Interaction approach
looks at input, production of language or output and feedback of interaction as
a means of explaining learning. According to Gass and Selinker (2008, 317)
interaction research’s starting point is the assumption that language learning
is stimulated by communicative pressure and it examines the relationship
between communication and acquisition and the mechanisms that mediate between
them. In short interaction studies look at communication and acquisition using
interactions between speakers of a language.
Components of interaction
include negotiation, recasts and feedback. Negotiation of meaning is dealt with
in this essay.
When the flow of conversation
is disturbed, participants question particular utterances and request help with
the conversation. This is a kind of negotiation of meaning in order to get
equal participation in the conversation, to be part of the conversation from
which the speaker slipped due to lack of understanding (or proficiency
factors). Negotiation of meaning happens when parties in a conversation
interrupt its flow to understand what the conversation is about. This happens
frequently with non-native speakers according to Gass and Selinker (318). In my
experience, this happens also with native speakers when internal or external
factors affect the speaker or the listener. For example, in a mentally
preoccupied situation, the listener may not interpret the speaker in the right manner.
This necessitates clarification from the speaker for the smooth conduct of the
conversation. Sometimes, especially with NNS, this happens too often that most
of the conversation time is occupied by interruption as in 10.10.
Such lack of understanding
is a block to exchange of ideas and opinions. So from the passage, we
understand that not only NSs, but also NNSs change their conversation structure
to negotiate meaning. Long notices NNS conversations to have forms that are not
seen in NS conversations. Examples are confirmation checks like ‘am I right?’,
comprehension checks like ‘did you understand?’ and clarification requests like
‘eh?, huh?, what, etc.’.
Different kinds of
questions are asked by NSs and NSSs of English. If a NS and a NNS are in conversation,
then it is usually the NNS who expresses non-understanding. The NS then
clarifies using different techniques to reduce complexity of the utterance so
that the NNS can understand. These tactics convey much information to the NNS.
Some of these tactics are, repeating the question after giving a pointer to the
answer, giving choices for the listener to choose from, giving alternatives,
rephrasing, etc.
But there are subtler
differences observed in conversation. In case of NNS, there is a willingness to
change topics abruptly when understanding is not reached. This can also happen
as a result of unfruitful and long attempts to negotiate meaning. I have
similar experiences with a Thai student of mine. We have often abandoned topic
because neither of us could make sense of each other.
Here, modifications are
for understanding of the NNS. Thus NNS is assisted in understanding what is
spoken and to produce speech, so that there is less pressure on her. Another
perspective on this is that this exercise could be for showing solidarity.
There could be no aspect of ‘helping in understanding’ at all.
But here we need to make
a distinction between comprehension and acquisition. Both are not equal.
Comprehension is a single event, while acquisition is a permanent state in
terms of learning.
The comparison of
Conversational Analysis of two theorists Mori and Kasper with an Interactionist
analysis of a conversation shows clear differences in approach. Input analysis
is surface focused and is not looking for motivation of NS speech. That is,
interactionist perspective is not concerned about the detailed aspects of a
conversation that they don’t count as learning. For them, activities are not
central to their approach. Therefore, increased accomplishment within an
activity is not counted as or relevant as learning.
Reference
Gass, Susan M. andn
Selinker, Larry. Second Language Acquisition. Routledge. London. 2008.
No comments:
Post a Comment