A study on theme types in Taiwanese senior high school students' narratives
Tsai, Tsi Chuen
Yu, Hsueh Ying
Tsai, Tsi Chuen
|上傳時間: ||2012-10-30 10:33:10 (UTC+8)|
Theme plays a significant role in guiding the information flow in text. Nonetheless, there is evidence indicating that many EFL learners often fail to make good choices of theme to secure sentential relationship or writing coherence.
Through the observation on the occurrences and distribution of theme types in three levels of student compositions: the high, the middle and the low-rated narratives, the present study aims to investigate the establishment of theme in Taiwanese senior high school students’ narratives in order to gain understanding of theme’s effect on writing coherence and writing quality.
The entire study consists of a pilot study and a formal one. The pilot study helps establish the criteria for the main study. In the main study, 111 student compositions were gathered and two raters were recruited and trained for the rating. Based on the rating system, the student compositions are divided into 3 levels. 10 samples from each level were randomly selected for thematic analysis.
The result shows that the occurrences and distribution of theme types in the three levels of writing are alike. In general, unmarked NP theme is the most favored by all the students and marked theme Non-fi C + NP is the least desirable. Nonetheless, in terms of the establishment of theme, there are major differences between groups. In particular, the high-rated essays tend to establish a theme that is connected to the theme or the rheme in the preceding discourse or provides background information for the development of the event. In contrast, the mid-or low-rated essays are more likely to establish a theme that is unrelated or disruptive to the progression of the current discourse. Based on the findings of the present study, it is suggested that the notion of theme including its features and functions be incorporated into the teaching of English compositions to help Taiwanese senior high school students identify the characteristics of coherent writing and facilitate coherence in their English narratives.
|參考文獻: ||Allison, D., Varghese, S., & Wu, S. M. (1999). Local coherence and its limits: A second look at the second sentences. Journal of Second Language Writing, 8, 77-97.|
Bae, J. (2001). Cohesion and coherence in children’s written English: Immersion and English-only classes. Issues in Applied Linguistics, 12(1), 51-88.
Bamberg, B. (1984). Assessing coherence: A reanalysis of essays written for the National Assessment of Education Progress. Research in the Teaching of English, 18, 305-319.
Bardovi-Harlig, K. (1990). Pragmatic word order in English composition. In U. Connor & A. M. Johns (Eds.), Coherence in writing: Research and pedagogical perspective (pp. 45-65). Alexandria VA: TESOL.
Berry, M. (1995). Thematic options and success in writing. In M. Ghadessy (Ed.), Thematic development in English texts (pp. 55-84). New York: Pinter Publishers.
Bloor, T., & Bloor, M. (1995). The functional analysis of English: A Hallidayan approach. London: Arnold.
Brown, G., & Yule, G. (1983). Discourse analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Casanave, C. P. (2005). Uses of narrative in L2 writing research. In P. K. Matsuda & T. J. Silva (Eds), Second language writing research: Perspectives on the process of knowledge construction (pp. 17-32). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Chang, Vincent W. (1995). Freshman English composition: An error analysis from the discourse perspective. The National Science Council of the Republic of China.
Chao, Kwei-hsiang. (2002). Thematic progression in the argumentative essays of EFL senior high school students. Unpublished master’s thesis. National Chengchi University, Taipei.
Contreras, H. (1976). A theory of word order with special reference to Spanish. Amsterdam: North-Holland.
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.
Downing, A. (1991). An alternative approach to theme: A systemic-functional perspective. Journal of the Linguistic Circle of New York, 42(2), 119-143.
Downing, A., & Locke, P. (2002). A university course in English grammar. London: Routledge.
Firbas, J. (1964) On defining the theme in functional sentence analysis. Traveaux Linguistiques de Prague, 1, 267-280.
Foz, M. C. (2000). A contribution to a descriptive functional-semantic framework for Theme analysis. Word, 53(2), 173-183.
Francis, G. (1989). Thematic selection and distribution in written discourse. Word,
Fries, P. H. (1981). On the status of theme in English: Arguments from discourse. Forum Linguisticum, 6(1), 1-38.
Fries, P. H. (1983). Patterns of information in initial position in English. In P. H. Fries & M. Gregory (Eds.) Discourse in society: Functional perspectives (pp.47-65). Norwood, NJ: Ablex Publishers.
Fries, P. R. (1995). Themes, methods of development, and texts. In R. Hasan & P. H. Fries (Eds.), On subject and theme (pp. 317-359). Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
Givon, T. (1983). Topic continuity in discourse: An introduction. In T. Givon (Ed.), Typological studies in language 3: Topic continuity in discourse (pp. 1-41). Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
Givon, T. (1993). English grammar: A function-based introduction 2. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
Gómez-González, M. Á. (2001). The theme-topic interface: Evidence from English. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
Halliday, M. A. K. (1967) Notes on transitivity and theme in English, Part 2. Journal of Linguistics, 3, 199-244.
Halliday, M. A. K. (1970). Functional diversity in language as seen from a consideration of mood and modality in English. Foundations of Language, 6, 322-361.
Halliday, M. A. K. (1978). Language as social semiotic: The social interpretation of language and meaning. London: Edward Arnold.
Halliday, M. A. K. (1994). An introduction to functional grammar. NY: Oxford University Press.
Hasan, R., & Fries, P. H. (1995) Reflection on subject and Theme. In R. Hasan & P. H. Fries (Eds.), On subject and theme (pp. xxvi-xxvii). Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
Hawes, T., & Thomas, S. (1997). Problems in thematisation in student writing. RELC Journal, 28, 35-55.
Hu, Z., Brown, D., & Brown, L. B. (1982). Some linguistic differences in the written English of Chinese and Australian students. Language Learning and Communication, 1, 39-49.
Johns, A. M. (1986). Coherence and academic writing: Some definitions and suggestions for teaching. TESOL Quarterly, 20(2), 247-265.
Kuno, S. (1972). Functional sentence perspectives. Linguistic Inquiry, 3, 269-320.
Kurzon, D. (1988). The Theme in text cohesion. In Y. Tobin (Ed.), The Prague School and its Legacy (pp.155-162). Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
Lautamatti, L. (1987). Observations on the development of the topic in simplified discourse. In R.B. Kaplan, & U. Connor (Eds.), Writing across languages: Analysis of L2 text (pp.87-114). MA: Addison-Wesley Publishing.
Lee, I. (2002). Teaching coherence to ESL students: a classroom inquiry. Journal of Second Language Writing, 11(2), 135-159.
Lock, G. (1996). Functional English grammar: An introduction for second language teachers. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Lowe, I. (1987). Sentence initial elements in English and their discourse function. Occasional Papers in Systemic Linguistics, 2, 5-34.
Martin, J. R., & Joan, R. (1986). What a functional approach to the writing task can show teachers about ‘good writing.’ In B. Couture (Ed.), Functional approaches to writing: Research perspectives (pp. 241-265). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
Martin, J. R. (1992). English text: System and structure. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
Martin, J. R., & Rose, D. (2003). Working with discourse: Meaning beyond the clause. London: Continuum.
Mathesius, V. (1939). O Tak Zvaném Aktuálním cleneni Vetném. Slovo a Slovesnost, 5, 171-174.
Mathesius, V. (1975). A functional analysis of present day English on a general linguistic basis. The Hague: Mouton.
Matthiessen, C. M. I. M. (1995). Theme as an enabling resource. In M. Ghadessy (Ed.), Thematic development in English texts (pp. 20-54). New York: Pinter Publishers.
Mauranen, A. (1996). Discourse competence: Evidence from thematic development in native and non-native texts. In E. Ventola, & A. Mauranen (Eds.), Academic writing: Intercultural and textual issues (pp. 195-230). Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
McCarthy, M. J. (1991). Discourse analysis for language teachers. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Quirk, R., Greenbaum, S., Leach, G., & Svartvik, J. (1972). A grammar of contemporary English. New York: Seminar Press.
Rashidi, L. S. (1992). Towards an understanding of the notion of Theme: An example from Dari. In D. Martin, & L. Ravelli (Eds), Advances in systemic linguistics: Recent theory and practice (pp. 189-204). New York: Pinter Publishers.
Ravelli, L. J. (1995). A dynamic perspective: Implications for metafunctional interaction and an understanding of Theme. In R. Hasan, & P. H. Fries (Eds.), On subject and theme (pp. xxvi-xxvii). Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
Reid, J. (1996). U.S. academic readers, ESL writers, and second sentences. Journal of Second Language Writing, 5(2), 129-161.
Ripich, D. N., & Griffith, P. L. (1990). Narrative abilities of children with learning disabilities and nondisabled children: Story structure, cohesion, and propositions. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 21, 165-173.
Scarcella, R. (1984). How writers orient their readers in expository essays: A comparative study of native and non-native English writers. TESOL Quarterly, 18, 671-688.
Thomas, S. & Hawes, T. P. (1994). Thematic options in reports of previous research. Australian Review of Applied Linguistics, 17, 45-72.
Thompson, S.A. (1987). Subordination and narrative event structure. In R. Tomlin (Ed.), Coherence and grounding in discourse (pp. 435–454). Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
Thompson, G. (1996). Introducing functional grammar. New York: Oxford University Press.
Thornbury, S. (2005). Beyond the sentence: Introducing discourse analysis. Oxford: Macmillan Education.
Yu, Chun-chi (2006). 學測與指考英文作文評分樣例. 選才電子報, 142. Retrieved Aug 12, 2010, from http://www.ceec.edu.tw/CeecMag/Articles/142/142-2.htm
Yu, Hsueh-ying (2001). The placement of English adverbial clauses in narrative texts of native speakers and Chinese college students. English Teaching and Learning, 26(2), 89-106.
Vande Kopple, W. J. (1986). Given and new information and some aspects of the structures, semantics, and pragmatics of written texts. In C.R. Cooper, & S. Greenbaum (Eds.), Studying writing: Linguistic perspectives. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
Vasconcellos, M. (1992). The theme as message onset: Its structure and characteristics. Linguistics, 30 (1), 147–163.
Ventola, E. & Mauranen, A. (1991). Non-native writing and native revising of scientific articles. In E. Ventola (Ed.), Functional and systemic linguistics: Approaches and uses (pp. 457-492). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Weigle, S. C. (2002). Assessing writing. New York : Cambridge University Press.
Wikborg, E. (1990). Types of coherence breaks in Swedish writing: Misleading paragraph division. In U. Connor, & A. M. Johns (Eds.), Coherence in writing: Research and pedagogical perspectives (pp. 131-149). Alexandria, VA: TESOL.