Cross-Cultural Analysis of Student Writing

Written Communication Jul 2008

Cross-Cultural Analysis of Student Writing

Tiane Donahue University of Maine at Farmington

Abstract

Text analysis traditions in France and the United States include discourse analysis, critical linguistics, French functional linguistics, Bakhtinian dialogics, and “generous reading.” These frames have not been used, however, in cross-cultural analysis of university student writing. The author presents a study of 250 student texts from French and U.S. introductory university courses, using a methodology for cross-cultural analysis that draws on other French and U.S. methodologies, particularly those using the dialogic utterance as a unit of analysis, but extended by the tools of reprise-modification and textual movement. The results provide a complex picture of university students' writing as a site of social-textual dynamics, resisting more traditional contrastive approaches while reintroducing a focus on the text. The interpretive analysis brought out more commonality than difference; the author hypothesizes that students entering the university share a discourse of learning and negotiation across cultural contexts. The methodology supports cross-cultural analysis beyond “discourses of difference.”

Journal: Written Communication
Published: 2008-07-01
DOI: 10.1177/0741088308319515
Open Access: Closed
Topics: discourse analysis quantitative research

Citation Context

Cited by in this index (2)

Madden et al. (2021)

Untangling Methodological Commitments in Writing Research: Using Collaborative …

Written Communication
Kilfoil (2015)

Beyond the “Foreign” Language Requirement: From a Monolingual to a Translingual…

Rhetoric Review

Cites in this index (5)

Johnson-Eilola et al. (2007)

Plagiarism, originality, assemblage

Computers and Composition
Canagarajah (2006)

The Place of World Englishes in Composition: Pluralization Continued

College Composition and Communication
Haswell (2005)

NCTE/CCCC’s Recent War on Scholarship

Written Communication
HASWELL (2000)

Documenting Improvement in College Writing

Written Communication
RUSSELL (1997)

Rethinking Genre in School and Society

Written Communication

Also cites 23 works outside this index ↓

10.3406/prati.1984.1325

↗
10.7551/mitpress/4130.001.0001

↗
Bazerman, C. (2004). Intertextuality: How texts rely on other texts . In C. Bazerman & P. Prior (Eds.), What …

↗
Boch, F. (2001)

10.3406/lidil.2001.1804

LIDIL: Apprendre à Citer le Discours d'Autrui ↗
10.1017/CBO9781139524599

↗
Delcambre, I. (2001)

10.3406/lidil.2001.1806

LIDIL: Apprendre à Citer le Discours d'Autrui ↗
10.3406/prati.2002.1970

↗
Donahue, C. (2004). Student writing as negotiation: Fundamental movements between the common and the specific…

↗
Donahue, C. (2008)

Ecrire à l'université: Analyse comparee en France et aux États-Unis

↗
Donahue, C.

Genre and disciplinary work in French didactics research

↗
10.1075/slcs.16.07ehl

↗
10.3917/puf.grize.1996.01

↗
10.2307/1512118

↗
10.1075/swll.5

↗
10.2307/j.ctt46nrtw

↗
10.2307/358759

↗
10.3406/spira.2002.1443

↗
10.1016/S1060-3743(00)00037-0

↗
Prior, P. & Shipka, J. (2003). Chronotopic lamination: Tracing the contours of literate activity. In C. Bazer…

↗
10.1111/j.1600-0811.2006.00043.x

↗
Reuter, Y. (2001)

10.3406/lidil.2001.1800

LIDIL: Apprendre à Citer le Discours d'Autrui ↗
10.2307/377158

↗
10.2307/j.ctt5hjt0q

↗

CrossRef global citation count: 9 View in citation network →