1 / 36

Helmut Gruber Birgit Huemer Dept. of Linguistics University of Vienna

Two views on text structure: Using Rhetorical Structure Theory and Register & Genre Theory to improve students’ academic writing. Helmut Gruber Birgit Huemer Dept. of Linguistics University of Vienna e-mail: helmut.k.gruber@univie.ac.at birgit.huemer@univie.ac.at. Database of the study:.

brynn-franklin
Download Presentation

Helmut Gruber Birgit Huemer Dept. of Linguistics University of Vienna

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Two views on text structure: Using Rhetorical Structure Theory and Register & Genre Theory to improve students’ academic writing Helmut Gruber Birgit Huemer Dept. of Linguistics University of Vienna e-mail: helmut.k.gruber@univie.ac.at birgit.huemer@univie.ac.at

  2. Database of the study: Macro-level: Text corpus: 19 student term papers (77.233 words) written in four academic disciplines, associated with four departments (social history, business studies, business psychology) at two Austrian universities and 7 seven papers of Linguistics students in Vienna. All in all 26 papers.

  3. Research questions: Functional moves, communicative acts and their lexicogrammatical realisations: • types of moves, communicative acts and lexicogrammatical realisations • Differences between existing terminology for social science research texts in English and Austrian students‘ term papers written in German Linguistic realisation of RST relations on the micro- and meso-textual levels: • how many linguistic markers/ relation • types of linguistic markers/ types of relations Correlations between generic stages and rhetorical relations in Austrian students’ term papers: • Agreement and non-agreement between these two text structures • Possibility to improve text quality by changing these texts so that both structures correspond more closely

  4. Generic structure

  5. Text-structure: Austrian students’ term papers have a text structure unfolding sequentially as follows: • Introducory part • Theoretical part • (Empirical part) – not always realized • Concluding part

  6. Introductory Part

  7. Theoretical part

  8. Empirical part

  9. Concluding part

  10. Orientation and Coda Two functional moves occur independently of text-segments: orientation and coda • orientation has the function of announcing what will be discussed in the following section • coda summarizes and concludes the previous section

  11. Introduction: original structure 1-10 Background Elaboration 1-9 87-100 5-10 2-9 Nonvolitional-result Concession 2-4 29-37 6-9 Nonvolitional-result Nonvolitional-result Nonvolitional-result 2-3 18-27 6-8 78-85 Nonvolitional-result 10-14 14-16 39-61 7-8 Elaboration 62-63 65-76 Claiming relevance of the study (5 – 16) establishing the gap present research is meant to fill (1) 18 - 37 relate study to existing research39 - 76 establishing the gap (2)78 - 85 Previewing author’s accomplishments87 - 100

  12. Example: Introductory part

  13. Moves • Relating study to exisiting research: In most of the term papers this move is realized only through one communicative act. • Claiming relevance of study: Usually realized through the communicative act „ Asserting relevance of field of which study is a part”. • Establish the gap present study is meant to fill: If this move is realized, it often follows the move „Claiming relevance of study“. • Previewing author’s new accomplishments: This move is often realized together with „Outlining author’s approach“, as in this text example. • Outlining author’s approach: Usually realized through the communicative act „ Presenting structure of study “.

  14. Lexicogramatical realizations

  15. Reporting what is known about phenomena under study Key realizations • Studies showed, that … (Studien haben aufgezeigt, dass...) • It could be shown, that…, (Es konnte gezeigt werden, ...) Time-orientation: past  present Person: written in third person, sometimes de-personalized (es, man) Processes: relational, material Modality: propositions (declarative), modalization of usuality, modality middle-high Theme: phenomenon under study or previous studies Logical structure: projection, parataxis

  16. Rhetorical structures

  17. Table 1: n of linguistic markers/ relation

  18. Table 2: “Argumentative/ explanatory” relations vs. “descriptive” relations

  19. Content tie Content specification Explicit expression of relation (Lexicalisation) Conjunction Stereotypical metacommunicative expression Metacommunication (indicating N-S border) Specifying presuming reference Generic presuming reference Absolute or partial recurrence Linear thematic progression “dove-tailed” thematic progression (topic sentences) Modality Discourse particles Syntactic construction Grammatical metaphor Layout Linguistic markers which signal RST relations:

  20. Primary relation markers: Conjunctions: • concession • contrast • non-volitional result • sequence • list

  21. Primary relation markers: Stereotyped metacommunicative expressions: • restatement • interpretation • content preparation • purpose

  22. Primary relation markers: Explicit realisation of relation (lexicalisation): • evaluation • Metacommunicative sequence + “content tie”: • background

  23. Primary relation markers: Content specification: • Subclassifications • Whole – Part relations • elaboration

  24. Secondary relation markers: • Cohesive devices: • generic presuming and • specific presuming reference • partial and • total recurrence • metacommunicative sequences which indicate the N-S border

  25. Table 3: Structural and functional markers/ relations

  26. Linguistic realisations of RST Relations in sample text level 1: Background: Meta-communication, content tie, position of text span (at the end of the introduction): „[S]: introduction, lines 5-85 [N] Ziel dieser Studie [metacommunication, textual position; SM] war es, ein Instrument zur Erfassung der gesundheitsbezogenen Lebensqualität [content tie, presuming reference, PM] zu entwickeln, bei dem sowohl die Bedürfnisse der PatientInnen als auch der ÄrztInnen berücksichtigt werden sollten.“ „[S]: introduction, lines 5-85 „It was the aim of this study[metacommunication, textual position; SM] to develop an instrument for measuring the health-related quality of life [content tie, presuming reference, PM]…“

  27. Linguistic realisations of RST Relations in sample text level 2: elaboration: Recurrence, content specification: „[N]Die Erfassung von Lebensqualität nimmt in der Medizin eine wichtige Rolle ein, […]. [S] Dass Lebensqualität [anaphoric tie, SM] von der subjektiven Wahrnehmung eines Individuums bestimmt wird, erschwert jedoch die Messbarkeit dieses Phänomens [content specification, PM]…“ „[N] Measuring the quality of life has an important role in medicine, … [S] That the quality of life [anaphoric tie, SM] is influenced by individual perception, makes it difficult to measure this phenomenon [content specification, PM]….”

  28. Linguistic realisations of RST Relations in sample text level 3: non-volitional result: conjunction „Wenn ÄrztInnen Lebensqualität oder Lebensqualitätsdefizite adäquat erfassen wollen [hyper-new; summarizes previous paragraph(s)], erscheint es daher [PM] als unumgänglich, dass sie sich, außer mit klassischen medizinischen Messkriterien, auch individuell mit den PatientInnen und deren Problemen auseinandersetzen, ihnen zuhören und deren subjektive Schilderungen und Eindrücke einbeziehen und diesen eine besondere Bedeutung beimessen.“ „If doctors want to record quality of life or deficits in quality of life adequately[hyper-new; summarizes previous paragraph(s)], it seems therefore[PM] inevitable that they…

  29. Linguistic realisations of RST Relations in sample text level 3: concession: conjunction „Dass es in der Kommunikation zwischen ÄrztInnen und PatientInnen [linear thematic progression] jedoch [conjunction; PM] immer wieder zu Problemen kommt, wurde bereits in verschiedenen linguistischen Studien aufgezeigt.“ „That problems in doctor- patient communication [linear thematic progression] occur still[conjunction; PM] again and again was already shown in various linguistic studies.”

  30. Introduction: original structure 1-10 Background Elaboration 1-9 87-100 5-10 2-9 Nonvolitional-result Concession 2-4 29-37 6-9 Nonvolitional-result Nonvolitional-result Nonvolitional-result 2-3 18-27 6-8 78-85 Nonvolitional-result 10-14 14-16 39-61 7-8 Elaboration 62-63 65-76

  31. Introduction: original structure 1-10 Background Elaboration 1-9 87-100 5-10 2-9 Nonvolitional-result Concession 2-4 29-37 6-9 Nonvolitional-result Nonvolitional-result Nonvolitional-result 2-3 18-27 6-8 78-85 Nonvolitional-result 10-14 14-16 39-61 7-8 Elaboration 62-63 65-76 Claiming relevance of the study (5 – 16) establishing the gap present research is meant to fill (1) 18 - 37 relate study to existing research39 - 76 establishing the gap (2)78 - 85 Previewing author’s accomplishments87 - 100

  32. Introduction: original structure 1-10 Background 1-9 87-100 Elaboration Concession 5-10 2-9 Nonvolitional-result Nonvolitional-result 2-4 29-37 6-9 Nonvolitional-result 2-3 18-27 6-8 78-85 Nonvolitional-result Nonvolitional-result 10-14 14-16 39-61 7-8 Elaboration 62-63 65-76 Claiming relevance of the study (5 – 16) establishing the gap present research is meant to fill (1) 18 - 37 relate study to existing research 39 - 76 establishing the gap (2) 78 - 85 Previewing author’s accomplishments 87 - 100

  33. Introduction: 1st modification Background Elaboration 1-9 87-100 5-10 2-9 Nonvolitional-result Concession 2-4 29-37, 39-40 6-9 Nonvolitional-result Justify Nonvolitional-result 2-3 18-27 78-85 7-9 Nonvolitional-result 10-14 14-16 41-61 8-9 Elaboration 62-63 65-76 Claiming relevance of the study (5 – 16) establishing the gap present research is meant to fill 18 - 37; 39-40; 78 – 85 (3 nuclear elements) relate study to existing research 41 bis 76 (1 central nucleus) Previewing author’s accomplishments87 - 100

  34. Introduction: 2nd modification 1-12 Background 1-11 87-100 Elaboration 5-10 2-11 Nonvolitional-result Nonvolitional-result 2-5 6-9 10-11 Nonvolitional-result Elaboration Concession 2-3 4-5 6-7 8-9 29-37 78-85 Nonvolitional-result Nonvolitional-result Nonvolitional-result Nonvolitional-result 10-14 14-16 18-25 25-27 39-61 62-63 65-74 74-76 Claiming relevance of the study 5 bis 16 establishing the gap …1 (18-27) relate study to existing research 39 bis 76 (1 central nucleus) establishing the gap …2 (29-37;78-85) Previewing author’s accomplishments 87 bis 100

  35. Introduction: 3rd modification 1-12 Background 1-11 87-100 Elaboration 5-10 2-11 Nonvolitional-result Concession 2-7 8-10 78-85 Nonvolitional-result Elaboration Condition 10-14 14-16 4-7 8-9 29-37 Elaboration Nonvolitional-result Nonvolitional-result 39-61 62-63 6-7 18-25 25-27 Nonvolitional-result 65-74 74-76 Claiming relevance of the study 5 bis 16 relate study to existing research 39 bis 76 (1 zentraler Nukleus) establishing the gap … (18-37;78-85) „APK“ Previewing author’s accomplishments 87 bis 100

  36. The end

More Related