One discussion that comes up from time to time among CI teachers is how to choose the language chunks, or "items", or "structures", that we teach. Martina Bex has a very useful description of "language chunks" on her blog here. In addition, for extra perspective, I would like to describe here what Usage-based Linguistics researchers call "constructions".
Constructions are not simply language written on a page, but are a psychological construct, measured in the human mind through corpus research. A construction is defined as any linguistic symbol of any length that the mind connects with meaning. A word is a construction because it is a sound (or written string of writing, or sign language signs) that represents meaning. A morpheme is the smallest linguistic unit that represents meaning, and so it is also a construction. The more interesting constructions in the Usage-based Linguistics literature are those that help explain grammar in the mind. As VanPatten often says on his podcast, Tea with BVP, language is shaped by Universal Grammar and general learning architecture. Usage-based linguists seeks to better understand this general learning architecture, holding to what we call the "cognitive commitment". This means assuming that Universal Grammar is not real, and instead looking to exhaust all possible other learning mechanisms before allowing for which parts of language may indeed be shaped by Universal Grammar. Usage-based linguists seek to explain grammar as general pattern recognition and human categorization processes, which will be explained below as we look at phrase-length constructions. To be clear, both Usage-based AND Universal Grammar models of language view input as central to language development. Neither of these research camps argue that learners should learn an explicit rule, and then practice that rule, nor should they use problem solving abilities to master a rule. Input as raw language data (hearing and reading the language itself) is still necessary and central to acquisition in Usage-based models. So what is a multi-word construction? A multi-word construction consists of multiple slots in a particular order, that together represent meaning. Each slot can be either fixed, or open but limited to certain categories. For example, "wants to X" is a construction with two fixed words and an open slot. The open slot in this construction is limited to the verbs category. Another example is "put X Loc", where "put" is a fixed word, the X slot is limited to grammatical objects (the cat, the car, a fork), and Loc = locative phrase, is composed of a preposition (on, into, under) and a location (the table, the cave, the bed). So a construction contains not only the known words, but also the open slots for a limited selection of other words. Corpus research has shown that some words are more common in each construction than are other words, but that's for another post. Does it make much difference whether teachers plan to input only fixed "language chunks" or we plan for the fixed words plus open slots together in constructions? Maybe not, because teachers will fill in those open slots anyways when giving input to students. But human categorization needs exposure to a limited number of different examples in those slots before a category unconsciously develops in the mind. So if we are going to teach "sees a movie", the acquirer's mind is more likely to unconsciously build a category of "things we can see" in the construction's X slot (in a "sees X" construction), compared to if they only hear "sees a movie" (all words fixed) hundreds of times. This is one of the beautiful features of Circling, in which the slot openness is automatically built into the input. There is a lot more to be said about Cognitive Science, Cognitive Linguistics, Usage-based Linguistics, and Construction Grammar. I recognize that I have done them all very little justice in writing such a short post, but I hope this basic concept might offer a new perspective on the language we choose to offer our learners in their input.
0 Comments
In my post on Leveling Heritage with Non-Heritage Learners, I argued that continuously talking about new people, places, things, and events allowed for repeated language without asking Circling questions, and why. Here I illustrate how I finish making a set of PictureTalk slides quickly. What I've learned from making Bottomless PictureTalk files (mine are now often 30 to 40 slides) is to design with speed in mind; I don't want to spend 3 hours making just one file.
HOW TO: Here's how I do it: 1) if you have a unit theme, search Google Images for things, people, and places within that theme. Add them to your slides in Powerpoint, Keynote, or Google Slides (links to examples below). 2) Always download or copy 3 to 4 variations of each images of a person, thing, or place you find. That saves time from searching again. Place these images in randomly in your slide set (or place then in the order you found them and randomize later). 3) Consider your age group, and search the internet for "top celebrities now" (for high school and college) or "best cartoons for children now" (for K-6 through middle school). This is the "own culture" portion needed for your students to talk about what they know and like in the target language. If you do invisibles (cartoon creatures drawn by the students in your class, then step 5 is useful). If you trust that the cartoon/celebrity list is really appropriate for your age group, choose images that you've never heard of, so the students can really teach you new information, 4) Again, download 3 to 4 images of each person or cartoon or thing or place you find. This fills your slides and saves time. 5) In your populated slide set, duplicate some of the slides, and obscure the version of the image that occurs first. This introduces variation in the discussion, where some of the slides allow for discussion of what might appear next (for example, two ear tips might be Bugs Bunny's ears, and the next slide reveals that it is indeed him). 6) On the final slide, include many pictures that have appeared on previous slides. You can use this as an assessment, or if you just like giving students opportunities to talk, this slide is for that. 7) Finally, if you want to include the written versions of the words you are targeting (and if you are targeting), make a small text box with a white background in the first slide. Copy this, and quickly paste it into all of the slides. Again, the goal here is speed, as PictureTalks can normally take 2 to 3 hours to create if speed is not your goal. I use these steps to cut that time down to about 20 minutes. To end, here is a link to a sample I made for Day 2 with elementary schoolers so they could hear how to ask people's names, and who they like. Here is one for Mother's Day, where I asked elementary schoolers if they would buy each set of flowers for their mother, and who would like them (the children themselves and/or their mothers). In each of these class discussions, non-targeted words and structures come up naturally as well, as the students show interest in what they want to talk about. At first I wanted to title this post "Differentiating for Heritage & Non-heritage Learners", but my idea is really the opposite, as I will explain.
In my CI/TPRS teaching, I design my instruction to promote language proficiency by providing input in the context of communication ("The interpretation, expression, and (sometimes) negotiation of meaning in a given context", to borrow Bill VanPatten's most recent definition of communication). One central way I do this is by ensuring that the language learners hear and read contain words and structures (the input) which are repeated a lot (a "high frequency in the input" to use the SLA/Usage-based research term I like). The standard TPRS practice is to get this repetition by Circling, where the teacher asks lots of similar questions slowly, so our beginning learners have opportunities to process the same words in a variety of target-like sentence contexts. When I hear Vietnamese and more advanced French, Spanish, and German in teaching demos, I am usually eager to hear even the same sentence a few more times. It's at my current ability to process and my current level of challenge. When teaching Mandarin to undergrads at the University of Hawai‘i, and to 2nd, 3rd, & 4th graders at Punahou School's after-school immersion program, I'm always teaching heritage learners (often half to 3/4 of my class) who already understood me the first time I ask a question. Circling questions are confusing to them. They understood me the first time, so move on. But the non-heritage learners want to hear it again. My solution for balancing everyone out, and keeping us all in the class discussion during the listening part of the lesson is what I'm calling "Bottomless PictureTalk" (basic PictureTalk is described here, and please message me if this idea has already been described elsewhere). If I can ask two questions about each picture and three about how the students' own lives relate to each picture, and I do this for 20 separate pictures, then that's already (5 x 20) 100 times learners hear and process a target construction (or an otherwise emergent construction generated by the students when I'm doing non-targeted CI teaching). "But wouldn't many students feel annoyed by 100 similar questions?" To answer to this question we can simply do a web page search. I recommend trying this now: 1) open a long web page, maybe the Wikipedia page for "China", 2) search the page for the word "the", 3) search for "of". My search found over 1000 matches for "the" and another 1000 matches for "of". But shouldn't I have felt annoyed at so many uses of "the" and "of"? Probably not, because language naturally repeats when we keep talking about different things. If you go shopping with someone, you might ask each other "What about this one?" as many times as you need until you find what you needed. Neither person is likely to say, "Okay already!! Please use a different phrase. I'm so tired of this one." We use language to focus on meaning, and if the referent keeps changing, we don't notice the repeated use of language. My thinking now is that when we are all talking about new things, new people, new places, and new events, we don't have to differentiate for heritage and non-heritage learners. Everyone can continue being engaged in, and contributing to, our discussion in the target language. The non-heritage learners get the repeating language as we talk briefly about each picture, and no one suffers from repeated content. See how I make my long PictureTalk files as speedily as possible at this post here. In language teaching, we often talk about how to teach culture. In the CI/TPRS teaching I do, I often weave pictures of Chinese "Products" and "Practices" into my PictureTalk slides, and relevant concepts into the stories I write. But the current professional talk is really into a full three Ps: Products, Practices, and Perspectives. For novice learners, I often see teachers fall into an easy trap of over-simplification and stereotyping. This happens when images show Chinese people drinking hot water but Americans drinking ice water. The lesson implicitly promotes making assumptions about individual people based on norms which may or may not represent the fuller population and its various communities. It seems as if we want our students strike up conversations with Chinese people and say, "Oh, you are Chinese, so you must use chopsticks and drink only hot water." This seems irresponsible to me.
Recently when teaching Chinese jiaozi (dumplings) to students, one teacher, herself being from China, told us in private, "I'm from the south. We don't eat Jiaozi there." I remembered meeting people born and raised in Sichuan who don't eat spicy food. This is not a regional difference, but an individual one. I soon started thinking about how I was born and raised in the US, but I'm not into sports. Not one sport. Not a one. I mentioned to Ngan, my partner in teaching crime, what if we designed a unit about the people who don't do some norm in a country? Doesn't that kill two birds with one stone; introduce the perspectives of why people do and don't do some norm at the same time? Ngan responded, "Essential Question: Who doesn't eat jiaozi." Boom. Diversity. What a thought. In CI teaching, I might do this for my college students by PictureTalking with survey numbers provided by my Chinese friends. The survey would be designed somewhat openly, asking, maybe, "What do you drink with different kind of meals, and why?". For the 2nd and 3rd graders I teach after school, I might write a story about a person from Sichuan who wants a light-tasting meal. Each restaurant they go to offers a spicy meal, mentioning why spicy is good ("when living in Sichuan, I was often told that it helps you sweat, to keep you cooled of"). There. Products: food. Practices: eating spicy and avoiding eating spicy. Perspectives: keeps you cool and not everyone there cares about sweating to keep cool. Cultural norms as viewed from the perspective of non-participants, a kind of "local outsiders". |
Reed Riggs (Author)
Archives
April 2022
Categories
All
|