What is 起 承 轉 合 ?

Question

Right now I\'m doing a tutorial on English writing on a wiki. While I was searching Y!KB+ on past questions and answers to find potential help, I saw two frequent but contradictory answers. One says that 英文寫作和中文一樣，有起承轉合 (例, 例). The other says that 英文寫作和中文不一樣 (例, 例). My understanding is that the styles of both languages are rather different, so 英文寫作應該是和中文的不一樣，沒有所謂的起承轉合。To set the record right, can someone please explain 起承轉合? If possible, please explain with a short essay.Also, I\'d love to use the answers on the wiki. If you agree to make your answers open content under GFDL, please say so in your answers. (Or, you can just jump in and edit it away)One more thing. Why the contradiction? 臺灣英文考試改法和國外的不同嗎？

Answer 1

按照此網頁中 (http://140.111.34.46/chengyu/mandarin/fulu/dict/cyd/3/cyd03998.htm)教育部重編國語辭典對於「起承轉合」之解釋如下：起，開端。承，承接上文並加以申述。轉，轉折，從正面、反面加以立論。合，結束全文。為舊時詩文布局的順序。後亦泛指文章的作法。我覺得英文寫作也有起承轉合，只不過其用法與中文寫作不盡相同。英文寫作同樣囊括了Introduction, thesis, supporting paragraphs, conclusion。當然，這只是基本的模式，就像中文寫作也有倒敘法，同樣於英文也可開頭便先將結論點出再倒敘。寫作的方式太多種了，就算於中文「起承轉合」也只是初學作文時遵循的規範，一旦寫的得心應手時，根本就不需要侷限於這個模式。同樣的，英文寫作一開始都說要 「Introduction, thesis, supporting paragraphs, conclusion」也只是給初學者的一個模仿模式，一旦寫習慣了自然可隨意跳出這個框框。我認為不管中文寫作或英文寫作，「起、承、轉、合」皆為一篇好文的四大要素，其先後不需要按照這樣的順序，但是皆為好文章不可或缺的部份。英文一樣要開頭，一樣要敘述立場、舉出正反辯辭，要換到下一點時也需要有 Paragraph transitions，同樣要有結語或結論。只是語言和文法上的不同，文章構造基本上是大同小異的。I think I've made my points clear so there's no need to post a sample essay.I don't know how essays are graded in Taiwan.

2006-05-25 07:41:59 補充：
I truly wish people would read more clearly before they make any comments. If you understood my Chinese correctly, you would understand that I did NOT say that English writing structure is the same as that of Chinese.

2006-05-25 07:47:01 補充：
What I DID say is that FACTORS that make a great composition are the same, whether in Chinese or in English. I believe those students that make the professors sick of their essays must have many grammatical errors in their essays. The problem is their grammar, not the writing style.

2006-05-25 07:51:33 補充：
Don't brag in English if you can't understand Chinese correctly.

2006-05-27 21:39:22 補充：
It's a waste of time if you keep on making irrelevant arguments. The Chinese or Taiwanese students have such problems with their essays because they THINK in Chinese and later try to translate their thoughts into English.

2006-05-27 21:47:55 補充：
Clearly, that is a problem caused by inappropriate translation, NOT the writing style.
And what you mentioned above, “…most problems are tones, conhesion, originality, focus, structural logic, and sentence structure.” These are actually problems found in ALL weak arguments.

2006-05-27 21:51:08 補充：
Many native English speakers are terrible with essay writing because they don’t understand how to make a sound argument. Being a native English speaker does NOT mean that that person will definitely be able to write well in English.

2006-05-27 21:55:32 補充：
You asked your professor about "Asian" students' writing problems and those were the answers. If you addressed the question differently and ask the professor, “What ARE the GENERAL writing problems?” The professor will answer you with pretty much the same FACTORS.

2006-05-27 22:01:44 補充：
FYI, ad hominem statements do not help to validate your points, you may want to consult with your professor regarding this problem.

2006-05-28 20:55:47 補充：
avisitor: First of all, do you really understand what “ad hominem” means? I don’t see it in any of my arguments because I made the points to express my opinion.

2006-05-28 20:56:23 補充：
You made ad hominem comments because of your provocative and disdainful tone, and an argument is NOT considered a sound argument when it is ad hominem in nature.

2006-05-28 21:06:34 補充：
Like what Feihong mentioned above, essays in any language require a framework; don’t tell me that an English essay can start off with supporting points out of the blue without specifying what they support.

2006-05-28 21:12:48 補充：
If you read Chinese correctly you’d see that I specified that 「起承轉合」 is regarding writing framework that people are taught early in the beginning writing classes, and it is comparable with “Intro, Support, Conclusion” in entry level English composition.

2006-05-28 21:18:10 補充：
It will be useless to edit if an essay does not have a framework to begin with. If an essay has one paragraph with a focus, and another paragraph an opposite focus, and the whole essay does not contain any transitional sentences or phrases (轉), then what is the purpose of editing and proofreading?

2006-05-28 21:28:14 補充：
I’ve already stated in the answer that there are just too many writing styles, and that one’s writing style will not be confined to the pattern of「起承轉合」as long as one is able to express ideas in a good flow.

2006-05-28 21:36:07 補充：
A good flow requires certain framework in order for readers to clearly understand what the writer is trying to express. Also, considering「起承轉合」as the four great elements in writing does not mean that an essay does not require a final polish with editing and proofreading.

2006-05-28 21:42:00 補充：
Editing and proofreading are required in composition in ALL languages; they are indeed factors other than 「起承轉合」 that help to build a great essay, but I did not have to mention those because the inquirer only asked about「起承轉合」.

2006-05-28 21:43:27 補充：
There can be innumerable factors that help to build a great essay, but it is not the focus of the above question. You can argue all you want and keep coming up with other factors, but please check the question and answer once again before you try to have a debate and express your off-topic comments.

Answer 2

to avisitor:

I think 逸朗's answer provided above actually has a lot of valid points. Of course English and Chinese will never be identical, but the essential framework of a good essay regardless of the language used is pretty comparable, if u know what I mean..

2006-05-25 10:10:18 補充：
in response to the point u've made about "those English profs who are completely sick of Chinese or Taiwanese students like you who insist to stick with Chinese writing style.",

2006-05-25 10:10:37 補充：
I think it's more due to student's lack of understanding of appropriate syntax and grammar usage, rather than misuse of the writing structure itself

2006-05-28 00:18:24 補充：
to avistor:

Just a side point.. when I said "student's lack of understanding of appropriate syntax and grammar usage", I didn't mean that Chinese students are bad at grammar. I was referring to the misplacements of fragments or clause so often commited by these students.

2006-05-28 00:21:18 補充：
U c, when people learn English in Asia, they learn grammar patterns by heart, rather than by usage example. It reinforces ur argument of "problems with tones, conhesion, originality, focus, structural logic, and sentence structure".

2006-05-28 00:25:17 補充：
However, it also supports 逸朗's argument, in that "these are actually problems found in ALL weak arguments.", rather than being unique to Chinese students.

2006-05-28 00:26:04 補充：
Anyone who learns English by fragmented grammar patterns will suffer from the same issue, and that includes the Anglos as well (which doesn't usually happen of course :) )

2006-05-28 07:40:23 補充：
ok.. so one more question to you, don't you consider "Introduction, body(arguing against and for), supporting paragraphs, conclusion" when u write ur English essay? Isn't that the framework u were taught of at the high school? and aren't they parallel to「起、承、轉、合」?

2006-05-28 07:44:37 補充：
I think u r more onto good writing techniques and logics, rather than essential writing framework, so perhaps our arguments never crossed each other like what u said :)

2006-05-28 10:17:31 補充：
Just to add to my point, have u noticed that any good essay, be it in Chinese or English or any other language, can be translated without losing their original clarity of the structure and the logic?

2006-05-28 10:21:23 補充：
What u've said about the EDITING, FOCUS, and LINKS is correct, and they don't exclusively apply to English writing, Chinese essay requires that too! Likewise, the basic structural guideline (「起、承、轉、合」or "Intro, body and conclusion") is also applicable across different languages

Answer 3

If you said the structure of English writing is the same as Chinese wrting, you would fail your courses as many time as necessary to turn your head on what the formal academic English writing is.

2006-05-24 22:11:13 補充：
Not me who wanna fail you, don't worry, but those English profs who are completely sick of Chinese or Taiwanese students like you who insist to stick with Chinese writing style.

2006-05-24 22:11:58 補充：
Oh, BTW, you will fail most commerce courses with your Chinses-style writing because you just don't bother to write the executive summary and follow all required styles.

2006-05-24 22:19:12 補充：
There is a website to guide you how to write in English and make you not so stupid:

http://www.calstatela.edu/library/styleman.htm#collegewriting

2006-05-27 18:01:50 補充：
feihong, it's not about the grammar. I have talked with a prof about Asian students' writing problems, and he agreed that the most problems are tones, conhesion, originality, focus, structural logic, and sentence structure.

2006-05-27 18:03:11 補充：
For Asian students, they are damn good at grammar, but they're really bad at those things I mentioned above plus word usage.

2006-05-27 18:10:26 補充：
Anyone can explain in a length of a book about how to write a good essay in English, but it's never been 「起、承、轉、合」!

2006-05-27 18:10:50 補充：
These elements are NOT what a good Englsih writing is about, and Chinese students NEVER bother to do editing.
Editing is NOT about correcting errors, but a complete different work from the previous drafts.

2006-05-27 18:11:01 補充：
If you only remember the elements and patterns of writing, you cannot write a good essay with originality, conciseness, and liveliness.

2006-05-27 18:23:12 補充：
To me, English writing is like arts because no two drafts from the same essay should be similar, but Chinese writing is like parody -- you already have the guideline like 「起、承、轉、合」, what else you can restrain a writer to craft an essay?

2006-05-27 18:30:09 補充：
The reason that Chinese and Taiwanese students are good at grammar is that we all study the grammar as if we studied chemistry -- tons of formulas, and we just memorize them all!

2006-05-27 18:30:20 補充：
Does it sound familiar to you that a prof may say you have good grammar but you don't understand how to use the words and idioms in the content? Or your writing is vague and off topic? This is the main problem which is caused by something like 「起、承、轉、合」!

2006-05-28 03:12:18 補充：
feihong, actually, those English native speakers have more chances to make fragment, run-on, and comma slice errors THAN Asian students. It's NOT about the grammar because grammar problems are easy to resolve and correct -- you only need to memorize them.

2006-05-28 03:31:47 補充：
逸朗, as you insisted on the FACTORS, well, please choose a good example and tell me where the FACTORS are, and how many time the author applies "合". Otherwise, your arguments are just ad hominem as well.

2006-05-28 03:33:59 補充：
逸朗,I didn't imply those native speakers are good at writing; instead, I DID mention that EDITING is very important for good writing, which you omitted.

2006-05-28 03:39:18 補充：
Both of you don't bother to see my points, just like I didn't read carefully your points. Even though those FACTORS are important for argumentative compositions, but NOT all types of essays need them.

2006-05-28 03:43:07 補充：
feihong, the problems with originality, cohesion, focus, and so on are NOT even relevant to grammar. You can very clearly detect grammar errors, but you CANNOT easily explain why an essay doesn't sound right. You blended these together, please think twice before making your supports.

2006-05-28 03:48:35 補充：
If you guys still insist on those FACTORS, it would be fine with me, but a good argumentative writing is about editing, focus, and links between your sentences and statements.

2006-05-28 03:51:26 補充：
You can easily make an essay with ALL those 4 FACTORS but off topic, just like your arguments here (especially yours, feihong; 逸朗 is, on the other hand, a good participant in this debate).

2006-05-28 03:55:18 補充：
逸朗, I can answer your question about GENERAL PROBLEMS with no need to ask my prof -- they are EDITING, FOCUS, and LINKS. We cannot pick up those 4 factors without seeing an essay as a whole, can we?

Answer 4

"起承轉合"是學校教作文所建議最基本的一種方式而已, 採用這種型態, 提醒不會失去結構焦點也比較清楚.
我覺得, 每個人的表達方式其實都不盡相同. 寫成文章當然各有特色, 這樣才能有獨自的風格, 所謂的"原生性". 學術研究或評論者把各家的風格與文章, 整理做出分析與說明,提出另外的各種不論是結構說或 whatever 方式. 這種教授作文或文學賞析的可以讓更多的人快速的瞭解個類文風, 當然也會影響學習者, 但是學習能清潔的表達自己意念, 我覺得更重要.