In foreign language classrooms, students and teachers together create practices for language use; they talk the institutional context and institutional identities into being. According to Lave and Wenger, learning can be seen as a deepening process of participation in a community of practice. Learning a language in a classroom can be regarded as gradual changes in language use that are accomplished through participation in collaborative work. In that case, the study of variation in language alternation, code-switching and the activities the students and the teachers are engaged in can contribute to understand language learning in a foreign language classroom context. The purpose of this article is to describe and analyse how code-switching as a local practice is used in teaching and learning Swedish as a foreign language. The context of the study is classes in Swedish as a foreign language in upper secondary schools in Finland. The material consists of video recordings of one lesson in second grade where the students have been studying Swedish for 5 years. The article focuses especially on the practices of language choice in repair. Students tend to keep up a division of labour between FL used for institutional work and L1 as the language reserved for interaction. The article discusses the conditions of learning repair practices in an FL classroom.
AlfonzettiG. (1998). Italian dialect code-switching in Sicily. In AuerP. (Ed.), Code-switching in conversation: Language, interaction and identity (pp. 180–211). London, UK: Routledge.
2.
AuerP. (1995). The pragmatics of code-switching: A sequential approach. In MilroyL.MuyskenP. (Eds.), One speaker, two languages: Cross-disciplinary perspectives on code-switching (pp. 115–135). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
3.
AuerP. (1998). Bilingual conversation revisited. In AuerP. (Ed.), Code-switching in conversation: Language, interaction and identity (pp. 1–24). London, UK: Routledge.
4.
BakhtinM. M. (1986). Speech genres & other late essays. Austin, TX: University of Texas Press.
5.
BartonD. (1994). Literacy: An introduction to the ecology of written language. Oxford, UK: Blackwell.
6.
CarrollD. (2005). Vowel-marking as an interactional resource in Japanese novice ESL conversation. In RichardsK.SeedhouseP. (Eds.), Applying conversation analysis (pp. 214–234). Houndmills, Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.
7.
Council of Europe. (2001). Common European framework of reference for languages: Learning, teaching, assessment. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
8.
Couper-KuhlenE. (1992). Contextualizing discourse: The prosody of interactive repair. In AuerP.di LuzioA. (Eds.), The contextualization of language (pp. 337–364). Amsterdam, the Netherlands: John Benjamins.
9.
CromdalJ. (2003). Bilingual text production as task and resource: Social interaction in task oriented student groups. Nordlyd, 31, 746–761.
10.
CromdalJ. (2005). Bilingual order in collaborative word processing: On creating an English text in Swedish. Journal of Pragmatics, 37, 329–353.
11.
DrewP. (1997). ‘Open’ class repair initiators in response to sequential sources of troubles in conversation. Journal of Pragmatics, 28, 69–101.
12.
DrewP.HeritageJ. (2001). Analyzing talk at work: An introduction. In DrewP.HeritageJ. (Eds.), Talk at work: Interaction in institutional settings (pp. 3–65). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
13.
FirthA.WagnerJ. (2007). Second/foreign language learning as a social accomplishment: Elaborations on a reconceptualized SLA. Modern Language Journal, 91, 798–817.
14.
FoxB.HayashiM.JaspersonR. (1996). Resources and repair: A cross-linguistic study of syntax and repair. In OchsE.SchegloffE. A.ThompsonS. A. (Eds.), Interaction and grammar (pp. 185–237). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
15.
GardnerR.WagnerJ. (Eds.) (2004). Second language conversations. London, UK: Continuum.
16.
Green-VänttinenM.Lehti-EklundH. (2007). Självreparationer i svenska som S1 och S2 [Self-repair in Swedish as L1 and L2]. In Lehti-EklundH. (Ed.), Att växa till lärare—Svensklärarutbildning i utveckling (Nordistica Helsingiensia 8) (pp. 53–81). Helsinki, Finland: Department of Scandinavian Languages and Scandinavian Literature, Helsinki University.
17.
GrosjeanF. (1982). Life with two languages. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
18.
GustavssonL. (1988). Language taught and language used: Dialogue processes in dyadic lessons of Swedish as a second language compared with non-didactic conversations (Linköping Studies in Arts and Sciences 18). Linköping, Sweden: Linköping University.
19.
HakulinenA.VilkunaM.KorhonenR.KoivistoV.HeinonenT. R.AlhoI. (2004). Iso suomen kielioppi [Great Finnish Grammar]. Helsinki, Finland: Suomen kirjallisuuden seura.
20.
HeritageJ. (1984a). A change-of-state token and aspects of its sequential placement. In AtkinsonJ. M.HeritageJ. (Eds.), Structures of social action (pp. 299–345). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
21.
HeritageJ. (1984b). Garfinkel and ethnomethodology. Cambridge, UK: Polity Press.
22.
HeritageJ. (1997). Conversation analysis and institutional talk: Analyzing data. In SilvermanD. (Ed.), Qualitative research: Theory, method and practice (pp. 161–182). London, UK: SAGE.
23.
JeffersonG. (1972). Side sequences. In SudnowD. N. (Ed.), Studies in social interaction (pp. 294–338). New York, NY: Free Press.
24.
JoutsenoJ. (2007). Tehtäväjaksojen ongelmien käsittely [The dealing of problems in task sequences]. In TainioL. (Ed.), Vuorovaikutusta luokkahuoneessa. Näkökulmana keskustelunanalyysi (pp. 181–209). Helsinki, Finland: Gaudeamus.
KärkkäinenE.SorjonenM.-L.HelasvuoM.-L. (2007). ‘Discourse structure.’ In ShopenT. (Ed.), Language typology and syntactic description: Complex constructions (pp. 301–371). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
27.
Keski-RaasakkaK. (1998). Svensk ordföljd i finskt perspektiv. Beskrivningen av svenskans ordföljd i skolgrammatikor för finska elever 1884-1997 [Swedish word order from a Finnish perspective. A description of the Swedish word order in school grammars for Finnish students]. Joensuu, Finland: Joensuu University.
28.
KohonenV. (2006). On the notions of the language learner, student and language user in FL education: Building the road as we travel. In PietiläP.LintunenP.JärvinenH.-M. (Eds.), Language learners of today (AFinLA Yearbook) (pp. 37–66). Jyväskylä, Finland: Finnish Association of Applied Linguistics.
29.
KurhilaS. (2006). Second language interaction. Amsterdam, the Netherlands: John Benjamins.
30.
LantolfJ. P.PavlenkoA. (2000). Second language learning as participation and the (re)construction of selves. In LantolfJ. P. (Ed.), Sociocultural theory and second language learning (pp. 155–177). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
LinellP. (1990). De institutionaliserade samtalens elementära former: Om möten mellan professionella och lekmän [Elementary forms of institutional conversations: On meetings between professionals and laymen]. In: Forskning om utbildning (Vol. 4, pp. 18–35).
33.
MacbethD. (2004). The relevance of repair for classroom correction. Language in Society, 33, 703–736.
34.
Martin-JonesM. (1995). Code-switching in the classroom: Two decades of research. In MilroyL.MuyskenP. (Eds.), One speaker, two languages (pp. 90–111). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
35.
McHoulA. W. (1990). The organization of repair in classroom talk. Language in Society, 19, 349–377.
36.
McRaeK. D. (1997). Conflict and compromise in multilingual societies: Finland (Vol. 3). Waterloo, ON: Wilfrid Laurier University Press.
37.
MehanH. (1998). The study of social interaction in educational settings: Accomplishments and unresolved issues. Human development, 41(4), 245–269.
38.
MilroyL.WeiL. (1995). A social network approach to code-switching: The example of a bilingual community in Britain. In MilroyL.MuyskenP. (Eds.), One speaker, two languages: Cross-disciplinary perspectives on code-switching (pp. 136–157). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
39.
NikulaT. (2005). English as an object and tool of study in classrooms: Interactional effects and pragmatic implications. Linguistics and Education, 16, 27–58.
40.
NikulaT. (2008). Oppilaiden osallistuminen luokkahuonevuorovaikutukseen englanninkielisessä aineenopetuksessa [Students’ participation in classroom interaction in teaching content through English]. In: LeppänenS.NikulaT.KääntäL. (Eds.), Kolmas kotimainen (pp. 42–72). Helsinki, Finland: Suomalaisen kirjallisuuden seura.
41.
NuolijärviP.TiittulaL. (2000). Televisiokeskustelun näyttämöllä [On the scene of a TV-show]. Helsinki, Finland: SKS.
42.
OhtaA. S.NakaoneT. (2004). Teacher and peer answers in the FL classroom. IRAL, 42, 217–237.
43.
Pitkänen-HuhtaA. (2003). Texts and interaction: Literacy practices in the EFL classroom. Jyväskylä, Finland: University of Jyväskylä.
44.
RaevaaraL. (1996). Kysymyksen paikka ja tulkinta [The place and interpretation of a question.]. In HakulinenA. (Ed.), Kieli 10. Suomalaisen keskustelun keinoja II. [Methods in Finnish conversation] (pp. 23–46). Helsinki, Finland: The Department of Finnish language at the Helsinki University.
45.
RamptonB. (1998). Language crossing and the redefinition of reality. In AuerP. (Ed.), Code-switching in conversation: Language, interaction and identity (pp. 290–317). London, UK: Routledge.
46.
RamptonB. (2006). Language in late modernity: Interaction in an urban school. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
47.
RogoffB. (1990). Apprenticeship in thinking: Cognitive development in social context. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
48.
SahlströmF. (1999). Up the hill backwards: On interactional constraints and affordances for equity-construction in the classrooms of the Swedish comprehensive school (Uppsala studies in education 85). Uppsala, Sweden: Uppsala University.
49.
SchegloffE. A. (1992). Repair after next turn: The last structurally provided defense of intersubjectivity in conversation. The American Journal of Sociology, 97, 1295–1345.
50.
SchegloffE. A. (2000). When ‘Others’ initiate repair. Applied Linguistics, 21/2, 205–243.
51.
SchegloffE. A.JeffersonG.SacksH. (1977). The preference for self-correction in the organization of repair in conversation. Language, 53, 361–382.
52.
SeedhouseP. (1999). The relationship between context and the organisation of repair in the L2 classroom. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, 37, 59–81.
53.
SeedhouseP. (2004). The interactional architecture of the language classroom: A conversation analysis perspective. Malden, MA: Blackwell.
54.
Slotte-LüttgeA. (2005). Ja vet int va de heter på svenska. Interaktion mellan tvåspråkiga elever och deras lärare i en enspråkig klassrumsdiskurs [I don’t know what it’s called in Swedish. Interaction between bilingual students and their teachers in a monolingual classroom discourse]. Åbo, Finland: Åbo Akademi University Press.
55.
SorjonenM.-L. (1997). Recipient activities: Particles nii(n) and joo as responses in Finnish conversation (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of California, Los Angeles, CA.
56.
SorjonenM.-L.LaaksoM. (2005). Katko vai eiku? Itsekorjauksen aloitustavat ja vuorovaikutustehtävät [Cut-off or eiku? Ways to mark self-repair and its interactional functions]. Virittäjä, 2, 244–269.
57.
SwainM.LapkinS. (2000). Task-based second language learning: The uses of the first language. Language Teaching Research, 4, 251–274.
58.
TainioL. (2005). Luokkahuoneen vuorottelujäsennyksen rikkomukset [Violations of the turn taking organization in a classroom]. In KuureL.KärkkäinenE.SaarenkunnasM. (Eds.), Kieli ja sosiaalinen toiminta—Language and social action (AFinLA Yearbook) (pp. 179–192). Jyväskylä, Finland: Finnish Association of Applied Linguistics.
59.
TainioL. (Ed.). (2007). Vuorovaikutusta luokkahuoneessa. Näkökulmana keskustelunanalyysi [Interaction in classroom. Conversation analysis as an angle of vision]. Helsinki, Finland: Gaudeamus.
60.
ÜstünelE.SeedhouseP. (2005). Why that, in that language, right now? Code-switching and pedagogical focus. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 15, 302–325.
