臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

本研究旨在探討中英文寫作架構之異同，以及這些架構的形成因素。參與本研究的三位大學生，在第一學期期末時，必須先寫下一篇英文作文。然後在寒假過後，再以相同的題目，寫下一篇中文作文。此外，在寫作進行時，他們必須同時說出頭腦裡所想的東西。為了對出聲思考這個資料收集的方式有所補強，在每次寫作完畢後，三位大學生皆需填寫一份問卷，以期能更瞭解他們整個寫作的過程。本研究亦包括與學生面對面的深入訪談，以藉此瞭解他們的英語學習背景，以及個人對寫作的概念。
此研究探討之問題共有以下四項：一、在中英文的寫作過程中，學生會投注多少注意力在文章組織架構上？二、學生在從事中英文寫作時，是否會使用不同的組織策略？三、以不同語言寫作，學生是否會使用相同的架構？而這種架構又會對文章品質產生什麼樣的影響？四、學生個人英文學習背景在他們寫作中扮演了什麼樣的角色？
研究結果顯示：一、在英文寫作時，學生會較注意文章組織架構，但較高的注意力並不代表得分就會較高。二、不管是中文寫作還是英文寫作，學生所使用的組織策略差異性並不明顯，只是在中文寫作時，所使用的策略較少。三、學生在寫中文及英文作文時，所使用的文章架構不盡相同。在英文寫作方面，組織架構較好時，文章的整體品質也會較好。四、學生對寫作能力的自信心，以及主動閱讀、寫作的習慣，皆是影響其英文寫作表現的重要因素。

This study aimed to investigate the text structures in the English and Chinese essays and to explore how and why these rhetorical patterns came into being. Three female juniors were first asked to write an English essay at the end of the first semester and, after an interval of a winter vacation, write again in Chinese on the same persuasive topic. In addition, while completing the two writing tasks, they had to verbalize their thoughts. Also, to supplement the think-aloud protocols, they had to fill out a questionnaire about their writing processes once they finished the writing assignments. Moreover, interviews were conducted to reveal more information about their personal backgrounds and opinions towards writing.
Five research questions were designed to guide this thesis research: (1) What is the relative attention the three advanced L2 student writers enrolled in the advanced level writing course at National Tsing Hua University pay to organization when they are composing English and Chinese persuasive writings? (2) Do the student writers differ with regards to their organization strategies when composing in the two languages? (3) When students write persuasive essays, can we find similar or dissimilar rhetorical patterns in individual students* Chinese and English writings? If we can, how do these patterns affect the quality of each student*s writing? (4) What are the roles that past L2 instructional and personal writing backgrounds play in the student writer*s L2 writing products?
The findings specific to the research questions were: (1) The attention level on the dimension of organization was higher in the English writing task. However, a higher amount of attention in the writing process did not guarantee a higher score in the written product. (2) The organization strategies employed by individual writers were similar across languages but fewer in the Chinese writing task. (3) All three participants employed rhetorical patterns that were different to some extent in their English and Chinese essays. There was a clear relationship between the organization score and the holistic score in English essays. (4) The confidence in writing essays, the frequency of self-initiated reading and writing experience were important factors that affected effective writing.

Page
CHAPTER
1. INTRODUCTION 1
1.1 Background 1
1.2 Purpose of the Study 3
1.3 Research Questions 4
1.4 Scope of the Study 4
1.5 Definitions of Terms 5
1.6 Organization of the Thesis 6
2. LITERATURE REVIEW 7
2.1 Previous Studies on Rhetorical Patterns of Chinese and English 7
2.2 Factors Influencing L2 Writing Performance 10
2.2.1 The Connection between Culture and Writing 10
2.2.2 The Connection between Other Factors and Writing 12
2.3 Comparison between L1 and L2 Writing Processes 15
2.4 Strengths and Limitations of the Think-aloud Method 19
2.5 Conclusion 21
3. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY 23
3.1 Case Study Research 23
3.2 Participants 26
3.3 Data Collection 29
3.3.1 Collecting Writing Samples 29
3.3.2 Collecting Think-aloud Protocols 30
3.3.3 Collecting Questionnaire Data 31
3.3.4 Collecting Interview Data 32
3.4 Data Analysis 34
3.4.1 Analyzing Writing Samples 34
3.4.2 Analyzing Think-aloud Protocols 35
3.4.3 Analyzing Questionnaires 35
3.4.4 Analyzing Interviews 36
3.5 Evaluation of Essays 36
3.6 Conclusion 37
4. RESULTS 38
4.1 The First Research Question 38
4.1.1 Categorization and Illustration of Different Attention Types 39
4.1.2 Each Individual*s Attention to Organization
in Two Writing Tasks 43
4.1.3 Self-evaluated Attention Levels in Two Writing Tasks 45
4.2 The Second Research Question 46
4.3 The Third Research Question 47
4.3.1 Jasmine*s Essays 49
4.3.2 Stella*s Essays 50
4.3.3 Rebecca*s Essays 51
4.4 The Fourth Research Question 52
4.4.1 Data from the Short Interview after the English Writing Task 52
4.4.2 Data from the Short Interview after the Chinese Writing Task 54
4.4.3 Data from the Long Interview 56
4.5 Conclusion 65
5. SUMMARY 68
5.1 Review and Discussion of the Results 69
5.1.1 The First Research Question 69
5.1.2 The Second Research Question 71
5.1.3 The Third Research Question 73
5.1.4 The Fourth Research Question 76
5.2 Limitations of the Study and Recommendations for Future Research 79
REFERENCES 82
APPENDICES 87
A. Personal Background Survey 87
B. The Question Lists of the Two Short Interviews 88
C. The Question List of the Long Interview 89
D. Essays Written by the Three Students 90

Ardnt, V. (1987). Six writers in search of texts: A protocol-based study of L1 and L2 writing.
ELT Journal, 41(4), 257-267.
Bosher, S. (1998). The composing processes of three Southeast Asian writers at the post-
secondary level: An exploratory study. Journal of Second Language Writing, 7(2), 205-241.
Brown, D. H. (1994). Teaching by principles: An interactive approach to language
pedagogy. NJ: Prentice Hall.
Carson, J. E., Carrell, P. L, Silberstein, S., Kroll, B., & Kuehn, P. (1990). Reading-writing
relationships in first and second language. TESOL Quarterly, 24(2), 245-266.
Chou, H. L. (1989). Contrastive rhetoric: Chinese and English. Papers from the Sixth
Conference on English Teaching and Learning in the Republic of China, 251-267.
Cohen, A. D., & Hosenfeld, C. (1981). Some uses of mentalistic data in second language
research. Language Learning, 31(2), 285-313.
Fagan, E. R., & Cheong, P. (1987). Contrastive rhetoric: Pedagogical implication for the
ESL eacher in Singapore. RELC Journal, 18(1), 19-31.
Faigley, L. and Witte, S. (1981). Analyzing revision. College Composition and
Communication, 32(4), 211-228.
Ferris, D. R. (1994). Rhetorical strategies in student persuasive writing: differences between
native and non-native speakers. Research in the Teaching of English, 28(1), 45-64.
Freidlander, A. (1990). Composing in English: Effects of a first language on writing in
English as a second language. In B. Kroll (Eds.), Second language writing: Research
insights for the classroom (pp. 109-125). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Grabe, W., & Kaplan, R.B. (1989). Writing in a second language: Contrastive rhetoric. In D.
M. Johnson & D. H. Roen (Eds.), Richness in writing: Empowering ESL students (pp.
253-262). New York: Longman.
Gungle, B. W. & Taylor, V. (1989). Writing apprehension and second language writers. In D.
M. Johnson & D. H. Roen (Eds.), Richness in writing: Empowering ESL students (pp.
263-283). New York: Longman.
Hayes, J. R. & Flower, L. S. (1980). Identifying the organization of writing processes. In L.
W. Gregg &E. R. Steinberg (Eds.), Cognitive process in writing (pp. 3-30). Hillsdale,
NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Hirose, K., & Sasaki, M. (1994). Explanatory variables for Japanese students* expository
writing in English: an Exploratory study. Journal of Second Language Writing, 3 (3),
203-229.
Hinds, J. (1990). Inductive, deductive, quasi-inductive: Expository writing in Japanese,
Korean, Chinese, and Thai. In U, Connor & A.M. Johns (Eds.), Coherence in writing:
Research and pedagogical perspectives (pp. 87-109). Alexandria, VA:TESOL
Kaplan, R. B. (1966). Cultural thought patterns in intercultural education. Language
Learning, 16(1), 1-20.
Kobayashi, H. (1984). Rhetorical patterns in English and Japanese. TESOL Quarterly, 18(4),
737-734.
Kobayashi, H., & Rinnert, C. (1992). Effects of first language on second language writing:
Translation versus direct composition. Language Learning, 42(2), 183-215.
Kobayashi, H., & Rinnert, C. (1996). Factors affecting composition evaluation in an EFL
context: Cultural rhetorical pattern and readers* background. Language learning, 46(3),
397-437.
Krapels, A. R. (1990). An overview of second language writing process research. In B. Kroll
(Eds.), Second language writing: Research insights for the classroom (pp. 37-56).
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Kubota, R. (1998). An investigation of L1-L2 transfer in writing among Japanese university
students: implications for contrastive rhetoric. Journal of Second Language Writing,
7(1), 69-100.
Lay, N. (1982). Composing processes of adult ESL learners. TESOL Quarterly, 16(3), 406.
Leki, I. (1991). Twenty-five years of contrastive rhetoric: Text analysis and writing
pedagogies. TESOL Quarterly. 25(1), 123-143.
Lin, C. Y. (1986). A second thought on Robert Kaplan*s theory of Chinese thought pattern.
Papers from the Third Conference on English Teaching and Learning in the Republic of China, 187-196.
Liu, C. K. (1996). Research on English composition. Taipei: The Crane Publishing Co., Ltd.
Matalene, C. (1985). Contrastive rhetoric: an American writing teacher in China. College
English, 47(8), 789-808.
Matsumoto, K. (1993). Verbal-report data and introspective methods in second language
research: State of the art. RELC Journal, 24(1), 32-61.
Matsumoto, K. (1995). Research paper writing strategies of professional Japanese EFL
writers. TESL Canada Journal, 13(1), 17-27.
McKay, S. L. (1989). Topic development and written discourse accent. In D. M. Johnson &
D. H. Roen (Eds.), Richness in writing: Empowering ESL students (pp. 253-262). New
York: Longman.
Merriam, S. B. (1988). Case study research in education. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass
Publishers.
Mohan, B.A., & Lo, W. A-Y. (1985). Academic writing and Chinese students: transfer and
developmental factors. TESOL Quarterly, 19(3), 515-534.
Norment, N. (1986). Organizational structures of Chinese subjects writing in Chinese and in
ESL. Journal of the Chinese language teachers association, 21(3), 49-72.
Nunan, D. (1992). Research methods in language learning. New York: Cambridge
University Press.
Olster, S. E. (1987). English in parallels: A comparison of English and Arabic prose. In U.
Connor & R. B. Kaplan (Eds.), Writing across languages: Analysis of L2 texts (pp. 169-
200). Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
Pennington, M., & So, S. (1993). Comparing writing process and product across two
languages: A study of 6 Singaporean university student writers. Journal of second
language writing, 2(1), 41-63.
Raimes, A. (1985). What unskilled ESL students do as they write: A classroom study of
composing. TESOL Quarterly, 19(2), 229-258.
Raimes, A. (1987). Language proficiency, writing ability, and composing strategies: A study
of ESL college student writers. Language Learning, 37(3), 439-467.
Richards, J. C. (1990). The Language Teaching Matrix. New York: Cambridge University
Press.
Richards, J.C., Platt, J., & Platt, H. (1992). Dictionary of Language Teaching & Applied
Linguistics (2nd ed.). Harlow: Longman.
Silva, T. (1993). Toward an understanding of the distinct nature of L2 writing: The ESL
research and its implications. TESOL Quarterly, 27(4), 657-677.
Tsao, F. F. (1983). Linguistics and written discourse in particular languages: contrastive
studies: English and Chinese (Mandarin). In R. Kaplan. (Ed.), Annual review of applied
linguistics (pp. 99-117). Rowley, Ma: Newbury House Publishers, Inc.
Uzawa, K. (1996). Second language learners* processes of L1 writing, L2 writing, and
translation from L1 into L2. Journal of Second Language Writing, 5(3), 271-294.
Uzawa, K., & Cumming, A. (1989). Writing strategies in Japanese as a foreign language:
Lowering or keeping up the standards. The Canadian Modern Language Review, 46(1),
178-194.
Wu, Y. H. (1986). Contrastive analysis of Chinese and English writings. Papers from the
Third Conference on English Teaching and Learning in the Republic of China, 75-85.
(In Chinese)
Zamel, V. (1983). The composing process of advanced ESL students: Six case studies.
TESOL Quarterly, 17(2), 165-187.