1. ENGLISH 343
Week 6: Cross-cultural differences in writing, cultural
representation constructed by dominant discourses

2. Overview
 Your Voices: General discussion on this week’s readings
 Introduction to Contrastive Rhetoric (CR)
 Critiques of CR
 Short clip from “Writing Across Borders”
 Discussion Facilitation by Tara and Victoria
Unfinished Knowledge: The story of Barbara
Silvia, T. (1997). Differences in ESL and native English speaker writing: The research and its
implications
Hinkel Chapters
 Midterm Study Guide
 Language and Culture Trajectory papers

3. The goal of today’s class
is
 To understand the influence of cultures on our writing
 To understand and go beyond cultural relativism in
writing classrooms. And, to understand cultural
representation as constructed by discourse.
 To problemitize the binaries in writing and come to an
understanding that cultural differences are constructed
by discourses rather than existing a priori (notion of
culture as a discursive construct)
 To understand what Contrastive Rhetoric is and how
we can apply this knowledge to ESL/EFL teaching

4. Initial Discussion on CR
 Consider your criteria of “good writing”. In what ways do your
criteria reflect norms of your native language and academic
culture? In what ways may your own criteria differ from those of
someone from a different country and language background?
 As a teacher, how could you begin to understand the writing
styles and norms of other cultures?
 As English becomes more and more a language used all over he
world among native and non-native speakers alike, discuss your
opinions on the importance of teaching and expecting proficiency
in the norm of the dominant mode? Who establishes these norms
and for whom are they most relevant? How important is it to
uphold those norms in the academic setting?

5. Contrastive
Rhetoric/Intercultural
Rhetoric
 Interdiciplinary domain of second language studies and applied
linguistics that deals with examining differences and similarities in
writing across cultures.
 The assumption is: any language includes written texts that are
constructed using identifiable rhetorical features
 Raises teachers’ awareness on cultural differences in writing.
Helps L2 students to explore cultural differences in L2 writing
Contrastive Rhetoric/Intercultural Rhetoric: What is the impact of
culture on writing? How do students negotiate the composing
conventions in their own L1 literacy practice and the writing
convention of the target language?
(Atkinson, Enkvist, Hinds, Connor, Kubota, Kaplan, Matsuda, Nelson
)

6. Robert Kaplan’s Contrastive Rhetoric
argument
 Contrastive Rhetoric: Cultural thought
patterns in intercultural education”
(Kaplan, 1966; the doodle article)
6

7. Robert Kaplan’s Contrastive Rhetoric argument: Cultural
Though Patterns in Intercultural Education (also referred
as “doodles article”
 First study/a pioneer work by a U.S. applied linguist to explain the written
style of ESL writers (as opposed to patterns of speech!)
 Explored the links between the culturally specific logic/thought patterns
and paragraph structures in English essays written by NNES students.
 Came up with five lingua-cultural groups in rhetorical structures of a piece
of writing in students’ cultures- He claims that Anglo-European
expository essays follow a linear development; Oriental languages prefer
an indirect approach and come to the point at the end; p. 223
 “The patterns of paragraphs in other languages are not so well
established, or perhaps only not so well known to speakers of English.
The patterns need to be discovered and compared with patterns of
English in order to arrive a practical means for the teaching of such
structures to nonnative users of the language”
7

8. Early Criticism to Kaplan’s doodle
article: Flows in his arguments
 The generalizations about student’s culture based on the rhetorical and
cultural through patterns has been contested by many scholars.
Fault # 1: Essays were collected as class exercise, students did not have
comparable language skills (they were all developmental writers)
Fault # 2: He was making assertions about one’s L1 writing rhetoric and
thought patterns based on a general L2 essay structure. Other factors such as
topic knowledge, language proficiency, educational background also influences
students paragraph development, but he did not account for these in hic 1966
article.
Fault # 3: Rhetorical deviations he found in NNES students were similar to the
rhetorical errors made by NS students
Fault # 4: Considering standard English speaking NSs as the norm-
overlooks the plurality within language groups. Native English speakers do not
all write in linear, straight line paragraph development. Members of different
discourse communities write in different genres.

9. Faults in Kaplan’s
argument (cont.)
Ethnocentric view of culture:
 The worldview of a group of people using the same
language is determined by that single language and
culture? (strong version of Sapir-Whorf Hypothesis)

10. STILL…
 He drew teachers and scholars attention to linguistic
differences in ESL students’ writers “Writing is
culturally influenced”
 The study of writing is seen as a cultural-educational
activity.

11. So, how should we approach such
cultural representations?
 It is important to understand the meaning of such
cultural labels (where do they come from, what do
they do to people?) and do not fall into the trap of
generalizations/stereotypes.
 Such representations need to be viewed as particular
knowledge rather than objective truth.
 These also need to be reevaluated from the point of
view of a discourse in which power relations construct
and legitimate such beliefs.

12. We need to adopt a Critical literacy
approach (not an assimilationist one)
 Both affirms and critically interrogate what is perceived as the
authentic student voice
 Legitimizing the vernaculars of minority does not exclude their
need to acquire the dominant codes.
 The cultural and linguistic codes of the dominant group needs to
be demystified so that the subordinate students “can use the
dominant knowledge effectively in their struggle to change the
material and historical conditions that enslaved them”
(Freire, 1993, p. 135)
 Lisa Delpit also argues for the need to both maintain cultural
heritage and develop skills necessary for success in mainstream
society.

13. Approaches to apply CR
in the classroom
 Teachers should encourage their students to analyze the purpose
of their writing and analyze their audience carefully: This kind of
investigation involve breaking down students’ stereotypes of their
L1 and L2 and helping them come to a more complex
understanding of how their L1 rhetoric creates meaning (p. 46)
 Teachers can ask students to compare L1 and L2 texts with
regard to paragraph and discourse-level organization (preferably
with intermediate and advanced level students). The comparison
of comparable L1 and L2 texts can be taken to full text levels
(analyzing letters, research articles, books).
 Teachers can involve students in examining audience and reader
expectation in different cultures (and in different genres). What is
good writing in a Chinese academic research context/opinion
article/argumentative writing vs U.S.?

14. ESL Assignments/Notes
based on CR/IR
As a way to focus on rhetorical strategies, ESL instructors
in Indiana University tried the following assignments:
Chose two magazine advertisements that sell the same
kind of product but appeal to audiences in different
cultures and have similar socio-economic classes (luxury
car ad in Germany and a secondary luxury car as aimed
at people in the U.S. Analyze the differences and
similarities.
(You may try this ad analysis assignments targeting
different audience “in the same culture” man vs women)

15. Writing Across Borders:
Intercultural Rhetoric
 The role of culture in writing
 Culturally sensitive ways of
assessing students’ writing
 Struggles that international
students face while writing
in American colleges.
 The teaching and
assessing practices that
disadvantage international
students
15

16. Introducing the
documentary
 Made over a three period at Oregon State University
 Features interviews with international
students, second language scholars addressing
various writing issues in the college context.
 Strategies used by faculty to work with cultural writing
differences
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=quI0vq9VF-c
16

17. Barbara’s story
 The main points
1) Teachers usually have good intention while reflecting cultural
differences instead of denying them.
2) However, this liberal view of cultural difference tends to fall inyo
cultural relativism essentializing cultures and creating a
dichotomy between “us” and “them”
3) The liberal view of cultural difference also FAILS to examine how
cultural differences are constructed by discourses and how power
is exercised in perpetuating such differences.
4) In order to understand the cultural differences critically issues of
power and discourse need to be examined (p. 12)

18. Summary
NARRATIVE, DRAMATIZE, WRITE DOWN, DRAW A STORY BOARD ETC:
 Who is Barbara? What were some of her initial thoughts on her ESL
students? What are some of the dilemmas she experiences?
 Who is Carol? What are her views on culture? What are some of her
suggestions to Barbara?
 Who is David? How does he conceptualize the notion of culture? What are
some of his suggestions to Barbara? What did Barbara realize after her
conversations with David? What changes did she apply to her ESL
teaching?
“Barbara would emphasize that the students need not abandon their own
culture—they simply need to acquire new cultural conventions in order to
succeed in the academic community” (p.14)—What pedagogical model in Kubota
1999 does this fit in?

19. Questions to keep in
mind while watching
 How does culture play out in writing, and how are our
expectations shaped by cultural preferences?
 How do we assess international student writing when
we have to grade it alongside the writing of native
speakers, and how can we think about surface error in
a fair and constructive manner?
 What kinds of teaching and testing practices
disadvantage international students and which help
them improve as writers?

20. Three approaches in reading and
responding to ESL writing
1. Assimilationist
The goal is to help L2 writers write linear, topic-driven, idiomatic and error-
free papers
2. Accommodationist
The goal is to teach academic discourse without letting the student lose their
L1 linguistic and cultural identities. It’s up to the reader “how much like a
native speaker” she wants to sound.
3. Separatist/Multicultural writing
The goal is to preserve support the student in maintaining her linguistic
identity separate. You help the student preserve the difference. Looking
at writing as an “act of communication”
Source: Matsuda, P. & Cox, M. (2004). Reading an ESL writers’ text. In S.Bruce &
B.Rafoth. ESL Writers: A guide for writing center tutors.

21. Responding to a student
writing
 Imagine that an ESL students submits this essay.
Read and respond to one ESL essay in your groups.
How would you respond to this essay? Provide both
marginal and end comments to this student.

22. Good responding
strategies
 Respond student writing as a work in progress rather than judging it as a finished product.
 Respond to patterns of errors rather than individual errors.
 Focus on errors that impede meaning rather than errors in idiom.
 Ask questions to clarify meaning.
 Less is more.
 Ensure your comments reflect your priorities.
 Engage in dialogs about students’ writing process instead of the writing product only.
 Inform L2 writers about the academic writing conventions and genres in English.
 Encourage them to visit the writing center.
22

23. Marginal and End
Comments
 Marginal comments
 These comments are best suited for giving feedback on specific
sections of the text.
 End comments
 These comments are usually more lengthy and are saved for
more global concerns affecting the whole essay.
 Here is where you point out the patterns you noticed in the
student’s paper.
 Find a manageable set of issues for the student to work on for
the next draft or paper
23

24. Successful classroom pedagogies while
responding to ESL writing
 Ask students’ believes and expectations on good writing. L2 students
becoming “ethnographers” of their own writing.
 Research students’ writing experiences both in L1 and L2.
 Awareness building activities of audience, expectations of rhetorical
features: Educate students about different genres, expectations of readers
and the social purposes of writing.
 Raise students’ awareness on readers’ expectations.
 Refrain from perpetuating stereotypes when talking about student writing.
 Teachers need to be cautious in essentializing languages and cultures
(“reinforcing the cultural uniqueness” Kubota, 1998)
24