Causality in the Essays of Korean EFL College Writers

Abstract

Kress (1994) presents two models of causality, the powers theory of causality and the regularity theory of causality, and argues that both modalities clearly exist in both speech and writing. However, if one goes deeper into his argument, one can discover the fact that the powers model of causality is more closely connected with writing than with speech, while the regularity model is more closely connected with speech than with writing. In other words, speech, with its chaining syntax co-ordinated in sequences, tends by its very structure to favour the regularity model. Writing, with its greater preponderance of subordination and embedding, leaves the regularity model as an option, but tends to favour the powers view. There has been very little work done in "the expression of causality" in L2 writing. Only recently, the use of two models of causality was examined in depth in a study by Reynolds (2002). Following closely the concept of two models of causality and being sparked by Reynolds's study, the present study examines how usage of causality markers is characterized in the essays of EFL college writers. The previous research by Reynolds compares changes in the way L1 and L2 writers between the ages 10 and 13 use Kress's set of causality markers. The present study differs from the analysis in Reynolds in that it focuses exclusively on the college writers' use of causality markers in their writing. The basis for this study is 7 essays written by five undergraduate students from a large, comprehensive university in Seoul. Students wrote two essays at home. Two TWE prompts were chosen because with both topics, the writers clearly need to express explicit causality in the form of justification for specific reasons. The results of this study show that EFL college writers have a relatively high usage of regularity markers and low usage of powers markers on both topics. In fact, in both texts the adjoining and co-ordination of simple clauses is the dominant structural form. And these writers use greater sequential connections between events on both topics. Though they have no need to sequence the reasons or establish a flow of events, their high usage of regularity markers in general may indicate greater reliance on narrative modes of development across both topics. The textual structures of 7 essays overall seem to be the writers' adherence to the regularity view of causality. The texts by five students contain significantly more instances of two of the markers, and and because. As a whole, the most common regularity markers are and and in. The problem that five writers have is that they avoid using complex sentences. They are overdependent upon simple sentences composed of clauses strung together with coordinating conjunctions. In addition, the results also support Reynolds' research, which suggests that the ESL students used the causality markers similarly across both topics whereas the regular language arts students were found to differ in their usage of causality markers between the two topics.