Use of Comparison and Contrast Transition Signals in Thai EFL Students’ Writing: A Corpus-Based Study
Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
Abstract
To build a well-organized comparative text, the effective use of cohesive devices, especially comparison and contrast (CC) transition signals, is essential for comparing and contrasting ideas and connecting clauses, sentences, or paragraphs. This study thus aims to investigate the use of 19 CC transition signals in expository compositions written by Thai EFL undergraduate English majors and further explore the usage patterns of CC transition signals commonly used by Thai students through the corpus of Contemporary American English (COCA). According to the AntConc analysis, the 5 most frequently used CC transition signals are also, however, on the other hand, while, and in contrast. A qualitative look revealed inappropriate use both semantically and syntactically of CC transition signals, namely unnecessary use, wrong form/format, non-equivalent exchange, omission, and wrong relation. Finally, further qualitative inspection of the grammatical patterns of the 5 most common CC transition signals in both the learner corpus and the COCA revealed that English native speakers employed a variety of patterns, especially a greater variety of the positions of CC transition signals while Thai students employed basic structures. Therefore, the study recommends an application of data-driven learning (DDL) and more exposure to appropriate English language input.
Article Details
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
References
Alghamdi, E. A. (2014). Discourse markers in ESL personal narrative and argumentative papers: A qualitative and quantitative analysis. International Journal of Humanities and Social Science, 4(4), 294-305.
Anthony, L. (2023). AntConc (Version 4.2.4) [Computer Software]. Tokyo, Japan: Waseda University. Retrieved from https://www.laurenceanthony.net/software.
Ariyanti, A. (2021). EFL students’ use of transition signals in essay writing. Indonesian Journal of EFL and Linguistics, 6(1), 285-294.
Biber, D., Johansson, S., Leech, G., Conrad, S., & Finegan, E. (1999). Longman grammar of spoken and written English. Essex, England: Pearson Education Limited.
Boonyarattanasoontorn, P. (2017). An investigation of Thai students’ English language writing difficulties and their use of writing strategies. Journal of Advanced Research in Social Sciences and Humanities, 2(2), 111-118.
Bui, H. P. (2022). Vietnamese EFL students’ use and misconceptions of cohesive devices in writing. SAGE Open, 1-12.
Carrell, P. L. (1982). Cohesion is not coherence. TESOL Quarterly, 16(4), 479-488.
Carter, R., & McCarthy, M. (2006). Cambridge grammar of English. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
Chanyoo, N. (2018). Cohesive devices and academic writing quality of Thai undergraduate students. Journal of Language Teaching and Research, 9(5), 994-1001.
Cowan, R. (2008). The teacher’s grammar of English. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
Crewe, W. J. (1990). The illogic of logical connectives. ELT Journal, 44(4), 316-325.
Dagneaux, E., Denness, S., & Granger, S. (1998). Computer-aided error analysis. System, 26(2), 163-174.
Davies, M. (2020). The COCA corpus. Corpus of contemporary American English. Retrieved from https://www.english-corpora.org/coca.
Dhanarattigannon, J. (2022). English writing. Bangkok, Thailand: Danex Intercorporation.
Drew, C. (2023). Difference between expository & argumentative essays. Retrieved from https://helpfulprofessor.com/text-types.
Farneste, M. (2012). Usage of comparison/ contrast pattern in undergraduate academic essays. Baltic Journal of English Language, Literature and Culture, 2, 42-53.
Flowerdew, J. (2013). Discourse in English language education. New York: Routledge.
Fraser, B. (1999). What are discourse markers?. Journal of Pragmatics, 31(7), 931-952.
Granger, S. (1998). Learner English on computer. London, England: Longman.
Granger, S. (2008). Learner corpora. In A. Lüdeling & M. Kytö (Eds.), Corpus Linguistics: An International Handbook. Volume 1 (pp. 259-275). Berlin & New York: Walter de Gruyter.
Granger, S., & Tyson, S. (1996). Connector usage in the English essay writing of native and non-native EFL speakers of English. World Englishes, 15(1), 17-27.
Halliday, M. A. K., & Hasan, R. (1976). Cohesion in English. London, England: Longman.
Hamed, M. (2014). Conjunctions in argumentative writing of Libyan tertiary students. English Language Teaching, 7(3), 108-120.
Hammann, L. A., & Stevens, R. J. (2003). Instructional approaches to improving students’ writing of compare-contrast essays: An experimental study. Journal of Literacy Research, 35(2), 731-756.
He, Z. (2020). Cohesion in academic writing: A comparison of essays in English written by L1 and L2 university students. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 10(7), 761-770.
Kao, T. Y., & Chen, L. M. (2011). Diagnosing discoursal organization in learner via conjunctive adverbials. ROCLING papers, 310-322.
Krashen, S. D. (1981). Second language acquisition and second language learning. Oxford, England: Pergamon Press Inc.
Kraut, S. (2018). Two steps forward, one step back: A computer-aided error analysis of grammar errors in EAP writing (Master’s thesis). St. Cloud State University, United States.
Lee, K. (2020). Chinese ESL writers’ use of English contrastive markers. English Language Teaching, 32(4), 89-110.
Matte, M. L., & Sarmento, S. (2018). A corpus-based study of connectors in student academic writing. English for Specific Purposes World, 55(20), 1-21.
Narita, M., Sato, C., & Sugiura, M. (2004). Connector usage in the English essay writing of Japanese EFL learners. LREC, 27, 1171-1174.
Nugraheni, R. (2015). Cohesive devices in learners’ writing. LLT Journal, 18(1), 51-62.
Oshima, A., & Hogue, A. (2006). Writing academic English: Level 4. (4th ed.). New York: Longman.
Pearson. (n.d.). Longman dictionary of contemporary English Online. Retrieved from https://www.ldoceonline.com.
Prommas, P., & Sinwongsuwat, K. (2011, April). A comparative study of discourse connectors used in argumentative compositions produced by Thai EFL learners and English-native speakers. Paper presented at the 3rd International Conference on Humanities and Social Sciences, Prince of Songkla University, Thailand.
Quirk, R., Greenbaum, S., Leech, G., & Svartvik, J. (1985). A comprehensive grammar of the English language. London, England: Longman.
Rahayu, T., & Cahyono, B. Y. (2015). Discourse markers in expository essays written by Indonesian students of EFL. International Journal of Language and Linguistics, 2(2), 21-29.
Rahimi, M. (2011). Discourse markers in argumentative and expository writing of Iranian EFL learners. World Journal of English Language, 1(2), 68-78.
Rojanavarakul, T., & Jaroongkhongdach, W. (2017). Exploring logical thinking through the use of logical connectors in Thai and international research articles. Online Proceedings of the International Conference: DRAL 3/19th ESEA 2017, 328-337.
Sitthirak, C. (2013). A comparison between Thai university students and English speakers using contrastive discourse markers. Foreign Language Teaching and Learning, 2(1), 875-886.
Sukman, K., & Namtachan, P. (2019). A corpus-based analysis of two English synonymous nouns: Alternative and option. Social Science Research Network. Retrieved from https://ssrn.com/abstract=3521891.
Tikham, S. (2022). Analysis of discourse markers in Thai EFL students’ essay writing: A case study of a university in Northern Thailand. Rajapark Journal, 16(46), 50-56.
Wang, Y. (2022). Linking adverbials in argumentative essays of advanced EFL learners: A corpus-assisted analysis. Korean Journal of English Language and Linguistics, 22, 396-417.
Wongrat, K. (2018). A corpus-based analysis of English synonymous verbs: Predict and forecast (Independent study paper). Thammasat University, Patumthani.