Textual Features in EFL Writing: Comparing Two Differing Levels of Writing Proficiency
0
조회
0
다운로드
0
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
This study examined the features of EFL composition in two student groups at differing levels of writing proficiency. The primary purpose of this investigation was to identify types of features in nonnative writers’ written text and the relationship of such features to their overall writing proficiency. Twenty five undergraduate and fourteen graduate students (N=39) in English major in a local university of Korea wrote English essays and these data, as the base for the linguistic corpora, were analyzed using WordSmith Tools for lexical variance, syntactic complexities, and textual cohesion. The study shows that the graduate students used more function words in general. Lexical density and variance in the text were higher among the graduate group, and such strength of lexicality in this group was extended to exceptionally higher levels of syntacticcomplexities with more passive voice and more relative clauses. The undergraduate group instead showed heavy reliance on personal pronouns yet with lack of referential cohesive devices like definite article. While no noticeable difference was found in the two groups’ textual cohesion, central to the group differences is the writer’s philosophy in writing, where the higher proficiency group seemingly presumes their goal in writing to levels of discourse construction, beyond sentence-making. The findings overall suggest that writing proficiency serves as an index for features in EFL composition. Implications of the findings are discussed. (223 words)
Abstract
This study examined the features of EFL composition in two student groups at differing levels of writing proficiency. The primary purpose of this investigation was to identify types of features in nonnative writers’ written text and the relationship of such features to their overall writing proficiency. Twenty five undergraduate and fourteen graduate students (N=39) in English major in a local university of Korea wrote English essays and these data, as the base for the linguistic corpora, were analyzed using WordSmith Tools for lexical variance, syntactic complexities, and textual cohesion. The study shows that the graduate students used more function words in general. Lexical density and variance in the text were higher among the graduate group, and such strength of lexicality in this group was extended to exceptionally higher levels of syntacticcomplexities with more passive voice and more relative clauses. The undergraduate group instead showed heavy reliance on personal pronouns yet with lack of referential cohesive devices like definite article. While no noticeable difference was found in the two groups’ textual cohesion, central to the group differences is the writer’s philosophy in writing, where the higher proficiency group seemingly presumes their goal in writing to levels of discourse construction, beyond sentence-making. The findings overall suggest that writing proficiency serves as an index for features in EFL composition. Implications of the findings are discussed. (223 words)
참고문헌 (38)
- Cho, Y. G., "Perception on second language writing: Comparing two ESL learners", English Language Teaching, 26(2), pp.23~42 (2014)
- 조영교, "EFL Writers’ Revision Patterns at Discourse Level and Their Relationship to Writing Proficiency", 영어교육연구, 31(4), pp.1~21 (2019), 팬코리아영어교육학회[DOI]
- Choi, Y., "Text structure of Korean speakers’ argumentative essays in English", World Englishes, 7(2), pp.129~142 (1988)
- Choi, Y., "Textual coherence in English and Korean : An analysis of argumentative writing by American and Korean students", Dissertation Abstracts International, 50(2), pp.429A~ (1988)
- 최연희, "Effects of Revision Training on L2 Writing", 영어교육, 65(1), pp.25~56 (2010), 한국영어교육학회[DOI]
- Emig, J., "The composing processes of twelfth graders" (1971), National Council of Teachers of English
- Faigley, L., "Analyzing revision", College Composition and Communication, 32, pp.400~414 (1981)
- Ferris, D. R., "Lexical and syntactic features of ESL writing by students at different levels of L2 proficiency", TESOL Quarterly, 28(2), pp.414~420 (1994)
- Ferris, D. R., "The case for grammar correction in L2 writing classes : A response to Truscott(1996)", Journal of Second Language Writing, 8(1), pp.1~11 (1999)
- Flower, L., "A cognitive process theory of writing", College Composition and Communication, 32, pp.365~387 (1981)
- Grabe, W., "Theory and practice of writing" (1996), Longman
- Halliday, M. A. K., "Cohesion in English" (1976), Longman
- Hall, C., "Managing the complexity of revising across languages", TESOL Quarterly, 24(1), pp.43~60 (1990)
- Harklau, L., "The role of writing in classroom second language acquisition", Journal of Second Language Writing, 11, pp.329~350 (2002)
- Hinds, J., "Writing across languages: Analysis of L2 Text", pp.141~152 (1987), Addison-Wesley
- Hinkel, E., "Matters of cohesion in L2 academic texts", Applied Language Learning, 12(2), pp.111~132 (2001)
- Hyland, K., "Genre-based pedagogies : A social response to process", Journal of Second Language Writing, 12, pp.17~29 (2003)
- Kobayashi, H., "Rhetorical patterns in English and Japanese", TESOL Quarterly, 18(4), pp.737~738 (1984)
- Kobayashi, H., "Factors affecting composition evaluation in an EFL context : Cultural rhetorical pattern and readers’ background", Language Learning, 46(3), pp.397~437 (1996)
- Kobayashi, H., "Factors relating to EFL writers’ discourse level revision skills", International Journal of English Studies, 1(2), pp.71~101 (2001)
- Lee, I., "ESL learners’ performance in error correction in writing : Some implications for college-level teaching", System, 25, pp.465~477 (1997)
- Leki, I., "The preferences of ESL students for error correction in college-level writing classes", Foreign Language Annals, 24, pp.203~218 (1991)
- Leki, I., "Students’ perceptions of EAP writing instruction and writing needs across the disciplines", TESOL Quarterly, 28(1), pp.81~101 (1994)
- McCulley, G. A., "Writing quality, coherence, and cohesion", Research in the Teaching of English, 19(3), pp.269~282 (1985)
- Matsuda, P. K., "Process and post-process : A discursive history", Journal of Second Language Writing, 12, pp.65~83 (2003)
- Porte, G., "When writing fails : How academic context and past learning experiences shape revision", System, 24(1), pp.107~116 (1996)
- Raimes, A., "What unskilled ESL students do as they write : A classroom study of composing", TESOL Quarterly, 19(2), pp.229~258 (1985)
- Raimes, A., "Landmark essays on ESL writing" (2001), Erlbaum
- Sasaki, M., "Toward an empirical model of EFL writing processes : An exploratory study", Journal of Second Language Writing, 9(3), pp.259~291 (2000)
- Sasaki, M., "Effects of study-abroad experiences on EFL writers : A multi-data analysis", The Modern Language Journal, 9, pp.602~620 (2007)
- Silva, T., "Toward an understanding of the distinct nature of L2 writing : The ESL research and its implications", TESOL Quarterly, 27(4), pp.657~677 (1993)
- Silva, T., "Landmark essays on ESL writing" (2001), Erlbaum
- Sommers, N., "Revision strategies of student writers and inexperienced adult writers", College Composition and Communication, 31, pp.378~388 (1980)
- Trimbur, J., "Taking the social turn : Teaching writing post-process", College Composition and Communication, 45, pp.108~118 (1994)
- Truscott, J., "The case against grammar correction in L2 writing classes", Language Learning, 46, pp.327~369 (1996)
- Truscott, J., "The case for ‘‘the case for grammar correction in L2 writing classes’’ : A response to Ferris", Journal of Second Language Writing, 8, pp.111~122 (1999)
- Zamel, V., "Writing : The process of discovering meaning", TESOL Quarterly, 16(2), pp.195~209 (1982)
- Zamel, V., "The composing processes of advanced ESL students : Six case studies", TESOL Quarterly, 17(2), pp.165~187 (1983)