2014/11/29
Research Method
Midterm
NA3C0004 Brenda
To Access Literature Reviews of Two Theses
Introduction
On this assignment of midterm, we have to search for two full texts of
articles or theses relevant to our topics in future research. It seems like
not a piece of cake. I appreciate Dr. Huang pushes us to move on
because we always give us a quantity of excuses to cease moving.
What we have learned during lectures, we take the guidelines of good
LR writing to access two theses. I followed professor’s steps, seeking one
more full text via the first thesis related to our topic in the reference of
reference. Therefore, in the next paragraph, I compare two theses, (a)
an exploration of vocabulary knowledge in English short talks- a
corpus-driven approach, and (b) a corpus based analysis of academic
lectures across disciplines.
Compare Two Theses
Paper
Format
Thesis A
․Abstract
․Introduction
Thesis B
․Introduction
․The lexical density of spoken discourse
․Literature review
․Methodology
․Results & Discussion
․Conclusion
․Limitations
․References
․The delivery speed of spoken discourse
․Trends in lecturing style
․Speed and density in the BASE corpus
․Comparison with EAP listening
materials
․Discussion: the significance of speed
and density
․Conclusion
․Acknowledgements
․Referecnces
Abstract
Introduction
Reviews
of
Literature
A summary of thesis A
․Background
․Reasons
․Examples
no
․The results of prior literature
․The purpose of this thesis
․Corpus-based vs.
․The lexical density of spoken discourse
․The delivery speed of spoken discourse
corpus-driven study
․A definition of English short
talks
2014/11/29
Research Method
Midterm
NA3C0004 Brenda
․Previous corpus studies & L2
learning
․Data collection
Methodology ․Data analysis
․Trends in lecturing style
․Speed and density in the BASE corpus
․Comparison with EAP listening
materials
Background
A PhD student at National
Taiwan Normal University
A professor in English Language in
Coventry University, UK
Two paper formats are quite different; however, there are a few
similarity listed below:
(a) We could know both of researchers take quantitative research to
collect data through data collection.
(b) There are no participants in both theses.
(c) Two articles are relevant to Corpus research.
(d) Both of them also take BASE corpus to do data analysis.
(e) Authors hope those finding could furnish teachers and students more
details of teaching and learning.
Thesis A: In LR of Introduction
Introduction is composed of three paragraphs, background, reasons,
and examples. The author interprets and critiques it adequately. Let me
believe implications of corpus linguistics. When a research mentions
why students demonstrate presentations in a predicament, I have the
same situation. Therefore, the author analyses those data to provide an
adequate data for future teachers and learners. (Wang, 2012)
Thesis B: In LR of Introduction
In the opening of introduction, the author describes a thesis which is
connected to a survey of 130 participants from 28 countries and
responses the result, “taking notes at speed”. (Nesi, 2001) It is quite
interesting. For me, I want to dig in more and know a professor’s point of
view. But, I did not see citations of this survey. I thought professor Hilary
should cite it out because I am also interested in a survey.
I still like the arrangements of introduction. After pointing out the
purpose of this study, she provides what she would examine in this thesis.
LR in introduction, she cites out next to proper nouns. So! It is quite fresh
2014/11/29
Research Method
Midterm
NA3C0004 Brenda
for me. I thought only one situation, one sentence or one phrase, so I
have to insert citations.
Thesis A：Reviews of Literature
The author divide into three main reviews of Literature, Corpus-based vs.
corpus-driven study, a definition of English short talks, previous corpus
studies & L2 learning. Only three sections, it seems like less LR in chapter
two, but the author take it clearly.
The first one, reviewing other aspects of prior literature, and he explains
why to choose a corpus-driven study.
The second is a definition of English short talks. Adopting from Loan’s
(1990) definition, a short talk is a less than 20 minute presentation that
“requires a more sustained level of clarity if it is to be successful”;
moreover, “like any presentation, a short talk should have a beginning,
middle, and an end”. But this reviewed reference is not current, should
be updated.
Thirdly, previous corpus studies and L2 Leaning are my expatiation of
more references. The author review literature in terms of five research
findings to synthesize and interpret information related to topics.
Accessing reviews of literature, I know new information, for examples,
two corpus, TED and Base and five corpus tools, AntConc,RANGE,
KfNgraam, CANCODE and MonoConc.
Thesis B：Reviews of Literature
I thought the lexical density of spoken discourse and the delivery speed
of spoken discourse belong to reviews of Literature. In the first LR, the
author shows the scope of LW adequately and reveals the significance
of study. She takes three research findings (lexical density) to tell readers
the influence on note-taking.
The second part, she also takes one research finding and summarizes
the results to show different types (radio, lectures, interviews and
conversation) of delivery speed.
In my view, I am quite fond of the first part; she compares two findings
to present and uses the third findings to point out the main idea.
The second part, she illustrates and LR is readable. But only one
reference exhibits the lack of persuasiveness.
Unclear situations:
2014/11/29
Research Method
Midterm
NA3C0004 Brenda
(1) Blue sentences are highlighted because I am unsure to divide into LR
and methodology. Is it accessible?
(2) Checking references of references, I cannot find the article. Is it
normal? Would we have methods to find easily?
(3) I saw the part of Write-N-Cite on RefWorks ppt. I also downloaded it
and followed steps to insert citation. However, I am unsure the
correct methods.
Is it a good way to use Write-N-Cite?
(4) References downloaded, I thought we should check once more. Do
we have the correct reference form to follow?
(5) When we read articles, we could not find references of citation.
What can we do?
References
Anthony, L. (2005). AntConc: Design and development of a freeware corpus analysis
toolkit for the technical writing classroom. Professional Communication
Conference, 2005. IPCC 2005. Proceedings. International, 729-737.
Anthony, L. (2006). Developing a freeware, multiplatform corpus analysis toolkit for
the technical writing classroom. IEEE Transactions on Professional
Communication, 49(3), 275-286. doi:10.1109/TPC.2006.880753
Bhatia, V. K. (1993). Analysing genre : Language use in professional settings. London;
New York: Longman.
2014/11/29
Research Method
Midterm
NA3C0004 Brenda
Biber, D., Conrad, S., & Cortes, V. (2004). If you look at …: Lexical bundles in
university teaching and textbooks. Applied Linguistics, 25(3), 371-405.
doi:10.1093/applin/25.3.371
Drieman, G. H. J. (1962). Differences between written and spoken language: An
exploratory study. Acta Psychologica, 20(0), 36-57.
doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0001-6918(62)90006-9
FLOWERDEW, L. (2003). A combined corpus and systemic-functional analysis of the
problem-solution pattern in a student and professional corpus of technical
writing. TESOL Quarterly, 37(3), 489-511. doi:10.2307/3588401
Loan, C. V. (1990). How to have a good short talk. Retrieved April 15, 2012, from
http://www.cs.cornell.edu/cv/ShortTalk.htm
Künstler, V., Maiwald, P., & Saage, S.
A guide to corpus linguistics.
Nesi, H. (2001). A corpus based analysis of academic lectures across disciplines.
London: Continuum Press., 16, 201-218.
SIMPSON, R., & MENDIS, D. (2003). A corpus-based study of idioms in academic
speech. TESOL Quarterly, 37(3), 419-441. doi:10.2307/3588398
2014/11/29
Research Method
Midterm
NA3C0004 Brenda
Wang, Y. (2012). An exploration of vocabulary knowledge in English short talks- A
corpus-driven approach. International Journal of English Linguistics, 2(4)