LEARNER STRATEGIES
Anna Husna
Learning Strategies
Formulaic speech
Creative speech
Production Strategies
A Model of L2 Production
LEARNING STRATEGIES
BASIS OF LINGUISTIC PRODUCT
• Formulaic • Creative
Speech Speech
FORMULAIC SPEECH
“expressions which are (1) learned as unanalysable wholes
and (2) employed on particular occassions.”
(Lyon 1986)
(1) Learners may produce an utterance he learned,
knowing its function without knowing its structure.
(2) Learners use each formula for each particular
communicative goal.
TYPES OF FORMULAIC SPEECH
Routines Patterns Scripts
Totally unanalyzed Partially unanalyzed Rather fixed and
predictable
How do you do?
Can I have a _____?
You are welcome. E.g., Greeting
There is no ______?
I can’t speak sequences
I wanna ______.
English.
(Krashen & Scarcella 1978) (Ellis 1984c)
STRATEGIES INVOLVED IN ACQUIRING FORMULAIC SPEECH
PATTERN PATTERN PATTERN
MEMORIZATION IMMITATION ANALYSIS
Psycholinguistic Behavioural
strategy strategy
Cannot be Can be
observed observed
PATTERN MEMORIZATION
STORED
INPUT
(1) Patterns (2) Each pattern
have to be has to be linked to
highly a communicative
frequent function Holistic processing is involved
(Seliger 1982)
PATTERN IMMITATION
Learners deliberately and methodically
copy the whole utterance or part of it
PATTERN ANALYSIS
FORMULA FORMULA
segment segment segment segment
Rule-bound ways of combination
NEW STRUCTURE
BASIS FOR THIS ANALYSIS:
Comparing formulas and looking for similarities and differences
FORMULAIC SPEECH
Common in early SLA
Reduce the learning burden
while maximizing communicative ability
PROCESS ACCOUNTABLE FOR CREATIVE SPEECH
(Interlanguage)
Overgeneralization
SIMPLIFICATION
Transfer
HYPOTHESIS FORMATION
Intralingual
INFERENCING
Extralingual
RECEPTIVE
HYPOTHESIS TESTING PRODUCTIVE
METALINGUAL
INTERACTIONAL
Formal Practice
AUTOMATIZATION
Functional Practice
HYPOTHESIS FORMATION
Hypotheses about interlanguage rules are formed in
three ways:
1. Using prior linguistic knowledge
2. Inducing new rules from the input data
3. A combination of (1) and (2)
SIMPLIFICATION
“attempts by the leaners to control the range of hypotheses he
attempts to build by restricting hypothesis formation to those
hypotheses which are relatively easy to form and will facilitate
communication.”
(Ellis 1985)
SIMPLIFICATION STRATEGIES
TRANSFER OVERGENERALIZATION
Use L1 as a basis for Extend existing L2 knowledge
forming hypotheses about L2 to new interlanguage forms
E.g., overgeneralization of
E.g., transfer of Vietnamese
forming past form for
word order into English
irregular verbs
INFERENCING
Learners attempt to “induce the rule from the input”.
(Ellis 1985)
INFERENCING STRATEGIES
INTRALINGUAL EXTRALINGUAL
INFERENCING INFERENCING
Build up hypotheses by Build up hypotheses by relying
analyzing external L2 data on contextual meaning
HYPOTHESIS TESTING
Hypotheses can be tested out in a number of ways:
1. Receptively (comparing hypotheses with L2 data)
2. Productively (making utterances containing the
hypothesized rules to check their correctness in terms
of feedbacks)
3. Metalingually (consulting teachers, natives,
dictionaries)
4. Interactionally (elicit a repair from interlocutor)
(Faerch & Kasper 1983b)
AUTOMATIZATION
Learners try to consolidate hypotheses about L2 by
accumulating confirmatory evidence.
(Ellis 1985)
AUTOMATIZATION
FORMAL FUNCTIONAL
PRACTICE PRACTICE
Focus is on Focus is on
formal features of L2 communicative endeavour
PRODUCTION STRATEGIES
Planning of Utterances
Correction of Utterances
A MODEL OF L2 PRODUCTION
Littlewood (1979) proposes a model and
distinguishes two sets of strategies based
on it:
Minimal Strategy
Maximal Strategy
1. Planning Strategies
Semantic Simplification
Linguistic Simplification
2. Correcting Strategies
Monitoring is a correcting strategies