This study adopts the revised interpersonal model of metadiscourse to discover whether and to what extent Chinese authors employ a varying amount of Interactional Metadiscourse (IM) in the past decade in English abstracts of economics Research Articles (RAs). The data was drawn from a prestigious economics journal in China to compose a corpus of 289 abstracts. The analysis indicates that Chinese authors harmonize with English counterparts by capitalizing on more hedges, while the amount of boosters unexpectedly maintains at a high level over time, both of which can be attributed to the interaction of Chinese deep-seated cultural leanings and Anglo-American cultural preferences. Consistent with our prediction, attitude markers exhibit no significant difference along the years given the initial parallel with English counterparts. However, there are significant differences of self-mentions in the past decade regardless of English rhetorical conventions, which may be attributed to economical influences in China. With regards to engagement features, they remain relatively underused with no marked difference within the period resulting from the genre-specific factor which confines their use.

Our study offers a linguistic–pragmatic examination of instances of bystander intervention, a social action that takes place when a bystander or a group of bystanders intervenes when a wrongdoer abuses a victim or behaves outside socially acceptable norms. We approach this social phenomenon by analyzing data drawn from a database of 11 video-recordings that all involve naturally occurring interactions in public settings in China. The notion of intervention discourse is tentatively introduced in this study to distinguish it from those used to achieve other communicative purposes and to disclose some recurrent patterns of language use in bystander intervention. The data analysis summarizes six categories of intervention discourse along the continuum of strong to weak intervention: terminating, consequence-stating, advising, judging, appealing and stance-taking. Our study demonstrates that the skillful exercise of deontic authority embodied in intervention discourse might have a tangible influence on the outcome of the intervention.

Given that intervention has been relatively under-researched in pragmatics, this paper offers a linguistic-pragmatic examination of a case of bystander intervention, a notion which is generally known in social psychology. This study approaches the phenomenon of bystander intervention by analyzing discourse data transcribed from a video posted online. Drawing on participation status and relational identity theory, this paper investigates the issues of relational identity and relationships involved in an intervening interaction. The findings indicate that the intervener’s relational identity is in a constant process of construction and negotiation, and the study also notices that three most prominent strategies in our case are employed that give rise to the effective intervention, namely humor, empathy and imposition of power, which might provide some insights into further research in this field.

The impact of the psychological states of the negotiators, the social conditions of negotiations, and the behavior of negotiators on the outcomes of negotiations differs from country to country. Various suboptimal, individual-level, and country-level solutions have been suggested to predict and explain such cross-national variations. Drawing inspiration from a series of cross-cultural studies on job satisfaction and motives for volunteer work that successfully employed multilevel modeling, we propose a multilevel research approach to more accurately examine the generalizability of negotiation models across countries.

In Mandarin Chinese, the expression nǐ kànzhe bàn ba can be employed in either ‘you-decide use’ (you assess and decide by yourself), whereby the speaker disclaims his/her deontic authority to the recipient in decision-making, or ‘I-claim use’ (you have to assess and decide cautiously), whereby he/she claims a higher degree of deontic authority than the recipient when determining a proposed action. Focusing on the ‘I-claim use’ of nǐ kànzhe bàn ba, this study examines how this expression is manipulated by customers to negotiate solutions for their complaints with customer service representatives in Chinese e-shopping platforms. Utilising naturally occurring data from Taobao service encounters spanning about one year, this study employs a discursive approach and finds that this expression fulfills one of a number of pragmatic functions: (1) when there is no mutual agreement on the complaint proposals, the customers deploy it to upgrade their deontic authority to orient to their own unilateral solution and refrain from further negotiations; (2) when expressing a negative evaluation, the customers use it to pre-empt potential complainables that reflect their strong deontic authority; or (3) following non-substantive rectification on the part of the agent, the customers use it to express diluted deontic authority in order to display disaffiliation and solicit more substantive proposals. By analyzing the use of this expression in e-shopping service encounters, our study contributes to understanding how deontic authority is exercised in negotiating solutions to complaints.