Process Types of Transitivity System in Engineering Lecture Introduction: A Pedagogic Discourse
Abstract
Abstract: This study is aimed at investigating the transitivity process types constructed in a pedagogical discourse of engineering lecture introduction in a university in the Netherlands, where English is used as the medium of instruction. The pedagogic discourse theory and tran- sitivity analysis were employed to analyze the data. A qualitative approach was applied in this study while the data were collected from Cosmolearning Corpus’s 7 engineering lectures. The findings showed that all transitivity processes appeared in engineering lecture introduction. Material process, relational process, mental process, verbal process, behavioral process, and existential process were identified. It was also revealed that the most dominant process used by the lecturers in engineering lecture was material process. This indicated that the engineering lecturers in lecture introduction have succeeded at reaching the level of material process. In oth- er words, they were aware of realization aspect of the students’ behavior because all of them di- rected toward the goals of the teaching-learning activity. To sum up, at the engineering lectures introduction, the regulative register which was related to the goals, purposes, and directions of the teaching-learning activity became very important.
Keywords: process types of transitivity system, engineering lecture, pedagogic discourse, sys- temic functional linguistics
Abstrak: Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk menyelidiki jenis proses transitivitas yang dibangun dalam wacana pedagogis perkuliahan pembuka kelas teknik di satu universitas di Belanda yang menggunakan bahasa Inggris sebagai bahasa pengantar. Teori wacana pedagogis dan analisisis transitivitas digunakan untuk menganalisis data. Pendekatan kualitatif diterapkan pada pene- litian ini sedangkan data diambil dari 7 sesi perkuliahan teknik di TU Delft, Belanda pada Korpus Cosmolearning. Temuan menunjukkan bahwa semua proses transitivitas muncul dalam perkuliahan pembuka kelas teknik. Proses material, proses relasional, proses mental, proses verbal, proses perilaku, dan proses eksistensial teridentifikasi. Temuan juga mengungkapkan bahwa proses yang paling dominan digunakan oleh dosen dalam perkuliahan pembuka kelas teknik adalah proses material. Ini menunjukkan bahwa perkuliahan pembuka kelas teknik telah berhasil mencapai tingkat proses material. Dengan kata lain, dosen menyadari aspek realisa- si dari perilaku mahasiswa karena itu semuanya menunjukan tujuan langsung dari kegiatan belajar-mengajar. Sebagai kesimpulan, dalam perkuliahan pembuka kelas teknik, regulative register yang berkaitan dengan target, tujuan dan arah dari kegiatan pengajaran-pembelajaran menjadi hal yang sangat penting.
Kata- kata Kunci: jenis proses sistem transitivitas, perkuliahan teknik, wacana pedagogis, linguistik sistemik fungsional
Full Text:
PDFReferences
Bernstein, B. (1990). The structuring of ped- agogic discourse: Gloss codes and con- trol (Vol. IV). London, UK: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
Bligh, D. (1998). What’s the use of lectures?
Exeter, UK: Intellect Ltd.
Bloor, T., & Bloor, M. (2004). The functional analysis of English (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Arnold.
Butt, D., Fahey, R., Feez, S., Spinks, S., & Yallop, C. (2000). Using functional gram- mar: An explorer’s guide (2nd ed.). Syd- ney, NSW: NCELTR, Macquarie Univer- sity.
Castro, S. T. R. (2006). Understanding rep- resentations of English as a foreign lan- guage teachers’ and students’ roles in dif- ferent contexts in the light of transitivity analysis. Proceedings of 33rd International Systemic Functional Congress. São Paulo, Brazil: Catholic University of São Pau- lo.
Christie, F. (1990). First and second-order registers in education. In E. Ventola (Ed.), Functional and systemic linguistics: Ap- proaches and uses (pp. 235-258). Berlin: de Gruyter.
Christie, F. (1995). Pedagogic discourse in the primary school. Linguistics and Edu- cation, 7, 221-242. Retrieved from https:// doi.org/10.1016/0898-5898(95)90024-1
Christie, F. (2001). Pedagogic discourse in the post-compulsory years: pedagogic subject positioning. Linguistics and Education, 11(4), 313–331. Retrieved from https://doi. org/10.1016/S0898-5898(00)00031-0
Cresswell, J. W. (2009). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, mixed-methods approach. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publication, Inc.
Creswell, J. W. (2003). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed meth- ods approach (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publication, Inc.
Derewianka, B., & Jones, P. (2016). Teaching Language in Context (2ed.). Melbourne, SA: Oxford University Press.
Deroey, K.L.B., & Taverniers, M. (2012). Just remember this: Lexicogrammatical rele- vance markers in lectures. Journal of Eng- lish for Specific Purposes, 31(4), 221-233.Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1016/j. esp.2012.05.001
Domizio, P. (2008). Giving a good lecture. (Online). (http://www.irabpath.org/234. pdf.
Eggins, S. (2004). An introduction to sys- temic functional linguistics (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Continuum.
Emilia, E. (2014). Introducing functional gammar. Bandung: Pustaka Jaya.
Emilia, E., & Syifa, I. L (2018). Gender in EFL classroom: transitivity analysis in English textbook for Indonesian students. Indonesian Journal of Applied Linguistics. 7(1), 206-214. doi: dx.doi.org/10.17509/ijal. v7i1.6877.
Ernofalina. (2017). Culture shocks experi- enced by Indonesian students studying overseas. International Journal of Educa- tional Best Practices (IJEBP), 1(2), 87-105. Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.31258/ ijebp.v1n2.p87-105
Halliday, M. A. K. (1994). An introduction to functional grammar (2nd ed.). London: Edward Arnold.
Halliday, M. A. K. (1985). An introduction to functional grammar. London: Edward Arnold.
Halliday, M. A. K., & Matthiessen, C. M. I.M. (2014). Halliday’s introduction to func- tional grammar (4th ed.). London: Rout- ledge.
Halliday, M. A. K., & Matthiessen, C. M. I.M. (2004). An introduction to functional grammar (3rd ed.). London: Hodder Ar- nold.
Hasan, R. (1985). Part B. language, con- text, and text: Aspects of language in a socialsemiotic perspective. Oxford, UK: OUP.
Ignatieva., & Rodriguez-Vergara (2015). Ver- bal processes in an academic language in Spanish: exploring discourse genres with- in the systemic functional framework. Functional Linguistics. 2(2), 1-14. doi 10.1186/s40554-015-0014-9.
Institute of International Education. (2017). Open doors 2017 report: Information and data tables. Retrieved from http://www. iie.org.
Krippendorff, K. (2004). Content analysis: An introduction to its methodology (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publica- tions,Inc.
Lee, J. J. (2011). A genre analysis of second language classroom discourse: Exploring the rhetorical, linguistic, and contextual dimensions of language lessons. (Unpublished Dissertation). Georgia State Uni- versity.
Lu, Angelia (2008). Ideational Perspectives on Feedback in Academic Writing. Pro- ceedings of ISFC 35: Voice around the world. Sydney: Macquarie University.
Mukminin, A. (2019). Acculturative expe- riences among Indonesian graduate stu- dents in Dutch higher education. Journal of International Students, 9(2), 488-510. doi: 10.32674/jis.v0i0.265.
Mulatsih, S., Saleh, M., Warsono, & Yuliasri, I (2018). Ideational meanings of teachers’ utterances in reading and writing classes. International Journal of Language Teach- ing and Education. 2(3), 275-285. Re- trieved from https://doi.org/10.22437/ijolte. v2i3.5689
Olsen, L. A., & Huckin, T. H. (1990). Point-driven understanding in engineering lecture comprehension. Journal of English for Specific Purposes, 9(1), 33–47. Re- trieved from https://doi.org/10.1016/0889- 4906(90)90027-A
Rido, A. (2010). The use of discourse markers as an interactive feature in science lecture discourse in L2 setting. TEFLIN Journal, 21(1), 90-106.
Rido, A. (2019). What is Newton’s law of inertia?: The use of questions in science lectures. Litera: Jurnal Penelitian Baha- sa, Sastra dan Pengajarannya, 18(2), 312-325.
Rose, D. (2014). Analyzing pedagogic dis- course: An approach from genre and reg- ister. Functional Linguistics. 1(11), 1-32. Retrieved from http://www.functional- linguistics.com/content/1/1/11.
Shamsudin, & Ebrahimi (2012). Analysis of the moves of engineering lecture intro- ductions. Procedia: Social and behavioral sciences, 70, 1303-1311.
Stake, R. E. (2010). Qualitative research:Studying how things work. New York, NY: Guilford Press.
Sinar, T.S. (2017). A study of experiential meaning of Malaysian lecture discourse. Journal of Modern Languages, 15(1), 191-215. https://jml.um.edu.my/article/ view/3791
Sujatna, E.T.S (2009). Material process in the English clause: Functional grammar ap- proach. Sociohumaniora, 11(3), 65-73.
Sunardi, Tarjana, Poedjosoedarmo, & San- tosa. (2017). Experiential realizations of pedagogic discourse in an Indonesian EFL classroom. Advances in Social Science, Education and Humanities Research, 115, 239-245.
Thompson, G. (2014). Introducing functional grammar (3rd ed.). New York, NY: Rout- ledge.
Thompson, S. (1994). Frameworks and con- texts: A genre-based approach to ana- lyzing lecture introductions. Journal of English for Specific Purposes, 13(2), 171–186. https://doi.org/10.1016/0889-
(94)90014-0
Wegener, R., Schhuller, B., & Cassens, J. (2017). Needing and wanting in academ- ic lectures: Profiling the academic lecture across contexts. Proceedings of 44th Inter- national Systemic Functional Congress (pp. 82-88). Wollongong, Australia: Wol- longong University.
Yaakob, S. (2013). A genre analysis and cor- pus-based study of university lecture in- troductions. (Unpublished Dissertation), The University of Birmingham.
Zare, Z., & Keivanloo-Shahrestanaki, Z. (2017). The Language of English academ- ic lectures: The case of the field of study in highlighting importance. Lingua. Re- trieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.lin- gua.2017.04.005
Refbacks
- There are currently no refbacks.