Linguistic Forensic Analysis of Texts

14778 words (59 pages) Dissertation

16th Dec 2019 Dissertation Reference this

Tags: Linguistics

Disclaimer: This work has been submitted by a student. This is not an example of the work produced by our Dissertation Writing Service. You can view samples of our professional work here.

Any opinions, findings, conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of NursingAnswers.net.

Index

INTRODUCTION

METHODOLOGY

ANALYSIS

Author ‘A’

Similarities and differences

CONCLUSION

APPENDIX

Average sentence length

Text 1 (Author ‘A’)

Text 2 (‘Author A’)

Text 3 (‘Author A’)

Text 1 (Author B)

Text 2 (‘Author B’)

Author B (‘Text 3’)

Author Unknown

Average word length

Lexical density and variation

Stylistic approaches

Unknown Author

Most frequent words –Author Unknown

Author A

Most frequent words (Author A)

Author B

Most frequent words (Author B)

BIBLIOGRAPHY

INTRODUCTION

To start with, I would like to define what is forensic linguistic. I would like to focus on two definitions in particular. One of the definitions is given by Mcmenamin (2002) and the other one by Coulthard and Johnson (2007).  Mcmenamin stated that forensic linguistics as the ‘science study of language as applied to forensic purposes and contexts’, in other words, it is the application of the science of language (linguistics) to legal issues (i.e. the law and law enforcement). (2002, p.67)  Whereas Coulthard and Johnson approach the subject from two distinct perspectives (i.e. the language of the legal process and language as evidence). Coulthard separates these into three distinct interrelated areas:

  1. Language and the law
  2. Language of the legal process
  3. Language as evidence

In order to accomplish this assessment, it is essential to use the ‘Language as evidence’, which means language used as proof in cases where discourse analysis is applied in documents to uncover what might have happened, for instance: bomb threats, obscene phone calls suicide notes, disputed emails, wills, text messages, authorship, and plagiarism). Notwithstanding, how can evidence from linguistics be used for the purposes of law enforcement? The two most frequent types of cases are:

  • Disputed meanings
  • Questioned authorship

The principal question of this analysis is to recognise or distinguish the authorship of the unknown text. Whether it belongs to Author A or Author B. Consequently, the methodological issue of this analysis is based on quantitative and qualitative analysis, which are based on the following methods: stylistic approaches, lexical richness, average sentence length and average word length

METHODOLOGY

To establish whether the unknown text given belongs to Author A or B it is essential to perform a deep analysis. As far as I know, both writers are professors in a university and they are writing for the same purpose so it is likely to see similar language markers. Therefore, we have to identify individual style markers in the unknown text and compare against both texts.  According to McMenamin the analysis can be a descriptive analysis or a quantitative analysis or both. (McMenamin, 2002, p.122-123) For this assessment we will see a combination of descriptive and quantitative analysis. On one side, a descriptive analysis specify the range of variation by describing the aggregate set of all deviations and variations, at every linguistic level, for the questioned and known writings, based on the combination of markers identified from the reading analysis plus those from the concordance analysis. On the other side, a quantitative analysis determines the need for quantitative analysis of selected style markers.

To develop this analysis the following methods have been used:

 

 

Stylistic approaches

To start with, we should be aware that every person has his/her own idiolect, which the Longman Dictionary of Language Teaching and Applied Linguistics (1992) defines as:

‘’The Language system of an individual as expressed by the way he or she speaks or writes within the overall system of a particular language. In its widest sense, someone’s idiolect includes their way of communicating; for example, their choice of utterances and the way they interpret utterances made by others. In a narrower sense, an idiolect may include those features, either in speech or writing, which distinguishes an individual from others’ (p.172)

In other words, every person has way of communicating (written and oral). We all are constantly making choices when we speak or write and that choices have been key to help us to distinguish whether the text from the Unknown Author belongs to Author A or B

On the one hand Luff stated ‘’Style is not a uniform concept in language. Style in spoken language relates to linguistic variation resulting from the social context of conversation’’.  On the other hand, he stated that ‘’style in written language refers to the variable ways that language is used in certain genres, periods, situations, and individuals’’.

What is more, according to Mcmenamin ‘’style is a reflection of group or individual variation in written language’’.  As McMenamin stated ‘’stylistic variation as a use of different variant forms to express  a similar linguistic meaning is reflected in the distinct dialects of groups who speak the same language; it thus reflects the class characteristics of speaking and writing for the subgroup, e.g. the form and function of women’s and men’s language’’. (McMenamin, 2002, p.111) Furthermore, ‘’ Stylistic variation is also reflected in the idiolect of individuals who speak the same dialect and language, thus reflecting the individual characteristics of speakers and writers. The idiolect is ‘the totality of the possible utterances of one speaker at one time in using a language to interact with one other speaker…’’ (Bloch, 1948: 7)

As McMenanimm stated ‘’ Social or physical separation of groups will result in the formation of distinct communities and microcommunities’’ (McMenamin,2002, p.116)

Social norms relate to group acceptance of language forms and uses. Examples of norms for language behaviour in communities or groups, as discussed by EcKert (1989:249), Grice (1975), Hudson (1980:116), Labov (1972:120), and Wolfram and Fasold (1974:17), include the following, which are neither exhaustive of the possibilities nor mutually exclusive:

• Prestige norms (of acceptance by upper social classes)

• Norms of social convention or necessity

• Norms of governing use of registers, varieties and other languages

• Class norms (age, sex, ethnicity, race, socioeconomic status, etc.)

• Regional norms (of geographic location)

• Circumstantial norms (of situation: purpose, topic, reader, time, place, etc.)

• Appropriate-language norms (of proper social behaviour)

• Correct-language norms (of correct linguistic behaviour)

(McMenamin, 2002, p.116)

Apart from these, we have to take into account specify style-markers that are found in all linguistic levels:

  • Format or layout of these of the document itself such as margins, spacing, etc.
  • Punctuation of all types
  • Spelling, all the various kinds of patterned variants and mistakes
  • Word formation, including inflectional variation
  • Syntax (sentence structure, coordination, subordination, and punctuation)

Lexical richness

According to Laufer & Nation ‘’measures of lexical richness attempt to quantify the degree to which a writer is using a varied and large vocabulary. However, there are many factors besides vocabulary, size that could affect lexical richness in writing. These could include familiarity with the topic, skill in writing and communicative purpose. This means that a change of the topic could result in market change in lexical richness’’. (1995, p.307)

In Laufer & Nation study of lexical richness in L2 writing production, they highlighted four measures of lexical richness:

1. Lexical originality (LO)

2. Lexical density (LD)

3. Lexical sophistication (LS)

4. Lexical variation (LV)

Even though, we are going to focus on lexical density and lexical variation to accomplish this analysis.

In the first place, it is essential to comprehend what lexical density and lexical variation is.

Lexical density is defined as the percentage of lexical words in the text, i.e. nouns, verbs, adjectives, adverbs and is a useful measure of the difference between texts (e.g. between a person’s written language and their speech):

LD = (number of lexical tokens/ total number of tokens) x 100

Lexical words include lexical verbs, nouns, adjectives and adverbs.

Function words, therefore, include the remaining auxiliary verbs, numerals, determiners, pronouns, prepositions and conjunctions.

Lexical variation is the type/token ratio, i.e. the ratio in percent between the different words in a text and the total number of running words:

LV= (number of types/number of tokens) x 100

The type/token ratio has been shown to be unstable for short texts and can be affected by differences in texts length. Lexical variation is dependent on the definition of a word.

Average sentence length

According to Nordquist ‘’In English grammar, sentence length refers to the number of words in a sentence’’.

Average word length

Word length refers to the number of letters in a word.

Cusum method

As Grant stated ‘’the significance of this method is that there have not been many explicit examples of forensic methods in authorship attribution that have been presented in and accepted as forensic evidence by the courts, but this was. However, this was only for a short period of time and the method was ultimately shown to be flawed’’ (2004, p.25)

According to Grant ‘’Cusum analysis faces the problem that there is no theoretical or linguistic explanation for how it works. As Morton admits, there is no theoretical foundation to his system’’. (2004, p.33)

‘’There has no been study undertaken that could demonstrate its reliability. For example, foreign insertions into texts sometimes go unnoticed, and texts without insertions or with insertions made from other texts by the same author can produce cusum charts in which there were apparent disturbances’’. (2004, p.38)

Due to all of these reasons, I have chosen not to use cusum because it fails to identify a clearly defined marker that can be shown to discriminate reliably between authors. (Grant, 2004, p.41)

ANALYSIS

Author ‘A’

Text 1 is written in Times New Roman, size 10. The total number of words in the text is three hundred and it has eighty eight words and four paragraphs. They do not have the same length. The first paragraph has three sentences and it is composed of fifty hundred and one words but it also has a mistake because when the sentence ’The precise articulation of this dissertation comes as somewhat of a surprise’ ends the author forgot to write the stop. There is also a word in bold ‘analysis’. The second one is the shortest paragraph, it is composed of three sentences and fifty eight words. The length of the sentences are shorter than in the first paragraph. The third paragraph is the longest composed of one hundred and forty one words and five sentences. The last paragraph is composed of eighty eight words and three sentences. But in this paragraph the first sentence does not has a stop, instead we find the following: (?). What is more, the word of the beginning of the second sentence is written with capital letters – AND.

Text 2 is also written in Times New Roman, size 10. The total number of words in the text is four hundred and thirty three words and it has five paragraphs. The first paragraph has two sentences and it is composed of forty eight words. The second is the longest paragraph, which is composed of one hundred and thirty five words and seven sentences. The third one is composed of one hundred and thirty two words and five sentences. The fourth paragraph has 4 sentences and it is composed of eighty eight words. The last paragraph is the shortest, which is composed of thirty words and two sentences.

Text 3 is again written in Times New Roman, size 10. The total number of words in the text is three hundred and six and it has five paragraphs. The first one is composed of sixty one words and three sentences. The second one has eight sentences. The third one has two sentences and it is composed of thirty three words. The fourth paragraph is composed of fifty one words and three sentences. The last paragraph has one sentence composed of thirteen words.

Similarities and differences

Concerning to the total number of words in the Unknown Author texts it seems to match with Author A given that it is the one that gets closer.

Also, the number of sentences in all texts of Author B are much long than the ones written by Author A and the Unknown Author; Author A is again the one that is more similar.

The number of paragraphs are also longer in all of the three texts of Author B, while Author A and the Unknown Author are once again similar.

To start with the analysis, firstly I would like to focus on the average word length. (See graphics and table in the appendix)

The analysis done shows similarities between Author A, Author B and Unknown Author. The text that is closer to the average word length of the Unknown Author is Author B. The average word length of the Unknown Author is 4.98 while the mean of Author B is also 4.98. Although, the difference between the mean of Author A and B is not that big, we can observe that the mean of Author A is 4.87.

Secondly, the average sentence length of the texts of the three authors shows that Author A is the one with the closest result to be the Unknown Author. The results show that the Unknown Author has an average sentence length of 21.62 while Author A mean is 21.73, being the closest one to the Unknown Author.

Thirdly, we need to focus on the lexical richness of the texts. In order to do that, we need to analyse the lexical density and lexical variation.

After seeing the result of the analysis we can observe that the Lexical Density of the Unknown Author is 52.65 and the author who has the closest result to the unknown author is Author B, which has a mean of lexical density of 49.81. Although, we can observe that there is not a big difference between the mean of the Lexical Density of Author A and B. Author A has a mean of Lexical Density of 48.37 while Author B Lexical Density has a  mean of 49.81.

Lexical variation shows us that Author A is the one closest to the result of the Unknown Author. The Lexical variation of the unknown text is 56.69 and of the Author A is 51.77. In this case, Author A is more likely to be the Unknown Author. On the contrary, ‘Author A’ lexical variation is 47.19, this result is further to the result of the Unknown Author.

The majority of the characteristics in the texts such as total number of words, total number of sentences and total number of paragraphs found in the text of the unknown writer are similar to the texts of Author A.

Observing the margins and font type of three texts, all of them coincide having 2.54 of margins and times new roman as font type. Therefore, these data is not significant to identify the author of the unknown text.

The paragraph spacing matches with Author A.

The use of numbering is present in the texts of Author B and in the text of the Unknown Author. The only difference is that one uses numbers and other letters.

Author A and the unknown author coincide with the same acronym, which is ST (Special Topics)

All three texts have different forms of page referencing. The Unknown author is consistent with the page referencing, while Author A and B are not consistent. But Author B and the Unknown Author use page once, while Author A uses it fifteen times.

Concerning to commas, the unknown author has 20 commas, so the Author who is closer to this number is Author A because text 1 has 18 commas, text 2 16 and text 3 23, while the number of commas that are present in texts of Author B are less (15, 5, 12). Also, the use of parenthesis is similar in text 1 of author A and the text of the unknown writer, while author B has 8 in the first text, 7 in the second and 5 in the third.

Regarding the passive voice, text three of the author A has three forms of passive voice which gets closer to the unknown author, who uses four forms of the passive voice. While, Author B uses much more forms in each text: 12 in the first text, 6 in the second and 10 in the last one.

Misspelling ua 1  ab 7

Self reference 2 / ua 4/ a5

CONCLUSION

On the one had, the qualitative analysis has shown that Author A is the autor of the unknown text. On the other hand, in some occasions the quantitative analysis was not as helpful as the qualitative analysis. This is due to the similarities in the results. To conclude, in my opinion the author of the unknown text is more likely to be ‘Author A’.

APPENDIX

Average sentence length

Average sentence length Author A Author B Unknown Author
Text 1 28.21 16.94 21.62
Text 2 21.65 15.07
Text 3 15.35 17.1
Mean 21.73 16.37
Graphics – Average sentence length

https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/Aoy0DC3v-N8mHCJJYaMwpesgWpowrY5AQoYWLAauM1-6xVlDGg7icpdK_9eQWQMHSFpPHeVP2BNNjw4b7UjGGbafognXm7Rm9ibrjTd_ZTWUpGk4KFOXCIhWtuWv8sVFEWZbh0b4

Graphic 1. Text 1 (Author A)

 

https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/a3q6bcGqNBysfCzg-8zYDrEyzC9oY4is0F05Wk0RBigGsX9fkKah7Z-bfMgwUx2pt3icANMPmL-MQ3XqyC2W1D_9dOCBCBW_WOVJrNfm6k9OidnfnQ6lnFgJSbNHSfYmPpWvCzTx

Graphic 2. Text 2 (Author A)

https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/18RErutbcL0VycPWy5SypZ5HckwuoGgcFpt9bAQbsjvg_ME04EzorcQG5X1KB4NU6ikEZAp0HgdG1nDkGGhx8JkAPv2wq67Jg_xXC1gaTpRGh3ajMfn08mZd4tZ4qQgxwIFGIUZu

Graphic 3. Text 3 (Author A)

 

https://lh6.googleusercontent.com/AT_bN6Sp0T3JLCwZlPE8CTXzfez3rSE_KP8FDu7vmVZ3BJzjjPpIeRnXJaheNrvuUdH67SaL0PhJeqDpSrr2Vfoy-Ly01NNTzugKPs4r_dkpKdZg5pLZYQOL9PNOItGgxjiJAgUG

Graphic 4. Text 1 (Author B)

https://lh6.googleusercontent.com/am9uK1U2Cie-HK5glG33TIT4Ezo2Rs2HVPXJjTFUFfXe3eqVKYdv-oSVPEN69ZtlaCGgzitsBPsPx5KaCwNNE7UrXvrPuHEXJToYtj0bNVqAYQU7JBe4QNVxOGMMPanC-OYF9Pql

Graphic 5. Text 2 (Author B)

https://lh6.googleusercontent.com/oBrJFOUueQmAtHRXezGhSTJ7DngDCXX5uIFecWPTGVAKk6hOhM-sxOj9dx5VBJgtIB_ppOqY_CLfVpcgCaZHOs_1Jl9uNSEjDgTWnE9_eNOnN2MtqyrSxFaRBqpxpCAxGRFlrKiG

Graphic 6. Text 3 (Author B)

 

https://lh6.googleusercontent.com/oIklKdjWdbvPelo9UeKzZVOCJ2yVe8UtIovra5j46Zo-fObHLuYjqaYNItmIWWweMJBhcM5cwCbMqcFTJDXVTWD-cC-nGrVyCcKe5Awlizn66EzkBfK6qBLvZeY2XhgluGskhU8_

Graphic 7. Unknown Author

Text 1 (Author ‘A’)

Sentence Number of words per sentence
  1. The precise articulation of this dissertation comes as somewhat of a surprise
12
  1. The distance-learning writer was kind enough to come to Portsmouth to discuss the dissertation in the early part of the summer, and we reached agreement on its shape: early chapters on definitional issues relating to ‘technical translation’ and ‘culture’; an identification of the ways in which cultural elements are articulated in technical translation and an analysis of the identified cultural elements on the basis of a corpus of appropriate texts.
70
  1. While this shape has been retained, the space allocated to the various sections of the dissertations was not expected.
19
  1. Of the 90 pages devoted to the dissertation, some 60 are taken up by the corpus, leaving only 30 for the analytical sections of the dissertation.
26
  1. If we calculate that there are approx. 350 words per page, the total number of words is 10,500.
18
  1. This makes the dissertation short of the prescribed length of 12,000 to 15,000 words.
14
  1. The key analytical section – pages 86 to 94 – is less than 10 pages.
13
  1. Most of it is taken up with terminology – pages 86 to 91, a total of fives pages – if we subsume the sections on terms, compounds and neologisms (sections 6.1 and 6.2) under terminology.
33
  1. Section 6.3 on culture in syntax covers a number of points – word order in relation to the verb, sentence length, use of passive, impersonal style – in one page and provides highly limited evidence.
33
  1. The concluding section, 6.3 on culture in typology and layout, is also very short –less than half a page – and again includes limited evidence, e.g. the use of italics in a single instance.
33
  1. There is simply not enough evidence to support to writer’s contention that cultural elements constitute an element of technical translation, of which the translator should be aware.
27
  1. The highly limited investigation of a substantial corpus – and it should be noted that no details on the texts are provided beyond a list of website addresses for the ST and a list of website addresses for the parallel texts
40
  1. AND that no explanation is given as to why these texts in particular were selected – means that the dissertation cannot be accepted as a pass.
25
  1. For a resubmission the student will be required to produce a new version of Chapter 6, taking the above points into account.
22
Total number of words 385
Total number of words divided by the total number of sentences 385/14 = 27.5

Text 2 (‘Author A’)

Sentence Number of words per sentence
  1.  The writer produces the first survey of its kind: a snapshot of the use and perception of Translation Memory in Poland.
22
  1. The picture which emerges in the concluding chapter is both useful and interesting, complementing as it does earlier surveys carried out in different regions of the world.
28
  1. The writer’s command of English is very good and communication with the reader is generally not impeded.
18
  1. On occasion, however, the complex sentence structures employed by the writer cause the reader to go over particular passages several times.
22
  1. An example is provided on page 5 where the writer is reporting on Trados’ adoption of Atril’s integrated approach.
20
  1. And while on the subject of structure, better paragraphing in places would have facilitated comprehension.
16
  1. See, for example, chapter 4 which has a number of long paragraphs.
13
  1. Occasionally, the writer lets slip his own perspective, e.g. the use of ‘worrrying’ when describing the tendency for translation agencies to insist on their translators’ use of TM (Trados).
30
  1. Expressions like ‘huge mistake’ (p.38) and ‘not to be sneezed at’(p.40) also suggest that an academic writing style is not consistently maintained.
23
  1. This lack of rigour is manifested elsewhere in the dissertation.
11
  1. For example, when reporting on the findings of his survey he maintains that “females are less computer-minded” (page 22).
20
  1. However, no attempt is made to correlate the purported lesser use of TM by women translators against the perception of their IT skills (on the same page).
28
  1. And while the author is generally good at drawing the reader’s attention to the limitations of the survey he doesn’t always do so consistently.
25
  1. So, for example, the geographical location of the respondents is pinpointed on page 20, but the writer fails to take adequate account of the random nature of his respondents’ geographical location in the conclusions he draws on page 34 from the table which shows the perception of TM promotion according to region.
53
  1. Greater rigour could have been achieved through better use of concluding summaries at the end of key chapters.
19
  1. For example, a concluding summary at the end of chapter 2 would have prepared the way for the ensuing chapter which reports on the survey.
26
  1. And the same applies to chapter 3 where a linking section between the report on the findings of the survey and the interviews would have been welcome.
28
  1. As a reader I would have welcomed a clearer idea of what the foci were of the interviews.
19
  1. In summary, the writer has undertaken some useful research and produced a unique account.
15
  1. The methodology employed is basically sound, but could have been applied with more rigour and objectivity..
17
Total number of words 453
Total number of words divided by the total number of sentences 22.65

Text 3 (‘Author A’)

Sentence

 

Nº of Words per sentence
1) The writer adopts a professional approach to the dissertation; her main aim is to produce a series of recommendations for implementation by future translators of tourist websites based on the data she has assembled in the form of corpora. 39
2) And in this she is very successful. 7
3) The recommendations emerge from a discussion of the relevant data and flow logically from it. 15
4) The dissertation has a number of further strengths. 8
5) It is very readable; the writer makes appropriate use of technical terms without overindulging herself. 15
6) There are, I suppose inevitably, some stumblings, examples of which can be found on pages, 11 and 14, and the quotation on page 26 appears to be misquoted. 28
7) However, such occurrences are few and far between. 8
8) Secondly, the writer has assembled a unique set of two corpora, parallel and comparable, all taken from a Spanish context, Picos de Europa. 23
9) A particularly interesting feature of the parallel corpus is the unexpected shortness of the target texts, approx. 12,000 words, compared to the approx. 1800 words of the Spanish texts, i.e. they are 50% shorter. 34
8) The writer puts forward a number of potential explanations for this phenomenon, all of which resonate. 16
9) It would have been useful to have explored this further, although it might have proved problematic. 16
10) Thirdly, the writer does not just focus on text, but takes an approach which is more embracing and multi-modally based. 20
11) The section of the dissertation on localisation features is both interesting and revealing. 13
11) Could the dissertation be improved? 5
12) Well yes, the data provided could have been more detailed – more use could have been made of tables, and of appendices, for example. 23
13) Significantly the findings concur with those of a similar dissertation, which suggests that the methodology applied by the writer was fit for purpose. 23
14) The dissertation warrants a good mark in the Merit category, in my view. 13
Mean scores Total number of words divided by the total number of sentences

306/14

21.8

Text 1 (Author B)

Sentence Number of words per sentence
  1. (Student name) has submitted a first class dissertation which shows a detailed grasp of context, literature and method.
18
  1. The dissertation looks at the constructs of motivation, WTC, anxiety and SPCC and applies them to his students at a university in Taiwan.
23
  1. These constructs are explained and operationalised using contemporary literature and measurement techniques.
12
  1. Throughout there is an impressive thoroughness to the text.
9
  1. Terms are defined and supported with literature.
7
  1. Questions of the appropriate nature of the constructs and their contextual suitability are regularly raised.
15
  1. This shows an ability to both apply and critique ideas and methods.
12
  1. There is thus a sense of someone in control of his research.
12
  1. Moreover, where the results are different to those predicted there is a willingness to rethink rather than blag.
18
  1. The dissertation is well organised and logical.
7
  1. It follows a traditional research-based dissertation format.
7
  1. Key terms are defined early and succinctly.
7
  1. The Introduction is perhaps the weakest section in terms of organization.
11
  1. The format is fine but this reader would have liked to see (1) more sources used before identifying the ‘gap’ on page 2; and (2) perhaps 200 words on the history of Taiwan.
33
  1. Both these points are significant in that throughout the text there is a tension between Taiwan as unique context and Taiwanese learners are being linked with Chinese ones.
28
  1. Taiwan, of course, has an inimitable cultural position.
8
  1. That said, it was impressive throughout how much context-specific literature had been found and how the nuances of, say, Wen and Clement had been taken on board.
27
  1. Another tension in the text is the relationship between WTC, exams and speaking (this begins of page 6).
18
  1. The relationship between these variables for the target students needs more explanation.
12
  1. There are also occasions where more discussion (and showing the diagrams) of the models would have aided in the explanations (e.g. p12).
22
  1. This may have been due to pressure of space and in some senses may be a positive – the text is not a beginner’s essay.
24
  1. The summary on p19 and p20 was a very useful digest of the earlier specialised and technical discussion.
18
  1. There was a huge amount of data in the research.
10
  1. The text shows an awareness of the correct application of statistical tests and the limitations of certain procedures.
18
  1. Again, there was a sense of control over the research.
10
  1. A little more precision in the description of the participants (p.27) would have been useful.
15
  1. Although the research is sensitive to the context in the most part in is here (p28) that the particularity of the participants becomes most evident [the argument that they are at “the top of their game” is debatable; that if they are anxious then anxiety is a “grave problem for all” more so.
53
  1. Less space is given to pedagogical implications than might have been expected in a dissertation inspired by a enthusiasm to improve teaching.
22
  1. This may be due to the ‘snap shot’ nature of the study – it is not longitudinal – and the fact that no changes in teaching to see what improves things has been undertaken.
32
  1. The text is presented exceptionally well.
6
  1. There are few typos or errors.
6
  1. All that said, I was impressed, on a page by page basis, in the level of understanding, insight and energy in this dissertation.
23
  1. With suitable developing and structuring it is the basis of a publishable paper.
13
Total number of words 556
Total number of words divided by the total number of sentences 556/33 = 16.84

Text 2 (‘Author B’)

Sentence Number of words per sentence
  1. This is a bold and structured approach to a longstanding educational problem (evaluating new materials) applied to a contemporary method (genre pedagogy).
23
  1. The research is based on an extensive reading of complex literature and a principled view of methodology.
18
  1. The main limitation of the research, which has been present since its inception, is the experimental design and the limited scale of the data in relation to the conclusions.
30
  1. The aim is to test whether or not the genre approach is “more successful” than a traditional process one.
20
  1. The genre approach is presented as the ‘wheel’.
9
  1. More explanation, evaluation and references to this pedagogical approach would have helped to motivate the research.
17
  1. There are areas where the text moves too quickly without sufficient depth (e.g. p10) so the writer’s understanding is not brought out.
23
  1. The rationale for the method is unpersuasive.
8
  1. Claims on p11 are not substantiated.
7
  1. A clear picture of the research does not emerge.
10
  1. Citations appear for display rather than simply to point out the basis for a clear explanation.
17
  1. There are errors in terminology (e.g. stratified).
8
  1. Some aspects of the conduct of the study are dubious.
11
  1. What is the relation between students being informed about their participation and the “impersonating a student publisher” on page 15?
21
  1. Why were the treatments different in terms of the number of texts (p. 16)?
15
  1. These may seem like small points but they may have affected the reliability of the study.
17
  1. The results section is impressive and seems to reflect the student’s strengths with text analysis.
16
  1. A fine-grained analysis of texts based on many in-depth articles is presented.
13
  1. There is a question about the number of clauses in each student text – a detail which significant.
18
  1. There are one or two omissions and errors in the referencing.
12
  1. There are occasional breakdowns in language but not so many as to impede understanding.
15
  1. Some areas of the text seem rushed: final proofreading or drafting is required (p9 refers to an appendix which is not present).
23
  1. The main drawback of the research is that the intervention (the different texts given to the experimental group) is simply too small to account for any difference in the student product.
32
  1. This means that the evidence will not support the conclusion.
11
  1. The student does not show an awareness of this difficulty.
11
  1. Nevertheless, there is a clear suggestion that the student has provided a solid and well-meaning structure to a difficult problem.
21
  1. Seen as a pilot study in method, the research is more worthy than when seen as a proof of the findings.
22
Total number of words 448
Total number of words divided by the total number of sentences 16.59

Author B (‘Text 3’)

Sentence Number of Words per sentence
1) This is a strong, energetic and applied piece of research which reflects an appreciation of the literature and a focus on a problem of genuine interest. 26
2) The literature includes references to the debate on languages within Europe and business, discussion of studies in particular companies, and (importantly) ones on second language learning. 26
3) The section on motivation could have been more detailed and wider referenced. 12
4) The research comes from a practical problem rather than a gap in the literature; the literature is used to support the research. 22
5) In addition to the quality of the literature review there is a useful array of data presented from questionnaires to qualitative interviews. 22
6) This is appropriate. 3
7) The research has been conducted in a thorough and ethical manner. 11
8) The main criticism of the dissertation is in the clarity of the research question and a methodological foundation for the research. 21
9) Reference to literature on case studies and perhaps action research would have helped to define the approach (as opposed to the methods used) and would have given a greater sense of a structure to the conclusion. 36
10) The target companies have been left anonymous. 7
11) However, more context is needed both to describe their business (size, turnover, etc), to explain why the manages are learning French, and to show why that language is important in their individual careers. 33
12) Moreover, it is unclear why the three companies were taken as a cohesive group other than French classes from the researcher. 21
13) This contributes to (or may be a consequence of) the methodological limitations. 12
14) The personal thread may explain a sense of frustration in the findings (4.1.2). 13
15) The generic structure of the abstract and introduction requires attention. 10
16) The abstract is more like an introduction and the introduction too brief. 12
17) Other sections are much stronger. 5
18) The objectives of the research needed to be stated in the introduction and again at the beginning of the methodology. 20
19) The objectives need to be revisited throughout the text. 9
20) On occasion, the readability of the text breaks down, e.g. the first sentence of the introduction could be broken down into three shorted ones. 24
21) However, these occasions do not prevent the text from being well written and controlled. 14
Mean scores Total number of words divided by the total number of sentences

359/21

17.09

Author Unknown

Sentence Nº of words per sentence
  1. The writer has come a long way since submitting her first major assignment.
13
  1. Her English proficiency has significantly improved thanks to the efforts she has made with the support of the University’s Academic Skills Unit.
22
  1. As a result, her prose style, though not perfect, is sufficient to enable uninterrupted reading.
15
  1. The student sought dissertation guidance on a number of occasions, and it is pleasing to see that she has acted on the guidance which was provided, with particular regard to structuring and exemplification.
33
  1. The writer takes us through a series of definitional sequences in relation to (i) the status of bed and breakfast establishments in British and Taiwanese tourist cultures, (ii) the B&B brochure as a marketing tool, (iii) the relevance of functional and communicative translation theories.
44
  1. Chapter 4, in which the STs and writer’s TTs are presented, is followed by a full discussion of key translation issues.
21
  1. Significantly, both the introductory chapters and the commentary chapter are equally long, which gives the dissertation a nice balance.
19
  1. The commentary section is based on the key elements of B&B brochures, which again allows the writer to structure coherently what she presents to the reader.
26
  1. The analysis is accompanied by a numerous examples, the quality of which is assessed by the second marker, a Chinese native speaker.
22
  1. See below.
2
  1. The writer’s thesis is that promotional texts of this kind require a hybrid creative translation strategy.
16
  1. However, I did think that to devote just two to three pages to this strategy at text level towards the end of the dissertation, pages 73,74,75, was not sufficient.
31
  1. And this did tend to undo some of the balances in the dissertation, to which I have referred earlier.
19
Total number of words 283
Total number of words divided by the total number of sentences 283/13 = 21.76

Average word length

Average word length Author A Author B Unknown Author
Text 1 4.7 4.91 4.98
Text 2 4.93 4.93
Text 3 4.99 5.1
Mean 4.87 4.98
Graphics – Average word length

https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/Aoy0DC3v-N8mHCJJYaMwpesgWpowrY5AQoYWLAauM1-6xVlDGg7icpdK_9eQWQMHSFpPHeVP2BNNjw4b7UjGGbafognXm7Rm9ibrjTd_ZTWUpGk4KFOXCIhWtuWv8sVFEWZbh0b4

Graphic 8. Text 1 (Author A)

https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/a3q6bcGqNBysfCzg-8zYDrEyzC9oY4is0F05Wk0RBigGsX9fkKah7Z-bfMgwUx2pt3icANMPmL-MQ3XqyC2W1D_9dOCBCBW_WOVJrNfm6k9OidnfnQ6lnFgJSbNHSfYmPpWvCzTx

Graphic 9. Text 2 (Author A)

https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/18RErutbcL0VycPWy5SypZ5HckwuoGgcFpt9bAQbsjvg_ME04EzorcQG5X1KB4NU6ikEZAp0HgdG1nDkGGhx8JkAPv2wq67Jg_xXC1gaTpRGh3ajMfn08mZd4tZ4qQgxwIFGIUZu

Graphic 10. Text 3 (Author A)

https://lh6.googleusercontent.com/AT_bN6Sp0T3JLCwZlPE8CTXzfez3rSE_KP8FDu7vmVZ3BJzjjPpIeRnXJaheNrvuUdH67SaL0PhJeqDpSrr2Vfoy-Ly01NNTzugKPs4r_dkpKdZg5pLZYQOL9PNOItGgxjiJAgUG

Graphic 11. Text 1 (Author B)

https://lh6.googleusercontent.com/am9uK1U2Cie-HK5glG33TIT4Ezo2Rs2HVPXJjTFUFfXe3eqVKYdv-oSVPEN69ZtlaCGgzitsBPsPx5KaCwNNE7UrXvrPuHEXJToYtj0bNVqAYQU7JBe4QNVxOGMMPanC-OYF9Pql

Graphic 12. Text 2 (Author B)

https://lh6.googleusercontent.com/oBrJFOUueQmAtHRXezGhSTJ7DngDCXX5uIFecWPTGVAKk6hOhM-sxOj9dx5VBJgtIB_ppOqY_CLfVpcgCaZHOs_1Jl9uNSEjDgTWnE9_eNOnN2MtqyrSxFaRBqpxpCAxGRFlrKiG

Graphic 13. Text 3 (Author B)

https://lh6.googleusercontent.com/GJ8jmYp8ZXw5oFTXXFCxcr3mQib0yfAk_8dE-CbeoxLMFsChTAP5Pmg1pwcUhKyOb3f3Id7vYDQYfLmHuwYNM6PL8YKJK32VVtb0TDhZVsJgNXReihCv6mRmCaon7_0_kLppgxrf

Graphic 14. Author Unknown

Lexical density and variation

Lexical Density
Author A Author B Unknown Author
Text 1 192/385 = 0.4987 x 100 = 49.87 282/556=0.5071 X100=50.71 52.65
Text 2 202/453 = 0.4459 X 100 = 44.59 214/448=0.4776 X100= 47.76
Text 3 155/306=0.5065 X100= 50.65 183/359=0.5097 X100= 50.97
Mean 48.37 49.81
Lexical Variation
Author A Author B Unknown Author
Text 1 Number of types(186) / Number of tokens (371) = 0.50 x 100 = 50.13 Number of types(264) / Number of tokens (555) = 0.47 x 100 = 47.56 Number of types (161) / Number of tokens (284) = 0.56 x 100 = 56.69
Text 2 Number of types (216)/Number of tokens (434)  = 0.49 x 100 = 49.76 Number of types (206)/Number of tokens (427)  = 0.48 x 100 = 48.24
Text 3 Number of types (168) / Number of tokens (303) = 0.55 X 100 = 55.44 Number of types(303) / Number of tokens (662) = 0.45 x 100 = 45.77
Mean 51.77 47.19

Stylistic approaches

Unknown Author

UNKNOWN AUTHOR TEXT
TOTAL NUMBER OF WORDS 281
TOTAL NUMBER OF SENTENCES 12
TOTAL NUMBER OF PHARAGRAPS 5
STYLISTIC APPROACHES
FORMAT
MARGINS 2,54 cm (Top, left, bottom and right) justified
FONT TYPE Times New Roman (Body)
FONT SIZE 12
PARAGRAPH & LINE SPACING 1,15
VARIATION IN FORMAT EXAMPLES
PARAGRAPH 1-3 SPACES: 4
BOLDING FOR EMPHASIS: 1 However, I did think that to devote just two to three pages to this strategy at text level towards the end of the dissertation.
NUMBER AND SYMBOLS EXAMPLES
NUMERALS 1-10 INSTEAD OF NUMBER-WORDS:  1 Chapter 4
USE OF NUMBERING (i), (ii): 3 (ii) the B&B brochure as a marketing tool
ABBREVIATIONS EXAMPLES
ALL CAPITAL LETTER ABBREVIATIONS: 4 (iii) the relevance of functional and communicative translation theories. Chapter 4, in which the STs and writer’s TTs are presented…

The commentary section is based on the key elements of B&B brochures, which again allows the writer to structure coherently what she presents to the reader.

PAGE REFERENCING: 1 However, I did think that to devote just two to three pages to this strategy at text level towards the end of the dissertation, pages 73,74,75

 

CHARACTERISTIC USAGE OF NUMBER-WORDS: 2 However, I did think that to devote just two to three pages to this strategy at text level…
USE OF ORDINALS: 1 The writer has come a long way since submitting her first major assignment.
PUNCTUATION NUMBER PER TEXT
COMMAS
TOTAL NUMBER OF COMMAS 20
COMMA SPACING: 17 1 space after;

As a result, her prose style, though not perfect, is sufficient to enable uninterrupted reading.

SEMICOLON
TOTAL NUMBER OF SEMICOLONS 0
COLON
TOTAL NUMBER OF COLONS 0
QUESTION
TOTAL NUMBER OF QUESTION MARKS 0
DASH (HYPHEN)
TOTAL NUMBER OF HYPHENS 0
DASH TO SEPARATE JOINED COMPUND WORDS
0
QUOTES
TOTAL NUMBER OF QUOTE MARKS 0
QUOTES AROUND PHRASES 0
APOSTROPHE
TOTAL NUMBER OF APOSTROPHES 3
INSTRUCTIVE APOSTROPHES: 3 EXAMPLES
‘The writer’s thesis is that promotional texts of this kind require a hybrid creative translation strategy’

‘Her English proficiency has significantly improved thanks to the efforts she has made with the support of the University’s Academic Skills Unit

APOSTROPHES FOR EMPHASIS 0
PARENTHESIS
TOTAL NUMBER OF PARENTHESIS 3
 
SYNTAX
PASSIVE VOICE: 4 EXAMPLES
‘the guidance which was provided with particular regard to structuring and exemplification’.

‘Chapter 4 in which the STs and writer’s TTs are presentedis followedby a full discussion of key translation issues’.

OTHER STILYSTIC APPROACHES  
MISSPELLING: 1 ‘The analysis is accompanied by a numerous examples, the quality of which is assessed by the second marker, a Chinese native speaker’
SELF-REFERENCE: 4 EXAMPLES
 I did think, to which I referred earlier’

 ‘the writer takes us

‘she presents to the reader

Most frequent words –Author Unknown

Author unknown
Rank Frequency Word
14 23 dissertation
17 22 writer
19 18 research
23 16 text
27 15 page
28 15 student
30 13 texts
36 10 number
40 9 section
46 8 chapter
49 8 translation
54 7 method
57 7 study
58 7 terms
59 6 analysis
64 6 example
66 6 genre
67 6 literature

Author A

AUTHOR A
TEXT 1
TOTAL NUMBER OF WORDS 385
TOTAL NUMBER OF SENTENCES 14
TOTAL NUMBER OF PHARAGRAPS 4
TEXT 2
TOTAL NUMBER OF WORDS 453
TOTAL NUMBER OF SENTENCES 20
TOTAL NUMBER OF PHARAGRAPS 5
TEXT 3
TOTAL NUMBER OF WORDS 306
TOTAL NUMBER OF SENTENCES 14
TOTAL NUMBER OF PHARAGRAPS 5
 STYLISTIC APPROACHES
FORMAT
PARAGHRAPH SPACING Text 1: 3

Text 2: 4

Text 3:  4

MARGINS 2,54 (Top, left, bottom and right) justified
FONT TYPE Times New Roman (body)
FONT SIZE 10
LINE AND PARAGRAPH SPACING 1.0
DOUBLE SPACING 2
VARIATION IN FORMAT EXAMPLE
FONT TYPE: use of bold analysis (line 4)
CAPITAL LETTERS FOR WORD EMPHASIS AND that no explanation is given
 
NUMBERS AND SYMBOLS EXAMPLE
NUMERALS INSTEAD OF NUMBER-WORDS 90 pages; 350 word per page; 12,000 to 15,000 words
ORDINAL NUMBERS First
PERCENTAGE 50%
 
ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS EXAMPLE
ABBREVIATIONS IN ALL LOWER CASE LETTERING e.g. (exempli gratia) ; i.e (id est)
ACRONYMS: 2 TM (Trados); ST(Special Topics)
DIFFERENT ABRREVIATION TO GIVE EXAMPLES e.g. (exempli gratia) ; i.e (id est)
GENERAL USE OF ABBREVIATIONS Approx. (approximately); e.g. (exempli gratia)
 
PUNCTUATION EXAMPLE
NO PUNCTUATION AT THE END OF THE SENTENCE The precise articulation of this dissertation comes as somewhat of a surprise
PAGE REFERENCES: variation within the text pages 86 to 91; (p.38); (page 22)
PARENTHESIS: 7 Text 1: 2

Text 2: 5

(sections 6.1 and 6.2); (trados)

COMMAS: 57 Text 1: 18 commas

Text 2: 16 commas

Text 36: 23 commas

LONG DASHES: 7 Most of it is taken up with terminology – pages 86 to 91, a total of fives pages
COMMA BEFORE SUBORDINATE CLAUSE: 2 (There is simply not enough evidence to support to writer’s contention that cultural elements constitute an element of technical translation, of which the translator should be aware.); (For a resubmission the student will be required to produce a new version of Chapter 6, taking the above points into account.); (Significantly the findings concur with those of a similar dissertation, which suggests that the methodology applied by the writer was fit for purpose.) There is an instance of subordination without a comma observed line 22
SEMI-COLONS AND COLONS text 1: semi-colon (1) colon(1)

text 2: semi-colon (0) colon(1)

text 3: semi-colon (2) colon(0)

total semi-colons: 3

total colons: 2

SUSPENSION POINTS more rigour and objectivity..
APOSTROPHE: 7 Text 1: 2

Text 2: 5

Atril’s; reader’s; writer’s

QUESTION MARK: 1 for the parallel texts (?)
 
QUOTES EXAMPLE
QUOTES AND QUOTATION MARKS Text 2: 1 (double quotation mark)
QUOTES AROUND SINGLE WORDS ‘technical translation’ and ‘culture’
 
SYNTAX EXAMPLE
PASSIVE VOICE: 22 Text 1:

‘…the ways in which cultural elements are articulated in technical translation and an analysis of…’.

‘While this shape has been retained the space allocated to the various sections of the dissertations was not expected’.

‘Of the 90 pages devoted to the dissertation some 60 are taken up by the corpus…’.

‘The highly limited investigation of a substantial corpus and it should be noted that no details on the texts are provided beyond a list of website addresses for the st and a list of…’

‘And that no explanation is given as to why these texts in particular were selected means that the dissertation cannot be accepted as a pass’.

‘For a resubmission the student will be required to produce a new version of chapter 6 taking the above points into account’.

Text 2:

‘The writer’s command of English is very good and communication with the reader is generally not impeded’.

An example is provided on page 5 where the writer is reporting on Trados’ adoption of Atril’s integrated approach’.

‘Expressions like huge mistake’ p 38 and not to be sneezed at’ p 40 also suggest that an academic writing style is not consistently maintained’.

‘The lack of rigour is manifested elsewhere in the dissertation’.

‘However no attempt is made to correlate the purported lesser use of tm by women…’

‘So for example the geographical location of the respondents is pinpointed on page 20 but…’

‘Greater, rigour could have been achieved through better use of concluding summaries at the end of key chapters’.

‘And the same applies to chapter 3 where a linking section between the report on the findings of the survey and the interviews would have been welcome’.

‘The methodology employed is basically sound but could have been applied with more rigour and objectivity’.

Text 3:

‘…the quotation on page 26 appears to be misquoted’.

‘Could the dissertation be improved?’

‘Well yes the data provided could have been more detailed more use could have been made of tables and of appendices for example’.

 
OTHER STYLISTIC APPROACHES EXAMPLE
MISSPELING fives pages; worrying; rigour
SELF REFERENCE As a reader I; I suppose; we referenced 3 times

 

 

Most frequent words (Author A)

Author A (Text 1 )
Rank Frequency Word
14 23 dissertation
17 22 writer
19 18 research
23 16 text
27 15 page
28 15 student
30 13 texts
32 11 approach
36 10 number
40 9 section
46 8 chapter
49 8 translation
54 7 method
57 7 study
58 7 terms
59 6 analysis
64 6 example
66 6 genre
67 6 literature
Author A (text 2)
Rank Frequency Word
14 23 dissertation
17 22 writer
19 18 research
23 16 text
27 15 page
28 15 student
30 13 texts
32 11 approach
36 10 number
40 9 section
46 8 chapter
49 8 translation
54 7 method
57 7 study
59 6 analysis
64 6 example
66 6 genre
67 6 literature
Author A (text 3)
Rank Frequency Word
14 23 dissertation
17 22 writer
19 18 research
23 16 text
27 15 student
30 13 texts
32 11 approach
30 10 number
40 9 section
46 8 chapter
48 8 pages
49 8 translation
54 7 method
57 7 study
58 t terms
59 6 analysis
64 6 example
66 6 genre
67 6 literature

Author B

AUTHOR B
TEXT 1
TOTAL NUMBER OF WORDS 556
TOTAL NUMBER OF SENTENCES 33
TOTAL NUMBER OF PHARAGRAPS 9
TEXT 2
TOTAL NUMBER OF WORDS 421
TOTAL NUMBER OF SENTENCES 27
TOTAL NUMBER OF PHARAGRAPS 8
TEXT 3
TOTAL NUMBER OF WORDS 359
TOTAL NUMBER OF SENTENCES 21
TOTAL NUMBER OF PHARAGRAPS 5
STYLISTIC APPROACHES
FORMAT
MARGINS 2,54 cm (Top, left, bottom and right) justified
FONT TYPE Times New Roman (Body)
FONT SIZE 10
PARAGRAPH & LINE SPACING 1,0
VARIATION IN FORMAT EXAMPLES
PARAGHRAP SPACING 1-3 SPACES: 19 Text 1: 8

Text 2: 7

Text 3: 4

BLODING FOR EMPHASIS: 1 (Student name) has submitted a first class dissertation which shows a detailed grasp of context, literature and method.
NUMBER AND SYMBOLS EXAMPLES
NUMERALS 1-10 INSTEAD OF NUMBER-WORDS: ON PAGE 2; ON PAGE 6. The format is fine but this reader would have liked to see (1) more sources used before identifying the ‘gap’ on page 2; and (2) perhaps 200 words on the history of Taiwan.; Another tension in the text is the relationship between WTC, exams and speaking (this begins of page 6)
USE OF NUMBERING: (1), (2): 1 The format is fine but this reader would have liked to see (1) more sources used before identifying the ‘gap’ on page 2; and (2) perhaps 200 words on the history of Taiwan.
USE OF FIGURES FOLLOWED BY A NOUN: 1 …and (2) perhaps 200 words on the history of Taiwan.
NUMERALS IN PARENTHESIS WITH NO ACCOMPANYING WORDS: 1 The personal thread may explain a sense of frustration in the findings (4.1.2).
ABBREVIATIONS EXAMPLES
ALL CAPITAL LETTER ABBREVIATIONS: 2 The dissertation looks at the constructs of motivation, WTC, anxiety and SPCC and applies them to his students at a university in Taiwan.
NONSTANDARD ABBREVIATION: 4 Although the research is sensitive to the context in the most part in is here (p28) that the particularity of…
ABBREVIATIONS IN ALL LOWER CASE LETTERING: 12 There are also occasions where more discussion (and showing the diagrams) of the models would have aided in the explanations (e.g. p12).
USE OF THE ABBREVIATION INSTEAD OF THE FULL WORD: 4 The summary on p19 and p20 was a very useful digest of the earlier specialised and technical discussion.
PAGE REFERENCING: 8 1. identifying the ‘gap’ on page 2

2. explanations (e.g. p12)

3. exams and speaking (this begins of page 6).

4. The summary on p19 and p20

5. description of the participants (p.27)

6. the most part in is here (p28)

PUNCTUATION NUMBER PER TEXT
COMMAS
TOTAL NUMBER OF COMMAS: 32 Text 1: 15 commas.

Text 2: 5 commas.

Text 3: 12 commas.

COMMA SPACING: 32 1 space after;

Text 1: 15

Text 2: 5

Text 3: 12

SEMICOLON
TOTAL NUMBER OF SEMICOLONS: 3 Text 1: 2 semicolons.

Text 2: no semicolons.

Text 3: 1 semicolon.

COLON
TOTAL NUMBER OF COLONS: 1 Text 1: no colons.

Text 2: 1 colon.

Text 3: no colons.

QUESTION
TOTAL NUMBER OF QUESTION MARKS: 2 Text 1: no question marks.

Text 2: 2 question marks.

Text 3: no question marks.

DASH (HYPHEN)
TOTAL NUMBER OF HYPHENS: 5 Text 1: 2 hyphens.

Text 2: 3 hyphens.

Text 3: no hyphens.

DASH TO SEPARATE JOINED COMPUND WORDS: 5 EXAMPLES
Nevertheless, there is a clear suggestion that the student has provided a solid and well-meaning structure to a difficult problem.
QUOTES
TOTAL NUMBER OF QUOTE MARKS: 8 Text 1: 4 quote marks.

Text 2: 4 quote marks.

Text 3: no quote marks.

QUOTES AROUND PHRASES: 8 EXAMPLES
…the particularity of the participants becomes most evident [the argument that they are at “the top of their game” is debatable;…
APOSTROPHE
TOTAL NUMBER OF APOSTROPHES: 9 Text 1: 5 apostrophes.

Text 2: 4 apostrophes.

Text 3: no apostrophes.

INSTRUCTIVE APOSTROPHES: 3 EXAMPLES
The results section is impressive and seems to reflect the student’s strengths with text analysis.
APOSTROPHES FOR EMPHASIS: 6 EXAMPLES
…but this reader would have liked to see (1) more sources used before identifying the ‘gap’ on page 2;…
PARENTHESIS
TOTAL NUMBER OF PARENTHESIS: 20 Text 1: 8 parentheses.

Text 2: 7 parentheses.

Text 3: 5 parentheses.

PARENTHESES ONLY AROUND EXAMPLES OR NOTES: 4 EXAMPLES
There are errors in terminology (e.g. stratified).
PARENTHESES IN THE PLACE OF COMMAS: 5 EXAMPLES
This is a bold and structured approach to a longstanding educational problem (evaluating new materials) applied to…
PARENTHESES TO ENCLOSE PHRASE OR SENTENCE: 3 EXAMPLES
This contributes to (or may be a consequence of) the methodological limitations.
PARENTHESES TO ENCLOSE SINGLE WORDS: 1 EXAMPLES
and (importantly) ones on second language learning.
SQUARE BRACKETS FOR NOTES: 1 EXAMPLES
…the particularity of the participants becomes most evident [the argument that they are at “the top of their game” is debatable; that if they are anxious then anxiety is a “grave problem for all” more so.
 
SYNTAX EXAMPLES
USE OF PASSIVE VOICE: 28 Text 1: 12

  • ‘These constructs are explained and operationalised using contemporary literature and measurement techniques’.
  • ‘Terms are defined and supported with literature’.
  • ‘Questions of the appropriate nature of the constructs and their contextual suitability are regularly raised’.
  • ‘Key terms are defined early and succinctly’.
  • ‘…there is a tension between Taiwan as unique context and Taiwanese learners are being linked with Chinese ones’.
  • ‘That said it was impressive throughout how much context specific literature had been found and how the nuances of say wen and clement had been taken on board’.
  • ‘Less space is given to pedagogical implications than might have been expected in a dissertation inspired by a enthusiasm to improve teaching’.
  • ‘No changes in teaching to see what improves things has been undertaken’.
  • ‘The text is presented exceptionally well’.

 

Text 2: 6

 

  • ‘The research is based on an extensive reading of complex literature and a principled view of methodology’. (I’m not sure this is passive. Based on might be acting as an adjective? Maybe?)
  • ‘The genre approach is presented as the wheel’.
  • ‘… the writer’s understanding is not brought out’.
  • ‘Claims on p11 are not substantiated’.
  •  A fine-grained analysis of texts based on many in-depth articles is presented.
  • ‘Some areas of the text seem rushed final proofreading or drafting is required p9 refers to an appendix which is not present’.

 

Text 3: 10

 

  • ‘The section on motivation could have been more detailed and wider referenced’.
  • ‘The research comes from a practical problem rather than a gap in the literature the literature is used to support the research’.
  • ‘The research has been conducted in a thorough and ethical manner’.
  • ‘The target companies have been left anonymous’.
  • ‘However more context is needed both to describe their business (size, turnover, etc.) to explain…’
  • ‘Moreover it is unclear why the three companies were taken as a cohesive group other than…’
  • ‘The objectives need to be revisited throughout the text’.
  • ‘The objectives of the research needed to be stated in the introduction and…’
  • ‘On occasion the readability of the text breaks down e g the first sentence of the introduction could be brokendown into three shorted ones’.
  • ‘However these occasions do not prevent the text from being well written and controlled’.
 
OTHER STYLISTIC APPROACHES EXAMPLES
MISSPELLING: 7 The use of apostrophe is missed on: ‘these variables for the target students needs more explanation’ it should be ‘these variables for the target students’ needs more explanation.’; Less space is given to pedagogical implications than might have been expected in a dissertation inspired by a enthusiasm to improve teaching.
SELF REFERENCE: 2 The format is fine but this reader would have liked to see (1) more sources used before identifying the ‘gap’ on page 2; and (2) perhaps 200 words on the history of Taiwan.; All that said, I was impressed, on a page by page basis, in the level of understanding,

Most frequent words (Author B)

Author B (text 1)
Rank Frequency Word
14 23 dissertation
17 22 writer
19 18 research
23 16 text
27 15 page
28 15 student
30 13 texts
32 11 approach
36 10 number
40 9 section
46 8 chapter
49 8 translation
54 7 method
57 7 study
58 7 terms
59 6 analysis
64 6 example
66 6 genre
67 6 literature
Author B (text 2)
Rank Frequency Word
14 23 dissertation
17 22 writer
19 18 research
23 16 text
27 15 page
28 15 student
30 13 texts
32 11 approach
36 10 number
40 9 section
46 8 chapter
49 8 translation
54 7 method
57 7 study
58 7 terms
59 6 analysis
64 6 example
66 6 genre
67 6 literature
Author B (text 3)
Rank Frequency Word
14 23 dissertation
17 22 writer
19 18 research
23 16 text
27 15 page
28 15 student
30 13 texts
32 11 approach
36 10 number
40 9 section
46 8 chapter
49 8 translation
54 7 method
57 7 study
58 7 terms
59 6 analysis
64 6 example
66 6 genre
67 6 literature

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Cite This Work

To export a reference to this article please select a referencing stye below:

Reference Copied to Clipboard.
Reference Copied to Clipboard.
Reference Copied to Clipboard.
Reference Copied to Clipboard.
Reference Copied to Clipboard.
Reference Copied to Clipboard.
Reference Copied to Clipboard.

Related Services

View all

DMCA / Removal Request

If you are the original writer of this dissertation and no longer wish to have your work published on the UKDiss.com website then please: