ERIC ED427546: Literacy Across Cultures: Newsletter of the JALT Foreign Language Literacy N-SIG, 1998.

54 Pages·1998·1.1 MB·English

by  ERIC

DOCUMENT RESUME
FL 025 742
ED 427 546
Literacy Across Cultures: Newsletter of the JALT Foreign
TITLE
Language Literacy N-SIG, 1998.
Japan Association for Language Teaching, Tokyo.
INSTITUTION
ISSN-1344-204X
ISSN
PUB DATE
1998-00-00
53p.; For 1997 issues of this newsletter, see FL 024 935.
NOTE
Serials (022)
PUB TYPE
Collected Works
Literacy Across Cultures; v2 n1-2 Feb-Sep 1998
JOURNAL CIT
EDRS PRICE MF01/PC03 Plus Postage.
Classroom Techniques; Foreign Countries; Grammar; Listening
DESCRIPTORS
Skills; *Literacy Education; *Phonemics; Phonics; Phonology;
Reading Skills; Rhetoric; Second Language Learning; Teaching
Methods; World Wide Web
Japan; Japanese People; *Phonemic Awareness
IDENTIFIERS
ABSTRACT
This document consists of the two issues published during
1998 of the newsletter of the Japan Association for Language Teaching (JALT)
national special interest group (N-SIG) on foreign language literacy. Major
articles in these issues are: "Academic Protocol and Targeted Rhetoric"
(Denise D. Brown); "Key Concepts in FL Literacy: Phonemic Awareness" (Charles
Jannuzi); "Grammar, Reading, and Listening Skills among Japanese Students of
English: A Comparison of Respective Abilities" (Bern Mulvey); "Literacy
Links: Phonology, Phonetics, Phonemic Awareness and Phonics" (Jannuzi);
"Specialty Booksellers on the WWW" (Jannuzi); and presentations from the 1997
JALT meeting, including: "FL Literacy: Meeting Needs and Realities in Japan"
(panel discussion) (Andy Barfield, David Dycus, Barry Mateer, Elin Melchior);
"Phonemic Awareness: Is It Really Language Specific?" (Brett Reynolds); "A
Key Concept Revisited: Phonemic Awareness" (Jannuzi); "The Internet TESL
Journal" (Dycus); and "Report on the Robert Kaplan Workshop" (Brown). Book
and materials reviews are included in each issue.
(MSE)
***************************************** ***** **********************************
Reproductions supplied by EDRS are the best that can be made
*
*
from the original document.
*
*
********************************************************************************
iteracy
cross
ultures
X.3ZitU-7-9:>4
February, 1998
VOlume
2, Number 1
EDUCATION
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF
Research end Improvement
Office of Educational
INFORMATION
EDUCATIONAL RESOURCES
CENTER (ERIC)
been reproduced as
\This document has
organization
PERMISSION TO REPRODUCE AND
received from the person or
DISSEMINATE THIS MATERIAL HAS
originating it.
BEEN GRANTED BY
have been made to
0 Minor changes
quality.
improve reproduction
opinions stated in this
Points of view or
necessarily represent
document do not
policy.
official OERI position or
TO THE EDUCATIONAL RESOURCES
2
INFORMATION CENTER (ERIC)
1
LE
BEST COPY AVAIL
iteracy
cross
ultures
1
112
IgrtA-11*.s-7:t
A5C{L19
February, 1998
Volume 2, Number 1
Academic Protocol
and Targeted Rhetoric
Key Concepts in
FL Literacy:
Phonemic
Awareness
Grammar, Reading, and
Listening Skills Among
Japanese Students of
English: A Comparison of
Respective Abilities
Literacy Links: Phonology,
Phonetics, Phonemic
Awareness and Phonics
Specialty Booksellers
on the WWW
Links to Literacy
insights
fs
1N4
tit&ft...
\n
Our Statement of Purpose
virtually anyone wishing to
Literacy in one's first language (LI) has become essential for
between the world's
function in most of the modern world. At the same time, growing contact
highlighted the need for a
people has increased the need for foreign language learning and has
and implications of FL literacy
greater understanding of the aspects, processes, development
N-SIG) (presently
(FLL). The Foreign Language Literacy National Special Interest Group (FLL
under the auspices of the Japan Association for Language
a provisional special interest group
that can help lead to
Teaching) seeks to network people, ideas, theory, practice and experiences
doing so, we aim to move beyond idealized constructs of the
a better understanding of FLL. In
practices,
L2 and FL learner, and to make clear the differences between LI, L2 and FL literacy
processes and theoretical models.
literacy in
To do this, we seek to encourage locally relevant research into foreign language
language literacy
Japan and to map out commonalities and differences between features of foreign
in Japan and in other countries. The FLL N-SIG also aims to foster and network study groups
their situations
and local grassroots linkups with teachers in other countries in order to learn about
in
and needs, and to create greater understanding and mutual cooperation between teachers
different countries and situations.
In this Issue
Feature Articles
Academic Protocol and Targeted Rhetoric
1
by Denise D. Brown
Key Concepts in FL Literacy: Phonemic Awareness
7
by Charles Jannuzi
Insights
Grammar, Reading, and Listening Skills among Japanese Students
13
of English: A Comparison of Respective Abilities
by Bern Mulvey
Links to Literacy
Literacy Links: Phonology, Phonetics, Phonemic Awareness and Phonics
14
by Charles Jannuzi
Specialty Booksellers on the WWW
16
by Charles Jannuzi
It is Written...
Extensive Reading in the Second Language Classroom
20
Information
Membership information
21
Publication guidelines
21
Officers and contact information
22
Academic Protocol
and Targeted
Rhetoric
Denise D. Brown
University of Library and
Information Science
Tsukuba, Japan
Both literacy and rhetoric
are, by their
that community. I will define
an Anglo speech
very nature, culture-specific institu-
community as the variety of English
spoken in
tions. Both are bound by the
con-
the home country (England), together
with all
ventions and expectations of
a particular
of the varieties spoken in the former
British
speech community and
a particular social
empire, colonial
powers, commonwealth
code. Patterns of discourse have
little univer-
nations, and British-mandated territories
of
sal value away from their immediate
social
today (i.e., the varieties of English
spoken in
systems. The acquisition of linguistic mecha-
America, Australia, Canada, New
Zealand,
nisms is one thing, putting these
mechanisms
South Africa, certain other African
states,
to use with the intimate knowledge of
an
India, etc.). Note that I
am using the term
insider is another. Thus in
a very real sense,
Anglo in its purely linguistic
sense here, as a
literacy and rhetoric
are artificial constructs.
derivative of OE Anglisc (English).
They exist solely within the communal
mind
of a group of people and have
merit solely
Literacy in Anglo speech
because of collective procedure.
Yet it is one
communities
of those human vagaries that
academic proto-
col within a community is generally
First of all, it is necessary to consider
believed
what
to be a universal truth, often without
literacy and rhetoric
are. We might say that
any
comparative scrutiny whatsoever.
literacy is the ability to utilise one's
In this
LI profi-
paper I will discuss the nature of academic
ciently enough to be able
to read and write
protocol, the linguistic conventions
reasonably sophisticated texts; and that
that de-
rheto-
fine literacy in a speech community,
ric is the ability to manipulate the lexis
and a
and
procedure for teaching Anglo (i.e.,
syntax and stylistic devices of
a linguistic code
English)
rhetorical style.
in order to be optimally received
in that code.
However, such a distinction is
to draw a
Definitions of terms
somewhat artificial divide between the
two
skills, so that I will
use assume 'literacy' to
Academic protocol
can be taken to mean
subsume 'rhetoric'.
the rules and constraints that
are operative on
When considering literacy,
one generally
the written products of the
educated circles
thinks of academic or scientific
or journalistic
of a linguistic fellowship.
Targeted rhetoric
writing rather than creative writing
(as the
is the practice whereby literacy
in an L2 is
latter allows a manipulation of form
which the
systematically developed for the
express
former do not). We have observed
that the
purpose of efficacy amongst the members of
concept of literacy (and, by extension, rheto-
an alien fellowship (the target community). In
ric) is manifestly dependent
upon its generat-
order to be perceived
as efficacious in an
ing culture. Therefore, it follows that
we
acquired language, one must satisfy
the de-
must consider literacy only within the
parame-
mands and expectations of the
LI speakers in
ters of a specific cultural matrix.
It happens
February, 1998
1
understand the parameters of this protocol
that Anglo literacy is broadly characterised by
linearity. Whilst linearity in English written (i.e., that implicit messages are more impor-
tant that explicit ones), then this rhetorical
discourse is not an all-encompassing feature,
style is quite potent. Furthermore, it must be
and many English texts do in fact exhibit vari-
said that, due to the pervasiveness of Anglo
ant styles of organisation (cf. Braddock,
writing in the Western hemisphere (in
1974), it is nevertheless a feature that most
government, in the media, in academia, in
Anglo speakers will recognise and implicitly
adopt. One of many examples of linearity of
legal documentation, in scientific and medical
journals, in computing literature, etc.), rhetori-
text is the structural demand for a clear Intro-
cal style which features linearity may be held
duction, Development, and
in false preference to a host of other, equally
Conclusion, logically progressing from the
legitimate academic protocols.
top to the bottom of a document in a vertical
manner. This passion for linearity may have
Literacy cross-culturally
its origins in the Anglo-Saxon lineage of Eng-
lish (i.e., in the Northern European tribes of
If we consider literacy dispassionately then,
Angles and Saxons who invaded England in
it soon becomes clear that we must be ever-
the 5th and 6th centuries A. D.). Certainly the
vigilant against preconceived conviction and
native Celtic tongues of the English Isle (i.e.,
prejudice when it comes to matters of aca-
Scots Gaelic, Irish, Manx, Welsh, Cornish,
demic protocol. Kaplan (1966), in a
and Breton of todaythe languages that
controversial and much-quoted paper,
were pushed out to the 'fringe' of England)
graphically depicted various modes of dis-
exhibit a natural lyricism and structural fluid-
course structure according to what he
ity that Anglo-Saxon English must labour to
believed was the exhibited pattern of textual
achieve. And it is true that the majority of
development. These are repeated in Figure 1.
Western nations which are not Anglo in
origin, e.g., France, Germany, Russia, and
Semitic
English
Spain, to list only a few, are patently less
linear in their academic writing styles. These
cultures exhibit a high tolerance for the
circuitousness, digressions, and parenthetical
sub-structures that academic protocol in Eng-
lish so rigorously denies. It seems then, that
Oriental
Romance
linearity is not so much a feature of the West-
ern world as a feature of the Anglo world, a
point which needs to be stressed frequently in
the L2 classroom.
When teaching targeted rhetoric, one must
make clear that one is teaching the conven-
Russian
tions of a nominated L2 community (e.g.,
English), which may or may not be intrinsi-
cally valuable. Rhetorical conventions differ
widely and each is as licit and effective in its
own environment as the other. In Japanese
literacy, for example, it is assumed that the
Figure I. Graphic representations of various
reader is able to interpret the 'white' or
modes of discourse structure.'
'empty' spaces between the lines (i.e., that
which is unsaid), so that author and reader
Adapted from "Cultural thought patterns in
enter into a kind of collusion (S. Mushakoji,
inter-cultural education" by R.B. Kaplan, 1966,
personal communication). If both parties
Language Learning 16 , p.15. Utilised with
permission of R.B. Kaplan and Language Learning.
Literacy Across Cultures Vol.2 No.1
2
The 'Romance' diagram for the Romanic
topic) in the opening sections of
text. The
(i.e., Latin) structures of, for example,
thesis may be mentioned towards the middle
France, Italy, Rumania, and Spain is
not so
of the text, towards the end,
or indeed perhaps
different to the ones drawn for Russia and
never clearly at all.
It is left to the reader to
Germany, as Figure 2 shows.
assemble the main thrust of the argument,
based upon the clues in the text. Kaplan
Romance
Russian
(1966) calls such a style an 'approach by indi-
rection'. Discourse development follows
a
pattern of 'turning and turning in a widening
gyre'. The loops revolve around the topic and
view it from a variety of positions, but
never
address it directly. "Things are developed in
terms of what they are not, rather than in
terms of what they are" (Kaplan, op. cit).
Loveday (1982) refers to this type of
discourse as the 'dot-type' presentation of
one
item after the other, in
a highly anecdotal or
episodic manner, without ever actually stating
Figure 2. Graphic representations of certain
a conclusion. And Fliegel (1987) refers to it
Indo-European discourse structures (cf.
as 'emblematic mode', one which presents a
Loveday, 1982 for the German).
variety of generic outcomes rather than
a sin-
gle chosen position. The overriding principle
Notice that all three diagrams in Figure
2
for all of these discourse structures is that the
(representing a goodly portion of the 'West-
reader must extrapolate
a position from seem-
ern' world) are hardly linear, suggesting that
ingly unrelated facts or situations. But
as I
weaving, wavering, ambivalence, and lack of
have already suggested, the obscure textual
clear progression are unremarkable
patterns
clues may in fact be very obviously related
to
of discourse organisation in these nations.
members sharing the same LI code. This is
This is especially noteworthy in that it
contra-
perhaps a correlate of the goal of the
dicts any preexistent notions that
'Europeans'
discourse. Leki (1991) notes that rhetoric in
are of a single 'textual' frame of mind. And it
the Asiatic tradition has
an historical purpose
is an excellent counterargument
to the claim
of announcing truth rather than proving it,
that 'linear' is the superior
so
or preferred style
that the speaker/writer
arranges the proposi-
for academic writing. However, I invite
the
tions of the announcement in such
a way that
reader to judge whether European
texts
references to a communal, traditional wisdom
match the diagrams listed above, noting
that
invite easy and harmonious agreement. Rhet-
Kaplan has been censured
over the years for
oric in the Western tradition, quite conversely,
his claims.
Still, I will endorse him conceptu-
has an object of convincing
peers of some
ally, and venture to
say that whilst graphical
(originally political) position, and
revision might be in order, the principal
consequently places much prominence
on the
notion holds (i.e., that cultures differ consid-
speaker/writer's ability to reason and to
mar-
erably in their modes of constructing
text).
shal evidence. In
summary then, we might
describe the 'Oriental' mode of text develop-
Asiatic 'circular' style of
ment as deferential, anecdotal, and circuitous,
literacy
one which seeks to address an issue by de-
The 'Oriental' style of Figure 1 supposedly
scribing the surrounding terrain. It empha-
characterises an East Asian rhetorical
sises group collectivity, the elicitation of
pattern.
con-
In this rhetorical mode, the writer avoids
sent, and the avoidance of direct conflict (cf.
a
direct delineation of thesis (i.e.,
Fliegel, op. cit.).
statement of
February, 1998
3
Problem areas for literacy in
Number (i) is a rather boring but seemingly
neglected domain concerned with presenting
English
a document properly in English. Therefore, I
Although controvertible (cf. Braddock,
usually address this point first when teaching
1974; Hinds, 1983; Mohan and Lo, 1985;
Anglo protocol. It concerns such matters
as
Sa'adeddin, 1989; Leki, 1991), Kaplan's
recording one's personal details on
a docu-
1960s diagrams can be utilised
as a spring-
ment (name, title, class/organisation), assign-
board with which to view rhetorical patterns
ing a suitable title to the text, using standard
discriminately. We may disagree with terms
margin settings (i.e., one inch or 2.54 cm),
such as 'Oriental' (a marked 'American'
term,
positioning the text on the page, employing
incidentally, since the Orient traditionally sub-
section headings and subheadings, ensuring
sumes the Near, Middle, and Far East), and
that the text is of a suitable length, and
any
we may dispute his 'circular' representation in
other matters concerning the physical form of
Figure 1. Yet Kaplan was among the first
to
the document (paper size, binding, extra
identify the wide divergency in rhetorical ori-
inclusions such as a table of contents, list of
entations, and his work is seminal in the field
references, appendices, etc. where necessary).
of cross-cultural literacy. He
was, in fact,
Number (v) will be discussed in the next
rather cautious about his original claims,
section. However, it might be appropriate
to
emphasising that they were exploratory and
mention here that if syntactic or rhetorical
tentative.
deficiencies exist in the source code (i.e., the
So then, we have seen that linearity is at
LI), then these tendencies will predictably
least a prima facie requirement of Anglo
carry into the L2 code. That is to say, if an
rhetorical patterning. Therefore, it must be
L2 writer exhibits syntactic error or
poor
explicitly taught and compared with the L2
development in the target code, it may well
speaker's native conventions (where possi-
be due not so much to Ll rhetorical interfer-
ble).
Other problem areas are the students'
ence as to the reality that the same blunders
habitual lack of signalling devices (e.g.,
would be committed in the native language
opening the discourse, introducing
a new
(cf. Mohan and Lo, 1985).
point, sequencing, illustration, qualification,
generalising, summarising, concluding, etc.),
Procedure for teaching
improper layout of a document (formatting),
rhetorical literacy in English
choice of textual strategy (e.g., chronological;
areal; ranking; comparison and contrast;
For East Asian students, I generally draw
cause and effect, discussion, etc.), syntactic
the following two illustrations (Figure 3)
on
error (e.g., tense and aspect; modality; voice;
the blackboard, and invite their assent
or dis-
relative clauses; reference), and violation of
sent, according to their perceptions of their
academic protocol in the target language. I
own language code.
list below a few of the key problem
areas I
have identified in the teaching of literacy in
Anglo
English:
(i)
proper presentation format
(formatting)
(ii)
linearity vs. circuity (structure)
(iii)
use of semantic markers (signalling)
Figure 3.
Linearity vs.
'circuity': (cf.
(iv)
developmental style (style)
Kaplan, 1966)
(v)
syntactic error (syntax)
(vi)
violation of academic protocol
Whatever the outcome, their
awareness of
(protocol)
variant rhetorical patterning has been
secured, and this in itself is a significant
4
Literacy Across Cultures Vol.2 No.1
advantage as they approach
the acquisition of
cately suggest rather
than labour
a point, and
L2 literacy. It is then
necessary to give
give much
more credit to the reader than is
detailed instruction
on the components of
customary in the native rhetorical
mode. In
linearity in English. Whilst
I accept that lin-
targeted rhetoric pedagogy,
the goal is always
earity is a concept that
may in fact be in need
the perception of literacy
in the L2.
of critical revision, I will
nevertheless repeat
Following on from the last
section, below
here the broadly defining
outline of Anglo
is a list of procedural
steps which I have
discourse structure which
I present to stu-
found to be useful when
introducing the
aca-
dents. Unsurprisingly,
these can be divided
demic protocol for Anglo
literacy:
into (a) the textual:
Introduction (statement of
thesis), Development
(expansion of thesis,
A. General Skills
usually with supporting
arguments), and
Conclusion (summation
or synthesis of the-
(i ) formatting:
proper presentation format
sis); and (b) the sentential:
phrasal and
(ii) structure: linearity
vs. circuity
clausal linearity, such
as the characteristic
(iii) signalling:
use of semantic markers
word order of the L2
(e.g., SVO, SOV,
VSO,
etc.); coherence within
nominal and verbal
B. Pointed Skills
constituents; and
proper anaphoric,
cataphoric, and exophoric
reference within
or
(iv) style: representative
text development
across clauses.
Concerning structure in
gen-
(a) chronological (points
arranged
eral, I have found that
an exposition of struc-
according to their temporal
tural linearity at the
textual level helps learn-
sequence)
ers to perceive its presence
at the sentential
(b) areal (points arranged
according to a
level. That is to
say, a cultivated appreciation
categorical area)
of vertical linear
structure at the macro level
(c) ranking (points
arranged according
of text can facilitate
a gradual appreciation of
to their order of importance)
horizontal linear
structure at the micro level
(d) comparison and
contrast (points
of sentence. (For
example, the perception
of
arranged according
to their
the overall linear
pattern of SVO in English
similarities and dissimilarities)
linguistic structure;
the perception of the
lin-
(e) cause and effect
(points arranged
ear modification of a head
element based
according to a causal
relationship
upon the position of modifiers in
the L2; the
between x and y)
perception of the linear
anaphoric reference of
(t) discussion (points
arranged accord-
pronouns and relative clauses
to nominal
ing to a combinative
utilisation of
heads).
(a)
(e) )
What is important is
that the L2 learner
appreciate the necessity for
linearity in Eng-
(v) syntax: syntactic
strategies
lish, whether
or not he or she believes it
to be
(a) tense and aspect
(Past vs. Non-Past
an attractive rhetorical quality.
Understand-
tense in English; Simple,
ing precisely what
mechanisms need
to be
Progressive, Perfective
aspects)
acquired is part of the
adult learning
process.
(b) modality (epistemic,
deontic)
While this
may be a rationalist viewpoint, it
is
(c) voice (active
vs. passive)
I think, defensible, given
that textual organisa-
(d) relative clauses
(restrictive vs.
non-
tion procedure is
so little taught in either the
restrictive)
Ll or L2 of
many speakers. It might be
use-
(e) reference (anaphoric,
exophoric,
ful to imagine the Anglo
learner ofJapanese
cataphoric)
who, having been
accustomed to a lifetime
of
linearity and explicitness
in his or her Ll, sud-
(vi) protocol: adherence
to L2 protocol
denly finds that s/he
must skirt the issue, deli-
February, 1998
5
9
wonder how our 'aggressive' Occidental dis-
Note that number (v) is not necessarily to be
course is received by the Oriental readership.
taught per se; it is rather an inventory of
Consequently, it behoves us all as educators
essential linguistic mechanisms which can be
to be as open and neutral as possible when
successfully employed by the L2 learner, if the
approaching a complex task like targeted
level of general proficiency is such that s/he
rhetoric.
would appreciate a pointed analysis and dem-
onstration of use in the development of a text.
References
Braddock, R. (1974). The frequency and placement
Conclusion
of topic sentences in expository prose. Research
Academic convention, both spoken and
in the Teaching of English, 8, 287-302.
Fliegel, D. (1987, June16 ). Immigrant professionals
written, is a culture-specific construct. Most
must speak American. The Boston Globe.
protocols are 'top-down', in that they depend
Hinds, J. (1983). Contrastive rhctoric: Japanese and
on what the speaker psychologically brings to
English. Text, 3 (2), 183-196.
the written discourse (cf. Jannuzi 1997).
Jannuzi, C. (1997). Key concepts in FL literacy:
They are therefore culturally introspective,
Schema thcory. Literacy Across Cultures, 1 (2),
and by extension, universally inefficient.
10-15.
Kaplan, R. B. (1966). Cultural thought patterns in
However, I hope that the above discussion
inter-cultural education. Language Learning, 16
convincingly conveys that the protocol of the
(1 and 2), 1-20.
target code (i.e., the requisite principles and
Kaplan, R B. (1967). Contrastive rhetoric and the
expectations of the L2 rhetoric) can be ac-
teaching of composition. TESOL Quarterly 2 (1),
quired through systematic and explicit instruc-
10-16.
Kaplan, R. B. (1978). Contrastive rhetoric: some
tion in cross-cultural modes of literacy.
I
hypotheses. ITL (39-40), 61-72.
stress 'systematic' here because rhetoric is
Kaplan, R. B. (1983). Contrastive rhetorics: Some
often haphazardly and uncomprehensively
implications for the writing process. In A. Freed-
taught, if at all.
man, I. Pringle, and J. Yalden (eds.), Learning to
Finally, it is of paramount concern for
strite: First language/Second language, London,
writer and reader alike to suspend linguistic
Longman, 139-161.
Leki, I. (1991). Twenty-five years of contrastive
judgements when viewing text. This is so
rhetoric: text analysis and writing pedagogics.
natural an inclination that few of us can resist
TESOL Quarterly, 25 (1), 123-143.
this pitfall. However, to do so is to focus on
Loveday, L. (1982). The Sociolinguistics of learning
form rather than on substance; on the packag-
and using a non-native Language. Oxford:
ing rather than on the gist of the text. But
Pergamon Press.
Mushakoji, S. (1997). Associate Professor, Faculty
because so much depends on the use of prop-
of Knowledge Science, University of Library and
er protocol in a linguistic code, it happens
Information Science, Tsukuba-shi, Japan.
time and again that quite worthy texts are
Mohan, B. A., and Lo, W. A-Y. (1985). Academic
summarily dismissed by the uninformed, with
writing and Chinese students: transfer and devel-
the typical comment that the writer 'doesn't
opmental factors. TESOL Quarterly, 19 (3),
know how to write'. In my own experience, I
515-534.
Sa'adeddin, M. A. (1989). Text development and
know that when I am asked to correct the
Arabic-English negative interference. Applied
written texts of Japanese colleagues, the
Linguistics 10 (1), 36-51.
various lexical and syntactic errors always
seem trivial in comparison to a violation of
01010.0.0..
the anticipated protocol (i.e., lack of linearity,
no clear statement of thesis, no apparent
Dr. Denise Douglas-Brown can be contacted
introduction, no supporting arguments, no
of
at Foreign Language Centre, University
summation or synthesis: not articulating the
Library and Information Science (ULIS),
controlling idea, not getting to the point, not
1-2 Kasuga, Tsukuba 305, JAPAN, and by
expanding or defending the point, not return-
e-mail at <[email protected]>.
ing to or exploiting the idea).
Indeed I often
Literacy Across Cultures Vol.2 No.1
6
l)