DOCUMENT RESUME ED 478 285 FL 027 736 AUTHOR Johnson, David Cassels, Ed.; Hult, Francis M., Ed. TITLE Working Papers in Educational Linguistics, 2003. INSTITUTION Pennsylvania Univ., Philadelphia. Graduate School of Education. PUB DATE 2003-00-00 NOTE 120p.; Published biannually. Only one issue published in 2003. For individual articles, see FL 027 737-740. For the issue published in 2002, see ED 466 978. AVAILABLE FROM Language in Education Division, Graduate School of Education, University of Pennsylvania, 3700 Walnut Street, Philadelphia, PA 19104-6216. E-mail: [email protected]; Web site: http://www.gse.upenn.edu/wpel. PUB TYPE Books (010) Collected Works Serials (022) JOURNAL CIT Working Papers in Educational Linguistics; v18 n2 2003 EDRS PRICE EDRS Price MF01/PC05 Plus Postage. DESCRIPTORS *Applied Linguistics; Business Education; Business English; Communication Skills; Communicative Competence (Languages); Conversational Language Courses; Economics Education; Educational Research; Elementary Secondary Education; Faculty Advisers; Higher Education; Language Proficiency; Language Usage; *Second Language Learning IDENTIFIERS Conversation; Language Contact ABSTRACT This collection of articles includes the following: "Second Language Acquisition Research and Applied Linguistics" (Teresa Pica); "'Communicative Lingerings': An Exploratory Study of the Experience of 'Foreign' Communicative Features in the Interactions of American Expatriates after Reentry" (Laura Sicola); "Acquiring Business English in a Quasi-Natural Business Environment: A Method of Teaching Business English to Students of Business and Economics" (Oleg Tarnopolsky and Svitlana Kozhushko); "Closing the Advising Session" (Mihyon Jeon); and "Languages in Education Dissertations." (SM) Reproductions supplied by EDRS are the best that can be made from the original document. Volume 18 Number 2 2003 tr) 00 00 11, eucationa in uis ics U S DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION Office of Educational Research and Improvement EDUCATIONAL RESOURCES INFORMATION CENTER (ERIC) This document has been reproduced as received from the person or organization PERMISSION TO REPRODUCE AND originating it DISSEMINATE THIS MATERIAL HAS Minor changes have been made to BEEN GRANTED BY improve reproduction quality Points of view or opinions stated in this 11 document do not necessarily represent 11 1,/I official OERI position or policy TO THE EDUCATIONAL RESOURCES INFORMATION CENTER (ERIC) 1 Y) 3EStf COPY AVM.! 2 WORKING PAPERS IN EDUCATIONALLINGUISTICS I.anguage in Education Division Graduate School of Education University of Pennsylvania Editors-in-Chief Faculty Advisors David Cassels Johnson Nancy H. Hornberger <[email protected]> Anne Pomerantz Francis M. Hu It <[email protected]> Editorial Panel Division Faculty Jin Alm Susan Lytle, Chair Cristi Alberino Morton Botel Cynthia Groff Yuko Goto Butler Mihyon Jew! Vivian Gadsden Hyirn-Sook Kong Nancy H. Hornberger Erin Kearney Teresa Pica Sean McGrew Lawrence Sipe Mark Ouellette Shannon Sauro Laura Sicola Production and Design Division Programs Erin Kearney Educational Linguistics Shannon Saturn Intercultural Communication Reading/Writing/Literacy TESOL WPEL is published by the Language in Education Division of the Graduate School of Education at the University of Pennsylvania and printed by Creative Communications. Individual authors retain copyright privileges. WORKING PAPERS INEDUCATIONAL LINGUISTICS Volume 18 Number 2 2003 CONTENTS Editors' Note ARTICLES Second Language Acquisition Research and AppliedLinguistics TERESA PICA 1 "Communicative Lingerings": An Exploratory Study ofthe Emergence of 'Foreign' Communicative Features in theInteractions of American Expatriates after Reentry LAURA SICOLA 27 Acquiring Business English in a Quasi-Natural Business Environment: A Method of Teaching Business English toStudents of Business and Economics OLEG TARNOPOLSKY and SVITLANA KOZHUSHKO 55 Closing the Advising Session MIHYON JEON 89 LANGUAGE in EDUCATION DISSERTATIONS 107 Editors' Note We are pleased to bring you Volume 18 Number 2 of theWorking Papers in Educational Linguistics. This issue would not be possible with- out the help and support of numerous individuals. First, wewould like to thank our advisors, Dr. Nancy H. Hornbergerand Dr. Anne Pomerantz, for their guidance and encouragement. We are also grateful to Penny Creedon, Lorraine Hightower, SuzanneOh, and Mary Schlesinger of the Language in Education Division at Penn GSE who give generously of their time and always with warm smiles.Finally, we would like to express our appreciation for the dedication and tireless efforts of the WPEL editorial panel. This issue is hoisted high on their shoulders. In this Issue Twenty-five years after the publication of Spolsky's (1978) seminal monograph defining educational linguistics, the nature of the field remains opaque. Spolsky's vision of educational linguistics was that it would be a field of (applied) linguistics, much like educational psychol- ogy or educational sociology arefields of their disciplines proper, that "start[s] with a specific problem and then looks to linguistics and other relevant disciplines for their contribution to its solution" (1978:2). Educational linguistic inquiry, then, takes place across disciplines much like applied linguistics (Markee 1990). Educational linguistics is, inthis sense, similar to applied linguistics inits transdisciplinary nature. Describing applied linguistics, Halliday writes: I say 'transdisciplinary' rather than 'inter-' or 'multidisciplinary' because the latter terms seem to me to imply that one still retains the disciplines as the locus of intellectual activity, while building bridges between them, or assembling theth into a collection; whereas the real alternative is to supercede them, creating new forms of activity which are thematic rather than disciplinary in their orientation(2001: 176). What, then, separates educational linguistics from applied linguistics? The fundamental distinction, it seems, lies in the scope ofeducational lin- guistics, which Spolsky elaborates as "the intersection oflinguistics and related language sciences with formal and informal education" (1978: 2, emphasis added). It is here where Hornberger (2001) suggests that edu- cational linguistics has developed a niche in relation to applied linguis- Working Papers in Educational Linguistics18/2: v-vii, 2003 L WPEL VOLUME 18, NUMBER 2 tics. She explains that: The core differences between applied linguistics and educational lin- guistics, and they are not negligible ones, are the focus and starting points for the discipline. In educational linguistics, the starting point is always the practice of education and the focus is squarely on (the role of) language (in) learning and teaching. It is on those important differences that the argument for educational linguistics as a sepa- rate field rests, and it is in addressing those important challenges that the field of educational linguistics has its work cut out for many years to come (Homberger 2001: 19). Since its inception, WPEL has been a forum for addressing and com- municating the unique challenges of educational linguistics. The contri- butions to this issue continue the tradition of transdisciplinary explo- ration into language-related themes in or around' the practice of formal and informal education. A pioneer in the field of educational linguistics, Teresa Pica has made and continues to make significant contributions to the field. Here, she reviews both theoretical and applied contributions to SLA research, illus- trating that while many important insights into language learning and teaching have been gained, there is still much work to do. Laura Sicola investigates previously unexplored language behavior which she calls "communicative fingerings." She argues that the adjust- ment difficulties adult expatriates experience upon re-entry into their home country are linguistic as well as cultural. Her findings challenge common ideas about the role and stability of a person's "dominant" or "primary" language in communicative behavior. In the spirit of educational linguistics being a problem-oriented disci- pline, Oleg Tarnopolsky and Svitlana Kozhushko begin with a pressing problem for learners of Business English (BE) in the Ukrainedevelop- ing the communication skills uniquely necessary for interacting in Business English. They proffer a method and coursebook and present data comparing theirs with other books, indicating that theirs will be a valuable addition to BE course materials. Closing a conversation appropriately can be a formidable challenge for language learners. Mihyon Jeon investigates conversational closing patterns in English Language Program advising sessions. Not only do the sociolinguistic rules for these speech acts lack saliency but it is an open question whether they can be taught. Jeon's research illuminates the types of closings that English language learners rely upon and her find- ings suggest that the patterns of this speech situation are learnable. 1The phraseology here is borrowed from Hornberger's (1990) definition of biliteracy. vi EDITORS' NOTE We hope you find this collection of papers as engaging as we have. We believe the authors' research helps to illuminate the transdisciplinary nature of educational linguistics while engendering challenging ques- tions for future research. David Cassels Johnson Francis M. Hu lt 15 May 2003 Philadelphia References Halliday, M.A.K. (2001). New ways of meaning: The challenges to applied lin- guistics.In