UBC Theses and Dissertations

UBC Theses Logo

UBC Theses and Dissertations

Language use in the Japanese as a foreign language classroom Nakamura, Emy Jane 2005

Your browser doesn't seem to have a PDF viewer, please download the PDF to view this item.

Item Metadata

Download

Media
831-ubc_2005-0283.pdf [ 9.31MB ]
Metadata
JSON: 831-1.0091984.json
JSON-LD: 831-1.0091984-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 831-1.0091984-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 831-1.0091984-rdf.json
Turtle: 831-1.0091984-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 831-1.0091984-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 831-1.0091984-source.json
Full Text
831-1.0091984-fulltext.txt
Citation
831-1.0091984.ris

Full Text

L A N G U A G E U S E I N T H E J A P A N E S E A S A F O R E I G N L A N G U A G E C L A S S R O O M by E M Y J A N E N A K A M U R A B . A . , Un ive r s i t y o f B r i t i s h C o l u m b i a , 1999 B . E d . , Un ive r s i t y o f B r i t i s h C o l u m b i a , 2000 A T H E S I S S U B M I T T E D I N P A R T I A L F U L F I L M E N T O F T H E R E Q U I R E M E N T S F O R T H E D E G R E E O F M A S T E R O F A R T S i n T H E F A C U L T Y O F G R A D U A T E S T U D I E S M o d e r n Language Educa t ion T H E U N I V E R S I T Y O F B R I T I S H C O L U M B I A A p r i l 2005 \ © E m y Jane Nakamura , 2005 Abstract T h i s study examined target language ( T L ) and first language ( L I ) use i n an intermediate level Japanese-as-a-foreign-language ( J F L ) context at a Western Canadian Un ive r s i t y ( W C U ) . The ratio o f T L and L I use by students and their instructors ( inc lud ing instructors ' perceived use) and the purposes for w h i c h they used the T L and code-swi tch ing were investigated to understand h o w mixed-language use can provide scaffolding for Japanese learners, thus enhancing their second language ( L 2 ) learning experiences. The participants i n this study inc luded two focal instructors, s ix non-focal instructors and 45 students. S i x o f the instructors were native Japanese speakers, w h i l e the other two were Chinese and Taga log speakers. For ty o f the students had Chinese backgrounds, two were Korean , 1 had a Japanese background, and three came f rom A n g l o p h o n e , n o n - A s i a n ethnic backgrounds. T h e study was conducted over a three-month per iod i n an intermediate-level J F L class focus ing on conversat ion and compos i t ion . The class met four times a week (50 minutes each class) for thirteen weeks. A quali tat ive approach was employed , and data were col lec ted through: (a) regular c lassroom observations and researcher fieldnotes; (b) semi-structured interviews; (c) audio-recorded c lass room lectures; and (d) audio-recorded pa i rwork sessions. Da ta analysis f o l l o w e d Stake 's (1981) suggestion o f cod ing whole episodes, interviews, or documents and then c lass i fy ing them according to salient themes that recur. T h e findings revealed that language use i n such mul t i l ingua l language classrooms is a complex and dynamic process that changes across interlocutors, task-type and task complex i ty . B o t h instructors and students used the T L and L I (and addit ional languages, i i especial ly M a n d a r i n or Cantonese) for mul t ip le purposes dur ing teacher-led and col laborat ive pa i rwork tasks. The prevalence o f code-swi tching suggests that d rawing on a combina t ion o f languages provided scaffolding for students, w h i c h increased opportunities for rece iv ing and processing T L input. In addit ion, issues concerning Chinese , E S L and heritage language learners in the J F L c lass room and their l inguis t ic needs and preferences are discussed, along wi th some pedagogical impl ica t ions . iii TABLE OF CONTENTS Abstract i i Tab le o f Contents i v L i s t o f Tables v i i L i s t o f Figures ^ v i i i Acknowledgemen t s . . i x Ded ica t ion x Chapter 1 I N T R O D U C T I O N 1 1.1 The Identification o f the P r o b l e m 1 1.2 T h e Purpose o f the Study 3 1.3 Quest ions G u i d i n g the Research 4 1.4 T h e Signi f icance o f the Study 4 1.5 O v e r v i e w of the Thesis 6 Chapter 2 R E V I E W O F L I T E R A T U R E 8 2.1 Introduction 8 2.2 Issues i n L I and T L U s e i n the Language C l a s s r o o m 8 2.3 T h e R o l e o f L I and T L 9 2.3.1 M a x i m u m L I U s e Pos i t ion 10 2.3.2 T h e V i r t u a l [L2] and M a x i m a l [L2] Pos i t ion 11 2.3.3 T h e O p t i m a l U s e Pos i t ion 15 2.3.3.1 The L e a r n e r s ' U s e o f T L & L I : E m p i r i c a l Ev idence .18 2.3.3.2 T h e Teachers ' U s e o f T L & L I : E m p i r i c a l Ev idence .21 2.4 A Sociocul tura l Perspective 22 2.4.1 T h e Z o n e o f P r o x i m a l Deve lopment 23 2.5 G r o u p W o r k and Col labora t ive L e a r n i n g ; 27 2.6 Chapter S u m m a r y 31 Chapter 3 R E S E A R C H M E T H O D O L O G Y 33 3.1 Introduction 33 3.2 A Qual i ta t ive A p p r o a c h : M u l t i p l e Case Studies 33 3.3 Research Questions 35 3.4 Participants and Context o f Exp lo ra t i on 37 3.4.1 Participants ....37 3.4.2 Sett ing 39 i v 3.5 D a t a C o l l e c t i o n Procedures 44 3.5.1 Observations and Fieldnotes 45 3.5.2 C l a s s r o o m Lectures 46 3.5.3 Student Pa i rwork 47 3.5.4 Instructor Interviews 48 3.5.5 Student Interviews 49 3.5.6 Course materials: Wr i t t en documents 49 3.6 Transcr ip t ion Procedures and Convent ions 50 3.7 Da ta A n a l y s i s 50 3.8 Chapter Summary : 51 Chapter 4 F I N D I N G S A N D D I S C U S S I O N 52 4.1 Introduction 52 4.2 Ra t io o f Japanese and E n g l i s h U s e by Instructors 52 4.3 Instructors' Perceptions o f Japanese and E n g l i s h U s e 61 4.3.1 Instructors' Perceptions 62 4.3.2 F o c a l Instructors' Perceptions 64 4.3.3 F o c a l Instructors' Students Perceptions 66 4.4 Ra t io o f Japanese, E n g l i s h and U s e o f Other Languages b y Students....68 4.4.1 C l a s s r o o m Lectures 72 4.4.1.1 Japanese Language U s e 72 4.4.1.2 E n g l i s h Language U s e 78 4.4.2 P a i r w o r k Tasks 83 4.4.3 D i scus s ion 90 4.5 Purposes for Japanese and E n g l i s h U s e by Instructors 92 4.5.1 Instructors' and F o c a l instructors ' comments 92 4.5.1.1 The "Ideal" Teach ing Env i ronmen t and a Japanese-O n l y P o l i c y - 9 2 4.5.1.2 Purposes for Japanese Language U s e 94 4.5.1.3 Purposes for E n g l i s h Language U s e 97 4.5.1.4 Factors Af fec t ing o f Language C h o i c e 103 4.5.2 S tuden t s 'Commen t s .' 106 4.5.2.1 Thoughts on Japanese-Only P o l i c y 106 4.5.2.2 Purposes for Japanese Language U s e ...107 4.5.2.3 Purposes for E n g l i s h Language U s e 108 4.5.2.4 Reflect ions on Instructors' Language U s e 110 4.5.3 C l a s s r o o m Da ta 113 4.5.4 D i s c u s s i o n .....121 4.6 Purposes for Japanese, E n g l i s h and Other Language U s e by Students 122 4.6.1 Instructors' and F o c a l Ins t ruc to r s 'Comments 123 4.6.2 S tuden t s 'Commen t s . . . 125 4.6.3 C l a s s r o o m Data 128 4.6.4 D i scus s ion 142 4.7 Adaptat ions and Adjustments to A c c o m m o d a t e Students ' Language L e a r n i n g Exper iences 144 v 4.7.1 Code- swi t ch ing 145 4.7.1.1 Code- swi t ch ing by Instructors 146 4.7.1.2 Ass i s t ed Performance D u r i n g Peer Interaction: L 1 . L 2 , and L 3 U s e 149 4.7.2 "Katakanization" o f E n g l i s h V o c a b u l a r y 154 4.7.3 Needs o f E S L Learners o f J F L 158 4.7.4 Kanji 160 4.7.5 Heri tage Language Learners: A n Illustrative Case 168 4.8 Chapter S u m m a r y 175 Chapter 5 I M P L I C A T I O N S A N D C O N C L U S I O N S 176 5.1 Introduction 176 5.2 Pedagogica l Implicat ions 176 5.3 L imi t a t i ons Of the Study T 8 0 5.4 Di rec t ions for Future Research 181 5.5 C o n c l u d i n g Remarks 183 References 185 A p p e n d i x I Informed Consent F o r m for F o c a l Instructors 191 A p p e n d i x II Informed Consent F o r m for N o n - F o c a l Instructors 195 A p p e n d i x H I Informed Consent F o r m for Students 199 A p p e n d i x I V Instructor Interview G u i d e 203 A p p e n d i x V Student Interview G u i d e 204 A p p e n d i x V I Transcr ip t ion Convent ions 206 A p p e n d i x V I I Katakanization W o r d L i s t 207 A p p e n d i x VITI W o r d Coun t Convent ions 208 v i L I S T O F T A B L E S Table 3.1 Part icipant Profi les : Instructors 38 Table 3.2 Part icipant Prof i les : F o c a l Students 40 Tab le 4.1 Categories o f Utterances 53 Tab le 4.2 Language U s e S u m m a r y o f M s . Inoue 55 Tab le 4.3 Language U s e Summary o f M s . Y a b u n o 57 Tab le 4.4 Language U s e Averages for A l l F o u r Sessions: F o c a l Instructors 60 Table 4.5 C o m p a r i s o n o f Japanese Utterances and its Equiva len t i n E n g l i s h 61 Tab le 4.6 Perce ived U s e o f T L and E n g l i s h by Instructors for Intermediate J F L Classes .63 Table 4.7 Perce ived U s e o f T L and E n g l i s h o f Instructors by Students 67 Table 4.8 Language U s e by Students dur ing C l a s s r o o m Lectures ( A l l F o u r Sessions) 72 Tab le 4.9 P a i r w o r k Groupings 83 Tab le 4.10 Language U s e Averages for Student P a i r w o r k 91 Table 4.11 T o p F i v e Purposes for E n g l i s h U s e (Engl i sh & M i x e d Utterances) 114 Tab le 4.12 T o p F i v e Purposes for N L U s e dur ing Pa i r Tasks 129 Tab le 4.13 T o p F i v e Purposes for M i x e d Language U s e dur ing Pa i r Tasks . . . . 129 v i i LIST O F FIGURES Figure 2.1 L l / T L U s e C o n t i n u u m 10 F igure 4.1 C o m p o s i t i o n Task Out l ine 101 F igure 4.2 Test T o p i c s ' Out l ine 101 F igure 4.3 C o m p o s i t i o n Test Out l ine 102 F igure 4.4 F i n a l E x a m i n a t i o n Out l ine 102 F igure 4.5 C o m p o s i t i o n Test Out l ine 102 F igure 4.6 C o m p a r i n g kanji w i th Chinese Characters: fH 162 F igure 4-7 C o m p a r i n g T w o &anj7/Chinese Characters: M> and i l 164 F igure 4.8 C o m p a r i n g T w o &an/7/Chinese Characters: % and JC 164 v i i i ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I w o u l d l ike to express m y gratitude to a l l those who supported me throughout the comple t ion o f this thesis. I a m deeply indebted to m y supervisor, D r . Pa t r ic ia Duff , to w h o m I extend m y sincere gratitude and appreciat ion. I w o u l d l ike to thank D r . D u f f for be l i ev ing i n m y potential and her constant encouragement throughout this journey. The support and inspirat ion has been ove rwhe lming and I a m truly grateful for this experience. I w o u l d also l i ke to thank D r . Duanduan L i for being on m y examin ing committee. D r . L i ' s suggestions and comments have been most helpful . I have also been greatly inspired by m y professors D r . Pat r ic ia Duf f , D r . M o n i q u e Bournot-Tri tes , D r . B o n n y N o r t o n , and Dr . L i n g S h i , whose teaching has greatly influenced m y interest to pursue research i n second language learning. I am grateful to m y colleagues M a r t i n Guardado and Y a y o i Sh inbo for their support dur ing our classes together and throughout the comple t ion o f m y thesis. In addit ion, the cooperat ion I received f rom m y research participants is gratefully acknowledged. Las t ly , I w o u l d l ike to thank m y fami ly and close friends for support ing me dur ing m y studies. T o each o f the above, I extend m y deepest appreciation. This research has been supported by the Centre for Intercultural Language Studies and funded, i n particular, by the Un ive r s i t y o f B r i t i s h C o l u m b i a Teach ing and Lea rn ing Enhancement F u n d . ix T o my parents, grandfather and l o v i n g memory o f m y grandmother. Chapter 1 INTRODUCTION 1.1 The Identification of the Problem In recent years, there has been renewed interest i n the issue o f whether students' first language ( L I ) should be incorporated i n foreign language ( F L ) courses and i f so, how and to what extent. A s M a c a r o (2001) observes, "the exc lus ive use o f the target language ( T L ) i n mono l ingua l foreign language classrooms has recently been the subject o f considerable debate" (p. 531). There s t i l l remain gaps i n the research addressing questions such as: H o w much T L and L I is be ing used by teachers at different levels o f F L learning and i n different contexts? W h a t differences, i f any, are there between F L teachers' perceived use o f the T L and L I , and their actual c lass room use o f the T L and L I ? A n d how are teachers and learners o f F L s us ing the T L and L I as media t ing tools to learn the T L ? A typica l argument is that students o f Japanese as a foreign language ( J F L ) i n Nor th A m e r i c a do not have the same opportunities outside o f the language c lassroom to access Japanese, as do learners o f Japanese i n Japan, for example . F o r this reason, J F L learners' m a i n source o f language is the language teacher, materials and other students. A s P o l i o and D u f f (1994) expla in , "what transpires i n the c lassroom is , arguably, even more cr i t ica l for F L students because the c lassroom is often the students' sole source o f F L input" (p. 313). In other words , for foreign language students, the target language ( T L ) is not as easi ly accessible as it may be for students who are learning the same language i n a second language environment. Therefore, these students require more opportunities to receive this k i n d o f language input. 1 A c c e s s to large quantities o f T L can help facilitate the process o f learning a second language ( L 2 ) ; however , one cannot disregard the necessity to address the issue o f quali ty, as w e l l . Recent research and practice support the v i e w that purposeful incorporat ion o f the L I can increase the quali ty o f T L input and, thus, accommodates language intake ( A n t o n & D i C a m i l l a , 1999; B r o o k s & Donato , 1994; C o o k , 2001a, 2001b; Danhua , 1995; D u f f & L i , 2004; D u f f & P o l i o , 1990; F r a n k l i n , 1990; K i m , 2005; M a c a r o , 1997; N g u y e n , Shin , & Krashen , 2001; N o o r , 1994; Ohta, 2001 ; P o l i o & Duff , 1994; R o l i n - I a n z i t i & B r o w n l i e , 2002; Scheers, 1999; Tarone & S w a i n , 1995; Turnbu l l , 2001 ; Turnbu l l & Arnett , 2002; W e l l s , 1999). A s L e v i n e (2005) argues, " a mul t i l ingua l rather than a monol ingua l approach to instruction is necessary because it can both m a x i m i z e second language use and promote learner autonomy and cr i t ica l awareness" (p. 110). H o w e v e r , there has been little research done that has quantified actual T L and L I use by instructors in F L settings. D u f f and P o l i o (1990) investigated levels o f T L use i n F L classes, inc lud ing Japanese, and found that teachers used the T L from 10% to 100% o f the t ime. In Rol in - Ianz i t i and B r o w n l i e ' s (2002) study o f four F L teachers o f French , teachers' use o f native language ( N L ) dur ing the l is tening act ivi ty var ied f rom 0 % -18.15%. Teacher 1, w h o used no L I during the l is tening act ivi ty ended up us ing 5 5 . 5 1 % o f L I dur ing the grammar activities. In addit ion, D i c k s o n (1996), w h o investigated teacher perceptions o f the amount o f T L use, found that teacher-talk in the T L characterized between h a l f to three-quarters o f their c lassroom talk. Unfortunately, this questionnaire study on ly included F L teachers o f French , German , Spanish, U r d u , Italian and Russ ian . 2 Secondly , there have few empir ica l studies that have investigated the benefits o f the use o f students' specific F L contexts ( A n t o n & D i C a m i l l a , 1999; B r o o k s & Donato , 1994; F r a n k l i n , 1990; P o l i o & Duff, 1994; Ro l in - Ianz i t i & B r o w n l i e , 2002). The on ly studies that examine language use and language learning in a J F L context are from Oh ta (1995, 2000, 2001). In these studies, Oh ta focuses on peer-peer interaction and assisted performance in the zone o f p rox ima l development ( Z P D ) . H e r studies revealed that col laborat ive peer interaction, inc lud ing the use o f the L I , a l lowed students to learn Japanese i n each other's Z P D . F i n a l l y , there have been no studies to m y knowledge that address these issues in J F L classrooms, in a N o r t h A m e r i c a n context, in w h i c h the majori ty o f learners are Chinese native speakers learning J F L through their second or third language, E n g l i s h . A s Turnbu l l and Arnet t (2002) explains future research must determine what this [i.e. m a x i m u m use o f the L I ] real ly means in terms o f the quantity and qualit ies o f T L and L I use and i n terms o f w h e n it is acceptable and/or effective for teachers to draw on the students' L I . M o r e research is also needed to understand what factors . . . prompt S L and F L teachers to speak the students' L I . (p. 211) 1.2 T h e P u r p o s e o f the S t u d y The present study examined the use o f Japanese, E n g l i s h and other languages used by instructors and their students during intermediate-level J F L classes. The study focused on what languages they accessed, as w e l l as h o w and w h y they used the language(s) to facilitate Japanese learning. The main objective o f the study was to investigate language choice and use by the instructors; however, student opinions , perceptions, and language use were necessary to complement the mult ifaceted nature o f J F L classes. In other words , the purpose o f this study was to examine what and h o w 3 much language (Japanese, E n g l i s h and other languages) was be ing used by instructors and their students, the purposes for us ing these various languages and its effects, and, to explore h o w instructors use language to accommodate their students' pr ior language learning experience. 1.3 The Questions Guiding the Research F o r e i g n language classrooms create a chal lenging teaching and learning environment for instructors and students. B a l a n c i n g the use o f Japanese and E n g l i s h i n less than ideal situations is a daunting task. Th i s study investigates some o f the more prevalent issues concerning J F L classrooms and the role o f the T L (Japanese) and L I (normal ly Eng l i sh ) . The research questions that guide the present study are as fo l lows : 1. (a) W h a t is the ratio o f Japanese use to E n g l i s h use by instructors i n univers i ty Japanese as a foreign language ( J F L ) classrooms? (b) W h a t are the instructors ' o w n perceptions about the ratio o f Japanese use to E n g l i s h use? (c) W h a t is the relative ratio o f Japanese, E n g l i s h and Chinese use by students i n J F L classrooms? 2. (a) F o r what purposes are Japanese and E n g l i s h used by instructors? (b) F o r what purposes are Japanese, E n g l i s h and other languages used by students? 3. H o w do J F L instructors adapt and adjust their language use to accommodate the language learning experiences o f the students in their classes? 1.4 The Significance of the Study It is hoped that the present study w i l l make several significant contributions to foreign language learning, especial ly w i t h respect to the role o f the L I (and L 2 and L 3 ) i n 4 the f ie ld o f less c o m m o n l y taught foreign languages such as Japanese. In a broader sense, this study attempts to add to the g rowing literature and research on the role o f L I in L 2 , immers ion , and F L classrooms. A s C o o k (2001b) argues, "b r ing ing the L I back from ex i le may lead not only to the improvement o f exis t ing teaching methods but also to innovat ions in methodology" (p. 419). H o w e v e r , there st i l l remains the chal lenge o f determining the most appropriate and effective ways for language teachers to balance the use o f T L and L I ( L i u et al . , 2004; Turnbu l l , 2001), both quantitatively and qual i tat ively, and to evaluate h o w L I use during code-swi tching scaffolds L 2 learning and the reasons behind the teachers' choice to do so (Levine , 2003). A s a result, this study may provide insights into the need to "establish some pr inciples for code-swi tching i n F L classrooms by understanding its functions and consequences" (Maca ro , 2001 , p. 545). Furthermore, from a sociocultural and sociocogni t ive perspective and w i t h respect to L 2 learners, I hope to make a contr ibution by examin ing the role o f T L and L I dur ing peer-peer interactions. W i t h multicompetent language learners in their ( C o o k , 1999), F L classrooms "should exp l ic i t ly recognize a situation o f d ig loss ia" (Tarone & Swa in , 1995, p. 174). A s Storch and W i g g l e s w o r t h (2002) state: "student[s] a lways approach learning a L 2 w i t h expertise in their L I , and this expertise remains a somewhat underexplored resource" (p. 768). B y us ing a qualitative case study approach, the study further investigates the role o f L I as a valuable tool for scaffolding L 2 learning. B y do ing so, the study w i l l offer f indings that assist in the understanding o f h o w m u c h T L , L I , and other languages such as M a n d a r i n and Cantonese are being used, as w e l l as the purposes for w h i c h these languages are used. 5 A third contr ibut ion is that the study offers a learner 's perspective o f their instructors ' use o f the T L and L I . F e w studies (e.g., D u f f & P o l i o , 1990; L i u et al . , 2004; M a c a r o , 1997) have inc luded learners' opinions about their teacher's use o f T L and L I use. In order to ful ly understand the effectiveness o f a teacher's balance o f the T L and L I , w e need to take into consideration the effects that language use has on the T L processing o f L 2 learners and the most effective w a y to do this is to directly ascertain the opinions o f the learners. The study provides insights on h o w learners feel about the ratio o f their teachers' use o f the T L and L I and their use o f the T L and L I for var ious purposes. In addit ion, it w i l l also examine learners' perspectives about their use o f T L and L I for L 2 learning, and the purposes for w h i c h they feel the L I (or addit ional languages) is useful. 1.5 O v e r v i e w o f the Thes i s T h i s thesis consists o f six chapters. Chapter 1 provides an introduct ion to the thesis by g i v i n g the background to the present study, ident i fying the problem and the rationale, ou t l in ing the questions that w i l l be investigated, as w e l l as stating the s ignif icance o f the study to current research in second language learning. Chapter 2 provides the theoretical f ramework to this study by r ev i ewing relevant literature and empir ica l studies related to second language learning. The first section o f this chapter explores current issues in foreign and second language c lassroom and the role o f the target language and the first language in such learning environments. The next section w i l l discuss language use from a sociocul tural perspective and w i l l r ev iew literature on the zone o f p rox imal development, group w o r k and col laborat ive learning. 6 Chapter 3 w i l l describe the qualitative approach used in the present study, as w e l l as the methodology, and the data col lec t ion and analysis procedures used for the c lassroom observations, audio recordings o f the lectures and pai rwork , and the participant interviews. It w i l l also provide a detailed descript ion o f the participants (focal teachers, other teachers, and students) and the context o f the study inc lud ing the details o f the research site. Chapter 4 presents a detailed account o f the major f indings o f the present study and then a discuss ion o f the findings. In this chapter, the ratio o f Japanese and E n g l i s h use by instructors w i l l be described, as we l l as their perceived amounts o f language use i n their classes. The ratio o f Japanese, E n g l i s h and other languages used by students w i l l also be presented and discussed. A t the end, the purposes for w h i c h teachers and students us ing these var ious languages w i l l be examined, fo l lowed by adaptations and adjustments the instructors implemented to accommodate student learning. F i n a l l y in Chapter 5 , the major areas o f the f indings and their impl ica t ions w i l l be explored. This w i l l be fo l lowed by a discussion o f the l imitat ions o f this study and suggestions for future research. 7 Chapter 2 REVIEW OF LITERATURE 2.1 Introduction T h i s chapter w i l l r ev iew the literature w h i c h provides the context and background for this research study by p rov id ing an overv iew of the knowledge and ideas have been established concerning this topic. It w i l l provide a summary o f the key developments and describe the past and current areas o f debate on the issue o f L I and T L use i n the L 2 / F L c lassroom. M o r e o v e r , the articles and empi r i ca l studies w i l l be rev iewed and major themes o f importance w i l l be presented to illustrate and situate the relevance o f m y study. I w i l l begin by examin ing the literature related to L I and T L use i n second language classrooms f o l l o w e d by a br ief descript ion o f four approaches to teaching L 2 wi th respect to language use. Nex t , language use w i l l be discussed f rom a sociocul tural perspective to show how T L and L I can enhance F L input as it mediates language learning through assisted performance (i.e., teacher-student and student-student interaction) and col laborat ive dialogue (i.e., student-student interaction) i n the zone o f p r o x i m a l development. 2.2 Issues in LI and TL Use in the Language Classroom There has been an assumption for the past several decades among second language teaching methodologists and researchers that the use o f the L I i n the c lassroom should be discouraged, and as a result the use o f the L 2 has been seen as posi t ive and the L I as negative (Cook , 2001b). H o w e v e r , more recent research and practice illustrate some benefits o f us ing both languages i n F L classrooms, result ing i n an increased interest i n this issue (An ton & D i C a m i l l a , 1999; C o o k , 2001a, 2001b; Danhua , 1995; D u f f & L i , 8 n d . ; D u f f & P o l i o , 1990; F rank l in , 1990; M a c a r o , 1997; N g u y e n , Shin , & Krashen , 2001; N o o r , 1994; Ohta, 2001; P o l i o & Duff, 1994; Ro l in - Ianz i t i & B r o w n l i e , 2002; Scheers, 1999; Tarone & Swain , 1995; Turnbu l l , 2001; Turnbu l l & Arnet t , 2002; W e l l s , 1999). W h i l e some researchers are interested in the quantity o f language use by instructors (e.g., D i c k s o n , P . , 1996; D u f f & P o l i o , 1990; M a c a r o , 2001 ; P o l i o & Duff , 1994; Ro l in - I anz i t i & B r o w n l i e , 2002; M e i r i n g & N o r m a n , 2002), others are more concerned w i t h the quality o f different amounts o f L I versus L 2 use (e.g., A n t o n & D i C a m i l l a , 1999; Chavez , 2003; D u f f & P o l i o , 1990; Ohta, 2001) and the functions o f L I in scaffolding L 2 development and use, specif ical ly. Because access to the T L , in terms o f quantity and also quality, can be more chal lenging in foreign language classrooms where access and exposure to native speakers or h ighly proficient non-native speakers are more l imi ted , more so than in immers ion and second language classrooms, language use by both instructors and students is an aspect o f teaching and learning that needs further invest igation. A s P o l i o and D u f f (1994) explain , "what transpires in the c lassroom is, arguably, even more cr i t ical for F L learners because the classroom is often the learners' sole source o f F L input" (p. 313). 2.3 T h e R o l e o f L I a n d T L The role o f the T L and L I can be broadly separated into several theoretical categories: M a c a r o (2001) suggested three: the V i r t u a l [L2] Pos i t ion , M a x i m a l [L2] Pos i t ion and Op t ima l [L2] Use Posi t ion , but one addit ional category cou ld be added: M a x i m u m L I U s e Pos i t ion . F igure 2.0 illustrates an L l / T L cont inuum representing the four approaches The M a x i m u m L I U s e posi t ion holds that the method used should take m a x i m a l advantage o f teachers' and students' L I to focus on explanations o f L 2 grammar, 9 vocabulary and so on. It is perhaps most aligned wi th a traditional grammar-translat ion Figure 2.1 Ll/TL Use Continuum approach. The V i r t u a l [L2] Pos i t ion , on the other hand, states that the c lassroom environment should replicate the target culture by complete ly e l imina t ing the use o f the L I . Therefore, it is bel ieved, a sk i l l fu l F L teacher is able to teach in the T L and does not need to use the L I to teach the L 2 . The M a x i m a l [L2] Pos i t ion , al though also supporting the c l a i m that there is little pedagogical benefit in using the L I in teaching, takes a more realistic perspective: s imula t ing the ideal target language environment w o u l d be imposs ib le and teachers w i l l u l t imately incorporate the usage o f L I into their lesson for a variety o f purposes. F i n a l l y , the Op t ima l [L2] U s e Posi t ion is even more tempered but adds a theoretical rationale for L I use, arguing that there is an important role for the L I i n L 2 instruction to assist learners in learning the L 2 . Each o f these w i l l be discussed in turn below. 2.3.1 Maximum LI Use Position The M a x i m u m L I U s e Pos i t ion promotes the learning o f the T L through the use o f lots o f practice by means o f the L I . Th is posi t ion is characterized by teaching Maximum Optimal Maximal Virtual L2 L2 L2 I Ll /TL USE 10 techniques in w h i c h there is a heavy emphasis on translation and l inguis t ic analyses o f T L . The traditional grammar-translation method, cogni t ive code, and l inguis t ics courses fal l under this category since they m a x i m i z e L I use by us ing the L I to expla in and analyze the T L as an object (not medium) o f study. Students learn the language (i.e., its grammar) us ing a deductive approach by learning the grammar rules and acquire the T L through memor iza t ion , repetition and/or analysis. B y ana lyz ing and translating numerous T L texts f rom the T L into the L I , and v ice versa, it is c la imed that students gain a basic foundation o f T L knowledge. The grammar-translation method exp l ic i t ly teaches grammar rules; however , it does not focus on how to use the language in communica t ive contexts in compar ison to the f o l l o w i n g methods. 2.3.2 T h e V i r t u a l [L2] a n d M a x i m a l [L2] P o s i t i o n The V i r t u a l [L2] and the M a x i m a l [L2] Pos i t ion both advocate for a target language-only p o l i c y . The V i r t u a l [L2] Pos i t ion is idealist ic and is representative o f a language use pr inc ip le w h i l e the M a x i m a l [L2] Pos i t ion is more characteristics o f a realist ic language use methodology. Support for the V i r t u a l Pos i t ion and M a x i m a l [L2] Pos i t ion is i l lustrated through the Natura l Approach and the earlier Di rec t M e t h o d (e.g., as used in B e r l i t z language schools and in textbooks by H . D . B r o w n (2000, 2001)). A c c o r d i n g to K r a s h e n and Terre l l (1983), language learners "acquire" the T L by means o f the Na tu ra l A p p r o a c h , w h i c h simulates a T L setting, and it is through an immers ion in the language, particular types o f activit ies and an affectively supportive social context that competency in a language is achieved. Th i s competence is gained from language acquisition, an unconscious process, and not through language learning, a conscious process, it is c la imed. M o r e o v e r , this acquis i t ion happens by means o f the Language A c q u i s i t i o n 11 D e v i c e ( L A D ) ( introduced through the w o r k o f C h o m s k y ) , an internal language processor, w h i c h receives input f rom one's interlocutors. H o w e v e r , not a l l the input received by the learner can be acquired. A s Krashen (1985) explains in his Input Hypothes is , the learner w i l l be able to acquire those structures that are at his or her next 'stage' . Th i s next 'stage' is predetermined by the Natura l Order Hypothes is , w h i c h c la ims that a learner w i l l acquire language in a predictable order. The /' represents the present competence level o f the learner, and / + 1 is the next language rule that can be acquired accord ing to the natural order. I f the teacher provides this ' comprehens ib le input ' (i.e., / + 1) in L 2 and a suitable affective context, then the learner w i l l be able to acquire the next language structure. Therefore, exc lus ive use o f the L 2 is necessary to generate as much 'comprehensible input ' as possible. The use o f the L I is detrimental; it deprives language learners o f the 'comprehensible input ' that is v i ta l for second language acquis i t ion. Chambers (1991) explains h o w the L 2 can be used in most teaching circumstances, in keeping w i t h the Natura l Approach . W i t h respect to teacher talk for managerial purposes (organizational instruction, act ivi ty instructions, evaluat ion and correct ion o f pup i l ' s F L performance, and d isc ip l inary interventions), much thought and effort need to be g iven to selecting the L 2 words and phrases used in the class. Furthermore, these words and phrases must be recorded in a logbook and used regular ly and exploi ted l inguis t ica l ly : l imi ted , in i t i a l ly , and then gradually increasing in numbers as learners learn and use the acquired language. The learners w i l l also have to be able to communica te i n the L 2 and w i l l need to be taught structures to express themselves effectively in the c lassroom environment. The language functions that need to be 12 covered are requests, asking for help, apologies and evaluation. The learners must be encouraged to use these phrases since teachers w i l l pretend not to understand them i f they use their L I . Las t ly , Chambers explains the importance o f materials and act ivi ty select ion i n T L - o n l y classrooms. Teachers need to take advantage o f materials, i n particular, textbooks and tests that exploit the F L and do not overuse the students' L I . A c c o r d i n g l y , since the teacher is the key source to accessing the T L , it is the duty o f the teacher to make al l ' comprehensible input ' available to the learners. A s H a l l i w e l l and Jones (1992) advocate, it is crucia l for learners to be exposed to the T L being used as a means o f real communica t ion for all aspects o f language learning. R e a l communica t ion includes al l social interaction inc lud ing prais ing, c lassroom management and even rapport-bui lding chitchat unrelated to the language lesson. Th i s w a y " i t reinforces the notion that. . . not the F L [not the L I ] , is the language for genuine communica t ion in the c lass room" (Po l io & Duff , 1994, p. 322) so that learners subconsciously do not separate the 'pedagogica l ' functions f rom the ' r ea l ' functions o f language (Hancock , 1997). D u f f and P o l i o (1990), suggest a number o f techniques to increasing ' comprehensib le input ' . Some o f these are: 1. U s e verbal modif icat ions by repeating utterances used in class, mod i fy ing input by speaking at a s lower pace, paraphrasing, s imp l i fy ing the syntax and vocabulary, and mak ing a habit o f frequently us ing useful phrases and expressions. 2. U s e nonverbal cues such as visuals and gestures that help contextual ize the oral input. 13 3. Insist on an L 2 - o n l y po l i cy from the start. 4. Teach grammatical te rminology in the L 2 f rom the outset and use it frequently. 5. L e t students speak E n g l i s h when necessary. 6. Stress that al l language need not be comprehended. 7. E x p l i c i t l y teach and then use grammatical terms in the L 2 . 8. P r o v i d e supplementary grammatical texts in Eng l i sh , (pp. 162-163) H a l l i w e l l and Jones also stress the importance o f the L 2 for the development o f the learners' o w n language learning as they process the L 2 in their minds. Furthermore, by a l l o w i n g students to experience the language as real communica t ion the students w i l l be g i v e n exposure to the T L w h i c h is more representative o f the unpredictable language use u t i l ized by T L communit ies . A l s o , in Tarone and S w a i n ' s (1995) study o f F rench immers ion elementary school-aged chi ldren, it was argued that immers ion chi ldren rarely get any L 2 input in non-academic language styles and that efforts to do so do not seem to have been very successful. Therefore, unfortunately, the L 2 becomes labeled as the language reserved for peer-peer and teacher-student interactions in ' ins t i tu t ional ' domains only . They report that: "In the immers ion speech communi ty , the L 2 provides a superordinate language style, but the older chi ldren need a vernacular for peer-peer social functions that are essential to their social existence" (p. 169). A s a result, the learners end up us ing their native language vernacular for peer-peer interactions since they do not have access to the necessary L 2 vernacular. Thus , students not on ly need m a x i m u m L 2 input and practice, but also opportunities for interaction across a range o f language genres, registers, and interlocutors (i.e. m a x i m u m sociol inguis t ic variation). 14 2.3.3 T h e O p t i m a l [L2] Use P o s i t i o n The Op t ima l U s e Pos i t ion c la ims that the L I can be used as a tool to enhance the learning experience o f F L learners. Learners o f foreign languages are multicompetent language users according to C o o k (1991, 1999, 2001a, 2001b) and a lways have access to their L I and " i n the mind , the L I is not insulated from the L 2 " ( C o o k , 1999, p. 193). C o o k (2001b) argues that " t ry ing to put languages in separate compartments in the m i n d is doomed to failure since the compartments are connected in many w a y s " (p. 407). F o r instance, the t w o languages are interwoven in the L 2 user's m i n d in vocabulary (Beauv i l l a in & Grainger , 1987), in syntax ( C o o k , 1994), in phono logy (Obler , 1982), and in pragmatics (Locastro , 1987). L 2 users are more f lexible in their ways o f th ink ing and are less governed by cul tural stereotypes ( C o o k , 1997). The L 2 meanings do not exist separately f rom the L I meanings in the learner's mind , regardless o f whether they are part o f the same vocabulary store or parts o f different stores mediated by a single conceptual system ( C o o k , 1997). (Cook , 2001b, p. 407) Since F L learners are sti l l learning the L 2 and their interlanguage may not a l low them to perform certain functions in the L 2 , it is on ly natural for these learners to code-swi tch in order to provide the necessary scaffolding in the learning process and to express their understanding o f a task before proceeding wi th it, for example. Therefore, learners and teachers should treat the L I as a crucial resource that can be exploi ted to enhance the learning experiences o f L 2 learners. One function o f the L I in supporting students' performance in L 2 learning is as a cogni t ive tool ( B r o o k s & Donato, 1994; Turnbul l & Arnett , 2002; W i g g l e s w o r t h , 2002 ). A s Storch and W i g g l e s w o r t h (2002) argue, "the use o f the L I may provide learners w i t h addit ional cogni t ive support that a l lows them to analyse language and w o r k at a higher level than w o u l d be possible were they restricted to sole use o f their L 2 " (p. 760). 15 Furthermore, the L I can also have social or interpersonal functions. The L I provides learners opportunities for intersubjectivity ( A n t o n & D i C a m i l l a , 1999), w h i c h a l lows learners to create a social space in w h i c h they can feel comfortable to perform a chal lenging task together. Espec ia l ly for lower level F L learners, the L I use can foster a favourable, cooperative atmosphere that facilitates peer col laborat ion as they w o r k through a task. M o r e o v e r , the learners may use the L I for jokes and other off-task soc ia l i z ing functions, w h i c h can help buil t rapport and create posit ive c lassroom relationships (Hancock , 1997; Swa in & L a p k i n , 2000). A s noted in the previous section, wi th in an academic language learning context, characterized by insti tutional teacher talk and educational materials, learners often have l imi ted access to vernacular language, w h i c h is necessary for peer-peer social functions (Tarone & Swa in , 1995). I f learners are forced to use the L 2 for such interactions, it is l i ke ly that this may negatively affect the learner 's attitude and mot ivat ion towards any L 2 learning experience since "the need to perform the social functions is far greater to the [learner's] social identi ty than the need to stay in the L 2 (and look l ike a dweeb) when they have and share the L I style they need" (p. 169). A s C h a v e z (2003) argues, "we are pretending when we tell our students that a mono l ingua l [ T L ] environment f i l l ed wi th monol ingua l [ L I ] speakers is authentic, according to any real l ife norms. O u r students see through this pretence and behave accord ing ly" (p. 194). O n the other hand, as P o l i o and D u f f (1994), in their M a x i m a l U s e Pos i t ion , argued that i f students aren't g iven an opportunity to develop social language use, they w i l l remain unable to use the L 2 for those purposes later. A l s o , i f teachers are not g iven pr inciples for max ima l L 2 use, they w i l l lapse into frequent uses o f the L I . 1 6 Investigations o f teachers' use o f L I in foreign and second language classes ( D u f f & P o l i o , 1990; F rank l i n , 1990; Harbo rd , 1992; P o l i o & Duff , 1994) reveal that there are many reasons for teachers' use o f the L I in the L 2 c lassroom and their use o f the L I can be motivated by a variety o f factors. A c c o r d i n g to C o o k (2001a), there are four factors for w h i c h the L I can be used as a posit ive tool: efficiency, learning, naturalness and external relevance. I f an aspect o f the L 2 can be learned more effectively and efficiently through the use o f the L I , then teachers may choose to use the L I to assist their students wi th their performance. A l s o , L 2 teachers w h o incorporate the L I can provide necessary or additional scaffolding for a variety o f learning purposes such as check ing comprehension, expla in ing complex grammar concepts, and p rov id ing supplemental background information (e.g., historical or cultural background) for L 2 lesson topics. Furthermore, learners w h o feel more comfortable (i.e., a feel ing o f naturalness) executing particular c lassroom functions or discussing certain topics in the L I , may benefit f rom the teacher's creation o f an atmosphere in w h i c h the L I can be accessed as necessary. Las t ly , teachers w h o encourage the use o f both the L I and L 2 , i nc lud ing code-swi tch ing techniques, and acknowledge their potential benefits for future, rea l -wor ld situations can equip learners w i th the tools to be better L 2 users. U l t ima te ly , these students are L 2 learners and users and w i l l probably not attain nat ive- l ike prof ic iency status. Therefore, "language teaching should place more emphasis on the student as a potential and actual L 2 user and be less concerned w i t h the monol ingua l native speaker" (Cook , 1999, p. 196). A s L e v i n e (2005) argues, "a mul t i l ingua l rather than a monol ingua l approach to instruction is necessary because it can both m a x i m i z e second language ( L 2 ) use and promote learner autonomy and cri t ical awareness" (p. 110). 17 2.3.3.1 T h e L e a r n e r s ' Use o f T L a n d L I : E m p i r i c a l E v i d e n c e In V i l l a m i l and de Guerrero ' s (1996) research i n v o l v i n g 54 adult, native Spanish speakers i n an E S L course, the L I assisted the learners in a variety o f ways . The L I was used to gain control o f the task by " m a k i n g meaning o f the text, retr ieving language f rom memory , exp lo r ing and expanding content, gu id ing their act ion though the task, and main ta in ing d ia logue" (p. 60). F o r example, learners translated texts into Spanish to check the meaning o f the E n g l i s h sentences and they w o u l d think through words i n Spanish, through "private speech" (self-directed speech), before us ing them in E n g l i s h . In S w a i n and L a p k i n ' s (2000) study o f 22 pairs o f grade 8 French immers ion , learners kept the task m o v i n g forward by us ing E n g l i s h to determine what steps to take to successfully perform the task, retrieve semantic information, and to manage the task. In addit ion, the L I was used when learners wanted to draw attention to their search for specific vocabulary items, focusing on form and performing explanations. It was also used to "frame" utterances or segments in French that were grammat ica l ly incorrect and to retrieve grammatical information necessary to complete the task. He re is an example o f students us ing E n g l i s h to focus attention on their search for a F rench vocabulary i t e m 1 J l : Et elle est tickelee. H o w do y o u say ' t i ck l ed ' ? J2: Chatouilee. J l : O K . Chatouilee. Chatouilee. H o w do y o u say ' foot ' ? J2: Le pied. J l : A h , Chatouilee lespieds. (p. 259) A l s o , A n t o n and D i C a m i l l a ' s (1999) data from five dyads o f Eng l i sh - speak ing adult learners o f Spanish as a second language showed h o w the L I acts as a cr i t ical psychologica l tool that enables learners to construct effective col laborat ive dialogue in the comple t ion o f meaning-based language tasks by performing three important functions: construct ion o f ' The students were talking about tickling someone's foot. 18 scaffolded help, establishment o f intersubjectivity, and use o f private speech, (p. 245) E n g l i s h was used for scaffolding by us ing it for managing the task, encouraging each other to maintain interest in the task, keeping their focus on the goal o f the task, and t a lk ing each other through any problems encountered during the t a s k - especial ly through parts o f the task where each member, on their o w n , could not have been successful, yet as a dyad were able to co l lec t ive ly be successful. Take for example, the f o l l o w i n g dialogue in w h i c h t w o novice learners are us ing the L I to provide scaffolded help to a p roblem wi th accessing the Spanish equivalent o f "to arrive". R : D o w e just start wri t ing? W e wri te the exact same thing? A l l r i g h t . . . imagine we ' r e go ing on a trip to M e x i c o . T e l l me what y o u plan to do on this trip . . . al l r i g h t . . . start it o f f . . . I ' m horrible at starting things o f f . . . . T : L e t ' s say, h o w do y o u say, u m . . . we ' re gonna, w e ' l l arr ive there? R : U m , arrivar, I don ' t know, uh, why don ' t w e say . . . . T : 'Cause w e cou ld say we ' r e gonna be, we ' re gonna get there at, and w e can put it in , y o u k n o w , the date, and the time, and . . . . R : A l l right, al l right, all r i g h t . . . to arrive is. I think, i t ' s l ike , arrivar? T: O r h o w about leave, leave? R : That despues, leave . . . is, um. T : W h y do w e have to have the recorder on? R : 'Cause she wants to record everything we say, so watch it. T : O k a y . R : So w e could say, w h y don ' t we say, l ike , uh, T . . . . T : W e just learned, we just learned the w o r d to go, um. R : Vamosl T: N o , t h e ' s ' word . R : U h , salgo . . . Salir . . . Y e a h . T : T o go . . . . okay. R : O k a y , you ' r e right, um . . . . (p. 238) M o r e o v e r , the L I helps guide them through their o w n th ink ing processes dur ing complex L 2 tasks. B e l o w , E n g l i s h helps then decide what it is they want to say about M e x i c o C i ty . 19 S: U m . . . en la ciudad. . . u m . . . y o u want to say M e x i c o C i t y is a b i g c i ty w i t h lots o f people? Hay muchas personas? D : Okay . S: O r in M e x i c o C i t y . . . let 's just say M e x i c o C i t y is a b i g ci ty w i t h a lot o f people, is that okay? D : Y e a h . S: I don ' t want to tell y o u what to say, I just thought (laugh). D : N o , I don ' t k n o w what else to say . . . there's more I want to say, I just can't , w e haven' t learned i t . . . la cuidad de Mexico. . . es or estd? Es . . . . S: Y o u could say ' hay ' there are a lot o f people . . . . D : I was go ing to say es muy grande . . . . S: That ' s , that 's great. D : Yhay... muchospersonas . . . here, h o w about this? H a y . . . hay mas personas, wai t , no, en la ciudad de Mexico, estdn mas personas que Indianapolis . . . is that right? S: I d o n ' t . . . say it again . . . . D : U n , en la ciudad de Mexico, estdn mas personas uh, que . . . Indianapolis . S: Y o u want to say there are a lot o f people from Indianapolis? D : There are more people in M e x i c o C i t y that Indianapolis . . . . S: So y o u w o u l d say . . . hay mas personas . . en la cuidad de Mexico que Indianapolis? D : That ' s what I thought S: Is that, okay . . . . D : Hay mas personas . . . okay, en la ciudad de Mexico . . . que Indianapolis . . . what else? D o e s ciudad have an accent? S: It probably does, but I don' t k n o w where (laugh). D : Okay , what else? (p. 239) Las t ly , the L I can act as private speech. E v e n i f meant for oneself, pr ivate speech cou ld be overheard by other group members and therefore "speech intended p r imar i ly for se l f can also function to inform or direct a co-participant and this play(s) a significant role in h o w the interaction proceeds" (Wel l s , 1999, p. 251). Th rough such col laborat ive L I interactions, A n t o n and D i C a m i l l a ' s (1999) conclude that "the L I is beneficial for [second] language learning, since it acts as a cr i t ical psycholog ica l too l that enables learners to construct effective col laborat ive dialogues" (p. 245). 20 2.3.3.2 T h e T e a c h e r s ' U s e o f T L a n d L I : E m p i r i c a l E v i d e n c e E m p i r i c a l studies show that teachers do use the L I wi th in their language classrooms regardless o f pol ic ies or preferences to the contrary. Ro l in - I anz i t i and B r o w n l i e (2002) studied four teachers o f beginner 's French and found that the range o f native language (i.e., Eng l i sh ) use during the l is tening act ivi ty ranged from 0 % to 18.5%, w i t h a cross-teacher average o f 8.80%. Howeve r , Teacher 1, w h o used no E n g l i s h i n the l is tening act ivi ty, ended up using 5 5 . 5 1 % E n g l i s h dur ing the grammar act ivi ty w h e n rules for the possessive were being explained. Teachers in this study used E n g l i s h for a variety o f purposes. These include us ing the L I for translation o f vocabulary items, g i v i n g instructions, comment ing , and mot ivat ing learners to speak in the F L . The researchers also concluded that this study confi rmed that code-switching (together w i th other adjustments) modif ies input for F L learning in a desirable way (p. 423). The research o f D u f f and P o l i o (1990) and P o l i o and D u f f (1994), w h i c h investigated the amount o f T L used in various universi ty level F L classrooms, revealed that F L teacher talk ranged from 10 to 100% percent. Examples o f situations in w h i c h teachers swi tched to using the L I include instances when they were managing the c lassroom, g i v i n g instructions on grammar, p rov id ing translations for u n k n o w n T L vocabulary , deal ing w i t h learners' apparent lack o f comprehension, and us ing administrat ive vocabulary items. F r a n k l i n ' s (1990) study l ook ing at T L use in Scottish secondary-level F r ench language classrooms describes the challenges o f teaching in the T L . The highest ranking tasks (i.e. tasks that were easily conducted in E n g l i s h rather than in French) were c lassroom management tasks, expla in ing grammar, discussing language objectives, 21 teaching background information, and correct ing wri t ten work . Ac t iv i t i e s that were easier to conduct us ing French rather than E n g l i s h were those related to c lassroom organizat ion, explanation o f activities, and informal chats w i th students. Ove ra l l , the study found that that the reason w h y 95 percent o f the teachers (N=201) resorted to not us ing the L I was student disc ipl ine . In D i c k s o n ' s (1996) survey o f 508 F L teachers on the issue o f spoken language, the data show that E n g l i s h plays a key role in classrooms, even for those teachers w h o are native speakers o f the F L being taught. Teachers in this study mentioned that factors such as disorder ly behaviour and l o w achievement o f learners were the main factors that contributed increasing use o f the L I , whi le factors such as departmental p o l i c y and teacher's o w n confidence in their F L use were the least l i ke ly to influence L I use. M a n y teachers felt that the T L alienated l o w achievers since it affected their comprehension, increased anxiety and was demotivat ing. W i t h respect to issues speci f ica l ly related to teaching in the T L language, 4 2 % o f the teachers found it very easy to ask questions in the T L . H o w e v e r , 4 4 % c la imed that explanations o f meaning were quite diff icul t and 5 5 % felt that teaching grammar in the T L was very difficult . It appears that any teaching functions that entail the use o f language that is above that o f what the learners already k n o w w i l l make us ing the T L diff icult because "i t is practical and a realist ic acknowledgement o f t ime constraints ... and swi tching to E n g l i s h is thus, in one sense, a w ay o f enr ich ing the content o f language lessons" (p. 16). 2.4 A S o c i o c u l t u r a l Pe r spec t ive A c c o r d i n g to Sociocul tural Theory , developed by V y g o t s k y and his colleagues, "human consciousness is fundamentally mediated mental ac t iv i ty" and "psycho log ica l 22 processes have to be explained as part o f active part icipation in the everyday w o r l d , and not in the w o r l d o f the experimental laboratory" ( L a n t o l f & A p p e l , 1994, p.7). Humans , use too l s— both physical and p s y c h o l o g i c a l — and in col laborat ion w i t h other people, as mediators to influence and change the w o r l d around us. Language (whether L I or L 2 ) , a psycho log ica l too l , is a key mediator for the mental act ivi ty o f indiv iduals . 2.4.1 T h e Z o n e o f P r o x i m a l D e v e l o p m e n t U n l i k e , Kra shen ' s Natural A p p r o a c h and the L A D ( D u n n & Lantol f , 2000; K i n g i n g e r , 2001), Sociocul tura l Theory argues that "human psycho log ica l processes do not preexist inside the head wai t ing to emerge at just the right maturational moment" (Lantolf , 2000, p. 14). Men ta l actions are first experienced as external, mater ia l ly based, social actions that are in i t ia l ly introduced to a person through social interaction. F o r example, an adult or an expert w i l l assist the ch i ld or novice to execute a specific action. T h i s act ion w i l l be mediated by a tool : language. A t first the c h i l d or novice is dependant on the adult or expert and can only perform the action w i t h assistance. Even tua l ly the act ion w i l l be performed without any external assistance and n o w any mediated support has been internalized and can be self-regulated. The zone of proximal development ( Z P D ) is the name g iven to this difference between what the ch i ld or novice cou ld not do alone, yet could perform wi th the assistance o f the adult or expert. The Z P D is "the distance between the actual development level as determined by independent p roblem so lv ing and the level o f potential development as determined through prob lem so lv ing under adult guidance or in col laborat ion wi th more capable peers" ( V y g o t s k y , 1978, p. 86). V y g o t s k y ' s Z P D is important to language learning for several reasons. F i rs t o f 23 a l l , l i ke the c h i l d and adult interaction displayed in the assisted performance, the F L c lass room also has experts, the teacher or more proficient L 2 learners, and the novice , a less proficient L 2 learner. Secondly, language learning occurs on a social plane: a c lassroom environment i n v o l v i n g teacher-student or student-student interaction. Language, whether it is in the T L or the L I , can be used as a mediat ional too l to facilitate language learning by p rov id ing scaffolding in the Z P D . "In social interaction a knowledgeable participant can create [scaffolding], by means o f speech, supportive condit ions in w h i c h the nov ice can participate in , and extend, current sk i l l s and knowledge to her levels o f competence" (Donato, 1994). A c c o r d i n g to W o o d , Brune r and R o s s (cited in Donato , 1994), scaffolding has these characteristics: 1. recruiting interest in the task; 2. simplifying the task; 3. maintaining pursuit o f the goal ; 4. marking cr i t ical features and discrepancies between what has been produced and the ideal solut ion; 5. controlling frustration during problem so lv ing , and 6. demonstrating an ideal ized vers ion o f the act to be performed, (p. 41) There are a g rowing number o f studies that illustrate h o w learners use language as a means o f p rov id ing scaffolding in L 2 classrooms (e.g., A n t o n & D i C a m i l l a , 1999; M a c a r o , 2001 ; Ohta , 2000; Swain , & L a p k i n , 2000; Tarone & Swa in , 1995; V i l l a m i l & de Guerrero, 1996). M a n y support the c la im that the students' L I can be an advantageous resource that promotes and enhances the L 2 language learning opportunities ( B r o o k s & Donato , 1994; Turnbu l l , 2001; Turnbu l l & Arnet t , 2002; 24 W i g g l e s w o r t h , 2002). F o r example, A n t o n ' s (1999) report on observations o f first-year univers i ty F rench and Italian classes provides evidence for the fact that teachers, " through dialogue, can lead learners to become highly i nvo lved in the negotiation o f meaning, (and) l inguis t ic f o r m " (p. 314) and through this negotiation scaffolding is suppl ied for communica t ive moves such as directives, assisting questions, repetition, and nonverbal devices such as pauses and gesturing. In Storch and Wigg l e swor th ' s (2003) study o f 24 universi ty E S L students, scaffolding between peers had a number o f functions. The pairs used their L I for task management and task clar if icat ion. F o r example, Pair 6 used their L I , Chinese, for the d iv i s i on o f labour, c lar i f icat ion o f vocabulary items and issues o f meaning, and the discuss ion o f grammatical structures. Las t ly , in L i u et al . 's (2004) study o f South K o r e a n high school students studying E F L , 13 h igh school teachers participated in one 50-minute audio-taped session each reveal ing that the teachers used code-swi tching as a scaffolding technique for several specif ic functions. F i r s t ly , the teachers used K o r e a n (the L I ) increasingly more w h e n the lesson invo lved the explanat ion o f vocabulary, grammar and background information. T h i s swi tch in language use seemed most often to be triggered when learners appeared to be struggling to comprehend the lesson content. Secondly, al l the teachers used the method o f frequently translating their E n g l i s h utterances into K o r e a n right after they said it in E n g l i s h . The researchers suggest that perhaps the teachers may have preferred this strategy as be ing more effective rather than e m p l o y i n g some modi f ied L 2 input. Th i rd ly , 25 the teacher swi tched to using K o r e a n when they felt the need to h ighl ight important informat ion in order to draw learners' attention to that F L input. A l t h o u g h there is increasingly more research be ing done in L 2 and F L settings, there is lit t le research that examines F L learning o f less c o m m o n l y taught languages ( D u f f & P o l i o , 1990; K u b o t a , 1998) - especial ly that o f Japanese as a foreign language ( J F L ) . One researcher w h o has conducted studies in J F L classrooms is Oh ta (2001). She analyzed the language learning processes o f universi ty level J F L students by s tudying the interactions dur ing peer task work . O n average, first year students had 2 3 . 6 0 % o f transcript l ines that contained E n g l i s h and second year students averaged 40 .85%. W h e n l o o k i n g at the t w o numbers, however, Ohta warns readers not to compare the first year percentage w i t h the second year percentage because each group experienced different language tasks that were implemented in a different manner. What is more useful is to look at the overal l functions for wh ich the students used E n g l i s h to scaffold their F L learning. W i t h both the first (59.62%) and second year (81.82%) learners, task management proved to be the function that students used the most E n g l i s h . Af ter that, language questions ( 1 s t year= 48.08; 2 n d yea r -69 .7%) and translation ( 1 s t year= 40.38; 2 n d year=60.61%) fo l lowed , in decreasing order o f E n g l i s h use. E v e n though this gives us a g l impse o f language use in J F L classrooms, there needs to be much more research to ful ly understand the complex nature o f teaching the Japanese language in foreign language settings. Future research needs to include examinat ion o f the roles o f Japanese and L I (and even L 2 , L 3 ) use in J F L classrooms in order to better comprehend and evaluate the classroom dynamics that are unique to J F L teaching and learning in a variety o f contexts. 26 2.5 G r o u p W o r k , C o l l a b o r a t i v e L e a r n i n g , a n d L 1 / L 2 Use A s argues earlier, peer mediat ion through col laborat ive dialogue dur ing L 2 tasks can mediate L 2 learning (An ton , & D i C a m i l l a , 1999; B r o o k s & Donato , 1994; K o b a y a s h i , 2004, 2003; Ohta , 1995, 2000, 2001; Swa in & L a p k i n , 1998, 2000; Swa in , B r o o k s , & T o c a l l i - B e l l e r , 2002; V i l l a m i l & de Guerrero, 1996). A s L o n g and Porter (1985) outline, there are f ive pedagogical arguments for using group w o r k in L 2 classrooms. F i rs t , they c l a i m that group w o r k increases the opportunities for language practice. N o t on ly is it important to create situation for input but it is crucial for learner to practice output for successful language learning (Swain , 1993, 1995, 2000). Learners need t ime al located to not on ly l is tening and reading in the T L but for producing language through wr i t i ng and, in particular, through oral means. Second, group w o r k improves the quali ty o f student talk. Learner-centred tasks, as opposed to teacher-fronted lessons, can promote face-to-face communica t ion w h i c h enables learners to take on different roles and posit ions that a l l o w practice o f a variety o f language functions such as m a k i n g suggestions, m a k i n g inferences, hypothes iz ing, general iz ing, and managing the conversation. N e x t , group w o r k helps ind iv idua l i ze instruction by a l locat ing tasks to suit i nd iv idua l learner 's needs. The fourth argument for group w o r k is that is promotes a posi t ive affective atmosphere. A small group atmosphere can cater to shy or insecure learners w h o are int imidated by large class discussions; the group w o r k can help rel ieve this tension and facilitate learner involvement and interaction. In addit ion, smal l peer groups help avoid the stress o f the teacher j udg ing one's responses in front o f classmates and can foster more risk taking. Las t ly , group work motivates learners because it permits 27 greater quantity and quali ty o f language practice in a more comfortable and posi t ive atmosphere. K o b a y a s h i ' s (2004) study o f Japanese undergraduate students enrol led i n a univers i ty- level E S L program demonstrated h o w one group (Nana, K i k u , and Shingo) w o r k e d together to support each other during their oral presentation assignments. F i r s t ly , the group members were able to assist each other in negotiating the task def ini t ion and the teacher 's expectations for the presentation. This i nvo lved attempts to negotiate the content (done most ly in the L I ) in order to meet the cri teria o f the task (writ ten in the L 2 ) . Secondly , the students col laborat ively w o r k e d through the development o f their PowerPo in t document through dialogue (in L I ) o f the Eng l i sh words and phrases they were t ry ing to choose for the writ ten text document. D u r i n g this part o f the task, negotiat ion took the form o f negotiating meaning, mak ing suggestions, and evaluat ing the appropriateness o f l ex ica l items w i t h respect to their audience. F i n a l l y , the group interaction invo lved rehearsing and performance-coaching for the presentation. A s other members practiced their scripts, K i k u acted as a peer-coach. The fr iendly atmosphere created wi th in the group even facilitated a humourous imitat ion o f their teacher's vo ice by K i k u causing N a n a and herself to break out in laughter. Overa l l , the group benefited f rom the col laborat ive efforts o f its members by interacting and negotiat ing the content i n the L 2 us ing their L I , and managing the task in order to produce a high qual i ty presentation (students received an ' A ' grade, one o f the highest marks). Furthermore, K i m ' s (2005) study o f col laborat ive interaction between K o r e a n E S L learners and their interlocutors during oral and wri t ten critiques o f newspaper editorials and their partner's opinions found that the E S L learners benefited from 28 planning for and part icipat ing in col laborat ive dialogue. The E S L participants reported that the col laborat ive sessions made them " w o r k harder to conceptualize and formulate their ideas in preparation for their interaction" (p. 199) and "were pushed to use the L 2 broadly and process it deeply in an actual and potential w a y " (p. 200). The ind iv idua l peers attempted to provide scaffolding to each other, by means o f the L I , dur ing l ex i ca l and rhetorical gaps through a variety o f communica t ion strategies: code-swi tching, meaning replacement, and w o r d coinage. A s a result, they "experienced the powerful role that col laborat ive dialogue can play in helping them to notice and w o r k toward correct ing their L 2 shortcomings and i m p r o v i n g their L 2 products" (p. 205). F r o m a sociocul tural perspective, col laborat ive interaction is important because "dia logue among learners can be as effective as instructional conversations between teachers and learners" since "learners are capable o f scaffolding each other through the use o f strategies that parallel those relied upon by experts" (Lantolf , 2002, p. 106). A s L a n t o l f and P a v l e n k o (1995) explain, "the construction o f a Z P D does not require the presence o f expertise. Individuals , none o f w h o m qualifies as an expert, can often come together in a col laborat ive posture and jo in t ly construct a Z P D in w h i c h each person contributes something to, and takes something away from, the interaction" (p. 116). In order to increase the chances for social interaction and interlanguage talk, and therefore act ivi ty in the Z P D , teachers should include and increase opportunities for col laborat ive efforts dur ing L 2 tasks. G r o u p and pair w o r k provide learners the opportunity to engage in meaningful interaction, and to l ike L 2 meanings to social contexts as they are g iven the opportunity to create wi th language in g iven contexts. U n l i k e native speaker - non-native speaker interaction i n w h i c h there is a clear expert, the roles o f novice and expert are f luid and changing in learner-29 learner interaction as the learners contribute their ind iv idua l differences i n matured and maturing ski l l s . Add i t i ona l l y , the learners' potential for accompl ishments beyond their ind iv idua l abil i t ies increases when their strengths are col laborat ively jo ined . (Ohta, 1995, p. 97) In D o n a t o ' s (1994) study on col lec t ive scaffolding, students were g iven an open-ended L 2 task and w o r k e d col laborat ively to co-construct and mediate their L 2 learning experiences. Three universi ty level F rench as a foreign language students w o r k i n g together i l lustrated h o w the learners were able to guide and support each other's learning by p r o v i d i n g co l lec t ive scaffolding. D u r i n g the task, all learners took on the role o f novice and expert result ing in an increase in the development o f the i nd iv idua l ' s L 2 knowledge w h i l e also contr ibuting to the l inguis t ic development o f their peers. In Ohta ' s (1995) study, assistance between learners, two "non-experts", was shown to result in col laborat ive learning in the Z P D . In her analysis o f B e c k y (a learner wi th higher L 2 prof ic iency) and M a r k (a learner o f weaker abi l i ty) , both learners were able to learn w i t h i n their Z P D and perform at a higher level than they w o u l d have been able to achieve i f they had each w o r k e d on their own . M a r k and B e c k y scaffolded each others' learning through a variety o f functions inc lud ing act ively testing hypothesis through language play; convers ing in Japanese about the here-and-now; exper iment ing w i t h l ex ica l choice ; us ing Japanese for conversational management inc lud ing the modula t ion o f the pace i f the interaction, repair, and role negotiation; managing the task; and, hav ing a learning experience that a l lows each learner to w o r k on their o w n tasks i n the L 2 w h i l e engaged in meaningful interaction (p. 116). Wha t was interesting i n this study was h o w much o f the scaffolding was done using the T L , although there were some instances o f L I use as w e l l . 30 A l t h o u g h these studies show the benefits o f col laborat ive learning dur ing group work , it should also be noted that in order for the col laborat ive effort to be effective, learners need to be able to k n o w when and h o w to provide developmenta l ly appropriate assistance in the Z P D dur ing col laborat ive tasks: "the provis ion o f developmental ly appropriate assistance is not only dependent upon attention to what the peer interlocutor is able to do, but also upon the sensitivity to the partner's readiness for help, w h i c h is communica ted through subtle interactional cues" (2001, p.53). These interactional cues are described as bids for help and are most evident when the their interlocutor shows signs o f not cont inuing (e.g., r is ing intonation, elongating the final syl lable o f the last w o r d uttered, and s lowed rate o f speech). W h e n students request or are responding to bids o f assistance, their partner communicate this through either, or a combina t ion of, the T L , E n g l i s h , or addit ional languages. A s the studies and the literature indicate, code-swi tch ing can be an effective strategy for p rov id ing scaffolding and even students, considered "non-experts", are able to use language to enhance L 2 learning. 2.7 S u m m a r y o f C h a p t e r The literature illustrates that the debate on T L and L I use in the L 2 / F L c lass room remains an issue o f concern as instructors struggle to balance their T L use pr inc ip le w i t h the reality o f their classrooms. Current ly , the debate is centered more on the L I and i f it should be used in the L 2 / F L l a n g u a g e classroom.. Those that support a M a x i m a l U s e Pos i t i on w o u l d argue that using the L I w o u l d deprives the students o f T L input, w h i l e those w h o favour the O p t i m a l U s e Pos i t i on c l a im that the L I can be used strategically to support and enhance T L input and therefore act as an effective T L learning tool . F r o m a sociocul tural perspective, the L I can be used through code-swi tch ing techniques that can 31 ul t imately take advantage o f a student's zone o f p rox ima l development so that interaction between interlocutors can lead to T L input. Th is interaction can take place between teachers and students, as w e l l as between students themselves. Th i s r ev iew o f the literature provides a backdrop for this study. The study w i l l investigate the role o f the T L and L I (as w e l l as L 2 and L 3 ) and h o w language is used in the F L c lassroom. It w i l l examine h o w much and the purposes for w h i c h T L and T L are used and h o w this affects the F L classroom. Furthermore, it w i l l a im to identify ways in w h i c h the instructors adapt and adjust their language use to accommodate their students' needs. 32 Chapter 3 METHODOLOGY 3.1 Introduction T h i s chapter w i l l expla in how I approached the study o f L I and T L use i n the J F L c lassroom. In order to achieve a deeper understanding o f the issues, a mul t ip le case study approach was selected so that I cou ld take ful l advantage o f s tudying the participants i n their natural environment . A s opposed to a control led , unnatural setting, the teachers and students in the J F L classes p rov ided a real-l ife, real-context to study the issues that were di rect ly related to the research questions. In order to present results and interpretations that were rel iable for portraying the teaching and learning experiences o f the participants, data was gathered through mul t ip le procedures. T h i s inc luded observations and audio-recordings o f c lass room lectures and student pair work . T o complement the data f rom the c lassroom, interviews were conducted to corroborate the c lass room data. These data co l lec t ion procedures helped wi th tr iangulation so that the f indings f rom the data analysis were presented and interpreted as accurately as possible . Da ta analysis f o l l o w e d an empi r i ca l grounded approach. Themes that emerged were coded and analyzed and the major f indings w i l l be reported and discussed i n Chapter 4 as they pertained to the research questions. 3.2 A Qualitative Approach: Multiple Case Studies The descriptive and explanatory nature o f the present study ca l l ed for a quali tat ive approach to invest igat ing the dynamic and mult ifaceted environment o f the J F L learning and teaching c lassroom. A qualitative research design was more conducive to this type of study where, as Stake (1995) describes, "research questions (are) t yp i ca l ly oriented to 33 cases or phenomena, seeking patterns o f unanticipated as w e l l as expected relat ionships" as opposed to quantitative research questions that "(seek) out relationships between a smal l number o f var iables" (p. 41) and "represent happenings w i t h scales and measurements (i.e., numbers)" (p. 40). Furthermore, because this study requires the researcher to investigate each case (the class) w i th in its real-l ife (sociocul tural ) context, a mul t ip le case study research strategy was employed ( M e r r i a m , 1998) so that an in-depth examinat ion o f each o f the t w o classes o f intermediate J F L cou ld be conducted. Case studies are preferred when the researcher has little control over the events and w h e n the study environment includes some real l i fe context requir ing the ma in methods o f data col lec t ion to consist o f asking (e.g., in terviewing) and watching (e.g., observing) (E r i ckson , 1981, cited in van L i e r , 1988). In particular, this study fo l l owed t w o central pr inciples : the emic and etic pr inciple . The emic pr inc ip le is that the research strategy used w i l l be that o f an insider 's perspective (van L i e r , 1988). B y col lec t ing data direct ly f rom the instructors and students, the researcher develops a clearer and more accurate understanding o f the experiences o f participants. The etic p r inc ip le invo lves the researcher as a focal participant in the selection o f the issue(s) and the interpretation o f the data col lected, thus taking on an outsider 's perspective. B y relating the emic to the etic issues, a greater understanding o f the case w i l l result. Th i s study fo l lows the hol i s t ic pr inc ip le , w h i c h proposes that the study be done by examin ing the phenomenon i n relat ion to the entire system to w h i c h it belongs. Thus, the researcher can come to an understanding o f not only the instructors and students, ind iv idua l ly , but h o w they influence each other and are influenced by other variables and, in do ing so, increasing the understanding o f the case in its greater context. Furthermore, the emic and hol is t ic not ion 34 are characterized by analysis that entail "deve lop ing categories and concepts that make sense and have functional relevance to the participants in the setting. These categories and concepts ( w i l l be)— developed induct ively , in context, and from the ground u p " (Johnson, p. 148) through thick description. The mul t ip le case study research method helped i l lumina te the dynamic , mult ifaceted nature o f the two Japanese as a foreign language ( J F L ) classes. The study y ie lded insights w i th in the J F L f ie ld as w e l l as for other language instructors by p rov id ing naturalistic generalizations (Stake, 1995) that helped to generalize to other cases by becoming part o f a new group or by inv i t ing the prospect to modi fy ex is t ing generalizations. The challenges experienced by J F L instructors and h o w they adapted and adjusted lessons to overcome such language use challenges, cou ld be used by other foreign and second language instructors to enhance their o w n teaching practices. In addi t ion, future instructors could benefit from this information to understand and be sensitive to such issues in universi ty language classrooms. 3.4 R e s e a r c h Ques t i ons A s a heritage language learner ( H L L ) o f Japanese and a former student o f J F L classes myself, it was my intention to explore the teaching and learning the Japanese language in a foreign language environment to better understand the processes i nvo lved and also to focus on the role o f language use in J F L classes in w h i c h the instructors and students both have diverse cultural and language backgrounds. A n A n g l o p h o n e univers i ty where the J F L instructors and students are non-native speakers o f E n g l i s h and where they do not necessarily share the same L I , provides an interesting environment for a case study invest igat ing the dynamics and complex i ty o f F L classes such as the one 35 mentioned. I wanted to examine h o w instructors facilitated learning in a J F L environment, in particular, w i th respect to language use in teacher-student interactions and student-student interactions. A t Western Canadian Un ive r s i t y ( W C U ) , where the study took place, it is not u n c o m m o n for both the J F L instructors and the students to have a background in more than t w o languages. The J F L classes at W C U are composed o f students w h o are mul t icul tura l and knowledgeable about mul t ip le languages and are, therefore, able to interact us ing their L I , L 2 and/or L 3 . F o r many students, E n g l i s h is their th i rd language and Japanese their fourth language. In fact, a unique feature o f the W C U J F L classes is that the majority o f the students who enrol have Chinese ethnic backgrounds and speak either M a n d a r i n or Cantonese, or both. The ove rwhe lming Chinese demographic presented an interesting J F L context for my research. W i t h these objectives, three research questions emerged. The first addresses the issue o f the ratio o f Japanese and E n g l i s h use by instructors and students, i nc lud ing the instructors ' perceived ratio as we l l . The second seeks to investigate the purposes for part icular language use by instructors and students. The third question examines h o w instructors use language to facilitate the learning o f their students. The research questions are: 1. (a) W h a t is the ratio o f Japanese use to E n g l i s h use by instructors in univers i ty Japanese as a foreign language ( J F L ) classrooms? (b) W h a t are the instructors ' o w n perceptions about the ratio o f Japanese use to E n g l i s h use? 36 (c) W h a t is the relative ratio o f Japanese, E n g l i s h and Chinese use by students in J F L classrooms? 2. (a) F o r what purposes are Japanese and E n g l i s h used by instructors? (b) F o r what purposes are Japanese, E n g l i s h and other languages used by students? 3. H o w do J F L instructors adapt and adjust their language use to accommodate the language learning experiences o f the students in their classes? 3.4 Participants and Context of Exploration 3.4.1 Participants T w o main groups o f participants were targeted for this study. The first group consisted o f instructors o f intermediate (200-level or 2 n d year) J F L classes at W C U . This group o f participants was further d iv ided into two groups: focal instructors and regular instructors. The focal instructors were both teaching an intermediate level J F L class at W C U . These two instructors were both native Japanese speakers and spoke E n g l i s h as their second language. M s . Inoue (a pseudonym) had been teaching at W C U for one year and M s . Y a b u n o (a pseudonym) had been teaching at W C U for t w o years. The focal instructors gave permiss ion to have their c lassroom lectures observed, audio-taped, and to participate in a semi-structured interview. In addit ion to the t w o focal instructors, other J F L instructors, currently teaching jun io r (beginners and intermediate) level J F L at W C U were asked to participate in an interview about their teaching experience. In total, six other instructors participated. These six only participated in the semi-structured interviews. O f these six, four were, at the t ime, teaching intermediate level J F L classes at W C U . The last t w o included a J F L instructor at another loca l higher educational 37 Table 3.1 Participant Profiles: Instructors2 Instructor Role First Language Second Language(s) Higher Education Training JFL courses taught at WCU Years teaching at WCU Inoue focal instructor Japanese E n g l i s h M A . Language Educa t ion 1 s t & 2 n d year 1 Y a b u n o focal instructor Japanese E n g l i s h M A . Japanese L ingu i s t i c s 1 s t & 2 n d year 2 M u r a k a m i regular instructor Japanese E n g l i s h M . A . L ingu i s t i c s 1 s t to 3 r d year 9 C h e n regular instructor Chinese E n g l i s h Japanese P h . D . L ingu i s t i c s 1 s t to 4 t h year 14 Y o u n g regular instructor Taga log Chinese E n g l i s h Japanese M . A . Japanese as a Second Language 1 s t & 2 n d year 1 K i t a m u r a regular instructor Japanese E n g l i s h M . A . Soc io logy 1 s t & 2 n d year 3 Sasaki regular instructor Japanese Eng l i sh B . A . L ingu i s t i c s none* none* Tanaka regular instructor Japanese E n g l i s h B u d d h i s m * * none** none** *has been teaching 1st & 2' JFL courses at another local higher education institution for five years **2-year college Japanese degree; lias been teaching JSL in Asia in private institutions for the about 10 years inst i tut ion; and another w h o was a J S L instructor wi th about ten years teaching experience. Table 3.1 gives a detailed profi le o f these participants (all names are pseudonyms). The second group o f participants were the intermediate-level J F L students enrol led i n each o f the two focal instructors ' intermediate level J F L course. Twen ty - two students were taught by M s . Inoue, and another 23 students were taught by M s . Y a b u n o . O f these 45 students, 40 were o f Chinese background, 2 were o f K o r e a n background, 1 2 Some aspects of the instructor's backgrounds not directly relevant to the L1-L2 issue have been altered to protect their identity. 38 was o f Japanese heritage background, and 3 were o f Ang lophone , n o n - A s i a n ethnic backgrounds. A l l 45 students consented to participating in the audio-taped c lassroom lectures. A l l but five students in M s . Inoue's course granted permiss ion to have their pair w o r k audio-recorded. In M s . Y a b u n o ' s class, only one student refused to participate i n pair w o r k audio-recordings. Furthermore, o f these 45 students, a total o f 21 students participated i n a semi-structured interview about their Japanese language learning experience. W i t h i n this group, 8 were from M s . Inoue's class and 13 were f rom M s . Y a b u n o ' s class. In addit ion, a T A . was assigned to each focal instructor and both T. A . s gave permiss ion to be observed and audio-recorded during c lassroom lectures and pair w o r k activities. Table 3.2 gives a detailed profi le o f the participants in terviewed (al l names are pseudonyms). 3.4.2 S e t t i n g T h i s study took place at a major Ang lophone Nor th A m e r i c a n univers i ty ca l led W C U . A s indicated earlier. This universi ty has an ethnical ly diverse campus 3 and is situated i n a c i ty among a m i x o f cultures and languages. W C U is currently exper iencing an in f lux o f students from Pac i f i c R i m countries, especial ly f rom A s i a . 4 Since the focus o f m y study was on the language use in J F L classes, the learning environment o f this universi ty proved to be an ideal setting as it w o u l d provide an ample number o f students w h o are non-native speakers o f E n g l i s h and speakers o f mul t ip le languages. Furthermore, 3 WCU's 2004 fact guide states that 20.7% off all students enrolled in the 2003-2004 school year were non-Canadians (i.e., have citizenship of another nationality covering the following continents: Central & South America, Europe, Africa, Asia, and Australia) with 34.8% of these non-Canadians holding citizenship from mainland China, Taiwan or Hong Kong. 11.6% of WCU's students are of International Student status and 25.8% of these are from China, Taiwan or Hong Kong. 4 This information was taken from WCU's Faculty of Arts webpage. 39 T a b l e 3.2 P a r t i c i p a n t P ro f i l e s : F o c a l S tudents Name U L2,L3 Age group Migration to this country Major and/or minor First JFL experience Purpose for taking Japanese Brad Cantonese Mandarin English late teens to 20s 4 years old Chinese language • 100 level • personal interest Gabriella Cantonese English late teens to 20s Gr. l l Finance & International Business • took classes outside of school in Hong Kong as young teen • 100 level' • language requirement for LB. student exchange** • language and student exchange requirement and for personal interest Cassie Mandarin English late teens to 20s Gr.9 Biology; Japanese minor* • Gr. 10 • 100 level • personal interest • travelling Diana Cantonese Mandarin English late teens to 20s Gr.9 Japanese* • 100 level • personal interest Justin English none late teens to 20s born here M.A. Sc. Biochemistry • 100 level • didn't like French; culture is really interesting** • peer influence; Arts credits • travelling Phil Mandarin English late teens to 20s 7 years ago Engineering » 100 level • Living in R (dormitory with Japanese exchange students) " personal interest Sean Mandarin English late teens to 20s 4 years ago Animal Biology • 100 level • for Arts credits • personal interest Johnny Mandarin English late teens to 20s 10 years ago Marketing • Gr. 9-12 • 100 level • personal interest • need for electives Isabella Korean English late teens to 20s 6'/2 years ago English or Linguistics* • 100 level • career • personal interest • language requirement Anna Mandarin English late teens to 20s 6 years ago Biology • Gr. 9 • peer influence in Taiwan • culturally similar to Taiwan Table 3.2 Participant Profiles: Focal Students (Continued) Name LI L2,L3 Age group Migration to this country Major and/or minor First JFL experience Purpose for taking Japanese Kelly Cantonese English late teens to 20s 7 years ago Biochemistry; Japanese minor* • tutoring outside of school during high school • 100 level • personal interest Michelle Mandarin English late teens to 20s 7 years ago Nursing • Gr. 10-11 • last year of high school was spend learning outside of school • grandfather's influence • wants to formally learn language Todd Mandarin English late teens to 20s 11 years old Political Science & Economics; German minor • Japanese classes outside school for 1 month, then quit • 100 level • peer influence • continue language learning • usefulness of language • worked in Japan for 1-15 years Yuan Mandarin English none late teens to 20s 2 years ago International Business & Finance • 100 level • personal interest • peer influence Miho Japanese English none late teens to 20s born here International Relations; Japanese minor* • attended Japanese language Saturday school until around Gr. 7 • started at 200 level • communicate with parents • future career • may relocate to Japan Kwan Korean English late teens to 20s 1 year exchange student from Korea Japanese & Japanese Literature • at Korean university and private institute • necessary for diplomat test Alexis Mandarin English late teens to 20s unknown Psychology • 100 level • best friend is Japanese * personal interest Darren Cantonese English none late teens to 20s 5 years old Statistics; Japanese minor* • attended classes at a community center before Gr. 9 • Gr. 9-12 • personal interest Table 3.2 Participant Profiles: Focal Students (Continued) Student LI If l l§ll Age group Migration to this country Major and/or minor First JFL experience Purpose for taking Japanese Veronica Mandarin English late teens to 20s Gr. 5 Japanese • Gr. 9 • personal interest • continue language learning * grandparents know Japanese Wendi Cantonese English late teens to 20s Gr. 9 General Arts (Economics*; Japanese minor*) • Gr. 10 • language requirement* • continue language learning Krista •undeclared o English r unsure as ct none late teens to 20s i t born here Asian Studies or Japanese* • Gr.9 • personal interest** • lived in Japan for 1 year "purposes for taking Japanese specifically for pre-university period because there was no off icial department wide language use po l i cy w i t h respect to its J F L programs, W C U J F L classes w o u l d facilitate a learning environment i n w h i c h instructors and students could voluntar i ly communica te in the language(s) w h i c h they felt most comfortable. H o w e v e r , it should be noted that both focal instructors mentioned that all intermediate level conversat ion course instructors met before the start o f the academic year and decided to use as much Japanese language as possible for the intermediate-level J F L conversat ion classes. In considerat ion o f the selection o f the J F L classes for this study, it was v i ta l that the classes sought w o u l d be p rov id ing opt imal opportunities, for both the instructors and students, for a variety o f communica t ion , preferably oral language use, w i t h respect to the language input, output and language choice. The classes for the cases were selected according to these pre-determined criteria: (a) opportunities for teacher talk; (b) opportunities for teacher - student interaction; (c) opportunities for student - student interactions; (d) a focus on oral output in L I , L 2 or L 3 . U s i n g these criteria, it was decided that an intermediate-level course wi th an emphasis on conversat ion w o u l d be the preferred environment for the data col lect ion. A l t h o u g h four ind iv idua l sections o f this course were planned to be offered in T e r m 1 o f the 2002-2003 academic year, t w o sections were targeted pr imar i ly due to practicali ty issues: one section met four t imes a week i n the morning, and, the other section met four times a week in the afternoon. Furthermore, the instructors o f these two intermediate J F L courses w i l l i n g l y volunteered to participate in this study. 43 3.5 Data Collection Procedures A l l the data were gathered during an intensive three-month per iod (from October to December , 2002) during the first term o f the 2002-2003 academic year at W C U . Before the academic term, I met w i th both focal instructors. B o t h instructors were g iven a b r i e f wri t ten descript ion o f the research study and the details discussed. A n y changes affecting the data co l lec t ion were w o r k e d out beforehand and plenty o f t ime was g i v e n for negotiat ing m y involvement in their classrooms. F o r these two sections o f intermediate Japanese language class, I attended every class (whenever possible) for a t w o month per iod during September to November . E a c h class met four t imes a week for thirteen weeks per semester. E a c h session was 50 minutes in length and, un l ike the first year beginner level J F L courses in w h i c h the sessions were clearly d iv ided into week ly lecture and laboratory sessions, al l intermediate level courses held 4 lecture classes that incorporated lecture and oral practice as one. The intermediate level classes, dur ing the semester, covered Chapters 1 to 5 in their textbook by M i u r a and M c G l o i n ' s (1994) An Integrated Approach to Intermediate Japanese. A l l sections o f this course had an identical syl labus, taught the same lesson content and gave the same tests and handouts across a l l sections. A l s o , about once a week a Teach ing Assistant (T. A . ) , a Japanese native speaker, came and taught the kanji Chinese character lesson. F o r the first t w o months, 1 attended the two sections ( twelve classes per instructor); however , no data were off ic ia l ly col lected. A s Stake (1995) states, it is important to take the opportunity to become acquainted w i t h the people, spaces, schedules and problems o f the cases in study. Therefore, as arranged by the focal instructors, October was used solely for the purpose o f bu i ld ing a rapport w i th the 44 instructors and, most importantly, w i t h the students in preparation for the data co l lec t ion in the f o l l o w i n g months. A t this point, I was s imply int roduced to the students as a Japanese language volunteer and took on the role as in informal participant observer. D u r i n g this two-month per iod, I act ively participated in assisting the students w i t h their c lass room activit ies. Towards the end o f October, the focal instructors and I met once more and it was decided that they felt comfortable wi th al l aspects o f m y data co l lec t ion and that I w o u l d o f f i c ia l ly begin m y data col lect ion. C l a s s r o o m observations were conducted, fieldnotes taken, and c lassroom audio-recordings were gathered for a one month period from the end o f October to the end o f N o v e m b e r (fourteen classes per instructor). D u r i n g this t ime, I was no longer part icipat ing in the class activit ies and my role was redefined as a passive observer-researcher. Pa i r and group w o r k audio-recordings and student interviews were col lected dur ing three weeks in November . Instructor interviews, inc lud ing both the focal instructors and other instructors, were conducted during N o v e m b e r and December . These mul t ip le methods o f data col lec t ion were u t i l ized as a fo rm o f t r iangulat ion i n order to increase confidence in m y interpretation o f the cases by p r o v i d i n g considerable amount o f "uncontestable descr ipt ion" (Stake, 1995). 3.5.1 O b s e r v a t i o n s a n d F ie ldno tes In order to gain a better understanding o f the dynamics o f the J F L classes, observations o f the lectures were conducted. A s Y i n (1994) describes, direct observation is a source o f evidence especial ly when the object o f the study is not purely his tor ical and, therefore, "relevant behaviours or environmental condit ions w i l l be avai lable for observation ... and is often useful in p rov id ing addit ional information about the topic 45 being studied" (pp. 86-87). Information col lected through classroom observations can help corroborate, or even contradict, the information provided by teachers and students through their interviews. Because the classrooms were smal l in size, I was able to sit and observe the teacher and students in close p rox imi ty where I cou ld see and hear the majori ty o f the c lassroom interactions. D u r i n g these observations, I quietly watched and listened as the teacher and students interacted wi th each other. Moreove r , I took wri t ten record o f this descriptive informat ion so that it w o u l d assist in the process o f better understanding and interpreting the cases. Since both instructors preferred audio-taping the class lectures as opposed to video-taping, the fieldnotes were part icularly helpful for details related to descr ibing events in the c lassroom that the audio-recording d id not or cou ld not provide. These inc luded items such as any w r i t i n g done on the board or the overhead projector, the content o f transparencies used dur ing lessons, any visual aids used to enhance the lesson (e.g., flash cards, drawings and gestures). In addit ion, the fieldnotes were helpful i n m a k i n g notes o f particular participants ' utterances so that these quotes could be examined further after the classes. The fieldnotes were vital for capturing the complex i ty o f the context in w h i c h this teaching and learning occurred; the observations were one step in p rov id ing mul t ip le realities for each ind iv idua l case. Since a l l participants permitted me to observe them, there was not any information that had to be excluded from being reported as part o f m y study. 3.5.2 C l a s s r o o m L e c t u r e s Aud io - r eco rd ing the c lassroom lectures was crucial since the focal point o f this study was to evaluate h o w much language was being used dur ing the lessons. The 46 recordings were necessary to not only understand what language was be ing used but also to examine the role o f language choice in dai ly c lassroom interactions. In addit ion, the c lassroom recordings were necessary for calcula t ing and comment ing on the ratio o f the languages used by instructors and students. E v e r y class lecture that was attended during N o v e m b e r was audio-taped. Because the phys ica l size o f the classrooms and the number o f students were smal l , one professional-type cassette recorder was used to audio-record the lessons. The cassette recorder was placed towards the front o f the classroom, in between the instructor and the students, so that the instructors ' and students' voices could be caught by the recorder. E v e r y class was taped from beginning o f class to the end o f class regardless o f the activity. A g a i n , both instructors, their T . A . s , and their students granted me permiss ion to audio-record their interactions dur ing the class and so I was able to access al l the recorded data. Af ter each class, I reviewed each audio-recording. A t the same t ime, I used this t ime to check over my fieldnotes from the observations and made any addi t ional notes and necessary changes alongside my fieldnotes. 3.5.3 S t u d e n t P a i r W o r k Because students were not assigned specific seats in the c lassroom and since both sections o f the J F L classes d id not have the same classroom for every class dur ing the week, the students did not always sit wi th the same partner. Furthermore, since one student in M s . Y a b u n o ' s class and five students in M s . Inoue's class said that they d id not want to participate in the pair w o r k recordings, it was not always possible to audio-record the same pairs. W h e n possible, I tried to audio-record the same pairs. 47 S i x ind iv idua l cassette recorders were used for student pair w o r k audio-recordings. Before the co l lec t ion o f any data began, students were g iven a short explanation o f h o w to set-up and use the cassette recorders. A t the beg inn ing o f every class, s ix pairs were g iven a cassette recorder and asked to audio-record any act ivi ty that i nvo lved pair w o r k . The students were instructed to place the cassette recorder on top o f their desk so that it was at an equal distance from the both o f them and to keep the tape running from the beg inn ing o f the act ivi ty until the very end, regardless o f whether the students had f inished the task early or were off-task. 3.5.4 I n s t r u c t o r I n t e r v i e w s The interviews were a crucial part o f my data col lec t ion methods since each instructor was expected to share his or her o w n dist inct ive thoughts and experiences; each interviewee provided an invaluable insider 's v i e w that neither the students nor I cou ld gain access. " K e y informants ... not only provide the case study investigator w i th insights into a matter but also can suggest sources o f corroboratory evidence — and initiate access to such sources" ( Y i n , 1994, p. 84). The interviews conducted for this study were semi-structured around open-ended questions (see A p p e n d i x D for a list o f sample interview questions for instructors). E v e r y jun io r - l eve l (beginner and intermediate) J F L instructor at W C U was requested an interview. Bes ides the interviews wi th the t w o focal instructors, five other W C U J F L instructors volunteered to participate in a 45-minute audio-recorded, semi-structured in terv iew about their J F L teaching experiences. In addit ion, t w o other instructors participated in the interview. One was, at the t ime, a jun ior - l eve l J F L instructor at another loca l higher educational institution. The other was a J S L instructor w h o has 48 experience teaching international adult students in private institutions throughout A s i a . A l l in terviews were conducted in either the instructor 's office or in a private room in the l ibrary. A l s o , since these interviews were audio-recorded, on ly mino r notes were taken so that I cou ld attend to the direct ion o f the in terview by formulat ing any related questions and concentrating on any probing that was necessary. 3 . 5 . 5 S t u d e n t In t e rv i ews The students acted as informants, too, and could provide very useful data to add to the evidence col lected from the direct observation and the instructor interviews. In order to get a more descriptive and accurate portrayal o f J F L classes, students f rom the t w o classes were asked to participate in a 30-minute semi-structured in terview o f an open-ended nature (see A p p e n d i x E for a list o f sample interview questions for students). A total o f twenty-one students participated in a semi-structured in terview about their Japanese language learning experience. W i t h i n this group, eight were from M s . Inoue's class and thirteen were from M s . Y a b u n o ' s class. Excep t for the difference in the in terv iew questions, al l student interviews were conducted in the same manner as the instructor interviews. A l l students were interviewed one-on-one, except for one pair o f students w h o preferred to have the interview conducted as a pair, in a private room in the l ibrary or an empty classroom. 3 . 5 . 6 C o u r s e M a t e r i a l s : W r i t t e n D o c u m e n t s Wr i t t en documents col lected during this per iod included the course textbook, handouts, quizzes and tests. These documents were gathered pr imar i ly to examine the amount o f Japanese and E n g l i s h the students were able to access. O f part icular interest were the handouts, quizzes and tests since the intermediate J F L instructors, either on their 49 o w n or col laborat ively, created these by themselves for their students. These documents could be analyzed for some o f the key language use issues and challenges faced by teachers and students in the J F L courses. 3.6 Transcription Procedures and Conventions M u c h o f m y data was audio-recorded, i nc lud ing the c lass room lectures, student pair work , and instructor and teacher interviews. A p p e n d i x F provides a detailed account o f the transcription conventions used in this study. 3 .7 Data Analysis Qual i ta t ive research o f this nature requires an empir ica l approach. "The phenomenon studied cannot be deduced but require empir ica l observat ion" and therefore there is the "need to remain open to elements that cannot be codif ied at the t ime o f the study" since the results w i l l be grounded in the data (Baszanger & Dod ie r , 1997, p. 10). The process o f exp lor ing the phenomenon and descr ib ing it makes it necessary to include as many variables as possible so that the interactions can be thoroughly represented and interpreted because "prev ious ly u n k n o w n relationships and variables can be expected to emerge from case studies" (Stake, 1981, p. 4 7 ) . Stake (1981) suggests a method o f cod ing to classify who le episodes, interviews or documents so that the data are more easily accessible dur ing analysis . T h e data were rev iewed and salient themes that occurred more broadly were identif ied for the c lassroom lectures, pa i rwork interactions, and the interviews. This was fo l lowed by again examin ing each o f these methods for key themes, in w h i c h cod ing categories were developed as they emerged through the data. Eve ry c lassroom dialogue excerpt, 50 pa i rwork interaction excerpt and interview selection was separated into one o f the categories, and when necessary, were assigned to two or more relevant categories. The data and themes were re-examined again, and organized into salient themes that were then arranged in such a way to develop an argument for this s tudy's f indings. E x a m p l e quotes from interviews, excerpts from c lassroom and pa i rwork dialogue, and support from the course documents w i l l be inc luded throughout the report to i l lumina te the discuss ion o f the study's findings. Through these means o f analyses, the report w i l l shed l ight on the complex , dynamic nature o f language use in J F L classrooms and w i l l help g ive a vo ice to the teachers and learners invo lved in this L 2 learning phenomenon. 3 . 8 C h a p t e r S u m m a r y The methods used to collect and analyze data were chosen to address the three sets o f research questions. The observation, recordings and interviews were instrumental in i l l umina t ing the context under study and representative examples from the data could be analyzed and y i e l d the findings presented in the next chapter on T L and L I use in the J F L c lassroom. A p p r o a c h i n g this study from a mul t ip le case study research method y ie lded for r ich , descriptive data representative o f the complex yet unique learning context o f J F L i n v o l v i n g J F L students wi th diverse language backgrounds. 51 Chapter 4 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION 4.1 Introduction The chapter w i l l present and discuss o f the research f indings o f the study. The findings w i l l f o l l o w the or ig ina l order o f the research questions. Sections 4.1-4.3 w i l l cover Research Quest ions # l a - l c on the ratio o f Japanese and E n g l i s h use by instructors, as w e l l as their perce ived ratio o f use. These sections w i l l also present the results on the ratio o f language use by the J F L students. Nex t , the f indings for Research Questions #2a and 2b w i l l be reported. Ques t ion #2a and 2b are concerned wi th the purposes for w h i c h instructors and students use Japanese, E n g l i s h and other languages. T h e last section covers Research Quest ion #3. Here I w i l l offer the f indings on h o w J F L instructors have adapted and adjusted their language teaching i n order to enhance the language learning experiences o f their students. T h i s part w i l l also address the unique situation o f hav ing a Japanese program wi th many Chinese N L students, as w e l l as the learning experiences o f a heritage language learner. The f indings throughout this chapter w i l l be discussed at the end o f each section (except for Sect ion 4.1-4.3 w h i c h w i l l be discussed together at the end o f Sect ion 4.3) to illustrate how the f indings connect w i th past research and current literature on L 2 learning. Sub-sections i n Sect ion 4.6 w i l l have a discuss ion o f each strategy at the end o f its o w n section. 4.2 Ratio of Japanese and English Use by Instructors U s i n g the fieldnotes taken f rom the c lassroom observations, four c lass room lectures (i.e., four i nd iv idua l lessons) f rom each focal instructor were selected to be transcribed verbat im us ing a w o r d processor. T h e cr i ter ion used to select the four 52 lectures was that the lecture had to cover a variety o f activit ies so that they represented a wide range o f language use samples. The lectures chosen to be transcribed for M s . Inoue 's class were the dates o f N o v e m b e r 4, 12, 19, and 26, 2002. The lectures chosen for M s . Y a b u n o were, coincidental ly , for the exact same dates. Af te r the lectures were transcribed, al l utterances were categorized by language: Japanese (J), E n g l i s h (E) or a mix o f Japanese and E n g l i s h ( M ) . A mixed utterance inc luded more than one w o r d from both languages. W h e n the utterance was composed T a b l e 4.1 C a t e g o r i e s o f Ut t e rances T y p e o f U t t e r a n c e E x a m p l e s Japanese or L 2 , L 3 • Hai, koutai shite renshvv shite kudasai. {Okay, please change (partners) and practice.} • Iroiro na courses wo totte imasu. {(She) is taking var ious courses} E n g l i s h • C o u l d be shorter that one page? • Wha t does henri mean? {What does convenient mean?} M i x e d • Dakara, kono ga wa in noun modif ica t ion sometimes y o u can change this ga and use no instead. { A n d so, this ( (nominat ive case marker ga)) in noun modif ica t ion sometimes y o u can change this ga (nominat ive case marker) and use no (genitive case marker) • De, another example y o u have in the textbook is shukudai wo wasureta koto ni ki ga tsnku. {to notice that (you) forgot (your) homework} • Par t ic le desu. {It's a particle} o f one Japanese w o r d and one E n g l i s h w o r d , it was categorized as a m i x e d utterance, as w e l l . Otherwise, i f an utterance consisted o f more than two words in Japanese and no more than one w o r d in E n g l i s h , the utterance was counted as a Japanese utterance. S imi l a r l y , an utterance consis t ing o f more than t w o words in E n g l i s h and no more than one w o r d in Japanese considered an E n g l i s h utterance. Th i s method o f utterance categorization was adopted after referring to D u f f and P o l i o ' s (1990) cod ing in w h i c h single w o r d citations o f another language were, at first, g iven their o w n separate category 53 but were, in the end, col lapsed together wi th the category wi thout 1-word citations. Af te r a l l the utterances were categorized, the sum for each language utterance was calculated for the ind iv idua l dates, the ind iv idua l focal instructors, and for both instructors and dates combined . T o provide an idea o f the length o f each type o f utterance (i.e., Japanese, E n g l i s h or mixed) a w o r d count was conducted. Illustrating the length o f each utterance (i.e., the number o f words in an utterance) is important because, whereas it is clear where a w o r d begins and ends in E n g l i s h , in Japanese the unit o f the w o r d is not so clear due to its agglutinative nature. The w o r d count was done by sampl ing five pages o f c lass room lecture transcripts f rom each o f the four lesson dates for each focal instructor. The f ive page samples were chosen by selecting the five pages w h i c h had the most variat ion in language usage and h igh numbers in utterances per language category type. T o dis t inguish a standard for establishing the w o r d unit in Japanese, K a i s e r et al . 's (2001) book, Japanese: A Comprehensive Grammar, was consulted. (See A p p e n d i x H . ) Af ter the w o r d count was achieved, the average utterance length was quantified for each focal instructor. The averages were then pooled to give an average for both focal instructors combined . The w o r d count data was compi led to help expla in any differences that might emerge in the length o f the utterance for ind iv idua l utterance types. W h a t fo l l ows is the results and discussion for Research Quest ion # la : W h a t is the ratio o f Japanese use to E n g l i s h use by instructors in Japanese as a foreign language ( J F L ) classrooms? The data show that the ratio o f Japanese, E n g l i s h and m i x e d (i.e., Japanese and E n g l i s h intra-utterance code-switching) utterances used by M s . Inoue (see Table 4.2) for the four sessions combined are: Japanese (80.6%), E n g l i s h (14.7%), m i x e d 54 (4.8%). S imi l a r l y , M s . Y a b u n o ' s data (see Table 4.2) for the same dates show the averages o f Japanese (79.4%), E n g l i s h (15.9%) and mixed (4.6%). Interestingly, Table 4.2 Language Use Summary for Ms. Inoue ALL FOUR SESSIONS Japanese English Mixed Tota l % o f utterances 80 .6% 14.7% 4 . 8 % Average number o f words per utterance 6.3 6.6 11.4 NOVEMBER 4th Lesson content: Test outl ine; Interview session info & sign-up; H o m e w o r k check; C h . 4 Kaiwa5 #1 lesson, Grammar point: AwaB ni nite iru; betsu ni + negative To ta l % o f utterances 84 .0% 11.9% 4 . 2 % Average number o f words per utterance 7.0 7.8 14.3 NOVEMBER 12th L e s s o n content: W a r m up: teacher lead Q & A session; Rev i sed course schedule; Pa i rwork : F i n d hanashi kotoba & change to kaki kotoba us ing C h . 5 Kaiwa #3 ; C h . 5 Kaiwa #3 lesson; Return Test C h . 3 & 4 & review answers To ta l % o f utterances 8 1 . 1 % 14.0% 4 . 9 % Average number o f words per utterance 5.9 5.8 11.9 NOVEMBER 19th L e s s o n content: Col lec t s intei reflection discussion; P a i r w o r "view tapes; col lect homework; kanji lesson; Interview c: Interview Ref lec t ion C o m p o s i t i o n Tota l % o f utterances 7 6 . 3 % 20 .4% 3 .3% Average number o f words per utterance 7.1 7.2 9.8 NOVEMBER 26th L e s s o n content: Direc t ions to bu i ld ing for interview activi ty; F i n a l E x a m outl ine; kanji quiz ; vocab qu iz ; Ch .5 Kaiwa #2 lesson, Grammar practice: 'x' ni wa ikanai; Adobaisu wo ataeru6 handout discussion Tota l % o f utterances 78 .4% 15.2% 6 .3% Average number o f words per utterance 5.9 6.5 9.7 5 Kaiwa sections have dialogues. There are three or four dialogues in each chapter. 6 Adobaisu wo ataeru = Giving advice 55 both instructors have average percentages that are very s imi lar in a l l three language use categories. The combined average (see Tab le 4.3) for both instructors w i th regard to the ratio o f language use is: Japanese (80.0%), E n g l i s h (15.3%), and m i x e d (4.7%). W i t h respect to w o r d count for M s . Inoue's lectures (see Table 4.2), the average Japanese utterance consisted o f 6.3 words , the average E n g l i s h utterance consisted o f 6.6 words , and the average mixed utterance was 11.6 words. A s illustrated in the examples in Table 4 .1 , m i x e d utterances, compared to utterances in on ly one language, were usual ly used for explanations i n v o l v i n g complex grammar structures or u n k n o w n vocabulary and for negotiating the text and therefore, on average, resulted in longer utterances. M s . Y a b u n o ' s combined average o f these sessions is: Japanese (80%), E n g l i s h (16%), mixed (5%), and the average w o r d count for a Japanese utterance is 4.3 words , an E n g l i s h utterance is 5.9 words, and a mixed utterance is 11.4 words . (See Table 4.3.). The combined w o r d count average (see Table 4.3) for each type o f utterance was 4.2 words for Japanese, 6.0 words for Eng l i sh , and 11.3 words for mixed . In M s . Inoue 's language use summary, sessions that have more grammar and test content related lessons (i.e., N o v e m b e r 12, 2002 class) had much more E n g l i s h language use (25 .6% E n g l i s h use) compared to other dates in w h i c h this did not occur (i.e., N o v e m b e r 19, 2002 wi th 3 .8% E n g l i s h use). The average percentage o f each language type used over the four sessions illustrates that M s . Inoue and M s . Y a b u n o used almost the exact same ratio o f Japanese, E n g l i s h , and, m i x e d utterances in both their classes. Th is is interesting in that, despite the fact that the Japanese language program at W C U has no off ic ia l departmental language po l icy , both instructors used a high ratio o f Japanese (comparable to that reported by 56 T a b l e 4.3 L a n g u a g e Use S u m m a r y fo r M s . Y a b u n o Japanese E n g l i s h M i x e d A L L F O U R S E S S I O N S Tota l % o f utterances 79 .4% 15.9% 4 . 6 % Average number o f words per utterance 4.3 5.9 11.4 N O V E M B E R 4 t h L e s s o n content: Kanji Q u i z ; test announcement; Pa i rwork : role-play weekend us ing aizuchi7); Kaiwa #1 l istening, oral vs writ ten speech le point: bestu ni 'x' arimasen, Cul ture Notes discussion on responding , talk about sson, grammar to compl iments Tota l % o f utterances 86 .3% 9 .3% 4 .4% Average number o f words per utterance 4.3 3.7 12.0 N O V E M B E R 1 2 t h Lesson content: return & go over kanji quiz wi th T . A . ; A d m i n re: term schedule; C h . 5 Kaiwa #1 lesson, grammar point: 'x' ni ki ga tsuku; Return Test C h . 3 & 4 & rev iew answers To ta l % o f utterances 68 .4% 25 .6% 5.9% Average number o f words per utterance 4.3 6.6 11.2 N O V E M B E R 1 9 t h L e s s o n content: Discuss ion : in terview reflections, pa i rwork: in terview reflection compos i t ion , compos i t ion test outline Tota l % o f utterances 95 .4% 3 .9% 0 .7% Average number o f words per utterance 4.4 3.8 13.0 N O V E M B E R 2 6 t h L e s s o n content: Grammar les Adobaisu wo ataeru handout < questions; O r a l exam schedu son: 'x'niwaikanc discussion, Pai rwork ing details; Pa i rwor ii. Lecture: C h . 5 Kaiwa #2 lesson; : Ora l : practice A d v i c e handout c Ora l exam practice session To ta l % o f utterances 7 5 . 5 % 18.8% 5.7% Average number o f words per utterance 4.0 6.4 10.9 P o l i o and D u f f (1994) for Japanese classes); the J F L instructors are free to use as much or as less T L as they, ind iv idua l ly , choose to use and yet both instructors ' use o f language was very s imilar . E v e n though the intermediate J F L instructors had met before the 7 Back-channeling cue (e.g., Oh really? Is that right? Oh! Wow! Uhuh). 57 academic year began and agreed to use as much Japanese language as possible, this agreement was quite in formal and each instructor was left to interpret and act upon this decis ion as they wanted. [For] 200 leve l , we had a meeting at the beginning and ah we decided that we should use Japanese as much as possible. A l l o f us. ... It 's ah second year students. T h e y k n o w the basic grammar and ah they don ' t have much exposure to Japanese other than the c lassroom. That ' s the basic reason. (Yabuno , Interview, November , 2002) . 8 T h i s pr inc ip le is also echoed by M s . Inoue, w h o commented that, for the 200 levels , "I ta lked wi th other teachers who are also teaching the same course and we decided to speak as much as Japanese i n class, so i n that sense we are t ry ing to speak Japanese intent ional ly i n class." (Interview, November , 2002). In addi t ion, both instructors used E n g l i s h and code-swi tch ing i n their teaching o f Japanese language. E v e n f rom before the term began, it was clear that the instructors were aware that teaching intermediate level Japanese w o u l d i nvo lve the use o f E n g l i s h . O f course we knew that some students w i l l be real ly uncomfortable just, y o u k n o w , be ing exposed to Japanese because most o f the students f inished their 100 leve l i n here, and for the 100 leve l courses, teachers, we k n o w that teachers, any teachers, are us ing more E n g l i s h than Japanese... . So , so we talked about this but we hoped that even the students who are not confident i n communica t ion or l is tening . . . abi l i ty , they cou ld , we knew that they w o u l d feel uncomfortable at the beg inn ing but they w o u l d be, they w o u l d get used to a l l this environment.. . . So , u m , I anyway I and many other teacher, too, try to make them feel comfortable first o f a l l , and then we hope that they c o u l d get used to l is tening to on ly Japanese and then also to f ind out solutions, what they c o u l d do i f they don ' t understand, or they c o u l d guess what we are saying, and I also to ld them some important things I w o u l d say i n E n g l i s h not i n Japanese so that they can feel a litt le bit more comfortable probably. ( M s . Inoue, Interview, November , 2002) F r o m comments such as this, it was apparent that language choice was inf luenced by many variables such as student confidence, c lass room atmosphere, and teaching methods All instructor and student interviews were conducted in English. 58 at beginner levels. W h e n asked about their thoughts on Japanese-only p o l i c y in a foreign language setting, M s . Inoue commented about the challenges o f teaching in Japanese only : I don ' t real ly l ike Japanese-only po l i cy because, as I said, [for] some important announcement I don ' t think that we should speak in Japanese, or, some grammar probably, because they, students have to comprehend. A n d for the comprehension they need language [that] they k n o w . So, st i l l for the 200 level , they are still in the stage o f l ike a really i m p r o v i n g f rom first level to [a] more advanced level . So, some students are not real ly strong in terms o f speaking and l is tening especial ly [because] they are only in Canada; they don ' t really have friends to practice their Japanese. (Interview, November , 2002) F r o m the students' learning perspective, M s . Y a b u n o explains: I think in m y class it doesn't have to be Japanese only. A n d if, first o f a l l i f it takes a long, long t ime for students to communicate in Japanese to each other and i f there's some k ind o f misunderstanding, w e l l it is g o o d i f they can overcome that and they can use some strategies and then communicate , that's great, but i f that's ((i.e., communica t ing in Japanese)) the purpose o f the class then I think it 's great to use Japanese but for t ry ing to y o u k n o w to teach them certain function and stuff. So , to make it more effective I think i t ' s g o o d to use E n g l i s h sometimes when i t ' s necessary.... Be tween the students. (Interview, November , 2002) F r o m these comments, it seems that M s . Inoue and M s . Y a b u n o favoured the Op t ima l U s e posi t ion, w h i c h states that their preferred teaching method incorporates as much T L as possible w h i l e also acknowledg ing the benefits o f the L I in learning the F L . The relat ively h igh amount o f T L may have been influenced by several factors. First , because both instructors are native speakers o f Japanese and have studied E n g l i s h as their second language, this may have influenced the choice o f language, result ing in a lower use o f E n g l i s h and higher use o f Japanese, although this inference cannot be conf i rmed by the present data. Furthermore, my phys ica l presence in the classrooms and the influence o f the tape-recorded sessions may have affected the language use ratio. Since both instructors commented about t ry ing to use as much Japanese as possible, it w o u l d 59 not be surpris ing i f the instructors tried to use more o f the T L than they w o u l d regularly. Las t ly , since both teachers were aware o f the purpose o f the study and are both recent graduates f rom coursework i n the field o f second language teaching, it w o u l d not be surprising i f they consc ious ly made efforts to speak more Japanese than usual . However , f rom m y personal compar i son o f the twelve classes (per instructor) o f observations previous to any data co l lec t ion , and the fourteen classes (per instructor) that audio recording and observations o f classes were done, there was no apparent difference i n lesson del ivery. Table 4.4 Language Use Averages for All Four Sessions: Focal Instructors Japanese English Mixed Ms. Inoue and Ms. Yabuno Tota l % o f utterances 80 .0% 15 .3% 4 .7% Average number o f words per 4.2 6.0 11.3 utterance Ms. Inoue Tota l % o f utterances 80 .6% 14.7% 4 .8% Average number o f words per 6.3 6.6 11.4 utterance Ms. Yabuno Tota l % o f utterances 79 .4% 15.9% 4 .6% Average number o f words per 4.3 5.9 11.4 utterance W i t h respect to the w o r d count, al though it appears that the Japanese utterances tended to be shorter, it needs to be mentioned that due to the nature o f the Japanese being an agglutinative language, utterances that have lower or ident ical w o r d counts may i n fact be longer or shorter than its E n g l i s h equivalent when translated into E n g l i s h . E x a m i n e the f o l l o w i n g examples i n Table 4.5. The length and quantity o f the utterances has also been inf luenced by textbook or handout texts since, for example , teachers' repetit ion o f textbook dialogue excerpts and handout questions, most ly i n Japanese, has also been 60 inc luded in the total number o f utterances and w o r d counts. Despi te the var ious influences on T L and E n g l i s h output, there was still access to a great quantity o f T L input for students. Table 4.5 Comparison of Japanese Utterance and its Equivalent in English Japanese utterance Number of Japanese words English Translation Number of English words Motto muzukashii bun ni shite kudasai. 6 Please make it into a more diff icul t sentence. 8 Nihonjin desu. 2 It is a Japanese person. 5 The m i x e d category o f utterances o f both instructors revealed that utterances us ing code-swi tch ing were twice to two-and-a-half t imes as long as the E n g l i s h and Japanese utterances. This w o u l d help expla in the function o f intra-utterance code-swi tch ing; it was used for the most part for expla in ing complex concepts or for functions that w o u l d require use o f language w h i c h the students did not k n o w in the T L . (See Table 4.1.) Explanat ions o f grammar and sentence structure or for conduct ing administrat ive duties such as exam outl ine and announcements were the most c o m m o n purposes for w h i c h these code-swi tch ing techniques were used. 4.3 Instructors' Perceptions of Japanese and English Use The amount o f T L and E n g l i s h use actually used in the c lassroom often d id not reflect the amount o f language the teachers thought they were us ing or were ideal ly t ry ing to use. A l t h o u g h a l l the teachers who were interviewed found it most favourable to use as much Japanese as possible, the teachers also mentioned that, for a variety o f reasons, it was not real is t ical ly possible to conduct the entire lesson in on ly the T L . Sect ion 4.3 w i l l 61 address Research Quest ion # lb : Wha t are the instructors ' o w n perceptions about the ratio o f Japanese use to E n g l i s h use? 4.3.1 I n s t r u c t o r s ' Pe r cep t i ons O n average (see Table 4.4), the eight instructors perceived themselves to be us ing about 6 1 % Japanese and 3 9 % E n g l i s h in their intermediate level J F L classes (except for instructor Tanaka w h o taught J S L in Japan) although the perceived Japanese and E n g l i s h language use responses ranged f rom 20-80%. M s . M u r a k a m i , w h o was the on ly instructor to report us ing less than 5 0 % Japanese and more than 5 0 % E n g l i s h even though she favoured the Op t ima l U s e Pos i t ion , commented that the nature o f the course forced her to use a lot o f Eng l i sh . W i t h the schedule we have [and] as many chapters w e have to cover, ah the lecture i tself is most ly geared for grammar explanation. A n d that 's about eighty per cent time. A n d the twenty per cent, I ' d l ike to squeeze into activities: pai rwork. So they can at least use Japanese to each other... . W i t h the schedule we have, yes, i t 's very diff icult . Y e a h . N o matter h o w g o o d the textbook is the students want some explanation w h y w e ' r e us ing this form instead o f that form.. . . [So, I use] a lot o f E n g l i s h , unfortunately. ( M u r a k a m i , Interview, November , 2002) O f these eight, one instructor mentioned that she w o u l d prefer to have a Japanese-on ly language po l i cy at W C U . Instructor Y o u n g , who has (and is the on ly one to have) a graduate degree in teaching J S L , c la imed that, g iven the chance, she w o u l d choose the Di rec t M e t h o d . H o w e v e r , since students' attitudes reflected the th ink ing that, "We 're in Canada anyways, so what's the use?" and " W h y do we have to speak all Japanese? W e ' r e in Canada . " (i talics show instructor emphasis), M s . Y o u n g had decided to not use the Di rec t M e t h o d at W C U even though she thought (and was the only one to th ink so) it was possible to teach the intermediate J F L classes all in Japanese. 62 M o r e o v e r , instructor M u r a k a m i explained that the Di rec t M e t h o d might have been possible i f the number o f students were decreased to an ideal number o f twe lve because w i t h a class o f thirty, it w o u l d be diff icult to interact wi th each ind iv idua l student to ensure that the entire class understood the language lesson. Nevertheless, in her op in ion , w i t h the compos i t ion o f the classes as they were and w i t h the majority o f the students c o m i n g from A s i a , the Di rec t M e t h o d might not have been such a g o o d idea since her experience told her that A s i a n students seemed to be afraid to raise their hands to ask for help when they d id not understand. F o r both these instructors, the teaching o f grammar seemed the most chal lenging aspect o f teaching in Japanese. Table 4.6 Perceived Use of TL and English by Instructors for Intermediate JFL Classes Instructor Role Japanese (%) English (%) Apparent Philosophy On LI Use9 Inoue focal instructor 80 20 O p t i m a l U s e Y a b u n o focal instructor 60 40 O p t i m a l U s e M u r a k a m i other instructor 20 80 M a x i m a l U s e C h e n other instructor 60 40 Op t ima l U s e Y o u n g other instructor 60 40 M a x i m a l U s e K i t a m u r a other instructor 70 30 O p t i m a l U s e Sasaki other instructor 60 40 O p t i m a l U s e Tanaka other instructor 80 20 M a x i m a l U s e Average of two focal instructors 70 30 Average of other instructors 58 42 Average of all instructors 61 39 Overa l l , among these instructors the decision to use Japanese or E n g l i s h seemed to be most ly affected by what was being communica ted to the students and, therefore, the p reva i l ing reason for resorting to E n g l i s h had to do wi th (1) concerns about the 9 This represents what I felt was their preferred personal philospohy on LI use as interpreted from their interviews. Although Ms. Murakami and Ms. Young seemed to support the Maximal Use Position, in the context of teaching JFL at WCU, they felt that the most effective approach was the Optimal Use Position (despite the fact the Ms. Murakami's self-reported use of the TL was only 20%) 63 effectiveness o f the lesson in terms o f comprehension by students (especial ly o f grammatical concepts) and (2) the restrictive t ime allocated to the course. (See Sect ion 4.4.1.) A s M s . C h e n explained, her use o f E n g l i s h was influenced by: t ime constraints, that's a practical reason, and in order to teach form. A h , i t ' s use fu l . . . . It 's actually more efficient and effective [to use] E n g l i s h to teach l ike grammar . . . [and I] need to explain . . .more complex structures: relative clauses, subordinate clauses, and so on. Student[s] w i l l understand very easily, and qu i ck ly i f you can expla in to them in E n g l i s h and then [we can] move on to do some activit ies in Japanese. So i t ' s not wor th wast ing, y o u k n o w , . . . too much t ime in exp la in ing grammar or t ry ing to use the target language [to teach it]. (Interview, December , 2002) S imi l a r l y , M s . Y o u n g commented that I speci f ica l ly want [to use] . . . E n g l i s h in g i v i n g important grammar points, yeah, because when I use everything in Japanese there's this tendency [for students] to misunderstand what I ' m saying, especial ly [wi th respect to] language, y o u k n o w , so basical ly that's the only th ing [that] I want to use E n g l i s h . Other than that I want to use everything in Japanese. (Interview, November , 2002) La te r in the chapter, reasons behind instructors ' language choice and use w i l l be examined in further detail in order to provide a more thorough understanding o f the mult ifaceted nature o f language use in the J F L classroom. 4.3.2 F o c a l I n s t r u c t o r s ' Pe rcep t ions M s . Inoue perceived her L 1 - L 2 balance to be 8 0 % Japanese and 2 0 % E n g l i s h . T h i s is almost identical to the results from the classroom lectures that revealed that M s . Inoue d id actually use 8 1 % Japanese and 15% Eng l i sh . A s for M s . Y a b u n o , she thought she was us ing 6 0 % Japanese and 4 0 % E n g l i s h when in fact she used about 7 9 % Japanese and 16% E n g l i s h . The discrepancy between what teachers think they are do ing versus what is actually occur r ing in the c lassroom is representative o f what other studies have reported (e.g., L i u et al . , 2004). However , instead o f over-est imating the use o f the T L as 64 in most studies, the teachers in the present study under-estimated their use o f the T L . A s mentioned previously , many factors may account for the h igh percentage o f T L use. The most obvious influence o f an increase in T L ratio w o u l d be the incorporat ion o f Japanese utterances read and repeated directly f rom textbook, handouts, or overhead transparencies. Since most o f the intermediate-level instructors admitted to us ing a lot more E n g l i s h at the beginner level , it w o u l d only be natural for some E n g l i s h to sti l l be part o f the J F L learning environment and this is reflected in the comments made by both focal instructors. A t the pre-semester informal meeting between intermediate level J F L teachers, the teachers discussed the issue o f T L and E n g l i s h use. Th i s probably became an issue because, as many teachers mentioned in their interviews, a h igh ratio o f E n g l i s h was be ing used to teach Japanese at the beginner level . The overal l consensus was that they w o u l d make a commitment to use as much T L as possible. Th i s impl ies that there w o u l d be some use o f E n g l i s h , although preference w o u l d be g iven to the use o f T L i n most cases as was suggested at this informal pre-semester meeting. A s M s . Y a b u n o explained: when I expla in grammar or some compl ica ted things [at the intermediate level] ah the students have to understand; then, I use E n g l i s h so that they w i l l understand for sure. A n d , also some announcements ] , i f i t ' s compl ica ted then it has to be read in Eng l i sh . . . . W h e n t ime is pressing, I have to swi tch to E n g l i s h so that t hey ' l l just understand w h e n I say something just once. (Interview, November , 2002) Since both teachers acknowledged the use o f E n g l i s h in their J F L classes, it was interesting to learn that the actual ratio o f languages used in the class d i d not greatly differ f rom the self-reported L 1 / L 2 ratio in both M s . Inoue's and M s . Y a b u n o ' s classes. 65 4.3.3 P e r c e p t i o n s o f F o c a l I n s t r u c t o r s ' S tuden ts F o r the t w o classes in w h i c h data were specif ical ly col lected, the students o f the t w o focal instructors w h o volunteered to be interviewed also commented on their o w n perception o f the balance o f E n g l i s h and Japanese used in their classes. The range o f perceived Japanese and E n g l i s h language use for M s . Inoue was from 5-50% and 50-92%, respectively. The averages among these eight students were 3 0 % for E n g l i s h , and 7 0 % for Japanese use. The responses from the 13 students interviewed f rom M s . Y a b u n o ' s class ranged from 15-30% for E n g l i s h language use and 70 -85% for Japanese language use. The averages are 2 8 % for E n g l i s h and 7 2 % for Japanese use. The total average for students o f both classes is E n g l i s h (29%) and Japanese (71%). The students in M s . Inoue's class, on average, perceived the Japanese ratio to be 10% less than what was reported by M s . Inoue: M s Inoue perceived her Japanese use was 8 0 % w h i l e her students thought it was closer to 70%. Howeve r , the students i n M s . Y a b u n o ' s class perceived the Japanese ratio to be 10% more than what their teacher thought. Interestingly, students in both classes perceived the ratio to be quite s imilar , despite being taught by different teachers who , ind iv idua l ly , reported either 10% less or 10% more than what their students c la imed. M o s t students made posi t ive c o m m e n t s 1 0 when asked to comment and reflect o n the balance o f language use by their instructors. Some examples include: B r a d : " T w e n t y [%] Eng l i sh , w h i c h I think is fine. I th ink it help me. It improve my l is tening ski l l s because she said she speaks a lot o f Japanese. Y e a h , so I think it helps." 1 0 Many students were not native English speakers and their English has not been edited for grammaticality below and elsewhere in the thesis. 66 Diana: "I w o u l d say, w e l l , she speaks a lot o f Japanese but at the same t ime she k n o w s when to l ike explain things in E n g l i s h . " "It w o u l d be better i f + i f u m she could i f there were more time, okay, for the class and it w o u l d be better i f she speaks more Japanese. Justin: " I ' d say i t ' s (the ratio) probably about right for me. . . . She knows , y o u k n o w , sort o f where to go wi th it. A n d I can see that a lot o f people i n the class have no problem. They f o l l o w her most o f the times. . . . A lot o f them can answer her questions, y o u k n o w . " Table 4.7 Perceived Use of TL and English of Instructors by Students Instructor: Ms. Yabuno Student Name Japanese Language Use (%) English Language Use (%) Gabriella 85 15 Diana 70 30 Justin 65 35 Phil 70 30 Sean 75 25 Isabella 80 20 Kelly 80 20 Miho 70 30 Kwan 70 30 Alexis 71 29 Darren 60 40 Veronica 80 20 Krista 60 40 AVERAGE 72 28 Instructor: Ms. Inoue Student Name Japanese Language Use (%) English Language Use (%) Brad 80 20 Cassie 70 30 Johnny 70 30 Anna 75 25 Michelle 95 5 Todd 50 50 Yuan 60 40 Wendi 60 40 AVERAGE 70 30 Combined Average for Both Instructors Japanese Language Use (%) English Language Use (%) AVERAGE 71 29 67 Isabella: " I think she tries to speak more Japanese as much as possible unless w e don ' t understand." " I ' m fine [with this balance]." O f the 21 students w h o were interviewed, only one student had something negative to say: Phil: "I w i s h she could speak more E n g l i s h so w e can understand better. Somet ime she speakfs] a lot; too fast. I really have a hard t ime ." F r o m the student responses, the balance o f Japanese and E n g l i s h used by M s . Inoue and M s . Y a b u n o seems to be satisfactory and although the ratio o f the languages st i l l seemed to be at a chal lenging level , students did not appear to be discouraged by this. The instructors were able to respond to student needs by adjusting the amount o f T L use when students felt uncomfortable or cou ld not understand. Other intermediate-level J F L instructors w h o were using much lower levels o f the T L or did not want to or cou ld not use h igh levels o f the T L might f ind these student comments encouraging. O n the other hand, P h i l ' s comment revealed that teachers were perhaps not m o d i f y i n g their T L use sufficiently to facilitate students' comprehension and that is an area that deserves more attention as w e l l . 4.4 Ratio of Japanese, English and Use of Other Languages by Students T h i s section w i l l cover Research Quest ion #1 c: W h a t is the relative ratio o f Japanese, E n g l i s h and Chinese use by students in J F L classrooms? A s mentioned earlier, W C U ' s Japanese program had no off ic ia l language use pol icy . The teachers were able to interpret and implement their unofficial decis ion to use "as much Japanese as poss ib le ." T h i s attitude was also evident in the language use by students, as they were never exp l i c i t l y to ld to use Japanese only or to avoid us ing E n g l i s h or any other first, second or th i rd languages such as M a n d a r i n , Cantonese or Korean . D u r i n g m y two-month 68 classroom observations, I never heard the instructor force or even encourage students to use the T L although it was an i m p l i e d expectation when the task invo lved direct practice o f the T L , especial ly dur ing oral practice tasks. Since oral tasks tended to be short (between 2 to 7 minutes) and structured (e.g., us ing the textbook or handout as a guide), students were able to stay on-task by us ing the T L the majority o f the time. H o w e v e r , tasks i n v o l v i n g wr i t ing , in particular compos i t ion-wr i t ing tasks, i nvo lved an increase in language use other than the T L . The data reveals that the ratio o f language used dur ing pair w o r k tasks were as fo l lows: Japanese (42%), L I (Eng l i sh or Chinese) (50%), and m i x e d (a combina t ion o f E n g l i s h , Japanese and/or Chinese) (7%). H o w e v e r , dur ing ora l tasks, the T L ratio was clearly higher: Japanese (70%), L I (28%), and mixed (2%). The data support the observation that wr i t ing tasks increased the amount o f col laborat ive dialogue i n v o l v i n g L I and mixed utterances wh i l e decreasing the amount o f T L use, whereas oral tasks had the opposite effect. Here are two typica l examples excerpts o f student pa i rwork tasks. The task for Excerp t 4.1 invo lved wr i t i ng a reflective compos i t ion after conduct ing interviews wi th Japanese international exchange students. The task for Excerp t 4.2 was to practice the function o f pra is ing w h i l e hav ing a conversat ion about fami ly members. Translations f o l l o w utterances in cur ly brackets. The native languages o f the students are provided at the end o f excerpt titles. Excerpt 4.1 Interview reflection composition task (Miho: HLL, Sheri: Chinese) 1. Sheri : W e have to wri te l ike three paragraphs, ((laughs)) 2. M i h o : W e can wri te this class is everyday or something. W e can just wri te ++. ((laughs)) 3. Sheri: I don ' t know. I think she said about l ike she taking something about cultural + l ike the only class that 's al l in E n g l i s h is cultural= 69 4. M i h o : =Oh yeah, i t ' s u m + i t ' s Ar t s I think i t ' s cal led A r t s Studies but i t ' s l ike u m + A s i a i t ' s l i ke + i t ' s l ike Canadian A s i a n + I think cul tural I think +. 5. Sheri : Is it business and + (xxx) . 6. M i h o : Okay . U m + ((laughs uncomfortably)) U m . ((mumbles something)) 7. Sheri : (xx) . 8. M i h o : H o w about l ike the hardest class she is taking is + that because it is a l l i n Eng l i sh? Does that make l ike= 9. Sheri : ((laughs)) K i n d o f l ike I wrote k ind o f l ike in another++. 10. M i h o : That ' s okay. It means the same thing, right? 11. Sheri : ( (mumbles as she reads what they have writ ten thus far)) +++ 12. M i h o : Okay , yeah so. Y e a h so we can write l ike Kanako-san no ichiban muzukashii ka-, kamoku is l ike course? {Kanako ' s most difficult sub-, 'kamoku' is like 'course '?] 13. Sheri: U m , subject. 14. M i h o : Subject. Kamoku wa. {Subject is} + I think i t ' s ca l led yeah u m d i d she say what i t ' s cal led? I think i t 's A r t Studies. 15. M i h o : She said something cultural . 16. Sheri : Y e a h . (Pa i rwork , N o v e m b e r 19, 2002) Excerpt 4.2 Role-play: Talk about weekend and practice using aizuchi (Isabella: Korean; Gabriella: Cantonese) 1. Isabella: [Okay, ((laughs)) A h + senshuu no doyoubi ni watashi wa tomodachi to ah KFC ni + it-te hirugohan wo tabe-ta ato de kankoku no eiga wo mimashita. {Ah + this past Saturday, I with my friends ah w e we-nt to ah K F C and after w e a-te lunch w e wa tched a Korean movie.} 2. Gabr ie l l a : O h , sou desu ka. {Oh, is that so?} 3. Isabella: Hal Eiga wa tottemo ah + omoshirokatta desu. {Yup. T h e movie w a s very ah + it w a s very entertaining.} 70 4. Gabr ie l l a : +++ Sou desu ka. ((both laugh)) {Is that, right?} 5. Isabella: A h + nichiyoubi ni wa + tomodachi ni ((particle choice error; should be to)) TWUni itte shukudai wo shimashita. {Ah + on S u n d a y + friend ((dative marker)) went to T W U and did homework.] 6. Gabr ie l l a : +++ O h . Sou nan desu ka. {Oh. Is that so?} 7. Isabella: Tomodachi ga atarashii hito wo watashi ni shoukai wo shite kuremashita. {My friend introduced a new person to me.} 8. Gabr ie l l a : Sou desu ka. {Is that right?} 9. Isabella: + A h ++ A h + (xxx) . Atode + tomodachi to karaoke ni itte + ah + uchi ni ++ ah uchi ni += {After that + I went to karaoke with my friends + ah + home ++ ah home ((dative marker))+=} 10. Gabr ie l l a : =Sore wayokkata desu ((rising intonation)). {=That w a s great.} (Pa i rwork , N o v e m b e r 4, 2002) A s evident f rom these typica l excerpts, composi t ion wr i t i ng tasks i nvo lved more negotiation o f the content and the language structures and, therefore, resulted in more use o f E n g l i s h , whereas the oral conversation tasks invo lved more interaction in the T L and less negotiation o f content and language was necessary because students usual ly used a model text to guide them through these type o f tasks. In the both J F L classes, the teacher did not discourage the use o f other languages by students, and students used other languages without much hesitation. B o t h M s . Inoue and M s . Y a b u n o knew that their students were using other languages, such as E n g l i s h , M a n d a r i n , Cantonese and Korean . M s . Inoue's comment reflects o f the teachers' attitude towards students' L I , L 2 and, even, L 3 use: I don ' t mind they're speaking whatever languages they l ike , in Chinese , or E n g l i s h , o f course, Japanese, I don' t mind , and I k inda notice that . . . some stronger students prefer or tend to speak or try to speak Japanese, but 71 probably other students don ' t really want to speak in Japanese because they ' re not really confident and or they don ' t k n o w h o w to express so they tend to speak back in E n g l i s h [@] or Ch inese . . . . I don ' t mind . ... F o r smaller g roupworks , the most important thing is anyway they share their op in ion and they brainstorm. (Interview, November , 2002) 4.4.1 Classroom Lectures D u r i n g c lassroom lectures, w h i c h were teacher-fronted, there was very li t t le student-teacher interaction. Student-talk comprised only 12.6% o f al l utterances over the four sessions in w h i c h data was analyzed, wh i l e teacher-talk dominated: 87.4%. The majority o f the student-talk consisted o f Japanese use (73.7%) wi th some E n g l i s h use (25.8%). In addit ion, almost no use o f code-swi tching occurred during the lecture sessions. Table 4.8 Language Use by Students during Classroom Lectures (All Four Sessions) Japanese English Mixed Tota l # o f utterances by students (total for session « = 5 6 0 2 ) 520 (9.3%) 182 (3.2%) 4 (0.0%) Average number o f words per utterance 8.9 4.1 8.3 ratio o f utterances by students as percentage 73 .7% 2 5 . 8 % 0.6% ratio o f utterances by students as percentage o f total 9 .3% 3 .2% 0 .0% 4.4.1.1 Japanese Language Use A l t h o u g h there seemed to be a high ratio o f Japanese language use by the students, m u c h o f this d id not invo lve any creative use 1 1 o f the language. The Japanese uttered by students consisted main ly o f repetition o f teacher utterances (see Excerp t 4.3), responding '' "Creative language use involves the recombination of familiar elements (words, structures, and prefabricated patterns) in new ways to produce utterances that have never been produced before by that particular individual (for that individual. They are therefore unique)." O u^nan, 1999, p. 77) 72 to teacher led question-and-answer tasks (see Excerp t 4.4), and referring to informat ion direct ly f rom the textbook, handouts (e.g., re-enactment o f a role-play scenario) (see Exce rp t 4.5) and kanji flashcards (see Exce rp t 4.6). Furthermore, the majority o f student-talk was init iated by the teacher and, therefore, the language choice for responses was i n large part under the control o f the instructor. A s M s . Y a b u n o points out, " I think w h e n I want m y students to talk back in Japanese I think I should talk to them i n Japanese. I t 's more natural. I f I ask them in E n g l i s h and i f I expect them to speak back in Japanese i t ' s k ind o f strange" (Interview, November , 2002). A s a result, since the instructors used the T L about 8 0 % o f the t ime dur ing the lectures, it is not surprising that student utterances w o u l d also result in h igh frequencies o f Japanese. E x c e r p t 4.3 R e p e t i t i o n o f teacher ut terances 1. Y a b u n o : 'Totemo', desu ne. Hanasu toki ni wa emphasis ne. "Tottemo kawaii wa" 'Tottemo' tte iimasune. Kaku tokiwa 'totemo'. + Chotto iimashyou ka. Hanashi kotoba arimasu ka kara ne. Saisho kaki kotoba no hou itte kudasai. Motte iru. {It's 'totemo' isn't it? W h e n one talks, it's (for) emphas is , okay. "Very cute!" W e say 'tottemo', right? W h e n w e write, it's 'totemo'. + W h y don't w e say it? A r e there s p e e c h words- there are okay. A t first, p lease say the written words . 'Motte iru'.} 2. Students: Motte iru. {To have ((speech style)).} 3. Y a b u n o : Motte ru. {To have ((written style)).} 4. Students: Motte ru. {To have ((written style)).} 5. Y a b u n o : Kore wa ii desu ne. Chotto wa chotto desu ne. Nimai arimasu keredomo. {This is good . 'Chotto' is 'chotto', isn't it? 'Nimai arimasu keredomo') 6. Students: Nimai arimasu keredomo. {However ((written style)), there are two sheets.} 7. Y a b u n o : Nimai arimasu ga. {However ((speech style)), there are two sheets.} 73 8. Students: Nimai arimasu ga. {However ((speech style)), there are two sheets.} 9. Y a b u n o : Nimai arimasu kedo. {However ( (speech style)), there are two sheets.} 10. Students: Nimai arimasu kedo. {However ( (speech style)), there are two sheets.} 11. Y a b u n o : Ee, 'ne'waii desune. Nani wo shite irassharu no. {Um, 'ne' is fine, isn't it? 'Nani w o shite irrasharu no".} 12. Students: Nani wo shite irassharu no. {What are you doing ((written style; honorific form))?} (Class room Lecture, Y a b u n o , N o v e m b e r 4, 2002) E x c e r p t 4.4 R e s p o n d i n g to teacher led Q u e s t i o n - a n d - A n s w e r task 1. Inoue: Ja, kazoku nan desu keredomo, Jaison no kazoku dare ga imasu ka. Otoo-san, okaa-san= {Okay, about their family, who ' s part of J a s o n ' s family?=} 2. Students: =Onii-san. {=Older brother.} 3. Inoue: Onii-san. {Older brother.} 4. Students: Imouto. {Younger sister.} 5. Inoue: Imouto-san + desu ne. Sore to Jaison. Dakar a, gonin kazoku desu ne. Jaa, more in format ion Sukoshizut.su diiteeru kikimasu keredomo. Otoo-san wa donna hito desu ka. {Younger sister, + right? A n d J a s o n . A n d so, it's a family of five, isn't it? Okay , more information. I'm going to ask you details little by little. W h a t kind of person is his father?} 6. Y u a n : Se ga takai. {Tall.} 7. Inoue: Se ga takai? Hai. Hoka ni wa. {Tall? Okay . W h a t else?} 8. R o n : Daigaku= {University=} 9. Inoue: =Daigaku + de [oshiete iru. {=Teaches [at + a university.} 10. R o n : [Oshiete imasu. {[is teaching at.} 74 11. Inoue: Un, daigaku de oshiete imasu ne. Nani wo oshiete ru n desu ka. {Mhm, is teaching at a university, right? What is (he) teaching?} 12. Students: Amerikashi. {U.S. history.} 13. Inoue: Amerikashi. Amerika no rekishi. Amerikashi desu ne. {U.S. history. The history of the United States. American history, right?} (Class room Lecture, Inoue, N o v e m b e r 4, 2002) Excerpt 4.5 Referring to information from a 'Responding to Praise' handout 1. Y a b u n o : Aa, kawaii ojyou-san no koto. {Oh, what a cutie ((i.e., to a girl))!} 2. Students: lie, tomdemonai. {No way!} 3. Y a b u n o : Ma, sugoi kooto. Takakatta deshou. {Wow, what a fabulous coat! Expensive, wasn't it?} 4. Students: lie, honno yasui mono yo ho ho ho. ((laughs)) {No, it's quite a cheap thing, you know, ha ha ha.} 5. Y a b u n o : Ho ho ho te (x). ((Students laugh)) Kore ano otoko no hito wa tsukawanai desu yo ne. (xx) dakara ne. Onna no hito no speechi desu ne. Hal + E ga ojyouzu desu ne. {'Ho ho ho'is (x). This um men don't use (this), do they? It's because of (xx), right? It's female speech, isn't it? Okay. + (You're) such a good painter!} 6. Students: lie, sore hodo demo: {No, not really.} 7. Y a b u n o : Sore hodo demo. {Not really.} 8. Students: Sore hodo demo. {Not really.} 9. Y a b u n o : / / oheya desu ne. {What a nice place!} 10. Students: lie, tonde mo arimasen. {No, no way!} 11. Y a b u n o : Tonde mo arimasen. {Noway!} 12. Students: Tonde mo arimasen. {No way!} (Class room Lecture, Y a b u n o , N o v e m b e r 4, 2002) 75 E x c e r p t 4.6 R e f e r r i n g to I n f o r m a t i o n f r o m Kanji F l a s h c a r d s 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. T . A . : Students: T . A . : Randy : L a n a : T . A . : 7. Students: 8. T . A . : 9. Students: 10. T . A . : 11. Students: 12. T . A . : 13. Students: Kore wa nan deshou. {What is this?} Soudan. {Consult.} Imiwa. {Definition?} Consul t . Consul t . Consul t . Sou desu ne. + De, chotto + kyou jikan ga nai n de eeto hyaku ni peeji wo akete kudasai. De, eeto itsumo douri issho ni yomimashou. Konkai wa juurokuhan made. Jimuin. {That 's right. + A n d , + w e don't really have time today and so p lease open to page 102. Okay , let's read together like a lways . Th i s t ime (we'll do) until #16. Office.} Jimuin. {Office.} Tate mono. {Building.} Tate mono. {Building.} Genkan. {Foyer.} Genkan. {Foyer.} Hah garni. {Poster.} Hah garni. {Poster.} (Class room Lecture , Inoue, N o v e m b e r 19, 2002) These excerpts exempl i fy the three key points. Firs t , they show h o w the teacher dominates the interaction and h o w her questions lead the students to answer in Japanese. A l t h o u g h the students could answer in E n g l i s h , it w o u l d seem inappropriate and unnatural; there is an imp l i ed expectation that the students w i l l respond in Japanese and that they are be ing socia l ized into such practices. Secondly, the responses e l ic i ted by the teacher do not require the student to use Japanese creatively. They s imp ly need to access 76 the required Japanese words and phrases and reproduce or repeat this information for the instructor. W h e n students attempt to make any creative use o f Japanese, the utterances tend to be short and the exchanges do not last more than a few lines. Exce rp t 4.7 presents one example. It involves T o d d , whose past experience w i t h Japanese includes w o r k i n g a couple o f years in Japan. T o d d ' s answers are atypical (L ines 2, 4 and 10) because o f their creativi ty or unpredictabi l i ty (double underlines were added to emphasize the areas o f creative use o f language) yet the content o f the responses all i nvo lve items learned at an intermediate level and resembles genuine, meaningful communica t ion . E x c e r p t 4.7 G r a m m a r lesson: 'x' ni nite iru ( ' to r e semble ' x " ) 1. Inoue: Ja, Todd-san wa + onii-san ga iru n desu tie, iru n desu tte. {Then, T o d d + (you) said you 've an older brother, (you) sa id you have (one)?} 2. T o d d : Onii-san to- aniki to otouto. { A n older brother and, o lder brother and a younger brother.} 3. Inoue: Ja, Todd-san wa onii-san ni nite imasu ka. {And so, Todd , do you resemble your older brother?} 4. T o d d : Zenzen nite imasen. {I don't resemble (him), not at all.} 5. Inoue: Zenzen nite imasen. Sou desu ka. Ja, otouto-san wa Todd-san ni nite imasu ka. {Don't resemble at all . Is that, right? S o , does your younger brother resemble you , Todd?} 6. T o d d : (x). 7. Inoue: Docchi ni mo nite imasen. Sou desu ka. Yokkata desu ka. ((laughs)) {Doesn ' t resemble either. Is that so. That 's good , is it?} 8. T o d d : Aaaa. {Oh!} 9. Inoue: Aaaa. {Oh!.} 10. T o d d : Betsu ni. {Not particularly.} 77 11. Inoue: A, betsu ni a ii desu ne. Betsu ni. {Oh, "betsu nf'\ o h that's good . "Betsu nf.} (C la s s room Lecture, N o v e m b e r 4, 2002) Th i rd ly , opportunit ies for genuine student-teacher interaction are very l imi ted . Students se ldom are init iators o f interactions and teachers appear to leave little r o o m for student-ini t iated discussions or questions. F o r the most part, student part icipation is restricted to responding to requests made and commands g iven by their instructors. Therefore, this, again, l imi t s the amount o f Japanese and E n g l i s h students could have potential ly accessed or used dur ing the lectures. Overa l l , student-talk, as revealed by the data, was characterized by 1) a h igh ratio o f T L use; 2) non-creative talk; and, 3) m i n i m a l student-init iated interaction. 4.4.1.2 E n g l i s h L a n g u a g e U s e W i t h respect to E n g l i s h language use, the data from the c lass room lecture show that the students' use o f E n g l i s h was also to a great extent determined by the teacher. F o r example, students tended to use Eng l i sh to reply to requests for translations and when instructors posed questions in E n g l i s h . The fo l l owing two excerpts help illustrate this point. The first excerpt is f rom M s . Y a b u n o ' s N o v e m b e r 4, 2002 class (under l in ing was added to draw attention to key sections). Dur ing this part o f the lecture, the instructor was r ev i ewing parts o f a conversation text from the textbook using an overhead transparency and ask ing for translation o f certain terminology. E x c e r p t 4.8 G r a m m a r lesson: bestu ni 'x' not ( 'no t p a r t i c u l a r l y ' ) 1. Y a b u n o : N o t right. Sou desu yo ne. {That's right, isn't it?} ((laughs)) Negatibu desu yone. {It's negative, right?} ((Ss laugh)) Kono goro {Around now} without this + "betsu ni" ga nakattara {if there w a s no 'betsu ni'} i t ' s not there + reason 78 Translation \ ^ request / English \ 2 . Students: translation Translation request 3. Y a b u n o : 4 . Students: Translation \ 5 . Y a b w i O : request English \ 6 . Sarah: translatio ne. It 's not special reason. + Desuyo ne. {Right?} 'Betsu ni' + has a meaning o f nani? (what?} N o t part icularly. N o t part icularly. Sou desu yone. {That 's right, isn't it?} So this is an adverb. Be t su n i mezurash iku arimasen. ++. De kore wa + used w i t h negative. Mezurashiku arimasen. ++. Ii desu ne. Mezurashii, i-adjective desu. Mezurashiku arimasen desu ne. De wa, kondo wa mou ichido teepu wo kikimasu. Kondo wa hanashi no naiyou + hanashi no naiyou kangaenagara teepu wo kiite kudasai. Naivou tie wakaru. {It is not particularly unusual . ++ A n d this is + used with negative. It's not particularly unusual , is it? ++ That 's good, okay? Unusua l , it an /-adjective. It's not particularly unusual , is it? Then , next (we're) will listen to the tape once more. Now, the content of the story + while thinking about the content of the story, l isten to the tape please.} ((no response)) Naiyou. Nan desu ka. {Content. W h a t is it?} Content. 7.Yabuno: Content. Sou desu ne. {That's right, isn't it?} (Class room lecture, N o v e m b e r 4, 2002) In this next excerpt, the students respond to the instructor 's request that is made i n E n g l i s h . E x c e r p t 4.9 L e s s o n : C h a p t e r 5 Kaiwa #1 English question 1. Y a b u n o : Nihyakuhachi gou shitsu desu yo. Genkan no doaa no soba ni hari garni ga shiteatta deshou. { R o o m 208, right? There w a s a poster near the entrance, wasn' t thee?} D i d y o u notice that she ((i.e., o n cassette tape)) used r i s ing intonation here? ++. Hari garni ga shiteatta deshou. {There was a poster, wasn' t there?} ++. T h i s r i s ing intonation indicates? 2. Students: 3. Y a b u n o : ++. Shite atta deshou. {Was there, wasn' t it?} 79 answer English answer English answer Intonation? M a r i e ? Is it a information? English \ 8 . Gabr i e l l a : answer 9. Y a b u n o : Information? What k i n d o f informat ion? So she's te l l ing her there's informat ion (xx) . Mou chotto ookii hoe de itte kudasai. {P lease say it in a louder voice.} English \ l u . Gab r i e l l a : She 's te l l ing Susan that there's some informat ion that she can fo l l ow? txxx^ can f o l l o w . A a , then w h y don ' t just use hah garni %a shite arimasu vo. English N y L Y a b u n o : question English N^ 1 2 G a b r i e l l a : answer 13. Y a b u n o : {There is a poster up.} M o r e poli te? (xxx) . Dou desu ka. Atta deshou. {How about it? W a s there, wasn' t it?} 14. Students: ++. 15. Y a b u n o : Hah garni ga shite arimasuyo. {There is a poster up.} 16. W i l l : I wonder? 17. Y a b u n o : Aa, naruhodo ne. Mm. Hokaniwa. {Oh, okay. M m . Wha t else?} 18. K e r r i : Isn't it? 19. Y a b u n o : Sou desu ne. {That's right, isn't it?} T h i s is conf i rmat ion. I i . There is a post ing, wasn ' t i t? (C lass room lecture, N o v e m b e r 12, 2002) D u r i n g this part o f the lesson, M s . Y a b u n o asked the students to exp la in w h y there was r is ing intonation at the end o f this sentence: Genkan no doaa no soba ni hah garni ga shite atta deshou {There was a poster near the entrance door, wasn ' t there?}. Since M s . 80 Y a b u n o asked the quest ion us ing E n g l i s h , it invi ted students to respond, most naturally, i n Eng l i sh . A s G a b r i e l l a starts to guess i n E n g l i s h , it sets an atmosphere for E n g l i s h language use. E v e n w h e n the instructor switched to us ing Japanese part w ay through this part o f the d iscuss ion, the students continued to answer i n E n g l i s h unt i l this aspect o f the discussion came to a close. Th i s was also found to be true i n P o l i o and D u f f s (1994) study where teachers' use o f E n g l i s h set the stage for students to use E n g l i s h , too. A third, c o m m o n w a y that students used E n g l i s h was dur ing administrat ive tasks. In these situations, the instructor usual ly began the interaction i n E n g l i s h because these discussions often i n v o l v e d more complex te rminology and seemed to be va lued as important interactions and, therefore, the instructors appeared to change their language use for effectiveness and eff iciency. In the f o l l o w i n g example i n M s . Inoue's class, the instructor is addressing the oral exam. A l t h o u g h M s . Inoue began addressing the topic o f the oral exam i n Japanese, she q u i c k l y switched to E n g l i s h (see L i n e 1). T h i s set a precedent for E n g l i s h language use for this particular topic. E x c e r p t 4.10 O r a l e x a m a n n o u n c e m e n t 1 Inoue: H a i , chotto ii desu ka minasan. Ooraru eguzamu no + ororaru eguzamu no firstpaato wa I w i l l te l l you . It 's not just y o u p i ck the topic. I w i l l ask y o u to talk about, " O k a y , please talk about this ." {Okay, everyone. T h e oral exam's + oral exam's first part I will tell you.} 2. Students: O H . 3. Inoue: O k a y , that's the first part. A n d then y o u say, based on the informat ion y o u got f rom the ah interviewee, okay? A n d then the second part, is I ask y o u more specif ic questions and then y o u answer. ++. 4. L a n a : A r e the topics s imi lar to the sakubun/tesuto no topikku? {topic of the composition/test?} 81 5. Inoue: A h , ah, ah I don ' t know. ((Ss laugh)) I cannot say yes or no. Y o u can, y o u can have this paper, y o u can have this sheet wi th you . 6. Lana : Ser iously? 7. Inoue: M h m . 8. Lana : O h , really? 9. Inoue: Y u p . ++. 10. Lana : (xxx) memor ize (xx). 11. Inoue: N o . N o . N o . Sorry, no. I ' m sorry, no. Y o u cannot. Y o u cannot have this sheet [but y o u can take a l ook at this + ' t i l the last minute, okay, entering the room. 12. Students: [ A w . ((laughs)) 13. Inoue: I w i l l ask other teachers again and then i f y o u ' r e a l l owed to have this sheet I w i l l let y o u k n o w , okay? So y o u can this sheet but please study. D o not look at the sheet when you ' r e do ing the exam. + ' T i l the last minute y o u can have take a look. ++. (Class room lecture, N o v e m b e r 26, 2002) These excerpts from the c lassroom lectures reveal that the instructor was a key factor wi th respect to the type o f language uttered by the students. M o r e often than not, it was the teacher inf luencing the students' use o f E n g l i s h rather than v i ce versa. Th i s is probably so because both M s . Inoue and M s . Y a b u n o are native speakers o f Japanese and feel m u c h more comfortable and natural speaking Japanese rather than us ing E n g l i s h , al though when they felt it was necessary (e.g., tasks that are more l inguis t ica l ly demanding or o f h igh importance such as grammar lessons or exam announcement) they code-switched. 82 In summary, the data show that students used Japanese when the task involves repetit ion o f teacher utterances, answering teacher led question and answer tasks, and referring to information direct ly f rom textbook, handouts, and flashcards. M o r e o v e r , E n g l i s h was often used by students during requests for translations, answering questions or responding to discussion started in E n g l i s h by the teacher, and for administrat ive task related interactions. 4.4.2 Pairwork Tasks Pairs selected for analysis were chosen to represent a variety o f language pairs: E n g l i s h native speakers (Justin & Kr i s ta ) , heritage language learner & partner ( M i h o & various partners), K o r e a n native speaker & Chinese native speaker (Isabella & var ious Chinese native partners), M a n d a r i n native speakers (Phi l & various partners; Johnny & A n n a ; B e l i n d a & Joanna), and Cantonese native speakers (Cyn th ia & Made le ine ) . Table 4.9 Pairwork Groupings Pairs LI type Total number of sessions recorded Total number of minutes recorded Justin or K r i s t a , and their var ious partners E n g l i s h native speaker & non-Engl i sh native speaker 5 43 M i h o & various partners Heri tage language speaker & non-heritage speaker 4 57 Isabella & var ious partners K o r e a n native speaker & non-Korean native speaker 8 83 P h i l & various partners Johnny & A n n a B e l i n d a & Joanna M a n d a r i n native speakers 10 94 C y n t h i a & M a d e l e i n e Cantonese native speakers 3 39 83 D a t a from the pair w o r k were or ig ina l ly transcribed verbat im us ing a w o r d processor and the count ing o f utterances was done in the same way as w i t h the c lass room lecture transcripts except that the language categories increased to seven'to also include: Chinese (C) , Japanese and Chinese ( J & M ) , E n g l i s h and Chinese ( E & C ) , and, Japanese, E n g l i s h and Chinese ( J & E & C ) . Af ter al l the utterances were categorized, the sum for each language utterance was calculated for the ind iv idua l dates, the ind iv idua l pair groups, and for both pair groups and dates combined. This resulted in the ratio o f E n g l i s h , Japanese and other languages used by the students. The w o r d count for the pair w o r k was the same as w i t h the c lassroom lecture transcripts. Student-talk dur ing the pa i rwork tasks ( inc luding groups o f two to five students) showed a drastic difference when compared wi th the ratio o f language use dur ing the c lass room lectures. Japanese use (73.7%) dur ing lectures consisted o f a large por t ion o f al l the utterances spoken by students. However , this decreased dramat ical ly dur ing the pa i rwork sessions. Overa l l , Japanese use dropped to 4 7 % , whereas the ratio o f E n g l i s h (39%) and m i x e d (4%) utterances increased. S imi l a r results were found in L e v i n e ' s (2003) study where a questionnaire based study, based on student beliefs (and not actual observations), revealed that the T L was used less by students than instructors. Th i s was a lways the case except for when students interacted with instructors; when the interaction was between a student and their instructor, T L use increased. Pairs in w h i c h the c o m m o n L I was E n g l i s h used more E n g l i s h (52%) than the T L (43%). A s for Chinese students who were able to access both E n g l i s h and Chinese (e.g., M a n d a r i n or Cantonese), these two languages combined were used on average about 3 8 % o f the t ime. Students who had access to Chinese used various combinat ions o f m i x e d 84 utterances o f Chinese (Japanese and Chinese; E n g l i s h and Chinese ; and Japanese, E n g l i s h and Chinese) more than m i x e d utterances o f Japanese and E n g l i s h . O v e r a l l , pairs who shared Chinese as a c o m m o n language used more code-swi tch ing (8%) than those who on ly shared E n g l i s h (5%). The f o l l o w i n g excerpt illustrates the complex i ty i n language use by students dur ing a compos i t ion task. Excerpt 4.11 Writing task on topic of "My Country" (Phil, Joanna, Vivian, Joanna: Mandarin, Krista: English) English Japanese & Mandarin Japanese \ 6 . P h i l 1. A m e l i a : The most important is tour ism. U h u h . ((laughs)) 2. P h i l : Tou r i sm? 3. Joanna: T o u r i s m [is kankou. {Tourism [is 'kankou'.} 4. P h i l : Y o u can say famous + instead o f important (x). + 5. Joanna: Gaaden machi12 ichiban taisetsu na, + ni xiang yao Jiang ma? Na jiu, jia jingqu jiu hao le ba! {Garden City 's most important + you want to say that? T h e n just add it then!} De yome ((mispronounces yuumei)) desu. Yuumei desu. De. {Is (err). Is famous. ((Particle de)).} De= {((Particle de))=} =No, no, no. N o , I 've got= Qianmian shi, yinggai shi + (x). Qianmian shi + (x). Bu shi, qianmian shi (xx) {In the beginning, it should be + (x). No, in the beginning (xx)} is famous for what? 11. K r i s t a : Gaaden machi wa +. {Garden City ((topic marker wa))+.} 12. P h i l : (x). 13. V i v i a n : H o w about the grammar, the grammar point? 1 2 Name of city had been replaced with pseudonym. 85 14. P h i l : Y e a h , wa de= {((topic marker wa)) ((particle cfe))=} 15. V i v i a n : GaadenMachiwa + de. {Garden C i t y ((topic marker wa)) + ((particle de))=} Japanese \ 16. P h i l : Gaaden Machi wa {Garden City is} ++ ' kay , what y o u wanna say? & English / Famous for + f ishing? 0 r = 17. V i v i a n : W e can say V a n c o u v e r has a lot o f sa lmon so + and tour ism. (Groupwork , N o v e m b e r 5, 2002) Anothe r interesting point is that the average Japanese utterance by students decreased f rom 8.9 words dur ing the lectures to 3.2 words dur ing pa i rwork sessions. E n g l i s h utterances s t i l l were about 4 words i n length and m i x e d utterances about 8 words. Whereas dur ing the lectures, the students often on ly repeated or read o f f sentences f rom textbooks and handouts, pa i rwork interaction was more diverse and less structured. A s a result, utterances d i d not a lways consist o f entire sentences but consisted o f just a few words or short phrases instead. Since E n g l i s h and m i x e d utterances were less predictable, the average length o f the pa i rwork utterances seemed to have changed very litt le f rom those uttered dur ing the lectures. The f o l l o w i n g excerpts illustrate typ ica l interactions between student pairs. The first shows students interacting dur ing an in te rv iew preparation task w h i l e the second excerpt is dur ing a compos i t ion task. The th i rd example w i l l illustrate language use dur ing an oral practice task. Excerpt 4.12 Interview reflection composition task13 (Amelia: Mandarin, Krista: English) 1. A m e l i a : Senkouwa nan desu ka. + {What is (your) major? +} 1 3 In pairs, students conducted an interview with a Japanese International Exchange Student. These Japanese exchange students were part of a special program at W C U . After the interview, the students had to reflect on their interviews and write a composition about the interviewee. 86 2. K r i s t a : A n d dou-? W h y ? Dou shite + kono senkou wa= {And wh-? W h y ? W h y + this major ((topic marker wa))=} 3. A m e l i a : =Chose? ((laughs)) 4. K r i s t a : Era-, erabe- = {Cho-, choo-=} 5. A m e l i a : =Erabeta. {=Able to choose.} 6. K r i s t a : Erabeta? {=Able to choose?} 7. A m e l i a : T o chose? +++ Doushite += {To c h o s e ? +++ W h y +=} 8. K r i s t a : =Doushite. {=Why?} 9. A m e l i a : Kono senkou wo= {This major ((accusative marker wo))=} 10. K r i s t a : W o u l d it be kono or sono because= {Would it be this or that because=} 11. A m e l i a : =Sono. {=That.} 12. K r i s t a : Sono. {That.} 13. A m e l i a : [Senkou wa +++. {[Major ((topic marker wa)) +++.} 14. K r i s t a : Senkou wa +++ dou shite era-, erabi- (x)ta ka. {[Major ((topic marker wa)) +++ why did (you) cho-, choo- (x)?] 15. A m e l i a : Era-, eramasen. Era-= {Cho- , ((err)). Cho-=} 16. K r i s t a : =Erabu. {=To choose.} 17. A m e l i a : Erabu. {To choose.} 18. K r i s t a : Erabimasu ka. {Do (you) choose?} 19. A m e l i a : E-ra-bi-ma-su-ka. {D-o (y-o-u) c-h-o-o-s-e?} (Pa i rwork , N o v e m b e r 15, 2002) Excerpt 4.13 Interview reflection composition task (Johnny & Anna: Mandarin) 1. Johnny: O k a y . Ranhoujiu. {Then.} 87 2. A n n a : Nihon de wa, + right? {In Japan} 3. Johnny: U h u h . Nihon de wa na jiu shi (x) nihon de wa (x) lots o f qu iz . {In Japan that is (x) in Japan (x) lots of quiz.} 4. A n n a : M m . + O h ! 5. Johnny: M a r k e t i n g s 6. A n n a : =Or w e can talk about l ike + nihon de wa ichinenjuu {in Japan all year long} l ike semester, two semester and she needs l ike some credits so she takes + this many courses. 7. Johnny: U m . +++ 8. A n n a : (xxx) jiu mei de xie. {(xxx) nothing to write.} 9. Johnny: M m . Shi ah (xx) first year. Zheme rongyi a. O n l y eighteen. ++ So nice. {Yes (xx) first year. So easy ah.} 10. A n n a : Per semester, (xx) eh. Name tamen bi women duo a. {(xx) eh. Then they have more than us ah.} 11. Johnny: Per semester? 12. A n n a : Y e a h . 13. Johnny: Liang ge semester. Women ye shi Iiang ge semester. {Two semesters. We also have two semesters.} 14. A n n a : Name mei ge term shiwu ge credits. Eh, shi ba? [San, san wu yishiwu. {Then every term fifteen credits. Eh, right? [Three, three time five is fifteen.} 15. Johnny: [Uh, bi women duo. Bi women duo. {[Uh, more than us. More than us.} 16. A n n a : W e l l depends o n (xx) course l ike four credits (x). 17. Johnny: O h yeah. A c t u a l l y , yeah. (Pa i rwork , N o v e m b e r 19, 2002) 88 E x c e r p t 4.14 O r a l t ask : T a l k u s i n g pra i se a n d aizuchi ( M a n d i : C h i n e s e , J u s t i n : E n g l i s h ) 1 J u s t i n : Watashi no otouto wa Nathan desu. {My younger brother is Nathan.} 2. M a n d i : Sou desu ka. ((laughs)) {Is that, so?} 3. Justin: Nathan wa + totemo seikakufx) te (x) ga arimasu. {Nathan has a very (x) (x) personality.} 4. M a n d i : Sou na n desu ka. ((laughs)) {Is that, right?} 5. Justin: Sore kara Nathan wa nijuuisai ((mispronounces nijuuissai)) desu. ((rising intonation)) {And also, Nathan is twenty-one} 6. M a n d i : Ee, sou desu ka. {Oh really?} 7. Justin: 8 . M a n d i : Demo + Nathan wa daigakusei ja arimasen. [But + Nathan isn't a university student.} Sou na n desu ka. Sugoi desu ne. ((laughs)) Kawaii otouto desu ne. ((J laughs)) {Is that, s o ? W o w . W h a t a cute younger brother.} 9.Justin: lie. Tondemonai ((mispronounces tondemonai)). {No. Not really.} (Pa i rwork , N o v e m b e r 5, 2002) A s these excerpts illustrates, students can access a variety o f languages and language combinat ions dur ing their pair w o r k tasks. Since students were not discouraged from using their L I , L 2 or L 3 along wi th the T L , they were free to use whatever language they felt most comfortable w i th interacting wi th their classmates: neither focal instructor to ld their students to "speak Japanese" when communica t ing in other languages. The findings support the observation that students did use languages other than the T L dur ing most o f their tasks but, as mentioned before, oral practice tasks made use o f more Japanese w h i l e wr i t i ng tasks, i n w h i c h students needed to negotiate meaning as they composed essays, saw a drop i n T L use and a rise in L I , L 2 or L 3 use and code-swi tching. 89 4.4.3 D i s c u s s i o n In this study thus far, the findings have revealed that teachers at W C U are ove rwhe lming ly in favour o f supporting the Opt imal U s e Pos i t ion . Since Japanese is be ing taught in a F L setting, where many students enrol l ing in Japanese classes are not native speakers o f E n g l i s h anyway, it may be most effective to adopt a teaching approach that embraces m a x i m i z i n g T L use, wh i l e us ing E n g l i s h when necessary. The intermediate-level J F L teachers w h o were interviewed c la imed that they used anywhere f rom 60 -80% Japanese and about 20 -40% Eng l i sh . Interestingly, M s . M u r a k a m i was the only teacher to report us ing more E n g l i s h than Japanese although she is h igh ly knowledgeable in current L 2 teaching methodology and c la imed to favour an O p t i m a l U s e Pos i t ion . B o t h focal instructors, on average, c la imed to be using around 7 0 % Japanese and in fact there actual use o f the T L was even higher. M s . Inoue and M s . Y a b u n o seem to be successfully prac t ic ing us ing the Opt imal U s e Posi t ion. Since both instructors c la imed to adjust their language use relative to the needs o f their students, it w o u l d appear that, in general, students were able to keep up wh i l e rece iv ing a fair amount o f T L input. Th is was conf i rmed through the student interviews when most learners reported that the balance o f Japanese and E n g l i s h use by instructors was to their satisfaction. Ano the r key f ind ing is that students spoke very little dur ing teacher-led act ivi t ies al though their output was high in T L when they d id speak. The reverse was found to be true dur ing col laborat ive peer tasks. D u r i n g peer tasks, students used more E n g l i s h or their N L for communica t ing and managing what they wanted to say or write. Because 90 Table 4 .10 : Language Use Averages for Student Pairwork Japanese English Mixed Chinese Japanese & Chinese English & Chinese Japanese, English & Chinese TOTAL All language pairs Tota l number o f utterances 2238 1852 199 384 53 20 11 4757 Tota l % o f utterances 4 7 % 3 9 % 4 % 8% 1% 0.4% 0 .2% 100%* A v e r a g e number o f w o r d s per utterance 3.7 7.2 5.8 9.2 7.1 9.5 n/a Non-Chinese language pairs Tota l number o f utterances 1261 1540 146 n/a n/a n/a n/a 2947 Tota l % o f utterances 4 3 % 5 2 % 5% n/a n/a n/a n/a 100% A v e r a g e number o f words per utterance 6.3 6.6 11.4 n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a Chinese language pairs Tota l number o f utterances 977 312 53 384 . 53 20 11 1810 To ta l % o f utterances 5 4 % 17% 3 % 2 1 % 3 % 1% 1% 100% A v e r a g e number o f w o r d s per utterance *The nercenraaes fnr p*rh lan 3.1 3.7 7.5 5.8 9.2 7.1 9.5 n/a students were sti l l only at an intermediate level , they might have felt that they d i d not have the necessary vocabulary and language structures to negotiate w i t h each other. E v e n though the instructors have model led ways to do this through their o w n teaching, the students had little experience do ing so and, as a result, they resorted to us ing E n g l i s h or their N L instead since it feels more natural to them. I f students are expected to use more T L during peer tasks then they need to be taught h o w to do this before their teachers can expect students to complete the task wi th a h igh ratio o f T L use. 4.5 Purposes for Japanese and English Use by Instructors This section w i l l address the Research Quest ion #2a: F o r what purposes are Japanese and E n g l i s h used by instructors? First , comments f rom the instructor interviews w i l l be discussed, fo l lowed by comments from the focal instructors ' students. A t the end, I w i l l discuss the purposes for w h i c h Japanese and E n g l i s h use were observed dur ing the c lass room lectures o f M s . Inoue and M s . Y a b u n o . 4.5.1 Instructors' and Focal Instructors' Comments The major themes that emerged from the instructor interviews are: 1) comments related to the " i d e a l " teaching environment and v iews on a T L - o n l y teaching approach, 2) purposes for Japanese language use, 3) purposes for Eng l i sh language use, and 4) factors affecting language choice and challenges regarding the balance o f Japanese and E n g l i s h use, i nc lud ing issues related to student motivat ion, confidence, c lassroom atmosphere and student-teacher relationships. 4.5.1.1 The "Ideal" Teaching Environment and Japanese-Only Policy The overal l consensus was that all instructors wanted to use as much Japanese as possible in their teaching. In the ideal situation, M s . Chen explained that she w o u l d l ike 92 to a lways use the T L and take the t ime to teach the students using Japanese. M o r e o v e r , according to M s . M u r a k a m i , a realistic language class w o u l d consist o f lessons to ta l l ing 10 hours per week and w o u l d ideal ly have a class size o f twelve students instead o f thirty. A s mentioned earlier, M s . Y o u n g , i f g iven the chance, w o u l d choose the Di rec t M e t h o d o f teaching Japanese: M o s t o f m y students ninety, ninety-five percent are al l Chinese and there's a problem i nvo l ve d in that.... Chinese speakers, the way the brain w o r k s for them, E n g l i s h is not their first language; Chinese is their first language. I don ' t k n o w h o w they translate it. Speak wi th them in E n g l i s h and they w i l l probably think in Chinese and then the output w i l l be in Japanese. So it w o r k s in three different languages. (Interview, November , 2002) A l t h o u g h the ideal scenario w o u l d be to use Japanese only or p r imar i ly Japanese, the learning situation at W C U is less than ideal. W h e n asked about their opinions in terms o f a Japanese-only po l i cy , all instructors were reluctant to have such a po l i cy in a context such as the one at W C U . A c c o r d i n g to M s . Chen , the present Japanese Language Coordinator , f o l l owing one specific p o l i c y w o u l d not be the most effective. [The] use o f language a l l depends on what y o u are do ing in the class. In some class i f you ' r e deal ing wi th , y o u know, just as I mentioned before, teaching forms then y o u need to use Eng l i sh . So , it depends on what y o u do on specific day. A n d also depends on the context so w e have to be very f lexible , I think. There 's no one single mode l to fo l low. (Interview, December , 2002) M s . Inoue 's reply was s imilar : I don ' t real ly l ike Japanese-only po l i cy because . . . [for] some important announcement I don' t think that w e should speak in Japanese, or, some grammar probably, because they, students, have to comprehend. A n d for the comprehension they need l anguage . . . S t i l l , for the 200 level they are st i l l in the stage o f l ike a really i m p r o v i n g from first level to more advanced level so some students are not really strong in terms o f speaking 93 and l is tening especial ly [since] they are on ly in Canada; they don ' t real ly have friends to practice their Japanese. (Interview, November , 2002) The unique context o f the J F L classes at W C U makes language choice and language use a complex issue. A t W C U , al l intermediate level instructors and the majority o f their students are teaching and learning Japanese through their second or third language: E n g l i s h . F o r some instructors, Japanese is their second language and E n g l i s h their th i rd language. A s a result, instructors are teaching and the students are learning Japanese (besides us ing the T L ) through a c o m m o n language w h i c h is not their native language; they are interacting through Engl i sh as their second (or third) language. 4.5.1.2 P u r p o s e s f o r J apanese L a n g u a g e Use The J F L instructors c la imed that the T L was used for one main reason: to provide T L input and interaction w h i l e learning the Japanese language. Japanese was used for g i v i n g instructions or commands, r ev iewing and pract ic ing Japanese, exp la in ing and g i v i n g examples for chal lenging lesson content, asking questions or having discussions to el ici t T L responses, and responding to students w h o ask questions in the T L . Fi rs t o f a l l , four o f the instructors mentioned that when g i v i n g instructions, Japanese was used. F o r instance, M s . Y o u n g said that she used Japanese for s imple instructions and announcements for such things as exams dates and anything that i nvo lved c lass room management. A s for M s . M u r a k a m i , s imple commands such as "c lose the w i n d o w " or "c lose the door" were also g iven in the T L and assignment instructions were wri t ten on the board in Japanese as w e l l . Furthermore, M s . Sasaki expla ined that instructions and s imple questions, especial ly those that involve set phrases that were c o m m o n l y used in the classroom, were a lways in Japanese: for example, pea ni natte kudasai (please get 94 into pairs), kiite kudasai (please listen), wakarimasu ka (do y o u understand?) , and shitsumon arimasu ka (do y o u have any questions?). Secondly , Japanese was used for r ev iewing and prac t ic ing Japanese content, i n particular for oral and aural practice. M s . M u r a k a m i c l a imed that she deliberately reserved the first ten minutes o f class for r ev iewing prev ious ly taught structures and that Japanese use for this part o f the lesson was strictly enforced. She used this t ime to interact w i t h students and to have them practice us ing the sentence patterns or structures that were p rev ious ly taught. She wanted to create a s imula t ion o f real l ife situations by encouraging students to interact i n the T L (and not on ly to l isten to tapes or C D s for authentic input). D u r i n g this first ten minutes, she never responded i n E n g l i s h and, thus, encouraged students to speak i n the T L and not iced that "usua l ly after a mon th or so, [the students tried] to respond i n Japanese as m u c h as poss ible" . L i k e M s . M u r a k a m i , M s . K i t a m u r a set aside the beginning part o f her lessons for T L speaking and l is tening practice. " A t the beg inn ing o f the [class], students seem sleepy; then, I can talk about what I d i d dur ing the weekend i n Japanese. A n d they, i f they miss some words it doesn't matter. N o t h i n g to do w i t h the qu iz , but just [to] enjoy." Th rough m y observations o f M s . Inoue's class, it was evident that M s . Inoue pract iced a s imi la r routine, especial ly after the weekend or w i t h respect to a special event o f hol iday . Another use o f Japanese was when instructors gave explanations and examples o f lesson content. A l t h o u g h a l l instructors mentioned the challenges o f exp la in ing the content i n the T L , many instructors s t i l l made attempts to incorporate Japanese into their lessons before resorting to E n g l i s h . Fo r instance, M s . Sasaki and M s . Ode mentioned that when their students struggled to understand they gave alternate explanations and 95 examples us ing s imple Japanese before they resorted to using E n g l i s h . M s . Ode had the f o l l o w i n g to say: I have to explain more us ing different phrases, different words. . . . Somet imes I don ' t m ind do ing that. Espec i a l ly [for] expla in ing . . . the meaning o f one sentence in Japanese, . . . I try to use a different phrase or sentence in Japanese, pretty s imi la r one. Sometimes I do that because translating the meaning into E n g l i s h . . . sometimes doesn' t make real ly make sense. So [in] that case, I try to use Japanese more, and even though I k n o w its more t ime consuming I don ' t m ind do ing that. (Interview, November , 2002) W h e n M s . Sasaki gives grammatical explanations, she stated that she w o u l d first try to g ive some examples us ing Japanese sentences especial ly wi th particles that do not exist in the E n g l i s h or Chinese languages (although Chinese has other kinds o f particles). In this example, M s . Sasaki explained h o w she w o u l d teach the difference between t w o particles that mark locat ion, or the difference between several types o f condi t ional structures: F o r example, what is the difference between ni and del T h e y both mark locations but the usage is different. The usage is different. So, I g ive example. A n d then . . . i f they don ' t understand I g ive them E n g l i s h explanation. F o r example i f I explain . . . condit ionals , l ike in Japanese [there are] tara, nam, reba ... [and] ba. I give a lot o f examples. L i k e these instructors, all other instructors used this method and resorted to us ing E n g l i s h on ly when students did not comprehend the Japanese explanat ion and no other strategy was useful. F i n a l l y , Japanese was used when instructors wanted to ask questions or have discussions i n order to deliberately el ici t T L responses. A s M s . Y a b u n o explained, " I th ink [that] when I want my students to talk back in Japanese I think [that] I should talk 96 to them in Japanese. It 's more natural. I f I ask them in E n g l i s h and i f I expect them to speak back in Japanese i t ' s k i n d o f strange." They also reported that they tended to respond i n Japanese to students w h o ask questions in the T L . F o r example, when students tried so hard to use Japanese M s . M u r a k a m i a lways tried to answer in the T L , and i f students ask questions in Japanese, M s . Sasaki c la imed that she never answered students i n E n g l i s h . E v e n when students asked questions in E n g l i s h , instructors st i l l preferred to reply in Japanese when possible. In these situations, instructors such as M s . C h e n tended to answer us ing s imple Japanese. 4.5.1.3 P u r p o s e s fo r E n g l i s h L a n g u a g e Use The J F L instructors revealed that their use o f E n g l i s h for two main purposes. These are 1) eff iciency and effectiveness in t ime management; and 2) eff ic iency and effectiveness in comprehension. E n g l i s h was used for expla in ing grammar, teaching vocabulary, rephrasing or repeating instructions for tasks, p rov id ing addit ive or supplemental materials, d iscussing comparisons between Japanese and other languages, and exp la in ing and announcing important items such as exams. The most c o m m o n reason g iven for the use o f E n g l i s h was for the teaching and exp la in ing o f grammar. A l l instructors mentioned that the teaching o f grammar greatly affected their language use because us ing Eng l i sh was a more efficient and effective method than us ing the T L . A s M s . Chen explained, It 's actually more efficient and effective [to use] E n g l i s h to teach grammar. ... [F]or example, y o u need to explain some structures to the students l ike more complex structures: relative clauses, subordinate clauses, and so on. Student[s] w i l l understand very easily and q u i c k l y i f y o u can expla in to them ... in E n g l i s h and then [you can] move on to do some activit ies in Japanese. So it 's not worth wasting, y o u k n o w , us ing 97 too much t ime in exp la in ing grammar or t ry ing to use the target language. (Interview, December , 2002) Furthermore, M s . Y o u n g and M s . Y a b u n o c la imed that they used E n g l i s h w h e n teaching important grammar points because there was a tendency to misunderstand when they expla ined everything in Japanese; they wanted to ensure that students had clearly understood. M s . M u r a k a m i , whose self-reported ratio o f E n g l i s h use was 8 0 % , commented that expla in ing grammar in Japanese was imposs ible and, therefore, she used a lot o f E n g l i s h in his classes. She usual ly answered grammar related questions in E n g l i s h because it was economica l and t ime was a b i g issue for her. In addit ion, M s . C h e n commented that hearing E n g l i s h explanations helped students feel more secure, especial ly for the more "cogn i t ive" learners, in particular the Chinese students, w h o needed to understand structures. T w o J F L instructors also said that they used E n g l i s h for teaching vocabulary. Spending a lot o f t ime to explain one vocabulary i tem using Japanese w o u l d not be an effective use o f t ime even though students received a lot more T L input f rom a teacher's effort to explain the vocabulary i tem in Japanese. M s . K i t a m u r a recalls her o w n experience learning E n g l i s h as a second language: W h e n I came here, ... the instructor was expla in ing in E n g l i s h . ... " [ W ] h y [do] they have to use Engl i sh? ... [To] understand one concept w h y do I have to struggle?" A n d I visi ted [an]other class to observe and the teacher is t a lk ing about [the word] basement and the students cou ldn ' t understand [the word] basement. It 's a lengthy t ime [that] the teacher spent, just to talk about basement. Then, " W h y don ' t you [say] basement in another language?" Then ... the instructor can spend more t ime to let [the students] practice or [do] other more important things? L i k e vocab, they can l o o k at the dict ionary. (Interview, November , 2002) 98 Since M s . K i t a m u r a ' s had personally experienced this type o f struggle w i t h the learning o f vocabulary items, she decided that it was not wor th the t ime and effort to expla in a vocabulary i tem that could be easi ly communica ted by the use o f one equivalent E n g l i s h w o r d . In order to ensure comprehension, J F L instructors stated that they used E n g l i s h to rephrase or repeat what they had uttered in Japanese. In most cases, the strategy used was intra-utterance code-switching. M s . Sasaki reported that she used this strategy w h e n m a k i n g announcements about a test or something important so that she cou ld be sure that the students had comprehended her message. This is s imi lar to what M s . Chen d id : s imple instructions, for example exam dates, were g iven in Japanese but rephrased i n E n g l i s h to ensure that students had understood. Because learning a language consists o f an appreciation o f the historical and cultural background o f the society associated wi th the T L , instructors at W C U also said that they used supplementary materials to enhance their students' language learning experiences. In most cases, these materials were related to cultural aspects or p rov ided historical background to complement topics being covered in the cur r icu lum. It should be mentioned here that the textbook used at W C U , An Integrated Approach to Intermediate Japanese ( M i u r a & M c G l o i n , 1994), incorporates culture and language throughout its lessons and that there is a specific section for cultural notes. These cul tural notes are g iven in E n g l i s h . A c c o r d i n g to M s . K i t a m u r a , students cannot be expected to understand an anthropological analysis in Japanese because this w o u l d be too diff icult . Sometimes, instructors must explain w h y a sentence may be grammat ica l ly correct but cul tural ly unacceptable. 99 F o r instance, the first years students learn kudasai (please). ... It is [or can be a] request and [a] command. B u t in certain situations w e should not use kudasai: kudasai in upper status 1 4 , and also on commercia l [s ] they don ' t use kudasai in Japan. A n d here [in N o r t h A m e r i c a ] , y o u can use " B U Y T H I S ! " W e can' t use [it in this manner in Japanese society] . ... W e have to expla in this because once they learn certain grammar structures, i t ' s grammat ica l ly correct but cultural ly, normat ively , [it 's] not acceptable regarding [such] ... s i tuat ion^] . ( M s . K i t a m u r a , Interview, November , 2 0 0 2 ) Ano the r use for E n g l i s h for discussions i n v o l v i n g comparisons between Japanese and other languages. Instructors who shared a c o m m o n first language background w i t h their students, or had studied other languages offered discussions in E n g l i s h to draw attention to specific cultural or grammatical structures between the two languages. Some instructors, such as M s . Y o u n g , compared kanji and Chinese characters. Others, l ike M s . K i t a m u r a , had often d id general language comparisons between E n g l i s h and Japanese, Chinese and Japanese, and K o r e a n and Japanese. In order to explain the s imilar i t ies and differences, E n g l i s h had to be used. Furthermore, M s . K i t a m u r a used their cul tural background and kanji to improve understanding. F o r example, she compared Japanese N e w Y e a r ' s w i t h new year 's traditions in other cultures. In addit ion, words that don ' t transfer over sociocul tural ly , such as "granny", in Eng l i sh , and obaa-san (granny), in Japanese, needed to be explained in E n g l i s h since such specific explanations were not provided in the cultural notes in the textbook; it seemed more effective to have teachers expla in them in E n g l i s h . Las t ly , E n g l i s h was c o m m o n l y used for expla in ing and announcing important items such as exam dates, test content, interview act ivi ty scheduling. Wr i t t en 1 4 This refers to the informal register used between the well-acquainted; it is considered rude and impolite when used for commands and requests especially with strangers and people of higher social status (e.g., elders, teachers, etc.) 1 0 0 assignments (see Figures 4.1) and tests (see Figures 4.2, 4.3, 4.4. and 4.5), wri t ten on the overhead transparency, used E n g l i s h to ensure that the instructions are clear. The documents col lected from the classes I observed support the c l a i m that important items such as quizzes, test instructions, and oral examinat ion assignment handouts were wri t ten in E n g l i s h , whereas practice handouts and homework sheets tended to be in Japanese. M s . Y a b u n o explained that some students whose L I was not E n g l i s h cou ldn ' t even understand the E n g l i s h instructions on exams and tests and so J F L instructors at W C U had to use simpler, easier vocabulary so that their students could answering questions. F i g u r e 4.1 C o m p o s i t i o n T a s k O u t l i n e : intra - N body I organization conclusion J utrj: mm (Inoue, C lass room Lecture , N o v e m b e r 4, 2002) F i g u r e 4.2 Tes t T o p i c s ' O u t l i n e Chapter 3 & 4 o G r a m m a r o Textbook, o Funct ions o Request o Permiss ion o Cul tu ra l aspects o handouts (Inoue, C lass room Lecture , N o v e m b e r 4, 2002) 101 / Figure 4.3 Composition Test Outline15 o 1 1 J ! 2 2 0 ( & ® B) o h M°y? : ? ? > f ^ - l f a ' Evaluation Content 2 Accuracy 5 Coherence 3 Genkooyoosh i 2 Complexity 3 = = 15 & (Yabuno , C l a s s r o o m Lecture , N o v e m b e r 1, 2002) Figure 4.4 Final Examination Outline V o c a b kanji Lis t en ing G r a m m a r Short wr i t ing Comple t e a dialogue Cul tu ra l aspects (Inoue, C lass room Lecture , N o v e m b e r 26, 2002) Figure 4.5 Composition Test Outline 1. Intro 2. B o d y 3. C o n c l u s i o n o Interviewee's opinions/thoughts o Y o u r opinions/thoughts ( I H ^ ) b$&\siz~$' Dic t iona ry : E n g - J a p a Japan-Eng (- O K B o t h (Inoue, C l a s s r o o m Lecture , N o v e m b e r 21 , 2002) 15 Genkouyooshi is a standard composition writing sheet. It looks like a grid paper and lias 400 boxes (i.e., one letter/punctuation per box). 102 4.5.1.4 F a c t o r s A f f e c t i n g L a n g u a g e C h o i c e The key factors that affect language choice and, as a result, direct ly influence language use include practicali ty, L I o f students, and creating a comfortable learning environment for the learners. In terms o f practicali ty, instructors were p r imar i ly concerned w i t h issues o f t ime. U n l i k e most N o r t h A m e r i c a n univers i ty programs, W C U ' s academic year is shorter by about one month, only offering about 110 hours o f instruct ion for an entire academic year. Instructors felt the pressure o f cover ing the cur r icu lum and t ry ing to cram the content into all their lessons because o f the textbook cur r icu lum. Th i s tight schedule definitely had its effects on language choice. A s three teachers explained, w e have a very hectic schedule ... [and so] we have to compromise a litt le b i t . . . in order to save time. ... W e may want to just expla in something in E n g l i s h and get it over w i th in t w o minutes rather than spending l i ke ten, fifteen minutes on that." (Chen, Interview, December , 2002) F i f ty minutes [per class] is not long enough. ... W h e n the t ime is pressing, I have to swi tch to E n g l i s h so that [the students] w i l l just understand when I say something just once and [then] we can move onto the activi ty. (Yabuno , Interview, November , 2002) I ' d l ike to [explain] ... everything about grammar wi thout us ing E n g l i s h and i t ' s chal lenging ... but I can' t do it here. ... I prefer not to because m y students w i l l not . . . understand it and I [wi l l ] have to repeat it again right f rom the start. So, i t 's a waste o f t ime. ( Y o u n g , Interview, November , 2002) E x p l a i n i n g grammar tended to be a c o m m o n culpri t o f resorting to E n g l i s h in order to save t ime: " I f i t ' s a grammar related questions, [I] usually answer in E n g l i s h : much faster; economica l . [Exp la in ing in Japanese] wastes t ime. ... T i m e 103 is a b i g issue" ( M u r a k a m i , Interview, November , 2002). Bes ides grammar, instructors had to cut down on wait t ime when t ry ing to elici t responses from students. M s . Inoue thought that her Chinese student learning attitudes often resulted in m i n i m u m part icipat ion during teacher-fronted activities. W h e n t ry ing to interact wi th her students, she tried to be patient until someone said something in response but often found that she d idn ' t have t ime to wait , and that she had to g ive up and say something first. Language use was also affected by the students' L I . Because the majority o f students w h o enrolled in Japanese classes at W C U were native speakers o f Chinese , teachers found it somewhat chal lenging to teach to students who were E S L learners. A s ment ioned earlier by M s . Y o u n g , about ninety to ninety-five percent were Chinese background students and in her op in ion the students had diff icul ty w h e n it related to instruction o f grammar points in E n g l i s h . Furthermore, teaching Chinese native speakers required a m i x o f E n g l i s h and Japanese because Japanese language structures are very different f rom Chinese . A s experienced by M s . Inoue, E n g l i s h used on tests also needed careful considerat ion because many E S L students did not understand instructions that native speakers found quite easy and clear. A l t h o u g h hav ing many Chinese language background students proved chal lenging, there were also some benefits. W i t h respect to expla in ing vocabulary or teaching kanji, students were able to grasp the idea o f a w o r d by s imply l o o k i n g at the kanji and us ing their Chinese language background to provide some scaffolding. In addit ion, instructors d id not have to spend t ime exp la in ing h o w to wri te the kanji. Therefore, the focus on kanji teaching t ime decreased and w i t h that the use o f Eng l i sh , overa l l , also decreased. 104 M o r e o v e r , instructors who , themselves, have a Chinese language background were able to use Chinese to assist student learning. F o r example , M s . Tanaka , who had recently taught Japanese as a second language i n Japan wi th ninety-eight percent o f her students c o m i n g f rom a Chinese language background, found that she tended to speak i n Chinese since it was much easier to expla in Japanese through the use o f Chinese , rather than i n Japanese or E n g l i s h . A t W C U , M s . C h e n , who c o u l d speak both M a n d a r i n and Cantonese, used Chinese to help her students but on ly i f it was outside o f class t ime. T h i s was to be fair to a l l students who attended her classes and to not isolate those w h o d i d not k n o w Chinese . "I th ink i t ' s okay to teach them i n Chinese i f it helps ... because E n g l i s h ... for many o f them is not [their] native language." If students preferred or felt more comfortable to ask questions in Chinese , then she responded i n Chinese , too. The third factor affecting language use was the goal to create a comfortable learning environment for the learners. Several instructors ment ioned that E n g l i s h helped to motivate their students and to create a c lassroom atmosphere that was more conducive to language learning. F o r example, a former student o f M s . K i t a m u r a had revealed to her that i n her previous Japanese learning experience the instructor used on ly Japanese and that she couldn ' t understand the lessons. In her op in ion , she described the previous experience as very bad and she felt that she c o u l d on ly retain about thirty percent o f the lesson content. A s a result, M s . K i t a m u r a commented that us ing E n g l i s h made her students feel safe and secure, a l l o w i n g them to learn Japanese without feel ing threatened. S i m i l a r l y , M s . Y a b u n o c l a i m e d that some students felt uncomfortable be ing exposed to a lot o f Japanese. She ment ioned that she was concerned about their psycho log ica l and emot ional state because she real ly wanted her students to enjoy what they d i d i n class. 105 F i n a l l y , M s . Tanaka thought that us ing o n l y Japanese w o u l d offend her students and w o u l d upset the balance o f languages i n the c lassroom needed to create an atmosphere i n w h i c h the students w o u l d felt comfortable to speak Japanese. 4.5.2 Student Comments T h i s section w i l l discuss the use o f Japanese and E n g l i s h f rom the students' perspective. Students offered their v iews on Japanese on ly p o l i c y , and expla ined the purposes for w h i c h they had experienced Japanese and E n g l i s h be ing used by their instructors ( M s . Inoue and M s . Yabuno) , and gave their opinions on w h y they think teachers chose to use the language that they d i d when teaching intermediate J F L . 4.5.2.1 Thoughts on Japanese-Only Policy O v e r a l l , students were not i n favour o f a Japanese-only po l i cy . T h e students' ma in concern was that they w o u l d have di f f icul ty understanding what the instructor was saying and wor r i ed about miss ing important informat ion. Commen t s revealed by Justin were typ ica l : If she teaches everything Japanese ... w e ' d be a lot confused, you k n o w . ... If she was us ing s imple Japanese I ' m sure we c o u l d a l l f o l l o w it but, y o u know, that's not necessari ly effective. A n d some o f the concepts, she cou ldn ' t exp la in properly. L i k e we wou ldn ' t understand the Japanese i n order to be able to use them. ... I can probably can figure [it] out faster [in E n g l i s h rather] than i f she was us ing Japanese. (Interview, November , 2002) A n d as Isabella states, a Japanese-only method w o u l d affect a l l areas o f learning such as instructions for activit ies and homework , explanations o f cul tural points, lessons i n v o l v i n g kanji, understanding vocabulary and grammar points. If the classes were taught a l l i n Japanese, students w o u l d "be very t i red," their learning experiences w o u l d be "frustrating" and they w o u l d "feel uncomfortable us ing E n g l i s h " to ask for help: the 106 "comfort l eve l dissipates". Students felt that they w o u l d vis i t the instructor 's office hour more often since they c o u l d not understand the lesson and w o u l d feel in t imidated to ask for help i n class. Some benefits that the students offered for i n the use o f Japanese-only were that it w o u l d give them more exposure to the T L and that there w o u l d be more interaction wi th the T L . M o r e o v e r , students might learn new vocabulary dur ing explanations that were a l l i n Japanese. A l s o , since students w o u l d get to l isten to an entire hour o f Japanese, students w o u l d greatly benefit f rom the mode l l i ng o f teacher talk i n order to learn and listen to increased quantities o f real Japanese speaking style. A l t h o u g h T L on ly has its benefits, there are some obvious trade-offs such as less understanding and more confusion. A s comment by Isabella illustrates the d i l emma: " i f we have forever , . . . then we c o u l d do everything i n Japanese. That w o u l d be great. Bu t , you k n o w , we don ' t have forever." 4.5.2.2 Purposes for Japanese Language Use A c c o r d i n g to the data f rom the student interviews, the consensus is that the instructor seemed to use a lot o f Japanese except for when students m a y not or have not understood. W h e n students were asked to describe the purposes for w h i c h their instructors used Japanese, most students repl ied by stating that the instructor used E n g l i s h when students were confused or d i d not understand. T h i s impl ies that instructors most l i k e l y used Japanese for mul t ip le purposes and swi tched to E n g l i s h when student reaction to ld them that they d i d not comprehend the Japanese. T h i s is i l lustrated i n D i a n a ' s comments : I w o u l d say, w e l l , [that] she speaks a lot o f Japanese but at the same t ime she knows when to l i ke expla in things i n E n g l i s h and when to expla in 107 things i n Japanese. A n d , u m w e l l I don ' t k n o w about other people but ... [I] don ' t carry a blank face l ike 9 0 % of the [time] ... [and] usual ly she knows that we don ' t understand. A n d she w o u l d exp la in it again i n Japanese unt i l we understand or, you k n o w , i n E n g l i s h . (Interview, November , 2002) A practice ment ioned by students was that the instructor tended to continue wi th their attempts to exp la in by means o f us ing other or s impler Japanese before changing to E n g l i s h . A l t h o u g h most students d i d not mention any functions i n particular, the few things that were ment ioned include the use o f Japanese for instructions and for the textbook dialogue lessons. One student even ment ioned that she thought M s . Inoue taught grammar mos t ly i n Japanese. 4.5.2.3 Purposes for English Language Use The students who were in terviewed c l a imed that, i n general, the instructors appeared to swi tch to E n g l i s h after reading the facia l expressions o f their students or when students d i d not respond when asked questions. F o r instance, Johnny commented that "when she's go ing through grammar and u m when the class doesn' t respond to something, you k n o w , maybe that means that we don ' t understand this [and] so then she ' l l exp la in it again i n E n g l i s h . " A l s o , T o d d ment ioned that, " I ' ve not iced at first she was t ry ing to exp la in it in Japanese. W h e n people . . . [have a] . . . , " ITmm?" face and they were l i ke ((makes a confused facial expression)) and she ' l l go on i n E n g l i s h . " T h e teachers were able to recognize when students d i d not or c o u l d not f o l l o w what was be ing said i n Japanese. T h i s seemed to have been a successful strategy because when asked to comment on the balance o f T L and E n g l i s h use by their instructors, none o f the students compla ined that they w o u l d have wanted their teacher to speak more E n g l i s h ; i n fact, a l l 108 students ment ioned that they were either fine wi th the balance o f Japanese and E n g l i s h or had wanted even more Japanese. The majori ty o f the students thought that the teachers' use o f E n g l i s h was for the purposes o f comprehension and clar i f icat ion. The c lass room functions for w h i c h students observed teachers us ing E n g l i s h i n this manner is for explanations about homework and tests, teaching grammar, m a k i n g announcements, ta lk ing about assignments, g i v i n g instructions, and exp la in ing complex vocabulary. Furthermore, one student not iced that his teacher used E n g l i s h for teaching cultural content since cultural explanations i n v o l v e d grammar and vocabulary that has yet to be taught. F o r h i m , the teacher d i d this for the purpose o f eff ic iency since it got the point across to the students faster than us ing Japanese. Ano the r way that teachers used E n g l i s h was for the purpose o f p rov id ing the background and context to set phrases so that students w o u l d k n o w the appropriate contexts for their usage. A s K r i s t a explained, "after i t ' s exp la ined to me i n E n g l i s h I feel okay. ' S o , here's the three reasons [for us ing this particular set phrase] ' . . . [and] I k n o w that I can defini tely use this w o r d . " A s , ment ioned earlier i n this chapter by M s . K i t a m u r a , students cannot be expected to understand anthropological analysis i n Japanese because this w o u l d be too diff icul t . E v e n the cul tural notes section i n the textbook is writ ten i n E n g l i s h . F i n a l l y , another student thought that E n g l i s h was used to teach grammar because the textbook explanations happened to be i n E n g l i s h . T h e use o f E n g l i s h by teachers dur ing grammar lessons, she thought, was perhaps inf luenced by the fact that the grammar explanat ion for each new grammar point was p rov ided i n E n g l i s h . 109 E v e n though this was an interesting point, this was one function for w h i c h none o f the in terviewed teachers ment ioned as a reason for us ing E n g l i s h dur ing grammar lessons. 4.5.2.4 Reflections on Instructors' Language Use O v e r a l l , the majori ty o f the students noted that they were satisfied wi th the amount o f Japanese and E n g l i s h being used by their teachers. N o n e o f the students in te rv iewed felt the need to have their teacher use more E n g l i s h and several students said that they w o u l d not m i n d i f their instructors used more Japanese. E v e n though M s . Inoue and M s . Y a b u n o used Japanese 8 0 % o f the t ime, a re la t ively h igh percentage compared to other studies o f T L use (e.g., D u f f & P o l i o , 1990; L i u et a l . , 2004), the students d i d not feel that the instructors used too much or too less Japanese. M o r e o v e r , this is consistent wi th results f rom D u f f and P o l i o ' s (1990) study i n w h i c h the majori ty o f the students reported that they were satisfied wi th the ratio o f T L and L I be ing used by their instructors. A s D i a n a and Isabella commented, M s . Y a b u n o used a lot o f Japanese but she also regulated her use o f the T L by accessing the E n g l i s h language when she felt necessary. F r o m the interviews, it appeared that the students were satisfied w i t h the balance o f T L and E n g l i s h use and that this was i n huge part a result o f the students k n o w i n g that their teachers were using E n g l i s h as an addit ional tool to scaffold their learning experiences. Furthermore, because the students were se ldom to ld to or felt direct pressure to use the T L exc lus ive ly , the atmosphere o f the class a l l owed students to use their L I : because the students observed that their teachers used E n g l i s h when teaching Japanese, the students felt safe to do the same. 110 The majori ty o f the students stated that, f rom the point o f v i e w as learners, their teachers' use o f E n g l i s h was useful and necessary. T h e function for w h i c h students felt it most necessary was dur ing their grammar lessons. A s Jason said: I think when we ' r e go ing over the grammar points ... [English] is important because you need to understand, you k n o w , w h y they're us ing the forms [that] they're using. A s much as people say [it], the translation i sn ' t a lways accurate. I think it is important, sometimes, to actually, y o u k n o w , i f y o u get the meaning o f the sentence i n one language then you can sort o f l ook at that sentence i n another language and get a feel for it. A n d , so yeah I think the grammar points and the examples they use there are important, [to be] in E n g l i s h . ... If she was us ing s imple Japanese I ' m sure we c o u l d a l l f o l l o w it but, you k n o w , that's not necessari ly effective. A n d some o f the concepts, she cou ldn ' t exp la in properly. L i k e we wou ldn ' t understand the Japanese i n order to be able to use them. ... That wou ldn ' t be very effective, r ight? ... I can probably can figure that out faster than i f she was us ing Japanese. (Interview, November , 2002) Students not on ly found that E n g l i s h use dur ing the grammar explanations were efficient and effective, but they also felt, as the teachers defini tely revealed i n their interviews, that t ime was an important factor i n terms o f the cu r r i cu lum and the t ime per iod that teachers had to cover the required course materials. If more t ime was avai lable for the course, students w o u l d want the teacher to use more Japanese since there w o u l d be t ime to try and comprehend the explanations i n Japanese. A s D i a n a commented, i f there were more t ime ... for the class ... it w o u l d be better i f she speaks more Japanese. L i k e , I don ' t m i n d her repeating the same thing over and over again unt i l I real ly understand the who le thing i n Japanese. B u t since we on ly have an hour or fifty minutes so we can ' t rea l ly do that. (Interview, November , 2002). Some students mentioned that they preferred to have instructions expla ined in E n g l i s h . M s . Inoue's student, Johnny, stated that students d idn ' t necessarily ask for c lar i f ica t ion o f instructions when they were not sure and sometimes they have even assumed that they have understood. A l s o , P h i l ment ioned that sometimes the teacher 111 spoke a lot o f Japanese and spoke it very fast. H e real ly had a hard t ime and hoped that she w o u l d speak more E n g l i s h so that he c o u l d understand her explanations. O n the other hand, several students stated that they enjoyed the high frequency o f Japanese spoken i n class. T h e y felt that they were be ing forced to listen to Japanese and that this helped them develop and improve their overa l l language sk i l l s . E v e n though this p roved to be chal lenging, students ment ioned that they preferred to hear their teacher use s imple Japanese before resorting to E n g l i s h use. A s T o d d expla ined: I think i t ' s important to immerse yourself i n the environment [so] that get comfortable i n the language because we have, we ' re expose[d] to so litt le Japanese outside o f school . . . . [F]our hours [a] week is a l l we have. So , l ike the more Japanese we listen to, that we practice, yeah. T h e more we write the better we get: the more comfortable we get w i th the language. (Interview, November , 2002) F o r the most part students appeared to have adjusted w e l l to their teachers' balance o f Japanese and E n g l i s h use i n the c lassroom. Espec i a l l y w i t h new vocabulary items, students not iced that teachers used Japanese first and then automatical ly, after a short pause, said the E n g l i s h translation. T h i s way, students were able to hear the Japanese and then hear its equivalent i n E n g l i s h . A n n a described her experience wi th such practice as fo l lows : So , [the] first thing, she says that i n Japanese once; [she] just want[s] to see i f people understand. A n d also, I think i t ' s a good practice for us because [the] first t ime we can listen to a Japanese part and then [we can] see how m u c h we understand and then compare to the E n g l i s h part to see i f that part we got ... [it] correct. L. I f I don ' t understand, yeah, ((laughs)) I w i l l be wa i t ing for the E n g l i s h part. (Interview, November , 2002) W h e n students had trouble understanding, they were able to f ind other methods to assist themselves such as searching for the E n g l i s h explanations i n the textbook, asking a f e l low classmate, and referring;back to the texts (e.g., instructions on handout or pictures 112 on the overhead projector). In general, the students i n both classes appeared to be satisfied wi th their instructors ' use o f language i n the c lassroom. T h i s w o u l d probably not have been the case i f E n g l i s h was not a part o f their lessons. The instructors used a variety o f strategies us ing language to scaffold their students learning. (See Sect ion 4.6.) Furthermore, as w i l l be discussed in the next section o f this chapter, students were able to provide strategies to assist each other as w e l l . 4 . 5 . 3 Classroom Data A s ment ioned earlier, it was found that M s . Inoue and M s . Y a b u n o used an average o f 8 0 % o f Japanese i n their classrooms. A s ment ioned by their students, their teachers used a lot o f Japanese for a variety o f functions. Because the T L dominated almost a l l aspects o f their teaching, the focus here w i l l be to get an understanding o f the purposes i n w h i c h the instructors swi tched to us ing E n g l i s h . F r o m the four sessions selected for data analysis, E n g l i s h and m i x e d utterances compr i sed 2 0 % o f a l l spoken language i n class. 113 T a b l e 4.11 T o p F i v e P u r p o s e s fo r E n g l i s h U s e ( E n g l i s h & M i x e d Ut t e rances ) r a n k M s . Inoue M s . Y a b u n o P u r p o s e # o f u t terances % P u r p o s e # o f u t te rances % #1 administrat ive 168 37 grammar 178 42 #2 rev iew test answers 47 10 draw students' attention 44 10 #3 important/key words 47 10 back to back translations 43 10 #4 back to back translations 40 9 ease o f use; eff ic iency 31 7 #5 draw students' attention 32 7 rev iew test answers 19 4 Overa l l , it was found that the instructors' ma in purposes for E n g l i s h language use and m i x e d utterances var ied quite s ignif icant ly. M s . Inoue had a strong preference for us ing E n g l i s h and m i x e d utterance for administrative tasks (168 utterances), whereas M s . Y a b u n o on ly had a total o f 17 utterances for 'administrat ive purposes. ' M s . Y a b u n o used E n g l i s h and m i x e d utterances most frequently for grammar related tasks (178 utterances), wh i l e M s . Inoue used on ly 30 times. The top use o f each instructor d i d not even make it as one o f the top five purposes o f the other instructor. I w i l l illustrate h o w the instructors used E n g l i s h and m i x e d utterances for five o f these purposes: exp la in ing grammar, addressing administrat ive issues, g i v i n g back to back translations, d rawing students' attention, and r e v i e w i n g test answers. The data revealed that M s . Yabuno , who used E n g l i s h and m i x e d utterances the most for grammar related tasks, and M s . Inoue, w h o used it m u c h less, used E n g l i s h to 114 supplement the grammar (or metal inguist ic) lessons because some structures 1) carry nuances or were complex and best expla ined i n E n g l i s h , 2) use k e y grammatical terminology, and 3) u t i l ize the same terminology but serve different grammatical functions (i.e., comparat ive analysis). In the f o l l o w i n g example , a student asked i f two phrases had ident ical meanings: Ikanai wake ni wa ikanai and ikanakute wa ikemasen and M s . Inoue helped expla in the slight difference i n meaning that each w o r d carries. Excerpt 4.15 Grammar Lesson: 'x' wake ni wa ikanai ('cannot do 'x") 1. Inoue: Ikanakute wa ikemasen. Onaji imi desu ne. Imi wa onaji. {I have to go. It's the s a m e meaning. Mean ing is the same.} T h e same meaning. A l m o s t the same meaning but the phrase is different. So i n this case gakusei B {student B} feels k i n d o f obl iga t ion because sensei 's c o m i n g . I must go. (Class room Lecture , Inoue, N o v e m b e r 26, 2002). In this example , M s . Inoue uses E n g l i s h to describe a slight difference i n the two structures. E v e n though they both mean T have to go, ' ikanai wake ni wa ikanai has a feel ing o f obl igat ion wh i l e ikanakute wa ikemasen does not. Instructors also used E n g l i s h when they used grammatical te rminology dur ing their grammar lessons. In the f o l l o w i n g , M s . Y a b u n o uses the E n g l i s h terms for 'honor i f ic f o r m ' and 'humble f o r m ' instead o f us ing its Japanese equivalents. Excerpt 4.16 Lesson: Chapter 5 Kaiwa #1 1. Y a b u n o : Ukagaitai n desu ga. Ukagau. {May (I) ask (you a quest ion)? T o ask (humble form)} Honorific fo rm or humble form? 2. Students: H u m b l e . 3. Y a b u n o : Jya moto no doushi wa nan desu ka. {Okay, what is it's original verb?} H u m b l e form o f what? 115 4. Pau l : Kiki. Kiku. {To ask. T o ask.} (Class Lecture , Y a b u n o , N o v e m b e r 12, 2002) In this next excerpt, M s . Y a b u n o begins to expla in h o w the noun modi f ica t ion o f kata and hito, both meaning 'person ' , can change when mod i f i ed by se ga takai (tall). W h e n she describes the noun modif ica t ion she used the te rminology ' m o d i f y ' , ' n o u n ' , 'noun modi f i ca t ion ' and 'noun m o d i f y i n g clause ' . Excerpt 4.17 Lesson: Chapter 4 Kaiwa #1 1. Y a b u n o : T h i s whole thing: se ga takai {tall} + or se no takai {tall} modi fy this noun kata {person} or hito, ne {person, okay?}. Dakara, kono ga wa {And so, this ((nominative c a s e marker ga)) is} i n noun modif ica t ion sometimes y o u can change this ga {((nominative c a s e marker ga))} and use no {((genitive case marker no))} instead. B u t when your noun m o d i f y i n g clause is very long , y o u don ' t use no y o u use ga {((nominative c a s e marker ga))}. B u t i f i t ' s very short y o u can use no instead o f ga {((nominative c a s e marker ga))}. (Class Lecture , Y a b u n o , N o v e m b e r 4, 2002) Other grammatical terms used were: particle, structure, past tense, negative, adverb, adjective, noun phrase, te-form, irregular humble fo rm, p la in fo rm, causative form. T h i r d l y , E n g l i s h was used to help compare two different uses for the same terminology. In the f o l l o w i n g example, M s . Y a b u n o describes the difference i n usage o f the term saki. Here , M s . Y a b u n o explains the difference between two usages o f the w o r d 'saki'. T o make her explanat ion clear, she not on ly provides an example o f where students have heard the w o r d 'saki' previous to this lesson, but she also explains the difference i n E n g l i s h . Excerpt 4.18 Lesson: Chapter 5 Kaiwa #1 1. Y a b u n o : De kono saki to iu ji desu yo ne. Osaki ni shitsurei shimasutte iu no wa l eaving before someone ne. Sono saki desu yo ne. {Okay 116 and this word 'saki'. T h e meaning of 'osaki ni shitsurei shimasutte'is ' leaving before someone ," alright?} Before . Demo kore wa {But this} refers to destination. T h e end. T h e other end where you g o . . . . Whe re you ' re s tudying + univers i ty you ' re s tudying at. Ryuugaku saki. {Study abroad destination.} (Class Lecture , N o v e m b e r 12, 2002) T h e second use o f E n g l i s h was for administrative tasks, w h i c h inc lude i tems related spec i f ica l ly to announcing tests, d iscussing schedule changes and such. D u r i n g the month o f November , the students were i n v o l v e d wi th preparing to in terview native Japanese speaking international students s tudying E n g l i s h at W C U . In this next excerpt, M s . Inoue tr ied to expla in to her students about the schedul ing o f the actual interviews. A t first she began to expla in things in Japanese but as the content o f her message got more diff icul t to express, not due to language di f f icul ty but d i f f icul ty w i th the schedul ing process, she swi tched to E n g l i s h . It w o u l d seem that M s . Inoue used E n g l i s h so that what she wanted to express c o u l d be communica ted c lear ly and q u i c k l y . E x c e r p t 4.19 I n t e r v i e w s c h e d u l i n g a n n o u n c e m e n t 1. Inoue: Kono aida kikimashita keredomo san-ji, yo-ji sono jikantai de daijoubu desu ka, mina-san. Juuichi-gatsu juuhachi-nichi no san-ji, yo-ji. De, dochira demo ii n desu. Mou muzukashii no de {[(I) a s k e d you the other time three o'clock, four o 'c lock is it okay around that time, c l a s s? Three o 'clock, four o 'c lock of November 1 8 t h . A n d either one is fine. B e c a u s e it's too difficult} (Class Lecture , N o v e m b e r 4, 2002) The third purpose for E n g l i s h was for translating f rom Japanese to E n g l i s h or v ice versa wi th in the same utterance or by means o f sentences one after another. A s students ment ioned i n their interviews, this is one strategy the teachers used to help students wi th Japanese phrases and vocabulary. M o s t t imes, the teacher w o u l d say the Japanese w o r d or phrase and then immedia te ly f o l l o w it w i th its translation. T h i s strategy assisted 117 students by p rov id ing the meaning o f the w o r d or phrase so that students c o u l d understand the meaning right away without hav ing a break i n communica t ion ; the teacher c o u l d prevent students be ing confused and the lesson d i d not need to be interrupted s i m p l y to c lar i fy the def ini t ion o f the w o r d or phrase. A l s o , as A n n a mentioned, it c o u l d help students q u i c k l y check i f they had understood what the teacher had just said. Excerpt 4.20 Lesson: Chapter 5 Kaiwa #3 1. Inoue: Dou desu ka. {How about it?} 2. E rn ie : Sangyoume. {The third line.} 3. Inoue: Sangyoume. The third l ine . {The third line.} (Class Lecture , N o v e m b e r 12, 2002) Excerpt 4.21 Interview reflection composition task 1. Inoue: Take out your o w n sheet jibun no ruusuriifu de ii desu. {Your own sheet your own loose-leaf is fine.} (Class Lecture , N o v e m b e r 19, 2002) Excerpt 4.22 Lesson: Chapter 5 Kaiwa #3 1. Y a b u n o : Sou desu yone. Sono toki ni kimetara dou. {That's right. H o w about deciding at that time?} H o w 'bout ++. dec id ing it + that t ime, ne. {Okay?} Sono toki ni kimetara dou. {How about deciding at that time?} (Class Lecture , Inoue, N o v e m b e r 19, 2002) A s these examples illustrate, by immedia te ly g i v i n g students the E n g l i s h equivalent the students understood the w o r d or phrase and the lesson cont inued without be ing interrupted. A l s o , students' thought processes as they l istened d i d not need to be interrupted either. These smal l and short instances o f assistance seemed to be a useful strategy as it p rov ided scaffolding to students w h o ment ioned that they usual ly had di f f icul ty w i th vocabulary. 118 E n g l i s h was also used to draw students' attention to certain words and phrases and for emphasis. F o r example , towards the end o f a qu iz M s . Inoue announced "thirty seconds!" to alert students as to how much t ime was left. A l s o , when she read f rom a handout on g i v i n g advice that l is ted the ind iv idua l expressions a long wi th their corresponding degrees o f politeness, she drew the students' attention by announcing i n E n g l i s h "the difference i s " before she began her explanat ion o f the various degrees o f politeness that each expression represented. M s . Y a b u n o used E n g l i s h i n the same way. T h i s f o l l o w i n g excerpt illustrates a situation when M s . Y a b u n o was t ry ing to have students identify the miss ing (i.e., impl ied) particle o f a sentence f rom the dialogue i n the textbook. W h e n students d idn ' t answer, she tried us ing E n g l i s h two separate times (L ine 3 and 5) i n order to emphasize the element that the students should be examin ing . The text that the students were t ry ing to analyze has been double underl ined. E x c e r p t 4.23 L e s s o n : C h a p t e r 4 Kaiwa #1 1. Students: ++. (x). 2. Y a b u n o : 'Nado'l 'Nado'dake de Un desu ka. {'Etcetera'? You ' r e fine with 'etcetera'?} + L o o k at the structure. + Josei no beneoshi + mada ookunai. Jyoshi irimasen ka. {Female lawyers + not many yet. Don't (you) need a particle?} 3. Students: ((no response)) 4. Y a b u n o : Joshi wa. ++ Josei no bengoshi + mada ookunai no yo. {The particle? ++ Fema le lawyers + there aren't many yet, you know.} Part icle . ++ Nan ga hitsuyou desu ka. {What is necessary?} 5. Students: ++. (x). 6. Y a b u n o : Nani. {What?} 7. Shel ley: Wa. {Topic marker wa.) 8. Y a b u n o : Wa. Sou desu yo ne. {Topic marker wa. That ' s right, isn't it?} 119 (Class room Lecture , N o v e m b e r 12, 2002) Las t l y , the E n g l i s h was used when answers to the test were rev iewed. E v e n though Japanese was used, for the most part, dur ing the lessons that i n v o l v e d these test i tems, it seemed that the task o f r ev iewing test answers s ignal led a swi tch into E n g l i s h . There are two reasons that can help expla in this. Fi rs t o f a l l , it is a rev iew of the answers and, therefore, the teachers wanted to make test comments clear to a l l students -especia l ly to those students who might have answered the question incorrect ly . Secondly , since it was a rev iew session, i n order to save t ime instructors used E n g l i s h i n order to be t ime efficient. A thi rd explanation c o u l d be because they were not t ry ing to save t ime, but because they were running out o f class t ime. T h i s was the case wi th M s . Inoue, who left the test answer rev iew session unt i l the very end o f class w i th o n l y a few minutes left to go over the answers. H o w e v e r , both instructors used an increased amount o f E n g l i s h dur ing these times. W h a t fo l lows is M s . Inoue's rev iew o f section four on the test. E x c e r p t 4.24 Tes t a n s w e r s ' r e v i e w session 1. Inoue: Sect ion four, the next section. + W h y the under l ined part is inappropriate. Y o u r explanation i n E n g l i s h . I want (x) you to write something + ta lk ing about prais ing i f somebody praises + your f ami ly members. If you say, i f you write Japanese people do not agree wi th that k i n d o f comment . If your answer is that + not enough explanation. O k a y ? Lo t s o f people say Japanese people do not agree. Japanese people do not praise + ah your o w n fami ly members. That ' s not enough, okay? I wanted y o u to write it is impol i t e or it is rude to say something good about your f ami ly members. That ' s important part. It is rude. It is impol i te . Or , Japanese people are humble . T h e y don ' t want to show off. O k a y ? That k i n d o f + words I was l o o k i n g for. (C lass room Lecture , N o v e m b e r 12, 2002) 120 In this excerpt, M s . Inoue d i d not use Japanese at a l l , even though she used Japanese during her actual language lessons. In Excerp t 4.25, M s . Y a b u n o is r ev i ewing the answers f rom section two o n the exact same test: E x c e r p t 4.25 Tes t a n s w e r s ' r ev i ew session 1. Y a b u n o : De, eeto niban mite kudasai «e.{And, un p lease look at number two, okay?} Y o u ' r e ta lk ing to your close friend, + very close friend, That means y o u need to use casual form, casual speech, So i f y o u use very formal speech l ike temo ii desu ka {can I?} for number two, [the] formali ty is wrong, ++. Sore kara + eeto. {And then, um.} In a way , a pol i te Japanese speaker w o u l d . Y o u have to say no i n a way a pol i te Japanese speaker w o u l d say 'sore wa chotto' {but}. + It is pol i te but i t ' s not poli te enough. I f you ' re pol i te y o u w o u l d provide some k i n d o f reason. Watashi mo ima tsukatte iru no de + tsukatte irukara. {I a m using it right now also + because (I'm) using (it).} + A lot o f y o u used no de {because} for reason, to show the reason, but i n casual speech + it should be kara {because}. + D i d n ' t take any point for that but it should be kara {because}. A n d instead o f sumimasen {sorry} it should be gomen {sorry}. r (Class room Lecture, N o v e m b e r 12, 2002) A l t h o u g h , overa l l , M s . Y a b u n o used m u c h less E n g l i s h dur ing her test answer rev iew sessions, it was one o f both teacher's top f ive purposes for the use o f E n g l i s h . The five most c o m m o n uses o f the E n g l i s h language for each instructor is summar ized i n Table 4.11. 4.5.4 D i s c u s s i o n The instructors seemed to agree that they favoured the O p t i m a l U s e Pos i t ion , and consciously made efforts to use as m u c h T L as possible, w h i l e r ecogn iz ing that code-swi tching w o u l d be the most effective method for teaching J F L at W C U . The language o f instruction, besides the T L , was E n g l i s h and since many students and even teachers 121 were E S L , everyone was w e l l aware o f the role that L I p layed i n p rov id ing scaffolding to students. Others that have found the use o f L I beneficial inc lude A n t o n and D i C a m i l l a (1999), V i l l a m i l and de Guerrero (1996), and S w a i n and L a p k i n (2000). T h e target language was used for a variety o f purposes. It was used for instructions, commands , r ev i ewing and pract ic ing T L content, and, exp la in ing and g i v i n g examples for cha l lenging lesson content. Furthermore, the T L was used to ask questions or have discussions to e l ic i t T L responses, and for responding to students w h o posed questions i n the T L . A c c o r d i n g to the students, the instructor used E n g l i s h when they felt that Japanese might hinder the comprehension or negat ively affect the c lar i ty o f the lesson content. The students ment ioned that the teachers' were sensitive to their needs and were able to interpret their reactions (e.g., b lank or confused facial expressions or getting no response) and adjust their T L / L 1 use accordingly . T h e students appreciated their teachers' use o f code-swi tching and preferred it over a target language-only type o f learning environment. S ince M s . Inoue and M s . Y a b u n o were able to use h igh frequencies o f the T L and yet s t i l l satisfy their students' needs, it appears that a h igh ratio o f T L use does not necessarily result i n insecure and anxious students. T h i s is consistent w i t h L e v i n e ' s (2003) study that examined the relat ionship between language use and anxiety. 4.6 P u r p o s e s f o r Japanese , E n g l i s h a n d O t h e r L a n g u a g e s ' U s e b y S tuden t s F r o m the interviews o f both the instructors and the students, as w e l l as m y o w n observations dur ing class lectures and pa i rwork the students spoke other languages other than E n g l i s h . A l t h o u g h the c o m m o n language between a l l members o f the c lassroom commun i ty was E n g l i s h , for many E n g l i s h was not their L I . F o r many, their native 122 language ( N L ) was Chinese (either M a n d a r i n or Cantonese). T h i s meant that the Chinese background students were learning Japanese through their L 2 , E n g l i s h , or even sometimes E n g l i s h was their L 3 . T h i s section w i l l l ook at issues that revolve around such questions as: W h e n d i d students use their N L ? F o r what purposes d i d they feel the needed to use their L I or E n g l i s h ? H o w d i d students use language to enhance their learning experience? 4.6.1 Instructors' and Focal Instructors' Comments A c c o r d i n g to a l l the J F L instructors, it was quite noticeable that most students enrol led i n the J F L classes had Chinese language background. M s . M u r a k a m i even c l a imed that 9 9 % were Chinese . M s . Y o u n g expla ined what she observed: "95 per cent are Chinese: m a i n l y f rom H o n g K o n g , and then T a i w a n , and then M a i n l a n d C h i n a . A h , [there are] very few Caucasians l ike u m three, yeah three or four Caucas ians ." In fact M s . C h e n expla ined that perhaps Caucas ian studentfs] are int imidated: many o f them. A n d maybe that's w h y we end up hav ing such large numbers o f Chinese speaking students i n class wi th very few Caucas ian students, although we are i n an E n g l i s h speaking univers i ty ." Despi te hav ing many Chinese language background students, most teachers, i n general, d i d not feel its effects dur ing the c lass room lectures. H o w e v e r , the students' L I and/or E n g l i s h seeped i n dur ing smal l group and pa i rwork sessions: most students interacted i n their L I and/or E n g l i s h and not Japanese. W h e n this happened i n M s . Y o u n g ' s class she a lways to ld them to "try not to speak any other language except Japanese." A l s o , as M s . Sasaki wa lked around her c lassroom, she to ld students "Japanese o n l y . " A s for M s . M u r a k a m i , when students kept ta lk ing i n their L I and/or 123 E n g l i s h and they were off-task, she w o u l d approach them as say, "Nihongo de! Nihongo de!" ("In Japanese! In Japanese!"). Interestingly, M s . Y a b u n o and M s . Inoue d i d not make any such comments dur ing their interviews and no such practice was observed or audio-recorded in either o f their classes. The majori ty o f the instructors saw the benefits o f L I use and no teacher tried to ban its use f rom their classes. F o r example , teachers such as M s . M u r a k a m i and M s . Inoue reported that students used their N L because they m a y be insecure and not confident i n their T L abi l i ty and be ing able to use their L I made them feel more comfortable. Ano the r purpose for us ing other language besides the T L is that it is much easier to communica te and discuss their ideas. A s M s . Inoue commented, "the most important this is ... [that] they share their op in ion and brainstorm", and, furthermore, as M s . C h e n added, students may require E n g l i s h or Chinese to "get inspi red ." T h i r d l y , the L I was used to help students expla in grammar structures to each other. In M s . Y a b u n o ' s op in ion , this was a very good method: • 'Cause i f one student, w e l l , i f when they're w o r k i n g together l ike pa i rwork or something, i f one o f them ah does not understand what ' s go ing on on certain grammar or something, [and so] i f the other person can help, and [also] I think i t ' s go ing to be very tough to help i n Japanese, r ight? So they can help i n E n g l i s h or Chinese o f K o r e a n I think that's good. (Interview, November , 2002) The other purpose o f students use o f L I or E n g l i s h ment ioned i n the instructor interviews was for the purpose o f comprehension checks. M s . Tanaka observed that students used their L I to conf i rm wi th each other by asking, " M a y b e this is what the teacher sa id?" In general, instructors a l l owed students to use their L I and/or E n g l i s h dur ing peer-peer interaction. If the purpose o f the task was to practice their speaking sk i l l s then teachers tended to r emind students to speak Japanese and for the most part the data 124 revealed that the students d i d use Japanese for oral practice tasks. H o w e v e r , dur ing tasks i n w h i c h students needed to discuss their ideas i n order to produce a product i n the T L (e.g., wr i t ing a compos i t ion , creating a list o f in terview questions, preparing materials for the oral exam) then teachers acknowledged the benefits o f the L I and/or E n g l i s h to verbal ize their th ink ing processes and discuss the content o f the task. A s M s . Tanaka said, i t ' s "just natural behaviour" to communicate i n the L I and/or E n g l i s h . 4.6.2 S t u d e n t s ' C o m m e n t s The student in terviews revealed that most students d i d not use the Japanese except when referring to or creating the required content o f the task. It seemed that some students d i d not feel confident i n their speaking abi l i ty and hesitated to use Japanese as illustrated i n Sean's comment : "I don ' t wanna try and embarrass m y s e l f us ing Japanese." Th i s was also supported i n the c lassroom data. A s they were s t i l l at an intermediate leve l , it s t i l l took some t ime before Japanese utterances w o u l d come out more spontaneously and easily. W h a t P h i l ' s a i d is typ ica l o f some o f the student response: "It 's hard. It's hard for me to ask quest ion i n Japanese. I also have to th ink to organize [what I want to say] first." W h e n P h i l v i s i ted M s . Y a b u n o dur ing her office hours, he a lways prepared his in i t ia l question beforehand even though "after w h e n she keep[s] ask ing me question[s] back [in Japanese] then I w i l l just [think], " O h , man . " [and say] " M o w ichido" {Please repeat once again} ." A s for Gabr i e l l a , she commented that she w o u l d use Japanese i f " i t ' s s imple l ike just asking something, ' W h a t is i t ? ' ... but [if] i t ' s too diff icul t to answer a question then usual ly [I] use E n g l i s h . " A n n a , a student I w o u l d describe as quite confident, mentioned that, "I don ' t th ink i t ' s good to just use your o w n language [for] the who le class. T h e n 125 there's no point o f learning that new language [that] you ' re learn ing ." She continued by saying that she thinks it w o u l d be good to use Japanese when m a k i n g sma l l talk w i t h classmates. Some o f the expressions, but not sentences she emphasized, that she l i ked to use and makes an effort to use were taihen desu ne {Isn't it ha rdwork?} , ganbatte {best o f l uck} , and sayou nara {goodbye}. W i t h respect to L I and E n g l i s h use, the students commented that they preferred to use L I or E n g l i s h because it felt natural, was more comfortable, was easier to understand than Japanese for explanations, and created a better learning atmosphere. Firs t o f a l l , i f the student had not been here for a long t ime and d i d not speak E n g l i s h fluently, then it felt unnatural to communica te i n any other language other than the L I and/or E n g l i s h when both partners spoke the same language. Isabella, a K o r e a n native speaker, said h o w she felt a w k w a r d hav ing to speak Japanese w i t h another K o r e a n speaker: "I feel k inda u m we i rd speaking Japanese w i t h K o r e a n 'cause I ' m , h o w I ' m supposed to say, ah I ' m k inda afraid o f what he might think o f me speaking. I th ink they're gonna think l ike . ' W h y is she speaking Japanese and stuff?' 'Is she showing o f f ? ' " T h i s was also a sentiment ment ioned by K o r e a n native pairs i n K i m ' s study (2005). Isabella also shared her story about her experience last year: W e had to do ah oral presentation ... w i t h a partner. So when we have to write a ah wri te out a short p lay I had a K o r e a n partner and it was m u c h easier 'cause w e both understand what we ' re t ry ing to say. (Interview, November , 2002). Therefore, us ing the L I and/or E n g l i s h w i t h a f e l low classmate seemed more natural and created more amicable learning relat ionship; students d i d not have to feel threatened or defensive. 126 S i m i l a r l y , students felt more comfortable us ing their L I or E n g l i s h relative to speaking Japanese. S ince not everyone was yet fluent i n the T L , us ing the L I or E n g l i s h w o u l d feel much more comfortable than taking r isks by us ing Japanese. B r a d , a Chinese speaker w h o had l i v e d here since he was four years o l d and was, therefore, fluent i n E n g l i s h , commented that even though he knew Cantonese he felt more comfortable communica t ing i n E n g l i s h because he was i n Canada. K e l l y , shared her thought on L I / E n g l i s h language use: W h e n y o u try to learn a second language u m you ' re not comfortable ... us ing it. So , maybe you have to use l ike spend l ike ah few minutes to put those [Japanese] things i n your head before you can actually say it out. So by the t ime you want to say i t i t ' s already real ly late. So , I guess ... [if you] wanna get first hand answers [and] ... you wanna instant response and stuff ... I ' l l use m y first language or E n g l i s h . (Interview, November , 2002) F r o m these examples, it is evident that, as a result, communica t ing i n the N L or E n g l i s h made students feel more comfortable i n class. If a F L student started responding i n Japanese, the person at the other end, as ment ioned by Isabella and Sean, w o u l d l i k e l y think that "they're real ly c o c k y " , thus m a k i n g the learning partnership awkward . T h i r d , the N L or E n g l i s h , the students felt, gave them a communica t ion tool that a l l owed them to talk about the language (i.e., Japanese) to enhance their understanding o f Japanese, much more than they c o u l d achieve i f us ing on ly Japanese. G a b r i e l l a preferred E n g l i s h because she c o u l d use E n g l i s h w i th her partners to ask questions and hear answers i n E n g l i s h , too. T h i s , she said, was better and easier to understand because when she was alone, she d idn ' t feel that she c o u l d ask for help. S i m i l a r l y , Sean and W e n d i ment ioned that they felt E n g l i s h was useful since he c o u l d use it to understand what was 127 go ing on dur ing the classes by asking his friends for help. F o r Sean, he felt that this was more effective than i f he were to try to use Japanese. Las t l y , the students ment ioned that being able to access their L I and E n g l i s h helped create a better learning environment i n the F L classroom. A l l o w i n g the students to use their N L or E n g l i s h created an learning atmosphere that was more conducive to learning. F o r example , i n B r a d ' s in terview he ment ioned that " i f she d i d say ... you can on ly speak Japanese, then people might not even, they w i l l participate less i n class because they're shy about us ing Japanese." In addi t ion, being paired wi th and sharing the same L I helped b u i l d friendship and a rapport that was connected wi th language and culture. A n n a who said how, by sharing the N L , she was able to get k n o w more people faster because they had s imi la r backgrounds. 4.6.3 C l a s s r o o m D a t a T h e data compar ing student language use act ivi ty dur ing c lassroom lectures compared to pa i rwork tasks revealed that student use o f Japanese decreased w h i l e N L or E n g l i s h language use increased. W h y were student us ing more N L or E n g l i s h and code-swi tch ing dur ing peer task? W h a t purposes necessitated the use o f N L or E n g l i s h use and code-swi tching? The data f rom the c lassroom were gathered f rom three distinct activit ies. These tasks were chosen because they represented a range o f act ivi ty types w h i c h had the most amount o f peer group audio-recordings. T h e three tasks were: 1) oral practice us ing praise and back-channel l ing cues (4 peer groups), 2) an oral examinat ion preparation session (5 peer groups), and 3) a compos i t ion wr i t ing task (4 peer groups). E a c h utterance was coded into categories as they emerged f rom the data. S ince the pairs that 128 shared Chinese as their L I had more variat ion i n m i x e d utterances (than those whose c o m m o n language was on ly Eng l i sh ) , i n the end, a l l m i x e d combinat ions o f utterances were l umped into one language group ca l l ed ' m i x e d ' . S i m i l a r l y , a l l ' c o m m o n language' ( C L ) utterances (either E n g l i s h , M a n d a r i n or Cantonese) were combined into one larger language group labe l led as ' C L " . A s a result, the utterances were separated as either T L , C L Or m i x e d . U s i n g these three class activit ies, the utterances were coded and categories for the purposes for language use emerged. It was found that dur ing peer-peer interactive tasks, the most frequent uses o f the L I (Eng l i sh , M a n d a r i n and/or Cantonese) and m i x e d utterances was for task management, off-task interaction, metal inguist ic talk, and meta-task task. Others that were less frequent were translations for N L use, and, for m i x e d language use, the N L for expressing the actual N L equivalent o f a w o r d or phrase that students wanted to write or say i n the T L . Table 4.12 and Tab le 4.13 provides an outline and gives the frequency o f N L and m i x e d use, respectively, dur ing the three peer tasks. Table 4.12 Top Five Purposes for CL Use during Pair Tasks Purpose Frequency (%) #1 task management 47 #2 off-task interaction 20 #3 metal inguist ic talk 19 #4 meta-task talk 16 #5 translations 4 Table 4.13 Top Five Purposes for Mixed Language Use during Pair Tasks Purpose Frequency (%) #1 metal inguist ic talk 52 #2 task management 35 #3 off-task interaction 6 #4 N L for actual content 4 #5 translations 2 129 Task management was by far the purpose for w h i c h the C L was used the most. T a s k management includes utterances that i nvo lve managing h o w to do proceed and carry on the task, negotiat ing the content o f the task, d iscussing h o w to structure the actual text (oral or written) (e.g., how to organize what they write) and for mainta in ing and regulat ing the f l ow o f the interaction. Off-task and side comments also u t i l i zed the C L . T h i s category includes conversations that are not direct ly related to the task or any comments made on the side that is not direct ly related to task content. F o r example , students discussed their other classes, their plans for winter hol idays , made jokes and such. T h e C L was used for metal inguist ic purposes. Meta l ingu i s t i c talk consisted o f peer interactions around the Japanese language itself. F o r example , this c o u l d inc lude ta lk ing about language choice and structures and also to discuss language problems. O n the other hand, students used the C L to talk about the actual task cr i ter ia or task instructions (meta-task). In addit ion, when requesting and r ep ly ing to requests for translations, student d i d so by us ing the C L . T h i s also inc luded unsol ic i ted translations. Las t l y , students incorporated the N L when they said the N L equivalent o f a Japanese phrase or sentence i n order to let the other group member k n o w what it was that they wished to say or write i n the T L . F o r a variety o f reasons, especial ly those ment ioned by the students i n Sect ion 4.5.2, students found it effective to use the C L for task management, off-task interaction, metal inguist ic talk, meta-task talk, and the g iv ing and requesting o f translations. In Excerp t 4.6, dur ing their compos i t ion task, M i h o and Sheri try to recal l the name o f the course that their interviewee took so that they c o u l d figure out what to wri te i n their in terview reflection compos i t ion . 130 E x c e r p t 4.26 I n t e r v i e w ref lec t ion c o m p o s i t i o n t a sk ( M i h o : H L L ; S h e r i : C h i n e s e ) 1. M i h o : I th ink i t ' s ca l led yeah u m d id she say what i t ' s ca l led? I th ink i t ' s A r t Studies. 2. Sher i : She s a i d ' s o m e t h i n g cul tura l ' . 3. M i h o : Y e a h . 4. Sheri : That ' s w h y . + I d idn ' t know. 5. M i h o : W e can write l ike + I ' m pretty sure i t ' s A r t Studies 'cause m y friends are taking (x). B u t we can say i n A r t Studies they learn cul tural stuff. + So then + Ichiban muzukashii kamoku wa {the most difficult subject is} or is this [under] another topic? A r e we a l lowed to talk about it? 6. Sheri : O r maybe w e can just say the on ly + just l ike the on ly u m subject she's tak ing that 's a l l i n E n g l i s h is culture. 7. M i h o : O k a y . 8. Sheri : U m . + + 9. M i h o : H o w do I, h o w do I say that (xx)? Kazuko-san wa {Kazuko is} ++ (x) eigo {English}, no I don ' t k n o w h o w to say it. 10. Sher i : Kazuko-san wa ++ totte iru kamoku no naka de um + ei- zenbu eigo de + oshite= {Kazuko ++ among the subjects she's taking + en- in all English + teaching= 11. M i h o : -Zenbu eigo + zenbu ++ eigo tsukatte ru no wa. {All English + all ++ the (one) using English.} I think eigo {English} yeah. +++ Wo totte iru Kazuko-san, totte- Kazuko-san ga totte iru. ++ {Kazuko who is taking, take- that Kazuko is taking} 12. Sher i : To-tte iru. {Is taking.} ( (wri t ing down)) Totte iru. {Is taking.} 13. M i h o : Totte iru. {Is taking.} 14. Sheri : Kamoku. {Subject.} 15. M i h o : Kamoku. Totte iru kamoku no naka de. {Subject. Among the subjects (that she's) taking} 16. Sher i : Ka-mo-ku. +Totte= {Subject. Take.} .131 17. M i h o : =Naka de + zenbu, zenbu eigo + zenbu eigo +++. {Among al l , all Engl i sh all English} Is it eigo de benkyou shite iru no wa {studying in Engl i sh is} or is it a l l she's taking? L i k e = 18. Sher i : -Benkyou shite iru no wa. {Studying is} 19. M i h o : No wa. {((genitive c a s e marker no)) ((topic marker wa))} ++ S h o u l d we just write Ar t s Studies 'cause I think that's the course name. 20. Sher i : ++ W e have to k n o w (xx) . 21. M i h o : Ar t s Studies? M m . Or , cul tural studies? ((laughs)) 22. Sher i : I ' m not sure, ((laughs)) ' 23. M i h o : Y e a h . *Karu- *karucharal}6 + to kankei ga aru. {Cul - cultural + } Karuchaani yotte or karuchaa ni yotte {according to culture or related to culture} + or something? ++ 24. Sher i : *Karucha. {culture} 25. M i h o : Karuchaa ni- {culture ((dative marker))} 26. Sher i : = N i ? 27. M i h o : Karuchaa no kankei {related to culture} or something. + O r , karu-karuchaa ni yo:tte + kamoku desu or something. {According to cu l -culture + subject} 28. Sher i : Karuchaa no. {culture ((genitive c a s e marker))} 29. M i h o : Kurachaa. ++ {culture} 30. Sher i : Ni yotte. W h a t is that lni yotte"? {According to} 31. M i h o : It 's l ike += 32. Sher i : =1 think i t ' s depending on. 33. M i h o : Y e a h . A c c o r d i n g to. + 34. Sher i : Karuchaa. +++ {Culture.} 1 6 Miho and Sheri decide to use the English word for culture and to use it directly into Japanese by changing it to sound as if it is a katakana word . The word for culture in Japanese is bunka and although we say karuchaa in Japanese, it is evident that they were using the English word since they tried to use it for the word 'cultural'. "KarucharaV is not Japanese. See Section 4.6.3.2 for more information on this. 132 35. M i h o : (xx)ni kankei {related to} ++ ga aru. {has} 36. Sher i : H m ? 37. M i h o : Karuchaa {culture} u m + to kankei ga aru. {is related to} 38. Sheri : O k a y . 39. M i h o : Kan- + to kankei +++ kan- de aru or something. ++ 40. Sher i : (xxx) . 41. M i h o : O k a y . + Shoot what t ime is it? (Pa i rwork , N o v e m b e r 19, 2002) In this excerp t , the m a i n act ivi ty was content management. Throughout most o f this excerpt M i h o and Sher i t r ied to figure out what to wri te and h o w to wri te it i n Japanese. In L ines 1-5, they tr ied to figure out the name o f the course that K a z u k o , the interviewee, was taking. Since they cou ldn ' t recal l the exact name, M i h o to ld Sheri (a Chinese student) that she w o u l d compromise by dec id ing to incorporate both ' A r t Studies ' and 'cul ture ' i n the sentence that they planned to compose. Towards the end o f L i n e 5, M i h o was not sure about the placement o f this sentence and'asked i f they should move it to another section o f the compos i t ion . The dialogue exchanged up to this point occurred a l l i n Eng l i sh . F r o m L i n e s 9-19 and L i n e s 23-29, they both w o r k e d together to try to construct a meaningful sentence i n Japanese. A s they negotiated through this process, they code-switched between Japanese and E n g l i s h as M i h o and Sheri both attempted to construct the sentence. T h e n i n L i n e 30, Sheri switched to E n g l i s h to ask for a translation and i n the three l ines that fo l lowed the two partners discussed the translation i n Eng l i sh . F r o m L ines 34 to 39, they cont inued to construct their sentence, un t i l L i n e 41 when M i h o suddenly, wor r i ed about the t ime, blurted out, "Shoot what t ime is i t ? " as a side comment 133 to draw attention to the fact that perhaps they need to move on more q u i c k l y . D u r i n g this part o f the task, M i h o and Sheri used E n g l i s h for task management, s ide-comments and translation purposes. In Excerp t 4.27, Isabella (Korean speaker) wrote the incorrect kanji and G a b r i e l l a (Chinese native speaker) q u i c k l y came to the assistance o f Isabella to correct this error i n kanji selection. In L i n e 5, Gabr i e l l a to ld Isabella to write the kanji for the w o r d 'yesterday' (i.e., E£3). Isabella wrote the left side part o f it incorrect ly and i n L i n e 7, G a b r i e l l a explains to her that the kanji is incorrect. T h e rest o f the excerpt focuses on the correct ion o f this kanji and is done most ly i n E n g l i s h . In the end, it seemed that G a b r i e l l a had to write it d o w n on behalf o f Isabella who c o u l d hot understand Gabr i e l l a ' s explanations for m a k i n g the appropriate corrections even though most o f the interaction i n v o l v e d E n g l i s h , their c o m m o n language. The discuss ion over correct ing the wrong kanji is an example o f metal inguist ic interaction. Furthermore, L i n e 1 gives an example of how students used E n g l i s h to illustrate the phrase that they wanted translated into the T L : "Yes terday we in te rv iewed" Y u r i and A k i . Excerpt 4.27 Interview reflection composition task (Isabella: Korean; Gabriella: Cantonese) l . Gabr ie l l a : A h , what d i d we wri te? Yesterday we in terviewed it w i th b lah , blah, b lah. 2. Isabella: O k a y . 3. Gabr ie l l a : Kinou= {Yesterday} 4. Isabella: =Kinou {Yesterday} ((both laugh)). 5. Gabr ie l l a : Just write konou. {err} 6. Isabella: W r i t e konoul {err} 134 7. Gabr i e l l a : E h ? N o , no, no. The kanji is wrong . T h e first one 's kanji wrong . 8. I s abe l l a : N o ? W h a t is it? 9. Gabr ie l l a : It 's supposed to be + nichi= {{{kanjifor 'day'))} 10. Isabella: =Huh? 11. Gabr ie l l a : A n d then the other part. (xx) . ++ ((helps correct kanji)) ++ Same for this one. Bes ide . + Y o u understand what I mean? 12. Isabella: Y o u have to have= 13. Gabr i e l l a : =This (x) ++ ((writing)). 14. Isabella: O h , oh, oh , ah. 15. Gabr ie l l a : Instead o f that one. 16. Isabella: O k a y . O k a y . 17. Y a b u n o : Kanji sonna shinpai shinai yo, tada kaite kudasai. {(You) don't have to worry about kanji so much, p lease just write} ((I laughs)) 18. Gabr ie l l a : [Kinou, + here, here, here. {Yesterday} 19. Isabella: [Kinou +. {Yesterday} 20. Gabr i e l l a : U m , Yuri-son to Aki-san + ni + intaabyuu wo shimasu-, [shimashita. {(We) interview, interviewed Yur i and Aki} 21. Isabella: [ U m . ++ O k a y , y o u want me to wri te i t? ( ( G laughs)) (Pai rwork: C o m p o s i t i o n , N o v e m b e r 19, 2002) In this next example , the students used E n g l i s h to discuss Gabr i e l l a ' s confusion over the use o f two particles: topic marker wa and nominat ive case marker ga. T h i s excerpt also illustrates metal inguist ic uses o f E n g l i s h and code-swi tching. Excerpt 4.28 Oral exam practice session (Isabella: Korean; Gabriella: Cantonese) 1. Gabr i e l l a : B u t I don ' t understand w h y you use wa {((topic marker wa))} instead o f ga {((nominative c a s e marker ga))}. + Yomi mono ga ++= {readings ((nominative c a s e marker ga))} 135 2. Isabella: =Because yomi mono {readings} + is not subject. ' T h e y ' is , ' they' is the subject, right? T h e y don ' t have to. 3. Gabr ie l l a : ++ T h i s one 's wa {((topic marker wa))} is what? W h a t marker again? 4. Isabella: It's a subject marker but + i t ' s different. + It's not the ma in subject, . right? 5. Gabr ie l l a : ++ 6. Isabella: If you wanna say i n E n g l i s h they don ' t have to read it , right? They ' r e not, they don ' t have to do the reading. So= 7. Gabr i e l l a : =They is the subject, right? 8. Isabella: Y u p . So , i t ' s [omitted here. 9. Gabr ie l l a : [Ga. {((nominative case marker ga))} + So , i t ' s probably= 10. Isabella: =Daigakusei +. {university student} 11. Gabr ie l l a : Ga {((nominative case marker ga))} +++. ((laughs)) 12. Isabella: If you wanna say daigakusei wa yomi mono wo shinakute mo ii {university students don't have to do readings}, but, +1 think i t ' s wrong here. It 's= 13. Gabr ie l l a : =1 s t i l l don ' t understand l ike how when to use ah when to use ga {((nominative case marker ga))} and when to use wa {((topic marker wa))}. 14. Isabella: O k a y , jugyou wa ichijikan= {classes last for one hour} 15. Gabr ie l l a : =See this one. Mainichi shukudai ga nai. {Everyday (we) have no homework.} 16. Isabella: M m . 17. Gabr ie l l a : Shukudai wa nai. {Have no homework.} 18. Isabella: Y o u can say wa {((topic marker wa))} here. 19. Gabr ie l l a : +++ ((laughs; confused)) 20. Isabella: Here i t ' s interchangeable. 136 (Pai rwork, N o v e m b e r 26, 2002) In L i n e 1, G a b r i e l l a stated her confusion wi th these two particles. F r o m L i n e 2 to 12 Isabella tr ied to help expla in the difference to Gabr i e l l a . D u r i n g this d iscuss ion, there was extensive use o f E n g l i s h as Gabr i e l l a tr ied to understand what her partner was exp la in ing to her. Y e t , i n L i n e 13 she was s t i l l confused and asked for help again us ing E n g l i s h : "I s t i l l don ' t understand l ike how when to use ah when to use ga and when to use w a . " F o r the rest o f the conversat ion, they both cont inued to interact us ing code-swi tch ing as G a b r i e l l a tried to grasp the difference i n usage between the two particles. Students also used E n g l i s h for discussing part icular aspects o f the task itself. T h i s meta-task talk was almost always done in E n g l i s h . W h e n K r i s t a and A m e l i a prepared for their oral examinat ion, they began to wonder about the procedures o f the examinat ion and started to chat. T h e i r conversat ion is presented i n Excerp t 4.29. Excerpt 4.29 Oral exam practice session Amelia: Mandarin; Krista: English) 1. A m e l i a : So maybe i n the interview + on the test she w i l l have a sheet and say "talk about the particular part". T a l k about other side. T a l k about, yeah. 2. K r i s t a : So bas ica l ly i f you memor ize some o f these sentences= 3. A m e l i a : =But can we look at i t? 4 . K r i s t a : W e cannot look at it whi le the test is happening. W e can br ing it wi th us, l ook at it before the exam, and then we have to g ive it to her i n the exam. 5. A m e l i a : So how about wh i l e we l ook at it. Because she w i l l g ive us l ike one minute to look at the sheet. 6. K r i s t a : Y e a h , w e ' l l have t ime to look at it so. 7. A m e l i a : W e can br ing this right? 8. K r i s t a : I ' m gonna br ing this. I ' m gonna br ing this. The report, r ight? +++ 137 9. A m e l i a : W e have to answer questions. Wha t k i n d o f questions? 10. K r i s t a : I don ' t k n o w . W h a t k i n d o f questions are on the exam? Yasashii shitsumon. {Easy questions} (Pa i rwork , N o v e m b e r 26, 2002) A s illustrated here, since meta-task talk d idn ' t a lways require the negotiat ion o f T L language content, students used their C L as opposed to the T L for such interactions. Besides meta-task discussions, off-task type o f conversations were i n large part conducted i n the same manner. In this next example, Johnny and A n n a , two M a n d a r i n native speakers, were d iscuss ing their interviewee 's hobbies for their ref lect ion composi t ion . In Excerp t 4.30, Johnny mentioned the singer K y l i e M i n o g u e since they were ta lk ing about their interviewee enjoying music . Since A n n a was not famil iar w i t h this singer, she swi tched into M a n d a r i n (L ine 4) to f ind out w h o he was t a lk ing about. Fo r Johnny ' s explanat ion, he used M a n d a r i n , too (L ine 5 and 7). N o w that they were engaged i n this interesting off-task topic , A n n a tried to continue the conversat ion by asking Johnny about the mov ie , W e d d i n g Planner i n L i n e 8. Unfor tunate ly , the teacher began to make an announcement, s igna l l ing an end to their fr iendly chat about music and movies . E x c e r p t 4.30 I n t e r v i e w ref lec t ion c o m p o s i t i o n t a sk ( J o h n n y & A n n a : M a n d a r i n ) 1. Johnny: [Shumi wa: eiga, kai mono, ongaku. {Hobbies are movies , shopping, music} 2. A n n a : [Shumi + eiga, kai mono, ongaku. {Hobbies + movies , shopping, music} 3. Johnny: Kairi Minogu. {Kylie Minogue} Kairi Minogu. {Kylie Minogue} 4. A n n a : S h i s h e i y a ? {Who's that?} 5. Johnny: S h i geshou a. {She's a s inger} ((starts s inging tune o f song)) M e i t i n g guo? {Never heard of it?} 138 6. A n n a : Haoxiang ting guo. {Yeah, it sounds familiar} 7. Johnny: Neige/Z jingchang zai bo. + {That, Z ((radio station)) a lways plays that song} 8. A n n a : Kairi Minogu. {Kylie Minogue} Weddingu Plannaa. {Wedding Planner} Ni xihuan. {Do you l ike?} W e d d i n g Planner, ah. W e d d i n g Planner? 9. Johnny: M m . (Pairwork: C o m p o s i t i o n , N o v e m b e r 19, 2002) Excerp t 4.31 illustrates another example o f two students w h o got off task. A t the end o f their oral examinat ion practice task, Be th and Ju l ie (Cantonese native speakers) started getting off task. Throughout L i n e s 1 to 9, they ta lked about the end to the term. T h e y chatted about how it was the last week o f classes and that they were scared because f inal examinat ion week was fast approaching. T h e y cont inued to discuss other issues i n M a n d a r i n such as hav ing to vis i t M s . Y a b u n o for Japanese assistance (L ine 4) , their winter vacat ion plans (Lines 10-14) , shopping (L ine 15) and sk i i ng (L ine 17-19). T h i s entire conversat ion, except for a couple o f E n g l i s h words (i.e., L i n e s 4 and 7) was i n M a n d a r i n . Excerpt 4.31 Oral exam practice session (Julie & Beth: Mandarin) 1. Be th : Zhe libai yinggai shi zuihou yige libai le. {This week should be the last week} 2. Jul ie : Ou, hao kongbu oh! {Oh, it's scary!} 3. Be th : Wo hao pa oh! {I a m scared!} 4. Jul ie : Jintian yao qu office hour, ranhou laoshi jiao wo du zhong yin. {Today I'll go to her office hour, then the teacher will t each me s t ressed syllables} 5. Be th : Hao nan nei! {It is so difficult!} 6. Jul ie : Wo dou ting bu dong. {I don't understand at all} 139 7. Be th : Ni qing tutor jiao ni le ma? {Have you hired a tutor to teach you?} 8. Jul ie : Meiyou ah. +++ Hao taoyan oh! {No, I haven't. It's really annoying!} 9. Be th : (xxx) Wo wangji le. {I forget it} 10. Jul ie : Na winter na? Winter ni yao zuo sheme? {How about winter? What are you going to do in winter?} 11. Be th : (xxx). Ni yao dai zai zheli ma? {Are you going to stay here?} 12. Ju l ie : Jiu shi deng ba. {Just wait} 13. Be th : Jiu shi deng qian lai! Zhe jiu shi zui xingfen de. Dajia yi da zao jiu qu pai dui. {Just wait for the money to come! This is most exciting! Everybody gets up early in the morning and wait in the line} ((laughs)) 14. Jul ie : Mei cuo! {That's right!} (xxx). Qian yige week jiu hen duo. {The money, it's a lot for a week} 15. Be th : (xxx) Jiu shi you xie dian jiu bao man, you xie dian jiu shi na zhong hen gui de nei zhong. Ni zhidao ma? {It's like some stores will be full of customers, like those expensive stores, you know?} 16. Jul ie : Mei you. {No, I have no idea} 17. Be th : Na ni yao qu ski trip ma? {Then, are you going on a ski trip?} 18. Ju l ie : Wo genben meiyou qu guo. Conglai meiyou hua guo. {I have never been. Never been skiing yet} 19. Be th : Zhe hen kepa de la. {It's scary} (Pai rwork: O r a l E x a m Practice, N o v e m b e r 26, 2002) F i n a l l y , this last example illustrates how students used their native language (Cantonese) as they fooled around. In Excerp t 4.32, Cass ie began to laugh and make fun o f the w o r d 'Canada ' after M i n d y pronounced it incorrect ly us ing an E n g l i s h accent. Excerpt 4.32 Interview reflection composition task (Cassie & Mindy: Cantonese) 1. Cass ie : =Kanada no. {Canada's} 140 2. M i n d y : Kanada no sensei= ( (C laughs)) {Canada ' s teachers} 3. Cassie: =Kaneda. ((mispronounced)) {Kaneda.} 4. M i n d y : A h ! 5. Cassie: Y i n g ah . {Cool} 6. M i n d y : Kaneda . ((says i n E n g l i s h accent)) ((both laugh)) [Canada no sensei ++ hou ga + yuukou-. {Canada ' s teachers are (more) friend-} Y i h gah j a u {Now \t's} yau houte ta to + shi {((error))} a i y a . {hey!} ((makes correct ion on paper)). 7. Cassie : [Canada no sensei no hou ga + yuukouteki da. {Canada ' s teachers are (more) + friendly} 8. M i n d y : Shi+te i+ma+su. {Am doing} 9. Cassie : K a n a d a y a u y u t w u a n g geh. ((laughs)) { C a n a d a has a whole row} 10. M i n d y : [ H y w o h , j o m u t gwie ah? {Oh yeah, what 's going on?} 11. Cass ie : [ x x g i y w h a k . {The plan is spoiled} K a n o d a . ((laughs)) 12. M i n d y : Kanada . 13. Cassie: K a m e d a . ((laughs)) Kanoda . ((laughs)) 14. M i n d y : J a u g u m y e u n g . {It's like that} 15. Cass ie : Because she thinks that the teacher i n Canada is more fr iendly, she l ikes Canada more. 16. M i n d y : D o o d u k w h o , d a h n h i y y i u bo f a h n nee dee. {That works , let's add (it)} (Pai rwork: C o m p o s i t i o n , N o v e m b e r 19, 2002) In L i n e 2, Cass ie found something humorous about the w o r d ' C a n a d a ' and began to p lay around w i t h its pronuncia t ion i n L i n e 3. In L i n e 6, M i n d y j o i n e d i n by mispronounc ing Canada again. T h e y cont inued w o r k i n g on their compos i t ion us ing Japanese and E n g l i s h ; however , the conversat ion o f mispronouncing ' C a n a d a ' cont inued i n Cantonese (Lines 9-14). M e a n w h i l e , task management portions o f the exchange s t i l l used their 141 native language and, interestingly, the translation o f their completed sentence was read out l o u d i n E n g l i s h . 4.6.4 D i s c u s s i o n T h e f indings revealed that students made frequent use o f other languages besides the T L . In M s . Inoue and M s . Y a b u n o ' s classes, these languages inc luded E n g l i s h , M a n d a r i n and Cantonese. W h e n peers shared the same L I , they took advantage o f their L I to assist them through the process port ion o f the task. If they d i d not share the same L I , then the students chose to use E n g l i s h as their language m e d i u m for comple t ing the task. Students almost never used the T L to manage the task, discuss the task itself, talk about metal inguist ics or make talk off-task or side comments . In fact, m u c h o f their communica t ion i n v o l v e d their L I and/or E n g l i s h . E v e n though students were not discouraged f rom using their L l / E n g l i s h , they remained on task for the most part and used their access to other languages i n a way that helped them complete the task successfully. T h e y were able to communicate w i th each so that they c o u l d make decisions and w o r k through the act ivi ty more smoothly and effect ively than they c o u l d have by us ing on ly the T L . T h e f indings f rom the pa i rwork are consistent w i th most o f the present literature on this topic. F o r example , V i l l a m i l and de Guerrero (1996) found that the use o f the L I was an important strategy employed by student dur ing peer revis ion tasks for purposes o f ga in ing control o f the task. L i k e the students i n M s . Inoue and M s . Y a b u n o ' s classes, the Spanish E S L students in V i l l a m i l and de Guerrero ' s study found that the L I p rov ided the "verbal matrix for interact ion" and that the T L was "used m a i n l y to refer to specific parts o f the text or dur ing reading, copy ing , and compos ing" (p. 60). S w a i n and L a p k i n ' s (2000) 142 study o f F rench i m m e r s i o n students found that students used the E n g l i s h to move the task along ( inc lud ing task management), focusing attention (e.g., searching for vocabulary, focus ing on form, retr ieving grammatical information), and for interpersonal interaction (e.g., o f f task and disagreement). The majori ty o f the students i n m y present study had s imi la r L I use experiences. In fact, Tarone and S w a i n ' s (1995) research on French immers ion grade school learners revealed h o w students used the T L as the insti tutional language o f academic discourse yet swi tched to the L I for peer-peer interactions o f a non-academic nature. Th i s was also true o f students i n W C U ' s J F L classes. W h e n they were t a lk ing off-task or discussing items that weren ' t related to the language task or once they were completed the task, students swi tched to their N L or E n g l i s h since they needed and preferred the L I vernacular for authentic, natural communica t ion purposes. A s many students and teachers ment ioned i n their interviews, it felt more comfortable and natural to do so. Despite the fact that students enjoyed their J F L learning experiences, the student interviews revealed that very few students act ively pursued opportunit ies to use their Japanese language sk i l l s . The in-class interactions were characterized by a lack o f spontaneous and creative uses o f the language. E v e n on campus, where there were many overseas Japanese students and w i t h i n the Garden C i t y communi ty where there were many opportunities to practice Japanese w i t h residents, immigrants , vis i tors , as w e l l as w i t h w o r k i n g v i s a and student v i s a indiv iduals , the students d i d very little to act ively practice Japanese. Unfortunately , the on ly "authentic" communica t i on they had w i t h T L speakers was the one in te rv iew that the students had w i t h the one Japanese international exchange student. I f students are go ing to become comfortable and confident i n us ing 143 and increasing their quantity and qual i ty o f the T L , the students w i l l need more opportunities for genuine communica t ion practice. A s M i h o ment ioned i n a fo l low-up interview, she had hoped that her teachers w o u l d have encouraged the students to use the T L in class, especia l ly dur ing peer interaction: "the professor d idn ' t encourage us to speak [Japanese]" ( F o l l o w - u p interview, synchronous onl ine chat, A p r i l 2005), 4.7 Instructors' Language Use: Adaptations and Adjustments to Accommodate Student Language Learning Experiences Instructors used a variety o f language use strategies to accommodate the language learning experiences o f their J F L students. There were four specific ways that instructors d i d so. The first strategy used was code-swi tching. The m a i n way that code-swi tch ing benefited students is that it increased comprehension by d rawing on their knowledge o f other languages (i.e., i n this case, Eng l i sh ) . F r o m the teacher's perspective, code-swi tch ing also functioned as a t ime saver so that students had more t ime allotted to cover ing the cu r r i cu lum content and pract ic ing T L activit ies. In addi t ion, the teachers' adjustment i n the use o f E n g l i s h and the use o f code-swi tch ing dur ing their lessons, helped mode l language learning and teaching, and, as a result, students cop i ed their teachers' use o f L l / E n g l i s h and code-swi tching throughout their o w n interactive peer tasks w h i c h helped provide scaffolding and enhance T L input when w o r k i n g col labora t ive ly on a task. Second, and somewhat related to the first point, instructors assisted students by means o f "katakanization" o f important words. "Katakanization" refers to teachers pronouncing E n g l i s h words i n a Japanese accent such that it was temporar i ly adopted as a katakana17 w o r d although that particular w o r d does not 17 Katakana is the Japanese syllabary system for writing loan words from other languages. Some examples are Kanada (Canada), koohii (coffee), suupaa (supermarket) and kasutera (castella cake). 144 c o m m o n l y exist i n Japanese or c lear ly has a Japanese equivalent that they cou ld have easily used. Students also cop ied the teacher's use o f this strategy w h e n they were unsure o f the Japanese w o r d for a specific terminology. N e x t , instructors adjusted their language use by acknowledg ing the needs o f J F L learners as E S L . T h i s was part icularly relevant to testing situations. A fourth strategy instructors used was by us ing the language background o f Chinese speakers when addressing issues related to kanji. Kanji differences, most often w i t h wr i t ing , were speci f ica l ly targeted towards Chinese background students i n order to draw attention to certain details to reduce error and develop an awareness o f subtle but significant differences between the two languages. A discussion o f each o f the four strategies w i l l be p rov ided at the end o f each section. Furthermore, at the end o f this section, issues regarding heritage language ( H L ) learners w i l l be discussed by examine h o w M i h o , a H L learner i n M s . Y a b u n o ' s class, coped w i t h learning Japanese. 4.7.1 C o d e - s w i t c h i n g Code - swi t ch ing was used throughout the class. B y code-swi tch ing , I mean the alteration or co-occurrence o f two languages w i t h i n the same excerpt or speech event. It facilitated J F L language learning by he lp ing students draw on their knowledge o f E n g l i s h to comprehend T L vocabulary and more complex features o f T L instruction. A s discussed i n Sec t ion 4.4, both teachers and students reported that code-swi tch ing helped w i t h comprehension and c lar i f ica t ion o f T L lesson content. 145 4.7.1.1 Code-switching by Instructors Code- swi t ch ing b y instructors was most evident dur ing discussions on fo rm and dur ing administrat ive tasks where focus on comprehension was very important. In Excerp t 4 .33, M s . Inoue organized her students for the interview act ivi ty . Excerpt 4.33 Interview activity announcement 1. Inoue: Anna-san, Johnny-san wa issho no peaa de ii desu yo ne. Sore kara Eugenia-san, Holly-san mo issho no peaa de ii desu ne. {Anna and Johnny you're fine as a pair, right? A n d then Eugenia , Holly you're a lso fine a s a pair, right?} Michelle-san, Lynette-san, JoAnna-san {Michelle, Lynette, JoAnna} you can decide who you want to w o r k wi th , okay. Y o u have to be i n a pair though. ++. De, ++. ia kono hitotachi wa {And, these people} the people +_inJlvjs^ejisions y o u have to go to A-center at three o ' c l o c k next M o n d a y for the in terview act ivi ty, okay? A n d then these three pairs you have to go to A-center again at four o ' c l ock . + Ii desu ne. {Okay?} De, kore igai no hito + wa + {And, the other people} first o f a l l you have to f ind a partner f rom this class, okay? A n d then, f ind a Japanese person. + O k a y ? A n d these two people kono hito wa T-daigaku no gakusei desu. Taro A-san, sore kara Masami S-san. {this person is a student from T-university. Taro , and Masami.} T h e y are, they are, they said they are available for f ive to s ix (o ' c lock ) . + A c t u a l l y we are not having five to six (o ' c lock ) session so maybe you can contact them to arrange your o w n interview, okay? ++. To iu koto desu ga ++. daiioubu deshou ka. {This is what 's going on . Everything okay?} A n y confusion.? (Class room Lecture , N o v e m b e r 12, 2002) W h a t we not iced here is that M s . Inoue used code-swi tch ing to instruct her students about pair groupings and expla in where and when the interviews w o u l d take place. T h i s informat ion was very c ruc ia l to the success o f the act ivi ty and so M s . Inoue ensured that she was clear by incorporat ing E n g l i s h into her explanat ion to the extent that the E S L students understood it. Ano the r strategy seen was when the teacher uttered a Japanese phrase and then immedia te ly gave its E n g l i s h equivalent. In Excerp t 4.33 there are two instances o f The name of the university has been replaced with "T-university" 146 such use. T h e T L utterance has been double under l ined and the E n g l i s h translation had been dotted underl ined. In fact, M s . Y a b u n o and M s . Inoue d i d this quite often as i l lustrated i n Excerpts 4.34 to 4.36. The first two function as translations. Excerpt 4.34 Lesson: Chapter 5 Kaiwa #3 1. Inoue: Kore wa onna kotoba desu ne. Onna kotoba. {This is female speech , right? F e m a l e speech}. Female speech. Haitta no yo. {(I) went in, you know.} Femaje speech^ (Class room Lecture , N o v e m b e r 12, 2002) Excerpt 4.35 Lesson: Chapter 4 Kaiwa #1 1. Y a b u n o : Kore wa nukete masu vo. {This has been omitted.} O p i i t t e d (Class room Lecture , N o v e m b e r 4, 2002) Excerpt 4.36 Final exam discussion 2. Inoue: Ne, shukudai de takusan kakimashita ne. {Okay, we wrote many for homework} + Sore wo mou ichido fukushuu r ev iew, okay? {review that once more} R e v i e w those wr i t ing . Fukujhim^fute_piiekudqsai. {Please review} (Class room Lecture , N o v e m b e r 26, 2002) In Excerp t 4.36, M s . Inoue code-switched to emphasize to the students that they had to rev iew for the f inal examinat ion . She d i d this buy saying the k e y w o r d ' r ev iew ' first i n Japanese, then twice i n E n g l i s h and then again i n Japanese. N o t on ly d i d code-swi tch ing help wi th the comprehension o f teacher-talk but it also acted as emphasis i n order to draw students' attention to important information. In this last excerpt, Excerp t 4.37, M s . Y a b u n o used code-swi tch ing for a few more functions. 147 E x c e r p t 4.37 G r a m m a r lesson: 'x' ni kiga tsuku ( ' to no t ice ' x " ) 1. Y a b u n o : Demo {but} past-tense desu yo ne koko {here, isn't it?}. C a n y o u use eeto ne ++ 'kigatsuitayo ne' {um ++ 'noticed, right?'} + the sentence we have is this one. Shukudai wo wasureta koto ni ki ga tsuita no wa kurasu ga hajimatte kara datta. {When I realized that I forgot my homework was when once c lass had already begun} It was after the class started. Desu ne. {Right?} Kore {this} past desuyo ne {isn't it?}. Kore {this} + can it be non-past tense here? + Shukudai wo wasureru {Forget homework} ((i.e., instead o f wasureta, the past tense form)). Because we have past tense here. Past tense here kigatsuita {noticed}. ++. W i l l it w o r k w i t h non-past tense here? 2. Students: ++. 3. Y a b u n o : W o u l d it? 4. Students: ++. 5. Y a b u n o : Y e s ? N o ? + Okashii desuyo ne. {It's strange isn't it?} W h e n I not iced + that I forgot m y homework . Past tense desu yo ne {isn't it?}. Wasureta koto ni kigatsuita. {I noticed that I had forgotten}. (Class room Lecture , N o v e m b e r 12, 2002) First , i n L i n e 1, M s . Y a b u n o used E n g l i s h to help her student notice the important lesson content that she wanted to focus. Whenever she wanted to point out and emphasize that the verb was i n past tense, she used the E n g l i s h words 'past-tense' and 'past ' to let student k n o w to focus o n that grammatical feature. Then she stopped to make sure that her students where f o l l o w i n g her explanat ion by asking i n E n g l i s h " W i l l it w o r k w i t h non-past tense here?" In the next three utterances (L ine 3 and L i n e 5), as M s . Y a b u n o tried to e l ic i t a response f rom her students, she used E n g l i s h to invi te her students to participate and conf i rm that her argument was being fo l l owed and understood. In the end, her requests were denied and she answered her o w n question. F r o m the teacher's perspective, code-swi tch ing also functioned as a t ime saver because w h e n students d idn ' t respond or had trouble understanding the explanations i n the T L , they used E n g l i s h to 148 supplement their T L use so that, ul t imately, teachers can get through the teacher-fronted lectures and q u i c k l y m o v e onto T L activities. 4.7.1.2 Assisted Performance During Peer Interaction: LI, L2, and L3 Use W h e n students w o r k e d on col laborat ive tasks, they were also able to take advantage o f code-swi tch ing to help them tackle language problems by p rov id ing assistance to each other i n their zone o f p r o x i m a l development. B y w o r k i n g together, the pairs were able to help each other get further a long wi th the task than i f they were w o r k i n g alone. Here is an example from M i h o ' s and Sher i ' s compos i t ion session: Excerpt 4.38 Interview reflection composition task (Miho: HLL; Sheri: Chinese) 1. M i h o : M m , I don ' t think you can nomina l i ze it that way . ++ Torn n ja arimasen. {Don't take} Y e a h , it doesn't make, torn n ja arimasen. {Don't take} + Sono kurasu +++. {That class} 2. Sher i : Toranai= {Don't take} 3. M i h o : =To-, [totte imasen. {Ta-, a m not taking} 4. Sher i : [Totte imasen. {am not taking} 5. M i h o : I think 'totte imasen'. 'Cause I what are y o u t ry ing to nomina l i ze? 6. Sher i : A h l ike the whole thing? K i n d o f l i ke you say u m ongaku wo kiku no ga suki desu. {I like to listen to music} 7. M i h o : M m . 8. Sher i : That makes sense, right? 9. M i h o : Y e a h , that makes sense. 10. Sher i : Y e a h , l ike that. 11. M i h o : Y e a h , I don ' t think i t ' s the same (x) here. ++ 12. Sher i : Wo toranakute then we just= {Don't have to take ((accusative marker wo))} 149 13. M i h o : =Yeah . 14. Sher i : O k a y . + 15. M i h o : Futsuu no kurasu wo toranakute- {Don't take regular c lasses}. O h yeah, 'toranakute' {'Don't take'} 16. Sher i : (x) toranakute ++ te. {'Don't take'} (Pai rwork, N o v e m b e r 19, 2002) In this dialogue, M i h o and Sheri are t ry ing to construct a sentence to expla in that the student they had in terv iewed d i d not take regular classes but took special classes for students in the international program. W h a t they tried to f ind is the construct ion for the negative gerund form o f the verb 'to take' {torn). In L i n e 1, M i h o used her knowledge of Japanese and in tu i t ive ly came to the conc lus ion that torn n ja arimasen was not what they wanted to write. She requested Sher i ' s help i n this process by comment ing , " Y e a h , this doesn't make sense", and f rom L i n e s 2-6 they tried several constructions o f the negative form o f torn. In fact, i n L i n e 5, M i h o thought that totte imasen "sounded" l i ke an appropriate choice . Y e t , she was s t i l l unsure and, therefore, asked, "what are you t ry ing to n o m i n a l i z e ? " to facilitate more discussion. W h e n , i n L i n e 6, Sher i s ignal led that she was not satisfied wi th totte imasen, the pair cont inued to search for the appropriate fo rm unt i l L i n e 12 when Sher i said toranakute. T h e n M i h o immedia te ly j u m p e d i n to reassure her that this was i n fact the form that they were searching for. B y w o r k i n g col labora t ive ly and by be ing able to negotiate the content o f the task as a pair, M i h o and Sheri helped support each other through this process. B y conf i rming , s igna l l ing dissatisfaction, and asking questions to request assistance students p rov ided scaffolding to each other. A s a result, us ing their C L and be ing able to code-swi tch enabled the students to successfully f i n d the verb form. 150 T h e second example , i l lustrated by the pair E m m a and P h i l dur ing their ora l practice session, showed the pair t ry ing to negotiate the correct verb choice for 'to take a test'. In L i n e s 2-4, E m m a and P h i l p lay wi th two verbs, both meaning 'to take ' . In L i n e 5, E m m a used M a n d a r i n to say aloud the sentence equivalent that they were t ry ing to write i n Japanese. In L i n e 6-9, they tried different forms o f the verb torn. Af te r l is tening to each other's utterances, in L i n e 10, P h i l not iced that these d i d not sound correct and that indeed the verb ikeru was the one that they were searching for and tried it out i n L i n e 11, where after hearing the sentence, E m m a agreed that this was correct. F i n a l l y i n L i n e 14, they were able to construct the correct sentence. Excerpt 4.39 Role-play using Chapter 5 Kaiwa #1 as guide (Phil & Emma: Mandarin) 1. E m m a : Ee. ++ Nihongo no + pureesumento testo ((mispronounces tesuto)) ga ++= {Ah. J a p a n e s e language placement test ((nominative c a s e marker ga))} 2. P h i l : =To-, totte. {Ta-, take} 3. E m m a : Uke- ++. {Ta-} 4. P h i l : Uke-{Ta-}MM jiang. {You tell them} 5. E m m a : Wo yao shuo ni, ni you meiyou na guo? ( ( ( looking i n textbook)) ++ {I'm asking you , if you have ever taken it?} 6. P h i l : Totte. {Take} 7. E m m a : Totte? {Take?} 8. P h i l : Totta. + Totta. Totta ga am ( (grammatical ly incorrect)). {Take. T a k e . Have you take?} 9. E m m a : Totta gaaru? + (xxx) . {Have ((dative c a s e marker ni)) you take?} 10. P h i l : O h , uketa. ++ {take} 11. E m m a : Pureesumento testo wo uke-, uketa? {Did (you) ta- take the placement test?} 151 12. P h i l : M m . ((agrees)) + Arimasen. {(I) haven't.} 13. E m m a : A h . + + A h , + . 14. P h i l : Ee, doko depureesumento tesuto + ukemasu ka. {Um, where do you take the p lacement test?} (Pa i rwork , N o v e m b e r 14, 2002) In this th i rd and f ina l example (Excerpt 4.40) o f assisted performance i n the zone o f p r o x i m a l development, Gabr ie l l a , M e l i s s a , and Isabella w o r k e d together to complete a role-play act ivi ty . In L i n e 1, Gabr ie l l a , who took on the role o f a student t ry ing to make an appointment to see an academic advisor, struggled to conjugate the verb au into the potential form. In L i n e 2, M e l i s s a questioned Gabr ie l l a ' s choice o f the incorrect verb form airaemasu. In L i n e 3, Gabr i e l l a said the non-past form o f the verb and the tried to conjugate is i n L i n e 5. T h i s p roved to be unsuccessful and, therefore, M e l i s s a offered the inf ini t ive fo rm o f the verb: ae. In L i n e 7, Gabr i e l l a was s t i l l unsure and, therefore, revealed her frustration i n E n g l i s h , to w h i c h Isabella offered the correct conjugated form o f the potential F i n a l l y , i n L i n e 9, w i t h the assistance o f her group members , she is able to use the correct fo rm o f the verb and complete the role-play. Excerpt 4.40 Role-play using Chapter 5 Kaiwa #1 as guide (Isabella: Korean; Gabriella: Cantonese) 1. Gabr ie l l a : M m , eeto rai- {um, next} uh + unti l? Raishuu no + pureesument tesuto wo kaite {Write next week's p lacement test} ((incorrect tense o f verb; should be kaita)) atode {later} + k y o u - ah j i d o u k y o u j u ni + ah ai + te ai + airare + masu. {((err)) ah ((err)) ((dative c a s e marker ni)) ah ((err)) (err)) ((err))} 2. M e l i s s a : Airaremasul {((err})} 3. Gabr ie l l a : Au, r ight? {to meet} 4. Isabella: M m . 152 5. Gabr ie l l a : Ai+rareru. {((err))} 6. M e l i s s a : Ae? {To meet ((infinitive form))?} 7. Gabr ie l l a : I dunno a what. ((Isabella laughs)) Aiue. Ae, r ight? ('a', Y, ' u ' , ' e . ' ? T o meet ((infinitive form))} 8. Isabella: Aerareru. {Can meet} 9. Gabr ie l l a : Ae- + rare.masu. {Can meet} 10. Isabella: A, sou desu ka. Wakarimashite. Domo arigatou gozaimashita. (oh, is that right? I understand. Thank you very much.) 11. Gabr ie l l a : lie. {Don't mention it} (Groupwork , N o v e m b e r 14, 2002) In a l l three examples o f the peer tasks, students were able to negotiate their way through the task by ask ing and rece iv ing for help. The students were able to identify the cues for help. E v e n though a l l peers were s t i l l learning Japanese, each learner had knowledge and competencies i n different areas concerning the T L . T h i s means that even students cou ld offer to act as an 'expert ' when their peers struggled. It is not the case that assistance can o n l y come i n the form o f the teacher. A s Ohta (2000) concludes from her studies on J F L students, students are able to express and recognize bids for assistance, and it is possible to have peers provide this assistance. Th i s is one step i n the process o f internalization o f T L forms and can be enhanced w i t h the use o f code-swi tch ing when necessary. The L I can funct ion as a cogni t ive too l that mediates L I learning. These findings are consistent w i t h other s imi lar studies on col laborat ive peer dialogue and assisted performance ( A n t o n & D i C a m i l l a , 1999; Arnfast & Jorgensen, 2003; B r o o k s & Donato, 1994; Ohta , 2001 , 2002, 1995; V i l l a m i l & de Guerrero, 1996); however , there are very few studies that address J F L classrooms and, therefore, there needs to be more 153 research i n J F L settings to develop a greater understanding o f learning and teaching processes unique to J F L classrooms. 4.7.2 "Katakanization" o f E n g l i s h V o c a b u l a r y Teachers also adopted the Japanese method o f incorporat ing foreign loan words into Japanese language through the use o f their katakana syl labary. B y us ing this syl labary as a base, teachers used E n g l i s h words and made them into Japanese-sounding words. B y do ing so, the E n g l i s h w o r d has become, what I c a l l , "katakanized" and is g iven a Japanese pronunciat ion and is used to sound l i ke a T L word . T h e teacher used this strategy for words that were already often used i n E n g l i s h , most hav ing to do wi th grammatical te rminology. Such examples f rom the grammar lectures inc lude: *kajuaru (casual speech), *negatibu (negative), *meiru (male (speech)), and *reguraa (regular). Other words were used dur ing administrative tasks: *konpozishon tesuto (composi t ion test), *fainaru eguzamu (final exam), *risuningu (listening) and *raitingu (wri t ing) . In the f o l l o w i n g excerpt, M s . Inoue expla ined about the u p c o m i n g mid te rm examinat ion . T h e katakanized words have been double underl ined. E x c e r p t 4.41 M i d t e r m E x a m d i s c u s s i o n 1. Inoue: Chapter three and four de benkyou-shi-ta *fankushon-wa +. request sore kara permiss ion + plus etcetera, etcetera. A , *handoauto mo chanto mitoite kudasai, *handoauto. + *Handoauto ne. ++ // desu ka. *Handoauto kara mo demasu kara *handoauto mo chanto mitoite kudasai. ++ Nani ka shitsumon arimasu ka. *Foomatto wa daitai onaji desu. The almost the same format, okay? O k a y . *Maritipuru choisu mo arimasu. (Class room Lecture , N o v e m b e r 4, 2002) In this excerpt, M s . Inoue has changed the E n g l i s h words for ' func t ion ' , 'handout ' , ' format ' and 'mul t ip le cho ice ' into Japanese-like words. T h e advantage o f us ing this method is that the teacher d i d not need to necessari ly teach or use new vocabulary dur ing 154 her lessons, w h i c h might have disrupted the f l ow o f the message and conversat ion. B y insert ing E n g l i s h words pronounced as Japanese, it was much easier for students to understand what the teacher is attempting to communicate since it sounded l i ke E n g l i s h words. A list o f words for w h i c h teachers used katakanization is l is ted i n A p p e n d i x I. W h a t is even more interesting is that the students adopted and learned to use the same strategy when they wanted to make E n g l i s h words into Japanese or when they d idn ' t k n o w the Japanese equivalent and s i m p l y changed the E n g l i s h w o r d so that it became Japanese-like. T h i s was evident i n Excerp t 4.30 (p. 80) when Johnny and A n n a were ta lk ing about mus ic and the singer K y l i e M i n o g u e . T h e two students decided to talk to each other us ing Japanese: Kairi Minogu. A n d later on , A n n a mentions Weddingu Plannaa for the m o v i e title, "The W e d d i n g Planner ." Here is another example o f Johnny, us ing this method for the course name 'Consumer B e h a v i o u r ' . Because he d i d not k n o w the Japanese for this course name, instead he opted to change it into the katakana reading. E x c e r p t 4.42 I n t e r v i e w re f l ec t ion c o m p o s i t i o n t a sk ( J o h n n y & A n n a : 1. Johnny: =Ichiban suki na koosu. {Favourite course} 2. A n n a : Ichi+ban + ichiban, ichiban suki na + koo+su wa = {Most + most, most M a n d a r i n ) favourite course is} 3. Johnny: ((says i n a deeper, exaggerated tone)) *Konsuumaa biheebiaa. {Consumer Behaviour} 4. A n n a : D o we have to write E n g l i s h ? 5. Johnny: It's okay. (Pai rwork, N o v e m b e r 19, 2002) 155 A l t h o u g h the use o f katakana is appropriate for foreign words such as names o f people and titles o f movies , some student learned to use this method for other words that should not be modi f i ed i n such a w a y even though the intended message remained clear. In Excerp t 4 .43, Cass ie and M i n d y are not sure h o w to wri te the words 'cafeteria ' and so they try to pronounce it i n a Japanese manner. (See L i n e s 2, 8 and 9.) The i r attempt was not successful but their use o f this strategy a l lowed them to produce a w o r d that was very close to the Japanese w o r d '/cafeteriaor, i n fact, they c o u l d have used the w o r d shokudou, w h i c h they probably do not remember or k n o w . E x c e r p t 4.43 I n t e r v i e w ref lec t ion c o m p o s i t i o n t a sk (Cass i e & M i n d y : Can tonese ) 1. Cassie : Tutor wo owattara kafe-, kafeteria deyoru gohan wo tabemasu a. I:? + {After finishing tutoring, cafe-, (she) eats dinner at the cafeteria a .} 2. M i n d y : * Kafetaria (xx) . {err} 3. Cassie : O h , ah T a n d e m 1 9 , Tandem +. 4. M i n d y : Tandem. 5. Cassie : [Tooii. {It's far} 6. M i n d y : [(x). D e e m y e u n g p i n g ah? {How do you pronounce it?} 7. Cassie: H i e m m hie g u m ah? J a u g u m y i n g m u n soon . {Is it like this? Just write it in English.} 8. M i n d y : N e e g o h j a u n g y m geh y i n g goy. {It should be correct} [*Ka-fu-teria. 9. Cassie : [*Ka-fu-. (Pa i rwork , N o v e m b e r 19, 2002) Excerp t 4.44 shows an example o f M i h o and Sheri m a k i n g a Japanese equivalent for the E n g l i s h w o r d culture. They should k n o w that the Japanese w o r d for culture is ' This is the name of the dormitory. The name has been changed. 156 bunka, yet they s t i l l proceed to use the strategy o f katakanization to compensate for not remember ing the Japanese. T h i s use o f changing the w o r d 'cul ture ' into *karucha or karuchaa (L ine 3-5, 7-9) and the w o r d ' cu l tura l ' (L ine 3) into *karucharal may be inf luenced by the textbook section entit led "Cul ture notes" for w h i c h the instructor sometimes refers to as karuchaa nooto. A l t h o u g h we do use the w o r d karuchaa, the students were obv ious ly unsure as they tr ied to use this strategy to make the words *karucha and *karucharal. In this example , the students do not seem to be aware that they used this strategy, as opposed to the previous example i n w h i c h it was done quite deliberately. Excerpt 4.44 Interview reflection composition task (Miho: HLL; Sheri: Chinese) 1. M i h o : Ar t s Studies? M m . Or , cultural studies? ((laughs)) 2. Sher i : I ' m not sure, ((laughs)) 3. M i h o : Y e a h . *Karu- *karucharal + to kankei ga am. {Cul- cultural + } Karuchaa ni yotte or karuchaa ni yotte {according to culture or related to culture} + or something? ++ 4. Sher i : *Karucha. {culture} 5. M i h o : Karuchaa ni= {culture ((dative marker ni))} 6. Sher i : = M ? {((dative marker ni))} 7. M i h o : Karuchaa no kankei {related to culture} or something. + O r , kam-karuchaa ni yo:tte + kamoku desu or something. {According to cu l -culture + subject} 8. Sher i : Karuchaa no. {culture ((genitive c a s e marker))} 9. M i h o : Karuchaa. ++ {culture} (Pai rwork, N o v e m b e r 19, 2002) 157 Excerpts 4.41-4.44, illustrate h o w students have adopted and learned h o w to katakanize E n g l i s h words so that they became Japanese and, therefore, made it easier to continue their task output i n the T L . In this manner, students began us ing a strategy to deal w i t h u n k n o w n or n e w E n g l i s h vocabulary items. Th i s method seemed to be a useful strategy because there was s t i l l effective communica t ion between members o f the conversation. H o w e v e r , a l though many words have their proper equivalent i n katakana, some words do not and teachers w h o use katakanization need to be aware that their students have adopted this strategy for their o w n communica t ion purposes and that they must be careful i n its use to avo id situations where students w o u l d not k n o w the difference between a katakana w o r d and one that is s imply katakanized for oral communica t ion purposes. Katakanization may be suitable for oral communica t ion but it cou ld not transfer over to the writ ten m e d i u m since these words are not a part o f the Japanese language and, therefore, teachers need to make this point clear to their students. 4.7.3 Needs o f E S L L e a r n e r s o f J F L The make-up o f J F L classes at W C U is unique i n that many students w h o enrol are not native or fluent E n g l i s h speakers. Since the majori ty o f J F L students have come from C h i n a , T a i w a n and H o n g K o n g , instructors have had to make certain adaptations to help E S L learners learn Japanese. A s M s . Y o u n g mentioned i n her in terview, she noticed that Chinese speakers, they way the brain works for them [is that] E n g l i s h is not their first language; Chinese is their first language. I don ' t k n o w h o w ... they translate it. [When we] speak w i t h them i n E n g l i s h , ...they w i l l p robably th ink i n Chinese and then the output w i l l be i n Japanese. So it works i n three different languages so I ' m not so sure [if] the students' brain real ly w o r k s that way . (November , 2002) 158 Other teachers brought up this concern as w e l l . W h e n M s . K i t a m u r a asked students for translations into E n g l i s h , she not iced that many o f them had trouble expressing themselves through the E n g l i s h language. She expla ined that some students had yet to pass the E L F T (a pseudonym acronym), a written compos i t ion test to measure a students' E n g l i s h language prof ic iency for entry into univers i ty- level E n g l i s h courses. The E L P T is used to indicate i f students' E n g l i s h leve l is h igh enough for univers i ty- level wr i t ing courses. A l t h o u g h students who have fai led this test cannot enrol l i n regular E n g l i s h courses, they can s t i l l enrol l i n a l l other courses. M s . K i t a m u r a further ment ioned that some o f her J F L students, even at the third-year l eve l , had not even passed this test. T h i s impl ies that, i n particular for Chinese- language-background students, they might have problems wi th their grammatical accuracy especia l ly wi th the tense/aspect system. M s . K i t a m u r a commented that, T h e i r speaking, pronunciat ion, is good but I think the E L P T is l o o k i n g at accuracy as w e l l , l i ke [the] T O E F L exam T h e n when I mark, [they can ' t even] change the [verb] 'put ' [in]to past tense. [It should be] 'put, put, put ' , r ight?. [However , ] they wrote 'put, putted, pu t t ed ' . 2 0 (Interview, November , 2002) T h e impl i ca t ion for this is that students have di f f icul ty w i th translation-type questions on exams and it makes it more chal lenging to mark their answers. M s . Inoue had the same concerns and shared her thoughts. I found that some students, whose first language is not Japanese, . . . cannot really, understand instructions on the exams or tests [that are] writ ten i n E n g l i s h . So for example , we use a certain vocab w h i c h is obv ious ly clear to E n g l i s h native speakers but maybe [it 's] not real ly [clear] to second language students. F o r example , ... l i ke this question, for this k i n d o f question we have to ask for permiss ion using certain structure^] i n Japanese; that's one thing [that] students have to do. A n d then i n [response] to ... question, they have to give [a] yes or no [response] i n [an] appropriate [manner]. So , the instructions say ... make a request or ask for This comment is addressing issues with English translations. 159 permiss ion, whichever [you choose, and] so y o u have to decl ine [by stating] certain reasons. T h e w o r d 'dec l ine ' , probably some students don ' t k n o w the meaning o f 'dec l ine ' . So we have to use s impler , easier vocab . . . . [This is] probably something [that] we real ly have to think about. (Interview, November , 2002) One way i n w h i c h Chinese- language-background students, more so for those who are less proficient i n E n g l i s h , can use their knowledge is wi th Chinese characters to help them wi th kanji. In this respect, students have an alternative to re ly ing on their knowledge o f E n g l i s h . T h i s w i l l be discussed further i n the f o l l o w i n g section. 4.7.5 Kanji The huge popula t ion o f Chinese- language-background students i n J F L programs has inf luenced teachers and students i n different ways. S o m e teachers such as M s . C h e n c l a imed that it had not inf luenced their lessons, w h i l e others such as M s . K i t a m u r a , M s . M u r a k a m i , and M s . Inoue admitted that they adjusted their lessons due to the large number o f Chinese speakers. One area i n w h i c h some teachers adjusted their lessons was kanji teaching. Kanji is one o f three types o f orthography i n Japanese. It originated f rom Chinese characters and w h i l e many are written ident ica l ly the same, some are unique to Japanese and need to be learned wi th caution. M s . K i t a m u r a commented that i f there were no Chinese speakers i n her class, that she w o u l d spend more t ime on kanji. S i m i l a r l y , M s . M u r a k a m i said that there was defini tely a direct effect on her kanji lessons: "I don ' t go over kanji: not as much as the textbook suggests. I can just skip over, or, focus on reading o f kanji i n Japanese [instead]." A c c o r d i n g to M s . Inoue, the Chinese- language-background students probably wrote better and knew the meaning o f each kanji, and therefore, she d idn ' t necessari ly 160 need to expla in their meaning. Howeve r , M s . C h e n , who has Chinese language background, warns that [kanji] sometimes acts as a disadvantage for them. F i rs t o f a l l , i n terms o f wr i t ing , the wr i t i ng o f some kanji i n Chinese are different f rom that i n Japanese and [students] tend to make a lot o f mistakes. A n d secondly, more important ly, part icularly when it comes to reading, when they rely too m u c h on kanji they w i l l neglect the structure and so on . T h e y thought [that] they [know] more or less by reading the kanji. T h e y think they might think that they k n o w the meaning, ... but actually without k n o w i n g the structure w e l l ah that's not the case. (Interview, December , 2002) So how d i d the J F L instructors use this knowledge to help their students learn Japanese? T h e teachers used kanji i n two ways: 1) they pointed out differences when wr i t ing kanji (kanji versus wr i t ing Chinese) , and 2) they used kanji to help students get an idea o f the meaning o f a new w o r d so that teachers d i d not have to expla in every u n k n o w n vocabulary i tem. T o d d expla ined what he saw, especial ly after a kanji qu iz : " W h e n some people make mistake wi th the kanji,... [ M s . Inoue] points out the difference between the Chinese character and Japanese character." A s W e n d i compla ined , she not iced that some smal l parts o f the characters were different and that she a lways got those parts w r o n g on the quizzes . She found that it was useful when the teacher pointed the differences out since when she looked at her kanji chart, she just thought o f the Chinese character. A c c o r d i n g to M s . Sasaki , she exp l i c i t l y showed students differences because she wanted to "make sure that.. . [the students] don ' t use the wrong character because they use, especia l ly M a n d a r i n people, ...use s impl i f i ed characters but . . . those characters are not . . . part o f Japanese and we don ' t use them." M s . Sasaki expla ined that she used kanji to help her students wi th vocabulary. " Y e a h , sometimes I write d o w n the w o r d [in kanji characters] and 161 then [the Chinese speakers] w i l l l ook at the characters and sometimes they can p i ck up what I want to say." S i m i l a r l y , as M s . Y a b u n o points out that, "Chinese speakers, they sometimes ask for Chinese characters and then I ' l l show them and I ' l l p rovide [the] furigana (the Japanese pronunciation/reading) for non-Chinese speakers as w e l l . " It was observed that M s . Y a b u n o and M s . Inoue d i d focus on Chinese speakers to exp l i c i t l y teach difference between kanji and Chinese characters. The in-class discussion o f such differences d i d not happen very often because kanji lessons and kanji quizzes occurred infrequently, but teachers d i d ment ion that students d i d get such feedback on ind iv idua l writ ten assignments. W h e n teachers d i d do this it was apparent that it targeted Chinese languge background students. F o r example , M s . Inoue stopped the kanji lesson, lead by the T . A . , to point out a difference i n the first o f the two kanji for the w o r d 'yousu'21 w h i c h means aspect, state or appearance. T h e point o f focus is represented in F igure 4.6. Figure 4 . 6 Comparing kanji with Chinese characters: W. Japanese kanji Chinese character The kanji for yousu is Hi-p0 The teacher is focusing on bottom right portion of the character HI. 162 E x c e r p t 4.45 Kanji L e s s o n 1. Inoue: Ano, T-sensei yousu tte kanji wo chotto kaite itadakemasu. ((writes the kanji for yousu on blackboard)) Atto ne, chotto minna ni mieru you ni. ((re-writes the kanji for yousu)) ++ Mou sukoshi (xx). ++ Mm. Ano watashi mo onaji nan desu kedo T-sensei to ++koko ne ((points to bot tom right part o f the kanji)) + kono koko ano Chainiizu kanji mo kore tsukaimasu ka. {Um, instructor T, will you write the kanji for 'yousu*! O o p s um, so that everyone c a n see . A little (xx). M m . For me it's the s a m e as instructor T but here, okay, here here. D o e s the C h i n e s e character a lso use this?} 2. Rache l : (x). 3. Inoue: Arimasu ka. Arimasen ka. {Have (it)? Have (it)?} 4. Students: Arimasu. {(We) have (it)} 5. Inoue: Arimasu? Hai. Kou yatte kakimasu ka. ((writes Chinese version o f the same kanji)) De, ++ koko to koko ((points to bot tom right part o f the kanji)) ga betsubetsu desu ka [Chaineezu kanji wa. {(you) have it? O k a y . Do you write (it) like s o ? A n d , here and here, is it separate?} 6. Students: [Ha i . {Yes} 7. Inoue: Watashi wa T-sensei to onaji de + kou yatte kaite kou iufuu ni kaku n desu ne. De, nan ka ne ano chuugokukei no hito no kanji kore wo mite ruto koko to koko ga separate + ni natte ru hito ga ooii no de + dou nano ka na ((laughs)) tte zutto omotte ta n desu kedo. Ano yoku kyoukasho wo yoku mite, mite kudasai ne. Dou natte n desu ka. ((Ss l o o k i n g i n their textbook for the kanji)) ++ {I'm the s a m e as instructor T (I) write like this, write in this manner, okay? A n d , something okay C h i n e s e background people 's kanji there are many in which , when I look at this, here and here is separate. I a lways wondered how it was . U m , p lease look, look in your textbook carefully, carefully, okay? H o w is (it in there)? 8. B r a d : Kuttsuite ru. {(It's) together} (Class room Lecture , N o v e m b e r 19, 2002) T w o other examples f rom a previous class inc lude the kanji and ' tH'. (See F igure 4.7). Ano the r example f rom M s . Y a b u n o ' s class include the 163 kanji 'M\ for w h i c h many Chinese students wrote the kanji 'JC'- A l t h o u g h both characters exist i n both Japanese and Chinese , enough students wrote the incorrect kanji that the T . A . had to e x p l i c i t l y point out the difference dur ing the rev iew o f answers for a kanji qu iz . T h i s example is i l lustrated i n F igure 4.8. Figure 4.7 Comparing two &an/?/Chinese characters: and Japanese kanji Chinese character The top portion of the Chinese r r ^ . version has an extra horizontal V c E z T ^ ^ stroke, and also there is a stroke / 1 «, coming down directly from that l - ^ V horizontal line; Japanese kanji Chinese character J Q j > The horizontal stroke in the middle is longer; it sticks out Figure 4.8 Comparing two fcan/7/Chinese characters: M and H Japanese kanji What many Chinese students wrote s F r o m the students' perspective, many said that their Chinese language background helped them wi th kanji. The majori ty o f the students in terv iewed c l a imed that, pr ior to enro l l ing i n J F L classes, they had the perception that Japanese w o u l d be 164 easy to learn because they k n e w Chinese . In fact, some students thought that it w o u l d be easy and indeed it had been, at least wi th respect to kanji. H o w e v e r , there were some students who were surprised to f ind out h o w different the two language are i n many ways . W h e n in terv iewed about pre-conceived notions o f learning Japanese, T o d d responded by saying: " Y e s [I thought it w o u l d be easy], and I was wrong . 'Cause I thought l i ke kanji w o u l d be easy and ah, y o u k n o w [but it wasn ' t ] . Y e a h , that's l i ke m y first impress ion ." W h e n students were in terv iewed and asked how k n o w i n g Chinese had helped them wi th learning Japanese, almost a l l students said that it was not that helpful except when it concerned kanji. T h e i r background o f Chinese characters helped them most ly wi th the wr i t ing o f the actual kanji (i.e., stroke order) and wi th recogni t ion. A s Cass ie mentioned, she not iced o n l y a little difference between kanji and Chinese characters and, therefore, it was easy to write kanji. A n d P h i l commented that the strokes are about 8 0 % similar . Other students such as M i c h e l l e , A n n a , Johnny, and P h i l argued that the meanings were quite the same and that it was easy to get an idea o f the text by s k i m m i n g the kanji. The biggest difference they not iced was wi th the pronunciat ion and readings o f the kanji. U n l i k e Chinese , Japanese kanji characters have mul t ip le pronunciat ion patterns and this is one aspect that Chinese students cou ldn ' t re ly on their Chinese background for. A m o n g peers, there were several examples o f students us ing their kanji background to help them wi th wr i t ing and recogniz ing kanji dur ing wr i t i ng tasks. In the f o l l o w i n g excerpt, Johnny assisted A n n a wi th wr i t ing a kanji by referring to the Chinese character (L ine 4). E x c e r p t 4.45 I n t e r v i e w re f l ec t ion c o m p o s i t i o n task ( J o h n n y & A n n a : M a n d a r i n ) 1. A n n a : O k a y . +++ D e , ah + ki+ra+ri (xx) koosu wa account ing += {the course they (err) is accounting} 165 2. Johnny: =Taikeigakubu. {Systematic studies} 3. A n n a : O h . ((makes correction)) ++ 4. Johnny: Kanji is kuaiji. {The kanji is 'accountant'} Hui {((character 'hui))}. I mean hui {((character 'hui))}. Kangei. {Welcome party} (Pai rwork, N o v e m b e r 19, 2002) In Excerp t 4.46, M i h o , a heritage language learner, asked her group member Sean, a M a n d a r i n speaker, to help her wi th the meaning o f the w o r d for ' located ' w h i c h was written on a vocabulary sheet (L ine 1). In L i n e 2, Sean expla ined that " i t ' s l i ke ' located ' and then i n L i n e 6 he stated that he guessed the meaning because that is its meaning i n Chinese . H e then conf i rmed wi th Darren , a fe l low Cantonese speaker, w h o also used his Chinese language knowledge to check on the meaning o f the kanji. Excerpt 4.46 Writing task on topic of "My Country" (Miho: HLL; Sean & Darren: Cantonese but fluent English speakers; Kwan: Korean) 1. M i h o : W h a t ' s ichishite imasu? {located} 2. Sean: It 's l i k e ' l o c a t e d ' . 3. M i h o : O h , real ly? O k a y , w e ' l l just, w h y don ' t y o u ((laughs)). 4. Sean: H u h ? 5. M i h o : [Gaaden Machi22 wa + nishi ni. {Garden City is west} Is it +++? 6. Sean: [No , no, no. Just mak ing it up because it l ook l ike Chinese. ((Darren & Sean laugh)) 7. Darren: O h yeah. 8. Sean: [Is it located? L o o k s l ike it. 9. Dar ren : Y u p . 2 2 Reference to the actual city name has been change to Garden City, or in Japanese, G-machi. 166 (Groupwork , N o v e m b e r 5, 2002) In this next example , Gabr i e l l a re l ied on her Chinese language knowledge to create a Japanese kanji combina t ion word . T h i s new w o r d she has created, 'maika', is correct. In L i n e 4, it was evident that Gabr i e l l a had used her Chinese knowledge to combine the Chinese characters for 'every ' and 'c lass ' to supposedly create a v a l i d Japanese kanji. A l s o , by t ry ing to affix a Japanese reading to it (i.e., pronunciat ion) she tr ied to pass the characters as kanji. Unfortunately i n this situation, this strategy was unsuccessful. Excerpt 4.47 Interview reflection composition task (Isabella: Korean; Gabriella: Cantonese) 1. Isabella: Jugyou wa, ++ju-gyou ( (wri t ing d o w n on paper))+. {Class is, class} 2. Gabr ie l l a : Maika. {((err))} 3. Isabella: W h a t ' s maika"? {((err))} 4. Gabr ie l l a : I don ' t k n o w . I just think o f the kanji. I don ' t k n o w what it is , what ' s the word . Mai- ++. I don ' t k n o w what is this i n Japanese. Maika. {((err))} ( (wri t ing kanji on paper)) E a c h + class. + Mai jugyou? {((prefix for 'every')) class?} 5. Isabella: ++ 6. Gabr ie l l a : ((laughs)) (Pai rwork, N o v e m b e r 19, 2002) T h i s next excerpt s i m p l y shows how Isabella, a K o r e a n speaker, re l ied on Gabr ie l l a ' s Chinese background to ask for assistance i n wr i t i ng the kanji for 'tokidoki' (sometimes) to w h i c h Gabr i e l l a w i l l i n g l y responded by showing Isabella the characters. Excerpt 4.48 Interview reflection composition task (Isabella: Korean; Gabriella: Cantonese) 1. Isabella: Toki- how do y o u write= {Some} 167 2. Gabr ie l l a : =Tokidoki, right? {Sometimes} 3. Isabella: H o w do wri te the kanji? 4. Gabr ie l l a : L i k e this. (Pai rwork, N o v e m b e r 19, 2002) These four excerpts showed that Chinese- language-background students c o u l d re ly on their knowledge o f Chinese characters to help themselves and their peers wi th some kanji related language situations. W i t h respect to kanji, Chinese-speaking students were able to use Chinese characters to identify kanji characters, attempt to make creative constructions o f kanji and assist non-Chinese background peers wi th wr i t ing kanji characters. E v e n though both teachers and students c l a i m e d that there were advantages to using kanji to help learn Japanese. H o w e v e r , A s M s . M u r a k a m i c l a imed , the Chinese students d i d just as poor ly on their kanji quizzes as other students, al though they had beautiful handwri t ing . It seemed that when used caut iously, kanji c o u l d be helpful i n certain situations but its use was very l imi ted . Somet imes, it appeared that the teachers and students found some negative transfer when students re l ied too much on their Chinese background to wri te , read and pronounce kanji. There defini tely needs to be more research into this area to determine the advantages and disadvantages that the knowledge o f Chinese characters has on Japanese language learning. 4.7.5 Heritage Language Learners: An Illustrative Case A m o n g the 45 students w h o participated i n the study, there was on ly one heritage language learner. M i h o , w h o was born i n Eastern Canada and raised i n Garden C i t y , was born to a Japan-born-and-raised Taiwanese mother and a Japanese father. She attended 168 Japanese heritage language classes throughout her elementary school years yet quit after on ly 5 or 6 years. T h e W C U class that I observed was the first Japanese language class that she had taken since she was a c h i l d . A l t h o u g h she l i v e d on her o w n , currently, her parents spoke Japanese at home as she was g rowing up. D u r i n g h igh school , M i h o took an interest i n Japanese entertainment and identif ied herself as be ing Japanese. N o w , she ident i f ied herself as Taiwanese-Japanese although she c o u l d relate more to Japanese-Canadians than to Chinese or Chinese-Canadians. . She d i d not k n o w any Chinese . W i t h her background as a heritage language learner ( H L L ) , M i h o was quite different f rom many o f her classmates. She had some oral prof ic iency i n the Japanese vernacular. Furthermore, even though she stated that her grammar was real ly weak, the pa i rwork tasks revealed that she had indeed internal ized some grammar rules, w h i c h a l l owed M i h o to in tu i t ive ly evaluate T L structures. In the f o l l o w i n g peer task act ivi ty, M i h o attempted to create a sentence but her intui t ion to ld her that something wasn ' t quite right about the sentence. In L i n e 1, the sentence she produced was incorrect. She offered no explanat ion for her evaluat ion except for the fact that, "Th i s is w e i r d . " T h i s comment showed that she thought there was something wrong wi th the sentence, yet she c o u l d not identify what the p rob lem was and, therefore, c o u l d not exp la in what she was th ink ing to her groupmates. In L i n e s 11 ,15 and 17, M i h o repeated her in i t i a l utterances and acted as i f she was v o c a l i z i n g the sentence for the purpose o f l is tening to herself i n order to assess i f it "sounds right". T h e r i s ing intonation at the end o f her utterances, indicated that she was unsure about the sentence. Perhaps, she was voca l i z i ng her private speech since it d i d not seem as i f her groupmates felt the need to assist her, but were, rather, s i m p l y wa i t ing for M i h o to figure it out on her o w n . 169 Excerpt 4.49 Writing task on topic of "My Country" (Miho: H L L ; Sean & Darren: Cantonese but fluent English speakers; Kwan: Korean) 1. M i h o : Gaaden Machi no kikou wa sekai de ichiban su- sumi ni? Sumi ni ii kikou desu? {Garden City 's climate is number one in the world Ii-, ((infinitive of 'to live')) ((dative case marker ni))? ((infinitive of 'to live')) ((dative case marker ni)) is good climate?} T h i s is we i rd . + Gaaden Machi no kikou wa sekai de ichiban nano, nano de +. {Because Garden City's climate is number one in the world} Because i t ' s the best place to l ive-1 mean because it has very good cl imate i t ' s a good place to l ive . Gaaden Machi no kikou wa sekai de= {Garden City 's climate is in the world} 2. Darren: = W h a t ' s sekai? {world} 3. M i h o : W o r l d . 4. Darren: O h . 5. M i h o : Sekai de ichiban nano de sumi yasui desu ((r ising intonation; unsure)). {Is number one in the world, and therefore, is very liveable} 6. Dar ren & Sean & K w a n : + 7. M i h o : M a y b e ? I don ' t k n o w . 8. Sean: I don ' t k n o w . (xxx) . ( ( H laughs out loud)) N o Japanese. 9. M i h o : (x) Gaaden Machi no {Garden City ((genitive case marker no))} ++ was it Gaaden Machi no { Garden Ci ty ((genitive case marker no))} + what d i d y o u +, kikou {climate}? 10. Darren: Gaaden Machi no= {Garden City ((genitive case marker no))} 11. M i h o : =Kikou wa +++ ichiban ii ((r ising intonation; unsure)). Ichiban ii? {Climate is the best. Best?} 12. Dar ren & Sean & K w a n : ++ 13. M i h o : Nan de sumi yasui desu. {Why it is very liveable?} 14. K w a n : Y u p , okay. 15. Sean: H o w do you say (x)? 16. K w a n : (xx) . (x) ichiban. ( ( H laughs)) {number one} 170 17. M i h o : H o w about Gaaden Machi umi no chikaku ni arimasu! (x) umi no chikaku ni + nano de. (Groupwork , N o v e m b e r 5, 2002) Excerp t 4.50 illustrates the same intui t ive sense that M i h o had about her sentences. In L i n e 10 she made a grammat ica l ly correct sentence yet she found that there was something not quite right about it (L ine 12) by saying, " T h i s makes sense." i n a sarcastic tone. T h i s , again, appeared to be voca l i zed private speech since her response was a reflection commentary on her sentence. In a fo l low-up interview she conf i rmed that she was indeed v o c a l i z i n g her private speech i n order to see i f the sentence sounded correct and this was a strategy she used often. Ano the r H L L feature exhibi ted i n this excerpt and i n Excerp t 4.51 was a weakness wi th kanji. In L i n e 1 o f Excerp t 4.50, M i h o d idn ' t k n o w the kanji or even the reading for the w o r d 'forestry ' . T h i s was evident because in L i n e 2, Dar ren created the w o r d 'forestry' by us ing the words 'ki' (tree) and 'sangyou' (industry) and c o m b i n i n g them to mean ' industry o f trees'. M i h o laughed at his response and cont inued her search for the kanji. Then , she found the vocabulary list sheet for the act ivi ty and pointed to an i tem. Sean was able to read the kanji for ' forestry' and let M i h o k n o w that it was pronounced lringyou' (and not 'sangyou') when he said, "Is it ringyouT E v e n hav ing heard the pronunciat ion o f this kanji she was s t i l l not sure because she d i d not k n o w the Japanese reading for ' forestry ' . Therefore, she cont inued to persist and pointed (L ine 5) to a kanji and asked i f that particular one was the kanji for 'forestry (L ine 7 ) ' . F i n a l l y w i th K w a n ' s conf i rmat ion, M i h o determined that she had located the correct kanji. 171 Excerpt 4.50 Writing task on topic of "My Country" (Miho: HLL; Sean & Darren: Cantonese but fluent English speakers; Kwan: Korean) 1. M i h o : [Forestry. W h a t ' s forestry? 2. Darren: Ki no sangyou. {Industry of trees} ( ( M i h o laughs)) 3. M i h o : Gaaden Machi no san- (Garden City 's ind-) oh is this it ((points to vocabulary list))? 4. Sean: Is it ringyou! {forestry} 5. M i h o : Y e a h , i t ' s this one? 6. Darren: Rin-. {For-} 7. M i h o : Is that tree, forest ((asks S & D to examine the kanji))? 8. Sean: M a y b e . 9. K w a n : Y u p . 10. M i h o : So , what is i t? Gaaden Machi no sangyou wa ringyou desu. {Garden City's industry is forestry.} Vancouve r ' s industry is forestry? ((laughs)) 11. K w a n : (x). 12. M i h o : ( (A bit o f sarcasm i n tone)) T h i s makes sense. 13. Darren: T h e ma in industry omoni. {main} 14. M i h o : Omo na sangyou [wa + ringyou. {The main industry is forestry} 15. Darren: [Omo na. {Main} 16. K w a n : O k a y . 17. M i h o : O k a y , ((laughs)) (Groupwork , N o v e m b e r 5, 2002) S i m i l a r l y , i n Excerp t 4.51 M i h o re l ied on her peers for kanji assistance. T h i s t ime she wanted to wri te the kanji for ' f ishery ' and again pointed to a kanji on the vocabulary sheet. Once Sean conf i rmed her 'guess ' , she expla ined that she identif ied that particular 172 kanji because it had the kanji for ' f i s h ' 2 3 as part o f the first kanji o f fishing industry. The kanji for fish is an easy one w h i c h is usual ly learned at an early pr imary school level . She most l i ke ly remembered this f rom her heritage school days. She also conf i rmed this to be true i n her fo l low-up interview. Excerpt 4.51 Writing task on topic of "My Country" (Miho: H L L ; Sean & Darren: Cantonese but fluent English speakers; Kwan: Korean) 1. M i h o : O k a y , so w e can just say i t ' s forestry and fishery. ( ( K w a n laughs then H a n a laughs)) W h i c h one is fishery? + Th i s one? 2. Sean: Sure. 3. M i h o : I only notice the fish, ((laughs)) ++ Ringyou + oh, h o w about, h o w do y o u say i t ' s not only forestry but also fishery? (Groupwork , N o v e m b e r 5, 2002) T o summarize h o w M i h o , as a H L L , had to adapt and adjust in the J F L classes, Excerp t 4.52 contains a conversation between M i h o and Sheri (Chinese speaker) about the challenges o f learning J F L as a H L L . Excerpt 4.52 Interview reflection composition task (Miho: H L L ; Sheri: Chinese) 1. M i h o : I wanna learn l ike everything, ((laugh)) 2. Sheri : I think your Japanese is pretty good. 1 think y o u just had trouble w i t h kanji. ((laughs)) 3. M i h o : A n d the vocabulary. L i k e y o u keep on saying, I th ink y o u k n o w more o f the vocabulary than me. 4. Sheri : B u t I don ' t k n o w (xx). I have to think very s low. 5. M i h o : 'Cause l ike when I, 'cause when people l ike + l ike say something and use hard words , I don' t l ike I have no idea. B u t I think y o u w o u l d k n o w . 6. Sheri: B u t I have to think s lowly . The kanji for fishery is / iH The kanji for fish is & 173 7. M i h o : A t least you k n o w , ((laughs)) A n d so (xx) m y grammar is rea l ly bad. +++ L i k e you k n o w i n ga {((Nominative case marker ga))} and stuff l i ke that? I don ' t k n o w when you use it. ((laughs)) That ' s w h y I ' m (x) s tudying (xxx) . A n d then, and then you (xxx) but I don ' t even k n o w . So , I have to study. 8. Sher i : (xxx) . 9. M i h o : W e l l , I, I have to study for the test but l i ke before I d idn ' t k n o w (about grammar rules at a l l ) . (Pai rwork, N o v e m b e r 19, 2002) M i h o rea l ized that she was weaker wi th vocabulary and kanji.24 Furthermore, she revealed that her grammar knowledge was " rea l ly bad" because unt i l n o w she "d idn ' t even k n o w " the grammar rules. In a fo l low-up interview i n 2005, M i h o conf i rmed that the observations and interpretations described her language learning accurately. W h e n asked i f she felt that she acted as a "language broker" between the teacher and her group members she had ment ioned that she never felt that she took on this role because her Japanese was at the same level as her peers. In fact, M i h o felt that her grammatical knowledge was weaker than the rest o f the students since she had not taken any beginner-level universi ty courses i n J F L . She felt that the others had "learned Japanese properly f rom the start," however she had not. F o r M i h o , code-swi tch ing proved to be useful because she had trouble expressing w h y a Japanese phrase sounded " w e i r d " . She was able to ask for assistance us ing E n g l i s h and used it to expla in w h y she m a y have felt this way . Because she d i d not have a so l id background i n the formal learning o f the grammar rules, it was even more useful her M i h o to be able to access both Japanese and E n g l i s h to communicate wi th and get appropriate assistance f rom her peers. 2 4 See Shinbo (2004) about the challenges of HLLs of Japanese. 174 4.8 C h a p t e r S u m m a r y T h e f indings revealed that instructors i n this insti tution were us ing a h igh ratio o f T L (80%) i n the J F L classes and that this was s imi la r to what the M s . Inoue and M s . Y a b u n o had perceived themselves to be using. Furthermore, the students felt that the teachers used the T L about 7 0 % o f the t ime and the majori ty o f the students were satisfied wi th their instructor 's balance o f T L and E n g l i s h use. T h e data also found that instructors used E n g l i s h and u t i l i zed code-swi tching as a strategy to enhance the learning experiences o f their students. The students said that they d i d not favour a T L - o n l y p o l i c y and that they benefited f rom their teacher's use o f code-swi tching. O v e r a l l , both teachers' and students' concerns over T L use was related to challenges w i t h comprehension and clar i ty o f lesson explanations. A s a result, the teachers and students used a variety o f language-related strategies to enhance the learning o f the Japanese language. F i n a l l y , the chapter also h ighl ighted the different k inds o f expertise that students f rom different ethnolinguist ic backgrounds contributed to the c lass room learning situation: for example , the K o r e a n students brought their knowledge o f K o r e a n syntax, w h i c h is s imi la r to Japanese; the Chinese learners brought their knowledge o f Chinese characters, w h i c h are s imi la r to kanji; and the H L L brought her o w n tacit knowledge o f Japanese i n the fo rm o f grammatical intuit ions. 175 Chapter 5 Implications of the Study 5.1 Introduction T h i s chapter w i l l introduce and discuss the pedagogical impl ica t ions o f this study. It w i l l be suggested that strategic and purposeful use o f code-swi tch ing by instructors can enhance F L learning. A l s o , students' use o f code-swi tching dur ing peer tasks offers necessary access to T L use and the negotiation o f T L structures as they complete a task. Furthermore, by being aware and adapting F L programs according to the language needs o f the students, F L learning experiences and opportunities for more effective scaffolding, and, thus, input, w i l l be available to the students. The l imitat ions o f this study include the subjectivity o f the researcher due to the qualitative nature o f this case study research, the smal l number o f cases selected and the size o f each class (i.e., number o f students), the refusal o f the use o f video-recording, and the fact that only just over ha l f the students participated in interviews. A l s o being explored w i l l be the direct ion for future research i n the areas o f T L and L I use, as w e l l as for J F L teaching and learning. The chapter w i l l end w i t h some conc lud ing remarks. 5.1 Pedagogical Implications T h i s study focused on language use in J F L classrooms. O f part icular focus was the use o f the T L and the C L for enhancing Japanese language learning. The study showed that strategic uses o f the T L and C L can be useful f rom both the teachers' and the students' perspective. F o r the teacher, it can provide scaffolding to students, especial ly dur ing complex or important tasks where effective communica t ion is cr i t ica l . F o r students, the need to comprehend and to do so in a clear and efficient manner was the 176 main goal dur ing c lassroom lectures. D u r i n g pa i rwork , students used the T L and L l / N L to negotiate the content and manage the task. In other words , the students found it necessary to adjust their language use to improve communica t ion i n order to meaningful ly complete the task. O v e r a l l , the instructors were able to adjust and adapt to student needs through a variety o f language-related strategies. Fi rs t o f a l l , teacher use o f E n g l i s h , when strategically motivated, can be an effective mediat ing tool for language teaching. M o s t important ly, code-swi tch ing helps increase comprehension, especial ly dur ing form-focused lessons and administrat ive tasks. T h e important point here is to be able to meet the needs o f the students, and adjust the level o f scaffolding as necessary. A c c o r d i n g to the students, the teachers used E n g l i s h i n areas where they might otherwise struggle or showed signs o f struggle. Other than these times, the teacher used as m u c h T L as possible without j eopard iz ing comprehension, thus preventing any negative effects w i th respect to opportunities for input. T h i s study cal ls for ra is ing the awareness o f instructors who use a h igh ratio o f E n g l i s h i n their F L teaching and/or are afraid to increase their T L use because they feel that it w i l l negatively affect their students confidence or mot iva t ion . A s the majori ty o f students i n this study reported, they were c lear ly satisfied wi th their instructors ' ratio o f language use; they were satisfied even when their teachers' were us ing as much as 8 0 % of the T L i n class. Therefore, teachers do not necessarily have to assume that h igh quantities o f T L use w i l l have a negative impact on their language classrooms. The key is to use the L I strategically to enhance and complement the T L , and to adjust their language use according to the specific needs o f their students and not necessari ly according to 177 department pol ic ies , se l f - imposed pr inciples , or because i t ' s convenient for the teacher to use the L I without seriously consider ing its use. Secondly , the study suggests that code-swi tching dur ing col laborat ive tasks can support L 2 learning. Because many students d i d not use the T L dur ing teacher-led lectures, pa i rwork activities can provide much needed opportunities for language negotiat ing and T L use, i n general. T h i s study found that students used a fair amount o f L I , E n g l i s h and m i x e d utterances dur ing the process part o f the language task. T h i s impl ies that use o f the C L was a natural and comfortable strategy, yet effective i n that it helped students manage the task by negotiating the T L content necessary to successfully complete the task. A l t h o u g h code-swi tch ing helped students complete the task, i n every instance the T L used was on ly to refer to T L items f rom textbooks, handouts, writ ten notes and such. Unfortunately, there was se ldom creative or spontaneous use o f the T L . Perhaps it can be conc luded that the students d i d not have the language tools to perform these functions i n the T L . M o r e evident is that fact that students rarely had in-class opportunities to be creative and spontaneous. If students are expected to use the language for authentic communica t ion , students must be g iven the language tools and the encouragement to do so. F i n a l l y , the study suggests that teachers and program coordinators need to consider the language backgrounds o f their students and adjust their program, cu r r i cu lum and methodology accordingly . T h e study raises questions about h o w the J F L cu r r i cu lum can be modi f i ed i n such a way that learners can engage i n more spontaneous, creative language use, as listeners and speakers, us ing the T L . In this case, there were many Chinese-speaking students enrol led i n the J F L classes and teachers made several 178 adaptations to accommodate this populat ion. F o r example , the teachers were sensitive to their needs and helped them wi th certain aspects o f the Japanese language such as exp la in ing the difference between s imi la r kanji pairs, s imp l i fy ing exam instructions for Chinese E S L students, and mod i fy ing T L input through the use o f code-swi tching . W i t h such high enrolments o f Chinese- language-background students, programs may f ind it beneficial to even have a separate stream for Chinese students and to have the T L taught not through the c o m m o n language o f E n g l i s h , but rather through Chinese direct ly. W i t h some non-Chinese students and F f L L s c l a i m i n g that they felt that the Chinese students had an advantage over them, the populari ty o f J F L among Chinese students may i n fact discourage students o f other ethnic and language backgrounds f rom enro l l ing i n these classes. T h e issue o f attracting more non-Chinese students defini tely needs further invest igation. Furthermore, H L L s , who have their o w n different set o f needs, often get neglected i n the process since there are usual ly few H L L s that enrol i n J F L classes at this insti tution (for reasons unknown) and more important ly, regular F L classes are not designed to cater to H L L needs. In terms o f T L and L I use, hav ing different streams can further enhance J F L learning experiences because the Chinese speakers can learn J F L using the T L and their N L ; non-Chinese , n o n - H L L s learners can benefit f rom more attention to their needs, especial ly when it comes to kanji and vocabulary lessons; and H L L s can benefit f rom lessons wi th an almost exc lus ive use o f the T L . The role o f the L I i n F L learning remains a complex issue. The most chal lenging aspect o f T L / L 1 use is determining how much, i n addi t ion to in what ways the use o f the L I is "appropriate" and the "most effective". S ince every F L class is not exact ly 179 identical to any other F L class, this issue continues to be an in t r iguing one that requires further invest igation. 5.3 L i m i t a t i o n s o f the S t u d y The qualitative nature o f this study requires that the researcher be i nvo lved i n interpreting the data. Da ta were collected from a number o f sources so that these sources cou ld provide information to support the f indings, regardless o f the researcher's subjectivity, thus strengthening the internal va l id i ty i f the study. Despi te the tr iangulat ion o f teacher and student interviews and the classroom lecture and pa i rwork audio recordings, it is not possible to completely eradicate the researcher's role in the data analysis process. The researcher herself is often ocnsidered an instrument in qualitative research. T w o cases were the pr imary object o f investigation and, al though the two J F L classes p rov ided a wealth o f information, general iz ing from this study to other populations is not possible. However , the case study can provide informat ion that can contribute to the current research on s imi lar issues on T l / L l use and ind iv idua ls or groups w h o are experiencing s imi la r learning contexts can use this study to try and understand their o w n teaching or learning experiences. Furthermore, the study sheds l ight on the different experiences o f students from different backgrounds learning the same language, Japanese. The relat ively smal l size o f each class (less than 25 students in each o f the t w o classes) meant that I could on ly record a l imi ted number o f pair groupings dur ing peer tasks. Th is was because not all students consented to the audio-recordings. Therefore, there was great variat ion in the number o f pairs that were audio-recorded during every 180 task. A t the most, five pairs (total for both classes combined) were avai lable for analysis. I f students were g iven a tape-recorder and yet chose not to record their sessions, then I d id not get access to that pa i rwork recording. However , the pairs and excerpts selected were representative o f the learning experiences o f the students. Ano the r point is that during the first meeting wi th the t w o focal instructors, I asked the teachers i f I cou ld videotape their lectures. The i r response was that the v ideo recording w o u l d distract students and perhaps make them uncomfortable. Therefore, the only recording device accessible were the cassette recorders. The v ideo recordings w o u l d have been useful to observe any body gestures that the instructor or students may have used when communica t ing to each other. Furthermore, I could have observed the facial expressions o f the students, especial ly before and after instances o f code-swi tch ing in order to see the reactions o f the students to the lesson. A l s o , since I used one professional tape recorder to record the c lassroom lectures, it may have been helpful to have another recording device to catch all the utterances, especial ly o f those students w h o spoke softly or sat the farthest f rom the tape recorder. Las t ly , on ly about ha l f the students participated in the interviews. In addit ion, the interviews (wi th both instructors and students) were done only once and no fo l low-up in terv iew or discussion session took place. A l s o , after data analysis was complete, member checks were not done for both instructors and students. One except ion is w i t h M i h o , w i th w h o m I had a fo l low-up online chat in terview about her H L L experiences. 5.4 D i r e c t i o n s fo r F u t u r e R e s e a r c h Th i s study attempted to fill a gap in the literature on L I and T L use and, in particular, research concerning Japanese-as-a-foreign-language classes. D u e to the 181 l im i t ed scope o f this research, i n addit ion to the l imita t ions ment ioned i n the previous section, I w o u l d l i ke to suggest a few areas for future research. F r o m the best o f m y knowledge , this present study, aside f rom Ohta (2001, 20001 , 1995), is the on ly study that examined the role o f language dur ing J F L classes. A l t h o u g h Ohta ' s l ooked on ly at peer tasks, m y study also addresses code-swi tching and scaffolding p rov ided by instructors to their students. Furthermore, this study is unique i n that it also investigated the effects o f hav ing many Chinese- language-background students i n J F L classes i n a N o r t h A m e r i c a n contex, a trend that may continue i n the future, g iven recent immigra t ion patterns. The study il lustrated code-swi tching practices not on ly i n the T L and E n g l i s h (the ma in instructional language besides the T L ) but also wi th addi t ional languages i n the same conversat ion. T o get a more thorough understanding o f the experiences o f the Japanese language teachers and their students, it w o u l d be more effective to not on ly in terview themonce but to do research for a longer per iod wi th a few interviews dur ing the entire per iod. H a v i n g focus groups o f students only , teachers on ly , and students and teachers might y i e l d evidence o f more interesting informat ion that c o u l d either con f i rm or perhaps even contradict the f indings o f this study. It w o u l d be exc i t ing , for example , to f ind out i f the teacher's L I status had any effect on teaching J F L , especia l ly to a majori ty Chinese class. W o u l d native speakers o f E n g l i s h or native speakers o f Chinese teach differently f rom the two teachers observed, and i f so, h o w ? A s imi la r study wi th non-native teachers o f Japanese c o u l d demonstrate h o w non-native speakers o f Japanese cope wi th the challenges o f teaching Japanese through their o w n L 2 or L 3 , perhaps. 182 A topic for farther invest igation w o u l d be to examine the role o f E S L learners in J F L classes and h o w they cope wi th issues o f language ( T L , E n g l i s h , and N L ) in classes where the teacher is proficient in the T L , yet less proficient in E n g l i s h . It w o u l d be interesting to see h o w teachers and students w o u l d negotiate the language gap and what strategies they w o u l d use (wi th respect to language) to scaffold their learning. S imi l a r ly , it w o u l d be interesting to conduct a study about a N o r t h A m e r i c a n J F L (Chinese stream) class taught by a Chinese speaking instructor and to what extent they w o u l d use E n g l i s h to teach Japanese to Chinese-language-background students. 5 . 5 C o n c l u d i n g R e m a r k s Th i s study investigated the role o f the T L and L I in a J F L learning context where many students had Chinese language background. A total o f 2 focal instructors, 6 other instructors, and 45 students (21 o f w h o m participated in interviews) participated in the study through c lassroom observations, interviews, and pa i rwork audio-recordings. The data showed that teachers used a relat ively large amount o f T L w h i l e students' T L use dur ing peer tasks was about ha l f that o f the teacher. B o t h teachers and students made use o f code-swi tch ing to assist learners by p rov id ing scaffolding in the zone o f p r o x i m a l development. It was found that teachers used a variety o f l inguis t ic and pragmatic strategies to help students learn Japanese. The unique processes and effects o f J F L learning for K o r e a n , Chinese, and Japanese H L speakers were also identified and illustrated. A s a former universi ty J F L student and a H L L , as w e l l as a secondary school Japanese teacher, it was very rewarding to conduct research in an area that is o f personal and professional interest. Because I was a lways intr igued by the large Chinese-speaking 183 student populat ion enrol led i n J F L classes at W C U , this gave me an opportunity to understand this phenomenon and to get a g l impse o f the popular i ty o f Japanese among Chinese youth. A l s o , I became quite interested i n how M i h o was exper iencing her J F L classes. L i k e other H L L s , she felt that her grammar basis was weak and that kanji and vocabulary were the most diff icul t aspects o f learning Japanese as a H L L . Because I c o u l d relate to her experiences, it was interesting to see what strategies she used to overcome the challenges. W h a t was the most salient was that her Japanese language learning was connected to her identity as a Japanese-Taiwanese. She felt that she should k n o w Japanese because she was Japanese; this was exact ly how I felt dur ing m y o w n undergraduate years. Interestingly, o f a l l the students i n the study, I became most acquainted wi th M i h o . T h e experience o f do ing research has been both cha l lenging and exc i t ing . I learned a lot f rom the study itself, as w e l l as the process o f conduct ing research. U p o n reflection, the discussions wi th the participants about their language learning/teaching were the highl ights o f the data co l lec t ion and seeing how a l l the data merged together to fo rm this thesis has been a most rewarding experience. 184 R E F E R E N C E S A n t o n , M . (1999). T h e discourse o f a learner-centered c lassroom: Sociocul tura l perspectives on teacher-learner interaction i n the second-language c lassroom. The Modern Language Journal, 83, 303-318. A n t o n , M . , & D i C a m i l l a , F . J . (1999). Soc io-cogni t ive functions o f L I col laborat ive interaction i n the L 2 c lassroom. The Modern Language Journal, 83, 233-247. Arnfast , J .S . , & J0rgensen, J . N . (2003). Code- swi t ch ing as a communica t ion , learning, and socia l negotiat ion strategy i n first year learners o f D a n i s h . International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 13, 23-53. Baszanger , I., & Dod ie r , N . (1997). Ethnography: Re la t ing the part to the whole . In D . S i lve rman (Ed.) , Qualitative research: Theory,method and practice (pp. 8-23). L o n d o n : Sage. B e a u v i l l a i n , C , & Grainger , J . (1987). A c c e s s i n g in ter lexical homographs: some l imitat ions o f a language-selective access. Journal of Memory and Language, 26, 658-672. B r o o k s , F . B . , & Donato , R . (1994). V y g o t s k y a n approaches to understanding foreign language learner discourse. Hispania, 77, 262-274. B r o w n , H . D . (2000) Principles of Language Learning and Teaching. N e w Y o r k : L o n g m a n . B r o w n , H . D . (2001). Teaching by principles: an interactive approach to language pedagogy. N e w Y o r k : A d d i s o n W e s l e y L o n g m a n . Chambers , F . (1991). P romot ing use o f the target language i n the c lassroom. Language Learning Journal, 4, 27-31. C h a v e z , M . (2003). T h e digloss ic foreign-language c lassroom: Learner ' v i ews on L I and L 2 functions. In C . S . B l y t h (Ed.) , The sociolinguistics of foreign-language classrooms: Contributions of the native, the near-native, and the non-native speaker (pp. 163-208). Bos ton : He in l e . C o o k , V . J . (1991). T h e poverty-of-the-stimulus argument and mult i -competence. Second Language Research, 7, 103-117 C o o k , V . J . (1994). T i m e d grammatical i ty judgments o f the head parameter i n L 2 learning. In G . Bartel t (Ed.) , The dynamics of language processes, (pp. 15-31). Tub ingen , The Netherlands: Gunter Narr . 185 C o o k , V . J . (1997). The consequences o f b i l i ngua l i sm for cogni t ive processing. In A . de Groo t & J .F . K r o l l (Eds.) , Tutorials in bilingualism: Psycholinguistic perspectives. (pp. 279-299) H i l l s d a l e , N J : Lawrence E r l b a u m . C o o k , V . J . (1999). G o i n g beyond the native speaker i n language teaching. TESOL Quarterly, 33, 185-209. C o o k , V . J . (2001a). Second language learning and language teaching. (3rd ed.). L o n d o n : O x f o r d Un ive r s i t y Press. C o o k , V . J . (2001b). U s i n g the first language i n the c lassroom. The Canadian Modern Language Review, 57, 402-423. Danhua , W . (1995). M e d i u m o f instruction i n the L 2 c lassroom. TEANGA: The Irish Yearbook of Applied Linguistics, 15, 21-29. D i c k s o n , P . (1996). Using the target language: A view from the classroom. L o n d o n : Na t iona l Foundat ion for Educa t iona l Research. Dona to , R . (1994). C o l l e c t i v e scaffolding i n second language learning. In J .P . Lanto l f , & G . A p p e l , (Eds.) Vygotskian approaches to second language research, (pp. 33-56). N o r w o o d , N . J . : A b l e x Pub l i sh ing Corpora t ion . Duf f , P . , & L i , D . (n.d.). L I and L 2 use i n M a n d a r i n classrooms. U n p u b l i s h e d manuscript. Duff , P . A . , & P o l i o , C . G . (1990). H o w much foreign language i n there i n the foreign language c lassroom? The Modern Language Journal, 74, 154-165. D u n n , W . E . , & Lantol f , J .P . (1998). V y g o t s k y ' s zone o f p r o x i m a l development and Krashen ' s i + 1: Incommensurable constructs; incommensurable theories. Language Learning, 48, 411-442. F r a n k l i n , C . E . M . (1990). Teach ing i n the target language. Language Learning Journal, 2L 20-24. Hancock , M . (1997). B e h i n d c lassroom code-swi tching: L a y e r i n g and language choice i n L 2 learner interaction. TESOL Quarterly, 31, 217-35. Harbord , J . (1992). T h e use o f the mother tongue i n the c lassroom. ELT Journal, 46, 350-355. Johnson, D . M . (1992). Approaches to research in second language learning. N e w Y o r k : L o n g m a n . 186 Kaise r , S., I ch ikawa, Y . , K o b a y a s h i , N . , & Y a m a m o t o , H . (2001). Japanese: A comprehensive grammar. L o n d o n : Rout ledge. K i m , C . (2005). Mediating ESL learning through collaborative dialogue: An exploration of the processes occurring between Korean adults and their partners. U n p u b l i s h e d doctoral dissertation, Ontar io Institute for Studies i n Educa t ion o f the Un ive r s i t y o f Toronto , Toronto , Ontar io . K i n g i n g e r , C . (2001). i +1^ Z P D . Foreign Language Annals, 34, 417-425. K o b a y a s h i , M . (2004). A sociocultural study of second language tasks: Activity, agency, and language socialization. U n p u b l i s h e d doctoral dissertation, Un ive r s i t y o f B r i t i s h C o l u m b i a , Vancouver , B r i t i s h C o l u m b i a , Canada. K o b a y a s h i , M . (2003). The role o f peer support i n E S L students' accompl ishment o f oral academic tasks. The Canadian Modern Language Review, 58, 337-368. Krashen , S . D . (1985). The input hypothesis: Issues and implications. L o n d o n : L o n g m a n . Krashen , S . D . & Ter re l l , T . D . (1983). The natural approach: Language acquisition in the classroom. L o n d o n : Prentice H a l l Europe . K u b o t a , R . (1998). V o i c e s f rom the margin: Second and foreign language teaching approaches f rom minor i ty perspectives. The Canadian Modern Language Review, 54, 394-412. Lanto l f , J . P . (2000). Introducing Sociocul tura l theory. In J . P . L a n t o l f (Ed.) , Sociocultural theory and second language learning (pp. 1-26). O x f o r d : O x f o r d Un ive r s i t y Press. Lanto l f , J . P . (2002). Sociocul tura l theory and second language acquis i t ion. In R . B . K a p l a n (Ed.) , The Oxford handbook of applied linguistics (pp. 109-119). O x f o r d : O x f o r d Un ive r s i t y Press. Lanto l f , J .P . , & A p e l , G . (1994). Theoret ical framework: A n introduct ion to V y g o t s k i a n perspectives on second language reaserch. In Lanto l f , J .P. , & A p p e l , G . (Eds.) Vygotskian approaches to second language research (pp. 1-32). N o r w o o d , N . J . , A b l e x Pub l i sh ing Corpora t ion . Lanto l f , J . P . , & Pav lenko , A . (1995). Sociocul tura l Theory and second language acquisi t ion. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 15, 108-124. L e v i n e , G . S. (2005). Co-cos t ruc t ion and art iculat ion o f code choice practices i n foreign language classrooms. In C M . Barette, & K . Paesani (Eds) . Language program articulation: Developing a theoretical foundation (pp. 110-130). Bos ton : He in l e . 187 L e v i n e , G . S. (2003). Student and instructor beliefs and attitudes about target language use, first language use and anxiety: Repor t o f a questionnaire study. T h e Modern Language Journal, 87, 343-364. L i u , D . , A h n , G , Baek , K . , & H a n , N . (2004). South K o r e a n h igh school E n g l i s h teachers' code swi tch ing: Questions and challenges i n the dr ive for m a x i m a l use o f E n g l i s h i n teaching. TESOL Quarterly, 38, 605-638. Locas t ro , V . (1987). Aizuchi: A Japanese conversat ional routine. In L . E . S m i t h (Ed.) , Discourse across cultures (pp. 101-113). N e w Y o r k : Prentice H a l l . L o n g , M . H . , & Porter, P . A . (1985). G r o u p work , interlanguage talk, and second language acquis i t ion. TESOL Quarterly, 19, 207-227'. M a c a r o , E . (1997). Target language, collaborative learning and autonomy. C l evedon : M u l t i l i n g u a l Matters . M a c a r o , E . (2001). A n a l y s i n g student teachers' codeswi tch ing i n foreign language classrooms: Theories and decis ion mak ing . Modern Language Journal, 85, 531-548. M e i r i n g , L . , & N o r m a n , N . (2002). B a c k on target: Reposi t ioning the status o f target language in M F L teaching and learning. Language Learning Journal, 26, 27-35. M e r r i a m , S . B . (1998). Qualitative research and case study application in education. San Franc isco : Jossey-Bass. M i u r a , A . , & M c G l o i n , N . H . (1994). An integrated approach to intermediate Japanese. T o k y o : Japan T imes . M o n t g o m e r y , C , & Eisenste in , M . (1985). R e a l reali ty revisi ted: A n experimental communica t ive course i n E S L . TESOL Quarterly, 19, 317-334. N g u y e n , A . , & S h i n , F . , & Krashen , S. (2001). Deve lopment o f the first language is not a barrier to second-language acquisi t ion: Ev idence f rom Vie tnamese immigrants to the U n i t e d States. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 4, 159-164. N o o r , H . H . (1994). Some impl ica t ions o f the role o f the mother tongue i n second language acquis i t ion. Linguistica Communicatio, 6, 97-106. Nor ton , B . (2000). Identity and language learning: Gender, ethnicity and educational change. H a r l o w , Eng land : Longman/Pearson Educa t ion . Nor ton Peirce, B . (1995). S o c i a l identity, investment, and language learning. TESOL Quarterly, 2 9 , 9 - 3 1 . 188 Obler , L . K . (1982). The pars imonious b i l ingua l . In L . K . Ob le r & L . M e n n , (Eds.) , Exceptional language and linguistics (pp. 339-346). San D i e g o , C A : A c a d e m i c Press. Ohta , A . S. (2001). Second language acquisition processes in the classroom: Learning Japanese. M a h w a h , N . J . : Lawrence E r l b a u m . Ohta , A . S. (2000). Re - th ink ing interaction in S L A : Deve lopmen ta l ly appropriate assistance in the Zone o f P r o x i m a l Deve lopment and the acquisi t ion o f L 2 grammar. In J . P . Lan to l f (Ed.) , Sociocultural theory and second language learning (pp. 51-78). Oxfo rd : O x f o r d Un ive r s i t y Press. Ohta , A . S. (1995). A p p l y i n g sociocul tural theory to an analysis o f learner discourse: Learner-learner col laborat ive interaction i n the Z o n e of P r o x i m a l Development . Issues in Applied Linguistics, 6, 93-121. P o l i o , C . G . , & Duff , P . A . (1994). Teachers ' language use i n the universi ty foreign language classrooms: A qualitative analysis o f E n g l i s h and target language Al te ra t ion . The Modern Language Journal, 78, 311-326. Ro l in - I anz i t i , J . , & B r o w n l i e , S. (2002). Teacher use o f learners' native language i n the foreign language c lassroom. The Canadian Modern Language Review, 58, 402-426. Shinbo , Y . (2004). Challenges, needs, and contributions of heritage language students in foreign language classrooms. U n p u b l i s h e d master's thesis, Un ive r s i t y o f B r i t i s h C o l u m b i a , Vancouver , B r i t i s h C o l u m b i a , Canada. Stake, R . E . (1995). The art of case study research. Thousand Oaks : Sage. Storch, N . , & W i g g l e s w o r t h , G . (2003). Is there a role for the use o f the L I i n an L 2 setting? TESOL Quarterly, 37, 760-770. S w a i n , M . (2000). The output hypothesis and beyond: M e d i a t i n g acquis i t ion through col laborat ive dialogue. In J . P . L a n t o l f (Ed.) Sociocultural theory and second language learning (pp. 97-114). O x f o r d : O x f o r d Un ive r s i t y Press. S w a i n , M , B r o o k s , L , & T o c a l l i - B e l l e r , A . (2002). Peer-peer dialogue as means o f second language learning. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 22, 171-185. S w a i n , M . , & L a p k i n , S. (2000). Task-based second language learning: T h e uses o f the first language. Language Teaching Research, 4, 251-274. S w a i n , M . , & L a p k i n , S. (1998). Interaction and second language learning: T w o adolescent French immers ion students w o r k i n g together. Modern Language Journal, 82, 320-337. 189 Tarone, E . , & S w a i n , M . (1995). A sociol inguis t ic perspective on second language use i n immers ion classrooms. Modern Language Journal, 79, 166-178. T u r n b u l l , M . (2001). There is a role for the L I i n second and foreign language teaching, but . . . . The Canadian Modern Language Review, 57, 531-540. T u r n b u l l , M . , & Arnet t , K . (2002). Teachers ' uses o f the target and first languages i n second and foreign language classrooms. Annual review of applied linguistics, 22, 204-218. V i l l a m i l , O . S., & de Guerrero, M . C . M . (1996). Peer rev is ion i n the L 2 c lassroom: Soc ia l -cogni t ive activit ies, mediat ing strategies, and aspects o f socia l behavior. Journal of Second Language Writing, 5, 51-75. V y g o t s k y , L . S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambr idge : Ha rva rd Un ive r s i t y Press. W e l l s , G . (1999). U s i n g L I to master L 2 : a response to A n t o n and D i C a m i l l a ' s " S o c i o -cogni t ive functions o f L I col laborat ive interaction i n the L 2 c lass room". The Modern Language Journal, 83, 248-254. Wigg l e swor th , G . (2002). The role o f the first language i n the second language c lassroom: F r i e n d or foe. E n g l i s h Teaching, 57, 17-31. Y i n , R . K . (1994). Case study research: Design and methods. ( 2 n d ed.). Thousand Oaks : Sage. 190 Appendix I Informed Consent Form for Focal Instructors Title of Study: Language use i n Japanese as a Fore ign Language Class rooms Faculty Advisor D r . Pa t r ic ia D u f f Associa te Professor Department o f Language and Li t e racy Educa t ion Facu l ty o f Educa t ion 604-822-9693 Graduate Student E m y N a k a m u r a Mas te r o f Ar t s Candidate Department o f Language and Li t e racy Educa t ion T h e Un ive r s i t y o f B r i t i s h C o l u m b i a X X X - X X X - X X X M . A . Thesis research Purpose T h e purpose o f this study is to examine teacher and student communica t ion patterns i n Japanese as a foreign language classrooms ( J F L ) i n a loca l universi ty setting. I a m interested i n the roles o f first, second, and even th i rd languages i n J F L learning environments. I w i l l be examin ing how J F L instructors adapt their language use to enhance communica t ion wi th students when teaching Japanese. Procedures Y o u r part icipat ion w i l l i nvo lve a 30-45 minute audio-taped in terview, a questionnaire and c lass room observation sessions dur ing T e r m 1 o f the W i n t e r 2002 academic year at The Western Canadian Unive r s i ty . The c lassroom observations o f the seminar sessions o f Intermediate Japanese (i.e. J A P N X X X X ) w i l l occur four t imes throughout the term. These four c lassroom observations w i l l be audio-recorded wi th the permiss ion o f the students i n v o l v e d and w o u l d be during weeks 4-8. F o r the interview session, I w o u l d be glad to arrange an in terview on campus at a t ime convenient for you . 191 Confidentiality A n y informat ion result ing f rom this research study w i l l be kept strictly confident ia l . Participants w i l l not be identif ied by name and where necessary pseudonyms w i l l be used for anonymi ty i n any reports o f the completed study. Audio- tapes and transcribed documents w i l l be kept i n a secure f i l i n g cabinet and w i l l be ident i f ied on ly by a code number. Compensation In appreciation o f your involvement i n the study, each participant w i l l receive an honorar ium i n the amount o f $200. Contact If y o u have any questions or desire to for further information or feedback wi th respect to this study, you may contact E m y N a k a m u r a at X X X - X X X - X X X or emyn@interchange.ubc.ca , or, the faculty advisor, D r . Pa t r ic ia D u f f at 604-822-9693 or patr ic ia .duff@ubc.ca . If y o u have any concerns about your treatment or rights as a research participant you may contact the Di rec to r o f Research Services at The Un ive r s i t y o f B r i t i s h C o l u m b i a at 604-822-8598. 192 S T A T E M E N T O F I N F O R M E D C O N S E N T T i t l e o f S t u d y : Language use in Japanese as a Fore ign Language Class rooms I understand that m y part icipation i n this study is entirely voluntary and that I may refuse to participate or wi thdraw from the study at any t ime without penalty. If you are w i l l i n g to participate i n this study, please f i l l i n the information be low. B e sure to keep a s igned copy o f page 3 for your o w n records, and pages 1-2. I have received a copy o f this consent fo rm for m y o w n records. I consent to participate i n this study. N a m e : Signature Date Phone number Witness Date Please keep this copy for your records. 193 S T A T E M E N T O F I N F O R M E D C O N S E N T T i t l e o f S t u d y : Language use i n Japanese as a Fo re ign Language Class rooms I understand that m y part icipat ion i n this study is entirely voluntary and that I m a y refuse to participate or wi thdraw from the study at any t ime without penalty. If you are w i l l i n g to participate i n this study, please f i l l i n the informat ion be low. B e sure to keep a s igned copy o f page 3 for your o w n records, and pages 1-2. I have received a copy o f this consent fo rm for m y o w n records. I consent to participate i n this study. N a m e Signature Date Phone number Witness Date Please return this copy to the researcher. 194 A p p e n d i x I I I n f o r m e d C o n s e n t F o r m f o r N o n - F o c a l I n s t ruc to r s T i t l e o f S t u d y : Language use i n Japanese as a Fore ign Language Class rooms Faculty Advisor D r . Pa t r ic ia D u f f Assoc ia te Professor Department o f Language and L i t e racy Educa t ion Facu l ty o f Educa t ion 604-822-9693 Graduate Student E m y N a k a m u r a Mas te r o f Ar t s Candidate Department o f Language and L i t e racy Educa t ion The Un ive r s i t y o f B r i t i s h C o l u m b i a X X X - X X X - X X X M . A . Thesis research Purpose T h e purpose o f this study is to examine teacher and student communica t ion patterns i n Japanese as a foreign language classrooms ( J F L ) i n a loca l universi ty setting. I a m interested i n the roles o f first, second, and even th i rd languages i n J F L learning environments. I w i l l be examin ing how J F L instructors adapt their language use to enhance communica t ion wi th students when teaching Japanese. Procedures Y o u r part icipation w i l l i nvo lve a 30-45 minute audio-taped interview dur ing T e r m 1 o f the W i n t e r 2002 academic year at T h e Western Canad ian Un ive r s i t y . I w o u l d be g lad to arrange the in terview on campus at a t ime that is convenient for you . Confidentiality A n y information result ing f rom this research study w i l l be kept strictly confident ia l . Participants w i l l not be identif ied by name and where necessary pseudonyms w i l l be used for anonymity i n any reports o f the completed study. Audio- tapes and transcribed documents w i l l be kept i n a secure f i l i ng cabinet and w i l l be identif ied on ly by a code number. 195 Compensation In appreciation o f your involvement i n the study, each participant w i l l receive a $40 gift certificate to a loca l bookstore. Contact If y o u have any questions or desire to for further informat ion or feedback wi th respect to this study, you may contact E m y N a k a m u r a at X X X - X X X - X X X or emyn@interchange.ubc.ca , or, the faculty advisor, D r . Pa t r ic ia D u f f at 604-822-9693 or patr ic ia .duff@ubc.ca. If y o u have any concerns about your treatment or rights as a research participant you m a y contact the Di rec to r o f Research Services at The Un ive r s i t y o f B r i t i s h C o l u m b i a at 604-822-8598. 196 S T A T E M E N T O F I N F O R M E D C O N S E N T T i t l e o f S t u d y : Language use i n Japanese as a Fore ign Language Class rooms I understand that m y part icipat ion i n this study is entirely voluntary and that I m a y refuse to participate or wi thdraw f rom the study at any t ime without penalty. If y o u are w i l l i n g to participate i n this study, please f i l l i n the informat ion be low. B e sure to keep a s igned copy o f page 3 for your o w n records, and pages 1-2. I have received a copy o f this consent fo rm for m y o w n records. I consent to participate i n this study. N a m e — Date Signature Phone number Date Wi tness — Please keep this copy for your records. 197 S T A T E M E N T O F I N F O R M E D C O N S E N T T i t l e o f S t u d y : Language use i n Japanese as a Fo re ign Language Class rooms I understand that m y part icipat ion i n this study is entirely voluntary and that I m a y refuse to participate or wi thdraw from the study at any t ime without penalty. If y o u are w i l l i n g to participate i n this study, please f i l l i n the informat ion be low. B e sure to keep a s igned copy o f page 3 for your o w n records, and pages 1-2. I have rece ived a copy o f this consent f o r m for m y o w n records. I consent to participate i n this study. 1 N a m e . Signature Date Phone number Witness Date Please return this copy to the researcher. 198 A p p e n d i x I I I I n f o r m e d C o n s e n t F o r m f o r S tuden t s T i t l e o f S t u d y : Language use i n Japanese as a Fo re ign Language Class rooms Faculty Advisor D r . Pa t r ic ia D u f f Associa te Professor Department o f Language and L i t e racy Educa t ion Facu l ty o f Educa t ion 604-822-9693 Graduate Student E m y N a k a m u r a Mas te r o f Ar t s Candidate Department o f Language and L i t e racy Educa t ion The Un ive r s i t y o f B r i t i s h C o l u m b i a X X X - X X X - X X X M . A . Thesis research Purpose The purpose o f this study is to examine teacher and student communica t ion patterns i n Japanese as a foreign language classrooms ( J F L ) i n a loca l universi ty setting. I am interested i n the roles o f first, second, and even third languages i n J F L learning environments. I w i l l be examin ing how J F L instructors adapt their language use to enhance communica t ion wi th students when teaching Japanese. Procedures Y o u r part icipation w i l l i nvo lve being observed by the researcher dur ing your Japanese class. T h i s w i l l inc lude up to four classes o f the seminar sessions ( J A P N X X X X ) dur ing T e r m 1 o f your W i n t e r 2002 academic year at T h e Western Canadian Unive r s i ty . These observations w i l l be audio-taped Confidentiality A n y informat ion result ing f rom this research study w i l l be kept strictly confident ia l . Participants w i l l not be identif ied by name and where necessary pseudonyms w i l l be used for anonymi ty i n any reports o f the completed study. Audio- tapes and transcribed documents w i l l be kept i n a secure f i l i ng cabinet and w i l l be ident i f ied on ly by a code number. 199 Contact If you have any questions or desire to for further information or feedback wi th respect to this study, you may contact E m y N a k a m u r a at X X X - X X X - X X X or emyn@interchange.ubc.ca , or, the faculty advisor, D r . Pa t r ic ia D u f f at 604-822-9693 or patr ic ia .duff@ubc.ca . If y o u have any concerns about your treatment or rights as a research participant y o u m a y contact the Di rec to r o f Research Services at T h e Un ive r s i t y o f B r i t i s h C o l u m b i a at 604-822-8598. 200 S T A T E M E N T O F I N F O R M E D C O N S E N T T i t l e o f S t u d y : Language use i n Japanese as a Fo re ign Language Class rooms I understand that m y part icipat ion i n this study is entirely voluntary and that I m a y refuse to participate or wi thdraw from the study at any t ime without penalty. If you are w i l l i n g to participate i n this study, please f i l l i n the informat ion be low. B e sure to keep a s igned copy o f page 3 for your o w n records, and pages 1-2. I have rece ived a copy o f this consent fo rm for m y o w n records. I consent to participate i n this study. Date Date Please keep this copy for your records. N a m e Signature Phone number Wi tness 201 S T A T E M E N T O F I N F O R M E D C O N S E N T T i t l e o f S t u d y : Language use i n Japanese as a Fore ign Language Class rooms I understand that m y part icipation i n this study is entirely voluntary and that I m a y refuse to participate or wi thdraw f rom the study at any t ime without penalty. I f you are w i l l i n g to participate i n this study, please f i l l i n the informat ion be low. B e sure to keep a s igned copy o f page 3 for your o w n records, and pages 1-2. I have received a copy o f this consent fo rm for m y o w n records. I consent to participate i n this study. N a m e Signature Date Phone number : : Witness ' Date Please return this copy to the researcher. 202 Appendix IV Instructor Interview Guide 1. F o r what purposes do y o u prefer to use E n g l i s h as opposed to Japanese i n the Japanese c lassroom? W h y ? F o r what purposes do y o u prefer to use Japanese as opposed to E n g l i s h i n the Japanese c lassroom? W h y ? 2. W h a t do you feel is the role o f E n g l i s h i n your Japanese c lassroom? 3. T o what extent, and by w h o m , are languages other than Japanese or E n g l i s h used i n your class? W h i c h languages are used for what purposes? W h a t are your v iews about the use o f addit ional languages (such as Chinese) i n your classes? 4. W h a t languages do students generally use to communica te w i th one another i n class? 5. W h a t do you think is the ratio o f E n g l i s h to Japanese language use i n your Japanese classroom? Is the language you choose to use throughout your sessions something y o u so consc ious ly (i.e. through lesson planning)? H o w , i f at a l l , does your use o f E n g l i s h or Japanese change over t ime? 6. W h a t are your thoughts about Japanese as a foreign language ( J F L ) classes that are taught on ly i n the target language? D o you think it is possible to do so? In your op in ion , is it an effective method for teaching J F L ? W h a t challenges are there i n t ry ing to teach i n this way? 7. Wha t k i n d o f tasks or activities have you found to be successful i n m a x i m i z i n g Japanese language use among students? W h a t kinds o f tasks or activities have you found to be not as successful i n m a x i m i z i n g Japanese language use? 8. W h a t are some o f the challenges or issues that you have encountered i n teaching students whose first language is not E n g l i s h , and for w h o m Japanese is the third or even fourth language? H a v e you had to learn to adapt or modi fy your lessons to accommodate such learners? W h a t types o f accommodat ions have you implemented? 9. H o w do y o u think that your teaching style or lesson p lanning has been inf luenced by the increase i n Chinese-as-a-first-language students? H o w do you think this affects students enrol led i n the Japanese class w h o are non-native speakers o f Chinese? H o w do you balance these two elements wi th in the same c lassroom environment? W h a t impact does the presence o f Chinese-background students have on your approach to l i teracy tasks and instruction? 203 Appendix V Student Interview Guide 1. C a n you tel l me br ief ly about your past experience learning Japanese pr ior to this -course? W h a t is your major? W h y are you learning Japanese? W h y d i d y o u decide to study Japanese at W C U and w h y d i d you choose this course i n part icular? W h a t are the best features o f the class, i n your op in ion? 2. W h a t do y o u think is the ratio o f E n g l i s h use to Japanese use b y your instructor? W o u l d you l i ke your instructor to use more E n g l i s h ? W o u l d y o u l i ke her to use more Japanese? W h y or w h y not? H o w do you think the use o f one or the other language affect your language learning? 3. W h a t are your thoughts about intermediate Japanese as a foreign language ( J F L ) classes that are taught on ly or almost a l l i n the target language? W h a t challenges w o u l d y o u face i n such a class? W h a t benefits w o u l d you receive i n such a c lassroom environment? 4. F o r what purposes w o u l d you prefer that the teacher use E n g l i s h as opposed to Japanese i n the Japanese classroom? W h y ? F o r what purposes do you prefer the teacher to use Japanese as opposed to E n g l i s h i n the Japanese c lassroom? W h y ? 5. In general, what k i n d o f tasks or activities do y o u f ind to be useful i n chal lenging and m a x i m i z i n g your Japanese language use and language learning? In general , what k i n d o f tasks or activities do you f ind to not be as cha l lenging or not as useful i n m a x i m i z i n g Japanese language use? 6. D o you have any opportunities to practice Japanese outside o f class? Please expla in . 7. (Chinese-as-a-first-language students) In what ways is knowledge o f your first language, Chinese , helpful i n learning Japanese? D o you have opportunities to use Chinese i n class as w e l l as Japanese and E n g l i s h ? H o w , i n what situations? D o your teachers use your first language background to help you learn Japanese? H o w , any examples? H o w often do you f ind your teachers use your first language background to help you earn Japanese? H o w do you think this makes non-Chinese-as-a-first-language students feel? H o w different do you the learning situation w o u l d be i f a l l the students i n the class knew Chinese? (Non-Chinese-as-a-first-language students) If your first language is not Chinese or E n g l i s h does your teacher use your first language background to help you learn Japanese? H o w often do y o u f ind your teachers us ing your first language background to help you learn Japanese? In regards to the Chinese-as-a-first language students, how often do y o u f ind your teachers us ing their first language background to help them learn Japanese? H o w does it make you feel? 204 (English-as-a-first-language background students) W h a t advantages or disadvantages are there i n s tudying Japanese i n a class l i ke yours w i th students f rom different language backgrounds? In what ways do you think your experience w o u l d be different i f a l l the students i n the class spoke E n g l i s h as their first language? 8. W h a t is your op in ion about the textbook? H o w do y o u f ind the m i x o f E n g l i s h and Japanese throughout your textbook? 9. H o w has learning Japanese changed you? 205 A p p e n d i x V I T r a n s c r i p t i o n C o n v e n t i o n s [ beginning o f over lapping speech = words cut o f f by or cutting o f f a partner's utterance; w-b- r -d short pause i n the midd le o f a word , usual ly i n between syl lables +; ++; +++ one second pause; two seconds pause; three or more seconds pause (x); (x); (xxx) one unclear word ; two unclear words ; three or more unclear words C A P I T A L loud speech under l in ing emphasized speech i tal ics Japanese words i n romanized form (only i n translations) ' w o r d ' gloss or ci tat ion form i n excerpts, quotation marks indicate reported speech ( ) author 's insert ion ((comments)) comments o f relevant details pertaining to interact ion unusual ly lengthened sound or syl lable X - (attached) cu tof f w o r d (err) untranslatable sequence o f letters or mispronounced w o r d {} translation 206 A p p e n d i x V I I Katakanization W o r d L i s t Katakanazation w o r d E n g l i s h equ iva l en t Katakanazation w o r d E n g l i s h e q u i v a l e n t shichueeshon situation fainaru f inal buranku blank omitto omi t obiasu obvious regulaa regular guramaa grammar fakuto fact puroburemu prob lem pirioddo per iod paamishon permiss ion gaarisshu gi r l i sh undaarain underl ine rukkusu looks kontorasuto : contrast kontekisuto context sesshon session familii neemu f ami ly name modem no daiaroggu mode l dialogue Chainiizu Chinese fankushon function paatonaa , . partner handoauto handout pointo foomu point fo rm foomatto format ruusuriifu loose leaf maritipuru choisu mult ip le choice essei foomu essay fo rm negatibu ' negative daburu speesu double space akusepputaburu acceptable intorodakushon . introduction skippu skip konkurujon conc lus ion Chaputaafoo Chapter F o u r bodii body hai skuum sisutemu H i g h S c h o o l system meem male yangaa younger raiburarii l ibrary konfuujon confusion rekuchaa lecture kajuaru casual birudingu b u i l d i n g spiichisutairu speech style miitaa paakingu meter park ing kasutamaa customer daialoggu dialogue Noosu Amerika Nor th A m e r i c a risuningu l i s tening famirii f ami ly raitingu wr i t i ng sain uppu shiito sign-up sheet muubu move peaa '. pair bookabu vocab ribaizudo revised oopuningu opening konpozishon tesuto compos i t ion test kurouzingu c los ing ooraru eguzamu oral exam finisshu f in ish shiito sheet ekusupaato expert maakingu mark ing karuchaa culture paato part forouppu fo l low-up taamu term dissenbaa twerubu December twelve 207 Appendix VIII JAPANESE WORD COUNT CONVENTIONS CATERC;()R\ WORD2 5 EXAMPLE ITEMS Particles One word/attached 1. conjunctive: aida, -ba, dattara, de (copula), kara, ga, keredomo, -nagara, nara, node, shi, -tara (including dattara), -tarif-dari, -tatte, -te kara, -te mo/-de mo, -te wa, to (samuku naru to), toki (hima na toki), uchi, 2. adverbial: bakari, dake, demo, gurai/kurai, hodo, koso, nado, nanka, nante, shika, to, shika, to (pikapika to hikaru), -zutsu 3. focus: datte, made, mo, wa (ni wa, e wa, to wa, kara wa) 4. case: de, e, ga, kara, made, made-ni, ni, no, wo, to, yori, to (with),yori, 5. conjoining: ka (or), to (and), toka, ya 6. question: ka 7. quotative: to 8. final: mon(o), ne, no, yo, wa 9. phrasal: ni atatte, ni kanshi(te), ni taishite, ni totte, bi tsuite, ni yoreba, ni yotte, wo motte, to shite, 10. comparative: yori Relational noun One word Mae, naka, uchi, Time noun One word Koro, toki Lexical noun One word Mon(o) Adjectives- One word Furui hon, shizuka na machi, pinku no fuku noun modifying Nominalizer One word Koto, mono/mon, no, Adverbs One word Totemo, ima, yugata ni, kitto, amari, Demonstrative/ Kore, sore, are, dore questions words Kono, sono, ano, dono Kou, sou, aa, dou Kochira, sochira, achira, doshira Pronoun One word No "One word" means that items in this category can stand alone as one word. "Attached" words are those in which the item is not counted as a word since it is usually attached to the end of other item. "Attached" examples are those that have a dash before the item e.g., -nagara, ox-tachi. These only become counted as one word once it is attached to another word such as tabenagara (while eating) or watashitachi (we, us). 208 JAPANESE WORD COUNT CONVENTIONS (CONTINUED) Suf f ix At tached -domo, -garu, -gata, -goro, personal:-san, -sama, plural: -ra, -tachi nominalizing: -sa, kata e.g (tabekata), -mi adjforming: -teki structural noun One w o r d Hou, mama, tame sentence ending One word/attached Hazu, kamoshirenai, -mai, mitai, ni chigai nai, n(o) da, rashii, sou (hear say), -sou (likely to), -tai, -takatta, -ta aru, -te ageru, -te hoshii, -te hoshikatta, -te ikuf-teku, -te iruf-teru, -te itadaku, -te, kudasaru, -te kureru, -te kuru, -te miru, -te morau, -te oku/-toku, -te shimaru/ -chau, -te yaru, tsumori, -tte, wake, hazu, you V+masu verb ending attached V+masu Negative ending (verb) attached -naif-masen, de wa nai, V+suru verb ending VERBAL NOUN One w o r d V+suru: hakken suru, kenkyuu sum Passive form of verbs One w o r d Taberareta, korareta, Negative conjunctive One word/attached Nakute, ja nakute, v-nakute, v-nai de, -te form verbs v-te v.katte ageru, -ta (past/perfect ending) attached -ta: natta, kureta, atta, data, shita, V tai form Attached Tabe-tai, morai-tai Counters Attached -kai, -mai, -sai Indirect quotations One w o r d To iu, to, -tte/te, OTHER ITEMS English words pronounced as Japanese Counted as Japanese w o r d English contractions One w o r d 209 

Cite

Citation Scheme:

        

Citations by CSL (citeproc-js)

Usage Statistics

Share

Embed

Customize your widget with the following options, then copy and paste the code below into the HTML of your page to embed this item in your website.
                        
                            <div id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidgetDisplay">
                            <script id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidget"
                            src="{[{embed.src}]}"
                            data-item="{[{embed.item}]}"
                            data-collection="{[{embed.collection}]}"
                            data-metadata="{[{embed.showMetadata}]}"
                            data-width="{[{embed.width}]}"
                            async >
                            </script>
                            </div>
                        
                    
IIIF logo Our image viewer uses the IIIF 2.0 standard. To load this item in other compatible viewers, use this url:
http://iiif.library.ubc.ca/presentation/dsp.831.1-0091984/manifest

Comment

Related Items