Working Papers
in Language Education and Research
http://eliworkingpapers.org/L2 Vocabulary in the L1 Environment
Keith Barrs
Corresponding author: keith-b@kanda.kuis.ac.jp
Publication date: February, 2013	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  ISSN 2187-4972	  	  	  To cite this article
Barrs, K. (2013). L2 vocabulary in the L1 environment. Working Papers
in Language Education and Research, 1 (1), 3-10.

Scroll down for article

Working	  Papers	  in	  Language	  Education	  and	  Research	  Vol.	  1	  No.	  1.	  February	  2013,	  3	  -­‐	  10	  L2 VOCABULARY IN THE L1 ENVIRONMENT
Keith Barrs
Kanda University of International Studies	  ABSTRACT	  
Pedagogical value can be gained from raising students' awareness of the L2
lexical resource that surrounds them in their L1 environment, in the form ofloanwords existing in the linguistic landscape. Such awareness-raising can be afocused and engaging part of vocabulary development in EFL/ESL situations
around the world, wherever English has been incorporated into the workings ofthe native language. The huge wealth of English-based loanwords which havebeen incorporated into the Japanese language has the potential to be a usefullexical resource for Japanese learners of English, and as such this article
reports on the practicalities involved in setting up a digital photography
linguistic landscape project. Students were tasked with documenting examples ofEnglish usage found in the society around them, uploading these pictures to aclass Flickr.com photo-sharing page, and then carrying out classroom-based
activities that focused students' attention on phonological and morphologicalsimilarities and differences between the original words and the adapted forms
found in Japanese.	  	  	  	  1. INTRODUCTION

Language contact and transfer situations lead to the absorption, adaptation andintegration of linguistic elements from one language into the other. In Japan in particular,
extensive language contact with Chinese, English and various European languages has
resulted not only in the modern Japanese orthographic system consisting of an interplay offive scripts (Barrs, 2011), but also in a lexicon consisting of a stratified layering of native,
Sino-Japanese, and foreign elements (Tsujimura, 2002; Yamaguchi, 2007). Such hybridity inthe workings of a language is often most outwardly visible in the linguistic landscape of thecountry, incorporating a vibrant and dynamic admixture of scripts and vocabulary items onshop signs, wall posters, road markings and various other ‘inscriptions’ (Wienold, 1994).	  	  	  3	  Working	  Papers	  in	  Language	  Education	  and	  Research	  Vol.	  1	  No.	  1.	  February	  2013,	  3	  -­‐	  10	  Pedagogical value can arise from drawing students’ attention to this non-native
vocabulary that exists in the linguistic landscape of their native language. Once awarenesshas been raised of the quantity of words that are incorporated into their social environment,and students have been encouraged to document such occurrences through the use of personal
diaries, word lists and photography, focus can then be concentrated on the types and forms of
the words found. This can be done through dedicated classroom practice that focuses on thecross-linguistic similarity found between the words in their original L1 and their modified L2
versions. This article reports on the initiation and implementation of a pedagogical activity
that involved students interacting with their social environment and investigating issues ofcross-linguistic similarity found between English-based loanwords in the Japanese linguistic
landscape and their original English language forms.

2. BACKGROUND

2.1 Bringing the Linguistic Landscape into the Classroom
Where L2 interactional opportunities outside of the classroom are restricted by the L1
environment, students can be made aware of the value in examining the linguistic landscapearound them. They can be guided to record instances of English use outside of the classroom,and to bring these recordings into class for group analysis and discussion. Attention can befocused on semantic, phonological, morphological and syntactic similarities and differences
between the words in their L1 and English, potentially assisting students in their vocabularydevelopment. For this particular project, students were asked to photograph instances ofEnglish written in katakana, found in the linguistic landscape, and to upload the photos to an
online photo-sharing website (Flickr.com). These photographs then became the data source
for classroom analyses and discussion, which involved a primary focus on morphological andphonological adaptations.	  	  	  4	  Working	  Papers	  in	  Language	  Education	  and	  Research	  Vol.	  1	  No.	  1.	  February	  2013,	  3	  -­‐	  10	  2.2. Previous Research Concerning the Forms and Functions of English in JapanThe Japanese linguistic landscape has been shown, through a specialised research
investigation conducted in Tokyo, to include inscriptions of 14 different languages (Backhaus,2007, p. 73) used across a range of media such as advertising billboards, road signs, street
markings and window posters (Backhaus, 2007). The English that appears in the Japanese
linguistic landscape takes on a multitude of forms and functions, ranging across a continuum
from simple decorative applications with little concern for denotative meaning (Dougill,2008) to purposeful instructional uses of the language intended for foreign travellers andresidents (Backhaus, 2007). Discussing the various stages of assimilation of English into theJapanese language, Loveday (1996) proposes a ‘scale of assimilation’ which can be seen in
the linguistic landscape representations of English. (Figure 1 below is an adapted version ofthat which appears in Loveday, 1996, p. 120).

Figure. 1. Assimilation Scale of English in Japan	  	  	  5	  Working	  Papers	  in	  Language	  Education	  and	  Research	  Vol.	  1	  No.	  1.	  February	  2013,	  3	  -­‐	  10	  2.3 Defining the Terms
Because of the various forms in which English can appear in Japanese society, as
shown in Figure 1, it is of primary importance to explicitly define the specific form ofEnglish which is to become the object of analysis; be it English appearing only in Romanletters (least assimilated), in mixed scripts, or in Japanese script only (most assimilated). For
the study under discussion in this article, English written in katakana was the object ofanalysis. Katakana is most commonly associated with the representation of foreign loanwords(gairaigo).
Further, for the purposes of this activity the concept of the linguistic landscape wasseen within a broader definition than that proposed by Backhaus in his 2007 study. Backhaus
follows Landry and Bourhis (1997, p. 25) by seeing the linguistic landscape as the language
contained on identifiable ‘signs’, but acknowledgement is also given to varying
interpretations of the term and one of these, that by Wienold (1994, p. 640), is the one
adopted for this pedagogical activity; namely that the linguistic landscape includes
inscriptions of all kinds appearing in society, such as those on clothing, newspapers andpersonal items.

3. METHODOLOGY

3.1. The Set-up of the Activity
For detailed step-by-step instructions of the set-up process for this activity, please see thedescription in Barrs (2012).	  	  	  6	  Working	  Papers	  in	  Language	  Education	  and	  Research	  Vol.	  1	  No.	  1.	  February	  2013,	  3	  -­‐	  10	  4. DISCUSSION
4.1. Classroom Analysis of the Photos
Once the activity had been initiated and photos were being emailed to the class Flickr
page, the next stage was to construct an analysis framework with which the language
contained in the pictures could be analysed. It was decided to focus primarily on phonology
and morphology as these structural elements precede the analysis of meaning in the search forcross-linguistic similarity (Ringbom, 2007). Figures 2 and 3 show the framework used for theanalysis of phonology and morphology respectively.

Figure. 2. Analysis Framework for Phonology.	  	  	  7	  Working	  Papers	  in	  Language	  Education	  and	  Research	  Vol.	  1	  No.	  1.	  February	  2013,	  3	  -­‐	  10	  Figure. 3. Analysis Framework for Morphology.

Students worked in groups to analyse each of the pictures that had been uploaded to the class
Flickr site, in terms of the phonological and morphological similarities and differences they
noticed between the original English word and the Japanese loanword. Students were first
asked to fill out the phonological table for the language which appeared in the pictures,
identifying the extent of the phonological change (by using a dictionary), the specific type ofchange (such as vowel epenthesis), and other words which are known to follow similar
patterns of adaptation. They were then asked to analyse the morphology using a similar table,in terms of the extent of the change (by conducting a Google search), the type (such asback/front/mid clipping) and the possible reason(s) behind the formation of the truncation.

5. CONCLUSION

The main goal of this activity was to explicitly draw students’ attention to thesimilarities and differences found between words as they appear in their L1 and L2. It is
generally accepted in the field of first and second language education that such consciousness	  	  	  8	  Working	  Papers	  in	  Language	  Education	  and	  Research	  Vol.	  1	  No.	  1.	  February	  2013,	  3	  -­‐	  10	  raising activities can assist students in their vocabulary acquisition, by helping them toexplicitly focus on and critically examine vocabulary items. Indeed, Nation proposes that
one of the four main strands involved in vocabulary learning is ‘language-focused learning’,
helping students to focus on form through the deliberate concentration on specific vocabulary
items.
Moving beyond the practical considerations of the implementation of this activity,
empirical research can be carried out not only on the quantity, type and form of words foundby students participating in such an activity, but also on the qualitative aspects of students’reactions to the words. Questions can be asked about: reactions to the incorporation ofloanwords into one’s native language, reflections on the sociolinguistic considerations
involved in the use/non-use of the loanwords, and opinions on the linguistic status of adeveloping variety of Japanese English. These are some of the potential future directions forwork involving the investigation of L2 vocabulary in the L1 environment.

6. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

Thank you to RILS&LE for assistance with the funding to present this activity at KOTESOL
in South Korea, 2011.	  	  	  9	  Working	  Papers	  in	  Language	  Education	  and	  Research	  Vol.	  1	  No.	  1.	  February	  2013,	  3	  -­‐	  10	  7. REFERENCES
Backhaus, P. (2007). Linguistic Landscapes: A Comparative Study of Urban Multilingualism
in Tokyo. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
Barrs, K. (2012). Photographing, uploading and discussing English words in Japanesesociety. The Language Teacher, 36(5).
Barrs, K. (2011). Unlocking the encoded English vocabulary in the Japanese language.
English Today, 27(03), 15–20.
Dougill, J. (2008). Japan and English as an alien language. English Today, 24(1), 18–22.
Landry, R. & Bourhis, R. (1997). Linguistic landscape and ethnolinguistic vitality: An
empirical study. Journal of Language and Social Psychology 19(1): 23–49.
Ringbom, H. (2007). Cross-linguistic similarity in foreign language learning. Clevedon:
Multilingual Matters.
Stanlaw, J. (2004). Japanese English Language and culture contact. Hong Kong: Hong Kong
University Press.
Tsujimura, N. (2002). The Handbook of Japanese Linguistics. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers
Ltd.
Wienold, G. (1994). Inscriptions in daily life. In Sabban, A. & Schmitt, C. (eds.), Der
sprachliche Alltag. Linguistik–Rhetorik–Literaturwissenschaft: Festschrift für Wolf
Dieter Stempel, pp. 635-652. Tübingen: Niemeyer.
Yamaguchi, T. (2007). Japanese linguistics: An introduction. London: Continuum.	  	  	  10