Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-xtgtn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-20T00:00:07.974Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Writing in a Second Language

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  19 November 2008

Sarah Hudelson
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

In an cited essay, Hairston (1982) asserts that a revolution is taking place in the teaching of compostition, a revolution she characterizes as involving a basic shift in paradigms with regard to the act of composition. Hairston describes the prevailing view of writing, a view that had its orgins in traditional theories of rhetoric, as one that considers writing a linear process in which writers know what they want to say before they begin to write. The major task of the attends to editing concerns in order to perfect the manuscript. Thus the focus of composition instruction in this paradigm is the product that the writer produces.

Type
Sla and Classroom Instruction
Information
Annual Review of Applied Linguistics , Volume 9 , March 1988 , pp. 210 - 222
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1988

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Unannotated Bibliography

Bar, Lev Z. 1986. Discourse theory and “contrastive rhetoric.” Discourse processes. 9. 235–246.Google Scholar
Bickner, R.. and Peyasantiwong, P.. 1988. Cultural variation and reflective writing. In Purves, A. (ed.) Writing across languages and cultures: Issues in constrastive rhetoric. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications. 160–176.Google Scholar
Canale, M., Frenette, N., and Belanger, M.. 1988. Evaluation of minority student writing in first and second languages. In Fine, J. (ed.) Second language discourse: A textbook of current research. Norwood, NJ: Ablex. 147–166,Google Scholar
Chamot, A. and O'Malley, M.. 1987. The congitive academic language approach: A bridge to the mainstream. TESOL quarterly. 21. 2. 227–250.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chaudron, C. 1983. Evaluating writing: Effects of feedback on revision. Paper presented at the 17th Annual Convention of Teachers of English to Speakers of Other Languages, Toronto. [ERIC document No. ED 227 706.]Google Scholar
Connor, U. 1987. Research frontiers in writing analysis. TESOL quarterly. 21. 4. 677–696.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cannor, U. and Lauer, J.. 1988. Cross-cultural variation in persuasive student writing. In Purves, A. (ed.) Writing across languages and cultures: Issues in contrastive rhetoric. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications. 138–159.Google Scholar
Connor, U. and Schneider, M.. 1988. Topical structure and writing quality: Results of an ESL study. Paper presented at the 22nd Annaul Convention of Teachers of English to Speakers of Other Languages. Chicago.Google Scholar
Cummins, J. 1983. Language proficiency and academic achievement. In Oller, J. W. Jr. (ed.) Issues in language testing research. Rowley, MA: Newbury House. 81–96.Google Scholar
Egginton, W. 1987. Written discourse in Korean: Implications for effective communication. In Connor, U. and Kaplan, R. B. (eds.) Writing across languages: Analysis of L2 text. Reading, MA: Addision-Wesley. 153–168.Google Scholar
Farris, C. 1987. Current composition: Beyond process vs. product. English journal. 76. 1. 28–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grabe, W. and Kaplan, R. B.. In press. Writing in a second language: Contrastive rhetoric. In Johnson, D. and Roen, D. (eds.) Richness in writing: Empowering ESL students. New York: Longman.Google Scholar
Hairston, M. 1982. The winds of change: Thomas Kuhn and the revolution in the teaching of writing. College composition and communication. 33. 1. 76–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hairston, M.. 1986. Different products, different processes: A theory about writing. College composition and communication. 37. 4. 442–452.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hamp-Lyons, L. 1986. No new lamps for old yet, please. (In The Forum.) TESOL quarterly. 20. 4. 790–795.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hinds, J.. 1987. Reader versus writer responsibility: A new typology. In Connor, U. and Kaplan, R. B. (eds.) Writing across languages: Analysis of L2 text. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesely. 141–152.Google Scholar
Horowitz, D. 1985. Process, not product: Less than meets the eye. (In The Form.) TESOL quarterly. 20. 1. 141–144.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Horowitz, D. 1986. What professors actually require: Academic tasks for the ESL classroom. TESOL quarterly. 20. 3. 445–462.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hudelson, S. In press. A tale of two childern: Individual differences in ESL childern's writing. In Johnson, D. and Roen, D. (eds.) Richness in writing: Empowering ESL students. New York: Longman.Google Scholar
Indrasuta, C. 1988. Narrative style in the writing of Thai and American students. In Purves, A. (ed.) Writing across language and cultures: Issues in contrastive rhetoric. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications. 206–226.Google Scholar
Jenkins, S. and Hinds, J.. 1987. Business letter writing: English, French and Japanese. TESOL quarterly. 21. 2. 327–343.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Johns, A. 1986. Coherence and academic writing: Some definitions and suggestions for teaching. TESOL quarterly. 20. 2. 247–266.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jones, S. 1985. Problems with monitor using in second language composition. In Rose, M. (ed.) When a writer can't write. New York: The Guilford Press. 96–118.Google Scholar
Jones, S. and Tetroe, J.. 1987. Composing in a second language. In Matsuhashi, A. (ed.) Writing in real time: Modeling production processes. Norwood, NJ: Ablex. 34–57.Google Scholar
Kanchru, Y. 1988. Writers in Hindi and English. In Purves, A. (ed.) Writing across languages and cultures: Issues in contrastive rhetoric. Newbury Park, CA: 109–137.Google Scholar
Krashen, S. 1982. Principles and practice in second language acquisition. New York: Pergamon.Google Scholar
Peyton, J. Kreeft and Mackinson-Smyth, J.. In press. Writing and talking about writing Computer networking with elementary students. In Johnson, D. and Roen, D. (eds.) Richness in writing: Empowering ESL students. New York: Longman.Google Scholar
Kreeft, Peyton J. and Mackinson-Smyth, J. et al. , 1988. Beyond writing assigments: The influence of communicative context on ESL students' writing. Paper presented at the 22nd Annual Covention of Teachers of English to Speakers of Other Languages. Chicago.Google Scholar
Mittan, R. In press. The peer review process: Harnessing students' communicative powers. In Johnson, D. and Roen, D. (eds,) Richness in writing: Empowering ESL students. New York: LongmanGoogle Scholar
Mohan, B. and Lo, W.. 1985. Academic writing and Chinese students: Transfer and developmental factors. TESOL quarterly. 19. 3. 515–534.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ostler, S.. English in parallels: A comparison of English and Arabic prose. In Connor, U. and Kaplan, R. B. (eds.) Writing across languages: Analysis of L2 text. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley. 169–185.Google Scholar
Perl, S. 1979. The composing processes of unskilled college writers. Research in the teaching of English. 13. 317–336.Google Scholar
Purves, A. 1987. Literacy, culture and community. In Wanger, D. (ed.) The future of literacy in a changing world. New York: Pergamon. 216–232.Google Scholar
Raimes, A. 1983. Tradition and revolution in ESL teaching. TESOL quarterly. 17. 4. 535–552.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Raimes, A. 1985. What unskilled ESL students do as they write: A classroom study of composing. TESOL quarterly. 19. 2. 229–255.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Raimes, A. 1983. Teaching ESL writing: Fitting what we know to what we do. The writing instructor. Summer. 154–165.Google Scholar
Reid, J. 1985. The radical outliner and the radical brainstormer: A perspective on the composing process. (In The Forum.) TESOL quarterly. 18. 4. 529–534.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reid, J.. In press. ESL composition in higher education: The expectation of the audience. In Johnson, D. and Roen, D. (eds). Richness in writing: Empowering ESL students. New York: Longman.Google Scholar
Robb, R., Ross, S., and Shortreed, I.. 1986. Salience of feedback on error and its effect on EFL writing quality. TESOL quarterly. 20. 1. 83–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rose, M. 1984. Writer's block: The congitive dimension. Carbondale, IL: Southern Illinois University Press.Google Scholar
Samway, K. 1987. The writing processes of non-native English speaking children in the elementary grades. Rochester, NY: University of Rochester. Ph.D. diss.Google Scholar
Santos, T. 1988. Professors' reactions to the academic writing of nonnative-speaking students. TESOL quarterly. 22. 1. 69–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Scardemalia, M. and Bereiter, C.. 1986. Research on written compsition. In Wittrock, M. C. (ed.) Handbook of research on teaching. 3rd ed.New York: Macmillan. 778–803.Google Scholar
Shih, M. 1986. Content-based approaches to teaching academic writing. TESOL quarterly. 20. 4. 617–648.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Soter, A. 1988. The second language learner and cultural transfer in narration. In Purves, A. (ed.) Writing across languages and cultures: Issues in contrastive rhetoric. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications. 177–205.Google Scholar
Spack, R. 1984. Invention strategies and the ESL college composition student. TESOL quarterly. 18. 4. 649–670.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Spack, R. 1988. Intiating ESL students into the academic discourse community: How far should we go? TESOL quaterly. 22. 1. 29–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Spack, R. and Sadow, C.. 1984. Student-teacher working journals in ESL freshman composition. TESOL quarterly. 17. 4. 575–893.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Swales, J. 1982. Examining examination papers. English language research journal. 3. 9–25.Google Scholar
Swales, J. 1987. Utilizing the literatures in teaching the research paper. TESOL quarterly. 21. 1. 41–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Urzuna, C. 1987. ‘You stopped too soon’: Second language childern and revising. TESOL quarterly. 21. 2. 279–304.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zamel, V. 1983. The composing processes of advanced ESL students: Six case studies. TESOL quarterly. 17. 2. 165–187.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zamel, V. 1985. Responding to student writing. TESOL quarterly. 19. 1. 79–101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zamel, V. 1987. Recent research on writing pedagogy. TESOL qurterly. 21. 4. 697–716.CrossRefGoogle Scholar