SLA position paper

7/28/2019 SLA position paper

1/26

Component 4: Language, Language Learning, and Teaching from the Perspective of a 1

Practicing Teacher Zhengzheng Wu MATFL

My students at the Defense Language Institute (DLI) often ask me how I learned English.

Before and after my arrival in the United States I have constantly tried to improve my language

ability. Back in China, I excelled at learning English as a foreign language (FL), but my need for

using English in a social context was very limited. Therefore, my proficiency suffered. An

unprecedented personal breakthrough occurred after my arrival in the U.S.: English became my

second language (L2), a survival tool that I relied on to perform social functions. Social

interactions have given me ongoing opportunities to pick up new language features, and discover

the target forms that construct meanings effectively. Gradually, English grew beyond a mere

linguistic tool for my daily life. It enabled me to develop professionally. Owing to my language

skills I successfully completed my first U.S. graduate degree. I have also broadened my pursuit

of personal interests into realms that have required a high level of English literacy, such as

reading about Western art and history.

After I took up the profession of teaching Chinese to American adults, I began to

contemplate how my language learning influenced my teaching philosophy. I regard language as

a dynamic system that displays both regularity and flexibility in use. Besides its function to

enable communication, language is also a mediational tool for self-development. When

discussing successful language learning in the sense of achieving an advanced level of language

competence with fluency and accuracy (VanPatten, 2003), I deem input, grammatical language

use, and social interaction as the three most essential factors. As a FL Chinese teacher,

maximizing learners input, promoting noticing through output practice, and scaffolding

constitute the core of my teaching philosophy.


2/26



What is Language?

The notion of emergent grammar presents two contrasting traits inherent in language: Its

fixed constructions can be traced as stable, yet over time they continue to grow and change

through incorporation of new terms and shedding of archaic usages (Hopper, 1988). The

following discussion will mainly focus on language as a meaning-form associated system in

order to demonstrate its stability, as well as highlight its flexible side. In addition to examining

language from a cognitive perspective, I will also address how language acts as a mediational

tool of ones thinking from a sociocultural (SCT) perspective.

A Dynamic System

Larsen-Freeman (2003) breaks language down into three interdependent subsystems:

form, meaning, and use. Form mainly represents what we can hear and see in how language is

represented, such as through sound and pronunciation, orthography, inflectional morphemes, and

grammatical structure; meaning encompasses literal and extended meanings of derivational

morphemes, singular words, and grammatical strings (multiple words); and use, or pragmatics,

refers to what speakers intend to convey by their language choice. Pragmatics highlights the

relationship of an utterance to its given context (Finegan, 2012).

Ellis (2007) describes language as a database consisting of associative form-meaning

mappings with specific functions such as pragmatics (language use). The three dimensions of

language as represented in form, meaning, and use are interconnected through multiple cross-

referential relationships. An associative disconnect between any of these two dimensions can

result in a breakdown of communication. For example, the noun phrasegreen lightcomprises an

adjectivegreen, and a head noun light. I used to think a linear correspondence existed between

the form, meaning, and use of this lexical string. I had only associated the meaning ofgreen


3/26



lightwith the traffic-controlling device. Its contextual use refers to a real-world object.

Therefore, I was completely puzzled when someone said to me one day, I will give hera green

lightif she asks me. Due to my unfamiliarity with the figurative meaning ofgreen lightas in

approval, I had to stop my interlocutor and ask him to explain what he meant. The context of

this particular conversation was a discussion about giving someone permission to do something.

The meaning was borrowed from the primary referent, the green signal in the traffic light that

indicates permission to pass; therefore, the use ofgreen lightto mean to approve bears a

metaphorical resemblance to the traffic-controlling device green light. Based on these two

instances, the noun phrasegreen lightpresents one written form, but two different semantic

references, and two different relationships to their corresponding contexts (two pragmatic uses).

The language example above points to the significance of varying contexts in language use.

Without knowledge of the specific context, one is unable to build a connection between form,

meaning, and use.

The two referential meanings ofgreen lightabove are commonly used in English.

Therefore, it is considered a relatively conventionalized and steady linguistic unit. However, new

metaphors are created by language users all the time based on conventionalized principles

(Finegan, 2012). This phenomenon illustrates the flexibility of language, as both an ever-

evolving process, and an outcome of growth (Larsen-Freeman, 1997). For example, for a long

time the word li ( in Chinese) had only one primary linguistic meaning, namely thunder, the

explosive noise from lightning. In recent years, due to the frenzy of online language coinages li

has been endowed with a brand new metaphor: an exceptionally stunning effect that resembles

the shock of thunder. As a result of this metaphorical meaning li has gained two new syntactic

uses in two widely popular forms. One acts as an adjective in the term li rn (in Chinese,


4/26



literally thunder person). It refers to a person whose conduct and/or speech is so absurd and

out of the norm that it has a thunderous effect. The other form bi li do (in Chinese,

passive marker + verb + resultative complement) is a verbal phrase in a passive voice where li

functions as an intransitive verb. Literally translated as be thunder-struck down, bi li do is

used to express an exaggerated feeling of shock with the negative connotation of disgust.

According to Larsen-Freeman (1997), the growth and changes of language are what best

captures language as a dynamic system. From a single-character noun li to the compound

noun li rn , and to the passive verbal phrase bi li do , new language forms are

grafted onto old language elements to take on new meanings in extended contexts. A new

meaning (e.g., metaphorical extension) assigned to the old form has led to the growth of new

forms, as well as new uses.

A Mediational Tool for Self-development

Language systems consist of bodies of interrelated coding symbols employed to describe

experiences and perceptions. To align our thoughts with linguistic symbols requires the efficient

mapping of form, meaning, and use. However, in my experience, whether it is in my first

language (L1), or L2 English, it has not always been a simple process, which is possibly due to

the fact that my perceptions do not always start off as a black-white picture. Rather, they are

subject to changes mediated by way of interaction. Mediate here refers to resolving conflicts,

whether real or perceived. For example, the other day I expressed a somewhat opinionated view

to an American friend that foreigners living in the U.S. should utilize their opportunity to go

beyond their cultural comfort zones to develop a greater interest in U.S. culture. He immediately

asked me to name some appealing aspects of U.S. culture. The first thing that came to mind was

the right to self-determination, which I interpreted as people being able to build their own lives


5/26



the way they see fit. The moment I uttered this thought, I saw the outright paradox with my

original assumption that foreigners should learn to appreciate U.S. culture in a certain way.

Maybe it is precisely because people are able to choose their own life styles and cultural values

in the U.S. that the country has attracted immigrants from all over the world. As these thoughts

went through my mind I voiced my thinking to my friend until I decided to retract my initial

statement.

The conversation above exemplifies the mediational power of language. Similar to

physical tools we use to change the world around us, the power of language as a symbolic tool

resides in its use in action: its meaning-making capacity (Lantolf, 2011, p. 25). Through this

particular capacity, Lantolf (2011) reminds us that interaction in early L1 development is not

about language itself but about learning other things, which leads to self-development. Lantolfs

model of dialogical interaction reveals the significant interplay between the social and

psychological aspects of language. In other words, learning begins with interaction, but is then

consolidated within oneself through a cognitive process of rethinking ones original assumptions.

Also important to note is how this interplay, according to Lantolf, operates on the basis of a

minimum of two interlocutors. In my case, the interaction was triggered by my initiation of an

opinion, and then expanded by a request for elaboration from my friend. Such a request suggests

that the dialogue started on an interpsychological level. Later on when my friend made an

inquiry into my conclusion, I had to find an illustration to support my view, which prompted me

to cast doubt on my original view. At this point, the dialogue switched to an intrapsychological

plane. The latter involves a self-discourse between I and Me, where I was able to reflect on

the lack of coherence in my own utterances. As a result I discovered a deductive mismatch

between my opinion and the supporting example. When I abandoned my original view I gained a


6/26



deeper insight into how language is an indispensable tool through which one can understand U.S.

culture.

This encounter with my friend shows how I started with an ambiguous belief and

eventually arrived at a logically coherent perspective. My fulfilled self-reflection and deepened

understanding of U.S. culture amount to self-improvement. However, I could not have done this

without the mediational tool of language triggered by social interaction.

What is Language Learning?

Back in China, my English study was devoid of social use in context. As a self-motivated

learner, I paid close attention to the use of new language features in input to increase my

language repertoire. I was considered in the upper range among my peers in English skills.

However, my confidence in English plummeted into an abyss of self-doubt upon my arrival in

New York. There were many unknown meanings of otherwise familiar words (e.g., the story of

green light), legions of idiomatic expressions (e.g., chin up means do not get defeated), and most

crushingly, I was at a sheer loss when it came to writing an academic paper or doing a formal

oral presentation in English.

Looking back I would not indiscriminately dismiss my English study in China as a waste

of time. Instead, my early habit of noticing carried me a long way to gain greater language

accuracy. Via daily interactions with my current L2 community, I have fully realized the other

two critical factors that facilitate language acquisition: widened and enhanced input, as well as

frequent interaction with English users more competent than myself. To integrate my learning

experiences from both China and the U.S., and to build on my earlier examination of what I

consider language to be, my discussion of language learning will mainly focus on three aspects:

process varied input, noticing, and social interaction.


7/26



Process Varied Input

VanPatten (2003) defines input as the language that a learner hears (or reads) that has

some kind of communicative intent (p. 25). Input shapes the basis of language acquisition

(Gass, 1997). Due to its communicative purpose, input for language acquisition requires making

the information comprehensible for what is known as input processing (VanPatten, 2003, p.

29). Language examples, fixed and emergent, consist of countless associative mappings of

meaning, form, and use. To encounter, comprehend, and internalize them requires exposure to

extensive input over time.

Language input for me comes in the form of picking up new terms from context on a

daily basis. The order in which language representations appear seems to be linked with ones

life experiences. For example, I enjoy reading the often effervescent CD reviews written by

enthusiasts of classical music on Amazon.com before making a purchase. In those reviews, I

often encounter formulaic chunks, such as technical prowess and individualistic interpretation

that I can apply to describe my musical experience. On other occasions, encountering new

features of language use can be completely random. The metaphorical use ofgreen lightthat

emerged in an unplanned incidence of social interaction prompted me to adjust my literal

interpretation to the speaker's intent. The implication is that learners should expand their

language input cross a wide range of topics, pragmatic uses, and sociolinguistic situations in

order to pick up new language examples.

As mentioned above, input useful for language acquisition needs to be comprehensible

(VanPatten, 2003). The academic readings from my first semester of graduate school exceeded

my reading proficiency level. The inputs complexity in syntactic structures, context-specific

vocabulary, and the prerequisite cultural and historical background knowledge all presented


8/26



gigantic challenges to my ability to comprehend those reading assignments. To bridge the

massive learning gaps, I had to spend lengthy hours to quickly expand my vocabulary,

familiarize myself with the syntactic structures and rhetorical styles of academic language, and

enhance my topical and background knowledge in U.S. public policy. By the end of the second

semester, my L2 academic reading skills had improved greatly. As my reading comprehension

grew, so did my competence in academic language use, such as writing academic papers and

doing formal oral presentations.

My personal struggles with language learning serve as a daily reminder of the importance

of exposing learners to varied input as well as making that input comprehensible for processing.

Details regarding the teaching techniques I utilize to address these two focal points can be found

in the later section, What is Language Teaching?.

Notice Target Forms

L2 language proficiency demands rule-based grammatical accuracy and complexity

(Skehan, 1998). As pointed out by Larsen-Freeman (2003), grammar concerns accuracy in form

as well as creating an effective meaning. Without English grammatical skills, I would have had

great difficulty conveying what I intended to say. Grammar is therefore the interconnecting point

of form, meaning, and use. To be able to say what I want to say drove me to consciously notice

target forms from the very beginning. This noticing involves two subprocesses of conscious

activity: detection of the occurrence of a stimulus event, and subsequent storage in long-term

memory (Schmidt, 1994, p. 197). The latter is associated with learners intake, defined as

linguistic data held in working memory and made available for future processing (VanPatten,

2003, p. 117). Schmidt (1990, 1995, 2001) claims that language features that have been noticed

by learners have a better potential to become intake.


9/26



For instance, here is a recent example of how I used noticing to my advantage as a

language learner. One morning I ran into a working-mom friend at the gym. I asked her, When

do you need to drop your kids offthe school? She stared at me for a second and asked, Did you

mean when I take them to school? I confirmed her recast, but sensed right away that I must

have said something off in the first place. I asked if I had confused her in my question. She

then explained the differences in meaning between drop offa place and drop off ata place. The

language example I produced gave the impression that she would literally drop the kids off from

the top of the school. However, with the insertion of the locative preposition at, the grammatical

rule mandates that the place coming after it is where the kids will be taken.

My personal experience resonates with Schmidt and Frotas (1986) observation that the

learners noticing of mismatches between the target input and his/her output is a key factor in

making progress. My awareness of the possible difference between my output and the target

form caught my attention: I asked for corrective feedback from my native speaker (NS) friend,

and tried to register it in my mind. At this point, target input had transferred to uptake, or

learners response to feedback (Lyster & Ranta, 1997). First-time detection is perhaps the first

step towards internalization. According to Schmidt (1995), completed acquisition demands self-

activated attention to the target form in order to convert the input into intake. Shortly after this

incident when I needed to produce an utterance indicating to drop someone off, I mentally

checked if I needed to specify the location by inserting at. Through the continued act of

attending to the target form, the linguistic knowledge of this particular form was transferred into

my long-term memory (intake) which ensured an effective match between meaning and form.

Engage in Social Interaction


10/26



In my previous section on what language is, I discussed its use as a mediational tool and

underscored the importance of social interaction. Here, I extend that observation by elaborating

on the significance of social interaction in language learning.

My English study reached a turning point after I moved to New York from Beijing.

Participation in various social activities, such as taking classes, looking for an apartment, making

new friends, and exploring the kaleidoscopic locations of New York, led me to a host of brand

new experiences. As a result, I was able to broaden the scope of my language input, discover

new target forms, and compare my own output against the target input.

Discussions on the social aspects of language learning and development brings into focus

Vygotsky and his Zone of Proximal Development (ZPD). Vygotskys (1986) ZPD delineates the

distance between a novices independent ability in performing a certain task in the future and

his/her current ability in doing so under the guidance of a more capable and experienced

member. The SLA implication of ZPD is that language learners make progress in their language

proficiency through collaborating and interacting with language users with higher competence

(Lightbrown & Spada, 2006). My befriending a NS classmate in New York illustrates how

learning with a more capable peer through everyday social interaction greatly contributed to my

academic success and self-growth. My classmate was a diligent note-taker, enthusiastic reader,

and a thoughtful writer. She and I would carry on extensive discussions over school subjects

whenever time allowed, and I believe this helped my oral presentations in class.

Furthermore, by working with her on class assignments and group projects, I was able to

benefit from the scaffolded help she provided to clarify my thinking process. Scaffolding refers

to the guidance and feedback received by learners in the process of collaborating (Donato, 1994).

For example, she would listen to my ideas, proofread my portion of the group writing


11/26



assignments, and ask me to clarify my intended meanings if my language was unclear. When I

tried to restate or clarify my point she would sometimes challenge me to think differently. Other

times she would say, I think what you meant is and I would either feel enlightened, or

disagree with her, and offer further explanation. By drawing on her feedback and the guidance

she provided me, I gradually learned how to construct and articulate my points with precise

academic language, which marked the fulfillment of my self-development. Via interacting with a

more competent peer, as in Vygotskys model of ZPD, I witnessed the growth of my L2

proficiency as well as academic skills.

What is Language Teaching?

Based on the critical aspects of language learning discussed above I would like to

elaborate on three areas of language teaching that are closely related to my day-to-day classroom

practice: maximizing learners access to input, promoting learners noticing through output

practice, and using scaffolded tasks. In contrast to Van den Brandens (2006) more narrow

definition of task as communicative behavior that naturally arises from performing real-life

language tasks (p. 9), I have elected to go with Duff and Coughlans (1994) broader

interpretation of task as a behavioral blueprint with specified objectives provided to

subjects in order to elicit linguistic data (p. 175). The reason is simply that the latter definition

applies to all the tasks included in my lesson plan.

Maximize Learners Access to Input

Ellis (2005) asserts that the L2 should be treated not only as the object of instruction

but also the medium (p. 217). In a classroom, a teachers speech is a rich source of input.

However, the existence of comprehension gaps between NS teachers and non-native speaker

(NNS) students presents obstacles for language immersion. Incomprehensible input may be a


12/26



disservice to achieving the goal of language acquisition (Long, 1981; Wong, 2005). Therefore,

one challenge of language immersion is finding solutions to bridge comprehension gaps.

Negotiation for meaning (NFM) stands out as one solution. NFM represents adjustments made in

linguistic form, conversational structure and message content to remove communication

breakdowns between NS instructors and NNS learners (Long, 1996, p. 418).

Researchers (e.g., Long, 1983; Varonis & Gass, 1985a, 1985b) have reported on

commonly used devices of NFM, such as repetition, reformulation, and comprehension checks.

For instance, my students asked me to explain the meaning of a Chinese phrasepingwn de

gngzu ( in Chinese, literally level stable job), which appeared in a listening passage.

The phrase, composed of the adjectivepingwn de (in Chinese, meaningsteady) and the

noungngzu ( in Chinese, meaningjob), translates as a secure job. I first provided the

students a context: You do not have to worry about your job because you will always have it. I

looked around for a quick comprehension check: One student nodded and the rest still looked

puzzled. I asked the student who nodded to name one job commonly thought of aspingwn de.

She uttered dentist. Her answer brought out a few smiles but one student still looked puzzled.

So I drew on the board both a wavy line and a contrasting straight line. I pointed at the wavy line

and said b pngwn (, or not steady, b here is a negation word), and then referred to the

straight line aspngwn , followed by the repetition of my earlier explanation. As a result of

my using multiple NFM strategies such as reformulation, repetition, and relying on a graphical

aid, my students were all able to work out the meaning of the word.

Another key aspect of maximizing learners input is varied input. Language teachers

should diversify the classroom input in terms of genres, sources, pragmatic uses, and even

regional variants. Task 3 in my lesson plan exemplifies this principle. The DLI official textbook


13/26



material assigned to the class hour, an edited article regarding Chinese peoples weekend

activities, was written in dry, formal, and non-authentic language. To offset this, I found a

current video clip from YouTube featuring a Chinese-speaking foreigner interviewing Chinese

people about their weekend activities. Previously I have introduced other authentic materials in

the classroom to help the students develop a comfort zone with this kind of input. Drawing on

my familiarity with the DLI Chinese textbooks, I filtered through the key words and syntactic

structures in the video to ensure a high degree of working comprehension readiness. The video

contained a fair amount of language representations familiar to my students at that point in the

class. On the other hand, the video also featured some unknown colloquial, fun, and authentic

expressions for acquisition. Before watching the video I made the students read the videos title,

and then introduced the interview's topic to activate the learner's schemata (Hedgcock & Ferris,

2009). Via the aid of Chinese subtitles, reference resources, and NFM strategies, most of my

students were able to contribute to the peer oral report on the discussion question which I had

previously prepared (Appendix D in the lesson plan). Some of them even attempted to

incorporate the new expressions in their oral report from the video they just watched.

Enhance Noticing through Output Practice

As noted by Schmidt (1994) earlier, noticing involves two subprocesses: detecting, and

storage in long-term memory. More recently, Nassaji and Fotos (2011) argue that Focus on Form

grammar instruction can be both input-based and output-based. Furthermore, Swains (2005)

Output Hypothesis points out the inadequacy of input processing in L2 acquisition, but language

production can compensate for this. Output refers to language produced by learners for a

communicative purpose (VanPatten, 2003). Output is the critical trigger of noticing: While


14/26



producing/using the language, learners notice what language features they need to use to ensure

successful communication (Swain, 1995).

This noticing-enhancing function of output has been witnessed on a daily basis in my

classroom experience. Oftentimes my students have trouble saying what they want to say. My

responsibility is to find the right words and structures to help them complete their utterances.

When they orally reproduce what I say, I encourage them to note down their new linguistic

discovery (detecting). This note taking will remind them how to use the form correctly in the

future (long-term memory storage). Between input-based and output-based grammar instruction,

I believe working with the latter is more conducive to language learning, based on my classroom

observation.

Pre-task 2 in the lesson plan illustrates my effort to use output practice to enhance

noticing. In order to maximize output practice opportunities, I designed a small competition that

used an open-ended prompt to make students respond to a new grammar feature by drawing on

their personal experiences. Within a brief period of time they were asked to produce as many

responses as possible that were relevant to the prompt. Then they had to come up with their own

prompts with which to conduct peer interviews. As they walked around the classroom and talked

to their peers, their attention was drawn to the target grammar structure each time they used their

self-created prompt. When a peer asked for clarification of the meaning of the prompt, the

learner had to negotiate for meaning in order to facilitate communication which provided

additional opportunities for noticing.

Scaffold Learning Tasks

According to Lantolf (2000), Vygotskys notion of ZPD suggests that a novices future

ability to perform social tasks independently can be shaped and brought out by an experts


15/26



mediating guidance and collaboration. The concept of scaffolding is compatible with the ability-

enhancing guidance as described by the ZPD. Scaffolding requires consistent pursuit of learning

goals, nurturing support created by the mentor, and the novice's interest to participate in the

learning tasks (Wood, Bruner & Ross, 1976; see also Donato, 1994).

The prerequisites of scaffolding present two SLA pedagogical implications: The teacher

needs to identify (a) the interests as well as challenges of the students, and (b) appropriate

resources for guidance. As mentioned above, the authentic video I chose for the lesson plan

(Appendix D) features a foreigner who interviewed local Chinese people in his flawless Chinese.

My students immediately took an interest in his effortless way of interacting with ordinary NSs.

This video also presents a few challenges in listening comprehension: rapid speech rate, lack of

precise articulation, and prevalence of non-standard language use. The discussion question I

prepared (Appendix D) further defined the challenge. This task aimed to move the students from

comprehending the controlled presentation text (predictable language features) to less predictable

language usage. The Chinese subtitles in the video served as background support and an

invaluable aid for comprehension. These subtitles can almost be viewed as equivalent to the

teachers assistance since the students could stop the video when needed. Additionally, pair

discussions enabled the students to draw on each others extra skills to gather facts pertaining to

the question. For example, I noted several occasions when one learner noticed some key

language features in the subtitle/utterance, looked them up in the dictionary, and then explained

them to his/her partner in the TL.

The story above sheds light on another strength of ZPD-driven scaffolding: using peer

assistance as a form of guidance to help individual learners accomplish learning goals. Most

formal language instruction is not conducted on a one-on-one basis. Part of the teachers


16/26



responsibility in scaffolding is to allocate resources to maximize the appropriate guidance

provided to students. Assigning group work, for example, is an economic way of bridging ones

learning gaps via peer help and collaboration. Task 2 in my lesson plan was designed for student

pairs to produce a graph in order to show the relationship between the variable they chose and

the findings presented in a social survey. First, they worked under my guidance to identify all

three variables by scanning the text. Then, they negotiated with a partner to pick out one of the

three variables. Next, each pair produced one graph on the easel board. The students checked

with one another on their comprehension of the survey findings, discussed which form to use,

and what key facts to present with the graph. Through negotiated and mediated talk, the final

product varied in accordance with their favored design and form. One pair did a symbolic

drawing; another used a pie chart; and the third opted for a table. One way or another, the graphs

had enabled them to connect the findings with the variables, thus allowing them to gain a

thorough understanding of the survey results. The design of Task 2 illuminates the beneficial

effect of peer-interaction in allowing students to move further along their ZPD manifested by

overcoming challenges and completing the task.

Conclusion

Language is a dynamic system that reflects both stability and change. It is also a

mediational tool with which we generate and refine our thoughts. As a result, it pushes us

through personal development. Language learning is not only composed of cognitive activities,

but is also interlaced with social interactions. Successful language learning requires wide access

to input, noticing, and assistance from more competent users of the language. It is the teachers

goal, as well as responsibility, to address these learning needs in his/her lesson plans. My

teaching philosophy is an eclectic approach based on both cognitive and sociocultural beliefs.


17/26



The result lies in combining comprehension-enhanced activities with extensive input varieties,

grammar instruction with output practice, and teachers guidance with inter-peer assistance in

scaffolded learning.

(Word count: 5028)


18/26



References

Coughlan, P., & Duff, P. A. (1994). Collective scaffolding in second language learning. In J.

Lantolf, & G. Appel (Eds.), Vygotskian approaches to second language research (pp.

173-193). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.

Donato, R. (1994). Collective scaffolding in second language learning. In J. Lantolf, & G. Appel

(Eds.), Vygotskian approaches to second language research (pp. 33-59). Norwood, NJ:

Ablex.

Ellis, N. (2007). The associative-cognitive creed. In B. VanPatten and J. Williams (Eds.),

Theories in second language acquisition:An introduction (pp. 77-95). Mahwah, NJ:

Lawrence Erlbaum.

Ellis, R. (2005). Principles of instructed language learning. System, 33, 209-224.

Finegan, E. (2012).Language: Its structure and use. (6th ed.). Boston, MA: Wadsworth.

Gass, S. M. (1997).Input and interaction and the second language learner. Mahwah, NJ:

Laurenc Erlbaum.

Hedgcock, J. S., & Ferris, D. R. (2009). Teaching readers of English: Students, texts, and

contexts. New York, NY: Routledge.

Hopper, P. (1988). Emergent grammar and the a priori grammar postulate. In D. Tannen (Ed.),

Linguistics in context: Connecting observation and understanding(pp. 117-134).

Norwood, NJ: Ablex.

Lantolf, J. P. (2000). (Ed.). Sociocultural theory and second language acquisition. Oxford, UK:

Oxford University Press.


19/26



Lantolf, J. P. (2011). The sociocultural approach to second language acquisition. In D. Atkinson

(Ed.),Alternative approaches to second Language acquisition (pp. 25-47). London, UK:

Routledge.

Larsen-Freeman, D. (1997). Chaos/complexity science and second language acquisition.Applied

Linguistics, 18, 141-65.

Larsen-Freeman, D. (2003). Teaching language: From grammar to grammaring. Boston, MA:

Heinle.

Lightbrown, P., & Spada, N. (2006).How languages are learned. (3rd ed.). Oxford, UK: Oxford

University Press.

Long, M. H. (1981). Input, interaction, and second language acquisition.Annals of the New York

Academy of Sciences, 379, 259-278.

Long, M. H. (1983). Native speaker/non-native speaker conversation and the negotiation of

comprehensible input.Applied Linguistics, 4(2), 126-141.

Long, M. (1996). The role of the linguistic environment in second language acquisition. In W.C.

Ritchie, and T. Bhatia (Eds.),Handbook of second language acquisition (pp. 487-535).

Malden, MA: Blackwell.

Lyster, R. & Ranta, L. (1997). Corrective feedback and learner uptake: Negotiation of form in

communicative classrooms. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 19, 37-66.

Nassaji, H., & Fotos, S. (2011). Teaching grammar in second language classrooms: Integrating

form-focused instruction in communicative context. New York, NY: Routledge.

Schmidt, R. (1990). The role of consciousness in second language learning.Applied Linguistics,

11, 129-58.

Schmidt, R. (1994). Implicit learning and the cognitive unconscious: Of artificial grammars


20/26



and SLA. In N. C. Ellis (Ed.),Implicit and Explicit Learning of Languages (pp. 165-

209).

London, UK: Academic Press.

Schmidt, R. (1995). Consciousness and foreign language learning: A tutorial on the role of

attention and awareness in learning. In R. Schmidt (Ed.), Attention and awareness in

foreign language learning(pp. 1-63). Honolulu, HI: National Foreign Language

Resource Center.

Schmidt, R. (2001). Attention. In P. Robinson (Ed.), Cognition and second language instruction

(pp. 3-33). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.

Schmidt, R., & Frota, S. (1986). Developing basic conversational ability in a second language: A

case study of an adult learner of Portuguese. In R. R. Day (Ed.), Talking to learn:

Conversation in second language acquisition (pp. 237-326). Rowley, MA: Newbury

House.

Skehan, P. (1998). A cognitive approach to language learning. Oxford, UK: Oxford University

Press.

Swain, M. (2005). The output hypothesis: Theory and research. In E. Hinkel (Ed.),Handbook of

research in second language teaching and learning(pp. 471-483). Mahwah, NJ:

Lawrence Erlbaum.

Van den Branden, K. (Ed). (2006). Task-based language education: From theory to practice.

Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.

VanPatten, B. (2003).From input to output: A teachers guide to second language acquisition.

Chicago, IL: McGraw-Hill.


21/26



Varonis, E.M. & Gass, S.M. (1985a). Miscommunication in native/nonnative conversation.

Language in Society, 14(3), 327-343.

Varonis, E.M. & Gass, S.M. (1985b). Non-native/non-native conversations: A model for

negotiation of meaning.Applied Linguistics, 6(1), 71-90.

Vygotsky, L.S. (1986). Thought and language. (Newly revised & edited by A. Kozulin).

Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Wong, W. (2005). Input enhancement: From theory and research to the classroom. New York,

NY: McGraw-Hill.

Wood, D., Bruner, J.S., & Ross., G. (1976).The role of tutoring in problem solving. Journal of

Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 17, 89-100.


22/26



zhnggurn znme gu zhum

What do Chinese people do on weekends?

Instructor: Zhengzheng Wu

Setting: the Defense Language Institute(DLI)

Level: Intermediate-low (6 students)

Length: 50 minutes

Materials: SmartBoard; Tablet PCs; Easel Boards; Color markers; Reading text and audio

recording from DLI Chinese Unit 6 textbook; Handout with listening questions based on thepresentation; One prompt relating to a new grammar pattern; YouTube video clip; Handout withdiscussion question based on the video.

Background of the lesson: In the preceding session of this lesson the students studied the new

vocabulary and expressions related to the text in the presentation (Appendix A). Therefore, theyhave been prepared to directly process the text input with a degree of readiness.

Objectives:

Students will be able to:

1. Comprehend the main ideas of the presentation text via listening and reading activities2. Notice the function of+subject+ resultconstruction1and integrate it in language use

3. Design and draw graphs demonstrating the key findings of a social survey

4. Discuss the significant facts revealed by the YouTube video relating to changes in

Chinese peoples weekend activities.

Time

(Est.)Activities Objective(s)

met

Materials

Pre-Task 1

(2 min.)

Greet students and have a short

conversation about their previous

weekend activities

N/A N/A

Pair up students to use tablet PC to

listen to the selected audio hyperlinked

1 Textbook

presentation

1(sh)+noun + result indicates enabling a result to happen to someone or something, similar to

the English present participial adjective, such as excitingin Chinese can translate into ,

literally meaning enabling () people () excited ().


23/26



Task 1:

pair work

on listening

questions

(7 min.)

on their electronic presentation text(paragraphs 1 & 2 in Appendix A)

Ask pairs to work on the handout

questions based on the audio(Appendix B)

Note: students have previewed newvocabulary and expressions relating to

the presentation text in a precedingclass session

audio (paragraphs1 & 2 in

Appendix A)

Appendix B

Tablet PCs

Post-Task 1

(3 min.)

Call on each pair to orally share their

answer on one of the questions fromthe handout

1

Appendix B

Pre-Task

2 :

grammar

constructio

n

(8 min.)

Use the question prompt featuring the

+subject+ resultconstruction

(Appendix C) to elicit as many

response items as possible from each

student (a one-minute minicompetition)

Find out who has produced the longest

list and share his/her answers (a smallprize prepared)

Make each student produce 1or 2

questions containing the grammar

pattern and interview 2 classmatesusing the self-created prompt

2

One pre-written

brainstorming

prompt thatcontains

+subject + result

Task 2:

pair work

on

producing

graph

(12min.)

Re-pair students

Have each pair skim through

paragraphs 3 & 4 (see Appendix A)

Help pairs identify the three

variables and let each pair pick one

Guide each pair to design a graph

representing the correspondingfindings related to the variable chosen

(see Appendix E)

1

3

Paragraphs 3 & 4in thepresentation

(Appendix A)

Easel boards

Post-Task

2:

swap

graphs

Have students walk around the

classroom to read and comment on

graphs made by the other pairs

1

3

Easel boards

Color markers


24/26



(4 min.)

Pre- Task 3

(2 min.)

Make students resume their previous

pairing arrangement

Instruct pairs to use the link given

(Appendix D) to locate a YouTube

video on their tablet PCs

Have pairs read the title on the

YouTube video to activate

background knowledge

Brief on the topic of the interview and

the characters involved

N/A

YouTube video

clip (Appendix

D)

Tablet PCs

Task 3:

watch a

video clip

(10 min.)

Encourage students to go through theentire video twice and try to grasp themain idea and general topic

Orient students to focus on one

selected video segment2and suggest

students use the Chinese subtitles as acomprehension aid

Help students prepare for an oral

report that answers the discussion

question (Appendix D), and alsobridge the comprehension gaps of

unfamiliar terms and concepts whenneeded

Answer additional questions ( e.g.,

vocabulary, grammatical structures,

and content-related) and during the

pair discussion

4

Appendix D

Tablet PCs

Post Task-

3:

Wrap-up

(2min.)

Have a volunteer pair give their oral

report to the whole class

4

Appendix D

2The segment starts at 1min. 14 sec. and ends at 2min.04 sec.


25/26



Appendix A: Presentation text (Presentation 3, Lesson 36, Unit 6)

Note: The presentation text is directly extracted from Unit 6, DLI official textbook for the Basic

Chinese Program. Its readability lies in the fact that the DLI textbook materials are coherently

developed and validated by the curriculum design specialists for DLI Chinese students to

gradually gain language proficiency throughout the program.

OK

3

Appendix B: Listening questions

1. Who were interviewed? (3 details)

Residents of female and male, various ages and professions from a local apartmentcomplex.

2. What was the interview question? What was the rationale for this interview?

Due to the expanded weekend from one day to two days (the implementation of fiveworking days since 1995), it would be interesting to find out how Chinese people spend their

weekend (what weekend activities do Chinese people normally have?).

3 The underlined sentence contains the new grammatical construction +subject+ result

introduced in pre-task 2.


26/26



Appendix C: Grammar practice prompt

1. ? (What activities make you happy on the weekend?)

Appendix D: Link to the YouTube video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ykCdxN5AWh8

Discussion question:

(What changes are reported relating to Chinese peoples leisure activities through the foreignersinterview of Chinese ice-skaters?)

Appendix E:Example pair work on Task 2

(Age) 4 (young people) (senior people)

(Popular weekend activities)

(watch films)

(dance) OK

(Karaoke), (hike)

(housework)

(rest) (online

activities),

(hike)

4 The example only shows one variable (age) and its related findings.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ykCdxN5AWh8http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ykCdxN5AWh8

SLA position paper

Documents

Transcript of SLA position paper