Abstract
This paper reports work-to-date on a particular practical context, applying one approach to interlanguage, the discourse domains approach, merged with the rhetorical-grammatical approach, involving both language and content. The context is an MA course for teacher residents placed in urban schools, and their English language learners (ELLs) in math and science classes, providing content area teachers the linguistic support they need to teach the language of their content, and thus the content itself. We were interested in how exactly learners’ interlanguage creation interacts with their understanding of scientific concepts. We primarily look at the rhetorical function “definition,” with discourse level semantic choices, and attendant grammar, with ELL data gathered by the teacher residents. Correct definitions in expected grammatical form point to an understanding of the scientific concept within the discourse domain, providing evidence that the science or mathematics content has been understood by the student. In our data analysis, we concentrated on the semantics and grammar of this rhetorical function, but other functions kept intruding, especially “classification”. Cross-language transfer appears not to be a factor, but cross-domain transfer is. Finally, we discuss how the marriage of this view of interlanguage with safe rule rhetorical/grammatical functions can better support teacher preparation, especially given how challenging teaching ELLs is for content area teachers.
Appendix
“EST RHETORICAL PROCESS CHART” (UPDATED, Trimble 1985, 11)
“RHETORICAL-GRAMMATICAL PROCESS CHART” (Lackstrom et al. 1970, 2)
References
Beck, Isabel L. & Margaret G. McKeown. 1985. Teaching Vocabulary: Making the instruction fit the goal. Educational Perspectives 23(1). 11–15.Search in Google Scholar
Beck, Isabel L., Margaret G. McKeown & Linda Kucan. 2013. Bringing words to life: Robust vocabulary instruction, 2nd edn. New York: The Guilford Press.Search in Google Scholar
Bley-Vroman, Robert, Larry Selinker & Louis Trimble. 1973. Presupposition and technical rhetoric. The Trend in Engineering 25. 22–25.Search in Google Scholar
Common Core State Standards: http://www.corestandards.org/Search in Google Scholar
Douglas, Dan & Larry Selinker. 1994. Research methodology in context-based second-language research II. In Elaine Tarone, Susan Gass & Andrew Cohen (eds.), Methodologies for eliciting and analyzing language in context, 119–132. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Search in Google Scholar
Echevarria, Jana, MaryEllen J. Vogt & Deborah Short. 2008. Making content comprehensible for English learners: The SIOP model, 3rd edn. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.Search in Google Scholar
Faltis, Christian J. 1993. Critical issues in the use of sheltered content instruction in high school bilingual programs. Peabody Journal of Education 69(1). 136–151.10.1080/01619569309538755Search in Google Scholar
Frauenfelder, Uli. 1982. Report on the 1980 Vincennes conference. Interlanguage Studies Bulletin 6(1). 152–156.Search in Google Scholar
Krashen, Stephen D. 1981. Second language acquisition and second language learning. London: Pergamon Press.Search in Google Scholar
Kuteva, Tania. 2001. Auxiliation: An enquiry into the nature of grammaticalization. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Search in Google Scholar
Lackstrom, John, Larry Selinker & Louis Trimble. 1970. Grammar and technical English. In Robert C. Lugton (ed), English as a second language: Current issues. Philadelphia: Center for Curriculum Development, Chilton Press.Search in Google Scholar
Lackstrom, John, Larry Selinker & Louis Trimble. 1973. Technical rhetorical principles and grammatical choice. TESOL Quarterly 7(2). 127–136.10.2307/3585556Search in Google Scholar
Larson, Ron, Laurie Boswell & Lee Stiff. 2004. Geometry grades 9-12: Mcdougal Littell high school geometry. New York: Houghton Mifflin Hartcourt.Search in Google Scholar
Naiditch, Fernando. (ed.). 2017. Developing critical thinking: From theory to classroom practice. Lanham., MD: Rowman & Littlefield.Search in Google Scholar
Next Generation Science Standards: https://www.nextgenscience.org/Search in Google Scholar
Odlin, Terence. 2014. Rediscovering prediction. In ZhaoHong Han & Elaine Tarone (eds.), Interlanguage: Forty years later, 27–46. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins.10.1075/lllt.39.04ch2Search in Google Scholar
Oster, Sandra. 1981. The use of tenses in reporting past literature in EST. In Larry Selinker, Elaine Tarone & Victor Hanzeli (eds.), English for academic and technical purposes, 76–90. Rowley, MA: Newbury House.Search in Google Scholar
Schleppegrell, Mary J. 2004. The language of schooling: A functional linguistics perspective. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.10.4324/9781410610317Search in Google Scholar
Schmidt, Robert. 2012. Attention, awareness, and individual differences in language learning. In Wai Meng Chan, Kwee Nyet Chin, Sunil Kumar Bhatt & Izumi Walker (eds), Perspectives on individual characteristics and foreign language education (Studies in Second and Foreign Language Education), 27–50. Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter.10.1515/9781614510932.27Search in Google Scholar
Schmidt, Robert & Sylvia Frota. 1986. Developing basic conversational ability in a second language: A case study of an adult learner of Portuguese. In Richard R. Day (ed.), Talking to learn: Conversation in second language acquisition, 237–326. Rowley, MA: Newbury House.Search in Google Scholar
Selinker, L, B. Kumaravadivelu & David Miller. 1985. Second language composition teaching and research: Towards a ‘safe rule’ perspective. PALM (Papers in Applied Linguistics, Michigan) 1. 53–83.Search in Google Scholar
Selinker, Larry. 1969. Language transfer. General Linguistics. 9(2). 67–92.Search in Google Scholar
Selinker, Larry. 1972. Interlanguage. International Review of Applied Linguistics 10. 209–231.10.1515/iral.1972.10.1-4.209Search in Google Scholar
Selinker, Larry. 1979. On the use of informants in discourse analysis and ‘language for specific purposes’. International Review of Applied Linguistics 17. 189–215.10.1515/iral.1979.17.1-4.189Search in Google Scholar
Selinker, Larry. 1980. Les domaines de reference dans une theorie de l’interlangue. Encrages. Groupe de recherches sur l’acquisition du langage. No. special, Automne. 85–86.Search in Google Scholar
Selinker, Larry. 1986. Understanding interlanguage within academic discourse domains. In Makhan K. Tickoo (ed.). Language across the curriculum: Proceedings of the 1985 RELC seminar. Anthology Series 15. 53–54. Singapore: Regional Language Centre.Search in Google Scholar
Selinker, Larry. 1992. Rediscovering interlanguage. London: Longman.Search in Google Scholar
Selinker, Larry. 2011. Some unresolved SLA issues in a new media age: Towards building an interlanguage semantics. Working Papers in TESOL & Applied Linguistics. Teachers College, Columbia University. Vol 11 (2). Video guest lecture. https://tesolal.columbia.edu/article/issues-in-an-elt-new-media-age/(accessed 15 August 2017)Search in Google Scholar
Selinker, Larry. 2014. Interlanguage 40 years on: Three themes from here. In ZhaoHong Han & Elaine Tarone (eds.), Interlanguage: Forty years later, 221–246. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins.10.1075/lllt.39.12ch1Search in Google Scholar
Selinker, Larry & Dan Douglas. 1985. Wrestling with ‘context’ in interlanguage theory. Applied Linguistics 6(2). 190–204.10.1093/applin/6.2.190Search in Google Scholar
Selinker, Larry & Dan Douglas. 1987. LSP and interlanguage: Some empirical studies. ESP Journal 6(2). 75–84.10.1016/0889-4906(87)90013-5Search in Google Scholar
Selinker, Larry & Dan Douglas. 1988a. Comparing episodes in discourse domains in LSP and interlanguage studies. In Anne-Marie Cornu, John Vanparijs, N. Delahaye & Lut Baten (eds.), Beads or bracelet: How do we approach LSP, 366–378. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Search in Google Scholar
Selinker, Larry & Dan Douglas. 1988b. Using discourse domains in creating interlanguage: Context theory and research methodology. In Josef Klegraf & Dietrich Nehls (eds.), Studies in descriptive linguistics: Essays on the English language and applied linguistics on the occasion of Gerhard Nickels’ 60th birthday, 357–379. Heidelberg: Julius Groos Verlag.10.1515/east-1988-0111Search in Google Scholar
Selinker, Larry & Dan Douglas. 1989. Research methodology in contextually based second language research. Second Language Research 5(2). 93–126.10.1177/026765838900500201Search in Google Scholar
Selinker, Larry, Mary Todd-Trimble & Louis Trimble. 1976. Presuppositional rhetorical information in EST discourse. TESOL Quarterly 10. 281–290.10.2307/3585704Search in Google Scholar
Tarone, Elaine. 1979. Interlanguage as chameleon. Language Learning 29(1). 181–191.10.1111/j.1467-1770.1979.tb01058.xSearch in Google Scholar
Tarone, Elaine. 2000. Still wrestling with ‘context’ in interlanguage theory. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics 20. 182–198.10.1017/S0267190500200111Search in Google Scholar
Tarone, Elaine. 2014. Enduring questions in the Interlanguage Hypothesis. In ZhaoHong Han & Elaine Tarone (eds.), Interlanguage: Forty years later, 7–26. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins.10.1075/lllt.39.03ch1Search in Google Scholar
Taylor, Barbara M. & James E. Ysseldyke (eds.). 2007. Effective instruction for struggling readers K-6 (Language and Literacy Series). New York: Teachers College Press.Search in Google Scholar
Trimble, Louis. 1985. English for science and technology: A discourse approach. New York: Cambridge University Press.Search in Google Scholar
Wingard, Peter. 1981. Some verb forms and functions in six medical texts. In Larry Selinker, Elaine Tarone & Victor Hanzeli (eds.), English for academic and technical purposes, 53–64. Rowley, MA: Newbury House.Search in Google Scholar
Woken, Malcolm & John Swales. 1989. Expertise and authority in native–non–native conversations: The need for a variable account. In Susan Gass, Carolyn Madden, Dennis Preston & Selinker. Larry (eds.), Variation in second language acquisition: Discourse and pragmatics, vol. 1, 211–227. Clevedon, England: Multilingual Matters.Search in Google Scholar
Zuengler, Jane. 1989. Performance variation in NS-NNS interactions: Ethnolinguistic difference or discourse domain? In Susan Gass, Carolyn Madden, Dennis Preston & Selinker. Larry (eds.), Variation in second language acquisition: Discourse and pragmatics, vol. 1, 228–244. Clevedon, England: Multilingual Matters.Search in Google Scholar
Zuengler, Jane. 1993. Explaining NNS interactional behavior: The effect of conversational topic. In Gabriele Kasper & Shoshana Blum-Kulka (eds.), Interlanguage pragmatics, 184–195. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Search in Google Scholar
Zuengler, Jane & Barbara Bent. 1991. Relative knowledge of content domain: An influence on native–nonnative conversations. Applied Linguistics 12. 397–451.10.1093/applin/12.4.397Search in Google Scholar
© 2017 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston
