Webb
1. The author is working within the Processing approach of cognitive linguistics. I know this because he is interested in the limits of human vocabulary, and wants to know what the human mind, independent of social circumstances, is capable of.
2. This article investigates transition theory, as the author often contrasts L1 learners to L2 learners and is interested in SLA.
3. This article pretty much confirmed something I already knew. There are passive bilinguals whose entire L2 vocabularies are receptive and non-productive. Of course learners can understand more than they can speak: almost every L2 learner knows the feeling of tip-of-the-tongue. I suppose it’s interesting that Webb spent so much time confirming an aspect of SLA that I had always simply assumed was true.
Monday, March 29, 2010
L2 Vocabulary Learning From Context: Strategies, Knowledge Sources, and Their Relationship With Success in L2 Lexical Inferencing
Nassaji
1. Because the author uses the think-aloud technique and appears to consider the research subjects as individual processing machines unconnected to their surroundings, I believe this article fits within the cognitive approach.
2. The author addresses transition theory by studying how second language readers guess at the meanings of unknown words.
3. I found it very interesting that Nassaji did not advocate any one strategy, but recognized that no one strategy was successful. Nassaji goes on to recognize that the strategy of using contextual clues has been overused in ESL classrooms. I too am guilty of overteaching using context. I believe any teaching strategy can be overemphasized, and none is the correct answer. I liked how Nassaji did not call for a radical anti-context overhaul, but suggested that less emphasis be placed on using contextual clues. This moderation reflects well on the field; more researchers should exercise this much restraint when criticizing a teaching method.
1. Because the author uses the think-aloud technique and appears to consider the research subjects as individual processing machines unconnected to their surroundings, I believe this article fits within the cognitive approach.
2. The author addresses transition theory by studying how second language readers guess at the meanings of unknown words.
3. I found it very interesting that Nassaji did not advocate any one strategy, but recognized that no one strategy was successful. Nassaji goes on to recognize that the strategy of using contextual clues has been overused in ESL classrooms. I too am guilty of overteaching using context. I believe any teaching strategy can be overemphasized, and none is the correct answer. I liked how Nassaji did not call for a radical anti-context overhaul, but suggested that less emphasis be placed on using contextual clues. This moderation reflects well on the field; more researchers should exercise this much restraint when criticizing a teaching method.
Rate of Acquiring and Processing L2 Color Words in Relation to L1 Phonological Awareness
Hu
1. This article falls within processing theory (and, more specifically, as described in our book, into the Lexical/Functional Grammar), as the authors attempt to account for both ELLs’ grammar and the cognitive processing speed and accuracy of their grammars. The authors also discuss saliency, and therefore also write within the Teachability Hypothesis.
2. This article addresses Transition theory, as it concentrates on language learners’ processing models.
3. I think this study lends support to the Hierarchical nature of language, in that people who have trouble with lower strata of language, like phonology, will also have trouble with higher levels of the hierarchy, like vocabulary. I would not be surprised if the author found that students who have poor phonological awareness have trouble at all levels of the grammar.
1. This article falls within processing theory (and, more specifically, as described in our book, into the Lexical/Functional Grammar), as the authors attempt to account for both ELLs’ grammar and the cognitive processing speed and accuracy of their grammars. The authors also discuss saliency, and therefore also write within the Teachability Hypothesis.
2. This article addresses Transition theory, as it concentrates on language learners’ processing models.
3. I think this study lends support to the Hierarchical nature of language, in that people who have trouble with lower strata of language, like phonology, will also have trouble with higher levels of the hierarchy, like vocabulary. I would not be surprised if the author found that students who have poor phonological awareness have trouble at all levels of the grammar.
Do Language Learners Recognize Pragmatic Violations? Pragmatic Versus Grammatical Awareness in Instructed L2 Learning"
Bardovi-Harlig
1. These authors take both a functional/pragmatic perspective, as they are interested in ELLs’ SL pragmatic competence, and a sociolinguistic perspective, as they consider the authors’ sociocultural contexts (ESL or EFL). This article was an interesting amalgamation of social approaches.
2. The article addresses transition theory. It is interested in learning how learners’ contexts affect their attitudes towards pragmatic acceptability.
3. I find it interesting that the authors suggest awareness-raising in the pedagogy section, since they did not directly test awareness-raising! My literature search ofr the paper for this class, and my experience teaching, suggest to me that awareness-raising seems like an easy answer for many language teachers. It allows them to continue teaching without switching to a more methodologically sound but perhaps more cutting-edge and radical teaching method. Overall, though, I liked this article. It had a large N and tested something I had not really considered testing before.
1. These authors take both a functional/pragmatic perspective, as they are interested in ELLs’ SL pragmatic competence, and a sociolinguistic perspective, as they consider the authors’ sociocultural contexts (ESL or EFL). This article was an interesting amalgamation of social approaches.
2. The article addresses transition theory. It is interested in learning how learners’ contexts affect their attitudes towards pragmatic acceptability.
3. I find it interesting that the authors suggest awareness-raising in the pedagogy section, since they did not directly test awareness-raising! My literature search ofr the paper for this class, and my experience teaching, suggest to me that awareness-raising seems like an easy answer for many language teachers. It allows them to continue teaching without switching to a more methodologically sound but perhaps more cutting-edge and radical teaching method. Overall, though, I liked this article. It had a large N and tested something I had not really considered testing before.
Consistency and variation in second language acquisition
Kanno
1. Because Kanno states that “I take the position that UG is intact and fully
present in the acquisition device of adult second language learners,” but their language learning is not as consistent over time, Kanno supports the Partial Access Hypothesis in the UG theoretical pproach.
2. The article addresses transition theory because it is concerned with the nature of SLA and how it compares to FLA.
3. I found nothing interesting or important about this article. That is unusual; I have been enjoying these articles thus far. The only thing the author did was prove that sometimes language learners make mistakes, and everyone already knows that. I think the author needs to realize that UG is not the answer to all SLA questions.
1. Because Kanno states that “I take the position that UG is intact and fully
present in the acquisition device of adult second language learners,” but their language learning is not as consistent over time, Kanno supports the Partial Access Hypothesis in the UG theoretical pproach.
2. The article addresses transition theory because it is concerned with the nature of SLA and how it compares to FLA.
3. I found nothing interesting or important about this article. That is unusual; I have been enjoying these articles thus far. The only thing the author did was prove that sometimes language learners make mistakes, and everyone already knows that. I think the author needs to realize that UG is not the answer to all SLA questions.
INPUT, INTERACTION, AND SECOND LANGUAGE DEVELOPMENT
Mackey
1. The article tests Long’s Interaction Hypothesis and is based on assumptions associated with Input and Interaction approaches (e.g., input should be both comprehensible and challenging, both input and output are essential for SLA).
2. The article addresses property theory. It tests if Long’s Interaction Hypothesis is true by conducting a controlled experiment to determine if conversations can facilitate SLA. Unsurprisingly, yes, they can.
3. It was very interesting that Mackey tested both task-based conversational partners and learners with scripted conversations. I remember reading those in high school Spanish. The idea is that students cannot yet from their own sentences; it’s like one step above Grammar-Translation, which is of course terrible. I wish this study had had more participants, but it I certainly important and interesting empirical evidence that meaningful interaction is important. Actually, I’ve already read this article at some point in my past; at Murray State my professors were all about the Communicative Approach, so of course they loved “negotiating meaning.”
1. The article tests Long’s Interaction Hypothesis and is based on assumptions associated with Input and Interaction approaches (e.g., input should be both comprehensible and challenging, both input and output are essential for SLA).
2. The article addresses property theory. It tests if Long’s Interaction Hypothesis is true by conducting a controlled experiment to determine if conversations can facilitate SLA. Unsurprisingly, yes, they can.
3. It was very interesting that Mackey tested both task-based conversational partners and learners with scripted conversations. I remember reading those in high school Spanish. The idea is that students cannot yet from their own sentences; it’s like one step above Grammar-Translation, which is of course terrible. I wish this study had had more participants, but it I certainly important and interesting empirical evidence that meaningful interaction is important. Actually, I’ve already read this article at some point in my past; at Murray State my professors were all about the Communicative Approach, so of course they loved “negotiating meaning.”
Monday, March 22, 2010
sound to meaning correspondences facilitate word learning
Nygaard et al. 2009
1. This article appears to fall into the processing theories category of cognitive approaches to SLA. While most cognitive theorists are concerned with transition theories and this one (I think) is driven by property theory, the authors of this article assume that language ability is innate and also that processing time will decrease as practice increases. These assumptions are central to processing theories of cognition.
2. The article addresses property theory because it challenges an assumption about the nature of natural language—that the sound-symbol relationship is arbitrary—and is not primarily concerned with how people acquire language. The authors do note that sensitivity to cross-linguistic sound symbols can facilitate language learning, but they are actually focused more on what this means in terms of the nature of human languages.
3. I find the entire article fascinating and inherently significant. Challenging long-held assumptions is always important and this study introduces a very mysterious phenomenon. It reminds me of those studies that try to show that people have some ESP. It sends a chill down my spine. This is a great article.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
