Selasa, 11 Januari 2011

MAULISA MUHAS (0743042021) negotiation of meaning

SECOND LANGUAGE ACQUISITION
(Task)
“NEGOTIATION OF MEANING”




By :
MAULISA MUHAS
0743042021









ENGLISH EDUCATION
LANGUAGE AND ART DEPARTMENT
TEACHER TRAINING AND EDUCATION FACULTY
UNIVERSITY OF LAMPUNG
BANDAR LAMPUNG
2010



INTRODUCTION

English is not easy to learn. People try many things in order to be able become proficiency in using English. Thus, they apply many ways so they are able to comprehend the meaning being said by the speaker. This is an example of the conversation between two speakers who have low ability in speaking English;
C : I explained them about second language acquisition
Z : You send them some money ?
C : No, I explained them about second language acquisition
Z : Oh, sorry. I think you send them some money.

By observing this conversation, we can see that Z has misunderstanding toward the words being said by C, and then Z asks clarification from C. This way commonly happens in every circumstance where people try to communicate in English. That is what we call Negotiation of Meaning. But those errors are not totally broke the communication what the pioneer of education calls global errors. That ways is assumed as the technique to acquire the language by using the new system in order for easily to get the language.

It has been taken long time ago, people try to analyze how people negotiate the meaning when they found difficulties to grasp the meaning. Wagner (1996) in Yufrizal argues that interest in the study of interaction within the last two decades is partly due to consideration of the role of communication for second/foreign language acquisition. Second/ foreign language acquisition occurs especially when learners are engaged in the use of the language for communication. In this view interaction is treated as one of the most important aspects that influences the success or failure of second and/or foreign language acquisition. Pica, Kanagy, and Falodun (1993) claim that ‘language is best learned and taught through interaction’ (p.10). Long (1996) confirms that interactional modification leads to second language development and more active involvement in negotiated interaction leads to greater development.

Therefore I am also interested to record the conversations then finally identify the conversation where negotiation of meaning is occurred. As the language learner and teacher to be, this is going to be important to recognize how the negotiation is happened and to know whether it has bad implication in acquiring the language or not.




FRAME OF THEORIES

A. Input and Output
There are two important differences between comprehensible input and comprehended input. First, the former implies the speaker, rather than the hearer, controls the comprehensibility. With comprehended input, the focus is on the hearer (the learner) and the extent to which he or she understands. In Krashen’s sense of the word taken from Yufrizal (2007), comprehension is treated as a dichotomous variable; something is either understood or it is not. He was apparently using the most common meaning of the word, whereas in this sense we refer to comprehension as a continuum probabilities ranging from semantics to detailed structure analysis.

B. Intake
Yufrizal (2007; 76) states that intake is the process of assimilating linguistic material; it refers to the mental activity that mediates input and grammar. Gass (1998) refers to intake as selective processing. Intake is not merely s subset of input. It is the intake component that psycholinguistic processing takes place. That is, it is where information is matched against prior knowledge and where, in general, processing takes place against the backdrop of the existing internalized grammatical rules.

C. Negotiation of Meaning in Interaction
Yufrizal (2007; p.80) states Negotiation of meaning is defined as a series of exchange conducted by addressors and addressees to help themselves understand and be understood by their interlocutors. In this case, when native speakers (NSs) and non native speakers (NNSs) are involved in an interaction, both interactants work together to solve any potential misunderstanding or non understanding that occurs, by checking each others’ comprehension, requesting clarification and confirmation and by repairing and adjusting speech (Pica, 1988).

Varonis and Gass (1985) proposed a simpler model for the exchanges that create negotiation of meaning. The model consists of four primes called :
  • Trigger (T) Which invokes or stimulates incomplete understanding on the part of the hearer.
  • Indicator (I), which is the hearer’s signal of incomplete understanding.
  • Response (R) is the original speaker’s attempt to clear up the unaccepted-input, and,
  • Reaction to the response (RR), which is an element that signals either the hearer’s acceptance or continued difficulty with the speaker’s repair.


D. The Roles of Negotiation of Meaning in Second Language Acquisition
Every researcher will have their own definitions and description of negotiation of meaning. It shows that interest in the study of negotiation of meaning has developed rapidly. Beside the forms and definition of negotiation of meaning, researchers also vary in their perception of the role of negotiation of meaning in second/foreign language acquisition. Pica (1996) admits that although there has been no empirical evidence of a direct link between negotiation of meaning and second/foreign language development, research studies in negotiation of meaning for the last two decades have shown that there are two obvious contribution of negotiation of meaning to second language acquisition. Firstly, through negotiation of meaning (particularly in interaction involving native speakers) nonnative speaker obtain comprehensible input necessary for second language acquisition much more frequently than in interactions without negotiation of meaning. Secondly, negotiation of meaning provides opportunities for non native speakers to produce comprehensible output necessary for second language acquisition much more frequently than in interactions without negotiation of meaning.



CONVERSATION

 Conversation I
This is a conversation between two people that haven’t known each other.
Reva : “Hello” (FU)
Vika : “Hello” (FU)
Reva : “I’m Reva. May I have your name?” (T)
Vika : “Oh you may, I’m Vika” (FU)
Reva : “Would you mind to help me?” (T)
Vika : “That’s very nice to me. What is it?” (FU)
Reva : “I’m from Punggur and I don’t know where is the way to go to POLRES Metro.” (t)
Vika : “POLRES?” (S)
Reva : “Yes, POLRES?” (R)
Vika : “From punggur, you have to go straight and you will pass irrigation and you will find
           Metro Terminal on left side. After you pass it, turn left, go straight again, and then
           turn right and you will see POLRES. Ummm…What will you do there?” (FU)
Reva : “Pardon?” (S)
Vika : “What will you do in POLRES Metro?” (T)
Reva : “ooo…I want to make my driving license. Ummm…May I have your help again?” (FU)
Vika : “Please” (FU)
Reva : “Can you show me the way to Poksai street?” (T)
Vika : “Pub what?” (S)
Reva : “No no no no. Poksai. Name of street. Poksai street.” (R)
Vika : “Oh, I see. Poksai street. It’s near from here.” (FU)
Reva : “Where is it?” (T)
Vika : “Before Tingkat primary school, you will find a side-street on the right side then you
            turn right, that’s   Poksai street.” (FU)
Reva : “OK, thank you very much for you help. I’m so sorry for disturbing you. And…I must
           go now because my friend has waited me in POLRES Metro.” (FU)
Vika : “Oh, never mind. It’s very nice to help you. Beautiful day for you.” (FU)
Reva : “Bye” (FU)
Vika : “Bye” (FU)

Note : FU = Follow up
T = Trigger
R = Respond
S = Signal


 Conversation II
This is a conversation between two people which they are a friend. Rama and Viko are friends. Now they are in KODIM hostel.
Nino : “Why do you look so sad Rama?” (T)
Rama : “Yaeh, I have to send some money to my sister in east java.” (FU)
Nino : “Ow…you can go to a Bank. So…what’s the problem?” (FU)
Rama : “No Niko, I don’t have an account.” (FU)
Nino : “Umm…I think you need to go to post office. You can also send your money from
           there.” (FU)
Rama : “Really? Where is the nearest post office here?” (T)
Nino : “It nears Taqwa Mosque.” (FU)
Rama : “Pardon?” (S)
Nino : “Taqwa Mosque.” (R)
Rama : “Taqwa Mosque?” (S)
Nino : “Yes. From here you have to go straight until you find POLRES Metro and then you
           turn right. Keep on move until you find a crossroad. then you turn left and be on
           your way. On left side, you will find the post office. (FU)
Rama  : “Would you mind to take me there?” (FU)
Nino   : “OK, but after we are from post office, I want to show you my new girlfriend.” (FU)
Rama  : “new green fen? Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha” (FU)
Nino   : “No dude, new girlfriend!” (FU)
Rama  : “Wow, where is she?” (T)
Nino   : “Ummm…let me remind it for a minute because I have just gone there for first
             time. I think from post office we just go straight toward irrigation.” (FU)
Rama  : “As I know, it’s a forb, it’s a forbidden way, isn’t it?” (FU)
Nino   : “Oh, I almost forget it. From post office we have to turn right first and then we
             turn left. We will pass the POLRES Metro and one side-streets. Then we turn
             left again after that we turn right, and we will see the irrigation. My girlfriend’s
             house is in front of the playing-field.” (FU)
Rama : “ehem…so you need to prepare well ‘cause you will meet your girlfriend.” (FU)
Nino  : “Yeah…and you need to take a bath ‘cause your smell is not good” (FU)
Rama : “And I will exhaust your perfume” (FU)
Nino  : “10.000 rupiah for a spray” (FU)
Rama : “After that I will kill you” (FU)
Nino and Rama : “Ha ha ha ha ha” (FU)

Note : FU = Follow up
T = Trigger
R = Respond
S = Signal


ANALYSIS
Based on the conversation above, we can analyze there are many negotiation of meaning done by the speakers. They tried to clarify each words which probably difficult to be receipted so that the conversation can run well. It commonly happens with Indonesian’s students whereas English is a foreign language. Nevertheless, the writer believes that negotiation of meaning is a part of learning the language. That is one of ways to acquire the language directly, consciously/unconsciously.

Tidak ada komentar:

Posting Komentar