Grammaticalité des formes verbales en production lors de l'apprentissage précoce de l'anglais langue étrangère : un enseignement intégré fait-il une différence à l'école primaire?

Vraciu, Alexandra

doi:10.4000/linx.7112

Cited by 1 publication

(5 citation statements)

References 30 publications

(31 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Likewise, the findings of this study lend support to the ones obtained in longitudinal studies on morphosyntax with a CLIL and a NON-CLIL group, where no signs of evolution were found between both testing times in the provision of affixal morphemes (Lázaro Ibarrola 2012;Lázaro Ibarrola and García Mayo 2012). They are also in line with recent studies targeting young learners and CLIL effects (Fernández-Pena and Gallardo-del-Puerto 2021;Vraciu 2020) in that they did not find statistically significant differences between CLIL and NON-CLIL learners in terms of affixal morphology either. As these studies have shown, morphological development does not speed up until 12-13 years of age, and earlier, the additional exposure obtained through CLIL (4 h per week in CLIL I and 6 h per week in CLIL II) does not lead to faster morphosyntactic development.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 91%

“…A bulk of studies examining morphosyntactic features have focused on production accuracy and another strand on syntactic complexity, either alone or together with accuracy measures. The vast majority of investigations have been conducted with secondary school learners (Martínez-Adrián and Gutiérrez-Mangado 2009, 2015a, 2015bGutiérrez-Mangado and Martínez-Adrián 2018;García Mayo and Villareal Olaizola 2010;Lázaro Ibarrola 2012;Lázaro Ibarrola and García Mayo 2012), except for Fernández-Pena and Gallardo-del-Puerto (2021) and Vraciu (2020). Most investigations have compared CLIL to NON-CLIL learners and others, lower in number, offer a longitudinal perspective.…”

Section: Morphosyntactic Featuresmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In the case of primary school learners, very little research has been done (e.g. Agustín Llach 2016;Fernández-Pena and Gallardo-del-Puerto 2021;Jiménez Catalán and Ojeda Alba 2009;Vraciu 2020), perhaps because CLIL programmes are not so widespread in primary education, as some scholars have noted (e.g. Pladevall-Ballester and Vallbona 2016), but also because this population has not been the target of investigations on second language (L2) learning up to quite recently (Martínez-Adrián et al 2021;García Mayo and Imaz Agirre 2019;García Mayo and Lázaro Ibarrola 2015;Pinter 2007;Shintani 2012), despite the attested differences between adults and children in their approach to language learning (Oliver and Azkarai 2017).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Even if recent years have witnessed a growing body of research on these meaning-oriented programmes, studies have primarily tackled the effect of CLIL exposure on the acquisition of general proficiency (Martínez-Adrián and Gutiérrez-Mangado 2015a; Jiménez Catalán et al 2006;Lasagabaster 2008;Merino and Lasagabaster 2018;Ruiz de Zarobe 2008. However, research on language specific areas such as morphosyntax is still quite limited (Martínez-Adrián and Gutiérrez-Mangado 2009, 2015a, 2015bGutiérrez-Mangado and Martínez-Adrián 2018;García Mayo and Villarreal Olaizola 2010) and the vast majority have targeted secondary school learners, except for Fernández-Pena and Gallardo-del-Puerto (2021) and Vraciu (2020). Although Fernández-Pena and Gallardo-del-Puerto (2021) and Vraciu (2020) have investigated morphosyntactic features such as subject omission and verbal morphology, we are in the need of widening the scope of other features that have been the target of previous investigations conducted with CLIL secondary school learners.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…However, research on language specific areas such as morphosyntax is still quite limited (Martínez-Adrián and Gutiérrez-Mangado 2009, 2015a, 2015bGutiérrez-Mangado and Martínez-Adrián 2018;García Mayo and Villarreal Olaizola 2010) and the vast majority have targeted secondary school learners, except for Fernández-Pena and Gallardo-del-Puerto (2021) and Vraciu (2020). Although Fernández-Pena and Gallardo-del-Puerto (2021) and Vraciu (2020) have investigated morphosyntactic features such as subject omission and verbal morphology, we are in the need of widening the scope of other features that have been the target of previous investigations conducted with CLIL secondary school learners.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Exploring the pseudo-longitudinal development of specific morphosyntactic features and syntactic complexity in CLIL young learners

Martínez-Adrián

Nieva-Marroquín

2022

International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

CLIL studies on language specific areas such as morphosyntax are still quite limited, particularly those with young learners. Likewise, the pseudo-evolution of morphosyntactic aspects across age and proficiency deserves particular attention. This paper will fill these gaps by investigating production accuracy and syntactic complexity in two different age/proficiency groups of CLIL primary school learners (grade 4 and 6). In terms of accuracy, L1 Spanish transfer effects associated with the pro-drop parameter (i.e. subject omission and subject-verb inversion), and the third person singular -s morpheme omission will be explored. Syntactic complexity will be operationalised through the production of simple and complex clauses. The findings obtained align with previous research in that the accumulated hours of CLIL + EFL exposure by grade 6 seem to positively affect the development of complexity measures. However, the lack of progress in the case of the rest of the features examined (i.e. subject omission, inversion of the subject and the third person singular -s omission) calls for the incorporation of focus-on-form components in CLIL programmes.

show abstract