1887
Volume 133, Issue 1
  • ISSN 0019-0829
  • E-ISSN: 1783-1490
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes

Abstract

This paper uses a schemata-theoretic conception of reading in an assessment of ESL reader recall of unstated levels of meaning in narrative prose. Schemata theory suggests that the skilled reader selects one of a finite number of text schemata to use in the decoding, retention and recall of a particular text, and it has been demonstrated that better knowledge of the schematic structure makes possible better recall. Here, reader recall of two types of unstated meaning in narrative prose is assessed for a group of advanced learners of ESL, who use Chinese as L1. Evidence is presented of poor recall of unstated meaning, concomitant with a lack of knowledge of the requisite schematic structure. It is therefore suggested that formal instruction on the requisite structure will enhance learner recall of unstated meaning.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/itl.133-134.02tic
2001-01-01
2019-08-22
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. ADAMS, Marilyn J. , and Allan, COLLINS
    1979 A schema-theoretic view of reading. InNew directions in discourse processing. Roy O. Freedle (Ed.), 1–22. Norwood, New Jersey : Ablex Publishing Corporation.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. CARRELL, Patricia L.
    1983a The three components of background knowledge in reading comprehension. Language Learning33(2): 183–207.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. 1983b Background knowledge in second language comprehension. Language Learning and Communication2(l): 25–34.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. 1983c Some issues in studying the role of schemata, or background knowledge, in second language comprehension. Reading in a Foreign Language1(2): 81–92.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. 1984 Evidence of a formal schema in second language comprehension. Language Learning34(2).
    [Google Scholar]
  6. CARRELL, Patricia L. , and Joan C. EISTERHOLD
    1983 Schema theory and ESL reading pedagogy. TESOL Quarterly17(4):553–573.
    [Google Scholar]
  7. CARRELL, Patricia L. , and Bill WALLACE
    1983 Background knowledge : context and familiarity in reading comprehension. InOn TESOL '82, Mark, A. Clarke and Jean HANDSCOMBE (Eds.), 295–308. Washington, D.C. TESOL.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. CONNOR, Ulla
    1984 Recall of text : differences between first and second language readers. TESOL Quarterly18(2):239–256.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. LABOV, W.
    1981 Speech actions and reactions in personal narrative. InAnalysing Discourse : Text and Talk. Georgetown University Round Table. Washington, DC : Georgetown University press.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. LABOV, W. & J. WALETZKY
    1967 Narrative analysis : oral versions of personal experience. In J. Helm (Ed.) Essays on the verbal and visual arts. Proceedings of the 1966 Annual Spring Meeting of the American Ethnological Society. Seattle : University of Washington Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  11. MARTIN, J.R. & J. ROTHERY
    1981Writing project Number 2. Working Papers in Linguistics, Department of Linguistics, University of Sydney.
    [Google Scholar]
  12. 1984 Choice of genre in a suburban primary school. Paper present atthe Annual Conference of the Applied Linguistics Association of Australia, Alice Springs.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. 1986 What a functional approach to the writing task can show teachers about 'good writing', In, B. Couture (Ed.) Functional Approaches to Writing : Research Perspectives. New Jersey : Ablex.
    [Google Scholar]
  14. MEYER, Bonnie J.F.
    1975The organization of prose and its effects on memory. Amsterdam : North Holland Publishing Co.
    [Google Scholar]
  15. 1997a The structure of prose : effects on learning and memory and implications for educational practice. In Schooling and the acquisition of knowledge, Richard C., Anderson , Rand J., Spiro , and William, E.
    [Google Scholar]
  16. MONTAGUE
    Eds. 179–208. Hillsdale, New Jersey : Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
  17. MEYER, Bonnie J.F.
    1977b What is remembered from prose : a function of passage structure. InDiscourse production and comprehension, Roy O. Freedle (Ed.), 307–336. Norwood, New Jersey : Ablex Publishing Corporation.
    [Google Scholar]
  18. MEYER, Bonnie J.F. , David M. BRANDT and George J. BLUTH
    1980 Use of top-level structure in text: key for reading comprehension and ninth-grade students. Reading Research Quarterly16(1):72–103.
    [Google Scholar]
  19. MEYER, Bonnie J.F. , and Roy O. FREEDLE
    1984 Effects of discourse type on recall. American educational Research Journal21(1): 121–143.
    [Google Scholar]
  20. ROTHERY, J.
    1989 Learning about language. In R. Hasan & J.R. Martin (Ed.s), Language Development : Learning Culture (Meaning and Choice in Language : Studies for Michael Halliday). Ablex : New Jersey.
    [Google Scholar]
  21. 1990 'Story' writing in primary school : assessing narrative type genres. Unpublished PhD thesis. University of Sydney.
  22. 1995 Reading and writing narrative : what can we teach in English?In M.L. Tickoo (Ed.) Reading and Writing : Theory into Practice. Singapore : RELC Anthology Series 35.
    [Google Scholar]
  23. RUMELHART, David E.
    1977 Toward an interactive model of reading. In Attention and performance, Volume, VI, Stanislav Dornic (Ed.), 573–603. New York : Academic Press.
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1075/itl.133-134.02tic
Loading
  • Article Type: Research Article
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