M2 MEEF November 2014

Learner language

Tarone, E., & Swierzbin, B. (2009). Exploring learner language. Oxford University Press.

input ≠ intake

input ≠ intake

❖ the linguistic forms we teach a second language (L2) learner are not the same as the forms that learner learns

input ≠ intake

❖ the linguistic forms we teach a second language (L2) learner are not the same as the forms that learner learns

❖ fundamental mismatch between language teaching and language learning

input ≠ intake

❖ the linguistic forms we teach a second language (L2) learner are not the same as the forms that learner learns

❖ fundamental mismatch between language teaching and language learning

❖ learners have their own “built-in” syllabus (Corder, 1967)

input ≠ intake

❖ the linguistic forms we teach a second language (L2) learner are not the same as the forms that learner learns

❖ fundamental mismatch between language teaching and language learning

❖ learners have their own “built-in” syllabus (Corder, 1967)

built-in !syllabus

target !language (TL)!

grammar

≠

interlanguage

interlanguage❖ native speakers see their own

language (NL) as rule-governed, even if they cannot articulate all the rules

interlanguage❖ native speakers see their own

language (NL) as rule-governed, even if they cannot articulate all the rules

❖ they perceive a second language learner’s language as characterised by mistakes and errors

interlanguage❖ native speakers see their own

language (NL) as rule-governed, even if they cannot articulate all the rules

❖ they perceive a second language learner’s language as characterised by mistakes and errors

❖ yet learner language is also rule-governed; the linguistic system of learner language has been called interlanguage

interlanguage❖ native speakers see their own

language (NL) as rule-governed, even if they cannot articulate all the rules

❖ they perceive a second language learner’s language as characterised by mistakes and errors

❖ yet learner language is also rule-governed; the linguistic system of learner language has been called interlanguage

autonomy!of learner!language

transfer

what processes!shape learner!

language !development?

transfer❖ native language transfer is

particularly obvious in early stages, and with phonology

what processes!shape learner!

language !development?

transfer❖ native language transfer is

particularly obvious in early stages, and with phonology

❖ intralingual transfer concerns the TL structures being learned; the learner may overgeneralise a rule

what processes!shape learner!

language !development?

transfer❖ native language transfer is

particularly obvious in early stages, and with phonology

❖ intralingual transfer concerns the TL structures being learned; the learner may overgeneralise a rule

❖ transfer of training occurs when instruction goes wrong and learner believes incorrect information

what processes!shape learner!

language !development?

theories explaining SLA

second !language!

acquisition!(SLA)

theories explaining SLA❖ behaviorist theories suggest

learning a new language means replacing old (NL) habits with new (TL) ones

second !language!

acquisition!(SLA)

theories explaining SLA❖ behaviorist theories suggest

learning a new language means replacing old (NL) habits with new (TL) ones

❖ innatist theories state that all learners follow the same developmental sequence because of innate language-learning capacities

second !language!

acquisition!(SLA)

theories explaining SLA❖ behaviorist theories suggest

learning a new language means replacing old (NL) habits with new (TL) ones

❖ innatist theories state that all learners follow the same developmental sequence because of innate language-learning capacities

❖ interactionist theories claim that acquisition results from interaction with other speakers

second !language!

acquisition!(SLA)

behaviourism

behaviourism

❖ behaviorist theories are based on contrastive analysis (CA) of NL and TL

behaviourism

❖ behaviorist theories are based on contrastive analysis (CA) of NL and TL

❖ linguistic features which are similar in the two languages are easy to learn, those which are different will be difficult

behaviourism

❖ behaviorist theories are based on contrastive analysis (CA) of NL and TL

❖ linguistic features which are similar in the two languages are easy to learn, those which are different will be difficult

❖ BUT behaviorist theory does not predict the patterns we observe in learner language

behaviourism

❖ behaviorist theories are based on contrastive analysis (CA) of NL and TL

❖ linguistic features which are similar in the two languages are easy to learn, those which are different will be difficult

❖ BUT behaviorist theory does not predict the patterns we observe in learner language

linguistic!difference!

=!learning!difficulty

innatist theories

Universal !Grammar

innatist theories

❖ innatist theories include Universal Grammar (Chomsky)

Universal !Grammar

innatist theories

❖ innatist theories include Universal Grammar (Chomsky)

❖ developmental stages!

❖ negation!

❖ question formation!

❖ relative clauses

Universal !Grammar

innatist theories

❖ innatist theories include Universal Grammar (Chomsky)

❖ developmental stages!

❖ negation!

❖ question formation!

❖ relative clauses

❖ Monitor Model

Universal !Grammar

Monitor model

Monitor model❖ Krashen’s monitor model

Monitor model❖ Krashen’s monitor model

1. acquisition (subconscious process) ≠ learning (conscious process)

Monitor model❖ Krashen’s monitor model

1. acquisition (subconscious process) ≠ learning (conscious process)

2. SLA follows a natural order, similar to TL

Monitor model❖ Krashen’s monitor model

1. acquisition (subconscious process) ≠ learning (conscious process)

2. SLA follows a natural order, similar to TL

3. an internal monitor edits language production in certain circumstances

Monitor model❖ Krashen’s monitor model

1. acquisition (subconscious process) ≠ learning (conscious process)

2. SLA follows a natural order, similar to TL

3. an internal monitor edits language production in certain circumstances

4. comprehensible input is sufficient for SLA

Monitor model❖ Krashen’s monitor model

1. acquisition (subconscious process) ≠ learning (conscious process)

2. SLA follows a natural order, similar to TL

3. an internal monitor edits language production in certain circumstances

4. comprehensible input is sufficient for SLA

5. an affective filter blocks acquisition when a learner’s attitude is negative

Monitor model❖ Krashen’s monitor model

1. acquisition (subconscious process) ≠ learning (conscious process)

2. SLA follows a natural order, similar to TL

3. an internal monitor edits language production in certain circumstances

4. comprehensible input is sufficient for SLA

5. an affective filter blocks acquisition when a learner’s attitude is negative

comprehensible !input!“i+1”

Interactionist theories

Interactionist theories

❖ SLA results from learner’s active interaction with other partners

Interactionist theories

❖ SLA results from learner’s active interaction with other partners

❖ passive reception of input is not enough (≠ Krashen)

Interactionist theories

❖ SLA results from learner’s active interaction with other partners

❖ passive reception of input is not enough (≠ Krashen)

❖ communicative activities encourage focus on meaning while using targeted linguistic forms

Interactionist theories

❖ SLA results from learner’s active interaction with other partners

❖ passive reception of input is not enough (≠ Krashen)

❖ communicative activities encourage focus on meaning while using targeted linguistic forms

communication!with focus!

on meaning

Interactionist theories

Interactionist theories❖ noticing: learners must

consciously notice a form in order to acquire it (Schmidt)

Interactionist theories❖ noticing: learners must

consciously notice a form in order to acquire it (Schmidt)

❖ focus on form: brief attention to linguistic form during meaning-based activities (Doughty, Long)

Interactionist theories❖ noticing: learners must

consciously notice a form in order to acquire it (Schmidt)

❖ focus on form: brief attention to linguistic form during meaning-based activities (Doughty, Long)

❖ scaffolding: more knowledgeable partners help co-construct language (Vygotsky, Bruner)

Interactionist theories❖ noticing: learners must

consciously notice a form in order to acquire it (Schmidt)

❖ focus on form: brief attention to linguistic form during meaning-based activities (Doughty, Long)

❖ scaffolding: more knowledgeable partners help co-construct language (Vygotsky, Bruner)

switch!between!

focusing on!meaning!

and noticing!form

Teaching implications

explicit!and !

implicit!knowledge

Teaching implications

❖ explicit knowledge from teacher and textbook, needed for tests explicit!

and !implicit!

knowledge

Teaching implications

❖ explicit knowledge from teacher and textbook, needed for tests

❖ implicit knowledge is used to produce language when learners focus on meaning

explicit!and !

implicit!knowledge

Teaching implications

❖ explicit knowledge from teacher and textbook, needed for tests

❖ implicit knowledge is used to produce language when learners focus on meaning

❖ teaching needs to take both kinds of knowledge into account

explicit!and !

implicit!knowledge

implicit language

implicit language

❖ implicit knowledge has its own independent logic

implicit language

❖ implicit knowledge has its own independent logic

❖ language forms will be acquired in a different order from explicit language learning

implicit language

❖ implicit knowledge has its own independent logic

❖ language forms will be acquired in a different order from explicit language learning

❖ this difference is no-one’s fault; it is due to the way the brain is wired to acquire language

implicit language

❖ implicit knowledge has its own independent logic

❖ language forms will be acquired in a different order from explicit language learning

❖ this difference is no-one’s fault; it is due to the way the brain is wired to acquire language

implicit!knowledge has!

its own!independent!

logic

Reading

❖ Lightbown, P. M., Spada, N., Ranta, L., & Rand, J. (2006). How languages are learned (Vol. 2). Oxford: Oxford University Press.!

❖ Tarone, E., & Swierzbin, B. (2009). Exploring learner language. Oxford University Press.

Learning and Teaching !Foreign Languages

http://unt.unice.fr/uoh/learn_teach_FL/

http://www.scoop.it/t/telt/