CHAPTER VI CONCLUSION
6.4 Suggestions for Further Research
國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
69
the raters can be more appropriate for the study. Furthermore, the narratives of native English speakers should be evaluated by the rater to confirm that these narratives are the high grades narratives. There may be different recognitions between a good narrative for native English speakers and a high grades narrative for Taiwanese college entrance exams. The differences may affect the availability of the linguistic features of the narrative for the pedagogical use.
6.4 Suggestions for Further Research
For the further research on a similar topic, the suggestions are to improve the limitations of the present study. First, the narratives collected for the study should have a similar form because the same form of the narrative can help to generate more convincing results. Second, the students' narratives should be chosen among students with narrative ability to ensure the credibility of the results. Third, the choice of the rater should be appropriate. The rater in real college entrance exams is the professor, and each student’s narrative is graded by two professors at least. Therefore, we suggest the rater of the further research should be two or more professors, and the grades of the narratives of the study can be more accurate. Finally, in this study, seven linguistic features of the narrative were formulated. Linguistic features of the
narrative offer the students a basic construction of the English narrative and help them
‧ 國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
70
distinguish the narrative and the descriptive. In addition to the narrative, expository is also a common type of the writing for college entrance exams. Therefore, further research can inquire the linguistic features of expository essays.
‧ 國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
71
REFERENCES
Akyel, A. (1994). First language use in EFL writing: Planning in Turkish vs. Planning in English. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 4, 169-196.
Baack, E. (1997). Portfolio development: An introduction. English Teaching Forum, 35(2), 38-43.
Biber, D. (1988). Linguistic features: algorithms and functions in Variation across speech and writing. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Brill, E. (1992). A Simple Rule-based Part of Speech Tagger. In Proceedings of the Workshop on Speech and Natural Language, 112-116. Morristown, NJ:
Association for Computational Linguistics.
Brooks, E. (1985). Case studies of ‘unskilled’ ESL college writers: A hypothesis
about stages of development. ERIC Document, 289-340.
Byrne, D. (1988). Teaching writing skills. London, New York: Longman.
Carson, J. E., Carrell, P. L., Silberstein, S., Kroll, B., & Kuehn, P. A. (1990).
Reading-writing relationships in first and second language. TESOL Quarterly, 24,245-266.
Chanthalone, Smith. (2011). Narrative writing in native English and ESL learners:
developmental trajectories and predictors. Published doctoral dissertation.
‧ 國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
72
University of Toronto, Canada.
Chao, Kwei-hsiang. (2002). Thematic progression in the argumentative essays of EFL
senior high school students. MA thesis. National Chengchi University, Taipei.
Chen, D.W. (1998). Understanding the two sources of EFL writing performance as the means to improve EFL writing instruction. Proceedings of the seventh
international symposium on English teaching. Taipei: Crane, 197-207.
Chen, M. (2005). Differential effects of “Product Approach” and “Process Approach”
on Chinese EFL learners of different writing abilities. Foreign Language
Teachingand Research, 6, 460-464.
Clachar, A. (1999). It’s not just cognition: The effect of emotion on multiple-level
discourse processing in second-language writing. Language Science, 21, 31-60.
College Entrance Examination Center (CEEC) web page.http://www.ceec.edu.tw/
Coltheart, M. (1981). The MRC Psycholinguistic Database Quarterly. Journal of
Experimental Psychology, 33A:497-505.
Connor, U.,& Asenavage, K. (1994). Peer response groups in ESL writing classes:
How much impact on revision? Journal of Second Language Writing, 3, 257-276.
Crossley, S.A., Greenfield, J. and McNamara, D.S. (2008). ‘Assessing text readability using cognitively based indices’, TESOL Quarterly, Vol. 42, pp.475–493.
‧ 國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
73
Daneš, F. (1974). Functional sentence perspective and the organization of the text. In
F. Danes (Ed.), Papers on functional sentence perspective (pp. 106-128). Prague:
Publishing House of the Czechoslovak Academy of Sciences.
Feng, H.P. (2001). Writing an academic paper in English: an exploratory study of six Taiwanese graduate students. Unpublished Dissertation. New York: Columbia University.
Grabe, W., & Kaplan, R. (1989). Writing a second language: Contrastive rhetoric. In D. Johnson, & D. Roen (Eds.), Richness in Writing: Empowering ESL Students (pp. 263-283). New York: Longman.
Grant, L., &Ginther, A. (2000). Using computer-tagged linguistic features to describe L2 writing differences. Journal of Second Language Writing, 9(2), 123-145.
Halliday, M. A. K., & Matthiessen, C. M. I. M. (2004). An introduction to functional grammar (3rd edition). London: Arnold.
Han, J. L. (2001). English language teaching: Process-genre approach. Foreign
Language World, 4, 35-40.
Hinkel, E. (2002). Second Language Writers’ Text: Linguistic and Rhetorical
Features. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Jurafsky, D. and Martin, J.H. (2008) Speech and Language Processing: An
Introduction to Natural Language Processing, Computational Linguistics, and
‧ 國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
74
Speech Recognition, Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ.
Jenna Blum. ( 2013) The Modern Scholar published by Recorded Books, The Author
at : The Art of Writing Fiction, Disk 1, Tracks 14-15.
Kaplan, R. B. (1966). Cultural thought patterns in intercultural education. Language
Learning, 16(1), 1-20.
Kaplan, R. B. (2000). Response to “on the future of second language writing”. Journal
of Second Language Writing, 9(3), 311-320.
Kaplan, R. B. (2001). ‘Cultural thought patterns in inter-cultural education.’ In P. K.
Matsuda & T. Silva (eds), Landmark Essays on ESL Writing. New Jersey:
Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, pp. 11–26.
Kaplan, R. B., & Grabe, W. (2002).A modern history of written discourse analysis.
Journal of Second Language Writing, 11(3), 191-223.
Keh, C. L. (1990). Feedback in the writing process: A model and methods for implementation. ELT Journal, 44, 294-304.
Kiany, G. R., &Nejad, Khezri M. (2001). On the relationship between English proficiency, writing ability, and the use of conjunctions in Iranian EFL learners’
compositions. ITL Review of Applied Linguistics, 133/134, 227–241.
Klare, G.R. (1974–1975). Assessing Readability. Reading Research Quarterly, 10:
62-102.
‧ 國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
75
Kobayashi, H. & Rinnert, C. (1992). Effects of first language on second language writing: Translation versus direct composition. Language Learning, 42, 183-215.
Lannon, J.M. (1989). The writing process (3rd ed.). Glenview, IL: Scott, Foresman and Company.
Li, X. M. (1996). ‘Good Writing’ in Cross-Cultural Context. Albany: State University of New York Press.
Lynn M. Berk. (1999). English Syntax.
Ma, G. H., & Wen, Q. F. (1999). Factors affecting English writing of Chinese university students. Foreign Language Teaching and Research, 4, 34-39.
Mangelsdorf, K. (1992). Peer reviews in the ESL composition classroom: What do the students think? ELT Journal, 46, 274-284.
Matalane, C. (1985). Contrastive rhetoric: An American writing teacher in China, College English, 47(8), 789–808.
Mendonca, C. O., & Johnson, K. E. (1994). Peer review negotiations: revision activities in ESL writing instruction. TESOL Quarterly, 28, 745-769.
Miller, G.A. (1990). WordNet: An On-line Lexical Database. International Journal of Lexicography, 3:235-312.
Mohan, B., & Lo, W. (1985). Academic writing and Chinese students: Transfer and developmental factors. TESOL Quarterly. 19(3), 515-534.
‧ 國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
76
Raimes, A. (1987). Language proficiency, writing ability, and composing strategies: a study of ESL college student writers. Language Learning, 37, 439-467.
Regina L. Smalley, Mary K. Ruetten, Joann Rishel Kozyrev. ( 2010). Refining Composition Skills.
Sasaki, M. (2000). Toward an Empirical Model of EFL Writing Processes: An exploratory study. Journal of Second Language Writing, 9(3), 259-291.
Sekine, S. and Grishman, R. (1995). A Corpus-based Probabilistic Grammar with Only Two Nonterminals. In Proceedings of the Fourth International Workshop on Parsing Technology, 216-223. Prague, the Czech Republic: ACL/SIGPARSE.
Tsai, Meng-feng. (2009). The effects of using pictures as prompts on English writing
performance of high and Low achievers in senior high school. MA thesis.
National Chengchi University, Taipei.
Tsai, Tsi-chuen. (2011). A study on theme types in Taiwanese senior high school
students' narratives. MA thesis. National Chengchi University, Taipei.
Landauer, T., McNamara, D.S., Dennis, S. and Kintsch, W. (Eds.) (2007). Handbook
of Latent Semantic Analysis, Erlbaum, Mahwah, NJ.
Liu ,Ying-hsiu. (2008). A Discourse Analysis of Adverbial Participle Clauses in
Taiwanese Senior High Students' Writing. MA thesis. National Taiwan Normal
University, Taipei.
‧ 國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
77
Wilson, M.D. (1988). ‘The MRC psycholinguistic database: machine readable dictionary, version 2’, Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, and Computers, Vol. 20, pp.6–11.
Yu, Jia-wen. (2010). The use of English adverbial clauses in Taiwanese senior high
school students’ writing. MA thesis. National Chengchi University, Taipei.
Zamel, V. (1983). The composing process of advanced ESL students: six case studies.
TESOL Quarterly, 17, 165-187.
Zhang, J. S., & Zhou, P. (2002). A comparative study of process and product
approach in English writing teaching. Foreign Languages and Their Teaching, 9, 19-22.
Zhang, J. (2008). A comprehensive review of studies on second language writing.
HKBU Papers in Applied Language Studies Vol. 12, 89-123.
‧ 國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
78
APPENDIX A
說明：1. 依提示在「答案卷」上寫一篇英文作文 2. 文長至少 120 各單詞 (words)
提示：請仔細觀察以下三幅連環圖片的內容，並想像第四幅圖片可能的發展，
並寫出一個涵蓋連環圖片內容並有完整結局的故事。
‧ 國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
79
APPENDIX B
Topic Version Number of Words
No Hair Day San Min Book 679
The Chain of Love San Min Book 611
Gulliver's Travels:
A Voyage of Lilliput
San Min Book 793
Gifts of Love The Far East Book 497
The Bicycle The Far East Book 510
‧ 國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
80
APPENDIX C
Topic Version Number of Words
My American Journey Refining Composition Skills 290
The Best Part Refining Composition Skills 323 The struggle to be an
All-American Girl
Refining Composition Skills 805
Mardi Gras Madness Refining Composition Skills 255
One Summer Day Refining Composition Skills 287
‧ 國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
81
APPENDIX D
College Entrance Examination Center (CEEC)