Languaging, direct correction, and second language writing: Japanese university students of English

It has been suggested that languaging plays a crucial role in learning a second language (L2). The effect of languaging, especially oral languaging (e.g., collaborative dialogue, private speech), has been tested on the learning of L2 knowledge domains. Many studies have shown a positive relation between oral languaging during problem solving tasks and subsequent performance on various post-test measures. The paucity of empirical research on written languaging (e.g., written reflection, written/typed explanations, and diaries) in second language acquisition (SLA) research, despite its theoretical importance for learning and the empirical evidence documented in non-L2 knowledge domains, prompted this exploratory study.;Theoretical and pedagogical implications are also discussed in this thesis study. Theoretically, the study, together with other research indicates that we learn an L2 not only by manipulating the linguistic input inside the head but also by externalizing it via speaking and writing (i.e., languaging). Pedagogically, the implications of the study may suggest that L2 teachers should ask their students to reflect, in diaries, journals, and portfolios, on the linguistic problems they have encountered during their classroom activities.;This study explored the effects of written languaging about the direct corrections provided on draft essays written by 24 Japanese learners of English. The effect of both the type (e.g., grammar-based vs. lexis-based) and the quality (e.g., noticing with reasons vs. noticing only) of written languaging was assessed by subsequent text revisions. Three major findings emerged. First, written languaging about direct feedback on linguistic errors in the first essay helped learners successfully correct these errors during immediate revision and possibly aided in rendering the new essay more accurate. Second, both lexis- and grammar-based written languaging were associated with improved accuracy. Third, both written languaging at the level of noticing only and written languaging at the level of noticing with reasons were associated with accuracy improvement. These findings appear to support Swain's (2006b) claim that providing learners with the opportunity to language about or reflect on their developing linguistic knowledge in the course of L2 learning mediates L2 learning and development.