OUTPUT-pdf.
pdf
wandita
ADQUISICIÓN DEL INGLÉS COMO SEGUNDA LENGUA I
4º Grado en Estudios Ingleses
Facultad de Filosofía y Letras
Universidad de Granada
Reservados todos los derechos.
No se permite la explotación económica ni la transformación de esta obra. Queda permitida la impresión en su totalidad.
Topic 2. Input, output and interaction
No se permite la explotación económica ni la transformación de esta obra. Queda permitida la impresión en su totalidad.
Output
What is output?
Input alone is not sufficient for acquisition, because when one hears language one can often
interpret the meaning without the use of syntax.
For example, if one hears only the words dog, bit, girl, regardless of the order in which those
words occur, it is likely that the meaning The dog bit the girl is the one that will be assumed rather
than the more unusual The girl bit the dog.
Reservados todos los derechos.
As far as language production or output is concerned, one is forced to put the words into some
order. Production then “may force the learner to move from semantic processing to syntactic
processing” (Swain 1985, p. 249)
The output is the language that speakers produce: need to convey meaning and produce
messages.
Main focus in interaction research: modified output following feedback.
• Modified output promotes learning by encouraging learners to reflect on the original
message.
The Output Hypothesis
Developed by Merrill Swain (1985).
Theory of language acquisition that accounts for the role of output in language learning. The
Output Hypothesis claims that “the act of producing language (speaking or writing) constitutes,
under certain circumstances, part of the second language learning. (Swain 2005, p.471)
Learning occurs when the learner encounters a gap in their L2 knowledge.
Swain´s (1985) study:
• Research project concerned with the development of L2 proficiency in French
immersion schools in an English-speaking province of Canada.
• L1 English – L2 French children in the school setting of a French immersion program.
• Compared to ESL learners, these children make infrequent use of the L2 outside of the
school setting.
a64b0469ff35958ef4ab887a898bd50bdfbbe91a-6457922
AIM: To analyse students L2 proficiency, relating their output to their language learning
environment.
• Participants: French immersion students (N=69) + control group of French natives
(N=10).
(69 French immersion students + 10 native French speakers from unilingual French
school in Montreal)
• The framework within which this study was carried out incorporates as traits several
No se permite la explotación económica ni la transformación de esta obra. Queda permitida la impresión en su totalidad.
components of communicative competence: oral production, multiple choice and
written production tasks.
• Participants: L2 French students (N=69) + control group of French natives N=10)
• Tasks: Oral production, multiple choice and written production tasks.
Grammatical competence:
Reservados todos los derechos.
Interview, multiple – choice questionnaire and four narratives.
RESULTS:
• The native speakers score significantly higher than the immersion students, indicating
clearly that although the immersion students are doing quite well, they have not acquired
native-like abilities in the grammatical domain (Swain 1985, p. 238)
• “In those categories where grammatical knowledge inevitably plays a role […],
immersion students’ performance is inferior to that of native speakers” (p. 244)
For grammar, the difference is significant regardless of method.
• In spite of 7 years of comprehensible input in the target language, their grammatical
performance is not equivalent to that of native speakers.
• Immersion students, however, perform similarly to native speakers on those aspects of
discourse and sociolinguistic competence which do not rely heavily on grammar for their
realization.
¿Cuál es tu trabajo tech ideal? Descúbrelo con IRONHACK aquí
a64b0469ff35958ef4ab887a898bd50bdfbbe91a-6457922
CONCLUSIONS:
• Comprehensible input is essential for L2 acquisition BUT not enough
• What is missing? Output
• Not sufficient opportunities for students to use the L2 in meaningful ways, through
speaking and writing
• While comprehensible input and the concomitant emphasis on interaction in which
meaning is negotiated is essential, its impact on grammatical development has been
overstated. The role of these interactional exchanges in SLA may have as much to do
No se permite la explotación económica ni la transformación de esta obra. Queda permitida la impresión en su totalidad.
with comprehensible output as it has to do with comprehensible input.
Swain´s (1985) study
I understand everything anyone says to me, and I can hear in my head how should I sound when
I talk, but it never comes out that way.
(Grade 9 immersion student: Swain 1985, p.248)
Reservados todos los derechos.
Comprehension is usually possible without the full processing of forms:
• Key content words aided by knowledge of the world, contextual clues, guessing, etc.
In production, psycholinguistic demands of composing messages force speakers to use
syntactic processing to a much greater extent.
“Producing the target language may be the trigger that forces the learner to pay attention to
the means of expression needed in order to successfully convey his or her own intended
meaning” (Swain 1985, p.249)
SO…
Output allows receiving feedback, which pushes learners to produce more accurate,
appropriate, complex and comprehensible forms.
The meaning of ‘negotiating meaning’ needs to be extended beyond the usual sense of simply
‘getting one’s message across.’ Simply getting one’s message across can and does occur with
grammatically deviant forms and sociolinguistically inappropriate language.
Negotiating meaning needs to incorporate the notion of being pushed toward the delivery of a
message that is not only conveyed, but that is conveyed precisely, coherently, and
appropriately.
Llévate 1 año de WUOLAH PRO con BBVA. ¿Cómo? ¡+Info aquí!
a64b0469ff35958ef4ab887a898bd50bdfbbe91a-6457922
Then, output seems to play three roles:
No se permite la explotación económica ni la transformación de esta obra. Queda permitida la impresión en su totalidad.
• Opportunity for meaningful use of the language.
• Opportunity to test hypotheses about the L2 and modify them if necessary.
• Production “may force the learner to move from semantic processing to syntactic
processing” (Swain, 1985: 249)
Further considerations…
Against the traditional view of output as a way of practicing existing knowledge:
It has been demonstrated that input alone is not sufficient for acquisition.
And that comprehension processing is different from production processing insofar as in
language production, learners are forced to successfully meet communicative goals Production
“may force the learner to move from semantic processing to syntactic processing” (Swain 1985,
Reservados todos los derechos.
p. 249)
MODIFIED OUTPUT is useful when learners notice the relationship between
• Their initially erroneous forms
• The feedback they receive
• Their output
Developmental level is also key:
• If a learner is not sufficiently advanced to be able to make appropriate changes…
• … then, feedback may not be useful.
The idea that output could be part of learning was not seriously contemplated prior to Swain’s
notion of comprehensible or pushed output (1985). What is meant by this concept is that learners
are pushed or stretched in their production as a necessary part of making themselves understood.
In doing so, they might modify a previous utterance or they might try out forms that they had not
used before.
Output may stimulate learners to move from the semantic, open-ended, nondeterministic,
strategic processing prevalent in comprehension to the complete grammatical processing
needed for accurate production. Output, thus, would seem to have a potentially significant role
in the development of syntax and morphology.
(Swain 1995, p. 128)
It is when learners produce language that they are most likely to see:
• The limits of their L2 ability.
• The need to find better ways to express their meaning.
a64b0469ff35958ef4ab887a898bd50bdfbbe91a-6457922
Let´s see an example of pushed output…
No se permite la explotación económica ni la transformación de esta obra. Queda permitida la impresión en su totalidad.
Learner´s perception of being “pushed” to modify their speech:
In this example I see I have to manage my err err expression because he does not
understand me and I cannot think of exact word right then. I am thinking thinking it is
nearly in my mind, thinking bigger and magnificate and eventually magnify. I know I see
this word before but so I am sort of talking around around this word but he is forcing me
Reservados todos los derechos.
to think harder, think harder for the correct word to give him so he can understand and
so I was trying. I carry on talking until finally get it, and when I say it, then he
understands it, me. (Mackey 2002)
It is evident from these comments that this learner understood that her language was not clear and
struggled to come up with the appropriate expression. She was pushed through the negotiation
sequences to make her language clearer.(Macky 2002)
Functions of output (Learning process)
1. Meaningful language use
2. Noticing function
3. Hypothesis-testing function
4. Metalinguistic function
5. Fluency development
6. Generator of input
7. Shift from meaning processing to syntactic processing
1) Meaningful language use → Receiving feedback
It is well-established that learner output provides opportunities for correcting
learner errors and generating more comprehensible input via feedback.
At the same time, learner output that contains incomprehensible or incorrect/inaccurate
structures or rules generates negative evidence or corrective feedback, such as
explicit corrections and recasts, that enables the learner to replace the incorrect
Llévate 1 año de WUOLAH PRO con BBVA. ¿Cómo? ¡+Info aquí!
a64b0469ff35958ef4ab887a898bd50bdfbbe91a-6457922
hypotheses and assumptions about the TL structures and rules with the correct
ones.
“When a second language user speaks or writes, he or she may make an error. When
this error is corrected, this […] helps the learner change his or her conscious mental
representation of the rule or alter the environment of rule application”
(Krashen 1982, p. 61).
In such cases, learner hypotheses and assumptions about the TL are revised
No se permite la explotación económica ni la transformación de esta obra. Queda permitida la impresión en su totalidad.
(rejected or adjusted/modified) in the light of the new input provided in response
to the learner’s output.
2) Noticing functions. It promotes the conscious awareness of L2 gaps by pushing learners
to revise their speech.
The claim here is that while attempting to produce the target language, learners may
notice that they do not know how to say (or write) precisely the meaning they wish to
convey.
In other words, under some circumstances, the activity of producing the target
language may prompt second language learners to recognize consciously
Reservados todos los derechos.
some of their linguistic problems: It may bring their attention to something they
need to discover about their second language (possibly directing their attention to
relevant input).
This awareness triggers cognitive processes that have been implicated in second language
learning— ones in which learners generate linguistic knowledge that is new for them, or
that consolidate their current existing knowledge.
• Internal: Learner notices the gap
• External: Detected by interlocutor
Subsequent consequences:
• Input available: More attention to solve problems and fill in the gaps.
• Input not available: Thought processes to revise their knowledge.
3) Testing hypotheses about how the L2 works (forms, structures, meaning, etc.)
The claim here is that output may sometimes be, from the learner’s perspective, a
“trial run” reflecting their hypothesis of how to say (or write) their intent. If learners
were not testing hypotheses, then changes in their output would not be expected following
feedback Research has shown that learners do modify their output in response to such
conversational moves as clarification requests or confirmation checks.
• Through interaction.
• Output is a trial run that reflects learners’ hypotheses.
• Production raises awareness and allows to think about language.
• If learners didn´t test hypotheses, changes in their output wouldn´t be expected.
• Piece of evidence: self-correction or correction following feedback.
NNS: Dos más cervezas, por favor.
NS: ¿Dos cervezas más?
NNS: Sí, dos.
Llévate 1 año de WUOLAH PRO con BBVA. ¿Cómo? ¡+Info aquí!
a64b0469ff35958ef4ab887a898bd50bdfbbe91a-6457922
4) Metalinguistic (reflective) function
No se permite la explotación económica ni la transformación de esta obra. Queda permitida la impresión en su totalidad.
The claim here is that using language to reflect on language produced by others or
the self mediates second language learning.
The L2 learner says something in the L2 and then reflects on it:
• Learner: I eated curry last night.
• Learner´s reflection: I said “eated”, but is it correct? Wait a minute, the past form
of the verb eat is ate, not eated. Eat is an irregular verb. Okay, next time I´ll say
ate, I´ll not make the same mistake.
Conscious reflection about language by others or the self.
Metalinguistic reflection on the learner´s own output may improve his/her
grammatical ability.
Reservados todos los derechos.
5) Development of L2 fluency. Developing automaticity in language production.
Output, in the sense of practicing, enhances L2 learner’s fluency. It automatizes
knowledge of comprehended L2 rules and structures.
In order to automatize comprehension skills, a learner needs practice in comprehension;
and to acquire automaticity in production, he/she needs practice in production.
“Consistent and successful mapping (practice) of grammar to output results in automatic
processing” (Gass & Selinker, 2008)
“The more we practice speaking, the less of an effort we have to make when we engage
again in interaction” (DeKeyser, 2001)
6) Output as a generator of input:
• Interaction: When the message is not understood → feedback adaptations to
reformulate the original utterance (input).
• Feedback: Better quality input.
• ‘Negotiation of meaning’: Clarification requests, confirmation and
comprehension checks eventually lead to L2 development. (Pica 1994).
7) Shift from L2 meaning-based processing to a syntactic processing.
Opportunity to produce language and gain feedback which, through focusing learners’
attention on certain aspects of their speech, may lead them to notice either:
• Mismatch between their speech and that of an interlocutor, or
• Deficiency in their output
SO OUTPUT IS NOT JUST PRODUCING LANGUAGE
Output as merely repetition may be less useful than output where learners
are given opportunities to incorporate new forms into their production.
a64b0469ff35958ef4ab887a898bd50bdfbbe91a-6457922
SO, TO RECAP…
➢ Notion of pushed/comprehensible output.
➢ Semantic vs. syntactic processing.
➢ Functions of output for L2 processing.
▪ Meaningful L2 use
▪ Noticing
▪ Testing hypotheses
▪ Metalinguistic function
▪ Fluency development
No se permite la explotación económica ni la transformación de esta obra. Queda permitida la impresión en su totalidad.
▪ Input generator
▪ Shift to syntactic processing
Reservados todos los derechos.
Llévate 1 año de WUOLAH PRO con BBVA. ¿Cómo? ¡+Info aquí!
a64b0469ff35958ef4ab887a898bd50bdfbbe91a-6457922
