Many thanks for the time you took to elaborate on this important, but little
known, research.

 

From: englishlanguage-bounces at nifl.gov
[mailto:englishlanguage-bounces at nifl.gov] On Behalf Of Elaine Tarone
Sent: Wednesday, January 28, 2009 1:41 PM
To: The Adult English Language Learners Discussion List
Subject: [EnglishLanguage 3689] Re: Post critical period oral L2 learning of
adults w/low L1 litearcy

 

Andrea asked for a fuller explanation of the literacy brain research; those
not interested can skip this part!

 

Cognitive psychologists and brain researchers ran a series of studies of
native language oral processing by experimental and control groups of
adults, one group literate and the other illiterate in an alphabetic script
(where phonemes are represented by visual symbols).  They gave them all the
same oral tasks, some of them requiring semantic processing (using the
meanings of words) and some requiring 'phonological' processing (perceiving
and manipulating linguistic segments like phonemes, syllables, and words).  

 

Examples of semantic processing tasks are (1) word repetition: 'donkey'
'table' 'oxcart', and (2) semantic fluency: you have one minute to list all
the animals you can think of. 

 

Examples of phonological processing tasks are (1) pseudoword repetition:
'nontey' 'pagle' 'otsparp', (2) phonological fluency: you have one minute to
list all the words you can think of that begin with the sound 's', and (3)
segment manipulation tasks such as: phoneme deletion (if I take the 's'
sound off the word 'strop', what do I have? (trop));  phoneme reversal (what
is 'tob' backwards? (bot)); and syllable reversal (what is pa-me backwards?
(me-pa)).

 

In study after study, in a range of different languages, they found there
were no differences at all in their ability to do the semantic tasks ... and
they also did equally well in rhyming tasks (do these words rhyme? bat-bot)
But the studies found significant differences between literate and
illiterate adults in their ability to do the phonological processing type
tasks.   (And brain imaging studies showed major differences of brain
activation in pseudoword repetition tasks between literate and illiterate
brains.)

 

How do they explain these differences? Reis and Castro Caldas say: both
literate and illiterate adults can use meaning to do the semantic tasks, but
when one learns to represent a phoneme with a visual symbol, one can then
also use those visual symbols as additional tools  in short term memory to
help do the phonological fluency tasks.  For example, in a syllable reversal
task, when hearing the sequence ''pa-me",  I know I visualize it in my mind,
I reverse the visual symbols in my  mind, and then I 'read' them off. If I
didn't have visual symbols to represent the segments, I would have a much
harder time doing this oral task.

 

I think this line of brain research sheds light on the frequent failure of
our attempts to teach grammar -- patterns of  linguistic forms -- to
illiterate and low literate second language learners, or to get them to
notice corrective feedback on grammatical errors that don't affect meaning:
word order in questions, or grammatical morphemes where the meaning can be
inferred from context (third person singular -s, plural -s, past tense -ed.)


 

On Jan 28, 2009, at 10:44 AM, Andrea Wilder wrote:





Could you explain this more fully?

 

Thank you!

 

Andrea

 

On Jan 28, 2009, at 11:15 AM, Elaine Tarone wrote:





 

I'm just urging caution:  There is undoubtedly lots of research on how the
brain learns, but almost all of it, (except for studies like Reis and
Castro-Caldas, Read et al, etc) is research on the brains of literate
people.  

 

There are brain imaging studies showing that literate and illiterate brain
images are different during oral pseudoword repetition tasks, where
individuals can't process words semantically but have to process them in
terms of linguistic form.      (One such is Castro-Caldas et al (1998) Brain
121, 1053-1063.)  

 

These results are consistent with what teachers tell us they see in the
classroom with regard to the difficulties typically experienced by adults
who aren't alphabetically literate in 'focus on form' type activities.
There are cognitive reasons why literacy affects certain kinds of oral
language processing.

 

 

 

On Jan 28, 2009, at 9:23 AM, Steve Kaufmann wrote:





I am not talking about generalizations about how the brain learns. I ma
referring to the work of Manfred Spitzer who describes where in the brain
this leaning takes place and how. 

Reading is learned in a different area of the brain from the spoken
language, by the way. In any case there is a lot of research on how the
brain learns, and that research should be applied to teaching. We should
recognize that learning takes place in the brain, not in the classroom, as
Spitzer says.  Read Spitzer's book on learning and the brain when it comes
out in English.

Steve Kaufmann
www.lingq.com

On Wed, Jan 28, 2009 at 5:27 AM, Elaine Tarone <etarone at umn.edu> wrote:

There is research demonstrating significant differences in cognitive
processing between matched groups of literate and illiterate adults.  I can
send copies of these studies to anyone who is interested. 

 

These studies suggest that we need to be very cautious in making
generalizations about the way illiterate adults' brains process and acquire
second languages.  

 

In the meantime, it is very important to do what we are doing in this
discussion -- share information on what works in classrooms, and what
doesn't.  

 

 

On Jan 27, 2009, at 8:46 PM, Steve Kaufmann wrote:





I  believe that our brain will, with enough exposure to content that is
relevant and interesting, start to sort out some rules relating to word
order, and other aspects of the structure of the new language, with or
without explicit grammar explanations and drills. Some degree of grammar
review, corrections etc, are helpful but not necessary, and not as important
as the massive input. Most learners attending ESL language class do not get
enough input of English.

Some aspects of a new language may never stick. In English, articles are
difficult for people form languages without articles. The spoken difference
between "he" and "she"  is difficult for well educated Chinese people, even
after ten or more years of grammar study, and even though the concept is not
difficult and universally understood. It  just does not exist in Chinese, so
it is hard to develop the natural ability to say "she" and "he" when
required.


>From my reading and observation, the brain sorts these things out on its own

schedule, and slowly. Explanations and drills are relatively ineffective,
but can help a little. Only lots of input will enable the brain to gradually
get better, as long as there is a will, and the input continues. That has
been my experience in learning Russian over the last 2 years, and that has
been the experience of many others who are prepared to put in the time,
listening and reading, according to what they have told me.

Obviously the non-reader is at a disadvantage. However, intensive listening
on an iPod to content of interest could go a long way. However, I admit I
have no experience with non-literate learners.

Steve Kaufmann
www.lingq.com

On Tue, Jan 27, 2009 at 3:58 PM, Elaine Tarone <etarone at umn.edu> wrote:

It is possible that formal teaching imposes accuracy standards that are very
difficult to attain unless the learner is alphabetically literate.  I think
this is particularly true of grammatical features that do not dramatically
change the semantics, like word order in questions and final morphemes that
are really redundant in context.   Maybe teachers can find other ways to
communicate those standards (like use of cuisinaire rods to show word order
shifts) to make the learner aware of the difference between their production
and the accurate target.

 

 

On Jan 27, 2009, at 5:10 PM, Steve Kaufmann wrote:





Is it possible that formal teaching imposes accuracy standards on learners
that are either not relevant to their own language goals, or applied too
soon in their language development? We all know fluent speakers of English
and other languages who make many mistakes.

Steve Kaufmann
www.lingq.com

On Tue, Jan 27, 2009 at 2:15 PM, Martha Bigelow <mbigelow at umn.edu> wrote:

Anne,

This is fascinating.  Would you happen to have a publication or citation you
could share with the list yet?  I'm sure many would be very interested to
read more, even if it is a handout.  I'm often overwhelmed by the English
language fluency and pragmatic skills of the teens I've worked with.  But
sometimes the transcriptions show surprises!  They are not as accurate as
they seem.

Martha

 


----------------------------------------------------
National Institute for Literacy
Adult English Language Learners mailing list
EnglishLanguage at nifl.gov
To unsubscribe or change your subscription settings, please go to
http://www.nifl.gov/mailman/listinfo/englishlanguage
Email delivered to steve at thelinguist.com

 

----------------------------------------------------

National Institute for Literacy

Adult English Language Learners mailing list

EnglishLanguage at nifl.gov

To unsubscribe or change your subscription settings, please go to
http://www.nifl.gov/mailman/listinfo/englishlanguage

Email delivered to etarone at umn.edu

 


----------------------------------------------------
National Institute for Literacy
Adult English Language Learners mailing list
EnglishLanguage at nifl.gov
To unsubscribe or change your subscription settings, please go to
http://www.nifl.gov/mailman/listinfo/englishlanguage
Email delivered to steve at thelinguist.com

 

----------------------------------------------------

National Institute for Literacy

Adult English Language Learners mailing list

EnglishLanguage at nifl.gov

To unsubscribe or change your subscription settings, please go to
http://www.nifl.gov/mailman/listinfo/englishlanguage

Email delivered to etarone at umn.edu

 

----------------------------------------------------

National Institute for Literacy

Adult English Language Learners mailing list

EnglishLanguage at nifl.gov

To unsubscribe or change your subscription settings, please go to
http://www.nifl.gov/mailman/listinfo/englishlanguage

Email delivered to andreawilder at comcast.net

 

----------------------------------------------------

National Institute for Literacy

Adult English Language Learners mailing list

EnglishLanguage at nifl.gov

To unsubscribe or change your subscription settings, please go to
http://www.nifl.gov/mailman/listinfo/englishlanguage

Email delivered to etarone at umn.edu

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.nifl.gov/pipermail/englishlanguage/attachments/20090128/225734cc/attachment.html