A Comparative Study On Reporting In Literature Review Of English M.A. Theses

From the perspective of comparative analysis, this thesis is an attempt to make an investigation into the linguistic phenomenon of reporting in Literature Reviews (LRs for short) in English M.A. theses by English native speakers (hereafter called ELRs) in America and those by Chinese learners of English (hereafter called CLRs). Based on Halliday's Systemic-Functional Grammar, Swales'genre analysis and Hyland's framework of reporting verbs, the current study is intended to probe into characteristics of reporting in LRs, aiming to find out similarities and differences between ELRs and CLRs in terms of reporting patterns, reporting verbs, tenses and voices of reporting verbs, and also the underlying reasons for the similarities and differences between ELRs and CLRs and then to obtain some enlightenment on the writing of LRs.Quantitative and qualitative approaches are combined in the study. In the process of analysis, numbers and statistics are obtained and shown in tables and figures to demonstrate frequencies and show the significance of the differences. This quantitative approach is used to provide evidence for the analysis of the similarities and differences. The qualitative approach is mainly adopted to explain functions of reporting and the major underlying reasons for the discrepancies in reporting between ELRs and CLRs.The whole corpus of the study consists of 50 LRs. The corpus of ELRs is made up of 25 LRs selected randomly from ProQuest Digital Dissertations (PQDD), and 25 CLRs are selected from Full-text Database of M.A. Theses of CNKI (China National Knowledge Infrastructure). All the 50 M.A. theses are written by students graduated from 2005 to 2009(the years of 2005 and 2009 included).The results of a detailed comparative analysis of data reveal that there are some considerable similarities and remarkable differences in the use of reporting between two corpora. Generally speaking, the density of reporting in ELRs is higher than that in CLRs. Specifically, in terms of reporting patterns, the writers of ELRs prefer non-integral reporting while the writers of CLRs are inclined to use integral reporting, which indicates the writers of CLRs pay more attention to the person who makes the research while the writers of ELRs concentrate on the reported message or findings. As for reporting verbs, it is found that Research verbs and Discourse verbs are preferred in both ELRs and CLRs whereas more Research verbs and Cognition verbs appear in CLRs. The writers of ELRs use more reporting verbs and employ a larger variety of reporting verbs than those of CLRs, which demonstrates that the writers of ELRs are more flexible and skillful than those of CLRs in the use of reporting verbs. With regard to tenses of reporting verbs, the simple present tense is the most widely used one in both corpora, whereas total occurrence of the simple present tense employed in CLRs is higher than that in ELRs. In terms of voice of reporting verbs, passive voice is used more frequently in ELRs than in CLRs. The above two phenomena show that the writers of CLRs prefer to use the simple present tense and active voice to convey a more subjective attitude to the reported author or message and to identify their position in academic community.This thesis has provided new insights into reporting in M.A. theses by a comparative study. It not only serves to help Chinese learners of English to understand and use reporting better, but also provides some suggestions for the teaching of English academic writing.