【正文】 L1 to L2 Writing Process and Strategy Transfer: A Look at Lower Proficiency WritersAbstractThis article examines the posing process and writing strategies of three lower proficiency Japanese subjects in their L1 and L2. This study found that while some L1 strategies may transfer to the L2 writing processes, lower proficiency writers struggle in utilizing all strategies that could help their writing process in the L2. The results suggest several pensating strategies for dealing with L2 language issues and facilitating L1 posing process transfer. Finally, suggestions for teachers are given so that teachers can help students discover and utilize existing strategies within their L1 and L2 posing processes as well as pensating strategies to improve their L2 writing. Review Of LiteratureWriting in a second language (L2) is a challenging and plex process. While the first language (L1) writing process includes producing content, drafting ideas, revising writing, choosing appropriate vocabulary, and editing text, writing in an L2 involves all of these elements jumbled with second language processing issues. In the case of lower L2 proficiency writers, these L2 issues can overwhelm the writing process, even to the point of a plete breakdown of the process (Bereiter amp。 Scardimalia,1987). L1 Use to Drive L2 WritingWriting in a second language (L2) is a challenging and plex process. While the first language (L1) writing process includes producing content, drafting ideas, revising writing, choosing appropriate vocabulary, and editing text, writing in an L2 involves all of these elements jumbled with second language processing issues. In the case of lower L2 proficiency writers, these L2 issues can overwhelm the writing process, even to the point of a plete breakdown of the process (Bereiter amp。 Scardimalia,1987). L1 Use to Drive L2 WritingAlthough many L2 writers use their L1 in some way while writing in the L2, the amount of L1 used during L2 writing is not the same for all L2 writers. In general, proficient L2 learners do not depend heavily on the L1 to drive the writing process because they have a sufficient level of L2 automaticity and knowledge to think and plan in the L2 (Jones amp。 Tetroe, 1987). However, lower L2 proficiency writers rely more heavily on their L1 during the writing process in order to sustain the process and prevent a plete breakdown in language (Arndt, 1987。 Cumming, 1989。 Raimes, 1985。 Uzawa amp。 Cumming, 1989). [1]Uzawa and Cumming (1989) observed two distinct strategies that helped sustain the writing process of their lower L2 proficiency subjects. One they termed keeping the standard and the other lowering the standard. Keeping the standard strategies were used in L2 writing in order to maintain the level of writing achieved in the L1. These were strategies such as taking more time, revising extensively, and seeking assistance. Lowering the standard strategies were used in order to plete the writing task within a reasonable amount of time and without excessive mental effort. These were strategies such as reducing information, simplifying syntax, substituting lexical items, and ignoring reader concerns. The subjects in the study produced L2 papers that had less content than their L1 writing, but about equal quality to their L1 writing. Overall, the L1 aided in keeping the standard. If the L1 was not used, we can surmise that the quality of writing would have been lower than it was and the standard would have had no checks and balances in place to keep it on a higher plane.Several studies have looked at the effect of posing in the L1 and then translating into the L2 (Cohen amp。 BrooksCarson, 2001。 Kobayashi amp。 Rinnert, 1994). These studies have found that the lower L2 proficiency writers benefited from posing in the L1 and then translating into the L2, a result that highlights the importance of using L1 posing strategies for lower L2 proficiency writers. Jones and Tetroe (1987) did a study on the effect of L1 use during L2 writing. They found that the lower L2 proficiency writers who did not use their L1 were less effective in their planning. The writers who did use their L1 produced more details during the planning stage of L2 writing. Furthermore, the L1 facilitated more abstract thought during planning.Research QuestionAlthough we have some understanding of how lower proficiency writers cope with the demands of writing in an L2, our picture is still inplete. One area in which we still have little understanding is the degree to which L2 writers transfer their L1 posing process and strategies to their L2 writing. While it is given that L2 writing poses challenges that are unique from L1 writing and thus require unique strategies to deal with, it is reasonable to assume that parts of the posing process are similar or even the same in the L1 and the L2. The purpose of this study is to investigate the degree to which lower L2 proficiency writers transfer their posing processes and strategies from L1 writing to L2 writing. The question that this research sought to answer is: What L1 posing processes and strategies do lower L2 proficiency writers transfer to L2 writing? MethodSubjectsThree native Japanesespeaking subjects were selected from an intensive English program in the . to participate in this research. They were chosen for their beginning English proficiency, their wider experience with writing in Japanese, and their limited experience with writing in English. All three subjects were female and their ages ranged from 26 to 28 years old. All three subjects were high school graduates, and two of the three subjects had also graduated from 2year colleges. [2]ProcedureSix thinkaloud protocols were collected while the subjects posed essays in Japanese and then in English. Each subject individually participated in two posing sessions in which the subject wrote an essay while thinking aloud. In the first session subjects wrote a Japan