This paper examines task-related variation in EFL (English as a Foreign Language) learners' texts and writing processes. Understanding task-related effects on second-language (L2) learners' textual choices and the cognitive strategies they employ is of great theoretical and pedagogical interest. Most L2 research, however, has focused primarily on examining the effects of task requirements (e.g., genre, discourse mode) on L2 writing test scores. This paper aims to contribute to our understanding of L2 variability by examining task-related variation in L2 learners' texts and writing processes.

Forty-five advanced EFL learners each wrote essays on two tasks, one argumentative and one expository. In addition, a representative sample of 15 students provided think-aloud protocols while writing the essays. The essays were analyzed and compared across tasks in terms of fluency, grammatical and lexical accuracy, syntactic complexity, lexical richness, and use of metadiscourse markers. The think-aloud protocols were analyzed in terms of problem-solving strategies and level of attention to aspects of emerging text using Cumming's (1989) model.

The results of text analysis detected some task-related variability in the rhetorical measures but no task effects on measures of fluency, linguistic accuracy, and syntactic complexity. Furthermore, there were trade-offs between fluency, accuracy, and complexity, which suggests that the participants were unable to attend to these three linguistic aspects simultaneously. Finally, the participants produced hedged, considerate texts that are assertive but not threatening to the reader, although the texts manifested several features of the spoken register.

The analysis of the think-aloud protocols indicated that the argumentative task elicited more complex combinations of strategies, whereas the expository task prompted more single but successful strategies. However, task type had no major effect on the level of attention the EFL learners allotted to discourse, gist, language, intentions and procedures. The paper concludes with some theoretical explanations of the findings and suggestions for L2 teaching and research.

References

Cumming, A. (1989). Writing expertise and language proficiency. Language Learning, 39, 81-141.

Engber, C. (1995). The relationship of lexical proficiency to the quality of ESL compositions. Journal of Second Language Writing, 4, 139-155.

Intaraprawat, P. & Steffensen, M. (1995). The use of metadiscourse in good and poor ESL essays. Journal of Second Language Writing, 4, 253-272.

Laufer, B. & Nation, P. (1995). Vocabulary size and use : Lexical richness in L2 in written production. Applied Linguistics, 16, 307-322.

Wolfe-Quintero, K; Inagaki, S; & Kim, H. (1998). Second language development in writing : Measures of fluency, accuracy and complexity. Honolulu, HI : University of Hawaii Press.