Negotiation of meaning and codeswitching in online tandems

Language Learning and Technology

Volumn 7, Issue 2, 2003, Pages 145-172

  Kötter, Markus ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MÜNSTER   (Germany)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 3042643906     PISSN: 10943501     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (74)

1. Anton, M., & DiCamilla, F. J. (1998). Socio-cognitive functions of L1 collaborative interaction in the L2 classroom. Canadian Modern Language Review, 54, 314-342.
2. Appel, M. C. (1999). Tandem language learning by e-mail: Some basic principles and a case study. (Occasional Paper No. 54). Dublin: Centre for Language and Communication Studies.
3. Aston, G. (1986). Trouble-shooting in interaction with learners: The more the merrier? Applied Linguistics, 7, 128-143.
4. Auer, P. (1984). Bilingual conversation. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
5. Barson, J., Frommer, J., & Schwartz, M. (1993). Foreign language learning using e mail in a task-oriented perspective: Interuniversity experiments in communication and collaboration. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 2, 565-584.
6. Belz, J. A. (2002a). Second language play as a representation of the multicompetent self in foreign language study. Journal for Language, Identity and Education, 1(1), 13-39.
7. Belz, J. A. (2002b). Social dimensions of telecollaborative foreign language study. Language Learning & Technology, 6(1), 60-81. Retrieved May 3, 2002, from http://llt.msu.edu/vol6num1/belz/
8. Belz, J. A. (2002c). The myth of the deficient communicator. Language Teaching Research, 6(1), 59-80.
9. Brammerts, H. (1996a). Language learning in tandem using the Internet. In M. Warschauer (Ed.), Telecollaboration in foreign language learning (pp. 121-130). Honolulu: University of Hawai'i Second Language Teaching and Curriculum Center.
10. Brammerts, H. (1996b). Tandem language learning via the Internet and the International E-Mail Tandem Network. In D. Little & H. Brammerts (Eds.), A guide to language learning in tandem via the Internet (pp. 9-22). Dublin: Centre for Language and Communication Studies.
11. Brooks, F. B., Donato, R., & McGlone, J. C. (1997). When are they going to say "it" right? Understanding learner talk during pair-work activity. Foreign Language Annals, 30(4), 524-541.
12. Burk, J. (1998). The play's the thing: Theatricality and the MOO environment. In C. Haynes & J. R. Holmevik (Eds.), High wired. On the design, use, and theory of educational MOOs (pp. 232-249). Ann Arbor: The University of Michigan Press.
13. Burt, S. M. (1992). Codeswitching, convergence and compliance: The development of micro-community speech norms. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development, 113(1&2), 169-185.
14. Cherny, L. (1995). The MUD register: Conversational modes of action in a text-based virtual reality. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Stanford University.
15. Chun, A., Day, R., Chenoweth, A., & Luppescu, S. (1982). Errors, interaction, and correction. A study of native-nonnative conversations. TESOL Quarterly, 16, 537-547.
16. Dam, L. (1995). Learner autonomy: From theory to practice. Dublin: Authentik.
17. Dam, L., & Legenhausen, L. (1997). Developing learner autonomy: Principles - practices - outcomes. In K. Head (Ed.), ELT links. Proceedings of the British Council/IATEFL SIG symposium held at the University of Vienna, September 1996 (pp. 56-57). Whitstable, England: IATEFL.
18. Dibbell, J. (1993, December 21). A rape in cyberspace or how an evil clown, a Haitian trickster spirit, two wizards, and a cast of dozens turned a database into a society. The Village Voice, pp. 36-42. Retrieved May 14, 2002, from http://www.levity.com/julian/bungle_vv.html
19. Donaldson, R. P., & Kötter, M. (1999a). Language learning in cyberspace: Teleporting the classroom into the target culture. CALICO Journal, 16(4), 531-557.
20. Donaldson, R. P., & Kötter, M. (1999b). Language learning in a MOO: Creating a transoceanic bilingual virtual community. Literary and Linguistic Computing, 14(1), 67-76.
21. Eck, A., Legenhausen, L., & Wolff, D. (1994). Assessing telecommunications projects: Project types and their educational potential. In H. Jung & R. Vanderplank (Eds.), Barriers and bridges: Media technology in language learning (pp. 45-62). Frankfurt: Lang.
22. Hauck, M., & Haezewindt, B. (1999). Adding a new dimension to distance (language) learning and teaching - the tutor's perspective. ReCALL, 11(2), 46-54.
23. Holmevik, J. R., & Haynes, C. (2000). MOOniversity. Needham Heights: Allyn and Bacon.
24. Kern, R. G. (1995). Restructuring classroom interaction with network computers: Effects on quantity and characteristics of language production. The Modern Language Journal, 79, 457-476.
25. Kinginger, C. (1998). Videoconferencing as access to spoken French. The Modern Language Journal, 82, 502-513.
26. Kinginger, C., Gouvès-Hayward, A., & Simpson, V. (1999). A tele-collaborative course on French/American intercultural communication. French Review, 72, 853-866.
27. Kitade, K. (2000). L2 learners' discourse and SLA theories in CMC: Collaborative interaction in Internet chat. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 13(2), 143-166.
28. Kötter, M. (2001). MOOrituri te salutant? Language learning through MOO-based synchronous exchanges between learner tandems. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 14(3-4), 289-304.
29. Kötter, M. (2002). Tandem learning on the Internet: Learner interactions in virtual online environments (MOOs). Frankfurt: Lang.
30. Kötter, M., Shield, L., & Stevens, A. (1999). Real-time audio and e-mail for fluency: Promoting distance language learners' aural and oral skills via the Internet. ReCALL, 11(2), 55-60.
31. Lee, L. (2001). Online interaction: negotiation of meaning and strategies used among learners of Spanish. ReCALL, 13(2), 232-244.
32. Legenhausen, L. (1991). Code-switching in learner's discourse. International Review of Applied Linguistics, 29, 61-73.
33. Little, D. (1996). Freedom to learn and compulsion to interact: promoting learner autonomy through the use of information systems and information technologies. In R. Pemberton, E. S. L. Li, W. W. F. Or, & H. D. Pierson (Eds.), Taking control: Autonomy in language learning (pp. 203-218). Hong Kong: Hong Kong University Press.
34. Little, D., & Brammerts, H. (Eds.). (1996). A guide to language learning in tandem via the Internet. Dublin: Centre for Language and Communication Studies. [Occasional Paper No. 46].
35. Little, D., Ushioda, E., Appel, M. C., Moran, J., O'Rourke, B., & Schwienhorst, K. (1999). Evaluating tandem language learning by e-mail: Report on a bilateral project (Occasional Paper No. 55). Dublin: Centre for Language and Communication Studies.
36. Long, M. H. (1996). The role of the linguistic environment in second language acquisition. In W. Ritchie & R. Bhatia (Eds.), Handbook of second language acquisition (pp. 413-468). New York: Academic.
37. Long, M. H., Inagaki, S., & Ortega, L. (1998). The role of implicit negative feedback in SLA: Models and recasts in Japanese and Spanish. The Modern Language Journal, 82, 357-371.
38. Long, M. H., & Porter, P. (1985). Group work, interlanguage talk, and second language acquisition. TESOL Quarterly, 19, 207-228.
39. Lundstrom, P. K. M. A. (1995). Synchronous computer-mediated communication: Will Internet talkers improve the communicative competence of ESL/EFL students? Unpublished manuscript, University of Hawai'i.
40. Lyster, R., & Ranta, L. (1997). Corrective feedback and learner uptake. Negotiation of form in communicative classrooms. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 19(1), 37-66.
41. Marsh, D., Arnold, I., Ellis, N., Halliwell, J., Hodgins, C., & Malcom, S. (1997). Project MERLIN. A learning environment of the future. ReCALL, 9(1), 52-54.
42. Marvin, L. E. (1995). Spoof, spam, lurk and lag: The aesthetics of text-based virtual realities. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 1(2). Retrieved November 16, 1998, from http://jcmc.huji.ac.il/vol1/issue2/marvin.html
43. Maynor, N. (1994). The language of electronic mail: Written speech? In G. D. Little & M. Montgomery (Eds.), Centennial usage studies (pp. 48-54). Tuscaloosa: Alabama University Press.
44. Mitchell, R., & Myles, F. (1998). Second language learning theories. London: Arnold.
45. Müller-Hartmann, A. (2000). The role of tasks in promoting intercultural learning in electronic learning networks. Language Learning & Technology, 4(2), 129-147. Retrieved May 03, 2002, from http://llt.msu.edu/vol4num2/muller/
46. Myers Scotton, C. (1992). Comparing codeswitching and borrowing. In C. Eastman (Ed.), Codeswitching (pp. 19-41). Clevedon, England: Multiligual Matters.
47. Negretti, R. (1999). Web-based activities and SLA: A conversation analysis research approach. Language Learning & Technology, 3(1), 75-87. Retrieved May 3, 2002, from http://llt.msu.edu/vol3num1/negretti/
48. Ortega, L. (1997). Processes and outcomes in networked classroom interaction: Defining the research agenda for L2 computer-assisted classroom discussion. Language Learning & Technology, 1(1), 82-93. Retrieved February 17, 2000, from http://llt.msu.edu/vol1num1/ortega/default.html
49. Pellettieri, J. (2000). Negotiation in cyberspace. The role of chatting in the development of grammatical competence. In M. Warschauer, & R. Kern (Eds.), Network-based language teaching: Concepts and practice (pp. 59-86). Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
50. Pica, T. (1988). Interlanguage adjustments as an outcome of NS-NNS negotiated interaction. Language Learning, 38, 45-73.
51. Pica, T., & Doughty, C. (1985). The role of group work in classroom second language acquisition. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 7, 233-248.
52. Porter, P. (1986). How learners talk to each other: Input and interaction in task-centered discussions. In R. Day (Ed.), Talking to learn. Conversation in second language acquisition (pp. 200-222). Rowley, MA: Newbury House.
53. Sanchez, B. (1996). MOOving to a new frontier in language learning. In M. Warschauer (Ed.), Telecollaboration in foreign language learning (pp. 145-163). Honolulu: University of Hawai'i Second Language Teaching and Curriculum Center.
54. Schneider, J., & von der Emde, S. (2000). Brave new (virtual) world: Transforming language learning into cultural studies through online learning environments (MOOs). ADFL Bulletin, 32(1), 18-26.
55. Schweller, K. (1998). MOO educational tools. In C. Haynes & J. R. Holmevik (Eds.), High wired. On the design, use, and theory of educational MOOs (pp. 88-106). Ann Arbor: The University of Michigan Press.
56. Schwienhorst, K. (1997). Talking on the MOO: Learner autonomy and language learning in tandem. Paper presented at the CALLMOO: Enhancing Language Learning Through Internet Technologies, Bergen, Norway. Retrieved December 15, 2001, from http://www.tcd.ie/CLCS/assistants/ kschwien/Publications/CALLMOOtalk.htm
57. Schwienhorst, K. (2000). Virtual reality and learner autonomy in second language acquisition. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Dublin, Trinity College.
58. Scott, M. (1999). WordSmith Tools (Version 3.0) [Computer software]. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.
59. Sotillo, S. M. (2000). Discourse functions and syntactic complexity in synchronous and asynchronous communication. Language Learning & Technology, 4(1), 82-119. Retrieved May 3, 2002, from http://llt.msu.edu/vol4num1/sotillo/
60. Sullivan, N. (1998). Developing critical reading and writing skills: Empowering minority students in a networked computer classroom. In J. Swaffar, S. Romano, P. Markley, & K. Arens (Eds.), Language learning online. Theory and practice in the ESL and L2 Computer Classroom (pp. 41-55). Austin, TX: Daedalus Group.
61. Sullivan, N., & Pratt, E. (1996). A comparative study of two ESL writing environments: A computerassisted classroom and a traditional oral classroom. System, 29(4), 491-501.
62. Swain, M. (1995). Three functions of output in second language learning. In G. Cook & G. Seidhofer (Eds.), Principles and practice in applied linguistics: Studies in honor of H. G. Widdowson (pp. 125-144). Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.
63. Swain, M., & Lapkin, S. (1998). Interaction and second language learning: Two adolescent French immersion students working together. The Modern Language Journal, 82, 320-337.
64. Swain, M. & Lapkin, S. (2000). Task-based second language learning: The uses of the first language. Language Teaching Research 4, 253-276.
65. Tallis, C., & Harnack, A. (1997, April 1-3). Seven pedagogical principles for effective educational MOOing. Paper presented at the second annual Teaching in the Community Colleges Online Conference. Retrieved August 31, 2001, from http://leahi.kcc.hawaii.edu/org/tcc_conf97/pres/harnack.html/
66. Tella, S. (1992). Talking shop via e-mail: A thematic and linguistic analysis of electronic mail communication. Helsinki: University of Helsinki, Department of Teacher Education.
67. Turkle, S. (1995). Life on the Screen: Identity in the Internet. New York: Simon and Schuster.
68. Van Handle, D. C., & Corl, K. A. (1998). Extending the dialogue: Using electronic mail and the Internet to promote conversation and writing in intermediate level German language courses. CALICO Journal, 15(1-3), 129-143.
69. Varonis, E. M., & Gass, S. M. (1985). Non-native/non-native conversations: A model for negotiation and meaning. Applied Linguistics, 6, 71-90.
70. von der Emde, S., Schneider, J., & Kötter, M. (2001). Technically speaking: Transforming language learning through virtual learning environments (MOOs). The Modern Language Journal, 85, 210-225.
71. Warschauer, M. (1996). Comparing face-to-face and electronic discussion in the second language classroom. CALICO Journal, 13(2/3), 7-26.
72. Weininger, M. J., Shield, L., & Davies, L. B. (1998). A MOOving experience. In P. Lewis (Ed.), Teacher, learners, and computers: Exploring relationships in CALL (pp. 87-94). Nagoya: JALT CALL N-SIG.
73. Werry, C. C. (1996). Linguistic and interactional features of Internet Relay Chat. In S. C. Herring (Ed.), Computer-mediated communication. Linguistic, social and cross-cultural perspectives (pp. 47-63). Amsterdam: Benjamins.
74. Zähner, C., Fauverge, A., & Wong, J. (2000). Task-based language learning via audiovisual networks. The LEVERAGE project. In M. Warschauer & R. Kern (Eds.), Network-based language teaching: Concepts and practice (pp. 186-203). Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.