Negotiation of Meaning Muhammad Zacky Saputra (0853042025)

“NEGOTIATION OF MEANING IN SECOND LANGUAGE ACQUISITION”

BY
Muhammad Zacky Saputra
0853042025
















TEACHER TRAINING AND EDUCATION FACULTY
LAMPUNG UNIVERSITY
2011


ACKLNOWLEDGE

In every country where English is being learned as the foreign language, it is going to be difficult to make use it as well as their language. Especially, in Indonesia having so many tribes and also having different mother tongue, this is believed has become difficult to acquire English even they need to master Indonesian as well. Therefore, the linguistics is attracted to investigate the way how people acquire the language.

Second language acquisition is the study of how learning creates a new language system with only limited exposure to a second language (Yufrizal, 2007). By considering this, the writer believes that the language learner where English is as the second language will face some difficult things to acquire the language as well as native. The proficiency is not as good as people who live in the country who use it as their language. Therefore, they will create a new system so that they can master it.

In this opportunity, the writer tries to investigate how people communicate in English whether there are ways when they find difficulties in acquiring the meaning is used. Because each communicator will have their own strategies to negotiate when they don’t understand what people say to them?

This is also as the requirement in having semester test. But, before we elaborate it deeply, i must say thanks to Almighty Allah who always gives us changes to learn everything in the world. Not only our God but we also thank to the greatest prophet Muhammad SWT as the leader of Moeslem. Honestly, we cannot comprehend this subject without our beloved lecture therefore we also thank to our best lecture Mr. Hery Yufrizal, M.A.,Ph.D as the Second Language Acquisition lecture who has given his merciful in teaching us this subject patiently. This whole material is taken from his book; the title is An Introduction to Second Language Acquisition.



I. INTRODUCTION


Since English is not easy, people try so many things in order to be able become proficiency in using it. Thus, they apply so many ways so that they are able to comprehend the meaning being said by the speaker. For example, it is the conversation between two speakers who have low ability in speaking English;
A : I bought a new car yesterday
B : You brought a new car yesterday
A : No, I bought a new car yesterday
B : sorry you bought or brought a new car yesterday?
A : I bought not I brought
B : Oooh,, You bought it

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

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

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










II. FRAME OF THEORIES

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

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

C. Integration
Gass and Slinker (1994) outlined four possibilities for the outcome of input. The first two take place in the intake component and result in integration, the third takes place in the integration component, and the fourth represents input that exist the system early in the process.

D. Negotiation of Meaning in Interaction
Yufrizal (2007; p.80) states Negotiation of meaning is defined as a series of exchange conducted by addressors and addressees to help themselves understand and be understood by their interlocutors. In this case, when native speakers (NSs) and non native speakers (NNSs) are involved in an interaction, both interactants work together to solve any potential misunderstanding or non understanding that occurs, by checking each others’ comprehension, requesting clarification and confirmation and by repairing and adjusting speech (Pica, 1988).
Varonis and Gass (1985) proposed a simpler model for the exchanges that create negotiation of meaning. The model consists of four primes called:
a. Trigger (T) Which invokes or stimulates incomplete understanding on the part of the hearer.
b. Indicator (I), which is the hearer’s signal of incomplete understanding.
c. Response (R) is the original speaker’s attempt to clear up the unaccepted-input, and,



d. Reaction to the response (RR), which is an element that signals either the hearer’s acceptance or continued difficulty with the speaker’s repair. The model was elaborated into the following figure and excerpt that follows:



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


III. ANALYSIS


A. DIALOG 1

This is a conversation between two people in daily activity. Both of them are different level in English upper and lower.

(RR) A: Hy Apri…!!!
(RR) B: Hy mita………
(RR) A: How are you ?
(RR) B: Fine,, so fine,,
(T) A: Where is Erwin ap?
(I) B: What,,, Erwin??
(R) A: Iyaa Erwin
(RR) B: ohhh,,,Erwin still sleeps in the room.
(T) A: Do you have plan for week end ?
(I) B: Plan??
(R) A: Yeahhh a plan.
(RR) B: owhhh am sorry,, am busy this week.
(T) A: How about next Friday ??
(I) B: Friday
(R) A: eheemmmmm
(RR) A : Ok no problem, I have free time.
(RR) B : Ok,, we will meet in next Friday
(RR) A : see you
(RR) B : ok,,, see you

Trigger (T) : Sound that can make misunderstanding
Indicator (I) : Confirmation Check, Clarification Request
Response (R) : Self Repetition
Reaction to the responsde (RR) : statement showed understanding




B.Analysis 1
Based on the conversation above, the writer analyze there are three negotiation of meaning done by the speakers. They tried to clarify each words which probably difficult to be receipted so that the conversation can run well. It commonly happens with Indonesian’s students whereas English is a foreign language. Nevertheless, the writer believes that negotiation of meaning is a part of learning the language. That is one of ways to acquire the language directly, consciously/unconsciously.











A.DIALOG II
This is a conversation between two people in daily activity. Both of them are different level in English upper and lower.
This is a conversation between two people in daily activity. Both of them are different level in English upper and lower.

(RR) A : Morning…. andree
(RR) B : morning….. bob.
(T) A : Could you help me Andree…..!!!
(I) B : Pardon
(R) A : Could you help me….

(RR) B: owhhh help you,,,
(RR) A : yeaaaahhh
(RR) B : What can I do for u friend ??
(T) A : I need grammar book, please lend me.
(I) B : Grammar,,, what for ?
(T) A : I have to do my home work, tomorrow is the dead line to submit my work
(I) B : dead line..
(R) A : ehhheemmmm
(RR) B: ok,, no problem,, I will give you that book
(RR) A : Thank you andree
(RR) B : But,, next week it should finished..!!
(RR) A : yeaahhh I will do it.
(RR) B : okk,,,, that’s good
(RR) A : thank you friend,,
(RR) B : you are welcome.

Trigger (T) : Sound that can make misunderstanding
Indicator (I) : Confirmation Check, Clarification Request
Response (R) : Self Repetition
Reaction to the responsde (RR) : statement showed understanding

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