Abstract Summary
In comparing the effectiveness of language modes in dyadic, computer-mediated communication, van Mulken & Hendriks (2014) found that L1–L2 interactions in (neighbor) German and Dutch were more effective in realising communicative goals (spot-the-ten-differences) than the ELF interactions. Besides the use of different communication strategies we captured also some more linguistic discourse-driven differences in the patterns that were used in the German/Dutch versus the ELF language modes.
Abstract :
In investigating new plurilingual methods for learning a new (neighbor) language, we carried out a follow-up experiment on the basis of van Mulken & Hendriks (2014) findings with students from Universität Münster (BA and MA of Arts, Germanistisches Institut) and Nijmegen (Radboud University, BA and ReMa of Arts, Language and Communication). In comparing the effectiveness of language modes in dyadic, computer-mediated communication, van Mulken & Hendriks (2014) found that L1–L2 interactions in (neighbor) German and Dutch were more effective in realising communicative goals (spot-the-ten-differences) than the ELF interactions. Besides the use of different communication strategies (such as more meta-descriptions in German/Dutch than in ELF), we captured also some more linguistic discourse-driven differences in the patterns that were used in the German/Dutch versus the ELF language modes.
In a more psycholinguistic-oriented designed experiment we compared first some pilot L1-analyses of monologues (picture descriptions) and spot-the-difference dialogues (CMC via Facebook messenger, as was used by van Mulken & Hendriks, 2014) by native speakers of English, French, German and Dutch. These analyses demonstrated that these different mother language speakers employ different strategies to structure their monologue picture descriptions and their dialogues. As we have found previously in investigating differences in spatial descriptions: Dutch/German speakers emphasize where they see things on a picture whereas English/French speakers use what they see as a structuring principle. These pilot results seem to suggest that in German Dutch native non-native interactions in the classroom, the Dutch-German interaction works better than ELF, both for communication as for information-discourse reasons. In the present acquisition study we will present our findings of this new more psycholinguistic-oriented experiment on the basis of CMC chat-dialogue interactions between native and non-native speakers of German and Dutch (in Dutch - German as neighbor receptive multilingualism versus ELF).
