The Rhetorical Structure of Short Lecture by Famous Applied Linguists Jack C. Richards Posted on YouTube
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.52690/jadila.v1i2.40Keywords:
rhetorical structure, the lecture, move and step analysis; short lectureAbstract
This study aims to investigate the rhetorical structure of move and step of short lecture by famous applied linguist Jack C. Richards posted on YouTube. The data of this study were 22 video-transcripts of a short lecture of Jack C Richards. The results: (1) three moves of rhetorical structure such as M1 – Introduction, M2 – Content of Short Lecture, and M3 – Conclusion. They are 100% occurred in all of the data analyzed as obligatory category. (2) the most often found steps in the short lectures that occurred 100% and classified as obligatory category, such as M2SB – Argumentation of the short lecture and M3SA – Summarizing the points and the steps with 60-99% percentage of occurrences as classified as conventional category, namely are M1SE – Announcing topic of oral presentation, M1SA – Greeting the Audience, M2SC – Illustration of short lecture, and M2SA – Description of short lecture. The new proposed model of spoken genre analysis adapted from Ali and Singh (2019), the Sermon model by Cheong cited in Safnil (2010) and Seliman (1996) for identifying the rhetorical structure of short lecture is effective enough to capture the possible rhetorical moves and steps in a whole text of short lecture by famous applied linguist posted in YouTube.
Downloads
References
Ali, M., and Singh, M. (2019). A genre-based investigation of the introduction sections of academic oral presentation. Asian Journal of University Education. 15(2), 95-125.
Creswell, J. W. (2013). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mix methods approaches. USA. SAGE Publication Inc.
Chafc, W. (1982). Integration and involvement in speaking. writing and oral literature. In D. Tannen (ED). Spoken and written language: Exploring orality and literacy, 35-54, Norwood. NJ:Ablex
Fairclough, N. (2003). Analyzing discourse textual analysis for social research. London and NY. Routledge
Fortanet, I. (1997). The use of “We” in university lectures: reference and function. English for Specific Purposes, 23, 45-46
Gee P. James (2018). Introducing to discourse analysis from grammar to society. NEW YORK. Routletge
https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=jack+c+richard+short+lectures retrieved on February 12, 2020 at 23.15pm
http://www.lilsubs.com/ retrieved on February 12, 2020 at 23.15pm
Kamarudin and Suryani. (2014). Rhetorical structure in academic research writing by non-native writers. International Journal of Higher Education in Malaysia, 3(1), 3.
Kemendikbud. (2016). Silabus mata pelajaran sekolah menengah pertama/madrasah tsanawiyah [Syllabus for junior high school/madrasah tsanawiyah]. Jakarta: Kementrian Pendidikan dan Kebudayaan Direktorat Jenderal Guru dan Tenaga Pendidikan
Noermanzah, N., Syafryadin, S., Castrena, O. W., & Abid, S. (2020). Rhetoric structure of the master of ceremony and the function of the akikah event in Lubuklinggau City. Journal of English Education and Teaching, 4(2), 232-247.
Pujiyanti A. I., Safnil., and Arono. (2018). rhetorical structure analysis on introduction chapters of english master theses by indonesian postgraduate students. IJEE (Indonesian journal of English education), 5 (2), 143-146.
Rowley-Jolivet, E. & Carter-Thomas, S. (2005). The rhetoric of conference presentation introductions: context, argument and interaction. International Journal of Applied Linguistics,15, 45-70.
Safnil, (2010). Pengantar analisis rhetorika teks. Bengkulu.FKIP UNIB
Seliman, S. (1996). The genre and the genre expectations of engineering oral presentations related to academic and professional context. Unpublished Dissertation, University of Stirling.
Syafryadin, H., & Salniwati, A. R. A. P. Digital storytelling implementation for enhancing students’ speaking ability in various text genres. International Journal of Recent Technology and Engineering (IJRTE). 8(4), 3147-3151.
Syafryadin, S., Martina, F., & Salniwati, S. (2020). Compensation strategies in speaking activities for non-English department students: poor and competent speakers. JEES (Journal of English Educators Society), 5(2), 109-116.
Wannaruk and Zhang. (2016). Rhetorical structure of education research article methods sections. PASAA: Journal of Language Teaching and Learning in Thailand, 51. 155-184.
Wannaruk and Shi, (2014). Rhetorical structure of research Article in Agriculture Science. English Language Teaching. Canadian Center of Science and Education. 7(8), 1.
Zareva, A. (2019). Lexical complexity of academic presentgations: similarities despite situational differences. Journal of Second Language Studies, 2(1), 72-93.
Zhang, Y. (2010). An analysis of spoken discourse between two native speakers. review of european studies. School of Foreign Languages, Qingdao University of Science and Technology. 6(2), 70.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2020 Idham Widodo, Irma Diani, Safnil Safnil
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
_1.png)
