Article published in:
Australian Review of Applied Linguistics
Vol. 24:2 (2001) ► pp. 17–34

What are they getting at? Placement of important ideas in lengthy Chinese newstext

A contrastive analysis with Australian Newstext

| The University of Queensland
When reading lengthy expository texts, Australian-born (Aus) learners of Modern Standard Chinese (MSC) as a second language (L2) often find it difficult to elicit the main points being expressed by the text author. Contrastive rhetoric studies attribute this to the differing stylistic patterns of argumentation between L1-English and L1-MSC discourse. This explanation, however, is far from universally accepted, with many studies refuting such conclusions. This study seeks to contribute to the debate by applying a more rigorous analytic framework, the Rhetorical Structure Theory (RST) framework, to lengthy newstext, so as to explicate the lower level, more local features of Chinese discourse that may lead to the problems faced by L2 learners of MSC. Results reveal that local level placement of clauses differs between Australian and Chinese newstexts. Pedagogical implications are discussed, namely the benefits of promoting awareness of such cross-cultural variation within the language classroom.
Published online: 01 January 2001
https://doi.org/10.1075/aral.24.2.02ram
References
Backlund, I.
(1988) Grounds for prominence. On hierarchies and grounding in English expository text. Studia Neophilologica 601:37–61. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Bateman, J. A. and K. J. Rondhuis
(1997) Coherence relations: towards a general specification. Discourse processes 241:3–49. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Baumann, J. F.
(1986) Effect of rewritten content textbook passages on middle grade students’ comprehension of main ideas: making the inconsiderate considerate. Journal of Reading Behavior 181:1–21. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Callow, K. and J. C. Callow
(1992) Text as purposive communication: a meaning-based analysis. In W. C. Mann and S. A. Thompson (eds) Discourse description: diverse linguistic analyses of a fundraising text. Amsterdam, John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Clyne, M.
(1987) Discourse structures and discourse expectations: implications for Anglo-German academic communication in English. In L. E. Smith (ed.) Discourse across cultures: strategies in world Englishes. New York, Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
(1994) Inter-cultural communication at work: cultural values in discourse. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Connor, U.
(1994) Text linguistics and the study of contrastive rhetorics. In S. Cmejrkova, F. Danes and E. Havlova (eds), Writing vs speaking: language, text, discourse, communication. Tubingen, GNV Gunter Narr Verlag.Google Scholar
(1996) Contrastive rhetoric: cross-cultural aspects of second-language writing. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
de Beaugrande, R.
(1991) Linguistic theory: the discourse of fundamental works. London, Longman.Google Scholar
Fox, B.
(1987) Discourse structure and anaphora in written and conversational English. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Freebody, P. and R. C. Anderson
(1986) Serial position and rated importance in the recall of text. Discourse Processes 91:31–36. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Goldman, S. R., E. U. Saul and N. Cote
(1995) Paragraphing, reader and task effects on discourse comprehension. Discourse Processes 201:273–305. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Grabe, W. and R. B. Kaplan
(1996) Theory and practice of writing: an applied linguistic perspective. London, Longman.Google Scholar
Hatch, E.
(1992) Discourse and language education. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Hinds, J.
(1987) Reader versus writer responsibility: a new typology. In U. Connor and R. B. Kaplan (eds) Writing across languages: analysis of L2 text. Reading, Massachusetts, Addison Wesley.Google Scholar
(1990) Inductive, deductive, quasi-inductive: expository writing in Japanese, Korean, Chinese, and Thai. In U. Connor and A. M. Johns (eds) Coherence in writing: research and pedagogical perspectives. Alexandria, Teachers of English to Speakers of Other Languages.Google Scholar
Hoey, M.
(1991) Patterns of lexis in text. Oxford, Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Kaplan, R. B.
(1989) On written text. Anglo-American Studies 91:117–27.Google Scholar
Kieras, D. E.
(1985) Thematic processes in the comprehension of technical prose. In B. K. Britton and J. B. Black (eds) Understanding expository text: a theoretical and practical handbook for analyzing explanatory text. Hillsdale, New Jersey, LEA Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Kies, D.
(1990) Indeterminacy in sentence structure. Linguistics and Education 21: 231–58. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Kirkpatrick, A.
(1993) Information sequencing in Modern Standard Chinese. Australian Review of Applied Linguistics 16,2: 27–60. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(1995) Chinese rhetoric: methods of argument. Multilingua 14,3:271–95. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(1996) Topic — comment or modifier — modified? Information structure in Modern Standard Chinese. Studies in Language 20,1:93–113. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Knott, A. and R. Dale
(1994) Using linguistic phenomena to motivate a set of coherence relations. Discourse Processes 181:35–62. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Krzeszowski, T. P.
(1990) Contrasting languages: the scope of contrastive linguistics. Berlin, Mouton de Gruyter. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Leki, I.
(1991) Twenty-five years of contrastive rhetoric: text analysis and writing pedagogies. TESOL Quarterly 251:123–43. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Lorch, R. F. Jr
(1989) Text-signaling devices and their effects on reading and memory processes. Educational Psychology Review 11:209–34. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Lotfipour-Saedi, K. and F. Rezai-Tajani
(1996) Exploration in thematization strategies and their discoursal values in English. Text 161:225–49. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
McGregor, W.
(1991) Discourse analysis and intercultural communication. Australian Journal of Communication 18,1:13–29.Google Scholar
McKoon, G., R. Ratcliff, G. Ward and R. Sproat
(1993) Syntactic prominence effects on discourse processes. Journal of Memory and Language 321:593–607. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Mann, W. C. and C. M. I. M Matthiessen
(1991) Functions of language in two frameworks. Word 421:231–49. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Mann, W. C. and S. A. Thompson
(1986) Relational propositions in discourse. Discourse Processes 91:57–90. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(1988) Rhetorical Structure Theory: toward a functional theory of text organization. Text 81:243–81. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Mann, W. C., C. M. I. M. Matthiessen and S. A. Thompson
(1992) Rhetorical Structure Theory and text analysis. In W. C. Mann and S. A. Thompson (eds) Discourse description: diverse linguistic analyses of a fund-raising text. Amsterdam, John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Matthiessen, C.
(1992) Interpreting the textual metafunction. In M. Davies and L. Ravelli (eds) Advances in systemic linguistics: recent theory and practice. London, Pinter.Google Scholar
Mauranen, A.
(1993) Cultural differences in academic rhetoric: a textlinguistic study. Frankfurt am Main, Peter Lang.Google Scholar
Meyer, B. J. F.
(1992) An analysis of a plea for money. In W. C. Mann and S. A. Thompson (eds) Discourse description: diverse linguistic analyses of a fund-raising text. Amsterdam, John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Mohan, B. A. and W. A. Y. Lo
(1985) Academic writing and Chinese students: transfer and development factors. TESOL Quarterly 191:515–34. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
O’Brien, T.
(1995) Rhetorical structure analysis and the case of the inaccurate, incoherent source-hopper. Applied Linguistics 161:442–82. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Sanders, T. and C. van Wijk
(1996) PISA - a procedure for analyzing the structure of explanatory texts. Text 161:91–132. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Sanders, T. J. M., W. P. M Spooren and L. G. M Noordman
(1992) Toward a taxonomy of coherence relations. Discourse Processes 151:1–35. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Scollon, R. and S. Scollon
(1997) Point of view and citation: fourteen Chinese and English versions of the ‘same’ news story. Text 17,1: 83–125. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Tai, J. H. Y.
(1985) Temporal sequence and Chinese word order. In J. Haiman (ed.) Iconicity in syntax. Amsterdam, John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Tai, J. H. Y
(1993) Iconicity: motivations in Chinese grammar. In M. Eid and G. Iverson (eds) Principles and prediction: the analysis of natural language: papers in honor of Gerald Sanders. Amsterdam, John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Taylor, G. and T. Chen
(1991) Linguistic, cultural, and subcultural issues in contrastive discour[s]e analysis: Anglo-American and Chinese scientific texts. Applied Linguistics 12,3: 319–36. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Thompson, S. A. and W. C. Mann
(1987) Rhetorical Structure Theory: a framework for the analysis of texts. IPRA Papers in Pragmatics 11:79–105. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Tomlin, R. S.
(1985) Fore ground-background information and the syntax of subordination. Text 51:85–122. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Tomlin, R. S., L. Forrest, M. M. Pu and M. H. Kim
(1997) Discourse semantics. In T. A. van Dijk (ed.) Discourse as structure and process. London, Sage. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Tyler, A.
(1994) The role of syntactic structure in discourse structure: signaling logical and prominence relations. Applied Linguistics 151:243–62. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Tyler A. and Bro, J.
(1992) Discourse structure in nonnative English discourse: the effect of ordering and interpretive cues on perceptions of comprehensibility. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 141: 71–86. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Uhlirova, L.
(1993) Parts of the sentence: evidence of their communicative significance in text structure. Quantitative Linguistics 521:263–70.Google Scholar
van den Broek, P. and T. Trabasso
(1986) Causal networks vs. goal hierarchies in summarizing text. Discourse Processes 91:1–15. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
van Dijk, T. A.
(1980) Text and context: explorations in the semantics and pragmatics of discourse. London. Longman.Google Scholar
Wang, X.
(1994) Writing concepts in Chinese writing instruction. Issues in Applied Linguistics 51:211–29.Google Scholar
Wong, S. L C.
(1988) What we do and don’t know about Chinese learners of English: a critical review of selected research. RELC Journal 191:1–20. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Young, L. W. L.
(1994) Crosstalk and culture in Sino-American communication. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Cited by

Cited by 5 other publications

da Cunha, Iria & Mikel Iruskieta
2010. Comparing rhetorical structures in different languages: The influence of translation strategies. Discourse Studies 12:5 ► pp. 563 ff. Crossref logo
Lee, Sook Hee
2014. Argument structure as an interactive resource by undergraduate students. Linguistics and the Human Sciences 9:3 Crossref logo
Taboada, Maite & William C. Mann
2006. Applications of Rhetorical Structure Theory. Discourse Studies 8:4 ► pp. 567 ff. Crossref logo
Zhang, Liang, Yuan Jia & Aijun Li
2014.  In The 9th International Symposium on Chinese Spoken Language Processing, ► pp. 265 ff. Crossref logo
Zhang, Liang, Yuan Jia & Aijun Li
2016.  In 2016 10th International Symposium on Chinese Spoken Language Processing (ISCSLP), ► pp. 1 ff. Crossref logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 03 april 2022. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.