The English Language Past,Present, Future 11.
Question:
The following is the introductory section of an article in
the European research journal, learning and Instruction.
Written language like spoken language achieves communicative
and conceptual goals by using a complex system of arbitrary
symbols and conventional rules…. Writing however is a visible
language, a graphic symbolic system whose roots we suggest
lie in pictographic representation before links are
established with spoken language.
In this respect, development reflects evolution in that all
writing systems which represent sounds of language evolved
from pictorial representations rather than from spoken
language. In literate societies, a developed writing system is
pervasive in children’s environment and it is likely that each
individual child constructs or re-invents, their own approach
to writing from whatever salient experiences the environment
offers which they can utilize at different levels of
development.
Analyze the linguistic features in the above extract and say
why it is typical of academic discourse. Using this extract as
a starting point, discuss the nature and function of academic
English in general.
English academic language has replaced Latin as an
international academic communication, and research
journals previously published in German are now
governed by the English language. Researchers,
academics, and teaching activities have increased
significantly through-out the world. Academic English,
a medium for higher education communication now dominates
and it is shaped by social conventions and functional
requisite of academic discourse. English academic writings
are decisively scrutinized and pressured to conform to the
accepted conventions of the ‘inner circle’. Such conventions
are seen as an intellectual ostentation, constricting the
diversity of academic expression. The idea of flawless
academic English resulted in an unrealistic idealized notion
since even within the ‘inner circle’ variation strays from
idealized archetype. As the inner circle dominates most of
information technology, the views of the majority are thus
prevented from contributing to world‘s knowledge base.
We will look at the nature and function of academic
writings; the diversity of cultural rhetorical
expressions that has been denied by Contrastive
rhetoric (CR) research; and lastly, the inevitable
changes in genres seems to reveal the future
direction of non-conformity to rigid convention.
The above extract reflects several distinctive linguistic
features of academic English. This extract starts off with a
topic sentence and this helps to summarize the main idea in
the paragraph. Accuracy of grammar, correct spelling and
precise punctuation of standard English are used. There are
also specific lexical features – arbitrary symbols, graphic
symbolic and pictographic representation associated with
specific subject- writing, drawing or speech that the general
readers may find it hard to understand; as these are technical
terms that are specific to the particular subject. Vocabulary
used here is formal, different from those used in daily
conversations – e.g ‘conceptual goals’ , ‘salient experiences’
and ‘utilize’ (instead of ‘used’). And ‘In this respect’ is an
example of linking words that allows the smooth flow of ideas.
The syntactic features invoke formality as it involved much
longer sentences. Lastly,the points made are well organised
reflecting a clear and cohesive structure.
Academic English follows two golden rules: linguistic accuracy
– correct standard English grammar usage, correct spelling and
correct punctuation; and sociolinguistic rules which is
concerned with appropriateness. University students’writings
are critically analysed on ‘surface features’ of correct
grammar, spelling and punctuation. Hundreds of universities
use diagnostic English tests to assess the grammar, spelling
and punctuation of new students. Besides linguistic precision,
the appropriateness of its stylistic features and tone of the
discourse is another important consideration. Personal
opinions using ‘I’ ‘we’ - ‘I think that’, ‘we feel that’ that reflects
subjectivity are unacceptable in the formality of academic
writing. These subjective tone are substituted with objective
phrases – ‘it seem like, it appear that’ This lack of personal
attitudes or emotions is essential in serious scientific
journals where detached objectivity are prized.
Other characteristics of academic English include textual
organisation, it is imperative that ideas are coherent.
Academic essay begins with an introduction that introduce the
relevant background knowledge of the topic discussed, the
definition of any abstract specialized lexis, a thesis and the
signposts of the argument. This helps to orientate the reader
to the direction of the text thus making it easier to
understand the discourse. Next, a topic sentence is essential
in addressing the main idea discussed in each paragraph. Ideas
are further expanded through linking words in the subsequent
paragraphs and this helps to signpost the direction of the
discussion; so that the fluency of ideas are conveyed without
awkward disruption and the reasoning must be explicit. Lastly,
the essay ends with a conclusion which summarise the main ideas
discussed. A bibliography is included after the conclusion, to
ensure all evidence supporting the discussion are correctly
referenced.
There are different genres in English academic writing. In art
history- literature and music or painting, ideas are presented
in a form of critical textual analysis whereas in scientific
journals – new researches are presented in report style. These
various genres have their own distinct conventions. For example,
writing in narrative style is very much different than writing
in argumentative style:
It was drizzling, people wore drab attire and they were silent
for a long time, all of which made me feel even more gloomy
(narrative style).
The gloomy atmosphere was emphasized by dreary drizzle,
drab attire and the long silence.
(argumentative style)
(Halliday Mark and JR Martin (1993:211-22))
Narrative style uses more active voice which helps the readers
to personally experience the atmosphere and the use of first
person pronoun ‘I’ leading to a subjective feeling; whereas
passive voice is featured more in argumentative essays
resulting in a detached, matter-of-fact manner of objective
description of the scene. Academic text poses difficulty for
readers as it uses a formal structure, formal
vocabulary and longer sentences. Readers are alienated by the
specialized lexis that are distinctive in a particular topic
(e,g biology, science) and the detached objectivity
that is far from those we used in everyday conversation.
Academic English functions as the lingua franca of the academic
community, used by lecturers, scholars and researchers of
diverse backgrounds around the world. It is considered a
common modern language with US taking a prominent role in
many academic fields of research leading to massive
publication of research journals; and it supersedes the
previously dominant international German-language research
journals. It also displaces other languages in some social
functions - for example,in Singapore, academic English has
economic objectives rather than cultural or political
connotation. Presently, as a world English, it serves as the
official language of the European Association. Additionally,
Academic English is increasingly used as a vehicle in
university education as well as in teaching activities.In
some countries like Singapore and Africa, academic English
has being established as a medium for communication in
higher education. These teaching activities are a
well-established field of educational research designed
to help students to achieve their academic purposes.
Furthermore, academics of diverse cultures are able to link
into a distinct academic culture by writing in the same
language; in this way, they gain speedy entry to the latest
research findings and technological advances. Sans common
academiclanguage/culture, people will be alienated and lose
countless opportunities in the world economies. Academic
principle purpose is to introduce and summarise new research
findings to specific audiences. These audiences are members
of exclusive discourse communities of professionals-
researchers, technologist or scientists; and they must
conform to their particular distinct discourse conventions.
Academic English thrives in these different discourse
communities- specific disciplines in arts, sciences and
social sciences. These genres have their own functional
requirements, convections and practices of academic
discourse. For example, academic articles follow certain
structure of report style from abstract message to
introduction, methods, results and conclusions of the
research. Swales(1990) has advocated four consecutive steps
in establishing the introduction sections in scientific
research articles: Firstly, specifying the field of study,
then summarize the previous research followed by the
preparations forpresent research and lastly introducing the
present research.
The diversity of cultures within the academic English activity
is massive and there exists an array of academic English, some
of these may have related stylistic features. And according to
Bhatia 1993) there is a common assumption by academics around
the world, that writers should be explicit in their reasoning
to other researchers in their discourses. However, there are
intense disagreements to what contribute to the validity of a
piece of academic work. The critical analysis of academic
varieties of Englishare meant to conform to the conventional
styles of the ‘inner circle’( English speakers). Is this
restrictive convention a superficial expression of linguistic
style? There are variations in academic style of other
cultures: French academic writing style differs in its
eloquence with a more personal expressiveness, perhaps less
detached whereas Czech academic journals uses a more direct,
personal tone compared to English, hedged, impersonal and
detached tone. Academics of diverse cultures experience a
swing in cultural shifts because of their ethnic/class
background; and in asserting their sense of personal
identity unwittingly stray from conventions of academic
English. Kachru ( p. 305) argues for cultural flexibility in
the conventions of academic ‘Englishes’ and she insists that
there are more than one legitimate, culturally based
approach of making reasoning explicit in English.
To illustrate, ‘Academics in chains’ (p. 310), written by a
Nigerian student, while much favoured by Nigerian readers was
not acceptable to the greater majority of other students as it
does not conform to the conventions of academic English. The
lack of logic (who? why? how?) and lack of development makes
the essay confusing. The sentences are too long, decorated
with dramatic flowery vocabulary resulting in bizarre
expressions. Another example of the outer circle, like
India, has its own distinctive discourse features known as
the spiral/circular rhetorical uses a nonlinear macro
structure starting with global introductions rather than
just relevant background of topic; more than one topic in a
paragraph; use of ornate language and cyclical sequencing of
components such as initiation, problem, elaboration,
solution and evaluation. Moreover, in Hindi its
‘deliberative’ text differs from English argumentative text.
Deliberative text present the favourable points as well as
those opposed, the decision of right or wrong rests on the
readers after the presenting all facets of an issue whereas
in argumentative text all competing opinions are wrong. The
complex thing here is we have academics writing in English
while influenced by their own specific cultural styles of
academic writings. This leads to contrastive rhetoric - the
influence of different cultures in academic writing.
Contrastive rhetoric (CR) is a research that examines the
discrepancy in the linguistic and rhetoric convention across
different cultures and the idea of what comprise a ‘good’
academic writing are the ideas of the inner circles of
English speakers. These principles are universally valid or
are they? This is questionable. Additionally,any digression
from academic English of the ‘inner circle’ conformist style
is seen as problematic. The major claim of the CR hypothesis
is that writers of English from the outer and expanding
circles employ ‘a rhetoric and a sequence of thought which
violate the expectations of naïve reader(inner circle)
(Kaplan (1966)1980) hence their writing is perceived as
‘out of focus’. ‘lacking organization’, or
‘lacking cohesion’(Kaplan (1996)1980) .
The framework of CR need take into account the criteria for
establishingcomparability across the genres of different
cultures. They need to take into account the different
rhetoric patterns related with different genres, for example,
the genre of writing horoscopes (patra in Hindi) differs from
the Anglo-American genre of written invitations for parties
and weddings. Moreover , Hinds (1987) argues that Japanese
expository prose feature non-linear patterns indicate that
the reader has the chief responsibility for efficient
communication and this contrast sharply in US English in
which the ultimate responsibility lies with the writer.
Furthermore, in social context, writers from China and India
tends to gives excessive background information without
directly relating it to the topic. The social meaning here
is the concept of politeness – that directness is considered
not polite. Thus, they give a lot of background information
leaving the readers to their own assessment. Additionally,
the sociocultural meaning that derive from unique traditions
should be considered. For instance, the meaning of Indian
texts originates from classical Sanskrit (as well as to some
extent via English ) shared Greco-Roman convention.
Contrary to illusion of a well-established inner circle model
for academic writing. Americans, Australians Britons, new
Zealanders have been shown to differ significantly from each
other in their rhetoric styles ( e.g. Connor and Lauer,1985; Vahapassi,1988; see also Hoey, 1983, p.68; Smith and Liedlich,
1980, p.21). For example, there are different spellings and
grammatical conventions between US and British English. Even
within a developed industrial culture such as USA communities,
literacy differs in the roles, domain, functions and values,
and these different societies reveal great variation in their
literacy practices, Additionally, it is doubtful that there
are well-defined text types such as ‘expository’ and
‘argumentative prose’ in English ( biber, 1989; Grabe, 1987)
which form the basis of CR research. So genre is changing,
not static, for example, the writing styles in the academic
journals of middle and late 20th century differ to quite a
considerable degree.
Thus, the nature and genre of Academic English is not
absolutely distinctive, there are variations and these
cultural rhetoric variations deserved validity even though
they do not adopt the conventional styles of inner circle.
CR narrow perspective of conventions fails to embrace the
unique rhetoric styles of a wider pool of cross-
linguistic and cross-cultural writing. With globalisation,
no country owns the English language, it belongs to every
English speakers/writers. English language is no longer
solely signifies the British/Victorian culture. The world
has grown up, and matured into realm of diverse cultural
expressions. There is no denial that Academic English is no
longer an exclusive possession, it now belongs to the world
of diversity.
(2145 words)
Bibliography:
Mercer N., and Swann J. (2002), Learning English: development and diversity, The Open University, London, Routledge.
CD 6, Band 8, ‘Essay Writing Skills’, Learning English: development and diversity, The open University.
VCD 3, Band 9 ‘ A university Tutorial’, Learning English: development and diversity, The open University.
No comments:
Post a Comment