第２号

福井大学
University of Fukui

国際教育交流研究

第２号〈研究論文〉

EFL 学生の会話力の認識について：
学習者の自己評価対 CEFR の基準を用いた面接者による評価‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥ ベッチェ・ニコランジェロ，ヘネシー・クリストファー

１

福井県の方言に対する日本人の意識・イメージに関するパイロット調査‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥ ヘネシー・クリストファー １３

非漢字系中級学習者の論文読解における語の意味理解に関する読み誤りの分析―教育実践論文の読解プロセスの観察データから―‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥ 桑原陽子 ２５〈実践・調査報告〉

国際テレビ会議システムを利用した第二言語としての英語
（ESL）
能力の向上
‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥ ボイド・Ｄ ３７

外国にルーツを持つ子どもの学習を支える学生の実践のプロセス―コーディネーターの省察から―‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥ 半原

芳子 ４９〈研究ノート〉

日本人英語学習者に共通してみられるエラー：冠詞の使用‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥ ダイクス・ロバート ６３

バイリンガル話者のコードスイッチング‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥ ダイクス・ロバート ７３

International Education and Exchange Research Vol.2〈Research papers〉
Perceptions of Japanese EFL Student Oral Language Ability:
Learner Self-Assessment versus Interviewer Assessment Using CEFR Descriptors‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥Nicolangelo Becce，Christopher Hennessy １
A Pilot Investigation into Japanese Speakers' Perceptions and Attitudes of Dialects in
Fukui Prefecture‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥ Christopher Hennessy １３An analysis of the errors concerning the meaning of vocabulary on the reading processes for academic papers of intermediate Japanese learners from non-Kanji cultures―from the observed data of the process of reading academic papers concerning educational practices‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥ Yoko Kuwabara ２５〈Practice and research reports〉
Improving ESL Using a Global Videoconference‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥ D. Boyd ３７
The University Students' Process of Designing Learning Support System
for a Foreigner in a Japanese Elementary School ; A Coordinator's Reflection‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥ Yoshiko Hanbara ４９〈Research Note〉
A Common Error with Japanese Learners of English: Article Usage‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥ Robert Dykes ６３
Code-Switching Among Bilinguals‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥ Robert Dykes ７３

Perceptions of Japanese EFL Student Oral Language Ability: Learner Self−Assessment versus Interviewer Assessment Using CEFR Descriptors

Perceptions of Japanese EFL Student Oral Language Ability:
Learner Self-Assessment versus Interviewer Assessment Using
CEFR Descriptors
Nicolangelo Becce, Christopher Hennessy
Abstract
Each April from 2015 to 2017, the authors, in conjunction with other faculty members at
a Japanese national university, conducted five-minute oral interviews based on the Common European Framework of Reference for Languages (CEFR) with over 800 first-year
students each year for English class placement. This CEFR-based interview system wasprimarily developed by the authors, utilizing the CEFR descriptors for "Listening," "Spoken Interaction," and "Spoken Production." As an additional part of this interview process, participating students were asked to self-assess their own English language ability
through a questionnaire utilizing descriptors from the A1 Level to the C2 level, also inthe categories of "Listening," "Spoken Interaction," and "Spoken Production." In the firstpart of this paper, the authors will explain the rationale for using the CEFR and CEFR-J(Common European Framework of Reference for Languages − Japan) as the framework for developing this interview system, give a brief synopsis of the interview system
in general, and describe the CEFR self-assessment questionnaire utilized. In the second
part, the authors will give an analysis of Japanese EFL learners' own CEFR self-assessment versus the CEFR profile given by interviewers through the interview process.
The results as a whole suggest that, overall, the Japanese EFL learners involved in thisstudy assessed "Listening," "Spoken Interaction," and "Spoken Production" higher thanthe CEFR profiles they received through the interview process, despite general claims
about Japanese language learners' tendency toward "modesty" in describing their own
language abilities. In the final section, the paper offers an overview of issues surrounding the development of English interview protocols - including question creation andnorming issues - and future research planned by the authors on the oral interview protocol system.
Keywords: EFL, CEFR, CEFR-J, oral placement interview, Japanese higher education.

―１―

国際教育交流研究第２号

1. Introduction
In 2013, the Japanese national university where this research was conducted reformed its
English language curriculum after having become one of the funding recipients of the MEXT
Global 30 Plus program. This program, supported by the Japanese Ministry of Education, Culture,
Sports, Science and Technology (MEXT), aims at promoting the internationalization of the academic environment of Japanese universities. During the academic years 2014-2015, 2015-2016,
and 2016-2017, this new language program developed through MEXT Global 30 Plus involved 16
full-time instructors and around 1,600 first- and second-year students of the faculties of Engineering, Medical Sciences, and Education and Regional Studies. The students were divided into 67
English language classes of 24 students each that met twice, on average, a week for 90 minutes.
For each of the academic years, the curriculum started with a focus on personal communication,
gradually shifting toward English for professional communication and TOEIC (Test of English
for International Communication) Listening and Reading test preparation.
Since, in compliance with the MEXT requirements, this English language program had specific goals in terms of average TOEIC scores among the student population, the TOEIC test wasalso used during the academic years 2013-2014 and 2014-2015 for placement purposes. But, at thesame time, given that the first part of the language curriculum started with a focus on communication-based activities, the authors developed a new placement system that could place students
according to their spoken English level, as well as an activity capable of producing a positive affective outcome in the interviewees. In order to develop a system that could be valid on an international level, but that at the same time could be flexible enough to be tailored to the specificneeds of the student population, the authors decided to follow the Common European Framework of Reference for Languages (CEFR) (Council of Europe, 2001) and its Japanese counterpart,the CEFR-J. Indeed, the CEFR is being integrated into English education in Japan by MEXT
from 2020 (MEXT, 2015; "New Standardized College," 2017) and the CEFR-J project is now actively contributing in the updating process of the CEFR (Council of Europe, 2017).
Besides for developing an entire interview system based on CEFR and CEFR-J, the authors
also had all 1,600-plus participating students of the interview sessions in April 2016 and 2017 complete language self-assessment questionnaires based on "Listening," "Spoken Interaction," and"Spoken Production." In this paper, the authors will show the results from comparing the CEFR
profile given to students by their interviewer versus their own perceived CEFR profile based on
their own self-assessment. In order to show this analysis, the authors will first describe the CEFR
and CEFR-J and the rationale for using this as a framework, and then describe the CEFR self-assessment questionnaire given to students. They will then lay out the methodology for this comparison, followed by the results and discussion. They will conclude with future directions of theirresearch and the interview process as a whole.
―２―Perceptions of Japanese EFL Student Oral Language Ability: Learner Self−Assessment versus Interviewer Assessment Using CEFR Descriptors

1-1 The CEFR and CEFR-J
The Common European Framework of Reference for Languages (CEFR) is a language
framework developed by the Council of Europe as a method of learning and assessing language
use in Europe. The CEFR divides learners into 6 levels (A1, A2, B1, B2, C1, C2) according to theirreading, listening, speaking and writing abilities. A language-independent framework by definition, the CEFR has been adapted to the specific needs of the English language teaching contexts
in Japan by Tono and Negishi (2012), who developed a new framework, the CEFR-J (Common
European Framework of Reference for Languages − Japan).
The CEFR-J refines the "can do" descriptors developed by the Council of Europe, and further divides the original framework into 12 levels (Pre-A1; A1.1, A1.2, A1.3; A2.1, A2.2; B1.1, B1.2;
B2.1, B2.2; C1; C2). Moreover, the CEFR-J introduces a wordlist of 5,639 words, covering the levels
from Pre-A1 to B2. This wordlist is based on the analysis of major English textbooks used in
Asian regions (Tono & Negishi, 2012). Both the CEFR and CEFR-J "can do" descriptors for speaking were used as a starting point for the creation of a set of new descriptors for this interview
protocol.
The authors chose to use the CEFR and CEFR-J as frameworks for creating this interview
system for three reasons. First and foremost, as mentioned above, CEFR has been set by MEXT
to be integrated into English education in Japan by 2020 (MEXT 2015, "New Standardized College," 2017). Next, with this reform, Tono (2017) has mentioned the timeliness of any research activity connected to CEFR. Third, Tono (投野 2013) further described CEFR as offering a framework to shed light on utilizing both language communication ability and general everyday activities, which was part of the design of the personal communication-based English language program at the university in which this interview system was designed.

1-2 The Interview System
In order to conduct over 800-plus interviews over one week with limited personnel, theauthors decided that interviews could last no longer than five minutes. Given the time constraints, in terms of both general preparation and norming process for the interviewers as well as
in terms of available time to concretely interview the students, the authors decided to develop aninterview system using the following "can do" descriptors:
A1 − I can ask and answer simple questions, initiate and respond to simple statements in areas of immediate need or on very familiar topics.
A2 − I can give simple descriptions of things and make comparisons. I can describe past activities and personal experiences.
B1 − I can explain and give reasons for my plans, intentions and actions.
B2 − I can develop an argument well enough to be followed without difficulty most of the―３―

国際教育交流研究第２号

time. I can speculate about causes, consequences and hypothetical situations.
The A1 level is preceded by a Pre-A1 level that does not currently have any "can do" descriptor, given that the authors decided to define it as the result of the interview result in casethe interviewee performance was not sufficient to be considered at the A1 level. Apart from the
Pre-A1 level, the four "can do" descriptors here reported follow the original CEFR scale model,
except that they cover only the first four original levels (A1-B2). This choice has been made fortwo main reasons: the first being, the authors expected the student population to be composed, inmost cases, of A and B-level students, with only a limited number of C-level students based on
previous TOEIC scores by the student populations as well as the understanding of the CEFR
level system and the level of textbooks used by the students of that specific Japanese national
university. Consequently, the authors assumed that, for the expected student population, regrouping the levels B2, C1 and C2 into "B2+" would not have affected, in a determinant way, thegrouping of students in different classes. The second reason is directly related to time constraint;
as explained above, each interview had to be contained within five minutes. Since the interview
protocol workflow (see Figure I) always starts from the lowest levels (from Pre-A1 to B2+), thechoice to avoid the assessment of the interviewee performance beyond the B2 level was believedto help the interviewers stay within this five-minute time limit.

Figure I. Sample Interview Protocol―４―Perceptions of Japanese EFL Student Oral Language Ability: Learner Self−Assessment versus Interviewer Assessment Using CEFR Descriptors

1-3 The CEFR Self-Assessment
Before the actual interview, students were explicitly told that they would have a short interview with a Language Center instructor. In addition, they were told that the purpose of the interview was to see how they could speak English, and that during the interviews they shouldhave relaxed, and tried to speak as much as they could. Moreover, students received a self-assessment form in which they were supposed to circle all the descriptors that described their perceived levels of English language proficiency. Figure II represents an adapted version of the selfassessment grid included in the Common European Framework of Reference for Languages andtranslated by the Goethe-Institut of Tokyo (吉島 2004).

Figure II. Self-Assessment FormIn this table, only the descriptors related to the categories of "Listening," "Spoken Interaction," and "Spoken Production" are maintained. The purpose of this self-assessment form was togive interviewees an idea of their language abilities that did not focus on the pernicious dichotomy "wrong versus correct answer," but rather, following the principles of the Common European Framework of Reference, it gave them a more empowering overview of the goals that they
could achieve in terms of communication in a second language.
Apart from the pedagogical purpose implicit in the activity of self-assessing their language
proficiency through CEFR Can-Do descriptors, this self-assessment activity gave the authors achance to compare the students' perceived language abilities with the interview profiles assessedby the interviewers.

―５―国際教育交流研究

第２号

2. Methodology
The authors sought to compare the results of the interview profiles given to students by theinterviewers against the results of students' own CEFR self-assessment. This comparison isbased on a simple numerical analysis of interview profiles versus self-assessment profiles, inwhich A1 is assigned numerical value 1, A2 is 2, B1 is 3, B2 is 4, C1 is 5, and C2 is 6. All student
profiles − both the interview and self-assessment − were transferred into numerical values
based on this scale through Microsoft Excel. The results will be described in the next section.

Figure III. Comparison Between Interview Profiles and Self-Assessment Results − 2017

3. Findings
Figure III represents a comparison between the self-assessment results and the interview
profiles for the academic year 2017-2018. The first four columns on the left side of the figure show
the results of the self-assessment profiles divided into interview profiles. After the authors collected the self-assessment results, they calculated the average between listening, spoken interaction and spoken production of each interviewee. Consequently, they divided all the self-assessment results in four groups, according to the interview results, namely A1, A2, B1, B2+ (whichmeans B2, C1 and C2 combined). Since the original CEFR Self-Assessment Grid does not provide―６―Perceptions of Japanese EFL Student Oral Language Ability: Learner Self−Assessment versus Interviewer Assessment Using CEFR Descriptors

any descriptors for the Pre-A1 level, the authors decided not to consider all the forms resulting in
the Pre-A1 range, because they thought it was possible that some students might have misunderstood the instructions, thus leaving the self-assessment form blank and incomplete.
All the CEFR levels (Pre-A1, A1, A2, B1, B2+) are represented in different shades of gray.
The four columns on the left side of the figure seem to show a clear pattern. In fact, it seems that
there is a certain degree of consistency between the self-assessment results and the interview
profiles, which means that, from the interview profiles A1 to those in the B2+ range, students
seemed to gradually self-assess themselves at higher levels of language proficiency.
The right side of the figure shows a clear comparison between the total self-assessment results (second column from the right) and the interview results (first column from the right). What
seems to be clear from the interview results is that, in accordance with Tono and Negishi (2012),
more than eighty percent of the students were assessed either A1 or A2, and only a limited number of students were assessed at the B1 level or higher (it might be useful to add that very similar results were also obtained in 2015 and 2016). On the other hand, there is an evident discrepancy between the interview results and the self-assessment results, given that less than 65% of
the students self-assessed themselves either A1 or A2 level, and roughly 30% of them self-assessed themselves at the B1 level. Considering that this self-assessment procedure was imple-

Figure IV. Comparison Between Interview Profiles and Self-Assessment Results - 2016―７―

国際教育交流研究第２号

mented in 2016, it is important to note that in both 2016-2017 and 2017-2018 the results of bothself-assessment and interviews are quite similar. Figure IV shows the same type of comparison
chart between self-assessment results and interview results, this time in relation to the academic
year 2016-2017.

4. Discussion
The data collected give the opportunity to make a few considerations. As Runnels (2013)
pointed out, it seems to be normally assumed that, "for self-assessment surveys in particular,[Japanese survey-takers are] subject to Japanese cultural factors related to modesty" (p. 5; seealso Matsuno, 2009). Yet, the data seem to show that students, at least in this specific case, might
have been more lenient toward their listening and speaking skills compared to the results of theplacement interviews. It is important to point out that the self-assessment form was only related
to listening, spoken interaction and spoken production, and it did not have any descriptors forreading and writing skills, meaning that, if students were asked to assess their reading and writing proficiency as well, the self-assessment results could have been different. What seems to be
sure from the self-assessment results is that, as can be noticed in figures V-VI, by considering A1

Figure V. Self-Assessment Results According to Interview Profiles A1-A2―８―

Perceptions of Japanese EFL Student Oral Language Ability: Learner Self−Assessment versus Interviewer Assessment Using CEFR Descriptors

Figure VI. Self-Assessment Results According to Interview Profiles B1-B2+=1, A2=2, B1=3 and so on, then the total average self-assessment result becomes 2.16 on a scalethat goes from 1 to 6, which means that, at least in this specific case, the idea that Japanese survey-takers normally tend to choose neutral responses seems to be in contradiction with the datacollected (see Runnels, 2013; Dornyei& Taguchi, 2010).
¨
On the other hand, the fact that a relatively limited number of students (at least in comparison with the interview results) chose A1 as well as B2 or higher levels could be related to the factthat low-achieving students might consider their proficiency level as higher than it really is, and,vice versa, high-achieving students might feel that their English proficiency is still too limited
compared with their expectations. While this assumption is, at this stage of the research, nothing
more than speculation, it might be useful to notice that the same trend was already observedwith the self-assessment results of the academic year 2016-2017, and it might be interesting tocompare the self-assessment results with other data collected, for example the nervousness levelof the interviewees as perceived by the interviewers, or the answers collected through the postinterview questionnaires handed out to the interviewees after the interviews.

―９―国際教育交流研究第２号

5. Conclusion
As already mentioned, further research needs to be done on many levels, for example interms of error variance (Brown, 2005). In this sense, the researchers are trying to collect a number of video interviews from a variety of different student populations (for example, at the University of L'Aquila in Italy) in order to test the flexibility of the protocol system in different social,
cultural, and linguistic contexts, and also to use Rasch analysis (Boone, Staver, & Yale, 2015) totest the norming process and study the protocol system from the interviewers' point of view.
Among the other aspects that the authors are planning to investigate, there is how to further streamline and simplify the norming session for the academic year 2018-2019 through ablind assessment based on developed and updated protocols, as well as practice interview sessions with local high schools in order to test the interview system at the secondary level of education. In addition, to further simplify the interview and assessment process for interviewers, amore detailed analysis of the CEFR descriptors will be conducted, and new ways to develop a
flexible user interface for various contexts will be explored (for example, through the use of tablets or laptop screens to display the interview protocols rather than single sheets of A4 paper.)To study more in detail the interview system in affective terms for the interviewees, further
breakdown and analysis of interviewee self-assessment and interview profile will be conducted,
and, based on the questionnaires that interviewees compiled after the interviews conducted during the academic years 2015-2016 and 2016-2017, a qualitative analysis of the interview experience will be conducted.

References
Boone, W. J., Staver, J. R., & Yale M. S. (2015) Rasch analysis in the human sciences. New York, NY:
Springer.
Brown, J.D. (2005) Testing in language programs: a comprehensive guide to English language assessment.
Upple Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Council of Europe (2001) The Common European Framework of Reference for Languages: learning,teaching, assessment. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Council of Europe (2017) Common European Framework of Reference for Languages: learning, teaching,assessment. Companion volume with new descriptors. Provisional edition September 2017.
<https://rm.coe.int/common-european-framework-of-reference-for-languages-learningteaching/168074a4e2> (Accessed November 27, 2017).
D!rnyei, Z., & Taguchi, T. (2010) Questionnaires in second language research: Construction, administration, and processing. New York, NY: Routledge.
Matsuno, S. (2009) Self-, peer-, and teacher-assessments in Japanese university EFL writing. Language Testing, 26 (1), 75-100.
―１０―Perceptions of Japanese EFL Student Oral Language Ability: Learner Self−Assessment versus Interviewer Assessment Using CEFR Descriptors

Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology (MEXT) (2002) Developing a strategic plan to cultivate “Japanese with English abilities”: Plan to improve English and Japaneseabilities.
<http://www.mext.go.jp/english/news/2002/07/020901.htm> (Accessed November 27,2017).
Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology (MEXT) (2015) 生徒の英語力向上推進プラン.
<http://www.mext.go.jp/a̲menu/kokusai/gaikokugo/̲̲icsFiles/afieldfile/2015/07/21/
1358906̲01̲1.pdf> (Accessed November 27, 2017).
New standardized college entrance exam to adjust English test format. (2017). The Mainichi Shimbun.
<https://mainichi.jp/english/articles/20170516/p2a/00m/0na/020000c> (Accessed November 27, 2017).
Runnels, J. (2013) Student ability, self-assessment, and teacher assessment on the CEFR-J's can-dostatements. The Language Teacher, 37.5, September/October 2013, 3-7.
Tono, Y. (2017) The CEFR-J and its impact on English language teaching in Japan. JACET International Convention. Selected Papers Vol. 4.
<http://www.jacet.org/publication/selected-papers/past-issues/> (Accessed November
27, 2017).
Tono, Y. & Negishi, M. (2012) The CEFR-J: Adapting the CEFR for English language teaching inJapan. JALT Framework & Language Portfolio SIG Newsletter 8, 5-12.
投野由紀夫/編 (2013) 『英語到達度指標 CEFR−J ガイドブック CAN−DO リスト作成･活用』東京: 大修館書店.
吉島･大橋 (訳･編) (2004)『ヨーロッパ言語共通参照枠組み(CEF)の最近の動向』Tokyo, JP: Goethe-Institut, 28-29.
<https://www.jpf.go.jp/j/publish/japanese/euro/pdf/01-3.pdf> (Accessed November 27,2017).

―１１―

国際教育交流研究

第２号

EFL学生の会話力の認識について：学習者の自己評価対CEFRの基準を用いた面接者による評価
ベッチェ・ニコランジェロ，ヘネシー・クリストファー
２０１５年から２０１７年の３年間、毎年４月に、筆者はその他教員陣と共に、日本の国立大学の８００
人を超える学部１年生を対象に、英語授業のクラス分けのため、ヨーロッパ共通参照枠（CEFR）に基づく５分間の面接試験を行った。この CEFR に基づく面接試験制度は、同フレームワークの「聴解」「対話」「会話生産」の基準を活用して主に筆者らが開発したものである。この面接試
験過程の一環として、参加学生はアンケートへの回答により、自分の英語力について、「聴解」「対話」「会話生産」の各分野について CEFR のレベル A1から C2までの自己評価を行った。当論文
では、はじめに、CEFR 及び CEFR−J（ヨーロッパ共通参照枠−日本）を当面接試験制度を開発するうえでのフレームワークとして活用した理論的根拠を説明する。そのうえで、面接試験制
度の概要に触れ、また評価において使用した CEFR 自己評価のためのアンケートについて紹介する。次に、日本の EFL 学習者による CEFR 自己評価、及び面接試験を通じた面接者による
CEFR に基づく評価について比較分析する。全体的な結果として、この研究に参加した日本のEFL 学習者は、「聴解」「対話」「会話生産」の全ての分野において、面接者による評価よりも自己評価結果の方が高かった。日本人の外国語学習者は、一般的に、自分の言語能力を「控えめに」表現する傾向にあると言われているにも関わらずである。最後に、設問や評価基準等を含む英語の面接試験を開発するうえでの諸問題について概要を示し、また口頭試験制度に関する将来的な研究計画について記す。

―１２―

A Pilot Investigation into Japanese Speakers’ Perceptions and Attitudes of Dialects in Fukui Prefecture

A Pilot Investigation into Japanese Speakers' Perceptions andAttitudes of Dialects in Fukui Prefecture
Christopher Hennessy
Abstract
Recent research papers in perceptual dialectology have shown strong evidence forawareness, use, and affinity towards a Hokuriku dialect (Tanaka et al. 2016; Aizawa
2012). However, these recent research advances have a gap in that the dialect-rich Hokuriku area is described as one dialect boundary. The author conducted a pilot survey
in November of 2017 to identify in general the perceptual dialectology map of Fukui
Prefecture, understand a number of different aspects of attitudes towards the Fukui
dialect, and further define the overall perceptual dialect maps of the Hokuriku region.
This survey included 64 respondents from inside and outside of Fukui. Results indicatedthat Fukui natives tend to describe three overarching dialect boundaries within Fukui
Prefecture (Fukui dialect, Kansai dialect, and Ono dialect) compared to two described by
Fukui non-natives (Fukui dialect and Kansai dialect). Furthermore, the research showed atendency for Fukui natives to find their own northern Fukui dialect to be the mostpleasant, but there were also a large number of northern Fukui natives who described
the Kansai dialect spoken in the southern part of the prefecture as most pleasant. Finally, both those from the northern and southern parts of the prefecture described eachother other's dialect as either "slightly different" or "completely different."
Keywords: perceptual dialectology, dialect consciousness, Japanese linguistics,
dialectology, Fukui dialect

1. Introduction
The author, as a recent resident of Fukui City in Fukui Prefecture, conducted small-scale research in 2015 and 2016 using perceptual dialectology research tools, such as questionnaires andinterviews, with local foreign residents of Fukui City and local Japanese residents native to
Fukui City to understand and assess perceptions of the local dialect (Hennessy & Kuwabara
2017; Hennessy & Kuwabara 2016). Within the above research, participants described a numberof different perceived dialect boundaries within Fukui Prefecture. Based on that, the author began investigating these perceptual dialectology maps in other research and discovered both
Tanaka et al. (2016) and Aizawa (2012), which suggested different attitudes towards the Ho―１３―

国際教育交流研究第２号

kuriku dialect, but did not look deeply into the attitudes towards dialects within Fukui Prefecture.
To fill this gap, the author has conducted a small-scale pilot investigation that seeks to understand more the attitudes and perceptions towards dialects within Fukui Prefecture from botha Fukui native and non-native perspective. Specifically, the author will investigate: (1) perceptions of the number of dialects within Fukui Prefecture, (2) the areas and names of those dialect
boundaries, (3) the level of pleasantness respondents feel towards the different dialects described,
and (4) the level of similarity between the dialects described.

2. Methodologies
In this section, the author will describe the research method utilized for collecting data fromthe 64 respondents, as well as the methods for determining the number of dialects, the naming of
those dialects, the pleasantness level respondents have towards a dialect, and the similarity level
the respondents feel between described dialects.

2-1. Questionnaire
The author chose to use a questionnaire-style survey because of the ease in collecting larger
amounts of data compared to other methods such as research interviews used in the author's
previous research (Denscombe 2017). The research used standard demographic questions as wellhand-drawn map methods utilized over many years in the field by Preston (1989; 1999), Long &Yim (2002), and Long (1999). The initial demographic portion contained seven questions in Japanese: (1) Gender, (2) Hometown, (3) Age, (4) Often-used dialects, (5) Occupation, (6) Length of time
lived in Fukui Prefecture and areas lived, and (7) Length of time lived outside of Fukui Prefecture
and areas lived. The hand-drawn map section of the questionnaire is described in detail below.

2-2. Hand-Drawn Maps
Respondents were given a blank map of Fukui Prefecture with only city lines. They werethen given directions in Japanese to: (1) draw circles over areas where they believe dialect
boundaries occur, (2) give dialect names of drawn areas, (3) numerically rank the drawn areasfrom the most pleasant dialect to least 'pleasant' dialect, where '1' equals the most pleasant dialect,and (4) assign the drawn areas a similarity ranking to their own spoken dialect from (A) to (D),where (A) equals the same, (B) equals slightly different, (C) equals very different, and (D) equals
incomprehensibly different. The research tools described in (1), (2), (3), and (4) are utilized in muchof the previous literature in the field (Preston 1989; Preston 1999; Long 1999; Long & Yim 2002;
McKinnie and Dailey-O'Cain 2002).

―１４―

A Pilot Investigation into Japanese Speakers’ Perceptions and Attitudes of Dialects in Fukui Prefecture

Figure 1: An example of the Fukui Prefecture map used

2-3. The Respondents
For the purpose of this small-scale research, the author received 64 completed questionnaires. All participants were affiliated with a national university in Japan, either as an employee
or student. Of the 64 questionnaires collected, 10 were discarded for various reasons such as not
being completely filled out or using the city administrative lines seen in Figure 1 as dialect
boundaries, essentially identifying every city as having its own dialect.
Of the valid 54 questionnaires left, 39 were from Fukui natives and 15 were from non-natives.
The age range of respondents is described in Figure 2:
Fukui Native
Age Range

Number of Respondents

10s

16

20s

10

30s

3

40s

6

50s

2

60s

2

TOTAL

39

Fukui Non-Native
10s

8

20s

7

TOTAL

15

Figure 2: Age range of respondents―１５―国際教育交流研究第２号

Among these, all had demographic questions and hand-drawn areas completed for generaluse, but some were not complete with regards to dialect naming, pleasantness level, and similarity level. However, even if these latter sections were not completed, the questionnaires were still
utilized for their dialect boundary element.

3. Dialect Boundaries in Fukui
In terms of phonology, grammar, and vocabulary, there are two overarching dialect boundaries in Fukui as given in descriptive linguistics: (1) Reihoku − the northern area, and (2) Reinan −the southern area. The boundary split occurs at the furthest north part of Tsuruga City, which isalso an area of a geographical split due to a mountain range within the prefecture. The Reihoku
dialect belongs to the overall set of dialects in the Hokuriku region which comprises Fukui Prefecture, Ishikawa Prefecture, and Toyama Prefecture. The Reinan dialect belongs to the Kinki setof dialects, which also encompasses major cities such as Osaka and Kyoto. The grammar of bothareas are similar, however the vocabulary can differ significantly (Sato 2003).
Within the Reihoku area, smaller dialect boundaries exist between the western and easternparts. In the west, the major cities of Fukui City, Sabae City, and Takefu City are considered accentless. However, both Ono City and Katsuyama City in the eastern part of Reihoku are considered part of the Keihan-type accent dialects, which are best represented again by Kyoto andOsaka (Kindaichi 1977). Ishikawa Prefecture and Toyama Prefecture, situated north of Fukui
Prefecture, are also considered part of the Keihan-type accent dialects, meaning the accentlesswestern part of Reihoku in Fukui Prefecture is surrounded by otherwise Keihan-type dialects, aremarkable phenomenon.

4. Fukui Native Spoken Dialects
In this section, the author will highlight some major parts of the data reflecting Fukui native
respondents' own evaluation of their spoken dialects in the demographic section. Out of the 54
valid questionnaires received, 39 were from respondents who identified their hometown aswithin Fukui Prefecture. From those 39 respondents, there were 29 who identified one specificdialect spoken, with six indicating two dialects spoken.
By far the most named dialect spoken was Fukui dialect, which 26 respondents gave as theirspoken dialect. All of these listed their hometown as somewhere in the western part of Reihoku.
There was only one respondent who listed their hometown as Ono City, however, they also listed
their dialect as the Ono dialect, giving evidence towards a dialect split perception between theeast and west parts of Reihoku noted above by descriptive linguists. Finally of note, there were
two respondents who listed their hometown as Tsuruga City. Both listed Tsuruga dialect as theirspoken dialect, with one of them also citing Kansai dialect as a spoken dialect, suggesting some
―１６―

A Pilot Investigation into Japanese Speakers’ Perceptions and Attitudes of Dialects in Fukui Prefecture

sort of perception split between the dialect spoken in Tsuruga City and the Kansai dialect, whichis the dialect centered in Osaka and Kyoto, as a whole.

5. Fukui Native and Fukui Non-Native Dialect Perceptions
In this section, the author will highlight the Fukui dialect boundaries drawn on the map by
respondents from both Fukui and not from Fukui. The data suggests two quite different perceptions of Fukui speech boundaries between these two sets of respondents.

5-1. Fukui Native Perception Maps
The dialects boundaries represented in the hand-drawn maps of the 39 Fukui natives suggest an overall average of 3.03 dialects perceived within all of Fukui Prefecture. The mean andmode of actual dialect number are both three, with a range of one to five.
As for the actual dialects with areas circled and described, 24 total perceived dialect boundaries were identified once similar names over similar boundaries were collapsed into single categories (e.g. Fukui dialect and simply Fukui). Fukui dialect with a general placement over Fukui City
led the dialects described with 32 total responses, with a potential increase to 35 if the number of
respondents who circled the general Fukui City area but did not name the dialect specifically areincluded. Following this, Kansai dialect with a general indication of the Reinan area had 18 responses. This number could be further increased by one if we understand one respondent's Reinan dialect-marked area as at least something different from what was perceived for the Reihoku
area. Thirteen respondents perceived an Ono dialect. This can also be increased to 18 if we include the five responses that indicated the general Ono City area, but did not actually give aname to the dialect. The two dialects that followed were Tsuruga dialect with seven responses
and the Katsuyama dialect with six responses. Beyond the above, no description received overthree responses.

Perceived Dialect(Response rate > 3)

Number of Respondents(Respondent total = 39)

Fukui

35

Kansai

19

Ono

18

Tsuruga

7

Katsuyama

6

Figure 3: Perceived dialects within Fukui Prefecture identified by Fukui natives
5-2. Fukui Non-Native Perception Maps
The dialect boundaries drawn and described by the Fukui non-natives have an average of―１７―

国際教育交流研究第２号

2.07 dialects perceived per map. The mean and mode are both two, and the range is one to five.
Fourteen total perceived dialect boundaries were identified once similar names over similarboundaries were collapsed into single categories. The main two dialects described are the Fukui
dialect and the Kansai dialect, both with nine responses. The Fukui dialect may be increased to 11
though if one response overtly labeled Reihoku dialect and another response of Reihoku area withno specific dialect label were included. The Kansai dialect can increase as well by three to 12 if
the response of Reinan dialect plus the non-labeled responses indicating the general southern portion of Fukui prefecture were included. Beyond this, no other dialect described garnered morethan two responses.

Perceived Dialect(Response rate > 3)

Number of Respondents(Respondent total = 15)

Kansai

12

Fukui

11

Figure 4: Perceived dialects, within Fukui Prefecture identified by Fukui non-natives
5-3. Prototype Dialect Perception Maps of Fukui Native and Non-Natives
Using the average of three dialects based on the 39 Fukui native responses combined withthe three most described dialects by this same group − (1) Fukui dialect, (2) Kansai dialect, and (3)Ono dialect − we can use the following respondent-drawn map as a prototypical perceived dialect map for the Fukui native (Figure 5).

໛֔༕
ȁȁłĲ
ఱ࿤༕
ȁȁŃĳ

‫۾‬ୌ༕
ȁȁńĴ

Figure 5: Fukui native-drawn map with Fukui dialect, Ono dialect, and Kansai dialect boundaries.

―１８―

A Pilot Investigation into Japanese Speakers’ Perceptions and Attitudes of Dialects in Fukui Prefecture

Conversely, using the average of two dialects based on the 15 Fukui non-native responses combined with the two most described dialects − (1) Fukui dialect and (2) Kansai dialect − we can use
the following respondent-drawn map as a prototypical dialect map for the Fukui non-native (Figure 6).

Ĳį ໛֔༕ȁȁȪńĪĳį ‫۾‬ୌ༕ȁȁȪŃĪ

Figure 6: Fukui non-native-drawn map with Fukui dialect and Kansai dialect boundaries.

6. Dialect Pleasantness
In this section, the author will describe the respondents' perception of pleasantness towards
a dialect, which is based on ranking the dialects they have described on a pleasantness scale
where "1" equals the "most pleasant." Two particular points came through from data analysis.
The first is connected to the Reihoku Fukui native respondents' perceptions of their home dialectversus the Kansai dialect. The next has to do with Fukui non-native respondents' perceptions of
Reihoku and Reinan.
6-1. Fukui Native − Home Dialect Pleasantness vs. Kansai Dialect Pleasantness
Out of the 39 Fukui native respondents, 30 filled out the dialect pleasantness ranking activity.
Of these 30 responses, 16 from the western part of Reihoku described the Fukui dialect as the mostpleasant of the dialects they described. Both the respondents from Tsuruga City described the
Tsuruga Dialect as the most pleasant, and the lone Ono City respondent described the Ono dialect
as the most pleasant.
The most interesting part of this portion of the research though is that 11 respondents who
are from Reihoku, the northern part of Fukui Prefecture, described the Kansai dialect, the dialect―１９―

国際教育交流研究第２号

marked for Reinan, the southern part of Fukui prefecture, as the most pleasant dialect. Thismeans that these 11 respondents perceive the dialect they speak with in their daily life as insome way inferior to a dialect separate from them. Perhaps this phenomenon is connected withthe popularity of the Kansai dialect within modern culture. Similar research in the perception of
Korean dialects has shown that the standard dialect being perceived as the most pleasant dialect
in Korean for many Koreans, despite the fact it is not their native dialect (Long & Yim 2002).
While not the standard dialect, the Kansai dialect more than any other enjoys a place among Japanese dialects almost equaling that of the standard dialect. For similar reasons, perhaps Fukui dialect speakers put more value on the Kansai dialect compared to their own dialect.
6-2. Fukui Non-Native − Reihoku vs. Reinan Split
In contrast to Fukui native speakers, non-native speakers seemed more split on the pleasantness of the Fukui dialect versus the Kansai dialect. Of the 11 valid responses to the questions ofpleasantness, five perceived the Fukui dialect as the most pleasant, while six described the Kansai
dialect as the most pleasant.
7. Dialect Similarity
In this section, the author will describe respondents' perceptions of the similarity of described dialects to their own home dialect. Respondents indicated this through a ranking scale
between (A) and (D). Describing the rankings of the scale, (A) is the same as their dialect, (B) isslightly different, (C) is completely different, and (D) is incomprehensible.

Fukui Natives' Similarity Perception of the Opposite SideIn general, two points of interest arose from this data analysis regarding Fukui natives' dialect perceptions. First, 21 Fukui natives from Reihoku viewed the Kansai dialect as "(C) completely
different" from their own Fukui dialect. A further 12 Fukui natives from Reihoku identified theKansai dialect as "(B) slightly different." On the opposite end of this, three respondents from the
Reinan area described the Fukui dialect as "(C) completely different." This suggests a reciprocal
perception between Reihoku and Reinan regarding the difference of their dialects, even if there issome discrepancy between the actual level of difference. Furthermore, a number of these from
Reihoku who marked the Kansai dialect as "(C) completely different" from their own Fukui dialect
also marked the Kansai dialect as the most pleasant dialect, suggesting that great difference between a native dialect and another dialect is not a barrier to the pleasantness one derives from adifferent dialect.

―２０―

A Pilot Investigation into Japanese Speakers’ Perceptions and Attitudes of Dialects in Fukui Prefecture

8. Discussion
There are a number of points that can be summarized from the Fukui Prefecture perceptual
dialect map data presented in this paper. First, native Fukui people from the western part of Reihoku identify themselves as speaking a Fukui dialect. Though far more scant, there is evidence
that shows native Fukui people from the eastern part of Reihoku identify themselves as speaking
something different from that of the western part, such as Ono dialect. This distinction conforms
to an overall dialect boundary division described in a traditional analysis by descriptive linguistsof dialects in this area, with the eastern part of Reihoku and all of Reinan considered part of the
Keihan-type family of dialects, and the western part of Reihoku considered part of a non-accentarea. The fact this western area is surrounded by Keihan-type dialect area could suggest that the
Fukui dialect itself may be some deviation from an older dialect.
Second, from descriptions of Fukui Prefecture's dialects through hand-drawn maps, weknow that Fukui natives perceive on average about three dialects within Fukui Prefecture: (1)Fukui dialect, (2) Kansai dialect, and (3) Ono dialect. This is in slight opposition to Fukui non-native
respondents, who identified the same two Fukui dialect and Kansai dialect, but failed to describe asa whole a third Ono dialect. This suggests that people from Fukui in general perceive more dialect difference in Fukui Prefecture than those who are not from Fukui. However, this survey was
limited particularly with regard to non-native Fukui respondents, as almost all had lived in Fukui
for only one or two years. Fukui non-natives who have lived longer might further identify in linewith Fukui natives, and so more research is necessary.
Third, on a whole, those from Fukui believe that their own spoken dialect, the Fukui dialect,
is the "most pleasant." However, nearly one-third of the valid responses from Fukui natives bornin the northern Reihoku area actually identified the southern Reinan dialect, the Kansai dialect, as
the most pleasant. The reason for this may lie in the perceptions towards the more cosmopolitan
Kansai dialect versus the more provincial Fukui dialect. In previous research, the author throughresearch interviews discovered a sense of "embarrassment" from many Fukui native participants
towards speaking the Fukui dialect when in the Kansai area (Hennessy & Kuwabara 2016). Thisphenomenon has been described in previous literature as a "dialect inferiority complex" (Long &Yim 2002).
Finally, though part of the same prefecture, the great majority of respondents from both Reihoku and Reinan perceive the other's dialect as at least "slightly different," with the majority going further to say the two dialects are "completely different." These perceptions may have an effect on both Reihoku and Reinan natives' attitudes towards each other.
9. Conclusion
Though on a small scale, this pilot investigation into a detailed perception map of dialects in―２１―

国際教育交流研究

第２号

Fukui Prefecture gives many insights for understanding how Fukui natives perceive their own
dialect boundaries. The author hopes to replicate this research on a larger scale not just for
Fukui Prefecture, but all of the Hokuriku region in order to have a more detailed understandingof the dialect perception mapping project of the whole of Japan that has been conducted by
Tanaka et. al (2016) and Aizawa (2012), which focused on larger regions such as Hokuriku as opposed to specific prefectures. Also, further mapping based on characteristics such as age, sex,
profession, hometown, among others is necessary to have as complete a picture of the perceptual
dialect map of the Hokuriku area as possible.
The current goal of the author is to use this research and future research based on it to startcreating a system for understanding dialectal importance within the Hokuriku region, whichthen may be used for connecting to other research, such as dialectal levelling and dialectal need,particularly with regard to learners of Japanese as a second language who live within the region.
This system, if successfully developed, could be further utilized to inform Japanese language education within Japan as a whole to help more successfully integrate non-Japanese into the local
Japanese community.

References
Aizawa, Masao. (2010) “Hougen’ishiki no genzai wo toraeru: 2010−nen zenkoku hougen’ishiki chousa totoukei bunseki [Research on Present-day Dialect Consciousness: Nationwide Survey in 2010
and its Statistical Analyses]". NINJAL Project Review No. 3(1) pp.26-37.
Chambers, J.K. and Trudgill, Peter. (2009) Dialectology (2 nd ed). Cambridge University Press: Cambridge.
Denscombe, Martyn. (2017) The Good Research Guide. McGraw-Hill Education: New York.
Hennessy, Christopher and Kuwabara, Yoko. (2017) "A Sense of Affinity and the Local Dialect:
Fukui City Service-Industry Workers' Perceptions of Fukui Dialect Usage and Implications for Non-Native Japanese Speakers". University of Fukui International Education and Exchange Research, pp 1-13.
Hennessy, Christopher and Kuwabara, Yoko. (2016) "A Sense of Inclusiveness Through Japanese
Dialect: Preliminary Results of a Pilot Study on Non-Native Japanese Speakers' Attitudes
Towards Learning the Local Dialect in Fukui City." University of Fukui International Center
Research Bulletin v.2, pp 23-34.
Inoue, Fumio. (1992) "Toukaidousoizen no hougen-shiyou to hougen'ishiki [Dialect Use and Dialect
Consciousness along the Tokaido Line]". Tokyo University of Foreign Studies Research Bulletin
No. 45, pp. 11-50.
Kerswill, Paul, and Williams, Ann. (2002) "Dialect recognition and speech community focusing in
new and old towns in England: The effects of dialect levelling, demography, and social net―２２―

A Pilot Investigation into Japanese Speakers’ Perceptions and Attitudes of Dialects in Fukui Prefecture

works" in D. Preston (Ed.) Handbook of Perceptual Dialectology: Volume 2 (pp. 173-204). John
Benjamins Publishing: Amsterdam.
Kindaichi, Haruhiko. (1977) "Akkusento no bunpu to hensen [Accent map and change]". Iwanami
kouza nihongo 11 hougen, pp. 176-177
Labov, William. (1964) "Stages in the acquisition of standard English" in R. Shuy (Ed.) Social Dialects and Language Learning. National Council of Teachers of English: Champaign, IL.
Long, Daniel. (1999) "Geographical perceptions of Japanese dialect regions" in D. Preston (Ed.)
Handbook of Perceptual Dialectology: Volume 1 (pp. 177-198). John Benjamins Publishing:Amsterdam.
Long, Daniel, and Yim, Young-Cheol. (2002) "Regional differences in the perception of Korean dialects" in D. Long & Preston (Eds.) Handbook of Perceptual Dialectology: Volume 2 (pp. 249275). John Benjamins Publishing: Amsterdam.
McKinnie, Meghan, and Dailey-O'Cain, Jennifer. (2002) "A perceptual dialectology of anglophone
Canada from the perspective of young Albertans and Ontarians" in D. Long & Preston(Eds.) Handbook of Perceptual Dialectology: Volume 2 (pp. 277-294). John Benjamins Publishing: Amsterdam.
Preston, Dennis R. (1989) Perceptual Dialectology. De Gruyter: Amsterdam.
Preston, Dennis R. (1999) "Introduction" in D. Preston (Ed.) Handbook of Perceptual Dialectology:
Volume 1 (pp. xxiii-xi). John Benjamins Publishing: Amsterdam.
Sato, Ryou'ichi. (2003) The Japanese Dialect Dictionary [Nihon-hougen jiten]. Shougakukan Press:
Tokyo.
Tanaka, Y., Hayashi, N., Maeda, T., Aizawa, M. (2016) "1man−nin chousa kara mita saishin no hougen
kyoutsuugoishiki: 2015nen zenkoku hougen ishiki Web chousa no houkoku [Latest Trends in Nationwide Language Consciousness of Regional Dialects and Common Language Usage inJapan : Analysis of a 2015 Web Survey of 10,000 Participants]". NINJAL Research Papers(11) pp. 117-145.

―２３―

国際教育交流研究第２号

福井県の方言に対する日本人の意識・イメージに関するパイロット調査
ヘネシー・クリストファー
最近の方言意識の研究において、北陸における方言に対する意識・利用頻度・愛着の高まりが示されている（田中等 ２０１６；相澤 ２０１２）。しかしながら、最近の研究の発展においては、方言が豊かな北陸地域が一つの方言地域として分析されている。筆者は２０１７年１１月に、福井県の方言
意識の分布を認識し、また福井の様々の方言に対する異なるイメージを理解し、さらに北陸地域
全体の方言意識の分布を把握するため、パイロット調査を行った。本アンケート調査では、福井県内外から６４の回答を得た。その結果、福井県出身者は県内に３つの方言（福井弁、関西弁、大野弁）が分布していると回答する人が多かった。それに対して、福井県以外の出身者は２つの方言（福井弁、関西弁）が分布していると回答する人が多かった。さらに、福井県嶺北地域の出身者は、自分たちの嶺北の方言（福井弁）が最も「感じが良い」と回答する傾向にあった。しかし、多くの福井県嶺北地域の出身者は、嶺南地域で話されている関西弁が最も「感じが良い」とも回答した。最後に、嶺北と嶺南地域の出身者は、それぞれの方言は「少し違う」、または「かなり違う」と回答した。
キーワード：

方言意識、日本語学、方言、福井弁―２４―非漢字系中級学習者の論文読解における語の意味理解に関する読み誤りの分析

非漢字系中級学習者の論文読解における語の意味理解に関する読み誤りの分析−教育実践論文の読解プロセスの観察データから−
桑原

陽子
要

旨

本研究では，非漢字系中級日本語学習者１名の論文読解プロセスを詳細に観察した。
調査の結果，日本語の学術論文の読み方を学び始めたばかりの学習者が遭遇する，論文を読む難しさについて，次の５つが明らかとなった（ａ）語の区切り方，特にひらがなの連続をどう区切るかが難しい。
（ｂ）「である体」の文末表現を適切に読むのが難しい。
（ｃ）字形の似ている漢字を識別するのが難しい。
（ｄ）（ａ）（ｃ）から，辞書で単語の意味を調べるのが難しい。
（ｅ）辞書の語義や例文の適切な選択，専門用語の意味の理解が難しい。
キーワード：学術論文，読解，非漢字系中級学習者，教育系

１．目的
日本語学習者の読解支援のためには，学習者の読解のプロセスを詳細に調査して，どのような点が学習者にとって難しいのかを明らかにする必要がある。桑原・山口（２０１４），桑原（２０１５，
２０１７）では，旅行の予約サイトやグルメサイトのクチコミ，スーパーのちらし，薬の用法が書かれなまた薬の袋などの生活上読む必要が高い生の素材を調査材料として，それらを読む過程で学習者はどのような点に難しさを感じるのか，どのような原因で読み誤るのかについて，インタビューによる調査を行った。調査の対象者の中心は，初級日本語学習者である。調査の結果，生の素材の読解には，日本語母語話者の教師が気づきにくい難しさがあることが明らかになった。
一方，上級日本語学習者を対象とした同様の調査には，野田・花田・藤原（２０１７）がある。同研究では，学習者に実際に論文を読んでもらいながら，考えていることを母語で話してもらっている。その結果，上級学習者であっても学術論文を読む過程には多くの困難点があり，多くの読み誤りが観察されるが，学習者自身はそのことに気づいていないことが指摘されている。野田他（２０１７）では，学習者の読み誤りについて，次の４つを挙げている。
（１）・語の意味理解に関する読み誤り・文構造のとらえ方に関する読み誤り
・文脈との関連づけに関する読み誤り
・背景知識との関連づけに関する読み誤り―２５―

国際教育交流研究第２号

野田他（２０１７）の研究の調査対象者は，中国語を母語とする上級学習者である。中国語を母語とする学習者は，母語の漢字の知識を利用できるので日本語の読解では有利であると考えられている。「上級日本語学習者は，日本語で書かれた自分の専門分野の学術論文を読むのをあまり難しいとは考えていない（野田，２０１４）」のも，母語の漢字の知識によるところが大きいと推測される。そのような学習者であっても多くの読み誤りが観察されるということは，学術論文の読みの指導のあり方については，まだ多くの研究課題が残されているということであろう。しかも，学術論文を読むことが要求されるのは，かならずしも上級の学習者とは限らない。専門分野によっては，中級前半から日本語で書かれた学術論文を読むことを要求される学習者も存在する。そしてそのような学習者の中には，漢字系の学習者だけではなく非漢字系の学習者も含まれる。
本研究では，非漢字系中級日本語学習者１名について，日本語で書かれた論文を読むプロセスを詳細に観察し，日本語の学術論文の読み方を学び始めたばかりの学習者が遭遇する，論文を読む難しさの要因を探る。調査方法は野田（２０１４）や野田他（２０１７）と同様に，学習者に実際に論文を読んでもらい，考えていることを母語で話してもらう。
非漢字系中級学習者であれば，まず学術論文中に多用される漢字の語彙の理解が大きな困難点になると予想される。野田他（２０１７）では観察された読み誤りのうち半数以上が語の意味の理解に関するものであった。そこで本研究では，野田他（２０１７）で観察された４つのタイプの読み誤りの中の「語の意味の理解に関する読み誤り」を中心に分析を行う。
「語の意味の理解に関する読み誤り」は，次の４つに分類されている。
（２）・語の形態認識に関する読み誤り（語の区切り方に関する読み誤り，別の語との混同に関する読み誤り）・語の意味推測に関する読み誤り（文字からの意味推測に関する読み誤り，文脈からの意味推測に関する読み誤り）・辞書からの語義選択に関する読み誤り
・モダリティ的表現の意味理解に関する読み誤り
本研究では，論文を読む過程において，これらの語の意味理解に関する読み誤りが具体的にどのように表れるのかについて記述し分析を行う。また，語の意味理解のためには辞書等の外部リ
ソースの使用が不可欠であり，それらのリソースをどのように使用しているかについても具体的に事例を示す。非漢字系中級学習者の論文を読むプロセスを丹念に追った研究はほとんどなく，論文をどのように読み進めているかの記述自体に意味があると考える。
２．調査方法２．
１ 調査協力者
日本国内の教育系大学院修士課程１年生（調査当時）の非漢字系中級（前半）日本語学習者１名である。調査時の日本語学習歴は約１５ヶ月で，所属大学の日本語クラスで『みんなの日本語中級１』を学習中であった。第１言語は英語である。本論文ではこれ以降，この調査協力者を「学習者Ａ」と呼ぶことにする。
―２６―

非漢字系中級学習者の論文読解における語の意味理解に関する読み誤りの分析

２．
２ 調査時期
調査は２回実施した。調査中，必要に応じて１５分から３０分程度の休憩を複数回とった。
第１回調査：２０１５年１１月２２日 １３時から１７時半まで
第２回調査：２０１６年１月２３日 １３時から１７時半まで
２．
３ 調査材料日本の中学校の授業研究・授業実践に関する論文集『授業のプロセスとデザイン

数学・理科・技術編』（福井大学教育地域科学部附属中学校研究会，
２００９）の中の，第１章第２節「北陸本線に列車を走らせよう」の前半５ページ分である。総文字数は２，
８６５文字で総文数は７７文（表は除く）であった。これは，中学１年生の数学の一次関数の授業を分析した論文で，本調査のために使用する素材として学習者Ａ自身が選んだものである。この論文を選んだ理由は，大学院の授業のために読む必要があること，自身の研究のためにも読まなければならないこと，教育研究に関わる用語が多数含まれており自身の語彙の拡充にも役立つと考えたことである。
２．
４ 調査方法
上記の論文をふだん通りの方法で読んでもらった。そのために，ふだん学習者Ａが論文を読むときに使っているノートパソコンとスマートフォンを使ってもらった。そして論文を読みながら，考えていることを英語で話してもらった。調査には英語と日本語の通訳者が参加し，学習者Ａが英語で話したことはすべてほぼ同時に日本語に通訳された。調査者は，学習者Ａの発言を聞きながら，必要に応じて通訳者を介して質問した。たとえば，学習者Ａが「この文の意味はよくわからないが，読めなくても支障はない」というような発言をした場合は，なぜ読めなくても支障がないと考えたのかを詳しく聞き出した。このような調査の様子は，学習者Ａの許可を得た上で，ビデオ２台で録画し，さらに IC レコーダーで録音した。本研究では，２回の調査で得られた約６時間分の読解の記録を分析対象とする。
３．読解プロセスの分析
３．
１ 読解中の外部リソースの使用状況
論文を読んでいる最中に学習者Ａが使用した辞書や翻訳サイトは，スマートフォン用の日英辞
書 imiwa?と，google translation である。
imwa?は手書き入力とローマ字入力が可能で，主に読み方がわからない漢字を手書き入力によって調べるとき使用されていた。google translation はノートパソコンで使用されており，使われるのは主として次の３つの場合であった。１つ目は，読み方がわかっている漢字で構成されている熟語の意味を調べる場合である。読み方がわかっていれば，ローマ字入力が可能である。２つ目は，漢字熟語の読み方に自信がないとき，それが正しいかどうか確認する場合である。自分が確認したい読みをひらがなで入力し，当該の漢字熟語が漢字変換候補にあるかどうかでその読みが正しいかどうかを確認している。３つ目は，意味がわからない表現や文をまるごと翻訳する―２７―

国際教育交流研究第２号

場合である。
具体的にどのような使い方をしているのかを（３）に示す。
（３）は「日常事象」という漢字
熟語の意味と読みを調べたときの様子である。
（３）「日常事象」を構成するそれぞれの漢字の読み方を知っているので，google translation
ひ

じょう

こと

に「日」「 常」「事」と一文字ずつ入力する。
「象」は「対象」と入力し，「対」を削除する。このようにして入力した「日常事象」の意味は，daily event

だとわかる。

「日常事象」の読み方を知るために，imiwa?を使う。
「ひじょう」と入力しても検索結果に「日常」がないため，「にちじょう」と入力しなおす。「日常」が検索結果の中に見つかったため，「日常」の読みは「にちじょう」だとわかる。
こと

しょう

じしょう

「事」
「 象」を１つずつ入力して「事象」で検索すると，「事象」が検索されるので「事象」の読み方は「じしょう」だとわかる。全体として「日常事象」の読み方は「にちじょうじしょう」だとわかる。
「日常事象」という単語を見てからその意味と読みがわかるまでにかかった時間は２分１８秒である。
学習者Ａは，時間と手間がかかっても，単語の意味だけでなく読み方も必ず確認していた。その理由については，ゼミや研究会などで討論に参加したければ，語の読み方を知っていなければならないからと説明している。
次に，どの程度の頻度で辞書と翻訳サイトを使用したかについて，（４）に具体例を示す。
（４）
は，調査で使用した「北陸本線に列車を走らせよう」の冒頭部分の一段落である。一重下線は，学習者Ａが google translation を使ったところである。波線は imiwa?を使ったところで，二重下線は両方を使ったところである。
（４）第２節

北陸本線に列車を走らせよう「はじめに」
数学は日常事象の中に存在する。しかし生徒の中には，実生活とはかけ離れた受験数――――学として認識されている面がある。また，数学的構造を実感として理解するには自らが数学的活動を体験する以外に道はないのであるが，時間の関係もあって，教師は説明で終わらせている場合も多い。
「北陸本線に列車を走らせよう」は，このような実態を踏――
まえ，身の周りの事象を数学の視点で捉え，課題を発見し，数学的に解釈して処理し，実生活に適用していくことをロングスパンで組織したものである。
（４）からは，頻繁に辞書と翻訳サイトを使用していることがわかる。単語に対して外部リソースを使用しているのは，「日常事象」「存在」「受験」「認識」などすべて漢字を調べるためであり，漢字の知識が十分でないことが負担になっていることがうかがえる。また，単語だけではな
く，「以外に道はないのである」「説明で終わらせている」のように，意味が簡単にとらえられない表現があり，それを google translation の全文翻訳を手がかりに理解しようとしている。結果
として，この段落１つを読み終わるのに約４０分かかっている。論文の冒頭の一段落を読み進めるのに４０分かかることからも，この素材を読むことは学習者Ａにとって非常に負担の大きい作業で―２８―非漢字系中級学習者の論文読解における語の意味理解に関する読み誤りの分析あることがわかる。
３．
２ 語の意味の理解に関する読み誤り
３．
２．
１ 語の形態認識に関する読み誤り
野田他（２０１７）では，語の形態認識に関する読み誤りとして，語の区切り方に関する読み誤りと，別の語との混同に関する読み誤りの２つが挙げられている。学習者Ａの読みのプロセスでも，両方のタイプの読み誤りが合計１７例見られており，語の意味の理解に関する読み誤りの中では語の形態認識に関する読み誤りが最も多い。また，野田他（２０１７）では合計３０８９文のうち語の形態認識に関する読み誤りは２１例であるのに対し，本研究では７７文中１７例である。本研究は学習者１名を対象としているので直接比較は難しいが，学習者Ａは野田他（２０１７）と比べると語の形態認
識の読み誤りの出現頻度が高いことがうかがえる。
まず，語の区切り方に関する読み誤りは７例であった。以下に例を挙げる。
（５）「緩やか」を「緩／やか」と区切る。
（６）「確かなものにしていく」の「確かなもの」を「かかなもの」と読み誤り，それをひとたしまとまりと捉える。「確か」にたどり着いたあとは，「確か／なものに／していく」と区切る。
（５）では，まず手書き入力で「緩」を調べ，「緩」の意味 relax と「ゆる／カン」という読み方を確認した。しかし，同じ辞書に訓読みとして記載されている「ゆるやか」に気づかず，「緩やか」を１つの語ではなく「緩／やか」ととらえていた。そのため，「緩やか」を翻訳すると gentleという意味になる理由がわからず，「緩やか」が１つの単語であると理解するまでに時間がかかった。
かく（６）では，「確」は「確認」の「確」なので「確かなもの」の読み方は「かかなもの」になると考えた!。そのため，「確か」という単語を辞書で見つけるまでに時間がかかった。
「確か」
を辞書の見出し語として見つけたあとは，「確か／なものに／していく」と区切った。
「確か」が１つの語なら，まず「確か」で区切るべきと考えたようである。最終的には，辞書では「確かなものにする」がひとまとまりの表現として扱われていることに気づいたが，学習者Ａはこのプロセスについて（７）のように話している。学習者Ａが話したことの概要を，日本語に翻訳して記す。
（７）こういうのはいつも難しい。全部ひらがなだ。１つだけ漢字でそのあとに「していく」「してくる」などひらがながある。どこで始まってどこで終わるのかがわからない。ス
ペースがないので，どれが１つの単語なのかわからない。私は「確かに」は知っていたが「確かな」は知らない。「していく」は１つだとわかるから，「確か」「なものに」「していく」と区切ればいいのか。でも辞書には「確かなものにする」が１つの単語だと書いてある。
ひらがなの連続をどこで区切ったらよいかわからないというコメントは，野田他（２０１７）の上級学習者と同じである。しかし，学習者Ａは，ひらがなの連続の先頭にある漢字がわからない。
―２９―

国際教育交流研究

第２号

その漢字が活用語の語幹である場合は，漢字に続くひらがなの連続の中には，補助動詞や助動詞だけでなく活用語尾も含まれる可能性が高く，その結果，区切り方がわからないひらがなの連続は，上級学習者よりもさらに長くなることが推測される。
次に，別の語との混同に関する読み誤りについては，（８）（９）のようなものが１０例見られた。
（８）「知を確かなものにしていく」の「知」を「和」と読み誤る。
「和」は数学の専門用語であるため，「和＝sum」と解釈し，誤りに気づかない。
（９）「列車」の「列」を「例」と読み誤り，example car とは何か悩む。
これらの例はいずれも形の似た漢字との混同によるものであり，非漢字系学習者ならではの誤りと言えるだろう。野田他（２０１７）では，このような誤りの事例については言及されていない。
３．
２．
２ 語の意味推測に関する読み誤り
語の意味推測に関する読み誤りは次の２例であり，どちらも文字からの意味推測に関する読み誤りであった。
（１０）「意図的に授業で扱う」の「意図」について「図を通して意味をとらえる」と解釈した。
（１１）「本単元」は「この単元」と解釈すべきところ，「original（本）の単元」と解釈した。
学習者Ａは論文を読むために必要な漢字語彙がまだ不十分であることから，自信が持てないものについては逐一辞書を使って意味を確認している。そのため既有知識を使って単語の意味を推測することはほとんどしていない。意味推測に関する読み誤りが少なかったのはそのためである。
野田他（２０１７）では，語の意味推測に関する読み誤りが語の意味の理解に関する読み誤りの中で半数以上を占めており，非漢字系中級学習者と中国語を母語とする上級学習者との読むプロセスの違いがうかがえる。
３．
２．
３ 辞書からの語義選択に関する読み誤り
辞書から適切な語義を選ぶことができなかった例は（１２）の１例である。
（１２）「グループごとに」の「ごと」が「毎」「共」「事」のうちどの意味か特定できない。
これは，検索するときにどこで区切るかという検索単位の問題も絡んでおり，「ごとに」ではなく「ごと」で検索したことが語義選択の難しさの要因となっている。
「ごとに」であれば，imiwa?
で検索した場合に「毎に」しか出てこない。また，「グループ」との共起を考えても「毎」の可能性が非常に高い。
「KOTONOHA『現代日本語書き言葉均衡コーパス』少納言」（国立国語研究所

http://www.kotonoha.gr.jp/shonagon/）で，「グループごと」で検索するとヒットした７
３

件の例文すべてが「グループ毎」という意味であった。しかし，そのような知識がないと「グループ共＝グループ全体」「グループ事＝グループのこと」のような解釈もできなくはなく，「毎」「共」「事」を同じ重みでとらえて悩んでしまう。なお，「KOTONOHA『現代日本語書き言葉
均衡コーパス』少納言」によれば，「グループ毎」は３件の例文がヒットしたが，「グループ事」「グループ共」はいずれも該当する例文が検索されなかった。
辞書の例文の中から，調べたい表現にあったものが選べず，その結果，選んだ語義が適切かど―３０―非漢字系中級学習者の論文読解における語の意味理解に関する読み誤りの分析

うかを論文の中で確認することが難しかった事例もあった。
（１３）「〜に驚く」の意味を調べるのに，「その薬は彼の体に驚くほどよく効いた」という例
文を参照する。
（１３）の例文は，調査当時 imiwa?で「驚く」の例文の６番目に掲載されていたもので，助詞「に」と「驚く」の間に何も挿入されていない最初の例文であった。１番目の例文は「その銃声に我々はあっと驚いた」で，「に」と「驚く」の間に「我々はあっと」が挿入されているので，学習者Ａは「〜に驚く」の例文であるとは認識できなかった。学習者Ａは，単語の意味を辞書で調べるとき，それが動詞の場合は，論文の中でその単語といっしょに使われている助詞とあわせて，辞書中の例文を探している。その助詞の前に来る表現と動詞との関係を確認するためである。
そのため，（１３）のように適切な例文を参照できないと，読み誤りにつながる可能性がある。
一方，読み誤りではなく，辞書を使用しても意味が理解できなかった事例もある。その代表が専門分野独特の表現である。特定の専門分野で使用される表現は，辞書に掲載されている意味と結びつきにくく，辞書を使用しても意味を理解することができないことが多い。たとえば（１４）のような例である。
（１４）論文中に「グラフの式化」という表現があったが，「式化」は imiwa?に掲載されていな
い。google translation の翻訳 formalized は，「グラフの式化」の解釈に結びつかない。
特に，「グラフの式化」は「グラフから式化する（式にする／式をつくる）」が名詞化されたもので，名詞表現になることでさらにその意味の解釈が難しくなっていると考えられる。
また，専門用語については，正しい語義を選択した場合であっても，複数の日本語の単語の語義が同じ英語単語で示されるため，その日本語の単語の違いが理解できないという事例もあった。
たとえば，次のような例である。
（１５）「過程」（process）と「処理」（processing）は英単語としては同じなので，意味や使い方の違いがわからない。
imiwa?では「過程」の意味として最初に記載されているのは process である。学習者Ａはこれまでの学習から「過程＝process」と理解している。一方で，「処理」の意味として最初に記載されているのは，processing でありどちらも同じ英語の単語が充てられていることから，「過程」と「処理」の違いが理解できていないと話している。この場合，「過程」と「処理」について，論文中で読み誤ることはないので，論文を読むことだけを考えれば問題ないのだが，「過程」「処理」を使って自身が日本語の文を産出する際には支障が出ることになる。
３．
２．
４ 論文の文体に関する難しさ
学習者Ａが論文を読む最中に，何度も「難しい」とコメントしたのは，文末表現についてである。３．
２．
１の（５）（６）で挙げたような，ひらがなの連続の切れ目の問題もそれに含まれる。しかし，特徴的だったのは，文末表現の「である」に代表される論文の文体に不慣れなことによる
とまどいや，読みの難しさである。たとえば，次のようなコメントがあった。
（１６）「以外に道はないのであるが」について，「道はないんですが」という意味なのか，「道―３１―国際教育交流研究第２号

はないので，（何かが）あります」という意味なのか，どちらが正しいのかがわからない。「のである」については，「理由を示す『ので』＋存在を示す動詞『ある』
」とも解
釈できる。
学習者Ａは，調査当時，いわゆる「である体」で書かれた文章を読む訓練を受けていない。日本語クラスで読んだものは，ほとんどが丁寧体（です・ます体）で書かれたものであり，普通体で書かれた文章であっても，「である」はほとんど使われず「〜だ」が多用されている。そのため，文末に「である」が使われている文章を読むことに慣れていなかった。
「ある」を見ると，
まずは存在を示す動詞「あります」を連想してしまうし，特に「〜のである」は理由を示す助詞「ので」＋動詞「ある」のように思ってしまい混乱する，とコメントしている。
そして，そのようなわかりにくさを軽減させるために，学習者Ａは，文末の「である」については，（１７）のように自分にとって慣れているわかりやすい表現に言い換えながら読んでいた。
（１７）「構成していこうとしたのである」→「構成していこうとしたんです」「考えているのである」→「考えているんです」「〜であった」→「〜でした」
このような文末表現の読みの難しさは，大きくとらえるならば，野田他（２０１７）の「モダリティ的表現の意味理解に関する読み誤り」の１つと解釈できるかもしれない。しかし，規定を示す「〜こととする」「〜とする」や引用を示す「〜という」等を上級学習者が読み誤るのと比較す
ると，「〜である」「〜のである」の読みの難しさは，論文読解のごく最初の段階に現れるものと言えるのではないだろうか。
４．考察
本研究のデータから，非漢字系中級学習者が学術論文を読む難しさは，次のようにまとめられるだろう。
（１８）語の区切り方がわからない。特にひらがなの連続をどう区切るかが難しい。
（１９）「である体」の文末表現を適切に読むのが難しい。
（２０）字形の似ている漢字を識別するのが難しい。
（２１）（１８）（２０）が原因で，辞書で単語の意味を調べるのが難しい。
（２２）辞書から適切な語義や，該当する例文を選択するのが難しい。また，漢字熟語が多い専門用語の意味の理解が難しい。
（１８）から（２２）のうち（１９）以外はすべて辞書などの外部リソースの利用に関する難しさであることからも，学習者Ａが外部リソースにかなりの部分を頼って読んでいることがうかがえるだろう。
本研究で観察された読みの難しさは，漢字系上級学習者にとっての難しさと重なるものもある。
たとえば（１８）（２２）である。（１８）の語の区切り方の難しさについては，野田他（２０１７）でも指摘されており，本研究の学習者Ａもどの単位に区切って辞書をひけばよいのかがわからず，苦労している様子がうかがえた。ただ，上級学習者と中級学習者とでは，中級学習者のほうが区切り―３２―

非漢字系中級学習者の論文読解における語の意味理解に関する読み誤りの分析

方のわからないひらがなの連続の長さが長いことが推測される。特に非漢字系学習者の場合，論文を読むために必要な漢字の知識が不足しているので，上級学習者にとっては活用語尾として認識されるひらがな部分が，切れ目のわからないひらがなの一部の中に含まれてしまう可能性がある。
また，（２２）については，辞書に掲載されている例文を適切に参照することが思った以上に難しいことが明らかとなった。適切な語義を選択しようとするならば，どうしても例文を参照する
必要がある。特に，活用語の場合は共起する助詞とのセットで意味をとらえなければならない。
しかし，活用語と助詞の間に距離があれば，セットとしてとらえることは難しい。これは辞書に
どのような例文を掲載するかという問題であり，初級，中級学習者を意識するならば，活用語と助詞の間には，できるだけ余計な語を挟まないものを選ぶ必要があるだろう。
一方，学術論文を読みはじめたばかりの非漢字系中級学習者の抱える問題として，漢字系上級
学習者には見られない（１９）（２０）が明らかとなった。特に，（１９）の「である体」の読みづらさについては，今後，中級前期の留学生対象の読解指導において何が必要かを考える上で重要であろう。初級を終了したばかりの学習者に対する「である体」の文章を読むことに特化した練習は，
一般的な読みの学習としてはあまり行われないものである。しかし，学習者のニーズに合わせて，中級前半から学術的な文章を読むことを目指した読みの学習を考えるのであれば，「である体」に対して早い段階から慣れておくことが求められるだろう。
本研究の調査対象者である学習者Ａの読解プロセスの調査は，今後も１年以上継続して実施する予定である。このような調査を継続することによって，今回明らかとなった難しさがどのように克服されていくのか，あるいは，今回観察されなかった別の難しさが今後観察されるのかについて詳細なデータを蓄積することが可能となる。そのようなデータに基づけば，学術的な文章を読むことに特化した指導に何が必要なのかについて，説得力のある示唆が得られるはずである。
本研究は，科研費（１５Ｈ０１８８４）の助成を受けたものである。
参考文献
桑原陽子（２０１５）「非漢字系日本語学習者がレストランのクチコミから情報を得るときの方略と困難点」『国語研究所論集』９，
１０１‐１２０．
桑原陽子（２０１７）「初級読解教材作成を目指した非漢字系初級学習者の読解過程の分析」『国語研究所論集』１３，
１２７‐１４２．
桑原陽子・山口美佳（２０１４）「中国語初級日本語学習者がホテル検索サイトを読むときの困難点」『国立国語研究所論集』８，
１０９‐１２８．
野田尚史（２０１４）「上級日本語学習者が学術論文を読むときの方法と課題」『専門日本語教育』第
１６号，
９‐１４．
野田尚史・花田敦子・藤原未雪（２０１７）「上級日本語学習者は学術論文をどのように読み誤るか―中国語を母語とする大学院生の調査から―」『日本語教育』１６７号，
１５‐３０．
―３３―

国際教育交流研究第２号

福井大学教育地域科学部附属中学校研究会 ２
００９ 『授業のプロセスとデザイン

数学・理科・

技術編』
注
!

かく

学習者Ａは「確」について「確認の確」とはっきり発話しているが，「確かなもの」については「かくかなもの」ではなく「かかなもの」と発音している。

―３４―

非漢字系中級学習者の論文読解における語の意味理解に関する読み誤りの分析

An analysis of the errors concerning the meaning of vocabulary on the reading processes for academic papers of intermediate Japanese learners from non-Kanji cultures―from the observed data of the process of reading academic papers concerning educational
practices
Yoko KuwabaraThis paper investigated the reading processes for academic papers by intermediate Japanese learners from non-Kanji cultures. The results showed that there are five main types of difficulties in reading academic papers which learners who have just started to learn how to readacademic papers will encounter.:(a) to divide Hiragana-character strings into the appropriate words(b) to read appropriately the sentence final expressions of literary forms with the sentence ending "de aru"(c) to distinguish the Kanji characters from different Kanji with similar shape(d) to look up the word meaning by dictionary(e) to chose appropriate meanings of the words or example sentences from a dictionary and tounderstand the meaning of technical terms.
Keywords: academic papers, reading process, intermediate Japanese learners from non-Kanji cultures, educational practice―３５―

Improving ESL Using a Global Videoconference

Improving ESL Using a Global Videoconference
D. Boyd
Abstract
This paper examined using ODL (open and distance learning) technology in the classroom, specifically videoconference, to improve language learning skills for K-12 to firstyear university students. This is part one of a planned four part research that uses videoconferencing technolology in the classroom in the belief of creating a more efficient
ESL (English as a Second Language) classroom learning environment. Part one focuseson the preliminary lesson plan for teachers who are interested in using videoconferencing technology in their classrooms. The three essential language learning components ofmotivation, confidence and ability (Wu & Marek 2010) were intregal in the design of the
included module.

Definition:"Videoconferencing is an active tool that incorporates audio, video, computing and communications technologies to allow people from different locations to collaborate face-to-face in realtime, and share all types of information including data, documents, sounds, and pictures." (Ritzel,
2010).

Introduction
Videoconferencing (VC) as a tool for educational purposes, has been used for more than
three decades (Aydin, 2012). Szeto (2014) stated that it has been used for multi-campus teaching
and is often used to distribute lectures to students at remote sites. Although VC may be often
used as a tool to enhance student learning, more should be done to incorporate it into the modern
classroom. Kan stated that educational professionals are catching up however, videoconferencing
is already rapidly grown in business and industry because of its cost and time saving benefits(Kan, 2011).
Connecting students at remote locations with others for enhancement of educational experiences seems less of a challenge than before (Szeto, 2014). However, intensified communication
across country borders still require detailed planning and the use of a substantial number ofpedagogical strategies (Kan, 2011).
The lesson module described in this paper focused on a plan for incorporating learning standards created for American schools as a means for improving English language education for lan―３７―

国際教育交流研究

第２号

guage learners primarily in rural areas in Japan. A major reason for the creation of the pilot is toprovide students who will travel abroad a "pre-travel abroad" experience by videoconferencewith ESL students in other countries. Part one of this research focused on the preliminary lesson
plan. Part two will revise part ones' lesson plan based on feedback from the student test group
questionaires and peer suggestions. Part three is expected to have a working model ready for application in the classroom. Part four will finalize the research and compile data collected into a final paper. A pilot lesson plan to organize cross-cultural communication for such an "intensified"program will now be discussed.

Subject Matter:
Improving ESL (English as a Second Language) Using a Global Videoconference

Method and Design
A Pedagogical Approach:
The mode of teaching will attempt to use synchronous videoconferencing. This mode facilitates a type of real-time "face-to-face" VC communication between the home country and anotherglobal classroom, which will possibly provide students timely opportunities to practice speaking
English with peers.
The pedagogial approaches that will be attempted will require joint team-teaching efforts
between the classrooms using the “World Language Learning Goals” and lesson plan, located theappendix section, in an attempt to create an interactive learning environment for the instructors
to observe students. This approach,theoretically, could increase the probability that students will
improve and retain the language skills learned in the lesson. Peer-to-peer learning and the distributed learning approaches will be used. Students will work with their peers in a global classroom to practice their English (Davis and Niederhauser, 2007).
The instructors will be largely passive which should allow the less advanced language learners to benefit from the experience of working with potentially more advanced language learners(Read, 2005). The cross-cultural collaborative work approach will also be used as students communicate with one another about their individual cultures. Student-generated content will be
used as part of this approach (McCarty, 2006).

Standards and Key Concepts:
The following is a partial listing of language concepts borrowed from the Maryland Department of Education to be used only for the preliminary lesson plan as a reference. Newly createdconcepts and goals will be created during the revisal period based on feedback from the student
test group questionaires and peer suggestions.
―３８―Improving ESL Using a Global Videoconference

World Language Learning Goal (In title only) − (Maryland Department of Education, 2003)
Rationale:
To meet language learning educational requirements, students need to meet the communication standards.
Goal: To build language skills and confidence in speaking English as a second language (ESL)
by using Microsoft Office and Web 2.0 technologies such as facebook/Skype for students. In addition to students generated content written and verbal content in English.

STANDARD 1.0 Communication
1.1 Interpersonal: Students exchange information orally and in writing in the target language ina culturally appropriate manner to provide and obtain information, express feelings and emotions,and exchange opinions.
Beginning Indicator: Students engage in brief exchanges about personal interests in the target
language.
Objective a. The student will ask and answer simple questions related to family and self.
Objective b. The student will exchange personal preferences, emotions and opinions.
Objective c. Express personal needs.
Objective d. Ask for repetition and repeat to ensure understanding.
Objective e. Exchange brief messages, emails, postcards, and letters.
Objective f. Give and follow simple directions.
1.2 Interpretive: Students understand and interpret the target language in its spoken and written
form on a variety of topics.
Beginning Indicator: Students understand spoken and written language on very familiar topics inthe target language that promote the learning of basic linguistic structures.
Objective a. Interpret the basic message from spoken and written texts that are on very familiar topics.
Objective b. Identify the main idea and some supporting details from authentic spoken andwritten texts that have visual support.
Objective c. Demonstrate understanding of developmentally appropriate information gained
through active listening or reading by applying it to a different context.
1.3 Interpretive: Students present information, concepts, and ideas to an audience of listeners or―３９―

国際教育交流研究第２号

readers on a wide variety of topics in the target language.
Beginning Indicator: Students make short presentations and write simple verbal communication
on very familiar topics in the target language.
Objective a. Write and deliver short descriptions about very familiar topics of personal interest.
Objective b. Tell or write a brief story, journal entry, or blog.
Objective c. Present songs, short poems, impromptu skits, or dialogs.
Major Assignments:
Each one is finished at the end of one of the module units. There are five:1.) Prepare presentation introducing the class to the guest classroom class. Include information on daily life in the local community.
2.) Participate in video conference discussion on daily life.
3.) Particpate in video conference presentation on one cultural practice (chosen by students).
4.) Participate in role play exercises illustrating cultural practice chosen in assignment 3
above.
5.) Complete a joint letter/email inviting new global classroom students to participate in thecultural practice. The letter will outline the guest students' role in the practice.

Summary of Classroom Module:
The purpose of the module is to increase both the technical language skills and the speaking
confidence levels of beginning-level, ESL students.
Speaking only English, students work with a class of students who tested at a slightly higher
level of English language proficiency. The two classrooms become familiar with each others dailyliving habits and at least one cultural practice. Moderated video discussion forums allow students
to share ideas and experiences. To reinforce language skills and to build speaking confidence,
students give a presentation via video conference. The module culminates with development andpresentation of a letter of appreciation.
Students who complete this module should be able to discuss the key aspects of the daily
lives of global classroom students. In addition, their confidence level when speaking English
should increase. Each class gives the presentation to the partner classroom. Each classroom audience rates the presentation.

Background:
The module utilizes language learning standards from the Maryland State Curriculum,―４０―Improving ESL Using a Global Videoconference

World Languages standard to measure student progress. It is designed to help beginning-level
conversational English students achieve the "beginning indicators" of Standards 1 and 2 of thecurriculum ( Maryland Department of Education, 2003). Students studying English for at least 2
years should be a requirement.

Time Frame:
There are five units with five 60 minute lessons each with a total class time of 90 minutes.
There are expected to be some slow-learners in the class. The length of the unit may be altered ifsome students are having a hard time using and retaining the information they learn during thisunit.

Subject/Grade Level:
The subject is ESL (or other comprable English class). The module is based on standards
from the Maryland Deparment of Education. The guest classroom speaks English at a slightly
higher level of proficiency.

Key Challenge:
Motivating students to actually talk only in English might create some challenges for the instructor. Consequently, it may take longer to complete this unit.

Prior Knowledge:!

Students have studied English for at least 2 years.

!

Students will know how to use the Internet and laptop computers.

!

Students will know how to function with tools such as Microsoft Office!

Students will have had some experience creating PowerPoint presentations.

!

Students will have general knowledge of the concept of video- conferencing.

!

Students should have prior experience conducting research on the Internet.

Technological Activities
Students will:!

Use Microsoft PowerPoint to create presentations.

!

Use email to communicate with students.

!

Use the Internet to research the daily lives and cultural practice of each group of students.

!

Use videoconference tools to collaborate with other students.

!

Use Microsoft Word to create a letter of appreciation.
―４１―

国際教育交流研究

第２号

Essential Questions:Students will be able to answer the following questions about their country and the guest
classroom's country.
!

What are the daily practices of the global classroom students?

!

How can I communicate the daily practices of my community to the global classroom
students.

!

How can I describe one cultural practice of the the global classroom students in English?

!

How can role plays be used to teach important lessons?

!

What makes a role play strong? Weak?

!

What are the most important oral and written presentation skills?

! How can I deal with feelings of shyness when speaking English?
! What is the value of learning about other cultures?
Conclusion
This paper sought to explore using ODL (open and distance learning) technology, specifically
videoconference, in the ESL classroom. The aim was to improve students language learning skills.
As this is the first part of a four part plan, more research, data collection, and revisions areneeded.The three essential language learning components of motivation, confidence and ability
were an intregal part in the design of the included module. Videoconference as a tool for education purposes has been used for more than three decades (Aydin, 2012).The lesson focused on aplan of incorporating learning standards created for American schools as a means for improving
English language education for language learners primarily in remote areas in Japan and otherglobal classrooms around Asia. This pilot program module to organize cross-cultural communication plan will require further research. The next step in research is collecting data based on feedback from student test group questionaires and peer suggestions to be processed into information for the second stage.

―４２―

Improving ESL Using a Global Videoconference

Appendix
Improving ESL Using a Global Videoconference (Preliminary Lesson Plan)
Lesson Outline − Unit 4
Summary

During this lesson students will create role plays in English basedon their Internet research and discussions with the guest classroom. Each role play is a demonstration of one cultural practiceobserved by students. Students will work in groups of 4. Role
plays will be presented simultaneously to home and guest classrooms. This module helps students build their speaking confidence and their ability to connect concepts in English.

Starting Activity

Classroom lecture introducing the "role plays." Detailed descriptions of how one can learn from role plays will be included. Students have not previously been exposed to this method of learning. Students will watch DVDs of students engaged in role plays
in both Japanese and English. Guest classroom instructor will use
same video recording.

Formative Assessment!
!

Summative Assessment

Quiz on "role plays" as a learning tool and the English vocabulary associated with role plays.
Writing a 10-line role play in Japanese and English.

Playing a spoken part in a role play and submit a short evaluationof classmates' role plays. Completing a quiz on the cultural practices presented during the unit.

Day 1

Day 2

Day 3

Day 4
(sample lessonplan page 11)

Day 5

What is a role
play?

What makes arole playeffective?
Getting themessageacrossAs part of anassigned small
group, decide on arole play topic andbeginning outlining
a script.

As part of anassigned small
group, finalize andrehearse role play.

Name somethings thatstood out
about
amongst theculturalpresentations
you saw.

How do roleplays help us
learn?

Review roleplays on DVD
and identify
their strengths
andweaknessesof role plays.

Group leader
summarizes roleplay plan. Eachgroup gets feedback from peers
and instructor.

Perform role play tolocal and globalclassroom as partof assigned small
group. Observe roleplays of classmatesand submit a shortevaluation (factors
to rate and scale
provided byinstructor)

Describe one
or moreculturalpracticespresented.

―４３―

国際教育交流研究第２号

Lesson Plan for Unit 4, Day 4
Lesson Title andLengthComposition and Presentation: Creating and performing a role play

Grade
Level/Subject
Area

Grade 10 (Japanese system), students' English proficiency is developing
Subject Area − Conversational English, English reading, writing, andcomprehension

Concept/Topic

Communicating lessons in English via role-play.

Overview &PurposeStudents have spent the last three days understanding role plays, learning to identify the strength and weaknesses in a role play and understanding how role plays can be used to teach important concepts.

Education
Standards
Addressed

Maryland World Language Learning Goals
Goal 1 - Students exchange information orally and in writing in the target language in a culturally appropriate manner to provide and obtain information, express feelings and emotions, and exchange opinions.

Objectives(Specify
skills/informationthat will belearned.)!
!
!
!

Role play writing.
Participating in a small group.
Performing a role play.
Evaluating role plays.

Technology Use

!
!
!
!

Students will access global network, ePals.
Students will set up video projector for video conference.
Students will complete online evaluations.
Students will Microsoft Word to write role play scripts.

Information!
!

Students will be know how to acces various global networks.
Students will understand the definition of a role play and the elements needed to create one.
Students will understand how to identify the strengths and weaknesses of a role play.

!
Verification

Objectives have been successfully achieved when the student participates fully in writing a role play. Instructor and supporting members
will sit with each small group for 5-10 minutes to observe students' contributions. Students will perform a speaking role in their group's roleplay. English pronunciation and context should be at least average basedon the rubric for this module. Students will complete an evaluation ofclassmates' role plays. Students will participation in review discussion ofmaterial presented by other students. Students will achieve 70% on final
quiz reviewing cultural practices presented by other students.

―４４―

Improving ESL Using a Global Videoconference

Activity

30 Minutes: The students will work within their assigned small group,
selected from their classmates, to finalize and rehearse their role plays.
During the previous three days, the instructor and supporting members
observed the students and recorded their technical and social competency levels: fast-learner/leader, average-learner/follower, and slowlearner/lagger. This information is written in the notebook marked"Videoconference Module." Instructor assigned students to five groups offour so that there is one fast-learner, two average-learners, and on slowlearner per group.
30 Minutes: Students will upload their role plays to the class website.
Students at local and global classroom will give their presentations.
After each presentation, class will take 5 minutes to submit their evaluations of the presenting group via the classroom website.
Presentations will be video recorded.
15 Minutes: Instructors lead discussion of the cultural practices presented by the groups. This is a joint discussion between the local andglobal classroom. Instructor dismisses class.
15 Minutes:
Students will take a twenty-question quiz on role plays. The majority ofthe questions will focus on writing and performing role plays.
Local and global classrooms will go over the quizes together, grade themand then upload them to the class website.

Materials

!
!
!
!
!

Classroom notebooks.
Laptops
Pens
Computer stations/multi-media room
Video conference equipment

DifferentiatedInstruction!

Slow-learners will be placed in groups with faster learners and average learners so that they can more easily access the information.
Instructor will have supprrting members who will give additional
one-on-one support to slower learners during the classroom sessions.
One element in the rubric will be "degree of improvement" so thatslow-learners are rewarded for the progress that they make even ifthat progress falls short of the lesson goal.
TTDY will be available for the hearing impaired.

!
!
!

Re-teaching!

Concepts and skills will be reinforced during the classroom discussion period. Peer-to-peer learning will be encouraged during these
discussion.

Extension
Activities!

The top three groups (based on peer evaluations) will work with the
instructors during the next week to create a vodcast of their presentation. Presentations will be uploaded to the class website and madeavailable to English learners in other grades―４５―

国際教育交流研究

第２号

References
Aydin, I. E. (2012). Relationship between affective learning, instructor attractiveness and instructor evaluation in videoconference-based distance education courses. TOJET: The Turkish
Online Journal of Educational Technology, 11(4).
Davis, N. & Niederhauser, D.S. (April 2007). Virtual schooling. Learning and Leading with Technology. 34(7).10-16.
Kan, K. H. (2011). Meeting Face to Face= Seeing Eye to Eye?: Interglobal Dialogue via Videoconference. International Journal of Education & the Arts, 12(10), n10.
Maryland Department of Education. (2003). The Maryland state curriculum for world languages.
World Languages. Retrieved March 22, 2011 from http://www.marylandpublicschools.org/
MSDE/divisions/instruction/world̲languages.htm
McCarty, S. (2005) Spoken internet to go: Popularization through podcasting. The JALT CALL Journal. 1(2), 67-74. Retrieved March 24, 2011 from http://jaltcall.org/journal/articles/1̲2̲
McCarty.pdf.
Read, B. (2005) Drexel U. will give free iPods to students in School of Education. The Chronicle ofHigher Education. Retrieved March 25, 2011 from http://www.educause.edu/Resources/
DrexelUtoHandOutVideoPlayingiP/153606 .
Ritzel, D. O. (2010). International Videoconferencing: A Reaction to Burke et al. American Journalof Health Education, 41(1), 62-64.
Szeto, E. (2014). Bridging the students' and instructor's experiences: exploring instructional potential of videoconference in multi-campus universities. TOJET: The Turkish Online Journalof Educational Technology, 13(1).
Wu, W. C. V., & Marek, M. (2010). Making English a" Habit": Increasing Confidence, Motivation,
and Ability of EFL Students through Cross-Cultural, Computer-Assisted Interaction. Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology−TOJET, 9(4), 101-112.

―４６―

Improving ESL Using a Global Videoconference

国際テレビ会議システムを利用した第二言語としての英語（ESL）能力の向上
ボイド・D
本論文は、幼児から大学一年次にわたる学生の語学学習スキルの向上を目的として、授業でのopen and distance learning（開放遠隔教育）技術、特にテレビ会議システムの活用について考察したものである。当研究は、より効果のある ESL（第二外国語としての英語）学習環境を作り出すと考えられるテレビ会議システムの活用についての、全四部からなる研究の第一部にあたる。
第一部では、教師が授業にテレビ会議システムを取り入れる際の準備段階としての授業計画について記述する。

―４７―

外国にルーツを持つ子どもの学習を支える学生の実践のプロセス

外国にルーツを持つ子どもの学習を支える学生の実践のプロセス―コーディネーターの省察から―
半原

芳子
要

旨

本稿は、福井大学の学生が取り組んでいる外国にルーツを持つ子どもへの学習支援の展開をコーディネーターである筆者がふり返り、そのプロセスを辿るものである。具体的には、最も長く継続されている中国出身Ｍちゃんへの支援に注目し、Ｍちゃんが小１から小４になるまでの２年８ヶ月間の支援の展開を追った。当初学生３人で始まった本
支援は、その継続とプロセスのなかでさまざまな人や団体がかかわり、支援が調整され発展・拡大していた。また、Ｍちゃんだけではなく、支援者である学生の成長も見られた。そこから、今後学生の成長をより良く支えていくために、彼らが実践と省察のサイ
クルを発展的に積み重ね力量を培っていけるようにすること、そして、それを持続的に支えるコミュニティが必要であるとの示唆を得た。
キーワード：省察、記録化、コーディネーターの力量形成

１．はじめに日本では、１
９９０年の「出入国管理および難民認定法」の改正後、外国籍住民が増加の傾向にあり、近年では母国の経済不況や政情への不安から滞在の長期化・定住化が進んでいる。それに伴い日本の学校に学ぶ外国にルーツを持つ子ども達も増加し、子ども達の背景や状況はかつてないほど多様化かつ複雑化している。移民や難民の受け入れが世界的な喫緊の課題となっている今、日本は現在居住している外国人、そしてこれから来る外国人をどのように受け入れ共に暮らして
いくかといった課題に直面していると言える。
杉澤（２００９）は、日本がかつてない多言語多文化化を迎えるなか、今後日本人と外国人が共生する社会を築きあげていくには、多様な専門や領域の者達が協働で問題解決を図っていくこと、そのためにその協働を支えるコーディネーターの存在が必要であると強調する。そして、コーディネーターの力量形成のためには実践者（コーディネーター）が自らの実践を「省察」（Sch!n１９８３／柳沢・三輪２００７）することが重要であるとしている。また、柳沢（２０１６）は、専門性の力
量形成においては実践の省察と記録化が極めて重要な意味を持つこと、さらにはそれらを実践者が相互に検討し事例研究を定期的に進めていくことを提起している。
現在、筆者は多言語多文化共生社会を志向し、福井大学の学生と外国にルーツを持つ子ども達への学習支援に取り組んでいる。支援を行っているのは主に学生であり、筆者はコーディネータ
ーの役割を担っている。本稿では、学生によって取り組まれている学習支援のプロセスを記述し―４９―

国際教育交流研究第２号報告する。その目的は、一つは筆者自身のコーディネーターとしての力量を培うためである。学生が取り組んでいる支援の展開を辿ることは、すなわち筆者のコーディネーターとしての実践をふり返ることでもあり、そこから支援の意義と今後の展望を探りたいと考えている。もう一つは、
多言語多文化共生社会に向け「実践者が実践を相互に検討し事例研究を定期的に進めていく」（柳沢２０１６）ための共有財産をつくるためである。本稿はコーディネーターである筆者の省察であるが、それを「記録化」したことに意義があると考える。書いたものは話し言葉と異なり文字として残る。そのため、空間や時間を超え他者と共有できる知恵となる。一人一人の実践者が取り組めることや経験できることには限界がある。しかし、他者によって記録されたものが存在することにより人は相手の状況を借りて学ぶことができる。他者の記録を読みながら「自分がその実践の当事者だったらどのような判断をし、どのように実践を展開させただろうか」と想像をめぐらせ、状況を読む力や活動を発展させていく力を培っていくことが可能となる。
現在、福井大学の学生とは、大学や近隣の複数の小・中学校で支援を行っている。ここではそのなかで最も長く続いている中国出身Ｍちゃんへの学習支援に注目する。省察の資料とするのは、支援者である学生の記録とふり返り、および筆者の記録である。
２．中国出身Ｍちゃんへの学習支援の展開
Ｍちゃんは福井市内の公立小学校に通う女の子である。２０１３年４月、先に来日していた両親が当時６歳だったＭちゃんを呼び寄せる形で日本に来た。Ｍちゃんは両親との３人家族で、母親は市内の中華料理店でコックとして働き、父親は家事をしている。両親は日本語を話さない。
Ｍちゃんへの支援は２０１４年３月に始まった。これまで支援を担当してきた学生は以下の通りである。
・２０１４年３月〜２０１５年３月【２０１３−２０１４年度】
中国人留学生Ｔさん（教育学研究科２年）
中国人留学生Ｙさん（教育学研究科２年）
日本人学生Ｈさん（教育学研究科２年）
・２０１５年４月〜２０１６年３月【２０１５年度】
中国人留学生Ｔさん（修了生※前年度から継続）
中国人留学生Ｏさん（教育学研究科２年）
日本人学生Ｎさん（教育地域科学部４年）
・２０１６年４月〜２０１７年３月【２０１６年度】
中国人留学生Ｏさん（※前年度から継続）
中国人留学生Ｊさん（工学部研究生）
日本人学生Ｆさん（教育学研究科２年）
・２０１７年４月〜現在【２０１７年度（現在）】
中国人留学生Ｈさん（工学研究科１年）
中国人留学生Ｓさん（教育学研究科交換留学生）―５０―

外国にルーツを持つ子どもの学習を支える学生の実践のプロセス

日本人学生Ｍさん（教育地域科学部４年）
支援者はほぼ年度によって交替しているが、それは卒業が主な理由となっている。学生らはＭ
ちゃんの支援を離れる際、次の支援者を探し引き継いでいくことでＭちゃんの支援を継続させてきている。本支援はＭちゃんの母語である中国語と第二言語である日本語の両方を育てることを主な目的としている。そのため支援者は中国人留学生と日本人学生のペアもしくはチームが基本となる。以下、支援開始当初から２０１６年度までを辿りながらＭちゃんの支援のプロセスを跡づける。
２‐１． 「教科・母語・日本語相互育成学習」の開始（２０１４年３月）
支援は、２０１４年３月、Ｍちゃんが小学２年生になる直前の春休みに教育学研究科の院生３人（中国人留学生Ｔさん、Ｙさん、日本人学生Ｈさん）によって立ち上げられた。きっかけとなったのは彼女達が履修していた同研究科の「協働実践研究Ⅰ・Ⅱ」という授業である。その授業で３人は、外国人子女をテーマに協働実践研究を行うことを計画していた。筆者は当該科目の担当教員
ではないが、長年外国にルーツを持つ子ども達への学習支援にかかわっていたことから３人の協働実践研究に同行することとなった。
Ｍちゃんは中国人留学生Ｙさんの知り合いであった。６歳という低年齢で来日しているため、Ｍちゃんはこのままだと今後母語の力が弱くなりダブルリミテッド（二言語不十分）に陥ることが危惧された。学生とはそうした状況を共有し、相談の上「教科・母語・日本語相互育成学習」（岡崎１９９９）を取り入れることとした。それは子どもの母語（Ｍちゃんの場合中国語）と第二言語である日本語で教科学習を行うものである。教科
は国語を選んだ。その一番の理由は、Ｍちゃんが最も学校でついていけない教科であったからである。
また、日本人学生のＨさんが国語教育専攻だったことから、学生の力がより良く発揮できる教科であるとの判断もあった。
支援の進め方は岡崎（１９９９）を参考に、先行学習の形をとった。それはＭちゃんの在籍級での学習に先行して学習（支援）を行うものである。
図１は『たんぽぽのちえ』（小２光村図書）の単元での支援で用いられた母語のワークシートである。
上に本文の訳文、下に設問がある。Ｍちゃんは『たんぽぽのちえ』を母語であれば十分に内容を理解することができ、想像力を働かせることができる。こ
こでは「春天到来，蒲公英会ᘙฟொ஄㠞ⓗⰼ㜜ඒ࿔？
（春が来たらたんぽぽの花はどのように咲きますか？）」、「蒲公英的根茎ḡொ஄఍పᆶ฿ᆅ㠃࿔？（た―５１―

図１ 母語ワークシート（２０１４年３月使用）

国際教育交流研究第２号

んぽぽの根はどうして地面まで垂れていますか？）」など、本文の内容を読み取りさらにそれを自分の言葉で説明する質問がなされている。支援ではその問いをめぐり、Ｍちゃんと中国人留学生Ｔさん、Ｙさんとがディスカッションを行う。
母語での学習の後は日本語での学習である。すでに母語で内容を十分理解しているが、Ｍちゃんは来日してまだ１年であるため、内容は分かっていても日本語で自分の思いや考えを表現するのは難しい。
図２は『ふきのとう』（小２光村図書）の単元で用いられた日本語のワークシートである。ここでは「このおはなしは
あてはまる

いつの

じかんの

ことばに

まるを

おはなしですか。
つけましょう（あさ・ひる・よる）」など、主に内容確認の問題が選択形式で出されている!）。Ｍちゃんは日本人学生のＨさんとやりとりしながら、日本語の言葉や表現を獲得していく。こうして先行学習を行った後に、Ｍ

図２ 日本語ワークシート（２０１４年３月使用）

ちゃんは在籍級での授業を受ける。あらかじめ母語と日本語で内容を理解しているため、クラス
では先生の説明や友達の発言に集中することができる。
週に１回９０分のＭちゃんへのこうした支援が軌道に乗り始めた２
０１４年４月、学生がある一つの事実に気がつく。それはＭちゃんが放課後や週末に一人で遊んでいることであった。心配した中国人留学生のＴさんとＹさんがＭちゃんの両親に尋ねたところ、それは両親が家にいるよう命じているとのことだった。理由は、Ｍちゃんが日本人の友達の家に遊びに行き、もし迷惑をかけても自分達が日本語で謝りに行けないからというものだった。Ｍちゃんが同年代の子ども達に比べ行動や交流範囲が狭く社会とのつながりが弱いことを案じた学生は、Ｍちゃんのコミュニティを広げるため、福井大学の学生が取り組む「探求ネットワーク」にＭちゃんをつないでいく。
２‐２． 福井大学「探求ネットワーク」との連携（２０１４年度）「探求ネットワーク」は福井大学の学生が地域の子ども達と行っている探求活動である。１９９５
年から２０年以上に渡り続いている。学校５日制の導入に伴い発足したもので、子ども達が土曜日に自ら様々な体験活動に参加するなかで、探求する力・表現する力・問題解決していく力を獲得することをねらいとしている。当時は公開講座として開講されたが、現在は学部の専門の授業科目として積極的に位置づけられている（森他２００３）。
現在、探求ネットワークには「かみすきブロック」や「もぐもぐブロック」、「それいけ探検隊
ブロック」など９つのブロックがあり、小学４年生から高校３年生までの子ども達約３００人が参加している。５月から１２月までの８ヶ月が３つのサイクルで構成され、活動は基本的に第２・第―５２―

外国にルーツを持つ子どもの学習を支える学生の実践のプロセス

４土曜日の午前中に行われている。夏（夏サイクル）にはキャンプや合宿、春（春サイクル）と冬（冬サイクル）には学習の成果を発表するおまつりがある（福井大学教育地域科学部探求ネットワーク２０１４）。探求ネットワークであればＭちゃんのご両親も安心してＭちゃんを外で活動させることができるだろうと考えた学生は、探求ネットワークを紹介し承諾を得、Ｍちゃんは２０１４
年５月に探求ネットワークに入ることとなった。
Ｍちゃんは地元の伝統工芸である紙すきを活動のメインに据える「かみすきブロック」に入った。かみすきブロックでは毎回あるテーマに基づき、自分達で紙をすきオリジナルの紙や作品を作る。当時、このブロックには小学生から高校生までの子ども達が３０名ほど参加しており、Ｍちゃんは一番年下で、また唯一の外国籍児童であった。
以下は「かみすきブロック」でのある日のやりとりである。この日のテーマは「すごく〇〇な紙」で、Ｍちゃんの班は「すごく光る紙」を作成することとなった。みんながいる所から少し離れた場所にいろいろな素材や材料が置かれている。ＭちゃんはＴ君と学生スタッフと一緒に素材選びをしており、青とオレンジのビニールテープに目をつける。それを班に持ち帰り、みんなの意見を聞いている場面である。
Ｍ：絶対破れないあの牛乳パックとか使っていい？もっと私らしか使わない最新手段
Ｔ：（ビニールテープを触りながら）ほらぐちゃぐちゃ
スタッフ：使えそう
Ｍ：使えそうねー［班のみんながいるところに戻って］
Ｍ：青とオレンジのテープ、これとこれ、どっちがいい？
スタッフ：どっちもいいね
Ｍ：じゃ、みんな集まって［みんなが顔を寄せる］
Ｍ：どれがいい？決めて。（オレンジのテープを持って）じゃあこれがいい人？
［何人か手を挙げる］
Ｍ：何人ある？（青のテープを持って）じゃあこれがいい人？
［一人手を挙げる］
Ｍ：オレンジがいい人、青がいい人・・・
スタッフ：オレンジでやってみよっか。待って、（このオレンジのテープで）何するんだっけ？
（２０１４年５月２４日

筆者の観察ノートより抜粋）

ここでは、Ｍちゃんは他の子ども達やスタッフとの協働のなかで、自分から提案したり、仲間の意見を聞いたり、相手の意見を吟味したりしている。また、この日スタッフとの間で以下のよ
うなやりとりがあった。
―５３―

国際教育交流研究第２号

スタッフ：ウォーシーリーベンレン（＝中国語で「私は日本人です」）
Ｍ：中国人じゃないでしょ。（発音を直す）ウォーシーリーベンレン
スタッフ：＃＃＃（中国語で何か言う）（Ｍちゃんとスタッフとの間で中国語によるやりとりが少し続く）（２０１４年５月２４日

筆者の観察ノートより抜粋）

これは第二外国語で中国語を勉強している男子学生がＭちゃんに中国語で話しかけ、Ｍちゃん
がその学生に中国語を教えている場面である。探求ネットワークの学生は、Ｍちゃんが中国出身であり中国語が母語であることをＭちゃんの個性として積極的に捉え、大切にした。また、Ｍちゃんの父親が迎えに来るとブロックのリーダーの学生や高校生が駆け寄り、談笑する姿があった。
Ｍちゃんが探求ネットワークに入ったことで、Ｍちゃんの家族もまた日本社会との接点が広がっていった。
こうしてＭちゃんは週に１回放課後に「教科・母語・日本語相互育成学習」、月に２回土曜日に「探求ネットワーク」の活動で福井大学にやってきた。両者の学生はゆるやかにつながりＭちゃんの成長に同行した。この時期、「教科・母語・日本語相互育成学習」では、「コミュニケーシ
ョン活動」というものが取り入れられるようになっていった。Ｍちゃんは特に日本語支援の時間に、自分の気持ちを日本人学生のＨさんに伝えるため身振り手振りを駆使していた。学生はそうしたＭちゃんの姿勢を大事にしたいと考え、毎回支援の終わりの１０分ほどを「コミュニケーショ
ン活動」の時間にするようになった。当初は学生主導で行われていたが、次第にＭちゃんが主導するようになっていった。活動にはいくつかバリエーションがあるが、なかでもＭちゃんは「言葉あてクイズ」が大好きだった。それは、出題者がホワイトボードにある一つの単語（例えば「いるか」）を書き、それを表現者がジェスチャーで回答者に伝えるというものである。はじめは具体物を表す一つの単語だったものが、Ｍちゃんによって文章や抽象的な言葉へと難易度が上げられていった。活動に没頭するあまり、父親が迎えに来ても活動をやめないことがしばしばあった。
コミュニケーション活動はＭちゃんと学生によって大事にされ、その後２年間に渡り続いた。
Ｍちゃんと学生達は、天気が良い日は教室を飛び出し校内の散歩に出かけた。福井大学には四季折々の草花が至る所にある。それらの名前を中国語と日本語で学んだり、散歩して発見したことを作文にまとめたりすることもあった。こうして支援はＭちゃんと学生達によってどんどん工夫され、Ｍちゃんの思考や感情を耕すものとなっていった。
２‐３． 学校と探求ネットワークとの調整のなかで学習がデザインされる（２０１５年度）
２０１５年３月、支援を立ち上げた中国人留学生ＴさんとＹさん、日本人学生Ｈさんが卒業した。
Ｍちゃんへの支援は、もとは３人が教育学研究科の授業「協働実践研究Ⅰ・Ⅱ」において、外国人子女をテーマに協働実践研究を行うために計画・実施されたものであった。３人は卒業する自分達に代わりＭちゃんの支援をしてくれる学生を探した。その頃、Ｍちゃんへの支援とは別に、市内のＫ中学校にて教育地域科学部の学生達が外国にルーツを持つ生徒への支援を開始していた。
―５４―

外国にルーツを持つ子どもの学習を支える学生の実践のプロセス

そこにかかわってくれていた教育地域科学部４年のＮさんが、Ｍちゃんの支援を担当してくれることとなった。Ｎさんは将来国語の教員になることを志している女子学生であった。母語支援者
はすぐには見つからず、中国人留学生のＴさんが卒業後も就職活動のためしばらく日本にいるとのことで、Ｍちゃんの支援の担当を数ヶ月継続してくれることとなった。
新年度（２０１
５年度）となりＭちゃんは小学３年生になった。Ｍちゃんへの支援はＮさんが加わったことで、新たな展開を迎えた。それは学校のカリキュラム（学習内容や夏休みや冬休みといった長期休暇、学校行事等）に加え、「探求ネットワーク」の活動計画が意識され工夫が施されるようになったことである。Ｎさんは探求ネットワークを２年間行った経験を持っていた。これまで、Ｍちゃんへの支援は学校での学習を先行して行うものであるため、学校のカリキュラムは学生達によってよく意識されていた。そこに、探求ネットワークの活動計画を熟知しているＮさんによって、探求ネットワークの活動やそこでのＭちゃんの状況を見据えた支援が意識されるようになった。具体的にはこんなことがあった。探求ネットワークでは夏や秋にキャンプや宿泊合
宿を行うことが多いが、２０１５年度Ｍちゃんの所属している「かみすきブロック」も夏に１泊２日の宿泊合宿に出かけることとなった。小３のＭちゃんにとって宿泊合宿は初めてであることに加え、探求ネットワークのメンバー（子ども、福井大学の学生）はＭちゃん以外みんな日本人であることから２４時間以上日本語ばかりの環境となる。Ｍちゃんは普段学校では日本語環境であっても、家に帰れば母語環境となる。しかし合宿では母語は使えず、ずっと日本語ばかりとなる。そのことをよく分かっていたＮさんは、宿泊合宿の次の回の支援では母語中心の支援を提案した。
それは宿泊合宿で日本語のみの環境にあったＭちゃんに、母語の時間および力を回復するねらいを持ったものであった。その日の支援では、Ｍちゃんは始めから終わりまでほぼずっと中国語を使っていた。このように「教科・母語・日本語相互育成学習」の支援は、学校と探求ネットワー
クのリズムとの調整のなかで工夫がされていった。
年度の途中、母語支援者が交替した。これまで支援をしてくれていた中国人留学生Ｔさんが忙しくなり支援にかかわることが難しくなったためである。Ｔさんに代わって中国人留学生Ｏさん
が、Ｍちゃんの支援を担当してくれることとなった。Ｏさんは教育学研究科１年の女性の院生である。ＴさんとＯさんは中国の同じ大学の出身で先輩・後輩の関係にあったが、Ｏさんに声をかけたのは日本人学生のＮさんだった。後で聞いた話であるが、Ｎさんは教育学研究科の院生が集まる部屋に行き、Ｍちゃんの支援をしてくれそうな中国人留学生に声をかけていったという。それに応じてくれたのがＯさんであった。院生のＯさんと学部生のＮさんはそれぞれタイプが違う
ものの、息がぴったり合っていた。２人はよく相談しながら支援を組み立て、Ｍちゃんの希望にもよく耳を傾けた。クリスマスやお正月がある冬休みは、特別メニューとして、中国の絵本の朗
読や、Ｍちゃんのリクエストから手作りカルタでカルタ大会を行ったりした。
この頃、Ｍちゃんは母語の力とあわせて日本語の力もぐんぐん伸びていった。支援開始当初は、
日本語の支援の時間では単元の内容を確認することが精一杯であったが、小３の後半になると日本語支援の内容が母語でのものと同様に、自分の言葉で物事を説明したり人物の心情を想像し表現したりするなど高度なものとなっていった。図３は、２０１６年１月に行った『モチモチの木』（小―５５―

国際教育交流研究第２号

３光村図書）の単元の日本語支援時のワークシートである。ワークシートには、この単元で鍵となる「月」の古い呼び名を調べる問題
や、モチモチの木を自分の言葉で説明する問題、登場人物の心情を想像する問題が置かれている。この時のＭちゃんの様子について、
後日Ｎさんは筆者にメール

図３

日本語ワークシート（２０１６年１月使用）

で「問題量も自分で考える問題も増えたのに、しっかり解いてくれた」と報告してくれた。
また、この年度において初の試みだったこととして、Ｎさんが２０１６年２月に行われた「実践研究福井ラウンドテーブル」にて実践報告を行ったことがある。ラウンドテーブルは５〜６人の小グループで、お互いの実践を報告・交流するものである。当日ＮさんはＭちゃんへの１年間の支援を約６０分の時間をかけ、同じグループとなった県内の公立学校の校長先生や教育委員会の方、県外の定時制高校の先生に報告を行った。教員採用試験に合格し卒業後県内の国語の教員になることが決まっていたＮさんは、ラウンドテーブルで様々な角度からの感想をもらったことにより、教員になってからの展望が見出せたとのことだった。
２‐４． Ｍちゃんのコミュニティの拡大と支援体制の拡大（２０１６年度）
Ｍちゃんは「探求ネットワーク」の活動を小学２年生から３年生までの２年間続けたが、新年度（２０１６年度）となり、進級と同時に探求ネットワークを卒業した。理由は、地域のバドミント
ンクラブに入ったためである。バトミントンクラブへの入部はＭちゃんの強い希望であった。Ｍちゃんはそこで異学年の子ども達とバトミントンに励むようになった。小学２年生のとき、放課
後一人で遊んでいたＭちゃんの姿も、またＭちゃんを自宅にいるよう命じていた両親の姿もなくなった。Ｍちゃんの決断は「探求ネットワーク」から次のコミュニティへと世界を広げていくものであり、そうしたＭちゃんの成長を探求ネットワークの学生達も喜んだ。
２０１６年度は、中国人留学生Ｏさんが就職準備のため、支援準備にこれまで同様の時間をかけることが難しくなった。そのため支援で使用する教材の翻訳（中国語訳）を上海からの交換留学生が担当してくれるようになった。そのことによって、Ｍちゃんに直接支援を行う直接支援者と、直接の支援を行わないが翻訳を通じ間接的な支援を行う間接支援者の協力体制ができあがっていった。
２０１７年１１月現在、Ｍちゃんへの支援は３年８ヶ月目に突入した。６歳で来日したＭちゃんは当
初ダブルリミテッド（二言語不十分）が危惧されたが、学生の継続的な支援のおかげで、現在母―５６―

外国にルーツを持つ子どもの学習を支える学生の実践のプロセス

語と日本語の両方を伸ばしながら教科（国語）の力をつけていっている。先述したように母語での支援、日本語での支援ともに論理的な思考や想像力を働かせるものとなってきている。この学習支援をＭちゃん自身が非常に楽しみにしてくれている。どんなに暑い日もどんなに大雨の日も休まずにやってくるＭちゃんの熱意に学生がどのように応えていくのか、また、目に見えて成長していくＭちゃんに学生が今後どのように支援を工夫し更なる展開を見せてくれるのか今後が楽しみである。
３．学生の成長−日本人学生Ｎさんの省察−
ここまで中国出身Ｍちゃんへの支援の展開を跡づけてきた。Ｍちゃんへの支援では、Ｍちゃん
だけでなく支援にかかわっている学生達も成長している。以下は、教育地域科学部４年生Ｎさんのふり返りである。ＮさんはＭちゃんが小学３年生のとき（２０１５年４月〜２０１６年３月）支援を担
当してくれた学生である。前節で述べたようにＮさんは支援当時、国語の教員になる夢を持っていた。教員採用試験に合格し、現在は県内で教員をしている。卒業する直前の２０１６年３月、ＮさんはＭちゃんの１年間の支援を次のようにふり返ってくれた（ふり返りの一部を以下抜粋）。
１年間は短かかったんですけど、ふり返るとＭちゃんの成長がいろいろなところで実感できた１年だったと思います。Ｍちゃんは身長も１年の間にぐんぐん伸びたし、言葉遣いや感覚も、例
えば以前は女の子なのにと思うような足の開き方をしていたんですが、それも少しだけおさまりました。そうした様子を見ると、やはり心も大人になっているんだなと思います。また、思春期ということもあって、自分のルーツに対する疑問もあるんだろうなと思います。この１年間、そばで成長が見られたのは本当に嬉しかったです。Ｍちゃんはもちろん学力も伸びました。字も多少きれいになった気がしないでもないですし、思考力の問題については、支援を始めたばかりの頃には考えられなかったような答えをどんどん出してくれるようになりました。そういうＭちゃんの姿を見て、この１年間無駄じゃなかったと感じました。
自分自身の成長をふり返ってみると、やはりこれから教員になるということで、学校に外国の子どもがいることを知っているのと、知らないで教員になるのとでは違うと思います。また、Ｅ市のある学校は生徒の２割が外国にルーツを持つ子どもだと聞きますが、そうした学校に赴任したとき、このような母語を活用した支援があることや、地域のなかに助けてくれる存在がいることを知っていると全然違うだろうなと思います。外国の子どものことは他人事ではありません。
そうした大事なことについて自分ができることを考えられたので、そこは自分の成長だと思っています。
また、支援をしていてやっぱり一番大切だなと思ったのがチームプレーでした。Ｍちゃんとのつながりも大切ですが、私と中国人留学生のＯさんの関係も支援をしていく上ではとても大切でした。自分で言うとちょっと恥ずかしいんですけど、Ｏさんとは合っていたなと思います。お互いにタイプがまったく違うから異なった影響をＭちゃんにしてあげられたと思います。じゃあ、教員になった時、こうして外国の子どものことを一緒に考えるペアが誰になるのかと考えたら、―５７―

国際教育交流研究第２号

それは同僚の先生や子どもの保護者さんになると思います。その時はＯさんとやったようなことはできないかもしれませんが、そこで諦めずにたくさん話をしていきたいです。そして、気持ちを通じ合わせて、一緒に子どものことを考えられたらいいなと思います。
ＮさんはＭちゃんの成長や現在考え始めていることについて、ゆっくりと時間をかけ語ってくれた。そこには、学校の教員として今後何ができるかについての展望も含まれている。Ｎさんは、
現在県内の学校で教員をしながら、日本人の子どもと外国人の子どもが学び合うインクルーシブ
教育を考え進めている。今後、Ｍちゃんへの支援が続いていくなかで、いつか教員となったＮさんと再会し、何かが一緒にできる日が来るかもしれないと期待している。
４．今後の展望ここまで、筆者が福井大学の学生と取り組んでいる外国にルーツを持つ子ども達への支援のなかで、最も長く継続されている中国出身Ｍちゃんへの支援に注目し、Ｍちゃんへの２年８ヶ月の支援の歩みを辿ってきた。ふり返ってみて改めて気づくのは、本支援には実にさまざまな人や団体がかかわっていることである。はじめは教育学研究科の３名の院生によって立ち上げられた「教科・母語・日本語相互育成学習」の支援であるが、「探求ネットワーク」とつながり、また３名の院生の卒業後は複数の中国人留学生と日本人学生がバトンを渡しながらＭちゃんの支援を担い、ここまできている。Ｍちゃんの支援が長いスパンで継続できているのは、特定の人物や団体によるものではなく、みんなでＭちゃんの成長を支え合っていることが大きいだろう。例えば、「教
科・母語・日本語相互育成学習」の支援は、大学の夏季休業中は中国人留学生の一時帰国等により支援がしばらく休みとなることがある。しかし、「教科・母語・日本語相互育成学習」の支援が休みでも、Ｍちゃんは「探求ネットワーク」の活動で大学にやってくる。その逆、つまり「探求ネットワーク」が休止期間中に「教科・母語・日本語相互育成学習」が活動しているということもある。このように複数の人と団体がかかわることで、Ｍちゃんへの継続的で多角的な支援が可能となっている。
また、Ｍちゃんへの支援において、Ｍちゃんの成長はもちろんであるが、支援者である学生が力をつけていることにも注目したい。それはＮさんのふり返りにおいて確認できることであるが、支援の展開を辿ると、そこには学生達がＭちゃんの様子を見て取り、その時々の最適の判断をしていることに気づく。一人で遊んでいるＭちゃんに気づき「探求ネットワーク」につないでいっ
たこと、Ｍちゃんの身振り手振りをＭちゃんの大事な表現方法と位置づけそこから「コミュニケーション活動」を取り入れていったこと、初めての宿泊合宿後に母語中心の時間を設けたことな
ど、それは学生同士がＭちゃんのことをよく考え判断していったことである。その判断と行動は実践のなかで培われている力量であると言ってよいだろう。
では、こうしたことを踏まえ、今後筆者は福井大学の学生の外国にルーツを持つ子ども達への支援をどのようにコーディネートしていくとよいだろうか。一つは、学生の力量形成のために「省察」（Sch!n１９８３／柳沢・三輪２００７）を位置づけたい。今回は学生が行っている支援をコーディ―５８―

外国にルーツを持つ子どもの学習を支える学生の実践のプロセス

ネーターである筆者がその展開を跡づけたが、学生は実践のなかでたくさんの判断と挑戦と失敗をし、そして再チャレンジをしている。その積み重ねの上での３年８ヶ月であり、実践の展開である。そうした実践のプロセスや起伏を、今後は実践者である学生自らが掴み展望を切り拓いていけるように支えたい。
そのためには実践と省察のサイクルの発展的な積み重ねと、それを持続的に支える実践者の「コミュニティ」が必要となる。現在、Ｍちゃんの支援の他に、福井市内の複数の小中学校での支援が展開している。それぞれの場所で出会う子ども達の背景や状況は実にさまざまである。例えば、
Ｋ中学校には外国にルーツを持つ生徒が複数在籍している。週に１回放課後に学校の教室を借りて支援を行っているのであるが、そこには中１〜中３までのフィリピン出身や日系ブラジル人の子ども達が集まる。Ｈ小学校では、中学年の児童への支援を行っている。その児童は母親がフィリピン人であるが、フィリピン語をまったく話さない。それは母親が「ここは日本であるから」という理由で、つたない日本語で子育てをしてきたためである。学生達は、その児童のことばの力をどのように育てていけるかを日々模索している。今後は、そうした個々の取り組みをつなぐ
こと、そして全体で持続的に協働省察・協働探究していけるような「探求するコミュニティ」を学生達と共につくっていきたい。
多言語多文化共生社会はあらかじめそこに存在するものではなく、自分達で耕していくものであることを、学生達の取り組みや姿勢から筆者自身が学んでいる。日々の地道かつ継続的な実践と省察、そしてその相互検討によって、日本に住むすべての人の言語と文化が尊重され保全される社会へと少しずつ歩を進めていきたい。そのためにも、本稿で切り拓いた知見をもとに、また明日からの実践に取り組んでいきたい。
注!毎回の支援において準備された訳文とワークシートは学生によって作成された。ワークシート
は、長年「教科・母語・日本語相互育成学習」の取り組みを継続的に行っている「NPO 法人
子ども LAMP」（佐藤他２０１３）にて作成されているものを参考に、学生達がＭちゃんの言葉の発達の状態を見ながら、Ｍちゃんと一緒に考えたいと思う設問をつくりだしている。
引用・参考文献
岡崎敏雄（１９９７）「日本語・母語相互育成学習のねらい」『平成８年度外国人児童生徒指導資料母国語による学習のための教材』、pp．
１‐７ 茨城県教育庁指導課
佐藤真紀・岡崎眸・清田淳子・原瑞穂・朱桂栄・小田珠生・高橋織恵・半原芳子・大上忠幸・宇津木奈美子・三輪充子・Alexandra Makhrakova・秦松梅・公平・齋瀟瀟・趙有珍・桃井菜
奈恵・柏楊（２０１３）「NPO 法人子ども LAMP１３年間の軌跡−言語少数派の子どもの学びを支える実践」『言語文化と日本語教育』４５、pp．
３１‐３４ お茶の水女子大学日本言語文化学研究会
杉澤経子（２００９）「『多文化社会コーディネーター養成プログラム』づくりにおけるコーディネー―５９―

国際教育交流研究

第２号

ターの省察的実践」『多言語・多文化協働実践研究』別冊１、pp．
６‐３０ 東京外国語大学
多言語・多文化教育研究センター
福井大学教育地域科学部探求ネットワーク（２０１４）『協働探求者を育むプロセス−子どもたちと長期にわたる活動から見えてくる探求的学び』、福井大学教育地域科学部社会教育研究室
森透・寺岡英男・柳澤昌一（２００３）「小・中学生と学生との探求活動とその省察−文部科学省フ
レンドシップ事業『探求ネットワーク』報告−」『福井大学教育実践研究』２８、pp．
１２７‐１４６
福井大学
柳沢昌一（２０１６）「実践と省察のサイクルを通して実践力を培う−福井大学の履修証明プログラム」日本社会教育学会（編）『地域を支える人々の学習支援−社会教育関連職員の役割と力量形成』、pp．
１６２‐１７３ 東洋館出版社
Donald A. Sch!n. (1983). The Reflective Practitioner: How Professionals Think in Action : Basic
Books.（柳沢昌一・三輪建二監訳『省察的実践とは何か』２００７ 鳳書房）
付記
本研究は、次の２つの助成を受けた研究成果報告の一部である。
・平成２７〜２９年度科学研究費補助金研究基盤（Ｃ）「日本人住民と外国人住民の共生コミュニテ
ィ形成を支える探究型教育連携モデルの構築」（研究課題番号：１５Ｋ０２６３７ 研究代表者：半原芳子）
・平成２９年度福井大学地域貢献事業支援金「外国籍児童生徒への教科・母語・日本語相互育成学習」（事業責任者：半原芳子）―６０―

外国にルーツを持つ子どもの学習を支える学生の実践のプロセス

The University Students' Process of Designing Learning Support System for a Foreigner in a
Japanese Elementary School ; A Coordinator's Reflection
Yoshiko Hanbara
This paper discusses how the researcher followed and reflected on the whole process of establishing a learning program support with university students of University of Fukui for minority children with foreign roots, more specifically on the case of M-chan. M-chan is from China andis being supported by these University of Fukui students for two (2) years and eight (8) months
already ― the longest support program the researcher is handling. The learning support program initially started with only three university students; but has now grown and developed intoa much larger scale as more people and various organizations have been involved in the process.
Aside from M-chan, the university students supporting her learning have also been maturing ―taking a more positive and conscious responsibility to provide better support for her. Hence, inorder to actively contribute to these university students' growth, the researcher discusses thecultivation of 'community of inquiry' as a product of accumulated experiences, practices and reflection cycles as a more sustainable model of support for these young practitioners.
Keywords: reflection, practice record, coordinator's practice―６１―

A Common Error with Japanese Learners of English: Article UsageA Common Error with Japanese Learners of English: Article Usage
Robert Dykes
Abstract
Research has shown that article selection is the single most frequently occurring error
with Japanese learners of English (JLE). This essay explores the a/an and the articles aswell as the oft overlooked zero article. The major attempts at creating systems to explain article usage are briefly covered before breaking down the reasons why JLE
struggle with articles. In a two-step conclusion the essay first explains that while many
detailed article systems and approaches exist they are too complicated and/or filledwith far too many exceptions to be taught to a non-native speaker of English. It suggests that articles must simply be learned and memorized through practice and repetition for usage. Building upon that disheartening conclusion the essay recommends thatthe best way to teach articles may be to not focus on them at all, but to integrate various examples of article usage into basic grammar lessons.
Keywords: definite article, indefinite article, zero article, Japanese learners of English

1. Introduction
Articles may appear simple at first glance, but are one of the most problematic areas for non-native speakers of English (Han, Chodorow, & Leacock, 2006; Master, 2002; Whitman, 1974). Article usage errors are often more frequent with students whose L1 contains no articles (Han et al.,2006). Chinese, Korean, and Russian are common examples. This paper will focus on common errors by native speakers of Japanese, another language which contains no articles.
Articles traditionally fall into the definite, a/an, indefinite, the, and zero/null forms. They areused as determiners (Fromkin, Rodman, & Hyams, 2003) to specify a noun phrase's (NP) definiteness or indefiniteness (Crystal, 1997). Eastwood (2002) adds that articles can also be used to indicate a generalized meaning or to describe or classify an NP. Article usage is vast and the rules
governing them can be complex for native and non-native speakers of English (Master, 2002;
Palmer, 1947).
This essay will first cover the grammatical fundamentals of article usage. Next, the essay
will examine the types of errors common with Japanese learners of English (JLE) and the possible reasons behind the errors. Lastly, the essay will examine various pedagogical teaching suggestions that may help decrease article usage errors.
―６３―

国際教育交流研究第２号

2. Grammatical Analysis of Articles in the English Language
In the English language, articles are some of the most frequently used words (Master, 2002).
They include a, an, the, and the zero article, sometimes referred to as the null article or O
/ . Itshould be noted that some scholars (Master, 1997) differentiate between two forms of the zero article, calling them "null/zero" or "O/ 1/O/ 2" (Master, 2002). This essay will use zero article from thispoint forth and it will be used to refer to any and all forms of the article in question. A and the areamong the top five most frequently used words in the English language; however, the zero article occurs even more often (Master, 2002). Articles are a subclass of determiners (Fromkin et al.,2003), but they do not always function within this classification. There are four functions of articles, only two of which act as a determiner. These functions include: neither quantity nor determiner, quantity alone, determiner alone, or both quantity and determiner (Whitman, 1974). Articles are most often divided into indefinite (non-specific), a/an, and definite (specific), the (BurtonRoberts, 1976; Liu & Gleason, 2002). However, the zero article "is presumed to be both definite
and indefinite at the same time" (Berezowski, 2009, p. 2). Not all scholars view articles in such a direct and dichotomic explanation of indefinite or definite. Whitman (1974) explains that while articles may appear in the same grammatical structure, there is a misconception that articles are primarily the same, "differing only along a dimension of 'definiteness/indefiniteness' or 'specificity/
non-specificity.' A/an and the are, in fact, entirely different syntactic entities, quite unrelated toeach other" (p. 254).

3. Articles
3-1. The Definite Article: theDefinite words "refer to a unique object insofar as the speaker and listener are concerned"(Fromkin et al., 2003, p. 186). Within the subclass of articles, the, is the definite article. In the example, "I bought a car", no assumption is made that a particular car is being referenced, simply adescription of an action that took place. However, in ''I bought the car'', it is assumed a certain car
is being referred to. According to Fromkin et al. (2003), it is common for indefinite articles to be
used in the beginning of a discourse and definite articles will later be used in pointing to an NP
whose referents are agreed upon by both the speaker and listener. In short, when using the, "thespeaker implies that the recipient should be able to identify the intended referent" (Juvonen, 2006,
p. 484). Traditionally the usage of the can be broken into 4 subcategories:(a) unique referent e.g., the Pope; (b) referent physically present e.g., Pass me the pepper please;(c) referent previously mentioned in the discourse; and (d) specific referent assumed to be
known to the hearer e.g., the man is standing behind you (Lui & Gleason, 2002, pp. 2-3)

―６４―

A Common Error with Japanese Learners of English: Article Usage

In addition to these 4 subcategories, Huddleston (1988) remarks that in rare cases the can also act
as an adverb of degree (e.g., The slower we move, the faster we die.).
Similar to many rules in grammar, if rules regarding articles used in discourse are broken,
then the sentence is viewed as unacceptable. For example:
A: The price on a red convertible I like was lowered yesterday.
B: What are you going to do?
A: I just bought the car.
If the final sentence was changed to:
A: I just bought a car.
Most people would consider this sentence now unacceptable. As Fromkin et al. (2003) points out,
the inclusion or lack thereof the can change the meaning of a sentence dramatically, for example:
The terrorists are in control of the government.
The terrorists are in the control of the government. (Fromkin et al., 2003, p. 212)
In the second sentence the government is in control over the terrorists which is a stark contrast
to the first sentence in which the terrorists are in control.
The can be used with any noun (Eastwood, 2002), but proper names are not usually precededby the. There are some exceptions such as The Statue of Liberty, The Big Apple, and The Amazon. In the case of the William McDonalds, the is used to indicate the family of William McDonald.
An additional special case is when a noun phrase is modified by a prepositional phrase (e.g., The
America of the 50s...) (Fromkin et al., 2003).
3-2. The Indefinite Article: a/an
When using the a/an article, the speaker implies that the recipient should not necessarily beable identify a specific referent (Juvonen, 2006). Unlike the, a/an is used with singular nouns exclusively (Eastwood, 2002), but not all, only those that are considered countable (Palmer, 1947). However, it is not that straightforward. Most non-countable singular nouns can be converted to countable form (Palmer, 1947). Grass is typically a non-countable singular noun, but in "a grass of some
type could be planted here to stop erosion", grass is used as a singular countable noun. Palmer(1947) outlines varied uses for indefinite articles, but differentiates between what he calls the"two very distinct varieties" of the a/an article (p. 65). In the first case, it is acting as "the numerical or quantitative article" and is functioning as a "shortened and weaker form" of one (Palmer,
1947, p. 65). This is a way of showing less emphasis on the oneness of an NP. The other function ofa/an is to essentially mean "a certain" (Palmer, 1947). In the example, "Oh, did you hear? There
was a shark at the beach today", a is referring to a "a certain shark".
Palmer (1947) goes on to explain various occasional uses for the indefinite article. "A sometimes means: any particular individual thing or person chosen at random as being characteristic of all―６５―

国際教育交流研究第２号

others, or a thing called a or that sort of thing that is called a" (p. 66; italics in original). Another use fora is when it means 'every' (Palmer, 1947). Only in these two last cases does Palmer (1947) feel thata/an act as the true indefinite article.
Burton-Roberts explains in further detail the four functions of the indefinite article.
1. Generic determiner, e.g., a whale is a mammal
2. Specific indefinite determiner of subjects of non-generic sentences e.g., a whale struck the
shipa. Determiner of objects in non-generic, non-copulative sentences,e.g., the whale struck a ship
3. Attributive indefinite determiner of complement NP's in predicates, e.g., John is a scientist
4. Non-specific indefinite determiner, e.g., I'm going to marry a millionaire(adapted from Burton-Roberts 1976, p. 427)
Burton-Roberts points out that a does not always point to a referent as we see in the thirdfunction. John is the only referent. Burton-Roberts (1976) explains that in sentences like this, "scientist" is simply attributing a "quality of being a scientist" onto John (p. 428).

3-3. The Zero Article
Berezowski (2009) points out that the definite and indefinite articles in English have been singled out and discussed in scholarly works as early as the mid-1500s. The concept of the zero article in its current explanation did not begin to show up in scholarly works until about 60 years ago.
In the realm of linguistics, zero is "an abstract unit... that has no physical realization in speech"(Crystal, 1997, p.440). The zero article is when a NP does not require a determiner or in otherwords, the zero article is the absence of an article (Berezowski, 2009). The zero article is somewhat controversial in that most scholarly articles and books on English grammar do not evenmention this odd part of speech (Berezowski, 2009). Hurford (1994) mentions that there is a definite article and an indefinite article and adds, "that's all − there are no more articles" (p. 18). This
non-recognition of the zero article may be creating the most confusion with English learners
while trying to understand the article system (Plamer 1947). Palmer (1947) feels that where wefind no physical article, what he has coined the alogistic (non−word) article, it "is perhaps the mostimportant point in connection with the learning of English article-usage" and adds "[t]he distinction between the and a is difficult enough, but where we find neither the nor a the difficulty turns
into hopeless perplexity" (p. 67). To add even more to zero article's controversy as an article,
when its existence is acknowledged, it is believed to be both indefinite and definite at the sametime (Berezowski, 2009).
Zero article usage can be better understood through the following six contrasting NP in―６６―

A Common Error with Japanese Learners of English: Article Usage

which Master (2002) uses O/ to represent the zero article.
1. mass (O/ cake) vs. count (a cake)2. general (O/ stone) vs. particular (a stone)
3. abstract (O/ prison) vs. concrete (a prison)
4. adjective (O/ Fool that he was [=He was foolish]) vs. noun (He was a fool)
5. name (O/ director of the program, O/ Dr. Smith) vs. description (the directorof the program, the doctor)
6. familiar (O/ next week) vs. unfamiliar (the next week)(adapted from Master, 2002, p. 337)

4. Usage Factors
Choosing the correct article is incredibly complex due to the nature of multiple heterogeneous factors and rules (Han et al., 2006; Palmer, 1947). Complicating things even further, "almost
every rule for articles has many exceptions or subrules" (Han et al., 2006, p. 117). Palmer (1947) admits that with many of the exceptions that are to be found, often un-familiar terms such as institutions and proper names, can cause confusion and hesitation with even native English speakers,e.g., "University College, London (a college in London named University) or The University College,
London, (The College of The University of London) " (p. 73). Colloquial factors also create an additional
set of exceptions (Palmer, 1947; Masters, 1997). Palmer (1947) states that they must simply bememorized one by one.
Memorizing exceptions aside, scholars have made numerous attempts at bringing order tothe article system. Palmer (1947) has a very detailed list of rules that govern article usage; however, it is too long to summarize in this essay. His first and certainly most straightforward rule isworth taking note of: "If a non-proper noun is not preceded by some special determinative word(e.g. this, my, many, all, one) it must be preceded by one of the [articles]" (Palmer 1947, p. 62). Han etal. (2006) has attempted to simplify the process by grouping the rules into lexical (e.g. countabilityof the head noun in the NP), syntactic (e.g. use of superlative adjective, 'the best'), discourse (e.g.
repetition usage), and general knowledge factors (e.g. colloquial usage).
Liu and Gleason (2002) report that, regardless of phrasing, article choice begins with the observation of the NP and then the determination of its semantic function. Their method attempts
to classify the usage of articles based on the observations of the semantic function of the NP. The
semantic function of the NP can be classified by two binary discourse options. The first iswhether the NP is a specific referent or not (+-SR). The other binary option is whether the hearer
knows the referent, referred to as (+-HK). From here, there are four combinations of the binary
options which help determine which article can and cannot be used (1. -SK , +HK 2.+SK, + HK 3.
+SK, -HK 4. -SK, -HK) (Lui & Gleason, 2002).
―６７―

国際教育交流研究第２号

While the 3 above examples make no explicit mention in their grouping process, phonemic
factors play a subtle role in the more precise article choice as Eastwood (2002) points out. "Before
a consonant sound the articles are a /!/ and the /"!/. Before a vowel sound they are an /!n/ andthe /"
I /" (Eastwood, 2002, p. 199).
a /!/shelf
an /n/ accident
the /!/self
the /I/ accident
It is the pronunciation of the next word which determines /!/ /n/ /I/, not the spelling.
Some difficult combinations:a one day event

an only childa university

an umbrellaa European country

an errora holiday

an hour(Eastwood, 2002, p. 199)

5. Common Errors by Japanese Learners of English
Research has shown that ESL learners make article errors in a consistent manner (Rozovskaya & Roth, 2010). Japanese ESL learners are no exception. Bryant (1984) conducts research in which he concludes that the majority of mistakes that Japanese learners of English
make are L2 errors (intralingual). However, these errors tend to be minor and do not have as detrimental an impact on communication as L1 errors (interlingual). L1 errors tend to originate
when languages, in this case, Japanese and English, have large syntactical differences, and students "unconscious[ly] attempt to transfer to English certain native Japanese structures" (Bryant,1984, p. 1). In Bryant (1984) research, the single highest occurring error was an L1 error, incorrectomission of the definite and indefinite articles. A similar conclusion is also reached by Izumi,
Uchimoto, Saiga, Supnithi, and Ishihara (2003). In their research data, they conclude overwhelmingly that article errors are the single most frequently occurring mistake that Japanese learnersof English make, omission type errors being the most common. Other article errors include correct article selection of the indefinite or definite article and over-inclusion. Over-inclusion is a situation where the zero article is the appropriate choice, sometimes referred to as "error of commission" (Liu & Gleason, 2002, p. 4).
While article omission may seem like a small error, it creates sentences that are not only
grammatically incorrect, but will make them "extremely vague and nonspecific" (Bryant, 1984, p.
4). But why are articles so problematic? Master (2002) believes that just because of their sheer
frequency in the English language, it makes "continuous conscious rule application difficult over
―６８―

A Common Error with Japanese Learners of English: Article Usagean extended stretch of discourse" (p. 332). In addition, he writes that "function words are normallyunstressed and consequently very difficult if not impossible for an non-native speaker to discern,thus affecting the availability of input in the spoken mode; and the article system stacks multiple
functions onto a single morpheme" (Master, 2002, p. 332). The different functions that are often
stacked include definiteness, countability, and number.

6. Pedagogical Implications
It is without question that teaching articles to a JLE can be a daunting task. Liu and Gleason(2002) refer to it as "hard grammar" and write, in regard to ESL, that it is often considered "verydifficult if not impossible to teach" (p. 2). Similarly, Master (2002) reports that "there are some who
maintain that the system is not learnable in any conscious way and is therefore not teachable" (p.
334). Fortunately, Master (2002) does not feel that way and responds to such sentiment with "[if]we remain critical of any misuse of the article system, we are obliged to provide some means forthem to understand and utilize the system" (pp. 334-335).
Whitman (1974) believes that many of the errors in article usage are not due to their lexical
complexity, but in the sense that linguists and teachers have held a common misconception
about the article, mainly that a/an is the indefinite article and the is the definite article. He believes that a/an and the to be so different, that using the term and calling them both 'article' is togeneralize them too much.
Ignoring the language barrier for one moment and assuming a teacher could explain
Palmer's (1947) twelve rules, or Liu and Gleason's (2002) semantic binary option system to JLE influent Japanese, which many cannot, the students would be very bored, if not hopelessly lost.
There is perhaps a better method to increase article usage proficiency without having to directly
teach articles.
Instead of trying to teach, explain, or even interpret the idea of indefiniteness and definiteness, Whitman (1974) proposesa learning method where article selection is broken down into six
steps that can easily be adapted to almost any classroom lesson. The key to his method is not singling out article selection, rather incorporating it within relevant and related grammar lessons.
In Whitman (1974) process, quantity is covered in one step, generic plural in the next, noncount nouns in after that, and so on. Articles are not the central core of the lesson, but play a vitaland relevant role in each of the steps. In step three, non-count nouns, Whitman (1974) emphasizes
that a/an should not be singled out and discussed as it "can only serve to confuse" (p. 259). Only
the semantic plurality and syntactic singularity nature of non-count nouns should be focusedupon (Whitman, 1974).
In Whitman's (1974) sixth step he recommends that the discussion of generic article usage is"probably best delayed considerably" and he goes into no further detail of any pedagogical impli―６９―

国際教育交流研究第２号

cations and merely states "[t]hey are not, in fact, all that commonly found, and are left entirely outof many EFL texts, which teach the generic plural alone" (p. 261). This mimics Master (2002) sentiments as well in which he believes that some more complex conditions of articles such as thedifference between generic and specific uses of a should be saved for highest level of ESL students.
Some foreseeable problems with any approach is the large list of exceptions. For example,
Whitman's (1974) approach has us teach count and non-count nouns; however, they are not always one or the other. Most non-count nouns can be transformed into count form, as mentioned
earlier, or count nouns into non-count form, e.g., "The vet found bits of chewed-up pencil in the
dog's stomach'' (Master , 2002, p. 334).
There are also colloquial considerations. Water is a word often learned very early by my students. It is a non-count noun; however, you will often hear in a restaurant or similar location ''awater please'' or ''four waters''. This means ''a cup of water'', but often in spoken colloquial English
we leave out "cup" as Masters (2002) points out in "a coffee" and "two sugars" (p. 334).

7. Conclusion
Many grammar textbooks would lead us to believe that only two articles exist, a/an and the,and are used either as indefinite or definite determiners for a NP (Crystal, 1997; Eastwood, 2002).
A deeper search into the subject reveals a much more complex picture. One in which three articles exists, a/an, the, and the zero article; a system that is rife with rules, sub-rules, and exceptions. It is also revealed that the concept of indefinite and definite result in half-truths, representing only some of the usage of articles. Whitman (1974) points out that the label of determiners is
misleading and only applicable to two of the article's four functions. Scholars such as Whitman(1974) believe the term article is over-generalized and simplified, and it simply adds to the large
confusion often surrounding the subject because of article's syntactic differences.
Through research, articles have been shown to be the single most frequently occurring errors made by not only Japanese English learners, but nearly all ESL students. Though manyrules have been written, systems organized, and exceptions cataloged, it is possible that the best
way to increase article usage proficiency is by not focusing on articles at all, but perhaps adopting a method similar to Whitman's suggestion in which correct article usage is simply memorizedthrough examples and repetition during more generalized grammar lesson, where article are notthe center of the activity or lesson.

―７０―

A Common Error with Japanese Learners of English: Article Usage

References
Berezowski, L. (2009). The myth of the zero article. London: Continuum.
Bryant, H. (1984). Typical errors in English made by Japanese ESL Students. JALT Journal, 6, 1-18.
Burton-Roberts, N. (1976). On the generic indefinite article. Linguistic Society of America, 52(2),427-448.
Crystal, D. (1997). The Cambridge encyclopedia of Language. (2nd ed.). Ernst Klett Sprachen.
Eastwood, J. (2002). Oxford guide to English grammar. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Fromkin, V., Rodman, R., & Hyams, N. (2003). An introduction to language. (7th ed.). United States:
Wadsworth.
Han, N., Chodorow, M., & Leacock, C. (2006). Detecting errors in English article usage by non-native speakers. Natural Language Engineering, 12(2), 115-129.
Huddleston, R. (1988). English grammar: an outline. Cambridge: Cambridge University press.
Hurford, J. (1994). Grammar: A student’s guide. Cambridge: Cambridge University press.
Izumi, E., Uchimoto, K., Saiga, T., Supnithi, T., & Ishihara, H. (2003). Automatic error detection in
the Japanese learners' English spoken data. Proceedings of the 41st Annual Meeting on Association for Computational Linguistics, 2, 145-148.
Juvonen, P. (2006). Articles, definite and indefinite. In: K. Brown (Ed.), Encyclopedia of Language andLinguistics. (2nd ed.). (pp. 484-487). Oxford: Elsevier.
Liu, D. & Gleason, J. (2002). Acquisition of the article the by nonnative speakers of English. SSLA,
24, 1-26.
Master, P. (1997). The English article system: Acquisition, function, and pedagogy. System, 25(2),215-232.
Master, P. (2002). Information structure and English article pedagogy. System, 30, 331-348.
Palmer, H. (1947). English article-usage. ELT Journal, 2(3), 62-73.
Rozovskaya, A. & Roth, D. (2010, June). Training paradigms for correcting errors in grammar andusage. In Human language technologies: The 2010 annual conference of the north american chapter of the association for computational linguistics (pp. 154-162). Association for Computational
Linguistics.
Whitman, L. (1974). Teaching the article in English. TESOL Quarterly, 8(3), 253-262.

―７１―

国際教育交流研究

第２号

日本人英語学習者に共通してみられるエラー：冠詞の使用
ダイクス・ロバート研究によると、冠詞は日本人英語学習者（JLE）に最も頻繁に起こるエラーであるとされている。本論では冠詞の a/an、the、そしてよく見過ごされがちな無冠詞について考察する。まず、
英語の冠詞体系を説明した主な試みについてふれた後、なぜ日本人英語学習者にとって冠詞の習得が困難なのかについて述べていく。また、本論では２段階で結論を展開する。まず、冠詞詳細
なシステムやアプローチが多く存在するが、それらは非ネイティブ学習者に教えるには複雑すぎであり、それに加え、もしくは単に例外が多すぎるという点を説明する。そして、これは簡潔に言えば、冠詞を使用の練習や繰り返しによって学ばれなければならないということを示している。
期待外れな結論となってしまうが、この結論から本論は、冠詞を教える最善の方法は冠詞に焦点をあてず、その豊富な使用例を基本的な文法の指導の中で導入、紹介していくことであるということを示唆する。
キーワード：定冠詞、不定冠詞、無冠詞、日本人英語学習者―７２―

Code−Switching Among Bilinguals

Code-Switching Among Bilinguals
Robert Dykes
Abstract
Some linguists estimate that as many as two thirds of the Earth's population falls somewhere in the spectrum of bilingualism. Code-switching is a very complex linguistic tooland phenomena used by bilinguals to enhance communication. Often sub-conscious, therule-governed behavior of code-switching exists in every bilingual speech community tocreate and share meaning beyond what is available to a single language. This essay will
briefly cover bilingualism before going in-depth to explore code-switching investigating
patters, behavior, motivating factors, and models used to analyze code-witching.
Keywords: code-switching, bilingualism, language borrowing

1. Introduction
Code-switching, switching between two or more languages and/or language varieties, often
occurs in bi and multilingual communities. Using the assumption that code-switching follows a
set of rules, this essay will examine patterns of code-switching, motivating factors behind switching, and will briefly discuss the models used to analyze code-switching among bilingual speakers.
Before covering the analysis of code-switching patterns and behavior, this essay will first definebilingualism. It will then explain what code-switching is, the various types of switches that occur,
followed by a look at its similarities to and differences from language borrowing.

2. Bilingualism
Before examining code-switching, bilingualism, the context in which it takes place, must be
explained first. Crystal (2003) estimates that as many as two-thirds of the world's children areborn into bilingual environments. Wei (2006) estimates that nearly one-third of the world regularly uses more than one language for communication. Fromkin, Rodman, and Hyams (2003) estimate that nearly 50% of the world's population has the ability to speak at least two languages,
Trask (2007) reports it is as high as 70%, while Baker (2010) places his estimate between these
two estimates. But what qualifies an individual to be bilingual? The definition of bilingual is not as
straightforward as some may expect. Trask (2007) begins his section on bilingualism with the following definition: "the ability to speak two languages" (p. 31). This answer is far too vague for the―７３―

国際教育交流研究第２号

purposes of this essay. Both Crystal (1997) and Baker (2011) point out that the obvious definitionof bilingualism is not adequate. For a more accurate description, Grosjean (2010) proposes, "bilinguals are those who use two or more languages (or dialects) in their everyday lives" (p. 4); however, Crystal (1997) poses a number of intriguing questions exposing the vagueness of bilingualism that Grosjean's improved definition still fails to address: does bilingualism include people who
use two languages irregularly, or not at all for long periods of time (dormant bilingual), or who
have receptive comprehension of a second language, but lack productive skills (passive bilingual),or those who can read and write a second language, but lack oracy comprehension?
If one were to say that bilingualism is fluency in two languages, it would only apply to asmall percentage of people (Baker, 2010), as people "who have 'perfect' fluency in two languages...
are the exception, not the rule" (Crystal, 1997, p. 364). Crystal (1997) believes there is no clear levelof proficiency that one must reach before a speaker can be considered bilingual.
Visualizing bilingualism on a continuum scale is possibly the best way to categorize it. On acontinuum scale based on ability, the extreme minimalist end of the continuum would be incipient bilingualism (Baker, 2011). This would include a tourist with a few phrases memorized fortravel purposes, or a businessman who knows a few greetings and pleasantries in a second language. The other extreme of this continuum would be perfect fluency in both languages, an idealized point called balanced bilingualism (Baker, 2010; 2011). These two superlative points on thecontinuum stand the danger of being too inclusive or too exclusive (Baker, 2011). This is one reason why estimates of bilinguals vary so greatly. Baker (2011) admits that defining exactly who isbilingual and who is not is "essentially elusive and ultimately impossible" (p.15).

3. Explanation of Code-Switching
3-1. Code-Switching Defined
Why do so many people use two languages? A possible answer might be: to "communicate
with people of a different language background" (Crystal, 1997, p. 364). Similarly, as in the definition of bilingualism, Crystal (1997) emphasizes that this definition is not adequate. Bilingual tomonolingual interactions do occur, where a bilingual speaker will use either their L1 or L2. However, interactions of this type are in the minority, as the majority of bilingual interactions occur
in a bilingual society or speech community with other bilinguals (Crystal, 1997). Wei (2006) explains that these interactions are far more complex than bilingual/monolingual interactions.
Based on a number of factors such as setting, listener, speaker, tone, attitude, and context, bilinguals will use "their different languages in a complex network of interaction" (Crystal, 1997, p.
364). This is where code-switching takes place.
The term code−switching was first coined by Einar Haugen (1950) and Uriel Weinreich (1953).
It is sometimes referred to as language switching, language mixing (Crystal, 1997), code mixing,―７４―

Code−Switching Among Bilinguals

language interlarding, or integration (Kebeya, 2013) and is found wherever bilingual speakers are(Cook, 2008). Kebeya (2013) summarizes Haguen's definition of code-switching as "a linguistic situation where bilinguals introduced a single unassimilated word from one language into another," (p. 225) which is no longer in use today. Weinreich (1953) simply defined code-switching as thepractice of shifting between two languages. While this is more accurate to the currently held
definition, it needs to be specified further. Beginning with research conducted by John Gumperz(Mahootian 2006), possibly as early as 1972 with Jan Blom (Gross, 2006), scholars currently define
code-switching as "the process whereby speakers move from one language to another either
within a single utterance or between one utterance and the next in the same interaction" (Bentahila & Davies, 1994, p. 75).
Code-switching consists of a matrix or host language, and an embedded or guest language(Mahootian, 2006). The matrix language provides the grammatical structure and system morphemes while the embedded language provides content morphemes "rather like putting the flesh
onto the skeleton" (Cook, 2008, p. 177). However, it is not that clear as Kebeya (2013) found it difficult to differentiate between embedded and matrix language during intrasentential switching(see "Types of Codes-Switching"). Also, similar to code-switching versus borrowing (see "CodeSwitching Versus Language Borrowing"), "no feasible criteria have been established that systematically distinguish the matrix language from the embedded language in all instances of code
switching" (Mahootian, 2006, p. 514).
Language attrition or weakness has often been linked to code-switching (Mahootian, 2006).
Fromkin et al. (2003) writes that in the early studies of bilingualism, code-switching in children"was taken as an indication that the child was confused or having difficulty with the two languages" (p. 375). Today most scholars assert that code-switching is a byproduct natural to language competence of more than one language, a normal part of bilingual language acquisition,and not a sign of language deficit (Mahootian, 2006; Fromkin et al., 2003). Gross (2006) describes
code-switching as "a complex, skilled linguistic strategy used by bilinguals to convey importantsocial meaning above and beyond the referential content of an utterance" (p. 509) and Mahootian(2006) writes that it is a "systematic rule-governed linguistic behavior" (p. 512). While code-switching is sometimes a conscious choice performed by design and on purpose, the majority of thetime it occurs unplanned on a subconscious level (Mahootian, 2006).

3-2. Types of Code-Switching
Code-switching is often broken down into two main categories, intersentential and intrasentential, with scholars occasionally identifying a third type, tag switches (Mahootian, 2006). Intersentential switches occur when "one sentence will be in one language while the other sentence
will be in a totally different language" (Kebeya, 2013, p. 228). Intrasentential switches are far more
―７５―

国際教育交流研究第２号

complex with switching taking place "within the confines of a single sentence, constituent, oreven word" and garner the most interest from linguists (Poplack, 2001, p. 2062). Poplack (2001)
claims researchers "are unanimous in the conviction that it [an intrasentential switch] is grammatically constrained" (p. 2062). Bentahila and Davies (1994) report that while there are researchers who "have argued forcefully" (p. 74) for the existence of universal switching constraints (see"Models of Code-Switching"), research has been conducted that cast doubt on such claims.
In linguistics a tag "refers to a question structure usually consisting of an auxiliary verb plus
pronoun, attached to the end of a statement" and the intonation of an uttered tag determines between the asking and telling function (Crystal, 2008, p. 476). Crystal (2008) notes that some grammars allow tag statements. Tag switches are code-switches that occur in the inclusion of tag
forms from one language into a sentence of a different language (Mahootian, 2006). Not all scholars consider tag switches a separate category of switching. Bentahila and Davies (1994) consider
tag switches as intrasentential switches and count them among fillers and parentheticals. BerkSeligson (1986) considers them intersentential and counts them along explanations, idioms, andinterjections.
Cook (2008) reports the results of one study that found 84% percent of switches are isolated
to single words, 10% to phrases, and 6% were whole clauses. However, these numbers seem tovary greatly depending on the languages involved, generation, and age of the bilingual speaker.
In the Bentahila and Davies (1994) study of French-Moroccan/Arabic speakers they found a considerable difference between younger and older generations. The most common switch for theolder generation was whole clauses consisting of 25.5% of all switches, while the younger generation switched whole clauses only 5.6% of the time observed. The younger generation's most common switch was noun phrases at a 50% switch rate, while this was the older generation's second
most common switch at 16.5%.
There is some debate that the use of intersentential and intrasentential switches signify a bilingual speaker's proficiency. Berk-Seligson (1986) and Bentahila and Davies (1994) both writethat a number of studies claim and have shown that those with a higher proficiency in both languages tend to use more intrasentential switches while those with less proficient ability use intersentential and tag switches more often. Bentahila and Davies (1994) add that these patterns do
not always hold true with all language pairs as they found with their research with French-Moroccan/Arabic speakers. Berk-Seligson (1986) also reports that her research with Hebrew/Spanish speakers showed no correlation between code-switching type and levels of proficiency andconcludes that her findings "strongly dispute[s] the currently held notion that the ability to codeswitch, particularly at the intrasentential level is a mark of bilingual's high competence in his/her
two languages" (pp. 334-335).

―７６―

Code−Switching Among Bilinguals

3-3. Code-Switching Versus Language Borrowing
It is important to address the issue of code switching versus language borrowing as they areclosely related, and in some cases they are inseparable linguistic features of bilingualism. Sufficiently differentiating code-switching from language borrowing is a well-established issue forscholars (Mahootian, 2006) and "most researches seem to agree that code-switching needs to be
distinguished from borrowing" (Bentahila & Davies, 1994, p. 76). Even though unnecessary borrowing does occur, necessary borrowing is more frequent and occurs when a word is taken by amonolingual speaker from another language to fill lexical gaps, often occurring in topics such as
food, technology, government, and religion (Mahootian, 2006). This essay will cover two types ofborrowings common to the context of code-switching, established borrowings and nonce borrowings.

3-3-1. Established Borrowing
Fully integrated borrowings are usually referred to as established borrowings or loanwords(Baker, 2010; Mahootian, 2006). Established loanwords will be widespread among a monolingual
speech community, used often and without knowledge of origin, and have been adapted syntactically, morphologically and phonologically to the recipient language (Poplack, 2001; Mahootian2006). It should be noted here that by proper definition code-switches are not morphologicallyand phonologically adapted to the host language and typically established borrowings are single
words while switches are utterances of longer length (Mahootian, 2006).
With a surface examination it may seem easy to point out a clear difference between codeswitching and established borrowings; however, established borrowings do not occur instantaneously. The formation of established loans is a gradual process that begins with the introduction ofa new word or phrase by bilinguals that will be adapted phonologically and morphologically into
the host language, finally being adapted into monolingual usage (Mahootian, 2006). Other issues
arise as well when trying to distinguish the difference between established borrowings and codeswitching:[L]ength of utterance does not offer a clear-cut distinction. Phonological adaptation also
fails to be foolproof. For example, if a bilingual speaker has transferred the phonological system of L1 to L2 while acquiring L2 (in other words the speaker has an accent), it will be difficult to evaluate whether word X from L2 has been borrowed into an L1 sentence or if the
speaker has code switched into L2. Most researchers acknowledge the shortcoming of usingmorphological adaptation as a guideline in cases where the switch may be only one wordsuch as an adverb or an uninflected free morpheme. (Mahootian, 2006, p. 514)

―７７―

国際教育交流研究第２号

3-3-2. Nonce borrowing
Nonce borrowings differ from established borrowings in that their use is spontaneous, notwidespread, not recurrent, and used only by bilingual speakers (Poplack, 2001; Mahootian, 2006).
Code-switching and nonce borrowings have many commonalities: both are spontaneous, not established, neither are they phonologically adapted to the host language, and there is no guarantee of recurrence (Mahootian, 2006). Mahootian (2006) also notes that while nonce borrowings areusually morphologically adapted to the host language, and code-switches are not, as mentioned
earlier, morphological adaptation is not a foolproof criterion to distinguish one from the other.
Poplack (2001) believes that "distinguishing nonce borrowing from single-word [code-switching] is conceptually easy but methodologically difficult" (p. 2063). Baker (2010) suggests there is noclear barrier between code-switching and nonce borrowing as they form a continuum.

4. Analysis of Code-Switching
4-1. Code-Switching Patterns
The patterns of code-switching can be influenced by any number of reasons. Bentahila andDavies (1994) conducted preliminary research comparing language switching between two different generations of French-Moroccan/Arabic speakers. Their findings showed that while thenumber of code-switches was almost identical, the younger generations switched noun phrases
more frequently, while the older generation switched whole clauses and conjunctions more often.
Bentahila and Davies (1994) contrasted their data with similar studies and noticed a common pattern emerging, "young children tend to switch predominantly for single words, and in particular
nouns" (p. 87) and older bilinguals tend to switch clauses and conjunctions; however, Bentahila
and Davies (1994) felt that code-switching research aimed at children "tended to view the phenomenon rather differently from the switching used by adults" (p. 87). Upon conducting further
research on young bilingual children, their new data directly contradicted their earlier findings.
As a result Bentahila and Davies (1994) refined their conclusions to say that rather than rhetorical functions or structural constraints being the main factors affecting code switching patterns,"the circumstances in which bilinguals have encountered their two languages, the role these languages fulfill in the community and in the individual's lifestyle, the experience they have had ofusing them and of hearing others use them" (p. 91) are more influential.

4-2. Motivational Factors of Code-switching
Wei (2006) reports that "there is a widespread impression that bilingual speakers codeswitch because they cannot express themselves adequately in one language" (p. 6). Code-switching due to a lack of knowledge in one language is indeed a recognized and valid trigger, but only
one of many varied factors in a complex system that influences code-switching (Baker, 2010;―７８―

Code−Switching Among Bilinguals

Gross, 2006). Code-switching is triggered not by linguistic factors, rather social and psychologicalfactors are the driving force (Baker, 2010). Mahootian (2006) outlines four main types of functions:
Referential switching is motivated by lack of linguistic knowledge, lexical gaps, or fluency
deficiency. Expressive switches occur where the switching act is a "comment about the
speaker rather than the speech". The motivation behind transactional switching includes
variables such as topic and the participants of the communication act. The fourth factor,
metaphorical, motivates switching to affect the "extralinguistic message the speaker wishes
to express, the effect the speaker wants to have on the hearer" (adapted from Mahhotian,
2006, p. 515).
Baker (2010) details a list of 12 common factors that have been identified to trigger codeswitches which has been condensed and adapted into the list below:
1. emphasize a particular word or phrase
2. a speaker does not know a word or phrase in one language
3. express a concept without an equivalent in the culture of the other language
4. reinforce a request
5. clarify a point
6. indicate deference, friendship, or family bonding
7. a method of interjecting into a conversation
8. ease tension and/or inject humor into a conversation
9. reflect a change of attitude or relationship10. indicate the speaker's wish to elevate statues, create a a distance from thelistener, or establish a more formal business relationship11. to exclude people from a conversation
12. when certain topics are introduced(adapted from Baker, 2010, pp. 56-57)
Gross (2006) feels even seemingly thorough lists such as these are useful and a good place tostart, but "these types of lists fail to answer the question of what motivates speakers to make thechoices they do" (p. 508). Reviewing research by Howard Giles, Peter Auer, and Carol MyersScotton, Gross (2006) details three different approaches used to analyze and explain the motivations triggering code-switching beyond the ability of static lists. One approach postulates that"speakers are motivated by their desire for approval vis-a-vis their desire to disassociate themselves from the hearer" (Gross, 2006, p. 509). Speech convergence or divergence is used to either―７９―国際教育交流研究第２号

increase or decrease social distance (Gross, 2006). Another theory states that the motivation behind code-switching is created by the speaker based on preceding and following turns in discourse. In this approach "social meaning is constituted locally rather than at societal level" (Gross,
2006, p. 509). Gross (2006) points out that, contrary to this approach, most scholars subscribe to
the notion that the languages available in bilingual speech communities hold specific social andinteractional meanings that participants consistently use to influence language choice. In thethird approach Gross (2006) explains that code-switching is triggered by the speaker's desire to
optimize the outcome of participation in a conversation by minimizing costs and maximizing rewards based on the code or language selection. These choices exist on a continuum with the twoends being either marked, unexpected or strange for the interaction, or unmarked, which would
be expected language choices that meet the social norms for the particular interaction (Gross,2006).

4-3. Models of Code-switching
Cook (2008) details two theories that attempt to explain the restrictions on where codeswitching can occur, equivalence of structure constraint, or equivalence constraint, and the freemorpheme constraint. In her study of Spanish/Hebrew bilingual speakers, Berk-Seligson (1986)
details an additional constraint, size-of-constituent.
Equivalence of structure constraint states that:
Code-switches will tend to occur at points in discourse where juxtaposition of L[1], and L2
elements does not violate a syntactic rule of either language, i.e., at points around which thesurface structures of the two languages map onto each other. According to this simple constraint, a switch is inhibited from occurring within a constituent generated by a rule fromone language which is not shared by the other. (Poplack, 1980, p. 586)
According to the free morpheme constraint theory "code-switching is prohibited between afree and a bound morpheme" (Berk-Seligson, 1986, p.314). In other words a switch cannot takeplace "between a word and its endings unless the word is pronounced as if it were in the language of the ending" (Cook, 2008, p. 176). The size-of-constituent constraint says that "higher-level
constituents, that is major constituents (e.g., sentences, clauses) tend to be switched more frequently than lower-level constituents, or smaller ones" (Berk-Seligson, 1986, p. 314). Berk-Seligson(1986) notes that a common exception to this constraint is the noun.
Based on Berk-Seligson's (1986) study, she concluded that neither the equivalence nor size-ofconstituent constraint can be postulated as a universal model in their present form. Berk-Seligsion (1986) remarks that the size-of-constituent or the equivalence constraint "must be restricted―８０―

Code−Switching Among Bilinguals

to use in describing the code-switching of languages that are syntactically similar or else it must
be modified, to a weaker formulation" (p. 334).

5. Conclusion
Code switching and bilingualism are without a doubt very complex linguistic phenomenathat cannot exist without each other. Even though billions of bilinguals inhabit this earth, no single, solid, and precise definition of bilingualism can be agreed upon to more precisely estimate thenumber of bilingual speakers. Bilingualism, more specifically code-switching, is a powerful linguistic tool used to enhance communication. Code-switching, the often subconscious, rule-governed behavior, is a common, yet elaborate linguistic strategy that exists in every bilingual
speech community to create and share meaning beyond that available to a single language, all
the while triggered by any number of motivational factors.

References
Baker, C. (2010). Code-switching. In K. Malmkj!r (Ed.), Linguistics Encyclopedia. (3rd ed.). (pp 55-60).
USA:Routledge.
Baker, C. (2011). Foundations of Bilingual education and bilingualism (5th ed.). UK: Multilingual Matters.
Bentahila, A.& Davies, E. (1994). Patterns of code-switching and patterns of language contact. Lingua 96, 75-93.
Berk-Seligson, S. (1986). Linguistic constraints on intrasentential code-switching: A study of Spanish/Hebrew bilingualism. Language in Society 15, 313-348.
Cook, V. (2008). Second Language Learning and Language Teaching. London: Hodder Education.
Crystal, D. (1997). The Cambridge Encyclopedia of English Language. (2nd ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
Crystal, D. (2003). English as a Global Language. (2nd ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Crystal, D. (2008). A Dictionary of Linguistics and Phonetics. (6th ed.). United States: Blackwell Publishing.
Fromkin, V., Rodman, R., & Hyams, N. (2003). An Introduction to Language. (7th ed.). United States:
Wadsworth.
Gross, S. (2006). Code switching. In K. Brown (Ed.), Encyclopedia of Language and Linguistics (2nd ed.).
(Vol. 2, pp. 508-511) Oxford: Elsevier.
Grosjean, F. (2010). Bilingual: Life and Reality. Harvard University Press.
Haugen, E. (1950). The analysis of linguistic borrowings. Language 26 (2), 210-31.
Kebeya, H. (2013). Inter- and Intra-Sentential Switching: Are they really Comparable?. International Journal of Humanities and Social Science 3(5), 225-233.
―８１―

国際教育交流研究

第２号

Mahootian, S. (2006). Code Switching and Mixing. In K. Brown (Ed.), Encyclopedia of Language andLinguistics (2nd ed.). (Vol 2, pp. 511-526) Oxford: Elsevier.
Poplack, S. (1980). Sometimes I'll start a sentence in Spanish y termino en espaniol: Toward a typology of code-switching. The bilingualism reader, 18(2), 221-256.
Poplack, S. (2001). Code Switching (Linguistic). International Encyclopedia of the Social and Behavioral Sciences. 2062-2065.
Trask, R. (2007). Key Concepts in Language and Linguistics. USA/Canada: Routledge.
Wei, L. (2006). Bilingualism. In K. Brown (Ed.), Encyclopedia of Language and Linguistics (2nd ed.). (Vol.
2, pp 1-12) Oxford: Elsevier.
Weinreich, U. (1953).1968. Languages in contact. The Hague: Mouton.

―８２―

Code−Switching Among Bilinguals

バイリンガル話者のコードスイッチング
ダイクス・ロバート
言語学者らによると、地球上の人口の３分の１が何らかの形でバイリンガリズムのスペクトラ
ムに属するという。コードスイッチングはバイリンガル話者がコミュニケーションを向上させるために使う非常に複雑な言語のツール、またはメカニズムである。多くの場合は無意識的に行われるが、どのバイリンガル話者のコミュニティーにおいても一言語で表現できること以上の意味を表現するための規則的なコードスイッチングの行動がみられる。本論ではまず、簡単にバイリ
ンガリズムについてふれた後、コードスイッチングのパターン、ふるまい、動機、そして、コードスイッチングの分析に使われるモデルについて深く考察していく。
キーワード：コードスイッチング、バイリンガリズム、言語の借入―８３―

【執筆者紹介】
ベッチェ・ニコランジェロ
ボイド・Ｄ

Boyd, D（語学センター・特命助教）

ダイクス・ロバート
半原芳子

Dykes, Robert（語学センター・特命助教）

Hanbara Yoshiko（教職大学院・准教授）

ヘネシー・クリストファー
桑原陽子

Becce, Niccolangelo（国際地域学部・助教）

Hennesy, Christpher（国際地域学部・助教）

Kuwabara Yoko（語学センター・准教授）【編集委員】
佐藤綾（語学センター・准教授）

国際教育交流研究
第２号
２
０
１
８年３月３
１日発行
編

集

発行者

国際教育交流研究編集委員会
福井大学国際センター・語学センター
〒９
１
０
‐
８
５
０
７ 福井市文京３丁目９番１号
電話 ０
７
７
６
‐
２
７
‐
８
４
０
６（国際課）

印刷所

株式会社エクシート