(SLA) DISCOURSE ASPECTS OF INTERLANGUAGE

Name    : Safitri Dyah Utami

NIM       : 2201411058

Class      : 103-104

Discourse Aspects of Interlanguage

The study of learner discourse in SLA has been informed by two rather different goals. On the one hand there have been attempts to discover howL2 learners acquire to ‘rules’ of discourse that inform native-speaker language use. On the other hand, a number of researchers have sought to show how interaction shapes interlanguage development.

Ø  Acquiring discourse rules

There are rules or at least, regularities in the ways in which native speakers hold conversation. In the United States, for example, a compliment usually calls for a response and failure to provide one can be considered sociolinguistic error. Furthermore, in American English compliment responses are usually quite elaborate, involving some attempt on the part of the speaker to play down the compliment by making some unfavourable comment.

However, L2 learners behave differently. Sometimes they fail to respond to a compliment at all. At other times they produce bare responses

There is growing body of research investigating learner discourse. This show that, to some extent at least, the acquisition of discourse rules, like tha acquisition of grammatical rules, is systematic, reflecting both distinct types of errors and developmental sequences.

Ø  The Role of Input and Interaction in L2 Acquisition

A number of rather different theoretical positions can be identified. A behaviourist view trearts language learning as environmentally determined, controlled from the outside by the stimuli learners are exposed to and the reinforcement they receive. In contrast, mentalist theories emphasize the importance of the learner’s ‘black box’. They maintain that learners’ brains are especially equipped to learn language and all that is needed is minimal exposure to input in order to trigger acquisition. Interactionist theories of L2 acquisition acknowledge the importance of both input and internal language processing. Learning takes place as a result of complex interaction between the linguistic environment and the leraners’ internal mechanisms. Two types of foreigner talk:

a.       Ungrammatically foreigner talk

It is socially marked. If often implies a lack of respect on the part of the native speaker and can be resented by learners. It is characterized by the deletion of certain grammatical features such as copula be , modal verbs and articles, the use of the base form of the verb in place of the past tense form, and the use of special constructions such as ‘no + verb’.

b.      Grammatical foreigner talk

It is the norm. various types of modification of baseline talk can be identified:

First, grammatical foreign talk is delivered at a slower pace.

Second, the input is simplified.

Third, grammatical foreigner talk is sometimes regularized.

Fourth, foreigner talk sometimes consist of elaborated language use.

According to Stephen Krashen’s input hypothesis, L2 acquisition takes place when a learner understands input that contains grammatical forms that í + I’. Karenshen suggests that the right level of input is attained automatically when interlocutors succed in making themselves understood in communication. Success is achieved by using the situational context to make messages clear and through the kinds of input modifications found in foreigner talk.

Michael Long’s interaction hypothesis also emphasizes the importance of comprehensible input but claims that it is most effective when it is modified through the negotiation of meaning.

Another perspective on the relationship between discourse and L2 acquisition is provided by Evelyn Hatch. Hatch emphasizes the collaborative endeavours of the learners and their interlocutures can grow out of the process of bulding discourse.

Other SLA theorist have drawn on the theories of L.S. Vygotsky, a Russian psychologist, to explain how interaction serves as the bedrock of acquisition. The two key constructs in what is known as activity theory’, based on vygotsky’s ideas, are ‘motive’ and ‘internalization’.

·         First, concerns the active way in which individuals define the goals of an activity for themselves by deciding what to attend to and what not to attend to.

·         Second, concerns how a novice comes to solve a problem with the assistance of an ‘expert’. Who provides ‘scaffolding’, and then internalizes the solution.

Vygotsky argues that children learn through interpersonal activity, such as play with adults, whereby they form concepts that would be beyond them if they were acting alone. In other word, zones of proximal development are created through interaction with more knowledgeable others. Subsequently, the child learn how to control a concept without the assistance of others.

Ø  The Role of Output in L2 Acquisition

There are conflicting opinion:

1.       Krashen argues that ‘speaking is the result of acquisition not its cause’. He claims that the only way learners can learn from their output is by treating is as auto-input. In efeect, Krashen is refuting the cherished belief of many teachers that languages are learned by practicing them.

2.       Merrill Swain has argued that comprehensible output also plays in L2 acquisition. She suggests a number of specific ways in which learners can learn from their own output:

First, output can serve a consciousness – raising function by helping learners to notice gaps in their interlanguages.

Second, output helps learners to test hypotheses.

Third, learners sometimes talk about their own output, identifying problems with it and discussing ways in which they can be put right.