Thematic Progression in Acehnese EFL Learner-Produced Texts
Abstract
This study reports the thematic progression of the EFL learner- produced texts in Acehnese context. The study employed qualitative method focusing on the content analysis. The content analysis technique was incorporated to analyse the corpora of 40 learner-produced texts. The findings of the study highlight both prevalent and problematic thematic progression patterns in the students’ texts. The EFL learners are inclined to use the constant theme pattern with less consistency of accuracy in longer paragraphs. With regard to the problematic patterns, the students tend to find difficulties in developing the ideas throughout the texts. This is shown through the emergence of many brand new themes and empty rhemes which result in incohesive and incoherent texts. The overall findings suggest that introducing the theme- rheme pattern concept to the students in English writing classes can be useful for improving the cohesion of the EFL students’ writings.
Keywords
Full Text:
PDFReferences
Astuti, Y. F., Suryani, F. B., &Kurniati, D. (2010). The analysis of coherence in the background of Skripsi (thesis) written by English education department students of Teacher Training and Education faculty of Muria Kudus University. Journal Sosial dan Budaya, 3(2), 1-16.
Bates, E. (1976). Language and context: The acquisition of pragmatics. New York: Academic Press.
Bloor, M., & Bloor, T. (1992). Given and new information in the thematic organization of text: An application to the teaching of academic writing. Occasional Papers in Systemic Linguistics, 6(1), 33-43.
Carter-Thomas, S. (1999). Thematic networks and text types. ASp, la Revue du Geras, 23-26,
-147.
Danes, F., 1974.Functional sentence perspective and the organisation of the text. In:Danes, F. (Ed.), Papers on Functional Sentence Perspective. Academia, Prague,pp. 106e128.
Danes, F., 1995.The paragraph central unit of the thematic and compositional build-up of texts. In: Wårvik, B., Tanskanen, S.-K., Hiltunen, R. (Eds.), Organisation in Discourse. Anglicana Turkuensia, vol. 14. University of Turku, Finland,Turku, pp. 29e40.
Eggins, S. (2004). An Introduction to Systemic Functional Linguistics. New York: Continuum.
Erteschik-Shir, N. (1988). Topic-chaining and dominance-chaining. In Y. Tobin (Ed.), The Prague school and its legacy in linguistics, literature, semiotics, folklore, and the arts (pp.145-53). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Fries, P. H. (1983). On the status of theme in English: Arguments in discourse. In J.S. Petofi
& E. Sozer (Eds.), Micro and macro connexity of text. Hamburg: Helmut BuskeVerlag
Halliday, M.A.K. (1976). Cohesion in English. London: Longman.
Halliday, M.A.K. (1985, 2004). Introduction to Functional Grammar. London: Arnold.
McCarthy, M., 1991. Discourse Analysis for Language Teachers. Cambridge Language
Teaching Library.
Mellos, V. D. (2011). Coherence in English as a Second Language undergraduate writing: a
Theme-Rheme analysis. San Diego State University Theses and Dissertations. Paltridge, B. (2006). Discourse analysis. London: Continuum
Rørvik, S. (2003).Thematic progression in translation from English into Norwegian. Nordic
Journal of English Studies, 2(2), 245-264.
Thompson, G. (2014). Introducing functional grammar (3rd ed.). Abingdon: Routledge. Wang, L. (2007). Theme &Rheme in the Thematic Organization of Text: Implications for
Teaching Academic Writing. Asian EFL Journal. Vol. 9/1, 164-176.
Weil, H. (1844). In Super, C.W. (Ed.), De L’ordre des Mots dans les Langues Anciennes
Comparees aux Langues Modernes.Amsterdam: John Benjamins
Witt, S., &Faigley, L. (1981).Coherence, Cohesion and Writing Quality.College Composition
& Communication. Vol. 32/2, 189-204.
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.22373/jid.v20i1.4603
Refbacks
- There are currently no refbacks.
E-ISSN: 2355-6129
except where otherwise noted.