Keywords
age
task type
interaction patterns
topic management skills
How to Cite
Number of views: 81
Number of downloads: 0
Abstract
Oral interaction is crucial for second language learning because it provides opportunities to practice the target language and enhance the comprehensibility of both input and output (Long, 1981; Oliver, 2002; Swain, 2005). However, there is a paucity of research that has examined oral interactions among young learners of Chinese as a second language. This study involved 110 students aged 10-12 from five primary schools in Hong Kong. The study analyzed interaction patterns and topic management skills when they performed two types of tasks. Results showed that the most frequently displayed pattern was collaborative, followed by dominant/passive. Regarding the impact of task type, the percentages of collaborative and expert/novice patterns were higher in the required information exchange tasks than in the optional information exchange tasks. In addition, the required information exchange tasks triggered significantly more turns, target language, short-other-extensions, and other-extensions than the optional information exchange tasks. There was an increase in the exhibition of collaborative patterns and a decrease in dominant/passive patterns from Grades 4 to 6. However, there were no significant differences in the measures of topic management skills across the three grades.
Funding
This project was funded by the Early Career Scheme (Ref. 28607420) of the Research Grants Council, Hong Kong.
References
Ahmadian, M., & Tajabadi, A. (2017). Patterns of interaction in young EFL learners’ pair work: The relationship between pair dynamics and vocabulary acquisition. 3L: Southeast Asian Journal of English Language Studies, 22(3), 98-114. DOI: https://doi.org/10.17576/3L-2017-2301-08
Azkarai, A., García Mayo, M. d. P., & Oliver, R. (2020). The effect of task repetition on the patterns of interaction of ESL children. ITL – International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 171(1), 90-112. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1075/itl.17034.azk
Azkarai, A., & Kopinska, M. (2020). Young EFL learners and collaborative writing: A study on patterns of interaction, engagement in LREs, and task motivation. System, 94, 102338. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2020.102338
Barraja-Rohan, A.-M. (2011). Using conversation analysis in the second language classroom to teach interactional competence. Language Teaching Research, 15(4), 479-507. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168811412878
Butler, Y. G., & Zeng, W. (2014). Young foreign language learners’ interactions during task-based paired assessments. Language Assessment Quarterly, 11(1), 45-75. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/15434303.2013.869814
Butler, Y. G., & Zeng, W. (2015). Young learners’ interactional development in task-based paired-assessment in their first and foreign languages: A case of English learners in China. Education 3-13, 43(3), 292-321. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/03004279.2013.813955
Chen, W. (2017). The effect of conversation engagement on L2 learning opportunities. ELT Journal, 71(3), 329-340. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/ccw075
Çimenli, B., Sert, O., & Jenks, C. (2022). Topic maintenance in video-mediated virtual exchanges: Rolling the ball back in L2 interactions. System, 108, 102834. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2022.102834
Cong, T. H., Cen, S. J., Qi, Y. H., & Zhang, Q. Y. (2012). Study on ethnic minority students learning Chinese in Hong Kong. Hong Kong University Press.
Dao, P. (2021). Effects of task goal orientation on learner engagement in task performance. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, 59(3), 315-334. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/iral-2018-0188
Doughty, C., & Pica, T. (1986). “Information gap” tasks: Do they facilitate second language ac-quisition? TESOL Quarterly, 20(2), 305-325. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/3586546
Foster, P. (1998). A classroom perspective on the negotiation of meaning. Applied Linguistics 19(1). 1-23. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/19.1.1
Galaczi, E. D. (2008). Peer-peer interaction in a speaking test: The case of the First Certificate in English examination. Language Assessment Quarterly, 5(2), 89-119. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/15434300801934702
Galaczi, E. D. (2014). Interactional competence across proficiency levels: How do learners manage interaction in paired speaking tests? Applied Linguistics, 35(5), 553-574. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amt017
Gass, S., Mackey, A., & Ross-Feldman, L. (2005). Task-based interactions in classroom and laboratory settings. Language Learning, 55(4), 575-611. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0023-8333.2005.00318.x
Gilabert, R., Barón, J., & Llanes, À. (2009). Manipulating cognitive complexity across task types and its impact on learners’ interaction during oral performance. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, 47(3-4), 367-395. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/iral.2009.016
Goh, C. C. M. (2017). Research into practice: Scaffolding learning processes to improve speaking performance. Language Teaching, 50(2), 247-260. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0261444816000483
Goh, C. C., & Burns, A. (2012). Teaching speaking: A holistic approach. Cambridge University Press.
Hong Kong Government (1997). 1997 policy address. https://www.policyaddress.gov.hk/pa97/english/paindex.htm
Kaivanpanah, S., & Miri, M. (2017). The effects of task type on the quality of resolving language-related episodes and vocabulary learning. TESOL Journal, 8(4), 920-942. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/tesj.311
Kunitz, S., & Yeh, M. (2019). Instructed L2 interactional competence in the first year. In M. R. Salaberry & S. Kunitz (Eds.), Teaching and testing L2 interactional competence: Bridging theory and practice (pp. 228-259). Routledge. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315177021-10
Loewen, S., & Sato, M. (2018). Interaction and instructed second language acquisition. Language Teaching, 51(3), 285-329. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0261444818000125
Long, M. H. (1981). Input, interaction, and second-language acquisition. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 379(1), 259-278. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1749-6632.1981.tb42014.x
Mackey, A., Abbuhl, R., & Gass, S. M. (2013). Interactionist approach. In S. Gass & A. Mackey (Eds.), The Routledge handbook of second language acquisition (pp. 7-23). Routledge. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4324/9781410612564
Office of The Ombudsman. (2019, February 19). Government’s support for non-Chinese speaking students. https://www.ombudsman.hk/wp-content/uploads/2022/07/2019-2_FR_DI422_Governments_support_for_non-Chinese_speaking_students.pdf
Oliver, R. (2002). The patterns of negotiation for meaning in child interactions. Modern Language Journal, 86(1), 97-111. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/1540-4781.00138
Oliver, R. (2008). How young is too young? Investigating negotiation of meaning and corrective feedback in children aged five to seven years. In A. Mackey & C. Polio (Eds.), Multiple perspectives on Interaction: Second language interaction research in honour of Susan M. Gass (pp. 135-156). Routledge.
Oliver, R., & Azkarai, A. (2019). Patterns of interaction and young ESL learners: What is the impact of proficiency and task type? Language Teaching for Young Learners, 1(1), 82-102. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1075/ltyl.00006.oli
Oliver, R., Philp, J., & Duchesne, S. (2017). Children working it out together: A comparison of younger and older learners collaborating in task based interaction. System, 69, 1-14. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2017.08.001
Pinter, A. (2007). Some benefits of peer-peer interaction: 10-year-old children practising with a communication task. Language Teaching Research, 11(2), 189-207. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168807074604
Pladevall-Ballester, E., & Vraciu, A. (2020). EFL child peer interaction: Measuring the effect of time, proficiency pairing and language of in-teraction. Studies in Second Language Learning and Teaching, 10(3), 449-472. DOI: https://doi.org/10.14746/ssllt.2020.10.3.3
Poupore, G. (2016). Measuring group work dynamics and its relation with L2 learners’ task motivation and language production. Language Teaching Research, 20(6), 719-740. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168815606162
Qiu, X., & Cheng, H. (2022). The effects of task types on L2 oral production and learner engagement. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, 60(4), 1063-1088. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/iral-2020-0128
Salaberry, M. R., & Kunitz, S. (2019). Teaching and testing L2 interactional competence: Bridging theory and practice. Routledge. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315177021
Sato, M., & Ballinger, S. (2016). Peer interaction and second language learning: Pedagogical potential and research agenda. John Benjamins. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1075/lllt.45
Skehan, P. (1996). A framework for the implementation of task-based instruction. Applied Linguistics, 17(1), 38-62. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/17.1.38
Storch, N. (2002). Patterns of interaction in ESL pair work. Language Learning, 52(1), 119-158. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9922.00179
Storch, N. (2005). Collaborative writing: Product, process, and students’ reflections. Journal of Second Language Writing, 14(3), 153-173. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2005.05.002
Swain, M. (2005). The output hypothesis: Theory and research. In E. Hinkel (Ed.), Handbook of research in second language teaching and learning (pp. 471-483). Lawrence Erlbaum.
Tan, L. L., Wigglesworth, G., & Storch, N. (2010). Pair interactions and mode of communication: Comparing face-to-race and computer mediated communication. Australian Review of Applied Linguistics, 33(3), 27.1-27.24. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1075/aral.33.3.02tan
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Harvard University Press.
Vygotsky, L. S. (1986). Thought and language. MIT Press.
Wang, D., & Tsung, L. (2022). Teaching Chinese to ethnic minority students in Hong Kong: A systematic review. Chinese Journal of Applied Linguistics, 45(3), 375-393. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/CJAL-2022-0304
Wong, J., & Waring, H. Z. (2020). Conversation analysis and second language pedagogy: A guide for ESL/EFL teachers. Routledge. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429488023
Xie, X.J., Qi, Y.H., & Cen, S.J. (2012). Chinese learning and teaching for non-Chinese speaking students: Curriculum, textbooks, teaching methods, and assessment. Hong Kong University Press.
Yan, J., & Goh, C. (2025). Impact of task type and task complexity on negotiation of meaning in young learners of Chinese as a second language. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, 63(4), 2665-2693. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/iral-2023-0327
Yan, J., Tse, S. K., & Jin, C. (2025). Task-based interactions in inclusive education: A comparative study of oral interaction patterns among primary six non-Chinese-speaking and Chinese-speaking students in Hong Kong. In Y. Liang & Z. Li (Eds.), Diversity and inclusiveness in Chinese as a second language education (pp. 55-73). Routledge. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003441663-5
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Jing Yan
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International 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.