English Discourse

Chapter 2. Methodological Issues in Research

Prepared by Rowanne Marie Mangompit

Learning Outcome

• explain discourse concepts and ethical considerations through written and oral engagements (CLO1)  

Introduction

In conceptualizing and writing a paper, you will consider the possible methodological issues that you will encounter in the process of gathering data. Knowing these methodological issues can help you in addressing these issues by following the ethical standards that you consider in data collection. This chapter provides some insights on how to address these issues and to evaluate studies whether these conform to the ethical standards. 

Preparation

Activity: Question and Answer (Pair Share)

When you read a research paper, what do you consider in reading the methodology section? Why?

Presentation

In conducting research, consider the issues in the methodology including the ethics.

These are some of the concerns: 

1. informed consent

2. observer’s paradox

3. inter-rater reliability

4. coding

5. triangulation

6. data security

Informed Consent

According to Schneider (2018), audio - or video-recording naturally occurring 

conversation in the truest sense of the word is virtually impossible because informed consent is needed before the actual recording. So, a transmittal letter or cover letter in the survey questionnaires would be distributed first prior to the gathering of data. 

Observer’s Paradox

Schneider (2018) also mentioned the observer’s paradox stating that: 

       […] the aim of linguistic research in the community must be to find out how people 

        talk when they are not being systematically observed; yet we can only obtain this 

        data by systematic observation. (Labov 1972: 209 in Schneider, 2018). 

However, the naturalness of data is affected due to the observer’s paradox. So, addressing the observer’s paradox can be done by leaving the audio-recorder or letting the participants record their conversations and deleting the first few minutes (e.g. 5-10 minutes) of the data and disregard the recorded data in the analysis to get as natural data as possible.

Inter-rater Reliability

For studies using the texts and naturally occurring conversations or interactions as sources of data, the reliability and validity of the data will be done by having at least three inter-raters or coders. In demonstrating the reliability and validity of data, each inter-rater (also called inter-coders) independently codes and analyzes the data and reaches a consensus through discussion. Another way is to have verifiers who will check the analyzed data whether there are discrepancies and resolve the coding by discussing with the researcher. Hence, it is a reassurance that the data are well-analyzed.

Coding

Coding is also essential in the methodology, especially in discourse analysis. Trinidad (2019) considered uncoded data as one of the mistakes in methods and instruments. In coding systematically, you should connect concrete answers from your interviewers (participants) to the more abstract concepts as well as themes from the readings to refrain from biases. Names of interviewees or participants can also be coded and written anonymously for confidentiality purposes.

Triangulation

In gathering the data, you should have at least two or even three instruments to validate the results. For instance, if you use a Microsoft form for your survey questionnaire, validate the data from the questionnaires with focus group discussion or interviews. In this manner, you will be able to see diverse perspectives. Hence, surveys can be validated with interviews that can now be virtually done through Zoom meeting, Google Meet, or social media such as Facebook page or Messenger.

Data Security

As directed by the Ethics Committee where most of the universities have, the data collected from research should be kept in a repository with a security password. Video recordings and images of infants with the caregiver are not shown during the paper presentation to protect the research participants like in the study of Heyrosa (2018).

Practice

Reading and Evaluation Task:

Directions: Explain how the methodological issues are addressed and how   

                  the ethical standards are applied in the paper of Heyrosa (2019). Write your 

                  insights in the Forum in ODILO. 

Extracts from Heyrosa (2019): A sample of Ethical Considerations

“Ethical Considerations

Recruitment

Researchers adhere to ethical practices and principles if: a) they treat research participants fairly (Mikesell, Bromley & Khodyakov, 2013); b) considered them as independent beings (Gostin, 1991), and; c) give them sufficient information about the study and freedom to decide whether they want to participate (Glass & Kaufert, 2007) as cited in Mikesell et al. (2013). Thus, the current researcher ensured that she briefed the qualified prospects individually using the vernacular, and gave them the opportunity to ask any questions about the research project, and answered them honestly and politely.

 During the briefing session, the researcher made sure to provide sufficient information and well-detailed procedures of data gathering so that they had a basis on whether to participate in the study or not. Informed consent was required from the mothers who were willing to participate because the study involved a vulnerable population due to their young age (i.e. five-to-six-month infants). Step-by-step procedures of recruiting the participants were explained in the Data Gathering section.

Benefits

Mother-infant participants who partially or completely participated in the present study received a fair incentive (i.e. grocery package amounting to Php 800.00) for their participation, along with the general knowledge that they were assisting in furthering the knowledge related to this research. The package included 2 boxes of Tiki-Tiki Plus Drops (30mL/box), 3 boxes of Nestle Cerelac (120g/box), and 2 packs of Marie biscuits that helped nourish the infants even after the data had been gathered. In the same manner, the family of the infants (i.e. parents and siblings) also benefited because they were given canned goods and fruits which were part of the package. This was done to avoid disappointing and hurting the feelings of the other members of the family.

The community also benefited from the present study because its output provided mothers further knowledge of logical communication goals to their infants. The future ones would also benefit from the knowledge on the prelinguistic means of communications of infants provided in the present study so they could further assist their babies’ early language development. Equipped with knowledge in communicating with preverbal infants, mothers would ultimately have helped the survival and development of their babies. Thus, the beneficence of the study was not only the mother-infant participants but also the community. They were not only providing knowledge but also helped infants’ survival. The benefits, therefore, were not only available in the present but also in the future. 

Risk Concern

The prospects who voluntarily agreed to participate in the study might experience negative emotions in carrying out their roles. Particularly during the video recording, the mothers might experience short-term stress which might arise when infants began crying continually and loudly — a sign of discomfort because it might be hungry, wet, feel hot for staying indoor. The length of the video recording might also add to the stress. Besides, the mother might feel discomfort when nursing the baby or changing her infant’s diaper as these activities might reveal sensitive body parts (i.e. mother’s breast or infant’s genitals).

The moment the participants experienced stress and discomfort, they had the ultimate freedom to refuse to take part in the study. They might also withdraw completely from interacting with their infants at any time if they felt the need for whatever reasons, without affecting their relationship with the researcher or the University of San Carlos. Their decision would not result in any loss of benefits to which they were entitled. The momentary stress and discomfort that they might experience could readily be dispelled since they were free to withdraw, pause, or stop any time they wish to. Hence, no pressure or imposition to continue is involved.

The researcher also gave them the freedom to delete the video should they wish to withdraw their participation in the study. This was to give them assurance that their rights were protected and their privacy was not invaded. Should they wish to continue, the researcher ensured the participants that video clips or screenshot images showing their sensitive body parts would not be shown to anybody. The researcher might disclose some video clips and images extracted from the video recording in furtherance of her scientific purpose; however, these were subject to the participants’ approval. Only approved video clips and images were made available to the public to prove that the researcher respected the participants’ decisions and choices. Thus, the influence of the video recording session would not seriously cause any social damage to the participants. 

Meanwhile, questions in the questionnaire and in the structured interview session were designed to assist the mothers to determine the pre-symbolic means of communications of infants in certain circumstances and interpret the meaning of the pre-symbolic communications of infants found in the video recording, respectively. The session, therefore, could not be thought of as modifying the knowledge, thinking, attitudes, feelings, or behavior of the participants.

Both the video recording and interview sessions were conducted in a safe place indoor without any use of harmful objects and chemicals; thus, the study did not cause any physical harm to the participants. No economic risk was involved either. The participants were also free to express their concerns to either the researcher or advisor (through the given cellphone number).

Moreover, no standards of correctness or qualifying measures were set for the infants’ performance. Only disciplinary (i.e. linguistic) were obtained, thus, no risks of below-par measures would embarrass or shame the participants. Apparently, the methods of the study and the justifications mentioned above justified that the possible benefits of the study outweighed the risks.

Privacy and Confidentiality

All personal information and research data (i.e. video recordings, audio recordings, responses in questionnaires and interviews) of the mother-infant participants were treated with the strictest confidence and with the utmost sensitivity throughout the study and would be destroyed 2 years after they had been gathered, as agreed by the researcher and the participants legally (i.e. notarized by a lawyer). Moreover, the participants involved in the study were treated with uttermost respect which Gostin (1991) considered as the ethical foundation for privacy. Therefore, the researcher gave the participants the right to choose who has access to the data under specific circumstances that were legally agreed upon. 

To present a more credible scientific report, the researcher asked the participants’ consent to allow the researcher to disclose the video recordings to her advisor and to a linguistic major who served as one of the verifiers. Since one of the objectives of the present study was to determine the pre-symbolic means of communications of infants, video clips and screenshot images from the video footage were disclosed to the research committee during the oral defense of her study and to the public when given an opportunity to present the research output in an academic conference. Whereas video clips included the vocalizations and eye contact of the infants, images consisted of screenshots of infants showing their facial expressions. 

To prevent stigmatizing and demeaning the participants’ dignity, integrity, and confidentiality, the researcher ensured them that data with extreme sensitivity would not be disclosed to anybody. This includes the visibility of the mother’s breasts when nursing their infants in the middle of video recording or the noticeable private part of the infant when changed with a diaper. The participants were given the opportunity to review and approve the entire video recordings, video clips, and images. 

Apart from these purposes, the researcher did include any such information in any report she might publish that would make it possible to identify their identity. The mother-infant participants’ names were replaced with pseudonyms in the written report, in the interview, and in the questionnaire: ‘5-M-I Mother’ and ‘6-M-I Mother’ for the 5-month and 6-month infants’ mothers, respectively. 

Should they wish to receive a copy of any documents pertaining to them such as the recorded video, a summary of the compiled responses from the interview, they would be provided at the end of the study….” (Source: Heyrosa, F. (2019, pp. 44 - 49).

Note: A consent was also sought from the author prior to the usage of this extract in this module.

Performance

Evaluating the research methodology section. (Pair Share)

Directions: 

1. Explain the following methodology section of the paper in this link: http://js.cmu.edu.ph/dev/posts/functions-characteristics-and-effectiveness-of-selected-public-signs-in-cebu-city.

2. Evaluate the parts whether the study addressed the methodological issues and follow the ethical considerations. Write two to three sentences only. Your answers can be posted in the Forum in ODILO.

References

Espina, I., Medalla, D. & Maxilom-Mangompit, R. (2019). Functions, characteristics, and effectiveness of selected public signs in Cebu City, Central 

Mindanao University Journal of Science, 23 (2),     .

Heyrosa, F. (2018). Five-to-six-month infants’ pre-symbolic communications with mother-caregivers. Unpublished master’s thesis. University of San Carlos, Cebu City.                            

Schneider, K. (2018). Methods and ethics of data collection In Jucker, A., Schneider , K. & Bublitz, W. (2018). (eds.) Methods in pragmatics, Boston: De Gruyter Mouton. (pp. 37-93). doi: https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110424928-002

Trinidad, J. (2019). Error proofing your research: Common mistakes and how to address them. Quezon City: Bluebooks.

Chapter 3. Transcript Notation

Prepared by Rowanne Marie Mangompit

Learning Outcome:

• Explain discourse concepts and ethical considerations through written and oral engagements (CLO1).

Introduction

This chapter is about the transcript notation introduced by Gail Jefferson. These symbols are useful in transcribing recorded (audio or video) interviews, focus group discussions, and other instruments used in gathering the data. These symbols are used in discourse analysis and conversation analysis in describing the recorded phenomenon or situation. 

Preparation

Guessing Game

Direction: Match the meaning in one of the following symbols how these are used in the transcribed data. Choose the letter of the correct answers. 

Column A Column B

1. contextual information such as coughing a. (1.0)

2. timed pause b. ((   ))

3. overlapping speech c. [ 

4. unclear words d. HAPPY 

5. loudly said utterance e. (   ) 

Presentation

Please see the symbols in this link on “What is the Jefferson’s transcriptions” (2020): https://www2.le.ac.uk/departments/psychology/research/child-mental-health/cara-1/faqs/jefferson. 

(Note: A PowerPoint of the symbols or notes can also be viewed.)

Please appendix for the symbols.

Practice 

Directions: 1. Watch this video clip on the financial literacy with Boy Abunda and FEU  students here:   https://youtu.be/MEJJwmLkRYc                      

          2. Pick three English utterances from Boy Abunda’s answers to the question of the first student who 

                       asked him.

                   3. Transcribe the data using any of the applicable transcription symbols discussed and explain during the presentations.

Performance

Written Output: Recording a Dialogue online (10-15 minutes) (Individual/Pair Work)

Directions: 1. Download a recording app on your cell phone or use your cellphone 

                       recorder.          

                  2. Go to a YouTube channel of the World Health Organization on an interview in this

link: https://youtu.be/CTrunX2SdEg (Option 1). You can also find an interview online of your choice. (Option 2).

                   3. Record the first few 10 minutes of the talk show using a recording app or 

                       your smartphone. 

       4. Transcribe the recorded interview online using Gail Jefferson’s transcript 

            notation. 

       5. Format: short bond paper size (8x12), times new roman, 12 fond size, 

                      portrait, microsoft word, single-spaced.

References

“Boy Abunda urges aspiring public speakers to find their power pose” (2020) Retrieved on August 23, 2020 from the World Wide Web at 

https://youtu.be/MEJJwmLkRYc.

Flowerdew, J. (2013). Discourse in English language education. Routledge: London.

“Live on Q & A #Covid 19” (2020) Retrieved on August 23, 2020 from the World Wide 

Web at https://youtu.be/CTrunX2SdEg

Sidnell, J. (2010). Conversation Analysis: An introduction., pp. ix-x, West Sussex, UK: Wiley-Blackwell (CTU Main 3rd Floor)

 “What is Jefferson’s transcription?” (2020) Retrieved on August 22, 2020 from the World Wide Web at: 

https://www2.le.ac.uk/departments/psychology/research/child-mental-health/cara-1/faqs/jefferson.

Appendix

Transcript System

A glossary of some of the major symbols of Jefferson’s model is as follows (developed by Hutchby & Wooffitt, 2008 in Flowerdew, 2013, p. 118). 

(0.5) The number in brackets indicates a time gap in tenths of a second 

(.) A dot enclosed in a bracket indicates a pause in the talk of less than two-tenths of a second (also referred to as a micropause).

= The ‘equals’ sign indicates ‘latching’ between utterances.

[ ] Square brackets between adjacent lines of concurrent speech indicate the onset and end of a spate of overlapping talk.

.hh A dot before an ‘h’ indicates speaker in-breath. The more h’s, the longer the in breath. 

hh An ‘h’ indicates an out-breath. The more h’s, the longer the breath.

((  )) A description enclosed in a double bracket indicates a non-verbal activity. For example ((banging sound)). Alternatively double brackets may 

                 enclose the transcriber’s comments on contextual or other features.

soun- A dash indicates the sharp cut-off of the prior word or sound.

sou:::nd Colons indicate the speaker has stretched the preceding sound or letter. The more colons, the greater the extent of the stretching.

! Exclamation marks are used to indicate an animated or emphatic tone.

(  ) Empty parentheses indicate the presence of an unclear fragment on the tape.

(guess) The words within a single bracket indicate the transcriber’s best guess at an unclear utterance.

word. A full stop indicates a stopping fall in tone. It does not necessarily indicate the end of a sentence.

word? A question mark indicates a rising inflection. It does not necessarily indicate a question.

↑↓ Pointed arrows indicate a marked falling or rising intonational shift. They are placed immediately before the onset of the shift.

a: Less marked falls in pitch can be indicated by using underlining immediately preceding a colon.

a: Less marked rises in pitch can be indicated by using a colon which is itself underlined.

Under      Underlined fragments indicate speaker emphasis.

CAPITALS     Words in capitals mark a section of speech noticeably louder than that surrounding it.

.  . Degree signs are used to indicate that the talk they encompass is spoken noticeably quieter than the surrounding talk.

Tha(gh)t A ‘gh’ indicates that the word in which it is placed had a guttural pronunciation.

>  < Inward chevrons indicate that the talk they encompass was produced noticeably faster than the surrounding talk.

→ Arrows in the left margin point to specific parts of an extract discussed in the text.

[H:21.3.89:2] Extract headings refer to the transcript library source of the researcher who originally collected the data.

                        Source: Flowerdew, 2013, p. 118

Chapter 1. Discourse 

Prepared by Prof. Jelyn Pepito

Intended Learning Outcome

• explain discourse concepts through written and oral engagements (PO2)

Introduction

This chapter focuses on discourse analysis, the meaning of discourse, spoken vs written, and utterance vs sentence. Discourse Analysis, or, to use a more recent term, Discourse Studies can be defined as the study of language in its contexts of use and above the level of the sentence. The more recent term Discourse Studies is perhaps more appropriate than the older term, Discourse Analysis, because it gets away from the misconception that the field is only concerned with analysis (that it is just a method), while it is also concerned with theory and application (and it comprises a host of methods) (van Dijk, 2001b).

Preparation

Questions:

1. What is Discourse?

2. What is the difference between Spoken vs. Written? Utterance vs Sentence?

Presentation

Here's the video presentation:

Discourse Analysis may focus on any sort of text, written or spoken. The term ‘text’, in Discourse Analysis, refers to any stretch of spoken or written language. In written text, Discourse Analysis may consider texts as diverse as news reports, textbooks, company reports, personal letters, business letters, e-mails, and faxes. In spoken discourse, it may focus on casual conversations, business and other professional meetings, service encounters (buying and selling goods and services), and classroom lessons, among many others. 

While Discourse Analysis has traditionally focused on written and spoken text, in recent years it has started to extend its field of activity to consider multimodal discourse, where written and/or spoken text is combined with visual or aural dimensions, such as television programs, movies, websites, museum exhibits and advertisements of various kinds. These texts, which form the data of Discourse Analysis, may be contemporary or historical. Indeed, Discourse Analysis has much to offer historical studies (Flowerdew, 2012a).

There are various usages of the term discourse, but we will begin here by defining it broadly as language in its contexts of use. In considering language in its contexts of use, the concern is also with language above the level of the sentence. The emphasis on contexts of use and the suprasentential level is important, because for much of the history of modern linguistics, under the influence of the generative linguist Chomsky, language has been analyzed as separate from context, as decontextualized sentences. The rationale for a contextualized and suprasentential consideration of language is based upon the belief that knowing a language is concerned with more than just grammar and vocabulary: it also includes how to participate in a conversation or how to structure a written text. To be able to do this, it is necessary to take into account the context, or situation, in which a particular use of language occurs and how the units of language combine together and structure the overall discourse. 

More restricted in sense, the term ‘discourse’ can also be used to refer to a particular set of ideas and how they are articulated, such as the discourse of environmentalism, the discourse of neoliberalism, or the discourse of feminism. In this case, the term refers to a type of specialized knowledge and language used by a particular social group. This meaning is associated with French post-structuralist thinkers such as Michel Foucault.

The discourse analyst Gee (2011a) memorably refers to the first of the two meanings of discourse considered thus far – discourse as language in the contexts of its use and above the level of the sentence – as little ‘d’ discourse and the second meaning – discourse as ideas and how they are articulated – as big ‘D’ discourses (note the first is always singular, while the second can be pluralized).

According to Chafe and Danielewicz (1987), spoken text is fragmented (loosely structured) and involved (interactive with the listener). Written text is integrated (densely structured) and detached (lacking in interaction with the listener). Some linguistic features of the spoken text are as follows:

• phonological contractions and assimilations; 

• hesitations, false starts and filled pauses; 

• repetition; 

• sentence fragments rather than complete sentences; 

• structured according to prosodic features rather than clauses; 

• high incidence of discourse markers at the beginning or end of tone groups;

• relatively frequent use of questions and imperatives; 

• first- and second-person pronouns; 

• deixis (reference outside the text – this, that, here, there).

Linguistic features of written text, on the other hand, are:

• longer information units (complete clauses and sentences); 

• complex relations of coordination and subordination; 

• high incidence of attributive adjectives; 

• wider range and more precise choice of vocabulary than in speech; 

• high degree of nominalizations; 

• longer average word length; 

• greater use of passive voice.

In spite of these differences, however, spoken and written text are not two totally distinct categories. Halliday (1989: 46) argues that there is a cluster of registers that share the written medium, on the one hand, and a cluster of registers that share the spoken medium, on the other, but that there are nevertheless certain features which are characteristic of either mode. With the advent of electronic media, the distinction between certain registers is becoming blurred, many ‘virtual’ texts exhibiting features typical of both speech and writing.

Typically, written text will have a higher lexical density than spoken text. Halliday is keen to stress, however, that this does not mean that written text is more complex than spoken. Both types of text have their individual type of complexity. Halliday describes writing as the world of ‘things’ rather than ‘happenings’, of ‘product’ rather than ‘process’, and of ‘being’ rather than ‘becoming’. 

Spoken text, on the other hand, is the world of happening, of processes and of becoming, Writing reflects upon the world, while speech represents the world as action or process. In terms of the grammar, written text is characterized by lexical intricacy, while spoken text is characterized by complex chains of clauses. ‘[T]he complexity of written language is lexical, while that of spoken language is grammatical’ (Halliday, 1989: 63). 39, 

There is a third unit that carries meaning; however, we may not notice it as clearly because we take it for granted in day-to-day interactions. Consider this utterance: I now pronounce you husband and wife. This sentence may be uttered in very different sets of circumstances: (1) by an officiant at a ceremony, speaking to a couple getting married in the presence of their families and friends or  (2) by an actor dressed as an officiant, speaking to two actors before a congregation of Hollywood extras assembled by a director filming a soap opera. In the first instance, I now pronounce you husband and wife create a marriage for the couple intending to get married. But that same utterance has no effect on the marital status of any actor on the filming location. 

Thus, the circumstances of utterance create different meanings, although the linguistic meaning of the sentence remains unchanged. It is therefore necessary to know the circumstances of an utterance in order to understand its effect or force. We say that the sentence uttered in the wedding context and the sentence uttered in the film context have the same linguistic meaning but are different utterances, each with its own utterance meaning. 

The difference between sentence meaning and utterance meaning can be further illustrated by the question: Can you shut the window? There are at least two ways in which an addressee might react to this question. One would be to say Yes (meaning ‘Yes, I am physically capable of shutting the window’) and then do nothing about it. This is the “smart-aleck” interpretation; it is of course not the way such a question is usually intended. Another way in which the addressee might react would be to get up and shut the window. 

Obviously, these interpretations of the same question are different: the smart-aleck interpretation treats the question as a request for information; the second interpretation treats it as a request for action. To describe the difference between these interpretations, we say that they are distinct utterances. Sentence semantics is not concerned with utterance meaning. One of the premises of sentence semantics is that sentences must be divorced from the context in which they are uttered—in other words, that sentences and utterances must be distinguished. To experienced language users, this premise may appear strange and counterintuitive because so much meaning depends on context. 

The point is not to discard context as unimportant but to recognize that sentences may carry meaning independently of context, while utterance meaning depends crucially on the circumstances of the utterance. Semantics is the branch of linguistics that examines word and sentence meaning while generally ignoring context. By contrast, pragmatics pays less attention to the relationship of word meaning to sentence meaning and more attention to the relationship of an utterance to its context.

Practice

Written Output.

Exercise 1.

Now that you have been introduced to different definitions of discourse, try to formulate an alternative definition in your own words.

Exercise 2:

1. Spoken Discourse may include:                                                                      

2. Written discourse may include:

Performance

Written Output (Individual work)

Format: Microsoft Word, Times New Roman, 12 font size, portrait, justified, short bond paper size (8x12)

Write your views on the following quotations:

1. “To use language is always, inevitably, to enter into particular situations” (Kress 1990:90)

2. “Society is indeed performed through discourse” (Bowers & Iwi 1993: 387)

References

Finegan, E. (2012). Language: Its structure and use: 6th ed. California: Wadsworth Cengage Learning.

Flowerdew, J. (2013). Discourse in English Language Education. New York: Routledge (Chapter 1, pp. 1-9)

van Dijk, T.A. (2001b) Critical discourse studies. In Wodak, R. & Meyer, M. (Eds) Methods of Critical Discourse Analysis (pp. 63-86). London: Sage. 

Chapter 4. Narrative Structure

prepared by Prof. Jelyn Pepito

Learning Outcome:

• explain discourse concepts and ethical considerations through written and oral engagements (CLO1)

Introduction

This chapter focuses on Narrative Structure. The narrative has been one of the major themes in humanistic and social-scientific thought since the mid-twentieth century. The essence of humanness, long characterized as the tendency to make sense of the world through rationality, has come increasingly to be described as the tendency to tell stories, to make sense of the world through narrative.

Preparation

Watch a Silent Video and narrate the story: https://youtu.be/mpjEyBKSfJQ

Presentation

In linguistics, the narrative was one of the first discourse genres to be analyzed, and it has continued to be among the most intensively studied. We turn to some of the most influential works on the linguistics of narrative, that of Labov and Waletzky (1967, 1997; Labov 1972: 354–96). We then sketch work on the structure of narrative by linguistic anthropologists and scholars interested in information processing for computational purposes. 

Linguist William Labov closely studied the unrehearsed stories that people tell each other every day — what he called “natural narratives” — and identified six common elements that form the structures of well-developed narratives:  

• Abstract: An optional set-up for the story, such as, “I remember when my family went on vacation to the beach.”  

• Orientation: The who, when, where, and/or why of the story, such as, “My sister and I were walking along the shore and collecting shells.”  

• Complicating Action: The plot of the story. “We saw a swimmer waving his hands in the air and calling out for help. A rip current was pulling him out to sea. We ran down the beach and alerted a lifeguard.” 

• Resolution: What happened, in which the problem posed by the complicating action comes to a conclusion. “The lifeguard paddled out on his surfboard and rescued the swimmer.” 

• Coda: Returns the listener back to the present. This is the storyteller saying that the story is over. “And we all lived happily ever after!” 

• Evaluation: Optional comments, made at any point in the story, that explain why the story is being told or why the events are notable, for example, “It’s a good thing we were there or who knows what might have happened!”

Practice 

Below is the transcription of an excerpt from the film Steam of life. Use it to label the sections of the man’s natural narrative based on Labov’s model. The “evaluation” sections have been labeled for you.

Part A

____________________ I got married during the war and had two children when I was on leave.  

____________________ But then my wife got sick.  

__Evaluation_________ When she was still alive, if I was away for a few hours, I always worried if I would find her dead or alive.  

__Evaluation_________ I couldn’t always get the boys to watch her.  

__Evaluation_________ My eldest son was there a few times and asked me, “How can you cope with this life for so many years, Dad?” But I just had to carry on, and you get the strength for it as you go along.  

 ____________________ It went on for five years before she finally died. Then I was alone.  

Part B 

____________________ I sat home alone on my bed and cooked whenever I wanted, what little I wanted, alone.  

____________________ Suddenly I had this hunger for other people. I said to myself that something has to change in my life. My son came to visit and said, “Listen, Dad. We have to do something. You have to get out and about or else you will go crazy.” After my son told me that, I got my act together and went to the veterans’ Christmas party. I found a nice-looking person there.  

__Evaluation_________ I thought she would be a nice company if only I would dare to ask.  

____________________ I finally approached her and asked if I could one day come for a cup of coffee. She said yes, and soon enough I went there with a bunch of flowers.  

____________________ That’s how it started, and it still goes on, hopefully for a long time.  

__Evaluation_________ We’ve had great companionship and a good life.  

__Evaluation_________ She’s a good person and can cook and tells me how to do laundry and helps me in everything.  

__Evaluation_________ I’m living the best years of my life.  

Performance

Activity. (Collaborative work)

Directions: Create a digital story with the theme, "Resiliency during the pandemic". The video must be at least 5 minutes long and a maximum duration of 10 minutes. 

Criteria:

Creativity-10

Content/relevance to theme-10

Presentation skills-10 

Total =30 points 

References

Labov, W. 1972.the transformation of experience in narrative syntax. In W. Labov, ed., Language in the Inner City: Studies in the Black English Vernacular. 

Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, pp. 354-96

Simpson, Paul. Stylistics. London: Routledge, 2005. http://www.routledge.com/textbooks/0415281059/

Tannen, D. Hamilton, H. & Schiffrin, D. (2015). The Handbook of Discourse Analysis. Wiley Blackwell.pov-steamoflife-handout.pdf 

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://www.pbs.org/pov/downloads/2011/pov-

steamoflifehandout.pdf&ved=2ahUKEwiBpamWqbvrAhWCHqYKHamGCqoQFjAAegQIARAC&usg=AOvVaw2OrT4ZohFEoRK63RqBdpuX

Chapter 5. Discourse Markers

prepared by Prof. Jelyn Pepito

Learning Outcome

• explain discourse concepts and ethical considerations through written and oral engagements (CLO1)

Introduction

This chapter is about Discourse Markers. Discourse markers are one type of commentary pragmatic marker: they are “a class of expressions, each of which signal show the speaker intends the basic message that follows to relate to the prior discourse” (1990: 387), and they all fall into only one of three functional classes: contrastive (prototypically, but), elaborative (prototypically, and), and inferential (prototypically, so) (2009a: 300–1) (Fraser). Fraser (1998) builds upon the sequential function of discourse markers such that discourse markers necessarily specify (i.e., provide commentary on) a relationship between two segments of discourse: this specification is not conceptual but procedural (it provides information on the interpretation of messages; see also Ariel 1998).

Preparation

Direction: Complete the following sentences using an appropriate discourse marker.

1. _________ nurses are overworked and underpaid.

1. In particular

2. Broadly speaking

3. Especially

4. Except for

2. I don’t believe in ghosts, ________ I haven’t seen one yet.

1. I think

2. At least

3. In particular

4. In other words

3. I think he should be acquitted. ________ he is too young to know the difference between right and wrong.

1. After all

2. At least

3. Well 

4. Honestly

4. The man was sleeping soundly on the river bank. _______ a crocodile was creeping closer.

1. Despite this 

2. Meanwhile

3. As a result

4. By contrast

5. The child didn’t get any medical attention. ________, she died soon after.

1. Despite this

2. As a result

3. In this case

4. In spite that

Presentation

Discourse markers – expressions such as oh, well, y’know, and but – are one set of linguistic items that function in cognitive, expressive, social, and textual domains.

Schiffrin’s initial work defined discourse markers as “sequentially dependent elements which bracket units of talk” (1987a:31)–that is, non-obligatory utterance-initial items that function in relation to ongoing talk and text. She proposed that discourse markers could be considered as a set of linguistic expressions comprising members of word classes as varied as conjunctions (e.g., and, but, or), interjections (e.g., oh), adverbs (e.g., now, then), and lexicalized phrases (e.g., y’know, I mean). Also proposed was a discourse model with different planes: a participation framework k, information state, ideational structure, action structure, and exchange structure. The specific analyses showed that markers could work at different levels of discourse to connect utterances on either a single plane (1) or across different planes (2).

Practice

See if you can put the following ten discourse markers into the three categories below.

• for example

• in summary

• whereas

• in conclusion

• while

• unlike

• for instance

• on the other hand

• to illustrate

• in short

CONTRAST

EXAMPLE

CONCLUSION

Performance

Video selfie (individual work)

Each student must record a minute video of themselves talking about how important discourse markers using different discourse markers. 

Criteria:

The video must be in portrait mode, with at least 4 minutes of duration and a maximum of 5 minutes.

References

Fraser, Bruce. 1990. An approach to discourse markers. Journal of Pragmatics, 14, 385-95

Fraser, Bruce. 1998. Contrastive discourse markers in English. In Andreas Jucker and Yael Ziv, eds., Discourse Markers: Description and Theory. 

Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins, pp. 301-26.

Fraser, Bruce B. 2009a. An account of discourse markers. International Review of Pragmatics, 1(2), 293-320.

Tannen, D. Hamilton, H. & Schiffrin, D. (2015). The Handbook of Discourse Analysis. 

Wiley Blackwell.

Chapter 6. Conversation Analysis

Prepared by Rowanne Marie Mangompit

Learning Outcome

• Articulate concepts of understanding discourses through selected ways of analysis such as conversation analysis, discourse analysis, genre analysis, and corpus-based approaches (CLO2) 

Preparation

Pair Work

Directions: Read the extract from Lacia, Ginco & Maxilom (2019). Describe the dialogue between two students. Write your answers in the ODILO Forum/comment box.

Sample  1 (Lines 10-21) 

10. S2: Why? 

11. S1: Because  my  classmates say  that.. my  polo is  good.

12. S2: And  you believe?

13. S1: Yes.14. 

Presentation

Conversation analysis was developed by Harold Garfinkel who later was followed by Harvey Sacks, Emanuel Schegloff, and Gail Jefferson who are sociologists. These researchers focused on studying language through social interaction by gathering empirical data from the recorded naturally occurring data or talk that were transcribed. (Flowerdew, 2013, p. 117). Few concepts of the conversation analysis such as turn-taking, adjacency pairs, and repairs are discussed in this chapter.

Turn-taking

Remember the rules of Turn-taking mentioned by Sacks et al., 1978: 13 cited in Flowerdew, 2013).

1. The rules for the allocation of turns, following the principle of transition relevance

1. Where the next speaker is selected by the current speaker, the current speaker must stop talking and the next speaker must take over 

2. where the next speaker is not selected by the current speaker, any speaker may, but need not, self-select, with the first speaker acquiring rights to a turn. 

3. where the next speaker is not selected by the current speaker: the current speaker may, but need not, continue if no other speaker self-selects. Whichever choice has been made, then 1. A–C come into operation again. (adapted from Sacks et al., 1974/1978: 13).

Adjacency Pairs

Adjacency pairs are defined by Schegloff (1972, 2007) and Schegloff and Sacks (1973 in Flowerdew, 2013) as having the following features: 

1. two-utterance  length

2. adjacent positioning of component utterances

3. different speaker producing each utterance

4. relative ordering of parts 

5. discrimination relations.

In addition, Flowerdew (2013) enumerated the sample adjacency pairs:

1. accusation–denial/confession

2. announcement–response

3. apology–acceptance/refusal

4. assertion–agreement/dissent

5. boast–appreciation/derision

6. challenge-response

7. closing–closing

8. complaint–apology/denial

9. compliment–acceptance/rejection

10. greeting–greeting

11. insult–response

12. invitation–acceptance/refusal

13. offer–acceptance/refusal

14. question–answer

15. request–acceptance/rejection

16. summons–answer

17. threat–response

Note: A PowerPoint presentation may be prepared. 

Practice

1. Turn-taking, Adjacency Pairs and Repairs

Directions: Read the extract from Lacia, Ginco & Maxilom (2019).

                  Analyze the rule of turn-taking, type of adjacency pairs and repairs.

Sample  5 (lines 79-83) 

S1:    You’re brave,  you have much  experience than me.  

          I only  had 3  girlfriends and two were  is just a joke. 

S2:    Joke?  *laughs  

S1:    Yeah,  I  didn‟t  know,  we  were  really  young,  we  don‟t think that much. 

         Everything  was just a game. 

2. Writing an Article Critique

Directions: 1. Read the following article of Opina (2017) in this link:      

                                http://dx.doi.org/10.11648/j.ijll.20170505.13

        2. Write your reaction in the ODILO Forum/comment box. 

                  3. Be sure to write one strength and one suggestion.

Performance

1. Viewing and Recording an interview.

Directions: 

1. View this video clip in this link: https://youtu.be/qro1JOuE7ek 

                      (“Oprah”, 201) 

2. Record while viewing and transcribe the interview .

3. Choose 4-5 lines and analyze the interaction based on the rules of turn-taking.

4.Determine whether repairs are prevalent and analyze the interaction.

2. Article Critique

Directions: 

1. Find a scholarly journal that contains the topic conversation analysis or uses conversation analysis in the study.

           2. Write 4 separate paragraphs for the following parts:

             a. Summary of the article with the objective, method, and key findings of the scholarly journal reviewed. (3-5 sentences)

    b. Strengths (2-3 sentences)

    c. Limitation written as a suggestion to improve the study (1-2 sentences only)

          3. Follow the format: font size 12, Arial, 8x12 (short bond paper size), one inch in all sides.

     4. This is the rubric in rating.

Rubric:

Content -15

Organization - 15

Grammar - 10

Mechanics - 10

Total = 50 pts.

References

Flowerdew, J. (2013). Discourse in English Language Education. New York: Routledge, Chapter 7, pp. 117 – 135)

Lacia, K., Ginco, J. & Maxilom, R. (2019). Interactional strategies and anaphoric repairs of BS Information and Communications Technology (BSIT) 

Students Indonesian Journal of EFL and Linguistics. 

doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.21462/ijefl.v4i1.103

Opina, K. (2017). Verbal Communication Behaviors: How Male and Female University Students interact in Gendered Talks. (Open Access) Link: 

http://www.sciencepublishinggroup.com/journal/paperinfo?journalid=501&doi=10.11648/j.ijll.20170505.13 3

“Oprah opens up about her recent health scare for the first time” (2019). Retrieved on August 31, 2020 from the World Wide Web at 

https://youtu.be/qro1JOuE7ek

Chapter 7. Genre Analysis

Prepared by Rowanne Marie Mangompit

Learning Outcome:

• Articulate concepts of understanding discourses through selected ways of analysis such as conversation analysis, discourse analysis, genre analysis, and corpus-based approaches (CLO2) 

Introduction

Flowerdew (2013) provided a background of the term genre which originated from the Greek philosopher, Aristotle. Genre refers to the major types of literature such as poetry, drama, and epic, however, this term is differently used in Applied Linguistics. Instead, genre refers to the communicative events that are associated with particular settings and which have recognized structures and communicative functions. (Flowerdew, 2013).  

Preparation

Question: What could be the possible genres which you can analyze? 

Suggestions: You can use menti.com for the posting of your answers.

Presentation

There are many examples of genres mentioned by Flowerdew (2013). These are the following:

1. business reports

2. academic lectures

3. news articles

4. recipes

5. religious sermons

6. political speeches

7. curriculum vitae

8. more recent ‘virtual’ genres 

1. e-mails

2. text messages

3. instant messages

4. tweets

5. Facebook pages.

There are also other genres you can add to the list and analyze these various forms such as flyers, abstracts of research papers, promotional materials, etc. A PowerPoint presentation can be viewed.

Practice

Reading the Sample Papers on Genre Analysis

Directions: 1. Please click on these links for the sample genres in the following studies. 

      2. Write your insights in any of the two scholarly journal articles in the 

                      storage folders assigned to you. 

(Note: It is assumed that you prepare a folder in Google Drive during the first week of classes for the storage of your requirements.) 

Journal Article 1, Barabas (2018) on the brochures: 

Link: https://www.elejournals.com/tag/asian-esp-journal-volume-14-issue-1-june-2018/ 

Please download the entire journal and read the article of Barabas (2018).

Journal Article 2, Maxilom & Constantino (2017) on the flyers:

Link: http://www.sciencepublishinggroup.com/journal/paperinfo?journalid=214&doi=10.11648/j.ijecs.20170206.16

Performance

Analyzing the Research Abstract (Pair Work)

Directions: 

1. Read the journal article of Zand-Moghadam (2016) and observe the five-move model created by Hyland (2000) such as introduction, purpose, method, product, and conclusion.

2. Read the abstract of the published scholarly journal below and code, analyze, and evaluate the abstract based on Hyland’s (2000 in Zand-Moghadam, 2016) moves. 

“This paper is anchored on genre analysis to investigate the rhetorical moves and communicative functions of the brochures published by selected higher education institutions in the 

Philippines from 2014 – 2016. Drawing on the work of Swales (1990) in genre analysis and Fairclough (1993) in the textual analysis of university prospectuses, and Halliday (1994) in 

Systemic Functional Linguistics, the paper sought to identify the rhetorical moves in the twelve (12) brochures were identified following the guidelines in segmenting the moves set by 

Swales (1990). Rationalization on the presence of these moves was derived and the communicative functions were determined. Eight rhetorical moves were identified and in terms of 

transitivity type, material process was the most common in the corpus. All rhetorical moves have utilized verbs in this process type to communicate certain ideas and to portray roles or 

relationships between the actors involved in the discourse event.

 Keywords: rhetorical moves, genre analysis, linguistic elements in brochure, higher education promotion, transitivity, discourse analysis” [Source:  Barabas (2018)] 

      Note: Informed consent was sought from the author.

References

Barabas, C. (2018). Rhetorical Moves and the Functional Constituent of Process in Higher Education Promotional Materials, The Asian ESP Journal, 14 (1), 

364-390. https://www.elejournals.com/asian-esp-journal/asian-esp-journal-volume-14-issue-1-  june-2018/

Flowerdew, J. (2013). Discourse in English Language Education. New York: Routledge (Chapter 5, pp. 138-15). 

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/235771851_discourse_in_english_language_ed

Hyland, K. (2000). Disciplinary discourses: Social interactions in academic writing. London: Longman.

Maxilom, R. & Constantino, C. (2017). Textual analysis of condominium flyers in Cebu. 

International Journal of Education, Culture and Society, 2 (6): 195-202. doi: http://www.sciencepublishinggroup.com/journal/paperinfo?journalid=214&doi=10.11648/j.ijecs.20170206.16

Zand-Moghadam, A. (2016) A rhetorical move analysis of TEFL thesis abstracts: The case of Allameh Tabataba’i University, English in Language Teaching, 

  5 (1) 23-  . http://ilt.atu.ac.ir/article_7714.html.

Chapter 8. Corpus-Based Approaches

Prepared by Rowanne Marie Mangompit

Learning Outcome:

Articulate concepts of understanding discourses through selected ways of analysis such as conversation analysis, discourse analysis, genre analysis, and corpus-based approaches (CLO2) 

Introduction

In the present time, researchers use corpus-based approaches in collecting their data whether these are from naturally occurring data like interviews and conversations or genres as mentioned in the previous chapter. 

As defined by Flowerdew (2013), “…a  corpus  (plural corpora) is a large collection of language, usually held electronically, which can be used for the purposes of linguistic analysis. The earliest known corpora were compiled by hand and consisted of biblical texts. In the modern era, an early electronically stored corpus was the Brown corpus, developed at Brown University, USA, in the early 1960s, and consisting of one million words. Other notable, more recent, corpora are the Bank of English, developed by COBUILD at Birmingham University, UK, which consists of well over 500 million words, the British National Corpus (BNC), consisting of 100 million words and the Corpus of Contemporary American English (COCA), consisting of over 425 million words and still growing….” (Source: Flowerdew, 2013, p. 160) 

Preparation

Directions: 1. List down 2 new words that you encounter from March 16, 2020 to the present.

                2.  Go to this link: https://www.english-corpora.org/coca/ and encode each word in the search box and click frequency.

      3. Determine the number of words that appear.             

Presentation

There are already many corpora available online especially if your research interests are on the usage of words, collocations, frequency of words, contexts, and others. Instead of gathering data primarily, recent studies use available online corpora as their research data. In this way, the time in collecting research data can be shortened because of the use of online corpora.

As mentioned by Dita (2020) during her lecture on Corpus Linguistics on a Webinar organized by the Linguistic Society of the Philippines and the Lasallian Institute for Development and Educational Research (LIDER), these are the corpus available online in the English Corpora:

1. iWeb: The Intelligent Web-based corpus 

Link: https://www.english-corpora.org/iweb/

2. News on the Web (NOW)

Link: https://www.english-corpora.org/now/

3. Global Web-based English (GloWbE)

Link: https://www.english-corpora.org/glowbe/

4. Wikipedia Corpus

Link: https://www.english-corpora.org/wiki/

5. Corpus of Contemporary American English (COCA)

Link: https://www.english-corpora.org/coca/

6. Corpus of Historical American English (COHA)

Link: https://www.english-corpora.org/coha/

7. The TV Corpus

Link:  https://www.english-corpora.org/tv/

8. The Movie Corpus

Link: https://www.english-corpora.org/movies/

9. Corpus of American Soap Operas

Link: https://www.english-corpora.org/soap/

10. New: The Coronavirus Corpus

Link: https://www.english-corpora.org/corona/

Practice

Directions: 

1. Reading and Reflecting:

1. Read the presented paper titled “Philippine languages online corpora: Status, issues, and prospects” by Dita & Roxas (2011) in this link: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/Philippine-Languages-Online-Corpora%3A-Status%2C-and-Dita-Roxas/2306fd734c1199d40a7bfa91b50256ff7eb767b8.                                   

2. Describe issues and challenges in building Philippine Languages Online Corpora.  (two to three sentences only)                                                                       

3. Write your brief reflections. (two to five sentences only)

2. Collocates:

1. Choose one among the English corpora and write a word in the search box.

2. Click the collocates. 

3. Observe what are the words before and after the word.

4. List down the common usage of the word in the sentences. 

5. Takedown notes of the frequency of usage.

Performance

Directions:

1. English Corpora 1. Go to the Coronavirus Corpus in this link: 

                    https://www.english-corpora.org/corona/. 

2. Register in the English Corpora log in after the confirmation received in your e-mail address.

3. By looking at the context of stay home and stay at home, analyze the differences of their meanings using the Coronavirus Corpus. Explain your answer.

References

Dita, S. (2020, May 23). An online lecture on “Using corpus in ELT: The whats and the Hows,” hosted by the Linguistic Society of the Philippines and the 

  Lasallian Institute for Development and Educational Research on May 23, 2020 via zoom.

Dita, S. & Roxas, R. (2011). Philippine languages online corpora: Status, issues, and prospects,  Proceedings of the 9th Workshop on Asian Language 

  Resources, pages 59–62, Chiang Mai, Thailand, November 12 and 13, 2011.

https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/Philippine-Languages-Online-Corpora%3A-Status%2C-and-Dita-Roxas/2306fd734c1199d40a7bfa91b50256ff7eb767b8

“English Corpora” (2020) Retrieved from the World Wide Web at https://www.english-corpora.org/.

Flowerdew, J. (2013). Discourse in English language and education. London: Routledge.

Chapter 9. Writing a Publishable Paper

Prepared by Dr. Ariel Ramos

Learning Outcome

• Demonstrate skills of analyzing discourses through a well-written publishable paper (CLO3)

Introduction

Knowledge, in many cases, is considered insignificant when not put into practical applications in life. To gain more knowledge about the world along with its inhabitants and their interactions, research studies are done either quantitatively or qualitatively. 

In the context of linguistic research, there are researchers who apply Critical Discourse Analysis in order to uncover text and talk that are emerging form-critical linguistics, critical semiotics, and in general, from a socio-politically conscious and oppositional way of investigating language, discourse, and communication.

Given the fact that the previous topics in the course have exposed you to the concepts related to Critical Discourse Analysis along with your new knowledge on corpus-based approaches, genre analysis, discourse markers, narrative structure, ethnography of speaking, speech acts, conversation analysis, and transcript notation, it is now time that this knowledge will be put into practical application.

Preparation

Before introducing the concepts of publication conducted through a qualitative study, the students are tasked to fill in the K-W-L Chart.

Use the following guide questions:

1. What are general and specific ideas about publication?

2. What are the things you wish to gain more through this topic?

3. What practical benefits can writing a publishable paper provide in the context of your possible career?

K (now)

W (ant to know)

L (earned from the topic)

Note: This column is for the things that students already knew about writing a publishable paper.

Note: This column is for the students’ expectations as to what they would like to know about things related with the topic.

Note: This column is for the learning of the students, which shall be filled in at the later part of the lesion after the discussion.

Note: It is very important for the facilitator to allow the students to grasp the value of 

         publishing rather than seeing it as a mere part of the academic requirements.

Presentation

Converting approximately 200-page research into a publishable paper certainly requires a great number of skills in analyzing and synthesizing to make sure that all those included in the paper are highly significant. After all, not all that can be counted. Thus, it is important to focus on what counts and not on what can be counted when writing a publishable paper.

Simply, a publishable paper is summarized according to these parts:

1. Introduction

2. Materials and Methods

3. Results 

4. Discussion

In addition, other minor parts include the title, the abstract, keywords, and references. However, it should be remembered that the format varies depending on the template being prescribed by the publisher.

In order to be guided as to what contains and how each of these parts is constructed, you are directed to watch the 4-minute YouTube video on IMRD: The Parts of a Research Paper using the following link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aO6ipI-d2fw&list=TLPQMjkwODIwMjDDs8hj1i6IOQ&index=2

Note: Before allowing the students to watch the video, the class should be divided into four (4) groups. Each group is assigned to a corresponding part of a publishable research paper (Group 1 for I, Group 2 for M, Group 3 for R, and Group 4 for D).

As they watch the video, be sure that they are guided by allowing them to fill in the matrix below for the concepts that they will get corresponding to their assigned topic or part of a publishable research paper.

Parts of Publishable Paper

What it is?

How to Write it?

Introduction

Materials and Methods

Results

Discussion

(Note: Group 1 should only provide answers for row 1 while the rest of the groups will do the same according to their assigned topic.)

After watching the video and all the boxes are filled in, it is important to process the responses using the following questions:

1. What word can you associate to each of the parts of a publishable paper?

2. Describe the process of writing each of the parts of a publishable paper.

3. What should be considered in making sure that there are continuity and fluidity thoughts in the paper?

4. What should be considered in choosing the title?

5. What should contain the abstract of the research paper?

6. Discuss the role of relevant and updated citations in writing a publishable paper.

Practice

Note: These shall be done according to their grouping.

No. 1 Analysis: Given the sample published research paper entitled: Rapid Expectation Adaptation During Syntactic Comprehension by Fine et.al, examine each paragraph and arrange them accordingly following the IMRD format. Be ready to explain your responses as to why you have decided to arrange them in that order.

No. 2 Synthesis: Look for a sample undergraduate thesis, read and make a drafted publishable paper following the IMRD format. Be ready to discuss your paper.

Performance

Note: This shall be done individually (or by group).

Choose a research paper you have previously submitted in this class using critical discourse analysis. Improve that paper by writing it into a highly publishable one.

Be ready to present your output and defend it orally among your peers.

Note: Before the end of this lesson, let the students answer the last column of the K-W-L 

          Chart.

References 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aO6ipI-d2fw&list=TLPQMjkwODIwMjDDs8hj1i6IOQ&index=2

Elsharkawy, AE. (2017). What is Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA)?. The Second Literary Linguistics Conference. Johannes Gutenberg-University.

Nikolov, P. (2013). Writing Tips for Economics Research Papers. Unpublished Paper, Harvard University, https/www.kimoon.co.kr/gmi/reading/nikolov-writingtips-2013.pdf.

Reynolds, M. (2014). Pragmatics and Discourse in Languages and Linguistics Koros Press. United Kingdom.

Here is the link of the guidelines: 

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1OMX57va6EDLjKOH0DP06vcptOPHS2N9A/edit?usp=sharing&ouid=109615040054200478844&rtpof=true&sd=true