Just like the last session, this
session will enable you to identify and use textual patterns characteristic of
specialist writing. While the last session focussed on sentence-level syntax,
this session will home in on larger units of text. Even short pieces of
specialist text tend to exhibit predictable patterns; we will look at three of
these: ‘general–specific’, ‘problem–solution’ and ‘claim–counter-claim’.
There is no required
reading for this session. However, you may wish to pursue the subject further
by by consulting the Purdue Writing Lab website or by
reading up on how to write a dissertation (or ‘term
paper’). A good book on the subject is John M. Swales/Christine B. Feak, Academic
Writing for Graduate Students, Ann Arbor: the Universiy of Michigan Press.
We will discuss these sources in greater detail in the session devoted to
‘Writing Specialist Texts’.
Assignment: 1) Write two or
three introductory paragraphs for your dissertation (or ‘term paper’). If
possible, use one or several of the textual patterns we discussed in class. 2)
Use
the notes below to write a passage using the ‘claim–counter-claim’ pattern; employ
appropriate phraseology to link individual sections:
Claim
Traditional
view – speech is an inferior version of writing – i.e. less ‘correct’,
full of errors and hesitations – in speech, grammar is very much simpler than in
writing – with loosely-organised syntax.
Counter-claim
More recently – linguists challenge view – primacy
of speech i.e. speech preceded writing – two different systems with different functions. e.g. Halliday
(1989) –’grammatical intricacy’ of spoken language
and ‘lexical density’ of written language – i.e. speech is not ‘ungrammatical’ but uses a different grammatical system.
(Exercise 2 retrieved from the Internet, author unknown)