Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t8hqh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-29T07:18:29.806Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Choosing the languages of subtitles and spoken dialogues for media presentations: Implications for second language education

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 November 2008

W.E. Lambert ,
I. Boehler  and
N. Sidoti
W.E. Lambert*
Affiliation:
McGill University
I. Boehler
Affiliation:
McGill University
N. Sidoti
Affiliation:
McGill University
*
W.E. Lambert, Psychology Department, McGill University, 1205 Dr. Penfield Avenue, Montreal, Quebec, Canada, H3A 1B1
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This study explored novel ways of using the media for education, especially second language instruction. Various combinations of visual and auditory presentations of messages were compared, for example, both written script and spoken dialogue in subjects’ first language (L1), or script and/or dialogue in a second laguage (L2), and so on. Subjects were elementary pupils with advanced training in L2. The dialogues of radio programs were transcribed, permitting such combinations as: dialogue in L2, script in L1 (the normal subtitling format); dialogue in L1, script in L2 (reversed subtitling); both dialogue and script in L1 or in L2; and so forth. On L1 and L2 tests of memory, certain combinations (e.g., reversed subtitling) were much more promising for the development or maintenance of second language skills, or for literacy training, than was conventional subtitling. Theoretical and practical inplications are discussed.

Type
Articles
Information
Applied Psycholinguistics , Volume 2 , Issue 2 , May 1981 , pp. 133 - 148
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1981

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Cziko, G. A.Differences in first- and second-language reading: The use of syntactic, semantic and discourse constraints. The Canadian Modern Language Review, 1978, 34, 473–489.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Genesee, F.Scholastic effects of French immersion: An overview after ten years. Interchange, 1978–9, 9, 20–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goodman, K. S.Reading: A psycholinguistic guessing game. Journal of the Reading Specialist, 1967, 6, 126–135.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lambert, W.E., & Tucker, G. R.Bilingual education of children: The St. Lambert experiment. Rowley, Mass.: Newbury House, 1972.Google Scholar
Maccoby, E.E. Sex differences in intellectual functioning. In Maccoby, E. E. (Ed.)., The development of sex differences. Stanford, Calif.: Stanford University Press, 1966.Google Scholar
Neisser, U.Cognitive psychology. New York: Appleton-Century–Crofts, 1967.Google Scholar
Ryan, E.B., & Semmel, M.I.Reading as a constructive language process. Reading Research Quarterly, 1969, 5, 59–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sherman, J.A.Sex-related cognitive differences. Springfield, Ill.: C.C. Thomas, 1978.Google Scholar
Smith, F.Understanding reading. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1971.Google Scholar
Swain, M.French immersion programs across Canada. The Canadian Modern Language Review, 1974, 31, 117–128.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Swain, M.Test de Compréhension Auditive, (Niveau B). The Ontario Institute for Studies in Education, Toronto, 1979.Google Scholar