Comparing EFL Experienced Writers'' L1 and L2 Writing Processes

• Main Authors: I-chen Lee, 李宜甄
• Other Authors: Shih-guey Joe
• Format: Others
• Language: en_US
• Published: 2005
• Online Access: http://ndltd.ncl.edu.tw/handle/42838755058698045676

碩士 === 國立雲林科技大學 === 應用外語系碩士班 === 93 === This study investigated the EFL mature writers’ composing processes in both L1 and L2 by means of think-aloud method and retrospective interview. The existed well-known writing models were established upon the observation of native English speakers’ composing processes (Flower & Hayes, 1981; Hayes, 1996; Scandamalia & Bereiter, 1987). However, the writing processes undergone by L2 writers are argued to be more complicated than those depicted in the models (e.g. Leki, 1992; Liu, 1999; Zamel, 1983). L2 writers needed to face more challenges such as the deficiency of linguistic competence and rhetoric conventions (e.g. Hinds, 1990; Kaplan, 1966, 1971; Odlin, 1989). This study, hence, examined the EFL mature writers’ composing processes when they write on the same topic in both L1 and L2. The purposes are to explore L1 and L2 writing processes undergone by EFL mature writers, detect the similarities and differences of strategy use in L1 and L2 writing, and to realize the participants’ perceptions of L1 and L2 writing. Three graduate students majoring in Teaching English as a Foreign Language participated in the current study. They were required to compose an expository essay in English and Mandarin at an interval of at least one month. The subjects’ think-aloud writing process and the retrospective interview following each writing task were videotaped and audio-taped for further analysis. The results revealed that firstly, EFL experienced writers are found to undergo a recursive writing process while composing in English and Mandarin. Secondly, EFL experienced writers seem to perform the strategies similarly in both L1 and L2 writing processes. They seem to focus more on planning for the writing task, focus more on global concerns than local concerns and apply the same writing approaches to accomplish the writing tasks. They also appear to activate the same strategies in L1 and L2 writing. On the other hand, L1 writing appears to be different from L2 writing. L2 writing is more like knowledge-transforming than L1 writing. L2 writing is more demanding than L1 writing. Thirdly, L1 writing is characterized by relying frequently on reviewing what has been written to generate more ideas. L2 writing is characterized by using L1 to develop ideas and depending on L2 to transform ideas into words. Finally, the participants hold different perceptions of L1 writing and L2 writing in terms of writing conventions and task emphasis. This study, thus, attempts to provide further insight to the development of EFL writers’ L2 writing models, highlight the potentially influential factors on L2 writing, and pinpoint the importance of writing instruction.