1887
  1. Home
  2. e-Journals
  3. ITL - International Journal of Applied Linguistics
  4. Volume 156, Issue 1
  5. Article
Volume 156, Issue 1
  • ISSN 0019-0829
  • E-ISSN: 1783-1490
GBP
Buy:£15.00 + Taxes

Abstract

Abstract

This study examines whether writers vary how they write under influence of the changing task situation when writing in a second language (L2) and, if so, whether differences in the way they write are related to variations in text quality. Twenty first year students wrote four texts each in their L2 (English) under think-aloud conditions. The analysis focused on four cognitive activities: Reading the assignment and sources, Planning, Generating ideas and Formulating. Results indicate that, on average, the occurrence of each activity varies during the writing process. In addition, writers differ in the extent that they vary their process execution (i.e., the way they apply different activities) while writing. These differences, however, depend on the moment in the writing process, and on the activity being carried out. In general, writers’ behaviour is rather stable between tasks, at least at the start of the writing process. Finally, results indicate that the correlation between each activity and text quality varies during the writing process and also differs somewhat between tasks.

Instituut voor Toegepaste Linguistiek
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.2143/ITL.156.0.2034433
2008-01-01
2024-04-18

  • From This Site

    /content/journals/10.2143/ITL.156.0.2034433
    dcterms_title,dcterms_subject,pub_keyword
    -contentType:Journal -contentType:Contributor -contentType:Concept -contentType:Institution
    10
    5
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Beare, S., & Bourdages, J. S.
    (2007) Skilled writers’ generating strategies in L1 and L2: an exploratory study. InG. Rijlaarsdam (Series Ed.), M. Torrance, L. Van Waes & D. Galbraith (Eds.), Studies in Writing Vol. 20, Writing and cognition: Research and applications (pp.151–161). Amsterdam: Elsevier.
     [Google Scholar]
  2. Breetvelt, I., Van den Bergh, H., & Rijlaarsdam, G.
    (1994) Relations between writing processes and text quality: when and how?Cognition and Instruction, 12 (2), 103–123.
     [Google Scholar]
  3. Breuker, J. A., Elshout, J. J., Van Someren, M. W., & Wielinga, B. J.
    (1986) Hardopdenken en protokolanalyse [Thinking aloud and protocol analysis]. Tijdschrift voor Onderwijsresearch, 11 (5), 241–254.
     [Google Scholar]
  4. Broekkamp, H., & Van den Bergh, H.
    (1996) Attention strategies in revising a foreign language text. InG. Rijlaarsdam (Series Ed.), G. Rijlaarsdam, H. Van den Bergh & M. Couzijn (Eds.), Studies in Writing Vol. 2, Theories, models and methodology in writing research (pp.170–181). Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  5. Carey, L., & J., & Flower, L.
    (1989) Foundations for creativity in the writing process: Rhetorical representations of ill-defined problems (Tech. Rep. No. 32). Berkeley, CA; and Pittsburgh, PA: Center for the Study of Writing.
     [Google Scholar]
  6. Chenoweth, N. A., & Hayes, J. R.
    (2001) Fluency in writing, generating text in L1 and L2. Written Communication, 18 (1), 80–98.
     [Google Scholar]
  7. Couzijn, M., Van den Bergh, H., & Rijlaarsdam, G.
    (2002) Writing Processes and text quality: effects of L1/L2. Paper presented at theSIG Writing ‘02 Conference, Staffordshire, UK.
     [Google Scholar]
  8. Cumming, A.
    (2001) Learning to write in a second language: two decades of research. International Journal of English Studies, 1 (2), 1–23.
     [Google Scholar]
  9. Ellis, R., & Yuan, F.
    (2004) The effects of planning on fluency, complexity, and accuracy in second language narrative writing. Studies in Second Language Acquisition26 (1), 59–84.
     [Google Scholar]
  10. Ellis, R., Yuan, F.
    (2005) The effects of careful within-task planning on oral and written task performance. InN. Spada & J. Hulstijn (Series Eds.), R. Ellis (Ed.), Language learning and language teaching Vol. 11, Planning and task performance in a second language (pp.167–192). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
     [Google Scholar]
  11. Ericsson, K. A.
    (1998) Protocol analysis. InW. Bechteld & G. Graham (Eds.), A Companion to Cognitive Science (pp.425–432). Oxford: Blackwell.
     [Google Scholar]
  12. Ericsson, K. A., & Simon, H. A.
    (1980) Verbal Reports as Data. Psychological Review, 87 (3), 215–251.
     [Google Scholar]
  13. Flower, L., & Hayes, J. R.
    (1980) The Dynamics of composing: making plans and juggling constraints. InL. W. Gregg & E. R. Steinberg (Eds.), Cognitive processes in writing (pp.31–50). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
     [Google Scholar]
  14. (1981) Plans that guide the composing process. InC. H. Frederiksen & J. F. Dominic (Eds.), Writing: The nature, development and teaching of written communication. Volume 2: Writing: process, development and communication (pp.39–58). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
     [Google Scholar]
  15. Grabe, W.
    (2001) Notes toward a theory of second language writing. InT. Silva & P. K. Matsuda (Eds.), On Second Language Writing (pp.39–57). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
     [Google Scholar]
  16. Hayes, J. R., & Flower, L. S.
    (1980) Identifying the organization of writing processes. InL. W. Gregg & E. R. Steinberg (Eds.), Cognitive processes in writing (pp.3–30). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
     [Google Scholar]
  17. Hayes, J. R., & Gradwohl Nash, J.
    (1996) On the nature of planning in writing. InC. M. Levy & S. Ransdell (Eds.), The science of writing: Theories, methods, individual differences & applications (pp.29–55). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
     [Google Scholar]
  18. Janssen, D., Van Waes, L., & Van den Bergh, H.
    (1996) Effects of thinking aloud on writing processes. InC. M. Levy & S. Ransdell (Eds.), The science of writing: Theories, methods, individual differences & applications (pp.233–250). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
     [Google Scholar]
  19. Jones, S., & Tetroe, J.
    (1987) Composing in a second language. InA. Matsuhashi (Ed.), Writing in real time; Modelling production processes (pp.34–57). Norwood, NJ: Ablex Publishing Corporation.
     [Google Scholar]
  20. Kennedy, M. L.
    (1985) The composing process of college students writing from sources. Written Communication, 2 (4), 434–456.
     [Google Scholar]
  21. Levelt, W. J. M.
    (1989) Speaking: From intention to articulation. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  22. Levy, C. M., Marek, J. P., & Lea, J.
    (1996) Concurrent and retrospective protocols in writing research. InG. Rijlaarsdam (Series Ed.), G. Rijlaarsdam, H. Van den Bergh & M. Couzijn (Eds.), Studies in Writing Vol. 2, Theories, models and methodology in writing research (pp.542–556). Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  23. Levy, C. M., & Ransdell, S.
    (1995) Is writing as difficult as it seems?Memory and Cognition, 23 (6), 767–779.
     [Google Scholar]
  24. Manchón, R. M., Murphy, L., & Roca de Larios, J.
    (2005) Using concurrent protocols to explore L2 writing Processes: methodological issues in the collection and analysis of data. InP. K. Matsuda & T. Silva (Eds.), Second language writing research; perspectives on the process of knowledge construction (pp.191–205). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
     [Google Scholar]
  25. Qi, D. S.
    (1998) An inquiry into language-switching in second language composing processes. The Canadian Modern Language Review/La Revue canadienne des languages vivantes, 54 (3), 413–435.
     [Google Scholar]
  26. Rijlaarsdam, G., & Van den Bergh, H.
    (1996) The dynamics of composing-an agenda for research into an interactive compensatory model of writing: many questions, some answers. InC. M. Levy & S. Ransdell (Eds.), The science of writing: Theories, methods, individual differences & applications (pp.107–125). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
     [Google Scholar]
  27. (2006) Writing process theory: a functional dynamic approach. InC. A. MacArthur, S. Graham & J. Fitzgerald (Eds.), The handbook of writing research (pp.41–53). NY: Guilford Publications.
     [Google Scholar]
  28. Roca de Larios, J., Manchón, R. M., & Murphy, L.
    (2006) Generating text in native and foreign language writing: a temporal analysis of problem-solving formulation processes. The Modern Language Journal, 90 (i), 100–114.
     [Google Scholar]
  29. Roca de Larios, J., Marín, J., & Murphy, L.
    (2001) A temporal analysis of formulation processes in L1 and L2 writingLanguage Learning, 51 (3), 497–538.
     [Google Scholar]
  30. Roca de Larios, J., Murphy, L., & Marín, J.
    (2002) A critical examination of L2 writing process research. InG. Rijlaarsdam (Series Ed.), S. Ransdell & M. L. Barbier (Eds.), Studies in Writing Vol. 11, New directions for research in L2 writing (pp.11–47): Kluwer Academic Publishers.
     [Google Scholar]
  31. Sanders, T., & Schilperoord, J.
    (2006) Text structure as a window on the cognition of writing; How text analysis provides insights in writing products and writing processes. InC. A. MacArthur, S. Graham & J. Fitzgerald (Eds.), The handbook of writing research (pp.386–402). NY: Guilford Publications.
     [Google Scholar]
  32. Sasaki, M.
    (2002) Building an empirically-based model of EFL learners’ writing processes. InG. Rijlaarsdam (Series Ed.), S. Ransdell & M. Barbier (Eds.), Studies in Writing Vol. 11, New directions for research in L2 Writing (pp.49–80): Kluwer Academic Publishers.
  33. (2004) A multiple-data analysis of the 3.5-year development of EFL student writers. Language Learning, 54 (3), 525–582.
     [Google Scholar]
  34. Schoonen, R., Van Gelderen, A., De Glopper, K., Hulstijn, J., Simis, A., Snellings, P.
    , et al. (2003) First language and second language writing: the role of linguistic knowledge, speed of processing and metacognitive knowledge. Language Learning, 53 (1), 165–202.
     [Google Scholar]
  35. Shi, L.
    (2004) Textual borrowing in second language writing. Written Communication, 21 (2), 171–200.
     [Google Scholar]
  36. Silva, T.
    (1993) Toward an understanding of the distinct nature of L2 writing: the ESL research and its implications. TESOL Quarterly, 27 (4), 657–677.
     [Google Scholar]
  37. Snijders, T. A. B., & Bosker, R. J.
    (1999) Multilevel analysis; an introduction to basic and advanced multilevel modelling. London: Sage publications.
     [Google Scholar]
  38. Stevenson, M.
    (2005) Reading and writing in a foreign language; a comparison of conceptual and linguistic processes in Dutch and English. SCO-Kohnstamm Instituut van de Faculteit der Maatschappij- en Gedragswetenschappen, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam.
     [Google Scholar]
  39. Stevenson, M., Schoonen, R., & De Glopper, K.
    (2006) Revising in two languages: a multi-dimensional comparison of online writing revisions in L1 and FL. Journal of Second Language Writing, 15, 201–233.
     [Google Scholar]
  40. Thorson, H.
    (2000) Using the computer to compare foreign and native language writing processes: a statistical and case study approach. The Modern Language Journal, 84 (ii), 155–170.
     [Google Scholar]
  41. Uzawa, K.
    (1996) Second language learners’ processes of L1 writing, L2 writing and translation from L1 into L2. Journal of Second Language Writing, 5 (3), 271–294.
     [Google Scholar]
  42. Van den Bergh, H., & Rijlaarsdam, G.
    (1996) The dynamics of composing: modelling writing process data. InC. M. Levy & S. Ransdell (Eds.), The science of writing: Theories, methods, individual differences & applications (pp.207–232). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
     [Google Scholar]
  43. (2001) Changes in cognitive activities during the writing process and relationships with text quality. Educational Psychology, 21 (4), 373–385.
     [Google Scholar]
  44. (2007) The dynamics of idea generation during writing: an online study. InG. Rijlaarsdam (Series Ed.), M. Torrance, L. Van Waes & D. Galbraith (Eds.), Studies in writing Vol. 20, Writing and cognition: research and applications (pp.125–150). Amsterdam: Elsevier.
     [Google Scholar]
  45. Van der Hoeven, J.
    (1996) Children’s composing: a study of the relationships between planning and revision skill, writing processes, text quality and linguistic skills. InG. Rijlaarsdam (Series Ed.), G. Rijlaarsdam, H. Van den Bergh & M. Couzijn (Eds.), Studies in writing Vol. 2, Theories, models and methodology in writing research (pp.108–120). Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  46. Van Weijen, D., Van den Bergh, H., Rijlaarsdam, G., & Sanders, T.
    (2008a) Variation in the orchestration of cognitive activities and text quality in L1 writing. Manuscript submitted for publication.
     [Google Scholar]
  47. (2008b) Composing episodes: The hierarchical structure of L1 and L2 writingManuscript submitted for publication.
     [Google Scholar]
  48. Wang, W., & Wen, Q.
    (2002) L1 use in the L2 composing process: an exploratory study of 16 Chinese EFL writers. Journal of Second Language Writing, 11 (3), 225–246.
     [Google Scholar]
  49. Woodall, B. R.
    (2002) Language-switching: using the first language while writing in a second. Journal of Second Language Writing, 11, 7–28.
     [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.2143/ITL.156.0.2034433
Loading
  • Article Type: Research Article

Most Cited

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was successful
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error