查詢結果分析
來源資料
相關文獻
- Indonesian Students' English Writing Development in Taiwan: A Qualitative Investigation of Voice and Positioning
- 臺灣與東南亞五國產業分工情形之探討
- 從印尼外資政策看臺、印經貿關係
- 印尼經濟概況及對我貿易關係
- 女性身體的貿易--臺灣/印尼新娘貿易的階級,族群關係與性別分析
- 女性身體的貿易:臺灣/印尼新娘貿易的階級與族群關係分析
- 臺商在印尼投資之發展與困境
- Comparison of the properties of Soda Straw Pulps Made from Taiwan & Indonesia Varieties
- 經濟南向
- Evaluating the Effectiveness of the Coal Ash Artificial Reefs at Wan-Li, Northern Taiwan
頁籤選單縮合
| 題 名 | Indonesian Students' English Writing Development in Taiwan: A Qualitative Investigation of Voice and Positioning=印尼學生在臺灣的英語寫作發展:聲音與立場的質性探究 |
|---|---|
| 作 者 | 葉淑芬; 王在德; 李迦恩; | 書刊名 | 正修學報 |
| 卷 期 | 38 2025.12[民114.12] |
| 頁 次 | 頁397-422 |
| 分類號 | 805.1 |
| 關鍵詞 | 第二語言寫作; 作者之聲; 系統功能語言學; 英語授課; 印尼; 臺灣; Second language writing; Authorial voice; Systemic functional linguistics; English-medium instruction; Indonesia; Taiwan; |
| 語 文 | 英文(English) |
| 中文摘要 | 近年來因為臺灣的國際化與新南向政策,來自東南亞的學生在大學越來越多,也讓 EFL/EMI(外語 情境/英語授課)下的學術英文寫作挑戰更明顯。本研究用質性的多重個案,探討在臺就讀的印尼 大學生如何在英文寫作中形成並展現「作者之聲」(voice),以及他們如何在文本中「定位」自己 (positioning)。資料包含:每位學生兩篇個人英文作文(共 3 人)、兩份開放式問卷與半結構式訪 談。分析依據系統功能語言學的三個面向:內容(ideational)、互動(interpersonal)、組織(textual), 並把「作者之聲」具體化為三種資源:自我指涉(如 I/we)、立場(如情態詞、強弱語氣)、與讀 者互動(如提問、提示語)。結果顯示三個面向的發展不平均。內容面向:學生有實質想法,但清楚 度偶爾被時態與句法問題影響(中介語常見現象)。互動面向:第一人稱與情態詞的使用展現了作 者的能動性,但有時語氣過強,少了學科寫作需要的謹慎。組織面向是主要瓶頸:指代不清、主題推 進(theme–rheme)薄弱、銜接鏈不穩,即使用了轉折或例證標示語,仍難以穩定帶領讀者。整體來 看,這些學生「有想法、也有主動性」,主要需要的是如何鋪陳資訊與調整語氣的明確支持,而不是 全面性的「文法補救」。本研究建議在 EMI 課程中加入精簡且內嵌的寫作支援:主題推進練習、立 場調整(如適當使用模糊語/強化語、引述動詞),以及內容規劃框架;並在課程或學程層級,配合 評量時間提供寫作資源,與學校的國際化目標相互呼應。 |
| 英文摘要 | Internationalization initiatives in Taiwan have increased the presence of Southeast Asian students in higher education, foregrounding challenges of English academic writing in EFL/EMI contexts. This qualitative multiple–case study examines how Indonesian undergraduates in Taiwan develop and perform voice in English writing and how positioning manifests across their texts. Data included two individually authored texts per participant (n = 3), two open-ended questionnaires, and semi-structured interviews. Analysis drew on Systemic Functional Linguistics (ideational, interpersonal, textual) and an operationalization of voice as the orchestration of self-mention, stance, and engagement. Findings show uneven development across macrofunctions. Ideationally, students conveyed substantive content and articulated values and goals, but clarity was intermittently obscured by tense/aspect and clause-level issues typical of interlanguage. Interpersonally, frequent first-person reference and modal usage indexed emerging authorial agency, yet stance was sometimes over-boosted relative to disciplinary caution. Textually, organization was the chief bottleneck: under-specified reference (e.g., bare this, ambiguous we), fragile cohesive chains, and reliance on signposting without explicit links reduced reader guidance. Taken together, results depict writers with ideas and agency whose primary need is explicit support in staging information and calibrating stance rather than wholesale remediation of “grammar.” The study argues for concise, embedded supports in EMI courses—cohesion and reference repair, stance-tuning with hedges/boosters and reporting verbs, and ideational planning frames—paired with program-level resources timed to assessment cycles, aligned with broader internationalization goals. |
本系統中英文摘要資訊取自各篇刊載內容。