International Journal of Linguistics Studies (IJLS) DOI: 10.32996/ ijls Journal Homepage: www.al-kindipublisher.com/index.php/ijls Page | 1 A Comparative Analysis on Cohesive Markers in Essay Composition of First Language and Second Language: Direct Writing Versus Translation Noor Shahariah Saleh 1 Siti Fatimah Murtaza 2 , and Nurshila Umar Baki 3 1 Academy of Language Studies, Universiti Teknologi MARA Cawangan Negeri Sembilan Kampus Seremban, Persiaran Seremban Tiga/1, 70300 Seremban, Negeri Sembilan, Malaysia 2 Centre for Language Studies, Universiti Tun Hussein Onn Malaysia, 86400 Parit Raja, Batu Pahat, Johor, Malaysia 3 SMA Shamsuddiniah, Parit Medan, Kundang Ulu, 84710 Tangkak, Johor Corresponding Author: Noor Shahariah Saleh, E-mail: noorshahariah@uitm.edu.my ARTICLE INFORMATION ABSTRACT Received: August 08, 2021 Accepted: September 14, 2021 Volume: 1 Issue: 2 DOI: 10.32996/ijls.2021.1.2.1 Studies have revealed that first language has significant impacts on learners’ second language development. Utilizing L1 in the writing processes such as translation method and direct writing is a conventional strategy used by low proficiency level L2 learners. However, there is a lack of studies that determine the quality of writing influenced by L1 transfer. This study aims to provide a comparative analysis on the use of cohesive markers as a result of the use of Malay in English written text via translation and direct composition. The writing quality in terms of content, organisation and writing style of a group of students with low, intermediate and advanced proficiency levels from a secondary school in the district of Tangkak, Johor was scrutinised. Data were collected via two different topics of writing tasks using direct composition and translation writing process. The first topic involved English direct composition while the second topic employed direct Malay composition which was then translated into English. The results of the study indicated that English essays of direct writing showed less variety of cohesive markers as compared to Malay essays due to the lack of L2 writing skills. The learners apparently generated more ideas in their native language as well as utilized their L1 cohesive markers into L2 composition via the translation writing process. Nevertheless, the similarities and differences of cohesive markers in Malay and English help teachers to understand learners' organisation of Malay and English essays. KEYWORDS Cohesive markers, translated writing, direct writing, L1 transfer and L2 writing 1. Introduction 1 Early studies mainly indicated the negative influence of L1 on L2 development. Based on the notion that acquisition is better than learning, the main principle is that L2 teachers and learners should use only L2 in the classroom as the use of L1 could be detrimental to the process. Theories like Krashen’s monitor theory are the main foundation to this principle. In the 1980s, there was a shift of interest from product to process orientation. Research studies have begun to acknowledge the more positive role of L1 on L2 development. For instance, Cummins (1989), through his common underlying proficiency (CUP) model of bilingualism, highlighted the importance of L1 in developing L2. Research has identified L1 as a salient writing strategy utilized by L2 learners. It is considered as a compensatory strategy to overcome writing difficulties faced by L2 learners especially by the lower proficiency group (Lifang, 2008; Stapa & Majid, 2012). In addition, several studies have analysed the effects of using different writing processes such as direct writing and translation method (Kobayashi & Rinnert, 1992; Ahmed Ismail & Omer Alsheikh, 2012; Petchprasert, 2013). These studies have discovered that the lower proficiency learners of L2 gained more benefits from composing in L1 and then translating into L2 writing. This highlights the importance of using L1 composing strategies for lower L2 proficiency writers. Published by Al-Kindi Center for Research and Development. Copyright (c) the author(s). This open access article is distributed under a Creative Commons Attribution (CC-BY) 4.0 license