Dear Karin,
This is a fascinating problem. I would agree to a certain extent with Phil,
but I would also elaborate it a bit further. The choice of a language, I
think, will depend on:
1. on one hand, a particular activity in which one is engaged and
2. on the other, the extent to which one has developed linguistic tools for
that particular activity.
Most of the time L1 will be more developed than L2 for most of the
activities. The difference in the development of linguistic tools necessary
for an activity, between L1 and L2, will likely be greater for more complex
intellectual activities. For instance:
Mike mentioned that "when asked to do numerical
calculations, even highly adept l2 users revert to L1". This is true for
many bilingual people. (like in my case)
However, I would add that this is true only if the numerical calculations
are learned in L1 and have a better developed set of linguistic tools to
make them fast and reliable.
There is a reverse situation, too. It often happens when the schools use a
different language than the one spoken at home. In those situations, people
learn to perform certain intellectual operations better in L2 than in L1.
Many people in former colonial countries, as well as minorities in host
countries, learn one language at home and another in school. They may do
math and or other academic and intellectual tasks better in the language of
their formal education, but some other activities must be performed in their
"native" language to be "real".
I would say that whichever language is the one that better serves certain
cognitive activity, that language will tend to be preferred for that
particular task.
Ana
-----Original Message-----
From: mkdtostes [mailto:mktostes@uol.com.br]
Sent: Wednesday, March 26, 2003 3:29 PM
To: xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
Subject: L1 helping L2
Dear more knowleageable peers,
I was just taking a "last" look at my master's dissertation and realized
there was something else I could still include but which I cannot seem to be
able to explain. It's related to the use of first language as a mediating
tool in second language learning.
I have explored several aspects, but one of them just became salient today.
It seems that when my student is engaged in trying to understand how the
language works or something related to an activity, even though she could
say some of the things in English (her FL) she uses her mother tongue
(Portuguese).
My guess is that in the process of trying to understand how the language
works she uses the mother tongue as a reflection tool. But why?
Could it be that in the initial 'stages' of language learning this cognitive
process has to be carried out in the mother tongue??
Or could it be that while analysing how something in the FL works using the
own FL would be a double process of abstraction not possible for that
student at that moment?
Or... could it be that when we focus our attention on something, especially
if it is difficult to grasp, we resort to the mother tongue because it is
less stressful for us, or less demanding cognitively?
Or could it be that in seeking for assistance we resort to the mother tongue
"as a means of obtaing needed mediation", as Lantolf (2000) suggests, but
referring to artifacts?
or because private speech is most likely to be in the mother tongue???
These will seem quite silly questions in a few days (probably) after I give
it a little more thought but at the moment... Anyway, I'm running out of
time and I'm afraid I won't be able to figure that out by myself.
Or would it suffice to say that the L1 is being used as a tool for
reflection?
Swain (2000) has cited Brooks and Donato (1994); Brooks, Donato and McGlone
(1997); Anton and DiCamilla (1998); Swain and Lapkin (1998) in relation to
L1 as a mediational tool in L2 learning, but unfortunately I have no access
to the material.
Could any of you help me with your insights?
Thank you very much,
Karin
mktostes@uol.com.br
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Apr 01 2003 - 01:00:07 PST