元语用话语体现了语言使用者在交际过程中的自我调节与反思意识。本研究以关系管理理论为框架，运用话语分析法考察情感热线主持人元语用话语的人际语用调节功能及其情感取向。研究结果显示，主持人使用的八类元语用话语在频率上呈现显著差异。其中，立场展示性、施为性、态度性与强调性使用频率较高，主要用于建构认同、推动互动与调节情绪，而信源性、免责性、评价性与规约化等类型则相对较少。不同类型的元语用话语在面子管理、社交权利与义务管理、情绪管理以及互动目标管理四个维度上发挥多层次调节功能。在情感取向方面，元语用话语表现出积极趋同与消极趋异两种路径，展现了主持人对人际关系和情感干预的动态调控能力。本研究不仅拓展了元语用话语的理论研究范畴，也为理解情感型机构互动中的语用实践提供了新的视角和实证依据。

Metapragmatic discourse reflects speakers’ self-regulation and reflexive awareness in communication. Drawing on the theory of rapport management theory and employing discourse analysis, the present study investigates the interpersonal pragmatic regulatory functions and emotional orientations of metapragmatic discourse used by hosts of emotional helpline programs. The findings reveal significant frequency differences across eight types of metapragmatic discourse. Among them, stance-marking, performative, attitudinal, and emphatic types occur most frequently, primarily serving to construct alignment, facilitate interaction, and regulate emotions, whereas source-based, disclaiming, evaluative, and conventionalized types appear less often. These different types operate across four dimensions—face management, social rights and obligations management, emotion management, and interactional goal management—thereby realizing multi-layered regulatory functions. Regarding emotional orientation, metapragmatic discourse manifests two distinct patterns: positive convergence and negative divergence, reflecting the hosts’ dynamic capacity to regulate interpersonal relations and emotional intervention. The study not only broadens the theoretical scope of metapragmatic discourse but also offers new perspectives and empirical evidence for understanding pragmatic practices in emotion-centered institutional interaction.