The effect of interlocutor proficiency on the collaborative dialogue between Korean as a second language learners

Language Teaching Research

Volumn 12, Issue 2, 2008, Pages 211-234

  Kim, You Jin ^a   McDonough, Kim ^a  

^a NORTHERN ARIZONA UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Collaborative dialogue; Korean as a second language; LRE; Pair dynamics; Proficiency

Indexed keywords

EID: 55249083954     PISSN: 13621688     EISSN: 14770954     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/1362168807086288     Document Type: Article

References (38)

1. Adams, R. (2007). Do second language learners benefit from interaction with each other? In A. Mackey (Ed.), Conversational interaction in second language acquisition: A series of empirical studies (pp. 29-51). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
2. Dörnyei, Z., & Kormos, J. (2000). The role of individual and social variables in oral task performance. Language Teaching Research, 4, 275-300.
3. Gass, S.M., & Varonis, E. (1985). Task variation and non-native/ non-native negotiation of meaning. In S. Gass & C. Madden (Eds.), Input in second language acquisition (pp. 149-161). Rowley, MA: Newbury House.
4. Genesee, F. (1987). Learning through two languages: Studies of immersion and bilingual education. Rowley, MA: Newbury.
5. Hedge, T. (2000). Teaching and learning in the language classroom. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
6. Hess, N. (2001). Teaching large multilevel classes. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
7. Iwashita, N. (2001). The effect of learner proficiency on interactional-moves and modified output in nonnative-nonnative interaction in Japanese as foreign language. System, 29, 267-287.
8. Jeon, K.S. (2007). Interaction-driven L2 learning: Characterizing linguistic development. In A. Mackey (Ed.), Conversational interaction in second language acquisition: A series of empirical studies (pp. 379-403). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
9. Koda, K. (1996). L2 word recognition research: A critical review. The Modern Language Journal, 80, 450-460.
10. Kowal, M., & Swain, M. (1994). Using collaborative language production tasks to promote students' language awareness. Language Awareness, 3(2), 73-93.
11. Kowal, M., & Swain, M. (1997). From semantic to syntactic processing: How can we promote metalinguistic awareness in the French immersion classroom? In R. Johnson & M. Swain (Eds.), Immersion education: International perspectives (pp. 284-309). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
12. Lee, I., & Ramey, S.R. (2000). The Korean language. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.
13. Leeser, M.J. (2004). Learner proficiency and focus on form during collaborative dialogue. Language Teaching Research, 8, 55-81.
14. McDonough, K., & Sunitham, W. (2007). Collaborative dialogue between Thai EFL learners during self-access computer activities. Manuscript in review.
15. Ross-Feldman, L. (2007). Interaction in the classroom: Does gender influence learning opportunities? In A. Mackey (Ed.), Conversational interaction in second language acquisition: A series of empirical studies (pp. 53-77). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
16. Sohn, H. (1999). The Korean language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
17. Storch, N. (1998). A classroom-based study: Insights from a collaborative text reconstruction task. ELT Journal, 52, 291-300.
18. Storch, N. (2001). How collaborative is pair work? ESL tertiary students composing in pairs. Language Teaching Research, 5, 29-53.
19. Storch, N. (2002 a). Patterns of interaction in ESL pair work. Language Learning, 52, 119-158.
20. Storch, N. (2002 b). Relationships formed in dyadic interaction and opportunity for learning. International Journal of Educational Research, 37, 305-322.
21. Strauss, S. (2003). A cognitive account of Korean morpheme -se. Language Science, 25, 375-392.
22. Strauss, S., Lee, J., & Ahn, K. (2006). Applying conceptual grammar to advanced-level language teaching: The case of two completive constructions in Korean. The Modern Language Journal, 90, 185-209.
23. Swain, M. (1985). Communicative competence: Some roles of comprehensible input and comprehensible output in its development. In S. Gass & C. Madden (Eds.), Input in second language acquisition (pp. 235-253). Rowley, MA: Newbury House.
24. Swain, M. (1993). The output hypothesis: Just speaking and writing aren't enough. Canadian Modern Language Review, 50, 158-164.
25. Swain, M. (1995). Three functions of output in second language learning. In G. Cook & B. Seidlhofer (Eds.), Principle and practice in applied linguistics: Studies in honor of H.G. Widdowson (pp. 125-144).Oxford: Oxford University Press.
26. Swain, M. (1998). Focus on form through conscious reflection. In C. Doughty & J. Williams (Eds.), Focus on form in classroom second language acquisition (pp. 64-81). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
27. Swain, M. (2000). The output hypothesis and beyond: Mediating acquisition through collaborative dialogue. In J. P. Lantolf (Ed.), Sociocultural theory and second language learning (pp. 97-114). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
28. Swain, M. (2005). The output hypothesis: Theory and research. In E. Hinkel (Ed.), Handbook of research in second language teaching and learning (pp. 471-484). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
29. Swain, M. (2006). Languaging, agency, and collaboration in advanced second language proficiency. In H. Byrnes (Ed.), Advanced language learning: The contributions of Halliday and Vygotsky (pp. 95-108). London: Continuum.
30. Swain, M., & Lapkin, S. (1995). Problems in output and the cognitive processes they generate: A step toward second language learning. Applied Linguistics, 16, 371-391.
31. Swain, M., & Lapkin, S. (1998). Interaction and second language learning: Two adolescent French immersion students working together. The Modern Language Journal, 82, 320-337.
32. Swain, M., & Lapkin, S. (2000). Task-based second language learning: The uses of the first language. Language Teaching Research, 4(4), 251-274.
33. Swain, M., & Lapkin, S. (2001). Focus on form through collaborative dialogue: Exploring task effects. In M. Bygate, P. Skehan, & M. Swain (Eds.), Researching pedagogic tasks: Second language learning, teaching, and testing (pp. 99-118). Harlow, UK: Longman.
34. van Lier, L. (1996). Interaction in the language curriculum: Awareness, autonomy and authenticity. London: Longman.
35. Watanabe, Y., & Swain, M. (2007). Effects of proficiency differences and patterns of pair interaction on second language learning: Collaborative dialogue between adult ESL learners. Language Teaching Research, 11, 121-142.
36. Williams, J. (1999). Learner-generated attention to form. Language Learning, 51, 303-346.
37. Williams, J. (2001). The effectiveness of spontaneous attention to form. System, 29, 325-340.
38. Yule, G., & Macdonald, D. (1990). Resolving referential conflicts in L2 interaction: The effect of proficiency and interaction role. Language Learning, 40, 536-539.