Discourse Analysis of Grammatical Cohesion Devices in Student Explanation Texts

Maulana Rizki, Didin Nuruddin Hidayat, N. Husna, A. Alek
{"title":"Discourse Analysis of Grammatical Cohesion Devices in Student Explanation Texts","authors":"Maulana Rizki, Didin Nuruddin Hidayat, N. Husna, A. Alek","doi":"10.31605/eduvelop.v6i1.1545","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This study aims to find out the use of cohesive grammatical devices in twelfth-grade students’ explanation texts. In addition, this study also aims to explore the types of grammatical cohesion specifications in their essays. In this study, the researcher wanted to find out how good the quality of their student’s writing explanation texts was. To achieve this goal, the researcher used the conceptual framework of Halliday and Hasan (1976) regarding grammatical cohesion. This study applied to the twelfth grade of the Senior High School Level. The research uses descriptive and analytic studies by assigning students to write the texts. The result from the students’ explanation texts as the data in this research, there are 146 cohesive grammatical items found in students’ explanation texts. The reference occurs 68 times which has 46.5 of percentages. Conjunction occurs 53 times with 36.3% percent. Substitution occurs 23 with 15.7% percent. Ellipsis occurs two times with the lowest rate of 1.3%. The result shows that all four types of grammatical cohesion appear in students’ explanatory texts, which are the primary data in this study. However, there are subtypes of cohesive devices that don’t exist in students’ explanation texts from all of those devices. The most dominant was the reference and conjunction; on the other hand, ellipsis was the smallest presentation among grammatical cohesive, and only a few students used them. The result also indicated that the lack of grammatical cohesion devices used in terms of the generical structure of explanation text, knowledge, and ability in writing leads the college students to use inappropriate grammatical cohesion devices to be applied to this type of text. Thus, this study comes up with feedback to teachers that the discussion on the structural writing of texts and the use of coherence and cohesion should be more intensive.","PeriodicalId":436636,"journal":{"name":"Eduvelop: Journal of English Education and Development","volume":"57 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-09-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Eduvelop: Journal of English Education and Development","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.31605/eduvelop.v6i1.1545","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This study aims to find out the use of cohesive grammatical devices in twelfth-grade students’ explanation texts. In addition, this study also aims to explore the types of grammatical cohesion specifications in their essays. In this study, the researcher wanted to find out how good the quality of their student’s writing explanation texts was. To achieve this goal, the researcher used the conceptual framework of Halliday and Hasan (1976) regarding grammatical cohesion. This study applied to the twelfth grade of the Senior High School Level. The research uses descriptive and analytic studies by assigning students to write the texts. The result from the students’ explanation texts as the data in this research, there are 146 cohesive grammatical items found in students’ explanation texts. The reference occurs 68 times which has 46.5 of percentages. Conjunction occurs 53 times with 36.3% percent. Substitution occurs 23 with 15.7% percent. Ellipsis occurs two times with the lowest rate of 1.3%. The result shows that all four types of grammatical cohesion appear in students’ explanatory texts, which are the primary data in this study. However, there are subtypes of cohesive devices that don’t exist in students’ explanation texts from all of those devices. The most dominant was the reference and conjunction; on the other hand, ellipsis was the smallest presentation among grammatical cohesive, and only a few students used them. The result also indicated that the lack of grammatical cohesion devices used in terms of the generical structure of explanation text, knowledge, and ability in writing leads the college students to use inappropriate grammatical cohesion devices to be applied to this type of text. Thus, this study comes up with feedback to teachers that the discussion on the structural writing of texts and the use of coherence and cohesion should be more intensive.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
学生讲解语篇中语法衔接手段的语篇分析
本研究旨在了解衔接语法手段在高三学生解释性课文中的使用情况。此外,本研究还旨在探讨他们的文章中语法衔接规范的类型。在这项研究中,研究人员想要找出他们学生的写作解释文本的质量有多好。为了实现这一目标,研究者使用了韩礼德和哈桑(1976)关于语法衔接的概念框架。本研究适用于高中12年级。该研究使用描述性和分析性研究,通过分配学生写文本。本研究以学生解释性语篇为数据,在学生解释性语篇中发现了146个衔接语法项目。参考文献出现68次,占46.5 %。合相发生53次,占36.3%。取代率为15.7%。省略出现2次,最低率为1.3%。结果表明,四种类型的语法衔接都出现在学生的解释性文本中,这是本研究的主要数据。然而,在学生的解释性文本中,有一些衔接手段并不存在于所有这些衔接手段中。最主要的是指称和连接;另一方面,省略是语法衔接中最小的表现形式,只有少数学生使用省略。结果还表明,大学生在解释性语篇的总体结构、知识和写作能力方面缺乏语法衔接手段,导致大学生在解释性语篇中使用不当的语法衔接手段。因此,本研究对教师提出了反馈意见,即应该加强对篇章结构写作和连贯衔接运用的讨论。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Using “Listening Time Podcast” on Spotify to Improve Students’ Listening Comprehension Level Of Understanding of TBI Students Towards Plagiarism at Stain Majene Implementing Flipped Classroom Model Integrated with Interactive Multimedia To Enhance Students’ Writing Ability at English Tadris Program of UIN Datokarama Palu Teaching English for Management Students. Does Technology Essential? Comparative Efficacy of Elsa and English Speaking Practice: A Quasi-Experimental Study on EFL Learning Outcomes
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1