Paraphrase Patterns of Expert Academic Writers: Implications for Writing Development, Writing Pedagogy, and Plagiarism Policies

Q1 Arts and Humanities
Paul Michiels, Karyn Kessler, P. Rogers
{"title":"Paraphrase Patterns of Expert Academic Writers: Implications for Writing Development, Writing Pedagogy, and Plagiarism Policies","authors":"Paul Michiels, Karyn Kessler, P. Rogers","doi":"10.29344/0717621x.46.3133","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This study offers a linguistic analysis of language borrowing in expertly produced paraphrases. Within the context of higher education, paraphrase writing, an essential skill for source-based writing tasks across the curriculum and a key component in the development of disciplinary expertise, represents a challenge for students and teachers because 1) there is no precise and generally accepted definition of acceptable academic paraphrase, 2) discussions of paraphrase are more often framed in terms of plagiarism than effective writing, and 3) little is known about the linguistic (or rhetorical dimensions) of paraphrases in writing published by experts. The present study analyzes five corpora of paraphrase/source passage pairs (n = 233) produced by expert writers. Corpora 1 and 2 contain exemplar paraphrase/source passage pairs drawn from writing guides and handbooks designed for college students. The remaining three corpora of paraphrase/source passage pairings were assembled using award-winning published articles in three disciplines. Using Keck’s (2006) taxonomy for classifying paraphrases, the study found that about 27% of the average paraphrase of the expert writers analyzed here is made up of language found in the source passage. Paraphrase patterns of expert academic writers point toward a potential continuum of acceptable language borrowing practices likely driven by disciplinary differences. Implications for writing development, writing pedagogy, plagiarism policy, and further research are discussed.","PeriodicalId":35120,"journal":{"name":"Literatura y Linguistica","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-02-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Literatura y Linguistica","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.29344/0717621x.46.3133","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Arts and Humanities","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This study offers a linguistic analysis of language borrowing in expertly produced paraphrases. Within the context of higher education, paraphrase writing, an essential skill for source-based writing tasks across the curriculum and a key component in the development of disciplinary expertise, represents a challenge for students and teachers because 1) there is no precise and generally accepted definition of acceptable academic paraphrase, 2) discussions of paraphrase are more often framed in terms of plagiarism than effective writing, and 3) little is known about the linguistic (or rhetorical dimensions) of paraphrases in writing published by experts. The present study analyzes five corpora of paraphrase/source passage pairs (n = 233) produced by expert writers. Corpora 1 and 2 contain exemplar paraphrase/source passage pairs drawn from writing guides and handbooks designed for college students. The remaining three corpora of paraphrase/source passage pairings were assembled using award-winning published articles in three disciplines. Using Keck’s (2006) taxonomy for classifying paraphrases, the study found that about 27% of the average paraphrase of the expert writers analyzed here is made up of language found in the source passage. Paraphrase patterns of expert academic writers point toward a potential continuum of acceptable language borrowing practices likely driven by disciplinary differences. Implications for writing development, writing pedagogy, plagiarism policy, and further research are discussed.
专业学术作家的释义模式:对写作发展、写作教学法和抄袭政策的启示
这项研究提供了一个语言学分析的语言借用在专业生产的意译。在高等教育的背景下,意译写作是整个课程中基于资源的写作任务的基本技能,也是学科专业知识发展的关键组成部分,这对学生和教师来说是一个挑战,因为1)可接受的学术意译没有精确和普遍接受的定义,2)对意译的讨论更多地是在抄袭而不是有效写作的基础上进行的。3)我们对专家发表的文章中释义的语言学(或修辞层面)知之甚少。本研究分析了5个由专家作家创作的意译/源段落对语料库(n = 233)。语料库1和2包含来自为大学生设计的写作指南和手册的范例释义/源段落对。剩余的三个意译/源段落配对语料库使用三个学科的获奖论文进行组装。使用Keck(2006)的释义分类方法,研究发现,在本文分析的专家作者的释义中,平均约有27%是由源段落中的语言组成的。专业学术作家的释义模式指出了可能由学科差异驱动的可接受的语言借用实践的潜在连续体。讨论了对写作发展、写作教学法、抄袭政策和进一步研究的影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Literatura y Linguistica
Literatura y Linguistica Arts and Humanities-Literature and Literary Theory
CiteScore
0.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
24
审稿时长
48 weeks
期刊介绍: Literatura y Lingüística (L y L from now on) is an annual academia publication published by the Spanish Teaching Programme of Universidad Católica Silva Henríquez with venue in the city of Santiago, Chile. Its main purpose is to illustrate the results of the research work and teaching support prepared by the faculty staff of this professional training centre. In the development of this work, L y L seeks to promote the expansion and scattering of ideas that converged with the UCSH choice of values identified with the proposal of a pluralist dialogue between Faith and Culture.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信