(Luận án tiến sĩ) discourse features of ielts sample essays a functional grammar perspective

THE UNIVERSITY OF DANANG
UNIVERSITY OF FOREIGN LANGUAGE STUDIES

NGUYỄN THỊ TRUNG

DISCOURSE FEATURES OF IELTS SAMPLE ESSAYS
- A FUNCTIONAL GRAMMAR PERSPECTIVE
Major:

ENGLISH LINGUISTICS

Code:

9.22.02.01
DOCTORAL THESIS

IN SOCIAL SCIENCES AND HUMANITIES

SUPERVISOR: Assoc. Prof. Dr. Nguyen Thi Quynh Hoa

Danang, 2021

luan an


i

STATEMENT OF AUTHORSHIP
Except where reference is made in the text, this thesis contains no material
published elsewhere or extracted in whole or in part from a thesis by which I have
qualified for or been awarded another degree or diploma.

No other person's work has been used without due acknowledgements in the
thesis.
This thesis has not been submitted for the award of any degree or diploma in
any other tertiary institution.
Da Nang, November 2021

Nguyen Thi Trung

luan an


ii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Above all, I would like to express my deepest gratitude to my supervisor, Associate
Professor Nguyễn Thị Quỳnh Hoa, for her understanding, encouragement, helpful
comments and professional guidance at every stage of this thesis.
I am also deeply indebted to Associate Professor Trần Văn Phước for his constructive
feedback, distribution of materials, and continuing support.
My special thanks goes to Professor Hoàng Văn Vân, and Associate Professor Phan
Văn Hòa for their advice in the first steps of the research paper, saving me from
confusion.
My heartfelt gratitude goes to Associate Professor Tôn Nữ Mỹ Nhật for her astute
comments and encouragement.
I would like to express my deepest appreciation to the University of Foreign
Language Studies, The University of Danang and the Faculty of English for their
generous support and timely assistance.
Finally, I am indebted to my family for their love, care and sacrifice; and to my
colleagues and friends for all their encouragement and untiring assistance.

luan an


iii

ABSTRACT
Over the past three decades, the International English Language Testing System
(IELTS) has been considered as the preferred test to assess English language
proficiency of non-native English speakers. With a view to improving the quality of
IELTS candidates’ answers to the academic writing test, the thesis addresses three
aspects of meaning, namely textual, interpersonal and experiential meaning in
formulating IELTS Academic essays based on the Systemic Functional Theory
developed by Halliday (1994), and Halliday and Matthiessen (2004, 2014). A
descriptive method accompanied by qualitative and quantitative approaches was used
to give a detailed description of three kinds of meaning in relation to the band
descriptors. 180 sample essays with band scores of 7.0-7.5 and others rated 9 were
selected as data for text analysis. The findings revealed that the prevailing types of
Themes deployed in the essays were multiple Themes, demonstrating high levels of
English proficiency among IELTS writers in constituting a message. It is also
noticeable that more successful IELTS writers favoured marked topical Themes and
exhibited tactical manipulation of thematic progression to arrange information
logically in the text. From the perspective of interpersonal metafunction, successful
writers were good at building up and maintaining appropriate relationships with
examiners thanks to appropriate modality and mood choice. In terms of experiential
meaning, the writers employed more clause complexes than clause simplexes to
specify the type of interdependency in the texts. From the findings, it is recommended
that IELTS writers should choose clause complexes over clause simplexes, make
good use of cohesive devices, modality and mood choice, different types of
interdependency as well as deploy multiple Themes. In particular, more marked
Themes, and subtly a few interpersonal Themes are suggested to be deployed in order

to create logical connections between experiential events and to make the writing
more academic. It is obvious that IELTS test-takers with better insights into the
salient linguistic features of IELTS essays in terms of thematic structure, cohesion,
mood, modality, logico-semantic relation and transitivity can produce a piece of
writing in accordance with the IELTS community expectation, thus reaching the
perceived and desired IELTS band score.

luan an


iv

TABLE OF CONTENTS
CHAPTER ONE ........................................................................................................................... 1
INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................................ 1
1.1. Rationale .............................................................................................................1
1.2. Aims and Objectives of the Study .....................................................................3
1.2.1. Aims ...........................................................................................................3
1.2.2. Objectives ...................................................................................................3
1.3. Research Questions ............................................................................................4
1.4. Scope of the Study ..............................................................................................4
1.5. Significance of the Study ...................................................................................5
1.6. Organization of the Thesis.................................................................................6
1.7. Terminology ........................................................................................................8
CHAPTER TWO ........................................................................................................................ 11
LITERATURE REVIEW AND THEORETICAL BACKGROUND .......................... 11
2.1. Literature Review.............................................................................................11
2.1.1. Review of Systemic Functional Linguistics ...........................................11
2.1.2. Review of Studies Related to Academic Writing in the light of Systemic
Functional Linguistics ......................................................................................13

2.1.3. Review of IELTS Academic Writing Studies .........................................16
2.2. Theoretical Background ..................................................................................19
2.2.1. IELTS Writing as Academic Writing .....................................................19
2.2.1.1. Academic Writing ...............................................................................19
2.2.1.2. The IELTS Test ...................................................................................20
2.2.1.3. IELTS Writing as Academic Writing .................................................22
2.2.2. Discourse Analysis through Systemic Functional Linguistics ..............30
2.2.3. Context: Culture and Situation ..............................................................30
2.2.4. The Three Metafunctions........................................................................33
2.2.4.1. Textual Metafunction ..........................................................................34
2.2.4.2. Interpersonal Metafunction .................................................................46
2.2.4.3. Experiential Metafunction ...................................................................52
2.3. Summary ...........................................................................................................61
CHAPTER THREE ................................................................................................................... 62

luan an


v
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY ........................................................................................... 62
3.1. Research Design ...............................................................................................62
3.2. Research Methods ............................................................................................63
3.3. Data Collection .................................................................................................64
3.3.1. Criteria for Collecting Data ....................................................................64
3.3.2. Description of Sampling..........................................................................65
3.4. Data Analysis ....................................................................................................67
3.4.1. Clause and Above the Clause .................................................................67
3.4.2. The Coding Scheme ................................................................................68
3.5. Analytic Framework ........................................................................................73
3.6. Reliability and Validity ....................................................................................74

3.7. Summary ...........................................................................................................75
CHAPTER FOUR ...................................................................................................................... 76
TEXTUAL MEANING IN IELTS ACADEMIC SAMPLE ESSAYS .......................... 76
4.1. Thematic Structure ..........................................................................................76
4.1.1. Types of Themes ......................................................................................76
4.1.1.1. Marked and Unmarked Theme ...........................................................77
4.1.1.2. Topical, Interpersonal and Textual Theme .........................................80
4.1.1.3. Simple and Multiple Theme ................................................................84
4.1.2. Thematic Progression .............................................................................87
4.2. Cohesion ............................................................................................................95
4.2.1. Grammatical Ties ....................................................................................96
4.2.1.1. The Use of Reference ..........................................................................96
4.2.1.2. The Use of Substitution .......................................................................98
4.2.1.3. The Use of Ellipsis ..............................................................................99
4.2.1.4. The Use of Conjunction ......................................................................99
4.2.2. Lexical Ties ............................................................................................101
4.2.2.1. The Use of Reiteration ......................................................................101
4.2.2.2. The Use of Collocation .....................................................................103
4.3. Textual Meaning in Relation to the IELTS Band Descriptors ..................108
4.4. Summary .........................................................................................................110
CHAPTER FIVE ...................................................................................................................... 112
INTERPERSONAL MEANING IN IELTS ACADEMIC SAMPLE ESSAYS ....... 112

luan an


vi
5.1. Mood Structure ..............................................................................................112
5.2. Modality ..........................................................................................................114
5.3. Interpersonal Meaning in Relation to the IELTS Band Descriptors ........122

5.4. Summary .........................................................................................................123
CHAPTER SIX ......................................................................................................................... 125
EXPERIENTIAL MEANING IN IELTS ACADEMIC SAMPLE ESSAYS............ 125
6.1. Logico-Semantic Relation Analysis ..............................................................125
6.1.1 Taxis System ...........................................................................................125
6.1.2. Logico-Semantic System .......................................................................132
6.2. Transitivity Structure ....................................................................................137
6.3. Experiential Meaning in Relation to the IELTS Band Descriptors ..........144
6.4. Summary .........................................................................................................146
CHAPTER SEVEN .................................................................................................................. 148
CONCLUSION ......................................................................................................................... 148
7.1. Conclusions .....................................................................................................148
7.2. Implications ....................................................................................................150
7.3. Limitations ......................................................................................................153
7.4. Suggestions for Further Research ................................................................154
PUBLICATION LISTS ........................................................................................................... 155
REFERENCES.......................................................................................................................... 156
APPENDIX A: SOURCES OF DATA ................................................................................ 175
APPENDIX B: SUMMARY OF TABLE OF CONJUNCTIVE RELATIONS ....... 188

luan an


vii

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS AND SYMBOLS
CEFR

Common European Framework of Reference

IELTS

The International English Language Testing System

MOET

Ministry of Education and Training

NFL

Vietnam’s National Foreign Language Project

SFG

Systemic Functional Grammar

SFL

Systemic Functional Linguistics

TOEFL

Test of English as a Foreign Language
||

clause divider

|||

clause complex divider

^

clause conjunction

α , β, Ɣ

hypotactic related clauses

1, 2, 3,…

paratactic related clauses

’

Idea

”

Locution

+

Extension

=

Elaboration

X

Enhancement

[…]

Embedding

luan an


viii

LIST OF TABLES
Table 2.1. IELTS Task 2 Writing band descriptors (public version) ...............28
Table 2.2. Conjunctive adjuncts ...........................................................................37
Table 2.3. Mood adjuncts ......................................................................................38
Table 2.4. Types of grammatical and lexical cohesion .......................................40
Table 2.5. Giving or demanding ...........................................................................47
Table 2.6. Realization of modality in English ......................................................51
Table 2.7. Examples of verbs serving as Process in material clauses ................54
Table 2.8. Examples of verbs serving as Process in mental clauses ..................55
Table 2.9. Examples of verbs serving as Process in relational clauses ..............56
Table 2.10. Examples of verbs serving as Process in behavioural clauses ........57
Table 2.11. Examples of verbs serving as Process in verbal clauses .................57
Table 2.12. Examples of verbs serving as Process in existential clauses ...........58
Table 2.13. Clauses in paratactic and hypotatic clause complexes....................59
Table 2.14. Basic types of clause complexes.........................................................61
Table 3.1. Coding scheme ......................................................................................68
Table 3.2. Abbreviation for data analysis ............................................................69
Table 4.1. Cohesive ties ..........................................................................................95

Table 4.2. Grammatical ties ..................................................................................96
Table 4.3. Lexical ties ...........................................................................................101
Table 4.4. Textual meaning in relation to the IELTS band descriptors .........109
Table 5.1. Mood types ..........................................................................................112
Table 5.2. Speech function ...................................................................................113
Table 5.3. Interpersonal meaning in relation to the IELTS band descriptors ...123
Table 6.1. Distribution of clause simplexes and clause complexes ..................126
Table 6.2. Distribution of logico-semantic relation ...........................................132
Table 6.3. Distribution of logico-semantic relation (Corpus 1) .......................133
Table 6.4. Distribution of logico-semantic relation
(Corpus 1- Discussion essays) ...............................................................................133
Table 6.5. Distribution of logico-semantic relation
(Corpus 1- Exposition essays) ..............................................................................133

luan an


ix
Table 6.6. Distribution of logico-semantic relation (Corpus 2) .......................134
Table 6.7. Distribution of logico-semantic relation
(Corpus 2- Discussion essays)...............................................................................134
Table 6.8. Distribution of logico-semantic relation
(Corpus 2- Exposition essays) ..............................................................................134
Table 6.9. Experiential meaning in relation to the IELTS band descriptors .145

luan an


x

LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 2.1. Common European Framework of Reference .................................21
Figure 2.2. Genre and register in relation to language .......................................32
Figure 2.3. Field, tenor and mode in relation to metafunctions ........................33
Figure 2.4. The MOOD system network (Halliday & Matthiessen, 2014, p.24) ...48
Figure 2.5. The mood system .................................................................................48
Figure 2.6. System network of Modality (Halliday & Matthiessen, 2014, p.182) 50
Figure 2.7. The modality system ...........................................................................51
Figure 2.8. Types of process in English ................................................................54
Figure 2.9. The system of the clause complex ......................................................60
Figure 3.1. Distribution of topical, interpersonal and textual Themes .............64
Figure 3.2. Analytic framework ............................................................................74
Figure 4.1. Distribution of marked and unmarked Themes ..............................78
Figure 4.2. Distribution of marked and unmarked Themes (Corpus 1) ...........78
Figure 4.3. Distribution of marked and unmarked Themes (Corpus 2) ...........78
Figure 4.4. Distribution of topical, interpersonal and textual Themes .............81
Figure 4.5. Distribution of simple and multiple Themes ....................................85
Figure 4.6. Thematic progression .........................................................................87
Figure 4.7. Thematic progression (Corpus 1) ......................................................88
Figure 4.8. Thematic progression (Corpus 2) ......................................................88
Figure 5.1. Distribution of each type of modality..............................................114
Figure 5.2. Distribution of modality of Corpus 1 & 2.......................................115
Figure 5.3. Distribution of modal values ............................................................118
Figure 5.4. Distribution of modality orientation ...............................................120
Figure 6.1. Distribution of taxis ..........................................................................129
Figure 6.2. Distribution of taxis (Corpus 1) .......................................................129
Figure 6.3. Distribution of taxis (Corpus 2) .......................................................129
Figure 6.4. Transitivity in IELTS sample essays...............................................138
Figure 6.5. Transitivity in IELTS sample essays (Corpus 1) ...........................138
Figure 6.6. Transitivity in IELTS sample essays (Corpus 2) ...........................139

luan an


1

CHAPTER ONE
INTRODUCTION
1.1. Rationale
Foreign language competence has been identified as essential for young
Vietnamese graduates to be able to work effectively and make a significant
contribution to the international integration of the country. Recognising the
importance of foreign languages in human resource, the Prime Minister has approved
the document ‘The scheme on foreign language teaching and learning in the national
education system in the 2008-2020 period’ (Decision No.1400/QD-TTg dated
September 30, 2008). The Ministry of Education and Training (MOET) has
implemented Vietnam’s National Foreign Language 2020 Project (NFL2020) and
applied the Prime Minister’s Decision No. 2080/QD-TTg dated 22 December 2017
on "Approving amendments and supplements to the scheme of teaching and learning
foreign languages in the national education system for the period of 2017-2025".
In tertiary education, graduates majoring in English language are required to
achieve a minimum language competence at level C1 according to the Common
European Framework for Reference (CEFR), a guideline used to describe
achievements of learners of foreign languages, equivalent to an IELTS score of 7.07.5 ( As
a result, a multitude of Vietnamese tertiary institutions such as Can Tho University,
Hue University of Foreign Languages, and Quang Nam University have included
IELTS in their curriculum so that the students can gain an international English
certificate indicating their English proficiency level, which is considered to be one of
the most essential requirements in applying for a good job or tertiary education in
another country.

The International English Language Testing Systems (IELTS), which involves
the assessment of four English language skills, namely listening, reading, writing and
speaking has been regarded as the preferred test to measure English language
proficiency of those who study English as a foreign language or second language. It
is now accepted by over 6000 tertiary institutions in over 135 countries (IELTS

luan an


2

Research Reports Online Series, 2017). Achieving a high score in this international
exam is the key that enables candidates to open the door to their future career.
Among the four English language skills assessed by IELTS, Academic
Writing, especially Task 2 of the Academic Module, which is given more weight than
Task 1, is generally considered one of the most challenging skills for IELTS testtakers since it requires a higher level of productive language manipulation. How to
enhance IELTS writing outcomes, therefore, has been a matter of concern for
language researchers and educators in different countries where English is taught as
a foreign language or second language. A considerable amount of practical research
has been carried out to investigate the IELTS writing tasks in the past few years
(Allen, 2016; Bagheri, 2016; Dickinson, 2013; Majdeddin, 2010; Mickan &
Motteram, 2008, 2009; Moore & Morton, 2005, 2007; Panahi, 2015). It is clear that
most of these studies present valuable findings related to the field of IELTS writing.
However, only limited studies of IELTS essays (e.g. Ebrahimi, 2014; Moghaddam,
2010; Nakamura, 2009; Soleymanzadeh & Gholami, 2014) have been conducted
from the functional grammar perspective up to now. Thus, this thesis is aimed at
identifying the linguistic features of IELTS sample essays, particularly the
experiential meaning, interpersonal meaning and textual meaning in the light of
functional grammar with a view to enabling test-takers to make good use of the salient
linguistic features in order to formulate good quality IELTS Academic essays.

The theoretical framework adopted for analysing and explaining how
experiential meanings, interpersonal meanings, and textual meanings are expressed
in clause structures in IELTS sample essays is Systemic Functional Grammar (SFG)
developed by Halliday (1994), and Halliday and Matthiessen (2004, 2014). As
Halliday (1994, p. 41) stated, “The aim of Systemic Functional Grammar has been to
construct a grammar for the purpose of text analysis: one that would make it possible
to say sensible and useful things about any text, spoken or written, in modern
English”. Indeed, Halliday’s grammar has been acknowledged as “the most widely
employed methodology for analyzing texts”, according to Finch (2000, p. 191).

luan an


3

In this thesis, the main focus is the analysis of three metafunctions in highscoring IELTS Academic essays written by successful test-takers in the light of
functional grammar for the purpose of uncovering the prominent linguistic features
of their writing to meet the expectations of the academic discourse community in
terms of the experiential meaning, interpersonal meaning, and textual meaning, and
highlighting some pedagogical implications for conducting a successful piece of
IELTS writing, thereby making substantial methodological and practical
contributions to successfully accomplish the IELTS Academic Writing Task 2 in
response to the urgent need for IELTS test-takers in general and English major
students in Vietnam in particular to achieve the language competence required by the
Ministry of Education and Training.

1.2. Aims and Objectives of the Study
1.2.1. Aims
This study is aimed at investigating the linguistic features of IELTS Academic
exposition and discussion essays written by successful test-takers on six common

topics: education, environment, family, work, social issues, and health in terms of
experiential, interpersonal and textual meanings, and then making a comparison
between two groups of data: one with 7-7.5 band scores and the other with a band
score of 9 or prepared by examiners as examples of very good models to identify
similarities and differences between two band group essays in relation to the band
descriptors, thereby providing non-native writers with a better understanding of the
linguistic feature requirements of an IELTS Academic essay, thus making significant
methodological and practical contributions in Academic writing success.

1.2.2. Objectives
The objectives of the study are to examine and compare:
- the textual meaning of IELTS Academic sample essays with band scores of
7 - 7.5 and 9.0 from two perspectives, namely thematic structure and cohesion in
relation to the band descriptors.

luan an


4

- the interpersonal meaning of IELTS Academic sample essays with band
scores of 7 - 7.5 and 9.0 under the headings of mood and modality in relation to the
band descriptors.
- the experiential meaning of IELTS Academic sample essays with band scores
of 7 - 7.5 and 9.0 in terms of transitivity system and the logico-semantic relation in
relation to the band descriptors.

1.3. Research Questions
To achieve the aims and objectives mentioned, the study will address the
following research questions:

1. How is the textual meaning realised in IELTS Academic sample essays with
band scores of 7 - 7.5 and 9.0 in relation to the band descriptors?
2. How is the interpersonal meaning realised in IELTS Academic sample
essays with band scores of 7 - 7.5 and 9.0 in relation to the band descriptors?
3. How is the experiential meaning realised in IELTS Academic sample essays
with band scores of 7 - 7.5 and 9.0 in relation to the band descriptors?

1.4. Scope of the Study
In pursuit of the goal of the study, based on the optimum access to related
documentation, the thesis investigates IELTS Academic sample essays taken from
the textbooks and relevant IELTS websites with band scores of 7 - 7.5 and those rated
9 or prepared by examiners as examples of very good models, focusing on
experiential metafunction, interpersonal metafunction and textual metafunction. The
selected data are divided into two categories: Corpus 1, with a band score of 9 or
prepared by examiners as examples of very good models, as comparable to CEFR
Level C2, and Corpus 2, with 7 - 7.5 band scores, which are equivalent to level C1
on the CEFR. As indicated in the Rationale, the purpose of the study is to enable
IELTS test-takers, especially Vietnamese students majoring in English to carry out
the IELTS Academic Writing Task 2 proficiently in response to the language
competence outcome required by the MOET. As a result, only highly rated essays,
that is, ones with band scores of 7 - 7.5 and very highly rated essays, that is, ones
rated 9 are selected for the data analysis. The study is also restricted to two types of

luan an


5

argumentative essays: exposition and discussion which are viewed as common types
found in the IELTS Academic Module (Coffin, 2004; Nakamura, 2009; Riazi &

Knox, 2013) and within the six most common topics namely education, environment,
family, work, health and social issues ().

1.5. Significance of the Study
The study explores how experiential, textual and interpersonal meaning are
deployed in high scoring IELTS exposition and discussion essays, thereby making a
significant theoretical, pedagogical and practical contribution to research in the field.
Theoretically, the study confirms that Systemic Functional Linguistics (SFL),
which views language as a resource for making meaning, is an effective tool for
analysing and evaluating academic written discourse. Halliday’s functional grammar
is one of the underlying approaches assisting researchers, potential stakeholders, and
IELTS designers, as well as IELTS trainers to have better insight in IELTS material
developments and band descriptor revisions.
Pedagogically, the study sheds light on the salient discourse features of
successful IELTS essays in terms of textual meaning, experiential meaning, and
interpersonal meaning, in relation to the IELTS assessment criteria, which gives
pedagogical implications to the teaching and learning process in improving learners’
academic writing. It can be argued that the job of teaching writing skills is not only
to help learners to be able to identify problems they often meet in their essay writing
at discourse level, but also to provide them with a more detailed picture of the salient
linguistic features of the IELTS Academic Writing Task 2 systematically to meet the
expectations of the academic discourse community. Once IELTS candidates gain a
deeper understanding of the linguistic expectations of the IELTS community in
relation to three kinds of meaning interwoven in the fabric of the discourse, they can
fully meet the IELTS writing test requirements, tactically manage all aspects of
cohesion and coherence well, and manipulate the flow of information in the essay
effectively, thus achieving higher scores in their test. It is clear that failures to keep
standard and rhetorical patterns which are determined by the discourse community
are likely to lower the acceptance rate (Syryani et al., 2014). As a result, if the teachers

luan an


6

of IELTS essay writing can design a program that takes the theoretical framework of
these metafunctions into account and use SFG as a framework of analysis to evaluate
students’ writing, their learners will acquire a sensitivity for the experiential,
interpersonal and textual demands of the IELTS writing test, utilize a wide range of
linguistic resources in composing, organizing and structuring their texts in
accordance with the academic IELTS conventions, whereby they can competently
accomplish the IELTS Academic writing Task 2.
Practically, how to enhance IELTS writing outcomes has been an ongoing
question for language researchers and educators in Vietnam, where English is taught
as a foreign language. According to a survey published in the official IELTS website
(), the percentage of Vietnamese who achieved high scores was
still low in the distribution of scores gained by different groups of test takers in 2018,
with an overall mean band score of 5.98, of which the writing skill was the lowest
with 5.63% in the academic module despite the increasing number of Vietnamese
IELTS test-takers. Meanwhile, an IELTS band scale of 7.0, indicating a good level
of proficiency in English is good enough for candidates to study abroad as most of
the universities around the world start accepting candidates as soon as they achieve
an overall band scale of above 7.0 bands to be granted admission and aligning with
the CEFR Level C1, the minimum language competence that English majored
students have to gain as required by Vietnam’s National Foreign Language Project
(NFL). Thus, the research is in line with the aim of NFL2020 in particular, and of the
education reform in Vietnam in general.

1.6. Organization of the Thesis
This thesis includes seven chapters as follows:

CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION
This chapter introduces the rationale of the study, followed by aims,
objectives, and the research questions. It also presents the scope, the significance of
the study, and the terminology used in the thesis.
CHAPTER TWO: LITERATURE REVIEW AND THEORETICAL
BACKGROUND

luan an


7

This chapter reviews the literature related to the study focusing on IELTS
Academic writing, and Systemic Functional Linguistics, particularly, the textual
metafunction, the interpersonal metafunction, and the experiential metafunction. It
also provides the theoretical background for the research questions addressed in the
study.
CHAPTER THREE: RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
This chapter explains the research design and methods used in the study and
gives a description of the qualitative and quantitative approaches to linguistic feature
analysis, drawing on SFL developed by Halliday (1994), and Halliday and
Matthiessen (2004, 2014) as an analytical tool, and the sampling, procedures used in
data collection and analysis.
CHAPTER FOUR: TEXTUAL MEANING IN IELTS ACADEMIC
SAMPLE ESSAYS
This chapter provides the results of the data analysis concerning the textual
meaning in IELTS Academic sample essays followed by a comparative analysis of
the meaning in the two corpora in relation to IELTS Task 2 band descriptors and their
lexical grammatical realizations.
CHAPTER FIVE: INTERPERSONAL MEANING IN IELTS ACADEMIC

SAMPLE ESSAYS
This chapter examines the interpersonal meaning in IELTS Academic sample
essays. It also presents the similarities and differences between the two corpora in
relation to IELTS Task 2 band descriptors and clarifies their lexical grammatical
realizations.
CHAPTER SIX: EXPERENTIAL MEANING IN IELTS ACADEMIC
SAMPLE ESSAYS
This chapter presents the findings of the experiential meaning in IELTS
Academic sample essays. A comparative analysis of this kind of meaning in the two
corpora in relation to IELTS Task 2 band descriptors, and their lexical grammatical
realizations are also notified.
CHAPTER SEVEN: CONCLUSION

luan an


8

This chapter summarizes what has been studied and draws out some
conclusions. This is followed by the implications on IELTS Academic essay writing
and the limitations of the study.
The study ends with references and appendices.
1.7. Terminology
As mentioned in the rationale, Systemic Functional Linguistics developed by
Halliday (1994), and Halliday and Matthiessen (2004, 2014) serves as the framework
for the data analysis. This part defines terminology used in the study in order to have
a better perception of the underlying terms.
Discourse
Discourse can be viewed as one of the most important elements that is used to
understand how language functions in human life aspects (Hyland, 2000). As

explicitly stated by Celce-Murcia and Olshtain (2000), “A piece of discourse is an
instance of spoken or written language that has describable internal relationships of
form and meaning that relate coherently to an external communicative function or
purpose and a given audience”. In SFL, the term discourse is used to refer to either
‘spoken text’ or the level of meaning above the lexico-grammar, the level concerned
with relations of meaning of a text (Martin & Rose, 2003). In this study, discourse
will be an umbrella term to refer to a written text that is internally constructed as
patterns of textual, interpersonal and experiential meanings and externally organized
as a unit performing in the context of culture (genre) and context of situation (register)
(Halliday, 1994; Halliday & Matthiessen, 2014).
Exposition and Discussion Essays
An exposition is a one sided argument text that requires the writer to set
forward only one point of view and justify it although counter arguments and
evidence may be presented at various points in the body of the essay. Meanwhile, a
discussion is a two sided argument text in which the writer explores two or more sides
of an issue followed by a judgment or a position toward the issue and
recommendation if required (Coffin, 2004; Emilia, 2012).
Systemic Functional Linguistics

luan an


9

Eggins (1994, p. 2) views SFL as a functional-semantic approach to language
that focuses on how people use language with each other in accomplishing everyday
social life. In SFL, language has two characteristics: one systemic and the other
functional. Language is systemic because it is a network of systems or, in other words,
it is an interrelated set of options for making meaning (Halliday, 1994). Meanwhile,
functional attribute refers to the ways people use language to make meanings. The

Systemic Functional Theory developed by Halliday is used as a theoretical
framework for analysis. For Halliday, the main purpose of SFL lies in its language
function because language is a resource for creating meanings influenced by the
social and cultural context in which they are exchanged (Halliday & Matthiessen,
2014, p. 3).
Field, Tenor, and Mode
In SFL theory, the context of a situation has three aspects: field, tenor, and
mode of discourse, which are related to the metafunctions (Halliday & Matthiessen,
2014).
Field is defined by Halliday (1985, p. 12) as ‘what is happening to the nature
of social action that is taking place: what is it that the participants are engaged in.’
Eggins (1994, p. 52) defines field as ‘what the language is being used to talk about.’
Butt, Fahey, Feez and Spinks (2012, p. 23) claim that field describes ‘what is
to be talked or written about’. In the present study, field, which is related to
experiential metafunction, is defined as the subject matter of a written text.
Tenor is defined by Martin and White (2005, p. 7) as ‘how people are
interacting, including the feeling they try to share.’ According to Butt, Fahey, Feez
and Spinks (1999, p. 13), tenor refers to ‘the relationship between the speaker and
hearer (or, of course, writer and reader)’. In the present study, tenor, which is related
to interpersonal metafunction, expresses the relationship between the writer and the
reader and encompasses the writers’ attitude and opinions on the issues discussed in
a written text.
Mode is defined by Halliday (1985, p. 12) as ‘the symbolic organization of the
text, the status it has, and its function in the context, including the channel and also

luan an


10

the rhetorical mode.’ In the present study, mode, which is related to textual
metafunction, is used to refer to how ideas are organized in a coherent written text.
Clause Complex
A clause complex is a combination of two or more clauses into a larger unit,
with their interdependence normally shown by such explicit signals as conjunctions.

Theme
Theme is defined as ‘the first group or phrase that has some function in the
experiential structure of the clause’ (Halliday, 2014, p. 91) serving as a starting point
of clause from the perspective of SFL. For Halliday, theme ‘provides the environment
for the remainder of the message, the Rheme.’ (Halliday, 1994, p. 67).

Thematic Progression
Thematic progression refers to the way Themes relate with each other and with
Rhemes in organizing the whole text.

luan an


11

CHAPTER TWO
LITERATURE REVIEW AND THEORETICAL BACKGROUND
The focus of this study is on the analysis of three strands of meaning in highscoring IELTS Academic Writing, namely textual meaning, interpersonal meaning
and experiential meaning in relation to the IELTS band descriptors. This chapter will
first discuss studies that have been carried out in this area to date, and then move to
the theoretical background with a view to providing a framework for the study.

2.1. Literature Review
2.1.1. Review of Systemic Functional Linguistics

Systemic Functional Linguistics (SFL), a social theory of language views
language not as a system of rules but as a resource for meanings (Christie, 1990;
Emilia, 2014; Fang & Schleppegrell, 2008; Halliday, 1985, 1994; Halliday &
Matthiessen, 2004, 2014; Thompson, 2004). SFL, which was primarily formulated by
Halliday in the early 1960s, has had a great influence on educational studies
throughout the world (Christie, 1999, 2002; Christie & Martin, 1997; Connor, 1996;
Unsworth, 2000) and especially on the teaching of writing (Wells, 1999). The British
linguist J.R. Firth has had an obvious effect on Halliday’s early formulation in terms
of the notion of context of situation (as cited in Bloor & Bloor, 1995; Christie, 1987;
Halliday, 1976; Halliday, 1985c). SFL also owes much to the ideas of anthropologist
Malinowski (1923, 1930) about context of culture and of situation, Hockett’s (1965)
focus on the relationship between grammatical meaning and grammatical structure
and viewing meaning as the underlying essence of language, Saussure’s concept that
‘language is a system of signs’ in its interpreting language as a semiotic system, and
Chomsky’s generative grammar and linguists such as Fawcett, and Tucker belonging
to Cardiff grammar.
Unlike formal linguists who are concerned with the description of the structure
of individual sentences based on a formulated set of rules for grammatically correct
or incorrect usage guided for language users, functional linguists have generally

luan an


12

dedicated themselves to the study of language in relation to its roles in human
communication for social purposes through meaning, not just formation.
Several studies of SFL have been conducted providing a useful desciptive and
interpretative framework for viewing language as a stragic, meaning-making
resources (Bloor & Bloor, 2004; Butt et al., 2000; Eggins, 2004; Halliday, 1994,

2002b; Lock, 1996; Martin, Matthiessen & Painter, 2010; Matthiessen, 1995a;
Matthiessen & Halliday, 2004, 2014; Thompson, 1996, 2004).
From a systemic perspective, Lock (1996, p. 248) affirmed that “learning to
communicate in a second language involves gaining progressive control over the
systems of options in the new language; learning which options to select to make
which meanings in which contexts; and mapping the configurations of grammatical
functions realizing the options on to one another in structures".
According to Halliday (1985), there are three types of meaning within
grammatical structures with three different functions. Experiential meaning is
concerned with interacting with people. Interpersonal meaning talks about the world
and experiences. And textual meaning involves creating coherent discourse. All three
are, in turn, determined by the social context (register) and the cultural context (genre)
of language use.
From the angle of the functional approach, a number of Vietnamese linguists
have made significant contributions to the study of texts. Hoàng Văn Vân (2012) shed
light on the experiential grammar of the clause and the system of transitivity in his
book entitled “An Experiential Grammar of the Vietnamese Clause”, based on the
findings of his PhD dissertation, conducted between 1994 and 1997 at the Department
of Linguistics, Macquarie University, Sydney. His detailed description grounded on
Systemic Functional Theory enables researchers, especially Vietnamese linguists to
be more aware of the system of transitivity in Vietnamese.
Đỗ Tuấn Minh (2007) analysed thematic structure in English and Vietnamese
from the systemic functional perspective in order to explore similarities and
differences between the two languages mentioned, which is of great theoretical and
practical value to the understanding of the thematic structure of the Vietnamese clause

luan an


13

from a systemic functional perspective. In addition, Lê Thị Giao Chi (2014) examined
grammatical metaphor in English official documentation using a corpus approach.
Her research provides insights into metaphorical modes of expression via
nominalizations, which makes a significant contribution to the training of translators
and the translation practice.

2.1.2. Review of Studies Related to Academic Writing in the light of
Systemic Functional Linguistics
Under the umbrella of academic writing, the choice and representation of
Theme are seen as a crucial element related to the success of a text (Bloor & Bloor,
1992; Martin, 1985, 1992b; Martin & Rothery, 1993, Wang, 2007; Wei, 2013a,
2013b; 2014). Theme and Rheme are two terms representing the way in which
information is distributed in a clause. The notion of Theme and Rheme has been a
topic of interest for language researchers and educators such as Garvin (1964), Danes
(1974), Brown and Yule (1983), McCarthy (1991), Firbas (1992), Berry (1995,
1996), McCabe (1999), Green et al. (2000), Belmonte and McCabe (2001), Halliday
(1985, 1994), and Halliday and Matthiessen (2004, 2014). Several studies on ThemeRheme employment in Academic Writing have been conducted up to now. For
example, Witt and Faigley (1981) indicated that students are able to write better when
they develop the ability to use Theme and Rheme more effectively. An investigation
by Belmonte and McCabe (2001) proved that the notion of Theme-Rheme can
function as a useful tool for evaluating students’ writing at the level of discourse.
Wang (2007) focused on developing students’ Theme-Rheme employment and their
textual metafunction to frame effective teaching of cohesive essays.
Jalilifar (2010) stated that English as a foreign language (EFL) students in Iran
with low English proficiency tend to use more simple Themes than multiple Themes
and indicated that Themes are important elements in constructing better English texts.
For Ebrahimi and Ebrahimi (2012), senior students employ marked Themes more
frequently than sophomores thanks to their academic experience.
Another study undertaken by Lu (2013) found among three groups of

freshmen, namely Singaporean students from an English speaking background,

luan an


14

Singaporean students from a Chinese-speaking background, students from the
People’s Republic of China, Singaporean students from an English speaking
background employ more topical and interpersonal Themes than the other two
groups. The findings of Lu’s study showed that English Singaporean and Chinese
learners yield a variety of similarities and differences, traceable to their
sociolinguistic and educational backgrounds. Similarly, using a Systemic Functional
Linguistics framework to analyse English writing, Naderi and Koohestanian (2014)
demonstrated that thematic structure occupies a crucial position in making any
written discourse successful and progressive.
In addition, Fang (2015) claimed that one way of achieving textual cohesion
and coherence in L2 writing is through thematic structure while Rahayu (2015) found
that Indonesian students’ ability to construct good academic texts may be enhanced
by the understanding of Theme-Rheme arrangement. Kang’s (2016) research showed
that the choice and ordering of Themes can create textual meanings, establish
interaction between readers and writers, and fulfil the social purpose of a discourse.
In a similar way, the research conducted by Gunawan and Aziza (2017) stated
that although the choice of Theme and Rheme progression is constrained by the
culture of the audience, good academic texts share their characteristics across
cultures. Nurdianingsih and Purnama’s (2017) action research, examining whether an
improvement in students’ writing skill performance can be achieved after being
taught using thematic progression, showed that thematic progression pattern
effectively improves coherence in their skills.
Addressing the misuse of Theme and Rheme, Kuswoyo and Susardi (2017)

identified common problems in thematic progression of the students’ academic
writing namely: brand new Theme, double Rheme, empty Rheme, overuse of constant
theme pattern, confusing selection of textual Theme, unneeded textual Theme, and
incorrect choice of topical Theme and they suggested that the students should be well
cognizant of the flow of Theme and Rheme of thematic progression in their writing,
an essential element in making a piece of academic writing cohesive and coherent.

luan an