A Comparative Analysis of Rhetorical Organization of English and Turkish Master’s Thesis Introductions on Turkish Sign Language

Yıl 2024, Cilt: 18 Sayı: 35, 151 - 162, 10.11.2024

Merve Geçikli , Cansu Gür

https://doi.org/10.54316/dilarastirmalari.1439007

Öz

The present study investigates the rhetorical organization of introductions in English and Turkish master’s theses on Turkish Sign Language (Türk İşaret Dili [TİD]). This study aims to compare the structural patterns and rhetorical strategies used in the introduction sections of master’s theses in two languages, using Swales’ CARS model. Through corpus-based analysis, this study examines how writers establish the research space, articulate the gap in the literature, and present their research purpose and objectives within the context of TİD studies. By adopting a comparative approach, this study contributes to our understanding of cross-linguistic and cross-cultural variations in academic discourse practices, particularly within TİD research. The findings offer insights into the linguistic and rhetorical conventions that shape academic writing in English and Turkish.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Rhetorical, Master’s Theses, Introduction, Turkish Sign Language, TİD, CARS Model

Türk İşaret Dili Konulu İngilizce ve Türkçe Yüksek Lisans Tezi Girişlerinin Retorik Organizasyonunun Karşılaştırmalı Bir Analizi

Öz

Bu çalışma, Türk İşaret Dili (TİD) alanında hazırlanan İngilizce ve Türkçe yüksek lisans tezlerindeki girişlerin retorik organizasyonunu incelemektedir. Bu çalışmanın amacı ise Swales’ın CARS modelini kullanarak yüksek lisans tezlerin giriş bölümlerinde kullanılan yapısal kalıpları ve retorik stratejileri iki dilde karşılaştırmaktır. Derlem temelli analiz yoluyla bu çalışma, TİD alanı kapsamında yazarların araştırma alanını nasıl oluşturduklarını, literatürdeki boşluğu nasıl dile getirdiklerini ve araştırma amaçlarını ve hedeflerini nasıl sunduklarını araştırır ve inceler. Karşılaştırmalı bir yaklaşım benimseyen bu çalışma, özellikle TİD araştırması alanında akademik söylem uygulamalarındaki diller arası ve kültürler arası farklılıkları anlamamıza katkıda bulunmaktadır. Bulgular, İngilizce ve Türkçe akademik yazıyı şekillendiren dilsel ve retorik geleneklere dair iç görüler sunmaktadır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Retorik, Yüksek Lisans Tezleri, Giriş, Türk İşaret Dili, TİD, CARS Modeli

Kaynakça

• AHMAD, Ummul K. (1997). Scientific Research Articles in Malay: A Situated Discourse Analysis. Doctoral Dissertation. Michigan: University of Michigan.
• ALOTAIBI, Hmoud. (2013). Research Article Abstracts and Introductions: a Comparative Genre-based Study of Arabic and English in the Fields of Educational Psychology and Sociology. Doctoral Dissertation. Texas: Texas A&M University.
• AL-QAHTANI, Abdulkhaleq. (2006). A Contrastive Rhetoric Study of Arabic and English Research Article Introductions. Doctoral Dissertation. Oklahoma: Oklahoma State University.
• ARIK, Engin. (2013). “Introduction: Previous and current research on Turkish Sign Language (TİD)”. Current Directions in Turkish Sign Language Research (Edt. Engin Arık). Newcastle upon Tyne, UK: Cambridge Scholars Publishing, 1-17.
• BASTURKMEN, Helen. (2009). “Commenting on results in published research articles and masters dissertations in Language Teaching”. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 8/4: 241–251.
• BHATIA, Vijay K. (1993). Analysing Genre: Language Use in Professional Settings. London: Longman.
• CANAGARAJAH, Suresh. (2002). Critical Academic Writing and Multilingual Students. Michigan: University of Michigan Press.
• CHARLES, Maggie. (2003). “This mystery...’: a corpus-based study of the use of nouns to construct stance in theses from two contrasting disciplines”. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 2/4: 313–326.
• CROOKES, Grahan. (1986). “Towards a validated analysis of scientific text structure”. Applied Linguistics, 7: 57-70.
• FAKHRI, Ahmed (2004). “Rhetorical Properties of Arabic Research Article Introductions”. Journal of Pragmatics, 36/6: 1119-1138.
• FEAK, Christine B.; SWALES, John M. (2009). Telling a Research Story: Writing a Literature Review. Michigan: University of Michigan Press.
• FLOWERDEW, John. (2001). Attitudes of Journal Editors to Non-native Speaker Contributions. TESOL Quarterly, 35: 121-150.
• FLOWERDEW, John; LI, Yongyan. (2009). English or Chinese? The Trade-off between Local and International Publication among Chinese Academics in the Humanities and Social Sciences. Journal of Second Language Writing, 18/1: 1-16.
• GOFFMAN, Erwing. (1967). Interaction Ritual. Essays on Face-to-Face Behavior. New York: Pantheon Books.
• GOFFMAN, Erwing. (1972). “On Face-work: An Analysis of Ritual Elements in Social Interaction. In Interaction ritual: Essays on Face-to-Face Behaviour (Ed. Erwing Goffman). London: The Penguin Press, 5-46.
• GÜR, Cansu; GEÇIKLI Merve. (2022). “A Diachronic Content Analysis of Research Papers and Theses on Turkish Sign Language Published between 2012-2022”. Dil Araştırmaları (Ed. Selma Baş et al.). Konya: Palet Yayınları, 145-163.
• HIRANO, Eliana. (2009). Research Article Introductions in English for Specific Purposes: A Comparison between Brazilian Portuguese and English. English for Specific Purposes, 28/4, 240-250.
• HYLAND, Ken. (1999). “Academic Attribution: Citation and the Construction of Disciplinary Knowledge”. Applied Linguistics, 20/3: 341-367.
• HYLAND, Ken. (2004). Disciplinary Discourses: Social Interactions in Academic Writing. University of Michigan Press.
• JOGTHONG, Chalermsri. (2001). Research Article Introductions in Thai: Genre Analysis of Academic Writing. Doctoral Dissertation. Morgantown: University of West Virginia.
• KWAN Becky S. C. (2006). “The schematic structure of literature reviews in doctoral theses of applied linguistics.” English for Specific Purposes, 25/1, 30–55.
• LOI, Chek K. (2010). “Research Article Introductions in Chinese and English: A Comparative Genre-based Study”. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 9/4: 267-279.
• LOI, Chek K.; SWEETNAM EVANS, Moyra. (2010). “Cultural Differences in the Organization of Research Article Introductions from the Field of Educational Psychology: English and Chinese. Journal of Pragmatics, 42/10: 2814-2825.
• MORENO, Ana. I. (2008). “The Importance of Comparable Corpora in Cross-cultural Studies”. Contrastive Rhetoric: Reaching to Intercultural Rhetoric (Ed. Ulla Connor et al.). Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 25-41.
• NAJJAR, H. (1990). Arabic as a Research Language: The Case of the Agricultural Sciences. Doctoral Dissertation. Michigan: University of Michigan.
• ÖZTÜRK, İsmet (2007). The Textual Organization of Research Article Introductions in Applied Linguistics: Variability within a Single Discipline. English for Specific Purposes, 26/1: 25-38.
• PALTRIDGE, Brian. (2002). “Thesis and dissertation writing: An examination of published advice and actual practice”. English for Specific Purposes, 21(2), 125–143.
• SAMRAJ, Betty. (2002). “Introductions in research articles: variation across disciplines”. English for Specific Purposes, 21/1: 1-17.
• SAMRAJ, Betty. (2004). “Discourse Features of the Student-produced Academic Research Paper: Variation across Disciplinary Courses”. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 3/1: 5-22.
• SAMRAJ, Betty. (2005). “An Exploration of a Genre Set: Research Article Abstracts and Introductions in Two Disciplines”. English for Specific Purposes, 24/2: 141-156.
• SAMRAJ, Betty. (2008). “A discourse analysis of master’s theses across disciplines with a focus on introductions”. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 7/1: 55–67.
• SHELDON, Elena. (2011). “Rhetorical Differences in RA Introductions Written by English L1 and L2 and Castilian Spanish L1 Writers”. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 10/4: 238-251.
• SHI, Ling. (2002). “How Western-trained Chinese TESOL Professionals Publish in Their Home Environment”. TESOL Quarterly, 36/4: 625-634.
• SHIM, Eunsook. (2005). Explicit Writing Instruction in Higher Educational Contexts: Genre Analysis of Research Article Introductions from the English Teaching and TESOL Quarterly Journals. Doctoral Dissertation. Minnesota: University of Minnesota.
• SOLER-MONREAL, Carmen; CARBONELL-OLIVARES, Maria; GIL-SALOM, Luz (2011). “A Contrastive Study of the Rhetorical Organisation of English and Spanish PhD Thesis Introductions”. English for Specific Purposes, 30/: 4-17.
• SWALES, John M. (1990). Genre Analysis: English in Academic and Research Settings. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• SWALES, John M. (2004). Research Genres: Explorations and Applications. Cambridge University Press.
• SWALES, John M., & FEAK, Christine B. (2004). Academic writing for graduate students: Essential tasks and skills (2nd ed.). Ann Arbor, MI: The University of Michigan Press.
• TAYLOR, Gordon; CHEN, Tinguang. (1991). “Linguistic, cultural, and subcultural issues in contrastive discourse analysis: Anglo-American and Chinese scientific texts”. Applied Linguistics, 12: 319-336.
• THOMPSON, Paul. (2005). “Points of focus and position: Intertextual reference in PhD theses”. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 4/4: 307–323.