Second Language Writers' Text: Linguistic and Rhetorical Features (ESL & Applied Linguistics Professional Series)
Eli Hinkel
Language: English
Pages: 392
ISBN: 0805840338
Format: PDF / Kindle (mobi) / ePub
This comprehensive and detailed analysis of second language writers' text identifies explicitly and quantifiably where their text differs from that of native speakers of English. The book is based on the results of a large-scale study of university-level native-speaker and non-native-speaker essays written in response to six prompts. Specifically, the research investigates the frequencies of uses of 68 linguistic (syntactic and lexical) and rhetorical features in essays written by advanced non-native speakers compared with those in the essays of native speakers enrolled in first-year composition courses. The selection of features for inclusion in this analysis is based on their textual functions and meanings, as identified in earlier research on English language grammar and lexis. Such analysis is valuable because it can inform the teaching of grammar and lexis, as well as discourse, and serve as a basis for second language curriculum and course design; and provide valuable insight for second language pedagogical applications of the study's findings.
fluidity, that is, nonhierarchical progression of ideas in topic development, instead of the rigidly ordered topic progression commonly found in English discourse. He also indicated that the syntactic preponderance of coordinating conjunctions, such as and, but, and so, used in Arabic and other Semitic languages contributes to the fluid style of written discourse. On the other hand, Aziz emphasized that Arabic text relies on the topic/theme and predicate phrase/rheme repetition patterns for the
delay their academic progress (pp. 155–156). Although there is little doubt that expanding one’s lexicon and syntactic range takes time, it is not clear, for example, why writing and composition courses cannot expedite students’ progress. Furthermore, if students enroll in mainstream classes with limited linguistic range, their lack of language skills may prove to be a serious handicap in their academics. It is not at all surprising that L2 learners have greater difficulty conveying “their
1996). In writing, they can be used in contexts similar to those of English modals but cover a wider range of meanings and contextual implications, such as insistence, intention, willingness, compulsion, and occasionality. In Vietnamese, meanings similar to those expressed by necessity and possibility modals are usually conveyed by means of particles and/or action verbs (Nguyen, 1987). On the other hand, 3 Some types of modals without an explicit or implicit lexical verb are called modal
employed as a cohesive localizer (Halliday & Hasan, 1976). However, Biber (1988) and Francis (1994) found that they are also common in written academic corpora. Amplifiers: absolutely, a lot (ϩ comparative adjective), altogether, always, amazingly, awfully, badly, by all means, completely, definitely, deeply, downright, forever, enormously, entirely, even (ϩ adjective/noun), ever, extremely, far (ϩ comparative adjective), far from it, fully, greatly, highly, hugely, in all/every
Range Emphatics Range Presupp. Markers Range Fixed Strings Range 0.00 2.07 0.91 4.46 1.22 5.77 0.00 1.10 3.76 20.19 L1 Chinese Japanese Korean Vietnamese Indonesian Arabic 0.24** 4.26 1.28* 8.44 2.83** 7.74 0.00 2.10 0.96** 4.76 0.19** 0.00** 3.17 5.71 0.88 1.42** 8.76 10.00 2.26** 1.97** 12.50 10.92 0.00* 0.00* 1.71 1.39 1.19** 1.03** 8.70 4.55 Note. All comparisons are relative to NSs. *one-tailed p Ͻ 0.05. **two-tailed p Ͻ 0.05. 0.00* 2.46 0.99 6.03 2.68** 6.85 0.00 1.03 1.20** 6.41 0.00