FAQ

Studia Linguistica Universitatis Iagellonicae Cracoviensis

L1 vs L2 spoken modality use: Theoretical considerations – part 2

Data publikacji: 08.07.2013

Studia Linguistica Universitatis Iagellonicae Cracoviensis, 2013, Volume 130, Issue 2, s. 129 - 138

https://doi.org/10.4467/20834624SL.13.007.1138

Autorzy

Marcin Jaroszek
Uniwersytet Jagielloński w Krakowie, Polska, ul. Gołębia 24, 31-007 Kraków
Wszystkie publikacje autora →

Abstrakt

This article discusses the role of input in the development of discourse competence with reference to modality use, as well as the role of language transfer, which can in fact cover many aspects L2 communication, for instance, cultural codes or elements of the politeness system, including modality, in L2 learning. It indicates that just exposing the learner to linguistic input may not enable them to fully comprehend the pragmalinguistic intricacies of authentic communication. It also suggests pragmalinguisticly intricate features of communication may fail to be taken in even by the advanced foreign language learner, since they may not meet the relevance requirement of the input provided.

Bibliografia

Arabski J. 2006. Language transfer in language learning and language contact. – Arabski J. (ed.). Cross-linguistic influences in the second language lexicon. New York: 12–21.

Blommaert J. 2005. Discourse: A critical introduction. Cambridge.

Goffman E. 1981. Forms of talk. Philadelphia.

Gregg K. 1984. Krashen’s Monitor and Occam’s razor. – Applied Linguistics 5: 79–100.

Grzegorczykowa R. 2007.Wstęp do językoznawstwa. Warszawa.

Gullberg M. 2008. Gestures and second language acquisition. – Robinson P., Ellis N.C. (eds.). Handbook of cognitive linguistics and second language acquisition. New York: 276–305.

Higgs T., Clifford R. 1982. The push toward communication. – Higgs T. (ed.). Curriculum, competence, and the foreign language teacher. Lilncolnwood (Illinois): 57–79.

Jakubowska E. 1999. Cross-cultural dimension of politeness in the case of Polish and English. Katowice.

Kasper G. 1992. Pragmatic transfer. – Second Language Research 8.3: 203–231.

Kellerman E. 1995. Crosslinguistic influence: Transfer to nowhere? – Annual Review of Applied

Linguistics 15: 125–150.

Krashen S. 1982. Principles and practice in second language acquisition. Oxford.

Littlewood W. 2001. Cultural awareness and the negotiation of meaning in intercultural communication. – Language Awareness 10: 189–99.

Littlewood W. 2005. Second language learning. – Davies A., Elder C. (eds.). The handbook of applied linguistics. New York: 501–524.

McLaughlin B. 1987. Theories of second-language learning. London.

Niżegorodcew A. 2007. Input for instructed L2 learners: The relevance of relevance. Clevedon.

Odlin T. 1989. Language transfer. Cross-linguistic influence in language learning. Cambridge.

Odlin T. 2008. Conceptual transfer and meaning extensions. – Robinson P., Ellis N.C. (eds.).
Handbook of cognitive linguistics and second language acquisition. New York: 306–340.

Okulska U. 2006. Pośredniość i bezpośredniość w dyskursie politycznym na przykładzie polskich i amerykańskich strategii uzyskiwania informacji w wywiadzie radiowym. –Duszak A. et al. (eds.). Korpusy w angielsko-polskim językoznawstwie kontrastywnym. Kraków: 183–209.

Pütz M. 2007. Cognitive linguistics and applied linguistics. – Geeraerts D., Cuyckens H. (eds.). The Oxford handbook of cognitive linguistics. Oxford: 1139–1159.

Ronowicz E.A. 1995. Aussies are friendly and Poles aren’t rude. Some remarks on problems in intercultural communication. – Papers and Studies in Contrastive Linguistics 30: 31–44.

Rutherford W.E. 1987. Second language grammar: Learning and teaching. Harlow.

Schmidt R. 1990. The role of consciousness in second language learning. – Applied Linguistics
11: 129–158.

Schmidt R., Frota S. 1986. Developing basic conversational ability in a second language: A case study of an adult learner of Portuguese. – Day R. (ed.). Talking to learn: Conversation in second language acquisition. Rowley (MA): 237–326.

Skehan P. 1998. A cognitive approach to language learning. Oxford.

Slobin D. 1985. Crosslinguistic evidence for the language-making capacity. – Slobin D. (ed.). The crosslinguistic study of language acquisition. [vol. 2: Theoretical issues]. New Jork: 1157–1256.

Slobin D. 1993. Adult language acquisition: A view from child language study. – Perdue C. (ed.). Adult language acquisition: Cross-linguistic perspectives. [vol. 2: The results]. Cambridge: 239–252.

Swain M. 1985. Communicative competence: Some roles of comprehensible input and comprehensible output in its development. – Gass S., Madden C. (eds.). Input in second language acquisition. Rowley (MA): 235–253.

Thornbury S. 1997. Reformulation and reconstruction: Tasks that promote ‘noticing’. – ELT Journal 51.4: 326–335.

Thorne C. 1998. Aspects of communication in a cross-cultural gatekeeping encounter. [Unpublished lecture materials. Adam Mickiewicz University]. Poznań

Widdowson H. 1990. Aspects of language teaching. Oxford.

Wilson D., Sperber. D. 2004. Relevance theory. – Ward G., Horn L. (eds.). Handbook of pragmatics. Oxford: 607–632.

Wode H. 1981. Language acquisition universals: A unified view of language acquisition. – Winitz H. (ed.). Native language and foreign language acquisition. [= Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences 379]. New York: 218–234.

Informacje

Informacje: Studia Linguistica Universitatis Iagellonicae Cracoviensis, 2013, s. 129 - 138

Typ artykułu: Oryginalny artykuł naukowy

Tytuły:

Angielski:

L1 vs L2 spoken modality use: Theoretical considerations – part 2

Autorzy

Uniwersytet Jagielloński w Krakowie, Polska, ul. Gołębia 24, 31-007 Kraków

Publikacja: 08.07.2013

Status artykułu: Otwarte __T_UNLOCK

Licencja: Żadna

Udział procentowy autorów:

Marcin Jaroszek (Autor) - 100%

Korekty artykułu:

-

Języki publikacji:

Angielski

Liczba wyświetleń: 21

Liczba pobrań: 14