| Summary: | 碩士 === 國立臺北教育大學 === 兒童英語教育學系碩士班 === 102 === Cross-cultural variations in writing conventions have been shown to have influence on L2 writing. Previous studies have indicated that there were similarities and differences in the use of move and verb tense in English research article (RA) abstracts written by native English writers (NEWs) and by non-native English writers (NNEWs). Furthermore, the factor of the speech communities sharing the same L1 may be a variable leading to variations in L2 writing. This study investigates the similarities and differences in the use of moves and verb tenses in English abstracts written by Taiwanese and Chinese researchers in L2 research article abstracts related to Applied Linguistics published in Taipei and Peking respectively, in reference to those written by native English writers.
The corpus was composed of 50 English RA abstracts published in the U.S.A by NEWs, 50 English RA abstracts published in Taiwan, and 50 English RA abstracts published in Peking. Chi-square tests were used to examine the similarities and differences in the use of move and verb tense among the three groups.
The results revealed similarities and differences in the use of move among the three groups. In terms of frequency and sequence of moves, Purpose, Method, Results and Conclusion were considered obligatory (above 50%) by the three groups, while Introduction move was considered optional by NNEWs from Peking, but obligatory to NEWs and NNEWs from Taiwan. The most favorite move pattern used in NEWs was four-move pattern, followed by three-move, five-move, two-move, and one-move structure was not found in the abstracts; the most frequently used move pattern used in NNEWs from Taiwan was four-move pattern, followed by five-move, three-move, two-move, and one-move; the most predominately used move pattern in NNEWs from Peking was three-move, four-move, two-move, five-move, and one-move. The most frequently used move pattern was Purpose-Method-Results-Conclusion in NEWs, Introduction-Purpose-Method-Results-Conclusion in NNEWs from Taiwan, and Purpose-Results-Conclusion in NNEWs from Peking.
Furthermore, in the use of verb tense, all the three groups had various preferences in the choice of verb tenses associated with specific function in different moves. In the Introduction move, three groups tended to use present tense; in the Purpose move, three groups tended to employ present tense; In the Method move, NEWs and NNEWs from Taiwan tended to adapt past tense, while NNEWs from Peking tended to use present tense; in the Results move, NEWs and NNEWs from Taiwan tended to use past tense, while NNEWs from Peking tended to employ present tense; in the Conclusion move, three groups tended to use present tense.
The results suggested that NNEWs from Taiwan displayed more similarities to NEWs in the use of move and verb tenses in English RA abstracts than NNEWs from Peking. The findings of the current study can serve as valuable references for cross-cultural and cross-regional research in Applied Linguistics, and offer pedagogical implications for the teaching of L2 research writing.
|
|---|
