Riassunto esame Linguistica inglese, prof. Pavesi, libro consigliato Second Language Acquisition, Gass, Selinker

INSTRUCTED SECOND LANGUAGE LEARNING

Classroom language

In language classrooms, the language addressed to learners may be somewhat modified. Gaies (1979)

presented data from 8 teacher trainees and their speech to a) each other and b) four groups of ESL

students at four proficiency levels. In nearly all cases there are statistically significant differences in

proficiency level among these inexperienced ESL teachers.

In foreign language instruction there are 3 sources of input:

a)teacher

b)materials

c)other learners.

There is evidence that learners do not pick up errors from one another. It may be that learners know

when they are right and maybe also know when they are wrong or at least have a sense that they are

not sure.

Example of Swain & Lapkin (1998): the use of conversation as a tool for learning. (two classroom

learners who are jointly writing an essay: Rick wavers between alternatives for alarm clock and, through

questioning of Kim and responses from Kim, he comes to the correct French word réveille-matin. Rick

changes from the correct form to the incorrect one, to finally change again to the correct form. The

change is not a one-time affair, but shows a back and forth wavering between correct and incorrect

forms. Rick is seen to generate hypotheses (his questions), and Kim's responses are either confirmatory or

disconfirmatory. Rick receives input and uses output as a means of learning the new word.

Zone of Proximal Development: potential development comes about through problem-solving in

collaboration with more capable peers.

However, it it not always the case that learner forms can serve as 'good' input for other learners. Teachers'

intervention is often essential.

Processing instruction

Processing instruction refers to a type of instruction that takes as its basis how learners process input.

VanPatten and his colleagues presented a model for instructional intervention that relied heavily on the

notion of attention to form and its crucial role in a learner's movement from input to intake and finally to

output. They compared 2 instructional models, one in which input is practiced as a form of output

manipulation (traditional grammar instruction in which information is presented to learners for practice)

and the other in which an attempt is made to change the way input is perceived and processed

(processing instruction).

The attempt is to influence the way that input is processed and hence the way the system develops.

Traditional instruction in foreign language learning:

Focused

practice

Processing instruction in foreign language teaching:

Input → Intake → Developing System → Output

Processing

mechanisms

Focussed

practice

VanPatten presents 3 premises that are the basis of processing instruction:

1 Learners need input for acquisition

2 A major problem in acquisition might be the way in which learners process input

3 If we can understand how learners process input, then we might be able to devise effective

input enhancement or focus on form to aid acquisition of formal features of language.

VanPatten outlines 3 basic features of processing instruction:

1 Give learners information about a structure or form

2 Inform learners about a particular processing strategy that may get in the way of selecting

the form/structure during comprehension

3 Structure input so that learners must rely on form/structure to get meaning and not rely on

natural processing tendencies.

He presents an example from French causative:

Jean Fait promener le chien à Marie

John makes to walk the dog to Mary

''John makes Mary walk the dog''

The first step is to have learners answer the question Who walks the dog?

VanPatten refers to these as referential activities because there is a right/wrong answer.

The results of experiments suggest a positive effect for processing instruction. Learners in the processing

instruction group were better able to understand and produce the target structure than learners in the

traditional instruction group.

Another series of studies that considered the role of input processing in a slightly different manner is

known as the ''garden path'' studies by Tomasello and Herron (88,89). Here input in the form of

corrective feedback was provided either a) before a faulty generalization was made or b) after learners

had been led down the ''garden path'' and induced into making an overgeneralization. Tomasello and

Herron found that the corrective feedback was more meaningful after learners had been induced to

produce an error as opposed to 'preventing' an error. Some sort of comprehension must take place

before we can begin to talk about intake and acquisition.

What is meant by comprehension?

Top-down processing relying on prior knowledge and contextual (visual, oral, etc) cues, as well as

bottom-up processing, in which attention to form is crucial, are both relevant to understanding

comprehension. Comprehension and acquisition are NOT synonymous. Some input will be utilized for

meaning, while other input for grammar development. Semantic comprehension is a prerequisite to

syntactic comprehension and syntactic comprehension is a prerequisite to acquisition. Semantic

comprehension is necessary for syntactic comprehension but does not guarantee it.

Teachability/Learnability

There has been emphasis on the idea that acquisition takes place in some sort of natural order.

Krashen stated this as part of the entire Monitor Model as the Natural Order Hypothesis, which claims

that elements of language are acquired in a predictable order. The order is the same whether or not

instruction is involved. The ''natural order'' was determined by a synthesis of the results of the morpheme

order studies and is a result of the acquired system, without interference from the learned system. The

source of the Natural Order Hypothesis stems from studies of English morpheme acquisition. The 3

hypotheses are dependent on one another: the Monitor is needed to account for discrepancies in the

Natural Order; a Learning-Acquisition distinction is needed to justify the use of the Monitor; thus the

argumentation is circular, rendering it vacuous. Nontheless, one cannot argue that an order of

acquisition does not exist.

Mackey (1995) noted that interaction was able to ''step up the pace'' of development, but was not able to

push learners beyond a developmental stage.

Considering the AH (Accessibility Hirarchy) from the point of view of learnability. If difficulty is at the

base of this universal , we would expect learners to learn to relativize according to the ordering of

the AH positions. What would happen if through instruction, a learner were to come to learn a more

difficult relative clause position before learning an easier one. Would knowledge of that more difficult

relative clause construction generalize to knowledge of the easier relative clause positions?

In some sense, knowledge of a more difficult structure should incorporate knowledge of a related easier

structure.

Two studies lend support to this prediction, one by Gass (1982) and the other by Eckman, Bell and

Nelson (1988). The conclusion of both studies suggest that learners' maximum generalization occurs

from more marked (or difficult) structures to less marked ones. Generalization from less difficult to

more difficult does not appear to occur.

Yabuki-Soh (2007) study suggests that generalization from more marked to less marked is possibile and

may indeed be an effective basis of syllabus design.

A final point to consider is that learning of relative clauses may not always be driven by language-related

issues, but may also be mediated by an individual's capacities, working memory being a prime possibility.

Focus on form

Implicit in the notion of attention is the concept of focus on form. Long distinguished between focus on

form and focus on formS.

The latter refers to earlier teaching methodologies in which the main organizing principle for language

classrooms was the accumulation of individual language items (e.g. plural endings, passives). The former

refers to a need for meaning focused activity into which an attention to form is embedded. As Long

stated, focus on form overtly draws students attention to linguistic elements as they arise incidentally in

lessons whose focus is on meaning or communication.

Enhanced input is input that can be enhanced by an external source (teacher) or a internal source

(learners relying on their own resources). Williams showed that learners at low levels of proficiency do

not often spontaneously attend to language form. When there's learner-generated attention to form, the

attention is generally given to words rather than to other linguistic features. Ohta noted that students in a

classroom context can assimilate corrective feedback even when it is not directed at them.

Clearly instructed learning can offer a context for focus on form. This does not mean that all forms are

''teachable''. The English article system, for example, appears to be virtually impermeable to instruction.

Two areas that are relevant to the study of focus on form are timing and forms to focus on.

Timing

Harley investigated focus on form intervention on the acquisition of French gender. The results indicate

that focus on form instruction produces better results than no instructional focus, but learners do

not extend their knowledge to other words.

One needs to learn what needs to be learned before being able to sort out the specific facts of what

is to be learned, that is students demonstrate metalinguistic knowledge after having learned the

form.

Forms to focus on

It is clear that one cannot use focus on form instruction with all grammatical constructions. Williams and

Evans investigated the effect of focus on form on two structures: a) participial adjectives of emotive verbs

(I am bored) and b) passives. The overall results of this study suggest that learners readiness

contributes to their ability to focus on and take in new information. A second finding is that not all

structures are created equal with regard to input type. For the participial adjectives explicit instruction

was more beneficial than providing input alone. For the passives there was little difference between input

flood or instruction since both served equally to induce noticing.

Input manipulation and input enhancement

A significant function of language instruction is the manipulation of input. The concept of input

enhancement highlights ways in which input is made salient to learners. Input enhancement can take

place in a number of ways, through drawing attention to a form (e.g. by coloring or bold facing in

written input). Underlying the importance of input enhancement is the concept of noticing. Salience can

come about by a learner's own internal devices (processing mechanisms) or by something that is

externally created (input enhancement). Sharwood Smith refers to two variables involved in externally

created salience: 1 e