1887
Volume 156, Issue 1
  • ISSN 0019-0829
  • E-ISSN: 1783-1490
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes

Abstract

Abstract

Studies on both second language discourse in general and Chinese EFL/ESL discourse in particular have reported mixed findings about the relationship between L1 and L2 writing. This study investigates the rhetorical features of argumentative essays written by Chinese college EFL students by analyzing paragraph and overall textual organization and development in 69 sample essays. The results show that the majority of the participants compose in a deductive pattern similar to what is typically employed by native English speaking writers. However, the way in which the Chinese EFL students develop their L2 written discourse lacks effectiveness and adequacy, in terms of the following features: the quality of the topic sentence (of paragraphs) and the introduction paragraph (of essays), the adequacy of supporting details, transitions between sentences and paragraphs, and the effectiveness of the ending (of essays). Furthermore, we explore the factors that may underlie the observed patterns. We conclude the paper by discussing the pedagogical implications of the findings and suggesting directions for future research.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.2143/ITL.156.0.2034431
2008-01-01
2019-08-23
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Atkinson, D.
    (1991) Discourse analysis and written discourse conventions. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 11, 57–76.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Cai, J.
    (2006) Daxue Yingyu jiaoxue: Huigu, fansi he yanjiu [College English Teaching: Retrospection, reflections and research]. Shanghai, China: Fudan University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Chen, C.
    (2006) Why does my English writing sound so Chinese?Proceedings of the CATESOL State Conference 2006.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Chiang, S. Y.
    (1999) Assessing grammatical and textual features in L2 writing samples: The case of French as a foreign language. The Modern Language Journal, 83, 219–232.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Connor, U.
    (1996) Contrastive rhetoric: Cross-cultural aspects of second-language writing. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Cortazzi, M. & Jin, L.
    (1996) Cultures of learning: Language classrooms in China. InH. Colemen (Ed.), Society and the language classroom (pp.169–206). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  7. Folse, K. S., Muchmore-Vokoun, A., & Solomon, E. V.
    (1999a) Great essays: An introduction to writing essays. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. (1999b) Great paragraphs: An introduction to writing paragraphs. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. Hinds, J.
    (1990) Inductive, deductive, quasi-inductive: Expository writing in Japanese, Korean, Chinese, and Thai. InU. Connor & A. Johns (Eds.), Coherence in writing (pp.87–109). Alexandria, VA: TESOL.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Hinkel, E.
    (1997) Indirectness in L1 and L2 academic writing. Journal of Pragmatics, 27, 361–386.
    [Google Scholar]
  11. Hirose, K.
    (2003) Comparing L1 and L2 organizational patterns in the argumentative writing of Japanese EFL students. Journal of Second Language Writin g, 12, 181–209.
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Kaplan, R. B.
    (1966) Cultural thought patterns in inter-cultural education. Language learning, 16, 1–20.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. (2005) Contrastive Rhetoric. InE. Hinkel (Ed.), Handbook of research in second language teaching and learning (pp.375–391). Mahwah, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
    [Google Scholar]
  14. Kubota, R.
    (1992) Contrastive rhetoric of Japanese and English: A critical approach. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Toronto.
    [Google Scholar]
  15. (1998) An investigation of L1-L2 transfer in writing among Japanese university students: Implications for contrastive rhetoric. Journal of Second Language Writing, 7, 69–100.
    [Google Scholar]
  16. Kubota, R., & Lehner, A.
    (2004) Toward critical contrastive rhetoric. Journal of Second Language Writing, 13, 7–27.
    [Google Scholar]
  17. Li, S.
    (2005) Daxue Yingyu Siliuji Kaoshi jiujing gai hequhecong [College English Test Band 4 and Band 6: Where to go?]. RetrievedApril 10, 2008, fromnews.xinhuanet.com/edu/2005-01/14/content_2457700.htm
  18. Li, X.
    (1996) “Good writing” in cross-cultural context. Albany, New York: State University of New York Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  19. Lisle, B., & Mano, S.
    (1997) Embracing a multilingual rhetoric. InC. Severino, J. C. Cuerra & J. E. Butler (Eds.), Writing in multilingual settings (pp.12–26). New York: The Modern Language Association of America.
    [Google Scholar]
  20. Liu, J.
    (2005) Placement of the thesis statement in argumentative essays written by Chinese and American students: A study of contrastive rhetoric. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Purdue University.
    [Google Scholar]
  21. Liu, M., & Braine, G.
    (2005) Cohesive features in argumentative writings produced by Chinese undergraduates. System, 33, 623–263.
    [Google Scholar]
  22. Matalene, C.
    (1985) Contrastive rhetoric: An American writing teacher in China. College English, 47(8), 789–808.
    [Google Scholar]
  23. Ministry of Education of the People’s Republic of China
    Ministry of Education of the People’s Republic of China (2004) Daxue Yingyu kecheng jiaoxue yaoqiu (shixing) [Guidelines to College English teaching: A preliminary version] RetrievedJan 07, 2008, fromwww.edu.cn/20040120/3097997.shtml
  24. Mohan, B., & Lo, W.
    (1985) Academic writing and Chinese students: Transfer and developmental factors. TESOL Quarterly, 19, 515–534.
    [Google Scholar]
  25. Mu, C., & Carrington, S.
    (2007) An investigation of three Chinese students’ English writing strategies. TESL-EJ, 11(1), 1–23.
    [Google Scholar]
  26. Noor, R.
    (2001) Contrastive rhetoric in expository prose: Approaches and achievements. Journal of Pragmatics, 33, 255–269.
    [Google Scholar]
  27. Purdue University Online Writing Lab (OWL)
    Purdue University Online Writing Lab (OWL). The argumentative essay. RetrievedApril 4, 2008fromowl.english.purdue.edu/owl/resource/685/05/
  28. Quanguo Daxue Yingyu Siliuji Kaoshi Weiyuanhui
    Quanguo Daxue Yingyu Siliuji Kaoshi Weiyuanhui (2006a) Daxue Yingyu liuji kaoshi dagang (2006 nian xiugai ban) [2006 revised outline of College English Test Band 6]. RetrievedApril 11, 2008, fromwww.exam8.com/english/CET46/zhinan/200711/68872_2.html
  29. Quanguo Daxue Yingyu Siliuji Kaoshi Weiyuanhui
    Quanguo Daxue Yingyu Siliuji Kaoshi Weiyuanhui (2006b) Daxue Yingyu siji kaoshi dagang (2006 nian xiugai ban) [2006 revised outline of College English Test Band 4]. RetrievedApril 11, 2008, fromedu.sina.com.cn/cet/2007-11-22/1801109279.shtml
  30. Sasaki, M.
    (2000) Toward an empirical model of EFL writing processes: An exploratory study. Journal of Second Language Writing, 9(3), 259–291.
    [Google Scholar]
  31. Shaw, P., & Liu, E. T.
    (1998) What develops in the development of second-language writing?Applied Linguistics, 19, 225–254.
    [Google Scholar]
  32. Shi, L.
    (2002) How Western-trained Chinese TESOL professionals publish in their home environment. TESOL Quarterly, 36, 625–634.
    [Google Scholar]
  33. Tsao, F.
    (1983) Linguistics and written discourse in particular languages: Contrastive studies: English and Chinese (Mandarin). Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 3, 99–117.
    [Google Scholar]
  34. Tylor, G., & Chen, T.
    (1991) Linguistic, cultural, and subcultural issues in contrastive discourse analysis: Anglo-American and Chinese scientific texts. Applied Linguistics, 12, 319–336.
    [Google Scholar]
  35. Wang, W., & Wen, Q.
    (2002) L1 use in the L2 composing process: An exploratory study of 16 Chinese EFL writers. Journal of Second Language Writing, 11, 225–246.
    [Google Scholar]
  36. Wu, J.
    (2003) Daxuesheng Yingyu lunshuowen yupian jiegou tezheng diaocha [Discourse organization of English expository essays by college students]. Guowai Waiyu Jiaoxue (2003)2, 35–42.
    [Google Scholar]
  37. Yang, L., & Shi, L.
    (2003) Exploring six MBA students’ summary writing by introspection. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 2, 165–192.
    [Google Scholar]
  38. Zhang, X.
    (2004) Daxue Yingyu Ceshi Zhiyi Shuping [Comments on the criticisms of the College English Test]. Waiyujie (2004)2, 65–69.
    [Google Scholar]
  39. Zhonguo Yingyu Kaoshi Wang
    Zhonguo Yingyu Kaoshi Wang (2006) Siliuji de zhenglun shi Zhongguo de bei’ai [To debate on CET-4/6 Tests in China is pathetic]. RetrievedApril 10, 2008, fromwww.english86.com/CET46/CET46dongtai/4426.htm
    [Google Scholar]
  40. Zhongguo Yingyu Xuexi Wang
    Zhongguo Yingyu Xuexi Wang (2007) Zhenglun: Yingyu Siliuji Kaoshi gai quxiao [Debate: Should CET-4/6 Tests be abolished]. RetrievedApril 01, 2008, fromwww.cnenlearning.com/testquestion/CET6exam/12719.html
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.2143/ITL.156.0.2034431
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