آمار
| تعداد نشریات | 7 |
| تعداد شمارهها | 102 |
| تعداد مقالات | 1,142 |
| تعداد مشاهده مقاله | 1,048,993 |
| تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله | 868,415 |
Facing the Challenge of Generic Hybridity in EAP Research and Pedagogy | ||
| Journal of Applied Linguistics and Applied Literature: Dynamics and Advances | ||
| مقاله 3، دوره 8، شماره 2، دی 2020، صفحه 23-37 اصل مقاله (753.75 K) | ||
| نوع مقاله: Review Article | ||
| شناسه دیجیتال (DOI): 10.22049/jalda.2020.26894.1187 | ||
| نویسنده | ||
| Davud Kuhi* | ||
| Assistant Professor of TEFL, Department of English, Faculty of Humanities, Islamic Azad University, Maragheh Branch, Maragheh, Iran | ||
| چکیده | ||
| Since its introduction to EAP theory in the 1980s, the concept of genre has proven to be a rigorous theoretical construct for a deeperunderstanding of the nature of academic discourse. However, the inherent potential of this concept as a means of classifying and categorizing academic texts has also given rise to what we have called “the misconception of homogeneity”. Criticizing this misconception and drawing on the concept of hybridity/heterogeneity of scientific/academic genres, the present paper explores some of the major implications of this view for EAP research and pedagogy. It is argued that the recognition of the concept of hybridity of academic genres would result in redefining the corpus design issues, focusing on genre networks instead of single genres, trying further possibilities of triangulation, redefining the criteria for the selection of formal/functional properties in analytic projects and development of thicker explanatory frameworks. The paper also looks at possibilities of operationalizing this concept within what is called “a hybridity-sensitive EAP pedagogy” and suggests intertextuality/interdiscursivity tracing tasks and discursive conversion tasks as means of raising EAP learners awareness. | ||
| کلیدواژهها | ||
| Genre؛ Hybridity؛ Academic Discourse؛ EAP Research؛ EAP Pedagogy | ||
| مراجع | ||
|
Baker, P., & Ellece, S. (2011). Key terms in discourse analysis. London & New York: Continuum.
Basturkmen, H. (2006). Ideas and options in English for specific purposes. Mahwah, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers.
Bazerman, C. (2012). Genre as a social action. In J. P. Gee & M. Handford (Eds.), The Routledge handbook of discourse analysis (pp. 226-238). London & New York: Routledge.
Bhatia, V. (2004). Worlds of written discourse. London: Continuum.
Bloor, M., & Bloor, T. (2007). The practice of critical discourse analysis: An introduction. London: Hodder Arnold.
Chang, Y., & Swales, J. (1999). Informal elements in English academic writing: Threats or opportunities for advanced non-native speakers? In C. Candlin & K.
Hyland (Eds.), Writing: texts, processes and practices (pp. 145-167). London: Longman.
Fleck, L. (1979). The genesis and development of a scientific fact. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Hyland, K. (1999). Academic attribution: Citation and the construction of disciplinary knowledge. Applied Linguistics, 20(3), 341-367.
Hyland, K. (2004). Genre and second language writing. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
Hyland, K. (2006). English for academic purposes: An advanced resource book. London: Routledge.
Hyland, K. (2016). Teaching and researching writing (3rd ed.). New York: Routledge.
Koester, A., & Handford, M. (2012). Spoken professional genres. In J. P. Gee & M. Handford (Eds.), The Routledge handbook of discourse analysis (pp. 252-268). London & New York: Routledge.
Kuhi, D. (2017a). Hybridity of scientific discourses: An intertextual perspective and implications for EAP pedagogy. The Journal of Applied Linguistics and Applied Literature, 5(2), 61-80.
Kuhi, D. (2017b). Towards the development of a socially-informed and processoriented model of research in metadiscourse. In C. Hatipoglu, E. Akbas & Y. Bayyurt (Eds.), Metadiscourse in written genres: Uncovering textual and interactional aspects of texts (pp. 23-56). Bern: Peterlang.
Kuhi, D., & Behnam, B. (2011). Generic variations and metadiscourse use in the writing of applied linguists: A comparative study and preliminary framework. Written Communication, 28(1), 97-141. Martin, J. R., & Rose, D. (2007). Working with discourse: Meaning beyond the clause (2nd edn). London: Continuum. Miller, C. R. (1984). Genre as social action. Quarterly Journal of Speech, 70(2), 151- 167.
Miller, C. R., & Bazerman, C. (2011). Gêneros textuais (Genres). Available at www.nigufpe.com.br/serie-bate-papoacademico-vol-1-generos-textuais Myers, G. (1992). Textbooks and sociology of scientific knowledge. English for specific Purposes, 11, 3-17.
Rezaei, S., Kuhi, D. & Saeidi, M. (2019). Cross-sectional diachronic corpus analysis of stance and engagement markers in three leading journals of applied linguistics. Journal of Modern Research in English Language Studies, 6(2), 1-25.
Swales, J. (1990). Genre analysis: English in academic and research settings. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Swales, J. (2004). Research genres. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Tardy, C. M. (2011). Genre analysis. In K. Hyland & B. Paltridge (Eds.), Continuum companion to discourse analysis (pp. 54-68). London & New York: Continuum.
Widdowson, H. G. (1990). Aspects of language teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Wong, A. T. Y. (2005). Writers mental representations of the intended audience and of the rhetorical purpose for writing and the strategies that they employed when they composed. System, 33, 29-47.
Yates, J., & Orlikowski, W. (1997). Genres of organizational communication: A structurational approach to studying communication and media. In C. G. A. Bryant & D. Jary (Eds.), Antony Giddens: Critical assessments (pp. 387-415). London: Routledge. | ||
|
آمار تعداد مشاهده مقاله: 312 تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله: 299 |
||