Contrastive study in the perspective of didactics of writing in L2: The three axes of rhetoric

Lihua Jin

Abstract


We can now admit without theoretical constraint that speech acts, being the subject of linguistic studies, are profoundly marked by culture, as proved by many works inspired by the notion of stereotype, politeness, etc., ranging from the sentence pattern to the discursive sequential scale or from verbal materials to non-verbal materials. In doing so, contrastive linguistics opens the possibility of enlightening the similarities and differences in the realization of the speech acts of the sender with different cultural affiliations. In the field of foreign language teaching, in particular, the contrastive perspective has expanded possible models of analysis that allow better understanding of functions of compared languages and the language writing behaviors of speakers from different cultures. This work proposes an inventory of the works relating to the contrastive rhetoric, which have mainly dealt with the writings of the learners of foreign language and the native writers with the aim of highlighting the differences in the “style, argumentation and organisation” (Purves, 1986) that characterize texts produced by the writers of different discursive cultures. We set these three angles as the main research issues of contrastive rhetoric whose aim is to differentiate and to bring into consistency various discursive elements and phenomena described and analyzed so far. We consider that this approach is all the more crucial in order to take account of the results of research entitled in various ways, each of which has its own rhetorical study subjects: for example, connectors; reasoning method, the style, the writing convention, the textual organization, the question of cohesion/coherence, the argumentative structure, etc.


Keywords


rhetoric; contrastive perspective; foreign language teaching

References


Adam, J.-M. (1985). Le texte narratif. Paris : Nathan.

Adam, J.-M. (2005). La linguistique textuelle : Introduction à l’analyse textuelle des discours. Paris : Armand Colin.

Ali Bouacha, M. (1993). Enonciation, argumentation et discours : le cas de la généralisation. Semen, 8, 43–61.

Anscombre, J.-C. (1983). L’argumentation dans la langue / Jean-Claude Anscombre ; Oswald Ducrot. Bruxelles : Mardaga.

Anscombre, J.-C., Ducrot, O. (1984). L’argumentation dans la langue. Revue Philosophique de la France et de l’Etranger, 174, 111–112.

Anscombre, J.-C. (1995). Théorie des topoï. Argumentation, sciences du langage. Paris : Éd. Kimé.

Benveniste, E. (1966). Problèmes de linguistique générale I. Paris : Gallimard.

Benveniste, E. (1974). Problèmes de linguistique générale II. Paris : Gallimard.

BI, X. (2016). Rhétorique de la dissertation : Étude contrastive des conventions d’écriture académique en français et en chinois. Thèse de doctorat – Sorbonne Paris Cité.

Carter-Thomas, S. (2000). La cohérence textuelle pour une nouvelle pédagogie de l’écrit. Paris : L’Harmattan.

Charolles, M. (1978). Introduction au problème de la cohérence des textes. Langue Française, 38, 7–41.

Chafe, W. L. (1976). Givenness, contrastiveness, definiteness, subjects, topics and points of view. In : C. N. Li (ed.), Subject and Topic (pp. 25–55). New York : Academic Press.

Charolles, M. (1982). Études sur la cohérence et l’interprétation des discours. Thèse d’Etat, l’Université de Franche-Comté.

Charolles, M. (1988). Les études sur la cohérence, la cohésion et la connexité textuelles depuis la fin des années 1960. Modèles Linguistiques, 10(2), 45–66.

Charolles, M. (1988). Les plans d’organisation textuelle : périodes, chaînes, portées et séquence. Pratiques, 57, 3–14.

Combettes, B. (1983). Pour une grammaire textuelle. La progression thématique. Paris : De Boeck- Duculot.

Combettes, B. (1988). Pour une grammaire textuelle. La progression thématique. Paris : De Boeck- Duculot.

Connor, U., Kaplan, R. B. (eds.). (1987). Writing across languages : Analysis of L2 texts. Reading. MA : Addison-Wesley.

Connor, U. (1996). Contrastive Rhetoric : Cross-cultural Aspects of Second Language Writing. Cambridge : Cambridge University Press.

Grabe, W., Kaplan, R. B. (1989). Writing in a Second Language : Contrastive Rhetoric. In : M. Donna, D. Johnson, H. Roen, J. Stephen, Richness in Writing : Empowering ESL Students (pp. 263–283). New York : Longman.

Halliday, M. A. K., Hasan, R. (1976). Cohesion in English. London : Longman.

Hoey, M. (1991). Patterns of Lexis in Text. Oxford : Oxford University Press.

Kaplan, R. B. (1966). Cultural Thought Patterns in Inter-Cultural Education. Language Learning, 16(1-2), vol. XVI n°1 et 2, 1–20.

Kaplan, R. B., Grabe, W. (2002). A modern history of written discourse analysis. Journal of Second Language Writing, 11 (janvier), 191–223.

Purves, A. (1986). Rhetorical communities, the international student and basic writing. Journal of Basic Writing, 5, 38–51.

Purves, A. (1988). Introduction. In : A. Purves (ed.), Writing across languages and cultures (pp. 9–21). Newbury Park, CA : Sage.

Purves, A. (1992). Reflections on research and assessment in written composition. Research in the Teaching of English, 26(1), 108–122.

Saneikashani, N. (2012). Autour des relations conjonctives interphrastiques dans les productions écrites en français langue seconde d’apprenants universitaire : essai d’analyse textuelle. Thèse de doctorat, sous la direction de B. M. Kashema Laurent Masegeta, Université de Strasbourg.

Tirrkonen-Condit, S. (1985). Argumentative Text Structure and Translation. Ph. D. Dissertation. University of Jyvaskyla, Jyvaskyla.

Van Dijk, T. A. (1980). Macrostructures. Hillsdale, NJ : Erlbaum.

Van Dijk, T. A. (1985). Semantic Discourse Analysis. In :T. A. Van Dijk (ed.), Handbook of Discourse Analysis, I : Disciplines of Discourse ; II : Dimensions of Discourse ; III : Discourse and Dialogue ; IV : Discourse Analysis in Society (pp. 103–112). London : Academic.




DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.17951/ff.2018.36.1.109-124
Date of publication: 2018-11-05 11:24:41
Date of submission: 2018-02-10 17:41:01


Statistics


Total abstract view - 721
Downloads (from 2020-06-17) - PDF (Français (France)) - 339

Indicators



Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


Copyright (c) 2018

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.