Cover not available

In:The Pragmatics of Discourse Coherence: Theories and applications
Edited by Helmut Gruber and Gisela Redeker
[Pragmatics & Beyond New Series 254] 2014
► pp. 243–266

Get fulltext from our e-platform
JBE logo with link
PDF logo with download linkDownload Book PDF
authorization required

(Non-)signalling of coherence structures in English learner writing

Published online: 26 November 2014
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.254.09sch
This study explores different realisations of discourse relations in a corpus of English learner writing. A sample of 30 essays produced by upper intermediate learners of English (mean age: 23) is subjected to a multi-method analysis incorporating (1) global coherence ratings, (2) rhetorical structure analysis (RST), and (3) features at the linguistic surface level. The focus is on explicit signalling vs. implicitness of discourse relations in essays rated high vs. low in coherence. The results show differences in the type of connectives used in highrated vs. low-rated texts as well as in the use of connectives to signal relations at higher and lower levels of the discourse structure.
References (38)
Altenberg, Bengt, and Marie Tapper. 1998. “The Use of Adverbial Connectors in Advanced Swedish Learners’ Written English.” In Learner English on Computer, ed. by Sylviane Granger, 80–93. London: Longman.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bateman, John A., and Klaas Jan Rondhuis. 1997. “Coherence Relations: Towards a General Specification.” Discourse Processes 24: 3–49. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bifie – Bundesinstitut für Bildungsforschung, Innovation und Entwicklung des österreichischen Schulwesens. 2012. “Assessment Scale B2”. Available at: [URL] (accessed 22 May 2012).
Bublitz, Wolfram. 1999. “Introduction: Views of Coherence.” In Coherence in Spoken and Written Discourse: How to Create It and How to Describe It. Selected Papers from the International Workshop on Coherence, Augsburg, 24–27 April 1997, ed. by Wolfram Bublitz, Uta Lenk, and Eija Ventola, 1–10. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cain, Kate, and Hannah M. Nash. 2011. “The Influence of Connectives on Young Readers’ Processing and Comprehension of Text.” Journal of Educational Psychology 103 (2): 429–441. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Christiansen, Thomas. 2011. Cohesion: A Discourse Perspective. Bern: Peter Lang.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Council of Europe. 2001. Common European Framework of Reference for Languages: Learning, Teaching, Assessment. Cambridge: CUP.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cozijn, Reinier. 2000. Integration and Inference in Understanding Causal Sentences. PhD Thesis, Tilburg University.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cresswell, Andy. 2010. Textual Metadiscourse in Research Articles and Student Essays: A Corpus Investigation Using Discourse Tagging. PhD Thesis, University of Reading.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Database of English Learner Texts (DELT). 2007–. Compiled by the Centre for English Language Teaching. Vienna: University of Vienna. [URL]Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
De Beaugrande, Robert, and Wolfgang U. Dressler. 1981. Introduction to Text Linguistics. ­London: Longman.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Degand, Liesbeth. 1998. “On Classifying Connectives and Coherence Relations.” Proceedings of COLING-ACL Workshop on Discourse Relations and Discourse Markers , 29–35. Montréal, Canada.
Dörnyei, Zoltán. 2007. Research Methods in Applied Linguistics: Quantitative, Qualitative and Mixed Methodologies. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Fraser, Bruce. 1999. “What are Discourse Markers?” Journal of Pragmatics 31 (7): 931–952. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Freebody, Peter, and Richard C. Anderson. 1983. “Effects of Vocabulary Difficulty, Text Cohesion, and Schema Availability on Reading Romprehension.” Reading Research Quarterly 18 (3): 277–294. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Granger, Sylviane. 2004. “Computer Learner Corpus Research: Current Status and FuturePprospects.” In Applied Corpus Linguistics. A Multidimensional Perspective, ed. by Ulla ­Connor, and Thomas Upton, 123–145. Amsterdam: Rodopi.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Granger, Sylviane, and Stephanie Tyson. 1996. “Connector Usage in the English Essay Writing of Native and Non-Native EFL Speakers of English.” World Englishes 15 (1): 19–29. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Halliday, Michael A. K., and Ruqaiya Hasan. 1976. Cohesion in English. London: Longman.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hunt, Kellogg W. 1965. Grammatical Structures Written at Three Grade Levels. (NCTE Research Report No. 3). Urbana, IL: National Council of Teachers of English.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Johnson, Patricia. 1992. “Cohesion and Coherence in Compositions in Malay and English.” RELC Journal 23 (2): 1–17. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Liu, Meihua, and George Braine. 2005. “Cohesive Features in Argumentative Writing Produced by Chinese Undergraduates.” System 33 (4): 623–636. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mann, William C., Christian M. I. M. Matthiessen, and Sandra A. Thompson. 1992. “Rhetorical Structure Theory and Text Analysis.” In Discourse Description: Diverse Linguistic Analyses of a Fund-raising Text, ed. by William C. Mann, and Sandra A. Thompson, 39–78. ­Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mann, William C., and Sandra A. Thompson. 1987. Rhetorical Structure Theory: A Theory of Text Organization. ISI: Information Sciences Institute, Los Angeles, CA, ISI/RS-87-190, 1–81. Available at: [URL] (accessed 30 May 2012).Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1988. “Rhetorical Structure Theory: Toward a Functional Theory of Text Organization.” Text 8 (3): 243–281.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Milton, John, and Elza S. C. Tsang. 1993. “A Corpus-Based Study of Logical Connectors in EFL Students’ Writing: Directions for Future Research.” In Studies in Lexis, ed. by Richard Pemberton, and Elza S. C. Tsang, 215–246. Hong Kong: The Hong Kong University of Science and Technology.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Narita Masumi, Chieko Sato, and Masatoshi Sugiura. 2004. “Connector Usage in the English Essay Writing of Japanese EFL Learners.” In Proceedings of 4th International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation (LREC 2004) , 1171–1174.
Risselada, Rodie, and Wilbert Spooren. 1998. “Introduction: Discourse Markers and Coherence Relations.” Journal of Pragmatics 30: 31–133. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Sanders, Ted, Jentine Land, and Gerben Mulder. 2007. “Linguistic Markers of Coherence Improve Text Comprehension in Functional Contexts.” Information Design Journal 15 (3): 219–235. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Sanders, Ted, and Leo Noordman. 2000. “The Role of Coherence Relations and their Linguistic Markers in Text Processing.” Discourse Processes 29 (1): 37–60. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Shea, Mark. 2009. “A Corpus-based Study of Adverbial Connectors in Learner Text.” MSU Working Papers in SLS 2009 1 (1): 1–13. Available at: [URL] (accessed 18 May 2012).Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Soria, Claudia, and Giacomo Ferrari. 1998. “Lexical Marking of Discourse Relations – Some Experimental Findings.” Proceedings of COLING-ACL Workshop on Discourse Relations and Discourse Markers , 36–42. Montréal, Canada.
Taboada, Maite, and William C. Mann. 2006. “Rhetorical Structure Theory: Looking Back and Moving Ahead.” Discourse Studies 8 (3): 423–459. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Tankó, Gyula. 2004. “The Use of Adverbial Connectors in Hungarian University Students’ Argumentative Essays.” In How to Use Corpora in Language Teaching, ed. by John McHardy Sinclair, 157–181. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Widdowson, Henry G. 2004. Text, Context, Pretext. Critical Issues in Discourse Analysis. Oxford: Blackwell. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Wilson, Deirdre, and Dan Sperber. 2004. “Relevance Theory.” In Handbook of Pragmatics, ed. by Laurence R. Horn, and Gregory Ward, 607–632. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Witte, Stephen P., and Lester Faigley. 1981. “Coherence, Cohesion, and Writing Quality.” College Composition and Communication 23 (2): 189–204. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Zhang, Meisuo. 2000. “Cohesive Features in the Expository Writing of Undergraduates in Two Chinese Universities.” RELC Journal 3 (1): 61–95.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mobile Menu Logo with link to supplementary files background Layer 1 prag Twitter_Logo_Blue