Motivating the design of a computer assisted environment for writers in a second language

  • Lyn Pemberton
  • Simon Shurville
  • Tony Hartley
Learning Environments: Modelling and Design
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 1108)


We have discussed the importance of writing to the non-native speaker of English in science, technology and engineering and have sketched the processes involved in writing in a first and second language, showing the complexities of any writing task. We have suggested that the Cooperative Software model of interaction is a promising approach to the design of software for supporting writers of structured documents, by providing context sensitive information in an easily accessible and flexible form.


Word Processor Writing Process Academic Writer Writing Task Research Insight 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Barrass, Robert. 1978. Scientists must write: a guide to better writing for scientists, engineers and technologists. London: Chapman and Hall.Google Scholar
  2. Casanave, Christine P. and Philip Hubbard. 1992. The Writing Assignments and Writing Problems of Doctoral Students: Faculty Perceptions. Pedagogical Issues and Needed Research. English for Special Purposes Journal, 11/1, pp. 33–49.Google Scholar
  3. Ferraris, M., F. Caviglia and R. Degli'Innocenti. 1992. WordProf: a writing environment on computer. In J. Hartley (ed.), Technology and Writing: Readings in the Psychology of Written Communication. London: Kingsley, pp. 221–232.Google Scholar
  4. Fischer, G., Nakakoji, K., Ostwald, J., Stahl, G. and T. Sumner. 1993. Embedding Computer-Based Critics in the Contexts of Design. In Proceedings of INTERCHI '93. New York: ACM Press.Google Scholar
  5. Flower, L. S.. and J. R. Hayes. 1980. The Dynamics of Composing: Making Plans and Juggling Constraints, in Cognitive Processes in Writing (ed. L. W. Gregg and E. R. Steinberg). Hillsdale, N. J.: Lawrence Erlbaum,.Google Scholar
  6. Friedlander, Alexander. 1990. Composing in English: first language effects. In Kroll, Barbara (ed.), 1990, Second Language Writing: Research Insights for the Classroom. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 1990, pp. 109–125.Google Scholar
  7. Jenkins, Susan, Mary Kaye Jordan and Patricia O. Weiland. 1993. The Role of Writing in Graduate Engineering Education: A Survey of Faculty Beliefs and Practices. English for Special Purposes, 12/1. pp. 51–67.Google Scholar
  8. Johns, Ann M. 1990. Composition Theories: implications for developing theories of L2 composition, In Kroll, Barbara (ed), Second Language Writing: Research Insights for the Classroom. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 1990, pp. 24–36.Google Scholar
  9. Mangenot, François. 1995. Aides logiciels pour apprentis scripteurs en langue maternelle et en langues étrangères. Unpublished thesis, Université Paris X.Google Scholar
  10. Moss, Gillian. 1992. Cognate Recognition: Its Importance in the teaching of ESP Reading Course to Spanish students. English for Special Purposes Journal, 11/3, pp. 141–160.Google Scholar
  11. Mustafa, Zahra. 1995. The Effect of Genre Awareness on Linguistic Transfer. English for Special Purposes Journal, 11/1, pp. 33–49.Google Scholar
  12. Pennington, Martha C. 1992. Beyond Off-the-Shelf Computer Remedies for Student Writers: Alternatives for Canned Feedback. System, 20 (4), pp. 423–437.Google Scholar
  13. Rettig, Marc. 1993. Cooperative Software. Communications of the ACM, 36/4, pp. 23–28.Google Scholar
  14. Sharples, Mike, James Goodlet and Lyn Pemberton. 1992. Developing a Writer's Assistant. In J. Hartley (ed.), Technology and Writing: Readings in the Psychology of Written Communication. London: Kingsley, pp. 209–220.Google Scholar
  15. Sharples, Mike and Lyn Pemberton. 1992. Representing Writing. In Patrik O'Brien Holt and Noel Williams (eds), Computers and Writing. Oxford: Intellect Books.Google Scholar
  16. Silverman, Barry G. 1992. Critiquing Human Error: A Knowledge-Based Human-Computer Collaboration Approach. London: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  17. Sionis, Claude. 1995. Communication Strategies in the Writing of Scientific Research Articles by Non-native users of English. English for Special Purposes, 14/2. pp. 99–113.Google Scholar
  18. Smith, John B. and Marcy Lansman. 1992. Designing Theory-based Systems: A Case Study. Proceedings of CHI '92, Monterey. New York: ACM Press.Google Scholar
  19. Swales, J. 1990. Genre Analysis: English in Academic and Research Settings. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  20. Swales, J. and C. Feak. 1994. Academic Writing for Graduate Students: A Course for Non-native Speakers of English. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.Google Scholar
  21. Tarone, Elaine and George Yule. 1989. Focus on the Language Learner. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  22. Tufte, Edward, R. 1990. Envisioning Information. Cheshire, Connecticut: Graphics PressGoogle Scholar
  23. Varadi, T. 1980. Strategies of target language learner communication: message adjustment. IRAL, 18, 59–71.Google Scholar
  24. Wylie, A. 1993. On the Road to Discovery: a study of the composing strategies of academic writers on the word processor. Unpublished MA thesis, University of Lancaster, August 1993.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1996

Authors and Affiliations

  • Lyn Pemberton
    • 1
  • Simon Shurville
    • 1
  • Tony Hartley
    • 1
  1. 1.University of BrightonUK

Personalised recommendations