政大機構典藏-National Chengchi University Institutional Repository(NCCUR):Item 140.119/77854

政大典藏 > College of Foreign Languages and Literature > Graduate Institute of Linguistics > Theses > Item 140.119/77854

Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/77854

Title:	敘述文的語言特徵─教學與學習上的建議 Linguistic Features of Narrative Writing: Implications to Teaching and Learning
Authors:	張孝晨 Zhang, Xiao Chen
Contributors:	張郇慧 Chang, Hsun Huei 張孝晨 Zhang, Xiao Chen
Keywords:	語言特徵敘述文 Linguistic features Narrative
Date:	2015
Issue Date:	2015-08-24 09:52:22 (UTC+8)
Abstract:	在大學入學考的英文科目中，英文作文的考題以敘述文與論說文兩種類型最為常見。特別注意的是，於每年二月份所舉行的大學學測的英文考科中，2004年至2014年間，敘述文的出現次數高達八次。因此，如何教導學生進行英文的敘述文寫作是每位高中英文老師所要面對的課題。此外，記敘文與敘述文均為描寫形式的文章，學生容易對這兩種文體產生混淆，可能影響學生的敘述文體的英文寫作而造成負面的影響。為了幫助學生能夠了解敘述文體的特性，本研究經由以英文母語者的文章整理出七項關於敘述文的特性。此外，本研究也利用敘述文的七項特性來檢驗五篇高中英文教科書的文章與五十篇學生的英文文章，除了審視這五十五篇文章是否達到七項特性之外，也利用學生敘述文的分數發現會影響分數的語言特徵。最後，藉由研究中的發現給予英文教科書編寫與英文敘述文教學及學習上的建議。 The most common styles of English writing in the college entrance exam are narratives and expository. Furthermore, narrative writing occurs more frequently than expository in the General Scholastic Ability Test (GSAT) held in early February every year. During the years 2004 to 2014, writing a narrative with sequential pictures was used eight times to evaluate Taiwanese senior high school students` English writing abilities. Therefore, the teaching and learning of English narratives is of a great importance for teachers and students in Taiwanese senior high schools. In order to help the teaching and learning of narrative writing, this study aims to find out the linguistic features of the narratives based on the analysis of English narratives written by native speakers. Then, according to the seven linguistic features of the narrative found in this study, fifty-five narratives from Taiwanese English textbooks and senior high school students were investigated to know whether the seven linguistic features were presented. Furthermore, to determine the significant grades-related linguistic features of students` narratives, the grades of students` narratives and the linguistic features are examined in this study. Lastly, by using the findings of the study, some pedagogical implications are offered for English textbooks, the teaching and learning of the narrative style.
Reference:	1. Akyel, A. (1994). First language use in EFL writing: Planning in Turkish vs. Planning in English. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 4, 169-196. 2. Baack, E. (1997). Portfolio development: An introduction. English Teaching Forum,35(2), 38-43. 3. Biber, D. (1988). Linguistic features: algorithms and functions in Variation across speech and writing. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 4. Brill, E. (1992). A Simple Rule-based Part of Speech Tagger. In Proceedings of the Workshop on Speech and Natural Language, 112-116. Morristown, NJ:Association for Computational Linguistics. 5. Brooks, E. (1985). Case studies of ‘unskilled’ ESL college writers: A hypothesis about stages of development. ERIC Document, 289-340. 6. Byrne, D. (1988). Teaching writing skills. London,New York:Longman. 7. Carson, J. E., Carrell, P. L., Silberstein, S., Kroll, B.,& Kuehn, P. A. (1990). Reading-writing relationships in first and second language. TESOL Quarterly,24,245-266. 8. Chanthalone, Smith. (2011). Narrative writing in native English and ESL learners: developmental trajectories and predictors. Published doctoral dissertation. University of Toronto, Canada. 9. Chao, Kwei-hsiang. (2002). Thematic progression in the argumentative essays of EFL senior high school students. MA thesis. National Chengchi University, Taipei. 10. Chen, D.W. (1998). Understanding the two sources of EFL writing performance as the means to improve EFL writing instruction. Proceedings of the seventh international symposium on English teaching. Taipei: Crane, 197-207. 11. Chen, M. (2005). Differential effects of “Product Approach” and “Process Approach” on Chinese EFL learners of different writing abilities. Foreign Language Teaching and Research, 6, 460-464. 12. Clachar, A. (1999). It’s not just cognition: The effect of emotion on multiple-level discourse processing in second-language writing. Language Science, 21, 31-60. 13. College Entrance Examination Center (CEEC) web page.http://www.ceec.edu.tw/ 14. Coltheart, M. (1981). The MRC Psycholinguistic Database Quarterly. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 33A:497-505. 15. Connor, U.,& Asenavage, K. (1994). Peer response groups in ESL writing classes: How much impact on revision? Journal of Second Language Writing, 3, 257-276. 16. Crossley, S.A., Greenfield, J. and McNamara, D.S. (2008). ‘Assessing text readability using cognitively based indices’, TESOL Quarterly, Vol. 42, pp.475–493. 17. Daneš, F. (1974). Functional sentence perspective and the organization of the text. In F. Danes (Ed.), Papers on functional sentence perspective (pp. 106-128). Prague: Publishing House of the Czechoslovak Academy of Sciences. 18. Feng, H.P. (2001). Writing an academic paper in English: an exploratory study of six Taiwanese graduate students. Unpublished Dissertation. New York: Columbia University. 19. Grabe, W., & Kaplan, R. (1989). Writing a second language: Contrastive rhetoric. In D. Johnson, & D. Roen (Eds.), Richness in Writing: Empowering ESL Students (pp. 263-283). New York: Longman. 20. Grant, L., &Ginther, A. (2000). Using computer-tagged linguistic features to describe L2 writing differences. Journal of Second Language Writing, 9(2), 123-145. 21. Halliday, M. A. K., & Matthiessen, C. M. I. M.(2004). An introduction to functional grammar (3rd edition). London: Arnold. 22. Han, J. L. (2001). English language teaching: Process-genre approach. Foreign Language World, 4, 35-40. 23. Hinkel, E. (2002). Second Language Writers’ Text: Linguistic and Rhetorical Features. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. 24. Jurafsky, D. and Martin, J.H. (2008) Speech and Language Processing: An Introduction to Natural Language Processing, Computational Linguistics, and Speech Recognition, Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ. 25. Jenna Blum. ( 2013) The Modern Scholar published by Recorded Books, The Author at : The Art of Writing Fiction, Disk 1, Tracks 14-15. 26. Kaplan, R. B. (1966). Cultural thought patterns in intercultural education. Language Learning, 16(1), 1-20. 27. Kaplan, R. B. (2000). Response to “on the future of second language writing”. Journal of Second Language Writing, 9(3), 311-320. 28. Kaplan, R. B. (2001). ‘Cultural thought patterns in inter-cultural education.’ In P. K. Matsuda & T. Silva (eds), Landmark Essays on ESL Writing. New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, pp. 11–26. 29. Kaplan, R. B., & Grabe, W. (2002).A modern history of written discourse analysis. Journal of Second Language Writing, 11(3), 191-223. 30. Keh, C. L. (1990). Feedback in the writing process: A model and methods for implementation. ELT Journal, 44, 294-304. 31. Kiany, G. R., & Nejad, Khezri M. (2001). On the relationship between English proficiency, writing ability, and the use of conjunctions in Iranian EFL learners’ compositions. ITL Review of Applied Linguistics, 133/134, 227–241. 32. Klare, G.R. (1974–1975). Assessing Readability. Reading Research Quarterly, 10:62-102. 33. Kobayashi, H. & Rinnert, C. (1992). Effects of first language on second language writing: Translation versus direct composition. Language Learning, 42, 183-215. 34. Lannon, J.M. (1989). The writing process (3rd ed.). Glenview, IL: Scott, Foresman and Company. 35. Li, X. M. (1996). ‘Good Writing’ in Cross-Cultural Context. Albany: State University of New York Press. 36. Lynn M. Berk. (1999). English Syntax. 37. Ma, G. H., & Wen, Q. F. (1999). Factors affecting English writing of Chinese university students. Foreign Language Teaching and Research, 4, 34-39. 38. Mangelsdorf, K. (1992). Peer reviews in the ESL composition classroom: What do the students think? ELT Journal, 46, 274-284. 39. Matalane, C. (1985). Contrastive rhetoric: An American writing teacher in China, College English, 47(8), 789–808. 40. Mendonca, C. O., & Johnson, K. E. (1994). Peer review negotiations: revision activities in ESL writing instruction. TESOL Quarterly, 28, 745-769. 41. Miller, G.A. (1990). WordNet: An On-line Lexical Database. International Journal of Lexicography, 3:235-312. 42. Mohan, B., & Lo, W. (1985). Academic writing and Chinese students: Transfer and developmental factors. TESOL Quarterly. 19(3), 515-534. 43. Raimes, A. (1987). Language proficiency, writing ability, and composing strategies: a study of ESL college student writers. Language Learning, 37, 439-467. 44. Regina L. Smalley, Mary K. Ruetten, Joann Rishel Kozyrev. ( 2010). Refining Composition Skills. 45. Sasaki, M. (2000). Toward an Empirical Model of EFL Writing Processes: An exploratory study. Journal of Second Language Writing, 9(3), 259-291. 46. Sekine, S. and Grishman, R. (1995). A Corpus-based Probabilistic Grammar with Only Two Nonterminals. In Proceedings of the Fourth International Workshop on Parsing Technology, 216-223. Prague, the Czech Republic: ACL/SIGPARSE. 47. Tsai, Meng-feng. (2009). The effects of using pictures as prompts on English writing performance of high and Low achievers in senior high school. MA thesis. National Chengchi University, Taipei. 48. Tsai, Tsi-chuen. (2011). A study on theme types in Taiwanese senior high school students` narratives. MA thesis. National Chengchi University, Taipei. 49. Landauer, T., McNamara, D.S., Dennis, S. and Kintsch, W. (Eds.) (2007). Handbook of Latent Semantic Analysis, Erlbaum, Mahwah, NJ. 50. Liu ,Ying-hsiu. (2008). A Discourse Analysis of Adverbial Participle Clauses in Taiwanese Senior High Students` Writing. MA thesis. National Taiwan Normal University, Taipei. 51. Wilson, M.D. (1988). ‘The MRC psycholinguistic database: machine readable dictionary, version 2’, Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, and Computers, Vol. 20, pp.6–11. 52. Yu, Jia-wen. (2010). The use of English adverbial clauses in Taiwanese senior high school students’ writing. MA thesis. National Chengchi University, Taipei. 53. Zamel, V. (1983). The composing process of advanced ESL students: six case studies. TESOL Quarterly, 17, 165-187. 54. Zhang, J. S., & Zhou, P. (2002). A comparative study of process and product approach in English writing teaching. Foreign Languages and Their Teaching, 9, 19-22. 55. Zhang, J. (2008). A comprehensive review of studies on second language writing. HKBU Papers in Applied Language Studies Vol. 12, 89-123.
Description:	碩士國立政治大學語言學研究所 100555007
Source URI:	http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0100555007
Data Type:	thesis
Appears in Collections:	[Graduate Institute of Linguistics] Theses

Files in This Item:

File	Size	Format
500701.pdf	1183Kb	Adobe PDF2	228	View/Open

社群 sharing

Loading...