An editorial footnote.

Derewianka, Bev

`Help/We have to fill four more pages.' Not enough space for another article. Too much for a book review. Leave them blank? Insert some drawings? Instead, I have taken the liberty of filling these pages with an extended footnote to Ness Goodwin's article.

One of the themes running through the contributions to this issue of the Journal is the question `What counts as language proficiency in older students?' Ness Goodwin addresses this explicitly, outlining a number of markers of linguistic maturity. I would like to share some findings from my research which complement those reported by Goodwin -- in particular, the way in which more mature writing tends to `compact' information in texts which are increasingly dense, abstract and technical.

In researching the language development of my son, Nick, between the ages of five and fourteen, one of the most striking features to emerge in later childhood and adolescence was the ability to use language to `accumulate meanings'. He had learnt to spell out an idea and then summarise it into a noun-like form. This is often referred to as a type of `nominalisation', whereby processes are packaged as `entities'. Once they have been nominalised, they can be taken for granted and the discussion can be taken further, building on the assumed knowledge.

We could illustrate this phenomenon by referring to the news headlines on the radio. In an early broadcast, you might hear a certain event being introduced: `The capital of Erehwon has been invaded by enemy forces ...'. In the following bulletin, this piece of news is taken for granted and is used as the basis for the next incident: `The invasion of the capital of Erehwon has provoked outrage from its allies ...'. Here we have an event (`The capital of the Erewhon has been invaded ...') now being presented as a `thing' or `fact' (`The invasion of the capital of Erehwon ...'). What was earlier foregrounded as `news' is now backgrounded as assumed knowledge.

In Nick's early writing there were no instances of this use of language. At around eleven years of age, however, a few examples can be found. In a project on Chinese history, Nick was describing how the Qin dynasty collapsed after the death of the emperor, Qin Shi Huang Ti. The next section began with the words, `After the collapse of the Qin dynasty ...'. Having spelled out the way in which the dynasty collapsed, he now takes that for granted and uses this information as the `jumping off point' for the next stage of the text. Later on, Nick states that `The Qing emperors expanded the empire', and follows this with: `but this expansion led to too much responsibility'. Again the nominalisation, `expansion', refers back to previous information presented in `verb' form and packages it as a noun.

When Nick was twelve and thirteen, his writing showed a significant increase in the instances of this type of nominalisation, as in the following examples.

* In a narrative, he tells how the main character is going to visit his aunt. This is taken up later by `While he is on his visit ...'.

* An historical account outlines how the building of Australia's railway system was delayed. In accounting for this, the text continues with `The reason for these delays was that Australia didn't have any steel industries of its own'.

* In recounting Ned Kelly's exploits, Nick tells how Kelly shot a number of people. He later refers to `the shooting of police troopers and hostages'.

* A review of a short story by Paul Jennings describes how the teacher belted one of the students. The retelling of the story is then moved along with `After this cruel belting ...'.

* In a newspaper article, Nick announces that Gorbachev has resigned and then tells how `the people are rejoicing at the thought of Gorbachev's resignation'.

So far we have seen how Nick moved from reporting a single event to the nominalisation of that event. A further development, however, is the use of a nominalisation to summarise a series of events or interrelated ideas, using certain abstract nouns as `summarisers'. As an example from real life, Nick and his brother were playing with packets of tiny beads. One of the packets broke open and spilled the beads, mixing them in with other beads so that they all had to be sorted out. When his father asked what had happened, Nick stated that they had had a little catastrophe. The noun `catastrophe' was being used to summarise the series of events which had taken place.

In his writing, Nick was also learning to use these summarising abstractions, as evidenced in this procedure:

 Pour water into the beaker containing salt and sand. Then pour it into a
 filter funnel, with a beaker underneath, then evaporate water by heating
 the beaker with a bunsen. Repeat this process.

Here all the steps in the procedure have been condensed into a single word, `process'.

As students grow older, they will be expected to interpret and deploy an increasing number of these summarising abstractions. Terms such as `issue', `problem', `fact', `system', `incident', `theory', `principle', `phenomenon', `strategy', `case', `theme', `situation', `hypothesis' and `concept' all construe particular configurations of events and ideas as abstract `things'.

This phenomenon has significance for students as they move from primary to secondary school. In their writing, one of the challenges is to write extended texts which are well structured and coherent and which guide the reader through the line of reasoning being developed. Instead of writing, for example, a short journal entry about their favourite book, in secondary school they might be asked to write a lengthy critical review of a novel, justifying their opinions. Or instead of a recount of a personal experience, they might be expected to write an extended account of an historical event, explaining its causes and significance. In both cases, the secondary level text would more likely require the development of a relatively complex line of reasoning over a number of paragraphs. One way of structuring the flow of a text is to summarise at various points using a nominalisation. Once summarised, the information is taken for granted and these nominalisations can then be used to move the text along. In this way, the meanings in the text are accumulated, each phase assuming and building on the points made in the previous section of text.

When students' writing is being assessed, it is expected to demonstrate a certain depth of knowledge. If no nominalisation is used, the text can sound immature, operating at a fairly elementary level without building up assumed knowledge and moving on.

To illustrate this point briefly, let's look at excerpts from two argumentative texts. Text A is typical of the writing of children, containing no nominalisations. Text B contains virtually the same content as Text A, but it is highly nominalised.

Text A

We need our forests because plants can turn carbon dioxide into oxygen and if we didn't have oxygen we would die. People are worried that if the rainforest in Brazil is cut down the earth will not have enough oxygen to keep humans and animals alive ...

Text B

Our reliance on forest vegetation for its life-sustaining capacity to generateoxygen through photosynthesis has led to concern that the destruction of the Brazilian rainforest will result in depleted supplies of oxygen ...

Comparing these two texts, we find:

 Text A Text B

We need our forests [`process'] Our reliance on [`thing']
 forest vegetation
plants can [`process'] its ... capacity [`thing']
turn carbon dioxide [`process'] photosynthesis [`thing']
into oxygen
we would die [`process'] life-sustaining [`thing']
People are worried [`process'] concern [`thing']
if the rainforest in [`process'] the destruction [`thing']
Brazil is cut down of the Brazilian
 rainforest
will not have enough [`process'] depleted supplies [`thing']
oxygen

Text B is not necessarily `better' than Text A. You could even argue that Text A is more easily understood. On a quick reading, however, most people would judge Text B to be more `mature', more in control of the topic. In Text A, the concepts and arguments are detailed for the reader (e.g. `We need our forests'), whereas in Text B the fact that we need our forests is taken for granted (`Our reliance on forest vegetation ...'). Rather than being treated as `news', Text B is packaged as simply a stepping-off point for the building up of a complex sequence of cause-and-effect arguments.

A considered use of nominalisation can give the impression that the writer is confidently aware of what could be assumed knowledge and what needs to be spelled out. If, however, nominalisation is overused, the reader will wonder whether in fact the writer really understands the concepts underlying the nominalisations or whether he or she is merely trying to impress. So a fine course needs to be steered between taking nothing for granted and taking too much for granted.

Nominalisation can take many different forms and has a variety of functions. As we have seen, it can be employed in the development of certain types of abstraction, compacting a whole configuration of meanings into a single abstract or technical term. In this way, meanings are accumulated as the text unfolds.

As meanings are nominalised, they are taken for granted and built on. While this is a necessary strategy in mature writing, it can cause frustration and alienation among adolescents, who may need assistance in coming to grips with this use of nominalisation in their reading and writing.

Note: Some of this material appeared in an earlier article in Idiom, Vol. XXX, No. 1, March 1995.