The negotiation model in asynchronous computer-mediated communication (CMC): Negotiation in task-based email exchanges

CALICO Journal

Volumn 23, Issue 2, 2006, Pages 319-348

  Kitade, Keiko ^a  

^a RITSUMEIKAN UNIVERSITY   (Japan)

Author keywords

Asynchronous CMC; Computer mediated communication; Email; Interactional features; Negotiation of meaning

Indexed keywords

EID: 84855364013     PISSN: None     EISSN: 20569017     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1558/cj.v23i2.319-348     Document Type: Article

References (67)

1. Beauvois, M. H. (1992). Computer assisted classroom discussion in the classroom: Conversation in slow motion. Foreign Language Annals, 25 (5), 525-534.
2. Beauvois, M. (1997). High-tech, high touch: From discussion to composing in the networked classroom, Computer Assisted Language Learning, 10, 57-69.
3. Blake, R. (2000). Computer mediated communication: A window on L2 Spanish interlan-guage. Language Learning & Technology, 4 (1), 120-136. Retrieved October 10, 2005, from http://llt.msu.edu/vol4num1/blake
4. Braine, G., & Yorozu, M. (1998). Local area network (LAN) computers in ESL and EFL writing classes: Promise and realities. JALT Journal, 20, 47-59.
5. Chapman, D. (1996). Computer-mediated communication (CMC) and Japanese immer-sion: A case study on developing sociolinguistic competence through e-mail. Paper presented at the Symposium on New Technologies and Less Commonly Taught Language, University of Hawaii, Honolulu, HI.
6. Chiang, C., & Dunkel, P. (1992). The effect of speech modification, prior knowledge and listening proficiency on EFL lecture learning. TESOL Quarterly, 26, 345-374.
7. Chun, D. (1994). Using computer networking to facilitate the acquisition of interactive competence. System, 22 (1), 17-31.
8. Crooks, G. (1988). Planning, monitoring, and second language development: A review (Technical Report No. 4). Honolulu: University of Hawaii, Center for Second Language Classroom Research.
9. Curtis, A., & Roskams, T. (1999). Language learning in networked writing labs: A view form Asia. In J. A. Inman & D. N. Sewell (Eds.), Taking flight with OWLs: Ex-amining electric writing center work (pp. 29-39). London: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
10. Davis, B., & Thiede, R. (2000). Writing into change: Style shifting in asynchronous electronic discourse. In M. Warschauer & R. Kern (Eds.), Network-based language teaching: Concepts and practice (pp. 87-120). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
11. Day, R. R., Chenoweth, N. A., Chun, A. E., & Luppescu, S. (1984). Collective feedback in native nonnative discourse. Language Learning, 34 (2), 19-45.
12. Doughty, C., & Williams, J. (1998). Focus on form in classroom second language acquisi-tion. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
13. Doughty, C. (2000). Negotiating the L2 linguistic environment. University of Hawaii Working Papers in Second Language Studies, 18 (2), 47-83.
14. Doughty, C., & Pica, T. (1986). Information-gap tasks: Do they facilitate SLA? TESOL Quarterly, 20 (2), 305-325.
15. Doughty, C., & Varela, E. (1998). Communicative focus on form. In C. Doughty & J. Williams (Eds.), Focus on form in classroom second language acquisition (pp. 114-138). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
16. Ehrlich, S., Avey, P., & Yorio, C. (1988). Discourse structure and the negotiation of comprehensible input. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 11 (4), 397-414.
17. Fernández-García, M., & Martínez-Arbelaiz, A. (2002). Negotiation of meaning in non-native speaker-nonnative speaker synchronous discussion. CALICO Journal, 19 (2), 279-294.
18. Foster, P. (1998). A classroom perspective on the negotiation of meaning. Applied Linguis-tics, 19 (1), 1-23.
19. Gass, S., & Varonis, E. (1985). Task variation and nonnative-nonnative negotiation of meaning. In S. Gass & C. Madden (Eds.), Input in second language acquisition. (pp, 149-161). Rowley, MA: Newbury House.
20. Gass, S., & Varonis, E. M. (1994). Input, interaction, and second language production. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 16 (3), 283-302.
21. Gass, S. (1990). Second and foreign language learning: Same, different or none of the above? In B. VanPatten & J. Lee (Eds.), Second language acquisition-foreign language learning (pp. 34-44). Clevedon, UK: Multilingual Matters.
22. Goffman, E. (1974). Frame analysis. New York: Harper & Row.
23. Hatch, E., Flashner, V., & Hunt, L. (1986). The experience model and language teaching. In R. Day (Ed.), Talking to learn (pp. 5-22). Rowley, MA: Newbury House.
24. Hymes, D. (1974). Foundations in sociolinguistics: An ethnographic approach. Philadel-phia: University of Pennsylvania Press.
25. Kelm, O. (1992). The use of synchronous computer networks in second language instruc-tion: A preliminary report, Foreign Language Annals, 25 (5), 441-545.
26. Kern, R. G. (1995). Restructuring classroom interaction with networked computers: Effects on quality and characteristics of language production. The Modern Language Journal, 79, (5), 457-476.
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. Lamy, M., & Goodfellow, R. (1999). “Reflective conversation” in the virtual language classroom. Language Learning & Technology, 2 (2), 43-61. Retrieved October 10, 2005, from http://llt.msu.edu/vol2num2/article2
29. Long, M. (1983a). Native speaker/non-native speaker conversation and the negotiation of comprehensible input. Applied Linguistics, 4 (2), 126-141.
30. Long, M. (1983b) Native speaker/non-native speaker conversation in the second language classroom. In M. Clarke & J. Handscombe (Eds.), On TESOL ‘82: Pacific perspectives on language learning and teaching (pp. 207-225). Washington, DC: TESOL.
31. Long, M. (1989). Tasks, group and task-group interactions. University of Hawaii Working Papers in ESL, 8, 1-26.
32. Long, M. (1990). The least a second language acquisition theory needs to explain. TESOL Quarterly, 24 (4), 649-666.
33. Long, M. (1996). The role of the linguistic environment in second language acquisition. In W. Ritchie & T. J. Bhatia (Eds.), Handbook of second language acquisition (pp. 413-468). Orlando, FL: Academic Press.
34. Long, M., & Robinson, P. (1998). Focus on form: Theory, research, and practice. In C. Doughty & J. Williams (Eds.), Focus on form in classroom second language acquisition (pp. 15-41). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
35. 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.
36. Mackey, A., Oliver, R., & Leeman, J. (2003). Interactional input and the incorporation of feedback: An exploration of NS-NNS and NNS-NNS adult and child dyads. Language Learning, 53 (1), 35-66.
37. Markee, N. P. (1995). Teachers’ answers to students’ question: problematizing the issue of making meaning. Issues in Applied Linguistics, 16 (2), 63-92.
38. Musumeci, D. (1996). Teacher-learner negotiation in content-based instruction: Communication at cross-purposes? Applied Linguistics, 17 (3), 286-325.
39. Ortega, L. (1999). Planning and focus on form in L2 oral performance. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 21 (1), 109-148.
40. Pica, T. (1987). Second language acquisition, social interaction, and the classroom. Applied Linguistics, 8 (1), 3-21.
41. Pica, T., Doughty, C., & Young, R. (1986). The impact of interaction on comprehension: Do interactional modifications help? International Review of Applied Linguis-tics, 72, 1-25.
42. Pica, T., Young, R., & Doughty, C. (1987). The impact of interaction on comprehension. TESOL Quarterly, 21, 737-758.
43. Pica, T., Kanagy, R. & Falodun, J. (1993). Choosing and using communication tasks for second language instruction. In G. Crooks & S. Gass (Eds.), Tasks and language learning: Integrating theory and practice, (pp. 9-34). Clevedon, England: Mul-tilinguial Matters.
44. Pica, T., Lincoln-Porter, F., Paninos, D., & Linnel, J. (1996). Language learners’ interac-tion: How does it address the input, output, and feedback needs for L2 learners? TESOL Quarterly, 30, 59-84.
45. Pica, T., & Garcia-Mayo, P. (2000). L2 learner interaction in a foreign language context: Are learning needs addressed? International Review of Applied Linguistics, 38, 35-58.
46. Rutherford, W. & Sharwood Smith, M. (1985). Conscious-raising and universal grammar. Applied Linguistics, 6 (3), 274-282.
47. Rost, M., & Ross, S. (1991). Learner use of strategies in interaction: Typology and teach-ability. Language Learning, 41, 231-249.
48. Sato, C. (1986). Conversation and interlanguage development: Rethinking the connection. In R. Day (Ed.), Talking to learn (pp. 23-45). Rowley, MA: Newbury House.
49. Schiffrin, D. (1994). Approaches to discourse: Language as social interaction. Cambridge, MA: Blackwell publishers, Inc.
50. Schmidt, R. (1990). The role of consciousness in second language learning. Applied Lin-guistics, 11 (2), 17-46.
51. Sharwood Smith, M. (1991). Speaking to many minds: On the relevance of different types of language information for the L2 learner. Second Language Research, 7, 118-132.
52. Shehadah, A. (1999). Non-native speakers’ production of modified comprehensible output and second language learning. Language Learning, 49 (4), 627-675.
53. Shieffelin, B., & Ochs, E. (1986). Language socialization. Annual Review of Anthropology, 15, 163-191.
54. Skehan, P. (1994). Second language acquisition strategies, interlanguage development, and task-based learning. In M. Bygate, A. Tonkyn, & E. Williams (Eds.), Grammar and the language teacher (pp. 175-199). New York: Prentice-Hall.
55. Skehan, P. (1998). A cognitive approach to language learning. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
56. Smith, B. (2003). Computer-mediated negotiated interaction: An expanded model. The Modern Language Journal, 87 (1), 38-57.
57. Sotillo, M. (2000). Discourse functions and syntactic complexity in synchronous and asynchronous communication. Language Learning & Technology, 4 (1), 82-119. Retrieved October 10, 2005, from http://llt.msu.edu/vol4num1/sotillo/default.html
58. Sullivan, N., & Pratt, E. (1996). A comparative study of two ESL writing environments: A computer-assisted classroom and a traditional oral classroom. System, 29 (4), 491-501.
59. Tarone, E., & Liu, G. Q. (1995). Situational context, variation, and second language acquisition theory. In G. Cook & B. Seidlhofer (Eds.), Principle and practice in applied linguistics: Studies in honor of H. G. Widdowson (pp. 107-124). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
60. Topping, K. (1998). Peer assessment between students in colleges and universities. Review of Educational Research, 68 (3), 249-276.
61. Toyoda, E., & Harrison, R. (2002). Categorization of text chat communication between learners and native speakers of Japanese. Language Learning & Technology, 6 (1), 82-99. Retrieved October 10, 2005, from http://llt.msu.edu/vol6num1/toyo da/default.html
62. Van den Branden, K. (1997). Effects of negotiation on language learners’ output. Language Learning, 47, 589-636.
63. Varonis, E., & Gass, S. (1985). Non-native/non-native conversations: A model for negotiation of meaning. Applied Linguistics, 6 (1), 71-90.
64. Warschauer, M. (1996). Comparing face-to-face and electronic communication in the second language classroom. CALICO Journal, 13 (1), 7-26.
65. Warschauer, M. (1998). Online learning in sociocultural context. Anthropology & Education Quarterly, 29 (1), 68-88.
66. Wendel, J. (1997). Planning and second-language narrative production. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. Temple University, Philadelphia, PA.
67. Wigglesworth, G. (1997). An investigation of planning and proficiency level on oral test discourse. Language Testing, 14, 85-106.