The Persuasive Power of Hedges: Insights from TED Talks
Marina Jovic, Iranda Kurtishi, Mohammad Awad AlAfnan
American University of the Middle East
阅读操作
确认中在文库中上传 PDF 后可生成中文音频讲解。
摘要与影响
The corpus-based study focuses on the use of hedges in persuasive TED Talk speeches, which are powerful, premeditated speeches delivered in a distinctive communicative environment that combines elements of both spoken and written discourse. The authors employ both quantitative and qualitative methods to analyze the hedging devices used to bolster the three rhetorical appeals: ethos, pathos, and logos. The results show that only 2% of the words in the corpus serve as hedging devices, which is lower compared to previous studies on written and spoken discourse. The incidence of hedges is highest in the logos parts, followed by pathos, with the lowest incidence in ethos. Strong credibility is generally established by avoiding hedging devices. To evoke emotions in the audience, the speakers mainly rely on adverbs and verbs. The use of approximators and shields to strengthen logos resembles the use of hedges in written academic discourse. The qualitative analysis focuses on the four most commonly used hedges: ‘actually’, ‘just’, ‘could’, and ‘think’. ‘Actually’ has a mitigating effect when it promotes intimacy, indicates the speaker's commentary, or introduces a challenging, even reinforcing effect. ‘Just’ is often used to convey a mildly positive or reassuring tone in communication. Both the parenthetical phrase ‘I think’, used in a variety of meanings, and the modal verb ‘could’, used as a hypothetical possibility, most often enhance the logical strength of an argument. The paper suggests incorporating these findings into ESL teaching materials and conducting further studies on the topic, as most existing studies focus on developing a scientific argument in writing. Developing an argument in speech is distinct and deserves attention.
逐年被引趋势
关键指标
同类平均 = 1
同领域 · 同年份 · 同类型
Google Scholar 与 OpenAlex 的被引统计范围不同,数值存在差异属正常。
AI 辅助阅读
依据:摘要
可就本文提问;依据不足时会说明。
学术脉络
学科主题
社会科学Discourse Analysis in Language Studies
Linguistics and Discourse Analysis · Linguistics and Language Analysis
参考文献 59
此处列出前 3 条
引用本文 8
按被引量排序,此处列出前 3 条