Metanotes (written languaging) in a translation task: do L2 proficiency and task outcome matter?

Abstract

Languaging has been identified as a contributor to language learning. Yet, compared to oral languaging, such as collaborative dialogs in contextualized settings, little seems to be known about written languaging. In order to fill this gap, this study investigates languaging in the form of ‘metanotes,’ that is, metatalk in a written modality, in a decontextualized setting. Two groups of 24 Japanese learners of English at two different proficiency levels took metanotes while performing a translation task and, subsequently, checking a model translation. An analysis of the metanotes showed that the participants' English proficiency levels influenced their metanotes in terms of focus on the target form and, to a lesser extent, quantity and type. Moreover, the impact of learners' task outcome (i.e. accuracy in translation) on their metanotes was investigated. This paper examines the results by reviewing the findings of studies on languaging in order to explore the potential function of written languaging.

Keywords:

• output
• languaging
• metatalk
• metanotes
• note taking

Acknowledgments

I am grateful to the anonymous reviewers and Wataru Suzuki for their extremely valuable comments and suggestions on the earlier draft of this paper. I also wish to thank Yukako Hatakeyama for her encouragement and support. Any remaining errors are mine.

Notes on contributor

Masako Ishikawa is an associate professor in the Department of Language Education Center at Josai University, Japan. Her interests include output, languaging, and feedback.

Notes

1. Swain (1998) stated that ‘the demonstration of metatalk that included the explicit statement of rules and the use of metalinguistic terminology succeeded … in capturing students' attention’ (77).

2. Limitations in space and scope preclude a detailed analysis of participants' translations in this paper. In scoring the translations, grammatical mistakes, especially ones in the target form, were penalized. Meanwhile, minor spelling and punctuation problems, such as *Kalen for Karen, were ignored.