In text-based online facilities such as text-chat rooms where most of us have ever been, it’s not easy for learners to adhere to the same topic and follow the turns like face-to-face learners do. Because each of the participants could send messages at the same time, learners need to respond more quickly so as to catch up the pace; however, when the conversational text goes to fast, there will be different responses from learners. Some might feel stressful and lose confidence but others might take it as a chance or challenge to force themselves to speed up. In my opinion, text-based online facilities are an safe and comfortable environment because we are faceless; therefore, there‘s no need to worry much about my own mistakes which would embarrass me. What’s more, in text-base environment, I can correct my own errors before sending them out, so it will kind of ensure me from losing confidence. I could feel more comfortable to ask question in public as well.
It is more convenient to approve English through internet-based facilities no matter in text chat or voice chat because of its accessibility and convenience. In the process, learners are in charge of their own learning instead of sitting and listening in regular class. When it comes to Moo like Second life which is one of the era-crossing innovations in language education and provides users another state of visual stimulation, I believe that most of us would choose Moo as the medium to converse with other language learners when it compared with tandems. It enables users to proceed with more real role play and at the same time, participants converse as if they are face to face because of the contact of avatars.
However, speakers and interlocutors do not always respond to each other as they think, so sometimes how repair moves work in negotiation depends on interlocutors. Take Kelly's experience for example which she shared in class, when she didn't understand what the interlocutor talked about, she asked for explanation but somehow the interlocutor didn't answer her directly, instead, he just said it was a joke. In the same setting, even none of the other participants answered her. I guess, for some native speakers, having a conversation with somebody else is for fun rather than learning a language so that they somehow lack a kind of motivation to keep it rolling.
On the contrary, while I was talking to a French guy, he often expressed his ideas as clearly as possible so as not to confuse me and he even corrected his typing errors before I got confused. Native speakers who don’t intent to practice language with learners or have no idea about their interlocutors seem to predominate the conversation most of the time; hence, if they don’t pass the ball back, it would reduce opportunities to negotiate meanings.
How does "faceless work on you in virtual world then?
3 則留言:
Your and Kelly's experiences do represent players' different purposes of SL use. Besides, how do you guess your interlocutors's backgrounds or intentions?
I also feel something fearful when I was in oral training lecture. But when in SL, I can chat with others smoothly. Because in classroom, i am kinda of afraid teasing by other classmates. Even they may be out of fun.
To Emma:
Most of the time I would ask them directly, but sometimes I would guess from they way interlocutors carry themselves or the content they talk about.
To Jason:
I feel the same way especially in big class. To be challenged by someone else in public seems to be a threshold before we get into another advanced stage.
張貼留言