<p>The principal aim of this essay was to study why some teachers at upper secondary school choose to work with alternative material in the English classroom, whereas others choose a combination of alternative material and coursebooks. The investigation further deals with how alternative material is used. What students think about various kinds of material and whether they are encouraged to influence the choice of material has been considered as well. The method used was interviews with three teachers and six students.</p><p>The results of the study showed that all three teachers agreed that coursebooks should not be the only teaching material used in the classroom; they believed that the use of course-books alone would be boring and not very stimulating for the students. Coursebooks combined with alternative material were considered to work very well as teachers and students benefit from the advantages of both. Furthermore, alternative material would be used more if it were not such a time-consuming business for the teachers. Concerning how the three teachers made alternative material, practise varied. One teacher for who mainly used alternative material and also made it herself, had many different sources, whereas the other two teachers mostly used books and movies. Regarding the students, their requests of teaching material varied. The majority however preferred either alternative material or a combination with coursebooks. They also declared that they are encouraged to influence the choice of material.</p>

Inaug.-diss.--Würzburg. / "Literatur": p. vii-x.

This dissertation investigates interlanguage influence, i.e. the influence of one or more non-native language on the production of a third or additional language. A qualitative and a quantitative study were conducted with speakers of Italian as third or additional language with English, Spanish or French as native or non-native languages. Subjects of Study 1 are a French Ll speaker and an English Ll speaker. Subjects of Study 2 are 238 Spanish L1 speakers and 130 English Ll speakers. Combining a traditional Crosslinguistic Influence (CLI) approach with theories of L 1, L2 and L3 production, we examine the role of crosslinguistic phonological activation during on-line processing and the effect of recency of activation on written production. It is argued that the process of transfer may be constrained by underlying crosslinguistic activation during on-line processing and that the incorporation of non-target lexicon into production may be influenced by the recent activation of a non-native language fonnally dissimilar to the intended target. We also hypothesise the existence of a cognitive process which we refer to as 'system shift' by which learners may transfer a lexical unit from one non-native language to another and then fail to recognize the source of their knowledge in the original linguistic system. We further propose two principles that interact in blocking Ll transfer: perception of correctness and association of foreignness. We also examine the relationship between the incorporation of non-target function words and the rate of subject insertion and omission in written production. Results show the rate of subject insertion to be significantly higher in the texts of English L1 and Spanish LI speakers with knowledge of French as a non-native language. We discuss the implications of our findings for a general and comprehensive theory of CLI

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.