The logogenesis of writing to learn: A systemic functional perspective

被引：8

作者：

Klein, Perry D. ^{[1
]}

Unsworth, Len ^{[2
]}

机构：

[1] Univ Western Ontario, Fac Educ, London, ON N6G 1G7, Canada

[2] Fac Educ & Arts, Sydney, NSW, Australia

来源：

LINGUISTICS AND EDUCATION | 2014年 / 26卷

关键词：

Writing to learn; Semantic; Syntax; Grammatical metaphor; Logogenesis; Nominalization;

D O I：

10.1016/j.linged.2013.12.003

中图分类号：

G40 [教育学];

学科分类号：

040101 ; 120403 ;

摘要：

Writing to learn has become an important practice in science education. How is scientific knowledge constructed during writing? To investigate this question, we examined the process through which four university students constructed written explanations of either projectile motion or buoyancy. The analysis, informed by systemic functional linguistics, focused on the mapping of semantic elements to grammatical choices, and the way in which this mapping unfolded throughout the course of each text. The texts began largely congruently; grammar mapped closely to experience. Gradually, each text shifted towards greater use of grammatical metaphor. Nominalization allowed propositions and sequences of events to serve as participants in complex causal and epistemic relationships. Students' texts showed several properties of professional scientific texts: transcategorization, compaction, and logicality; however, professional science texts instantiate these properties synoptically and systemically, whereas student texts exemplify them dynamically and instantially. (C) 2014 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

引用

页码：1 / 17

页数：17

共 51 条

[11]

Christie F., 1989, Language development: Learning language, learning culture, P152

[12] Learning to write history - The role of causality [J].

Coffin, C .

WRITTEN COMMUNICATION, 2004, 21 (03) :261-289

[13] Bowling alone together: Academic writing as distributed cognition [J].

Cronin, B .

JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, 2004, 55 (06) :557-560

[14] Keeping it short and sweet: Brief, ungraded writing assignments facilitate learning [J].

Drabick, Deborah A. G. ;

Weisberg, Robert ;

Paul, Luci ;

Bubier, Jennifer L. .

TEACHING OF PSYCHOLOGY, 2007, 34 (03) :172-176

[15]

Emig J., 1977, COLL COMPOS COMMUN, V28, P122, DOI [10.2307/356095, DOI 10.2307/356095]

[16] Disciplinary Literacies Across Content Areas: Supporting Secondary Reading Through Functional Language Analysis [J].

Fang, Zhihui ;

Schleppegrell, Mary J. .

JOURNAL OF ADOLESCENT & ADULT LITERACY, 2010, 53 (07) :587-597

[17]

Galbraith D., 2009, The Sage handbook of writing development, P48, DOI [https://doi.org/10.4135/9780857021069.n4, DOI 10.4135/9780857021069.N4]

[18] THE CONSEQUENCES OF LITERACY [J].

GOODY, J ;

WATT, I .

COMPARATIVE STUDIES IN SOCIETY AND HISTORY, 1963, 5 (03) :304-345

[19] Writing for different audiences: Effects on high-school students' conceptual understanding of biology [J].

Gunel, Murat ;

Hand, Brian ;

McDermott, Mark Andrew .

LEARNING AND INSTRUCTION, 2009, 19 (04) :354-367

[20]

Halliday M.A.K., 1997, LANGUAGE SCI COLLECT, V5, P181

← 1 2 3 4 5 6 →