Słowa kluczowe
przerwy w pisaniu
język szwedzki jako język obcy
Teoria Systemów Dynamicznych
Jak cytować
Abstrakt
The paper investigates the dynamic character of pausing behaviour in foreign language writing. In a longitudinal study on Polish learners of Swedish, pause length and frequency, as well as the interplay between pause length and the development of lexical diversity, syntactic complexity, accuracy, and fluency, were investigated. According to the assumptions of Dynamic Systems Theory, intra- and inter-subject variability were analysed. The study has shown that the mean length of pauses did not change during the three-year period of second language learning; however, the frequency of pauses significantly decreased, as demonstrated by the increasing number of words written between pauses. There was a considerable variation within subjects during the entire period, and even moderate inter-subject variability was noticed. The occurrence of longer pauses was almost always interconnected with a higher level of accuracy, syntactic complexity, and fluency. This interplay, however, could only be confirmed at the individual level, showing the necessity of following the development of a second language in individuals rather than for the entire group.
Bibliografia
Alamargot, D. i in. (2007), Parallel Processing Before and After Pauses: A Combined Analysis of Graphomotor and Eye Movements During Procedural Text Production, (w:) Torrance, M., Van Waes, L., Galbraith, D. (red.), Writing and Cognition. Research and Applications. Leiden, The Netherlands: Brill, s. 11–29. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1163/9781849508223_003
Briggs, J., Peat, F. D. (1989), Turbulent mirror: an illustrated guide to chaos theory and the science of wholeness. 1st ed. New York: Harper & Row.
Byrne, D. (2002), Interpreting Quantitative Data. London: SAGE Publications Ltd. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4135/9781849209311
Caspi, T. (2010), A Dynamic Perspective on Second Language Acquisition. Groningen: s.n.
Chanquoy, L., Foulin, J. N., Fayol, M. (1996), Writing in adults: a real-time approach, (w:) Couzijn i in. (red.), Theories, Models and Methodology in Writing Research. Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press, s. 36–43.
De Bot, K. (2008), Introduction: Second Language Development as a Dynamic Process. “Modern Language Journal”, nr 92(2), s. 166–178. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4781.2008.00712.x
De Bot, K., Lowie, W., Verspoor, M. (2005), Second language acquisition: an advanced resource book. London; New York: Routledge. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203446416
Deane, P., Zhang, M. (2015), Exploring the Feasibility of Using Writing Process Features to Assess Text Production Skills: Using Writing Process Features to Assess Text Skills. “ETS Research Report Series”, 2015(2), s. 1–16. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/ets2.12071
Flower, L., Hayes, J. R. (1981), A Cognitive Process Theory of Writing. “College Composition and Communication”, nr 32(4), s. 365–387. DOI: https://doi.org/10.58680/ccc198115885
Goldin-Meadow, S., Alibali, M. W. (2002), Looking at the hands through time: A microgenetic perspective on learning and instruction, (w:) Parziale, J., Granott, N. (red.), Microdevelopment: Transition Processes in Development and Learning. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, s. 80–106. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511489709.004
Herdina, P., Jessner, U. (2002), A Dynamic Model of Multilingualism: Perspectives of Change in Psycholinguistics. Bristol, Blue Ridge Summit: Multilingual Matters. DOI: https://doi.org/10.21832/9781853595547
Kollberg, P. (1996), Rules for the S-notation: a computer-based method for representing revisions. Stockholm: Kungliga Tekniska Högskolan. No. TRITA-NA-P9609, IPLab-102.
Larsen-Freeman, D. (1997), Chaos/Complexity Science and Second Language Acquisition. “Applied Linguistics”, nr 18(2), s. 141–165. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/18.2.141
Larsen-Freeman, D., Cameron, L. (2008), Complex Systems and Applied Linguistics. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
Leijten, M., Van Waes, L. (2013), Keystroke Logging in Writing Research: Using Inputlog to Analyze and Visualize Writing Processes. “Written Communication”, nr 30(3), s. 358–392. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0741088313491692
Matsuhashi, A. (1981), Pausing and Planning: The Tempo of Written Discourse Production. “Research in the Teaching of English”, nr 15(2), s. 113–134. DOI: https://doi.org/10.58680/rte198115773
Medimorec, S., Risko, E. F. (2017), Pauses in written composition: on the importance of where writers pause. “Reading and Writing”, nr 30(6), s. 1267–1285. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-017-9723-7
Polat, B., Kim, Y. (2014), Dynamics of Complexity and Accuracy: A Longitudinal Case Study of Advanced Untutored Development. “Applied Linguistics”, nr 35(2), s. 184–207. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amt013
Sasaki, M. (2000), Toward an Empirical Model of EFL Writing Processes: An Exploratory Study. “Journal of Second Language Writing”, nr 9(3), s. 259–291. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S1060-3743(00)00028-X
Schilperoord, J. (2002), On the Cognitive Status of Pauses in Discourse Production, (w:) Thierry, O., Levy, C. M. (red.), Contemporary Tools and Techniques for Studying Writing. Springer, Dordrecht, s. 61–87. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-010-0468-8_4
Severinson Eklundh, K., Kollberg, P. (1992), Translating keystroke records into a general notation for the writing process (IPLab-59). Stockholm: Department of Numerical Analysis and Computing Science, Royal Institute of Technology.
Siegler, R. S. (2002), Microgenetic studies of self-explanation, (w:) Parziale, J., Granott, N. (red.), Microdevelopment: Transition Processes in Development and Learning. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, s. 31–58. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511489709.002
Spelman Miller, K. (2000), Academic writers on-line: investigating pausing in the production of text. “Language Teaching Research”, nr 4(2), s. 123–148. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1191/136216800675510135
Spoelman, M., Verspoor, M. (2010), Dynamic Patterns in Development of Accuracy and Complexity: A Longitudinal Case Study in the Acquisition of Finnish. “Applied Linguistics”, nr 31(4), s. 532–553. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amq001
Strömqvist, S., Malmsten, L. (1998), Scriptlog Pro 1.04—User’s Manual. Technical report. Gothenburg: Department of Lingustics, Göteborg University.
Torrance, M. (2012), EyeWrite — A Tool for Recording Writers’ Eye Movements. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1163/9781780529295_082
(w:) Torrance, M. i in. (red.), Learning to Write Effectively: Current Trends in European Research. Leiden, The Netherlands: Brill, s. 355–357.
Van Geert, P. L. C. (2007), Dynamic systems in second language learning: Some general methodological reflections. “Bilingualism: Language and Cognition”, nr 10(1), s. 47–49. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S136672890600280X
Van Waes, L., Schellens, P. J. (2003), Writing profiles: the effect of the writing mode on pausing and revision patterns of experienced writers. “Journal of Pragmatics”, nr 35(6), s. 829–853. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-2166(02)00121-2
Verspoor, M. H. |Bot, De Bot, K., Lowie, W. (red.) (2011), A Dynamic Approach to Second Language Development. Amsterdam, Filadelfia: John Benjamins Publishing Company. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1075/lllt.29
Verspoor, M., Lowie, W., Van Dijk, M. (2008), Variability in Second Language Development From a Dynamic Systems Perspective. “Modern Language Journal”, nr 92(2), s. 214–231. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4781.2008.00715.x
Wengelin, Å. (1999), Pauses and editings in the written language production of adults with and without sever reading and writing difficulties. (w:) Strömqvist, S., Ahlsén, E. (red.), The process of Writing. A progress report. Gothenburg: Department of Lingustics, Göteborg University, s. 71–84.
Wengelin, Å. i in. (2009), Combined eyetracking and keystroke-logging methods for studying cognitive processes in text production. “Behavior Research Methods”, nr 41(2), s. 337–351. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/BRM.41.2.337
Xu, C., Qi, Y. (2017), Analyzing Pauses in Computer-Assisted EFL Writing—A Computer- Keystroke-Log Perspective. “Educational Technology & Society”, nr 20(4), s. 24–34.
Licencja
Prawa autorskie (c) 2024 Iwona Kowal
Utwór dostępny jest na licencji Creative Commons Uznanie autorstwa – Bez utworów zależnych 4.0 Międzynarodowe.
Przedstawiany utwór (artykuł) upubliczniany jest na podstawie umowy z autorem i na licencji Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivatives 4.0 International (CC BY-ND 4.0).
Użytkownicy mają obowiązek podania wraz z rozpowszechnionym utworem, informacji o autorstwie, tytule, źródle (odnośniki do oryginalnego utworu, DOI) oraz samej licencji;
- bez tworzenia utworów zależnych,
- utwór musi być zachowany w oryginalnej postaci.
Uniwersytet im. Adama Mickiewicza w Poznaniu zachowuje prawo do czasopisma jako całości (układ, forma graficzna, tytuł, projekt okładki, logo itp.).