Developmental Patterns of Metadiscourse in Second Language Writing
2
조회
0
다운로드
2
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
The present study aimed to profile the developmental patterns of discourse in second language (L2) writings among different first language (L1) groups. Applying the list of metadiscourse markers proposed by Ken Hyland to learner language, this study investigates variation of metadiscourse across proficiency levels, as well as across L1 backgrounds. Using the International Corpus Network of Asian Learners of English, the present study compared the frequencies of metadiscourse markers used in the writings among different learner groups. The results suggest that the six learner groups that were compared have diverse frequency change patterns of metadiscourse features across proficiency levels. To be specific, Japanese learners’ heavy reliance on self-mentions and boosters is remarkably antithetical to Thai learners’ preference of engagement markers and hedges. Moreover, B2 and higher level learners in China and Taiwan exhibited greater numbers of evidential patterns (hereafter evidentials) than learners in other groups. These differences can be attributable to their L1 rhetorical strategy, not to their lexical and grammatical competence. Therefore, we should consider the idiosyncrasies in metadiscourse of each L1 group when assessing L2 learners based on their language performance.
Abstract
The present study aimed to profile the developmental patterns of discourse in second language (L2) writings among different first language (L1) groups. Applying the list of metadiscourse markers proposed by Ken Hyland to learner language, this study investigates variation of metadiscourse across proficiency levels, as well as across L1 backgrounds. Using the International Corpus Network of Asian Learners of English, the present study compared the frequencies of metadiscourse markers used in the writings among different learner groups. The results suggest that the six learner groups that were compared have diverse frequency change patterns of metadiscourse features across proficiency levels. To be specific, Japanese learners’ heavy reliance on self-mentions and boosters is remarkably antithetical to Thai learners’ preference of engagement markers and hedges. Moreover, B2 and higher level learners in China and Taiwan exhibited greater numbers of evidential patterns (hereafter evidentials) than learners in other groups. These differences can be attributable to their L1 rhetorical strategy, not to their lexical and grammatical competence. Therefore, we should consider the idiosyncrasies in metadiscourse of each L1 group when assessing L2 learners based on their language performance.
참고문헌 (24)
- Attarn, A., "Study of metadiscourse in ESP articles: A comparison of English articles written by Iranian and English native speakers", International Journal of Learning, Teaching and Educational Research, 5(1), pp.63~71 (2014)
- Conner, U., "Contrastive rhetoric: Cross-cultural aspects of secondlanguage writing" (1996), Cambridge University Press
- Crismore, A., "Talking with readers: Metadiscourse as rhetoric act" (1989), Peter Lang
- Glynn, D., "Corpus methods in cognitive semantics: Quantitative studies in polysemy and synonymy", pp.443~485 (2014), John Benjamins
- Greenacre, M., "Correspondence analysis in practice" (2016), Chapman & Hall
- Harris, Z., "The transformational model of language structure", Anthropological Linguistics, 1(1), pp.27~29 (1959)
- Hawkins, J. A., "Criterial features in L2 English: Specifying the reference levels of the Common European Framework" (2012), Cambridge University Press
- Hinkel, E., "Second language writers’ text : Linguistic and rhetorical features" (2002), Lawrence Erlbaum Associates
- Hong, H., "Interactional metadiscourse in young EFL learner writing : A corpus-based study", International Journal of Corpus Linguistics, 19(2), pp.201~224 (2014)
- Hyland, K., "Metadiscourse: Exploring interaction in writing" (2005), Continuum
- Hyland, K., "Metadiscourse in academic writing : A reappraisal", Applied Linguistics, 25, pp.156~177 (2004)
- Ishikawa, S., "The ICNALE and sophisticated contrastive interlanguage analysis of Asian learners of English", Learner Corpus Studies in Asia and the World, 1, pp.91~118 (2013)
- Kachru, B., "The other tongue : English across cultures" (1992), University of Illinois Press
- Kobayashi, Y., "Investigating metadiscourse markers in Asian Englishes : A corpus-based approach", Language in Focus : International Journal of Studies in Applied Linguistics and ELT, 2(1), pp.19~35 (2016)
- Krzeszowski, T., "Contrasting languages : The scope of contrastive linguistics" (1990), Mouton de Gruyter
- Leacock, C., "Automated grammatical error detection for language learners" (2014), Morgan and Claypool Publishers
- Murakami, A., "Twenty years of learner corpus research: Looking back, moving ahead", pp.325~334 (2013), Presses universitaires de Louvain
- Nagata, R., "Reconstructing an Indo-European family tree from non-native English texts", Proceedings of the 51st Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics, pp.1137~1147 (2013)
- Nakamura, J., "Text typology and corpus : A critical review of Biber’s methodology", English Corpus Studies, 2, pp.75~90 (1995)
- Petch-Tyson, S., "Learner English on computer", pp.107~118 (1998), Longman
- Tan, H., "Metadiscourse use in the persuasive writing of Malaysian undergraduate students", English Language Teaching, 7(7), pp.26~39 (2014)
- Tono, Y., "Automatic treatment and analysis of learner corpus data", pp.169~204 (2013), John Benjamins
- Vande Kopple, W., "Some explanatory discourse on metadiscourse", College Composition and Communication, 36, pp.82~93 (1985)
- Williams, J., "Style : Ten lessons in clarity and grace" (1981), Scott Foresman