Keywords
oral English proficiency
interactional usage-based linguistics
How to Cite
Number of views: 750
Number of downloads: 671
Abstract
Following the call in Sandlund, Sundqvist, and Nyroos (2016) for incorporating discursive approaches into the field of oral second language (L2) testing, this paper proposes an interactional usage-based approach to the analysis of oral L2 performance. Based on Eskildsen (2018a), we combine analytic tools from usage-based linguistics and conversation analysis. We draw on usage-based linguistics to analyze performance in terms of test-takers’ inventories of linguistic constructions and on conversation analysis to understand their interactional competence in terms of the relation between the linguistic constructions and the actions they are used to accomplish. Performance assessment is thus constructional and interactional. Participants in this pilot study were two Danish primary school children who performed two consecutive oral tasks: a semi-guided interview and a picture-elicited narrative task. Data were analyzed by means of cross-child comparisons and cross-task comparisons within each child. Our data confirm the observation from previous research that simple question-answer(-assessment) sequences dominate oral test formats, but also that the format is sometimes abandoned, which allows for the accomplishment of new social actions. Moreover, the picture-description task affords a different speech exchange system with the interviewer participating more as an active listener when the children do not voluntarily carry out the requested task.
References
Bachman, L. (1990). Fundamental considerations in language testing. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Bates, E., & MacWhinney, B. (1988) What is functionalism? Papers and Reports on Child Language Development, 27, 137-152.
Benitoz-Quieroz, C. F., Wilbur, R. B., & Martinez, A. M. (2016). The not face: A grammaticalization of facial expressions of emotion. Cognition, 150, 77-84.
Brouwer, C. E. (2003). Word searches in NNS-NS interaction: Opportunities for language learning? Modern Language Journal, 87(4), 534-545.
Burch, A. R. (2014). Pursuing information: A conversation analytic perspective on communication Strategies. Language Learning, 64(3), 651-684.
Cadierno, T., & Eskildsen, S. W. (2018). The younger, the better?: A usage-based approach to learning and teaching of English in Danish primary schools. Project report. European Journal of Applied Linguistics, 6(1), 171-182.
Cadierno, T., Hansen, M, Eskildsen, S. W., Hannibal-Jensen, S., Fenyvesi, K., & aus der Wieschen, M. (2020). Does younger mean better? Age of onset, learning rate and short-term L2 proficiency in Danish young learners of English. Vigo International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 17, 57-86.
Canale, M., & & Swain, M. (1980). Theoretical bases of communicative approaches to second language teaching and testing. Applied Linguistics, 1(1), 1-47.
Danish Ministry of Education. (2019). Engelsk Læseplan [English curriculum]. Retrieved from https://emu.dk/sites/default/files/2019-08/GSK-Læseplan-Engelsk.pdf
Ellis, N. C. (2002). Frequency effects in language acquisition: A review with implications for theories of implicit and explicit language acquisition. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 24, 143-188.
Ellis, N. C., & Ferreira-Junior, F. (2009). Construction learning as a function of frequency, frequency distribution, and function. Modern Language Journal, 93(3), 370-385.
Enever, J. (2011). Early language learning in Europe (ELLiE). London: British Council.
Eskildsen, S. W. (2011). The L2 inventory in action: Conversation analysis and usage-based linguistics in SLA. In G. Pallotti & J. Wagner (Eds.), L2 Learning as social practice: Conversation-analytic perspectives (pp. 337-373). Honolulu, HI: University of Hawai’i, National Foreign Language Resource Center.
Eskildsen, S. W. (2012). L2 negation constructions at work. Language Learning, 62(2), 335-372.
Eskildsen, S. W. (2015). What counts as a developmental sequence? Exemplar-based L2 learning of English questions. Language Learning, 65(1), 33-62.
Eskildsen, S. W. (2018a). Building a semiotic repertoire for social action: Interactional competence as biographical discovery. Classroom Discourse 9(1), 68-76.
Eskildsen, S. W. (2018b). L2 constructions and interactional competence: Subordination and coordination in English L2 learning. In A. Tyler, L. Huang, & H. Jan (Eds.), What is applied cognitive linguistics? Answers from current SLA research (pp. 63-97). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Eskildsen, S. W., & Cadierno, T. (2007). Are recurring multi-word expressions really syntactic freezes? Second language acquisition from the perspective of usage-based linguistics. In M. Nenonen & S. Niemi (Eds.), Collocations and idioms 1: Papers from the first Nordic conference on syntactic freezes (pp. 86-99). Joensuu: Joensuu University Press.
Eskildsen, S. W., & Cadierno, T. (2015). Advancing usage-based approaches to L2 studies. In T. Cadierno & S. W. Eskildsen (Eds.), Usage-based perspectives on second language learning (pp. 1-18). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Eskildsen, S. W., & Kasper, G. (2019). Interactional usage-based L2 pragmatics: From form-meaning pairings to construction-action relations. In N. Taguchi (Ed.), The handbook of second language acquisition and pragmatics (pp. 176-191). New York, NY: Routledge.
Goodwin, C., & Goodwin, M. (1986). Gesture and co-participation in the activity of searching for a word. Semiotica, 62, 51-75.
He, A. W., & Young, R. (1998). Language proficiency interviews: A discourse approach. In R. Young & A. W. He (Eds.), Talking and testing. Discourse approaches to the assessment of oral proficiency (pp. 1-24). Amsterdam: Benjamins.
Heaton, J. B. (1966). Composition through pictures. London: Longman (reprinted 1972).
Hopper, P. (1998). Emergent grammar. In M. Tomasello (Ed.), The new psychology of language: Cognitive and functional approaches to language structure (Vol. 1, pp. 155-175). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Housen, A., & Kuiken, F. (2009). Complexity, accuracy, and fluency in second language acquisition. Applied Linguistics, 30(4), 461-473.
Hutchby, I. & Wooffitt, R. (2008). Conversation Analysis. Cambridge: Polity Press.
Karrebæk, M. (2011). At blive et børnehavebarn [Becoming a kindergarten child]. Copenhagen: Copenhagen University Press.
Kasper, G., & Ross, S. J. (2013). Assessing second language pragmatics: An overview and introductions. In S. J. Ross & G. Kasper (Eds.), Assessing second language pragmatics (pp. 1-40). Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
Kasper, G., & Wagner, J. (2014). Conversation Analysis in applied linguistics. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 34, 171-212.
Levinson, S. C. (2013). Action formation and ascription. In T. Stivers & J. Sidnell (Eds.), The handbook of conversation analysis (pp. 103-130). Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell.
Lieven, E., Salomo, D., & Tomasello, M. (2009). Two-year-old children’s production of multiword utterances: A usage-based analysis. Cognitive Linguistics, 20(3), 481-507.
McKay, P. (2006). Assessing young language learners. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
McNamara, T., & Roever, C. (2006). Language testing: The social dimension. Oxford: Blackwell.
Nevile, M. (2015). The embodied turn in research on language and social interaction. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 48, 121-151.
Muñoz, C. (Ed.). (2006). Age and the rate of foreign language learning. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
Nikolov, M. (Ed.). (2016a). Assessing young learners of English: Global and local perspectives. New York: Springer.
Nikolov, M. (2016b). Trends, issues, and challenges in assessing young language learners. In M. Nikolov (Ed.), Assessing young learners of English: Global and local perspectives (pp. 1-17). New York: Springer.
Pekarek Doehler, S. (2018). Elaborations on L2 interactional competence: The development of L2 grammar-for-interaction. Classroom Discourse 9(1), 3-24.
Rea-Dickins, P. (2000). Assessment in early years language learning contexts. Language Testing, 17(2), 115-122.
Roeher-Brackin, K. (2014). Explicit knowledge and processes from a usage‐based perspective: The developmental trajectory of an instructed L2 learner. Language Learning, 64(4), 771-808.
Roever, C., & Kasper, G. (2018). Speaking in turns and sequences: Interactional competence as a target construct in testing speaking. Language Testing, 35(3), 331-355.
Salaberry, R., & Kunitz, S. (Eds.). (2019). Teaching and testing L2 interactional competence: Bridging theory and practice. New York: Routledge.
Sandlund, E., Sundqvist, P., & Nyroos, L. (2016). Testing L2 talk: A review of empirical studies on second language oral proficiency testing. Language and Linguistics Compass, 10(1), 14-29.
Schegloff, E. A. (2007). Sequence organization in interaction. A primer in Conversation Analysis (Vol. 1). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Sert, O., & Walsh, S. (2013). The interactional management of claims of insufficient knowledge in English language classrooms. Language and Education, 27(6), 542-565.
Skehan, P. (2009). Modelling second language performance: Integrating complexity, accuracy, fluency, and lexis. Applied Linguistics, 30(4), 510-532.
Sternberg, R. J., & Grigorenko, E. L. (2002). Dynamic testing: The nature and measurement of learning potential. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Tode, T., & Sakai, H. (2016). Exemplar-based instructed second language development and Classroom experience. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 167(2), 210-234.
Tomasello, M. (2003). Constructing a language. A usage-based theory of language acquisition. Cambridge, MA: Harward University Press.
van Compernolle, R. A. (2011). Responding to questions and L2 learner interactional competence during language proficiency interviews: A microanalytic study with pedagogical implications. In J. K. Hall, J. Hellermann, & S. Pekarek Doehler (Eds.), L2 Interactional competence and development (pp. 117-144). Bristol: Multilingual Matters.
Youn, S. J. (2015). Validity argument for assessing L2 pragmatics in interaction using mixed methods. Language Testing, 32(2), 199-225.
License
1.1 The Author hereby warrants that he/she is the owner of all the copyright and other intellectual property rights in the Work and that, within the scope of the present Agreement, the paper does not infringe the legal rights of another person. The owner of the copyright work also warrants that he/she is the sole and original creator thereof and that is not bound by any legal constraints in regard to the use or sale of the work.
1.2. The Publisher warrants that is the owner of the PRESSto platform for open access journals, hereinafter referred to as the PRESSto Platform.
2. The Author grants the Publisher non-exclusive and free of charge license to unlimited use worldwide over an unspecified period of time in the following areas of exploitation:
2.1. production of multiple copies of the Work produced according to the specific application of a given technology, including printing, reproduction of graphics through mechanical or electrical means (reprography) and digital technology;
2.2. marketing authorisation, loan or lease of the original or copies thereof;
2.3. public performance, public performance in the broadcast, video screening, media enhancements as well as broadcasting and rebroadcasting, made available to the public in such a way that members of the public may access the Work from a place and at a time individually chosen by them;
2.4. inclusion of the Work into a collective work (i.e. with a number of contributions);
2.5. inclusion of the Work in the electronic version to be offered on an electronic platform, or any other conceivable introduction of the Work in its electronic version to the Internet;
2.6. dissemination of electronic versions of the Work in its electronic version online, in a collective work or independently;
2.7. making the Work in the electronic version available to the public in such a way that members of the public may access the Work from a place and at a time individually chosen by them, in particular by making it accessible via the Internet, Intranet, Extranet;
2.8. making the Work available according to appropriate license pattern Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0) as well as another language version of this license or any later version published by Creative Commons.
3. The Author grants the Publisher permission to reproduce a single copy (print or download) and royalty-free use and disposal of rights to compilations of the Work and these compilations.
4. The Author grants the Publisher permission to send metadata files related to the Work, including to commercial and non-commercial journal-indexing databases.
5. The Author represents that, on the basis of the license granted in the present Agreement, the Publisher is entitled and obliged to:
5.1. allow third parties to obtain further licenses (sublicenses) to the Work and to other materials, including derivatives thereof or compilations made, based on or including the Work, whereas the provisions of such sub-licenses will be the same as with the Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0) Creative Commons sub-license or another language version of this license, or any later version of this license published by Creative Commons;
5.2. make the Work available to the public in such a way that members of the public may access the Work from a place and at a time individually chosen by them, without any technological constraints;
5.3. appropriately inform members of the public to whom the Work is to be made available about sublicenses in such a way as to ensure that all parties are properly informed (appropriate informing messages).
6. Because of the royalty-free provision of services of the Author (resulting from the scope of obligations stipulated in the present Agreement), the Author shall not be entitled to any author’s fee due and payable on the part of the Publisher (no fee or royalty is payable by the Publisher to the Author).
7.1. In the case of third party claims or actions for indemnity against the Publisher owing to any infractions related to any form of infringement of intellectual property rights protection, including copyright infringements, the Author is obliged to take all possible measures necessary to protect against these claims and, when as a result of legal action, the Publisher, or any third party licensed by the Publisher to use the Work, will have to abandon using the Work in its entirety or in part or, following a court ruling in a legal challenge, to pay damages to a third party, whatever the legal basis
7.2. The Author will immediately inform the Publisher about any damage claims related to intellectual property infringements, including the author’s proprietary rights pertaining to a copyrighted work, filed against the Author. of liability, the Author is obliged to redress the damage resulting from claims made by third party, including costs and expenditures incurred in the process.
7.3. To all matters not settled herein provisions of the Polish Civil Code and the Polish Copyright and Related Rights Act shall apply.