Toegepaste Taalwetenschap in Artikelen - Volume 17, Issue 1, 1983

In the present article the author tries to define the notion of "strategy", with respect to related notions like "approach" plan and process. "Approach" must be seen as a relatively large category, that is linked with personality and acts upon the choice of "plans".Plan is seen as opposed to execution; within "execution" strategy (controlled) has process (automatic) as its counterpart.Next, a number of definitions and classifications of strategies are subjected to a critical analysis, after which specific attention is given to productive communicative strategies.In this respect the question is addressed as to how the use of strategies can best be studied (observation, thinking out loud, interview). In the last part of the article, a framework is suggested, which allows research to be conducted into the use of strategies with more results than have been obtained so far.

Social status of and solidarity between participants in interaction are important for the way in which they formulate speech acts. The use of a particular language variety functions as a cue for the assessment of status and solidarity in intergroup interaction between strangers: speakers of a language variety are evaluated on these dimensions because of their use of that variety.In our research we compared the evaluations of language varieties, made by speakers of those varieties and made by relevant outgroups. Discongruency in evaluations is likely to prevent a smooth interaction between participants. Agreement in .evaluation can be the basis for a mutual nonproblematic interpretation of the interaction. Perceived differences between speakers can explain the use of certain accommodation strategies and politeness strategies.Our research concentrated on two accent varieties in relation to standard Dutch (AN), an ethnic variety Moluccan Dutch (MN) , and a regional variety Groningen Dutch (GN). There appeared to be interesting differences in the evaluations between the two accent groups in the city of Groningen. The Moluccan group evaluated the Correctness of MN and the Social Status of the MN-speaker more positively than the others did. The speakers of the regional GN however agreed with the AN-speakers about the low evaluation of GN and its speaker on this dimension. Moreover it turned out that the Moluccan group (by comparison) gave preference to the Moluccan speaker on the dimension of Solidarity, but that the GN-group preferred the AN-speaker. This result was similar to the degree of identification with speaker and language: the MN-group mostly with the MN-speaker, the GN-group with the AN-speaker.It is argued that these differences are the result of differences in the perception of the social identity of the groups.

In this paper the effect of monitoring in the acquisition of Dutch as a second language has been investigated in a descriptive design. Starting point was an experimental investigation, carried out by Hulstijn (1982). As his investigation was restricted to only two variables, a number of experimental conditions (unnatural situation) and to correct sentences only, it was decided to replicate this investigation with the following alterations: (1) only natural data from three different situations were used. These data ranked from formal to informal: dialogue (informal), monologue (formal) and written report (formal); (2) all kinds of linguistic variables that were relevant for the acquisition stage of the subjects were scored: syntactic, morphological, lexical variables, both correct and incorrect usage; (3) subjects were subdivided with respect to LI into English and less related languages (Slavic), and with respect to L2-achievement according to the teacher: good and not so good achievers. Some results1. English speaking subjects and good achievers had better scores generally on the variables under investigation. This means that these variables are valid to describe the language acquisition process of Dutch as L2.2. Those linguistic features that are well acquired are under the domain of monitoring in such a way that under formal circumstances (more reflection time) fewer errors occurred: word order, content words, and those morphological phenomena that are essential for the meaning of the message (tense, plural).3. Those linguistic features that are not internalized completely are under the domain of monitoring in such a way that under formal circumstances more errors occurred: morphological phenomena that are less relevant with respect to meaning (e.g. incorrect plurals), and function words.4. English subjects and good achievers demonstrated more correct monitoring.5. The results 1. to 4. fit quite well into the L1=L2 hypothesis. There seems to be a universal order for language acquisition that is influenced only in minor points by the LI of the language learner. These findings have some interesting consequences for L2-education.

This study contains a reanalysis of some of the data collected by Cummins et al. (to appear), in their study of Japanese and Viet-namese immigrant students in Canada. The present study focusses on the English communicative test data elicited from 11 grade 2/3 and 11 grade 5/6 Japanese students who had been in Canada from 15 months to 5| years.The objectives of the present study were (1) to code these data for characteristics of various L2 proficiency aspects suggested in the literature, (2) to look for clustering patterns among the coded variables by means of factor analyses (tables 3 and 4), and (3) to assess how the variables and common factors in the students' L2 performance were related to their Age and Length of Residence in Canada (by means of analyses of variance: table 5).The findings demonstrate that there is more to L2 proficiency than 'just1 knowledge of words and grammar rules. It is the type of task in which this knowledge has to be applied that plays a crucial moderating role. A paper-and-pencil reading test, a face-to-face interview, and a story telling task all measure linguistic skills, but each does so in a very different way, and along with different nonlinguistic skills.Furthermore, this study yielded 'Communicative Style' as a nonlinguistic L2 proficiency factor, not related to Age or Length of Residence. Future research will have to show whether Communicative Style must be considered a genuine language proficiency component or rather an artifact (method effect) created by the use of two type of tests, interactional and noninteractional tests.

In the first part of our paper we investigate what the law and the official curriculum say about the use of dialect in primary schools in Denmark, Sweden, the Swedish-speaking part of Finland and Norway. In (2) we take a look at the language attitudes of pupils and teachers towards dialect, while (3) deals with the question if, when and by whom dialect is used during the lessons. In countries with a standard language education is generally based on this standard. Pupils speaking other varieties are said to have problems at school. What kind of problems are signalled in Scandinavia is dealt with in (4). In (5) we discuss what solutions, in the form of experiments with different methods of integrating the mother tongue and the standard language, are found. In this paper we contrast Denmark, Sweden and Finland with Norway. The first three countries have both a written and a spoken standard language, and all pupils are supposed to learn to understand, read, write and speak this standard in a more or less rigid form. Norway has over a hundred years experience in dialect integration, since its 1879 Education Act says that education should be given as much as possible in the children's own language. There is no official spoken standard language, but there are two officially recognized written standards. These are however, not as rigid as those in Denmark, Sweden and Finland. We conclude with recommendations given by Scandinavian experts on education, with regard to the integration of dialect in education (6).

In this paper a report is given of a study concerning the processes involved in the learning of reading by Turkish children when the reading instruction is simultaneously given in LI en L2. After a short survey of the literature concerning bilingualism and learning to read the design of the study is worked out with reference to three research questions:(1) What is the linguistic and socio-cultural background of Turkish children at the moment when they start to read?(2) To what extent does interference play a role in the simultaneous acquisition of two written codes?(3) How can the individual variation in L1/L2 reading results after one year of reading instruction be explained?The results of the study show that the Turkish children are mainly dominant in LI-skilIs. Further it turns out that the simultaneous acquisition of the written codes of two languages does not have to lead to negative learning results. It seems that LI reading skills results in a positive transfer to L2 reading skills