L1 Versus L2 Use in Pre-Task Planning of Novice L2 Learners’ Written Tasks

Abstract

The purpose of this study is to investigate how the use of L1 versus L2 during pre-task planning affects novice L2 learners’ written performance. The study’s rationale is based on the following: 1) novice L2 learners’ planning behavior, including language choice (L1 versus L2), has rarely been examined in planning studies and 2) repeated and redundant measures for complexity, accuracy, and fluency (CAF) combined with a lack of qualitative data on the relationship between planning and writing have not clearly shown what L2 writers actually do during planning. A total of 42 undergraduates were divided into two groups: Korean pre-task planning (KPP) and English pre-task planning (EPP). Each composed two narrative writings for a detailed selection for novice level of English proficiency and main task with L1 or L2 planning conditions. Twelve measures of CAF were assessed to compare two groups’ written performance, and qualitative data by four coding themes (new ideas, content ideas, linguistic errors, and L1 transfer) were supplemented. Findings demonstrated that the KPP group significantly improved phrasal syntactic complexity (MLC) compared to the EPP group, whereas the EPP group significantly increased overall accuracy (EFC/C) and specific accuracy (E3/T) compared to the KPP group. There was no significant difference in speed and repair fluency between the two groups. Additionally, the KPP group generated more new ideas during pre-task planning and applied them to writing, while L1 transfer may be one of reasons for deteriorating accuracy. The EPP group’s incorrect lexical use in planning seemed to be a predictive indicator for subsequent errors in writing. Experimental and pedagogical implications will be suggested.