A Comparison of Input Enhancement and Explicit Instruction of Mitigators.

As the instructional shortcomings of Focus on FormS and Focus on Meaning have surfaced, Focus on Form (i.e., drawing brief attention to linguistic forms while learners engage primarily in meaning) has slowly but steadily gained the attention of researchers and teachers. The research question underlying this study was whether Focus on Form could be applied to the teaching of second language pragmatics. This study compared two instructional paradigms: Focus on FormS and Focus on Form. Provoked by the proposition that even advanced L2 learners cannot fully utilize pragmatic knowledge (e.g., mitigators), the researchers attempted to raise learners' consciousness about mitigators. Two questions were asked. First, to what extent does input enhancement (Focus on Form) affect learners' ability to recognize the appropriate use of mitigators? Second, does it affect their recognition ability as well as explicit instruction (Focus on FormS) does? In this study, each of three randomly assigned groups (Focus on Form, Focus on FormS and Control) of adult ESL students took two types of posttests: listening comprehension and pragmatic recognition. The researchers created two versions of a videotaped drama in which the characters performed mitigated requests. The Focus on Form group watched the version that contained typographical enhancement of mitigators in captions, whereas the Focus on FormS group watched the version that gave the participants explicit instruction on mitigators. The Control Group watched a different videotape that did not show any requests. The participants' task in each group was to comprehend the content of the drama. Although the statistical results were inconclusive, the empirical study itself provides considerable insight into the operationalization of Focus on Form for purposes of interlanguage pragmatics pedagogy.

[1]  James Dean Brown,et al.  Developing prototypic measures of cross-cultural pragmatics , 1998 .

[2]  M. Tomasello,et al.  Down the Garden Path: Inducing and correcting overgeneralization errors in the foreign language classroom , 1988, Applied Psycholinguistics.

[3]  Yoshinori J. Fukuya,et al.  Consciousness-Raising of Downgraders in Requests. , 2002 .

[4]  P. Brown,et al.  Universals in language usage: Politeness phenomena , 1978 .

[5]  C. Doughty.  Second Language Instruction Does Make a Difference , 1991, Studies in Second Language Acquisition.

[6]  Bill VanPatten,et al.  Explicit Instruction and Input Processing , 1993, Studies in Second Language Acquisition.

[7]  N. S. Prabhu,et al.  Second Language Pedagogy , 1987 .

[8]  S. Fotos.  Consciousness Raising and Noticing through Focus on Form: Grammar Task Performance versus Formal Instruction , 1993 .

[9]  Issues and Terminology in Long Term Care , 2022 .

[10]  Michael H. Long.  INPUT, INTERACTION, AND SECOND‐LANGUAGE ACQUISITION , 1981 .

[11]  Richard Schmidt,et al.  Consciousness, Learning and Interlanguage Pragmatics , 1990 .

[12]  Sandra Lee McKay.  On Notional Syllabuses. , 1980 .

[13]  B. Vanpatten,et al.  Input Processing and Second Language Acquisition: A Role for Instruction , 1993 .

[14]  Kristine Billmyer,et al.  "I really like your lifestyle": ESL Learners learning how to compliment , 1990 .

[15]  LESTER LOSCHKY,et al.  5 Grammar and Task-Based Methodology , .

[16]  A. Trosborg.  Interlanguage Pragmatics: Requests, Complaints, and Apologies , 1994 .

[17]  Stephen Krashen,et al.  The Natural Approach , 1983 .

[18]  Rod Ellis,et al.  Learning to Communicate in the Classroom , 1992, Studies in Second Language Acquisition.

[19]  Michael Tomasello,et al.  Feedback for Language Transfer Errors , 1989, Studies in Second Language Acquisition.

[20]  Michael H. Long.  Native speaker/non-native speaker conversation and the negotiation of comprehensible input1 , 1983 .

[21]  Michael H. Long.  The Role of the Linguistic Environment in Second Language Acquisition , 1996 .

[22]  Martha Trahey.  Positive evidence in second language acquisition: some long-term effects , 1996 .

[23]  Kathleen Bardovi-Harlig,et al.  Learning the Rules of Academic Talk , 1993, Studies in Second Language Acquisition.

[24]  Manfred Pienemann,et al.  Psychological Constraints on the Teachability of Languages , 1984, Studies in Second Language Acquisition.

[25]  Marjorie Bingham Wesche,et al.  Second Language Vocabulary Acquisition: Vocabulary enhancement activities and reading for meaning in second language vocabulary acquisition , 1996 .

[26]  M. V. Mulken.  Politeness markers in French and Dutch requests , 1996 .

[27]  Jürgen M. Meisel,et al.  On determining developmental stages in natural second language acquisition , 1981, Studies in Second Language Acquisition.

[28]  Michael Sharwood Smith,et al.  Input Enhancement in Instructed SLA , 1993, Studies in Second Language Acquisition.

[29]  Lydia White,et al.  Positive Evidence and Preemption in the Second Language Classroom , 1993, Studies in Second Language Acquisition.

[30]  Catherine Doughty,et al.  Does textual enhancement promote noticing? A protocol analysis , 1995 .

[31]  Yoshinori J. Fukuya,et al.  Does Focus on Form Work for Teaching Sociopragmatics , 1998 .

[32]  M. Kubota.  Teachability of Conversational Implicature to Japanese EFL Learners. , 1995 .

[33]  Z. Dörnyei,et al.  Direct Approaches in L2 Instruction: A Turning Point in Communicative Language Teaching? , 1997 .

[34]  Gabriele Kasper,et al.  Can pragmatic competence be taught , 1997 .

[35]  R. Schmidt.  Awareness and Second Language Acquisition , 1992, Annual Review of Applied Linguistics.

[36]  J. House.  Developing Pragmatic Fluency in English as a Foreign Language: Routines and Metapragmatic Awareness , 1996, Studies in Second Language Acquisition.

[37]  Manfred Pienemann,et al.  Is Language Teachable? Psycholinguistic Experiments and Hypotheses , 1989 .

[38]  Alison Mackey,et al.  Conversational Interaction and Second Language Development: Recasts, Responses, and Red Herrings? , 1998 .

[39]  Michael H. Long.  Focus on Form: A Design Feature in Language Teaching Methodology , 1991 .

[40]  Kathleen Bardovi-Harlig,et al.  Congruence in Native and Nonnative Conversations: Status Balance in the Academic Advising Session * , 1990 .

[41]  T. Hill,et al.  The development of pragmatic competence in an EFL context , 1997 .

[42]  R. Schmidt.  The role of consciousness in second language learning , 1990 .

[43]  Sharon Lapkin,et al.  Evaluating Bilingual Education: A Canadian Case Study , 1984 .

[44]  R. Lyster.  The Effect of Functional-Analytic Teaching on Aspects of French Immersion Students' Sociolinguistic Competence. , 1994 .

[45]  Kenneth R. Rose,et al.  AN EXPLORATORY CROSS-SECTIONAL STUDY OF INTERLANGUAGE PRAGMATIC DEVELOPMENT , 2000, Studies in Second Language Acquisition.

[46]  Sandra Fotos,et al.  Teachers of English to Speakers of Other Languages , Inc . ( TESOL ) Integrating Grammar Instruction and Communicative Language Use through Grammar Consciousness-Raising Tasks , 2019 .

[47]  Andrew D. Cohen,et al.  The Learning of Complex Speech Act Behaviour , 1990 .