Evaluating Coherence in Experts' and Students' Research Arguments: An Exploratory Study

專家與學生的學術寫作之連貫性評估：探索性研究

張珮青(Peichin Chang)

《英語教學期刊》 41卷2期 (2017/06) Pp. 1-20

https://doi.org/10.6330/ETL.2017.41.2.01

摘要

This study explores coherence in research argument by investigating semantic overlaps in experts' and EFL students' texts. The semantic overlap is investigated through tracking the number of the recurrent concepts/terms, which form into lexical chains (LCs) in the macro- Theme and how these are resonated in the hyper-Themes. Macro- Themes are identified as the thesis statement in academic genre and hyper-Themes, the topic sentence of a paragraph. Both expert and student Introduction texts are quantitatively examined. The results reveal that the difference in semantic overlaps is not statistically significant between the experts' and novice writers' texts. Close analysis of the texts, however, reveals several weaknesses in the students' texts. First, they often resort to exact ＂repetition＂ when mentioning the key concepts, contrary to the experts who use other lexical cohesive devices to elaborate and explain difficult concepts. Second, the students often repeat static terms (e.g. ＂students＂) as opposed to abstract concepts, which prevents them from presenting in-depth argument. Third, they often cram the third move, occupying the niche, with numerous variables, producing very dense information at the end. Implications are drawn regarding raising student writers' awareness in deploying more effective LCs, macro- and hyper-Themes to sustain the key propositions in the argument.

關鍵字

text coherence ； Themes ； lexical chains

並列摘要

本文探討專家和英語為外國語學習者在學術寫作詞彙鏈的呈現與連貫性的關係。透過追蹤專業術語在宏觀及段落主位的重複程度可了解語意重複的現象與文章連貫的關係，此重複程度可透過詞彙鏈 (lexical chains)達成。本研究量化分析專注學術寫作「緒論」(Introduction)之語意重複性。研究結果雖顯示專家和學生語意重複的現象並未達統計顯著，進一步分析發現學生文章有若干缺點。首先，學生常重複無意義的詞彙而非抽象概念，使其論點無法更深入。此外，學生習慣在最後一個修辭言步「介紹本研究」提及諸多變數，使得他們的論點發展頭輕腳重。

並列關鍵字

寫作連貫性 ； 主位 ； 詞彙鏈

參考文獻

Halliday, M. A. K., & Hasan, R. (1976). Cohesion in English. London, UK: Longman.

Achugar, M., & Schleppegrell, M. (2005). Beyond connectors: The construction of cause in history textbooks. Linguistics & Education, 16, 298-318.

Basturkmen, H., & von Randow, J. (2014). Guiding the reader (or not) to re-create coherence: Observations on postgraduate student writing in an academic argumentative writing task. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 16, 14-22.

Biber, D., & Gray, B. (2010). Challenging stereotypes about academic writing: Complexity, elaboration, explicitness. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 9, 2–20.

Bitchener, J., & Basturkmen, H (2006). Perceptions of the difficulties of postgraduate L2 thesis students writing the discussion section. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 5, 4-18.