Analysing ESP Texts, but How?

• Autorzy: Natalia Borza
• Języki publikacji: EN

Abstrakty

EN

English as a second language (ESL) teachers instructing general English and English for specific purposes (ESP) in bilingual secondary schools face various challenges when it comes to choosing the main linguistic foci of language preparatory courses enabling non-native students to study academic subjects in English. ESL teachers intending to analyse English language subject textbooks written for secondary school students with the aim of gaining information about what bilingual secondary school students need to know in terms of language to process academic textbooks cannot avoiding deal with a dilemma. It needs to be decided which way it is most appropriate to analyse the texts in question. Handbooks of English applied linguistics are not immensely helpful with regard to this problem as they tend not to give recommendation as to which major text analytical approaches are advisable to follow in a pre-college setting. The present theoretical research aims to address this lacuna. Respectively, the purpose of this pedagogically motivated theoretical paper is to investigate two major approaches of ESP text analysis, the register and the genre analysis, in order to find the more suitable one for exploring the language use of secondary school subject texts from the point of view of an English as a second language teacher. Comparing and contrasting the merits and limitations of the two contrastive approaches allows for a better understanding of the nature of the two different perspectives of text analysis. The study examines the goals, the scope of analysis, and the achievements of the register perspective and those of the genre approach alike. The paper also investigates and reviews in detail the starkly different methods of ESP text analysis applied by the two perspectives. Discovering text analysis from a theoretical and methodological angle supports a practical aspect of English teaching, namely making an informed choice when setting out to analyse texts in English. It can be concluded from the literature that the register perspective yields more readily applicable data of text analysis for ESL teachers instructing in a pre-college environment. Besides teachers working in bilingual secondary school, the pedagogical conclusions of the study are also useful for teachers instructing in international secondary schools where the language of education is English and the alumni comprise non-native students.

Słowa kluczowe

EN

English for specific purposes (ESP); text analysis; register analysis; genre analysis; academic English; bilingual education; English as a second language (ESL)

• Wydawca: Sciendo
• Czasopismo: Practice and Theory in Systems of Education
• Rocznik: 2015
• Tom: 10
• Numer: 1
• Strony: 1-15

Daty

otrzymano

2015-01-10

online

2015-03-01

zaakceptowano

2015-03-01

Twórcy

autor

Natalia Borza

• Pázmány Péter Catholic University, Piliscsaba, Hungary,

Bibliografia

• Atkinson, D. (1999). The philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London, 1675-1975: a sociohistorical discourse analysis. Language in Society, 25, 333-371.
• Bednarek, M. (2006). Evaluation in media discourse: analysis of a newspaper corpus. London: Continuum.
• Bell, A. (1991). The language of news media. Oxford: Blackwell.
• Berkenkotter, C., & Huckin, T. N. (1993). Rethinking genre from a sociocognitive perspective. Written Communication, 4 (475-509).[Crossref]
• Bhatia, V. K. 1993. Analysing genre: language use in professional settings. London: Longman.
• Bhatia, V. K. (1998). Generic patterns in fundraising discourse. New directions for philanthropic fundraising, 22, 95-110.
• Bhatia, V. K. (2002). A generic view of academic discourse. In J. Flowerdew (Ed), Academic discourse (pp. 21-39). Harlow: Longman.
• Biber, D. (1988). Variation across speech and writing. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Biber, D. (1995). Dimension of register variation: a cross-linguistic comparison. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Biber, D. (2006). University language: a corpus-based study of spoken and written registers. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
• Biber, D., & Finegan, E. (1994). Sociolinguistic perspectives on register. New York: Oxford University Press.
• Biber, D., Conrad, S., & Reppen, R. (1998). Corpus linguistics: Investigating language structure and use. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Biber, D., Johansson, S., Leech, G., Conrad, S., & Finegan, E. (1999). Longman grammar of spoken and written English.
• Biber, D., Connor, U., & Thomas, A. (2007). Discourse on the move: using corpus analysis to describe discourse structure. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
• Biber, D., & Conrad, S. (2009). Register, genre, and style. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Bruthiaux, P. (1994). Me Tarzan, you Jane: linguistic simplification in "personal ads" register. In D. Biber, & E. Finegan (Eds.), Sociolinguistic perspectives on register (pp. 136-154). New York: Oxford University Press.
• Bruthiaux, P. (1996). The discourse of classified advertising: exploring the nature of linguistic simplicity. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• Bunton, D. (2002). Generic moves in Ph.D. thesis introductions. In J. Flowerdew, (Ed.), Academic discourse (pp. 57-75). Harlow: Longman.
• Bunton, D. (2005). The structure of PhD conclusion chapters. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 4, 207-224.
• Connor, U. (1996). Contrastive rhetoric: cross-cultural aspects of second-language writing. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Connor, U., & Mauranen, A. (1999). Linguistic analysis of grant proposals. European Union research grant. English for Specific Purposes, 18 (1), 47-62.
• Connor, U., Precht, K., & Upton, T. (2002). Business English: Learner data from Belgium, Finland, and the U.S. In. S. Granger, J. Hung, & Petch-Tyson (Eds.), Computer learner corpora, second language acquisition and foreign language teaching (pp. 175-194). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
• Conrad, S. (1996). Investigating academic texts with corpus-based techniques: an example from biology. Linguistics and Education, 8, 299-326.
• Conrad, S. (2001). Variation among disciplinary texts: a comparison of textbooksa and journal articles in biology and history. In S. Conrad, & D. Biber (Eds.), Variations in English: multi-dimensional studies (pp. 94-107). London: Longman.
• Conrad, S., & Biber, D. (Eds.). (2001). Variations in English: multi-dimensional studies. London: Longman.
• Crystal, D. (2001). Language and the internet. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Csomay, E. (2005). Linguistic variation within university classroom talk: a corpus-based perspective. Linguistics and Education, 15, 243-274.
• del-Teso-Craviotto, M. (2006). Language and sexuality in Spanish and English dating chats. Journal of Sociolinguistics, 10 (4), 460-480.[Crossref]
• DeMarco, C. (1986). The role of register analysis in an English for Special (sic!) Purposes (ESP) curriculum. TESOL TEIS Newsletter, 2 (2). Retrieved from http://www.tesol.org/news-landing-page/2011/10/31/the-role-of-register-analysis-in-an-english-for-special-purposes-%28esp%29-curriculum-%28from-winter-1986-vol.-2-no.-2%29 [10.03.2013]
• Dias, P. (1994). Initiating students into the genres of discipline-based reading and writing. In A. Freedman, & P. Medway (Eds.), Learning and teaching genre (pp. 193-206). Portsmouth, NH: Boynton / Cook.
• Ervin-Tripp, S. (1972). On sociolinguistic rules: alternation and co-occurrence. In J. Gumperz, & D. Hymes (Eds.), Directions in sociolinguistics: the ethnography of communication (pp. 213-250). New York: Holt.
• Fahnestock, J. (1993). Genre and rhetorical craft. Research in the Teaching of English, 27, 265-271.
• Ferguson, C. (1983). Sports announcer talk: syntactic aspects of register variation. Language in Society, 12, 153-172.
• Flowerdew, J. (1993). An educational, or process, approach to the teaching of professional genres. ELT Journal, 27, 11-15.
• Flowerdew, J., & Dudley-Evans, T. (2002). Genre analysis of editorial letters to international journal contributors. Applied Linguistics, 23 (4), 463-489.[Crossref]
• Flowerdew, L. (2002). Corpus-based analysis in EAP. In J. Flowerdew (Ed.), Academic discourse (pp. 95-114). Harlow: Longman.
• Flowerdew, L. (2005). An integration of corpus-based and genre-based approaches to text analysis in EAP/ESP: countering criticisms against corpus-based methodologies. English for Specific Purposes, 24, 321-332.
• Fox., A., Butakto, D., Hallahan, M., & Crawford, M. (2007). The medium makes a difference: gender similarities and differences in instant messaging. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 26 (4), 389-397.
• Freedman, A. (1993). Show and tell? The role of explicit teaching in the learning of new genres. Research in the Teaching of English, 27, 222-251.
• Freedman, A., & Medway, P. (1994). Introduction: New views of genre and their implications for education. In A. Freedman, & P. Medway, (Eds.), Learning and teaching genre (pp. 1-22). Portsmouth, NH: Boynton / Cook.
• Gains, J. (1999). Electronic mail - a new style of communication or just a new medium? An investigation into the text features of email. English for Specific Purposes, 18 (1), 81-101.
• Giddens, A. (1979). Central problems in social theory. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
• Gledhill, C. (2000). The discourse function of collocation in research article introductions. English for Specific Purposes, 19 (2), 115-135.
• Gosden, H. (1992). Discourse functions of marked theme in scientific research articles. English for Specific Purposes, 11, 207-224.
• Heather, S. B., & Langman, J. (1994). Shared thinking and the register of coaching. In D. Biber, & E. Finegan (Eds.), Sociolinguistic perspectives on register (pp. 82-105). New York: Oxford University Press.
• Henry, A., & Roseberry, R. (2001). A narrow-angled corpus analysis of moves and strategies of the genre: letter of application. English for Specific Purposes, 20, 153-167.
• Herring, S. C., & Paolillo, C. (2006). Gender and genre variation in weblogs. Journal of Sociolinguistics, 10 (4), 493-459.
• Hopkins, S., & Dudley-Evens, T. (1988). A genre-based investigation of the discussion sections in articles and dissertations. English for Specific Purposes, 7 (2), 113-122.
• Hyland, K. (1998). Hedging in scientific research articles. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
• Hyland, K. (1999). Talking to students: metadiscourse in introductory course books. English for Specific Purposes, 18 (1), 3-26.
• Hyland, K. (2002). Teaching and researching writing. Harlow: Pearson Education.
• Hyland, K., & Tse, P. (2004). Metadiscourse in academic writing: a reappraisal. Applied Linguistics, 25 (2), 156-177.[Crossref]
• Hyland, K., & Tse, P. (2005). Hooking the reader: a corpus study of evaluative that in abstracts. English for Specific Purposes, 24, 123-139.
• Hymes, D. (1974). Foundations in sociolinguistics: an ethnographic approach. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.
• Hymes, D. (1984). Sociolinguistics: stability and consolidation. International Journal of the Sociology of Language, 45, 39-45.
• Hyon, S. (1996). Genre in three traditions: Implications for ESL. TESOL Quarterly, 30 (4), 693-722.[Crossref]
• Janda, R. (1985). Note-taking English as a simplified register. Discourse Processes, 8, 437-454.[Crossref]
• Kamberelis, G. (1995). Genre as institutionally informed social practice. Journal of Contemporary Legal Issues, 6, 115-170.
• Koester, A. J. (2006). Investigating workplace discourse. London: Routledge.
• Kong, K. C. C. (2006). Property transaction report: news, advertisement or a new genre? Discourse Studies, 8 (6), 771-796.[Crossref]
• Kress, G., & Hodge, R. (1979). Language as ideology. Boston, MA: Routledge and Kegan Paul.
• Lee, D. (2001). Genres, registers, text types, domains and styles: Clarifying the concepts and navigating a path through the BNC jungle. Language, learning, and technology, 5 (3), 37-72.
• Love, A. M. (1991). Process and product in geology: An investigation of some discourse features of two introductory textbooks. English for Specific Purposes, 10, 89-109.
• Love, A. M. (2002). Introductory concepts and "cutting edge" theories: can the genre of the textbook accomodate both? In J. Flowerdew (Ed.), Academic discourse (pp. 76-91). Harlow: Longman.
• Louhiala-Salminen, L. (1999). From business correspondence to message exchange: The notion of genre in business communication. Jyvaskyla, Finland: University of Jyvaskyla.
• Martin, J. R., Christie F., & Rothety, J. (1987). Social processes in education: A reply to Swayer and Watson and others. In I. Reid (Ed.), The place of genre in learning: Current debates (pp. 46-57). Geelong, Australia: Deakin University Press.
• Miller, C. (1984). Genre as social action. Quarterly Journal of Speech, 70, 151-167.[Crossref]
• Nwogu, K. N. (1991). Structure of science popularizations: A genre analysis approach to the schema of popularized medical texts. English for Specific Purposes, 10, 111-123.
• Paltridge, B. (2002). Thesis and dissertation writing: an examination of published advice and actual practice. English for Specific Purposes, 21, 125-143.
• Pickett, D. (1986). Business English: Falling between two styles. COMLON, 26, 16-21.
• Ramanathan, V., & Kaplan, R. B. (2000). Genres, authors, discourse communities: Theory and application for (L1 and) L2 writing instructors. Journal of Second Language Writing, 9 (2), 171-191.
• Raimes, A. (1991). Out of the woods: Emerging traditions in the teaching of writing. TESOL Quarterly, 25, 407-430.[Crossref]
• Reaser, J. (2003). A quantitative approach to (sub)registers: the case of sports announcer talk. Discourse Studies, 5 (3), 303-321.[Crossref]
• Reid, I. (1987). A generic frame for debates about genre. In. L. Reid (Ed.), The place of genre in learning: Current debates (pp. 1-8). Geelong, Australia: Deakin University Press.
• Rittman, R. J. (2007). Automatic discrimination of genres: The role of adjectives and adverbs as suggested by linguistics and psychology. [Unpublished doctoral thesis.] New Jersey: New Brunswick Rutgers University.
• Salager-Meyer, F. (1990). Discoursal flaws in medical English abstracts: A genre analysis per research- and text-type. Text, 10, 365-384.
• Samraj, B. (2002). Introduction in research articles: variation across disciplines. English for Specific Purposes, 21, 1-17.
• Selinker, L., Todd-Trimble, M., & Trimble, L. (1976). Presuppositional rhetorical information in EST discourse. TESOL Quarterly, 10 (3), 281-290.[Crossref]
• Stotesbury, H. (2003). Evaluation in research article abstracts in the narrative and hard sciences. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 2, 327-241.
• Swales, J. (1981). Aspects of article introductions. Birmingham: University of Aston.
• Swales, J. M. (1990). Genre analysis: English in academic and research settings. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Swales, J. M. (2004). Research genres: explorations and applications. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Taavitsainen, I., & Pahta, P. (2004). Medical and scientific writing in late Medieval English. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Thompson, S. (1994). Frameworks and contexts: A genre-based approach to analysing lecture introductions. English for Specific Purposes, 13, 171-186.
• Threadgold, T. (1988). The genre debate. Southern Review, 21, 315-330.
• Thurlow, C. (2003). Generation Txt? The sociolinguistics of young people's text-messaging. Discourse Analysis Online, 1. Retrieved from http://extra.shu.ac.uk/daol/articles/v1/n1/a3/thurlow2002003.html [10.09.2014]
• Upton, T. (2002). Understanding direct mail letters as a genre. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics, 7 (1), 65-85.
• Upton, T., & Connor, U. (2001). Using computerised corpus analysis to investigate the textlinguistic discourse moves of a genre. English for Specific Purposes, 20(4), 313-329.
• Ure, J. (1982). Introduction: approaches to the study of register range. International Journal of the Sociology of Language, 35, 5-23.
• Verantola, K. (1984). On noun phrase structures in engineering English. Turku: University of Turku.
• Vilha, M. (1999). Medical writing: modality in focus. Amsterdam: Rodopi.
• Weissberg, B. (1993). The graduate seminar: Another research-process genre. English for Specific Purposes, 12, 23-35.
• Williams, J. M., & Colomb, G. G. (1993). The case for explicit teaching: Why what you don't know won't help you. Research in the Teaching of English, 27, 252-264.
• Zamel, V. (1984). The author responds. TESOL Quarterly, 18, 154-157.[Crossref]

Identyfikatory

DOI

10.1515/ptse-2015-0001