P30
as the learner’s proficiency in the language increases (Lantolf, 1997; Parr & Krashen, 1986). An interesting finding in Lantolf’s 1997 study of the use of language play by university students studying Spanish is that learners tended to engage in language play most frequently after more meaningful activities, such as conversations, and less so after mechanical tasks, such as grammar study and pattern drills. For foreign language instruction, language play may be activated through meaningful activities and may facilitate the language learning process. In this perspective, language play is rehearsal of private speech and thus, it is part of the cognitive work of language learning. Thus, private speech, mental rehearsal, and language play foster flex- ibility and change within the interlanguage system of the learner, resulting in its growth and development.
Recent research (Hall, 2013) has also revealed an interactive dimension to the self- talk of teachers, inasmuch as it can serve to elicit problem-solving assistance from learn- ers in addition to eliciting empathy from them and maintaining their attention during the lesson. In this regard, self-talk may have a role to play as an important classroom resource for prompting non-traditional participation opportunities. See Chapter 8 for a fuller discussion of how teachers can use their own self-talk to configure new participa- tion dimensions in the language classroom.
■?????As students acquire language, why does language play decrease?
This view of language play as rehearsal contrasts with the view of language play as fun or self-amusement known as ludic play (Broner & Tarone, 2001; Cook, 2000). Fun, defined as “an experience of positive affect often associated with laughter” (Broner & Tarone, p. 364), can be play with language form, including sounds, rhyme, rhythm, song, etc., and it can also be play with meaning, combining semantic elements to create words that do not exist. Tarone (2000) points out that children often play with language they know or are learning for enjoyment and self-entertainment. Of importance to language teachers is that when students invent words, create songs, or write graffiti on their note- books in the language, they are engaging in ludic play, and are mediating learning as a result of reflecting upon language, exploring the language, and learning it. Thus, ludic language play, which is common in L1 language development, may contribute to the growth and development of the L2 learner’s interlanguage (Broner & Tarone, 2001). In a similar vein, humor itself has a role to play in the foreign language classroom. In their study of interactions in a university advanced Spanish conversation course, Pomerantz and Bell (2011) found that students used humor to engage in language use in a less threatening way than the exchanges generally expected in the typical TL classroom, to diverge slightly from the generic conventions of classroom communication, and to con- struct multiple meanings that may transcend the immediate activity and pertain to the larger context of the particular students and teacher in the class. To this end, humor is thought to facilitate language acquisition because it not only necessitates attention to discourse features but also addresses the key issue of unpredictability (van Lier, 1996). Pomerantz and Bell (2011) conclude that “humor can function to create safe houses” (p. 159) in which learners help shape their own language-learning situation and create novel ways of interacting.
It is important to remember that sociocultural (that is, Vygotskyan) theory differs from the Interaction Hypothesis because of the different emphasis placed on internal cognitive processes. Whereas the Interaction Hypothesis offers learners the input they need to activate internal processes, sociocultural theory maintains that “speaking (and writing) mediates thinking, which means that people can gain control over their mental
P31