlocutors or to indirectly convey an appeal. When establishing social and gender issue discourses, speakers use “you” and “everyone” to create issue-related hypothetical scenarios to increase the recipients’ involvement in the issues. Speakers also use “I” to share experiences and initiate interactions. This not only demonstrates affinity toward the recipient but also highlights the speaker’s involvement in the issue and raises the possibility of the discourse being accepted.
This study guides students’ understanding of the pragmatic characteristics of Chinese issue-oriented discourses from a persuasive perspective. It also provides actual language frameworks and teaching applications. These can help students freely choose and better understand first-hand information in the future, thereby enabling students to engage in more communication using the target language.

丁姍（2008）。元話語研究綜述。當代教育理論與實踐，1（2），154-156。
中文考試服務網（無日期）。HSK口語高級。漢考國際教育科技（北京）有限公司。2024年3月2日，取自 https://www.chinesetest.cn/HSKK/3
方瑾、招靜琪（2020）。YouTube華語教學背後的奧妙：後教學法如何揭示開放式網路教學之宏觀與微觀策略。應華學報，22，89-118。
王世哲（2002）。全球化現象的成人教育出路－哲學的省察。載於中華民國成人教育學會（主編），全球化與成人教育（99-122頁）。師大書苑。
王立軍（2015）。說服類言語交際研究（未出版博士論文）。吉林大學。
王志輝（2022年5月14日）。亞里斯多德。華文哲學百科。http://mephilosophy.ccu.edu.tw/entry.php?entry_name=亞里斯多德
王等元（2023）。中小學新興議題教育的反思：永續發展全球在地化觀點。臺灣教育評論月刊，12（5），138-144。
申智奇（2004）。關聯理論對說服行為的解釋。外國語言文學，4，31-35。
江芝瑩（2006）。社會運動組織議題倡議策略之研究——以媒體改造學社推動「無線電視公共化」議題為例（未出版碩士論文）。國立臺灣師範大學。
江淑琳（1998）。從報紙報導看性騷擾議題的社會建構（未出版碩士論文）。國立政治大學。
吳欣儒（2017）。華語演講的語步分析及其教學應用（未出版博士論文）。國立臺灣師範大學。
吳昭穎（2021）。中英知識型與指導型YouTube影片之語用策略對比分析語教學應用（未出版碩士論文）。國立臺灣師範大學。
呂佩茹（2020）。主流媒體語另類媒體的國際災難新聞框架（未出版碩士論文）。國立中山大學。
宋佩芬、陳麗華（2008）。全球教育脈絡分析兼評臺灣的全球教育研究。課程與教學季刊，11（2），1-26。
李秀明（2006）。漢語元話語標記語研究（未出版博士論文）。復旦大學。
李秀明（2011）。漢語元話語標記語研究。中國社會科學出版社。
李宜玲（2020）。世代融合議題YouTube頻道的內容製作策略之研究（未出版碩士論文）。天主教輔仁大學。
李欣憶（2006）。問題導向學習應用於高中地理海岸環境議題教學之研究（未出版碩士論文）。國立臺灣師範大學。
李信漢、杜綺文（2007）。Web 2.0，麥克魯漢知多少？新聞學研究，92，183-192。
李家豪（2011）。華語說服語言語意、語用、語篇分析研究（未出版碩士論文）。國立臺灣師範大學。
周真安（2016）。中英學術引言之後設論述策略分析與教學應用（未出版碩士論文）。國立臺灣師範大學。
林永豐（2012）。全球教育的重要主題及其課程設計。課程研究，7（2），31-54。
林妤昕（2021）。YouTuber爭議性社會議題傳播效果分析：通姦除罪化（未出版碩士論文）。國立政治大學。
林芝逸（2015）。環保議題融入中高級華語課程設計與實踐（未出版碩士論文）。國立政治大學。
林婷萍（2008）。初探華語同志電影隱/現中的議題——以《蝴蝶》、《面子》為例（未出版碩士論文）。銘傳大學。
林靜怡（2021）。中德網路新聞語篇標記研究與閱讀教學建議（未出版碩士論文）。國立臺灣師範大學。
邱明建（2006）。資訊融入國小社會領域教材資源庫之學習成效分析——以全球議題為例（未出版碩士論文）。國立臺北教育大學。
侯穎（2022）。科普短視頻中的互動元話語研究。現代語言學，10（1），75-81。
紀孫澧（2020）。華語學術寫作的說服策略分析語教學應用（未出版碩士論文）。國立臺灣師範大學。
計艷、蔡希望（2010）。《菜根譚》中元話語對語境的建構功能。廣播電視大學學報，154，110-113。
計艷、龍華丹（2011）。元話語與修辭—論蔡元培《就任北京大學校長之演說》。河北理工大學學報，11（3），124-128。
唐淑媛（1987）。說服的巧妙秘訣。文國出版。
唐霞（2007）。中美“勸說”言語行為的對比研究（未出版博士論文）。廣西師範大學。
唐霞（2009）。“勸說”言語行為的語用分析。長沙大學學報，23（3），73-75。
徐金雲（2010）。亞里斯多德《修辭學》中的「語用空缺」問題研究—一個當代非形式邏輯的考察（未出版博士論文）。東海大學。
國立臺灣大學語文中心中國語文組（無日期）。課程介紹CLD課程大綱-高級華語課程二。國立臺灣大學語文中心中國語文組。2023年1月14日，取自http://homepage.ntu.edu.tw/~cld222/courseintroduction.html
國立臺灣師範大學國語教學中心（主編）（2016）。實用中文讀寫。國立臺灣師範大學出版。
國立臺灣師範大學國語教學中心（無日期）。學習目標，詳細的課程等級、學習目標、字彙量及教材對照表。國立臺灣師範大學。2023年1月14日，取自https://mtc.ntnu.edu.tw/course-seasonal.htm
國家教育研究院（2019年12月）。議題融入說明手冊。國家教育研究院。https://www.naer.edu.tw/PageSyllabus?fid=197。
張金蘭（2019）。華語教學視角下的文化教學理論與實務。新學林出版。
張金蘭（2022）。臺灣與美國華語教材之文化內容比較分析——以《新版實用視聽華語》與Integrated Chinese為例。教科書研究，15（1），81-109。
張玲瑛（2009）。現代漢語句末助詞「嗎、啊、吧、呢」的教學語法。華語文教學研究，6（2），99-127。
張晏豪（2015）。高中公民與社會全球議題批判思考教學之行動研究（未出版碩士論文）。國立臺灣師範大學。
張培新（2003）。全球化浪潮之下公民資質初探。人文及社會學科教學通訊，14（1），58-75。
張善禮（2015）。外語教育的前瞻：以跨文化溝通能力建構國際行動能力的外語教育。外國語文研究，22，97-115。
教育部（無日期）。議題。重編國語辭典修訂本。2024年3月20日，取自https://dict.revised.moe.edu.tw/dictView.jsp?ID=151561&la=0&powerMode=0
梁福鎮（2009）。全球化脈絡下臺灣公民教育的挑戰與回應。教育科學期刊，8（1），63-86。
許雅晴（2014）。華法網路新聞之語篇標記研究與教學應用（未出版碩士論文）。國立臺灣師範大學。
許雅雯（2013）。全球化觀點下的華語習得規劃——以法國里昂第三大學中國研究系為個案（未出版碩士論文）。國立高雄師範大學。
郭于嫣（2014）。從資訊豐富度、議題態度和關係強度看Facebook分享行為：以國民健康署為例（未出版碩士論文）。世新大學。
郭陽道（1980）。新聞媒介「議題設定」功能之研究－以大學生認知中美關係調整問題為例。新聞學研究，25，1-59。
陳建山（2003）。漢字造型符號形式轉化之創作研究（未出版碩士論文）。國立交通大學。
陳韋博（2018年11月）。拍出改變社會的正能量！YouTube持續鼓勵創作者透過頻道為社會帶來正向改變。Think with google。https://www.thinkwithgoogle.com/intl/zh-tw/marketing-strategies/video/whats-on-yt_q4/
陳凌（2005）。說服傳播過程與實踐。五南圖書出版。
陳振宇（總編）（2021）。縱橫天下事。聯經出版公司。
陳毅（2018）。以「性別議題」為主題之中高級華語教學設計與實踐（未出版碩士論文）。國立政治大學。
陳韻如（2017）。以全球議題為核心的國小社會領域國際教育課程發展（未出版博士論文）。國立臺灣師範大學。
彭妮絲（2013）。華語文讀寫讀暨教學研究—以系統功能語言學理論為基礎之研究。臺北市立大學學報，44（2），33-62。
華語文能力測驗（無日期）。能力描述。國家華語測驗推動工作委員會。2024年4月15日，取自https://tocfl.edu.tw/index.php/test/speaking/list/2
華語文能力測驗（無日期）。測驗說明。國家華語測驗推動工作委員會。2023年4月15日，取自https://tocfl.edu.tw/index.php/test/speaking/list/3
華語文能力測驗（無日期）。測驗類別——題型範例及考試技巧。國家華語測驗推動工作委員會。2023年4月15日，取自https://tocfl.edu.tw/index.php/test/speaking/list/4
華語文能力測驗（無日期）。適用對象。國家華語測驗推動工作委員會。2024年4月15日，取自https://tocfl.edu.tw/index.php/test/reading/list/2
黃子純（2019）。華語內容與語言整合學習課程設計與教材編寫：「臺灣社會議題」課程之個案探析（未出版碩士論文）。國立臺灣師範大學。
黃富順（2002）。全球化與成人教育。載於中華民國成人教育學會（主編），全球化與成人教育（1-27頁）。師大書苑。
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。
楊國德（2002）。全球化與成人教育。載於中華民國成人教育學會（主編），全球化與成人教育（237-264頁）。師大書苑。
廖婉君、宋如瑜（2014）。以真實材料融入華語教學。華文世界，113，35-45。
臺灣網路資訊中心。2023臺灣網路報告。財團法人臺灣網路資訊中心。2024年1月12日，取自https://report.twnic.tw/2023。
齊滬揚（2002）。語氣詞與語氣系統。安徽教育出版社。
劉真辰（2021）。華德網路新聞之語篇標記研究與教學應用（未出版碩士論文）。國立臺灣師範大學。
蔡明哲（2004）。虛擬、解構與拼貼：後結構主義的網際空間課程觀。資訊社會研究，7，147-171。
鄧守信（主編）（2018）。當代中文課程。聯經出版公司。
穆從軍（2010）。中英文報紙社論之元話語標記對比分析。外語教學理論與實踐，4，35-43。
聯合國公約與誓言（1992年6月14日）。21世紀議程。https://www.un.org/zh/documents/treaty/21stcentury#36.%20%E4%BF%83%E8%BF%9B
謝佳玲（2015）。漢語與英語跨文化對比：網路社會之語用策略研究。文鶴出版。
謝佳玲（主編）（2017）。新版實用視聽華語（第三版）。正中書局出版。
謝佳玲、吳欣儒（2023）。中文學術論文的後設論述研究。臺灣華語教學研究，27，1-39。
謝佳玲、吳欣儒、紀孫澧（2018）。華語學術寫作中表達確信程度的語用策略與教學建議。載於巫宜靜（主編），銘傳大學2018年華語文教學國際學術研討會會後論文集（69-82頁）。銘傳大學出版。
謝娜（2019）。新聞評論中的元話語分析——以“第二十七屆中國新聞獎”獲獎評論為例。阜陽師範學院學報，189（3），55-60。
顏佩如（2002）。全球教育的初探。教育研究，1-17。
羅翊芳（2016）。跨文化比較與華語電影教學--以「死亡」議題為例（未出版碩士論文）。國立臺灣師範大學。
蘇國權（2004）。媒體對特定議題之新聞呈現—兼論與民眾態度的差異（未出版碩士論文）。東吳大學。
Nothstine, W. L.（1992）。說服策略：如何影響別人（雷佩珍譯）。麥田出版（原著出版於1989）。
Similarweb（無日期）。臺灣新聞與媒體發行商熱門網站排名。2024年1月13日，取自https://www.similarweb.com/zh-tw/top-websites/taiwan/news-and-media/
Stiff, J. B.（1995）。說服傳播（蔡幸佑、彭敏慧譯）。五南圖書出版（原著出版於1994）。
英文文獻
Ágnes, M. G. (2012). Are you with me? A metadiscursive analysis of interactive strategies in college students' course presentation. International Journal of English Studies, 12(1), 55-78.
Alger, C. F., & Harf, J. E. (1986). Global education: Why? For whom? About what? In R. E. Freeman (Ed.), Promising practices in global education (pp. 1-13). National Council on Foreign Language and International Studies.
American Council on the Teaching of Foreign Languages. (2015). World-readiness standards for learning language. https://www.actfl.org/educator-resources/world-readiness-standards-for-learning-languages
Amiryousefi, M.R., & Rasekh, A.E. (2010). Metadiscourse: Definitions, issues and its implications for English teachers. English Language Teaching, 3, 159-167.
Anderson, G. G. (1996). Global issues in the university ESL classroom [Supplemental material]. The Language Teacher Online, 20(11). https://jalt-publications.org/tlt/articles/2066-global-issues-university-esl-classroom
Austin, J. L. (1962). How to do things with words. University Press.
Baesler, E. J. (1997). Persuasive effects of story and statistical evidence. Argumentation and Advocacy, 33, 170-175.
Baesler, E. J., & Burgoon, J. K. (1994). The temporal effects of story and statistical evidence on belief change. Communication Research, 21(5), 582-602.
Balistreri, S., Di Giacomo, F. T., Noisette, I., & Ptak, T. (2012, April). Global education：Connections, concepts, and careers. Research in review, 2012-4 [Supplemental material]. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED562681
Beck, U. (2000). What is globalization? (P. Camiller, Trans.). Polity. (Original work published 1998)
Becker, J. M. (1982). Goals for Global Education. Theory Into Practice, 21(3), 228-233.
Beebe, S. A., & Beebe, S. J. (2012). Public speaking: An audience-centered approach. Person Education.
Benoit, & Benoit, P. J. (2008). Persuasive messages: The process of influence. Blackwell.
Blankenship, K., & Holtgraves, T. (2003). The role of different makers of linguistic powerlessness and persuasion. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 22(10), 1-22.
Boar, A., Bastida, R., & Marimon, F. (2020). A systematic literature review. Relationships between the sharing economy, sustainability and sustainable development goals. Sustainability, 12(17), 1-14.
Borchers, T. A. (2013). Persuasion in the media age. Waveland Press, Inc.
Burke, K. A. (1969). A rhetoric of motives. University of California Press.
Burnouf, L. (2004). Global awareness and perspectives in global education. Canadian Social Studies, 38(3), 1-12.
Burrell, N. A., & Koper, R. J. (1998). The efficacy of powerful/powerless language on attitudes and source credibility. In M. Allen & R.W. Preiss (Eds.), Persuasion: Advances through meta-analysis (pp. 203-216). Hampton Press.
Byram, M., & Guilherme, M. (2000). Human rights, cultures and language teaching. In A. Osler (Ed.), Citizenship and democracy in schools: Diversity, identity and equality (pp. 63-78). Trentham Books.
Byram, M., & Parmenter, L. (2012). The common European framework of reference: The globalisation of language education policy. Multilingual Matters.
Cacioppo, J. T., Petty, R. E., Feinstein, J. A., & Jarvis, W. B. G. (1996). Dispositional differences in cognitive motivation: The life and times of individuals varying in need for cognition. Psychological Bulletin, 119(2), 197-253.
Cao, F., & Hu, G. (2014). Interactive metadiscourse in research articles: A comparative study of paradigmatic and disciplinary influences. Journal of Pragmatics, 66, 15-31.
Carter, D. J. (1991). Foreword. In K. A. Tye (1991). Global education: From thought to action. The 1991 ASCD yearbook (p. v). Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
Cates, K. A. (1990). Teaching for a better world: Global issues in language education. The Language Teacher, 14(5), 41-52.
Cates, K. A. (2022). Global education as a cross-curricular approach to language teaching for democracy. Iranian Journal of Language Teaching Research, 10(3), 75-96.
Charney, D., & Porter, J. (1991). Current research in technical communication. Technical Communication, 38(1), 137-139.
Chen, M., & Qu, X. (2021). Study of teachers' use of metadiscourse in EFL instruction -- A case study of the SFLEP national foreign language teaching contest. International Journal of Social Science and Education Research, 4(11), 112-121.
Cheng, M. (2016). The power of persuasion: Modality and issue framing in the 2012 Taiwan Presidential Debates. Discourse & Society, 27(2), 172-194.
Christie, F. (1999). Genre theory and ESL teaching a systemic functional perspective. TESOL Quarterly, 33(4), 759-763.
Cialdini, R. B. (2007). Influence: The psychology of persuasion. Harper Collins.
Council of Europe (2020, April). Common European framework of reference for languages: Learning, teaching, assessment companion volume. https://www.coe.int/en/web/common-european-framework-reference-languages/level-descriptions
Cox, R. (1996). A perspective on globalization. In J. M. Mittelman (Ed.), Globalization: Critical reflections (pp. 21-30). Lynne Rienner Publishers.
Crismore, A., & Farnsworth, R. (1989). Mr. Darwin and his readers: Exploring interpersonal metadiscourse as a dimension of ethos. Rhetoric Review, 8(1), 91-112.
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.
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, 95-113.
Daun, H. (2001). Educational restructuring in the context of globalization and national policy. Routledge.
Dyer, B., & Bushell, B. (1996). World issues or a global perspective? The Language Teacher Online, 20(11).
Erickson, B., Lind, E. A., Johnson, B. C., & O’Barr, W. M. (1978). Speech style and impression formation in a court setting: The effects of “powerful” and “powerless” speech. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 14, 266-279.
Estaji, M., & Vafaeimehr, R. (2015). A comparative analysis of interactional metadiscourse markers in the introduction and conclusion sections of mechanical and electrical engineering research papers. Iranian Journal of Language Teaching Research, 3(1), 37-56.
Festinger, L. (1957). A theory of cognitive dissonance. Stanford University Press.
Fontes, C. (2010). The global turn of the alternative media movement. In K. Howley (Ed.), Understanding community media (pp. 381-390). SAGE Publication.
Fotheringham, W. C. (1966). Perspectives on persuasion. Allyn and Bacon.
Giddens, A. (1990). The consequences of modernity. Stanford University Press.
Global Media Insight. (n.d.). YouTube statistics 2024 (demographics, users by country & more). Dubai Digital Interactive Agency. Retrieved March 1, 2024, from https://www.globalmediainsight.com/blog/youtube-users-statistics/#daily
Halliday, M. A. K. (1978). Language as social semiotic: The social interpretation of language and meaning. University Park Press.
Halliday, M. A. K. (1985). An introduction to functional grammar. Edward Arnold.
Halliday, M. A. K., & Matthiessen, C. M. I. M. (2013). Halliday's introduction to functional grammar. Routledge.
Hanvey, R. G. (1975). An attainable global perspective. Center for War/ Peace Studies.
Hanvey, R. G. (1982). An attainable global perspective. Theory into Practice, 21(3), 162-167.
Harris, Z. S. (1959). The transformational model of language structure. Anthropological Linguistics, 1(1), 27-29.
Hass, R. G. (1981). Effects of source characteristics on cognitive responses and persuasion. In R. E. Petty, T. M. Ostrom, & T. C. Brock (Eds.), Cognitive responses (pp. 141-172). Lawrence Erlbaum.
Heider, F. (1946). Attitudes and cognitive organization. Journal of Psychology, 21, 107-112.
Heider, F. (1958). The psychology of interpersonal relations. Wiley.
Hoeken, H., & Hustinx, L. (2003). The relative persuasiveness of different types of evidence. In F. H. van Eemeren, J. A. Blair, C. A. Willard, & A. F. Snoeck Henkemans (Eds.), Proceedings of the fifth conference of the international society for the study of argumentation (pp. 497-501). Sic Sat.
Holmes, J. (1982). Expressing doubt and certainty in English. Regional English Language Center, 13, 19-28.
Horniks, J., & Heoken, H. (2007). Cultural differences in the persuasiveness of evidence types and evidence quality. Communication Monographs, 74(4), 443-463.
Hosack, I. (2011). Foreign language teaching for global citizenship. Policy Science, 18(3),125-140.
Hosman, L. A. (1989). The evaluative consequences of hedges, hesitations, and intensifiers: Powerful and powerless speech styles. Human Communication Research, 15(3), 383-406.
Hosman, L. A. (2002). Language and persuasion. In J. P. Dillard & M. Pfau (Eds.), The persuasion handbook: Developments in theory and practice (pp. 371-390). Sage.
Hosman, L. A., & Wright, J. W. (1987). The effects of hedges and hesitations on impression formation in a simulated courtroom context. Western Journal of Speech Communication, 51(2), 173-188.
Hovland, C. I., Janis, I. L., & Kelley, H. H. (1953). Communication and persuasion: Psychological studies of opinion change. Yale University Press.
Hsieh, C. L. (2008). Evidentiality in Chinese newspaper reports: subjectivity/objectivity as a factor. Discourse Studies, 10(2), 205-229.
Hurlbert, C., & Totten, S. (1992). Social issues in the English classroom. National Council of Teachers of English.
Hyland, K. (1998). Persuasion and context: The pragmatics of academic metadiscourse. Journal of Pragmatics, 30, 437-455.
Hyland, K. (2005a). A convincing argument: corpus analysis and academic persuasion. In U. Connor & T. Upton (Eds.), Discourse in the professions: perspectives from corpus linguistics (pp. 87-112). John Benjamins.
Hyland, K. (2005b). Metadiscourse: Exploring interaction in writing. Continuum.
Hyland, K. (2017). Metadiscourse: What is it and where is it going? Journal of Pragmatics, 113(1), 16-29.
Hyland, K., & Tse, P. (2004). Metadiscourse in academic writing: A reappraisal. Applied Linguistics, 25(2), 156-177.
Intaraprawat (1988). Metadiscourse in native English speakers and ESL students’ persuasive essays [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. Illinois State University.
International Association of Teachers of English as a Foreign Language. (n.d.). What are global issues? Retrieved August 5, 2023, from https://gisig.iatefl.org/
Izquierdo, M., & Pérez Blanco, M. (2023). Interactional metadiscourse: Building Rapport and Solidarity in informational-persuasive discourse. an English-Spanish case study. Journal of Pragmatics, 216, 106–120.
Jones, E. E., & Nisbett, R. E. (1972). The actor and the observer: Divergent perceptions of the causes of behavior. In E. E. Jones, D. Kanouse, H. H. Kelley, R. E. Nisbett, S. Valins, & B. Weiner (Eds.), Attribution: Perceiving the causes of behavior (pp. 79-94). General Learning Press.
Jones, R. G. (2013). Communication in the real world: An introduction to communication studies. Flat World Knowledge.
Kawase, T. (2015). Metadiscourse in the introductions of PhD theses and research articles. The Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 20, 114-124.
Kazoleas, D. C. (1993). A comparison of the persuasive effectiveness of qualitative versus quantitative evidence: A test of explanatory hypotheses. Communication Quarterly, 41(1), 40-50.
Kennedy, G. A. (1980). Classical rhetoric and its Christian and Secular tradition from ancient to modern times. University of North Carolina Press.
Kim, H. Y. (2022). The metadiscourse analysis of the argumentative discourse in Chinese: A Case study of the debate show I can I BB [Unpublished master dissertation]. National Taiwan University.
Kjaerbeck, S. (1998). The organization of discourse units in Mexican and Danish business negotiations. Journal of Pragmatics, 30(3), 347-362.
Kniep, W. M. (1989). Global education as school reform. Educational Leadership, 7, 43-45.
Kramsch, C. (2014). Teaching foreign languages in an era of globalization: Introduction. The Modern Language Journal, 98, 296-311.
Kramsch, C., & Von Hoene, L. (2001). Cross-cultural excursions: Foreign language study and feminist discourses of travel. In A. Pavlenko, A. Blackledge, I. Piller, & M. Teutsch-Dwyer (Eds.), Multilingualism, second language learning, and gender (pp. 283-306). Mouton de Gruyter.
Latawiec, B. M. (2012). Metadiscourse in oral discussions and persuasive essays of children exposed to collaborative reasoning [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. University of Illinois.
Le, E. (2004). Active participation within written argumentation: Metadiscourse and editorialist’s authority. Journal of Pragmatics, 36, 687-714.
Lee, J. J., & Deakin, L. (2016). Interactions in L1 and L2 undergraduate student writing: Interactional metadiscourse in successful and less-successful argumentative essays. Journal of Second Language Writing, 33, 21-34.
Liu, S., Gui, D. Y., Zuo, Y., & Dai, Y. (2019). Good slang or bad slang? Embedding internet slang in persuasive advertising. Frontiers in Psychology, 10, 1-12.
Mao, L. R. (1993). I conclude not: Toward a pragmatics account of metadiscourse. Rhetoric Review, 11(2), 265-289.
Martin, J. R., Christie, F., & Rothery, J. (1987). Social processes in education: A reply to Sawyer and Watson (and others). In I. Reid (Ed.), The place of genre in learning: Current debates (pp. 58-82). Deakin University.
McClaran, S. (2022). Persuading through fictional televisions: A mixed methods investigation of genre expectations [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. Michigan State University.
McLuhan, M. (1964). Understanding media: The extensions of man. McGraw Hill.
Merryfield, M. M. (1994). In the global classroom: Teacher decision-making and global perspectives in education. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans, USA.
Merryfield, M. M., & Harris, J. (1992). Getting started in global education: Essential literature, essential linkages for teacher educators. School of Education Review, 4, 56-66.
Miller, G. R. (1980). On being persuaded: Some basic distinctions. In M. E. Roloff & G. R. Miller (Eds.), Persuasion: New directions in theory and research (pp. 11-28). Sage.
Molina, S., & Lattimer, H. (2013). Defining global education. Policy Futures in Education, 11, 414-422.
Moyer-Gusé, E. (2008). Toward a theory of entertainment persuasion: Explaining the persuasive effects of entertainment-education messages. Communication Theory, 18(3), 407-425
O’Hair, D., Rubenstein, H., & Stewart, R. A. (2006). A pocket guide to public speaking. Bedford/St. Martin’s.
O’Hair, D., Stewart, R., & Rubenstein, H. (2017). A speaker’s guidebook: Text and reference. Bedford/St. Martin’s.
O’Keefe, D. J. (2016). Persuasion: Theory & research. (3rd ed.). Sage.
Osler, A., & Starkey, H. (2005). Citizenship and language learning: International perspectives. Trentham Books.
NETworking (2012, May). Social Issues in the English Classroom. Education Bureau. https://nets.edb.hkedcity.net/individual.php?p=27
Perloff, R. M. (2003). The dynamics of persuasion: Communication and attitudes in the 21st century. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Petty, R. E., & Briñol, P. (2008). Persuasion: From single to multiple to metacognitive processes. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 3(2), 137-147.
Petty, R. E., & Cacioppo, J. T. (1986). The elaboration likelihood model of persuasion. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 19, 123-205.
Petty, R. E., Cacioppo, J. T., & Goldman, R. (1981). Personal involvement as a determinant of argument-based persuasion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 41(5), 847-855.
Piccardo, E., North, B., & Goodier, T. (2019). Broadening the scope of language education mediation, plurilingualism, and collaborative learning the CEFR companion volume. Journal of e-Learning and Knowledge Society, 15(1), 17-36.
Pike, G. (1997). The meaning of global education: From proponents’ visions to practitioners’ perceptions [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. University of York.
Pike, G. (2000). Global education and national identity: In pursuit of meaning. Theory into Practice, 39(2), 64-73.
Porto, M., Houghton, S.A., & Byram, M. (2018). Intercultural citizenship in the (foreign) language classroom. Language Teaching Research, 22, 484 - 498.
Roberts, W. R. (1924). Notes on Aristotle’s ‘Rhetoric’. The American Journal of Philology, 45(5), 351-361.
Robertson, R. (1992). Globalization: Social theory and global culture. Sage.
Robertson, R. (1995). Globalization: Time-space and homogeneity - heterogeneity. In M. Featherstone, S. Lash, & R. Robertson (Eds.), Global modernities (pp. 25-44). Sage.
Rogers, W. A. (2007). Persuasion: Messages, receivers, and contexts. Rowman & Littlefield.
Rosentiel, T. (2012, July 27). YouTube as a Major Platform for News Videos. Pew Research Center. https://www.pewresearch.org/2012/07/27/ask-the-expert-youtube-as-a-major-platform-for-news-videos/
Sachs, J. D. (2020). The ages of globalization: Geography, technology, and institutions. Columbia University Press.
Scarantino, L. M. (2008). Persuasion, rhetoric and authority. Diogenes, 217, 22-36.
Schiffrin, D. (1980). Meta-talk: Organizational and evaluative brackets in discourse. Sociological Inquiry, 50(3-4), 199-236.
Sherif, M., & Hovland, C. I. (1961). Social judgment: Assimilation and contrast effects in communication and attitude change. Yale University Press.
Sherif, M., & Sherif, C. W. (1967). Attitude as the individual's own categories: The social judgment-involvement approach to attitude and attitude change. In C. W. Sherif & M. Sherif (Eds.), Attitude, ego-involvement, and change (pp. 105-139). Wiley.
Simons, H. W. (1976). Persuasion: Understanding, practice, and analysis. Addison-Wesley.
Simons, H. W., Berkowitz, N. N., & Moyer, R. J. (1970). Similarity, credibility, and attitude change: A review and a theory. Psychological Bulletin, 73(1), 1-16.
Stocking, G., Kessel, P. V., Barthel, M., Matsa, K. E., & Khuzam, M. (2020, September 28). Many Americans get news on YouTube, where news organizations and independent producers thrive side by side. Pew Research Center. https://www.pewresearch.org/journalism/2020/09/28/many-americans-get-news-on-youtube-where-news-organizations-and-independent-producers-thrive-side-by-side/
Su, D. (2021). The discourse authenticity model (DAM) for second language teaching materials. Chinese Language in the World, 5, 88-114.
Swales, J. M. (1990). Genre analysis: English in academic and research settings. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.
Tajeddin, Z., & Alemi, M. (2012). L2 learners’ use of metadiscourse markers in online discussion forums. Issues in Language Teaching, 1(1), 93–121.
Taylor, S. E., & Thompson, S. C. (1982). Stalking the elusive "vividness" effect. Psychological Review, 89(2), 155-181.
Taylor, S., Rizvi, F., Lingard, B., & Henry, M. (1997). Education policy and the politics of change. Routledge.
Thompson, G. (2001). Interaction in academic writing: learning to argue with the reader. Applied Linguistics, 22(1), 58-78.
Thompson, G., & Thetela, P. (1995). The sound of one hand clapping: The management of interaction in writing discourse. Text, 15(1), 103-127.
Tikly, L. (2001). Globalisation and education in the postcolonial world: Towards a conceptual framework. Comparative Education, 37(2), 151-171.
Toulmin, S. E. (2003). The uses of argument. Cambridge University Press.
Trim, J. L. M. (2007). CEFR in relation to the policy aim of the Council of Europe. In Council of Europe (Ed.), The common European framework of reference for languages (CEFR) and the development of language policies: challenges and responsibilities (pp. 50-51). Council of Europe.
Tung, C. J. (2013). The rhetorical devices for persuasion and the meaning construction in Jing Si Yu [Unpublished master dissertation]. Providence University.
Tye, K. A. (2014). Global education: A worldwide movement. An Update. Policy Futures in Education, 12(7), 855-871.
Tye, K.A., & Kniep, W. M. (1991). Global education around the world. Educational Leadership, 48 (7), 47- 49.
Uccelli, P., Dobbs, C. L., & Scott, J. (2013). Mastering academic language: Organization and stance in the persuasive writing of high school students. Written Communication, 30(1), 36-62.
United Nations Education Scientific and Cultural Organization (2015). Global citizenship education: topics and learning objectives. https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000232993
United Nations Education Scientific and Cultural Organization (2017). Textbooks for sustainable development: A guide to embedding. https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000259932
United Nations Education Scientific and Cultural Organization (n.d.). Sustainable development goals for social and human sciences. Retrieved March 8, 2024, from https://en.unesco.org/sustainabledevelopmentgoalsforsocialandhumansciences
United Nations. (n.d.). Take action for the sustainable development goals. Retrieved January 3, 2024, from https://www.un.org/sustainabledevelopment/sustainable-development-goals/
Vande Kopple, W. J. (1985). Some exploratory discourse on metadiscourse. College Composition and Communication, 36(1), 82-93.
Wallerstein, I. (1974). The rise and future demise of the world capitalist system: Concepts for comparative analysis. Comparative Studies in Society and History, 16(4), 387-415.
Waters, M. (2001). Globalization. Routledge.
White, C. M. (1977). A limitation of balance theory: The effects of identification with a member of the triad. European Journal of Social Psychology, 7(1), 111-116.
Williams, J. (1981). Style: Ten lessons in clarity and grace. Scott Foresman.
Wrench, J. S., Goding, A., Johnson, D. I., & Attias, B. A. (2011). Stand up, speak out: The practice and ethics of public speaking. FlatWorld.
Wright, J. W., Hosman, L. A. (1983). Language style and sex bias in the courtroom: The effects of male and female use of hedges and intensifiers on impression information. Southern Speech Communication Journal, 48(2), 137-152.
Xian, L., Wu, H., & Tao, H. (2012). Using authentic materials for language teaching: Theory and practice in TCSL. Journal of the Chinese Language Teachers Association, 47(1), 135-157.
Yakovchuk, N. (2004). Global issues and global values in foreign language education: Selection and awareness-raising. English Language Teacher Education and Development, 8, 28-47.
Yeh, T. L. (2019). Metaphor as a persuasive linguistic device in storytelling: An investigation of L2 narratives [Unpublished master dissertation]. National Taiwan University.