Language Learners' Interaction and the Production of Modified Output Do Thi Quy Thu Hue University, College of Foreign Languages Vietnam 1.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Supervisor: Nor Fadzlinda Ishak Prof. Paul Seedhouse
Advertisements

Which comes first - integration, participation or motivation?
Oral Production and Error Correction Amongst Arab Learners of English
Corrective Feedback – pronunciation errors How effective it is in learning L2 oral communication Nguyễn Thị Tố Hạnh.
The university of South Australia Division of Education, Arts and Social Sciences School of Communication, International Studies and Languages DUC TIEN.
INDIVIDUAL DIFFERENCES.  Q. What is the best age for learning a new language? Why?   Children are popularly believed to be better at learning languages.
OBSERVING PEDAGOGICAL PRACTICES THAT FACILITATE NEGOTIATION FOR MEANING IN L2 CLASSES.
Chapter 4 Key Concepts.
SLA Research: Who Cares? TESOL Spain Conference March 2011 Geoff Jordan.
Modified Approximants in L2 Spanish Teacher Talk: What are Students Hearing in the L2 Classroom? Meghan V. Huff Department of Linguistics University of.
TBLT Nonnative-Nonnative Negotiations on Targeted, Communicative Pronunciation Tasks Laura Sicola University of Pennsylvania.
Ellis’ Principles of Instructed Language Learning
The development of language proficiency acquisition is promoted by face to face interaction and communication.
Principles for teaching speaking 1.Give students practice with both fluency and accuracy 2.Provide opportunities for students to interact by using pair.
Multimedia Call: Lessons to be learned from research on instructed SLA by Carol chapelle Iowa State University Daniel, Rania, Alice.
Week 10: Second Language Acquisition
Connecting second language acquisition theory and Accelerated Literacy pedagogy Rhonda Oliver & Kate Mullin.
LIN 540G Second Language Acquistion
The Relationship Between Second Language Acquisition Theory and Computer-Assisted Language Learning Chapelle, C. A. (2009). The Relationship Between Second.
The Basics of Language Acquisition
Second Language Acquisition SS Topics How do adult speakers acquire a second language? What characterizes the process of second language acquisition?
L2 Methodologies South Asian Languages. Focus Who is the second language learner? What does s/he bring to class?
”When CALL is the better choice” Jane Vinther, Ph.D. University of Southern Denmark CALL 2008 conference University.
Input and Interaction and Second Language Acquisition
Language Development in FL-Medium Learning Environment Eeva Rauto Vaasa University of Applied Sciences
TASK-BASED INSTRUCTION Teresa Pica, PhD Presented by Reem Alshamsi & Kherta Sherif Mohamed.
+ Online Portfolios in a French Course Jessica S. Miller University of Wisconsin-Eau Claire.
Getting Your Students Speaking FromInputToUptake Harnessing the power of blended learning and new technologies Giving Students A Voice.
Education of English Conversation
I’m online, let’s chat! Neny Isharyanti-GloCALL 2007.
14: THE TEACHING OF GRAMMAR  Should grammar be taught?  When? How? Why?  Grammar teaching: Any strategies conducted in order to help learners understand,
THE EFFECTS OF GENDER ON COMMUNICATION STRATEGIES OF VIETNAMESE EFL LEARNERS PRESENTER: ĐINH NGỌC HẠNH People’s Police College.
INCORPORATING CULTURE IN DEVELOPING ENGLISH SPEAKING SKILLS FOR EFL ADULT LEARNERS: A CASESTUDY OF VIETNAMESE TEACHERS’ VOICES Mach Buu Hien SEAMEO RETRAC.
Colorado State University April 12 th, 2014 Leslie Davis Devon Jancin Moriah Kent Kristen Foster THEORIES OF SECOND LANGUAGE ACQUISITION: What are their.
Giles Witton-Davies, National Taiwan University, Taiwan
Strangers Here Ourselves: How NNESTs Work with Multilingual Writers NNEST/SLW Intersection TESOL 2009, Denver, CO Ryuko Kubota University of British Columbia.
Learning through Conversation Exploring effective Communication to promote learning Kirsty Brown, Educational Psychologist
Individual Differences in SLA: Gender 1.Interlanguage Not a rich area for examination of gender differences. Selinker, L. (1969). Language transfer. General.
Multimedia CALL: Lessons to Be Learned from Research on Instructed SLA Carol A. Chapelle Presenters: Thorunn April.
Ellis 2003, chapter 1 pp By Aida W. Wardhananti
Tony Lynch University of Edinburgh. Feedback in SLA (Lyster & Ranta 1997)  Explicit correction  Recast  Clarification request  Metalinguistic feedback.
Presenter: Chen, Yu-Chu Advisor: Chen, Ming-Puu Date: 2008 Nov.3 Corrective Feedback in the Chatroom: An experimental study Loewen, S. & Erlam, R. (2006).
Reading Comprehension Exercises Online: The Effects of Feedback, Proficiency and Interaction Betty, Frances, Gordon & Judith.
Input/Output Lindsay Robertson Sarah Wilson Katie Luscombe.
The design of EFL multi-media materials in assisting listening By Guan Lin.
SLA Effects of Recasts as Implicit Knowledge Young-ah Do Fall, College English Education.
The Linguistic Environment (Ch. 4)
Negotiating meaning in the mixed-ability language classroom María F. Muradás-Taylor University of York.
Input, Interaction, and Output Input: (in language learning) language which a learner hears or receives and from which he or she can learn. Enhanced input:
Methodology MSc in TESOL Muna Morris-Adams. Outline 1.Introduction 2.ELT methodology 3.Trends and influences 4.The MET module 5.Action Research 6.Assessment.
Comprehensible Input Hypothesis — A classic theory in SLA Speaker: Wang Na Major: Applied Linguistics Date: June,
Yokel Yilmaz & Gisela Granena. Yilmaz: Language Research Center, University of Calgary. Canada. Granena: University of Maryland at College Park. 2.
Eliciting child and adolescent data in second language research: Adapting for age and cultural differences. Rhonda Oliver.
Welcome to the flashcards tool for ‘The Study of Language, 5 th edition’, Chapter 14 This is designed as a simple supplementary resource for this textbook,
INTERACTION HYPOTHESIS – M.Long
How Languages Are Learned
Teaching methodology, Fall, 2015 Teaching Grammar form vs. forms structure.
Providing EAL students with grammatical focus in a mainstream secondary school Irena Gwiazda, PhD Teach Meet Research Oxford 2016.
The Interaction Hypothesis
Negative evidence through classroom interactional feedback in SLA
University of Essex Beatriz de Paiva
Explaining Second Language Learning
Oral Corrective Feedback during ELL Academic Conversations
Authenticity in the Language Classroom
Adapted from Franceschina, F.
Investigating the Empirical Links between Learner Uptake and Language Acquisition through Task-Based Interaction Wenchi Haung 2019/1/16.
SECOND LANGUAGE ACQUISITION
International Conference on Task-Based Language Teaching University of Leuven Leuven, Belgium September 21-23, 2005 Modified Output during Task-based Pair.
Discourse aspects of interlanguage
Chapter 3 Interlanguage.
Presentation transcript:

Language Learners' Interaction and the Production of Modified Output Do Thi Quy Thu Hue University, College of Foreign Languages Vietnam 1

1. Introduction Thu Do_International TESOL Conference, Sept Comprehensible Output Hypothesis:  necessity of opportunities for NNSs to produce comprehensible output in SLA  learners need to be “pushed” into making their output more precise, coherent, and appropriate Swain (1985)

1. Introduction Thu Do_International TESOL Conference, Sept  not consider the comparison between NNS/NNS and NS/NNS interactions (except for Varonis & Gass, 1985, 1994; Pica et al., 1996) Previous studies investigating Swain’s hypothesis:  collect data mostly from NS/NNS interactions (e.g., Pica, 1988; Linnell, 1996; Nobuyoshi & Ellis, 1993)

2. Research questions Thu Do_International TESOL Conference, Sept Based on Pica et al.’s study (1996) and Iwashita’s study (2001), the study investigated NNS/NNS vs. NS/NNS interactions and 1. Opportunities for modified output through interactional moves 2. Types of interactional moves provided to other interlocutors 3. Production of modified output in response to interactional moves.

Hypothesis Thu Do_International TESOL Conference, Sept HypothesisPrediction 1.Opportunities for modified output NNS/NNS dyads ≠ NS/NNS dyads 2.Proportions of interactional moves NNS/NNS dyads ≠ NS/NNS dyads NNSs ≠ NSs 3.Production of modified output (MO) NNS/NNS dyads < NS/NNS dyads

3. Methodology Thu Do_International TESOL Conference, Sept Subjects 15 NNSs of English, 5 NSs of English: 5 NS/NNS dyads and 5 NNS/NNS dyads 3.3. Data collection procedures 20 audio-recordings: 10 dyads performing 2 communication tasks 3.2. Communicative tasks One-way information gap tasks adapted from related studies (see, e.g., Pica et al., 1996; Iwashita, 2001)

3. Methodology Thu Do_International TESOL Conference, Sept Data transcription and analysis  Data transcribed and coded for linguistic features:  interaction moves : confirmation checks and clarification requests  types of modified outputs: lexical modifications and syntactic modifications (see samples)(see samples)  Data analysed using an analysis of variance (ANOVA) test

4. Results and Discussion Thu Do_International TESOL Conference, Sept HypothesisPredictionSupported? 1.Opportunities for modified output NNS/NNS dyads ≠ NS/NNS dyadsNo 2.Proportions of interactional moves NNS/NNS dyads ≠ NS/NNS dyads NNSs ≠ NSs Yes 3.Production of modified output (MO) NNS/NNS dyads < NS/NNS dyadsYes Table 1. Summary of results (see ANOVA test_level of significance)

4.1. Hypothesis 1 Thu Do_International TESOL Conference, Sept Task 1 Task 2 Total n%n%n% NNS/NNS dyads Other c-units CC and CR* NS/NNS dyads Other c-units CC and CR * CC, confirmation check; CR, clarification request Table 2 Interactional moves in c-units which provided opportunities to produce MO

4.2. Hypothesis 2 Thu Do_International TESOL Conference, Sept Task 1Task 2Total n %n%n % NNS/NNS dyads CC CR NS/NNS dyads CC CR (Additional notice from the 2 tasks in NS/NNS dyads: Task 1: NSs: information providers; NNSs: information receivers Task 2: NSs: information receivers, NNSs: information providers) Table 3 Proportion of CC and CR in NNS/NNS and NS/NNS dyads

Hypothesis 2 Thu Do_International TESOL Conference, Sept NNS1: There is a teapot on the shelf. NNS2: Teapot on the shelf? (CC) NNS1: Aah, in the first layer. NNS2: First layer? (CC) NNS1: Yeah, the bottom one, the bottom layer. There're three glasses on the shelf, the top layer. NNS2: Ok, in the top layer. Three glasses? (CC) NNS1: Yes. And bottle, a bottle on the cupboard. NNS2: Ok. Excerpt 1. Example of frequent use of CC by NNSs.

Hypothesis 2 Thu Do_International TESOL Conference, Sept NNS: At the back. And next to the cat, on the carpet, we will see a magazine on the carpet. NS: Is it on the left of the cat? (CR) NNS: On the left, magazine, ok? NS: Ok. NNS: And on the right of the cat, you will see the...next to the sofa...you will see the...the lamp on the table, the round table. NS: Where is the table? (CR) NNS: It's behind. NS: The lamp is on the table? (CR) NNS: Yep. On the table, and a book is next to the lamp. Excerpt 2. Examples of frequent use of CR by NSs.

4.3 Hypothesis 3 Thu Do_International TESOL Conference, Sept Task 1Task 2Total n %n%n % NNS/NNS dyads Modified output Other responses NS/NNS dyads Modified output Other responses Table 4 Production of modified output in NNS/NNS and NS/NNS dyads

Hypothesis 3 Thu Do_International TESOL Conference, Sept  Modified output: NS/NNS > NNS/NNS  NNSs’ modifications : syntactic type NSs’: syntactic + lexical  NNSs’ syntactic modifications: simple, short, mostly repeated from other interlocutors' prior utterances.

Hypothesis 3 Thu Do_International TESOL Conference, Sept NNS1:There's a saucepan in the cooker. NNS2:On the cooker? NNS1:Aah, on the cooker (syntactic modification) NNS2:Which side, left or right? NNS1: Uhm...on the cooker. NNS2:Just on the cooker? NNS1:Yeah, just put it on the cooker. (syntactic modification) NNS2: Ok. Excerpt 3. Examples of modifications used by NNSs.

Thu Do_International TESOL Conference, Sept NS:the next shelf, on the left, teapot NNS: teapot? NS: Teapot, teapot has a handle on the side, that's on the left (lexical modification) NNS:ok, I got it. Excerpt 4. Examples of modifications used by NSs. Hypothesis 3

5. Conclusions and Implications Thu Do_International TESOL Conference, Sept  Opportunities for modifications: NNS/NNS ~ NNS/NS.  CR > CC in NS/NNS interactions:  NSs: CR > CC in interactional moves.  NNSs: mainly CC  Production of modified output: NS/NNS > NNS/NNS interactions.  NS’s responses:  rich in lexical and structural modifications  not a particularly rich context to aid learners in L2 learning, i.e. to produce modified output

Thu Do_International TESOL Conference, Sept  Provide models of L2 morphosyntax in building L2 grammar  assist L2 acquisition Implications  Identify, adapt or create suitable communicative tasks for classroom interactions  Provide opportunities for learners to modify interactions through negotiation.

References Thu Do_International TESOL Conference, Sept Duff, P.A. (1986). Another look at interlanguage talk: talking task to task. In R. Day (Ed.), Talking to Learn: Conversation in Second Language Acquisition (pp ). Rowley, MA: Newbury House. Gass, S. (2003). Input and interaction. In C. Doughty & M. H. Long (Eds.), The handbook of second language acquisition (pp ). London: Blackwell. Gass, S., Varonis, E. (1985). Task variation and non-native/non-native negotiation of meaning. In S. Gass & C. Madden (Eds.), Input in Second Language Acquisition (pp ). Rowley, MA: Newbury House. Gass, S., Varonis, E. (1986). Sex differences in NNS/NNS interactions. In R. Day (Ed.), Talking to Learn: Conversation in Second Language Acquisition (pp ). Rowley, MA: Newbury House. Gass, S., Varonis, E. (1994). Input, interaction and second language production. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 16, Iwashita, N. (2001). The effect of learner proficiency on interactional moves and modified output in nonnative-nonnative interaction in Japanese as a foreign language. System, 29, Iwashita, N. (1999). Tasks and learners’ output in nonnative-nonnative interaction. In K. Kanno (Ed.), Studies on the Acquisition of Japanese as a Second Language (pp ). Amsterdam: John Benjamin. Linnell, J. (1996). Can negotiation provide a context for learning syntax in a second language? Working Paper in Educational Linguistics, 12, Nobuyoshi, J., Ellis, R. (1993). Focused communication tasks and second language acquisition. English Language Teaching Journal, 47, Pica, T. (1988). Interlanguage adjustments as an outcome of NS-NNS negotiated interaction. Language Learning, 28, Pica, T., Holliday, L., Lewis, N., Morgenthaler, L. (1989).Comprehensible output as an outcome of linguistic demands on the learner. Studies in Second language Acquisition, 11(1), Pica, T., Lincoln-Porter, F., Paninos, D., Linnel, J. (1996). Language learners' interaction: How does it address the input, output and feedback needs of L2 learners?. TESOL Quarterly 30(1), Shehadeh, A. (1999). Non-native speakers' production of modified comprehensible output and second language learning. Language Learning 49(4), Swain, M., Communicative competence: some roles of comprehensible input and comprehensible output in its development. In S. Gass & C. Madden (Eds), Input in Second Language Acquisition (pp ), Rowley, MA: Newbury House. Watcyn-Jones, P. (1984). Penguin functional English. Great Britain: Penguin Books. Yamaguchi, Y., (1994). Negative Evidence and Japanese as a Foreign Language Acquisition. Ms, University of Western Australia, Perth.

Thu Do_International TESOL Conference, Sept Thank you