Dear Ana, Vera, Huong and Mike,
It is a very interesting topic. As a trilingual (Cantonese, Mandarin Chinese
and English), I often see myself having inner speech which cannot be
characterized as L1, L2 or L3 in a clearcut way, but perhaps can be said to be
frequent alternations among them, or put in another way, I see myself drawing
on all the linguistic and cultural resources that I have, including Japanese
and Korean linguistic and cultural resources (although I don't have full
mastery of the latter 2) depending on the topic, task or activity I'm engaged
in. I suppose our thinking (and inner speech) is much more
bilingual/multilingual than our public speech, which is in turn much more
bilingual/multilingual than our informal writing, which again is much more
bi/multilingual than our formal writing. I'd say the the langauge and
cultural boundaries are politically and socially determined (or imposed)
whereas our mind is relatively more "free" to cross boundaries (lingusitc and
sociocultural ones). I think the linguistic and cultural boundaries reflect
our political structures, whereas our mind sees (or aspires to) fewer such
boundaries althouh very often we also internalize those boundaries. That
might explain why when we speak (and write) in formal, public situations, we
feel more compelled NOT to code-mix and code-switch (and the same goes for
formal writing, eg, academic journal writing).
I suppose this can be seen as much more than a langauge learning issue (i.e.,
the "techicalized" topics in SLA or FLA research literatures), but involves
how we see (and construct) ourselves and "Others" (e.g., our
languages/cultures/ways of being in this world and "Others"'s
languages/cultures/ways of being in this world). We tend to construct a
"Self" and "Other(s)" (and hence the boundaries of L1, L2... and C1 and C2...)
and we might easily fall into the trap of linguistic and cultural
essentialism. My guess (and theory) is there's much bore boundary-crossing
and hybridzing, non-clearcut resources which cannot easily be characterized as
L1, L2... or C1, C2.... However, our academic disciplines (eg.,second and
foreign language learning/acquisition) operate on these boundaries (or
boundary constructions), and so do our social and political structures.
However, the learning issue is a very important one, and not only a cognitive
one (as is constructed in the SLA literature and discipline). It is very much
a sociocultural one and political one. It involves inclusion and exclusion,
access to symbolic capital (and the lack of it), memberships to certain groups
(and their activities) and exclusion from certain groups (ref. Jean Lave's
theories) and it involves the human sociocultural acts of drawing boundaries
and constructiong "Self" and "Others". Foreign language learning as cultural
politics in an intercultural world (a book in 2002 by Multilingual Matters) is
becoming more and more recognized as an important topic than SLA (second
language acquisition). I think the existing or traditional foreign/second
langauge acquisition literature tends to depoliticalize and "technicalize" the
very sociopolitical act of multi-langauge/lingual (and multicultural)
learning. Here, I think postcolonial studies and globalization studies will
be as useful resources as language learning theories.
Angel
>===== Original Message From Ana Marjanovic-Shane <anamshane@speakeasy.net>
=====
>--Boundary_(ID_SXlbupzmlInThre2mrsXWQ)
>Content-type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
>Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
>
>Dear Vera, Huong, Mike,
>
>I am also very interested in the issue of "thinking" in a language (foreign
>or native, L2/L1). I think we all have some experiences but it is hard to
>catch them. And there is a problem of research, too. Maybe we will have time
>to talk about it at AERA, Vera.
>
>Mike,
>It may have been a clash of C1 and C2 (as in Culture) -- You meant a praise,
>and I took it as... something else. But thanks for clarifying...
>
>Ana
>
>-------------------------------------------
>Ana Marjanovic-Shane
>1-267-334-2905(m)
>1-215-843-2909(h)
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Vera John-Steiner [mailto:vygotsky@unm.edu]
> Sent: Sunday, April 20, 2003 7:44 PM
> To: xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
> Subject: Re: Thinking in a foreign language
>
>
> Dear Huong, Ana and Mike
> My point was that we don't really "think" in a foreign language; we use L1
>or L2 subvocally, at times, which we equate with thinking in that
>language.We think in condensed meanings which we expand into fully formed
>utterances in a particular situation. As Ana's example about sneezing
>illustrated-she is aware that one is supposed to say something after a
>person sneezes. What she actually says is a realized meaning in a particular
>situation. Language and thought are not identical, it is
> communicative intent and meanings that are realized in words. Once a
>semantic system is expanded with new shades of meaning as a result of
>learning a new language, that system becomes more complex nuanced, etc. But,
>I believe that in fluent speakers of two or more languages the meaning
>system is unified while the production system is what is more and more
>differentiated.
> These thoughts may not communicate well I will have to get off the
>conversation for a while because of AERA.
> Thanks for raising the topic, Vera
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Ana Marjanovic-Shane
> To: xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
> Sent: Sunday, April 20, 2003 12:51 PM
> Subject: RE: Thinking in a foreign language
>
>
> Hi Mike, Huong, Vera,
>
> These are difficult topics, for a letter format, but I'll try to add
>some of my views: both as a "foreign" languages speaker and as someone who
>studies language and construction and creation of meaning.
> First I somewhat agree with Mike that a better way to learn L2 is
>through immersion in a meaningful, goal oriented activity, face-to-face.
>This is probably true for every L2 learner. But some will also benefit from
>the written materials and explicit teaching of grammar and vocabulary. It is
>also possible to learn just the written language and be able to read better
>than to speak. (A friend of mine who is deaf can read English -- as a
>foreign language -- but cannot speak it; she speaks Serbo-Croatian and
>"hears" it through lip-reading as a native speaker)
> As a foreign language student I have been exposed to many different
>methods:
> a.. I learned several foreign languages in school from textbooks: they
>were usually organized so that each chapter (lecture) contained a simple
>event based short story with a lot of dialogues; then a vocabulary list of
>new words, then new grammar rules, and a little test at the end.
> b.. I learned in an audio-visual lab, where instead of written
>lectures, we viewed short films, then played out the same situations through
>casting ourselves and trying to repeat the dialogue in a reenactment of the
>same event; and finally getting all in a text form to take home and
>practice. There were very little grammar drills or other "meta" language
>exercises.
> c.. I learned through total immersion in a foreign language country
>with and without structured coaching.
> d.. Finally I watched my children learn foreign languages at different
>age levels, and through different methods.
> As a student, I know that nothing can replace the total immersion in the
>L2 culture and communication. But I also know that for some people, learning
>can be speeded up when supplemented with appropriate structured coaching
>using written materials. However, that does not depend only on age and educa
>tion of the L2 student but also on many other things. Some people like to
>get a grammar rule and some feel intimidated by grammar. Some people are
>afraid to use L2 in live situations, for a long time, because they feel
>embarrassed to be so "ignorant, and "deficient" -- they can "concentrate"
>better on written materials and reading... Other people don't mind making
>mistakes as long as they get their meaning across.
>
> As a researcher of language development I would try to conceptualize
>learning L2 in the following ways: L2 skills range from alternative ways to
>do the same as in L1, (like knowing synonyms in your first language) to
>completely new skills and relationships which do not exist in L1. Learning a
>foreign language is a combination of these two types of learning. These
>cover not just the vocabulary, but also grammar and pragmatic rules (rules
>of appropriate use in actual situations). Language, according to Vygotsky,
>originated as a communicative device, but at some point in development (both
>individual and species development), started to play a major role in shaping
>cognition. What does that mean? As a communicative device, language is a
>means of creating relationships between co-locutors and the topic they
>communicate about. Every utterance is an action in which a speaker does
>something to the listener(s) regarding some topic. These three: speaker,
>listener(s) and the topic, are three functional elements of every meaning.
>In every culture, the relationships between the three elements become coded
>and rule governed specific to that culture. Because of that, once language
>starts playing a cognitive function, cognition (understanding the world
>around us) becomes culturally mediated by these three intertwined elements
>of every meaning. Learning the first language means at the same time
>developing a specific, culturally dependent cognitive skills. These include
>not just the creation of a very developed conceptual system, but also a very
>developed and built in cultural norms and values and ways to create
>relationships.
> Learning L2, obviously means on one hand learning new codes for the
>existing conceptual/cultural system, but, on the other hand, it also means
>learning new concepts and cultural norms. The difference between L1 and L2
>will probably determine how the types of leaning that will occur more often
>and be more important in the beginning.
> For instance: I think that the pragmatic rules of language are very
>important: what relationships and actions are appropriate at what time, for
>which situations and between which participants. They will determine the
>"entry point" into the foreign language and they would be the "tacit"
>boundary rules at every point of learning. Especially the differences in
>pragmatic rules between L1 and L2.
>
> Becoming a fluent speaker of a foreign language is as much becoming a
>member of the "foreign" culture as it is developing certain
>conceptual/cultural cognitive tools. We will probably tend to use those tool
>which do the task better, or in case of "synonyms" those that are more in
>use in the "current" culture we inhabit. And sometimes, a gesture is more in
>uttering something than in what exactly is being uttered.
>
> Here is a personal example: For a long time, I felt totally inadequate
>when trying to say something to a person who had just sneezed. I would just
>freeze. I could never remember which utterance to use from the four I could
>use: "god bless you", "tzum gesund", "gesundheit", "nazdravlje". Until one
>day I realized that the situation is so structured (here in the USA) that
>it really does not matter which actual words I use -- When someone sneezes,
>and then someone else exclaims something, everyone immediately understands
>the meaning regardless of their particular language and culture. So now I
>just utter the one that comes first in my L1 -- "nazdravlje". I would call
>this a total situational synonym between several languages/cultures.
>
> But there are many more situations when the part that is synonymous
>between L1 and L2 is smaller and smaller and the differences between the
>languages/cultures are greater and greater. In all those situations, there
>are many facets or aspects that a learner of a foreign language has to
>grasp. And that takes time and engagement in the meaningful activities both
>face-to-face and through all kinds of written and other materials.
>
> Finally, one of the media that is hugely underrepresented in the foreign
>language teaching and learning is play. Play is a "natural" mode for
>children's learning, a true Zone of Proximal Development (ZPD). Play is also
>one of the main places where children learn a foreign language. Observing my
>children I became aware that it was their play that FIRST became spoken in a
>foreign language -- long before they started using L2 with the same
>proficiency in "real" activities.
>
> For instance, when we came to the USA, my older son was 5 and a very
>prolific speaker of his L1 (Serbo-Croatian). On the first day we came, there
>was a party we went to, with a lot of children. He asked me how to say
>"freeze" in English, and the next two hours he spent playing "Freeze tag"
>with the rest of the children and learning to say other things about this
>play, and everything else, in English. The point is: he could organize the
>whole play just with the knowledge of one word. This was a great natural
>entry into the new language/culture.
>
> The closest I came to using play in learning a foreign language were
>those "audio-visual" labs when we re-enacted a short situations observed in
>a movie. Play is a great way of learning even for adults, and I think that
>it is grossly underrated as mode of learning language.
>
> What do you think? (as Eugene would say)
>
> Ana
>
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Mike Cole [mailto:mcole@weber.ucsd.edu]
> Sent: Saturday, April 19, 2003 6:21 PM
> To: xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
> Subject: Re: Thinking in a foreign language
>
>
> Huong-- Seems like an empirical question about how to arrange for
> L2 learning in an optimal way. You think that reading will engender
> more and different kinds of talk and have a positive effect? Could
> be, depending upon lots of factors. My guess is that reading textbooks
> about a language as less efficacious than being immersed in face to
> face, goal-oriented, joint activty were the oral mode is dominant.
>
> Perhaps I am wrong.
>
> Lets see if others have any opinion on the issue.
> mike
>
>
>
>--Boundary_(ID_SXlbupzmlInThre2mrsXWQ)
>Content-type: text/html; charset=iso-8859-1
>Content-transfer-encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE
>
><!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
><HTML><HEAD><TITLE></TITLE>
><META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1">
><META content="MSHTML 6.00.2723.2500" name=GENERATOR>
><STYLE></STYLE>
></HEAD>
><BODY bgColor=#ffffff>
><DIV><FONT id=IMOL_MON_FONT_TAG face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2>Dear Vera,
>Huong, Mike,</FONT></DIV>
><DIV><FONT id=IMOL_MON_FONT_TAG face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2
>IMOL_MON_FONT_TAG="yes"></FONT> </DIV>
><DIV><FONT id=IMOL_MON_FONT_TAG face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2
>IMOL_MON_FONT_TAG="yes">I am also very interested in the issue of "thinking"
in
>a language (foreign or native, L2/L1). I think we all have some experiences
but
>it is hard to catch them. And there is a problem of research, too. Maybe we
will
>have time to talk about it at AERA, Vera.</FONT></DIV>
><DIV><FONT id=IMOL_MON_FONT_TAG face="" size=+0
>IMOL_MON_FONT_TAG="yes"></FONT> </DIV>
><DIV><FONT id=IMOL_MON_FONT_TAG face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2
>IMOL_MON_FONT_TAG="yes">Mike,</FONT></DIV>
><DIV><FONT id=IMOL_MON_FONT_TAG face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2
>IMOL_MON_FONT_TAG="yes">It may have been a clash of C1 and C2 (as in Culture)
-- >You meant a praise, and I took it as... something else. But thanks for >clarifying...</FONT></DIV> ><DIV><FONT id=IMOL_MON_FONT_TAG face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2 >IMOL_MON_FONT_TAG="yes"></FONT> </DIV> ><DIV><FONT id=IMOL_MON_FONT_TAG face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2 >IMOL_MON_FONT_TAG="yes">Ana</FONT></DIV> ><DIV><FONT id=IMOL_MON_FONT_TAG face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2 >IMOL_MON_FONT_TAG="yes"></FONT> </DIV> ><DIV><FONT id=IMOL_MON_FONT_TAG face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2 >IMOL_MON_FONT_TAG="yes">-------------------------------------------</FONT></D IV> ><DIV><STRONG>Ana Marjanovic-Shane</STRONG></DIV> ><DIV><STRONG>1-267-334-2905(m)</STRONG></DIV> ><DIV><STRONG>1-215-843-2909(h)</STRONG></DIV><SPAN >id=IncrediOriginalMessage></SPAN> ><DIV> </DIV> ><BLOCKQUOTE dir=ltr style="MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px"> > <DIV class=OutlookMessageHeader dir=ltr align=left><FONT id=IMOL_MON_FONT_TAG > face=Tahoma size=2>-----Original Message-----<BR><B>From:</B> Vera > John-Steiner [mailto:vygotsky@unm.edu]<BR><B>Sent:</B> Sunday, April 20, 2003 > 7:44 PM<BR><B>To:</B> xmca@weber.ucsd.edu<BR><B>Subject:</B> Re: Thinking in a > foreign language<BR><BR></FONT></DIV> > <DIV>Dear Huong, Ana and Mike</DIV> > <DIV>My point was that we don't really "think" in a foreign language; we use > L1 or L2 subvocally, at times, which we equate with thinking in that > language.We think in condensed meanings which we expand into fully formed > utterances in a particular situation. As Ana's example about sneezing > illustrated-she is aware that one is supposed to say something after a > person sneezes. What she actually says is a realized meaning in a particular > situation. Language and thought are not identical, it is</DIV> > <DIV>communicative intent and meanings that are realized in words. Once > a semantic system is expanded with new shades of meaning as a result of > learning a new language, that system becomes more complex nuanced, etc. But, I > believe that in fluent speakers of two or more languages the meaning > system is unified while the production system is what is more and more > differentiated. </DIV> > <DIV>These thoughts may not communicate well I will have to get > off the conversation for a while because of AERA.</DIV> > <DIV>Thanks for raising the topic, Vera </DIV> > <BLOCKQUOTE > style="PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px"> > <DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message ----- </DIV> > <DIV > style="BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: black"><B>From:</B> > <A title=anamshane@speakeasy.net href="mailto:anamshane@speakeasy.net">Ana > Marjanovic-Shane</A> </DIV> > <DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A title=xmca@weber.ucsd.edu > href="mailto:xmca@weber.ucsd.edu">xmca@weber.ucsd.edu</A> </DIV> > <DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Sunday, April 20, 2003 12:51 > PM</DIV> > <DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> RE: Thinking in a foreign > language</DIV> > <DIV><BR></DIV> > <DIV><FONT id=IMOL_MON_FONT_TAG face=Arial color=#000080 size=2>Hi Mike, > Huong, Vera,<BR><BR>These are difficult topics, for a letter format, but > I'll try to add some of my views: both as a "foreign" languages speaker and > as someone who studies language and construction and creation of > meaning.<BR>First I somewhat agree with Mike that a better way to learn L2 > is through immersion in a meaningful, goal oriented activity, face-to-face. > This is probably true for every L2 learner. But some will also benefit from > the written materials and explicit teaching of grammar and vocabulary. It is > also possible to learn just the written language and be able to read better > than to speak. (A friend of mine who is deaf can read English -- as a > foreign language -- but cannot speak it; she speaks Serbo-Croatian and > "hears" it through lip-reading as a native speaker)<BR>As a foreign language > student I have been exposed to many different methods:</FONT></DIV><FONT > id=IMOL_MON_FONT_TAG size=2> > <UL> > <LI><FONT id=IMOL_MON_FONT_TAG face=Arial color=#000080>I learned several > foreign languages in school from textbooks: they were usually organized so > that each chapter (lecture) contained a simple event based short story > with a lot of dialogues; then a vocabulary list of new words, then new > grammar rules, and a little test at the end.</FONT> > <LI><FONT id=IMOL_MON_FONT_TAG face=Arial color=#000080>I learned in an > audio-visual lab, where instead of written lectures, we viewed short > films, then played out the same situations through casting ourselves and > trying to repeat the dialogue in a reenactment of the same event; and > finally getting all in a text form to take home and practice. There were > very little grammar drills or other "meta" language exercises.</FONT> > <LI><FONT id=IMOL_MON_FONT_TAG face=Arial color=#000080>I learned through > total immersion in a foreign language country with and without structured > coaching.</FONT> > <LI><FONT id=IMOL_MON_FONT_TAG face=Arial color=#000080>Finally I watched > my children learn foreign languages at different age levels, and through > different methods.</FONT></LI></UL> > <DIV><FONT id=IMOL_MON_FONT_TAG face=Arial color=#000080>As a student, I > know that nothing can replace the total immersion in the L2 culture and > communication. But I also know that for some people, learning can be speeded > up when supplemented with appropriate structured coaching using written > materials. However, that does not depend only on age and education of the L2 > student but also on many other things. Some people like to get a grammar > rule and some feel intimidated by grammar. Some people are afraid to use L2 > in live situations, for a long time, because they feel embarrassed to be so > "ignorant, and "deficient" -- they can "concentrate" better on written > materials and reading... Other people don't mind making mistakes as long as > they get their meaning across.</FONT></DIV> > <DIV><FONT id=IMOL_MON_FONT_TAG face=Arial color=#000080></FONT> </DIV> > <DIV><FONT id=IMOL_MON_FONT_TAG face=Arial color=#0000ff>As a > researcher of language development I would try to conceptualize > learning L2 in the following ways: L2 skills range from alternative ways to > do the same as in L1, (like knowing synonyms in your first language) to > completely new skills and relationships which do not exist in L1. Learning a > foreign language is a combination of these two types of learning. These > cover not just the vocabulary, but also grammar and pragmatic rules > (rules of appropriate use in actual situations). Language, according to > Vygotsky, originated as a communicative device, but at some point in > development (both individual and species development), started to play a > major role in shaping cognition. What does that mean? As a communicative > device, language is a means of creating relationships between co-locutors > and the topic they communicate about. Every utterance is an action in which > a speaker does something to the listener(s) regarding some topic. These > three: speaker, listener(s) and the topic, are three functional > elements of every meaning. In every culture, the relationships between the > three elements become coded and rule governed specific to that culture. > Because of that, once language starts playing a cognitive function, > cognition (understanding the world around us) becomes culturally > mediated by these three intertwined elements of every meaning. > Learning the first language means at the same time developing a specific, > culturally dependent cognitive skills. These include not just the > creation of a very developed conceptual system, but also a very developed > and built in cultural norms and values and ways to create > relationships.</FONT></DIV> > <DIV><FONT id=IMOL_MON_FONT_TAG face=Arial color=#0000ff>Learning L2, > obviously means on one hand learning new codes for the existing > conceptual/cultural system, but, on the other hand, it also means > learning new concepts and cultural norms. The difference between L1 and L2 > will probably determine how the types of leaning that will occur more often > and be more important in the beginning.</FONT></DIV> > <DIV><FONT id=IMOL_MON_FONT_TAG face=Arial color=#0000ff>For instance: I > think that the pragmatic rules of language are very important: what > relationships and actions are appropriate at what time, for which situations > and between which participants. They will determine the "entry point" into > the foreign language and they would be the "tacit" boundary rules at > every point of learning. Especially the differences in pragmatic rules > between L1 and L2. </FONT></DIV> > <DIV><FONT id=IMOL_MON_FONT_TAG face=Arial color=#0000ff></FONT> </DIV> > <DIV><FONT id=IMOL_MON_FONT_TAG face=Arial color=#0000ff>Becoming a fluent > speaker of a foreign language is as much becoming a member of the "foreign" > culture as it is developing certain conceptual/cultural cognitive tools. We > will probably tend to use those tool which do the task better, or in case of > "synonyms" those that are more in use in the "current" culture we inhabit. > And sometimes, a gesture is more in uttering something than in what exactly > is being uttered.</FONT></DIV> > <DIV><FONT id=IMOL_MON_FONT_TAG face=Arial color=#0000ff></FONT> </DIV> > <DIV><FONT id=IMOL_MON_FONT_TAG face=Arial color=#0000ff>Here is a personal > example: For a long time, I felt totally inadequate when trying to say > something to a person who had just sneezed. I would just freeze. I could > never remember which utterance to use from the four I could use: > </FONT><FONT id=IMOL_MON_FONT_TAG face=Arial color=#0000ff>"god bless you", > "tzum gesund", "gesundheit", "nazdravlje". Until one day I realized that the > situation is so structured (here in the USA) that it really does > not matter which actual words I use -- When someone sneezes, and then > someone else exclaims something, everyone immediately understands the > meaning regardless of their particular language and culture. So now I just > utter the one that comes first in my L1 -- "nazdravlje". I would call this a > total situational synonym between several > languages/cultures.</FONT></DIV><FONT id=IMOL_MON_FONT_TAG face=Arial > color=#0000ff> > <DIV><BR>But there are many more situations when the part that is > synonymous between L1 and L2 is smaller and smaller and the differences > between the languages/cultures are greater and greater. In all those > situations, there are many facets or aspects that a learner of a foreign > language has to grasp. And that takes time and engagement in the > meaningful activities both face-to-face and through all kinds of written and > other materials.</DIV> > <DIV> </DIV> > <DIV>Finally, one of the media that is hugely underrepresented in the > foreign language teaching and learning is play. Play is a "natural" > mode for children's learning, a true Zone of Proximal Development > (ZPD). Play is also one of the main places where children learn a > foreign language. Observing my children I became aware that it was their > play that FIRST became spoken in a foreign language -- long before they > started using L2 with the same proficiency in "real" activities. </DIV> > <DIV> </DIV> > <DIV>For instance, when we came to the USA, my older son was 5 and a very > prolific speaker of his L1 (Serbo-Croatian). On the first day we came, there > was a party we went to, with a lot of children. He asked me how to say > "freeze" in English, and the next two hours he spent playing "Freeze tag" > with the rest of the children and learning to say other things about this > play, and everything else, in English. The point is: he could organize > the whole play just with the knowledge of one word. This was a great natural > entry into the new language/culture.</DIV> > <DIV> </DIV> > <DIV>The closest I came to using play in learning a foreign language were > those "audio-visual" labs when we re-enacted a short situations observed in > a movie. Play is a great way of learning even for adults, and I think > that it is grossly underrated as mode of learning language.</DIV> > <DIV> </DIV> > <DIV>What do you think? (as Eugene would say)</DIV> > <DIV> </DIV> > <DIV>Ana </FONT></DIV> > <DIV><FONT id=IMOL_MON_FONT_TAG face=Arial color=#0000ff></FONT> </DIV> > <DIV><FONT id=IMOL_MON_FONT_TAG face=Arial color=#0000ff></FONT><FONT > id=IMOL_MON_FONT_TAG face=Arial > color=#0000ff></FONT><BR><BR><BR>-----Original Message-----<BR>From: Mike > Cole [<A > href="mailto:mcole@weber.ucsd.edu">mailto:mcole@weber.ucsd.edu</A>]<BR>Sent: > Saturday, April 19, 2003 6:21 PM<BR>To: xmca@weber.ucsd.edu<BR>Subject: Re: > Thinking in a foreign language<BR><BR><BR>Huong-- Seems like an empirical > question about how to arrange for<BR>L2 learning in an optimal way. You > think that reading will engender<BR>more and different kinds of talk and > have a positive effect? Could<BR>be, depending upon lots of factors. My > guess is that reading textbooks<BR>about a language as less efficacious than > being immersed in face to<BR>face, goal-oriented, joint activty were the > oral mode is dominant.<BR><BR>Perhaps I am wrong.<BR><BR>Lets see if others > have any opinion on the >issue.<BR>mike<BR><BR></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></BLOCKQUOTE></FONT></BODY></HTML> > >--Boundary_(ID_SXlbupzmlInThre2mrsXWQ)--Angel Lin, Ph.D.(Toronto) Associate Professor Department of English and Communication City University of Hong Kong Tat Chee Ave., Kowloon, Hong Kong Fax: (852) 2788-8894 Phone: (852) 2788-8122 E-mail: enangel@cityu.edu.hk http://www.cityu.edu.hk/en/staff/angel/angel_p.html http://www.tesl-hk.org
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu May 01 2003 - 01:00:09 PDT