英語(yǔ)專業(yè)學(xué)生知識(shí)觀身份構(gòu)建與學(xué)術(shù)寫(xiě)作中轉(zhuǎn)述動(dòng)詞使用復(fù)旦_第1頁(yè)
英語(yǔ)專業(yè)學(xué)生知識(shí)觀身份構(gòu)建與學(xué)術(shù)寫(xiě)作中轉(zhuǎn)述動(dòng)詞使用復(fù)旦_第2頁(yè)
英語(yǔ)專業(yè)學(xué)生知識(shí)觀身份構(gòu)建與學(xué)術(shù)寫(xiě)作中轉(zhuǎn)述動(dòng)詞使用復(fù)旦_第3頁(yè)
英語(yǔ)專業(yè)學(xué)生知識(shí)觀身份構(gòu)建與學(xué)術(shù)寫(xiě)作中轉(zhuǎn)述動(dòng)詞使用復(fù)旦_第4頁(yè)
英語(yǔ)專業(yè)學(xué)生知識(shí)觀身份構(gòu)建與學(xué)術(shù)寫(xiě)作中轉(zhuǎn)述動(dòng)詞使用復(fù)旦_第5頁(yè)
已閱讀5頁(yè),還剩16頁(yè)未讀, 繼續(xù)免費(fèi)閱讀

付費(fèi)下載

下載本文檔

版權(quán)說(shuō)明:本文檔由用戶提供并上傳,收益歸屬內(nèi)容提供方,若內(nèi)容存在侵權(quán),請(qǐng)進(jìn)行舉報(bào)或認(rèn)領(lǐng)

文檔簡(jiǎn)介

Englishmajorstudents’epistemologicalbeliefs,identity,andtheuseofreportingverbsinacademicwriting

英語(yǔ)專業(yè)學(xué)生的知識(shí)觀、身份構(gòu)建與學(xué)術(shù)寫(xiě)作中轉(zhuǎn)述動(dòng)詞的使用

ZHENGYongyan鄭詠滟FudanUniversity復(fù)旦大學(xué)ELTChina2014OverviewBackgroundResearchdesignQuantitativefindingsQualitativefindingsDiscussion&ConcludingremarksAcademicwritingassocialpracticesTraditionalviewofacademicliteracyasasetofdiscrete,value-freerulesandtechnicalskillsRecentshifttosocialconstructivismthatviewsACADEMICLITERACIESassocialpracticesratherthanasetofskills(Barton,1994;Anstey&Bull,2004;LeaandStreet,1998)Academicwritingseenascollectiveliteracypracticessituatedinthespecificdisciplinaryculture(Hyland,2002)DisciplinarycultureDiscipline:humaninstitutionswhereactionsandunderstandingsareinfluencedbypersonal,interpersonal,institutionalandsocioculturalMargina-lizedideascontestingtheoriesPeripheralcontributorStudentneophytesDisciplinesarecharacterizedbyseveralcompetingperspectivesandembodyoftenbitterlycontestedbeliefsandvalues.Thesametextscanbeusedfordifferentpurposes,withdifferentquestions,anddifferentdegreesofengagement(Hyland,2002)competingdiscourseAppliedscientistsHyland(2013):thereisalwaysgoingtobemorethanonepossibleinterpretationofdata,andthefactthatwecanhavethesecompetingexplanationsshiftsattentionfromthelaboratoryorclipboardtothewaysthatacademicsarguetheirclaims.Wehavetolookforproofinthetextualpracticesforproducingagreement.Attheheartofacademicpersuasioniswriters’attemptsbothtoforeseeandaddresspotentiallynegativereactionstotheirclaims,andtodothistheyusethediscoursesoftheirdisciplines.CitationpracticeasdialogicengagementCitationassituatedliteracy

practicesCitationisadirectandexplicitmeansofintertextualitywherebyinformationofvarioustypesisattributedtosourcesexternaltothetext(Coffin,2009;Hyland2002).Citationmediatestherelationshipbetweenawriter’sargumentandhis/herdiscoursecommunity,helpswriterstoestablishapersuasiveepistemologicalandsocialframeworkfortheacceptanceoftheirarguments.Citationpracticesinfluencedbydisciplinarycultures(Thompson,Tribble,2001;Hyland,2002;Charles,2006)andethnolinguisticcultures(Taylor&Chen,Bloch&Chi,1995;Bondi,2009;Hu&Wang,2014)Chinese(student)researchers’citationpracticesTaylor&Chen1995:Anglo-AmericanphysicalscientistswritinginEnglishusedmorecitationsthantheirChinesecounterpartswritinginEnglishandChineseHu&Wang2014:Chinesescholars,intheirChinesepublications,usedfewercriticalcitations;theyweremoreinclinedtousemoredialogicallycontractivecitations(explicitendorseandconteststance)thandialogicallyexpansivecitations(implicitacknowledgeordistancestance).ThepracticesareheavilyinfluencedbyethnolinguisticepistemologyrootedinConfucianism.SomefindingsfromChinesescholars孫迎暉(2009):Chinesestudentwritersareabletouseavarietyofreportingverbs,buttheytendedtooverusefactiveverbstodescriberesearch-relatedactivities,butunderusenon-factiveverbsthatindicatetheirstanceorattitude.Whentheydidusethem,theytendedtoendorsethepositionbyusingauthor-positiveverbsandneverusedanycounter-factiveorauthor-criticalverbs.婁寶翠(2011):Chinesestudentwritersfrequentlyusedauthor-positiveverbs(64.8%)aswellasauthor-criticalverbs(24.2%).Butwhentheyusedauthor-criticalverbs,theyactuallyintendedtoconveypositiveorneutralstance.Therefore,thefrequentuseofauthor-criticalverbswasprobablyaresultofmisuse.史文霞(2013):Chinesewriters’useofreportingverbsisheavilyinfluencedbytheirproclivityofapositivistepistemology.Also,thefrequentuseofpositiveverbsmayalsoresultfromamisunderstandingofthedifferentfunctionsoftheseverbs.Theyalsotendedtousedialogiccontractivecitationforms,leavinglittleroomforfurthernegotiation.ThecurrentstudyMixed-methodWritingsamples:reportingverbsIn-depthinterviews:epistemologyandidentityethnographicperspectiveonacademicwritingFourth-yearundergraduateSecond-yearmasterstudentsSecond-yeardoctoralcandidatesTobetterunderstandstudents’choiceofusingreportingverbsinacademicwritingSofttheoretical:literatureSoftapplied:appliedlinguisticsAnalyticframework(Hyland,2002)EvaluationFactiveNon-factiveAuthorpositiveAuthorneutralAuthortentativeAuthorcriticalCounter-factiveAcknowledge,pointout,establishfail,overlook,exaggerate,ignoreadvocate,argue,hold,seeaddress,cite,comment,lookatsuggest,believehypothesizeattack,condemn,object,challengeFindings:UseofreportingverbsacrossdisciplinesThereareobviousdisciplinarydifferencesintheusebetweenthetypesoffactivevs.non-factivereportingverbs,positive,neutral,tentativeandcriticalverbs.UseofreportingverbsacrosslevelsPostgraduatestudents(masteranddoctoralstudents)aremoreabletousetentativeandneutralreportingverbs.Butstill,criticalstanceisseldomadoptedbystudentwriters.UnawarenessofusingreportingverbsBL:Idon’tknow(whyI

usedthesereportingverbs.It’skindofahabit.I’mjustusedtotheseverbs.Itisanacademicpaper,andmostofthemareverynaturaltome.Idon’tlikeshowingIdon’tknowaboutresearch.(appliedlinguistics,doctoral)WW:IwasnotawareofthereportingverbsthatI

used.I

basicallyusedwhateverpoppedintomyheadwhenIwaswriting.(appliedlinguistics,doctoral)misunderstandinginusingreportingverbsArgue:Non-factive;authorpositiveJC:WhenIuse‘a(chǎn)rgue’,Imeanthatthisisanewideaproposedbytheauthor,thevoiceheutters.ButIdon’tapproveordisapprove.I’msimplytryingtostateafactthattheauthorproposesanewidea.(appliedlinguistics,master)ZJ:Ithink‘a(chǎn)rgue’isaneutralword.WhenIwanttoexpressaneutralattitude,I’duseit.(literature,doctoral)LN:Ithinkargueisaneutralword.It’slikethatthequestionisworthdiscussing,althoughdifferentschoolsmayhavedifferentopinions.Butstill,neutral.(literature,4th-yrundergraduate)Epistemologicalbeliefs:

positivisttendencyZJ(lite.doc.)MJ(lite.master)TT(ling.master.)Factive81421Non-factive12146Counter-factive010positive793neutral132tentative421critical000ZJ:WhatIdohere(inwritingtheliteraturereview)istosummarizeallthestudies,andthenIcanaddsomecomments.IhopeIusealltheneutralwords,suchas“argue”and“incorporate”,sothatIcanpresentthepastresearchasobjectivelyaspossible.IhopeIcanbuildupsomesortofresourcepoolforlaterresearch.(literature,doctoral)MJ:Iexpecttopresentthecurrentstatusasobjectivelyaspossible.Ithinktheperfectreviewisanobjectiverepresentationofwhathasbeendoneintheresearch.(appliedlinguistics,master)TT:Thepurposeofliteraturereviewistopresenttotheaudiencetheextantresearch.Iwillsimplystatewhatresearchhasbeendone.Idon’tneedtoexpressifwhatIthinkisrightorwrong.Notnecessarily.WW:Ithinkthepurposeofliteraturereviewistoleadtomyownresearch.Itwillbealittlebitsubjective.Notpossibletobeveryobjective.…Oneimportantaspectofliteraturereview,orquotingothers,istocriticize.

WX:Ibelieveliteraturereviewneedstobelinkedtoone’sownstandpoint.Becauseifitiscompletelyobjective,thennomatterwhoyouare,whatyouwritedownwillbeallthesame.Sowhenyouwrite,youneedtoselect,andexpressyourattitude.WW(ling.doc.)WX(lite.master)Factive911Non-factive1913Counter-factive42positive73neutral16tentative113critical01Epistemologicalbeliefs:

socialconstructivismtendencyDialogicengagement—I’mnobody.ZJ:Idon’tthinkI’mhavingadialoguewiththeresearchers.BecausetheyarenothearingwhatIsay.Mywritingwillprobablybereadbysomepeople,butnotthem.(literature,doctoral)WJ:Ican’tsaythatI’mhavingadialoguewith(theauthors),especiallytheoldones.Theyareeithertoooldoralreadydead.(appliedlinguistics,4th-yearundergraduate)JC:Iamseldomcriticaltoothers.I

hatedebate.It’sagainstmyownpersonality.AndIdon’tliketopickouttheloopholesinotherpeople’sarguments.(appliedlinguistics,4th-yearundergraduate)MJ:Ialwaysgotthefeelingthatourresearchisnotworthy.Ourteachersdon’tcaremuch.Theydon’texpectsomethingnewfromourresearch.Well,Idon’tthinkIamintheresearchcommunity.(appliedlinguistics,master)DialogicengagementandidentityLN:WhenIwasreadingtheirarticles,IfeelasifI’mhavingadialoguewiththem.It’slikethisonehasthisidea,andthatonehasanotheridea.Thenyoufeelasiftwopeoplearearguingwitheachother.Itisthenthatyoucanstepinandsay,Iagreewithyouonthispart.(literature,4th-yrundergraduate)YY:InmyownwritingIperhapsuselesscriticalevaluation.ButIbelieveitisverynecessary.Tocriticizedoesn’tmeantodenyorevendenouncesomeone.Itmeanstoexpressyourownidea.…Idon’tthinkI’mintheresearchcircleyet.AtmostI’minaslowenteringprocess.(literature,doctoral)WW:Nomatterhowinexperiencedyouareasastudent,it’sstillpossibleforyourtoidentifyapossibleprobleminsomefamousresearcher’slogicoranalysismethod,evenifyourcriticalcommentmaynotalwaysbetrue.Butitisyouropinion….IthinkI’matthebottomofthisresearchsociety.Basicallynotmanypeoplewouldreadmywriting.(appliedlinguistics,doctoral)Itiscriticaltoconstructaresearchcommunityforthestudentwriters,orhelpthemtoimagineacommunityofpracticeintheirownarea.DiscussionUseofreportingverbs:morefrequentuseoffactiveverbsthannon-factiveverbs;morefrequentuseofpos

溫馨提示

  • 1. 本站所有資源如無(wú)特殊說(shuō)明,都需要本地電腦安裝OFFICE2007和PDF閱讀器。圖紙軟件為CAD,CAXA,PROE,UG,SolidWorks等.壓縮文件請(qǐng)下載最新的WinRAR軟件解壓。
  • 2. 本站的文檔不包含任何第三方提供的附件圖紙等,如果需要附件,請(qǐng)聯(lián)系上傳者。文件的所有權(quán)益歸上傳用戶所有。
  • 3. 本站RAR壓縮包中若帶圖紙,網(wǎng)頁(yè)內(nèi)容里面會(huì)有圖紙預(yù)覽,若沒(méi)有圖紙預(yù)覽就沒(méi)有圖紙。
  • 4. 未經(jīng)權(quán)益所有人同意不得將文件中的內(nèi)容挪作商業(yè)或盈利用途。
  • 5. 人人文庫(kù)網(wǎng)僅提供信息存儲(chǔ)空間,僅對(duì)用戶上傳內(nèi)容的表現(xiàn)方式做保護(hù)處理,對(duì)用戶上傳分享的文檔內(nèi)容本身不做任何修改或編輯,并不能對(duì)任何下載內(nèi)容負(fù)責(zé)。
  • 6. 下載文件中如有侵權(quán)或不適當(dāng)內(nèi)容,請(qǐng)與我們聯(lián)系,我們立即糾正。
  • 7. 本站不保證下載資源的準(zhǔn)確性、安全性和完整性, 同時(shí)也不承擔(dān)用戶因使用這些下載資源對(duì)自己和他人造成任何形式的傷害或損失。

最新文檔

評(píng)論

0/150

提交評(píng)論