Discourse Analysis and Second Language Writing

---------------------------------------

Chapter 1
Discourse Analysis and Second
Language Writing

For those who want to develop their writing skills in another lan-
guage, discourseNauthentic language as it occurs in contextNcan be
a primary resource. The writing classroom in English as a second
language (ESL) can be organized so that students themselves learn to
analyze the written discourse of the society around them and appro-
priate the results of their analysis for their own writing purposes. In
so doing, they can personalize their learning, choosing discourse
materials suitable for their own proficiency level and areas of special
interest. By introducing specific discourse analysis techniques and
tasks, instructors can foster greater independence in their students as
they develop the ability to take control of their own language devel-
opment. A discourse analysis approach also leads to greater writing
versatility, as student writers are exposed in a systematic way to a
variety of written genres,or types of written discourse. Each genre
presents a different set of rhetorical choicesNfrom lexicon and gram-
mar to format, content, and organizationNthat students can study
and adapt to their own writing. Because cultures use genres to
accomplish their social interactions, discourse analysis provides a
window on the values and priorities of the community that created
them. Moreover, the role of discourse analyst offers a more powerful
identity for an ESL student than that of foreigner, alien, or nonnative
speaker. Students can become language researchers, or ethnogra-
phers, studying the surrounding cultureOs ways of writing and
adapting what they learn for their own purposes.
The discourse analysis approach presented in this volume is
intended for high-intermediate to advanced students. It involves
organizing a class curriculum so that students research a variety of
genres of written discourseNfor example, formal letters, recipes,
stories, or academic reports. Following the guidelines provided in
this book, students discuss the purposes and uses of each genre, its
structural features, and the social roles and conventions that it
upholds. They then collect samples of these genres from authentic

3



--------------------------------------- 2

wennerstrom chap 01 6/23/03 11:31 AM Page 4

4 Theoretical Background

social contexts and analyze, compare, and evaluate their rhetorical
and linguistic conventions. The analyses are focused into manage-
able, concrete tasks: for example, students might study strategies for
politeness in formal letters or trace the use of a specific grammatical
feature, such as verb tense, in college application essays. After com-
pleting each analysis, students compose their own writing, taking
into account what they have learned from their discussion and
analysis of genre samples. Finally, they review and revise their work,
applying similar discourse analysis techniques to their own and their
peersO drafts. With a more sophisticated understanding of discourse,
they are in a stronger position to make informed choices in their
future writing.

What Is Discourse Analysis?
To understand what it means to take a discourse analysis approach to
the teaching of writing, we need to begin by understanding the term
discourse analysis,which refers to a broad area of inquiry that involves
several dimensions and spans a variety of disciplines. As Chomsky
(1965) observed, there is no limit to the number of possible sentences
that can be generated from the grammar and lexicon of a language.
However, stringing together a random group of sentences that may
be grammatically allowable does not result in discourse. Discourse
must instead be organized in some coherent way that makes sense in
the context of an interaction. Thus, one important aspect of discourse
analysis is that texts are regarded as wholes, beyond the level of the
grammatical sentence. This extended structureNthe sequence in
which the language occurs and the connections among the unitsN
becomes an object of study in itself. It is also possible for the analysis
of a very short text to count as a discourse analysis. Austin (1970,
243), for example, argued that a sign posted in a field and bearing the
single word OBullO could function as a warning. He was interested in
how this language constituted a kind of actionNthe Ospeech actO of
warning. The point is that regardless of its size, if considered as a
functional entity, any text can be analyzed as discourse.
For most scholars, however, the analysis of linguistic structure
(extended or otherwise) is not enough to constitute a discourse
analysis. Crystal (1987, 116) cites the common concern among dis-
course analysts Oto see language as a dynamic, social, interactive



--------------------------------------- 3

wennerstrom chap 01 6/23/03 11:31 AM Page 5

5 Discourse Analysis and Second Language Writing

phenomenonNwhether between speaker and listener, or writer and
reader.O He goes on to emphasize that discourse involves Othe par-
ticipantsO beliefs and expectations, the knowledge they share about
each other and about the world, and the situation in which they inter-
act.O Thus, another important principle of discourse analysis is that
language is always studied in its social context. As van Dijk (1997b, 8)
points out, when we speak or write, we seldom do so by accident;
rather, we have a social purpose in mind.
To understand the social contexts of a text, discourse analysts
usually work with naturally occurringNor, to use SchiffrinOs termi-
nology, OempiricalONdata. Schiffrin (1987, 416) explains, OData come
from a speech community: data are about people using language, not
linguists thinking about how people use language.O Not only spoken
language but written language as well can be said to occur naturally.
The preceding example of the sign bearing the word OBullO can be
considered naturally occurring in that the writer used language for
the social purpose of warning possible wanderers of a dangerous
bull. If written on the wall of a college cafeteria as a piece of graffiti,
the word OBullO might serve a different social purposeNperhaps to
express disdain at another writerOs remark (as in OI donOt believe this
bull!O) or to make an existential lament on the absurdity of life in
general (as in OItOs all bull!O). In each case, the intention and inter-
pretation of the language depend on the social setting.
Beyond the immediate social context is the broader cultural con-
text in which discourse occurs, which is also of interest to many dis-
course analysts. Communities develop norms and conventions for
speaking and writing that are usually taken for granted as OnaturalO
within that group. In this sense, the discourse of a community can be
said to reflect the commonsense notions, or ideologies, of that com-
munity. According to van Dijk (1997b), ideologies are the belief sys-
tems that define a group, its social practices, and its interaction with
other groups (26). He points out that ideologies tend to preserve the
status quoNthe power relations among the members of the group.
He further cites several ways in which the ideology of a group affects
its discourse: the rhetorical devices used, the kind of vocabulary con-
sidered appropriate, the choice of metaphors, and the very topics
selected are influenced by group ideology (33). Moreover, ideologies
place constraints on who can communicate with whom and under
what conditions. For example, the social act of applying for a job
involves many cultural norms derived from ideologies surrounding



--------------------------------------- 4

wennerstrom chap 01 6/23/03 11:31 AM Page 6

6 Theoretical Background

the hierarchical structure of workplace institutions: the proper time
to apply, the particular person or group to whom one applies, the fact
that one must apply, and the special genre of writingNthe job appli-
cation letterNare all quite restricted. It would be risky to ignore the
conventions of the genre of the job application letter by writing the
salutation as OAliceO instead of ODear Professor JonesO or by writing
the letter by hand on a torn piece of paper. We are not incapable of
acting in these ways, but in the cultural context of applying for a job,
to ignore the conventional expectations of this genre would be inter-
preted as naive or disrespectful of the gatekeeping authority invested
in the recipient and the institutional power structure of the work-
place. A person violating the cultural constraints of the genre would
risk losing the opportunity to obtain the job.
In view of the relationship between ideology and discourse,
another aim of discourse analysts is to better understand a culture
by studying the discourse of its members. Ethnography, the study
of culture through intensive observation and participation, often
involves the analysis of discourse in order to understand the ideology
behind the use of language. The language with which we choose to
express ourselves and the contexts in which we do so displays our
social identities and group affiliations. Thus, discourse analysis can
lead to a better understanding of the values and social practices of a
community.
To summarize, discourse analysis involves the study of naturally
occurring language in the context in which it is used. Discourse ana-
lysts, whether they are concerned with the coherence of extended
structure or with the interpretation of more minute texts, are inter-
ested in the language choices people make to accomplish their social
goals. For many analysts, cultural ideologies that are reproduced in
the discourse of a community are the focus of analysis. In this sense,
discourse analysis can be used both as a structural tool to better grasp
how texts are organized and as an ethnographic tool to broaden oneOs
understanding of cultural dynamics.

Spoken versus Written Genres of Discourse
There are certain crucial differences between spoken and written dis-
course. It has been clearly demonstrated that writing is not just spo-
ken language written down (Biber 1988, 1992, 1995). Distinctions in
lexicogrammatical and rhetorical structures tend to occur between



--------------------------------------- 5


wennerstrom chap 01 6/23/03 11:31 AM Page 7

7 Discourse Analysis and Second Language Writing

1
spoken and written language, depending on the genre. For a second

language learner, this means that regardless of oneOs proficiency in

speaking, conventions of writing may pose a challenge.

One traditional view (e.g., Goody and Watt 1968) is that written

discourse is of a higher orderNmore logical, formal, and complexN

than oral discourse and is therefore superior to it. However, the traits

considered superior by proponents of this view are not necessarily

confined to written genres. The notion of formality, for example, is an

aspect of many spoken genres, such as courtroom argumentations or

academic presentations, while some written genres, such as email or

personal diaries, can be considered informal. As Ochs (1979) points

out, rather than using the terms formaland informal,it may be more

appropriate to speak of planned versus unplanned discourse to

describe the differences between such cases. Furthermore, spoken

genres are not unstructured or illogical; work in conversation analysis

(e.g., Sacks, Schegloff, and Jefferson 1974; Atkinson and Heritage

1984) has clearly demonstrated that the most casual of conversations

is a tightly structured system. The orchestration of turn taking

involves a high degree of social coordination. Sacks observed in a

1967 lecture:

One person can start up talking within one tenths, two tenthsNthat

order of speedNof a second after another had done what is, upon much

later reflection by an analyst, something that seems to be a sentence.

(Jefferson 1995, 650)

Thus, the belief that conversation is somehow random or chaotic

when compared to writing is untenable. Instead, the point of view

taken here is not that written language is superior to spoken but that

any genre of communication is likely to have unique characteristics

that differentiate it from other genres.

Nevertheless, within this view, certain general characteristics can

be said to manifest themselves differently in written versus spoken

genres. At the organizational level, there is a tendency for rhetorical

structures to distinguish the two modes. For example, the separation

1. My use of the term genrecoincides with BiberOs and othersO use of the term

register.Biber (1995, 9) points out that there is no clear consensus in the field

on the distinction between the two. He states, OIn my own previous studies, I

have used the term genreas a general cover term, similar to my use of register

in the present book.O



--------------------------------------- 6

wennerstrom chap 01 6/23/03 11:31 AM Page 8

8 Theoretical Background

of topics into chunks or paragraphs in many genres of writing con-
trasts with the gradual shift from one subject to the next, or topic
shading (Schegloff 1990), that is likely to occur in conversation.
Moreover, explicit cohesive devices, such as the phrases Othe second
pointO or Oin contrast,O are often used to link topic units together in
academic essays, while conversation is more often replete with dis-
course markersNsuch as Owell,O Ooh,O and OsoO (Schiffrin 1987)Nto
indicate organizational structure. At the lexicogrammatical level,
Biber (1988, 1992) has found statistical evidence that the frequency
with which specific grammatical structures occur differs between
spoken and written genres. His method was to conduct computer-
based searches of huge corpora of texts to discover sets of linguistic
features common to various text types. Some of these characteristics
may be traced to the differing functions that particular genres serve.
As Kaplan (1987, 14) notes, because requests for information are less
common in written language than in many spoken genres, patterns of
question formation are more likely to be found in spoken discourse.
To add other examples, scientific writing contains frequent nominal-
izations (Halliday 1988)Nsuch as Othe execution of the experiment,O
rather than Owe executed the experimentONand many written genres
are likely to include parallel structures, sentential organization, and
embedded, instead of conjoined, clauses (Hatch 1992, elaborating
on Ochs 1979).
Furthermore, the expression of emotion and attitude is different
in spoken versus written genres. In speaking, one can rely more on
facial expressions, gestures, and prosodyNthe pitch, timing, and
volume of the voiceNto convey a variety of meanings and emotions
(Wennerstrom 2001). Although written genres can be equally expres-
sive, such expressions must be conveyed either through more elabo-
rate lexicogrammatical descriptions or through punctuation, special
fonts, and so on. A related difference involves the relationship between
the speaker/writer and the audience. Spontaneous conversation
tends to involve a continual negotiation of what direction the inter-
action will take next, as each participant responds verbally or non-
verbally to the last contribution. In the case of a misunderstanding,
for example, one speaker can immediately indicate that clarification
is needed, and the other can repair or otherwise redirect what has
been said (Clark 1992). Likewise, one personOs feedback to anotherOs
remark can affect the direction the topic takes. In most genres of
writing, in contrast, it is necessary to imagine the audience reaction.
Planning, composing, and revising with the audience in mind are



--------------------------------------- 7

wennerstrom chap 01 6/23/03 11:31 AM Page 9

9 Discourse Analysis and Second Language Writing

part of the process. Thus, as Kaplan (1987, 17) notes, a written text
may be Omerely a waystageO in the evolution of a finished written
product. In general, writers have more opportunity than speakers to
review, revise, or otherwise OpolishO their output. This generalization
does not apply universally, as there are genres of speaking, such as
formal speeches, that involve composing and polishing, as well as
genres of writing, such as list making and form filling, that may be
relatively spontaneous. Moreover, the luxury of revision is not neces-
sarily an advantage, because there is higher audience expectation for
written genres. In conversation, participants expect false starts, hesi-
tations, slips of the tongue, and so on as a natural part of the inter-
action, whereas readers of finished written products may be less
tolerant of these so-called errors.

Discourse and the Second Language Writer
How do the preceding facts about discourse come into play in a situ-
ation of adult second language learning? At the purely structural
level, Fine (1988) points out that part of oneOs cultural knowledge is
an awareness of how genres of discourse are organized. Members of
a speech community develop schemataNsets of expectations based on
repeated experiencesNfor the rhetorical patterns of written genres.
For example, when American readers read a newspaper article in
English, they expect that the first paragraph is likely to contain a
bare-bones summary of the news story and that later paragraphs
will provide further details. They also expect a general-to-specific
paragraph structure. Such knowledge of rhetorical conventions facili-
tates cognitive processing, in that as the readers read and listen, they
are able to locate key elements and predict what the structure will be
(Fine 1988, 13).
However, many scholars, starting with Kaplan (1966), have
claimed that rhetorical patterns are not necessarily the same cross-
culturally. Indeed, the field of contrastive rhetoric (Connor 1996;
Kaplan 1966; Leki 1991) is devoted to the comparison of culturally
based conventions of discourse. Claims about the influence of cul-
ture on rhetorical patterns involve many aspects of discourse: the
sequencing of sentences (McClure, Mason, and Williams 1983), the
use of discourse markers (Fine 1988), the overall organization of ideas
into Odiscourse blocsO (Connor 1996, 32), the presentation of facts and
how they are supported (Leki 1992), and even the degree of effort



--------------------------------------- 8

wennerstrom chap 01 6/23/03 11:31 AM Page 10

10 Theoretical Background

that the writer versus the reader is expected to make to ensure that
the communication is clear (Hinds 1987). This suggests that a second
language learner who has developed rhetorical schemata in one lan-
guage may be hindered in language processing at the discourse level
in another language. Information presented in an unfamiliar rhetori-
cal pattern may also be more difficult to retain in long-term memory
(Eggington 1987). Likewise, second language writers who follow the
rhetorical strategies of their heritage culture may find that audiences
from other backgrounds misinterpret or devalue their writing, by
judging it according to their own cultural expectations (Connor 1996,
167).
In sum, the cultural knowledge students need to communicate
effectively, or their Osociolinguistic competenceO (Kramsch 1993),
includes a knowledge of how to use genres of discourse in context.
The stakes in this regard can be quite high, because the genres of a
community often serve a gatekeeping function. Swales (1990) points
out that community membership is constituted in the ability to use
genres appropriately; he focuses his discussion on the academic
community, where the writing of such genres as abstracts, research
reports, and grant proposals constitutes the very activities of the
community and delineates the options for participation. Thus, an
effective strategy for language learning is to become familiar with
the genres of discourse, their conventional structure, and the norms
for how and by whom they are used in the context of the surrounding
community.
A discourse analysis approach to the teaching of ESL writing can,
therefore, provide strong advantages to students. First, with a focus
on the organization and content of discourse, this approach explicitly
addresses the rhetorical differences among culturally based writing
conventions in a variety of genres. Students can analyze the macro-
structure of discourse samples from the surrounding culture in order
to understand the rhetorical strategies that contribute to their overall
coherence. In this way, they develop and enhance their own schemata
for these genres. To paraphrase Johns (1997, 27Π28), it is through
repeated experience of processing, producing, and reflecting on texts
that we become familiar with the genres of our communities, and
when students engage in a variety of genre-based activities, they
develop increasingly sophisticated knowledge for how to approach
future texts of a similar nature.
A second advantage of a discourse analysis approach is that it
provides opportunities for intensive study of grammar and lexicon in



--------------------------------------- 9

wennerstrom chap 01 6/23/03 11:31 AM Page 11

11 Discourse Analysis and Second Language Writing

context. Ellis (1995, 90) proposes that the progress of students learning
a second language is influenced by the studentsO OnoticingO of target
structures and by their Ocognitive comparisonO of these and their
own interlanguage structures. As Ellis explains, such comparisons
Oserve as a mechanism for disconfirming or confirming hypotheses
in implicit knowledge.O A discourse analysis approach can facilitate
this type of cognitive comparison: it allows students to trace through
a text to analyze particular grammatical structures. As noted earlier,
work by Biber has demonstrated that genres of discourse vary in the
frequency with which different lexicogrammatical patterns occur.
Therefore, by varying writing assignments among several genres,
students can be exposed to numerous lexical and grammatical struc-
tures. Within each genre, students can target particular structures for
analysis as is appropriate for their level of language proficiency. For
example, in discourse analysis 8-C in part 2 of this volume, students
analyze modal auxiliaries used in emails of request (e.g., Ocouldyou
possibly . . .O). By examining multiple examples of modals in different
email messages, they can draw conclusions about the grammar and
pragmatics of these structures. Vocabulary can also be a focus of the
analysis. In discourse analysis 9-B, students search for words and
phrases used to make contrasts in academic texts and apply these to
their own assignments. Approaches to the teaching of writing that
center on a single genre are missing the lexicogrammatical variety
offered by a genre-based discourse analysis approach.
A third advantage of a discourse analysis approach is that stu-
dents can become more critically aware of the social structure and
ideologies of the culture or community that produced the discourse.
Students are then in a better position to make informed choices about
how they would like to interact with the dominant culture or present
themselves in it. As Norton Peirce (1995) notes, by better understand-
ing the power relations of the dominant culture, students may dis-
cover avenues of participation where they might otherwise have been
marginalized. The writing class can become a forum for a discussion
of cultural values.
Students as Discourse Analysts
In a discourse analysis approach, students are encouraged to take an
active role as language analysts, orNas Riggenbach (1999) expresses
itNethnographers. In other words, they study language in detail in
the context in which it occurs and draw conclusions about the social
structure and ideologies of the culture that produced it. Many other



--------------------------------------- 10

wennerstrom chap 01 6/23/03 11:31 AM Page 12

12 Theoretical Background

applied linguists have advocated the role of ethnographer for the
ESL student (e.g., Benesch 1996; Johns 1997; Liebman 1988; Norton
Peirce 1995; Roberts et al. 2001; Silberstein 1984; van Lier 1988). Lieb-
man (1988), who used an ethnographic approach to the teaching of
academic writing, lauds the increased cultural awareness that the
approach fosters, as well as the broader repertoire of rhetorical
choices with which students become familiar. She also cites the high
level of motivation of students involved in an ethnographic project.
[I]t provided an opportunity for the students to write in a meaningful
and interesting context. They were engaged in the topic, and they felt
they were doing important work. (17)
Similarly, Riggenbach (1999) stresses the importance of the researcher
role in increasing student motivation.
[P]roviding learners with the tools to develop language research skills
can appeal to their autonomy, build confidence, and tap into their natu-
ral inquisitiveness. If learners invest in their own learning process by
observing OrealO language interactions (spoken and written), by reflect-
ing critically on these and their own language exchanges, and by collab-
orating on and reviewing what they have observed, the result can be an
energizing and validating experience. (14Π15)
Riggenbach also emphasizes that the analytical approach is suited to
many adultsO inductive learning styles. As she explains, the point of
this approach is that students are not handed down OcorrectO answers
but, rather, are encouraged to analyze the complexity of language in
context. She writes:
[M]any of the activities have no one right or wrong conclusion. A pri-
mary goal of these discourse analysis activities is to stimulate student
interest in language, to develop learnersO confidence in their own abilities
to OdiscoverO truths about the structure of language, and to help raise
learnersO consciousness not only about the structure of language but also
about their own linguistic strengths and weaknesses. (47)
In this sense, the discourse analysis approach rejects the one-way
Otransmission modelO of education (as does Friere 1970), in favor of a
more dynamic exchange of information about cultural traditions. As I
explain in more detail in chapter 3, in the discourse analysis approach,
the instructor takes on the role of planner and facilitator of the activ-
ities, while the students themselves work as analysts.



--------------------------------------- 11

wennerstrom chap 01 6/23/03 11:31 AM Page 13

13 Discourse Analysis and Second Language Writing

For many students involved in the language learning process,
the role of ethnographer or cultural analyst is more interesting and
empowering than the role of a mere novice. According to SchumannOs
view (1976, 1978), a large component of success in language acquisi-
tion is the extent to which learners acculturate to the dominant cul-
ture. In his acculturation model, the degree of affiliation the learner
establishes with respect to the target community, which depends on
social and psychological distance, affects language acquisition. Nor-
ton Peirce (1995), however, critiques Schumann on the grounds that
his view of acculturation puts most of the responsibility for social and
psychological distance on the shoulders of the individual learner. She
points out that the political power structures of the dominant culture
in relation to the learnerOs culture greatly affect what that contact will
be like. If a learner is positioned by the dominant culture as an alien,
a minority, or in other ways an outsider, an individual may be at a
loss to decrease social distance, regardless of personal motivation.
Norton Peirce argues:
[T]heories of communicative competence in the field of second language
learning should extend beyond an understanding of the appropriate
rules of use in a particular society, to include an understanding of the
way rules of use are socially and historically constructed to support the
interest of a dominant group within a given society. (18)
A discourse analysis approach, with its emphasis on cultural study, is
compatible with a deeper sensitivity to such issues of social power.
This approach encourages students to study the surrounding culture
in an ethnographic sense, under instructor guidance. Assignments
used under this approach commence with discussion questions so
that students can evaluate, for better or worse, how various genres
of writing are used and what purposes they serve in preserving the
institutions of the culture being studied. For many students, the
heightened awareness and understanding of the ideologies and con-
ventions of the surrounding culture may allow them to reconsider
their own position and choices about participation. The hope is that,
in Norton PeirceOs words, Othey may learn to transform social prac-
tices of marginalizationO (27). From the perspective of cultural ana-
lyst or ethnographer, students can begin to view society as a system
of communities with social practices and can discover new ways to
Oclaim the right to speak [and write]O (ibid.) in those communities of
practice (see Roberts et al. 2001 for a similar perspective).



--------------------------------------- 12

wennerstrom chap 01 6/23/03 11:31 AM Page 14

14 Theoretical Background

In sum, a discourse analysis approach teaches language learners
to analyze discourse in a purposeful wayNin order to discover those
linguistic features that are pertinent to their own language develop-
ment and in order to become more aware of the value system of the
culture that produced the discourse. This approach considers lan-
guage structure at both the micro and the macro levels. The focus on
genre provides a rich variety in the forms and purposes of the texts
students encounter. It is hoped that in viewing the discourse of the
surrounding culture as an object of study, students will gain a sense
of control over their language development, making informed
choices about how to use language to meet their needs in a variety
of social contexts.

Organization of This Book
This chapter has suggested several advantages of using discourse
analysis activities that take genre into account in high-intermediate to
advanced ESL writing classes. Students themselves can take an active
role in analyzing the discourse of the kinds of writing that are rele-
vant to their lives. Chapter 2 addresses the topic of genre in more
depth. As we have seen, genres serve social purposes and tend to
have conventionalized features. By exploring a variety of genres,
students can become more versatile as writers, as they familiarize
themselves with the ways in which the surrounding culture has organ-
ized its written activities. Chapter 2 also traces the history of the pop-
ular Oprocess approachO in writing pedagogy, to suggest that a genre
approach can add a more practical, task-based orientation. Successful
writing is the result not only of native creativity but also of a knowl-
edge of conventional modes of expression. Researchers in language
learning argue that because these conventions are culturally con-
structed, they are learned (and therefore learnable). By conducting
discourse analysis activities in a variety of genres, students become
more aware of how writing practices respond to social needs and
of how they can apply their skills to improve their writing in these
genres.
Chapter 3 is devoted to the practical aspects of the writing class
itself. Principles are there outlined for how to organize and conduct
discourse analysis activities and how to effectively promote team-
work among students. Following these principles, students move
from a research phase, in which they collect and analyze discourse



--------------------------------------- 13

wennerstrom chap 01 6/23/03 11:31 AM Page 15

15 Discourse Analysis and Second Language Writing

samples from the culture around them, to a composition phase, in
which they draft their own writing, taking advantage of what they
have learned from the analysis. Revision and editing are encouraged
as students again apply discourse analysis techniques in reviewing
their own and their peersO written work. Many additional activities
are suggested to enhance the learning process and to integrate other
skill areas into the writing class. Chapter 3 concludes with a discus-
sion of how to adapt discourse analysis activities and create new
ones.
Part 2 of this book presents a variety of sample assignments and
activities, with detailed instructions for carrying them out. The assign-
ments are divided into two chapters, one involving writing in every-
day life and the other on academic writing. The sample activities are
meant to illustrate how the approach can work; however, instructors
are encouraged to adapt them for their own situations. Chapter 4
provides a series of writing assignments in nonacademic genres,
including formal letters, recipes, and informational brochures. Each
assignment begins with a discussion of the social purposes of these
genres and the cultural factors surrounding their use. The activities
guide students through the process of collecting examples of these
genres of writing in their OnativeO contexts and analyzing, compar-
ing, and evaluating these samples. The analysis activities cover a
range of topics. At the macro level, many activities involve the overall
cohesion and organization of the writing, as well as pragmatic issues
of politeness, persuasion, and audience. At the micro level, grammar
and vocabulary activities help students focus on the finer details of
linguistic structure. In the application phase, students assess their
own writing needs and reformulate for the purposes of their own
compositions what they have learned in their discussions and data
analysis. Finally, revising, editing, and in some cases even publishing
of the writing is encouraged.
Chapter 5 provides a series of academic writing assignments.
These begin with a genre that is used before one even begins college:
the college application essay. Other assignments include email com-
munications, descriptions of graphs, and, for more advanced graduate
students, research abstracts. The activities encourage students to
discover the purposes and conventions of these genres of academic
discourse and to collect samples for analysis. Students are then given
techniques for analyzing these samples and applying their findings
to their own academic assignments. As in chapter 4, the focus of the
activities ranges from the macro level of understanding the global



--------------------------------------- 14

wennerstrom chap 01 6/23/03 11:31 AM Page 16

16 Theoretical Background

role of academic writing in context to the micro level of discovering
specific lexicogrammatical features in the texts.
For Teachers: Discussion Questions
1. How might you define the term discoursein simple terms for
a language student?
2. This chapter states that a random group of sentences does not
constitute discourse. What are some mechanisms in written
language that serve to link the words, clauses, or paragraphs
together, orNas some sayNto provide OcohesionO to a text?
Find a short newspaper article and search for actual examples.
How might you explain the examples to a language student?
3. Think of examples of a single word or phrase (e.g., OBullO in
the example in this chapter) that can take on a completely
different meaning depending on context and social purpose.
How might you explain the examples to a language student?
4. Several differences between spoken and written genres of
discourse have been mentioned in this chapter. Under what
circumstances might it be an advantage to speak rather than
write or to listen rather than read? What are the implications
of the differences for language teaching?
5. This chapter claims that Ocommunities develop norms and
conventions for speaking and writing that are usually taken
for granted as OnaturalO within that group.O Do you agree
with this statement? Think of a community in which you felt
like an outsider. What was considered OnaturalO in that group
but seemed unusual to you? Now think of a community to
which you belong. What do members of this community take
for granted that might not seem OnaturalO to a newcomer?
6. Think of examples of how the values of your culture are man-
ifest in its discourse. Consider organizational structures, the
topics considered appropriate, and vocabulary choices,
among other features of the discourse.
7. Discuss evidence (from your teaching, language study, or
other life experience) for the claim that the rhetorical struc-
tures and conventions of written discourse differ from culture



--------------------------------------- 15

wennerstrom chap 01 6/23/03 11:31 AM Page 17

17 Discourse Analysis and Second Language Writing

to culture. Is this claim true for all writers and types of writing,
or are there exceptions?
8. How do you understand the term social distanceas a factor in
language acquisition? Where do you place the responsibility
for social distanceNin the motivation of the learner, in the
social structures of society, or in both? What are the implica-
tions for language teaching if opinion tends toward one end
of the spectrum or the other?

Suggested Readings
Celce-Murcia, M., and E. Olshtain. 2000. Discourse and context in language teaching.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
The authors of this book recommend that language teachers incorporate an
awareness of discourse and pragmatics into their teaching if they truly wish
to implement a communicative approach. After two introductory chapters on
discourse and pragmatics, the authors show how a discourse perspective can
enhance the teaching of traditional areas of linguistic knowledge (pronuncia-
tion, grammar, and vocabulary) and the teaching of language processing
skills (listening, reading, writing, and speaking). Within this perspective, they
also discuss curriculum development, language assessment, and classroom
research. This book includes discussion questions and activities at the end of
each chapter.
Connor, U. 1996. Contrastive rhetoric: Cross-cultural aspects of second language writing.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
This book outlines and reviews several approaches to contrastive rhetoric. It
demonstrates that rhetorical patterns differ cross-culturally on many levels
and that the writing patterns of oneOs primary language and culture are likely
to influence writing in a second language. Taking a broad view of rhetoric,
Connor suggests that ESL educators need to be aware of how these differences
can affect student reading and writing. This book is well researched and pro-
vides an excellent resource on the topic of contrastive rhetoric.
Hatch, E. 1992. Discourse analysis and language education.Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
This practical book, designed for instructors of ESL and other languages, out-
lines several of the major areas of inquiry in the field of discourse analysis.
Hatch provides questions and hands-on activities for each area, so that read-
ers can actually collect and analyze discourse in context. In so doing, they can
become more aware of the issues involved in discourse analysis and of the
cultural basis of many discourse-level aspects of language. Hatch argues that
ESL education should include discourse-level topics, and gives suggestions
for how to teach students to use spoken and written discourse more effectively.



--------------------------------------- 16

wennerstrom chap 01 6/23/03 11:31 AM Page 18

18 Theoretical Background

McCarthy, M. 1991. Discourse analysis for language teachers.New York: Cambridge
University Press.
The author of this book offers a range of approaches for analyzing discourse,
with the goal of providing language instructors with a thorough understand-
ing of the subject. This book breaks language down into skill areas, such as
vocabulary, grammar, and pronunciation, and provides analysis activities for
each area. There is also a chapter on the analysis of spoken interaction, includ-
ing turn taking, storytelling, and other aspects of informal talk. McCarthy
provides many samples of authentic discourse, as well as analysis tasks for
practice.
Riggenbach, H. 1999. Discourse analysis in the language classroom. Vol. 1, The spoken
language.Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
This companion volume to the present book focuses on spoken, rather than
written, discourse. It outlines a rationale for having students themselves
explore their own and othersO spoken interactions, analyzing both micro and
macro features. Riggenbach gives many practical discourse analysis activities
for the ESL classroom, in which students are taught to tape-record and tran-
scribe natural speech for analysis. She argues that discourse analysis provides
a means of improving communicative competence, putting language develop-
ment under the learnerOs control. Volumes 1 and 2 can be used individually or
in tandem.
Roberts, C., M. Byram, A. Barro, S. Jordan, and B. Street. 2001. Language learners
asethnographers. Clevedon, UK: Multilingual Matters.
This fascinating book outlines an ethnographic approach to the study of lan-
guage and culture from a social constructivist perspective. After a thorough
discussion of the philosophy behind the approach, a particular case, the Ealing
Ethnography Project, is examined in detail. Language learners who partici-
pated in this program lived abroad and employed ethnographic methods to
analyze the everyday social practices of a subculture of the society in which
they lived. Simultaneously, they developed their communicative competence
within that culture. The authors of this book argue that ethnography leads to
a richer language socialization experience and a deeper intellectual under-
standing of the complex relationships among language, culture, and identity.
van Dijk, T., ed. 1997. Discourse studies: Amultidisciplinary introduction.2 vols.
London: Sage.
In this two-volume series, van Dijk presents a comprehensive collection of
articles on the structural, social, cultural, and political aspects of discourse
analysis. In both volumes, van Dijk has recruited distinguished lists of con-
tributors, including many top scholars in the field. Volume 1, Discourse as
structure and process,centers on discourse structure, asking how form and
function interrelate. This book includes such topics as genre, cognition, argu-
mentation, semantics, and semiotics. In volume 2, Discourse as social interaction,
which deals with the sociocultural aspects of discourse, the issues covered
include critical discourse analysis, conversation analysis, gender and dis-
course, institutional discourse, and discourses of ethnicity, culture, and
racism. Readers will appreciate van DijkOs introductions to these volumes,
which give thorough and accessible overviews of the field.