Switching to first language among writers with differing second-language proficiency

doi:10.1016/j.jslw.2003.08.003

Journal of Second Language Writing

Volume 12, Issue 4, December 2003, Pages 347-375

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2003.08.003 Get rights and content

Abstract

Switching interactively between first (L1) and second (L2) languages has been recognized as one of the salient characteristics of L2 writing. However, it is not clear how switching between languages is related to L2 proficiency nor how switching to the L1 assists writers with differing L2 proficiency in their composing processes. The present study investigated these issues with eight adult Chinese-speaking English as a Second Language (ESL) learners with two differing levels of proficiency in English performing two writing tasks: an informal personal letter and an argument essay. Data were the students’ think-aloud protocols, retrospective interviews, questionnaires, and written compositions. Quantitative and qualitative analyses of these data show that the participants’ frequencies of language-switching varied slightly by their L2 proficiency, suggesting that L2 proficiency might determine writers’ approaches and qualities of thinking while composing in their L2.

Section snippets

Previous studies

In the domain of L2 writing, a consensus has been reached that one consistent and salient characteristic, which is fundamentally distinct from L1 writing processes, is that L2 writers, either “skilled” or “unskilled,” switch back and forth between their L1 and L2 in order to work through a particular problem that they are struggling with while composing in the L2. As several studies have reported, L2 writers use their L1 to plan their writing for text generation (Cumming, 1989, Jones & Tetroe,

Participants

The present study involved adult Chinese-speaking learners enrolled in an English as a Second Language (ESL) school in Toronto. The school offers 12-week, eight-level courses throughout the year. Students are placed at different levels of classes on the basis of their placement test scores on the Canadian Language Benchmarks

Discussion

In general, all participants switched languages frequently and to about the same extent (from 30 to 45% of their thinking sequences) while composing in the L2. This finding suggests that L-S was common to the HP and LP participants, and it might have facilitated their writing processes while they were composing. The key finding of the study is that the HP participants switched to their L1 more frequently than the LP participants did while composing the two writing tasks. This finding

Conclusions and implications

Overall, in contrast to previous studies which have tended to show that the amount of L1 use decreased as the writers’ L2 proficiency developed, the present study showed that the amount of bilingual writers’ L-S is not reduced when their L2 proficiency has developed. Rather, the qualities of, or strategic ways in which, bilingual writers switch to the L1 do suggest some kind of developmental continuum associated with L2 proficiency. As the present analyses suggest, the HP learners appeared to

Acknowledgements

This research is based on my M.A. thesis from the Ontario Institute for Studies in Education of the University of Toronto under the supervision of Dr. Alister Cumming. I am extremely grateful to Dr. Cumming for his careful reading of the manuscript, thoughtful suggestions, and invaluable comments on the earlier version of this article.

References (42)

C. Bereiter et al.
Cognitive operations in constructing main points in written composition
Journal of Memory and Language
(1988)
S. Bosher
The composing processes of three Southeast Asian writers at the post-secondary level: An exploratory study
Journal of Second Language Writing
(1998)
M. Pennington et al.
Comparing writing process and product across two languages: A study of six Singaporean University student writers
Journal of Second Language Writing
(1993)
K. Uzawa
Second language learners’ processes of L1 writing, L2 writing, and translation from L1 into L2
Journal of Second Language Writing
(1996)
M. Victori
An analysis of writing knowledge in EFL composing: A case study of two effective and two less effective writers
System
(1999)
W. Wang et al.
L1 use in the L2 composing process: An exploratory study of 16 Chinese EFL writers
Journal of Second Language Writing
(2002)
B. Woodall
Language-switching: Using the first language while writing in a second language
Journal of Second Language Writing
(2002)
V. Arndt
Six writers in search of texts: A protocol-based study of L1 and L2 writing
ELT Journal
(1987)
R. Berman
Learners’ transfer of writing skills between languages
TESL Canada Journal
(1994)
Chafe, W. L. (1985). Linguistic differences produced by differences between speaking and writing. In D. R. Olson, N....

A. Cohen et al.

Research on direct versus translated writing: Students’ strategies and their results

Modern Language Journal

(2001)

Cumming, A. (1988). Writing expertise and second language proficiency in ESL writing performance. Unpublished doctoral...

A. Cumming

Writing expertise and second-language proficiency

Language Learning

(1989)

A. Cumming

Metalinguistic and ideational thinking in second language composing

Written Communication

(1990)

A. Cumming et al.

Reading and summarizing challenging texts in first and second languages

Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal

(1989)

C. Edelsky

Writing in a bilingual program: The relation of L1 and L2 texts

TESOL Quarterly

(1982)

Ericsson, A. K., & Simon, H. A. (1984). Protocol analysis: Verbal reports as data. Cambridge, MA: MIT...

Friedlander, A. (1990) Composing in English: Effects of a first language on writing in English as a Second Language. In...

C. Hall

Managing the complexity of revising across languages

TESOL Quarterly

(1990)

Hayes, J., & Flower, L. (1980). Identifying the organization of writing processes. In L. Gregg & E. Steinberg (Eds.),...

G. Hull

The editing process in writing: A performance study of more and less skilled college writers

Research in the Teaching of English

(1987)

Cited by (76)

Translanguaging in the academic writing process: Exploring Chinese bilingual postgraduate students’ practices at a British university
2023, Journal of English for Academic Purposes
Written translanguaging within educational settings has drawn increasing attention in recent years, but research which explores translanguaging practice in detail in the postgraduate dissertation writing process is still limited. This study focuses on five Chinese postgraduate students who studied at a British university. It investigates their translanguaging practice in the outlining, note-taking and drafting phases of their master's dissertation writing process with reference to Plakans' reading-to-write test task model. We collected and analysed the texts from our participants and conducted interviews to introduce emic perspectives to our analysis. The findings reveal six translanguaging practices in the academic dissertation writing process, showing that translanguaging supports students' development of self-regulation and serves as an efficient self-regulation tool for them to control the recursive and extensive dissertation writing process, to reach their immediate and global writing goals. The paper problematizes and challenges the orthodox academic discourse and practice and highlights the need for EAP tutors and dissertation supervisors to encourage translanguaging in students' writing practice in response to the potential issues raised by the monolingual norms in the academic communities.
Associations of L1-to-L2 rhetorical transfer with L2 writers’ perception of L2 writing difficulty and L2 writing proficiency
2020, Journal of English for Academic Purposes
Citation Excerpt :
For example, Ong, 2014 demonstrated the moderate correlations between the result of a retrospective self-report questionnaire and that of actual student performance. Manchón, de Larios, & Murphy (2009), Manchón and de Larios (2007), and Wang (2003) also used post-writing retrospective questionnaires to elicit the participants’ recall of rhetorical considerations involved in their composing processes. It is worth mentioning that the retrospective questionnaire administered in Wang, 2003 study enabled participants to retrospect the frequency of L1 transfer activities during L2 writing based on their task memory.
The rhetorical transfer from an L1 to an L2 has been acknowledged as a common phenomenon in L2 writing. Nevertheless, limited research concentrated on individual differences in this transfer, which thus tended to be simplified as the interference in L2 writing. This study investigated how this transfer was related to L2 writers’ perception of L2 writing difficulty and L2 writing proficiency in L2 argumentative writing. Data were collected from 89 Chinese non-English major undergraduates using English writing tests, an English argumentative writing task plus a post-writing retrospective questionnaire, and a follow-up interview. Results suggested that: 1) L2 writers’ perception of L2 writing difficulty and L2 writing proficiency were found as individual factors relevant to L1-to-L2 rhetorical transfer; 2) L2 writers’ perception of L2 writing difficulty was positively associated with the transfer related to the argument organization respecting within-paragraph organization and consideration of a thesis; 3) L2 writers’ L2 writing proficiency had a negative association with the transfer that did not reflect the active role of L1 rhetoric.
Translation as Mobile practice
2020, Journal of Second Language Writing
Combining insights from an inter-disciplinary body of research on translation, this study argues that translation be theorized as a site to perform embodied, situated, and mediated rhetorical work. This study examines the translation practices of Morgan, a multilingual writer, as mediated by a transnational network of brokers, semiotic resources, and digital tools. By tracing the role of translation in her completion of a first year writing assignment across formal, informal, and digital spaces, I illustrate the extraordinary cognitive, emotional, and physical labor of translation. Working from a mobility framework, this study explores translation as simultaneously fluid, frictive, and fixed when students engage in open inquiry into and negotiate with language, rhetorical, and cultural differences during multilingual composing. The passage of textual meaning across languages, readers, and rhetorical traditions brings into convergence multiple cultural narratives, multilingual and semiotic repertoires, rhetorical traditions and learning trajectories, which creates tensions and fissures as well as opportunities for innovation and creativity. By making visible the backstage, collaborative scenes of translation, I explore translation as fertile grounds for retooling writing-related knowledge and strategies, which will help second language writing instructors to reconsider pedagogical practices.
Investigating L2 writers’ metacognitive awareness about L1-L2 rhetorical differences
2020, Journal of English for Academic Purposes
Rhetorical differences between L1 and L2 writing imply the likelihood of interference from L1 rhetoric in L2 academic writing. L2 writers’ awareness of such differences is a particularly meaningful topic concerning L2 academic writing development in a foreign language learning context. From the metacognitive perspective, this study attempted to investigate L2 writers’ self-awareness about L1-L2 rhetorical differences between their L1 and L2 argumentative writing. A total of 458 Chinese EFL learners volunteered to participate in this study. Data were collected through a questionnaire on the metacognitive awareness about Chinese-English rhetorical differences, an English argumentative writing task, and a retrospective questionnaire on Chinese-to-English rhetorical transferring processes. A 3-factor structure of the metacognitive awareness about Chinese L1-English L2 rhetorical differences with acceptable discriminant validity and composite reliability was determined through relevant statistical analyses, consisting of Reader Awareness Across Languages, Perception of Differences in the Coherence of Discourse Units Between Chinese and English Writing, and Perception of Differences in the Pattern of Argumentation Between Chinese and English Writing. It was found that Reader Awareness Across Languages and Perception of Differences in the Pattern of Argumentation Between Chinese and English Writing were negatively associated with Chinese L1-to-English L2 rhetorical transferring processes; all the three factors of metacognitive awareness were positively related to English writing performance. This study provides a novel insight into contrastive rhetoric and validates a construct of metacognitive awareness pedagogically useful to aid L2 academic writing development.
Multicompetent EFL writers’ use of language repertoire during the composing process across languages: A case study
2020, Lingua
Citation Excerpt :
In this research, the results of the previous body of L2 studies on L2 writers’ language use during the L2 composing process are contested. First, most of the previous studies investigated the L1 use and its effect on L2 text production during the L2 composing process, and even though some of them examined both L1 and L2 composing processes, the focus of the studies still seemed limited to L1 use during the L2 composing process (Cumming, 1990; Kobayashi and Rinnert, 1992; Lay, 1982; Manchón et al., 2000, 2009; McCarthey et al., 2005; Murphy and Roca de Larios, 2010; Qi, 1998; Roca de Larios et al., 1999, 2001; Sasaki and Hirose, 1996; Smith, 1994; Uzawa, 1996; Van Weijen et al., 2009; Wang, 2003; Wang and Wen, 2002; Whalen and Menard, 1995; Wolfersberger, 2003). How L2 is used and how it is used with L1 are rarely discussed.
Based on multicompetence theory and the framework of adaptive transfer and to identify the development of multicompetence, this study investigates how and when 15 Chinese EFL writers with different levels of L2 proficiency and exposure to (L2) instruction used their language repertoire when they composed argumentative essays aloud in English L2 and Chinese L1. To avoid the effect of translation, the participants composed English essays first and Chinese essays a week later. Through the transcribed think-aloud protocols, the specific purposes for which the languages were used were categorized. The results indicate that regardless of L2 proficiency and exposure to (L2) instruction, extensive L1 use was evident in both L1 and L2 processes; in the L2 process, the participants were capable of using both Chinese and English to complete the composing activities that helped them generate the content of L2 papers and cope with language issues. In the L1 process, higher proficiency and experienced writers’ use of language repertoire was manifested in a more bilingual way than low proficiency and novice writers’ usage. Examining the L2 process presented less uniform and more complicated methods used by the participants to engage in language use. While higher proficiency and experienced writers verbalized in both L1 and L2 to perform more cognitive-related activities, low proficiency, and novice writers used a mixture of L1 and L2 in the activities that were more related to the compensation for their L2 linguistic inadequacy. Subsequently, a picture of the development of multicompetence was demonstrated. The merged system of L1 and L2 from separate to overlapping was observed during the composing process across languages; those overlapping parts were usually discovered in most of the areas more related to linguistic or lexical problems. The more the L2 writers’ superlanguage system is merged, the more developed their multicompetence, and the more flexible they become in using language repertoire to write. L2 learners’ flexibility with using language repertoire should be the indicator of their approaches to language use for composing activities. Corresponding to the framework of adaptive transfer, such L2 learners’ flexibility grows with the development of multicompetence, which is affected by L2 proficiency and especially exposure to (L2) instruction. This study challenges previous studies on the place of L2 proficiency in L2 writers’ language use and provides a new perspective on interpreting L2 writers’ language use during the composing processes in L1 and L2.
Assessing the metacognitive awareness relevant to L1-to-L2 rhetorical transfer in L2 writing: The cases of Chinese EFL writers across proficiency levels
2020, Assessing Writing
For decades, L1-to-L2 rhetorical transfer has been researched as a meaningful topic for foreign language writing development and pedagogy. Recent studies have begun to focus on an underlying cause for this transfer -- L2 writers’ agency. The present study was an initial attempt to inquire into one of the ingredients of L2 writers’ agency accounting for L1-to-L2 rhetorical transfer by assessing the relevant metacognitive awareness. The participants were 36 Chinese EFL writers, who differed in their level of English writing proficiency. Multiple sources of data were collected using an English argumentative writing task, a retrospective verbal report, native English raters’ evaluation, and a text- and video-based stimulated recall. Results suggested that lower-proficiency L2 writers tended to display partial or no metacognitive awareness about L1-to-L2 rhetorical transfer; they could only monitor but not control this transfer or neither monitor nor control this transfer; the deficiency of metacognitive awareness was related to their sense of L2 writing difficulty or limited L2 rhetorical knowledge. It was also found that most of the higher-proficiency L2 writers were capable of both metacognitively monitoring and controlling L1-to-L2 rhetorical transfer; such complete metacognitive awareness was characterized by comparative rhetorical awareness, which helped to make the transfer compatible with L2 writing situations and to prevent its negative effect. Based on the results, this study concluded that there existed a difference in the metacognitive awareness of L1-to-L2 rhetorical transfer between lower- and higher- proficiency L2 writers.

View all citing articles on Scopus

View full text

Switching to first language among writers with differing second-language proficiency

Abstract

Section snippets

Previous studies

Participants

Discussion

Conclusions and implications

Acknowledgements

Journal of Memory and Language

Journal of Second Language Writing

Journal of Second Language Writing

Journal of Second Language Writing

System

Journal of Second Language Writing

Journal of Second Language Writing

Six writers in search of texts: A protocol-based study of L1 and L2 writing

ELT Journal

Learners’ transfer of writing skills between languages

TESL Canada Journal

Research on direct versus translated writing: Students’ strategies and their results

Modern Language Journal

Writing expertise and second-language proficiency

Language Learning

Metalinguistic and ideational thinking in second language composing

Written Communication

Reading and summarizing challenging texts in first and second languages

Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal

Writing in a bilingual program: The relation of L1 and L2 texts

TESOL Quarterly

Managing the complexity of revising across languages

TESOL Quarterly

The editing process in writing: A performance study of more and less skilled college writers

Research in the Teaching of English