In Learner Language and Language Teaching

2021 ◽  
pp. 177-197
2019 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
pp. 9-30
Author(s):  
Armine Garibyan ◽  
Evelin Balog ◽  
Thomas Herbst

Abstract This paper sets out to illustrate differences between learner language and the language of native speakers by a number of tests carried out with students of English at the Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg. The first part of the experiment aims at testing knowledge of collocations: In order to compare to what extent combinations of certain words are stored in the constructica of native speakers and advanced learners of English, we used the test battery developed by Dąbrowska (2014): although, as was to be expected, on the whole, native speakers displayed a much greater competence at judging which combinations of words can be regarded as established collocations, interestingly, some learners outperformed some native speakers. The second part of the project was designed to explore the number and types of different valency constructions informants produce on being provided with a verbal stimulus. It is very interesting to see that, given the stimulus word caught, for example, the non-native speakers would predominantly produce sentences with police, thief, murderer, suspect etc. which do not rank amongst the 50 top collexemes of caught in the British National Corpus. We would thus argue that an analysis of the words used in particular slots of argument structure constructions (i.e. the collexemes or itecxes) provides a useful means of characterizing the language of advanced learners and to underscore the importance of collo-phenomena in language teaching.


ReCALL ◽  
2001 ◽  
Vol 13 (1) ◽  
pp. 3-14 ◽  
Author(s):  
CAROL A. CHAPPELLE

The technologies demonstrated at the InSTIL and EUROCALL 2000 conferences were very inspiring. They gave participants the sense that the technologies of their wildest imaginations are at last materializing, particularly in long awaited advances in speech technologies. Some challenges, however, remain ahead as attempts are made to put these technologies to use in CALL. Past experience demonstrates for example that software designed for recognition of a proficient speaker’s language is different than that required for learner language. It is also evident that while language use may be critical for language acquisition, language use does not necessarily indicate language acquisition. These points were made by Marty, who was working with speech software for French teaching a few years before the current excitement:...[W]e should keep in mind that the present research and development is aimed only at producing speech easily understandable by natives (e.g., English for native speakers of English) and that the potential markets are industrial (e.g., replacing visual indicators or visual alarms with audio warnings) and in home products (especially toys). Until our needs for improved FL instruction are better understood, it is not likely that those devices will have the voice quality we need. (Marty, 1981:52).If Marty had attended the InSTIL and EUROCALL conferences in 2000, no doubt he would have been very, very impressed. Even though plenty of work remains, we do seem to have very good voice quality in speech synthesis. The question today is how can we best use these emerging technologies, and so Marty’s suggestion that we must better understand our needs in foreign language teaching remains very relevant. What are the needs for foreign language teaching in the 21st century? The papers at EUROCALL 2000 as well as other work in technology, business, and language teaching suggest that we should be prepared for change in the coming years, but what kind of change? The turn of the century seems an appropriate time to examine some of the speculation on the future of language teaching in general, as well as how technology fits into that future. This paper considers these general questions, and then suggests ways in which links might be made between work in second language acquisition (SLA) and CALL in order to put technologies to use for L2 teaching.


2020 ◽  
Vol 2019 (1) ◽  
pp. 461
Author(s):  
Leigh McDowell

Error Analysis (EA) was initially conceived in early Second Language Acquisition research in the 1960s to investigate the systems underlying learner language and has since gained wider application in English Language Teaching research. However, for many language teachers, the practical and technological barriers to employing EA in their professional practices remain restrictively high. This paper demonstrates a simple yet robust procedure for EA that can be applied by anyone with access to the commonly available tools of Microsoft Word and Excel. Additionally, by drawing on data from an EA of 18 texts written by Japanese materials scientists, the paper illustrates how this procedure can inform language teaching practices by identifying the most pressing grammatical needs within a population of L2 English users. 本来、誤答分析(Error Analysis)は、語学学習者の言語の根本にあるシステムを調査する為に1960年代の初期第二言語習得(SLA)研究中に提案されていて、その後英語教授法(ELT)研究に広く使われるようになった。しかし、多くの語学教師等にとっては、仕事に誤答分析を用いるには技術的な壁が未だに高い。本論文では、一般的に使われているワードやエクセル等によって簡単で確実に誤答分析が出来る方法を紹介する。また、18名の日本人の材料科学研究者の文章の誤答分析のデータを用いて、どのようにしてこの方法を使って言語教育法を明確に出来るかを、第二言語として英語を話すグループの課題となる文法の必要性を示しながら、を説明する。


ELT-Lectura ◽  
2015 ◽  
Vol 2 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Budianto Hamuddin

This paper presents the importance of Error Analysis (EA) in English language teaching (ELT) classroom, bygiving a systematic review of the concepts and theories concerning Error Analysis, as well as the various reasons causing errors are comprehensively explored. This article aims to introduce and give a brief picture of the causes and types from grammatical errors to the students in ELT classroom start from collecting samples of learner language, identifying the errors in the sample, describing these errors, classifying them according to their nature and causes, and evaluating the students seriousness. The idea of Error Analysis brought into ELT classroom, promising an advantageous and benefits for both learners and lectures. The activity Involves For learners, error analysis uses to show and introduce the types of errors, so they will know how to avoid of having the errors in their sentences Whereas for lecturers it is required to evaluate themselves whether they are successful or not in teaching English.


1987 ◽  
Vol 18 (3) ◽  
pp. 194-205 ◽  
Author(s):  
Phil J. Connell

The teaching procedures that are commonly used with language-disordered children do not entirely match the goals that they are intended to achieve. By using a problem-solving approach to teaching language rules, the procedures and goals of language teaching become more harmonious. Such procedures allow a child to create a rule to solve a simple language problem created for the child by a clinician who understands the conditions that control the operation of a rule.


2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Norbert Schmitt ◽  
Diane Schmitt
Keyword(s):  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document