Evaluating the use of lexical coherence tools in Persian textbooks of junior high school

Authors

1 ---

2 ----

Abstract

In the present study, contents of Persian textbooks of junior high school (seventh, eighth and ninth grades) were examined regarding the use of lexical coherence tools within the framework of Halliday and Hasan's Functional linguistics theory (1976). The research was conducted in a content analysis method and was descriptive. From each of the three books, three chapters were randomly selected. All lexical coherence tools were identified and tallied in the textbooks. The percentage of occurrence of each instrument was also obtained. The results showed that in the seventh, eighth, and ninth grade Persian books 158, 125, and 120 lexical coherence tools were used, respectively. In the seventh grade book, collocations and opposites were the most and the least commonly used instruments, respectively. In the eighth grade book, collocation and synonymy were the most and the least used instruments, respectively. In the ninth grade books, hyponymy and collocation were the most and the least used instruments, respectively. For more accurate statistical analysis, Chi-square test was used to explore the distribution of lexical coherence tools in each of the books. Based on the results obtained at the level of p <0.05, there was a significant difference between the distribution of lexical coherence instruments in each of the books.

Extended Abstract:
   In this research, the content of Iranian Junior High School Persian textbooks (Grade 7, 8 and 9), published in school year 97-98, is studied in terms of Lexical Cohesive Devices in the framework of Halliday and Hassan’s functional Linguistics.
   This investigation is conducted by analyzing content in a descriptive way. And the content includes three lessons randomly picked from the above books. Cases that are considered as Lexical Cohesive Devices from Halliday and Hassan’s perspective, were extracted from all three books. Frequency and percentage of usage of each device was diagnosed as well. After analyzing the data, we came to conclusion that the 7th grade book with 158 cases of Cohesive Devices, the 8th grade book with 125 cases and the 9th grade Persian textbook with 120 cases, respectively achieved the first, second and third rank in using Lexical Cohesive Devices.
   In 7th grade Persian textbook, collocations were the most and antonyms were the least used Cohesive Devices; collocations and synonyms were distinguished as the most and the least useful Lexical Cohesive Devices in 8th grade, and in 9th grade Persian textbook, hyponymy was the most used Device and collocations were the least.
   In order to achieve a more exact statistical analysis on distribution of Lexical Cohesive Devices in each book, the Chi-Square Test was used. Based on the results, in pth, 8th, 9th grade Persian textbooks’ distribution of Lexical Cohesive Devices.

Keywords

References

Abbasi, Mahmoud., Oveisi, Abdolali,. & Savab,Fateme. The lexical coherence in the surrealistic  text of the Blind Owl by Sadeq Hedayat based on the Halliday and Hassan,s theory. Language related research.7(5),283-308
Aghagolzadeh, F. (2015). Critical Discourse Analysis, Publisher: Scientific and cultural Research Co. Tehran, Iran.
 Ahmadi, A., Ostovari, A. (2011).Textual cohesion special characteristics for knowing styles of Persian literature. Journal of linguistics and rhetorical studies.2(3).pp,7-20.
 Ahmadian, sakine.,& Shrkufegi, Hamed. (2016). Integration of text in Persian textbooks(Second Ptenth Secondary) and Its role in students' comprehension. Survey in teaching humanities. 1(4),19-30.
Amraie, M., Rezaei Haftador, Gh., & Zand Vakili,M. (2017). Coherence Theory of Halliday and Hassan (1985) and Its Implementation in Surah Alaq and Persian Translations of Haddad Adel. Translation Researches in the Arabic Language And Literature. 7(16), 119-149.
Arabani Dana, A. (1386). Lexical Cohesion in High school English Textbooks. Roshd FLT, 84,(22), 48- 53
Crystal, D. (2003). Encyclopedia of language and linguistics. Arnold press.
Comaei-fard, saeede. Jaber, Maryam.(2012). Coherence of text definitions in academic textbooks. Research and writing of academic books. 16(26), 25-45
Fazlollahi, Seifollah., & Maleki Tavana, Mansoure. (2011). The evaluation and assessment of  eadability of the third grade science book in elementary school according to 5 standard formulas: Fry, Gunning, Flesch, Laughlin and Close. Journal of Curriculum Studies (J.C.S.). 6(22), 141-162.
Gourchian, Nader. (1994).A analysis of continuing curriculum. Quarterly Journal of Research and Planning in Higher Education.5,47-69.
Green, Kith., & libhan, Gil. (2004). Literary criticism course. Trans. Bahrani.m ,Leila .firth edition.Tehran: Journalist's publication.
Gutwinski, Waldemar .(1976), Cohesion in Literary Texts. Paris: Mouton.
Halliday, Michael A. K., & Hasan, Ruqaiya. (1976). Cohesion in English. London: Longman.
Halliday, M. A. K .(2002). Linguistic Studies of Text and Discourse. London: Continuum.
Halliday, M. A. K., & Matthiessen, C. M. I. M. .(2004). An Introduction to Functional Grammar. Third ed. London: Arnold Publication.
Innajih, A. (2007). The impact of textual cohesive conjunctions on the reading comprehension of foreignlanguage Students. ARECLS-Journal, 31-20
Kai, J.(2008). lexical cohesion patterns in NS & NNS dissertation abstract in Applied Linguistics : A  comparative study. Linguistics Journal, 3, pp.132- 144. Retrieved from : http://www.linguisticsjournal.com/Desember_2008.pdf
Karimi, Abdoalazim.(2010).Comparison of the performance of Iranian students in the study of Thais with several selected countries. Research Project. Research Institute for Education Studies.
Mikk, J. (2000). Suggestions for Comprehensible Writing In Textbook: Research and Writing. 183-184. Frankfurt: Peter Lang.
Mohammad Ebrahimi, Zeinab., & Payande,Leila.(2011).The study of coherence factors in two Surahs of Naml and Fajr and comparison with Persian translation. Magazine Mind. 12(4), 156-175.
Najafi Pazoki, Masoume. (2012).Reading Literacy, Reading Comprehension  teaching.Tehran:Madrese.
Palmer, F. R. (2002). New look to semantic. Translation by safavi, kourosh. Printed in Tehran, center publication.
Parvaz, M., & salmaninodoushan, M. (2007). How does text cohesion affect reading comprehension?Iranian journal of language studies (IJLS). 1(1), 57-64
Pourdana, N., Naziri, M., & Rajeski, J. S. (2014). Cohesive Devices Frequency in English Textbooks: Do They Help or Hinder EFL Reading Comprehension? . International Journal of Applied Linguistics & English Literature, 3(4), 154- 161  
Pourzahir, A. (2002). Introduction to curriculum  and educational planning. Tehran,Agah publication.
Raie Dahghi, A. (2001). Types of textual coherence tools in firth, secont and thirth elementary farsi books and their frequency.MA thesis. Allame Tabatabaie University.
Rahemi, J. (2009). Reciprocal teaching as a tool to foster autonomy: Practical considerations in Iranian high school. Roshd FLT . 89(23), 29-36
Richards, J. C., & Platt, H. (1992). Dictionary of Language Teaching & Applied Linguistics. GB: Longman.
Safavi, kourosh. (2000). An Introduction to Semantics.Tehran,: Sooreye Mehr publication.
Sareli, Naser Qoli., & Ishani,Tahere. (2011).Coherence Theory and Coordination of Coherence and Its Application in a Minimal Farsi Story (Ladder Story).Zaban Pazhuhi. 2(4),51-77.
Shabani, Hassan. (2007). Training Skills,teaching methods and   techniques.Tehran: Samt publication.
Shekufegi, Hamed. Ahmadian, Sakine.(2016).Integration of text in Persian textbooks(Second Primary until tenth Secondary) and Its role in students' comprehension. Scanning in Human Sciences Education.4.1(3),19-30.
Snow, C. E, Burns, M. S., & Griffin, P. (1998). Preventing reading difficultees in young children. Washington, DC: National Academy press.

Files

History

  • Receive Date: 03 January 2018
  • Revise Date: 21 April 2018
  • Accept Date: 21 April 2018

Share

How to cite

Statistics