- Home
- e-Journals
- ITL - International Journal of Applied Linguistics
- Previous Issues
- Volume 156, Issue 1, 2008
ITL - International Journal of Applied Linguistics - Volume 156, Issue 1, 2008
Volume 156, Issue 1, 2008
-
Working Memory and Writing in Bilingual Students
Author(s): Anne-Marie Adams and Kim Guillotpp.: 13–28 (16)More LessAbstractThe vocabulary, spelling and writing skills of French/English bilingual students aged between 12 and 15 years were assessed, along with their verbal working memory (VWM), visuo-spatial working memory (VSWM) and phonological short-term memory (PSTM) skills. The extent to which individual differences in writing performance reflected variations in working memory skills which were specific to the memory domain and the language of testing was assessed. All three components of working memory were significantly associated across languages confirming their independence in this bilingual sample. Significant associations were also identified between vocabulary knowledge and VWM in both languages. For text composition in English, significant associations were identified between spelling and PSTM assessed in English, with medium sized, but non-significant, correlations identified with vocabulary knowledge and VWM. For text composition in French, although the associations with spelling, PSTM and VWM were of a moderate effect size, none of these associations reached significance. Comparisons across languages revealed that although writing in English was not significantly associated with either French vocabulary or spelling, writing in French was associated with both these subcomponent skills assessed in English. Visuo-spatial working memory bore little association with either spelling or writing skills either within or across languages. Broadly speaking therefore the data were consistent with an interpretation of the relationship between working memory and writing that reflects a domain-specific view of the capacity limitations in working memory which constrain writing performance, rather than limitations imposed by a domain-general attentional construct. However, it was proposed that these verbal processing effects are not language-specific.
-
Notetaking and Writing from Hypertexts in L1 and L2
Author(s): Marie-Laure Barbier, Annie Piolat, Jean-Yves Roussey and Françoise Rabypp.: 31–50 (20)More LessAbstractThis study analyzes the cognitive effort and linguistic procedures of sixty students using information taken from an experimental website in L1 (French) and in L2 (English). The students navigated on the website and took notes on paper or with a word processor. A triple-task paradigm was used to estimate the cognitive load of reading, notetaking, and writing processes in L2. The students had to perform two additional tasks while a main task (notetaking, for example) was being carried out. They had to react as fast as possible to sound signals sent out at random intervals. They also had to identify what they were doing at the time the sound signal was heard (reading, notetaking, or writing). The study focuses on the way the students managed their cognitive resources while exploring the website, selecting and writing down the ideas they considered useful, and reconstructing them later when producing their own text. Surprisingly, no difference in cognitive load was observed between L1 and L2. By relying almost exclusively on the copy and paste functions to retrieve information from the website, the participants using a word processor in L2 succeeded in making reading a less costly activity, and they performed similarly to the notetakers in L1. The students’ difficulties in L2 became apparent only in the paper condition. The strategies and linguistic procedures of the students are described and related to the ways teachers can approach the new dimensions of notetaking and writing with a computer.
-
Developmental Stages in Advanced SLA
Author(s): Estela Enepp.: 53–86 (34)More LessAbstractSecond Language Acquisition (SLA) researchers have yet to map the developmental stages language learners go through as they approach the target language. In studies of English as a Second Language (ESL) writing, the term 'advanced learner' has been applied indiscriminately to learners ranging from freshman ESL composition to graduate students. There is a need to examine the advanced stages of SLA in order to refine SLA theories and pedagogical approaches. A corpus of texts written by non-native English-speaking doctoral students in applied linguistics from several linguistic backgrounds was analyzed to determine the texts’ lexical, morphological and syntactic fluency, accuracy and complexity. A sub-corpus of papers by native-English-speaking peers was used for comparison. The texts were strictly-timed and loosely-timed exams written 2 to 3 years apart. Surveys and interviews were also conducted. Based on findings, the study defines data-based criteria that distinguish four quantitatively and qualitatively distinct developmental stages: the advanced, highly advanced, near-native, and native-like stages. Advanced learners make more frequent and varied errors which can be explained by transfer from the first language. Native-like writers make few errors that can be explained by overgeneralization of conventions from informal English and working memory limitations (similar to native speakers’ errors). The study suggests that SLA is a process of transfer followed by relearning of morpho-syntactic specifications (Herschensohn, 2000), with syntax being used with the greatest accuracy (Bardovi-Harlig & Bofman, 1989) and lexicon with the least. The relationships between accuracy and other social and cognitive factors are considered, and pedagogical recommendations are made.
-
Plagiarism by Non-Native Speaker Student Writers
Author(s): Robert Lankamppp.: 91–107 (17)More LessAbstractMany studies have attributed plagiarism to the temptations of the Internet, teachers’ reluctance to enforce the rules, belonging to a culture where academic plagiarism is condoned, or non-native speakership. In this paper, it is first argued that none of these can be considered direct causes of plagiarism, and other studies are cited that support this position. It is further argued that non-native student plagiarism is caused by ignorance of the rules and/or authorial problems. Further support for this claim is provided by an empirical study involving inappropriate use of source texts by eight non-native speaker graduate students. This study confirms the findings in Pecorari (2003, 2006) where it is claimed that plagiarizing non-native speakers have personal, idiosyncratic views of plagiarism that demonstrate their ignorance of the generally accepted rules. This study also confirms the findings in Abasi et al. (2006) where it is claimed that authorial problems are a root cause of plagiarism by ESL students. Finally, it is investigated what the relationship is between ignorance of the rules of plagiarism and authorial problems.
-
Learner Agency and Identity in Second Language Writing
Author(s): Heekyeong Leepp.: 109–128 (20)More LessAbstractIn this paper, I provide a critical discussion about the socio-cultural-historical dimension of a student’s struggle in the processes of learning academic writing in second language (L2). Some teachers or researchers may assume that L2 students often struggle because they do not know or do not understand the information they are taught. Therefore, teachers may feel that it is their duty to explicitly teach the information to students. I argue that some L2 students’ difficulties in their academic writing processes should not only be viewed as due to their limited proficiency of language or motivation to learn. Rather, L2 student writers’ struggles can be influenced by the process of negotiating learner agency and identity in their multiple social worlds. The primary source of the data presented is one Korean student’s personal narrative about his learning challenges and struggles in an intensive ESL program at a Canadian university. Findings of data call for a re-examination of hegemonic approaches that have become normative ways of framing, representing and describing L2 student writers and their learning challenges from a deficit view.
-
Development of Fluency and Revision in L1 and L2 Writing in Swedish High School Years Eight and Nine
Author(s): Eva Lindgren, Kristyan Spelman Miller and Kirk P.H. Sullivanpp.: 133–151 (19)More LessAbstractIn this paper we use keystroke logging to examine the development of fluency and revision in high school L1 Swedish and L2 English writing. Each writer wrote one text in English and one in Swedish in each year of the study. Using a combination of statistical and automatic analyses of the keystroke log, we attempted to investigate: i) how the on-line writing process in terms of revising, pausing and fluency in first and second language writing changes over time, ii) whether there are on-line writing process variables which can be identified as contributing to text improvement, and iii) whether there are any aspects of L1 writing which can be identified as contributing to L2 writing and learning processes and which may form part of a teaching programme. Previous studies of L2 writers have attested to changes in fluency, pause and revision behaviour, and amount of text produced, although associations with the quality of the final output are not clearly supported. The within-writer comparison of this study addresses differences in fluency, pause and revision behaviour between L1 and L2 writing. A regression analysis looking at quality and two types of revision (Form, and Conceptual) found that form revision frequency was related to the language of writing and that conceptual revision frequency was dependent on linguistic experience rather than on language. The findings suggest that conceptual revision and writing skills are transferred from the L1 to the L2, and that these skills should be taught accordingly.
-
Intercultural Discourse Patterns in Writing Argumentative Texts
Author(s): Bruria Margolin and Hanna Ezerpp.: 153–168 (16)More LessAbstractThis study examines the quality of the writing of Jewish (L1) and Arab (L2) first-year student teachers at Hebrew-speaking colleges. The study seeks to understand the quality of argumentative writing of the student teachers at the beginning of their studies and to expose the discourse patterns that emerge from those argumentative texts. A code book serving as a coding analysis device was developed in order to reveal the following rhetorical text features: content, structure, syntax and style. Each global feature contained a number of specific measures. The findings indicate that the writing quality of first-year L1 students is significantly higher than that of first-year L2 students on all the specific writing measures examined. The texts of the Arab students were less coherent and lacked rhetorical structure and accepted grammatical forms, whereas those of the Jewish students were more coherent and self-explanatory. The study concludes that when Arab students write in Hebrew as a second language, the linguistic and rhetorical conventions of Arabic interfere with their Hebrew writing. The results demonstrate significant and interesting differences between Jewish native speakers (L1 students) and Arab non-native speakers (L2 students). While the texts of L1 students tend to display 'explicit coherence,' those of L2 students show 'implicit coherence.'
-
Discourse Features of Argumentative Essays Written by Chinese EFL Students
Author(s): Ruiqin Miao and Xiuyun Leipp.: 179–200 (22)More LessAbstractStudies on both second language discourse in general and Chinese EFL/ESL discourse in particular have reported mixed findings about the relationship between L1 and L2 writing. This study investigates the rhetorical features of argumentative essays written by Chinese college EFL students by analyzing paragraph and overall textual organization and development in 69 sample essays. The results show that the majority of the participants compose in a deductive pattern similar to what is typically employed by native English speaking writers. However, the way in which the Chinese EFL students develop their L2 written discourse lacks effectiveness and adequacy, in terms of the following features: the quality of the topic sentence (of paragraphs) and the introduction paragraph (of essays), the adequacy of supporting details, transitions between sentences and paragraphs, and the effectiveness of the ending (of essays). Furthermore, we explore the factors that may underlie the observed patterns. We conclude the paper by discussing the pedagogical implications of the findings and suggesting directions for future research.
-
Differences in Process and Process-Product Relations in L2 Writing
Author(s): Daphne van Weijen, Huub van den Bergh, Gert Rijlaarsdam and Ted Sanderspp.: 203–226 (24)More LessAbstractThis 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.
Volumes & issues
-
Volume 175 (2024)
-
Volume 174 (2023)
-
Volume 173 (2022)
-
Volume 172 (2021)
-
Volume 171 (2020)
-
Volume 170 (2019)
-
Volume 169 (2018)
-
Volume 168 (2017)
-
Volume 167 (2016)
-
Volume 166 (2015)
-
Volume 165 (2014)
-
Volume 164 (2012)
-
Volume 163 (2012)
-
Volume 162 (2011)
-
Volume 161 (2011)
-
Volume 160 (2010)
-
Volume 159 (2010)
-
Volume 158 (2009)
-
Volume 157 (2009)
-
Volume 156 (2008)
-
Volume 155 (2008)
-
Volume 154 (2007)
-
Volume 153 (2007)
-
Volume 152 (2006)
-
Volume 151 (2006)
-
Volume 149 (2005)
-
Volume 147 (2004)
-
Volume 145 (2004)
-
Volume 143 (2004)
-
Volume 141 (2003)
-
Volume 139 (2003)
-
Volume 137 (2002)
-
Volume 135 (2002)
-
Volume 133 (2001)
-
Volume 131 (2001)
-
Volume 129 (2000)
-
Volume 127 (2000)
-
Volume 125 (1999)
-
Volume 123 (1999)
-
Volume 121 (1998)
-
Volume 119 (1998)
-
Volume 117 (1997)
-
Volume 115 (1997)
-
Volume 113 (1996)
-
Volume 111 (1996)
-
Volume 109 (1995)
-
Volume 107 (1995)
-
Volume 105 (1994)
-
Volume 103 (1994)
-
Volume 101 (1993)
-
Volume 99 (1993)
-
Volume 97 (1992)
-
Volume 95 (1992)
-
Volume 93 (1991)
-
Volume 91 (1991)
-
Volume 89 (1990)
-
Volume 87 (1990)
-
Volume 85 (1989)
-
Volume 83 (1989)
-
Volume 81 (1988)
-
Volume 79 (1988)
-
Volume 77 (1987)
-
Volume 76 (1987)
-
Volume 75 (1987)
-
Volume 74 (1986)
-
Volume 73 (1986)
-
Volume 72 (1986)
-
Volume 71 (1986)
-
Volume 70 (1985)
-
Volume 69 (1985)
-
Volume 67 (1985)
-
Volume 66 (1985)
-
Volume 65 (1984)
-
Volume 64 (1984)
-
Volume 63 (1984)
-
Volume 62 (1983)
-
Volume 60 (1983)
-
Volume 59 (1983)
-
Volume 58 (1982)
-
Volume 57 (1982)
-
Volume 56 (1982)
-
Volume 55 (1982)
-
Volume 54 (1981)
-
Volume 53 (1981)
-
Volume 52 (1981)
-
Volume 51 (1981)
-
Volume 49 (1980)
-
Volume 48 (1980)
-
Volume 47 (1980)
-
Volume 45 (1979)
-
Volume 44 (1979)
-
Volume 43 (1979)
-
Volume 41 (1978)
-
Volume 39 (1978)
-
Volume 38 (1977)
-
Volume 37 (1977)
-
Volume 36 (1977)
-
Volume 35 (1977)
-
Volume 34 (1976)
-
Volume 33 (1976)
-
Volume 32 (1976)
-
Volume 31 (1976)
-
Volume 30 (1975)
-
Volume 29 (1975)
-
Volume 28 (1975)
-
Volume 27 (1975)
-
Volume 25 (1974)
-
Volume 24 (1974)
-
Volume 23 (1974)
-
Volume 22 (1973)
-
Volume 21 (1973)
-
Volume 20 (1973)
-
Volume 19 (1973)
-
Volume 18 (1972)
-
Volume 17 (1972)
-
Volume 16 (1972)
-
Volume 15 (1972)
-
Volume 14 (1971)
-
Volume 13 (1971)
-
Volume 12 (1971)
-
Volume 11 (1971)
-
Volume 10 (1970)
-
Volume 9 (1970)
-
Volume 8 (1970)
-
Volume 7 (1970)
-
Volume 6 (1969)
-
Volume 5 (1969)
-
Volume 4 (1969)
-
Volume 3 (1969)
-
Volume 2 (1968)
-
Volume 1 (1968)
Most Read This Month

-
-
The updated Vocabulary Levels Test
Author(s): Stuart Webb, Yosuke Sasao and Oliver Ballance
-
- More Less