Learner Language in Korean Classrooms: Implications for teaching

1
Learner Language in Korean Classrooms
Implications for teaching

• Elaine Tarone
• University of Minnesota
• Am. Assoc of Teachers of Korean
• 2004

2
Learner Language A Brief Personal History

• 1968, Edinburgh University - Scotland - Diploma
  in Applied Linguistics. On faculty Larry
  Selinker, S.P. Corder, Alan Davies. Fellow
  student H.G. Widdowson
• Times Contrastive Analysis (Robt Lado, Charles
  Fries) ALL learning difficulties
  of ALL second-language learners are caused by
  native language transfer
• Revolution lets study learners language!
• 1. Error Analysis Do errors LOOK like theyre
  all caused by native language transfer, or
  something else?
• 2. Language Acquisition Device do adult
  second-language learners have a built-in
  syllabus similar to that of children acquiring
  their first language? (Corder)
• For first time in history (that we know), people
  interested in teaching second language stopped
  talking about what TEACHERS do, and began to look
  systematically at what second-language LEARNERS
  do, and know, and think about the learning
  enterprise. SLA research was born.

3
Different Views of Learner Language

• S.P. Corder Transitional competence. Learner
  has a built-in syllabus that he follows no
  matter what the teachers syllabus is. Input
  does not equal intake.
• Larry Selinker Adult second-language learners do
  not have the same language acquisition device
  children do. We know this because

4
second-language learning is so difficult for
adults (cf Selinker 1972)

• While every young child acquires a native
  languages perfectly, and without instruction,
• adults never acquire a second language
  perfectly, and seem to need instruction.
• The result of early child acquisition is a
  perfect native language the result of adult SLA
  is always an interlanguage.

5
Interlanguage is defined by Selinker (1972) as

• The unique linguistic system evidenced when an
  adult second-language learner attempts to USE the
  language to express meanings.
• This linguistic system is created from
  generalizations made by the learner. It is not
  just the native language rules and not just the
  target language rules. Learner generates and
  tests hypotheses.
• A fossilized system never develops to point of
  identity with the target language. Selinker felt
  this was because of cognitive loss, with age, of
  the language acquisition device.

6
Hallmarks of the Interlanguage Claim

• Applies to adults, not children.
• Characteristics derive in part from the native
  language, in part from the target language
  (overgeneralization of target language rules), in
  part from instruction, and in part from
  strategies (communication strategies and learning
  strategies)
• Learner makes interlingual identifications
  (hypotheses about what is the same and what is
  different across languages)
• Fossilization is central and inevitable, for
  adults

7
What is the target of interlanguage development?

• The learners target is not necessarily native
  speaker competence in the target language.
• Interlanguage doesnt always develop linearly it
  could be influenced by more than one target.
• The target of learning is selected by the
  learner. The target might be the learners model
  of Indian English, or of Hong Kong English.
• Whatever the learners target, the interlanguage
  hypothesis suggests that the adult learner will
  not achieve it because the LAD is gone.

8
English (L1)-Korean(L2) interlanguage?

• Lets consider some features of interlanguage in
  turn
• 1. IL is formed by learner generalizations that
  come from many sources
• 2. IL is only used when learner expresses meaning
• 3. Learners need form-focused feedback when they
  use IL
• 4. IL fossilizes

9
Examples of English-Korean IL

• Hye-Sook Give Korean examples (?!)
• Papers at this conference
• Jin Hong Kim, on Korean learner corpora
• K. Seon Jeon, on L2 lexical learning
• Helen Kim, on processing transfer and strategies
• Yoo Sang Rhee, on speech acts produced by Korean
  learners
• Jeonyi Lee, conversation patterns of learners of
  Korean

10
Data for this presentation

• Journals of two American learners of Korean at a
  large Midwest University (ER and TF), who wrote
  down their reflections about their learning of
  Korean, in journals addressed to their teacher,
  Jihyeon Jeon (1995, 1996)
• Id like to identify (w/Hye-Sooks help) some
  features of Korean-English interlanguage that
  these learners refer to in their journals, and
• consider, with you, what classroom teachers can
  learn from these learners reflections.

11
1. The learner creates his or her own IL rules
and generalizations. IL is a separate linguistic
system not the native language system and not
the target language system.

• These generalizations are created by the learner,
  sometimes but not always based on native language
  rules. Adults do not transfer ALL their old
  grammar and pronunciation patterns into their new
  language.
• Adults do not immediately produce the EXACT
  grammar or pronunciation of the new language,
  sounding exactly the way native speakers do.
  Their learner rules may be over-generalized parts
  of Korean rules theyve learned.
• Adults combine elements of their native language,
  elements of the new language, and other elements
  when they try to speak the new language.

12
TF on interlanguage generalizations (Jihyeon
Jeon, 1995, 1996)
13
TF on Korean word structure (part 1)
14
TF on Korean word structure (part 2)
15
Korean/English interlanguage Native language
transfer

• Errors in phonology due to native language
  transfer (Jeon, p.c.)
• 1. pronouncing the consonant sounds (e.g. ka
  (with a little aspiration), kka (without
  aspiration), kha (with more aspiration), etc.)
• 2. pronouncing vowel sounds (particularly, vowel
  length)
• 3. having appropriate rhythm in the language.
  Korean sounds flatter than English because
  every syllable in a sentence is more or less
  equally stressed, whereas English sounds rhythmic
  because some syllables are more stressed than
  others. Americans try to use English rhythm
  patterns in Korean.

16
Korean/English Interlanguage Native language
transfer

• Syntactic errors due to native language transfer
  (Jeon, p.c.)
• 1. Not using subject markers and object markers
  (which clarify meaning in a Korean sentence)
  appropriately.
• 2. Supplying sentence parts that are not required
  in context. Since Korean language is based on
  high-context culture, whenever they are
  understood from the context, the subject and the
  object of the sentence are omitted. On the other
  hand, the subject and object are required
  sentence parts in an English sentence. And thus,
  English speakers often use the subject and the
  object even though they are not required in
  context for Korean.

17
TF on pronouncing Korean vowels sliding between
two Korean sounds (not English transfer)
18
TF on separating sounds from meaning in Korean
19
TF on length in vowels and consonants
20
Implications for Teaching

• Expect learners to draw on multiple sources for
  their generalizations and rules English, Korean,
  instructional rules, personal perceptions and
  preferences, strategies.
• Expect learners rule systems to change over time
  according to their own internal syllabus. Be
  patient input does not equal intake.
• Teach inductively give students examples of
  Korean target structures and ask them to create
  generalizations then show them the correct rule.
• Have interested students keep journals for you to
  read, so you can understand their perspective,
  and the generalizations they are making about
  Korean.

21
2. Interlanguage system is revealed when learner
tries to express meaning

• We only see the the language the learner has
  really internalized (IL) when he tries to express
  an original meaning in the new language.
• We do not see this when she is repeating
  something after the teacher, or copying what is
  on the board, or reciting memorized sequences.
  Such activities do not draw on the interlanguage
  rules.
• Can such activities help the interlanguage
  develop? These learners dont think so

22
ER on copying from the board

• Im finding that we have to do a lot of copying
  from the board in this class. I dont really like
  it, because it takes a lot of time. Last week
  Li had us practice a little reading selection.
  However, she gave us the reading selection by
  writing it on the board first, and then we had to
  copy it down. So, is that legitimate reading?
  copying?

23
ER on copying grammar rules

• The teacher simply stops talking, turns her
  back to us, and starts writing grammar rules on
  the board. Were expected to copy it all down,
  and to learn it that way. She will, then, when
  most of us are finished writing, orally talk
  through it again, and that is when shell go
  through examples to illustrate what were
  learning. Usually, the best part of the lesson is
  the time spent on examples.

24
TF on value of meaningful use of Korean
interlanguage
25
Implications for teaching

• If your goal is to have students who can USE
  Korean to transmit meaning, then give them
  opportunities in the classroom to practice using
  the Korean they know to transmit real meaning
  (e.g., to tell you or one another something new,
  give and follow directions, etc. using Korean).
• They can do this with you, in front of class, or
  in pairs with each other.

26
3. Students need form-focused feedback (Doughty
Williams 1998)

• Learner notices and responds to implicit and
  explicit negative feedback provided when errors
  are made in the course of communicating meaning.
• When the learner does this, many researchers
  claim that acquisition results. Thus, feedback
  (correction) in the midst of communicative
  activity is extremely important.

27
ER on need for feedback

• I got my tape back from Park. She only corrected
  one sentence of mine for pronunciation. However,
  I didnt clearly understand what my mistake was.
  Sometimes I cant hear the correct differences
  between words and sounds.
• Ive never received any feedback regarding my
  writing. The quizzes, too, often seem random. I
  never quite know what they are testing.

28
Implications for Teaching

• Find ways to correct student performance WHILE
  they are using Korean to communicate
• provide explicit correction
• recast errors ask students to recast each
  other
• correct student writing and ask for rewrites
• correct students pronunciation make them
  practice (have them tape sentences with pauses
  between the sentences, listen to the tapes, and
  provide correct pronunciations in the pauses)

29
4. Interlanguage is fossilized

• Adults always stop developing their new language
  before they reach their goal (whatever that is).
• Their grammar and pronunciation and vocabulary
  always sound foreign to speakers of the target
  variety.

30
TF on pronouncing Korean vowel (pt 2)
31
Implications for Teaching

• Model native behavior in Korean use but be
  strategic in what you correct.
• Correct first for intelligibility, not 100
  nativeness, in learners Korean language use
• Encourage students when you see progress

32
Summary Teaching Suggestions consistent with
research on learner language

1. Teach inductively give students examples of
   target structures, invite them to make
   generalizations, then tell them the correct rule.
2. Give students opportunities to practice using the
   Korean they know to transmit real meaning e.g.
   to tell you or one another something new, using
   Korean.
3. Expect errors to come from several sources
   learners reliance on English, their
   overgeneralizations of Korean rules theyve
   learned, and strategies they use.
4. Find ways to correct student performance in
   speech and writing, ideally their performance
   transmitting MEANING in Korean.

33
We need studies on English-Korean interlanguage

• What is the built-in syllabus of Korean L2? What
  are the stages of its acquisition?
• What is the role of native language transfer in
  shaping a Korean IL?
• What sorts of overgeneralizations of Korean rules
  do learners of Korean make?
• What is the role of meaningful use of Korean IL
  in SLA? Can IL develop from memorization and
  copying tasks?
• Does negative feedback in the midst of
  communicative activity have an impact on the
  development of Korean L2? Can students provide
  this feedback effectively to each other?
• Are there learners of Korean L2 whose ILs do not
  fossilize?

34
References

• Doughty, C., Williams, J. (Eds.). (1998). Focus
  on Form in Classroom Second Language Acquisition.
  Cambridge Cambridge University Press.
• Jihyeon Jeon (1996). Instructed L2 acquisition
  and learners motivation, English Teaching,
  51(1), p. 59-81.
• Jihyeon Jeon Park (1995). Adult learners
  motivation in learning a non-cognate foreign
  language, Ph.D. Thesis, University of Minnesota.
• Selinker, L. (1972). Interlanguage. IRAL
  10209-241.
• Tarone, E. (1994). Interlanguage. In R. Asher
  S. Simpson (Eds.), Encyclopedia of Language and
  Linguistics (Vol. 4, pp. 1715-1719). Oxford
  Pergamon.