In the foreign language (FL) classroom, learners commonly use their shared L1, especially during peer interaction. Because of this extensive L1 use, English teachers often hesitate to use peer interaction, since teacher-led lessons enable a more controlled, 'maximal' use of the TL (ibid.). This leads to the question, whether L1 use should be avoided in the FL classroom entirely or whether some uses of the L1 can support FL learning.
While most SLA researchers would agree that maximizing learners' exposure to the TL is essential for FL learning, this 'maximal' TL use does not, however, necessitate a total exclusion of the L1. On the contrary, there is indicative evidence that occasional use of the L1 by the learners may be beneficial for FL learning. Existing research has found that learners use their shared L1 for collective scaffolding (Dicamilla & Antón, 2012), to build knowledge about the FL and to solve FL-related linguistic problems during collaborative dialogue (Swain & Watanabe, 2020), to mention but a few purposes.
The existing studies within sociocultural theory have focused on adult learners' use of a majority L1, and minority L1 use in peer interaction by young FL learners has not gained attention thus far. Thus, the present study sets out to investigate young learners' utilization of their existing linguistic repertoire in task-based peer interaction in the EFL classroom.
For this purpose, a multiple case study with young learners (9-11-year-olds) was designed, including both majority and minority L1 speakers. Their task-based learner interaction with a same-L1 peer was recorded, after which retrospective interviews with the learners were conducted. Vygotskyan microgenetic analysis (Ganem Gutierrez, 2007) of learners' L1 use, with a focus on their collaborative dialogue and collective scaffolding, as well as other purposes of L1 use, was undertaken. The preliminary findings of this analysis show that during the task resolution young learners use their shared L1 for purposes that facilitate their FL learning, such as providing each other with scaffolded help, thus collaboratively building a collective expert and co-constructing FL utterances beyond each individuals' proficiency during collaborative dialogue.
Questions:
The holistic, moment-by-moment microgenetic analysis is combined with a deductive analysis that includes the L1 uses found in prior research, to answer the research question. Feedback on the presented analytic sequences is very welcome.For cross-case comparisons, stark reductions of the qualitative data is required. Literature tips, useful strategies and examples for such data reduction would be helpful.References
Dicamilla, F. J., & Antón, M. (2012). Functions of L1 in the collaborative interaction of beginning and advanced second language learners. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 22(2), 160–188. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1473-4192.2011.00302.x
Ganem Gutierrez, A. (2007). Microgenesis, Method and Object: A Study of Collaborative Activity in a Spanish as a Foreign Language Classroom. Applied Linguistics, 29(1), 120–148. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amm032
Swain, M., & Watanabe, Y. (2020). Languaging: Collaborative Dialogue as a Source of Second Language Learning. In C. A. Chapelle (Ed.), The concise encyclopedia of applied linguistics (pp. 667–673). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley Blackwell.
Dominique Caglia
