The Palgrave Handbook of Applied

Linguistics Research Methodology 1st

ed. Edition Aek Phakiti
Visit to download the full and correct content document:
https://ebookmass.com/product/the-palgrave-handbook-of-applied-linguistics-researc
h-methodology-1st-ed-edition-aek-phakiti/
THE PALGRAVE HANDBOOK
OF APPLIED LINGUISTICS
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
Edited by Aek Phakiti, Peter De Costa,
Luke Plonsky and Sue Starfield
The Palgrave Handbook of Applied Linguistics
Research Methodology
 Aek Phakiti • Peter De Costa
Luke Plonsky • Sue Starfield
Editors

The Palgrave
Handbook of Applied
Linguistics Research
Methodology
Editors
Aek Phakiti Peter De Costa
Sydney School of Education and Social Work Department of Linguistics, Germanic, Slavic,
University of Sydney Asian and African Languages
Sydney, NSW, Australia Michigan State University
East Lansing, MI, USA
Luke Plonsky
Applied Linguistics Sue Starfield
Northern Arizona University School of Education
Flagstaff, AZ, USA UNSW Sydney
Sydney, NSW, Australia

ISBN 978-1-137-59899-8    ISBN 978-1-137-59900-1 (eBook)

https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-137-59900-1

Library of Congress Control Number: 2018955931

© The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s) 2018

The author(s) has/have asserted their right(s) to be identified as the author(s) of this work in accordance with
the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988.
This work is subject to copyright. All rights are solely and exclusively licensed by the Publisher, whether the
whole or part of the material is concerned, specifically the rights of translation, reprinting, reuse of illustrations,
recitation, broadcasting, reproduction on microfilms or in any other physical way, and transmission or informa-
tion storage and retrieval, electronic adaptation, computer software, or by similar or dissimilar methodology
now known or hereafter developed.
The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc. in this publication does
not imply, even in the absence of a specific statement, that such names are exempt from the relevant protective
laws and regulations and therefore free for general use.
The publisher, the authors and the editors are safe to assume that the advice and information in this book are
believed to be true and accurate at the date of publication. Neither the publisher nor the authors or the editors
give a warranty, express or implied, with respect to the material contained herein or for any errors or omissions
that may have been made. The publisher remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps
and institutional affiliations.

Cover illustration: © Aek Phakiti

This Palgrave Macmillan imprint is published by the registered company Springer Nature Limited.
The registered company address is: The Campus, 4 Crinan Street, London, N1 9XW, United Kingdom
 Preface

Applied linguistics is a broad, evolving interdisciplinary field of study, which

examines language use with relevance to real-world problems across a range of
social contexts using a diverse set of methodologies. This Handbook aims to
provide a comprehensive, yet accessible treatment of basic and more advanced
research methodologies in applied linguistics as well as to offer a state-of-the-­
art view of various substantive domains within the field. The Handbook covers
a range of research approaches, presents current perspectives, and addresses
important considerations in different research methods, such as designing and
implementing research instruments and techniques and analyzing different
types of applied linguistics data. Innovations, challenges, and trends in applied
linguistics research are addressed throughout the Handbook.
This Handbook has brought together a range of authors in various areas of
research into one volume. The authors work with a variety of languages in a
host of research contexts, ensuring both breadth and depth. As the
Handbook editors, we have curated themes and ideas that are aligned with the
current research climate as well as areas that help applied linguists better
understand social and educational phenomena and the nature of language,
language learning, and language use.

Readership
As we anticipate that many readers of this Handbook may be junior scholars
seeking guidance on research methods, and taking into account the many
options and pathways on offer, we have striven to ensure that the Handbook pro-
vides an up-to-date entry point into both approaches that have stood the test

v
vi Preface

of time and approaches that may be less well known, but offer interesting
possibilities and perspectives. This Handbook is suitable for use by advanced
undergraduate and postgraduate students as well as beginning and well-­
established applied linguists who would like both a broad and in-depth under-
standing of contemporary applied linguistics research methods and topics.
Specifically, this Handbook can be used in applied linguistics, second language
studies, and TESOL graduate programs around the world. Libraries, univer-
sity departments, and organizations dealing with applied linguistics issues will
also find this Handbook to be an invaluable resource.

Comments or Suggestions
The editors would be grateful to hear comments and suggestions regarding
this Handbook. Please contact Aek Phakiti at aek.phakiti@sydney.edu.au,
Peter De Costa at peteridecosta@gmail.com, Luke Plonsky at lukeplonsky@
gmail.com, or Sue Starfield at s.starfield@unsw.edu.au.

Sydney, NSW, Australia Aek Phakiti

East Lansing, MI, USA  Peter De Costa
Flagstaff, AZ, USA  Luke Plonsky
Sydney, NSW, Australia  Sue Starfield
 Acknowledgments

We wish to express our heartfelt thanks to the contributors of this Handbook

who worked hard to produce great chapters and promptly responded to our
requests and comments on earlier drafts. You are all truly amazing. We would
also like to thank the many researchers, authors, and methodologists who
published research articles, book chapters, and books not only in applied lin-
guistics but across various disciplines. Their contributions have helped us
deepen our understanding of numerous issues and methods relevant to applied
linguistics. Next, we are very grateful to Palgrave for their kind support
throughout the completion of this Handbook.
We would like to thank our colleagues and friends at Georgetown University,
Michigan State University, Northern Arizona University, the University of
New South Wales, and the University of Sydney who discussed with us essen-
tial ideas and issues to be included in this Handbook and read and commented
on several chapter drafts, in particular: Janette Bobis, Jesse Egbert, Mia Jun,
Amy Kim, Wendy Li, Alison Mackey, Guy Middleton, Lourdes Ortega, Brian
Paltridge, Jack C. Richards, Fran Waugh, and Yiran Xu.
Finally, we would like to thank our partners who supported us throughout
the process of putting together this Handbook, including weekend Skype time
when our schedules—sometimes across four distinct time zones—would
align.

vii
 Contents

Part I Research Approaches and Methodology    1

1 Applied Linguistics Research: Current Issues, Methods, and

Trends  5
Aek Phakiti, Peter De Costa, Luke Plonsky, and Sue Starfield

2 Habits of Mind: How Do We Know What We Know? 31

Richard F. Young

3 Quantitative Methodology 55
Luke K. Fryer, Jenifer Larson-Hall, and Jeffrey Stewart

4 Qualitative Methodology 79
Shim Lew, Anna Her Yang, and Linda Harklau

5 Mixed Methodology103
Alison Mackey and Lara Bryfonski

6 Traditional Literature Review and Research Synthesis123

Shaofeng Li and Hong Wang

7 Research Replication145
Rebekha Abbuhl

ix
x Contents

8 Ethical Applied Linguistics Research163

Scott Sterling and Peter De Costa

9 Writing a Research Proposal183

Sue Starfield

10 Writing a Research Article199

Betty Samraj

Part II Research Instruments, Techniques, and Data Sources 221

11 Interviews and Focus Groups225

Matthew T. Prior

12 Observation and Fieldnotes249

Fiona Copland

13 Online Questionnaires269
Jean-Marc Dewaele

14 Psycholinguistic Methods287
Sarah Grey and Kaitlyn M. Tagarelli

15 SLA Elicitation Tasks313

Susan Gass

16 Introspective Verbal Reports: Think-Alouds and Stimulated

Recall339
Melissa A. Bowles

17 Corpus Research Methods for Language Teaching and

Learning359
Magali Paquot

18 Digital Discourses Research and Methods375

Christoph A. Hafner
 Contents xi

Part III Data Analysis 391

19 Correlation and Simple Linear Regression in Applied

Linguistics395
Reza Norouzian and Luke Plonsky

20 Exploratory Factor Analysis423

Aek Phakiti

21 Confirmatory Factor Analysis and Structural Equation

Modeling459
Aek Phakiti

22 Analyzing Group Differences501

Luke Wander Amoroso

23 Statistics for Categorical, Nonparametric, and Distribution-­

Free Data523
Jesse Egbert and Geoffrey T. LaFlair

24 Reliability Analysis of Instruments and Data Coding541

Kirby C. Grabowski and Saerhim Oh

25 Analyzing Spoken and Written Discourse: A Role for Natural

Language Processing Tools567
Scott A. Crossley and Kristopher Kyle

26 Narrative Analysis595
Phil Benson

27 Interaction Analysis615
Elizabeth R. Miller

28 Multimodal Analysis639
Jesse Pirini, Tui Matelau-Doherty, and Sigrid Norris
xii Contents

Part IV Selected Research Topics and Areas in Applied

Linguistics 659

29 Instructed Second Language Acquisition663

Shawn Loewen

30 Bilingualism and Multilingualism681

Tej K. Bhatia

31 Forensic Linguistics703
Samuel Larner

32 World Englishes719
Peter De Costa, Jeffrey Maloney, and Dustin Crowther

33 Heritage, Community, and Indigenous Languages741

Shereen Bhalla and Terrence G. Wiley

34 Translation and Interpreting761

Claudia V. Angelelli

35 Identity777
Ron Darvin

36 Gesture Research793
Gale Stam and Kimberly Buescher

37 Language Policy and Planning811

David Cassels Johnson and Crissa Stephens

38 Second Language Pragmatics829

Soo Jung Youn

39 Language Testing and Assessment845

April Ginther and Kyle McIntosh
 Contents xiii

40 Linguistic Landscape869
David Malinowski

41 Researching Academic Literacies887

David Bloome, Gilcinei T. Carvalho, and Sanghee Ryu

Index903
 Notes on Contributors

Rebekha Abbuhl is Associate Professor of Linguistics at California State University

Long Beach, where she teaches courses in language acquisition, research methods,
and pedagogy. Her research interests include second language writing and the role of
feedback in the development of foreign language proficiency.
Luke Wander Amoroso is Assistant Professor of Linguistics at Truman State
University. His research interests are in the validity and reliability of L2 tests, speak-
ing proficiency, and second language acquisition (SLA) research methodology. He
tries to keep his features in order and works as a language testing consultant with the
United States Department of Justice. He works with ESL and EFL teachers in the
United States and China to incorporate insights from SLA interaction research into
ESL/EFL teaching methods.
Claudia V. Angelelli is Chair of Multilingualism and Communication at Heriot-
Watt University, UK, and Professor Emerita of Spanish Linguistics at San Diego State
University, US. Her research lies at the intersection of sociolinguistics, applied linguis-
tics, and translation and interpreting studies. She has authored Medical Interpreting
and Cross-cultural Communication (2004) and Revisiting the Role of the Interpreter
(2004) and co-edited Researching Translation and Interpreting (2015) and Testing and
Assessment in Translation and Interpreting Studies (2009). Her work has appeared in The
Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, The Critical Link, Cuadernos de ALDEEU,
International Journal of the Sociology of Language (IJSL), Interpreting, Meta, MonTI, The
Translator, Translation and Interpreting Studies (TIS), and numerous edited volumes.
Phil Benson is Professor of Applied Linguistics at Macquarie University, Sydney,
Australia. His research interests are in autonomy and out-of-class language learning,
study abroad, and multilingualism. He has a strong preference for qualitative research
and has published on both qualitative research methods and narrative inquiry. He is
especially interested in oral history as an approach to research on the long-term lan-

xv
xvi Notes on Contributors

guage learning experiences of multilingual individuals. He is co-author of Second

Language Identity in Narratives of Study Abroad (Palgrave Macmillan, 2012) and
Narrative Inquiry in Language Teaching and Learning Research (2013).
Shereen Bhalla is a research associate and the facilitator of the Language Policy
Research Network and serves as Manager of Online Education at the Center for
Applied Linguistics (CAL). At CAL, Bhalla conducts research, co-authors papers,
and regularly presents at national and international conferences on issues regarding
language policy, heritage language learning, and English as an international language.
She has experience teaching and working with pre-service and in-service teachers in
the areas of culturally responsive teaching, second language acquisition, writing
development and oral communication. She received her PhD in Culture, Literacy
and Language from the University of Texas at San Antonio.
Tej K. Bhatia is Professor of Linguistics and Director of South Asian languages at
Syracuse University, Syracuse, New York. He has been Director of the Linguistic
Studies Program and Acting Director of Cognitive Sciences. He is also a Faculty
Fellow at the Forensic & National Security Sciences Institute. He is Editor-in-Chief
of Brill Research Perspectives on Multilingualism and Second Language Acquisition. His
publications include five handbooks with William C. Ritchie: Handbook of
Bilingualism and Multilingualism (2013), A New Handbook of Second Language
Acquisition (2009), The Handbook of Bilingualism (2006), Handbook of Child Language
Acquisition (1999), and Handbook of Second Language Acquisition (1996).
David Bloome is College of Education and Human Ecology (EHE) Distinguished
Professor of Teaching and Learning at The Ohio State University. David’s research
focuses on how people use spoken and written language for learning, teaching, social
relationships, constructing knowledge, and shared histories. He is former president of
the National Council of Teachers of English and of the National Conference on
Research in Language and Literacy; former co-editor of Reading Research Quarterly;
and founding editor of Linguistics and Education. David was inducted into the
Reading Hall of Fame in 2008 and in 2015 he received the John. J. Gumperz Lifetime
Achievement Award.
Melissa A. Bowles is an associate professor in the Department of Spanish and
Portuguese and Director of the Second Language Acquisition and Teacher Education
PhD concentration at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. Her main
research interests are classroom second and heritage language acquisition and the
ways in which instruction differentially affects the two learner groups. She routinely
uses verbal reports in her research and has written about them extensively, most nota-
bly in The Think-Aloud Controversy in Second Language Research (2010).
Lara Bryfonski is a doctoral candidate in applied linguistics at Georgetown
University. Her research focuses primarily on interaction and corrective feedback in
second language acquisition, as well as task-based language teaching and learning.
Lara is also a licensed English as a Second Language (ESL) teacher and has taught
ESL in a variety of contexts in the U.S. and abroad.
 Notes on Contributors xvii

Kimberly Buescher is Assistant Professor of Applied Linguistics at the University of

Massachusetts, Boston. Her research interests include L2 learning and teaching, L2
literacy, students and teachers’ use of gesture, French prepositions, and teacher educa-
tion preparation. Her dissertation “Developing Second Language Narrative Literacy
Using Concept-Based Instruction and a Division-of-Labor Pedagogy” examined the
extent to which concept-based instruction and a division-of-­labor pedagogy pro-
moted the development of intermediate learners’ narrative literacy abilities in French.
She has published book chapters on the learning and teaching of French prepositions
and the internalization of talk, gesture, and concepts in the L2 classroom.
Gilcinei T. Carvalho is an associate professor at Universidade Federal de Minas
Gerais, Brazil. He is a member of the Knowledge and Social Inclusion Graduate
Program and a researcher at the Center for Literacy Studies, in the School of
Education. He explores sociolinguistic approaches in the study of acquisition and the
development of written language, including academic literacies. He is co-editor of
Jornal Letra A.
Fiona Copland is Professor of TESOL at the University of Stirling, Scotland. She has
taught English and trained teachers in a number of different countries. Her research
interests include post-observation feedback in pre-service teacher education, teaching
English to young learners and ethics in qualitative research. Fiona has written a book
on Linguistic Ethnography: Collecting, Analysing and Presenting Data (2015, SAGE)
with Angela Creese, as well as edited a collection entitled Linguistic Ethnography:
Interdisciplinary Explorations (2015, Palgrave) with Julia Snell and Sara Shaw.
Scott A. Crossley is Associate Professor of Applied Linguistics at Georgia State
University. Scott’s primary research focus is on natural language processing and the
application of computational tools and machine learning algorithms in language
learning, writing, and text comprehensibility. His main interest area is the develop-
ment and use of natural language processing tools in assessing writing quality and
text difficulty. He is also interested in the development of second language learner
lexicons and the potential to examine lexical growth and lexical proficiency using
computational algorithms.
Dustin Crowther is a visiting Assistant Professor of English at Oklahoma State
University, and holds a PhD in Second Language Studies from Michigan State
University. He previously completed his MA in Applied Linguistics at Concordia
University in Montréal, Canada. His research interests include second language pro-
nunciation, the promotion of mutual intelligibility in multilinguistic and multicul-
tural contact, World Englishes, and research methodologies. His research has been
published in a wide range of journals, including Studies in Second Language Acquisition,
The Modern Language Journal, and TESOL Quarterly.
Ron Darvin is a Vanier Scholar at the Department of Language and Literacy
Education of the University of British Columbia. Together with Bonny Norton, he
received the 2016 TESOL Award for Distinguished Research for their article
xviii Notes on Contributors

“Identity and a model of investment in applied linguistics” that appeared in the

Annual Review of Applied Linguistics. Ron has also published in TESOL Quarterly,
Journal of Language, Identity, and Education, and The Routledge Handbook of Language
and Identity.
Peter De Costa is an associate professor in the Department of Linguistics and
Languages at Michigan State University. His primary areas of research are identity
and ideology in second language acquisition. He is the author of The Power of Identity
and Ideology in Language Learning (Springer, 2016). He also edited Ethics in Applied
Linguistics Research (2016). His work has appeared in AILA Review, Applied Linguistics
Review, International Journal of Applied Linguistics, Language Learning, Language
Policy, Language Teaching, Linguistics and Education, Research in the Teaching of
English, System, TESOL Quarterly, and The Modern Language Journal. He recently
guest edited special journal issues on scalar approaches to language learning and
teaching (Linguistics and Education, 2016, with Suresh Canagarajah), teacher identity
(The Modern Language Journal, 2017, with Bonny Norton), study abroad research
methodologies (System, 2017, with Hima Rawal and Irina Zaykovskaya), and World
Englishes and second language acquisition (World Englishes, 2018, with Kingsley
Bolton). He is the co-editor of TESOL Quarterly.
Jean-Marc Dewaele is Professor of Applied Linguistics and Multilingualism at
Birkbeck, University of London. He is interested in individual differences in foreign
language acquisition and use. He won the Equality and Diversity Research Award
from the British Association for Counselling and Psychotherapy (2013) and the
Robert Gardner Award for Excellence in Second Language and Bilingualism Research
(2016) from the International Association of Language and Social Psychology. He
authored Emotions in Multiple Languages (second edition published in 2013 by
Palgrave).
Jesse Egbert is an assistant professor in the Applied Linguistics program at Northern
Arizona University. He specializes in corpus-based research on register variation, particu-
larly academic writing and online language, and methodological issues in quantitative
linguistic research. His research has been published in journals such as Journal of English
Linguistics, International Journal of Corpus Linguistics, Corpus Linguistics and Linguistic
Theory, and Applied Linguistics (2018, Routledge). His books include an edited volume
titled Triangulating Methodological Approaches in Corpus Linguistic Research (2018,
Routledge) and a book titled Register Variation Online (2018, Cambridge).
Luke K. Fryer is an associate professor and head of faculty and research postgradu-
ate student teaching and learning programs at the University of Hong Kong. His
main area of research is the role of non-cognitive factors like interest within teaching
and learning. His work on interest, related motivations, and learning strategies has
been published widely in journals such as British Journal of Educational Psychology,
Internet and Higher Education, and Computers and Education. His statistical analyses
focus on longitudinal structural equation modeling and person-centered analyses.
 Notes on Contributors xix

Susan Gass is University Distinguished Professor at Michigan State University. She

has published widely in the field of second language acquisition. She serves as co-­
editor of Studies in Second Language Acquisition. She has lectured in many parts of the
world, including South America, North America, Asia, Africa, and Australia. From
2002 to 2008, she was the President of the International Association of Applied
Linguistics and prior to that she was the President of the American Association for
Applied Linguistics. She is the recipient of numerous awards and serves as the
Director of the Second Language Studies Program and the English Language Center,
both at Michigan State University.
April Ginther is an associate professor in the Department of English at Purdue
University, where she directs two language support programs. She has been an invited
speaker and workshop provider at institutions and conferences around the world,
presenting on her primary scholarly pursuits: the development and validation of sec-
ond language proficiency assessments, the measurement of second language fluency,
and the use and interpretation of language proficiency test scores by diverse groups of
stakeholders. She recently stepped down as co-editor of Language Testing.
Kirby C. Grabowski is adjunct assistant professor in the Applied Linguistics and
TESOL Program at Teachers College, Columbia University, where she teaches courses
on second language assessment, performance assessment, generalizability theory,
pragmatics assessment, research methods, linguistics, and L2 pedagogy. She is on the
Editorial Advisory Board of Language Assessment Quarterly and formerly served on
the Executive Board for ILTA as Member-at-Large. She was a Spaan Fellow for the
ELI at the University of Michigan, and she received the 2011 Jacqueline Ross TOEFL
Dissertation Award for outstanding doctoral dissertation in second/foreign language
testing from Educational Testing Service.
Sarah Grey is Assistant Professor of Linguistics and Spanish at Fordham University
in New York City, United States of America. She uses psycholinguistic approaches
and ERPs to study adult second language acquisition and bilingualism, and her work
has appeared in The Modern Language Journal, Studies in Second Language Acquisition,
and the Journal of Neurolinguistics. She received her PhD in Applied Spanish
Linguistics from Georgetown University and prior to joining Fordham University
she worked as a postdoctoral research fellow in Psychology and the Center for
Language Science at Pennsylvania State University.
Christoph A. Hafner is an associate professor in the Department of English, City
University of Hong Kong. He has published widely in the areas of English for specific
purposes, digital literacies, and language learning and technology. He is co-author
(with Rodney H. Jones) of Understanding Digital Literacies: A Practical Introduction
(Routledge, 2012).
Linda Harklau is a professor in the TESOL and World Language Education and
Linguistics Program at the University of Georgia. Her research examines language
xx Notes on Contributors

learning and academic achievement of immigrant youth in high school and col-
lege, schooling structure and educational policy, and teacher education. A recipi-
ent of the TESOL Distinguished Research Award, she also teaches and publishes
on the subject of qualitative methods, particularly longitudinal case study and
ethnography.
David Cassels Johnson is Associate Professor of Education at the University of
Iowa. He holds a PhD (with distinction) in Educational Linguistics from the
University of Pennsylvania. His research, teaching, and service focus on how lan-
guage policies impact educational opportunities for linguistically diverse students, in
both bilingual education and English language education programs. He is the author
of Language Policy (2013, Palgrave Macmillan) and co-editor of Research Methods in
Language Policy and Planning: A Practical Guide (2015, Wiley-Blackwell, with Francis
M. Hult).
Kristopher Kyle is an assistant professor in the Department of Second Language
Studies at the University of Hawai’i. His research interests include second language
writing and speaking, language assessment, and second language acquisition. He is
especially interested in applying natural language processing (NLP) and corpora to
the exploration of these areas.
Geoffrey T. LaFlair is an assistant professor in the Department of Second Language
Studies at the University of Hawai’i at Mānoa. He conducts research on large- and
small-­scale language assessments and quantitative research methods in the field of
second language studies. His research has been published in Language Testing, Applied
Linguistics, and The Modern Language Journal.
Samuel Larner is a lecturer in Linguistics at Manchester Metropolitan University,
UK. His PhD thesis, completed in 2012, explored the socio- and psycholinguistic
theory of formulaic sequences and their use by authors when writing short personal
narratives, with the goal of identifying individual authorial consistency and distinc-
tiveness for authorship purposes. He has published several journal articles, book
chapters, and a monograph, focussing mainly on methods of forensic authorship
attribution. In addition to teaching and researching forensic linguistics, Samuel
undertakes consultancy in authorship analysis.
Jenifer Larson-Hall is an associate professor in the English Department at the
University of Kitakyushu in Japan. Her research interests lie mainly in second lan-
guage acquisition but she believes statistics substantially affects conclusions that are
drawn in the field and has published a variety of articles and books geared toward
applied researchers in second language acquisition. Her most recent book is A Guide
to Doing Statistics in Second Language Research using SPSS and R (2016, Routledge ).
Her 2017 article in The Modern Language Journal, “Moving Beyond the Bar Plot and
Line Graph to Create Informative and Attractive Graphics”, argues for the impor-
tance of data-accountable graphics.
 Notes on Contributors xxi

Shim Lew is a doctoral candidate in the Department of Language and Literacy at

the University of Georgia. Her area of research is in teacher education for English
learners, particularly developing content-area teachers’ hybrid professional develop-
ment as content and language teachers and integrating disciplinary literacy instruc-
tion into K-12 STEM classrooms.
Shaofeng Li is an associate professor in Foreign/Second Language Education at
Florida State University where he teaches courses in second language acquisition and
language pedagogy and supervises masters and PhD students. His main research
interests include task-based language teaching and learning, form-­focused instruc-
tion, individual learner differences (especially language aptitude and working mem-
ory), and research methods.
Shawn Loewen is an associate professor in Second Language Studies in the
Department of Linguistics & Germanic, Slavic, Asian and African Languages at
Michigan State University. His research interests include instructed second language
acquisition, particularly as it pertains to learner interaction. He is also interested in
research methodology and the development of statistical knowledge. He teaches a
quantitative analysis class, as well as classes on second language acquisition. In addi-
tion to journal articles, he has authored Introduction to Instructed Second Language
Acquisition (2015) and co-authored, with Luke Plonsky, An A–Z of Applied Linguistics
Research Methods (2016, Palgrave). His co-edited volume (with Masatoshi Sato) The
Routledge Handbook of Instructed Second Language Acquisition appeared in 2017.
Alison Mackey is Professor of Linguistics at Georgetown University. She is inter-
ested in interaction-­driven second language (L2) learning, L2 research methodology
and the applications of interaction through task-based language teaching, as well as
second language dialects and identities. She is the editor of the Annual Review of
Applied Linguistics, published by Cambridge University Press, an official journal of
the American Association for Applied Linguistics.
David Malinowski is a language technology and research specialist with the Center
for Language Study at Yale University. With a background in language and literacy
education, multimodal communication, and technology-enhanced learning, he con-
ducts research and supports pedagogical innovation on such technology-­related top-
ics as internet-mediated intercultural language learning (telecollaboration) and
course-sharing with videoconferencing. At the same time, he maintains a significant
interest in linguistic landscape, seeking to find productive intersections between
urban sociolinguistics and place-based language learning. David holds a masters in
TESOL from San Francisco State University and a PhD in Education from UC
Berkeley.
Jeffrey Maloney is Assistant Professor of English at Northeastern State University.
He holds a PhD in Second Language Studies from Michigan State University and an
MA in Applied Linguistics from Ohio University. His research interests include lan-
xxii Notes on Contributors

guage teacher training with technology, computer-assisted language learning, and

language teacher and learner identity.
Tui Matelau-Doherty is a PhD candidate at Auckland University of Technology
in New Zealand. Her research uses Multimodal (Inter)action Analysis to explore the
relationship between creative practice and ethnic identity. Her masters research
examined the ethnic identity co-constructed within tertiary education environments
by Māori female students. The findings of this research were published in Interactions,
Texts and Images: A Reader in Multimodality (2014, De Gruyter). In addition, poems
she wrote as part of her data collection were published in the journal Multimodal
Communication.
Kyle McIntosh is an assistant professor in the Department of English and Writing
at The University of Tampa, where he works primarily in the academic writing and
TESOL certificate programs. His research focuses on English for Academic Purposes,
intercultural rhetoric, and writing assessment. With Carolina Pelaez-Morales and
Tony Silva, he co-edited the volume Graduate Studies in Second Language Writing
(2015).
Elizabeth R. Miller is Associate Professor of Applied Linguistics in the English
Department at the University of North Carolina at Charlotte. Her research involves
adult immigrant learners of English in the U.S. and focuses on issues related to lan-
guage ideologies and learners’ agency and identity. Her work has appeared in a num-
ber of journals, and two of her recent publications include The Language of Adult
Immigrants: Agency in the Making (2014) and the co-edited volume Theorizing and
Analyzing Agency in Second Language Learning: Interdisciplinary Approaches (2015).
Reza Norouzian is a PhD candidate in the English as a Second Language program
at Texas A&M University. In addition to his doctoral studies, Reza has also obtained
a Graduate Certificate in Advanced Research Methods from Texas A&M University.
Reza’s research interests include instructed second language acquisition and advanced
research methods. Reza has published in a number of journals including Second
Language Research and Issues in Applied Linguistics. Reza is a contributor to
StackExchange (data science, statistics, and programming forum).
Sigrid Norris is Professor of Multimodal (Inter)action and Director of the AUT
Multimodal Research Centre at Auckland University of Technology in New Zealand.
Born in Feudingen Germany, she received her BA in Russian Language and Literature
from George Washington University, and later received an MS and was conferred her
PhD in Linguistics by Georgetown University in the United States. She is the founder
of the theoretical/methodological framework Multimodal (Inter)action Analysis, has
edited and authored numerous academic books, journal articles and book chapters,
written two poetry books, and is the editor of the international journal Multimodal
Communication.
Saerhim Oh is Senior Test Development Manager at Assessment Technology and
Engineering at Pearson. Her research interests include linguistic tools in second lan-
 Notes on Contributors xxiii

guage writing assessment, feedback in second language writing, speech recognition in

second language speaking assessment, and English Language Learner assessment. She
received her doctorate degree in Applied Linguistics from Teachers College, Columbia
University. She was the 2017 Robert Lado Memorial Award recipient in recognition
of the best graduate student paper presentation at the annual meeting of Language
Testing Research Colloquium (LTRC).
Magali Paquot is a permanent Fonds de la Recherche Scientifique (F.R.S.-FNRS)
research associate at the Centre for English Corpus Linguistics, Université catholique
de Louvain. She is co-editor-in-chief of the International Journal of Learner Corpus
Research and a founding member of the Learner Corpus Research Association. Her
research interests include corpus linguistics, learner corpus research, vocabulary,
phraseology, second language acquisition, linguistic complexity, crosslinguistic influ-
ence, English for Academic Purposes, pedagogical lexicography and electronic
lexicography.
Aek Phakiti is an associate professor in TESOL at the University of Sydney. His
research focuses on language testing and assessment, second language acquisition,
and research methods in language learning. He is the author of Strategic Competence
and EFL Reading Test Performance (2007), Experimental Research Methods in Language
Learning (2014), Language Testing and Assessment: From Theory to Practice (Bloomsbury,
forthcoming), and, with Carsten Roever, of Quantitative Methods for Second Language
Research: A Problem-Solving Approach (2018). With Brian Paltridge, he edited the
Continuum Companion to Research Methods in Applied Linguistics (2010) and Research
Methods in Applied Linguistics: A Practical Resource (2015). He is Associate Editor of
Language Assessment Quarterly. He was Vice President of ALTAANZ (Association for
Language Testing and Assessment of Australia and New Zealand, 2015–2017).
Jesse Pirini is a lecturer in the School of Management at the Victoria Business
School, Victoria University of Wellington. Jesse received his PhD at the Auckland
University of Technology, studying knowledge communication, agency and intersub-
jectivity in high school tutoring. Jesse develops multimodal theory and methodology.
He works with a wide range of data sources, including f­ amily interaction, high school
tutoring, augmented reality and video conferencing. Along with academic journal
articles and chapters, Jesse is also the author of a practical workbook for training
tutors and he supports community-based peer tutoring programmes.
Luke Plonsky is Associate Professor of Applied Linguistics at Northern Arizona
University, where he teaches courses in research methods and second language acquisition.
Recent and forthcoming publications in these and other areas can be found in journals
such as Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, Applied Linguistics, Language Learning, The
Modern Language Journal, and Studies in Second Language Acquisition, as well as in edited
volumes published by Cambridge University Press, Wiley Blackwell, De Gruyter, and
others. He is also Associate Editor of Studies in Second Language Acquisition, Managing
Editor of Foreign Language Annals, and Co-Director of IRIS (iris-database.org).
xxiv Notes on Contributors

Matthew T. Prior is Associate Professor of Applied Linguistics/Linguistics/TESOL

in the Department of English at Arizona State University, where he teaches courses in
qualitative methods, discourse analysis, sociolinguistics, TESOL, and second lan-
guage acquisition. His interests include narrative, discursive-­ constructionist
approaches to identity, and social-psychological dimensions of multilingualism. He is
author of Emotion and Discourse in L2 Narrative Research (2016) and co-editor of the
volume Emotion in Multilingual Interaction (2016).
Sanghee Ryu is a research professor in the research center of Korean Language and
Literature Education at Korea University, South Korea. Ryu’s research focuses on the
use of discourse analysis and formative-design experiments to explore and improve
the teaching and learning of argumentative writing with an emphasis on underlying
definitions of rationality. Ryu has taught pre-service teacher education courses on
teaching reading and teaching writing at The Ohio State University. She teaches grad-
uate courses on research methodology at Korea University.
Betty Samraj is Professor of Linguistics at San Diego State University. Her main
research interests are in academic writing in different disciplines (including interdis-
ciplinary fields) and genre analysis. She has conducted analyses of several different
genres such as research article introductions, abstracts, masters theses, graduate stu-
dent research papers, manuscript reviews, personal statements and, most recently,
suicide notes. She teaches teacher preparation courses such as English for Specific
Purposes and Teaching ESL Reading and Writing in a masters program in applied
linguistics.
Gale Stam is Professor of Psychology at National Louis University in Chicago,
Illinois. Her research interests include language, culture, and cognition; gesture; and
L1 and L2 acquisition. She has published articles on changes in thinking for speak-
ing, the importance of looking at gesture in L2 acquisition, gesture and lexical
retrieval in an L2 setting, and language teachers’ gestures. She serves on the editorial
board of the journals Gesture and Language and Sociocultural Theory and has co-edited
two volumes: Gesture: Second Language Acquisition and Classroom Research (2008)
and Integrating Gestures: The Interdisciplinary Nature of Gesture (2011).
Sue Starfield is a professor in the School of Education at UNSW Sydney. With
Brian Paltridge, she is co-author of Thesis and Dissertation Writing in a Second
Language: A Handbook for Supervisors (2007) and of Getting published in academic
journals: Negotiating the publication process (2016) and co-editor of the Handbook of
English for Specific Purposes (2013). She co-authored Ethnographic Perspectives on
Academic Writing with Brian Paltridge and Christine Tardy (2016). With Brian
Paltridge, she is co-editor of two new book series: Routledge Introductions to English
for Specific Purposes and Routledge Research in English for Specific Purposes. Her research
interests include tertiary academic literacies, advanced academic writing, postgradu-
ate pedagogy, ethnographic methodologies, identity in academic writing, and access
and equity in higher education.
 Notes on Contributors xxv

Crissa Stephens is a doctoral candidate at the University of Iowa. Her work uses a
critical sociocultural lens to examine how language policies interact with social iden-
tity development and opportunity in education. Her teaching and activism in the US
and abroad help to inspire her approach, and her recent publications utilize ethno-
graphic and discourse-analytic methods to explore language policy and educational
equity in local contexts.
Scott Sterling is Assistant Professor of TESOL and Linguistics in the Department
of Languages, Literatures, and Linguistics at Indiana State University. His recent
work investigates the level of training, current beliefs and practices that the field of
applied linguistics has towards research ethics. His main area of focus is meta-research,
particularly research ethics, and he has published work related to these topics in vari-
ous journals and edited volumes in linguistics. He completed his PhD at Michigan
State University in 2015 with a dissertation that focused on the complexity and com-
prehensibility of consent forms used in ESL research.
Jeffrey Stewart is Director of Educational Measurement and a lecturer at Kyushu
Sangyo University in Japan. He has published articles in numerous journals such as
TESOL Quarterly and Language Assessment Quarterly regarding vocabulary acquisi-
tion and testing using a number of advanced statistical modeling tools, most specifi-
cally item response theory.
Kaitlyn M. Tagarelli works as a postdoctoral fellow in Psychology and Neuroscience
at Dalhousie University in Halifax, Canada. She received her PhD in Applied
Linguistics from Georgetown University and her research uses behavioral, Event-
related Potential (ERP), and Functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) tech-
niques to examine the neural and cognitive mechanisms involved in language learning
and processing. Dr. Tagarelli is particularly interested in the brain structures and
memory systems underlying language learning, and how individual differences and
learning conditions interact with learning processes and outcomes. Her work has
appeared in edited volumes and Studies in Second Language Acquisition.
Hong Wang is a subject librarian and information specialist at the University of
Auckland. She has a masters degree in library and information science, a bachelor’s
degree in foreign language education, and an associate degree in computer science.
She has extensive experience in lecturing on information literacy, and she has also
taught ESL and Chinese in various instructional settings in China and the U.S.
Terrence G. Wiley is Professor Emeritus at Arizona State University and immediate-
past President of the Center for Applied Linguistics, specializing in language educa-
tion and policy. His recent works include Handbook of Heritage, Community, and
Native American Languages: Research, Policy, and Practice (co-editor, 2014) and Review
of Research in Education, 2014, 38(1). Wiley co-founded the Journal of Language,
Identity and Education and the International Multilingual Research Journal. He is
organizer of the International Language Policy Research Network of Association
xxvi Notes on Contributors

Internationale de la Linguistique Appliquée and recipient of the American Association

for Applied Linguistics Distinguished Scholarship and Service Award (2014).
Anna Her Yang is a doctoral student in the Department of Language and Literacy
Education at the University of Georgia. She is also the project coordinator of a five-
year National Professional Development grant. Her research interest primarily focuses
on the pedagogical experiences of mainstreamed ESOL (content-area) teachers of
English learners.
Soo Jung Youn is Assistant Professor of English at Northern Arizona University,
USA. Her academic interests include L2 pragmatic assessment, task-based language
teaching, quantitative research methods, and conversation analysis. In particular, her
research focuses on assessing L2 learners’ ability to accomplish various pragmatic
actions in interaction by investigating a wide range of interactional features indicative
of a varying degree of pragmatic competence using mixed methods. Her studies have
recently been published in Language Testing, System, and Applied Linguistics Review.
Richard F. Young is Emeritus Professor of English at the University of Wisconsin-
Madison and Chutian Professor in the School of Foreign Languages at Central China
Normal University. His research focuses on the relationship between language and
social context and has resulted in four books: Discursive Practice in Language Learning
and Teaching (2009), Language and Interaction (2008), Talking and Testing, and
Variation in Interlanguage Morphology (1998), as well as over 70 articles.
 List of Figures

Fig. 1.1 The five key stages of empirical research 13

Fig. 2.1 “Practicing speaking” in Spanish (Hall, 2004, p. 76) 34
Fig. 2.2 Representing embodied cognition (Goodwin, 2003, Fig. 2.9,
p. 35)39
Fig. 3.1 Beeswarm plot of interest in interacting with Chatbot (Data 1)
and human partner (Data 2) 61
Fig. 3.2 Diagram of longitudinal Chatbot experiment design 65
Fig. 3.3 Combination interaction/boxplots of the longitudinal Chatbot
data66
Fig. 3.4 A parallel plot showing interest in human versus Chatbot
interlocutors over three testing times 68
Fig. 3.5 Hypothesized model of interest in task and course 71
Fig. 3.6 Final model of interest in task and course 71
Fig. 9.1 The four questions framework 185
Fig. 9.2 Visual prompt for a literature review 188
Fig. 9.3 How is my study contributing? 191
Fig. 12.1 Draft 1 of fieldnotes 254
Fig. 12.2 Coded fieldnotes 259
Fig. 12.3 Screenshot of Transana programme used to collate fieldnotes and
recordings (Hall, personal data, 2015) 264
Fig. 14.1 Sample visual world. Note: In this example, “cat” is the target,
“caterpillar” is an onset competitor, “bat” is a rhyme competitor,
and “hedgehog” is an unrelated distractor. Images are from the
Multipic database (Duñabeitia et al., 2017) 291
Fig. 14.2 Sample data from mouse-tracking language experiment. Note:
The black line represents a competitor trajectory; the gray line
represents a target trajectory. Images are from the Multipic
database (Duñabeitia et al., 2017) 292

xxvii
xxviii List of Tables

Fig. 14.3 Sample ERP waves and scalp topography maps of the standard
ERP correlate of semantic processing (N400). Note: Each tick
mark on y-axis represents 100 ms; x-axis represents voltage in
microvolts, ±3μV; negative is plotted up. The black line repre-
sents brain activity to correct items, such as plane in example 2a.
The blue line represents brain activity to a semantic anomaly,
such as cactus in example 2b. The topographic scalp maps show
the distribution of activity in the anomaly minus correct
conditions with a calibration scale of ±4μV. From data reported
in Grey and Van Hell (2017) 296
Fig. 14.4 Examples of (a) semantic priming using lexical decision, (b)
masked semantic priming, and (c) syntactic priming using a
picture description task. Note: Drawing credit: Kyle Brimacombe 298
Fig. 14.5 Artificial linguistic systems in language learning paradigms
(based on Morgan-Short et al., 2010; Saffran et al., 1996;
Tagarelli, 2014). Note: Drawing credit: Kyle Brimacombe 302
Fig. 17.1 Grammar and Beyond 4, “Avoid Common Mistakes” box (p. 75) 365
Fig. 17.2 “Be careful note” on the overuse of modal auxiliaries (MEDAL2,
p. 17)367
Fig. 19.1 Scatterplots of four samples of students’ scores 401
Fig. 19.2 Scatterplots indicating small, medium, and large r in L2 research 402
Fig. 19.3 Crosshatched area representing an r2 of 0.25 (25%) 403
Fig. 19.4 Representation of Pearson’s r as a non-directional measure 404
Fig. 19.5 Representation of regression as a directional measure 404
Fig. 19.6 Scatterplot for predicting OLA from LR(years)406
Fig. 19.7 Menu for selecting simple regression analysis in SPSS 407
Fig. 19.8 Selections for running regression analysis in SPSS 407
Fig. 19.9 Statistics for running regression in SPSS 408
Fig. 19.10 ANOVA partitioning of total sum of squares (SOS) in OLA
(R2 = 50.1%)410
Fig. 19.11 Scatterplot with for LR(years) predicting OLA with the regression
line413
Fig. 19.12 Factor shown as the commonly shared area among standardized
variables417
Fig. 20.1 EFA versus PCA 425
Fig. 20.2 12 essential steps in EFA 429
Fig. 20.3 Screenshot of the strategy use in lectures data 429
Fig. 20.4 Descriptive statistics options in SPSS 430
Fig. 20.5 EFA in SPSS 432
Fig. 20.6 Factor analysis menu 433
Fig. 20.7 SPSS Descriptives dialog box 433
Fig. 20.8 SPSS extraction dialog box 435
Fig. 20.9 SPSS extraction dialog box 436
 List of Figures xxix

Fig. 20.10 Scree plot (PCA) 438

Fig. 20.11 Creating a parallel analysis syntax 439
Fig. 20.12 Customising a parallel analysis syntax in SPSS 440
Fig. 20.13 Extracting factors using the principal axes factoring method with
the fixed factor number = 5 441
Fig. 20.14 Scree plot (PAF) 443
Fig. 20.15 Rotation dialog box (direct Oblimin method) 444
Fig. 20.16 Rotation dialog box (Varimax method) 445
Fig. 20.17 Options dialog box 445
Fig. 20.18 Creating a factor score 452
Fig. 20.19 Factor scores in the SPSS data sheet 452
Fig. 20.20 Creating a composite score for comprehending strategies 453
Fig. 21.1 A third-order factor CFA model 462
Fig. 21.2 CFA model of reading performance (Standardised solution;
N = 651)463
Fig. 21.3 CFA model of reading performance (Unstandardised solution;
N = 651)464
Fig. 21.4 A hypothesised SEM model of the influences of trait cognitive
and metacognitive processing on reading performance (N = 651)466
Fig. 21.5 Eight essential steps in CFA or SEM 470
Fig. 21.6 Open a data file in EQS 478
Fig. 21.7 EQS spreadsheet 479
Fig. 21.8 EQS diagram drawing tool 480
Fig. 21.9 EQS diagram drawing canvas 481
Fig. 21.10 Factor structure specification 481
Fig. 21.11 A hypothesised CFA of comprehending strategies 482
Fig. 21.12 EQS model specifications 483
Fig. 21.13 EQS model specifications 484
Fig. 21.14 Analysis in EQS 485
Fig. 21.15 Distribution of standardised residuals 486
Fig. 21.16 Parameter estimates options 490
Fig. 21.17 First-order CFA for comprehending strategy use (unedited
version)491
Fig. 21.18 Revised first-order CFA model for comprehending strategy use 492
Fig. 21.19 Distribution of standardised residuals (revised model) 493
Fig. 21.20 Revised CFA model of comprehending strategy use 494
Fig. 22.1 Histogram of vocabulary test scores for Teaching Method 2 507
Fig. 23.1 Bar plot displaying normed frequency of said in news and other
CORE registers 527
Fig. 23.2 Resampled mean differences based on the data from Donaldson
(2011)533
Fig. 25.1 TAALES GUI 579
Fig. 25.2 TAALES .csv file for analysis 580
xxx List of Figures

Fig. 25.3 WEKA explorer 581

Fig. 25.4 File selection in WEKA 581
Fig. 25.5 Histogram for normally distributed TAALES index 582
Fig. 25.6 Histogram for non-normally distributed TAALES data 583
Fig. 25.7 Selection of model in WEKA 585
Fig. 25.8 Selection of cross-validation type in WEKA 585
Fig. 25.9 Initial linear regression model reported in WEKA with suppres-
sion effects 586
Fig. 25.10 Final linear regression model 587
Fig. 33.1 Heritage language dissertations between 2011 and 2016 by
country748
Fig. 33.2 Language(s) studied by articles in the Heritage Language Journal
and dissertations. Note: Some of the articles published in the
Heritage Language Journal and dissertations publised in the
ProQuest Database contain the examination of one more
heritage language 751
 List of Tables

Table 5.1 Common types of mixed methods designs 107

Table 6.1 A comparison between traditional reviews and research
syntheses140
Table 9.1 Thesis proposals: structure and purpose (based on Paltridge &
Starfield, 2007, p. 61) 194
Table 10.1 Moves in empirical research article introductions 203
Table 10.2 Dimensions to consider when constructing a research article 214
Table 10.3 Discovering norms for use of metadiscoursal features 215
Table 14.1 Common language-related ERP effects 295
Table 19.1 Two variables showing a perfectly positive Pearson’s r397
Table 19.2 Two variables showing a perfectly negative Pearson’s r398
Table 19.3 Imperfect r due to differences in ordering399
Table 19.4 Imperfect r due to differences in scores’ shapes399
Table 19.5 Imperfect r due to differences in scores’ shapes and ordering399
Table 19.6 Data for predicting OLA from LR (N = 10)405
Table 19.7 SPSS output of model summary from simple regression
analysis408
Table 19.8 ANOVA output table for simple regression analysis in SPSS 409
Table 19.9 Output for regression coefficients in SPSS 412
Table 19.10 Result of prediction of OLA from LRyears for our ten partici-
pants412
Table 19.11 Coefficients table with modified scale for predictor variable 413
Table 20.1 Descriptive statistics of items one to five 431
Table 20.2 Cronbach’s alpha coefficient of the questionnaire 431
Table 20.3 KMO and Bartlett’s test based on 37 items 434
Table 20.4 Communalities (initial and extracted) 437
Table 20.5 Total variance explained 438

xxxi
Another random document with
no related content on Scribd:
 Päivä kallistui iltapuolelle, kun Hannes joutui tutuille maille.
Siinähän oli jo Hautalan ja Hakalan raja. Linja pohotti aukeana kauas
pohjoiseen.

Mieli heltyi ja lämpeni entistä perintömaata astuessa. Joka kivi ja

kanto ja tien mutka oli tuttua.

Maa oli joka paikassa samaa, mutta kaikesta huolimatta

synnyinseutu oli kaikista rakkainta. Kurjia ne, jotka siitä
vapaaehtoisesti luopuivat.

Hakalan lähellä, eräällä metsäpolulla, tuli Hautalaisen poika, Olli

häntä vastaan.

— Kas, Hanneshan se… taidat mennä isäukkoasi katsomaan,

puheli Olli.

— Niinpä aioin.

Tuossa oli siis riistäjän poika, ainoa Hautalassa. Hannes ei voinut

mitään, että tunsi kylmiä väreitä hänen läheisyydessään.

— Onkin isäsi sairastellut viime aikoina. Taitaa pian loppu

lähennellä…

— Taitaapa, taitaa… taisit olla menossa maitasi katselemaan,

virkkoi
Hannes kylmästi.

— Eipä minulle niin erikoista… aisapuita olisi pitänyt, mutta minä

voinkin tulla mukaasi.
 Metsätiellä oli vähän vaikea kävellä rinnakkain ja Hannes jäi
askeleen jälemmäksi.

— Minulta se isä kuoli, kuului Olli sanovan. Et taida tietääkään.

— Kuoli? Isäsi! Ja milloinka? En ole kuullut.

— Johan siitä on pian kolmisen kuukautta. Pääsiäisenä olivat

hautajaiset.

Hanneksesta oli tieto kummallinen. Mies täysissä voimissa ja

tietysti viimeiseen asti halukas kokoomaan maallista tavaraa. Sai
jättää kaikki.

He kulkivat hetkisen vaieten. Hannes mietti, että nyt on pojalla

kaksi taloa, vaikka ei kykene viljelemään kunnollisesti yhtäkään.

— Asettuisit sinäkin kotitaloosi. En minä monia taloja tarvitse,

kuului
Olli sanovan. Paremminhan Hakala sinulle kuuluu kuin minulle.

Hannes astui Ollin rinnalle. Mitä hän nyt kuulikaan?

— Että mitä?

— Sitä vain, että ottaisit Hakalan hoteillesi. En minä sillä suuria

voittoja pyydä. Vai et ehkä halunnekaan maamieheksi?

Hannekselle oli Ollin puhe melkein outoa. Miten Hautalaisen poika

voisi saamansa noin vain luovuttaa. Mutta ehkäpä olikin pojasta polvi
muuttunut.

— Kyllähän minä maamieheksi aion, mutta taidat vaatia Hakalalla

siksi paljon, että on minunlaiseni mahdotonta ajatella.
 — Mitäpä minä… talossa tosin teki isäukko korjauksia ja onhan
maan arvo muutenkin noussut. Sen hinta kai nousi
viiteenkymmeneen tuhanteen, mutta sinä saisit sen
kuudellakymmenellä… Sittenpähän näet, kun katselet.

— Onko sinulla ihan tosi aikomus talon myyntiin? tuli jo lämpimästi

Hannekselta. Miksi hän ei ottanut rahoja tehtaan konttorista. Siinä
setelipinossa olisi ollut melkein riittävä summa. Mutta ehkäpä Olli
puhuukin ilmaa vain.

— Mitä minä kahdella talolla… ja taisi isältäkin tulla suotta niin

kuin ahnasteltua sen talon kanssa.

Hyvä, että Olli myönsi sen. Monta muuta oli ukko aikoinaan
ahnastellut.

— Pysytkö siis tarjouksessasi? kysyi Hannes.

— Minun puolestani saat hakea kirjan tekijän vaikka paikalla.

— Mutta eihän minulla ole rahoja, virkkoi Hannes kuin

koetellakseen toisen aikomuksia.

— Mitä minä… jäihän noita vähän ukolta … tottapahan maksat.

Onhan siinä nouseva metsä, kyllä sinä siinä alkuun pääset. Se iso
suokin on nyt laitettu.

He olivat tulleet talon pihaan. Navettakartano oli uusi ja

hauskannäköinen. Tuparakennuskin oli katettu ja korjailtu. Hannes
katseli kaikkea kuin ihmetellen. Vihdoin hän ojensi kätensä Ollille.

— Tuohon käteen siis. Minä haen illalla kirjan tekijän.

 — Sama kai se on.

— Mennäänpä sitte isäukolle kertomaan… eiköhän ällisty, arveli

Hannes.

— Se taitaa vähät semmoisista… on jo kuulonsakin menettänyt.

Tulenpahan sitten illalla ja tuon vieraat miehet.

Hannes katseli portailla hetkisen poistuvaa naapuria. Olisi tehnyt

mieli juosta hänen jälkeensä ja sulkea hänet veljen syleilyyn.

*****

— Nyt minä tulin, huusi Hannes isänsä korvaan porstuakamarissa.

— Ka, niin, niin… minä tässä vain huonoudessani…

— Ja nyt en enää menekään… Olli myy Hakalan minulle… tänä

iltana tulee kirjan tekijä.

Ukko ei näyttänyt oikein käsittävän.

— Myy… ei se enää mitä myy… johan se kuopattiin…

— Olli myy talon minulle! huusi hän uudelleen ukon korvaan, ja

ukko näytti käsittävän.

— Vai myy… onko sulla rahaa? liekö sinusta talon mieheksi…

— On rahaakin… ja minusta on tullut mies… ymmärtääkö isä?

Mutta ukko turisi vain:

— … tässä huonoudessani… vai on sulla rahoja…

 Hannes jätti isänsä ja meni pelloille. Suvilaiho lainehti viljavana ja
ruis teki tähkää. Nyt ei näkynyt missään surkastunutta, vaan kaikki
oli rehevää todistaen työn siunausta.

Hannes tunsi niin rajatonta kiitollisuutta, että hänen teki mieli

laskeutua polvilleen tuoksuvaan nurmeen. Hän oli sittenkin päässyt
maahan kiinni ja saanut samalla lapsuuskodin takaisin itselleen.

Hannes muisti pihaan palatessaan, että oli luvannut palata taloon

takaisin, josta lähti. Mitä he nyt sanovat, kun häntä ei kuulukaan.
Heitä minä kaipaan aina, ajatteli hän. Ja taloa myös. Siellä minä sain
suorittaa yhden luokan itsekasvatuksen kovaa koulua.
XIV.

Seuraavana päivänä oli talon työväki aamiaisella, kun Hannes palasi

kyytimästä kirjantekijää kirkonkylään. Hän oli keittiön kautta mennyt
kamariinsa ja kuuli tuvasta miesten keskustelun. Suvituuli leyhytteli
avonaisesta ikkunasta sisään.

— Se kuuluu siellä tehtaassa ollessaan keksineen jonkun koneen,

sanoi joku miehistä syöntinsä lomassa.

— Minkä koneen?

— Mikä lie peltovärkki… en häntä paremmin tiedä.

— Sanovat sen siitä saaneen rahoja niin paljon, ettei uskaltanut

yhdelläkertaa mukaansa ottaa.

— Elä… se on sitten rikas.

— Velkanapahan kuuluu talo olevan, sanoi joku tiukalla äänellä.

Eikö liene hävittänyt jos on saanutkin. Osasi sen isäkin ennen
hävittää.

Ja sitten seurasi pitkä juttu siitä, miten ukko ennen hävitti ja sai
rahoja menemään.
 Hannes tunsi hieman masentuvansa. Tulisiko vastakin olemaan
niin, että arveltiin pojan seuraavan isänsä polkuja. Tämä ei tuntunut
hyvältä. Ja mitä heillä oli aina toisten asioissa tekemistä. Kun
omiaan ei kukaan kehdannut ajatella, niin oli mukava toisten
portinpieluksia penkoa.

Tuvasta kuului vielä ukkojen turina.

— On se käynyt riuskaksi liikkeiltään. Ei luulisikaan Hakalan Eeron

pojaksi.

— Taitaa hyvin tuntea oman arvonsa.

— Mistä sen tietää… mies on vasta ensimäistä päivää isäntänä,

kuului joku vanhempi mies sanovan.

Keskustelu tuntui saaneen ikävän käänteen. Enemmistöllä tuntui

olevan niinkuin jotain vanhaa muisteltavaa häntä vastaan.

Joku miehistä aloitti taas:

— Mutta mitenkähän tosiaankin on sen kanssa, että velaksi otti

talon, jos kerran oli rahoja.

Hannesta melkein nauratti. Hän oli istunut keinuun kädet pään

taakse ja jäänyt kuuntelemaan juttua.

Olipas niillä tekemistä hänen rahoistaan, joita ei edes voinut sanoa

olevankaan.

Setelipinkka oli jäänyt sinne pöydälle häneltä. Oli tosin sanottu,

että rahat talletetaan pankkiin, josta ne saisi.
 Itse asiassa oli samantekevää, jos ei saisikaan niitä rahoja.
Parempi oli lähteä näin tyhjästä ponnistamaan. Hyvinvointi olisi vain
hyvä pohja veltolle elämälle. Hän voisi kyllä talon maksaa
muutenkin. Ison suon oli Hautalainen laittanut hyvään kuntoon ja
kasvoihan metsäkin.

Miehet olivat jo poistuneet töihinsä, kun Hannes meni tupaan ja

asettui aterialle.

Tuvassa liikehti nuori tyttö, jota vanha Saara kuului sanovan

Liisaksi.
Hannes oli nyt vasta huomannut tytön.

Liisa oli verevä ja sukkela liikkeissään ja Hannes huomasi, että

tyttö oli heti ensi näkemältä miellyttävä.

Liisa toi lisää ruokia pöytään ja Hannes huomasi, että tytöllä oli
siniset silmät ja somanmuotoinen suu.

— Mistä sinä olet? kysyi Hannes tytöltä.

Tyttö hymähti. Hannes ei tuntenut häntä, vaikka hän oli ollut kerran
ennenkin talossa.

— Haanpään mökistä minä olen.

— Haanpään Liisa, niinkö?

— Niin.

— Enpäs minä sinua tuntenut. Olet somistunut ja pyöristynyt.

Tyttö punastui.
 — Mistäpähän isäntä olisi muistanut.

»Isäntä» kuulosti hieman vieraalta.

— Kun kerran olet Liisa, niin sano minua Hannekseksi.

Tyttö punastui vielä enemmän ja poistui askareilleen.

Hannes ei voinut aivan heti kääntää hänestä ajatuksiaan toisaalle.

Sillä oli hiuksetkin kuin kultaa.

Mutta mitäpä nyt siitä. Oli mentävä pelloille.

Taloon oli jäänyt entiset hevoset eri kaupassa ja Hanneksen vanha

ajokas oli vielä säilynyt ajokunnossa. Hannes kävi suitsimassa sen
haasta ja meni kynnökselle.

Astuessaan auran jälessä mietti Hannes viime päivien menoa. Oli

tapahtunut paljon kahdessa päivässä. Hän oli saanut
perintömaansa, oman kotinsa kuin ihmeen kautta. Ja sitten oli
talossa tyttö, josta hän tunsi ensi näkemältä pitävänsä.

Vaikka eihän Liisa tietysti ollutkaan talossa sitä varten, että hänen
pitäisi tyttöä omakseen katsella. Kukaan ei taas kieltäisi
katselemastakaan.

Liisa oli ollut kiltti jo pienenä tyttönä ja näytti suorittavan nytkin

hyvin tehtävänsä.

Hän oli ehtinyt mietteissään jo toiselle sarkapalstalle. Aura tuntui

kuin värisevän työntyessään maahan. Hän painoi sitä syvemmälle.
Tämä oli toista kuin tehtaassa rehkiminen ja sitten kaikkein
alkuperäisintä ja ihaninta työtä. Miksi tätä halveksittiin? Miksi talojen
pojat ja tyttäret olivat kansoittaneet kaupunkeja ja tehdasalueita?

Yhteiskunta taisi sittenkin olla suuria parannuksia vailla. Elettiin

ehkä murrosajan kynnyksellä. Maatyö ja vähäväkisen luokan maasta
eläminen oli joutunut huonoon huutoon. Jos oli tätä luokkaa kohtaan
vaatimuksia, täytyisi olla samalla velvollisuuksiakin. Olojen
pakottamana oli kovin monen täytynyt jättää perkkiönsä ja lähteä
kaupunkiin tai tehtaaseen.

Se oli taas häpeä, että maataomistavan luokan pojat ja tyttäret

unohtivat ihanimman ja kunniakkaimman: maatyön. Hän ei
huomannutkaan, että ilta oli käsissä, ennen kuin näki miesten
riisuvan hevosiaan.

Hänen taluttaessaan hevosta pihan poikki hakaan kulki Liisa siinä

hänen edellään maitohuoneeseen. Käänsi päänsä ja hymyili jo kuin
tuttavalle.

Hannes olisi tahtonut tietää, oliko kukaan onnellisempi kuin hän

päivätyön päätyttyä omalla pihallaan.
XV.

Heinäkuu oli tullut kuin huomaamatta. Hannes ajeli kirkonkylästä.

Maantie muuttui huonoksi ja kuoppaiseksi, kun kylätielle käännyttiin.

Siinä oli tienvarressa kylä siellä, toinen täällä. Muutamien ulkoasu

oli ränsistynyt ja näiden omistajilla oli asiatkin huonosti. Kunnan
pankki ja paremmin asutut naapurit olivat saamamiehinä. Omistajat
kävelivät askareissaan velttoina ja allapäin.

He eivät ole oppineet tekemään työtä, ja siinä koko juttu, mietti

Hannes ohi ajellessaan. He eivät ymmärrä, että työllä voidaan
pelastaa kaikki. Ei ainoastaan kannattavat ja huonosti tuottavat
vainiot, vaan myöskin ihminen.

Hannes muisteli menneisyyttään. Työ oli ollut joskus sangen

vaikeata suorittaa. Se tuli tehdyksi hutiloimalla, mutta se ei antanut
tyydytystä. Kaipasi huveja ja muuta semmoista.

Ja niin seurasi onnettomat harha-askeleet. Joskus oli saanut

työstä jonkunlaista nautintoa, mutta se särkyi, kun sairas veri vaati
rikosta jatkamaan.

Kuin ihmeen kautta oli hän pelastunut.

 Entinen sukutalo nousi nyt kuin tuhkasta. Vieläkin oli paljon
voitettavana, vaan kaikki oli leikkiä entisyyteen verraten.

Kylällä juoruiltiin hänestä kaikenlaista. Kansaparka ravitsi itseään

ja naapureitaan juoruilla. Ja oli vanha tapa, että ei ennusteltu hyvää
pojalle, jonka isä oli tehnyt haaksirikon, tai ottanut vain harha-
askeleitakin.

Hänkin oli saanut juoruista runsaan osansa. Jotkut sattuivat niistä

kipeästi, mutta työssä löysi rauhallisen mielen.

Äskettäin oli hän yrittänyt tehdä jotain kylän edistyspyrintöjen

herättämiseksi. Kylässä oli ollut ennen nuorisoseura, mutta se oli
vuoden elettyään jäänyt siihen. Hannes oli esittänyt kylän nuorille,
että pantaisiin seura pystyyn uudelleen.

Siitäkös syntyi elämä! Muutamat nauroivat vasten naamaa ja kylän

kellot soittivat suutaan.

— Vai rupeisi tämä Eeron poika nuorisoseuraa puuhaamaan,

mukamas…
Mikähän se on olevinaan. Kaikki tässä!

— Saisi tyttöjen kanssa siellä puuhata ja halailla niitä. On sillä

isänsä metkut.

— Kunhan se äityy nyt siinä, niin rupeaa vielä papiksi!

Nämä puheet oli Hannes saanut kuulla kerran kylällä käydessään.

Joku isäntämieskin oli naureskellen veistellyt:

— Se tämä Hannu taitaa puuhata sitä nuorisoseuraansa vielä…

eiköhän olisi parasta, kun sonniyhtiön perustaisit. Niitä
sonniasioitahan se isäsikin ennen harrasti.

Ja sitten oli mies livauttanut silmää naapurilleen ja pirullisesti

nauranut.

Se koski kipeästi.

Jääköön vain hänen puolestaan kaikki yhteisharrastukset

kyläläisten kanssa. Hän tiesi kumminkin, että vaikka olisi yrittänyt
jotain muutakin, olisi tulos ollut sama. Ei kannattanut.

Ja Hannes oli päättänyt tämän jälkeen sulkeutua kokonaan omaan

elämäänsä. Hänen omilla alueillaan olisi hänelle työalaa.

Hakalan mailla oli autiomökkejä ja hän oli päättänyt ne asuttaa ja

panna kuntoon uudelleen.

Oli sellaisiakin mäkitupia ja torppia, joissa elettiin kituvaa elämää.

Niissä olisi hänen edistyshalullaan työalaa, ränsistyneitten tupien
sijalle uusia ja pellot voimaperäisiksi. Pian asukkaat tuntisivat, että
maatyö voi elättää suurenkin perheen ja antaa onnea, jota muuten ei
ollut löydettävissä.

Näin hänellä olisi onnea maailmassa ja hän saisi tuntea iloa sen
edistymisestä.

Hannes oli ehtinyt kotipihalle. Renki Kalle, joka oli ollut yhtämittaa
Hakalassa, tuli ottamaan hevosen.

— Menehän saunaan, me muut olemme jo kylpeneet.

Nyt vasta Hannes muisti, että olikin lauantai-ilta. Miten hän oli sen
saattanut kotimatkalla unohtaa.
 Tuvassa lepäilivät miehet saunan jälkeen valkoisissaan.
Heinäkuun ilta oli valoisa ja tuvan etäisimmässä nurkassa oli vain
varjoisaa.

Miten viihtyisä on kesäinen lauantai-ilta maalaistalossa saunan

jälkeen. Valo viipyy vielä pihamailla ja pelloilla ja tulvehtii sisään
ikkunoista. Ja vaikka miehiltä tarinat loppuvat, ei ole kiirettä
nukkumaan. On pyhäistä päivää levätä, katseleepahan siinä vain
ikkunasta valoisaa pihamaata ja vaaleaa taivasta. Ja siinä
katsellessa kulkevat ajatukset viikon kuluessa suoritetuissa töissä,
eikä minkäänlainen murhe paina mieltä.

Hanneskaan ei olisi malttanut lähteä saunaan. Oli niin kauan siitä,

kun oli heinäkuun lauantaina ollut kotipirtissä saunaan
hankkiutumassa. Tuli mieleen kaikenlaisia muistoja, joita ei olisi
hennonut karistaa pois.

— Mutta nyt sauna jäähtyy.

Se oli Liisa, joka siitä hymyillen huomautti.

Kas, Liisallahan oli kaksi somaa hymykuoppaa, joita hän ei ollut

ennen huomannutkaan. Hiukset oli somasti sitaistu niskaan.
Mukavapa oli häntä siinä puuhaillessaan katsella lauantaiehtoon
pehmeässä valossa.

Saunaan mennessä oli niin kuin joku olisi nykäissyt häntä hihasta.

Sinä katselet Liisaa ja hän miellyttää sinua. Liisa on hyvä tyttö.

Liisaa minä olen tosin katsellut, myönteli Hannes. Hän on sen

joskus huomannut ja lievästi punastunut, mutta mitään
lähentelemisyrityksiä ei hän ole puolestaan tehnyt. Kas, se on jotain
se. Mitäpä se paranee katselemisesta. Kysyn kerran tytöltä, eikö hän
pikkuisen pitäisi minusta ja, jos se on niin menevä, niin tulkoon
hänestä Hakalan emäntä.

Ilta oli jo hämärtynyt, kun Hannes palasi saunasta. Miehet olivat

menneet jo makuutiloilleen ja tuvassa valvoi vain Liisa, korjatakseen
Hanneksen illallisen pois.

Kun Hannes oli aterioinut, meni hän karsinaikkunan ääreen, jossa

Liisa luki sanomalehteä.

— Eikö sinua väsytä, kun saat näin myöhään valvoa? kysyi hän
tytöltä, istuen ikkunan toiseen pieleen.

— Ei yhtään. Johan nyt, jos tällä iällä väsyttäisi.

— Saat melkein yksin raataa koko talon työt. Pitäisi saada edes
nuorempi apulainen sinulle.

— Kyllä minä jaksan.

Tyttö naurahti ja aikoi lähteä korjaamaan illallista pois.

— Et nyt menisi vielä, pyyteli Hannes.

Tyttö istui jälleen ja näytti niin kuin jotain odottavan. Ehkäpä

Hannes tahtoisi jostain erikoisemmin huomauttaa.

— Tahtoisin, että olisimme oikein hyviä ystäviä. Minä olen niin

yksin, eikä minulla ole ketään…

Hanneksen sanat katkesivat. Hän muisti ilottoman nuoruutensa,

muisti viime kesän muutamat päivät Jokivarren talossa. Jos Liisakin
nyt hylkäisi hänen pyyntönsä…
 Liisa oli noussut seisomaan ja nojasi ikkunapieleen katsellen ulos.
Puna peitti somat kasvot.

— Jos minä olen mielestäsi ystävyytesi arvoinen, jatkoi Hannes ja

ojensi kätensä tytölle.

Tytön sormet värisivät hänen kädessään, mutta katse oli kirkas ja

lämmin.

— Jos minä vain olen, mutta koetanhan olla, sanoi tyttö hiljaa.

Ei puhuttu sen enempää. Ikkuna jäi ihmetellen katsomaan. Niin

lyhyeenkö se kävi ja keskenkö se jäi. Mutta olihan tytön katse niin
ihmeen kirkas.

Hannes valvoi vielä vuoteessaan. Hän tunsi ihanan rauhan

soluvan suoniinsa ja hän oli varma, että tulevalle polvelle voisi jättää
perinnöksi hyvin paljon.
XVI.

Oli taaskin lanantainehtoo, mutta ulkona pelloilla ja metsissä oli jo

elokuu. Viljavainiot olivat kypsyneet ja talon ruispellosta oli jo osa
kuhilailla.

Järvi lepäsi tyvenenä. Siitä näkyi pieni pala pirtin lasista siihen,
missä Hannes istui keinutuolissa saunan jälkeen viihdytellen.

Tuvassakin oli elokuun tuntua. Liisa oli tuonut ruislyhteen orsille.

Se oli vanha perinnäistapa, ja se tuoksui nyt siellä oljelta ja
kärsämöltä.

Hannes keinahteli siinä yksin onnellisissa mietteissään.

Kaappikello nurkassa mittasi verkalleen kahdeksatta tuntia, mutta
valo viipyi vielä tuvassa. Miehet olivat poistuneet kylälle, kissa vain
kehräsi keskilattialla.

Viikko sitten oli käynyt muuan vieras talossa. Hän oli ollut pellon
aitaa korjaamassa, kun Liisa tuli sanomaan, että vieras on tullut ja
odottaa.

Se oli yksi Rauta-yhtiön vanhemmista kirjanpitäjistä. Mies oli

noussut kohteliaasti tervehtimään häntä. Kamarissa kertoi hän
vartavasten tulleensa tuomaan rahoja, jotka Hannes oli silloin
jättänyt ottamatta. Toimitusjohtaja oli usein ihmetellyt, miksi ei
Hannes mitään kirjoita, vaikka on talon ostanut ja tiettävästi tarvinnut
rahoja. Sitten oli huhuna kuullut kerrottavan, että Hannesta ahdistaa
rahoista talon myyjä ja heti oli käskenyt hänen, konttoristi Helomaan
lähtemään. Oli samalla käskenyt tuomaan terveiset Hannekselle,
että joskus kävisi tehtaalla, että hän saisi vielä kiittää keksinnöstä.

Sitten oli Helomaa laskenut pöydän kulmalle setelitukun.

— Siinä pitäisi olla viisikymmentätuhatta.

Hannes oli mielihyvin korjannut rahat ja Melomaa oli vielä kertonut

toimitusjohtajan arvelleen, että kai hänen keksintönsä oli tarpeen
omillekin perkkiöille, ja kone oli nyt lähiasemalla, kun vaan kävisi
noutamassa.

Siitä päivästä oli tullut sitten juhlapäivä taloon. Melomaa oli jättänyt
matkansa seuraavaan päivään ja Liisa oli häntä kestinyt parhaansa
mukaan.

Rahat olivatkin tulleet hyvään aikaan. Kyläläisten painostuksesta

oli Olli muuttanut mieltään ja käynyt vaatimassa talon hintaa
Hannekselta. Hyvät naapurit olivat saaneet vielä keksityksi
lisäkoukun. Hannesta oli vaadittu kaivattamaan syvä viemäri eräältä
kohdalta maansa läpi, kun muka vesi seisoi keväällä heidän
viljelyksillään. Oli uhattu käräjöidä, jollei viemäriä heti aloitettaisi.

Tämän hankkeen johdosta oli Hanneksella ollut melkoista

päänvaivaa. Tehtaalta voisi saada rahat talon hintaan, mutta mistä
otti ne viemäriin?
 Kylällä oli jo puhuttu, että myyttäjän vasara heiluu Hakalassa vielä
toisenkin kerran. Taisikin vain Hautalan Olli ilman leikitellä
Hanneksen kanssa hänelle talon myydessään, kun tiesi sen pian
takaisin saavansa.

Hannes keinahteli hieman voitonriemuisesti ja puhalsi pitkän

savukiemuran piipustaan.

Samana päivänä, kun Helomaa tuli, oli rahat viety Ollille ja

lähetetty sana kylälle, että viemäri aloitetaan heti. Siihen tarvittavia
varoja liikeneisi nyt kyllä talosta.

Olli oli ollut häpeissään ja pyydellyt anteeksi. Kyläläisten

kiusaamana oli tullut rahoja vaatineeksi.

Ja sitten muutamien päivien perästä oli Kalle tuonut kylän läpi

uutta muokkauskonetta asemalta. Oli herja omassa kylässä huutanut
joka talon pihassa, että »tulkaa katsomaan Hakalan sampoa, se on
sen »Eeron pojan» keksimä.»

Oli katseltu ja ihmetelty ja nenät olivat venähtäneet, kun saivat

tietää, että siitä Hannes rahaa sai.

Hannes hymähti keinussaan ja sysäsi sen liikkeeseen. Mitä varten

naapurit kadehtivat häntä ja yleensä ihmiset toisiaan. Sehän tappoi
kaiken muun hyvän harrastuksen ihmisestä. Taisi sekin kateus olla
sukuperintöä ihmisissä. Kukaan ei sitä huomannut juuria pois
itsestään ja se meni perintönä polvesta polveen.

Liisa tuli tupaan ja lopetteli astiain pesua karsinapuolella. Ei

kuulunut vähään aikaan muuta kuin kellon verkkainen käynti
nurkassa ja karjan kellojen hiljainen helähtely ulkoa tarhasta.
 Oli onnellinen tuokio Hanneksen elämässä. Lauantaiehtoon rauha
ympäröi hänet eikä minkäänlaiset huolet painaneet mieltä. Liisa oli
siinä askareissaan liikkumassa. Hän vain ojentaisi kätensä ja tyttö
olisi hänen.

Miten se siinä taas puuhasikin sukkelana. Kelpasipa katsella sen

käyntiä ja kädenliikkeitä. Eipähän arvannut mitä muuan mies
keinussa hänen lähellään ajatteli. Jos olisi arvannut, miten sen
poskille olisikaan puna karehtinut.

— Liisa.

— No?

— Tulehan vähän lähemmäksi.

Tyttö seisoi siinä katse alas luotuna. Yritti hymyillä, mutta tuli
jälleen totiseksi. Ei vetänyt pois kättään, johon Hannes oli tarttunut.

— Nyt minä sen sanon.

— Minkä?

Jopahan tyttö karahti punaiseksi.

— Että sinä olet minun.

Hannes veti tytön polvelleen.

— Teet vain pilkkaa minusta.

Hannes kaivoi liivinsä laskusta pienen esineen. Oli tullut sen jo

hankkineeksi kaupungissa käydessään.