Are CLIL learners simply faster or also different? Evidence from L1 use in the repair sequences and discourse markers of CLIL and EFL learners
| dc.contributor.author | Lázaro Ibarrola, Amparo | |
| dc.contributor.department | Filología y Didáctica de la Lengua | es_ES |
| dc.contributor.department | Filologia eta Hizkuntzaren Didaktika | eu |
| dc.date.accessioned | 2019-06-05T08:26:31Z | |
| dc.date.available | 2019-06-05T08:26:31Z | |
| dc.date.issued | 2016 | |
| dc.description.abstract | Este trabajo analiza cómo estudiantes en contexto AICLE y de Inglés como Lengua Extranjera (ILE) producen secuencias de reparación, evitan la L1 y utilizan marcadores discursivos cuando narran en inglés. Los datos se recogieron en dos momentos con un intervalo de dos años (a las edades de 13 y 15 años) y proceden de alumnos bilingües euskera-castellano divididos en dos grupos: los que aprenden en contexto de AICLE (n. 15) y los que únicamente aprenden ILE (n. 11). Los resultados muestran diferencias intergrupales e intragrupales. En el grupo AICLE las reparaciones se generan mayoritariamente en inglés y decrecen con el tiempo, al contrario que en el grupo de ILE. Además, los alumnos AICLE incorporan las reparaciones menos a menudo mientras que los alumnos ILE las van incorporando con mayor frecuencia. Los marcadores del discurso aparecen en las L1s en los dos grupos pero el grupo ILE apenas los utiliza. | es_ES |
| dc.description.abstract | This study compares the linguistic abilities of CLIL and EFL learners regarding their need for repair sequences, their ability to avoid L1 use and their production of discourse markers while narrating stories in English. Data were collected from a CLIL and an EFL group (n. 15 and 11) of (Spanish/Basque) adolescents narrating a story twice over a two year period (ages 13 and 15). The analyses of the learners’ production revealed differences between groups as well as changes in both groups over time. Repairs in the CLIL group were often generated in English and dropped over time unlike in the EFL group. Also, the CLIL learners incorporated the repairs gradually less often in their subsequent speech while the EFL learners did so more and more frequently suggesting two different attitudes towards the language. Finally, discourse markers were used in the L1 in both groups but the EFL group underutilized them. | en |
| dc.description.sponsorship | The author gratefully acknowledges the funding from research grant FFI2012-32212 (Spanish Ministry of Economy and Competitiveness). | en |
| dc.format.extent | 19 p. | |
| dc.format.mimetype | application/pdf | en |
| dc.identifier.uri | https://academica-e.unavarra.es/handle/2454/33238 | |
| dc.language.iso | eng | en |
| dc.publisher | Universidad de Vigo | es_ES |
| dc.relation.ispartof | VIAL: Vigo International Journal of Applied Linguistics, nº 13, 2016 | en |
| dc.relation.projectID | info:eu-repo/grantAgreement/ES/6PN/FFI2012-32212/ | |
| dc.rights.accessRights | info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess | |
| dc.subject | AICLE | es_ES |
| dc.subject | ILE | es_ES |
| dc.subject | Marcadores discursivos | es_ES |
| dc.subject | Secuencias de reparación | es_ES |
| dc.subject | Uso de la L1 | es_ES |
| dc.subject | CLIL | en |
| dc.subject | EFL | en |
| dc.subject | Discourse markers | en |
| dc.subject | Repair sequences | en |
| dc.subject | L1 use | en |
| dc.title | Are CLIL learners simply faster or also different? Evidence from L1 use in the repair sequences and discourse markers of CLIL and EFL learners | en |
| dc.type | info:eu-repo/semantics/article | |
| dc.type.version | info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion | |
| dspace.entity.type | Publication | |
| relation.isAuthorOfPublication | c78b64f1-5cde-418e-9b20-23fb67e17018 | |
| relation.isAuthorOfPublication.latestForDiscovery | c78b64f1-5cde-418e-9b20-23fb67e17018 |