Instructions

We welcome abstracts of max 3000 characters (spaces included, literature excluded) for 20-minute presentations, followed by a 10-minute discussion. Please ensure that your submission is fully anonymised.

Submission may be sent by e-mail to Jacopo Saturno (jacopo.saturno@unibg.it) with the object "ICL2".

Introduction

The workshop focusses on adult L2 acquisition and teaching in the context of intercomprehension, here defined as a situation in which the target language (L2 or L3, Hufeisen 2018) is closely related in terms of grammar and vocabulary to a bridge language (L1 or L2) already known to the learner. The workshop is intended as a forum for scholars engaged in research on multilingualism and transfer in second language acquisition (SLA), as well as language teachers working with learners in situations in which intercomprehension may arise.

Although proposals on related areas are also welcome, specific attention will be devoted to the following themes:

1. Intercomprehension in second language acquisition. Papers in this session should aim to describe the effect of intercomprehension from various perspectives within linguistics (e.g. psycholinguistics, neurolinguistics, experimental SLA). All theoretical and methodological frameworks are welcome.

2. Intercomprehension in language teaching. Papers in this session are expected to present experiments and reports on didactic approaches taking advantage of intercomprehension strategies.

3. Intercomprehension in L2 Polish acquisition and teaching. Since the vast majority of its learners are speakers of closely related Slavic languages, L2 Polish is an ideal case study for the role of intercomprehension. Papers in this section are expected to discuss teaching practices and materials designed to meet the needs and maximise the potential of Slavic-speaking learners of L2 Polish.

Theoretical background

Being one of the classic themes of SLA research from the very onset of the field, the role of the learner's language repertoire in the acquisition and teaching of L2s and L3s has generated a wealth of research and often radically contrasting views (Odlin 2003; Juncal Gutierrez Mangado et al. 2019; VanPatten et al. 2020). However, relatively little specific attention has been paid to language learning in an intercomprehension context. Moreover, since transfer is both a common concept in SLA reflection and a conspicuous phenomenon in language teaching practice, myths and beliefs often interfere with empirical observations and scientific knowledge.

Indeed, intercomprehension is a common phenomenon in language teaching practice and may require specific actions in terms of curriculum and material design or class management (e.g. Della Putta 2019). Although research has shown that language acquisition sequences are to a large extent independent of previously known languages (Dulay et al. 1982; Håkansson et al. 2002), language teachers often do report that L1/L2 proximity seems to facilitate acquisition. Empirical information on the actual effect of intercomprehension is needed to shed light on these problems and appropriately deal with transfer effects.

The study of intercomprehension in language teaching also concerns the development of multilingualism - one of the key elements of present-day European language policy - since it is often intuitively assumed that if appropriately exploited, it may facilitate the learning of new L3s thanks to positive transfer (Marx & Mehlhorn 2010). In addition, great emphasis has been placed in the last decades on the so-called “plurilingual approaches”, aimed to develop a multilingual repertoire and partial skills in multiple languages. While the focus of these programmes has traditionally been on receptive skills (Bonvino 2014), more recent research increasingly aim at the development of productive skills and may thus benefit from didactic approaches aimed at maximising the positive impact of intercomprehension.

Selected literature

• Bonvino, Elisabetta. 2014. Intercomprehension studies in Europe: history, current methodology and future developments. In Roberto, Dolci & Tamburri, Anthony (eds.), Intercomprehension and plurilingualism: assets for italian language in the usa (Transactions 3), 29–59. New York, NY: John D. Calandra Italian American Institute.

• Della Putta, Paolo. 2019. Promoting learning and unlearning through textual enhancement in a closely related L1-L2 relationship: The results of a bidirectional study with Spanish-speaking students of Italian and Italian-speaking students of Spanish. European Journal of Applied Linguistics 7(1). 1–30.

• Dulay, Heidi C. & Burt, Marina K. & Krashen, Stephen D. 1982. Language two. New York: Oxford University Press.

• Håkansson, Gisela & Pienemann, Manfred & Sayehli, Susan. 2002. Transfer and typological proximity in the context of second language processing. Second Language Research 18(3). 250–273.

• Hufeisen, Britta. 2018. Models of multilingual competence. In Bonnet, Andreas & Siemund, Peter (eds.), Hamburg Studies on Linguistic Diversity, vol. 7, 173–189. Amsterdam: Benjamins

• Juncal Gutierrez Mangado, Maria & Martinez Adrián, Maria & Gallardo-del-Puerto, Francisco. 2019. Cross-linguistic influence: from empirical evidence to classroom practice. Cham: Springer

• Marx, Nicole & Mehlhorn, Grit. 2010. Pushing the positive: encouraging phonological transfer from L2 to L3. International Journal of Multilingualism 7(1). 4–18.

• Odlin, Terence. 2003. Cross-Linguistic Influence. In Doughty, Catherine & Long, Michael. (eds.), The Handbook of Second Language Acquisition, 436–486. Oxford: Blackwell

• VanPatten, Bill & Smith, Megan & Benati, Alessandro. 2020. Key Questions in Second Language Acquisition: An Introduction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

abstract submission deadline: 24.09.2022

acceptance notification: 30.09.2022

conference: 2-3.12.2022

Christof Heinz (Leipzig): Third Language Acquisition, the source language being a previously acquired slavic L2

In research on SLA, the influence of languages other than L1 has long been marginalized, but gained more prominence since the late 1990s, when the acquisition of a third or additional language (TLA) became an integral part of multilingual approaches towards SLA. Questions of TLA, thus, have significantly contributed to a turn in foreign language teaching away from a strictly communicative approach towards an understanding of language acquisition that allows for the deliberate use of previously acquired languages by the learner. In TLA, therefore, the notion of language awareness as well as a revised concept of language transfer play an important role, allowing for a broader understanding and including different forms of crosslinguistic influence.

Since then, questions of TLA have been discussed with regards to different language families, most prominently within the Germanic and the Romance group. Research focussing on Slavic languages has also provided some interesting insights, especially in question of the role of bound morphology, different spelling systems and the focus on receptive competences.

After 20 years of research, a multilingual approach should be a common place, but still some obstacles for application of TLA in everyday practice of language teaching of Slavic target languages seem to prevail, at least in a German speaking context.

The talk will reconsider the development of TLA concepts during the last decades in general with a special focus on Slavic languages and present findings of own research in the field as well as experience in applying an intercompehensive method in language teaching practice.

Elisabetta Bonvino (Roma 3): Intercomprehension and Second Language Acquisition: the role of transfer

Within the framework of educational linguistics, Intercomprehension (IC) is seen as one of the possible ways to promote plurilingualism and, even more, to enhance the linguistic repertoire of the individual, both monolingual and plurilingual. IC proposes a communicative model in which people communicate using their own language by encouraging the development of the competences required for successful communication.

Studies in IC investigate the spontaneous phenomenon of IC and attempt to make a detailed description of the comprehension processes, with the aim of proposing operational models in order to carry out instructional interventions, which should increase not only comprehension skills but also the ability to interact in IC. The turn of studies in IC implies that it has changed from an observable spontaneous phenomenon into an objective to be achieved or a skill that can be developed or increased by means of an instructional programme.

Although there is great diversity in objectives and techniques, all methodologies based on IC share the following principles, which represent the common denominator of teaching IC: plurilingual approach (more than one language at the same time), use of partial competences, attention to comprehension, reflection on language(s), and development of strategic and metacognitive knowledge and competences. Most of the teaching paths based on IC aim to raise learners’ awareness of comprehension processes, therefore allowing students to develop specific strategies connected with analogy, approximation (or ‘ambiguity tolerance’), association, transfer, inference and metalinguistic knowledge.

In this contribution I will try to illustrate some methodologies based on IC between Romance languages, and to show concretely how inherited resemblances between languages can be identified and exploited as a potential aid to understand other languages and how one can help learners to recognize lexical and structural cognacy, promoting awareness of resemblances across Romance languages among the general public and educators, especially by valorising the linguistic repertoire of the learner. In particular, I will focus on the concept of transfer and show how this is exploited in concrete terms by methodologies for teaching IC. Transfer has been much studied in the field of second language acquisition and language teaching. In the context of plurilingual teaching and IC, it plays an even more important role, since IC can largely be considered "the result of successful interlingual transferring" (Meißner 2004: 41). I will try to highlight how the numerous empirical studies of IC have enabled the concept of transferring itself to be developed and expanded, highlighting its complexity and elaborating on many important aspects such as:

(a) the distinction between transfer basis and transfer process;

b) the insufficiency of the dichotomy negative transfer vs. positive transfer;

c) the multidirectionality of the transfer.

The aim of this presentation is to highlight how the awareness of proximity and the grammar of similarities develops, when it is important to provide linguistic indications related to the grammar of the various languages involved, and how explicit the teaching about Romance language’s grammar should be. I will also try to show that IC is still innovative today as well as what the main critical points are.

Katarzyna Bednarska (Łódź): Dlaczego Słowianie nie zaczynają nauki języka polskiego od poziomu A0? Analiza transferu językowego zachodzącego podczas nauki polszczyzny przez osoby ukraińsko- i słoweńskojęzyczne

Transfer pozytywny związany jest z zastosowaniem języka ojczystego lub innych znanych języków w taki sposób, aby konstrukcja powstała w wyniku przeniesienia charakterystycznych dla L1 form do L2 była poprawna (Gass, Selinker 2008:520). W przypadku języków pokrewnych, jakimi są język polski, ukraiński i słoweński, jest procesem częstym i – jeśli zostanie odpowiednio wykorzystany – znacznie ułatwiającym naukę.

Słownictwo, wiedza gramatyczna i nawyki zgromadzone przez Ukraińców i Słoweńców podczas przyswajania ich języków ojczystych pomagają w (zarówno świadomym, jak ni nieświadomym) zrozumieniu polskich konstrukcji.

Badanie transferu pozytywnego bywa trudne, gdyż często nie da się jednoznacznie stwierdzić, czy uczeń użył danej struktury poprawnie z powodu transferu z L1, czy po prostu dobrze się jej nauczył. Skutki transferu pozytywnego najłatwiej dostrzega się, analizując wypowiedzi osób uczących się języka obcego w grupach, których członkowie posługują się różnymi L1, gdyż możliwe jest wtedy zaobserwowanie kontrastów, jednak nie jest to jedyną możliwą metodą.

W wystąpieniu przedstawię inny sposób badania transferu pozytywnego, a mianowicie analizę ćwiczenia bazującego na rozumieniu tekstu pisanego, zawierającego słowa i konstrukcje gramatyczne występujące zarówno w polszczyźnie, jak i języku ukraińskim lub słoweńskim. Ponieważ tego typu analiza ma sens jedynie w przypadku uczniów poczatkujących, a ponadto może być stosowana tylko do badania sprawności biernych, w znaczny sposób ogranicza możliwość zbadania transferu zachodzącego na różnych poziomach języka. Na jej podstawie można jednak stworzyć ćwiczenia pozwalające kursantom w szybki sposób przyswajać podstawy języka polskiego.

Tech-check – Monday 28.11.2022 17.30 Warsaw time

https://uw-edu-pl.zoom.us/j/98238209379?pwd=Y0FlY1kvZE4xNW9FRkNjWW9PMEt4UT09

Meeting ID: 982 3820 9379

Access code: 474201

Conference – Friday 02.11.2022 09.00 - Saturday 03.11.2022 15.00 Warsaw time

https://teams.microsoft.com/l/meetup-join/19%3ameeting_ZDNhNTEyNGYtNWQyMS00YmQ4LWIyYzUtMjBhNmI4ZjA3MDlk%40thread.v2/0?context=%7b%22Tid%22%3a%222d9a5a9f-69b7-4940-a1a6-af55f35ba069%22%2c%22Oid%22%3a%223b8708c7-864c-453c-9c43-66ccc7dcd029%22%7d

Meeting ID: 953 8406 1987

Access code: 448331

Daniele Artoni (Università di Verona)

Przemysław Gębal (Uniwersytet Warszawski)

Radosław Kucharczyk (Uniwersytet Warszawski)

Władysław Miodunka (Uniwersytet Jagielloński)

Jacopo Saturno (Università di Bergamo)

Irena Chawrilska (Uniwersytet Gdański)

Przemysław Gębal (Uniwersytet Gdański, Uniwersytet Warszawski)

Jacopo Saturno (Università di Bergamo)

Jacopo Saturno (Università di Bergamo): jacopo.saturno@unibg.it