Chapter published in:
Widening Contexts for Processability Theory: Theories and issues
Edited by Anke Lenzing, Howard Nicholas and Jana Roos
[Processability Approaches to Language Acquisition Research & Teaching 7] 2019
► pp. 349–370

Can print literacy impact upon learning to speak Standard Australian English?

Second language learning research mostly investigates literate learners. Based on studies by Tarone, Bigelow and colleagues (2004, 2005, 2006, 2006) this small scale study focuses on low level literacy learners who are acquiring Standard Australian English as their second dialect. It explores whether literacy levels impact upon the processing of language when engaging in oral interaction tasks. Utilising Pienemann’s (1998, 2005) stages of question formation, feedback given to the learners targeted questions within the learners’ developmental stage. Participants were asked to identify whether the language used differed from their own, and if so, to attempt to reproduce it. The findings show that feedback was often noticed, but no significant relationship was found between literacy level and noticing. However, there was a significant relationship between literacy level and the reproduction of targeted forms. This study, like the others contained within this section, is concerned with the developmental readiness of second language learners to acquire target forms and the approach is closely aligned with that of Li and Iwashita (this volume). However, it does differ in that its participants are learners of a second dialect with low literacy levels, representing an under-studied population.
Published online: 28 November 2019
https://doi.org/10.1075/palart.7.15ste
References

References

Anderson, J. R.
(2000) Learning and memory: An integrated approach. New York, NY: John Wiley.Google Scholar
August, D., & Shanahan, T.
(2006) Developing literacy in second-language learners: Report of the national literacy panel on language-minority children and youth. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. < http://​www​.cal​.org​/projects​/archive​/nlpreports​/Executive​_Summary​.pdf > Google Scholar
Berry, R., & Hudson, J.
(1997) Making the jump: A resource book for teachers of Aboriginal students. Kimberley Region: Catholic Education Office.Google Scholar
Bialystok, E., Luk, G., & Kwan, E.
(2005) Bilingualism, biliteracy, and learning to read: Interactions among languages and writing systems. Scientific Studies of Reading 9(1), 43–61. Crossref CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Bigelow, M., & Tarone, E.
(2004) The role of literacy level in second language acquisition: Doesn’t who we study determine what we know? TESOL Quarterly 38(4), 689–700. Crossref CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Bigelow, M., Delmas, R., Hansen, K., & Tarone, E.
(2006) Literacy and the processing of oral recasts in SLA. TESOL Quarterly 40(4), 665–689. Crossref CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Block, D.
(2003) The social turn in second language acquisition. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.Google Scholar
Bokamba, E.
(1988) Code-mixing, language variation, and linguistic theory: Evidence from Bantu languages. Lingua 76(1), 21–62. Crossref CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Creswell, J.
(2008) Educational research: Planning, conducting, and evaluating quantitive and qualitative research (3rd ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Pearson Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
Department of Education, W.A., & Development, D.o.T.a.W
(2012) Tracks to two-way learning. Western Australia: Department of Education, Western Australia and Department of Training and Workforce Development.Google Scholar
Eagleson, R. D., Kaldor, S., & Malcolm, I. G.
(1982) English and the Aboriginal child. Canberra, Australia: Curriculum Development Centre.Google Scholar
Ellis, R.
(1994) The study of second language acquisition. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Firth, A., & Wagner, J.
(1997) On discourse, communication, and (some) fundamental concepts in SLA research. The Modern Language Journal 81(3), 285–300. Crossref CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Fraenkel, J. R., & Wallen, N. E.
(2009) How to design and evaluate research in education (7th ed.). Boston, MA: McGraw Hill.Google Scholar
Gass, S. M.
(1997) Input, interaction, and the second language learner. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Gass, S., Mackey, A., & Pica, T.
(1998) The role of input and interaction in second language acquisition: Introduction to the special issue. The Modern Language Journal 82(3), 299–307. < http://​www​.jstor​.org​/stable​/329956 > Crossref CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Kasper, G.
(1997) “A” stands for acquisition: A response to Firth and Wagner. The Modern Language Journal 81(3), 307–312.Google Scholar
Lightbown, P. M., & Spada, N.
(1999) How languages are learned. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Littlewood, W.
(2006) Second Language Learning. In A. Davies & C. Elder (Eds.), The handbook of applied linguistics (2nd ed., pp. 501–524). Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Long, M.
(1990) The least a second language acquisition theory needs to explain. TESOL Quarterly 24(4), 649–666. < http://​www​.jstor​.org​/stable​/3587113 > CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Long, M. H.
(1996) The role of the linguistic environment in second language acquisition. Handbook of second language acquisition, 2(2), 413-488.Google Scholar
(1996) The role of the linguistic environment in second language acquisition. In W. C. Ritchie, & T. K. Bhatia (Eds.), Handbook of second language acquisition (pp. 413–468). New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Long, M., Inagaki, S., & Ortega, L.
(1998) The role of implicit negative feedback in SLA: Models and recasts in Japanese and Spanish. The Modern Language Journal 82(3), 357–371. < http://​www​.jstor​.org​/stable​/329961 > CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Mackey, A.
(1994) Using communicative tasks to target grammatical structures. A handbook of tasks and instructions for their use. Sydney: Language Acquisition Research Centre, University of Sydney.Google Scholar
(1999) Input, interaction, and second language development: An empirical study of question formation in ESL. SSLA 21(4), 557–587.Google Scholar
Mackey, A., & Oliver, R.
(2002) Interactional feedback and children's L2 development. System 30(4), 459–477. DOI: CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(2003) Interactional context and feedback in child ESL classrooms. The Modern Language Journal 87(4), 519–533 Crossref CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Mackey, A., & Philp, J.
(1998) Conversational interaction and second language development: Recasts, responses, and red herrings? The Modern Language Journal 82(3), 338–356. < http://​www​.jstor​.org​/stable​/329960 > CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Nelson Australia
(2003) The PM Benchmark Kit. Melbourne: Thomson Learning Australia.Google Scholar
Oliver, R.
(1998) Negotiation of meaning in child interactions. The Modern Language Journal 82(3), 372–386. < http://​www​.jstor​.org​/stable​/329962 > CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Oliver, R., Rochecouste, J., Vanderford, S., & Grote, E.
(2011) Teacher awareness and understandings about Aboriginal English in Western Australia. Australian Review of Applied Linguistics 34(1), 60–74. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Partington, G., & Galloway, A.
(2007) Issues and policies in school education. In G. Leitner & I. G. Malcolm (Eds.), The habitat of Australia's Aboriginal languages: Past, present and future (pp. 239–265). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Petersson, K. M., Reis, A., Askelöf, S., Castro-Caldas, A., & Ingvar, M.
(2000) Language processing modulated by literacy: A network analysis of verbal repetition in literate and illiterate subjects. Journal of cognitive neuroscience, 12(3), 364-382.Google Scholar
Philp, J.
(2003) Constraints on “noticing the gap”: Nonnative speakers’ noticing of recasts in NS-NNS interaction. SSLA 25(1), 99–126. DOI: CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Pienemann, M.
(1998) Language processing and second language development: Processability Theory. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(Ed.) (2005) Crosslinguistics aspects of Processability Theory. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Crossref CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Pienemann, M., & Keßler, J.-U.
(2012) Processability Theory. In S. Gass & A. Mackey (Eds.), Handbook of second language acquisition (pp. 228–246). Abingdon: Routledge.Google Scholar
Pienemann, M.
(2015) An outline of Processability Theory and its relationship to other approaches to SLA. Language Learning 65(1), 123–151. Crossref CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Ravid, D., & Tolchinsky, L.
(2002) Developing linguistic literacy: A comprehensive model. Journal of Child Language 29(2), 417–447. DOI: CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Reis, A., & Castro-Caldas, A.
(1997) Illiteracy: A cause for biased cognitive development. Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society 3(5), 444–450.Google Scholar
Schmidt, R.
(1990) The role of consciousness in second language learning. Applied Linguistics 11(2), 129–158. < http://​applij​.oxfordjournals​.org/ > Crossref CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Selinker, L.
(1972) Interlanguage. IRAL-International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, 10(1-4), 209-232.Google Scholar
Siegel, J.
(2010) Second dialect acquisition. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press. Crossref CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Silburn, S. R., Nutton, G. D., McKenzie, J. W., & Landrigan, M.
(2011) Early years English language acquisition and instructional approaches for Aboriginal students with home languages other than English: A systematic review of the Australian and international literature. Darwin, Australia: The Centre for Child Development and Education, Menzies School of Health Research.Google Scholar
Swain, M.
(1985) Communicative competence: Some roles of comprehensible input and comprehensible output in its development. In S. Gass & C. Madden (Eds.), Input in second language acquisition (pp. 235–253). Rowley, MA: Newbury House.Google Scholar
(1995) Three functions of output in second language learning. In G. Cook & B. Seidlhofer (Eds.), Principle and practice in applied linguistics: Studies in honor of H.G. Widdowson (pp. 125–144). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
(2005) The output hypothesis: Theory and research. In E. Hinkel (Eds.), Handbook of research in second language teaching and learning (pp. 471–483). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Tarone, E.
(2010) Second language acquisition by low-literate learners: An under-studied population. Language Teaching 43(1), 75–83. DOI: CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Tarone, E., & Bigelow, M.
(2005) Impact of literacy on oral language processing: Implications for second language acquisition research. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics 25, 77–97. Crossref CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Tarone, E., Bigelow, M., & Hansen, K.
(2006) The impact of alphabetic print literacy level on oral second language acquisition. The Literacy Institute at Virginia Commonwealth University, 99–122. < http://​www​.theliteracyinstitute​.org​/projects​/pdf​/LESLLA%20Research6​.pdf > Google Scholar
Trudgill, P.
(1986) Dialects in contact (p. 95). Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
White, L.
(1987) Against comprehensible input: The input hypothesis and the development of L2 competence. Applied Linguistics, 8(2), 95-110.Google Scholar