理解一:大学文学论文中自我指称的修辞变化

IF 0.5 0 LITERATURE COLLEGE COMPOSITION AND COMMUNICATION Pub Date : 2016-06-01 DOI:10.15781/T2610VT2B
L. Beerits
{"title":"理解一:大学文学论文中自我指称的修辞变化","authors":"L. Beerits","doi":"10.15781/T2610VT2B","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"It seems only fair to start with my own first-person admission: I am personally, pedagogically, and professionally interested in how students do and do not write about themselves in their academic papers. And as a composition instructor, I have seen that students, too, are deeply concerned with understanding the \"rules\" for academic writing, particularly around the use of the pronoun I. Their confusion is understandable: high school teachers, college professors, and writing handbook authors-all wrestling with how best to train students to becomes successful writers in and outside of the classroom-sometimes offer conflicting guidelines and advice. Some contend that first-person pronouns make a text more readable or better highlight a writer's own contributions, while others caution that first-person references are overly informal or subjective.1Scholars, though, consistently use first-person pronouns in their own writing-though this, too, is not uncomplicated. In a survey of 240 scholarly articles from well-regarded journals across a variety of academic fields, linguist Ken Hyland found that every article in the sample contained \"at least one first person reference,\" with scholars in the humanities and social sciences self-referencing particularly frequently (\"Humble Servants\" 212).2 Despite this evidence that scholars commonly use first-person pronouns, Hyland believes this practice is still at odds with traditional academic attitudes. He observes that impersonality in writing is often \"institutionally sanctified\" as a signal of disciplinary mastery, yet it is also \"constantly transgressed\" in our scholarship (209). Because of this contradiction, Hyland argues that gauging where and when self-referencing is appropriate \"remains a perennial problem for students, teachers, and experienced writers alike\" (208).What becomes clear from this conflict is that we have historically and ideologically conflated first-person pronoun use with more informal, personal writing. But is this conflation warranted? To examine this, I argue that we must carefully refine what we mean by \"personal\" and \"academic\" writing. For although we have spent decades discussing the appropriateness and utility of these two writing styles (often as iterations of the seminal Bartholomae/ Elbow Debate, and, more recently, in productive explorations of alternative discourses and widened disciplinary conventions), we still largely intuit our own definitions of each kind of writing.3 And too often, these definitions are used to create a good-versus-bad, academic-versus-personal binary that student writing-and our own-simply does not follow. What makes writing academic? What makes writing personal? Can writing be both academic and personal? And, most relevant to the current study, does the use of first-person pronouns necessarily signal or encourage personal writing?Individual instructors will always, of course, have different preferences around first-person pronoun use; some will welcome it as a style that bolsters a student's voice, while others will dismiss it as inappropriate in an academic setting. This study is not intended to adjudicate this debate, nor will I use the results to make claims about the overall rhetorical effectiveness of selfreferencing. Instead, the study aims to look at how such first-person statements function, to appreciate their rhetorical variety, and to offer a critical vocabulary by which to respond to them.In addition to refining the way we look at first-person references, we also need to examine how frequently students are really using these pronouns or referencing their personal lives in their academic writing. Some instructors report that they consistently encounter personal responses in their students' papers, regardless of the assignment prompt, while others find evidence that students have rigidly internalized a proscription against using I at all.4 But beyond these conflicting anecdotal observations, there is surprisingly little understanding of our undergraduate students' actual writing practices. …","PeriodicalId":47107,"journal":{"name":"COLLEGE COMPOSITION AND COMMUNICATION","volume":"67 1","pages":"550"},"PeriodicalIF":0.5000,"publicationDate":"2016-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Understanding I: The Rhetorical Variety of Self-References in College Literature Papers\",\"authors\":\"L. Beerits\",\"doi\":\"10.15781/T2610VT2B\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"It seems only fair to start with my own first-person admission: I am personally, pedagogically, and professionally interested in how students do and do not write about themselves in their academic papers. And as a composition instructor, I have seen that students, too, are deeply concerned with understanding the \\\"rules\\\" for academic writing, particularly around the use of the pronoun I. Their confusion is understandable: high school teachers, college professors, and writing handbook authors-all wrestling with how best to train students to becomes successful writers in and outside of the classroom-sometimes offer conflicting guidelines and advice. Some contend that first-person pronouns make a text more readable or better highlight a writer's own contributions, while others caution that first-person references are overly informal or subjective.1Scholars, though, consistently use first-person pronouns in their own writing-though this, too, is not uncomplicated. In a survey of 240 scholarly articles from well-regarded journals across a variety of academic fields, linguist Ken Hyland found that every article in the sample contained \\\"at least one first person reference,\\\" with scholars in the humanities and social sciences self-referencing particularly frequently (\\\"Humble Servants\\\" 212).2 Despite this evidence that scholars commonly use first-person pronouns, Hyland believes this practice is still at odds with traditional academic attitudes. He observes that impersonality in writing is often \\\"institutionally sanctified\\\" as a signal of disciplinary mastery, yet it is also \\\"constantly transgressed\\\" in our scholarship (209). Because of this contradiction, Hyland argues that gauging where and when self-referencing is appropriate \\\"remains a perennial problem for students, teachers, and experienced writers alike\\\" (208).What becomes clear from this conflict is that we have historically and ideologically conflated first-person pronoun use with more informal, personal writing. But is this conflation warranted? To examine this, I argue that we must carefully refine what we mean by \\\"personal\\\" and \\\"academic\\\" writing. For although we have spent decades discussing the appropriateness and utility of these two writing styles (often as iterations of the seminal Bartholomae/ Elbow Debate, and, more recently, in productive explorations of alternative discourses and widened disciplinary conventions), we still largely intuit our own definitions of each kind of writing.3 And too often, these definitions are used to create a good-versus-bad, academic-versus-personal binary that student writing-and our own-simply does not follow. What makes writing academic? What makes writing personal? Can writing be both academic and personal? And, most relevant to the current study, does the use of first-person pronouns necessarily signal or encourage personal writing?Individual instructors will always, of course, have different preferences around first-person pronoun use; some will welcome it as a style that bolsters a student's voice, while others will dismiss it as inappropriate in an academic setting. This study is not intended to adjudicate this debate, nor will I use the results to make claims about the overall rhetorical effectiveness of selfreferencing. Instead, the study aims to look at how such first-person statements function, to appreciate their rhetorical variety, and to offer a critical vocabulary by which to respond to them.In addition to refining the way we look at first-person references, we also need to examine how frequently students are really using these pronouns or referencing their personal lives in their academic writing. Some instructors report that they consistently encounter personal responses in their students' papers, regardless of the assignment prompt, while others find evidence that students have rigidly internalized a proscription against using I at all.4 But beyond these conflicting anecdotal observations, there is surprisingly little understanding of our undergraduate students' actual writing practices. …\",\"PeriodicalId\":47107,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"COLLEGE COMPOSITION AND COMMUNICATION\",\"volume\":\"67 1\",\"pages\":\"550\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2016-06-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"3\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"COLLEGE COMPOSITION AND COMMUNICATION\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.15781/T2610VT2B\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"LITERATURE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"COLLEGE COMPOSITION AND COMMUNICATION","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.15781/T2610VT2B","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"LITERATURE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

摘要

似乎只有从我自己的第一人称承认开始才公平:我个人、教学和专业上都对学生在学术论文中如何写自己和不写自己感兴趣。作为一名作文指导老师,我发现学生们也非常关心学术写作的“规则”,尤其是代词“I”的使用。他们的困惑是可以理解的:高中老师、大学教授和写作手册的作者们——他们都在为如何最好地训练学生在课堂内外成为成功的作家而绞尽脑汁——有时会给出相互矛盾的指导方针和建议。一些人认为第一人称代词使文本更具可读性或更好地突出作者自己的贡献,而另一些人则警告说,第一人称引用过于非正式或主观。然而,学者们在自己的写作中一贯使用第一人称代词——尽管这也不是简单的。语言学家肯·海兰德(Ken Hyland)调查了240篇来自不同学术领域的知名期刊的学术文章,发现样本中的每篇文章都包含“至少一个第一人称引用”,人文和社会科学领域的学者尤其频繁地自我引用(《谦卑的仆人》212页)尽管有证据表明学者们普遍使用第一人称代词,但海兰认为这种做法仍然与传统的学术态度不一致。他观察到,写作中的客观常常被“制度上神圣化”,作为学科精通的标志,然而在我们的学术研究中,它也“不断被违反”(209)。由于这种矛盾,海兰德认为,衡量何时何地自我引用是合适的“对于学生、教师和经验丰富的作家来说,仍然是一个长期存在的问题”(208)。从这场冲突中可以清楚地看出,我们在历史上和意识形态上把第一人称代词的使用与更非正式的个人写作混为一谈。但这种合并有道理吗?为了检验这一点,我认为我们必须仔细地界定“个人”和“学术”写作的含义。因为尽管我们花了几十年的时间讨论这两种写作风格的适当性和实用性(通常是开创性的Bartholomae/肘部辩论的迭代,最近,在对替代话语和扩大学科惯例的富有成效的探索中),我们仍然在很大程度上凭直觉对每一种写作的定义而且,这些定义经常被用来创造一个好与坏、学术与个人的二元对立,而学生的写作——以及我们自己的写作——根本不遵循这种二元对立。是什么让写作具有学术性?是什么让写作个人化?写作可以既学术性又私人化吗?而且,与当前研究最相关的是,第一人称代词的使用是否必然暗示或鼓励个人写作?当然,个别教师对第一人称代词的使用总是有不同的偏好;一些人会欢迎它,认为它是一种增强学生声音的风格,而另一些人则会认为它在学术环境中不合适。这项研究并不是为了裁决这场辩论,我也不会用结果来宣称自我引用的整体修辞效果。相反,这项研究的目的是研究这些第一人称陈述是如何发挥作用的,欣赏它们的修辞多样性,并提供一个批判性的词汇来回应它们。除了改进我们看待第一人称引用的方式,我们还需要检查学生在学术写作中使用这些代词或引用他们个人生活的频率。一些教师报告说,他们总是在学生的论文中遇到个人回答,而不管作业提示是什么,而另一些教师则发现有证据表明,学生已经严格地内化了一种禁止使用I的禁令但除了这些相互矛盾的轶事观察之外,令人惊讶的是,我们对本科生的实际写作实践知之甚少。…
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
Understanding I: The Rhetorical Variety of Self-References in College Literature Papers
It seems only fair to start with my own first-person admission: I am personally, pedagogically, and professionally interested in how students do and do not write about themselves in their academic papers. And as a composition instructor, I have seen that students, too, are deeply concerned with understanding the "rules" for academic writing, particularly around the use of the pronoun I. Their confusion is understandable: high school teachers, college professors, and writing handbook authors-all wrestling with how best to train students to becomes successful writers in and outside of the classroom-sometimes offer conflicting guidelines and advice. Some contend that first-person pronouns make a text more readable or better highlight a writer's own contributions, while others caution that first-person references are overly informal or subjective.1Scholars, though, consistently use first-person pronouns in their own writing-though this, too, is not uncomplicated. In a survey of 240 scholarly articles from well-regarded journals across a variety of academic fields, linguist Ken Hyland found that every article in the sample contained "at least one first person reference," with scholars in the humanities and social sciences self-referencing particularly frequently ("Humble Servants" 212).2 Despite this evidence that scholars commonly use first-person pronouns, Hyland believes this practice is still at odds with traditional academic attitudes. He observes that impersonality in writing is often "institutionally sanctified" as a signal of disciplinary mastery, yet it is also "constantly transgressed" in our scholarship (209). Because of this contradiction, Hyland argues that gauging where and when self-referencing is appropriate "remains a perennial problem for students, teachers, and experienced writers alike" (208).What becomes clear from this conflict is that we have historically and ideologically conflated first-person pronoun use with more informal, personal writing. But is this conflation warranted? To examine this, I argue that we must carefully refine what we mean by "personal" and "academic" writing. For although we have spent decades discussing the appropriateness and utility of these two writing styles (often as iterations of the seminal Bartholomae/ Elbow Debate, and, more recently, in productive explorations of alternative discourses and widened disciplinary conventions), we still largely intuit our own definitions of each kind of writing.3 And too often, these definitions are used to create a good-versus-bad, academic-versus-personal binary that student writing-and our own-simply does not follow. What makes writing academic? What makes writing personal? Can writing be both academic and personal? And, most relevant to the current study, does the use of first-person pronouns necessarily signal or encourage personal writing?Individual instructors will always, of course, have different preferences around first-person pronoun use; some will welcome it as a style that bolsters a student's voice, while others will dismiss it as inappropriate in an academic setting. This study is not intended to adjudicate this debate, nor will I use the results to make claims about the overall rhetorical effectiveness of selfreferencing. Instead, the study aims to look at how such first-person statements function, to appreciate their rhetorical variety, and to offer a critical vocabulary by which to respond to them.In addition to refining the way we look at first-person references, we also need to examine how frequently students are really using these pronouns or referencing their personal lives in their academic writing. Some instructors report that they consistently encounter personal responses in their students' papers, regardless of the assignment prompt, while others find evidence that students have rigidly internalized a proscription against using I at all.4 But beyond these conflicting anecdotal observations, there is surprisingly little understanding of our undergraduate students' actual writing practices. …
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
CiteScore
1.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊介绍: College Composition and Communication publishes research and scholarship in rhetoric and composition studies that supports college teachers in reflecting on and improving their practices in teaching writing and that reflects the most current scholarship and theory in the field.
期刊最新文献
CCCC News Thinking about Feeling: The Roles of Emotion in Reflective Writing The Student-Podcaster as Narrator of Social Change? Announcements and Calls The Virtual Writing Marathon Ecosystem: Writing, Community, and Emotion
×
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