Ever since Kaplan explicitly hypothesized that each language has its unique rhetorical features and organizational patterns, a heated debate has followed among researchers as to whether L1 indeed has an influence on the writing of L2. My perspective is that the learner might be influenced by the rhetorical categories already established by his L1 in writing in L2, but its effect is not deterministic. I read academic journals in L2 English on a frequent and regular basis, focusing on the different rhetorical aspects of the L2 in comparison to my L1 Korean. I compare two parallel texts, one written in Korean and the other in English, to make sense of different L2 features. Among all the differences, one of the most prominent is the way in which sentences in a paragraph are organized. English texts tend to display a deductive logic, where the thesis statement comes at the fore in the paragraph, whereas Korean texts tend to place thesis argument at the end of the paragraph, with examples foregrounded. From my perspective, L1 plays a facilitative, rather than debilitative, role in making sense of L2 writing structures in that it serves as a starting point for understanding different rhetorical aspects of L2.
Another debate revolves around what is meant by culture. While acknowledging that L1 has a role to play in shaping how one writes in L2, I believe that CR requires a more sophisticated description of what constitutes culture. As Casanave points out, culture could mean different things to different people. It could mean something specific to mind or body, or something taught it school, etc. More pertinent to L2 writing are questions of whether the differences are attributable to the cultural differences, inexperience in L2 writings, or low educational level. A consensus on the definition of the terms commonly used in the study of IR will facilitate more meaningful communication.
Comments
Post a Comment