Hostname: page-component-7dd5485656-wjfd9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-10-29T10:57:20.755Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Modified Input as an Aid to Comprehension

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  07 November 2008

Ken Kelch
Ken Kelch
Affiliation:
University of Hawaii at Manoa
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Much work in the field of second language acquisition (SLA) has focused on the linguistic adjustments made by native speakers (NSs) when speaking to non-native speakers (NNSs) of that language. Modifications of speech to NNSs are usually assumed to be an attempt to make the target language more comprehensible. The study of second language teachers' classroom discourse has contributed to a thorough description of such modifications, which in general may be termed foreigner talk (FT).

Information

Type
Research Notes
Information
Studies in Second Language Acquisition , Volume 7 , Issue 1 , February 1985 , pp. 81 - 90
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1985

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

REFERENCES

Cervantes, R. 1983. Say it again Sam: The effect of exact repetition on listening comprehension. ESL 670 term paper. University of Hawaii at Manoa.Google Scholar
Chaudron, C. 1982. Vocabulary elaboration in teacher's speech to L2 learners. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 4(2); 170–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chaudron, C. 1983a. Foreigner talk in the classroom—an aid to learning? In Seliger, Herbert W. & Long, Michael H. (eds.), Classroom-oriented research in language acquisition. Rowley, MA: Newbury House.Google Scholar
Chaudron, C. 1983b. Simplification of input: Topic reinstatements and their effects on L2 learners' recognition and recall. TESOL Quarterly 17(3); 437–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gaies, S. J. 1977. The nature of linguistic input in formal second language learning: Linguistic and communicative strategies in ESL teachers' classroom language. In Brown, H. Douglas, Yorio, Carlos A., & Crymes, Ruth H. (eds.), On TESOL ‘77, pp. 204–12. Washington, D.C.: TESOL.Google Scholar
Henzl, V. 1975. Speech of foreign language teachers: A sociolinguistic register analysis. Paper presented at the 3rd AILA conference,Stuttgart, West Germany.Google Scholar
Henzl, V. 1979. Foreign talk in the classroom. International Review of Applied Linguistics 17(2); 159–67.Google Scholar
Long, M. H. 1983. Input and second language acquisition theory. Plenary Address at the 10th University of Michigan Conference on Applied Linguistics: Input in 2nd Language Acquisition: Learners' Use and Integration of Language in Context.Ann Arbor, Michigan,Oct. 28–30. To appear in Gass, S. & Madden, C. (eds.), Input and second language acquisition. Rowley, MA: Newbury House, in press.Google Scholar
Meisel, J. M. 1977. Linguistic simplification: A study of immigrant workers' speech and foreigner talk. In Corder, S. Pit & Roulet, Eddy (eds.), Actes du 5ème colloque de linguistique appliquée de Neuchâtel, pp. 88–113. Geneva, Switzerland: Droz.Google Scholar
Oller, J. W. 1979. Language tests at school. London: Longman.Google Scholar