L2 Vocabulary Acquisition: The Impact of Negotiated Interaction

Ng Lee Luan, Sheila Marina Sappathy

Abstract


Interaction between teachers and students during teaching/learning sessions and the language during these interactions form the main source of language input besides instructional materials from textbooks and workbooks. Research has shown that appropriate input and suitable contexts for interaction among students can lead to successful second language acquisition (SLA). This study examines the relationship between negotiated interaction and the ability to retain vocabulary items among a group of primary school English as a Second Language (ESL) learners with similar first language (L1) backgrounds. 48 participants took part in a one-way input task which involved traditional teaching/learning methods where the teacher used translations and pictures to teach vocabulary. 24 of the 48 participants took part in an additional two-way interactive task in the form of an information gap task. Learners worked in pairs to describe target vocabulary items in pictures. The interactive sessions were audio/video taped and transcribed. All the 48 participants sat for a pretest and three posttests (both immediate and delayed). The results showed that learners who negotiated for meaning in the two-way task achieved higher vocabulary test scores. The 24 students involved in the interactive task demonstrated their ability to negotiate for meaning despite their lack of proficiency in the language. As negotiated interaction has proved successful in enabling students to acquire and retain vocabulary items, such interactive tasks should be encouraged in the classroom. 


Keywords


interactional input, negotiation of meaning, second language acquisition, vocabulary retention, vocabulary acquisition.

Full Text:

PDF

References


Bitchener, J. (2003). The value of negotiated interaction for learning vocabulary. (Online) Retrieved 15 May 2009,, from http://www.englishaustralia.com/au/ea_conference03/proceedings/pdf005F_Bitchener.pdf.

Corder, S. P. (1967). The significance of learners’ errors. International Review of Applied Linguistics, 5, 161-170.

de la Fuente, M. J. (2002). Negotiation and oral acquisition of L2 vocabulary: The roles of input and output in the receptive and productive acquisition of words. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 24, 81-112.

de la Fuente, M. J. (2006). Classroom L2 vocabulary acquisition: Investigating the role of pedagogical tasks and form-focused instruction. Language Teaching Research, 10(3), 263-295.

Doughty, C. & Pica, T. (1986). “Information gap” tasks: Do they facilitate second language acquisition? TESOL Quarterly, 20(2), 305-325.

Ellis, R. (1990). Instructed second language acquisition. Oxford: Blackwell.

Ellis, R., Tanaka. Y., & Yamazaki, A. (1994). Classroom interaction, comprehension, and the acquisition of L2 word meanings. Language Learning, 44, 449-491.

Faisal, M. H. (2006). English Language and the language of development: A Malaysian perspective. International Conference IPBA 24th – 26th September 2006. (Online) Retrieved 1 November 2009, from http://apps.emoe.gov.my/ipba/rdpba/cd1/article13.pdf

Gass, S. M., & Torres, M. J. A. (2005). Attention when?: An investigation of the ordering effect of input and interaction. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 27(1), 1-31.

Krashen, S. D. (1985). The input hypothesis: issues and implications. London: Longman.

Long, M. H. (1996). Input, interaction and second language acquisition. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

New Straits Times (2005). 30 000 grads in unsuitable jobs. November 10, p.10.

Nunan, D. (1991). Language teaching methodology: A textbook for teachers. Longman.

Oliver, R. (1998). Negotiation of meaning in child interaction. The Modern Language Journal 82, 372-386.

Oliver, R. (2002). The patterns of negotiation for meaning in child interactions. The Modern Language Journal, 86(1), 97-111.

Pica, T. (1994). Research on negotiation: What does it reveal about second-language learning conditions, processes and outcomes? Language Learning, 44(3), 493-527.

Pica, T., Young, R., & Doughty, C. (1987). The impact of interaction on comprehension. Tesol Quarterly, 21, 737-758.

Swain, M. (1985). Communicative competence: Some roles of comprehensible input and comprehensible output in its development. In S. M. Gass & C. G. Madden (Eds.), Input in second language acquisition (pp. 235-253). Rowley, MA: Newbury House.

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

Wesche, M. B. (1984). Input and interaction in second language acquisition. In C. Gallaway & B. J. Richards. Input and interaction in language acquisition (pp. 219-249). London: Cambridge University Press.

Wilhelm, K. H. & Pei, B. C. (2008). University teacher and students’ perception of ELT methodologies and their effectiveness. GEMA Online™ Journal of Language Studies, 8(2), 79-102.

Zhao, S. Y. & Bitchener, J. (2007). Incidental focus on form in teacher-learner and learner-learner interactions. System 35, 431-447.


Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


 

 

 

eISSN : 2550-2131

ISSN : 1675-8021