| . |
. |
. |
|
A
Problem Solution Approach
|
|
|
|
Much has been written about
strategies for writing effective academic articles. For an excellent overview of issues to
consider when publishing an academic article, we recommend Malcolm Benson's article in the
April, 1994 Forum . Much less has been written about how a focus on the overall
structure of the paper can help the reader and editor evaluate ideas and produce more
readable articles. We wish to demonstrate that the format of the article and flow of ideas
is not arbitrary but serves to help the reader identify what kind of information can be
found where. Following certain discourse guidelines will not only make an article easier
to read but will, in fact, raise the possibility that it will be published. To make these
ideas more concrete, we will focus on the problem-solution organization, which is the most
common overall structure in a Forum article.
|
|
|
|
Before beginning the writing process, the author
needs to ask a series of questions such as: What is the purpose of the article and what do
potential readers already know about the topic? Answering these questions may help the
author generate ideas for the article and discard elements which may not be useful (More
questions are provided in Figure 2
). After sufficient brainstorming, one might consider writing an introduction, which
ultimately serves the writer as much as the reader by helping both stay on track. The
introduction can be considered as a contract or promise which must be honored in the rest
of the text (see Footnote 1 ).
|
|
|
Establishing a relationship with the audience-writing an effective
introduction
|
|
|
From our experience the introduction poses the
most serious problems for potential authors. The introduction is extremely important
because it is the part of the article where the writer establishes a relationship with the
reader. Here is where the writer needs to express in concrete terms who the intended
audience really is. We receive many interesting articles describing issues particular to
one country or providing detail about language contrasts with English with no reference to
more universal concerns. Although this type of article may be extremely useful for
teachers in that particular country, a Forum reader on the other side of the world
may have difficulty seeing the relevance of the idea to his/her local situation. In
homogeneous cultures, one can expect the reader to share the same cultural assumptions as
the writer and be able to fill in the unstated inferences and assumptions (see Footnote 2 ). A Forum writer,
on the other hand, writing for a worldwide audience, cannot assume similar conditions,
background, and assumptions on the part of the reader. The Forum writer has to
spell out the context s/he is referring to and make a conscious effort to link his/her
situation to those of a multitude of readers. It is the responsibility of the writer to
ensure that the varied readers do not get lost within the text. To compensate for a lack
of common background, journals such as the Forum try to follow a regular format
with established conventions so that readers will know what level of information can be
found where.
|
|
|
One of the first things a writer must do is
achieve credibility vis-a-vis the reader, usually by indicating that s/he is in a position
of authority to write on the subject. An effective way of doing so is to summarize for the
reader important developments on the topic by including a brief survey of the literature.
The survey of the literature not only establishes the writer's credentials but provides
the reader with necessary background of important research to interpret the new ideas in
the article. The review of literature has the added advantage of providing useful sources
for further reading. The Forum writer may wish to establish early that s/he is
treating a problem of general interest shared by readers in many parts of the world.
Reviewing the literature, making generalizations, or emphasizing the importance of the
idea will highlight the knowledge and interest of the writer ("situate" the
writer) and help ensure that the reader will be brought up to speed in terms of current
developments in the field. Swales (1992) calls this rhetorical move "establishing a
territory."
|
|
|
The author also may wish to signal early what
problem s/he intends to solve. Most Forum articles attempt to explain theories
which have practical implications or provide solutions to practical ideas which will work
in most classrooms. Showing that previous articles have not solved a specific problem
provides an opportunity for an author to fill a gap and justifies adding yet another
article to the wealth of publications on EFL methodology. Swales calls this move
"establishing a niche."
|
|
|
Finally the writer may wish to outline how s/he
is going to solve the problem. At this stage the writer announces in advance the technique
s/he is going to describe or the manner in which a theory can be applied, in Swale's words
"occupying the niche." These stages in the introduction can be summarized as
follows (adapted from Swales 1990:141):
|
|
|
| Move 1 |
Establishing a territory |
|
Step 1 Claiming centrality |
|
|
and/or |
|
Step 2 Making topic generalizations |
|
|
and/or |
|
Step 3 Reviewing items of previous research |
| Move 2 |
Establishing a niche |
|
Indicating a gap |
| Move 3 |
Occupying the niche |
|
Outlining purpose of paper |
There is a progression from general to specific as one goes from Move 1 to 3. In other
words, Move 1 makes generalizations, Move 2 describes a more specific problem, and Move 3
offers a unique solution. Although this model was designed for academic papers (see Footnote 3 ), we will see that an
adapted form can be found useful even for the more practical papers in the Forum .
In a Forum article not all stages need to be followed; however, the general outline
of steps, which indicate an evolving author/reader relationship provides useful guidelines
for prospective contributors.
|
|
|
Swale's move/step structure corresponds well
with Hoey's (1981) problem/solution text type, which has the following stages: situation,
problem, solution, and evaluation. The situation section indicates to the reader
that the author is going to deal with important and generalized issues. The problem
section also relates to the teacher/reader who will most probably have shared the
situation described by the writer as a problem (see Footnote 4 ). The introduction forecasts the solution , which will
be proposed with a positive evaluation , which once again invites the reader to
read on for specifics.
|
|
|
The following shows how one can combine Swale's
and Hoey's approaches.
|
|
|
| Situation |
Establishing a territory |
|
|
Claiming centrality |
|
|
Making topic generalization(s) |
|
|
Reviewing items of previous research |
| Problem |
Indicating a gap |
| Solution |
Occupying the niche |
|
|
Outlining purpose of paper |
| Evaluation |
(Negative evaluation creates a whole new
situation/problem) |
|
|
|
In order to make the ideas more concrete, we will look at two examples of Forum
articles, the first by William Holden on page 77 of the July/October issue (See Figure 1 ).
|
|
|
Mr. Holden begins the paper by stating what an
important problem he is going to address. Sentence 1 states that it is " one of
the most difficult aspects of learning...," while sentence 2 mentions that
context is one of the crucial factors . By claiming centrality, the author tells
the reader he is going to treat important subjects which merit the attention of the
reader. The author indicates in sentence 3 that he will be treating a problem related to
this important issue, which many students, and by implication teachers face, not only in
Japan but in much of Asia (and perhaps elsewhere). The niche, or justification for writing
yet another article is provided in sentence 3. The solution to the challenge mentioned in
sentences 1 and 2 is evaluated negatively; an unsuccessful solution leaves us with an
unsolved problem. This problem is explicitly signaled with the words unfortunately,
however , and with required accompanying the need to master long lists of
decontextualized words, which most teachers believe is undesirable. The results of this
problem are indicated in sentence 4 (mere memorization). Sentence 5 is more positive,
previewing that an attempt at a solution will be made. The subject changes from students
to teachers , who are in a position to act on the problem. Finally in sentences 6
and 7 the specific solution is proposed, which occupies the niche. The solution is
positively evaluated with the words interesting and useful , which indicates
to the reader that the problem portion of the passage is over and the solution has begun.
A negative evaluation would indicate to the reader that the attempted solution was
unsuccessful, which raises a new problem. For example, if the writer had written "The
following is a list of activities that students have often tried. However, each has
certain limitations and disadvantages," we as readers would know we were still in the
problem section of the paper.
|
|
|
In short, a combination of the Swales move/step
and the Hoey problem-solution approach seems to produce effective introductions and in
fact is the most common organization strategy for most Forum articles. A good
introduction not only previews the content of the article but helps the reader find the
content by giving an indication of the structure of the article. Introductions are like
maps which help the driver start out in the right direction. The better the map the less
likely the readers will get lost as they speed through the text.
|
|
|
The problem is often reintroduced in the body of
the article. The problem section is the part of the paper where the writer shows that s/he
shares readers' concerns. This section of the paper may describe a local situation in
sufficient detail to provide a context for the solution. The description of the problem
helps the reader identify with the context described to the extent that s/he may feel that
the situation is actually very similar to his/her own. It is important to note that all
the paragraphs and even the sentences normally work to serve the larger organization of
the text. The problem section of Janet Niederhauser's paper, which immediately follows
this article, provides a good example. The heading, Sources of low motivation in the
Korean context, tells the reader that the following section will focus on problems
(and implies that a later section will focus on solutions). Since topic sentences normally
serve the larger whole, the reader is led to expect topic sentences including cause and
effect words related to source as well as a reference to low motivation. In fact, the
first sentence of every paragraph of the problem section of the Niederhauser article
includes a word referring to the cause of the problem. Let us analyze the first paragraph
in the problem section to see how the paragraph supports the heading. The cause and effect
and reason words are in italics, while problem words are underlined:
|
|
|
1. One cause of motivation among Korean
students is the relative of difficulty they face in fulfilling their college graduation
requirements. 2. Grading is generous and often based on factors to academic achievement.
3. Another cause is the of students to choose their majors on the basis of
personal interest rather than entrance examination scores. 4. Although Korean universities
now are talking about giving students greater freedom in choosing their major, one
institution has adopted the idea thus far. 5. A third influence on motivation is
gender. 6. Large numbers of Korean women traditionally major in foreign languages, but
many are highly due to the of well-paying career opportunities for female graduates
and to parental pressure to marry upon graduation.
|
|
|
This paragraph is full of explicit or implied
words of causation such as cause or on the basis of which all relate to the
cause word sources in the heading. The perspective is negative throughout. In fact,
the actual or implied words of negation such as or help the reader recognize that a
problem is being described.
|
|
|
One interesting aspect of this paragraph is that
the cause words that relate to the heading dominate subsequent sentences which give more
information (elaborate) about specific causes. Sentences which elaborate other sentences
are indented and the head of the noun phrase is underlined.
|
|
|
| 1. One cause of low motivation among
Korean students |
|
2. Grading |
| 3. Another cause |
|
4a. Although Korean universities now |
|
b. only one institution |
| 5. A third influence on motivation |
|
6a. Large numbers of Korean women traditionally |
|
b. but many. |
In the paragraph above the three sentences with a cause word or a synonym such as influence
as a subject are modified by the three sentences without. For example, sentence 2 provides
supporting detail for sentence 1 as does sentence 4 for sentence 3 and so on. To make sure
the reader has not missed the connection, Ms. Niederhauser begins sentences 1, 3, and 5
with One, Another , and A Third . The rest of the problem section of the
article continues in a similar fashion. The heading orients the reader towards sources of
problems, while the paragraphs explicitly relate back to the heading. The writer has
provided the reader with signal words to show the relationship of the sentences to the
overall organization and has placed the cause words in the first position in the sentence
to provide a launching point for the new information which follows (see Footnote 5 ).
|
|
|
We can see then that the writer has helped
orient the reader to the problem with the heading, the placement of problem and cause
words in the beginning of the clauses, and the words of negation. As can be seen in this
paper, the problem section is largely about causes, factors or examples of causes of low
motivation (such as the media). The people who have these problems are students, who are
mentioned in this section five times as often as teachers.
|
|
|
At some point in this type of article, one
expects a switch from problem to solution. This switch may come after a few sentences as
in the Holden article or after several paragraphs as in the case of the Niederhauser
article (see Footnote 6 ). Once
again, this switch is signaled in many ways, first and foremost by a heading. In the
Niederhauser article, for example, the heading of the solution section is parallel to that
of the problem section. In the heading "Strategies for raising student
motivation," the word Motivation is shared with the problem heading, but the
word low is replaced by raising and sources is replaced by strategies
:
|
|
|
| Sources |
of low |
motivation in the Korean context |
1 |
2 |
3 |
| Strategies for raising
student motivation |
As was the case with the problem section, we would expect the paragraphs and sentences to
adjust to accommodate the new orientation. The following is the first paragraph of the
solution section of the same article:
|
|
|
In spite of the array of factors that tend to
language learning motivation, teachers working in Korea can use a number of strategies to
their students' and in English. Before any specific course of action, however, should take
the time to get to know their students individually at the start of each term. is
especially important for native-speaking newcomers to Korea who may be surprised to learn
that the bored-looking student in a beginning conversation class actually grew up in an
English-speaking country or that half of the class did not want to major in English at
all.
|
|
|
Notice at the paragraph level there may be a
change of negative to positive words. The first phrase beginning with, "In spite
of..." includes a cause word, factor , and a problem word (motivation) as a
bridge to the earlier section, while the rest of the sentence includes positive words such
as and . None of the sentences in this section focuses on problems, whereas many mention
solutions. The actors in the solution section are mostly teachers, who are mentioned three
times as often as students. Where students are mentioned in the solution section, they are
largely affected by the teacher or are governed by passive verbs or verbs which indicate a
mental state over which the student would have little control ( understand, feel ).
In short, the change in orientation from problem to solution is indicated not only by the
heading, which is the inverse of the problem section but by the beginning of the
sentences, which substitute passive students for active problem-solving teachers and by a
switch from synonyms of problem or words of negation to synonyms of solution
or the agents of change (teachers). At all stages of the text, readers are oriented to how
a particular section fits into the whole.
|
|
|
The conclusion is also very difficult for Forum
contributors. Berkenkotter and Huckin suggest that the conclusion can be seen as a mirror
image of the introduction. Whereas the introduction starts from general and moves to
specific, the conclusion starts with the specific study or technique described in the
article and moves to the general (see Footnote 7 ). If we consider the conclusion to be some sort of inverse of
the introduction, we might expect the conclusion to evaluate a technique positively, and
then move on to a more general situation. We can return to William Holden's article once
again to view how he has treated this issue in his conclusion:
|
|
|
1). While these activities are neither new nor
the final solution to the problems of vocabulary acquisition and retention, they are
interesting and easy to use, and encourage students to take a more active, personal
approach to vocabulary development. 2). They have the added advantages of being self-paced
and regulated, and of encouraging students to learn cooperatively.
|
|
|
Sentence 1 explicitly states that a solution has
been described and evaluates the technique positively ( interesting, easy to use,
and encourage ...). In the final sentence, the author moves beyond the specific
techniques to describe additional advantages affecting general areas such as encouraging
students to learn cooperatively. In the conclusion the writer can use the specific example
described in detail in the article as a launching point for further study or to remind
readers that s/he is treating a general problem or has found a solution to additional,
more general problems.
|
|
|
Revising: After writing the first
draft, one needs to see how the text looks to an uninitiated reader. One way of revising
is to try to read the article as if one were unfamiliar with the text. One should also
give the article to a colleague who may have many comments or suggestions and may find
points which are unclear. One of the most important points would be to insure that the
article actually includes the content and structure promised in the introduction. One
might also want to insure that information is included in the appropriate section of the
article (see Figure 2 ). As,
"Revising is as much reading as it is rewriting," (Leki 1995:141) one will
probably have to rewrite large sections of the text based on the feedback from other
readers.
|
|
|
This article has emphasized the importance of
the article format, which serves a purpose of situating the writer and orienting the
reader. Articles which include signposts such as headings and good initial directions in
the introductions will keep the reader on track as s/he attempts to understand the idea
and the connection between different parts of the text. Good directions will in turn help
the writer stick to the controlling idea. All aspects of the text from topic sentence to
order of elements within individual sentences serve the purpose of orienting the reader to
the general organization of the article and help the reader determine which are
superordinate and which are subordinate ideas. We have focussed on specific examples, not
to be prescriptive, but to provide concrete samples of some of the principles put into
practice. We are not trying to force all our potential writers into the problem-solution
model, but have explored this text type in depth because it is the most common
organization for Forum articles in particular and in academic articles in general.
|
|
|
Whether the article follows the problem/
solution structure as exemplified in this article or some other strategy, the order of
information in the sentences will most probably vary with the different sections. The
format conventions and placement of ideas in a text help the reader identify what is
important and what is new, and help relate parts of the text to the whole. A standardized
organization helps bridge the gaps of readers from different backgrounds and provides a
common denominator within which one's ideas can be widely disseminated. We hope that
focussing on the typical moves and steps of an article will not only help potential
contributors lead readers through the text but will help us become better and more
critical readers.
|
|
|
Tom
Miller is an English Language Officer with USIA and is Associate Editor of the
English Teaching Forum. He has worked with USIA in Pakistan, Morocco, and France.
Dee Parker is an English Language Officer with USIA and is
Editor of the English Teaching Forum. She has worked with USIA in Argentina, South Africa,
and Italy. |
|
|
Return
|
|
|
- Benson, M. 1994. Writing an academic article: An editor writes. English Teaching Forum,
32, 2, pp. 6-9, 25.
- Berkenkotter, C., and T. N. Huckin. 1995. Genre Knowledge in Disciplinary Communication-
Cognition/Culture/Power. Hillsdale, NJ: Law-rence Erlbaum Associates.
- Dudley-Evans, T. (Forthcoming). Genre models for the teaching of academic writing to
second language speakers: Advantages and disadvantages. In Functional approaches to
written test: Classroom applications. ed. T. Miller. Washington, D.C. USIA.
- Fries, P. 1993. The structuring of information in written English text. Language
Sciences, 14, 461-488.
- Fries, P. 1994. On theme, rheme and discourse goals. M. Coulthard (ed), Advances in
written text analysis. London: Routledge, 229-249.
- Fries, P. (Forthcoming.) Theme and new in written English. In Functional approaches to
written test: Classroom applications. ed. T. Miller. Washington, D.C. USIA.
- Halliday, M. 1994. Functional grammar. London: Edward Arnold.
- Hinds, J. 1987. Reader versus writer responsibility: A new typology. In Writing across
languages: Analysis of L2 text. eds. U. Connor and R. Kaplan. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley,
141-152.
- Hoey, M. 1981. On the surface of discourse. Discourse monographs No. 6. Birmingham,
England: University of Birmingham.
- Holden, W. 1996. Warm-ups, work-outs and wind-downs: Vocabulary practice. English
Teaching Forum. 34, 3-4, pp. 77-79.
- Leki, I. 1995. Academic writing: Exploring processes and strategies. New York: St.
Martin's Press.
- Martin, J. Forthcoming. Waves of abstraction: Organizing exposition. In Functional
approaches to written test: Classroom applications. ed. T. Miller. Washington, D.C. USIA.
- Molpus, A. 1990. The Expert Editor. Alexandria, VA: Editorial Experts, Inc.
- Swales, J. 1981. Aspects of article introductions. Aston ESP Research Report No. 1,
Language Studies Unit, University of Aston in Birmingham, Birmingham, U.K.
- Swales, J. 1990. Genre Analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press
|
|
Figure 2
QUESTIONS FOR WRITERS AND
READERS
Sections I and II focus on the pre-writing and writing process, while sections III and
IV focus on the revising process. The writer may also wish to revise by considering the
questions for the reader, while the reader in turn may wish to see if the author
effectively answered the questions for the writer. |
|
|
| Questions for Writer |
| I. Defining the audience |
|
1. Who are my readers? |
|
2. What do they already know and what do I need to tell them about the
topic? |
|
3. Why would the reader want to read this article? What problems would my
article define and solve? |
|
4. How would the reader be able to use the article? |
|
5. What are the reader's preconceptions, attitudes, and expectations
regarding the topic? |
|
6. What possible attitudes and objections might cause the reader to
dismiss my ideas? |
| II. Defining the author |
|
1. Why do I want to write this article? |
|
2. What special knowledge, experience, and perspectives do I bring to the
topic? |
|
3. How does my article relate to other publications on the topic? |
| III. Evaluating the structure |
|
1. Does the overall organization of the article reflect my goals? |
|
2. Have I stated the purpose clearly in the introduction? |
|
3. Has my introduction effectively defined the intended reader and the
author? |
|
4. Does the body of the article fulfill the promises made in the
introduction? |
|
5. Do the headings support the overall organization and do the paragraphs
support the headings? |
|
6. Do important ideas receive more support than unimportant ones? Has
irrevelant material been removed? |
|
7. How have I helped the reader reconstruct the overall design of the
article? |
|
8. Does the conclusion summarize important points of the article? Does it
relate to other important points? |
|
9. How is the relationship between ideas signalled within paragraphs? |
|
|
| Questions for Reader |
| IV. Peer response |
|
1. Does the author provide necessary background knowledge as a basis for
the paper? |
|
2. Is the problem clearly defined? |
|
3. Does the solution address items brought up in the problem? What other
solutions would you propose? |
|
4. Did the writer bring a new perspective to the topic? |
|
5. Is the language, terminology, and tone of the article consistent with
the intended reader? |
|
6. Were portions of the article unclear? |
|
7. Did the article sustain the reader's interest? |
|
8. What additional suggestions would you propose? |
Figure 1
| 1. |
Situation:
Establishing territory |
1). One of the most difficult aspects of learning a foreign
language, particularly in an EFL context, is the retention of vocabulary. 2). The role of
context, which provides the lexical environment, has been identified as one of the crucial
factors in vocabulary acquisition. 3). Unfortunately, however, in Japan as in much of
Asia, students are often expected (read: required) to master long lists of
decontextualized words in order to pass a standardized examination. 4). This leads
students to translate and memorize, but not internalize, the lexis to which they are
exposed. 5). Teachers are faced with the task of providing a means by which students can
go beyond the limitation of short term memory and begin to make the lexis their own
through the development of learning strategies and active use. 6). The following is a list
of activities that students have found interesting and useful in their attempts to build
vocabulary. 7). Many of the activities are based on the use of word cards. |
|
|
| 1-2. |
claiming centrality |
| 1-2. |
making generalizations |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 3. |
Problem: Indicating a gap |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 4-5. |
details of problem |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 6. |
Solution/Evaluation: Occupying the niche |
| 7. |
detail of solution |
|
|
|
|
Figure 2
QUESTIONS FOR WRITERS AND
READERS
Sections I and II focus on the pre-writing and writing process, while sections III and
IV focus on the revising process. The writer may also wish to revise by considering the
questions for the reader, while the reader in turn may wish to see if the author
effectively answered the questions for the writer. |
|
|
| Questions for Writer |
| I. Defining the audience |
|
1. Who are my readers? |
|
2. What do they already know and what do I need to tell them about the
topic? |
|
3. Why would the reader want to read this article? What problems would my
article define and solve? |
|
4. How would the reader be able to use the article? |
|
5. What are the reader's preconceptions, attitudes, and expectations
regarding the topic? |
|
6. What possible attitudes and objections might cause the reader to
dismiss my ideas? |
| II. Defining the author |
|
1. Why do I want to write this article? |
|
2. What special knowledge, experience, and perspectives do I bring to the
topic? |
|
3. How does my article relate to other publications on the topic? |
| III. Evaluating the structure |
|
1. Does the overall organization of the article reflect my goals? |
|
2. Have I stated the purpose clearly in the introduction? |
|
3. Has my introduction effectively defined the intended reader and the
author? |
|
4. Does the body of the article fulfill the promises made in the
introduction? |
|
5. Do the headings support the overall organization and do the paragraphs
support the headings? |
|
6. Do important ideas receive more support than unimportant ones? Has
irrevelant material been removed? |
|
7. How have I helped the reader reconstruct the overall design of the
article? |
|
8. Does the conclusion summarize important points of the article? Does it
relate to other important points? |
|
9. How is the relationship between ideas signalled within paragraphs? |
|
|
| Questions for Reader |
| IV. Peer response |
|
1. Does the author provide necessary background knowledge as a basis for
the paper? |
|
2. Is the problem clearly defined? |
|
3. Does the solution address items brought up in the problem? What other
solutions would you propose? |
|
4. Did the writer bring a new perspective to the topic? |
|
5. Is the language, terminology, and tone of the article consistent with
the intended reader? |
|
6. Were portions of the article unclear? |
|
7. Did the article sustain the reader's interest? |
|
8. What additional suggestions would you propose? |
Footnote 1
| 1. We are well aware that the writing process informs
all of the decisions regarding the structure of the article. We hope here to show that a
standard structure can also guide the writing process. |
Footnote 2
| 2. Hinds (1987) calls this environment "reader
responsible." If a text is unclear, the reader is at fault, not the writer. |
Footnote 3
| 3. The model was followed more or less by
approximately 75% of the introductions in Swales's 1981 study. |
Footnote 4
| 4. Since the situation and problem are often
mentioned together, one equally valid organization would be a combined problem/situation
stage. The situation can be considered an appendage of the problem section, while the
evaluation could be seen as an attachment to the solution section. |
Footnote 5
| 5. For the sake of simplicity, we will ignore a
discussion of Theme. For more information on Theme and the overall organization of a
passage, the reader may refer to Fries (1993, 1994, forthcoming), Halliday (1994), and
Martin (forthcoming). |
Footnote 6
| 6. It should be emphasized, however, that the
Niederhauser article is somewhat unusual in the length of the problem section. Most Forum
articles are more oriented towards the solution. |
Footnote 7
7. A conclusion could be seen to have the following
moves:
|
Move 1 |
Occupying the Niche |
|
Move 2 |
(Re)establishing the Field |
|
Move 3 |
Establishing Additional Territory (quoted in |
| Dudley-Evans, 1995:186) |
|
Back to Article
|
. |
. |