Italian as a second language and as a foreign language

In recent decades, researchers have examined the teaching and learning of Italian as a second language. The necessity of discussing and investigating it, indeed, started to grow during the Balkan wars and later with the emigration from China, Northern Africa and Bangladesh in the 1980s and 1990s (Caon, in Maraschio, Caon, 2011, 103). Initially, this was a new field and it has often been confused with the learning of Italian as foreign language.

The two concepts are discussed here, highlighting the main differences between them.

Saville-Troike (in Saville-Troike, Barto, 2012, 4) stated that a second language is “an official or societally dominant language needed for education, employment, and other basic purposes […] often acquired by minority group members or immigrants who speak

35

another language natively”. Pallotti (in Caon, in Maraschio, Caon, 2011, 96) added that a second language is "a language that is learnt after the native one in a country where it is an official language”². Such definitions indicate that a second language is characterised by continuous stimuli, identifiable in the learner’s everyday life, representing the means of communication with their surrounding world. Therefore, the linguistic input for their learning process is often brought by the students themselves, recalling real-life situations (Serragiotto, 2009, 35). The objectives are related to daily communication needs, either personal or professional.

By contrast, a foreign language is a language that is “not widely used in the learners’

immediate social context which might be used for future travel or other cross-cultural communication situations, or studied as a curricular requirement or elective in school, but with no immediate or necessary practical application” (Saville-Troike, Barto, 2012, 4). In this case, the surrounding world is not influential, and the only linguistic input is presented by the teacher (Caon in Maraschio, Caon, 2011, 96).

These points reveal the main difference between the two objects of the learning process. However, researchers have identified several features that help not only to distinguish them but also to highlight certain considerations when teaching a second language and planning appropriate didactic activities. The focus here is on the main characteristics that differ, as identified and outlined by Balboni (2015, 228-230):

- Presence in the environment: whereas a second language is present in the country where it is studied, a foreign language is spoken only in scholastic contexts.

- Selection and grades of inputs: the learners of a second language are immersed in the language itself, choosing their own linguistic inputs through a process of spontaneous learning. By contrast, for a foreign language, the educator takes control of the lesson and chooses the inputs, materials and methodologies.

- Role of the teacher: the teacher of a foreign language represents the ideal model of the speaker of a foreign language. Conversely, the structures and the terminology

2 Translated from the original Italian quote: “una lingua appresa dopo la prima (…) nel paese dove essa viene parlata abitualmente”.

36

used by the teacher of a second language are often considered to be too formal when compared to everyday life.

- Didactic activities and methodologies: the unrealistic simulations during didactic activities in a foreign language are replaced by real-life situations when speaking a second language. The use of the second language is thus an authentic communicative necessity.

- Lesson planning and observance of the syllabus: as revealed by the origin of the linguistic inputs of the two learning processes, when dealing with learners of a foreign language, the teacher can schedule a syllabus and remain faithful to it when planning a lesson. By contrast, since the input in second-language learning is mainly external, the facilitator must face several topics related to the learners’ surrounding world, according to their real and authentic necessities.

- Testing and evaluation: Teachers of a foreign language are conscious of their teaching objects and objectives and can thus establish what must be evaluated and how to do so, through specific evaluation parameters. By contrast, learning a second language usually implies spontaneous acquisition, which means the educator must put aside formal testing in favour of analysis and continuous feedback from the learners’

productions.

- Use of technological devices: again, the difference here is given by the linguistic input of the process. For foreign language, the only way to offer authentic material is to use technological devices to present real-life situations as interpreted by native speakers, who carry their own social and cultural features. By contrast, while teaching a second language, the facilitator is already offering an authentic model, so that the essential role of technology is limited. In this regard, although I recognize the need for technological tools when teaching a foreign language, I believe that nowadays they provide excellent support for teaching second languages too. They give learners the opportunity to receive new stimuli and to express themselves in different ways, communicating with distant people as they would with their peers in person.

To sum up, teaching Italian as a second language is a unique and burdensome task. It requires specific academic contexts and appropriate development of teachers, who differ

37

from teachers who present Italian as a foreign language or as a native language. Their objectives should be considered from an integration-oriented perspective. The peculiarity of the learners and their characteristics is also important. I discussed in the previous chapter how every immigrant learner exhibits specific personal traits, including not only their mother tongue but also their personal encyclopaedia and knowledge of the world.

This is made up of ideas from schooling and relationships and especially cultural elements, which affect learning acquisition and influence the learner’s way of thinking and facing their new environment (Caon in Maraschio, Caon, 2011, 101).