A comparision of the revising processes of spanish speakers and english native writers: similarities and differences.

Abstract

The aim of the investigation is to portray a composite picture of the native and<br/>non-native expert and novice writers' composing and revising processes as they wrote<br/>an argumentative essay in English. Analyses of the experienced and novice writers'<br/>revision processes served to answer four main questions posed at the beginning of the<br/>experimental study: 1. When did revisions occur during the composing process? 2.<br/>Were there any similarities and differences in the categories of revision the subjects<br/>employed? 3. Were there any similarities and differences in the techniques the subjects<br/>employed? and 4. Were there any similarities and differences in the purposes of the<br/>subjects' revisions? These questions were also posed to compare the native and nonnative<br/>expert writers and the native and non-native novice writers.<br/>The results indicate that the native and non-native experienced and novice<br/>writers in this study made changes in the first and second writing sessions, in the four<br/>writing cycles, and in the combinations pre-draft/first draft and between draft/final draft,<br/>although they revised to different extends. Both writer groups coincided in their<br/>preference for the word level over the surface, phrase, clause, sentence, paragraph and<br/>global levels. The experienced subjects, however, revised at the higher discourse levels<br/>more often than the novice writers did. No important differences were concluded<br/>between both writer types in the techniques used for revising. Per purposes of revision,<br/>both the expert and novice writers revised with an informational purpose in mind,<br/>although they differed in their preference for the rest of purposes of revision: while the<br/>expert writers made higher proportions of meaning revisions, the novice showed a<br/>tendency for formal changes. Further comparisons indicate there were also similarities<br/>between both types of writers: the unskilled writers in this study were also aware of the<br/>need for making content revisions. Indeed, they made some attempts at improving<br/>meaning through sentence, paragraph and global revisions, although they failed to<br/>achieve success.<br/>The native and non-native experienced subjects coincided in their preference for<br/>the word level across drafts and writing sessions. The rest of the levels occurred in<br/>descending order as the discourse level ascended from the word to the global level.<br/>Global changes were often avoided as they needed more cognitive effort. They also<br/>showed interest for the surface level, although they seemed to have the cognitive ability<br/>to manage form and content at the same time. Additions and substitutions of<br/>information prevailed over the rest, since the writers hardly ever deleted to start again.<br/>Despite the similarities between the native and non-native expert writers, further<br/>comparisons reveal that the native expert subject showed more concern with meaning,<br/>while the non-native were worried about grammatical correctness, which may be due to<br/>the greater emphasis that they receive in L2 writing classes. Also, the subjects displayed<br/>different revision patterns, which supports the belief that there is no single revision<br/>pattern resulting in successful prose.<br/>The native novice subjects made higher percentages of final version revisions,<br/>while the non-native were more inclined to making premature revisions, coupled with<br/>large numbers of revisions in an attempt to reduce the cognitive load that revising<br/>entailed on their minds. The pre-draft, between-draft and the combinations of drafts<br/>were virtually of no importance and, thus, the writers did not go back and forth between<br/>their essays and outlines to add changes or to check how well the drafts matched their<br/>outlines. Yet, both writer types redirected their attention to meaning towards the latest<br/>stages of writing and, therefore, they were not insensitive to revision at the higher<br/>discourse levels, contrary to the beliefs commonly held for novice writers.

El objetivo de esta investigación es describir los procesos de escritura y<br/>aprendizaje de escritores nativos y no nativos expertos e inexpertos mientras escribían<br/>un texto argumentativo en inglés. El análisis de los procesos de revisión de los<br/>escritores experimentados y menos experimentados sirven como punto de partida para<br/>contestar cuatro preguntas principales: 1. ¿Cuándo se dan las revisiones en el proceso de<br/>escritura? 2. ¿Hay similitudes y diferencias en las categorías de revisión que los<br/>participantes usaron? 3. ¿Hay similitudes y diferencias en las técnicas que los<br/>participantes emplearon? 4. ¿Hay similitudes y diferencias en los propósitos de las<br/>revisiones de los participantes? Estas mismas preguntas se plantearon para observar las<br/>similitudes y diferencias entre los escritores experimentados nativos y no nativos y entre<br/>los escritores no experimentados nativos y no nativos de inglés.<br/>Los resultados indican que los escritores expertos y no expertos nativos y no<br/>nativos de este estudio hicieron cambios en las dos sesiones de escritura, en los cuatro<br/>ciclos de escritura, así como en las combinaciones guion/primer borrador y borrador<br/>intermedio/borrador final aunque revisaron en diferente medida. Los escritores<br/>experimentados, sin embargo, revisaron a niveles discusivos más altos con más<br/>frecuencia que los menos experimentados, aunque los menos expertos no son<br/>completamente inconscientes de la necesidad de hacer revisiones de significado.<br/>Los escritores experimentados y menos experimentados nativos y no nativos<br/>coincidieron en su preferencia por la revisión a nivel de la palabra en todos los<br/>borradores y sesiones de escritura. No hicieron cambios que afectaran la estructura<br/>global del texto puesto que implicaban un mayor esfuerzo cognitivo. A pesar de las<br/>similitudes los escritores expertos nativos mostraron un mayor interés por el<br/>significado, mientras los no nativos se preocuparon de la corrección gramatical de sus<br/>textos.<br/>Los escritores nativos no expertos hicieron un mayor número de revisiones en el<br/>borrador final que los no nativos menos experimentados, mientras éstos revisaron en<br/>fases demasiado avanzadas del proceso de escritura además de hacer un gran número de<br/>ellas en un intento de reducir la carga cognitiva que revisar imponía en sus mentes.<br/>Ambos se centraron en la comunicación de significado en las fases finales de escritura.