Cover not available
Part of
Languaging in Language Learning and Teaching: A collection of empirical studies
Edited by Wataru Suzuki and Neomy Storch
[Language Learning & Language Teaching 55] 2020
► pp. 129–148

Chapter 6
Languaging

Chinese students rewrite a narrative in English

| Beijing Foreign Studies University

Taking a perspective from sociocultural theory, this study examined the effects of languaging on Chinese university EFL students’ rewriting a story. Multiple sources of data were collected including discussions, co-constructed writings, individual revisions, and interviews. Data analysis found that languaging helped the participants co-construct meaning and solve comprehending and language problems in the process of writing. Languaging was also observed to have immediate, delayed, and ongoing effects on joint writing and individual revision. This study suggests that an opportunity to engage in languaging with the support of source readings and models can facilitate the generation of students’ ideas and expressions necessary for writing and allow them to reflect on their language knowledge in the process of writing and revising.

Keywords: story rewriting task, EFL learner, languaging, models
Article outline
  • Introduction
  • Languaging and L2 writing
  • Method
    • Context and participants
    • Data collection
    • Data analysis
  • Findings and discussions
    • Languaging focus at the composing stage
    • Languaging focus at the comparing stage
    • Noticing and individual revision
  • Conclusion
  • Acknowledgements
  • References
Published online: 14 August 2020
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/lllt.55.06yan
References
Brooks, L., & Swain, M.
(2009) Language in collaborative writing: Creation and response to expertise. In A. Mackey & C. Polio (Eds.), Multiple perspectives on interaction: Second language research in honor of Susan M. Gass (pp. 58–89). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Chi, M. T. H., Bassok, M., Lewis, M. W., Reimann, P., & Glaser, R.
(1989) Self-explanations: How students study and use examples in learning to solve problems. Cognitive Science, 13 (2), 145–182. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cohen, A. D.
(1983) Reformulating second-language compositions: A potential source of input for the learner (ERIC ED 228).Google Scholar
Cumming, A.
(1990) Metalinguistic and ideational thinking in second language composing. Written Communication, 7 (4), 482–511. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Donato, R.
(1994) Collective scaffolding in second language learning. In J. P. Lantolf & G. Appel (Eds.), Vygotskian approaches to second language research (pp. 33–56). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.Google Scholar
Ferris, D.
(2010) Second language writing research and written corrective feedback in SLA: Intersections and practical applications. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 32 (2), 181–201. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hanaoka, O., & Izumi, S.
(2012) Noticing and uptake: Addressing pre-articulated covert problems in L2 writing. Journal of Second Language Writing, 21 (4), 332–347. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Nassaji, H., & Tian, J.
(2010) Collaborative and individual output tasks and their effects on learning English phrasal verbs. Language Teaching Research, 14 (4), 397–419. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Niu, R.
(2009) Effect of task-inherent production modes on EFL learners’ focus on form. Language Awareness, 18 (3–4), 384–402. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pieson, H., Kumar, S., Lin, Z., & Neu, P.
(2007) New perspective graduate series reading, writing and rhetoric for the 21st Century (pp. 85–90). Beijing: Higher Education Press.Google Scholar
Storch, N.
(2002) Patterns of interaction in ESL pair work. Language Learning, 52 (1), 119–158. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2011) Collaborative writing in L2 contexts: Processes, outcomes, and future directions. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 31 , 275–288. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2013) Collaborative writing in L2 classrooms. Bristol: Multilingual Matters. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Swain, M.
(1995) Three functions of output in second language learning. In G. Crook & B. Seidlhofer (Eds.), Principles and practices in applied linguistics: Studies in honour of H. Widdowson (pp. 125–144). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
(2000) The output hypothesis and beyond: Mediating acquisition through collaborative dialogue. In J. P. Lantolf (Ed.), Sociocultural theory and second language learning (pp. 97–114). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Swain, M., & Lapkin, S.
(1998) Interaction and second language learning: Two adolescent French immersion students working together. The Modern Language Journal, 82 (3), 320–337. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2002) Talking it through: Two French immersion students’ response to reformulation. International Journal of Educational Research, 37 (3-4), 285–304. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Swain, M.
(2006) Languaging, agency and collaboration in advanced second language proficiency. In B. Heidi (Ed.), Advanced language learning: The contribution of Halliday and Vygotsky (pp. 95–108). New York, NY: Continuum.Google Scholar
Swain, M., Lapkin, S., Knouzi, I., Suzuki, W., & Brooks, L.
(2009) Languaging: University students learn the grammatical concept of voice in French. The Modern Language Journal, 93 (1), 5–29. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Tocalli-Beller, A., & Swain, M.
(2005) Reformulation: The cognitive conflict and L2 learning it generates. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 15 (1), 5–28. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Vygotsky, L. S.
(1978) Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google 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 (3), 225–246. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Watanabe, Y., & Swain, M.
(2007) Effects of proficiency differences and patterns of pair interaction on second language learning: Collaborative dialogue between adult ESL learners. Language Teaching Research, 11 (2), 121–142. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Watanabe, Y.
(2008) Peer-peer interaction between L2 learners of different proficiency levels: Their interactions and reflections. The Canadian Modern Language Review, 64 (4), 605–635. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Whalen, K., & Mènard, N.
(1995) L1 and L2 writers’ strategic and linguistic knowledge: A model of multiple-level discourse processing. Language Learning, 45 (3), 381–418. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Yang, L., & Zhang, L.
(2010) Exploring the role of reformulations and a model text in EFL students’ writing performance. Language Teaching Research, 14 (4), 141–160.Google Scholar
Yang, L., & Gao, S.
(2013) Beliefs and practices of Chinese university teachers in EFL writing instruction. Language, Culture and Curriculum, 26 (2), 128–145. DOI logoGoogle Scholar