Cover not available
Part of
Language Learning, Discourse and Cognition: Studies in the tradition of Andrea Tyler
Edited by Lucy Pickering and Vyvyan Evans
[Human Cognitive Processing 64] 2018
► pp. 249–273

Chapter 10
Effects of L2 exposure on the use of discourse devices in L2 storytelling

This study builds on Nakahama, Tyler and van Lier (2001), which showed that conversation provides a plethora of learning opportunities as opposed to decontextualized, mechanical types of activities. The study investigates second language (L2) storytelling by Japanese learners of English as a second language (ESL) and English as a foreign language (EFL) while talking with native speaker interlocutors. Major differences were found between the two groups. ESL learners produced more words and discourse markers (DMs) than their EFL counterparts. Furthermore, while the EFL learners’ narratives were monologic, the ESL learners’ narratives were dialogic and involved NS collaborations. Negotiation of meaning was found in both groups when non-understanding occurred during the storytelling. However, while the EFL learners’ errors received recasts from the NS, the ESL learners’ errors went uncorrected by their interlocutor.
Keywords: discourse markers, English as a Second/Foreign Language, narratives
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Background
    • 2.1Narrative as a means of communication
    • 2.2Collaboration between speakers and listeners in storytelling
    • 2.3Discourse markers (DMs)
    • 2.4The effects of learning environment on L2 pragmatics
  • 3.Method
    • 3.1Participants
    • 3.2Procedures
    • 3.3Analysis
  • 4.Results and discussion
    • 4.1Use of DMs (oh, okay and y’know)
    • 4.2Use of oh
    • 4.3Use of okay
    • 4.4Use of y’know
    • 4.5L1 use in learner discourse
    • 4.6Q & A or conversation
    • 4.7Recast and negotiation of meaning
    • 4.8Post hoc interview with the NSs
  • 5.Conclusion
  • 6.Limitations and implications
  • Acknowledgements
  • References
  • Appendix
Published online: 20 December 2018
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/hcp.64.11nak
References (48)
References
Ajmer, K. (2002). English discourse particles: Evidence from a corpus. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bachman, L. F., & Palmer, A. S. (1996). Language testing in practice. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Bardovi-Harlig, K. (2000). Tense and aspect in second language acquisition: Form, meaning, and use. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
(2008). One functional approach to second language acquisition: The concept-oriented approach. In B. VanPatten & J. Williams (Eds.), Theories in second language acquisition (pp. 57–75). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Bardovi-Harlig, K., & Dörnyei, Z. (1998). Do language learners recognize pragmatic violations? Pragmatic awareness in instructed L2 learning. TESOL Quarterly, 32, 233–262. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Berman, R. & Slobin, D. (1994). Relating events in narrative: A crosslinguistic developmental study. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Carter, R. A. & McCarthy, M. J. (2006). Cambridge grammar of English: A comprehensive guide to spoken and written grammar and usage. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Chaudron, C. & Parker, K. (1990). Discourse markedness and structural markedness: The acquisition of English noun phrases. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 12, 43–64. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Choi, S. & Lantolf, J. P. (2008). Representation and embodiment of meaning in L2 communication: Motion events in the speech and gesture of advanced L2 Korean and L2 English speakers. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 30, 191–224. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cortazzi, M. & Jin, L. (1994). Narrative analysis: Applying linguistics to cultural models of learning. In D. Graddol & J. Swann (Eds.), Evaluating language (pp. 75–90). Clevedon, U.K.: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
Crosthwaite, P. (2011). The effect of collaboration on the cohesion and coherence of L2 narrative discourse between English NS and Korean L2 English users. Asian EFL Journal, 13, 135–166.Google Scholar
De Fina, A. (1997). An analysis of Spanish bien as a marker of classroom management in teacher-student interaction. Journal of Pragmatics, 28, 337–54. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fung, L. & Carter, R. (2007). Discourse markers and spoken English: Native and learner use in pedagogic settings. Applied Linguistics, 28, 410–439. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gardner, R. (2001). When listeners talk: Response tokens and listener stance. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Goodwin, C. (1995). The negotiation of coherence within conversation. In M. A. Gernsbacher & T. Givón (Eds.), Coherence in spontaneous text (pp. 117–137). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Heritage, J. (1984). A change-of-state token and aspects of its sequential placement. In J. M. Atkinson & J. Heritage (Eds), Structures of social action (pp. 299–335). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
(1998). Oh-prefaced responses to inquiry. Language in Society, 27, 291–334. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Huebner, T. (1985). System and variability in interlanguage syntax. Language Learning, 35, 141–163. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Jarvis, S. (2002). Topic continuity in L2 English article use. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 24, 387–418. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Jarvis, S. & Pavlenko, A. (2010). Crosslinguistic influence in language and cognition. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Maschler, Y. & Schiffrin, D. (2015). Discourse markers: Language, meaning, and context. In D. Tannen, H. E. Hamilton, & D. Schiffrin (Eds.), The handbook of discourse analysis. 2nd edition (pp. 189–221). UK: Wiley Blackwell.Google Scholar
Markee, M. (2000). Conversation analysis. Mahwah, NJ: Laurence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Mayer, M. (1969). Frog, where are you? New York: Dial Press.Google Scholar
McCarthy, M. J. & R. A. Carter. (1995). Spoken grammar: What is it and how can we teach it? English Language Teaching Journal, 49(3), 207–218 DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mitchell, R., Myles, F., & Marsden, E. (2013). Second language learning theories (3rd edition). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Nakahama, Y. (2003). Development of referential management in L2 Japanese: A film retelling task. Studies in Language and Culture, 25(1), 127–146. Graduate School of Languages and Cultures. Nagoya University.Google Scholar
(2005). Emergence of conversation in a semi-structured L2 English interview. Studies in Language and Culture, 27(1), 133–147. Graduate School of Languages and Cultures. Nagoya University.Google Scholar
(2011). Referent markings in L2 narratives: Effects of task complexity, learners’ L1 and proficiency level. Tokyo: Hituzi Shobo Publishing.Google Scholar
Nakahama, Y. & Kurihara, Y. (2007). Viewpoint setting in L1 and L2 Japanese narratives. In H. Sirai, S. Arita, M. Hirakawa, S. Inagaki, M. Minami, Y. Oshima-Takane, Y. Shirai & Y. Terao (Eds.), Studies in Language Sciences, 6, 179–194. Tokyo: Kurosio Publishers.Google Scholar
Nakahama, Y., Tyler, A., & van Lier, L. (2001). Negotiation of meaning in conversational and information gap activities: A comparative discourse analysis. TESOL Quarterly, 35, 377–405. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Norrick, N. R. (2001). Discourse markers in oral narrative. Journal of Pragmatics, 33, 849–878. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2016). Discourse markers in oral narrative. In A. Capone & J. Mey (Eds.), Interdisciplinary studies in pragmatics, culture and society. (pp. 297–327). London: Springer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Odlin, T. (2005). Cross-linguistic influence and conceptual transfer: What are the concepts? Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 25, 3–25. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Riessman, C. K. (1993). Narrative analysis: Qualitative research methods. Newbury Park, London: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
Rose, K. (2000). An exploratory cross-sectional study of interlanguage pragmatic development. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 22, 27–67. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Röver, C. (2012). What learners get for free: learning of routine formulae in ESL and EFL environments. ELT Journal, 66, 10–21. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ryan, J. (2015). Overexplicit referent tracking in L2 English: Strategy, avoidance, or myth? Language Learning, 65, 824–859. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Schauer, G. (2006). Pragmatic awareness in ESL and EFL contexts: Contrast and development. Language Learning, 56, 269–318. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Schegloff, E. A. & Sacks, H. (1973). Opening up closings. Semiotica, 8, 289–327. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Schiffrin, D. (1987). Discourse markers. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Shimizu, T. (2004). Influence of learning context on L2 pragmatic realization: A comparison between JSL and JFL learners’ compliment responses. In N. Taguchi (Ed.), Pragmatic competence (pp. 167–198). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
(1993). Adult language acquisition: A view from child language study. In C. Perdue (Ed.), Adult language acquisition: Cross-linguistic perspectives (pp. 239–252). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Taguchi, N. (2008). The role of learning environment in the development of pragmatic comprehension: A comparison of gains between EFL and ESL learners. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 30, 23–452. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Tanskanen, S. K. (2006). Collaborating towards coherence: Lexical cohesion in English discourse. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wyner, L. (2014). Second language pragmatic competence: Individual differences in ESL and EFL environments. Working Papers in TESOL and Applied Linguistics, 14, 84–99. Teachers College, Columbia University.Google Scholar
Yosioka, K. (2008). Gesture and information structure in first and second language. Gesture, 8, 236–255. DOI logoGoogle Scholar