Languaculture Re de fining Advanced Proficiency Jim Lantolf Penn State

Languaculture: Re(de)fining Advanced Proficiency Jim Lantolf Penn State University

Distinguished Language Proficiency ACTFL Shows strong sensitivity to social and cultural references and aesthetic norms by processing language from within the cultural framework. ILR Use the language fluently and accurately on all levels normally pertinent to professional needs. Organizes discourse well, using appropriate rhetorical speech devices, native cultural references, and understanding.

The Encirclement Language Segregated from Culture Saussure Builds the Wall n Language = inventory of systematically organized symbols Bloomfield Builds a Higher Wall n “ripped” language out of the ethnographic research program [of Boas] • linguistics = the study of the sound system and grammar. • study of meaning assigned to psychology (Agar 1994, see also Crowley 1996)

Consequences for Language Teaching Encased-linguistics framed the way applied linguistics construes language. • Pedagogy • Language Assessment

Triumph of Structure (Fauconnier & Turner 2002) n We live in an age of the triumph of form. In mathematics, physics, music, the arts, and the social sciences, human knowledge and its progress seem to have been reduced in startling and powerful ways to a matter of essential formal structures and their transformations… scientific knowledge is only a matter of finding deep hidden forms behind ostensible forms.

Meaning, Mind & Culture Anthropology argues that culture is meaning Antipsychological stance • Pushed psychology out of anthropology • Geertz, sustaining Saussure’s dualism, insisted meaning resides exclusively in signs and relations between them n Cognitive Anthropology -- meaning resides in individuals & collectives (Strauss & Quinn 1997) n Cultural Psychology – organic & dialectical relationship between psychological and cultural processes meaning organizes and imbues humans with mental intentionality (Vygotsky 1987)

Learning a Second Language n Learning inside-the-wall • Make a few minimum frame changes, and you’re ready to communicate (Agar 1994). • Inside the wall most aspects of language are perceptual, indexical, iconic, or denotative • FL learners rely on word definitions because the experience in which concepts emerge are not open to this group (Kecskes & Papp 2000). n – Fork = Gabel, tenedor, forchetta, etc. • L 2 laid down on L 1 inner speech (Ushakova 1994)

Learning Outside the Wall Re-establish connection between language and culture – languaculture (Agar 1994) • The Challenge: n Development of new L 2 conceptual base (Lantolf 1999) • Learner centeredness: concern with learning richness of the L 2 system’s symbolic resources rather than with ‘creatively’ expressing personal meanings or applying learning strategies and styles, a frequent interpretation in FLED (Byrnes 2002)

Conceptual Proficiency n Conceptual Proficiency = know how the target language reflects or encodes its concepts on the basis of metaphorical structuring and other cognitive mechanisms. Conceptual knowledge also serves as a basis for grammatical and communicative knowledge. (Kecskes & Papp 2000)

Problem of L 2 Conceptual Development n n Are new conceptual systems learnable ? • Does this entail experiential replication ? • If so, which experiences are open to adult L 2 learners ? Are new conceptual systems teachable ? (Valeva 1996)

Motion Events Six criteria: n Figure: object moving/located with respect to another object (ground) n Ground: reference object in relation to which the figure moves n Path: trajectory of figure n Motion: changes of locatedness n Manner: how motion is performed n Cause: efficient origin of change in motion or location (Talmy 2000)

Talmy’s Motion Event Typology n n Verb-Framed Languages: conflate path of motion with verb and express manner lexically, through gesture or not at all. • Romance Languages (Spanish, French, Portuguese, Rumanian, Italian, Catalan, etc. ); Japanese, Korean, Turkish Satellite-Framed Languages: conflate manner of motion with verb and express path through a satellite mentioning the ground against which figure moves. • English, German, Dutch, Russian, Chinese

Motion Event Examples S-Language The cat crawled/scrittered up inside the drainpipe [Figure] [Manner] [Satellite … Ground] V-Language (Type 1) El gato subio el canalon. The cat climbed up the drainpipe [Figure] Path Ground V-Language (Type 2) payswukwan sok-ulo tul-e drainpipe interior-via enter-INF (a cat) goes into the drainpipe ka-se go-and

Manner of Motion n The cat rolls out of the drainpipe El gato sale rodando del canalón The cat exits rolling from the drainpipe koyangi-ka tasi ccwulwulwuk nayly-e cat-NM again ONM descend-INF wa-ss-eyo. come-PST-POL

Thinking for Speaking n n Slobin (1996): in activity of speaking, thinking takes on a particular quality as experiences are filtered through languages into verbalized events. TSF not merely influence how people talk about events but how they experience those events “they are likely to talk about later” (Slobin, 2003, p. 179).

Manner Saturation n n English lexicon highly saturated with conflated manner verbs: trudge, shinny, swagger, plop, scamper, leap frog, slog, skip, barrel, etc. Spanish lexicon has conflated manner verbs, but not saturated: tambalearse, trepar, agitar • (Slobin 2003)

Gesture/Speech Interface n n Growth Point: integration of distinct verbal and imagistic “semiotic architectures” into a single meaning system (Mc. Neill 1992) Gestures: “material carriers of thinking” and therefore provide "an enhanced window into mental processes“ (Mc. Neill & Duncan 2000)

Gesture and Motion n n V-languages: gestures synchronize with path verbs & optionally used to express manner. S-languages: gestures synchronize with path satellites or conflated manner verb, depending on focus (Mc. Neill & Duncan 2000)

Negueruela, Lantolf, Jordan & Gelabert (2004) Spanish L 1 > English L 2 3 Speakers Residing in U. S. 1 > 6 years English L 1 > Spanish L 2 3 Speakers Enrolled in Spanish Graduate Program; min. 1 year abroad English L 1 control = 3 Spanish L 1 control = 3 Task: Narrate Frog Goes to Dinner

L 1 Speakers Path L 1 Spanish: La rana [se ha metido en el saxofon] The frog [got into the saxophone] PATH = hand cupped describes trajectory, other hand mimicking the bell of the saxophone) L 1 English The frog … jumps out of boy’s pocket, through the restaurant, into a saxophone (Path = three strokes, one on each satellite – hand emerges from pocket with index finger extended, moves away from body, moves downward index still extended

L 2 Speakers: Path Spanish L 1: the [frog appears] … from inside the salad. PATH = hands move toward face English L 1: y me parece que se va a caerse [pa detras] Path = hand body leaning back with stroke of gesture on invented satellite

L 1 Speakers: Manner Spanish L 1: la ensalada [echa un desastre] ‘the salad [is a disaster] Manner = hand shaking English L 1: the plate’s [kind of tumbling a little bit] Manner = hand shaking

L 2 Speakers: Manner Spanish L 1: and [the cup, the plate, the fork are all falling off the table] MANNER + PATH = four consecutive strokes with both hands, palms facing each other, vigorously moving upward English L 1: la ensalada [está. . . como en medio aire] ‘the salad [is. . . like in mid-air]’ MANNER = hand shaking palm down

Choi & Lantolf: L 2 Korean & L 2 English Path Gestures L 2 Korean: [RH ku phai/phu] [ an-ulo tul-e ka pipe inside-via enter-INF go-and ^se /silpeysuthe-ka][ Sylvester-TC Sylvester enters inside the pipe. Right hand, with all fingers extended, moves up passing through left hand which is holding a shape of a pipe: path only information.