Ａｎａｌｙｓｉｓ ｏｆ Ｍａｃｒｏ－Ｓｔｒｕｃｔｕｒｅ ｏｆ Ｗｈｙ Ｈｉｓｔｏｒｉａｎｓ ＤｉｓａｇｒｅｅＬｅｓｓｏｎ ３ ｏｆ ＣｏｎｔｅｍｐｏｒａｒｙＣｏｌｌｅｇｅＥｎｇｌｉｓｈＢｏｏｋ４

Abstract: With the development of the study of text analysis and functional grammar， text teaching has gradually become an important method in foreign language teaching. In the field of text analysis， textual structure has always been linguists’ focus. After introducing researches on macro-structure of text， this paper gives a brief introduction to the text Why Historians Disagree， and then discusses how different macro-structure patterns are adopted in the text， at last draws implications for the teaching of intensive reading course.

Key words: intensive reading course; Why Historians Disagree; macro-structure

【中圖分類號】G642 【文獻標識碼】A 【文章編號】1002-2139(2009)-17-0166-02

Introduction

With the development of the study of text analysis and functional grammar， text teaching has gradually become an important method in foreign language teaching. The purpose is to improve the students’ capacity to understand the author’s idea， attitude， emotion， motivation， and future develop their capability of grasping the text as a whole. In this sense， text teaching outweighs traditional teaching of intensive reading. So it is significant to do further study on how to apply text analysis to English teaching. This paper just takes one text from Contemporary College English as an example， by analyzing its macro-structure， to explore new way of putting text analysis into the practice of intensive reading class.

一. Researches on Macro-Structure of Text

In the field of text analysis， textual structure has always been linguists’ focus. They commonly accept that different languages can not be explained by one grammar model as what traditional linguistics did. Every language has its own special structure system. In addition， due to different communicative functions of different textual styles， topics and contents， there is a variety of text structures: micro-structure and macro-structure followed by linear， sequential and recursive ones.

Macro-structure refers to the general structure of a text. From psychological point of view， the writing of a text is always controlled by certain motivation so as to reach certain goal. The writer keeps his attention on the main steps such as the development of ideas， the arrangement of structures， etc. The analysis of macro-structure goes beyond the level of words， and starts from meaning groups and texts that express complete and exact sense and content. It analyzes all kinds of devices used to denote the relations between sentences in terms of time， logic， cause and effect， the cohesion of paragraphs， coherence of meaning and logical thinking. This analysis focuses on the arrangement of the whole text， that is， the methods and structures the author uses to express his ideas. The purpose of macro-structure analysis is to comprehend the deep meaning of a text， to grasp the text as a whole， to predict the following section’s meaning logically. In this way we can get correct and deep understanding and interpretation of the significance of a text and the purpose of the author.

Recently， linguists have contributed much to the study of text structure. The representative patterns are: “layer structure of propositions” proposed by Van Dijk Kintsch (1980)， “generic structure potential” by Hasan (1987)， “systemic flow chart” by Fawcett et al， “transition network” by Murray (1987). Tadros(1994) explored text macro-structure of expository writing from the perspective of predicting relation of text. Hunston and Myers (1994) respectively studied the macro-structures of academic writing and scientific and technological writing. Bolivar and Caldas-Couthard (1994) did some researches on the macro-structure of journalism from different angles.

二. Introduction to the Text Why Historians Disagree

This is a much condensed and adapted version of the preface to the book called Conflict and Consensus compiled by two American history professors. In this essay， the two authors discuss the definition of history， the role of the historian and the reasons why historians disagree. They point out the common misunderstanding that history is just names， dates and statistics of the past and the historian’s job is to find and remember as many of them as possible. They tell us that historians do not just collect facts. They give meaning to the facts. And because they have different interests and a different understanding of human motivation and human behavior which in turn is due to their different background in age， sex， race， class， education， religion， politics， etc， they tend not only to be interested in different facts but also interpret the same facts differently. The two historians therefore emphasize the importance of understanding the historians’ approach， perspective and philosophy rather than the facts they have used or left out.

It is a piece of expository writing， with typical characteristics of academic writing such as formal words， impersonal structures and long sentences. As the reference book suggests， “the emphasis in teaching should be on content and clear presentation. It might be helpful for students to have an outline of the piece in mind so that they will see how the main ideas are cleverly organized.”

三. Macro-Structure Patterns of Why Historians Disagree

Text pattern here refers to the macro-pattern of the organization of a text. Winter points that there are two basic patterns: situation and evaluation pattern; hypothesis and real pattern/claim-counterclaim pattern. Hoey (1983) concluded three core pattern: problem-solution pattern， general-particular pattern and matching pattern. After careful study of the text Why Historians Disagree， we discover that it is a successful model of problem-solution pattern. In addition， claim-counterclaim pattern and general-particular pattern are also used in paragraph development.

3.1 Problem-Solution Pattern

Problem-solution pattern is often used in narration and exposition. Its characteristic is to pose a question and then solve it. There are two sub patterns: situation-question-answer-evaluation pattern and question-potential answer-retort-positive evaluation pattern.

In the text Why Historians Disagree， 13 paragraphs are redivided into 6 parts.

Part One: Para 1-3: Introduction to the topic: why historians disagree?

Part Two: Para 4-5: Three kinds of definition of the word “history”.

Part Three: Para 6-10: Historians disagree because they begin from different premises.

Part Four: Para 11: Historians disagree because they are not discussing the same thing.

Part Five: Para 12: Historians disagree with themselves by revising their ideas

Part Six: Para 13: Conclusion: disagreement cannot be eliminated but can be used to help students get interested in the study of history.

In the introductory part， it is posed that common misunderstanding of historical study leads to their confusion about disagreement among historians. Then the author offer explanations step by step， first clear up the definition， then state three conditions or reasons why they disagree. At last the discussion leads to a conclusion， providing a new look at the study of history. Though it is not possible to eliminate all disagreements， the answer to “why historians disagree” is clear.

When explaining the reasons， the author does not state them separately， but in a gradually developing way. In Part Three， the pattern of question-potential answer-extortion-positive evaluation is best used to lead the students to go further step by step in the exploration for the answer.

After making clear the definitions of history， the author continues to say “But this does not say enough…historians cannot know everything because not everything was recorded①… Like detectives， they piece together evidence to fill in the gaps in the available records …by using some theory of human motivations and behavior②… If the choices were as simple as this， the problem would be easily resolved. But the choices were not so easy to make③… Historians investigating the United States’ entry into World War I will find in addition to German submarine warfare a whole series of other facts that could be relevant to the event under study④… What then are historians to make of these facts?⑤… One group simply list them…⑥But another group of historians might argue that the list is incomplete…⑦ Similarly a third group of historians might maintain that the various items on the list should not be given equal weight…⑧In the examples given， historians disagree because they begin from different premises.⑨

The procedure goes in this way:

① question——②potential answer——③retort——④evidence for retort——⑤new question relevant——⑥potential answer——⑦retort——⑧retort——⑨answer/conclusion

3.2 Claim-Counterclaim Pattern

Hypothesis and real pattern is also call claim-counterclaim pattern. As the term suggests， there are two parts: hypothesis and reality. The author first only states others opinion， then in the second part gives his own idea——positive or negative comments on the former statement. The introductory part of the text being discussed makes good use of this pattern.

In the beginning， the author describes the common misunderstanding of the study of history and the work of historians， which lead to their confusion. Most students are misled that “the study of history is the study of ‘facts’ about the fact” and “the professional historian is simply one who brings together a very large number of ‘facts”. Therefore， they reach a deadlock when they discover “historians disagree sharply even when they are dealing with the same event.” At the end of this part， the author corrects their misunderstanding: “historians come to different conclusions because they view the past from a different perspective. History now becomes a matter of choosing one good interpretation from among many. It is the students’ lack of ability to make choices that make them feel uncomfortable.

3.3 General-Particular Pattern

General-particular pattern is very popular in all kinds of writings. In this pattern， general statement is followed by elaborate description. The elaborate description may be examples for the general statement or may provide more information of the details of the whole. The former type is called generalization-example pattern while the latter one is preview-detail pattern.

This pattern is properly adopted in Part Two to introduce definitions of history. Paragraph 4 leads the students to consider the problem. Then three meanings of history are listed in the next paragraph. In addition， in Part Three and Part Four， historical and daily examples are given to illustrate how historians make choices which result in different conclusions.

四. Implications for the Teaching of Intensive Reading Course

4.1 Characteristics of Traditional Teaching Method

Traditionally， intensive reading has a relatively important position in English teaching. In most of the traditional reading classes， teaching has remained at the level of words and sentences. The common traditional teaching procedure of reading courses is as follows: Students preview the text before class， mostly memorizing new words and understanding difficult sentences. In the class， the teacher explains the texts word by word and sentence by sentence， translates difficult sentences into the mother tongue and lists all the language points on the blackboard， including words， phrases and complicated sentence structures. After the explanation， the teacher checks students' comprehension by asking some questions. Under such a mode of teaching， the following cases are bound to arise: The teacher's explanation solely rests on vocabulary and sentences， so what the students have to do in the class is just to translate some sentences. With the teacher as the center of the class， students just take notes and passively soak up the so-called systematic knowledge. The students always feel tired of the teacher's detailed explanation of words， phrases and grammatical structures since the teacher cannot predict students' really existing problems， and some of the explanation is not fresh or necessary for most students. Under such a mode of teaching， students will gradually lose interest in English study. They cannot study actively. This mode of teaching shows that the teacher may understand reading in the following ways: Reading is not a psycholinguistic process that a reader must experience. So after the explanation students can of course easily understand the text and then reading is finished. The chief difficulty in reading is vocabulary and syntactic problems， so teaching is finished with a detailed explanation of difficult language points. The first point above is obviously wrong， for no one can learn to read only by listening to others. The second point is only partially true. On the whole， we can say that the understanding of reading reflected from the traditional teaching mode is only partially true.

4.2 The Application of Macro-Structure Analysis to Intensive Reading Course

As a matter of fact， reading is the interaction of bottom-up and top-down understanding， and good and efficient reading relies more heavily on top-down understanding， which puts more emphasis on schematic， contextual and pragmatic knowledge. With the application of text analysis to intensive reading course， we can overcome the shortcomings of traditional teaching method. The students can benefit not only in terms of reading comprehension， but also in the aspect of oral expression and writing skills.

Still let’s take the text Why Historians Disagree as an example. We can draw a diagram as follows:

Why Historians Disagree

Istudy of history ——memorizing “facts”

|

historians disagree——?——all reasonable and persuasive

|

same data——different perspective

|

study of history—— choosing one good from among many

II Definitions of history 1. whole of history

2. recorded past

3. what historians write about the past

III. Different premises: 1. detective work 1)select 2)re-create

|

theory of human motivation and behavior

IV. Different levels of cause and effect

1. Why were you late for class…overslept…I was born

2. civil war…Fort Sumter attack……discovery of America

| |

proximate causenecessary cause

V. They disagree with themselves by revising their ideas

VI. Conclusion: disagreement cannot be eliminated but can be used to help students get interested in the study of history.

With the outline， the text becomes easy for the students to understand. It also provides a clue for them to retell or rewrite the text thus improve their ability to speak and write. When I gave a lecture on this lesson， at the end of it I assigned the students to write a summary on the basis of the outline. I first gave an example by condensing the introductory part which consists of three long paragraphs into only four sentences without missing any important points. Then the students followed me. They did quite a good job and felt a sense of confidence and achievement in English learning.

Conclusion

In all， text structure analysis assists the reader to get hold of the theme of a text， to get a quick and exact understanding of the information the text aims to transmit. The application of text structure analysis to intensive reading course helps the Chinese students get familiar with English way of text organization， avoid negative transfer or interference of Chinese thinking mode， and promote its positive transfer. So text structure analysis is an good way to improve the efficiency of intensive reading course.

References

[1] Hoey M. On the Surface of Discourse [M]. London: Allen and Unwin， 1983

[2] 蔡蓓. 語篇結構和整體教學法[A]. 南京曉莊學院學報，2005.3

[3] 黃國文. 語篇分析概要[M]. 長沙:湖南教育出版社， 1988

[4] 楊立民總主編. 現代大學英語第四冊教材及參考書[M].北京:外語教學與研究出版社，2003.2

[5] 張煥香.語篇宏觀結構的多方位研究綜述[A]. 天津職業技術師范學院學報，2001.3

[6] 朱永生. 語言· 語篇· 語境[M]. 北京: 清華大學出版社，1983