Abstract
Research on the use of the first language (L1) in interactional strategies by young Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL) is still in its infancy. Here we compare CLIL and NON-CLIL primary school children in terms of L1 use in interactional strategies. The oral production of 44 age- and proficiency-matched dyads (21 CLIL, 22 NON-CLIL) is analyzed in terms of use of the L1 in appeals, clarification requests and metacomments. The results indicate that NON-CLIL learners produce more instances of L1 use in interactional strategies and that greater differences emerge as grade increases. This is consistent with previous research in CLIL contexts as well as investigations that have compared CLIL and NON-CLIL contexts. A qualitative inspection of the results has also revealed that there are differences between groups in their preference for either the L1 or the target language (TL) in the case of appeals and clarification requests. However, metacomments are always produced in the L1 in both groups, which appears to support previous classroom observation data.
Acknowledgement
The author would like to acknowledge the grants awarded by the Spanish Ministry of Economy and Competitiveness (FFI2012-32212) and (FFI2016-74950-P), the University of the Basque Country (UPV/EHU) (UFI 11/06) and the Basque Government (IT904-16).
References
Agustín Llach, María Pilar. 2009. The role of Spanish L1 in the vocabulary use of content and non-content EFL Learners. In Yolanda Ruiz De Zarobe & Rosa María Jiménez Catalán (eds.), Content and Language Integrated Learning: Evidence from research in Europe, 112–129. Bristol: Multilingual Matters.10.21832/9781847691675-010Search in Google Scholar
Agustín Llach, María Pilar. 2014. L1 use in children EFL learners in traditional versus CLIL instruction. Paper presented at the International Conference on Child Foreign Language Acquisition, Universidad del País Vasco, 16–17 October.Search in Google Scholar
Alegría De La Colina, Ana & María del Pilar García Mayo. 2009. Oral interaction in task-based EFL learning: The use of the L1 as a cognitive tool. International Review of Applied Linguistics (IRAL). 47(3). 325–345.10.1515/iral.2009.014Search in Google Scholar
Antón, Marta & Frederick Di Camilla. 1998. Socio-cognitive functions of L1 collaborative interaction in the L2 classroom. The Modern Language Journal. 83(2). 233–247.10.1111/0026-7902.00018Search in Google Scholar
Arratibel Irazusta, Izaskun. 2015. They start to busq the jump: A pseudo-longitudinal study of cross-linguistic influence in L3 English CLIL learners. Vitoria-Gasteiz: The University of the Basque Country MA Thesis.Search in Google Scholar
Arratibel-Irazusta, Izaskun & María Martínez-Adrián. In press. The use of previously known languages in the oral production of L3 English learners: a pseudolongitudinal study. European Journal of Applied Linguistics.Search in Google Scholar
Birello, Marilisa. 2005. La alternancia de lenguas en la clase de Italiano lengua extranjera. Su uso en las interacciones en subgrupos de alumnos adultos en Cataluña. Barcelona: Universitat de Barcelona PhD thesis.Search in Google Scholar
Brooks, Frank & Richard Donato. 1994. Vygotskyan approaches to understanding foreign language learner discourse during communicative tasks. Hispania. 77. 262–274.10.2307/344508Search in Google Scholar
Celaya, María Luz. 2008. I study natus in English: Lexical transfer in CLIL and regular learners. In Rafael Monroy & Aquilino Sánchez (eds.), 25 Años de lingüística aplicada en España: Hitos y retos, 43–49. Murcia: Editum (Ediciones de la Universidad de Murcia).Search in Google Scholar
Celaya, Maria Luz & Yolanda Ruiz De Zarobe. 2010. First language and age in CLIL and Non-CLIL contexts. International CLIL Research Journal. 1(3). 60–66.Search in Google Scholar
Cenoz, Jasone. 2001. The effect of Linguistic Distance, L2 status and Age on Crosslinguistic Influence in Third Language Acquisition. In Jasone Cenoz, Britta Hufeisen & Ulrike Jessner (eds.), Cross-linguistic influence in Third Language Acquisition: Psycholinguistic perspectives, 8–20. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.10.21832/9781853595509-002Search in Google Scholar
Cenoz, Jasone. 2003. Cross-linguistic influence in third language acquisition: Implications for the organization of the multilingual mental lexicon’. Bulletin VALS-ASLA (Vereinigung für angewandte Linguistik in der Schweiz). 78. 1–11.Search in Google Scholar
Chavez, Monika. 2003. The diglossic foreign-Language classroom: Learners’ views on L1 and L2 functions. In C. S. Blyth (ed.), The sociolinguistics of foreign-Language classrooms, 163–208. Heinle: Thomson.Search in Google Scholar
Coyle, Do. 2007. Content and language integrated learning: Toward a connected research agenda for CLIL pedagogies. The International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism. 10. 543–562.10.2167/beb459.0Search in Google Scholar
Cummins, Jim. 2000. Language, power and pedagogy. Bilingual children in the crossfire. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.10.21832/9781853596773Search in Google Scholar
Gallardo Del Puerto, Francisco 2015. L1 influence in CLIL vs. EFL schoolchildren: A study of codeswitching and transfer lapses. Paper presented at the 33th AESLA International Conference, Universidad Politécnica de Madrid, 16-18 April.Search in Google Scholar
García, O. 2009. Bilingual education in the twenty-first century: A global perspective. New York, NY: Wiley-Blcakwell.Search in Google Scholar
García Mayo, María Pilar. 2015. The interface between task-based language teaching and content-based instruction – Introduction to Special Issue on learning language and content through tasks: Exploring the interfaces. System. 54. 1–3.10.1016/j.system.2015.09.003Search in Google Scholar
García Mayo, María Del Pilar & Amparo Lázaro Ibarrola. 2015. Do children negotiate for meaning in task-based interaction? Evidence from CLIL and EFL settings. System. 54. 40–54.10.1016/j.system.2014.12.001Search in Google Scholar
Gass, Susan & Larry Selinker. 1992. Language transfer in language learning. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.10.1075/lald.5Search in Google Scholar
Gierlinger, Erwin. 2007. Modular CLIL in lower secondary education: Some insights from a research project in Austria. In Christiane Dalton-Puffer & Ute Smit (eds.), Empirical perspectives on CLIL classroom discourse, 79–118. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.Search in Google Scholar
Gené Gil, María, María Juan Garau & Joana Salazar Noguera. 2012. A case study exploring oral language choice between the target language and the L1s in mainstream CLIL and EFL secondary education. Revista De Lingüística y Lenguas Aplicadas. 7(1). 133–146.10.4995/rlyla.2012.1129Search in Google Scholar
Gost, Catalina & María Luz Celaya. 2005. Age and the use of the L1 in EFL oral production. In María Luisa Carrió Pastor (ed.), Perspectivas Interdisciplinares de la Lingüística Aplicada, 129–136. Valencia: Universitat Politècnica de València.Search in Google Scholar
Grosjean, François. 1998. Studying bilinguals: Methodological and conceptual issues. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition. 1. 131–149.10.1002/9780470756997.ch2Search in Google Scholar
Gutiérrez Mangado, M. Juncal. 2015. The development of L1 use by schoolchildren in CLIL and NON-CLIL contexts. Paper presented at the 33th AESLA International Conference, Universidad Politécnica de Madrid, 16-18 April.Search in Google Scholar
Jarvis, Scott. 2015. Influences of previously learned languages on the learning and use of additional languages. In María Juan-Garau and María Salazar-Noguera (eds.), Content-based learning in multilingual educational environments, 69–86. Dordrecht: Springer.10.1007/978-3-319-11496-5_5Search in Google Scholar
Lasagabaster, David. 2008. Foreign language competence in content and language integrated courses. The Open Applied Linguistics Journal. 1. 30–41.10.2174/1874913500801010030Search in Google Scholar
Lázaro Ibarrola, Amparo. 2016. Are CLIL learners simply faster or also different? Evidence from L1 use in the repair sequences and discourse markers of CLIL and EFL learners. Vigo International Journal of Applied Linguistics (VIAL). 13. 127–145.Search in Google Scholar
Lázaro Ibarrola, Amparo & Raúl Azpilicueta Martínez. 2015. Investigating negotiation of meaning in EFL children with very low levels of proficiency. International Journal of English Studies. 15. 1–21.10.6018/ijes/2015/1/203751Search in Google Scholar
Lázaro Ibarrola, Amparo & María del Pilar García Mayo. 2012. L1 use and morphosyntactic development in the oral production of EFL learners in a CLIL context. International Review of Applied Linguistics. 50. 135–160.10.1515/iral-2012-0006Search in Google Scholar
Lin, Angel M. 2015. Conceptualising the potential role of L1 in CLIL. Language, Culture and Curriculum. 28(1). 74–89.10.1080/07908318.2014.1000926Search in Google Scholar
Lorenzo, Francisco, Sonia Casal & Patricia Moore. 2009. The effects of content and language integrated learning in European education: Key findings from the Andalusian bilingual sections evaluation Project. Applied Linguistics. 31(3). 1–25.10.1093/applin/amp041Search in Google Scholar
Martínez-Adrián, María & M. Juncal Gutiérrez-Mangado. 2015a. L1 Use, lexical richness, accuracy and complexity in CLIL and non-CLIL learners. Atlantis, Journal of the Spanish Association for Anglo-American Studies. 37(2). 175–197.Search in Google Scholar
Martínez-Adrián, María & M. Juncal Gutiérrez-Mangado. 2015b. Is CLIL Instruction Beneficial Both in Terms of General Proficiency and Specific Areas of Grammar? Journal of Immersion and Content-Based Language Education. 3(1). 51–76.10.1075/jicb.3.1.03adrSearch in Google Scholar
Méndez, María del Carmen & Víctor Pavón. 2012. Investigating the coexistence of the mother tongue and the foreign language through teacher collaboration in CLIL contexts: Perceptions and practice of the teachers involved in the plurilingual programme in Andalusia. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism. 15. 573–592.10.1080/13670050.2012.670195Search in Google Scholar
Möhle, Dorothea. 1989. Multilingual interaction in foreign language production. In Hans Wilhelm Dechert & Manfred Raupach (eds.), Interlingual processes, 179–195. Tübingen: Gunter Narr.Search in Google Scholar
Muñoz, Carmen. 2007. Cross-linguistic influence and language switches in L4 oral production. VIAL, Vigo International Journal of Applied Linguistics. 4. 73–94.Search in Google Scholar
Navés, Teresa, Inmaculada Miralpeix & María Luz Celaya. 2005. Who transfers more … and what? Crosslinguistic influence in relation to school grade and language dominance in EFL. International Journal of Multilingualism. 2(2). 1–22.10.1080/14790710508668380Search in Google Scholar
Navés, Teresa & Mia Victori. 2010. CLIL in catalonia: An overview of research studies. In David Lasagabaster & Yolanda Ruiz De Zarobe (eds.), CLIL in Spain: Implementation, results and teacher training, 30–54. Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.Search in Google Scholar
Pastrana Izquierdo, Amanda. 2010. Language functions in CLIL classrooms: Students’ oral production in different classroom activities. Views, Vienna English Working Papers (Current research on CLIL). 19(3). 72–82.Search in Google Scholar
Pérez Vidal, Carmen. 2007. The need for focus on form (FoF) in content and language integrated approaches: An exploratory study. Revista Española de Lingüística Aplicada. 1. 39–55.Search in Google Scholar
Pinter, A. 2006. Verbal evidence of task related strategies: Child versus adult interactions. System. 24. 615–630.10.1016/j.system.2006.09.005Search in Google Scholar
Pladevall, Elisabet & Alexandra Vraciu. 2017. Exploring early EFL: L1 Use in oral narratives by clil and non-CLIL primary school learners. In María Pilar García Mayo (ed.), Learning foreign languages in primary school: Research insights, 124–148. Bristol: Multilingual Matters.10.21832/9781783098118-009Search in Google Scholar
Poulisse, Nanda. 1990. The use of compensatory strategies by Dutch learners of English. Dordrecht: Foris.10.1515/9783110868975Search in Google Scholar
Poulisse, Nanda & Theo Bongaerts. 1994. First language use in second language production. Applied Linguistics. 15. 36–57.10.1093/applin/15.1.36Search in Google Scholar
Ringbom, Hakan. 1987. The role of the first language in foreign language learning. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.Search in Google Scholar
Ruiz De Zarobe, Yolanda. 2008. CLIL and foreign language learning: A longitudinal study in the Basque Country. International CLIL Research Journal. 1(1). 60–73.Search in Google Scholar
Serra, Cecilia. 2007. Assessing CLIL at primary school: A longitudinal study. The International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism. 10(5). 582–602.10.2167/beb461.0Search in Google Scholar
Storch, Neomy & Gillian Wigglesworth. 2003. Is there a role for the use of the L1 in an L2 setting? TESOL Quaterly. 37(4). 760–770.10.2307/3588224Search in Google Scholar
Swain, Merryl & Sharon Lapkin. 2000. Task-based second language learning: The uses of the first language. Language Teaching Research. 4(3). 251–274.10.1177/136216880000400304Search in Google Scholar
Swain, Merryl & Sharon Lapkin. 2013. A Vygotskian sociocultural perspective on immersion education: The L1/L2 debate. Journal of Immersion and Content-Based Education. 1. 101–129.10.1075/jicb.1.1.05swaSearch in Google Scholar
Tedick, Diane J. & Pamela M. Wesely. 2015. A review of research on content-based foreign/second language education in US K-12 contexts. Language, Culture and Curriculum. 28(1). 25–40.10.1080/07908318.2014.1000923Search in Google Scholar
Tian, Lili & Ernesto Macaro. 2012. Comparing the effect of teacher codeswitching with English-only explanations on the vocabulary acquisition of Chinese university students: A lexical focus-on-form study. Language Teaching Research. 16(3). 361–385.10.1177/1362168812436909Search in Google Scholar
Turnbull, Milles & Jennifer Dailey-O’Cain. 2009. First language use in second and foreign language learning. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.10.21832/9781847691972Search in Google Scholar
Viladot, Judith & María Luz Celaya. 2007. How do you say preparar?: L1 use in EFL oral production and task-related differences. In María Losada Friend et al. (eds.), Proceedings of the 30th international AEDEAN conference. Huelva: U de Huelva.Search in Google Scholar
Williams, Sarah & Björn Hammarberg. 1997. L1 and L2 influence in L3 production. Stockholm: Stockholm University, Centre for Research on Bilingualism.Search in Google Scholar
Zhao, Ting & Ernesto Macaro. 2014. What works better for the learning of concrete and abstract words: Teachers’ L1 use or L2-only explanations? International Journal of Applied Linguistics. 26(1). 75–98.10.1111/ijal.12080Search in Google Scholar
Correction statement
Correction added after ahead-of-print publication on 22 March 2018: Reference Arratibel-Irazusta and Martínez-Adrián was updated.
© 2020 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston
