Systemic functional linguistics-legal genres and their configurations in the Islamic law and jurisprudence textbooks at a university in Indonesia

Abstract

The great importance of textbooks in the English language in the academic, pedagogic, and scientific world is uncontested. Acquiring holistic knowledge of legal transdisciplinary is of great importance to Islamic law students in Indonesia. Nevertheless, English reading proficiency of Indonesian students is problematic. The present research was to identify the genre types and unfold them through what patterns the genres are mostly structured. Data of the study were one Islamic Law textbook and one Jurisprudence textbook used as teaching resources and required reading at Universitas Islam Negeri Sumatera Utara, Indonesia. Based on the five main Systemic Functional Linguistics-based genre frameworks for the analysis, findings from the Islamic Law textbook showed 18 genre types including three proposed ones under four genre families of which History genres are the most frequent ones followed by Explanation, Report, and Argument genres. On the other hand, 16 genre types including three new ones belonging to four genre families were identified in the Jurisprudence in which Report genres are the most frequent ones followed by Argument, Explanation, and History genres. The commonalities and discrepancies of the findings between the two legal textbooks are assumed to be the logical results of the ideological differences and the resource aspects from which the legal discipline is oriented. The findings of the study would be useful to design teaching of reading legal English texts that can facilitate students which is unfortunately neglected by both English and Law teachers.

Keywords

• Systemic Functional Linguistics
• genre
• textbook
• Islamic Law; Jurisprudence

References

1. Bernstein, B. (1990). Class, Codes and Control: The Structuring of Pedagogic Discourse. London: Routledge.
2. Carrell, P. L. (1985). Facilitating ESL Reading by Teaching Text Structure. TESOL Quarterly, 19(4), 727-752. https://doi.org/10.2307/3586673
3. Carrell, P. L. (1992). Awareness of Text Structure: Effects on Recall. Language Learning, 42(1), 1-18. https://doi.org/10.2307/747572
4. Chinhengo, A. M. (2000). Essential Jurisprudence (2nd ed.). London: Cavendish Publishing Limited
5. Christie, F., and Derewianka, B. (2010). School Discourse: Learning to Write Across the Years of Schooling. London: Continuum.
6. Coffin, C. (1997). Constructing and Giving Value to the Past: An Investigation into Secondary School History. In F. Christie and J. R. Martin (Eds.). Genre and Institutions: Social Processes in the Workplace and School (pp. 196–230). London: Continuum.
7. Coffin, C. (2006). Historical Discourse: The Language of Time, Cause and Evaluation. London: Continuum.
8. Dalimunte, A. A., and Pramoolsook, I. (2020). Genres Classification and Generic Structures in the English Language Textbooks of Economics and Islamic Economics in an Indonesian University. LEARN Journal, 13(1), 1-19. https://www.tci-thaijo.org/index.php/LEARN/article/view

9. Derewianka, B. (1990). Exploring How Texts Work. Maryborough: Australian Print Group.
10. Derewianka, B., and Jones, P. (2012). Teaching Language in Context. Victoria: Oxford University Press.
11. Dickson, S. (1999). Integrating Reading and Writing to Teach Compare-Contrast Text Structure: A Research-based Methodology. Reading and Writing Quarterly, 14, 49-79. https://doi.org/10.1080/105735699278297
12. Durant, A., and Leung, J. (2016). Language and Law. New York: Routledge.
13. El-Fadl, K. A. (2013). The Shari’ah. In John L. E. and Shahin E. E. (Eds.) The Oxford Handbook of Islam and Politics (pp.7-26). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
14. Elliott, D. L., and Woodward, A. (Eds.). (1990). Textbooks and Schooling in the United States (89th Yearbook of the National Society for the Study of Education). Chicago: National Society for the Study of Education.
15. Foucault, M. (1972). The Archaeology of Knowledge and the Discourse on Language. New York: Tavistock Publications Limited.
16. Hallaq, W. B. (2009). An Introduction to Islamic Law. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
17. Hoey, M. (2001). Textual Interaction: An Introduction to Written Discourse Analysis. London: Routledge.
18. Hyland, K. (2000). Disciplinary Discourses: Social Interactions in Academic Writing. Harlow, UK: Pearson Education.
19. Kuhn, S.T. (1996). The Structure of Scientific Revolutions (3rd ed.) Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
20. Lee, C. D., and Spratley, A. (2010). Reading in the Disciplines: The Challenges of Adolescent Literacy. New York: Carnegie Corporation of New York.
21. Leon, J. A., and Carretero, M. (1995). Intervention in Comprehension and Memory Strategies: Knowledge and Use of Text Structure. Learning and Instruction, 5(3), 203-20. https://doi.org/10.1016/0959-4752(95)00011-Q
22. Martin, J. R. (1990). Factual Writing: Exploring and Challenging Social Reality (2nd ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
23. Martin, J. R. (1993). Literacy in Science: Learning to Handle Text as Technology. In M. A. K. Halliday and J. R. Martin (Eds.). Writing Science: Literacy and Discursive Power (pp.166-202). London: Falmer Press.
24. Martin, J. R., and Rose, D. (2008). Genre Relations: Mapping Culture. London: Equinox.
25. McGee, L. M. (1982). Awareness of Text Structure: Effects on Children's Recall of Expository Text. Reading Research Quarterly, 17(4), 581-590. https://doi.org/10.2307/747572
26. Meyer, B. J. F., (1975). Identification of the Structure of Prose and its Implications for the Study of Reading and Memory. Journal of Reading Behavior, 7(1), 7-47.
27. Okasha, S. (2002). Philosophy of Science: A Very Short Introduction. New York: Oxford University Press.
28. Orwin, R. G. (1994). Evaluating coding decisions. In: H. Cooper and L.V. Hedges (Eds). The Handbook of Research Synthesis (pp.177-200). New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
29. Parodi, G. (2010). The Rhetorical Organization of the Textbook Genre Across Disciplines: A ‘Colony-in-Loops’? Discourse Studies, 12(2), 195-222. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461445609356500
30. Paul, R. and Elder, L. (2006). Critical thinking: learn the tools, the best thinkers use. USA: Pearson Education, Inc.
31. Richgels, D. J., McGee, L. M., Lomax, R. G., and Sheard, C. (1987). Awareness of Four Text Structures: Effects on Recall of Expository Text. Reading Research Quarterly, 22(2), 177-196.
32. Rose, D. (2012). Genre in the Sydney School. In J. Gee and M. Handford (Eds.). The Routledge Handbook of Discourse Analysis (pp. 209-225). London: Routledge.
33. Stern, L., and Roseman, J. E. (2004). Can Middle School Science Textbooks Help Students Learn Important Ideas? Findings from Project 2061’s Curriculum Evaluation Study: Life Science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41(6), 538-568. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20019
34. Strong, R. W., Silver, H. F., Perini, M. J., and Tuculescu, G. M. (2002). Reading for Academic Success: Powerful Strategies for Struggling, Average, and Advanced Readers, Grades 7-12. California: Corwin Press, Inc. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED465158
35. United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO). (2009). Promoting Gender Equality Through Textbook: A Methodological Guide. France: United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization.
36. Unsworth, L. C., (1995). How and Why Recontextualizing Science Explanations in School Science Books (Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation). University of Sydney, Sydney.
37. Uso-Juan, E., and Flor, A. M. (Eds.). (2006). Current Trends in the Development and Teaching of the Four Language Skills. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
38. Veel, R. (1997). Learning How to Mean-Scientifically Speaking: Apprenticeship into Scientific Discourse in the Secondary School. In F. Christie and J. Martin (Eds.). Genres and Institutions: Social Processes in the Workplace and School (pp.161-194). London: Continuum.
39. Zarrati, Z., Nambiar, R. M., and Maasum, T. N. R. T. M. (2014). The Importance of Text Structure Awareness in Promoting Strategic Reading among EFL Readers. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 118, 537-544. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.02.073
40. Zhang, X. (2008). The Effects of Formal Schema on Reading Comprehension: An Experiment with Chinese EFL Readers. Computational Linguistics and Chinese Language Processing, 13(2), 197-214.