The development of L2 interactional competence: evidence from turn-taking organization, sequence organization, repair organization and preference organization

Doehler, Simona Pekarek; Berger, Evelyne

doi:10.1515/9783110378528-012

Cited by 116 publications

(57 citation statements)

References 28 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The students in my data repeatedly orient to items as learnables and teachables, talk about learning, doing learning, and being learners; they display being aware of this through comments that link newly encountered vocabulary to existing knowledge, through verbalizing meta‐knowledge, through re‐indexing previous learning moments, and—most clearly—through stating that they are learning a lot of new words and hoping they will not forget them. A question not tackled here but to be answered in the future is how this behavior changes over time as part of a developing interactional competence (Hall, Hellermann, & Pekarek Doehler, ; Pekarek Doehler & Pochon–Berger, ). I have unanalyzed data that suggest that such behavior becomes increasingly abstract (in terms of pointing out of the context there and then) and increasingly precise as the participants make it public how new items fit in with their existing knowledge.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

‘We're Learning a Lot of New Words’: Encountering New L2 Vocabulary Outside of Class

Eskildsen

2018

The Modern Language Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article presents empirical evidence that the Interaction Hypothesis (Long, 1996), especially key concepts in Negotiation for Meaning, bears little relevance for language learning outside of class ('in the wild,' cf. Hellermann, Eskildsen, et al., 2018;Wagner, 2015) but seems to be epiphenomenal to experimentally elicited data. Instead, the article shows that the learning, vis à vis negotiation for meaning, that takes place in the wild needs to be viewed as repair practices, as it investigates speakers' displays of (non)understanding and learning as fundamentally social processes that take place as observable phenomena in real-time interaction and ultimately sustain the accountable processes of reaching and maintaining intersubjectivity (Kasper, 2009;Koschmann, 2011Koschmann, , 2013. This moment-to-moment coconstructed interactional work of second language (L2) users and their co-participants is brought to bear on long-term L2 learning in the wild as I explore and document the long-term repercussions of situated word searches through the lens of Conversation Analysis. Finally, the paper will discuss ways to use students' everyday interactions in L2 teaching (Eskildsen & Wagner, 2015b;Piirainen-Marsh & Lilja, 2018).

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

‘We're Learning a Lot of New Words’: Encountering New L2 Vocabulary Outside of Class

Eskildsen

2018

The Modern Language Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Instead, this research uses data from everyday settings to understand the social fabric of L2 learning (Hellermann et al., ). Some research on L2 interactional competence, although not framed as language learning in the wild, is carried out in the same vein and under similar epistemological considerations (see Pekarek Doehler & Pochon–Berger, , for a recent overview).…”

Section: Second Language Learning and Teaching In The Wildmentioning

confidence: 99%

L2 Teaching in the Wild: A Closer Look at Correction and Explanation Practices in Everyday L2 Interaction

Theodorsdottir

2018

The Modern Language Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article argues for a reconceptualization of the concept of 'corrective feedback' for the investigation of correction practices in everyday second language (L2) interaction ('in the wild'). Expanding the dataset for L2 research as suggested by Firth and Wagner (1997) to include interactions from the wild has consequences for the traditional concept of corrective feedback, which comes from classroom dyads of native speakers and nonnative speakers and focuses on a native speaker's correction of a linguistic error in an L2 speaker's turn. Correction practices in the wild, however, are co-constructed and predominantly initiated by the L2 learner herself. The study also shows that explanation practices are initiated by the L2 speaker or otherwise occasioned and that they emerge following a lack of understanding on the part of the L2 speaker during a correction episode. The data reveal no examples of L2 teaching in the wild as correction or explanation practices that are not occasioned, that is, they do not come 'out of the blue.' I will argue that L2 teaching practitioners might benefit from more awareness of the circumstances that occasion and sustain correction and explanation practices.Keywords: CA-SLA; repair; corrective feedback; L2 teaching in the wild; L2 learning in the wild THE NOTION OF CORRECTION HAS BEEN studied in detail in second language acquisition (SLA) research as a feedback practice, that is, a practice in which second language (L2) speakers receive feedback on their output by first language (L1) speakers in interactional dyads. These dyads are often referred to as native speaker-nonnative speaker (NS-NNS) talk and staged primarily as information gap tasks for research purposes, or they consist of teacher-student interactions. The focus in this research has been on instances of erroneous language use by an L2 learner and the subsequent reaction of the L1 speaker or the language expert in such dyads. In particular, this reaction to the erroneous turn by the L1 speaker has been targeted as this is where the feedback is located. Designed to provide the L2 learner with feedback on the correctness of her output, this

show abstract

“…This project overlaps to some extent with current CA work in second language acquisition (SLA) studies on (instructed) language learning and interactional competence (see, e.g., Hall, Hellermann, & Pekarek Doehler, ; Pekarek Doehler & Pochon‐Berger, ). However, it also differs from this body of work in that, while the principal focus of CA‐SLA research is on investigating how language learning may be understood in social terms, we are primarily interested in how (TBLT) curricula are achieved as local educational order in language classrooms.…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 85%

Tracking Immanent Language Learning Behavior Over Time in Task‐Based Classroom Work

Kunitz

Marian

2017

TESOL Quarterly

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this study, the authors explore how classroom tasks that are commonly used in task-based language teaching (TBLT) are achieved as observable aspects of local educational order (Hester & Francis, 2000) through observable and immanently social classroom behaviors. They focus specifically on students' language learning behaviors, which they track through the longitudinal conversation-analytic methodology called learning behavior tracking (LBT) (Markee, 2008). From a theoretical point of view, they situate LBT within the ethnomethodological (EM) perspective on social action pioneered by Garfinkel (1967) and relate it to socially defined ways of understanding planning (Burch, 2014;Markee & Kunitz, 2013). In the empirical part of the article, the researchers analyze TBLT work that was conducted in an English as a foreign language (EFL) classroom in a Swedish junior high school. Specifically, they track the occurrences of a learnable (the spelling of the word disgusting) that was emically oriented to as such by the students as they engaged in planning and accomplishing teacher-assigned tasks. The authors then develop an emic, sequential account of the participants' practical reasoning and dynamically evolving epistemic positions. They argue that this kind of basic empirical research refines our understanding of how TBLT curriculum work is achieved by participants as practical, mundane, and observable activities in language classrooms, and that these insights may feed into more applied research on teacher training, thereby fostering the design of instructional innovations.

show abstract

The development of L2 interactional competence: evidence from turn-taking organization, sequence organization, repair organization and preference organization

Cited by 116 publications

References 28 publications

‘We're Learning a Lot of New Words’: Encountering New L2 Vocabulary Outside of Class

‘We're Learning a Lot of New Words’: Encountering New L2 Vocabulary Outside of Class

L2 Teaching in the Wild: A Closer Look at Correction and Explanation Practices in Everyday L2 Interaction

Tracking Immanent Language Learning Behavior Over Time in Task‐Based Classroom Work

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About