中国英语专业本科生定时与非定时议论文写作中语音的比较研究

IF 4.2 1区 文学 Q1 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH Assessing Writing Pub Date : 2024-10-01 DOI:10.1016/j.asw.2024.100896
Xiangmin Zeng , Jie Liu , Neil Evan Jon Anthony Bowen
{"title":"中国英语专业本科生定时与非定时议论文写作中语音的比较研究","authors":"Xiangmin Zeng ,&nbsp;Jie Liu ,&nbsp;Neil Evan Jon Anthony Bowen","doi":"10.1016/j.asw.2024.100896","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>As a somewhat elusive and occlusive concept, voice can be a challenging and formidable hurdle for second language (L2) writers. One area that exemplifies this struggle is timed argument writing, where authors must position claims, ideas, and individual perspectives to an existing knowledge base and scholarly community under the confines of time. To enrich our understandings of voice construction in L2 English writers’ timed writing, we explored how 41 Chinese English-major undergraduates deployed authorial voice in two prompt-based argument writing tasks (timed versus untimed). We also sampled their self-reported knowledge, use, and understanding of voice through a survey-based instrument. To compare the quantity and quality of voice construction between the two samples, we measured 10 voice categories, three voice dimensions, and overall voice strength. Results showed that only two categories displayed statistically significant differences in terms of frequencies, but all three voice dimensions and overall voice strength scored significantly higher in untimed writing samples. Based on the results of our text analysis and survey, we further highlight the complexities of voice in L2 writing, provide evidence in support of existing voice rubrics, and make practical suggestions for teaching and assessing voice in writing.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":46865,"journal":{"name":"Assessing Writing","volume":"62 ","pages":"Article 100896"},"PeriodicalIF":4.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A comparative study of voice in Chinese English-major undergraduates’ timed and untimed argument writing\",\"authors\":\"Xiangmin Zeng ,&nbsp;Jie Liu ,&nbsp;Neil Evan Jon Anthony Bowen\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.asw.2024.100896\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><div>As a somewhat elusive and occlusive concept, voice can be a challenging and formidable hurdle for second language (L2) writers. One area that exemplifies this struggle is timed argument writing, where authors must position claims, ideas, and individual perspectives to an existing knowledge base and scholarly community under the confines of time. To enrich our understandings of voice construction in L2 English writers’ timed writing, we explored how 41 Chinese English-major undergraduates deployed authorial voice in two prompt-based argument writing tasks (timed versus untimed). We also sampled their self-reported knowledge, use, and understanding of voice through a survey-based instrument. To compare the quantity and quality of voice construction between the two samples, we measured 10 voice categories, three voice dimensions, and overall voice strength. Results showed that only two categories displayed statistically significant differences in terms of frequencies, but all three voice dimensions and overall voice strength scored significantly higher in untimed writing samples. Based on the results of our text analysis and survey, we further highlight the complexities of voice in L2 writing, provide evidence in support of existing voice rubrics, and make practical suggestions for teaching and assessing voice in writing.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":46865,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Assessing Writing\",\"volume\":\"62 \",\"pages\":\"Article 100896\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Assessing Writing\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"98\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1075293524000898\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"文学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Assessing Writing","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1075293524000898","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

对于第二语言(L2)写作者来说,"声音 "是一个难以捉摸的隐性概念,是一个具有挑战性的巨大障碍。定时论证写作就是一个很好的例子,在这种写作中,作者必须在时间的限制下,将自己的主张、观点和个人观点定位到现有的知识基础和学术界。为了丰富我们对后天英语写作者定时写作中语音建构的理解,我们探讨了 41 名中国英语专业本科生如何在两个基于提示的论证写作任务(定时与非定时)中使用作者语音。我们还通过调查问卷对他们自我报告的对语音的认识、使用和理解进行了抽样调查。为了比较两个样本之间语音构建的数量和质量,我们测量了 10 个语音类别、三个语音维度和整体语音强度。结果显示,只有两个类别在频率上显示出统计学上的显著差异,但在未计时写作样本中,所有三个语音维度和整体语音强度的得分都明显较高。基于文本分析和调查的结果,我们进一步强调了第二语言写作中语音的复杂性,为现有的语音评分标准提供了支持证据,并为写作语音的教学和评估提出了切实可行的建议。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
A comparative study of voice in Chinese English-major undergraduates’ timed and untimed argument writing
As a somewhat elusive and occlusive concept, voice can be a challenging and formidable hurdle for second language (L2) writers. One area that exemplifies this struggle is timed argument writing, where authors must position claims, ideas, and individual perspectives to an existing knowledge base and scholarly community under the confines of time. To enrich our understandings of voice construction in L2 English writers’ timed writing, we explored how 41 Chinese English-major undergraduates deployed authorial voice in two prompt-based argument writing tasks (timed versus untimed). We also sampled their self-reported knowledge, use, and understanding of voice through a survey-based instrument. To compare the quantity and quality of voice construction between the two samples, we measured 10 voice categories, three voice dimensions, and overall voice strength. Results showed that only two categories displayed statistically significant differences in terms of frequencies, but all three voice dimensions and overall voice strength scored significantly higher in untimed writing samples. Based on the results of our text analysis and survey, we further highlight the complexities of voice in L2 writing, provide evidence in support of existing voice rubrics, and make practical suggestions for teaching and assessing voice in writing.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Assessing Writing
Assessing Writing Multiple-
CiteScore
6.00
自引率
17.90%
发文量
67
期刊介绍: Assessing Writing is a refereed international journal providing a forum for ideas, research and practice on the assessment of written language. Assessing Writing publishes articles, book reviews, conference reports, and academic exchanges concerning writing assessments of all kinds, including traditional (direct and standardised forms of) testing of writing, alternative performance assessments (such as portfolios), workplace sampling and classroom assessment. The journal focuses on all stages of the writing assessment process, including needs evaluation, assessment creation, implementation, and validation, and test development.
期刊最新文献
A comparative study of voice in Chinese English-major undergraduates’ timed and untimed argument writing The impact of task duration on the scoring of independent writing responses of adult L2-English writers A structural equation investigation of linguistic features as indices of writing quality in assessed secondary-level EMI learners’ scientific reports Detecting and assessing AI-generated and human-produced texts: The case of second language writing teachers Validating an integrated reading-into-writing scale with trained university students
×
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