No abstract

No abstract

This article provides support for a theoretical orientation toward viewing dialogue as both a means of communication and a cognitive tool. Data to support this position come from an analysis of the language-related episodes isolated in the dialogue of two grade 8 French immersion students as they carry out ajigsaw task. During the task, the students work out a story line and write it out. As they do so, they encounter linguistic problems. To solve them, the students use their first language (Ll) and second language (L2) in order to communicate to each other and as tools to aid their L2 learning. The language-related episodes discussed provide evidence of language use as both an enactment of mental processes and as an occasion for L2 learning. Variation in how other pairs of students in the class perform the task supports existing evidence that the same task does not provide similar occasions for L2 learning to all student dyads. THEORETICAL PERSPECTIVEWe take the position in this article that language use is both communication and cognitive activity. Language is simultaneously a means of communication and a tool for thinking. Dialogue provides both the occasion for language learning and the evidence for it. Language is both process and product.When language use is considered as communication, the concepts of input, comprehensible input, and comprehensible output are appropriate metaphors because they conjure up images of messages. These messages are transmitted as output from one source and received as input elsewhere. When there are difficulties in encoding or decoding these messages, language users modify and restructure their interaction to achieve message comprehensibility. "As they negotiate, The Modern LanguageJournal, 82, iii, (1998) 01998 The Moden Language Journal 0026-7902/98/320-337 $1.50/0

This study investigated the effects of second language (L2) proficiency differences in pairs and patterns of interaction on L2 learning, making use of both qualitative and quantitative data. We designed the study in such a way that four different core participants interacted with higher and lower proficiency non-core participants. These learners engaged in a three-stage task involving pair writing, pair comparison (between their original text and a reformulated version of it) and individual writing. The core participants also engaged in a stimulated recall after the task. We analysed each pair's collaborative dialogue in terms of language-related episodes and patterns of pair interaction (Storch, 2002a) as well as each learner's individual post-test score. The findings suggested that the patterns of pair interaction greatly influenced the frequency of LREs and post-test performance. When the learners engaged in collaborative patterns of interaction, they were more likely to achieve higher posttest scores regardless of their partner's proficiency level. It seems that proficiency differences do not necessarily affect the nature of peer assistance and L2 learning.

This article provides support for a theoretical orientation toward viewing dialogue as both a means of communication and a cognitive tool. Data to support this position come from an analysis of the language-related episodes isolated in the dialogue of two grade 8 French immersion students as they carry out ajigsaw task. During the task, the students work out a story line and write it out. As they do so, they encounter linguistic problems. To solve them, the students use their first language (Ll) and second language (L2) in order to communicate to each other and as tools to aid their L2 learning. The language-related episodes discussed provide evidence of language use as both an enactment of mental processes and as an occasion for L2 learning. Variation in how other pairs of students in the class perform the task supports existing evidence that the same task does not provide similar occasions for L2 learning to all student dyads. THEORETICAL PERSPECTIVEWe take the position in this article that language use is both communication and cognitive activity. Language is simultaneously a means of communication and a tool for thinking. Dialogue provides both the occasion for language learning and the evidence for it. Language is both process and product.When language use is considered as communication, the concepts of input, comprehensible input, and comprehensible output are appropriate metaphors because they conjure up images of messages. These messages are transmitted as output from one source and received as input elsewhere. When there are difficulties in encoding or decoding these messages, language users modify and restructure their interaction to achieve message comprehensibility. "As they negotiate, Journal, 82, iii, (1998) 01998 The Moden Language Journal 0026-7902/98/320-337 $1.50/0 The Modern Language