|
controlled information processing
.
If inferencing leads to the formation of working hypotheses,
structuring
,
which is a higher level of processing, contributes to the establishment of
mental representations. As we learn from schema theory, which explains
how the human mind organizes knowledge in long-term memory (Schank
& Abelson, 1977), the faster the testing and refinement of working hypoth-
eses, the swifter the formation of mental representations and greater the
chances of limited capacity, working-memory systems being purged and re-
placed by permanent long-term memory schemas. Memory schemas are re-
sponsible for storing incoming information, retrieving previously stored in-
formation, and pattern-matching mental representations (McClelland et
al., 1986). This transition from working memory systems to permanent
memory schemas is critical because, as we learn from schema theorists, lan-
guage use requires that linguistic units such as phonemes, morphemes,
words, phrases, syntactic patterns, and other discourse units be abstracted
and stored in the form of memory schemas.
Repeated cycles of hypothesis formation, testing, and confirmation or
rejection, and the construction of memory schemas mediated by intake
processes, particularly by the process of structuring, result in the strength-
ening of mental representations of the TL, thereby considerably increasing
the learners’ ability to gain a greater analysis of and a better control over
the properties and principles of the TL system. Any remaining gap in the
establishment of mental representations is taken care of either by further
opportunities for intentional corrective learning or by the activation of the
process of restructuring.
Restructuring
, as mentioned earlier, represents
LEARNING: FACTORS AND PROCESSES
51
quick insight formation that could result in incidental learning whereby
complex and hitherto unclear language problems are teased out paving
way for accurate decisions about the TL system. This level of intake process-
ing, where the complex and combined processes of inferencing, structur-
ing, and restructuring gradually assist the learners in internalizing the L2
system and in accessing the system for effective communicative use, consti-
tutes a part of what has been called
automatic information processing
.
An important point to remember in the overall process of internaliza-
tion of the L2 system is that each of the intake processes is facilitated as well
as constrained, not merely by the availability and accessibility of linguistic
input and the interplay of intake factors, but also by the role played by
learner output. The arrows connecting input and output (Fig. 2.5) suggest
that learner output is not a terminal point; it is rather a part in a cycle serv-
ing as an important source of input data for the learner thereby affecting
the course of L2 development.
The interactive framework of intake processing described here incorpo-
rates several aspects of parallel distributed processing at both micro and
macro levels. At the micro level, intake processing is considered to involve a
large number of parallel, simultaneous, and interacting processes such as
perception, syntactic parsing, and semantic interpretation, and the selec-
tion of whatever input information is relevant and useful, be it phonologi-
cal, syntactic, semantic, or pragmatic. The development of a particular syn-
tactic rule, for example, depends often on the development of a rule in
some other domain, say a phonological or lexical rule, or vice versa (Ard &
Gass, 1987; Klein, 1990). Following the
connectionist perspective
, the intake
processing network is seen as a continual strengthening or weakening of in-
terconnections in response to the language input encountered by learners,
and to the language use employed by them.
At the macro level, the framework posits a criss-cross interplay among in-
take factors on one hand, and between them, and intake processes on the
other hand. Most of the intake factors appear to interweave and interact
with each other in a synergic relationship where the whole is greater than
the sum of the parts. How the learner seeks, recognizes, attends to, and
controls the input data depend to a large extent on the synergy of intake
factors.
The interactive framework also suggests that the linguistic input is not
processed linearly by proceeding step by step from one intake factor
through another, or from one intake process through another. Instead, the
entire operation is seen as interactive and parallel, responding simulta-
neously to all available factors and processes at a given point of time. In
other words, none of the intake factors by themselves seems to be a
prerequi-
site
for another to be activated but each is considered to be a
corequisite
. The
processing of input data is never consistent; it varies according to varying
52
CHAPTER 2
degrees of influence brought to bear on it by an unstable and as yet un-
known configuration of intake factors and intake processes. Different in-
take factors and intake processes take on different statuses in different learn-
ing contexts, thereby significantly affecting the learners’ working hypotheses
about the TL and their strategies for learning and using it. The configuration
also varies widely within an individual learner at different times and situa-
tions of learning, and also between learners, thereby accounting for wide
variations in the degree of attainment reached by learners.
Do'stlaringiz bilan baham: |
