TV Talk Show Metadiscourse

The number of talk shows broadcasted by television stations continues to grow, and they have become significant segments of television broadcasts. Television talk shows have occupied a key position in the programming of programming in which they mostly concentrate on topics that people face in such a way that the viewer can relate to what they are saying. Top programs with strong ratings and broad crowds include shows hosted by television figures such as Steve Harvey, Ellen DeGeneres, and Wendy Williams. The hosts believe they are playing critical roles in discussing problems that concern people, issues that most people are reluctant to discuss. However, some people are quite skeptical about the roles that the shows have on their viewers with the view that they focus mostly on issues that are incendiary and emotional. Be that as it may, their presence has brought about plenty of interest and arguments on the analysis of media discourse. Most of the studies have approached talk shows as events in broadcasting by which the corroboration of lay experience and expression are forefront (Guowen 2010). Talk shows are also approaching as mediated performances which are at times manipulated. It, therefore, becomes necessary to analyze the social construct associated with the talk shows when it comes to communication.

The subject of focus is the application of the metadiscourse construct in communication. Metadiscourse has emerged to be the new way of presenting ones thoughts on an issue to facilitate a healthy conversation when it comes to the media industry. The importance of metadiscourse comes into perspective and is evident since material which is presented and consumed by the audience can be quantified and examined in depth to come up with the intended message. The study will precisely aim at unraveling the link present between metadiscourse and verbal put in place in talk shows. It also purposes to assess the interaction between the two constructs such that it becomes easier to understand gauge on the level of acceptance and interpretation that would result in terms of the way information is consumed and analyzed by various segments of the audience.

Significance of Knowledge

The communication process is generally a situation similar to that of a give and take scenario but in this case information is the key component in place. Communication can be considered to have achieved its intended purpose only when the parties involved are fully in touch with the information and in return give their feedback (Keyton, 2011). Metadiscourse is a construct that has become quite popular on studies regarding interaction. According to Hyland (2005), he insinuates metadiscourse as an outlook that considers great interaction between the parties involved in the engagement process. In other words, communication gains more interest when different personalities of people are also considered and put into assessment. The media is among the major factors in the society that facilitate the communication process. One of the areas in the media that involve plenty of interaction is that of television talk shows (Guowen, 2010). TV syndicated programs have involved a focal place in the transmission of programs by which they mostly concentrate on issues that face individuals to such an extent that the group of onlookers relates with what they are displaying. The shows mostly involve interpersonal communication as they deal primarily with issues that affect the lives of the people by which the host makes it an interactive process to allow the members of the audience to express their views. Metadiscourse gains insight with the relation it bears and intergrates in the interaction process. The interpersonal function of metadiscourse permits the use of an encoded language while interacting, people’s relation and association is also given priority and there is room for internal analysis of one self besides others viewpoint (Adel, 2010). Therefore, by understanding the development and the structure of metadiscourse, it becomes easier to figure out whether there are benefits that result with the uptake of metadiscourse in the communication engagement process by TV hosts with regards to the way information is articulated and comprehended. Thus, the area of concentration will put more effort and analysis on the relation that is realized when obtaining a comparison between metadiscourse and language involved in the shows.

Key Concepts and Terminology

Metadiscourse

Metadiscourse entails various facets in the communication process that include both verbal and non-verbal communication. It incorporates issues such as diversity, the medium of communication and the different methods used in presenting the information (Hyland, 2005). Simply put, apart from communication involving the exchange of ideas, it also includes other aspects such as individual personality, behavior, and attitude of the people who are interacting. It is viewed as the similarities between communication. The meta-talk discourse illustrated by Schiffrin metalinguistic referents, metalinguistic operators, and metalinguistic verbs presents an excellent analysis of what takes place in television talk shows.

Communication

Keyton (2011) describes communication as the transmission of content such that there is an understanding between the involved parties. The communication process is where by information is relayed through parties and requires the availability of medium to effectively achieve the intended outcome. One can relate to the quality and effectiveness of information relayed. Parties involved feel that they are content and have acquired the message.





Theoretical Background

From a linguistic perspective, metadiscourse is a new form of quantifying persuasive writing while considering expectations of the intended audience. Metadiscourse is based on the view that speech and writing are larger constructs instead of just being facets that guide the communication process in addition to the presentation of written concepts. Speaking and writing are perceived to be social actions that involve the speakers, the audience and the writers such that they can communicate with each other in understanding. Metadiscourse is therefore an important tool when it comes to the analysis role it plays of content submitted to the audience and pinpointing of the areas of merit and demerit. Its objective is to dissect details on a step by step basis by engaging diverse opinions in the assessment.

The comprehension makes it easier for them to respond effectively. Hyland (2005) states that metadiscourse communication is more than just interchange of message among other factors but also more of persona attitude of those who are involved in the whole process. In other words, metadiscourse doesn’t plainly incorporate brainstorming of ideas but also amalgamates personality traits and behavior of an individual in the interaction process. Thus, it can be regarded as communication assimilated with communication. Adel (2010) approaches metadiscourse with the view "metadiscourse is a functional category that can be realized in a great variety of ways" which presents the view an item may differ on direction and its use when it comes to Meta discussion. The interpersonal function of metadiscourse is an important element integrated in talk shows for the general improvement and synthesis of knowledge. Metadiscourse also employs an ideational function, as it allows the utilization of language in exemplifying ideas and experiences such that ideas align to the proposition in content. Also, the textual function of metadiscourse allows the organization of content in a text such that it aligns with the views of the involved parties (Arundale, 2010).

Models Associated with Metadiscourse

From a broad range of perception, metadiscourse isn’t a regulated field since it encompasses and integrates diversity within itself. Various taxonomies have been proposed by scholars to explain the facets associated with metadiscourse. One of the models suggested is Vande Kopple puts into perspective interpersonal and textual discourse. According to the Kopple, the interpersonal metadiscourse comprises of three strategies that include attitude markers, commentaries and validity markers (Arundale, 2010). For the textual discourses, it is affiliated with four strategies that include; code glasses, narrators, code glosses and text connectives. The model by Vande Kopple was significant with the view that it was the first strategic test to bring into perspective a taxonomy that prompted various studies that resulted in other taxonomies. However, the major drawback of the taxonomy is that the discourses tend to overlap in function and exhibit vagueness (Arundale, 2010). Crismore et.al (1993) developed a revised model of Vande’s model.

The model maintained the interpersonal and textual discourses but manipulated the strategies in both discourses. Crismore et al. divided the textual discourse into interpretive and textual trajectories with the goal of distinguishing organizational and assessment roles. The textual trajectories include elements that support the presentation of the discourse while the interpretive trajectories focus on assisting readers to comprehend and make interpretations of what is presented to them in writing (Crismore et al., 1993). Hyland (2005) brings another model that consists of interactional and interactive facets. The design highlights association among the markers in a more comprehensive manner. The collaborating identifier keeps in mind the target audience of the writer, the energy that comes into place when illustrating the areas of want and the fulfilment that is realized. For the interactional marker, the author explains his or her views explicitly and involves the audience by expecting responses and objections regarding the presented content. From an analytical perspective, metadiscourse in TV talk shows abide by the interactive and interactional markers presented by Hyland (2005).

The model considers the reaction of the audience when it comes to showing a piece of work. In regards to the interpretive marker, the audience of a TV host, the amount of energy that comes into place from the presenter in ensuring fulfillment and pleasure of the content, in the sense that the host is satisfied with what he or she is presenting to the audience and the expected outcomes. For the interactional marker, the host illustrates his or her views explicitly and involves the audience by expecting responses and objections regarding the presented content. It entails the presentation of information such that feedback is obtained from the targeted audience. The feedback might be negative or positive depending on the views held by the audience, and hence the host has to be keen on emotional and practical aspects associated with content such that he or she gets satisfied with the interaction (Arundale, 2010). Schiffrin (2011) introduces the point of meta-talk that involves using the chunk of words in the delivery during the conversation. From her view, Metatalk is influenced by the surroundings and the social relation that people have. Meta-talk is mostly used in TK talk shows and tends to be informal such that some conversations are cut short (Schiffrin, 2011).

Schiffrin proposes three indicators of meta-talk that include; metalinguistic referents, operators, and verbs. The metalinguistic referents refer to characteristics given to an entity by which the entity is a part of the language. A good example of a referent is the assertion former and latter. Metalinguistic operators illustrate either the combination or the modification of propositions such that they exhibit complex forms in methods that align with logical operations. A good example is the assertion right and wrong. Meta-linguistic verbs refer to things that people utilize in language. A good example is a phrase for instance (Schiffrin, 2011). She also puts into perspective discourse units that involves chunks used in meta-talks. The chunks mostly occur when an individual is trying to give a response or when interrupting a conversation. An example of a discourse unit is the assertion in brackets in the following conversation.

SM: What is your opinion on abortion?

NB: (Well, this is how I am going to answer)

Metadiscourse and the Community

The association between metadiscourse and community brings into perspective the presence of a discourse community. A discourse community has several features. One of the features is that it contains a wide number of common goals that are identified by the public. The community also contains a strategy of public interaction among individuals and that it employs participatory strategies used in presenting information and receiving feedback. Also, the discourse community contains and uses the features used in the articulation of information, contains some unique terminologies, and contains members in its initial occurrences who exhibit expertise in discourse (Llie, 2001). In other words, the discourse community refers to the individuals that a text is targeted. For the TV talk shows, the discourse community comprises of the viewers and the people affected by the presented content.

It can be approached by a group of individuals who have similar experiences, norms and unique rules that define their interaction. Looking at the aspect from a wide range, metadiscourse comprises of the view that knowledge justifies the ideas present in our society and that the involved parties must ensure that issues such as expectations by the audience, norms that govern the audience and the responses are highlighted in regards to persuasion. The features found in metadiscourse tend to be sensitive when it comes to expectations for the audience, norms that govern the audience and the responses and hence the involvement of the audience using an interactive approach boosts the communication process. It is important to note that culture impacts how people communicate and relate to each other and hence having an influence when it comes to metadiscourse. Culture shapes the level of comprehension of an individual and hence affects the methods in which information is presented to the public (Llie 2001).

In the textual context, in regards to the English culture, the markers present in metadiscourse guides considers when going through a text. However, in the Japanese culture where the reading is based on the reader, the connections found in a text are approached from an implicit perspective (Llie 2001). In other words, effective communication lies in the hands of the writer in the English culture while in the Japanese culture, the reader is responsible for effective communication. It is important to note that every culture is characterized with exhibiting different norms, language, values in addition to the levels of interaction. What makes a method of communication to present proper organization depends on how it is viewed by various cultures. TV talk shows revolve around the communication process and aim at targeting a broad audience. In regards to metadiscourse, televisions hosts have to put into perspective the differences in cultures when discussing an issue. The responses from the diverse audience have to be considered to prevent any form of misunderstanding such that both the host and the audience become satisfied from the interaction (Guowen, 2010). Apart from the view of the audience, the level of comprehension of content has to be taken into consideration. A concept regarding an issue in the U.S. might be easily understood by the audience in the U.S. because of background information. However, when explaining the same concept to people in China, plenty of effort has to be employed for it to be understood due to lack of background information. Simply put, communication tends to be effective when the audience relates to the presented concept when compared to interacting with an audience that has no idea on the presented issue (Guowen, 2010).

Metadiscourse as a Significant Part of the Communication Process

Metadiscourse is a central segment in the pragmatic paradigm that allows speakers to associate with their audience such that they are both satisfied in the communication process. Hyland (1998) asserts that studies have proved metadiscourse to be an important aspect when it comes to persuading the targeted audience. High occurrence off metadiscourse in interaction processes has facilitated understanding between a speaker and his or her audience and hence an important constructs (Guowen, 2010).

TV Talk Shows Discourse

The types of talk shows to include in the analysis are those that include celebrities or experts or guests who are invited on talk shows such that they discuss issues that surround them in addition to personal issues. The guests bring in various perspectives and at times oppose the topics being presented by the hosts. The shows feature the use of social and communication skills that can be affiliated to different discourses (Llie, 2001). For example, a talk show may involve several sections of entertainment, discussions, and also other article focusing on the primary goal of a session in addition to sharing of information. As a result of including several discourses, talk shows are at times referred to as infotainments. Also, when talk shows focus on issues regarding health, they tend to take the nature of a doctor to a patient conversation and at times incorporating therapeutic conversation. It is important to note that most talk shows spend an immense proportion of their time engaging in dialogue and hence considered to involve plenty of conversation discourse (Llie, 2001).

The presence of sequential and distribution of movements in addition to turning taking, incorporation of various forms of responses and questions that may occur either at the same time or separately also makes the discourse in talk shows quite different (Llie, 2001). From an analytical perspective, the presence of a unique structure affiliated to the patterns of interaction in talk shows illustrate the primary goal of the shows but tend to be less institutionalized when compared to news broadcasts. It is necessary to note that despite the host having the role of presenting topics and asking questions, the audience is also allowed to ask questions and contribute their opinions on issues. With such a platform, the audience has the power to challenge the structured affiliates of authority.

With such a construct, the association between the host and the audience and the association between the host and the guests or participants are established and reestablished such that interesting, new or provocative form of interactions are included in the shows. In other words, the shows are multifaceted in the sense that they are flexible and allow active communication among the involved parties. Talk shows can be perceived to be the modern art of communication or rather communication hybrids as they involve several aspects of social interaction and communication skills. The flexibility of talk shows makes them engage in several topics such as health, fitness, marriage, divorce, single parenthood, managing finances, subjects in the entertainment industry and much more (Llie, 2001).







Institutional Discourse

The essential feature of talk shows is that they incorporate plenty of interaction. Conversation plays a huge role in human interaction as it acts as the center of human interaction by which people communicate and share various perspectives (Mauranen, 2007). Conversations work as spheres that bring understanding among people and allow persuasions if need be. The conversation has been analyzed both theoretically and empirically being a form of natural talk, in regards to the common knowledge among speakers by which social rule and linguistic competence are put into perspective. The analysis makes sit necessarily to look at the facet of conversation analysis or rather CA. CA entails putting into consideration the various methods that talk is formulated and organized socially by the joint efforts of individuals taking part in an interaction. It is important to note that initially, CA focused on patterns on regular conversations (Mauranen, 2007). However, nowadays, it incorporates others aspects associated with the communication process. Also, discourse entails use of linguistic while metadiscourse, message isn’t solely the exchange of ideas or thoughts but also includes other aspects such as attitudes, a behavior of individuals in addition to the personality of an individual. It’s viewed as the relation that is present within two communicating parties.

Discourse in any institutional setting involves more than just dialogue. One of the essential features of discourse is that the participants take their roles and identities in regards to the interaction and that the functions of the participants play a significant part in the communication (Mauranen, 2007). Also, institutional discourse may incorporate the use of simple language with the need for maintaining power differentiation among the members. Institutional discourse has limits in regards to the freedom of expression by which verbal abuse is not entertained, and respect is required when opinions are expressed (Llie, 2001).

Historical Background of Talk Shows

As stated earlier, the primary feature of talk shows is that they incorporate plenty of interaction by which face to face interaction is used. From a historical perspective, the conversational structure was significant in regards to the occasions that people engaged. Communication scholars present the view that there lack universal rules that guide the conversation process (Arundale, 2010). The view is attributed to the fact that various cultures have norms that govern how people relate to each other and hence having their systems of interactions. Also, the society consists of different social groups that might employ certain rules on their language of communication. Centuries ago, certain social groups in the society emerged such that they had particular settings for the purpose of interaction through conversations. The settings differed from one society to another and would take either public or private forms. For example, in Italy during the sixteenth century, there existed a group referred to as the academy that comprised of scholars. The group met during specific times and had fixed membership. In the seventeenth century, the French came up with their social group that was referred to as a salon that also consisted of intellectuals. The salon was organized by a hostess and mostly held once a week. The people that attended them referred to themselves as people of letters (Arundale, 2010).

During the eighteenth century, several social groups rose in England; with good examples being the assembly, coffee-house, and the club. Llie (2001) defines present talk shows as an Anglo-Saxon version involving named type of conversations taking place in partial established practices. However, she explains that a caveat is in place such that there are various distinctions on talk shows despite the globalization of the shows through the use of satellites and the English language in the media houses. One of the differences can be attributed to culture or ethnic background. From a more practical perspective, there are several differences between British and American hosts in regards to communication ethos. As highlighted earlier, the participants of an interaction process must comply with their rules for the interaction to be effective. However, there might be issues such as personal attitude, personal issues and cultural factors that may cause variations in the manner in which people talk and hence influencing the way in which talk shows are presented in addition to being rated.

The American stage of talk shows can be divided into three sections. They include evening, late night and morning talk shows (Llie, 2001). Among the three, the daytime talk shows tend to be popular in regards to the topics that the hosts present. The first reason for their popularity is that they include controversial topics, facilitate critical thinking of issues that are challenging people in the society, include views or experiences that are common to everyone in regards to the systems of administration, in addition to conflicting issues such as homosexuality and abortion. The second reason for their popularity is that the audience can reflect on the issues presented by the broadcast by which they attach their feelings on them. In other words, the shows present issues that the audience can relate with, whether right or bad, such that there is a connection between a show and the targeted audience (Llie, 2001).

It is important to note that trends depict the growth of popularity of talk shows with the internet making it possible for individuals to catch up if they had missed a program in their televisions channels (Guowen, 2010). Shows such as Ellen, the late night show by Jimmy Fallon, The Steve Harvey Show, and The Wendy Williams Show have high ratings because of their larger audiences. Some shows such as The Steve Harvey show, have a global presence and hence having large audiences and high ratings.

The talk shows have become more diverse in regards to content. Some years back, it was a taboo for hosts to engage in topics such as homosexuality, sex in general, in addition to issues that may bring about the conflict between them and the government. However, these days, it is quite common for hosts to talk about these issues as they affect a good number of individuals in the society. Some hosts even use individuals that have experienced the issues under discussion to allow the audience to make a connection with the situation while others use their life experiences as the way of illustrating connection with the audience (Guowen, 2010). The view is that the audience will empathize with the host such that they can reflect and make connections with what is being presented. Some hosts even go to the extent of taking part in community group associations as a way of connecting with their audience. A good example is the Oprah Whitney initiative of the Book of the Month Club that included the participation of the audience and hence reaching her audience using a different approach instead of the usual dialogue. With such variations, it becomes clear that talk shows tend to be varied in their discourse such that they include various facets of interaction and communication.

The Conversational Nature of Talk Shows

Talk shows can be perceived to be heterogeneous with the view that they involve varied responses, audience participation and discussions in addition to diverse audiences, analysis, and interpretations (Llie, 2001). Controversies arise in talk shows because of lack of homogeneity. The infotainment aspect makes them involve various discourses such as debates, entertainments, casual conversations, interviewing celebrities in addition to classroom discussions. The difference in discourses brings about similarities and differences in talk shows. There are various expectations from talk shows by their audience. Most talk shows are expected to be fun and entertaining despite including sessions on pressing topics. The talk shows are scheduled to keep their audiences on toes such as drama, hilarious situations, controversial issues and matters that impact the emotions of the audience. The view is to generate several reactions from the audience. It is important to note that the interactions and the responses from the audience, hosts, and guests tend to be spontaneous in the sense that they are not guided by rules. The idea is to maintain flexibility such that diversity in opinions and beliefs is considered during the interaction process. Also, when a guest of any member of the audience has saddening issues, or the host is presenting an issue that is affiliated to emotions, the audience is expected to align to the emotions such that they empathize with the involved situations for the level of interaction to be effective. It is important to note that the audience of talk shows tends to be loyal to their programs such that they take them more seriously when compared to other broadcasts (Llie, 2001).

Data and Methodology

It is important to note that talk shows exhibit the metadiscourse construct in regards to being mainly characterized by interaction. It puts into perspective the use of both communication skills and social interaction such that the hosts, the audience and the guests actively participate in the interaction. For the metadiscourse analysis, the show of focus is The Tonight Show with Jimmy Fallon. The study centered on the relationship between metadiscourse and the language used in television talk shows. It also purposed to assess the interaction between the two constructs such that it becomes easier comprehend on the viability and sustainability of metadiscourse when aiming to come up with clarity on whether its impact improves on the interaction process by bettering how information is put across and interpreted. The approaches used in analyzing the show include both the discourse and conversational analyses while putting into perspective the meta-talk and the formality used in the interactions. The view is to observe the application of metadiscourse in talk shows in regards to language, the level of presentation and the social interaction skills. The show is recorded daily on YouTube and hence an adequate platform for analyzing one of the shows by Jimmy Fallon.

The Tonight Show with Jimmy Fallon

The show takes place during weeknights at exactly 11.35 GMT. The host of the show is Jimmy Fallon. The show exhibited a proper application of metadiscourse in talk shows because of the interactive sessions, the guests present in the show and the activities submitted by the host. Most of the guests were celebrities whom Jimmy Fallon actively engaged in conversations in regards to their personal lives, work, and events taking place in their lives. Each interview was marked with an activity basing on the interests of the guests and the audience. The host incorporated various games such as truth or dare, card games, lip-synching competitions and even dancing. The host also included hashtag activities for his audience found on social media. The show was characterized by plenty of meta-talk in regards to the three indicators; referents, operators, and verbs.

An Analysis of a Conversation the Former U.S. President, Barrack Obama

I. JM: Has Donald Trump called you for advice or talked to you? You know so far you have given us some good advice. But has he called and talked to you?

The phrase so far you have represents a metalinguistic operator

II. BO: (Well) No

The term well is an example of a discourse unit.

JM: No?

BO: Not that I know of

JM: Do you think the Republicans are satisfied with their choice?

BO: We are…You know…that was too easy…you understand me…you understand what I imply?

The expression what I mean represents a metalinguistic verb that refers to things that people utilize in language.

III. JM: Yes, I know what you mean

The phrase you know what represents a meta-linguistic referent that entails characteristics given to an entity by which the term what is a part of a language.

Analysis

The show has a broad social media presence and audience. The host applies various discourses in the interaction with their audience such that they even include viewers who are not physically present in the interaction. From the analysis of the Tonight Show with Jimmy Fallon, it is quite evident that there exists a relationship between metadiscourse and the language used in television talk shows. The phrase YOU KNOW WHAT represents a meta-linguistic referent that entails characteristics given to an entity by which the term WHAT is a part of the language. The phrase I MEAN represents a metalinguistic verb that refers to things that people utilize in a language while the words SO FAR YOU HAVE represents a metalinguistic operator. The fact that the audience of both hosts actively participated in the show as a result of various discourses of interaction presented employed in the shows clearly proves the importance of metadiscourse in the communication process and when dealing with the target audience as overall, a positive and enriching interaction between the parties would result which would consequently better interpretation and the way details are consumed by people.

Besides that,