Discourse Features of Argumentative Essays Written by Chinese EFL Students

2008 ◽  
Vol 156 ◽  
pp. 179-200 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ruiqin Miao ◽  
Xiuyun Lei
Keyword(s):  
Future Research ◽  
Written Discourse ◽  
Efl Students ◽  
English Speaking ◽  
Rhetorical Features ◽  
Argumentative Essays ◽  
Textual Organization ◽  
L1 And L2 Writing ◽  
L1 And L2

Abstract Studies on both second language discourse in general and Chinese EFL/ESL discourse in particular have reported mixed findings about the relationship between L1 and L2 writing. This study investigates the rhetorical features of argumentative essays written by Chinese college EFL students by analyzing paragraph and overall textual organization and development in 69 sample essays. The results show that the majority of the participants compose in a deductive pattern similar to what is typically employed by native English speaking writers. However, the way in which the Chinese EFL students develop their L2 written discourse lacks effectiveness and adequacy, in terms of the following features: the quality of the topic sentence (of paragraphs) and the introduction paragraph (of essays), the adequacy of supporting details, transitions between sentences and paragraphs, and the effectiveness of the ending (of essays). Furthermore, we explore the factors that may underlie the observed patterns. We conclude the paper by discussing the pedagogical implications of the findings and suggesting directions for future research.

Discourse Features of Argumentative Essays Written by Chinese EFL Students

2008 ◽  
Vol 156 ◽  
pp. 179-200
Author(s):  
Ruiqin Miao ◽  
Xiuyun Lei
Keyword(s):  
Future Research ◽  
Written Discourse ◽  
Efl Students ◽  
English Speaking ◽  
Rhetorical Features ◽  
Argumentative Essays ◽  
Textual Organization ◽  
L1 And L2 Writing ◽  
L1 And L2

Studies on both second language discourse in general and Chinese EFL/ESL discourse in particular have reported mixed findings about the relationship between L1 and L2 writing. This study investigates the rhetorical features of argumentative essays written by Chinese college EFL students by analyzing paragraph and overall textual organization and development in 69 sample essays. The results show that the majority of the participants compose in a deductive pattern similar to what is typically employed by native English speaking writers. However, the way in which the Chinese EFL students develop their L2 written discourse lacks effectiveness and adequacy, in terms of the following features: the quality of the topic sentence (of paragraphs) and the introduction paragraph (of essays), the adequacy of supporting details, transitions between sentences and paragraphs, and the effectiveness of the ending (of essays). Furthermore, we explore the factors that may underlie the observed patterns. We conclude the paper by discussing the pedagogical implications of the findings and suggesting directions for future research.

Realizations of oppositional speech acts in English: a contrastive analysis of discourse in L1 and L2 settings

2021 ◽  
Vol 18 (2) ◽  
pp. 163-202
Author(s):  
Christopher Hopkinson
Keyword(s):  
Speech Acts ◽  
Language Use ◽  
Large Body ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Contrastive Analysis ◽  
Customer Reviews ◽  
English Speaking ◽  
L1 And L2 ◽  
L1 English ◽  
Dimensions Of Variation

Abstract This paper presents the results of a study seeking insights into how speakers express oppositional stance in an online genre (businesses’ responses to negative customer reviews on TripAdvisor). The research is contrastive, exploring the differences between the practices of speakers in two types of setting – L1 English-speaking countries and countries where English is L2 – when performing oppositional speech acts (e.g. disagreement, criticism of the review/reviewer, etc.). Although there exists a large body of work concerned with contrastive differences in speech act realizations, oppositional speech acts remain under-researched – especially in contexts of non-politeness or impoliteness. This paper presents the results of a mixed-method qualitative/quantitative analysis revealing substantial differences along two principal dimensions of variation: the (in)directness with which opposition is expressed, and the downgrading (mitigation) or upgrading (aggravation) of oppositional speech acts. Some of these differences can be traced to well-known tendencies related to L1 versus L2 language use, while others represent new empirical findings that open up potential avenues for future research.

scholarly journals Gender-preferential language use in L1 and L2 argumentative essays? Evidence against lists of ‘gendered’ language features

2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
pp. 226-241
Author(s):  
Sulistya Ningrum ◽  
Peter Crosthwaite
Keyword(s):  
English Learners ◽  
Language Use ◽  
Female Students ◽  
Linguistic Features ◽  
Gendered Language ◽  
Male And Female ◽  
Gender Comparison ◽  
Argumentative Essays ◽  
L1 And L2 Writing ◽  
L1 And L2

This study identifies and compares the gender-preferential language features present in the argumentative writing of L1 Indonesian and Indonesian L2 English learners. The data is comprised of 80 English argumentative essays sampled from the International Corpus Network of Asian Learners of English (ICNALE, Ishikawa, 2011) and a comparative corpus of 80 L1 Indonesian argumentative essays collected online from Indonesian university students, both equally divided by gender. Comparison of the data was performed through quantitative analysis of three supposed ‘male-preferential’ features and seventeen ‘female-preferential’ features between the male- and female-produced corpora in L1 and L2 writing. This study investigated (1) the extent of variation in the use of ‘gendered language features’ between male and female-produced L1 and L2 texts; (2) whether the use of male/female ‘gendered-language features’ across male/female produced L1/L2 texts match their suggested gender preference, and (3) to what extent L1’s preference for ‘gender language features’ affects male and female learners’ use of such language in L2. The results suggest the majority of supposed gender-preferential features were not significantly different across male/female produced texts, indicating that argumentative essays may be gender-neutral to a certain extent. This study also revealed that L1 preference of gendered language forms does not determine their preferences in the L2. In conclusion, male and female students adopt similar linguistic features to express their arguments. We may claim that gender language forms are not fixed and absolute in academic discourse because instructive texts tend to have a set model to fulfil the pedagogical criteria.

scholarly journals The Structures and Functions of Lexical Bundles in Argumentative Essays by Chinese EFL Students at the Tertiary Level

2021 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Argumentative Writing ◽  
Lexical Bundles ◽  
Lexical Richness ◽  
Colloquial Language ◽  
Efl Students ◽  
Argumentative Essays ◽  
Effective Use ◽  
It Structure

The present study investigated and analysed the structures and functions of 3-word to 6-word lexical bundles of 120 English argumentative writing by Chinese EFL students and employed the framework based on Biber et al.’s structural classification and Hyland’s functional classification of lexical bundles. It was found that there was generally a negative correlation, both structurally and functionally, between the frequency and the length of lexical bundles although there were some fluctuations in certain specific categories. Results indicated that the participants did not have a good command of lexical bundles, affecting the quality of English argumentative writing in various ways. First, the sampled students used limited types of lexical bundles frequently. They generally lacked lexical richness when employing specific lexical bundles to express their opinions and text-oriented lexical bundles to convey transitional signals. Second, they relied heavily on the anticipatory it structure and did not have the consciousness of using hedges and boosters when expressing their attitude. Third, they virtually did not use lexical bundles involving attributive clauses. Fourth, they are inclined to use colloquial language in writing. The paper includes implications for instruction of effective use of lexical bundles in argumentative writing.

scholarly journals The Effect of Using Conjunction as Cohesive Device on the Undergraduates’ Quality of Writing in Argumentative Essays of Jordanian EFL Learners

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rawhi Yousef Salman Al Shamalat ◽  
Che An Binti Abdul Ghani
Keyword(s):  
Undergraduate Students ◽  
English Language ◽  
Mixed Method Research ◽  
Writing Quality ◽  
Efl Learners ◽  
Cohesive Devices ◽  
Efl Students ◽  
Argumentative Essays ◽  
Mu'tah University

The goal of this research was to investigate the effect of use conjunctions on the overall quality of argumentative writing of Jordanian English as foreign language (EFL) learners. This mixed-method research included sixty (n=60) undergraduate students at the Department. of English Language and Literature at Mu’tah University in Jordan. The participants of the research were selected using purposive sampling method. The data of the research were collected using written essays and interviews. The data was analyzed using SPSS. The data was collected using analytical scale Jacob et al., (1981) to measure the quality of argumentative essays. The result of this research showed that there was a weak negative but irrelevant correlation between writing quality and the frequency of conjunctions as cohesive devices. This correlation indicates that the frequent and general use of devices in the writing of Jordanian students did not contribute to the quality of the writing under any conditions. Also the finding revealed that there is an extremely negative but irrelevant correlation between the use of conjunctions devices by Jordanian EFL students and their writing quality. Therefore, the correlation was negative and insignificant for Jordanian EFL students. More specifically, the result shows that the frequencies of conjunctions were not found as an indicator of good writing quality for Jordanian EFL students. This research is significant for providing a considerable number of pedagogical implications for further research that will offer great contribution to the field of teaching writing in EFL setting in Jordan in particular and English as second language (ESL) context in general. Moreover, the research has shown a better understanding of cohesive devices / conjunctions by Jordanian EFL students at Mu’tah University.

scholarly journals Revising writing in an online learning environment

2012 ◽  
Vol 20 (1) ◽  
pp. 129
Author(s):  
Eleni Nikiforou
Keyword(s):  
Online Learning ◽  
University Students ◽  
English Language ◽  
Writing Process ◽  
Good Practice ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Online Learning Environment ◽  
Efl Students ◽  
Research Questions

The screen of the computer provides good practice for the writing process and functions as an exemplar for it since what is being written is not permanent in contrast to writing with pen on paper. The following research questions were addressed to explore the area and were investigated through the data: 1) Do students revise their writing globally or on the surface? 2) Do students co-operate or collaborate to edit their produced text? This paper will report the results from data taken from tertiary EFL students writing collaboratively and/ or co-operatively in a wiki to complete a task. This paper focuses on the revisions and editing university students did to their text while completing a group task in a wiki for the purposes of an upper-intermediate to advance English language course. The methodology that lies behind the research is grounded theory. The research conducted is qualitative and as such the data is collected from the wiki and the history pages which kept track of the students work in the wiki. An attempt is made to distinguish between superficial and global revisions the students performed. Emphasis is given to the frequency with which the students entered the wiki to edit, and the quality of the revisions to their work. From the data we can also draw conclusions as to whether the students collaborated or co-operated to edit their work. The discussion will round off with implications for future research and offer suggestions about how EFL students from the specific and similar contexts could be encouraged to revise in order to write better.

scholarly journals Coherence: Implications for teaching writing

2016 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
pp. 17-30
Author(s):  
Emilija Sarzhoska-Georgievska
Keyword(s):  
Foreign Language ◽  
Language Learners ◽  
Academic Writing ◽  
English Language ◽  
Second Language Learners ◽  
First Language ◽  
Teaching Writing ◽  
Written Discourse ◽  
Argumentative Essays ◽  
L1 And L2

The paper presents the results of a study consisting of three text-based analyses of groups of student argumentative essays written on the same topic. The aim was to identify text-based features of coherence in L1 and L2. The analyses were carried out on essays written by first and third year undergraduates at the Department of English Language and Literature, Faculty of Philology "Blazhe Koneski" at the Ss. "Cyril and Methodius" University in Skopje, Republic of Macedonia who wrote in their first language Macedonian, L1, and in English as a foreign language, L2. The goal was to recognise the importance of discourse organisation in academic writing in L1, and to examine factors which may affect second language learners' competence in the organisation of written discourse in English as a foreign language, L2. The paper points out the differences in the rhetorical models in Macedonian and English written discourse and how these differences may have an impact on writing assessment and the teaching of writing at university level.

scholarly journals Plagiarism in second-language writing

2014 ◽  
Vol 47 (3) ◽  
pp. 269-302 ◽  
Author(s):  
Diane Pecorari ◽  
Bojana Petrić
Keyword(s):  
Second Language ◽  
Language Learning ◽  
Second Language Writing ◽  
L2 Writing ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Writing Research ◽  
Language Writing ◽  
L1 And L2 Writing ◽  
L1 And L2

Plagiarism is a broad and multidisciplinary field of study, and within second-language (L2) writing, research on the topic goes back to the mid-1980s. In this review article we first discuss the received view of plagiarism as a transgressive act and alternative understandings which have been presented in the L1 and L2 writing literature. We then survey and identify salient themes in the growing body of work relating to plagiarism, primarily from an L2 writing/applied linguistic perspective. These themes include terminological distinctions; views of the role of textual plagiarism in language learning and a writer's development; a concern with students’ and teachers’ sometimes differing understanding of plagiarism; and disciplinary differences in perceptions of plagiarism. We review research into the role of the electronic media in changing orientations toward plagiarism, the potential role of culture as a cause of plagiarism in the work of L2 writers, and pedagogical approaches to guiding students away from plagiarism. Methodological issues in researching plagiarism are surveyed, and the article concludes by suggesting directions for future research.

scholarly journals Revision Strategy and Self-Diagnosis in Italian L1 and L2 Argumentative Essays

EL LE ◽  
2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yahis Martari
Keyword(s):  
Quantitative Analysis ◽  
Text Structure ◽  
The Third ◽  
Text Production ◽  
Structure Text ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Argumentative Essays ◽  
L1 And L2 Writing ◽  
L1 And L2 ◽  
Different Levels

The present study investigates the effects of Revision Strategy (RS) on Argumentative Essay (AE) writing. Specifically, the study provides an analysis of 58 short AEs written by L1 and L2 university students. Two different levels of errors are examined: linguistic (Spelling, (Morpho)syntax, Lexicon, Syntax, Punctuation) and structure (Text structure and Coherence) errors, in order to measure how RS influences the texts. The comparison between RS and non-RS samples shows a significant difference in favour of texts with RS. In fact, we can surmise that RS positively influences text production both in L1 and L2 writing. In the third section we provide a quantitative analysis of the errors and we find some common issues within the specific rhetorical and linguistic framework of AE.

Self-Compassion and Quality of Life in Adults Who Stutter

2020 ◽  
Vol 29 (4) ◽  
pp. 2097-2108
Author(s):  
Robyn L. Croft ◽  
Courtney T. Byrd
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Social Connectedness ◽  
The Self ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Self Compassion ◽  
Adults Who Stutter ◽  
And Gender ◽  
Relationship Of ◽  
The Impact

Purpose The purpose of this study was to identify levels of self-compassion in adults who do and do not stutter and to determine whether self-compassion predicts the impact of stuttering on quality of life in adults who stutter. Method Participants included 140 adults who do and do not stutter matched for age and gender. All participants completed the Self-Compassion Scale. Adults who stutter also completed the Overall Assessment of the Speaker's Experience of Stuttering. Data were analyzed for self-compassion differences between and within adults who do and do not stutter and to predict self-compassion on quality of life in adults who stutter. Results Adults who do and do not stutter exhibited no significant differences in total self-compassion, regardless of participant gender. A simple linear regression of the total self-compassion score and total Overall Assessment of the Speaker's Experience of Stuttering score showed a significant, negative linear relationship of self-compassion predicting the impact of stuttering on quality of life. Conclusions Data suggest that higher levels of self-kindness, mindfulness, and social connectedness (i.e., self-compassion) are related to reduced negative reactions to stuttering, an increased participation in daily communication situations, and an improved overall quality of life. Future research should replicate current findings and identify moderators of the self-compassion–quality of life relationship.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document