cll lecture: the role of input in sla november 2004 florencia franceschina
TRANSCRIPT
![Page 1: CLL lecture: The role of input in SLA November 2004 Florencia Franceschina](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022062511/5515f76755034694308b4794/html5/thumbnails/1.jpg)
CLL lecture: The role of input in SLA
November 2004
Florencia Franceschina
![Page 2: CLL lecture: The role of input in SLA November 2004 Florencia Franceschina](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022062511/5515f76755034694308b4794/html5/thumbnails/2.jpg)
Types of evidence
Positive evidenceDo you like pasta?
![Page 3: CLL lecture: The role of input in SLA November 2004 Florencia Franceschina](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022062511/5515f76755034694308b4794/html5/thumbnails/3.jpg)
Types of evidence
Negative evidence– Direct
Explicit(correction, instruction)‘Like you pasta?’ is wrong.
Implicit (recasts)A: Do he likes pasta?B: Does he like pasta? I think so.
– IndirectAbsence of x
![Page 4: CLL lecture: The role of input in SLA November 2004 Florencia Franceschina](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022062511/5515f76755034694308b4794/html5/thumbnails/4.jpg)
Type / amount of input
Delayed input Bilingual/multilingual input Modified input (motherese, foreign talk, etc.) Classroom/naturalistic input
![Page 5: CLL lecture: The role of input in SLA November 2004 Florencia Franceschina](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022062511/5515f76755034694308b4794/html5/thumbnails/5.jpg)
How do learners make use of the L2 input?
For learners to be able to make use of the L2 input in learning they need to be able to parse it first. That is, they have to be able to assign a structure to the strings of speech they hear.
This happens at many levels:- phonological- syntactic- semanticetc.
![Page 6: CLL lecture: The role of input in SLA November 2004 Florencia Franceschina](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022062511/5515f76755034694308b4794/html5/thumbnails/6.jpg)
Failure-driven learning
The assumption is that learners parse the (L2) input on the basis of their existing grammar. If this grammar is insufficient/inadequate for parsing some input, this motivates restructuring of the grammar in an attempt to accommodate to the available input. This process is what drives development according to researchers such as:
Berwick and Weinberg (1984) Carroll (2001) Gibson and Wexler (1994) Schwartz and Sprouse (1994, 1996) White (1987)
![Page 7: CLL lecture: The role of input in SLA November 2004 Florencia Franceschina](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022062511/5515f76755034694308b4794/html5/thumbnails/7.jpg)
Theories of the role of input in SLA
Input Hypothesis (Krashen, 1982, 1985) ‘Less is more’ (Newport, 1990) Processability Theory (Pienemann, 1998) Input Processing (Van Patten and Cadierno,
1993) Autonomous Induction Theory (Carroll, 2001)
![Page 8: CLL lecture: The role of input in SLA November 2004 Florencia Franceschina](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022062511/5515f76755034694308b4794/html5/thumbnails/8.jpg)
Morpheme studies
Brown (1973) deVilliers and deVilliers (1973) Burt and Dulay (1973) Bailey, Madden and Krashen (1974) Staubler (1984)
Exercise
![Page 9: CLL lecture: The role of input in SLA November 2004 Florencia Franceschina](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022062511/5515f76755034694308b4794/html5/thumbnails/9.jpg)
PoS
Poverty of the stimulus
Plato’s problem
Underdetermination of knowledge by the input
(Orwell’s problem)
![Page 10: CLL lecture: The role of input in SLA November 2004 Florencia Franceschina](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022062511/5515f76755034694308b4794/html5/thumbnails/10.jpg)
The L1 grammar as a filter
Brown (2000): L1 Chinese, L1 Japanese / L2 English can they learn to perceive the difference
between /p/ vs /f/, /f/ vs /v/ and /l/ vs /r/? findings: the features of the L1 determine what
is achievable; no signs of development in problematic areas
![Page 11: CLL lecture: The role of input in SLA November 2004 Florencia Franceschina](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022062511/5515f76755034694308b4794/html5/thumbnails/11.jpg)
Phonetic feature contrasts
English contrasts
Japanese phonemes
Chinese phonemes
Contrastive feature
Contrastive in
Japanese
Contrastive in Chinese
Predictions for SLA of contrasts
/p/ vs /f/ /p/, /f/ /p/, /f/ continuant yes yes Jap: yes
Chi: yes
/f/ vs /v/ /f/ /f/ voice yes yes Jap: yes
Chi: yes
/l/ vs /r/ /r/ /l/ coronal no yes Jap: no
Chi: yes
![Page 12: CLL lecture: The role of input in SLA November 2004 Florencia Franceschina](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022062511/5515f76755034694308b4794/html5/thumbnails/12.jpg)
Brown’s results
/p/ vs /f/ /f/ vs /v/ /l/ vs /r/
L1 Japanese
(n=15)
94% 99% 61%
L1 Chinese (n=15)
90% 96% 86%
English NS (n=10)
100% 98% 96%
![Page 13: CLL lecture: The role of input in SLA November 2004 Florencia Franceschina](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022062511/5515f76755034694308b4794/html5/thumbnails/13.jpg)
The role of negative evidence
1. Short-lived effects of instruction
Trahey (1996), Trahey and White (1993), White (1990/1991), and White, Spada, Lightbown and Ranta (1991): - L1 French / L2 English- Can L1 French speakers learn that the following is ungrammatical? *Cats catch often mice.- different types of input: direct instruction, indirect instruction and input flood- findings: direct instruction was the most effective in the short term, but none of the three methods had any long-term effects (after 1-year)
![Page 14: CLL lecture: The role of input in SLA November 2004 Florencia Franceschina](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022062511/5515f76755034694308b4794/html5/thumbnails/14.jpg)
2. L2 learners can override instruction
Bruhn-Garavito (1995):- L1 French, L1 English / L2 Spanish- study of the acquisition of pronoun reference in subjunctive clauses in L2 Spanish - teachers and textbooks usually teach learners about a rule about pronoun co-reference that applies to subjunctive clauses across the board- however, NSs do make a difference between different types of clauses- findings: L2 learners appear to behave like NSs, despite misleading instruction
![Page 15: CLL lecture: The role of input in SLA November 2004 Florencia Franceschina](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022062511/5515f76755034694308b4794/html5/thumbnails/15.jpg)
Subjunctive rule (as taught to L2 learners):
The subject of an embedded subjunctive clause must have disjoint reference from the subject of the matrix clause:
[I] want [me/he/she] to go to the party.
![Page 16: CLL lecture: The role of input in SLA November 2004 Florencia Franceschina](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022062511/5515f76755034694308b4794/html5/thumbnails/16.jpg)
However, there are some subjunctive clauses (namely those containing modal verbs or adjuncts) where this doesn’t hold:
[I] hope that [I/he/she] will be able to speak to John today.
[I] will call you when [I/he/she] arrive(s).
![Page 17: CLL lecture: The role of input in SLA November 2004 Florencia Franceschina](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022062511/5515f76755034694308b4794/html5/thumbnails/17.jpg)
Subjunctives Subjunctive+modal
Subjunctive adjuncts
L2 learners (n=27)
50.75% 86% 87.4%
Spanish NS (n=12)
2.5% 85% 91.66%
![Page 18: CLL lecture: The role of input in SLA November 2004 Florencia Franceschina](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022062511/5515f76755034694308b4794/html5/thumbnails/18.jpg)
Input vs intake
Corder (1967)
Krashen (1982, 1985)
and many others
![Page 19: CLL lecture: The role of input in SLA November 2004 Florencia Franceschina](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022062511/5515f76755034694308b4794/html5/thumbnails/19.jpg)
Focus on form
A definition:
“treatment of form in the context of performing a communicative task”
(Ellis et al. 2002: 419)
![Page 20: CLL lecture: The role of input in SLA November 2004 Florencia Franceschina](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022062511/5515f76755034694308b4794/html5/thumbnails/20.jpg)
Form, forms and meaning(Long, 1991)
Focus on forms = structuralist approach
Focus on meaning = non-interventionist approach
Focus on form = communicative approach with occasional shift of attention to form
![Page 21: CLL lecture: The role of input in SLA November 2004 Florencia Franceschina](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022062511/5515f76755034694308b4794/html5/thumbnails/21.jpg)
Types of focus on form (Ellis et al., 2002: 429)
A. Reactive focus-on-form 1. Negotiation
a. Conversational
b. Didactic
2. Feedback
a. Implicit
b. Explicit
B. Pre-emptive focus-on-form 1. Student initiated
2. Teacher-initiated
![Page 22: CLL lecture: The role of input in SLA November 2004 Florencia Franceschina](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022062511/5515f76755034694308b4794/html5/thumbnails/22.jpg)
The role of output
Swain’s (1985, 1993, 1995) Output Hypothesis proposes that output can be used to:
– test hypotheses about structures and meaning– get feedback for the verification of these hypotheses– develop automaticity– shift from meaning- to form-focused mode
![Page 23: CLL lecture: The role of input in SLA November 2004 Florencia Franceschina](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022062511/5515f76755034694308b4794/html5/thumbnails/23.jpg)
Interaction Hypothesis(Long, 1996)
“negotiation for meaning, and especially negotiation work that triggers interactional adjustments by the NS or more competent interlocutor, facilitates acquisition because it connects the input, internal learner capacities, particularly selective attention, and output in productive ways” (pp. 451-452)
![Page 24: CLL lecture: The role of input in SLA November 2004 Florencia Franceschina](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022062511/5515f76755034694308b4794/html5/thumbnails/24.jpg)
Reading
•Doughty, C. 2001: Cognitive underpinnings of focus on form. In Robinson, P. (ed.): Cognition and second language instruction. Cambridge: CUP. Pp. 206-257.
•White, L. 2003: Second language acquisition and Universal Grammar. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. (Chapter 5)