Cover not available
Article published In:
ITL - International Journal of Applied Linguistics
Vol. 111/112 (1996) ► pp.155–192

Effect of Gender on the Rate of Interaction. Some Implications for Second Language Acquisition and Classroom Practice

| University of the North South Africa

In the course of a preliminary analysis of data used in an investigation into the effect on the rate of interaction in the target language of the "level of proficiency" and the "type of task", some unexpected results for participation pattern led the analyst to pursue additional lines of enquiry. A decision was taken to consider gender in a subsequent analysis. Gender had been suggested by previous studies as being capable of affecting the learners' L2 access and performance. Some of the data of the wider investigation were re-analyzed with gender as an independent variable in lieu of, then together with, the level of proficiency. This paper reports on the results of the wider investigation and describes the findings of the analysis of data with gender as an independent variable. To set the scene for the discussion of the results relevant to gender, the paper discusses a sampling of studies on gender and communication. The results of the analysis concurred with those of at least four separate studies in which it had been suggested that gender tended to affect the learners1 target language access and performance in ways that may influence their language learning.

Published online: 1 January 1996
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/itl.111-112.07kas
References
BAIRD, J.E.
(1976) : Sex differences in group communication: A review of relevant research. The Quarterly Journal of Speech 621: 179–192. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
BAKIR, M.
(1986) : Sex differences in the approximation to standard Arabic: A case study. Anthropological Linguistics 281 (1) : 3–9.Google Scholar
BARASCH, R.M. and JAMES, C. V.
(eds.) (1994) : Beyond the Monitor Model Comments on Current Theory and Practice in Second Language Acquisition. Boston, MA: Heinle – Heinle.Google Scholar
BENTON, A.H.
(1973) : Reactions to demands to win from an opposite sex opponent. Journal of Personality 41: 430–442. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
BLACK, M.B.
(1969) : A note on gender in eliciting Ojibwa semantic structures. Anthropological Linguistics 111 (6) : 177–186.Google Scholar
BOSTROM, R.N. and KEMP, A.P.
(1968) : Type of speech, sex of speaker, and sex of subject as factors influencing persuasion. Central States Speech Journal 301: 245–252.Google Scholar
BRADLEY, P.H.
(1980) : Sex, competence and opinion deviation: An expectation state's approach. Communication Monographs 471: 105–110. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(1981) : The folk-linguistics of women's speech: An empirical examination. Communication Monographs 481: 73–90. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
BROOKS, L.
(1974) : Interactive effects of sex and status on self-dis-closure. Journal of Counselling Psychology 211: 469–474. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
CARROLL, S. and Swain, M.
(1993) : Explicit and implicit negative feedback. An empirical study of the learning of linguistic generalizations. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 15 (3) : 357–386. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
CARROLL, S., ROBERGE, Y. and SWAIN, M.
(1992) : The role of feedback in adult second language acquisition: Error correction and morphological generalizations. Applied Psycholinguistics 131: 173–198. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
CHAUDRON, C.
(1983) : Simplification of input: Topic reinstatements and their effects on L2 learners’ recognition and recall. TESOL Quarterly 171 (3) : 437–458. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
DOUGHTY, C. and PICA, T.
(1984) : Small group work in the esl classroom: Does it facilitate second language acquisition? Paper at the 18th Annual tesol Convention, Houston.Google Scholar
(1986) : ‘Information gap tasks’ : An aid to second language acquisition? TESOL Quarterly 201 (2) : 305–325. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
DUFF, P.A.
(1986) : Another look at interlanguage talk: Taking task to task. In R.R. Day (ed.), Talking to Learn: conversation in Second Language Acquisition, 147–181. Rowley, Mass.: Newbury House.Google Scholar
ELLEY, W. B. and MANGUBHAI, f.
(1983) : The impact of reading on second language learning. Reading Research Quarterly 191 (1) : 53–67. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
ELLIS, R.
(1985) : Understanding Second Language Acquisition. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
(1990) : Instructed Second Language Acquisition: Learning in the Classroom. Oxford, etc.: Blackwell.Google Scholar
(1991) : The interaction hypothesis: A critical evaluation. In E. SADTONO (ed.), Language Acquisition and the Second/Foreign Language Classroom. Singapore: relc.Google Scholar
(1994) : Modified Oral Input and the Acquisition of Word Meanings. Proceedings of the Fourth National Conference of the South African Teachers of English to Speakers of Other Languages (SATESOL), 5–7 August 1994, 10–45. University of the North, Northern Transvaal.Google Scholar
FAECH, C. and KASPER, G.
(1986) : The role of comprehension in second language learning. Applied Linguistics 71: 257–274. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
FULLER, J.W. and GUNDEL, J.K.
(1987) : Topic-prominence in interlanguage. Language Learning 371 (1) : 1–18. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
GASS, S.M. and VARONIS, E.M.
(1986) : Sex differences in NNS/NNS interactions. In R.R. Day (ed.), Talking to Learn: conversation in Second Language Acquisition, 327–251. Rowley, Mass.: Newbury House.Google Scholar
GOURAN, D.S.
(1968) : Variables related to consensus in group discussions of questions of policy. Speech Monographs 361: 387–391. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
GXILISHE, S.
(1994) : Is second language learning a ‘feminine’ activity? South African Journal of Higher Education 81 (2) : 103–106.Google Scholar
HUNT, K.W.
(1966) : Recent measures in syntactic development. Elementary English 431: 732–739.Google Scholar
(1970) : Syntactic Maturity in Schoolchildren and Adults. Monographs for the Society for Research in Child Development 34 (134).Google Scholar
HARPER, R.
(1970) : The effects of sex and levels of acquaintance on risk-taking in groups. Unpublished PhD thesis, University of North Dakota.Google Scholar
JAMES, D. and Drakich, J.
(1993) : Understanding differences in.amount of talk: A critical review of research. InD. Tannen (ed.), Gender and conversational Interaction, 281–312. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
JUDD, E.L.
(1983) : The problem of applying sociolinguistic findings to TESOL: The case of male/female language. In N. Wolfson and E.L. Judd (eds.), Sociolinguistics and Language Acquisition, 234–241. Rowley, MA: Newbury House.Google Scholar
KASANGA, L.A.
(1994) : Task type, interaction, and second language acquisition. A study of oral productions by Zairean EFL students. Unpublished DPhil thesis, University of York, United Kingdom.Google Scholar
in press -a) : Peer speech repairs in efl classroom activities. Tesl Reporter, 29 (1).
in press -b) : Peer interaction and L2 learning. The Canadian Modern Language Review, 52 (4). DOI logo
KAYIBA, K.
(1988) : The effect of formal instruction on monitored and on spontaneous naturalistic interlanguage performance: A case study. TESOL Quarterly 221 (3) : 509–515. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
KRASHEN, S.D.
(1977) : The monitor model of adult second language performance. In M. Burt, H. Dulay and M. Finocchiaro (eds.), Viewpoints on English as a Second Language, 152–161. New York: Regents.Google Scholar
(1978a) : The monitor model for second language acquisition. In R. Gringas (ed.), Second Language Acquisition and Foreign Language Teaching, 1–26. Washington, D.C.: Center for Applied Linguistics.Google Scholar
(1978b) : Second Language Acquisition. In W.O. Dingwall (ed.), A Survey of Linguistic Science. 2nd ed., 317–338. Connecticut: Greylock.Google Scholar
(1980) : The input hypothesis. In J.E. Alatis (ed.), Current Issues in Bilingual Education. (Georgetown University Roundtable on Languages and Linguistics), 168–180. Washington, D.C.: Georgetown University Press.Google Scholar
(1981) : Second Language Acquisition and Second Language Learning. Oxford, etc.: Pergamon.Google Scholar
(1982) : Principles and Practice in Second Language Acquisition. Oxford: Pergamon.Google Scholar
(1985) : The Input Hypothesis: Issues and Implications. London: Longman.Google Scholar
KRASHEN, S.D., BUTLER, J., BIRNBAUM, R. and ROBERSTON, J.
(1978) : Two studies in language acquisition and language learning. I.T.L. Review of Applied Linguistics 39/40: 73–92.Google Scholar
LAUFER, B.
(1990) : Why are some words more difficult than others? Some intralexical factors that affect the learning of words. International Review of Applied Linguistics 28 (4) : 293–307. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
LEET-PELLEGRINI, H.M.
(1980) : conversational dominance as a function of gender and expertise. In H. GILES, W.P. Robinson and P. SMITH (eds.), Language: Social Psychological Perspectives. Oxford: Pergamon.Google Scholar
LEVENTHAL, G.S. and LANE, D.W.
(1970) : Sex, age, and equity behaviour. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 151: 312–316. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
LONG, M.H.
(1980) : Input, interaction and second language acquisition. Unpublished PhD thesis, University of California at Los Angeles.Google Scholar
(1981a) : Input, interaction and second language acquisition. In H. Winitz (ed.), Native Language and Foreign Language Acquisition. (Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences 379), 259–278. New York: N. Y. Academy of Sciences.Google Scholar
(1981b) : Questions in foreigner talk discourse. Language Learning 311 (1) : 135–157. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(1983a) : Native speaker/non-native speaker conversation and the négotiation of comprehensible input. Applied Linguistics 41 (2) : 126–141. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(1983b) : Native speaker/non-native speaker conversation in the second language classroom. In M. Clarke and J. Handscombe (eds.) , On TESOL ‘821, 207–225. Washington, D.C.: TESOL.Google Scholar
(1983c) : Linguistic and conversational adjustments to non-native speakers. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 51 (2) : 177–193. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(1983d) : Does second language instruction make a difference? A review of research. tesol Quarterly 171 (3) : 359–382. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
LONG, M.H. and CROOKES, G.
(1987): Interaction points in second language classroom processes. In B.K. Das (ed.), Patterns of Classroom Interaction in Southeast Asia. 177-203. Singapore: Regional Language Centre.Google Scholar
LOSCHKY, L.
(1989): Negotiated interaction. The roles of task and culture. Unpublished Master's thesis, University of Hawaii at Maoa.Google Scholar
LOW, G.D. and MORRISON, D.M.
(1980) Skyscraper. Skyscraper. Skyscraper: Some new perspectives on monitoring and the language learner. Working Papers in Linguistics and Language Teaching (University of Hong Kong) 31: 30-53.Google Scholar
MARKHAM, P.
(1988): Gender and perceived expertness of the speaker as factors in esl listening recall. TESOL Quarterly 22(3): 397-406. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
MARSHALL, J. E., HESLIN, R.
(1975): Boys and girls together: Sexual composition and the effect of density and group size on cohesiveness. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 311: 952-961. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
MAYALA, N.-K.
(1991): Learners' knowledge of verb form-function relationships at different stages in the acquisition of English as a second language: A study of college learners' interlanguage in Zaïre. Unpublished PhD thesis, University of Durham, United Kingdom.Google Scholar
MCHOUL, A.W.
(1985): Two aspects of classroom interaction: Turn-taking and correction. Australian Journal of Human Communication Disorders 13(1): 53-64. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
MCLAUGHLIN, B.
(1978): The monitor model: Some methodological considerations. Language Learning 28(2): 309-332. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(1987): Theories of Second-Language Learning. London: Edward Arnold.Google Scholar
MEDITCH, A.
(1975): The development of sex-specific speech patterns in young children. Anthropological Linguistics 17(9): 421-433.Google Scholar
MEEKER, B.F. and WEITZEL-O'NEILL, P.A.
(1977): Sex roles and interpersonal behaviour in task-oriented groups. American Sociological Review 421: 91-105. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
MORRISON, D.M. and LOW, G.D.
(1983): Monitoring and the second language learner. In J.C. Richards and R.W. Schmidt (eds.), Language and Communication, 228–250. London & New York: Longman.Google Scholar
MUBENGA, K.-S.
(1988) Teaching Listening Comprehension to Zairean Students: The Effect of Training on the Performance of EFL Listening Tasks. Unpublished PhD thesis, University of East Anglia, Norwich, United Kingdom.Google Scholar
NSAKALA, L.
(1990) : Errors in the speech of Zairean students of English: with reference to rate and lexical diversity. Unpublished DPhil thesis, University of York, United Kingdom.Google Scholar
NTAHWAKUDERWA, B.C.
(1987) : Form and function in the interlan-guage of Zairean learners of English. Unpublished PhD thesis, University of Edinburgh, United Kingdom.Google Scholar
OXFORD, R.L., Nyikos, M. and Ehrman, M.
(1988) : Vive la difference? Reflections on sex differences in use of language learning strategies. Foreign Language Annals 211 (4) : 321–329. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
PEARSON, A.B. and Lee, K.S.
(1992) : Discourse structure of direction giving: Effects of native/nonnative speaker status and gender. TESOL Quarterly 261 (1) : 113–127. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
PEARSON, J.C.
(1976) : The effects of sex and sexism on the criticism of classroom speeches. Unpublished PhD thesis, Indiana University.Google Scholar
(1981) : The effects of setting and gender on self-disclosure. Group and Organizational Studies: The International Journal for Group Facilitators 6: 334–340. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(1985) : Gender and Communication. Dubuque, Iowa: Wm C. Brown.Google Scholar
PICA, T.
(1987) : Second language acquisition, social interaction, and the classroom. Applied Linguistics 81 (1) : 3–21. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
PICA, T. and doughty, C.
(1984) : The role of group work in classroom second language acquisition. Paper at the Colloquium on Classroom-Centered Research at the 18th Annual tesol Conference, Houston.Google Scholar
PICA, T. and DOUGHTY, C.
(1985a) : Input and interaction in the communicative language classroom: A comparison of teacher-fronted and group activities. In S. M. Gass and C. Madden (eds.) , Input in Second Language Acquisition, 115–132. Rowley, Mass.: Newbury House.Google Scholar
(1985b) : The role of group work in classroom second language acquisition. In C. Faerch and G. Gasper. (eds.) , Foreign Language Learning in a Classroom Setting. Special Issue of Studies in Second Language Research 7: 233–248.Google Scholar
(1988) : Variations in classroom interaction as a function of participation pattern and task. In J. Fine (ed.), Second Language Discourse: A Textbook of Current Research, 41–55. Norwood, N. J.: Ablex Publishing.Google Scholar
PICA, T., DOUGHTY, C. and YOUNG, R.
(1986) : Making input comprehensible: Do interactional modifications help? I.T.L. Review of Applied Linguistics 721 (1) : 1–25.Google Scholar
PICA, T., HOLLIDAY, L., LEWIS, N., BERDUCCI, D. and NEWMAN, J.
(1991) : Language learning through interaction: What role does gender play? Studies in Second Language Acquisition 121 (2) : 343–376. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
PICA, T., HOLLIDAY, L., LEWIS, N. and MORGENTHALER, J.
(1989) : Comprehensible output as an outcome of linguistic demands on the learner. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 111 (1) : 63–90. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
PICA, T., YOUNG, R. and DOUGHTY, C.
(1987) : The impact of interaction on comprehension. TESOL Quarterly 211 (4) : 737–758. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
RIVERS, W.
(1987) : Interaction as the key to teaching language for communication. In W. RIVERS (ed.), Interactive Language Teaching, 3–16. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
SCARCELLA, R. and OXFORD, R.
(1992) : The Tapestry of Language Learning: The Individual in the Communicative Classroom. Boston, MA: Heinle and Heinle.Google Scholar
SCOTTON, C. and BERNSTEN, J.
(1988) : Natural conversations as a model for textbook dialogue. Applied Linguistics 91 (4) : 372–383. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
SHARWOOD-SMITH, M.
(1986) : Comprehension versus acquisition: Two ways of processing input. Applied Linguistics 71 (3) : 239–256. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
STAFFORD, C. and COVITT, G.
(1978) : Monitor use in adult second language production. I.T.L. Review of Applied Linguistics 39/30: 103–125.Google Scholar
STALEY, CM.
(1978) : Male-female use of expletives: A heck of a difference in expectations. Anthropological Linguistics 201 (8) : 367–380.Google Scholar
SWAIN, M.
(1985) : Communicative competence: Some roles of comprehensible input and comprehensible output in its development. In S.M. Gass and C. Madden (eds.) , Input in Second Language Acquisition, 235–253. Rowley, Mass.: Newbury House.Google Scholar
SWAIN, M., LAPKIN, s. and ANDREW, CM.
(1981) : Early French immersion later on. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development 21 (1) : 1–23. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
TANNEN, D.
(1990) : You Just Don't Understand. Women and Men in conversation. London: Virago Press.Google Scholar
TANNEN, D. ed.
(1993) : Gender and conversational Interaction. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
UNDERWOOD, G. and Jindal, N.
(1994) : Gender differences and effects of co-operation in a computer-based language task. Educational Research 361 (1) : 63–74. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
WELLS, G.
(1987) : Learning Through Interaction: The Study of Language Development. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
WHITE, L.
(1987) : Against comprehensible input: The input hypothesis and development of second language competence. Applied Linguistics 8 (2). 95–110. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cited by

Cited by 4 other publications

Adams, Rebecca & Lauren Ross-Feldman
2021. Gender Effects. In The Cambridge Handbook of Corrective Feedback in Second Language Learning and Teaching, ► pp. 668 ff. DOI logo
Kentmen, Hazel, Emre Debreli & Mehmet Ali Yavuz
2023. Assessing Tertiary Turkish EFL Learners’ Pragmatic Competence Regarding Speech Acts and Conversational Implicatures. Sustainability 15:4 ► pp. 3800 ff. DOI logo
King, Brian W. & Janet Holmes
2014. Gender and Pragmatics. In The Encyclopedia of Applied Linguistics, ► pp. 1 ff. DOI logo
Sunderland, Jane
2000. Issues of language and gender in second and foreign language education. Language Teaching 33:4 ► pp. 203 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 1 april 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.