Advertisement

The Anatomy of Learning a Foreign Language in Classroom with a Textbook: An Interactional and Multimodal Approach

  • Augustin Lefebvre
Chapter
Part of the Educational Linguistics book series (EDUL, volume 39)

Abstract

From the perspective of an ethnomethodological (Garfinkel H, Studies in ethnomethodology. Polity Press, Prentice-Hall, 1967) approach of learning (Nishizaka A, Res Lang Soc Interact 39:119–154, 2006; Berducci D, Pragmat Cogn 19:476–506, 2011) and of a conversation analytic and multimodal approach of writing (Mondada L, Svinhufvud K, Language and Dialog 6:1–53, 2016), this chapter proposes to reconceptualise the connections between language, learning and literacy by examining their temporal and multimodal dimensions in social interaction. I focus on the case of the interactional processes through which a teacher and students teach and learn a foreign language with a textbook. Examination of the interactional processes specific to foreign language learning in the classroom presents two heuristic interests: (1) to show that within social interaction, practices such as talking, listening, reading and writing, are not strictly separated but are embedded within a single course of action. (2) observation of how participants articulate these practices within their interaction reflexively indicates how they organize the teaching/learning of a foreign language in an institutional setting.

Keywords

Conversation analysis Ethnomethodology L2 learning Classroom interaction Multimodality Writing Reading French Japanese 

References

  1. Anderson, M. L. (2003). Embodied cognition: A field guide. Artificial Intelligence, 149, 91–130.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Berducci, D. (2011). THIS → is learning: A learning process made public. Pragmatics & Cognition, 19, 476–506.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Breen, M. (1989). The evaluation cycle for language learning tasks. In R. K. Johnson (Ed.), The second language curriculum (pp. 187–206). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Council of Europe. (2001). Common European framework of reference for languages: Learning, teaching, assessment (CEFR). http://www.coe.int/en/web/common-european-framework-reference-languages. Accessed 27 Sept 2017.
  5. Ellis, R. (2003). Task-based language learning and teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  6. Garfinkel, H. (1967). Studies in ethnomethodology. Prentice-Hall: Polity Press.Google Scholar
  7. Garfinkel, H., & Sacks, H. (1970). On formal structures of practical actions. In J. C. McKinney & E. A. Tiryakian (Eds.), Theoretical sociology: Perspectives and developments (pp. 337–366). New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts.Google Scholar
  8. Heath, C. (1986). Body movement and speech in medical interaction. Cambridge/Paris: Cambridge University Press/Editions de la Maison des Sciences de l’Homme.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Heritage, J., & Atkinson, J. M. (1984). Structures of social action studies in conversation analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  10. Hutchins, E. (1995). Cognition in the wild. Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  11. Jakonen, T. (2016). Gaining access to another participant’s writing in the classroom. Language and Dialogue, 6, 179–204.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Lave, J. (1988). Cognition in practice: Mind, mathematics and culture in everyday life. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Lerner, G. H. (2002). Turn-sharing: The choral co-production of talk-in-interaction. In C. E. Ford, B. A. Fox, & S. A. Thompson (Eds.), The language of turn and sequence (pp. 225–256). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  14. Lubben, F., Campbell, B., Choshi, K., Hileni, K., Noah, G., & Utji, K.-M. (2003). Teachers’ use of textbooks: Practice in Namibian science classrooms. Educational Studies, 29, 109–125.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Luke, C., De Castell, S., & Luke, A. (1989). Beyond criticism: The authority of the schoolbook. In S. De Castell, A. Luke, & C. Luke (Eds.), Language, authority and criticism (pp. 245–260). London: Falmer Press.Google Scholar
  16. McHoul, A. (1978). The organization of turns at formal talk in the classroom. Language in Society, 7, 183–213.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Mehan, H. (1979). ‘What time is it, Denise?’: Asking known information questions in classroom discourse. Theory Into Practice, 28, 285–294.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Mondada, L. (2001–2014). Conventions for multimodal transcription. https://franz.unibas.ch/fileadmin/franz/user_upload/redaktion/Mondada_conv_multimodality.pdf. Accessed 20 Feb 2018.
  19. Mondada, L. (2009). Emergent focused interactions in public places: A systematic analysis of the multimodal achievement of a common interactional space. Journal of Pragmatics, 41, 1977–1997.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Mondada, L. (2013). Interactional space and the study of embodied talk-interaction. In P. Auer, M. Hilpert, A. Stukenbrock, & B. Szmrecsanyi (Eds.), Space in language and linguistics: Geographical, interactional and cognitive perspectives (pp. 247–275). Berlin: De Gruyter.Google Scholar
  21. Mondada, L., & Svinhufvud, K. (2016). Writing-in-interaction, studying writing as a multimodal phenomenon in social interaction. Language and Dialogue, 6, 1–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Mori, J., & Hayashi, M. (2006). The achievement of intersubjectivity through embodied completions: A study of interactions between first and second language speakers. Applied Linguistics, 27, 195–219.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Nishizaka, A. (2006). What to learn: The embodied structure of the environment. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 39, 119–154.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Olsher, D. (2004). Talk and gesture: The embodied completion of sequential actions in spoken interaction. In G. Rod & W. Johannes (Eds.), Second language conversations (pp. 346–380). London: Continuum.Google Scholar
  25. Preston, A., Balaam, M., Seedhouse, P., Rafiev, A., Jackson, D., & Olivier, P. (2015). Can a kitchen teach languages? Linking theory and practice in the design of context-aware language learning environments. Smart Learning Environments, 2, 1–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Sacks, Harvey, Schegloff, Emanuel Abraham and Jefferson Gail. 1974. A simplest systematics for the organisation of turn-taking for conversation. Language 50: 696–735.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Schegloff, E. A. (1992). Repair after next turn : The last structurally provided defense of intersubjectivity in conversation. American Journal of Sociology, 97, 1295–1345.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Seedhouse, P. (2013). Conversation analysis and classroom interaction. In C. Chapelle (Ed.), The encyclopedia of applied linguistics (pp. 954–958). Oxford: Blackwell Publishing.Google Scholar
  29. Seedhouse, P., & Almutairi, S. (2009). A holistic approach to task-based interaction. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 19, 311–312.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Suchman, L. (1985). Plans and situated actions: The problem of human-machine communication. Palo Alto: Palo Alto Research Center.Google Scholar
  31. Weinbrenner, P. (1992). Methodologies of textbook analysis used to date. In H. Bourdillon (Ed.), History and social studies – Methodologies of textbook analysis (pp. 21–34). Amsterdam: Swets & Zeitlinger.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Augustin Lefebvre
    • 1
  1. 1.Centre Interuniversitaire d’Etudes Hongroises et Finlandaises CIEH & CIEFiSorbonne Nouvelle Paris 3 UniversityParisFrance

Personalised recommendations