Ubaldus Djonda(1*),

(1) English Education Study Program, FKIP, Universitas Katolik Widya Mandira, Kupang Indonesia
(*) Corresponding Author


This paper describes a contrastive study of the Philippine and Indonesian newspaper editorials in order to see similarities and differences in their physical size in terms of words and how Filipino and Indonesian editorialists utilized their discourse strategies through metadiscourse markers. To this end, 30 editorials of the Philippine Daily Inquirer and the Jakarta Post were examined through the lens of contrastive rhetoric analysis. The investigation of metadiscourse devices was grounded on the metadiscourse framework of Hyland (2005). Regarding the length of the editorials, the data revealed that the Philippine editorials employed more words compared to the Indonesian ones. The findings also show that both groups of editorialists used more interactional category, especially subcategory attitude markers in their writing, although the frequencies of the counts were different. The Philippine editorials contain more metadiscourse markers in all subcategories compared to the Indonesian editorials. The findings may indicate that as a genre, newspaper editorials have a generic feature of metadicourse markers, namely attitude markers. By using attitude markers effectively, editorialists make clear their stance on particular public issues and try to persuade readers to accept the opinion of the newspaper editors.  The study shows that newspaper editorials are reader-oriented texts.


metadiscourse markers, newspaper editorials, genre, contrastive rhetoric

Full Text:



Ansary, H., & Babaii, E. (2009). A cross-cultural analysis of English newspaper editorials: A systemic functional view of text for contrastive rhetoric research. Regional Language Centre Journal, 40, 211-249.

Barrios, A.L. (2013). Organizational framework in editorials of two Philippine local newspapers. Philippine ESL Journal, 11, 86-114.

Bonyadi, A., & Samuel, M. (2013). Headlines in newspaper editorials: A contrastive study. SAGE Open, 3(2), 1-10. doi: 10.1177/2158244013494863

Bunton, D. (1999). The use of higher level metatext in PhD theses. English for Specific Purpose, 18, 41-56.

Connor, U. (2003). Changing currents in contrastive rhetoric: Implications for teaching and research. In Kroll, B. (ed.) Exploring the dynamics of second language writing. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Faghih, E., & Rahimpour, S. (2009). Contrastive rhetoric of English and Persian written texts: Metadiscourse in applied linguistic research articles. Rice Working Paper in Linguistics, 1, 92-107.

Farrokhi, F. & Nazemi, S. (2015). The rhetoric of newspaper editorials. International Journal on Studies in English Language and Literature, 3(2), 155-161.

Hyland, K. (1998). Persuasion and context: The pragmatics of academic discourse. Journal of Pragmatics, 30, 437-455.

Hyland, K. (1999). Talking to students: Metadiscourse in introductory course books. English for Specific Purposes, 18 (1), 3-26.

Hyland, K. (2005). Metadiscourse: Exploring interaction in writing. London: Continuum.

Hyland, K. (2010). Teaching and researching writing. London: Longman.

Kartika, O.R. (1997). A study on rhetoric by Indonesian and English native writers in the Jakarta Post. Unpublished Thesis. Malang: English department of state university of Malang, Indonesia.

Kopple, W. J. V. (1985). Some exploratory discourse on metadiscourse. College Composition and Communication, 36, 82-93.

Kramsch, C. (1998). Language and culture. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

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. (2004). Active participation within written argumentation: Metadiscourse and editorialist’s authority. Journal of Pragmatics, 36, 687-714.

Longo, B. (1994). Current research in technical communication: The role of metadiscourse in persuasion. Technical Communication, 4, 348-352.

Mauranen, A. (1993). Cultural differences in academic rhetoric. Frankfurt: Peter Lang.

Moradian, M.R., Adel, S.M.R., & Tamri, M.S. (2014). An intercultural rhetoric investigation of the discourse topic in the English and Persian editorials. Switzerland Research Park Journal, 103 (1), 62-72.

Nugroho, A. (2020). Investigating the use of metadiscourse markers by American and Indonesian writers in opinion and business articles. Journal of English Language and Culture, 10 (2), 75-87.

Pulido, D.H. (2011). A systemic functional analysis of Philippine English newspaper editorials. TESOL Journal, 4, 52-63.

Shokouhi, H., & Amin, F. (2010). A systemist ‘verb transitivity’ analysis of the Persian and English newspaper editorials: A focus of genre familiarity on EFL learner’s reading comprehension. Journal of Language Teaching and Research, 1 (4), 387-396.

Sugiharto, S. (2007). New directions in contrastive rhetoric: Some implications for teachers of writing in multilingual contexts. The Journal of Asia TEFL, 4 (1), 107-124.

Sukma, B.P., & Sujatna, E.T.S. (2014). Interpersonal metadiscourse markers in opinion articles: A study of texts written by Indonesian writers. International Journal of Applied Linguistics & English Literature, 3 (2), 16-21.

Swales, J. (1990). Genre analysis: English in academic and research settings. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Turmudi, D. (2020). English scholarly publishing activities in the industrial revolution 4 . 0 : What , Why , and How ? ELTEJ, 3(1), 52–63.

Vergaro, C. (2002). “Dear Sirs, what would you do if you were in our position?‟: Discourse strategies in Italian and English money chasing letters. Journal of Pragmatics, 34, 1211-1233.

Williams, J. (1981). Style: Ten lessons in clarity and grace. Boston: Scott Foresman.



  • There are currently no refbacks.

Copyright (c) 2022 Author

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.



Universitas Muhammadiyah Metro

Unit Publikasi Ilmiah ( Scientific Publication Unit)


Gedung HI Lt 1, Ruang UPT Publikasi Ilmiah Universitas Muhammadiyah Metro

Jl. Ki Hajar Dewantara No.116, Iringmulyo, Metro Timur, Kota Metro, Lampung 34111
Phone/WA: +6285709141060 


e-ISSN-2442-482x  p-ISSN-2089-3355

Download Premise Official Template  June -October 2022