The Negotiation Model in Asynchronous Computer-mediated Communication (CMC)
Negotiation in Task-based Email Exchanges
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.1558/cj.v23i2.319-348Keywords:
Computer-mediated Communication, Negotiation of Meaning, Email, Asynchronous CMC, Interactional FeaturesAbstract
Based on recent studies, computer-mediated communication (CMC) has been considered a tool to aid in language learning on account of its distinctive interactional features. However, most studies have referred to synchronous CMC and neglected to investigate how asynchronous CMC contributes to language learning. Asynchronous CMC possesses features distinguishable from synchronous CMC (e.g., more accurate, complex, formal, and longer utterances than those in synchronous interactions). The discourse structure in such interactions should be different from that in synchronous interactions, and it is necessary to investigate how such features can facilitate second language acquisition. This study investigates task-based email interactions among 24 native speakers non native speaker (NS-NNS) dyads with respect to the negotiation structure and strategies followed in asynchronous CMC. The findings underscore the potential of syntactic development, the necessity of instruction in effective feedback strategies, and the distinguishable negotiation structure of asynchronous CMC.
References
Beauvois, M. H. (1992). Computer assisted classroom discussion in the classroom: Conversation in slow motion. Foreign Language Annals, 25 (5), 525-534.
Beauvois, M. (1997). High-tech, high touch: From discussion to composing in the networked classroom, Computer Assisted Language Learning, 10, 57-69.
Blake, R. (2000). Computer mediated communication: A window on L2 Spanish interlanguage. Language Learning & Technology, 4 (1), 120-136. Retrieved October 10, 2005, from http://llt.msu.edu/vol4num1/blake
Braine, G., & Yorozu, M. (1998). Local area network (LAN) computers in ESL and EFL writing classes: Promise and realities. JALT Journal, 20, 47-59.
Chapman, D. (1996). Computer-mediated communication (CMC) and Japanese immersion: A case study on developing sociolinguistic competence through e-mail. Paper presented at the Symposium on New Technologies and Less Commonly Taught Language, University of Hawaii, Honolulu, HI.
Chiang, C., & Dunkel, P. (1992). The effect of speech modification, prior knowledge and listening proficiency on EFL lecture learning. TESOL Quarterly, 26, 345-374.
Chun, D. (1994). Using computer networking to facilitate the acquisition of interactive competence. System, 22 (1), 17-31.
Crooks, G. (1988). Planning, monitoring, and second language development: A review (Technical Report No. 4). Honolulu: University of Hawaii, Center for Second Language Classroom Research.
Curtis, A., & Roskams, T. (1999). Language learning in networked writing labs: A view form Asia. In J. A. Inman & D. N. Sewell (Eds.), Taking flight with OWLs: Examining electric writing center work (pp. 29-39). London: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Davis, B., & Thiede, R. (2000). Writing into change: Style shifting in asynchronous electronic discourse. In M. Warschauer & R. Kern (Eds.), Network-based language teaching: Concepts and practice (pp. 87-120). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Day, R. R., Chenoweth, N. A., Chun, A. E., & Luppescu, S. (1984). Collective feedback in native nonnative discourse. Language Learning, 34 (2), 19-45.
Doughty, C., & Williams, J. (1998). Focus on form in classroom second language acquisition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Doughty, C. (2000). Negotiating the L2 linguistic environment. University of Hawaii Working Papers in Second Language Studies, 18 (2), 47-83.
Doughty, C., & Pica, T. (1986). Information-gap tasks: Do they facilitate SLA? TESOL Quarterly, 20 (2), 305-325.
Doughty, C., & Varela, E. (1998). Communicative focus on form. In C. Doughty & J. Williams (Eds.), Focus on form in classroom second language acquisition (pp. 114-138). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Ehrlich, S., Avey, P., & Yorio, C. (1988). Discourse structure and the negotiation of comprehensible input. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 11 (4), 397-414.
Fernández-García, M., & Martínez-Arbelaiz, A. (2002). Negotiation of meaning in nonnative speaker-nonnative speaker synchronous discussion. CALICO Journal, 19 (2), 279-294.
Foster, P. (1998). A classroom perspective on the negotiation of meaning. Applied Linguistics, 19 (1), 1-23.
Gass, S., & Varonis, E. (1985). Task variation and nonnative-nonnative negotiation of meaning. In S. Gass & C. Madden (Eds.), Input in second language acquisition. (pp, 149-161). Rowley, MA: Newbury House.
Gass, S., & Varonis, E. M. (1994). Input, interaction, and second language production. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 16 (3), 283-302.
Gass, S. (1990). Second and foreign language learning: Same, different or none of the above? In B. VanPatten & J. Lee (Eds.), Second language acquisition-foreign language learning (pp. 34-44). Clevedon, UK: Multilingual Matters.
Goffman, E. (1974). Frame analysis. New York: Harper & Row.
Hatch, E., Flashner, V., & Hunt, L. (1986). The experience model and language teaching. In R. Day (Ed.), Talking to learn (pp. 5-22). Rowley, MA: Newbury House.
Hymes, D. (1974). Foundations in sociolinguistics: An ethnographic approach. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.
Kelm, O. (1992). The use of synchronous computer networks in second language instruction: A preliminary report, Foreign Language Annals, 25 (5), 441-545.
Kern, R. G. (1995). Restructuring classroom interaction with networked computers: Effects on quality and characteristics of language production. The Modern Language Journal, 79, (5), 457-476.
Kitade, K. (2000). L2 learners’ discourse and SLA theories in CMC: Collaborative interaction in internet chat. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 13 (2), 143-166.
Lamy, M., & Goodfellow, R. (1999). “Reflective conversation” in the virtual language classroom. Language Learning & Technology, 2 (2), 43-61. Retrieved October 10, 2005, from http://llt.msu.edu/vol2num2/article2
Long, M. (1983a). Native speaker/non-native speaker conversation and the negotiation of comprehensible input. Applied Linguistics, 4 (2), 126-141.
Long, M. (1983b) Native speaker/non-native speaker conversation in the second language classroom. In M. Clarke & J. Handscombe (Eds.), On TESOL ‘82: Pacific perspectives on language learning and teaching (pp. 207-225). Washington, DC: TESOL.
Long, M. (1989). Tasks, group and task-group interactions. University of Hawaii Working Papers in ESL, 8, 1-26.
Long, M. (1990). The least a second language acquisition theory needs to explain. TESOL Quarterly, 24 (4), 649-666.
Long, M. (1996). The role of the linguistic environment in second language acquisition. In W. Ritchie & T. J. Bhatia (Eds.), Handbook of second language acquisition (pp. 413-468). Orlando, FL: Academic Press.
Long, M., & Robinson, P. (1998). Focus on form: Theory, research, and practice. In C. Doughty & J. Williams (Eds.), Focus on form in classroom second language acquisition (pp. 15-41). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Lyster, R., & Ranta, L. (1997). Corrective feedback and learner uptake: Negotiation of form in communicative classrooms. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 19 (1), 37-66.
Mackey, A., Oliver, R., & Leeman, J. (2003). Interactional input and the incorporation of feedback: An exploration of NS-NNS and NNS-NNS adult and child dyads. Language Learning, 53 (1), 35-66.
Markee, N. P. (1995). Teachers’ answers to students’ question: problematizing the issue of making meaning. Issues in Applied Linguistics, 16 (2), 63-92.
Musumeci, D. (1996). Teacher-learner negotiation in content-based instruction: Communication at cross-purposes? Applied Linguistics, 17 (3), 286-325.
Ortega, L. (1999). Planning and focus on form in L2 oral performance. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 21 (1), 109-148.
Pica, T. (1987). Second language acquisition, social interaction, and the classroom. Applied Linguistics, 8 (1), 3-21.
Pica, T., Doughty, C., & Young, R. (1986). The impact of interaction on comprehension: Do interactional modifications help? International Review of Applied Linguistics, 72, 1-25.
Pica, T., Young, R., & Doughty, C. (1987). The impact of interaction on comprehension. TESOL Quarterly, 21, 737-758.
Pica, T., Kanagy, R. & Falodun, J. (1993). Choosing and using communication tasks for second language instruction. In G. Crooks & S. Gass (Eds.), Tasks and language learning: Integrating theory and practice, (pp. 9-34). Clevedon, England: Multilinguial Matters.
Pica, T., Lincoln-Porter, F., Paninos, D., & Linnel, J. (1996). Language learners’ interaction: How does it address the input, output, and feedback needs for L2 learners? TESOL Quarterly, 30, 59-84.
Pica, T., & Garcia-Mayo, P. (2000). L2 learner interaction in a foreign language context: Are learning needs addressed? International Review of Applied Linguistics, 38, 35-58.
Rutherford, W. & Sharwood Smith , M. (1985). Conscious-raising and universal grammar. Applied Linguistics, 6 (3), 274-282.
Rost, M., & Ross, S. (1991). Learner use of strategies in interaction: Typology and teachability. Language Learning, 41, 231-249.
Sato, C. (1986). Conversation and interlanguage development: Rethinking the connection. In R. Day (Ed.), Talking to learn (pp. 23-45). Rowley, MA: Newbury House.
Schiffrin, D. (1994). Approaches to discourse: Language as social interaction. Cambridge, MA: Blackwell publishers, Inc.
Schmidt, R. (1990). The role of consciousness in second language learning. Applied Linguistics, 11 (2), 17-46.
Sharwood Smith, M. (1991). Speaking to many minds: On the relevance of different types of language information for the L2 learner. Second Language Research, 7, 118132.
Shehadah, A. (1999). Non-native speakers’ production of modified comprehensible output and second language learning. Language Learning, 49 (4), 627-675.
Shieffelin, B., & Ochs, E. (1986). Language socialization. Annual Review of Anthropology, 15, 163-191.
Skehan, P. (1994). Second language acquisition strategies, interlanguage development, and task-based learning. In M. Bygate, A. Tonkyn, & E. Williams (Eds.), Grammar and the language teacher (pp. 175-199). New York: Prentice-Hall.
Skehan, P. (1998). A cognitive approach to language learning. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Smith, B. (2003). Computer-mediated negotiated interaction: An expanded model. The Modern Language Journal, 87 (1), 38-57.
Sotillo, M. (2000). Discourse functions and syntactic complexity in synchronous and asynchronous communication. Language Learning & Technology, 4 (1), 82-119. Retrieved October 10, 2005, from http://llt.msu.edu/vol4num1/sotillo/default.html
Sullivan, N., & Pratt, E. (1996). A comparative study of two ESL writing environments: A computer-assisted classroom and a traditional oral classroom. System, 29 (4), 491-501.
Tarone, E., & Liu, G. Q. (1995). Situational context, variation, and second language acquisition theory. In G. Cook & B. Seidlhofer (Eds.), Principle and practice in applied linguistics: Studies in honor of H. G. Widdowson (pp. 107-124). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Topping, K. (1998). Peer assessment between students in colleges and universities. Review of Educational Research, 68 (3), 249-276.
Toyoda, E., & Harrison, R. (2002). Categorization of text chat communication between learners and native speakers of Japanese. Language Learning & Technology, 6 (1), 82-99. Retrieved October 10, 2005, from http://llt.msu.edu/vol6num1/toyo da/default.html
Van den Branden, K. (1997). Effects of negotiation on language learners’ output. Language Learning, 47, 589-636.
Varonis, E., & Gass, S. (1985). Non-native/non-native conversations: A model for negotiation of meaning. Applied Linguistics, 6 (1), 71-90.
Warschauer, M. (1996). Comparing face-to-face and electronic communication in the second language classroom. CALICO Journal, 13 (1), 7-26.
Warschauer, M. (1998). Online learning in sociocultural context. Anthropology & Education Quarterly, 29 (1), 68-88.
Wendel, J. (1997). Planning and second-language narrative production. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. Temple University, Philadelphia, PA.
Wigglesworth, G. (1997). An investigation of planning and proficiency level on oral test discourse. Language Testing, 14, 85-106.
