1887
image of What is in the learner’s mind when trying to verbalize grammatical rules?
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes

Abstract

Abstract

The present study examines the outcome of teaching second language English (L2 English) third-person singular present tense - for declarative knowledge in two different settings, namely Sweden and Vietnam. Third person - is one of the most studied grammatical structures in second language acquisition research. Data are collected in two classroom contexts with different teaching traditions. Participants are 76 young learners, 11–12 years old, 32 with Swedish as L1 and 44 with L1 Vietnamese. The results demonstrate differences in learner outcomes in these two groups. The Vietnamese learners outperformed the Swedish learners on the tests of declarative knowledge. The analyses of learner explanations of third-person singular present tense - reveal that learners tend to decompose this complex rule into several features, which sometimes lead them into misconceptions. This has pedagogical implications about EFL teaching and learning for young learners.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/pl.22002.son
2022-09-20
2022-10-06
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Andersen, R.
    (1984) The one-to-one principle of interlanguage construction. Language Learning, 34, 77–95. 10.1111/j.1467‑1770.1984.tb00353.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-1770.1984.tb00353.x [Google Scholar]
  2. Andrews, K. L. Z.
    (2007) The effects of implicit and explicit instruction on simple and complex grammatical structures for adult English language learners. TESL-EJ, 11(2), 1–15.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Bolton, K., Botha, W., & Kirkpatrick, A.
    (Eds.) (2020) The Handbook of Asian Englishes. John Wiley & Sons. 10.1002/9781118791882
    https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118791882 [Google Scholar]
  4. Cabau-Lampa, B.
    (2005) Foreign language education in Sweden from a historical perspective: Status, role and organization. Journal of Educational Administration and History, 37(1), 95–111. 10.1080/0022062042000336109
    https://doi.org/10.1080/0022062042000336109 [Google Scholar]
  5. Chomsky, N.
    (1995) The minimalist program. Cambridge, Mass.: The MIT Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Cohen, A. & Robbins, M.
    (1976) Toward assessing interlanguage performance: The relationship between selected errors, learners’ characteristics and learners’ explanations. Language Learning, 26(1), 45–66. 10.1111/j.1467‑1770.1976.tb00259.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-1770.1976.tb00259.x [Google Scholar]
  7. DeKeyser, R. M.
    (2005) What makes learning second-language grammar difficult? A review of issues. Language learning, 55(S1), 1–25. 10.1111/j.0023‑8333.2005.00294.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0023-8333.2005.00294.x [Google Scholar]
  8. Ellis, R.
    (2006) Current Issues in the Teaching of Grammar: An SLA Perspective. TESOL Quarterly, 40(1), 83–107. 10.2307/40264512
    https://doi.org/10.2307/40264512 [Google Scholar]
  9. (2008) Investigating grammatical difficulty in second language learning: Implications for second language acquisition research and language testing. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 18, 4–22. 10.1111/j.1473‑4192.2008.00184.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1473-4192.2008.00184.x [Google Scholar]
  10. Ellis, R., Loewen, S., Elder, C., Erlam, R., Philp, J., & Reinders, H.
    (2009) Implicit and explicit knowledge in second language learning, testing and teaching. Bristol: Multilingual Matters.
    [Google Scholar]
  11. Goldschneider, J. M., & DeKeyser, R. M.
    (2001) Explaining the “Natural Order of L2 Morpheme Acquisition” in English: A Metaanalysis of multiple determinants. Language Learning, 51(1), 1–50. 10.1111/1467‑9922.00147
    https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9922.00147 [Google Scholar]
  12. Green, P. S. & Hecht, K.
    (1992) Implicit and Explicit Grammar: An Empirical Study. Applied Linguistics, 13(2), 168–184. 10.1093/applin/13.2.168
    https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/13.2.168 [Google Scholar]
  13. Hoang, V. V.
    (2011) The current situation and issues of the teaching of English in Vietnam. Studies in Language and Culture, 22(1), 7–18.
    [Google Scholar]
  14. Hudson, R.
    (1999) Subject-verb agreement in English. English Language and Linguistics, 3(2), 179–207. 10.1017/S1360674399000210
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S1360674399000210 [Google Scholar]
  15. Hulstijn, J.
    (1995) Not all grammar rules are equal: giving grammar instruction its proper place in foreign language teaching. InR. Schmidt (Ed.) Attention and awareness in foreign language learning (pp.359–386). Honolulu: Second Language Teaching and Curriculum Center.
    [Google Scholar]
  16. Kam, H. W.
    (2002) English language teaching in East Asia today: An overview. Asia Pacific Journal of Education, 22(2), 1–22. 10.1080/0218879020220203
    https://doi.org/10.1080/0218879020220203 [Google Scholar]
  17. Källkvist, M., & Petersson, S.
    (2006) An s, or not an s; that is the question: Swedish teenage learners’ explicit knowledge of subject-verb agreement in English. InJ. Einarsson, E. Larsson Ringqvist & M. Lindgren (Eds.), Språkforskning på didaktisk grund: Rapport från ASLA:s höstsymposium [Language research on didactic basis: Report from ASLA Autumn Symposium] (pp.112–133). Växjö: Växjö University.
    [Google Scholar]
  18. Köhlmyr, P.
    (2002) “To Err is Human…” An investigation of grammatical errors in Swedish 16-year-old learners’ written production (Doctoral Dissertation). Diss.Göteborg. Actoa Universitatis Gothoburgensis.
  19. Krashen, S. & Pon, P.
    (1975) An error analysis of an advanced ESL learner: the importance of the Monitor. Working Papers on Bilingualism, 7, 125–129.
    [Google Scholar]
  20. Krashen, S.
    (1982) Principles and Practice in Second Language Acquisition. Oxford: Pergamon.
    [Google Scholar]
  21. Lardiere, D.
    (2009) Some thoughts on a contrastive analysis of features in second language acquisition. Second Language Research, 25(2), 173–227. 10.1177/0267658308100283
    https://doi.org/10.1177/0267658308100283 [Google Scholar]
  22. Larsen-Freeman, D.
    (2003) Teaching language: From grammar to grammaring. Heinle & Heinle Pub.
    [Google Scholar]
  23. Le, V. C.
    (2000) Language and Vietnamese pedagogical contexts. InJ. Shaw, D. Lubeska, & M. Noullet (Eds.), Partnership and interaction. Proceedings of the Fourth International Conference on Language and Development (pp.73–80). Bangkok: Asian Institute of Technology.
    [Google Scholar]
  24. Le, V. C., & Do, T. M. C.
    (2012) Teacher preparation for primary school English education: A case of Vietnam. InB. Spolsky, & Y.-I. Moon (Eds.), Primary school English education in Asia: From policy to practice (pp.106–128). New York, NY: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  25. Lichtman, K.
    (2013) Developmental Comparisons of Implicit and Explicit Language Learning. Language Acquisition, 20, 93–108. 10.1080/10489223.2013.766740
    https://doi.org/10.1080/10489223.2013.766740 [Google Scholar]
  26. Lundahl, B.
    (2012) Engelsk språkdidaktik. Texter. kommunikation, språkutveckling [English language didactics. Texts, communication, language development]. Lund: Studentlitteratur AB.
    [Google Scholar]
  27. (2014) Texts, topics and tasks: Teaching English in years 4–6. Lund: Studentlitteratur AB.
    [Google Scholar]
  28. Malmberg, P.
    (2001) Språksynen i dagens kursplaner [The language view in today’s syllabi]. InR. Ferm, & P. Malmberg (Eds.), Språkboken: En antologi om språkundervisning och språkinlärning [The language book: An anthology of language teaching and language learning] (pp.16–25). Stockholm: Skolverket/Liber Distribution.
    [Google Scholar]
  29. Malmberg, P., Bergström, I., Håkanson, U., Tornberg, U., & Öman, M.
    (2000) I huvudet på en elev. Projektet STRIMS: Strategier vid inlärning av moderna språk [In the head of a student. The STRIMS project: Strategies for learning modern languages]. Stockholm: Bonniers.
    [Google Scholar]
  30. MOET (Vietnamese Ministry of Education and Training)
    MOET (Vietnamese Ministry of Education and Training) (2010) Quyết định 3321/QĐBGDĐT về việc ban hành chương trình thí điểm tiếng Anh tiểu học [Decision No 3321/QĐ-BGDĐT on the promulgation of the pilot English curriculum for primary school]. Hà Nội: Bộ giáo dục và Đào tạo [Hanoi: Ministry of Education and Training].
    [Google Scholar]
  31. Pica, T.
    (1983) Adult acquisition of English as a second language under different conditions of exposure. Language Learning, 33(4), 465–497. 10.1111/j.1467‑1770.1983.tb00945.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-1770.1983.tb00945.x [Google Scholar]
  32. Pienemann, M.
    (1984) Psychological constraints on the teachability of languages. Studies in second language acquisition, 6(2), 186–214. 10.1017/S0272263100005015
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263100005015 [Google Scholar]
  33. Phuong, C. T. H.
    (2019) Teaching English to young learners in Vietnam: From policy to implementation. The Asian Journal of Applied Linguistics, 6(1), 96–104.
    [Google Scholar]
  34. Roehr, K. & Gánem-Gutiérrez, G. A.
    (2009) The status of metalinguistic knowledge in instructed adult L2 learning. Language Awareness, 18(2), 165–181. 10.1080/09658410902855854
    https://doi.org/10.1080/09658410902855854 [Google Scholar]
  35. Seliger, H. W.
    (1979) On the Nature and Function of Language Rules in Language Teaching. TESOL Quarterly, 13(3), 359–369. 10.2307/3585883
    https://doi.org/10.2307/3585883 [Google Scholar]
  36. Skolverket
    Skolverket (2020) Engelska (Ämnesplan). [English – Syllabus]. RetrievedJanuary, 20, 2020fromhttps://www.skolverket.se/download/18.7f8c152b177d982455e1158/1615808938264/%C3%84mnesplan_engelska.pdf
  37. Slabakova, R.
    (2009) How is inflectional morphology learned?In: Roberts, L., Véronique, D., Nilsson, A. & Tellier, M. (2009) EUROSLA Yearbook, 9(1), 56–75. 10.1075/eurosla.9.05sla
    https://doi.org/10.1075/eurosla.9.05sla [Google Scholar]
  38. (2013) What is easy and what is hard to acquire in a second language. In: Mayo, M. P. G., M. J. G. Mangado & M. M. Adrián (Eds.) Contemporary Approaches to Second Language Acquisition (pp.5–28). Amsterdam: Benjamins. 10.1075/aals.9.04ch1
    https://doi.org/10.1075/aals.9.04ch1 [Google Scholar]
  39. Son, T. V.
    (2018) English in primary education in Sweden and Vietnam: Teaching practices, learner outcomes and out-of-school exposure (Doctoral dissertation). Diss. Travaux de Línstitut de Linguistique de Lund 55. Lund University.
  40. (2022) Procedural and Declarative Knowledge: The Swedish and Vietnamese learners’ acquisition of knowledge in English grammar, and Pedagogical Implications. International Journal of TESOL & Education, 2(1), 238–250. 10.54855/ijte.222115
    https://doi.org/10.54855/ijte.222115 [Google Scholar]
  41. Sorace, A.
    (1985) Metalinguistic knowledge and language use in acquisition-poor environments. Applied Linguistics, 6(3), 239–254. 10.1093/applin/6.3.239
    https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/6.3.239 [Google Scholar]
  42. Vygotsky, L. S.
    (1986) Thought and Language. Cambridge, Mass.: IT Press.
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1075/pl.22002.son
Loading
/content/journals/10.1075/pl.22002.son
Loading

Data & Media loading...

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