Here is where I got the term “language fabric” used in this last series of posts:
http://www.cafe.edu/genres/n-conver.html#3
Below is the key phrase from that article, the one that truly makes the case – in my mind at least – for non-targeted input:
Function sociale de la conversation.
La conversation constitue un tissu langagier grâce auquel les membres d’une communauté non seulement communiquent quotidiennement, mais encore assurent leur appartenance au groupe. La conversation a une fonction intégrative, elle assure la cohésion entre les membres d’un groupe, mais aussi une fonction différenciative, elle manifeste par son absence l’exclusion de ceux qui n’appartiennent pas au groupe. Par la conversation, l’individu construit sa face sociale, mesure son insertion dans la société.
Social function of conversation.
Conversation is made up of a language tissue that allows members of a community to communicate on a daily basis but also one that assures their place in the group. Conversation therefore has an integrative function, it assures cohesion between the members of a group, but it also has a differentiating function, because when it is absent those not in the group are excluded. Thus, it is through conversation that the individual constructs his social persona and measures his place in society.
To me in my own mind as moderator of this group, I think that this is where we must now look if we are to be successful in our work with comprehensible input. We must look unerringly and intensely at how we construct a “language tissue” in our classrooms via full social inclusion of our students and the building of community. This has been the main focus of this recent series on language tissue – the “tissue langagier” described above.
I add this theme to the list of others we have for the 2017-2018 academic year: our mental health, our continued local interest here in NT work, avoiding bashing people, and now, constructing community and excluding no one via un tissue langagier in our classrooms.