1、Entering an Academic Conversationn9.1 Entering an academic conversationn9.2 What“they say”:The literature reviewn9.3 What“I say”:Raising and addressing a questionn9.4 Identifying the structural“moves”in a scholarly introductionn9.5 Writing activities,prompts,and peer reviewn9.6 Reference materials9.
2、1 Entering an academic conversationn Lets do another thought experiment:n Directions：Imagine that you are holding your annotated bibliography in one hand and copies of all of the research studies that you have just read in the other hand.Now imagine something very mysterious:All of these papers turn
3、 into peopleyour first research article turns into the person who wrote it,your second research article turns into the person who wrote it,and so on.The room now has nine or ten people in it,maybe more,and they are all talking about your research topic,some louder than others.Imagine that you are in
4、 the room,listening to them.n In this conversation,there are so many people varying in ages and research fields:Although most of the people discussing your topic are not so old,perhaps there are some very old people,including Socrates and Confucius,sitting over against the other wall.SocratesConfuci
5、usM.A.K.HallidaynIf you are doing a study in applied linguistics,imagine that some of the most famous linguists of all time are sitting in the room,possibly including Noam Chomsky.nIf you are doing a study in the teaching of English as a foreign language,imagine that some of the most famous scholars
6、 about TEFL(e.g.Rod Ellis,Stephen D.Krashen)are sitting nearby,talking.Noam ChomskyRod EllisStephen D.KrashennWhoever is in the room is or was talking about your research topic.Some have already spoken;others are talking,possibly arguing,right now.nNow,you take a deep breath.nYou are no longer just
7、sitting on the sidelines,just listening to what other great thinkers have said about your research topic.nListening,of course,is important,and it is a good thing that you are,most likely,an accomplished listener.But you are getting ready to step into the“conversation”and say something new about the
8、topic.nMost likely you will not completely disagree with the people who have spoken most recently,but you may have a question that they have not considered.You may have another angle for examining their subject.nYou might say“Yes,but.”and go on to point out something previously understated in the co
9、nversation.You might say,“Yes,and in addition”and extend their line of thinking with new examples.First,you will raise a question and enter the conversation,then you will say more,adding what you are thinking or what you have discovered.nYour discovery process can be compared to such a conversation.
10、nThe idea that discovery is grounded in dialogue is millennia old,although the “conversational metaphor”just described gained new currency with the theories of Kenneth Burke,Mikhail Bakhtin,and Wayne Booth,among others in the twentieth century.Gerald Graff,Cathy Birkenstein,and Russel Durst further
11、popularized the metaphor with the title phrase of their writing book entitled They Say,I Say.9.2 What“they say”:The literature reviewn What is literature review?n Most research papers draw us in with some reason to care about the topic,some reason to think the topic is significant and worth explorin
12、g.Then they summarize what we already know about the topicthat is,they summarize what the best scholars have already said about the topic.This summary of old information is called a“literature review.”In this context,“literature”means“information about the subject”;it does not mean stories or fictio
13、n.nThe position of literature review:Sometimes the“literature review”is part of the introduction.Sometimes the“literature review”is a separate section that comes after the introduction.Either way,the literature review tells us what other experts say;it tells us what“they say”about the topic.Literatu
14、re reviews will be discussed in more detail in Chapter Three.9.3 What“I say”:Raising and addressing a questionnListening:Again,discovery begins with intensive“listening”to what“they say”since very little research occurs in a vacuum of other knowledge.nReading:It is important to read widely and deepl
15、y and know what the best scholars have said about a particular subject.Eventually,you will observe some conflicting perspectives or different methodologies or possibly new ways to apply an old idea.You will then ask a question or find a problem or gap in what has already been said.When youre ready,y
16、ou will“enter the conversation”with what you have to say,some original research.That is the“I say.”How do you make“I say”?You may not be ready to“enter the conversation”with more than a question right now,but you will be later.In the meantime,you can observe how other people have“entered the convers
17、ation,”something you can see every time you read an introduction to a research paper.These introductions have a“they say,I say”pattern,and later you will structure the introduction to your research paper in a similar way.The Swales model(the CARS model)nWe can observe the“conversation”in introductor
18、y paragraphs from a linguistic perspective.Linguist John Swales developed an empirically-based model of the“moves”that you will find in the research introductions that you are reading now.These“moves”parallel the turns in the“conversational metaphor.”An explosion of research in applied linguistics,g
19、enre studies,and English for Academic Purposes has since established the relevance and usefulness of Swales model(called CARS for Create a Research Space).Establish a research territoryEstablish a nicheOccupy the nicheMove 1Move 2Move 39.4 Identifying the structural“moves”in a scholarly introduction
20、n Simply put,as Swales observed,the introductions to most research articles can be understood as making three“moves”:Move 1 Establishing a territory(with parallels to listening or “they say”in the conversational metaphor).Here the writer might point out the importance of the general subject,make gen
21、eralizations about the subject,or review items of previous research.Move 2 Establishing a niche.Here the writer finds a gap,makes a counter-claim,raises a question,or extends a previous line of thinking.Move 3 Occupying the niche.Here the writer typically tells us the purpose or significance of the
22、research,the main finding or conclusion or thesis,and a skeletal outline of what will follow.We can identify these three“moves”in most of the research mentioned so far about both Task-Based-Learning and Kate Chopins stories,and you should be able to identify them in the articles that you are reading
23、 for your own project.Eventually,you will make similar“moves”when writing your thesis.n Following is a more detailed list of the moves and sub-moves in the CARS model:n Move 1 Establish a research territory a.Explain the extent to which it is important,central,interesting,problematic or relevant b.P
24、rovide background information about the area c.Introduce(and review)aspects of previous research in the area d.Define terms and constructsn Move 2 Establish a niche a.Indicate gap in previous research b.Raise a question about previous research c.Identify a problem or need d.Extend previous knowledge
25、n Move 3 Occupy the niche a.Outline the purpose,aim,or objectives of the present study b.Specify research questions/hypotheses investigated c.Outline the theoretical perspectives d.Describe the methodology and design of the research e.Indicate the scope and delimitations of research f.Explain the co
26、ntribution/value of research to the field g.Outline the chapter organization of thesis9.5.1 In-class exercise:Framing attributions(quotations)and positionsn Writers of English often use special phrases to frame attributions and positions of agreement and disagreement.Below are just a few of many way
27、s to frame such passages.9.5 Writing activities,prompts,and peer reviewnAttribution:Author X(2010)argues that.Author X(1999)states that.As the renowned critic X(1965)says.According to Author X(2011),.In her book,Author X(2002)maintains that,“.”In Author Xs view(2013),.As Author X(1955)and Author Y(1
28、959)were the first to point out,.nWays to frame disagreement and agreement:Author X(2010)oversimplifies.Although X(2005)acknowledges.she does not consider.Author Xs claim(2013)is too.because.By emphasizing.,Author X(2003)overlooks.Author(1995)rightly notes that.,but ignores.Read the passage below ab
29、out Mary Shelleys book Frankenstein.Fill the blanks in with the appropriate missing passages.Notice how the critic,Harold Bloom,frames other critics views and his own position.(on page 89.)9.5.2 In-class genre analysis of the structural moves in an introductionOur in-class writing is based on the in
30、troduction to a research article,ideally one of your own sources.Please practice writing a short structural analysis of the“moves”that you observe in the introduction.nWhy will you need to do this?One,this exercise helps train you as a critical reader of the research you are reading.You will have a
31、sharper eye and notice more about the way other researchers use these structural“moves.”Two,this exercise will prepare you for the academic writing that you will be doing later on.For this short genre analysis,what will you do?Youll essentially fill in the blanks of the template shown in Figure 9-1o
32、n page 173.n To see examples of other research and genre analyses of it,first read the introductions in Figures 9-2,9-3,and 9-4.n Each introduction includes the three“moves”Move 1 Establishing a research territory by identifying others who have talked about the issue.Move 2 Finding a gap or niche.Mo
33、ve 3 Occupying the niche by saying how the new research will answer the question.In short,each introduction presents both“they say”and“I say”parts.After reading the introductions in Figures 9-2,9-4,and 9-4,you can trace the genre analyses of two of them in Figures 9-5 and 9-6.Then you can try it,usi
34、ng the template in Figure 34 to analyze a research introduction,ideally one of the introductions that you have read for your own research.9.5.3 Peer reviewn Why we need to do peer review in academic writingThe“conversational metaphor”just discussed loosely applies to peer review.Of course,peer revie
35、w can be a useful classroom activity,but it also is a very important part of doing research.Scholars quite literally talk with each other,even argue with each other,and peer review is one important forum for that“conversation.”Before any manuscript is accepted for publication,it is“peer reviewed.”To
36、day peer review sets the“gold standard”that distinguishes what is accepted as knowledge or valuable scholarship from mere opinion and hearsay.Nothing is accepted as“knowledge”in academia that has not been accepted first by peer review.When scholars discuss drafts of their academic writing,peer revie
37、wers help them clarify their ideas,which in turn helps improve both the content of the research and the expression of it.Ideally,the peer review of your genre analyses and annotated bibliography will be conducted with a writing group in order to give group members a chance to discuss your emerging r
38、esearch ideas.In your notebook,you can write“Peer Review”and the date and then take notes when your peers offer comments.Each student should do the following:Read your genre analysis.Discuss your annotated bibliography with your classmates.a.Read just one of your annotations from your annotated bibl
39、iography.b.What kind of sources are you finding?What journals and databases are you using?c.What problems are you finding?d.What do you think your research question is now?Should it be focused or revised in some way?Again,take notes.Indicate any advice that classmates offered.9.5.4 Recommended out-o
40、f-class assignmentn Please read sections 9.1,9.2,and 9.3 and add three more entries to your existing annotated bibliography.n Then,most importantly,it is recommend that you select fifteen quotations,chosen from at least four different sources.Perhaps half of them will be from one source,but then mak
41、e sure the other half are selected from at least three other sources.For each of the fifteen selections,first write the quotation,and then write a good paraphrase of it.You could construct this as a dialectical journal,but the right hand column would be limited to paraphrase.Ideally,your quotations
42、will be from the results or discussion sections of the articles you are reading,not just from the abstracts and introductions.The more thoroughly you are reading and digesting your articles,the better.9.6.1 Sample research introduction from quantitative researchnFigure 9-2(on pages 175-176)presents
43、Nana Okura Gagnes introduction to her study of politeness making use of both quantitative and qualitative methods.nThis study,called“Reexamining the notion of negative face in the Japanese Socio linguistic politeness of request,”also makes use of the three“moves”discussed earlier.9.6 Reference mater
44、ialsnLet us do some analysis of the sample research introduction:nHer three moves:nMove 1:To establish the research territory by identifying the key scholars who have engaged in a debate about linguistic politeness,beginning with Brown and Levinson in their 1987 study.She cites many other scholars.T
45、his part presents the“they say”of her introduction.nMove 2:Finding a research niche.There is a problem because Brown and Levinson claimed they came up with some“universal”principles about politeness.Many scholars question whether Brown and Levinsons principle really is universal.Gagne takes as her p
46、roblem finding a way to reconcile the polarized reactions to Brown and Levinsons study.nMove 3:To occupy the niche or find a way to address the problem,which she aims to do with both quantitative and qualitative methods.nShe makes the third move with language like this:“Rather than dismiss previous
47、insights on politeness theory as outdated or categorically false,it would be more productive to continue testing their applicability within different social milieus.”n Her language use:n She continues,with each of the next two sentences getting more specific about how she plans to apply Brown and Le
48、vinsons work to new social milieus.Even if her language is too technical to understand,you can recognize her third move,her intent to apply the old theory in a new way.“us,building on previous insights and supplementing qualitative interviews with quantitative pragmatic research among Japanese speak
49、ing and English speaking respondents (conducted in 2001 and 2002),this paper revisits the theory of politeness as an analytical tool to examine the pragmatics of linguistic politeness,particularly the concept of negative face.Specifically,I explore the metapragmatic self-explanations and the local p
50、henomenology of politeness,examining the ways in which the members of the speech community actualize and reflexively justify the idea of politeness.”9.6.2 Sample research introduction from qualitative researchnFigure 9-3(on page 177)presents the first paragraph of Andrea Reveszs introduction to a st
