people's democratic republic of algeria ministry of higher education and scientific research freres

348 Pages·2010·4.34 MB·English

PEOPLE’S DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC OF ALGERIA
MINISTRY OF HIGHER EDUCATION AND SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH
FRERES MENTOURI UNIVERSITY, CONSTANTINE
Faculty of Letters and Languages
Department of Letters and English Language

Implementing Discourse Qualifying Devices to Improve
Students' Stylistic Interpretation of Literary Texts
A Case Study of First Year LMD Students of English at
Mohamed Kheider University of Biskra

Thesis submitted to the Department of Letters and English Language in fulfilment of
the requirements for the degree of 'Doctorat Es-Sciences' in Comparative Stylistics

By Mr. Ramdane MEHIRI Supervisor: Dr. Amel BAHLOUL

Board of Examiners
Chairperson: Prof. Zahri HAROUNI Mentouri University (Constantine)
Supervisor: Dr. Amel BAHLOUL EL Hadj Lakhdar University (Batna)
Member: Prof. Ahmed MOUMENE Mentouri University (Constantine)
Member: Prof. Youcef BEGHOUL Mentouri University (Constantine)
Member: Dr. Saliha CHELLI Mohamed Kheider University (Biskra)
Member: Dr. Nadir KAOULI EL Hadj Lakhdar University (Batna)

Thesis defended on June 8th, 2016
Dedication

I dedicate this modest work, with all my love and respect, to
My late parents: Mouloud and Turkia ZAIM, for everything
My late grand-mother: Achoura LAGHA, for her affection, patience and care,
My wife: Faiza KHELIFI, for her constant support and encouragement,
My sons: Miloud, Noureddine and Mohamed Ali, and my daughter: Amina,
My brothers and sisters
My extended family in Tolga and Lichana,
All my post-graduate teachers,
All my post-graduate mates,
Biskra University teachers,
My country: Algeria, its flag and its national anthem,
Mohamed KHEIDER, martyr and son of Tolga,
All our martyrs.

I
Declaration

I, Ramdane MEHIRI, do hereby solemnly declare that the work I presented in
this thesis is my own, and has not been submitted before to any other institution or
university for a degree.
I assert that all information in this document has been obtained and presented in
accordance with academic rules and ethical conduct. I also assert that, as required by
these rules and conduct, I have fully cited and referenced all material and results that
are not original to this work.
This work was carried out and completed at Mohamed KHEIDER University of
Biskra, Algeria.

Certified:

Mr. Ramdane MEHIRI
Teacher, the Department of English

Signature of Candidate:

II
Acknowledgements
I would first of all like to thank my advisor Dr. Amel BAHLOUL for her efforts to
read, correct, help, and above all offer suggestions to improve each chapter in this
work. Her guidance throughout the process has been invaluable, and I really appreciate
the support she has offered me since the day I first met her in Batna University.
Without her guidance, this thesis could not have been completed. Dr. Amel
BAHLOUL, for me, has been the main source of motivation and encouragement. Her
benevolent spirit and cheerful mood made me look at things from different angles, and
at my research with a scrutinising eye.
My thanks go to the members of the board of examiners: Prof. Zahri HAROUNI,
Prof. Ahmed MOUMENE, Prof. Youcef BEGHOUL, Dr. Saliha CHELLI, and Dr.
Nadir KAOULI for accepting to read, evaluate and comment on this thesis.
I am also grateful to the teachers, administrators, and students of the English
Department in Mohamed KHEIDER University of Biskra for their support in managing
the data collection. Special thanks go to my friends and colleagues Dr. Ahmed Chaouki
HOADJLI and Mr. Salim KERBOA who have discussed with me topics relevant to
questionnaires and tests, and have urged me to collect data and analyse them
empirically. I would also like to thank Dr. Adel Chala and Mr. Ahmed Abid for their
assistance in the statistics study and use of the SPSS software; Prof. Sane Yagi, Dr. Issa
TÖzÜn, Dr. Bachir Bouhania, and Dr. Aziz Mostefaoui for the comments they provided
me on the data collection methods. I also wish to thank my friends and colleagues for
encouraging me to tackle this work.
Finally, I would like to thank my wife who always encouraged and helped me
during this study. We have been married for few years now, and I bear witness that she
has always been a good woman and a faithful companion.
III
Abstract
Many first year EFL students in our university find it difficult to analyse and interpret texts.
Although some of them show certain proficiency when they deal with comprehension
questions, they seem to be unable to call for any background knowledge or show an
awareness of text or discourse hanging-devices. The present study examined whether
explicit instruction in stylistics and discourse devices improved the stylistic
interpretation of literary texts by first year students of English. The study employed an
intervention strategy that introduced some discourse devices to a section (sample) of 39
students who participated simultaneously in the study as the control and experimental
groups. This section received instruction on coherence, cohesion, situationality and
intertextuality for a period of 15 hours through 5 weeks after it had taken a pretest on
the old model of exams. A posttest was then taken on the new model of exams and
ANOVA tests were used to check the improvement of the students' stylistic
interpretation of literary texts and overall achievement before and after the intervention.
Prior to the intervention, the thirty-nine students responded to a questionnaire and the
teachers of the course were interviewed to provide the researchers with insights into
different aspects of the classroom situation and the programme of the first year. The
analysis of the data gathered resulted in important differences in the stylistic analysis
and general comprehension of texts by the students in the posttest, attaining better
scores than they did in the pretest. The teachers' responses in the interviews, the
students' answers to the questionnaires and the scores achieved indicated that it is
important to include the teaching of discourse devices in the first year Literary Texts
programme.
Key Words: First year EFL students, discourse devices, stylistic interpretation, literary
texts, intervention strategy, Literary Texts programme.
IV
List of Abbreviations and Acronyms

ANOVA: Analysis of Variance
BAC: Baccalaureate (the last secondary school exam)
CBA: Competency-Based-Approach
EFL: English as a Foreign Language
Ells: English language learners
ESP: English for Specific Purposes
ICTs: Information and Communication Technologies
LMD: Licence-Master-Doctorat (system)
MA: Master of Art (Magister)
MEC: Ministry of Education and Culture (Brazil)
MOOCs: Massive Open Online Courses
OFSTED: Office for Standards in Education
PhD: Doctor of Philosophy (Doctorate degree)

V
List of Tables
Table Page
2.1 Wang's examples showing the borderline between themes and rhemes …. 78
3.1 Wright's view of modern student-teacher relationship…………………..... 98
3.2 Definitions of learning as proposed by Pritchard…………………………. 109
3.3 A framework of course development processes as suggested by Kathleen
Graves……………………………………………………………………... 115
4.1 Time allotment in the licence curriculum…………………………...…….. 130
4.2 Number of students in the English department……………………...……. 133
4.3 Number of students per year (from 2007 to 2013)………………………... 136
4.4 Number of department teachers and their ranks (from 2007 to 2013) …… 138
4.5 Statistics on higher education in Algeria, Morocco and Tunisia………..…. 151
6.1 Length of time spent in studying English…………………………………. 215
6.2 Students' attitudes towards the current materials………………….............. 217
6.3 Categorisation of actions and activities suggested by the students……….. 221
6.4 Frequency of teacher's classroom practices as seen by students………….. 232
6.5 Categorisation of teaching and learning needs suggested by the students... 235
6.6 The "Text Analysis1/ Text Analysis2" Dichotomy……………….............. 237
6.7 Grid for inventing the students' own literary text analysis model………… 237
6.8 An overview of the interviewees' features………………………………… 242
6.9 ANOVA results for the pre-test and posttest students' marks……............. 258
6.10 Tukey (HSD) / Analysis of differences between the modalities with an
interval of confidence at 95%........................................................................ 259
6.11 Recapitulation of means and groups/ levels differences………………….. 259
6.12 ANOVA results for the pre-test and posttest marks of males and females.. 260
6.13 Tukey (HSD) / Analysis of differences between the modalities with an
interval of confidence at 95% …………………………………………….. 261
6.14 Recapitulation of means and groups/ levels differences………………….. 261
6.15 ANOVA results for the pre-test and posttest students' written production.. 262
6.16 Tukey (HSD) / Analysis of differences between the modalities with an
interval of confidence at 95%...................................................................... 263
6.17 Recapitulation of means and groups/ levels differences………………….. 263
6.18 ANOVA results for the students' Scores in the posttest activities………... 264
6.19 Fisher (LSD) / Analysis of differences between the modalities with an
interval of confidence at 95%....................................................................... 265
6.20 Recapitulation of means and groups/ levels differences…………………………….. 265

VI
List of Figures
Figure Page
4.1 Time allotted to Literary Texts in semesters 1, 2, 3 and 4…………. 132
4.2 Time allotted to Literary Texts in semesters 5 and 6………………. 132
4.3 Number of students in the English department…………………….. 134
4.4 Status of the LMD student population in 2007…………………….. 135
4.5 Status of the LMD student population in 2013…………………….. 135
4.6.1 Increase of the LMD student population between 2007 and 2013… 137
4.6.2 Increase of the LMD student population between 2007 and 2013… 137
4.7.1 Whole body of teachers and students (2007/2013)………………… 140
4.7.2 Whole body of teachers and students (2007/2013)………………… 140
4.8 General scheme of the LMD system……………………………….. 142
4.9 Map of the Big Maghreb and its location in the world…………….. 150
4.10 Map of Bologna and its location in Italy…………………………... 151
6.1 Students' sex (Percentages)………………………………………… 214
6.2 Students' age range (Percentages)………………………………….. 214
6.3 Students' choices of English Major (Percentages)…………………. 214
6.4 Students' BAC streams (Percentages)……………………………… 214
6.5 Extent of liking English (degree and percentage)………………….. 216
6.6 Students' attitudes towards their learning environment……………. 218
6.7 Students' attitudes towards the lack of qualified teachers………….. 219
6.8 Students' most preferred literary genre…………………………….. 222
6.9 The most difficult practice as considered by students……………... 223
6.10 The sources of difficulty in classroom practices…………………… 224
6.11 Students' classification of activities in terms of importance……….. 225
6.12 Students' ranking of problems in terms of difficulty………………. 226
6.13 Students' classification of sources of knowledge in terms of use at
home………………………………………………………………... 228
6.14 Students' attitudes towards teacher's feedback……………………... 229
6.15 Students' feelings towards teacher's help…………………………... 230
6.16 Frequency of teacher's classroom practices as seen by students…… 231
6.17 Students' conception of a good text analysis………………………. 234
6.18 Students' ideal literary text analysis model………………………… 239
6.19 A sample plan for analysing qualitative data………………………. 244
6.20 The principles of analysing qualitative data……………………….. 244
6.21 Graph of means showing the students' improvement……………… 258
6.22 Graph of means showing the female students' improvement………. 260
6.23 Graph of means showing students' improvement in written
production………………………………………………………….. 262
6.24 Graph of means showing students' scores in the posttest activities... 264

VII
Table of Contents
Dedication ………………………………………………………………………... I
Declaration ……………………………………………………………………..… II
Acknowledgements …………………………………………………………..…... III
Abstract ………………………………………………………………………..…. IV
List of Abbreviations and Acronyms …………………………………………….. V
List of Tables …………………………………………………………………..… VI
List of Figures …………………………………………………………………..... VII
Table of Contents ……………………………………………………………..….. VIII
General Introduction ………………………………………………………..…..
1. Statement of the Problem …………………………………………………..….. 02
2. Aim(s) of the Study ……………………………………………………………. 03
3. Research Questions ………………………………………………………..…... 04
4. Research Hypotheses ……………………………………………………….….. 04
5. Significance of the Study ……………………………………………………… 05
6. Research Scope and/Limitations …………………………………………….… 06
7. Research Methodology ……………………………………………………..…. 07
8. Research Organisation …………………………………………………..…….. 07
9. Demystification of Terms and Anticipation of Criticism ………………..……. 09
9. 1. The Style ……………………………………………………………..…… 10
9. 2. The Case……………………………………………………………..……. 10
9. 3. The Sample………………………………………………………….……. 12
9. 4. The "Participants"………………………………………………….……… 13
PART ONE: LITERATURE REVIEW……………………………….……….
Chapter 1: History and Emergence of Stylistics ………………………..…......
Introduction ………………………………………………………………..…... 16
1.1. The Definition of Style …………………………………………………...….. 17
1.1.1. Style as a Concept …………………………………………………..…... 17
1.1.2. Style as a Varying Element …………………………………………..…. 19
1.1.3. Style as a Feature of Distinction ……………………………………..…. 21
1.2. The Description of Style ………………………………………………..……. 23
1.2.1. Leech, Deuchar and Hoogenraad's Approach ……………………..……. 23
1.2.2. Leech and Short's Approach ……………………………………..……... 24
1.2.3. Galperin's Approach ……………………………………………..…….... 25
1.3. The Measurement of Style …………………………………………..………. 25
1.3.1. Labov's approach ………………………………………………..…….... 27
1.3.2. Bell's Approach …………………………………………….....……...…. 27
1.4. Individual vs. Group Styles ………………………………………..………… 29
1.4.1. Dialects and Idiolects ……………………………….…...…..…..……… 29
1.4.2. Register: Field, Tenor and Mode …………………….……..………....... 29
1.4.3. Formal and Informal language ……………………….……..…….…….. 30
1.4.4. Speaking and Writing ……………………………..……………..……… 32
VIII
1.5. A Brief History of the Discipline ……………………………………..……... 33
1.5.1. What is Stylistics?......…..……………………………………..………… 34
1.5.2. Early Beginnings and Origins ………………………….……....……….. 38
1.5.3. Linguistics and Literature ……………..……………………………..…. 39
1.6. Stylistics: Functions and Major Types …………………………………..…... 42
1.6.1. Historical Stylistics …………..……………………………………..…... 43
1.6.2. Linguistic Stylistics …………..…………………………………..……... 46
1.6.3. Literary Stylistics ………..………………………………………..…….. 48
1.7. Stylistics and Pedagogy ………………………………………………..……. 51
Conclusion ………………………………………………………………..……. 53
Chapter 2: Discourse Analysis and Text-Hanging /Qualifying Devices …......
Introduction ………………………………………………………………..….... 56
2.1. What is Discourse? ……………………………………………………..……. 56
2.2. What is Discourse Analysis? …………………………………………..…….. 57
2.2.1. General Overview …………………………...………………………..… 57
2.2.2. Practical Considerations ………………………………..…………..…... 58
2.3. Rules Governance (Discourse Qualifying Devices) ……………………..….. 61
2.3. 1. Cohesion and Coherence ………………………………………….……. 62
2.3. 2. Situationality and Intertextuality………………………………………... 64
2.4. Types of Discourse………… ……………………………………………….. 64
2.4.1. Spoken and Written Discourses…………………………………………. 64
2.4.2. Transactional and Interpersonal Discourses………………………..…… 66
2.4.3. Discourse Styles…………………………………………………….…… 67
2.5. Discourse and the Other Disciplines ……………………………………..….. 69
2.5. 1. Discourse and Literature…………………………………………….….. 69
2.5. 2. Discourse and Linguistics………………………………………………. 70

2.6. Text and, or Context ……………………………………………………….... 71
2.7. Text, Mood, Theme and Rheme ……………………………………….….…. 76
2.8. Text and Meaning ……………………………………………………….…... 79
2.9. Discourse Analysis as a Qualitative Method for Analysing Written Texts...... 82
2.10. Discourse Analysis and Case Studies ………………………………………. 85
2.11. Discourse Analysis and text Interpretation ……………………………….... 90
Conclusion …………………………………………………………………..…. 91
Chapter 3: Innovation and Education ……………………………………..…..
Introduction ………………………………………………………………..…… 94
3.1. What is Innovation?………………………………………………………..… 95
3.2. Major Aspects of Innovation ……………………………………………..….. 98
3.2.1. Interaction and Focus ………………………………..……………..…… 98
3.2.2. Alternative Activities ……………………………………..………..…… 100
3.3. Innovation in Today’s Education ………………………………………..…... 101
IX