Patterns of rhetorical organization in The Jakarta Post opinion articles

Dwi Indarti

Abstract


Opinion articles are part of a professional discourse genre that can be found in newspapers. These articles are separated from news pages and written for the public, so they contain a variety of cultural backgrounds. This study looked at 151 opinion articles published in The Jakarta Post of the March 2016 editions. Shi and Kubota’s (2007)four pattern of rhetorical organization was adapted as the theoretical framework for the present study. The results of this study showed that the overall rhetorical pattern of The Jakarta Post opinion articles is a three-part structure of introduction, body and conclusion paragraphs. In term of the placing of the thesis statement, 47% of non-native writers and 38% of native writers put the thesis statement in the introduction part with a single sentence paragraph or two short single-sentence paragraphs, and 38% of non-native writers and 40% of native writers wrote the introduction part with two or more multi-sentence paragraphs, and put the thesis statement at the end of them. Only 8% of non-native writers and 5% of native writers put the thesis statement in the body part, while 7% of non-native writers and 17% of native writers put the thesis statement in the conclusion. Generally, there was a slight difference between native and non-native writers in terms of the placement of thesis statement, where the non-native writers tended to use a single sentence paragraph as the thesis statement as well as to begin the essays, while native writers preferred to use two or more multi sentence paragraphs. This study proves that professional writings such as newspaper opinion articles follow the English rhetorical conventions; deductive, logical, and direct style as represented in the three-part structure.


Keywords


Opinion articles, Professional discourse analysis, Rhetorical organization, Thesis statement

Full Text:

PDF

References


Ansary, H., & Babaii, E. (2009). A cross-cultural analysis of English newspaper editorials: A systemic-functional view of text for contrastive rhetoric research. Regional Language Center Journal, 40(2), 211-249.

Bhatia, V. K. (1993). Analysing genre: Language use in professional settings. London: Longman.

Bonnell, T. D. (1994). Independent writing. Boston, MA: Heinle and Heinle.

Bonyadi, A. (2010). The rhetorical properties of the schematic structures of newspaper editorials: A comparative study of English and Persian editorials. Discourse and Communication, 4(4), 323-342.

Carrell, P. L., & Eisterhold, J. C. (1983). Schema theory and ESL reading pedagogy. TESOL Quarterly, 17(4), 553-573.

Connor, U. M. (1996). Contrastive rhetoric: Cross-cultural aspects of second-language writing. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Dafouz-Milne, E. (2008). The pragmatic role of textual and interpersonal metadiscourse markers in the construction and attainment of persuasion: A cross-linguistic study of newspaper discourse. Journal of Pragmatics, 40(1), 95-113.

Devira, M. (2017). Acquisition of academic literacy in an engineering communication of academic literacy of English for specific purposes (ESP) and systemic functional linguistics (SFL). Studies in English Language and Education, 4(1), 38-53.

Dita, S. (2009). Physical and topical structure analysis of professional writing in inner, outer, and expanding circles of English. TESOL, 1(1), 95-118.

Etalle, S. (2004). How to write an introduction: Some suggestions. Retrieved from http://www.win.tue.nl/~setalle/introduction.html

Francis, W. N. (1958). The structure of American English. New York: Ronald Press.

Gehring, M. (2014). Developing body paragraphs. Retrieved from http://www.sjsu.edu/writingcenter/handouts/Body%20Paragraphs.pdf

Gunnarsson, B.-L. (1993). Pragmatic and macrothematic patterns in science and popular science: A diachronic study of articles from three fields. In M. Ghadessy (Ed.), Register analysis: Theory and practice (pp. 165-179). London: Pinter Publishers.

Gunnarsson, B.-L., Linell, P., & Nordberg, B. (1997). The construction of professional discourse. Chicago, IL: Addison Wesley Longman.

Hinds, J. (1979). Organizational patterns in discourse. In T. Givón (Ed.), Discourse and syntax: Syntax and semantics (pp. 135-157). New York: Academic Press.

Irvin, J. L., Odell, L., Vacca, R., Warriner, J. E., & Hobbs, R. (2009). Elements of language: First course. Austin: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston.

Kaplan, R. B. (1966). Cultural thought patterns in inter-cultural education. Language Learning, 16, 10-16.

Kaplan, R. B. (1972). The anatomy of rhetoric: Prolegomena to a functional theory of rhetoric. Philadelphia, PA: Center for Curriculum Development.

Kaplan, R. B. (1988). Contrastive rhetoric and second language learning: Notes towards a theory of contrastive rhetoric. In A. C. Purves (Ed.), Writing across languages and cultures (pp. 275-304). Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.

Karper, E. (2002). Writing a thesis statement. Retrieved from http://owl.english.purdue.edu/handouts/print/general/gl_thesis.htm

Langan, J. (2013). Reading and study skills (10th ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company.

Liu, J. J. (2007). Placement of the thesis statement in English and Chinese argumentative assays: A study of contrastive rhetoric. Electronic Journal of Foreign Language Teaching, 4(1), 122-139.

Marin-Arrese, J. I. (2008). Commitment and subjectivity in the discourse of opinion columns and leading articles. RAEL: Revista Electrónica de Lingüística Aplicada, 1(1), 82-98.

Masroor, F. (2013). Argumentative strategies of newspaper editorials in English across cultures. Asian ESP Journal, 9(3), 35-72.

Oshima, A., & Hogue, A. (1999). Writing academic English. London: Longman.

Petric, B. (2005). Contrastive rhetoric in the writing classroom: A case study. English for Specific Purposes, 24(2), 213-228.

Procter, M. (2016). Using thesis statements. Retrieved from http://advice.writing.utoronto.ca/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/thesis-statements.pdf

Pulungan, A. H., Subroto, E. D., Tarjana, S. S., & Sumarlam, S. (2010). Intertextuality in Indonesian newspaper opinion articles on education: Its types, functions, and discursive practice. TEFLIN, 21(2), 137-152.

Rahayuni, N. K. S. (2015). Errors in writing a thesis statement made by students of English Department Udayana University. Paper presented at the The 62nd TEFLIN International Conference: Teaching and Assessing L2 Learners in the 21st century (pp. 422-429). Denpasar: Udayana University.

Raygor, A. L. (1979). Reading for the main idea. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company.

Rinehart, H., & Winston. (2002). Elements of literature: Fourth course (3rd ed.). Boston: Houghton Mifflin School.

Rodriguez, M. J. G. (2008). On the interpretation of ideology through comment articles: Two views in opinion discourse. RAEL: Revista Electrónica de Lingüística Aplicada, 1(1), 49-68.

Ruiying, Y., & Allison, D. (2003). Research articles in applied linguistics: Moving from results to conclusions. English for Specific Purposes, 22(4), 365-385.

Shi, L., & Kubota, R. (2007). Patterns of rhetorical organization in Canadian and American language arts textbooks: An exploratory study. English for Specific Purposes, 26(2), 180-202.

Smirnova, A. V. (2009). Reported speech as an element of argumentative newspaper discourse. Discourse & Communication, 3(1), 79-103.

Smith, F. (2009). Writing and the writer. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann Publishing Company.

Toulmin, S. E. (1958). The uses of argument. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Wang, W. (2008). Intertextual aspects of Chinese newspaper commentaries on the events of 9/11. Discourse Studies, 10(3), 361-381.

Yang, L., & Cahill, D. (2008). The rhetorical organization of Chinese and American students’ expository essays: A contrastive rhetoric study. International Journal of English Studies, 8(2), 113-132.




DOI: https://doi.org/10.24815/siele.v5i1.8535

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


Copyright © 2018 Syiah Kuala University

Print ISSN: 2355-2794, Online ISSN: 2461-0275

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.