Loading...
|
Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
https://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/106383
|
| Title: | 台灣高中英文教科書與學生英文作文佳作之文體與因果關係探討
The use of causal relations in narrations and expositions: a case study of Taiwan senior high school textbooks and high performance students` compositions |
| Authors: | 林侑萱
Lin, Yu Hsuan |
| Contributors: | 張郇慧
Chang, Hsun Huei
林侑萱
Lin, Yu Hsuan |
| Keywords: | 敘述文
說明文
因果關係
教科書
作文
連接詞
narration
exposition
causal relations
textbooks
compositions
logical connector |
| Date: | 2017 |
| Issue Date: | 2017-02-08 16:31:38 (UTC+8) |
| Abstract: | 本研究旨在探討台灣英文教科書與學生英文作文佳作中，敘述文與說明文中的因果關係使用。因為因果關係在閱讀與寫作中很常見，所以對學生來說，學會如何正確使用因果關係是件極為重要的事。根據李(2003)的研究，她發現因果關係對學生來說是最難學好的因果關係。因此，本研究希望能了解教科書中的敘述文與說明文是如何介紹因果關係給學生。同時，本研究亦希望能得知學生如何在不同文體的英文作文中，使用因果關係。
本研究選用三個版本的高中英文教科書來進行研究，之所以選擇此三版本教科書的原因在於，此三個版本在台灣高中英文課本的市占率最高。而又因為敘述文和說明文在學測和指考的英文作文考試中是最常要測驗學生的文體，因此本研究進一步挑選課本中的敘述文和說明文來進行分析與探討。此外，本研究亦研究民國100年到105年的學測、指考英文作文佳作，舉凡是敘述文和說明文中所使用的因果關係都進行分析與探討。
研究結果顯示在三個版本中，敘述文和說明文的分布無明顯差異。此外，本文發現年級越高的高中生會接觸到愈多的敘述文，但愈少的說明文。研究結果亦顯示文體會影響因果關係的使用情形。相較於敘述文中的因果關係使用，我們發現教科書作者在說明文中使用較多因果關係。
而我們也發現在不同文體中的不同文章結構，因果關係使用的情形不同。在敘述文中，因果關係主要被使用於Complications和Resolutions中。在說明文中，因果關係則主要被使用於Arguments supported by evidence 和Summing up the position中。除此之外，本文亦發現在四類因果連接詞中，Reason和Result這兩類的因果連接詞最常被使用於敘述文和說明文中。
為了清楚看出因果關係，本文針對包含因果關係的句子皆進行了句法、時間及邏輯順序的分析。結果發現幾乎所有因果關係中的時間順序皆與邏輯順序一致。同時，本文亦歸納出教科書中的因果關係的七種使用形式，並提供教科書中的例句來進行討論。
最後，透過學生英文作文佳作的分析，我們發現在因果關係的使用量方面，這群學生與教科書作者相似。而本研究亦歸納出學生在佳作中的四個因果關係誤用的問題。
希望本研究的發現及所提供的建議可供台灣高中英文科教師、教科書作者以及高中生參考。
The purpose of the study is to investigate the variations of causal relations in narrations and expositions in Taiwan senior high school`s English textbooks, and high performance students’compositions. Since causal relations are common in reading and writing, it is important for students to learn to use it. According to Lee (2003), causal relations are the most difficult logical relations for students to master. The present study wants to know how causal relations are introduced to learners in the narrations and expositions from textbooks. Besides, the present study also wants to know how students use causal relations in different genres of compositions.
In the study, three series of textbooks are selected for the examination. These three textbooks were chosen as they are commonly used textbooks in Taiwan senior high schools. The selected texts for examination are the texts of two genres: narration and exposition, for these two genres are frequently tested in College Entrance Exams. Moreover, the causal relations in narrations and expositions among the high-scoring essays in years of 2011 to 2016College Entrance Exams were examined as well.
The results showed that three series of textbooks in have no significant differences in the distributions of narrations and expositions. Besides, senior high school students expose more narrations but fewer expositions in the higher grades. Furthermore, the result revealed that genres do influence the uses of causal relations, for expositions in the textbooks applied more causal relations than the narrations in the textbooks.
Moreover, different usages among different text organizations in both narrations and expositions were found. In the text organizations of narrations, causal relations were mainly used in complications and resolutions.In the text organizations of expositions, causal relations were mainly used in Arguments supported by evidence and Summing up the position. The types of causal relations which are frequently used in textbooks were also found as well. The results showed that Reason and Result type of causal logical connectors were mainly used in both narrations and expositions.
Analyses of casual relations’sequences were conducted to clearly see the syntactic sequences, temporal sequences, and logical sequences of the sentences with causal relations. It was found that almost all the causal relations in the textbooks had the temporal sequences equaled to the logical sequences. Moreover, six usages of causal logical connectors were categorized and presented with example sentences.
Last but not least, through the analyses of causal relations in students’high-scoring essays, the result showed that high performance students used the similar amounts of causal relations in their compositions with the textbooks’ writers. The present study also categorizes the errors of misusing the causal relations into four problems.
It is hoped that this study can provide insights for the senior high school English teachers, textbook publishers, and students to follow. |
| Reference: | Biber, D., Johansson, S., Leech, G., Conrad, S., & Finegan, E. (1999). Longman grammar of spoken and written English. London: Longman.
Bolton, K., Nelson, G., & Hung, J.A. (2002). A corpus-based study of connectors in student writing: Research from the International Corpus of English in Hong Kong (ICE-HK). International Journal of Corpus Linguistics, 7, 165-182.
Carter, R. & McCarthy, M. (2006). Cambridge Grammar of English. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Celce-Murcia, M., and D. Larsen-Freeman. (1999). The Grammar Book: An ESL/EFL Teacher`s Course. 2nd ed. Boston, MA: Heinle & Heinle.
Chen, C. W. Y. (2006). The use of conjunctive adverbials in the academic papers of advanced Taiwanese EFL learners. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics, 11(1), 113–130.
Chiang, P. J. (1993). How to improve composition teaching in Taiwan’s high schools: A study of error types and learning strategies. Unpublished master’s thesis, National Kaohsiung Normal University.
Conrad, S. (2000) Will corpus linguistics revolutionize grammar teaching in the 21st century? TESOL Quarterly Vol. 34, pp. 548-560.
Derewianka, B. (1990). Exploring how texts work. Sydney: Primary English Teaching Association.
Field, Y. & Yip, L. M. O. (1992). A comparison of internal conjunctive cohesion in the English essay writing of Cantonese speakers and native speakers of English. RELC Journal, 23(1), 15-28
Greenbaum, S., & Quirk, R. (1990). A student`s grammar of the English language. England: Longman.
Halliday, M. A. K., & Hasan, R. (1976). Cohesion in English. London: Longman.
Hill, S. (2006). Developing early literacy: Assessment and teaching. Australia: Eleanor Curtain Publishing.
Hung, M. F. (2002). A study on the use of conjunctions in compositions by Taiwanese senior-high-school students. Unpublished master’s thesis, National Chengchi University, Taiwan.
Hyland, K. (1999). Academic attribution: citation and the construction of disciplinary knowledge. Applied Linguistics, 20(3), 341-367.
———. (2000). Disciplinary Discourses: Social Interactions in Academic Writing. Harlow: Longman.
Johns, T. (1997), Contexts: the background, development and Mailing of a concordance-based CALL program. In Baker, P. Using Corpora in Discourse Analysis. London: Continuum.
Karimi, K. (2010). A Brief Introduction to Temporality and Causality.
Kaszubski, P. (1998). Enhancing a written textbook: national perspective. In S. Granger (Ed.), Learners English on computer. London: Longman.
Kay, H., & Dudley-Evans, T. (1998). Genre: What teachers think. ELT Journal, 52(4), 308-314.
Kuo, Y. T. (2009). Investigating Genres of the Reading Texts in EFLTextbooks of Senior High School in Taiwan. Unpublished master’s thesis, National Chung Cheng University, Taiwan.
Li, T. C. (2014). A study of Conjunctions adverbials in academic journal articles 科技學刊，第23卷，人文社會類，第2期，頁145-161。
Lo, K. C. (2003). An analysis of senior high school students’ English compositions in terms of conjunction. Unpublished master’s, National Chengchi University, Taiwan.
Lorentz, G. (1999). Learning to Cohere: Causal Links in Native vs. Non-Native Argumenative Writing. In Bublitz,W., Lens, U. and Ventola, E. (eds) 1999. Coherence in Spoken and Written Disourse. How to create it and how to describe it. Amsterdam: Benjamins
McDevitt, D. (1989). How to cope with spaghetti writing? ELT Journal, 43(1), 19-23.
Quirk, R., Greenbaum, S., Leech, G., & Svartvik, J. (1985). A comprehensive grammar of the English language. London: Longman.
Steffani, S. A., & Nippold, M. A. (1997). Japanese speakers of American English: Competence with connectives in written language. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 40, 1048–1055.
Swales, J. M. (1990). Genre analysis: English in academic and research settings. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Tai, James H-Y. 1985. Temporal sequence and Chinese word order. In J. Haiman (ed.), Iconicity in syntax. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 48-72.
Thwaite, A. (2006). Genre writing in primary school: From theory to the classroom, via First Steps (1). Australian Journal of Language & Literacy, 29(2), 95-116.
Wu, S. (1995). Transfer in Chinese students` academic English writing. Unpublished doctoral thesis, Northern Arizona University, Flagstaff, Arizona, USA. |
| Description: | 碩士
國立政治大學
語言學研究所
103555001 |
| Source URI: | http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0103555001 |
| Data Type: | thesis |
| Appears in Collections: | [語言學研究所] 學位論文
|
Files in This Item:
| File |
Size | Format | |
|---|
| 500101.pdf | 1923Kb | Adobe PDF2 | 63 | View/Open |
|
All items in 政大典藏 are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved.
|
