CAN WRITING ACTIVITIES IMPROVE L2 SPEAKING?

Maria Boyadzhieva, NBU

,
( ) -
.

.
, ,
- . ,
,
, ?


. - ,
,
,
.

The idea of using writing to improve speaking may sound a little strange at first,
as common sense tells us that speaking should be improved by the practice of
speaking. But what about a learning situation when there are few people to
communicate with in the foreign language, let alone native speakers?
There are studies which show how spoken language, especially dialect, affects
writing (e.g. Whiteman 1981). However, little research has been conducted on
how written language affects speaking, or how the use of writing can help to
improve speaking. The reason may be that we tend to take it for granted that
writing acquisition comes after speaking acquisition, although it is not unusual
that some learners are more proficient in writing than speaking L2. This is often
the case in EFL contexts when the language is not acquired in the host country,
but is studied in a foreign language environment. All of us who live and teach
1

(or study) languages in Bulgaria are familiar with the problem. Speaking L2
seems to be the most difficult skill to master.

Rationale of using writing activities to improve speaking

There are three advantages of using writing to promote speaking:
1. Writing is easier to handle for those learners who are not ready to speak
up in class either psychologically (because they are too shy) or physically
(because of a large class, lack of time, etc.).
2. Writing can reinforce what has been practised orally and vice versa: it can
provide practice in forms that are more fully realized in writing (Rivers
and Temperly 1978).
3. Writing activities are applicable to a large class if the activities require no
teacher response.
Therefore, it is worthwhile to seek ways in which writing can serve oral
proficiency development in L2. Of course, we cannot expect our students to
improve their speech drastically solely through writing activities. Writing
activities are expected to facilitate speaking in an indirect way, and expected to
be used as a warm-up activity and homework.
However, it is clear that writing is not simply speech written down on a sheet of
paper. There are a number of ways in which writing and speaking differ.
According to Finegan (1994), there are four basic differences between writing
and speaking: a). Speaking has such channels as intonation, voice pitch and
gestures to convey information, whereas writing has only words and syntax;
b). Writing requires more time than speaking in terms of planning; c). Speakers
and addressees are often face-to-face, while writers and readers are not;
d). Speaking tends to rely on the context of the interaction more than writing.
2

However, there is no absolute dichotomy. For instance, lectures and job

interviews may need as much planning as writing. In face-to-face
communication, speakers are said to use more personal expressions such as I
think and you see, but those expressions could be seen in personal letters as well.
When it comes to the reliance on context, speakers may use more spatial and
temporal deixis such as this and today, but a written note can read Dont do this!
as long as the referent of this is clear for the reader. Even for communication
channels, we are able to convey additional information in writing by using bold
and italic print.
In short, although speaking and writing are different skills, they share many
features. This idea is supported by evidence obtained when studying the
acquisition sequences in written work and speech. The results of these studies
indicate that the acquisition sequences and hierarchies of certain structures
elicited in natural writing are virtually identical to those observed in oral
production (Dulay, Burt and Krashen 1982: 211). Reid (1991) claims that both
oral and written discourse form a kind of continuum, which is dependent on
situation, task, audience and function. According to Maxwell and Meiser (1997:
106), speaking parallels writing in important ways. Like writing, speaking must
be purposeful, serving an authentic communicative need geared to audience and
context. Moreover, in both media students need to experience the range of
communicative functions, namely: expressing feelings, ritualizing, imagining,
informing and controlling. Therefore, it is reasonable to say that writing and
speaking have a close relationship.

Writing activities
Since writing and speaking have many features in common, by deliberately
controlling a number of variables, teachers can make writing closer to speaking.
The important thing is that the task itself should not be very difficult when the
aim of writing is to improve speaking. In this sense, free-writing techniques and
the communicative approach are thought to be appropriate for this purpose. If
the students already know the basic skills of writing such as grammar,
vocabulary, and punctuation, the task becomes much easier.

Free-writing technique
The free-writing technique is one of the ways to make writing more like
speaking. It is a pre-writing technique which encourages students to overcome
their fear of the blank page and their preoccupation with correctness. By prewriting is meant the first stage of the writing process, followed by drafting,
revising and editing, when the purpose is to teach writing skills. In this case,
however, since our aim is to facilitate speaking, we concentrate only on the first
stage. Free-writing can be seen as the closest writing can get to impromptu
speech. This is how Elbow (1973: 3) describes it: The idea is simply to write
for ten minutes. Dont stop for anything. Go quickly without rushing. Never stop
to look back, to cross something out, to wonder what word or thought to use, or
to think about what you are doing. If you cant think of a word or a spelling, just
use a squiggle , just put down something. The easiest thing is just to put down
whatever is in your mind The only requirement is that you never stop.
The description of free-writing shows that the writer is free to put down
anything that comes to mind and is free from any concerns about spelling or
grammar. In this way it often brings thoughts to mind that more structured
writing would not.
4

The following procedure can be used to organize free-writing in class. First,

students are assigned a topic (hobbies, family, a person they admire, etc.).
Second, they have five to ten minutes to write. Third, students can write
anything, in any writing style. Fourth, they need not be concerned about
grammar or spelling mistakes. Fifth, students cannot refer to any dictionaries or
textbooks. With this guidance, students are required to write at least 80 100
words; intermediate students will probably write more than that. They can count
and record their words to see if they are building fluency. In this way, students
have no recourse other than continuing to write without worrying about
grammar, the quality of the ideas, or editing. They are allowed to tear it up and
throw it away, unseen, as soon as they are finished.
To sum up, free-writing is a technique to advance and develop ideas on a theme
and often, when this exercise is over, it is followed by an oral discussion,
especially if the topic is of sufficient interest to the learners. Thus free-writing
directly enhances oral production and stimulates learners communication
activity in class. This should not come as a surprise if we keep in mind the fact
that writing in general is meant to be shared. On the one hand, sharing ideas
about writing is the most effective way to help writers get started. On the other
hand, when we write something that we believe is particularly good, our first
impulse is to read it to someone. So a writing classroom becomes a talking
classroom (Maxwell and Meiser 1997: 140).

Mapping
Mapping is another pre-writing technique, useful when the writing topic is not
familiar to the students. It helps to generate ideas and organization. Mapping is
sometimes called webbing because the resulting diagram resembles a spider
5

web. By either name, the intention is to generate and connect subtopics. The
subject is placed in the centre, and topics are added on extending lines as the
writer thinks of them. So, if asked to speak on the mapped topic, the learner
knows what to talk about, how to organize his/her speech and how to connect
relevant subtopics.

Communicative approach
The communicative approach stresses the audience and the purpose of a piece of
writing (Raimes 1983). In order to make the writing activity a written version of
oral communication, such techniques as brainstorming, skits, and interviews are
useful. As in the case with the free-writing technique, it is important to give
students a limited period of time while they are encouraged to write as many
sentences as possible without worrying about making mistakes. Let us take up
each technique briefly to see how it can be used.
In brainstorming, students write based on a map, a picture, or personal
experience. For example, by looking at the picture of a dog, students may write
sentences such as the following: It is brown, I think it is a puppy, I want
to keep this dog, It looks very much like the one I had, and so on.
A teacher-guided brainstorming session is useful for generating ideas on a given
topic. For example, on the topic A Wonderful Party, the teacher can draw a table
on the board and jot down information for the two boxes in Figure 1. After the
students have worked out the ideas and come up with appropriate language, they
have warmed up and are ready to fully participate.

A Wonderful Party
Ideas

Language

Date
Place
People
Mood
Decorations
Music
Equipment
Atmosphere
Food and drinks
..

June 10th, 2006

Peters place
Peters friends, classmates,
neighbours
cheerful, light-hearted
colourful lights
disco, hip-hop
a stereo system
friendly
sandwiches, a cake, Coke
...................

Figure 1. Brainstorming

A similar activity is the free associations game, when students are given a word
and are asked to write down all the words they associate with it within a limited
period of time (e.g. one minute). After that they share their associations with
their classmates and can be asked to explain what made them think of a
particular word. This exercise/game is a natural transition from writing to oral
practice. The following is a list of associations my students made with the word
university: students, New Bulgarian, lecturer, books, intelligent, stupid,
competition, economics, maths, exams, difficult, computers, administration,
coffee, hall, friends, work, practice, big, different, education, expensive.
When asked about the word hall it became clear that they did not use it in the
sense of entrance hall. What they actually meant was lecture theatre, a word
they did not know, so it was taught to them as a result.
Skits* can be used in a similar way to brainstorming. For instance, the teacher
____________________________

* A skit is a short piece of humorous writing that makes fun of somebody/something by

copying them; a short performance in which actors make fun of people, events, types of
literature, etc. by imitating them.

shows students a picture of a young couple and asks them to write down a
possible conversation. They may come up with a conversation like that:
Man: Are you hungry?
Woman: Yes. Lets go to a restaurant.
Man: What kind of a restaurant do you want to go to?
Woman: How about a Chinese restaurant?

With interviews, the teacher makes up a set of questions that an interviewer

might ask, and students respond in writing. This is a time-consuming technique
whereby all the students can be interviewed simultaneously. For instance:
Where are you from?
What do you do at weekends?
What subject do you like best?
Do you live by yourself?
How many languages do you speak? etc.
Needless to say, the techniques above can lead to an effective transition from
writing to oral practice as students share and discuss their writing with the
teacher or other classmates. Pair-work and group-work can be effective for the
purpose. The point here, however, is that these writing activities in themselves
contain elements which strengthen speaking, and they are not merely a starter
for oral communication. This is a positive reinterpretation of the role of writing
in the communicative approach.

Conclusion

In this article, I first attempted to reinterpret writing activities based on the

analysis of the nature of written and spoken language, and then discussed how
writing activities could be put into practice to facilitate speaking, thus serving a
double function to promote both writing and speaking. It is hoped that the
ideas presented will shed some new light on the role of writing activities in the
language classroom.

REFERENCES
Dulay, H., M. Burt, S. Krashen 1982: Language Two. Oxford: Oxford
University Press, p. 211.
Elbow, P. 1973: Writing Without Teachers. Oxford: Oxford University Press,
p.3.
Finegan, E. 1994: Language. Second Edition. New York: Harcourt Brace and
Company.
Maxwell, R. and M. Meiser 1997: Teaching English in Middle and Secondary
Schools. Second Edition. New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, Inc., p. 106; p. 140.
Raimes, A. 1983: Techniques in Teaching Writing. New York: Oxford
University Press.
Rivers, W. M. and M. S. Temperly 1978: A Practical Guide to the Teaching of
English as a Second or Foreign Language. New York: Oxford University Press.
Whiteman, M. 1981: Dialect Influence in Writing. In Variation in Writing:
Functional and Linguistic Cultural Differences. M. Whiteman (ed.). Hillsdale,
NJ: Erlbaum.

10