Editor for this issue: Dina Kapetangianni <dina
linguistlist.org>
I need some help with references for the thesis I am planning to write. This is my abstract - ---------- In the current sociocultural approach to writing, learning to write is seen as an ability to learn the norm of the community to which the student seek admission. However, how the teacher can efficiently make the student "enculturated" (Johns, 1997) is open to discussion (Knoblauch and Brannon, 1984; Bizzel, 1992; Freedman, 1994; Dias, Freedman, Medway, Par�, 1999). In this research, I am interested in answering the following questions: - When evaluating a student's essay, do professors look for the same features that are valued in professional writing? - Can teachers explicate these features so that the students can accurately evaluate their own essays? (One study shows a positive evidence. See Sengupta, 1999) - Does an identity as a professional (rather than just a student) help the students apply their explicit knowledge to their writing? (suggested in Johns, 1997) I plan to answer the above questions through questionnaires, interviews, and analyses of papers. - ----------- I am looking for references in following areas - Research methodology - Teacher's evaluation criteria - Student's ability to evaluate essays (critical reading) - Identity as a writer (rather than a non-writer) Any suggestions will be appreciated. - Tosh Linguistics, 4th Year Honors Carleton University e-mail: lastcreatureMail to author|Respond to list|Read more issues|LINGUIST home page|Top of issueyahoo.com homepage: http://www.freespeech.org/lastman/index.html - ---------- "The world seems logical to us because we have already made it logical." - Friedrich Nietzsche, "The Will to Power"
It is generally agreed that the German sentence in (1a), transliterated in (1b), may be construed as being synonymous with (2). This reading is somewhat problematic, because it seems to require that only the negative part of "kein Auto" be fronted. (1a) Alle Professoren haben kein Auto. (1b) All professors have no car. (2) Not all professors own cars. It has been suggested to me that the English sentence in (1b) admits of the same construal, and I would like to know if that is correct, and if there dialectal or idiolectal variation in this point. It seems to me that it is fairly easy to read (3a), where I suppose "no geniuses" must be read predicatively, as synonymous with (3b), and would like to know if this is true, and if so, whether this reading is easier to obtain than in the case of (1b): (3a) All professors are no geniuses. (3b) Not all professors are geniuses. Finally, I would be interested to know if speakers' intuitions about (1b) and (3a) are somehow related to their intuitions about sentences in which negation associates with the verb, such as the following: (4) All professors aren't ill. Bart GeurtsMail to author|Respond to list|Read more issues|LINGUIST home page|Top of issue