Metadiscourse markers and EFL learners' reading comprehension skill. -9 7
8 Metadiscourse markers and EFL learners' reading comprehension skill. -9 7
Journal of College Reading and Learning. 9
N SB
Crawford, B. (2003) Metadiscourse and ESP reading comprehension: An I
exploratory study. Reading in a Foreign Languages, 15(1). S G
IN D
Cumming, A., Kantor, R., Baba, K., Erdosy, U., Eouanzoui, K. & James, M. (2005).
Differences in written discourse in independent and integrated prototype CE
tasks for next generation TOEFL. Assessing Writing, 10, 5-43.
Dafou-Milne, E. (2008). The pragmatic role of textual and interpersonal N E
metadiscourse markers in the construction and attainment of persuasion:
Across-linguistic study of newspaper discourse. Journal of Pragmatics, 40,
Gebril, A. (2006). Independent and integrated academic writing tasks: A study in
E CC
generalisability and test method. Unpublished Ph.D dissertation. The
University of Iowa, Iowa City. 74 4
Hinkel, E. (2004). Teaching academic EFL writing-practical techniques in vocabulary and grammar. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Hinkel, E. (2005). Hedging, inflating, and persuading in EFL academic writing. Applied Language Learning, 15(1 & 2), 29-53. Holmes, J. (1982b). Expressing doubt and certainty in English, RELC Journal, 13(2), 9-29. Hsu, H-W. (2006). An investigation of pre-third grade teachers, parents’ and school directors’ attitudes and practices with respect to children learning EFL in Taiwan. Unpublished MRes dissertation, University of Essex, UK.
Hyland, K. (1994). Hedging in academic writing and EAP textbooks. English for Specific Purposes, 13, 239-256.
Hyland, K. (1996a). Nurturing hedges in the ESP curriculum. System, 24(4), 477- 490.
Hyland, K., & Milton, J. (1997). Hedging in L1 and EFL student writing. Journal of Second Language Writing, 6, 183–206.
Hyland, K. (1998a). Boosting, hedging and the negotiation of academic knowledge. 18, 349-382.
Hyland, K. (1998d). Persuasion and context: The pragmatics of academic metadiscourse. Journal of Pragmatics, 30, 437-455. Hyland, K. (1999). Talking to students: Metadiscourse in introductory course books. English for Specific Purposes, 18, 3-26.
Hyland, K. (2008a). Academic clusters: Text patterning in published and
postgraduate writing. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 18(1),
Jacobs, H.L., Zinkgraf, S.A., Wormuth, D.R., Hartfiel, V.F. & Hughey, J.B. (1981).
7 8 -9
Testing ESL composition: A Practical Approach. Rowley, Mass.: Newbury
House Publishers, Inc.
SB I
Kong, R. (2009). Empirical study on metadiscourse in Chinese EFL learners oral
communication. Celta Journal, 32, 1.
IN D
Knoch, U. (2007). Diagnostic Writing Assessment: The Development and E
CE
Validation of a Rating Scale. Unpublished thesis, University of Auckland. O R
Lakoff, G. (1972). Hedges: A Study in meaning criteria and the logic of fuzzy
concepts. Chicago Linguistic Society Papers, 8, 183-228.
Lee. H., S. (2006). The use of interpersonal resources in argumentative/persuasive essays by East-Asian EFL and Australian tertiary students. PhD CO
Dissertation, University of Sydney.
N I2
Lee. H., S. (2008). An integrative framework for the analyses of argumentative/ CC E
persuasive essays from an interpersonal perspective. Text & Talk, 28(2), R
239-270.
Martin-Martin, P. (2008).The mitigation of scientific claims in research papers: A comparative study. IJES, 8(2) 133-152. Oller, J. W., Jr. (ed.). (1983). Issues in Language Testing Research. Rowley, Mass.: Newbury House.
Oxford, R. & Nyikos, M. (1989). Variables affecting choice of language learning strategies by university students. The Modern Language Journal, 73, 291- 300.
Plakans, L. (2008). Comparing composing processes in writing-only and reading- to-write test tasks. Assessing Writing, 13, 111-129. Paravaresh, V. & Nemati, M. (2008). Metadiscourse and Reading Comprehension: The Effects of Language and Proficiency. Electronic Journal of Foreign Language Teaching, 5(2), 220-239.
Salager-Meyer, F. (1994). Hedges and textual communication function in medical English written discourse. English for Specific Purposes, 13, 149-170. Salager-Mayer, F. (1997). I think that perhaps you should: A Study of Hedges in Scientific Discourse. In Functional Approaches to Written Text: Classroom
Applications – Washington: United States Information Agency. Sekaran, U. (2007). Research Methods for Business: A Skill Building Approach. Wiley India, Ansari Road, New Delhi. Shengming, Y. (2009). The Pragmatic Development of Hedging in EFL Learners. Ph.d Dissertation. Department of English, City University of Hong Kong.
Silver, M. (2003). The Stance of Stance: A Critical Outlook at Ways Stance is
Expressed and Modelled in Academic Discourse. Journal of English for
Academic Purposes, 2, 359-374. 85
Varttala, T. (1999). Remarks on the communicative functions of hedging in
7 8 -9
popular scientific and specialist research articles on medicine. English for
Specific Purposes, 18, 177-200.
SB I
Varttala, T. A. (2001). Hedging in Scientifically Discourse: Exploring variation
according to discipline and intended audience. Published Ph.D
IN D
Dissertation. E University of Tampereen Yliopisto. Finland,
CE http://acta.uta.fi//pdf/951-44-5195-3.pdf O R
Vold, E. T. (2006). Epistemic modality markers in research articles: a cross-
linguistic and cross-disciplinary study. International Journal of Applied
Linguistics, 16(1), 61–87.
CO 1 2 0
Winardi, A. (2009). The use of hedging devices by American and Chinese writers
I2 N
in the field of Applied Linguistics. Journal of SASTRA INGGRIS, 8(3), 228-
CC E
Wishnoff, J., R. (2000) Hedging Your Bets: EFL Learners’ Acquisition of Pragmatic Devices in Academic Writing and Computer-mediated Discourse. Second
Language Studies, 19(1). Wu, S. (2008). An empirical study of the role of metadiscourse in listening comprehension. Celea Journal, 3(1). Yeung, L. (2007). In Search of Commonalities: Some Linguistic and Rhetorical Features of Business Reports as a Genre. English for Specific Purposes, 26, 156-179.
-6 -25
-59 67 7 8 -9
N SB
S G D IN
E CE
E N E R FN
2 1 CO
I2 N CC E
Istilah-Istilah yang Digunakan Penagih Dadah dalam Proses Berinteraksi: Panduan Kepada Bakal Kaunselor di Agensi Pemulihan Dadah
Mohamad Azhari Abu Bakar; Universiti Malaysia Sarawak, Malaysia;
abmazhari@fcs.unimas.my
Nor Hasniah Ibrahim; Universiti Malaysia Sarawak, Malaysia; inhasniah@fcs.unimas.my Mohd Razali Othman; Universiti Malaysia Sarawak, Malaysia; orazali@fcs.unimas.my Siti Norazilah Mohd Said; Universiti Malaysia Sarawak, Malaysia;
mssnorazilah@fcs.unimas.my
Aina Razlin Mohammad Roose; Universiti Malaysia Sarawak, Malaysia;
mrarazlin@fcs.unimas.my
Edris Aden; Universiti Malaysia Sarawak, Malaysia; aedris@fcs.unimas.my Muhamad Sophian Nazaruddin; Universiti Malaysia Sarawak, Malaysia;
msophian@fcs.unimas.my
Abstrak – Penggunaan istilah-istilah tertentu dalam kalangan penagih dadah (pelatih) merupakan perkara yang tidak asing lagi dalam interaksi harian mereka. Istilah-istilah tersebut mempunyai makna yang tersirat dan sukar difahami oleh orang awam. Contohnya, istilah kristal bukan merujuk kepada batu kristal yang kita fahami tetapi merujuk kepada syabu iaitu sejenis dadah. Oleh itu, seseorang yang berminat untuk menjadi kaunselor di agensi pemulihan perlu mempersiapkan diri bagi memahami istilah-istilah yang digunakan oleh pelatih. Kajian ini dijalankan untuk mengumpul maklumat berkaitan istilah-istilah yang digunakan oleh para pelatih di Pusat Pemulihan
-6
Pelatihan Narkotik (PUSPEN). Pemahaman istilah tersebut dapat membantu kaunselor
-25
85
untuk berinteraksi dengan lebih mudah (proses pembinaan hubungan) semasa sesi
berlangsung mahupun di luar sesi kaunseling. Kaunselor juga dapat membantu diri
-59
mereka daripada ditipu oleh pelatih apabila dapat memahami istilah yang digunakan. 67 7 8 Data penyelidikan ini diperolehi daripada 69 pelatih dan 40 kakitangan yang bertugas -9
secara langsung dengan golongan pelatih di sebuah Pusat Pemulihan Pelatihan Narkotik
N SB
(PUSPEN). Responden telah menyenaraikan seberapa banyak istilah-istilah yang biasa
digunakan atau diketahui oleh mereka. Data yang diperolehi telah dianalisa dan
dikategorikan mengikut maksud yang sama walaupun mempunyai istilah yang berbeza.
IN
E D CE
Dapatan kajian menunjukkan bahawa pelatih telah menyenaraikan sebanyak 75
kelompok istilah dan kakitangan menyenaraikan 66 kelompok istilah. Hasil kajian ini
akan dipanjangkan dalam bentuk manual istilah sebagai panduan kepada bakal
kaunselor di agensi pemulihan untuk berinteraksi dengan golongan pelatih dengan lebih
efektif.
2 Kata kunci – istilah; pelatih; dadah; komunikasi. CO
0 1 I2
E CC