DOCSLIB.ORG

Negotiation of Meaning in Inte

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Negotiation of Meaning in Inte NEGOTIATION OF MEANING IN INTERLANGUAGE TALK by Friederike A. Tegge A Thesis Submitted to the Faculty of The Dorothy F. Schmidt College of Arts and Letters in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Arts Florida Atlantic University Boca Raton, Florida April 2004 NEGOTIATION OF MEANING IN INTERLANGUAGE TALK by Friederike A. Tegge This thesis was prepared under the direction of the candidate' s advisor , Dr. DuBravac, Department of Languages and Linguistics, and has been approved by the members of her supervisory committee . It was submitted to the faculty of The Dorothy F. Schmidt College of Arts and Letters and was accepted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts. SUPERVISORY COMMITTEE : of Arts & Letters Studies ii ABSTRACT Author: Friederike A. Tegge Title Negotiation of Meaning in Interlanguage Talk Institution: Florida Atlantic University Thesis Advisor: Dr. DuBravac Degree: Master of Arts Year: 2004 This small-scale study investigated the extent to which negotiations of meaning during methodologically focused communicative partner- activities were concerned with a grammatical target structure, the dative case following spatial prepositions in German. In addition, the impact of the negotiation of the target structure on subsequent learner performance was investigated. The subjects, beginning-level students of German, participated in two two-way information-gap activities, preceded and followed by the same grammaticality judgment test. The interaction was audiotaped and transcribed. The improvement in accuracy between the pretest and the posttest was calculated and correlated with the number of negotiation moves. The results indicate that the subjects negotiated meaning, including form, frequently . However, no significant change in the subjects' subsequent performance was observed. lll TABLE OF CONTENTS List of Table ........................................... vii List of Figures .......................................... ix Negotiation of Meaning in Interlanguage Talk ............. 1 Negotiation of Meaning .............................. 7 Negotiation of Meaning and Interlanguage Talk ................... .... 11 Grammar in Negotiation of Meaning ........ 14 The Merits of Negotiation of Meaning ..... 16 Negotiation of Meaning: An Overview ................ 18 Interaction as the Means and not the End of Acquisition ................... 20 The Issue of Comprehensible Input ........ 22 Michael Long's Interaction Hypothesis .... 27 Negotiation of Meaning and Comprehensible Output .................... 29 The Structure of Negotiation of Meaning .. 32 Feedback and Negative Evidence ........... 32 iv Negotiation of Meaning and Information Processing ................................ 33 Consciousness-Raising and Input Enhancement . .............................. 3 4 The Present Study in the Context of Research on Negotiation of Meaning .... 35 Method ................................................... 35 Research Questions . ................................. 35 Participants ....... ................................. 36 Materials .......................................... 37 Design and Procedure ................................ 37 Data Analysis . ...................................... 41 Results .................................................. 48 Discussion .............. ................................ 51 References ............................................... 57 v APPENDIX Appendix A: Grammaticality Judgment Test ................. 62 Appendix B: Experimental Activities ...................... 67 Appendix C: Excerpts from the Transcribed Data ........... 73 vi TABLES Table 1: A Communicative Task ........................... 7 Table 2: Conversational Adjustments .................... 11 Table 3: GROUP A: Number of Correct Answers in the Pre- and Posttest ......................... 41 Table 4: Group B: Number of Correct Answers in the Pre- and Posttest ............................. 42 Table 5: Groups A and B: Number of Correct Answers in the Pre- and Posttest ...................... 42 Table 6: Group A: Number of Interactional Units ........ 46 Table 7: Group B: Number of Interactional Units .... ... 47 Table 8: Number of Units for Group A and Group B ....... 47 Table 9: Percentages of Negotiations in All Units ...... 47 Table 10: Percentages of Negotiations Addressing Form in All Negotiations ...................... 48 Table A1: Grammaticality Judgment Test .................. 62 Table A2: Task 1: Instructions .......................... 67 Table A3: Task 1: Crime Scene and Objects ............... 68 Table A4: Task 1: Worksheet A ........................... 69 Table AS: Task 1: Worksheet B ................. ... .. 7 0 vii Table A6: Task 2: Worksheet A ........................... 71 Table A7: Task 2: Worksheet B ........................... 72 Table AS: Transcripts of Negotiations of Meaning Addressing Other Linguistic Features than Form ..................................... 73 Table A9: Transcripts of Negotiations of Meaning Addressing Form ............................... 74 Table AlO: Transcripts of Negotiations of Meaning Addressing the Target Structure ............... 75 viii FIGURES Figure 1: Correlation between Test Improvement and Total Negotiations ........................ 50 Figure 2: Correlation between Test Improvement and Dative-Negotiations ....................... 51 i x Negotiation of Meaning in Interlanguage Talk This study deals with negotiation of meaning in interlanguage talk with a specific focus on grammatical form. Negotiation of meaning is defined by Ellis (1994) as "the collaborative work which speakers undertake to achieve mutual understanding" (p. 260). It occurs during interaction between speakers when an actual or potential breakdown of communication is perceived and is intended to prevent or repair such disruption of conversation. In the field of second language acquisition (SLA) many researchers are exclusively concerned with interaction that includes at least one non-native speaker (NNS), i.e. a second or foreign language learner, except when interaction among native speakers (NSs) is used as control data. Pica, Lincoln-Porter, Paninos & Linnell (1996) give an accurate description: Negotiation between learners and interlocutors takes place during the course of their interaction when either one signals with questions or comments that the other's preceding message has not been successfully conveyed. (p. 61) Long (1980, 1983) coined the term "discourse modification", which has now come to be known as negotiation of meaning and first provided the following now widely accepted types of strategies for negotiation of meaning: comprehension check (Do 1 you understand?), clarification request (What was that? Sorry?), confirmation request (Do you mean "Kirche"?), and self- and other-repetition (see also Gass & Selinker, 2001, for an introduction) Negotiation of meaning occurs during conversations among all pairs of interlocutors (NS-NS, NS-NNS, NNS-NNS), due to the fact that they all need to deal with breakdowns of communication. As the title implies, this study focuses on negotiation of meaning in a very specific setting, that is, negotiation of meaning in interlanguage talk. The term interlanguage, coined by Selinker (1972), refers to the developing grammatical system in a learner's mind. This system consists of correct and incorrect rules and hypotheses about the target language as well as transfer from their first language, and, therefore, differs from the target language structure. Interlanguage talk, thus, refers to discourse among non-native speakers (Ellis, 1994) Since the NNSs' grammatical system is "imperfect" or non­ target-like, it has been argued that interlanguage talk does not aid language acquisition or, more extreme, that it is detrimental to language learning. The latter has been disproved (Ellis, 1994, p. 266). On the basis of the existing research on interlanguage talk (Varonis & Gass, 1985,among others), it has been widely accepted that interlanguage talk provides valuable learning opportunities. This acceptance can be seen in the Communicative Approach, the current trend of language teaching, which makes great use of communicative 2 partner- and small-group activities (Littlewood, 1981; Omaggio Hadley, 2001). The term "negotiation of meaning" to a person less familiar with the field might imply a focus on semantic meaning or on lexis. However, negotiation of meaning can be concerned with various linguistic features, including lexis, phonology, or grammatical structure. Form creates meaning, in other words, grammar play s an important part in creating a meaningful utterance . A great number of studies on negotiation of meaning hav e a rather vague task design, in the sense that the tasks do not encourage or require the use and negotiation of specific morphosyntactic features (Pica, 1994; Pica, 1996; Varonis & Gass, 1985; Pica, 1988; Pica et alt., 1996; ). Varonis & Gass (1985 ) , for example, ask the subjects to "introduce [themselves) and find out about each other" (p. 72). Pica (1988) described that the "topics [of the NS-NNS conversations) ranged from matters pertinent to the NS's paper, to those more personal to the NNSs such as their family and friends, previous education, and future plans" (p . 48) Pica et alt. (1996 ) worked with jigsaw tasks that had no specific grammatical focus . Other studies are designed with a greater focus on specific forms, such as Ellis & Nobuyoshi (1993 ) , who studied the negotiation of past tense
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Critical Period Hypothesis for L2 Acquisition: an Unfalsifiable Embarrassment?
    languages Review The Critical Period Hypothesis for L2 Acquisition: An Unfalsifiable Embarrassment? David Singleton 1 and Justyna Le´sniewska 2,* 1 Trinity College, University of Dublin, Dublin 2, Ireland; [email protected] 2 Institute of English Studies, Jagiellonian University, 31-120 Kraków, Poland * Correspondence: [email protected] Abstract: This article focuses on the uncertainty surrounding the issue of the Critical Period Hy- pothesis. It puts forward the case that, with regard to naturalistic situations, the hypothesis has the status of both “not proven” and unfalsified. The article analyzes a number of reasons for this situation, including the effects of multi-competence, which remove any possibility that competence in more than one language can ever be identical to monolingual competence. With regard to the formal instructional setting, it points to many decades of research showing that, as critical period advocates acknowledge, in a normal schooling situation, adolescent beginners in the long run do as well as younger beginners. The article laments the profusion of definitions of what the critical period for language actually is and the generally piecemeal nature of research into this important area. In particular, it calls for a fuller integration of recent neurolinguistic perspectives into discussion of the age factor in second language acquisition research. Keywords: second-language acquisition; critical period hypothesis; age factor; ultimate attainment; age of acquisition; scrutinized nativelikeness; multi-competence; puberty Citation: Singleton, David, and Justyna Le´sniewska.2021. The Critical Period Hypothesis for L2 Acquisition: An Unfalsifiable 1. Introduction Embarrassment? Languages 6: 149. In SLA research, the age at which L2 acquisition begins has all but lost its status https://doi.org/10.3390/ as a simple quasi-biological attribute and is now widely recognized to be a ‘macrovari- languages6030149 able’ (Flege et al.
    [Show full text]
  • KTJ13-2Web.Pdf
    Korea TESOL Journal Volume 13, Number 2 Korea Teachers of English to Speakers of Other Languages Korea TESOL Journal, Vol. 13, No. 2 Korea TESOL Journal Volume 13, Number 2 The Official Journal of Korea Teachers of English to Speakers of Other Languages (KOTESOL / Korea TESOL) Editor-in-Chief: Kara Mac Donald, Defense Language Institute, USA Associate Editor: David E. Shaffer, Gwangju International Center, Korea Publications Committee Chair: James Kimball, Semyung University, Korea Board of Editors Yuko Butler, University of Pennsylvania, USA Richard Day, University of Hawaii at Manoa, USA Michael Griffin, Chung-Ang University, Korea Yang Soo Kim, Middle Tennessee State University, USA Douglas Paul Margolis, University of Wisconsin–River Falls, USA Levi McNeil, Sookmyung Women’s University, Korea Scott Miles, Dixie State University, USA Marilyn Plumlee, The American University in Cairo, Egypt Eric Reynolds, Woosong University, Korea Bradley Serl, University of Birmingham, UK William Snyder, Kanda University of International Studies, Japan Stephen van Vlack, Sookmyung Women’s University, Korea Editors Suzanne Bardasz, University of California, Davis, USA Reginald Gentry, University of Fukui, Japan Lindsay Herron, Gwangju National University of University, Korea Ondine Gage, California State University, Monterey Bay, USA Stewart Gray, Hankuk University of Foreign Studies, Korea Junko Matsuda, Defense Language Institute, USA Jessica Fast Michel, Virginia International University, USA Federico Pomarici, Defense Language Institute, USA Adam Turner, Hanyang University, Korea Fred Zenker, University of Hawaii, Manoa, USA Production Layout: Media Station, Seoul Printing: Myeongjinsa, Seoul © 2017 by Korea TESOL ISSN: 1598-0464 iii Korea TESOL Journal, Vol. 13, No. 2 About KOTESOL Korea TESOL, Korea Teachers of English to Speakers of Other Languages (KOTESOL) is a professional organization of teachers of English whose main goal is to assist its members in their self-development and to contribute to the improvement of ELT in Korea.
    [Show full text]
  • Teaching Grammar Using Focus on Form Approach in Communicative Language
    Teaching Grammar Using Focus on Form Approach in Communicative Language Teaching for Korean Middle School Students By Minseo Yu A Master’s Paper Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Masters of Arts in TESOL _________________________________ Advisor’s Name _________________________________ Date University of Wisconsin-River Falls 2013 Abstract In Korea, exceptional English communication skills are considered essential when conducting business internationally. This awareness led the Korean government to include English as one of the prerequisite subjects in public education. From the 1950s, to the early 1990s, students were taught English using a traditional approach which focused on teaching sentence level grammar rules without verbal communication. However, it did not improve their communicative skills. For this reason, the Korean government introduced the communicative approach in English instruction, and since then students have not only learned how to use English appropriately in different social situations, they have significantly improved their oral fluency as well. Unfortunately, students’ accuracy in communication has remained relatively low as teachers do not typically correct students’ spoken grammatical errors as they occur. Considering this, Korean English education needed a new approach which offered students sufficient opportunities for authentic communication, in addition to improving the grammatical accuracy of their output. The use of Michael Long’s approach, focus on form, seems to have offered the solution. Focus on form provides teachers with eleven teaching techniques in order to improve students’ grammatical accuracy in communication. The implicit techniques, which include input flood, task-essential language, and input enhancement etc., can be used by teachers to improve their students’ language awareness implicitly.
    [Show full text]
  • Lourdes Ortega Curriculum Vitae
    Lourdes Ortega Curriculum Vitae Updated: August 2019 Department of Linguistics 1437 37th Street NW Box 571051 Poulton Hall 250 Georgetown University Washington, DC 20057-1051 Department of Linguistics Fax (202) 687-6174 E-mail: [email protected] Webpage: https://sites.google.com/a/georgetown.edu/lourdes-ortega/ EDUCATION 2000 Ph.D. in Second Language Acquisition. University of Hawai‘i at Mānoa, Department of Second Language Studies, USA. 1995 M.A. in English as a Second Language. University of Hawai‘i at Mānoa, Department of Second Language Studies, USA. 1993 R.S.A. Dip., Diploma for Overseas Teachers of English. Cambridge University/UCLES, UK. 1987 Licenciatura in Spanish Philology. University of Cádiz, Spain. EMPLOYMENT since 2012 Professor, Georgetown University, Department of Linguistics. 2004-2012 Professor (2010-2012), Associate Professor (2006-2010), Assistant Professor (2004-2006), University of Hawai‘i at Mānoa, Department of Second Language Studies. 2002-2004 Assistant Professor (tenure-track), Northern Arizona University, Department of English. 2000-2002 Assistant Professor (tenure-track). Georgia State University, Department of Applied Linguistics and ESL. 1999-2000 Visiting Instructor of Applied Linguistics, Georgetown University, Department of Linguistics. 1994-1998 Research and Teaching Graduate Assistant, University of Hawai‘i at Mānoa, College of Languages, Linguistics, and Literature. 1987-1993 Instructor of Spanish, Instituto Cervantes of Athens, Greece. FELLOWSHIPS 2018: Distinguished Visiting Fellow at the Graduate Center, City University of New York, Advanced Research Collaborative (ARC). August through December, 2018. 2010: External Senior Research Fellow at the Freiburg Institute of Advanced Studies (FRIAS), University of Freiburg. One-semester residential fellowship at FRIAS to carry out project titled Pathways to multicompetence: Applying usage-based and constructionist theories to the study of interlanguage development.
    [Show full text]
  • Key Issues in Second Language Acquisition Since the 1990S
    ISSN 1799-2591 Theory and Practice in Language Studies, Vol. 5, No. 9, pp. 1916-1920, September 2015 DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.17507/tpls.0509.21 Key Issues in Second Language Acquisition since the 1990s Shuangshuang Wang Shandong Normal University, Jinan, China Abstract—The research field of the second language acquisition has been increasingly widened in recent years, and emerged various kinds of new theories. This thesis summarizes foreign and domestic researches’ key issues in this field since the 1990s according to theoretical framework of the second language research, then sorts out relative achievements from respective points of sociocutural theory; input, interaction and output in SLA; learner differences; external elements of learners, tacit knowledge and explicit knowledge and universal grammar and interlanguage representations, and looks into the future development, so as to make domestic learners better understand the current researches of this field and increase the general level of our foreign language education and teaching. Index Terms—key issues, SLA, since the 1990s I. INTRODUCTION Second Language Acquisition (SLA) refers to a field of research which aims to make its own distinctive contribution to fundamental understandings and to study the workings of the human mind or the nature of language. It also has potential to inform the improvement of social practice in some other fields, most obviously in language learning and teaching. The second language acquisition research mainly focuses on the process and principles of second language acquisition after one has acquired the second language. Being an independent subject, the second language acquisition rises during the end of the 1960s and the beginning of the 1970s with the promotion of interlanguage theory, and boasts a history of more than 30 years.
    [Show full text]
  • Hypothesis of Interaction: Reflections on Its Theoretical And
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by Scholink Journals Studies in English Language Teaching ISSN 2372-9740 (Print) ISSN 2329-311X (Online) Vol. 2, No. 3, 2014 www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/selt Original Paper Hypothesis of Interaction: Reflections on its Theoretical and Practical Contributions for Second Language Acquisition (SLA) Ahmed A. Al Khateeb1 1 Affiliation (Department of English Language), King Faisal University * Ahmed A. Al Khateeb, E-mail: [email protected] Abstract This article is about one of the most influential hypothesis in the fields of applied linguistics and language learning. It is based on the work of a number of scholars who contributed to the understanding of this hypothesis such as Steve Krashen, Mike Long, Teresa Pica and Merrill Swain. It starts with a brief introduction about the significance of interaction hypothesis generally in language learning in general and its central role in second language acquisition (SLA). The next section reviews some of the fundamental works and studies that have investigated the theoretical and practical understanding of this phenomenon and its relationship to learners’ achievement. It also highlights the contribution of interaction hypothesis to learning in two basic areas: noticing and feedback. There are explanatory examples presented in the following section in order to show how interactional modification techniques are used by learners. The last section presents some concluding thoughts pertaining to this topic with a focus on how it can be employed in language learning classrooms. Keywords Interaction, second langage acquisition, comprehensible input, output 1. Introduction This hypothesis has been taken is regarded as one of the most influential hypotheses in language learning and approaches.
    [Show full text]
  • Context Effects in Second Language Acquisition
    Chapter 1 Context effects in second language acquisition: formal instruction, study abroad and immersion classrooms Carmen Pérez-Vidal Universitat Pompeu Fabra Sonia López-Serrano Universitat Pompeu Fabra; Universidad de Murcia Jennifer Ament Universitat Pompeu Fabra Dakota J. Thomas-Wilhelm University of Iowa; Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona This volume within the EuroSLA Studies Series has been motivated bytwo fundamental reasons. Firstly, the assumption that applied linguistics research should first and foremost deal with topics of great social relevance, and, secondly, that it should also deal with topics of scientific relevance. Both ideas have led us to choose the theme ‘contexts of language acquisition’ as the topic around which the monograph would be constructed. The aim of this introduction is to set the scene and present the three contexts on focus in the monograph and justify this choice of topic within second lan- guage acquisition (SLA) research, the perspective taken in this volume. Starting with the latter, in the past two decades the examination of the effects ofdiffer- ent contexts of acquisition has attracted the attention of researchers, based on the idea that “the study of SLA within and across various contexts of learning forces a broadening of our perspective of the different variables that affect and Carmen Pérez-Vidal, Sonia López-Serrano, Jennifer Ament & Dakota J. Thomas-Wilhelm. Con- text effects in second language acquisition: formal instruction, study abroad and immersion classrooms. In Carmen Pérez Vidal, Sonia López-Serrano, Jennifer Ament & Dakota J. Thomas- Wilhelm (eds.), Learning context effects: Study abroad, formal instruction and international im- mersion classrooms, 1–19. Berlin: Language Science Press.
    [Show full text]
  • Linguistic Outcomes of Language Contact Gillian Sankoff University of Pennsylvania
    In Peter Trudgill, J. Chambers & N. Schilling-Estes, eds., Handbook of Sociolinguistics. Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 2001, pp. 638-668. Linguistic Outcomes of Language Contact Gillian Sankoff University of Pennsylvania 1.0 INTRODUCTION In virtually every country in the world at the inception of the 21st century, linguistic minorities can be found. These have arisen both through immigration and through the adoption – often, but not always, imposition – of languages not previously not spoken by local populations. Though this has led in hundreds of cases to language loss and to a reduction of linguistic diversity (as documented in the Wolfram chapter in this volume), language contact is part of the social fabric of everyday life for hundreds of millions of people the world over. To what extent have these different historical and contemporary social processes produced different linguistic outcomes? The crucial point here, almost too obvious perhaps to merit stating, is that languages spoken by bilinguals are often altered such that ensuing changes differ from the results of internal processes of change within monolingual speech communities. In other words, languages spoken by bilinguals influence each other in various ways. The goal of this chapter is to review work in sociolinguistics devoted to understanding what has happened to languages “in contact”, i.e., spoken by bilinguals (Weinreich 1968). The other chapters in this section (by Britten on diffusion and Kerswill on koineization) deal with contact among speech varieties that are more closely related. However, some of the same processes involved in these cases will also be seen to operate across language boundaries – the diffusion of uvular (r) in a number of European languages is one well-known example (Trudgill 1974a; see also Tristram 1995).
    [Show full text]
  • Practicing Theory in Second Language Writing
    Second Language Writing Matsuda Silva Theory has been used widely in the field of second language writing. Second language writing specialists—teachers, researchers, and administrators—have yet and to have an open and sustained conversation about what theory is, how it works, and, more important, how to practice theory. Practicing Theory in Second Language Writing features fourteen essays by distinguished scholars in second Practicing Theory language writing who explore various aspects of theoretical work that goes on in in Second Language Writing Language in Second Theory Practicing the field. The key issues addressed inPracticing Theory in Second Language Writing in Second Language include the nature of theory in second language writing and the role theory plays in second language writing research, instruction, and administration; the possibil- ity and desirability of developing a comprehensive theory or theories of second language writing; applications of theory, including the advantages, disadvantages, Writing and limitations of adapting theories from other areas of inquiry to second language writing research, instruction, and assessment; theorizing and building theory, in- cluding the ways in which second language writing teachers, researchers, and ad- W ministrators develop theories of second language writing, what a theory of second language writing might look like; the relationship between the conceptual work of theorizing and data-driven theory building; practicing theory, including how second language writing teachers, researchers, and administrators might address theory; the practical issues of learning to work with theory; and the ways that theory informs instruction and administration as well as materials development. Contributors include Dwight Atkinson, Diane Belcher, A. Suresh Canagarajah, Joan Carson, Deborah Crusan, Alister Cumming, Doug Flahive, Lynn M.
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 2 Multilingualism from a Language Acquisition Perspective
    Chapter 2 Multilingualism from a language acquisition perspective Laura Sánchez Stockholm University This chapter conceptualizes and discusses two subtypes of multilingualism, namely, (a) third language acquisition in learners who have prior experience in acquiring one or more non-native languages, and (b) subsequent language acquisition in learners who are bilingual from an early age. The chapter also discusses the roles played by age (both biological age and age of onset) and proficiency in multilin- gual acquisition. As regards age, the discussion focuses primarily on two aspects, namely, differential effects in instructed and naturalistic contexts, and the apparent superiority of older learners and late starters against younger learners and early starters. It is stressed that further research is necessary in order to identify and single out the particularities of L3 acquisition for learners with prior experience in the concurrent or consecutive learning of one or more non-native languages. Likewise, the chapter highlights the need to obtain a deeper understanding of how age-related differences in the level of linguistic entrenchment in multilinguals con- strain L3 learning after exposure to additional languages. With respect to the profi- ciency factor, it is argued that it is important to consider proficiency thresholds and to tease apart the distinctive effects of proficiency in the target language (theL3) and in the background languages when exploring linguistic development among multilinguals. These distinctive effects are also relevant for understanding crosslin- guistic influence in L3 acquisition, above all in determining the potential source languages and the direction of this influence. The art of language learning may lie not in the acqui- sition of an individual language but in the mastery of the learning process itself.
    [Show full text]
  • Understanding Second Language Acquisition Pagethis Intentionally Left Blank Understanding Second Language Acquisition
    Understanding Second language acquisition This page intentionally left blank Understanding Second language acquisition Lourdes Ortega Understanding Language Series Series Editors: Bernard Comrie and Greville Corbett First published 2009 by Hodder Education Published 2013 by Routledge 2 Park Square, Milton Park, Abingdon, Oxon OX14 4RN 711 Third Avenue, New York, NY, 10017, USA Routledge is an imprint of the Taylor & Francis Group, an informa business Copyright © 2009 Lourdes Ortega All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reprinted or reproduced or utilised in any form or by any electronic, mechanical, or other means, now known or hereafter invented, including photocopying and recording, or in any information storage or retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publishers. The advice and information in this book are believed to be true and accurate at the date of going to press, but neither the authors nor the publisher can accept any legal responsibility or liability for any errors or omissions. British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data A catalog record for this book is available from the Library of Congress ISBN 13: 978-0-340-90559-3 (pbk) Extracts from The Philosopher’s Demise: Learning French by Richard Watson are reprinted by permission of the University of Missouri Press. Copyright © 1995 by the Curators of the University of Missouri. Cover © Mark Oatney/Digital Vision/GettyImages Typeset in 11/12pt Minion by Phoenix Photosetting, Chatham, Kent A mis padres, Andrés y Lourdes, que tan bien me han entendido siempre en todas mis lenguas, aunque sólo compartamos una.
    [Show full text]
  • Attitudes and Awareness Around Codeswitching
    Attitudes and awareness around codeswitching What are teachers’ and students’ attitudes towards codeswitching in the English learner classroom in Norway, and what can influence the teachers’ utilization of it? Tonje Haugen Mehl Mastergradsavhandling ved Institutt for lærerutdanning og skoleforskning, Engelsk fagdidaktikk UNIVERSITETET I OSLO Våren 2014 © Tonje Haugen Mehl 2014 Attitudes and awareness around codeswitching: what are teachers’ and students’ attitudes towards codeswitching in the English learner classroom in Norway, and what can influence the teachers’ utilization of it? Tonje Haugen Mehl http://www.duo.uio.no/ Trykk: Reprosentralen, Universitetet i Oslo II Abstract The present qualitative study investigates what attitudes and opinions can influence the teachers’ decision to either utilize or avoid codeswitching in the English learner classrooms in Norwegian schools. The study is based on observations and semi-structured interviews of three 10th grade teachers and three VG1 teachers in the counties Oslo, Akershus and Buskerud. In addition to this, two group interviews with VG1 students were conducted to scrutinize their opinions on the issue. The theoretical framework is based on different theories about how codeswitching is either helpful or damaging for the students’ degree of input and language learning. This was viewed in light of the terms plurilingualism and English as an International Language. The interviews were conducted to investigate whether the teachers had different attitudes and opinions about language choice in the classroom and to determine what factors could explain their attitudes towards codeswitching. During the observations the codeswitching situations were coded and analyzed, but were essentially made to check whether the teachers’ opinions coincide with their utilization.
    [Show full text]