ML Thematic Essay

The purpose of this paper is to present an interpretation and an alternative view of interaction in the field of Second Language Acquisition (SLA) research. This interpretation draws upon both cognitive and sociocultural perspectives on language acquisition and development. The discussion offered here is not intended to be conclusive but rather to explore a diversified approach that integrates complementary viewpoints within SLA. A hermeneutic approach is adopted to interpret the role of interaction with texts—distinct from verbal interaction—as a “mediated process” (Lantolf, n.d., p. 197) through which language learning and development occur. Interaction with Texts (IwT) is thus conceptualized as an ecological activity in which “perceptual and social activity” (Van Lier, n.d., p. 247) plays a fundamental role in second-language development. 

In this essay, the term Interaction with Texts is used interchangeably with reading, one of the four core language skills. The framing emphasizes process rather than product. Although the term book is frequently used to denote the physical tool mediating the interaction, the concept encompasses far more than “serious academic reading.” It includes engaging with a range of written and multimodal forms—“reading the comics, scanning the television listings for a favorite program, or skimming a magazine article to decide whether it merits close attention” (Day & Bamford, 1998, p. 11). 

To examine this process, several conceptual terms—Linguistic Imaging, Realization of Forms, Extended Forms, and Cloze Mental Structures—are introduced to describe IwT and to situate it in relation to existing theories of interaction in SLA. The central argument revolves around Linguistic Imaging: during the act of interacting with texts, perception triggers a Realization of Forms, which differs from the Negotiation of Meaning emphasized in verbal interaction. Through repeated realizations of linguistic forms, readers develop visual and mental representations—Cloze Mental Structures and Extended Forms—that contribute to language development. The pedagogical relevance of this process is discussed within the context of English as a Foreign Language (EFL) classrooms, particularly regarding how receptive skills such as reading influence productive skills such as writing and speaking.

The concept of interaction lies at the core of SLA theory and practice. Its complexity is reflected in the range of meanings it assumes depending on theoretical orientation. To contextualize the perspective advanced in this paper, interaction is examined first through a cognitive lens and then through an ecological, sociocognitive one. Each view offers distinctive insights and limitations relative to IwT. 

From a cognitive standpoint, learning is an internal mental process. The cognitivist account of interaction focuses on the learner’s processing of input. Ellis (1991) describes this form of interaction as “a situation in which the conversational partner shares a symmetrical role relationship,” thereby allowing for “more opportunities for interactional restructuring” (p. 8). Learning occurs through information processing in which “learners need to comprehend input to develop their interlanguage” (p. 8). Within this framework, interaction facilitates learning primarily through the Negotiation of Meaning, which improves comprehensibility of input, enhances attention, and stimulates output (Van Lier, 2000). Development is further supported when such negotiation takes place with a More Knowledgeable Other (MKO). 

In contrast, the sociocultural and ecological perspectives replace the notion of input with affordance. Although they acknowledge the value of negotiation, they emphasize learning as emergent and contextually situated rather than as information transfer. Van Lier (2000) argues that learning is “the development of increasingly effective ways of dealing with the world and its meanings” (p. 245). Consequently, the focus shifts from what is stored inside the learner’s mind to how the learner actively engages with the environment. 

Affordance refers to a property of the environment that offers possibilities for action (Swain et al., 2015). Whether an individual can capitalize on an affordance depends on contextual factors—“demands, requirements, opportunities, limitations, rejections, invitations, enablements, and constraints” (Van Lier, 2000, p. 253). Learning, therefore, arises through reciprocal interaction between learner and environment. This expanded understanding broadens the MKO construct beyond human interlocutors. As Swain et al. (2015) note, an MKO may be either animate or inanimate. Similarly, Brown et al. (1991, as cited in Thompson, 2013) observe that sociocultural interaction encompasses not only people of differing expertise but also artifacts—such as books, videos, wall displays, or computer environments. 

From this view, learning is “socially mediated,” dependent on both human and material contexts (Mitchell & Myles, 2004, p. 159). This paper adopts that principle of mediation while emphasizing the physical dimension—interaction with texts—as a primary means through which language development occurs.

Within this interpretation, interaction is positioned within the Zone of Proximal Development (ZPD), extending beyond reliance on an MKO to include artifacts as active agents in learning. This conceptualization is informed by professional experience in EFL contexts where English is neither an official nor a widely spoken second language. In such settings, interaction with texts often becomes the principal medium of language exposure and development. 

In contexts where learners have limited opportunities for direct communication with native speakers, instruction tends to emphasize reading and writing over interpersonal communication. Consequently, learners frequently develop strong Cognitive Academic Language Proficiency (CALP) while their Basic Interpersonal Communicative Skills (BICS) remain less advanced (Lekrama, n.d.). 

Artifacts—whether physical tools such as books or symbolic systems such as language—play an essential mediating role in this process. From a Vygotskian perspective, reading functions as a mediational means that simultaneously offers affordances and constraints (Swain et al., 2015). In contrast to verbal interaction, where “human thinking is mediated by culturally organized and transmitted symbolic meanings” (Lantolf, 2014, p. 57), IwT engages both symbolic and physical mediation. Through sustained engagement with authentic texts, learners construct mental images of linguistic forms and develop awareness of cultural and contextual nuances in the target language. 

Interaction with texts thus supports both cognitive and sociocultural dimensions of development. Texts not only facilitate comprehension but also nurture academic writing and oral expression. As Fenner (2000) argues, “Dialogue with different literary texts develops a different kind of competence than traditional language competence … Through literature learners can experience how language can be used in different situations, for different purposes, and to varying effects” (p. 15).

Identifying IwT as a legitimate form of interaction requires clarifying its constituent agents. To illustrate, it may be compared with verbal interaction, which relies on the MKO and the Negotiation of Meaning (NofM) between interlocutors. In verbal exchange, language development occurs through assisted performance and mutual negotiation. 

By contrast, IwT involves unassisted engagement with a text, giving rise to what can be termed the Realization of Forms (RofF). Rather than negotiating meaning with another person, the learner recognizes and internalizes linguistic forms encountered in reading. RofF encompasses both cognitive and sociocultural dimensions. Cognitively, readers process input through “inner speech,” or subvocal articulation (Ortega, 2009, p. 220). Non-native readers may require additional processing time as they engage in semantic and syntactic restructuring—“the internal reorganization of the learner’s grammar to facilitate rapid deployment of language in real time” (Carter & Nunan, 2001, p. 225).

 Socioculturally, RofF unfolds iteratively as readers recall linguistic items from memory, restructure them, and later use them in writing or speaking. In this sense, RofF parallels the NofM but operates within reading rather than conversation. It can also be seen as an expanded form of noticing: through recurrent interaction with texts, learners construct Linguistic Images that gradually lead to RofF. These visual representations evolve into mental schemas stored as Cloze Mental Structures (CMSs) and Extended Forms (EFs). 

The term Cloze Mental Structures derives from the cloze procedure used in reading comprehension to assess learners’ awareness of semantic and syntactic properties. Similarly, CMSs represent internalized reflections of linguistic structures that enable the spontaneous recall of complex lexical and syntactic patterns without conscious awareness. Functionally, CMSs operate at the discourse level, allowing learners to retrieve appropriate patterns and positions within textual environments. They resemble intake, defined as “vocabulary, grammar, and expressions that are understood and subsequently acquired by the learner” (Carter & Nunan, 2001, p. 222). 

Extended Forms (EFs), by contrast, signify visual and memorized linguistic units—collocations, formulaic expressions, idioms, or proverbs—acquired through repeated reading. Both CMSs and EFs function as intake at different levels: CMSs at the discourse level and EFs at the lexical or phrasal level. Together, they demonstrate how reading promotes both the internalization and productive application of linguistic forms.