论文部分内容阅读
Sydney Institute of Language and Commerce.Shanghai University，Shanghai，201800）
Abstract：This paper is a theoretical discussion of socio-cultural aspect of second language acquisition，which is frequently ignored in the mainstream research literature.This paper attempts to address the issue of how the learning environment and classroom interaction affect second language learners’ perception or altitude towards the target language in china.Building a safe learning community is a suggested way for further debate.
Key words：socio-cultural aspect of SLA；afe learning community；a theoretical discussion
中图分类号：G642.0 文献标志码：A 文章编号：1674-9324（2013）18-00××-××
Purpose of This Paper
Second language acquisition normally starts from the acquisition of linguistic aspect of the language such as phonology，grammar games and basic vocabulary.In most cases，educators focus on teaching the linguistic knowledge of a second language while they neglect other aspects of the target language.This paper explores these other aspects，or more specifically the need of building a supporting learning community for second language learners.Does second language acquisition really need something beyond the linguistic and cultural knowledge in smoothing out the process of acquisition？If the answer is yes，what is this supporting community supposed to be？And how do we measure the formation of this intangible supporting community among the second language learners？In response to a series of questions raised by this paper at the very beginning，this paper aims at exploring second language acquisition as a socio-psychologically developmental process.By exploring the connections between second language acquisition and individual second language learner’s socio-psychological development，this paper will discuss the need of building a benign and safe leaning community for second language learning.Besides that，this paper will present the invisible profile of such learning community and its criticism.
Rationalizations of a Safe Learning Community in the Field of Second Language Acquisition
Firstly，the idea of building a safe learning community for second language learning looks at the connections between socio-psychological factors and second language learning outcomes.Some pioneering studies of socio-psychological variables in second language learning by Gardner and Lambert（1959，1972）demonstrated that “a positive，statistically significant，relationship could be established between motivation，positive attitudes towards the L2 and its speakers，the mastery of those aspects of the L2 that are less susceptible to conscious manipulation，such as phonology.”Later，Schumann’s acculturation hypothesis（1978，1986）suggests that “the degree to which the learner（particularly the adult immigrant）acculturates to the target language（TL）group controls the degree to which the learner acquires the TL.In this view，differential language learning outcomes are explained in terms of psychological and social distance between adult learners and the TL group”.These two arguments try to establish a certain kind of link between an actual second language learning outcome and socio-psychological，social difference within the target language group and second language learners.The idea of creating a safe learning community is based on the activation of a positive link such as spontaneous communicative desire with learners in this community and positive attitudes towards the L2 and its speakers. Secondly，the aim of building such a learning community for second language learning is based on the conflicts resulting from the expansion of second language learners’ identity.Another strand of socio-psychological inquiry examined the relationship between second language learning and ethnic group membership，drawing on Tajfel’s（1974，1981）theory of social identity.Tajfel viewed “social identity as derived from group membership and suggested that，when individuals see their present social identity as less than satisfactory，they may attempt at times successfully，at times not-to change their group membership in order to view themselves more positively.”These researchers represented by Tajfel suggested that “members of groups where the in-groups identification is suggested that members of groups where the in-group identification is weak，in group vitality low，in-group boundaries open and identification with other groups strong may assimilate and learn the second language rapidly.”（Pavlenko，2002）whenever there is an identification or assimilation of something，there is the underlying assumption of differences either distinguishable one or unnoticeable one.This paper aligns with the assumption about one perspective of the arguments on social identity that there is such a thing called mainstream culture.“Many critics also point out that most of the studies within the socio-psychological paradigm have been carried out in English-speaking environments in the US，UK and Canada.In other words，there were carried out in environments where most often there was one clearly dominant language and culture.”（Pavlenko，2002）Just because of the existence of one distinguished dominant language and culture，the need of building a safe learning community is justified.And this paper considers that the need of building such a learning community is most needed when the second language learning happens in a society with one distinguishable and dominant culture such as China，Japan，UK，US and Canada.Since the existence of the mainstream culture，the identity of second language learners is expanded either voluntarily or unconsciously under the resistance to influence from the mainstream culture or voluntary assimilation into the mainstream culture.During this process，second language learners’ identity is supposed to be transformed with subtle conflicts，big frustrations or joys.That is where the idea of building a safe learning community comes in.Second language learners expand their identities with a group of people who they can trust. Thirdly，the intention to building a safe learning community for second learning is derived from the conceptualization of language in the poststructuralist framework.Language is conceptualized as “a site of identity construction”.（Pavlenko，2002）“Identities are seen as constructed by and in discourses that supply the terms by which identities are expressed（identity performance）and assign differential values to different identities or subject positions.Subject positions，in turn，refer to the intersection of factors that position individuals as single welfare mothers，Chicana lesbians，inner-city youth or middle-class accountants，and entail age，gender，sexuality，class and race，as well as other factors that influence the ways in which we are perceived by others”.（Pavlenko，2002）Just because learning a second language is not a simple matter of acquiring a system of linguistic proficiency it is always about reconstruction of individual learner’s identity under the meaning renders by different discourses in the process of language acquisition.It is always about how to see oneself in terms of power relationship within different discourses.From this sense，learning a second language is not like building a high rise with different linguistic bricks.This process will definitely involve the psychological，emotional and ideological conflicts and development.In order to smooth out this process and nurture a positive development，the signification of building a safe learning community is rationalized.Last but not least，poststructuralist approaches reconceptualise second language as “an intrinsically social- rather than simply cognitive-process of socialization into specific communities of practices，also referred to as ’situated learning’”.（Lave
Abstract：This paper is a theoretical discussion of socio-cultural aspect of second language acquisition，which is frequently ignored in the mainstream research literature.This paper attempts to address the issue of how the learning environment and classroom interaction affect second language learners’ perception or altitude towards the target language in china.Building a safe learning community is a suggested way for further debate.
Key words：socio-cultural aspect of SLA；afe learning community；a theoretical discussion
中图分类号：G642.0 文献标志码：A 文章编号：1674-9324（2013）18-00××-××
Purpose of This Paper
Second language acquisition normally starts from the acquisition of linguistic aspect of the language such as phonology，grammar games and basic vocabulary.In most cases，educators focus on teaching the linguistic knowledge of a second language while they neglect other aspects of the target language.This paper explores these other aspects，or more specifically the need of building a supporting learning community for second language learners.Does second language acquisition really need something beyond the linguistic and cultural knowledge in smoothing out the process of acquisition？If the answer is yes，what is this supporting community supposed to be？And how do we measure the formation of this intangible supporting community among the second language learners？In response to a series of questions raised by this paper at the very beginning，this paper aims at exploring second language acquisition as a socio-psychologically developmental process.By exploring the connections between second language acquisition and individual second language learner’s socio-psychological development，this paper will discuss the need of building a benign and safe leaning community for second language learning.Besides that，this paper will present the invisible profile of such learning community and its criticism.
Rationalizations of a Safe Learning Community in the Field of Second Language Acquisition
Firstly，the idea of building a safe learning community for second language learning looks at the connections between socio-psychological factors and second language learning outcomes.Some pioneering studies of socio-psychological variables in second language learning by Gardner and Lambert（1959，1972）demonstrated that “a positive，statistically significant，relationship could be established between motivation，positive attitudes towards the L2 and its speakers，the mastery of those aspects of the L2 that are less susceptible to conscious manipulation，such as phonology.”Later，Schumann’s acculturation hypothesis（1978，1986）suggests that “the degree to which the learner（particularly the adult immigrant）acculturates to the target language（TL）group controls the degree to which the learner acquires the TL.In this view，differential language learning outcomes are explained in terms of psychological and social distance between adult learners and the TL group”.These two arguments try to establish a certain kind of link between an actual second language learning outcome and socio-psychological，social difference within the target language group and second language learners.The idea of creating a safe learning community is based on the activation of a positive link such as spontaneous communicative desire with learners in this community and positive attitudes towards the L2 and its speakers. Secondly，the aim of building such a learning community for second language learning is based on the conflicts resulting from the expansion of second language learners’ identity.Another strand of socio-psychological inquiry examined the relationship between second language learning and ethnic group membership，drawing on Tajfel’s（1974，1981）theory of social identity.Tajfel viewed “social identity as derived from group membership and suggested that，when individuals see their present social identity as less than satisfactory，they may attempt at times successfully，at times not-to change their group membership in order to view themselves more positively.”These researchers represented by Tajfel suggested that “members of groups where the in-groups identification is suggested that members of groups where the in-group identification is weak，in group vitality low，in-group boundaries open and identification with other groups strong may assimilate and learn the second language rapidly.”（Pavlenko，2002）whenever there is an identification or assimilation of something，there is the underlying assumption of differences either distinguishable one or unnoticeable one.This paper aligns with the assumption about one perspective of the arguments on social identity that there is such a thing called mainstream culture.“Many critics also point out that most of the studies within the socio-psychological paradigm have been carried out in English-speaking environments in the US，UK and Canada.In other words，there were carried out in environments where most often there was one clearly dominant language and culture.”（Pavlenko，2002）Just because of the existence of one distinguished dominant language and culture，the need of building a safe learning community is justified.And this paper considers that the need of building such a learning community is most needed when the second language learning happens in a society with one distinguishable and dominant culture such as China，Japan，UK，US and Canada.Since the existence of the mainstream culture，the identity of second language learners is expanded either voluntarily or unconsciously under the resistance to influence from the mainstream culture or voluntary assimilation into the mainstream culture.During this process，second language learners’ identity is supposed to be transformed with subtle conflicts，big frustrations or joys.That is where the idea of building a safe learning community comes in.Second language learners expand their identities with a group of people who they can trust. Thirdly，the intention to building a safe learning community for second learning is derived from the conceptualization of language in the poststructuralist framework.Language is conceptualized as “a site of identity construction”.（Pavlenko，2002）“Identities are seen as constructed by and in discourses that supply the terms by which identities are expressed（identity performance）and assign differential values to different identities or subject positions.Subject positions，in turn，refer to the intersection of factors that position individuals as single welfare mothers，Chicana lesbians，inner-city youth or middle-class accountants，and entail age，gender，sexuality，class and race，as well as other factors that influence the ways in which we are perceived by others”.（Pavlenko，2002）Just because learning a second language is not a simple matter of acquiring a system of linguistic proficiency it is always about reconstruction of individual learner’s identity under the meaning renders by different discourses in the process of language acquisition.It is always about how to see oneself in terms of power relationship within different discourses.From this sense，learning a second language is not like building a high rise with different linguistic bricks.This process will definitely involve the psychological，emotional and ideological conflicts and development.In order to smooth out this process and nurture a positive development，the signification of building a safe learning community is rationalized.Last but not least，poststructuralist approaches reconceptualise second language as “an intrinsically social- rather than simply cognitive-process of socialization into specific communities of practices，also referred to as ’situated learning’”.（Lave