Argument structures in Chinese university students’ argumentative writing

Abstract

Situated within a Systemic Functional Linguistics genre paradigm, this study adopted a function-based linguistic approach to examine the argument structures in English writing produced by Chinese university students of English as foreign language (EFL). Their English writing was contrasted with three other sets of argumentative essays in order to explore differences and similarities in the use of argument structures. The four sets of essays were produced by three groups of university students: native English- and Chinese-speaking university students and Chinese university EFL students. Participants’ interviews and questionnaire responses were also collected. The study found that most native English-speaking participants used an analytical arguing strategy, while most Chinese-speaking university participants preferred a hortatory argument structure both in their English and Chinese writing. It was also found that Chinese participants’ English writing was influenced by both English and Chinese.

Evaluative language in discussion sections of doctoral theses: Similarities and differences between L1 Chinese and L1 English writers

“…'Peer review is a useful technique') (p. 27). Liu & Thompson (2009) contrasted Attitude choices in two essays, one in English and one in Chinese, written by the same L1 Chinese undergraduate student. They found fewer Judgement items in the Chinese text, and suggested that this reflected an emphasis on 'the use of language and rhetoric to achieve social harmony' (Liu & Thompson, 2009: 7).…”

An Examination of Written Genres in English Language Textbooks in Japan

“…The findings in the current article and Horverak (2016) may suggest that the teaching of argumentative writing is influenced by that of L1 writing. This is supported by one of the research findings by Liu and Furneaux (2015). They found that Chinese EFL learners tended to write Hortatory expositions which asserted appropriate actions for an issue while native English-speaking writers were likely to employ Analytical expositions, which aims to persuade readers to think in a certain way.…”

Untitled

“…The findings in the current article and Horverak (2016) may suggest that the teaching of argumentative writing is influenced by that of L1 writing. This is supported by one of the research findings by Liu and Furneaux (2015). They found that Chinese EFL learners tended to write Hortatory expositions which asserted appropriate actions for an issue while native English-speaking writers were likely to employ Analytical expositions, which aims to…”

“…Discussion texts, however, provide learners with opportunities to present their perspectives or opinions. In an ESL context, for example, undergraduate L1 students employ either Exposition or Discussion texts to discuss their stances (see e.g., Woodward-Korn, 2002, for an Australian case and Liu & Furneaux, 2015, for an English case). The variety of genres that occurred in the MEXT-approved textbooks seems to echo the objectives of English language teaching set in the course guidelines established by MEXT (1999).…”

“…1, Spring 2017, 64-80 77 persuade readers to think in a certain way. They argue that this tendency of the Chinese writers may have resulted from the writing instruction they received in China (Liu & Furneaux, 2015). Li (1996) found that writing instruction in China emphasises the importance of embedding moral messages in writing.…”