Form-Meaning Connection Problem in SLA Classroom - Essay Example

Running Head: FORM-MEANING CONNECTION PROBLEM Form-Meaning Connection Problem in SLA room [The [The of the Institution] Form-Meaning Connection Problem in SLA Classroom Applied linguistics employs linguistic theory and methods in teaching and in research on learning a second language. It also looks at the errors people make as they learn another language, and tries to understand what happens in the mind of the learner. From the early research on acquisition orders to current day minimalist discussion of the crossing point between syntax and morphology, Form-Meaning Connections (FRCS) have been an integral component of Second Language Acquisition (SLA). Learners must grapple with verb inflections, nominal inflections, particles, determiners, and other FRCS as they work their way toward the creation of a linguistic system that bears resemblance to the L2. This paper attempts to link these strands of research in a unified discussion by turning attention to questions of processing. Empirical and theoretical literature on FRCS has looked at a wide range of behavioural and cognitive sub processes, beginning with the initial link between a lexical or grammatical form and its meaning(s) to the use of the form by the L2 learner within the classroom. (Felix, 2005) What Is a Form-Meaning Connection It may seem obvious that a form-meaning connection is a situation in which a form encodes some kind of referential meaning. However, the situation is a bit more complicated. Three distinct possibilities present themselves: 1. One form encodes one meaning 2. One form encodes multiple meanings A. in different contexts B. in a single context 3. Multiple forms encode the same meaning A Critical Perspective of Form-Meaning Connections The establishment of FRCS is a fundamental aspect of both first and second language acquisition. All but a few L2 learners pursue meaning first, in an effort to communicate and to understand the world around them. Research in a variety of contexts attests to this impulse. This often, though not always, means that lexical acquisition takes precedence over the acquisition of grammatical features of the language. (Bardovi-Harlig, 1995) Indeed, it has been argued that processes involved in the acquisition of the semantic and formal components of words are distinct. Despite the clear importance of FRCS, they have not often been a central focus in SLA research. In the burgeoning research from a Chomskyan perspective since the mid-1980s, syntax has continued to be the centre of the bulk of research from a theoretical perspective. However, this strand of research may be more closely connected to FRCS than it first appears, and there is good reason for that exploring second language syntax to concern themselves with FRCS. (McCarthy, 2001) Current Minimalist perspectives clearly link syntax and morphology (i.e., inflections and allomorphs, which are aspects of FRCS) either in terms of what is called feature checking or in terms of the interface between morphology and syntax for understanding the development of syntax itself (White, 2003). It seems that continued examination of the what, why, and how of establishing FRCS during second language acquisition is a profitable endeavour. Its payoff may be seen in theory and in application. Acquisition And Form-Meaning Connections Following the ideas of others, we adopt the idea that acquisition must consist of multiple, distinct but related processes that together make up what is commonly referred to as the process of acquisition. Given that the concern here is FRCS, three processes associated with their acquisition are discussed. These processes can be considered stages in that an FMC must go through each process in order to be fully acquired. We will refer to these processes/stages as (1) making the initial connection, (2) subsequent processing of the connection, and (3) accessing the connection for use. Making the Initial Connection An FMC is initially made when a learner somehow cognitively registers a form, a meaning, and the fact that the form encodes that meaning in some way. The learner either accesses a semantic, conceptual, or functional meaning from existing knowledge to process a new form, or the learner notes from the surrounding linguistic or social context that there is a new meaning or concept to be acquired and that a particular form expresses that meaning. (Collins, 2002) An example of the first is familiar: The L2 learner attaches the concept of 'airplane' with the new form, avion, based on prior (LI) experience. An example of the second might result from an initial encounter with honorifics by an L2 Japanese learner (Cook, 2001). The learner would have to create a new meaning and connect it to a form encountered in the input. This process differs from Schmidt's idea of noticing in two ways. First, Schmidt's noticing is restricted to some kind of registration of a form in working memory but does not necessarily entail a simultaneous connection to a meaning or function (Schmidt 1990, Kellerman, 1995). Second, no claims are made about level of awareness involved. Although it is likely that learners may be aware of encountering a novel lexical form, we cannot say that they have the same level of awareness or any at all for various kinds of grammatical form. It is not necessary for the present discussion whether a FMC is made with or without awareness. What is necessary is an exploration of why some FRCS are made but not others. Subsequent Processing Once an initial FMC has been made, what happens next We argue that there are always psycholinguistic consequences of the initial FMC, however weak or incomplete they may be. Any event, any experience produces a distributed pattern of activity in many parts of the cognitive system. Repeated exposure to the forms in these incipient FRCS offer several possibilities regarding robustness, completeness, and proximity to target: Initially incomplete FRCS, in which only one or some of the possible connections have been made, may be filled in for a more complete mapping. Strengthening If the initial encounter with a form in the input results in a weak connection with its meaning, subsequent encounters in the input may add to the robustness of this FMC, increasing the likelihood of long-term retention, although not guaranteeing availability for use. Conversely, lack of subsequent input may have the opposite effect: The FMC may fade and eventually disappear from memory. (Ecktnan, 2001) This is the case with such forms as verbs in the subjunctive mood in Romance languages, which are often taught early on. At the time of instruction, learners may be exposed to appropriate input that contains subjunctive forms and the connections may be initiated. Frequency of one form that is in competition with another for meaning may cause the less frequent form to fade. This scenario is illustrated by the well known U-shaped acquisition of irregular past tenses, which are temporarily pushed out by the overwhelmingly more frequent past tense forms. (Lightbown, 2002) This leads to the next process. Bardovi-Harlig (2000) describes systems in which there are several formal options for encoding past events. One-to-One Principle, learners will initially prefer to match one form to one meaning. In a language such as Spanish, which has a complex system for marking pastness, establishing target-like FRCS may take extensive exposure to and processing of input. This process of restructuring can help trim nontarget forms from the IL. A second type of restructuring will affect the initial FMC, but other FRCS in the lexical component of the IL as well. Continuing with the example of Spanish tense, one past tense is used to mark punctual, completed events, another, to mark nonpunctual events and activities. (Salaberry, 1999) Bardovi-Harlig (1997) argued that although preposition stranding may be seen as structurally more complex than pied piping, its relative frequency in the input and its novelty make it more salient than the more typologically common and straightforward pied piping. A greater understanding of how these factors impact learners' processes will be an important step in advancing the research agenda in instructed language learning (Doughty, 2003). Conclusion The effect of input frequency on SLA has been discussed extensively in recent empirical research. Although it seems evident that its impact is important, it is not yet clear if frequency affects all aspects of language in the same way: lexical versus grammatical, more versus less meaning bearing forms. There have been strong claims for the effect of frequency on lexical learning, and also on morphology and multiword units. Regarding FRCS, for example, the issue may be whether frequency is likely to have an impact on the initial establishment, strengthening, or integration of these connections. Although it seems intuitively logical that the more often L2 learners encounter a form, the greater the potential for an initial FMC to be established, this is not always the case. Universal processing mechanisms can variously support, fail to support, or actively hinder the initial establishment of FRCS. The information encoded in grammatical forms may be redundant and therefore may not draw their attention. References Bardovi-Harlig, K. (1997). Markedness and salience in second-language acquisition. Language Learning, 37, 385-407. Bardovi-Harlig, K. (2000). Tense and aspect in second language acquisition: Form, meaning and use. Language Learning, 50 (Supplement 1). Bardovi-Harlig, K., & Reynolds, D. (1995). The role of lexical aspect in the acquisition of tense and aspect. TESOL Quarterly, 29, 107-131. Collins, L. & Segalowitz, N. (2002, April). Representing and accessing knowledge in a second language: the case of temporal morphology. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Association for Applied Linguistics, Salt Lake City, UI. Cook G. & B. Seidlhofer (Eds), 2001. Principle and practice in applied linguistics: Studies in honour of H. G. Widdowson (pp. 107-124). Oxford, England: Oxford University Press. Doughty, C. (2003. Designing psycholinguistically valid instructional treatments. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Association of Applied Linguistics, Arlington, VA. Ecktnan, F., Bell, L., & Nelson, D. (2001). On the generalization of relative clause instruction in the acquisition of English as a Second Language. Applied Linguistics, 9, 10-20. Felix, S., & Hahn, A. (2005). Natural processes in classroom second language learning. Applied Linguistics, 6,223-238. Kellerman, E. (1995). Cross-linguistic influence: Transfer to nowhere In W. Grabe Ed. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 15, 125-150. Lightbown, P. (2000). Classroom SLA research and second language teaching. Applied Linguistics, 21, 431-462. McCarthy M. & N. Schmitt (Eds. ), 2001. Vocabulary description acquisition and pedagogy (pp. 140-155). Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press. Salaberry, R. (1999). The development of past tense verbal morphology in classroom L2. Applied Linguistics, 20, 151-178. Schmidt, R. (1990). The role of consciousness in second language learning. Applied Linguistics, 11, 17-46. White, L. (2003). Against comprehensible input: The input hypothesis and the development of second-language competence. Applied Linguistics, 8, 95-110 Read More