Communication topics and strategies in e-mail consultation: Comparison between american and international university students

Language Learning and Technology

Volumn 9, Issue 2, 2005, Pages 24-46

  Biesenbach Lucas, Sigrun ^a  

^a AMERICAN UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 21244498469     PISSN: 10943501     EISSN: 10943501     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Review

References (63)

1. Abdullah, M. H. (1998). Electronic discourse: Evolving conventions in online academic environments. ERIC Clearinghouse on Reading, English and Communication, ED422593.
2. Atamian, R., & DeMoville, W. (1998). Office hours - none: An e-mail experiment. College Teaching, 46(1), 31-35.
3. Bardovi-Harlig, K., & Hartford, B. (1990). Congruence in native and nonnative conver-sations: Status balance in the academic advising session. Language Learning, 40(4), 467-501.
4. Bardovi-Harlig, K., & Hartford, B. (1993a). The language of co-membership. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 26(3), 227-257.
5. Bardovi-Harlig, K., & Hartford, B. (1993b). Learning the rules of academic talk: A longitudinal study of pragmatic development. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 15, 279-304.
6. Baron, N. (in press). Language of the Internet. In A. Farghali (Ed.), Stanford handbook for language engineers. Stanford, CA: Center for the Study of Language and Information.
7. Baron, N. S. (2002). Who sets e-mail style? Prescriptivism, coping strategies, and democratizing communication access. The Information Society, 18, 403-413.
8. Baron, N. (1998). Letters by phone or speech by other means: The linguistics of e-mail. Language and Communication, 18(2), 133-170.
9. Benbunan-Fich, R., & Hiltz, S. R. (1999). Impacts of asynchronous learning networks on individual and group problem solving: A field experiment. Group Decision and Negotiation, 8, 409-426.
10. Biber, D. (1992). Using computer-based text corpora to analyze the referential strategiesof spoken and written texts. In J. Svartvik (Ed.), Directions in corpus linguistics Proceedings of Nobel Symposium. Stockholm (pp. 213-252). Berlin: Mouton.
11. Biesenbach-Lucas, S. (2000). "I'll check my e-mail for your response": Teacher-student consultations in cyberspace. WATESOL News, 30(3), 1-2, 11.
12. th Annual Conference of the Linguistic Association of Canada and the United States (LACUS), Rice University, Houston, TX.
13. Biesenbach-Lucas, S., & Weasenforth, D. (2001, March). Institutional discourse in the real world: Professors' judgments of student requests. Paper presented at the Georgetown University Roundtable of Languages and Linguistics (GURT).
14. Biesenbach-Lucas, S., & Weasenforth, D. (2002). Virtual office hours: Negotiation strategies in electronic conferencing. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 15(2), 147-165.
15. Bloch, J. (2002). Student/teacher interaction via e-mail: The social context of Internet discourse. Journal of Second Language Writing, 11(2), 117-134.
16. Bonk, C. J., & King, K. S. (Eds.). (1998). Electronic collaborators. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
17. Boxer, D. (2002). Discourse issues in cross-cultural pragmatics. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 22, 150-167.
18. Collins, M. (1998). The use of e-mail and electronic bulletin boards in college-level biology. Journal of Computers in Mathematics and Science Teaching, 17(1), 75-94.
19. Condon, S. L., & Cech, C. G. (1996a). Discourse management strategies in face-to-face and computer-mediated decision making interactions. The Electronic Journal of Communication, 6(3). Retrieved October 5, 2004, from http://www.cios.org/www/ejc/v6n396.htm
20. Condon, S. L., & Cech, C. G. (1996b). Functional comparison of face-to-face and computer-mediated decision meaking interactions. In S.C. Herring (Ed.), Computer-mediated communication: Linguistic, social, and cross-cultural perspectives (pp. 65-80). Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins.
21. Crouch, M. L., & Montecino, V. (1997). Cyberstress: Asynchronous anxiety or worried in cyberspace - "I wonder if my teacher got my e-mail." Retrieved April 16, 1997, from http://leahi.kcc.hawaii.edu/org/ tcc-conf/pres/crouch.html
22. Danet, B. (2002, June). The language of e-mail. Lecture given at the European Union Summer School, University of Rome.
23. Danet, B. (2001). Cyberpl@y: Communicating online. Oxford, England: Berg.
24. Danet, B. (1999, October 7). "Feeling spiffy": The changing language of e-mail. Annual Hugo Mueller Lecture presented at the American University, Washington, DC.
25. Davis, B. H., & J. Brewer. (1997). Electronic discourse: Linguistic individuals in virtual space. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.
26. Gains, J. (1999). Electronic mail - A new style of communication or just a new medium? An investigation into the text features of e-mail. English for Specific Purposes, 18(1), 81-101.
27. Gallego, J. C. (1997). The structure of the office hour consultation: A case study. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED406888.)
28. Gatz, L. B., & Hirt, J. B. (2000). Academic and social integration in cyberspace: Students and e-mail. Review of Higher Education, 23(3), 299-318.
29. Gee, J. (1999, March). Social discourses. Paper presented at The Annual National TESOL Convention, New York.
30. Gu, P. (2004). Leaving the bathtub to make waves. Essential Teacher, 1(4), 32-35.
31. Hara, N., & Kling, R. (1999). Students' frustrations with a web-based distance education course: A taboo topic in the discourse. CSI Working Paper. Retrieved January 17, 2000, from http://www.slis.indiana.edu/CSI/wp99_01.html
32. Hartford, B., & Bardovi-Harlig, K. (1996). "At your earliest convenience": A study of written student requests to faculty. In L. F. Bouton (Ed.), Pragmatics and language learning, Monograph Series Volume 7 (pp. 55-69). Urbana, IL: Division of English as an International Language.
33. Haworth, B. (1999). An analysis of the determinants of student e-mail use. Journal of Education for Business, 75(1), 55-59.
34. Herring, S. (1994). Politeness in computer culture: Why women thank and men flame. Cultural Performances: Proceedings of the Third Berkeley Women and Language Conference. Berkeley Women and Language Group (pp. 278-94).
35. Herring, S. (1996a). Bringing familiar baggage to the new frontier: Gender differences in computer-mediated communication. In V. Vitanza (Ed.), CyberReader (pp. 144-154). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
36. Herring, S. (1996b). Posting in a different voice: Gender and ethics in computer-mediated communication. In C. Ess (Ed.), Philosophical perspectives on computer-mediated communication (pp. 115-145). Albany: State University of New York Press.
37. Herring, S. (1999a). Interactional coherence in CMC. Journal of Computer Mediated Communication, 4(4). Retrieved October 5, 2004, from http://www.ascusc.org/jcmc/vol4/issue4/herring.html
38. Herring, S. (1999b). Posting in a different voice: Gender and ethics in computer-mediated communication. In P. A. Mayer (Ed.), Computer media and communication: A reader (pp. 241-265). New York: Oxford University Press.
39. Herring, S. (2000). Gender differences in CMC: Findings and implications. Computer Professionals for Social Responsibility Newsletter, Winter 2000. Retrieved November 5, 2002 from http://www.cpsr.org/publications/newsletters/ issues/2000/Winter2000/index.html
40. Herring, S. C. (2002). Computer-mediated communication on the Internet. Annual Review of Information Science and Technology, 36, 109-168.
41. Herring, S. C. (2003). Computer-mediated discourse. In D. Schiffrin, D. Tannen, & H. E. Hamilton (Eds.), The handbook of discourse analysis (pp. 612-634). Malden, MA: Blackwell.
42. Kelly, L., Duran, R. L., & Zolten, J. J. (2001). The effect of reticence on college students' use of electronic mail to communicate with faculty. Communication Education, 50(2), 70-76.
43. King, S. (1996). Reseraching Internet communities: Proposed ethical guidelines for the reporting of results. The Information Society, 12, 119-127.
44. Kirkley, S. E., Savery, J. R., & Grabner-Hagen, M. M. (1998). Electronic teaching: Extending classroom dialogue and assistance through e-mail communication. In C. Bonk & K. King (Eds.), Electronic collaborators (pp. 209-232). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
45. Kunderewicz, L., Michener, S., & Chambliss, C. (2001). The educational impact of e-mail: Extraverted versus introverted students. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED449411.)
46. Li, Y. (2000). Surfing e-mails. English Today, 16(4), 30-34, 55.
47. Marbach-Ad, G., & Sokolove, P. (2001). Creating direct channels of communication: Fostering interaction with e-mail and in-class notes. Journal of College Science Teaching, 31(3), 178-182.
48. Martin, M. M., Myers, S. A., & Mottet, T. P. (1999). Students' motives for communicating with their instructors. Communication Education, 48, 157-164.
49. McKeage, K. (2001). Office hours as you like them: Integrating real-time chats into the course media mix. College Teaching, 49(1), 32-38.
50. Payne, C. (1997). Opening the door with e-mail: From no tech to low-tech. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED412936.) Retrieved April 16, 1997, from http://leahi.kcc.hawaii.edu/org/tcc-conf/pres/payne.html
51. Poling, D. J. (1994). E-mail as an effective teaching supplement. Educational Technology, 34(5), 53-55.
52. Ronau, R. N., & Stroble, B. (1999). Student teacher electronic network: Expenditure or investment? Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 7(1), 33-55.
53. Sharf, B. F. (1999). Beyond netiquette: The ethics of doing naturalistic discourse research on the Internet. In S. Jones (Ed.), Doing Internet research: Critical issues and methods for examining the net (pp. 243-256). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
54. Shetzer, H. (1998). Critical reflection on the use of e-mail in teaching English as a second language. Unpublishes master's thesis, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. Retrieved June 14, 1999, from http://www. internetsmart.com/shetzer97/
55. Stallworth, B. J. (1998). Using e-mail to extend dialogue in an English methods course. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED427766.)
56. Tait, A. (1999). Face-to-face and at a distance: The mediation of guidance and counseling through the new technologies. British Journal of Guidance and Counselling, 27(1), 113-122.
57. U.S. Department of Education. (1997). Distance education in higher education institutions [NCES 98-062], Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education. Retrieved June 15, 1999, from http://nces.ed.gov/pubs98/98132.html
58. Wallace, F. L., & Wallace, S. R. (2001). Electronic office hours: A component of distance learning. Computers & Education, 37(3-4), 195-209.
59. Walther, J. B. (1992). Interpersonal effect in computer-mediated interaction: A relational perspective. Communication Research, 19(1), 52-90.
60. Walther, J. B. (1994). Anticipated ongoing interaction versus channel effects on relational communication in computer-mediated interaction. Human Communication Research, 20(4), 473-501.
61. Warschauer, M., Shetzer, H., & Meloni, C. (2000). Internet for English teaching. Alexandria, VA: Teachers of English to Speakers of Other Languages.
62. Worrels, D. S. (2002). Asynchronous distance learning: E-mail attachments used as the medium for assigned coursework. Atea Journal, 29(2), 4-6.
63. Yen, J. W. (1999). Pedagogical possibilities of e-mail communication. Proceedings of the World Conference on the WWW and Internet, 1633-1634.