Abstract
Second language (henceforth L2) motivation has been traditionally studied from the lens of integrative motivation. However, this framework presents problems in that it is limiting and lacks insights from emerging cognitive motivational research. This paper investigated the L2 motivation of Timorese English language learners (henceforth ELLs) using Dornyei’s (2009) L2 Motivational Self System and Markus and Nurius’s (1986) possible-selves theory. Ten Timorese ELLs studying in a school of higher learning in the Philippines participated in a free writing task and a follow-up focus group discussion. These activities aimed to examine the content and functions of the students’ two most important types of possible selves: ‘ideal L2 self’ and ‘ought-to L2 self.’ The results revealed that the students’ ‘ideal L2 self’ coincides with the original theoretical construct, which includes a promotion-focused function for studying English, i.e., to achieve personal goals and to communicate with other people. Interestingly, however, the present study corroborated Chen’s (2012) findings in the Taiwanese context that the ‘ought-to L2 self’ is not simply prevention-focused, but a mixture of prevention- and promotion-focused functions of learning English. The findings pointed to necessary research, curriculum design and pedagogical implications, which are discussed as this paper closes. DOI: http://doi.org/10.17576/gema-2016-1603-05
Highlights
Language learning motivation has been traditionally viewed as the integration of language learners with others (Gardner, 1985)
The extant literature on language learning motivation would suggest that a considerable body of work along this line focused on identifying various groups of learners in various levels and contexts according to whether their L2 motivation was instrumental (Al-Haq, 2000; AlTamimi & Shuib, 2009; Hohenthal, 2003; Lai, 2005, 2009; Majumder, 2005; Shirbagi, 2010; Ofori &Albakry, 2012; Quinto, 2015), i.e., language learning is utilitarian in nature and language is acquired as a linguistic tool and not as an instrument of cultural integration (Kachru, 1992); or integrative (Benson, 1991; El-Dash & Busnardo, 2001; Hogan-Brun & Ramoniene, 2004, 2005), i.e., language learning towards linguistic cultural integration with a specific group of speakers (Prator, 1968 in Kachru, 1992)
After the introduction of Markus and Nurius’ (1986) possible-selves theory, research shifted focus from one that viewed the L2 motivation as the identification of language learners’ with others to one that views it as the identification of L2 learners with their future selves, as seen in the emergence of motivation studies made along lines of the possible-selves theory (Chen, 2012; Huang, Hsu & Chen, 2015; Papi & Abdollahzadeh, 2012; Sampson, 2013)
Summary
Language learning motivation has been traditionally viewed as the integration of language learners with others (Gardner, 1985). Integrativeness or integrative motivation in learning a second language ( L2) was first introduced by Gardner and Lambert (1959). Around the same time when the theoretical foundation of the integrativeness concept was being questioned, the notion of future-oriented self-guides was introduced (Markus & Nurius, 1986) and the direction of L2 motivation research shifted. After the introduction of Markus and Nurius’ (1986) possible-selves theory, research shifted focus from one that viewed the L2 motivation as the identification of language learners’ with others to one that views it as the identification of L2 learners with their future selves, as seen in the emergence of motivation studies made along lines of the possible-selves theory (Chen, 2012; Huang, Hsu & Chen, 2015; Papi & Abdollahzadeh, 2012; Sampson, 2013)
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
