Authorial Voice in Islamic College English Department Students’ Argumentative Writing

Authors

  • Nur Afifi State College for Islamic Studies (STAIN) Kediri, Indonesia

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.30762/jeels.v1i1.40

Keywords:

authorial voice, self voicing, argumentative writing

Abstract

While considered elusive and abstract, authorial voice is paramount in English writing. Unfortunately, many of Indonesian EFL learners found it is highly challeging to show their voice in their writing. The importance of voice is even exaggerated in argumentative writing, since this kind of writing needs obvious stance of the writer. This study investigates the authorial voice students made in their argumentative writing. The purpose of this study is to gain the picture of students' writing ability especially in authorial voice to map the road in guiding the next writing classes. The object of the study is the argumentative writing made by English department students' at one Indonesian State College of Islamic Studies in their writing III course. Using Hyland's interactional  model of voice (2008) the data analysis results the authorial presence in the essays is in position 2 at 0 ² 4 scale which means the reader feels somehow weak presence of the authorial voice in the essay. This result confirms the findings of some previous studies that EFL learners especially from 'interdependent' cultural background tend to find this authorial voice difficult in writing English essay.

References

Bakhtin, M.M. (1986). From speech genres and other late essays. In P. Morris (Ed.), The Bakhtin reader (pp. 81-87). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

Benesch, S. (1999). Thinking critically, thinking dialogically. TESOL Quarterly, 33, 573 - 580.

Connor, U. And Kaplan, R. (1987).Writing across laguages: Analysis of L2 text. USA: Addison - Wesley.

Fox, H. (1994).Listening to the world: Cultural issues in academic writing. Urbara Illinois: National Council of Teachers of English.

Helms-Park, R. & Stapleton, P. (2003). Questioning the inportance of individualized voice in uderraduate L2 writing: an empirical study with pedagogical implications. Journal of Second Language Writing, 12 (3), 245 - 265.

Hyland, K. (2008) Disciplinary voices: Interactiosn in research writing. English Text Contruction, 1 (1), 5 - 22.

Hyland, K. (1998) Hedging in scientific research articles. Amsterdam: John Benjamin.

Ivanic, R. (1997). Writing and Identity: The discoursal construction of identity in academic writing. Amsterdam: John Benjamin.

Li, X. (1996). Good writing in cross cultural context. Albary: State University of New York Press.

Matsuda, P.K. (2001) Voice in Japanese writers discourse: implication for second language writing. Journal of Second Language Writing, 10, 35 - 53.

Shen, F.(1989). The classroom and the wider culture: identity as a key to learning English composition. College Composition and Communication, 40 (4), 466 - 469

Stapleton, P. (2002). Critiquing voice as a viable pedagogical tool in writing: Returning the spotlight to ideas. Journal of Second Langauge Writing 11, 177 - 190.

Downloads

Published

2014-11-20

How to Cite

Afifi, N. . (2014). Authorial Voice in Islamic College English Department Students’ Argumentative Writing. JEELS (Journal of English Education and Linguistics Studies), 1(1), 118–133. https://doi.org/10.30762/jeels.v1i1.40