<html><body>INFOLING. Información global sobre lingüística
hispánica: <a href="http://infoling.org"
target="_blank">http://infoling.org/</a>
<br />
<br />Moderadores: Carlos Subirats (U. Autónoma Barcelona), Mar Cruz
(U. Barcelona)
<br />Editoras: Paloma Garrido (U. Rey Juan Carlos), Laura Romero (U.
Barcelona)
<br />Programación y desarrollo: Marc Ortega (U. Autónoma
Barcelona)
<br />Directoras de reseñas: Alexandra Álvarez (U. Los Andes,
Venezuela), Yvette Bürki (U. Bern, Suiza), María Luisa Calero (U.
Córdoba, España)
<br />Asesores: Gerd Wotjak (U. Leipzig, Alemania)
<br />Colaboradores: Antonio Ríos (U. Autónoma Barcelona)
<br />
<br />Con el apoyo de:
<br /><ul style="margin: 0;padding-left:15px;"><li
style="padding-bottom: 0px;padding-top:0px;">Editorial Octaedro: <a
href="http://www.octaedro.com/"
target="_blank">http://www.octaedro.com/</a>
<br /><li style=";padding-top:0px;padding-bottom: 0px;">Arco Libros:
<a href="http://www.arcomuralla.com/Arco/Shop/default.asp"
target="_blank">http://www.arcomuralla.com/Arco/Shop/default.asp</a></li></ul>
<br /><font style="font-size:90%">ISSN: 1576-3404 </font>
<br /><font style="font-size:90%">© Infoling 1996-2010. Reservados
todos los derechos</font>
<br />
<br /></br><hr /><b>Tesis doctoral: </b><br />Vicente Rasoamalala,
Leticia. 2009. Teachers’ Reactions to Foreign Language Learner
Output. Universidad de Barcelona (España), Departamento de Filología
Inglesa y Alemana.<br />URL: <a
href="http://www.tesisenxarxa.net/TDX-0920110-124612/index_cs.html"
target="_blank">http://www.tesisenxarxa.net/TDX-0920110-124612/index_cs.html</a><br
/><b>Información de:</b> Leticia Vicente Rasoamalala
<letivicra@hotmail.com><br /><hr /><br /><b>Director/a de tesis:
</b>Carmen Pérez Vidal<br /><b>Codirector/a: </b>M. Luz Celaya
Villanueva<br /><br /><b>Descripción</b><br /><p>The general
objective of the dissertation is to develop a better understanding of
one recurrent practice in formal FL instruction: how teachers react to
FL learner output in classroom oral interactions. To this end, the
formal features and phenomena involved in Teacher Reaction Episodes
(TREs) are addressed. ‘Teacher reactions’ refer to any
instructional strategies that handle learner oral productions. <br
/><br />In traditional SLA research, this teacher practice has been
conceptually examined under the rubric of ‘corrective feedback’.
This thesis covers multidisciplinary theoretical and methodological
approaches related to TREs. Video data collected from a case study of
two Senegalese international schools illustrate the differential
effects of teacher reactions on FL learner uptake. Through
corpus-based evidence from three immersion settings, an attempt is
made to discover conditions and means for felicitous TREs in
acquisitional terms. Learners receiving metalinguistic feedback appear
to generate more uptake than those receiving recasts.</p><br
/><b>Área temática:</b> Análisis del discurso, Español como lengua
extranjera (ELE), Español como segunda lengua (EL2), Lingüística de
corpus, Teorías lingüísticas<br /><br /><b>Índice</b><br
/><p>ABSTRACT <br />TABLE OF CONTENTS <br />LIST OF FIGURES <br />LIST
OF TABLES <br />LIST OF ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS <br
/>ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS <br /><br />INTRODUCTION <br />0.1 MOTIVATION FOR
THE DISSERTATION <br />0.2 DELIMITATION OF THE STUDY <br />0.3
ORGANISATION OF THE THESIS <br /><br />PART I THE GENERAL CONCEPTUAL
FRAMEWORK <br /><br />CHAPTER 1 TEACHER REACTIONS AND SLA THEORY <br
/>1.1 AN OVERVIEW OF THE AREA <br />1.2 DEFINITION OF TERMS: TEACHER
REACTION, RESPONSE AND FEEDBACK <br />1.2.1 Teacher Reaction original
notion <br />1.2.2 Reaction vs. Response <br />1.2.3 ‘Reaction’ as
educational feedback <br />1.2.4 Foreign Language Learner Output <br
/>1.3 THE MANIFOLD NATURE OF TEACHER REACTIONS <br />1.4 PROMINENT SLA
THEORIES AND TEACHER REACTIONS <br />1.4.1 The SLA intrapsychological
and interpsychological approaches <br />1.4.2 Instructional Input as a
trigger in SLA: from mentalist to cognitive models <br />1.4.2.1
Krashen’s Input Hypothesis <br />1.4.2.2 Non-interactive Input<br
/>1.4.2.3 Input Enhancement <br />1.4.3 Input shaped through
interaction: second language conversations <br />1.4.3.1 Hatch’s
(1978) Analyses of Interactions <br />1.4.3.2 Long’s Interaction
Hypothesis (1981, 1996) <br />1.4.4 Output and Interaction
Hypothesis <br />1.4.5 The teacher’s reaction roles in the Input and
Output Approaches <br />1.5 SUMMARY <br /><br />CHAPTER 2 TEACHER
REACTIONS AND SOCIOCULTURAL THEORY <br />2.1 BRIEF HISTORY OF
SOCIOCULTURALISM <br />2.1.1 Vygotskian perspective <br />2.1.2
Activity Theory <br />2.1.3 Sociocultural applications to educational
contexts <br />2.2 THE SOCIOCULTURAL FRAMEWORK: KEY CONCEPTS <br
/>2.2.1 Mediation and tools <br />2.2.2 The Zone of Proximal
Development <br />2.2.3 Scaffolding <br />2.3 THE SOCIOCULTURAL
APPROACH TO THE FL CLASSROOM CONTEXT <br />2.3.1 Joint activity and
guided interaction <br />2.3.2 The verbal and non-verbal in
communicative teaching activities <br />2.3.3 Sociocultural
interpretations of teacher reactions to FL learner output <br />2.4
RECONCEPTUALISATION OF SLA RESEARCH: OLD IDEAS IN A NEW SOCIOCULTURAL
GUISE <br />2.5 SUMMARY <br /><br />CHAPTER 3 TEACHER REACTIONS AND FL
CLASSROOM INTERACTION <br />3.1 INITIAL IRF
(INITIATION/RESPONSE/FEEDBACK) CLASSROOM DISCOURSE PATTERN STUDIES <br
/>3.2 THE ETHNOGRAPHY OF CLASSROOM COMMUNICATION <br />3.3 DISCOURSE
ANALYSIS <br />3.4 CONVERSATION ANALYSIS <br />3.4.1 The
Conversational SLA classroom complexity <br />3.4.2 FL Teacher
Reaction strategic turn-taking patterns <br />3.4.3 Learning
opportunities <br />3.5 THE SOCIAL INTERACTIONIST APPROACH IN SLA <br
/>3.5.1 Foreign Language Teacher Reactions and Negotiation <br />3.5.2
Negotiation of meaning <br />3.5.3 Negotiation of form <br />3.6
SUMMARY <br /><br />CHAPTER 4 TEACHER REACTION FEATURES IN THE LIGHT
OF FEEDBACK STUDIES <br />4.1 MAJOR RESEARCH TRENDS INTO LANGUAGE
EXPERT REACTIONS TO LEARNER OUTPUT <br />4.1.1 L1 Acquisition
Context <br />4.1.1.1 The Anti-Negative Evidence Assumption <br
/>4.1.1.2 The Pro-Negative Evidence Assumption <br />4.1.2 General
views of Language experts and Teacher Reactions to FL Learner
Output <br />4.2 ERRORS, FL TEACHERS AND LEARNERS<br />4.2.1 Brief
historical review of errors in SLA research<br />4.2.2 Learner Output
Study Approaches: EA (Error Analysis) and CA (Contrastive Analysis)<br
/>4.2.3 Error Evaluation Analysis: Native and Non-Native
Evaluators <br />4.2.4 Teachers as Evaluators of L2 Learner Output <br
/>4.3 ERROR TREATMENT <br />4.3.1 The arguments for and against
correcting errors <br />4.3.2 When correcting errors <br />4.3.3 Which
errors to correct <br />4.3.4 Error Treatment Sequences <br />4.4
CURRENT TYPICAL ORAL INTERACTION FEEDBACK TYPES <br />4.4.1 Positive
feedback <br />4.4.2 Negative Feedback <br />4.4.2.1 Explicit Negative
Feedback <br />4.2.2.2 Implicit Negative Feedback <br />4.4.2.2.1
Recast or Reformulation <br />4.4.2.2.2 Clarification Request <br
/>4.4.2.2.3 Repetition <br />4.4.2.2.4 Metalinguistic Feedback or
Cues <br />4.4.2.2.5 Elicitation <br />4.5 THE NOTIONS OF UPTAKE AND
REPAIR <br />4.5.1 Uptake <br />4.5.2 Repair <br />4.5.3 Possible
correlations with Teacher Reactions and educational contexts <br
/>4.6 FURTHER TRAITS IN TEACHER REACTIONS OR FEEDBACK <br />4.6.1
Feedback on Content and Feedback on Form <br />4.6.2 Simple and
Multiple Feedback <br />4.6.3 Non-verbal features <br />4.6.4 L1
Alternation <br />4.6.5 Feedback adjustment <br />4.7 BELIEFS AND
PERCEPTIONS OF TEACHER FEEDBACK<br />4.7.1 Teacher beliefs in learner
output intervention <br />4.7.2 Learner perceptions and effects of
teacher reactions to their output<br />4.8 SUMMARY<br /><br />PART II
THE EMPIRICAL PART <br /><br />CHAPTER 5 STATEMENT OF PURPOSE <br
/>5.1 GENERAL STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM <br />5.2 RESEARCH
QUESTIONS <br />5.3 THE HYPOTHESES <br />5.4. SUMMARY <br /><br
/>CHAPTER 6 METHODOLOGY <br />6.1 RESEARCH PARADIGMS <br />6.2 THE
SETTING <br />6.2.1 The country: Senegal <br />6.2.2 The schools <br
/>6.2.2.1 The A School: two bilingual French/English tracks in
kindergarten and primary school <br />6.2.2.2 The B School:
International Bilingual English/French secondary school with L3
Spanish, German and Arabic<br />6.3 THE GENERAL DESIGN OF THE STUDY<br
/>6.3.1 The classroom settings<br />6.3.1.1 The A School: EFL
classrooms <br />6.3.1.2 The B School: Spanish as a Foreign Language
classrooms <br />6.4 THE PARTICIPANTS <br />6.4.1 Teachers <br />6.4.2
Students <br />6.5 DATA <br />6.5.1 The classroom oral data: verbal
and non-verbal components <br />6.5.2 Data collection procedures <br
/>6.5.2.1 Video recordings: technicalities and corpus <br />6.5.2.2
Note-taking sheet <br />6.5.2.3 Questionnaires and interviews <br
/>6.5.2.3.1 The learners’ questionnaires <br />6.5.2.3.2 The
teachers’ questionnaires <br />6.5.2.3.3 The teachers’
interviews <br />6.6 UNITS OF ANALYSIS AND CODING <br />6.6.1 Units of
analysis <br />6.6.2 Coding the general characteristics of TREs <br
/>6.6.3 RQ1 categories <br />6.6.3.1 FL student initial turn <br
/>6.6.3.2 Teacher reaction turn <br />6.6.3.3 FL student response <br
/>6.6.3.4 Explicit linguistic feedback <br />6.6.3.5 Implicit
linguistic feedback <br />6.6.3.6 Non-verbal elements in teachers’
reactions <br />6.6.3.7 The use of the L1: ‘code-switching’ <br
/>6.6.4 RQ2 categories: uptake and learner self-repair moves <br
/>6.6.5 RQ3 categories: possible interconnections <br />6.7 MECHANICS
OF CODING AND DATABASE <br />6.7.1 Transcription of video data <br
/>6.7.2 Illustrating the TREs features <br />6.7.3 Operationalisation
and statistical analysis of the videoed database <br />6.8 INTER-RATER
RELIABILITY <br />6.9 ANALYSES OF INTERVIEW AND QUESTIONNAIRE DATA <br
/>6.10 SUMMARY <br /><br />CHAPTER 7 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION <br />7.1
THE DATABASE RESULTS <br />7.1.1 Teacher 1 setting: Intermediate
English Immersion <br />7.1.1.1 Trigger sources of TREs <br />7.1.1.2
The Implicit and Explicit Teacher 1 Reactive Moves <br />7.1.1.3
Teacher 1’s reactions and learner deviant linguistic forms <br
/>7.1.1.4 The distribution of uptake in T1’s classrooms<br />7.1.1.5
Learner self-repairs following Teacher 1’s reactions <br />7.1.1.6
Uptake and target language error repair <br />7.1.1.7 Teacher 1’s
view on the phenomenon <br />7.1.2 Teacher 2 setting: Advanced English
Immersion <br />7.1.2.1 Trigger sources of TREs <br />7.1.2.2 The
Implicit and Explicit Teacher 2 Reactive Moves <br />7.1.2.3 Teacher
2’s reactions and learner deviant linguistic forms <br />7.1.2.4 The
distribution of uptake in T2’s classrooms <br />7.1.2.5 Learner
self-repairs following Teacher 2’s reactions <br />7.1.2.6 Uptake
and target language error repair <br />7.1.2.7 Teacher 2’s view on
the phenomenon <br />7.1.3 Teacher 3 setting: Spanish as a FL
Immersion <br />7.1.3.1 Trigger sources of TREs <br />7.1.3.2 The
Implicit and Explicit Teacher 3 Reactive Moves <br />7.1.3.3 Teacher
3’s reactions and learner deviant linguistic forms <br />7.1.3.4 The
distribution of uptake in T3’s classrooms <br />7.1.3.5 Learner
self-repairs following Teacher 3’s reactions <br />7.1.3.6 Uptake
and target language error repair <br />7.1.3.7 Teacher 3’s view on
the phenomenon <br />7.2 TEACHER REACTION STYLES AND THEIR OUTCOMES
CONTRASTED <br />7.2.1 Complexity <br />7.2.1.1 Mono-episodic and
multi-episodic teacher reactions <br />7.2.1.2 Teachers’ extra
comments following instructional reactions <br />7.2.1.3
Code-switching or Alternation <br />7.2.1.4 Unexpected interruptions
in TREs <br />7.2.1.5 The non-verbal components <br />7.2.1.5.1
Embodied actions <br />7.2.1.5.2 Paralinguistic actions <br
/>7.2.1.5.3 Material actions <br />7.2.2 Salientness <br />7.3
POSSIBLE FACTORS INFLUENCING TRES: SCHOOL FEATURES, TEACHER AND
LEARNER CHARACTERISTICS, CLASSROOM GROUP SIZE AND THE DEGREE OF
FUTURE USE OF THE FL <br />7.3.1 The bilingual school context in
Senegal <br />7.3.2 Differences according to students’ ages and
language levels <br />7.3.3 Classroom group size<br />7.3.4 The degree
of future instrumental use of the language <br />7.4 DATA COLLIDED FOR
TRE PHENOMENA <br />7.4.1 Distribution of the reacted learner
output <br />7.4.2 Distribution of Teacher Reaction moves <br />7.4.3
Learner deviant linguistic forms and teacher reactions <br />7.4.4
Distribution of uptake in the immersion settings <br />7.4.5 Learner
self-repair following Teacher Reactions <br />7.4.6 Uptake and target
language repair <br />7.4.7 Learner Potential Learning Opportunities
in TREs <br />7.4.8 Participants’ views on the phenomenon <br
/>7.4.8.1 Learners’ views <br />7.4.8.2 Teachers’ views <br />7.5
DISCUSSION OF RESULTS: THE RESEARCH QUESTIONS <br />7.6 RELEVANT
ISSUES RELATED TO THE STUDY <br />7.6.1 Issue 1: consistency of
results with previous research <br />7.6.2 Issue 2: the individual and
contextual variables <br />7.6.3 Issue 3: the limitations <br />7.7
SUMMARY - 366 -<br /><br />CHAPTER 8 SUMMARY OF THE STUDY,
CONCLUSIONS, IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE, AND RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FUTURE
RESEARCH <br />8.1 SUMMARY OF THE STUDY <br />8.2 CONCLUSIONS <br
/>8.3 IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE <br />8.4 RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FUTURE
RESEARCH <br /><br />REFERENCES <br /><br />APPENDICES <br />APPENDIX
A <br />APPENDIX B <br />APPENDIX C <br />APPENDIX D <br />APPENDIX
E <br />APPENDIX F <br />APPENDIX G</p><br /><b>Fecha de lectura o
defensa:</b> 23 de diciembre de 2009<br /><br /><b>Número de
págs.:</b> 707<br /><br /><b>Cómo obtener la tesis:</b> <a
href="http://www.tesisenxarxa.net/TESIS_UB/AVAILABLE/TDX-0920110-124612//LVR_THESIS.pdf"
target="_blank">http://www.tesisenxarxa.net/TESIS_UB/AVAILABLE/TDX-0920110-124612//LVR_THESIS.pdf</a><br
/><br /><b>Correo-e del autor/a:</b> <letivicra@hotmail.com><br
/><br /><b>Información en la web de Infoling:</b><br /> <a
href="http://www.infoling.org/informacion/T38.html" target="_blank">
http://www.infoling.org/informacion/T38.html</a></body></html>