A SUGGESTION FROM RESEARCH ON CONTRASTIVE RHETORIC Nagiko Iwata Lee Ritsumeikan University [email protected]jp English-Japanese contrastive rhetoric studies Hinds (1983) Japanese written texts are characterized by an abrupt topic shift; ki-sho-ten-ketsu introduce-develop-turn to a subtheme-conclude Hinds (1987) Reader vs. Writer Responsibility Inductiveness Kobayashi (1984), Oi (1984), Kubota (1992) Japanese student writers tend to organize essays inductively (specific-to-general, placing main ideas at the end) Hinds (1990) Japanese texts are characterized as quasi-inductive (delayed introduction of purpose) Maynard (1996) Japanese newspaper opinion columns tend to place the opinion toward the end of the text Expressions of modality Lee (2006) ‘Boosters’ are hardly used in Japanese academic writing. Lee (2009) • ‘Boosters’ are hardly used in Japanese newspaper editorials. • American editorials use a wider variety of stance and engagement expressions Lee (2009) Data and Method • Editorials from major Japanese and American newspapers: 30 editorials from Asahi Newspaper （Average length of one editorial: 31.1T-units) 30 editorials from New York Times （Average length of one editorial: 30.9 T-units) • Selected and coded expressions of stance and engagement using Hyland’s model. • Stance: The ways writers present themselves and convey their judgments, opinions, and commitments. • Engagement: The ways writers relate to their readers with respect to the positions advanced in the text. （Hyland, 2005) Key resources of Stance (Hyland 2005) Stance Hedges Boosters Attitude Markers Selfmention Examples of Stance expressions • Hedges: Such experiments may not represent …… • Boosters: …we obviously do not see a static image as… • Attitude markers: … are rather important and, for this reason … • Self-mentions: I argue that their treatment is superficial … Key resources of Engagement (Hyland 2005) Engagement Reader Shared Personal Directives Questions pronouns knowledge asides Examples of Engagement expressions • Reader pronouns: Although we lack knowledge about … • Directives: Consider a sequence of batches in … • Questions: Is it , in fact, necessary to choose …? • Appeals to Shared knowledge: Chesterton was of course wrong to suppose … • Personal asides: And – as I believe many …. – critical thinking… Frequency of Stance expressions Hedges Boosters Attitude markers Self-mention Total American editorials 32 Japanese editorials 43 31 2 207 158 0 0 270 203 Frequency of Engagement expressions Reader pronouns Directives Questions Shared knowledge Personal asides Total American editorials 30 7+1 Japanese editorials 1 0+6 14 27 1 1 20 0 72 29 Reader pronouns A covert pronoun is a norm in Japanese. (Lee, 1987, Kameyama 1988) Some of the English reader pronouns →Desiderative “V-tai” in Japanese e.g.) We support the decision by … → ? Wareware wa sono ketsudan o shiji suru. → [ 0 ] sono ketsudan o shiji shi-tai. * Desiderative form “V-tai” requires the 1st person subject. Prominence of the desiderative form in Japanese editorials 36 occurrences of the desiderative were found in 20 out of 30 Asahi Shimbun editorials used as data in Lee (2009), whilst only 4 occurrences were identified in New York times editorials. The desiderative can be a stance marker, expressing the wish of the writer, and can be an engagement marker at the same time, implying the wish is to be shared with the readers. Discourse modality indicators (Maynard 1993, 2002 ) Cleft sentence (the word-order which reflects different information structure) [ A ] no wa [ B ] da. ‘What A is B’, ‘It is B that A’ ooku no hito o sukuidashita no mo karera datta. ‘It was they who also saved many people.’ Sentential nominal Shinsai kara 10 ka. ‘10 days since the day of earthquake.’ Frequency of Desiderative, Cleft sentence, and Sentential nominal in the data of Lee (2009) New York Times (30 editorials) Asahi Shimbun (30 editorials) Desiderative 4 36 Cleft sentence 3 6 Sentential nominal 3 5 Examples from editorials on the recent earthquake disaster in Japan Desiderative Ochitsuite koodoo shi-tai. ‘We want to act calmly.’ Cleft sentence ooku no hito o sukuidashita no mo karera datta. ‘It was they who also saved many people.’ Sentential nominal Shinsai kara 10 ka. ‘10 days since the day of earthquake.’ Frequency of Desiderative, Cleft sentence, & Sentential nominal in editorials on the recent earthquake disaster in Japan Asahi Shimbun (10 editorials) New York Ｔｉｍｅｓ (2 editorials) 0 Desiderative 20 (Aver. 2.0) Cleft sentence 12 (Aver. 1.2) 0 Sentential nominal 8 (From 2 editorials) 3 (From 1 editorial) The Ｔｈｅ Ａｇｅ Guardian (4 editorials) (3 editorials) 0 0 2 (Aver. 0.5) 0 4 (From 1 editorial) 0 • While obviously expressing modality is universal among languages, the ready availability>available forms of and acceptance (or even encouragement) toward high degree of personalization differ from one genre to another and from one language to another. (Maynard 1993:266, edited in red by Lee 2011) A suggestion from contrastive rhetoric • We need to look at data from the perspective of languages other than English as well. By looking at Japanese, typologically different from English, we have found the following: 1) There is an indicator which can be considered both as a stance marker and an engagement marker. <Japanese desiderative> 2) There are other markers which need to be examined for expressions of stance and engagement. <Cleft sentence, Sentential nominal> References • Hinds, J. (1983) Contrastive rhetoric: Japanese and English. Text, 3(2), • • • • • pp. 183-195. (1987) Reader versus writer responsibility: A new typology. In U. Connor & R.B. Kaplan (Eds.), Writing across languages: Analysis of L2 text (pp. 142-152). Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley. (1990) Inductive, Deductive, Quasi-inductive: Expository Writing in Japanese, Korean, Chinese, and Thai. In U. Connor & A.M. johns (Eds.), Coherence in Writing: Research and pedagogical perspectives, pp. 87109. Alexandria, VA: TESOL. Hyland, K. (2005) “Stance and engagement: a model of interaction in academic discourse” , Discourse Studies, 7 (2), pp. 173-92. Kobayashi (1984). Rhetorical patterns in English and Japanese. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Columbia University Teachers College, New York. Kubota (1992). Contrastive rhetoric of Japanese and English: A critical approach. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Department of Education, University of Toronto. • Lee, N.I. (1987) “Subject ellipsis in Japanese”, Working Papers in • • • • • • Linguistics, 18 (2) pp. 1-30. Department of Linguistics, University of Hawaii. (2006) “Contrastive academic writing in Japanese and English” in C.M. Figueroa & T.I.M. Garate (Eds.), Studies in Contrastive Linguistics. pp.509-515. Universidade de Santiago de Compostela. (2009) “Stance and Engagement in writing: Japanese and American Editorials” in V. K. Bhatia et. al (Eds.) Language for Professional Communication: Research, Practice,& Training, pp. 61-70 Maynard, S.K. (1993) Discourse Modality: Subjectivity, emotion and voice in the Japanese language, Amsterdam: John Benjamins. (1996). Presentation of one’s view in Japanese newspaper columns: Commentary strategies and sequencing. Text, 16(2), pp. 391-421. (2002) Linguistic Emotivity: Centrality of place, the topiccomment dynamic, and an ideology of pathos in Japanese discourse, Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Oi (1984). M.K. (1984). Cross-cultural differences in rhetorical patterning: A study of Japanese and English. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, State University of New York at Stony Brook.