Text-structuring metadiscourse, intonation and the signalling of organisation in academic lectures

Journal of English for Academic Purposes

Volumn 2, Issue 1, 2003, Pages 5-20

  Thompson, Susan Elizabeth ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF LIVERPOOL   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0344593980     PISSN: 14751585     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S1475-1585(02)00036-X     Document Type: Article

References (34)

1. Anderson, A., & Lynch, T. (1988). Listening. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
2. Barr, P. (1990). The role of discourse intonation in lecture comprehension. In M. Hewings (Ed.), Papers in Discourse Intonation. Discourse Analysis Monographs 16. Birmingham: ELR/University of Birmingham.
3. Brazil, D. (1997). The communicative value of intonation in English. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
4. Brown, G. (1995). Speakers, listeners and communication: explorations in communication. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
5. Brown, G., & Yule, G. (1983). Discourse analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
6. Charles, C., & Ventola, E. (2002). A multi-semiotic genre: the conference slide show. In E. Ventola, C. Shalom, & S. E. Thompson (Eds.), The language of conferencing. Frankfurt: Peter Lang.
7. Chaudron, C., & Richards, J. (1986). The effect of discourse markers on the comprehension of lectures. Applied Linguistics, 7, 113-127.
8. Clennell, C. (1997). Raising the pedagogic status of discourse intonation teaching. ELT Journal, 51, 117-125.
9. Coulthard, M., & Montgomery, M. (1981). The stucture of monologue. In M. Coulthard, & M. Montgomery (Eds.), Studies in discourse analysis (pp. 31-38). London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.
10. Crismore, A. (1983). Metadiscourse: what it is and how it is used in school and non-school social science texts (Technical Report 273). Urbana-Champaign: Center for the Study of Reading, University of Illinois.
11. Crismore, A., & Farnsworth, J. (1990). Metadiscourse in popular and professional science discourse. In W. Nash (Ed.), The writing scholar: Studies in academic discourse. London: Sage.
12. De Carrico, J., & Nattinger, J. R. (1988). Lexical phrases for the comprehension of academic lectures. English for Specific Purposes, 7, 91-102.
13. Dunkel, P. A., & Davis, J. N. (1994). The effects of rhetorical signalling cues on the recall of English lecture information by speakers of English as a native or second language. In J. Flowerdew (Ed.), Academic listening: Research perspectives. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
14. Flowerdew, J., & Miller, L. (1997). The teaching of academic listening comprehension and the question of authenticity. English for Specific Purposes, 16, 27-46.
15. Flowerdew, J., & Tauroza, S. (1995). The effect of discourse markers on second language lecture comprehension. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 17, 435-458.
16. Givón, T. (1995). Coherence in text vs. coherence in mind. In M. A. Gernsbacher, & T. Givón (Eds.), Coherence in spontaneous text. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
17. Heino, A., Tervonen, E., & Tommola, J. (2002). Metadiscourse in academic conference presentations. In E. Ventola, C. Shalom, & S. E. Thompson (Eds.), The language of conferencing. Frankfurt: Peter Lang.
18. Hoey, M. P. (1997). The interaction of textual and lexical factors in the identification of paragraph boundaries. In M. Reinhardt, & W. Thiele (Eds.), Grammar and text in synchrony and diachrony. Frankfurt am Main: Vervuert.
19. Hyland, K. (1998). Persuasion and context: the pragmatics of academic metadiscourse. Journal of Pragmatics, 30, 437-455.
20. King, P. (1994). Visual and verbal messages in the engineering lecture: notetaking by postgraduate L2 students. In J. Flowerdew (Ed.), Academic listening: Research perspectives. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
21. Lehiste, I. (1979). Perception of sentence and paragraph boundaries. In B. Lindblom, & S. Ohman (Eds.), Frontiers of speech research. London: Academic Press.
22. Lynch, T. (1994). Training lecturers for international audiences. In J. Flowerdew (Ed.), Academic listening: research perspectives. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
23. Murphy, D., & Candlin, C. N. (1979). Engineering lecture discourse and listening comprehension. Practical Papers in English Language Education, 2, 1-79 Lancaster: University of Lancaster.
24. Paltridge, B. (1994). Genre analysis and the identification of textual boundaries. Applied Linguistics, 15, 288-299.
25. Rost, M. (2002). Teaching and researching listening. London: Longman.
26. Scott, M., & Thompson, G. (Eds.). (2001). Patterns of text: In honour of Michael Hoey. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
27. Strodt-Lopez, B. (1991). Tying it all in: asides in university lectures. Applied Linguistics, 12, 117-140.
28. Tench, P. (1996). The intonation systems of English. London: Cassell.
29. Thompson, S. E. (1994). Frameworks and contexts: a genre-based approach to analysing lecture introductions. English for Specific Purposes, 13, 171-186.
30. Thompson, S. E. (1997). Presenting research: a study of interaction in academic monologue. Unpublished PhD thesis, University of Liverpool.
31. Wichman, A. (2000). Intonation in text and discourse: Beginnings, middles and ends. London: Longman.
32. Young, L. (1994). University lectures- macro-structure and micro-features. In J. Flowerdew (Ed.), Academic listening: Research perspectives. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
33. Young, R., & Becker, A. L. (1966). The role of lexical and grammatical cues in paragraph recognition. Mimeo: University of Michigan, Center for Research on Language and Language Behavior: Studies in Language and Language Behavior.
34. Yule, G. (1980). Speakers' topics and major paratones. Lingua, 52, 33-47.