SavedAdd your journal

Journals / The Journal of Language Learning and Teaching / 2014 / Cilt: 4 - Sayı: 2

Stressed Intonation on Recasts: Differential Effects in Comparison with Prompts

Nobuaki TAKAHASHİ
Pages
15–28
Publication Date
2016-07-14
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Perceptual saliency on negotiation moves made clear on their errors but learners further needed positive evidence for self correction.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:This study investigates the differential effects perceptual saliency of recasts in comparison with prompts in the Japanese-as-a-foreign-language (JFL) classrooms in terms of learners’ immediate uptake.
📊
Key Findings & Data:From 20 hours of first- and second-year level JFL classrooms, two types of recasts (nonsalient recasts vs. salient recasts with stressed intonation and/or facial expression) and prompts were examined on their impacts upon learners’ immediate uptake.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Perceptual saliency on negotiation moves made clear on their errors but learners further needed positive evidence for self correction.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Form-focused instruction · corrective feedback · recasts

Abstract

This study investigates the differential effects perceptual saliency of recasts in comparison with prompts in the Japanese-as-a-foreign-language (JFL) classrooms in terms of learners’ immediate uptake. Motivated by cognitive aspect of language acquisition, it is hypothesized that one crucial factor to determine the effectiveness of recasts is perceptual saliency (e.g., stressed intonation). From 20 hours of first- and second-year level JFL classrooms, two types of recasts (nonsalient recasts vs. salient recasts with stressed intonation and/or facial expression) and prompts were examined on their impacts upon learners’ immediate uptake. The results provide a clear picture of differential effects of each feedback, indicating that perceptual saliency adds power to the effectiveness of recasts in triggering learners’ noticing and self-correction, while prompts were not affected by perceptual saliency to the similar extent. Perceptual saliency on negotiation moves made clear on their errors but learners further needed positive evidence for self correction.

🔖

Cite This Article

TAKAHASHİ, N. (2016). Stressed Intonation on Recasts: Differential Effects in Comparison with Prompts. The Journal of Language Learning and Teaching, Cilt: 4 - Sayı: 2, 15–28. https://ajindex.com/articles/134672

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (15)

  1. Afshari, S. (2012). Reexamining the role of implicit and explicit focus on form: Iranian EFL context. International Journal of Linguistics, 4, 306-322.
  2. Braidi, S. (2002). Reexamining the role of recasts in native-speaker/non-native speaker interactions. Language Learning, 52, 1-42.
  3. Carroll, S., & Swain, M. (1993). Explicit and implicit negative feedback. An empirical study of the learning of linguistic generalizations. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 15, 357-386.
  4. Doughty, C., & Williams, J. (1998a). Issues and terminology. In C. Doughty & J. Williams (Eds.), Focus on form in classroom second language acquisition (pp. 1-11).
  5. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
  6. Doughty, C., & Williams, J. (1998b). Pedagogical choices in focus on form. In C. Doughty & J. Williams (Eds.), Focus on form in classroom second language acquisition (pp. 197-262).
  7. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
  8. DuBois, J., Schuetze-Coburn, S., Cumming, S., & Paolino, D. (1993). Outline of discourse transcription. In J. Edwards & M. D. Lambert (Eds.), Talking data: Transcription and coding in discourse research (pp. 45-90).
  9. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Earlbaum Associates. Egi, T. (2004). Recasts, perceptions, and l2 development. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Georgetown University, Washington, DC. Ellis, R. (2007). The differential effects of corrective feedback on two grammatical structures. In A. Mackey (Ed.), Conversational interaction in second language acquisition: A collection of empirical studies (pp. 407-452). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  10. Ellis, R., Loewen, S., & Erlam, R. (2006). Implicit and explicit corrective feedback and the acquisition of L2 grammar. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 28, 339-369.
  11. Ellis, R. & Sheen, Y. (2006). Re-examining the role of recasts in L2 acquisition. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 28, 575-600.
  12. Ishida, M. (2004). Effects of recasts on the acquisition of the aspectual form -te i-(ru) by learners of Japanese as a foreign language. Language Learning, 54, 311-394.
  13. Iwashita, N. (2003). Negative feedback and positive evidence in task-based interaction: Differential effects on L2 development. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 25, 1-36.
  14. Leeman, J. (2003). Recasts and second language development: Beyond negative evidence. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 25, 37-63.
  15. Lochtman, K. (2005). Negative feedback and learner uptake in analytic foreign language teaching. In A. Housen & M. Pierrard (Eds.), Investigations in in