Jump to ContentJump to Main Navigation
Show Summary Details
More options …

 

Language Learning in Higher Education

Journal of the European Confederation of Language Centres in Higher Education (CercleS)

Editor-in-Chief: Szczuka-Dorna, Liliana / O’Rourke, Breffni

Online
ISSN
2191-6128
See all formats and pricing
Online
Institutional Subscription
€ [D] 233.00 / US$ 350.00 / GBP 191.00*
Individual Subscription
€ [D] 49.00 / US$ 74.00 / GBP 40.00*
Print
Institutional Subscription
€ [D] 233.00 / US$ 350.00 / GBP 191.00*
Individual Subscription
€ [D] 233.00 / US$ 350.00 / GBP 191.00*
Print + Online
Institutional Subscription
€ [D] 277.00 / US$ 420.00 / GBP 227.00*
Individual Subscription
€ [D] 277.00 / US$ 420.00 / GBP 227.00*
*Prices in US$ apply to orders placed in the Americas only. Prices in GBP apply to orders placed in Great Britain only. Prices in € represent the retail prices valid in Germany (unless otherwise indicated). Prices are subject to change without notice. Prices do not include postage and handling if applicable. RRP: Recommended Retail Price.
More options …

Negotiation of meaning and language-related episodes in synchronous, audio-based Chinese-German eTandem

Julia Renner
  • Corresponding author
  • Department of Linguistics, Unit of language learning and teaching research, University of Vienna, Sensengasse 3a, 1090 Wien, Austria
  • Email
  • Other articles by this author:
  • De Gruyter OnlineGoogle Scholar
Published Online: 2017-05-09 | DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/cercles-2017-0006

30,00 € / $42.00 / £23.00

Get Access to Full Text

Abstract

The present paper examines negotiation of meaning and language-related episodes in Chinese-German eTandem interaction, focusing on Chinese as target language. Against the background of the interactionist approach to language learning and drawing upon Swain and Lapkin’s (1998, Interaction and second language learning: Two adolescent French immersion students working together. Modern Language Journal 82. 320–337) concept of “language-related episodes” (LREs), the main focus of this paper is to investigate how negotiation of meaning is undertaken in this particular learning environment, to what extent LREs occur in Chinese-German eTandems, and what the characteristics of these episodes are. Furthermore, differences between novice CFL (Chinese as a Foreign Language) learners and intermediate CFL learners participating in eTandems are identified. The findings show that the participants only use the target languages (Chinese and German) to negotiate meaning. Novice CFL learners rely heavily on code-switching to German, while intermediate learners mainly use Chinese. Compared to negotiation of meaning, LREs occur sparingly and cover word searches and reflections on grammar, pronunciation, and style/expression. Text-chat usage during negotiation of meaning and LREs points to the fact that focus on linguistic form is supported by a switch from oral mode to text-chat.

Keywords: audio-visual eTandem; synchronous CMC; negotiation of meaning; language-related episodes; focus on form

References

  • Akiyama, Y. 2014. Using skype to focus on form in Japanese telcollaboration: Lexical categories as a new task variable. In L. Shuai & P. Swanson (eds.), Engaging language learners through technology integration: Theory, application and outcomes, 181–209. Hershey, PA: IGI Global.Google Scholar

  • Apfelbaum, B. 1993. Erzählen im Tandem. Sprachlernaktivitäten und die Konstruktion eines Diskursmusters in der Fremdsprache. Tübingen: Narr Verlag.Google Scholar

  • Appel, C. & R. Gilabert. 2002. Motivation and task performance in a task-based web-based tandem project. ReCALL 14(1). 16–31.Google Scholar

  • Bechtel, M. 2003. Interkulturelles Lernen beim Sprachenlernen im Tandem – eine diskursanalytische Untersuchung. Tübingen: Narr Verlag.Google Scholar

  • Bower, J. & S. Kawaguchi. 2011. Negotiation of meaning and corrective feedback in Japanese/English eTandem. Language Learning & Technology 15(1). 41–71.Google Scholar

  • Brammerts, H. 1996. Tandem language learning via the Internet and international email tandem network. In D. Little & H. Brammerts (eds.), A guide to language learning in tandem via the Internet (CLCS Occasional Paper No.46). Dublin: Trinity College.Google Scholar

  • Brammerts, H. & M. Calvert. 2001. Lernen durch Kommunizieren im Tandem. In H. Brammerts & K. Kleppin (eds.), Selbstgesteuertes Sprachenlernen im Tandem – Ein Handbuch, 27–38. Tübingen: Stauffenburg Verlag.Google Scholar

  • Bueno-Alastuey, C. 2013. Interactional feedback in synchronous voice-based computer- mediated communication: Effect of dyad. System 41. 543–559.Google Scholar

  • Cappellini, M. 2016. Roles and scaffolding in teletandem interactions: A study of the relations between the sociocultural and the language learning dimensions in a French-Chinese teletandem. Innovation in Language Learning and Teaching 10(1). 6–20.Google Scholar

  • Cziko, G. 2004. Electronic tandem language learning (eTandem): A third approach to second language learning for the 21st century. CALICO Journal 22(1). 25–39.Google Scholar

  • El-Hariri, Y. 2016. Learner perspectives on task design for oral-visual eTandem language learning. Innovation in Language Learning and Teaching 10(1). 49–72.Google Scholar

  • El-Hariri, Y. & N. Jung. 2015. Distanzen überwinden. Über das Potenzial audio-visueller e-Tandems für den Deutschunterricht von Erwachsenen in Kolumbien. Zeitschrift für interkulturellen Fremdsprachenunterricht 20(1). 106–139.Google Scholar

  • El-Hariri, Y., N. Jung & A. Angulo. 2016. Distanzen überwunden? Eine Evaluation von e-Tandemerfahrungen Deutschlernender in Kolumbien. Zeitschrift für interkulturellen Fremdsprachenunterricht 21(1). 176–208.Google Scholar

  • Ellis, R. 2016. Focus on form: A critical review. Language Teaching Research 20(3). 405–428.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Ellis, R., H. Basturkmen & S. Loewen. 2002. Doing focus-on-form. System 30. 419–432.Google Scholar

  • European Commission. 2012. Europeans and their languages. Special Eurobarometer 386. http://ec.europa.eu/public_opinion/archives/ebs/ebs_386_en.pdf (accessed 14 June 2016).

  • Gass, S. & E. M. Varonis. 1985. Non-native/non-native conversations: A model for negotiation of meaning. Applied Linguistics 6(1). 71–90.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Gilmore, A. 2007. Authentic materials and authenticity in foreign language learning. Language Teaching 40(2). 97–118.Google Scholar

  • Goffman, E. 1967. Interaction ritual. Essays in face-to-face behaviour. New York: Doubleday.Google Scholar

  • Hampel, R. & U. Stickler. 2012. The use of videoconferencing to support multimodal interaction in an online language classroom. ReCALL 24(2). 116–137.Google Scholar

  • Hauck, M. & B. L. Youngs. 2008. Telecollaboration in multimodal environments: The impact of task design and learner interaction. Computer Assisted Language Learning 21. 87–124.Google Scholar

  • Jauregi, K. & E. Bañados. 2008. Virtual interaction through video-web communication: A step towards enriching and internationalizing language learning programs. ReCALL 20(2). 183–207.Google Scholar

  • Kötter, M. 2003. Negotiation of meaning and codeswitching in online tandems. Language Learning and Technology 7(2). 145–172.Google Scholar

  • Kotter, M. 2002. Tandem learning on the internet: Learner interactions in virtual online environment (MOOs). Frankfurt am Main & Vienna: Lang.Google Scholar

  • Little, D., E. Ushioda, M. C. Appel, J. Moran, B. O’Rourke & K. Schwienhorst. 1999. Evaluating tandem language learning by e-mail: Report on a bilateral project. CLCS Occasional Paper 55. Dublin: Trinity College.Google Scholar

  • Loewen, S. 2014. Introduction to instructed second language acquisition. London: Routledge.Google Scholar

  • Long, M. 1983. Linguistic and conversational adjustments to non-native speakers. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 5(2). 177–193.Google Scholar

  • Long, M. 1985. Input and second language acquisition theory. In S. M. Gass & C. G. Madden (eds.), Input in second language acquisition, 377–393. Rowley, MA: Newbury House.Google Scholar

  • Long, M. 1996. The role of the linguistic environment in second language acquisition. In W. Ritchie & T. Bhatia (eds.), Handbook of second language acquisition, 413–468. San Diego: Academic Press.Google Scholar

  • Mackey, A. 2012. Input, interaction, and corrective feedback in L2 learning. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

  • O’Dowd, R. 2003. Understanding the “other side”: Intercultural learning in a Spanish-English e-mail exchange. Language Learning & Technology 7(2). 118–144.Google Scholar

  • O’Dowd, R. (2006). Telecollaboration and the development of intercultural communicative competence. Munich: Langenscheidt.Google Scholar

  • O’Dowd, R. & P. Ware. 2008. Peer feedback on language form in telecollaboration. Language Learning & Technology 12(1). 43–63.Google Scholar

  • O’Dowd, R. & P. Ware. 2009. Critical issues in telecollaborative task design. Computer Assisted Language Learning 22(2). 173–188.Google Scholar

  • O’Rourke, B. 2005. Form-focused interaction in online tandem learning. CALICO Journal 22(3). 433–466.Google Scholar

  • O’Rourke, B. 2007. Models of Telecollaboration (1): ETandem. In R. O’Dowd (ed.), Online intercultural exchange: An introduction for foreign language teachers, 41–61. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar

  • Pinner, R. S. 2016. Reconceptualising authenticity for English as a global language. Bristol: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar

  • Ramos, K. A. 2015. Interactants’ beliefs in teletandem: Implications for the teaching of Portuguese as a foreign language. Documentação de Estudos em Lingüística Teórica e Aplicada 31(3). 691–709.Google Scholar

  • Renner, J. 2016. Task-Entwicklung für und mit E-Tandems. In J. Renner, I. E. Fink & M.-L. Volgger (eds.), E-Tandems im schulischen Fremdsprachenunterricht. 53–78. Vienna: Löcker Verlag.Google Scholar

  • Schmelter, L. 2004. Selbstgesteuertes oder potenziell expansives Fremdsprachenlernen im Tandem. Tübingen: Narr Verlag.Google Scholar

  • Schmidt, R. 1990.The role of consciousness in second language learning. Applied Linguistics 11. 129–158.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Schmidt, R. 1994. Deconstructing consciousness in search of useful definitions for applied linguistics. In J. H. Hulstijn & R. Schmidt (eds.), Consciousness in second language learning (AILA Review 11). 11–26.Google Scholar

  • Schmidt, R. 2001. Attention. In W. P. Robinson & M. Long (eds.), Cognition and second language instruction, 3–32. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

  • Swain, M. & S. Lapkin. 1995. Problems in output and the cognitive processes they generate: A step towards second language learning. Applied Linguistics 16(3). 371–391.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Swain, M. & S. Lapkin. 1998. Interaction and second language learning: Two adolescent French immersion students working together. Modern Language Journal 82. 320–337.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Telles, J. A. 2015a. Learning foreign languages in teletandem: Resources and strategies. Documentação de Estudos em Lingüística Teórica e Aplicada 31(3). 603–632.Google Scholar

  • Telles, J. A. 2015b. Teletandem and performativity. Revista Brasileira de Linguística Aplicada 15(1). 1–30.Google Scholar

  • Tian, J. & Y. Wang. 2010. Taking language learning outside the classroom: Learners’ perspectives of eTandem language learning via skype. Innovation in Language Learning and Teaching 4(3). 181–197.Google Scholar

  • Tudini, V. 2003. Using native speakers in chat. Language Learning & Technology 7(3). 141–159.Google Scholar

  • Van der Zwaard, R. & A. Bannink. 2014 Video call or chat? Negotiation of meaning and issues of face in telecollaboration. System 44. 1–12.Google Scholar

  • Van der Zwaard, R. & A. Bannink. 2016. Nonoccurrence of negotiation of meaning in task-based synchronous computer-mediated communication. Modern Language Journal 100(3). 625–640.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Vassallo, M. L. & J. Telles. 2006. Foreign language learning in-tandem: Theoretical principles and research perspectives. The ESPecialist 25(1). 1–37.Google Scholar

  • Vetter, E. & M. L. Volgger. 2016. Was die SchülerInnen wirklich aus dem Projekt gemacht haben. In J. Renner, I. E. Fink & M. L. Volgger (eds.), E-Tandems im schulischen Fremdsprachenunterricht. 9–36. Vienna: Löcker Verlag.Google Scholar

  • Wang, J., C. Berger & N. Szilas 2012. Pedagogical design of an eTandem Chinese-French writing course. Journal of Universal Computer Science 18(3). 393–409.Google Scholar

  • Wang, Y. 2013. Negotiation of meaning in multimodal tandem learning via desktop videoconferencing. International Journal of Computer-Assisted Language Learning and Teaching 3(2). 41–55.Google Scholar

  • Weskamp, R. 1999. Unterricht im Wandel – Autonomes Fremdsprachenlernen als Konzept für schülerorientierten Fremdsprachenunterricht. In C. Edelhoff & R. Weskamp (eds.), Autonomes Fremdsprachenlernen, 8–19. Ismaning: Hueber Verlag.Google Scholar

  • Wigham, C. & T. Chanier. 2015. Interactions between text chat and audio modalities for L2 communication and feedback in the synthetic world “Second Life”. Computer Assisted Language Learning 28(3). 260–283.Google Scholar

About the article

Julia Renner

Julia Renner holds a BA in Communication Studies and a BA / MA in Chinese Studies from the University of Vienna. She has been granted a PhD scholarship (Austrian Academy of Sciences) and is currently pursuing her studies in the field of language teaching and learning research, focusing on interaction in Chinese - German eTandems.

Published Online: 2017-05-09

Published in Print: 2017-05-24

Citation Information: Language Learning in Higher Education, Volume 7, Issue 1, Pages 137–159, ISSN (Online) 2191-6128, ISSN (Print) 2191-611X, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/cercles-2017-0006.

Export Citation

© 2017 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston.Get Permission

Comments (0)

Please log in or register to comment.
Log in