z-logo
open-access-imgOpen Access
Thinking Languages in L2 Writing: Research Findings and Pedagogical Implications.
Author(s) -
Jim C. Hu
Publication year - 2003
Publication title -
tesl canada journal
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
eISSN - 1925-8917
pISSN - 0826-435X
DOI - 10.18806/tesl.v21i1.273
Subject(s) - second language writing , discipline , second language acquisition , language proficiency , first language , writing system , psychology , second language , linguistics , perception , academic writing , language education , mathematics education , sociology , social science , philosophy , neuroscience
This article reports the findings of part of a major study exploring the disciplinary writing processes and perceptions of 15 Chinese graduate students in sciences and engineering at a major Canadian university. The findings relate to the thinking languages of the participants in writing disciplinary assignments. The study reveals that whether an L2 writer thinks in L1 or L2 may not depend on one factor as proposed in earlier studies (Friedlander, 1990; Qi, 1998), but on a number of factors including the language of knowledge input, the language of knowledge acquisition, the development of L2 proficiency, the level of knowledge demands, and specific task conditions. It is the interplay among these (and possibly other) factors that determines the writer's choice of the thinking language, which may switch back and forth between L1 and L2. Further, although translation may be a positive strategy for a student with limited L2 proficiency, it may gradually phase out as the student thinks more in L2 and writes L2 in approximation to the language of native writers. Thus a thinking language continuum may exist along which the use of translation varies.

The content you want is available to Zendy users.

Already have an account? Click here to sign in.
Having issues? You can contact us here