Use of implicit intertextuality by undergraduate students

Focusing on Monogloss in argumentative essays

Authors

  • Sook Hee Lee Federation University Australia at The International Institute of Business and Information Technology (IIBIT)

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.1558/lhs.30651

Keywords:

Implicit intertextuality, Presupposition, Appraisal theory, ENGAGEMENT System, Monogloss

Abstract

The present paper explores the differences between high-graded essays (HGEs) and low-graded essays (LGEs) in the use of implicit intertextuality expressed in persuasive essays written by undergraduate students. Their choices of implicit intertextuality are analysed within ENGAGEMENT. It constitutes a subsystem of the appraisal system formulated within the interpersonal meaning of a Systemic Functional Linguistics Framework. ENGAGEMENT consists of Monogloss (one voice) and Heterogloss (multiple voices). The present paper is concerned with Monogloss, focusing on 'presupposition' which is an element of Monogloss. As a result of applying the Monogloss system to an academic discourse field, a great deal of extension of the Monogloss system was required.
Text analyses reveal that significant differences are identified between HGEs and LGEs in the extent to which different types of Monogloss were deployed for the establishment of their authority while attempting to contextualzse their essays. Successful writers tend to use more presuppositions rather than other types of Monogloss such as 'fact' and 'assert' than unsuccessful writers in conjunction with other heteroglossic options along the schematic structure. The differences identified are interpreted in terms of Dialogic Literacy Perspectives. Pedagogical implications will be discussed in terms of their contributions to the support of academic literacy and integrity.

Author Biography

Sook Hee Lee, Federation University Australia at The International Institute of Business and Information Technology (IIBIT)

Sook Hee Lee obtained her PhD in TESOL from the University of Sydney in Australia in 2006. She is currently working at Federation University Australia at IIBIT as a lecturer. Her main research interests include the areas of functional grammar, evaluation, and interaction in essay writing, assessment, and intercultural rhetoric. Her recent publications include: (2015) Evaluative stances by undergraduate students: Focusing on Appreciation resources. Journal of Text and Talk, 35 (1), 49-76; (2014a). Principles and Practices of Oral Communication: Appraisal Theory and its Application to Casual Conversation. Cranmore Publications, UK; (2014) Argument structure as an interactive resource by undergraduate students. Journal of Linguistics and the Human Sciences, 9 (3), 277-306.

References

Andrews, R. (1995). Teaching and Learning Argument. London and New York: Cassell.

Bakhtin, M. (1981). The Dialogic Imagination. Austin TX: University of Texas Press.

Bakhtin, M. (1986). Speech Genres and Other Late Essays. Austin TX: University of Texas Press.

Bazerman, C. (1988). Shaping Written Knowledge: The Genre and Activity of the Experimental Article in Science. Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin Press.

Bazerman, C. (2004). Intertextuality: How texts rely on other texts. In C. Bazerman and P. Prior (Eds), What Writing Does and How it Does it, 83–96. Mahwah, NJ and London: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Braxley, K. (2005). Mastering academic English. In J. K. Hall, G. Vitanova, and A. L. Marchenkova (Eds), Dialogue with Bakhtin on Second and Foreign Language Learning: New Perspectives, 11–32. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Coffin, C. (1996). Exploring Literacy in School History. NSW Department of School Education.

Coffin, C. (2000). History as Discourse: Construal of Time, Cause and Appraisal. Unpublished PhD thesis, University of New South Wales.

Derewianka, B. (2007). Using appraisal theory to track interpersonal development in adolescent academic writing. In A. McCabe, M. O’Donnell, and R. Whittaker (Eds). Advances in Language and Education, 142–165. London: Continuum.

Fairclough, N. (1992a). Intertextuality in critical discourse analysis. Linguistics and Education 4: 269–293. https://doi.org/10.1016/0898-5898(92)90004-G

Fairclough, N. (1992b). Discourse and text: Linguistic and intertextual analysis within discourse analysis. Discourse and Society 3 (2): 193–217. https://doi.org/10.1177/0957926592003002004

Fairclough, N. (Ed.). (1992c). Critical Language Awareness. London: Longman.

Fairclough, N. (1992d). Discourse and Social Change. Cambridge: Polity.

Fairclough, N. (1993). Critical discourse analysis and the marketisation of public discourse; The universities. Discourse and Society 4 (2): 133–168. https://doi.org/10.1177/0957926593004002002

Fairclough, N. (1995). Critical Discourse Analysis: The Critical Study of Language. London: Longman.

Fairclough, N. (2001). Language and Power. 2nd edn. Harlow: Longman.

Fairclough, N. (2003). Analysing Discourse: Textual Analysis for Social Research. London and New York: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203697078

Farmer, F. (Ed.). (1998). Landmark Essays on Bakhtin, Rhetoric, and Writing. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Hall, J. K., Vitanova, G., and Ludmila. A. M. (Eds). (2005). Dialogue with Bakhtin on Second and Foreign Language Learning: New Perspectives. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Halliday, M. A. K. and Matthiessen. C. (2004). An Introduction to Functional Grammar. (4th edn). London: Arnold.

Halliday, M. A. K. (1994). An Introduction to Functional Grammar (2nd edn). London: Edward Arnold.

Hoey, M. (2001). Textual Interaction: An Introduction to Written Discourse Analysis. London and New York: Routledge.

Hood, S. and Martin, J. (2005). Invoking attitude: The play of graduation in appraising discourse. In R. Hasan, C. Matthiessen, and J. J. Webster (Eds), Continuing Discourse on Language: A Functional Perspective, 737–762. London: Equinox.

Hood, S. (2004). Appraising research: Taking a stance in academic writing. Unpublished PhD thesis, University of Technology Sydney, Australia.

Hood, S. (2006). The persuasive power of prosodies: Radiating values in academic writing. Journal of English for Academic Purposes 5 (1): 3–49. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2005.11.001

Hood, S. (2010). Appraising Research: Evaluation in Academic Writing. London: Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230274662

Hyland, K. (2000). Disciplinary Discourses: Social Interactions in Academic Writing. London: Longman.

Hyland, K. (2005). Metadiscourse: Exploring Interaction in Writing. London: Continuum.

Ivani?, R. (1998). Writing and Identity: The Discoursal Construction of Identity in Academic Writing. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishers https://doi.org/10.1075/swll.5

Kim, C. K. (2011). A corpus-based comparison of British professional writers’ L1 and Korean university students’ L2 argumentative texts on environmental issues in terms of heteroglossic engagement in appraisal. Korean Journal of Applied Linguistics 27 (2): 203–230.

Körner, H. (2001). Negotiating authority: The logogenesis of dialogue in common Law judgements. Unpublished PhD thesis, University of Sydney.

Kristeva, J. (1986). Word, dialogue and novel. In J. Kristeva (Ed.) The Kristeva reader, 35–61. New York: Columbia University Press.

Lee, S. H. (2006). The use of interpersonal resources in argumentative/persuasive essays by East-Asian ESL and Australian tertiary students. Unpublished PhD thesis. University of Sydney, Australia.

Lee, S. H. (2008a). The Use of Interpersonal Resources in Argumentative/persuasive essays: Cross-cultural and Grade-based Differences Between ESL and Australian Tertiary Students. Saarbrücken: VDM Verlag Dr M?ller.

Lee, S. H. (2008b). An integrated framework for the analysis of argumentative/persuasive. Journal of Text and Talk 28 (2): 239–270. https://doi.org/10.1515/TEXT.2008.011

Lee, S. H. (2008c). Attitude in undergraduate persuasive essays. Journal of Prospect 23 (3): 43–58.

Lee, S. H. (2010a). Attribution in high-and low-graded persuasive essays by tertiary students. Journal of Functions of Language 17 (2): 181–206.

Lee, S. H. (2010b). Command strategy by balancing authority and respect by undergraduate students. Journal of English for Academic Purposes 9 (1): 61–75. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2009.11.001

Lee, S. H. (2014). Argument structure as an interactive resource by undergraduate students. Journal of Linguistics and the Human Sciences 9 (3): 277–299. https://doi.org/10.1558/lhs.v9i3.277

Lee, S. H. (2015). Evaluative stances by undergraduate students: Focusing on Appreciation resources. Journal of Text and Talk 35 (1): 49–76. https://doi.org/10.1515/text-2014-0029

Lin, A. and, Luk, J. C. M. (2005). Local creativity in the face of global domination: Insights of Bakhtin for teaching English for dialogic communication. In J. K. Hall, G. Vitanova, and L. A. Marchenkova (Eds), Dialogue with Bakhtin on Second and Foreign Language Learning: New Perspectives, 77–98. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Liu, X. (2014). Contrastive rhetoric research of English and Chinese: An expanded and ecological Approach. Unpublished PhD thesis. University of Reading, England.

Macken-Horarik, M. and Martin, J. (2003). Negotiating heteroglossia: Social perspectives on evaluation. Text 23: 2.

Martin, J. (1995). Text and clause: Fractal resonance. In T. A. van Dijk (Ed.), Text 15 (1): 5–42.

Martin, J. (1997). Analysing genre: Functional parameters. In J. Martin and F. Christie (Eds), Genre and Institutions: Social Processes in the Workplace and School, 3–39. London: Cassell.

Martin, J. (2000). Beyond exchange: Appraisal systems in English. In S. Hunston, and G. Thompson (Eds), Evaluation in Text, 142–175. London: Oxford University Press.

Martin, J. and Rose, D. (2003/2007). Working with Discourse: Meaning Beyond the Clause (2nd edn). London and New York: Continuum.

Martin, J. and White, P. (2005/2007). The Language of Evaluation: Appraisal in English. (2nd edn). London and New York: Palgrave/Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230511910

Meng, M. and Li, X. (2010). A corpus-based study of ENGAGEMENT resources in English research papers of Chinese and NSE authors. Foreign Language Research 153 (2): 55–58.

Nystrand, M. (1986). The Structure of Written Communication: Studies in Reciprocity Between Writers and Readers. Orlando, FL: Academic Press.

Nystrand, M. and Wiemelt J. (1991). When is a text explicit?: Formalist and dialogical conceptions. Text 11 (1): 25–41.

Pecorari, D. (2001). Plagiarism and international students: How the English-speaking university responds. In D. Belcher and A. Hirvela (Eds), Linking Literacies Perspectives on L2 Reading-writing Connections, 229–245. Ann Arbor, MI: The University of Michigan Press.

Pecorari, D. (2003). Good and original: Plagiarism and patch writing in academic second-language writing. Journal of Second Language Writing 12: 317–345. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2003.08.004

Pennycook, A. (2001). Critical Applied Linguistics. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Scollon, R, Tsang, W., Li, D., Yung, V., and Jones, R. (1998). Voice, appropriation, and discourse representation in a student writing task. Linguistics and Education 9: 227–250. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0898-5898(97)90001-2

Simon-Vandenbergen, A. M., White, P. R., and Aijmer, K. (2007). Presupposition and ‘taking-for-granted’ in mass communicated political argument: An illustration from British, Flemish and Swedish political colloquy. In A. Fetzer and G. E. Lauerbach (Eds). Political Discourse in the Media: Cross-cultural Perspectives 31–74. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

Sinclair, M. (1993). Are academic texts really decontextualised and fully explicit? Text 13 (4): 529–558. https://doi.org/10.1515/text.1.1993.13.4.529

Street, B. (1995). Social Literacies: Critical Approaches to Literacy in Development: Ethnography and Education. London: Longman.

Swain, E. (2010). Getting engaged: Dialogistic positioning in novice academic discussion writing. In E. Swain (Ed.), Thresholds and Potentialities of Systemic Functional Linguistics: Multilingual, Multimodal and Other Specialised Discourses, 291–317. EUT-Libri.

Turner, E. (2017). The functions of references. Retrieved from http://awelu.srv.lu.se/sources-and-referencing/the-functions-of-references/ (June, 17).

White, P. (1998). Telling media tales: The news story as rhetoric. Unpublished Ph.D Thesis, University of Sydney, Australia.

White, P. (2002). The Semantics of Intersubjective Stance. SFL 2002 Conference, Macquaire University.

White, P. (2003). Beyond modality and hedging: A dialogic view of the language of intersubjective stance. Text, 23 (2): 259–284. https://doi.org/10.1515/text.2003.011

White, P. (2004). On line appraisal. Retrieved from http://www.grammatics.com/appraisal/2004 from on line appraisal.

Wu, S. M. (2005). Investigating evaluative language in undergraduate argumentative essays. Unpublished PhD dissertation, National University of Singapore.

Xiang, P. and Xiao, D. (2009). A study on ENGAGEMENT resources in Chinese EFL college learners’ English argumentative writing. Foreign Languages and Their Teaching 241 (4): 22–26.

Published

2019-05-28

How to Cite

Lee, S. H. (2019). Use of implicit intertextuality by undergraduate students: Focusing on Monogloss in argumentative essays. Linguistics and the Human Sciences, 13(1-2), 150–178. https://doi.org/10.1558/lhs.30651

Issue

Section

Articles