Sometimes there are processes going on in the students mind that were developed in L1 and cannot be made in L2 in the beginning. (my guess)
An example can be seen in the transcript below when my student was reading a text about vampires in class and could not understand what 'claws' meant in that context.
1.. D - What's claw? ((while reading the text))
2.. T - claws / ((makes the gesture for claws and the sound of a wild animal, like a lion))
3.. D - garras?
4.. T - Yes.
5.. D - No / I know this is claw / but I don't know the meaning here / on this / quê que isso tem a vê? ((what has this got to do with the text?))
6.. T - Ah / they have / you know ((makes the gesture again))
7.. D - Ah é ((Oh, yeah)) / something I forgot / they can / you know ((makes the gesture for nails growing))
8.. T - grow?
9.. D - grow the:: ((shows the nails))
10.. T - nails
11.. D - nails and / eh / in an episode on Night Walker / the / another vampire / making Sheedo / the Night Walker / get back to / Groenlândia?
((snip, snip, snip))
when the student tried to understand the relationship between the word "claws" and the text, she starts expressing herself in English (337), but asks the final question in her L1 ('quê que isso tem a vê?'). This may indicate she is involved in a task that requires the use of cognitive processes that have been developed in her L1 and, when she faces the difficulty, she uses the mediational resources she has at her disposal, that is, her L1. She also uses her previous knowledge about vampires (mostly constructed in her L1) to help her produce meaning. When she can produce meaning for the word "claws" in that context, she says "Ah é", using her L1 again. This seems to indicate that the cognitive process she was involved in occurred in her L1 and now announces its end, as she continues speaking in English.
That would bring us back to an earlier discussion in which many of you have greatly contributed to my further understanding of the relationship between L1 / L2, including a quote from Leontiev (1981) kindly sent by Phil Chappell.
(...) though used to support all our mental activities (such as the realisation of higher mental functions: thought, memory, perception), language in no way dictates the course of these activities, nor does it provide a means of their realisation. Man does not memorise data imposed by language: he uses language to memorise that which he needs. Man does not think in a way determined by language: he mediates his thought through language to the extent to which language answers to the content and to the tasks of his thought (my emphasis). Man does not perceive any ready-made significance: he ascribes such significance and verbalises it only when he needs to perceive it. Naturally, one can understand this only if one has a sufficiently clear idea of the interrelationship between the individual (personal) and social components in man's mental life".
Karin Quast
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Jul 08 2003 - 11:29:41 PDT