| The present study is intended to make a contrastive study of the different thematic progression (TP) patterns employed in English and Chinese scientific texts for the purpose of finding out the similar and different choices of TP patterns used in English and Chinese scientific texts and investigating the underlying factors responsible for the similar and different choices. The theoretical framework of the present study is the Halliday's (2000) textual metafunction and Dane's (1974) thematic progression theory.A review of the classifications of TP patterns made by Danes (1974) and Xu Shenghuan (1982) reveals that each of the two versions has its advantages and disadvantages and that the two versions are complementary rather than contradictory to each other. In order to make a more comprehensive analysis of TP patterns, the present study, on the basis of the two versions, develops the five TP patterns of its own to analyze the thematic progression employed in Chinese and English scientific discourses. The scientific texts analyzed in the present study include ten English scientific texts randomly selected from PNAS and ten Chinese scientific texts from Science in China from 2005-2006 (The scientific texts are usually very long) .The major findings of the present study are summarized as follows:First, both English and Chinese scientific texts most frequently employ the three TP patterns, that is: constant theme pattern (T1→T2), simple linear pattern (R1→T2), and concentrated pattern (R1→R2). The sequence of the five patterns in English is T1→T2>R1→T2>R1→R2>R1→R1'>T1→T1'while that in Chinese texts is T1→T2>R1→R2>R1→T2>T1→T1'>R1→R1'.Second, though the most common patterns in both languages are the same, differences exist in some ways: 1) Though constant theme pattern (T1→T2) ranks first among the five patterns in the two languages, their incidences are different with 39.11% in English against 27.63% in Chinese; 2) Concentrated pattern (R1→R2) ranks second in English but third in Chinese.Third, the analysis of the underlying factors contributing to the similarities and differences of TP patterns used in English and Chinese scientific texts show that their similarities are mainly due to the common rhetorical features of scientific text genre, that is, the use of techniques, such as illustration (from general to specific), logical division, comparison and contrast, etc. The use of such techniques characteristic of this genre justifies the choices of the TP patterns in scientific texts of both languages.Fourth, the different incidences of TP patterns in the English and Chinese scientific texts mainly result from distinctive typological features. As a result of the paratactic structure, the Chinese language is human-manipulated and with an open beginning. Such features account for the frequent ellipsis of themes (or subjects) and the initial position of adverbial clauses and also affect the choice of TP patterns in Chinese scientific texts. However, this is not the case with English, which is of hypotactic structure and is said to be regulation-manipulated and with open-ending. As a result, English adverbial clauses are usually put at the end position and the ellipsis of themes (or subjects) are strictly restricted by rules.The results of the study might have some pedagogical implications. An adequate knowledge of the Theme-Rheme patterns could help students grasp the main idea of a paragraph or a text more effectively and achieve a better understanding of it. Moreover, such a knowledge would also improve students'output, enabling them to organize their compositions in a more cohesive and coherent way. Besides, efforts should be made to enable students to see the relevant rhetorical techniques and typological features underlying the choices of the TP patterns in different languages. This could deepen their understanding of the target language and speed up their foreign language learning and acquisition.
|
PDF Full Text Request