模糊語教學(xué)課件資料

1、過程體裁法在模糊語教學(xué)中的應(yīng)用研究 -以非英語專業(yè)研究生學(xué)術(shù)論文摘要寫作為例A Study of Process-Genre Approach to Teaching Hedges in the English Abstract Writing of Academic Articles by Non-English Postgraduates Contents Purpose and organization of the paper Data analysis and discussions Classroom teaching scheme Conclusion Major problem

2、sPurpose of the paperThis research is concerned about a pedagogical exploration on hedges employed in Chinese non-English postgraduates English abstract writing. Many researches show that, compared with English natives, Chinese EFL learners have problems in using hedges in academic writing.Process-

3、Genre(PG )approach is applied in this research in an attempt to raise Ss awareness of hedges and improve their ability to hedge in academic writing.Hylands(1998) classification on hedges will be relied on as a theoretical framework to analyse data in this research. It is not only simple and straight

4、forward, but also more convenient for the identification and counting work. Hedges are mainly separated into two types, lexical and non-lexical. This study mainly concentrates on lexical hedges which represent the majority of hedges in English research articles.Modal verbsLexical verbsEpistemic Adve

5、rbsEpistemic AdjectivesEpistemic nounsLexical hedgesBadger and White (2000) attempt to combine the Product Approach, the Process Approach, and the Genre Approach. Then, a new teaching method is developed which is termed “Process-genre Approach”. Since it synthesizes the features of the above three t

6、eaching models, the PG approach reflects an integration of their theoretical frameworks, namely the Input Hypothesis theory, the Cooperative Learning theory, Genre Analysis theory and the Schema theory.Organization of the paper1 Introduction 1.1 Research rationale 1.2 Significance of the research. 1

7、.3 Layout of the paper2. Literature Review 2.1 An Overview of Previous Studies on Hedges 2.1.1 The Development of the Concept of Hedges from the Perspective of Logic to Pragmatics 2.1.2 Definitions and classification of hedges 2.1.3 Important Role of Hedges in Abstract Writing 2.2 Review of Process-

8、Genre Approach 2.2.1 An Introduction of Product Approach, Process Approach and Genre Approach 2.2.2 An Integrated Teaching Model-Process-Genre Approach 3. Research and Teaching Methodology 3.1 Research questions 3.2 Corpus Collection 3.3 Identification of Hedges 3.4 Processing Procedures 3.5 Classro

9、om Teaching Scheme4 Data Analysis 4.1 Overview 4.1.1 Overall frequency and distribution of hedges in the two corpora 4.1.2 Most-frequently-used hedges in both corpora 4.2 Different distributions and frequencies of hedges in each type 4.2.1 Modal verbs 4.2.2 Lexical verbs 4.2.3 Epistemic adverbs 4.2.

10、4 Epistemic adjectives 4.2.5 Epistemic nouns5 Implications 5.1 An overall assessment on the effect of PG approach on hedging instruction 5.2Pedagogical implications for the construction of English writing classroom in China 5.2.1 Scaffolding language and learning 5.2.2 Providing diversified types of

11、 feedback 5.2.3 Connecting writing skills with other basic skills 5.2.4 Reorienting teachers role in the process of writing 5.3 Summary 6 Conclusion6.1 Major findings 6.2 Limitations and suggestions for future studiesData analysis Research Questions(1) What are the hedging devices employed by Chines

12、e non-English postgraduates in their English abstracts? What about their performance compared with NES?(2) After an intended training on hedges, with PG approach as its central teaching model, are there any improvements made by these learners or how are these differences reflected in the distributio

13、n and frequencies of different types of hedges?(3) What kind of pedagogical implications could be drawn for future instruction on hedges, or the construction of academic writing classroom in a broad sense? Corpus Collection research subjects : 120 non-English postgraduates in BUPT information and co

14、mmunication engineering, economics and management, the school of automation. They choose the same writing course by the same professor, that is, they will receive the same teaching instruction and practices This writing course is arranged in the last half of their first-year post-graduation, and the

15、 intended training on hedges will be inserted into this course, occupying three teaching periods sampleBefore this research, these subjects have been randomly divided into 20 groups by the professor. The size of the sample is 60, that is to say, not all the 120 learners work would enter into our inv

16、estigation. We will adopt the stratified sampling , that is, to randomly select 3 abstracts from each group by drawing lots. Corpus1(pre-writing corpus): English abstracts of these subjects graduates thesis are collected to serve as candidate contents of the first self-compiled corpus before the tra

17、ining. Corpus2(post-writing corpus): These subjects are required to write an English abstract after reading an English journal related to scientific research in a test. The 60 subjects randomly selected as the research subjects for corpus1 also serve as the research subjects for corpus2. Identificat

18、ion of HedgesThere is still not a fixed list covering all lexical hedges, since any expression could be viewed as hedging devices once it conveys possibility and tentativeness. Hedges in the two corpora are marked out manually in accordance with the classification advanced by Hyland and by virtue of

19、 contextual analysis. The check-up will be conducted two times to avoid mistakes and improve accuracy as much as possible. Overall frequency and distribution of hedges in both corpora Collectively speaking, these subjects exhibit a better play in the usage of modal verbs, lexical verbs, and epistemi

20、c adverbs, yet they appear to be more unqualified in adopting epistemic adjectives and stagnate in the performance of their originally weak point, that is, epistemic nouns. Additionally, corpus2 is more heavily hedged than corpus1 and hedges counted in corpus2 are far more diversified than those in

21、corpus1. Among different types of hedges, both lexical verbs and modal verbs take a leading role of frequency. Classroom Teaching SchemeThe teaching lessons (three teaching periods) are carried out according to principles of PG approach. The major five stages are conducted in a systematic fashion, t

22、hat is, analysis of model text, imitating, creative writing, revising and getting feedback, second and final drafting. Tasks(imitating stage)learners are asked to figure out and underline the existed hedges in a sentence or an abstact. Then, learners are required to make a comparison between informa

23、tion with and without hedges. choose appropriate hedges from a bar of hedge candidates, to fill in gaps in an English abstract according to their understanding. (3) fill in gaps in an English abstract with hedges which they consider best fitted in the context, without any choices for reference. (4)

24、learners are required to correct errors in a targeted abstract and add hedges where they consider appropriate. In this task, both reading skills and grammatical accuracy are involved. Learners should make judgements on where and how to employ hedges in a practical discourse context Tasks(creative wr

25、iting stage)(5) Some Chinese advertisements are presented and learners are encouraged to rewrite these ads in English, particularly, insert some hedges so that the whole statement sounds modest and leave more room for possibility. These tasks are implemented with increasing difficulty, so that learn

26、ers could gradually digest and grasp the knowledge stored in the first stage, and pull their potential to a better play.Two tips for further improvements on PG approach in hedging instructionOn the one hand, more efforts may be devoted to add practices of different English basic skills with the expo

27、sition of hedges. Thus, a more informative and entertaining writing class could be expected and learners may be more engaged and passionate in writing. On the other hand, the style of getting feedback could be more diversified. This kind of exchanging ideas in peer-to-peer discussion and teacher-to-

28、student conversation could occur at any stage of the PG approach, not confined to the fourth stage- revising and getting feedback. For example, learners themselves presentation could be added in the model analysis stage to broaden channels for feedback provided.ConclusionScaffolding language and lea

29、rning: the teachers guidance and designing of activities are crucial in pushing forward the scaffolding development. For example, a series of practice could be organized of increasing difficulties, which is in accordance with the ZDP thoery. Providing diversified types of feedback : writing teachers

30、 should adopt different types of feedback, not confined to the teachers written feedback, such as the teacher-learner conferencing, peer assessment, in-class grammatical explanation and so on. Besides, getting feedback could occur at any stage of the PG approach, not confined to the fourth stage- re

31、vising and getting feedback. Pedagogical implicationsConnecting writing skills with other basic skills: some listening, reading and speaking activities be integrated with the writing tasks, so that learners could be exposed to a comprehensive training of language proficiency and they may build up in

32、terests and confidence in English learning. Reorienting teachers role in the process of writing : it is concerned about the teachers role in each stage of PG approach while implementing the teaching process. Different from other traditional models of teaching writing, PG approach requires teachers t

33、o flexiblly reorient their roles in the class. They will serve as a demonstrator, an observer, a guide and a facilitator. limitations1 the size of the two self-compiled corpora is narrow in scope and small in number, it impacts the representativeness of the research findings to some extent . Additio

34、nally, the data source for corpus1 is a collection of English abstracts of these subjects graduates theses. These abstracts could only reveal some of their problems in hedging devices, but not a comprehensive picture of their performance. corpus2 also face such a problem. 2 The identification of hed

35、ges in both corpora is a purely manual work combined with contextual analysis. Consequently, slight errors are unavoidable. That is, some words which could be identified as hedges but not included in my data.3 Due to the simple calculating method and energy limit, the real effects of PG approach in this research could not be fully evaluated by the