Advanced FL learners explaining their writing choices: epistemic attitude as an indicator of problem-solving and strategic knowledge in the on-line revision process

References

• Barbier, M.-L. 2003. Écrire en L2: bilan et perspectives des recherches. Arob@se 7, nos. 1–2: 6–21.
   Google Scholar
• Bereiter, C. and M. Scardamalia. 1987. The Psychology of Written Composition. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
   Google Scholar
• Bialystok, E. 2001. Bilingualism in Development: Language, Literary and Cognition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Bloch, J. 2010. A concordance-based study of the use of reporting verbs as rhetorical devices in academic papers. Journal of Writing Research 2, no. 2: 219–44.
   Google Scholar
• Bowles, M.A. 2010. The Think-Aloud Controversy in Second Language Research. New York and London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Chenoweth, N.A. and J.R. Hayes. 2001. Fluency in writing: generating text in L1 and L2. Written Communication 18, no. 1: 80–98. doi: 10.1177/0741088301018001004
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• De Angelis, G. 2007. Third or Additional Language Acquisition. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
   Google Scholar
• DeKeyser, R.M. 2009. Cognitive-psychological processes in second language learning. In The Handbook of Language Teaching, ed. M.H. Long and C.J. Doughty, 119–38. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• Ellis, R. 2005. Measuring implicit and explicit knowledge of a second language. A psychometric study. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 27, no. 2: 141–72.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ericsson, K. A. and H. A. Simon. 1993 [1984]. Protocol Analysis. Verbal Reports as Data. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Fayol, M. 2001. Produire des textes à l’écrit. Un état des recherches psycholinguistiques. In Quelles grammaires enseigner à l’école et au collège? Discours, genres, texte, phrase, ed. C. Garcia-Debanc, J.-P. Confais and M. Grandaty, 305–18. Actes du colloque Enjeux didactiques des théories du texte dans l'enseignement du français. Paris: Delagrave Édition et CRDP Midi-Pyrénées.
   Google Scholar
• Fetzer, A. and M. Johansson. 2010. Cognitive verbs in context: a contrastive analysis of English and French argumentative discourse. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics 15, no. 2: 240−66. doi: 10.1075/ijcl.15.2.05fet
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Green, D.W. 2011. Bilingual words. In Language and Bilingual Cognition, ed. V. Cook and B. Bassetti, 229–40. New York/Hove: Psychology Press.
   Google Scholar
• Gufoni, V. 1996. Les protocoles verbaux comme méthode d’étude de la production écrite: approche critique. Étude de Linguistique Appliquée 101: 20–32.
   Google Scholar
• Hakulinen, A., M. Vilkuna, R. Korhonen, V. Koivisto, T.R. Heinonen and I. Alho. 2005. Iso suomen kielioppi [A Comprehensive Finnish Grammar]. Helsinki: Finnish Literature Society.
   Google Scholar
• Hayes, J.R. 1996. A new framework for understanding cognition and affect in writing. In The Science of Writing: Theories, Methods, Individual Differences, ed. C.M. Levy and S. Ransdell, 1–27. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
   Google Scholar
• Hayes, J.R. and L.S. Flower. 1980. Identifying the organization of writing processes. In Cognitive Processes in Writing, ed. L.W. Gregg and E.R. Steinberg, 3–30. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
   Google Scholar
• Helasvuo, M.-L. 2014. Agreement or crystallization: patterns of 1st and 2nd person subjects and verbs of cognition in Finnish conversational interaction. Journal of Pragmatics 63: 63–78. doi: 10.1016/j.pragma.2013.11.011
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hu, G. 2002. Psychological constraints on the utility of metalinguistic knowledge in second language production. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 24, no. 3: 347–86. doi: 10.1017/S0272263102003017
   Google Scholar
• Kärkkäinen, E. 2003. Epistemic Stance in English Conversation. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
   Google Scholar
• Kasper, G. 1998. Analysing verbal protocols. TESOL Quarterly 32, no. 2: 358–62. doi: 10.2307/3587591
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kellogg, R.T. 2008. Training writing skills: a cognitive developmental perspective. Journal of Writing Research 1, no. 1: 1–26.
   Google Scholar
• Kielitoimiston sanakirja [The New Dictionary of Modern Finnish] 2006. Parts I and II. Helsinki: Research Institute for the Languages of Finland.
   Google Scholar
• Laury, R. and E.-L. Seppänen. 2008. Clause combining, interaction, evidentiality, participation structure and the conjunction-particle continuum: the Finnish että. In Crosslinguistic Studies of Clause Combining: The Multifunctionality of Conjunctions, ed. R. Laury, 153–78. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
   Google Scholar
• Mutta, M. 2007. Un processus cognitif peut en cacher un autre: Étude de cas sur l’aisance rédactionnelle des scripteurs finnophones et francophones. Turku: Turun yliopisto. https://oa.doria.fi/handle/10024/29185 (accessed 30 June, 2014).
   Google Scholar
• Mutta, M. 2012. Révision en temps réel: attitude métacognitive épistémique et conscience métapragmatique des apprenants universitaires. In Actes du XVIIIe congrès des romanistes scandinaves, ed. E. Ahlstedt, K. Benson, E. Bladh, I. Söhrman and U. Åkerström, 527−42. Göteborg: Romanica Gothoburgensia 69, Acta universitatis Gothoburgenis.
   Google Scholar
• Mutta, M. and V. Suzanne. 2012. Divergence et convergence dans les processus de production orale et écrite en FLE. In Recherches récentes en FLE, ed. A. Kamber and C. Skupien Dekens, 123−45. New York: Peter Lang.
   Google Scholar
• Nückles, M., S. Hübner and A. Renkl. 2009. Enhancing self-regulated learning by writing learning protocols. Learning and Instruction 19, no. 3: 259–71. doi: 10.1016/j.learninstruc.2008.05.002
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Olive, T. and R.T. Kellogg. 2002. Concurrent activation of high- and low-level production processes in written composition. Memory & Cognition 30, no. 4: 594–600. doi: 10.3758/BF03194960
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Olive, T. and A. Piolat. 2005. Le rôle de la mémoire de travail dans la production écrite de textes. Psychologie Française 50: 373–90. doi: 10.1016/j.psfr.2005.05.002
   Google Scholar
• Raimes, A. 1987. Language proficiency, writing ability, and composing strategies. Language Learning 37, no. 3: 439–68. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-1770.1987.tb00579.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Roca de Larios, J., R. Manchón and L. Murphy. 2006. Generating text in native and foreign language writing: a temporal analysis of problem-solving formulation processes. The Modern Language Journal 90, no. 1: 100–14. doi: 10.1111/j.1540-4781.2006.00387.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Roca de Larios, J., R. Manchón, L. Murphy and J. Marín. 2008. The foreign language writer's strategic behaviour in the allocation of time to writing processes. Journal of Second Language Writing 17, no. 1: 30–47. doi: 10.1016/j.jslw.2007.08.005
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Roehr, K. 2006. Metalinguistic knowledge in L2 task performance: a verbal protocol analysis. Language Awareness 15, no. 3: 180–198. doi: 10.2167/la403.0
   Google Scholar
• Roehr, K. 2008. Linguistic and metalinguistic categories in second language learning. Cognitive Linguistics 19, no. 1: 67–106. doi: 10.1515/COG.2008.005
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Scardamalia, M. and C. Bereiter. 1991. Literate expertise. In Toward a General Theory of Expertise, ed. K.A. Ericsson and J. Smith, 172–94. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Severinson Eklundh, K. and P. Kollberg. 1996. A computer tool and framework for analyzing online revisions. In The Science of Writing: Theories, Methods, Individual Differences, ed. C.M. Levy and S. Ransdell, 163–88. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
   Google Scholar
• Strömqvist, S. and H. Karlsson. 2002. ScriptLog for Windows. User's Manual. Lund: Department of Linguistics.
   Google Scholar
• Tillema, M., H. van den Bergh, G. Rijlaarsdam and T. Sanders. 2011. Relating self reports of writing behaviour and online task execution using a temporal model. Metacognition Learning 6, no. 3: 229–53. doi: 10.1007/s11409-011-9072-x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Torrance, M. and G. Jeffery. 1999. Writing processes and cognitive demands. In The Cognitive Demands of Writing: Processing Capacity and Working Memory Effects in Text Production, ed. M. Torrance and G. Jeffery, 1–11. Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Turcotte, C. and E. Cloutier. 2014. Le rappel stimulé pour mieux comprendre les stratégies de lecture d’élèves du primaire à risque et compétents. Canadian Journal of Education/Revue canadienne de l’éducation 37, no. 1: 72–95.
   Google Scholar
• Wallace, D.L., J.R. Hayes, J.A. Hatch, W. Miller, G. Moser and C. Murphy Silk. 1996. Better revision in eight minutes? Prompting first-year college writers to revise globally. Journal of Educational Psychology 88, no. 4: 682–88. doi: 10.1037/0022-0663.88.4.682
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wolff, D. 2000. Second language writing: a few remarks on psycholinguistic and instructional issues. Learning and Instruction 10, no. 1: 107–12. doi: 10.1016/S0959-4752(99)00021-3
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Woore, R. 2010. Thinking aloud about L2 decoding: an exploration of the strategies used by beginner learners when producing unfamiliar French words. The Language Learning Journal 38, no. 1: 3–17. doi: 10.1080/09571730903545210
   Google Scholar