Toegepaste Taalwetenschap in Artikelen - Volume 58, Issue 1, 1998

This article contains a concise discussion of models and measurement of language ability. A general definition of the concept language ability is given, Subsequendy, psycholinguistic models of oral and written language production and comprehension are discussed. The nature and extent of individual differences in language ability are illustrated by means of a discussion of LI reading. Models of language ability are reviewed and areas in need of further research are identified. In conclusion, some tentative answers to pertinent questions on components, development and transfer of language ability are presented.

In this article we address the question whether in word learning the effects of a bimodal (reading and pronouncing) condition are superior to the effects obtained in a monomodal (written only) condition. Research in the domains of psychology, psycholinguistics and foreign language learning lends support to the hypothesis that the effects of bimodal presentation and learning of words will be superior.In our experiment, pupils of intermediate classes from three different schools had to learn twelve French words in a bimodal condition: the words were presented in a text in a listening + reading condition; then the pupils learned the words by reading and pronouncing them. Pupils of three other (parallel) classes from the same three schools only read the same text and learned the words in a writing condition.The results of our investigation provide modest evidence for better retention in the bimodal condition: overall scores of the imodal' classes proved superior to scores of the monomodal classes. But this result is almost exclusively due to the results of only one school; in the two other schools test results did not differ significantly. This may be due to the small number of words.In subsequent research, the number of words to be learned will have to be larger than the modest number of twelve, in order to provide more convincing results.

In publications on language acquisition in formal and informal settings it is often assumed that utterances are addressed to one co-present other: the dyadic metaphor for communication which has 'conversation' as its paradigmatic format. Hymes (1972), Ochs (1983), and especially Goffman (1981) - among others - have emphasized that more complex participant roles are involved. In this paper structural features of the production of teacher and learner turns will be investigated. The data derive from a first English lesson, an 'action research' project and a longitudinal school diary co-authored by two teenage girls in the Netherlands. Their insider view of what happens in (language) classes corroborates the view that descriptive models of classroom talk underanalyze the notion of what are 'the' data that need to be accounted for. A more sophisticated tool is needed. It is suggested that Polanyi and Scha's Dynamic Discourse Model (Polanyi, 1988) - with modifications - could provide such a tool.

The content-based approach (CBA) to language teaching offers opportunities for language and content teaching in the Netherlands in a wide variety of contexts, varying from elementary school Dutch as L2 to university EFL-teaching. In order to promote the exchange of experiences and research from these different fields, this article proposes Dutch equivalents to key terminology (such as 'sheltered content', 'adjunct'model) as well as a common research focus. In empirical research, thoughtful attention should be paid to the teaching process within content-oriented language teaching. Therefore, characteristics of CBA- curricula and didactic procedures are summarized. It is argued that, in the present phase of development, small-scale case studies with a focus on the teacher and the teaching process are to be preferred over large scale quantitative studies with a focus on learner outcomes. More emphasis should be put on the content learning that takes place simultaneously with language learning.

A common form of practising grammar and training vocabulary acquisition at secondary schools, pedagogical translation (L1-L2) is generally considered to be particularly beneficial to advanced learners. Although the translation debate in Dutch academic journals in the 1980s suggests that university teachers agree on the importance of pedagogical translation for advanced learners of English at Dutch universities, they don't seem to agree on the particular benefits. At the same time, despite 6 years of English at secondary school and an extensive exposure to English in Dutch society, students often express a frustration at their inadequacy to master this form of skills training. Little research has been done into the actual effects of L1-L2 translation on advanced learners, neither in SLA nor in translation studies. The article is a review of the recent literature, and lists a number of possible research questions around the core question: can the effect of pedagogical translation be identified and measured in a systematic way? My hypothesis is that the effect is a student's enhanced understanding of the nature of Dutch texts and their specific features. This in turn will enable students to communicate the meaning of the text adequately into English.

Since 1991, an increasing number of Dutch secondary schools have been offering a bilingual programme (Dutch-English) in the first four years of pre-university education. In 1995 a longitudinal evaluation study of this type of education was started. In this paper the first results of a part of this study are presented. The data concern the testing of the size of passive word knowledge, measured during two consecutive school years by means of a yes/no-test. The test results of the experimental groups are compared with scores of control groups. The results indicate that the experimental groups have a larger passive vocabulary but no differences can be found between experimental and control groups in the growth of the passive vocabular

In SLA methodology it is recommended that students engage in conversation in fluency classes. The assumption underlying these recommendations is that conversational roles and tasks can be brought into and practised inside the classroom.This article is a report on research in progress and uses a discourse framework to demonstrate that the complexity of these settings has been underanalyzed (Polanyi & Scha, 1988). What exactly are the consequences of the fact that these conversations are not, of course, 'ordinary' 'authentic' conversations but pseudo-conversations acted out in institutional settings? If only because they occupy a position between 'instructions' and 'reporting back to the class', they construct a different type of unit. Constraints of the real-world social situation are not invalidated by embedding them into a pseudo-informal 'conversational' domain: speaking and hearing roles just become increasingly complex both for the students and for the teacher (Goffman, 'Footing', 1979).The data consist of freshmen fluency classes at Amsterdam University in various types of tasks and with varying group sizes.