1887
Volume 18, Issue 2
  • ISSN 0155-0640
  • E-ISSN: 1833-7139
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes

Abstract

The following study was undertaken to further understand the effect of content knowledge on learners’ participation in interactions between non-native speakers. 120 male students, all of them Spanish, were paired to form 20 dyads whose members had equal content knowledge, but different levels in oral proficiency, 20 dyads in which fluent learners were relative content experts, and 20 dyads in which learners with limited oral skills were the experts. Measures of conversational participation included: amount of talk, conversational fillers, back channels, topic moves, clarification questions, confirmation checks, and comprehension checks. analysis of results indicated that, regardless of learners’ level of proficiency, relative content knowledge can explain different conversational patterns of participation: the relative expert producing more output (number of words), while the relative nonexpert works hard to understand the message. Findings of the study support the relationship between content knowledge and conversational participation in the context of non-native interaction.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/aral.18.2.02alc
1995-01-01
2019-10-14
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Beebe, L.M. and H. Giles
    (1984) Speech accommodation theories: A discussion in terms of second-language acquisition. International Journal of the Sociology of Language46: 5–32.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Brock, C. , G. Crookes , R.R. Day , and M.H. Long
    (1986) The differential effect of corrective feedback in native speaker-nonnative speaker conversation. In R.R. Day (ed.) Talking to learn: Conversation in second language acquisition. Rowley MA., Newbury House.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Carrell, P. L.
    (1983) Three components of background knowledge in reading comprehension. Language Learning33: 193–207 doi: 10.1111/j.1467‑1770.1983.tb00534.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-1770.1983.tb00534.x [Google Scholar]
  4. Carrell, P.L.
    (1987) Content and formal schemata in ESL reading. TESOL Quarterly21: 461–481. doi: 10.2307/3586498
    https://doi.org/10.2307/3586498 [Google Scholar]
  5. Cohen, J. A.
    (1960) A coefficient of agreement for nominal scales. Educational and Psychological measurement20: 37–46. doi: 10.1177/001316446002000104
    https://doi.org/10.1177/001316446002000104 [Google Scholar]
  6. Gass, S. M. and E. M. Varonis
    (1984) The effect of familiarity on the comprehensibility of nonnative speech. Language Learning34: 65–89. doi: 10.1111/j.1467‑1770.1984.tb00996.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-1770.1984.tb00996.x [Google Scholar]
  7. (1986) Sex differences in NNS/NNS interactions. In R.R. Day (ed.) Talking to learn: Conversation in second language acquisition. Rowley MA., Newbury House.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Hatch, E.
    (1992) Discourse and language education. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. Doughty, C. and T. Pica
    (1986) Information gap tasks: do they facilitate second language acquisition?TESOL Quarterly20: 305–325. doi: 10.2307/3586546
    https://doi.org/10.2307/3586546 [Google Scholar]
  10. Duff, P.
    (1986) Another look at interlanguage talk: Taking task to task. In R. R. Day (ed.) Talking to learn: Conversation in second language acquisition. Rowley MA., Newbury House.
    [Google Scholar]
  11. Long, M.
    (1980) Input, interaction, and second language acquisition. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of California, Los Angeles.
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Lomg, M.
    (1981) Input, interaction and second language acquisition. In H. Winitz (ed.) The Comprehension approach to foreign language instruction. Rowley MA., Newbury House
    [Google Scholar]
  13. Long, M.
    (1983) Linguistic and conversational adjustments to non-native speakers. Studies in Second Language Acquisition5: 177–194. doi: 10.1017/S0272263100004848
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263100004848 [Google Scholar]
  14. (1985) Input and second language acquisition theory. In S. Gass and C. Madden (eds) Input in second language acquisition. Rowley MA., Newbury House.
    [Google Scholar]
  15. Markham, P.
    (1988) Gender and perceived expertness of the speaker as factors in ESL listening recall. TESOL Quarterly22: 397–406. doi: 10.2307/3587286
    https://doi.org/10.2307/3587286 [Google Scholar]
  16. Pica, T.
    (1987) Second language acquisition, social interaction, and the classroom. Applied Linguistics8: 3–21. doi: 10.1093/applin/8.1.3
    https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/8.1.3 [Google Scholar]
  17. Pica, T. , L. Holliday , N. Lewis , and L. Morgenthaler
    (1989) Comprehensible output as an outcome of linguistic demands on the learner. Studies in Second Language Acquisition11: 63–90. doi: 10.1017/S027226310000783X
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S027226310000783X [Google Scholar]
  18. Pica, T. , L. Holliday , N. Lewis , D. Berducci , and J. Newman
    (1991) Language learning through interaction: What role does gender play?Studies in Second Language Acquisition13: 343–72. doi: 10.1017/S0272263100010020
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263100010020 [Google Scholar]
  19. Scarcella, R. C.
    (1983) Discourse accent in second language performance. In S. M Gass and L. Selinker (eds) Language transfer in language learning. Rowley MA., Newbury House.
    [Google Scholar]
  20. Selinker, L and D. Douglas
    (1985) Wrestling with “context” in interlanguage theory. Applied Linguistics6: 190–204 doi: 10.1093/applin/6.2.190
    https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/6.2.190 [Google Scholar]
  21. Schachter, J.
    (1984) A universal input condition. In W. Rutherford (ed.) Universals and second language acquisition. Amsterdam, Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/tsl.5.14sch
    https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.5.14sch [Google Scholar]
  22. (1986) Three approaches to the study of input. Language Learning36: 211–226 doi: 10.1111/j.1467‑1770.1986.tb00379.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-1770.1986.tb00379.x [Google Scholar]
  23. Swain, M.
    (1985) Communicative competence: Some roles of comprehensible input and comprehensible output in its development. In S. Gass and C. Madden (eds) Input in second language acquisition. Rowley MA., Newbury House.
    [Google Scholar]
  24. Woken, M. and J. M. Swales
    (1989) Expertise and authority in native-nonnative conversations: The need for a variable account. In S. M. Gass , C. G. Madden , D. R. Preston and L. Selinker (eds) Variation in second language acquisition: Discourse and pragmatics. Clevedon, Avon, Multilingual Matters.
    [Google Scholar]
  25. Zuengler, J. and B. Bent
    (1991) Relative knowledge of content domain: An influence on native-nonnative conversations. Applied Linguistics12: 397–415. doi: 10.1093/applin/12.4.397
    https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/12.4.397 [Google Scholar]
  26. Zuengler, J.
    (1993) Encouraging learners’ conversational participation: The effect of content knowledge. Language Learning43: 403–432. doi: 10.1111/j.1467‑1770.1993.tb00620.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-1770.1993.tb00620.x [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1075/aral.18.2.02alc
Loading
  • Article Type: Research Article
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was successful
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error