Mar kppt 78

The Development of E-Mail Literacy: From Writing to

Peers to Writing to Authority Figures

Presenter: Ji-Jhen LiInstructor:Dr. Pi-Ying Hsu May 4, 2011

2

Citation

Chen, C-F. E. (2006). The development of E- mail literacy: From writing to peers to writing to authority figures. Language Learning and Technology, 10 (2), 35-55.

3

Content

Findings & Conclusions

3

Introduction1

Methodology2

Reflection4

4

E-mail has been widely used for both personal communication and institution. However, there are not paralinguistic

cues in using e-mail for status-unequal communication.

Introduction

5

Definition of Term

A shared mental Paralinguistic

cues

GesturesFacial

expression

Vocalinflection

6

Literature Review

Chinese students structure their request e-mails in an indirect sequence.

They transfer the request strategies in Chinese into the English request e-mails written to US professors.

(Kirkpatrick,1991; Nash,1983; Zhang,1955)

7

Purpose of the Study

to uncover the complexity of an L2 learner’s developing e-mail practice

to explore sociocognitive and sociopsychological factors affecting participant’s language use via e-mail

8

Methodology

Oneparticipant

3 in-depth interviews

266 e-mails

Online interview via mail

Online chat

Ling

9

Research Questions

1 Did Ling’s language use differ between the e-mails sent to peers and the e-mails sent to professors?

2Did her use of these discourse forms and strategies change over time in her e-mail practice?

10

Research Questions

3 From Ling’s perspective, what made her change or remain unchanged in her language use in e-mail communication?

4How can change or resistance to change in her e-mail practice be explained from sociocultural perspectives?

11

Data Analysis

Ling’s e-mail

discourse features

Discourse style

Message length

Message structure

12

Discourse Style

Easy and fluentA sense of

belongSolidarity

Informal

E-mails during master study

E-mails to

peers

E-mails during doctoral

study FormalPower relation

Showing respectGood impression

Familiarity

13

Message Length

Long entries

Stating purposesA sense of

personal touch

Shorter

E-mails during master study

E-mails to

peers

E-mailsduring

doctoral study

E-mail experience

Time Saving

Face-to-face interaction

Improved oral English

14

Message Structure

E-mails to

peers

E-mails during master study

E-mails during

doctoral study

Inductive Inductive Inductive

Indirect person

Native culture practice

15

Data Analysis

Request strategies

Request acts

Supportive moves

QueryPreparatory

Want Statement

sMitigating Aggravatin

g

16

Request Acts

Query Preparatory Want Statements

E-mails to peers

E-mails during master

E-mails duringdoctoral study

Mostly

Sometimes

Never

may

Supportive Moves

Mitigatingsupportive

moves

1717

E-mails to

peers

Smalltalk

apologizing

Self-humbling

Reluctance to impinge

availability

E-mails during Master study

E-mails during doctoralstudy

18

Supportive Moves

Aggravating supportive

moves

E-mails to

peers

Personal detailreasons

Student-oriented reasons

Urgency

Institutionalreasons

Ability

E-mails during Master study

E-mails during doctoralstudy

19

Conclusions

L2 learner’s frequent use of e-mail to

peers

Effectively for institutional

status-unequal communicatio

n

20

Conclusions

Ling’s e-mail writing

Subculture language

Common

Chinese culture

L1 writing style

Self-cognitio

n

21

Reflection

168 e-mailsto peers

98 e-mailsto US professors

22

Reflection

Over 2 .5 years

3 in-depth interviews

23

Reflection

24

Thanks for your listening.