سخنرانی های علمی انگلیسی: رشته دانشگاهی و بیان اهمیت

نوع مقاله: علمی پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 دانشگاه کوثر بجنورد

2 مجتمع آموزش عالی اسفراین

چکیده

هدف از انجام این تحقیق بررسی چگونگی بیان اهمیت در ارائه‌های رشته‌های علوم اجتماعی، علوم انسانی، علوم پزشکی و علوم فیزیکی است. روش تحقیق استفاده‌شده در این پژوهش ترکیبی است از یک روش پیکره-محور و تجزیه‌وتحلیل کلام. در ضمن، نشانگرهای اهمیت مطلب این مطالعه از 160 سخنرانی انگلیسی پیکره بیس استخراج‌شده‌اند. بررسی رونوشت این ارائه‌ها نشان داد، اول و مهم‌تر از همه رشته دانشگاهی برای بیان اهمیت مسئله نیست. به‌عبارت‌دیگر، سخنرانی‌های علمی رشته‌های مختلف دانشگاهی ازلحاظ بیان اهمیت تفاوت چشمگیری ندارند. دوم، مشاهده کردیم، صرف‌نظر از رشته، اهمیت مطلب را می‌توان با استفاده از یکی از پنج روش ارتباط دادن به امتحان، پوشش مفصل موضوع، ارزیابی نگرشی مطلب ازنظر اهمیت یا ارتباط، مرزبندی بین نکات و مطالب جانبی و ایجاد تعامل با مخاطب نشان داد. علاوه بر این، مشخص شد اساتید رشته‌های زندگی و علوم پزشکی بیشتر از استادان دیگر رشته‌ها تمایل دارند دانشجو را در کلام درگیر کنند. در کل، نتایج این مطالعه نشان داد اساتید دانشگاه از رشته‌های مختلف در بیان اهمیت مطلب به‌صورت تعاملی عمل می‌کنند.

کلیدواژه‌ها


عنوان مقاله [English]

English academic lectures: Field of study and importance marking

نویسندگان [English]

  • Javad Zare 1
  • Zahra Keivanlou-Shahrestanaki 2
1 Kosar University of Bojnord
2 Esfarayen University of Technology
چکیده [English]

The purpose of this study was to investigate importance signaling in the lectures of the fields of social sciences, humanities, medical sciences and physical sciences. The study was conducted based on a corpus-driven and discourse analytic approach. The importance markers in this study were extracted from the 160 English academic lectures of the BASE corpus. The results of the study showed that in importance marking the field of study of the lectures is not an issue. The results showed that signaling importance in the academic lectures of social sciences, arts and humanities, life and medical sciences and physical sciences is done through (1) dividing the lecture into points and asides, (2) using evaluative language, (3) extensive topic coverage, (4) revealing the contents of the assessment, and (5) audience engagement. The results also indicated that the lecturers in the disciplines of life and medical sciences tend more than other lecturers to have interaction with the audience.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • importance
  • Evaluation
  • academic lecture
  • Corpus
  • Discourse analysis
منابع

زارع، جواد، اسلامی-راسخ، عباس، و عزیزا... دباغی (زیر چاپ). ««این نکته‌ای که من می‌خوام اینجا دقت کنید»: برجسته کردن نکات مهم در ارائه‌های علمی فارسی». زبان پژوهی.

Ädel, A. (2010). Just to give you kind of a map of where we are going: a taxonomy of metadiscourse in spoken and written academic English. Nordic Journal of English Studies 9(2), 69–97.

Ädel, A. (2012). What I want you to remember is: Audience orientation in monologic academic discourse. English Text Construction 5(1), 101–127. doi:10.1075/etc.5.1. 06ade

Bednarek, M. (2006). Evaluation in media discourse. London: Continuum.

Biber, D. (2006). Stance in spoken and written university registers. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 5(2), 97–116. doi:10.1016/j.jeap.2006.05.001

Biber, D., Johansson, S., Leech, G., Conrad, S., & Finegan, E. (1999). Longman grammar of spoken and written English. London: Longman.

Biggs, J. (1997). Teaching across and within cultures: The issues of international students. In R. Murray-Harvey & H. C. Silins (Eds.), Learning and teaching in higher education: Advancing international perspectives (pp. 1–22). Proceedings of the Higher Education Research and Development Society of Australasia (HERDSA) Conference, Adelaide, South Australia.

Bilbow, G. (1989). Towards an understanding of overseas students’ difficulties in lectures: A phenomenographic approach. Journal of Further and Higher Education 13(3), 85–99. doi:10.1080/0309877890130308

Björkman, B. (2011). The pragmatics of English as a lingua franca in the international university: Introduction. Journal of Pragmatics, 43(4), 923–925. doi:10.1016/j. pragma.2010.08.015

Bondi, M. (2008). Emphatics in academic discourse: Integrating corpus and discourse tools in the study of cross-disciplinary variation. In A. Ädel & R. Reppen (Eds.), Corpora and discourse: The challenges of different settings (pp. 31–55). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

Buck, G. (1992). Listening comprehension: Construct validity and trait characteristics. Language Learning 42(3), 313–357. doi:10.1111/j.1467-1770.1992.tb01339.x

Burger, J. M., & Krueger, M. (2003). A balanced approach to high-stakes achievement testing: An analysis of the literature with policy implications. International Electronic Journal for Leadership in Learning, 7(4), 1–20.

Chaudron, C., & Richards, J. C. (1986). The effect of discourse markers on the comprehension of lectures. Applied Linguistics, 7(2), 113–127. doi:10.1093/applin/7.2.113

Cheng, S. W. (2012). “That’s it for today”: Academic lecture closings and the impact of class size. English for Specific Purposes 31(4), 234–248. doi:10.1016/j.esp.2012.05.004

Choi, M. (1997). Korean students in Australian universities: Intercultural issues. Higher Education Research and Development 16(3), 263–282. doi:10.1080/0729436970160302

Costin, F. (1972). Lecturing versus other methods of teaching: A review of research. British Journal of Educational Technology, 1(3), 4–31. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8535.1972.tb00570.x

Crawford Camiciottoli, B. (2004). Audience-oriented relevance markers in business studies lectures. In G. Del Lungo Camiciotti & E. Tognini Bonelli (Eds.), Academic discourse: Linguistic insights into evaluation (pp. 81–97). Bern: Peter Lang.

Crawford Camiciottoli, B. (2005). Adjusting a business lecture for an international audience: a case study. English for Specific Purposes 24(2), 183–199. doi:10.1016/j.esp.2004.05.002

Crawford Camiciottoli, B. (2007). The language of business studies lectures. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

Csomay, E. (2012). A corpus-based look at short turns in university classroom interaction. Corpus Linguistics and Linguistic Theory 8(1), 103–128. doi:10.1515/cllt-2012-0005

DeCarrico, J., & Nattinger, J. R. (1988). Lexical phrases for the comprehension of academic lectures. English for Specific Purposes, 7(2), 91–102. doi: 10.1016/0889-4906(88)90027-0

Deroey, K. L. B. (2014). 'Anyway, the point I'm making is’: Lexicogrammatical relevance marking in lectures. In V. Lieven, K. Davidse, C. Gentens & D. Kimps (Eds.), Recent advances in corpus linguistics: Developing and exploiting corpora (pp. 265–291). Amsterdam: Rodopi.

Deroey, K. L. B. (2015). Marking importance in lectures: Interactive and textual orientation. Applied Linguistics, 36(1), 51–72. doi:10.1093/applin/amt029

Deroey, K. L. B., & Taverniers, M. (2011). A corpus-based study of lecture functions. Moderna Språk, 105(2), 1–22.

Deroey, K. L. B., & Taverniers, M. (2012a). Just remember this: Lexicogrammatical relevance markers in lectures. English for Specific Purposes, 31(4), 221–233. doi:10.1016/j.esp.2012.05.001

Deroey, K. L. B., & Taverniers, M. (2012b). ‘Ignore that ‘cause it’s totally irrelevant’: Marking lesser relevance in lectures. Journal of Pragmatics, 44(14), 2085–2099. doi:10.1016/j.pragma.2012.10.001

Duguid, A. (2010). Newspaper discourse informalization. Corpora 5(2), 109–138.

Dunkin, M. J. (1983). A review of research on lecturing. Higher Education Research and Development, 2(1), 63–78. doi:10.1080/0729436830020105

Flowerdew, J. (1994). Research of relevance to second language lecture comprehension: An overview. In J. Flowerdew (Ed.), Academic listening: Research perspectives (pp. 7–29). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Flowerdew, J. (2003). Signalling nouns in discourse. English for Specific Purposes, 22(4), 329–346. doi:10.1016/S0889-4906(02)00017-0

Flowerdew, J., & Miller, L. (1992). Student perceptions, problems and strategies in second language lecture comprehension. RELC Journal, 23(2), 60–80. doi:10.1177/003368829202300205

Fortanet, I. (2004). The use of ‘we’ in university lectures: reference and function. English for Specific Purposes 23(1), 45–66. doi:10.1016/S0889-4906(03)00018-8

Giannoni, D. S. (2010). Mapping academic values in the disciplines: A corpus-based approach. Bern: Peter Lang.

Giannoni, D. S. (2011). Academic values in context. In R. M. Millar & M. Durham (Eds.), Applied linguistics, global and local (pp. 105–114). London: BAAL & Scitsiugnil Press.

Hanson, J. M., & Sinclair, K. E. (2008). Social constructivist teaching methods in Australian universities–reported uptake and perceived learning effects: A survey of lecturers. Higher Education Research & Development 27(3), 169–186. doi:10.1080/07294360802183754

Hunston, S. (1994). Evaluation and organization in a sample of written academic discourse. In M. Coulthard (Ed.), Advances in written text analysis (pp. 191–218). London: Routledge.

Hunston, S. (2004). Counting the uncountable: Problems of identifying evaluation in a text and in a corpus. In A. Partington, J. Morley & L. Haarman (Eds.), Corpora and discourse (pp. 157–188). Bern: Peter Lang.

Hyland, K. (2005). Metadiscourse: Exploring interaction in writing. London Continuum.

Hyland, K. (2009). Academic discourse: English in a global context. London: Continuum.

Isaacs, G. (1994). Lecturing practices and note-taking purposes. Studies in Higher Education 19(2), 203–216. doi:10.1080/03075079412331382047

Kiewra, K. A. (2002). How classroom teachers can help students learn and teach them how to learn. Theory into Practice, 41(2), 71–80. doi:10.1207/s15430421tip4102_3

Kilgarriff, A., Baisa, V., Bušta, J., Jakubíček, M., Kovář, V., Michelfeit, J., Rychlý, P., & Suchomel, V. (2014). The Sketch Engine: ten years on. Lexicography, 1(1), 7–36.

Lin, C. Y. (2010). '... that's actually sort of you know trying to get consultants in...': Functions and multifunctionality of modifiers in academic lectures. Journal of Pragmatics, 42(5), 1173–1183. doi:10.1016/j.pragma.2009.10.001

Lodico, M. G., Spaulding, D. T. & Voegtle, K. H. (2006). Methods in educational research from theory to practice. San Francisco, CA: John Wiley & Sons.

Lynch, T. (1994). Training lecturers for international audiences. In J. Flowerdew (Ed.), Academic listening: Research perspectives (pp.  269–289). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Marchi, A. (2010). ‘The moral in the story’: A diachronic investigation of lexicalized morality in the UK press. Corpora 5(2), 161–189.

McKeachie, W. J. (2002).  Teaching tips: Strategies, research, and theory for college and               university professors. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin.

Morell, T. (2004). Interactive lecture discourse for university EFL students. English for Specific      Purposes 23(3), 325–338. doi:10.1016/S0889-4906(03)00029-2

Nesi, H. (2001). A corpus-based analysis of academic lectures across disciplines. In J. Cotterill,       & A. Ife (Eds.), Language across boundaries. BAAL, Vol. 16 (pp. 201–218). London:             Continuum.

Nesi, H., & Basturkmen, H. (2006). Lexical bundles and discourse signaling in academic lectures. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics, 11(3), 283–304. doi:10.1075/ bct.17.03nes

Olsen, L. A., & Huckin, T. H. (1990). Point-driven understanding in engineering lecture comprehension. English for Specific Purposes, 9(1), 33–47. doi:10.1016/0889-4906(90)90027-A

Partington, A. (2014). The marking of importance in ‘Enlightentainment’ talks. In M. Gotti & D.    S. Giannoni (Eds), Corpus analysis for descriptive and pedagogical purposes (pp. 143–  166). Bern: Peter Lang.

Partington, A., Duguid, A., & Taylor, C. (2013). Patterns and meanings in discourse. Amsterdam: Benjamins.

Popham, W. J. (2001). Teaching to the test. Educational Leadership, 58(6), 16–20.

Ramsden, P. (1992). Learning to teach in higher education. London: Routledge.

Sacks, P. (2000). Predictable losers in testing schemes. School Administrator, 57(11), 6–9.

Siepmann, D. (2005). Discourse markers across languages: A contrastive study of second-level discourse markers in native and non-native text with implications for general and pedagogic lexicography. New York: Routledge.

Simpson, R. (2004). Stylistic features of academic speech: The role of formulaic expressions. In U. Connor & T. A. Upton (Eds.), Discourse in the professions: Perspectives from corpus linguistics (pp. 37–64). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

Sutherland, P., & Badger, R. (2004). Lecturers’ perceptions of lectures. Journal of Further and Higher Education, 28(3), 277–289. doi:10.1080/0309877042000241751

Suviniitty, J. (2010). Lecturers‖ questions and student perception of lecture comprehension. Helsinki English Studies 6, 44–57.

Swales, J. M. (2001). Metatalk in American academic talk the cases of point and thing. Journal of English Linguistics 29(1), 34–54. doi:10.1177/00754240122005189

Swales, J. M., & Burke, A. (2003). “It’s really fascinating work”: Differences in evaluative adjectives across academic registers. In P. Leistyna & C. F. Meyer (Eds.), Corpus analysis: Language structure and language use (pp. 1–18). Amsterdam: Rodopi.

Swales, J. & Feak, C. (1994). Academic writing for graduate students, Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.

Thompson, G., & Hunston, S. (2000). Evaluation: an introduction. In S. Hunston & G. Thompson (Eds.), Evaluation in text: Authorial stance and the construction of discourse (pp. 1–27). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Thompson, S. E. (2003). Text-structuring metadiscourse, intonation and the signaling of organization in academic lectures.  Journal of English for Academic Purposes 2(1), 5–20. doi:10.1016/S1475-1585(02)00036-X

Titsworth, B. S., & Kiewra, K. A. (2004). Spoken organizational lecture cues and student note taking as facilitators of student learning. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 29(4), 447–461. doi:10.1016/j.cedpsych.2003.12.001

Tognini-Bonelli, E. (2001). Corpus linguistics at work. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

Volante, L. (2004). Teaching to the test: What every educator and policy-maker should know. Canadian Journal of Educational Administration and Policy, 35, 1–6.

Wright, W. E. (2002). The effects of high stakes testing in an inner city elementary school: The curriculum, the teachers, and the English language learners. Current Issues in Education, 5(5), 1–23.

Young, L. (1994). University lectures: Macro-structure and micro-features. In J. Flowerdew (Ed.), Academic listening: Research perspectives (pp. 159–176). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Zare, J., & Tavakoli, M. (in press). The use of personal metadiscourse over monologic and dialogic modes of academic speech. Discourse Processes.