1887
  1. Home
  2. e-Journals
  3. Australian Review of Applied Linguistics
  4. Volume 27, Issue 1
  5. Article
Volume 27, Issue 1
  • ISSN 0155-0640
  • E-ISSN: 1833-7139
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes

Abstract

This study examines similarities and differences between English and Chinese letters to the editor on newspapers from the perspectives of contrastive rhetoric and genre theory. Generic structures, rhetorical structures, and logico-semantic relations of 20 letters to the editor (10 in Chinese and 10 in English) were examined in detail. Findings of this study include: 1) there was often an editor’s preview (i.e. a brief introduction to the letters written by editors) in Chinese letters to the editor in this study; 2) Appeals to values and needs were used to support their claims in Chinese letters to the editor, whereas English writers employed evidence to do this. The study suggests that ‘evidence’ and ‘appeals to values and need’ are deeply rooted in the two cultures and societies, and hence find their place in the writers’ texts; 3) consequential and additive logico-semantic relations were often used in both the Chinese and the English letters, however, consequential relations were more frequently used in the Chinese letters to the editor than in the English ones. All the findings are discussed in relation to the different writing styles and the socio-cultural values of each culture.

© 2004 John Benjamins Publishing Company
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/aral.27.1.06wan
2004-01-01
2023-09-21

  • From This Site

    /content/journals/10.1075/aral.27.1.06wan
    dcterms_title,dcterms_subject,pub_keyword
    -contentType:Journal -contentType:Contributor -contentType:Concept -contentType:Institution
    10
    5
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Allwright, D. & Bailey, K. M.
    (1991) Focus on the language classroom. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  2. Butt, D. , Fahey, R. , Spinks, S. , & Yallop, C.
    (2000) Using Functional Grammar. (2nd ed,) Sydney: National Centre for English Language Teaching and Research, Macquarie University.
     [Google Scholar]
  3. Cahill, D.
    (1999) Contrastive rhetoric, Orientalism, and the Chinese second language writer. PHD dissertation unpublishedChicago: University of Illinois.
     [Google Scholar]
  4. Cai, G.
    (1993) Beyond bad writing: Teaching English composition to Chinese ESL students. Paper presented atthe college composition and communication conference, San Diego, CA.
     [Google Scholar]
  5. Connor, U.
    (1996) Contrastive rhetoric: Cross-cultural aspects of second language writing. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi: 10.1017/CBO9781139524599
     https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139524599 [Google Scholar]
  6. (2002) New directions in contrastive rhetoric. TESOL Quarterly36(4). 493-510
  7. Gerot, L. & Wignell, P.
    (1994) Making Sense of Functional Grammar. Gold Coast, QSL: AEE Publishing.
     [Google Scholar]
  8. Halliday, M. A. K.
    (1994) An introduction to functional grammar. (2nd ed). London: Edward Arnold
     [Google Scholar]
  9. Hamp-Lyons, L. & Zhang, B. W.
    (2001) World Englishes: Issues in and from academic writing assessmentIn Flowerdew & Peacock (Ed.) Research perspectives on English for academic purposes (pp.101-116). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi: 10.1017/CBO9781139524766.010
     https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139524766.010 [Google Scholar]
  10. Ho, D. Y. , & Chiu, C.
    (1994) Component ideas of individualism, collectivism, and social organization: An application in the study of Chinese culture. In U. Kim , H. Triandis , C. Kagiteibasi , S. Choi , & G. Yoon (Eds.). Individualism and collectivism. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
     [Google Scholar]
  11. Hoey, M.
    (1983) On the surface of discourse. London: George Allen and Unwin.
     [Google Scholar]
  12. Kaplan, R. B.
    (1966) Cultural thought patterns in intercultural education. Language learning16:1-20. doi: 10.1111/j.1467‑1770.1966.tb00804.x
     https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-1770.1966.tb00804.x [Google Scholar]
  13. (1972) The anatomy of rhetoric: Prolegomena to a functional rhetoric. Philadelphia: Center for Curriculum Development.
     [Google Scholar]
  14. (1987) Cultural thoughts patterns revisited. In U. Connor & R.B. Kaplan . (Ed) Writing across language: Analysis of L2 Text (pp.9-21). Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
     [Google Scholar]
  15. (1988) Contrastive rhetoric and second language learning: Notes toward a theory of contrastive rhetoric. In A. C. Purves (Ed.), Writing across languages and cultures: Issues in contrastive rhetoric (pp.275-304). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
     [Google Scholar]
  16. (2000) Contrastive rhetoric and discourse analysis: Who writes what to whom? When? In what circumstances? In S. Sarangi & M. Coulthard (Ed.), Discourse and social life. London: Longman.
     [Google Scholar]
  17. Kirkpatrick, A.
    (1993) Information sequencing in modem standard Chinese. ARAL16(2): 27-60.
     [Google Scholar]
  18. (1995) Are they really so different? The ‘Chinese’ genre of university entrance essays. Open Letter. 5(2): 43-52.
     [Google Scholar]
  19. (1996) Topic—comment or modifier—modified?‘ Information structure in modern standard Chinese. Studies in Language. 20(1): 93-113. doi: 10.1075/sl.20.1.05kir
     https://doi.org/10.1075/sl.20.1.05kir [Google Scholar]
  20. Knapp, P. & Watkins, M.
    (1994) Context-text-grammar. Sydney: Text Productions.
     [Google Scholar]
  21. Leki, I.
    (1991) Twenty-five years of contrastive rhetoric: text analysis and writing pedagogies. TESOL Quarterly25(1): 123-143. doi: 10.2307/3587031
     https://doi.org/10.2307/3587031 [Google Scholar]
  22. Martin, J. R.
    (1992) English text: System and structure. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/z.59
     https://doi.org/10.1075/z.59 [Google Scholar]
  23. (1993) Genre and literacy-modelling context in educational linguistics. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics13: 141-172. doi: 10.1017/S0267190500002440
     https://doi.org/10.1017/S0267190500002440 [Google Scholar]
  24. (1994) Macro-genres: The ecology of the page. Network21:29-52.
     [Google Scholar]
  25. (1997) Analysing genre: functional parameters. In Frances Christie & J. R. Martin (Ed.). Genre and institutions (pp.3-39). London and New York: Continuum.
     [Google Scholar]
  26. (2001) Language, register and genre. In A. Burns & C. Coffin (Ed.). Analysing English in a global context (pp.149-166). London and New York: Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group.
     [Google Scholar]
  27. Martin, J. R. , Christie, F. , & Rothery, J.
    (1987) Social processes in education: A reply to Sawyer and Watson (and others). In I. Reid (Ed.), The place of genre in learning: Current debates (pp.46-57). Geelong, Australia: Deakin University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  28. Matalene, C.
    (1985) Contrastive rhetoric: An American teacher in China. College English47 (8): 789-808. doi: 10.2307/376613
     https://doi.org/10.2307/376613 [Google Scholar]
  29. Rottenburg, A. T.
    (1994) The structure of argument. Boston: Bedford Books of St. Martin‘s Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  30. Scollon, R.
    (1991) Eight legs and one elbow. Stance and structure in Chinese English compositions. Paper presented atInternational Reading Association, Second North American Conference on Adult and Adolescent Literacy, Banff.
     [Google Scholar]
  31. Taylor, G. & Chen, T.
    (1991) Linguistic, cultural, and subcultural issues in contrastive discourse analysis: Anglo-American and Chinese scientific texts. Applied Linguistics12(3): 319-336. doi: 10.1093/applin/12.3.319
     https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/12.3.319 [Google Scholar]
  32. Zhu, Y.
    (2000) Structural moves reflected in English and Chinese sales letters. Discourse Studies2(4): 525-548.
     [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1075/aral.27.1.06wan
Loading
  • Article Type: Research Article

Most Cited

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was successful
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error