| Summary: | 博士 === 國立高雄師範大學 === 英語學系 === 99 === The current study aims to compare Chinese and English rhetorical strategies employed in argumentative writings in Chinese and English newspaper editorials. Data were retrieved from three kinds of Chinese newspapers and three kinds of English newspapers published in 2009 in Taiwan. Only the columns of editorials in the newspapers were investigated. The following aspects were analyzed and discussed in this study: (a) the overall organizations of argumentative writing, (b) the rhetorical strategies for introduction paragraphs, (c) the location of thesis statement, (d) the rhetorical strategies for concluding paragraphs, (e) the rhetorical strategies for supporting the arguments, (f) the roles of opponent’s arguments, (g) the rhetorical strategies for refutation of opposing views, (h) the role of audience, (i) the differences and similarities between Chinese and English rhetoric, and (j) the potential culture factors behind Chinese and English rhetoric.
This study uncovers certain differences between Chinese and English rhetorical patterns in terms of argumentative texts in editorials. First, the traditional four-part structure qǐ-chéng-zhuǎn-hé is still encouraged in Chinese writings, whereas the tripartite pattern introduction-body-conclusion is suggested to organize texts among writers of English native speakers. Second, Chinese writers prefer employing rhetorical questions, quotations, and definitions to start their essays, but English writers tend to demonstrate the fact and ask for immediate actions or improvement at the very beginning. Third, to end a text, Chinese writers are likely to appeal to quotations and the use of rhetorical questions, which are not observed in the editorials in English newspapers. Fourth, Chinese particularly resort to historical events and the use of analogy to strengthen the persuasive power in supporting paragraphs while demonstrating the outcome of interviews, surveys, and examples is favored by English writers. Fifth, as for refutation, Chinese writers especially arouse audience’s ethical awareness to examine the opposing views; however, using a threatening voice to warn the opponents is frequently observed in English texts.
The results of comparative analysis also indicate that there exist several rhetorical similarities between Chinese and English editorials. First, both Chinese and English editorials place the thesis statement in the introduction to draw audience’s attention, especially on the first or second sentence. Second, to begin the whole texts, the use of background information, statistical evidence, and anecdotes is proposed by Chinese and English writers. Third, both attempt to present the summaries, personal opinions, and strong demand for further actions to end the argumentative essays. Fourth, when supporting the arguments, both present the advantages of the schemes, propose specific and feasible plans, and demonstrate the statistical figures. Fifth, for Chinese and English editorial writers, addressing the opponent’s arguments in an argumentative essay is indispensable. Sixth, both use the similar refutation strategies to attack the opponents’ ideas, such as raising critical comments and pointing out potential threats. Seventh, both emphasize the reader awareness to win audience’s approval by presenting shared values and goals.
In addition, the possible factors behind Chinese rhetorical strategies are the effect of indirectness, face-saving, reproduction, and Confucianism while the concepts of directness, face-threatening, analytical thinking, and discovery-orientation center in English rhetoric. On the other hand, the reasons that Chinese and English share several rhetorical similarities can be explained by the genre of argumentative texts, the notion of collectivism, the schema theory, and objectivism.
Grounded on the findings in this study, some pedagogical implications are proposed. First of all, teachers are supposed to place great emphasis on the instruction of contrastive rhetoric except sentential knowledge. In addition, explicit recognition of different rhetorical strategies in Chinese and English essays helps writing teachers raise awareness on cross-linguistic conventions in the classroom. Moreover, identification of similarities between Chinese and English rhetorical strategies in argumentative writing is viewed as an aid in producing acceptable L2 writing. What’s more, full-fledged understanding of rhetorical strategies between two languages has ESL or EFL writers know how flexible and acceptable their essays could be. Finally, writing teachers are responsible for involving cultural values and beliefs into academic discourses.
|
|---|
