L1 Literacy Practices’ Impact on L2 Text Organization

Aisha Sayidina

Resumen


Situated within the Intercultural Rhetoric (IR) framework, this study uses text linguistic analysis of Arab students’ English academic papers to investigate the transfer of the Arabic language instruction practices into ESL written texts. The analysis involves a comparison of surface linguistic features (syntactic relations and cohesive devices) in a corpus of Arab students and English-speaking students’ papers. Furthermore, the Arabic and English-speaking students completed surveys about the skills emphasized in their L1 classrooms. It is believed that the methods of writing instruction in Arabic, which are influenced by diglossia, are transferred into ESL written texts. The results show that the Arabic speaking and English-speaking students’ texts exhibit differences at the rhetorical level. The characteristics of the ESL texts are similar to Arabic native texts which suggest a transfer of L1 learned writing methods into L2 texts. The findings from the linguistic analysis and the data obtained from the surveys are discussed with reference to Arabic teaching methodology, diglossia, orality, and learning experience transfer from Arabic into English. 


Texto completo:

PDF (English)

Referencias


Asuncion-Lande, N. (1983). Language theory and language practice. International and Intercultural Communication Annual. 253-257.

Aziz, Y. (1988). Theme-rheme organization and paragraph structure in Standard Arabic. Word, 39(2), 117-127.

Clyne, M. (1987). cultural differences in the organization of academic texts: English and German. Journal of Pragmatics. 11(2), 211-247.

Connor, U. (1987). Argumentative patterns in student essays: cross-cultural differences. In Kaplan, R.B. and Connor, U. (Eds.), Writing across languages: analysis of L2 tests (pp. 57-71). Reading, Massachusetts: Addison-Wesley Publishing Company.

Connor, U. (2004). Intercultural rhetoric research: beyond texts. Journal of English for Academic Purposes. 3, 291-304.

Connor, U. (2008). Mapping multidimensional aspects of research: reaching to intercultural rhetoric. In Connor, U., Nagelhout, E., & Rozycki, W. (Eds.), Contrastive Rhetoric Reaching to Intercultural Rhetoric (pp. 299-315). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamin.

Connor, U. (2011). Intercultural Rhetoric in the Writing Classroom. Ann Arbor: the University of Michigan Press.

Enkvist, N. E. (1973). Linguistic Stylistics. The Hague: Mouton.

Ferguson, C. (1959). Diglossia. Word. 15(2), 325-340.

Gleason, H.A. (1965). Linguistics and English Grammar. New York: Holt, Rinehart, and

Winston

Gutwinski, W. (1976). Cohesion in Literary Texts: A Study of Some Grammatical and

Lexical Features of English Discourse. The Hague: Mouton.

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

Havelock, E. A. (1983). The linguistic task of the pre-Socratics: Ionian science in search

of an abstract vocabulary. In Robb, K. (Ed.). Language and thought in early Greek

Philosophy (pp.7- 41). La Salle, IL: The Hegeler Institute, Monist Library of Philosophy.

Havelock, E. A. (1991). The Oral Literate Equation: a Formula for the Modern Mind. In

Olson, D. R., Torrance, N. (Eds.) Literacy and Orality (pp. 11-27). Cambridge:

Cambridge University Press.

Hinds, J. (1983b). Contrastive rhetoric: Japanese and English. TEXT. 3(2), 183-195.

Hinds, J. (1990). Inductive, deductive, and quasi-inductive: expository writing in Japanese,

Korean, Chinese, and Thai. In Connor, U. and Johns, A. M. (Eds.). Coherence in

writing: research and pedagogical perspectives. Washington, DC: TESOL Publications

(89-109).

Hirose, K. (2003). Comparing L1 and L2 organizational patters in the argumentative

writing of Japanese EFL students. Journal of Second Language Writing. 12(2003), 181-

Hymes, D. (1972). On communicative competence. In Pride, J. B., and Holmes, J. (Eds.)

Sociolinguistics: Selected Readings (pp. 269-293). Harmondsworth: Penguin.

James, C. (1983). Contrastive Analysis. London: Longman.

Jandt, F.E. (1998). Intercultural communication: an introduction (second edition).

Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, international educational and professional

publisher.

Johnstone, B. (1987). Parataxis in Arabic: modification as a form for persuasion. Studies

in Language, 2(1), 85-98.

Kachru, Y. (1988). Writers in Hindi and English. In Purvis, A. (Ed.) Writing Across

Languages and Cultures: Issues in Contrastive Rhetoric (pp. 109-126). Newbury Park,

CA: Sage Publications Inc.

Kaplan, R. B. (1966). Cultural thought patterns in intercultural communication. Language

Learning, 14(2), 1-20.

Kaplan, R. B. (1972). The Anatomy of Rhetoric: Prolegomena to a Functional Theory of

Rhetoric. Philadelphia: Center for Curriculum Development.

Kaplan, R.B. (1976). A further note on contrastive rhetoric. Communication Quarterly, 24(2), 12-19.

Khalil, A. (1989). A study of cohesion and coherence in Arab EFL college students’ writing. System, 17 (3), 359-371.

Kupota, R. (1999). Japanese culture constructed by discourses: implications for applied linguistics research and ELT. TESOL Quarterly, 33(1), 9-35.

Liebman, (1992). Toward a new contrastive rhetoric: differences between Arabic and

Japanese rhetorical instruction. Journal od Second Language Writing. 1(2), 141-165.

Maamouri, M. (1998). Language education and human development: Arabic diglossia

and its impact on the quality of education in the Arab region. Mediterranean

Development Forum. September 3– 6. Marrakech, Morocco.

Mohamed, A. H. (1993). A contrastive study of syntactic relations, cohesion, and

punctuation as markers of rhetorical organization in Arabic and English narrative texts.

Unpublished PhD thesis, University of Exeter.

Mohamed, A. & Omer, M. (1999). Syntax as a marker of rhetorical organization in written

texts: Arabic and English. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language

Teaching. xxxvii (4), 291-305.

Mohamed-Sayidina, A. (2010). Transfer of L1 cohesive devices and transition words

into L2 Academic Texts: The case of Arab students. RELC Journal, 41(3), 253-266.

Mohan, B. & Lo, W. (1985). Academic writing and Chinese students: transfer and

developmental factors. TESOL Quarterly. 19, 515-534.

Myhill, J. (2014). The effect of diglossia on literacy in Arabic and other languages. In

Saiegh-Haddad, E. and Joshi, M. (Eds.). Handbook of Arabic Literacy: Insights and

Perspectives (pp.197-223). Dordrecht Heidelberg, New York and London: Springer.

Naser, S.H. (1992). Oral transmission and the Book in Islamic education: the spoken and

the written words. Journal of Islamic Studies. 3(1), 1-14.

Ong, W. J. (1979). Literacy and orality in our times. Profession. New York: Modern

Language Association of America.

Ong, W. J. (1982). Orality and Literacy: The Technologization of the Word. London and

New York: Routledge.

Ong, W. J. (1992). Writing is a technology that structures thought. In Downing P., Lima,

S. D., Noonan, M. (Eds.), The Linguistics of Literacy (pp. 293-319).

Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company.

Ostler, S. (1987). English in parallels: a study of Arabic style. In Conner, U., Kaplan, R.

B. (Eds.), Writing Across Languages: Analysis of L2 Texts (pp. 168-85). Reading, MA:

Addison Wesley.

Quirk, R. et al. (1972). A Grammar of Contemporary English. London: Longman.

Saiegh-Haddad, E. & Spolsky, B. (2014). Acquiring literacy in a diglossic context:

problems and prospects. In Saiegh-Haddad, E. and Joshi, M. (Eds.). Handbook of

Arabic Literacy: In sights and Perspectives (pp. 225-240). Dordrecht Heidelberg, New

York and London: Springer. DOI 10.1007/978-94-017- 8545-7.

Sayidina, A. (2010). Transfer of L1 Cohesive Devices and Transition Words into L2 Academic

Texts: The Case of Arab Students. RELC Journal. 41(3):253-266.

Sheikholeslami, C. & Makhlouf, N. (2000). The impact of Arabic on ESL expository

Writing. In Ibrahim, Z., Aydelott, S. & Kassabgy, N. Diversity in Language: Contrastive

Studies in Arabic and English. Cairo: The American University in Cairo Press.

Theoretical and Applied Linguistic.

Scolon, R. (1997). Contrastive rhetoric, contrastive poetics, or something else? TESOL

Quarterly. 31, (2) 352-358.

Shockley, M. & Nurcholis, A. (2016). features of diglossic stability in Arabic with

counterexamples. Journal Lisanudhad. 3(2), 69-85.

Tsao, F.F. (1983). Linguistics and written discourse in particular languages contrastive

studies: English and Chines (Mandarin). In Kaplan, R.B. (Ed.). Annual Review of

Applied Linguistics. vol. 3, 99-117.

Uysal, H.H. (2008). Tracing the culture behind writing: rhetorical patterns and bidirectional

transfer in L1 and L2 essays of Turkish writers in relation to educational context. Journal

of Second Language Writing. 17(3), 183-207

Valero-Garces, C. (1996). contrastive ESP rhetoric: metatext in Spanish-English

economics texts. English for Specific Purposes. 15(4), 279-294.

Zamel, V. (1997). Toward a model of transculturation. TESOL Quarterly. 31(2), 341-352.




DOI: https://doi.org/10.19136/etie.a2n3.3246

Enlaces refback

  • No hay ningún enlace refback.


Emerging Trends in Education, Volumen 2, Núm. 3, Julio - diciembre 2019, es una publicación semestral editada, publicada y distribuida por la División Académica de Educación y Artes (DAEA) de la Universidad Juárez Autónoma de Tabasco. Av. Universidad s/n, Zona de la Cultura, Col. Magisterial, Villahermosa, Centro, Tabasco, México, C.P. 86040, tel. (993) 358 15 00, www.ujat.mx. Editor responsable: Dr. Pablo Marín-Olán, editoremerging@ujat.mx. Reservas de Derechos al Uso Exclusivo No. 04-2018-071810385400-203, ISSN: 2594-2840, ambos otorgados por el Instituto Nacional del Derecho de Autor. Responsables de la última actualización de este número, Editor en Jefe - Dr. Pablo Marín-Olán, Asistente Editorial - Dra. Elia Margarita Cornelio-Marí y Diseñador Editorial - Lic. Urías Márquez Barrera. Av. Universidad s/n, Zona de la Cultura, Col. Magisterial, Vhsa., Centro, Tabasco, Méx. C.P. 86040, fecha de la última modificación: 01 de julio de 2019.

Las opiniones expresadas por los autores no necesariamente reflejan la postura del editor de la publicación. Se autoriza la reproducción parcial o total de los artículos, siempre y cuando se mencione o se cite al autor y a la revista Emerging Trends in Education