Blog 5

Woodall, Billy R. "Language-Switching: Using the First Language While Writing in a Second Language." Journal of Second Language Writing 11.1 (2002): 7-28. ScienceDirect. Web. 12 Mar. 2010.

In Woodall’s article “Language-Switching: Using the First Language While Writing in a Second Language,” Woodall discusses how language-switching (L-S) is used in L2 writing. Woodall defines the term L-S as “the spontaneous, non-prescribed use of the L1 in L2 writing” and explains that “the switch occurs privately (even though others may be present)” (8). Woodall identifies three factors that he believes affect L-S in L2 writing, and those are “L2 proficiency, task difficulty, and the genetic relationship between the L1 and the L2, i.e., whether the native and target languages are cognate (such as English and Spanish) or non-cognate (such as English and Japanese)” (10). While some studies report text quality is unrelated to L2 proficiency, others insist L2 proficiency does in fact affect L2 writing performance. Researchers also differ on the role of task difficulty in L2 writing. Despite the contradictory conclusions in the field, Woodall notes that “all research in L2 writing can be classified as studies in either cognate or non-cognate languages,” in addition, he argues that “one might expect all language learners, regardless of the relationship of native language to target language, to rely on what they know (L1) when building new knowledge (L2)” (10). Although a great deal of past research supports the idea that writing in the L1 is similar to writing in the L2, Woodall expounds on his hypothesis claiming there is a significant difference between L1/L2 writing especially in regards to L-S behavior (11). Woodall used 28 participants in his study and grouped them according to their L2 proficiency (intermediate and advanced). Woodall points out that 13 of the participants “were learning a second language that was cognate to their native language (Spanish/English), and 15 were learning a second language that was non-cognate to their native language (Japanese/English)” (12). Woodall used think-aloud protocols and instructed the participants to compose two texts – a letter and a persuasive essay. After the L-S think-aloud data was collected, it was analyzed with respect to a variety of factors. The first was “L2 proficiency, a between-subjects factor with two levels (intermediate and advanced), and the second factor was language group, another between-subjects factor with two levels (cognate and non-cognate)” (Woodall 15). Finally, “the third factor was task difficulty, a within-subjects repeated measure with two levels (easy versus difficult, i.e., letter versus essay)” (15). The results of Woodall’s study revealed L2 proficiency and task difficulty have no effect on L-S in L2 writing; however, Woodall concluded that “some students appeared to control their L-S using their L1 as a tool” while “for others L-S seemed out of control, and the L1 seemed more like a crutch to obtain cognitive stability” (20). As for the L-S with cognate and non-cognate languages, Woodall seems to attribute not being able to “control” the L1 to a writer of a non-cognate language and “using their L1 as a tool” to a writer of a cognate language which does not support his hypothesis (20). I would recommend this article because it both recognizes and supports the idea that employing the L1 while writing in L2 can be beneficial. It also introduces (at least to my knowledge) cognate and non-cognate languages and the significance of that concept within the field of L2 writing.