Influences of first language in the second language writing

Nowadays, it is common phenomenon to master at least two language or more as

there are over 5000 to 7000 languages worldwide (Cenoz & Gorter, 2010). This ability can
be termed as multilingualism. In the Malaysian multiracial context itself, the main
languages consist of the Malay language, English, Mandarin, Tamil and many others.
According to Cenoz & Gorter (2010), the teaching of different languages as subjects or
medium of instruction in schools are vital to produce multilingual individuals. As such,
schools in Malaysia practice multilingualism where pupils are compulsory to learn the two
main languages which is the Malay language and English. As such, Halliwell & Jones
(1991); Macdonald (1993); Chambers (1991) proposed that L2 should be used exclusively
in the classroom due to the assumption that L1 inhibits the learning process of the target
language. However, when it comes to writing in English, there is an interference of the
mother tongue language (L1) in the target language (L2) which can be termed as
‘language transfer’ or ‘crosslinguistic influence’.

Ali and Fawzi (2008) define the term ‘language transfer’ as the interference of L1
in L2 where the speaker applies the knowledge from their native language to the target
language. Smith (1994) cited in Azirah (2017:60) defines language transfer as the
influence of the L1 as well other known language prior to the development of the target
language. Ashikin et. al (2017) classifiy the three major types of L1 interference in L2 in
their research which are transfer of rules, redundancy reduction, and overgeneralization.
Generally, there are two types of transfer of rules that can be identified which are the
positive transfer and negative transfer. Positive transfer occurs when the linguistic
interference results in correct language production due to the similarities in structure of
both language (Ali & Fawzi, 2008). Consequently, when there are errors due to language
interference, it is called as negative transfer. On the other hand, Odlin (1989) cited in
Azirah (2017:63) classifies negative transfer itself into four subcategories which are
underproduction, overproduction, production errors and misinterpretation.

. According to Xiao Xia (2008), negative transfer from L1 proved to be more

dominant than positive transfer. This is in line with Bennui (2008) studies on the harmful
effect of L1 transfer that resulted in serious writing problems among Thai students.
However, there are numerous parties that disagree with the adverse effects discussed by
researchers about negative transfers being a more powerful aspect. At the same time,
Xiao Xia (2008) posits that L1 writing skills also proved to be one of the supporting
elements in L2 writing. This is supported by Yigzaw (2012) that L1 functions as a
contributing factor to support learning in L2 writing. His data research on pupils’ writing
practice tasks shows that pupils who discuss the ideas in L1 during the pre-writing stage
outdid significantly pupils who discusses fully in the L2. Similarly, Woodal (2002); Scott
(1996) advocates that the use of L1 in L2 pre-writing stage for a better overall results. On
the other hand, Okabe (2004) has summarized that there are no correlation between L1
and L2 in terms of writing skills.

On top of that, there are several studies conducted by researchers to investigate

the effect of composing in L1 and translates in L2. Most of the studies point out that lower
proficiency pupils tend to compose in their L1 and later translate to L2. This is consistent
with Ali and Fawzi’s (2008); Woodal’s (2002); Wang’s (2003) findings that lower
proficiency pupils will divert to their L1 during L2 writing tasks. As such, it can be concluded
that lower proficiency pupils are more inclined to switch to L1 when writing in L2. Moreover,
Yigzaw (2013) conducts a research to find out the relationship between L1 and L2 writing
skills based on the Linguistic Interdependence and Threshold Hypothesis proposed by
Cummings (1994). His results shows that pupils’ L1 writing skills have an impact on their
writing skills development in L2. At the same time, his findings is consistent with Fitzgerald
and Shanahan’s (2002) findings that there is a transfer in writing skills from L1 and L2.

‘A transfer from one language to the other can strengthen the expressive resources
of each language without actually a loss in intelligibility.’ (Azirah, 2017:62)

Despite various argument by different advocators about whether L1 should be

used in L2, it is inevitable that L1 still plays a significant role in a L2 classroom. Thus, the
main focus that need to be addressed is on how to use L1 effectively. This is because
teacher may end up overuse L1, consequently causing the issue of overdependence on
their mother tongue language which totally hampers the development of L2 (Yigzaw, 2012).
Yigzaw (2012) also infers that L1 should be use in a short span of time just to fill the ‘gap’
for linguistic deficiency in L2. In other words, L1 should mainly be used for lower
proficiency pupils.
Ali Ahmed Hussein, Fawzi M. Mohamad. (2008). Negative L 1 Impact on L2 Writing.
International Journal of Humanities and Social Science. 1(18). 184-195

Ashikin, A.M., Zarlina, M. Z., Indrani A.S.P., et.al (2017). Mother Tongue
Interference in the Writing of English as a Second Language (ESL) Malay
Learners. International Journal of Academic Research in Business and
Social Sciences. 7(11) 1294-1301.

Azirah Hashim (2017). Crosslinguistic Influence In the Written

English of Malay Undergraduates. Journal of Modern Languages.
1(12) 60-76. Retrieved from: https://jice.um.edu.my/index.php/
JML/article/download/3535/1538

Bennui, P. (2008). A Study of L1 Interference in the Writing of Thai EFL Students.

Malaysian Journal ELT Res. 4. 72-102.

Cenoz, J. & Gorter, D. (2010). The Diversity of Multilingualism in Education.

International Journal of the Sociology of Language. 205. 37-53. DOI:
10.1515/IJSL.2010.038

Chambers, F. (1991). Promoting use of the target language in the classroom.

Language Learning Journal. 4. 27-31.

Cummins, J. (1994). The Acquisition of English As a Second Language. In:

Spangenberg-Urbschat, K. & Pritchard, R. (Eds.). Kids come in all
languages: Reading Instruction for ESL Students, Newark. DE:
International Reading Association.

Fitzgerald, J., Shanahan, T. (2000). Reading and Writing Relations and their
Development. Education Psychology. 35. 39-50.

Halliwell, S., Jones, B.(1991). On target teaching in the target language. London:
Centre for Information on Language Teaching and Research
Odlin, T. (1989). Language Transfer. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Okabe, J. (2004). ‘The nature of L2 writing by Japanese learners of English.’ In
Makarova, V. & Rodgers, T. (n.d.). English language teaching: The case of
Japan. Munich: Lincom Europa.

Scott. V. M. (1996). Rethinking foreign language writing. Boston: Heinle & Heinle.

Smith, C. (2003). Modes of Discourse: The Local Structure of Texts. Cambridge:

CUP.

Wang, L. (2003). Switching to first language among writers with differing second-
language proficiency. Journal of Second Language Writing online. 12(1).
347-375.
Woodal, B. R. (2002). Language Switching: using the first language while writing
in a second language. Journal of Second Language Writing. 11. 7-18.
Xiao-xia, L. (2008). Literature Review on the Use and Effect of L1 in L2 Writing.
US-China Foreign Language 6(5). 50-53.

Yigzaw, A. (2012). Impact of L1 Use in L2 English Writing Classes. Ethiopian

Journal of Education and Sciences. 8(1). 11-27

Yigzaw, A. (2013) Students' First Language Writing Skills and Their English
Language Proficiency as Predictors of Their English Language Writing
Performance retrieved from
http://www.academicjournals.org/app/webroot/article/article1379497466_Y
igzaw.pdf