Content uploaded by Michele Daloiso
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Michele Daloiso on Nov 18, 2016
Content may be subject to copyright.
Available via license: CC BY-ND 4.0
Content may be subject to copyright.
The Role of Linguistic Routines in Early Foreign Language Learning
Michele Daloiso
Ca’ Foscari University, Venice
daloiso@unive.it
Abstract
According to recent studies in neuropsychology, when learning a language, young children mainly use
“implicit memory”, i.e. the memory of automatic procedures such as riding a bicycle. As an implication for
early foreign language teaching (EFLT), teachers will stimulate the pupils’ implicit memory by exposing
them to routine situations in which specific linguistic expressions are associated with recurring actions and
procedures. This paper will therefore discuss the neuropsychological, linguistic and educational roles of
routines in EFLT and will provide teachers with methodological principles to manage routine situations in
a foreign language.
Keywords
Preschool Education, Early Foreign Language Learning, Developmental Neuropsychology, Linguistic
Routine
Sommario
Recenti studi nel campo della neuropsicologia hanno dimostrato che nel processo di acquisizione
linguistica i bambini attivano la memoria implicita, ossia la memoria delle procedure automatiche. Le
implicazioni per l’accostamento alle lingue in tenera età sono notevoli, in quanto l’insegnante può
sollecitare l’attivazione della memoria implicita degli allievi creando routine situazionali in cui specifiche
espressioni linguistiche vengono associate ad azioni e movimenti ricorrenti. In questo saggio si
discuteranno il valore neuropsicologico, linguistico ed educativo delle routine e i conseguenti principi
metodologici per la gestione di momenti routinizzati in lingua straniera.
Parole chiave
Istruzione prescolare, un apprendimento precoce delle lingue, Developmental Neuropsychology, psicologia
neurale dello sviluppo, linguistica di routine
General features of early language learning
It is commonly assumed that children learn languages better, faster and easier than adults. Although some
empirical researches in EFLT argued that it is not always the case, recent studies in neuropsychology
showed there are some critical periods for language acquisition
1
The concept of “critical periods” is borrowed from biology and refers to the fact that some abilities might
only be acquired if proper stimulation is provided during a specific time window. If this time window is
missed, the development of those abilities will be imperfect, or even impossible.
According to many neurolinguistic researches, language acquisition is prone to critical periods as well
(Fabbro 2004; Gullberg, Indefrey, 2006). This would explain why young children exposed to two
languages in a bilingual context become native speakers of both languages. Besides, young children
exposed to a foreign language (FL) can distinguish, memorize and reproduce sounds, words and idioms
better than adults.
ESE de Paula Frassinetti
Revista Saber & Educar / Cadernos de Estudo / 14
1
1 We used the expression “critical period” in the plural because some recent neuroimaging studies showed that there are two critical periods for
language acquisition: 0-3 and 4-7 years (Wartenburger et al., 2003). If a child acquires two languages between the ages of zero and three, the
representation of both languages is located in the same cerebral regions. Alternatively, in children that acquire the second language between
three and seven years of age, the two languages are represented only partially in the same cerebral areas, although the child’s competence on the
second language is excellent. It has also been noted, in this case, that the second language generally occupies a wider region that, consequently,
needs more energy and a greater cognitive effort to be activated. Finally, in subjects who learn another language after the eighth year of age, this
language is represented in different and more extended regions than those of the mother tongue.
ISSN: 1647-2144
In the following paragraphs some features of early language learning are discussed, which are typical of
children within the critical periods.
Plasticity
Children’s brains appear to be particularly plastic – especially during the critical periods – because
(Fabbro, 2004; Goswami, 2004; for EFLT implications see Daloiso, 2007):
A Metabolism reaches maximum levels, which means that children’s brains are constantly processing
stimuli from the outside world, even when children do not seem to pay attention to them.
B New synapses can be formed. If a stimulus is frequent and reiterative, specific synapses – i.e. neural
connections – will be formed. Whenever that particular stimulus reaches the brain (through the
neurosensory system) only these synapses will be activated.
C Specific neural circuits can stabilize. Complex stimuli – such as linguistic input – require elaborate
processing. Therefore, groups of neurons can specialize in processing some specific stimuli. Neural
specialization is more likely to happen within critical periods because brain functions have not lateralized
yet 2.
Cerebral plasticity affects early foreign language learning in that constant and reiterative FL input can
contribute to form neural circuits specialized in FL processing. When considering the types of stimuli a
child is surrounded by, one should distinguish between (Munakata, Casey & Diamond, 2004):
A Experience-expectant processes, i.e. processes that use highly reliable environmental information in
order to trigger genetic-driven changes (using the auditory system to distinguish between linguistic and
non linguistic sounds and recognize and imitate intonation patterns).
B Experience-dependent processes, i.e. processes using environmental information that can vary among
individuals in order to trigger non genetic changes in response to specific experiences (learning Italian as a
native language, or growing up in a bilingual context).
Learning a FL at an early age is something in between these two types of processes. It is in fact experience-
dependent, because it will take place only when children are provided with an enriched learning
environment in which the FL is introduced on purpose by adults. On the other hand, children can also
activate experience-expectant processes to learn a FL. For instance, the ability of recognizing and
reproducing intonation and phonetic patterns in one’s own native language will not be stabilized until the
age of six. If exposed to a second language young children will rely on an experience-expectant process
(recognizing and reproducing sounds through the auditory and sensomotory system) to learn correct FL
pronunciation.
Neurosensory learning
During the first years of life, children learn by using their senses, which allow them to explore the
surrounding reality and to gain experience of it. By interacting with the environment, children learn to
integrate different sensorial modalities (such as sight, touch and smell) and to assign a meaning and a
proper response to environmental inputs. Senses are the doors through which information from the
environment enters, and they contribute to form associations among stimuli, feelings and responses. If the
environmental engagement is positive and reiterated, stable synaptic connections are created (Tasca,
2005).
As a result, the neurosensory experience plays a pivotal role for the child, who shows innate curiosity
towards the surrounding world by instinctively looking for stimuli and trying to gain new experiences.
ESE de Paula Frassinetti
Revista Saber & Educar / Cadernos de Estudo / 14
2
2 Brain lateralization is the process that situates the cognitive functions in specific regions of the cerebral hemispheres.
Young children use their neurosensory system also to learn languages. They associate lexical items and
idioms with actions, objects and physical experiences. For instance, pupils will find it easier to learn the
word “orange” by handling the real object (seeing, touching, smelling and tasting it). Similarly it will be
easier for a child to understand the meaning of the sentence “Put on your jacket and zip it up!” if he or she
can see and imitate the matching actions. In this case the pupil will also learn what to do whenever he or
she hears the same words again.
By connecting linguistic input to concrete experiences, young children will learn abstract notions as well,
that would not be otherwise understandable. This is the so-called perceptual conceptualization (Mukerjee,
Guha, 2007), which allows children to understand the meaning of some concepts by perceptual experience.
For instance, very young pupils will grasp the meaning of “cleanness versus dirtiness” by washing their
hands or taking off their dirty uniform.
The notion of perceptual conceptualization has important implications for teachers of FL to very young
learners. Since cognitive skills are not fully developed during the first years of life, pupils may gain
knowledge of some notions not only in their native language but also in the FL.
Procedural language learning
The process of language learning is different in children and adults. In fact, very young pupils:
A Have higher phonetic skills (Bortolini, 1992; Fabbro, 2004). The second to the fifth year is a delicate
phase for phonologic development because children improve their ability to discriminate phonetically, as
well as stabilizing their phonetic inventory. During this phase, pupils still have the possibility of
memorizing sounds that do not belong to the phonologic system of their native language. Therefore, it
follows that the FL input has to be highly qualitative in order to avoid wrong phonetic forms being
memorized.
B Use a great amount of prefabricated language (Brown, 1973; for a review, see Shibata Perera, 2001).
Young children can memorize long, ready-made chunks of sentences and reuse them in the correct context.
Some researchers claim that prefabricated language does not contribute directly to the creative process of
language acquisition. Krashen and Scarcella (1978), for instance, argue that true language acquisition is
independent of prefabricated language and occurs only when children reanalyze ready-made chunks of
sentences. A more recent perspective on the matter claims that prefabricated language allows early verbal
socialization, which serves as scaffolding. Parents, child-carers and peers provide children with support for
prefabricated language use and analysis (Shibata Perera, 2001).
C Imitate adults’ linguistic behaviour (for a review, see Aglioti, Fabbro, 2006). Children naturally imitate
complex behaviours. This imitation mechanism, which is first an unconscious reflex, becomes intentional
by the end of the second year of life and is activated also for language acquisition. In fact, young children
tend to adapt their speech following the example of adults. The imitation mechanism may be connected to
mirror neurons3, which allow an individual to reproduce complex behaviours, both physical and verbal
(Rizzolatti, Craighero, 2004).
D Seem to “absorb” languages. According to recent researches (Kroll, De Groot, 2005) very young children
have not developed the so-called “working memory” yet, so they cannot select relevant information to be
processed and stored in the “long-term memory”. As a result they process linguistic input directly in the
“long-term memory” (this explains why preschool children are able to memorize a great amount of words
and idioms which have not been explicitly taught to them).
All these features of early language learning are connected to “implicit memory” (Fabbro, 2004), i.e. a
procedural long-term memory that organizes knowledge in procedures and action sequences that are
increasingly automatic. This type of memory has a pivotal role in early language learning, because it
guarantees the acquisition of phonology and syntax in the form of unconscious automatisms.
ESE de Paula Frassinetti
Revista Saber & Educar / Cadernos de Estudo / 14
3
3 Mirror neurons are brain cells that fire both when an animal or a person acts and when the animal or the person observes the same action
performed by another conspecific living being. These types of neurons have been detected in both primates and humans.
On the contrary, vocabulary is chiefly stored in the “explicit memory”, i.e. a type of long-term memory that
enables the memorization of episodes, events and scenes – in the “episodic store” – as well as notions and
ideas – in the “semantic store”.
In general, while language learning in early infancy is guaranteed expressly by the implicit memory, in late
infancy explicit memorization and more elaborate and conscious memory strategies play a much more
important role.
Environmental support
A classic developmental issue is the relationship between nature and nurture, i.e. how genetic and
environmental factors interact to shape brain and mind. The nature-nurture debate has been also applied
to early language acquisition and two opposite perspectives on the matter have been developed: innatism
(see Jackendoff, 1993, Pinker, 1994) and interactionism (see Bakhtin, 1986; Peregoy, 1999).
On the one hand, the innatist school of thought claims that the ability to acquire a language is genetic.
General grammatical features (principles) are already inscribed on the baby’s brain. The environment will
just provide the babies with the so-called “triggering experience”, so they will be able to apply general
grammatical principles to the specific parameters of the language they are being exposed to.
On the other hand, the interactionist school of thought argues that children need a “Language Acquisition
Support System” (see Bruner), i.e. a rich learning environment that provides them with a step-by-step help
for language acquisition. This perspective assigns a central role to adults, since they have to supply child-
friendly linguistic input – the so-called motherese – and conversational support for the child to progress in
language acquisition.
In an EFLT perspective, children do have innate neurological potentials (such as plasticity and
neurosensory abilities) and possibly some innate inclination to language acquisition (this is the so-called
“Language Acquisition Device” by Chomsky). Within an educational context, such as preschool and
primary school, it is nevertheless necessary to provide pupils with appropriate environmental conditions to
help them acquire a FL by their innate potentials.
As an implication, within a child-friendly educational environment, FL input will be:
A Frequent. According to some neurolinguistic theories of bilingualism (for a review, see Paradis, 2004)
frequent linguistic input lowers the FL activation threshold4. It is thus necessary to expand the FL
exposure time by using specific teaching strategies. Conducting school routines in a FL suits especially
young children, whereas CLIL (Content and Language Integrated Learning) might be a very effective
strategy for older children.
B Meaningful. The FL activation threshold might also be lowered by teaching techniques that arouse the
interest of the child, who needs to feel involved from an emotional, relational and cognitive point of view.
Meaningful language learning is therefore (Caon, 2006):
Total, as it involves the cognitive, emotive and relational sphere.
Constructive, because children feel the need to integrate new information with their pre-existent
knowledge of the world.
Conditioned by motivation, which might depend on causes internal to the child, like interest, pleasure and
need.
C Natural. Speaking of “natural linguistic input” might sound like a paradox in FL contexts, since learning
a FL does not occur naturally in the environment. Nevertheless, FL learning can be regarded as a “natural”
experience if teachers set up an educational environment that stimulates some general features of early
language learning (see 1.1, 1.2, 1.3).
D Heuristic. Children being introduced to a new verbal code have the opportunity to discover something
new about language – for example, that communication has its own rules depending on the context or that
language is conventional. In other terms, FL learning should be an Eveil aux Language first (Candelier,
1998), i.e. an experience that helps children gain awareness about language faculty and diversity among
languages.
ESE de Paula Frassinetti
Revista Saber & Educar / Cadernos de Estudo / 14
4
4 The expression “activation threshold” refers to the quantity of energy necessary to activate a neuronal circuit. Neurolinguists have
hypothesized that a similar mechanism regulates the activation and inhibition of languages in bilingual brains.
2 The benefits of linguistic routines
School organizations – especially preschool/kindergarten and primary education – are based on routines,
i.e. recurring patterns of behaviour in relation to a specific task. Typical preschool and kindergarten
routines are: welcoming pupils in the morning, helping them take off their jackets and put on their
uniforms and slippers, having lunch and walking them to the toilet. Primary schools have their own
routines too, such as calling the register, taking a break and changing subject. Importantly, all teaching
activities are also marked by repeated actions such as changing the setting, introducing an activity,
handing out materials, dividing students into groups and drawing pupils’ attention on the task, providing
feedback.
School routines are a potential medium for FL teaching to very young learners, since each of them can be
associated with specific idioms (Balboni, Coonan, Ricci Garotti, 2001). Thus, if they are conducted in a FL,
they can become “linguistic routines”, i.e. frequent contextualized expressions that are heard and
pronounced within recurring situations (for methodological implications, see 3).
The following paragraphs will therefore outline some benefits of linguistic routines for FL learning at an
early age.
Neurological benefits
In the previous paragraphs we have seen some general features of early language learning (cerebral
plasticity, neurosensory and procedural learning, perceptual conceptualization and the need for a rich
language learning environment). Linguistic routines in EFLT respect young children’s natural way of
learning languages, since they:
A Support perceptual conceptualization. During routines language is always connected to actions and
procedures, which allow pupils to learn abstract notions through concrete experiences. For instance,
students will learn the idea of “presence versus absence” by putting a cross against their name on the
blackboard and noticing who is missing (see 1.2).
B Promote total response. During routines language is used for pragmatic purposes – when a teacher says
“Now, three at a time go and wash your hands!” he or she does want the children to go to the toilet and
wash their hands. Routines stimulate children’s neurosensory system as well, since they usually require a
physical response (see 1.2).
C Allow procedural learning. Being highly structured and contextualized, routines promote the use of
prefabricated language, which plays a pivotal role in early stages of language acquisition (see 1.3). Recent
preschool experimentation on the use of routines to introduce English as an FL, proved that children can
learn a great amount of prefabricated language memorized in form of automatism.
D Create a child-friendly learning environment. Routines mark young pupils’ life in and outside the
classroom – for example, children enjoy storytelling, which is based on specific patterns of predictability/
surprise and repetition/change (Taylor, 2000; Cameron, 2001; Daloiso, 2008). Inserting a FL within
school routines will be seen as meaningful by children, who will use it as a real means of communication
within a well-known context (see 2.2 and 2.3). Besides that, the daily nature of school routines allows
frequent and reiterative linguistic input, which positively affects the FL neurological activation threshold
(see 1.4).
Psychological benefits
According to the Venetian school of Language Teaching Methodology, EFLT should adopt a “formative
approach” to language teaching (for a review, Daloiso, 2007). Within this theoretical perspective language
learning at an early age results from the interaction of different evolutionary and developmental factors.
Therefore, it cannot be regarded as a self-standing process, independent of the overall growth of a child. As
an implication for EFLT, teachers should plan activities that improve students’ competence not only
linguistically, but also socially, culturally and cognitively.
In this paper we will examine the formative perspective and argue that routines conducted in a FL
contribute to the child’s psychological growth, since they help pupils:
A Be self-confident. Being highly structured, routines allow children to interact within a context that is:
Familiar, because routines are part of children’s lives in and outside the school.
ESE de Paula Frassinetti
Revista Saber & Educar / Cadernos de Estudo / 14
5
Safe, since the teacher’s presence supplies pupils with a sense of protection, which makes them feel self-
confident.
As a result, children develop an affective relationship with routines, because they can experiment and
manipulate objects, and have new learning experiences within a protected environment.
B Interact within a widened social setting. School routines are moments of group socialization, which help
young pupils overcome egocentrism and discover the pleasure of being part of a social group. This is
particularly important at preschool and kindergarten, where children move from a narrowed social
environment – the family – to a widened social setting, such as the class. However, primary school pupils
have not fully developed social abilities either, so routines as moments of group socialization would be
useful even to primary education.
C Understand and follow social rules. Routines are made of rules of conduct that children need to accept
and follow (waiting for one’s turn, learning that there is a time to be silent and a time to speak, allowing
classmates’ expression, following the teacher’s instructions, etc.). Routines play therefore a social role,
since they train children to mutual respect and adherence to community rules.
D Behave responsibly. Many school routines aim at pupils’ autonomy – children are asked to take care of
themselves and their own things, and gradually carry out simple tasks without the intervention of the
teacher.
Linguistic benefits
Learning a FL is not as easy as it may be assumed. If the language being learned is typologically different
from the native tongue, children need to adjust their internal speech-processing mechanisms from those
appropriate for their native language to those appropriate for the FL.
According to the Competition Model (MacWhinney, Bates, Kliegl, 1984; for a review see Gass, Selinker,
2001), language processing involves competition among various cues, such as word order, semantics,
morphological agreement and pragmatics. Not all the cues are equally important in all languages. Let us
consider two typologically different languages, such as Italian and English. Native speakers of Italian need
to rely mostly on morphology, semantics and intonation to interpret sentences, given that word order is
less important. In fact, Italian affirmative and interrogative sentences often have the same word order –
for example “Siete arrivati!” versus “Siete arrivati?”. On the other hand, native speakers of English use
word order as a primary cue to interpret sentences, since English is morphologically poor and
consequently differences in meaning are chiefly made by a specific word order.
The implication for FL learning is that some pupils will find it difficult to decode a FL which is typologically
different from their native language, because they need to “tune in” their speech-processing mechanisms to
the new code.
At early stages of language learning, conducting school routines in a FL might be helpful because:
A Language will be contextualized. If there is a typological gap between the pupils’ native language and the
FL, teachers have to provide extra support for FL comprehension. In school routines language is used
within a context that is familiar to children. As a result:
Pupils will carry out the requested task using the context to interpret sentences.
Since the already know what to do, children can focus on the FL typological features.
B Language will be perceived “as a whole”. As we have seen before, routines promote the use of
prefabricated language, which is pivotal in early stages of language acquisition.
C Different communication codes will be used. During school routines children are asked to perform
specific actions such as washing their hands, walking in a line and tidying up their classroom. Teachers can
use different codes that increase FL comprehension, such as body language and facial expressions to
support linguistic input and provide feedback.
D Children’s typical communication functions will be developed. Some studies on first language
acquisition showed that young children use language for interpersonal and instrumental purposes (for a
review see Power, Hubbard, 1996). Since in school routines language fulfills the same functions,
introducing the FL in these situations will help pupils develop the communicative functions they already
use in their native tongue.
ESE de Paula Frassinetti
Revista Saber & Educar / Cadernos de Estudo / 14
6
E Children’s typical vocabulary will be introduced. Children attending preschool have already developed
core vocabulary in their native language (for a review, see Camaioni, 2001). This includes “social regulation
words” (hello, bye-bye, see you, please, thank you, sorry, etc.), words related to everyday situations (at
home, in the garden, in the bathroom, etc.) and common objects/living beings (toys, pets, relatives and
friends). During school routines the same lexical categories can be introduced in the FL – for example,
greetings in the FL can be used at arrival at and departure from school and words connected to the human
body can be introduced during hygiene routines.
3 Key-principles for teachers
In the previous paragraphs we have understood that routines have important benefits from a neurological,
psychological and linguistic point of view. In the following section we will focus on some methodological
issues regarding the use of linguistic routines in EFLT at early stages. Namely, we will provide some
possible answers to the following questions: What school routines fit best for EFLT purposes? What
linguistic expressions can be associated with selected school routines? What communication strategies can
teachers use during routines? In order to answer these questions we will refer to both the theoretical
framework provided above (see 1. and 2.) and the results of some recent preschool experimentations,
namely the LESI Project5 and the Venetian “English at Preschool” Project.
Choosing the routines
Theoretically, all school routines can be helpful to EFLT, because they have potential language learning
benefits. However, when choosing the routines to be conducted in a FL, teachers must consider many
organizational aspects to make sure that those routines will support FL learning.
Before discussing these aspects, let us summarize in the following table some of the most relevant school
routines.
Arrival and departure
Greeting and welcoming children
Changing clothes (such as taking off/putting on one’s jacket, putting on/taking off one’s
uniform)
Forming a line
Pre-activity routines
Singing a song or playing a game (at the beginning and end of the school day)
Calling the register
Activity
Introducing activities
Forming groups
Arranging the setting
Handing out materials
Managing groups
Post-activity routines
Providing feedback
Changing activity
Tidying up the classroom
Changing the setting for the next activity
Behavior
Drawing pupils’ attention to the task
Rewarding
Correcting
Asking for silence
Break time
Recess
Lunch
Free play
Afternoon nap
Hygiene
Going to the bathroom
Washing one’s hands
Washing one’s teeth
Blowing one’s nose
ESE de Paula Frassinetti
Revista Saber & Educar / Cadernos de Estudo / 14
7
5 For an analysis of the LESI Project see Balboni, Coonan, Ricci Garotti (2001) and Coonan, Ricci Garotti (2004).
Table 1
School routines
Table 1 provides an impressive outline of how routines are widely spread all over schooltime. However,
not all these routines prove to be suitable for early exposure to a FL. In fact, teaches need to consider many
organizational aspects, such as the educator’s role during the routine, the type of routine (group/
individual, structured/free) and the certainty that it will be manageable in a FL.
Therefore, it might be useful for teachers to analyse each routine by answering the following questions:
Is the routine already known to children (are the children already familiar with the routine)? Have pupils
already learned how to behave and respond to the teacher’s stimuli within this context?
What type of routine is it? Is the routine collective or individual? (e.g., singing a song versus blowing one’s
nose). Is the routine structured or free? (calling the register is a structured routine, while during recess
children can play the game they want, by themselves or in groups).
What is the teacher’s role during the routine? Does he or she have a guiding or a supporting role? Some
routines are based on interaction between the educator and the whole class, so it will be easier for teachers
to provide a linguistic input to the entire group of students. On the other hand, during other routines most
of the interaction is among pupils; in this case the role of the teacher appears to be secondary (at lunchtime
and recess, for example) and FL input risks not to be noticed by children.
Is there a background of quietness during the routine? Is the routine structured so that FL input can be
heard by all students? Is the setting arranged so all children can see the teacher and follow his or her
instructions?
In the light of the answers to these questions it may happen that some school routines prove to be more
suitable for EFLT than others. The results of the Venetian “English at Preschool” Project showed that
structured and collective routines are more effective for language learning. The so-called “circle-time” –
that is the pre-activity routine where children are sitting in a circle on the floor or on their chairs or playing
a group game – is a typical example. On the other hand, other kinds of routines (especially those connected
to break-time) are difficult to be conducted in a FL. This is because only during structured and teacher-
guided routines the environment shows the necessary requirements for language learning (quietness and
silence to allow FL comprehension and understanding of the teacher’s instructions).
Using the foreign language
Teachers should also analyse the selected routines linguistically, that is regard them as communicative
events in which language is used for pragmatic purposes. Let us consider arrival at school. The main goal of
such a routine is to welcome children, make them feel comfortable at school and help them integrate into
the educational environment. For these goals to be reached, arrival at school follows specific procedures
(see 3.1), to allow pupils gain self-confidence within this context. At arrival, language plays a pivotal role
because it is the main means of communication between teachers and students. In fact, by means of
language, teachers greet children, have them change their clothes, gather them around a table, etc.
By analysing the communicative functions of each routine, teachers can select the linguistic input to be
provided in the FL. The following table summarizes some linguistic expressions that might be associated
with school routines. The table is taken from the “routine and activity phrasebook” compiled by the team of
teacher trainers for the Venetian “English at Preschool” Project.
ESE de Paula Frassinetti
Revista Saber & Educar / Cadernos de Estudo / 14
8
Arrival
Good morning, children!
How are you? Are you fine?
Take off your jacket/coat/hat/shoes/gloves.
Put your backpack on the chair.
Put on your uniform/slippers.
Are you tired?
Who is absent today?
Take off your uniform/slippers
Hygiene
Wash/dry your hands.
Brush your teeth.
Do you need to go to the toilet?
Did you hurt yourself?
Oh! You have a booboo here! Let’s put a
plaster on.
Blow your nose. Here is a tissue.
Behavior
Be careful!
Be quiet, please!
Silence, please!
Sit down and stay still please.
Listen!
Hands down. Don’t touch!
Not so loud!
Don’t grab the pencil from Marco! Ask Marco:
“Pencil please!”
No cheating!
No kicking/ No pushing.
Gently, gently.
Tidy your desk.
Go slowly!/ Hurry up!
I’m sorry!
Thank you! You are welcome!
Playful activities
Shall we open the box?
Who goes first? I/you go first.
Whose turn is it? It’s my/your turn.
Are you ready? Ready, steady, go!
Roll the dice.
How much did you get?
Well done!/ Excellent!/ Good job!
Lucky boy/girl!
Too bad! Try again!
Pick a card.
Spin the wheel.
Cover your eyes with your hands.
I/you win!/ You are the winner!
I won!
It’s a tie!
The game is over.
Break time
Are you hungry? Do you want a biscuit?
Eat up, finish your biscuit.
Are you thirsty? Water or juice?
Here is your glass. Pour some water in your glass.
Set the table.
Get the water please.
Put your bibs on.
Eat up. Finish your food, please.
Take off your bibs./ Put away your bibs.
Departure
Put on your jacket and zip it up.
Put on your shoes. Tie the laces.
Bye, bye, children! See you tomorrow!
It’s time to go home!
Table 2
Linguistic routines at preschool
Table 2 clearly shows that a great amount of language can be associated with school routines. This does
not mean that teachers must introduce all these expressions at once. In fact, the introduction of the FL in
school routines should be gradual. Teachers could:
A Start from the most frequent linguistic expressions in each routine and introduce the others later on. The
“English at Preschool” Project – as well as the LESI Project – showed that even expressions apparently
very difficult for young children had been easily understood, thanks to the childrens’ guessing abilities and
to the familiar context.
B Start from a couple of routines to be conducted in the FL, extending the use of the FL gradually. The
criteria for choosing the proper routines have been already discussed in 3.1.
However, the phrasebook here provided is not meant to be a rigid tool. In fact, although routines are
structured, children’s reactions and behaviours are sometimes other than what we expect. It follows that
the phrasebook must be considered just as a scenario. Teachers should also take advantage of unexpected
situations (a new arrival, a child that hurt his/herself, a birthday or a day trip) to provide children with FL
input.
Using strategies during routines
For school routines – as well as every other language activity – to have good effects on young pupils’ FL
learning, teachers need to activate specific strategies. The strategies that will be discussed here have been
experimented as part of the “English at Preschool” Project.
The following table provides an outline of the three main types of strategies teachers can activate. These
are:
ESE de Paula Frassinetti
Revista Saber & Educar / Cadernos de Estudo / 14
9
A Motivating strategies, which are used to arouse pupils’ curiosity and interest in the task.
B Classroom management strategies, which aim at keeping or restoring order during the activities.
C “Teaching” strategies, which aim at supporting children’s FL learning by facilitating comprehension,
stimulating production and helping children focus on accuracy.
As far as the third category is concerned, considering that syntax and phonetics are priority learning goals
for young learners (see 1.3), some examples of strategies to develop pupils’ syntactic and phonetic accuracy
will be provided.
Some of the strategies proposed are not far from the typical communicative and linguistic adaptations
performed by mothers when speaking to their babies, as well as by child-carers speaking to very young
pupils (see Gass, Selinker, 2001 for a review). On the other hand, some other strategies are specific to FL
learning at a very young age within the educational system.
CATEGORY
PURPOSE
EXAMPLES
Linguistic strategies Non linguistic strategies
EXAMPLES
Linguistic strategies Non linguistic strategies
Motivating
strategies
Support
motivation and
provide positive
feedback
Reply positively to children’s efforts (Yes!
Very good! Good job!)
Use native language if children lose heart
Emphasize words and expressions to convey
positive emotions
Pitch one’s voice lower to create suspense
Achieve surprise effect (for instance, using a
“magic box” to draw materials from)
Reward children with a little gift (stickers,
medals, sweets/ biscuits)
Use body language (smiling, winking,
shaking hands, clapping hands)
Keep eye contact with pupils
Classroom
management
strategies
Keep or restore
order during the
activities
Call to order in the FL or in the native
language
Suspend the activity and ask children to do
some linguistic routines (counting, naming,
etc.)
Pitch one’s voice lower to draw pupils’
attention
Use body language (making a sad, cross or
annoyed face)
Change the setting and/or the type of activity
(dynamic/static, group/individual)
“Teaching”
strategies
Promote
comprehension
Pronounce short sentences (as long as they
are grammatically correct)
Articulate sounds clearly
Stress the key-word in each sentence
Repeat and rephrase sentences
Ask for pupils’ feedback
Use pictures
Use realia
Support the linguistic message with other
communication codes (gestures, facial
expressions, etc.)
Stimulate
production
Use decision-making techniques (for
instance, let pupils’ choose materials,
pictures and toys)
Produce suspended sentences to have
children complete them
Make mistakes on purpose to have children
correct them
Use conventional gestures to encourage
pupils (nodding one’s head, smiling, clapping
one’s hands)
Reuse similar (or even the same) materials to
stimulate pupils’ memory
Focus on
accuracy
Rephrase wrong sentences after providing
positive feedback
Ask pupils to repeat
Repeat the same sentence modulating one’s
voice to help children notice different
intonation patterns (for example sad, happy
or cross voice)
Associate word syllabication with rhythm
(clapping hands, stomping feet, knocking on
the table)
Associate phonemes to gestures, so children
can “feel” sounds (for example have pupils
put their hand in front of their mouth while
pronouncing aspirates)
Bring pictures and objects close to one’s
mouth to draw children’s attention on both
the meaning of words and the manner of
pronunciation
Table 3
Strategies for school routines and language activities with young learners
ESE de Paula Frassinetti
Revista Saber & Educar / Cadernos de Estudo / 14
10
Conclusion
In this paper we discussed the role of linguistic routines in EFLT. After a brief survey on the features of
language learning at a very early age (see 1), we highlighted some potential benefits of routines on language
learning from a neurological, psychological and linguistic point of view (see 2). Finally, we discussed some
implications for EFLT (see 3).
Even though exposing pupils to a FL through school routines might be considered behaviouristic, there is
strong evidence that it is an effective method for at least three reasons.
First, learning the rudiments of a FL through routines respects some neuropsychological features of young
children’s brains (see 1). Most routines are in fact physical activities performed for practical purposes.
Children are therefore totally involved in performing the routine, which fulfills their need of neurosensory
learning. Besides, language is part and parcel of each routine, since it is the medium used by teachers to
provide instructions and feedback to their pupils. It is in turn the medium used by pupils to ask for
instructions and feedback, interact while carrying out the task, etc. Therefore, during routines a great
amount of the so-called “prefabricated language” is used, which has been proved to be pivotal in language
acquisition at early stages. The main features of routines (recurrence, corporeity and prefabricated
language) are likely to stimulate “implicit memory”, i.e a procedural long-term memory that organizes
knowledge in procedures and action sequences that are increasingly automatic.
Second, routines are already present at school. In this paper we focused on preschool routines in the first
place, but there are many similar routines at primary school, such as calling the register, taking a break
and changing subject. It follows that FL teachers do not need to create new communicative situations to
provide linguistic input in the FL. They can start from situations that are already present at school, in
which the FL will be used for authentic pragmatic purposes. For example, at break time, children will not
learn to say “Biscuit, please!” by pretending to ask for a biscuit but because it is their actual wish. On the
contrary, many FL activities for adolescents and adults take place in artificial contexts, such as role-plays.
Third, conducting school routines in the FL is not meant to replace creative language activities. These will
be carried out as usual in the class schedule. It follows that if some routines are conducted in the FL,
teachers have the opportunity to extend the FL exposition time, thus providing pupils with extra situations
to learn the rudiments of a new language.
ESE de Paula Frassinetti
Revista Saber & Educar / Cadernos de Estudo / 14
11
Bibliography
Aglioti, S. M. & Fabbro, F. (2006). Neuropsicologia del linguaggio. Bologna: Il Mulino.
Balboni, P. E., Coonan, C.M. & Ricci Garotti, F. (Eds.). (2001). Lingue straniere nella scuola dell’infanzia.
Perugia-Welland: Guerra-Soleil.
Bakhtin, M. (1986). “Speech Genres” and Other Late Essays. Austin: University of Texas Press.
Bortolini, U. (1992). La percezione dei suoni linguistici nei bambini. Padua: Progetto Editore.
Brown, R. (1973). A First Language. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Camaioni, L. (Ed.). (2001). Psicologia dello sviluppo del linguaggio. Bologna: Il Mulino.
Cameron, L. (2001). Teaching Languages to Young Learners. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Candelier, M. (1998). Projet de recherche concernant l’éveil au language à l’école primarie. Rassegna
Italiana di Linguistica Applicata. 2-3, 75-85.
Caon, F. (2006). Pleasure in Language Learning and Teaching. Perugia: Guerra Edizioni.
Coonan, C. M. & Ricci Garotti, F. (2004). Lingue europee nella scuola dell’infanzia. Percorsi educativi e
didattici. Trento: Provincia Autonoma di Trento.
Daloiso, M. (2007). Early Foreign Language Teaching. Perugia: Guerra Edizioni.
Daloiso, M. (2008). L’italiano con le fiabe. Costruire percorsi didattici per bambini stranieri. Perugia:
Guerra Edizioni.
Fabbro, F. (2004). Neuropedagogia delle lingue. Come insegnare le lingue ai bambini. Rome: Astrolabio.
Gass, S. M. & Selinker, L. (2001). Second Language Acquisition. An Introductory Course. London:
Erlbaum.
Goswami, U. (2004). Neuroscience and education. British Journal of Educational Psychology. 74, 1-14.
Gullberg, M. & Indefrey, P. (2006). The Cognitive Neuroscience of Second Language Acquisition. Oxford:
Blackwell.
Krashen, S. & Scarcella, R. (1978). On Routines and Patterns in Language Acquisition and Performance.
Language Learning. 28, 283-300.
Kroll, J. F. & De Groot, A. M. B. (Eds.). (2005). Handbook of Bilingualism: Psycholinguistic Approaches.
New York: Oxford University Press.
Jackendoff, R. (1993). Patterns in the Mind. Language and Human Nature. Harvester Wheatsheaf: Hemel
Hempstead.
MacWhinney, B., Bates, B. & Kliegl, R. (1984). Cue Validity and Sentence Interpretation in English,
German and Italian. Journal of Verbal Learning and Behaviour. 18, 79-89.
Mukerjee, A. & Guha, P. (2007). Baby’s Day Out: Attentive Vision for Language Acquisition from Pre-
Linguistic Concepts. Available on January 10th 2009, at www.cse.iitk.ac.in/~amit/pub/wapcv_2007-
am.pdf
Munakata, Y., Casey, B. J. & Diamond, A. (2004). Developmental Cognitive Neuroscience: Progress and
Potential. Trends in Cognitive Neuroscence. 8, 122-128.
Paradis, M. (2004). A Neurolinguistic Theory of Bilingualism. Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing.
Peregoy, S. (1999). Multiple Embedded Scaffolds: Support for English Speakers in a Two-Way Spanish
Immersion Kindergarten. Bilingual Research Journal. 23, 135-146.
Pinker, S. (1994). The Language Instinct. London: Penguin.
Power, B. M. & Hubbard, R. S. (Eds.). (1996). Language Development. A Reader for Teachers. Englewood
Cliffs: Prentice-Hall.
Rizzolatti, G. & Craighero, L. (2004). The Mirror-Neuron System. Annual Review of Neurosciences. 27,
169-192.
Shibata Perera, N. (2001). The Role of Prefabricated Language in Young Children’s Second Language
Acquisition. Bilingual Research Journal. 25, 251-280.
Tasca, S. (2005). Per i bambini, con i bambini. Da 0 a 6 anni. Milano: Editore Mammeonline.
Taylor, E. K. (2000). Using Folktales. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Wartenburger, I., Heekeren, H. R., Abutalebi, J., Cappa, S. F., Villringer, A. & Perani, D. (2003). Early
Setting of Grammatical Processing in the Bilingual Brain. Neuron. 37, 159-170.
ESE de Paula Frassinetti
Revista Saber & Educar / Cadernos de Estudo / 14
12
