IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ibn/eltjnl/v8y2015i6p20.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Epistemic Modality in the Argumentative Essays of Chinese EFL Learners

Author

Listed:
  • Chunyu Hu
  • Xuyan Li

Abstract

Central to argumentative writing is the proper use of epistemic devices (EDs), which distinguish writers’ opinions from facts and evaluate the degree of certainty expressed in their statements. Important as these devices are, they turn out to constitute a thorny area for non-native speakers (NNS). Previous research indicates that Chinese EFL learners differ significantly from the native speakers (NS) in marking epistemic modality. One problem of previous studies is that the essay topics are not well controlled, which makes it somewhat ambiguous as to whether the observed linguistic discrepancies are caused by the NNS/NS difference or by the topic differences. This paper sets out to explore much more comparable data from International Corpus Network of Asian Learners of English (ICNALE). The results show that while both NS group and NNS groups are heavily dependent on a restricted range of items, the manipulation of epistemic modality is particularly problematic for the L2 students who employ syntactically simpler constructions and rely on a more limited range of devices, as already discovered in the previous studies. Nevertheless, this study also shows that the most proficient L2 students modify their statements with less certainty markers and more tentative expressions than do their L1 counterparts, and that all learner groups, regardless of their overall language proficiency, use less boosters than L1 writers, which is in sharp contrast with previous studies. The ability to mark epistemic modality has much to do with L2 proficiency. While lower-band students exhibit a heavy reliance on a narrower range of items for strong assertions, higher-band students tend to be more tentative and demonstrate a more native-like use of some Eds. The observed patterns are explained in the light of the inherent properties of English EDs, the imperfect modal instruction and learner factors.

Suggested Citation

  • Chunyu Hu & Xuyan Li, 2015. "Epistemic Modality in the Argumentative Essays of Chinese EFL Learners," English Language Teaching, Canadian Center of Science and Education, vol. 8(6), pages 1-20, June.
  • Handle: RePEc:ibn:eltjnl:v:8:y:2015:i:6:p:20
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ccsenet.org/journal/index.php/elt/article/download/49404/26588
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://ccsenet.org/journal/index.php/elt/article/view/49404
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Zhenzhen Chen, 2012. "Expression of Epistemic Stance in EFL Chinese University Students’ Writing," English Language Teaching, Canadian Center of Science and Education, vol. 5(10), pages 173-173, October.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.

      More about this item

      JEL classification:

      • R00 - Urban, Rural, Regional, Real Estate, and Transportation Economics - - General - - - General
      • Z0 - Other Special Topics - - General

      Statistics

      Access and download statistics

      Corrections

      All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ibn:eltjnl:v:8:y:2015:i:6:p:20. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

      If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

      If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

      If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

      For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Canadian Center of Science and Education (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/cepflch.html .

      Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

      IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.