E-MAIL WRITING PROJECTS IN AN EFL CONTEXT: FROMLINGUISTIC AND ATTITUDINAL PERSPECTIVES

Authors

  • Pei-Ling Yang Assistant Professor Center for General Education Oriental Institute of Technology, Taiwan

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.46827/ejel.v0i0.1938

Keywords:

e-mail writing, discourse analysis

Abstract

A great number of benefits have been claimed in a Computer-Mediated Communication (CMC) context; however, little research has been conducted by the method of discourse analysis. The purpose of this study is to, through discourse analysis, unfold and uncover EFL learners’ underlying feelings about e-mail writing and their writing styles. The participants were thirty-four Applied English-majored college students, writing e-mail to their peers for five times. Based on the data collected from the learners’ e-mail and reflection discourse, the results showed that the majority (88.24%) had positive attitudes towards e-mail writing. Besides positive feelings about this writing project, the learners presented highly active participation in writing e-mail to their peers. Through the e-mail writing project, they not only had more opportunities to use the target language, but also supported each other to deal with academic and personal difficulties. Furthermore, their e-mail writing style had also been analyzed. Through the analysis, it was claimed that EFL learners also used repeated letters, punctuation marks, emoticons, and special features in the e-mail writing. Implications of these findings for future studies are proposed to be of help to those who would like to apply e-mail writing to an EFL context.

 

Article visualizations:

Hit counter

DOI

References

Al-Fadda, H., & Al-Yahya, M. (2010). Using web blogs as a tool to encourage collaboration in higher education. US-China Education Review, 7(7), 100-106.

Baron, N. S. (1998). Writing in the age of Email: The impact of ideology versus technology. Visible Language, 32.

Belisle, R. (1996). E-mail activities in the ESL writing class. . The Internet TESL Journal, 2(12).

Chun, D. (1994). Using Computer Networking to Facilitate the Acquisition of Interactive Competence. System: An International Journal of Educational Technology and Applied Linguistics, 22(1), 17-30.

Crystal, D. (2001). Language and the Internet. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Ducate, L., & Lomicka, L. (2008). Adventures in the blogosphere: from blog readers to blog writers. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 21(1), 9-28.

Elola, I. O., A. . (2010). Collaborative writing: fostering foreign language and writing conventions development. Language Learning & Technology, 14(3), 51-71.

Gains, J. (1999). Electronic Mail--A New Style of Communication or Just a New Medium? An investigation into the Text Features of E-Mail. English for Specific Purposes, 18(1).

Goertler, S. (2009). Using Computer-Mediated Communication (CMC) in Language Teaching. ProQuest Education Journals, 42(1), 74-87.

Goodwin, A. A., Hamrick, J., & Stewart, T. (1995). Instructional delivery via electronic mail.. TESOL Journal, 3(1).

Halliday, M. A. K. (1989). Spoken and written language. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Herring, S. C. (Ed.). (1996). Computer-mediated communication: Linguistic, social, and cross-cultural perspectives: Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

Kamhi-Stein, L. D. (2000). Integrating computer-mediated communication tools into practicum. In K. E. Johnson (Ed.), Teacher education: Case studies in TESOL practice (pp. 119-136). Alexandria, VA: TESOL.

Kern, R. G. (1995). Restructuring classroom interaction with networked computers: effects on quantity and characteristics of language production. The Modern Language Journal, 79(4), 457-478.

Kuzu, A. (2007). Views of pre-service teachers on blog use for instruction and social interaction. Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education, 8(3), 34-52.

Levy, M. (1997). Computer-assisted Language Learning: Context and Conceptualization: New York : Oxford University Press.

Liao, C.-C. (2002). EFL for Intercultural Understanding: Question-Answer Adjacency Pairs in Emailing Versus Face-to-Face Conversation Experimental Studies on Taiwanese Students. Journal of Language and Linguistics, 1(2).

McPherson, M., & Nunes, M. B. (2004). The failure of a virtual social space (VSS) designed to create a learning community: Lessons learned. British journal of Educational Technology., 35(3), 305-321.

Murray, D. E. (1988). Computer-mediated communication: Implications for ESP. English for Specific Purposes, 7(1).

Sharma, P., Ke, F., & Xie, Y. (2010). The Effects of Peer-Interaction Styles in Team Blogs on Students' Cognitive Thinking and Blog Participation. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 42(4), 459-479.

Trajtemberg, C., & Androula, Y. (2011). Weblogs: a tool for EFL interaction, expression, and self-evaulation. ELT Journal, 65(4), 437-445.

Warschauer, M. (1996). Comparing Face-to-Face and Electronic Discussion in the Second Language Classroom. CALICO Journal 13(2), 7-26.

Warschauer, M. (1997). Computer-mediated collaborative learning: Theory and practice. . Modern Language Journal 81(3).

Warschauer, M. (2007). Technology and writing. In C. Davison & J. Cummins (Eds.), The International Handbook of English Language Teaching (pp. 907-912). Norwell, MA: Springer.

Warschauer, M. (2009). Electronic literacies: language, culture, and power in online education. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.

Warshauer, M. (2004). Technology and social inclusion: rethinking the digital divide. Cambridge, Massachusetts: The MIT Press.

Yang, S.-H. (2009). Using blogs to enhance critical reflection and community of practice. Educational Technology & Society, 12(2), 11-23.

Downloads

Published

2018-09-14

Issue

Vol 4, No 1 (2018)

Section

Articles

License

Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:

 

  1. Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.

 

  1. Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.

 

  1. Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).