Student Speech: Email, Chat, and Spoken Language of Korean University Students
0
조회
0
다운로드
0
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
The results of research into the language learning potential of two forms of computer-mediated communication (CMC) — asynchronous email and synchronous chat — have indicated that there are a number of advantages to the use of these forms of language production, both in terms of language produced and learner attitudes. This research focused on a detailed analysis of the language production of three classes of Korean freshman university students to assess how their language varied across the three forms of spoken language, email and synchronous chat. Class A wrote emails to each other, Class B communicated through synchronous chat, and students from Class C were recorded during small group conversations. The language was then analyzed for complexity and accuracy, and compared across a range of variables. The results showed that there was not a clear distinction between language produced in asynchronous email, language produced in synchronous chat, and language produced when engaging in face-to-face communication. There were no clearly identifiable features to suggest they formed distinct language categories. Accordingly, it is suggested that other factors, such as task type and purpose of communication, may have as much influence on the language produced as the particular form in which it occurs.
Abstract
The results of research into the language learning potential of two forms of computer-mediated communication (CMC) — asynchronous email and synchronous chat — have indicated that there are a number of advantages to the use of these forms of language production, both in terms of language produced and learner attitudes. This research focused on a detailed analysis of the language production of three classes of Korean freshman university students to assess how their language varied across the three forms of spoken language, email and synchronous chat. Class A wrote emails to each other, Class B communicated through synchronous chat, and students from Class C were recorded during small group conversations. The language was then analyzed for complexity and accuracy, and compared across a range of variables. The results showed that there was not a clear distinction between language produced in asynchronous email, language produced in synchronous chat, and language produced when engaging in face-to-face communication. There were no clearly identifiable features to suggest they formed distinct language categories. Accordingly, it is suggested that other factors, such as task type and purpose of communication, may have as much influence on the language produced as the particular form in which it occurs.
참고문헌 (39)
- Abrams, Z. I., "The effect of synchronous and asynchronous CMC on oral performance in German", The Modern Language Journal, 87(2), pp.157~167 (2003)
- Beauvois, M. H., "E-Talk : Attitudes and motivation in computer-assisted classroom discussion", Computers and the Humanities, 28(3), pp.177~190 (1995)
- Beauvois, M. H., "Conversations in slow-motion : Computer-mediated communication in the foreign language classroom", The Canadian Modern Language Review, 54(2), pp.198~217 (1998)
- Biber, D., "Variation across speech and writing" (1988), Cambridge University Press
- Blake, R., "Computer mediated communication : A window on L2 Spanish interlanguage", Language Learning & Technology, 4(1), pp.120~136 (2000)
- Bygate, M., "Quality of language and purpose of task : Patterns of learners’ language on two oral communication tasks", Language Teaching Research, 3(3), pp.185~214 (1999)
- Chun, D. M., "Using computer networking to facilitate the acquisition of interactive competence", System, 22(1), pp.17~31 (1994)
- Crookes, G., "The utterance and other basic units for second language discourse analysis", Applied Linguistics, 11(2), pp.183~199 (1990)
- Egbert, J. L., "Analytic and systematic analysis of computersupported language learning environments", doctor, pp.1996
- Ellis, R., "Analyzing learner language" (2005), Oxford University Press
- Foster, P., "Measuring spoken language : A unit for all reasons", Applied Linguistics, 21(3), pp.354~375 (2000)
- Gonglewski, M., "Using email in foreign language teaching: Rationale and suggestions", The Internet TESOL Journal, 7(3) (2001)
- Gonzalez-Bueno, M., "The effects of electronic mail on Spanish L2 discourse", Language Learning & Technology, 1(2), pp.55~70 (1998)
- Halliday, M. A. K., "Spoken and written English" (1989), Oxford University Press
- Hamzah, M., "Facilitating second language acquisition (SLA) in a computermediated communication (CMC) learning environment", Internet Journal of e-Language Learning and Teaching, 1(1), pp.15~30 (2004)
- Hawkins, B., "Input in second language acquisition", pp.162~178 (1985), Newbury House
- Helgesen, M., "English firsthand 2" (2010), Pearson Longman Asia ELT
- Holmes, J., "Doubt and certainty in ESL textbooks", Applied Linguistics, 9(1), pp.21~44 (1988)
- Kern, R. G., "Restructuring classroom interaction with networked computers : Effects on quantity and characteristics of language production", The Modern Language Journal, 79(4), pp.457~476 (1995)
- Kern, R., "Literacy and language teaching" (2000), Oxford University Press
- Kern, R. G., "Perspectives on technology in learning and teaching languages", TESOL Quarterly, 40(1), pp.183~210 (2006)
- Kitade, K., "L2 learners’ discourse and SLA theories in CMC : Collaborative interaction in internet chat", Computer Assisted Language Learning, 13(2), pp.143~166 (2000)
- Ko, K. K., "Structural characteristics of computer-mediated language : A comparative analysis of interchange discourse", The Electronic Journal of Communication, 6(3) (1996)
- Lennon, P., "Error: Some problems of definition, identification, and distinction", Applied Linguistics, 12(2), pp.180~196 (1991)
- Levelt, W. J. M., "Speaking: From intention to articulation" (1989), The MIT Press
- Liu, Z., "CMC and face-to-face communication in L2 learning", Columbia University Working Papers in TESOL & Applied Linguistics, 11(2), pp.23~24 (2011)
- Ochs, E., "Syntax and semantics 12: Discourse and syntax", pp.51~80 (1979), Academic Press
- Payne, J. S., "Developing L2 oral proficiency through synchronous CMC : Output, working memory, and interlanguage development", CALICO Journal, 20(1), pp.7~32 (2002)
- Salaberry, M. R., "L2 morphosyntactic development in text-based computer mediated communication", Computer Assisted Language Learning, 13(1), pp.5~27 (2000)
- Savignon, S. J., "Beyond communicative language teaching: What’s ahead?", Journal of Pragmatics, 39(1), pp.207~220 (2007)
- Shekary, M., "Negotiation of meaning and noticing in text-based online chat", The Modern Language Journal, 90(4), pp.557~573 (2006)
- Smith, B., "Computer-mediated negotiated interaction : An expanded model", The Modern Language Journal, 87(1), pp.38~57 (2003)
- Smith, B., "The relationship between negotiated interaction, learner uptake, and lexical acquisition in task-based computer-mediated communication", TESOL Quarterly, 39(1), pp.33~58 (2005)
- Warschauer, M., "Comparing face-to-face and electronic discussion in the second language classroom", CALICO Journal, 13(2), pp.7~26 (1996)
- Warschauer, M., "The death of cyberspace and the rebirth of CALL", English Teachers’ Journal, 53(1), pp.61~67 (2000)
- Yanguas, I., "Oral computer-mediated interaction between L2 learners: It’s about time!", Language Learning & Technology, 14(3), pp.72~93 (2010)
- Young, D. J., "An investigation of students’ perspectives on anxiety and speaking", Foreign Language Annals, 23(6), pp.539~567 (1990)
- Young, D. J., "Creating a low-anxiety classroom environment: What does language anxiety research suggest?", The Modern Language Journal, 75(4), pp.426~437 (1991)
- Ziegler, M., "Synchronous computer-mediated communication and interaction: A research synthesis and meta-analysis", doctor, pp.2013