Academic-Writing-and-Chinese-Students-transfer-and

TeachersofEnglishtoSpeakersofOtherLanguages,Inc.(TESOL)AcademicWritingandChineseStudents:TransferandDevelopmentalFactorsAuthor(s):BernardA.MohanandWinnieAu-YeungLoSource:TESOLQuarterly,Vol.19,No.3(Sep.,1985),pp.515-534Publishedby:TeachersofEnglishtoSpeakersofOtherLanguages,Inc.(TESOL)StableURL::25/08/201008:31YouruseoftheJSTORarchiveindicatesyouracceptanceofJSTOR'sTermsandConditionsofUse,availableat://=tesol.EachcopyofanypartofaJSTORtransmissionmustcontainthesamecopyrightnoticethatappearsonthescreenorprintedpageofsuchtransmission.JSTORisanot-for-profitservicethathelpsscholars,researchers,andstudentsdiscover,use,andbuilduponawiderangeofcontentinatrusteddigitalarchive.Weuseinformationtechnologyandtoolstoincreaseproductivityandfacilitatenewformsofscholarship.FormoreinformationaboutJSTOR,[e-mail]ersofOtherLanguages,Inc.(TESOL)iscollaboratingwithJSTORtodigitize,preserveandextendaccesstoTESOLQuarterly.:TransferandDevelopmentalFactorsBERNARDA.MOHANUniversityofBritishColumbiaWINNIEAU-YEUNGLOVancouverCommunityCollegeandKwantlenCollegeOrganizationalproblemsinacademicwritingbysecondlanguagelearnersareoftenattributedtointerference,ornegativetransfer,fromthefirstlanguage,butrecentresearchsuggeststhatdevel-opmentalfactorsmayberelevant.InthecaseofChinese,anexaminationofclassicaltextsandmodernworksonChinesecom-positionfoundnosupportforclaimsthattheorganizationalpatternofChinesewritingdiffersmarkedlyfromthatofEnglish.Hence,languagetransferseemsmorelikelytohelpthantointerfere.Inregardtodevelopmentalfactors,researchinfirstlanguagecom-positionindicatesthatorganizationdevelopslateandcanbeinflu-encedbyappropriatecompositionpractices.ForthegroupofChinesestudentsstudied,acomparisonofcompositionpracticesinHongKongandBritishColumbiaindicatedthattheirschoolexperiencewithEnglishcompositionwasorientedmoretowardaccuracyatthesentencelevelthantowardthedevelopmentofappropriatediscourseorganization.Asurveyofthesestudentsalsosuggestedthattheysawtheircurrentwritingproblemsassentence-levelproblems.Thesefindingspointtoaneedforgreaterawarenessofstudents'nativeliteracyandeducationalexperienceasfactorsinfluencingthedevelopmentofacademicwritinginasecondlanguage.INTRODUCTIONItisgenerallyrecognizedthatmanysecondlanguagelearnershavedifficultieswithacademicwritinginEnglish.Someofthesedifficultiesaresentence-levelproblemswithgrammarandvocabu-lary.However,aspecialfeatureofacademicwritingistheimpor-tanceofdiscourseorganization.ThisarticleusesdatafromChinesestudentstoexaminefactorswhichmayaffectsecondlanguagelearners'competenceintheorganizationofwrittenacademicdis-courseinEnglish.515ThedevelopmentofacademicwritinginESLlearnersraisesissuesofwideimportance.IsthediscourseorganizationofacademicwritinginEnglishculture-specific,orisituniversal?Similarly,aretheunderlyingstructuresofacademicknowledgeculture-specificoruniversal?Arethereuniversalpatternsofdevelopmentintheabilitytoproduceacademicdiscourse?Whileresearchonthesequestionsisstillatabeginningstage,findingswillhavebroadimplicationsinanumberofareas.Take,forinstance,theconceptofbilingualproficiency.Shouldwethinkofthebilingualaspossessingtwodistinctandseparatelanguagecompetencies,orshouldweregardlanguagecompetenceascontainingacommoncomponentofcognitive/academiclanguageproficiency,manifestedindifferentsurfacefeaturesofL1andL2,asinCummins's(1980)dualicebergmodel?(Foradetailedexampleofacommoncognitivecomponent-knowledgestructureswhichareprobablyuniversal-seeMohan1985.)Ifthereisacommoncognitive/academiccomponent,wewouldparticularlyexpectittoappearinacademicdiscourseacrosscultures.InawidelyquotedworkonESLacademicwriting,Kaplan(1972)claimsthatproblemsoforganizationinacademicwritingbyESLstudentsareduetocross-culturaldifferencesinrhetoric.InKaplan'sview,deviationsfromtheexpectedorganizationofEnglishaca-demicdiscoursecanbeexplainedastheresultofinterference,ornegativetransfer,fromtherhetoricalorganizationofthewriter'sfirstlanguage.InsubsequentworkbasedontheKaplanapproach,Hinds(1983)exemplifiescross-culturaldifferencesinrhetoricbydocu-mentinganexpositorywritingschemainJapanesewhichdoesnotexistinEnglish.HewasabletodemonstratethatnewspaperarticleswhichfollowedthisschemawerejudgedsignificantlybetterinorganizationbyJapanesereadersthanbyEnglishreaders.NotingthatKaplan'spioneeringworkhasstoodessentiallyaloneinthefield,HindspointsoutthatKaplan'spositionhasbeenmisrep-resentedbylaterwriters,whohaveconvertedhisobservationsi