Social context and cognition in SLA: a variationist perspective elaine ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

A variationist perspective 61 such as availability of attention, but also on factors of social context such as the ‘accuracy demand of the situation’ and ‘various listener-based discourse constraints’(p. 324). A similar review of research studies on L2 learners’ awareness of negative feedback also concludes that such awareness is affected differently by different social contexts: there are differences between the fi ndings of laboratory and classroom studies, differences between primarily structure-focused and primarily content-focused classrooms, and differences between observational studies of naturally occurring feedback patterns in classrooms and experimental studies that focus on specifi c linguistic features and feedback types. (Nicholas, Lightbown, and Spada 2001: 751) For example, Lyster and Ranta (1997) showed that learners’ noticing of implicit corrective feedback was different depending on whether that feedback occurred in a classroom focused on meaning (e.g. an immersion classroom) as opposed to a classroom focused on form (e.g. a grammar-focused class). If it is true that learners must notice the difference between their own and new language forms in order to acquire a new L2 form, and social setting affects this noticing, then social setting must also affect acquisition. Of course, noticing may not always result in uptake; social context affects learners’ willingness to accept the corrective feedback that they notice and use it in their own speech. Here we must come to terms with an obvious fact: all corrective feedback on linguistic form is inherently value-laden and social, by its very nature. Correction is about getting someone else to align more closely to one’s own standard; doing this involves the corrector’s assumption that he or she has the right and the power to direct the correction. Acceptance of a correction is also acceptance of the corrector’s right to correct. It is hard to imagine corrective feedback provided by a human that does not involve this kind of assertion and negotiation of social power in a social relationship. Corrective feedback on form provided by a computer program (e.g. spellchecks) could be argued to lack that kind of social message, but not feedback provided by humans. 6 Rider (2005) documents in a university Italian class the complexity of the social negotiation involved in giving and receiving corrective feedback when learners are asked to provide this to one another in pairs as they review the essays they are writing. Learner R in the following example is somewhat overbearing; she enjoys prestige in this class, being generally recognized as the most profi cient in Italian, but learner M also is recognized as having considerable ability in the language. In the following exchange, R requests feedback from M on her (in fact incorrect) use of passato prossimo tense (ha lavorato), but M fails to provide feedback. (5) r: Il primo . . . È un uomo vecchio . . . Faceva bel tempo, um (7) Uomo vecchio, ah, ha lavorato? Nel giardino, sì? (The fi rst [frame] . . . It’s an old man . . . It was nice weather, um (7) Old man, ah, worked? In the garden, yes?) 04_Batstone_Ch04.indd 61 1/27/2010 10:40:49 PM
62 Sociocognitive Perspectives on Language Use and Language Learning m: Ah, ucio can-canta? (Ah, [bird] si-sings?) R takes M’s silence as tacit approval, and indeed, in their later essays both of them used the incorrect passato prossimo form, so this failure to negotiate was unfortunate, from an SLA perspective. In later stimulated recall sessions about this exchange, R ‘reported that she was worried that Michael would not contribute to the conversation, so she kept talking to “fi ll the space” ’. This comment suggests that R feels that she, as the more profi cient one, has the right to keep talking, and not pause to get M’s input. In his refl ection on this exchange, M reported that he was silent not because he approved but because he thought R ‘seemed to have the story all worked out in her head already’. M’s comment suggests acquiescence but also perhaps some resentment at R’s presumed right to assert that the grammatical form she proposes is correct without waiting for him to consider it; the subtext is that she does not really need him to tell her what he thinks. As a result of subtle and complex social negotiations around the giving and receiving of corrective feedback, R’s ‘request for feedback’ does not successfully elicit any feedback from M, corrective or otherwise. Their perceptions of one another’s right to dominate in deciding what is ‘correct’ Italian in this exchange, and perhaps also their perceptions of one another’s ability to make that decision, prevents any negotiation of form. In this way it results in lack of uptake and their use of incorrect verb forms in the fi nal essay. To summarize, we have seen that social setting systematically affects the L2 input provided to learners in three ways: 1 social setting affects L2 input, both the language variety and amount of linguistic or conversational adjustment provided; 2 social setting affects whether in speech production learners focus on linguistic form or meaning, and whether negotiation of meaning occurs in the L2; and 3 social setting affects learners’ noticing of corrective feedback and their willingness to incorporate the corrective feedback that is provided. Impact of social setting on learner language production Impact of audience on L2 production We turn now to consider the systematic impact of social variables on L2 learners’ language production. The question of whether the L2 learner identifi es with the interlocutor as a model of L2 use, leads us naturally into a consideration of Accommodation Theory. Accommodation theory Beebe and Giles (1984) explain learners’ second-language acquisition processes in terms of Speech Accommodation Theory (SAT). This theory predicts 04_Batstone_Ch04.indd 62 1/27/2010 10:40:49 PM
Page 1 and 2: 4 Social context and cognition in S
Page 3 and 4: 56 Sociocognitive Perspectives on L
Page 7: 60 Sociocognitive Perspectives on L
Page 19: 72 Sociocognitive Perspectives on L

Social context and cognition in SLA: a variationist perspective elaine ...

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?