Melanie Lynn D’Amico

Show more
Department of Languages, Literatures & Linguistics, Indiana State University, Terre Haute, IN, USA.
Show less

Abstract: The aim of this research was to explore the nature of conversation in a weekly second language Italian conversation group. Analysis of conversations focused on the range of topics and verbal structures used by learners. Additional analysis was completed to determine if learners engaged in negotiation of meaning or form during conversations. Results revealed that learners used a range of topics and verbal structures from Beginner level to Advanced level indicating that learners challenged themselves to produce high quality, natural conversation. Learners also showed some use of negotiation during conversations to repair communication breakdowns, principally to address meaning; however, the amount of negotiation was low when compared to task-based interaction designed to elicit negotiation.

Keywords: Conversation Group, Learner Interaction, Natural Conversation, Second Language, Range of Topics, Verbal Structures, Negotiation of Meaning

Cite this paper: D’Amico, M. (2015) Complexity of Interaction in a Second Language Conversation Group: An Exploratory Study. Open Journal of Modern Linguistics, 5, 348-360. doi: 10.4236/ojml.2015.54031.

References

[1]   Adams, R. (2007). Ch. 1: Do Second Language Learners Benefit from Interacting with Each Other? In A. Mackey (Ed.), Conversational Interaction in Second Language Acquisition (pp. 29-51). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

[2]   Bruton, A., & Samuda, V. (1980). Learner and Teacher Roles in the Treatment of Oral Error in Group Work. RELC Journal, 2, 49-63.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/003368828001100204

[3]   Del Pilar García Mayo, M., & Pica, T. (2000). L2 Learner Interaction in a Foreign Language Setting: Are Learning Needs Addressed? International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, 38, 1-22.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1515/iral.2000.38.1.35

[4]   Fernández Dobao, A. (2012). Collaborative Dialogue in Learner-Learner and Learner-Native Speaker Interaction. Applied linguistics, 33, 229-256.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/applin/ams002

[5]   Gass, S. M. (1997). Input, Interaction, and the Second Language Learner. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

[6]   Glaser, B., & Strauss, A. L. (1967). The Discovery of Grounded Theory: Strategies for Qualitative Research. Chicago: Aldine.

[7]   Hubert, M. D. (2011). Foreign Language Production and Avoidance in US University Spanish-Language Education. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 21, 222-243.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1473-4192.2010.00276.x

[8]   Levi, P. (1986). I Sommersi e i Salvati. Italy: Einaudi.

[9]   Long, M. H. (1983). Linguistic and Conversational Adjustments to Non-Native Speakers. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 5, 177-193.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0272263100004848

[10]   Long, M. H., & Porter, P. A. (1985). Group Work, Interlanguage Talk, and Second Language Acquisition. TESOL Quarterly, 19, 207-228.
http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/3586827

[11]   Mackey, A. (1999). Input, Interaction, and Second Language Development. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 21, 557-587.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0272263199004027

[12]   Mackey, A. (2007). The Role of Conversational Interaction in Second Language Acquisition. In A. Mackey (Ed.), Conversational Interaction in Second Language Acquisition (pp. 1-26). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

[13]   Mackey, A., Oliver, R., & Leeman, J. (2003). Interactional Input and the Incorporation of Feedback: An Exploration of NS-NNS and NNS-NNS Adult and Child Dyads. Language Learning, 53, 35-66.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1467-9922.00210

[14]   McDonough, K., & Hernández González, T. (2013). Chapter 15: Language Production Opportunities during Whole-Group Interaction in Conversation Group Settings. In A. Mackey, & K. McDonough (Eds.), Second Language Interaction in Diverse Educational Contexts (pp. 293-314). Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1075/lllt.34.20ch15

[15]   Ohta, A. S. (1995). Applying Sociocultural Theory to an Analysis of Learner Discourse: Learner-Learner Collaborative Interaction in the Zone of Proximal Development. Issues in Applied Linguistics, 6, 93-121.

[16]   Pica, T. F., Lincoln-Porter, F., Paninos, D., & Linnell, J. (1996). Language Learners’ Interaction: How Does It Address the Input, Output, and Feedback Needs of Learners? TESOL Quarterly, 30, 59-84.
http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/3587607

[17]   Sato, M. (2007). Social Relationships in Conversational Interaction: Comparison of Learner-Learner and Learner-NS Dyads. JALT Journal, 29, 183-208.

[18]   Sato, M., & Lyster, R. (2007). Chapter 5: Modified Output of Japanese EFL Learners: Variable Effects of Interlocutor versus Feedback Types. In A. Mackey (Ed.), Conversational Interaction in Second Language Acquisition (pp. 123-142). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

[19]   Swain, M. (1993). The Output Hypothesis: Just Speaking and Writing Aren’t Enough. The Canadian Modern Language Review, 50, 158-164.

[20]   Swain, M. (2000). The Output Hypothesis and beyond: Mediating Acquisition through Collaborative Dialogue. In J. P. Lantolf (Ed.), Sociocultural Theory and Second Language Learning (pp. 97-114). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

[21]   Tudini, V. (2013). Form-Focused Social Repertoires in an Online Language Learning Partnership. Journal of Pragmatics, 50, 187-202.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2012.12.005

[22]   Ziegler, N., Seals, C., Ammons, S., Lake, J., Hamrick, P., & Rebuschat, P. (2013). Chapter 14: Interaction in Conversation Groups: The Development of L2 Conversational Styles. In A. Mackey, & K. McDonough (Eds.), Second Language Interaction in Diverse Educational Contexts (pp. 269-292). Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1075/lllt.34.19ch14