Contingency and Multimodal Communication in the Learning Environment
A Second Language Read-Aloud Lesson
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.1558/lst.20987Keywords:
Contingent Interaction, Multimodal Ensembles, Perezhivanie, Instructional Conversation, Co-speech Gesture, Cultural-Historical Theory, Zone of Proximal Development, Cooperative Social RelationsAbstract
From a Vygotskian (1997) theoretical perspective, teachers and learners, of necessity, need to listen and respond to one another in a meaningful way, which, significantly, entails some form of role reversal (i.e., student as teacher and teacher as student). van Lier (1996) furthered this approach in relation to second language (L2) classroom environments, emphasizing the need for conversational symmetry between students and teacher so that participation by all includes contributing individual and collective thoughts and experiences in relation to the content of a lesson, or ‘contingent interaction’, which van Lier also based on a similar approach: Instructional Conversation. Furthermore, van Lier linked his perspective to Vygotsky’s (1987) central premise that language (signs) constitutes the primary mediational tool with which we navigate ourselves and the world, which includes not only meaning (znachenie) but sense (smysl), and as applied in the case of the current study to L2 immigrant children growing up in a multilingual society. Moreover, although Vygotsky had recognized the role of proto-gesture (e.g., an infant reaching for an object that is then brought by an adult) as perhaps the earliest form of semiotic mediation, he did not concentrate on nonverbal forms of mediation, nor did van Lier. However, the current research hopes to demonstrate that speech together with nonverbal forms of communication, especially in combination (multimodal ensembles) can constitute an important aspect of creating L2 contingent interaction, and following van Lier, as connected to the Zone of Proximal Development. Additionally, emotional development (Perezhivanie) as tied to contingency and as an aspect of cooperative social relations is given treatment. Data for the study come from a second-grade classroom of L2 learners of English engaged in a read-aloud lesson directed towards L2 language and literacy development.
References
Blunden, A. (2012). Concepts: A Critical Approach. Leiden, NL: Brill Academic Publishers. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004228481
Bragg, K. (2018). Conversational Movement Dynamics and Nonverbal Indicators of Second Language Development: A Microgenetic Approach (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Nevada, Las Vegas.
Bruner, J. (1983). Child’s Talk: Learning to Use Language. New York, NY: Norton.
Chalmers, D. J. (1996). The Conscious Mind: In Search of a Fundamental Theory. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
Clark, J. and Trofimovich, P. (2016). L2 vocabulary teaching with student-and teacher-generated gestures: A classroom perspective. TESL Canada Journal 34(1): 1–24. https://doi.org/10.18806/tesl.v34i1.1253 DOI: https://doi.org/10.18806/tesl.v34i1.1253
Darwin, C. (1872/1965). The Expression of the Emotions in Man and Animals. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1037/10001-000
Davin, K. (2013). Integration of dynamic assessment and instructional conversations to promote development and improve assessment in the language classroom. Language Teaching Research 17(3): 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168813482934 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168813482934
Donald, M. (2001). A Mind so Rare. New York: Norton.
Early, M., Kendrick, M. and Potts, D. (2015). Multimodality: Out from the margins of English language teaching. TESOL Quarterly 49(3): 447–460. https://www.jstor.org/stable/43893767. https://doi.org/10.1002/tesq.246 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/tesq.246
Eskildsen, S. W. and Wagner, J. (2015). Embodied L2 construction learning. Language Learning 65(2): 268–297. https://doi.org/10.1111/lang.12106 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/lang.12106
Gibbons, P. (2003). Mediating language learning: Teacher interactions with ESL students in a content-based classroom. TESOL Quarterly 37(2): 247–273. http://www.jstor.org/stable/3588504. https://doi.org/10.2307/3588504 DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/3588504
Goffman, E. (1981). Forms of Talk. Philadelphia, PA: University of Pennsylvania Press.
Goldenberg, C. (1991). Instructional conversations and their classroom application. Educational Practice Report: 2.
Goodwin, C. (2000). Action and embodiment within situated human interaction. Journal of Pragmatics 32(1): 1489–1522. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-2166(99)00096-X DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-2166(99)00096-X
Goodwin, C. (2007). Participation, stance, and affect in the organization of activities. Discourse and Society 18: 53–73. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0957926507069457 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0957926507069457
Graziano, M. and Gullberg, M. (2013). Gesture production and speech fluency in competent speakers and language learners. In Tilburg Gesture Research Meeting (TiGeR) 2013. https://tiger,uvt.nl
Gregersen, T. S. (2005). Nonverbal cues: Clues to the detection of foreign language anxiety. Foreign Language Annals 38(3): 388–400. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1944-9720.2005.tb02225.x DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1944-9720.2005.tb02225.x
Hudson, N. (2011). Teacher Gesture in a Post-secondary English as a Second Language Classroom: A Sociocultural Approach (Doctoral dissertation, University of Nevada at Las Vegas). http://digitalscholarship.unlv.edu/thesesdissertations/1044
Jacknick, C. (2018). Collaborative use of multimodal resources in discussions of L2 grammatical meaning: A microgenetic analysis. Language and Sociocultural Theory 5(2): 130–174. https://doi.org/10.1558/lst.32487 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1558/lst.32487
Kendon, A. (2004). Gesture. Visible Action as Utterance. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511807572
Kendon, A. (2009). Kinesic components of multimodal utterances. Berkeley Linguistics Society 35(2): 36–53. http://dx.doi.org/10.3765/bls.v35i2.3510 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3765/bls.v35i2.3510
Kramsch, C. (2008). Ecological perspectives on foreign language education. Language Teaching 41: 389–408. http://doi.org/10.1017/S0261444808005065 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0261444808005065
Lapp, D. and Flood, J. (2003). Examining exemplary reading instruction in urban elementary schools. In J. Flood and P. Anders (eds.), The Literacy Development of Students in Urban Schools: Research and Policy. Manuscript submitted for publication.
Lindberg, R., McDonough, K. and Trofimovich, P. (2021). Investigating verbal and non-verbal indicators of physiological response during second language interaction. Applied Psycholinguistics 1: 1–23. https://doi/org/10.1017/S014271642100028X DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S014271642100028X
Macedonia, M. and Klimesch, W. (2014). Long-term effects of gestures on memory for foreign language words trained in the classroom. Mind, Brain, and Education 8(2): 74–88. https://doi.org/10.1111/mbe.12047 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/mbe.12047
Majlesi, A. R. (2015). Matching gestures – Teachers’ repetitions of students’ gestures in second language learning classrooms. Journal of Pragmatics 76: 30–45. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2014.11.006 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2014.11.006
McCafferty, S. G. (2002). Gesture and creating zones of proximal development for second language learning. Modern Language Journal 86: 192–203. https://doi.org/10.1111/1540-4781.00144 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/1540-4781.00144
McCafferty, S. G. (2008a). Material foundations for second language learning: Gesture, metaphor, and internalization. In S. G. McCafferty and G. Stam (eds.), Gesture: Second Language Acquisition and Classroom Research 47–65. London: Routledge DOI: https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203866993
McCafferty, S. G. (2008b). Mimesis and second language acquisition: A sociocultural perspective. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 30: 147–167. https://www.jstor.org/stable/44488047. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263108080297 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263108080297
McNeill, D. (1992). Hand and Mind: What Gestures Reveal About Thought. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
McNeill, D. (2005). Gesture and Thought. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.7208/chicago/9780226514642.001.0001
McNeill, D. (2012). How Language Began. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139108669
Meeren, K., van Heijnbergen, C. C. R. J. and de Gelder, B. (2005). Rapid perceptual integration of facial expression and emotional body language. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 102(45): 16518–16523. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0507650102 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0507650102
Miller, R. (2011). Vygotsky in Perspective. New York. Cambridge University Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511736582
Morett, L. M. (2014). When hands speak louder than words: The role of gesture in the communication, encoding, and recall of words in a novel second language. Modern Language Journal 98(3): 834–853. https://doi.org/10.1111/modl.12125 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/modl.12125
Morrow. L. M. and Gambrell, L. B. (2019). Best Practices in Literacy Instruction (6th ed.). New York, NY: The Guilford Press.
Nakatsukasa, K. (2019). Gesture-enhanced recasts have limited effects: A case of the regular past tense. Language Teaching Research 25(4): 587–612. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168819870283 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168819870283
O’Halloran, K. L. (2011). Multimodal discourse analysis. In K. Hyland and B. Paltridge (eds.), Companion to Discourse, 120–137. London, UK: Continuum.
Reutzel, R. and Cooter, R. (2019). Strategies for Reading Assessment and Instruction: Helping Every Child Succeed (6th ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson Education Inc.
Rommetviet, R. (1974). On Message Structure: A Framework for the Study of Language and Communication. New York, NY: John Wiley and Sons.
Rosborough, A. (2012). Teacher and students’ use of gesture as a meaning-making affordance for second language learning. In B. Yoon and H. K. Kim (eds.), Teachers’ Roles in Second Language Learning, 63–80. Charlotte, NC: Information Age.
Rosborough, A. (2014). Gesture, meaning-making, and embodiment: Second language learning in an elementary classroom. Journal of Pedagogy 5(2): 227–250. https://doi.org/10.2478/jped-2014-0011 DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/jped-2014-0011
Rosborough, A. (2016). Understanding relations between gesture and chronotope: Embodiment and meaning-making in a second-language classroom. Mind, Culture, and Activity 23(2): 124–140. https://doi.org/10.1080/10749039.2015.1121400 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/10749039.2015.1121400
Roth, W. M. and Radford, L. (2010). Re/thinking the zone of proximal development (symmetrically). Mind, Culture, and Activity 17(4): 299–307. https://doi.org/10.1080/10749031003775038 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/10749031003775038
Smotrova, T. (2014). Instructional Functions of Speech and Gesture in the L2 Classroom (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). The Pennsylvania State University, State College, PA.
Smotrova, T. (2018). Gesture as a mediational tool in the L2 classroom. In J. Lantolf and M. Poehner (with M. Swain) (eds.), Routledge Handbook of Sociocultural Theory and Second Language Development, 472–486. New York, NY: Routledge. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315624747-30
Smotrova, T. and Lantolf, J. P. (2013). The function of gesture in lexically focused L2 instructional conversations. The Modern Language Journal 97(2): 397–416. https://www.jstor.org/stable/43651646. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4781.2013.12008.x DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4781.2013.12008.x
Stam, G. (2001). Lexical failure and gesture in second language development. In C. Cavé, I. Guaïtella and S. Santi (eds.), Oralité et Gestualité: Interactions et Comportements Multimodaux Dans la Communication, 271–275. Paris: L’Harmattan.
Sulzby, E. and Teale, W. H. (2003). The development of the young child and the emergence of literacy. In J. Flood, D. Lapp, J. Squire and J. Jensen (eds.), Handbook of Research on Teaching the English Language Arts (2nd ed.), 300–313. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Tharp, R. G. and Gallimore, R. (1988). Rousing Minds to Life: Teaching, Learning, and Schooling in Social Context. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139173698
Tharp, R. G. and Gallimore, R. (1991). The Instructional Conversation: Teaching and Learning in Social Activity. Retrieved from UC Berkeley Center for Research on Education, Diversity and Excellence website: http://escholarship.org/uc/item/5th0939d
Thibault, P. (2004). Brain, Mind and the Signifying Body: An Ecosocial Semiotic Theory. London, UK: A&C Black.
Tudge, J. (1990). Vygotsky, the zone of proximal development, and peer collaboration: Implications for classroom practice. In Moll, L. C. (ed.), Vygotsky and Education: Instructional Implications and Applications of Sociohistorical Psychology, 155–172. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139173674.008
van Compernolle, R. A. and Smotrova, T. (2014). Corrective feedback, gesture, and mediation in classroom language learning. Language and Sociocultural Theory 1(1): 25–47. https://doi.org/10.1558/71056194384 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1558/71056194384
van Compernolle, R. A. and Smotrova, T. (2017). Gesture, meaning, and thinking-for-teaching in unplanned vocabulary explanations. Classroom Discourse 8(3): 194–213. https://doi.org/10.1080/19463014.2016.1275028 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/19463014.2016.1275028
van Compernolle, R. A. and Williams, L. (2012). Promoting sociolinguistic competence in the classroom zone of proximal development. Language Teaching Research 16(1): 39–60. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168811423340 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168811423340
van Leeuwan, T. (2015). Multimodality in education: Some directions and some questions. TESOL Quarterly 49(3): 582–589. https://doi.org/10.1002/tesq.242 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/tesq.242
van Lier, L. (1996). Interaction in the Language Curriculum: Awareness, Autonomy, and Authenticity. London, UK: Longman Publishing.
Veresov, N. (2004). Zone of proximal development (ZPD): The hidden dimension? Development, 42–48. https://doi.org/10.1353/ner.2021.0041 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1353/ner.2021.0041
Veresov, N. N. (2017a). ZBR and ZPD: Is there a difference? Cultural-Historical Psychology 13: 23–26. https://doi.org/10.17759/chp.2017130102 DOI: https://doi.org/10.17759/chp.2017130102
Veresov, N. (2017b). The concept of perezhivanie in cultural-historical theory: Content and contexts. In Perezhivanie, Emotions and Subjectivity, 47–70. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-4534-9_3 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-4534-9_3
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in Society: The Development of Higher Psychological Processes (M. Cole, V. J. Steiner, S. Scribner and E. Souberman, Trans.). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Vygotsky, L. S. (1983). Sobranie sochinenii [Collected works] (Vol. 3). Moscow: Pedagogika.
Vygotsky, L. S. (1986). Thought and Language. Cambridge: MIT Press.
Vygotsky, L. S. (1987). Thinking and speech. In R. W. Rieber and J. Wollock (eds.), The collected works of LS Vygotsky, Vol. 1: Problems of General Psychology, 39–285. New York: Plenum.
Vygotsky, L. S. (1994). The problem of the environment. In J. Valsiner and R. Van der Veer (eds.), The Vygotsky Reader, 347–348. Basil: Blackwell.
Vygotsky, L. S. (1997). Genesis of higher mental functions. In R. W. Reiber and A. S. Carton, (eds.) The Collected Works of L. S. Vygotsky: Vol 3. Problems of the Theory and History of Psychology, 97–120. New York, NY: Plenum Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4615-5939-9_5
Xi, J. and Lantolf, J. P. (2021). Scaffolding and the zone of proximal development: A problematic relationship. Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour 51(1): 25–48. https://doi.org/10.1111/jtsb.12260 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/jtsb.12260
Zavershneva, E. and van der Veer, R. (2018). Vygotsky’s Notebooks. Singapore: Springer. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-4625-4
Zlatev, J. (2007). Embodiment, language, and mimesis. In T. Ziemke, J. Zlatev and R. Frank (eds.), Body, Language and Mind: Vol 1. Embodiment, 297–337. Berlin, Germany: Mouton de Gruyter.
Zlatev, J., Persson, T. and Gardenfors, P. (2005). Bodily Mimesis as ‘The Missing Link’ in Human Cognitive Evolution. Lund, Sweden: Lund University Cognitive Studies.
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
