2004 - Mondada - Pekarek - Second Language Acquisiciton As Situated Practice

Second Language Acquisition as Situated Practice: Task Accomplishment in the French
Second Language Classroom

Author(s): Lorenza Mondada and Simona Pekarek Doehler
Source: The Modern Language Journal, Vol. 88, No. 4, Special Issue: Classroom Talks
(Winter, 2004), pp. 501-518
Published by: Wiley on behalf of the National Federation of Modern Language Teachers
Associations
Stable URL: https://www.jstor.org/stable/3588582
Accessed: 15-04-2019 18:48 UTC
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide
range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and
facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at
https://about.jstor.org/terms
National Federation of Modern Language Teachers Associations, Wiley are collaborating

with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to The Modern Language Journal
This content downloaded from 170.210.214.14 on Mon, 15 Apr 2019 18:48:16 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
Second Language Acquisition
as Situated Practice:
Task Accomplishment in the French
Second Language Classroom
LORENZA MONDADA SIMONA PEKAREK DOEHLER
Universite de Lyon II Institut de Philologie Romane et de Linguistique

Laboratoire ICAR-CNRS ENS Franfaise
BP 7000 Universite de Neuchdtel
F 69342 Lyon Cedex Espace Louis Agassiz 1

France CH 2000 Neuchdtel
Email: Lorenza.Mondada@univ-lyon2.fr Switzerland

Email: Simona.Pekarek@unine. ch
This article provides an empirically based perspective on the contribution of conversation

analysis (CA) and sociocultural theory to our understanding of learners' second language
(L2) practices within what we call a strong socio-interactionist perspective. It explores the in-
teractive (re)configuration of tasks in French second language classrooms. Stressing that
learning is situated in learners' social, and therefore profoundly interactional, practices, we
investigate how tasks are not only accomplished but also collaboratively (re)organized by
learners and teachers, leading to various configurations of classroom talk and structuring spe-
cific opportunities for learning. The analysis of L2 classroom interactions at basic and ad-
vanced levels shows how the teacher's instructions are reflexively redefined within courses of
action and how thereby the learner's emerging language competence is related to other
(interactional, institutional, sociocultural) competencies. Discussing the results in the light
of recent analyses of the indexical and grounded dimensions of everyday and experimental
tasks allows us to broaden our understanding of competence and situated cognition in lan-
guage learning.
OVER THE LAST 2 DECADES, IT HAS BECOME last 2 decades, studies undertaken in conversa-
more and more accepted within such differenttion analysis (CA), as well as in the sociocultural
fields as cultural anthropology, language acquisi-and sociocognitive frameworks, have provided
tion, and developmental psychology that learn- empirical evidence suggesting that the social
ing processes, and more generally cognition,realm cannot be reduced to a mere background
have something to do with social interaction. Thefactor in relation to which activities, including
problem, of course, remains how to pin down thatcognitive processes, take place, but is an integral
something, that is, how to identify, both theoreti-part of cognitive development itself. This view
cally and empirically, the exact contribution of has been captured by the notion of situated learn-
the interactional dimension to learning. ing (Lave & Wenger, 1991), according to which
This embedded nature of cognitive develop- learning is rooted in the learner's participation
ment in social practices has been the focus of in social practice and continuous adaptation to
study in two intellectual frameworks. During the the unfolding circumstances and activities that
constitute talk-in-interaction. Situated learning
The Modern LanguageJournal, 88, iv, (2004) invites us to look from a new perspective at what
0026-7902/04/501-518 $1.50/0 the learner is doing when he or she engages in a
02004 The Modern Language Journal
specific task or activity in a given socio-institu-
502 The Modern Language Journal 88 (2004)
tional context. Such a view, however, has been even necessary; e.g., Gass & Varonis, 1985) for
consistently excluded from mainstream second learning by providing occasions for learners to
language acquisition (SLA) research. be exposed to comprehensible, negotiated, or
In what follows, some basic principles of what modified input (e.g., Long, 1983, 1996). This
we call a strong socio-interactionist approach to framework basically assumes that social interac-
second language (L2) learning will first be tion plays an auxiliary role, providing momen-
sketched out, drawing from both CA and tary frames within which learning processes are
sociocultural theory. Second, classroom interac- supposed to take place.
tion will serve as an empirical testing ground for Contrary to this position, the strong version of
investigating the interactional nature of learn- the interactionist approach recognizes interac-
ing processes, focusing on practical instances of tion as a fundamentally constitutive dimension
task accomplishment. Given the current enthusi- of learners' everyday lives. That is, interaction is
asm for tasks as both a research and pedagogical the most basic site of experience, and hence
object (e.g., Ellis, 2003), the notion of task ac- functions as the most basic site of organized ac-
complishment deserves critical analysis. On the tivity where learning can take place. In this view,
one hand, tasks as instructed actions are a classical social interaction provides not just an inter-
topic of ethnomethodology (Garfinkel, 1963, actional frame within which developmental pro-
2001), allowing us to respecify the problem of cesses can take place; as a social practice, it in-
following a rule; on the other hand, socio- volves the learner as a co-constructor of joint
cultural theory deals with tasks as activity that is activities, where linguistic and other competen-
both locally and historically shaped. On the ba- cies are put to work within a constant process of
sis of these two theoretical frameworks, we will adjustment vis-a-vis other social agents and in the
emerging context. This position is typically
be treating L2 classroom tasks as practices that
are reflexively defined and accomplished by adopted by conversationalist (Bange, 1992; Gajo
learners, and collaboratively (re)configured in & Mondada, 2000; Krafft & Dausendsch6n-Gay,
relationship to partners, either present, virtual, 1994; Pekarek, 1999) or sociocultural (Hall,
or absent. We will show the interpretive work 1993; Lantolf, 2000; Lantolf & Appel, 1994;
that is done during instructed action, by display- Lantolf & Pavlenko, 1995) approaches to L2 ac-
ing the active role that learners play in the quisition.1
achievement of learning opportunities. We will In this article, we develop the constitutive or
also demonstrate the intricate nature of their strong version of the interactionist approach,
linguistic competencies and how these compe- which formulates a radical critique of some cen-
tencies intermesh with other types of socio-insti- tral notions emanating from mainstream
tutional capacities. Finally, we will develop a oriented research. Many aspects of
cognitively
number of conclusions regarding our under- this position were discussed in Firth and Wag-
standing of language competence, social media- ner's (1997) seminal article on these issues. Our
tion, and cognition. own view is that the abstraction and isolation of
learning processes (or cognitive processes in
SOCIO-INTERACTIONIST APPROACHES TO
general) from action and interaction has given
LEARNING rise to a number of fundamentally problematic
concepts in L2 research. These include: (a) the
notion of competence that is treated as a phe-
Toward a Strong Socio-Interactionist Perspective
nomenon that is isolated from socialization pro-
The relationship between social interaction cesses; (b) a conception of learning that is ab-
stracted from the organization of actions,
and L2 acquisition, although still marginalized
in mainstream L2 research, has been the focus of
community membership, participation frame-
works, and so forth; and (c) a notion of context
increasing interest because the first systematic
studies on these questions were undertaken in to be reduced to a stable variable af-
that tends
the late 1970s and early 1980s (see e.g., Faerch
fecting& cognitive events.
Kasper, 1983; Hatch, 1978; Long, 1983). To date,The strong version of the interactionist ap-
the role of social interaction in L2 acquisition
proach leads to a respecification of these con-
has received very different interpretationscepts.
in re-For instance, if interactional activities are
search, ranging from what can be considered a
the fundamental organizational tissue of learn-
strong to a weak conception of this role.ers' The experience, then their competence cannot
weak version of the interactionist approach ac-
be defined in purely individual terms as a series
knowledges that interaction is beneficial (or
of potentialities located in the mind/brain of a
Lorenza Mondada and Simona Pekarek Doehler 503
lone individual, but needs to be conceived of as a Contrary to what is sometimes assumed, this view
plurality of capacities embedded and recognized does not deny the existence of social structures,
in the context of particular activities. norms, and values, but focuses on the way in
These considerations also have important which they are continuously achieved through
methodological consequences: If everyday inter- members' practices in a methodic way. CA,
launched by the work of Harvey Sacks and
action is a fundamental locus of socialization
and of cognitive and linguistic development,
Emanuel Schegloff, deepens our understanding
then learning processes need to be observed
of the methods by which participants structure
their action in an accountable way, by showing
within ordinary contexts of routine activities.
the endogenous, systematic organization of
This position motivates a focus on studying
talk-in-interaction (Sacks, Schegloff, &Jefferson,
learning within empirical settings, concentrating
1974; Schegloff & Sacks, 1973). CA also deals
on the organizational details of naturally occur-
ring actions and interactions, rather than with
on in-the ways in which social order is jointly es-
tablished (Schegloff, 1991) and shared cogni-
vestigating data that are elicited by researchers.
tion is continuously generated, maintained, and
The emphasis put on this locally achieved order
transformed.
offers not just a methodological input to the in- CA methods are systematic proce-
dures (of turn-taking, repairing, opening or clos-
vestigation of SLA but also provides a fundamen-
tal contribution to the understanding of ing both
conversations, etc.) by which members sus-
the context-dependent and the context-renew-tain, defend, and adjust their interpretations
ing methods by which learners become compe- and their conduct in order to make them mutu-
tent members in a community of practice. ally understandable. As such, they are part of
practical reasoning that defines human cogni-
tion not as an individual, decontextualized, or
Two Sources of Theoretical Inspiration: Conversation
universal property but as a situated process that
Analysis and Sociocultural Theory
is enacted through social activities. We suggest
The strong interactionist position can be lo-these methods play a central role in situated
that
cated within the partial convergence of two learning
lines and are at the same time part of the
of research, namely the ethnomethodological competence that allows members to participate
and CA approach to social interaction andin theadequate ways in social interactions, including
sociocultural approach to cognition. We have activities.2
learning
discussed in detail elsewhere how these two Although ethnomethodology and CA do not
aim to develop a model of language acquisition,
frameworks contribute to a notion of cognition
they provide a framework that has stimulated a
that is consistent with an interactionist approach
to L2 learning (Mondada & Pekarek Doehler, number of analyses of socialization processes, of
2000). Here, we limit ourselves to sketchingschool settings as well as of other social institu-
only
briefly their relevance for L2 research. tions involving learning (e.g., Cicourel, 1974;
Ethnomethodology and CA have playedFrancis a cen-& Hester, 2000; Lerner, 1995; Macbeth,
tral role within the social sciences in understand- 1990; McHoul, 1978, 1990; Mehan, 1979). With
regard to L2 learning, this framework has been
ing social order as praxis, that is, as an interlock-
ing set of reasoning practices, institutional an influential resource for investigations into in-
structures, and language. In Garfinkel's (1963)teractions between native and nonnative speak-
ethnomethodological program, order is viewed ers (see de Pietro, Matthey, & Py, 1989; Py, 1991;
as a phenomenon that is constantly achieved lo- Krafft & Dausendsch6n-Gay, 1993; Markee,
cally by participants in a way that produces its 1994) and into the detailed unfolding of.class-
room and other instructional interactions (see
indexicality as well as its stability. Normative ex-
pectations and social order are seen as the Gajo & Mondada, 2000; Markee, 2000; Mori,
2002; Pekarek, 1999; for a discussion, see also
emergent products of a vast amount of communica-
Mondada & Pekarek Doehler, 2000; Wagner,
tive, perceptual, judgmental and other "accomo-
1996).
dative" work whereby persons, in concert, and en-
The second theoretical inspiration for the
countering "from within the society" the
socio-interactionist view of learning that we draw
environments that the society confronts them with,
establish, maintain, restore and alter the social from is the sociocultural approach to cognition,
inspired by the work of Vygotsky and developed
structures that are the assembled products of the
temporally extended courses of action directed in
to the neo-Vygotskian line of thought (Cole,
these environments as persons "know" them. (pp. 1985, 1995; Lantolf & Pavlenko, 1995; Rogoff,
187-188) 1990; Wertsch, 1991b). In our sense, CA and
504 The Modern LanguageJournal 88 (2004)
sociocultural theory offer complementary ele- defining rules of conduct that value certain
ments with regard to our understanding of every- forms of agency and involvement (Lantolf,
day activities and of cognitive processes, the 2000).
former focusing on the way participants method-
ically and systematically accomplish ordinary ac-
Situated Cognition
tions (including learning), the latter stressing
the sociocultural dimension of activities and of
Both of these frameworks converge in insisting
cognitive development (for recent studies bring-
on the central role of contextually embedded
ing the two approaches together, see Ohta's
communicative processes in the accomplish-
2001 investigation on classroom socialization orof human actions and identities as well as
ment
Pekarek Doehler's 2002 reconsideration of me- of social facts.3 In bringing these two lines of
diation in the L2 classroom). The comple-
thought together, we want to stress that learning
mentarity of the two approaches, however, can-
activities are both negotiated and accomplished
not be reduced to using CA merely as an
in local contexts and transmitted and elaborated
analytical tool in the service of sociocultural the-
across historical contexts.
ory. As we illustrate through our analyses, one Learning
of a language, in this sense, essentially
the crucial contributions of CA's analytic mental-
means learning how to deal with contextualized,
ity is that it allows us to respecify crucial notions
interactionally oriented discourse activities. That
such as task or competence from a member's per- is, language learning involves much more than
spective (see also Markee & Kasper, this issue). an expert-novice relationship and much more
Sociocultural theory addresses the issuethan of scaffolded sequences of negotiation. More
cognition more explicitly than CA does, decon- specifically, language learning is rooted in learn-
structing the division between the individual ers' participation in organizing talk-in-interac-
and the social dimensions. A central idea here is
tion, structuring participation frameworks, con-
the Vygotskian notion of mediation (Vygotsky, figuring discourse tasks, interactionally defining
1978): Higher forms of human mental function- identities, and becoming competent members of
ing are mediated by tools (objects and symbolic the community (or communities) in which they
means such as language) collaboratively participate,
con- whether as students, immigrants,
structed by members of a culture, and the devel- professionals, or indeed any other locally rele-
opment of these forms is rooted in vant identities (see also He, this issue; Kasper,
socio-interactional practices within that culture this issue; Mori, this issue, for related insights).
(cf. Cole, 1985; Wertsch, 1991b). Cognition Such is participation gives rise to cognitive prac-
thus understood to be situated in social interac-
tices, forms of attention, and conjoined orienta-
tion (as stressed by Rogoff, 1990) and in larger tions that are embedded, publicly exhibited, and
contexts (as focused by e.g., Cole, 1995; made recognizable in actual actions, and are so-
Wertsch, 1991a, 1991b): As Wertsch (1991a) cially mediated and collectively monitored
noted: "Human mental functioning is inher- through interaction.
ently situated in social interactional, cultural, in- In this sense, cognition can be said to be so-
stitutional and historical contexts" (p. 6). cially situated in a twofold sense, in the
Activities take a particular shape in particular sociocultural definition of the situation as well as
social and institutional settings, a process that in the local contingencies of everyday actions.
implies specific forms of conduct and socializa-
tion, and therefore specific forms of social accep- THE LEARNER'S PRACTICE:
tance, recognition, and valuing of displayed INTERACTIONAL CONSTRUCTION OF
competencies. Learning a language is under- TASKS AND LEARNING ACTIVITIES
stood as being profoundly bound to social prac-
tices (see Ochs, 1988, for first language acquisi- Formulating, understanding, and accomplish-
tion), as being contingent on the learner's ing tasks is an omnipresent problem for mem-
participation as a competent member in the lan- bers in the classroom-for pupils and teachers
guage practices of a social group (see Hall, 1993; alike. This problem relates in general to th
Lantolf & Appel, 1994; Lantolf & Pavlenko, question of rules and of following rules
1995, for L2 learning). Empirical studies have (Garfinkel, 1963; Suchman, 1987; Wittgenstein,
shown, for instance, how students' joint manage- 1953) and to the issues of indexicality and reflex-
ment of L2 discourse is based on the establish- ivity. Instructions are general phenomena occur-
ment of intersubjectivity (Donato, 1994) or ring how in everyday and professional contexts where
the classroom community serves as a mediator, their clarity, consistency, completeness, and im-
plementation are issues that are dealt with by socio-interactional in nature. Even when it does
members within the practical circumstancesnot of appear to be so, learning is interactional be-
the "work of following instructions" (Garfinkel,
cause it is always rooted in activities, in language
2001, pp. 197-218). This work is not to be con-games, in forms of experience. There are, in fact,
fused with the rules themselves, because rulesactivity types that our common sense (and much
of the technical literature on acquisition) does
can, strictly speaking, neither predict action nor
account for it as it is locally and contingently ac-
not immediately or generally associate with social
complished. On the contrary, this work involves interaction. Instead, these tasks are viewed as be-
ing typically individual or as being concerned
skilled practices of adequately interpreting tasks,
with noninteractional objects and objectives.
and this is a competence that pupils have to ac-
quire, but which escapes formal instruction.However,
In once we consider these activities from
this sense, analyzing the detailed ways and prac-
an empirical perspective, we discover that they
are interactionally achieved in their detailed and
tices through which tasks are interpreted and ac-
complished can provide an understandingembodied of realizations. Even a traditional gram-
central dimensions of learning processes. mar exercise in the classroom, generally not con-
In the following analysis of interaction in sidered
a to be a communicative activity, is a task
French as a second language classroom, we focus that is interactionally organized by the partici-
on a series of different tasks, ranging from gram-
pants, as shown in Excerpt 1, taken from a special
mar to communication, and show how possible class for immigrant children (2, in this case, Ada
interpretations and decisions are implemented and Dani) who had difficulties with the standard
by the highly tuned, moment-by-moment wayscurriculum.
in
which learners respond to and accomplish them. This first excerpt shows how a grammar task is
Thus, we treat tasks not as products but as pro- realized through a recurrent pattern, consisting
cesses, insisting that they cannot be understood of a series of questions. Each of these questions is
as stable predefined entities. Rather, these tasks initiated (1-4, 14-15, 21-22, 28-29) by the
are configured by the learner's own activities teacher, Eliane (E), and each presents the infini-
and interpretation processes. tive verb plus the person to one or the other of
the students, Ada (A) or Dani (D). The students
Data orient to this pattern, partially repeating or re-
casting the questions, mostly in a lower voice, be-
The data for this study come from two large fore providing their answers (6, 16, 24). Their
corpora collected during the 1990s by therepetitions au- manifest their work in progress, pro-
thors within two related projects sponsored by
spectively giving them time to formulate their
the Swiss National Foundation on the acquisition answers while retrospectively exhibiting their un-
of French as a second language. One of thederstandingproj- of the question.
ects was studying the acquisition of French by The im- participants' attention to the formulation
migrant children in the French-speaking part of the
of task is observable in the first sequence:
Switzerland. The corpus consists of recordings in asks her question (1-2), highlighting its
Eliane
classes specially designed for newly arrived immi- relation to the previous question (2). When no
grant children, between 10 and 12 years ofanswer age, is provided (3), she repeats part of it (4)
and of recordings made by these children in in their
a lower voice. Ada prefaces her answer (6) by
ordinary out-of-school activities. Excerpts rephrasing
1, 2, the task, mentioning the verb that
and 3 were collected in three of these classrooms. she has to conjugate, then the person, without
The second project investigated French as athe L2 number. Within the same turn, she suggests
classrooms in a high school in the German-speak- a first solution (irons 'we will go'), followed by a
ing part of Switzerland. The database consists of that is not taken by Eliane as an opportu-
pause
conversational classroom activities, including nitya for repair, and a second solution that self-re-
series of literature discussions that were based on pairs the first (non irez 'no, you will go'). It is in-
the reading of French novels or plays. Excerpt teresting
4 is that the first and the second solutions
drawn from this database. use the same format, whose repair is initiated by
Eliane by means of a strong correction initiator,
The Fundamentally Interactional Nature of EH? (9), and by the formulation of the regular
Classroom Tasks pattern that is expected (dis-moi toujours avec le:
pronom 'tell me with the: [personal] pronoun').
Let us first turn to our most basic claim, namelyAda self-repairs her first solution in the norma-
that a great deal of learning is profoundly tive format (nous irons) and then, after a new re-
506 The Modern LanguageJournal 88 (2004)
EXCERPT 1
Let's Continue with the Future
1 E: euh aller, (0.6) euh: Ada (0.7) deuxieme personne, pluriel,

eh to go, (0.6) eh: Ada (0. 7) second person, plural,
2 on repart dans le futur hein,
let's continue with the future ok,
3 (1.4)
4 E: ?deuxieme personne pluriel,0
second person plural,
5 (0.7)
6 A: aller (0.6) deuxieme personne (0.4) irons
to go (0. 6) second person (0. 4) will go (Ist ps. pl.)
7 (2.55)
8 non irez
no will go (2nd ps. pi.)

9 (0.4)
10 E: EH? dis-moi toujours avec le: pronom [(personnnel)
HEY? why don't you tell me with the: (personal) pronoun
11 A: [nous irons,
[we will go,
12 E: deu:xieme personne
second person
13 A: non vous irez
no you will go
14 E: vous irez. (0.4) .h faire, euh:: troisieme personne
you will go. (0.4) .h to do, eh: third person
15 pluriel (0.35) Dani
plural (0.35) Dani
16 D: faire, (0.4) troisieme (.) ils feront
to do, (0.4) third (.) they will do
17 E: ils feront. comment est-ce que t'ecris ca
they will do. how d 'ou write that
18 (1)
19 D: f a i (0.4) non f eu er (.) o en ?te?
fa i ((spelling)) (0.4) no f e r (.) o n ?t? ((spelling))
20 E: voila, ef eu, hein, (.) tout du long eu, alors que le verbe
right fe ((spelling)) ok right all long e while the verb
21 faire ef a i er eu. d'accord.(0.7).h etre:, (0.9) euhm
to do f a i r e. ((spelling)) ok. (0. 7) .h to be:, (0.9) uhm
22 premiere personne singulier (0.3) Ada
first person singular (0.3) Ada
23 (1.7)
24 A: ?etre?
?to be?
25 (3.4)
26 A: je serai,
I will be,
27 E: je serai. elles les savent bien hein? c'est vraiment
I will be. they know it well don't they? it's really
28 epatant, (0.35) je serai, tres bien. (1.4) euhm (.) veni:r,
stunning (0.35) I will be, very well. (1.4) ehm (.) to come,
29 (2.8) deuxieme personne singulier, Dani.
(2.8) second person singular, Dani
30 D: je v- non, tu viendras
I w- no, you will come

31 E: tuviendras. (.) terminaison?
you will come. (.) ending?
32 D: a [ es
a [ s ((spelling))
33 A [a es,
[a s, ((spelling))
34 E: voila.
right.
pair initiated by Eliane, her second solution that depend on the sequential format and un-
(13). The exercise is thereby organized in a way folding of turns at talk and on social practice
that secures the production not only of the ex- such as turn taking, answering, repairing, asses
pected grammatical form, but also of an ex- ing, and so forth. A successful accomplishmen
pected answer format. The latter seems to be of the task, as well as the fulfillment of its ped
even more strongly corrected than the former by gogical virtues, rests on the mutual identificatio
of the relevant linguistic forms that are ident
Eliane's initiation in line 9. In this way, the orga-
fied (verb, person, and number), the relevant
nization of the exercise directs the orientation of
all participants toward the appropriate pattern. turn formats to be used, and the purpose of th
This pattern is further developed in a contin-task (e.g., the difference between quoting an
spelling).
gent way with regard to the specific difficulty in-
volved: For instance, when the question involves
an irregular verb (such as faire 'to make, do' in
The Intertwining of Competencies
line 14), the correct answer is followed by an ex-
tra request, which focuses on the spelling of theEven if traditional grammar exercises are not
form (17). The spelling is initiated and then designed as communicative tasks, they are in-
self-repaired by Dani (19), who exhibits in the re-
deed interactionally achieved. Moreover, such
pair itself her orientation toward the difficultyactivities and the problem-solving tasks they im-
(which is further accentuated by her way of pro- ply always involve more than one type of compe-
nouncing the repaired letters eu, line 19). A simi-
tence. As a consequence, deploying and devel-
lar extra request is made in the last case (31),oping language competencies also means
and obtains two answers in two different formats
deploying and developing a complex set of (so-
(Dani providing a spelling; Ada pronouncing
cial, cultural, or historical) competencies.
both letters). In a locally occasioned way, theseIn Excerpt 2, the teacher, Therese (T), is do-
specificities are taken by Eliane as an opportu-
ing a grammar exercise on demonstratives, in-
nity to insist on a grammatical phenomenon volving
in different students: Mohammed (M),
her closings of the sequence (20), where she pro-
Bernardo (B), Pierre (P), Lorena (L), Karl (K),
vides an explanation in the form of a generaliza-
William (W), Ariane (A), Robert (R).
tion. Adjusting the requests to the specificities ofThe students are involved here in another
its object occasions variations of the exercise for-
grammar exercise that consists of using a no
mat that orient the participants' attention to- adding a demonstrative, and using it in a sen
ward their status as grammatical particularities. tence. Mohammed is selected (1) by the teach
In this way, the regularities and specificities Therese,
of and suggests a determiner + noun pa
the grammar are reflexively embodied in the (6). It is interesting that his selection takes tim
very sequential format-both stable and vari-
Therese just mentions his name, as if the pre
able-of the exercise. ous format of the exercise allows Mohammed to
The excerpt shows not only a grammar exer-without being given any extra instruc-
answer
tion. this
cise on verb forms but also practice on how Because he does not answer (2), Therese
exercise may be done acceptably. Moreover, this
repeats the task, in a way that deals with ballon
practice is clearly being accomplished(5)innot and
just as the previous-item, but also as the
through the interaction. The clarity and lastcom-
item in a series, thereby showing that instruc-
pleteness of the task formulation and accom-
tions take their recognizable character not in iso-
plishment are designed and recognized in lation
ways
but in sequentially built paradigms. The
EXCERPT 2
This Pencil Case
1 T: Mohammed?
2 (1.9)
3 T: au suivant
the next
4 (2.4)
5 T: le suivant, (0.5) apres ballon
the next, (0.5) after balloon
6 M: ah cette cette trousse
ah this this pencil case
7 T: ctte trousse, comment on ecrit
this pencil case, how do you write
8 (3)
9 M: t er[o (.) u[:
t r [o (.) u [:((spelling))
10 T: [ce:, [NON, trousse c'est ecrit. mais cette:
[c ((spelling))[NO, pencil case it's written. but thi:s
11 (1.4)
12 M: euh es eu=
ehm s e ((spelling))=
13 T: =ce,
= c, ((spelling))
14 M: c eu t (i) t eu
c e t (i) te ((spelling))>
15 T: ce eu, (.) [te eu.] (.) une phrase avec [()
c e, (.) [t e ((spelling)) (.) one phrase with [()
16 R: [c'estjuste]
[that's right]
17 B: [cette chaine,
[this chain,
18 T: ?chhhh::::::? (.) Lorena une phrase avec ce[tte (trousse)
?chhhh::::::? (.) Lorena a phrase with thi [s pencil case
19 L: [cette trousse
[this pencil case
20 est dans ma valise
is in my bag
21 T: ok[e:. (.) ou]ais:,
ok[ay:. (.) ye]ah:,
22 B: [()]
23 P: cette trousse est a moi
this pencil case is mine
24 J: ((cough))
25 K: cette trousse est [(0.3) dans ma:] (0.9) ma sac
this pencil case is [(0.3) in my: (fem.)] (0. 9) my (fem.) bag
26 J: [((cough)) ]
27 T: ?mon:,?
?my:, ? (masc.)
28 K: mon sac
my bag
29 T: sac.
bag.
30 (0.7)
31 T: fais une phrase avec cette trousse Ariane.

make a phrase with this pencil case Ariane.
32 (0.9)
33 T: cette, (0.4) trousse, (2) comment elle est? (2) cette trousse?
this, (0.4) pencil case, (2) how is it? (2) this pencil case?
34 B: hhhh,
35 (1.5)
36 T: elle est de quelle couleur cette trousse?
which color is this pencil case?
37 W: elle est rouge
it is red
38 A: rouge
red
item, cette trousse 'this pencil case,' is accepted by Ariane does not take the opportunity to an-
Therese (7), who then adds a new request. That swer (33, 35) until William (W) suggests a possi-
is, she asks Mohammed to spell it. Her formula- ble sentence (37), which is partially repeated by
tion of the request does not specify its object. Af- Ariane (rouge 'red,' 38). Ariane's difficulties, like
ter a 3-second silence, Mohammed answers by the ones encountered previously by Mohammed,
spelling the noun but not the determiner (9). exhibit the indexical character of Therese's in-
His turn is overlapped by the beginning of an structions. That is, they demonstrate the amount
other repair by Therese (10), which is followed of interpretive work, of socialization, of specific
by an explanation of the response's inadequacy school skills that are necessary to deal with these
(10). After a while, Mohammed gives a spelling, instructions. As problems arise, instructions tend
the initial letter of which is repaired by Therese to become more elaborated, their relevant tar-
(13). His spelling is accepted for all practical gets are reformulated and focused-but also dis-
purposes, by means of Therese's repetition of it placed (37). Possible misunderstandings and
(15) and another student's assessment (16). persisting difficulties show that making instruc-
At that point, although Therese extends the tions explicit does not simply imply that they will
activity focused on cette trousse by asking for it to be followed more accurately; rather, instructions
be to included in a sentence, another student, and their results remain embedded in the class-
Bernardo (B), suggests a new pair of items, cette room course of action. Moreover, the reformula-
chaine 'this chain' (17), demonstrating a diver- tion of instructions does not simply perpetuate
gent orientation toward the closing of the se- them, but reflexively reconfigures the task, alter-
quence-which is not accepted by Therese (18). ing it, adjusting it to presumed facilitating proce-
The request for a sentence is now repeated with dures.
the selection of the next student, Lorena (L), in In addition, different skilled orientations to-
line 18, who answers immediately (19-20). ward the task are embodied in different partici-
Bernardo again utters something that overlaps pation frameworks: Pierre and Karl do not par-
Therese's ratification, possibly showing his ori- ticipate in the same way as Ariane or Bernardo
entation toward the ending of that task. Pierre (22) do. Hence, for the teacher, a central issue is
(P) initiates a new phrase (23) and so does Karlhow to make them participate within a conver-
(K; 25). In this way, different students show dif-
gent definition of the ongoing sequence and its
ferent orientations toward the interactional possible completeness.
completion of the task, the problem being The to
excerpt demonstrates an important
know whether the task is complete after a first
point: Being recognized as a good student pre-
correct response or if the teacher expects fur-
supposes putting to work not only one's linguis-
ther responses coming from various students. tic competence, which focuses on academic
Therese orients toward the latter. She does not content, but also on one's socio-institutional
do this as a preplanned way of doing the competence.
exer- Being recognized as such involves
cise, but as an emergent response that results the proper way of formulating content as well as
from the collaborative volunteering of solutionsthe proper ways of participating in a specific in-
by other students, namely Pierre and Karl. She
structional setting. In general terms, we can as-
selects Ariane (A) as the next speaker (31). sume that this competence always combines
with the way learners are socialized into the pants involved and through their ongoing inter-
communities of practice in which they use the pretations of the instructional setting. This situ-
L2, whether as a student, an immigrant, or a ated and praxeological dimension of tasks also
professional person. means that learners themselves can be actively
This latter point is clearly corroborated by crit- involved in reconfiguring the task at hand, as in
ical experimental work undertaken within both Excerpt 3. In this excerpt, the students, Fabian
the psychosocial approach to development and (F), Pablo (P), Rita (R), and Beat (B), are in-
the sociocultural paradigm. For instance, work- volved by the teacher, Mrs. Klein (K), in an exer-
ing within the first of these approaches, cise that consists of finding nouns derived from
Perret-Clermont, Perret, and Bell (1991), re- verbs.
ported a series of experiments that showed that The teacher, Mrs. Klein, formulates the task by
their participants' cognitive processes in spatial asking for a verb corresponding to the verb
planning and other tasks administered within phrase mettre dans la terre 'to put into the earth.'
the Piagetian theoretical framework were often Fabian, in looking for the solution, repeats only
not centered on dealing with the logical and the noun terre 'earth' (3-4). In the absence of an
symbolic features of the task but were focused on adequate response, Mrs. Klein recasts her ques-
understanding the people, social contexts, and tion in other terms (6). Pablo provides the an-
interactions in which they were involved. The au- swer in overlap (7). This first sequence shows a
thors argued that social factors can no longer be serial format, similar to the previous examples.
"considered external independent variables af- Here again, we witness a reformulation and an
fecting the cognitive responses, but appear to be adjustment of the task-which first consists of
intrinsic parts of the process by which persons deriving verbs from nouns or nominalizing them
create meaning" (pp. 43-44). This idea is sup- and then in looking for a verb in response to the
ported by further findings reported by the same semantic context provided by Mrs. Klein (6).
authors, showing, for instance, that gender and The second sequence, initiated by Rita, shows
social class differences repeatedly observed in an alternative organization. Rita reads the next
pretest performances sometimes disappear by occurrence and immediately provides the ade-
the posttest, the participants having come to a quate solution, cri/crier 'scream/to scream' (14),
better understanding of the kind of reasoning which is accepted by the teacher (15). But she
that is expected to be displayed in the given con-
then adds a context in which the target form is
text. used. It is interesting that this context refers to
This finding is also in line with Rogoff's (1990)
the title of a painting. In this way, Rita does not
simply initiate a topical development out of the
observation, from a sociocultural perspective, ac-
cording to which the participant's cognitive per-exercise, but she also displays her ability to use
formance is the result of his or her interpreta- an abstract form, an isolated noun phrase, in a
tion not only of the cognitive dimensions of the relevant sociodiscursive context. Her proposal
task but also of its social meaning and the com- can be compared to Beat's (17): He also orients
municative situation through which the tasktoward is an autonomous noun phrase, but com-
administered. A more general and more radical pletes it (le cri [de/dans] la nuit, 'the scream
view was offered by Wittgenstein (1953), whose [of/in] the night'); he too refers to a cultural
arguments suggest that instructions are context,
in- a film title, as a relevant context of use
dexical in the sense that their execution always for the noun phrase. Like Rita, he orients toward
involves a range of possible interpretations a possible narrative by imitating the scream. But
(Garfinkel, 1967; Suchman, 1987). That is, the the cultural horizons of the students do not in-
terest Mrs. Klein in the same way, because she

possibility of following a rule rests on its situated
understanding. provides for a continuation of Rita's and not of
Beat's proposal (18). By asking about the name
The Interactional Reconfiguration of Tasks and of the painter, she deals with the visual arts as a
Their Social Mediation topic that can be fed into in an encyclopedic way.
In this manner, however, Mrs. Klein reacts to
The preceding discussion clearly shows that Rita's topic less as a teacher than as a cultivated
we cannot consider a task as something predeter-person.
mined by a curriculum, a program, a plan, or a It is not only the initial task that is reconfigured
scientific experiment. Rather, tasks are accom-by this topical sequencing, but also the relevant
plished in a locally contingent and socially dis- categorizations of the participants (Mondada,
tributed way through the actions of the partici-1999). Indeed, the participation framework itself
EXCERPT 3
The Scream in the Night
1 K: essayez de trouver un mot de la meme famille, (0.5) un

try to find a word of the samefamily, (0.5) a
2 verbe, (0.8) mettre dans la terre. ['comment tu dis?=
verb, (0. 8) to put into the earth. [?how do you say'=
3 F: [Oterre terre?
['earth earth'
4 0?comme terre ( )"?
0?like earth ( ) ?
5 (1)
6 K: q[uand quelqu'un est mo:rt (.) voila.
w[hen somebody is dead: (.) there you go.
7 P: [enterrer,
[to bury (lit. to put in the earth)
8 (0.6)
9 K: Pablo?
10 P: enterrer
to bury
11 K: en: [terrer.
to bur[y
12 R: [madame?
[missis ?
13 F: en:terrer.
to bury.=
14 R: =madame, 1i:, (.) crier, le cri.
= missis, there:, (.) to scream, the scream.
15 K: ouais.
yeah. =
16 R: =y a un tableau qui s'appelle le cri. il a &et vole (j'pense)
= there's a painting which is called the scream. it has been stolen (I think)
17 B: le cri, (dans/de) la nuit, (0.5) [aaaah
the scream, (in/oJ) the night, (0.5) [aaaah
18 K: [tu sais qui l'a fait?
[do you know who did it?
19 (0.9)
20 R: non
no
21 X: ( )
22 K: (c'etait pas Van Gogh)
(wasn't it Van Gogh)
23 A: non c'est Munch
no it's Munch
24 K: non, (0.5) qu[i?
no, (0.5) wh[o?
25 A: [c'est c'est Munch (0.25) le[::
[that's that's Munch (0.25) th[e::
26 K: [ah:: Munch,
27 (0.3) oui c'estjuste,
(0.3.) yes that's right,
28 (0.8)
29 A: c'est un p[eintre euh [norvegien
he is a norwegian eh painter
30 K: [( ) [c'esttres: (1) frappant. (0.6)
[( ) [it's very: (1) striking. (0.6)
31 c'estjuste.
that's right.
32 (2.3)
is modified, enlarging it to the researcher, In this literary discussion, the teacher follows
Agathe (A; 23, 25), who is normally silent, and up on a student's remark, asking in what sense
modifying the relevant categories (expert/nov- Eve had changed. Responding to the student's si-
ice instead of teacher/student) lence, he further comments on his questions be-
This intrusion of the out-of-school world is col- fore the student, Gilles, provides a first response
laboratively established, being initiated by a stu- (6-8), stating that Eve understands Peter's ac-
dent, accepted by the teacher, and taken up bytions. In the following turn (9-12), the teacher
the researcher; it allows the students to expressfirst confirms this assessment and then inquires
specific types of knowledge that are not linguisticabout the noun corresponding to the verb
in nature but encyclopedic; it radically modifiescomprendre 'to understand.' He thereby first ori-
the participation structure of the interaction andents to the activity of interpreting a piece of liter-
leads up to various asymmetric displays of knowl-ature (9-10), and then formulates a meta-
edge on the extracurricular topic. This modifica-linguistic question (10-11). This move, however,
tion gives the students the opportunity to be in- is not just a simple shift from a focus on commu-
volved differently in the exercise, to become nicative interaction to a focus on form. Rather,
more active, to solicit the teacher's attention ex- the focus on form is clearly embedded in a con-
plicitly, to initiate topics, to present their pointsversational exchange centered on the interpreta-
of view, and to provide contributions to talk thattion of Sartre's work.
are longer and more complex than before. The Various characteristics of the interactional ex-
students thus end up putting to work differentchange support this interpretation. Having
dimensions of their language and more diverse asked what noun corresponded to the verb
social competencies than before. comprendre 'to understand,' the teacher develops
Such observations draw our attention, amonghis question at the level of content, inquiring
other things, to the reciprocal nature not only ofabout Eve's character (10-12). The issue of lin-
task accomplishment but also of the processes ofguistic form is thereby embedded in the discus-
social mediation, focused on by Vygotsky. Theysion of a specific communicative content. Ac-
show that it is not simply experts who help learn-cordingly, Gilles does not confine himself to
ers solve specific linguistic problems but also providing a linguistic form but integrates this
learners who can help experts adapt their media-form into the expression c'est de la comprehension
tion to their own needs and possibilities. In other 'it's understanding' (13), thereby providing an
words, the learners themselves can be mediators answer to the question about Eve's character.
with regard to the experts' tasks (Pekarek Finally, the teacher himself evaluates the stu-
Doehler, 2002). Moreover, the relevance of cate- dent's response, thereby accomplishing a typical
gories, such as expert or learner, can be rede- initiation-reaction-evaluation format, while rein-
fined and renegotiated in the contingent courseserting the term comprehension 'understanding'
of the action (Mondada, 1999, 2000). into the talk about Sartre's work (14) and
contextualizing it in this way within the literature
discussion. At the same time, the teacher writes
The Permeability of Tasks and Potential Objects of
Learning the word on the blackboard. The parallel deploy-
ment of talk and writing by means of the use of
A consequence of the intertwining of various two tools of social mediation-one semiotic (lan-
competencies and types of knowledge on the guage, spoken and written) and the other mate-
one hand and the situated and socially config- rial (the chalk and blackboard)-allows at this
ured nature of learners' tasks on the other hand very moment for an explicit double focus on
content and form.
is that tasks are multilayered (involving linguis-
tic, socio-interactional, institutional work) and As a result, the focus on the noun compre-
that their targets (i.e., the potential objects hension
of 'understanding' has two parallel effects.
learning they are oriented to) are permeable It toallows the teacher to attract the students' at-
each other. Excerpt 4 is taken from a discussiontention to a lexical element and at the same time
between a high school teacher, Mr. Ecker (E), serves, on the conceptual level, to deepen the in-
and his students about "Les jeux sont faits" by terpretation of the play: Eve not only under-
Jean-Paul Sartre. The student in this excerpt, stands Peter, but what is more, she shows that she
Gilles (G), and the teacher are actually talking understands him. An understanding of the noun
about Pierre and Eve, the protagonists of the phrase la comprehension leads to a better under-
play. standing of the literary work. In this sense, the
EXCERPT 4
Understanding
1 E: et maintenant, est-ce que: vous avez dit qu'elle a

and now, di:d you say that she has
2 change? eh <je pense qu'elle a effectivement chang6 ((rapide))>, dans
changed? eh <I think that she has in fact changed ((fast))> in
3 quel sens, (5) qu'est-ce qu'elle montre ici, (0.5) vis-a-vis de
what sense, (5) what does she show here, (0.5) regarding
4 Pierre, (.) et vis-a-vis de son acte de ses actes politiques (4) etje
Pierre, (.) and in relation to his act to his political acts (4) and I
5 pense que ca c'est nouveau (.) dans le comportement d'Eve. (3)
think that that's new (.) in Eve's behavior. (3)
6 G: je pense qu'elle le comprend pourquoi il veut faire ca et: et elle
I think that she understands him why he wants to do that and: and she
7 elle essaye de (.) lui donner des forces (et elle lui dit) il y a aussi
she tries to (.) give him strength (and she tells him) there are also
8 des autres (.)
others (.)
9 E: exactement, (.) elle le comprend, elle veut lui donner ( ) la force
exactly, (.) she understands him, she wants to give him () the
10 necessaire oui donc le substantif (.) comprendre (0.5) elle fait preuve
necessary strength strength yes so the noun understand (0.5) she shows
11 la de quelle (.) qualite? (1) qu'on a encore pas tres bien ren- enfin
what quality ? there (.) which we have not yet very much en- well
12 qu'on n'a encore pas souvent rencontree chez elle, (0.5)
which we have not yet often encountered with her, (0.5)
13 G: c'est de la comprehension
it's understanding
14 E: voila n'est-ce pas elle fait preuve de comprehension vis-a-vis de des
yes right she shows understanding with regard to (singular)to (plural)
15 actes de Pierre ((note le terme au tableau)) <bon je pense ca c'est
Pierre's acts ((puts the term on the blackboard)) < well I think that's
16 une des phrases-cle de ce passage ((plus forte voix)) > ((continue))
that's one of the key sentences of this passage ((louder))> ((continues))
twofold orientation of teacher and students to-

tertwined orientations of the ongoing activities,
ward linguistic form and communicative content
revealing that tasks as well as activities are perme-
able, allowing for subtle transitions between
is perfectly incorporated in the task accomplish-
ment as an interactionally enacted activity.them.
These observations lead to three critical Finally, the example cited reveals the funda-
points. First, they cast some doubt on mental, multilayered character of discourse and
any cate-
gorical distinction between focus on languageform and learning activities. That is, language
focus on communicative content. Not useonly
in social
are contexts always involves the deploy-
formal tasks often organized as interactional ment of linguistic
ex- and discourse capacities as
changes (see Excerpt 1), but also a focus on form well as modes of interpreting and thinking
may imply a reconceptualization of content about communicative
that content and ways of acting
would not otherwise take place. This adequately is another within socioculturally relevant inter-
level where linguistic competencies interact action, patterns,
with and communicative cultures.
other types of knowledge and skill. This fact corroborates the idea that dealing with
Second, the simultaneity of a content-focused the linguistic aspect of the situation is insepara-
discussion and the material inscription ble of
from dealing with its socio-interactional and
a for-
mal element on the blackboard illustrates the in- contextual dimensions. In this way, language ac-
514 The Modem Language Journal 88 (2004)
quisition is inevitably tied to processes of social- and the collective configuration of their local
ization. relevancies, whether they are related to ordinary
or experimental tasks.
The Socio-Institutional Situatedness of Cognitive On this and other points, our observations
Processes converge with empirical studies that show that
cognitive skills are embedded in the actual activi-
The data analyzed here draw our attention not ties of members. That is, cognitive skills cannot
simply to the impact of socio-interactional fac- be extracted from these activities nor taken for
tors on cognitive development, which has been granted in a general, decontextualized way. An
richly documented in previous research, but also illustration of this point is provided in a study un-
to an aspect that has received only limited atten- dertaken by Cole (1995) and his team, who orga-
tion. Social interaction and the related coordina- nized a series of activities involving reading, writ-
tion of perspectives, activities, and cognitive ef- ing, and human-computer interaction tasks for
forts contribute to creating the task at hand, to children in primary school. These activities were
defining the problem to be solved, and thereby implemented in four different institutional con-
to shaping the context of learning, as well as the texts: a school, a library, a youth club, and a kin-
meaning of what learning is (cf. Chaiklin & Lave, dergarten. Results showed that the children were
1993; Coughlan & Duff, 1994). This process, of performing the tasks very differently from con-
course, raises crucial questions with regard totext to context, depending on their own inter-
the relevance of tasks as abstract predefined pretation of the setting and on the social rela-
problems to be solved and, instead, stresses theirtions developed in each of them.
local contingencies. In a study on arithmetic tasks, Lave (1988)
One of the conclusions we can draw is that the documented that participants show elaborate
dynamic dimension of social interaction involves skills in a practical context (such as calculating
ongoing transformations of activities and gives prices on the market or calories in the everyday
rise to a continuing emergence of new objects of preparation of meals) while sometimes obtain-
learning and of new potentials for learning. Thising very poor scores in formal tests. A fortiori,
issue is highly consequential-reaching far be-this study also cast doubt on the context-neutral
yond the classroom-for the way we collect and value of experimental tests, which are supposed
interpret data. It means that neither tasks nor to assess the abstract, general skills of partici-
learning situations have a priori definitions, nor pants. These tests also measure the participants'
do they trigger a predetermined individual ca- ability to respond to a particular social situation,
pacity. Rather, they demand that the learner put represented by the experimental device that
to work variable resources and adapt them con- transforms settings, reducing them to a con-
tinuously to the local contingencies of the ongo- trolled and constrained frame, largely dissoci-
ing activities. ated from the everyday activities of the partici-
Such observations raise some fundamental pants.
Suchas
questions about the possibility of treating tasks analyses not only draw our attention to
the researcher's paradox-or, more radically, to
a reliable means for testing individual competen-
the unavoidable
cies and of transposing tasks from one context to reflexivity of the researcher's
another. The data discussed here illustrate a work-but also underline that the situation set
point clearly made by McNamara (1996),up whofor studying language or other skills shapes
suggested that individual testing-and hence the the
participant's production. They also question
assessment of competencies put to work-is a
the possibility of transferring the manifestation
complex social situation that implies socialand assessment of competencies from one con-
rou-
text to the other and of regarding them in a
tines as well as cognitive skills and that requires
decontextualized way. In this sense, our analyses
the learner to put to work not only linguistic
problematize the very possibility of assessing a
competencies but also social and institutional
knowledge and skills. These skills include linguistic
the or cognitive competence indepen-
communicative means and interactive dently
proce-from social competence that interprets so-
dures that are necessary to interpret thecial situations and responds to them in adequate
situa-
tion and to act accordingly in order to solve ways.the
This finding calls for further investigations
task at hand. These phenomena draw ourinto the contextualized efficiency, variability,
atten-
tion to the contextualized nature of the learner's and adaptation of learners' competencies, as ob-
problem solving activities, and hence to served the in actual settings of social action. In this
socio-interactional deployment of competencies sense, and in order to develop a better under-
standing of L2 acquisition, it is as important topossibilities for learning, but also as an

investigate what learners are doing in various that participates in the ongoing constru
learning activities and settings as it is to investi-
the situation. In this sense, processes of
gate what they actually learn in these settings. tion-in-interaction can be understood as
the methods by which members constru
CONCLUSION ing environments, tasks, identities, and
(Pekarek Doehler, 2002).
In this article, we have developed a series of ar- this position not only stresses th
Finally,
guments inspired by ethnomethodology and CA
textual nature of activities and compet
and by the sociocultural approach to cognition
but, even more radically, invites us to q
and learning in order to explore somesome features
classic dichotomies regarding the
of classroom tasks and their consequences for a
of cognition that are fundamentally inc
socio-interactionist approach to learning. The a socio-interactional understan
ble with
analysis of classroom interactions showed how,and cognition-such as the dist
learning
through the details of the interactions' sequen- interior and exterior processes,
between
tial organization, a task can be collectively
ual andinter-
social dimensions, and universal or ab-
preted and even transformed, how the resolu-
stract capabilities and contextualized ones (see
tion of a problem necessarily involves various
Coulter, 1989; Firth & Wagner, 1997; Lave &
embedded linguistic, interactional, institutional
Wenger, 1991; Rampton, 1997; Rogoff, 1990).
competencies, and how the ongoing and In reflex-
summary, this position implies that we need
ive redefinition of the task affects the to
potentiali-
go far beyond merely postulating activity as a
ties and the objects of learning as well contextual
as the un- phenomenon. It requires us to recog-
derstanding of what learning is. nize that cognitive processes in general and lan-
In this sense, rather than emphasizing theacquisition
guage im- in particular are publicly de-
pact of socio-interactional factors on ployed,
cognitivesocio-interactionally configured, and
development, we have focused on thecontextually
idea that contingent. Although there is ad-
social interaction and the related coordination
mittedly still a long way to go before we can
of perspectives, activities, and cognitive efforts
model this concept of cognition in terms of con-
contribute to creating the task at hand, to defin-
crete cognitive processes with any accuracy, the
ing the problem to be solved, and thereby to
interactionist approach to L2 acquisition, which
shaping the context of learning as well as the
focuses on the local activities, practices, and
meaning of what learning is. Several conse-
tasks that learners are performing in their every-
quences emanate from these observations.
day lives, participates in a broad framework of
Eirst, if interactional activities are the funda-
contemporary research that allows us to deepen
mental organizational tissue of learners' experi-
its praxological understanding.
ences, then their competence cannot be defined
in purely individual terms as a series of potential-
ities enclosed in the mind of an individual, but
need to be conceived of as capacities that are em- NOTES
bedded and expressed in collective action. De-

ploying and developing language competencies 1 Some of the interactionist SLA work has received
is contingent on deploying and developing a no attention in the Anglophone literature, perhaps be-
complex set of (social, cultural, historical) com- cause it has (almost exclusively) been published in
petencies. In this sense, learning to participate French. Since the 1990s, a distinct European tradition
in L2 discourse activities, to discuss or defend a in SLA has developed, which has so far had little effect
position, to solicit help or to instruct, or to en- on the cognitively oriented mainstream SLA work in
gage in team work or in collaborative prob- the United States. This European tradition is inspired
lem-solving tasks involves socioculturally valued by conversation analysis and is concerned with the dif-
interactional competencies that are objects of ferent interactional patternings of learning occasions
and situations, which include negotiation sequences,
development themselves, and are at the same
different types of classroom interactions, and different
time contingent on other objects of learning.
interactional formats for learning (see, e.g., the papers
Second, the social construction of the learning collected by Arditty & Vasseur, 1999, and Pekarek
situation also calls for a revision of the
Doehler, 2000). Although not explicitly drawing from
Vygotskian concept of social mediation,
theories inviting
of situated learning (or cognition) and being
us to look at mediation not only as a means
committed of
to different degrees to CA's analytic men-
collaboratively solving a problem and
tality,creating
these studies provide interesting insights into
the social accomplishment of interactional opportuni- Faerch, C., & Kasper, G. (Eds.). (1983). Strategies in
ties for L2 development. interlanguage communication. London: Longman.
2 Notice, for example, how Garfinkel and Sacks Firth, A., & Wagner, J. (1997). On discourse, commu-
(1970) spoke of the "mastery of natural language" (p. nication, and some fundamental concepts in
342). SLA research. Modern LanguageJournal, 81, 285-
3 It is worth noting that work emanating from a 300.
sociocultural approach and CA (and more generally Francis, D., & Hester, S. (Eds.). (2000). Ethnomethod-
situated cognition) is brought together in collective ological studies of education. Amsterdam: John
volumes-in domains other than L2 acquisition-such Benjamins.
as those by Chaiklin and Lave (1993) and Engestrom Gajo, L., & Mondada, L. (2000). Acquisition et interac-
and Middleton (1996). tion en contextes [Acquisition and interaction in
contexts]. Fribourg, Switzerland: Editions
Universitaires.
Garfinkel, H. (1963). A conception of, and experi-

REFERENCES
ments with, "trust" as a condition of stable con-
certed actions. In O. J. Harvey (Ed.), Motivation
and social interaction (pp. 187-238). New York:
Arditty,J., & Vasseur, M.-T. (Eds.). (1999). Interaction
Ronald Press.
et langue 6trangere [Social interaction and for-
Garfinkel, H. (1967). Studies in ethnomethodology.
eign language; Special issue]. Langages, 134.
Bange, P. (1992). A propos de la communication et Englewood
de Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Garfinkel,
l'apprentissage de L2 [On communication and H. (2001). Ethnomethodology's program. Lon-
don: Bowman & Littlefield.
L2 learning]. Acquisition et Interaction en Langue
Etrangre-AILE, 1, 53-85. Garfinkel, H., & Sacks, H. (1970). On formal struc-
tures of practical actions. In J. D. McKinney & E.
Cicourel, A. V. (1974). Language use and school perfor-
mance. New York: Academic Press. A. Tiryakian (Eds.), Theoretical sociology (pp. 337-
Cole, M. (1985). The zone of proximal development:366). New York: Appleton-Century Crofts.
Gass, S. M., & Varonis, E. M. (1985). Task variation and
Where culture and cognition create each other.
InJ. V. Wertsch (Ed.), Culture, communication and nonnative/nonnative negotiation of meaning.
cognition. Vygotskian perspectives (pp. 146-161). In S. M. Gass & C. G. Madden (Eds.), Input in sec-
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. ond language acquisition (pp. 149-161). Rowley,
Cole, M. (1995). Cultural-historical psychology: AMA: Newbury House.
meso-genetic approach. In L. M. W. Martin,Hall,K. J. K. (1993). The role of oral practices in the ac-
Nelson, & E. Tobach (Eds.), Sociocultural psychol- complishment of our everyday lives: The
sociocultural dimension of interaction with im-
ogy. Theory and practice of doing and knowing (pp.
168-204). Cambridge: Cambridge University plications for the learning of another language.
Press. Applied Linguistics, 14, 145-167.
Coughlan, P., & Duff, P. (1994). Same task, different Hatch, E. (Ed.). (1978). Second language acquisition-A
activities: Analysis of a SLA task from an activity book of readings. Rowley, MA: Newbury House.
theory perspective. In J. P. Lantolf & G. Appel He, A. W. (2004). CA for SLA: Arguments from the
(Eds.), Vygotskian approaches to second language re- Chinese language classroom. Modern Language
search (pp. 173-193). Norwood, NJ: Ablex. Journal, 88, 568-582.
Coulter,J. (1989). Mind in action. London: Polity Press. Kasper, G. (2004). Participant orientations in conver-
de Pietro,J.-F., Matthey, M., & Py, B. (1989). Acquisi- sation-for-learning. Modern LanguageJournal, 88,
551-567.
tion et contrat didactique: Les sequences
potentiellement acquisitionnelles dans la con-Krafft, U., & Dausendschon-Gay, U. (1993). La
versation exolingue [Acquisition and didactic sequence analytique [The analytic sequence].
contract: Potentially acquisitional sequences in Bulletin CILA, 57, 137-157.
exolingual conversation]. In D. Weil & H. Krafft, U., & Dausendsch6n-Gay, U. (1994). Analyse
Fougier (Eds.), Actes du 3e Colloque Rigional de conversationnelle et recherche sur l'acquisition
Linguistique (pp. 99-124). Strasbourg, France: [Conversation analysis and research on acquisi-
Universite des Sciences Humaines. tion]. Bulletin VALS/ASLA, 59, 127-158.
Donato, R. (1994). Collective scaffolding in second
Lantolf, J. P. (Ed.). (2000). Sociocultural theory and sec-
language learning. In J. P. Lantolf & G. Appelond language learning. Oxford: Oxford University
Press.
(Eds.), Vygotskian approaches to second language re-
search (pp. 33-56). Norwood, NJ: Ablex. Lantolf,J. P., & Appel, G. (Eds.). (1994). Vygotskian ap-
Ellis, R. (2003). Task based language learning and teach-
proaches to second language research. Norwood, NJ:
ing. New York: Oxford University Press. Ablex.
Engestrom, Y., & Middleton, D. (Eds.). (1996). Lantolf,J.

Cogni- P., & Pavlenko, A. (1995). Sociocultural the-
tion and communication at work. Cambridge: Cam- ory and second language acquisition. Annual Re-
bridge University Press. view of Applied Linguistics, 15, 108-124.
Lave,J. (1988). Cognition in practice: Mind, mathematics, kind of models for second language research?].
and culture in everyday life. Cambridge: Cambridge Acquisition et Interaction en Langue Etrangere-AILE,
University Press. 12, 147-174.
Mori,J. (2002). Task design, plan, and development of
Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legiti-
mate peripheral participation. New York: Cam- talk-in-interaction: An analysis of a small group
bridge University Press. activity in aJapanese language classroom. Applied
Lerner, G. H. (1995). Turn design and the organiza- Linguistics, 23, 323-347.
tion of participation in instructional activities.Mori, J. (2004). Negotiating sequential boundaries
Discourse Processes, 19, 111-131. and learning opportunities: A case from a Japa-
Long, M. H. (1983). Native speaker/non-native nese language classroom. Modern Language Jour-
speaker conversation and the negotiation of com- nal, 88, 536-550.
prehensible input. Applied Linguistics, 4, 126-141. Ochs, E. (1988). Culture and language development: Lan-
Long, M. H. (1996). The role of the linguistic environ- guage acquisition and language socialization in a Sa-
ment in second language acquisition. In W. moan village. Cambridge: Cambridge University
Ritchie & T. Bhatia (Eds.), Handbook of second lan- Press.
guage acquisition (pp. 413-467). San Diego, CA: Ohta, A. (2001). Second language acquisition process in the
Academic Press. classroom: Learning Japanese. Mahwah, NJ:
Macbeth, D. (1990). Classroom order as practical Erlbaum.
ac-
tion: The making and unmaking of a quiet re- S. (1999). Lefons de conversation: Dynamiques de
Pekarek,
proach. British Journal of the Sociology of Education,
l'interaction et acquisition de compitences discursives
11, 189-214. en classe de langue seconde [Conversation lessons:
Markee, N. (1994). Toward an ethnomethodological Interactional dynamics and acquisition of dis-
respecification of second language acquisitioncourse competencies in the second language
studies. In E. Tarone, S. M. Gass, & A. Cohen classroom]. Fribourg, Switzerland: Editions
(Eds.), Research methodology in second language ac- Universitaires.
quisition (pp. 89-116). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum. Pekarek Doehler, S. (Ed.). (2000). Approches
Markee, N. (2000). Conversation analysis. Mahwah, NJ: interactionnistes de l'acquisition des langues
Erlbaum. etrangeres [Interactionist approaches to foreign
Markee, N., & Kasper, G. (2004). Classroom talks: Anlanguage acquisition; Special issue]. Acquisition et
introduction. Modern Language Journal, 88, 491- Interaction en Langue Etrangere-AILE, 12.
500. Pekarek Doehler, S. (2002). Mediation revisited: The
McHoul, A. (1978). The organization of turns at for- socio-interactional organization of mediation in
mal talk in the classroom. Language in Society, 7, learning environments. Mind, Culture and Activ-
183-213. ity, 9, 22-42.
Perret-Clermont, A.-N., Perret,J.-F., & Bell, N. (1991).
McHoul, A. (1990). The organization of repair in class-
room talk. Language in Society, 19, 349-377. The social construction of meaning and cogni-
McNamara, T. F. (1996). Measuring second language per- tive activity in elementary school children. In L.
formance. London: Longman. B. Resnick,J. M. Levine, & S. D. Teasley (Eds.),
Mehan, H. (1979). Learning lessons. Social organization Perspectives on socially shared cognition (pp. 41-62).
in the classroom. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Univer- Washington, DC: American Psychological Associ-
sity Press. ation.
Mondada, L. (1999). L'accomplissement de l"'etran- Py, B. (1991). Bilinguisme, exolinguisme et acquisi-

geite" dans et par l'interaction: Procedures de tion: Role de LI dans l'acquisition de L2 [Bilin-
categorisation des locuteurs [The accomplish- gualism, exolingualism, and acquisition: The
ment of "strangeness" within and through inter- role of the LI in L2 acquisition]. TRANEL, 17,
action. Categorization processes of speakers]. 147-161.
Langages, 134, 20-34. Rogoff, B. (1990). Apprenticeship in thinking: Cognitive

Mondada, L. (2000). La competence de cate- development in social context. New York: Oxford
gorisation: Procedes situes de categorisation des University Press.
ressources linguistiques [Categorization compe- Sacks, H., Schegloff, E. A., & Jefferson, G. (1974). A
tence. Situated categorization processes of lin- simplest systematics for the organization of
guistic resources]. In P. Martinez & S. Pekarek turn-taking for conversation. Language, 50, 696-
Doehler (Eds.), La notion de contact de langues en 735.
didactique [The notion of language contact in Schegloff, E. A. (1991). Conversation analysis and so-
didatics] (pp. 81-101). Fontenay/ Saint-Cloud, cially shared cognition. In L. B. Resnick,J. M. Le-
France: Editions ENS. vine, & S. D. Teasley (Eds.), Perspectives on socially
Mondada, L., & Pekarek Doehler, S. (2000). Interac- shared cognition (pp. 150-171). Washington, DC:
tion sociale et cognition situee: Quels modeles American Psychological Association.
pour la recherche sur l'acquisition des langues? Schegloff, E. A., & Sacks, H. (1973). Opening up
[Social interaction and situated cognition. What closings. Semiotica, 8, 289-327.
518 The
The Modern
ModernLanguage
LanguageJournal
Journal
88 (2004)
88 (2004)
Suchman,
Suchman,L.L.(1987).
(1987).
Plans
Plans
as situated
as situated
actions.
actions.
Cam- Cam- vine,
vine, &&S.S.D.D.Teasley
Teasley(Eds.),
(Eds.),
Perspectives
Perspectives
on socially
on socially
bridge:
bridge:Cambridge
Cambridge University
University Press.
Press. shared
shared cognition
cognition(pp. (pp.
85-100).
85-100).
Washington,
Washington, DC: DC:
Vygotsky,
Vygotsky,L.L.S.S.
(1978).
(1978).
Mind
Mindin society.
in society.
Cambridge, MA: MA: American
Cambridge, AmericanPsychological
Psychological Association.
Association.
Harvard
HarvardUniversity
University Press.
Press. Wertsch,J.
Wertsch,J.V.V.(1991b).
(1991b).Voices
Voices
of of
thethe
mind:
mind:
A socio-cultural
A socio-cultural
Wagner,
Wagner,J.J.(1996).
(1996).
Foreign
Foreign
language
language
acquisition
acquisition approach
approachto
tomediated
mediatedaction.
action.
London:
London:
Harvester
Harvester
through
throughinteraction.
interaction.
Journal
Journal
of Pragmatics, 26, 26, Wheatsheath.
of Pragmatics,
215-235. Wittgenstein, L. (1953). Philosophical investigations. Ox-
Wertsch,J. V. (1991a). A sociocultural approach to so- ford, UK: Bla
ckwell.
cially shared cognition. In L. B. Resnick,J. M. Le-
Tribute to Phyllis Franklin
Phyllis
PhyllisFranklin,
Franklin,
Executive
Executive
Director
Director
Emerita
Emerita
of the Modern
of the Language
Modern Association
Language Association
(MLA), died on
(MLA),
Au- died
gust 20, 2004.
Franklin was born in 1932, grew up in Poughkeepsie, New York, graduated from Vassar College in
1954, and received MA and PhD degrees from the University of Miami. She taught American literature
and women's studies at the University of Miami until 1980. After a year as an American Council on Ed-
ucation fellow, she served as director of English programs and the Association of Departments of Eng-
lish for the MLA from 1981 until 1985. She was executive director of the MLA from 1985 until her re-
tirement in 2002.
The recipient of honorary degrees from George Washington University (1986), Rollins College
(2001), and Clark University (2001), Dr. Franklin was also named, in March, 2004, the recipient of the
ADE Frances Andrew March Award for Distinguished Service to the Profession by the Association of
Departments of English.
As executive director, Dr. Franklin strengthened the finances of the MLA, initiated survey projects
about curriculum and trends across the field, and worked to expand the scope of the MLA International
Bibliography and to develop outreach projects such as the MLA-sponsored radio program "What's the
Word?" She was the editor of Preparing a Nation 's Teachers ( 1999), a collection of essays reporting on the
3-year MLA teacher-education project that she initiated.
A strong believer in the importance of humanities education and an informed citizenry, she worked
during the 1980s to counter efforts to cut federal funding for the humanities. In 1991, she led the ef-
fort to ensure that only the most highly qualified individuals would serve on the Advisory Council to
the National Endowment for the Humanities.
In honor of her service to the profession, when Franklin retired, the MLA Executive Counc
lished the Phyllis Franklin Award for Public Advocacy of the Humanities. Memorial contribution
be made to the Franklin award: MLA, 26 Broadway, 3rd floor, New York, NY 10004-1789.
Her inspiration and dedication were a driving force in the profession.
Source: MLA Newsletter. 36(3), 2004, p. 1.

2004 - Mondada - Pekarek - Second Language Acquisiciton As Situated Practice

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

2004 - Mondada - Pekarek - Second Language Acquisiciton As Situated Practice

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

2004 - Mondada - Pekarek - Second Language Acquisiciton As Situated Practice

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Second Language Acquisition as Situated Practice: Task Accomplishment in the French

Second Language Classroom

National Federation of Modern Language Teachers Associations, Wiley are collaborating

Universite de Lyon II Institut de Philologie Romane et de Linguistique

F 69342 Lyon Cedex Espace Louis Agassiz 1

Email: Lorenza.Mondada@univ-lyon2.fr Switzerland

This article provides an empirically based perspective on the contribution of conversation

1 E: euh aller, (0.6) euh: Ada (0.7) deuxieme personne, pluriel,

no will go (2nd ps. pi.)

I w- no, you will come

31 T: fais une phrase avec cette trousse Ariane.

terest Mrs. Klein in the same way, because she

The Scream in the Night

1 K: essayez de trouver un mot de la meme famille, (0.5) un

1 E: et maintenant, est-ce que: vous avez dit qu'elle a

twofold orientation of teacher and students to-

standing of L2 acquisition, it is as important topossibilities for learning, but also as an

bedded and expressed in collective action. De-

Garfinkel, H. (1963). A conception of, and experi-

Engestrom, Y., & Middleton, D. (Eds.). (1996). Lantolf,J.

Mondada, L. (1999). L'accomplissement de l"'etran- Py, B. (1991). Bilinguisme, exolinguisme et acquisi-

Langages, 134, 20-34. Rogoff, B. (1990). Apprenticeship in thinking: Cognitive

Tribute to Phyllis Franklin

Source: MLA Newsletter. 36(3), 2004, p. 1.

You might also like