A Constructivist Approach to Grammar: Teaching Teachers to Teach Aspect (CARL BLYTH Department of French & laian University of Texas at Austin Austin, TX 78712-1197 Email cbbth@mail wiexas edu This article demonstrates how a constructivist approach to teacher education helps inex: perienced teachers understand the learning and teaching of aspect, a core grammatical concept. By consciously experiencing the process of narration (i.e., how a speaker per- ceives real or imagined events and then organizes perceptions into a coherent recounting of events), apprentice teachers construct @ deeper awareness of the form/meaning aspec: tual correlations of the target language. More generaly, this study argues that a constructiv. ist approach to teacher education facilitates the development of an innovative grammar pedagogy by challenging TAs's traditional beliefs about the nacure of grammar. MOST FOREIGN LANGUAGE TEACHERS ‘gradually develop a personal set of eclectic be- liefs about the teaching and learning of gram- mar based on a variety of sources: their lan- guage learning and teaching experiences, teacher education courses, participation in conferences and workshops, and frequent dis- cussions with other foreign language teachers ‘Although many teaching practices are taught explicitly and learned consciously in teacher ed cation programs, others are simply “picked up” or constructed in the process of becoming a teacher, a process akin to acculturation (Car den, 1988). In this respect, teachers of foreign Tanguages are ao different than teachers of other subjects or disciplines who also tend to develop their eclectic beliefs and practices over time (Clark, 1988; Cohen & Ball, 1990) Aldhough such pedagogical eclecticism may represent a healthy skepticism of educational innovations, itis not always enlightened. Many foreign language teachers hold traditional be- liefs about explicit grammar instruction that are no longer supported by current research in ‘The Modern Languagy frm, 8,5 (8997) 0026-79027 5066 "$1507 P1887 The Madrn Langage feral linguistics and second language acquisition (Lee & VanPatten, 1995; VanPatten, 1996). In particular, many teachers wedded to traditional ‘methods of grammar instruction resist learner centered or constructivist approaches to learn- ing. These teachers persist im their beliefs that the sequence of a grammatical syllabus can be derived unproblematically and in a priori fash ion from a given language and that communica tive skills and metalinguistic awareness can be taught adequately through teacher explanation of grammatical rules, followed by mechanical Grills and an occasional communicative exercise Given the misconceptions underlying the teaching of grammar, how can teacher prepara- tion programs help apprentice teachers shift their Focus from teaching to learning? How can teachers-in-training construct pedagogical practices that are more fiemly based on what is currently known about the way foreign lan guages are larned rather than on orthodox, nor ative beliefs about how languages should be ‘augh@ In an attempt to answer these questions, his essay examines the teaching and learning of aspect, specifically the distinction between the preterit and imperfect tenses of the Romance languages, for example, the passé romaaé and the injparfaitin French; the previloand the imperelo in Spanishto 2rs to education helps inex \ a core grammatical how a speaker per: * coherent recounting ‘orm/meaning aspec- lues that a constructiv innovative grammar of grammar. od language acquisition "eb; VanPatten, 1996) In les wedded to radtional "st approaches to learn: css im their beliefs that tomate syllabus ean be sally and in pie fa ic and that communis ‘inl avarenes cam be Ugh eacher explanation followed by mechanical -pllons underlying the ove ea teacher prepa Prentice teachers shit it leering? How can ateuct pedagogical Try based on wa i the way foreign lan Ulan on orthodox, aor v languages should be ing an learning of cases of the Romance ep compa ad the rinoaod the infra { | | Cart Blyth Aspect is a core grammatical concept, yet frequently it is poorly understood by students of French and Spanish (Connor, 1992; Ozete, 1987). Kaplan (1987) states that this aspectual opposition is perceived by teachers as “partic: ularly problematic for English-speaking learn- ers of French” (p. 53)? and Garcia and van Putte (1988) claim that it “constitutes one of the major difficulties encountered by native speakers of Germanic languages in the learning of Spanish" (p. 268). Graduate teaching assis- tants (TAs) often find aspect difficult to teach because they themselves lack a clear under- standing of it. Whac I shall argue below is that ‘constructivism provides a beneficial framework for teacher education progranis because it al- Jows teachers to gain essential technical knowl ‘edge about grammar while also gaining insight into beliefs concerning pedagogical practices. CONSTRUCTIVISM Constructivism is 2 theory of learning and knowledge closely associated with the work of several well-known psychologists: Jean Piaget, Lev Vygotsky, Jerome Bruner, and Howard Gard. ner, The moat fundamental and radical epis: temological principle of constructivism holds that knowledge “does not and can not have the purpose of producing representations of an in: dependent reality, but instead has an adaptive function” (von Glaserfeld, 1996, p. 3). In other words, constructivism rejects the idea that hu- man knowledge is a direct reflection of an ob- jective reality. A constructivist would argue that every human being constructs his or her own version of reality. As a consequence, multiple realities ac multiple ways of knowing are to be expected in the classroom, Fosnet (1996a) states the following: Luhe constructivist perspective is viewed as] a self: regulatory process of struggling with the conflict between existing personal models of the world and discrepant new insights, constructing new repre sentations and models of reality a¢ a buman meaning making venture with culturally developed tools and symbols, and further negouating sch meaning through cooperative social activity, die course, and debate. (px) Although constructivisin has become an im- portant poststructuralist psychological theory of learning. it does not transtate neatly intoa set of pedagogical practices. Nevertheless, Fosnot (0996b) suggests five general principles of con structivism with obvious applications to educa: tional practice: (a) Learning is not the result of 51 development, learning is development; (b) dis equilibrium facilitates learning; (c) reflective abstraction is the driving force of learning; (4) dialogue within a community engenders fur: ther thinking; (e) learning proceeds towards the development of... central organizing prin ciples that can be generalized across expe fences and that often require the undoing or reorganizing of earlier conceptions (pp. 29- 30), These general principles point to a learner- centered pedagogy in which the teacher acts as a facilitator of active and personalized learning Father than at an expert depensing prepared TRADITIONAL GRAMMAR TEACHING Largely unchanged for decades, the presenta: tion of grammar in foreign language textbooks and classrooms continues to be based on an outdated combination of behaviorism, struc- turalist linguistics, and versions of audiolingual ism and cognitive-code theory. In general, these traditional presentations of grammar are characterized by a strict sequence of drills as formulated by Paulston (1972): First learners practice grammatical structures via mechanical drills, then meaningful drills, and last, commu- nicative drills. To perform a mechanical drill, students do not need to attach any meaning © the grammatical form being practiced. The classic example of a mechanical drill is the transformational exercise in which students manipulate or transform an isolated gram- matical item, typically a verb conjugation or a nominal inflection. Like mechanical drills, meaningful drills have only one correct re sponse, however, they require students to un derstand both the stimulus and the response. Communieative drills also require the student to understand the meaning of the stimulus and the response, but differ from meaningful drills in that there is no single correct answer. Lee and VanPatten (1995) note that Paul: ston’s grammatical sequence was in keeping with the period of language teaching domi nated by behaviorism, which emphasized obsery- able behavior, avoidance of errors, and habit formation (p. 91). Today, however, such a tradi tional presentation of grammar is at odds with what is known and widely accepted about the role of input in first and second language acqui- sition. Traditional approaches pay little, if any, attention 1o the effects of input on the develop: ing grammatical system ofa learner and instead focus almost entirely on output or linguistic32 production. VanPatten (1996, p. 59) claims that the most serious problem for traditional ap- proaches to grammar i the “mismatch” be> ‘tween theory and practice, between the impor tant role attributed to input in current theory and the lack of input in current practice: ‘Wich ie emphasis on output practice, a traditional approach to grammar instruction ignores the crus tial roe of input in second language acquisition— and the definition of input in second language ac. ‘uistion dora noe include instructors’ explanations bout how the second language works, The defini. tion of input is Kimited 12 meaning-bearing input, language that the learner hears or ses that is used to communicate a message, Thus, i tacitional in struction, leamers practice a form or structure, but they aze not getting the input that ie needed to construct the mental representation of the struc ture itself, (VanPatten, 1996, p. 6) Despite recent theoretical developments that question a strict sequence of grammar drills, the emphasis on output practice remains wide. spread largely because ic is supported by entrenched beliefs among foreign language teachers: the belief that the grammar of a lan- Buage consists ofa series of isolated facts called grammar points, and the conviction that gram- ‘mar is eminently teachable, that is, profitably taught through explanations of grammar rules, Unfortunately, in their attempt to capture grammatical knowledge in the form of explicit rules, teachers frequently mistake the rule itself for what it actually represents—the mental proc- ess of the speaker. Current textbook rules and classroom practices used in the (caching of grammar pay scant attention to the speaker's ‘mental processes and thus "forfeit any chance of attacking meaning on its home ground” (Langacker, 1987, p. 99). In fairness co teachers, however, some degrec of reification is common to virtually all approaches to grammar. For ex- ample, Langacker (1994) points aut that key terms commonly used in linguistic discussions are invariably nouns: language, thought, con. cept, cognition, structure, construction, and 50 forth. Nevertheless, Langacker maintains that when he uses a term like contin his finguistic analyses, he does not envisage “a fixed, static cemtty like a physical object lodged somewhere in the brain” (p. 25) but rather, a dynamic men- tal process ‘On dhe other hand, Rutherford (1987) argues that a fixed, static entity is exactly what most traditional language teachers envisage when they use the term grammar. He refers to che commonplace reification of grammar in for ‘The Mode Language ona $197) ‘eign and second language instruction as “the accumulation of entities” (p. 17). According to Rutherford, traditional approaches to the teaching of grammar are predicated on the be- liefs that language is composed of discrete ea tities and chat the essential characteristics of the entities (eg. the rules for their formation) ‘an be directly imparted to the learner: "For pur poses of ‘teaching’ language form, it would seem, one has (0 “get a handle’ on something and the most natural kind of thing to wy to "grasp" in this way is a solid, stable, fixed piece of the total language product—something with edges to it... in other words, a language com- struct” (p. 56). There are many teachers, however, who have ‘grown wary of traditional, teacher-centered approach to explicit grammar instruction. Re- Jecting the traditional belief that grammar is ‘acquired through an explicit examination of a rule followed by application of the rule in the form of 2 mechanical drill, many teachers have ‘opted instead for a so-called comprehension: based pedagogy in which students come to kknow the grammar through exposure to “com: prehensible ipuc” (Krashen, 1982). Although comprehension-based approaches to instruc- tion may vary greatly in how instructors attempt to render the input comprehensible, they are similar in their reduced emphasis on formal grammatical analysis. Consequently, compre- hension-based approaches are often described as shifting the pedagogical focus from form 19 ‘meaning. Today, che terms “focus on form” and “focus on meaning” are frequently understood as a shorthand for two competing ideologies within the foreign language teaching prafes- sion, the 10 extremes of an ongoing debate over the efficacy of grammar instruction. Un- fortunately, the competing camps and the de- bate itself promote a dichotomous conception ‘of grammar instruction a8 described by Connor (0992) (On the one hand, we have concentrated on linguls- tie form with explicit instruction in grarsmar rks a the level of individual, decomtextualized sem tences, accompanied by some drill oflearned forms and by the fervent hope that these forms would prove accessible ifthe student found himself in a true, communicative situation, On the other hand) spurning traditional grammar instruction as ive. vant to acquisition, we have endeavored vo offer ‘comprehensible input and guidance in the some wat inscrutable ar of communicative competete all she white hoping that comprehensible, prof ‘ent output would emerge. (p31)Language Journat &1 (1997) uuage instruction as “the es" (p.17), According to nal approaches to the are predicated on the be- ‘omposed of discrete em sential characteristics of ules for their formation) 110 the learner: “For pur anguage form, it would ‘a handle’ on something, und of thing to try to solid, stable, fixed piece sroduct—something with sr words, a language co: thers, however, who have tional, teacher-centered, rammar instruction. Re belief that grammar is _xplicit examination of a cation of the rule in the drill, many teachers have o-called comprehension- shich students come to ‘ough exposure to “com srashen, 1982), Although, approaches (o instruc 1 how instructors attempt ‘omprehensible, they are .ed emphasis on formal Consequently, compre- thes are often described gical focus from form to ms "focus on form” and + frequently understood as competing ideologies aguage teaching profes- 's of an ongoing debate rammar instruction. Un- cting camps and the de- dichotomous conception n.as described by Connor ave concentrated on lingwi= satruesion in grammar Fules lua, decontextwalized sen some drill oflearned forms pe that these forme would student found himself ia a tuation. On the other hand, amar instrtion a ierele- hase endeavored to offer and guidance in the some: communicative competence, hat comprehensible, profi erge. (p31) Seige. = Cari Blyth RECONCEPTUALIZING GRAMMAR TEACHING VanPatten and Cadierno (1993) claim that the debate between traditional and nomradi- tional approaches to grammar misses the point. ‘The question is not whether grammar should bbe taught, but haw it should be taught. Before teachers can address this important question, they must understand the complexity and hec- erogeneicy of grammatical concepts. The either Jor approach to grammar instruction—cither you teach itor you don’t—indicates a profound misconception of grammar as a monolithic and homogeneous phenomenon, either wholly am- enable to instruction or not amenable at al. Rather, a pedagogical grammar is more profita: aly conceived of as a heterogeneous group of linguistic and psychological phenomena that ‘may be amenable to formal instruction, but to varying degrees and in varying ways. Such a conception of grammar would require teachers to determine more thoughsfully how grammar should be caught, including which grammatical phenomena “respond best to form-focused in- struction, and which will be acquired without explicit focus if learners have adequate expo- sure to the language” (Lightbown & Spada, 1998, p, 96). In order to construct a more effective gram- ‘mar pedagogy, teachers must first address the deleterious effects of their traditional concep tion of grammar instruction as an accumula: ‘ion of entities. Although such an approach has certain heuristic appeal, it ultimately conceals the dynamic relationship between grammar and the mind. Garrett (1986) argues that the perennial debate concerning explicit grammar instruction rarely addresses the crucial ques- tion of the psychological status of linguistic rules: ‘When we complain that teaching students grammar rules does not enable them to communicate, we fly confirm what linguistic theory has implied all Along: the rules which describe the system attested toby competence are abstract descriptive generat ations that do not per se describe the mental proc 88 by which a speaker formulates or comprehend any particular duerance. (p. 188) Garrett advocates a protesting approach to grammar instruction and argues for the rele- Vance of psycholinguistic theory to pedagogical Praxis. Similarly, Rutherford (1987) calls for a Drocess-oriented conceptalzation of grammar— rammar as “a mental strategy for the process ing of discourse” (p. 153). 53 Based on studies of put processing, the cog nitive procestes that learners employ to com- prehend meaning-bearing input, VanPatten (0996) suggests that instruction be based on “seructured input activities in which learners are given the opportunity to process form inthe input in a ‘controlled situation s0 that beter form-meaning connections might happen com pared with what might happen in less con- trolled situations" (p60). "Structured input" the centerpiece of what VanPatten refers (0 a8 “processing instruction,” an approach to gram: smat instruction that combines 2 traditional focus on form wich comprehensible mput in an attempt to “alter the processing strategies that learners take tothe task of comprehension and to encourage them to make better form- meaning connections than they would if lft to their own devices” (p. 60). OBSTACLES TO INNOVATION IN GRAMMAR TEACHING ‘What would happen if teacher education pro- {grams took the suggestions of Garrett, Ruther. ford, and VanPatten seriously and attezpced to promote a more process-oriented grammar in scruction? Unfortunately, current textbooks and current models of teacher education often hinder rather than promote pedagogical inno- vation. Ts such an approach to grammar even feasible given current textbooks? How much can an inexperienced teacher be expected to each against” a traditional textbook? Further- ‘more, can teacher educators reasonably expect inexperienced teachers to adopt an approach to grammar instruction that they have never ex- perienced themselves? What would it take to convince teachers of the efficacy and appto- priateness of a more learner-centered, process- oriented approach to grammar instructio ‘What obstacles prevent the adoption of innova- tive ways to teach aspect? Textbooks as Olstacles Hubbard (1994) claims that the conception and presentation of pedagogical grammar has remained virtually unchanged for centuries, Replacing a static conception of grammar with a more dynamic one will not be easy given the current treatment of grammar in textbooks: a brief grammar explanation followed by a se. quence of formfocused drills. Textbooks have a particularly strong influence on inexperienced teachers, shaping their teaching practices andcy even their beliefs about language learning. Of- ten an inexperienced teacher's metalinguistic knowledge is simply a reflection of the tex: book's grammatical explanations, Insecure about their grammatical knowledge, inex- perienced teachers tend to view linguistic rules as the business of the professional linguist and not of the practitioner. As a consequence, they accept the textbook's rules at face value, rarely ‘examining the criteria used in their formula tion: clarity, simplicity, predictive value, con ceptual parsimony, and relevance (Westney, 1904, p. 72). Hubbard (1994) notes, however, that the few recent improvements to pedagogi ceal grammars have come primarily from lan- {guage teachers rather than from theoretical lin- Buists (p. 49) Many textbooks not only present grammar ac- cording to Paulston's outdated taxonomy of drills but frequently contain highly misleading and, at times, inaccurate grammatical informa: tion, For example, Herschensohn (1988) found that in many firstyear French textbooks, dis- course phenomena, such as the choice of defi nite and indefinite articles, were routinely ex- plained in sentential terms. Another common problem with textbooks is the confusion be- tween the separate but related grammatical cat egories of tense and aspect. Garrett (1986) notes that traditional labels used in textbooks to discuss aspect are “seriously misleading as explanations, sometimes actually wrong.” She cites the example of the verb forms “imperfect” and “present perfect” which are said “to repre- sent different tenses, but infact they distinguish aspect” (p. M40) Textbook explanations of aspect may be problematic for an inexperienced teacher, yet they present even greater problems for the lin guistically naive student. For example, Dan- sereau (1987) blames “vague, incomplete, con tradictory, and generally poor explanations found in most beginning textbooks” (p. 35) for much of the confusion surrounding aspectual choice. The most serious problem with text- book explanations, Dansereau argues, is that they are exception-ridden. “Leaky rules” are a common problem in grammatical analysis, es: pecially in pedagogical grammars, which are ill: Suited to capturing the variability inherent in language performance.® In this regard, Westney (994) distinguishes between low-level rules of formation and high-level rules of use, Low-level rules present few problems for the learner be- ‘cause they are axiomatic—easy to understand, ‘easy to apply. By contrast, high-level rules de The Modern Language journal 81 (1997) scribing aspectual choice are essentially proba bilistic statements that prove difficult, fnot im possible, to apply in any principled way. Ic can be frustrating for both student and teacher alike to try to apply aspectual rules that are based on descriptive terms such as “con: tinuing event,” “durative event,” “punctual event,” “single event,” “repeated event,” and so forth, Dansereau (1987) argues that textbook rules based on thete descriptive terms often have trouble accounting for even ordinary sen tences such as the following: 1, Lew a rigné pendant soixante ans. (The king reigned (preterit) for sixty years.) 2. A hut heures, ylais dans mon lure. (At eight o'clock, I was (imperfect) in my office.) 3. Met souvent ven me vor (He often came (preterit) to see me.) 4. Cet i, ine mangeait que deus fois par jour (That summer, he only ate (imperfect) two times a day.) (p. 34-5) When encountering sentence 1, the student wonders why an event that continued for sixty years is encoded in the preterit and not the im- perfect, since the imperfect is prescribed for durative or continuing events, In sentence 2, the student puzzles over the use of the imper- fect, which is supposedly reser ed for situations without any reference to an exact moment of time, In sentence 8, the student finds the pret erit used with an event repeated an indetermi: nate number of times (“often”) even though the textbook rule states that the preterit encodes an event repeated a determinate number of times, In sentence 4, the imperfect is used even though the number of times is clearly stated ("two times a day"), a contradiction of the text book rule prescribing the imperfect for an event repeated an indeterminate number of times. Dansereau (1987) concludes from these ‘examples that the traditional descriptive termi: nology dooms the student “to confusion, frus tration, and incorrect usage” (p. 37) An even more serious charge is leveled by Garrett (1986) who claims that a traditional presentation of rules found in most textbooks “hinders not only students’ direct processing of meaning but even their realization of how such processing might be undertaken” (p. 142). In ‘other words, extbook rules often lead students to draw the wrong conclusions about how aspec- ‘ual meaning maps onto linguistic form in the minds of native speakers. For example, Dan- sereaut (1987) notes that the use of the termsfad Language Joel 811987 a choice are essentially sentially proba iat prove dificult Yin any principled way, ating for both student and £y C0 apply aspectual rules the scriptive terms such as “con uratve event,” "punctt en" “repeated event” and (4887) argues that textbook hese descriptive term oftes runing for even ordinary see » following: - penn anton fed (preter) for sy years i@ais dans mon bureau. ins och Tvs Timpete) in ny ne (preterit) 1 see me.) mangeait que deve fois par jour she only ate (impertect) two 34-5) ng sentence I, the student tne that continued for say the preterit and notte me imperfect is prescribed for sing event In semence over the Use ofthe Imper sel reserved for swat Xe to an exact moment of the staden finde the pret ent repeated an interns 5 often") even though he thatthe prwrtereobeee erminate number of tases imperfect is used even of tines is clearly wated 2 contradietion of the text ing the imperfec for an determinate number of 87) conchides from these Sitional descriptive erm sdent “Co confusion, us Usage” (p37) ious charge is leveled by claims that a traditional found in most textbooks let dretproceaing of \Freazation of bow sh Udertaken” (p12) In Tule fen ead dent clusions about how aspec wo ings Form in the tes. For example, Dare tat the use of the terme Cari Blyth a re af an event with grammatical ‘Racker Education Programs as Obstacles 1k seems ironic that teacher education pro- rams may actualy prove 6 be obstacles to sub- santive pedagogical change. Bu itis never an cary task to convince teachers to adopt new practices and, given the constraints imposed on many teacher education programs, profound change is often unrealistic, Because of institu: tional pressures, those involved in university language program direction feel obliged to focus methods courses on the immediate needs and concerns of the institution rather than on long-term professional development af TAS (Gorell & Cubillos, 1993; Fons, 1993). Thus, “teacher education” frequently becomes "teacher ‘raining’ with little time devoted to a critical valuation of teaching practices and the devel opment of more “imaginative or sophisticated Ses of being language teachers” (Marks, 1993, P.3) Kinginger (1995) claims that two common ‘models of teacher education—the craft made! and the applied science model—are poorly Suited to engendering lasting pedagogical change because they lack the necessary ele- ments of personal experience and reflection: “the craft model ... emphasizes imitation and emulation of the experts professional wisdom, and the appliad sence model... focuses on a rofession’s received knowledge, ‘the facts! ‘be found in journals, textbooks—and courses on education” (p. 125). The craft model of teacher education is essentially atheoretical 55 “Teaching is understood to be analogous to skilled activity in general; it develops primarily through practice and exposure to the activity of experts” (Kinginger, 1995, p. 125). For TAs who hold a reductionist view of teaching as a set of techniques to be mastered, the craft model is ‘often preferred for its perceived practicality. In the craft model, TAs apprenticing with master teachers are encouraged to follow demon strated teaching practices as closely as possible. Kaplan's (1993) autobiographical account of her own professional development as a French TA learning the “standard rites of pedagogy” provides a good example of several specific practices designed to teach the difference be- ‘ween che passé composé and the imparfait ‘You learn to draw a time line. You go wp to the blackboard, and it's dramatie, and you say, “this the imperfect: the imperfect is for description; is for events that haven't finighed,” The time it akes to sy this isjust about the time ic takes to drag your chalk line, slow all dhe way across the bosed. You pick up your chalk and you explain, hist in hand, that the imperfect is use! to describe feelings, states of being: i's used tp describe background, fandscape, and ongoing thoughts. All sorts of things with no definite beginning and end. Then you pause, take hold of your chalk plece like a treapon, and you stab that blackboard line atone point, then at another, This isthe passé compose, this staccato: & point on the imperfect line of expe rience, a discrete action in the past with a begin ‘ing and an end that you can name. (p. 42) One of the major problems with the craft ‘model is that the TA may learn how to perform such rituals flawlessly although never gaining ‘an understanding of their motivation. In the cease of the practices described by Kaplan, inex- perienced teachers rarely stop to consider why aspect is typically represented in visual mne- monies while most grammar points are ex. plained primarily in words. Since the role of the apprentice isto imitate practice not critique i the craft model does little to promote a critical evaluation of pedagogy. As a consequence, the craft model, when employed by itself as the basis for teacher education, actually reinforces pedagogical tradition by passing on long-held yet unexamined practices ‘The craft model by itself also fails to provide ‘TAs with important pedagogical content know! edge about linguistic structure and language learning. A recent survey of graduate TAS in French at various universities found that TAs generally lacked important metalinguistic Knowledge despite a strong emphasis on gram-56 ‘matical analysis throughout their own language learning experience (Fox, 1998). In particular, Fox's survey revealed that the model of lan- guage with which TAs begin their careers ig: ores discourse competence as a distinct Jeve! of grammatical organization. As a result, TAS are prone to conceive of grammar as comprised of distinct entities that are adequately de- scribed at a sentential level. The results of Fox's finding have particularly disturbing implica tions for the teaching of aspect: Despice years of traditional grammar instruction, TAs are often ‘unable to give a succinct and coherent explana: tion of aspect because they lack an understand- ing of its discourse basis. To fill che knowledge ‘gap, Fox suggests that TAs receive an introduc tion to linguistic description of the target lan~ Buage as part of their methods course in order to raise their awareness about grammatical phe- ‘nomena governed by discourse principles. Scholars have recently called for TA training programs to include a greater emphasis om sec- fond language acquisition theory and applied linguistic research (Fox, 1992, 1993; Rankin, 1994). In an effort to introduce TAs to the latest theoretical research and its implications for classroom practice, some educators adopt a ver. sion of the applied science model. Kinginger refers to chis model as top-down since teachers are envisioned as the consumers of research Produced by a group of experts, Unfortunately, ‘methods courses based on the applied science ‘model tend to reinforce the gap between theory and practice in the minds of many teachers wha Frequently judge such courses as too theoretical and therefore too impractical. More important, the suggested pedagogical applications of the esearch go unheeded because the TAS are ‘given litle, if any, practical experience A CONSTRUCTIVIST APPROACH ‘TO TA EDUCATION Kinginger (1995), following Wallace (199), uses the term reflective practitioner to charac terize the ideal teacher who integrates research, theory, and practical experiences through in: formed, critical reflection. This synthesis of dif ferent ways of knowing is central toa constructiv ist approach to learning. Implementing more effective ways to ceach grammar requires teacher education programs to do more than simply provide models to be emulated (the erafi model) and research to be applied (the applied Science model). Rather, the key to persuading ‘TAs to adopt a grammar pedagogy consonant The Modern Language journal 81 (1997) with current research is to challenge their tradi tional beliefs about the nature of grammar— what grammar is and how itis learned. A con structivist approach is particularly appropriate for TA education in this regard because it allows TAs to acquire essential linguistic and ped- agogical content knowledge—the technical facts—as well as an awareness of their own be- liefs about foreign language learning. Fosnot (1996e) argues that the primary goal of a con- structivist approach to teacher education is to facilitate new ways of knowing: If understanding the teaching/learning process from a constructivist view Is itself constructed, and if teachers tend 10 teach 25 they were taught, rather than at they were aught to teach, then teacher ed cation needs to begin with these traditional beliefs and subsequently challenge them through activity, Tefleetion, and discourse in both coursework and field work dhrough the duration of the program Most importantly, participants need experiences st earners that confront waditional views of teaching and earning inorder to enable them to conteruct ‘pedagogy that stands in contrat to older, more ta ‘itionaly held views. (P- 206) If personal experience ultimately plays the ‘most imporeant role in facilitating change in a teacher’ practices, then instead of being told about practices, TAs should directly experience teaching practices. Rather than observe a mas ter instructor who demonstrates practices on other stucents, TAs should experience new practices as a learner would. Thus, TA educa- tors should demonstrate a given practice on the ‘TAs themselves who in turn come to understand the practice from the learner's perspective, Fi- nally, TAs must be given the opportunity to re- flect on their experiences as learners. The goal is to help TAs integrate the scientific “facts” concerning aspect with their personal experi- ences through a period of critical reflection (Wallace, 1991), ‘TEACHING TAs ABOUT ASPECT In order to construct practices that more ef fectively aid students in their understanding of aspectual choice, TAs must have a clear under standing of aspectual phenomena including the conceptual knowledge underlying linguistic performance, To gain a more thorough under- standing of the relationship of aspect to cogni: tion, TAs benefit from a review of three related research areas: studies of L2 acquisition, cogni- tive linguists, and gestalt visual perception. Although technical knowledge is essential for thesm Language journal 81 (1997) nis tochallenge their tradi- the nature of grammar— id how it is learned, A con: is particularly appropriate this regard because itallows ential linguistic and ped: nowledge—the technical awareness of their own be- language learning. Fosnot the primary goal of a con- 10 teacher education is 10 of knowing: 1 teaching/learning process Criew is itself constructed, and ach as chey were taught, rather ight to Leach then teacher edo ‘with these traditional belies lllenge them through activity, curse in both coursework and the duration of the program, urtcipants need experiences at st traditional views of teaching to enable them to construct a sin contrast to older, more tra (9.208) ‘ence ultimately plays the in facilitating change in a then instead of being told should directly experience Rather than observe amas: , ‘demonstrates practices on should experience new ce would. Thus, TA educa- rate a given practice on the im turn come to understand ve learner's perspective. Fi- sven the opportunity to re ‘ences as learners. The goal grate the scientific “facts” sith their personal experi- stiod of critical reflection ROUT ASPECT ‘uct practices that more ef sin their understanding of 's must have a clear under- phenomena including the ge underlying linguistic in'a more thorough under ‘ionship of aspect to cogni vin a review of three related es of L2 acquisition, cogni ‘gestalt visual perception: narwledge is essential for the 4 Cat Bisth ‘construction of effective grammar instruction, ‘TA educators must keep in mind that appren- tice teachers are unlikely to adopt. given prac- tice based solely on a review of research find ings, however pertinent they may be. Thus, the resentation of basic linguistic knowledge Ffould be seen asa preliminary stage in foreign Tanguage teacher development, a means to an end. ‘Aspect in Second Language Acquisition Research TAs routinely confuse aspect with tense. ‘Therefore, a discussion of aspect should begin ay distinguishing these two grammatical cate gories. Tense is the grammatical category com- monly used in linguistic analysis to refer to the vway a language encodes the time at which an action denoted by a verb takes place. Thus, tense is concerned with situating events in ref erence to other events, in other words, with or- dering events along a timeline. Aspect, on the ‘other hand, is not concerned with temporal points of reference, but rather with the “differ- ‘ent ways of viewing the internal temporal con- stiguency of a situation” (Comrie, 1976, p. 3). In most approaches to aspect, the differences be tween the perfective aspect and imperfective aspect are explained in terms of the speaker's penpective. Perfective aspect is equated with an external perspective from which the speaker perceives the event as a self-contained whole From such an external perspective, one may ‘envision an event's boundaries or outlines~its beginning and end. In contrast, imperfective aspect reflects a situation as seen from an internal perspective; the speaker views the situa tion from within and is unable to distinguish temporal boundaries. « TAs need to understand that students who confuse inherent Jexieal agpect (he. the incrin- sic nature of an event) with grammatical aspect hhave posited an incorreet hypothesis about the ‘morphological system of the target language: the passé compost/preério tense encodes actions and the imparfail/imperfeco tense encodes states ‘This hypothesis is widely atested in early stages of interlanguage development and is known as the Defective Tense Hypothesis following Weist etal. 0964) because verb “tense” morphology Jnot used to encode tense or grammatical as ect, but rather inherent lexical aspect (An- dersen, 1990, p. 307).° Based on studies of Span: ish interlanguage, Andersen (1990) claims that learners pass through stages in the acquisition ‘ofthe Spanish tense/aspect systems learners fist 87 use present tense, then pret and finally imper- {eeta® Andersen’ notes, however, that when learners of Spanish first begin to employ the pret crit and the imperfect, they do so according to inherent lexical aspect and prototypicality, using the pretéito for prototypical punctual events and the imperfecto for prototypical states. A prototype is identified by a set of charac- teristic features, which define it as the best ex- emplar of its category. For example, events may be characterized by three semantic features as seen in Table 1: dynamic, telic, and punctual. A dynamic event requires some energy to sustain its a telic event deseribes an activity with a clear terminal point; and a punctual event is instan- taneous or momentary. TABLE 1 Semantic Feature Analysis of Events wo pam to Ihave run _a picture recognize puncual =~ = 5 telic = 6 + + dynamic = + + + [Nate From Anderson, 1990, pp. 310-31. Based on these three features, events can be arranged along a continuum. On one end of the continuum, “to have” possesses none of the rel evant semantic features while at the opposite end, “to recognize” possesses all three features. Andersen's claim is that the usage of the prerito in second language learning spreads from situa tions characterized by all three semantic fear tures ("to recognize”) to situations charac- terized by two features (“to paint a picture”), then to situations characterized by onl one fea. ture ("to run”), and finally, at a relatively ad: vanced stage, to situations characterized by none of the relevant features ("to have"). In 2 similar fashion, the marking of the imperfetobe- gins with situations lacking all three semantic features and spreads in the opposite direction, ‘eventually to situations possessing all three fea. tures. Thus, the two maximally differentiated ‘events in Table 1—"to have” and “to recognize’— are prototypes of the learner's incipient aspec- tual categories—imperfcio and pretirta, ‘Andersen's (1993) finding concerning Spanish L2 discourse is reflective of the discourse of na: tive Spanish speakers as wel. Fully proficient nax tive speakers exhibit a similar distributional bias in the classes of verbs to which they attach pret crit and imperfect verbal inflections. For exam- ple, there is a much higher frequency of imper-58 fect than preterit usage with stative verbs and there isa much higher frequency of preterit use than imperfect use with punctual verbs. TAS must understand that statistical properties of language performance are caused by a speaker's underlying conceptual knowledge. Any attempt to explain perfectivity and imperfectivity in terms of correlations with verb classes in the speech of native speakers (a common practice of many TAs) ultimately confuses cause with effect. Aspect in Cogriloe Linguitic Research The challenge for any pedagogical grammar of aspect is to capture a speaker's underlying conceptual knowledge of events or situations in a rule whose usage is clear, simple, and highly pre dictable. Capturing these abstractions in a ped agogical rule that proves comprehensible to st dents requires “a radical reformulation of our notion of grammar and of the operation of grammatical concepts . .." (Garrett, 1986, p. 145), Fortunately for language teachers, the outlines of such a reformulation already exist in cognitive functionalist grammars, The cognitve- fumtetionatist approach reflects a shift from the prevailing conception of linguistic knowledge characterized by Chomskyan competence as for- mal, abstract, and modular toward a conception Of language as the reflection of buman con sciousness (Bolinger, 1977; Chafe, 1998; Faucon- nier, 1985; Foley & Van Valin, 1984; Givén, 1984, 1989; Haiman, 1985; Hopper & Thompson, 1980: Lakoff, 1987; Lambrecht, 1994; Langacker, 1987, 1991; Wierzbicka, 1988}. Neither a standard nor a formalized linguistic theory, the cognitive-fune Lionalist approach is characterized by the follow- ing premises: (a) languages are systems primarily used for communication, (>) linguistic forms are best studied in terms oftheir semantic and prag ‘matic functions, and (€) acwal language use consists of multipropositional speech whose ‘organization is guided by discourse principles (Cooreman & Kilborn, 1990; Tomlin, 1994), In general, cognitive functionalist approaches 10 language attempt 10 determine the semantic or pragmatic conditions that lead 10 the selection of aliernative grammatical structures such as the perfective and the imperfective aspect. Tomlin (21994) claims that such an approach to grammar is consonant with the basic assumptions of com- muicative language teaching, Scholars working within this framework theo: Fie that language structure is directly associ ated with concepiwal structure, which in tara reflects scenes hasic human experience, Gon ‘The Modern Language Journal 81 (1997) sequently, a cognitive grammar takes the speaker's perception of events as the natural point of departure for explaining aspectual choice: “Within this framework, meanings are defined relative to conceptual domains, partic ular linguistic choices are often found to hinge upon the vantage point from which a given stu ation is viewed, and category boundaries are seen a8 fluctuating and dependent on, among ‘other things, the conceptualizer's experience or purpose” (Rudzka-Ostyn, 1988, p. ix).7 Lan: sgacker (1987) argues that experiences that are basic, recurrent, and sharply differentiated hhave a special perceptual saliency and as a con: sequence emerge as “archetypes.” Goldberg (01995) notes that these archetypes are first equated with prototypes and then are extended beyond the original prototypical values. An dersen’s (1990) findings about Spanish inter- language, that prototypical uses of the preterit and imperfect are learned before their less pro: totypical uses, is thus in keeping with the basic claims of cognitive linguistics, Aspect in Visual Perception Research Why do aspectual distinctions lend them- selves to a visual representation? How does the visual representation of a grammar rule help or hinder the learning of that rule? What is the semiotic relationship beween Kaplan's lines and dashes drawn on the blackboard and the concepts of perfectivity and imperfectivity? Vie wally every discussion of aspect invokes meta pphors of visual perception (Andrews, 1992; Con ‘nor, 1992; Fleischman, 1990; Lunn, 1985; Ozete, 1988; Paproue, 1988; Terry, 1981; Thogmartin, 1984). And in cognitive linguistic theory, “the existence and comprehensibility of metaphors linking aspect and perception are meant to be taken as evidence that the aspectperception Tink is real” (Lunn, 1985, p. 52). Some of the strongest evidence for the reality ofthe link be- tween aspect and perception is described by Rein hhart (1984) who claims that narrative strucwwre isan artifact of visual perception: narrative] organization ea temporal extension ifthe peiacpies goncening the spat! Organinatee fof the Ns Field to round, proposed by the gestalt theory, and |, J there ina sing correlation beeen the perceptial eviterin det ining dhe Figure al hone determining she ara five fee. cp. 79) Andersen (1993) makes « similar claint in his ‘explanation of the distributional bias of verbal inflections in Spanish interlanguage discourseModern Language Journal 81 (gop ognitive grammar takes the ~ tion of events as the atu ture for explaining aspeciual this framework, meanings are to conceptual domains, partic: vices are often found to hinge © point from which agiven sige, and category boundisies are ng and dependent on, among conceptualizer's experience ot ka-Ostyn, 1988, p. ix)? La gues that experiences that are and sharply differentiated reeptual saliency and asa con € as “archetypes.” Goldberg these archetypes are hk types and then are extended nal prototypical values. An- indings about Spanish inter. torypical uses of the preterit.“ learned before their less pro- hus in keeping with the basic c linguistics, ® veption Research nal distinctions lend them. retention? How does the on of a grammar rule help oF 2 of that rule? What isthe.“ hip between Kaplan's lines on the blackboard and the ivity and imperfectivity? Vir ion of aspect invokes meta eption (Andrews, 1992; Con. 1n, 1990; Lunn, 1985; Ozete, 8; Terry, 1981; Thogmartin, itive linguistic theory, “the wehensibility of metaphors rrception are meant io be at the aspectperception 1985, p52) Some Othe OF the reality ofthe link be- *ption is described by Rein ns that narrative structure ! perception: zation is temporal extension ing the spatial organization figureand ground, proposed, and (there isa sriking toe perceptual criteria deter, {tosedetemining the nar © a similar claim in his tributional bias of verbal | interlanguage discourse: a Bh he percepual ystems of humans and other ani MM ttow or perhaps ne might sy force us vo ds Tngush an important or foregrounded entity or ‘fen from ll ofthe unimportant or les important Sims. According to this base notion of dist ishing igure from groin, we woul 3) that he ftner perceives he punctal or cc ever as key tmp orground, and lear o mark them a faa ard to not mark the background evens or Seoaions. (328) Reinhart’s and Andersen's basic claim is that some experiences are perceptually more salient than others. These salient events are conceived of in terms of a foreground that stands out against 2 background of less salient, out-of- focus events. In gestalt theory, visual perception of a figure defined as “an intuitive notion of recognizable form,” depends on the relevant. background (Paproué, 1988, p. 458). In other words, we are able to recognize a figure or per- ceive 2 form because the backgrouind enables it tostand out. The functional dependency of the figure on the ground may be conceived of like a black dot on a computer screen. As one black- fens the screen, the dot becomes less and less perceptible, eventually disappearing altogether {nto the background, Following Labov (1972), Reinhart equates the foregrounded events of a narrative with the se quence of chronologically ordered main clauses encoded in perfective aspect, the so-called back- bone or plotline of the story’ In essence, all nar raves depend on perfeciive events to advance the plot. In contrast, backgrounded clauses in the imperfective aspect do net advance the plot since they are not temporally erdered and may be displaced within the text without changing the temporal order of the story. Reinhart argues that the three criteria of foregrounded events— sequentiality, punctuality, and perfectivity—are related to principles of gestalt perception of the figure, For example, the criterion of temporal Sequentiality finds a spatial analogue in the ge- stalt principle of good continuity. This principle states that we organize shapes according to con: tours and that continuous contours are given highest priority in visual perception. In Figure I, wwe see a white stripe on black stripes rather than four black figures, since the white stripe is the continuous shape. Similarly, events that are tem- Porally sequenced are easy to identify on the ‘rounds of good continuity. This phenomenon, the perception of sequential events in terms of a continuous contour, is apparent in the plotline and backbone metaphors so common to discus sions of narrative. 59 [Figures 1 through § are from Principles of Gestalt Payhology by Kurt Koftka, copyright 1985 by Harcourt Brace & Company and renewed in 1963 by Elizabeth Koftka, reproduced by per mission of the publisher.) IGURE 1 ‘ontinuous Contours/Privleged Interpretation According to gestalt theory, smaller areas are perceived more readily as figures and larger areas are perceived more readily as back- ground. The temporal equivalent of spatial size is the duration of an event, Punctual events are temporally smaller and are therefore readily perceived as figures against the temporally larger durative event. In Figure 2, the image is ambiguous because the black and white areas are approximately the same size. Is it a black ‘cross on a white background or vice versa? The ‘mind readily entertains both interpretations, FIGURE 2 Ambiguous Figure Ground Relationship In Figure 3, however, the mind entertains only one interpretation—a smaller white cross (the figure) is distinguished from a larger black background FIGURE 3 ‘Unambiguous Figure/Ground Rel jonship ciple of size is related to the princi- The pi ple of closure, wh enclosed an area is, the more itis figure-like Note that completed or perfective evens are hh states that the more60 bounded or closed on both ends (their begin- ning and ends are infocus). In Figure 4, we see three thin figures and a remaining line al- though other interpretations are possible (€.., three thick figures). FIGURE 4 Ambiguous Partially Bounded Figures I ‘When the space is more fully enclosed as in Figure 5, the ambiguity is eliminated; we see only three rectangular figures with one remain- ing bracket on the far left. FIGURE 5 ‘Unambiguous Fully Bounded Figure CW ‘TEACHING TAs TO TEACH ASPECT ‘The review of pertinent retearch on aspect should help TAs gain a better understanding of the link between a speaker's subjective percep- tion of events and his or her aspectual choices. My ultimate goal as a TA educator, however, is to help the TA translate the newly acquired technical understanding of aspect into teaching Practice. In order to accomplish this, appren- tice teachers must be allowed to raise their own questions about the instruction of aspect and to test their own hypotheses about whae i and is not an effective practice. In keeping with acon- structivist approach to TA education, my role is ‘ot so much to teach teachers how to teach as ect, but rather to facilitate and guide TAs's ‘own construction of teaching practices. Disequilibrium and Reflective Abstraction I begin my lessons on the instruction of as pect by challenging the TAs's received wisdom concerning the preterit/impertect distinction (disequilibrium facilitates learning). Recalling Dansereau's (1987) critique of textbook expla- nations of aspect, I give counterexamples 10 ev ery so-called usage rule that the TAs are able to formulate. With their received wisdom fully un- balanced (disequilibrium), TAs naturally seek ‘The Modern Language Journal 81 (1997) to restore that balance and are ready to enter- tain alternative approaches to explaining 28 pectual choice. Through a series of experience- based activites followed by personal reflection (Feflective abstraction is the diving force of learning), I help TAs understand how gram- matical form is linked to aspectual meaning, introduce the TAs 0 a technique deseribed in Connor (1992), which extends “already estab- lished, discourselevel notions of aspecnual com trast based on plot versus background (Dan- sereau, 1987; Thogmartin, 1984 ) or intrigue vs. ari plan by rendering such notions concrete through visualization” (p. $28). The greatest ad- vantage of this technique is that it reduces the various contradictory rules found in most text ‘books into “one concrete, visualizable template in which figure vs. ground equals plot vs. back: ground equals (preterit) vs, [imperfect)”(p. 325. Beginning foreign language students typ- ically decide between the two competing past tenses hased on the most immediate of con- texts, the inherent aspect of the verb, thereby ignoring the larger narrative discourse (Garefa ‘van Putte, 1986). TAS can distinguish an inap- propriate or infelicitous aspectual choice, but nevertheless have difficulty explaining its inap- propriateness or inflicity due to their lack of a transparent metalanguage and to their limited understanding of the role of the preterit and the imperfect in the construction of a narrative text. To overcome thete problems, f discuss the preterit and imperfect tenses with TAs almost exclusively in terms ofthe role these aspectual categories play in creating the foreground/ Dackground structure of narrative. This rela tively simple distinction is easily demonstrated by asking 2 TA o give a plot summary ofa film (preferably a mystery. With the plotline events written on the board, TAs soon understand that the temporal sequence of events implies causal ity and that a change in the chronology of events would lead 1oachange in the meaning of the story, sometimes destroying the story's co- herence altogether. Establishing the actual order ofthe events is of utmost importance to the plot of any mystery. 1m order to contrast the sequentiatty of fore ground events to the nonsequentiality of back- ground events, Ihave TAs read short newspaper articles about recent crimes oF accidents, Not only is this type of text characterized by a straight forward plotline, but it also includes crucial sipporting information (e.., the driver was drunk at the time ofthe accidents the burg lar was wearing a black ski mask: the assailantLanguage Journal 81 (1997) 1 and are ready to enter- coaches to explaining as ugha series of experience- ‘ed by personal reflection a is the driving force of s understand how gram 4 o aspectual meaning. 1 a technique described in \ extends “already estab- notions of aspectual con- ersus background (Dan. sti, 1984 ) oF intrigues og such notions concrete (p. 328). The greatest ad que is that it reduces the rules found in most text ete, visualizable template vand equals plot vs. back- 1s. imperfect)" (p. $28) language students typ- the two competing past most immediate of con Dect of the verb, thereby rrative discourse (Garcfa vean distinguish an inap- us aspectual choice, but culty explaining its inap- ty due to their lack of a age and to their limited role of the preterit and struction ofa narrative e problems, T discuss the tenses with TAS almost the role these aspects ating the foreground / of narrative. This rela a is easily demonstrated \ plot summary ofa film With the plotine events Assoon understand that of events implies causal in the chronology of ange in the meaning of astroying the story's co stablishing the actual { utmost importance to he sequentiality of fore- onsequentafty of back- Asread short newspaper imes or accidents. Not xt characterized by a ve, but it also includes ‘mation (eg, the driver the accident; the burg ski mask; the assailant Carl Blyth was known to one of his victims, etc.). Visual mnemonic devices are used to further reinforce the narrative functions of the foreground and background (Sharwood Smith, 1988c; Westfall & Foerster, .d.). While reading the stories, TAS must draw an arrow (—») above all verbs that move the plot forward and a circle (O) above all verbs that do not advance the plot. Next, the TAS list the foreground events (e;, the events indicated by an arrow) in chronological order and determine the scope of the background ‘events, Upon reflection, TAs discover that some background events have scope over the entire story, while others have scope over a sequence ‘of events, and stil others have scope over a sin- gle event. TAs also discover during this activity that the wider the scope of a background event, the easier it is to displace the event to other points in the narrative. Dialogue Within « Community of Learners When TAs are proficient at distinguishing background from foreground events in narra- tive, I ask them to remember a personal anee- dote that they would be willing to share in class. ‘While replaying the anecdote in their “mind's eye.” the TAS identify critical moments appear- ing in the foreground of the stream of events. Connor (1992) contends that perceived events are stored in memory as filmike images: clements in the Flmike substrate of mental imag: ery which appeared closer, brighter, clearer, more jn focus in the mind's eye would be matched with plotadvancing events and thus the passé composé (Boyer, 1985) while those elements which appeared ‘Maries, vaguer ... less salient’ (Wallace, 1982, p. 205) would be matched to background states or ‘events and hence, to the imparfit (p. 822) Connor reports that students who use this visu- alization technique significantly increase the accuracy of their usage of the preterit and of the imperfect in oral and written production. AAs soon as TAs have replayed the incident and categorized the events as foreground or back round, they each tell their story to the class in the target language and explain their aspectual choices in terms of discourse structure Although TAs begin to understand the link between aspectual choice and speaker perspec- tive, they may fail to grasp narration ata deeper level. [tis important for TAs to understand that a narrative is the creation of a narrator who intentionally, although largely unconsciously, ‘chooses what to attend to when perceiving che (Ong, 1982, p. 12). a Fleischman (1990) clarifies this point with her definition of narrative event as “a hermeneutic construct for converting an undifferentiated continuum of the raw data of experience, or of, the imagination, into the verbal structures we use to talk about experience: narrative, stories” (p. 99). To make these ideas more concrete, I play a 60-second video clip (a television com mercial with an obvious plotline) and ask the TAs to jot down their own versions of the story. ‘The TAs's narratives are compared and the dif. ferences in narrative structure are noted and analyzed. TAs must justify their aspectual choices to one another using the foreground/ Dackground distinction as well asa visual meta language borrowed from cinematography (close- up, Wide angle shot, outoffocus, etc.) rather than the traditional grammatical terminology. The sharing of viewpoints within the commu: nity of learners helps TAs to see how real world events (here, video events) are perceived by dif ferent narrators and then transposed into sig- nificantly different narratives (diaiogue within a community engenders further thinking), ‘When TAs share with each other their different aspectual choices, they begin to understand why it is possible for students to represent the same ‘events in different ways. Next, I hand out several brief narrative ver. sions of the same 60-second commercial, this time written by native speakers who had previ ously viewed the video clip. When the TAs read the narratives written by native speakers, they have not only seen the narrated events with their own eyes, but they have discussed various ways of grounding these events (ie., packaging the events as either part of the foreground or background). Other video clips are used in the same manner to help the TAs comprehend “the steps by which native speakers express and com- prehend meaning” in narrative discourse (Gar rett, 1986, p. 138). Central Organizing Principles ‘These activities are followed by a period of informed reflection during which TAs are en- couraged to derive general principles about language learning based on their personal ex. periences and their newly acquired scientific knowledge, TAs generally conclude that learn- ers must experience narrative events for them. selves in order to construct the concept of nar- rativity and the correlated concept of aspect. Reflecting on the hypothesis in cognitive lin guisties that the encoding of any event is di-2 rectly linked to the subjective perception of that event, TAs come to realize that the tcach- ing of aspect must be phenomenologically grounded such that percepts of a given event (he impression of the event as perceived by the senses) must be linked to concepts of perfec- tivity and imperfectivity (the abstractions de- rived from specific instances). Taus, by self consciously experiencing the process of narra: tion, TAs naturally develop “central organizing principles” of aspectual choice—the notions of cognitive processing and discourse—that closely reflect Rutherford’s (1987) conceptualization of grammar as “a mental strategy for the proc cessing of discourse.” ‘The quintessentially constructivist view of as- ppect formulated by the TAs themselves contra- dicts long-standing pedagogical practices, most notably the common use of cloze passages to teach aspectual choice to beginning studens. ‘TAs realize that cloze passages and third person narratives are mediated by someone else’s sub- jectivty and thus are inherently problematic. It ‘matters litle that the author is a famous writer and that the passage is from a wellknown work of literature; a cloze passage essentially requires the student to reconstruct the mencal processes of someone else’s mind, to see events through someone else's eyes, tricky task even for native speakers, Forced to fill in the “correct” aspec- tual choice without access to the author's mind (oF to the real life events, students inevitably re- sort to a strategy of playing the probabilities based on inherent lexical aspect and proto- ypicality ("Oh, it’s a stative verb so it must be imperfective.”). As a consequence, the use of cloze passages in beginning language classes unwittingly reinforces the erroneous Defective ‘Tense Hypothesis posited by most beginning language learners. Rather chan cloze passages of fictional narratives or even nonfictional third person accounts of past experience, TAS now understand why first person true narrative representations or personal accounts of lived experience are more transparent for the learner and thus more effective for teaching aspect (Oller, 1993), ‘Another key principle for the teaching of as- pect, which the TAs invariably adopt following a constructionist approach, is the importance of visual input, Ideally, visual information should accompany linguistic input so that learners may establish their own pragmatic mappings be- ‘hecen the visual concepts of figure and ground, the discourse concepts of foreground and back ‘ground, and the grammatical concepts of per- ‘The Modern Language fourna! 81 (1997) fectivity and imperfectivity, Current models of cognition now recognize what language teach: cers have long taken for granted—that a given mental representation is linked to other repre- sentations in the mind in such a way that words are associated with images (Paivio, 1986), Al- though TAs are generally aware of the impor. tant role visval aids play in listening compre. hension and in vocabulary learning, they frequently do not consider the role visual repre- sentations might play in the acquisition of ‘grammatical knowledge. Sharseood Smith (1988b) argues that ". ., maximizing visual representa: tions to accompany, illustrate, and explain lin fuistic items may well improve learning a great deal . . ." (p. 218). This principle contradicts ‘most textbooks’ reliance on written texts to ex cemplify aspectual distinctions. If aspect is based ‘on gestalt principles of visual perception as Rein- hart claims, then learners must sethe events in order to construe the foreground/backgraund relationship between the events in a narrative. This means that the teaching of aspect should make as liberal a use of visual input as possible, and in particular, of films and video. Although recent trends in video and interactive multi ‘media appear promising, the importance of vis- ual input for the acquisition of grammatical concepts remains to be fully explored by most commercial publishing companies, two excep- tions being the videobased programs French In Aaion (Capretz, 1994) and Destinos (1992). CONCLUSION ‘The constructivist approach to TA education advocated in this article is similar 10 the notion of raising grammatical consciousness as expli: ‘cated by Sharwood Smith (1988a) and Ruther ford (1987). In such an approach, all pedagogical materials and teaching practices are properly viewed as aids to learning but never as the ob- jects (0 be learned, an important distinction. “Thus, TAs should not focus exclusively on mem- prizing specific rules and practices during their teacher preparation courses in order to Fepro- duce or perform them later in their classrooms, rather they should strive ta understand the proc. ess by which grammatical forms map onto meanings, To teach aspect, TAs must self- consciously experience narration in order to envision aspect both aa formal system and a process for creating meaning. The development of effective practices and materials for the teaching of aspect requires an understanding of the form /meaning correlations of 2 languagedom Language Journal 81 (1997) “rectivty, Current models of ognize what language tee sn for granted that a get ‘ion is inked to other epee ind in sucha way that wees 1 images (Pavia, 1986) ak znerally aware ofthe impor 48 play in Tening compe vocabulary learning, they consider the rote visual rep, Play in the acquisition op "ge Sharwood Sith (9855) ‘nimizing visa represen illustrate, and explain Cll improve learning a gzen This principle conraios iance on written texts to es stinetions aspects based of visual perception a Ret ters must sete events in ve foreground background n the events in a narrate teaching of aspect should of visual input as posible, filmsand video. Athough tco and loteractve mul sng the importance ef quisition of grammateal te fully explored by mon, og companies, two excep. atased programs Pf Vand Detins (1992) \ppreach to TA education eis sla to the notion consciousness 38 expt ith (1988a) and Ruther- 2pproach al pedagogical f practices are property tng but never asthe ob a irsporcant distinction oes exchsvely on mem. od practices daring thet later in thee classrooms, to understand te proc, scat forms map onto ‘spe, TAY most sel. 2 Yormal sem and a ‘ning. The development 2nd materials for the ‘evan understanding of of #4 7 ee hac 2 ant Beh putemore important ierequres an understand pe srhow native and nonnative speakers per ing Cicvents and then selectively construct 2 eave out oftheir perceptal experiences eacher educators may worry thet TAs will find te cognitive notions discussed here to be (eaavact and too removed from the reales STatastoom practice In responge to sich rea SSnable objections, Rutherford Q9A?) reminds {Crchers and teacher trainers ofthe nature of Tanguage learning shathappensinseone'shen, ay concept are icrmed and tramsmied in what we how a a gouge an abeoknely crull concern foray dtr tal dcpine tat takes the nate ofan fuage tal ls pin of departate And language Etching suche icipine. The sor ame: Change bat lnguage aching iucnded to bring Sout-namey, be earning oa languages one that aatclyexltnale oy ee tins rl etn et eal ord tno how the min scaly we (p 2, empanie assed) teacher educators are serious about helping ‘TAs reconstruct traditional grammar practices slong cognitive lines, then they must accept the inevitable transfusion of psychology into the profession as recognized by Sharwood Smith (09886): “It has become increasingly evident in recent years that what is by convention termed Applied linguistics, in that it has to do with for- ‘ign language learning and instruction, should bbe as much applied psychology as applied lin- uisties...” (p. 206). Lee and VanPatten (1995) observe that de- spite research that calls into question a tradi tional presentation of grammar, most textbooks have changed very litte in the past few decades If we glance at language textbooks (including those that are described as communicative and or profit ciency oriented), it appears that instruetion in {grammar adheres wo several tenets rooted io behav toriem (the beet in reinforcing good habits) and historical inertia (The common argument of “That's the way i's been done for years and years and years"). (p: 90) As long as textbooks remain unchanged, teach- ers will have a hard time changing how they teach grammar. Thus, teacher education pro- grams must clearly demonstrate the benefits of ontraditional materials and practices that are more closely informed by research insights from such allied fields as second language ac- Quisision, psycholinguistics, sociolinguisties, ‘and psychology. More specifically, the challenge is to help apprentice teachers understand the 8 advantages of “an alternative approach to ‘grammar instruction, one which seeks 10 link meaning with structure or form, moves the learner from input to output, and is more learner centered than what we see in traditional grammar instruction” (Lee & VanPatten, 1995, p90). ‘The key to meeting this challenge lies in what ‘our teachers believe about the nature of gram: mar, for without a transformation in teachers’ beliefs about grammar, there will be little change in grammar instruction. A constructiv- ist approach to teacher education is well- suited to instructional reform because it helps teachers deconstruct the traditional concep- tion of grammar and in its place reconstruct a new one, a conception of grammar as a mental process NOTES 2 The term “tense” as commonly used in pedagoyi: cal grammars of French and Spanish is a misnomer fince the relevant distinetion is agpectual and not temporal. See Nehls (1992) for a crosslinguistic anal pais of aspect a it relates to language pedagony. In a report on the Canadian French immersion programs, Harley (1986) noted that students who had. eceived from 1000 to 3500 hours of content instruc: tion had made “minimal progress in marking aspect in the verb in the past” (p. 73) Swain (1985) makes similar observations of French immersion students ‘who continued eo struggle with the correct choice of fente when narrating the events of a story. On she other hand, Ginén (998) argues dhe it ie unrealistic t expect rules based on natural language ‘usage to be categorical (i, without exception): "Cat fegories conform to ther basic definitions in the ma jority of cases, and rules obey their strict descript more likely than not, But where is always a certain amount of mesty residue left, one that does not seem to ft into the eategory/rale in the strictest sense of their definition, This isan old dilemma with cognia: ing and perceiving organisms, having to do with how to process input categorically while allowing for fuzzy edges” (p. 12). One attempt 10 systematze language ‘variation i the variable rue, 2 statinical description (Of the relative influences of factors ivolved ithe production of any given utterance, The variable rile ‘ras originally used for sociolinguistic research but has been extended to the analfis of interlanguage sariabilty (Tarone, 1988), although its peychological Status remains controversial (Gregg, 1990). ‘The lingistc distinction between the terms per fective and imperfective is clarified by their ety- rmologies. The term peréctie comes from the past p= ciple pret of the Latin verb peer (10 40 to64 completion). The modern French infinitive perfaire Sana the modern English infinitive to pret have the fame senge (e-g to make perfect and to complete) ‘Although most English speakers are familiar with the cvaluative sent of the verb, to improse somedhing to the point of perfection, they ae frequently unaware of te second sense intended by Linguists, to do some- thing to the point of completion. * This same hypothesis has been shown to be opera tive in the acquisition of both the LT and L2 verb inflectional stem (Antinucc and Miler, 1976; Brock art and Sinclar 1973; Economides, 1985) as wel as in te evolution of ervole languages (Bickerton, 1975, 1861; Given, 1982), ‘Kaplan (1987) claims an identical developmental sequence for the acquisition of French as a second language from rise! o pase compost to input “For a cognitive linguistic approach to tense and ‘aspect, ee Lunn (1988) and Paprotte (1988) [REFERENCES Anvlersen, R. 1990), Developmental sequences: The ‘emergence of arpect marking in second lan- {guage acquisition, In T. Huebner & C. Fer sguson (Eds), Crosscurents im second language ‘acquisition ond linguistic thors (pp. 305-824) Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Andersen, R. (1998), Four operating principles and Input distribution as explanations for under developed and mature morphological systems. In K.Hiytenstam de. Viberg (Eds), Pgresion and regresion in language: sociocultural, neuro pycholpical and dnguine perspective (pp. $09- 4589), Cambridge: Cambridge University Pres, Andrews, B. (1992) Aspect in patttenaes in English ‘and French. huernaional Reoue of Appil Lingus tis, 30, 281-297, Antinucct, F, &R. Miller. (1976). How chile talk about what happemed. oral of Child Language 3, 169-180, Bickerton, D. 1975), Dynamics of owie sen. Cam ‘bridge: Cambridge University Press, Bickerton, D. (1981). Re of language Ann Arbor, MI: Karoma Publishers. Bolinger, D. (1977). Massing ond orm. London: Long- Boyer, H. (1985). L’économie des temps verbaux dans le discours narratif. Le frangais modern, 53, 73— #9, Bronckart, J.P, AH. Sinclair (1973). Time, tense, and aspect. Gagan, 2 107-239. Capretz, BJ. (with Abetti,A., Germain, M. A. Be Wy Tie, L.) (1994). French in action A ining course fn Tanguage and cule (2nd ed), New Haven, (GT: Vale University Pres. Gazden, C. (1988). Clason discourse The language of teaching and learning Portsmouth, NH: Het zeman Educational Books, Inc, The Modern Langue Jorma 81 (1987) hate, W. (1998). Discur, consciousnas, and tne: The "fos and dslacemen of cnsciou experent in speak ing and writing. Chicago: Chicago University Pres, Clark, C. (1988), Asking the right questions abou \eacher preparation: Contributions of research fom weather thinking. EdwatonalResrrch, 17,5 2, Cohen, D.K.,& Bal, KL. (1990), Policy and practice: ‘An overview. Educational Eveluation and Policy “Analy, 12, 827-348. Comrie, B. (1976), Aspect Cambridge: Cambridge Uni versity Press ‘Connor, M. (1992) A processing strategy using vieual epresentation to convey the passé composé/ |mparfait distinction in French. Inerational Re ue of Appl Lingus, 30, 321-828 Cooremen, A, & Kilborn, K. (1990), Funetionalist in uistce Discourse structure and language proc easing in second language acquisition. In T. Huebner and C. Ferguson (Bs), Cssurrents sveond danguage acquisition and linguistic theris (pp. 195-224), Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins Dansereau, , (1987). A discusion of techniques used In the teaching ofthe passé compose imparfait distinction in French, The French avis, 61, 38 38 Destinos: An Inrsuction to Spanish (1992). Anneberg/ (CPB Callection. Economides, PJ (1985). The expression of nt ad aspect sn the English indevianguagr ofa Vena did Un. published master's thes, UCLA. Fauconaier, G, (1985). Merial yz Aspects of moaning ‘catrucion in natural language Cambridge, MA: MIT Pres. Fieischman, §, (1990). Tense and naratiy: From mal vl performance to mader fiion Austin, TX: Uni Versty of Texas Pres. Foley, W.A., Van Valin, RJ. (1984). Functional stax cand universal grammar. Cambridge: Cambridge University Pres Fosnot, C.T. (1996). Preface. In C.Fosnot (Ed), Gm Suction: Thay peng, and race (pp. ix 1) New York: Teachers Galege Pres. Fornot, CT. (1896b). Constructiviem: A psychological theory of learning. In C. Fosnot (Ed.), Constr tion: Thor pepe, and practice (pp. 8-38) [New York: Teachers College Press. Fosnot, C. T. (1996). Teachers construct constrictit iam: The center for constructivist teaching/ ‘eacher preparation project, In C. Fosnot (Ed), Conseructvism: Theory, perspectives, and fratice (pp. 205-216). New York: Teachers College Press Fox, C. A. (1999) Toward a revised model of TA tai Ing. In J. Wale (Ea), Devens ad supersion of teaching aston im frig languages AUS. fnsues in language program direction (pp. 191 207), Besion: Heinledacement of cnscious 5 eperion in tng Chicago: Chicago Univeray | Asking the right questions abou, aration: Contributions of reearen inking. Educational Resch Tet I K. L. (1990), Policy and practice f Pinca! Eelucton sy 27-345, ont hy pect Cambridge: Cambridge Uni A processing strategy using visual nto convey the passé compose? inction in French, Inernatonal Re Lingus, 30, 321-898, lbor, K. (1990). Functionais tin ums structure and language proc rnd language acquisition. In I Ferguson (Eds.), Cossvrensin € acquisition and linguistic theories ‘Amsterdam and Philadelphia A discussion of tech niques used ‘ofthe pass composé /imparfait Tench. The Fench Revie 61, $$- mt Spanish (1992), Anneberg/ 3), The exresion of tense and aspect language of « Virnomaae hd Cin a's thesis, UCLA. Merial spaces: Aspect of mening ‘ural language Cambridge, MA Tse and narraivity: From mati moder fiction. Austin, TX: Uni 2. R, Jr. (1984), Functional nas nar, Cambridge: Cambridge face aC. Foanot (a), prpecis nd rar (ps achers College Press, "e anseructvim: A prycholgia {In G Fowmot (Ed), Gmc wre ond race (pp. 8-38) 5 College Press. e : aches contact consrucie or conarvctivit teaching? prec. Inc Fosnot (Ed, 2, fei end pace ow Work Teachers College ‘revised model of TA train. wogram direction (pp. i81- con Bh 4, 6 A (1999) Communicative competence and eles about language among graduate teach- fig atants in Pench. The dm Language foonel 7518-324 qucia EC. & van Pte, FC. 198). The value of ‘puri: contrasting value of urategien Ider ‘ial Re of Applet ings, 2268-280 ‘carve. (986) The problem with grammar: What ind can the language leaner use? Te Modern Tones Jara, 70 188-168. Gn, T0982, Tense aspectmodali: The creole ‘protoype and beyond. In P Hopper (Ed). Trust Bates sons end rages (gE 16s), Amsterdam and Philadephia: Joh Ben join Gin, 0984. Say, wl. Amsterdam and Phila “aphia: Joho Benjamin Ginn, 0989). Mind ada and cane says in fro nats Hilidale, N: Lawrence Erb Gotaberg. A. (995). onsrucs: A cnsrucon ran- wo opich erpanend scan Chicago: Unk ‘eri of Chica Pres Gore LC, & Cub, (993). TA programs: The fi between foreign langunge coche prepare tim and institutional need. In B.Benteler (a), The dynamic of longage raga dion. [AADSC iscsi language program direction (9p. 81-109) Bowon: Heinle Gregg. (1990, The yrabie competence model of Tecohd language acuiiion, and why i snc ‘ppl Ling, 12 96-85, Haiman, (985). Nata sya: emis and ein Cambridge: Cambridge University Pres Harley, B. 0985). Agen send longuge scion ‘von, England: Moliingual Mater Herichensbn, 1988), ing accuracy and text ook grammars: The determiner stem In French: Te Maden Lanuagy onal, 72, 409 ai Hopper, P, & Thompson, §, 1980. Transit in faminar and decours. Language 36 281-298 Hubtard, PL 0994), Nom wansformaona theories of grammar Inflation for lnguage tach ing: In T. Odin (Ea) Prnpcies om peg (immer (pp. 49-7), Cambridge: Cambrige Griverniy Pre Kaplan, A 0999), Frch kos A meni. Chicago: Chicago Univers Press Kaplan, M987), Decopmental paers of pat tense acquisition among foreign language Icaner of reach, in BVanPues, Deora, Er} Lee (Eds, Hog legge ling A ssh penpcne (pp. 82-608 Cambridge, MA Newbary Howe Ainginger ©1098), Toward a reflective practice of “TA eduction. Tn © Kramsch (Ea), Reining 2 huni of longa stay AALS ies i language program ciretion (pp. 123-144) Bouton inte eanen, 8D. OSE). Pinal and praia in scond iene aun. Onto, England Pergamon. 4 65 Labow, W. 0972), The transformation of experience in narrative syntax, In Language in th nner cy (pp. 954-896). Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press. Lakoff, G. 0987) Women, fr, and och dangerous things What categories rewal about the mind. Chicago: Ci ‘cago University Pres. Lambrecht, K. (1996). Jyjrmation srucre and sentence ‘form A Bry of pi fc, and th mel fresno of dinars rfernts Cambridge studies in lnguis tic. Cambridge: Cambridge Univerity Pres. Langacker, R. W, (1987), Reundations of cognitive gram mar’ Theoretical paspetves Stanford, CA: Stan ford University Pres. Langacker, R. W. (1991), Foundations of canitie gram: nar: Deitioe plication. Stanford, CA: Stan ford University Pres. Langacker, R. W. (1994), Culture, cognition, and {grammar In M. Patz (Ed), Language contac and language conflict (pp. 25-58). Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Lee, J, Se VanPatten, B. (1995). Making communiaine logguag uachng happen. New York: MeGraw Hil, Lightbown, P, & Spada, N. (1983) How language are learned. Oxford: Oxdord University Press Lunn, PV. (1985), The aspectual ens. Hispanic Lingus ti, 2 49-61 ‘Marks, E. (1998). Memory, desire, and pleasure in the ‘classroom: La grande mademoislle. MLA News ee, 25, $4. Nehls, D. (1992). An analysis of “verbal aspect as a ‘rosslinguistic category: Implications for lan- guage teaching. Inurmationl Ree of Api Lin (pit, 30, 255-280, (Oller, J; W. (1993). Reasons why some methods work Tn. W. Oller, J. (Ed), Methods tht wor: eas for uray and language teachers (pp. 874-886). Bos ton: Heinle (Ong, W. (0982). Oral remembering and narrative structure. In D. Tannen (Ed), Spoken and writen language: Eplring oality ond ieracy (pp. 12-24). "Norwood, NJ: Ablex (Orete, 0. 1988), Focusing on the preteite and im- perfec. Hispania, 7. 687-691 Paivio, A. (1986), Mental epseiatiots A dual coding ‘pfreach. Oxford: Oxford Univesity Pres Paprouté, W. 0988). A discourse perspective on tense ‘and aspect in standard modern Greek and English In B. Rudzka-Ostyn (Ed.) Topics in op sito inguiaics (pp. 447-506), Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Paulston, C. B. (1972). Structural pattern drills: A ‘lasification, In H, Allen & R. Campell (Eds), “Teaching English asa wend language (pp. 129-188). New Yorks MeGraw Hil. Pons, Cathy R. (1999). TA supervision: Are we prepar ing future professoriate? In David P. Benseler (Ed) The dynamics of guage pogrom direction “AAUSC issn language program direction (pp. 19 31), Boston: Hele Rankin, J 1994). Hit or miss, or missing: The role of66 second language acquisition in language teacher training, Die Unerihspraxs, 27, 18-27, Reinhart, T. (1984), Principles of gestalt perception ine temporal organization of narrative texts. Linguists, 22, 79-809. Rudzka-Ostyn, B. (Ed.), (1988). Tite i cognitive tn iguilic, Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins Rutherford, W. (1987), Sond language grammar: Lear: ‘ing and uacing: New York: Longman, SSharwood Smith, M. (1988). Consciousness raising ‘and the second language learner. In W. Ruther ford and M. Sharwood Smith (Eds), Grommar (and snd language acing A lnk madings (pp. 5 60). Rowley, MA: Newbury House. ‘Sharwood Smith, M. (1988). Applied linguistics and the psychology of instruction: A case for trans: fusion? In W. Rutherford and M. Sharwood Smith (Eds), Grammar and seand language each ing: Bako readings (pp. 206-223). Rowley, MA: Newbury House Sharwood Smith, M. (1988e). Imperfective versus Progressive: An exercise in contrastive ped: ‘agpgical linguists. In W. Rutherford and M. Sharwood Smith (Eds. Grommor and second la guage ching: A book of readings (Dp. 224-280), Rowley, MA: Newbury House. ‘Swain, M. (985). Communicative competence: Some roles of comprehensible inputs and compre- Fhensible ouput im its development. In S. Gass &C. G. Madaen (Eds), Inulin second language ‘acqustion (pp. 286-254), Rowley, MA: Newbury House ‘Tarone, E. (1988). Veriton in ineanguage. London: Edward Arnold ‘Terry, R. (1981). Concepts of pastness: The psd com {nséand the imperfect. Forign Languoge Annals, 14 105-0 ‘Thogmartin, C. (1984) Tense, aspect, and context. The French Review, 57, 844-848, ‘The Modern Language journal 81 (1597) ‘Tomlin, R, (1994). Functional grainmars, pedagogical ‘grammars, and communicative language teach- ing. In T. Odlin (Ea), Prnpcties on pede! ‘grammar (pp. 140-178), Cambridge: Cambridge Universiy Pres. VanPatten, B. (1996), input frocsing and grammar in trction in second language acquisition. Norwood, Nj: Ablex VanPatten, B, &'T: Cadierno. (1998). Explicit instruc: tion and input processing, Studs i Sond Lan ‘guage Acquistion, 13, 225-243. von Glaserfeld, E. (1996) Introduction: Aspects of constructive, In C, Fosmot (Ed.), Construct tam: Theory, perspectives, and frase (pp. 8-7) ‘New York: Teachers College Press, ce, M. (1991, Training frag Language eahes: A ‘afletive opprach. Cambridge: Cambridge Unk versity Press Wallace, . (1982). Figure and ground: The interrela ‘lonships of linguistic categories In P. Hopper (Ba), Tose spe: Betuwen semantics and (pp. 201-228). Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins Weist, R.M., Wysocka, HL, WitkowskaStadnik, K., ‘Bucrowska, W, & Konieczna, Z (984). The de fective tense hypothesis: On the emergence of tense and aspect in child Polish Jounal of Cd Language, I, M787, Westfall, R.,&¢Foerster, 8. (n.d). Beyond aspect: New strategie for teaching the preterite and the im- perfect. Unpublished manuseript, University of Texas. Wiestney P (1994) Rules and pedagogical grammar In. Odin (Ed), Prspecies on pdagopzal gram nar (pp. 72-96). Cambridge: Cambridge Unt versity Press. Wiersbicka, A. (1988). The semantics of grammar. An sterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins MLJ Offers No-Fee Copying for Course Packs ‘THE MIJIS PLEASED TO REMIND READERS THERE IS NO COPYRIGHT FEE FOR USING ITS articles in course packs for students. We hope that th policy will encourage learning and scholar ship by helping instructors make materials available to students. To constitute permission to use ML] material just copy this announcement and place it ia your course pack. There will continue to be a ‘copyright charge for other use of MLJ material. For further information, contact Margaret Walsh The University of Wisconsin, Press 114 N. Murray Street Madison, W1 5871 Tel: (608) 262-4925 Fax: (608 262-7560 1199 Email: mawalshl@facstalTwise-edu