First language (l1) as a mediational tool in peer interaction in english speaking tasks by efl college students in Vietnam

Hue University Journal of Sciences:Social Science and Humanities
ISSN 2588–1213
Vol. 128, No. 6B, 2019, Tr. 39–55, DOI: 10.26459/hueuni-jssh.v128i6B.4764
* Corresponding: vokhanhlinh56@yahoo.com 
Submitted: 21–04–2018; Revised: 20–12–2018; Accepted: 12–02–2019. 
FIRST LANGUAGE (L1) AS A MEDIATIONAL TOOL IN PEER 
INTERACTION IN ENGLISH SPEAKING TASKS BY EFL 
COLLEGE STUDENTS IN VIETNAM 
Vo Thi Khanh Linh* 
Universityof Foreign Languages, Hue University, 57 Nguyen KhoaChiem St., Hue, Vietnam 
Abstract. The sociocultural theory providesnew perspectives towards learning, shedding new lights on the 
potential role of the first language (L1) in language learning conducive to linguistic development and 
higher mental achievements.Drawing on the sociocultural theory, the authorinvestigates the use of L1 in 
speaking tasks by EFL college students in Vietnam.The study provides insights into the use of L1 in the 
EFL learning in English speaking tasks. Data collection was carried out by videotaping five pairs of stu-
dents on completing two speaking tasks. The findings reveal the mediational functions of L1 in peer inte-
raction with two prominent features of attention to vocabulary and meaning, and task elaboration. The L1 
use in the two speaking tasks is reported in close relation tolearners’ proficiency and task types. The re-
sults also claim the use of L1 in promoting the target language learning, which provides the pedagogical 
implications for using the mother tongue in teaching and learning English in the peer context. 
Keywords: L1, sociocultural theory, mediation, peer interaction 
1. Introduction 
Using first language (L1) in the language learning context has been a controversial subject 
with much debate due to the conflicts of exclusion or inclusion of L1 in the second language 
(L2) classrooms between audiolingual approach followers and advocators of L1. Many re-
searchers claim the necessity of L1 in the target learning process and reveal that using L1 in 
some situations of L2 learning is useful [Atkinson, 1987; Cook, 2001; Kieu, 2010; Tang, 2002; 
Wells, 1999]. They view L1 as an additional cognitive tool [Storch & Wigglesworth, 2003], a psy-
chological tool for providing scaffolded help as well as creating intersubjectivity when learners 
face cognitive difficulties [Antón & DiCamilla, 1998] or a mediational tool for regulating beha-
viour [Antón & DiCamilla, 1998; Swain, Brooks, Lapkin, Knouzi, &Suzuki, 2009; Swain & 
Lapkin, 1998]for understanding the tense [Harun, Behak& Massari, 2014]. The sociocultural 
Vo Thi Khanh Linh Vol. 128, No. 6B, 2019
40 
theory (SCT) emphasises social interaction including peer interaction in language learning and 
the knowledge co-construction is mainly mediated in cultural contexts through language and 
other symbols. In this sense, L1 is also a mediational tool for English as a foreign lan-
guage/English as a second language (EFL/ESL) learning from which higher mental abilities arise 
during peer interaction on solving the linguistic problems. The current study adoptsSCT as a 
framework to investigate the amount of L1 use and its functions as a mediational tool in peer 
interaction during completing English speaking tasks. 
2. Literature review 
The sociocultural theory highlights the role of interaction in language learning with the 
introduction of the zone of proximal development (ZPD), scaffolding and mediation. Vygotsky 
[1978, p.86]defines ZPD as “The distance between the actual development level as determined 
by independent problem solving and the level of potential development as determined through 
problem-solving under adult guidance or in collaboration with more capable peers”. This no-
tion suggests the ideas of working together in the learning environment where the more capa-
ble peers (experts) can scaffold the less capable peers (novices) to obtain the new knowledge 
until they can do it independently. The scaffolding process can be done in the forms of using 
mediational tools of physical materials, interacting with others and using symbolic signs, with 
the language being the most powerful sign [Vygotsky, 1978]. It is to say that through using the 
language of L1 and L2, we mediate our reasoning process, alter our ways of thinking, and de-
velop a mutual understanding of the communicated information in order for us to act and solve 
problems. 
Mediation has been defined as the way in which people change aspects of the world 
around them using “psychological tools”. Psychological tools are cultural artifacts, language, 
signs or symbols that facilitate interaction with the world and enable cognitive change. In the 
case of language learning, mediation can take the form of the textbook, visual material, class-
room discourse, opportunities for L2 interaction [Le, 2003, p. 33]. The author also points out that 
social mediation in the form of interaction can occur as expert-novice mediation or peer media-
tion. Mediation, in general, occurs in the forms of material tools, interaction with another per-
son and the use of symbols [Ellis, 2003]. 
Wertsch [1991, p. 12]claims “Human action typically employs mediational means such as 
tools and language and that these mediational means shape the action in essential ways”, while 
Daniels [2015, p. 34]implies that mediation is “The process through which the social and the 
individual mutually shape each other”. In other words, mediation can be done through means 
of communication as language and artifacts, and mediation itself is a process through which 
human beings gain the awareness and control of the mental ability [Lantolf & Thorne, 2006]. In 
Jos.hueuni.edu.vn Vol. 128, No. 6B, 2019
41 
this sense, language is a vital factor in social interaction by which human beings mediate and 
are mediated to move to a higher form of mental ability. In language learning settings, especial-
ly in peer interaction in classrooms, language, i.e., both L1 and L2, is used as the most essential 
tool for language learners to complete the tasks through interacting with each other. With the 
emphasis of language in mediating cognitive processes, Swain [2006, p. 98]proposed a term 
“languaging” to refer to “The process of making meaning and shaping knowledge and expe-
rience through language.” It means that languaging becomes a process in which language is 
used to mediate linguistic problem solutions in language learning. As a result, this mediational 
process results in newly constructed knowledge through collaborative efforts by using language 
[Swain, 2000]. 
In general, from a SCT perspective, language plays an important role in EFL learning in a 
variety of aspects in which benefits of L1 use have been confirmed in different classroom con-
texts as foreign language classrooms [Antón & DiCamilla, 1999; Brooks & Donato, 1994]and 
immersion classrooms [Swain & Lapkin, 2000]due to its role as a mediating tool in all forms of 
higher mental processing. Simply put, languaging, using language as a mediational tool for 
cognition to make and shape meaning [Swain, 2006], has helped the participants to mediate 
their understanding, and knowledge is constructed actively by the learners [Donato, 1994]. 
Studies on L1 as a mediational tool in peer interaction 
The benefits of using language including L1 and L2 as mediational tools in cultural con-
texts have been theoretically supported by SCT’s principles of association between learning and 
development. The sociocultural theory claims that learners co-construct knowledge when using 
language to interact with other people, objects and events in the collaborative environment 
through social interaction with the environment. From a sociocultural perspective, research 
shows that L1 enables learners to work effectively in the ZPD as a mediational tool and the role 
it plays in the production of L2 particularly in peer work [Algería de la Colina & García Mayo, 
2009; Bao & Du, 2015; Harun, Massari & Behak, 2014; Storch &Wigglesworth, 2003; Swain & 
Lapkin, 1998]. 
Swain and Lapkin’s [1998]study on two grade 8 French immersion students doing a jig-
saw task reported that the students use their L1 and L2 in order to communicate to each other 
and as tools to aid their L2 learning. The results showed three functions of L1 use as a tool to 
regulate students’ own behaviour, as an aid “to focus attention” as well as to generate and as-
sess alternatives“on specific L2 structures”. The findings of another study by Swain and Lapkin 
[2000]also revealed three other functions of L1 use to develop a joint understanding of the 
prompt and the instructions in the tasks, and to negotiate their collaboration throughout the 
tasks; to draw the learners’ attention to vocabulary and forms emerging during task completion 
and to build an interpersonal interaction between learners. In other words, the appropriate use 
Vo Thi Khanh Linh Vol. 128, No. 6B, 2019
42 
of L1 could promote L2 learning. 
Storch and Wigglesworth [2003]conducted a study exploring the use of L1s as a mediat-
ing tool when 12 pairs of university students (6 with a shared L1 and 6 with different L1s) per-
formed a text reconstruction task and a short joint composition task. In spite of the small 
amount of L1 use by learners due to their reluctance, the researchers informed that during in-
terviews the learners still perceived L1 use as a useful tool to assist them to discuss the prompt 
and structure of the composition in more depth and thus complete the task more easily. The use 
of L1 could also help learners provide each other with definitions of unknown words more di-
rectly and perhaps more successfully [Storch & Wigglesworth, 2003, p. 768]. 
Algería de la Colina and García Mayo [2009]reported the use of L1 and its functions in 
the oral interaction of twelve pairs of undergraduate EFL learners with low proficiency. Data 
from analysis of learners doing three collaborative tasks (jigsaw, text reconstruction and dictog-
loss) indicated that low proficiency EFL learners make use of L1 as a mediational tool to man-
age the task and to discuss grammar and vocabulary. The authors concluded that L1 provided 
essential cognitive support for focusing attention and understanding meaning. 
Harun et al.[2014]investigated the use of L1 as a semiotic mechanism in mediating learn-
ers’ understanding of the English tense-aspect system from working on concept-based instruc-
tion materials by eight Malay university-level learners. The study confirmed the mediational 
tool of L1 in order to structure and organise thought in helping learners gain a deeper under-
standing of the target grammatical concept. 
Bao and Du [2015]explored the extent to which L1 and its functions when beginner-level 
lower-secondary school learners of Chinese performed tasks in pairs and groups. The research-
ers confirmed the role of L1 in foreign language learning and that L1 use mainly occurred in 
learners’ efforts to mediate completion of the tasks. The findings showed that learners used L1 
to assist their peers to find unknown words, clarify and discuss these words, explain and ana-
lyse them. 
In general, these previous studies adopting SCT as a framework have confirmed L1 use 
as a mediational tool to create the social space for EFL and ESL learning in peer interaction 
where learners can mutually support to solve linguistic problems and gain common know-
ledge. They have demonstrated that L1 can serve a number of functions, including discussing 
the prompt and structure of the composition, negotiating their collaboration, drawing attention 
on grammar and vocabulary [Algería de la Colina & García Mayo, 2009; Anton & DiCamilla, 
1998; Bao & Du, 2015; Brooks & Donato, 1994; Storch & Wigglesworth, 2003; Swain & Lapkin, 
1998, 2000],managing the task [Algería de la Colina &García Mayo, 2009; Storch & Wiggles-
worth, 2003], checking for understanding [Kieu, 2010], and creating an atmosphere for social 
interaction in classroom [Yaghobian, Samuel& Mahmoudi, 2017]. The use of L1 may assist 
Jos.hueuni.edu.vn Vol. 128, No. 6B, 2019
43 
learners “to gain control of the task” [Brooks & Donato, 1994, p. 271]and work with the task at a 
higher cognitive level than might have been possible had they been working individually 
[Storch &Wigglesworth, 2003]. It is also acknowledged that the amount of L1 use depends on 
the proficiency level of learners [Bao & Du, 2015; DiCamilla & Antón, 2012; Swain & Lapkin, 
2000; Storch & Aldosari, 2010]with the larger amount of L1 use by elementary-level learners 
than that of the intermediate-level learners. 
A large body of L1 research was conducted in various contexts around the world except 
for Vietnamese contexts with a few studies on the use of L1 by teachers [Bui & Nguyen, 
2014;Kieu, 2010]. Therefore, it is necessary to widen our understanding of L1 use in the EFL 
learning context in Vietnam, especially by intermediate learners at the tertiary level in terms of 
the amount of L1 use and the mediational functions that L1 plays in peer interaction. The cur-
rent study attempts to find the answers to the following two questions: 
– How is L1 used by Vietnamese EFL college students in peer interaction in English 
speaking tasks? 
– How does L1 mediate Vietnamese EFL college students in peer interaction in English 
speaking tasks? 
3. The study 
Participants and procedures 
The participants in this study were 10 second-year students of English teachers’ training 
major. They were chosen randomly from 3 classes at the college level. The students worked in 5 
pairs to carry out two speaking tasks. The participants were instructed to collaboratively pro-
duce dialogues and encouraged to make any decisions and conclusions they might have. They 
were allowed to use their mother tongue while completing the tasks. Students had around 10 
minutes to prepare their tasks individually before discussing with their partners. 
The tasks 
Task 1: The decision-making task is adapted from Pica et al.[1993]in which learner dyads 
are given a problem for which there are a number of possible outcomes and they must choose 
one through negotiation and discussion. “The Desert Island” task provides the situation of two 
people on a sinking boat and they are allowed to bring five out of twelve items for their survival 
on a desert island until they are rescued. The task requires the participants to reach a mutually 
acceptable decision or an agreed solution following their discussion (see Appendix A). 
Task 2: The picture differences task is adapted from Gass et al.[2005]in which learner 
dyads are given two different versions of a picture (each learner hasa different version) and 
Vo Thi Khanh Linh Vol. 128, No. 6B, 2019
44 
asked to identify differences between the pictures. The set of pictures used in the task depicts 
identical park scenes with differences between the pictures; for example, in one picture, there is 
one girl playing on the merry-go-round; in the other picture, the merry-go-round is missing (see 
Appendix B). 
A decision-making task is claimed as two-way interactant relationship and convergent 
goal orientation that requires mutual relationship of request, suppliance and collaboration re-
sult in more meaning negotiation [Ellis, 2003, p. 215]while the picture differences task provides 
more negotiation of meaning in the classroom than the laboratory which is shown in the total 
amount of negotiation [Gass, Mackey & Ross-Feldman, 2005]. Therefore, the current study 
hopes to find out the answers for the application of the two tasks in Vietnamese contexts. 
Data collection and analysis 
Classroom interactive data were collected during the task completion of each pair. The 
discussion parts were videotapedwith the use of video feature on the smartphones by other 
students from the participants’ classes in order to reduce affectedresponses due to the research-
ers’ presence. The videotaping started as soon as the students began the activities. The research-
er was waiting outside the videotaping room, instead of interfering in the discussion.Ten dis-
cussions where L1 occurred were transcribed verbatim, extracted and coded for the analysis. 
L1 use was identified if students spoke in Vietnamese or contained phrases in Vietnam-
ese shown in the recording, which can be varied in length from a single word as in the case of 
code-switching or several turns students spoke in their mother tongue. The extent of L1 use is 
evaluated as a percentage of the total turns in tasks. In order to code the interaction data, a list 
of L1 functions with the suggestions from previous studies [Bao& Du, 2015; Storch & Wiggles-
worth, 2003; Swain & Lapkin, 2000; Algería de la Colina & García Mayo, 2009]was established 
with similar descriptions although the terms might be slightly different. Task elaboration cate-
gory is added and specified to meet all the aspects of the present study. Table 1 below defines 
L1 functions in the present study with explanations and examples in specific discussions. 
Table 1. The operational definitions of L1 functions 
Functions Explanations Examples 
Task manage-
ment 
Discussing how the task 
should be completed 
Student (S) 1: You want to write it? 
S2: You know my handwriting is not good (Pair 6, joint 
composition task; translated from Chinese) [Storch & 
Wigglesworth, 2003, p. 765] 
Task clarifica-
tion 
Discussing the meaning 
of the task prompt and 
instructions 
S1: Chose a few that are special, this one, this one. . . 
S2: Right, this small one, . . . 1985 ... let me first choose 
Jos.hueuni.edu.vn Vol. 128, No. 6B, 2019
45 
S1: We just need to pick 2 points, this one. . . 
S2: What about this, . . . should we first group which 
subject that have most women and which has most 
men according to its tendency? Then compare the two 
groups, which will give us 3 paragraphs. 
S1: Right, . . . this one increased, this one also increased. 
S2: Right, and this one has been increasing continuous-
ly. 
S1: This one is also continuously increasing (Pair 9, 
joint composition task; translated from Chinese) [Storch 
& Wigglesworth, 2003, p. 764] 
Vocabulary and 
meaning 
Clarifying unclear voca-
bulary, searching for the 
unknown vocabulary, 
making explanations, 
translating, and clarify-
ing the pronunciation of 
the words 
S2: Yes and . . . mm. . . around . . . mm. . . everything in 
the park have “cái tường là cái gì ta” (what is “cái 
tường” in English?) . . . mm. . . wall wall. 
Grammar Explaining grammar, and 
discussing uncertain 
grammatical structures 
S1: Australia is drawn Australia is drawn Australia it 
should be passive voice currently . . . 
S2: Mhm (Pair 8, reconstruction task; translated from 
Indonesian) [Storch & Wigglesworth, 2003, p. 765] 
Task elabora-
tion 
Discussing the specific 
ideas and elaborating the 
arguments to complete 
the task 
S4: Yes. Because in the desert island, it has a lot of 
things, it will dangerous for you so when you have 
first-aid-kit, maybe you can mm it helps you mm làm 
gì? (help you do what) 
S3: giải quyết (solve) 
S4: giải quyết được 
S3: to solve. It helps me to solve the problems 
4. Findings 
In order to answer the first question about the amount of L1 used by Vietnamese EFL 
students in peer interaction when completing the decision-making task and the picture differ-
ence task, L1 turns were calculated from each pair. Table 2 reports the number and percentage 
of L1 turns produced by each pair in two tasks. 
Table 2. The amount of L1 use across the two tasks 
Pairs Tasks L1 turns % Total turns 
S 1-2 
Decision-making 1 1.9 51 
Picture difference 3 5.4 55 
Vo Thi Khanh Linh Vol. 128, No. 6B, 2019
46 
S 3-4 
Deci