ENGL 0003 Writing Summaries 1. When writing a descriptive summary, you are basically paraphrasing what the author wrote in your own words. Therefore, it is important that you start by using an in-text citation of the article: • The in-text citation introduces the article: o In “[title of article]”, [author’s name] ([year]) states (article thesis). • For example: o In “Why McDonalds Fries Taste So Good”, Schlosser (2002) states that while McDonald’s spread all over the country during the 1960’s, the company tried to spend less on its workers, get its supplies from fewer sources, and guarantee that its French fries always tasted the same. 2. The body of a summary is always shorter than the original writing. A summary of a 5-10 page article may be about 3-4 paragraphs. Here are some helpful tips for identifying main ideas: • Read the article completely several times to develop a basic understanding of the ideas presented. • Pay attention to headings and subheadings in order to identify the main ideas that you want to include in your summary. • Include one or two examples at most for each main idea presented in the body of your summary. Your objective is to give a general idea of what the article was about, so avoid including too many details. • Consider whether the examples or details that you include are necessary to explain or support the main ideas of the article. 3. Additional things to keep in mind: • Use introductory phrases and verbs that indicate that you are summarizing information from a source (and not from your own head) such as: o The author/author’s name… o suggests, reports, argues, indicates, points out, asks, questions, concludes, etc. • Do not add your own opinion to a descriptive summary. You are summarizing what the author said; your opinion is not necessary in descriptive summaries. 1 How to Write a Summary With thanks to: Swales, John M. and Christine B. Feat. Academic Writing for Graduate Students, Essential Tasks and Skills. Ann Arbor: U Michigan P, 1994. 105-130. Preparing to Write: To write a good summary it is important to thoroughly understand the material you are working with. Here are some preliminary steps in writing a summary. 1. Skim the text, noting in your mind the subheadings. If there are no subheadings, try to divide the text into sections. Consider why you have been assigned the text. Try to determine what type of text you are dealing with. This can help you identify important information. 2. Read the text, highlighting important information and taking notes. 3. In your own words, write down the main points of each section. 4. Write down the key support points for the main topic, but do not include minor detail. 5. Go through the process again, making changes as appropriate. For example: Global Implications of Patent Law Variation A patent is an exclusive right to use an invention for a certain period of time, which is given to an inventor as compensation for disclosure of an invention. Although it would be beneficial for the world economy to have uniform patent laws, each country has its own laws designed to protect domestic inventions and safeguard technology. Despite widespread variation, patent laws generally fall under one of two principles: the first-to-file and first-toinvent. The first-to-file principle awards a patent to the person or institution that applies for a patent first, while the first-toinvent principle grants the patent to the person or institution that was first to invent – and can prove it. Most countries have adopted the first-to-file system. However, the United States maintains a first-to-invent system, despite obvious shortcomings. A result of countries employing different patent law principles is inconsistency of patent ownership. This first sentence is a general definition. It may be safe to assume that your audience is already familiar with patents; thus you do not have to include it in your summary. This is the main idea. The classification of the two principles is important. Ignore specific details about the different principles. The terms are self-explanatory. It is important to point out that most of the world follows one system and the United States another. Courtesy the Odegaard Writing & Research Center http://depts.washington.edu/owrc Include a description of the problem surrounding variation in patent laws. Patent ownership is not recognized globally. On the contrary, ownership may change depending on the country. It is not uncommon for an invention to have two patent owners – one in the United States and one in the rest of the world. This unclear ownership often has economic consequences. If a company is interested in using a patented invention, it may be unable to receive permission from both patent owners, which in turn may prevent manufacture of a particular product. Even if permission is received from both owners, pay royalties to both may be quite costly. In this case, if the invention is useful enough, a company may proceed and pass on the added cost to consumers. International economic tension has also been increasing as a result of differing policies. Many foreign individuals and companies believe that they are at a serious disadvantage in the United States with regard to patent ownership because of the logistical difficulties in establishing first-toinvent status. Further, failure of the United States to recognize patent ownership in other countries is in violation of the Paris Conventions on Industrial Properties, which requires all member nations to treat all patents equally. The conflict surrounding patents has prompted the World Intellectual Properties Organization (WIPO) to lobby for universality in patent laws. WIPO maintains that the first necessary step involves compelling the United States to reexamine its patent principle, taking into account the reality of a global economy. This push may indeed result in more global economic cooperation. Provide some support/explanation for the problem, but not all the details Describe this other problem associated with differing patent principles. Provide some explanation, but not all the details. Describe the action taken to solve the problem. Courtesy the Odegaard Writing & Research Center http://depts.washington.edu/owrc Writing the Summary: When writing the summary there are three main requirements: 1. The summary should cover the original as a whole. 2. The material should be presented in a neutral fashion. 3. The summary should be a condensed version of the material, presented in your own words. * * Also do not include anything that does not appear in the original. (Do not include your own comments or evaluation.) and Be sure to identify your source. For example: In his paper “Global Implications of Patent Law Variation,” Koji Suzuki (1991) states that lack of consistency in the world’s patent laws is a serious problem. In most of the world, patent ownership is given to the inventor that is first to file for a patent. However, the United States maintains a first-to-invent policy. In view of this, patent ownership can change depending on the country. Multiple patent ownership can result in economic problems; however, most striking is the international tension it causes. The fact that the United States does not recognize patent ownership in other countries, in violation of the Paris Convention on Industrial Properties, has prompted the World Intellectual Properties Organization (WIPO) to push the United States to review its existing patent law principles. Courtesy the Odegaard Writing & Research Center http://depts.washington.edu/owrc Journal of Pragmatics 42 (2010) 2814–2825 Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Journal of Pragmatics journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/pragma Cultural differences in the organization of research article introductions from the field of educational psychology: English and Chinese Chek Kim Loi *, Moyra Sweetnam Evans 1 Department of English and Linguistics, University of Otago, PO Box 56, Dunedin 9054, New Zealand A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T Article history: Received 20 October 2008 Received in revised form 24 March 2010 Accepted 26 March 2010 This paper investigates the rhetorical organization of the introduction sections of English and Chinese research articles in the field of educational psychology. The study reported in this paper adopts Swales’s (1990, 2004) framework of move analysis. In general, the findings of the present study reveal that there are similarities and differences between English and Chinese research article introductions in terms of the employment of moves and steps. It is suggested that the rhetorical differences reflect some of the distinctive characteristics of the two different cultures, English and Chinese. The findings of the present study have both theoretical and pedagogical implications. ß 2010 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved. Keywords: Genre analysis Contrastive rhetoric Communicative intention Socio-cultural factor Academic writing 1. Introduction Contrastive rhetorical studies confirm cultural preferences for certain rhetorical patterns and the use of first language rhetorical patterns by novice English second-language writers. Chinese speakers often include discourse features valued in Chinese culture in their writing, which differ from those used in English prose and include the use of a preponderance of proverbs, quotations, allusions and historical references to delay arguments (Tsao, 1980, 1983); the use of proverbs or formulaic expressions in conclusions (Chen, 1981); references to Confucian philosophy (Becker, 1995); and language (e.g. idioms, clichés and set phrases) used primarily as adornment (Matalene, 1985). The differences in preferred Chinese and English rhetorical patterns may cause problems for Chinese students writing academic English prose which tends to use logical reasoning and English rhetorical structure. To illuminate possible difficulties faced by Chinese ESL students in producing acceptable academic English writing and to suggest ways in which they and their teachers might deal with these difficulties, the study reported in this paper applied a genre-based contrastive rhetorical examination of textual differences between English and Chinese research article introductions. 2. The rationale for a genre-based contrastive study Genre analysis can be used to group texts based on significant similarities and differences in rhetorical purpose, form and audience (Dudley-Evans, 1989) and is attested in the literature as of pedagogical value for various reasons. Genre analysis pays close attention to distinguishing characteristics (Cheng, 2005), which include language features significant to the * Corresponding author. Tel.: +64 3 479 8952; fax: +64 3 479 8558. E-mail addresses: lck734@yahoo.com (C.K. Loi), moyra.sweetnam@otago.ac.nz (M. Sweetnam Evans). 1 Tel.: +64 3 479 8614; fax: +64 3 479 8558. 0378-2166/$ – see front matter ß 2010 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved. doi:10.1016/j.pragma.2010.03.010 C.K. Loi, M. Sweetnam Evans / Journal of Pragmatics 42 (2010) 2814–2825 2815 particular genre, rhetorical structures and style. It is useful for novice writers to identify these language features and the communicative purposes intended by the texts (Swales, 1990) and in turn to ‘‘gain insights into generic practices and disciplinary cultures embodied in the formal properties’’ (Cheng, 2005:22). Learners are able to exploit these features themselves (Brett, 1994). Genre analysis is able to provide useful information for novice writers who are not experienced users of a genre, by exposing them to the conventions of a particular genre and also the reasons assumed to underlie such conventions in the social practices of a community (Bhatia, 1997). With this awareness of genre practices, novice writers should be able to explore and produce more complex genres independently and creatively. Another advantage of genre analysis is that it is not prescriptive. Once novice writers have mastered using the conventions of a particular genre, they can produce their own representations of the genre based on genre exemplars. As Bhatia (1993:40) points out: [e]xploiting rules and conventions for the sake of creativity and innovation is good but it is much better to do so after one has developed at least a good awareness of, if not a good mastery over, such conventions. Moreover, analysis of generic conventions need not always be used prescriptively. Furthermore, the fact that explicit knowledge of genre conventions is used in practice, has the potential to provide longterm benefits and aid students in retaining genre knowledge over an extended period of time (Hyon, 2001). Explicit discussions of rhetorical structures and their use in different languages and cultures should facilitate students’ understanding of the ‘‘sociorhetorical parameters underlying the linguistic features in genre exemplars’’ (Cheng, 2005:22) and also of the communicative purposes of these texts which are produced within and according to the conventions of a particular discourse community (Swales, 1990). Genre analysis, with its focus on both the social context in which the text is created and the linguistic realizations of discourse, will thus provide learners with a thorough and complete understanding of specific texts. This in turn has the potential to assist learners in producing effective discourse. When the rules and conventions are made explicit through genre analysis as described above, contrastive rhetoric could then play its role by comparing and contrasting genres across two languages and attempting to link their similarities and differences to cultural patterns. Contrastive rhetorical studies are able to provide teachers and students with knowledge about the preferred patterns of writing (Connor, 2003) by uncovering specific rhetorical patterns, which might be culturally and contextually specific (Shim, 2005). Such knowledge could provide the basis for explicit strategies which Chinese ESL students might use to comprehend and produce effective English academic writing. The rationale for undertaking the genre-based contrastive rhetorical study described in this paper, is thus that it provides a wide range of insights from the fields of genre analysis and contrastive rhetoric, which form the basis for a comprehensive discussion of the distinctive rhetorical structures found in research article introductions written in the two different languages—English and Chinese. 3. Purpose and research questions of the study As outlined in the above rationale, the purpose of the present study was to investigate the genre structure of English and Chinese research article introductions in terms of moves and steps and to explore the socio-cultural implications that emerged from the findings. The major research questions addressed in the present study were: i. What are the similarities and differences between English and Chinese research article introductions in terms of the genre structures of moves and steps? ii. What are the socio-cultural inferences that can be drawn from the different genre structures in English and Chinese introductions? 4. Data collection and procedure The corpus for this study comprises 40 introductions of research articles – 20 Chinese and 20 English – in the field of educational psychology. The English research articles, written by first language speakers, were selected from The Journal of Educational Psychology, published by the American Psychological Association, Washington, DC. The Chinese research articles written by first-language Chinese speakers were selected from (Psychological Development and Education), a leading academic journal published in Beijing, China by (Children’s Psychology Research Institute of Beijing Normal University), and (Children’s Educational Psychology Research Institute of China Education Society). The journal has published research articles in educational psychology since 1985 with four issues yearly. The two journals were selected as being representative of prestigious refereed journals in the field of educational psychology in the respective countries. Initially, 60 articles were selected from each journal based on judgment sampling. Later, 20 articles were extracted from the 60 articles for each language to form the actual corpus of the present study. To obtain a random-stratified sample, the total population of 60 articles was first stratified into five subgroups based on publication in the five years preceding the year in which the sampling was made (2003–2007), followed by a simple random sampling to select articles from each of the five subgroups in proportion to their representation in the total population. A simple random sampling was employed within each stratum to ensure an unbiased representative sample. The modest size of 40 research article introductions was C.K. Loi, M. Sweetnam Evans / Journal of Pragmatics 42 (2010) 2814–2825 2816 considered to be justified considering the present study is a combination of qualitative and quantitative research which includes both a description of generic structures and quantitative data. Observations are restricted to the corpus. It is thus not the aim of the present study to generalize about the generic patterns of research article introductions in the field of educational psychology. 5. The instrument Swales’s (1990, 2004) CARS (Create a Research Space) model was selected as the basis for the analysis and coding of the moves and steps in both sets of articles (see Appendix A for the coding scheme). Past studies (e.g. Najjar, 1990; Taylor and Chen, 1991; Ahmad, 1997; Jogthong, 2001; Ahmed, 2004) have confirmed Swales’s move-analysis framework as a valid tool for analyzing research article introductions in particular and other research article sections (including complete research articles) in general. The CARS model consists of three stages termed ‘‘moves’’ by Swales. Swales and Feak (2000:35) specify a move as ‘‘the defined and bounded communicative act that is designed to achieve one main communicative objective’’. The three moves in Swales’s (1990, 2004) CARS model are i. Move 1—establishing a research territory ii. Move 2—establishing a niche iii. Move 3—occupying the niche (Swales, 1990)/Move 3—presenting the present work (Swales, 2004) As observed, Move 3 (occupying the niche) in Swales’s (1990) version of the CARS model was re-labelled Move 3 (presenting the present work) in Swales’s (2004) model, the latter term providing a more explicitly functional label. In Swales’s (1990, 2004) CARS model, these three moves are further sub-divided into their constituent steps. A step is defined by Swales (1990) as a smaller unit of discourse that builds moves. In other words, each step supports and guarantees the validity of the move. 6. Findings and discussion Overall, the rhetorical structures employed in both English and Chinese research article introductions appear to be characterized by the three major features, namely explicitness, specifying the value of research and taking a critical stance. Both English and Chinese research article introductions establish the context explicitly by defining the terms/concepts (Move 1 Step 2), presenting the background of the study (Move 3 Step 3), reviewing literature/findings of previous research (Move 1 Step 4), announcing the purpose (Move 3 Step 1) and the focus of the study (Move 3 Step 2). The data show that these constituent steps help establish clear contexts. In defining the terms/concepts (Move 1 Step 2), writers provide explicit meanings to the terms and concepts related to the research topic. In presenting the background of the study (Move 3 Step 3), writers provide background information on issues closely related to the reported studies before they are dealt with in detail in the subsequent sections of the articles. In reviewing previous research or findings (Move 1 Step 4), writers refer to other studies in the specific domain which is addressed in the article. In announcing the purpose (Move 3 Step 1) and the focus of the research (Move 3 Step 2), writers present clear indications on the direction and the scope of their studies, while in introducing the research questions (Move 3 Step 5), writers offer the readers a yardstick by which to measure the success of the studies. In addition, the linguistic realizations of the aforementioned constituent steps explicitly signal the communicative intentions of the writers in both the English and Chinese introductions. For example, in order to indicate the importance of the research topic, writers employ expressions such as ‘‘significant’’, ‘‘the most critical’’, and ‘‘increasing evidence’’. The above steps are manifested in the data, as shown below: Move 1 Step 2 Defining terms/concepts [E-16] Wineburg (1991a) defined heuristics as ‘‘sense-making activities [that help] their user resolve contradictions, see patterns and make distinctions among different types of evidence’’ (p. 77). [C-20] (Individual self-esteem is one of the core personalities and it is also one of the basic human needs.) Move 1 Step 4 Reviewing literature/findings of previous research [E-15] Mead (1934) elaborated on this account by arguing that it is not perceptions of specific significant others that influence the self-concept but rather the generalized other—the individual’s assessment of how he or she is generally perceived by others. [C-16] (The study reviewed the recent ten years’ research report concerning the work stress of university lecturers . . . For example, some research found out that[3], . . .) 2 In Chinese, the ellipsis is written with six dots (in two groups of three dots, occupying the same space as two characters in the center of the line) (i.e. . . . . . .). C.K. Loi, M. Sweetnam Evans / Journal of Pragmatics 42 (2010) 2814–2825 2817 Move 3 Step 1 Announcing the purpose of the study [E-5] The central goal of this study is to examine the interplay between motivational styles, agency beliefs, and how one calls on them to regulate academic actions related to school adjustment. [C-20] (The purpose of this study is . . .) Move 3 Step 2 Specifying the focus of the research [E-20] The focus of this part of the article is on examining helping behaviors, conditions for receiving help, task structure, and students’ perceptions of their small-group work. [C-1] (Therefore, the present research focused on the following three aspects: (1) . . . (2) . . . (3) . . .) Move 3 Step 3 Presenting the background of the study [E-7] The implementation of the reform models began in 1996, when Boston’s elementary schools were given a choice of literacy reform models. By the time data collection began in the fall of 2000, . . . [C-3] (In recent years, students with mathematical disability in our country were selected based on the intelligence level of students: average or above average intelligence, . . .) The value of the research is highlighted when both English and Chinese writers claim the centrality of their research (Move 1 Step 1). For example, claiming that their reported research forms part of a significant or appealing research area. In addition, the value of the research is established through the indication of the significance of the study (Move 3 Step 8) by both English and Chinese writers. These steps are exemplified below: Move 1 Step 1 Claiming centrality [E-7] The last quarter century has seen extensive progress in both theoretical accounts and empirical investigations of writing development. [C-15] (Research related to learning motivation has been the focus of educational psychology.) Move 3 Step 8 Claiming the significance of the study [E-18] However, our study makes additional contributions to the literature. First, . . . Second, . . . Third, . . . [C-14] (It provides an important guide to help primary and secondary students know how to manage their reading time outside of the classroom and improve their reading level.) Finally, it is evident that both English and Chinese writers take a critical stance when they indicate a gap (Move 2 Step 1) and/or raise a question (Move 2 Step 2) in the introductions. Some examples are as follows: Move 2 Step 1 Indicating a gap [E-7] The available literature suggests that vocabulary knowledge may play a role in writing; however, there is no available research investigating the question developmentally. [C-18] (To date, research in this aspect has not yet been studied in depth.) Move 2 Step 2 Raising a question [E-15] Yet how do these self-perceptions develop? Do students’ beliefs about what others think of them inform their own self-perceptions? Moreover, do students from different ethnic and/or socioeconomic backgrounds develop these academic self-perception systems in the same way? [C-5] (Then, what are the features of contemporary teachers?) While English and Chinese research article introductions broadly share the communicative intentions characterized by the three major features, the sets of data differ in the degree of application of these features. This study found that rhetorical variations exist between the research article introductions written by Chinese L1 users and English L1 users. Chinese research article introductions generally use these three major features to a lesser degree than English introductions do. The degree of use 2818 C.K. Loi, M. Sweetnam Evans / Journal of Pragmatics 42 (2010) 2814–2825 Fig. 1. The employment of steps in Move 1 of English and Chinese research article introductions. Fig. 2. The employment of steps in Move 2 of English and Chinese research article introductions. of these features is reflected in the percentage of the introductions employing the steps. Generally (except for Move 1 Step 4 and Move 2 Step 2), the above steps were employed in fewer Chinese than in English introductions as shown in Figs. 1–3. 6.1. Socio-cultural factors underlying the differences Rhetorical variations between articles written in English and other languages have been attributed to various factors such as the cultural traits valued in the particular culture (Taylor & Chen, 1991 for Chinese; Jogthong, 2001 for Thai; Fig. 3. The employment of steps in Move 3 of English and Chinese research article introductions. C.K. Loi, M. Sweetnam Evans / Journal of Pragmatics 42 (2010) 2814–2825 2819 Shim, 2005 for Korean): the influence of a local discourse community (Ahmad, 1997); the educational background of writers (Al-Qahtani, 2006); or the influence of English writing norms on the writing norms of other cultures (Lee, 2001). This paper suggests that the less frequent use of certain features in Chinese introductions may be ascribed to the influence of certain social conventions of Chinese societies and to certain values rooted in Confucian teaching. Confucius was a philosopher whose teaching is still very influential in Chinese and other East Asian cultures today, as may be seen in the following comments: Confucius was perhaps the most important scholar and teacher in Asian culture . . . the profound, long-lasting and largely positive Confucian legacy is still highly valued in modern societies of East Asian countries (Charles Forster, chairman of Asia Society, Texas Center, cited in Chen Ruwei, 2009: para. 15). Confucianism is certainly more than faith and creed of the Chinese scholars. It has become a way of thinking and way of life deeply ingrained in the fabric of Chinese society and polity (Ng, 2000:54). She [Matalene (1985)] finds the essence of Chinese rhetoric and education has been deeply embedded in Confucianism throughout history. Literacy and rhetorical practices have been built around the educational focus on Confucian classics and its ways of gaining knowledge (Jai, 1999:10). As suggested above, Confucian teaching is still the guiding principle for conducting social relationships, for world views, rhetoric and education in contemporary Chinese society. The following section presents a discussion from a socio-cultural perspective on the possible factors which might have had an influence on the lesser use of the features such as taking a critical stance, explicitness and specifying the value of research. 6.1.1. Taking a critical stance Chinese writers’ avoidance of making strong research claims might be considered as face-saving strategies or ‘‘getting mianzi’’ (Lu, 2000:15), common in Chinese culture. Strongly criticizing the work of others in public can be construed as causing embarrassment and bringing shame upon the person being criticized. To the Chinese, face-saving involving other people is related to ‘‘the Confucian value placed on honour, pride, and achievement’’ (Lu, 2000:16). Chinese writers’ avoidance of taking a strong critical stance is conceivably related to the Confucian principle of ‘‘zhong yong ( ) (the constant mean)’’ (Analects, trans, Huang, 1997:24). This principle values the adoption of the middle way between two extremes: the aggressive and frantic Kwang-Ja and the obedient and cowardly Hyup-Ja (Omasu, 1996). In relation to writing, strongly criticizing someone else’s work would be positioning oneself as unacceptably antagonistic. To avoid such extremes in writing, one would have to avoid using overly assertive and pejorative expressions in identifying the gaps in the existing literature and research. 6.1.2. Explicitness The relative lack of explicitness in Chinese introductions can be interpreted as reflecting Chinese high-context communication. In high-context communication, utterances are generally less explicit and less elaborate (Hall, 1976), as interlocutors depend on shared background knowledge to provide the necessary context. Context need thus not be specified and defined in the utterances in the way it is in English, for example. This high context communication in Chinese society might in turn have some bearing on the value of being hanxu (veiled and reserved) in the literary tradition. That is, writing is valued when thoughts are articulated implicitly in texts (Zhu, 1992). In addition, Chinese prose is considered more reader-responsible than English prose (Hinds, 1987). Chinese readers are expected to engage in particularly active roles while reading and less explicit prose permits more audience participation. This view does not deny the active role of readers in all reading, including reading in English, as has clearly been identified by reading research and theory and in a variety of models of reading (see for example, Gernsbacher and Foertsch, 1999; Kintsch, 2005). The specifically readerresponsible prose of Chinese writing can be traced back to the Confucian principle of ren ( ), which may be variously translated as ‘‘goodness’’ (Gardner, 2007:140), ‘‘humanity’’ (Analects, trans, Huang, 1997:16), ‘‘authoritative conduct’’ (Ames and Rosemont, 1998:165) and ‘‘benevolence’’ (Van Norden, 2002:27). Ren plays a significant role in the Confucian philosophy in that ethos must be accompanied by ren. In rhetorical terms, ethos refers to the character and nature of the writer while ren refers to the acceptance of the audience (Powers and Gong, 1994). The relationship between these two concepts reflects the necessity for mutual communication between writers and readers to maintain good relationships. This mutual communication reflects a form of interaction between the writer and the reader as indicated in Myers’s (1989:30) remark that ‘‘. . . while writing does not involve face to face contact, it is a form of interaction’’. Such interaction might be considered to be enhanced when readers are provided with opportunities to infer the intentions of the writers as is done in reader-responsible prose. The higher degree of explicitness in English introductions might be considered as indicative of the low-context communication of most English-speaking societies. According to Hall (1976), low-context communication uses more explicit code. English prose is rooted in Aristotelian rhetoric (Kaplan and Grabe, 1989; Jai, 1999) and explicitness in writing is related to the first among the three virtues of style proposed by Aristotle: clarity, propriety, and correctness (Bizzell and Herzberg, 1990). In addition, English prose is more writer-responsible than Chinese prose is, in the sense that the writer is required to be explicit and clear so that the audience or reader is able to understand the writer’s intention and point of argument easily (Hinds, 1987). This requirement for clarity is reflected in the maxims for the co-operative principle (be brief, 2820 C.K. Loi, M. Sweetnam Evans / Journal of Pragmatics 42 (2010) 2814–2825 be relevant, be informative, be truthful) postulated by Grice (1975), largely for communication in English. The comment that ‘‘[a] Chinese speaker might say ‘a word is like 1000 gold pieces’ while the English speaker would say ‘a picture is worth 1000 words’’’ illustrates the succinctness of high-context Chinese communication as opposed to the relatively more verbose low-context English communication (Snively, 1999:31). 6.1.3. Specifying the value of research The Chinese writers’ apparent reticence in highlighting the value of their own work might be related to a desire to avoid being considered ‘‘tai lou ( ) (too clear/explicit)’’ (Snively, 1999:135). Tai lou can be an attempt to get others to recognize the merits of one’s own work, behavior which is not acceptable in traditional Chinese society as this indicates an absence of humility. Humility is highly valued in the teaching of Confucius and is generally observed in Chinese society. According to Confucius’s teaching, a gentleman ( ) (chun tzu) should possess this ethos: ‘‘deference (humility) ( ), tolerance ( ), making good one’s word ( ), diligence ( ) and generosity ( )’’ (Analects 17:6, Ames and Rosemont, trans, 1998:204). As the first value mentioned in the list, ‘humility’ might be assumed to be the most important quality a gentleman (or wellmannered person) should have. It would seem, therefore, that Chinese writers are influenced by a set of common ethics valued in Chinese culture and reflected in their writing. This echoes the claim that Chinese rhetoric is ‘‘strong in ethos’’ (Kennedy, 1998:151). Ethos from the Chinese perspective is a collective ethos, which needs to have the ‘‘participation even the approval of others’’ (Wei, 2004:82). The English ethos does not require such participation and approval. Instead ‘‘self-projection’’ and ‘‘self-representation’’ of one’s own personal character as Wei puts it (2004:82), might be considered to reflect the assertiveness which characterizes at least some English-speaking societies (also see Samovar et al., 1998: 83–84 on the assertiveness of North Americans versus the interpersonal harmony of the Chinese and other East Asian societies). Confucius suggests that ‘‘real eloquence has to accompany morality’’ (Huang, 2002:135) while Aristotle claims that real eloquence pays greater attention to ‘‘logical reasoning (logos)’’ (Bizzell and Herzberg, 1990:153). These different emphases given to rhetoric further illustrate why the socio-cultural factors underlying the overall communicative intentions in Chinese research article introductions can be considered to mirror the collective ethos observed and valued in the Chinese tradition, while it is the individual ethos which projects and represents the writer’s own personal character (Wei, 2004) which concerns English writers. As in Aristotelian logic, English research article introductions rely heavily on logos (thoughts and reasoning). 7. Conclusion Despite the links postulated above between socio-cultural factors and rhetorical features in Chinese research article introductions, this study does not claim that the rhetorical organization of the corpus can or should be attributed solely to cultural conventions. Further research might shed more light on how written discourse can be viewed as at least partially influenced by the cultural background of the writer and the intended audience, in the same way that it is accepted that spoken discourse is so shaped (see, for e.g. Halliday, 1978; Halliday and Hasan, 1989). With knowledge of the distinctive rhetorical features in each of these languages (English and Chinese), Chinese students will be aware that the expectations of native English-speaking readers are different from those of Chinese-speaking readers. This could perhaps make the rhetorical aspects of English academic writing more visible and attainable. EAP writing instructors should be aware that Chinese students might base their EAP writing on a set of rhetorical forms that differ from those of English. This should allow them to make informed pedagogical decisions that are grounded in the understanding of the preferred rhetorical strategies in both languages, to guide Chinese students in writing English academic writings which are acceptable and comprehensible to English audiences. Acknowledgements Loi Chek Kim would like to express her gratitude to the New Zealand Government, specifically the New Zealand Ministry of Education for granting her a New Zealand Doctoral Research Scholarship, which enabled her to undertake this research at the University of Otago. In addition, deep appreciation goes to the University Malaysia Sabah for granting her study leave to pursue her PhD study. Gratitude also goes to both of her supervisors, Dr. Moyra Sweetnam Evans (the co-author of this paper) and Assoc. Prof. Jae Jung Song, for their perceptive and constructive comments. The authors wish to thank editor-in-chief, Jacob Mey for his editorial advice and the reviewers for their helpful comments. Appendix A See Table A.1. C.K. Loi, M. Sweetnam Evans / Journal of Pragmatics 42 (2010) 2814–2825 2821 Table A.1 Coding scheme for English and Chinese research article introductions in educational psychology. Specifying the topic Step Step Step Step Move 2 Making links between past research and present research Step 1 Step 2 Step 3 * Step Step Step Step Step Step Step Step * Announcing the purpose Announcing the focus of the research Presenting the background of the study * Introducing the research hypothesis * Introducing the research questions * Presenting positive justification Introducing the implications of the findings * Claiming the significance of the study Move 3 Introducing the present research 1 2 3 4 * Claiming centrality Defining terms/concepts Presenting the theoretical basis * Reviewing literature/findings of previous research Move 1 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Indicating a gap Raising a question Counter-claiming * * Note: *refers to steps adapted from Swales’s (1990, 2004) CARS model. Appendix B. List of English research articles E-1 (Article ID) Patrick, Helen, Ryan, Allison M., Kaplan, Avi, 2007. Early adolescents’ perceptions of the classroom social environment, motivational beliefs, and engagement. Journal of Educational Psychology 99 (1), 83–98. E-2 Mason, Linda H., 2004. Explicit self-regulated strategy development versus reciprocal questioning: effects on expository reading comprehension among struggling readers. Journal of Educational Psychology 96 (2), 283–296. E-3 Dearing, Eric, Kreider, Holly, Simpkins, Sandra, Weiss, Heather B., 2006. Family involvement in school and low-income children’s literacy: longitudinal associations between and within families. Journal of Educational Psychology 98 (4), 653–664. E-4 Watkins, Marley W., Coffey, Debra Y., 2004. Reading motivation: multidimensional and indeterminate. Journal of Educational Psychology 96 (1), 110–118. E-5 Walls, Theodore A., Little, Todd D., 2005. Relations among personal agency, motivation, and school adjustment in early adolescence. Journal of Educational Psychology 97 (1), 23–31. E-6 Penner, Andrew M., 2003. International gender x item difficulty interactions in mathematics and science achievement tests. Journal of Educational Psychology 95 (3), 650–655. E-7 Coker, David, 2006. Impact of first-grade factors on the growth and outcomes of urban schoolchildren’s primary-grade writing. Journal of Educational Psychology 98 (3), 471–488. E-8 Wolters, Christopher A., Daugherty, Stacy G., 2007. Goal structures and teachers’ sense of efficacy: their relation and association to teaching experience and academic level. Journal of Educational Psychology 99 (1), 181–193. E-9 Friedman-Weieneth, Julie L., Harvey, Elizabeth A., Youngwirth, Sara D., Goldstein, Lauren H., 2007. The relation between 3-year-old children’s skills and their hyperactivity, inattention, and aggression. Journal of Educational Psychology 99 (3), 671–681. E-10 Ackerman, Philip L., Beier, Margaret E., 2006. Determinants of domain knowledge and independent study learning in an adult sample. Journal of Educational Psychology 98 (2), 366–381. E-11 Newman, Richard S., Murray, Brian J., 2005. How students and teachers view the seriousness of peer harassment: when is it appropriate to seek help? Journal of Educational Psychology 97 (3), 347–365. E-12 Butler, Ruth, 2007. Teachers’ achievement goal orientations and associations with teachers’ help seeking: examination of a novel approach to teacher motivation. Journal of Educational Psychology 99 (2), 241–252. E-13 Rittle-Johnson, Bethany, Star, Jon R., 2007. Does comparing solution methods facilitate conceptual and procedural knowledge? An experimental study on learning to solve equations. Journal of Educational Psychology 99 (3), 561–574. 2822 C.K. Loi, M. Sweetnam Evans / Journal of Pragmatics 42 (2010) 2814–2825 E-14 Cowan, Richard, Donlan, Chris, Newton, Elizabeth J., Lloyd, Delyth, 2005. Number skills and knowledge in children with specific language impairment. Journal of Educational Psychology 97 (4), 732–744. E-15 Bouchey, Heather A., Harter, Susan, 2005. Reflected appraisal, academic self-perceptions, and math/science performance during early adolescence. Journal of Educational Psychology 97 (4), 673–686. E-16 Nokes, Jeffery D., Dole, Janice A., Hacker, Douglas J., 2007. Teaching high school students to use heuristics while reading historical texts. Journal of Educational Psychology 99 (3), 492–504. E-17 Dally, Kerry, 2006. The influence of phonological processing and inattentive behavior on reading acquisition. Journal of Educational Psychology 98 (2), 420–437. E-18 Bub, Kristen L., McCartney, Kathleen, Willett, John B., 2007. Behavior problem trajectories and first-grade cognitive ability and achievement skills: a latent growth curve analysis. Journal of Educational Psychology 99 (3), 653–670. E-19 Turner, Lisa A., Johnson, Burke, 2003. A model of mastery motivation for at-risk preschoolers. Journal of Educational Psychology 95 (3), 495–505. E-20 Gillies, Robyn M., 2003. The behaviors, interactions, and perceptions of junior high school students during small-group learning. Journal of Educational Psychology 95 (1), 137–147. Appendix C. List of Chinese research articles (the English version of authors’ names and titles of articles is as stated in the English abstracts provided by the authors) C-1 (Article ID) Chen, Li-na, Zhang, Ming, 2006. The relationship between sensation seeking, parent-child relation and mental health of middle school students. Psychological Development and Education 1, 87–91. C-2 Xiao, Hao-yu, Zhang, Qing-lin, Shi, Hur ying, 2006. Development of pupils’ question-asking. Psychological Development and Education 1, 58–61. C-3 Zhang, Yun-xian, Si, Ji-wei, 2006. A research on computational estimation emotion with mathematical learning disability. Psychological Development and Education 2, 40–45. C-4 Liu, Xiao-ming, 2004. Relationships between professional stress, teaching efficacy and burnout among primary and secondary school teachers. Psychological Development and Education 2, 56–61. C-5 Yuan, Xiao-lin, Wang, Sui-ping, Zhu, Bin-bin, Xu, Xiao-hong, 2005. A research on the images of teachers in the eyes of middle school students. Psychological Development and Education 3, 89–93. C-6 Kou, Yu, Xu, Hua-nu, Ni, Xia-ling, Tang, Ling-ling, Ma, Lai-xiang, 2006. Promoting emotional competence of fourth grade students in elementary school. Psychological Development and Education 2, 94–99. C-7 Liu, Xiao-ming, Wang, Yan-mei, 2003. The relation between achievement goal orientation and performance under success or failure condition. Psychological Development and Education 4, 57–61. C.K. Loi, M. Sweetnam Evans / Journal of Pragmatics 42 (2010) 2814–2825 2823 C-8 Chen, Ying-he, Zhao, Xiao-mei, 2007. A study on the development of analogical problem-solving and strategy using in grade 3–5 primary students. Psychological Development and Education 2, 18–22. C-9 Wang, Zhong-hui, Zhang, Jian-xin, 2007. Impacts of sex, gender role and gender belief on undergraduates’ personality traits. Psychological Development and Education 3, 50–55. C-10 Cao, Ke-yan, Long, Jun-wei, 2007. Teachers’ organizational citizenship behavior: its structure and influence factors. Psychological Development and Education 1, 87–92. C-11 Chen, Ying-he, Zhong, Ning-ning, Tian, Guo-sheng, Wang, Zhi-guo, 2004. A study of difference of elementary second to fourth graders’ representation strategy in arithmetic word problems. Psychological Development and Education 4, 19–24. C-12 Wang, Zhen-hong, Guo, De-jun, Ma, Xin-di, 2007. Emotional reactivity, emotional expressivity and aggressive behavior in junior school students. Psychological Development and Education 3, 93–97. C-13 Zhang, Ling, Zheng, Xue, Yan, Bio-bin, Wen, Juan-juan, Shi, Yan-cai, 2007. Researches on the relationship between interpersonal disturbances and subjective well-being in college students. Psychological Development and Education 2, 116– 121. C-14 Zhang, Xiang-yang, He, Xian-you, 2004. A study on the relationships among the amount of reading time outside of classroom, the distribution and reading achievement in primary and junior middle school students. Psychological Development and Education 3, 51–54. C-15 Zhang, Hong, Wo, Jian-zhong, 2003. A study on the relationship between middle school students’ motivation and their assessments of self-learning components. Psychological Development and Education 1, 25–30. C-16 Li, Hong, 2005. Development of college working stress scale. Psychological Development and Education 4, 105–109. C-17 Zheng, Hai-yan, 2005. Experimental researches on the effects of the teacher-expectancy on the self-worth sense and the motivational belief of middle school students. Psychological Development and Education 1, 43–47. C-18 Zeng, Tuo, Yang, Xiao-yang, Shen, Ji-ling, 2004. Mathematics teachers’ identification of problems in teaching in primary and secondary schools. Psychological Development and Education 4, 74–77. C-19 Wu, Hong-yun, 2006. EFL writing students’ metacognition in the context of formal classroom instruction. Psychological Development and Education 2, 81–84. 2824 C.K. Loi, M. Sweetnam Evans / Journal of Pragmatics 42 (2010) 2814–2825 C-20 Tian, Lu-mei, 2005. The effect of self-esteem on emotional states after failure of undergraduates. Psychological Development and Education 3, 104–107. References Ahmad, Ummul K., 1997. Scientific research articles in Malay: a situated discourse analysis. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation. University of Michigan. Ahmed, Fakhri, 2004. Rhetorical properties of Arabic research article introductions. Journal of Pragmatics 36 (6), 1119–1138. Al-Qahtani, Abdulkhaleq A., 2006. A contrastive rhetoric study of Arabic and English research article introductions. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation. University of Oklahoma State University. Ames, Roger T., Rosemont, Henry Jr. (trans.), 1998. The Analects of Confucius—A Philosophical Translation. Ballantine Publishing Group, New York. Becker, Ruth R., 1995. The second language writing of Chinese ESL students: transfer and writing development. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation. University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Champaign, IL. Bhatia, Vijay K., 1993. Analyzing Genre: Language We Use in Professional Settings. Longman, London. Bhatia, Vijay K., 1997. Introduction: genre analysis and world Englishes. World Englishes 16 (3), 313–319. Bizzell, Patricia, Herzberg, Bruce (Eds.), 1990. The Rhetorical Tradition: Readings from Classical Times to the Present. Bedford, Boston. Brett, Paul, 1994. A genre analysis of the result section of sociology articles. English for Specific Purposes 13 (1), 47–59. Chen, Ruwei, 2009. Confucius to Teach Houstonians Ancient Chinese philosophy. Retrieved September 18, 2009 from http://news.xinhuanet.com/English/ 2009-09/03/content_11986878.htm. Chen, YuFang, 1981. Teaching advanced English composition to Chinese college students. Unpublished Master’s Thesis. California State University, Fresno. Cheng, An, 2005. Genre and learning. Exploring learners and learning in the ESP genre-based framework of learning academic writing. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation. Pennsylvania State University. Connor, Ullar, 2003. Changing currents in contrastive rhetoric: implications for teaching and research. In: Kroll, B. (Ed.), Exploring the Dynamics of Second Language Writing. Cambridge University Press, New York, pp. 218–241. Dudley-Evans, Tony, 1989. An outline of the value of genre analysis in LSP work. In: Brooks, A., Grundy, P. (Eds.), Individualism and Autonomy in Language Learning. ELT Documents [3]. Modern English Publications, Oxford. Garner, Daniel K. (trans.), 2007. The Four Books—The Basic Teaching of the Later Confucian Tradition. Hackett Publishing Company, Inc., Indianapolis/ Cambridge. Gernsbacher, Morton A., Foertsch, Julie A., 1999. Three models of discourse comprehension. In: Garrod, S., Pickering, M.J. (Eds.), Human Language Processing. Psychology Press, East Sussex, UK, pp. 283–299. Grice, Paul H., 1975. Logic and conversation. In: Cole, P., Morgan, J.L. (Eds.), Syntax and Semantics III: Speech Acts. Academic Press, New York, pp. 41–58. Hall, Edward T., 1976. Beyond Culture. Doubleday, Garden City, New York. Halliday, Michael A.K., 1978. Language as Social Semiotic. Edward Arnold, London. Halliday, Michael A.K., Hasan, Ruqaiya, 1989. Language, Context and Text: Aspects of Language in a Social- Semiotic Perspective. Oxford University Press, Oxford. Hinds, John, 1987. Reader versus writer responsibility: a new typology. In: Connor, U., Kaplan, R.B. (Eds.), Writing across Languages: Analysis of Second Language Text. Newbury House, Rowley, MA, pp. 9–21. Huang, Bih-Shia, 2002. A comparison of Greek and Chinese rhetoric and their influence on later rhetoric. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation. Texas Tech. University. Huang, Chichung (trans.), 1997. The Analects of Confucius (Lun Yu). Oxford University Press, Inc., Madison Avenue, New York. Hyon, Sunn, 2001. Long-term effects of genre-based instructions: a follow-up study of an EAP reading courses. English for Specific Purposes 20, 417–438. Jai, Hee C., 1999. A study of contrastive rhetoric between East Asian and North American cultures as demonstrated through student expository essays from Korea and the United States. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation. Bowling Green State University. Jogthong, Chalermsri, 2001. Research article introductions in Thai: genre analysis of academic writing. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation. University of West Virginia, Morgantown. Kaplan, Robert B., Grabe, William, 1989. Writing in a second language: contrastive rhetoric. In: Johnson, D.M., Roen, D.H. (Eds.), Richness in Writing: Empowering ESL Students. Longman, New York, pp. 263–283. Kennedy, George, 1998. Comparative Rhetoric: A Historical and Cross-Cultural Introduction. Oxford University Press, Oxford, England. Kintsch, Walter, 2005. An overview of top-down and bottom-up effects in comprehension: the CI perspective. Discourse Processes 39 (2/3), 125–128. Lee, Sun, 2001. A contrastive rhetoric study of Korean and English research paper introductions. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation. University of Illinois. Lu, Xing, 2000. The influence of classical Chinese rhetoric on contemporary Chinese political communication and social relations. In: Heisey, D.R. (Ed.),Chinese Perspective in Rhetoric and Communication. Ablex Publishing Corporation, Stamford, Connecticut, pp. 3–23. Matalene, Carolyn, 1985. Contrastive rhetoric: an American writing teacher in China. College English 47, 789–808. Myers, Greg, 1989. The pragmatics of politeness in scientific discourse. Applied Linguistics 10, 1–35. Najjar, Hazim. 1990. Arabic as a research language: the case of the agricultural sciences. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation. University of Michigan. Ng S Rita Mei-Ching, 2000. The influence of Confucianism on Chinese conception of power, authority, and the rule of law. In: Heisey, D.R. (Ed.), Chinese Perspective in Rhetoric and Communication. Ablex Publishing Corporation, Stamford, Connecticut, pp. 45–55. Omasu, Kanaya, 1996. The mean in original Confucianism. In: Ivanhoe, P.J. (Ed.), Chinese Language, Thought, and Culture. Open Court, Chicago and La Salle, Illinois, pp. 83–94. Powers, John H., Gong, Gwendolyn, 1994. East Asian voice and the expression of cultural ethos. In: Yancey, K.B. (Ed.), Voices on Voice: Perspectives, Definition, Inquiry. National Council of Teachers of English, Urbana, IL, pp. 202–225. Samovar, Larry A., Porter, Richard E., Stefani, Lisa A., 1998. Communication between Cultures, 3rd ed. Wadsworth, Belmont, CA. Shim, Eunsook, 2005. Explicit writing instruction in higher educational contexts: genre analysis of research article introductions from the English Teaching and TESOL Quarterly Journals. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation. University of Minnesota. Snively, Helen, 1999. Coming to terms with cultural differences: Chinese graduate students writing academic English. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation. Graduate School of Education, Harvard University. Swales, John M., 1990. Genre Analysis. English in Academic and Research Settings. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK. Swales, John M., 2004. Research Genres. Exploration and Applications. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK. Swales, John M., Feak, Christine B., 2000. English in Today’s Research World: A Writing Guide. University of Michigan Press, Ann Arbor, MI. Taylor, Gordon, Chen, Tingguang, 1991. Linguistic, cultural, and subcultural issues in contrastive discourse analysis: Anglo-American and Chinese scientific texts. Applied Linguistics 12, 319–336. Tsao, Fengfu, 1980. Sentences in English and Chinese: an Exploration of Some Basic Syntactic Differences. Papers in Honour of Professor Lin Yu-k’eng on her Seventieth Birthday (1941). National Taiwan Normal University. C.K. Loi, M. Sweetnam Evans / Journal of Pragmatics 42 (2010) 2814–2825 2825 Tsao, Fengfu, 1983. Linguistics and written discourse in particular languages: English and Chinese (Mandarin). Annual Review of Applied Linguistics 3, 99– 117. Van Norden, Bryan W., 2002. Confucius and the Analects. New Essays. Oxford University Press, Inc., New York. Wei, Yong-Kang, 2004. Rhetoric as collective ethos: from classical Chinese texts to postmodern corporate images. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation. Iowa State University, Ames, Iowa. Zhu, Hong, 1992. Cohesion and coherence in Chinese ESL writing. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation. Indiana University. Chek Kim Loi is a lecturer at the University of Malaysia Sabah. She is presently pursuing her PhD program at the University of Otago under the New Zealand International Doctoral Research Scholarship (NZIDRS) and the sponsorship of University Malaysia Sabah. Her research interests include contrastive rhetoric, discourse analysis and cross-cultural communication. Dr. Moyra Sweetnam Evans is a senior lecturer in applied linguistics at the University of Otago, where she coordinates and teaches an undergraduate minor in TESOL, supervises postgraduate research students, and engages in research on bilingual reading and narrative.
Purchase answer to see full attachment