Alignment During Synchronous Video Versus Written Chat L2 Interactions: A Methodological Exploration

Marije Michel,Marco Cappellini

doi:10.1017/s0267190519000072

Abstract

AbstractConversational alignment (i.e., the automatic tendency of interactants to reuse each other's morphosyntactic structures and lexical choices in natural dialogue) is a well-researched phenomenon in native (Pickering & Ferreira, 2008) and to a smaller extent in second language (L2) speakers (Jackson, 2018) as confirmed by many highly controlled lab-based experimental studies investigating face-to-face oral interaction. Only a few studies have explored alignment in more naturally occurring L2 interactions (e.g., Dao, Trofimovich, & Kennedy, 2018), some of them extending the context to written computer-mediated communication (SCMC) (e.g., Michel & Smith, 2018).The current study aimed to address this gap by taking a closer look at alignment in L2 conversations mediated by two different types of SCMC (videoconference vs. text chat). We explored lexical as well as structural alignment in three target languages (Chinese, French, and German) involving interactional partners of different status (L2 peer, L1 peer, and L1 tutor).Results revealed that lexical and structural alignment are both present and observable in different SCMC contexts. From a methodological point of view, we discuss how different analyses suit the data generated by the affordances of the different SCMC contexts in the target languages and argue for a more dynamic and pervasive perspective on interaction.

Highlights

Linguistic policies are based on current paradigms in second language (L2) education that give great importance to interaction as a driving force to support second language acquisition (SLA) and L2 development
We propose the theoretical framework of alignment (Pickering & Garrod, 2004) as a way to study the linguistic actualization of the social dimension of language use in synchronous CMC (SCMC) for language learning
We refrain from providing inferential statistics, given that the data stem from small heterogeneous samples and that the aim of this article is to showcase the outcomes of applying the same analytical tools to different CMC contexts rather than testing hypotheses

Summary

Introduction

Linguistic policies are based on current paradigms in second language (L2) education that give great importance to interaction as a driving force to support second language acquisition (SLA) and L2 development. This was the case for the communicative approach (Brumfit, 1985; Van Ek & Trim, 1991) and for current philosophies that propose usage- and action-based perspectives on language pedagogy (e.g., Council of Europe, 2001; Tyler, 2010). Interactionist approaches to SLA, both in the anglophone (Mackey, Abbuhl, & Gass, 2012) and francophone (Matthey, 1997) literature, identified conversational dynamics that form the basis of L2 development. Much of this work focused on punctual phenomena such as negotiation of meaning and form during language-related episodes (Pica, 1994; Swain, 2000), noticing and uptake of interactional feedback (cf. Mackey & Ziegler, 2017, for review on computer-mediated communication), the presence of uptake in the learners’ turns (Lyster & Saito, 2010), and incidental learning (Leow & Zamora, 2017)

Objectives

Methods

Results

Discussion

Conclusion