On Discourse, Communication, and (Some) Fundamental Concepts in SLA Research

Abstract

This article argues for a reconceptualization of Second Language Acquisition (SLA) research that would enlarge the ontological and empirical parameters of the field. We claim that methodologies, theories, and foci within SLA reflect an imbalance between cognitive and mentalistic orientations, and social and contextual orientations to language, the former orientation being unquestionably in the ascendancy. This has resulted in a skewed perspective on discourse and communication, which conceives of the foreign language speaker as a deficient communicator struggling to overcome an underdeveloped L2 competence, striving to reach the "target" competence of an idealized native speaker (NS). We contend that SLA research requires a significantly enhanced awareness of the contextual and interactional dimensions of language use, an increased "emic" (i.e., participant-relevant) sensitivity towards fundamental concepts, and the broadening of the traditional SLA data base. With such changes in place, the field of SLA has the capacity to become a theoretically and methodologically richer, more robust enterprise, better able to explicate the processes of second or foreign language (S/FL) acquisition, and better situated to engage with and contribute to research commonly perceived to reside outside its boundaries.

Conceptualization of American English native speaker norms: a case study of an English language classroom in South Korea

“…In so doing, while the American native speakers served as norm suppliers, the non-native teacher acted as a norm transmitter and the learners became norm imitators and norm recipients. Whereas native speaker norms remained very strong in this English teacher's beliefs and classroom practices, learners and non-native speakers tended to remain defective communicators (Firth and Wagner 1997) rather than legitimate English users. The students in this study primarily repeated and memorized the materials to imitate the way American native speakers pronounce them.…”

“…Thus, EFL teachers should recognize that English is used in various contexts as the medium of communication rather than as fixed body of linguistic knowledge modeled by native speakers for their own lessons. In particular, teachers need to be aware of the notion of L2 learners as multi-competent language users (Cook 1999) or intercultural speakers (Kramsch 1998) rather than as defective communicators (Firth and Wagner 1997), value the advantages that learners have when they experience a new language and culture from a unique foundation of their own, and support learners' L2 communication needs and opportunities. Moreover, teachers should provide more frequent opportunities and more varied materials for the students to expose themselves to other varieties of English, since experience with other accents and varieties of English may help them better understand English language as spoken around the world.…”

“…However, more recently, the idealized concept of the native speaker has been challenged by several researchers (e.g., Cook 1999;Firth and Wagner 1997;Kramsch 1997Kramsch , 1998. Under the definition of a native speaker as a person who speaks his or her first-acquired language, a lateracquired language can never become a native language (Cook 1999).…”

Appropriation of a representational tool in a second-language classroom

“…science or mathematics learning. One reason may be that the field of language learning has long been dominated by traditional cognitive perspectives that emphasize the individual internalization of mental processes and the development of grammatical competence (Firth and Wagner 1997;Ortega 2012). This contrasts with CSCL studies undergirded by sociocultural perspectives.…”

Conversation Analysis of Computer‐Mediated Interactions

“…in interaction if we are to acquire a better understanding of CMI, in keeping with the emic or participant-relevant perspective of CA (see Firth & Wagner, 1997, for a detailed discussion).…”