Documenti di Didattica
Documenti di Professioni
Documenti di Cultura
.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
American Association of Teachers of Spanish and Portuguese is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve
and extend access to Hispania.
http://www.jstor.org
LINGUISTICS: APPLIED
409
410
articulate a rule is equivalent to having the Level II = fourthsemester; Level III = third
subject rationalizewhat is from the outset an year conversation. Rather than volunteers,
intuitive and therefore implicitjudgment.
entire classes were used for testing to ensure
Indeed, judgments and justifications are a more random sampling of typical collegeproblematic from an interpretive viewpoint. level language students and to avoidthe probHowever, such problems could be circum- lems inherent in 'self-selection.'"No subject
vented by tackling consciousness indirectly reported hearing impairmentsnor any other
with a task involvingsimultaneousprocessing. auditory problems that might interfere with
That is, given that conscious processing is the nature of the tasks. Of the entire populaserial and effortful, if subjects are asked to tion, only three subjects reported that another
attend to form while also processing the input languageother thanEnglishwas used at home
for meaning, then a negative effect should with the parents, but since these three also
appear in the comprehension process, i.e., claimed English as their dominant language
attention to form "robs"processing time from they were not excluded from the study.
attention to meaning. If this can be shown,
then it can be argued that learners cannot Method and Procedure
Each class listened to two passages which
simultaneouslyattend to form and content (or
at the very least, they have great difficultyin were pilot tested in the Spring of 1987 (see
doing so). If this is so, then learners should VanPatten, 1987b). While the subjects were
not be able to acquirelinguisticfeatures from not told so, the first passage served merely
the inputin a conscious fashionif the purpose as a warm up while the second passage was
of listeningto some one else is to gather infor- used as the source of data.3This passage was
mation. On the other hand, if learners can a short 3 minute segment on inflationin Latin
simultaneously attend to form and meaning/ America which was recorded by a near-native
content, then we could argue for a much speaker4of Spanish and the tape was played
stronger role for consciousness during input to each class on a Magnavoxstereo cassette
processing. The first step, then, is to investi- recorder. It should be noted that the speaker
gate whether learners can actually process did not speak at a normal rate and paused
both form and content.
briefly at clause boundariesand other breath
This paper will report on one study de- group marks to allow for processing time on
signed to investigate learners' abilities to the part of the subjects. In no instance was
simultaneouslyprocess form and meaning in any of the targeted items given suprasegmenthe input. The study requiredlearners to per- tal emphasis to enhance its acoustical saliform various tasks while listening to a short ence.
Classes were randomly assigned to compassage for meaning. Three hypotheses
guided the study:
plete one of four listening tasks. Task I con1. If learners have difficultyin directingatten- sisted of listening to the passage for content
tion toward both content and form, then a only. Task II consisted of listening to the pastask involvingconscious attention to non- sage for content and simultaneously noting
communicativegrammatico-morphological the verb morpheme -n. Task II consisted of
forms in the input will negatively affect listeningto the passage for content and simulcomprehension of content.
taneously noting the definite article la. These
2. If these same learners are (basically)going two morphemes were selected based on their
for meaningfirst, a task involvingconscious differential structural properties. The first,
attention to importantlexical items will not -n, is a bound, word final, nonsyllabic moraffect comprehension of content.
pheme. The second, la, is a free syllabicmor3. More advanced learners will not exhibit pheme occurring before nouns. If differential
the same patterns of performance on the properties of morphemes make a difference
tasks as the early stage learners.
for input processing, then we would expect
the difference to show up in this study. The
Subjects
fourth task, IV, consisted of listening for conA total of 202 students of Spanish at the tent and simultaneouslynoting the key lexical
University level served.as subjects in this item inflaci6n. Each item occurred 11 or 12
study. Three levels of classes were chosen times in the passage. In all three tasks, noting
for us in this study: Level I = first semester; an item was achieved by having the subjects
LINGUISTICS:APPLIED
Task I
16
15
13
Task II
16
23
11
Task III
20
20
14
Task IV
21
19
14
411
LevelI
LevelII
LevelIII
Task I
9.13
10.13
19.15
Task II
2.75
6.96
6.27
Task III
3.75
5.5
13.07
Task IV
6.90
10.0
16.36
SS
2200.660
1671.769
480.834
3340.016
MS
1100.330
557.256
80.139
17.579
F
62.593***
31.700***
4.559***
Results
Table 3. ANOVA for Recall Scores.
Mean scores per cell are displayedin Table
2. Moving across the table from left to right verge at Task II with their recall scores clusone can see a consistent pattern develop. tering arounda rather low point. In addition,
Task I (listening for content only) produced it was noted that there seemed to be an order
412
20
16
14
12
Id
Id
6
4
Id
T I
T 3
T 2
$-400L
-U
+-+
T4
I
2
-L
tL 3
A B C
A.L3T1 x - s
B. L3T4
x C.L3T3
x
D.L2T1
E.L2T4
EL1T1
G.L2T2
H.L1T4
I.L3T2
J.L2T3
K.L1T3
L.L1T2
D
s
s
E F
s s
s s
s
--x x
x
G
s
s
s
H I
s s
s s
s s
-s
J
s
s
s
s
K
s
s
s
s
s
s
L
s
s
s
s
s
s
s
s
x
TaskI
TaskIV
Task III
Task II
Task I
Task IV
Task III
Task II
s
s
X
s
s
X
s = p<.01
Table 5. Tukey HSD for Task Type.
Discussion
The results of the ANOVAalong with the
two pairwise tests suggest a significantdrop
s= p<.01
in recall scores when subjects were asked to
simultaneouslylisten for content and note a
Table 4. Tukey HSD for Level and Task.
grammatical morpheme of little referential
for task scores: Task I ---> Task IV ---> Task meaning. At the same time, these results do
III ---> Task II, in order fromhighest to lowest not suggest that the simultaneous tasks of
mean scores. IgnoringLevel, a pairwise test listening for content and noting a lexical item
was conducted to see if there were overall result in a significant drop in recall scores.
significant differences based on task type Using a differentpopulationandusing multiple
alone. In Table 5 the results of a Tukey HSD levels of exposure to the language,these data
for Task are reported. These data reveal that support the findingsof VanPatten(1987b) rethere is no significant difference between garding early stage learners in which signifiscores on Tasks I and IV nor between II and cant differences were foundbetween content
III. But there is a significant difference be- only recalls and content plus form focused
tween scores on Tasks I and II, I and III as listening on the one hand, but no significant
well as between IV and II and IV and III, differences between content only recalls and
suggesting a split along these general lines: content plus lexically focused listening.9
LINGUISTICS:APPLIED
413
Therefore, the first two hypotheses that occupythe highestrank,la is closerto being
guidedthis study are supported.They are word-likethanis the verb inflectionused in
this study.This resemblanceto words,howrepeatedhere:
1. Iflearnershavedifficulty
indirectingatten- ever,is information
thatis not available
to the
tion towardbothcontentandform,then a languageprocessorin the earlystages.
task involvingconsciousattentionto nonMorelikely,however,is an acousticexplacommunicative
nation.
For the early stage learner,Spanish
grammatico-morphological
forms in the inputwill negativelyaffect is nothingbut a streamof syllables'0when
of content.
listened to and roots of knownwords and
comprehension
2. Ifthese samelearnersare(basically)
going cognatesstandout to helparriveat meaning.
formeaningfirst,a taskinvolving
conscious Forthe moreadvancedlearner,wordboundattentionto important
lexicalitemswillnot ariesbecomemoresalientandthusfree moraffectcomprehension
of content.
phemessuchas la are moreeasily"isolated"
As suggestedinVanPatten
(1985),it would fromthe nounphrasesin whichthey appear
seem thatthe communicatively
loadeditems whereasboundmorphemes
maystillbe missed
ininputreceiveconsciousattentionfromearly since they are acousticallynot as salient.
as intake
In developingan inputbased acquisition
stage learnersandbecomeavailable
for the developinglanguagesystem. Gram- model, the results of the present study
maticalmorphemesof littlemeaningmaybe suggest that as inputbecomescomprehensileft "unattended."
ble (i.e., compareLevel1 TaskI recallscores
Concerning
hypothesis3 ("Moreadvanced with Level 3 Task I recallscores) available
learnerswillnot exhibitthe samepatternsof attentionand effort are not necessarilyreonthe tasksas earlystagelearn- leasedforfocusingon form.Onepossibleobperformance
ers"), the data offer mixedresults. On the jection that couldbe raised at this point is
one hand,moreadvancedlearnersdoprocess that the inputwas comprehensible,
but that
and recallmore content as revealedby the learnershadto workat understanding
everyscores on TaskI. However,the task demand thing. If attentionto formneeds to be conof consciouslynotinga verb inflectionwhile sciousat some point,thenthe inputmustbe
listeningfor meaningis so great that third easily comprehended.Commentsmade by
yearstudentsof Spanishperformedaboutthe some of the subjectsat the end of the exsame as the other subjects. However,it perimentation
attest to this:
shouldalso be notedthaton TaskII (definite "Itis hardto comprehendthe readings(sic) when listening
article),the LevelIIIsubjectsperformedsig- for certain verbs because you are more concerned with
nificantlybetter thanother LevelII subjects listening for the verbs than the actual words."
on Task II (verbmorpheme).This was not "I was concentratingon hearing the verbs with -n. I paid
the obtainedresultforLevelIIandIIIsubjects very little attention to the meaning of the oration."
who performedaboutthe sameon these two "I don't know. I forget to pay attention to the meaning
tasks. This findingsuggests that for lower of the passage. I was concentratingon the verbs."
levelsubjects,theremaybe no differencebe- "How are we supposed to listen for verb endings and for
tween boundand free morphemesbut that the information,too?"
for Level III subjectsthere is. Thus, while These early stage subjectsseemed to have
we see an overallpatternemerge based on been strugglingso muchwith meaningthat
task regardlessof level, type of formbeing consciousattentionandeffortusedto continuconsciouslyprocessedproducesdifferences ouslyseek out formsin the inputandprocess
at Level III. To what these differencesare them,hamperedthe processingof meaning."
attributable
can onlybe speculated.A tenta- Inotherwords,whenaskedto simultaneously
tive explanation
wouldleadus to lookat how listenfora grammatical
morphemeandto lisdefinite articles resemble lexical items ten for meaning,manylearnerscannotperwhereas bound morphemes do not. That is, formthe task.12The results do not suggest
that early stage learners are completelyincapable of focusing on form in the input. What
the results do suggest is that a focus on form
is probablynot continuous in the real world
of inputprocessing. That is, it maybe possible
to occasionallynotice a formconsciouslywhen
414
LINGUISTICS:
APPLIED 415
suggests that they probablywere roughlyequivalent. In
addition, the uniform pattern of behavior on the tasks
used in this study (e.g., Tables 2 and 5) where all groups'
scores peak and dip in the same mannerfurther suggests
that proficiency is not affecting outcomes within each
level.
3Passages were used since much of what formalclassroom learners hear as input is canned speech on tapes
(or if they're lucky, TV programs) or is monologued
teacher talk with minimallearner interaction.
4A near native speaker was used rather than a native
speaker since most formallanguagelearnersin FL classes
have nonnativeinstructors.
5The experimenter and his assistants monitored the
task carefullyto ensure that subjects were not 'peeking'
to see when others put check marks.
6Thefollowingis Carrell'sdefinitionof ideaunits: 'each
unit consists of a single clause (main or subordinate,
includingadverbialand relative clauses). Each infinitival
construction, gerundive, nominalizedverb phrase, and
conjunct was also identified as a separate idea unit. In
addition, optional and/or heavy prepositional phrases
were also designated as separate idea units' (737). The
passage on inflationwas independentlyanalyzedinto idea
units by two researchers in language learningwhich resulted in a final complete agreement on the units.
7Weare currently gathering data on super-advanced
learners' and native speakers' performanceon these two
tasks. Preliminaryanalysis suggests that there are no
significant differences between native speakers on the
tasks. However,due to smallsample size (only 8 subjects
in each cell) we are at this point refrainingfromreporting
the results until more subjects can be obtained.
8These cells are D x G, D x I, F x G and F x I. All
four involve level and task interactingand only the first
(D x G) can be used as evidence against the task as a
significant factor (e.g., D = Level II on Task I and G
= Level II on Task II). However, this cell just missed
the .05 level of significance.
'One possible objectionto the obtaineddifferences is
that inflacioin is a key polysyllabic word with stress
whereas -n is a non-syllabicboundmorpheme. The arguments againstthis are: (1) the definitearticlela is syllabic,
free, and prenominalbut falls in with third-person-n in
terms of subjects' task performance; (2) research on
polysyllabic but asemantic verbs (the Spanish copulas)
suggest that learners do not attend to something like
estd in the input (see VanPatten1983 and 1984). The only
difference between estd and inflaci6n is one of semantic
contributionto sentence meaning.
'oUnlike English, Spanishis a syllable timed language
and not a stress timed language.
"See also Terrell (1986) for discussion of the problem
of focusing on a (nonmeaningful)item in the input in a
NaturalApproachclassroom.
"This position is also supported by preliminaryevidence gathered by Francis Mangabhai (personal communication). Using data from a think-aloudtechnique,
Mangabhaireports that "my data suggests that learners
focused on the form only when they are able to retrieve
the meaning of an utterance more or less immediately."
These preliminarydatawere reportedat the 1987TESOL
in Miami (Mangabhai1987).
'3Datafrom other sources supportthe claimthat even
in a negotiated context, many early and intermediate
stage learners go for meaningfirst when processing input
and subsequently attend to those items in the inputthat
/ WORKSCITED
Carrell, P. "FacilitatingESL reading by teaching text
structure."TESOL Quarterly19 (1985) 727-52.
Dulany,D., R. Carlsonand G. Dewey. "ACase of SyntacticalLearningandJudgment:How ConsciousandHow
Abstract?"Journal of ExperimentalPsychology:General 113 (1984) 541-55.
Gass, S. and C. Madden. Input in Second Language
Acquisition. Rowley, MA: Newbury House, 1985.
Krashen, S. Newmark's'IgnoranceHypothesis' and Current Second LanguageAcquisitionTheory."InS. Gass
and L. Selinker (Eds.), Language Transferin Language Learning. Rowley: Newbury House, 1983.
135-53.
The Input Hypothesis.London, UK:
Longman, 1985.
416
APPENDIX
LINGUISTICS: APPLIED
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
24.
25.
26.
27.
28.
29.
30.
31.
32.
33.
34.
35.
es necesario
aumentarlos salarios otra vez
Asi la inflaci6nesti constantemente alta
En una situaci6n econ6mica como esta
es casi imposible
poner dinero en el banco
primero porque la gente tiene que pagar mais
para vivir
y no tiene dinero
para poner en el banco
y segundo porque no es buena idea
ahorrarnada en estas circunstancias
La gente cree
que en vez de ahorrardinero
es mejor
invertirloen cosas
que no pierden su valor
Entonces, las personas
36.
37.
38.
39.
40.
41.
42.
43.
44.
45.
46.
47.
48.
49.
50.
51.
52.
53.
417