1 INTRODUCTION TO GENRE

Genre, understood most simply, is a term for grouping texts together, representing broad rhetorical templates that writers draw on to respond to recurring situations: what users see as effective ways of getting things done using language. The importance of genre in second language writing instruction is that it allows teachers to understand and make explicit to students, the ways that texts can be written to achieve particular purposes. It is an approach to writing instruction that goes beyond helping learners to generate content, work through drafts or practice grammatical forms, and allows them to see texts as attempts to communicate with readers. It therefore counteracts any tendency to treat individual texts in isolation from others or to see grammar separately from use. In other words, genre helps teachers to theorize the common-sense labels we use to categorize texts and to unpack the ways they are structured and used; it provides a way of identifying the kinds of texts that students write in their target contexts and organizing courses to meet these needs.

Genre, then, is an approach to describing and understanding communication built on a social view of language in context. It is based on the idea that members of a community usually have little difficulty in recognizing similarities in the texts they use frequently and are able to draw on these repeated experiences to read, understand, and perhaps write them relatively easily. This is because writing (and speaking) is based on mutual expectations with writers and readers acting on assumptions about what the other will recognize and expect. In other words, we assemble sense from a text by making connections to prior texts to anticipate the other's actions. Coherence is achieved by activating a relevant schema of prior knowledge which we share with others. We know immediately, for example, whether a text is an essay, a joke, or a recipe, but we can also recognize innovation, irony, and creativity. Genres can thus be seen as a kind of tacit contract between writers and readers, influencing the behavior of text producers and the expectations of receivers. It is the unfamiliarity of these genres which is one reason why writing is often difficult for L2 students.

We all have a repertoire of these schemata and develop new ones as we need them, but this does not mean that we simply follow well-worn tracks. We are all different and interpret genres in ways that best suit our goals and personalities so established patterns often form the basis of variations (Tardy, 2009).

While genre approaches differ considerably in the emphasis they give to text or context, the research methods they employ, and the types of pedagogies they encourage, text-analytic varieties have had the most impact in classroom applications. These linguistic approaches are influenced by Halliday's (2004) Systemic Functional (SFL) view of language as a system of choices that link texts to particular contexts through patterns of lexico-grammatical and rhetorical features (Rose & Martin, 2012). Pedagogically, the main inspiration for genre in classrooms was Bernstein's (1990) ideas advocating “a visible pedagogy” to provide a more equal distribution of knowledge in schools irrespective of students' socioeconomic and cultural background. The failure of ‘progressive’ process writing curricula to help disadvantaged children, therefore, inspired research to assist learners in controling valued genres. Concepts such as the teaching and learning cycle (Rothery, 1994), the zone of proximal development (ZPD), and scaffolding (Vygotsky, 1978) were key to this work, as was the development of a metalanguage to help teachers better understand language and pedagogy.

A second, closely related, perspective on genre is that associated with English for Specific Purposes (ESP) which sees genre as a tool for understanding and teaching the kinds of writing required of nonnative English speakers in academic and professional contexts. The ability to function competently in a range of written genres is often a central concern for ESL learners as it can determine their access to career opportunities, positive identities, and life choices. As a result, ESP investigates the demands placed by academic or workplace contexts on communicative behaviors and addresses a cross-cultural and L2 dimension of writing instruction.

Influenced by the seminal work of Swales (1990), ESP operates with a more restricted view of genre than SFL. Instead of seeing genres as the linguistic strategies for achieving broad rhetorical goals in a culture such as narrative, argument, recount, etc, ESP explores the specific practices of target groups. Recurrent classes of communicative events such as case analyses, lab reports, and abstracts are the genres that orchestrate everyday life in communities. Genre analysts therefore set out to offer descriptions of “typified acts of communication” based on the form and purposes of texts. The emphasis genre advocates place on sharedness, patterns, regularities, typification, and recurrence, however, leads critics to position genre instruction as discriminatory and its classrooms as sites of forced linguistic homogenization. But rather than being a simple tool of conformity, genres are an essential prerequisite for an informed understanding of the contingency of prestige discourses. Genres provide insights into the workings of the academy for learners and assist individuals to enter a community with understanding as well as the ability to change it.

In reality, genre is often taught recognizing that these are plans not molds and with the sensitivity to acknowledge that form and genre vary across contexts (e.g., Hyland, 2018; Tardy, 2009). Choice is made possible by constraint, by awareness of what options are conventionally available and what different choices mean to readers and hearers. When writers manipulate established forms this is usually a subtle redrawing of a genre, confined within the boundaries of what is recognized as conventional practices. It also involves a good grasp of the resources for creating meanings and a certain confidence to depart from convention. As Bakhtin (1986, p 80) has suggested, writers must be able to control the genres they use before they can creatively exploit them. So genres embody diversity and facilitate innovation, but innovation is only possible in the context of convention. Moreover, every time a genre is used it is performed in a unique way. They are not static forms but living, changing resources for users.

中文翻译：

---

基于类型的教学和语料库

1 类型简介

最简单地理解，流派是一个将文本分组的术语，代表作者用来应对反复出现的情况的广泛修辞模板：用户认为使用语言完成任务的有效方式。体裁在第二语言写作教学中的重要性在于，它使教师能够理解并向学生明确说明为实现特定目的而编写文本的方式。这是一种写作教学方法，不仅可以帮助学习者生成内容、完成草稿或练习语法形式，还可以让他们将文本视为与读者交流的尝试。因此，它抵消了任何将单个文本与其他文本分开对待或将语法与使用分开看待的倾向。换句话说，体裁帮助教师对我们用来对文本进行分类的常识标签进行理论化，并揭示它们的结构和使用方式；它提供了一种识别学生在目标环境中所写文本类型并组织课程以满足这些需求的方法。

那么，体裁是一种基于语境中语言的社会观来描述和理解交流的方法。它基于这样的想法：社区成员通常很容易识别他们经常使用的文本中的相似之处，并且能够利用这些重复的经验来相对容易地阅读、理解甚至书写它们。这是因为写作（和说话）是基于相互的期望，作者和读者根据对方会认识和期望的假设行事。换句话说，我们通过与先前的文本建立联系来从文本中收集意义，以预测他人的行为。连贯性是通过激活我们与他人分享的相关先验知识模式来实现的。例如，我们立即知道文本是一篇文章、一个笑话还是一个菜谱，但我们也可以识别创新、讽刺和创造力。因此，体裁可以被视为作者和读者之间的一种默契，影响文本生产者的行为和接收者的期望。对这些体裁的不熟悉是二语学生写作困难的原因之一。

我们都有这些图式的全部，并在需要时开发新的图式，但这并不意味着我们只是遵循陈旧的轨道。我们都是不同的，并以最适合我们的目标和个性的方式解释流派，因此既定的模式通常构成变化的基础（Tardy，  2009）。

虽然体裁方法在对文本或上下文的重视程度、所采用的研究方法以及所鼓励的教学法类型方面存在很大差异，但文本分析的多样性对课堂应用产生了最大的影响。这些语言学方法受到 Halliday ( 2004 ) 的系统功能 (SFL) 观点的影响，该观点将语言视为一种选择系统，通过词汇语法和修辞特征的模式将文本与特定上下文联系起来 (Rose & Martin, 2012  )。在教学上，课堂流派的主要灵感来自伯恩斯坦（Bernstein，1990）的想法，即提倡“可见的教学法”，以在学校中提供更平等的知识分配，而不管学生的社会经济和文化背景如何。因此，“渐进”过程写作课程未能帮助弱势儿童，这激发了帮助学习者控制有价值的类型的研究。诸如教学和学习周期（Rothery，  1994）、最近发展区（ZPD）和脚手架（Vygotsky，  1978）等概念是这项工作的关键，元语言的开发也有助于教师更好地理解语言和知识。教育学。

第二个密切相关的体裁观点与特定用途英语 (ESP) 相关，后者将体裁视为一种工具，用于理解和教授非英语母语人士在学术和专业环境中所需的写作类型。能够胜任各种书面体裁的能力通常是 ESL 学习者关心的核心问题，因为它可以决定他们获得职业机会、积极的身份和生活选择的机会。因此，ESP 调查学术或工作场所环境对交际行为的要求，并解决写作教学的跨文化和 L2 维度。

受到 Swales ( 1990 )开创性作品的影响，ESP 的流派观点比 SFL 更受限制。ESP没有将体裁视为在某种文化中实现广泛修辞目标（如叙事、论证、叙述等）的语言策略，而是探索目标群体的具体实践。案例分析、实验室报告和摘要等经常性的交流活动是协调社区日常生活的类型。因此，类型分析师开始根据文本的形式和目的来描述“典型的交流行为”。然而，体裁倡导者强调共享性、模式、规律性、典型化和重复性，这导致批评者将体裁教学定位为歧视性的，并将其课堂定位为强迫语言同质化的场所。但流派并不是一种简单的从众工具，而是对声望话语的偶然性有充分了解的必要先决条件。流派为学习者提供了对学院运作的深入了解，并帮助个人以理解和改变的能力进入社区。

事实上，流派通常被教导要认识到这些是计划而不是模具，并且敏感地承认形式和流派会因环境而异（例如，Hyland，  2018；Tardy，  2009）。选择是通过约束、通过了解传统上可用的选项以及不同的选择对读者和听众意味着什么而成为可能的。当作家操纵既定形式时，这通常是对一种流派的微妙重新描绘，限制在公认的传统做法的范围内。它还包括对创造意义的资源的良好把握和一定的背离常规的信心。正如巴赫金（Bakhtin，1986，第 80 页）所建议的，作家必须能够控制他们所使用的类型，然后才能创造性地利用它们。因此，流派体现了多样性并促进创新，但创新只有在惯例的背景下才有可能。此外，每次使用一种流派时，都会以独特的方式进行表演。它们不是静态的形式，而是为用户提供的活生生的、不断变化的资源。