How does TBLT Affect the Emergence of Complexity?

:Usage-based Analysis of Written Production of an EFL Learner

Tomoko Tode (Niigata University of Health and Welfare) tode@nuhw.ac.jp

Hideki Sakai (Shinshu University)

This Study…

• the purpose = to explore how a task-based language teaching (TBLT) affects interlanguage development

• a case study of one learner receiving TBLT

• Time-series analysis was conducted in the framework of a usage-based theory of second language acquisition

A Usage-based Model of Language (Langacker, 2000)

•Grammar = a network of exemplars and their schemas that emerge from actual usage

Transfer V NP NP

send NP NP give NP NPsend me a package send you an e-mail give her a lift

•Emphasize the importance of semantics•No clear boundary between lexicon and grammar

Children’s early language is item-based

• Verb-Island Hypothesis (Tomasello, 1992)– __ kick __. Brush ___.

• “… the best predictor of this child’s use of a given verb on a given day was not her use of other verbs on the same day, but rather her use of that same verb on immediately preceding days.” (Tomasello, 2003, pp. 117-118)

Children produce novel utterances by usage-based syntactic operations

a longitudinal case study of a child (Lieven et al. 2003)

–Data was collected five days per week for six weeks.

–The child’s creative utterance was based on previously learned item-based constructions, on which small modifications were made via usage-based syntactic operations.

I want a __. I have some toast.

I want a paper. I want a knife.⇒ I want a toast.

Abstraction occurs gradually through frequent experience

input

→

→

→

→

→

Where’s the W?

Where’s your W?

Where are they?

This is my cup.

(exemplars and low-level schema)

→output

Where’s my cup?

•The network is gradually complexified through frequent experience of exemplars.

L2 acquisition is basically usage-based.

• L2 knowledge of beginning or false-beginning EFL learners is item-based. (Tode, 2003; Tode, submitted for publication)

• item-based constructions → schematization (e.g., Mellow, 2006; Zyzik, 2006)

However…

• various factors specific to L2 acquisition (e.g., cognitive development; L1 transfer; explicit instruction)

• Complexity Theory: need for in-depth longitudinal case studies (De Bot et al. 2007; Larsen-Freeman, 2006; Larsen-Freeman & Cameron, 2008)

Underlying Principles

TBLT (Willis & Willis, 2007)

Usage-based theory

Language is learned through use.

Grammar emerges from actual usage.

Start with meaning → Focus on language

Emphasis on semantics and form-meaning connections

Early communication is primarily lexical.

Early language is based on item-based constructions.

The Language Use Cycle of EFL Learners Receiving TBLT

FFI Explicit knowledge

Input

→

→

→

→

→

Item-based constructions

(a network of exemplars and low-level schemas)

→ Output

FFI

Research Questions

1. How does the participant produce novel language during the period of the TBLT?

2. How does the TBLT affect the interlanguage development of the participant?

the Participant Taro

• a freshman majoring in speech, language and hearing sciences

• taking a required EFL class for freshmen of a university

• English proficiency: false-beginning level

• He volunteered to participate in the data collection of this study.

the EFL class Taro took

• 90-minute class; once a week (14 meetings)• Instruction period: October 1, 2008 – January 7, 2

009• the teacher = the first researcher of the study• The teacher designed tasks based on the courseboo

k, which is not task-based by itself.• Coursebook used: a collection of reading material

on the topic of health & social welfare issues

Syllabus

topicdisability

sportschild abuse care plan

task

writing a script to present the history and roles of Paralympics

taking an interview exam to be admitted to a child-welfare department of a university

assessing a care plan and writing a report on it

hours 4.5 hours 6.5 hours 4.5 hours

the Cycle of Pretask-Task-FFI: the case of the unit of disability sports

Pretask 1 •Reading a passage about Paralympics

Pretask 2 •Mini-lectures (A & B) on different aspects of Paralympics

- Half of students attend Lecture A

- The other half attend Lecture B

•Students who have attended different lectures make groups of four and convey what they have heard to each other.

Task •Writing a script for a presentation titled the history and the roles of Paralympics.

FFI •Feedback to the whole class and each group by the teacher

•Modifying the scripts based on the feedback

•Reproducing

Data Collection

• Main data: English essays– Written in the first researcher’s office on an individual basis– 5 times during the study period (twice per month)– Under the same title “My Role as a QOL Supporter”– Without consulting anything

• Subordinate data: Stimulated recall responses, collected immediately after writing the essay

• Instructional data: instructional log, teaching material, written production the participant made in the classroom etc.

RQ1:How does Taro produce novel language?

Analyses and Results

Method of Analysis

• Sources of novel language in each essay except the first essay were identified.– similar expressions or subschema in previous

essays (←previous essays, SR)– pedagogical intervention that seems to have

affected the novel language (←instructional data, SR)

– explicit knowledge learned in middle or high school (←SR)

Results

previous essays

TBLTexplicit

knowledgeundetected

2nd 0.50 0.23 0.14 0.27

3rd 0.43 0.38 0.10 0.33

4th 0.70 0.17 0.13 0.17

5th 0.57 0.22 0.26 0.17

Previous essays

1st: So, I study hard every day. 2⇒ nd : I’m studying every day in Niigata University of Healthy because I want to ST in the future.

1st : ST is speech, language and hearing Therapy. ST is very important. Subschema: ⇒ ST is __. 2⇒ nd: ST is ‘never give up’ heart.

4th: Now, I think that I wish I had spoken with him. 5⇒ th: I like speaking with my friends.

TBLT example of enable and encourage

• Input from the text: They’re about enabling and encouraging disabled people to take part in sport….

+ FFI: encourage (a person) to do

• ⇒ 2nd essay: I’m enable and encouraging him/her to speech and hear.

TBLT example of communicate

• Production by Taro & his partner : Therefore, he can’t communication ….

• ⇒Teacher’s written feedback: “communication is a noun. The verb is communicate.”

• ⇒Reproduction: Therefore, he couldn’t communicate….

• ⇒5th essay: I can’t speak and communicate with patient well.

Previous essay + TBLTexample of that Clause

• 2nd essay: I’m interesting aphasia… that disabled people can’t do communication well.

• ⇒Input from text: The abuse should be reported…so that proper measures can be taken to help and protect the victim.

• ⇒Input from text: The local health department requests …so that the burden on his wife may be reduced.

• ⇒4th essay: I’m challenge that I don’t repeat mistake. (meaning I’ll challenge so that I will not repeat making mistakes.)

Explicit knowledge

• 5th essay: I like speaking with my friends.

(SR: First I wrote I like speak…. Then I modified it into I like speaking, because I knew that two verbs cannot be used together.)

Summary of the Results

• Taro created utterances based mainly on expressions produced in previous essays.

• He also actively made use of exemplars or slot-and-frame patterns experienced in the TBLT (e.g., encourage [a person] to do).

• Explicit knowledge learned in middle and high schools was also drawn on, but not so often.

RQ2: How does the TBLT affect Taro’s interlanguage development?

Analyses and Results

Methods of Analyses

a) To examine how accuracy and complexity changed

b) To examine how the same meaning is expressed before and after relevant TBLT intervention

c) To examine how the same meaning is expressed in more than 1 essay without any relevant TBLT intervention

a) Definitions of Accuracy and Complexity

• Accuracy score– Proportion of accurate clauses to the total

number of clauses plus independent sub-clausal unit

– accurate in terms of word order, verb argument structures, the usage of conjunctions, etc.

• Complexity score– average number of clauses per AS-unit

a) Results

• Change in accuracy • Change in complexityChange in accuracy

0.000.100.200.300.400.500.600.700.800.90

Time

Prop

ortio

n of e

rror-

free c

lause

s

Proportion oferror- freeclauses

Change in grammatical complexity

0.001.00

2.003.00

4.00

First

Roun

d

Thrid

Roun

d

Fifth

Roun

d

Time

Claus

es pe

r AS-

unit Clauses

per AS-unit

Analysis b)to be a speech therapist

【 inaccurate】→ Output, FFI, Reproduce→【 accurate】

relative clause Input, Output, FFI→【 inaccurate】→ Input, Output→【 accurate】

Because __. → __ because __

【 simple, complex】→ Output, FFI, Reproduce→【 complex】

Communication

as a verb →

communicate

【 inaccurate】→ Output, FFI, Reproduce→【 accurate】→【 inaccurate】

The most important is…

Input→【 inaccurate】→ Output, FFI→【 inaccurate】→ Input、 FFI→【 inaccurate】

Example) to be a speech therapist• 1st essay: My dream is ST. 2⇒ nd essay: I want to ST

in the future. • Output (in class, not in the elicitation writing task)

: I want to be child welfare facility. FFI: ⇒ I want to work for child welfare facility. + My dream is to be child welfare specialist in the future. Reproduce: ⇒ I want to work for child welfare facility.

• ⇒3rd essay: My dream is to be ST in the future. ⇒4th essay: I want to be ST in the future. ⇒5th essay: I will be ST in the future.

Analysis c)

I study 【 accurate】→【 inaccurate】→【 accurate】→【 inaccurate】→【 inaccurate】

ST is … 【 accurate】→【 inaccurate, accurate】→【 accurate】→【 accurate, inaccurate】

I am interested in …

【 inaccurate】→【 inaccurate】

Example) I study…

• 1st essay: I study hard every day.• 2nd essay: I’m studying every day in Niigata

University of Healthy. • 3rd essay: I study hard every day in Niigata

University of Health.• 4th essay: I studying hard in Niigata

University of Health.• 5th essay: I’m studying hard every day.

Summary of the Results

• A trade-off between accuracy and complexity development was observed. – At first, very complex, but not accurate– Later, more and more accurate

• In some cases, experience in the TBLT contributed to Taro’s improvement in accuracy, but, in other cases, did not.

• There was no evidence that accuracy improved without pedagogical intervention.

Answer to RQ1

• Taro produces new language, based on exemplars or subscema, which drive from his previous experience consisting essay-writing and TBLT.

= use of usage-based syntactic operations

• He also draws on explicit knowledge.

Answer to RQ 2

• TBLT has impact on Taro’s interlanguage development.

TBLT• complex but inaccurate → more accurate• TBLT consisting of input, output and FFI may hav

e contributed to his accuracy improvement. • The way TBLT affects the development seems to

be a complex process. – Sometimes it has an effect, but at other times, no chang

e at all. Performance waxes and wanes.

Limitations

• It is not clear what aspects (reading activities [input], production activities [output], FFI) of the TBLT have contributed to his development in what ways.

• Repetition of essay writing as a data collection method may have motivated Taro to pay more focused attention to classroom input than usual.

References

• De Bot, K., Lowie, W., & Verspoor, M. (2007). A dynamic system theory approach to second language acquisition. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 10. 7-21.

• Langacker, R. W. (2000). A dynamic usage-based model. In M. Barlow & S. Kemmer (Eds.), Usage-based models of language (pp. 1-63). Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications.

• Larsen-Freeman, D. (2006). The emergence of complexity, fluency, and accuracy in the oral and written production of five Chinese learners of English. Applied Linguistics, 27, 590-619.

• Larsen-Freeman, D. & Cameron, L. (2008). Complex systems and applied linguistics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

• Lieven, E., Behrens, H., Speares, J., & Tomasello, M. (2003). Early syntactic creativity: a usage-based approach. Journal of Child Language, 30. 333-370.

• Mellow, J. D. (2006). The emergence of second language syntax: A case study of the acquisition of relative clauses. Applied Linguistics, 27. 645-670.

• Tode, T. (2003). From unanalyzed chunks to rules: The learning of the English copula be by beginning Japanese learners of English. IRAL, 41, 23-53.

• Tode, T. (submitted for publication). Schematization and sentence processing by classroom foreign language learners: A reading-time experiment and a stimulated-recall analysis.

• Tomasello, M. (1992). First verbs: A case study of early grammatical development. New York: Cambridge University Press.

• Tomasello, M. (2003). Constructing a language: A usage-based theory of language acquisition. MA: Harvard University Press.

• Willis, D. & Willis, J. (2007). Doing task-based teaching. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.

• Zyzik, E. (2006). Transitivity alternations and sequence learning: Insights from L2 Spanish production data. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 28, 449-485.