Theme: Interaction (classroom vs outside) and development of a Second language for learners of English: a sociocultural Perspective

1.2 A Sociocultural Perspective on Interaction and Language Learning
Voicing concern with this narrow construction of language and learning, a group of scholars concerned with interaction and additional language learning has recently begun exploring other fields (Block,1996; Firth & Wagner, 1997, 1998; Hall, 1995a, 1997; Lantolf, 1995; Lantolf& Appel, 1994). These explorations have led to assumptions on the nature of language and learning that differ fairly substantially from those embodied in the more traditional approach to research on interaction and language learning.³
Drawing on theoretical insights into the nature language from linguistic anthropology and linguistic philosophy (e.g., Bakhtin, 1981,1986; Hymes, 1972, 1974; Wittgenstein, 1963), cultural psychology (e.g.,Cole, 1996; Leontiev, 1981; Scribner, 1997; Vygotsky, 1978, 1986; Wertsch,1991, 1998), and cross-cultural studies of first language development(e.g., Berman & Slobin, 1994; Halliday, 1975, 1978; Ochs, 1988;Schieffelin & Ochs, 1986), current understandings consider the essence of language to be social action, something that exists in use, in communication. In this view, language is not comprised of internal structures located in the individual. Rather, it is considered to be fundamentally social, comprised of linguistic resources whose meanings are both embodied in and constitutive of our everyday communicative activities and practices. Likewise, language learning is considered not the internal assimilation of structural components of language systems. Rather, itis a fundamentally social process, initiating in our social worlds.
Constituting these worlds is a heterogeneous mix of goal-directed,regularly occurring, communicative activities and events comprised of various communicative means for their accomplishment. Through repeated participation in these activities with more capable members, we acquire the linguistic, sociocultural and other knowledge and competencies considered essential to full participation. That is, we learn not merely the grammatical, lexical and other components of our language. We also learn how to take actions with our words. In the process of learning to become full, participating members in our activities, we not only transform the specific linguistic symbols and other means for realizing these activities into individual knowledge and abilities. We also acquire the communicative intentions and specific perspectives on the world that are embedded in them (Tomasello, 1999).In this sociocultural perspective of learning, the essence of mind is considered to be inseparable from the varied worlds it inhabits. Thatis, the communicative contexts in which we participate, along with the particular linguistic means that are needed to communicate with others in these contexts, do not simply enhance the development of universal mental structures that already exist. Rather, they fundamentally shape and transform them (Leontiev, 1981; Vygotsky, 1981). The more opportunities for taking part in our activities, the more fully we develop the linguistic, social and cognitive knowledge and skills needed for competent engagement. Because schools are important sociocultural contexts, they, and more particularly their classrooms, are considered fundamental sites of learning.
Because most learning opportunities are accomplished through face-to-face interaction, its role is considered especially consequential to the creation of effectual learning environments and ultimately to the shaping of individual learners’ development. For it is in the discourse created in the interaction of these classrooms that teachers and students together develop particular understandings of what constitutes language and language learning. In the next section, we look more closely at some of the more recent research on the role of classroom interaction in language learning that is based on this sociocultural perspective.