Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cohesion and coherence of a text is one of the major topics in the research of discourses. The Theme-Rheme Theory is an important functional system to do research on the cohesion and coherence of discourse. Theme is the origin of discourse; rheme which centers on the topic is the narration, description, and explanation of theme and often the core content of discourse. By describing this theory and discourse analysis of college English composition, this article mainly argues the application of this theory in composition teaching so as to help learners improve their writing. Key words: cohesion, coherence, the Theme-Rheme Theory Resume： La theorie de theme-rheme est un systeme fonctionnel etudiant l'articulation et l'enchainement d'un texte. L'articulation et l'enchainement d'un texte doivent etre coherents eux memes; autrement dit, les points de vue et les idees du meme texte doivent correlatifs pour former un ensemble enchaine. Le theme est le point de depart du et le rheme est la narration, le description, l'explication du theme. En general, c'est le contenu principal du texte. En faisant la description de la theorie theme-rheme, cet article a analyse certains textes du livre de redaction en anglais afin de trouver des methodes d'application de cette theorie dans la redaction et aider les apprenant a ameliorer leur niveau de redaction. Mots-cles: articulation, enchainement, theorie theme-rheme 摘要：主述位理論是研究語篇銜接與連貫的一大功能體系。語篇的銜接與連貫語篇就其自身而言必須是連貫的，也就是說語篇中的觀點、意思應該是彼此相關聯的，這樣方能成為一個連貫的整體。主位是話語的出發點；述位元則是圍繞主題所說的話，是對主位的敘述、描寫和說明，往往是話語的核心內容。本文通過對主述位理論的描述，就大學英語寫作中的某些語篇作了分析，旨在討論該理論在寫作教學中的應用，以此來幫助學習者提高寫作水準。 關鍵詞：銜接；連貫；主位—述位理論
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".