| The ability to make appropriate references to previous studies is an essential aspect of successful academic writing. Citation practices have received particular attention from scholars of varying research background. Despite the importance of citation for academic writing, little effort has been made to teach this technique. Chinese English learners have difficulty in using citations both correctly and strategically. This study is therefore designed to explore the status quo of the citation practices of advanced Chinese English learners so as to lay a foundation for possible suggestions on citation teaching and learning.Specifically, the study documented the formal and functional differences on the basis of a framework synthesized from the classification established by Swales (1990), Hyland (1999a) and Petric (2007). The analysis was conducted by comparing the citation practice of a set of MA theses written by advanced Chinese English learners with that of journal articles by expert writers of varying first language backgrounds in the field of applied linguistics.On the basis of data analysis, the study found that Chinese student writers differ a great deal from expert writers as far as the formal and functional aspects are concerned. Despite MA theses’ superiority in the absolute number of citations used, they employed fewer citations per10,000tokens than journal articles (JAs), especially in Introduction, Methodology and Conclusion. Although non-integral citations were the most preferred category for both groups, JAs used on average twice as many citations of this type as MAs. Little difference was revealed from the analysis of the subcategories of the integral category, indicating that student writers in general have learned to use integral citations.As for the presentation forms, the study found that summary and block quotation were respectively the most and least preferred form in both MAs and JAs. It was in the use of generalization and quote that MAs differed most from JAs, with MAs using less of both than JAs. MA students’stronger preference for summary to generalization implied that they were more willing to tackle each source independently and were relatively poor in extracting information from a range of sources.As regards the functional classification, it was found that attribution had the highest frequency and that evaluation occurred almost exclusively in the Literature Review, application and use in Methodology, and links one’s own work with that of others in Results and Discussion. The density of such functions as exemplification, further reference, application, links sources and multiple functions in MA theses was much lower than that in journal articles, no matter when different rhetorical sections or the whole papers were compared. Examination of the distribution of functional types across rhetorical sections suggested that all functions, except application, use, and links own, clustered in the Introduction and Literature Review section. Evaluation occurred almost exclusively in Literature Review. Application and use were found typical of Methodology. Links one’s own work with that of others was characteristic of Results and Discussions and Conclusion.Findings of this present study not only corroborated the idea that students do have difficulties in using citations but also implied that students should not be left to their own in the acquisition of citation skills and that EAP practitioners should fulfill their part in training students in this specific aspect of academic literacy. |
PDF Full Text Request