Coherence, Cohesion, and Writing Quality

Faigley, Lester; Witte, Stephen P.

doi:10.2307/356693

Cited by 250 publications

(89 citation statements)

References 2 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…This finding goes against studies which report high correlation between DMs use and overall writing quality (Hartnett, 1980;Jalilifar, 2008;Martinez (2004); Witte and Faigley, 1981). Of course, the findings in the literature as to the relationship between writing quality and discourse marker use are mixed.…”

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 51%

“…However, it should be noted that in studies on the strong correlation between DM use and writing quality, cohesion was defined both in terms of syntactic and lexical cohesion. Most of these studies found that high rated essays contained more lexical collocation and lexical reiteration (Witte and Faigley, 1981;Lieber, 1980). In fact, two thirds of the cohesion in the study by Witte and Faigley (1981) were lexical.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Most of these studies found that high rated essays contained more lexical collocation and lexical reiteration (Witte and Faigley, 1981;Lieber, 1980). In fact, two thirds of the cohesion in the study by Witte and Faigley (1981) were lexical. Similarly, Anderson (1980) found that there is a tendency to use lexical reiteration and not to use DMs or reference in both oral and written narratives.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Discourse Markers in Argumentative and Expository Writing of Iranian EFL Learners

Rahimi¹

2011

WJEL

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The aim of the present study was to investigate the frequency and the type of discourse markers used in the argumentative and expository writings of Iranian EFL learners and the differences between these text features in the two essay genres. The study also aimed at examining the influence of the use of discourse markers on the participants' writing quality. To this end the discourse markers used in two essays (an argumentative and an expository) written by the participants of the study were analyzed. The results indicated a hierarchy of use of discourse markers in both essay types with elaborative markers (mainly "and") the most frequently connectors used in both essay types. Next came contrastive and inferential markers; reason, exemplifier, and conclusive markers, respectively, were the least frequently used connectors. The results, moreover, indicated that, on the whole, the mean of discourse marker use was significantly higher in argumentative essays than in expository essays. As for discourse marker categories, contrastive and conclusive markers were used more frequently in argumentative than in expository essays. The results, nonetheless, showed that the use of discourse markers cannot be a significant predictor of the writing quality in argumentative and expository compositions of Iranian undergraduate EFL students.

show abstract

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 51%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Discourse Markers in Argumentative and Expository Writing of Iranian EFL Learners

Rahimi¹

2011

WJEL

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This is to suggest that writers begin to focus on text cohesion (McCutchen, 1986;Witte & Faigley, 1981), syntactic structures (Hunt, 1965; McCutchen & Perfetti, 1982), and cognitive strategies such as planning and revising (Abbott et al, 2010;Berninger et al, 1991). Based on these insights conventional wisdom dictates that teachers should follow a process approach to writing by following the stages of planning, drafting and revising: in that order.…”

Section: Point Of Departurementioning

confidence: 99%

Exploration of self-expression to improve L2 writing skills

Pfeiffer

Sivasubramaniam²

2016

PLING

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Keywords: expressive writing, self-expression, qualitative methods, journal entries, social aspects, cognitive aspects, noticeable students and distinguished students. POINT OF DEPARTUREWriting is often perceived as a difficult and complex activity by the current generation of students. Caught in a world of electronic gadgetry, visual culture and information overload, they neither appreciate the educational value of writing nor do they understand the sense of personal gratification it may instil in them.We are aware that learning to write often begins with the mastery of producing legible letters and basic spelling (Abbott, Berninger & Fayol, 2010) and that once these skills are attained, young writers attempt to master basic grammar and sentence structure. This is to suggest that writers begin to focus on text cohesion (McCutchen, 1986;Witte & Faigley, 1981), syntactic structures (Hunt, 1965; McCutchen & Perfetti, 1982), and cognitive strategies such as planning and revising (Abbott et al., 2010;Berninger et al., 1991). Based on these insights conventional wisdom dictates that teachers should follow a process approach to writing by following the stages of planning, drafting and revising: in that order. However, we were not convinced that the various stages mentioned above and their concomitant procedures and parameters (within which learning to write takes place) could serve as a motivation for students to express themselves in writing. To the contrary, these procedures and protocols (text cohesion, syntactic structures, cognitive strategies) appeared to overemphasize students' adherence to conventionality, grammaticality and linearity in their writing, thereby

show abstract

“…For example, by comparing five good writings with five poor writings of first-year college students, Witte and Faigley (1981) claimed that cohesive density, especially the function of reference, synonymy, and collocation, could distinguish good writing from poor writing. Jin (2001) analyzed the use of demonstrative reference, conjunctions, and lexical repetition in Chinese graduate students' writing, and found that the advanced learners used more of the devices than the intermediate learners did.…”

Section: Studies On Text Cohesionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effect of Alignment on Text Cohesion in the Continuation Task

Lin

Xin²

2016

ELT

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A continuation task provides learners with a text with its ending removed and requires them to complete it through writing in a most coherent and logical way. The current study investigated (a) whether the continuation task had a positive effect on text cohesion and (b) whether texts produced by pairs exhibited higher cohesion than those produced by individual learners. A total of 80 college students were randomly assigned to one of three task conditions: 1) 40 students working in pairs in a continuation task; 2) 20 working individually in a continuation task; and 3) 20 working individually in a picture writing task. Text cohesion was analyzed by using three indices from Coh-metrix: Argument Overlap, Latent Semantic Analysis, and Causal Cohesion. Moreover, the collaborative dialogue and think-aloud protocols were collected and transcribed for identifying language-related episodes (LREs). The results showed that learners in Condition 1 produced the highest text cohesion while those in Conditions 3 the lowest. Furthermore, learners in Condition 1 produced more cohesion-related LREs, especially proportionally more correctly resolved LREs than those in Conditions 2 and 3. The implications of these findings from the perspective of alignment are discussed.

show abstract

Coherence, Cohesion, and Writing Quality

Cited by 250 publications

References 2 publications

Discourse Markers in Argumentative and Expository Writing of Iranian EFL Learners

Discourse Markers in Argumentative and Expository Writing of Iranian EFL Learners

Exploration of self-expression to improve L2 writing skills

Effect of Alignment on Text Cohesion in the Continuation Task

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About