IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0340273.html

Dialogism in publicity discourses of Anglo-American and Chinese universities: A comparative analysis based on Engagement System

Author

Listed:
  • Lu Zheng

Abstract

Dialogism serves as a critical characteristic of university publicity discourse, encapsulating the origins of ideas and the communicative intentions inherent in such discourse. While both Chinese and Anglo-American university publicity discourses fall under the same category, they exhibit distinct dialogic approaches. To investigate the similarities and differences in dialogism, this study conducts a comparative analysis of dialogic contraction and dialogic expansion within English and Chinese publicity discourses, utilizing the Engagement System developed by functional linguist Martin J.R. The findings indicate that English discourse predominantly articulates its viewpoints through negative constructions to refute alternative perspectives, whereas Chinese discourse asserts its positions firmly with affirmative statements to limit space for opposing views. In terms of dialogic expansion, English discourse allows room for alternative viewpoints when presenting its own stance, while Chinese discourse directly cites other perspectives to bolster its arguments. This study has theoretical and practical significance. Theoretically, it advances Martin’s Engagement System and offers a replicable protocol for cross-cultural discourse studies. Practically, it guides university communications and provides a template for analysts integrating qualitative and quantitative methods.

Suggested Citation

  • Lu Zheng, 2026. "Dialogism in publicity discourses of Anglo-American and Chinese universities: A comparative analysis based on Engagement System," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 21(1), pages 1-16, January.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0340273
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0340273
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0340273
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0340273&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0340273?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0340273. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.