E-MAIL AND WORD PROCESSING IN THE ESL CLASSROOM: HOW THE MEDIUM AFFECTS THE MESSAGE

ABSTRACT Computer-based media place new demands on language which can promote variations in language use (cf. Halliday, 1990). Electronic mail has assumed functions and formal features associated with spoken language as well as formal writing (Davis & Brewer, 1997; Maynor, 1994; Murray, 1996). This has implications for language instructors: If electronic mail does engender features of both written and spoken language, it is questionable that electronic mail writing will improve academic writing abilities. The present study attempts to provide insights into this issue. Non-native students in an intermediate pre-academic ESL course responded to writing prompts using electronic mail and word processing. Their writing was examined for (1) differences in use of cohesive features (Halliday, 1967; Halliday & Hasan, 1976), (2) length of text produced in each medium, and (3) differences in text-initial contextualization. Results indicate no obvious differences between students' electronic mail and word-processed writing. However, the electronic mail texts were significantly shorter than the word-processed texts, and text-initial contextualization was more prominent in the word-processed than in the electronic mail texts. The findings raise the question of whether electronic mail benefits students in terms of academic writing development. INTRODUCTION Halliday (1990) notes that "when new demands are made on language ... [and when] we are making language work for us in ways it never had to do before, it will have to become a different language in order to cope" (p. 82). It is arguable that computer-based media present new demands which have the potential of promoting variations in language use as Halliday predicts. Perhaps the demands are not novel per se, but it is rather the blurring, the amalgamation, of previous demands which may result in linguistic variations. Take, for instance, computer communication systems which have placed demands, often associated with spoken language, on the production of written language. This reassignment is most observable in synchronous computer-mediated communication such as MOOs (MUD Object Oriented), MUDs (Multi-User Domain), and Chat. While the language takes on a written form, it is constrained by temporal limitations which require immediate responses. Conversely, this type of synchronous communication, which can be considered an essentially oral language (Collot & Belmore, 1996), is also constrained by norms -- including spelling norms -- most often associated with written language. A similar blending of demands is imposed on asynchronous media such as some forms of electronic mail (Tella & Mononen-Aaltonen, 1998). The temporal constraint is usually not as acute as it is for synchronous communication, but e-mail nonetheless engenders an involvement/immediacy which other types of non-mediated writing do not (Danet, 1999). E-mail is also often subject to conventions restricting written language usage. In addition to the various demands, Halliday (1990) further points out that variation in the functions which language serves is a factor of variation in language use. E-mail, as an example, has assumed functions which are in some cases associated with spoken language and in other cases associated with formal writing. One can, for instance, e-mail someone instead of telephoning or writing a letter or memorandum (Baron, 1998; Danet, 1999; Davis & Brewer, 1997). A question which then follows in light of the integration of demands and functions imposed on computer-mediated communication is whether the formal properties of the language used vary accordingly as Halliday (1990) predicts. Of further interest is whether such variations in the formal properties of computer-mediated language constitute a distinct genre or register. Research suggests that e-mail does exhibit distinct linguistic properties (Baron, 1998). Much recent literature describes e-mail as a hybrid of oral and written features (DuBartell, 1995; Marcus, 1995; Maynor, 1994; Murray, 1996; Uhlirova, 1994; Yates & Orlikowski, 1993). …