Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home
Hostname: page-component-888d5979f-lv79x Total loading time: 0.337 Render date: 2021-10-26T03:35:35.436Z Has data issue: true Feature Flags: { "shouldUseShareProductTool": true, "shouldUseHypothesis": true, "isUnsiloEnabled": true, "metricsAbstractViews": false, "figures": true, "newCiteModal": false, "newCitedByModal": true, "newEcommerce": true, "newUsageEvents": true }

LANGUAGE REFLECTION FOSTERED BY INDIVIDUAL L2 WRITING TASKS

DEVELOPING A THEORETICALLY MOTIVATED AND EMPIRICALLY BASED CODING SYSTEM

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 August 2019

Sonia López-Serrano*
Affiliation:
University of Murcia/Pompeu Fabra University
Julio Roca de Larios
Affiliation:
University of Murcia
Rosa M. Manchón
Affiliation:
University of Murcia
*
*Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Sonia López-Serrano, Pompeu Fabra University, Department of Translation and Language Sciences, Roc Boronat 138, 08018 Barcelona. E-mail: sonia.lopez@upf.edu

Abstract

There has been a growing interest in the study of writing from the perspective of its potential contribution to language development. However, scant attention has been paid to key methodological considerations regarding the analysis of the connection between L2 writing processes, reflection on language while writing, and language learning. In an attempt to advance in this domain, and informed by models of L2 writing, and cognitive L2 writing research framed in the problem-solving paradigm, this study provides a comprehensive description of the language reflection individual writers engage in when solving the linguistic problems they face while completing writing tasks in their L2. The think-aloud protocols generated by 21 EFL learners while writing an individual argumentative essay were analyzed on the basis of a reconceptualization of language-related episodes as problem-solving strategy clusters. The result is a comprehensive, theoretically motivated, and empirically based coding system that is offered as a basis for future research in the domain. We discuss the methodological implications of our analytic approach and advance some theoretical implications for future debates on the language learning potential of individual writing tasks.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2019 

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.)

Footnotes

This study was financed by the Spanish Ministerio de Economía y Competitividad (research grant FFI2016-79763) and by Fundación Séneca, Murcia, Spain (research grants 19463/PI/14 and 20832/PI/18). We would like to thank the volume editors and the anonymous reviewers for their insightful suggestions for improvement of this article.

References

Allan, D. (1995). Oxford placement test. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Bowles, M. (2010). The think-aloud controversy in second-language research . London, UK: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Byrnes, H., & Manchón, R. M. (2014). Task-based language learning: Insights from and for L2 writing: An introduction. In Byrnes, H. & Manchón, R. M. (Eds.), Task-based language learning: Insights from and for L2 writing (pp. 123). Amsterdam, The Netherlands: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Chenoweth, N. A., & Hayes, J. R. (2001). Fluency in writing: Generating text in L1 and L2. Written Communication, 18, 8098.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Craik, F. I. M. (2002). Levels of processing: Past, present, and… future? Memory, 10, 305318.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Craik, F. I. M., & Lockhart, R. S. (1972). Levels of processing: A framework for memory research. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behaviour, 11, 671684.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cumming, A. (1990). Metalinguistic and ideational thinking in second language composing. Written Communication, 7, 482511.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
DeKeyser, R. (2005). What makes learning second-language grammar difficult? A review of issues. Language Learning, 51, 125.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dörnyei, Z., & Kormos, J. (1998). Problem-solving mechanisms in L2 communication: A psycholinguistic perspective. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 20, 349385.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fernández-Dobao, A. (2012). Collaborative writing tasks in the L2 classroom: Comparing group, pair and individual work. Journal of Second Language Writing, 21, 4058.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fortune, A. (2005). Learners’ use of metalanguage in collaborative form-focused L2 output tasks. Language Awareness, 14, 2138.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fortune, A., & Thorp, D. (2001). Knotted and entangled: New light on the identification, classification and value of language related episodes in collaborative output tasks. Language Awareness, 10, 143160.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gánem-Gutiérrez, G. A., & Gilmore, A. (2018). Tracking the real-time evolution of a writing event: Second language writers at different proficiency levels. Language Learning, 68, 469506.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grabe, W., & Kaplan, R. B. (1996). Theory and practice of writing: An applied linguistics perspective. Harlow, UK: Pearson Education.Google Scholar
Harklau, L. (2002). The role of writing in classroom second language acquisition. Journal of Second Language Writing, 11, 329350.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hayes, J. R. (2012). Modeling and remodeling writing. Written Communication 29, 369388.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Izumi, S. (2003). Comprehension and production processes in second language learning: In search of the psycholinguistic rationale of the output hypothesis. Applied Linguistics, 24, 168196.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Izumi, S., & Hanaoka, O. (2012). Noticing and uptake: Addressing pre-articulated covert problems in L2 writing. Journal of Second Language Writing, 21, 332347.Google Scholar
Jiang, N. (2000). Lexical representation and development in a second language. Applied Linguistics, 21, 4777.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kellogg, R. T. (1996). A model of working memory in writing. In Levy, C. M. & Ransdell, S. E. (Eds.), The science of writing (pp. 5771). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Kormos, J. (2006). Speech production and second language acquisition. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Kormos, J. (2011). Speech production and the Cognition Hypothesis. In Robinson, P. (Ed.), Second language task complexity: Researching the cognition hypothesis of language learning and performance (pp. 3960). Amsterdam, The Netherlands: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kormos, J. (2012). The role of individual differences in L2 writing. Journal of Second Language Writing, 21, 390403.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Laufer, B., & Hulstijn, J. (2001). Incidental vocabulary acquisition in a second language: The construct of task-induced involvement. Applied Linguistics, 22, 126.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leow, R. P. (2015). Explicit learning in the L2 classroom: A student-centred approach. London, UK: Routledge.Google Scholar
Macaro, E. (2006). Strategies for language learning and for language use: Revising the theoretical framework. Modern Language Journal, 90, 320337.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Macaro, E. (2007). Language learner strategies: Adhering to a theoretical framework. The Language Learning Journal, 35, 239243.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Macaro, E. (2014). Reframing task performance: The relationship between tasks, strategic behaviour, and linguistic knowledge in writing. In Byrnes, H. & Manchón, R. M. (Eds.), Task-based language learning: Insights from and for L2 writing (pp. 5377). Amsterdam, The Netherlands: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Manchón, R. M. (2011). Writing to learn the language: Issues in theory and research. In Manchón, R. M. (Ed.), Learning-to-write and writing-to-learn in an additional language (pp. 6182). Amsterdam, The Netherlands: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Manchón, R. M. (2014). The internal dimension of tasks: The interaction between task factors and learner factors in bringing about learning through writing. In Byrnes, H. & Manchón, R. M. (Eds.), Task-based language learning. Insights from and for L2 writing (pp. 2752). Amsterdam, The Netherlands: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Manchón, R. M., & Roca de Larios, J. (2007). Writing-to-learn in instructed language learning contexts. In Alcón Soler, E. & Safont Jordá, M. P. (Eds.), Intercultural language use and language learning (pp. 101121). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Manchón, R. M., & Vasylets, O. (2019). Language learning through writing: Theoretical perspectives and empirical evidence. In Schwieter, J. W., & Benati, A. (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of language learning. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Manchón, R. M., & Williams, J. (2016). L2 writing and SLA studies. In Manchón, R. M. & Matsuda, P. K. (Eds.), Handbook of second and foreign language writing (pp. 567586). Berlin, Germany, and Boston, MA: De Gruyter Mouton.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
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. In Matsuda, P. & Silva, T. (Eds.), Second language writing research: Perspectives on the process of knowledge construction (pp. 191206). New York, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar
Manchón, R. M., Roca de Larios, J., & Murphy, L. (2009). The temporal dimension and problem-solving nature of foreign language composing: Implications for theory. In Manchón, R. M. (Ed.), Foreign language writing: Learning, teaching and research (pp. 102124). Clevedon, UK: Multilingual Matters.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Murphy, L., & Roca de Larios, J. (2010). Searching for words: One strategic use of the mother tongue by advanced Spanish EFL writers. Journal of Second Language Writing, 19, 6181.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Newell, A. (1980). Reasoning, problem solving and decision processes: The problem space as a fundamental category. In Nickerson, R. S. (Ed.), Attention and performance (pp. 693719). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Ortega, L. (2011). Reflections on the learning-to-write and writing-to-learn dimensions of second language writing. In Manchón, R. M. (Ed.), Learning-to-write and writing-to-learn in an additional language (pp. 237250). Amsterdam, The Netherlands: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Raimes, A. (1987). Language proficiency, writing ability, and composing strategies: A study of ESL college student writers. Language Learning, 37, 439468.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Révész, A., & Michel, M. (2019). Introduction. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 41, 491501.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Révész, A., Kourtali, N. E., & Mazgutova, D. (2017). Effects of task complexity on L2 writing behaviours and linguistic complexity. Language Learning, 67, 208241.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rijlaarsdam, G., & van den Bergh, H. (2006). Writing process theory: A functional dynamic approach. In MacArthur, C., Graham, S., & Fitzgerald, J. (Eds.), Handbook of writing research (pp. 4153). New York, NY: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
Roca de Larios, J. (2013). Second language writing as a psycholinguistic locus for L2 production and learning. Journal of Second Language Writing, 4, 444445.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Roca de Larios, J., Murphy, L., & Manchón, R. M. (1999). The use of restructuring strategies in EFL writing: A study of Spanish learners of English as a foreign language. Journal of Second Language Writing, 8, 1344.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sasaki, M (2000). Toward an empirical model of EFL writing processes: An exploratory study. Journal of Second Language Writing, 9, 259291.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sasaki, M. (2002). Building an empirically-based model of EFL learners' writing processes. In S. Ransdell & M. L. Barbier (Eds.), New directions for research in L2 writing (pp. 4980). Amsterdam: Kluwer Academic.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sasaki, M (2004). A multiple-data analysis of the 3.5-year development of EFL student writers. Language Learning, 54, 525582.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schmidt, R. (1990). The role of consciousness in second language learning. Applied Linguistics, 11, 206226.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Skehan, P. (1998). A cognitive approach to language learning . Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Smagorinsky, P. (2008). The method section as conceptual epicentre in constructing social science research reports. Written Communication, 25, 389411.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smith, V. (1994). Thinking in a foreign language: An investigation into essay writing and translation by L2 learners. Tubingen, Germany: Verlag.Google Scholar
Storch, N. (2013). Collaborative writing in L2 classrooms. Bristol, UK: Multilingual Matters.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Storch, N. (2016). Collaborative writing. In Manchón, R. M. & Matsuda, P. K. (Eds.), Handbook of second and foreign language writing (pp. 387406). Berlin, Germany: De Gruyter Mouton.Google Scholar
Swain, M. (1985). Communicative competence: Some roles of comprehensible input and comprehensible output in its development. In Gass, S. & Madden, C. (Eds.), Input in second language acquisition (pp. 235–153). Rowley, MA: Newbury House.Google Scholar
Swain, M. (1995). Three functions of output in second language learning. In Cook, G. & Seidlhofer, B. (Eds.), Applied linguistics. Studies in honour of H. G. Widdowson (pp. 125–144). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Swain, M. (2005). The output hypothesis: Theory and research. In Hinkel, E. (Ed.), Handbook of research in second language teaching and learning (pp. 471483). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Swain, M., & Lapkin, S. (1995). Problems in output and the cognitive processes they generate: A step toward second language learning. Applied Linguistics, 16 , 371391.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vygotsky, L. (1962). Thought and language . Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wang, L. (2003). Switching to first language among writers with differing second-language proficiency. Journal of Second Language Writing, 12, 347375.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
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, 225246.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Williams, J. (2012). The potential role(s) of writing in second language development. Journal of Second Language Writing, 21, 321331.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Witte, S. P. (1987). Pre-text and composing. College Composition and Communication, 38 , 397425.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zimmermann, R. (2000). L2 writing subprocesses: A model of formulating and empirical findings. Learning and Instruction, 10, 7399.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Supplementary material: File

López-Serrano et al. supplementary material

Tables 3-9

Download López-Serrano et al. supplementary material(File)
File 32 KB
8
Cited by

Send article to Kindle

To send this article to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about sending to your Kindle. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.

Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

LANGUAGE REFLECTION FOSTERED BY INDIVIDUAL L2 WRITING TASKS
Available formats
×

Send article to Dropbox

To send this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Dropbox.

LANGUAGE REFLECTION FOSTERED BY INDIVIDUAL L2 WRITING TASKS
Available formats
×

Send article to Google Drive

To send this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Google Drive.

LANGUAGE REFLECTION FOSTERED BY INDIVIDUAL L2 WRITING TASKS
Available formats
×
×

Reply to: Submit a response

Please enter your response.

Your details

Please enter a valid email address.

Conflicting interests

Do you have any conflicting interests? *