Exploring Situational Writing Strategies in English: A Systemic Functional Linguistics Analysis of Student Responses
Abstract
The research focused on how students effectively establish rapport with authors and readers in essays through linguistic constructs. Using qualitative methods, a group of 20 participants was studied, with three students selected for situational writing assessment. Halliday's (2004) metafunctions framework-ideational, interpersonal, and textual-guided the analysis of their compositions. The findings revelaed revealed that students 1, 2, and 3 adeptly employed these metafunctions. The ideational dimension was used to coherently present reasons for incomplete homework while maintaining thematic consistency. Interpersonally, the students employed respectful tones, expressed contrition, commitment, appreciation, and responsibility. Textually, their work exhibited logical structure and cohesion. Through the integration of these metafunctions, students enhanced their communication strategies. The study underscores the significance of metafunction awareness in language education, suggesting that incorporating ideational, interpersonal, and textual dimensions can elevate writing proficiency. It offers guidance for adaptable communication, nurtures comprehensive communication skills, and establishes transferable proficiencies and assessment criteria. Ultimately, this research contributes to effective communication pedagogy across diverse contexts, showcasing the nuanced strategies students employ to connect with authors and readers.
Downloads
References
Arunsirot, S. (2013). An Analysis of Textual Metafunction in Thai EFL Students’ Writing, Novitas-ROYAL-Research on Youth and Language, 7(2), 160-174.
Backer, L., Van Keer, H., & Valcke, M. (2016). Eliciting reciprocal peer-tutoring groups’ metacognitive regulation through structuring and problematizing scaffolds. J. Exp. Educ. 84, 804–828. doi:10.1080/00220973.2015.1134419
Bakuuro. (2017). Demystifying halliday’s metafunctions of language, International Journal of Language and Literature, 5(2), 211-217.
Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Bandura, A. (2006). Guide for creating self-efficacy scales,” in Self-efficacy Beliefs of Adolescents, eds F. Pajares and T. Urdan (Greenwich, CT: IAP), 307-337.
Braaksma, M. A., Rijlaarsdam, G., Van den Bergh, H., and van Hout-Wolters, B. H. M. (2004). Observational learning and its effects on the orchestration of writing processes. Cogn. Instr., 22, 1-36.
Chanquoy, L. (2008). Revision processes,” in The SAGE Handbook of Writing Development, eds R. Beard, D. Myhill, J. Riley, and M. Nystrand (Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE), 80-97.
Cho, K., Schunn, C. D., & Charney, D. (2006). Commenting on writing typology and perceived helpfulness of comments from novice peer reviewers and subject matter experts. Writ. Commun. 23, 260-294. doi:10.1177/0741088306289261
Chueasuai, P. (2017). The interpersonal metafunction and translation of power relations: A case study of fifty shades of grey. MANUSYA: Journal of Humanities, 1(23), 1-22.
Creswell, J. (2014). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (4th ed.). SAGE Publications, Inc.
De Backer, L., Van Keer, H., & Valcke, M. (2016). Eliciting reciprocal peer-tutoring groups’ metacognitive regulation through structuring and problematizing scaffolds. J. Exp. Educ., 84, 804–828. doi:10.1080/00220973.2015.1134419
Fadhillah, A.M. & Rahmadina, K.P. (2021). Interpersonal metafunction analysis of a literary response text in tertiary education, Indonesian Journal of Functional Linguistics, 1(2), 58-71.
Halliday, M.A. K. (1985). An introduction to functional grammar. London: Edward Arnold.
Halliday, M.A. K. (1994). An introduction to functional grammar. London: Edward Arnold.
Halliday, M.A.K. (2004). An Introduction to Functional Grammar (3rd Ed.). Great Britain: Arnold,
Kellogg, R. T. (2008). Training writing skills: a cognitive developmental perspective. J. Writ. Res., 1, 1-26. doi:10.17239/jowr-2008.01.01.1
Kellogg, R. T., & Whiteford, A. P. (2009). Training advanced writing skills: the case for deliberate practice. Educ. Psychol., 44, 250-266. doi:10.1080/00461520903213600
MacArthur, C. A. (2012). Evaluation and revision, in past, present, and future contributions of cognitive writing research to cognitive psychology, ed. V. W. Berninger (New York, NY: Psychology Press), 461-483.
Martin, J. R. & Zappavigna, M. (2019). Embodied meaning: A systemic functional Perspective on Paralanguage. Springer Open, 6(1), 3-33.
Topping, K. J. (2005). Trends in peer learning. Educ. Psychol., 25, 631-645. doi:10.1080/01443410500345172
Veenman, M. V., Wilhelm, P., and Beishuizen, J. J. (2004). The relation between intellectual and metacognitive skills from a developmental perspective. Learn. Instr. 14, 89-109. doi:10.1016/j.learninstruc.2003.10.004
Wischgoll A (2017) Improving Undergraduates’ and Postgraduates’ Academic Writing Skills with Strategy Training and Feedback. Front. Educ., 2, 33. doi: 10.3389/feduc.2017.00033
Yolanda, D., Putri, D.M. & Sinar, T.S. (2017). Textual Analysis of Verbal Texts in the Children's Picture Books, Lingua, Jurnal Bahasa & Sastra, 18(1), 12-20.
