blyth-1997-the modern language journal

A Constructivist Approach to Grammar: Teaching Teachers to Teach Aspect CARL BLYTH Department OfFrench &Italian University of Texas at Austin Awtin, TX 78712-1197 Email: cblyth@mail,utexas.edu

This article demonstrates how a constructivist approach to teacher education helps inexperienced teachers understand the learning and teaching of aspect, a core grammatical concept. By consciously experiencing the process of narration (i.e., how a speaker perceives real or imagined events and then organizes perceptions into a coherent recounting of events), apprentice teachers construct a deeper awareness of the form/meaning aspectual correlations of the target language. More generally, this study argues that a constructivist approach to teacher education facilitates the development of an innovative grammar pedagogy by challenging TAss traditional beliefs about the nature of grammar.

MOST FOREIGN LANGUAGE TEACHERS gradually develop a personal set of eclectic beliefs about the teaching and learning of grammar based on a variety of sources: their language learning and teaching experiences, teacher education courses, participation in conferences and workshops, and frequent discussions with other foreign language teachers.

Although many teaching practices are taught explicitly and learned consciously in teacher education programs, others are simply picked up or constructed in the process of becoming a teacher, a process akin to acculturation (Caz- den, 1988). In this respect, teachers of foreign languages are no different than teachers of other subjects or disciplines who also tend to develop their eclectic beliefs and practices over time (Clark, 1988; Cohen & Ball, 1990).

Although such pedagogical eclecticism may represent a healthy skepticism of educational innovations, it is not always enlightened. Many foreign language teachers hold traditional beliefs about explicit grammar instruction that are no longer supported by current research in

The M o d a Language Juuntal, 81, i (1997)

01997 The M o d a Language Juurnal 0026-7902/97/50-66 $1.50/0

linguistics and second language acquisition (Lee & VanPatten, 1995; VanPatten, 1996). In particular, many teachers wedded to traditional methods of grammar instruction resist learner- centered or constructivist approaches to learning. These teachers persist in their beliefs that the sequence of a grammatical syllabus can be derived unproblematically and in a priori fashion from a given language and that communicative skills and metalinguistic awareness can be taught adequately through teacher explanation of grammatical rules, followed by mechanical drills and an occasional communicative exercise.

Given the misconceptions underiying the teaching of grammar, how can teacher preparation programs help apprentice teachers shift their focus from teaching to learning? How can teachers-in-training construct pedagogical practices that are more firmly based on what is currently known about the way foreign languages are learned rather than on orthodox, nor- mative beliefs about how languages should be taught? In an attempt to answer these questions, this essay examines the teaching and learning of aspect, specifically the distinction between the preterit and imperfect tenses of the Romance languages, for example, the wsi compare and the impurfuit in French; the pretkto and the imperfect0 in Spanish.

Curl Blyth

Aspect is a core grammatical concept, yet frequently it is poorly understood by students of French and Spanish (Connor, 1992; Ozete, 1987). Kaplan (1987) states that this aspectual opposition is perceived by teachers as particularly problematic for English-speaking learners of French (p. 53)* and Garcia and van Putte (1988) claim that it constitutes one of the major difficulties encountered by native speakers of Germanic languages in the learning of Spanish (p. 263). Graduate teaching assistants (TAs) often find aspect difficult to teach because they themselves lack a clear understanding of it. What I shall argue below is that constructivism provides a beneficial framework for teacher education programs because it allows teachers to gain essential technical knowledge about grammar while also gaining insight into beliefs concerning pedagogical practices.

51

development, learning is development; (b) disequilibrium facilitates learning; (c) reflective abstraction is the driving force of learning; (d) dialogue within a community engenders further thinking; (e) learning proceeds towards the development of . . . central organizing principles that can be generalized across experiences and that often require the undoing or reorganizing of earlier conceptions (pp. 29- 30). These general principles point to a learner- centered pedagogy in which the teacher acts as a facilitator of active and personalized learning rather than as an expert dispensing prepared information.

CONSTRUCTIVISM

Constructivism is a theory of learning and knowledge closely associated with the work of several well-known psychologists: Jean Piaget, Lev Vygotsky, Jerome Bruner, and Howard Gard- ner. The most fundamental and radical epis- temological principle of constructivism holds that knowledge does not and can not have the purpose of producing representations of an in- dependent reality, but instead has an adaptive function (von Glaserfeld, 1996, p. 3). In other words, constructivism rejects the idea that human knowledge is a direct reflection of an ob- jective reality. A constructivist would argue that every human being constructs his or her own version of reality. As a consequence, multiple realities or multiple ways of knowing are to be expected in the classroom. Fosnot (1996a) states the following:

[the constructivist perspective is viewed as] a self- regulatory process of struggling with the conflict between existing personal models of the world and discrepant new insights, constructing new representations and models of reality as a human meaning-making venture with culturally developed tools and symbols, and further negotiating such meaning through cooperative social activity, discourse, and debate. (p. ix)

Although constructivism has become an important poststructuralist psychological theory of learning, it does not translate neatly into a set of pedagogical practices. Nevertheless, Fosnot (1996b) suggests five general principles of constructivism with obvious applications to educational practice: (a) Learning is not the result of

TRADITIONAL GRAMMAR TEACHING

Largely unchanged for decades, the presentation of grammar in foreign language textbooks and classrooms continues to be based on an outdated combination of behaviorism, struc- turalist linguistics, and versions of audiolingual- ism and cognitive-code theory. In general, these traditional presentations of grammar are characterized by a strict sequence of drills as formulated by Paulston (1972): First learners practice grammatical structures via mechanical drills, then meaningful drills, and last, communicative drills. To perform a mechanical drill, students do not need to attach any meaning to the grammatical form being practiced. The classic example of a mechanical drill is the transformational exercise in which students manipulate or transform an isolated grammatical item, typically a verb conjugation or a nominal inflection. Like mechanical drills, meaningful drills have only one correct response, however, they require students to understand both the stimulus and the response. Communicative drills also require the student to understand the meaning of the stimulus and the response, but differ from meaningful drills in that there is no single correct answer.

Lee and VanPatten (1995) note that Paul- stons grammatical sequence was in keeping with the period of language teaching domi- nated by behaviorism, which emphasized observ- able behavior, avoidance of errors, and habit formation (p. 91). Today, however, such a traditional presentation of grammar is at odds with what is known and widely accepted about the role of input in first and second language acquisition. Traditional approaches pay little, if any, attention to the effects of input on the develop- ing grammatical system of a learner and instead focus almost entirely on output or linguistic

52

production. VanPatten (1996, p. 59) claims that the most serious problem for traditional approaches to grammar is the mismatch between theory and practice, between the important role attributed to input in current theory and the lack of input in current practice:

With its emphasis on output practice, a traditional approach to grammar instruction ignores the crucial role of input in second language acquisition- and the definition of input in second language acquisition does not include instructors explanations about how the second language works. The definition of input is limited to meaning-bearing input, language that the learner hears or sees that is used to communicate a message. Thus, in traditional instruction, learners practice a form or structure, but they are not getting the input that is needed to construct the mental representation of the structure itself. (VanPatten, 1996, p. 6)

Despite recent theoretical developments that question a strict sequence of grammar drills, the emphasis on output practice remains wide- spread largely because it is supported by entrenched beliefs among foreign language teachers: the belief that the grammar of a language consists of a series of isolated facts called grammar points, and the conviction that grammar is eminently teachable, that is, profitably taught through explanations of grammar rules. Unfortunately, in their attempt to capture grammatical knowledge in the form of explicit rules, teachers frequently mistake the rule itself for what it actually represents-the mental process of the speaker. Current textbook rules and classroom practices used in the teaching of grammar pay scant attention to the speakers mental processes and thus forfeit any chance of attacking meaning on its home ground (Langacker, 1987, p. 99). In fairness to teachers, however, some degree of reification is common to virtually all approaches to grammar. For example, Langacker (1994) points out that key terms commonly used in linguistic discussions are invariably nouns: language, thought, concept, cognition, structure, construction, and so forth. Nevertheless, Langacker maintains that when he uses a term like concept in his linguistic analyses, he does not envisage a fixed, static entity like a physical object lodged somewhere in the brain (p. 25) but rather, a dynamic mental process.

On the other hand, Rutherford (1987) argues that a fixed, static entity is exactly what most traditional language teachers envisage when they use the term grammar. He refers to the common-place reification of grammar in for-

The Modern Language Journal 81 (1997)

eign and second language instruction as the accumulation of entities (p. 17). According to Rutherford, traditional approaches to the teaching of grammar are predicated on the beliefs that language is composed of discrete entities and that the essential characteristics of the entities (e.g., the rules for their formation) can be directly imparted to the learner: For pur- poses of teaching language form, it would seem, one has to get a handle on something, and the most natural kind of thing to try to grasp in this way is a solid, stable, fixed piece of the total language product-something with edges to it . . . in other words, a language construct (p. 56).

There are many teachers, however, who have grown wary of a traditional, teacher-centered approach to explicit grammar instruction. Re- jecting the traditional belief that grammar is acquired through an explicit examination of a rule followed by application of the rule in the form of a mechanical drill, many teachers have opted instead for a so-called comprehension- based pedagogy in which students come to know the grammar through exposure to comprehensible input (Krashen, 1982). Although comprehension-based approaches to instruction may vary greatly in how instructors attempt to render the input comprehensible, they are similar in their reduced emphasis on formal grammatical analysis. Consequently, comprehension-based approaches are often described as shifting the pedagogical focus from form to meaning. Today, the terms focus on form and focus on meaning are frequently understood as a shorthand for two competing ideologies within the foreign language teaching profession, the two extremes of an ongoing debate over the efficacy of grammar instruction. Un- fortunately, the competing camps and the debate itself promote a dichotomous conception of grammar instruction as described by Connor (1992):

On the one hand, we have concentrated on linguistic form with explicit instruction in grammar rules at the level of individual, decontextualized sen- tences, accompanied by some drill of learned forms and by the fervent hope that these forms would prove accessible if the student found himself in a true, communicative situation. On the other hand, spurning traditional grammar instruction as irrele- vant to acquisition, we have endeavored to offer comprehensible input and guidance in the some- what inscrutable art of communicative competence, all the while hoping that comprehensible, proficient output would emerge. (p. 31)

Grl Bhth

RECONCEPTUALIZING GRAMMAR TEACHING

VanPatten and Cadierno (1993) claim that the debate between traditional and nontraditional approaches to grammar misses the point. The question is not whether grammar should be taught, but how it should be taught. Before teachers can address this important question, they must understand the complexity and het- erogeneity of grammatical concepts. The either /or approach to grammar instruction-either you teach it or you dont-indicates a profound misconception of grammar as a monolithic and homogeneous phenomenon, either wholly amenable to instruction or not amenable at all. Rather, a pedagogical grammar is more profitably conceived of as a heterogeneous group of linguistic and psychological phenomena that may be amenable to formal instruction, but to varying degrees and in varying ways. Such a conception of grammar would require teachers to determine more thoughtfully how grammar should be taught, including which grammatical phenomena respond best to form-focused instruction, and which will be acquired without explicit focus if learners have adequate exposure to the language (Lightbown & Spada, 1993, p. 99).

In order to construct a more effective grammar pedagogy, teachers must first address the deleterious effects of their traditional conception of grammar instruction as an accumulation of entities. Although such an approach has a certain heuristic appeal, it ultimately conceals the dynamic relationship between grammar and the mind. Garrett (1986) argues that the perennial debate concerning explicit grammar instruction rarely addresses the crucial question of the psychological status of linguistic rules:

When we complain that teaching students grammar rules does not enabIe them to communicate, we only confirm what linguistic theory has implied all along: the rules which describe the system attested to by competence are abstract descriptive generaliz- ations that do not per se describe the mental process by which a speaker formulates or comprehends any particular utterance. (p. 138)

Garrett advocates a processing approach to grammar instruction and argues for the relevance of psycholinguistic theory to pedagogical praxis. Similarly, Rutherford (1987) calls for a process-oriented conceptualization of grammar- grammar as a mental strategy for the processing of discourse (p. 153).

53

Based on studies of input processing, the cognitive processes that learners employ to comprehend meaning-bearing input, VanPatten (1996) suggests that instruction be based on structured input activities in which learners are given the opportunity to process form in the input in a controlled situation so that better form-meaning connections might happen compared with what might happen in less controlled situations (p. 60). Structured input is the centerpiece of what VanPatten refers to as processing instruction, an approach to grammar instruction that combines a traditional focus on form with comprehensible input in an attempt to alter the processing strategies that learners take to the task of comprehension and to encourage them to make better form- meaning connections than they would if left to their own devices (p. 60).

OBSTACLES TO INNOVATION IN GRAMMAR TEACHING

What would happen if teacher education programs took the suggestions of Garrett, Ruther- ford, and VanPatten seriously and attempted to promote a more process-oriented grammar instruction? Unfortunately, current textbooks and current models of teacher education often hinder rather than promote pedagogical innovation. Is such an approach to grammar even feasible given current textbooks? How much can an inexperienced teacher be expected to teach against a traditional textbook? Further- more, can teacher educators reasonably expect inexperienced teachers to adopt an approach to grammar instruction that they have never ex- perienced themselves? What would it take to convince teachers of the efficacy and appro- priateness of a more learner-centered, process- oriented approach to grammar instruction? What obstacles prevent the adoption of innovative ways to teach aspect?

Textbooks as Obstacles

Hubbard (1994) claims that the conception and presentation of pedagogical grammar has remained virtually unchanged for centuries. Replacing a static conception of grammar with a more dynamic one will not be easy given the current treatment of grammar in textbooks: a brief grammar explanation followed by a sequence of form-focused drills. Textbooks have a particularly strong influence on inexperienced teachers, shaping their teaching practices and

54

even their beliefs about language learning. Of- ten an inexperienced teachers metalinguistic knowledge is simply a reflection of the textbooks grammatical explanations. Insecure about their grammatical knowledge, inexperienced teachers tend to view linguistic rules as the business of the professional linguist and not of the practitioner. As a consequence, they accept the textbooks rules at face value, rarely examining the criteria used in their formula- tion: clarity, simplicity, predictive value, conceptual parsimony, and relevance ( Westney, 1994, p. 72). Hubbard (1994) notes, however, that the few recent improvements to pedagogical grammars have come primarily from language teachers rather than from theoretical linguists (p. 49).

Many textbooks not only present grammar according to Paulstons outdated taxonomy of drills but frequently contain highly misleading and, at times, inaccurate grammatical information. For example, Herschensohn (1988) found that in many first-year French textbooks, discourse phenomena, such as the choice of definite and indefinite articles, were routinely explained in sentential terms. Another common problem with textbooks is the confusion between the separate but related grammatical categories of tense and aspect. Garrett (1986) notes that traditional labels used in textbooks to discuss aspect are seriously misleading as explanations, sometimes actually wrong. She cites the example of the verb forms imperfect and present perfect which are said to represent different tenses, but in fact they distinguish aspect (p. 140).

Textbook explanations of aspect may be problematic for an inexperienced teacher, yet they present even greater problems for the lin- guistically naive student. For example, Dan- sereau (1987) blames vague, incomplete, contradictory, and generally poor explanations found in most beginning textbooks (p. 35) for much of the confusion surrounding aspectual choice. The most serious problem with textbook explanations, Dansereau argues, is that they are exception-ridden. Leaky rules are a common problem in grammatical analysis, es- pecially in pedagogical grammars, which are ill- suited to capturing the variability inherent in language perf~rmance.~ In this regard, Westney (1994) distinguishes between low-level rules of formation and high-level rules of use. Low-level rules present few problems for the learner because they are axiomatic-easy to understand, easy to apply. By contrast, high-level rules de-


scribing aspectual choice are essentially proba- bilistic statements that prove difficult, if not im- possible, to apply in any principled way.

It can be frustrating for both student and teacher alike to try to apply aspectual rules that are based on descriptive terms such as continuing event, durative event, punctual event, single event, repeated event, and so forth. Dansereau (1987) argues that textbook rules based on these descriptive terms often have trouble accounting for even ordinary sen- tences such as the following:

1. Le mi a rignipendant soixante am.

2. A huit hares, jitais dam nwn bureau. (The king reigned (preterit) for sixty years.)

(At eight oclock, I was (imperfect) in my office.)

(He often came (preterit) to see me.) 4. Cet it&& il ne manpait que o h x fois par jour.

(That summer, he only ate (imperfect) two times a day.) (p. 34-5)

When encountering sentence 1, the student wonders why an event that continued for sixty years is encoded in the preterit and not the imperfect, since the imperfect is prescribed for durative or continuing events. In sentence 2, the student puzzles over the use of the imperfect, which is supposedly reserved for situations without any reference to an exact moment of time. In sentence 3, the student finds the preterit used with an event repeated an indeterminate number of times (often) even though the textbook rule states that the preterit encodes an event repeated a determinate number of times. In sentence 4, the imperfect is used even though the number of times is clearly stated (two times a day), a contradiction of the text book rule prescribing the imperfect for an event repeated an indeterminate number of times. Dansereau (1987) concludes from these examples that the traditional descriptive terminology dooms the student to confusion, frus- tration, and incorrect usage (p. 37).

An even more serious charge is leveled by Garrett (1986) who claims that a traditional presentation of rules found in most textbooks hinders not only students direct processing of meaning but even their realization of how such processing might be undertaken (p. 142). In other words, textbook rules often lead students to draw the wrong conclusions about how aspectual meaning maps onto linguistic form in the minds of native speakers. For example, Dan- sereau (1987) notes that the use of the terms

3. n at souvent venu me V O ~ Z

Carl Blyth

state versus action, as in the imperfect is used primarily for states and the preterit is used primarily for actions, (p. 36) inevitably leads students to confuse inherent lexical aspect, the intrinsic nature of an event, with grammatical aspect. Inherent lexical aspect and grammatical aspect are often distinguished poorly in textbooks because they exhibit a strong correlation in actual usage-inherently punctual verbs are most frequently encoded in perfective aspect and inherently stative verbs are most frequently encoded in imperfective aspect. Of course, students must learn that regardless of its inherent lexical aspect, any verb may be grammatically encoded for perfectivity or imperfectivity. Given that textbooks are not likely to change their presentation of aspect in the near future, it is largely the responsibility of teacher education programs to help teachers construct new practices and explanations for the teaching of aspectual distinctions.

55

Teaching is understood to be analogous to skilled activity in general; it develops primarily through practice and exposure to the activity of experts (Kinginger, 1995, p. 125). For TAs who hold a reductionist view of teaching as a set of techniques to be mastered, the craft model is often preferred for its perceived practicality. In the craft model, TAs apprenticing with master teachers are encouraged to follow demonstrated teaching practices as closely as possible. Kaplans (1993) autobiographical account of her own professional development as a French TA learning the standard rites of pedagogy provides a good example of several specific practices designed to teach the difference between the passt? composi and the imparfait;

You learn to draw a time line. You go up to the blackboard, and its dramatic, and you say, this is the imperfect: the imperfect is for description; its for events that havent finished. The time it takes to say this is just about the time it takes to drag your chalk line, slowly, all the way across the board. You pick up your chalk and you explain, chalk in hand, that the imperfect is used to describe feelings, states of being; its used to describe background, landscape, and ongoing thoughts. All sorts of things with no definite beginning and end. Then you pause, take hold of your chalk piece like a weapon, and you stab that blackboard line at one point, then at another. This is the passe compose, this staccato: a point on the imperfect line of experience, a discrete action in the past with a beginning and an end that you can name. (p. 142)

One of the major problems with the craft model is that the TA may learn how to perform such rituals flawlessly although never gaining an understanding of their motivation. In the case of the practices described by Kaplan, inexperienced teachers rarely stop to consider why aspect is typically represented in visual mne- monics while most grammar points are explained primarily in words. Since the role of the apprentice is to imitate practice not critique it, the craft model does little to promote a critical evaluation of pedagogy. As a consequence, the craft model, when employed by itself as the basis for teacher education, actually reinforces pedagogical tradition by passing on long-held yet unexamined practices.

The craft model by itself also fails to provide TAs with important pedagogical content knowledge about linguistic structure and language learning. A recent survey of graduate TAs in French at various universities found that TAs generally lacked important metalinguistic knowledge despite a strong emphasis on gram-

Teacher Educaticm Programs as Obstach

It seems ironic that teacher education programs may actually prove to be obstacles to sub- stantive pedagogical change. But it is never an easy task to convince teachers to adopt new practices and, given the constraints imposed on many teacher education programs, profound change is often unrealistic. Because of institutional pressures, those involved in university language program direction feel obliged to focus methods courses on the immediate needs and concerns of the institution rather than on long-term professional development of TAs (Gore11 & Cubillos, 1993; Pons, 1993). Thus, teacher education frequently becomes teacher training with little time devoted to a critical evaluation of teaching practices and the development of more imaginative or sophisticated styles of being language teachers (Marks, 1993,

Kinginger (1995) claims that two common models of teacher education-the craft model and the applied science model-are poorly suited to engendering lasting pedagogical change because they lack the necessary elements of personal experience and reflection: the uaft model . . . emphasizes imitation and emulation of the experts professional wisdom, and the applied science model . . . focuses on a professions received knowledge, the facts to be found in journals, textbooks-and courses on education (p. 125). The craft model of teacher education is essentially atheoretical:

p. 3).

56

matical analysis throughout their own language learning experience (Fox, 1993). In particular, Foxs survey revealed that the model of language with which TAs begin their careers ignores discourse competence as a distinct level of grammatical organization. As a result, TAs are prone to conceive of grammar as comprised of distinct entities that are adequately described at a sentential level. The results of Foxs finding have particularly disturbing implications for the teaching of aspect: Despite years of traditional grammar instruction, TAs are often unable to give a succinct and coherent explanation of aspect because they lack an understanding of its discourse basis. To fill the knowledge gap, Fox suggests that TAs receive an introduction to linguistic description of the target language as part of their methods course in order to raise their awareness about grammatical phenomena governed by discourse principles.

Scholars have recently called for TA training programs to include a greater emphasis on second language acquisition theory and applied linguistic research (Fox, 1992, 1993; Rankin, 1994). In an effort to introduce TAs to the latest theoretical research and its implications for classroom practice, some educators adopt a version of the applied science model. Kinginger refers to this model as top-down since teachers are envisioned as the consumers of research produced by a group of experts. Unfortunately, methods courses based on the applied science model tend to reinforce the gap between theory and practice in the minds of many teachers who frequently judge such courses as too theoretical and therefore too impractical. More important, the suggested pedagogical applications of the research go unheeded because the TAs are given little, if any, practical experience.

The M h Language Journal 81 (1997)

with current research is to challenge their traditional beliefs about the nature of grammar- what grammar is and how it is learned. A constructivist approach is particularly appropriate for TA education in this regard because it allows TAs to acquire essential linguistic and pedagogical content knowledge-the technical facts-as well as an awareness of their own beliefs about foreign language learning. Fosnot (1996~) argues that the primary goal of a constructivist approach to teacher education is to facilitate new ways of knowing:

If understanding the teaching/learning process from a constructivist view is itself constructed, and if teachers tend to teach as they were taught, rather than as they were taught to teach, then teacher education needs to begin with these traditional beliefs and subsequently challenge them through activity, reflection, and discourse in both coursework and field work through the duration of the program. Most importantly, participants need experiences as learners that confront traditional views of teaching and learning in order to enable them to construct a pedagogy that stands in contrast to older, more tra- ditionally held views. (p. 206)

If personal experience ultimately plays the most important role in facilitating change in a teachers practices, then instead of being told about practices, TAs should directly experience teaching practices. Rather than observe a master instructor who demonstrates practices on other students, TAs should experience new practices as a learner would. Thus, TA educators should demonstrate a given practice on the TAs themselves who in turn come to understand the practice from the learners perspective. Fi- nally, TAs must be given the opportunity to reflect on their experiences as learners. The goal is to help TAs integrate the scientific facts concerning aspect with their personal experiences through a period of critical reflection (Wallace, 1991). A CONSTRUCTIVIST APPROACH TO TA EDUCATION

Kinginger (1995), following Wallace (1991), uses the term reflective practitioner to charac- terize the ideal teacher who integrates research, theory, and practical experiences through informed, critical reflection. This synthesis of different ways of knowing is central to a constructivist approach to learning. Implementing more effective ways to teach grammar requires teacher education programs to do more than simply provide models to be emulated (the craft model) and research to be applied (the applied science model). Rather, the key to persuading TAs to adopt a grammar pedagogy consonant

TEACHING TAs ABOUT ASPECT

In order to construct practices that more ef- fectively aid students in their understanding of aspectual choice, TAs must have a clear understanding of aspectual phenomena including the conceptual knowledge underlying linguistic performance. To gain a more thorough understanding of the relationship of aspect to cognition, TAs benefit from a review of three related research areas: studies of L2 acquisition, cognitive linguistics, and gestalt visual perception. Although technical knowledge is essential for the

Carl Blyth

construction of effective grammar instruction, TA educators must keep in mind that apprentice teachers are unlikely to adopt a given practice based solely on a review of research findings, however pertinent they may be. Thus, the presentation of basic linguistic knowledge should be seen as a preliminary stage in foreign language teacher development, a means to an end.

57

use present tense, then pretknto, and finally imperfecto.6 Andersen notes, however, that when learners of Spanish first begin to employ the preterit and the imperfect, they do so according to inherent lexical aspect and prototypicality, using the pretkito for prototypical punctual events and the imperfecto for prototypical states.

A prototype is identified by a set of charac- teristic features, which define it as the best ex- emplar of its category. For example, events may be characterized by three semantic features as seen in Table 1: dynamic, telic, and punctual. A dynamic event requires some energy to sustain it; a telic event describes an activity with a clear terminal point; and a punctual event is instan- taneous or momentary.

Aspect in Second L a n p g z Acquisition Research

TAs routinely confuse aspect with tense. Therefore, a discussion of aspect should begin by distinguishing these two grammatical categories. Tense is the grammatical category commonly used in linguistic analysis to refer to the way a language encodes the time at which an action denoted by a verb takes place. Thus, tense is concerned with situating events in reference to other events, in other words, with or- dering events along a timeline. Aspect, on the other hand, is not concerned with temporal points of reference, but rather with the different ways of viewing the internal temporal con- stituency of a situation (Comrie, 1976, p. 3). In most approaches to aspect, the differences between the perfective aspect and imperfective aspect are explained in terms of the speakers perspective. Perfective aspect is equated with an external perspective from which the speaker perceives the event as a self-contained whole. From such an external perspective, one may envision an events boundaries or outlines-its beginning and end. In contrast, imperfective aspect reflects a situation as seen from an internal perspective; the speaker views the situation from within and is unable to distinguish temporal boundaries.4

TAs need to understand that students who confuse inherent lexical aspect (i.e., the intrinsic nature of an event) with grammatical aspect have posited an incorrect hypothesis about the morphological system of the target language: the passt? compmt?/petirito tense encodes actions and the impa.f.it/zmperficto tense encodes states. This hypothesis is widely attested in early stages of interlanguage development and is known as the Defective Tense Hypothesis following Weist et al. (1984) because verb tense morphology is not used to encode tense or grammatical aspect, but rather inherent lexical aspect (An- dersen, 1990, p. 307).5 Based on studies of Span- ish interlanguage, Andersen (1990) claims that learners pass through stages in the acquisition of the Spanish tense/aspect system; learners first

TABLE 1 Semantic Feature Analysis of Events

~ ~ ~

to to to paint to have run a picture recognize

+ punctual - - -

dynamic - + + + telic - - + +

Note. From Anderson, 1990, pp. 310-311.

Based on these three features, events can be arranged along a continuum. On one end of the continuum, to have possesses none of the relevant semantic features while at the opposite end, to recognize possesses all three features. Andersens claim is that the usage of the pretirito in second language learning spreads from situations characterized by all three semantic features (to recognize) to situations characterized by two features (to paint a picture), then to situations characterized by only one feature (to run), and finally, at a relatively ad- vanced stage, to situations characterized by none of the relevant features (to have). In a similar fashion, the marking of the imperfecto be- gins with situations lacking all three semantic features and spreads in the opposite direction, eventually to situations possessing all three features. Thus, the two maximally differentiated events in Table 1-to have and to recognize- are prototypes of the learners incipient aspectual categories-imperfictu and petirito.

Andersens (1993) finding concerning Spanish L2 discourse is reflective of the discourse of native Spanish speakers as well. Fully proficient native speakers exhibit a similar distributional bias in the classes of verbs to which they attach preterit and imperfect verbal inflections. For example, there is a much higher frequency of imper-

58

fect than preterit usage with stative verbs and there is a much higher frequency of preterit use than imperfect use with punctual verbs. TAs must understand that statistical properties of language performance are caused by a speakers underlying conceptual kndwledge. Any attempt to explain perfectivity and imperfectivity in terms of correlations with verb classes in the speech of native speakers (a common practice of many TAs) ultimately confuses cause with effect.

The M o d a Language Journal 81 (1997)

sequently, a cognitive grammar takes the speakers perception of events as the natural point of departure for explaining aspectual choice: Within this framework, meanings are defined relative to conceptual domains, particular linguistic choices are often found to hinge upon the vantage point from which a given situation is viewed, and category boundaries are seen as fluctuating and dependent on, among other things, the conceptualizers experience or purpose (Rudzka-Ostyn, 1988, p. ix).7 Lan- gacker (1987) argues that experiences that are basic, recurrent, and sharply differentiated have a special perceptual saliency and as a consequence emerge as archetypes. Goldberg (1995) notes that these archetypes are first equated with prototypes and then are extended beyond the original prototypical values. An- dersens (1990) findings about Spanish interlanguage, that prototypical uses of the preterit and imperfect are learned before their less prototypical uses, is thus in keeping with the basic claims of cognitive linguistics.

Aspect in Cognitive Linguistic Research

The challenge for any pedagogical grammar of aspect is to capture a speakers underlying conceptual knowledge of events or situations in a rule whose usage is clear, simple, and highly pre- dictable. Capturing these abstractions in a pedagogical rule that proves comprehensible to students requires a radical reformulation of our notion of grammar and of the operation of grammatical concepts . . . (Garrett, 1986, p. 145). Fortunately for language teachers, the outlines of such a reformulation already exist in cognitive-functionalist grammars. The cognitive- functionalist approach reflects a shift from the prevailing conception of linguistic knowledge characterized by Chomskyan competence as formal, abstract, and modular toward a conception of language as the reflection of human consciousness (Bolinger, 1977; Chafe, 1993; Faucon- nier, 1985; Foley & Van Valin, 1984; Givbn, 1984, 1989; Haiman, 1985; Hopper & Thompson, 1980; Lakoff, 1987; Lambrecht, 1994; Langacker, 1987, 1991; Wierzbicka, 1988). Neither a standard nor a formalized linguistic theory, the cognitive-functionalist approach is characterized by the following premises: (a) languages are systems primarily used for communication, (b) linguistic forms are best studied in terms of their semantic and pragmatic functions, and (c) actual language use consists of multipropositional speech whose organization is guided by discourse principles (Cooreman & Kilborn, 1990; Tomlin, 1994). In general, cognitive-functionalist approaches to language attempt to determine the semantic or pragmatic conditions that lead to the selection of alternative grammatical structures such as the perfective and the imperfective aspect. Tomlin (1994) claims that such an approach to grammar is consonant with the basic assumptions of communicative language teaching.

Scholars working within this framework theo- rize that language structure is directly associated with conceptual structure, which in turn reflects scenes basic to human experience. Con-

Aspect in Visual Perception Research

Why do aspectual distinctions lend themselves to a visual representation? How does the visual representation of a grammar rule help or hinder the learning of that rule? What is the semiotic relationship between Kaplans lines and dashes drawn on the blackboard and the concepts of perfectivity and imperfectivity? Vir- tually every discussion of aspect invokes metaphors of visual perception (Andrews, 1992; Con- nor, 1992; Fleischman, 1990; Lunn, 1985; Ozete, 1988; Paprotti, 1988; Terry, 1981; Thogmartin, 1984). And in cognitive linguistic theory, the existence and comprehensibility of metaphors linking aspect and perception are meant to be taken as evidence that the aspect-perception link is real (Lunn, 1985, p. 52). Some of the strongest evidence for the reality of the link between aspect and perception is described by Rein- hart (1984) who claims that narrative structure is an artifact of visual perception:

. . . [narrative] organization is a temporal extension of the principles governing the spatial organization of the visual field into figure and ground, proposed by the gestalt theory, and [ . . . ] there is a striking correlation between the perceptual criteria determining the figure and those determining the narrative foreground. (p. 779)

Andersen (1993) makes a similar claim in his explanation of the distributional bias of verbal inflections in Spanish interlanguage discourse:

Carl Blyth

The perceptual systems of humans and other ani- mals allow or perhaps we might say force us to distinguish an important or foregrounded entity or event from all of the unimportant or less important events . . . According to this basic notion of distinguishing figure from ground, we would say that the learner perceives the punctual or telic events as key, important, foreground, and learns to mark them as such and to not mark the background events or situations. (p. 328)

59

[Figures 1 through 5 are from finczpks of Gestalt Psychology by Kurt Koffka, copyright 1935 by Harcourt Brace & Company and renewed in 1963 by Elizabeth Koffka, reproduced by permission of the publisher.]

FIGURE 1 Continuous Contours/Privileged Interpretation

Reinharts and Andersens basic claim is that some experiences are perceptually more salient than others. These salient events are conceived of in terms of a foreground that stands out against a background of less salient, out-of- focus events. In gestalt theory, visual perception of a figure defined as an intuitive notion of recognizable form, depends on the relevant background (PaprottC, 1988, p. 458). In other words, we are able to recognize a figure or per- ceive a form because the background enables it to stand out. The functional dependency of the figure on the ground may be conceived of like a black dot on a computer screen. As one black- ens the screen, the dot becomes less and less perceptible, eventually disappearing altogether into the background.

Following Labov (1972), Reinhart equates the foregrounded events of a narrative with the sequence of chronologically ordered main clauses encoded in perfective aspect, the so-called backbone or plotline of the story. In essence, all narratives depend on perfective events to advance the plot. In contrast, backgrounded clauses in the imperfective aspect do not advance the plot since they are not temporally ordered and may be displaced within the text without changing the temporal order of the story. Reinhart argues that the three criteria of foregrounded events- sequentiality, punctuality, and perfectivity-are related to principles of gestalt perception of the figure. For example, the criterion of temporal sequentiality finds a spatial analogue in the gestalt principle of good continuity. This principle states that we organize shapes according to contours and that continuous contours are given highest priority in visual perception. In Figure 1, we see a white stripe on black stripes rather than four black figures, since the white stripe is the continuous shape. Similarly, events that are temporally sequenced are easy to identify on the grounds of good continuity. This phenomenon, the perception of sequential events in terms of a continuous contour, is apparent in the plotline and backbone metaphors so common to discussions of narrative.

According to gestalt theory, smaller areas are perceived more readily as figures and larger areas are perceived more readily as background. The temporal equivalent of spatial size is the duration of an event. Punctual events are temporally smaller and are therefore readily perceived as figures against the temporally larger durative event. In Figure 2, the image is ambiguous because the black and white areas are approximately the same size. Is it a black cross on a white background or vice versa? The mind readily entertains both interpretations.

FIGURE 2 Ambiguous Figure/Ground Relationship

In Figure 3, however, the mind entertains only one interpretation-a smaller white cross (the figure) is distinguished from a larger black background.

FIGURE 3 Unambiguous Figure/Ground Relationship

The principle of size is related to the principle of closure, which states that the more enclosed an area is, the more it is figure-like. Note that completed or perfective events are

60

bounded or closed on both ends (their beginning and ends are in-focus). In Figure 4, we see three thin figures and a remaining line although other interpretations are possible (e.g., three thick figures).

The M0ah-n Language Journal 81 (1997)

to restore that balance and are ready to enter- tain alternative approaches to explaining aspectual choice. Through a series of experience- based activities followed by personal reflection (reflective abstraction is the driving force of learning), I help TAs understand how grammatical form is linked to aspectual meaning. I introduce the TAs to a technique described in Connor (1992), which extends already estab- lished, discourse-level notions of aspectual contrast based on plot versus background (Dan- sereau, 1987; Thogmartin, 1984 ) or intrigue vs. arrike plan by rendering such notions concrete through visualization (p. 323). The greatest ad- vantage of this technique is that it reduces the various contradictory rules found in most textbooks into one concrete, visualizable template in which figure vs. ground equals plot vs. background equals [preterit] vs. [imperfect] (p. 323).

Beginning foreign language students typically decide between the two competing past tenses based on the most immediate of con- texts, the inherent aspect of the verb, thereby ignoring the larger narrative discourse (Garcia &van Putte, 1988). TAs can distinguish an inap- propriate or infelicitous aspectual choice, but nevertheless have difficulty explaining its inap- propriateness or infelicity due to their lack of a transparent metalanguage and to their limited understanding of the role of the preterit and the imperfect in the construction of a narrative text. To overcome these problems, I discuss the preterit and imperfect tenses with TAs almost exclusively in terms of the role these aspectual categories play in creating the foreground/ background structure of narrative. This relatively simple distinction is easily demonstrated by asking a TA to give a plot summary of a film (preferably a mystery). With the plotline events written on the board, TAs soon understand that the temporal sequence of events implies causal- ity and that a change in the chronology of events would lead to a change in the meaning of the story, sometimes destroying the storys co- herence altogether. Establishing the actual order of the events is of utmost importance to the plot of any mystery.

In order to contrast the sequentiality of foreground events to the nonsequentiality of background events, I have TAs read short newspaper articles about recent crimes or accidents. Not only is this type of text characterized by a straight forward plotline, but it also includes crucial supporting information (e.g., the driver was drunk at the time of the accident; the burg- lar was wearing a black ski mask; the assailant

FIGURE 4 Ambiguous Partially Bounded Figures

II (I II I When the space is more fully enclosed as in

Figure 5, the ambiguity is eliminated; we see only three rectangular figures with one remaining bracket on the far left.

FIGURE 5 Unambiguous Fully Bounded Figure

TEACHING TAs TO TEACH ASPECT

The review of pertinent research on aspect should help TAs gain a better understanding of the link between a speakers subjective perception of events and his or her aspectual choices. My ultimate goal as a TA educator, however, is to help the TA translate the newly acquired technical understanding of aspect into teaching practice. In order to accomplish this, apprentice teachers must be allowed to raise their own questions about the instruction of aspect and to test their own hypotheses about what is and is not an effective practice. In keeping with a constructivist approach to TA education, my role is not so much to teach teachers how to teach aspect, but rather to facilitate and guide TAss own construction of teaching practices.

Disequilibrium and Rejbctiue Abstraction

I begin my lessons on the instruction of aspect by challenging the TAss received wisdom concerning the preterit/imperfect distinction (disequilibrium facilitates learning). Recalling Dansereaus (1987) critique of textbook explanations of aspect, I give counterexamples to every so-called usage rule that the TAs are able to formulate. With their received wisdom fully un- balanced (disequilibrium), TAs naturally seek

Carl Bbth

was known to one of his victims, etc.). Visual mnemonic devices are used to further reinforce the narrative functions of the foreground and background (Sharwood Smith, 1988c; Westfall & Foerster, n.d.). While reading the stories, TAs must draw an arrow (+) above all verbs that move the plot forward and a circle (0) above all verbs that do not advance the plot. Next, the TAs list the foreground events (e.g., the events indicated by an arrow) in chronological order and determine the scope of the background events. Upon reflection, TAs discover that some background events have scope over the entire story, while others have scope over a sequence of events, and still others have scope over a single event. TAs also discover during this activity that the wider the scope of a background event, the easier it is to displace the event to other points in the narrative.

61

Fleischman (1990) clarifies this point with her definition of narrative event as a hermeneutic construct for converting an undifferentiated continuum of the raw data of experience, or of the imagination, into the verbal structures we use to talk about experience: narrative, stories (p. 99). To make these ideas more concrete, I play a 60-second video clip (a television commercial with an obvious plotline) and ask the TAs to jot down their own versions of the story. The TAss narratives are compared and the differences in narrative structure are noted and analyzed. TAs must justify their aspectual choices to one another using the foreground/ background distinction as well as a visual metalanguage borrowed from cinematography (close- up, wide angle shot, out-of-focus, etc.) rather than the traditional grammatical terminology. The sharing of viewpoints within the community of learners helps TAs to see how real world events (here, video events) are perceived by different narrators and then transposed into significantly different narratives (dialogue within a community engenders further thinking). When TAs share with each other their different aspectual choices, they begin to understand why it is possible for students to represent the same events in different ways.

Next, I hand out several brief narrative versions of the same 60-second commercial, this time written by native speakers who had previ- ously viewed the video clip. When the TAs read the narratives written by native speakers, they have not only seen the narrated events with their own eyes, but they have discussed various ways of grounding these events (i.e., packaging the events as either part of the foreground or background). Other video clips are used in the same manner to help the TAs comprehend the steps by which native speakers express and comprehend meaning in narrative discourse (Gar- rett, 1986, p. 138).

Dialogue Within a Community of h a m

When TAs are proficient at distinguishing background from foreground events in narrative, I ask them to remember a personal anecdote that they would be willing to share in class. While replaying the anecdote in their minds eye, the TAs identify critical moments appear- ing in the foreground of the stream of events. Connor (1992) contends that perceived events are stored in memory as film-like images:

elements in the film-like substrate of mental imag- ery which appeared closer, brighter, clearer, more in focus in the minds eye would be matched with plot-advancing events and thus the pass6 compose (Boyer, 1985) while those elements which appeared hazier, vaguer . . . less salient (Wallace, 1982, p. 205) would be matched to background states or events and hence, to the imparfait. (p. 322)

Connor reports that students who use this visualization technique significantly increase the accuracy of their usage of the preterit and of the imperfect in oral and written production. As soon as TAs have replayed the incident and categorized the events as foreground or background, they each tell their story to the class in the target language and explain their aspectual choices in terms of discourse structure.

Although TAs begin to understand the link between aspectual choice and speaker perspective, they may fail to grasp narration at a deeper level. It is important for TAs to understand that a narrative is the creation of a narrator who intentionally, although largely unconsciously, chooses what to attend to when perceiving the seamless web of history (Ong, 1982, p. 12).

G?ntral Organizing Rinciples

These activities are followed by a period of informed reflection during which TAs are encouraged to derive general principles about language learning based on their personal experiences and their newly acquired scientific knowledge. TAs generally conclude that learners must experience narrative events for themselves in order to construct the concept of narrativity and the correlated concept of aspect. Reflecting on the hypothesis in cognitive linguistics that the encoding of any event is di-

62

rectly linked to the subjective perception of that event, TAs come to realize that the teaching of aspect must be phenomenologically grounded such that percepts of a given event (the impression of the event as perceived by the senses) must be linked to concepts of perfectivity and imperfectivity (the abstractions derived from specific instances). Thus, by self- consciously experiencing the process of narration, TAs naturally develop central organizing principles of aspectual choice-the notions of cognitive processing and discourse-that closely reflect Rutherfords (1987) conceptualization of grammar as a mental strategy for the processing of discourse.

The quintessentially constructivist view of aspect formulated by the TAs themselves contradicts long-standing pedagogical practices, most notably the common use of cloze passages to teach aspectual choice to beginning students. TAs realize that cloze passages and third person narratives are mediated by someone elses sub- jectivity and thus are inherently problematic. It matters little that the author is a famous writer and that the passage is from a well-known work of literature; a cloze passage essentially requires the student to reconstruct the mental processes of someone elses mind, to see events through someone elses eyes, a tricky task even for native speakers. Forced to fill in the correct aspectual choice without access to the authors mind or to the real life events, students inevitably re- sort to a strategy of playing the probabilities based on inherent lexical aspect and prototypicality (Oh, its a stative verb so it must be imperfective.). As a consequence, the use of cloze passages in beginning language classes unwittingly reinforces the erroneous Defective Tense Hypothesis posited by most beginning language learners. Rather than cloze passages of fictional narratives or even nonfictional third person accounts of past experience, TAs now understand why first person true narrative representations or personal accounts of lived experience are more transparent for the learner and thus more effective for teaching aspect (Oller, 1993).

Another key principle for the teaching of aspect, which the TAs invariably adopt following a constructionist approach, is the importance of visual input. Ideally, visual information should accompany linguistic input so that learners may establish their own pragmatic mappings between the visual concepts of figure and ground, the discourse concepts of foreground and background, and the grammatical concepts of per-

The Modern LanguageJournal81 (1997)

fectivity and imperfectivity. Current models of cognition now recognize what language teachers have long taken for granted-that a given mental representation is linked to other representations in the mind in such a way that words are associated with images (Paivio, 1986). Al- though TAs are generally aware of the important role visual aids play in listening comprehension and in vocabulary learning, they frequently do not consider the role visual representations might play in the acquisition of grammatical knowledge. Sharwood Smith (1988b) argues that . . . maximizing visual representations to accompany, illustrate, and explain linguistic items may well improve learning a great deal . . . I (p. 213). This principle contradicts most textbooks reliance on written texts to ex- emplify aspectual distinctions. If aspect is based on gestalt principles of visual perception as Rein- hart claims, then learners must see the events in order to construe the foreground/background relationship between the events in a narrative. This means that the teaching of aspect should make as liberal a use of visual input as possible, and in particular, of films and video. Although recent trends in video and interactive multi- media appear promising, the importance of visual input for the acquisition of grammatical concepts remains to be fully explored by most commercial publishing companies, two excep- tions being the videobased programs French In Action (Capretz, 1994) and Destinos (1992).

CONCLUSION

The constructivist approach to TA education advocated in this article is similar to the notion of raising grammatical consciousness as expli- cated by Sharwood Smith (1988a) and Ruther- ford (1987). In such an approach, all pedagogical materials and teaching practices are properly viewed as aids to learning but never as the ob- jects to be learned, an important distinction. Thus, TAs should not focus exclusively on mem- orizing specific rules and practices during their teacher preparation courses in order to repro- duce or perform them later in their classrooms, rather they should strive to understand the process by which grammatical forms map onto meanings. To teach aspect, TAs must self- consciously experience narration in order to envision aspect both as a formal system and as a process for creating meaning. The development of effective practices and materials for the teaching of aspect requires an understanding of the form/meaning correlations of a language

Carl Bhth

but, more important, it requires an understanding of how native and nonnative speakers per- ceive events and then selectively construct a narrative out of their perceptual experiences.

Teacher educators may worry that TAs will find the cognitive notions discussed here to be too abstract and too removed from the realities of classroom practice. In response to such rea- sonable objections, Rutherford (1987) reminds teachers and teacher trainers of the nature of language learning:

. . . what happens inside ones head, as concepts are formed and transmitted in what we know as language, is an absolutely crucial concern for any educational discipline that takes the nature of language itself as its point of departure. And language teaching is such a discipline. The sort of cognitive change that language teaching is intended to bring about-namely, the learning of a language-is one that is ultimately explainable only by recourse to the kinds of thmtical abstractionr that are needed for research into how the mind actually works. (p. 2, emphasis added)

If teacher educators are serious about helping TAs reconstruct traditional grammar practices along cognitive lines, then they must accept the inevitable transfusion of psychology into the profession as recognized by Sharwood Smith (1988b): It has become increasingly evident in recent years that what is by convention termed applied linguistics, in that it has to do with foreign language learning and instruction, should be as much applied psychology as applied linguistics . . . (p. 206).

Lee and VanPatten (1995) observe that despite research that calls into question a traditional presentation of grammar, most textbooks have changed very little in the past few decades:

If we glance at language textbooks (including those that are described as communicative and or profi- ciency oriented), it appears that instruction in grammar adheres to several tenets rooted in behaviorism (the belief in reinforcing good habits) and historical inertia (The common argument of Thats the way its been done for years and years and years). (p. 90)

As long as textbooks remain unchanged, teachers will have a hard time changing how they teach grammar. Thus, teacher education programs must clearly demonstrate the benefits of nontraditional materials and practices that are more closely informed by research insights from such allied fields as second language acquisition, psycholinguistics, sociolinguistics, and psychology. More specifically, the challenge is to help apprentice teachers understand the

63

advantages of an alternative approach to grammar instruction, one which seeks to link meaning with structure or form, moves the learner from input to output, and is more learner centered than what we see in traditional grammar instruction (Lee & VanPatten, 1995,

The key to meeting this challenge lies in what our teachers believe about the nature of grammar, for without a transformation in teachers beliefs about grammar, there will be little change in grammar instruction. A constructivist approach to teacher education is well- suited to instructional reform because it helps teachers deconstruct the traditional conception of grammar and in its place reconstruct a new one, a conception of grammar as a mental process.

p. 90).

NOTES

The term tense as commonly used in pedagogical grammars of French and Spanish is a misnomer since the relevant distinction is aspectual and not temporal. See Nehls (1992) for a crosslinguistic analysis of aspect as it relates to language pedagogy.

2 In a report on the Canadian French immersion programs, Harley (1986) noted that students who had received from 1000 to 3500 hours of content instruction had made minimal progress in marking aspect in the verb in the past (p. 73). Swain (1985) makes similar observations of French immersion students who continued to struggle with the correct choice of tense when narrating the events of a story.

On the other hand, GivBn (1984) argues that it is unrealistic to expect rules based on natural language usage to be categorical (i.e. without exception): Cat- egories conform to their basic definitions in the ma- jority of cases, and rules obey their strict description more likely than not. But there is always a certain amount of messy residue left, one that does not seem to fit into the category/rule in the strictest sense of their definition. This is an old dilemma with cogniz- ing and perceiving organisms, having to do with how to process input categorically while allowing for fuzzy edges (p. 12). One attempt to systematize language variation is the variable rule, a statistical description of the relative influences of factors involved in the production of any given utterance. The variable rule was originally used for sociolinguistic research but has been extended to the analysis of interlanguage variability ( Tarone, 1988), although its psychological status remains controversial (Gregg, 1990).

The linguistic distinction between the terms perfective and imperfective is clarified by their ety- mologies. The term per-ctive comes from the past par- ticiple perfecturn of the Latin verb perficere (to do to

64

completion). The modern French infinitive parfaire and the modern English infinitive to pcrjit have the same sense (e.g., to make perfect and to complete). Although most English speakers are familiar with the evaluative sense of the verb, to improve something to the point of perfection, they are frequently unaware of the second sense intended by linguists, to do something to the point of completion.

This same hypothesis has been shown to be opera- tive in the acquisition of both the L1 and L2 verb inflectional system (Antinucci and Miller, 1976; Bronck- art and Sinclair, 1973; Economides, 1985) as well as in the evolution of creole languages (Bickerton, 1975, 1981; Givh, 1982).

Kaplan (1987) claims an identical developmental sequence for the acquisition of French as a second language from prisent to

For a cognitive linguistic approach to tense and aspect, see Lunn (1985) and Paprottt (1988).

composi to impatfoit

The Moakrn Language Journal 81 (1997)

Chafe, W. (1993). Lliswurse, ~ I ~ U U W S S , and time: The frow and duplammnt of m c i o u c expmence in speuk- ing and writing. Chicago: Chicago University Press.

Clark, C. (1988). Asking the right questions about teacher preparation: Contributions of research on teacher thinking. EduGafirmalZhxm~ 17,5- 12.

Cohen, D. K., & Ball, K. L. (1990). Policy and practice: An overview. Educational Evaluation and Policy

Comrie, B. (1976). Aspect. Cambridge: Cambridge Uni- versity Press.

Connor, M. (1992). A processing strategy using visual representation to convey the pass6 compost/ imparfait distinction in French. ZnternutionalRe- vue of Applied Linguistics, 30, 321-328.

Cooremen, A., & Kilborn, K. (1990). Functionalist linguistics: Discourse structure and language processing in second language acquisition. In T. Huebner and C. Ferguson (Eds.), C70sscumts in second language acquisitwn and linguistic theories (pp. 195-224). Amsterdam and Philadelphia:

John Benjamins. Dansereau, D. (1987). A discussion of techniques used

in the teaching of the pass6 composcYimparfait distinction in French. The French Review, 61, 33- 38.

Destim: An Znhoductiun to Spanish. (1992). Anneberg/ CPB Collection.

Economides, P.J. (1985). The erpwsUm of tenre and aspect in the Englrsh interlanguage of a Viehurmese child Un- published master's thesis, UCLA.

Fauconnier, G. (1985). Ma& spaces: Aspects of meaning umstncctMn in natural lan- Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Fleischman, S. (1990). Tenre and narrativity: Fnrm medi- cvalperfmnce to moda fiction. Austin, TX: Uni- versity of Texas Press.

Foley, W. A., &Van Valin, R. Jr. (1984). FunctMnal syntax and universd p m w . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Fosnot, C. T. (1996a). Preface. In C. Fosnot (Ed.), Ca-

Analy~i~, 12, 327-345.

5-hduim: zhq peqwtmq rmd pmdrre (pp. ix- xi). New York: Teachers College Press.

Fosnot, C. T. (1996b). Constructivism: A psychological theory of learning. In C. Fosnot (Ed.), Cbnstrw tivirm: T?amy, perspectives, andjrrmtice (pp. 8-33). New York: Teachers College Press.

Fosnot, C. T. (1996~). Teachers construct constructivism: The center for constructivist teaching/ teacher preparation project. In C. Fosnot (Ed.), Constructivism: Theory, perspectives, and practice (pp. 205-216). New York: Teachers College Press.

Fox, C. A. (1992). Toward a revised model of TA training. In J. Walz (Ed.), Development and StLpnVrna of teaching assistunts in forkgn languap. AAUSC issues in language program direction (pp. 191- 207). Boston: Heinle.

REFERENCES

Andersen, R. (1990). Developmental sequences: The emergence of aspect marking in second language acquisition. In T. Huebner & C. Fer- guson (Eds.), Crosscurrents in second language

Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Andersen, R. (1993). Four operating principles and

input distribution as explanations for under- developed and mature morphological systems. In K. Hyltenstam &A. Viberg (Eds.), Aogression and regression in language: sociocultural, neuro- psychological, and linguistic perspectives (pp. 309- 339). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Andrews, B. (1992). Aspect in past tenses in English and French. Zntmnafional RNlle of A f l U Linguis-

Antinucci, F., & R. Miller. (1976). How children talk about what happened. Journal of Child Language

Bickerton, D. (1975). @namics ofa creole s y s t m . Cam- bridge: Cambridge University Press.

Bickerton, D. (1981). Roots of hnguage. Ann Arbor, MI: Karoma Publishers.

Bolinger, D. (1977). Meaning rand f m . London: Long- man.

Boyer, H. (1985). L'tconomie des temps verbaux dans le discours narratif. L.e&n& nwobne, 53, 73- 89.

Bronckart, J. P., & H. Sinclair. (1973). Time, tense, and aspect. coglutiun, 2,107-130.

Capretz, P. J. (with Abetti, A., Germain, M. A., & Wy- lie, L.) (1994). French in actiun: A bepnning mrse in language and culture. (2nd ed.). New Haven, C T Yale University Press.

Cazden, C. (1988). Clarmxmr discourn: The language .f teaching and /earning. Portsmouth, NH: Hei- nemann Educational Books, Inc.

a tqu i s ih and linguistic thaories (pp. 305-324).

tics, 30, 281-297.

3, 169-189.

Carl Blyth

Fox, C. A. (1993). Communicative competence and beliefs about language among graduate teaching assistants in French. The Modern Language

Garcia, E. C., & van Putte, F. C. (1988). The value of contrast: contrasting value of strategies. Inter-

Garrett, N. (1986). The problem with grammar: What kind can the language learner use? The Modern

Givbn, T. (1982). Tense-aspect-modality: The creole prototype and beyond. In P. Hopper (Ed.),

163). Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Ben- jamins.

Givbn, T. (1984). Syntax, vol. I. Amsterdam and Phila- delphia: John Benjamins.

Givbn, T. (1989). Mind, code, and context: Essays in pmg- matics. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Goldberg. A. (1995). Conshuctimrr: A colnshuGfion grammar appmach to argument stmcture Chicago: Uni- versity of Chicago Press.

Gorell, L. C., & Cubillos, J. (1993). TA programs: The fit between foreign language teacher preparation and institutional needs. In D. Benseler (Ed.), The dynumics of language pmgram directh. AAUSC issues in language program direction (pp. 91-109). Boston: Heinle.

Gregg. K. (1990). The variable competence model of second language acquisition, and why it isnt. Applted Linguistics, 11,364-383.

Haiman, J. (1985). Natural syntax: Iwnzcity and Ooswn. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Harley, B. (1986). Age in second hnguage acyuisition. Avon, England Multilingual Matters.

Herschensohn, J. (1988). Linguistic accuracy and textbook grammars: The determiner system in French. The Modern Language J m d , 72, 409- 414.

Hopper, P., & Thompson, S. (1980). Transitivity in grammar and discourse. Languagv, 56, 251-299.

Hubbard, P. L. (1994). Non-transformational theories of grammar: Implications for language teaching. In T. Odlin (Ed.) Pmpectivcs on pedagogical grammar (pp. 49-71). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Kaplan, A. (1993). French hm: A memoir. Chicago: Chicago University Press,

Kaplan, M. (1987). Developmental patterns of past tense acquisition among foreign language learners of French. In B. VanPatten, T. Dvorak, & J. Lee, (Eds.), Foreign languugv learning: A research Pe~pecCriVe (pp. 52-60). Cambridge, MA: Newbury House.

Kinginger, C. (1995). Toward a reflective practice of TA education. In C. Kramsch (Ed.), Redefining the hndmies of language study. AAUSC issues in language program direction (pp. 123-144). Boston: Heinle.

Krashen, S. D. (1982). Principles and practice in secund l a m aquisitim Oxford, England Pergamon.

J o u ~ , 77, 313-324.

~ t i d Reuu of Applied Linguistics, 26, 263-280.

Language JOUTTL~, 70, 133-148.

T- Bebuaa se))~& ad- (pp. 115-

65

Labov, W. (1972). The transformation of experience in narrative syntax. In Language in thc i n w city (pp. 354-396). Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.

Lakoff, G. (1987). Woma,fire, and other dangnmcs things: What catepia m d about the mind Chicago: Chi- cago University Press.

Lambrecht, K. (1994). ln$mn&m shvctzlrc and senhce f017n:Afhemyofbfic,fonyandthemcntaln@zw&tm ofdismm @wn& Cambridge studies in linguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Langacker, R. W. (1987). Fmndationr of cognitive grammar: Themetical perspzctivcs. Stanford, CA: Stan- ford University Press.

Langacker, R. W. (1991). F a c n d a h of cognitive grammar: Desmpiw afllicatia. Stanford, CA: Stan- ford University Press.

Langacker, R. W. (1994). Culture, cognition, and grammar. In M. Piitz (Ed.), Language contact and language conjhct (pp. 25-53). Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins.

Lee, J., & VanPatten, B. (1995). Making communicative language teaching happen New York: McGraw Hill.

Lightbown, P., & Spada, N. (1993). How languap are Cearned Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Lunn, P. V. (1985). The aspectual lens. Htganic Linguis-

Marks, E. (1993). Memory, desire, and pleasure in the classroom: La grande mademoiselle. MLA News-

Nehls, D. (1992). An analysis of verbal aspect as a cross-linguistic category: Implications for language teaching. InternuCiollalRevueofApplred Lin-

Oller, J. W. (1993). Reasons why some methods work. In J. W. Oller, Jr. (Ed.), Mcthodc that work: Idcatfor literacy and language tachers (pp. 374-386). Bos- ton: Heinle.

Ong, W. (1982). Oral remembering and narrative structure. In D. Tannen (Ed.), spaken and written language: ExpIoring orality and literacy (pp. 12-24). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.

Ozete, 0. (1988). Focusing on the preterite and imperfect. H e n i n , 71, 687-691.

Paivio, A. (1986). Mental ngresmtah : A dual coding a*. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Paprotti, W. (1988). A discourse perspective on tense and aspect in standard modern Greek and English. In B. Rudzka-Ostyn (Ed.) Topicr in cognitive linguistics (pp. 447-506). Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins.

Paulston, C. B. (1972). Structural pattern drills: A classification. In H. Allen & R. Campell (Eds.), TmhingEngllSh as a second language (pp. 129-138). New York: McGraw-Hill.

Pons, Cathy R. (1993). TA supervision: Are we prepar- ing a future professoriate? In David P. Benseler (Ed.) The dynamics of language program directinn. AAUSCissves an languagvpmgmm direction (pp. 19- 31). Boston: Heinle.

Rankin, J. (1994). Hit or miss, or missing: The role of

tics, 2, 49-61.

letur; 25, 3-4.

g ~ i s l i c ~ , 30,255-280.

66

second language acquisition in language teacher training. Die Untenichtspaxis, 27, 18-27.

Reinhart, T. (1984). Principles of gestalt perception in the temporal organization of narrative texts. Linguistics, 22, 779-809.

Rudzka-Ostyn, B. (Ed.), (1988). Toplcs in mgtzitiue linguistics. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins.

Rutherford, W. (1987). second languagegrammar: Learn- ing and teaching. New York: Longman.

Sharwood Smith, M. (1988a). Consciousness raising and the second language learner. In W. Ruther- ford and M. Sharwood Smith (Eds.), Grummar andseamdlanguqeknching:A b m k o f d v ( p p . 51- 60). Rowley, MA: Newbury House.

Sharwood Smith, M. (1988b). Applied linguistics and the psychology of instruction: A case for transfusion? In W. Rutherford and M. Sharwood Smith (Eds.), Grammar and secund language teaching: A book of readings (pp. 206-223). Rowley, MA: Newbury House.

Sharwood Smith, M. (1988~). Imperfective versus progressive: An exercise in contrastive pedagogical linguistics. In W. Rutherford and M. Sharwood Smith (Eds.), Grammar and second language teaching: A h k of readings (pp. 224-230). Rowley, MA: Newbury House.

Swain, M. (1985). Communicative competence: Some roles of comprehensible inputs and comprehensible output in its development. In S. Gass & C. G. Madden (Eds.), Znput in second language acquisition (pp. 236-254). Rowley, MA: Newbury House.

Tarone, E. (1988). Variation in intmlanguage. London: Edward Arnold.

Terry, R. (1981). Concepts of pastness: The @si composi and the imperfect. Foreign Language Annals,

Thogmartin, C. (1984). Tense, aspect, and context. 14, 105-110.

The French Revkw, 57, 344-349.


Tomlin, R. (1994). Functional grammars, pedagogical grammars, and communicative language teaching. In T. Odlin (Ed.), Pmpctivar on pedagogical grammar (pp. 140-178). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

VanPatten, B. (1996). Input procRFsing and grammar instruction in second language acquisition. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.

VanPatten, B., & T. Cadierno. (1993). Explicit instruction and input processing. Studies in second Lan- guage Acquisitiun, 15, 225-243.

von Glaserfeld, E. (1996). Introduction: Aspects of constructivism. In C. Fosnot (Ed.), Constructiv- ism: Thewy, perspectives, and practice (pp. 3-7). New York: Teachers College Press.

Wallace, M. (1991). Training fmign language teachers: A refictive approach Cambridge: Cambridge Uni- versity Press.

Wallace, S. (1982). Figure and ground: The interrela- tionships of linguistic categories. In P. Hopper (Ed.), Tase-mfxct: Betwen semantics and pagmatics (pp. 201-223). Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins.

Weist, R. M., Wysocka, H., Witkowska-Stadnik, K., Buczowska, W., & Konieczna, E. (1984). The defective tense hypothesis: On the emergence of tense and aspect in child Polish. Journal of Child Language, 11, 347-374.

Westfall, R., 8c Foerster, S. (n.d.). Beyond aspect: New strategies for teaching the preterite and the imperfect. Unpublished manuscript, University of Texas.

Westney, P. (1994). Rules and pedagogical grammar. In T. Odlin (Ed.), Pe@ectiues on pedapgical grammar (pp. 72-96). Cambridge: Cambridge Uni- versity Press.

Wierzbicka, A. (1988). The semantics ofgramkr . Am- sterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins.

MLJ Offers No-Fee Copying for Course Packs

THE MLJIS PLEASED TO REMIND READERS THERE IS NO COPYRIGHT FEE FOR USING ITS articles in course packs for students. We hope that this policy will encourage learning and scholar- ship by helping instructors make materials available to students. To constitute permission to use MLJ material just copy this announcement and place it in your course pack. There will continue to be a copyright charge for other use of MLJmaterial. For further information, contact:

Margaret Walsh The University of Wisconsin Press 114 N. Murray Street Madison, WI 53715-1199 Tel: (608) 262-4925 Fax: (608 262-7560 Email: [email protected]

blyth-1997-the modern language journal

Documents

teaching teachers

foreign language teachers

teaching of grammar

apprentice teachers

teachers of foreign

teaching of aspect

teaching practices

given language