Cover not available
Part of
Writing and Language Learning: Advancing research agendas
Edited by Rosa M. Manchón
[Language Learning & Language Teaching 56] 2020
► pp. 309–332

Chapter 13
Writing on history in a Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL) context

Development of grammatical metaphor and abstraction as evidence of language learning

 | Universidad Autónoma de Madrid
 | Saint Louis University, Madrid Campus
In this chapter we attempt to answer Manchón and Williams’ (2016, p. 580) question as to “how language and writing develop in content-based instruction and CLIL programs” as a key concern in the study of writing as a site for language learning. Our longitudinal study from a CLIL context traces students’ development in writing in English by analyzing a key feature of disciplinary literacy, grammatical metaphor (GM), created through nominalizations and abstract nouns. Data for this study consists of 64 texts by the same 16 students, on a topic from the history syllabus, collected yearly over the four years of obligatory secondary education. In the data we identified and analyzed just under 1,500 instances of GM. Results showed a significantly higher use and greater accuracy of GM in second cycle texts. Given the role of writing in learning subject discourses, the chapter closes by reflecting on the implications of these findings for practice and for research directions for writing in CLIL contexts.
Article outline
  • Introduction
  • Writing in CLIL classes and academic language development
  • The role of grammatical metaphor (GM) in meaning-making in history writing
    • The development of grammatical metaphor
  • The study
    • Research questions
  • Method
    • Context, participants, and data collection procedures
    • Data analysis procedures
  • Results
  • Discussion: Expanding meaning-making resources through writing on history
  • Conclusions and pedagogical implications for writing in CLIL classes
  • Acknowledgements
  • Notes
  • References
Published online: 20 November 2020
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/lllt.56.13whi
References (68)
References
Beacco, J.-C. (2010). Items for a description of linguistic competence in the language of schooling necessary for learning/teaching history (end of obligatory education). An approach with reference points. Strasbourg: Council of Europe. <[URL]> (26 May, 2020).
(2017). Language in all subjects: The Council of Europe’s perspective. EuJAL 5, 157–176. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Byrnes, H. (2006). What kind of resource is language and why does it matter for advanced language learning. An introduction. In H. Byrnes (Ed.), Advanced language learning: The contribution of Halliday and Vygotsky (pp. 1–8). London: Continuum.Google Scholar
(2009). Emergent L2 German writing ability in a curricular context: A longitudinal study of grammatical metaphor. Linguistics and Education, 20, 50–66. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2011). Beyond writing as language learning or content learning. Construing foreign language writing as meaning-making. In R. M. Manchón (Ed.), Learning-to-write and writing-to-learn in an additional language, (pp. 133–157). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Christie, F. (2002). The development of abstraction in adolescence in subject English. In M. Schleppegrell & C. Colombi (Eds.), Developing advanced literacy in first and second languages (pp. 45–66). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
(2012). Language education throughout the school years: A functional perspective. Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar
Christie, F., & Derewianka, B. (2008). School discourse. London: Continuum.Google Scholar
Coffin, C. (2006). Historical discourse: The language of time, cause and evaluation. London: Continuum.Google Scholar
Colombi, M. C. (2009). A systemic functional approach to teaching Spanish for heritage speakers in the United States. Linguistics and Education, 20, 39–49. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Coetzee-Lachmann, D. (2007). Assessment of subject-specific task performance of bilingual geography learners: Analysing aspects of subject-specific written discourse (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Osnabrück University.Google Scholar
Dalton-Puffer, C. (2007). Discourse in content and language integrated learning (CLIL) classrooms. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
De Graff, R., Koopman, G. J., & Westhoff, G. (2007). Identifying effective L2 pedagogy in content and language integrated learning (CLIL). Viewz 16(3), 12–19.Google Scholar
De Oliveira, L. C. (2011). Knowing and wrting school history: The language of students’ expository writing and teacher expectations. Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing.Google Scholar
De Oliveira, L. C., & Lan, S.-W. (2014). Writing science in an upper elementary classroom: A genre-based approach to teaching English language learners. Journal of Second Language Writing, 25, 23–39. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Eggins, S., Martin, J. R., & Wignell, P. (1993). The discourse of history: Distancing the recoverable past. In M. Ghadessy (Ed.), Register analysis: Theory and practice (pp. 75–109). London: Pinter.Google Scholar
European Commission/EACEA/Eurydice, (2017). Key data on teaching languages at school in Europe: 2017 edition. Eurydice Report. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fontaine, L. (2017). Fluid boundaries and the categorization of nominal expressions. In S. Neumann, R. Wegener, J. Fest, P. Niemietz and N. Hützen (Eds.), Challenging boundaries in linguistics: Systemic functional perspectives (pp. 19–38). Frankfurt: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
Gené-Gil, M., Juan-Garau, M., & Salazar-Noguera, J. (2015). Development of EFL writing over three years in secondary education: CLIL and non-CLIL settings. Language Learning Journal, 43(3), 286–303. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gentil, G. (2011). A biliteracy agenda for genre research. Journal of Second Language Writing, 20(1), 6–23. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Halliday, M. A. K. (1993). Towards a language-based theory of learning. Linguistics and Education, 5(2), 93–116. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Halliday, M. A. K., & Matthiessen, C. (2014). Halliday’s introduction to functional grammar. London: Routledge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Harman, R. (2013). Literary intertextuality in genre-based pedagogies: Building lexical cohesion in fifth-grade L2 writing. Journal of Second Language Writing, 22, 125–140. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Heine, L. (2010). Problem solving in a foreign language: A study in content and language integrated learning. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hirvela, A. (2011). Writing to learn in content areas: Research insights. In R. Manchón (Ed.), Learning-to-write and writing-to-learn in an additional language (pp. 37–60). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Humphrey, S., & Macnaught, L. (2016). Functional language instruction and the writing growth of English language learners in the middle years. TESOL Quarterly, 50(4), 792–816. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Järvinen, H. M. (2010). Language as a meaning making resource in learning and teaching content: Analysing historical writing in content and language integrated learning. In C. Dalton-Puffer, T. Nikula, & U. Smit, Language use and language learning in CLIL classrooms (pp. 145–168). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Jexenflicker, S., & Dalton-Puffer, C. (2010). The CLIL differential: Comparing the writing of CLIL and non-CLIL students in higher colleges of technology. In C. Dalton-Puffer, T. Nikula, & U. Smit (Eds.), Language use and language learning in CLIL classrooms (pp. 169–89). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lasagabaster, D. (2008). Foreign language competence in content and language integrated courses. The Open Applied Linguistics Journal, 1, 30–41. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2011). English achievement and student motivation in CLIL and EFL settings. Innovation in Language Learning and Teaching, 5(1), 3–18. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Liardét, C. L. (2013). An exploration of Chinese EFL learner’s deployment of grammatical metaphor: Learning to make academically valued meanings. Journal of Second Language Writing, 22, 164–178. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2015). Academic literacy and grammatical metaphor: Mapping development. TESOL International Journal, 10(1), 29–46.Google Scholar
(2016). Grammatical metaphor: Distinguishing success. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 22, 109–118. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Llinares, A., & Whittaker, R. (2010). Writing and speaking in a history class: A comparative analysis of CLIL and first language contexts. In C. Dalton-Puffer, T. Nikula, & U. Smit (Eds.), Language use and language learning in CLIL classrooms (pp. 125–144). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Lorenzo, F. (2016). Historical literacy in bilingual settings: Cognitive academic language in CLIL history narratives. Linguistics and Education, 37, 32–41. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lorenzo, F., & Dalton-Puffer, C. (2016). Historical literacy in CLIL: Telling the past in a second language. In T. Nikula, E. Dafouz, P. Moore, & U. Smit (Eds.), Conceptualising integration in CLIL and multilingual education (pp. 55–72). Clevedon, UK: Multilingual Matters. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lorenzo, F., & Moore, P. (2010). On the natural emergence of language structures in CLIL: Towards a theory of European educational bilingualism. In C. Dalton-Puffer, T. Nikula, & U. Smit (Eds.), Language use and language learning in CLIL classrooms (pp. 23–38). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lorenzo, F., & Rodríguez, L. (2014). Onset and expansion of L2 cognitive academic language proficiency in bilingual settings: CALP in CLIL. System, 47, 64–72. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Manchón, R. (2011). Writing to learn the language: Issues in theory and research. In R. Manchón (Ed.), Learning-to-write and writing-to-learn in an additional language (pp. 61–82). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Manchón, R. M., & Roca de Larios, J. (2011). Exploring learners’ perceptions of the language learning potential of L2 writing. In R. M. Manchón (Ed.), Learning-to-write and writing-to-learn in an additional language (pp. 181–207). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Manchón, R. M., & Williams, J. (2016). L2 writing and SLA studies. In R. M. Manchón & P. K. Matsuda (Eds.), Handbook of second and foreign language writing (pp. 567–586). Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Martin, J. R., & White, P. (2005). The language of evaluation: Appraisal in English. Houndmills: Palgrave Macmillan. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Maton, K. (2013). Making semantic waves: A key to cumulative knowledge-building. Linguistics and Education, 24(1), 8–22. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
McCabe, A., & Whittaker, R. (2017). Genre and appraisal in CLIL history texts: Developing the voice of the historian. In A. Llinares, & T. Morton (Eds.), Applied linguistics perspectives on CLIL (pp. 105–124). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Meyer, O., & Coyle, D. (2017). Pluriliteracies teaching for learning: Conceptualizing progression for deeper learning in literacies development. EuJAL, 5, 199–222.Google Scholar
Mohan, B., & Beckett, G. H. (2001). A functional approach to research on content-based language learning: Recasts in causal explanations. Canadian Modern Language Review, 58, 133–155. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Navés, T. (2011). How promising are the results of integrating content and langage for EFL writing and overall EFL proficiency. In Y. Ruiz de Zarobe, J. M. Sierra, & F. Gallardo del Puerto (Eds.), Content and foreign language integrated learning: Contributions to multilingualism in European contexts (pp. 155–186). Bern: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
Painter, C., Derewianka, B., & Torr, J. (2005). From microfunction to metaphor: learning language and learning through language. In R. Hasan, C. Matthiessen, & J. Webster (Eds.), Continuing discourse on language: A functional perspective, Vol. II (pp. 563–588). London: Equinox.Google Scholar
Polio, C., & Park, J. H. (2016). Language development in second language writing. In R. M. Manchón & P. K. Matsuda (Eds.), Handbook of second and foreign language writing (pp. 287–306). Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ravelli, L. (2003). Renewal of connection. Integrating theory and practice in an understanding of grammatical metaphor. In A. M. Simon-Vandenbergen, M. Taverniers, & L. Ravelli (Eds.), Grammatical metaphor: Views from systemic functional linguistics (pp. 37–64). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Roquet, H., & Pérez-Vidal, C. (2016). Do productive skills improve in content and language integrated contexts? The case of writing. Applied Linguistics, 38(4), 1–24.Google Scholar
Rose, D. (2010). Reading to learn: Implementation and outcomes of the professional development program. Report for the Western NSW Region. NSW Department of Education and Training. NSW, Australia.
Rose, D., & Martin, J. R. (2012). Learning to write, reading to learn: Genre, knowledge and pedagogy in the Sydney School. London: Continuum.Google Scholar
Ruiz de Zarobe, Y. (2010). Written production and CLIL: An empirical study. In C. Dalton-Puffer, T. Nikula, & U. Smit, Language use and language learning in CLIL classrooms (pp. 191–210). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ryshina-Pankova, M. (2015). A meaning-based approach to the study of complexity in L2 writing: The case of grammatical metaphor. Journal of Second Language Writing, 29, 51–63. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ryshina-Pankova, M., & Byrnes, H. (2013). Writing as learning to know: Tracing knowledge construction in L2 German compositions. Journal of Second Language Writing, 22(2), 179–197. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Schleppegrell, M. J. (2004). The language of schooling: A functional linguistics perspective. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2011). Supporting disciplinary learning through language analysis: developing historical literacy. In F. Christie & K. Maton (Eds.), Disciplinarity: Functional linguistic and sociological perspectives (pp. 197–216). London: Bloomsbury.Google Scholar
Schleppegrell, M. J., Achugar, M., & Otéiza, T. (2004). The grammar of history: enhancing content-based instruction through a functional focus on language. TESOL Quarterly, 38(1), 67–93. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Schmid, H. J. (2000). English abstract nouns as conceptual shells. From corpus to cognition. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Veel, R., & Coffin, C. (1996). Learning to think like an historian: the language of secondary school history. In R. Hasan & G. Williams (Eds.), Literacy in society (pp. 191–231). London: Longman.Google Scholar
Whittaker, R., & Acevedo, C. (2016). Working on literacy in CLIL/bilingual contexts: Reading to Learn and teacher development. Estudios sobre Educacion, 31, 37–55. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Whittaker, R., & Llinares, A. (2009). CLIL in social science classrooms: Analysis of spoken and written productions. In Y. Ruiz de Zarobe & R. Jiménez Catalán (Eds.), Content and language integrated learning: Evidence from research in Europe (pp. 215–234). Bristol, UK: Multilingual Matters. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2011). Functions of language in CLIL secondary classes: A systemic functional approach. In C. Escobar & L. Nussbaum (Eds.), Aprendre en una altra llengua, Learning through another language, Aprender en otra lengua (pp. 141–161). Barcelona: U.A.B.Google Scholar
Whittaker, R., Llinares, A., & McCabe, A. (2011). Written discourse development in CLIL at secondary school. Language Teaching Research, 15(3), 343–362. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Williams, J. (2012). The potential role(s) of writing in second language development. Journal of Second Language Writing, 21, 321–331. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Weissberg, R. (2006). Connecting speaking and writing in second language writing instruction. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wolfe-Quintero, K., Inagaki, S. & Kim, H.-Y. (1998). Second language development in writing: measures of fluency, accuracy and complexity. Honolulu, HI: University of Hawai’i Press.Google Scholar
Cited by (3)

Cited by three other publications

Coyle, Yvette & Julio Roca de Larios
2024. Exploring Children's L2 Disciplinary Literacy Through a Multimodal Science Project in a CLIL Context. TESOL Quarterly 58:2 ► pp. 628 ff. DOI logo
Llinares, Ana & Tarja Nikula
2024. CLIL students’ production of cognitive discourse functions: Comparing Finnish and Spanish contexts. Language and Education 38:3 ► pp. 381 ff. DOI logo
Roca de Larios, Julio, Yvette Coyle & Vanessa García
2022. The effects of using cognitive discourse functions to instruct 4th-year children on report writing in a CLIL science class. Studies in Second Language Learning and Teaching 12:4 ► pp. 597 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 24 october 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.