Second language acquisition in multilingual and mixed ability indian classrooms

This book presentsa study on learner language in the spoken and written output of English as secondlanguage ESL learners of English in the Indian classroom teaching–learningcontext.. The

Vaishna Narang · Salonee Priya

Varalakshmi Chaudhry

Second Language Acquisition in

Multilingual and Mixed Ability

Indian Classrooms

Second Language Acquisition in Multilingual and Mixed Ability Indian Classrooms

Vaishna Narang Salonee Priya

Varalakshmi Chaudhry

Second Language

Acquisition in Multilingual and Mixed Ability Indian Classrooms

123

Centre for Linguistics, SLL & CS

Jawaharlal Nehru University

New Delhi, Delhi

India

Salonee Priya

Linguistic Empowerment Cell

Jawaharlal Nehru University

New Delhi, Delhi

India

Linguistic Empowerment CellJawaharlal Nehru UniversityNew Delhi, Delhi

This work is subject to copyright All rights are reserved by the Publisher, whether the whole or part

or information storage and retrieval, electronic adaptation, computer software, or by similar or dissimilar methodology now known or hereafter developed.

The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc in this

the relevant protective laws and regulations and therefore free for general use.

The publisher, the authors and the editors are safe to assume that the advice and information in this book are believed to be true and accurate at the date of publication Neither the publisher nor the authors or the editors give a warranty, express or implied, with respect to the material contained herein or for any errors or omissions that may have been made.

Printed on acid-free paper

This Springer imprint is published by Springer Nature

The registered company is Springer (India) Pvt Ltd.

Thefield of second language acquisition is one of the most thought, discussed andargued, written-about areas in applied linguistics The variety of its nomenclature

by itself is mind-boggling: whether you call it second language acquisition, secondlanguage learning or L2 acquisition, it refers to both the process by which peoplelearn a second language and the scientific discipline devoted to studying thatprocess To further complicate matters,“second language” refers to any languagelearned in addition to a person’s first language; although the concept is namedsecond language acquisition, it can also incorporate the learning of third, fourth, orsubsequent languages If the fact provides any comfort to the harried researcher,second language acquisition refers to what learners do; it does not refer to practices

in language teaching

To give a brief overview of thefield seems to be required here, to teeter close tocliché; it really is the need of the hour Emerging in 1967 (with Corder’s 1967 essayThe Significance of Learners’ Errors and reinforced by Selinker’s 1972 articleInterlanguage), today it is an independent field of research that is broad-basedenough to incorporate insight from psychology, cognitive psychology, sociolin-guistics, and education Originally, following Krashen (1981), the term acquisitionwas used to emphasize the subconscious nature of the learning process, but inrecent years “learning” and “acquisition” have become largely synonymous.Teachers accept the fact that theories on how SLA takes place abound but no singleview is accepted as a complete explanation by scholars This is inevitable when anarea is so interdisciplinary in nature that every new input entails a fresh look There

is agreement on the five stages of SLA: preproduction, early production, speechemergence, intermediatefluency, and advanced fluency (Haynes, 2007) It is alsoaccepted that adults learning a second language will not be as proficient as childrenlearning afirst language due to factors like fossilization and language transfer

In the last decade of the twentieth century, Vivian James Cook proposed themulti-competence approach to second language acquisition Multi-competence is

“the knowledge of two languages in one mind” (Cook, 1991) It follows that thosewho can use two languages will communicate differently as compared to those who

v

know one One can see shades of Chomsky’s ideas on LAD in this argument,especially when Cook asserts that all human beings have the potential for becomingmulti-competent, so monolinguals are not indicative of what the human mind canachieve These findings definitely hold significant implication for the languageclassroom So many of the do’s and don’ts of the classroom are insignificant in thelight of Cook’s 1997 paper in which he argues that knowledge of more than onelanguage can change how people think When behaviourism was shown the door bymentalist theory, the question of empirical proof was left unsaid in the face of thestrong Chomsky wave.

The current interdisciplinary turn that SLA research has taken towards cognitivescience attempts to answer this unspoken query By marrying quantitative andqualitative research methodology, researchers are making an attempt to resolvemany an old dilemma of SLA Of course, pedagogically speaking, this developmenthas the power to impact the complete SLA paradigm This volume is a part of theparadigm shift that holds the promise of optimizing ELT resources everywhere.Given its strong base of SLA with a mix of classroom observation, action researchand cognitive processing, it is an exciting enhancement

Prof Deepti GuptaDepartment of EnglishPanjab UniversityChandigarh, India

References

Cook, V J (1991) The poverty-of-the-stimulus argument and multi-competence ’ Second language research, 7(2), 103 –117.

Cook, V J (1997) The consequences of bilingualism for cognitive processing In A.M de Groot

& J.F Kroll (Eds.), Tutorials in bilingualism: Psycholinguistic perspectives Lawrence Erlbaum.

Corder, S P (1967) The signi ficance of learner’s errors International Review of Applied Linguistics, 5(2 –3), 161–169.

Haynes, J (2007) Getting started with english language learners: How educators can meet the challenge Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development ISBN 978-1-4166-0519-5.

Krashen, S (1981) Second language acquisition and second language learning New York: Pergamon Press ISBN 0-08-025338-5

Selinker, L (1972) Interlanguage International review of applied linguistics, 10, 209 –241

The study of second language acquisition (SLA) in the multilingual, multicultural,mixed ability classes has always been an exciting and challenging experience to anEnglish language teaching (ELT) theorist and action researcher This book presents

a study on learner language in the spoken and written output of English as secondlanguage (ESL) learners of English in the Indian classroom teaching–learningcontext There has always been a hiatus between theories and classroom practices.Either the two go completely in different directions or the practice blindly depends

on theory without a consideration of the feasibility problem The basic argument inthe book, based on two empirical studies reported, is that learning theories andpedagogical practices need to be constantly revised through classroom based actionresearch studies that throw light on the appropriate convergence of theory andpractice

The study of SLA has looked into the relationship between input, intake, andoutput in the context of task performance The cognitive processes that are triggered

in the mind of an ESL learner while processing input for spoken or written output inthe classroom situation is the focus of the study in this book What is the nature ofintake or rather what is the nature and type of processing done for subsequentoutput? What are the strategies used by the ESL learners at every stage of the input–intake–output framework? These are the questions put at the beginning of the study

of SLA in the context of Indian ESL classroom situation Multilingual classroomrefers to the minimum of two languages that the ESL learners in our study have.Mixed ability classroom refers to the difference in language level among the stu-dents in terms of learning style, students’ background knowledge, knowledge of theworld, their skills and talents in other areas andfinally in the levels of motivation.This book is based on the results of two empirical studies done to identify therelationship between input, intake, and output in spoken and written task perfor-mance For capturing the learner language in the spoken output, the learnerswere given a Seminar Speech Task, where the subjects spoke for 5 min on a

“prepared”—3-day preparation time—topic chosen out of 6 given by theteacher-researcher The seminar speeches were recorded and transcribed

vii

phonologically For capturing the learner language in the written output, thelearners were given a written test performance task The subjects selected textsources (3 minimum) to make an oral presentation on their favourite (self-chosen)topic Within a uniform preparation time of 3 days, they prepared a script for theseminar task There were 15 subjects, each of who presented his or her seminar infront of the others Each of the seminars was followed by a written test which hadcontent questions (on the topic) prepared by the teacher-researcher on the spot.Each of the subjects thus gave speeches to the other 14 Thus, every subject took

15 tests In every test the subjects had to answer two questions

The study of the learner language in the SST is based on the hypothesis thatthere are clearly distinguishable “acquired” and “learnt” elements in the spokenoutput of second language learners as theorized by Krashen (1985) through thedistinction made between “acquisition” and “learning” The study of the learnerlanguage in the WTPT is based on the hypothesis that the cognitive processesinvolved in SLA are triggered positively when an autonomous learner processesself-chosen text input to perform a spoken task The processes would involveinformation processing (for idea units; chunking—reflective of script dependence;and discourse structure) and input processing (for self-corrections, creativity, andnew vocabulary—involving errors as a part of all the three criteria) The taskperformance of subjects, irrespective of their proficiency levels, would be better onself than others A low proficiency subject would achieve successful task perfor-mance with a structured text input source and formatted notes taken while listening

to others A high/medium proficiency subject works with creativity and attempts atclarity of expression for effective communication

The subjects for the SST were 15 adult learners of English (20–22 years of age)enrolled in a proficiency course in English at Vivekananda School of Languages,Ramakrishna Muth (Hyderabad) Finalization of subjects was done based on thefollowing inclusion/exclusion criteria: mother tongue (Telugu); years of exposure toEnglish as a second language (14–20 years); age (21–22); sex, and Class X(secondary) and Class XII (higher secondary) board examination percentage andscores in the class tests The subjects were categorized into three types—high,medium, and low proficiency—based on a diagnostic test The subjects for theWTPT were (from a random sample of 32) the select sample of 15 subjects whowerefinalized on the basis of the following inclusion/exclusion criteria: age (range

21–22 years); mother tongue (Hindi); exposure to language (from 14 to 20 years);language proficiency (scores of the diagnostic test ranging from 15 to 24.5);socio-economic background (middle class); ethos of the college campus (same);preparation time for the seminar task and the written test (same); and test conditions(same)

The analysis of the learner language in the SST revealed“acquired” (Indianisms,sentence frames, use of articles, and instances of self-monitoring) and “learnt”(routines and patterns, formulaic expressions, rote-learnt chunks, and monitoringfrom the learnt system) elements Depending on theirfluency and discourse levelstrategies, the learners could be divided into good, poor, and okay speakers Alllearners resorted to the acquired system in seminar speeches, irrespective of their

proficiency level The data analysis of the learner language in the WTPT revealedthat there are two processes involved in text processing for written test perfor-mance: information (for idea units or information chunks) and input processing(for linguistic structure) Depending on their strategies of text source processing, thelearners could be categorized as high, medium, and low proficiency learners(based on the diagnostic test); high, medium, and low scorers (based on the writtentest); extensive, optimal, and intensive information processors; and finally, maxi-mal, optimal, and minimal input processors.

The results of the SST are presented within the framework of input, intake, andoutput; and the relationship among the three—in the context of SLA The focus,however, is only on the spoken output We studied in detail constituents of (spoken)learner language, fluency, monitoring, and self-monitoring The results of theWTPT gave us rich insights into the role of input processing in the SLA process.One obvious insight is the better task performance results by a greater number ofsubjects who did input processing when compared to their performance on thediagnostic test For example, as per the proficiency level categorization, there wereonly 5 high proficiency level subjects out of a total of 15 The low proficiencysubjects had a good score in the written test with the help of extensive and optimalinformation processing of their self-chosen text sources, painstaking preparation

of the script, and meticulous note-taking In fact, thefirst rank holder in the writtentest—S3 with a cumulative rank of 3H (3 high ranks—5th rank on self; 1st rank as aspeaker; and 3rd rank as a listener) is as per the diagnostic test a low proficiencysubject!

We can say that input processing has a highly positive role in the process ofsecond language acquisition (SLA) Results indicate that low proficiency as a cri-terion to label a group of students is completely erroneous and unnecessary becausestudents in this category process information as well as input, differently, i.e thechoice of strategies is different The book hopes tofill the lacunae in the area ofempirical studies based on the data from Indian classrooms and from the domains oflearning and teaching of English as a second language There is not much researchbased on empirical data collected from heterogeneous and mixed ability classrooms

in Indian institutions of higher learning The language of the book is lucid andaccessible to dedicated teachers who have been in thefield for a long time but donot have the required knowledge to comprehend the complex and complicatedprocesses that take place in the minds of the learners—the black boxes

Vaishna NarangSalonee PriyaVaralakshmi Chaudhry

1 Second Language Acquisition Research on Spoken

and Written Output 1

1.1 Introduction 1

1.2 Problems Identified in the Classroom as a Language Teaching Theorist 2

1.3 Issues Addressed in the Study 3

1.3.1 Second Language Acquisition (SLA) Theories and a Different Perspective on What Is Acquired 3

1.3.2 Materials and Methods 6

1.3.3 Task Planning and Task Performance 7

1.3.4 Evaluation and Measurement: Measurement of Accuracy, Complexity, and Fluency 9

1.3.5 Conclusion 11

1.4 Perspective for Our Studies of SLA: Spoken and Written Output 12

1.4.1 Attitudes and Expectations of the Learners 13

1.5 The Importance of Language in Higher Education 14

1.5.1 The Indian Setting for Our Studies on SLA in Classrooms 15

1.5.2 The Objectives and Scope 17

1.5.3 The Experimental Tasks 18

References 21

2 Certain Theoretical Concepts in SLA Research on Speech and Writing 23

2.1 Introduction 23

2.2 Certain Theoretical Notions Related to Language Production 25

2.2.1 Competence and Performance 25

2.2.2 Distinctions Similar to the Learning—Acquisition Distinction 25

2.2.3 Language Deployment 26

xi

2.2.4 Input Processing 26

2.2.5 Information Processing 27

2.3 Studies on Spoken Output 27

2.3.1 The Concept of Fluency 27

2.3.2 A Possible Role for Imitation in Learning to Speak 28

2.3.3 Speech Production in First Language 30

2.3.4 Errors and Self-Monitoring 32

2.3.5 Prefabricated Language 36

2.4 Studies on Written Output 39

2.4.1 SLA Process: Information and Input Processing 40

2.5 Research on Language Processing for Production 46

References 62

3 Second Language Acquisition in Mixed Ability Classrooms: Seminar Speech Task (SST) 69

3.1 Introduction 69

3.2 Methodology and Elicitation Procedures 70

3.2.1 Working Hypothesis 70

3.2.2 The Teaching–Learning Situation 70

3.2.3 The Selection of Participants: Inclusion–Exclusion Criteria 71

3.2.4 Elicitation of the Data 71

3.2.5 Transcription: Procedure and Problems 72

3.3 Analysis 73

3.3.1 Errors and Monitoring 73

3.3.2 Routines, Patterns and Rote Learning 81

3.4 Discussion 87

3.4.1 Discourse Structure and Fluency Strategies 87

3.5 An Overview of SST Study 94

References 95

4 Second Language Acquisition in Mixed Ability Classrooms: Written Test Performance Task (WTPT) 97

4.1 Introduction 97

4.2 Role of Input and Output in SLA Studies 98

4.3 The Pilot Study 101

4.4 Restatement of the Hypothesis 106

4.5 Methodology and Procedural Steps Followed in WTPT 108

4.5.1 Methodology 108

4.5.2 Analytical Procedures 109

4.6 Results and Discussion 121

4.6.1 Data Analysis and Results 121

4.6.2 WTPT Preliminary (Qualitative) Data Analysis of Three Participants 127

4.7 Fifteen Case Studies: Qualitative Data Analysis 132

4.7.1 Maximal Input Processor—Participant 1 (S1RM) 132

4.7.2 Optimal Input Processor—Participant 2 (S2MS) 136

4.7.3 Minimal Input Processor—Participant 3 (S3ND) 138

4.7.4 Participant 4: S4NT 139

4.7.5 Participant 5: S5RG 141

4.7.6 Participant 6: S6SS 144

4.7.7 Participant 7: S7SG 145

4.7.8 Participant 8: S8BM 146

4.7.9 Participant 9: S9NG 149

4.7.10 Participant 10: S10MY 151

4.7.11 Participant 11: S11SM 153

4.7.12 Participant 12: S12VS 154

4.7.13 Participant 13: S13AB 157

4.7.14 Participant 14: S14AD 158

4.7.15 Participant 15: S15EN 160

4.8 An Overview of WTPT Study 167

References 169

5 Revisiting the Issues in Learner Language Research in Indian Mixed Ability Classrooms 171

5.1 Introduction 171

5.2 Input Versus Information Processing in the Context of Acquisition Versus Learning Debate 172

5.3 SST 176

5.4 WTPT 178

5.5 Interpretation of SST and WTPT 179

5.6 Revisiting the Issues in Learning Theories and Pedagogical Practices 186

5.6.1 Learning Theories 186

5.6.2 Pedagogical Practices 188

5.6.3 Implications of the Two Studies for Language Pedagogy 190

5.6.4 Bridging the Gap Between Learning Theories and Pedagogical Practices 191

References 192

Appendix A 195

Appendix B 197

Appendix C 199

Appendix D 203

Appendix E 207

Appendix F 213

Vaishna Narang Ph.D has four decades of teaching and research experience inlinguistics She is Professor of Linguistics at Jawaharlal Nehru University (JNU),Delhi Her research interests include general and applied linguistics, learningtheories and pedagogical practices, application of linguistics in clinical practices ofspeech and language acquisition/learning, language and cognition, neurocognitivelinguistics, and the genetics of voice She has supervised more than 50 MPhil andPh.D dissertations Professor Narang has published 15 books and more than

100 articles in national and international journals of repute

Salonee Priya is Visiting Scholar at Linguistic Empowerment Cell, JawaharlalNehru University She has about 14 years of experience in teaching and research.Prior to this she was working as Associate Professor at Institute of InformationTechnology and Management (IITM), New Delhi As an author she has 12 pub-lished articles and as an editor she has to her credit eight books on the various facets

of linguistics

Varalakshmi Chaudhry (Late) Ph.D was Associate Professor at LinguisticEmpowerment Cell, JNU As a guest faculty at JNU, she taught courses in appliedlinguistics and psycholinguistics for M.A and MPhil students She won severalawards: The ELTAI Best English Teacher (College Level) National Award (2013),Chennai; Best Team Player (First Prize)—2013, Indian Institute of ManagementIndore; and Best Paper Award (2014), Lingaya’s University, Faridabad She pub-lished two books and 23 research articles in national and international journals.During preparation of this work, Varalakshmi passed away in July 2015 following aroad accident

xv

Second Language Acquisition Research

on Spoken and Written Output

Abstract This chapter introduces concepts beginning with second languageacquisition (SLA) as cognitive processes in the mind of a second language learnertriggered by the relationship between input, intake, and output in a particular taskperformance and the way this would enable the learner to internalize the language.The frameworks and the factors are introduced under two broad headings—theexternal factors of SLA and the internal External factors are the input, interactions,and social aspects of SLA such as—age, gender, social class and ethnic identity,natural versus educational settings Models like the acculturation model,socio-educational model, and intergroup model and key constructs in SLA such asmediated learning, zone of proximal development, corrective feedback, etc., arealso discussed The internal factors in the context of SLA are the issues of languagetransfer, evidence of transfer effects such as production, reception, and conceptualtransfer, constraints on transfer and also cognitive accounts of SLA—declarativeand procedural knowledge of L2, the nativization model and operating principles,etc., are included This chapter also introduces the concepts like input, intake,output, and input processing model

Keywords Input
Intake
Output and input processing model

1.1 Introduction

In his Communicative Methodology in Language Teaching (1984), Brumfitobserves that a genuine understanding of teaching involves talking about personalexperience and then in due course a shift towards basic philosophy This was thestarting point for this research Though the ultimate aim is to contribute toknowledge about teaching, the study has begun not with teachers and their reper-toire of methods and materials, but with the learner; following the intuition that onehas to understand learning in order to understand teaching The attempt has been toinform, enrich, and guide the discussion of personal experience with an

© Springer India 2016

V Narang et al., Second Language Acquisition in Multilingual

and Mixed Ability Indian Classrooms, DOI 10.1007/978-81-322-2604-8_1

1

understanding of current approaches to language acquisition and, in particular,second language acquisition.

1.2 Problems Identi fied in the Classroom as a Language

Teaching Theorist

We as authors have combined experience as both linguists and language teachers

We delve in both theory as well as practice As theorists working in the area oflanguage pedagogy, our perspective on language teaching is very different fromlanguage teachers without any background in linguistics or applied linguistics Aslanguage teaching theorists, we feel that apart from error correction as a peda-gogical exercise, it is very important to analyse the errors as feedback to the teacher

on learning processes, particularly in heterogeneous, mixed ability classrooms Inthe course of language teaching, we have noticed something in the teaching–learning classroom situation which has intrigued them

(i) Students’ preparation and the motivation for preparation as well as theirperformance after the preparation

(ii) Students get pass grades in English tests, whereas their proficiency does notimprove as expected

Students prepare well for a spoken task in advance because of the peer mance pressure in the classroom; whereas for the written task there is no such peerpressure Classroom practices also thus get directed to achieving a pass grade.Improvement in proficiency, which is an indicator of performance, gets lost Inputprocessing in second language acquisition (SLA) definitely has a major role to play

perfor-in this regard The above perfor-intriguperfor-ing issues with regard to learners of a secondlanguage are further discussed below:

(i) They seem to“prepare” a lot when it comes to classroom task performance:One wonders about the content and language of preparation It is obvious thatlearners at various proficiency levels prepare for a task in different ways However,what exactly is involved in preparation is an interesting question that a conscien-tious teacher has in mind How do low proficiency learners manage to performwithout competence? How do high proficiency learners become successful? Isproficiency exhibited in task performance related to the learners’ competence? Canlearners select those parts of the text sources which are suitable to their level ofproficiency as well as being useful for their task performance? What exactly is thataspect where a teacher becomes useful for the learner?

(ii) They seem to get pass grades in English tests, whereas their proficiency doesnot improve as expected: Despite a plethora of methods, materials, and evaluativetechniques that they have been experimented with in order to understand theparadox of“passing” the exam with low or no proficiency at all A related point is,why do the learners, on an average, perform very well in classroom tasks but focus

only on clearing exams or scoring maximum marks in thefinal written exam or viceversa? What do learners do to “clear” the English paper “without a Re” (“reap-pear”—when they do not get the mandatory pass marks)? What are the strategiesthey use to give responses in English successfully with little or no proficiency inEnglish at all? How do they comprehend the questions and plan the responses?What are the linguistic, lexical, and discourse features they concentrate on whilepreparing for the semester end university exam in English? What kind of books dothey refer to while preparing for the exam? What is their approach towards theteacher, test, success in exam, achieving a decent score in the exam, the questions to

be chosen and so on? What is the role of a teacher and their methodologies infacilitating the students’ progress?

To answer these questions, the role of input processing in second languageacquisition (SLA) was studied A study of the role of input or output in SLA, per se,would not help a teacher-researcher understand the complexities of classroomEnglish language learning and teaching We therefore also decided to conductresearch on our own students who are exposed to our teaching strategies: methods,materials, classroom methodologies, tests, tasks, andfinally—highly important—our evaluation techniques and standards of performance evaluation

1.3 Issues Addressed in the Study

1.3.1 Second Language Acquisition (SLA) Theories

and a Different Perspective on What Is Acquired

At the outset, it is essential to clarify the term“second language” A second guage has been variously defined vis-à-vis first language acquired during the earlydevelopment on the one hand vis-à-vis foreign language in terms of its role, status,and functions in the sociocultural context “A second language is typically an

lan-officially or societally dominant language needed for education, employment andother basic purposes” (Saville-Troike2006, p 4) In order to understand the process

of SLA, Saville-Troike (2006, p 7) seeks answers to three basic questions(i) What exactly does the L2 learner come to know?

(ii) How does the learner acquire this knowledge?

(iii) Why are some learners more successful than others?

The three questions led to the three frameworks for the study of SLA which arediscussed here Saville-Troike (2006, pp 24–28) summarizes the three frameworksand their perspectives These frameworks are: linguistic, psychological, and social.The linguistic perspective focuses on language and the brain: both internal andexternal aspects For the study of internal aspects, the frameworks are: transfor-mational generative grammar (in the 1960s), the principles and parameters model(in the 1980s), and the minimalist programme (in the 1990s) of Noam Chomsky

The external aspects of language and brain were studied under the framework offunctionalism (in the 1970s) Aspects of the brain were studied under the frame-work of neurolinguistics.

The psychological perspective focuses on learning processes and individualdifferences The frameworks for learning processes are: behaviourism (in the1950s), neurolinguistics and information processing (in the 1960s), connectionism(in the1980s), and processability (in the 1990s) For the study of individual dif-ferences, humanistic models were used

The social perspective focuses on micro-and macro-social aspects The lowing frameworks were used: sociocultural theory (in the 1950s and earlier),ethnography of communication and variation theory (in the 1960s), acculturationand accommodation theory (in the 1970s), and social psychology (in the 1980s).Krashen (1985) refers to five hypotheses which form his SLA theory and thisclearly underlines the present study

fol-(i) Acquisition-Learning distinction: According to Krashen, acquisition helpslearners to initiate utterances whereas learning acts only as a monitor at agiven time focus on form, and knowledge of the concerned rule

(ii) Monitor hypothesis: The learnt system helps in correcting utterances afterthey are produced

(iii) Input hypothesis: The only way to acquire a language is by internalizingcomprehensible input Comprehensible input is at a level just above thecurrent level of the competence of the learner This input is comprehendedwith the help of the non-verbal cues in the environment

(iv) The natural order: There is a predictable sequence of grammatical markers inthe process of acquisition

(v) Affectivefilter hypothesis: This posits that learners can acquire a languageonly when they are mentally comfortable while picking up a language If theaffective filter is up, it is difficult to acquire language and vice versa Theaffective filter is highly dependent on the attitude of the learner

Swain (1985) refers to the role of comprehensible output in language acquisition.According to Swain, output has three functions in language acquisition (related toaccuracy) As one of the major concerns of the present study is the role of inputprocessing and information processing which is displayed in the output it isessential to dwell on the role of output as pointed by Swain (1985):

(i) The noticing/triggering function, or what might be referred to as itsconsciousness-raising role

(ii) The hypothesis-testing function

(iii) The metalinguistic function, or what might be referred to as its reflective role.Swain and Lapkin (1995) later discuss the role of writing in SLA Since writingtask is the major focus of the study it is imperative to discuss its role in SLA Itincludes:

(i) Generating input

(ii) Enhancing fluency by furthering development of automaticity throughpractice Helping learners notice gaps in their own knowledge as they areforced to visibly encode concepts in L2 forms, which may lead them to givemore attention to relevant information

(iii) Allowing learners to test hypotheses they have formulated as part of theirdeveloping linguistic systems, with opportunity for monitoring and revision.(iv) Providing opportunities for others to comment on problems and give cor-rective feedback

A related study is that of Alister Cumming (1990), who argues for SLA throughsecond language composing Completely in agreement with Swain (1985),Cumming states that “this view of SLA suggests that composing might functionbroadly as a psycholinguistic output condition wherein learners analyse and con-solidate second language knowledge that they have previously (but not yet fully)acquired” (1990, p 483)

The subjects for Cumming’s study were 23 adult Francophone learners posing in English The task was that the subjects were required to “think aloud”while producing

com-(i) an informal letter discussing courses people were taking at that time.(ii) an expository argument on women’s role in contemporary society

So, the data consisted of 46 concurrent verbal reports The two interesting types

of data were searching and assessing improved phrasing and translation of Frenchwords Cumming concludes (on the basis of data analysis) that composition writingelicits attention to form-meaning relations that may prompt learners to refine theirlinguistic expressions—and hence their control over their linguistic knowledge—sothat it is more accurately representative of their thoughts and of standard usage.This process appears to be facilitated by the natural distinction between the writtentext and the mental processes of generating and assessing it

Apart from input and output, a different perspective on what is acquired is given

by Jayaseelan (1996, p 46) in a convincing argument for a new notion of what isacquired.“Actually there is no need to learn structures: the so-called structures fallout (sic) from the meanings of words following completely universal principlesembodied in the LAD” Extending it further,

… the most significant simplification achieved by the new theory is the elimination of phrase-structure rules … So then, the language learner does not have to learn phrase-structure rules (pp 47 –49)

On learner language and the process of learning, Ellis (2005a) provides acomprehensive review of the various aspects of learner language in detail Learnerlanguage and the significance of its study had been introduced first by Pit Corder(1967) in his seminal paper on the “Significance of Learners’ Errors”, and thenSelinker’s (1972) “Interlanguage” Faerch et al (1984) express their views onlearner language and language learning “Learner English … is often primarily

learnt inside a classroom, rather than in more normal communicative situations”(p 7) The learner language approach involves“basing the study of foreign lan-guage and teaching on prior analyses of learner language” (p 9); “by taking as itspoint of departure the learner’s situation, the gap between theory and practice ishopefully reduced” (p 16).

In this connection, Faerch et al (1984) discuss two types of grammatical rules(i) “Linguistic rules: Rules established in order to account for language data;formulated in linguistic terminology and belonging to a specific model oflanguage description

(ii) Psycholinguistic rules: Rules as psychological entities, activated by uals when they produce language” (p 114)

individ-1.3.2 Materials and Methods

A detailed review of the various methods of teaching English has been made byNarang (2006), by tracing the“evolution of a method” in terms of two paradigmshifts: GT methods to direct methods; and structure-oriented drill methods tolearner-oriented pedagogy, in the methods of teaching Along with this, learningsfrom the fields of linguistics and psychology (from structural linguistics andbehaviourist psychology to innateness hypothesis, Chomskyan theory, and cogni-tive psychology) have also been included Social, economic, political, and monetaryfactors play an important role in contributing to the paradigm shift in the methods ofteaching For example, thefirst paradigm shift was necessitated by World War I and

II and the politically involved people’s urgency to learn a foreign/second language

in a short time for handling their own identity crisis and for sheer survival The shiftfrom focus on structures and drills to learning and input processing was largely due

to the intellectual paradigm shift and Chomskyan cognitive revolution

The materials and methods used in SLA for various studies are presented briefly

in this section

Regarding materials, Breen (1985, p 61) presents four types of authenticity

i …of the texts which we may use as input data for our learners

ii …of the learners’ own interpretations of such texts

iii …of tasks conducive to language learning

iv …of the actual social situation of the language classroom.

The question of authenticity of the text is almost inseparable from the question:For whom might such a text be authentic? Authentic communication could beregarded as the process of interaction between, for example, the specific nature of awritten text and the particular reader’s interpretation of the text, the latter beingwhat she herself contributes to that text For this reason, the specific nature of a textand the point of view and approach of the person interpreting the text are very

closely related issues Kumaradas (1993) argues for “learner-chosen texts” thatpromote/facilitate SLA.

Methods can be worked out by analysing the cases of successful learners, theirstrategies and what worked out for them Success in the case of foreign languages(for 7 learners) has been analysed and reported in detail by Stevick (1989), andsuccessful learners were listed as follows

1 An intuitive learner, who usually learns through aural memory by taking inmeanings associated with the sounds (p 9)

2 A formal learner, who learns through audio-lingual thinking (p 27)

3 An informal learner, who learns through openness and risk taking

4 An imaginative learner, who learns through high degree of originality andimagination (p 64)

5 An active learner, who learns through monitoring and correcting (p 100)

6 A deliberate learner (p 100)

7 A self-aware learner

This study is interesting in that it helps us understand the cognitive processesinvolved in the acquisition of a foreign language—for individual participants.Nunan (1998) argues, based on Breen and Candlin (1980; cited in Nunan1998,

p 2), for an empirical approach to language teaching methodology For Nunan,methodology deals “with the selection and sequencing of learning tasks andactivities (how)” (1998, p 2), and syllabus design“concerns itself with the selectionand grading of linguistic and experiential context (i.e., what, why, when)” (p 2).Nunan (1998, p 228) assigns methods for teaching English as a second language

to three categories: The psychological tradition that takes into account logical theories of learning (p 229) and includes methods like audio-lingual(p 230) and cognitive code learning (pp 232–233), based on the behaviouristpsychology and structural linguistics of the 1950s

psycho-The humanistic tradition (Nunan1998, p 234) includes the following methods:the community language learning method (of Curran1972, p 76; in Nunan 1998,

p 236); the silent way (of Gattegno 1963 as in Nunan1998, p 237); and gestopedia (of Lozanov, in Nunan 1998, p 239) The SLA tradition includesmethods and the natural approach (Krashen and Terrell 1983; in Nunan 1998,

sug-p 241–243)

An example of planning studies is the one by Crookes (1989), which was thefirst toemploy measures of accuracy and complexity to the study of the effects of planning

on L2 production Crookes did not include any measures offluency

The general hypothesis was “planned speech will show more evidence ofdevelopment than unplanned speech in a variety of aspects” (Crookes1989, p 370)

This was broken into a series of“directional hypotheses” relating to the accuracy andcomplexity of learners’ productions The tasks were (for spoken data)

(i) a description of how to construct a Lego model and

(ii) an explanation of where to locate a building on a map

Two equivalent versions of each task were used The tasks were performed in a

“minimal planning condition” (i.e., the participants started as soon as they had theirtask instructions) and; a“planning condition” (i.e., the participants had 10 min toplan during which time they could make written notes, subsequently collectedbefore they performed the task) Data analysis was done on the basis of accuracyand complexity measures The participants were 40 adult ESL students (L1Japanese) at intermediate and advanced levels

The results of the study indicate that planning results in greater accuracy andgreater complexity Crookes concludes that“… planning is a process that can leadL2 learners to produce more developed speech in the short run” (p 379) Thefactors that may have limited the effects of planning could be that giving Japaneselearners the opportunity to plan may have only a limited effect, as they are culturallydisciplined to speak spontaneously even after they plan Also, it is possible that thelearners prioritized complexities at the expense of accuracy The ultimate questioncomes down to the proficiency versus competence difference

Varalakshmi (1993) studied the “learnt” and “acquired” elements in the pared” speech performance of adult learners of English The task was a “seminar”task The students were asked to give a seminar speech for 5 min The preparationtime was 3 days The data were analysed for“learnt” and “acquired” elements asper the acquisition versus learning distinction of Krashen (1985) The studyrevealed“learnt” elements like routines and patterns, and “acquired” elements likeuse of articles, grammatically accurate sentences and discourse structures Acquiredelements were also revealed through high instances of self-monitoring

“pre-The study revealed that there were very few instances of learnt elements and thatpreparation had no effect on the acquired system

The use of tasks as a way of promoting authentic materials for promoting SLAhas been explored in detail in Peter Skehan’s work Beginning with the exploration

of “individual differences in second language learning” (1989) proposing theconcept of task-based instruction and a framework for the implementation of thesame and its implications on SLA research (1996a,1998b); a cognitive approach tolanguage learning (1998a); later (1999, 2000)—the focus shifted to the task type,structure, and the processing conditions that influence performance; the role ofcognition, effect of planning on form and meaning prioritizing in task performanceand completion by learners—all are issues that reveal the important role played bythe study of the various aspects of the task that have to be considered in order tounderstand the individual differences, strategies, and proficiency level of the secondlanguage learners

Ellis (2005b, pp 158–160) discusses the effect of planning on task performance.Researchers have been interested in the effects of giving learners time for pre-task

planning This research views the opportunity to plan prior to performing a task as

“a pedagogical manipulation assumed to induce learners to focus on whicheverformal and systematic aspects of the language are needed to accomplish a particulartask” (Ortega1999, p 110) Thus, researchers have been motivated to study taskplanning in the belief that the focus-on-form that takes place incidentally during atask performance as a result of planning will assist both the performance itself andthe process of L2 acquisition They have investigated the effects of a range ofplanning variables (for example, the amount of time available to plan and whetherplanning is detailed or not) on accuracy, complexity, andfluency (Ortega1999)

of Accuracy, Complexity, and Fluency

In SLA research, the focus of evaluation, criteria for evaluation and measures usedare crucial Learner language, which is the focus of SLA studies, can be studied andevaluated from two perspectives (Ellis2005a, p 139)

(ii) “specific linguistic features in performance and their use” (for example: erroranalysis studies by Pit Corder1967and interlanguage by Selinker1972and

A Accuracy: This refers to“how well the target language is produced in relation

to the rule system of the target language” (Skehan1996b, p 23, in Ellis2005a,

C Fluency: This“is the production of language in real time without undue pausing

or hesitation” (Ellis 2005a, p 139) This happens when learners prioritizemeaning over form in order to get a task done It is achieved through the use ofprocessing strategies that enable learners to avoid or solve problems quickly

The measurement of accuracy, complexity, andfluency poses another challengewhich is also dealt differently by different researchers These three types of mea-surements as explained and illustrated by R Ellis are presented below Accuracycan be measured “by analyzing the suppliance of specific grammatical forms inobligatory occasions or by error analysis (percentage of error-free clauses or thenumber of errors per 100 words), to get an idea of the learner’s grammatical andlexical ability to perform accurately in the L2” (Ellis2005a, p 139).

The various measures of accuracy as illustrated by Ellis are as follows (Ellis2005a, pp 149–150):

(i) The number of self-corrections: The number of self-corrections as a centage of the total number of errors committed

per-(ii) Percentage of error-free clauses: The number of error-free clauses divided bythe total number of independent clauses, sub-clausal units and subordinateclauses multiplied by 100

(iii) Errors per 100 words: The number of errors divided by the total number ofwords produced divided by 100

(iv) Percentage of target-like verbal morphology: The number of correct finiteverb phrases divided by the total number of verb phrases multiplied by 100.(v) Percentage of target-like use of plurals: The number of correctly used pluralsdivided by the number of obligatory occasions for plurals multiplied by 100.(vi) Target-like use of vocabulary: The number of lexical errors divided by thetotal number of words in the text (excluding disfluencies)

It is imperative to give a special note on self-corrections:

Self-corrections reflect the extent of a learner’s orientation towards accuracyrather than being a measure of her accurate use of L2

Frequent self-corrections might be considered indicative of an integrative entation while a low level of syntactic self-correction may reflect a more seg-regative orientation (Ellis2005a, p 150)

ori-Complexity is traditionally measured “by examining the extent to which alearner employs subordination, the assumption being that the more complex thelanguage produced” (Ellis2005a, p 140)

The various measures of complexity are

(i) Interactional: Number of turns per unit

(ii) Propositional: number of idea units encoded The total number of (a) majorand (b) minor idea units in the text is counted Major and minor ideas areestablished with reference to a baseline performance of the message.Calculating“the number of idea units in a text … provide a measure of theextent to which learners have engaged in‘conceptualization’” (Ellis2005a,

specific linguistic feature (e.g., different verb forms); c Mean number of verbarguments.

(v) Lexical: The lexical measure takes into account the type-token ratio, meanlength of utterance (MLU), average length of T-unit, mean number of verbarguments, learners’ use of vocabulary (lexical complexity), and othermeasures such as the number of different word families used, the ratio ofstructural to content words, and the ratio of lexical to copula verbs (Ellis2005a, p 155)

The measures offluency are

(i) Temporal variables: (a) speech/writing rate (b) number of pauses; (c) pauselength; (d) length of run;

(ii) Hesitation phenomena: (a) false starts; (b) repetitions; (c) reformulations; and(d) replacements (Ellis2005a, p 137)

“This requires an investigation of temporal variables such as rate of production(for example, the number of syllables produced per minute of speech) or thenumber and length of pauses and of hesitation phenomena” (Ellis2005a, p 140)

A consideration of the concepts in SLA research leads to the following conclusions:

a There is a need for exploring methods that focus on the relation between theteacher and the learner, on one hand, and the text source which is being tackled

by them, on the other hand Methods used till date are inadequate in explainingthe paradox of the dominating influence of the teacher on the learner in a class;and at the same time, the power of the task/text source to control the classroomdynamics Research in the area of the right method to promote SLA needs toexplore the cognitive processes that are triggered by a text source or task pre-sented in the classroom in the minds of the teacher and learner Researchersneed to search for the specific task features that draw the complete attention ofthe learner or teacher—individually—and the reasons for the same need to beexplored

b There is a need to give more freedom to the learner to select their own materials

to understand concepts which are a part of the syllabus This would solve twoproblems: (i) the learner would not have a problem comprehending the contents

of the book as the language of the self-chosen text would be of her proficiencylevel; (ii) the focus of a learner in the test performance would be on expressinghimself or herself rather than getting“pass” marks This would make a learnerfail-proof Research needs to be done in the area of exploring the reasons for alearner’s choice of a particular text or the reasons for opting for a text source

Similarly, there is a need tofind out the self-set standards of performance of thelearners.

c There is a dire need for more research into the role of various types of tasks inpromoting SLA It would also be interesting to study what preparation for atask/test is involved on the part of the learners

d New techniques of evaluation need to be researched and followed to judge thestudents’ performance Current evaluation techniques help a researcher differ-entiate learners rather than identify the common ingredients that separate arelatively successful learner vis-à-vis a particular task and a particular teacherand her methods and methodologies In the learner language research, the focushas been on either the individual linguistic features or the features in a particulartask performance: accuracy,fluency, and complexity There is a need to evaluate

a student’s task performance with reference to the teacher, task features andstudent’s level of proficiency—all together, along with the student’s attitudinalfactors In short, a holistic approach needs to be researched and followed

e Learner language needs to be explored further In first language studies, forexample, the proficiency level and language quality of a child are determined bythe kind of feedback and prompts that the mother or caretaker provides.Similarly, for a second language learner, the teacher and the quality of teachingneed to be considered in detail

f The current theories of SLA somehow are inadequate when applied to thecomplexities of classroom dynamics Till now, the studies in SLA have largelyconcentrated on

i Role of input in SLA

ii Role of output in SLA

iii Role of input processing in SLA

iv Role of output processing in SLA

v Task performance and its contribution to SLA

However, the process of SLA is much wider and more complicated involvingmany issues In a multilingual and multicultural country like India, a qualitativetheory of SLA has to be formulated Therefore, there is a call for the process of SLAneeds to be explored more thoroughly and what constitutes SLA and who can besaid to have acquired the second language—all need to be researched in the Indianclassrooms by taking into account both the stakeholders, teachers, and students asequal participants

1.4 Perspective for Our Studies of SLA: Spoken

and Written Output

Barcelos and Kalaja (2011), in their editorial to the second special issue of System

on“Beliefs about SLA”, present 11 papers which are based on studies that deal withbeliefs (of teachers and learners) in SLA

…the studies tend to view beliefs as variable and fixed, and focus on changes in these and/or on the interaction between beliefs and learner or teacher actions, acknowledging their relationship to be a complex one (p 281)

Further, about the nature of beliefs, the papers confirm that

… they are context-dependent, in a number of cases variable even within one and same context or over time – and at the same time constant – complex, discursively constructed through negotiation, dynamic and contradictory (pp 285 –286)

These views are highly relevant to the studies presented in this book

1.4.1 Attitudes and Expectations of the Learners

Why does language acquisition get so trivialized when it comes to the classroom,where it becomes just a subject to be studied to answer a full-length paper at the end

of the academic semester/year? A study of the various theories of SLA does notseem to reflect the ambiguities and the sheer helplessness of the teacher to make thelearner realize the importance of language acquisition as a crucial factor inknowledge acquisition and communication

For example, in an engineering college, where various courses are offered onengineering (e.g., electronics and communication engineering, electronics andelectrical engineering, mechanical engineering, informational technology, computerscience, biotechnology), the acquisition of English (which is the medium ofinstruction in most institutions of higher learning, especially in science and tech-nology) is essential to comprehend and produce knowledge It is essential for ateacher to be updated about the latest developments in the field of science andengineering; and for the student to have the wherewithal to survive in a competitiveworld

Why is it that students do not realize the importance of attaining proficiency inEnglish and acquisition of study skills for their own professional growth? This hasbeen troubling us for many years now Existing theories of SLA (mostly Western)

do not seem to acknowledge the gravity of the situation Caught up in the whirlpool

of syntax, morphology, semantics and phonology and pragmatics, problems inapproach to English language acquisition, and communication in general somehowseem to have lost importance As a result, whether it be Chomsky’s view onlanguage acquisition or Krashen’s comprehensible input and monitoring theories,Swain’s output hypothesis, or the only Indian researcher who is pertinent to theIndian context of the study—Prabhu’s communicational task approach to promoteSLA—all seem inadequate in understanding the “attitude” problem of Indianlearners who seem to look at English as a subject where some topics have to bemastered to enable them to pass the exams The reluctance to express themselveswithout the compulsions of exams has to be, somehow, tackled byteacher-researchers of SLA

1.5 The Importance of Language in Higher Education

The importance of language, which is almost like the nervous system of humanexistence, has been well understood by ancient Sanskrit scholars (Sanskrit being thelanguage of science in ancient India) who have stated things like

jite jihvam / jite sarvey

[One who conquers the tongue rules the world]

and

sahanavavatu sahanav gunaktu / sahaveeryam karanavahai / tejasvi navadhitamastu /

ma vidvishavahai / om shanti, om shanti, om shanti

[May God protect us both (teacher and student), may God nourish us both, may we work together with energy and vigour, may our study provide knowledge and not give rise to ill feelings]

Taittiriya Upanishad, Katha Upanishad, Mandukya Upanishad and

Shvetashvatara Upanishad

Students will not feel that language acquisition is only required to get pass grades

in an exam but is needed for their own professional and personal development, onlywhen the combined efforts of the teacher and student are put together with peace,harmony, and positive feeling, in reading a text for comprehension and futureproduction Giving constant and qualitative feedback to the student in an attempt toappreciate the hard work put in by a student may bring about attitude change Thismay make the student less exam oriented and help her follow a more holisticapproach to acquire the language of science The student begins to see the acqui-sition of English as the acquisition of a macrocosmic view of the world and her owngrowth as an individual tofit into the wider world—as an expansion of her micro-cosmic world view given by language/s acquired in her early life development Thefirst language/s give/s a world view restricted to the community from where shecomes: parents, neighbours, relatives, and teachers, peers, classmates, friends,teachers, seniors at college and books, papers or any written things that she reads,and English acquired as a means to higher education helps expand her world view.The microcosmic view of the world given by thefirst language/s is constrained

by the variables mentioned above, whereas the macrocosmic view is constrained bythe teacher of English who provides the view as well as the materials and methodsused by him/her in the classroom If the methods, materials provided by the teachermotivate the learner enough to do self-study outside the classroom, then the learnergoes for authentic materials available outside through media or net and acquiresEnglish language by self-study

As long as the teacher does not actively participate in the dynamics of languagelearning in the classroom situation—whether in terms of the selection of topics,materials, handling the syllabus, evaluative techniques, and everything connected withthe learner—the student will continue to look at an English class as a compulsory bitterpill that has to be swallowed to“pass” the English paper at the end of the semester

1.5.1 The Indian Setting for Our Studies on SLA

in Classrooms

English for Science and Technology (EST) became prominent during the late 1960sand the early 1970s Hutchinson and Waters (1987) give credit to Selinker, Ewerand Latorre, Swales, and Trimble who have been initiators in thefield of EST.David Carter (1983) recognized English for Specific Purposes (ESP) as arestricted language Hutchinson and Waters (1987) have divided ESP into threebranches: (a) English for Science and Technology (EST); (b) English for Businessand Economics (EBE), and (c) English for Social Studies (ESS) They have beenfurther demarcated into two branches: English for Academic Purposes (EAP) andEnglish for Occupational Purposes (EOP)

Hutchinson and Waters (1987) agree that there is no clear demarcation betweenEAP and EOP and they can together be treated under the same term ofESP Though thefinal aim for both EAP and EOP are the same; the path taken isvery different as Cummins (1979) has clearly stated that their focus is very different.Two characteristics of ESP, i.e., absolute and variable features, have been specif-ically defined by Strevens in 1988 Dudley-Evans and St John (1998) have seg-regated the absolute characteristics of ESP and elaborated the concept further withmore variable characteristics

After the 1980s, there has been a thrust on ESP, but rather than talking about thelearners’ specific needs, researchers focused more on register-specific needs In thelast three decades, due to the unprecedented pace of technological development, thethrust has been on science and technology and a formulaic language is accepted asthe language for science and technology Language has been absolutely the lowestpriority in our education system Educationists and education planners have for-gotten that language, a product of human cognition, is a means to cognition as well.Learning languages enriches and enhances cognition Educationists fail to recog-nize the fact that the failure of education system, especially at the primary level, cansometimes be entirely attributed to the failure of language education

The Indian education system, just like the rest of the modern world, has ported science and technology, engineering and management, and commerce in thelast three or four decades Progress is dependent on science and technology, nodoubt, but language education is absolutely essential even for the students of sci-ence and technology so that they can interpret, argue, and contest the results andfindings of scientific experiments with absolute clarity and conviction The presentstudy and itsfindings, will hopefully throw a new light on the concept of SLA, with

sup-a cognitive perspective within the confines of a classroom and a focus on the learnerand the process of learning, especially in mixed ability Indian classrooms.The acquisition of English is important to survive today The ancient Indianteaching tradition has put the teacher (guru) on a pedestal, with a status at par withthe three primal gods of the Hindu pantheon—“Brahma”, “Vishnu”, and

“Maheshwar” The guru is considered to be an omnipotent, omniscient, and almostinfallible human being The disciples would have unquestioned faith in the integrity

of the guru The evaluation of a disciple’s quality and knowledge level was donesolely by the guru However, in recent times, the scenario, perspectives and atti-tudes of both the teacher and the learner have changed for many reasons Some ofthem are listed below

1 The percentage of literates in India has increased in practically all the states ofIndia, though it is not reflected in the numbers of educated people Literacyprogrammes of the Government of India have given equal importance to edu-cation and language education for adults who have had no opportunity to go toschool This creates awareness in the minds of those who had earlier neverthought of sending their children to school They could now as an afterthoughtconsider of not depriving the younger generation of basic education

2 Democratization of education has increased opportunities for the leged to send their children to schools and later even to the professional col-leges The Right to Education (RTE) Act, 2009,1has also been instrumental inproviding education to all

underprivi-3 Caste-based barriers have reduced due to radical social reforms, including those

in thefield of education The government’s attempt has been to provide access

to education for people from all sections and castes of the society Education ismore readily available and this is one of the reasons for a larger number ofchildren going to school Access to education has definitely made a lot ofdifference In ancient India, education was only available to the privileged fewwhile large numbers were kept out of it In the last 100 years, education hasbecome more readily available to all irrespective of caste, class, and creed As aresult onefinds that education becomes a great leveller

4 New technological advancements and the explosion of media have created aglobal village The internet, computers, and information technology havechanged the attitudes and life style of Indians with much more informationreadily available to far corners of the country

5 Transport, communication, and information systems have changed the concepts

of distance, and have contributed to the increase in the exchange of cultures.Mobile telephony and mobile internet use has increased manifold in the lastdecade, changing youth culture and approach to education and information inmajor ways

6 Globalization and revolutionary trends in commerce and business haveincreased the demand for learning English (as an international language) andother foreign languages The Internet generation learner is highly independent inthinking and bombarded with information from various media channels Thelearners receive information of their choice through the Internet, mobile, andother electronic devices In a context like the present one, the dominating role of

a teacher is questioned The learner is also equipped with a lot of informationbefore she enters the classroom

1 Refer to the Ministry of Human Resource Development ’s website: http://mhrd.gov.in/rte , for more details.

7 In this changing and growing world, Asian cultures have changed a lot Just asthe parent–child relationship has changed and increasingly it is seen as chil-dren’s right to reason, argue, and discuss with parents, similarly the relationshipbetween guru and shishya has also transformed The teacher and student todayhave become more interactive both within and outside classrooms Students doquestion and they are given the right to question They have become activeparticipants in the class instead of being mere passive observers The supremacyand infallibility of the guru are challenged or questioned In this changed sce-nario, both teachers and students need to redefine their roles to develop inter-active and positive learning environments within the classroom.

1.5.2 The Objectives and Scope

1.5.2.1 SST—Seminar Speech Task

The study is cross-sectional, partly quantitative and partly qualitative, and focusesonly on the spoken output (seminar speech) of the participants Pauses, hesitations,false starts, and intonations have been recorded and analysed The number ofparticipants was limited to 15

In a mixed ability classroom, the study intends want to find out that onceassigned a task what kind of preparation goes into it Two dimensions of priorpreparation: cognitive preparation and linguistic preparation, which also reflect intheir spoken output, were examined The Seminar Speech Task (SST) study wasconducted at the Vivekananda School of Languages, a part of Ramakrishna Muth,Hyderabad (South India)

For our purposes, the third author followed a rough and intuitive categorization

of the participants as “good”, “okay”, and “poor” speakers of English, based onpersonal experience with them as their teacher, the intuitions of other fellowteachers, and participants’ performance in the selected task (discussed below); aswell as their overall performance on the course

The course—a typical part-time proficiency course in English for adult secondlanguage learners—is called a Junior Certificate Course in Spoken English,administered by the Vivekananda School of Languages

The course, as its name suggests, aims to develop the speech skills of those whoenroll However, the instruction is not confined to “spoken English” in the sense ofeither phonetics or elocution, as the brief description below will make clear Thestudents have a prescribed course book, and a workbook The course book consists

of reading passages with exercises on grammar items (pronouns, adjectives, articles,prepositions, verbs, and sentence patterns), composition (letter writing), vocabulary(synonyms, antonyms, one-word substitutes, homophones, homonyms, interchange

of parts of speech and words liable to be confused), comprehension (of descriptive,factual, narrative passages), and phonetics (consonant sounds, vowel sounds,diphthongs and accent); and also punctuation The workbook consists of exercises

for further practice in the topics in the course book In the phonetics chapter in theworkbook, exercises for pronunciation practice are given.

After admission, students are given a diagnostic test to stream them into varioussections depending on the marks they secure The diagnostic test ascertains thestudents’ knowledge of basic grammar, their knowledge of vocabulary and theircomprehension skills The duration of the course is 5 months, with two classes aweek, each of 2 h’ duration (i.e., 4 h a week for 20 weeks) The minimum entrancelevel, as mentioned earlier, is a school-leaving (SSC, or Class X) certificate

1.5.2.2 WTPT—Written Test Performance Task

The Written Test Performance Task (WTPT) study was conducted in an neering college at Israna, Panipat district in the state of Haryana (North India), andexplores the various mechanisms and processes involved in the processing of awritten text in English by a group of 15 students (who are undergraduates ofbiotechnology, in thefinal year of the 4-year B.Tech course) They have a coursecalled Communicative Skills in English for Professional Practices, which is a totallyinternally evaluated course The students have three lectures of 55 min durationeach per week in a semester of 6 months

engi-The study is cross-sectional, partly quantitative, and partly qualitative engi-Theparticipants were asked to collect source materials (minimum three) on a topic oftheir choice within a time period of 3 days Then, they had to give a speech on thetopic (based on the script prepared by them) in front of the class Soon after thespeech, they were asked to take a written test based on the speech

The responses of the written test were analysed using ten criteria: Number ofIdea Units (C1); MLU (C2); Errors (C3); Self-corrections (C4); Clarity (C5);Creativity (C6); Dependence on Script (C7); Criticism (C8); Discourse Structure(C9); and New Vocabulary (C10)

Performance of a participant is compared in two ways

1 The participant’s own performance as a speaker and as a listener

2 The participant’s performance as compared to the others in response to the textproduced by the others

1.5.3 The Experimental Tasks

1.5.3.1 The SST

Students’ knowledge of grammar rules, comprehension, vocabulary, and theirwriting skills are tested in a written examination which is afinal examination con-ducted at the end of the 5-month course This examination carries a weightage ofabout 53 % in thefinal assessment There is an oral test (viva) besides the written

examination, at the end of the course This oral examination tests the spoken English

of the students and carries a weightage of about 33 % in thefinal assessment

In addition, there is an ongoing task called a “seminar”, which carries aweightage of about 13 % in the final assessment The total marks allotted for thefinal assessment is 150 Out of this, 80 marks are for the written test and 50 for theviva; 20 are for the seminar

The seminar is a form of internal assessment This task actually entails a briefspeech, for a time of about 3 min, by every student It is conducted at the end of everymonth during the 5-month course (In the last month, the month-end seminar is notconducted as the students have to take thefinal examination and viva) Twenty marksare allotted for each seminar In the final assessment, the average of the marksobtained in the four seminars is taken; and the marks are calculated out of a total of 20.For each month-end seminar, learners are given a set of topics, 3 days ahead ofthe seminar They thus come“prepared” for speech performance, on topics givenbeforehand (Hence, the use of the term “prepared” speech performance) Thisseminar task was selected to gather data for the investigation to see what speakers

do when they have to perform in a second language with inadequate linguisticcompetence, but are given time to“prepare” The situation seemed tailor-made forthe occurrence of both acquired and learnt elements

From our experience we can say that student preparation normally takes twoforms: cognitive preparation and linguistic preparation Cognitive preparation is theorganization of thoughts and ideas which the learner wants to express, and theirordering into a convincing discourse Linguistic preparation includes the speaker’sattempts tofind (in advance) the language to express her thoughts

Let us pause here to give a more precise characterization of the notion oflinguistic preparation To what extent is such preparation possible, or useful?Observe that linguistic preparation cannot be equated with activating the “learnt”system (which, it is assumed, cannot initiate utterances) Nor can it be mere rotelearning or the learning offixed expressions and formulae (routines and patterns).This is because the task requires not isolated responses, but a meaningful 3-mindiscourse: i.e., it requires the learner to be able to initiate utterances

To reiterate, it was assumed in accordance with the views of Krashen, that thelearnt linguistic system cannot be used to initiate utterances The learnt system or itselements act only as a monitor The problem faced by the second language speakerthen is: How are they to initiate utterances? Their linguistic competence is meagre,although they do have a certain degree of linguistic competence which can beassumed to be a result of 5–6 years of exposure to English as a second language Insuch a situation, speakers might

1 depend upon (insufficiently) acquired grammar

2 use the additional resource of “borrowed” language (including prefabricatedroutines and patterns)

3 rely on the surface structure of thefirst language, and attempt to make changes

or corrections using conscious grammar, the monitor

An interesting point to remember is that“borrowed” language may itself be oftwo kinds Thus, a part of it could be within the domain of the acquired competence

of the speaker; or just enough beyond it, to undergo assimilation into (and modication of) that competence, in the act of borrowing (One here may visualize the act

fi-of borrowing as an input, and the borrowed language as i + 1, in Krashen’s terms).One may also visualize the act of borrowing as the stimulation of“passive” com-petence That is, although competence is theoretically neutral between the receptiveand productive skills, it is a truism that receptive skills outstrip the productive ones inthe course of language learning Thus a part of“preparation” might be the transfer oflanguage from passive to active domains of performance, through rehearsal.However, it is possible that a part of“borrowed” language is quite beyond theacquired competence of the speaker; in which case they resort to theroutine-and-patterns strategy, or rote learning (memorization)

There also arises another question Let us assume that cognitive preparation andlinguistic preparation go together for the learner What happens when the speakerremembers the thought content they have rehearsed, but does not have the language

to express it—whether acquired language, or “borrowed” language? Anticipatingthe results, one might say that if the speaker in the seminar remembers the thoughtcontent they have rehearsed, but does not have the language to express it (acquiredlanguage or borrowed language?), they

1 abandon the thought completely, and pick up the next thought that they cameprepared with;

2 make a series of attempts to remember or recall the language, as revealedthrough false starts

3 end up producing an utterance that is incoherent

The task had the following stages:

Stage 1 The participants select text sources to make an oral presentation on theirfavourite topic The minimum number of text sources was three There was nomaximum limit

Stage 2 The participants were given a uniform preparation time of 3 days Theyprepared a script for the seminar task

Stage 3 Each participant presented his or her seminar in front of the other 14.Stage 4 Each of the seminars was followed by a written test which had contentquestions (on the topic) prepared by the teacher-researcher Each of the 15 par-ticipants thus gave speeches to the other 14 participants Each participant, thus, took

15 tests In every test the participants had to answer two questions The questionswere framed by the researcher after listening to the speeches of the 15 subjectsalong with the rest of the students in the class

The written test is the main source for data analysis and interpretation So, it will

be discussed in detail here

a Script (note-making): Note-making involves the writing of an essay on the topicchosen by a subject Notes range from mere copying of certain important pointsfrom the text source to a properly written essay after considering the informationfrom various sources

b Topics: Topics chosen by the subjects for the task are very useful in getting aninsight into the attitude of a subject towards the task and test Topics range fromvery general ones like hostel life, success in life and so on to technical topicslike hypnotism, biotechnology, and so on

c Choice of questions: Participants’ choice of questions reveals their attitudetowards the task, test, teacher, and success in exam and so on This is veryimportant as it reveals the mismatch between proficiency level and testperformance

d Notes taken (speaker-wise): The notes taken by the subjects while listening tothe seminars of others reveals a lot about their proficiency level, listening skill,attitude towards the task and test, and so on The length and format of the notesthrow light on the psychology of the subject

All the four stages in the task preparation are important for data analysis Thus,the experimental data was from three sources: i self-chosen input: (text inputsources chosen by the subjects); ii script (or essay prepared by the subject); iii.speech (recorded and transcribed in normal spelling) The comparative data wasfrom the written test (written responses of two per subject per topic) The responses

of the speakers were compared to the responses of the listeners on all the 15occasions

Carter, D (1983) Some propositions about ESP [J] The ESP Journal, 2, 131 –137.

Corder, S P (1967) The signi ficance of learner’s Errors International Review of Applied Linguistics, 5(2 –3), 161–169.

Crookes, G (1989) Planning and interlanguage variation Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 11(4), 367 –383.

Cumming, A (1990) Writing expertise and second language pro ficiency Language Learning, 39,

81 –141.

Cummins, J (1979) Cognitive/academic language pro ficiency, linguistic interdependence, the optimum age question and some other matters Working Papers on Bilingualism, 19, 121 –129 Curran, C A (1972) Counseling-learning: A whole-person model for education New York: Grune and Stratton.

Dudley-Evans, T., & St John, M (1998) Developments in ESP: A multi-disciplinary approach Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Ellis, R (2005a) Analyzing learner language London: Oxford University Press.

Ellis, R (2005b) Measuring implicit and explicit knowledge of a second language: A psychometric study Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 27(2), 141 –172.

Faerch, C., et al (1984) Learner language and language learning England: Multilingual Matters Gattegno, C (1963) Teaching foreign languages in schools: The silent way New York: Educational Solutions.

Hutchinson, T., & Waters, A (1987) English for speci fic purposes: A learning-centered approach Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Jayaseelan, K A (1996) Should the language acquisition device be a ‘Black Box’ to the language teacher? Indian Journal of Applied Linguistics, 22(2), 41 –56 (p 46).

Krashen, S D (1985) The input hypothesis: Issues and applications London: Longman Krashen, S D., & Terrell, T D (1983) The natural approach: Language acquisition in the classroom.

Kumaradas, S (1993) A case for learner-chosen texts as input in adult language learning M Phil thesis, CIEFL, Hyderabad.

Narang, V (Ed.) (2006) Contemporary themes and issues in language pedagogy Delhi: Book Plus.

Nunan, D (1998) Language teaching methodology London: Longman.

Ortega, L (1999) Planning and focus on form in L2 oral performance Studies in Second Language Acqusition, 21, 109 –148.

Robinson, P (2001) Task complexity, task dif ficulty and task production: exploring interactions in

a componential framework Applied Linguistics, 22, 27 –57.

Saville-Troike, M (2006) Introducing SLA Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Selinker, L (1972) Interlanguage International Review of Applied Linguistics, 10, 209 –231 Skehan, P (1989) Individual differences in second language learning London: Edward Arnold Skehan, P (1996a) A framework for the implementation of task-based instruction Applied Linguistics, 17, 38 –62.

Skehan, P (1996b) Second language acquisition research and task-based instruction In J Willis,

& D Willis (Eds.), The challenge and change in language teaching Oxford: Heinemann Skehan, P (1998a) A cognitive approach to language learning Oxford: Oxford University Press Skehan, P (1998b) Task-based instruction Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 18, 268 –286 Stevick, E W (1989) Success with foreign languages: Seven who achieved it and what worked for them New York: Prentice Hall.

Strevens, P (1988) ESP after twenty years: A re-appraisal In M Tickoo (Ed.), ESP: State of the Art (pp 1 –13) Singapore: SEAMEO Regional Centre.

Swain, M (1985) Communicative competence: Some roles of comprehensible input and comprehensible output in its development In S Gass & C Madden (Eds.), Input in SLA Rowley, MA: Newbury House.

Swain, M., & Lapkin, S (1995) Problems in output and the cognitive processes they generate: A step towards second language learning Applied Linguistics, 16(3), 371 –391.

Varalakshmi, V (1993) Acquired and learnt elements in the ‘Prepared’ speech performance of adult learners of English Unpublished M.Phil Thesis Hyderabad, India: EFLU.

Certain Theoretical Concepts in SLA

Research on Speech and Writing

Abstract This chapter provides an overview of literature on SLA research Certaintheoretical notions—competence and performance, learning and acquisition, lan-guage deployment, input and information processing—which are relevant for bothspoken and written tasks are discussed Concepts related to speech production in thestudies on spoken output—concept of fluency, role of imitation, speech production

infirst language, errors and self-monitoring, utterance initiation in a second guage, prefabricated language—are revisited The studies on written output focus indetail on various methods studied from the input and information-processing per-spective It also portrays the international and national scenarios in the field ofapplied linguistics and language teaching Mixed ability classes are discussed in thebackdrop of the Indian ELT scenario

lan-Keywords Error frequency
Errors and self-monitoring
Fluency strategy
Input
Intake
Output and input processing (model)

in the studies on both spoken and written outputs, whereas the second section isdevoted solely to spoken output and the third section is devoted to written output In

© Springer India 2016

V Narang et al., Second Language Acquisition in Multilingual

and Mixed Ability Indian Classrooms, DOI 10.1007/978-81-322-2604-8_2

23

Sect.2.2, the discussion begins with four related sets of ideas about languageacquisition, those of Noam Chomsky and John Macnamara for L1 and S.D.Krashen and N.S Prabhu for L2 According to Chomsky (1959,1965), language isspecies-specific, and language learning occurs when the language acquisitiondevice (LAD), or faculte de langage, of a child is activated when it has to cope withthe primary linguistic data presented to it Further, according to Macnamara (1973),

a language acquisition device is initiated by the child determining, independent oflanguage, the meaning which a speaker intends to convey to it, and then workingout the relationship between the meaning and the expression it hears Languageacquisition comes, then, from the child’s need to understand and express itself.Two closely related views on second language acquisition are those of Krashenand Prabhu Krashen’s (1985) input hypothesis claims that humans acquire lan-guage in only one way—by understanding messages or by receiving “compre-hensible input” Krashen makes a difference between “learning” (a consciousprocess that results in knowing about a language) and“acquisition” (the subcon-scious internalization of a language system) Based on this distinction, Krashenposits the monitor hypothesis that acquired competence is utilized for utteranceinitiation, while learning (conscious knowledge) serves only as an editor or monitor(i.e given time, focus on form and explicit knowledge of the rule concerned).According to Prabhu (1987), second language acquisition occurs subconsciouslywhen the learner is involved in“meaning-focused activity” Jayaseelan (1996) gives

a convincing argument that structures need not be learned Structures come outfrom the meanings of words following completely universal principles embodied inthe LAD

In Sect.2.2certain theoretical notions related to both spoken and written tasksare discussed Important aspects such as competence and performance, learning andacquisition, language deployment, input and information processing which arerelevant for both spoken and written tasks are discussed The overlap between thetwo is inevitable because some of the theoretical concepts arising out offirst lan-guage acquisition research are pertaining to acquisition research without anyspecific reference to the spoken or the written output In addition to these concepts,the spoken and written tasks have some characteristic features Though there are afew overlaps, but for the sake of clarity, we further present them under two separateheadings Input and information, for example, are important for both spoken andwritten performance, but the studies concerning the processing of input andinformation conducted on spoken tasks are few so they are revisited in the separatesection of written tasks

In the second Sect.2.3Studies on Spoken Output fluency, role for imitation inlearning to speak, speech production infirst language, errors and self-monitoring,utterance initiation in a second language and prefabricated language are discussed.The third Sect.2.4Studies on Written Output notes that studies on written outputhave either focused only on input or output per se There have been:

(a) Output studies: error analysis (Corder 1967); contrastive analysis (1940s–1950s); study of interlanguage (Selinker1972); routines and patterns or for-mulaic expressions (Brown, Scarcella—1970s); lexical phrases and colloca-tions (Ellis—1990s); word formation techniques (vocabulary studies); learnerstrategies (1990s); individual differences (Skehan—1990s) based on perfor-mance; learner language studies (Ellis2005b), and so on.

(b) Input studies: The role of comprehensible input in SLA (Krashen 1985) andthe role of comprehensible output in SLA (Swain1985) where the output isalso the input for SLA have been studied intensively

2.2 Certain Theoretical Notions Related to Language

Production

In his Aspects of the Theory of Syntax, Chomsky (1965, p 4) made a distinctionbetween competence and performance Competence was defined as “thespeaker-hearer’s knowledge of his language’’ Performance was defined as “theactual use of language in concrete situations’’ Performance could not directly

reflect competence, for a record of natural speech would show “numerous falsestarts, deviations from rules, changes of plan in mid-course and so on’’ Chomsky(1965, p 4) The problem was to determine, from the data of performance, theunderlying system of rules that had been mastered by the speaker—hearer, whichconstituted his “competence’’ or “knowledge of the language’’ Thecompetence-performance distinction is crucial to our argument The data for thestudy is second language performance data It has been hypothesized that thespeakers rely not only on their competence, i.e internalized linguistic ability in thelanguage, but also on other mental faculties like memory and consciously learntrules of language Crucially, then, performance in the data is an even more indirect

reflection of competence than in the native speaker

2.2.2 Distinctions Similar to the Learning —Acquisition

We may view the terms or descriptions in Column I as pertaining to the creation

of meaning and being utterance-based, and those in Column II to the creation of thelanguage forms and being sentence-based

In Second Language Pedagogy, Prabhu (1987) presents the notion of languagedeployment In normal language use, the user’s conscious mind is occupied withthe meaning content that is being exchanged, an internal linguistic competence isoperating simultaneously at an unconscious level, ensuring conformity to gram-matical norms The formal learning of language in school produces a child who canuse his knowledge of the language to pass in the examination, i.e to answerform-centred questions, but is unable to use it for communication The notion ofdeployment is to be related to the notion of utterance initiation, and the distinctionKrashen makes has to be related to the learning-acquisition distinction

2.2.4 Input Processing

There are, comparatively, very few studies on input processing as such Bill VanPatten (theory of SLA with focus on input processing where he makes a distinctionbetween “meaning” vs “form” focus of learners); Peter Skehan (through taskperformance studies from various perspectives); Allen Bialystok (in the area ofinput processing in bilinguals); and Nick Ellis (on vocabulary acquisition pro-cessing studies and sequencing in SLA) are some of the few SLA researchers whohave contributed a lot to thisfield of research

Table 2.1 Learning and acquisition-type distinctions

b Skill using Skill getting (Rivers 1972 )

c Acquisition Learning (Krashen 1976 )

d Implicit knowledge Explicit knowledge (Bialystok and Frohlich 1977)

e Expression rules Reference rules (Widdowson 1978 )

f Fluency Accuracy (Brum fit 1979 )

Source Brum fit ( 1984 , p 37)