Estrategias comunicativas y tareas de interacción oral en L3 presenciales y en línea

  1. Lucrecia Keim Cubas 1
  2. Gemma Delgar Farrés 1
  1. 1 Universidad de Vic-Universidad Central de Cataluña, UVic-UCC (España)
Revista:
RIED: revista iberoamericana de educación a distancia

ISSN: 1138-2783

Ano de publicación: 2019

Título do exemplar: Las redes sociales en educación: desde la innovación a la investigación educativa

Volume: 22

Número: 2

Páxinas: 225-244

Tipo: Artigo

DOI: 10.5944/RIED.22.2.22868 DIALNET GOOGLE SCHOLAR lock_openAcceso aberto editor

Outras publicacións en: RIED: revista iberoamericana de educación a distancia

Obxectivos de Desenvolvemento Sustentable

Resumo

When carrying out spoken interaction tasks, whether face-to-face or online, learners face considerable communicative challenges which prod them into responding strategically. This article compares the use of communicative strategies as two pairs of students of French and two pairs of students of German as additional languages carry out eight face-to-face and online spoken interaction tasks, the latter via videoconferencing, in order to examine the possible influence of modality, task typology, and language on communicative strategies used. Jigsaw and ranking tasks were recorded and transcribed using the CLAN programme, while the methodological approach applied was qualitative. Our data show that the jigsaw task elicited mostly the use of communication strategies with a view to clarification, while the ranking task tended toward strategies involving discourse reformulation. Furthermore, there appeared slight differences between students of French and students of German when resorting to compensatory strategies (searching, asking for help, code-switching). In all cases strategies were employed articulately forming complex communicative sequences. Thus, the results of our study indicate – with the exception of iconic gesturing utilised in mime strategy – modality does not significantly impact on the use of strategies. Nevertheless, both task typology and the particular language being learned may have an effect on strategies utilised.

Referencias bibliográficas

  • Baralt, M., Gilabert, R. y Robinson, P. (Eds.). (2014). Task Sequencing and Instructed Second Language Learning. London: Bloomsbury Academic.
  • Bygate, M. (2015). Domains and Directions in the Development of TBLT. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
  • Chamot, A.U. (2004). Issues in Language Learning Strategy Research and Teaching. Electronic Journal of Foreign Language teaching, 1 (1), 14-26. Recuperado de http://e-flt.nus.edu.sg/v1n12004/chamot.pdf
  • Cosnier, J. y Develotte, C. (2011). Le face à face en ligne, approche éthologique. En C. Develotte, R. Kern y M.-N. Lamy, (Eds.), Décrire la conversation en ligne. Le face à face distanciel (27-50). Lyon: ENS Éditions.
  • Cotton, D. et al. (2010). Market Leader: intermediate business English course book. 3rd Edition. Harlow: Pearson Education.
  • Delgar G. (2015). L’interaction orale en présentiel et à distance: une étude de cas en classe de français. Synergies Espagne, 8, 111-122. Recuperado de https://gerflint.fr/Base/Espagne8/delgar.pdf
  • Develotte, C., Kern, R. y Lamy, M.-N. (Eds.). (2011). Décrire la conversation en ligne. Le face à face distanciel. Lyon: ENS Éditions.
  • Dewaele, J.M. y Salomidou, L. (2017). Loving a partner in a Foreign Language. Journal of Pragmatics, 108, 116-130. doi: 10.1016/j.pragma.2016.12.009
  • Dörnyei, Z. y Kormos, J. (1998). Problem-solving mechanisms in L2 Communication. A psycholinguistic perspective. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 20, 349-385.
  • González-Lloret, M. (2015). Conversation analysis in Computer-assisted Language Learning. CALICO Journal, 32 (3), 569-594. doi: 10.1558/cj.v32i3.27568
  • Guichon, N. y Cohen, C. (2016). Multimodality and CALL. En F. Farr y L. Murray,(Eds.), The Routledge Handbook of Language Learning and Technology (509-521). London: Routledge.
  • Guichon, N. y Nicolaev, V. (2009). Caractériser des tâches d’apprentissage et évaluer leur impact sur la production orale en L2. En C. Develotte, F. Mangenot. y E. Nissen, (Coords.), Actes du colloque Epal 2009 (Échanger pour apprendre en ligne: conception, instrumentation, interactions, multimodalité). Recuperado de https://www.researchgate.net/publication/255622772_CARACTERISER_DES_TACHES_D'APPRENTISSAGE_ET_EVALUER_LEUR_IMPACT_SUR_LA_PRODUCTION_ORALE_EN_L2
  • Hampel, R. y Stickler, U. (2012). The use of videoconferencing to support multimodal interaction in an online language classroom. ReCALL, 24 (2), 116-137. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S095834401200002X
  • Holt, B., Tellier, M. y Guichon, N. (2015). The use of teaching gestures in an online multimodal environment: the case of incomprehension sequences. Gesture and Speech in Interaction 4th Edition. Nantes. Recuperado de https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-01215770v2/document
  • Isaeva, E. y Fernández-Villanueva, M. (2016). Gestures and Lexical Access Problems in German as Second Language. En M. Fernández-Villanueva y K. Jungbluth, (Eds.), Beyond Language Boundaries (93-113). Berlin: de Gruyter.
  • Jeong, N.-S. (2011). The Effects of Task Type and Group Structure on Meaning Negotiation in Synchronous Computer-Mediated Communication. En L. Plonsky y M. Schierloh, (Eds.), Selected Proceedings of the 2009 Second Language Research Forum (51-69). Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Proceedings Project. Recuperado de http://www.lingref.com/cpp/slrf/2009/paper2524.pdf
  • Keim, L. y Tortadès, À. (2015). Comparación de la interacción oral de estudiantes de alemán L3 presenciales y online en una tarea de aula. RIED. Revista Iberoamericana de Educación a Distancia, 18 (2), 325-353. doi: https://doi.org/10.5944/ried.18.2.13486
  • Kerbrat-Orecchioni, C. (2011). Conversations en présentiel et conversations en ligne : bilan comparatif. En C. Develotte, R. Kern y M.-N. Lamy, (Eds.), Décrire la conversation en ligne. Le face à face distanciel (173-195). Lyon: ENS Éditions.
  • Khan, S. (2010). Strategies and spoken production on three oral communication tasks. A study of high and low proficiency EFL learners. Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona. Recuperado de http://hdl.handle.net/10803/32083
  • Knight, J., Barberà, E. y Appel, C. (2017). A framework for learner agency in online spoken interaction tasks. ReCALL, 29 (3), 276-293. doi: 10.1017/S095834401700009X
  • Knight, J., Dooly, M. y Barberà, E. (2018). Multimodal meaning making: navigational acts in an online speaking task. System, 78, 65-78. doi: 10.1016/j.system.2018.07.007
  • Martín Peris, E. (2014). Un modelo de enfoque plurilingüe para la enseñanza de lenguas en la escuela. Linguarum Arena, 5, 47-66. Recuperado de https://repositori.upf.edu/handle/10230/24775
  • Mondada, L. (2016). Challenges of Multimodality: Language and the Body in Social Interaction. Journal of Sociolinguistics, 20 (3), 336-366. doi: https://doi.org/10.1111/josl.1_12177
  • Pica, T., Kanagy, R. y Falodun, J. (1993). Choosing and Using Communication Tasks for Second Language Instruction and Research. En G. Crookeset y S. Gass, (Eds.), Tasks and Language Learning. Integrating Theory and Practice (9-34). Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
  • Rosas, M. (2018). L2 learners’ use of communication strategies as affected by the task type. Revista Signos: Estudios de lengua y literatura, 51 (96), 107-131. doi: 10.4067/S0718-09342018000100107
  • Wigham, C. R. (2017). A multimodal analysis of lexical explanation sequences in web conferencing-supported language teaching. En B. O’Rourke y U. Stickler, (Eds.), Special issue of Language Learning in Higher Education: Synchronous communication technologies in language and intercultural learning and teaching in higher education, 7 (1), 81-108.
  • Yanguas, I. (2010). Oral computer mediated interaction between L2 learners:it’s about time! Language Learning & Technology, 14 (3), 72-93. doi: 10125/44227
Fonte de datos: Dialnet