An Argument for Nonadversarial Argumentation: On the Relevance of the Feminist Critique of Academic Discourse to L2 Writing Pedagogy

Journal of Second Language Writing

Volumn 6, Issue 1, 1997, Pages 1-21

  Belcher, Diane D ^a  

^a OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0038555096     PISSN: 10603743     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S1060-3743(97)90003-5     Document Type: Article

References (90)

1. Aisenberg, N., & Harrington, M. (1988). Women of academe: Outsiders in the sacred grove. Amherst, MA: University of Massachusetts Press.
2. Angier, N. (1988 November 6). Nice guys don't win Nobel Prizes. Review of D.L. Hall's Science as a process' An evolutionary account of the social and conceptual development of science The New York Times, pp. 14-16.
3. Atkinson, D. (in press). A critical approach to critical thinking in TESOL. TESOL Quarterly.
4. Atkinson, D., & Ramanathan, V. (1995). Cultures of writing: An ethnographic comparison of L1 and L2 university writing/language programs. TESOL Quarterly, 29, 539-568.
5. Ballard, B., & Clancy, J. (1991). Assessment by misconception: Cultural influences and intellectual traditions. In L. Hamp-Lyons (Ed.), Assessing second-language writing in academic discourse (pp. 19-35). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
6. Bannerji, H. (1991). But who speaks for us? Experience and agency in conventional feminist paradigms. In H. Bannerji, L. Carty, K. Dehli, S. Heald, & K. McKenna (Eds.), Unsettling relations: The university as site of feminist struggles (pp. 67-108). Toronto: Women's Press.
7. Barnlund, D.C. (1975). Public and private self in Japan and the United States: Communicative styles of two cultures. Tokyo: Simul.
8. Bazerman, C. (1988). Shaping written knowledge: The genre and activity of the experimental article in science. Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin Press.
9. Belcher, D. (1995). Writing critically across the curriculum. In D. Belcher & G. Braine (Eds.), Academic writing in a second language. Essays on research and pedagogy (pp. 135-154). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
10. Belenky, M.F., Clinchy, B.M., Goldberger, N.R., & Tarule, J.M. (1986). Women's ways of knowing: The development of self, voice, and mind. New York: Basic Books.
11. Benesch, S. (1993). ESL, ideology, and the politics of pragmatism. TESOL Quarterly, 27, 705-717.
12. Bleich, D. (1990). Sexism in academic styles of learning. Journal of Advanced Composition, 10, 231-247.
13. Bridwell-Bowles, L. (1992). Discourse and diversity: Experimental writing within the academy. College Composition and Communication, 43, 349-368.
14. Canagarajah, A.S. (1993). Up the garden path: Second language writing approaches, local knowledge, and pluralism. Comment on A. Raimes' Out of the woods. TESOL Quarterly, 21, 301-306.
15. Carson, J., & Nelson, G. (1996). Chinese students' perceptions of ESL peer response group interaction. Journal of Second Language Writing, 5, 1-20.
16. Cheung, K. (1990). The Woman Warrior versus the Chinaman Pacific: Must a Chinese American critic choose between feminism and heroism? In M. Hirsch & E.F. Keller (Eds.), Conflicts in feminism (pp. 234-251). New York: Routledge.
17. Clancy, P.M. (1986). The acquisition of communicative style in Japanese. In B. Schieffelin & E. Ochs (Eds.), Language socialization across cultures (pp. 213-250). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
18. Clark, G., & Doheny-Farina, S. (1990). Public discourse and personal expression: A case study in theory-building. Written Communication, 7, 456-481.
19. Clark, G., & Doheny-Farina, S. (1991). Response to Lunsford/Ede and Jarratt. Written Communication, 8, 120-124.
20. Dillon, G. (1993). Argumentation and critique: College composition and Enlightenment ideals. In A.R. Gere (Ed.), Into the field: Sites of composition studies (pp. 84-95). New York: MLA.
21. Doheny-Farina, S. (1989). A case study of one adult writing in academic and nonacademic dis-course communities. In C. Matalene (Ed.), Worlds of writing (pp. 17-42). New York: Random House.
22. Doi, T. (1973). The anatomy of dependency. (J. Bester, Trans.) New York: Harper & Row.
23. Ede, L., Glenn, C., & Lunsford, A. (1995). Border crossings: Intersections of rhetoric and feminism. Rhetorica, 13, 401-441.
24. Ede, L., & Lunsford, A. (1990). Singular texts/plural authors: Perspectives on collaborative writing. Carbondale, IL: Southern Illinois University Press.
25. Eisner, E. (1991). The enlightened eye: Qualitative inquiry and the enhancement of educational practice. New York: Macmillan.
26. Elbow, P. (1993). The uses of binary thinking. Journal of Advanced Composition, 13, 51-78.
27. Fairclough, N. (1992). Critical language awareness. London: Longman.
28. Foss, S., & Griffin, C. (1995). Beyond persuasion: A proposal for an invitational rhetoric. Communication Monographs, 62, 2-18.
29. Fox, H. (1994). Listening to the world: Cultural issues in academic writing. Urbana, IL: NCTE.
30. Freire, P. (1970). Pedagogy of the oppressed. M.B. Ramos, Trans. New York: Seabury.
31. Frey, O. (1990). Beyond literary Darwinism: Women's voices and critical discourse. College English, 52, 507-526.
32. Geertz, C. (1983). Local knowledge: Further essays in interpretive anthropology. New York: Basic Books.
33. Geisler, C. (1994). Academic literacy and the nature of expertise: Reading, writing, and knowing in academic philosophy. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
34. Gilbert, G.N., & Mulkay, M. (1984). Opening Pandora's box: A sociological analysis of scientists' discourse. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
35. Gosden, H. (1996). Verbal reports of Japanese novices' research writing practices in English. Journal of Second Language Writing, 5, 109-128.
36. Harding, S. (1987). The instability of the analytical categories of feminist theory. In S. Harding & J.F. O'Barr (Eds.), Sex and scientific inquiry (pp. 283-302). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
37. Hinds, J. (1987). Reader versus writer responsibility: A new typology. In U. Connor & R. Kaplan (Eds.), Writing across languages: An analysis of 12 texts (pp. 141-152). Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
38. Jarratt, S.C. (1991). Feminism and composition: The case for conflict. In P. Harkin & J. Schilb (Eds.), Contending with words: Composition and rhetoric in a postmodern age (pp. 105-123). New York: MLA.
39. Jensen, V. (1987). Teaching East Asian rhetoric. Rhetoric Society Quarterly, 77, 135-149.
40. Johns, A. (1995). Genre and pedagogical purposes. Journal of Second Language Writing, 4, 181-190.
41. Johnson, D.M., & Roen, D.H. (1992). Complimenting and involvement in peer reviews: Gender variation. Language in Society, 21, 27-57.
42. Kachru, Y. (1995). Cultural meaning and rhetorical styles: Toward a framework for contrastive rhetoric. In G. Cook & B. Seidlhofer (Eds.), Principle and practice in applied linguistics: Studies in honour of H. G. Widdowson (pp. 171-184). London: Oxford University Press.
43. Kirsch, G. (1993). Women writing the academy: Audience, authority, and transformation. Carbondale, IL: Southern Illinois University Press.
44. Krieger, S. (1991). Social science and the self: Personal essays on an art form. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press.
45. Kubota, R. (1996). Voices from the margin: Broadening pedagogical perspectives for integrated second/foreign language teacher education. Manuscript submitted for publication.
46. Lamb, C. (1991). Beyond argument in feminist composition. College Composition and Communication, 42, 11-24.
47. Lather, P. (1991). Getting smart: Feminist research and pedagogy with/in the postmodern. New York: Routledge.
48. Latour, B. (1991). Science in action: How to follow scientists and engineers through society. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
49. Leatherman, C. (1996, March 8). Whither civility? Some say academic discourse has become too vituperative. The Chronicle of Higher Education, pp. A21-A22.
50. Lebra, T.S. (1976). Japanese patterns of behavior. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press.
51. Leki, I. (1995). Coping strategies of ESL students in writing tasks across the curriculum. TESOL Quarterly, 29, 235-260.
52. Lincoln, Y., & Guba, E. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
53. Luke, C., & Gore, J. (1992). Women in the academy: Strategy, struggle, survival. In C. Luke & J. Gore (Eds.), Feminisms and critical pedagogy (pp. 192-210). New York: Routledge.
54. Mao, L. (1995). Individualism or personhood: A battle of locution or rhetoric? In J.F. Reynolds (Ed.), Rhetoric, cultural studies, and literacy: Selected papers of the 1994 Conference of the Rhetoric Society of America (pp. 127-135). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
55. McKay, S. (1993). Examining L2 composition ideology: A look at literacy education. Journal of Second Language Writing, 2, 65-81.
56. Matalene, C. (1985). Contrastive rhetoric: An American writing teacher in China. College English, 47, 789-808.
57. Meyer, S. (1993). Refusing to play the confidence game: The illusion of mastery in the reading/writing of texts. College English, 55, 46-63.
58. Moulton, J. (1983). A paradigm of philosophy: The adversary method. In S. Harding & M. Hintikka (Eds.), Discovering reality: Feminist perspectives on epistemology, metaphysics, and philosophy of science (pp. 149-231). Boston, MA: D. Reidel.
59. Myers, G. (1989). The pragmatics of politeness in scientific articles. Applied Linguistics, 10, 1-35.
60. Noddings, N. (1984). Caring, a feminine approach to ethics and moral education. Berkeley: University of California Press.
61. Ong, W. (1981). Fighting for life: Contest, sexuality, and consciousness. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
62. O'Reilley, M.R. (1993). The peaceable classroom. Portsmouth, NH: Boynton/Cook.
63. Powers, J., & Gong, G. (1994). East Asian voice and the expression of cultural ethos. In K.B. Yancey (Ed.), Voices on voice: Perspectives, definitions, inquiry (pp. 202-225). Urbana, IL: NCTE.
64. Prior, P. (1995). Tracing authoritative and internally persuasive discourses: A case study of response, revision, and disciplinary enculturation. Research in the Teaching of English, 29, 288-325.
65. Richardson, L. (1985). The new other woman: Contemporary single women in affairs with married men. New York: The Free Press.
66. Roen, D.H., & Johnson, D.M. (1992). Perceiving the effectiveness of written discourse through gender lenses: The contribution of complimenting. Written Communication, 9, 435-464.
67. Roen, D.H., Peguesse, C., & Abordonado, V. (1995). Gender and language variation in written communication. In D. Rubin (Ed.), Composing social identity in written language (pp. 113-131). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
68. Rose, M. (1991). A comment on [Sandra Stotsky's] "On literacy anthologies and adult education: A critical perspective." College English, 54, 81-83.
69. Schenke, A. (1996). Feminist theory and the ESL classroom: Not just a "social issue": Teaching feminist in ESL. TESOL Quarterly, 30, 155-159.
70. Shapin, S. (1988). Following scientists around, Review of Bruno Latour's Science in action: How to follow scientists and engineers through society. Social Studies of Science, 18, 533-550.
71. Shen, F. (1989). The classroom and the wider culture: Identity as a key to learning English com-position. College Composition and Communication, 40, 459-466.
72. Silva, T. (1990). Second language composition instruction: Developments, issues, and directions in ESL. In B. Kroll (Ed.), Second language writing: Research insights for the classroom (pp. 11-23). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
73. Sorensen, K.H. (1992). Towards a feminized technology? Gendered values in the construction of technology. Social Studies of Science, 22, 5-31.
74. Spack, R. (1988). Initiating ESL students into the academic discourse community: How far should we go? TESOL Quarterly, 22, 29-51.
75. Steinitz, V., & Kanter, S. (1991). Becoming outspoken: Beyond connected education. Women's Studies Quarterly, 19, 138-153.
76. Stotsky, S. (1990). Review: On literacy anthologies and adult education: A critical perspective. College English, 52, 916-923.
77. Stotsky, S. (1992). Sandra Stotsky responds. College English, 54, 83-85.
78. Sullivan, P. (1992). Feminism and methodology in composition studies. In G. Kirsch & P. Sullivan (Eds.), Methods and methodology in composition research (pp. 37-61). Carbondale, IL: Southern Illinois University Press.
79. Sunderland, J. (1994). Exploring gender: Questions and implications for English language education. New York: Prentice Hall.
80. Tannen, D. (1990). You just don't understand: Women and men in conversation. New York: William Morrow.
81. Tannen, D. (1994a, March). Beyond a culture of critique: The framing and reframing of academic discourse. Paper presented at the Georgetown University Round Table on Languages and Linguistics, Washington, DC.
82. Tannen, D. (1994b). Gender and discourse. New York: Oxford University Press.
83. Tannen, D. (1994c). Talking from 9 to 5: How women's and men's conversational styles affect who gets heard, who gets credit, and what gets done at work. New York: William Morrow.
84. Treichler, P.A., & Kramarae, C. (1983). Women's talk in the ivory tower. Communication Quarterly, 31, 118-132.
85. Vandrick, S. (1994). Feminist pedagogy and ESL. College ESL, 4, 69-92.
86. Van Maanen, J. (1988). Tales of the field: On writing ethnography. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
87. Wetzel, P. (1990). Are "powerless" communication strategies the Japanese norm? In S. Ide & N. McGloin (Eds.), Aspects of Japanese women's language (pp. 117-128). Tokyo: Kurosio.
88. Yum, J.O. (1988). The impact of Confucianism on interpersonal relationships and communication patterns in East Asia. Communication Monographs, 55, 374-388.
89. Zamel, V. (1993). Questioning academic discourse. College ESL, 5, 28-39.
90. Zamel, V. (1995). Strangers in academia: The experiences of faculty and ESL students across the curriculum. College Composition and Communication, 46, 506-521.