Abstract

This study investigates the added burden Mexican and Taiwanese non-native English speaker (NNES) researchers perceive when writing research articles in English as a second language (L2) compared with their experience of first language (L1) science writing. 148 Mexican and 236 Taiwanese researchers completed an established survey of science writing burden. Results revealed significant differences between L1 and L2 science writing with an increased burden for L2 science writing consisting of an average increase of 24% in difficulty, 10% in dissatisfaction and 22% in anxiety. No significant differences between the Mexican and Taiwanese researchers were found. Regression analyses established that the variables of science writing burden contribute to a sense that English is a barrier to writing science. We maintain that the additional burden of L2 science writing constitutes a linguistic injustice and a barrier to science that should be addressed by relevant constituents.

Journal
Written Communication
Published
2019-01-01
DOI
10.1177/0741088318804821
Open Access
OA PDF Bronze
Topics

Citation Context

Cites in this index (3)

  1. Written Communication
  2. Written Communication
  3. Written Communication
Also cites 46 works outside this index ↓
  1. 10.1515/9783110802689
  2. 10.1515/9783110869484
  3. 10.2167/cilp088.0
  4. 10.1080/09540250500145072
  5. 10.2307/j.ctt5hjn6c
  6. 10.20851/english-pathways
  7. 10.37514/PER-B.2012.0452.2.19
  8. 10.1016/j.esp.2009.06.002
  9. Pedagogies and policies for publishing research in English: Local initiatives supporting …
  10. 10.2307/3588284
  11. 10.1016/j.jeap.2008.03.001
  12. 10.1080/15348450802619979
  13. 10.4324/9780429053184
  14. 10.1177/1461445611403261
  15. 10.1007/s10993-012-9268-1
  16. 10.1016/S1060-3743(99)80116-7
  17. 10.2307/3587862
  18. 10.1016/j.jslw.2008.09.005
  19. 10.1016/S1060-3743(96)90021-1
  20. 10.1016/j.tree.2010.11.001
  21. 10.1075/aila.20.06ham
  22. 10.1590/S0103-18132013000200008
  23. 10.1016/j.jeap.2009.10.001
  24. 10.1080/02188791.2011.566983
  25. 10.1016/j.jslw.2016.01.005
  26. 10.1080/02188791.2015.1005050
  27. 10.1075/aila.28.06lil
  28. 10.1016/j.jeap.2018.03.008
  29. 10.1080/03057925.2010.523250
  30. 10.1002/leap.1089
  31. 10.1007/978-94-6209-407-9_7
  32. 10.1007/s11192-015-1570-1
  33. 10.1533/9781780633503
  34. 10.1002/tesq.154
  35. 10.1177/1028315306291945
  36. 10.1057/978-1-137-48736-0
  37. 10.1016/j.esp.2010.05.001
  38. 10.1515/9781614516378
  39. 10.1016/j.jslw.2016.09.003
  40. 10.1007/978-3-319-56791-4
  41. 10.37514/PER-B.2012.0452.2.25
  42. 10.1016/j.esp.2014.12.001
  43. 10.1016/0889-4906(87)90016-0
  44. 10.1016/j.jeap.2008.10.007
  45. 10.1126/science.1252743
  46. Yen C. P., Hung T. W. (2018). New data on the linguistic diversity of authorship in Philosophy journals. Erke…
CrossRef global citation count: 92 View in citation network →