Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
Thematic Progression and Cohesive Devices: An Approach to English Reading
Lan, Li mei
Chang, Hsun huei
Lan, Li mei
|Issue Date: ||2009-09-17 16:37:47 (UTC+8)|
|Abstract: ||本篇論文藉由探討主題推進類型 (thematic progression patterns)與凝結關係 (cohesive ties) 在高中英文教科書課文的呈現以及在英文大學入學考試試題 (綜合測驗，文意選填，篇章結構) 上的應用，來提倡篇章結構的閱讀方法；希望在英文閱讀方面能有啟發的功效。首先，高中英文教科書中敘述文和說明文類型的文章被挑選出來作分析。為了解釋文章的主題發展，功能語法觀點 (Functional Sentence Perspective) 的語言學家Daneš提出四個主題推進類型，分別為Type 1: Simple Linear TP，Type 2: TP with a continuous (constant) theme，Type 3: TP with derived T’s，Type 4: Exposition of a Split Rheme。Cloran另外建議兩個主題推進類型Type 5: Theme > Rheme 和Type 6: Rheme > Rheme。這六種主題推進類型再加上由Halliday and Hasan所提出的五種凝結關係 (cohesive ties, i.e. reference, substitution, ellipsis, conjunction, and lexical cohesion) 被用來分析上述的文章並且應用在英文大學入學考試試題的解題。研究發現除了上述六種預設的主題推進類型之外，第七種類型被歸為Referential Type，涉及指稱詞 this和that 的使用。其他的發現敘述如下：在高中英文教科書文章分析方面，Type 1和Type 2出現的頻率最多，第二多是Type 5 and Type 6；Referential Type排名出現頻率的第三名，而Type 4少見，Type 3最罕見.。另外，在英文大學入學考試試題的應用方面，結果亦大致符合上述。至於凝結關係 (cohesive ties) 的頻率，指稱詞 (reference)，尤其是人稱代名詞出現最多次，字彙 (lexicon) 次之，然而大部份都是相同字 (same word or repetition) 的一再重複出現；其他字彙的呈現，如同義詞 (synonym)、反義詞 (antonym)、搭配詞 (collocation)、統領詞 (superordinate) 等稍嫌不足。|
Because little attention has been paid to the explicit teaching of text structure
in local senior high schools, this present study analyzes the reading texts to explore how students are exposed to expositive and narrative text types and how the text is structured. Reading texts are selected from textbooks for senior high school students and then theme categories, thematic progression types and cohesive devices are analyzed. Combined Daneš’s theory with Cloran’s suggestion, the following six types of thematic progression (TP) are identified: Type 1, Rheme>Theme pattern (> means ‘followed by’); Type 2, Theme>Theme pattern; Type 3, Split Theme; Type 4, Split Rheme; Type 5, Theme>Rheme pattern; and Type 6, Rheme>Rheme pattern. Besides, five cohesive ties (i.e. reference, substitution, ellipsis, conjunction, and lexical cohesion) proposed by Halliday and Hasan are identified as clue to trace the progression. Next, evidence is found to decode gapped passages in Integrative Test (綜合測驗, i.e. Cloze Test), Semantic Choice (文意選填), and Discourse Structure (篇章結構).
Besides the presupposed six progression patterns mentioned above, one more type is found and categorized as Referential Type. The progression of Referential Type involves the use of cohesive device this or that. The findings are presented as follows: In the analysis of reading texts in EFL textbooks, thematic progression of Type 1 R>T and Type 2 T>T predominates the frequency of occurrence, while thematic progression of Type 5 T>R and Type 6 R>R follows behind, and Referential Type ranks third in terms of frequency, followed by Type 4 Split R outnumbering Type 3 Split T. Furthermore, while applying to the analysis of test passages, the outcome of progression types is roughly correspondent with what is mentioned above. As for cohesive ties, reference predominates the frequency of occurrence, followed by lexicon. Of all the cohesive devices, items of personal reference are found to appear most frequently, and then the second most are items of the same word.
Through the exploration and analysis of thematic progression and cohesive devices, it is hoped that students’ awareness of textual organization will be enhanced and thus help activate efficient reading.
|Reference: ||Anderson, R. C., Ralph, E. R., Diane, L. S., & Ernest, T. G.. (1977). Frameworks for comprehension discourse. American Educational Research Journal, 14(4), 367-381.|
Bartlett, F. C. (1932). Remembering: A study in experimental and social psychology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Benes, E. (1959). Zacatek nemecke vety z hlediska aktualniho cleneni vetneho [ with a German summary “ Der Satzbeginn im Deutschen, von der Mitteilungsperspektive her betrachtet” ]. CMF, 41, 205-217.
Carrell, P. L. (1983). Some issues in studying the role of schemata, or background knowledge, in second language comprehension. Paper presented at the 17th
Annual TESOL convention, Toronto, Canada, March, 1983.
Carrell, P. L. (1984). Evidence for a formal schema in second language comprehension. Language Learning, 34, 87-112.
Carrell, P. L. (1985). Facilitating ESL reading by teaching text structure. TESOL Quarterly, 19(4), 727-752.
Carrell, P. L. (1987). Content and formal schemata in ESL reading. TESOL Quarterly, 21(3), 461-481.
Carrell, P. L., & Eisterhold, J. C. (1987). Schema theory and ESL reading pedagogy. In M. C. Long & J. C. Richards (Eds.), Methodology in TESOL: a book of readings, 218-232. Boston, Mass: Heinle and Heinle Publishers.
Celce-Murcia, M., & Larsen-Freeman, D. (1999). The Grammar Book. (2nd ed.). Boston: Heinle & Heinle Publishers.
Celce-Murcia, M. (2002). Why it makes sense to teach grammar through context and through discourse. In E. Hinkel & S. Fotos (Eds.), New perspectives on grammar teaching in second language classrooms, 119-134. Mahwah, NJ:
Chao, Kwei-hsiang. (2002). Thematic Progression in the argumentative essays of EFL senior high school students. Unpublished master’s thesis. National Chengchi University.
Chen, Li-ting. (2003). Improving high school students’ performance on “Discourse Structure” tests through instruction of text structure and think-aloud modeling. Unpublished master’s thesis, National Taiwan Normal University.
Chen, S. I. (1992). Pedagogy for discourse structure in ESL academic writing: Developmental factors and the socio-cultural background of L1. Selected Papers from the English Conference on English Teaching and Learning in the Republic of China, 377-391. Taipei: Crane.
Cloran, C. (1995). Defining and relating text segments: Subject and theme in discourse. In R. Hasan & P. H. Fries (Eds.), On subject and theme, 361-403. Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
Coady, J. (1979). A psycholinguistic model of the ESL reader. In Ronald Mackay, Bruce Barkman, and R.R. Jordan (Eds.), Reading in a second language: hypotheses, organization, and practice, 5-12. Rowley, Mass: Newbury House Publishers.
Cohen, A. D. (1988). Reach in reading in a second language: Discussion paper. Revised. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 296578).
Connor, U., & Farmer, M. (1990). The teaching of topical structure analysis as a revision strategy for ESL writers. In B. Kroll (Ed.), Second language writing: research insights for the classroom, 126-139. NY: Cambridge University Press.
Cook, G. (1994). Discourse and literature. Oxford: Cambridge UP.
Danes, F. (1974). Functional sentence perspective and the organization of the text. In F. Danes (Ed.), Papers on functional sentence perspective, 106-128. Prague: Publishing House of the Czechoslovak Academy of Sciences.
Devine, J. (1988). The relationship between general language competence and second language reading proficiency: Implications for teaching. In Carrell, P. L., Devine, J., & Esdey, D. E. (Eds.), Interactive approaches to Second Language reading, 260-277. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Erteschik-Shir, N. (1988). Topic-chaining and dominance-chaining. In Y. Tobin (Ed.), The Prague School and its legacy in linguistics, literature, semeiotics, folklore, and the arts, 145-153. Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins Publishing Compamy.
Firbas, J. (1964). On defining the theme in functional sentence analysis. In Travaux Linguistiques de Prague I, 267-279.
Fries, H. P. (1995). Theme, methods of development, and texts. In R. Hasan & P. H. Fries (Eds.), On subject and theme, 317-359. Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
Gaies, S. J. (1980). T-unit analysis in second language research: Applications, problems and limitations. TESOL Quarterly, 14(1), 53-60.
Geva, E. (1992). The role of conjunctions in L2 text comprehension. TESOL Quarterly, 18(4), 384-405.
Goodman, K. (1970). Reading: a psycholinguistic guessing game. In H. Singer and R. B. Ruddell (Eds.), Theoretical models and processes of reading, 497-508. Newark, Delaware: International Reading Association.
Halliday, M. A. K. (1974). The place of “Functional Sentence Perspective” in the system of linguistic description. In F. Danes (Ed.), Papers on functional sentence perspective, 43-53. Prague: Publishing House of the Czechoslovak Academy of Sciences.
Halliday, M. A. K., & Hasan, R. (1976). Cohesion in English. Longman Group: London.
Halliday, M. A. K. (1994). An introduction to Functional Grammar. (2nd ed). London: E. Arnold.
Halliday, M. A. K., & Matthiessen, C. M. I. M. (2004). An introduction to functional grammar. (3rd ed). New York: Oxford University Press.
Hockett, C. (1958). A course in modern linguistics. New York: Macmillan.
Hughes, R., & McCarthy, M. (1998). From sentence to discourse: Discourse grammar and English language teaching. TESOL Quarterly, 32(2), 263-287.
Hunt, K. W. (1970). Syntactic maturity in school children and adults. Monographs of the society for research in child development. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Jenner, B. (2002). Method of text and discourse analysis. London; Thousand Oaks. Calif.: Sage.
Johnston, P. H. (1983). Reading comprehension assessment: A cognitive basis. Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
Kaplan, R. B. (1972). Cultural thought patterns in inter-cultural education. Language Learning, 16, 399-418.
Kiera, D. (1981). Component processes in the comprehension of simple prose. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 20(1), 1-23.
Kletzien, S. B. (1991). Strategy use by good and poor comprehenders reading expository text of differing levels. Reading Research Quarterly, 26, 67-86.
Kopple, V. (1991). Themes, thematic progressions, and some implications for understanding discourse. Written Communication, 8, 311-347.
Kuo, F. (2002). On cloze tests: probing reading strategies and language proficiency of EFL students. Unpublished master’s thesis, National Chengchi University.
Kurzon, D. (1988). The theme in text cohesion. In Y. Tobin (Ed.), The Prague School and its legacy in linguistics, literature, semeiotics, folklore, and the arts, 155-161. Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
Lautamatti, L. (1987). Observations on the development of the topic of simplified discourse. In U. Connor & R. B. Kaplan (Eds.), Writing across languages: Analysis of L2 text, 87-114. MA: Addison-Wesley Publishing.
Lee, I. (1998). Enhancing ESL students’ Awareness of Coherence-Creating Mechanisms in writing. TESL Canada Journal, 15, 36-49.
Lee, I. (2002). Teaching coherence to ESL students: a classroom inquiry. Journal of Second Language Writing, 11, 135-159.
Lu, Jen-ju. (2002). An analysis of the reading comprehension test given in the English Subject Ability Test in Taiwan and its pedagogical implications. Unpublished master’s thesis, National Chengchi University.
Mackay, R. (1987). Teaching the information gathering skills. In M. H. Long and J. C. Richards (Eds.), Methodology in TESOL: A book of reading, 248-258. Boston, Mass: Heinle & Heinle Publishers.
Mathesius, V. (1939). O tak zvanem aktualnim cleneni vetnem. [ On the so-called functional sentence perspective ]. Slovo a Slovestnost, 5, 234-242.
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, 195-210. Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
McCarthy, M. (1991). Discourse analysis for language teachers. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
McCarthy, M. (1994). It, this, and that. In M. Coulthard (Ed.), Advances in written text analysis, 266-275. London: Routledge.
Mo, Chien-ching. (1991). An extended topic chain: A paragraph development model for Chinese learners of English. Journal of Chengchi University, 62, 285-309. Taipei: National Chengchi University.
Mohan, B. A., & Lo, W. A. (1985). Academic writing and Chinese students: Transfer and developmental factors. TESOL Quarterly, 19, 515-534.
Nuttal, C. (1996). Teaching reading skills in a foreign language. London: Heinemann.
Quirk, R., S. Greenbaum, G. Leech, & J. Svartvik (1985). A Comprehensive Grammar
of the English Language. London: Longman.
Renkema, J. (1993). Discourse studies. Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing.
Robinett, B.W. (1978). Teaching English to speakers of other languages. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
Shen, Huilin. (2004). Improving coherence in High School Students’ English compositions through instruction of topical development. Unpublished master’s thesis, National Taiwan Normal University.
Shih, Y. H., Lin, M. S., Chen, C. Y., & Brooks. S. (2003). Far east new English reader for senior high schools, Book V~Book VI. Taipei: The Far East Book Company.
Shih, Y. H., Lin, M. S., & Brooks. S. (2004). Far east English reader for senior high schools, Book III~Book IV. Taipei: The Far East Book Company.
Shih, Y. H., Lin, M. S., Huang, C. S., & Brooks. S. (2005). New far east English reader for senior high schools, Book I~Book II. Taipei: The Far East Book Company.
Thompson, G. (2004). Introducing functional grammar (2nd ed.). New York: Oxford University Press.
Travnicek, F. (1962). O tak zvanem aktualnim cleneni vetnem. [ On the so-called functional sentence perspective ]. Slovo a Slovestnost, 22, 163-171.
Wang, Y. F. (1998). Facilitating EFL reading by teaching text cohesive ties. The proceeding of the seventh international symposium on English teaching, . 855-866. Taipei: Crane Publishing Co.
Weissberg, R. C. (1984). Given and new: Paragraph development models from scientific English. TESOL Quarterly, 18(3), 485-500.
Witte, S. P. (1983). Topical structure and revision: An exploratory study. College Composition and Communication, 34, 313-341.
Yu, H.S. (2001). The placement of English adverbial clauses in narrative texts of native speakers and Chinese college students. English Teaching & Learning, 26(2), 89-106.
大考中心. (1992). 指定科目考試規劃研究報告英文考科(IV). Taipei: CEEC.
|Source URI: ||http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0929510162|
|Data Type: ||thesis|
|Appears in Collections:||[英國語文學系] 學位論文|
All items in 政大典藏 are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved.