Measuring the Tolerance of Ambiguity

It has already been mentioned that the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator may be one measurement tool used to predict a person’s ambiguity tolerance (Grace, 1998; Sharp, 2004).  However, there are more direct means to assess learner’s tolerance of ambiguity.  Chapelle and Roberts (1986) studied a variety of international students enrolled in an intensive English program in Illinois and used Norton’s Measure of Ambiguity Tolerance  (MAT-50) to measure their AT. The MAT-50 was also used by El-Koumy (2000) in his study of Egyptian college freshmen.  The MAT-50 is a 62-61 item assessment developed in 1975, which asks students to agree with statements on a seven-point Likert-scale.  Numerous tests and studies of this instrument have proven it to be both a valid and reliable instrument (El-Koumy, 2000).  Another measurement device for AT is the Budner’s Scale of Tolerance-Intolerance of Ambiguity, which was used to study high school students learning French (Naiman, Frohlich, Stern, & Todesco, 1978).  Other instruments have been developed for specific studies.  Ely (1995) developed the Second Language Tolerance of Ambiguity Scale, which involves 12 items on a four-point Likert scale format to determine whether students are more or less tolerant of ambiguity.  The one factor that all measurement instruments for AT seem to have in common is the use of a Likert scale to rank students somewhere along a continuum of high, moderate, or low AT.

Encountering Ambiguity in SLA: The Three Branches

            In learning a language there are three branches of skills: receptive skills, productive skills, and overarching skills.  Listening and reading are receptive skills because they require a person to take in language and derive meaning from it.  Speaking and writing are considered productive skills because they require the learner to take the language they know and produce language that is meaningful.  Some skills are required for both receptive and productive aspects of language.  These overarching skills include grammar, vocabulary, cultural context, and self-study.  Here we will examine just how ambiguity is encountered in each of these three branches.

            Listening and reading make up the receptive branch of SLA.  Naiman (1978) studied high school students learning French as a second language and found that tolerance of ambiguity scores correlated significantly with students’ listening comprehension abilities (El-Koumy, 2000).  Ely (1995) attempts to explain just how ambiguous second language listening can be.  He suggests that when a learner listens to the second language, it is likely that there will be portions that are not understood, and the learner is left to wonder whether it was accent, rapid pronunciation, unclear vocabulary, or unfamiliar grammar that caused the ambiguity (Ely, 1995). 

            Listening in a second language contains a great deal of ambiguity, and reading in a second language often involves the same forms of ambiguity.  El-Koumy studied AT specifically in terms of reading comprehension in his study of Egyptian college freshmen.  He pointed out that second language “reading is also fraught with uncertainty” (p.4).  His study points out that reading involves phonological, syntactic, semantic, and cultural ambiguities, making reading a task that is very frustrating for students with a low AT (El-Koumy, 2000).  Papadopoulou (2005) also conducted a study specifically addressing reading and AT.  In her study she examined how second language readers process ambiguous constructions.  This study focused on three ambiguous constructions that learners must strategize to process.  These include distinguishing the main verb from the reduced relative clauses, distinguishing subjects from objects, and finally understanding relative clause attachments (Papadopoulou, 2005).  All of these tasks are necessary to derive meaning while reading, and all of these tasks are ambiguous.  Receptive skills in a second language, both listening and speaking, require a learner to encounter, process, and respond to a great deal of ambiguity.

            “As much uncertainty as ESL learners face in the ‘receptive’ areas of listening or reading, this lack of determinacy is dwarfed by that inherent in the ‘productive’ skills of speaking and writing” (Ely, 1995, p.87).  In other words, it is more ambiguous to give language than to receive it.  Speaking and writing make up the productive branch of language and are even more racked with ambiguity.  However, fewer studies have sited just how learners encounter ambiguity in specifically productive second language skills.  Naiman (1978) included in his study of high school French students, a correlation between AT and imitation activities.  While “repeat after me” is a common phrase in a second language course, Naiman found that imitation was less comfortable for students with low AT (Naiman et al., 1978).  He speculates that this is due to their uncertainty regarding whether or not they are recreating the sounds correctly as well as the possible uncertainty in what the word or phrase means or how it can be appropriately used.  Lyster (1998) also studied a component of second language speaking in his study on primary students in immersion classrooms.  He asked whether or not recasts and repetition involved ambiguity for these students.  A recast is when a student utters an incorrect sentence and the instructor simply repeats the sentence with correction.  He found that this process of recasting is a source of great ambiguity for students for many reasons.  First of all, instructors are not consistent in their recasting.  Not every incorrect utterance receives of recast from instructor to student.  Secondly, students do not always recognize recasting as a source of feedback (Lyster, 1998).  Thus speaking is ambiguous because students can not always be sure whether they have uttered a correct or acceptable language. 

            In terms of second language writing and ambiguity, there is not much literature available.  Ely (1995) notes that learning to brainstorm and to follow a second language writing process can be ambiguous because it involves learning new skills, and the newness of the experience is a source of ambiguity.  Studies seem to agree that productive language skills are the most ambiguous, and yet there seems to be little research to back up this assumption.

            The third branch of skills in SLA is the overarching branch.  These are skills that are necessary in both the production and the reception of language.  Ambiguity is also a factor for these skills, especially in the areas of grammar, vocabulary, cultural context, and self-study.  In Goncalves’ (2002) study of ambiguity in Mozambican African Portuguese, it was noted that Portuguese is a common second language among the people of Mozambique due to former colonization.  However, the flavor of Portuguese spoken by this people group significantly differs in grammar from standard Portuguese.  It was theorized that the language change was a result of learners using grammar rules from their first language to remedy ambiguous grammar in Portuguese (Goncalves, 2002).  This study points out that certain grammatical structures are ambiguous in the second language because of conflicting grammatical structures in the first language.  This is in line with the commonly accepted contrastive hypotheses in SLA.  Brown (2000) notes that second language ambiguity is encountered when the rules of a language “not only differ but . . . are internally inconsistent because of certain ‘exceptions’” (p.120).  It is true that grammar rules can be very ambiguous due to exceptions and irregularities in a language.  Piper (1993) points out that irregular verbs and irregular plurals are contradictions of the regular inflectual rules, and thus require a moderate AT on the part of the learner.

            In addition to ambiguous grammar, second language learners must endure ambiguous vocabulary.  Grace (1998) addresses ambiguous vocabulary in her study of computer assisted language learning.  She found that learners with low AT had difficulty retaining vocabulary when they could not be certain of the definition through translation into their first language (Grace, 1998).  Oxford and Ehrman (1993) report that words are often uncertain in a second language due to unknown meanings, unfamiliar pronunciation, and unclear referents.  It is even noted by Brown (2000) that some words may exist in the second language that do not exist in the first language, and cannot in any way be translated.  This lack of translation due to absence of words, phrases, or ideas is also a source of ambiguous vocabulary that can be attributed to cultural differences among language.

            Cultural context is also a part of this overarching branch of language skills.  Producing and receiving language involves a degree of familiarity with cultural perspectives.  In Illeva’s (2001) study of adult second language learners and cultural ambiguity, it is reported that cultural instruction cannot be a presentation of facts and set behaviors, because culture is complex, and ambiguous.  Despite the uncertain nature of culture, this article argues that culture is a necessary ingredient in SLA because it is a part of “the fabric of meaning in people’s lives” and language and culture are intricately interwoven and inseparable.  (Illeva, 2001, p.2).  Ely (1995) points out that it is likely that language comprehension may break down if a native speaker begins talking about some part of the second language culture that the second language learner is unfamiliar with.  Despite knowing the words and the grammar, if the context is unknown and ambiguous, communication can not be understood.  The literature agrees that ambiguous cultural context is yet another area of SLA in which learners must navigate through the rocky channels of ambiguity.

            Finally, self-study is also a part of the overarching branch of language skills. Cynthia White (1999) studied self-taught second language learners to find out how they approached language learning.  She found that students engaged in self-study of a language encountered an extremely high degree of ambiguity (White, 1999).  She found that after only six weeks of study 80% of the 23 learners reported feeling “less sure about either themselves as a learner or about their understanding of the material” (p.450).  In the absence of a guide who is fluent in the second language the degree of ambiguity in SLA is very high.  This is an important consideration in light of the fact that to some degree language learners must learn on their own or at least learn more independently from their instructor.  When this is required students will face a higher degree of ambiguity because they do not have an expert along side them assuring them that they are correct.