OXFORDlJNIVERSITY PRESS

Great Clarendon Street, Oxford, ox2 6DP,

United Kingdom

Oxford University Press is a department oftheUniversity of Oxford. It furthers the University'sobjective of excellence in research, scholarship,and education by publishing worldwide. Oxfordis a registered trade ma¡k ofOxford UniversityPress in the UK and in certain other countries

@ Oxford University Press 2013

The moral rights ofthe autho¡ have been asserted

First published in zor32077 201.6 zo1.s 2014 2oa3

10987654327AII rights reserved. No part ofthis publicationmay be reproduced, sto¡ed in a retrieval system,

or transmitted, in any form or by any means,

without the prior permission in writing of OxfordUniversity Press, or as expressly permitted bylaw, by licence or under terms agreed with theappropriate repro$aphics rights organization.Enquiries concerning reproduction outside thescope ofthe above should be sent to the ELT

Rights Department, Oxford University Press,

at the address above

You must not circulate this work in any otherform and you must impose this sarne conditionon any acquirer

Links to third party websites are provided byOxford in good faith and for information only.Oxford disclaims any responsibility for thematerials contained in any third party websitereferenced in this work

PhotocopyingThe Publisher grants permission for thephotocopying ofthose pages marked'photocopiable' according to the followingconditions. Individual purchasers may makecopies for their own use or for use by classes

that they teach. School purchasers may makecopies for use by staffand students, but thispermission does not extend to additionalschools or branches

Under no circumstances may any part ofthisbook be photocopied for resale

rsBN: 978 o 19 454126 8

Printed in China

This book is printed on paper fiorn certifiedand well-rnanaged sources.

AC I(NOWLE DGE ME NTS

The authors cmd ptblisher are grar,efuI to those who hqve

given permksion to reproduce the following extracts and

adaptations oJ copyight material: p.77 Extract fromLanguage Delelowent and Language Disorders byLois Bloom and Margaret Lahey (1978). MacmillanPublishers; p.47 Figure Ílom'Some issues relatingto the Monitor Model'by Stephen Krashen, On

TESOI (1977). Reprinted by permission ofTESOLInternational Association; p.49 Extract from'Constructing an acquisition-based procedurefor second language assessment'by ManfredPienemann, Malcolm Johnston, and Geoff Brindleyirt Studies in Second Longuage Acqu$üofl , Volume 10/2,

pp.277-a3 1988). Reproduced by permission ofCambridge University Press; p.53 Extract Ílom'speeding up acquisition ofhisfter: Expücit L1/L2

contracts help' itSecond Language Acquisition and

the Younger Learner: Child's Play? by Joanna White(2008) pp.193-228. With kind permission ofJohnBenjamins Publishing Company, Amsterdam/Philadelphia; p.54 Exhact ftom 'Second languageinstruction does make a diffe¡ence'by CatherineDoughty in Studies in Second Language Acquisiüon,

Volume 13/4, pp.431-69 (7991\. Reproduced bypermission of Carnbridge University Press; p.1 36

Reprinted fr om In t ern ati on al J ournol of E duc aüonalResearch, Volume 37 by Merrill Swain and Sharon

tapkin'Talking it through: two French immersionlearners' response to reformulations' Pp.285-304(2002)with permission from Elsevier; p.139 Exüactfrom 'Corrective feedback and learner uptake'by Roy Lyster and Leila Ranta in Studies in Second

Longuage Acquisition, Volume 7917 pp.37 -66 (7997).

Reproduced by permission of CambridgeUniversity Press.

Cartoonsw: Sophie Grillet @ Oxford UniversityPress 1993, 2005, and 2012.

t

qJntu os PeuJBe[ e BrI4 4.

ruorÍr,r ruoJJ stuePnls Pu" sJarlJeel arp oI

C/

ZL

ZL89t909L9<b

w0,8E

9e,

9e

t€,

,s,Q,Q,

0€.

6Z

,Z0z9T

,IET

ZI9IIs

z

Sulpear raqunJ .ro3 suolrsaSSngf;eunung

a8en8ue¡ (sraureel SulldureglSolouoq¿soneru8er¿lre¡nqeoo¡

af,uengur a8en8ue¡ lsJg lnoqe eJotr {saf,uenbas pruaurdolertag

a8en8ue¡.rarul pue 'ssl¡eue JoJJa 'slsl¡eue elnseJluo3sraureel a8en8ue¡ puof,esJo a8en8ue¡ agr Surlpnrg

suollrpuof SuluealsfnsrJalf,sJ€qf, JeuJEe'I

A\EIAAJd

Sururea¡ aten8ue¡ puores

Sulpear rar{unJ ;o3 suorrsaSSn5

lmurungrusrpn8ung pooqplll{J

sle¡ap pur sraprosrp aSen8uelsa,rn:eds¡ad ¡eruaudolarrap/lsluoIlfEJaruI

a¡'rpads¡ad lsltBuur eqla,upads¡ad lsrJnol^Eqeq aql

uoltrslnb¡¿ aSen8ue¡ rsrg Surure¡dxgs-real loorps aq1

sreal ¡ooqes-a-rd aq1sa¡uanbas ¡eruarudo¡a'reP PuE """t"tlsrililt::'g"T;tJ,Tr"

,{AAIAAJd

pooqp¡¡qc,(¡rua ur 8u¡urea¡ aSun8uel I"'ur8aq a^4. aroJag

uonrnPoJlul

uoDrPa wJnoJ a{l or orsJardsruarua8paf"roulcv

IIFIX

SINflINOf

vlll Contents

Individual differences in second language learning

PreviewResearch on learner characteristics

IntelligenceLanguage learning aptitudeLearning styles

PersonalityAttitudes and motivationMotivation in the classroomIdentiry and ethnic group affiliationLearner beliefs

Individual differences and classroom instructionAge and second language learning

The critical period: More than just pronunciation?Intuitions of grammaticalityRate of learning

Age and second language instructionSummarySuggestions for further reading

Explaining second language learning

PreviewThe behaviourist perspective

Second language applications: Mimicry and memorizationThe innatist perspective

Second language applications: Krashen's'Monitor Model'The cognitive perspective

Information processingUsage-based learningThe competition modelLanguage and the brainSecond language applications: Interacting, noticing,processing, and practising

The sociocultural perspectiveSecond language applications: Learning by talking

SummarySuggestions for further reading

75

75

7779BO

83848788B9

90o')

929495969699

100

103

103103103t04106108108110111

113

t13118119120t2l

6t27,

LLLEIT,

ZIZt07.t07t07.

86IL6rrz6l

78rLLIILI99t6ttv9r9Srt9rQ,EI

xaPuIfqderSongrg

frusso¡g

uorsnlf,uoJqoreesJr uor; Sururee'I :srapl re¡ndod aql uo Sulrcaga¡

,T\SIAEJd

pelrsr¡a¡ Sururea¡ e8enEuu¡ lnogs seap¡ ru¡ndo¿ L

Surprar raqunJ roj suorrsaSSng

frruungs¡rsodord agr Surssasry

pue aqr ur rq8¡.r rr raD 9elqBgf,Ear sl rEI{,/v\ qlEal t

auo JoJ o^\_r re) 7lFl s.la'I E

pear pue "' urlsrl rsnf ¿SuruurSaq aqr tuo{ rq8rr rr reD I

Surqceer rol spsodor¿,/V\aIAaJd

ruooJss¿¡f, aqt ur Sururea¡ aSen8uel puolas

XI

ZgI Sulpear rrr{rrnJ ro3 suonsaSSng

IEI frtuurnq6VI tgde.r8ouqrE

trl ruooJss¿1f, aqr ul suoltsan|6el uoorssEls 3r{1 uI >PEqPaaJ a^nfarroS

9€l suonf,€Jalur luepnls-luepnls :suosrJeduor tuooJssel3

6ZI suonJeJatul ruapnrs-Jer{f,eel:suosrJeduroc uoo;sse13

6T.I sel'uer{f,s uorlE^Jesgo

LT.I s8unlas Fuonf,nJtsur J rteorunuJuof, uI

9T,I s8ulllas ItuonrnJlsul pa$q-arnpnJts uI

,U s8ulues uo¡lsmbce IEJnrEu uIgU sSunlas leuonf,nJlsul pue IErnreNeT,l '/r'\al^aJd

eU ruoorssep a8en8ue¡ puof,as aqr q Srmrcear pue tulurea¡ tun-rasqg S

slualuo)

EpEueJ '¡g 'oruoro¡'epedg eur¡

VSn 'Vntr 'qclrrr-re¡1 'u.,r'oqrq3r1 '¡¡q lsre¿

'r{f,fteseJ pur '8ul-qf,Eer 'Sururea¡ a8en8ue¡ puof,as ol suonnglJluof, u1r\o Jraqr J>lEru or ueqra¡rdsu¡ pue a8ua¡¡eqf, III^{ r€qr uon€ruroJur pue smpr pug ilpi'TtrIH jo suon-lpe snor^ord aqr pear e Er{ oqd\ asoq} pue sJepeer

^\au qrog reqr adoq alN

'TV'IH ur Pef,nPorlur arc l3r{1scrdot ar{rJo eruos rnoqe Surureal anunuof, ol sJar{f¿at a8e¡norua ilynr sarJas

srqr ul qooq eqt r¿ql adog a4N'acrrre;d uoorsselr or s8urpug aqr Suqur¡ pueI{f,J¿aseJ tue a¡ar agr Surrrral,mr '(uollreJerur I"Jo pue'tbenl:rl'Sulqtear aSen8

-uBI pesrg-lualuoJ 'luarussasst se qons) :rdor cglcads E uo snJoJ III^{'Joqlneruera5lp e fg uaulrn'arunlo qf,Eg'utootssq) a&rn&uaT ar,p ntstdatuo2 [ay?otxO eqt 'sJar{f,?at JoJ qooq Jo sarJas

^^au E uo 8uq¡o¡'r f¡ruarrnc eJB alN

'lEIri/rar.ll"ar¡r¡a7uro:'dno z!\1r\,{\

tB pJSSef,f,B aq ue) ?autpa7 a& sa&an8ua7 mo¡¡ JoJ alrsqa,&\ er{I

JoJ sEepr Jraql ar¿r{s or puB slaqro qrra l]E;ir?::ffj;r:""üil'l'""T1ffi;apnord osle III/v\ rI looq ar{rJo srualum ar{rJo Sulpuersrapun pu¿ Surprer;nol a:uequa o] seJJnoseJ pur IErJetBru peseq-qe.{\ JJr{to pue 's8urpear 'sall-r^nf,E ltuorrrppe sureluoJ r{JIr{¡A atrsgo./$ uoru¿du¡oc E sr uonrpa sr{t JoeJnlEeJ ,{\eu JJrltouv 'soldot eqt Jo auros aro¡dxa ol sar}runl¡oddo sJapEaJ

a.r'13 reqr (sanr^rlf,V, ^tau atuos pepnlf,ur a^eq a \ pue fardeqc r{JpeJo pua aqr

te (uorlregeJ;o3 suonsan|, peppe a^Eq a-&\'TV'IHJo uollrpe qunoJ srr{t uI

'erJq

$nporlur f¡uo um a,/v\ leqr srldorSo Sulpuersrapun Jraql uadaap ot tsrl aJua

-reJal ar{r pue s8urpeal eseql ,&\olloj or sJapEeJ a8¿¡no¡ue a¿N'rardeqr qJEaJopue aqt te ,Surpeer Jer{unJ ro3 suonsaSSns, euJos patelouue elerl a,tr'uonrpesrql uI fu¿ur os.&\ou er€ ereql qJIq^Uo 'serpnls rvtau tuer¡odur pu" pleg aqrur sJrss¿¡f, ual \tag Sulsooqr luearu uauo ser{ qr8ua¡ elqeuos¿er E or {ooqaqt Suldaa¡ 'tprgrp a¡oru ulro.r8 a eq apnllul or r¿q.vr tnogB suorsrf,ep aqr

'uonrpe ^/rau

r{JEe JoJ r{rJtasal aqr Surrepdn u1 'uollrsnbce a8en8ur¡ puof,esur r{f,r"eserJo qrr'ror8 alqnlreurarJo slep l¡rea eqr ur ilns era.t a.&\ s066I pues086I eql ur uorlrpa rsrg erp uo 8uq¡o¡vr. aJa/v\ a.&\ uJrltysulSr¡o asoqr ruo{r"J pella^¿rl

^\ou eABr{ >looq arp Jo suorrrpa aargl 's;eaf lueru rol pe>lro./v\

qroq alrr eJar{ \ 'EpEuEJ 'cegan} ur sJer.lf,Bat .to3 sdoqslro,,'t ruarudo¡a,rap

¡ruorssajord Jo sarras E sE tno pelrtrs (fVfH) paufia7 atV sa&an&ua7 moH

NOIIICIfl HIUNO{flHI OI flf,V{ilud

'Sururea¡ (¿1) aSen8uel puoras or uorreler ur >loog

aqr ur rarel parlsr^er a.re faqr pue rardeg: sr{t ur patuasard are Sulurea¡ (11)atenSue¡ rsrg rnoge sarroarp IEre aS 'a8rn8ue¡ tsrg rrar{r a¡mb¡¿ uerpllqlnoq3o SulputtsJapun Jno lq pa:uangur uaeq ar'eq Sulqcear a8enSuel puocasput r{f,Jeasar a8en8ue¡ puooes r{1og asnef,eg ruerrodul sl punorSl:Eq slql'pooqpplr l¡.rea ur Suru:ea¡ a8en8ue¡ uo ;ardeqr E qlr^\ sur8ag 1ooq eql

'pJuJEal e¡¿ sa8en8uel ,/v\or{Jo Sulpuersrapun Jno r{tr^\

tuelsrsuof, eJoru eJe leql slerr,r. ur uaqt rdepz or osp rnq sprJJtBru pue $looq-txal Surlsrxa aten[E^a or l¡uo rou ruaqr dlag leru rrr{r l{f,Jeesar uo¡usnbrea8rnSuq ar{rJo aruos ot-peouarredxa pue af,r^ou qroq-sJar{oral arnpoJrulot sr looq srr{Uo ¡eo8 aq1 'spograu Sulql¿ar a8enSue¡ snoIrEAJo sluauodo¡dfq aperu srurelf, alenlele ol sJarlrBel Suld¡aq ur elqenl"^ osl¿ aJ¿ uorlrsrnb¡ea8en8ue¡ puof,as ul f;oagl pue qf,J"esal luoJj u,&\EJp wapl r¿qt e^elTag a1)N

'sluapnls rrar{l Jo sanllge pur spaeu eqr Jo Surpuetsrapun Jlar{l sE lleff\ sE

'sluaruturoddrslp ro sassaoons snol^erd qtvtr ecual¡adxa u¡rro ¡Iaql $ suorsloep

(sJar{feel uo ef,uengu¡ turuodul rsotu eqr 'aJns eq oI ¿sa3n3eJd ¡euorr-fnJlsur rueJe5rpJo ssaue nfaga p¡ruarod aql et¿np e ol sJer{3eel eJE.1v\oH

'tuetuoJ f,nuapef,E ar{r uo snf,oJ sluepnrs se l¡rruaplf,ul peureal eq il¡,l\3¡asrr eBenBuEI arp ter{} uondu¡nsse aqr qrvy\ laueru rralgns I{JEal ol runlperueqr se pasn sl a8rn8uq puof,es ar{l 'sruooJsselc auos u1 'a8en8url

^\eu eql

Sulsn a¡qz'r spalo¡d ¡o slser ul l¡er'lle¡adooc a8e8ua laqr sE sluepnts uea^\teg

uonef,runruuro: (l¿Jnleu, sa8utnocua Jeqloue ra¡'san8o¡e¡p aJrlua ezlJoluaru

pue seouelues tf,eJJof Jo las e aslr¡e.rd pue alellrm sluepnls 8ur,rerl3o an¡ert

aqt sazseqdua reglouv 'slxJl lreJatl¡ 3u¡re¡suerl uI esn or fre¡nqtcort joslsr pue reururer8jo sJlnr uJeal ot stuapnts seJlnbeJ q:eordde auo 'paruaru

-a¡drur pur pasodord uaag a,req Surgceat aSen8uq or saqceordde lue¡¡

l¡a,rrrcaga ueql esn ol lsag rrer{r op or a Er{ oqtll sJal{rrar or parnqlJ}slppu¿ paJepJo l¡durs are lagr 'sJrullatuos 'uolleluarua¡drul laqr ul 8ururc¡lalrsuetxa JoJ senrunlJoddo qrmt aruof, slEIJalEIu.lv\ou aql 'sauJllaurog 'uolSar

Jo loor{f,s E ur uorletuaua¡dul a}Blporurul JoJ paglJf,se¡d a.¡e saqceo:dde

^\au aqt 'sase¡ furru uI 'aJoJaq auo8 aaeg rel{r asoqr u"ql a^Ipüa aJoul

aq illr\r'laqr regr plor erE srrr{r"3J 'lSo8epad ¡o 's¡rlslnSuu 'l3o¡oqcfsd ur

qf,Jeasar rsarel er{t uo pJS"q eq ol pIES ueuo are laqr 'parnpo¡tur e¡e 8ul-qreel a8en8ue¡ u8laro3 pup puores roJ qooqrxal pur spoqraur ldau uaql¡

NOIIfNCIOUINI

Innoduction

In Chapter 2 we look at second language learners' developing knowledge,

their abiliry to use that knowledge, and how this compares with Ll learning.In Chapter 3, we rurn our attention to how individual learner characteristicsmay affect success. In Chapter 4, several theories that have been advanced

to explain second language learning are presented and discussed. Chapter5 begins with a comparison of naturd and instructional environments forsecond language learning.'We then examine some different ways in whichresearchers have observed and described teaching and learning practices insecond language classrooms.

In Chapter 6, we examine six proposals that have been made for second

language teaching. Examples of research related to each of the proposals are

presented, leading to a discussion of the evidence available for assessing theireffectiveness. The chapter ends with a discussion of what research findingssuggest about the most effective ways to teach and learn a second language

in the classroom.

In Chapter 7, we will provide a general summary of the book by looking at

how research can inform our response to some'popular opinions' about lan-guage learning and teaching that are introduced below.

A Glossary provides a quick reference for a number of terms that may be new

or have specific technical meanings in the context of language acquisitionresearch. Glossary words are shown in bold letters where they first appear inthe text. For readers who would like to find out more, an annotated list ofsuggestions for further reading is included at the end of each chapter. The

Bibliography provides full reference information for the suggested readings

and all the works that are referred to in the text.

'W'e have tried to present the information in a way that does not assume thatreaders are akeady familiar with research methods or theoretical issues insecond language learning. Examples and case studies are included through-out the book to illustrate the research ideas. Many of the examples are taken

from second language classrooms. \le have also included a number ofactivi-ties for readers to practise some of the techniques of observation and analysis

used in the research that we review in this book. At the end of each chapter

are 'Questions for refection to help readers consolidate and expand theirunderstanding of the material.

Before we begin ...It is probably true, as some have claimed, that most of us teach as we were

taught or in awaythat matches our ideas and preferences about howwe learn.

Take a moment to refect on your views about how languages are learned and

what you think this means about how they should be taught. The statements

in the activity below summarize some popular opinions about language

'seuo xelduo) eJolaqseJntrnJls a8en8ue¡ a¡durs qJeel Plnoqs sJeqf,eal | |

'Jaqloue ol uo 3uto3 aJoleq euo qf,ee

¡o sa¡dr,uexa as¡Dad plnoqs sJeuJeel Pu€'eutl elp euo selnJ lellleuue"r8 luasa.ld PlnoLls sJeq)€al Ol

'sra¡eads el!}eu ql!^ suotl€sJeluof, ut

ated¡r¡ued ,ftsea uer laqr'e8en8u€l e ,o ernDnJNilseq eql Pu€ sPJo^ 000'l ^

oDl sJeuJeal a)uo ó

'aSenBue¡ puof,as

eqt u! spunos lenpr^rpu! aql ¡¡e erunouordol alqE eq ol sJeuJeal Jo, l€lluassa s! rl I

'3utpea.t

q8no.rqr sr ,fue¡nqero,r /v\eu uJ€el ol ,(e¡,r lseq eql ¿

'a8entue¡ m-rg

Jleqt uo4 elueJeFetu! ol anP aJ€ 3)eu sJeuJ€el

e8en8ue¡ puof,as teqt selelslu eql ro lso¡ 9

'3uru;ea¡ ur ssaf,f,ns

,o pooqrle¿!l aql rateelt eql'seuu€J3o-rd ¡ooq:sur pe)npoJtut st aten8ue¡ Puofes P JallJeo eql S

'uolle^ltour st uortlslnb¡e a8en8ue¡ Puof,esu! sse)fns ¡o ;ontpard lusuodLul rsou aql t

'sJeuJeal

a8en8ue¡ poo8 a"re a¡doad rueS¡¡¡aru¡ llq8lU e

'sJoJJe ¡er¡teuue;3 a¡eu,(aqr ueq,r,r ueJpltql Sunol }¡a.l'¡or ,!¡ensn sluaJed Z

'uolletlru! q8no-rqr l¡ureu PeuJEel a;e sa8en8uel ¡

osovvsaar8esrp l¡Suorrs-q5

teq^ euos aa-r8esrp-6

leq^ euos aa-r8e-Y

ae.r8e ,!3uo;rs-y5:uoruldo rnol qlrr* Peletf,osse xoq eql ul

¡ ue Suqreu lq tuaualets q)ea qr!^A aa.l3e nol q)lq/v\ 01 luelxe aqt elerlPul

sluoruolels aseql uo uoluldo JnoÍ eAlD Arl^lrcv

'Sulurea¡ a8en8ue¡ Puoias ul ,Goaql Pue q3Jeasal luoJJnf, rnoge Pearnol sr punu ul rrJegl or suopf,EeJ rnol pue sluaruel?ls asaqr daal 'uorurdo

gr", qri^ aarSeslp ¡o aa¡8e nol raqtaqr'r rnoqe lun{I 'Surgrear pue Sulurea¡

uo4Jnpo4uI

Introduction

Photocopiable @ Oxford University Press

l2 Learners'errors should be corrected as soon as

they are made in order to prevent the formationof bad habits.

l3 Teachers should use materials that exposestudents only to language structures they have

already been taught.

l4 When learners are allowed to interact freely (forexample, in group or pair activities), they copyeach other's mistakes.

l5 Students learn what they are taught.

ló Teachers should respond to students'errors bycorrectly rephrasing what they have said ratherthan by explicitly pointing out the error.

l7 Students can learn both language and academiccontent (for example, science and history)simultaneously in classes where the subjectmatter is taught in their second language.

l8 Classrooms are good places to learn aboutlanguage but not for learning how to use language.

¿a8en8ur¡ auo ueqr a¡otu a¡rnb¡e uerPllql tenSut¡t9oP ./r\oH ¿PIro1( eql Punor¿ l¡re¡u¡s do¡a,rap eSenSur¡ PInp seoc ¿sasod

-¡nd lsour JoJ lryssaDns sI uolleflunluruof, a¡duls f¡rea -uaqr g8noqr ua,ra

a8en8uq ¡erlteruutr8 xa¡duro:8urdo¡a,rap uo oB ol uerPlrql seqsnd rer¡6

¿salueluas ¡ry3ulueau ul raqlaSor ureqr rnd ol lnq 'sProlv\ uJml ol l¡uo rou

pI,{¡ "

salgeua r"qrh\ ¿srgr gsr¡druorre uarPllqr oP.u'oH 'suorle¡aua8:o3 srs¡8

-o1oqilsd pue stslnSullJo uonuaue er{r Parf,EJrlB seq lEI{l auo-tta; Sulzeure

ue sl a8en8ue¡ e Sulurea¡ 'paapul ',alq-elq, rsJg al{l PaJaDn seq p¡o-reaf-auoasor{1rr sruarrd3o fol pur aprrd aqr ur arBl{s el/\ PuE 'sargeg rrPloJo Sullqqrq

,Eq-¿q-Eq, IEuoltesrs^uof aqr (re.¿!\suB, pue gSne¡ a¿¡ dqeq Plo-qruou-e3rr{1e lq apeul spunos eqr or arnsea¡d qlIA uetsll a¿¡ 'ruaurdole^aP u"runl{ Jospadse 8u¡reutoseS pue a,rtssardlul lsolu eqr Jo auo sr uorlrsrnbre o8enSuel

uonrspbce a8entuel rsrl¡

'looq slglJo snf,oJ

aqr sr r{f,rr{1vr ,(WS) uorlrslnb¡e a8enSue¡ puof,asJo uorssnf,srp el{r JoJ uollsr-eda¡d e se f¡ruulud ,I{iJEasaJ sII{l ur slutod uleru d\al E uo l{f,nol or s¡ rardrqrsII{l ur asod¡nd Jno .ile^\ sE r{fJessJJ I"Jntlnf,-ssoJf, puE f,nsrnSur¡ssor:3o

lpoq qru E sr erarp 'serllureJ umdorng PuE uEf,IJOlrtV I{lJoN ss"ll-alPPltu ul

euop ueaq s"q qf,J"asar sII{r Jo qcnur g8noqr¡y 'aBenBuBI PIIqr uo l{rreesar

Jo lunolue asuarurur uB sr aJer{I .peuJEal sl aSenSue¡./v\or{ JoJ suoneueldxa

s" paraJo ueeq e Br{ tEqr serroar{l IErrAes rePlsuof, ueqr ilI^\ a4N 'uarPllql

Sunol3o rueurdolalop aSrn8uq aqr re fgarrq lool ill1r\ ar* terdeqc slq] uI

^.er^eJd

COOHCITIHf,,TfUVE NIDNINUVfl-I flDVNDNVf

Language learning in early childhood

Tbef.rst three years: Milestones anddeu e lopmental sequences

One remarkable thing about first language acquisition is the high degree ofsimilariry in the early language of children all over the world. Researchers

have described developmental sequences for many aspects of first languageacquisition. The earliest vocalizations are simply the involuntary crying thatbabies do when they are hungry or uncomfortable. Soon, however, we hearthe cooing and gurgling sounds of contented babies, lying in their beds

looking at fascinating shapes and movement around them. Even thoughthey have little control over the sounds they make in these early weeks oflife, infants are able to hear subtle differences between the sounds of humanlanguages. Not only do they distinguish the voice of their mothers fromthose of other speakers, they also seem to recognize the language that was

spoken around their mother before theywere born. Furthermore, in cleverlydesigned experiments, researchers have demonstrated that tiny babies are

capable ofvery fine auditorydiscrimination. For example, they can hear thedifference between sounds as similar as pa'and'ba'.

Janet'ü7erker, Patricia Kuhl, and others have used new technologies that allowus to see how sensitive infants are to speech sounds. tü7'hat may seem even

more remarkable is that infants stop making distinctions between sounds

that are not phonemic in the language that is spoken around them. Forexample, by the time they afe ayear old, babies who will become speakers ofArabic stop reacting to the difference between pa' and'ba'which is not pho-nemic in Arabic. Babies who regularly hear more than one language in theirenvironment continue to respond to these differences for a longer period('Werke¡ 'Weikum,

and Yoshida 2006) . One important finding is that it is notenough for babies to hear language sounds from electronic devices. In orderto learn-or retain-the abiliry to distinguish between sounds, they need

to interact with a human speaker (Conboy and Kuhl 20II). The Internetabounds with remarkable videos of infants reacting to language sounds.

rMhether they are becoming monolingual or bilingual children, however,

it will be many months before their own vocalizations begin to refect thecharacteristics ofthe language or languages they hear and longer still beforethey connect language sounds with specific meaning. However, by the end oftheir first year, most babies understand quite a few frequently repeated wordsin the language or languages spoken around them. Theywave when someone

says 'bye-bye'; they clap when someone says pat-a-cake'; they eagerly hurryto the kitchen when 'juice and cookies' are mentioned.

At 12 months, most babies will have begun to produce a word or two thateveryone recognizes. By the age of two, most children reliably produce at

least 50 different words and some produce many more. About this dme, theybegin to combine words into simple sentences such as 'Mommy juice' and

I

I

(

l

IÍ:t

? Puz aql salf,rlr?

(lddrg sz furuoyt¡) e¡ndoo

(req slppeq) s- a,rrssessod

(tuam Áqeg) suro; rsed rep8arl(qooq ozvrr) s- prn¡d

(Suruunr furuo¡lq) &ur aqssat8o¡d luesa¡d

'parpnls fagr saruaqd

-roru rr{t Jo eruos s.l$,oqs (11ooq g.L6l su^&\org ruor3 pardepe) .vro¡aq tsIT eql'aruanbas JEInuls t ur pa;lnbce eJalv\ sauragdroru ¡ecneruruer8 Vl ñqt PunoJlaqr (qereg pue 'elg 'ur"py pa¡ec) ue¡P¡gr oerqrJo tuaurdola,rap a8en8ue¡

aqr3o.,(pnrs purpn¡l8uol e uI 'sruaPnrs PuE san8ea¡or slq PuE u^\org raSo¿

fq rno paur¿f, se,/v\ serpnrs úv\oul-lsaq eI{Uo auo 'qsrÉug u¡ saruagd.roru ¡rr-neruu¡¿¡8 a¡mb¡e uarpllql .&\oq uo Pasnf,oJ sJatlf,JEesar FJs es '<s096I el{r uI

seuer{dJoru IBf, lreuur"Jc

'sreal looqrs eqr ¡runIoJruof Japun llara¡druor aq rou deru PuB erull aJolu ua a saler (,laa3, se grns)s¡ern¡d re¡nSarrr Jo asn Darro3 'sunou or s8urpua p.rn¡d ppe l¡qertar larpero;aq 3uo1 ¡ern¡d pue .rt¡n8urs uea urq qsrn8urrslp utr uarPllql 'a¡duexaJoC 'arun Suoy r roj SurpuersJapun a,rnruSoo suaJPIIr{o ut luasa¡d uaag a^¿q

r¿qr s¿epl Sulssa¡dxa JoJ sluauela :lrsm8ut¡ 3I{r Jo uorllsrnbce ¡enprr8 aqr

tf,egal ot rr¡eas sa¡uanbas ¡eruaudolartap agl 'saser Jar{ro uI 'arullJo Surpurrs

-Japun auos do¡a,rap daqr Ipun ¡aa^\ lsEL Jo r!\oJJoulot, sE l{f,ns sgJs PE

¡e.rodruar esn lou op ueJpllqr'a¡druexa ro¿ 'tuarudo¡arrap arrrrluSol s,ueJPIIql

ot palEIeJ eJB uoltlslnbce a8en8uz¡ ur saSels esaql 'lualxa euros QT.',sa8els,

¡o sa¡uanbas ¡rruauldo¡a^epJo sturat uI PaqIJf,saP ueaq e^EI{ surauzd asaql

'sarnl¿al a8rn8uz¡ eruos roú '8uru;re¡ art faqr a8en8ue¡ aqrJo saJnrBai lueur

3o ruaudo¡a ep pue acuaS¡au¡a eql ur su¡au¿d a¡qerclpard are eraqt 's-real

aarr{r tsJg Jleql ur a8en8ut¡ 1o lra,rorslp aqt r¡8nonp ssa¡8o¡d uaJPIII{3 ry

,'de¡ rnolgo au do.rp or puaratd nol a-reqztr Sulqr

luury teqr op asee¡d {pp"C, ue^a ro ,Sutqtaruos paddorp ÍPP"C, ro üz'roP

¡a3lpprq, ueau rq8¡ru ,qo-qn lpP"C, (uolltnlls eqr uo Surpuedaq ,'ule8raplstno oB ol luezrr I, utetu &ur ,aptslno a.lotu, 'a¡dtuexe Jo{ 'sPJolv\ aulgluof,l¡a,rnrar: uer fagr regr su8rs ,&\oqs sefuetues PJod\-aaJI{l PUE -o^\l JIaI{I'pJEJrl a,req laqr teqr* SuneIurr fFcaSradull uBI{l arou Sutop aJE uerPIIIir

ler{t saJueluas l¡rea eseql ur ue^a 'afuePl^a aes osp aA\ 'llqelreura¡ ',ssr1

fgeg, se Sulgr arues eqr u€eru tou seoP fqeq ssu, 'PIIql Suqeads-qst8uE

uE JoJ'snql'spro,,'r jo rsIT e rsnl ueqr aJou Iueql salelu reqr dlgsuone¡ar

¡nj8uluearu e eAEq spro r. paulqruof, al{r Pue Suueag arr laqr e8en8ur¡ arir

Jo JJPJO PJoa al{l slJJUeJ JaPJo PJolv\ agt '8u¡ssnu a;e saruaqdrou TEJIleIu-uer8 pur spJo.lrauoprury gSnoqt ua^e ,asnefaq seouetues sE tual{t azruSora.t

a/N 'sgJa^,ftenxne PuE 'suolllsodard 'sa¡r¡rre se s8ulqt qf,ns lno a,rea¡ laqresnef,eg ,:tgdtr8a¡al, pallrf, seuneuros oJE sef,ueluos asaql '(u-1v\op

¡e3 lqeq,

?ooqfl lqr [1taa ut Sututoal a7anSuaT

(

I

lJ

Language learning in early childhood

regular past -el(she walked)third person singular simple present -s (she runs)

auxiliary be (he is coming)

Brown and his colleagues found that a child who had mastered the gram-matical morphemes at the bottom of the list had also mastered those at the

top, but the reverse was not true. Thus, there was evidence for a 'developmen-

tal sequence' or order of acquisition. However, the children did not acquire

the morphemes at the same age or rate. Eve had mastered nearly all the mor-phemes before she was two-and-a-halfyears old, while Sarah andAdam were

still working on them when they were three-and-a-half or four.

Brownt longitudinal work was confirmed in a cross-sectional study of 21

children. Jill and Peter de Villiers (1973) found that children who correctlyused the morphemes that Adam, Eve, and Sarah had acquired late were also

able to use the ones thatAdam, Eve, and Sarah had acquired earlier. The chil-dren mastered the morphemes at different ages, just asAdam, Eve, and Sarah

had done, but the order of their acquisition was very similar.

M-y hypotheses have been advanced to explain why these grammatical

morphemes are acquired in the observed order. Researchers have studied the

frequency with which the morphemes occur in parents' speech, the cognitive

complexity of the meanings represented by each morpheme, and the difficultyofperceiving or pronouncing them. In the end, there has been no simple satis-

factory explanation for the sequence, and most researchers agree that the order

is determined by an interaction among a number of different factors.

To supplement the evidence we have from simply observing children, some

carefully designed procedures have been developed to further explore chil-drent knowledge ofgrammatical morphemes. One ofthe first and best known

is the so-called 'wug test' developed byJean Berko Gleason (1958). In this'test', children are shown drawings of imaginary creatures with novel names

or people performing mysterious actions. For example, they are told, 'Here is

a wug. Now there are tvvo of them. There are two

-'

or 'Here is a man who

knows how to bod. Yesterday he did the same thing. Yesterday, he

-'.

By

completing these sentences with'wugs' and'bodded', children demonstrate

that they know the patterns for plural and simple past in English. By gener-

alizing these patterns to words they have never heard before, they show thattheir language is more than just a list of memorizedword pairs such as'book/

books' and'nod/nodded'.

AcrtvtrY Try out the'wug' testA web search for'wug test' will turn up many examples of the pictures and the

text created for this landmark research. lf you know some English-speaking

children under the age of five years, try using the test with them.

'.e9, PUE (oP, s3 qsns sgJe^

lrer¡xne;o ruJoJ lf,JJJoJ al{l ot lueue¡a arttteSau tql qf,Ettr or ur8ag uarPIIq)

V a8atg

1l tu31( luoP aH 'rr oP r,u?J I'sesuat ¡o suos¡ad ruaJ3JIP JoJ stuJoJ asagr,{:ert ral rou

op uerplrr{r ta,rellol-1 'qJO^ Iepour ro lreqtxne aqr or arr¡rz8eu eqt Surgrerre

3o uraued qsn8ug tf,arroo eIF ArolloJ or ¡¿add¿ seouetuas aseql '(luoP, PUE

,r¡ref,, 3{ll sPJolv\ Sulpn¡:ur ',ou, uEql raqro arure8eu el{rJo sruro; ppe leuuaJplrqJ 'efualuas xa¡duoc oJorrl E olul pelJasul sI luaruelo arrne8au aq¡

g aSatg

¡tel{t qlnor t,uoq 'rIBI{ qruoJ ou IPP"C

'.luoP, asn ueuo uouqlgord¡o uouoala¡ Sulssa¡dxa sef,uelues 'gJa^ aqt aJoJag lsnl s¡radde PJo^\ a^n¿

-8au aq1 'pepnloul eq leu rrafgns eJuelues aql PuB ra8uo¡ ntor8 saruerau¡

7 a8a6

'rIEr{ gluof, oN'aDloof, oN'oN'af,uBJalln eql uI PJoll

rsJU Jqt sE Jo Juol" IIE Jaqtla ',ou, pJodr agr fq passardxa f¡¡ensn sl uolte8a¡

¡ a8ug

'(tSet apol¡) IIa^\ sE sa8en8ue¡ raqro

ul pa^rasgo uaeq a^Er{ sa8ers rt¡rulg 't¡sÉug3o uorlrsrnbr¿ aql uI Pa^lesgouaag e^"q uone8au3o ruarudo¡a,raP aqt uI sa8ets SuvtrolloJ aql 'JePJo Prolúpue spJo,& ar¿l¡do¡dde aqr Sursn 'saf,ueluas ut ruaql ssa.ldxa uec faqr aJoJeq

eurn aruos sD¡sl rl 'sa¡ntsa8 Pu" sPJo¡a a13urs qrrrtr uaqt ssa;dxa PuE suon

-lury asaqr puetsJepun uerPIII{r q8noqr ue^a ?ú'oqs selPnls ¡eurpnrlSuo¡(I66I) s.ruoolg sIo'I sE .ra^a.r'roH 'a8els pror'r a¡8uls arp lE uala 'uotuess¿ uE

pala¡ ol ¡o ,uonsaSSns e esnJal or 'srcelqoSo acue¡eaddeslP eqr uo lueuIluof,ot ur¿al laqt 'st rtql d¡rte l¡a¡' uone8au Jo suollf,unJ al{r uJeal uarPIII{J

uonsSeN

'seJnlJnJls Pue suJoJ d\au alsaJf

or prEar{ a,req laqr reqA puolaq oB faqr ^roq PuE 'l¡r:neruarsfs sdo¡ar'ap

a8en8uq s,ueJPlrqf,,/!\oq s/\\oqs oslE saJnlEal a8en8ur¡ ragloJo uoplsmbre aq1

¿rlnluJlP eJoru

eJ€ sauo qlrLl^ pu€ lsee pug {eqr op sauaqd;otu le¡lleuuler8 qllqM

¿sa8e lua.ra¡¡rp

1€ ueJp¡ql aql Suoue ef,tlou nol op seluaJaJJlP Pue salllJ€lll'u!s reqM

poo tl?llzlr t1"taa m Sututaal a&an7uaT

Il.

e

A

c

S

S

s

f

0

J

I

T

(

I

1

10 Language learning in early childhood

You didnt have supper. She doesnt want it.

Even though their language system is by now quite complex, they may stillhave dificulty with some other features related to negatives.

I dont have no more candies.

QuestionsThe challenge of learning complex language systems is also illustrated in thedevelopmental stages through which children learn to ask questions.

There is a remarkable consistency in the way children learn to form ques-tions in English. For one thing, there is a predictable order in which the'uh-words' emerge (Bloom 1991). ''$7hat' is generally the first wh- questionword to be used. It is often learned as part of a chunk ('\(hassat?') and it issome time before the child learns that there are variations of the form, suchas ''$7hat is that?' and'\lhat are these?'.

'\lhere' and 'who' emerge very soon. Identifying and locating people andobjects are within the childt understanding of the world. Furthermore,adults tend to ask children just these types of questions in the early days oflanguage learning, for example, '\lheret Mommy?' or ''Whot that?'

'Why' emerges around the end of the second year and becomes a favouritefor the next year or two. Children seem to ask an endless number ofquestionsbeginning with why', having discovered how effectively this little word gets

adults to engage in conversation, for example, '\Why that lady has blue hair?'

Finall¡ when the child has a better understanding ofmanner and time, 'how'and'when emerge. In contrast to 'what', 'where', and 'who' questions, chil-dren sometimes ask the more cognitively difficult why', when, and 'how'

questions without understanding the answers they get, as the following con-versation with a four-year-old clearly shows.

cHrLD tü7hen can we go outside?PARENT In about five minutes.cHrLD l-2-3-4-51Can we go now?

The ability to use these question words is at least partly tied to children's cog-

nitive development. It is also predicted in part by the questions children are

asked and the linguistic complexiry of questions with different wh- words.Thus it does not seem surprising that there is consistency in the sequence oftheir acquisition. Perhaps more surprising is the consistency in the acquisi-tion of word order in questions. This development is not based on learningnew meanings, but rather on learning different linguistic patterns to express

meanings that are already understood.

l

!

I

I

q

f

A

n

.¿8url.r: aq sl ft¡¡r, tou tnq ,¿Sutfrc ag s1, 'a¡druexa.ro3) qtoq rou tnq 'PJo,r-qmE rouorsJalur Jaqtlo asn or alg" ruaes uaJplll{J 'JeAa^\oI{'a8els slql tr ue,tg

¿u?erf, acr e>lrl sSop oq

'ef,uatuas er{l1o uorsJe e^neJelf,ep aqt ut lrcqtxne ou

aq ppo^\ aJar{r r{rrrf'.r ur suonsanb ul .op, ppe ue^a uel ueJPIIqr 'a8ers slqr rtrr

¿aru quz'rle¡d or 3ulo3 nol ary

'rrafgns aqt aJoJaq ¡eadde ]Er{l sJIr

-Erlrxnr arp ur lrarre^ eJoru sr aJagl rng 'E a8trg jo asoqt elqruasal suonsanb

JrlI 'uolsJelul l¡erTrxne-t:algns lq pauro3 are suoltsenb auos '7 a8er5 lyyaSwg

¿tr par{f,ref, no,( lq¿¡ ¿euo e eq r uop nol fqr¡1

¿ar¡oor E a^Br{ uel I oC ¿prrll $ lppar aqr s1

'ruJoJ lualuelEls sll uI afuelues arpJo rsal aql Surrtea¡ 'esualuesBJo (luo{, aqr re (protvi uonsanb ro gra,r e) Sunpauros Surrrnd lq PauroJ art

suousanb teqr eq or srueas alnJ s,pllql eqt asnef,aq ,3urluor3, a8ers qgr IIEI alN

:euurer8 tppe equo arrn¡ads¡ad eqr ruo{ uEI{l rer{rrr a,rncads¡ad EPIIqT eqlruo;3 urarred eqt aas ot peau alr\'slql aglJf,seP oI'uosreJ 8uo¡rtr aqr ro3 lq8rraq &u faqr 'uraued llnpr aqt qrtetu a8zrs str¡r te suorlsanb aruos q8noqr¡y

¿lddeq nol ary¿o3 1 ue3

:sr l{f,ns suorlsanb acnpord or uÉag

pue ruaJaglp sr suoltsanb 3o arnnnrrs aql leqr e3llou uarPllql 'f¡enp-ergg aSatg

'suortsanb pateaJf u,{\o JIaI{l eprs8uo¡e ,¿reqrs.rerltr, sE r{f,ns sruJoJ peuJeel->lunql loerrof, aqr aonpord ol anunuoo lagl

¿rruos e^?q I ¿sn{r a>III noÁ

'uolteuolul Sulsrr qru*'ef,uetuas alneJ"lseP

eqrJo JaPJo PJo,/\4, al{r esn ueJPIIr{J 'suorlsanb ¡aeu sJolu 1se or urSag r{arp w7 a8ug

¿reqr ErEt1,N ¿fppeq srraqr6

:qunql s" Peuftal uaaq arreq,bqresnef,aq lf,eJJof,-suollsanb lce¡¡oo auros acnpotd leru laql 'arutl arues aql ly

¿1ooq Áuruol J ¿aDIooJ

:uolleuolul Sursr qurtr sa3uelues

pJo./v\-eeJq1 Jo -o1r\l a¡druls Jo sPJo¡a a¡8uls a:e suollsanb lseIIJEa s¡arp[Y)¡ a8atg

Footlplltp t(ltra ut Sututral a8anSuaT

scI

1

I

a

(

(

a

II

T2 Language learning in early childhood

Therefore, we may find inversio n in yes/no questions but not in wh- ques-

tions, unless they are formulaic units such as "ü7'hatb that?'

Stage 5At Stage 5, both wh- andyes/n questions are formed correctly.

Are these your boots?\íhy did you do that?Does Daddy have a box?

Negative questions may still be a bit too difficult.

\X/hy the teddy bear cant go outside?

And even though performance on most questions is correct, there is still one

more hurdle. tWhen tuh- words appear in subordinate clauses or embeddedquestions, children overgeneralize the inverted form that would be correctfor simple questions and produce sentences such as:

Ask him why cant he go out.

Stage 6At this stage, children are able to correctly form all question types, includingnegative and complex embedded questions.

Passage through developmental sequences does not always follow a steady

uninterrupted path. Children appear to learn new things and then fall back

on old patterns when there is added stress in a new situation or when theyare using other new elements in their language. But the overall path takes

them toward a closer and closer approximation of the language that is spoken

around them.

Zhe pre-scltoolyearsBy the age of four, most children can ask questions, give commands, reportreal events, and create stories about imaginary ones, using correct word order

and grammatical markers most of the time. In fact, it is generally accepted

that by age four, children have acquired the basic structures of the language

or languages spoken to them in these early years. Three- and four-year-olds

continue to learn vocabulary at the rate of several words a day. They begin to

acquire less frequent and more complex linguistic structures such as passives

and relative clauses.

Much of children's language acquisition effort in the late pre-school years is

spent in developing their ability to use language in a widening social environ-ment. They use language in a greater variery of situations. They interact more

often with unfamiliar adults. They begin to talk sensibly on the telephone

to invisible grandparents (younger children do not understand that theirtelephone partner cannot see what they see). They acquire the aggressive or

I

I&

1

coúIlIoITInel

rez'ca

iss

ofInL

rid

d¡¡rue3 pue spuerrj rrar{r qlrrvr, aJeqs or ar'o¡ feqr qlrq./$ '.salpplJpue 'suonsenb >1cur 'sa>1ol pror* ot ssef,f,E uaJplrr{f, sa¡.r8 Suru¿aru a¡dnpua ¿r{ uEf sefualues puE spJolv\ reqr Sumou;¡ lrlnSlque se s8ulqr r{f,ns Jo&ertoosrp eqt sapnlf,ur osle sseuar?1(E cnsm8ul¡elary ¡Jeuor{s l¡rnuersgns sr

stuasa¡da¡ rl rralgo egr q8noqr uaAe ',urBJJ, uer{l pJolvr Je8uo¡ e sr ,re¡¡ldralec,teql puetsJepun laql 'sr (asnor{, se lsnl 'prorrr e sr (ar{l, ter{t pu"rsJepun p¿aJ

uer or{ \ uerplrgr 'sp¡o-reaf-aarr{r eTlun 'stuasa¡da¡ u Sulqr egt ruo{ etEJ

-¿das sl (pJo1r\, e rtqr SulpuetsJapun aqt sef,Jo3urer Sulpta¡ '8ulu¿aru s¿ ila^\sB ruJoJ seg a8en8url regr SuryurtsJapun .&\eu E ot ueJplrql spea¡ a8ed e uos¡oqruls rer.llo pue sJouel lg paruasardal spJoa Sulaag 'sseuaJr^re rnsrn8url-Eleru ol rsoog;ofuur ¿ sa¡tr8 peeJ or Sulureal 's^r'ro¡8 pue spuedxa lr¡lqe srgl

's;eal ¡ooqcs aql ut pue 'sreaf loogcs-ard agt ur s8urueeru u1r\o rraqt ssardxa

ol pue srar{lo puelsJepun or aSen8ue¡ asn ol lrlllq" aqr do¡a,rap uaJpllr{f

sffia[ Iooqrs aql

'luarudo¡ar'ap a8enSuel JoJ sonrunlJoddo ¡'rau s8u¡rq pur e8en8uel

Sulsn 3o s&¡rr ¡'rau sa.rrnba¡ Suuas Iooqls aql (asn a8en8ue¡ pue a8enSurlroJ sllDIS pur a8pa¡r'tou¡ xa¡duo: a¡rnb¡e uarplrr{r ¡oor¡cs-ard q8noqr¡y

'looqls or oB fagr arun eql lg aroru ro srnor{ 000'02JoJ tuau¡uoJr^ue JrerFJo a8en8ue¡ eqr qrr^\ tf,¿luof, ul are larp ltr{l eterurlse

l¿ru a¡r' 'lep e srnoq e la \r Jo uat JoJ a>p./v\E arc uaJplll{f, JI 'stuaruuoJl^ua

qolr-a8en8ue¡ ul puads uerplrqf, snoq lurur r'rog rsnl nof zvroqs III^ esllraxe

I¿f,ntuer{reru >1:rnb y 'fta 'uorsr^elar Suryrreztr 'ol pear Surag 'suoltesrarr-uo3 (sJJqlo uo Sulddorpsalea 'suonesJa uof, ur Sull¿dlrlrred-a8en8ue¡qrvn SunceJerul srnor{ Jo spu"snor¡r ruads a^¿q ueJpllqr reql lgr.ror'r-alou osle sr lI 'elrssaJdrur sl s:eal ¡oorl:s-ard eqr ur uolllslnbce a8rn8url

'(punoJe ft¡rr 3uo¡¡tr aqt, sr Jarpo eqr rnq lillt, tl auo l"ql nol ¡ar uec lagl'(l?a er{l e>pf,, ruo5 le,rn tuareglp ¿ ul 8uo¡¡'¡. sr (Jrer{J aql {uIJp, rEI{r r'rortl'pueq raqto eqt uo 'sp¡o-reaf-arrr{ 'suearü rr r"q.ü puersJapun uec faqr rrrp13BJ rr{r uo l¡urcu sncoS ¡lrv' laqr rnq 'ppo llq e s,u .r*ou1 lagr reqr rrroqs leurleql 'l qrwr Suorrvr, Sulqrlue s erar{l reqr aJns ssel eJE lagl ',lea aqt a1to, fesJa^au ppol'r faqr g8noqrp ta e./ú\oH 'asuas a>pru r,usaop tI asn"f,eg ',JIBqfaqt >lurrp, fes or f¡ls, s,rr rerp nof ¡ar uEf, uarpllqr p1o-.real-aarq¡ 'sla,ruo:

tr Suru¿aru eqr ruo5 ete¡edas roalqo ue sr aBenBuEI r"oJr or óITr9e al{l 'sseu-a¡e¿rre:nsrnSu[elau do¡a,rap or ulSag os[B ueJplrr{J 'sreaf ¡ooqcs-ard aqr u¡

'sarJel a8en8ue¡ lgr'.r put lroq pu"tsJepun or ur8aq pur aroldxa larp'ftrvr sr¡r uI '(se3ro^ ruaJ$lp asaqr 8u¡sn asnce;d faql r{3ll{,/v\ ur &¡d puarardarerogele ur a8pa¡.,'ron1 srql asn laqr pue laqro q:ea or lpr fagr mog pueserqsq or lpr srlnPe ^/y\oq ue3.&\tag ef,uaJaJIP aqr Paur?al ar'rq laqr 13Ip /{ogsfaql 'punor8le¡d aql ur sfor rregr puaJap or pepaau sI rrr{r e8en8ue¡ 8ur¡ofu:

?ooqflltf [lraa wSutunal aSan&uaT

J(

JI

ar

3l

-ISI

S:

o.

SI

aÍ

PJ:

1J

us:

&

ll,l

l:

Pel

tr

t4 Language learning in early childhood

One of the most impressive aspects of language development in the schoolyears is the astonishing growth ofvocabulary. Children enter school with theability to understand and produce several thousand words, and thousandsmore will be learned at school. In both the spoken and written language atschool, words such as 'homework' or'ruler' appear frequently in situationswhere their meaning is either immediately or gradually revealed.'Words likepopulation or'latirude' occur less frequently, but they are made importantby their significance in academic subject matter.

Vocabulary grows at a rate of between several hundred and more than a

thousand words e year, depending mainly on how much and how widelychildren read (Nagy, Herman, andAnderson 1985). The kind ofvocabularygrowth required for school success is likely to come from both reading forassignments and reading for pleasure, whether narrative or non-fiction. DeeGardner (2004) suggests that reading avariety oftext types is an essential partof vocabulary growth. His research has shown how the range of vocabularyin narrative texts is different from that in non-fiction. There are words innon-fiction texts that are unlikely to occur in stories or novels. In addition,non-fiction tends to include more opportunities to see a word in its differentforms (for example, 'mummy', 'mummies', 'mummified').Th. importanceof reading for vocabulary growth is seen when observant parents report a

child using a new word but mispronouncing it in a way that reveals it has

been encountered only in written form.

Another important development in the school years is the acquisition of dif-ferent language registers. Children learn how written language differs fromspoken language, how the language used to speak to the principal is differentfrom the language of the playground, how the language of a science report is

different from the language of a narrative. As Terry Piper (2006) and othershave documented, some children will have even more to learn if they cometo school speaking an ethnic or regional variety ofthe school language that is

quite different from the one used by the teacher. They will have to learn thatanother variety, often referred to as the standard variety, is required for suc-

cessful academic work. Other children arrive at school speaking a differentlanguage altogether. For these children, the work of language learning in theearly school years presents additional opportunities and challenges.

'W'e willreturn to this topic when we discuss bilingualism in early childhood.

Explaining first language acquisitionThese descriptions of language development from infancy through the early

school years show that we have considerable knowledge of tahat childrenlearn in their early language development. More controversid, howeve¡ are

questions about how this development takes place. rVhat abilities does the

child bring to the task and what are the contributions of the environment?

¿(>pnn ar{t) ll or Pauaddeq leqAt ,\srvrr

(rerr¡)

'1cnrr dunq 'slaarl[\ ]f,nrr dtunq dirrildplf,nJt dunp eqr ul sleeq/( e¡ou¡ lnd euuo8 ar¡o sIo'I

'aJorü laD utrrad

'uo lool <sIoT

pue lsrr¿ 'sr¡npe o^\r alr{^/$, >l3nrr dulnp e qrl^\ Surlqd sr (sqruou V7) nta¿

'enSoprp Surirro¡o3

aqr uI r1npe aqt sat¿llurl Jalad ^{'oI{

sfllou 'eloqe suouusaP aqr Surs¡ 'r¡npt

Surlrsln ¿ qrl¡l pa&¡d laqr se peprof,er arar* laqr usrr{\ plo sqtuoru ,zfioqe¡¡e aram,{aq1 'uÁqru¡ pur 'lpul3 telad luoU sldr¡¡sue¡l aql eulluBxa

^\oN'SlOJJ¿f,

rre I{roq legl'storref, lea auo Jal{ro Jr{I 'sloJref, lea aH ,{cNIc

'urJoJ Jo uonelndrutu ar'¡rpadal :af,Itf,EJd

s¡op qrrn'fe¡¿ ,\cn'I

¿slloP aqr grv"' fe¡d er\ II?I{S uaHrol I

.ef,ueJaltn s esla euoerüos3o rrrd ro IIEJo uonnedar prortr-ro1-PJo1v\ :uollelllul

raprsuof, 'srulal o u asagr rq r""r* r;]'rlllff;{I;11*i:il?J"qJtüur sasse¡o¡d l¡¿ul¡d eqt sE l\xlJvtd pue uotlaluat Pa/'/'JL srsIJnoI^EI{3q eI{I

$ldut?tca ?u? suo?qu{aq :qcaads s,uaty¡tqe Sutst1auy

.uJ"el or spaau pF{l egr Surqrf-ra^aJo ef,Jnos aql sE luauuoJl^ua aql ol e3uEl

-¡odu¡l rze¡8 sa,tl3-froal{r slgl'rnolleqeq a8en8ue¡ s,P¡ql aqr adeqs PFo^\,luauluoJr,rua aql q sJJr{to lq pa-rago lualuef,JoJuleJ JIII Jo fcuats¡suoc ar¡t

s" II3./$ sE'sreallPltll 3q1 a8en8ut¡ sqrJo ó¡rurnb pue.lrnrnb aql'^\eI^

,rqio,8.rrp:o:ry:asn a3en8ue¡ DerJof,Jo ,sllq'I{, PeurroJ fagr ¡run su¡aued

pu? spunos eseql asnf,BJd pue arrr¡urr 01 anurluol pFo^, UaJPIII{3 'luatuuoJ

-rrr,rrlrr,{r,{q pafurnorua snql .uoneorunrurüoJ InJssaf,f,ns lsnl ro aslerd3o

urJoJ 3I{r e{81 PInoJ slrll '(luauef,JoJulal a,rrlrsod,,partraf,eJ PJ"3I{ larp reqm

,r.tiorárr ór riá*ru" rraql ,uaqr punorc asoqr,(q pacnpord a8en8uq aql

pal?lnul usrpllqr uaq.&\ rEqr pazsaqrodlq slslrnol^El{e3 IBuolllPBJJ '(Ls6l)

rauuDIS c .g sB,/ü lroaqr ¡etlSoloqrlsd srql3o tuauodo¡d u¡¿\olDl-lseg agl

,3.trurla¡ r3*3,r"1 or prrfiar qlrlN 'sarers perrun aql uI f¡rroadsa 's0l6lpue s076I aqr ur ltrluangur se/'r rsgr Sulurra¡3o lroaqr B sI IusIJnoI eqeg

a nur a ds"ta d $t¿not a? q a q a qI

'sa¡tpads¡ad ¡eruarudo¡a,reP/lsuolrf,EJalulpuE (ls¡euur ,tsl:nor,reqaq :ruarudolartap a8en8ue¡ ule¡dxa or PaJUB^P? uaaq

aAEII suousod prlraroaql ultru earqr'&nruel q10Z 3r{rJo slPPIlu srir muIS

Sl Footl?lltlr f,ltaa ut nurutaa1 aSan&uaT

¿r

JI

AJ

uA1

ila1

II

t.SI

e'l

SJ

SI

1I

u-l

SI

e

e:

IItl

uÁ.

lle:

J(

Á

,(

e

1l

J,

SI

llsl

a'

I(

T6 Language learning in early childhood

nETER (looking under chair for it) Lose it. Dump truck! Dumptruck! Fall! Fall!

LoIs Yes, the dump truck fell down.IETER Dump truck fell down. Dump truck.

(Unpublished data from P M. Lightbown)

Ifwe analysed a larger sample of Petert speech, we would see that 3040 percent of his senrences were imitations of what someone else had just said. \7ewould also see rhat his imitations were not random. Thar is, he did not simplyimitate 3040 per cent of everything he heard. Detailed analyses of largesamples of Petert speech over about a year showed that he imitated *otá,and sentence structures that were just beginning to appear in his sponraneousspeech. Once these new elements became solidly grounded in his languagesystem, he stopped imitating them and wenr on to imitate others.

unlike a parror who imitates the familiar and continues to repear the samethings again and again, children appear to imitate selectively. The choiceof what to imitate seems ro be based on something new that they have justbegun to understand and use, not simply on what is available in the environ-ment. For example, consider how Cindy imitates and practises language inthe following conversations.

Cindy (24 months, 16 day$ is looking at a picture of a carrot in a book andtrying to get Patsy's attention.

cINDY Kawo? kawo? kawo? kawo? kawo?pATsy 'ülhat are the rabbits eating?crNDY They eating ... kando?PATSv No, thatt a carrot.cINDy Carrot. (pointing to each carrot on the page) The other ...

carrot. The other carrot. The other carrot.

(A few minutes later, Cindy brings Patsy a stuffed toy rabbit.)

pATsy \ü/hat does this rabbit like to eat?

cINDy (incomprehensible) eat the carrors.

(Cindy gets another stufFed rabbit.)

crNDy He (incomprehensible) eat carrors. The other one eat carrots.They both eat carrots.

(One week later, Cindy opens the book to the same page.)

crNDy Heret the carrors. (pointing) Is that a carrot?PATSY Yes.

(Unpublished data from P. M. Lightbown)

'$uatuJltl3

Jo suonsenb sJe>[Eads JeTro eqr uo sal?Joq?Ia PuB suollsanb sJ3^\sLrB Put$lse er{s'pealsul 'Ja)Frds Jaqto aql salellrul l¡arer aqs tnq 'safueluas a:r¡:¿¡dparelaJjo sarJas e sacnpord roj¡asraq sreadal seulltaruos uf;qte¡ 'fpur3 a1ry

G€]:gLGI lr.lrT puu uroo¡g tuoglil

.ureJl

oor{f oor{J e sr sql (ulerr;o u¿d tno 8ur¡er) ¿ooI{J ool{l Y N,\uHrlrx'xoq aqr uI s,rl 'ePrsul sIo-I

¿urEJl oor{f, ool{f, aJolu ¿ aJJqra ¿aJJqrN'>pnrr ulrqre¡ (1cnrr rno 8ur¡er) lf,nJr ta) 'uIEJl oor{3

oor{f, aJoru oN 'eJoru B leD 'aJou ra8 1 (xoq ut Sutgcreas) N,runrvx

(:agraSor l srnd sro.1¡

'r*og nol r'roqs II<I >loo'I 'lr op uEf, noÁ 'll op uer noÁ ';4O sIo'I'srqr op I 'sn{r op 1 (raqraSor urc¡l tnd ot

8uú-u) 'slqr op rue,& I 'srqt oC (ulerr3o sJ33 o-1r\l tno 8ur¡er) N,\uHrvx

('roog eqr uo epIIS aqr stnd ulrgru¡)

'srqr oP I 'sFlL'roou uo u1(oP rnd N,\)rHrvx'sI rEI{r rBIl!\^\oDl nol qg sIo'I

¿srql EtErL[\'le¡d rue¿6 (epls tno Stqtt) 'ulerl ool{3 ool{f, I{11.&\

&¡d ruem I 'urerr ool{f, ool{f, qrv't le¡d turt\ I (8eq ro3 Surqeee-r)

'urerl ooqr oor{f, al{r rr¡8norq sIo'I'sa

¿urrrl ooqr ool{l eqr rq8norq sIo-I ¿ool{r ooq3 ¿s,{or 8ur-rq 1

¿rqSnorq 1 slot aqr aas nof pl6l

(sqruour V7)uthqYY'sro-I PuB urirgrr¡ uJJ \leq uollssJa^uo:8urno¡o; aql ut arnorrd

pue uonerrrul 3o saldruzxa al{l TJPISuoJ'luaf, rad 91 ueql ssal rE Parelm-lm uaaq seq tered pue lpur3 Jo rEI{r or a¡geredurof, elrr e re papaacord

luaudo¡autap esoq,/ra 'uaJPIItls JaIPo Jo q:aads eql uI uollelllul Jo lunour¿aql 'p¡p fprlf put rared se I{f,nru se asrlcr¡d PuE ele}llil uarPllqr IIE roN

'tuaruuorr^ua aqr lq uErF ral{}Er pll{c aqt aplst{

Surgtauos fg paulrurarep peruaes asrlce¡d Pue alelllul ol ]Erl^Uo alrol{o aIP

'/lres a^\ se 'os ue,rg 'uoltlslnb¡e e8en8ue¡ 3o uorreue¡dxe lslJnoll?qaq eW

or r¡oddns oruos pual ot ruaes lPttl PuB rered ruorj qraeds jo sa¡dues aq1

'¡oBuuroru,lpuarrnr $ aqs teq,t\ uo pasnroJ aq or .readde a¡lpe¡d PuE uoIlelIIUI JaI{

lared e{ll ,teql sl 8ur¡ns lsouI sI IP(LA'IISI^ lsel slsle¿ efuls uaas lou PEIIaqs 1ooq agr ul aSed aqt or rq8le.tts suJnl Pue ralsl >lea^\ E üossel aSenSue¡,

aql sJaqruaueJ el{s letlt sr Surlsa¡alul lsolu sdeqra¿ isessElf, a8en8ue¡ u8ra;o;

eruos uI tuepnrs E a>lll spunos reqr lem e uI saJnlJnJls PUE sPJo/( d\au sasll

-cerd aqg 'uotllsrnbrr a8tn8ue¡ req uo preq Suurortr aq or sreadde fPtlf,

?ootl?l?qr lpaa ut &urutua1 a8anSuaT

NTUHII'}ISIO'I

NA)THIYXSIO'I

Pr

UI

-ulsIaf,

eu

aB

Snr

sP.

a3.

Át,

qxJe(

LI

18 Language learning in early childhood

Thus, children vary in the amounr of imitation rhey do. In addition, manyof the things they say show that they are using language creativel¡ not justrepeating what they have heard. This is evident in the following e*ampl.r.

Patterns in knguageThe first example shows a child in the process of learning pamerns in lan-guage, in this case the rules of word formation, and overgeneralizing themto new contexts.

Randall (36 months) had a sore on his hand.

MoTHER M"yb. we need to take you to the doctor.RANDALL \7'hy? So he can doc mylittle bump?

Randall forms the verb 'doc' from the noun 'doctor', by analogy with farmerswho farm, swimmers who swim, and actors who act.

fNor l putd.-W"!,1!brrrysetÍ !

Focus onmeaning

Even older children have to work out some puzzles, for example, when famil-iar language is used in unfamiliar ways, as in the example below. vhen David(5 years, 1 month) was ar his older sister's birthday parry, toasrs were pro-posed with grape juice in stemmed glasses:

FATHER I d like ro propose a roasr.

Several minutes later, David raised his glass:

DAvrD I d like ro propose a piece of bread.

only when laughter sent David slinking from the table did the group realizethat he wasnt intentionally making a play on words! He was concentraring

(

IId

{ts

klllfr

¿5

gmd(let

the ptates oot *¡c tatle !

/Yon ,q¿a,^, I n+Ethe ptates oitte\'te.btc.,-

'uollrsrnbfe a8en8ue¡ JoJ suoneueldxa ruaraglp JoJ >lool ol sJar{rJresal pelsuonelruJrl asaql 'arlnbf,E ueJplrr{f ter{t JEruruE.rB xa¡duroo eJotu ar{lJo uog-rsrnbrr erlt JoJ uoneue¡dxa,ftotcrSsnrs r tou sr rusrJnor^Er{eq lrf,rsself, '.a>fertr

ueiplrql t"ql uonpzrprauaSra,l,o Jo slJos aqr Surureldxa ot ,(rr'r, aruos saoB

rusrrnor^Eqaq q8noqr¡e puv 'tol ? eletrurr oq,/!\ asoqr se l¡prde.r pue f11ry se

a8en8ue¡ a¡lnb¡¿ uouetrulr IJJ^o elurl op oq,&\ ueJplrql 1a^eaoH 'saSets tsar¡-rea aqr re fllelcadsa 'a3en3ue13o slradse aulrno: pur re¡n8eJ eqrJo aruos uJ?el

ueJplrr{f,./(oq Surpuersrapunjo lem alqruoseal E JeJo ot sruees rusrJnorler{eg

'lf,eJJof, uauo pue a¡qrsuegarduroc l¡ensn aJE seouatuas,/!\au Jraql 'spJo,s

JO SaSn 1v\eu JO STuJOJ l1\eu atearc feql 'slxaluof, 1v\eu ol ueql azrlEJauaS pwsu¡aued lno >pld or ;raddt uarplrql 'reqre¡ 'stlnpe ruoU preaq a,reg laqr r¿{¡saf,ualuasJo suortnada¡ l¡a.rau lou tre laql'uarp¡¡¡r lq parea-rr sruJoJ Jrp

Jo aruos urc¡dxa louuer euole rfnfe.rd pue uonelnul '8ulurca¡ a8en8uel 3ossa:o¡d aql uo l'ropuuvi E g1r^\ sn aplrro;d q:aads suarplrqrJo saldruexa asaql

'lf,aga pue asnef Jo JapJo ar{t se8uego <asnEfeg, Jo (aJo3ag, e>[l

pro^\ E.&\oq pu"tsrapun raf rou prp eH 'rsr5 pres aq r"g./ü ErEI{r os 'sPueq srq

Áp or parduaue IIEpuEU ero1ag pereaddesrp sla^\ol eqt <eser srql uI 'muar

-JnJJo Jraqr Jo JapJo arp ul stue a uonualrl or puer tuarudo¡a,rap a8en8ue¡

3o a8ers srql re ua:plgC 'rsJg sauof, asn"lo qrlq¡ rnogt a1€lsrru E ep€tu eq

rnq 'lervre sle,l\ot Jr{r IIB loor nol asnereg spueq ftu f-rp luer I, luearu eH

'spueq Áu lrp ruec I asntrag lene s¡azrrot eqr IIE >loor noÁ

'le \or e roj Suqoo¡ servr (sqruoru I 'sreaf E) Ippus¿vuanato np.rg

'luaurdo¡a,rap uonsanbul g aSrrgSo sa¡durexa poo8 are suoltsanb sIH 'aJuelues elpJo SuruulSaq arp

te ?re,rnd or se,/r\ suorlsJnb Suuse3o >lrlJr al{r rEI{t papnpuol p"q IFpusU

¿roq sr sql arv¿sroog fru arc asoql erv

¿slr"r rraqr a133ln uec sSop ary

'lep e ¡o asJnof, ar{1 Ja o suorl-Enlrs snorJBA ur suonsanb Surmo¡oj al{r pa>lse (sqruoru 6 'sfte/ Z) IIEPuBU

uo4au"toluo?rsanÓ

',peaJgJo acard e, 'rur(uoufs-¡tau lua¡edd¿srr qlv'r paoe¡dar aq rou plnoJ pu¿ lseor ewBS aqt lou stl't-(tsror

-^\au>I Jq

rq8noqr arl pro^{ aq1 tEIp azrlear or pelle3 aI{ rEI{r ,' ' ' asodord or aTI p(I, uols-sa¡dxa f,r¿lnruroJ ar{r pue a¡nlsa8 rvrau SuneurcsE agr Sunurol¡ad uo pr"I{ os

6I pooqpl?tp f,1wa utBuruwal a3an3ua7

3uez)

-o,

PI1I

I

\

IUi

-u

lsllu

20 Language learning in early childhood

7h e innatist p ersp ectiueNoam Chomsky is one of the most infuential figures in linguistics, andhis ideas about how language is acquired and how it is stored in the mindsparked a revolution in many aspecrs of linguistics and psychology, includ-ing the study of language acquisition. The innatist perspective is related toChomsky's hypothesis that all human languages are based on some innateuniversal principles.

In his 1959 review of B. F. Skinnert book Wrbal Behauior, Chomsky chal-lenged the behaviourist explanation for language acquisition. He argued thatchildren are biologically programmed for language and that language devel-ops in the child in just the same way rhar orher biological functions develop.For example, every child will learn to walk as long as adequate nourishmentand reasonable freedom of movement are provided. The child does not haveto be taught. Most children learn to walk at about the same age, and walkingis essentially the same in all normal human beings. For Chomsky, languageacquisition is very similar. The environment makes only a basic contribu-tion-in this case, the availabiliry of people who speak to the child. Thechild, or rather, the childk biological endowment, will do the rest.

Chomsky argued that the behaviourist theory failed ro account for 'the logicalproblem oflanguage acquisition'-the fact that children come to know moreabout the structure oftheir language than they could reasonably be expectedto learn on the basis of the samples of language they hear. The languagechildren are exposed to includes false starts, incomplete sentences, and slipsof the tongue, and yet they learn to distinguish between grammatical andungrammatical sentences. He concluded that childrenk minds are not blankslates to be filled by imitating language they hear in the enyironment. Instead,he hypothesized, children are born with a specific innate abiliry to discoverfor themselves the underlying rules of a language sysrem on the basis of thesamples of a natural language they are exposed to. This innare endowmenrwas seen as a sort of template, containing the principles that are universal toall human languages. This universal grammar (UG) would prevenr the childfrom pursuing all sorts of wrong hypotheses about how language sysremsmight work. If children are pre-equipped with UG, then what they have tolearn is the ways in which the language they are acquiring makes use of theseprinciples.

Consider the following sentences, from a book by Lydia \X/h ite ( 1 9 8 9). TheseEnglish sentences contain the reflexive pronoun'himself'. Both the pronounand the noun it refers to (the antecedent) are printed in italics. (An asteriskat the beginning of a sentence indicates that the sentence is ungrammatical.)

a John saw himselfb *HimselfsawJohn.

I

{

I

I

i

I

ir

n

Ihirsi

a(

oi

qr

w

'ureqr qrl^\ rf,Eralul aldoad qrq.rur sluaruuorrlua ur dn rq8no.rq are laqr3l srualsls a8en8ut¡ xa¡duroc armbdo¡e,rap ór¡lge e,urruSor parnul¡,Ga,r qtl\{ ueJp¡qr ua^g 'a8enSue¡ ualods3ouolusrnboe s¡a-rp¡gc SurJEer{ ot Jelrrurs sl ruetsls aSenSur¡ regr3o uortrsmb:uaqr ur ssa¡3o¡d Jraqr pu" 'fruejur ur tr ol pasodxa are faqr 3r a8rn8uel u8.rs

ureel llrlv\JEap llpuno3ord arc oqz'r ua¡pllgf, 'ólunruruor ¡en8ur¡r¡nur e ma,rr¡ fagrSl a8rn8ur¡ auo uer{t eJoru ro-e8rn8ue¡ a nru rlaqr armbce I¡¡S-sseflns uaJplrql il" rsotule r¿qr rrEJ aqr sazlseqdrua a,rn¡ads¡ad tslteuul aq1

'uo¡r¡s¡nbre a8en8uq ro3 lla,rrsn¡cxe pasn sI usruer{f,eru ateumer{r rer{r aJoruJaqunJ azrsagtodlq faql 'rndul Jr{lJo suon¿trurT Jo alds mxeruls xalduo: qf,ns relof,srp ot uaqr s \olle reqt a8pe¡mou>l ro rusruer{rarrral¿uur eruos e^Er{ rsnu laqr 'tuaruuoJrlua Jrar{} jo a8en8uq aqr a.rmbruuarplrqr IIE erurs trr{r ezr$qrodlq laq¡ 'lndur eqt ur alqelr¿,rr secualuas 3w-sn¡e.rd pue SunernulJo srseq eqr uo l¡a.rnd paur"al aq Ja au p¡nor reruure-6xa¡duroc r{Jns terir an3¡e a¡.rtcads¡ad lsneuur ar{l ruo{ uonrsrnbf,E a8rn8uu¡lpnrs oqru. sreqoreesa¿ 'srar{lo aql Jo ólTe¡neurue;8un aqt azuSorer punsaf,ualuas ¡ecrreruurerS aqr ra.tdratur lpcauoc or alqe aq plno^\ uarpllq:e8e-¡ooqos lsour 'taÁ 'ler'r aqr 8uo¡e sror;a e>leru op uerpllql pue 'uJEal o¡

p.leg lra,r aq plno \ tl suaes l 'ólxa¡duol Jo pury sryr rE >lool a^{ uaqlil

'tlasunr¡ ¡o a¡nt¡rd e ¿qft{ pa,&\oqs ¿utlo[ l:lllg ro uqof raqrta ol reJar Plnos a^Ixaua¡

er{r eJar{^\ (>1) ur se 'a¡glssod sr luepaf,etue euo u€ql aJoru 'sasef, aruos uI

' (asnr¡r alug) rua8t¡arur sr.!1 a sutt t¡ *tp sarayTag utl of * ('(asne¡c auug-uou) rua8r¡arur aqotllasuttc¡ sa€Ileg u7o[ t

'(f) ul tou lnq (l) ur uorlrsod rcalqns eqr ur aq uEf, a^Ixegar eql 'eJourJal{unJ'(q)

"l se 'slervr¡e lou tng '(p) pu¿ (e) ur se luapaf,elue otp sB esnrlr aIUES atp

ur aq tsnru e rxegal aqr l¡ens¡ 'r¿qr ueql parecr¡duoc eJoru ua^a Erl puy

'fiasru1q qser'r ot IIIS pesFuorduqof q

:Jar{lra >lJo \ l rJo \ alnJ sII{r tegt s tol{s (g) 'ra,razvro¡1 'luaPef

-alue aqr sr unouo¡d elrxageJ aql or rsesolf, unou aqr rrr{r epnl3uoJ rq8lru a,n

lasryr¡ qsr.l$olrugplol urlof* ttlasu,nq qsel,l'otlltg p¡or ugof ¡

tlasu,ttr1 peTI porC rer{r prcs uqof* a

t1asryr¡ p¿1;lr.ati ter{t ples ur{o[ p

:s" qf,ns safueluas JePrsuos eaJJ

' ur.1 of satoq!1a sruxq relJe 3ur¡oo1 r:srqr sar'ordsp (c) tng 'ot sra;ar

ll unou arF ^/\olloJ

lsnur unouord ar'rxagar er{rJr sE $lool ll '(q) pur (e) u1

?ooqnltp tltaa ut Sututaal a3on3uo7

(.IB:

>ISIJ

uncesat

aser

01 e

suJ:

PIrJorllUer

eqlJa^(.P?:

lutPUIrdra?e

PAIeJo

F]I

elE

orl-Pr

PulPu1

eqI-nqe8v3.tIa^E

1U3

'do-lallEI{.I3I

IZ

22 Language learning in early childhood

Children acquire the basic syntax and morphology of the language spoken tothem in a variety of conditions, some ofwhich would be expected to enhance

language development (for example, caring, attentive parents who focus onthe childb language), and some which might be expected to inhibit it (for

example, abusive or rejecting parents). Children achieve different levels ofvocabulary creativiry social grace, and so on, but virtually all achieve theabiliry to use the patterns of the language or languages spoken to them. Thisis seen as support for the hypothesis that language is somehow separate fromother aspects ofcognitive development and may depend on a specific moduleof the brain.

The Critical Period HypotltesisThe innatist perspective is often linked to the Critical Period Hypothesis(CPH)-the hypothesis that animals, including humans, are genetically

programmed to acquire certain kinds of knowledge and skill at specific times

in life. Beyond those 'critical periods', it is either difficult or impossible toacquire those abilities.'S7'ith regard to language, the CPH suggests that chil-dren who are not given access to language in infancy and early childhood(because ofdeafness or extreme isolation) will never acquire language if these

deprivations go on for too long.

It is difficult to find evidence for or against the CPH, since nearly all childrenare exposed to language at an early age. However, history has documented a

few'natural experiments'where children have been deprived of contact withlanguage. Two of the most famous cases are those of 'Victor' and'Genie'.

ln 1799, a boy who became known as Victor was found wandering naked

in the woods in France. His storywas dramatized ina1970 film by Frangois

Thuffaut called L'enfant sauuage (TheWild Child). 'Whe n Vctor was captured,

he was about 12 years old and completely wild, apparently having had no

contact with humans. Jean-Marc-Gaspard Itard, a young doctor accustomed

to working with deaf children, devoted five years to socializing Victor and

trying to teach him language. Although he succeeded to some extent in devel-

oping Victort sociabiliry memory and judgement, there was little progress

in his language abiliry.

Neárly 200 years later, Genie, a I3-year-old girl who had been isolated,

neglected, and abused, was discovered in California. Because of the irrationaldemands of a disturbed father and the submission and fear of an abused

mother, Genie had spent more than 11 years tied to a chair or a crib in asmall, darkened room. Her father had forbidden his wife and son to speak to

Genie and had himself only growled and barked at her. She was beaten when

she made any kind of noise, and she had long since resorted to complete

silence. Genie was undeveloped physically, emotionall¡ and intellectually.

She had no language.

lEr{l pepnlfuof, sJar{f,rEasal aql'dno;8 arsT arp ueqr l¡ruarsrsuof, sJotu Il¡aqt

pasn 'uJnl uI 'oq^\ dno.l8,(¡reg aqr uegr.{¡ruarslsuor Jrolu sJa>lr¿lu eql Pasn

dno¡8 a^IIBN ar{t 'sJa>lJ?ru p:ntruruer8 uo SutsnroS sls31 uo larta,"log 'a8pa

-prou¡ f-rqng"f,ol ur a¡durexa.lo3 ,.ISVJo asn rIeI{rJo stf,eds" eluos uI sdno¡8

eql uea^\rag af,ueJeJlp ou PunoJ lt,1¡ '(Zt a8e lar3e 15y Sururea¡ ue8aq

or¡,,v'.) s.reu8rs arET pue '(a8e 3o s¡eal xrs Pue JnoJ uaa^\lJq 15y 8u¡sn ue8aq

oqm) srauSls fl.rrg '(,{rtlq urorj TSV or pasodxa aram, ogrvr,) s¡au8rs a^IleN

pareduroc laql 's.raryru I¿f,Iterururr8 puaqarduos PUE acnpord 01 'ISVJo

srasnJEaPJo lrnlqB al{r PaIPnrs san8ea¡oc rel{ PuE (Oee t) rrodrv'a¡ rssr¡g

'sfuarua,roru fPoq

Jo pu"q cg¡rads q8no;gr passardxa are sJe1Jelu asaql 'Jequnu put (asual

rt"á ,r¡á*"*a ro3) ault se s8urqr r{fns attf,rpur ot sra>lJeru ¡m¡reuruer8 3oasn sa>lpru (15y) aEun8uul uSrg ueJrJerrrv'sa8en8url uatllJ/t\ PUE PJo ell-I

'Hdf al{i ol Par¿ler l{f,rEasar

lueuodrut atuosJo rcalqns agt uaaq seq aSen8ue¡ u8ls Sururea¡ ul acuauadxa

ralEl s,uarpllqr esaql'PIql aql ol rlqlssaf,f,e sI lBr{r aSrnSue¡3o PIo^eP lnqsfe,vr tsotu uI Flurou aq leru pouad PooqP¡ql f¡rea arp 'sng1 'lzr* Fruroufpua.redde uE ur lfEJalur 01 sssues Jer{lo sasn pln{t eql asnBf,eq JEaq louuef,

pplr rlaqt lrr{t ozllear tou feru stua¡ed Sutreag 'I{uIq ruory'ISV ol pasodxa

áq ór l¡at¡¡ eJE uerplll{r asaqr l¡uo pue 'sluarzd1"aP or urog srEJeaP f¡puno3

-ord aqr Jo luer rad g1-g l¡ug 'slualed Sulreaq a^EI{ oq.,'r _uarPIII{l JEáP

f¡punoSoid oruos roJ asrr agt sl slql .aru' Iensn ar¡r re aBenBuEI or ssrrrr

ri"q ro,, op ral ,slua¡¿d Jrarp ruog aJef, pue JAol a^Ief,al lagr araqn saruoq

1¡ou euros oq,/ú uarplrqf,Jo asm eql sI HdJ olpJo rser arel¡do¡dde aro.'' v.uonf,eJelur uerunr{ IEruJou ruog PereJedas a;arrr faqr aJoJag uela 'luetu

-¡ledrur a8en8uq rgnads e ro ,sle¡ap ¡eruaudo¡anaP 'aBBtuEP uIEJg luory

PsreJns uraql Jo JeI{rIa Jaq]3q,/v\ suI(UJJleP o1 elglssod rou sl r1 'a8tn8ue¡

.rr"q or lr¡¡qeul Jrar{l ol pernqrrruof, a,req tgSnu lrrJnleur ¡rer3o¡orq saPISaq

sJolf,?J Jaqro req \ /(ouI louuB3 al|t 'seseJ lBnsnun IPns tuog ef,uaPl^a Josrs€g aqt uo peurguor sl sseqrod,,(q aqr reqr an8;r ol lFlgJIP sl ll 'HdJ,qr jo i¡oddns .rt ,r,rtpt,tt apv.,'ord ot ¡eadde alua9 PuE rolf,I¡ g8noql¡y

'qraads aultnoJ

pu? f,rElnluJoJ pesnJe^o pue fFuarsrsuosur stuJoJ pcrrru[ue;8 Pasn eqs 'uolrltttpotá put-uolsuaqa¡duoc uae \leq dr8 purou uer¡r 1a3rc1 E se,r\ eral{I.p¡ó reaf-a,rg pordlr eJo tEr{l aIII rou ser'r a8en8uel s,alua) 'a8en8_ue1 ol arns

-'od"r jo tr"rf r,tg JaUE ,ssalaqlJa^eN 'stIBJl PuE selsel IEnP_I^lPul SuoJls Pu¿

sdqsuonr¡a.r puosrad daap pado¡a^ap aqs 'arE.&rB fla,rruuSoc PuE PazllBlf,os

Sulurocag ul ssa¡8o¡d alge>IJ¿tueJ sPrru elua) 'slooqrs ¡rtcads PaPueuE PUE

auoq JatsoJ ¿ uI Pa^II eqs 'erlua3 uoIlElITIqEqaJ 3 uI po¡rad JaIJq E J3!V.(LL6l) ssunJ .t"*g Snrpr¡rul ,slsrderaql pue srar{f,Eet lueur3o uoltedl¡lt

-red aqr qtl^\ Palef,nPa PII? roJ PeJEf sE,&\ eluaD 'POraAof,sIP sEl(\ aqs JeUV

PooqPl ltp,Qna ur Sututaa. aSanfuuaT 87,

24 Language learning in early chi ldhood

their study supports the hypothesis that there is a critical period for first lan-

guage acquisition, whether that language is oral or gestural.

Another line of research that has given new insight into the importance ofearly language experience comes from studies of international adoptees.'

These aré children who were adopted at an early age by families who didnot speak the language rhe child had heard during infancy. In their review

of rtudi.r of international adoptees, Johanne Paradis, Fred Genesee, and

Martha Crago (201 1) concluded that cognitive and linguistic outcomes were

generally veiy positive. Some comparisons of their language with that of.hildr.tr the same age who had always heard the same language showed that

subtle differences persist even after seyeral years, but these are not the kinds

of differences that most people would notice. Here again, of course, one

cannot know whethef something other than a late exposure to the language

spoken in the adoptive environment also contributed to differences between

these children and others who did not experience an abrupt change in their

Ianguage environment. Nevertheless, with continuing research on childrent

linguisiic behaviours and intuitions, as well as the neurological studies ofinfánts' speech perception that we saw above, it is becoming clearer that

lattguageácquisition begins ar birth, and possibly even before, as the child's

brain is shaped by exposure to the language(s) in the environment.

The innatist perspectiye is thus partly based on evidence that there is a criti-cal period foi l"ngu"ge acquisition. It is also seen as an explanation for 'the

logical problem oil"ng,r"g. acquisition', that is, the qu_estion of how adult

rp-."k ri come to know the complex structure of their first language on the

basis of the limited samples of language to which they are exposed.

Interactionist/ dea e lop m ental p ersp e ctiu es

Developmental and cognitive psychologists have focused on the interplay

b.t*..r, the innate learning ability of children and the environment in which

they develop. Th.y "rg,r.

th"t the innatists place too much emphasis on the

'final state' (th..o-p.t"nce of adult native speakers) and not enough on the

developmental aspects oflanguage acquisition. In theirview,language acquisi-

tion istut one example of the human childt ability to learn from experience,

and they see no needto assume that there are specific brain structures devoted

to language acquisition. They hJpothesize that what children need to know is

.rr.rály ",raifable

in the language they are exposed to as they hear it used in

thousanis of hours of interactions with the people and objects around them.

Psychologists attribute considerably more importance to the environment

than the lnnatists do even though they also recognize a powerful learning

mechanism in the human brain. They see language acquisition as similar

to and infuenced by the acquisition of other kinds of skill and knowledge,

rarher than as something that is different from and largely independent of

97

'7 raldEr{J ur aes

III¡\ a¡vr se 'tuarudo¡a,rap a8en8uel puofas uo r{fJBaseJ ur IEJtuef l¡Sursea;:uraluofeg a^?q s./rrar^ slrsto8l¡ 'uorlJeJatur lElf,os ul pa8rarua qcaads pue'qcaads pazr¡eu;arur l¡enuassa srr'rrg8noqr .Alsto8l¡roC 'plro^\ IEclsfgd aqrqll \ uonf,Ererur g8norgl paJrnbre e8pa¡non1 ssa¡dxa ol pesn eq plnof, ter{ru¡elsls ¡oqruls e s¿ a8¿n8ue¡ rtr,es ra8el¿ 's.re8el¿ ruog sJa5rp,r*al,r sÁ1sto8l¡

'a8pa¡zrroul ¡'rau a¡lnbce ot osle pue e^Eq lagr a8pa¡zrroul aWJolsoru Jr{t arytu uaqr sdlaq reqr ernlf,nJls a,rnroddns3o pur¡ e .sr trgl ,8u¡p¡o3

-J"f,s r{rr.&\ plql or1r apr,rord suonesra^uor ag1 'rq8noqt pue a8en8ue¡ qroq

3o sulSrro eqt suonrsJJ^uor esaqt ur 1r\Bs pue uarplrq) reqto qrv( pue sllnpEqrr^\ a^Er{ uerplrr{J ler{t suontsreluof,Jo e¡uet¡odrul eqr pe rJsqo l¡sro8l¡'KJ¿n luaudo¡a,rap purxord¡o auoz aqt se f¡ruapuadapur Surop3o alqedecaq p¡nomfaqr utqr eroru op plnof, uarplrrir r{llqr\ ul arr¡d ¡e:lroqderaru e orperreJer llslo8l¡ 'erueurro3red pur a8pa¡ru,oul Jo slar'a1 rag8rq 01 arue pBor alqe aJ¿ ueJplrr{J 'luJruuoJrrrua e^nfeJetul a,rn¡oddns E ur ter{t panSreaH 'uonrererul lurf,os ruor3l¡reuud sdo¡a,rap a8en8uel rErF papnpuor eH's0€6I Pu¿ s0z6l eqr uI uorun lrr^os eql ur sloor{f,s ur stlnpE pue uarplrqluaa.r\.]ag osle pue ua.rp¡qc Suoure suonf,Brarur pa^rasgo eH '(g/6 I ) flsro8l¡z'a1 rsr8o¡oqclsd aqr sen' tuarudola ep plr{r Jo rurpnls lBnuenHur rarFouv

'lueuruoJrlua eqt qrrd\ uonf,eralur ¡errslqd g8norqr palnbre J^Er{ uaJp¡qlreql a8pa¡moul ruasarder ol pasn aq um aSen8uel 'pooqplql ul pado¡az'apeJB lrr{t srualsfs loqrufs 3o Jagunu B

Jo euo sezrr a8en8ue¡ 'ra8el¿ JoC 'perel-ndrueru.ro pe lasqo ag um reqt s8ulqr eql pue pllql Jql uea^\taq uonJ€returaql uo rlnq sr Surpuersrapun a,rrtruSor Surdo¡a,rap aql 'ruasarda.r laqr srdar-uof ar{t 3o SurpuetsJapun suaJpl¡lo arp uo spuadap (aJoru, ro .ra88rg, se

r{Jns suJal ureuaf,Jo esn aqt 'eldurrxa.tog 'a8en8ue¡ arrnbce leqr rvrog aulru-rarap l¡rred ppo,/vl ruaudo¡a,rap artuuSoc suaJplrql r'roq eas ol lsea sl 11

'(rarer'r uo lBoH ol sJaqlo put lurs ol spoJ auros asn?J ('rre '¡e¡tateru'rg8¡a,,'r'azls rlaql) spoJJo tas eJo salr¡ado¡d qrlq^\ rno Sulrn8g) Surcuara3ul

¡erl8o¡ pue'(aur¡ pazaanbs l¡rq8p e ur saruuad 0I u¿ql snorerunu erour touaJE aurl 8uo¡ e uJoJ ol rno peards saruuad 0I ier{r Suml,oq) a:u¿.lraddrrrerp ur sa8ueqrSo ssa¡pre8ar sapnuenbSo ó¡¡qrts agr'(araqr ¡ps are rq8rsruog ueppl{ s8ulqr regr 8ultllou>1) acuaueurad roafqo se s8ulqr q:ns jo 8ur-PuetsrePun a,ulluSoc Jrar{t jo ruaurdo¡alap aqr a3eJr or elqE sE,/$, aH 'a¡doad

pue srcalqo glr^. uorreJelur Jrar{l ur puB íe¡d.naqr ur uarplrr{J put s}ueJur

pe^rrsgo ra8er¿ ',(¡ntuec qrgz ar{Uo saperap l¡ree aqr uI '(I 16I) raSer¿ ueaf'tslSolotualsldaTrsSo¡oqcfsd ssrrtg eqt sE \ ruarudo¡arrap azrlr¡u8oc Jreql uorlmg $ a8en8ue¡ suaJplrr{r tBr{r

^\or^ or{r jo srueuodo¡d lsJrlJea ar{rJo auo

llslotl¡pue ra8erd

'a8en8ue¡3o uonrsrnbfr Jrar{r pue tuarudo¡arrap ar'nluSoc s,ueJplrqruea.l*teg drqsuone¡ar esop eqr pazrsrqdua 8uo¡ a,req (gL6D ulqols ueq sE

r{fns sJar{f,Jeaser 'paapul 'tuarudo¡a-r'ap e,urruSoc pue a:uarradxe s pIr{J ar{r

?ooqpllqr r(1na ut Sututaal a7an&uaT

26 Language learning in early childhood

Cross-cultural research

Since the 1970s, researchers have studied childrent language learning envi-

ronments in a great many different cultural communities. The research has

focused not only on the development of language itself, but also on the ways

in which the environment provides what children need for language acquisi-

tion. Between 1985 and 1997, Dan Slobin edited five volumes devoted toresearch on the acquisition of 28 languages, providing examples and analyses

ofchild language and the language-learning environment from communitiesaround the world. One of the most remarkable resources for child language

researchers is the Child Language Data Exchange System (CHILDES),where researchers have contributed child language data in dozens of lan-guages in recorded and transcribed forms that are available as electronic files

from the CHILDES website (Mac\flhinney2000).

One feature of cross-cultural research is the description of child-rearing pat-terns. Catherine Snow (1995) and others have studied the apparent effects

on language acquisition of the ways in which adults talk to and interact

with young children. In middle-class North American homes, researchers

observed that adults often modify the way they speak when talking to littlechildren. This child-directed speech may be characterized by a slower rate ofdelivery higher pitch, more varied intonation, shorter, simpler sentence pat-

terns, stress on keywords, frequent repetition, and paraphrase. Furthermore,topics of conversation emphasize the childt immediate environment, picture

books, or experiences that the adult knows the child has had. Adults often

repeat the content of a childt utterance, but they expand or recast it into agrámmatically correct sentence. For example, when Peter says, 'Dump truck!

Dump truck! Fall! Fall!', Lois responds, 'Yes, the dump truck fell down.'

Ha ,he notCons;dere¿ 1'1cefr.cE9 of Stt¿t"'

B¿l go bf'

'ffi

'fem prldlr aJoru E

ul a8en8ue¡ do¡amp 01 uuJID Pa./dollr uollf,EJalul asol{^{ ¡auued IEuorlESraA-uof, B se l¡ruerrodrul arorrl 'lng '¡apour e se lluo lou-Jar{lorq JaPIo sI{ PEqaq :s.ru1f IuoS ruaJeglp se,r,r lualuuoJl^ua :nsnSul¡ s,uualD fe¡ap e8en8ue¡

3o adlr erurs ar{t feldsrp tou PP uuelD reglorg ¡e8unol s¡u¡f 'a8e srri jopcldlr e¡oru aSrn8uel fq pace¡dar 'pareaddesp Peq su¡aued graads FnsnunaqrJo rsoru sqluoru o^\r puB s.leal;noi3o a8e aqr lg 'a,rordur or ue8aq san

-lllqe a^lsserdxa srq 'r¡npe ue qll^\ suolssas leuorlesJaluor ue8ag ulf uaq¿¡

'JapJo pJo,&\ ¡eclteruruer8un '¡ensnun Pasn aq 'a8e slq or atet¡do¡dde szapl

ssa¡dxa or parduane ag qSnoqr¡y .a3en3ue13o stredse IIE ur la^el a3r r'ro1aq

IIa,^ se.ü eq lpr{l pJlBf,IpuI sqtuoru aulu pue uraf aeJl{l l" luJlussasse a8enSuel

y .a8en8ur¡ uSrs ¡o IEJO Jarpre ul rulq qlr^t parbrunruruof, lua;¿d E r{f,rrr( ur

lueuruorrlua lerurou e ur lueudo¡a.tep olrsln8ul sH ur8aq lou plp rulf f_o3

perrr IIa^\ se,l.r aq slcadsa¡ reqlo ur q8noqrp 'snql 'rul[ qrur a8en8uel u8ls

asn lou plp srua.red eql IEI{I uI lEnsnun ser'r fllueJ ag1 f¡ruanba5 PaI{3rBr\aq qllqlr\ 'uolsl^elal q8norgr s¿z'r a8¿n8uel IEro I{1I^\ lf€luof, l¡uo srq puz

'siuared3eapJo plqr SuliEaI{ E s",l\ eH 'urf pa¡¡m laql PII{I Elo ruaudo¡a,rap

aSeffiurl eql perpnts (Ig6i) san8ea¡or rer{ puB sqf,ES eullenbref 'Sutssnu sr

uorrf,erarur r{f,ns araq^\ seser lq Peteulrunlll sl PIIqI aqr ol spuodsal oq^\ Jol

-nf,olJetu uE pu¿ p¡lqc 3uru.rca1-a8en8ue¡ E uaa,l\leg uollJeJalulJo elor agluollf,sJelul Jo eJu"uodul eq¡

'uerplrqr or passarppe graads uI eletu srFP? aruos

teql suonef,glpotu el{l Jo rraJa urat-8uo1 aqr a8pnl or lFrUglP sl }I 'snql.a8en8uq Álunuuoc agl a;mbce fagr puv'luauruoJr^ua rreql ur ruaql ol

p3Suruuau sr lEr{l aSenSuq reag laqr r{JIqlA ur suoDBn}rs ur _aJE

ueJPlrqsi,{irrrot l¡a,re ul ;ssa¡rgrra,tr¡ .uJJpp{f, Jrerp grr^.r tf,BJa}ur sdno¡8 fruqra

puE f,[uouof,aorsos luaJeJrp u¡ s]ua¡ed sfer"r arp ur sDuaJaJIp lErluasqnsperuatunf,op a^EI{ sreqro PuB (886I) r{leaH acrrg lalrrq5 'solels Pallun aqr

urqlr^{ ua,rg .sre,lr8aref, Jraql sE a^ras oqm s8u¡¡qls Jeplo q¡m l¡r.reru¡.rd r:e-Jelur uJJpllqc Sunol'sJltellos Jtuos uI reqr Pa^Jesqo e^el{ sJaI{IJEJSaJ Jaqro

's¡us e8en8ue¡ pado¡a,raP

aJoru e^¿g puE Jeplo arz faqr llun srppe qtr/ú suorlEsJa^uof, ur elEdrf,rl

-¡ed or peSrrnotua ro parcadxa lou are leql 'sr¡npr 01 uals{ puE qf,rE^\ or

parrad*a are uerpllq) 'ltanos lrnul IEuoIrIP"rl uI lsqr Pa^lasgo (ZeeD o8er3

er{uery .s¡au¡zd IEuoIIESJa^uo¡ al¿udo¡ddz ag or uaJPIIql rlsl{l raPlsuof,

rou PrP ¿auln9 r'r,a¡ ende¿ uI srsqtou IInIE) lEI{l Punoi (066I) uneJell{f,S

Iqrutg ,a¡druexa roC 'uaJpllqo Sunof ,ftal qrrn' fe¡d ¡tqra,r Jo uolltsra^uof,

ui a8e8ua tou op srlnp' ,sa'arf,os eruos uI 'l'SJa^run su?auJ ou fq sl sauoq

u€rrreurv ssEIl-elPPItu uI Pe^rasgo qoaads ParserIP-PF{r Jo Pur>t aqr rEI{r

puno1 e^¿q >lJo \arueg cuolrezllelsos a8rn8uel, ¿ ul 3ur¡¡o1( sJal{fJeaseU

?oot/?l lqr Qna m Sututaal a8anSua'¡ LZ

28 Language learning in early c h ildhood

Jim showed very rapid acquisition of English once he began to interact with anadult on a one-to-one basis. The fact that he had failed to acquire language nor-mally prior to this experience suggests that impersonal sources oflanguage suchas television or radio alone are not sufficient. One-to-one inreraction gives chil-dren access to language that is adjusted to their level ofcomprehension. tü7hen

a child does not understand, the adult may repeat or paraphrase. The responseof the adult may also allow children ro find our when their own utterances areunderstood. Television, for obvious reasons, does not provide such interaction.Even in childrent programmes, where simpler language is used and topics arerelevant to younger viewers, no immediate adjustment is made for the needsof an individual child. Once children have acquired some language, however,television can be a source of language and cultural information.

Usage-based learningAs more and more research has documented the ways in which childreninteract with the environment, developmental and cognitive psychologistsfind further evidence that language acquisition is 'usage-based'. In this view,language acquisition is possible because ofchildrent general cognitive capac-ities and the vast number of opportunities they have to make connecdonsbetween the language they hear and what they experience in their environ-ment. Sophisticated electronic recording devices have been used to trackand count words and phrases children hear in their daily lives. Deb Roydocumented his son's acquisition of words, showing the frequency and thecontexts for the occurrence of language. Most remarkable, perhaps, is thedemonstration of the power of interaction between the child and the adultsand how adults focus on rhe language the child has begun to use (Roy 2009).

The usage-based perspective on language acquisition differs from the behav-iourist view in that the emphasis is more on the child's ability ro createnetworks of associations rather than on processes of imitation and habit for-mation. Referred to by various names, including cognitive linguistics, thisview also differs sharply from the innatists' because language acquisition isnot seen as requiring a separare 'module of the mind' but rather depends onthe child's general learning abilities and the contributions of the environ-ment. As Elena Lieven and MichaelTomasello (2008) put it, 'Children learnlanguage from their language experiences-there is no other way (p.168).According to this view, what children need to know is essentially available tothem in the language they are exposed to.

Some of the eady research in this frameworkwas done in the context of con-nectionism and involved computer simulations in which language sampleswere provided as input to a fairly simple program. The goal was to show thatthe computer could 'learn' cerrain things if exposed to enough examples.The program was found to be able to sort our the parterns from the inputand even generalize beyond what it was actually exposed to. It even made the

ol uonualtE f,n¿uals,{s eluos saPnlf,ul leql uollf,nJlsul <UaJPIII{3 lsolu Jq{'uonf,nJlsur rfaJrP slurT r{lr1v\ rulJd Jo salJelslu aqr Suue^ocslP (3I3EE

fq rsour¡r Sulprar uÉaq or u¡eas uarplll{r eruos 'uleruop leql uI rua¡qodrgnads E sr aJer{t regr rsaSSns feu¡ SuluolrunJ e pluSoc ¡eralo s,pf-Ip tqrv'r SurdaalJo tno ruees ter{l p¿er or Sulura¡ ul sle¡ap '.uerPllql rePlo rql

'8ur¡eads rou sI aqs -ro a{JI uala puE}sJapun or s¡raddr pue a8en8uq ospuodsar ppp ar{r rer{ler{lr\ auluJanp ot $ aSuer ¡eurrou eqt urpv'r ef,ueJa#P

lenpl^pq ue lldruls ro rua¡go;d e srraga; a8en8ue¡ pale¡ap .raqlal{^r aulrureurP

ot f¿,n auo 'ua.rp¡qr Sunof ,{-ra,r u1 'sreal aarqr3o a8e aqr aro3aq >¡eads tou ftroeruos 'sqluour ZI lg spro \ rs.lg a¡qrauSocar acnpord uarPllqr rsoru eF.tU[

'paapul epl \ sl (leruJou, roj a8uer aW rESpuru ur Burdaal 'l¡¡erurou a8rn8ue¡ Suldo¡a,rap rou $ pII{r

" rerp ¡ae3 farpy

arr^p€ puolssa3o.rd leas ol pa8e:nocua ag sJar{reat pue stuared reqr l"nuassr$ 1I '>looq srqrJo adors eqr ePlsrno s¡ ruarudolaztap aSrnSue¡ rfeJE serurlettro$

ttrp (uo os pue 'exa¡sfp 'f,usnnr 'srua¡gord frole¡nr¡rrc 'ssauJrep Sulpn¡ru¡¡sJrlrlrqesrp 3o sadó snorJe aqr Jo uolssnlslp V 'eser arlt rou $ slqt ruoq,,f,

roJ uarplrrlf, aruos er? a;aqt 'fr¡ap ro lr¡n:g3tp ruelgluSls tnoqll^\ turur-do¡e,rap aSrn8uq 3o sa8ets agr qSno.rr¡r ssa¡8o.ld uerplll{f, rsoru gSnorp¡y

sfe¡ap pue sreprosrp atenturl'aruar¡adxa q8norgr paurcJl l¡enrce are 'p¡ag ¡ensut

Jno ur srralqo Suna¡d¡alul pu¿ uo SulsnooS 'e¡duexa ro3 'paruelS JoJ e{E¡

e^,l' r¿qr serrrlrge Fnsr^ aqr 's¡ reql '(aes, ol Sulural Surpn¡rul 'Sururea¡ pnr-da¡¡ad pue a,ruuSor rrr{lo ol ll a¡rdruoc lagl 'p¡nll eql lq paqstdruorrtrEaJ alqDlJ¿uar ,{¡uo egl rou sl 'a¡rtssa¡dtul eIq¡A 'a8enSut¡ 3o uolrlslnb>t

'stsuoer{l paseg-a8esn .rog 'dn rlng ert sruroj a8tn8ue¡ Suorue pue Sulueaupue a8en8url uaa^\¡og siullJo Jagrunu ar¡r se 'l¡enper8 ece¡d saler Sulurer¡'sasergd pur spro.,'r ureal ol sauunl¡oddo Jo sputsnoqr lueu or pasodnar¿ uerpllql rrr{r rf,EJ eqr $ slsaqlodÁ1 srqr ol a¡ueuodul re¡ncrrred ¡g'sssuel qra^ r{f,rr{^|. qu¡'r o8 sgra Ps ¡troduar qllq,& ureel osp far¡1 '(a>¡¡¡ am¡

suouut? snou pur (sa>¡t aq) aunu p-taqunu pue uosrad ¡reru reql suroJ greleqt qrrn sunouo¡d alelf,osse ol ureal ,{aqr (¡re¡nuls '(Iooq) atnq '¡ull.

oB un

pue al pua (leq:) asxoqr qtlw oB aun pue q reql urtal laqt 'qrua.rg Sulurea¡

eJB uerPIIr{f,JI oS 'sunou qlra sIuJoJ arr.tDah¿ PuE elf,Iue arer¡do¡dde aqr elE

-rf,osse ol uJeal repua8 ¡erpeuurrr8 aA?I{ sunou I{JII{1v\ ur sa8en8ut¡ Sulurea¡

ueJpllql 'a¡druexa JoC 'uraqt qtlzvr Jnf,f,o reqr saruegdJoru lef,neurue.rS qrpspJo,4.l ro 'rueql qtr^{ Jnrf,o ler{r saserqd pue spro,,'r Jeqto aqt qrIA seserqd pwspror*Sulterf,ossrJo ssaf,ord r osp sl t1 'r0qear leuJarxaJo sluaruela qll^\ sPJo^t

Suner:osse f¡uo rou sa lo^ul uolllslnbf,¿ aSen8ue¡ 'lapour peseg-a8esn e u¡

'palua 'aldutexa JoJ 'qrazr rc¡nBarJI uE uo Sutpua pa-

re¡n8ar e Surund s¿ r{f,ns'a1eru ueJplrqt let{l (sJ>lelsru, a IlBaJf,Jo sPuD{ erues

?ooq?llqr Qtaa wEututaal a7unSuaT 6Z

30 Language learningin earfi childhood

sound-letter correspondences allows them to unlock the treasure chest ofreading. Both groups fall within a normal range. For some children, however,reading presents such great challenges that they need expert help beyondwhat is available in a typical classroom.

Childhood bilingualismThe language development of children who learn multiple languages duringchildhood is of enormous importance throughout the world. Indeed, themajority of the worldt children are exposed ro more rhan one language.Some children learn multiple languages from earliest childhood; othersacquire additional languages when they go to school. The acquisition andmaintenance of more than one language can open doors to many personal,social, and economic opportunities.

Unfortunatel¡ as Jim Cummins (2000) and others have pointed out, chil-dren who already know one or more languages and who arrive at their firstday of school without an age-appropriate knowledge of the language of theschool have often been misdiagnosed as having language delays or disorders.This includes immigrant and minority language children who do not speakthe school language at home and children who speak a different variety ofthe school language. These children's knowledge of a different language orlanguage variety is often incorrectly interpreted as a lack of normal languagedevelopment and a lack of background knowledge for school subjects. Theymay be placed in remedial or special education classes because schools are norequipped to provide an adequate assessment of childrent abillry to use rheirhome language or of their general cognitive abilities or their knowledge ofschool subjects, learned through another language. Researchers have recendymade important progress in providing guidelines that can help educatorsdistinguish between disabiliry and diversiry (Paradis, Genesee, and Crago20II), but much practical rvork remains to be done so that children canmake the most of their cognitive and linguistic abilities.

Children who learn more than one language from earliest childhood are

referred to as 'simultaneous bilinguals', whereas those who learn another lan-guage later may be called 'sequential bilinguals'. 'W'e sometimes hear peopleexpress the opinion that it is too difficult for children to cope with two lan-guages. They fear that the children will be confused or will not learn eitherlanguage well. However, there is little support for the myth that learningmore than one language in early childhood is a problem for children whohave adequate opportunities to use each one. There is a considerable bodyof research on childrent ability to learn more than one language in theirearliest years. Although some studies show minor early delays in one or bothlanguages for simultaneous bilinguals, there is no evidence that learning two

'(OOOZ sururun3) uoltf,Eralul fep-or-fep3o a8en8uel ¡eru-JoJur aqt ueqr arlnbre ot uaJplll{f, Jo3 t¡nr$P eJotu sI esJnof,slP f,IluePm¿ roJ

pepaeu a8en8ue¡ aqr reql 'razrerrroq 'paar8e flap¡ru, sI lI 'TBISJa^oJluof, uleruaJ

uonf,urlsrp aqr3o srcadse auJos Pu¿ 'tueqt guru oB ol Pual teql sulaned uon

-JEJalur aqr pue e8un8ut¡3o saIlaIJE^ oser{l sezIJe}JPJeI{f, rEI{l $ u fpcexa req,n

re orsrp ol rg8nos a^¿q srer{}o pue (7002) ¡a.r8adda¡r1c5 frryq 'passardxa suorleruJoJur fer'r aqr ul osle tng sarmbar I{rBa r¿ql lre¡nqecorl3o a8ue; agr u¡

lsnl lou <s$ueJaglp lueuodut aJE eJaql lnq 'luelxe uIElJa3 e ol de¡ra,ro san

-erJ¿A o1r\t aqlJo sf,IlsIJer3"JEI{J '(lruarcgord a8tn8ue¡ fIIuaPE3E a,rrrruSor)

dTVl pue (s¡rls uoll¿f,Iunruruol leuosJedraru¡ crseq) 5319 saIleIJeA o r¡aseqr pellrr sulrurunJ urf 'ursr¡en8unlq PooqP¡qr uo l{rreaser l¡rea srq u¡'s8unras rrruepme ur pesn sI reqr Áal¡r,r aql Pu" (sr¡npt JEIIIIuEJ qrul sSun

-res leruro3ur ur pue) sa^lesuaqr Suoue asn uerPllql reqr a8en8ue¡3o fiarre.r

aqr qloq urcal ot peau laqr 'lool{f,s re a8en8uel Puof,as E uJeal uarPIII{3 ry' GOOZ>1orsl¡ug) a3¡¡ rnoq8norr¡

ól¡rqlxag a,ulluSor or Sunnqlnuor sE PagIluaPI uaeq seq sef,Ior{r 8ur{¿u ur

acuar¡adxa srqr 'peapul 'a¡qerclpard uaryo PuE paurarred sr Surq:urtrs apor

teqt pue sa^lasuaql sse¡dxa or l\oq lnoqe sef,Ior{¡ Suqeru lpuetsuoc are

a8en8url euo uEI{l arou Jo sra>pads lEI{l u1üoqs azteg srsrSo¡orpls¿ 'a1of u

Suqeru ot lrlrep¡¡os Sulssa¡dxa ulorS 'suolte^Iloul rueJeJIP lueru a,l,rq leur1 lcual:go.rd3o 1or¡ e3o af,uaplla lou sI txatuoJ ¡enSullg e urqrrr'r sa8rn8ue¡

r{loq3o rsn aql 'sa8enSuel qroq .&ornl osp oII r srar{lo or leads lagr uaqm

r{frr^[s apof osle spnSur¡rq rFp¿ tuarf,goldl¡q8rg .sasod¡nd Fuorrr€raturJo

Áal¡e¡ e ro3 a8en8utl Jagro eqr tuoq Pro^l' EJo asn leuoltuelur aqr ag ua5o

se lsnf uEf, lr lnq 'uorssa¡dxa Jo PJo,/vr lre¡nqerort rc¡nrllred E Jo af,uasgr aIP

lrageJ seuJnauros leru saBtnBuEI uaa^\teg Surqrru,rs qJnS '<naaryqJ al q\rSurleld tu,1, '&s rg8ru gslSuE Pu¿ r{ruarC qroq s¡eads oI{

^, PIqr r 'alduexaJo{ 'uortBsJa^uor E ulr{ll^\ a8en8ur¡ euo ueql eJolu luo{ saserqd Jo sPJo-/v\Jo

asn aqt-8ulr{Jtr¡as epoo sE ot pJJJeJaJ sl asn a8en8ut¡ ¡rn8ulrq3o rradse aug

.Jaqto eqt .ot af,ueJeJaJd ul ¡o ,u"tp Jenag pasn eg f¡¡enrua,ra frtu a8en8ue¡

rerp 'Árunutuof, al{l uI PanP^ IHBH a.Ioul sI ro Jel{lo eql ueql ueuo aJoru

r{Jnur pJ"eq sr a8rn8uel euoJl 'Jldur¿xe roC 'a8en8url auo uBI{l aroIIJ uJeel 01

ólc¿de¡ uErunq eql uI uorlEtrul¡ lur or ueql peuJeal sr aSenSuq r{33a qlrq,/rl

ur se3uetsulnfrrf, ar{t or perEIeJ eq ot llalll JrouI eJE slBnPI^IPur ¡rn8unlqloaSrnSuq 3r{r ur pa^Jesqo eq,&ur rrqr suorlclnur-I .sseuaJt^\E rnsrnSur¡rtaus¿ qf,ns ,ssaf,¡ns f,rulapme or PaleleJ 3Je leq] saIlIIIgB uo slf,üe a,uusod a,reg

um .{cualcgord ¡en8u¡¡¡q Sultalqoe t€qr ef,uaPpe 8ur:ul,ruo¡ PunoJ e Bq

srsrSo¡ogcfsd ¡zruarudo¡a^aP PuE e,r¡ttuSor rel{ro PuE (tOOZ) lorsfprg ua¡g'sa8tn8ue¡ qroq uI loualrSord Jo sls al q8rq urtur uarPIrI{: lueru 'paapul

'tuaurdola,rap a,urruSoc grtr'r

seJaJJalur Jo tuaudo¡a,up rttsn8rnT;Ier{r uaoP sztro¡s l¡¡znue}sqns sa8en8uul

? o o tln ? q r [1ta a ut Suruta a1 a3rn3ua7 rc,

32 Language learning in early childhood

Children entering school with little or no knowledge of the language spoken

there may acquire BICS within a relatively short time-as little as a year or

two. They learn from watching and imitating interactions among their peers

and ben¡¡een teachers and students. They make connections between fre-

quently heard words and phrases and the routines and recurring events of the

classroom, cafeteria, and playground. For this reason, students are sometimes

perceived as'fuent' in their second language. This can lead teachers to assume

that any difficulties in academic tasks are not due to limited language skills butto other sau5s5-frsrn lack of motivation to learning disabilities. More careful

observation shows that the students, while fuent in social settings, do not have

the CALP skills needed for academic tasks such as understanding a problem inmathematics, defining a word, or writing a science report.

Virginia Collier (1989) found that, for most students, acquiring age-aPPro-

priate CALP takes several years. As the second language learner tries to catch

up, the children who came to school already speaking the school language

are continuing to learn hundreds of new words every year and to learn the

conc€pts that these words represent. If second language learners have limitedknowledge of the school language and do not have opportunities to continue

learning academic content in a language they aheady know, it is not surpris-

ing thai they fall behind in learning the academic subject matter that theirpeers have continued to develop.

Children need time to develop their second language skills. Many people

assume that this means that the best approach is to start learning as early

as possible and to avoid the use of the child's previously learned languages.

Ceitainl¡ it is important for children to begin learning and using the school

language as early as possible, but considerable research suggests that contin-,r.d d.rr.lopment of the child's home language actually contribures in the

long term to more successful acquisition of the school language. Researchers

and edu."tors have expressed concern about situations where children are

cut offfrom their family language when they are Yery young, spending long

hours away from their families in settings where the home language is absent

or even forbidden. Lily'Wong Fillmore (2000) observed that when children

are 'submerged' in a different language for long periods in pre-school or

day care, their development of the family language may be slowed down or

stalled before they have developed an age-appropriate proficiency in the new

language. Eventually they may stop speaking the family language altogether,

"nd thii loss of a common language can lead to significant social and psycho-

logical problems.'Wallace Lambert (1987) called the loss of one language on the way to learn-

ing another subtractive bilingualism. It can have negative consequences for

childre.rt self-esteem, and their relationships with family members are also

likely to be affected by such early loss of the family language. In these cases,

children seem to continue to be caught between two languages: they have not

eeJql uee/v\teq uaJPllql ro, Paqsllqnd eJe lEql qooq ul Pesn ,fuPlnqElo^

eqr le ¡ool Pu€ elols)ooq ro lJ€rqll P jo uolDas quaJPlltl) eqr 01 09 z¿SurpuU reql

r{11/v\ elql}eduof, sl }€tl} JardEqs sltll u! ueas nol e^eq teLlM'sJa^l8aJ¿f, Jaqlo

pu€ sluaJed Jreql {q ulaq} ot PassaJPP€ asenBue¡ ,o lunou€ aqr s¡ qu,ro-r3

l.re¡nqe:o,r queJplrql ,o roDlpard lsaq eql reql Puno, seq q)Jeesal eLuos I

uol})eEeJ Jo, suollseno

.sJauJEel aSrnSur¡ puosesJo aSrnSur¡ Suldola,rap agt Sulunuexa rpreasaJJo

s8urpug arpJo auos te >lool III¡r atr ¿ rardeq3 u1 'uortlsnbre a8en8ue¡ rsrg

8ulurc1dxa ro3 sa,rncedsrad ¡mnaroaqr PBoJg eeJl{r P3qIJ3saP a^"q 3l[r'uonls-mb¡e a3en3..r"1p.romr.ro rlf,J?aseJ peJuangur ser{ teqr tuaudo¡artap aSrnSur¡

l¡rea s,uarp¡lql uo r{f,JEaser er{} Jo eluos uo pasnfoJ e "r{

3 \ rarder¡r sryr uI

lreururng

'uoJa pue aoua¡ted

rrar{l PrB,4(\er III/\[ luslFn8ullq a^ppP¿ Jo slSeuaq lueu eqr^tel{l ^\otDI

or

paeu stuapnfr p,r" .slua¡rd ,sJal{Jpal rng 's;eal salzr aBenSuEI Puof,as E

Suldo¡a.rrap ,uaas a,req ar![ ry'a¡doad Suorue uoll?Jedoof, slllIouoss Pue uoll

-Ef,runruuroo ltJnlln3-ssoJf, JoJ salllunl¡oddo eseaJf,ul osle uef, a8en8ue¡ auo

uer{r aJoruJo a8pa¡mou¡ 'saITIIU"J Jlaqr PUE ueJPilql 3q1 ol enJDE rer{r esoqr

puolaq of tuaudo¡arr,ap ¡zn8ul¡nlnru ro pn8urlq3o sDa'a a¡rlrsod raqro

'a8en8uel puoras aqt Sururea¡ filrs a-re lagr e¡gr'r l¡rsea

pu¿lsrapun fagr aSenSur¡ e Sursn tuaurdola,rap a^lr3eJ¿ pur arrnruSos r{roq

,rr,rn.lo, ot filunr¡oddo aqr ruo5 rgauag laql 'aBznBuBI l'rau aqr ltads rou

op oq.&\ sa^nelal ro sruarcdpuzrS qrvrr suorlf,euuof, f1¡rur; urclar 01 uaJPIrr{J

s.&olp os¡r a8enSuel f¡¡rurJ aqt 3u¡urcrurc¡,,r¡ 'lrlunruuof al{l uI Jo '>lJo1t\ lE.,*o.1 aqr ePISrno aSenSur¡,/deu eql qrrrn sa¡88nrls u1t\o JIeI{r 3^3q,{eur leqlr" l¡piraisr ,ruealsa-j¡as u,/v\o Jrarp ureturpur ot stua¡¿d roj lernrt os¡e^sl s8u¡r

-rrr'i¡r-"j ul a8en8ue¡ u^\o Jrar{t Surs¡ .lla1v\ sE l'rorDl tou op lar{r a8en8ue¡

" ,r, ,h",r"* urc laqr ue{p etBJogEIa eJou pue Jaqf,rJ aJB ler{} sler'r ut seap¡

pue aSpaytroDl JIaI{1 ssa¡dxa ol alqB a-re fagr 'uarp¡rqc:laql qll'/r't' lsag ,^t\ou>I

faqr regr a8rn8ut¡ aqt asn ot enulluos sruarrdSl 'a8rnSur¡puooes ar{lJo sJa

-.rrL¡ ot1" ,r" '.rtt"á

eqtJl anrl l¡¡enadsa q slql 'Peureel Suleg sr a8enSuel

p.rorit eqr allq,{\ a8en8utlaruoq aI{Uo e3u¿ueluleru agr-rusqen8u1lq a p-lpp" roJ a^rrls 01 sr gceorddz Jsrreg e rrgr srsaSSns ef,uePr^e qf,J¿eseJ aLII

'uaJPIIql Jleqr qlld\ a8en8ue¡ looi{ls ar¡r Suqeads uo P"3}sq 3lB¡luaruof,

p,r" ,-og ie'a8"ná,r{ llUreJ eqr Suureads dors p¡nor¡s far¡r rrrp s1 sruared ot

asodo.ld tá*tp*or sJolef,npa ,uonnlos, aqt ,flarrunuoJun 'Sulurea¡ f,IruaPef¿

rrar{l ul pulqaq ¡¡ej leur laqt 'pouad uolllsuerl arp Suunq 'a8en8ue¡ fllwJr.¡t do¡t-p or prt.ttr,to, rou arrer¡ larp pue 'aSrn8uel looqls aqt pararseu rcl

pooqfllqr ,(paa ur Suruttal a8tnSutT EE

34 Language learning in early childhood

and six years old. Compare these to books for young readers, aged six toeight.What does this suggest about the importance of continuing to readto children after they have begun to learn to read at school? Finall¡ look atthe language used in textbooks for children at age l0 or I l.What can youconclude aboutthe challenge faced by English language learners enteringschool at this age?

3 lf you are or may be teaching a second language to a group of school-aged learners with different first language backgrounds, can you think ofpedagogical tasks/activities in which children can display and use their L I

knowledge to help them learn the second language?

Suggestions for further readingBerko Gleason,J. and N. Bernstein-Ratner (eds.). 2009. The Deuelopnnent

ofLanguage 7th edn. NewYork Allyn and Bacon.

Many of the chapters by leading expems in child language introducereaders to the best-known findings of the pasr 50 years of research on chil-drent language development. In addition, there are chapters based on newresearch, using the kinds of technology that have only recently becomeavailable. Thus, the rich database created by researchers with notepads,tape recorders, and tools such as the 'wug rest' is complemented by studiesofthe neurological bases oflanguage learning and language use.

Paradis,J., E Genesee, and M. B. Crago. 2011. Dual LanguageDeuelopment and Disorders: A Handbook on Bilingualism and Second

Language Learning2ndedn. Baltimore: Paul H. Brookes.

The authors describe language acquisition by children who learn more thanone language simultaneously or sequentiall¡ drawing on research from edu-cation, psychologr, and linguistics. They make the research accessible bytheir writing style, the inclusion of a glossary of terms, and above all by relat-ing the research to profiles of children who are acquiring their languages ina variety of home, school, and community situations. The authors provideinsights into both normal and atypical multilingual development.

Pearson, 8.2.2008. Raising a Bilingual Child: A Sup-by-Sap GuideforParents. NewYork Living Language (Random House).

Addressing herself mainly to parents, Barbara Zurer Pearson (2008)reviews research from many studies and shows how children become bilin-gual in many different environments. She also emphasizes the advantagesof growing up with a knowledge of more than one language-from theevidence for cognitive fexibiliry to the benefits of cultural knowledge.'W'ritten in an approachable and humorous style, the text is supportedby Zver Pearson's thorough knowledge of the research literature that isincluded in the bibliography.

'sosselr a8enSue¡ o¡ o3 ol lt¡unr.roddo ou turneq pu€ luauluoJraua a8entue¡puo)es e ur Suqlom uortetrnpa petdn"rsrp Jo parlull ql¡an tuer8rur.ur llnpe uE o

Í.Duno¡ u^ o Jteql ur a8enBue¡ uSraro¡ e Sullpnls luaf,selop€ uE rpuno.r8le¡d aql uo Jo aJe) lep ur a8en8uel puo)as e Sururea¡ plrr.ltr E o

aSen8ue¡ lsrg ? Sutureal pllr{l Sunol e .:.ra¡¡rp leu sJeuJ€el 3ur,r,ro¡¡o¡ eql Jo suogtpuor Sululea¡ pue sf,ttstJettreJeqf,

oqr ^

or{ rnoqs >lurql'sJn))o l¡¡errd,0 uorlrsrnb¡e a8en3ue¡ eq} qlrq^ ur

sluauuoJr^ue aql pue sf,tlstJelt€J€qf, rsJauJeel eql qroq,o sruJol ut anJl st

srql'a8en8uel puolas e Surulea¡ pltqt Jeplo ue.lo a8en8uel lsJU e Sur.llnbrep¡rqr 8uno,( E uroJl sle¡l luer.u u! luaJa#rp sr JeuJeel e8enBue¡ puores V

turu.ree¡ etentue¡ puo)as JoJ slxeluo) oJoldxf ^rtltr)v

'f3o¡ouoqd pue'scrrcruEurd'rfte¡nqmo,r3o tuaurdola,rep ,sJauJeelJo slf,adse aruos,/v\ar^eJ oslr e/N'a3¿n3-uEI puof,es eql ur seJntea3 prlSoloqdJou pue ¡rlr¿luls aruosJo uonrsrnbf,Eeqr ul saf,uanbes pue sa8ers tE >lool a4N'a8pa¡rv'oul reqr esn ot ól¡qe rraqrpue a8en8uel ariuo a8pall.oq Jreqr rnoq¿ sn ilel uBf, sJorra ter{ \ ssnf,srp puea>lBru sJeuJBel ]¿ql sJoJJa erpJo eruos eurruExa elN'slxeluoJ asaql ur sJeuJEel

Jo sf,rlsrJalf,?r?qf, luaJaJIP eqr sE ¡ar'r se Sulurea¡ a8en8uel puofes puE lsrg roJ

slxaluof, rueJeJrp eqt tE SuDIoo¡ lq urSaq arN'a8en8uel ^\au

rreqrJo rsn puea8pa¡mou1 Suldo¡a,rap <sraur¿al a8en8uel puoras uo snf,oJ ar'r.rardegc srqr uI

/ú.eI eJd

DNINUVfl-IIIDVNSNV-I CNOfiIS

36 Second language learning

Now ask yourself the following quest¡ons about these different learners.

I Do they already know at least one languagel

2 Are they cognitively maturelAre they able to engage in problem solving,

deduction, and complex memory tasks?

3 How well developed is their metalinguistic awareness? Can they define a

word, say what sounds make up that word, or state a rule such as'add an

-s to form the plural'?

4 How extensive is their general knowledge of the worldl Does thisknowledge enable them to make good guesses about what a secondlanguage interlocutor is probably saying?

5 Are they likely to be anxious about making mistakes and concerned aboutsounding'silly' when speaking the language?

ó Does the learning environment allow them to be silent in the early stages

of learning, or are they expected to speak from the beginning?

7 Do they have plenty of time available for language learning and plenty ofcontact with proficient speakers of the language?

8 Do they frequently receive corrective feedback when they make errors ingrammar or pronunciation, or do listeners usually overlook these errorsand pay attention to the meaning?

9 Do they receive corrective feedback when their meaning is not clear,

when they use the wrong word, or when they say something that seems

inappropriate or impolitel

l0 ls modified input available?That is, do interlocutors adapt their speech so

that learners can understand (for example, in terms of speed of deliver¡complexity of grammatical structure, or vocabulary)?

Then compare your views with the discussion of learner characteristics and

learning conditions below.

Learner characteristicsBy definition, all second language learners, regardless of age, have alreadyacquired at least one language. This prior knowledge may be an advantage inthe sense that they have an idea of how languages work. On the other hand,knowledge of other languages can lead learners to make incorrect guesses

about how the second language works, and this may result in errors that firstlanguage learners would not make.

Very young language learners begin the task of first language acquisitionwithout the cognitive maturity or metalinguistic awareness that oldersecond language learners have. Although young second language learners

have begun to develop these characteristics, they will still have far to go inthese areas, as well as in the area of world knowledge, before they reach thelevels already attained by adults and adolescents.

íu¡utoa¡ aSonñuo¡ rcJ nxatuo2 t'Z enol

ssa;¿ &rsla,r¡u¡ prorxg O a¡qerdorororg

tuasqe l¡¡ensn = - luesa,¡d l¡¡ensn = a

:uorlelou Sut,tlo¡¡o¡ aql esf'l 'aloqe Pauolluau sJauJ€el

lueJa#rp Jno, aql Jo, suotllPuor 3u¡urea¡ Pue slllslJaDeJ€ql JeuJeal ,oe)uesqe.¡o a¡uasa.ld eqt lnoq€ uotutdo Jnol a^t3'l'Z alqelu! ueqr aqr 3u¡s¡

&uruna1 aSrnSur¡puotag

rndur pagrpo¡

(ssauerr¡od

'ef,roqf, pJo^

'Surueau)

)l€qPee,a^pf,aJJoJ

(uorterrunuo"rdpue.retuue.rB)

)reqPea,eArltraJJoJ

eun a¡duy

lualls aqol uoPeeJl

suo!l!puor tu¡uee1

3ur¡eads

lnoqe ltarxuy

a8pa¡*rou¡

PIJO^A

sseueJe^ E

¡rlsrnBu!lelaN

A¡rnteuerrDtuSo3

aSen8ue¡

reqtouv

sf !ls!JepeJrq) JeuJee'l

(qo! aqr uo)

ilNPV

(uoo.rsse¡r)lualseloPV

(punorBle¡d)p¡rqr Suno¡

(aruoq re)p¡rqr Suno¡

eten8ue¡Puofes

etentue¡lsr!l

aJns lou ar,nor( Jo'luasqE sgtlllauos luasa.ld seultaLuos - ¿

38 Second language learning

On the one hand, cognitive maturiry and metalinguistic awareness allowolder learners to solve problems and engage in discussions about language.This is particularly important for those who are learning language in a class-room, with limited time in contact with the language. On the other hand,some theorists have suggested that the use of these cognitive skills-so valua-ble for many kinds of tasla actually interfere with language acquisition.They argue that successful language acquisition draws on different mentalabilities, abilities that are specific to language learning. It has been suggestedthat older learners draw on their problem-solving and metalinguistic abilitiesprecisely because they can no longer access the innate language acquisitionabiliry they had as young children. 'Sl'e will have more to say about this inChapter 3, when we discuss the role of age in second language acquisition.

In addition to possible cognitive differences, there are also attitudinal and cul-tural differences between children and adults. Most child learners are willingto try to use the language-even when their proficiency is quite limited.Many adults and adolescents find it stressful when they are unable to express

themselves clearly and correctly. Nevertheless, even very young (pre-school)children differ in their willingness to speak a language they do not know well.Some children happily chatter away in their new language; others prefer tolisten and participate silently in social interaction with their peers.

Learning conditionsYoung second language learners are often allowed to be silent until they are

ready to speak. They may also practise their second language in songs andgames that allow them to blend their voices with those of other children.Older second language learners are often forced to speak from the earli-est days of their learning, whether to meet the requirements of classroominstruction or to carry out everyday tasks such as shopping, medical visits, orjob interviews.

Another way in which younger and older learners may differ is in the amountof time they can actually spend learning a second language. 'We know thatfirst language learners spend thousands ofhours in contact with the language

or languages spoken around them. Young second language learners mayalso be exposed to their second language for many hours every day-in theclassroom, on the playground, or in front of the television. Older learners,

especially students in foreign language classrooms, receive far less exposure-perhaps only a few hours a week. Indeed, atypical foreign language studentwill have no more than a few hundred hours of exposure, spread out over a

number of years. Adult learners who are immigrants or minority language

speakers often continue to use the language they aheady know as they fulfiltheir daily responsibilities for work and family, and they may use the secondlanguage only in limited situations.

¡srelf,EJEr{f, esJurrl] ur-puBs eql ur gurrrJ,&\ uBSeg puE >llns ¿ lo(treq os (uoneruro3ur eqt eas plnor laqr3¡ dlaq p¡norvr rl rerp pepn¡cuoc apmf,aql 'uorlerlsn.r3 ul (¡¡eurC 'JIlrI Lrarr poors;apun spuar5 rno tnq .repnol putrápnol Sur¡mds rdal apm8 eql'uoneu.ro3ul a8urrpxe ol rueql ro3 tlnf,Iülpll eperu qsr¡8ug turlsrxa-uou srq pu€ esaurq3 petrrurT.rraqr ,l¡areunuol¡q'suonsanb etuos ap¡n8 rraqt pe>lsu laqr os '>¡ooqaprn8 ¿ ruog uea¡8 p¡nolaqr ueqt uaqr rnoqe uouBrrrJoJur a¡ou la8 ol palue/( pue sa¡duar rrJolsrqatuos Suulsr^ era-&\ laq¡ 'eulq3 ul perl laqr acualradxa uelo sn plor spuap¡u¿rpEuEJ etuos ¡repno¡ lur llduls larpJI rarrag pu"rsrepun sraur€al a{suuec laqt ler{r {uqt ol ruees aldoad qllq¡ ur suorlesraluor InJured asop

Pesseutl/v\ IP e^erl e/N 'lnJd¡ag rsotu aq III^\ sluetutsnlpe reqm sr'rou1 euoLraa^r

lou 'asrnof, JO 'puersJapun sJauftal d¡ag or al"u ol paau laqr sluerulsnlputer{ r.

Jo asues Jlr}rntur uE J ?q ol uraes sJauJeal a8enSuq grrrvr llrepSartfrJetur oq.,'l. a¡doad eruos 'uonrsrnb3e a8en8ue¡ puof,asJo slxeluof, Jqr uoSurpuadap {Ier Jerp"ar Jo {Ipr rautra.ro¡ peller ueaq saurnaruos seq ,uop

-lsmb¡e a8en8ue¡ lsr5 ur qraads palrrrrp-p¡ql pril¿r 'a¡fis qcaads patsnfpesrql'rndur patdepe ro pegrporu ol arnsodxa sl-lrnu¿nb ¡o lrrcnb ¡enba u1

rou q8noqr-sa8e ¡¡ejo sraurcal ol uoruruol oq ol s¡¿adde reqr uonrpum euo

'Pe1(ar^er aq IIyr\ ruoorssBlf, eql ur >lJ¿qPeeJJo alor ar{l uo q3rEasar 'gpue ss.ratdeq3 u1 f¡ruarsrsuor paprrtord s&r',r.¡e lou sr tr 'araql uarrg 'ruooJssrlf,

a8en8ue¡ agr sr buanba-r3 q8¡r¡ qr¡m ruasard l¡¡mrdlr sr rorre uo >peqpaaJ

araqn' are¡d lluo eql '8uo.l¡'r auoS peg Surqrauos t¿qt plol eq ppor'r.ra>1eadsa8en8ue¡ puores aqr teqt l¡a1lpn sr tr 'stlnpe uoe \teg l¡elradsa 'ool esrrslqt uI 'PePuerul sr regrrt les ol le¡rl arrlod aqr.&\oIr)I lou saop l¡durls Jo aprueq ol spuelu¡ ra>1eads eqr Jar{req^\ 8ul.uou1 rou 'algruo3urorun ¡aa3 leur sror-n3olJalur 'a8en8uel arel¡do¡ddeur asn ol s¡¿adde ;a>1eads a8en8ue¡ puofes E

eJal{,/v\ uoll¿nrls E uI 'Jolnf,olJalul pa¡zznd e ruo{ lualuluoo a.,lrala.l leu¡ a3ror{fprorrr Suor,tr eqr tnq 'uo pe>lJ"uroJ ag lou l¿u¡ uolter:unuo¡d pue reruuer8

Jo sJorJa 'snq1 les or Surl¡t sr ra>1eads eqr rrr{^\ pu¿tsJepun touu¿r lagr3¡JoJJa u? 01 lleeJ l¿ru s¡otncolJalur 'sselaque^eN 'tueql qtr^\ uontsJe uof, e

a^Er{ ol 8u¡l¡r se.,'t. or{,.rr euoeuros petfaJJof, pue perdnrrarur laqr3l alrodu¡lSurag a;an lagr ¡aag plno^,\ aldoad lsory 'pe>loolra^o l¡ensn a¡e Sulueaur{lr^\ eJeJJatur tou op ter{l sJoJJe (sruooJss¿lo eplstno Surumal aSen8ue¡

puof,as ur 'l¡.te¡rulS 'a8en8ue¡ s,uJJplrqr.uaqr;o l:e-rnf,f,¿ lerneruruer8 aqr oruer{t Jar{tEJ Suluraru agr or puodseJ ol puet slua;rd '1 ;ardeq3 ur 1v\es e¡a sV

'uonelrunluruof I?eJ ul a8en8ue¡ ar{rJo sasn a¡uar¡adxa ol sanrunl¡oddojo s.raurea¡ Sulrr.lrdap snql 'luerue8eueu uooJsself, to aur¡dnslp ro3 a8en8ue¡lsJg ,sluePnts Jrelp ot gf,rr,ryls uar'a fetu sJar{f,¿at 'sasse¡: a8en8ue¡ u8raro3lueuu1 's8uluas IErJos lsou ur pesn sr lr sB a8en8ue¡ eql ol uosrJedruoc ul IEruJoJtrl{aaruos $ leql a8en8ue¡ rg8ner ueuo aJE sJeuJeal ruooJsselo 'a¡druexa;og'sadlr as¡nocslp3o a8ue.r rallerus reJ E ol pasodxa eg or puat osp fagr 'a8en8-uEI

^\eu eqt qtl-&\ loeluoi ur erurl ssa¡ puads l¡uo rou sJeuJeal uooJssEIJ

Sututaal a8an&ur¡ puotag 6e,

40 S econd language learning

Ex.tttc tr€,l'¿hffl toíl€¿¡\ Pfsa* ?

-'

This brief discussion places the emphasis on how both the characteristics oflearners and the contexts in which they acquire a second language may be

different. In the following pages, we will focus more on similarities in howtheir knowledge of the new language develops over time.

Studying the language of secondlanguage learners'We have seen that childrent knowledge of the grammatical system of theirfirst language is built up in predictable sequences. For example, grammati-cal morphemes such as the -ing of the present progressive or the -ed of thesimple past are not acquired at the same time, but in a sequence. Are there

developmental sequences for second language acquisition? How does the

prior knowledge of the first language affect the acquisition of the second (or

third) language? How does instruction affect second language acquisition?

Are there differences in the development of learners whose only contact withthe new language is in a classroom and those who use the language in dailylife? These are some of the questions researchers have sought to answer, and

we will address them in this chapter as well as in Chapters 5 and 6.

Knowing more about the development of learner language helps teachers toassess teaching procedures in the light ofwhat they can reasonably expect toaccomplish in the classroom. As we will see, some characteristics of learner

llnsar er{r aq or pau¡nssB aJa./r^. sroJJe ((HVJ) srsaqrodfq slsfpue a ps?'r¡-uoJ aq] or Sulprorry 'a8enSur¡ raSrer aqr So uorsJe lf,arrof,ur ue se f¡durrsrlceads (srour¿rl aSen8uel puoras aas ot papuet oldoad ,s096I arEI er{r ¡runaSunSuE "talut ?u? $t stlaup "t o,L¿a,s1 st1aua a nq sy"t luo )

'a8en8ur¡ re8rer aqrjo suorsJe rcaSradun sr l¡duns tou .su¡alled

pu¿ salnJ 3ur,r¡orra u.,vr,o Jrarp qtv* sruarsls Surdo¡a,rap sE pagursap tseg areuonrsrnbcr a8en8ue¡ puores pur tsr5 qrog .ueql punorc reaq laqr a8rn8ue¡eqr qrr^\ lf,EJelur regr a8pa¡r'rou¡ rol.rd pue sassef,oJd a¡'llluSo¡ leuJalur uopesrq aq or radd¿ sacuelues

^\eu asaql 'prEar{ arreq laqr esoqr e{I l¡rcexa

lou are rer{l sarueluas arnpord lag¡ 'aclr:erd pue uonelrurr q8norgr fldrursa8en8ue¡ uJeel lou op sreurcal a8rn8ue¡ puof,as ,srauJeel aSen8ur¡ ]srg eln

'>lunr{f, E sE pJuftel ,ualr palelosr uElldruls ro a8pa¡nou1 a8en8ue¡ luaJJnf, s JauJEJI e ur f,¡Erualsls Surgraruos3oa¡lleluasa.rdal sr Jnor^Er{aq re¡nrnred E JaqtJr{,/r\ eurruJatap or r¡nlgrp uaryosr lr 'seJnpaf,o;d asaqt rnoqrr/N'a8en8ue¡3o asn elg¿ Jesgo Jrar{r Surl¡rapuna8pa¡r',rou¡ aqr lnog¿ aroru leeler ol d¡aq leql sarnpasord u8lsap osl¿ aA\

tng 'esn e8en8ur¡ snoau¿tuods (sJeuJ?al a^Jasqo e.&\ .uorlrsrnb:r a8enSue¡

rsrg lpnrs oq,&r asoqt e{l1 'op laqr reqr'r Suluasqo lq uoul sreurtel ter{.r\JeJuI lsnu laqr os 'spunu (sJauJ¿el pEeJ louuef, sJar{f,rceseJ pue sJar{feal

'qsn8ugJo pedsern¿rualsls e 3o a8pa¡mou1 Suldo¡alep Jo af,uapr,ra paplzro;d seq ,palng,sles oqrrt JauJEel egr rnq 'atel¡do¡dde sr 1r eJJr{,/v\ Je>lJ?tr¡ pa- ]f;ed re¡n8araql esn PFo,{\ ,rq8nog, sfes ogr* euo eql r¿qr epnlf,uof, louuBf J \ .uonelu

-roJur Jer{unJ rnorpr/N ',ta>lJn snq e rq8noq J, sles oqa auo ueqt rerurur.t3gsrr8ug tnoge aJoru r'rou1 leru ,le>lf,ll snq e palnq 1, sles oq,,'r rauJ¿el e lerpsueeur rBqI 're1reru pa- tsed a¡drurs rr¡n8ar agr llddr ol urcel laqt aro3aqsgJa uoruruoo urEtJaJJo sruJoJ asuJl tsed re¡n8a;.tl eqr u.rea¡ l¡lensn sJauJeel

a8en8ue¡ puoJas 'sJeureal a8rn8ue¡ rsJg e{q ,aldurexe ro¿ 'ssarSordjo uolt-Ef,rpur ue aq leru JoJJe ur eseeJf,ur uE 'asuas srqr uI 'pauJ?al rsJg serrr rr r{Jrr{ \qlv'r sualr lglf,eds agr puolaq uroJ IEJnEruurerS re¡non rcd e az,letaua8 oról¡q" 8ul8¡aua uE uo paseg aq leru sJorre 1v\eN 'Sulurea¡ >lunr{r Jo uon-EzIJouIauI aloJ uo PaS"g sE,/\\ lEI{] UIJOJ lf,3JJof, E

Jo 3sn aql uI aseaJf,Jp e urper3agal sl ssa¡8o¡d uolllsrnbc¿ a8en8ur¡ saunauos 'surJel asaqt ur paJn-searu ag slezrr¡e touuef, ssa¡8o¡d rng 'atunEwl taSJEt ar{t ser{f,reru a8en8ue¡rlaqr f¡aso¡r aor.l pue rq8ner uaeg wq ter{ { peurerl e^Eq sruepnts raqrar{ reurruJalap or,üt laql 'Jlun eqt ¡e a8en8ue¡ JauJEal aslpur sreq3Eat ,asJnof,

39 'a8en8ue¡ raurre¡ Surslpue asncrrd or &runr¡oddo up nol a¡'13 ot sa¡drurs

IEuorrrPPE eruos sE ¡arvr se a8en8u¿l JauJ"alJo salduexa3o raglunu E papnlsura^Br{ e^\ 'qlr¿eseJ a8enSue¡ puof,Js 3o s8ulpug aqt Jo aruos Sunuasard u1

'a8en8ur¡ puof,as aqr Suurnbce ur q8norgr oB s;au;ea¡ sdatsar{rJo aJntf,rd ¡¡rra,,ro ue a^eq lou saop auo jr Suxa¡drad aunb aq uec aSrn8ue¡

3u7utaa1 a8an&ur¡ puotag l?

42 Second language learning

of transfer from learners' first language. Detailed analysis of learners' errors

revealed, however, that not all errors made by second language learners can

be explained in terms of first language transfer alone. A number of studies

,ho-ihat many errors can be explained better in terms of learners' develop-

ing knowledge of the structure of the target language rather.than an attempt

ro"transfer p-att.rn, of their first language (Richards 1974). Furthermore,

some of the errors are remarkably similar to those made by young first lan-

guage learners, for example, the use of a regular -ed pxt tense ending on an

irregular verb.

A simplified version of the CAH would predict that, where differences exist,

errorsiould be bi-directional, that is, for example, French speakers learning

English and English speakers learning French would make errors on paral-

lel iinguistic f.aiur.s. H.l-ut Zobl (1980) observed that this is not always

the caie. For example, in simple English sentences, direct objects, whether

nouns or pronouns, come aftér the verb ('The dog eats the_ cookie. The dog

eats it.'). in French, direct objects that are nouns follow the verb (Le chien

mange le biscuit-literall¡ 'The dog eats the cookie'). However, direct object

prorri,rr* precede the verb (Le chien le mange-literally-.'The dog it_eats').

lhe CAHiould predicr rhar a narive speaker of English m1s!t make the

error of sayi ng: 'Le chien mange le' when learning French, and that a native

speaker of frá.h might say'The dog it eats'when learning English' In fact,

Éngfish speakers leaining-French aie more likely to make_the predicted

"rrá, .h"n French sp.ak.rs learning English. This may be due to the fact

that English rp."k"ri learning French hear many examples of sentences with

subjectiverbjobject *ord oÁer (for example , Le chien mange le b.iscuh) and

-"k th. incorráct generalization-based on both the word order of their

first languag. "rd.l,rld.nce

from the second lanq,uage-that all direct objects

.o-. "ñ.r

lhe rr.rb. French-speaking learners of English, on the other hand,

hearing and seeing no evidence that English direct object pronouns precede

',,erbs, áo ,tot t.rrd to use this pattern from their first language'

The finding that many aspecrs of learners' language could not be explained

by the CeÉ led a rrnmb.i of researchers to take a different approach to ana-

lysing learners' errors. This approach, which developed during the 1970s,

É.."á. known as 'error "."lytit'

and involved detailed descriptions of the

errors second language l.arrrárs made. The goal of this research was to dis-

cover what le"rneis ,Jdly ktr.* about the language. As Pit Corder observed

in a famous article published in 1967, when learners produce correct sen-

tences, they may simply be repeating something they have already heard;

when they produce sentences that differ from the target language, we may

assume thaithese sentences refect the learners' current understanding of the

rules and parrerns of that language.'We saw this in the example of a learner

who says ;b,ry.d' instead of 'bought.' Error analysis differecl from contras-

tive aniysis in th"t it did not ,.tlu. to predict errors. Rather, it sought to

ur oB loql'asJoq € e^Eq sJaqqoJ lta,r3'aruetsrp 3uo¡ e te oes ot sn paltrtuladr¡ reql sere¡8¡o 3ur¡ e qlr^ asn€lJ €]u€S saas oq/v\ urslunou aql u! sJaqqoJ

eaJqt a^eq no¡'sasr.rdrns ¡o ra¡red peJ E pup eLunlsof, pal € s€q a¡1 .sasudrns

auos elr8 o¡ lt!¡ e u¡ oB asn€lJ plues rourl aues eql ul .rnog € teo asJor.l srH'req 3tq p seq aLl 'esJor.l stq qlt/v\ uasap eqt ur oB loq,r,ror e fep luuns e 3ur.rn6

tuapnls looqls fuepuoras'a8en8ue¡ lsJU q)uaJJ : I JeulDel

¿.ra¡¡rp sa3enSuelJalul o/v\l aql op s,(e,r,r t€q^ ul t¿sJoJJa ro sPut) aues eqr a>leul sJeuJEal qroq oc t

¿puetsJepun or lrlllq€ rnol qtral lsotnaJaFelul sJoJJo,o spuq l€qM 'JeuJeal qtee lq apeu sJoJJe aqt eutuexf ¿

¿les or 3urfut sr JeuJeal qlea leq^ puelsJepun nol ue1 ¡

:suollsenb Surrr,ro¡¡o¡ aq¡ Jalv\sue pue slxel ar{r peeu

'ulu aFuoas lou P?q oq/v\ ouoeruos ot tr 8ur¡¡er a.rem Áeqr ¡¡ se'8ultr"lm ul l"lols eql lla¡at

ot pe)se a;em laql'u¡g aqt Surarar,r .rar¡y '(epeue) lo pJeo€ ru¡r3 ¡euorre¡r¡),Uaqqo¿ Aollo?Jg eq! pappua ulg uoouef, e Surqursep eJe^^ sJauJ€el Lltofl

'JeuJeal r¡npe 3ur¡eeds-aseurq3 e Jaqto aq¡'tuapn¡s loor,.l)s l;epuoras 3ur¿eads

-qluarl e auo'qsr¡3u3 ,o sJau.leel or*r lq uatltJ^ e"¡a¡,r slxel 8ur^ ollo, aql

etentue¡ JouJeel esll€uv rtltrf,v

'a8en8ue¡ ra8rrr arppue a8en8uelratur rrer{t uee,{\teq seluareglp azluSora,r ot uaqt dlaq p¡noalltqt >lleqpegJo pupl ar{lro uonf,nrtsul epnlrur tou saop aSen8uel puof,as arpol a¡nsodxa esorfd sreuJtal JoJ enJt l¡¡elradsa aq leru slgl 'Sur8uego dors oruaas aBrnBuEI sraurEJI p ur saJnteal eruos leql IJBJ ar{r or rgeJ or uop¿z1lssoJurat aql peurof, osl" relurlas 'ssa-l8o¡d Jer{un3 salelnuns Sulqraruos aroJJgalrq^r E.ro3 neare¡d ¿ r{f,Bal uagt 'ssarSord jo srsrng a Er{ sJauJea-I 'uarc putqloous l¡¡ressecau tou sr uonrslnb¡¿ a3¿n8ue¡ g8norgr qred aq¡'a8enSue¡puoJas aql tnoqe saseqrodlq Jlegt asr^eJ pue rndur eJour e^reJeJ sJauJeel

se 8ur,r¡o,ta f¡rnunuor 'crueulp osp eJE far¡r rnq 'cnerualsls eq or punoJuaaq a^¿q seSen8ue¡ralu1 'suratsfs a8en8ue¡rarul il¿ ul rnolo ol pue praua8ag ot ruees lBrF 'saruaqdrour ¡erneuuer8 pue spJo^\ uorrf,unJ Jo uorssnuoal{r sB qf,ns (sf,usrJetoeJeqf, aruos pue 'aBrnBuEI puof,es aqtJo sf,nsrJalf,eJeqf,

au¡os 'sa8en8ue¡ peurea¡ llsnornard lq pacuangur sf,nsrJalf,EJeq3 eruos s"q rrreqr s,toqs aSen8ue¡;arul s(raureal e3o srsf¡euy'a8pa¡z'rou1 aBen8ue¡ puolasSurdo¡a,rap (sJauJeal or aSen8ue¡Jalul arueu aqt arrr8 (ZL6ü ra>1ulag ,{-rre1

'alqerrlpard pue paure^o8-a¡nr sr l¿qt auo-rg8rr u^\o slr ur rualslse sl a8rn8uel raurea] a8en8url puof,as'a8en8ue¡ p¡r{r alll ,reqr srsagrodlqaql uo paseg s¿,4 slsfpue JoJrE '¿rep a8en8uq puores ssaco¡d sJeuJeal

^\oqPu?rsrePun ol lJoJa ue ur sroJJe Jo sPuq ruaraJlp sglJf,sap puE Ja^of,srp

&urutaa1 a8anSur¡ puocag e.,

44 Second language learning

the way of Santa Clause, not Santa Clause but his pocket of surprises. Afterthey will go in a city and they go in a saloon. [...](Unpublished data from P M. Lightbown and B. Barkman)

Learner 2; Chinese first language,adultThis year Christmas comes soon! Santa Claus ride a one horse open sleigh tosent present for children. on the back of his body has big packet. it have a lot oftoys. in the way he meet three robbers.They want to take his big packet. Santa

Claus no way and no body help, so only a way give them, then three robbersride their horse dashing through the town.There have saloon,they go to drinksome beer and open the big packent.They plays toys in the Bar.They meet a

cow boy in the saloon.

(Unpublished data provided by M. J. Martens)

Perhaps the most striking thing here is that many error types are common toboth learners. Furthermore, both make errors of spelling and punctuationthat we might find in the writing ofa young first language speaker ofEnglish.Even though French uses grammatical morphemes to indicate person andnumber on verbs and Chinese does not, both these learners make errors ofsubject-verb agreement-both leaving off the third person -s marker andoverusing it when the subje ct is plural ('a cowboy go' and 'three robbers in themountain who sees' by Learner 1 and 'Santa Claus ride' and 'they plays' byLearner 2). Such errors refect learners' understanding ofthe second languagesystem itself rather than an attempt to transfer characteristics of their firstlanguage. They are sometimes referred to as 'developmental' errors because

they are similar to those made by children acquiring English as their first lan-guage. Sometimes these are errors ofovergeneralization, that is, errors causedby trying to use a rule in a context where it does not belong, for example, the-s ending on the verb in 'they plays'. Sometimes the errors are better describedas simplification, where elements of a sentence are left out or where all verbshave the same form regardless of person, number, or tense.

One can also see, especially in Learner 2's text, the influence of classroomexperience. An example is the use offormulaic expressions such as'one horse

open sleigh' which is taken verbatim from a well-known Christmas song thathad been taught and sung in his English as a Second Language (ESL) class.

The vivid'dashing through the town' probably comes from the same source,with the substitution of 'town' for'snow'.

For those who are familiar with the English spoken by native speakers ofFrench, some of the errors (for example, preposition choice 'in the same

time') made by the first learner will be seen as probably based on French.Similarl¡ those familiar with the English of Chinese speakers may recog-

nize some word order patterns (for example, 'on the back of his body has

big packet') as based on Chinese patterns. These may be called transfer or

uu¿uauard paüuBl/t{ pu" (uesq¿lD pler"H 'lesrery ua8.rn[ 'e¡duexa rog'ruooJsselo eqr aprstno sel'r tueruuo¡l,rua Suru¡¿a¡,fteulrd esoq,e\ sJeuJ"elJosarpnls ruo5 eru¿J tsrg su;arred leruaudola ap eseql JoJ a3uepr^E 'spunorS-ryeq aBenBuEI tuereglp ruoU sraurea¡ Suorue rtllruls rre leqr l8o¡ogdroupue xeruls jo ruaudo¡aztep eqr ur suraued punoS a,req laql 'sernteal Jer{ro sE

IIe,&\ sE 'esaql pauru¿xe os[B e Er{ uortrsrnb¡e a8en8uel pumes ur sJer{JJeasa¡'suonsenb pue 'uone8au 'sauaqdJou l¿f,neruurr8 3o uolllsmbce a8en8

-uEI rsJg qsÉug ro3 saouanbes ¡truaurdola ap aruos .rr\ES a/r\ 1 .rardeq3 u1

'spunorSryeq a8en8ue¡ rsJU tuaJaJlp uroü sreuJea¡ Suorue rrllrurs arE

sa8ets ¡etuarudo¡a,rap aser{tJo slcadse lueru 'afuangur uE e^Eq saop a8en8ue¡

lsrg s JeuJBe¡ arir gSnogr¡e 'l¡¡eulg 'stxatuoo ¡e ur lpcarrof, sruroJ asaqr Sulsnlr¡ncgp a^Er{ sJauJeal palue^pe ua^e tng '(,aqt, ro e,) se¡rnre eJoru Jo auoser{ aJualuJs qsrÉug,üa.,ta l¡pnrrn'a¡duexa ro{ 'tsJU paureal sfmr¡e lou are

luanba.r3 lsoru aJE tBr{t a8rn8ue¡ er{lJo saJntEeJ eqr fo^oe.ro¡¡ 'aBenBuEI atues

aqrJo uonrsrnbr¿ a8en8uel rsr5 ur pa^Jesqo esoql ot relrurs osle pue spunor8->1ceq aBtnBuEI ]uareglp ruo{ srrurea¡ 3o a8en8u¿lralur Suldo¡arr,ap eqr urr¿lrruls ere leql sacuanbas ¡eruaudo¡a,r.ep pug er\ r?qt elge>lJttuar arour sr tr'srgr3o rg8r¡ u1 'sruroJ pro \ pue saf,ueluas 8un¿a¡r ro3 su;eued rueragrp ser{

rerp a8rn8u"l Jarpou¿ rrrou>l lpearle sJeureal a8en8ue¡ puof,es 'aJoruragunJ'reqro qf,ea ruo{ rueJeglp os¡e rnq '<plrrlr Iletus €Jo sacual¡adxe aqr ruor;,(¡uorou 'luaraglp alnb aq or l1a1q a.lr a8en8url eqr qrlv\ sarual¡adxa Jler{r pue

'algels aJoru r{3nru sr sraur?el a8enSuq puof,as ruarselope Jo tlnprJo rueu-do¡a,rap a,rrtruSo¡ eqr rng 'ruarll punoJe sroalqo pue (stue^a

'aldoad uealuegsdnlsuorre¡al lnoqe Suruea¡ ul sa¡uar¡adxe Jrerp or pue ruarudo¡a,rap elnru-3or rlaqt or pan l¡rred sl 8ururca¡ a8en8uel rraqr asnrcag Sulsud¡ns rueas touferu sacuanbas ¡eluaudolo epJo Jf,uatsxa aql 'sraurea¡ aSenSue¡ rsrg Suoury

'sJarpo lq llrea peureal sr auo fg f1-ree paureel sr teq^\ :ruarudo¡e,rap3o

saruanbas q8norqr ssed'sraureal a8en8uel tsrg eII (sJaurea¡ a8enSue¡ puo:as

sa Juanb a s pru, rr.tdol a n2 Q'af,u¿ruJoJJad a8en8uz¡ puof,as f,n¿rual

-sls s¡au¡eal eqtJo rred e aqSlasu leru .arueplo^E,Jo uouaurouaqd aqr pue

'la¡d:atur or rlnJgrp sr sJoJJe re¡ncrrred jo ef,uasgr ag¡ 'a8rn8ut¡rarul 8ut-do¡arrap (sJeuJeal er{l jo stcads¿ aruos lnoqe uoperuJoJul rnoqlt,t\ rsf¡ruragr Sunea¡ 'sJoJJe uretJaf Jo afuesqe aql or pea¡ leur efueplole slr{l 'rueqr

roJ llnrslp eg ol e lef,rad leqr rtgr aBenBuEIJo sarnrro3 auos Sutsn p¡or'esarunaruos srauJ?al 'elf,nJ? ,LGl E ul rno parurod JarI{JEqJS ul¡anb:ef se

'aJourJer{tJng 'tl op ,{r,qt [t¡m orur srg8tsur JEaIJ sn a,u8 sler'r¡e rou saop lI'op rq8nu laqr rrqm uerp raql€r op l¡¡enrre snureelpqm SulgucsepSo a8er

-uEAp" eqr ser{ srsf¡eue JoJJe elr{ \ (sngl's.ro;;aJo ef,Jnos al{l auruJelep oltplgrp ueryo $ 1r teqt sr 'Ja^a {oq ttalf, lsour q rErLA 'sJoJJe (af,ueJaJJalul,

3u V uta a1 aSan8ur1 pu o c a g ct?

46 Second language learning

( 1 98 1) identified developmental sequences in the acquisition of German byspeakers of several Romance languages who had little or no instruction.

Subsequent research has shown that learners who receive instruction exhibitsimilar developmental sequences and error patterns. In the interlanguage ofEnglish speakers whose only exposure to German was in university classes inAustralia, Pienemann (1988) found patterns that were similar to those of theuninstructed learners. In Chapter 6, we will discuss other studies that haveinvestigated the infuence of instruction on developmental sequences.

Grammatical morphemesResearchers have examined the development of grammatical morphemes bylearners of English as a second language in a variety of environmenrs, atdifferent ages, and from different first language backgrounds. In analysingeach learner's speech, researchers identify the obligatory contexts for each

morpheme, that is, the places in a sentence where the morpheme is necessaryto make the sentence grammatically correct. For example, in the sentence'Yesterday I play baseball for two hours', the adverb yesterday' creates anobligatory context for a past tense , and 'for two hours' tells us that the requiredform is a simple past ('played') rather than a past progressive ('was playing').Similarl¡ 'tR'o' creates an obligatory context for a plural -s on 'hours'.

For the analysis, obligatory contexts for each grammatical morpheme are

counted separatel¡ that is, one count for simple past, one for plural, one forthird person singular present tense, and so on. After counting the number ofobligatory contexts, the researche r counts the corre ctly supplied morphemes.The next step is to divide the number of correctly supplied morphemes bythe total number of obligatory contexts to answer the question what is thepercentage accufacy for each morpheme?' An accuracy score is created foreach morpheme, and these can then be ranked from highest to lowest, givingan accuracyorder for the morphemes.

The overall results of the studies suggested an order that was similar but notidentical to the developmental sequence found for first language learners.

However, the order the researchers found was quite similar among second

language learners from different first language backgrounds. For example,most studies showed a higher degree of accurary for plural -s than for posses-

sive - i, and for -ingthan for regular past(-ed). Stephen lGashen summarizedthe order as shown in Figure 2.l.1lne diagram should be interpreted as

showing that learners will produce the morphemes in higher boxes withhigher accuracy than those in lower boxes, but that within boxes, there is noclear pattern of difference.

sJer{f,JEesal Pel sanssr asaql '<adoJnE uI sI af,uEJc aI{L (slES JJuJEal E uel{.tr,

'aldruexa ro3 '3uo1aq rou op lagr arar¡rvr sace¡d ut sauagdrou pcneuure.6

Jo sasn lunoff,? olu¡ a>IEr rou saop t1 l¡uo slxatuof, lrore8rtqo uI asn traJJof

3o slsl¡euz aqr uo paseq sI uu8erp aqr uI repro el{r }eq} sI f¡rea parmbleaq or s.readdr selrllre qslSug sE rlnf,SIP sr Sulgnuos lqr'r uoseer raqlouy

'a¡o:s l¡¿¡n¡ce q8lq l¡Sulpeelsru E a^Bq leur raurea¡ aqr

'stxaluo¡ lrore8l¡qo (JaIsBe, aqt l¡uo surcluof, pasl¡eue sI rEI{r a¡drues a8en8

-uEI aqr JI 'sJar{ro rou rng slxatuor lroteSrTqo uIEtJaf, uI salrllJr Surllddnsq IIe^\ op leu sJauJBa'I 'sla^al Paf,uE^PE rE ua,ra 'qsr8ugSo roadst slqr IFIAa¡88nrrs ot enulluof, (asauedef PuE 'aseulq3 'sa8en8uel rl^EIS Surpn¡cw)

spunorS>lceq a8en8ue¡ lueur ruor3 sreureel 'a¡uanbas aqr ur f¡rea readdt sap

-lue g8noqr ue^a puv'(gsluedg Jo I{f,uarC se qcns) a,rrssassod aqr Suluro3

jo fertr ruaraglp Ata¡e seq a8en8uel rsJg esoq^\ asoq] ueqr raIIJEa a,ussassod

gs¡¡8ug aql arrnbre ot ruaes (qslueq PuE ururaD sr qrns) q gs{8ug arp

salgluasal rBql uJoJ a¡rrssassod e seg aSenSuEI rsJS asoqd\ sJauJBal 'a¡duexarog 'saruanbas uollsrnbce uo af,uangul u" e eq saop aSenBuEI lsJg .sJeuJ¿3¡Jr{r l"qr s,{\or{s sarPnls ¡ontsnbre aruaqdlou, aqr IIE Jo ,{aaIAeJ qSno-roqr e

'ra,rar*og 'HVl aql tsure8e aiuaPl,ra 8uo¡ls sE sII{l ,l\es sJal{f,rcaseJ Jruos PuE

'a8en8ue¡ lsJg .srauJeal eqr ruory JaJsuEJrJo surral uI paurqdxa Jo PaqlrlsaPaq louueo rapro l:ernJf,E aql teqr stsaSEns sJeuJ?el Suou¡¿ ólrr¡ru¡s aq1

aruanbas uotilstnb>o

aweqdtow ¡otnowwot7 eson&uo¡ puozasJo Atoutwns (ZgOt) quaqsor) ¡'¿ atn8¡1

q arttsSassod

s- .re¡nBurs uosrad prqtpa- rsed ;e¡n8e.t

tsed re¡n8arrt

alf,rtJE

(,3uro8 s! aH, ur s€

arussarSo-rd) fuet¡txne

(,eq or,) e¡ndor

¡e.rn¡d(a,rrssa.r3o.rd) 8ur-

/T?&u1utoal a8unSuq puotag

48 Second language learning

to question the adequacy ofobligatory contexr analyses as the sole basis forunderstanding developmental sequences. Teresa Pica (1983) argued thataccuraq/ scores should take account ofoveruse and incorrect uses to deter-mine a score for targetJike use rather than refect only use in obligatorycontexts.

The morpheme acquisition literature raises other issues, not least of them thequestion of why there should be an order of acquisition for these languagefeatures. some of the similarities observed in different studies r..^.d1o 6.due to the use ofparticular tasks for collecting the data, and researchers foundthat different tasks tended to yield different resuks. Nevertheless, a numberof studies have revealed similarities that cannot be explained by the data col-lection procedures alone. As with first language acquiiition, researchers havenot found a single simple explanation for the order. Jennifer Goldschneiderand Robert DeKeyser (2001) reviewed this research and identified a numberofvariables that contribute to the order. Salience (how easy it is to notice themorpheme), linguistic complexiry (for example, how many elemenrs youhave to keep track of), semantic transparency (how clear the meaning is),similarity to a first language form, and frequenry in the input all r..- to pl"ya role.

NegationThe acquisition of negative sentences by second language learners followsa path that looks nearly identical to the srages we saw in Chapter 1 for firstlanguage acquisition. However, second language learners from different firstlanguage backgrounds behave somewhat differentlywithin those stages. Thiswas illustrated in John Schumann's (1979) research with Spanish speakerslearning English and Henning \l'odet (1978) work on German speakerslearning English.

Stage IThe negative element (usually'no'or'not') is typicallyplaced before the verbor the element being negated. Often, ir occurs as the first word in the sen-tence because the subject is not there.

No bicycle.I no like it.Not my friend.

'No' is preferred by most learners in this early stage, perhaps because it isthe negative form that is easiest to hear and recognize in the speech they areexposed to. Italian- and Spanish-speaking learners may prefer 'no' because ircorresponds to the negative form in Italian and Spanish (No tienen muchoslibrol. They may conrinue to use Stage 1 negation longer than other learnersbecause of the similariry to a pattern from their first language. Even at moreadvanced stages, they may also use Stage 1 negatives in longer sentences or

'srueurge5 a)uatues Jo (eEInruJoJ 'sprorrl alSqs

I a&tts

'af,uengur a8en8ue¡ lsJU ol elqetngunB aJB teql saf,ueragrp eurosaJe aJaql 'ulr8¿ puv'uorrrsrnbrr a8enSuel rsJg ur pelJasqo euo aqt ol JEIrur_B

st aruanbas IIEJa^o aql 'uoneSau JoJ 1v\Bs e.^a sV'3urp¡og se.ur (regc;easal Jrp¡rafeld Jar{to aql a¡nrcld qlryx\ tno pu5 01 rapro ul suoltsanb >lse ol pEqlaqr qorqm ul aue8 e Surle¡d ere^\ oq.&\ sraleads qluarg tuoü aruof, (q r3"rSur esoqt rdacxa) sa¡drurxe eql ^\oleq 9-1 se8erg ur u^\oqs sr aruanb¡serp Jo uorsrel patdepe uy 'spunorS>1ceq aBenBuEI tsrg 3o Áaue.r. E ruo{gsrtSuE 3o sJauJrel lg suolrsenb 3o uolrlslnbre er{t ul acuenbas E peqrrlsep(886I) lalpur.rg JoaD pue 'uorsuqof ulocp¡zr¡ ,uueruauerd paüuel,{

suopsenb

'aJer{l lua,& r,uPrP I'qre^ aqt pue lrer¡xne erp qtoq

uo Jagrunu pue 'uosrad 'osuel >lJeru ol enunuoJ sJeuJeal euros 'JaAa-1r\oH

raddns a^¿q t,upp a¿N lro^\ tusaop rI

'a8en8uel ra8rer aqr3o esoqr el¡ rsnf aq or ¡eadd¿ sacualuas a3¿n3-uelJalur lsoru pue'raqurnu pue'uos;ad 'asuat JoJ pelJeur sr ,op, 'a8els srqr tr¡

, aSqS

(asna¡¡ qryu iqrxu uaruuoq azg) 'aruoq [or] rou auor lagl

g aSatg

6,

:sE qf,ns saluelues aonpord pue a,rne8au-gJe^ ol u¡aueda¡tne8au-l¡ellxne er{t ezqeraua8 leru g;e,r eqr JaUE a¡.ne8au aqr sarr¡dler{l aJnlf,nJls E ser{ a8enSuel tsJg asorfr\ 'sraleads uEruJeD 'e8ers slgt ry

'arrr a>lll r,uoP aqs'lddei¡ lou sE^\ aH

'araqr oB lou uEJ noÁ

'pasl¡eue f¡ry rou ilns sr ruJoJ .lJop, aqr 'a8ets srqr rE rng'uBf, Pu¿ '.sI,((eJ¿, e>lll sgra,r lrrl¡xne JelJe luaruale a¡.rl¿8au aqr aceld or ulSaq sJauJEa'J

'8uls uec tJop I'11a>lll l,uoP aH

.(Plnoqs, PUE ,uEf,, elll

sltpour eJoJaq pesn eq ua,ra l¿ru lr pue Jsual Jo fequrnu 'uos¡ed JoJ pa>lJeru

lou sI (luop, 'Ja^a.1t\oH ',luop, qll,lr\ Jl¿uJJlp leur ,lou, pue ,ou, 'e8els slqr 1V

7 aSatg

'a8ets pluatudo¡a,l,ap rr¡nrlued ¿ qSnorqr ssa¡8o¡d s rJuJEel p urrrop rttols leura8en8ue¡ tsJg s(JauJEa¡ e or lrrrepurs 'sng1 'a¡nssa¡d Japun are lagr ueqrrr

8u1utual a8an&ual puotag

50 Second language learning

Dog?Four children?\7hatt that?

Stage 2Declarative word order, no inversion, no fronting.

It's a monster in the right corner?The boys throw the shoes?

Declarative order with rising intonation is common in yes/no questions ininformal spoken French. French speakers may hypothesize that in English,as in French, inversion is optional.

Stage 3Frontin g: da - f r o nting, w h -f r o ntingwitho ut inversion, other fronting.

Do you have a shoes on your picture?\lhere the children are playing?Does in this picture there is four astronauts?Is the picture has two planets on top?

French has an invariant form est-ce que (literally 'is it that') that can be placedbefore a declarative sentence to make a question. For example, Jean aime lecinémabecomes Est-ce queJean aime le cinéma? ('is it that)John likes movies?'French speakers may think that'do' or'does' is such an invariant form andcontinue to produce Stage 3 questions for some time.

Stage 4Inyersion in wh- + copula; yes/n questions with other auxiliaries.

\(here is the sun?

Is there a fish in the water?

At Stage 4, German speakers may infer that if English uses subject-auxiliaryinversion, it may also permit inversion with full verbs, as German does, leadingthem to produce questions such as 'Like you baseball?' (Magst du basebalh)

Stage 5Inversion in wh- questions with both an auxiliary and a main verb.

How do you say'proche'?\,lhat's the boy doing?

French-speaking learners may have difficulry using Stage 5 questions inwhich the subject is a noun rather than a pronoun. They may say (andaccept as grammatical) 'Vhy do you like chocolate?' but not "ühy do chil-dren like chocolate?' In this, they are drawing on French, where it is often

9SrE(.t¿lueserd lq8noq laqr s¡ ¿

9SrEZt¿s8urqr er.uos 8ur,(nq laqr a.ry 9

z JeuJsrl

9SrEZt¿3urop aqs

s! l?q/y\'op aqs seop leq/v\'nol op reqm'¡.rr8 aql S

9SrEZt¿3uqu¡qr eq sr leq¡¡ t9SVEZt¿preoq ete)s srq rno Suqel aq sl €

9Sr€.Zt¿r.uooJ srrl ruooJ aql sl z

9Sr€.Zt¿Surles aq sr leq^ pue 3uro3 eq st eraqM I

I JauJ"e'l

etelg

('ur8aq nol a.ro¡aq suollsanb srJauJeal ql€a lo ¡¡e pea¡ :rurp)

'uorlsenb qrraot spuodsarol Naq leqt luaurdola^ap uoBsenb a8en8ue¡ puof,as ¡o aSers arp

elf,Jrf,'suoDsanb .ro¡ e¡uenbes ¡etuarudo¡arrap eqt lnoqe uoD€ur.ro¡ur aql Surs¡

suollsenb.sJouJeelesÍ|euv Att^ttfv

'sJoJJA Ja,/r\aJ

a:npord sJauJrel ter{l u¿eru sler'r.¡e lou saop e8ers raqSlq e ot ssarSord rerparoN 'seq JolnrolJalur JrJqt euo aql ruory ruaJegrp sr aas u?f, laqr arnrcrd aqrr'toq rno >lrom laqr lltun suonsenb 1se or a,rrq faqr pur sa;nud lrf,ltuepr rournq Jelrruls e^Er{ sJauJeJ¡ '1ser srgr uI lstl .saf,uaJaglp arp tods, e ur raleadselnru E r{rr^\ Surlr¿.ralul eJe r orf$ a8enSue¡ puoJas e se qsr¡8ug Jo sJeuJEIasauedef r¡np" aarql ruo5 eruo3 sa¡duexa )se\L'Z'Z elqeJ ul

"r"p eqt papr,r

-ord aqs pue 'sarpnls aser{rJo raqunu e euop e^Er{ san8eallor raq pue lalce¡,r¡uosr[V'9 rardeg3 ur pessnf,srp aq illr\\ q]lr{ \Jo eulos 'serpnlsJo regunu E

JoJ srsBg ar{l ueeq s¿q suor}sanb ro3 acuanbas ¡eruaudola^ap s.uupueuard

¿lepor sr etBp er{t rer{ r aru ilet nof ue3 :uorlsanb pappaqua

¿oB nol r,uer lq¿6 :uollsanb a,rne8au

¿rl rysl 'reueg s r1 :3rr uonsanb

sal ruaruxp nnbmo¿*) rralqns

&u1utaal a7an&ury puotag

'suollsanb xa¡druo3

9 a8atg

'(¿aptoqt a1 vuatuaunou E rlll1y\ uoISJa uI asn ol Ff,n¿IUuB.lSun

IE

52 Second language learruing

Photocopiable @ Oxford University Press

Toble 2.2 Questions by Joponese-speoking leorners of English

Possessive determinersA developmental sequence for the English possessive forms 'his' and'her' has

been observed in the interlanguage of French- and Spanish-speaking learn-ers. In English, the choice of 'his' or 'her' (or 'its') is determined by the naturalgender of the possessor. In French and Spanish (and many other languages),the correct form of the possessive determiner matches the grammaticalgender of the object or person that is possessed. This can be illustrated withthe following translation equivalents for French and English:

Sa mére = his mother or her motherSon chien = his dog or her dogSes enfants = his children or her children

8 ls they're ret¡rement peoplel t234569 ls this perfume or ... I don't know. 123456

l0 And it is necktie? t23456

Learner 3

I I Are there any shuttle? Space shuttle? 1234s6l2 lnside, is there any girl? 123456| 3 You dont see? 123456l4 What are, what the people wearing? t23456l5 And they are carrying pink boxl 123456

Answer keyLearner l: Questions 1,4, and 5 are Stage 5 questions. Question 5 isinteresting because it shows the speaker self-correcting, suggesting thatStage 5 is still a level that reguires some greater effort. Questions 2 and 3

are Stage 4 questions.

Learner 2: Questions 6 and 9 could be Stage 4 questions. However, the factthat questions 7 and 8 are Stage 3 questions suggests that this speakerhas not actually progressed from'fronting' to'inversion', particularly sincequestion l0 is a Stage 2 question.

Learner 3: Questions I I and 12 are Stage 4 questions. Questions l3 and15 are Stage 2 questions. Question 14 shows the speaker apparently onthe verge of a Stage 5 question, then retreating to a Stage 3 question.

'a8ue¡eqc aqr otsppB rer{unJ unou l.la,ra puE r{lBe Jo rapua8 ¡eclreuuer8 eqt ureal or peau3r{I 'JauluJalaP a Issassod arp3o rapua8 aqr Surulru;alapJo le,l¡. ¡"rau E uJEJIosF tsnu faql ,s.rauruuelep e^rssessod Sursoogr JoJ srsEq aqr se .rapua8 ¡e:-neuue¡8 asn ler{r sa8en8uq Jerpo lo ,rlruerC urea¡ s.ra>leads qsr¡Bug uaq¿N

lsBq srq unq aq PUE rePlnoqssrq uo ¡rB sq e>lel pep aqr puv :agraSor fe¡d pep req r{rr^\ 1.rr8 a¡ru aq1

'srred lpoq pue rapua8 ¡e,rnreu 8ur-pnpur slxetuof, IIE ur (Jeq, pue ,srr{, Jo asn aaU-JoJJa e enlJe l¡euy sJeu¡BJl'g a8erg s¡er (ggg¿) errq4r ler{ \ ur .a8els acuaS¡arua-tsod eqtJo pue eqt ry

l3eq srq uo ,reUE puB fappoqs srq uo ¡rl3 e¡ur1.rar1tnd pep aqldn pue rer{leJ srr{ >lool aqg 'a¡oórq rar{ uo 11a3 ¡rr8 aq¡

:apua8 lernleus?q pessessod rcalqo aql uer{,4 lou rng (Jar{, puE ,slr{, Jo asn palEnuareJl(I

a Jua8t a uür -4 s o¿ : E a&a,lg

'asl¡d.rns sr JarpeJ srr{ pue (peer{

srq uo 'purq sq uo dn-a1eu aqr rnd eqs .lnJnneeq3¡assrq 8ur1eu 1.rr8 aql'qslug er{s ueqr PUE

.13of,

rag'lued rer{ '<seqrolf, raq tnd er{s pue ,loq a¡ru1 .raq Sulsserp sr rer{lotu eql'sruJoJ arP

Jo auo fluo asn ot alueJaJaJd Suo.lrs B r{tr^\ ,,Jer.l, Jo/put ,slr{, Jo acuaS;arug

atua7tauE :Z a3?$

., r;:ff Jl#;' f,lTil'f ;:'ff liH 'rlf,Eruols arp '3e¡ aqt (urre eqr uo pre-pueq a^Er{ JH'a¡clc¡q agr gtr.aa.le¡d loq a¡ur1 aq1

'sJequnu Pue's.repua' 'suosrad ¡¡e roJ pasn ,.rnof .ro a¡r'r' arruga. '

,fh:!I]r:J]jiit*)ü

'suonf,EJetul pu" slua^a l¡rue3jo s8uvtrerp uoolJef, Surqrns:p areleql 'qsr¡8uE Sulu.rea¡ sluapnts Sunleads-rlcuerC ruoü eruof, 1v\olag u,/v\oqsseldurexe aq¡ 'sa8ers ureru aaJr{t olul padnor8 aq uec lar¡r rnq .ecuanbas aqtur sa8ets rq8re3o Ietol E punoJ atnl/,fr '(tzgeü IqoZ tnrulaH lq pasodord tsrgsE,&\ lpr{l acuenbas ¡eruaudo¡a,rap e Sulrdepe ,sluapnls Suqeads-qcuar¿ lqsJaururelep a,rrssassodSo uorlrsrnbr¿ aql parpnls (sooz .866I) ar¡q6euueof

'rure [sq] eqr a>lorq aH = sz,"¿q q ?styr $a,s I'JsuruJalap e,rrssassod E uBql Jarp"J elf,rlJs erruSap

e sasn l¡e:ldlr qcuerg 'rred fpoq E sr pessassod rralqo eqt ueq/v\ reqr etoN

€g &urutaa1 a&anSur¡Vuotag

54 Second language learning

Relative clauses

Second language learners first acquire relative clauses that refer to nouns in thesubject and direct object positions, and only later (and in some cases, never)learn to use them to modify nouns in other sentence roles (for example, indi-rect object and object of preposition). A summary of the observed patternof acquisition for relative clauses is shown in Thble 2.3.It is referred to as theaccessibility hierarchy, and it refects the apparent ease with which learnershave access to certain structures in the target language.

Part of speech Relative clause

Subject The girl who was sick went home.

Direct object The story that I read was long.

lndirect object The man who[m] Susan gave the present towas happy.

Object of preposition I found the book thatJohn was talking about.

Possessive I know the woman whose father is visiting.

Object of comparison The person that Susan is taller than is Mary.

Photocopiable O Oxford University Press

Toble 2.3 Accessibility hierorchy for relotive clouses in English

(odopted from Doughty I99l)

Unlike the study of grammatical morphemes, negation, and questions, thestudy of relative clauses was not inspired by research on child language.

Rather, it came from patterns that Edward Keenan and Bernard Comrie(1977) observed in a large number of languages. Th.y found that those lan-guages that included the structures at the bottom of the list in Thble 2.3would also have those at the top, but the opposite was not necessarily true.Subsequentl¡ Susan Gass (1982) and others found that if a second language

learner could use one of the structures at the bottom of the list, he or she

would probably be able to use any that precede it. On the other hand, a

learner who could produce sentences with relative clauses in the subject ordirect object positions (at the top of the list) would not necessarily be able touse them in any of the clause types further down the list.

Despite the similariry of the general pattern, several rypes of first language

influence have also been observed in the acquisition of relative clauses. First,it has been observed that for learners whose first language does not have aparticular clause type (for example, object of comparison), it is more dif-ficult to learn to use that rype in English. Second, where learners have a firstlanguage with a substantially different way of forming relative clauses (forexample, Chinese and Japanese, where the relative clause precedes the noun

f¡ruanbarS ssal sre>lreru tsed a¡dturs asn sraurea¡ '(.a1qaqr lq us or fddeq paruees all,) sruelsuor sE pa raf,rad aq leu trr{t <satels. ¡o(rroourage ¡F rue \s 1,) pouad aruos JoJ anunuoo leu rerp .sanr^rl3e, JoC '(.p{01 tue r put uurdse ue >1oor raqtorg l¡¡, ,'salltu eeJqr ueJ I,) (stuauralarr.lfr prrr

,stuauqsqduorfe, sE ol paJJaJaJ aJE eseql 'paurruJarap aq l¡rsra uec tulod pmasogrrr SurpauJos ot JaJaJ ter{r sgJal uo asuat tsed lreru ot Jersee tl puy ol ruJax

sJauJ¿a'I 'sqJa tuaJa5rp aqr fq passa¡dxa s8ulueaurjo spur¡ aqr'sr leql',lf,adsprrxal, eqr or enp ag or;eadde saruaraglp aser{I '<e>pl teql ur urc./v\s -raqrr3 f¡,1"Jo ¡eJ1d rse¡ fddeg peuaes aqs, sB r{fns sef,uatuas ur uerlt ,an13 qrrzvr tl paryratsls f¡4¡, pue (ase arp a>loJq I, sE r{f,ns seJuJtuas ur asuat rsed lreru or f¡a11eroul are sraureel rer{r punoJ e Eq srerpo pue (0002) 3r1re¡1-r,rop.reg uoalrpqt

'sreal uaarSg ef,urs aJer{ pe^rr ser{ eqs'qsg 8lq E per{f,I"r rarsrs l¡lr¡

'(rsed alduls aqr u"qr raqrer rra3.rad tuasa¡d aqr 'a¡drurnro3) ruroS asual lsed 8uo¡rll, er{} Jo asn aqr ;o Sulpua pa- rc1n8u aqr azrlere

-ua3¡arro &ru s¡au;eal 'sqJal re¡n8ar uo asual rsed Suqreu ur8aq laqr ragy

'qsruedg a>1ods a¿N 'Aep Ánt'a Iooqls ot tua \ alN

d¡qe¡¡er

pasn sr rstd re¡n8ar aql aJoJag pasn ag leu sq;a,r re¡nBaJJIJo suJoJ esuat tsed

'dors rrro¡1 'aun 3uo¡ 8ur¡ro,la. ey1¡

'Suluea¡u

ter{r JoJ sasn a8en8ue¡ ra8;er eql rBI{t euo eql ag tou leu¡ u q8nogr¡e 'tsedJoJ gJa aqr 8ur¡mu auagd;ou ¡ecneruruer8 B r{JEltE ol }JE}s s;au;ea¡ tarr¡

or ere¡dol JaJeJ

'lueJnelseJ ur lJoA\ eH 'atuof, uos l¡¡'PJEr{ ool >lJo,/l\ a/N'rueN rel^

'rsed agr ur paJJnJf,o luala al{l rBI{t 1üor{s

Jo erun B uonuaur Jo paJJnf,f,o laqr golq.tr uI JtpJo aIF uI slua^¡l¡duls feu a8en8uel petlrull qrl^\ sreureel <uaJpllr{r Sunol a1r1

'u.¡aued JelIuIs e u!

slua,ra lsed ot SurrraSa; ro; a8en8ut¡ eqt armbce 'sa8en8uel puocas3o ltal:e,r e

8ur¡mb:e pue spuno.rbpeg a8en8uel rsrg rueJaJlp ruol3 sraureel reqr u,ltorlsser{ r{rJEe$J er{I 'erun ur sruela a}Bf,ol or a8en8ue¡ asn or lrl¡ge Surdole,rap

aqt pa^resgo a,req '(¿g61) IesIeW ua8rnf8upn¡:ur 'sragorrasarJo raqunu Vlsed ol aJueraJe¿

rurq ^\ES r oq.&\ u'ru aq1, 'a¡dure"'::;;:yJ,tJ"r";iÍ:L::$ttffi:il1

e rrBlor eqr qroq acnpord uauo sra>leads clge.ry'a¡dtuexa ro{ 'a>lBtu srauJ¿el

sJoJJe ar{r ur uJas sr aluangul a8en8ue¡ rsJU 'pJItII 'parue PE f¡rlej sl a8en8

-uBIJeluI JIaIF ual{,l\ uela sasnBIJ eArlEIaJ Sutsn plo,Le leru lagr '(sagrporu u

gg &uru"raa1 a8anSual puotag

56 Second language learning

First language can have an influence here too. Laura Collins (2002) investi-gated the different English verb forms used by French speakers. The past tense

that is most commonly used in spoken French and that is usually a transla-tion of a simple past form in English is a form that resembles the present

perfect in English. Thus, the equivalent of 'Yesterday he ate an apple' is Hieril a mangé une pomme-literall¡ 'Yesterday he has eaten an apple'. Teachers

often comment on French speakers' tendency to overuse the present perfect.In Collins' stud¡ learners completed passages by filling in blanks with the

appropriate form of a verb. As expected, in places where English speakers

would use the simple past, French speakers did sometimes use the perfect(either present perfect or past perfect) forms. Furthermore, they used themmore frequently than a comparison group of Japanese speakers. However,

the French speakers were more likely to use perfect forms for achievementand accomplishmentverbs than for the states and activities. Collins observes,

'The [first language] infuence does not appear to override the effect of lexical

aspect; rather it occurs within iC (p. 85).

Movement through developmental sequences

\7e have seen in this section that, as in first language acquisition, there are

systematic and predictable developmental sequences in second language

acquisition. However, it is important to emphasize that developmental stages

are not like closed rooms. Learners do not leave one behind when they enter

another. In examining a language sample from an individual learner, one

should not expect to find behaviours from only one stage. On the contrary,

at a given point in time, learners may use sentences rypical of several differentstages. It is perhaps better to think of a stage as being characterized by the

emergence and increasing frequency of new forms rather than by the com-plete disappearance of earlier ones. Even when a more advanced stage comes

to dominate in a learnert speech, conditions ofstress or complexity in a com-municative interaction can cause the learner to slip back to an earlier stage.

In addition, as we have already noted, progress to a higher stage does notalways mean fewer errors. For example, a learner may produce correct ques-

tions at Stage 1 or Stage 3, but those correct forms are not necessarilybased on

underlying knowledge of subject-verb inversion. That is, correct questions

at Stage I are formulaic chunks, not sentences that have been constructed

from the words that make them up. At Stage 2, learners have advanced, in the

sense that they are forming original questions, but the word order of those

questions is not grammatical in the target language. At Stage 3, questions are

formed by placing a question form (most often a uh- word or a form of the

verb 'do') at the beginning of a sentence with declarative word order. This

may result in questions such as 'Do you want to go?' that conform to Englishpatterns. However, when the learner asks a question such as'Do you can help

'1(ou>I fpear¡r e.&\ ttr{auo Plrnq e1r\ ?deu 8uI¡rauos 8ulu.rea1 uI .'uollng <JEelf,D ou s?r{ JoreFr[E3a8en8ue¡ aq¡. 'll lnd (gEI t6O0Z) slllg >plN ysu.raued plo pue

^\au aF

uaaluaq feldJetur uE sr eJeqt 'e8en8ue¡ mau eqt qtu'r eoueuedxe e^EI{ sJeuJuel

sE pue 'paqsr¡gersa lltury aJE sa8en8ue¡ rallrea esor{r;o su¡aued aq1 'Sururea¡

are faqr a8rn8ue¡ ,/v\au aqr Jo sarlxa¡druor eqt Jalof,srp or frr lagr s? ,/r\ou1

lagr saBenBuEI Jar{}oJo su¡aued aqr uo,/'rerp sJauJeal tel{t lqnop ou sI arrgl

'sef uatuas a¡drurs JEIItuls pacnpord sJeuJuel uaqrvr'uorttstnb:ea8rn8ue¡ puooesJo sa8ets tsar¡ree aqr ul rsalea.r8 eJa¡a salllJellruls aql 'suoltst¡

-lQtuoo a8en8uel puof,as pue ]sJU aqt ut óalre,r lea¡3 aqrSo etrds ur 'sraurea¡eqlJo suJarred a8rn8ue¡Jarur or{l uI saIlIJelIuIS prruersqns aJaA\ eJel{l 'uode¡

G.66ü anprad a^rlJ pue ura¡¡ 8ue83lol¡ sV 'palpnts se¡'r saSen8ue¡ ra8rao^\t arp3o uollslnb¡e rlaql uI sJeurealJo ssa¡8o¡d agr 'punor81:eq a8en8uq

rsJg r{rEa .ro3 'os¡y 'pa;rduor are^\ spunor$¡ceq aSen8ue¡ tsrg ruereJlP o^\r

ruory sJauJeal 'a8rn8ue¡ ra8rer qcea rog 'a8en8ue¡ ueado;ng JeIpouE PeuJEqlaqt se pa./urollo3 eJa \ 'uolrfnnsul aBenBuEI puofes ou Jo eprll PEr{ tuoq,r

Jo lsoru 'sreureel aSenSue¡ rlnpy '8ulu.rea¡ a8enSuel PuoJas uo aSenSuq

tsJU eqr Jo efuangul aql aulruexa ot saltlunr¡oddo alqenp^ Jtuos Patee¡freqr lpnrs e lno paIJJ¿f, uoltepunoC afuaIJS ueadornE aqt lE sJel{r.Itasat

'uolustnbcB a8enSue¡ tnoqe uoItEIrrJoJuIJo af,Jnos Flluesse uE lsoll¡¡erruarod farp 'os Surop u1 'stsf¡eue elllseJluor PaPJefsIP osl¿ sreqoJeasar

aruos 'Lusunol^El{aq Sunrala¡ u1 'uotllslnbce a8en8ue¡ jo sl'rel^ lslJnol^Er{aq

qtt,!\ paterf,osse f¡aso¡o sernr stsl¡rue alllstJtuof, rEI{r }lEJ aql sE1( aSen8ue¡

raSrer aqr qrl^\ saltlnrglp s,.raurea¡ e urcJdxa rsaq PFo,&\ (ef,uareJrelul, ro

(JeJsuEJt, ler{r slseqlodlq ar¡r parcalar sJeI{)JEeseJ auos tetlt uoseeJ auo

aruanhfar aSan&ur¡ rtgfruoqp a,tory

'uoIlEf,Iunururof

r{tr^\ ara3ra}ul tou op sJoJJa rleqt JI a8ers reqr puofaq Sul,roru ó¡nrgrpe^Br{ osle leru faql 'a>leru or l¡a1r¡ ssal are sa8en8ue¡ raqto Jo sraleads rerps.ro¡¡a Suqeru dn pua pue urarred a8en8ue¡ rsJU rlal{t azl¡e;aua8 leu lat¡l'a8rn8ue¡ratul JIaI{r pue aSen8u"l tsJg Jleql uea uaq ,lrue¡nuls IEIfnrl,e a¡rre¡¡ad faqt qclqrnl le a8ers ¡eruerudola,reP E I{334J larp uagm 'Pa^Jasqo

(Oge t) IqoZ rnuleH Pu¿ (3/6I) apo¿¡SuruueH sE 1er{re¡ 'Puosas eql olula8en8ue¡ rsJg JIeI{r Jo sarnlf,nJ}s el{l JoJSuEJT l¡duls uer laqr l3l{l etunsse

or ¡eadde rou op sJeuJEO-I 'eouangul a8en8ut¡ tsJg I{tvlt tf,¿Jalul laqr ler'taqr $ saruanbas ¡eruarudo¡a,rap rnoqe uoltt^Jasqo lu¿l¡odrur laqrouv

('aouelues aqr3o Suruur8aq agr lE PJon\ uopsanb e tn¿,e¡11 Surqraruos sl l¡ea; a¡n: aSen8uBlJelul s,JeuJeal erp rer{r ees UEJ a^\ (¿etu

Sututaal a8an&ual yuocag LS

58 Second language learning

'We have seen some ways in which the first language interacrs with develop-

mental sequences. \flhen learners reach a certain stage and perceive a similariryto their first language, they may linger longer at that stage (for example, theextended use ofpreverbal'no'by Spanish speakers) or add a sub-stage (forexample, the German speakert inversion of subject and lexical verbs in ques-tions) to the sequence which, overall, is similar across learners, regardless oftheir first language. They may learn a second language rule but restrict itsapplication (for example, the French speakert rejection of subject-auxiliaryinversion with noun subjects that we saw in Stage 5 questions on page 50).

The first language may influence learners' interlanguage in other ways as well.As we saw earlier, the phenomenon of avoidance that Jacquelyn Schachter(I974) described appeared to be caused at least in part bylearners'perceptionthat a feature in the target language was so distant and different from theirfirst language that they preferred not to try it.

Other researchers have also found evidence of learners' sensitiviry to degrees

of distance or difference and a reluctance to attempt a transfer when theyperceive the languages as too different. In one revealing study, Hákanfungbom (1986) found that the interference errors made in English by bothFinnish-Swedish and Swedish-Finnish bilinguals were most often trace-able to Swedish, not Finnish. The fact that Swedish and English are closelyrelated languages that actually do share many characteristics seems to haveled learners to take a chance that a word or a sentence structure that workedin Swedish would have an English equivalent. Finnish, on the other hand,belongs to a completely different language family, and whether their ownfirst language was Swedish or Finnish, learners appeared reluctant to draw onFinnish in learning English.

The risk-taking associated with this perception of similariry has its limits,however. For example, Eric Kellerman (1986) observed that learners oftenbelieve that idiomatic or metaphorical uses ofwords are unique to a particu-lar language. Kellerman found that Dutch learners of English were reluctantto accept that certain idiomatic expressions or unusual uses of words werealso possible in English. For example, they rejected 'The wave broke on theshore' but accepted'He broke the cup' even though both are straightforwardtranslations of sentences with the Dutch verb brehen.

Another way in which learners' first languages can affect second language

acquisition is by making it difficult for them to notice that something theyare saying is not a feature of the language as it is used by more proficientspeakers. Lydia Vhite (1991) gave the example of adverb placement inFrench and English. Both languages allow adverbs in several positions insimple sentences. However, as the examples inTáble 2.4show, there are some

differences. English, but not French, allows SAVO order; French, but notEnglish, allows SVAO.

'suolle8llselul Jo serors PeJIdsuI seq dlqsuolrelal sII{lJo frrxa¡druo:eqt'^\oqs (SOOZ) o>1uel^E¿ PtauvPue su'.rr[rror5 PUB (8002) ulPO af,uaralfg srrtevrar allsuarxe ryrndur aqt uI JelunoJua sJauJea¡ regr a8en8ue¡ ra8raeqr Jo sa¡dues eqr pue 'sassaco¡d a¡'rlruSoc '(sa8en8ue¡ Paurcel l¡snorrtald

raqto ro) a8en8ue¡ rsJg er{r uea^\taq uoll)¿Jalul ar¡r aztseqdrua ruaudo¡ar'apa8rn8uel puof,esJo s¡aell tueJrn3 'raIIrEa PauJBal az'r (s)a8en8u¿l aqr Pu¿ls-Japun put asn a,u fer"r eqt uo lcedu¡l ue aAEq osp uBf, uJeel e¡ regl surarted

agt 'a8en8uel pJltp Jo puofas e a.rrnbre a^\ sE 'sI IEI{I 'lEuoIrseJIPIun suearü

ou lg sl drqsuolre¡ar eq1 reqr DEJ eqr Degar ot ued uI 'Pesn uJUo 1(ou sI af,ua

-ngur rnsrntull-ssorf, uJJar eql'sePmaP tualar uI Paugal uaaq sEL{ sa8en8uq

peureel-Jalel pue -lsrg uee \taq drqsuorre¡er ar{r Jo Surpurlsrapun rno

'9 pue g sratdeq3 uI srorra uo >lreqPag

PUB uonrnJlsurJo eloJ al{r rE >lool e1( uer{^\ slql ol uJnlal IIId\ alN'sJorrs aluss

eqr e>leru sJer{lo reaq leru faqr 'roe3 uI 'Pue Sulpuelslapunsllu asnec or,(1a1¡¡

lou eJE srorra u^\o rIeI{I 'punorSlcrq a8en8ue¡ lsrg arues aql uro{ srel{ro

qtl,l\ ttrErelul sreurcol uaqm Sur8ualler{l eroru uala aq &u slql 'pardn;srp

]ou sr uonef,runruruoo pue fq8u ¡e fpca3rad sPunos rueprrtnba uolte¡sueJl sll

uaqrrr l¡ercadsa 'tndul eql uI luesaJd lou sl 8u¡qlauos lBqt af,Ilou ol IFISIPsr lr'rno slu¡od erlqr6 ryOV^S tdar¡e qsr¡8ug3o srau#el Suqeads-qcuarg

pus ,lprrrrrurue¡8 s¿ OAVS rdar¡¿ ot enurluo3 r{tuarC Jo sJeuJEaI Suqeads

-gsr¡8uE 'aSrn8uq rsJg rIaI{} uI euo or JEIItuls st rr ¡ a8en8ue¡ ra8rel eqr uI

Jnf,f,o rou seop reqr u¡arr¿d E Jo PIr Sunra8 lr¡ncgP a,reg sdnor8 qroq lnq

'OVAS ppt ol I{ruerC Jo sreurtal Suueads-qsr¡8ug ro3 put a.rtouadar rlaql

ol OAVS ppr or risl¡8uE3o sraureal Suqeads-qcuarJ roJ fsea fpreS sruaas 1I

qq\u1 puD q)uelJ u Tuawan¡d qle^Pv yZ etqD!

ssar¿ &rs.re,rtu¡ prolxg O a¡qerdororoq¿

'¡errleuuert tou sr atruatuas aqr leql sueau (*) ¡slrolse aql:aroN

'?q1nP lua nosuoqeuDw'€al ua]lo $lulJP rfue¡*

ovs'gi'/¡ nP log rua nos euDw*

'€el s)ullP uaryo rfue¡ovs

?ue nos ?ql nP loq euow'uel¡o ear s¡ur"rp l-re¡

vo^s'?Ln np l¡oq euory ?uaano5

'eat s¡ulJP rfue¡'uaqgOASV

qre^pv= [ ]eefq6 = Q QJa¡\= ¡ ¡rafqnS = 5

69Sututaa1 a8an&ual puotag

60 Second knguage learning

So far this chapter has focused on the acquisition of morphology andsynraxin the second language . \7e now turn to the learning ofsome other importantcomponents of communicative competence: vocabular¡ pragmatics, andpronunciation.

Vocabul^ryIn 1980, Paul Meara characterized vocabulary learning as a'neglected aspectof language learning'. Researchers in the 1970s and early 1980s were drawnto syntax and morphology because of the way error patrerns and develop-mental sequences of these features might reveal somerhing about universalsin languages and language acquisition. How different things are now!Just as

Meara was commenting on the state of neglect, an explosion of research onvocabulary learning was beginning, and the acquisition of vocabulary has

become one of the most active areas in second language acquisition research.

For most people, the importance of vocabulary seems very clear. As it hasoften been remarked, we can communicate by usingwords that are not placedin the proper order, pronounced perfectly, ot -"t[.d with the proper gram-matical morphemes, but communication often breaks down if we do notuse the correct word. Although circumlocution and gestures can sometimescompensate, the importance ofvocabulary can hardly be overestimated.

Do You tneArfRENCtt ?

a0,0,

l;1

puB <alnJrs '133e1 'dlo.r3, :lsr1 Sulr'lolloJ eLIt u,üol{s JI 'a¡druexa JoC 'sraur¿Jl

paJuE^pB ualaJo azrs fre¡nqero^ eqt eletultsa ol Pasn ag uef, rsll PersnJrsuorf¡1ryarec V'punos rq8ru tI ueqr a^IlJeJe eJour sI arnparo;d ¿ r{JnS 'uasop

oslr aJE r¿r{r spJolü-uou Jo raqunu er{r Jo lunof,f,E sa>l¿l r"ql rol3tJ E lq fu-ssan8 ro3 patsnlpe sr segpuepl rauJeal aqr rer{r spro \ IEaUo Jegrunu eql 'rou

are tng spJold gsl¡8uE a>lII {ool rer{l sue}I euos sePnlf,ul osle lsII qf,eg 'PJo-ü

eqr r'rou>I laqr rou Jo Jeqlal{^\ or Sutprorre (ou, JO ,sal, ¡raqc ol Palf,nJtslnaJE sJaureel pur'stsl¡ PJo lJo turoJ aqr a1"1 slsal esal{r3o auos'rf,EJ slq¡Jo

a8etue,rpr e>ler teqt stsar pado¡a^eP a Eq (E002) san8rc¡¡oc sq Pue ErEeI'r(

InEd 'pJo^\ E sI rI l¿qt azluSo¡a¡ ot l¡duls sI PJo^\ E Sulrvroul ut dals rsJg eL{L

',acr¡druocce, ro'.pa8e¡e, 'fuotullsal, sE qf,ns sP¡o.s,

3o aSpa¡mou1 aqr rnoqlvlr rsol ag l¿ru asec tJnof, ? lnoqt elf,IlJE rad¿ds¡v'au e

;o Suluearu aqr 'a¡duexe JoC 'peeJ PuE JeeI{ a,vt s8urql lueruio Sutuearu atp

ol IErf,nJ3 aJE spJo^\ ruanbarj ssel 'stxal lef,Iul{f,al-uou lsoluJo tuar ¡ad 06-08s" r{Jnru se dn aleru qslSuE uI sP.Io^\ ruanbari lsolu Puesnoql eaJl{l Jo o^u

aqr q8noqr¡y'uotusmbre3o sa8ets lsour tE sJeur?el a8en8ue¡ Puof,as roJ esEJ

aJEJ E-spJo^\ el{rjo tuar ¡ad 16 uetll eJoru,4 ou>l ol sPaau auo 'lleuotlrtp e

llnsuof, ot sdots ruanbarj lnoqllm lxel e PurtsJePun ol JePJo uI 'íl"ql Pe^\oqs(OOOZ) uoneN InEd pur nH EIITf,TEI J 'lxeluo3 ruog Passen8 l¡rsea lou aru

tegt s8uruearu or 8ut;ta3al 'rlnfSIIP eJou eq l¿ru ot pasodxa a-re laqr sPJo^r

er{} 'srlnpe ro uerpllql raPlo are laqr 31 'a8en8ur¡ rsr5 rlal{r Jo sPro.4 PuBs

-nor{l o^\¡ Jo Juo lsrg slil ureal uerPIILI3 tllltl,/!\ uI esoql se ¡nid¡ag sB aq loufeu fre¡ngero^ 1r\eu Jalunofua sJeuJeal e8rn8ue¡ Puosas qllqrit ul slxaluoJ

aqr 'osppeureel aq or a8en8uÉl al{lJo sa¡durs railEus re3 or pasodxa eg or

l¡a>1r¡ a.re faqr '8urqr auo JoC 'sreureel a8en8ue¡ Puof,es roJ ruaraJlP alrnb st

,{ie¡nqeco.r. a8rr¡ e 8ul:rnboe 3o >ls¿r aql 'uo5a alqr^rasgo aprl qrrr'r a8en8

-uEI rsrg Jlaqt uI sPro^\Jo sPursnoqr urcel ueJPIIqJ 'I rardEI{J uI lvres e¡a ry'raurEal a8en8ue¡ puores E JoJ rueuqs¡¡duocce ruecgluS¡s e sl fre¡nqeco,r

rrseg E 8ul¡lnbr¿ 'os ueAE 'sJatf,errr{f, 000'<2 }noqe3o a8pa¡-la'ou¡ E I{1I^ Ptarag l¡ensn ueo lerJaleru lrf,rur{Ja}-uou pue 'aJEJ aJe tsoul 'sJatfeJeqf,Jo sPu¿s

-noquo suer a,rrq aseuedrf pue asaurq3 q8nor¡rp 'llre¡lulS 'sPro,/d 000'<2 elna;oru Sulqtatuos 'raqrunu Jalletus .le3 e sermbal uoIlESJaAuoo lepfra,ra lsoru

fng 'regr afltlq u"ql eJoul sI 13I{r Jequnu e rsaSSns se}Erullsa aruos Ísprorr,r

000'02 rstel lE ,/v\ou>I or Pa^eIIaq sl qsr¡8ug 3o ra¡eads llnPe Par?rnPa uV

'Pa^rJaP

aJE sJarpo aqr qllq^. ruo{ looJ a¡8urs e-,pJo.&\ euo 3o rred sB ruel{r Jo II3lunof, plno,/$ sJalpo allq^! sPJo.&\ ale¡edas se ,tgSnet pue 'Surqreal 'Jer{f,eal<r{fee], reaJr Plnod\ aruos 'a¡druBxa JOC 'PalunoJ eJE SPJO \ ^/v\oq uo utd ut

Surpuadap ,sprorrr uorll¡u euo ol 000'00I ruo;3 aragr'rlue a^EI{ ot PJlsrullse,(¡snorrr,r sr ,sa8en8uel afJnosJo Áaue,r teet8 e ruor3 frc¡nqef,o_^ sll lllnq seq

rplqr .qsÉuE 'spro1üJo regrunu a8re¡ f¡Sulqsluotse uE sttl a8en8ue¡ lrar'g.qf,JBasJJ tueJal I{tnur Jo snf,oJ el{t uaeg srq s8u¡rras 3o llal¡e,t E uI uollef,Iu

-nurIUoJ Injssalf,ns ro3,{-relnqero,r g8noua eSre¡ e Sulrrnbce3o a8ua¡rqr agl

&u1utaal a8an&uaT Vuotag I9

62 Second knguage learning

albeit', a proficient speaker of English would know that only one of thesewords is a real English word, albeit a rare and somewhat odd one. On theother hand, even proficient speakers might recognize none of the followingitems: 'goniomete¡ micelle, laminitis, throstle'. Even our computer's spell-checker rejected ñvo out of four, but all are real English words, according tothe New Oxford Dictionary ofAmerican English.

Among the factors that make new vocabulary more easily learnable bysecond language learners is the frequencywith which the word is seen, heard,and understood. Paul Nation (2001) reviews a number of studies suggesringthat a learner needs to have many meaningful encounters with a new wordbefore it becomes firmly established in memory. The estimates range as highas 16 times in some studies. Even more encounters may be needed before a

learner can retrieve the word in fuent speech or automatically understandthe meaning of the word when it occurs in a new conrexr. The ability tounderstand the meaning of most words without focused attention is essentialfor fluent reading as well as for fluent speaking.

Frequency is not the only factor that determines how easily words are learned,however, as illustrated by the words in the three lists shown in Thble 2.5.

List I List 2 List 3

friend hamburger SOVernment

more Coke responsibility

town T-shirt dictionary

book Facebook elementary

hunt taxi remarkable

srng Ptzza description

box hotel exPressron

smile dollar international

eye lnternet dénouement

night disco entente

Photocopiable @ Oxford University Press

Toble 2.5 English words thot moy be'eosy' or'difrcuh' for second longuage leorners

All of the words in List I look easy because they are simple one-syllable wordsthat refer to easily illustrated actions or objects. They are also quite commonwords in English, appearing among the 1,000 most frequent words. And yet,they are not likely to be known to students who have not had previous instruc-tion in English or exposure to the language outside school. Furthermore,

Surpear i"qr rqnop ou sI eraql 'arnsea¡d ro3 Sulpear sl grr'lor3,fte¡ngeco,r3oerrnos tsaq eqr ltrp palrass" str{ (686I) ueqser) uaqdatg'uogá I¿uonualulalttrl rpr^\ l-lelnqeco,r jo IEep te¿t? e uJrel uef, 'a8en8ue¡ lsJg Jral{r Sutu:ea¡

uaJplrql JIII 'sraurta¡ a8en8ue¡ puo3es reqr panS.rr eAEI{ slslJoeqr eruos

'qJe urrET eruBs eql uro5 aruEf, rbqr qSnoqr ue^e 'üollsanb r >1st,.ro

,tsanbar, su?eur qrlql\ '"ta?uputa? uISnoJ qJuaJC stl ruo5 Sulueatu luaJaJIPp spq (pueruep, gre^ gs¡¡8ug agr 'a¡durexa;og 'ulSlro arues eql uor3 fpua-JaJIP Pe^lo e arreq leru lagl ro sulSl¡o luJreJIP IUo{ aluof, leru .saleuSo:esl¿J, eseql 's8urueau rueraJlp a^EI{ rng sa8en8ue¡ o^\t aqr ul JEIIuTIs {oolrerp spro,u glm frlncglp ;e¡nolued a,reg leu stuaPnls 'PuEI{ ral{ro eqr uO

,'plernslg pue II{snS,JIaslI sllef, lel{l luerntlsar asauedef ¿ uI surell lrrplcadsqroq rr.oulleqr rerp aa.leat,(eu sra>1eads qsr¡8uE 'uoltfegal s,tueruoru E JaUE

puy'(.¿qsr¡8uÍur <qr?oJ, les nof oP./v\oH 'r{f,"or 'ftH,) ¿nu1&ua u2,qruoJ, l?P

uo iuautruor 'qJ?oJ ?H,:Euere lalcoq caqan| t ur p1o-real-rq8la ue lq palse

'uollsanb Sulmo¡1o; arp uI pateJrsnilI sE 'ruaql SurzluSo:a¡ ul aruepln8 paau

letu s¡au¡ra1 'a8en8ut¡ ua>¡ods arp ur a.re laqr uegt tuJo; uettlJ^\ Jlaql uI ezlu

-8oca¡ ol rarsee aq or l¡a11 eJE spro^\'s8ulT¡ads tuaJeJIP r{lrrvr ue^g '(qcua.rg

pue qsrlSug ut anbrcnru pue (f,Isnlu, .ro l¡a,rrrredser urruraD pue qsrpuE ur

¿ass?A pu? (JalB.lrr, 'a¡durexa -ro3) saSenBuEI o^\l aql uI PerEIar elr su¡alled 8ul

1¡ads moq jo a8palz'rou1 aruos a¡lnba; leru sraqto allq^\'Suluearu Pue tuJo3

ur IEJrluJpl a¡e satruSor auro5 'aBenBuEI puoJas Jraql uI sateuSoc Jo sPJo,ry\

pa.&\oJJog azluSo¡a¡ sle.Lrp III^,I sruepnrs regr eunsse tou ppol{s sJeqf,Ea1

drr¡nqmo,r rraqr puedxa srauna¡ dlar¡

uro Surueatu pareqs a^EI{ pue aTTE >lool rEI{r sPro.& asaq¡ '(sa8en8url ragro

ruo.r3 pardopt uaeg a^Eq rEI{r spro.,rn') sPJo.^aPa.uoJJog aJE',elualua, Pue (luau¡-anou?p, sE l{fns'sJel{to l(roor ¡eur8lJo eures eql ruory awof, aAEI{ reqr sprorvr)

saleuSoo a¡e 'l¡Buorlf,Ip, Pue (uolleu, s" I{Jns 'aruos ¡aoul fpearp lagrrrgr saBenBuEI rJr{ro u¡ tua¡e,unba uollelsueJt rlaql a>lII >lool laqr asneraq

a.rnsodxa a¡8urs e raUE rueqt uJeal ro rq8rs uo ruaql ,^\oDL ral{lle PFoly\sluapnls lueu¡ la,rarrro¡1 'aBenSuEI arp ut luanbar3ul \try1 are lsoru PuE'peterrsnllr l¡sea rou '3uo1 raqrer art lar¡1 'rFlUIp >lool E tsI-I uI sPro^\ aql

'ur¿al ot Buú¡t a;r lagr a8en8ue¡ aqr ulry\ou>I fpear¡e lagrsprold lueru .uoq uJrel ol pasudrns ag fru PIro,&\ agl rnog8noJgl sluaPnls'sa8en8ue¡ Jel{to tuo{ spro^\ pardepe PuE (Pe,4aorrog, JAEI{ sa8en8ur¡ lueur

'suorleorunluuro) Jo uoIlEZIIBuoItEuJaluI Sulseanul qrt¿¡ drcpqero,r

IeuolteuJerur uB Jo u¿d art laqt asneraq 'Z rsl'I uI sPJo^' ruroul lpear¡e

rg8ru qsr¡8uE palpnrs raleu aler{ orl,4 stuaPnts eutos (PuEq rar{ro eqr uO

'pegsrlqersa ila,ry\ sI Suru¿au

slr puc pJol( E uee.t\rag IuII arp eJoJeq sarull luetu sn{r oP rsnru larp 'a1nr

E se 'pue '3utu¿atu Jleqt I"eAeJ lEql slxeluof, uI sPJolt\ el{r JEaq Jo aos lsnu¡leqr 'uagr uJeal ol aJE stuapnlsSl '8ulurcru Jlaql ol an¡o e sa,u8 reqr se^las

-ueqr spJo,/$. aqlJo uollelfunuord agr.ro uJoJ uetllJl'r agr ul Surgrou sI aJel{r

Sututaal a3an3ua7 puotag €9

64 Second knguage learning

is an important potential source of vocabulary developmenr for second lan-guage learners as it is for first language learners. However, there are someproblems with the norion that vocabulary growth through reading requireslittle effort. As noted above, it is difficult to infer the meaning of a newwordfrom reading unless one already knows 95 per cent or more of the otherwords, and learners usually need to have many meaningful encounters wirha word before they recognize it in new conrexts or produce it in their ownspeaking and writing. As we saw in Chapter 1, Dee Gardner's (2004) researchdemonstrates that certain types of words are rare in narratives. Thus, stu-dents who read mainly fiction may have little chance of learning words thatare essential for their academic pursuits. Conversel¡ reading mainly sciencetexts will not provide many opportunities to learn the vocabulary of socialinteraction.

Research on vocabularylearning through readingwithout focused instructionconfirms that some vocabulary can be learned without explicit instruction(see Chapter 6, Study 17). On the other hand, Jan Hulstijn and Batia Laufer(2001) and others provide evidence that vocabulary development is moresuccessful when learners are fully engaged in activities that require them toattend carefully to the new words and even to use them in productive tasks.Izabella Kojic-Sabo and Patsy Lightbown (1999) found that effort and theuse of good learning strategies, such as keeping a notebook, looking wordsup in a dictionar¡ and reyiewing what has been learned were associated withbetter vocabulary development. Cheryl Boyd Zimmerman (2009) providesmany practical suggestions for teaching vocabulary and also for helpinglearners to continue learning outside the classroom.

Even with instruction and good strategies, the task of acquiring an adequatevocabulary is daunting. -What

does it mean to 'know' a word:

. Grasp the general meaning in a familiar context?

. Provide a definition or a translation equivalent?

. Provide appropriate word associations?

. Identify its component parts or etymology?o lJse the word to complete a sentence or to create a new sentence?. ljse it metaphorically?. lJnderstand a joke that uses homonyms (words that sound alike but

mean different things, such as 'cents', 'sense', 'scents')?

Second language learners whose goal is to use the language for both socialand academic purposes must learn to do all these things.

puof,es eqr ur seJnleal f,neruSeJd puer{aJdluof pue ellerJad or lrr¡qe ,sra-urral pauruexe a Er{ serpnrs rar{ro 'puno.r81oeq eStn8ue¡ tsrg rlaqr ro Io^JIloualogord rraql uI sef,uareglp ol uollelar ur SurztSo¡ode pue Surrr^ul sE l{rnssre qcaads ssa¡dxe sJauJeal qrry^\ ur sler't aql uo pasnf,oJ serl I{cJ¿eseJ sII{r

Jo errlos 'rc6GI3l.re¡1-l,rop.reg) ,srlreur8e.rd a8en8ue¡ralul, sE ot PerJeJar sI

a8en8url3o lcadse srgt arlnbcr sreureel a8en8url puoJas ^{oriJo

fpnrs eql

'.rl gu^\ Peqsrug a¡tnol ueq,/I\looq lEI{r e^?q au Sulua¡ punu p,nof

JI Jepuo¡a I, Jo )oog rBI{l eru aAID, JBeq e \Jr luaJaglp fra,r sI Jeualsrl PuB.ra>1eads uea \taq drqsuonrlar aqt tel{t erunsse l¡qeqord PFo,&\ arrr 'aldruexarog 'sfer't tuaJaglp ul passardxa sr rr uer{^/'r peJarle sl Sururaru cISEg arurs al{l

'llrEIItu¡S 'peqJad\og sraleads erpJo lno 8op arp la8 ot lsenbal tua8rn ue ag

rq8lru t¡ ro 'tad oAITJEJIIE uE Joj uolleJlrupe Jo uolssa¡dxa ue apace;d rg8rru

r1 .¿8op ;no.( reqr sL se l{rns uopsenb aldurs l¡rua.rrddt ue la¡d¡alur rq8¡ruauo sle¡'r lunu aqr3o rylql 'suoltentls tuaJeglp uI eAEq uEf, af,uatuas eUJES

ar{r rrqt s8ulueatu luru aqr azluSooa¡ ol uJeel o} Peau laql 'suolresJeluoo

Sur8eueru pur tnorung Sulzru8oca¡ 'sat8o¡ode ro stuarut¡duror or l¡atrlod 8ul-puodsar 'slsanba¡ Sutta¡d¡alul JoJ sllDIS a¡rnbcr ol Paau os¡e lag¡ 'a8enSue¡

Sursn ur ó¡ncg¡p relunooua IIIrs utr laqr 'a8en8ue¡ ra8rer elp Jo l8o¡oqd-rorrl pue xetufs elp Jo a8palmou1 poo8 e Pu" sPro.&\ 000'E Jo f;r¡nqero,re a¡lnbce sJeurcal JI ua^E 'eJueJa3ap PuE 'ssauall¡od 'ssaulca.up se s8urr¡r

qons ssardxa or rxaluol uI pasn sl a8en8ur¡ ^,oq3o

lpnrs aqr st scrleru8er¿

srIrBrrISBJd

,evnth* .rr'ffnll

r[o i 'J

rñt W7rr",'íEnrW

s9Surutaal aSan&ual yuotag

66 Second language learning

language and to judge whether a particular request is appropriate or inap-propriate in a specific contexr.

Since the early 1990s more research has directly investigated the acquisitionof second language pragmatic ability. This includes longitudinal and cross-sectional studies describing rhe acquisition ofseveral different speech acts. Onethat has been the focus of considerable attention is 'requesting'. Requests arean interesting pragmaric feature ro examine because there are identifiable waysin which requesrs are made within particular languages as well as differences inhow they are expressed across different languages and cultures.

In a review of longitudinal and cross-sectional studies on the acquisitionof requests in English, Gabriele Kasper and Kenneth Rose (2002) outlinea series of five stages of development. Stage I consists of minimal languagethat is often incomplete and highly context-dependent. Stage 2 includesprimarily memorized routines and frequent use of imperatives. Stage 3 is

marked by less use of formulas, more productive speech, and some mitiga-tion of requests. Stage 4 involves more complex language and increased use

of mitigation, especially supportive starements. Stage 5 is marked by morerefinement of the force of requests. The five stages, their characteristics andexamples are given below.

Stage 1: Pre-basicHighly context-dependent, no syntax, no relational goals.

Me no blue.Sir.

Stage 2: FormalaicReliance on unanalysed formulas and imperatives.

Lett play the game.Let's eat breakfmt.Dont look.

Stage 3: UnpachingFormulas incorporated into productive language use, shift ro conventionalindirectness.

Can you pass the pencil please?

Can you do another one for me?

Stage 4: Pragmatic erpansionAddition of new forms to repertoire, increased use of mitigation, morecomplex syntax.

Could I have another chocolate because mychildren-I have five children.Can I see it so I can copy it?

e Eq tou op oq t sraur?el a8rn8ue¡ u8¡aro3 roJ saeu poo8 sl srql .(¿69¿ asq¡pue ¡adsr;) a rf,aJa rsou¡ sr uo'f,ursur rrJr¡durr .r"g, .rrgiilrr.r{d;."7pue s8unres .'ooJss'If, ur pauJBaJ f¡n3ssarcns ag u,f saJnl'al ,rr"-e".a rrpPaleJlsuoruop srq sf,rleru3e-¡d30 8uqf,eal er{l uo qf,J?aseJ ,eJor.uJer{rJnc .suog-JunJ J^nef,runuruof, Jo aSuer rapu\r e or puodsal pu? ef,npord or sraurre¡salg'ua sq1 '(>¡rorrr dno¡3 pue rled 'a¡druexa ro3) sarnrcnirs uon¿aueg¡orued¡rlu¿d px' saloJ ruaraJlp ul a8e8ua ol sJauJ'el roJ osl, rng rndur ¡ol¡aue¡. ¡al¿a¡8 e ro3 l¡uo rou senrunr¡oddo ,ro- ,r"'rrr".p ,durqr'a¡

"s;¡ -uBI peseq-Iser pue ,paseg-lualuof, ,a nerrunruruof, u1 .(E rardeq3 ul s¡pJo uorssnf,srp Jar{unJ aas) toa;.toc l¡¡eclrerurue¡8 a¡aztr ler{l sJf,uelues ¡¡r5 Su,npord uo slelr¡e lsorul' r" rtrrgd*a aqt erer.l.{\ pue xleqpaal Jaqf,E¡-esuodsa¡ JauJ¿al-uonerlrur Jer{f,eel, r"^.rrrlt"d .tonr"nir,,,r".rr-op,.¡,eJar{^ry\ sluooJsself, paluo5-Jer{3?3r ur anrr l¡¡eDadse sE1ü srqr .slf,E gcaadsruaJaJrp lueur ureal or_sruepnrs roj rrtrtunrioddo arel¡dord& apnord ,ooplnoJ sruoorsse¡r eSen8uel puoJas tBr{r palunssB s'r\ lr ,arun á.ro1

" ,o¡

rr¡ncsrpa-''os.e^'qo,',.,'o''Jffi l;j"T:jil?::lljjJT''?,i,il1l:ilse a,rrarrad or l¡a>¡¡ eJa,/tt. sJosr^pe Jqr rer{r r.torrmáBr,r Buncalai ,.rj ,.ror"r-,ap¡,to:d_or pue uorlf,EJerur Sulsrztpe_ eql ut eloJ e nf,E aJouJ 3 a>pl 1¡1 peuJealfagr 'a1du-exe ro{ .ólIq" rlreu¡8¿¡d ,s'tprds r,rneu-uou,ql3o ,lerdse r.rroiul sse¡80¡d pe^rasqo srer{f,r¿aser er{l 'sqluoruJIEri E pue rnojJo pol.red ¿ JaAO

'(asJnof, reql alet IILaa. I, prES sra>1eads a^neu_uou aql seeJeq.{t ,,asJnofsrrp J>lEl ot ei1 ppol( I IUIW 1, fes ot pa,uesgo era,/r\ sra>¡eads arr.neu ,aldruexarog 'uorreSlr¡u Sulsn re sra>1eads e^neu eq] ueqr rdape sse¡ qrnu osle ero \sra>1eads e^neu-uou ag1 'sasuodsa¡ uollrafa¡ ra>yeads-a,ureu jo ¡ecldÁ rrou,se \ r{f,rq \',speau Áu teeu Janag plno^/v\ esJnof, Jar{lo srqr >lurqr I, Jo .,esJnoJ

13rp r{rr^\ slJrHuof, elnpeqls l¡¡, 8uúes30 pralsur ',esJnof, 1¿r{r ur palseJalurtou. ur? I IuHt J, Surles lg esrnof, relncrued B e{El or uonsa88ns srosr^pB u?rcaler p¡nozrr, fagr 'aldruexe Joc 'ar¿r¡do¡dde,rr ro apnr pug rq8lru srosr^peor{r reqr sle¡l ur ¡osr,rpe agr lq apeu suollsaSSns pafa¡ or iralmds a^neu-uouegr jo rred eqr uo lcuapuar B osp sBld aJer{r 'lBep re¿t? e prr"rrr,r, sra>1eadse^nBu seeJaq^\ suollsaSSns alBrlrur r_ou plp sra>pads a^rlEu-uou aqr ,e¡düexaJog 'sue¡d f,rluap?f,B rlaqt Sulleno8au ur ssa3cns Jessal Jo .lal¿a¡B ,rr.¡r orPelnqlJruol saf,ueJaJlp aseqrsuorsses Surslr\p? JrluepesE ur suorlfelesesJnoJ Jrerp passnrsp far¡r se srossa3ord Jreqr qlr \ patefrun{uuoc qsr¡BuEyo s.raleads a^neu-uou pur e neu rplr{ \ ul l¿zrt arp uJa.ry\tag sacua:ag¡ppa^rasqo (e66I) proJueH l¡ra,rag pue BrrreH-r^opreg uae¡pe) .pu"Bu-sez'ur flallsuatxa ueeg osle ser{ suollsaSSns lealar pue rr1"* or

^oq^B.ri,rr"r1¿eqr{^r. a¡ou¡ lue erar{r sI

'arer{t u,r\op ryeJnlg auos lnd plnor noÁ

'slxaluof, pue 's¡eo8 'sluedrclr¡ed ol eJJoJ arutsanbar3o Sulunt aurgSutuu aut¿ :g aSwg

Sutuwal a7un7ual puotag L9

68 Second language learning

extensive exposure to conversational interaction outside the classroom. The

question is no longer whether second language pragmatics should be taughtbut rather how it can be integrated into classroom instruction.

Phonologyfu noted earlier, grammar has been the focus for second language teachers

and researchers for a long time. Vocabulary and pragmatics have also received

more attention in recent years. However, we know less about pronunciationand how it is learned and taught. Pronunciation was a central component inlanguage teaching when the audiolingual approach was dominant. Several

techniques for teaching pronunciation were developed at that time, and

most of them focused on the pronunciation of segmentals, getting learners

to perceive and to produce distinctions between single sounds in minimalpair drills (for example, 'ship' and 'sheep').

tVhen the audiolingual approach was replaced by other ways of teach-

ing, attention to pronunciation was minimized if not totally discarded.

Furthermore, evidence for the critical period hypothesis, suggesting thatnativeJike pronunciation was an unrealistic goal for older second language

learners (see Chapter 3), led to the argument that instructional time wouldbe better spent on teaching something that learners could learn more success-

fully. \X/hen communicative language teaching (CLT) was first introduced inthe late I970s,little attention was given to the teaching of pronunciation.If it was taught, the emphasis was on suPrasegmentals (rhythm, stress, and

intonation)-aspects of pronunciation that were considered more likely toaffect communication (Celce-Murcia, Brinton, and Goodwin 1996).

Although research on the teaching and learning of pronunciation is not as

extensive as that in other language domains, there is theoretical and empirical

work to help us understand the processes involved in phonological develop-

ment in a second language and the factors that contribute to it. For example,

contrastive analysis helps to explain some aspects offirst language influence on

second language learners' pronunciation. \le can all think of examples fromour own experiences or those of our students. Japanese and Korean learners

of English often have problems hearing and produci ng I and r because these

sounds are not distinct in their language. Spanish speakers will often say'Ie-speak e-Spanish because Spanish words do not have consonant clusters

beginning with s at the beginning of a word. French speakers may place stress

orthe last syllable of a word because French usually stresses the last syllable.

Few languages have the th sounds that are frequent in English, and learn-

ers may substitute similar sounds from their first language (for example, ror d, s or z). Sometimes, however, learners overcomPensate for sounds that

they know are difficult. Thus, learners may pronounce a th (as in 'thin' or'this') where a t or a/sound belongs (saying 'thin when they mean 'tirt' for

'(LOOZ tltl¿) a8rn8ue¡ Puoras eql uI sluef,f,e ¡a8uo¡ls ezreg feuraSenSur¡ tsrg rraqrJo asn ¡alee¡3 a>ltru ol enunuof, or{^\ stlnpe r€r{r pa Jasgoueeq oslt ser{ 1I 'uonercunuo¡d pa,r.ordrul or p"el uer aSen8uel puoJes aqlol a¡nsodxa 3o sporred ra8uol reqr parrodar eler{ (1OOZ) a3a1g sauref pue'lq¡ceyq ue1 'a>1sr¿ uetsJoql 'uonerf,unuord or srorngrJluoc Flruengur sE

pegnuapl ueeg a^eq a8enSue¡ rsJg eqr Jo asn 3o aar8ap aqr pue a8en8ue¡ra8rer aqt o1 e¡nsodxa 3o edlr pu" tunorue arl] sE r{rns sJorce3 Jar{}O 'alortu¿t¡odu¡r ue sfe¡d a8enSue¡ tsr5 s.raureel aql ler{t Jeelr osle rl pu" ruqrfgrpue sseJlsJo seJnleal eruosJo uorlrslnbre agr ul lrrre¡lurs.roJ eJuapl^e sr eJer{l

'ssoleqleuoN 'uorrrsmbre ¡er€olouogd aSen8ue¡ puoces ur spunos lenpl^lpul;o sacuanbas ¡eruarudo¡a ap aqr tuaurnfop ol qf,JEOSeJ aptrl ueag sBr{ eJe[L

'uonerf,unuo;d a>¡T-a,rneu elpq or pa8pnl ararrr (asarueuterA ,aldurexa

-roj) qrrnq ruory ruetsrp arour era \ sa8enSur¡ tsrg asoqa sraleads er{r JoauoN 'stuof,f,e elrl-JlnBu a Er{ or paSpnl arezrL (ueu;ag.ro qsl¡8uE ,alduexa

-ro3) qclnq or perrlar flaso¡c se^\ ler{t a8en8uel e alods oq.&\ sreurcel esoqll¡uo 'se¡drues qraads agr a8pnl ol pa>lse eJa,/y\ qlrngJo sraleads e ntu ueqA\'spuno.r81ceq a8en8ue¡ rsr5Jo Áar¡e,r epra E ruog arum oq,&\ pur pooqrpperrarp ur r{f,rne paureal pBq or{.&\ sra>leads ruangord IUBH uro.r3 sa¡drues

qcaads patf,allof, (666D suae8uog oaql 'sruelsls a8en8uel rar{lo s¿ ila \ sE

uolterf,unuord sragr arurtsrp a8enSuel 'r{f,tnq Jo u¿uJaD 3o raleads rsaop ueql qslSug Sulurea¡ ur a8ua¡egr ¡alea;8 E sarBJ esaurr{C Jo .ra>¡eads e

'a¡drurxa.rog zvronl lpear¡e lar¡r sa8en8ue¡ aqt tuo{ rua.ragrp f¡¡epuetsqns sr

a8en8ue¡ reqrSl a8en8ur¡ u8laroS ro puof,es relnrnred e ur lcuang;o 1a,ra1 q8qB r{f,Bal ot ra8uo¡ sJaurcel se>lel tr ter{t uone Jesqo aqr ruorj l¡rred saurol srsa

-qrodlq aqr Surrroddns ef,urpr^a aq1 lrlncglp rarrar8 ot peel uec a8en8ue¡

ra8rer agr pue a8en8url a nru s,JauJeel eqr uee,/'lleg eluaJeglp ralrar8 e teqlpazrsagrodfg sl rr 'l;e¡ngeoo^ pue ¡eruu¡e¡8 or pre8a.r qlr^\ uaas e^"q a^\ sV

',al¡us, pue ,uoods, se qf,ns spro,r,rjo SuruulSaq agr lE lalv\ol¿ uasur ¡rts tq8lrusJauJ¿el arues Jsaql 'uortcnpord u./v\o Jrar{t ur 'Je^arvioH 'rus pua ds se qrnssJatsnlr Ienru qlr^\ spro r,opnesd (uorrerrlp ruor3) arrrrvr f¡pnsn p¡nor feqrreqt puno; aqs '(sprol'r qsuedg .a\eu, sp algerdacreun aq plno^\ spJo,¡( qloqriSnoqr uala 'üEgz, a>lll asoqt parralar pue ,snds, eTI spro,&opnasd pardaore.bq1 'a41 punos or pasoddns are spro^r qsr8ug regr'r SulzruSorar re poo8atrnb a¡a¡tr sra>¡eads qsrurd5 aql '<spJo,/v\ rlsr¡8uE.&\au, elqrssod a¡a¡tl spJo./ú

petua ur uplJer Jer{leq.&fes or per¡ leqr '1ser ouo uI 'pro.&\ EJo Suruur8aqJr{l rE sJetsnll tueuosuor qsr¡8uE Jo uouf,npo.rd pue suolldac¡ad ,sraleadsqsruedg aro¡dxa ot qser Jo sarras e padolar'ap (SOOO Sraquat¡y

"{r"E 'xa¡druoc sr spunosJo uorrnpord pue uolrdarrad uaarvrrag drqsuorre¡ar ag¡

'punos qt aytacnpotdpue afltou or lrrlrqe (sJauJ¿el ul ssa¡8o¡d luese¡der ftu slrp 'spunos p ro /Jo uonerf,unuo¡d tca¡¡o¡ JarlJ"a acrlda; laql31 'saruagdrou ¡eclrrruurer8 ro3,&{.¿s e^&r lBr{t sJoJJe uonez¡¡erauaS;arto aqr ot JEIIruls aJE sJoJJe qcng '(aldruexa

Sutuwal a8anSuq puotag 69

70 Second language learning

Learners' ethnic affiliation and their sense ofidentiryare also related to howthey

produce the sounds and rhythms of a second language. Elizabeth Gatbonton,

iravel T¡ofimovich, and Michael Magid (2005) found a complex relationship

between feelings of ethnic affiliation and second language learners' acquisi-

tion of pronuniiation. Among other things, they found that learners who had

achieved a high degree ofaccuracy in pronouncing the second language were

sometimes p.rc.i réd at being less loyal to their ethnic group than those whose

second la.tguage speech retained a strong'foreign acce-nt'. Such perceptions

can affect l"."t.t.ttt desire to achieve high levels of proficiency in the second

language, especially in contexts where there are conficts between groups or

whéte po*.t relationships imply a threat to one group's identity'

Pavel Thofimovich (2005) has looked at learning pronunciation from a

somewhat unusual persPecdve. His research raises questions about howwell

learners perceive the spécific sounds of the new language while their focus is

or -.".ti.tg. Second language learners of Spanish were asked to listen to a list

of familiarlSpanish *orár. For the purpose of comparison, they also heard

a list of worás in English, their native language. One group of participants

were told to 'just lisien to the words; the second group were asked to PaIatrenrion to hol" good the recording qualirywas; the third group were asked

ro fate the'pleasaitness' of the things the words referred to. Then they heard

anorher list, which included both the original words and some new words'

and they were asked to repeat each word as they heard it. Thofimovich then

.o-p"r.d how quickiy."ih l."rrr.. started to pronounce the words they had

"lr.áy heard and rhe new words. The difference in the time it took them

,o ,."., to 'old' and 'new' words is a measure of how easily words could be

retrieved from memory.

As expected, the particiPants were always faster at retrieving the old words

in their native language, and two groups of learners also showed this pattern

for their second lág""g.. But thé third group, who had been told to focus

on the 'pleasantnest; of1h. meanings, did not retrieYe the old words faster'

tofimovich suggesrs that when learners focus primarily on meaning, they

may not be ablJá ako pay atrenrion to the sounds that make up the words.

In bh"pter 6, we will review other research showing that learners sometimes

fail to notice certain language forms-grammatical morphemes, vocabulary

words, synractic parr.rrri, piagmatic features-when their focus is on under-

standing meaning.

Few studies have investigated the effectiveness of pronunciation- instruction,

but the results of receniresearch suggest that it can make a difference, par-

ticularly if the instruction focuses on suPrasegmental rather than segmental

aspects of pronunciarion (Hahn 2004).Tracey Derwing an{.her colleagues

liOOl)."rri.d out a series of studies to determine how intelligible learners

were judged to be. They found that learners who were given pronunciation

l.rroá, eáphasizing rtrés, and rhlthm were judged to be easier to understand

'e)uerJ En8url E sE r{srlSug

Jo sra>lBeds roqro qrv\r Suncr¡alur roJ sluapnrs 8ur*da.rd jo acuer.rodrui agisezruSora¡ tegt le,l e ur uouer3unuoJd Surq:ear ro3 acuepm8 sepl,rord (g ¡ g¿)ra{pl¡ ulqo¿ 'Suqeadsjo &.u,Iaqr a8ueq: ol aJB sraurea¡3r parrnbar sr uorl-E Iloru puE 'afueuedxa 'a¡nsodxe 'uorlf,nJlsul Jo uorrBurqruof, E rEqr pu¿q8noua lou sr uonJnJrsur uorltrfunuo.rd pazrlenlxaruooep reqr reayr lpearpsr tI 'uonueltE eJotu 8ururc8 sr uonErfunuord Sulrprer o1 palEler qrJrcsau

'GOOZ oJunry pue Surr'r.raq) a8rnSuel puorrs aqrJosJasn s3 sa,l.rralgo pue s¡eo8 Jrarp ol lue alaJJr sp srql ,r\ar^ sJeuJEa¡ a3en3ue1

Puof,as Jer{ro 'suosEal puolssaSo.rd pue puosrad JoJ luaf,f,e .elll-e^llEu, sJotue elrrulxo¡dde or pate,r.lroru aq leur'e8en8ue¡ raSrer aqr3o srcadsB Jeqto uraoueuro3;ad pue a8pay'roul Jo la^al q8¡i ¿ pe^err{f,e a^Er{ or{¡a asogr l1.rr1-nrlu¿d 'sJeuJ?al a8en8uel puof,es aruos 'snql 'uon?ururrJfslp JoJ srsEg ar{rsE pasn sl pue dlqsragueu dnorSSo Ja>lJEtu E sE sa^Jes IIls luaf,JE .suonBnlrs

atuos uI 'uorlErf,unuord ,sraleads aSenSue¡ puof,es or f¡artrreSau puodsar sre-uetsrl etuos ter{l lre3 ar.{r aSuerlc tou seop aJuepr^a qf,JEJSeJ .llareunrro3u¡

lfirtgrsuaqa¡duooro lrrtlqrSqerur pef,npal ur llnsal l¡;essarau lou saop tuaJf,E u8laroS Buo.use3o aruasard eqt rer{r s.,vroqs (t tOZ) 8uv'r-laq ,bxtaput orunt { lerrn¡zrq lqqJJBasaJ Sa ar'roH 'palBIaJ aJE aeJql aqt reqr rrroqs 8uúrs are ualeads trq.rnrpuersJepun or ll¡qe IEnrrE rrJqt pur 'lrllrqrsuaqarduocSo suondacrad rragl'luaol¿ u8rarojjo suonder¡ad ,sra>pads e^nru gsrlSuE uea \teq sdrqsuorre¡a.r

Jo sarPnts 'pJ€^ro} e^rJrs pFoqs sJouJEal lEr{r pJ¿puEls aql sr uonBrsunu-ord a1r1-a,rneu ueql Jarper lrr¡rqr8r¡arur rar{raq \ sl uoltsanb perpler V

'a8en8uel tsJg E sE qsrÉug3o uer{l C-IEJo sraleads aroru JEJ ^\ou

eJ?

erarp 'paapul '(CTg) atua{ un&uu e se gsÉuE 3o eloJ aqt sserls oq.&\ srelor{rslueru eqr Suorur are (11g¿) raJoqlplas Eregr'g pu' (E002) sur¡uaf ra¡uuafpue reues auef'p1ro.rl eql punore atua{an8uq E sE pesn eq ol eruor a Er{ ler{lqsrÉugjosanaue.l.raqtofuetuospeJeeJaqt,,sra>¡eadse ntu,uerp¿ue3,r{snug'uerleJtsnv 'uecuaury lq gspuE jo suorlerJunuord tuaragrp fueu eJerlt aJE

l¡uo ro¡ 'anJl ruo5 JEJ sr sqt pue 'qst8ug 3o lralrert llerror a¡8uls e sruearerp rpqr srsaSSns tr r¿qr sl uonsanb aqt qtv'r rua¡qo;d snor^go aug ,:aleadse lleu, B e>lll punos ol sr uonrsrnbce a8rn8u¿l pumas Jo po8 aqr Jer{rer{^ Jouonsanb eqr o] perEIaJ sr uon¿rfunuo.rd ul sanssr lersJaloJtuof, er{l Jo auo

'sesself, uorlerf,unuord ul splueuSase¡dns uo slseqdua tuaJJnf, aqr uoddnsesaqt aIII s8urpulg 'sJaqlo or graads rrer{lJo ór¡rqr8r¡arur ar{tJo uondac¡ad(sJeuatsrl esBeJf,ur ol ruaas tou pp srqt ,spunos asoqtJo asn Jreqt ur atEJnlfeeJour aJe \ spunos lenprlrpur uo uonf,nJtsur ue¡r8 aJa,{\ or{,la sJeuJeel eqlqSnoql ue^E 'spunos Fnpr^rpur uo pasnro3 suossal pe ref,er or{^\ sreureel ueqr

Sututaal a3an3ua1 puotag TL

72 Second language learning

Sampling learners' languageOne of the challenges of studying learners' language is the difficulty of col-lecting samples of their speech or writing that are large enough to ensurethat analyses and their findings are based on more than just a few learners orfrom just a few examples from a larger number of learners. Researchers oftenfind it difficult ro recruit learners, to obtain their consent to participate in a

study, and to persuade them to remain available over rhe time periods thatare necessary to show development. It can also be challenging to schedulesessions for recording speech or collecting writing samples, and to transcribeor digitize the speech samples for analysis.

Computer-based tools are making it possible for researchers to ask andanswer new questions and to revisit some of the tentative answers to ques-tions that have been around for a long time. For example, corpus linguisticshas provided us with large collections of naturally occurring data that canbe used to discover information about the frequency of different languagefeatures (words, phrases, grammatical patterns) in a variety of language con-texts and registers. Some of these corpora contain language samples that havebeen collected from newspapers and conversations, whereas others are morespecific to particular cypes oflanguage. In addition, there are learner corporaand pedagogic corpora. More and more researchers are making their learnerlanguage data available to others so that each corpus oflearner language datacan be used for a number of different studies. Some of these corpora are avail-able in CD or DVD format or online (Tarone and Swierzbin, 2009). Thelinks between corpus research and second language teaching are also becom-ing increasingly apparent (Bennet, 2010; Sinclair, 2004). For example, if a

corpus of classroom language reveals that certain features occur frequentlyin classroom input, teachers might decide to focus on features that occur less

frequently. Similarly if corpus research reveals that specific grammatical fea-tures are rarely used by native speakers in conversational interaction, teachers(and textbooks) may devote less time to the oral practice of these features.

SummaryThe language that second language learners produce and understand changesas they have more exposure to the language and as they use it in a greatervariety of situations. Describing those changes has been the focus of thischapter. \7e have seen that there are strong patterns ofsimilarity across learn-ers ofdifferent ages, learning in different contexts, and starting from differentfirst language backgrounds. The focus of this chapter has been mainly onthese similarities. In Chapter 3, we will turn our attention to some of theways in which learners differ from each other and how those individual dif-ferences affect how quickly and how well they succeed in second languageacquisition.

'a8pa¡mou1 f.re¡ngeco,r Surssesse pue Sulqcearur pe^lo ur asoqr pur Sulurea¡ lre¡nqeco,r jo sa8ua¡¡erp eqr qloq puprs-Jepun ol qsr.^\ orf'r stuapnls atrnperS-tsod pue sraqceel JoJ txel elgrsseffepuB lelluessa u¿ sureuJeJ lr 'auo srql ef,urs pagsrlqnd uaag a^Br{ Suru;ra1pue Surqcear lre¡ngeco^ uo $looq lueru qSnoqr¡y .a8rn8ue¡ u8raroSJo puofas e ur tuarudole^ap ,ftr1ngeco,r Sunsal pue Sulgceal JoJ suon-eorldrul Jrar{r pue ,iroaqr pue r{JJBesJJ sJelof >looq elrsuaqardruoo srql

'ssar¿ flrs;e,uun e8plrqure3 :a8pr-rque3'a&rn&ua7 uqiouv ux ,hapqatol&utu"raa7.I00Z A

.S .I (uolrrN

'le^JI arenpe¡8-rsod aqr te r{f,Jeesa¡ uonrsrnb¡r aSen8ue¡ puofesuo 8uq-reqrue aJe oq./!\ stuepnts ot lsaJelur pnads Jo aq ilv\\ looq eql'pasn ag uEf, slool ralndulof, .&oq uo .&\olreg Iaeqrry{ lq rardrqr B sE IIe./dse 'srsl¡eue pJnllnforf,os pue ,slsl¡eue lcuanba.r3 ,srsl¡eue ;oua Surpn¡cur'r¡ceordde f,nllEUB .rrlnclrred e ol pato ap sr 'tatdeqr rll€E .ErEp Sulslpuepue Sui.raqre8 ro3 sanbrugf,at pue spoqtatu3o a8ue¡ e Sulsn gc;easal per{srl-qnd jo./r\arleJ e rsuatxe uE sE sa Jes osp rI .a8en8ue¡ raureal Sune8rlsa,rulor sagceo;dde tueJaglp ol srepear sarnporlur aSan&uaT uutaaT SutsQruy

'ssar¿ Álsra,r¡un pro1xo:pro3xo z&an&uaT uutaaT &uts,(luuv.g¡¡Z.uazprplrpg .D pue .U .sllg

Sulpear requry roJ suorrsat8n5

¿saJnlea, a8en8ue¡ lueJeJIp eseql jo eruet.rodureql rlaueJ uorlf,nJlsur pue uorl)pJatut LuooJsseltr Jo, satltJot.rd ¡u¡qr

nol o6 ¿ s¡rler.u3e.ld ¿l3o¡ouoq¿ ¿l.re ¡ nqero¡ ¿ sauaqdrou lef, rt€ui uer g¿Japro pJoM ¿ruooJss€ll eLll aprstno l¡e,rrrra¡¡a a3en8ue¡ asn ot ltr¡¡qeJraql lle#€ or l¡a¡r¡ tsoLu aJE a8en8ue¡;alur rsJeuJeal ¡o sl:adse req¡¡ €

¿lool lnlesn eeq Plno^ ,lset 3n^ , aqr Iu!ql nol o6 ¿llnlultp aq plno^ )utqr nol op sauoq)!q¡¿Jo, slxatuof, eleeJf ol lsee l¡e,r,r1e¡a; eq plno A sauaqdrour auos

¡u¡qr nol oC ¿ I 'Z a;n8r¡ ur polsll sauaqd.rou aql ¡o qlee ro, stxaruof,l.rore8r¡qo al€eJf, ol sJauJeal Surpea¡ ul a^rl)e#a Norrl aq plno/v\ )sel

Surtr.r¡,r -ro 3ur¿eeds ¡o put) reqM¿sar.uaqdrou ¡er¡reruue.rS¡o uollslnb¡eaqr¡o lpnS e lo¡ a3en8uel JeuJEel¡o sa¡dr.ues trallol nol p¡norr,r

^ oH Z

¿arrnbre ol uoql Jo, NapJ€Ll tuoas seJnt€e, reqM¿spJo^ ¡erred5¿JepJo pJo^ tr sl'lsJu allou ol u¡ees s.¡auJEel teq/v\ lnoqe )urr{},uorleSau

qsr¡3u3 Jo, peqtJlsep ueeq spq leql aruanbas ¡eluaudo¡a^ep eql le 3ur¡oo1

¿qsr¡8u3 ur se)uelues arrte3eu ¡o suaned Jo selnJ ¡eleua3 aqt eJE req¡¡ |

€,1Eurutaal aSunBuE yuotag

uoll)olror ro, suollseno

/4 Second language learning

Tarone, E. and B. Swierzbin. 2009. ExphringLearner Language' Oxford:

Oxford University Press.

The authors collected speech andwriting samples from a group of English

language learners from different L1 backgrounds ParticiPatingin the same

t"rkr. Thit created a data base showing how each learner tried to achieve

the same communication goals. The texr is supplemented by a DVD ofthelearners engaged in the oral tasks. Exercises focus on different.ap_proaches

to understanáing th. learners' emerging language systems, including error

analysis, developmental sequences, learners' response to feedback, and

communication strategies. Many of the ideas that are introduced in this

chapter of How Langiaga Are Learned are illustrated in the examples oflearners'language that are presented in this book.

sasuodsar oq] daa)'aBEn?ue¡ u8re.ro¡ Jo puo)es e Bururea¡ ¡o se:uauadxalnoqe sJeqtleu l¡ltue¡ lo.sen8ea¡¡otr.spuat4 leJelas

^ atlJalut,a.lleuuollsanb

eqt ¡o sardor leuoDrppe Surs¡ rau"ree¡ eSenSue¡ e se a¡uar.¡adxa u¡,ro .¡noluo pegal or | '€ elqel ut aJteuuotlsanb eqr asn laldeqr stql peeJ nol e.ro¡ag

a)uelJodxe tu¡u;eel otentupl uo lfeBau ,t.rt^trrv

'seurof,lno 8ulu.rea1 pue sarusJaJrp IEnpr^rpur uea.^Atag sdrqsuorrelar ar¡rpuBtsJepun ol tqSnos e^Er{ tErlt sarpnls eqtJo etuos./\ .ar^eJ IIr^, a,^a :ardeg:srr{l uJ ¿a8e rrarp Jo 'uorls noru Jrar{l 'saril1rge lenrsallaru cglrads pue¡aaua8 Jrerp 'senrlBuosrad,srauleel lnogE uorlEurJoJur aAEr{ oAUl ronrrrn'br"a8en8uel puoJesJo sserJns aqt ur safueragrp rclpard e1,r u¿f r.trr*, r¿r{^\ or

;u13aq Sulurea¡ qllq¡a re a8e agr pue 'uolre,rrlotu 'acuaSrllarur aJE Buru;ea¡

a8en8uel ul ssef,rns rcrpe.rd ol pa erlaq ueUo srnsrJarr'rerlr .reqro ,órpuoi-.lad Sulo8rno ue ol uorrrppe uI .sraureal

Injssef,rns tsoru eql aq IIr^{ sllHsa8en8uel aslrre¡d ol sanrunlJoddo laas pue a8en8uel puomt rqi .r¡ uonrq-Iqur lnoqrr./v\ lf,?Jelur oq/!\ sluspnrs pelJe oJlxa rerp pefur^uof, eJ? sJer{f,Ea]lueu 'aldruexa Joc 'u1'rourl a^Er{ e.tr a¡doedjo rer{r Jo arual¡adxa u^ro Jno uopaseq eq feu sJalleq qcng '3ulurea1 a8rn8ue¡ ur arnllEJ ro ssef,f,ns rrpard uerJeureal eql ur luerar{ur are ltr{t saf,uareJlp lenpt,l'rpur t¿ql e€rleq sn3o lueyr¡

'a8en8ue¡ puores e Suru;ea¡ ur paaf,rns or Ál¡qerreql o1 Psrelal ar¿ sFnpl^lpur Jo s3nsrJalfBrer{f ar{l

^\or{ Surpuersrapun ur

lsaJelur uEéA"rl sJsr{f,JEesal puB sJolE3npe qlog 'Ápeata sarJ¿^ ssaf,fns esorl^/v\

'sraurea¡ a8en8uel puof,es 3o aruarradxe Jno r{rr.r\ slseJruof srqr .Jruu JaAoa8en8ue¡ arp esn ol sJnrunlroddo arenbape a^eq laqr reqr papr,r.ord ,pooq

^pllyrl¡rea ur ueql or (pau8rs -ro) ualods ere ler{t sa8en8ue¡ -ro a8en8ur¡ agt

8ul¡lnboe ur InJssef,f,ns sle.la,¡e lsorup aJe uaJplrr{J ,1 .rerdeq3 ur ,l\¿s er\ sV

/ú.eIAaJd

DNINUVfl-IE)VNDNVf CNOf,iIS NI

Sfl f, NiIUfl { T I CI fVN CI IAI CINI

76 Indiuidual dffirences in second language learning

to the quest¡onnaire and refer to them as you read this chapter aboutindividual differences in second language learning.

la What language do you speak best? Do you speak more than onelanguage equally well?

lb When did you begin to learn this language (these languages)?

2 Which second or foreign language(s) have you learned with themosf successl

3 Which second or foreign language(s) have you learned with theleost success?

4 For the languages you mentioned in response to questions 2 and 3,answer the following questions in the appropriate columns:

Languages learnedsuccessfully

Languages notlearned successfully

How old were you whenyou first tried to learnthe language?

Did you have a choiceabout learning thislanguage or were yourequired to learn it?

Do you currently speakthis language regularly?

Do you regularlyread this languagefor information orenjoyment?

How much of yourlearning experiencewith this language wasin a foreign language

classroom?

lf you no longer use thislanguage on a daily basis,

can you estimate howmany years you sPentlearning or using it?

Estimate how manyhours of classroominstruction you had forthis language.

a8en8ue¡ eqr uo sarocs g8¡q J^Eq osp III^\ arreuuo¡rsanb uone^rrour eqt uosa.rors q3¡q qtr^\ sreur€al reqr $ l f1a1r¡

^\or{ Jo uontf,lpur u€ sr uon¿lar-JoJ eql 'uopelaJJoJ E pellel arnpaco;d Ief,nsnets E sasn Jar{JJEasJJ JrF pue'pelo)s qtoq are err¿uuonsenb aqr pue tser aql 'fruarcgord a8rn8ue¡ puoresJraql ssJSsE or pasn sr tsetJo pur¡ eruos uaql 'uone^noru Jrer{l3o ea.r8ap puradlr aqr aJnseeru ot aJreuuonsanb e ruaqr arrr8 pu¿ slauJeal jo dnor8 E lfelasl¡ensn daqt 'saruortno Suru¡¿a1 a8en8ue¡ puofas ot parEIeJ sr uonplnourse qf,ns elq¿rJt^ E

^roq rno Sulpug ur palsaJelur eJE sJer{JJEeseJ uar{Ar 'auop

l¡rnsn sr Suru;ea1 a8en8uel puof,es uo saf,uaraJlp Ienpr^rpulJo aruengur aqruo qf,Jeasal ¡aoq aquf,sep or sr uorssnf,srp rno ur8ag ot le¡'r tsag eql sdegra¿

sJnsrJelJBJsrlJ Jaurcel uo rlJJsaseu

exa¡taQxa Swutoa¡ eF,on8luo¡ u¡ satuataltp pnpt^,pq tT eMDl

ssar¿ Arsra,uu¡ pJorxo O a¡qerdororoq¿

¿l¡rsea a8enSue¡ /v\au E suJ€a¡ oq*r uosrad e se ¡¡asrnol jo )u!ql nol oq

¿ezrl€Dos ol sa)!l oqr"r uosred e se ¡¡asrnol ,o ¿urq] nor( oq

¿snefqns loot1ls Jaqlo ul luapnls lnlsse))ns e nol erar*¡ery

¿e8en8ue¡ srqtur fte¡nqeror Surlpnrs

lofua nol plp/o6

¿e8en8ue¡ s¡qr

¡o rer,uuer8 eqr Surlpnrslofua no,( plp/o6

¿a8en8ue¡ s!qr )Peds oq^sJaquau l¡rr.ue¡ .ro s.raed

a,req nol op'a¡dr.uexaro1 ¿a8en8uel srql ol

slueuqf,ell€ leuorlou¡ero ¡euoslad arreq no,( oq

¿ (lr¡s.ra,r¡un'fu epuorasf.reruauala) le^al leq/v\

rV ¿loorlls le slralqnsJeqlo uJeal ol a8en8ue¡

aql pasn nol ane¡1

¿ue>¡odssr a8enBue¡ eql eJeq^

ere¡d e ur Surnr¡ tuads nole^€q au¡p qf,ntu /v\oH

LLSututaal a8an&uq yuotas ut sacuata[ty pnrunryuJ

78 Indiuidual dffirences in second language learning

test. If the two variables (motivation and language proficien?) are found tobe correlated, the researcher will try to discover just what the relationshipbetween them is. Note that correlations may be positive or negative. That is,one may find a pattern suggesting that learners with higher motivarion scoreshave higher language proficiency s cores (a positiue correlation) , or one might,in some circumstances, find that learners with lower motivation scores dobetter on proficiency measures (a negatiue correlation).

Although the correlation procedure seems straightforward, it requires carefulinterpretation. One problem is that, unlike variables such as height or age,

it is not possible to directly observe and measure motiyation, extroversion,or even intelligence. These are just labels for an enrire range of behavioursand characteristics. Furthermore, characteristics such as these are not inde-pendent of each other, and researchers have sometimes used the same labelto describe different sets of behavioural traits. For example, in motivationquesdonnaires, learners may be asked how often they use their second lan-guage outside a classroom context. The assumption behind the question is

that those who report that they frequently do so are highly motivared tolearn. This seems reasonable, but it is not so simple. If a learner responds thathe or she frequently interacts with speakers of the second language, it maynot be because he or she is more motivated to learn than one who reports less

interaction. Rather, it might be that this individual lives where rhere are moreopportuniti a greater necessiry-for language practice than those whoreport a low frequency of interaction. Because it is usually impossible toseparate these two variables (i.e. motivation or desire to interact and oppor-tunities or the needto interact), we cannot conclude whether it is motivation,necessiry or opportuniry that is being measured by this question.

Perhaps the most serious error in interpreting correlations is the conclusionthat one of the variables causes the other. The fact that two things tend tooccur together or increase and decrease in a similar pattern does not neces-

sarily mean that one causes the other. \X/hile it may be that one variableinfluences the other, it may also be that both are influenced by something else

entirely. Research on motivation is perhaps the best context in which to illus-üate this. Learners who are successful may indeed be highly motivated. Butcan we conclude that they became successful because of their motivation? Itis also plausible that early success heightened their motivation, or that bothsuccess and motivation are due to their special aptitude for language learningor the favourable context in which they were learning.

Another difficulry in assessing the relationship between individual learnercharacteristics and second language learning is how language proficiency is

defined and measured. In the L2 learning literature, some studies report thatlearners with a higher intelligence quotient (IQ) are more successful languagelearners than those with a lower IQ, while other studies report no such cor-relation. One explanation for these conflicting findings is that the language

leql Sururcel ol sauof, lr ueq{\ rotf,rpeJd Suo.lls r aq leu srsar }1 puon-rperr lq parnseau &l¡qe Jo puq er{r rer{t slsaSSns srql 'sllDls uonrnpord

IEJO ol PerEIaJun sez'r u 'lre¡nqEf,o PuE teruue¡8 'Sulpear a8en8uel PuoJasrlf,uar{ 3o ruaurdola^ap aqt or pareler ser* aruaSq¡erur elq r 'rerp puno3

9L6D eesauaD paJ{ 'EpEuEJ ur seuure¡8o¡d uors¡auul qluar¿ ur stuap-nrs qrv'r fpnls E ur 'alduexa .rog 'rbr¡rqe s^nefrunururor ol upr{l a8pa¡l|ou1rnsrn8ur¡eraru ol pat¿lar l¡Suorrs aJoru rg feur srsar |1 'aloqe parsaS8ns se

ta aA\oH 'Sulurea¡ a8en8ue¡ puof,as ur ssa)f,ns SulrcrpardSo sueaur pooS e

a;ar"r saroos |I rEql u.^aor{s sEr{ r{fJeaseJ auros 's.real aql Je^O 'Peuodar uaaq

seurrtaruos seg Sururta¡ a8en8uel puof,as pue arua8l¡elul uoa,ütag >lurT E put'loor{fs ur ssa3rns r{tr,t\ palErf,os$ uauo aJE slsal eseql 'slsatJo spur¡ ul?lJafuo afuerrJJoJrad ot ra3ar ol pesn uaaq flpuorrrpeJl ser{ ,acuaSl¡¡atul, ruJat eql

aruaSqlaruI

'saurof,lno Sururra¡ ur sefueJaglp.roJ suon¿ueldxa ra,rooslp or uoga aql uIpateSltsa,rul uaeq aleq reql sf,rlslJero¿Jtql pnpl^lpul el{rJo auos lE >lool s,ra-I

'srgeueg lelal:os Jar{ro pur 'lulrqou 'ruaufoldura 'uotle:npaJoJ sanrunuoddo Surdeqs uo seq Sulu*a¡ aSen8uel puooes loedrur snourrouear{r Jo asneJag pauJef,uol oslr sI Álunruuor re8rrl ag1 '8ulu;ea¡ aSen8ut¡

puof,es ur sserf,ns a^erqf,E ol sf,rlslJarf,eJ€qf, luaJe¡Ip I{tylr sJJuJeel Surd¡ar¡3o

sfellpug or edoq sJolernpg '8ururea1 uerunl{Jo Sulpuers:apun rauaq e urc3

uec laqr tBqt os 'salual¡edxa (sJeuJeel qtl^\ tleJarur laqr rtog PuE ParEIaJ aJe

selqerJe^ lrr¡euosr:d pue a,ttttuSof, ruaJaglp ,/v\ol{ ,&\orDl ol 1aes sJal{rJease¡'sJolef,npe pu" sJer{fJtaseJ qroq ol acuel¡odrur rearS3o sI eaJe slql uI I{f,JEesaJ

'ssalar{ue^eN'a8ua¡¡zqr e st Suturea¡ e8enSur¡ Puo3es uI ssaf,f,ns PuE'suollen-lrs lerfos

(sfnsrJerfeJtql Fnpr^Ipul uaa,&uag dtgsuorre¡ar aqr SulpuersJePun

'rrrpa-rd ppo,/'r s3nsrJarlt

-JEr{J eseqt rer¡r fcualcgord aqr a^aII{JE lou r(eru sJauJeel a8rn8url lryssaf,f,ns

3o ¡rrldfi sJrlsrJarf,eJer{J IEuoI}E^Ilotu pue a,rntuSo¡ JI{t qtl.^a a8en8uel r'lau

e greorddr or{^\ spnpr^lpul 'suotrlpuof, Ielf,os esoqr uI 'sJeI{JEel uela Pue'sen8ea¡¡oc 'sraad qtrrn uorlefrunruuJo¡ ul a8e8ua ol sallluntJoddo rlaqr rlrurltEr{t salnf,Erd ¡euotrecnpe pue l"rros lq pazr¡euÉrcru uauo ool are sdno¡8

lr¡rounu pur tuer8ruuJl aruos Jo sJegruery 'uolt¿f,Iunrutuoo uI s¡aut¡ed

panF se pa,rracrad are lagr eJer{^/rl. suorlsnlrs ur sdrqsuonEleJ lBrf,os ol ssatr3B

urc8 ol alge rou a.re faqr 3l InJssaf,rns aq rou l¿ru uoltls¡nb¡e a8en8uel JIeL{l

'8ururca¡ a8en8ur¡ InJssef,f,ns qrl^\ porelf,osse ueeg e^EI{ rerlt scltslJalfeJeqf,

er{Uo etuos ssessod sFnpI^IpuI uaq.^aue^a'tegt an8rr (tOOZ) lagoo¡uaa¡1a;pu" uouoN luuog 'sa^loslueqt pug sraurml r{lf{¡ ur s8utuas Fuonef,nPaPUE Ierf,os eql lunof,f,E olur elBl osp lsnuJ seJusJaJIP I"nPIAIPUI uo qf,Jeasau

'a8pa¡rrroul cnsm8urptauJ eJnseeur IEI{I slset o} uerp buang leuollesJe uoJ

Jo sernwaur 01 patrlerro: l¡aso¡c ssel aq feul |1 'a¡drurxa .rog 'a8pe¡,lou>1

Jo puH arups er{t aJnsearu rou op salpnrs rueraglp uI pesn stsat fcualcgord

Sutuwal a7un&ual puotas ut satuata[tp pnruaryuJ 6L

B0 Indiuidual dffirences in second language learning

involves language analysis and rule learning but may play a less importantrole outside the classroom or in classrooms where the instruction focusesmore on communication and interaction. Indeed, many students whosegeneral academic performance is weak experience considerable success insecond language learning if they are given the right opportunities.

Many educators have been infuenced by Howard Gardner's (1993) pro-posal that individuals have 'multiple intelligences' and that traditional IQtests have assessed only a limited range of abilities. Among the 'multipleintelligences' Gardner includes abilities in the areas of music, interpersonalrelations, and athletics, as well as the verbal intelligence that is most oftenassociated with success in school.

Language learning aptitudeSpecific abilities thought to predict success in language learning have beenstudied under the title of language learning'aptitude'. One of the pioneersin this area, John Carroll (1991), has characterized aptitude in terms of theabiliry to learn quickly. Thus, we may hypothesize that a learner with highaptitude may learn with greater ease and speed but that other learners mayalso be successful ifthey persevere.

Over several decades, the most widely used aptitude measures have been theModern LanguageAptitudeTest (MtAf) (Carroll and Sapon 1959) and thePimsleur Language Aptitude Battery (PIAB) (Pimsleur 1966). All the tests

are based on the view that aptitude has several components, for example, theabiliry to identify and memorize new sounds, understand the function ofparticular words in sentences, figure out grammatical rules from language

samples, and remember newwords. V/hile early research revealed a substantialrelationship between performance on the MLAI or PLAB and performancein foreign language learning, these studies were conducted at a time when lan-guage teaching was based on grammar translation or audiolingual methods.

\üfith the adoption of a more communicative approach to teaching, manyteachers and researchers came to believe that the abilities targeted by these

tests were irrelevant to the process of language acquisition. However, otherssuggest that some of the abilities measured by aptitude tests are predictiveof success even in settings where the emphasis is on communicative interac-tion. For example, Leila Ranta (2002) found that children who were good atanalysing language (one component of aptitude that is targeted by the tests)

were the most successful learners in an English second language programmein which acdvities almost never involved direct attention to grammar.

Nick Ellis (2001) and others have hypothesized that working memory(\lM) capacity may be the most important variable in predicting success forlearners in many language learning situations. \Working memory, also called

teBJBt eqr efnpoJd tou prp tnq uonfnJtsur JEururErB paseq-epr rnr¡fupa^refeJ dno¡8 uonf,nJlsur tndur pa;ntcnJts eqt ur sJeuJEe'I 'ruaqr acnpordol ueq] pue sunouord rcalgo rcarrp lg pafa,,'uoo s8urueau rueJeJlp aqt rnoarn8g or uaqr pa8r.rnorue leqt senr^nJe ur paredrcrrred laql peelsur :uou-rnJlsur ¡erurue¡3 ou pe^rareJ dno¡8 a^nf,npur eqt ur sJeuJEaT 'pauJeel pcrtr

laqr sa¡n; aqr esrlrerd ol Árunl¡oddo aqt lq pa.uo¡1o3 uor]f,nrtsur ¡eu¡u¡el$peseg-elnJ urrldxa pa^raf,f,J dno¡8 uoulnJlsur a rrnpap aqr ur sJauJEJ-I

'r{f,uaJC ul sunouo¡d rcalgo loeJrp uo uorlJnJtsurJo sadlr rr¡a

-¡aJIP ua,u8 pue sdno¡8 aarr{l olur pepl^¡p ueqr ara,trlagl droruaru 8ur{¡o,qpue 'lrr¡rqr Surpoc oruauogd 'lrlllq" cnfpue a3en3ue1 :apnrrrde a8en8ue¡_¡o

saJnsearu aeJr{} uo pessas$ aJa \ sluepntg'ndut yatnprutlt pue'a(t4Jn?ut 'aau-rnpa? peller aqs qrlr{¡a 'uortrnrtsur 3o sadlr luera5lp eaJr{r Jo ssaua^nlajg;eqr pu¿ apnrrrde ure^\teg drgsuolte¡ar E se,vr ararp reqrer{^\ paroldxa (E002}tuEIrE lreruaso¡ 'puvlv¿2,/\laN ur a8enSue¡ u8la.ro3 e se qf,uerC Jo slurp-nts lrepuoras qlr^\ fpnrs e ruo5 seuJof lerrr aues aql ur sJauJeal IIe t5euaqtouuer uononJtsur jo edlr 'telnrrued E rer{r turelf, er{r JoJ r¡oddns JerlunJ

'salgord apnrlrde rua.ra¡

-JIp r{l¡,l\ sJauJeel atBporuruorfp ol parJe^ lpuarcgns aff sarlr^rtfe SulqcearJraqt reqr eJnsue ot elqe ag leru sJaqf,Eel 'stuapnls Jraqt ot saf,ror{f r{fns JeJo

Plnor slooq3s ^&\aJ allrila, 'Per{flErusru ara^\ oq,^a asoqr ueql luatue^eqrBJos1a,ra1 raqSrq lpuergluS¡s urelte ol elge ara./!\ sluapnts Per{rrEu reqr persl-lpul elueprle euros 'uotttpp€ uI 'slueruuornua Surgcear algnedruof, r{rt,lr

PeqlrEIU aJa,&\ sluePnls uaq,/v\ uoIlf,€JSIIES JaI{fEel Pu€ ruaPnls 3o 1a,La1 q8rqe parrodar aq3salN'sa¡go.ld epnrrrde rrerll ot puodsauoo lou plp t¿qt sasselr

ul paceld aJelr\ stuepnls 's8urdno¡3 elglredtuoour aql uI 'a8en8ut¡ puof,as alp

Jo asn puonrun3 er{} punore pazrueSro ssEIf, E ur pareld ere¡a sllDIS clrf¡tuea8e¡a¡'e tnq.{roruau poo8 gurvl sJeuJeel :seJnlfnJts pcneruue;8 uo pesn)o3

ter{l Sulr{Jeat ot pau8lsse a¡a¡'r f¡oruatu a8e¡a,re rnq lrl¡qe onl¡eue q8rq qrr,r,r

sluapnts 's8urdno¡3 alqp¿dtuor ar{} uI 'a¡go.rd apnrnde rraqt qtr^/r elqlred-uJof,ur ro alglreduol JJr{lra eJe,r\ terlt sau¡ue¡8o¡d leuortonJ}sur ur parelderea oq^\ sruepntsJo sse¡8o¡d eqr perpnrs (tge t) er{rsal¡ auofrel¡¡ 'r{ruerC

Jo sJauJrel tlnpe JoJ aruue¡8o¡d aSen8ue¡ uerpeue3 E uI 'sauue¡8o¡d

Ieuononrlsu¡ 3o sadlr luaraJtlp ur peerrns or lr1¡¡qe rreql roJ tunocce ferustuauodruoc apnrrrdr tuaJeJtlp asaqt ur sassJrDlee,&\ put sqr8uerls (sJeuJEa'I

'slsf¡eue e8enBue¡ ul sertrTrgE

e8e¡a¡e l¡uo rnq serJouJeu¡ 8uo¡ts a,req feu aruos 'aldruexe Jo{ 'apnrrrde

3o sluauodruof arpJo ¡e ur Suons eg tou peeu sJeuJEe¡ a8en8ue¡ InJSSafJnsreqr srsaSSns (686I) uer{a>ls rata¿ d;ouraru 8uq¡or'r ul ssaco¡d uer fagt uotr-eruJoJur Jo tunoule ar{r ur JeJIp slenpr^rpur pue 'erult ua,rr8 e te passacordaq uEf, uolttruJoJur Jo lunorue uretJof e l¡uo ter{} sueeru reql 'perrturl sr

'btxdec l¡oruaru Suqrornr'peepul a8re¡ l.ra,r s¡ lrloeder f¡otuaru urer-8uo¡q8noqrpuoneruJo;urJo Sulssaco¡d aArD¿ arlt ol sJaJeJ ,(¡oruau uJJet-lJoLIS,

8uru"taa1 aSan&ual puotas ur satuau{tp pnrun?puJ I8

82 Indiu idual diferences in se co nd. language learn i ng

forms. Instead they participated in activities that exposed them to spokenand written examples of direct object pronouns.

f I wo¡ulcr if Wu've ever (L A*t, ürtd,'üwt' thirlpeñrorrt'T!W'Yñ

q

a

Erlam found that all learners benefited from the deductive instructionregardless of differences in aptitude. This was interpreted as support for Peter

Skehan's (1989) hypothesis that more structured teaching may even out indi-vidual differences compared with less structured teaching. Erlam's findingsalso showed that learners with greater language analytic ability and memorycapacity were able to benefit more from the inductive and structured inputinstruction on written (but not oral) tests. This supports the hypothesis thatlearners with greater aptitude can figure out the rules of language based oninput, and that they are able to consolidate this knowledge without the need

to produce language-at least in terms of their written abiliry.

Before we leave the topic of language learning aptitude, it is perhaps appro-priate to look at two extremes of the aptitude continuum. Some peoplewhose academic performance is usuallyvery good find themselves frustratedin their attempts to learn a foreign language. Lenore Ganschow and RichardSparks (2001) and their colleagues have studied many cases of young adultswho find foreign language learning exceedingly difficult. They identifiedseveral ways in which these students differ from successful learners. Mostperform poorly on at least some of the measures that make up aptitude tests.

Some have problems with certain kinds ofverbal skills, even in their own lan-guage. \What is perhaps most important about this research is that, with greateffort and instructional support, some of these students are able to succeed

in spite of their difficulties. The challenge is to find instructional approaches

that meet the needs of learners with a variety of aptitude profiles.

'drgsuonela; aqrJo erntru agr.,frruapr ot pepeeu aq

III^\ r{rreesrr eror.u ltr{r epnlf,uor ot (9002) uEr{eIS retad pue raluroq ug\ozPel r{J.rceseJ 3r{1 Jo ./v\er^al E ,Je^a \oH .8urureal a3en3ue1 puof,es ur ssas3nspuB aJuapuedapur plag uae.^uaq dlqsuonelar 8uo¡ls e sE,4a erar{t tEqr par:odarl¡aplr'r se,u rr 'srraf3o regurnu E JoC 'JUo xaldruoc eJouJ E ur pappaqua adeqscr.nauoa8 a¡drurs e pu5 ol pa>lsr a¡e slurdnrlred rlcrgm rJr. <$a satn7{ pry-?aqua ar¡r sr a¡lrs a,r¡rru8o: srrluo ernsEeur pcldlr y d¡Ef,rrsrloq aroru s8urqraesot ro punor$1ceq praua8 eqr ruo5 slrerap eleredas or puar larp ragraqrrrot Sutprorce 'tuapuadap pla5 ro ruepuodepur plrg se paqrrrsep uaag a Er{

slunpr^rpul 'sa1ós Sulureal a,LrrruSof, tuareglp uee^/úteq suorlrurlsrp uopesnroJ osle ser{ r{f,reaseJ elqereprsuo3 .sa/is Sururea¡ paseq-l¡¡enldar.lad s¿

ot perre3eJ ere esaql 'ssaro¡d Sururea¡ aqr d¡aq or sruaas fe¡d-a1or ¡o Sululruse qlns uonoe pcrslqd 'sJoureel .JnaqtsaeuDl sE ot perJeJeJ ,sJer{lo JoC .(JBe

lq, rseq uJeal ot ruaes 's¡au¡ea¡ ,frotrpne, pellel eq leru oqr'r ,sraqrg .sra

-ureel (lensr^, pellef, dno¡8 eql olur IIEJ plno^\ laq¡ 'u ueas eleq laqr ¡runSunpauos ur'el rouu'r lagr reqr les a¡doad pr¿er{ IIE e^Er{ e/N'(llp :t66tp¡a¿) ,s¡¡11s PuE uorlEuJJoJuI .i\\au Surulrta¡ pue 'Surssacord 'Surqrosqe 3o(s)fen parraSard pue (lentrg?q ,prnl¿u, s Fnpr^rpur uE s¿ peugep ,,a/rs 8ur-uJeal,Jo sruJe¡ ur safueJaglp lEnpr^rpur paleSnsa,rur e Eq sJer{f,JtaseJ eruos

sa4tts Sutu¿paT

,o'u,,oqoo,,,o^'oÍ;1'J,T?#:1il'#Jif ;:lrt;j:l:,T,T;'#tri r{lr1Y\ PelErf,ossE oslE sE./v\ tuelB} IEnsnun Jrerp lEq] s.r\oqs sa8en8ue1 a¡dlrpru3osraureal In3ssaf,rns tsou slrorsnlJo euosJo sasm erpJo,vreyret (7¡g7) s pJEJE

IeEr{Jrl/^{ 'sseler{}JalaN '3uru.rea¡ InJssefJns qtr^\ pererJosse ueuo JJE ter{l scrl-srJalf,EJEr{J lrlTeuos¡ad pu¿ 'lerfos 'e,rnruSor jo ruapuadapul f¡ued ls¿al tEsr Suru;ea1 a8en8uel ro3 apnrrrde ue ter{r rsaSSns sJauJeel ¡euondarxa rlcng

'patnurl allnb e¡azrr sllDls IErJos pue Suluolrcunj a,rnruSoc

IIEre o srr{ ter.p rreJ Jqr Jo rq&1 ur Sulqsuorse ll.reporrred se1ü tueruelerr{f,esrql 'esee tua¡edde r¡rul saSen8uel lueru paurBel oq.,r.r. IuE^ES topllod e

pa.lrrolloJ G66I) r¡drursaer.rel J-lqluEI pue qtnus IIaN .,$learvrJo relteru E, ur

a8en8ue¡,/v\eu e ur óuang pro alnbce ol elqE paruaas oq \ ueru ue3rJaruvauo Jo esef, erp uo pauodar (686I) Jalqo eurerro-I .Sulurea¡ aSen8uelpuoras ul algrssod sr lerl.^a tnoqe uonf,rpard l.ra,r.a,!ap or ureas stuaurelerqf,eJSor{,4ó. slenpr^rpur pu5 a,&\ urnnurluor apnrrrde arp Jo pue Jerpo aqt tV

Sututaal aSan&uq puocas ut satuata{tn lpnp?n!?uI E8

84 Indiaidual dffirences in second language learning

:]-.--

There are many questions about how learning styles interact with success inlanguage learning. For one thing, it is difficult to determine whether theyrefect immutable differences or whether they develop (and thus can be

changed) through experience. There is a need for considerably more research.

Nevertheless, when learners express a preference for seeing something writtenor spending more time in a language laborator¡ we should not assume thattheir ways ofworking are wrong, even if they seem to be in conflict with thepedagogical approach we have adopted. Instead, we should encourage learn-ers to use all means available to them. At a minimum, research on learningstyles should make us sceptical of claims that a single teaching method ortextbook will suit the needs of all learners.

PersonalityA number of personality characteristics have been proposed as likely to affectsecond language learning, but it has not been easy to confirm in empiri-cal studies. As with other research investigating the effects of individualcharacteristics on second language learning, studies of a similar personalitytrait produce different results. For example, it is often argued that an extro-verted person is well suited to language learning but research does not always

support this conclusion. Although some studies have found that success inlanguage learning is correlated with learners' scores on questionnaires meas-

uring characteristics associated with extroversion such as assertiveness and

adventurousness, others have found that many successful language learners

would not get high scores on measures of extroversion. Lily'W'ong Fillmore(1979) observed that, in certain learning situations, the quiet observantlearner may have greater success.

Another aspect of personality that has been studied is inhibition. It has

been suggested that inhibition discourages risk-taking, which is necessary

.uroorssBlf eqr eprslno puE eplsulsuonf,EJalur lErsos (sJeuJEal eql or parBIeJ osp s3^\ tr ]Eqt puE lBruJurJlep puE

IBrfSausq rltoq s¿ pe^refrad sE¡a {pnls Jrerp ur sreurcel 3r{r lq paruerradxasB (uorsuat rer{r punoJ laql ',uorsuel, rulel eqt pasn ( t OOZ) lls3oupe¿ lre¡rr¡pue uutrulaldg fng 'aurue¡8o¡d Jeruurns alrsuetur ue ur r{JueJg Surureelsllnpe Sunol 3o lpnrs E uI 'lelneu aroru eg ot Japrsuor faqr srurar raqroesn ol uesoqJ e Eq sJer{f,J¿aseJ etuos ,urJeJ a,rne8au E eg ot peJJprsuof, uauosr óarxue esnef,eg 'paaf,fns ol snf,oJ pue uonelrloru Jo uoneurguoc rqSrragr apr,ro-rd uer uo[Eluesa;d pro uE Jo lsel e eJoJag óarxue Sulrual;adxg'8ulu.rea¡ aletrlrf,E3 uele pue tfeJa alnrsod e a,req urf uorsuel Jo tunour¿uretJar e terp pue peq sr lrarxue IIE lou reqr panS.rr uaeq osle seq 1r ,asrnorJo

'(qe 'd) (stuapnls paxeler se lp¡crnb sE ureal lou III^ Ér,{l] ... tr ot suonrear

JrarP PUE Pusr{ rE >lsBr ar{l qlog uo pasnfoJ aJE stuepnls sno^Jeu asnB)eq,teqr senSre G66D arlrulcey,q ralJ¿ 'ssa3ord Sururea¡ eqr qtr.^a ereJratur uEf,

óarxur (txeluof, ar{r Ja^eterlt\ '1roru dnor8 ur s¡ead qtvtr Surre;elur uaq !rou rng ssBlf alor{^\ aqrJo ruo5 ur uoueluesard ¡ero ue 3u.l,u8 ueq.& snorxue3ur¡aa3 'aldruexa Joj uee.&\taq eprru ag ol suonounslp sr¡ru.rad srql .saf,urts

-urnfJrf pu¿ suortenlrs re¡noltrrd uo tuapuadap pue f,nutulp se flaxur aas

sruooJsself, a8en8ue¡ puocas ul ftarxue raurea¡ Sunegrlselur sJer{f,Jea$J Jer{tO

'cgroads-ualuof, pue l¡e¡odruat ag uEf, Áaxue ter¡rlrrTlglssod er{rJo runoJfe a{Et rou op sasuodsa¡ aJrcuuonsenb qons te a,raoH'ruooJSSEIf a8en8ur¡ puof,es aqt ul leads ol a^Bq I uaq,u sno Jeu euoJaq I, sB

r{f,ns slualuelEls r{tr1y\,aa.r8e l¡8uorrs, laqr3l (snorxuB, eg or palunss? JJE stuap-nls'a¡druexa roj 'o5 lem srrp ur Áalxue eJnseauJ (9961 ado3 pur .zlr,&uoH

'zlmrog) a¡erg lralxuv ruoorsselJ a8en8uel u8larog aqt e>lrl sa¡ecs ltarxuea8en8uel 3o lrrroleu aqt 'IJEJ u1 'fi¡¡euosrad s,raurca1 e Jo ernteal tuau-eru¡ad e se &arxue 3o rg8noqr sJarlfJeaseJ ,ault 8uo¡ e rog .pate8ltsa urf¡arrrsuatxa ueeg str{-a8en8ue¡ puoJas e Sururea¡ ueq,&\ a3ueuadxa sruap-nls fueu lerlt ssaJts Pu¿ 'sseusno,r¡au ',(¡¡o¡u.3o s8ullaay-lrarxu¿ JauJEa-I

¡PelErorralaPl¡plder uonerfunuord 'paratsrulrupe eJe \ Ior{oJIEJo sesop ra8re¡ uaq,&\ ter{l'Surssed ur 'elou os¡e leru a¿¡'3uru;eal qty( ueqt ef,u¿ruro3.rad qll^\ op olaJoru e Eq leru laqr 'Sullsa¡atul aJE asaql sE qJns stFSeJ JIIII/N fue >1ulrptou prp oq.,nl. esoqr ueqt slsat uortrr3unuo.rd uo rarraq prp IoqoJIEJo stunorue

IIErus 1uerp oq,ra. sruedlrrrred lpnrg 'uonerrunuord uo .uo¡l¡qFlul elnpaJor lrrTlge str JoJ u^\oDI (lor{mle

Jo sesop IIErus jo slJage aqt Jo srsf¡eue uepe^lo^ur lpnrs aug 'of,urruJoJJad uon¿r¡unuo¡d a8en8uel puoras roJ tseelt¿ 'ef,roJ alne8au E sr uorlrgqur ler{t urelr aqr ro3 rroddns puno3 (T,L6l)sanSra¡oc sry pur Erorn3 JJpuExa[V'sOL6l eqr ur serpntsJo serJas E uI .sre

-u;ea¡ ra8unol ueqr snorf,suof-Jles aJouJ aJE or{^\ ,slueJsalope .roj rua¡qordre¡nrnred B eg o¡ paraprsuoJ uarJo sr srql 'Sulurea¡ a8en8ur¡ ul ssarSord.roS

Sutunal aBanBuE puotas ut satua.ta¡ftp pnrult?puJ E8

B6 Indiuidual diferences in second language learning

A learner's willingness to communicate (\MTC) has also been related toanxiety. \fe have all experienced occasions when we tried to avoid commu-nicating in a second language. \fTC may change with the number of peoplepresent, the topic of conversation, the formaliry of the circumstances, andeven with whether we feel tired or energetic at a given moment. A colleague

in Canada, who works in the area of second language learning and speaks

several languages, recently confessed that he avoided the corner store in hisneighbourhood because the proprietor always spoke French to him. He rec-

ognized the proprietor's efforts to help him improve his skills in this newlanguage, and was grateful for it, but, as he told us with embarrassment, itwas just easier to go to the store where he could use English.

This is consistent with research carried out by Richard Clément, Peter

Maclntyre, and their colleagues, who argue that learners who willinglycommunicate in a wide range of conversational interactions are able to doso because of their communicative confidence. In a series of studies theyhave shown that communicative confidence is shaped by rwo variables: howrelaxed L2 learners are and how competent (or incompetent) they feel abouttheir L2 abiliry. These factors are directly infuenced by previous contactswith L2 speakers and are considered to be the main contributors to commu-nicative confidence (Clément, Baker, and Maclntyre 2003).

Several other personaliry characteristics such as self-esteem, empath¡ domi-nance, talkativeness, and responsiveness have also been studied. The research

does not show a clearly-defined relationship between one personality traitand second language acquisition. And, as indicated earlier, the major dif-ficulty in investigating personaliry characteristics is that of identification and

measurement. Another explanation has been offered for the mixed findings.Personaliry variables seem to be more consistently related to conversational

skills than to the acquisition of grammatical acctrnacy or academic language.

Finally, most of the research on personality variables has been carried outwithin a quantitative research paradigm, that is, an approach that relies

heavily on relating learners' scores on personaliry questionnaires to theirlanguage test performance. Some researchers have argued that a more qualitative approach to understanding and investigating personality variables is

needed to adequately capture their depth and complexiry especially as they

emerge and evolve over time.

Despite the contradictory results and the problems involved in carrying outresearch in the area of personaliry characteristics, many researchers believe

that personality will be shown to have an important influence on success inlanguage learning. This relationship is an intricate one, however, in that it isprobably not personality alone, but the way in which it combines with other

factors, that infuences second language learning.

I{sruEdS tear8 E rnoqE lurr{ sllal puerU e ralEl {ea,{\ V 'asrnof, eqt dorp olseproap llpr5 pur (uone,ulour elnnoaxa) sasselc or Suro8 sdors 'asrnoc agrr{rr,la pet€Jtsn{ seruooag aq suossal reruurrS3o srpuoru ,/(aJ e JaIV '(uortr,r-rlou Jf,roqr) asrnor gsruedg B e>l€l ol saproep pue uredg ot dl¡t Sunuo¡dn uetnoqe parrrxa $ puelod ur raureel Ioorlrs frepuoras E :eg ppo,/r\ saseqd asaqr

r¡Snorqr alcfr rq8nu auo rnror.{Jo a¡druexa uV'af,uer.uroJ.rad rlagr ot uonf,eerpue Jo ¡esre.rdde (stuapnls ol sJeJaJ ',uonf,edsoltal uon¿^noru, 'aseqd prrqraql pue (uonE rlour urclureuJ of $lsel l¡¿ssaceu aqt tno Sull¡¡e¡ lnoqB sr

',uorJelrloru alnnf,axe, 'aseqd puofas aqr 's¡eo8 Suuas ol pue palJels Sunra8ot sJaJaJ (uonBlnour elror{J, 'aseqd rsJy aql 'saseqd aaJqt Jo stsrsuof, ler{luorl¿ noruJo Iaporu paluerro-ssaco.ld e padola,rap (¿tOOZ) lafurog ugtloz

'arun Ja^o aceld a>1er regr sa8ueqr erp JoJ tunoJft ol serJl

pue uonelnoruJo aJnteu crueufp aqr sazrseqdue >lJo1d tuef,al eJotrAJ 'JeuJEal

aqtJo fnsrJetJEJEr{J elq"ls e se uonelrlouJ azr¡entdaruoo or pepual r{fJeasar

flrea 'arorurJqunC 'ólunuruoc str pue a8en8ue¡ ra3;er aqr ol uollerualJoJosadó o¡u esaql uaa.ülag qsn8urrsrp ot rlnJgrp sr lr 'stueluuoJrlue Sulu;ra¡euros ur'JeAa^\oH '8uru;ea1 a8en8ue¡ puof,as ur ssef,Jns or poteleJ ag ol punoJuaag a^Er{ uone^noruJo sadlr qroq (snql rorcrpard rauag E eq or punoJ se^\

uollelllour FlueurnJlsur 'rarrarrtoq 'slxaluof auJos uI '8uru;ee¡ InJSSaf,f,nsJororrrpard ¡a8uo.rls eql aq ol paJeprsuof se,^a uorlelrloru a,ule¡3atul arurt 8uo¡e ro¿ '(a8en8u"l rarpo ar{tJo sJa>l¿ads grrr'r netuor q8norqr luaurllrrua Iernl1nl pue grmor8 ¡euosrad ro3 Sururea¡ a8en8ue¡) uone lloru a,rne¡8elur pu¿

(spo8 ¡ecrrcerd ro atelpaurul rol Sururral aSen8url) uone,rnoru pluerunJlsu¡sural aql peurof, (Z¿et) urqrue-I aTEIIB/N pue raupre) lrago¡ 'uaqr qtr.&r

]f,Bluof, eJou eJrsaP lllzu laql 'a3en8ue¡ er{rJo sJe>leads arp spre,,vtol sePnlrueelgEJno^EJ e^Er{ sreuree¡ jr 'l1re¡ulS 'u ur lcualcgord errnbx ot pale^noruaq or lla1l aroJeraqt are pu¿ aSenSue¡ puores arpJo enlel alnerrununuoragt a,uar;ad ¡rrvr lagr 'suonrgru? ¡euorssajord HInJ ot Jo suollBnlrs lBrfosJoa8ue; aprr'r e ul e3¿n8uel puofes er¡r >1eads 01 paeu sJauJeol JI 'ltrunuruocaSen8uel puofes eqt spJpaor sepnrrut rrar¡l 'raqlo eqt uo pue 'spaeu elrluf-runuJurof, (s.rauJEal 'puEr{ auo eqt uo :srolJej o,^atJo suJJal ur peuyep ueaqser{ tI 'uouaruouagd xa¡druor e sr Sulu¡ea¡ a8enSue¡ puof,es ur uone rlory

'Sururea¡ daa>1 or ssau8ul¡lr'l e qtl^\ parerf,osse

eJE sepnlntB a,r.llrsod lErp afuePr^a eldrue sr eJar{r '8uru.rea¡ ur ssarf,ns asnBf

sePnlrDE a,rrlrsod rerp a,rord louuEf r{sJEeseJ arp gSnoqr¡y'sJolJEJ raqro lqparla5¿ erc qtog Jer{req.^a Jo 'sapnrlue a,ulsod srapua8ua Suturea¡ InJssaffnsro Sururea¡ InJssef,f,ns arnpord seprunle a,rrlrsod Jer{reqa auruJetep ol ls¿e

lou sl tr 'selgeuel rarpo qrr^\ asm ar{t sl sV'(€002 JauprED pue ra-ro8se¡n¡)

Sulu;ra1 a8en8uel puofas ur ssef,Jns pue 'firunruluof, slr pur e8enSue¡

u8laro3 Jo puooas eql pJe,ry\ol sepntnle s JeuJEal p uea,4 teq drqsuorre¡a.r Jr{r uor{f,JeesaJJo auue¡8o¡d e }no perJJEf a,rer¡ san8ea¡lof srr{ pue JeupJEO ueqo¡

uotlpa4out ?u3 srywglv

Sututaal a8anSuq puotas ut satuataftp pnplalpul LB

88 Indiuidual dffirences in second language learning

conversation course she is taking, and his 'choice motivation' is activatedagain. He decides to register in the conversation course and in just a fewweeks he develops some basic Spanish conyersational skills and a feeling ofaccomplishment. His satisfaction level is so positive (motivation retrospec-

tion) that he decides to enrol in a more advanced Spanish course when he

returns from his trip to Spain.

In a book devoted to helping second language teachers generate and maintainlearners' motivation, Dórnyei (2001b) proposes and describes concrete and

innovative methods and techniques that can help teachers motivate learners

throughout these three phases.

Motiuation tn tbe classroom

In a teacher's mind, motivated students are usually those who participateactively in class, express interest in the subject matter, and study a great dealTeachers also have more influence on these behaviours and the motivationthey represent than on students' reasons for studying the second language

or their attitudes toward the language and its speakers. Teachers can make a

positive contribution to students'motivation to learn ifclassrooms are places

that students enjoy coming to because the content is interesting and relevant

to their age and level of abiliry the learning goals are challengingyet manage-

able and clear, and the atmosphere is supportive. Teachers must also keep inmind that cultural and age differences will determine the most appropriate

ways for them to motivate students.

Little research has investigated how pedagogy interacts directly with moti-vation in second/foreign language classrooms. One exception is a stud,v

by Marie Guilloteaux and Zoltán Dórnyei (2008) who explored the linksbetween teachers' motivational practice and students' motivation for L2learning. It was a large-scale study with 27 rcachers and over 1 ,300 learners

in English as a Foreign Language (EFL) classrooms in Korea. The teach-

ers' motivational strategies were described using a classroom observationscheme-the Motivation Orientation of Language Teaching (MOLT).MOLI identified 25 motivational practices used by the teachers thatrelatively easy to define and to observe. They were divided into four cat-

egories that are described below along with examples of the motivationalbehaviours included within each.

Teacher discourse: arousing curiosity or attention, promoting autonom)',

stating communicative purpose/utiliry of activiryParticipation structure: group work/pair workActivity design: individual competition, team competition, intellectualchallenge, tangible task productEncouraging positive retrospectiye self-evaluation and activity design:

effective praise, elicitation ofself/peer correction session, class applause.

23

sannuepl pau8rsse lplornb a.la.,'r laqr reqr pa^resgo (0002) laqoo¿ uaallay

'sass"lr uarre8rapuu¡ unrpau-qsr¡8uE u1 uerpllql tue¡3lu¡u¡t qrrm Suqro¿¡

'ruooJsselo er{r eprsrno a8en8uel puofasaqt do¡ar'ap ot anunuof, or pue esllo¿¡d or peq farp salllunr¡oddo ar{r pallturlsuonrntrs asoql ul sacuar.radxa Jreql 'aouelequl ramod E se,,'r eJer{t L{Jlq \ ulsauo f¡¡ecrdlr ere^\ eseqt pue leads or luelrnleJ ara,la.laqr qrlq \ ul suollenlls

Ierf,os are,^a erar{t tele.&\o11 'gslSuE uJeal or pal¿ noru fU8ry ararrr lpnts;ag ul sruedlr¡r.rtd aqr ilV'(Ot ,166t af,rrad uorro¡) ,'Plrold ¡ercos 8u€ueqraqr or (rrruepr rar{/srq pue] rau;ea1 a8en8uel aqrSo drqsuolteler agr arnrdm.ot (tuauJtsalur, urJet eql sesn aqs 'peelsul '8uturee1 a8en8ue¡ pue 'lrrruapl'remodSo suoneleJ xa¡druoc aqr arnrdec f¡arenbape rou op uolte^Ilou a,rrlr¡8

-elur Pu¿ lEluaujnJlsur sE qlns sldacuoc terp sanS;e aqs 'EPEuEJ uI ueuro^\

lue¡Slrurul 3o sacuarredxa Suturea¡ a8en8ue¡ el{r Jo lpnts aser ¡eurpnrr8uo¡E ur parf,allof ErEp ruorS SulalrJq 'af,Jled uolJoN fuuog Jo >lJo,/v\ aqr ruo5seuroJ sra>¡teds a8tnSuel ta8rer pue sJeuJeal a8en8ue¡ Puofes uea^ taq uoll-f,EJelur r3eJE PIJO/\{ IBrf,os eqr ul ra,Lrod jo suoIlEIaJ

^\oI{Jo a¡durexa pooS y

'sdrqsuorre¡a¡ ¡a,trod pue srrueufp pr:osol J nrsues aJE srlnpe se IIea sE ueJp¡rl3 '8ulureal uI ssef,fns tJaJ¿ teqt salqe

-rJE^ eql PuelsJaPun 01 >lees 3,&\ uel{1l\ Pa>loolJe^o Jg louuEs slxaluof, IEIfosur tsrxa sa8en8uul trqr rf,¿J agl '8utu.rea¡ a8en8ue¡ Puoras uo sJotf,EJ Flalfosr{Jns jo traJe rf,Exe aqr rclpard or a¡qrssodrul sl tr g8noqt ua g 'a8en8ue¡

&r¡ourur e Surureay sJegruotu dno¡8 ll:oleur jo asoql ruo5 uollelltoru Puesapnlrrre ruaJeglp a,teq leru dno¡8 lrl¡oleru e3o aSen8uel arp 3ururca¡ dnorS

ltr¡oulru EJo sJegtueru 'aldurexa rog 'saSenBuEI uee \teq drqsuorre¡a.l ¡a¡'rod

ro rnueulp Frf,os aqr sI rolf,eJ l{f,ns auo 'sserrns Sulu;ea1 aSen8ue¡ pue

'sepnuup (uoltrlltour rf,eJE osle urc &lunruruo) JaPI^\ eql uI sJollEJ I3l3oS

aottptl{p dno¿7 nuqo ?uP ,Qgaap7

' (Z L tgOOZ raluroq pur xnearoilmS),sat8aterts Puollelltrour (sreqf,eala8en8uelSo pedrur cglrads-ruooJsselo 'ateJJuof al{l Suru¡a¡uo¡ eluaPl^e IEI-r¡rdrua lue, apr,ro;d or,{pnrs rsJg arp sI stqt asnef,ag ruerrodul are s8urpug

ar{r 'ssalar{ua,r.a¡ 'sdrqsuoDelal lfega-esnel atEfIPuI lou oP sllnseJ uollel-eJJof, t¿ql a8pa¡mou¡re sJeqfJ¿esal eql 'aJlEuuottsanb eq1 uo srrodar-3¡as

,sJaurcal aqt pue'srnol,teqaq tuarua8e8ue (sJauJral aql 'sa)I]f,eJd IeuoIlE^Iloru(sJaq)Eat aqr uaa.&\teq suolrplaJJoJ a,rrtrsod tuerglu8ts PunoJ sJeqf,Jeesal ar{I

'sstll T{E rrarp 01 perelar f¡¡erglcads sle^el uolle^Ilotu rleql lnoqt eJIEuuoIl

-sanb r para¡druoc oslr sJaureeT '(sruapnrs el{rJo sPrlqt o^\l uer{l a.rou) q8lqpue (sruapnts eqrJo sprlrll o/v\t ot Prrql auo) mo¡ '(sluapnrs ma3 e) r'ro¡ fra,"

:uossel pa^Jesgo qf,Ea uI luaruaS¿8ua eJns?auJ ol Pasn sE \ elB)s lo^al-aaJl{r V'palrln3l¿J se,l\ sellllllf,e Sulrnp PeJeelunlol l¡re8ea oq,/v\ PuE 'paltdtrluedfya,rlrce ogl"r'uonueur pred oq.{\ sruepnrslo uonrodo.rd aql 'ruauaSe8ua;o

Ia^al JrerFJo suJJal ur PeJns"au sElv\ uoll¿ Iloru (sJJuJEal aql 'uossel r{f,Ba uI

&urutaa1 a&anSuu1 puotas ur satuata¡f1p pnru(t!?ul 68

90 Indiuiduatdffirences in second language learning I

such as successful/unsuccessful, big/small, talkative/quiet, etc. in their firstlyear of school. of course, they also had the identity of 'being ESL. Becausellearners' identities impact on what they can do and how they can participarelin classrooms, this naiurally affects how much they can l."in. Fo, .*"-pl.,lone of the 'ESL children was consistently excluded from imaginative interac- |tive activities with her peers; another learner was perceived as someone who I

never lisrened or did the 'right thing'. Toohey argues that these identities ]

could eventually lead to their isolation and to restricted or less powerful par- I

ticipation in their classroom communiry. \7hile Toohey is careful to point l

out that identities are not sratic and can change over time, it is equally impor- l

tant to keep in mind that 'classrooms are organized to provide occasions I

upon which some children look more and some less able, and judgem.tttr ".. I

made which become social facts about individual children' (Toohey 2000: I

';'* *rsrudies above describe how issues of idenriry and investm"n, or"" Iimportant roles for both children and adults when learning a second lan- |

guage. Research has also documented how these factors contribute in I

complex and sometimes contradictory ways when learning a foreign lan- |

guage. For example, it has been observed that Japanese students are often Ireluctant to speak English in communicative lessons despite high levels of

I

motivation to learn the language. Furthermore, when students with high I

levels of English language proficiency do communicate they often speak with I

a strong Japanese accenr and intentionally produce grammarical errors for I

fear that they might be perceived as considering themselves to be superior I

(Greer 2000). I

In a study with secondary school Japanese learners of English as a foreig.r lan- |

guage, Yasuyo Tomita (201 1) observed that the students were more willing to I

communicate during activities that combined a focus on form and meaning I

than in exclusively meaning-based activities. In observations and interviews I

with the students, she concluded that learners were nor willing to invest in I

English communication with each other unless they were able to establish I

their identities as 'learners' by discussing language form and raising qr.r.r- |

tions about grammar. In exclusively communicative activities learners *.r. I

reluctant to use English to communicate their ideas or opinions for fear that l

they would be identified as 'show offs' and pretending to be someone other I

than Japanese. I

i

Learner beliefs i

Second language learners are not always aware of their individual cognitive or I

perceptual learning styles, but virtually all learners, particularly older learn- ]

ers, have strong beliefs and opinions about how their instruction should be l

delivered. These beliefs are usually based on previous learning experiences ]

'((uoneredard ur) g1g¿ ¿rurT solues pue ryedg) s.,r,rarl.sluep

-nts rraqr areqs or papuot lagr reqr pe,/\ .oqs sarpus eqr ur patednrr.red os¡e

orl^l sreqreal 'ICE pue 'ISg aqr ruo5 sllnser aql 'ef,n)Erd e,r.lr¿¡runruu¡o¡r{]r1v\ JEurtuE¡8 Sulle¡8alur roJ efuaJaJard e snqr-uorlsfrunuluoc ro3 ace¡d

lpo aqr se uees sr ruooJsself ar{} 'alqelre^E ere Z'I eqt ol aJnsodxa roj sauru

-nr¡oddo.&\eJ eJer{^\ te^a \oq 'lxeruoJ -ICE eql uI 'ruooJsself erp ur are laqruer{^/v\ uoneJrunuruJoo uorj llareredas ¡nuue¡8 uo snco; or llunr¡oddoaqr are¡rardde sraurca¡ 'ruoorssep eql aprslno uoDrfrunruuroo JoJ sarlrun¡-.loddo aJour oJE oJeql aJaq,r txeluof -ISE aql ur leqt ua,rr8 asuas J nrnturseleur srql 'sJeuJEel -IJE erp uBr{l aJoru qf,nlu uor}fEJalur a DefrunfrrrrroJruo5 reruure¡8 Sune¡edas penlr^ laqt reqr pauodar osl? sraur¿al TSE ar{l

1a^a./üoH 'a¡n¡r¡d elrlef,runu¡ruof urr{tr^r, Jruru¡e¡8 ol uorluelle Sune¡8aturparraSard sreurealJo sdno¡8 qroq rrr{t peterrpur stpsar IIEra^o aq1 'acnoerd

alnef,runururo3 urr{}r^/( pappaque Jo ruoü l¡are.redas ¡eruru¿¡8 uo snfoJ olperre3ard lag] reqtaq^\ uaqr 8un1sr 'sJeureel 0E7 or pararsrunupe ara-&\ serreu

-uonsanb 'a8enSu¿l uB BI utsreJoJ E sE r.{sr

(s-raqcear pur) srau;eal qrv!\ sarpnrsJo selros E u1 'rq8ner eq ppor{s tt uaqm rcJ

saouara3ard a,reg fagr3l JeI{tEJ rng InJesn sE uoltlnJlsut ¡eurue¡8 a,rta¡¡ad s¡a

-urc"I¿aqpqr? lou paultuexa a^¿q GOO) urtat I{rrraser rJr{ PuE epedg eur¡'qfuaJg pue 'ueru;a5 'gslued5

'a¡drurxe roJ 'ueql ureal ol sra>1eads qs¡¡8ug JoJ rlnlsrp arou snql PuEueadorng-opul uou a¡e sa8¿n8uel o^u ei{t esnef,eg aq tq8nu slql teill parsa8

-8ns sraqrreasel aql 'qtoq panp otl^\ rIqErV pu¿ asaurl{J 8uturca¡ asoqr

roj tdacxa uonf,nJlsur ¡euur¡8 sE I{fnul sE >lleqpaal eAI}feJJo) enle^ rou PIPsJauJeal '¡¡erang 'uonef,lunruulo3 uo snf,oJ aJouJ ro3 lpear PuB lI lnoqe f,IlsE

-rsnqtua ssal aJa^\ laqr snqr pue srauJeel aSrn8ue¡ u8raroS oqr or paredruoruonf,nJlsur ¡rruu¡e¡8 snouord jo s¡eaf a¡ou¡ pet{ sJeuJeal TSE aip tBt{t IJEJ

arp or par?lar ueaq a^Er{ tg8¡ru s¡q1 'sa8enSue¡ u8rarojSo sraureal plp sE r{f,nru

sB tr anle^ tou plp aBEnSuEI puof,as E sr qsr18ug3o srauffel 'alduexa JoJ 'uoll-rnrtsur ¡euru¿¡8 penlel sreureal IIE rou lng auos rerp punoS faql lleqPeaJe rlreJJoc pue uonf,nJlsur JEuJuJEJB rnoge sJelleq rtagl ssa.rdxa or saSen8uel

ruaraglp Jo sreurral gIzL p¿1se (6002) san8ealloo slr{ PuE ua^\aoT u^\eI{S

'^\er^ srql paJEr{s sJar{fBel eqrJoJIEq ¡a,ro lsnl',a8en8ue¡ aqr;o Áarseu IEnl-ua e er{t or pnuesse sr a8en8ue¡ aqr jo lpnrs IEruroJ, tEI{r pe^arTag stuePnls

rsotu alq \'uorlrPPE uI 'algErISeP sE,&\ slqt rleJ sraqf,ear r'taj,{-ra,r elll{.,!A Palf,aJ-Jof sJoJJa Jraqr e^eq 01 eJISep e passardxa stuepnts ¡e f¡pnrrlrr' ter{t PunoJ(t OOZ) zpqls at¿ua¿ sarpnls elrf,s-a8re¡ olu uI 's^\eIA (sJeI{rEe} Pue (stuaPnlsuaa,^ teg r{fterusnu E uauo sI eJeql r"qr sruJ5uoc Suturea¡ a8en8uel puofes uI>llBqpaa3 J^nJaJJoJ pue Jeuure;83o aloJ aqr rnoge sJaIIag JJuJ?JI uo I{fJtesad

sr uonf,nrlsur jo adlr rr¡nclued e reqr (8uo.rm ro rq8lr) uoltdrunsse aqt Pue

I6Sututaal aSan&ual puotas ur satuata¡ftp /an??nlpu]

qsl¡8ug pue a8en8uel puoras e sr qsr¡8ug3o

'urcal ot ruar{r JoJ fer'r rsag aql

92 lrudluldual dffirences in second lang,tage learning

Indiüdual differences and classroominstructionThere are many questions about how the exisrence of individual differencesshould infuence instruction. On a simple practical level, it is not possiblefor a teacher with 50 5¡uds¡¡5-sr even one with 10 students-to customizeinstruction to suit the abilities or preferences of each one. Neverrheless, therecan be little doubt that an instructional approach that rigidly adheres to a

single way of teaching all students and an expectation that all srudenrs canlearn in the same way will deprive some students of learning opportunities.Zoltán Dórnyei (2005) has reviewed the research on individual differencesand proposes a number ofways for educators to help learners make the mostof their individual abilities and learning preferences.

Learners' instructional preferences, whether due to inherent differences intheir approach to learning or to their beliefs about how languages are learned,will influence the kinds of strategies they use in trying to learn new mate-rial. Teachers can help learners expand their repertoire oflearning strategiesand thus develop greater fexibiliry in their ways of approaching languagelearning.

Ag. and second language learning'W'e now turn to a learner characteristic of a differenr rype: the age at whichlearning begins. Age is easier to define and measure than personaliry apti-tude, or motivation, but the relationship between age and success in secondlanguage acquisition is hardly less complex or contror¡ersial.

It is frequently observed that most children from immigrant families even-tually speak the language of their new community with nativelike fluency,while their parents often fall short ofsuch high levels ofproficiency, especiallyin the spoken language. 'Io be sure, many adult second language learnersachieve excellent language skills. One often sees reference to Joseph Conrad,a native speaker of Polish who became a major writer in the English language,and it is not uncommon to find adult second language learners with a richvocabular¡ sophisticated syntax, and effective pragmatic skills, even thoughthere may be subtle differences between their language use and that of thosewho began learning the language while very young.

As we saw in Chapter 1, the Critical Period Hypothesis is that there is atime in human development when the brain is predisposed for success inlanguage learning. It has been hypothesized that there is a critical periodfor second language acquisition just as there is for first language acquisi-tion. Developmental changes in the brain, it is argued, affect the nature oflanguage acquisition, and language learning that occurs after the end of the

¿uonlslnbf,E a8en8uel puolas roj polrad PJITIJO ou sI aJeql leq¡ueatu slqt saoq 'aBenBuEI puores eql uI aruallerxe eAaII{r¿ oqu, (sr¡npe puesruacsa¡ope) sJeurcel JaPIo rnoqe satoPf,aue ssallunof aJE eJer{l 'aJotuJeI{lJnC'af,uaf,selope ul uÉaq oq,/v\ asoqr uEI{t unJ 8uo¡ aqr ut lcuatogo¡d ¡at¿a¡8

o^Jrr{f,¿ slezrr¡r tou op IJ^al loor{fs f¡¿ur¡d re a8en8uel Puof,as e Sulurea¡

ul8ag ogrtr sJauftal 's8uluas Fuonef,npe uI 'uollonJtsul a8¿n8ur1 u8laro3 ro

puof,asJo lsou aqr a>¡eru laqt 'slllls 8ul^los-uelqoJd pue 'sar8are¡ls l¡oruaru

'a8pa¡ltou1 rnsln8ul¡etaru JIaIp Sulsn lg 'sJeuJeal ¡a8unol ueql luelfgaaJour eJE sJauJ?al Jeplo terp u^\oqs elpq saouetsuInf,Jlf, JEIItuls u¡ Suturea¡ sra

-u;ea¡ raSunol pue rap¡o3o ruarudo¡a,rap a8en8url Puoles al{rJo solPnts aruos

ta^a^\oH '3unol l¡a¡' aJE sJauJeal uagrrr sulSag IIJI Peaons ot l1a>1t¡ tsouJ st

uorlfnJlsur a8rn8uel puooes terp Jpnlluoo or stua¡ed lueur sB IIa^\ s¿ sJa>pu

frr¡od pur srolernpe aruos pel srq sarrFlSIP (sreureal lFPeJo uollelrasgo

IrurroJur ¡o acua¡¡adxa puosrad or uolllppe ul H¿f, eqr uo Paseq r{lrcesa¡

'a8en8ue¡ ¡aeu eqt asn ot Peeu ¡lu,(agr eJeI{,{, suollenlls uI salles

-ruoqt aceld or ssau8ut¡nr pue uolte^Iloru Jleql rcage feru s8uqee3 a,rtle8au

rpn5 'ueaur lagr reqr'r l¡rcexa les or 3ur1¡r uI uolteJlsn53o sarualradxe JaUe

fcenbaprul30 esues e do¡a,rep,{eru laqr pue a8en8uel el{lJo lrarsetuSo >1oe1

rrar¡r fq passerregrue uauo eJe stppv'seePl Palmr¡duoc arouJo uolssa¡dxe

eqr pu" aSenSut¡ xa¡druoo aJou puttuaP r?qt suoll?nlls uI sJllesuaqr Puyor l¡a41 aroul aJB srauJeel raplo 'pardarrr tsBal 13 ro 'pasrerd ua5o Jre slroga

rra3radurr l¡rea rraqr 'aJotuJequn¿ 'Suluur8ag lra,r aqr uor3 f¡arrrn3f,e PUE

l¡ruang >pads ol a¡nssa¡d 8uo¡ls acuat¡edxa rou op laqr oJaq.&\ sluauIuoJllue

ur a8rn8ur¡ aqr esn pue J¿eI{ ot salllunt¡oddo a¡ou a,teq uaryo laql 'aSen8ue¡

Sulurea¡ ol eto ap ol aulll eJou aAEq f¡ensn sluauIuoJllua Sulurea¡ a8en8

-uEI IBruJoJuI uI sreuJral ra8uno¡ 'ruJráJIP lral uatjo are Sutu;ee1 a8enSur¡

JoJ suotrtpuof, al{t 'stsagrodfll Polrad I¿f,IrIrJ ar¡r fq parsaSSns saf,uaJaJ

-jrp pcrSo¡orq a¡qrssod or uonIPPE uI 'sreureel a8en8ue¡ Puof,es sE sllnPe

put uaJplrqc a¡eduoc ot IFISIP sl 1l 'Z rardeq3 uI /\eES 31r\ sE 'asJnof, JO

u"r{r rarlr¿e pue teru aarnaue¡.ry\au EJo *rffJ;H;;:l*:H:fimlor lrr¡qr aqt'e¡druexa ro¿ 'Sulurea¡ a8en8ur¡3o sroadse ruaJaJIP or PalEIer

'sporrad IErItIrf, a¡dn¡nu aq leru arelp reql af,uePl^J Pug sreqlo 'JaIIJEa ue e

eq plnoJ u rsaSSns sJaI{f,JEasaJ eruos tnq útaqnd PunoJE aJer{d\euros sPua

porrad lef,nrr3 al{r rpqt perulelr ueuo lsotu sI lI 'PIIql Sunol eql o1 elqele^E

eJe ler{t sarlnedrc ateuul 'rgtcads aJotu eqt se 8ulurca¡ a8en8ue¡ JoJ alllf,aga

se lou arc senITIgE Sutu;ea¡ ¡erauaS asalP tBql pan8re sI lI 'uoll¿luJoJul Jo

sllplsJo spuDl rer{ro a¡rnbce 01 asn tg8¡ru lagr sauo eurBs ar{l-saltr¡rge 8ul

-uJrel Iereue8 a¡oru uo puadap leru s¡au¡eal JePIo 'Jerpe¡ 'PooqP¡¡{l llJee

ul uorlrsrnbre e8en8ue¡ puo3as ¡o uorlrsrnbce a8en8ue¡ lsJg or elnqlJluof, olpa^arTeq sarnrf,nJrs porSo¡olq el¿uul Jql uo Paseq aq tou leru porrad PrIlIrf,

&utu"raa1 a7an&uol puotas ur satuata[tp pn?laryul g6

94 Indiuidual diferences in second language learning

Tlt e critical p erio d: Mo re th an j ort pronunciation ?

Most studies of the relationship berween age of acquisition and secondlanguage development have concluded that older learners rypically have anoticeable 'foreign accenr' in the spoken language. But what about otherlinguistic features? Is syntax (word order, overall sentence structure) as

dependent on age of acquisition as phonological development? \lhat abourmorphology?

Mark Patkowski (1980) studied the relationship berween age and theacquisition of features of a second language other than pronunciation. Hehypothesized that, even if accenr were ignored, only those who had begunlearning their second language before the age of 15 could achieve full,native-like mastery of that language. Patkowski studied 67 highly educatedimmigrants to the United States. They had started to learn English ar variousages, but all had lived in the United States for more than five years. Hecompared them to 15 native-born Americans with a similarly high level ofeducation, whose variety of English could be considered the second languagespeakers' target language.

The main question in Patkowskit research was: 'lVill there be a differencebetween learners who began to learn English before puberry and those whobegan learning English later?' However, he also compared learners on thebasis of other characteristics and experiences that some people have sug-gested might be as good as age in predicting or explaining a person's success inmastering a second language. For example, he looked at the total amount oftime a speaker had been in the United States as well as rhe amount of formalESL instruction each speaker had had.

A lengthy interview with each person was tape-recorded. Because Patkowskiwanted to remove the possibility that the results would be afFected by accent,he transcribed five-minute samples from the interviews and asked trainednative-speaker judges to place each transcript on a scale from 0 (no knowl-edge of English) to 5 (a level of English expected from an educated nativespeaker).

The findings were quite dramatic. The transcripts of all native speakers and32 out of 33 second language speakers who had begun learning Englishbefore the age of I 5 were rarcd 4+ or 5. The homogeneiry of the pre-pubertylearners suggests that, for this group, success in learning a second languagewas almost inevitable. In contrast, 27 of the 32 post-puberty learners wererated between 3 and 4, but a few learners were rated higher (4+ or 5) and onewas rated at2+.The performance of this group looked like the sort of rangeone would expect if one were measuring success in learning almost any kindof skill or knowledge: some people did extremelywell; some did poorly; mostwere in the middle.

'ur"al uaJpllgo Sunol le^\ eql tuo{ rueraglp sr rzgr ft,n¿ ul a8rn8uel ureel leu s¡au¡¿al rlnpe rer¡r slsaqrodlq aqt ruJguoo or ¡¿add¿s8urpug ase[L 'pooqplq] ul gs¡pug paureel oq./ü asoqr roJ uonelerror r{rnsou se,ry\ eJer{t tala,l\oH 'ssaof,ns qrvv\ pateleJJor oJe-/v\ saJof,s epnlrrde 'st¡nprse qsr¡8ug Sururea¡ ue8aq oqrrr sruednlued ro3 'reqr puno3 pu¿ slsJl apnrrrdraSen8ue¡ a>ler or sluedrcll¡ed pe>lw eq 'uolrrppe uI lsel tuaruaSpnl eqr uoa:ueruroj;ad pur uorte;Srturur Jo a8r uaaz'rrag drgsuorre¡a.r 8uo¡rs E punoJoslt eH 'serels perlun aql ot stue¡Sltuur uelre8un¡1 qrr,l Buq.ro,n 'lpnrsrrodrc¡ pue uosuqof aqr3o uonecqder ¿ tno parrrro (ggg¿) rasfe)aq ueqo¡

d¡epvnr eJou parJe^ lsalJr{t uo arutuuoSrad.ueqr pue l¡rrerror serualues agr a8pnl or l¡a1l ssel are,&\

rare¡ ueSaq oq.&\ asoql '1ser ruauaSpnl aqr uo sarof,s rsag8ry eql pa^err{r¿ISaIIJBJ ue8aq oq./!\ sJeuJEa-I 'rsel eqr uo ssassns 3o rorrrpard tuecglugls e

sE./v\ sarEls Palrun eqr ur P^r.rr? jo a8e leqr PunoJ rrodrvta¡ pue uosugof

'lou eJe,{UIEg '¡ecnruue¡8 a.rarrr sef,ueluas

er{uoJI?H 'lf,eJJo3 sE^\ ef,ualuas r{f,Ea Jer{req./( al?f,rPur or PEr{ PUE sefueluaspeprof,er p.reaq faql 'xetuls pue l8o¡oqdroru gsrr8ugJo salnr ZI petsar rer{lseluetuasJo Jagrunu a3;e1 e3o sruarua8pnl lrr¡errreuruerS a>pru ot pa>lse

a¡a¡nr slu¿dnlued agl 'qsl8uE3o sreleads e^nEu 97 p dnofi uosl¡¿druoc e

papnlf,ur osp fpnrs aq1 'sreal aa;qr rseel tE ro1 selets palrun eqt ur ueaq peq

IIE pue &ls¡a,rrun uerrJeuv uE tE sJagruaru A¡n:e3 Jo sruepnts arar'r ¡¡y'sa8erurraJlp re qsrpug ureel ol un8ag prq otl^l sra>1eads uearo) pur aseulr{J

97 3o lpnrs ¿ pat3npuof, (ege t) uodrc¡ Essrlg put uosuqof aurlenbref

,&q a nla uuta ñ to sa o trynt uI

'uorlerounuord or l¡uo lldde rou saop uorrelnurl srqt reqrpue a8enSurl puof,as e3o lrarseru e1r-a^rreuJo tuaudola,rap aqt uo srr{ulT

Suntas ur JotfEJ lueuodrur uE sr uorlrsrnbcz3o a3¿'ruaruuoJrlua (l¿Jnleu, eqr

ul f¡rrerulrd a8en8uel puoras e a.rtnbce ol{,/v\ sJeuJeal JoJ ler{r punoJ pls \o{r¿d'snq¡ 'plp uolte.r8nurul 3o a8e se ile \ se sse3Jns rclpard rou prp 'a8e tuorS

paterrdas uaq./v\ 'uollfnJlsul Jo tunouJ¿ 'llre¡rul5 'a3r rat*a uE lE PaAIJJEosle per{ afuaprsal .re8uo¡ qtr^ asoqr reqr esef, er{r uarJo sE^{ rI laleldoH 'Jor

-crpa.rd pooS l1-rrc3 E ag ot perueas saurnauros sarers petlun al{l ur af,uaplser

jo rp8ual 'a¡duexa ro¿ f¡ara¡durol ueqr ale¡edas or algrssod lllear lou se^\ tIr?qr srorf,eJ rJrllo aqr ol pereler llaso¡c os selr\ a8r reqr rno paurnl uauo rr rnq'ssofrns Sururea¡ pue sJor3eJ asoqt uee,l\tag drqsuolrelal eruos 'l¡¡ernreu 'serur

eJar{L :rralf ssel qf,nru s¿,tt. a¡ntcld agl 'uorlrsrnb¡e a8en8uel puoJes uI ssafons

rceg¿ ol rq8noqr aq rq8lru rEI{t srorf,¿J rarflo alp peulrutxa Ils^\o>pe¿ ueqA\

&u1utaal a8an&ual puotas ut sacuata[tp pnrultryul 96

96 Indiuidual dffirences in second language learning

Rate of learningSome research suggests that older learners may have an advantage in terms ofthe rate oflearning. They appear ro learn faster in the early stages ofsecond

lTgy"g. development. In 1978, Catherine Snow and Mariañ Hoefnagel-Hóhle published a study on a group of English speakers who were learningDutch as a second language while living in the Netherlands. The learneriincluded children as young as three years old as well as older children, ado-lescents, and adults. on tests administered when learners had been in thecountry for less than ayeaf,adolescents were by far the most successful learn-ers. They were ahead of everyone on nearly all of the tests. Furthermore, irwas the adults, not the children, whose scores were second best. In otherwords, adolescents and adults learned faster than children in the first fewmonths of exposure to Dutch.

By the end of the yea¡ the children were catching up, or had surpassed,the adults on several measures. Nevertheless, the adolescents retained thehighest levels of performance overall. The fact that the young children werecatching up, together with evidence from other studies, suggests that theywould probably surpass the older learners if they continued to have adequateopportuniry to use the language. However, this study shows that adults andadolescents can make considerable and rapid progress in their proficiency ina second language in contexts where they use the language in social, personal,professional, or academic interaction.

One view of critical period research that has had an important impact onthe way we look at studies of language acquisition has been expressed in thework ofVivian Cook (2008). He makes a srrong case for the inappropriate-ness of using the criterion of indistinguishable from a natiye speaker' as thebasis for success in second language acquisition. Indeed, Cook argues thata second language speaker or bilingual person should not be compared tomonolingual native speakers because the real goal is 'multicompetence', thatis, knowledge of multiple languages that inform and enrich one another.

Research on the long-term ourcomes of second language learning as well as

the rate of learning at different ages brings us to a question that is probablyofgreatest interesr ro mosr readers ofthis book tü/hat can we conclude aboutthe role of age when learning takes place primarily in an educational setting?

Ag. and second language instructionMany people who have never heard of the critical period hypothesis believethat, in school programmes for second or foreign language teaching, youngeris better'. However, both experience and research show that starting early isno guarantee ofsuccess and that older learners can arrain high levels ofprofi-ciency in their second language. In considering the best age at which to begin

ue8aq a8en8url puo3es e se qsr¡8uE uI uoltJnnsul ql¡Il'r re a8e aqr 'srua¡edruoü aJnssaJd or Sulpuodsar 'ragan| ur 'e¡dtuexa Jo{ 'uollf,nJtsulJo sJnor{

plol eJour fueu ¡etua f¡¡enrce rou leru JarlJEe uollfnJlsul 8un¡¿ls 's8uluas

Ieuonef,npa lu¿ru ur 'aJoruJar{lJnC 'uoruruof,un IIE tE lou sI uoItEntIS sIqI'pareaddeslp.,(¡ertuassa sluapnrsJo sdno¡8 o^u aql uee./v\tag sorueJeJlp puÉ.Jot¿urruouop uoruruof, Ja^\ol E ot r{f,"al ol pJpuat uortfnJlsulJo sJnol{ IElolreaal per{ per{ oq,&\ stuapnls eqr pue stuepnls uers-l¡rea parue^pe arou aqlrFoq P?q oq,^A sreqf,eel'uonfnJlsur snor,ta¡d ou P?I{ PEq oq^r sluaPnrs q}uv\

sass¿lf loor{3s ,ürpuocas ur pace¡d se^leslueql PunoJ seruneuros 'sarutur.lS-ord r.rers-l¡¡ea ur ssa¡3ord epru per{ oq,/v\ sluaprus lpnrs lreupuel $LGI)s,lleisrng erclJ uI'rarlree ulSeq oqzrr esoqt qrl&\ dn qrrec uaryo (¿1 ro'II'g 1 a8e ]E 'aldruexa .ro3) rarq rJers oq^\ esogl ¡aarrr ,red uollf,nJtsulJo sJnol{

ru.a3 e.,{¡uo aAreJaJ sJauJeal 'sruoolsse¡l a8en8ue¡u8raJoJ pur -puofes tsoru uI

:ate¡ Surqctar a8en8ue¡ u8larojJo puof,as ur8ag or luanse aJoru eg leu l 'seAII JralpJo ued lu¿uodrut ue

eg ol enurruof, III^\ a8en8ue¡ e^Ileu s,p¡ql eqr reql paurnsse sr tI uaq,t\ Pue'ruatsls Fuon"Jnpe uE ur sluapnrs IIe JoJ ÁIlq" a lleflunururof, f,Iseq sr po8eql uat¡,tr\ 'a8en8ue¡ rs.]g Epllql aql Jo tuaurdo¡a,rap ara¡druooul ro ssol eql

¡¡erua leru a8en8ue¡ puof,as ar{r or a¡nsodxa ellsuatul{1tea 'y rardeq3 ur

,ry\ES e¡ sE tale,ry\oH 'a¡qrssod se l¡rea se a8en8ue¡ agr lq pepunorrns l¡ara¡d-ruor ag ot reureel el{t JoJ alqerlsep aq peapul leu r1 'a8en8ue¡ raSrer aqr u¡

lruarcgord aIII-a neu sr Sulurea¡ a8en8ue¡ puores 3o a,trrralqo eqt uaqrk\

'uon?rrunuo.rd a>1r¡-erttreu qrl,t\>¡eads or uer{l JeI{tEJ asJnof fIrueP¿JE uE JoJ stxel PeaJ ol Jo 'suoIl?uIuIEXa

a8en8ur¡ u8raro3 uo paalons ol (uoltef,IunuruJof feplra,l,a ro3 aSrn8ue¡ agr

asn ot sr ¡eo8 asoq,l.r sreuJeal lueru 3o spaou aql ,fsrres ill^\ arup 3o por.rad

rroqs l¡a,r.rrelar E ur a¡lnbce 01 elqe ere srauJeal replo reqt s¡qs puz aSpa

1^lou>I agl 'Sulurre¡3o sa8ers f¡rea agr ur flrr¡n:rued uarp¡qr.ra8unof urqll¡prder a¡ou ssa.rSord sruacsa¡op¿ pue ueJpllt{r rJplo rer{r uaoqs seq l{f,rBaser

's8uluas asaqr uI 'tuaudo¡a,rap e8en8ut¡ PuoJes JoJ eIqEIIE E saf,Jnosal eql

pue qeo8 eqt ssesse ot luel¡odrur ll.relnrlr.red sl tt 's8uluas IEuoIlEf,nPa uI

'l:uarogord alll-a^neuJo tuauruletlt elp uo pue a8e

uo lpo sasnro3 qJlr{¡a 'slsaqroddq porrad I"f,IlIJr aqr uo I{rJEaseJ uo f¡a¡os

paseq aq louurr ulSaq p¡noqs uollrnJtsul ql¡I¡a re a8e agr tnoq¿ suoISIreP

'snql 'Surureel JoJ suolrlpuof ¡e¡cos arer.rdordde agr PuE 'uolle^IlouJ 'ePnl-nde sa,r¡orrur lcuarcgord a8rn8ut¡ puof,as Jo s¡e,ra¡ q8¡g Sutrlcear 'sJeuJBOI

raplo ro3 l¡er¡adsa 'teqt uaas osle a^Br{ e/N '3uturea13o a8e qrut parelsosse eJE

saruorlno SuruJeel ur saoueJeJlp IEI{I aouaPt,ra Suotls st atagl 'uaas azreg ar*. ry'(¿SOOZ umoqrq8rl) rrers a¡qlssod lsallree

aqrSo-ll¡lgerlsap aql ue^a ¡s-Á¡ss333u egt rnoqe suolsnlf,uof, or dunla/ur aJoJeg sJn3fo U qf,Iri,{\ ul txaluoo erp PuE auue¡8o.ld leuoltfnJtsul ueJo

qeo8 aqr rnoqe l¡1ryaJef, 1ulqr ot Ieltuasse sI lI 'uolllnJlsul a8en8uel Puof,Js

Sututaal aBanBuE puocas ur satua"ra¡[ty pn?ruryuJ L6

9B Indiuidual diferences in second knguage learning

was lowered in recent years from about age 9 or i0 to age 6, but the totalnumber of hours of instruction was not increased. Rather, the number ofminutes of instruction per week was spread over more years (Lightbown,2012). Thus, after years of classes, learners who have had an early start mayfeel frustrated by the lack of progress, and their motivation to continue may

be diminished. Clearly the age at which instruction begins is not the onlyvariable that determines success in the second language classroom.

For many years, it was difficult to compare early-start and later-start learners

because of all the variations in their educational contexts. Since the 1990s,

many more studies have allowed us to investigate this question more effec-

tively. Some large-scale research projects have been particularly useful inseparating the effect of age and other factors in school-based foreign lan-

guage learning. For example, in Spain, the Barcelona Age Factor (BAF)

project studied the effects of changing the age of beginning to teach English

to Catalan/Spanish bilingual students.

V/hen the starting age for teaching English was lowered, Carmen Mu ñoz andher colleagues took advantage of the opportunity to compare the learningoutcomes for students who had started learning at different ages. They were

able to look at students' progress after 100, 416, and 726 hours of instruc-tion. Those who had begun to learn later (aged 17,14, or 18+) performedbetter on nearly every measure than those who had begun earlier (aged B).

This was particularly true of measures based on metalinguistic awareness oranalytic abiliry. On listening comprehension, younger starters showed some

advantages. Muñoz suggests that this may be based on younger learners' use

of a more implicit approach to learningwhile older learners' advantages may

reflect their ability to use more explicit approaches, based on their greater

cognitive maturiry. She points out that, in foreign language instruction,where time is usually limited, younger learners may not have enough timeand exposure to benefit fully from the alleged advantages of implicit learning'(Muñoz 2006:33).

One of the advantages of the BAF project is that the researchers were able

to follow the same learners' language development over several years. This

enabled them to examine whether the early learners would eventually surpass

the older learners as has been observed in the 'natural' setting. This did nothappen-although the younger learners caught up, the older learners main-tained their advantage over time.

Decisions about when to start second language instruction in schools shouldbe based on realistic goals and on realistic estimates of how long it takes to

achieve them. One or two hours a week will not produce advanced second

language speakers, no matter how young they were when they began. Olderlearners may be able to make better use of the limited time they have forsecond language instruction.

66

.a8rn8ue1 puof,es e Bururea¡ ur In;ssef -fns aq uEf, ssf,ueJaJerd Sururea¡ pu' sarrrlrq' luaJeJlp r{1r.4 sJeuJ'al 'Eq]

0ssenr^r138 leuorlfnJlsulJo lrarre,r apr,r\ E rfr^\ lueuJuoJl^ua Sulurea¡ B alEaJf,o1 sr JJr{f,¿ar a rlrsues ar{l Jo ¡eo8 aqr 'ruoo.rsselc e ur ,ssa¡agreuoN .JeuJeeJ

aSenSue¡ B s¿ ssaf,f,ns JJr{ Jo srr{ af,uangul III^\ sflrsuatoeJpr.l3 s pnpnrpur JEI-nclued E,&oq rrlpa.rd orflnlslP r,tt"*rrJ, rng ,suor:e-rrrl,

"r¡d*or esaq¡

Jo JJnrsu aqr aroldxa or Suluursaq aJp sJar{f,J'es'U .seurt ruaJeJrp ]E suorl-lpuoc erues aql or f¡ruaragrp treer IIr,,!\ raureal etues er{l ,paepul.suorlrpuorSururea¡ arues eqt_ot l¡ruaragrp rr"r, ¡r^ sJauJ¿al tuaJaglp p.r" ."r1á-o,aJB stueu¡uo¡lnua Sulu¡eel pue sfnsrJelJeJer{J lenpr^rpur ueel\teq sdrqsuon-EI'J 'uoDrpp' uI Jarpou' auojo ruapuadapur 10u e.r' sfrlsrJarf'rer{r aql leqlrlEJ erp o1 pue srnsrralf,ErBqJ lenpr^rpur 8ur¡nsraru pue Sulugap 30 lr¡nr5-JIp eql or enp l¡rred sl sFlI .la¡d¡atur ol lsea slezvrp ro,, ,i" ,rrurrrgrpI'npr^rpur uo r.lJr'esal Jo srFser ar{t r¿qt peuJEJI a^eq e.&\ tarderlc srql uI

,fteululng

¿suottenlts luaJa#tp ut seulof,tnoluaJe#tp parueuadxa arreq lq8rtu slenpt^tput eqr r€L{r )utqr nol oq g

¿slenpt^tput aql ut luaJequt sef,uaJa#tpot enp aJe euof,tno ur saJueJa#rp aql lulLl¡ nol op luetxe leq^ oL

¿sauo)tno aql Jo, a¡qrsuodsal are are¡d)ool 3u!u.¡eal ar{r qltq^ ur s¡xetuof, aqt ¡€r{¡ ¿u¡qr nol op }ua¡xe reLl/v\ oI €

¿suoneDedxa asoql e8ua¡¡eqr ol uaes seuo qrq6 Z

¿3uru.rea¡ e8enSue¡ puof,es ut-tt,o )lel eq¡ Jo-ssof,f,ns ql!/v\ poleooss?erp leqt selqetJe^ eql moqe suollel¡adxa lnol ulguor sese) q)tr.l^\ |

'spuatJl pue sanSea¡¡or lnol¡o t€r]l pu€ e¡uar.¡adxaSutulee¡ a8en8ue¡ "rnol lnoqe l.€ alq€f ul eper.u nol salou eqt re )rpq )oo-l

sse))ns tululee¡ etentue¡pue sofuero#lp |Enp!^!pu! uo ltoBeu ,l.rt^trcv

nro./$, pu' ,l'rros ,¡euos.red3o lrrrr,A e ur sa8en8uey rreql esn ;','rtl'# ilf lueru reqr pu' ssaf,rns Jo la^el rsaq8rq aqr a^erqf,e op sreur¿al raplo a.,,oslEql sa^IesJno pullueJ ol lu¿uodrul sr t1 'Surureal ur sssJfns Fnluo^a pue 8ur-uJEell_o erEr {poq lfeJE r3q1 srolfeJ rueuodru¡ osp are Suluma¡ aSenSue¡ rojapntrrde ur sefueJaglp pnphrpur pue .uJeal ol uone^nou eql ,(ruoorsseloaqr eprsrno pue aplsul qroq) Surureel roJ sanlunt¡oddo eql .Burureal regrJo ssesf,ns l¿nlu3^e eql pue 8uru.ree1 a8en8uel puofes sarpeo.rdde pnphrpuru¿ rpq^\ ur fe¡r. aql eurr.uJalep reql $rlsrralf,BJer{l er{l Jo auo ljuo't, ,3y

&ututaal a&anSuol puotas ut satuata¡ftp pnplal7ul

100 Indiuidual dffirences in second language learning

Questions for reflectionI Think of an example of a member of a majority group learning the language

of a minority group and one of a member of a minority group learning amajority group's language. How might the power relationships betweengroups of speakers affect the attitudes of language learners? How might thestatus of the languages affect opportunities for learning?

2 As a second/foreign language teacher or learner,what are your views aboutteaching grammar? Do you have any specific preferences for how it should

be taught or when? Do you know what your students' preferences mightbe for grammar teaching. lf not, do you think it would be useful to find out?

3 lf you were teaching English as a foreign language in a country with limitedopportunities for secondary and post-secondary education in English, whatrecommendations would you make regarding the age at which English

instruction would begin? What research would you draw on in supportingyour recommendations?

Suggestions for further readingDórnyei, 2.2005. The Psychohgy of the Language Learner: Indiuidual

Dffirences in Second LanguageAcquisition. Mahwah, NJ: LawrenceErlbaum and Associates.

Dórnyei reviews decades of research on how individual differences affectsecond language learning. The book covers personalityvariables, aptitude,motivation, learning sryles, learning strategies, and other individual char-

acteristics such as anxiety and willingness to communicate that may vary

according to the learning environment. Both thorough and accessible, thisreview concludes by emphasizing the evidence that individual differences

are strongly affected by the situation in which learning takes place rather

than being'context-independent and absolute.'

Muñoz, C. (ed.). 2006. Age and the Rate of Foreign Language Learning.

Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.

The Barcelona Age Factor study is the basis of this edited volume. Ten

chapters report on various aspects of students' learning of English, com-

paring the outcomes for students whose foreign language instructionbegan at different ages. In addition to the specific research reports on, forexample, the students' oral fluenry, vocabular¡ and rate of learning, there

is an overview chapter in which Carmen Muñoz, the project director and

editor of the volume, discusses the project in terms of broader issues of age

and language learning at school.

'Sulurea¡ Z'I perJnJrsur snsJal IEJnlEuJo sarprus pu? uonfnJlsurJosadlr ruaraglp or uorrelal ur selgErJEA rau;ea¡ SururuJexe sarpnrs lroreroqe¡pue ruooJSSEIf, sepnlfur srgl 'SurureelZ-Itc¿üa ol lxJluoJ Sulureal JEInf,rl-;ed e qrvrn rf,EJerur selqerJe JauJEJI lenpr^rpur,&\oq Sunr8nsa,rul qf,JeesaJ

segrJcsep uortf,es puof,as agt ur rardeqr r{)BE 'uonoura pue 'ltarxue 'uorl-e^rtour 'apniltde or PelBIeJ {Jo-ry\ IEfrleJoaql uo snfoJ uonf,es 1sJ5 aqr

ur s.rardeq: eql 'sualuoc Suru;ra1 put srusrJetreJer{3 raureel lrnpl^¡puluee \teg suonssJelur uo snf,oJ uortfallof PerrPe srqr 01 sJotngrJtuof, aql

'sururefuag uqof :urpranruy'8utu.taa7a8an&uaT pattn"¿$ul ?up saruata[rq pnpta?pul '7,007, '(pr) U .uosurgo¿

Sututoal a8anSual puocas ut sacuata¡{tp pnruaryul IOI

pesn llepr,&\Jo ruaudole^ap eqr ur lpf,errp tlg sE,/!\ aruangur rrer.Ll .a^'reds-red srgr 3o sruauodo¡d o¡u ann $r96y) ope-I ueqo¡ pue (096I) s>loorgt^otlt_N 's0/-61aqr 01 s076I eql ruo5 'Eruaurv r{uoN ur f¡ercadsa ,Surgcear

a8enSue¡ uSraro3 pue puof,as uo esuangur pjiaz*od ¿ peq rusunor^Eqeg

uotlvztloutau¿

Fu? hcptl¡1y :saouprtlddp a&pnsupl ?uoras

'suslunr{ JoJaluEs eql aq 01 pezsaqrodlq se,ryl ssaco¡d SuruJeel eql rnq ,sprurue,(ror"toq"¡r{11&\ auop serur. ,fioagr lsrJnor^Er{ag urqrl,r\ q)JEeseJ l¡.rea agr jo r{f,nw .uon-EruJoJ rrqBr{ puE '(ssaoons uo >lfEqpaaj ro) tuaurac;ojura¡ ,acllce¡d ,uollsllrur

Jo suJel ul Suru;ea¡ paure¡dxa lroaqr lsrJnor^Eqeg ;1 -rardrq3 ur ,ryr's e¡a s\y'.

e lpeds¡ad lsr¡nol,wqeq eql'lxatuof pnos re8.re1 e ur uollrslnbce

a8enSurl puoras sare¡d reqr a,rnrads;ad e ,lroaqr p.r.rproiros tE >lool III \arvr'l¡eurg 'uonBtuJoJur sa erJreJ pue 'sazruesJo .surcleJ ,sa,Lla¡¡ad p"t- rqtle-vr aqr azrseqdrua sarJoeql asaql 'sreal ruafal ur r{f,J'aseJ a8en8ue¡ puofespaurJojur llSulsea;cur J^Er{ rer{r l8o¡oqrlsd a,rnruSoc ruo{ sJrJoer{l au¡ostE lool oslE IIr^r e/xt 'uorlrsrnbce aSenSuel puof,as roJ lunoffp 01 pepuerxeueeq e^Eq 1 rardeg3 ur

^\ES a1rr' ter{l uoursrnb¡¿ a8en8ue¡ lsJg JoJ suoneu

-e1dxa rsrleuul pue rsrJnorler{eg eqr ,llor{ rB {ool IIp\ e/N .rr-orrndBuruJpel

IEug puE ssa¡8o¡d ¡eruarudo¡a,rap a3rn3ur1 puores roJ lunoff,E o1 paJaJoueag e Eq lBr{l ssrJoaqr eql Jo eruos surtrrExe e1v\ rardrgr srqr uI .slxeluof

1o fial.re,r E ur srnsrJerf,¿JBqJ Jo óel¡¿,r. E r{rL!\ sJauJeal lq uorrrslnbre a8en8-uEI JoJ tunorre ot speau uonlslnbr¿ a8en8ue¡ puof,as3o lroagt ¡eraua8 y

^.eI eJd

DNINUVE] EDVNDNV-ICINOf,flS DNINIV]dXE

t04 Exp laining second language learning

audiolingual teaching materials and in teacher training. Classroom activities

emphasized mimicry and memorization, and students learned dialogues and

sentence patterns by heart. Because language development was viewed as the

formation of habits, it was assumed that a person learning a second language

would start offwith the habits formed in the first language and that these

habits would interfere with the new ones needed for the second language.

Thus, behaviourism was often linked to the contrastive analysis hypothesis.

However, as we saw in Chapter 2, researchers found that many of the errors

learners make are not predictable on the basis of their first language, nor do

they always make the errors that would be predicted by a simple comparison

oftheir first and second languages. This discovery led to the rejection ofboththe contrastive analysis hypothesis and behaviourism, leading to a period

during which both the role of the first language and the role of practice

in learning a second language received limited attention in both research

and pedagogy.

In Chapter 2, we saw ample evidence that second language learners draw on

what they already know-including previously learned languages. However,

we also saw that they are sometimes reluctant to transfer certain first language

patterns, even when the translation equivalent would be correct. And we saw

ihat first language infuence may become more aPparent as more is learned

about the second language, leading learners to see similarities that they had

not perceived at an earlier stage. All this suggests that the infuence of the

learnert first language may not simply be a matter of habits, but a more

subtle and complex process of identifying points of similariry, weighing the

evidence in support of some particUlar feature, and even refecting (though

not necessarily consciously) about whether a certain feature seems to 'belong'

in the target language.

By the 1970s, many researchers were convinced that behaviourism and the

contrastive analysis hypothesis were inadequate explanations for second lan-

guage acquisition. As we shall see, however, as research on second language

á.q,rirition has evolved, the explanations offered by behaviourism and the

contrastive analysis hypothesis have been revisited and understood in terms

of new learning theories.

The innatist perspectivefu we saw in Chapter 1, the rejection of behaviourism as an explanation

for first language acquisition was partly triggered by Chomsky's critique ofit. Chomsky argued that innate knowledge of the principles of Universal

Grammar permits all children to acquire the language of their environment

during a critical period of their development. \X/hile Chomsky did not make

specifrc claims about the implications of his theory for second language

learning, Lydia \X/hite (2003) and other linguists have argued that Universal

EOI

8uil1rapun aouaradruo¡ aqr selquesal a8en8url puof,as er{Uo esn aqr serTJepuntegt acuatadruof, ar{r Jer.parÍ\\ ur pelsaJalul a.re laql 'sJauJBal Suruurseq 3oa8en8ur¡ aldrurs aql ur u'r{r rar{r'r-r,ruruerS xaldruor 3o a8palz*o'I rraql

-sJerTJEal-pafuB pE 3o acuaradruor a3en3ue1 aql uI pelseJalur l¡ensn arr

a,tlpads-lad on B ruo5 uorllslnbre a8enSuel puofas lpnrs oqn sJar{f,Jtasau

'sarnlBal aSen8uel r{rns uo lleqpeeJ pue uon)nJrsurJo rraJa aqt uo rlrreeser eruos eas ill^\ e-^a

, (te pue g 1 salpnrg) 9 ratdeq3 u1

'sra4eads gruarc lq parnpord sacualuas ur sqra^p' qsq8ug 3o l.'-ri"1áaqr3o lpnrs serrrl6 u,r srqrJo aldurexa poo8 e./v\Es a1ü .¿ rardeq3 uI .tou oplaqr 'rcej ur 'uaqrvl a8en8uel puocos eqr ur sruap,unba a,t"q já"du'I rsrger{r Jo seJnlf,nJls auos leql erunssE feru laqr (esr.&ueq}o .a3en8ue¡ puof,es3r{l ul ImnEuru¿¡8 lou sr lBr{ \ lnoqE uorleu;o3ur rl]rTdxa peJu saurrlauJosleu s¡au¡ea¡ a8en8ue¡ puores'a8enSue¡ rsJg er{rJo uolusrnbce aqr rq parerl'sl DOJo arnteu ar{l JSnE3aq ,regr rsaSSns os¡e laqr ta,rarvrolq 'a8en8ue¡ aqr

Jo esn ¡nSSuluearu ur pa8e8ua are sraurpal uaqm llprnreu aceld rrr1"l rá"n'B-uEI ,\\au eql Jo saJnleej ¡rcrteruure;8 lueu 3o uorlrslnb¡e reqr aarSe sJer{lopuE (I66I) ellqrt\ ep/1 .a8en8ml ar{rJo ernlrnJts Surl¡rapun aqlJo uop-lsrnbce agr .ra38rrr ot luarf,gns sl a8enSuel terpJo s.ra>1eads r{tr^\ uonf,EJetuJ'lueuJuoJr^ua sJauJeal aqr ur aSenSuel IEJnlEuJo Ál1lqe1re,re aqr uo pesEg sr

uonrsrnb:e a8en8uel regt san8rc aqg .aBenSuEI ,ryreu er{r Jo a8palzrroul crre-ruatsls Surl¡rapun eql rf,aJE rou op pue arueurojrad a8en8url ¡[o srcadse

¡elrg:adns lluo a8uegr ll?qpaal puB uoDrnrtsur leql sepnlf,uor .alduexaroJ'(€66I) zu¿^il{3s aruuog .a3en3ue1 puof,es ar{rJo a3pa1.,r,rou1 (sreurEsltf,eJe llrlv\ >flEqpaal Jo lrr¡qe1re,re eqr Jo uorlfnrlsur IEtuJoJ ,r\oq lnoqe sese

-podlq rrar{l ur raJrp oslu >lro,&etup{ Dn ar{l urqtl/v\ 8uqro,l.r. sJer{f,reese¡

'sa8en8ue¡ Jer{loJo uortrsrnbre aqr lq paratle uaog ser{ eJnleulfexa slr rEr{l }ng 'sJeuJBal aSenSue¡ puoJes or 3lgelrc^B pue ruesa.rd aq leruDn lBr{t an8re sragrc) 'uolllslnbce a8en8uel puof,as puE tsJg ur eurEs ar{r aJE

OnJo lrrlrge¡e,re puE aJnleu erp ter{r rurEIJ./\4,er^ srqr ploq oq,&\ slsrroer{r eqt

Jo eiuos 'sJauJEal a8en8ue¡ tsJg ot se ila,/v\ s3 sJeuJ¿el a8en8ue¡ puo)es ol alqB-lleñ aq rsntu DnJo a8pa¡r*orq ler{l sr uorrecr¡drur aql .or pesodxa ere laqrrndul eqr un llarnua puedap ot peq feqr 3¡ peurrel a,teq l¡geuosear plnof,lar¡r uegr a8en8ue¡ aqr lnog' aroru moul llpnrue^a sreur'al reqr rlEJ er{r roJuorteue¡dxa up paau e./v\ ,sr lEr{I .uorllslnb¡e a8en8uel puo3as 1o ,.ua1qorá¡ecr8o¡ aql, ilrls sr erer{l rBr{r rno lulod s;aqro pue (€002) loo3 uer^rl

?t\oleq pegulssp ssuoer{r pclSo¡oqolsd ¡e.raua8 erolu arpJo auo sdeqrad'l.roeqr Jar{to auos lq peuleldxe aq ol seq uonrsnbce a8en8ue¡ puooes reqrsutaru srql 'aer^ rreqr u1 'pol.rad Ipf,rlrrr agr passed a,req or{,4 sraurea¡ lq llpn-adsa 'eSenBuEI puofas ¿Jo uorlrsrnbce aqr JoJ uoneueldxa poo8 E JeJo tousaop lr 'uorllsrnbc¿ a8en8ue¡ rs.rg SurpuersJapun JoJ lJod\aruerj arerrdo;ddeue aq leru 3¡ q8nogr¡e ,reqr parsaSSns azreq (9661) rerr{rerps ullanbrefpu¿ (066I) ueruo-r¡-fa¡g ueqo¡ a¡druexa ro3 (srar{ro .uolllsmb¡e a8en8-uEI Puof,as puelsJepun o1 r{Jrrl^\ uro.I3 a,urads.rad rseq 3rF sJeJo JptutuEJS

&urutua1 a&an&ual puotas 7ururuldxE

r06 Exp kining secorud language learning

the language performance of native speakers. Thus, their investigations ofteninvolve grammaticality judgement or other methods to probe whatknow about the language rather than observations ofnatural language use.

Second langaage app lications : Kras lten's'Monitor Mod¿l'Perhaps the best known model of second language acquisition infuenced byChomskyt theory of first language acquisition is Stephen IGashent (1982)Monitor Model, first described in the early 7970s, at a time when there was

growing dissatisfaction with language teaching methods based on behaviour-ism. Krashen described his model in terms of five hypotheses.

Inthe acquisitionl learninghypothesis, Krashen suggests that we 'acquire' lan-guage as we are exposed to samples of language that we understand in muchthe same way that children pick up their first language-with no conscious

attention to language form. \We 'learn' on the other hand through conscious

attention to form and rule learning. In Krashent view, far more language is

acquired than learned.

Next, according to the monitor hypothesis, second language users draw onwhat they have acquired when they engage in spontaneous communica-tion. They may use rules and patterns that have 6een learned as an editoror 'monitor', allowing them to make minor changes and polish what theacquired system has produced. Such monitoring takes place only when thespeaker/writer has plenry of time, is concerned about producing correct lan-

guage, and has learned the relevant rules.

The natural orderhypothesis was based on the finding that, as in first language

acquisition, second language acquisition unfolds in predictable sequences, as

we saw in Chapter 2.The language rules that are easiest to state (and thus tolearn) are not necessarily the first to be acquired.

The comprehensible input hypothesis is that acquisition occurs when one

is exposed to language that is comprehensible and contains i + I .The'i' rep-resents the level of language akeady acquired, and the'+f is a metaphor forlanguage (words, grammatical forms, aspects of pronunciation) that is just astep beyond that level.

Krashen's ffiuiue fber hypothesis is proposed to account for the fact thatsome people who are exposed to large quantities of comprehensible input donot necessarily acquire language successfully. The 'affective filter' is a meta-phorical barrier that prevents learners from acquiring language even whenappropriate input is available. Afect rcfers to feelings of anxiety or negative

attitudes that, as we saw in Chapter 3, may be associated with poor learn-ing outcomes. A learner who is tense, anxious, or bored may fber oulinput,making it unavailable for acquisition.

¿os aq rq8ru slqr lq^ suosper eruos Jo )ulqr nol u€J I

'Surqreat e8en8ue¡

Puof,as ul lelluanUul Peul?uel aAeq s/v\alA EuaqsEJ) 'sseleqilaAaN'salPnls

l€lrJrdua ur saseqlod,(q a^U aqr lset ol flnlu$tp st lt leqt stsEq eqt uo ll!€d'lapo¡ Joiluoh quaqseJ) ro lllprle^ aqt pauotlsenb elpq sJaltJ^ ,o Jeqrunu V

lepol^l Jolluol,^l eql autuexf Art^trcv

'os aq leru srqr lqr* ure¡dxa or dleq l8o¡or¡clsd a¡rtruSo¡ ur prdola^rpsarJoJrll Suru;ea1 ruorS srq8rsur auos 'uonf,nJtsur paprn8 ot ssef,l¿ aAEr{ oslB

laqr ssa¡un a8enSue¡ puof,as eqr Jo saJnreal eruos uo ssa¡8o¡d JequnJ e>ltruor 1rr3 laqr qrrq.^a ruo5 turod e qcear leu sluapnls ler{} le^e

^.oq 'u./v\oqs os[E

a^Er{ serpnts 'uonf,nJtsur DeJrp lnoql.u lndur a¡q¡suaqarduor ol a¡nsodxaq8no;gr ssarSordSo pap rea;8 e aletu uer sluapnts ]eqt parurguor seq r{f,reesar

ruooJSsEIJ 'uonrsrnbf,E a8en8ue¡ puooas ur qJJEeseJ.roJ sueprJo afJnos e uaeqe Eq 'srsaqtodlg tndur algrsuar¡ardruor ar{l l¡plradsa 'sasar¡rodfg s,uaqsrr)'paruarualdrur l¡apr,l uaaq seq 'Surgrear a8rnSue¡ pasBg->lsel pue 'pJseq-tuJt-uo: <uorsJeruur Surpn¡oul 'Surgrrar a8en8ue¡ e^nef,runruu¡oc '9 rardeq3 uraes III/* a \ sE 'uarll a3urs 'Surueetu uo snooJ E r{trr't a8en8uel Sursn pazrserldrua]Eqt ser{Jeo¡dde or 'san8o¡erp Surzr¡oruaru Jo salnJ 8ulu.rea1 pazlseqdualEIp sar{feoJdde paseq-aJntf,nJts ruo;J uonrsueJt ur s¿,4 Surqceer aSen8ue¡

puofes uaq,u. polrad e Surrnp ltltuengur a¡a,,'r tuarudola^ep aSrnSue¡ puof,astnoqB seapr srq 'sselar{uala¡ '(¿961 aug¿¡) rlrJeasar ruoü suorsnlf,uof,3uo¡rv' eqr u.ry\Brp seq rr{ r¿r{t ro (ZSe t u${8nr1o¡¡) r{rreesar ¡eclrrdura ursasaqrodfq suaqseJ) tset ot a¡grssod lou sr tr rrqr pan8re a^Erl ruor{^Uo auJos

'slsuoaqt pue srer{rreesar ;eqto fq pa8ualpr{r ueeg Iepontr rolruory aql

LOI8utu.taa1 a&an8ual puocas &ururu1 dxE

108 Exp laining second language learning

2 Which of the hypotheses do you find intuitively convincing?

3 Which ones leave you sceptical? Whyl

The cognitive perspectiveSince the 1990s, research and theories from cognitive psychology have

become increasingly central to our understanding of second language devel-

opment. Some of these theories use the computer as a metaphor for the mind,comparing language acquisition to the capacities of computers for storing,integrating, and retrieving information. Some draw on neurobiology, seeking

to relate observed behaviour as directly as possible to brain activity.

As in first language acquisition, cognitive and developmental psychologists

argue that there is no need to hypothesize that humans have a language-spe-

cific module in the brain or that acquisition and learningare distinct mental

processes. In their view, general theories of learning can account for the

gradual development of complex syntax and for learners' inabiliry to sPonta-

neously use everything they know about a language at a given time. As notedabove, some linguists have also concluded that, while the innatist perspective

provides a plausible explanation for first language acquisition, somethingelse is required for second language acquisition, since it so often falls shortof full success. From the cognitive psychology persPective, however, first and

second language acquisition are seen as drawing on the same processes ofperception, memory, categorization, and generalization. The difference lies

in the circumstances of learning as well as in what the learners already knowabout language and how that prior knowledge shapes their perception of the

new language.

Info rm ati o n p r o c e s s ingCognitive psychologists working in an information-processing model ofhuman learning and performance see second language acquisition as the

building up of knowledge that can eventually be called on automaticallyfor speaking and understanding. Robert DeKeyser (1998), Richard Schmidt(200 1) and others have suggested that learners must pay attention at first to

any aspect ofthe language that they are trying to learn or produce' 'Pay atten-

tion' in this context is accepted to mean 'using cognitive resources to process

informatiori but there is a limit to how much information a learner can pay

attention to. Thus, learners at the earliest stages will tend to use most of theirresources to understand the main words in a message. In that situation, they

may not notice the grammatical morphemes attached to some of the words,

especially those that do not substantially affect meaning. Graduall¡ through

experience and practice, information that was new becomes easier to process,

and learners become able to access it quickly and even automatically. This

'uortout ur ssefoJd eqltas leqt a8pay'r,ou1 e^rreJelf,ap aqt passassod aruo larp rerp ¿ztIe¿J uola lou,{eru sraleads luJng 'uoseal srr{r Jo{ 'uenoSroj eq leur 'arurl ur 'qcn1,n 'a8pa-¡¡aoul alnerelf,ap agr sesdqea a8palz'rou1 ¡e.rnpaco.rd'aonce¡d g8noue qrr¿¡'elour f¡a¡'a 8ul¡edatd pue rnoqe Sur1ulqr l¡euolruarur elrq^\ elr>ls Jo Jef, E

a^rJp ot Buúrr3o'a¡duexa JoJ '.{ulql'tr3o ef,utruJoSrad qroous aqr srdnrsrpl¡¡enrre llr,ts aqr ruroSrad or Sull¡r alrqr'r a8pa¡noul e^nerellap ar{r rnoqeSuqurqr 'pazrteruotne eruofag silDIS af,uo 'a¡'ncads¡ad srql or Sulprory

'a8pa¡z',rou1 a^rl¿relrap sz lsr5 tr paureal 8uu'eq ra8ro3 leurJauJEel eq] pue pazrleruolne auof,aq uec a8pa¡r'rou1 leJnpelo;d aqt 'aonoe;dpenulluo3 grr¿¡ 'a8pa1,trou>I lll asn ol lrlllq" er{r ro 'a8pa¡,rtou1 lurnpef,-ord aruooaq leu a8palmoul a^nerelf,ap'acrrorrd q8norgr 'trr¡l sr srsagrodlgar{I 'elnJ ¡trurue¡8 e 'a¡druexa to3 '8uv'eq Jo eJ¿,tre aJE e^\ rrr¡r a8palmourl'sr teqt 'a8pa¡r'lou1 a lleJelf,ap r{lr1rt stJels 'Sururea¡ a8en8ue¡ Surpn¡cul '8ur-ureal tsoru regr rsaSSns laql ',Sulureel IIDIS, se uonlsrnb¡t aSrn8ue¡ puoraspareSnsa,rur e er{ srerpo pue (L007,'IO0Z'966I) raslayaq uaqo¡ '<>lro1d

G6GD suosrepuv 'U 'I uo Sulz*erq 'sJeqf,reasal lueu lq paro¡dxa uaaqeler{ uonrsrnbce aBrnBuEI puolas ot saqcro;dde Sulssacord uonrru;o3u1

'euJn auo le ul a8e8ua uEf, e,4i\

lr¡,rrrre lelueru pesnloJJo tunoruB arlt or trurl E sr aJaql regr srsaSSns IepotuSulssaco¡d uoneuroJur a{L 'rl puagardruoc f¡ry op l¡enrua,r.a faqr3l ua.ta

'lxat E puetsJapun ot aurrl aJouJ pJau sJepEaJ a8en8uq puocas lqr'r urc¡dxa otsd¡aq Sulueaur ot sseJJE Jneruotne Jo lJel aql 'rueql uaa.&\tag sdrqsuolre¡ar

erp pue spro.,'l' Fnpr^rpur 3o Suluearu aql Sulssaco¡d uo uonuauB rraql JoaJoru esn sJauJeal tuarcgord ssal seaJer{.&\'uoDes¡eluor Jo rxet r3o Suruearu

IpJe^o eqr ot uonuene IInJ rraqr a,l.l8 ue¡ s¡asn a8en8ue¡ ruarcgo.rd 'sngl'uoneurJoJul ¡*au Sulssaco;d ro; papeau sa)Jnosal Jo pupl agr dn esn louop sasuodsal Jnrurotnr r{lns 'rr puelsJapun rnq d¡aq touue) lagl 'puorasr{ds e JoJ ua^a 'pJo1v\ JBrlruEJ E JEer{ sJeuetsrl rualrgord ueqAys8urueaupJo,/úJo I"AarJleJ aql sr Surssaco¡d e8en8uel ur llorteuolneJo rcadse raqrouy

.(SOOZ preuley¡¡pue (ql¿l¡-uosdrulg 'sr¡E) a.rua8 cglcads e ul e8en8uel uanrr^\ pue a8en8ue¡

IeuorlesJa^uol r{Jnru ol oslt lnq 'suolssa.rdxa rneruorpr or l¡uo rou sar¡dde

suraued jo esn srql'raqraSor rncco l¡ecldlr ]Erp spro^\Jo s8ur¡rs Sursn lqJar{l¿J tng aurn ¿ te pJoA\ euo Sursoor¡: lq sacuetuas ¡aeu aleeJr rou op s.raleads

rueng 'sr lEr{I 'f,relnuroJ f¡r.red rsEal le JrE reql a8en8ue¡3o su¡erl¿d alqerf,rp

-ard ruo.r3 ur'reJp sr les sraleads aseql rer.{,&Jo r{f,nru 'aJoruJaqunC 'f,neruolne

l¡eltuassa sr sJa>fJEru porteruruerS are¡.rdo.rdde eq] qrv!\ .raqraSor uagr 8ul-8ur¡ls pue 'rueql Surcunouo.¡d 'spror'r Sursoogc 'sra>leads ruatcgo.ld ;o¿

'f,lteruolnr auof,aq l¡¡enprr8 'uJnt ur 'tBr{laSen8ue¡ agrjo snadse raqto efnou ol sa:¡nosa.r Surssaco¡d a¡.rlru8oc dn saar3

&ulutaa1 aSan&ual puotas &uturu1 dxE 60r

110 Exp laining second knguage learning

Sometimes changes in language behaviour do not seem to be explainablein terms of a gradual build-up of fluenry through practice. These changeshave been described in rerms of restrucruring (Mclaughlin i990). Theyseem to be based on some qualitative change in the learner's knowledge.Restructuring may account for what appear to be bursts of progress, whenlearners suddenly seem to 'put it all together', even though they have not hadany new instruction or apparently relevant exposure to the language. It mayalso explain apparent backsliding, when a systematic aspecr of a learner's lan-guage incorporates too much or incorporates the wrong things. For example,as we saw in Chapter 2, when a learner finally masrers the use of the regular-ed endingto show past tense, irregular verbs that had previously been usedcorrectly may be affected. Thus, after months of saying 'I saw a film', thelearner may say'I seed' or even 'I sawed'. Such overgeneralization errors arenot based on practice of those specific items but rather on their integrationinto a general pattern.

Another concept from psychology offers insight into how learners store andretrieve language. According to transfer-appropriate processing (TAP),information is best retrieved in situations that are similar to those in which itwas acquired (Lightbown 2008b). This is because when we learn somethingour memories also record aspects of the context in which it was learned andeven the cognitive processes involved in the way we learned it, for example,by reading or hearing it. To date, most of the research on transfer-appropriateprocessing has been done in laboratory experiments, for example, comparingthe learning ofword lists under different conditions. However, the hypothesisseems to offer a plausible way of explaining a widely observed phenomenonin second language learning: knowledge that is acquired mainly in rule learn-ing or drill activities may be easier to access on tests that resemble the learningactivities than in communicative situations. On the other hand, if learners'attention is drawn to grammatical forms during communicative activitiesin which their cognitive resources are occupied with a focus on meaning,the retrieval of those forms on a grammar test may be more difficult. InChapter 6, a classroom investigation of L2learning influenced by transfer-appropriate processing is described in Study 40.

Uage-based learningAs seen in the discussion of first language acquisition in Chapter 1, cognitivepsychologists, unlike innatists, s€e no need to hypothesize the existence ofa neurological module dedicated exclusively to language acquisition. Theyargue that what is innate is simply the ability to learn, rather than any specificlinguistic principles. Some usage-based theories also attribute less impor-tance to the kind of declarative knowledge that characterizes skill learningand traditional structure-based approaches to second language instruction.As Nick Ellis (2002) explains, the emphasis is on the frequency with which

uo Sursnf,oJ 'xoq lun e gsnd ¡1op loq e Surleru lq rno lr ltrE IIr^\ lagr ,loqqsnd xog, sE r{3ns spJo^\Jo 8ul¡ls e rraq laqrJI'snr r.'sef,uetuas ppo rard-rJlur ot plJo,&\ eqr ur >lro1( s8urqr len agt jo a8pa¡mou1 rraqr pue l¡erurue

Jo san3 asn l¡¡ensn uer uarpllqr Sunpads-qsl¡8ug p¡o real-ae;gr pup -o1{'rrefqo eqr uaqr'qJa eql uarll 'tsrg

rralgns eql suorluau aruatuas gsrpuE pcrdlr aq] 'sr tEqL '(O S) ralqg-qra¡-roalqns JapJo er{l a^Eq saf,uelues qsllSug tsory 'srueuoduoc ef,ueluasuae,{ueg sdlqsuonelal aqrJo Jorrf,rpur uoururof, lsou eql s¿ JapJo pJo,tr sasn

qsr¡3ug ¿Surueau eqt tno arn8g nof sdlaq req¿6'snorlqo l¡arerparuul rousI af,ualuas e 3o Sulueau eqr eJeqa uonentrs e ur Jealf seruof,eq srql 'r{rea

jo lrerurrd eqr ur JeJrp lagr rnq 'sano a¡dn¡nuJo esn a>pru saBenBuBI tso4'Jcuatuas or{l ur sunou agr;o lrerurue er.lt pue

(sJa>lJeru ¡erlreruuetS tap:o

p.roll, lq pa¡eu8ls aq leu erualues E ur spro^/d uae uaq drqsuonela.r aqr

'aldruexa JoC 'suonlun; oylcads pu8ls rerp (senf,, er{t asn ol /(oq puetsJepun01 aruof aSen8ue¡ re¡nrnred e 3o sraleads 's8uluearu relncnred qrr^\ peterJ-osse a8en8uel3o sa¡duexeJo spuesnoqt or ernsodxa qSnon¡1 'asn aSenSue¡

pue Suruearu a8enSue¡ osp tnq ruro3 a8en8ue¡ l¡uo lou lunoroe olur sa>pl

leql uonrsrnbce a8en8uel puores pue rsrg r{¡oq roJ uorreue¡dxa uE s¿ (lapou¡uolr¡redruoc, eqt pagrr3sap (I86I)lauun¡¡trery uerrg pue saleg qteqezrlg

P?otlt uoqtQdruor aql

'sJoJJe uorltzrlEJeuaS¡a,ro3uu¡eru ua^e 'azrleJaua8 os¡e uec tng rndur uror3 ,urea¡,lpo tou uer 'ue¡8o¡d¡atndruo¡ e lq pare¡nurs (ursruer{f,au Sulurea¡ e rer{r u,r\oqs seq qf,JpasaJ

pasrg-a8esn '1 rardeq3 ur patou sV 'arun E tE pJol( auo raqtaSot ]nd lllensnlou eJE saserrld Jo seJuelues pur 'spJol'r a18urs ueqr ra8re¡ suun ur pauJeall¡rred rsea¡ re sr a8en8uel 'srar{lo pue (1002 't007) sr¡191cr¡ lq parsaSSns ry'qunrp Jo slrun rrEInuJoJ uo paseg luetxe algeJaprsuof E or pue 'e¡gerclpa;dsr saJuaS re¡ncnred ur Jo uonesJeluoJ freulpro ur asn a,l¿' aSenSuel eql JoI{3ntu rBI{r 3 og¿ PauollueuJ uollB^Jesgo aql uJoü seluol sr'ral,r paseg-a8esn

JoJ ef,uepila Jqr Jo ewos 'JaqteSor uragr af,ueuedxe ol serlrunlJoddo .rarvta3

uaaq a Er{ aJar{t asnBraq .ra>pan flalrl¿ler aq leu laqr ro f¡ruanbarS raqraSor

peJJn)fo aler{ saJnlpa3 a8en8uel eqt esnereg Suo,lls aq feru suonJeuuo3

'tuJoJ qJe^ tfeJJor er{l selelufB unouo¡d rcalgns qoea

reqt uerJo os .sl¿s aq, pu¿ les 1, se qcns sa¡druexe pJrar{ a,reg lagr asntf,eq

rnq elnJ "

1üoDI larp asneraq lou 'tfaJJof luauaa¡3e gra,r-rcefqns ra8 tq8rusreuffal 'a¡druexa rog 'punu s,reur?el aqr ur (s)raqro aqr erp^ltlB III^I erntrcJcnsm8ur¡ Jo leuonenrrs auoJo acuasa¡d aqr l¡enrualg 'Jnf,Jo lar¡r gcrqi'r urstxaluof er{r pue saJnleeJ a8en8url uea,l\tag s¿ ila,tr sE saJnleal asaql uae,r\teqsuonf,euuof, Jo suonErf,oss"Jo >lJo1v\tau ¡e8uo.ns pue raSuo.lts e do¡a,rap sra

-ureal ?'rerl srql ot Surp.roly :aqtaSor rn)f,o sarnl¿a3 e8en8uel qf,rq \ qrv\{lcuanbar3 ar{t pur tndur eqt ur saJnreal :rrsrn8urT f,glleds Je}unorua sJeuJtal

Sututaal a8an&ual puotas Sututal dxE TII

r12 Exp laining second language learning

the fact that the'boy' is the natural agent ofaction in this situation. However,the SVO pattern is so strong in English that, by the time they are four yearsold, children hearing this sentence will ignore the fact that boxes dont nor-mally move on their own, and carefully demonstrate how the box pushes theboy. For English speakers, word order patterns are srronger than animacycues at this point. At this age, children may attribute the SVO relationshipto sentences in the passive voice. That is, 'The box was pushed by the boy'may be interpreted as 'The box pushed the boy.' Only later do they learn topay attention to the grammatical markers that distinguish the active voicesentence from the passive word order.

In contrast, Spanish and Italian have more fexible word orde¡ and speak-ers of these languages rely more on grammatical markers (for example, theagreement of subject and verb, the case marking of pronouns) or on theanimacy of nouns to understand how sentence elements are related. \lhenEnglish speakers are learning these languages, rhey may have difficulry sup-pressing their tendency to rely on word order as the basis for interpretation.For example, an English speaking learner of Italian may find it confusing tohear sentences such as Il giocanolo guarda il bambino (the toy-is lookingat-the boy). An Italian speaker, accustomed ro more fexible word order,focuses on the animacy of the two nouns and concludes rhat the most rea-sonable interpretation is that the boy is looking at rhe roy. According to thecompetition model, second language acquisition requires that learners learnthe relative importance of the different cues appropriate in the language theyare learning (Mac\flhinney 1997).

AcTtvlTY Look at how different cues lead to sentenceinterpretation

Consider the following sentences:

I The boy eats the apple.

2 The apple eats the boy.

3 The dog sees the ball.

4 The ball chases the dog.

5 The ball is chased by the dog.

I Do they all follow the patterns of English grammar?

2 How can you tell which noun refers to the ogent (the one who performsthe action)?

3 ln each sentence,what cue tells you which noun is the agentl

4 ls there more than one cuel

5 Howare sentences 4 and 5 above differentfrom each other?

'eJnleuraJd eJE Surqf,Eel a8en8ue¡ puofes JoJ r{f,ftaseJ

urtrg pue a8en8ur¡3o suonecr¡dur lue aroJaraql 'sSurpug pexru parnpordseq porlnpuor uaaq seq l¿qt qf,rcaser patrrurl aql 'eJourregrrng 'aur¡dlrslpSunol B sr srql reqt punu ur da>>1 ot tuer.rodur sr lr (ureJg arp pue SulurealaSen8uel puofas uaa^\teq suouleuuol lnoge lurqt ot Sulteurcse3 sr rr alrr¡A

'(tOOZ euq€H) saseerrur Zaeqt ur bualrgord sr sassa:

-o¡d ¡n:etuls lq pano¡1o; su¡aued Sulssaco¡d Il alll aJotu >lool ot rsJg ar¡a¡e sassa¡o¡d Jrlueuras ler{l ef,uJprle osle sr eraql 'Sulssaro¡d a8en8uel rsJg

Jo reqr alll aJor.u uloo¡ lrrarrce urEJq aqt 'sasearour fcualcgord sJauJEol Z-IuE se teqt u./(oqs ser{ r{rJeeseJ srqtJo aruog 'tndul a8enSue¡3o Sulssacord arpuI saf,uaJaJlp aroldxa ot sa^E^\ ureJq ur fllrrnre IEJrJtJela aqr paJnseeru a ¿q

sarpnls Jer{ro '(t tOZ Er}ereg) Surssaoo¡d I'I roJ seare ar{t ur l¡uo uorrr^nf,a.&\oqs oq./( sJauJEel ¡aSunol qlra es¿f ar{l 10u sl slql 'urEJq eqlJo s€aJE Jeqlour uorle^rtoe osle rng Surssaco¡d I-I JoJ pele rtfe aJE tpr{l sBeJE leJneu eures

eql ur uone^noe ^\oqs

laqr 'rralduoJ ol >lsel pcneuruer8 ¿ ua,rr8 eJe e3rl ulrarel aBenBuEI puofas r a¡rnboe oqlv\ sJauJeal uer{^\'a¡duexa ro¿ l:ualcgord

Jo Ia el pue a8e (sJauJeal eqt uo Surpuadap 'pa Jesgo ueeg e^Er{ sarueJeglp:ala \oH 'sa8en8ue¡ puof,as pu¿ rsry r{roq roJ anrl sr slql 'Surssaro¡d a8en8

-ue¡ Sul.rnp urerq ar{tJo sa.laqdsluag qrog ur suonef,ol tueraJqp ur uorlelrlre,,vroqs serpnls SulSeur ureJq tuafal 'sse¡aqrauo¡ 'urcJg er{r 3o areqdsnuarl

UJI er{l ul pal¿lol a.re^/nr suorlrun3 a8en8ue¡ lerp sE^\ uondrunss¿ aql arurl3uo1 e rog 'rndur a8en8uel rsrg ruo5 f¡ruaraglp rndur aBenBuEI puof,assassa¡ord urcJg ar{r Jer{req,&r pue urcJq elp Jo sEaJE aures JI{l uI patuasa.lda.l

pue parlnbre a¡e sa8enSuel puoras pue rsrg Jeqleq.t\ apnlrur pate8nsa.tutsuoltsanb erp Jo aruos 'urerg er{r pue Suturea¡ e8en8ue¡ qlv( peuraJuor sI

a.tncads¡ad a,rrlluSoc aqt or parrurl rou tng urytra >lJo^,\ Jo EaJE Jarpouv

uryrq aql ?u? a3un3uu7

'a8en8ue13o asn aql q8norqr surauedSo uorreurrurerep pue

'uorlezr¡o8ater 'l¡a¡.o¡slp aqt sa^lo^ul Suru;ea¡ a8en8ue¡ 'Suturea¡3o slcadse

Jeqlo il" e>lrl reqr pue seruelJedxa a,uuu8oc pue ¡enrdac¡ad ¡no q8norqrpeureel sr a8en8ue¡ reql srsaqlodlq aqr uouJuro) uI aAEI{ reqr saqreo.lddt

ruaraglp Jo Jegrunu E uo spgnq pur ruog s,&\EJp srlrsln8ur¡ a,uuu8of, terprsaSSns (SOOZ) slllg >plN pue uosurgo¿ rata¿ 'a;rnbre suerunl{ terp sruatsfs

a8pa¡mou¡ xa¡druor arp3o euo tnq s¡ aBenBuBI reqr ,&\eIA erp srg8r1q8ry puepa8rarua seq ,srrlsrn8ur¡ a,rrtruSor, urJel aql 'srcal luereJ u1 'acuatradxa 3osrseq eqr uo-a8en8ue¡ Surpn¡cul-uolleruJoJul uJeel pue ssaoo;d ol sall

-lllge ueunq praua8 Jo eloJ arp sazrsrqdrua a¡'ltceds¡ad a.r'ltluSol aql

¿uo snloJ sra¡eads esoql plno/v\ req¡¡¿qsr¡3u3u€ql repro pJoM elqrxall aJou e qr¡r* a8en8uel € lo sra¡eads lq pate.rd.ralur

aq satruoluas asaql tq8rlu ^

oq ¡lepou/ uolllpdun aqt ot Surp.rol)V 9

Sututaal a&an&ual puota s &uturu1 dxE 8,rt

rr4 Exp laining second language learning

S e co nd langaage app lications : Interacting, no ticingprocessin& and practisingA number of hypotheses, theories, and models for explaining second lan-guage acquisition have been inspired by the cognitive perspective.

The interaction hypothesisEvelyn Hatch (1978),Michael Long (19S3, 1996), Teres aPica(1994), SusanGass (1997), and many others have argued rhar conversational interactionis an essential, if not sufficient, condition for second language acquisition.These researchers have studied the ways in which speakers modi$' theirspeech and their interaction patterns in order to help learners participatein a conversation or understand meaning in a new language. Long (1983)agreed with Krashen that comprehensible input is necessary for languageacquisition. However, he focused on the question of how input could bemade comprehensible. He argued that modified interaction is the neces-

sary mechanism for making'language comprehensible. That is, what learnersneed is opportunities to interact with other speakers, working together toreach mutual comprehension through negotiation for meaning. Throughthese interactions, interlocutors figure out what they need to do to keep theconversation going and make the input comprehensible to the less profi-cient speaker. According to Long, there are no cases ofbeginner-level learnersacquiring a second language from native-speaker talk that has not been mod-ified in some way.

Modified interaction does not always involve linguistic simplification. It mayalso include elaboration, slower speech rate, gesture, or the provision of addi-tional contextual cues. Some examples of conversational modifications are:

I Comprehen5izT¡ ¿hs¡ps-efforts by the native speaker to ensure that thelearner has understood (for example, 'The bus leaves at 6:30. Do youunderstand?').

2 Clarifcation requestt-efforts by the learner to get ¡he native speaker toclari$' something that has not been understood (for example, 'Could yourepeat please?'). These requests from the learner lead to further modifica-tions by the native speaker.

3 Self-repetition or paraphrase-the more proficient speaker repeats his orher sentence either partially or in its entirety (for example, 'She got loston her way home from school. She was walking home from school. She

got lost.').

Long (1996) revised the interaction hypothesis, placing more emphasis oncognitive factors such as 'noticing' and corrective feedback during inter-action. 'When communication is difficult, interlocutors must 'negotiate

for meaning', and this negotiation is seen as the opportunity for language

aq¡Jo >llerr rdal pue >1;or'r;rcd ur sreur¿al peprof,ar (866I) uqdrl uoreqspue urc-&\S IIuraW 'pe>lro^\ laqr se o8en8uel rnog¿ pelnou laqr ter{^\ olurrq8rsul aruos Surpr,rord snrp '<pnolt Surluqr ellr{^r e^los or peq sreureel lerpsa¡zznd pJo.{\ssorf padola,rap (L66D lll'oJT uo¡ .suonf,Eralur JSor{} ul pared-r¡n¡ed laqr se Suqun¡r ara,l faqr regm aroldxa ot tuaql 8upea1 suoltsanbpa>lsr pup suour¿Jatur paderoaprrt ur sa lesrueqt ot uatsrl pue qfle./\t sJauJealperl (0002) q8nouoqcy,q rury pue ,sffi) uesns (a1oe¡¡ uosrlv .a¡durexa

Jo{ 'uonfeJatur aBenBuEI puof,as ul a8e8ua farp se uonualte (sJeuJeel >lf,EJl

ot sfe-/y\ punoJ eAEq sJer{fJeeseJ IEJaAaS .r{f,JeasoJ

3o rcalqo aqt eq ol enur}-uof, uorluerre puE ssaueJelv\E 3o aruerrodwr aqr lnogE suorlsanb asagl

'tndul agr ur SurqraruosJo ssauaJe./v\e s Jeurcel agr lq lou .Sulssacord ro3 alqe

lle^e sl Sulqrauros r{rlr{^a guzur buanbarj eqr lq parcrpard lsaq sr uorlrsrnbre

Jo pooqrle>lll aql 'e^nrads-rad paseq-a8esn E ruorC '3ulureal ol Jtnqrrtuoruec 'f¡euonualul tr or SurpuaDe Jo tr3o eJE.&\E tou eJe e \JI ua,ra .,aceds 8ur-ssaoord, Ietueru, Jno dn sasn teqr Surqilut ,seuoeql Surssaro¡d uonetuJoJuror Surp.ro:ry 'arugap alq¿reprsuor 3o rralqo aqr sl rndur Jqr ur Surqraruos

,8urcnou, a.re lagr layt a¿amp aq rsnru sJeuJeel Jeqleq,&\ 3o uolrsanb eql'a8en8uel aqr3o a8pa¡uoul rrar{l ur dr8 ¿ sllg rer{l;o peloadxa

faqt teqrvt tuo5 ruaJeJrp sr 13qr aSenSuq puosJs aqr ul Sulqteuros af,nou sJa

-uJeal ueq/r\ suÉag reqr ssarord Surureal E paqrJrsap osp (886I) sse) uESnS'lndul eqt ur tr Jo JJEIv\E atuooeq peq lagr ¡tun aJntEeJ a8en8uel E aJrnbreor ur8ag tou plnof, sreurrel a8en8ue¡ puoras ter{t pazr$qrodlq lprruqls'sauoeql Sulueal prlSo¡ogclsd uo Sulme.lq 'ruarps rueqt operu ef,ueuedxaJarpo aruos Jo sself, ur uonuene sry or rq8noJq aJa.& laqr asnmaq se./r\ srql'uraqr Pef,nou pBq er{ uaqr'r f¡uo u¡arsfs aSrnSue¡ puof,3s u.&o srq Jelua 01

ue8aq eurr elor{ \ ar{r ro3 luauruorrlua arp ur ruasa¡d ueaq peq rerp a8en8ue¡

Jo saJnteal urttJef ñqt ¿ztla¿J or ue8ag ag 'lrerp e Surdaa>1 pue (lrzeJg ul8ur,rr¡'sesselc 8ur1er;o sqtuoru rar3.y'asan8nlJodJo JauJEel e se aluar¡adxau,&o srq ruo5 eurer srsaqrodlg Surcnou er{r Jo ¡esodord pulSlro s.lpnuqls

'aJnl¿al a8en8utl -re¡ncn¡¿d eJo ere^\E saruoJeg JauJ"el eqt ssalun aSpa¡ruroula8enSue¡ u¡ qrmor8 ol peal lou saop tndur alqrsuagarduroo 'arlncadsrad srgrruor¿ 'rurod 8u¡l¡rls lenuassa eql sr tr lnq (uonrsrnbce ur tFsal Jlastr tousaop SunnoN '(paruou, uaaq seq rl ssepn paurcel sl Sulgrou tBr{t Surlseg-8ns 'srsaqroüq 8u¡rrrou eql pasodo.rd (tOOZ '066I) tprrur{rs prer{rDr

srsaqrodÍq8ulcnou aq1

'tuaudola,rap Jrerp ur peeqe sJauJeel ¡snd 'pazrsa-r¡rodlq aqs 'tndlno a¡qrsuaga.rduor Sunnpord jo spueuap eql 'Suluraturragr ssardxa ol sfe¡vl ¡auaq pug ol paeu eqr pue Ánrqe a8rn8ue¡ puof,as Jrar{r

Jo slIuII eql aas or l¡a>1¡¡ rsoru err faqr 'puelsrepun uEf, rolnrolralur rrar.lt leqla8enSuel arnpord tsnur sJeureal uar{^\ rpqt penBJE er{S 'srser{rodfg rndrnoa¡qrsuaqardruor (186I) EulE \S IIrrreW sr srql ol petBIeU 'rueudo¡a,rep

Sutuwal a8un&uul puotas &ururu1 dxE III

116 Exp laining second language learning

language features they mentioned. These research designs cannot tell us iflearners noticed things they did not mention. However, they do make it pos-sible to identify some things that learners were aware of and to look at howthis awareness is related to measures oftheir language knowledge. The extentto which learners' noticing oflanguage features affects their second languagedevelopment will come up again in our discussion of research on secondlanguage acquisition in the classroom in Chapters 5 and 6.

Input processingIn his research with American university students learning foreign languages,Bill VanPatten (2004) observed many cases of students misinterpreting sen-tences. For example, as predicted by the competition model discussed earlierin this chapte¡ when English speakers heard sentences in Spanish, they usedword order to interpret the relationships among the nouns in the sentence.Thus, they interpreted'La sig,re el señor'as'She (subject pronoun) followsthe man. The correct interpretation is 'Her (object pronoun) follows theman (subject of the sentence). In otherwords, rhe correct English translationwould be 'The man follows her'. In order to understand that, students needto learn that in Spanish, a pronoun object often precedes the verb and that,rather than rely on the word order alone, it is essential to pay artenrion towhether the form of the pronoun indicates a subject or an object.

VanPatten argued that the problem arose in part from the fact that learn-ers have limited processing capacity and cannot pay attention to form andmeaning at the same time. Not surprisingl¡ they tend to give priority tomeaning, overlooking some features of the language form. \X/hen the contextin which they hear a sentence helps them make sense of it, that is a goodstrategy for understanding the general idea, but it may interfere with learners'progress in acquiring the language. In Chapter 6 we will see how VanPattendeveloped instructional procedures that require learners to focus on the spe-

cific language features in order to interpret the meaning, thus pushing themto acquire those features.

Processability theory

Jürgen Meisel, Harald Clahsen, and Manfred Pienemann (1981) studied theacquisition of German by a group of adult migrant workers who had little orno second language instruction. They analysed large samples of their speech

and described the details of developmental sequences in their production ofsimple and complex sentences. They concluded that the sequence ofdevelop-ment for features of syntax and morphology was affected by how easy these

were to process. Ease of processing was found to depend to a large extent onthe position of those features in a sentence. Features that rypically occurredat the beginning or end of a sentence were easier to process (and learn) thanthose in the middle. All learners acquired the features in the same sequence,

Jrer{} lq 'r{c¡{¡n senrlnre urooJsself uo paseq sr pue a,rncads¡ad a¡l}lu3oraqt uo s,^aeJp tI '(sruau8ag qcaadg lenuessgJo stxatuoJ a^nefrunuJuroJ uruorlezneulotnv) SSEIfV peller Surrpear a8en8ue¡ or qreordde ue pado-lo^ap a^Eq (1002 'BB6i) zrr.no¡e8ag ueuroN pu¿ uotuogreD r{raqezrlg

'sruJoj lEnuessa->Is?l uo sn3oJ E aq PFor{s araqll €

':':'H,':il il ilffi: :liillÍ í:a,rncads¡ad (lsruonf,BJelur-a,Lllru3oo, aqt sllE3 ar{s tBri,/v\ ruou lno perJJEJ

qlreeser arp qrr^\ algrredruoc sE sees aqs rer{r uroorsselr a8enSuel u8ra-ro3 aqrul acncr.rd ;o3 sa¡dnur.rd aarrp pasodo.rd seq (/002) e8ar.rg seprnoT 'e)n-crrd ro3 saluuuroddo lq parcege osle a.re Sulpea.r pue Suluarsrl 'a8en8ue¡

Jo uollcnpord arp ot perrrurl tou sr 1r pue 'lef,ruerlf,eur tou sr ruaudo¡a,rapa8en8ue¡ JoJ papaou acllce¡d aqt 'a,rrrcads¡ad a¡rlru3or ar{t ruo5 rer{r aloN'erueurroJJad cneruotne ot ueqr pue a8pe¡r'roul lernparo¡d ot a8pa¡nou1e nBJEISap slJaluo3 f,f,n3erd mog re l¡aso¡c arou SuDIool.lvrou eJE sJer{fJeese¡

'uraqt qtr.&\ paterf,oss€ (s)Buluearu aqt pue pelllrp Surag su;ar

-r¿d aBenBuEI eqr uae \lag uonoouuor erp e>pru ot pelltJ ueuo uonf,nJlsurpn8ul¡orpne pezrrerf,¿rpqf, rer{r sllrJp arp '9 .rardeg3 ur ees illu a¡,r sV'ur"alot seqsra auo rBrll Jnol^Eqaq aqr sasrtr¿¡d auoJr a lDega lpo sl acrtce;d terprulod aqr pessrtu ursrJnorler{eqJo suorrele¡d¡alul ruooJsself, eruos ler.ll stJesse

(866I) .rasla;¡ag uagod 'Sururea¡ a8enSue¡3o tuauodtuoc prluesse uE tou sr

acltce¡d leqt 'Jale,lrroq 'ueeru lou seop srql 'afualadruor a,,tlleclunulluof, olpea¡ l¡rnsn lou seop asn a8rn8ue¡ ¡nj8ulueau ruou af,ItreJd sateredas ttgrpue Ilrrp uo paseg sr reqr Sururea¡ or qceordde ue 'a¡llcads.rad rsrrnor,regager{t Jo suorssnlsrp ur ,l.res a1'r ryarltrerd sl a,rrlrads¡ad a,rnluSor aqt urgrft\lseJelur Jo IE^\euaJ E uaas srr{ reqr Surureal a8en8url 3o ruauodruof, auo

erl]f,¿rdJo elor eql

'7:etdeq3ur suoltsanb pue sarlrtr8au Jo uonrsrnboe agr ut slql 3o saldruexe 1v\Es alnr'a8en8ue¡ lsry Jraql ur lslxe ,(pea4e leqr sernree3 agr 3o a8pa¡r'rou1 rrarp esn

uer lagr eroJag a8en8ue¡ puoras agr ur llced¿c Surssa¡o¡d3o ¡a.La¡ ur?lraf, E

dola,rap or a,req lagr 'pealsul 'uolllslnbce3o se8ers llrea tt aSen8ue¡ rsJg Jlar{t

ruo{ sernt¿eJ re3suerl f¡drurs tou op sraurEal lgz'r sulrldxe lroagr srr{ rel{rsanS¡e eH 'aouangur a8en8uel lsJg qrr^/\ sacuanbas ¡eruarudo¡a,rap3o uorre.r8

-atur aqr sr lroagr slg jo rcadse tuel¡odrut auo 'lEtuJoJuI pu¿ FuoIlJnJlsuIqrog 's8unras 3o ltaue,r r ul saBenBuEI ruaJaglp Jo sJauJeal I{lt.ry\ r{3rceseJ

Jo srseg ar{t uo lroeqr A¡¡¡qussacord padola,rap GOO7 'GGGI) uupueuerd

'saJnlBal IEuoIreIJ¿^ sE ol PaJJaJaJ eJald esaql 'saSers ¡rr-uarudola,rap ruaJeglp tE era.4a oq,/$, sreurea¡ fq pasn pur peurcal aq ppot pu"slureJtsuoJ asagr lq parfegt eq ol uJJes rou ptp saJnlral a8en8ut¡ eruos lrr{rpunoJ osl" srer{f,reeser ar{I 'sater ruaraJlp re passarSord farp g8noqr ua,ra

&uruwa1 a8anSual puotas Sututal dxE LII

118 Exp laining second language learning

nature, require learners to use meaningful units of language repetitiyelyin contexts where there are genuine exchanges of meaning. The goal is toprovide opportunities for using these units with sufficient frequenry thatthey will become automatic. Segalowitz (2010) has emphasized the impor-tance of increasing the amount of language that can be used automatically,thus freeing more cognitive resources for learning new things. Paul Nation(2007) has suggested that automaticity, which he,like Segalowitz, refers to as

'fuenry' may be the most neglected aspect of language teaching in contextswhere instruction focuses primarily on meaning.

The sociocultural perspectiveAs we saw in Chapter 1, Vygotskyt theory assumes that cognitive develop-ment, includinglanguage development, arises as a resultofsocial interactions.Unlike the psychological theories that view thinking and speaking as relatedbut independent processes, sociocultural theory views speaking and think-ing as tightly interwoven. Speaking (and writing) mediates thinking, whichmeans that people can gain control over their mental processes as a conse-

quence of internalizing what others say to them and what they say to others.

This internalizing is thought to occur when an individual interacts with an

interlocutor within his or her zone of proximal development (ZPD)-thatis, in a situation in which the learner can perform at a higher level because ofthe support (scaffolding) offered by an interlocutor.

In some ways, this approach may appear to restate some of the hypotheses

encountered elsewhere in this chapter. In fact, people sometimes wonderwhether the ZPD is the same as Krashent I +1.

'$7'illiam Dunn and JamesLantolf (1993) addressed this question in a review article, arguing that itis not possible to compare the two concepts because they depend on verydifferent ideas about how development occurs . The ZPD is a metaphoricallocation or 'site' in which learners co-construct knowledge in collaborationwith an interlocutor. In Krashen's i + 1, the input comes from outside thelearner and the emphasis is on the comprehensibiliry of input that includeslanguage structures that are just beyond the learner's current developmentallevel. The emphasis in ZPD is on development and how learners co-con-sffuct knowledge based on their interaction with their interlocutor or inpriYate speech.

Vygotskyan theory has also been compared to the interaction hypothesis

be cause ofthe interlocutor's role in helping learners understand and be under-stood. These two perspectiyes differ primarily in the emphasis they place on

the internal cognitive processes. In the interaction hypothesis, the emphasis

is on the individual cognitive processes in the mind of the learner. Interactionfacilitates those cognitive processes by giving learners access to the input theyneed to activate internal processes. In Vygotskyan theor¡ greater importance

a8en8ur¡ puoras u¡ tueuodrur s¿ uortf,EJelur ^\ar^

oslr orfy\ sJer{fJeasal Jarlto

Jo lBqr pue a,rn:adsrad prnrprorlos eql uaa \teg afuaJaJlp eql eJoJsJeqI

'(L6 'd),lrrnrrre IErJos sr rl pue ór^rlf,e a¡.lllu8o¡ sr 11 '8ulurca¡ a8rn8ue¡ 8ur-lerpJru asn a8en8uel $ lI 'Jn)f,o-of, uEf, Sururea¡ a8en8uel pue asn a8en8ue1,arar1lvr rxeluof, etp sE aseqr se qf,ns sanSo¡urp e^rrtJogBllof, sraprsuof, (OOOZ)

ulE^&S '8uru¿aru laqt ssardxa ot lseg aJa,{a sruJoJ reqrtr Sulprcap pue reqraSoruaqt Sulssnfsrp 'asn ot sruJo; lf,aJJof, Jrp rnoqe sasaqrodlg Sunsat eJe \ sJa

-uJeel 'l rerdeg3 ur g >lser uon¿rrunruruo3 ur u./!Loqs sy'Surueaur pue r.uJoJ

ot uollualle rrar{t ./'rerp l¡snoaurr¡nurrs ter{t (8uur,la. pue 8ur¡eads 'a.l) slsrruorrnpord ul SulSe8ua alrr¡rvr a8payz'rou1 onsrn8ull DnJlsuof,-of, sJeuJ¿el

aSen8ue¡ puoces ^,'l'oq auruJetep ol serpntsJo serJes E tno parJJef, a,req san8ea¡

-lof, rrer{} pue ur1de1 pue ur¿1úS 'an8o¡elp a^p"roqeilof, urrar aqr Suls¡d.roagr leJntlnforfos lq parenlrou ueeq seq >lJo^t tuefeJ aJou tng ,l.roagr

a,rnruSo¡ lq paruangur se.lvr slsaqrodfg tndtno eqr uo >1.rorvr l¡rea sJIerAS

'Sulurea¡ a8en8uel puof, as

uo tndlno Jo srf,age arp ele8nse^ur ot r{JJEaseJ a^rsuatxa tno parJJEf a Er{

san8ea¡¡oc Jer{ pue aqs 'uaql aJurs 'suJooJssEIJ uorsJeruur r{JueJC ur (rndrno'a'r) uonrnpord ¡egra,r ul a8e8ua ot sJauJ¿al JoJ senrunlJoddo a.rou parec-o^p¿ eqs 'uolsuaqa;druor Surualsll pue Surpear rrarp ur urgr uoncnporduJllrJlr\ pue ua>1ods Jraqr ur JelEa./v\ l¡qe.raplsuof, JJe,r\ sluapnls uorsJJuJurrqruarg ter{l uone^resgo aqt uo paseg srsarpod&¡ rndtno algrsuaqardruof, aqrpesodord lsrg (Eg6I) ur".e\S 'a8en8uelJo uorsueqe;duoc er{r ro; op llrrru-rpro fagr ueqr a8en8ue¡ q8norqr passardxa sr Suluearu ¡aoq ot uonuetlea¡ou f¿d rsnru laql 'a8en8url arnpord ol eABq sJauJeal uJr{^\ ter{r uonou aqlpue srsagrodlg rndtno a¡qrsuagardruof, EurE/lrS u¡ sulSrro slr s"q >lro/rl, rraql'sarurur¡8o¡d uors¡aruul {rua-rg uerpeueC ur Sururra¡ a8en8ur¡ puoles JoJ

suorteur¡dxa lernllnf,orf,os palr8nsa,rur a Er{ or{,4 '(ZOO1) uu1de1 uoJer{S pueurE.^^s llrrretr { Jo >lJo-/ú 3r{1 ruo5 u aldruexa ar[L 'saJnlsrd uor3 auqlrots e

tf,nJtsuof, or lrr laqt sB sqJa e rxegal qJueJC grru.8ur¡88nJls eJe sJaurcel aql'rdracxa reql uI '(LgI 'd) g rardeq3 ur g >lser uonef,runruruo3 ur $ srrltJoa¡druexa uV 'suon3tJetur JeuJEal-JauJEel Jo ef,r^ou-ef,rlou apnlour ol uJJelaqr peuepeoJq ser{ >lJo,&\ lua)al 'JaAe.&\oH 'oJr^ou e pue uadxe uB a^lo urol poorsJapun ueag s¿q C¿Z agr 'l¡euonrpe[ 'sJe>leads raqro qrl^/\ rre-Jalul pue areroqellor laqr uar¡rvr a8rn8ue¡ errnbf,e sJaurpel a8rn8uel puof,esr'rog Surrv'ogs ur palseralur arc srar{to pue '(y66I) orEUoC preqrrx ,(OOOZ)

JIoluBT rurf 'uorlrsrnbo¿ a8en8uel puoJas ot lroaqr url¡sro8,(¡ Sulpuarxg

3u7q7w tq SuVutuaT :suott?rtlddy a8unSury ?uoras

'Ál,ulo¿ pf oos Sulrnp pazrleuJarursl a8pay*ou>l sE uorlerpau Sulrnp sassaco¡d a,rrt¡u3o¡ ;raqt ezrue8JoeJ pue

Jo Iorruof, ule8 a¡doad lEr{l sploq l-roagr prnllnf,orf,os 'uourrJelul IEIros aqtg8norqr 8ul¡.rnc¡o Sulurea¡ qlw\'sa^lesueqt suorlesJaluof, erp or peqr¿ue sr

&urutua1 aSanBuE yuotas SututrydxE 6II

t20 Exp laining secorud knguage learning

acquisition is that sociocultural theorists assume that the cognitive pro-cesses begin as an external socially mediated acdvity and eventually becomeinternalized. Other interactionist models assume that modified input andinteraction provide learners with the raw material that is interpreted andanalysed through internal cognitive processes.

SummaryIn the end, what all theories of language acquisition are intended to accountfor is the ability of human learners to acquire language within a variety ofsocial and instructional environments. All of the theories discussed in thischapter and in Chapter 1 use metaphors to represent something that cannotbe observed directly.

Linguists working from an innatist perspective draw much of their evidencefrom studies of the complexities of proficient speakers' knowledge of lan-guage and from analysis of their own intuitions about language. Cognitiveand developmental psychologists argue that it is not enough to know whatthe final state of knowledge is and that more attention should be paid to cor-pus-based studies of the input, as well as to the developmental steps leadingup to the achievement of high levels of proficiency.

Recent cognitive perspectives have often involved computer simulations orcontrolled laboratory experiments where people learn specific sets of care-

fullychosen linguistic features, often in an invented language. Manylinguistsargue that this does not entitle psychologists to generalize to the complexitiesof the linguistic knowledge that learners eventually have.

Interactionists emphasize the role of negotiation for meaning in conversa-

tional interactions. This perspective and the sociocultural perspective provideinsights into the ways in which learners can gain access to new knowledgeabout the language when they have support from an interlocutor. Some

linguists challenge the interactionist position, arguing that much of whatlearners need to know is not available in the input, and so they put greater

emphasis on innate principles of language that learners can draw on.

Both linguists and psychologists draw some of their evidence from neuro-logical research. At present, most of the research on language representationin the brain and specific neurological activity during language processing is

inconclusive. However, advances in technology are rapidly increasing oppor-tunities to observe brain activiry more directly. Such research will eventuallycontribute to reinterpretations of research that previously could examineonly the observable behaviour of learners speaking or performing other lan-

guage tasks.

Educators who are hoping that language acquisition theories will give theminsight into language teaching practice are often frustrated by the lack of

¿lueilodu¡r (os¡e) sr rndur pag¡¡du¡s reqr >¡u¡qr noloC ¿uor]leJaru! pagrpotu uro4 rgaueq or l¡a>¡r¡ lsour aJE sJeuJeel a8en8ue¡

puof,as qf,rq/v\ ur slxatuo) aql aJe req¡¡¿3uru.rea¡ r.roddns tou leu teqlseJntee, euios eJaqt aJV¿sJeuJ€e¡ or ¡n¡d¡aq l¡¡erradsa eJ€ )u!t{t no,( reqruoDf,eJalur paurporu lo saJnleaj aqt Jo euos aJ€ req¡¡¿qree ¡o sa¡duexaauos lo >¡u¡qr nol ue3'tndur (pagr¡drurs .ro) pagrporu uor¡ paqsrn3urlsrp

sr srql'sJauJea¡ a8en8ue¡ puof,es Jo, afJnosal lelluassa ue s€ uaes sr

uorlf,eJetur paurpoLu'srsaqrodlq uorlreJalur aqt lo alrlf,ads.rad eql LuoJl €

¿sluepnts "rnol ¡o asoLlt rrroJ,

ro 'secue¡radxa Suru.rea¡ aBen8ue¡ ur"ro.lnol wot¡8,ut>rlou ¡o se¡duexa luearreq nol oC 's)Jo^ e8enSue¡ le3;el aqr /y\oq rnoqe 3u¡qrauos puplsJepun

,(¡uappns laqr uaqan sluau.¡or..u .eqe, e^€q op l¡ureilar sJeuJeal e8en8ue¡

puolas 'Jenel oH 'uJ€el ol uorluatur u€ uala Jo sseuaJe^ e lue lnoqlr¡"r',{¡¡otuapout uJeal o} a¡qrssod osle s! l! teqt panS"re ueeq seq rl 'sl reql

'l€rsJeloJluof, l€ql euos sr-peuJeol Suteq st l€q/v\,o ssaueJe^ e sa^lolu!sllnpe ur Sururee¡ a8en8ue¡ puof,as lle leqt-slsaqrodlq Surcrlou srlprurqls Z

¿^ ar^ srql ot nol rq8no-rq

reuJeal Jo Jaqf,sot e se saf,ualJadxe "rnol aAEq ^

ot{ 'os }l ¿pauJeol aJ€

sa8en8ue¡ l orl ,o Surpuetsrepun u/v\o rnol qlrr"r luelsrsuof, aJou uaql joauo s¡ 'laldeql slrlt ur pesodo.rd uaaq a^Eq Sururea¡ Zl Jo, serJoeqt l€JaAeS I

uolpoEeJ ro, suollseno

uo,,,srnboea'rn'uelJl"JiyffilTlfi 'JJ";1,::J";]?H";T,X'i:ü;suonf,egeJ (sJeqf,eel Sulpln8 ul p3d¡ag aJoru sI teqt uolteuJ.rojur epnordleru gcreasal slr{I 'par¡dul l¡arau seuruaruos 'perels lplrr¡dxa seurrlauros(suonetuarJo

lrlrleJoer{r Jo a8ue¡ epllr\ E uo s,e\EJp I{3J€asJJ par¡dde 1o lpoq3ur,no;8 y '8uru.rea¡ a8en8uel puof,esJo lroaqr a,l,lsuaqardruor EJo aruesge

aql ur arueurojrad (stuapnls sses$ pue suossal ue¡d pue r{Jtel or enulruol

¡¡rs rsnru laqt 'tsaJatur grrz* ruaudo¡alap,{-roaqr I{J}E1'\ sJaqf,eer eruos elI[DA,

'acn¡e¡d Sulgoear a8en8ue¡

roj parardrarur aq ppor{s lroaqr aql,t\oq lnoge suonsanb aq ilns ppo,/nr erel{r

'per{JEaJ aJe{\ tueruea;8e gcns JI ue g go lerrr 3uo1 e 'lsJg lB ,{¡qeqord sl

uorlrsrnbr¿ a8en8ue¡3o lroaqr ,ala¡druoc, ¿ uo lueulaar8e rnq '8ulurea1 pueSurqrear aSen8ue¡ roJ arurr5lu8ls ru¡at-8uo¡ tueuodrul seq po8 sll sp tuJur-do¡a,rap lroaqr sBq t¿qr qf,Jeese¿ 'autr 8uo¡ E roJ uo lJol't ol enunuor III^\slsnuarls teqr sapznd tuasa¡da¡ 'uolllsrnb¡e a8en8ur¡ lsJgJo esol{t DIIT 'uoll-lslnbr¿ a8en8ur¡ puof,asJo sanua¡duror ag1 ',slradxa, agt Suorur ruau¡aa¡8¿

&utu"raa1 a&an&ua¡ yuota s &ururu1 dxE t7,l

122 Expkining second language learning

Suggestions for further readingDórnyei, 2.2009. The Psycholog\ of second Language Acquisition. oxford:

Oxford Universiry Press.

This overview of the theories that have been proposed to explain secondlanguage acquisition is both comprehensive and."ry ro read. óórnyei pro-vides detailed treatment of the theories that are discussed in this .t

"p,.r,focusing particularly on those arising from the research in cognitivepsychology. In addition, the book intioduces the work in neurobiologythat provides a new level of explanation for language acquisition

"rd ur!.

swain, M., P. Kinnear, and L. steinman. 2070. sociocurtural Theory andsen.nd Language Education: An Introduction through Narratiues. Bristol:Multilingual Matters.

In this book the authors cover rhe key concepts ofsociocultural theory(for example, mediation, zone_ of proximal development, privare ,p...h,collaborative dialogue) through the use of narratives. The narratives comefrom the voices oflanguage learners and teachers from different educa-tional contexts. The book is of particular interest to readers motivated tounderstand how sociocultural theory relates to the teaching and learningofsecond languages.

vanPatten, B. andJ. tülilliams (eds.). 2007 . Theories in second LanguageAcquisition: An Introduction. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence ErlbaumAssociates.

vanPatten and \Tilliams set our a list ofobservations that have arisen fromresearch studies in second language acquisition. Then, well-known authorsdiscuss how the theoretical framework in which theyhave done their ownresearch would explain these obseryations. For example, there are chapterson ljniversal Grammar, sociocultural theor¡ skill acquisition theory, pro-cessab.ility, and input processing. The chapte* ate biief (about 20 pages,including discussion questions and readings) and wrimen in a style lrri, i,accessible to those with limited background in research and theory. Thefinal chapte¡ by Lourdes ortega, ptorrid., a concise overview of the differ-ent theories and identifies some ongoing challenges for explaining secondlanguage acquisition.

a^Eq l¿.u sass'If,^pes"g-arnrJnrrs ur sluJpnls e.'os .egen8ue¡ ra8rer aqr JosalnJ Ff,rt"rurue¡8 p_ue lre¡nqeoor\ aqr uJEel sluJpnls rBr{l rl ot eas ol ,, ¡"óes,rer{reat aq1 'aSen8ue¡ aqr lq parrJef, sa8esseru aql uo uErF rerper Jlastra8tn8ue¡ aqr uo sr snf,oJ aql 'sJaufta¡ a8en8ur¡ u8raro3 ro p.rorrr'jo dlorde or rqSner sr aSen8ue¡ eql 'sruauuoJr^ua lEuonJnJrsul pasBg-aJnrf,nJrs uI

se s¡aa d ql r^, u o rlf, Eral u r ur,',",; :ilL'JlH:iffil " *i*T*: ; Jl:ilE qfns uJ 'a3rn3ue1 ar{rJo sJeuJEel pJE./r\o] ,r"qr rr,F", sraleads a nEu pJE \o1

ParraJrp sr uonf,nJlsur aqr eJar{./$. pue aSenSue¡ raSrer ar{t Jo sraleads e^n¿uaJ¿ uaJplrr{f, Jer{ro eqrJo lsolu eJeg^,!\ uorlEntrs Ioor{JS e ul ,p¡qc E sr JauJEelaqr gr '.ro uorlf¿Jelur lEr)os ur Jo >lJo,e\ re a8en8ur¡ eqr or pasodxa sr JeuJEel3r{r q)rq^{ ur esoql sE poolsrepun eq pFoqs slxaluof, uollsrnb¡e [EJnrEN

s8u¡rtas puorpnrlsul pue IBrnreN

¿apY'ord uera¡nsodxa leJnleu lou pu¿ uonf,nJlsur f¡uo rer¡r suorlngrJluof, lBnuesse eJar{]

1" tO ¿al!\ PFoqS ¿uooJsself aqr uI luauluoJrAua aurcs aqt elBaJJ e./r\ u¿J¿8u¡urea¡ a8rn€ue1 (l¿Jnleu, slqr rnoqe ¡e,ads sr r,qAr .*ooirr"¡, eql eplsrnoo8en8ue¡ agr Sulsn acuar¡adxa prq e^¿q sJaureal InJssa¡ns lsoru r'r{} r,eJeql uo péseq eq leru jar¡aq sql .a^nf,agJ aJour sr (leerts aqt uo, Bururea¡ rrqrazrarlaq lue¡A¡ 'ruooJSsBIJ arp ur Sulu;eal woü rueJaJrp sl Sunlas lEuonf,nJlsur-uou B ur a8en8uel puo3es r Sururea¡ '7 ntdeya ul ól,rrlce Jr{l ur

^\ES a \ ry

'uorlsnJlsur lnoqll1üa8en8uel

^\au B urea¡ aldoad arar{.{\ s8uuas Jeqro pue Bururea¡ a8effiuef ro3

s8unras ruooJsself uee \leq saJueJeJrp eqr uo DeHaJ or luau¡our e a{Er sn rel'snp op a./\^, eJoJag 'stuooJssBl3 J8en8uel puof,as ur uo sao8 rer¡rrt paquf,sep puB

Pa^Jasgo e^sr{ sJer{f,JEasal qfrr.l./ú. ul slex\ luoJeJlp aro¡dxa az* rerdegc snp uI

/r4.el eJd

WOOUSSVff,ECVNDNVf CINOf,iIS

IIHI NI DNIHf,VEI ONVDNINUVEf DNIAUESSO

r24 Obseruing learning and teaching in the second kngudge classroom

opportunities to continue learning the target language outside the class-room; for others, the classroom is the only contact with that language. Insome cases' the learners' goal may be to pass an examination rather than touse the language for daily communicative interaction beyond the classroom.

Communicative, content-based, and task-based instructional environmentsalso involve learners whose goal is learning the language itself, but the sryle ofinstruction places the emphasis on interaction, conversation, and languageuse, rather than on learningaboutthelanguage. The topics that are discussedin communicative and task-based instructional environments are often ofgeneral interest to the learner, for example, how to obtain a driver's license.In content-based language teaching (cBLr), the focus of a lesson is usuallyon the subject matter, such as history or mathematics, which students arelearning through the medium of the second language. In these classes, rhefocus may occasionally be on the language itself, but the emphasis is on usingthe language rather than talking about it. The language that teachers use foiteaching is not selected solely for the purpose of teaching a specific featureof the language, but also to make sure learners have the language they needto interact in a variety ofcontexts. Students' success in these courses is oftenmeasured in terms of their abiliry to 'get things done' in the second language,rather than on their accuracy in using certain grammatical features.

fn natural acquisition settings'W.hen

people learn languages at work, in social inreracrions, or on the play-ground, their experiences are often quite different from those of learnersin classrooms. CompleteThble 5.1 on the nexr page. As you look at thepattern of + and - signs you have placed in the charr, you will probably findit matches the descriptions below.

. Language is not presented step by step. The learner is exposed to a widevariety of vocabulary and structures.

. Learners' errors are rarely corrected. If their interlocutors can under-stand what they are saying, they do nor remark on the correctness of thelearners' speech. They would probably feel it was rude to do so.

. The learner is surrounded by the language for many hours each day.Sometimes the language is addressed to the learner; sometimes it issimply overheard.

. The learner usually encounters a number of different people who use

the target language proficiently.. Learners observe or participate in many different rypes of language

events: brief greetings, commercial transactions, exchanges of informa-tion, arguments, instruction at school and in workplace interactions.

lndur peurpoLu

ol ssef,f,v

)eadsol aJnsseJd

sad& as.rno¡srppue aSenSue¡

¡o lra¡.re¡

sJeuJeel 01

s;e¡eads e,rrleu

lo one.¡ r.l3rH

Surutea¡rol aull a¡druy

SJOJJA

uo )f,eqPaa,tuanbar¡

eurlt E re 8u¡qrauo Surureal

luaPnls-luoPnls

luapnls-Jeq)eel

uollfnrlsu!a^!l€)!unl"ul.rloc

uo!lrnJlsu!Pes€q

-eJnlfnJlsuo¡1¡s¡nbee

leJN}?Ns)!lsuelf€JPtl3

Swutoa¡ aSon&uo¡ toJ s?xaluo, l.g amq[

ssa.r¿ llrsta,tu¡ pJorxg O e¡geldotoroq¿

¿ uorlf, eJatu r luap nls-Jaqf, Eal ut suaddeq lEq/v\ LuoJt luaJa#l p

reql sl ¿Jeqto qf,ea ot )lel sJauJ€al ueqr* sueddeq leq6'uortl€Jotur luepnts

-luePnls PUE luaPnls-JeqlPel olu! PePtNpqns uaaq sPq ut!nlol (uotlJnJlsuta^rlef,runuuo3, aqr leql eloN 'aJns lou aJ€ nol ¡r ,¿, alr.r¡¡?xeluof, teqt ur

pug tou op l¡¡ensn nol Surqtauos s! l! ¡r (-) snurur e lreN 'txaluof, reqt ro¡errdft st f,nstralf,eJeq) eql l elqer aql u¡ (4) snld € IJEN 'tuesqe ;o luasa.ld a;e

Tal aqr uo sf,DsrJalf,eJeqr eql Jaqleq^ aPDep'ualuof, r,.l)ea Jol'uunlof, qleelq patuasa.rdoJ slxeluof, Jno¡ aql to sf,tlstJalf,eJeql aLlr rnoq€ >¡u¡q1.3uru.rea¡

a8en8ue¡ puo)as Jo, slxetuof, leuotl)nJ¡sut pue leJnleu a.ledulo¡ e^ .auo

slr.ll ul 'sJeuJ€a¡ a8en8ue¡ puoles pue rsJUro sa¡go.rd eqt pe.redr,uof, e^ ,upqf,

teqr ul'¿.retdeq3 ur l'Z alqef ur auo eLF ol relr.urs sl l'S elqelul lJ€q) eql

slxoluo)tulu.lea¡eJedtuo) AItAtIf,v

g7l utootssplr aSun&uq yuocas ar¡t ut Sutr.ltaat yua Surutaal Sumtasqg

126 Obseruing learning and teaching in the second knguage classroom

Older children and adults may also encounrer the written language inthe use ofvideo and web-based materials.Learners must often use their limited second language ability to respondto questions or to ger information. In these situations, the emphasis ison getting meaning across clearl¡ and more proficient speakers tend tobe tolerant of errors that do not interfere with meaning.Modified input is available in many one-ro-one conversarions. In situ-ations where many native speakers are involved in the conyersation,however, learners may have difficulty gerring access ro language theycan understand.

In structure- b ased insnuctional s ettingsThe events and activities rhar are rypical of strucrure-based instruction differfrom those encountered in natural acquisition settings. In grammar transla-tion approaches, there is considerable use of reading and writing, as learnersüanslate texts from one language to another, and grammar rules are taughtexplicitly. In audiolingual approaches there is little use of translation, andlearners are expected to learn mainly through repetition and habit formarion,although they may be asked to figure out the grammar rules for the sentencesthey have memorized.

. Linguistic items are presented and practised in isolation, one item ata time, in a sequence from what teachers or textbook writers believe is'simple' to thar which is 'complex .

. Errors are frequently corrected. Accuracy tends to be given priority overmeaningful interaction.

. Learning is often limited to a few hours a week.

. In situations of foreign language learning the teacher is often the onlynative or proficient speaker the student comes in contact with.

. Students experience a limited range of language discourse rypes. Themost typical of these is the Initiation/Response/Evaluation (IRE)exchange where the teacher asks a question, a student answers, and theteacher evaluates the response. The written language students encoun-ter is selected primarily to provide practice with specific grammaticalfeatures rather than for its content.

. Students often feel pressure to speak or write the second language andto do so correctly from the very beginning.

. Teachers may use the learners' native language to give instructions orfor classroom management. \flhen they use the target language, theytend to modify their language in order ro ensure comprehension andcompliance.

JoJ slsanbeJ te^a1y\or{ '8ulu¿aru uo sr snf,oJ aql esnEJag 'arll¡e¡d a,r¡t

-EJrunuruoc ul pa8z8ua ere lar¡f uaq./v\ sJoJJe s(Jal{fo I{rEe lf,eJJoJ

l¡rra,ro ol lou pual sruepnrs 'tuJoJ JJAo pezrsEqdrua sl Sutuearu pue:Ieqf,¿el aqrSo ued eql uo uonf,errof, roJreJo tunorue parrurrl

" tt.lltj* .

snoauoJJe seruuaruos pue pagl¡drurs qlr^/r\ Jar{lo r{f"a apyrord ,r.rrp.rg'Eulpe.r6 lp.rnlrnrls g8norgr uer{l rJrlter 'se¡nlsa8 pue 'sdord 'sanc

IenrxeruorJo esn aqt lq a¡qrsuaqa¡druoc aperu puu paglldruls sl rndul .'uortrsrnbr¿ IEJnI¿u

or Jellruls sr lBqr len r ul a8en8ue¡ aqr elnbcr ill^\ sJJuJEel 'Surueatu uo 8ul-snfoJ ur 'ttr{t sr uorrdrunsse aql 'Sururaur rllJEIr ol rapro ur fluo uo pesnf,oJ

JJe suJoj I¿3nE{rJruEJg '>Porur -.rred -lo -dno:8 ur se^lasuaqr sluaPnrs eqr

Suorue pue sluapnrs pue Jer{feat uea^\req rpoq 'SulueauJo uollef,Iunururofaqr uo sl slsegdrua Jr{r (uonJnJrsul pJseq-rueluof, pue alltef,Iunruruol uI

sSalaas 1?aouJnu.sat a ntTsJtunrautoJ uJ

'slxeluof uolllsrnbcr

IEJnlEu 3o ¡ecrdÁ aJour esoql qll^\ uon3nJlsur pas"g-eJntlnJls Jo sJItsIJal

-f,¿rer{f, er{r Jo aruos are¡dar or rg8nos a EI{ sarurue;Sord Sulgcear a8rn8uu¡

e^rltorunruruo: 3o srau8rsaq'sanbtuqlar pue spoqraru Sutgcear a8en8ue¡

Jreql ur sraqf,Eal aprn8 reqr sa¡drcurrd eqrJo sural ul raJP oslt stuoorsselJ'selqerJt^ raqro lueru put 'Sutureel JoJ alqEII" B arun Jo lunoure 3I{1 'sluaP-nts eqr Jo uolrtllrotu pu" a8e aqr 'luaruuoJltua ¡errslqd aql Jo stuJal uIragrp Surur€al roJ suolllpuoo aql 'a>llle ]lB lou aJE surooJsse¡r a8en8uel

-F=-

a>t4rJry, q ?Otr 7S¡tw ,t¡efea|eq+ aúv sntd¿n fi1i.rou

lr¡l{rtr 'gtrn Cro.1¡xea ,q!

ffi2rñmrrrahl

¿ iJrr v t(7A(4

f,=

LT,l ruoo$solr a7an&ual yuoras aqt ut Surqtaal pua Surutaal Suxnasqo

l28 Obseruing learning and teaching in the second langaage classroom

clarification may ser'''e as implicit feedback. Negotiating for meaningmay help students see the need to say something in a differenr way.

o Learners usually have only limited time for learning. In a typical teacher-fronted classroom with 25-30 students, individual students get verylittle opportuniry to produce language in a 60-minute class, and whenthey do, it is usually in the form of a short response to a teacher's ques-tion. \lhen students work in pairs or groups, they have opportunitiesto produce and respond to a greater amount and variery of language.Sometimes, however, subject-matter courses taught through the secondlanguage can add time for language learning. A good example of thisis in immersion programmes where most or all the subject marter is

taught to a group of students who are all second language learners.. As in structure-based instruction, it is usually only the teacher who is

a proficient speaker. Learners have considerable exposure to the inter-language of other learners, particularly in student-student interaction.This naturally contains errors that would not be heard in an environ-ment where the interlocutors are native speakers, but it provides manymore opportunities for students to use the target language than is thecase in most teacher-fronted activities.

. A variery of discourse rypes may be introduced through stories, peer-and group-work, the use of 'authentic' materials such as newspapers andtelevision broadcasts. Text materials may include both those modifiedfor second language learners and those intended for native speakers. Inthe latter case, teachers use instructional strategies to help learners getthe meaning, even if they do not know all the words and structures. Instudent-student interaction, learners may practise a range of sociolin-guistic and functional features of language through role-play.

. There is little pressure to perform at high levels of accuracy, and there is

often a greater emphasis on comprehension than on production, espe-

cially in the early stages of learning.. Modified input is a defining feature of this approach to instruction. The

teacher makes every effort to speak to students in a level of language

they can understand. If students speak the same first language, they mayhave little difficulry in understanding each other. If they come from dif-ferent language backgrounds, they may modify their language as theyseek to communicate successfully.

General descriptions of classroom instruction such as those above cannotcapture the individual characteristics of particular classrooms. For thisreason, researchers have developed a number of ways to study classroomlearning and teaching.'W'e will discuss two approaches to classroom research

in this chapter.'Sl'e will look first at observation schemes, in which research-

ers anticipate the occurrence of particular events and behaviours and makenote of them within pre-planned frameworks or checklists. Then we will

q3eoJdd¿ Jrar{r ur JeJIp rEI{r suooJsself, uJo{ arrlof, sldufsuBJl aql'uollfBJelultuapnts-Jar{f,Ear ruasaJd o,l\t rsJU aI{I 'uonf,as Suvtro¡o3 al{l Pue sgt ut uaru8

eff uortfrJatur ruooJSSEIf, a8en8uq puof,esJo std¡rcsuert JnoJ Luo{ srdraoxE

suotlJp¿a|u? |u"pn| s-.¿a q J?aJ : suost¿? dutoz uto o¿swl J'sluaPnls PUE

sluaPnls uee \leq Pu" sruePnls Pu? sJer{f,Eal u3e \leg uollfsJelul Jo eJnl"uaqt azrJaloereqf, or eruaqos ITOf, el{r uI pasn esoqt or rcl¡uls sal¡o8ale¡

paurruJerep-a.rd 3o lJs E esn ot pe1se a¡¿ nol glll{¡a ul &l¡tlcr u" sI ^\olag

'seuo pef,uarredxaSo luarudo-la^ap ¡euorssajord eql uI pu" sJel{f,"el ,&euJo Suru¡e.rt oqr ur Pasn ueag ospe^Er{ seuaqf,s uor}E^Jesqo 'Sulurea¡ aSen8ue¡ puofes uI safuaJeJlP or PalEIeJa¡e sarll:¿¡d Sulqcear uI sarueJaJlp ,l\oq re >lool ot PePuarul sI IEI{I rlf,JeesaJ

ruoorss¿lr ul l¡.rtrurrd pesn uaag e eq tI aIII sraqro PUE stual{f,s JTOI aql'sJoJf,e (sJauJeal ot puodsar sra

-qf,"ar ,/v\or{ Pue Jar{req^\ PuE '1s3 sJel{f,Ea] suonsanbSo sPuDI aqr 'lertr lue ulpet3rJlsal sr uoltJnpoJd a8en8ue¡ JIaI{r JeI{teI{ \ 'acnpo;d sluePnls a8en8ue¡

(a¡ur¡ rvroq ro) qenu r'toq 'aldurexa ro3 'sluapnls PuE sraqf,Ear fq pacnp

-o¡d a8rn8uel elpJo spadse:grcads sequf,seP g ued'uolssnrsrP;o; scrdor

eql asoor{f, ol sruepn}s JoJ selllunlJoddo e¡¿ eJaql Jerpeq.,'r Pu" '8utu¿atuJo tuJoJ a8en8ue¡ uo sr snloJ aqt Jer{raqa'panuac-rauJrel Jo -JeI{J¿al eJ¿

sanrAItJE ¡errSo8epad elp Jaqral{^\ 'a¡dtuexe JoJ 'PJoraJ utf Ja^Jasgo eqt

'y tre¿ Sulsn uar¡6 'sadÁ lrlrrrrf,E Jo uollezlu¿8¡o pue 'snco3 'lualuoc 3osurral ur sarrl¡r¡d Surgrear saglJrs:P Vu¿d 'surd oruu olur PaPhIP sl I-IO:)'G661r{r1r{grC EIrEW pue epedS eur¡ lq PaqlrsseP aruel{f,S uonelresqo

OfOC) Surgceal a8rnSuel Jo uoltetuelro elll?slunruruoJ aql sI suloor

-ssr¡o aBenBuEI puo3as .roj l¡pcglcads pado¡a,rap Jruer{f,s e jo a¡druexa euo

'sSurprocar qlnsJo sld¡lcsuen ro s8utptorar

oapr^ Jo orpne aslpua ot urooJssell agl ePISlno JatEI Pasn Jo 'luooJssell eql

ul are laqr allq^ ,erult IeaJ, uI sJa^Jasqo lq pasn arr farp JeIFaq \ 01 uoll-elar ur reJlp osp seluer{f,s ar[L .uorlfErelur uroorsse¡c io saldruEs pel3elas

uo Jo uossel e rnog8noJql Pasn are laqr J3qrel{ \ put 'suotldufseP eAIlEl

-gruenb Jo e^IlElII¿nb uo snroj faqr raqreqz\t 'uleluoc fagr sarro8alm Joraqunu agr Surpn¡cu¡ 'sl:adsat pre^as ul raJIP lagl 'sruoo;sse1c a8en8uel

puof,as ur asn JoJ padola,l,ap ueaq e^Er{ soruer{Js uolle^resqo ruareglP fuelt¡

seueqJs uorls Jasgo

'suonrtcadxa ¡o

sarro8ateo paunuratepa;d lu¿ ot uoltelJasgo aqt IIUII ol lou Sutl¡l rng 'sdrgs

-uonEIoJ put suraued ro3 Sunlool 'ruooJssels eI{} ur suaddeq req^\ aqlJf,seP

or ra^resqo aqt salnbar trgr rprordde ue 'fgderSouqra ruoorssrls 13 >lool

u,tol$sap a7an&uq puotas aql m &utcltaal puu Sututual &um'tasqg 6T,t

r30 Obseruing learning and teaching in the second knguage ckssroom

to second language teaching; one ofthem represents structure-based instruc-tion; the other, a communicative approach. Structure-based approachesemphasize language form through either metalinguistic instruction (forexample, grammar translation) or patern practice (for example, audiolingual).'S7'ith

each transcript, there is a chart where you can indicate whether certainthings are happening in the inreraction, from the point ofview of the teacherand that of the students. Before you begin reading the transcripts, study thefollowing interpretations of the categories used in the charts:

I Errors: Are there errors in the language ofeither the teacher or the students?2 Feedback on errors: \7hen students make errors, do they receive feedback?

From whom?3 Genuine questions: Do teachers and students ask questions to which they

dont know the answer in advance?

4 Display questions: Do teachers ask questions that they know the answersto so that learners can display their knowledge of the language (or lackof it)?

5 Negotiation for meaning: Do the teachers and students work to under-stand what the other speakers are saying? 'S7'hat efforts are made by theteacher? By the students?

6 Metalinguistic comments: Do the teachers and students talk about lan-guage, in addition to using it to transmit information?

In the following excerpts, T represents the teacher; S represents a student.(The first two examples come from unpublished data collected by P M.Lightbown, N. Spada, and B. Barkman.)

Classroom A: A structure-based approach(Students in this class are 15-year-old French speakers.)

Teacher Student

Errors

Feedback on errors

Genuine questions

Display questions

Negotiation for meaning

Metalinguistic comments

Photocopiable @ Oxford University Press

r OK, we finished the book-we finished in the book UnitI,2,3.Finished.'S7'orkbook l, 2, 3. So today we're going to start with

'rooP eql asolc

¿8urop eq sI rEI{/v'

'apnEIJ ¿PrEuraB 'asrald rooP aqr aso¡o nof Ppo^'(preoq ar¡r uo

,rtt"rt 7*'qt¡,r. Buúe1d ru,I, sellJ^\) ¡osz¡a ¡nol qrv'r 3uúe1d er¡oÁ'ser\.

'Pallrxe eJ<no ¿-nof art IEILN't' ' ' tl-'f

'(preoq aq] uo rtol ol Suluarst¡ ru,1 ¿8urop nof a¡e ltqÁ\, sartrrrr) 'qg'sar\

'aru or Sulualsr aJ¡o^'nol or

¿qg_qn-ualsll-{n-ou .o¡

¿8urop nod e¡e reqrh\ ¿rrEIAJ qur'r 8uq¡er

nof ary ¿eru or Sutualsr no,( a¡e 'a.ry-Sutgraruos Surop eJ,noÁ

'Surqrlur Surop ro¡¡Sulqraruos Sulop ar,no¡

'Surqrlur Surop ro¡¡8u¡qraru os sutop ar.no¡ ¿surqrlue a;fi;,::=:it

¿Surqro¡'[Surqrou]uarx

¿1ne¿ '8uroP nol a¡¿ IELLN'aug

'<)O ¿^tou>I l,uoP noÁ ¿snonulluof, luasa¡d 'ueaLu rEIF saoP req l'seÁ

3-,t-l3-u-a

¿leql s,l"tl[\ ¿snonulluof lueseJd

snonulruor tuesa;d'g¡¿Yg

'rrq aFlnv'1rq alulT

¿rI sI lstlN ¿srÁseÁ

¿sI rl rEr{1ü lv\ou>l ]üoP noÁ

¿)O-snonu[uor tuasa.rd 'a,ussa¡8o¡d luasa¡d 'luasa¡d eql uI >lJo.t\

or Suro8 et,el"\'r,\un', rru¡ '(,rse¿ E-Z-I,PJeog uo sartrrvr) ptq'PIC

¿rsed agr ul,fie¡¡txne rrl¡1-rsed aql uIlse¿

¿>IO ¿uo >lrod\ a1V\ PIP esual 18tLA ¿asual lEq^\ uI Pa>lro/(

e'&\

€'Z'I uI '$looq rnof a>1el lrrop 'taf qooq rnof a>1el luoc '7 llun

ruoo¿ssryr aSon&ual puoeas aql ut Sutt¡taal pur &urutaa1 Sumtasqg

Is

Js

Is

JS

Js

IS

Is

Is

IS

Is

Is

Is

Is

Is

Js

Is

JS

r8,r

132 Obseruing learning and teaching in the second knguage classroom

r He is closing the door (writes 'He's closing the door' on the board).\lhat are you doing, Mario?

Classroom B: A communicative approach(Students in this class are 10-year-old French speakers. In this activiry theyare telling their teacher and their classmates what 'bugs' them. They have

written what bugs them' on a card or paper that they hold while speaking.)

Photocopiable @ Oxford University Press

s It bugs me when a bee string me.

T Oh, when a bee stings me.

s Stings me.

T Do you get stung often? Does that happen often? The bee stingingmany times?

s Yeah.

T Often? (Teacher turns to students who aren't paying attention) OK.Sandra and Benoit, you may begin working on a research project,hey? (Teacher turns her attention back to'\(/hat bugs me')

s It bugs me (inaudible) and my sister put on my clothes.

r Ah! She borrows your clothes? \lhen you're older, you mayappreciate it because you can switch clothes, maybe. (Tirrns to check

another studentt written work) Mélanie, this is yours, I will check-OK. It's good.

s It bugs me when I'm sick and my brother doesnt help me-my-mybrother,'s¿115s fig-rne-.

T OK. You know-when (inaudible) sick, you're sick at home in bedand you say, oh, to your brother or your sister: '\7ould you please get

me a drinkof¡y¿¡s¡:'-'Ah! Drop dead!'you know, 'Go play in thetraffic!'You know, it's not very nice. Martin!

s It bug me to have-T It bugs me. It bugzzme.s It bugs me when my brother takes my bicycle. Every day.

Teacher Student

Errors

Feedback on errors

Genuine questions

Display quest¡ons

Negotiation for meaning

Metalinguistic comments

'sluaPnls 3rl1 ruoü suonsanb oN 'lueura8?u¿ur ruooJ-sselr 01 pereler slez*¡e lsorulp rre laql tnq

^ aJ B <se^ :suorlsr"O r"ll;l n

JeqJEel eqt 'sJoJle aIBru op stuapnts Je^aueqlú .saÁ :sJoJJa uo >ll¿qpeeC Z'uossal aqr fq

pauull l¡pnsn sr les lagr rer{^\ pue JIll¡ ,{ra,r les loqt JSnEraq s¡o¡¡a lu¿ruool eTeru l uop sluapnts '(,¿sl U tBrfl\1r\orDl t<uop noÁ, .aldurexa roj) uolreu-olur Sursr¡ f,nerurJp qrr^\ pa>lse uer;o-rrlJoJ tuaurelets ur suonsanb agt'a¡durrxa ro3 'SulgoearSo adÁ srr{rJo ¡erldÁ srnsrJatlerer{c rer¡noad aruosJAEr{ seop gcaeds rer{ Ja er'roH 'reqf,Eal eqr;o rred aqr uo m,a3 l.ra¡ :srorJg I

vutoo,tssq)

¿ruaraJIPlarp are no¡1 ¿,,flldulexa sldl¡osurJt eseql ler{l stueuuoJrlue arpJo rlf,Be ursJauJrel ot JIqEITE^¿ aJ¿ uonf,eJalur JoJ sauunl.loddo pue rndul a8enSue¡

Puo)esJo SPUDI r?Yll\'J"J os paro¡druoo az'rg nol slrellf, oll\t Jtll aredruo3

uonrsJelul puu rndul Jo sf,psuelJBrBrl]

¿)O 'roJ sern8g eq ueqlsar{rlerrs rrou a^Er{ leru ag puv ¿allq srq eler ¡lm nol a>¡q rnol

se{Er aq ueq.& reqr rar{rorg rnol ¡ar nol ruop lqzrr .¡a¿¡'uaelrnog J'uaelJno{ s

¿aq sE^\ PIo /Y\oq Puv J¡rfiaÁ s

¿lepqrrrq sr¡1 r.€zq)rBw s

¿rerporq ¡nol sl plo ^/\oH ¡e¡clclq sr¡1 J

'a1có¡q (a¡qpneur) s

¿auo plo rnol saler rar{rorq rnof puy r(alqrpneuil s

'euo plo uE a eq nol puy r'raqrorq lyr¡ s

¿rerporq ¡nol ¡o no¡ ¿a¡cfrrq ^\eu E sBq oq.&\ ,urrJEtrAJ r

-sBr{ Jer{rorg s,uluBl ü s

¿ueaf ¡arnulur e rsnl'eoq^rrl'lag r¡so¡. s

'oo1 euo./v\au 3 spaau JeqloJq srq lng 'a¡ilr¡q ^\au

3 ser{ aH J(alqrpnruil s

'raqtorq ;nol roj a¡clc¡q

^,\.au E aleno8au aqleT,q 'tr lnoge pEp pue ruoru ¡nol ot >lle¿'lla \ ,yV r

'a1cb¡q (a¡qpneur) alclc¡q.&\au V iq¿eÁ s

¿a¡cfr¡q B eAEq luseop rarporq rnol 'q¡ ¿a¡rfrrq srq puel rerporqsrq plno3 ¿a¡clclq srq (alqrpneul)-orq rnol tusaog ¡gy ¿lep lrarg r

ruoo$splr a8an&uq puocas aql ut &uultual pua Sututaal Suuuasqg €,tr

r34 Obseruing learning arud teaching in the second langudge classroom

4 Display questions: Yes, almost all of the teacher's questions are of this rype.Interestingl¡ however, the students sometimes interpret display ques-

tions as genuine questions (T: \X/hat are you doing, Paul? S: Nothing.).The teacher wants students to produce a sentence-any sentence-inthe 'present continuous' but the student worries that het about to get introuble and asserts that he is doing'nothing'. This is a good example ofhow the teacher's pragmatic intent can be misinterpreted by the student,

and of how strongly, even in this setting, students seek to find genuine

meaning in language.

5 Negotiation for meaning: Very little, learners have no need to paraphrase

or requesr clarifications, and no opportuniry to determine the direction

of the discourse; the teacher is focused only on the formal aspects of the

learners' language. All the effort goes into getting students to produce a

sentence with the present continuous form of the verb.

6 Metalinguistic comments: Yes, this is how the teacher begins the lesson

and lets the students know what really matters!

Classroorn BI Errors: Yes, students make errors. And even the teacher says some odd

things sometimes. Her speech also contains incomplete sentences, simpli-fied ways of speaking, and an informal speech style.

2 Feedback on errors: Yes, sometimes the teacher repeats what the student

has said with the correct form (for example, 'hebugzz me'-emphasizingthe third person singular ending). However, this correction is not consist-

ent or intrusive as the focus is primarily on letting students express their

meanings.3 Genuine questions: Yes, almost all of the teacher's questions are focused on

getting information from the students. The students are not asking,ques-

iiottr itr this exchange. However, they do sometimes intervene to change

the direction of the conversation.4 Display quesrions: No, because there is a focus on meaning rather than on

acc;Jracy in grammatical form.

5 Negotiation for meaning: Yes, from the teacher's side, especially in the

long exchange about who has a bicycle!

6 Meialinguistic comments: No. Even though the teacher clearly hopes to

g.t stud.nts to use the third person ending, she does not say so in these

words.

You no doubt noticed how strikingly different these t\vo transcripts are,

even though the activities in both are teacher-centred. In the transcript from

ClassroomA, the focus is on form (i.e. grammar) and in Classroom B, it is oq

meaning. In Classroom A, the only purpose of the interaction is to practisd

the presént continuous. Although the teacher uses real classroom events an-d

,o*. h.r-our to accomplish th1s, there is no real interest in what studen(

¿Prrq aeJql zs'erar{r dn sr laarr] eql puv (ure8r ral sturo¿) .aru1

eqr sr srql (ure8r dn sruro¿) 'erDI aqt sl sIlL (.rrr aqr ur dn sturo¿)'dn sr arq eqr '-pl eql 'B -e s r1 '[aarr] B sr aJar{t .rq8u arp uo-o puv r s

sser¿ lrrsreruu¡ pJoJXO O a¡qerdororoq¿

sluourulof, r¡tsrn8u¡¡ela¡

Surueeu .ro, uoDeDo8eN

suonsanb le¡dsr6

suo¡lsanb eutnueg

sJoJJa uo )l€qPaal

sJoJJ3

z luePnlsI luePnls

('uerueel ra3luuafpue'ra,rr1g Bpuorlu 'larye¡¡ uosrly lq parca¡oe etep pai{srlqndun ruo.r; saurorldl¡osue¡l slql) 'uorrelcunuo¡d ta8¡et-uou atef,rpur sra>lopJq arenbg .aeJl ¿¡eau sse¡8 aruos uo Sulpuers are sern8y {lrrs eql .pueq srq Sulp¡oq 1rl3 epue erDI e Surlg log e-sarn8g ¡clrs Suru¡eluoo eurpno llrlq E sr Suwrerpsl 15 arntrld aq1 'arnrcld sJer{to r{JEe tou tng,(ernlsa8laqr uaqll) spuer{pue saf,EJ s rar{lo r{f,Ea aas uec lagr rpql os teur¿q IIEus ? lg pareredas ,a¡qet

e le Sururs a.re leql r\Erp ot ZS JoJ a¡ntrrd e Surgrrcsap sr I S erar{./y\ >lse} E

ur pa8e8ua a;e fag¡ 'Erleruos ruog sr (¿g) puocas agt fSuo;¡ 3uo¡1 ruo{ sr

(19) raurea¡ tsrg eql 'Erlerlsnv ur gsrÉug SururealSo real rsrg rrer{t ur sra

-ureel -ISE r¡rog 'srcal U-U pa8r slrr8 o \t Jo sr rdr¡csue¡l 8uv'ro¡o; agluoltdlJcseP eJnlJId :v Is¿] uorlBsrunuruoJ

'uortf,¿Jatur aqt ur Suruadderl are s8ulgr uretJar Jer{raq,/v\ etef,rpuruec nol aragzvt ]dl¡csue¡l qf,Ea qlrl\ lJer{l E sr aJer{l (uonJes snol¡a.rd Jqt ur sV

'$lsEl e^nBf lunurtuo3 luaJeJ-JIp ul pa8e8ua sreureal a8tn8ur¡ puores uae^\teg suorrreJelur eqr uo pa5¿qeJE slduosueJf er{I 'suorlfeJetur luepnls-luepnls aruos sluasa¡d uonf,os srql

su o rlJ 3n1. ut lu arynl s-|ua?rys : sa o sr¿? dut o J ut o o"c s snl )d¡essacau sr rr slJal Jer{3eel aqr uag.,'rlcEJnfJE ¡ecneruuer8 ot saf,uaJaJaryerJqeulos aJe araqr q8norllle 'suortsenb aumua8 pue 'uonf,EJetur FuontsJe^uo)'Suruearu uo sr snfoJ erp 'g tuooJSSEIJ uor3 ldl;csuBJl ar{l uI 'V urooJSsEIJuorS ldrnsueJl ar{l ur uortfaJJor JoJJe pue 'suorlsenb &¡dsrp ,¡eturue¡8

lf,JJJoJ uo snloJ &nul¡d E sr aJeql 'ruJoJ gJe^ lf,aJJof, agr Sursn .8urop arelaqr reqru.les ol úlllqe rlar¡r Sunq8l¡{3rg sr raqreat aql roqred '8urop are

ruoo¿ssap aSan8ual puoras aql ut Sutqnat yua &urutaa1 Suxtuasqo stt

r36 Obseruing learning and teaching in the second language c/.assroom

sr Huh?sz Is a three bird?

s1 Huh?s2 Up, up-up the kite?

s r Yeah, the kite is u-, the kite is up and the ltree] is down. (Points

directions)sz The lbird] down?

sr The kite-, the [tree] is down.sz \What's the [tee]?s1 Huh?sz \lhatt the ltree]? (Imitates Learner 1's production)s1 Feel?

s2 Fell?

Fell down? (Points down)s 1 No, it's not the fell down. No, it's just at the bottom.sz The bird?

s 1 No, the tree.

sz The tree? (Emphatic stress)

s1 Yes.

s2 It is left and right?s 1 It's right. (Points)

sz Itt long? It's llinle]?S 1 It's-what?sz It's long and fiittle]?s I lJm, a little-. It-, um, a middle size.

s2 Middle size tree?

s1 Yes.

s2 It's little. (Says as drawing the tree)

Communication task B: JigsawThe following transcript is of two students in a Grade 7 French immersion

classroom. They are engaged in a jigsaw activity based on a series of eight

pictures telling the story of a young girl being awakened by her alarm clock

áarly in the morning. One student has pictures 1,3,5, and7, and the other

student has pictures 2,4,6,and 8. They take turns telling the story portrayed

by the pictures and then they display all the pictures in sequence and write

the story they have just told. Telling the story requires the use of a number ofreflexive verbs in French. In the third person, the form sr is placed between

the subject and the finite verb. Thus, elle se llue (she gets up) and elle se souuient

(she remembers) are correct. The learners are called Dara (D) and Nina (N).

In the transcript incorrect uses ofthe refexive verbs are in italics; other errors

are not marked. (The data are from Swain and Lapkin 2002.)

[acnoe;d rlogf, E saJaql

lBIp sJequaruor eqs uaPPns ¿Jo IIE 'ou "' rloqc ro3] 'aleror{l aP

anbrrB¡d aun r .{ y.¡b ruamnos a1la dnot q lnot 'uou "' aproqs a¡ rnod

[se¡.1 'no[pea.r ra8 or seq ar¡s reql] :ared9-rd es lIoP ella,nb

[loq: seq eqs iEI{r sJeglueurar aq5] 'eproqc a1r a¡e,nb ruam'nos allg

[raqruaruar "' Jagruatuer qo] 'lualrnos "' tuel^nos 'qo

[raqruaruar s<rr ]ulqr l,uoP I] 'luallnos es lsa(3 anb sed asuad :[f¿s;aquraruar "' aqs uePPns

EJo II3 .'' 1IB.¿r\'ou] ¿tuannos es "' a¡¡a dnoc 3, lnol'1I31v\'uou

faqs'og] e¡a 'sro¡y

lot "' sJaquaruor aq5] 'uou "' luellnos as a1la [¡r;os fre,l']

frloqc or o3 or seg aqs l"qr sJegrueulal el{s uaPPns

pJo IM altrotlr el E, rallr UoP ' ' ' a1la pb ruat(tnos 2ll2 dnoc q rno¡[¡lotl3] 'aleror{J

irto,{Cl 'aleroIIJ

lpurq ol o3 or seg

eqs rBI{r sraglueruer aqs] ¿"' PuEq nE ralle uop a¡a¡bruaxnnos al/g

[rou] "' sed

fou 'sraqruarueJ ails "' sJequauer

N(I

N(I

Nq

CI

N

aqs "' sJegueureJ ar{s 'qr{E "' sJagruaruar ag5] 'ou 'lual¡nosas allg "' ruamnos allg ''' lusl^nos as alla 'qqe "' luamnos 2llg cI

f¿s.raquaual Jo sJaqruerua¿] ¿luamnot no ]ual^nos as N

[s;aqruaruar aqg]ruatnnos a1lE c[asss aqg] esss ellg N

[f¡uappng] dnoc t, rno¡ cI

[dn sra8 eqs os erllf,Brd rrogo e seq eqs

t"r{r sraquauer oqs 'ou 'sreqtualua; aq5] 'a^?l es slla sJole 'aleroqo

ap enbrrerd aun ' ' ' un e a¡a,nb I uaxnnos 2llg 'uou 'luel^nos 3s ellg cI

[r.lS] 'rilg c

ssar¿ &tsla,rtu¡ PJorxO O a¡qerdororoq¿

stueutuof, r¡rs¡n8u¡¡ere¡

Suruear.u .ro¡ uo¡teno8a¡

suorlsanb le¡dstq

suortsenb aulnuag

sJoJJa uo lleqPeal

N

C

CI

N(I

N

Lt l utoo"tssqr a&anflual puolzs aqt ut Sutqnat pua Sutu'taal Suxarasqo

sJoJJf

138 Obseruing learning and teaching in the second language classroom

Characteristics of input and interactionCompare the two charts you have completed. As before, what kinds ofsecondlanguage input and opportunities for interaction are available to learners ineach of the environments that these transcripts exemplify? How are they dif-ferent from each other and the teacher-student interactions you looked atpreviously?

Communication tashAI Errors: There are many errors in the speech of both learners. This includes

grammatical and pronunciation errors. These errors are present in several

breakdowns in the learners' conversation.2 Feedback on errors: There is no error correction in terms of form as the

learners struggle to understand each other's meaning. The difficulty theyare having in communication may serve as a kind of implicit feedback.That is, the fact that the interlocutor does not understand may signal thatthere is something wrong with what they have said.

3 Genuine questions: Yes, there are many genuine questions. Naturall¡ 52asks most of these questions because she needs to get the information fromS 1 in order to draw the picture. S 1 also asks some genuine questions andthese are almost always to ask for clarification.

4 Display questions: No, there are no display questions because theyare engaged in a real communication-gap exchange. 52 cannot see thepicture that S 1 is describing. Therefore all the questions asked are genuinequestions.

5 Negotiation for meaning: Yes, indeed! Both learners are trying hard tounderstand each other, even though they often fail to do so. This involvesmany comprehe nsion questions and clarification requests, as well as repeti-tions of each othert utterances, often with emphasis, trying to understandwhat the other learner has just said.

6 Metalinguistic comments: None.

Communication tash BI Errors: Both learners make several grammatical errors, most notably the

repeated failure to produce the refexive form of the verb se souuenir.

2 Feedback on errors: There is no actual error correction provided. Neitherlearner is really sure what the correct form is. Instead, there is metalinguis-tic refection and discussion as they try to figure out whether they are usingthe correct form of the verb se souuenir.

3 Genuine questions: The questions that are asked are genuine. The contentis language form, but the students are genuinely sharing informationabout how to complete the task.

4 Display questions: There are no display questions. The students are activelycollaborating to reconstrud the story and are asking genuine questions ofeach other.

Puo3es Pue rsrg r{rog ur lleqPasJ PaurwExs PErl ]¿qr slePou ruo5 serro8er?f,

rer{ro Pue aluar{fs Jlol er{l Jo g uBd ruo{ serro83l?f Juros Jo uorrEurq

-urof, E Sursn lq suone^f,asgo rraqr ue8aq faql 'sruapnrs p¡o-reaf-1I-6 qll¡asruooJss¿¡f, uorsJeururr qf,ueJC JnoJ ur uonfeJelur Surrnp papr,rord >lleqpaa3

elltoaJrof, Jo sadlr ruaragrp aqr Surnrasqo lq aruel{rs rraqr padole,r,ap fagl'uonrnrtsur a8en8ue¡ puoresJo sadlr reqro ur >p¿qp3eJ eglJrsep

ot pasn uaag osle seq r1 '(Sulgrear aSen8uel peseg-tueruoc 'a'r) uonf,nnsurranru-rralqns e¡,r a8en8uel ra8rer eqr uJeel stuepnls aSrn8uel puores araq,4^

suJooJsself uorsJerurur r{fuaJ{ ul pado¡a,r.ep se^\ eruer{f,s slql 'lJeqpaa3 aqlpaf,nou ser{ luapnls eqt trr{t uouerrpur ut-alerdn ruaprus seururexa osle

puE sJoJJe uo a,u8 sJer{f,Eal >llBqPaej aAnf,eJJoJ 3o sada lueJsJIP seglJf,seP

qrlrl¡A aruer{f,s uorlelresgo ur pado¡a.tap (L661elue¡ BIIe-I pue rarsr(1 lo¡sutoolsvlJ ?arpq-lualuoJ ut stsuJaü :I [?rug

utoo,tswlr aqL a? qr?q?aa! an?pa"¿ro)

'Surura¡ Z-I roJ arunJo uonngrrtslppue tunou¡E ar{r seglJlsep euo pue suousanb3o asn (sJaq)Eat ateSttsa,rut rno3(>l3BqpeeJ e^nfeJJo3 eururExe sarpnts aAIC 'Paultuexe uaaq sEI{ uollrnJtsul

Jo eJnfEaJ re¡notUed euo r{f,Iq-/y\ uI tloJ¿3sal uooJss¿If ,^ eI^eJ e \ 'suollf,esSurmo¡o3 er{r uI 'uonf,EJetul pue uollfnJrsul ruooJssul3 Jo eJnrEeJ 3glf,eds

auo uo snJoJ sJer{to 'sarnparord pue saf,Ilf,EJd puonrnrtsut 3o a8uer peorqe 8ur¡a,ror 'sar¡oSateo a¡oru lu¿ru asn seuaqts uorltlJesqo aruog 'satro8alec

uonB^Jesgo xrsJo suJal uI uollf,eJaluI luaPnls-luePrus PUE luePnls-Jar{3"e1pa;rduoo pur pequf,sep e^EI{ ar"r 'sa8¿d Surpacard eqt uI saItIAItJB aqt uI

úors agr jo luetuoJ agr ssnJSIp ot anulluof lar¡r se ruJo3 slr{l

Jo esn JraqtJo lce¡nccr ¡roneuuer8 agt uottsanb llpnunuor PUe¿tuanruot at

qJe a^rxegeJ er{rJo uIJoJ lf,aJJor aqr Sursn a.re lar¡r Jaqtel{^\ lnoqe stuaruettts

uor¡dxe IEJa JS a¡eru lagr 'lrors aqr Sutlrn¡tsuo¡al alrqr6 'Sutueau puetuJoJ qroq uo pasnf,oJ aJE sJauJeel oql 'Jo^a,^aor{ 'ld¡rosuerl luePnls-luePntspuoras eqt uI lset sr{t uI Surueau¡ ro3 areno8au lagr se slsanba¡ uonmglJtlfpue uorsueqa¡druo¡ Sursn l¡ruttsuoJ eJE ,,(aq1 'lrr,uror de8-uoll¿tuJoJul aqr

alaldruoc ot repJo uI Jotllo l{f,ee puetsJapun or Sutlrl uo pue Suluearu uo r(1a,rts

-nlf,xe pasnf,oJ eJE ueJpllqf, aql '>lsrt uollef,IunuruJoo rsJg Jqr uI 'Jal{lo I{fEa

ruo5 luaJeJrp,fta,r aJ? uonJEJalul luePnls-luaPnrsJo slduf,su¿J] o/yu asaql

'urro3 rg8rr aql pug ol Surl¡t uosn:oj laqr se a8en8uel rnoge 8uq¡rt eJE stuapnts ar{t ',unouo:d, lo ,gla,t,sE r{f,ns spJo^\ Sulsn lou ert lagr q8noqrry :sruJuruJof, clrsln8ul¡era¡lq 9

'l¿s ot ruer'r fagr paar8e a,r lagt rrqrvt les or

sruJoJ tJaJJoc aqr Sursn arr faqr Jalpaq/ú.Jo uorssn3slP aJotu 'sI lEI{l 'tuJo3

3o uoneno8au aJoru sr aJalp 'snql 'Aots al{rJo rueruof aql uo paa.r8e azttg

sluapnls er{l (uortfrJarul aql u¡ ru¡od sq1 rV :Suluearu JoJ uoItEIloStN 5

utootssqr aSan&ual puoJas aof w Sutqnal puu Sututaal &un"¿asqO 6et

r40 Obseruing learning and teaching in the second language classroom

language learning. They adjusted some of the categories to fit their data,and they also developed additional categories. This resulted in the identi-fication of six corrective feedback types, defined below The definitions aretaken from Lyster and Ranta (1997: pp.46-8). The examples come fromi0-1 1-year-old students in ESL classes that we have observed.

Explicit correction refers to the explicit provision of the correcr form. Asthe teacher provides the correct form, he or she clearly indicates thatwhat the student had said was incorrect (for example, 'Oh, you mean ...','You should say ...').

s The dog run fastly.T 'Fastly' doesnt exist. 'Fast' does not take -ly. That's why I picked

'quickly'.

Recasts involve the teachert reformulation of all or part of a studentt utter-ance, minus the error. Recasts are generally implicit in that they are notintroduced by'You mean', 'Use this word', or'You should say.'

s1 \X/hyyou dont like Marc?r \Mhy dont you like Marc?sz I dont know I dont like him.

Note that in this example the teacher does not seem to expect uptake fromS 1. It seems she is merely reformulating the question S t has asked 52.

Ckrifcation requests indicate to students either that their utterance has beenmisunderstood by the teacher or that the utterance is incorrect in some wayand that a repetition or a reformulation is required. A clarification requestincludes phrases such as 'Pardon me ...' It may also include a repetition ofthe error as in '\7hat do you mean by ... ?'

r How often do you wash the dishes?

s Fourteen.:r Excuse me. (Clarification request)

s Fourteen.:r Fourteen what? (Clarification request)

s Fourteen for a week.:r Fourteen times a week? (Recast)

s Yes. Lunch and dinner.

Metalinguisticfeedbackcontains comments, information, orquestions relatedto the correctness of the studentt utterance, without explicitly providing thecorrect form. Metalinguistic comments generally indicate that there is an

error somewhere (for example, 'Can you find your error?'). Also, metalin-guistic information generally provides either some grammatical terminologvthat refers to the nature of the error (for example, 'Itt masculine') or a worddefinition in the case of lexical errors. Metalinguistic questions also point to

ol srarpo pue (886I) ur¿./v\S IIrrreW pel ser{ Surqrear a8enSue¡ pesrg-luetuooulqrr,ry\Jlasrr a8en8uel puoras ar{rJo aSpa¡uou1 Sulcuer¡ua pue algrsuaqa-rd

-uror relleur-rcalgns aqr Surleru 3o a8ualpgr elqnop aqt 'peapul 'qceads

JIaIp Jo ruJoJ eqt utr{r Jarp¿J lueluof ar{l or Surpuodsar sr Jar{f,¿at aqt ter{leuJns$ feru laqr asneoeg '<IJEqpeeJ eAnJaJJoJ Jo stuJo3 Jer{ro ueql stsEJeJ

Jf,nou or l1a>p ssal eJE (ruro3 rou Surueeur uo sr srserldrua atp areqrrr) Surqreara8en8ue¡ peseq-lueluoc 8ul¡'leca¡ sluepnls regr pan8re s¿q (866I) rars/1

'ef,uerarln ¡rur8lro arpJo ruJoJ palf,arrof, e or peal or fla>¡t aroruos¡e ara,tr.lagl 'a>1erdn eJour ur pelFSeJ dluo tou >1ceqpaa3:lrsrn8urplau puesuonetrfrla 'aJoruJaqlJng 'suoruradal pue (>lregpaaj onsln8ulletatu 'slsenbaJuon¿f grJEIf JeUE Jnf,f,o or l1a>1r1 a.rour pue slseteJ ;JUE Jnf)o or l¡a>¡1 tsra¡ seru.

a¡erdn ruapnts 'uae.4 tag ur IIaJ {reqpaal elnf,rrrorSo sadlr raqto aql 'papl^-o¡d adlr >llrqpaeJ ruanbarj rs"al eqt se¡a rorra3o uollrada¡ 'sasselr rnoJ ar{r

ul papl,ro-rd >llBqPaaj l¿1or aquoJler{ uEqr arou JoJ Pelunof,f,E stse3er 'peepul

lleqpaaJJo adlr raqro lue utqr rrou¡ slstf,er pesn pe^Jesqo faqr sasself, uors-reunur qlueJC peseg-tuaruor ar{l ur srer{reel Ip reqr punoJ €rupU pue -rarsll

'(eJE a ^. Err ¡ern¡d s,rr ueqr6 ¿JoJJe

aqt eas noÁ ¿a>lrtsnu.rnol aas no¡ ¿rg8lr 'a¡doad o^\t s,rr rng ¿sr e/N r... sl e/N s

:uortoaJJof rrcr¡dxe puelueuruJof, JnsrngurTeleu lq paz'ro¡loJ sr uonrledar aqr 'aldruexa rxau eql uI

'ruoorPeg aql ur seH 'tuooJPag ¿uooJr{rEg r'ruooJr{rBg ar{r ur s eH s

:tsEf,al e fq pa/|o¡oj sr uorlrledal agr 'a¡durexa srql uI.JOJJE

aqr rgSr¡q8lq or se os uoneuolur Jraql rsnlpe sJer{feel 'sespf, rsoru uI 'af,ue

-Jelln snoauoJJe sluepnrs er{tJo uorlnade¡ sJOrlfEa} aqt or snlet uotltlada¿

¿selEld s

¿- eqt su"alf aI{ 'eru asnlxg r'are1d aqr su"elf, ragre3lT,q s

'efueJaltn Jrerp atEInuJoJaJ ot stuapnls 1se l¡¡euorsef,f,o sJaqf,¿el

'prlql '(,¿qs1¡8uE ur x les errr op ^\oH,

"' 'a¡druexa .ro3) sruro3 lrarror trrrlrot suoltsanb esn sJer{frat'puof,as'(,"'" s,r1,'a¡duexa ro3) aouerelln ul\oJrer{r3o uona¡duoc }rorle sJer{reet 'lsJrC 'stuapnls aql ruoü ruJoJ tf,eJJof, er{t

rrcrTa lprarlp ol esn sJer{Jear ter{r sanbluqcat aaJql rwal lE or sJeJeJ uoxl?lxJxlg

P-e s

¿rsed agr rnoge >llel a r uarlr* sqre^ uo rnd e-a,r Sulpue ar{r Erer{/6, rfrp-rarsal a¡doad aqr r€ >lool a/N s

'(,¿aulunua; ll sI, 'JIduBxa roj)]uapnts aqt tuog uonrruJo1ur Jr{r rrorle or tdu¡ane lnq JoJJe arpJo eJnrtu aI{}

ruoo$sap a7an&ual puocas aql ut Sutqwal pua &urutaa1 Sumtasqg Tr'I

r42 Obseruing learning and teaching in the second knguage classroom

conclude that'not all content teaching is necessarily good language teaching'

(p. 68). The challenges of content-based language teaching will be discussed

further in Chapter 6.

Since Lyster and Ranta reported their findings, many more observation

studies of corrective feedback in second or foreign language classrooms have

been carried out. Some of them report similar results-that recasts are the

most frequently occurring type of feedback and that they appear to go unno-

ticed by liarners. However, othefs report that learners do notice recasts in the

classroom. Below, two studies are described in which learners were observed

to notice and to respond to recasts provided by their teachers.

Study 2: Recasts andPriaate sqeech

In a study with aduli foreign language learners of Japanese, Amy Ohta(2000) examined the oral language that learners addressed to themselves

during classroom activities. She was able to obtain this private speech by

"tt".hitrg microphones to individual students during classroom. interaction

that focused or grammar and metalinguistic instruction. In this context'

Ohta discov.r.d ih"t learners noticed recasts when they were provided by

the instructor. Furthermore, learners were more likely to react to a recast

with private speech when it was directed to another learner or to the whole

class iather than when the recast was directed to their own errors. On the

basis ofthese findings, she concluded that recasts do get noticed in classroom

interaction even iftñey do not lead to uptake from the student who originally

produced the error.

Study 3: Recasts in dffirent instructional settings

Roy Lyster and Hiráhide Mori (2006) compared learners' immedi-

ate responses to corrective feedback in French and Japanese immersion

cl"rrroornr. They found that the teachers in both contexts used correc-

tive feedback in similar ways. However, the effects of recasts on learners'

uptake were different. In the Japanese immersion classes, learners frequently

repaired their utterances after réceiving recasts whereas learners in the French

iÁmersion classes rarely did. Instead, the greatest proportion of repair came

after prompts, that is, the feedback rypes that indicated to students that a

correition was needed and that encouraged them to self-correct'

In their efforts to understand these differences Lyster and Mori carried out

a detailed analysis of the instructional characteristics in these classes' Using

the COLI observation scheme described above to caPture differences in the

pedagogical practices, they discovered that there was an analytic orientation

i" thi J""p"tt.t. classrooms leading the teachers and learners to focus their

attenti;; on language form and accuracy. The orientation in the French

immersion cl"rrei was more experiential with a greater focus on content

and communication of messages. Lyster and Mori argued that because the

Japanese learners' attention was regularly drawn to form, they were primed

'slxaluof, pasnloJ-e8"n8ue¡ uor¡dxa Surrnp l¡ruanbar3 pue'sa8ueqcxeuouefrunruulof, pue 'luarua8eueru 'tueluof, Surrnp paprzrord l¡aJEJ sE^&\ >lJEg

-pee3 a rDer¡o¡ trcrTdxa lsa8ueqcxa pasnco3-e8rn8uel rlrr¡dxa ur os ssal rng'sa8ueg:xa luatuof, pue 'uoDefrununuor 'tuarua8ruetu ur etEJ q8rq l¡rua-lslsuof, E 1B Pasn eJa,/v\ slsEfal :slxeluof, ssoJJB PaIJeA oslE >ll"qPeeJ e^Ilf,eJJof,

3o sadlr arp 'l¡Sunsaratul 'sa8uegcxa tuarua8eueuJ ur Ja au pur 'saSuegcxauonef,runuJuof, pue luetuol ur euJn arp Jo auros fpo 'sa8uegrxa pasnf,oJ-a8rn8url ucr¡dxa unplzr'uauo lsorrl tndrnorlagr paglporu sJaur¿elter{t punoJleqr 'lceqpaal J noerro3 er{r ot peDear sraureel ,4aoq peurru¿xa fagr uar1t\'luarua8eueru pue 'uorte3runururoo 'tuatuor lq pa.d{olloJ 'sa8uegoxa pesnJoJ-a8en8ue¡ trclTdxa aqr ul ruanbeu tsoru sB^\ rl terll lnq stxatuoo leuonfnJtsurIIE ur papr^o¡d sr¡* >lleqpeal rer{t punoJ sreqrreesar er{I 'txatuor srr{t ur lse-tear3 a;am >lleqpeal JoJ senrunlJoddo snql 'sa8ueqrxa uourrrunuruol eqlur srorra a;ou l¡luecgluS¡s pacnpord sraur¿Jl leql puno3 laryery pue Ja^rTO

'l8o¡ounural rltsln8ur¡etaru Jo esn eqlput JEturuBJB uo s¿ztr srseqdrua agr :saSueqoxe pesnf,o;-e8en8ue¡ trcr¡dxa 7

pue'sle,,rr p;Surueauur r¡srÉug Sursn stuepnls uo se,l\ srseqdrua aqr :sa8uegcxa uorlef,runuruo3 g

Jnor^Eqeg uooJSSEIf, atel¡do¡dd¿ pue uossel

er{rJo uonea.ueBrc eqr rnoqe pe>llrl JaI{JEat aqr :sa8uerpxa tuarua8eueru ¿uJnlnfrJJnf, ar{rJo luaruof er{r lnogE

suonsanb pa>lse ro a8pa¡mou1 parredur raqf,Ber agr :sa8uegcxa lueruoJ I:PalsEJalur sJeuJBel PUE sJaqf,Eal qrlqlA uI slxeluof, JnoJ Pa5Il

-uapr laql 'uossal e ur uonf,eJetur JoJ stxatuoo Sull¡e,r uo Sulpuadap pararglp

lleqpaal eAnJaJJoJ Jo asn (sJeuJeel pue uorsrlo.rd ,sragreal Jer{taq,&\ pare8lr-sa,rul lar¡1 'sp¡o-real-¿I-9 qll¡a uroorsselr 1gg lrerurrd uerprrsny ue 3olpnrs a,r¡rdrrf,sap e lno perrrer (t00d lapeyrq uosllv pue ra^IIO Epuoq¿

Trcaluor m qnqpaalanqra.uo) :, [pnts

dplcr¡dxa eJoru ruroJ

or uorlualle rrer{r srf,eJrp rer{r >lleqpaal paeu tuaruorTSulueeru uo pasnf,oJ sI

tBr{l uorlf,nJtsur zl e^ref,al oq,ry\ sJauJEal lEql aq PFolv\ sII{lJo aldruexa aug'luaruuoJr^ue Fuon)nJlsur Jrar{l ur ol Peuolsnf,f,E auof,eq a,req laqr lEllv\ o1

alsoddo sr terll uonf,aJrp e ur petuerJo eJe sJauffelJl pallrou eg or l1a>¡t a;orusr 1reqpaa; 'srsar¡rodlq sr{t 01 Surproccy 'srsar¡rodfq ef,u"Iegralunof, eqlasodo¡d ol rrory pue.rarsr(1 pel r{rreeser raqlo tuog asoqr put s8ulpug asaq¡

'pres prq laqrrtr{ l,Jo uoneruJ5uor e l¡duls stlrr lsef,eJ (sJerlf,Eal aql reqr porunsst sJeuJeal

reqr l¡eryt sr snql ro¡¡a a8¿n8ue¡ e or Sulpuodsa¡ s¿rv' ¡al{reet aql tel{l reuJeel

arp or ¡eu8ls or f1a>1r¡ ssa¡ aJolü slsef,al ta^a,&\oq 'sosself, uolsJeunul qlueJgpaluarro-Surueeu¡ eJoru eql uI 'slsEJaJ

Jo uonf,unJ a^Itf,eJJof, el{r erlrou ol

Moo¿ssqr a3an3ua1 yuotas atp ur Sutc¡trat yua &urutaa1 Sum.tasqg E,'T

r44 Obseruing learning and teaching in the second language classroom

Oliver and MackeÉ study emphasizes how differences in the insrruc-tional context affect teachers'feedback and learners' response to it. It is alsoimportant to keep in mind that different corrective feedback rypes can beinterpreted differently depending on how they are delivered. Recasrs are a

case in point. In a study of corrective feedback in four different instruc-tional contexts, Younghee Sheen (2006) observed many conrrasting rypes ofrecasts, including recasts that were declarative versus interrogative, reducedversus non-reduced, single words or short phrases versus long phrases orclauses. Recasrs can also differ according to whether they are delivered withor without stress or emphasis. In a study of adult learners of English, ShawnLoewen and Jenefer Philp (2006) found that recasts containing 'prosodicstress were thirteen times more likely to result in successful uptake' (p. 547),that is, uptake in which the student produced the corrected form. However,these interactions were not associated with improved performance on a sub-sequent test.

Other factors that may affect learners' reacrions to different rypes of feedbackinclude age and learning goals. For example, adults may be more likely tointerpret recasts as feedback on language form, particularly if a high level ofaccuracy in the second or foreign language is one of their goals.

In this chapter we have examined the role of correcrive feedback primarilyin terms of learners' oral production. Most of this research has been con-cerned with the effects ofcorrective feedback in relation to learners' linguisticgrowth and more specificall¡ learners' grammatical development. There is

also an extensive body ofresearch that has investigated the role ofcorrectivefeedback on learners'written production. This research has been primarilyconcerned with whether corrective feedback can help learners improve theirwriting performance. Less atrention has been given to whether and howwritten corrective feedback contributes to learners' linguistic development.One recent study which has done that is Younghee Sheen's research describedin Study 5 below.

Study 5: Oral anduritten correctiuefeedbachYounghee Sheen (2010) compared the effects oftwo types oforal andwritten'corrective feedback on adult ESL learners' accurare use ofarticles. The oralcorrective feedback consisted of recasts or metalinguistic information; par-allel written corrective rypes were direct correcrion or direct metalinguisticfeedback. Five groups participated in the stud¡ of which one was a controllgroup. The other groups each received one of the following: 1) oral recasrs,i2) oral metalinguistic feedback, 3) written direct correction, and 4) writtenidirect metalinguistic feedback. I

I

All groups participated in rwo 30-minute activities in which theywere askedlto t."d

" rtory

".rJth.n ,.tell it either in the written or the oral mode. Learners]

in the oral corrective feedback group received either recasts or metalinguisticl

9I7I

'peetsul 'JeuJEel agrSo r,red aqt uo tJoJa a,uluSoc a¡rrr1 arrnba; tegt sasuodsar

a¡drurs ']ror{s ot peal or rq8nor¡r a;r larp asnereg suonsenb le¡dsrp ra^{g asn

or pa3.rn ueag a^Eq sJar{ftel 'Surqceat a8enSue¡ elnefrunururor Jo lxatuo)aqt uI'suonsanb le¡dsrpJo sragtunu.reqSry l¡areuon¡odo.ldslp pruodar osle

eAEr{ Jnor^eqaq Suruonsanb ,srar¡ceat uo sarpnls ruooJSsEIJ rarpo 'lpnrs oreg

pue 3uo1 aql erurs pa8uego a^Eq spoqraru Surgceat a8en8uel q8noqr uarE

'pa8ueq: aq pporls uontsJe^uolr.uooJSSEIrJo eJnrrnJls lruonreJetur aqt ter{t panSre laqr pua'(rBZ 'd) ,p¡.ro,,'r

IEeJ ar{l ur tuap.rrnba str Jo uorsJel peuotsrp l¡rear8, e sr uonreJalur JauJeal

-rer1f,Bot terp papnlruor sreqrJeesar erll 'suonsanb feldsrp uegr ruanba.r3

aJour eJo \ suoltsanb IEItuaJaJeJ 'ruooJsself, erp aprstno suonesJaluoc raleadsa^rteu-uou/ra>pads elrleu erp uI 'suonsanb uorteruJoJur ueqt suortsanb,(r¡dslp eroru pelse srer{ieel rtqt pape^eJ sesselr -ISE llnpr xrs ur stuapntspue sJeqleet uaa^\teq suonf,eJalur erp jo apeiu s8urpJof,eJ orpnv 'suon

-sanb (.plrueJeJaJ, ;o ,eurnua8,) ,uoneuro3ur, pup ,f"ldr1p,3o lrrruenb aqr

uJe \taq saf,ueJaglp ur pelsaratur f¡-relnclrrrd era,ulagl 'sra>1eads elnru-uoupue e rleu uee^llag uooJsself, eql aplslno pa^Jesgo sJnoIAEI{eg Suluonsanb

qtvur uaqr pa.reduoc pue sruooJSSEIr -ISE ur srar{f,eJl lq palse suonsanblosuonrunJ pue sruroJ eqr pauru?xa (EB6I) orES auelreq3 pue 3uo1 ¡aeqor¡¡

sutoorssryz TS'I u! suot$anb.staqrual:9 [pn6

raqunu E ur peururExe ueaq sEI{ uol}rErarul uroorss'¡c ur leld td',ttot:tj.]|'(.te,lsue eqt.{\ou>I lou l¿u Jar{feat er{r qlry./ü ot) suonsanb .plluata3er, ro

,eulnua3, pur (rarvrsue aql sr'rorDf lpear¡r Jarlf,Eat eqr lprq^! or) suonsanb

,l"ldrlP, se ot PerraJar aff Paurlusxa llarrrsuatxe uaeg arcq lBr{1 suo¡lsanblosadlr orrr¿'purlsJepun lagr gonu trog Surroldxa ur pue uollf,EJetul uI stuep

-nrs 8uÉe8ue ur letueruepunJ eJE suousan$ 'stuooJssel3 a8en8uel puofes uIr{f,fteseJJo pep poo8 e;o sn3oJ er{r ueeq seq rnol^Er{eg Sutuonsanb ,sraqcra¿

utoolswp aql u? suot$anb

'(ryeqpaa3

rnsln8ur¡etaur snsJel stsecar) >l3eqpaal a nreJJof aIFJo sseurlcr¡dxa aqr uEI{r

lueuodrul ssal sr papr^ord sl ¡cuqpJeJ a^Ilf,aJJoo riJII{.^a ul (uautrrvr snsJa^

¡e.ro) runlpau eqt trr{r of,uapr^a se sSulpug asarp sla;d;etul ueeqs 'stsal-tsod

pefe¡ap pue ertrperurur IIE uo dno¡8 lorruof, el{r peuroJredrno fpuergru8rs

'stsp)eJ I"Jo pa^refer ler{l euo er{r JoJ ldecxa 'sdno¡8 ilVr'lsel uoI}faJJoJ-JoJJa

uB put 'e neueu ualllJld E 'uonetf,rp Pepeads e papnlf,ul slsal aI{I 'JarEI $lee^\

V-e ute?e pue 'tuaruleeJr er{t .rage f¡atelparulur 'tuaruleaJl leuonf,nJlsul eqlaJoJag petsal sE1!\ salfnJe Jo a8payrroul rlagr 'fpoarrof salJnJB asn ol Áilq".rraqr pa,ro.rduJr sJeuJEal Jeqler{^\ euluJaleP oI 'Ja13l slep omr sJoJJe elf,IlJ¿

JoJ suonf,eJJof, r{lv![ seAI]EJJBu JIeIp pa^ref,a¡ l¡ols Jql a]oJ1d ol{1v\ sJeuJEe'I

drors aqr Ploler laqr a¡q,,'r Jorra el3rlft ue aPE1¡ laqr arurr lra.,'a >1ceqpaa3

ruoo$spp aSun&ual puotas acp ur Suuytual yua &urutaa1 Sutatasqg

\46 Obseruing learning and teaching in the second language classroom

they have been encouraged to ask more referential (or genuine) questionssince the latter are thought to require more cognitive processing and to gen-erate more complex answers.

More recentl¡ howeve¡ a re-evaluation of display quesrions has taken place.This is based on the observation that there are differentways inwhich displayquestions can be asked in classrooms. One is for the teacher to ask a series ofquestions in a drill-like format such as 'Do you have a brother?', 'Does he havea brother?', 'Do you have a sister?', 'Does she have a sister?' In this context,display questions do not have a meaningful or communicative purpose. Inother contexts, however, display questions can serve important pedagogicand interaction functions. The study below describes reachers' use of displayquestions in a more positive light.

Sr"dy 7: Scffi lding and dispky and referential questionsIn a case study of one teachert adult ESL class, Dawn McCormick andRichard Donato (2000) explored how the teacher's questions were linked toher instructional goals. \X/orking within sociocultural theor¡ the researcherschose the concept of scaffolding to investigate teacher questions as 'media-tional tools within the dialogue between the teacher and students' (p. 184).As we saw in Chapter I and Chapter 4, scaffolding refers to a process inwhich, for example, a more knowledgeable (or expert) speaker helps a less

knowledgeable (or novice) learner by providing an inreractional frameworkthat the learner can build on.

McCormick and Donato identified six functions of scaffolding (for example,drawing the novicet attention to the task, and simpli$'ing or limiting thetask demands). The researchers examined another function-the teacher's

use of questions during scaffolded interactions-and how it contributed toclass participation and learner comprehension. In the example below, theyargue that the teacher's use of the display question *Who usually lives inpalaces?' serves an important pedagogic function because it draws the learn-ers' attention to the word palace' through the display question and facilitaresthe learners' comprehension of the word.

T Palace?

s 1 Like castle?

s2 Special place, verygood.s: Very nice.r Castle, special place, very nice. \7ho usually lives in palaces?

ss Kings.r Kings, and queens, princes and princesses.

ss Yeah

s4 Maybb beautiful house?

r Big, beautiful house, yeah, really big.

LIrl

.Psureel eq or

IrrJeleru aqt Sulssaro¡d lllnJssef,f,ns aJoru pue 'seepr rlaql Surpurdxa ,sJa1v\sue

.ra¡n3 Surpl,ro;d sruapnts or peel uEf, ef,uEIEg rg8l.r agr Surpug ,uoll¡n¡lsur

Jo sPuDI luaraJlP ur Pu" s¡a,,'a¡ a8e ruereJlP le sluaPus qlr-&t stuoorssElt uI

'(lge t '¡e ra 3uo1) suorlsenb leldsrp¡pasolc rpr.tr pared-uro) suonsanb pnuara3arTuado ql,u:a8uo.ns eg ot pe Jesqo ueeg s¿q rf,agasrgr 'l¡Sulsrrdrns ro¡ 'xeldruoc eJoru pue ra8uo¡ osle eJE sasuodsa¡ Jrar{t tngsasuodsa¡ aJou a)npotd sruapnrs op f¡uo lou 'suonsenb or puodsal ot eurrleJoru sluJpnts Jrer{l a,r.r8 ot paurcJt aJe sJar{3eer uaq,tr reqt u./\^.oqs seq r{JJ¿eseU

'a8ua¡erp per e ag or sureas sef,uells

pJE^r>I.,taE Sullea¡r pue fplcrnb puodsar ot sluapnts uo a¡nssa.rd r{f,nru oorSulce¡d uaal\taq aruEIEq e Surpurg 'uorlJnJlsur e^npf,runuJurof ur Jnff,o osle,bqr 'sasse¡r pnSurlolpne3o ¡ecrdlr a¡e su¡allBd ra¡asue/uonsanb prde.r qcnsg8nogr¡y 'asuodsa¡ E al¿Fruro3 ol luepnrs ar{t roJ ue-Lr l¡rua¡rs ueqr rer{rrrsaun IEJeAas uorlsanb aqr asen¡drred ¡o leada¡ ot pepual os¡e laql 'sa las-ruaqr uo¡tsanb erp paJeasue Jo luapnls Jer{loue ol uonsanb eqt perf,eJrpfagr aroSaq o,&\.1 Jo puof,es B utrll aJouJ ou stuepnls a,re8 l¡eordlr sJar{f,Eel

leqr punoJ laql 'sasse¡i TSg pn8ul¡orpne ur eu¡n lre^\Jo srsl¡eue e^nelll-uenb e plp (786I) u.anoqtq8rl lsre¿ pue arrq r euueof 'puodsa.r ol aulrlluapnls agr ar'r8 ot uonsanb E pe>lsB Sur,reg rage sasned Jar{f,Eel aqr elun Jolunoru" eql-(aurrJ JrB,r\, sr Jnor^Er{Jg Suluollsanb (sJer{f,eeuo lcadse ragrouy

san4tutdSuquo4sanb ,s,taqr?at Fu? auft ry?/l¡:6 [pryS

'rer{f,Eal aqr3o rred aqr uo a8en8ue¡ u8larolJql ur a¡uatadtuocJo le^el ,{31,{

" sa¡¡nba¡ uor}f,EJalur asuodsa;Tuolrsanb3o

13^31 srqr r¿gr rnq suroorsself,'IIT3 esew ur sJauJ¿el l5auaq PIno \ suo¡lsanbuado xa¡druo) erour 8uu1se t¿ql pJpnlf,uof, ragnd-uorpq 'satuof,rno cpsln8-ur1 xa¡duof, tsour eq¡ or pel suoneue¡dxa .ro suoseal JoJ osle rng sDeJ JoJ

tsnl rou sJauJral pa>lse tBr{t suollsanb uado 'uonrppe uI 'suonsanb uado rarye

rndrno 3o ll¡enb pue ónurnb ¡area¡8 e parnpo-rd sluapnts 'uagr or a,rr8stuepnls sasuodsa¡ aqr sE IIaa sE 'sreqf,Eet qsrpug lq pals" suonsanbjo sadlraql paprorer orpne pue pe^resgo (9002) ra5nd-uorleq euerrsur{J 'er.rlsnyur sess¿lr (fIfC) Euru.rea¡ palre.rEalu¡-aEen8ue¡ pup luatuoc u1 'Suruosear

pu? uoneut¡dxa 'a¡druexa ro3 '8urpn¡f,ur 'sJa^\sue xaldruor JJoru pue ra8uo¡or Sulpra¡ f¡ecldlr 'uoneroqela etllur pue Je./v\sur a¡qrssod auo uer{l aJoru

e ?q suonsenb uadg 'or puodsar ol lsea pue 1:lnb ruaqr Sunpru 'sasuodsa.¡

pro,lt-auo a¡durs ot peal l¡ensn lerp pue reldsu¿ a¡qrssod auo l¡uo ar'eq

Á1pcÁ'h suorrsanb pasolC 'suo¡tsenb pasolf, pue uado uaa.&\tag teql sr suon-sanb aulnua8 pue le¡dslp uaa^uag euo aqt ot rplnuls uorlrurlsrp raqtouv

suousanb pasqt ?u? uado :g [pus'uonf,EJetur Jo uossel;e¡ncurd e ur s¡eo8

sJal{f,Eal 3I{r or ef,uaJgeJ I{1I1r\ Pu" uollf,"Jelul PaPIoJ€JsJo >lJo^/v\3IUEry aI{]

uqlLv\ peurru¿xa eq ppoqs suollsanb regt tsa8Sns ol¿uoq pue >llrruro3Jry

utoottsryr a8un&uq puotas aql ur &wo¡tnat pua Sututaal Sum.tasqg

148 Obseruing learningand teaching in the second langudge classroom

Study 10: Tirnefor learning langaages in schoolEarlier in this chapter we talked about the differences between learning a

second language in the natural setting compared with the classroom (see

Thble 5.1). One of the major differences is the amount of time available forlearning. In the natural sefting there is ample time to learn whereas in the ;

typical classroom setting, learners have limited time. One of the ways toprovide more time for learning a second/foreign language is via content-based

instruction. However, this is not always feasible or desirable (Lightbown

2Ol2). Other alternatives include increasing the total instructional time or

distributing time more intensively over the school year.

!íe know that it takes a great deal of time to learn a second language, butlittle research has been done to investigate how the distribution of instruc-tional time affects L2 learning. Exceptions to this include the work of some

Canadian researchers who have examined different amounts and distribu-tions of time in English and French as a second language programmes. In one

study in Quebec, learners receiving intensive ESL instruction for five hours

every day for five months of one school year (in Grade 5 or 6) were compared

to learners at the end of secondary school who had received the same totalamount of instruction spread over 7-8 years of schooling. On a number ofmeasures, the students who received the intensive instruction performed as

well as or better than those whose instruction was delivered in what has been

called a 'drip feed' approach (Lightbown and Spada 1994) '

In subsequent research, comparisons were made between grouPs of Grade 5

and 6 students who participated in intensive English language instructionduring a single school year, but with the time distributed differently: some

students received five hours of English a day for five months; others received

the same total number of hours, doing two and a half hours of English each

day for 10 months. The researchers found that both groups benefited fromthe overall increase in hours of instruction with some additional advantages

for learners receiving the more intensive instruction (Collins et al. 1999;

Collins and \X/hite 2011). The advantages were evident not only in superior

language abilities but also in attitudes toward the language and satisfaction

with language learning experiences. Similar findings have been reported

for different models of intensive and core French programmes (Netten and

Germain 2004;Lapkin, Hart, and Harley 1998).

The classroom observation studies we have described in this chapter focus

on specific features ofclassroom interaction. In these studies, the feature of

interest was determined in advance of the observation on the basis of some

hypothesis about what aspects of classroom instruction and interaction are

important for learning, that is, whether a particular type of corrective feed-

back led to more learner repair, whether a particular type of question led

to more learner output, and how the distribution of time affected learning

Sulssa¡dxa 'looqfs re sacual¡adxe u-/ro :larp Surlerrrod lla,rrre8au srua¡rdpepnlrur eruoq lE acual¡adxa uonezrlerlos a8rn8ue¡ suarplrqr eqr 3o ued,(¡ruapl,tg ''irr-1d rc sJotrEJ lerluangur aroru ,raqto palealal txetuor leJntlnfpuE lErros aqr3o srslpuE rapEorq E 'arnllBJ suarplrr{r aql ot sJolf,EJ Surrnq¡rr-uof aJelr\ sanssl aBenBuEI esaql q8noqrry .gsr18uE jo uorsJe^ lf,arJoJur ueuopue pal:rrtsar e qtr.&\ paceldar sez'r a8enSu¿l tsrg rrer{I .looqls ur aSen8uel]sJg suaJPlrql er{rJo asn ou s?./v\ aJeql .Sulllas

Iooqf,s puB e(uoq aql uaa \taqsanlel pu¿ asn a8enSuel ur seruareglp lueru paJalorun slslpue pelretap V'loor{3s ul pallt3 uerplrql er{rJo requnu a3rc1 E ,ssalar{trele¡ .ruarudo¡a,rap

a,rrrruSoc pur clrsln8ur¡ qrog ro3 SurreFluns puE r{f rJ eJe,e\ lEr{t stuauJuoJr^ua

PalEe^eJ seuoq eqt ur suon?^Jasgo 'looqls eqr ur pur eruor{ 3r{1 ur sacrlle¡dasn-e8en8uel pa-roldxa ar{S 'spuEIsI uoruolos eqr ur ser¡rue3 auru gum sreal

Iere^as ra,ro fpnr ¡eu¡pnr¡8uol e tno parrr€f, (2661oa8eg-uosre¿¡ uere)

Iooqrs pu? auoq aqt u? a3an3ua7 :I I t?n$

'adornEur auo puE '<EpEue) ur euo 'JgliEd qtnos arlt ur euo :surooJsselc aSen8urlu8raro; pu? puof,es ur lno parJJEc sarqderSouqra eeJr{tJo sarJeururns aJE aJeH

'puaqardruoc or ór¡lqeur ¡o aledlcll¡edol IESnJeJ se pata;drarursrul tou sr Jnor^Er{eq sueJplrql aqt reqt os srqt

^\ou¡ ol speJu Jotrn.rlsur aSenSue¡ puofas Jrer{l ,rppe uE ruo{ uJeel ol lernr a¡n-leJa pue p3rradsar E sr ef,ualrs qllq^a ur arntlnr E ruo5 atuor uerpllqlJl ler{lan8¡e ol rar{ pal uerplrqr rrnul qtr^r r{f,r¿eser uonrzrlerf,os a8en8ur¡ (7,661)so8tr3 BquEW 'a¡drurxa rog 'tuaurdole^ep Ierf,os pue .crlsrn8url .a,rnruSor

(sJeuJBel uo lledtur Jrer{l pue seull¿al ¡ecrrr¡od pue ,prnt¡nt ,leroos uo osle tnqSulrpear uo ¡o Suru¡ea¡ uo f1a¡os snroJ tou op sruoorsselc aSen8uel u8larojJo puof,as ur sargdrrSouqle (sr

reql 'a^oge peqlJfsep saruer{f,s uorlelJesqoSursn salpnls eql uer{t adors ul JepeoJg r{f,nru eJE teqr serpnrs a,rnetrpnba^lo^ur 8uru.rea1 pue Surrlcear 8u¡puersrapun ol sar¡reordde clqde.rSouqrg

'Surprooar pue Sur.Lrasgo 'punorSlceq ar{r ur f¡a,,'rsnrtgoun pue l¡ralnbslrs oq,l\ euoeuJos 'luedrcn¡ed-uou e se ro .pre sJoqf,Bat e se .aldruexa roj'sanr.rrlce ruooJssEl3 aqr ur ruedlf,rued E eq Jerpra um Ja^Jasqo eql

(r{f,JEOsaJ

crqderSougra Sulop u1 's8ulpunoJJns IErnlEu Jrer{l ul a¡doad3o dno¡8 e 8ur-fpnrs ur setou plJg sa>ltt rslSolodorgrue uE r{rrrl¡a ur fern aql ot JEInurs sr

uonelresgo ruoorsselr or greordde srql 'a8raua ter{t suJaued aqr roJ sioolpue suoDlpJatur pue'saon¡r¡d'serlrlnf,p er{Uo selou elrsuetxe sa>let Ja JasqoJr{t 'peersul 'sal¡oSalec peuruJeteperd3o ras E tnoqtt.&\ suJooJSSEIf a8enSueluSlaroj .ro puores ul Sururea¡ pue Surgrear Sunresqolo ferrr e sr fgderSouqtg

fqderSourpg

'Sulurea¡ a8en8ue¡ puof,as;o3 s8untas puoncn.nsur 8ur-taJdJalur pue Surgl.rcsap or qreordde ruaraglp E 01 uJnl .,'rou e/N .saurof,tno

ruoo$sqr aSon&ual puotas aql ut Suto¡taal pua &uruna1 Sumtasqg 6rr

150 Obseruing learning and teaching in the second knguage ckssroom

fears about their children's abiliry to succeed and raising fundamental ques-

tions about the value of school in their lives. The researcher concludes thatthese factors were central in contributing to the childrenb lack of continuedcognitive and linguistic development in school.

Study 12: Separation ofsecond knguage learners inltrimary schoobIn a longitudinal stud¡ Kelleen Toohey (2000) observed a group of chil-dren aged 5-7 inkindergarten, Grade 1, and Grade 2 inVancouver, Canada.

The group included children who were native speakers of English, as well as

children whose home language was Cantonese, Hindi, Polish, Punjabi, orThgalog. A1l the children were in the same class, and English was the mediumof instruction. Toohey identified three classroom practices that led to the sep-

aration of the ESL children. First, the ESL children's desks were placed close

to the teacher's desk, on the assumption that they needed more direct help

from the teacher. Some of them were also removed from the classroom twicea week to obtain assistance from an ESL teacher. Second, instances in whichthe ESL learners interacted more with each other usually involved borrow-ing or lending materials but this had to be done surreptitiously because the

teacher did not always tolerate it. Finally, there was a'rule' in the classroom

that children should not copy one another's oral or written productions.This was particularly problematic for the ESL children because repeating

the words of others was often the only way in which they could participatein conversational interaction. According to Toohe¡ these classroom Prac-tices led to the exclusion of ESL students from activities and associations inschool and also in the broader communiry in which theywere new members.

Furthermore, such practices did not contribute positively to the children's

ESL development.

Stu¿y 13: Sociopolitical change andforeign knguage classroorn ¿iscourse

In an ethnographic study of English-medium content classes in Hungariansecondary schools, Patricia Duff(1995) examined the impact of sociopolitical

changes on pedagogical practice. She compared the structure and participa-tion patterns of two classroom activities. One is a traditional activity called

afelrhs which is a heavily ritualized recitation format closely associated withSoviet-oriented policies that were rejected after the fall of communism in the

late 1980s. As a result, in many English-medium classes in Hungary thefeleht

was replaced by a more open-ended activity called'student lecture' in whichstudents prepared and presented material to the class in a less ritualized way.

l

In an examination of the kind of language produced by students when par'ticipating in student lectures, Duffobserved a large number of spontaneoul

comments and questions produced in English rather than Hungarian. Sh{

also noted how students appeared to incorporate feedback provided by thd

teacher (and other students) in their subsequent production, how the teache{

and students worked together to negotiate meaning and form, and how theJ

'a)uarJedxe

Surqreal u¡,ro.rnol uo.ro raldeqf, srql ur paprao.rd stdr.r¡sue.rl aqt uouorsr)ap ;nol eseq uel no ¿t.teqf, stqt ur papnlf,ut aq plnoqs teqt saJnlea,

Jeqlo aJe aJeqr ¡ulqr nol oq'(Suruear.u .ro¡ uoDerlo8eu'suollsanb aulnuaS

's.ror;a'a¡duuexa .ro¡) seJnt€al xrs epnlf ur .reldeq¡ sr¡t ur )ler luapnls-ruaPnts pue ¡ler luapnrs-Jeq)eel aqt asl¡eue ol pesn nol leql s}¡eqf, eqI €

¿ uorsoep Jeqr!a,o sa8eluenpesrp

/seSelue,rpe eql erE ¿u¡qr nol op leqM¿sspll eqtJo Ner aql qlt^ ueqleteJ8elur nol op Jo speeu Jreql ot puodsu o1 raq¡a3ol stuepnts asaql

dno.¡8 nol oC ¿uon)nrtsur ¡o aSen8u€l aqr upqr.raqto a8en8u€l lsJU € e^€qsluapnls .rnol ¡o luer.u aleqa,r suooJsself, ¡en8ur¡rt¡nr.u ur Surqreal nol a.ry ¿

¿rno pug ol op nol plnor l€q¡¡¿sedlr ¡reqpaaj luaJar¡p loa3ue"r e asn nol >¡urqr nol op .ro ,retduold, € Jo .Jals€f,er, e aq ol ¡¡atno,(

Jeprsuof, nol plno^ 'a¡duexa.rol ¿Surqreal .lnol ut IJ€qpao, eltlf,eJJof,

¡o adó "reln¡rl.¡ed e Sursn JoJ e)uaJeleld e a,req leu nol ¡u¡qr nol o6 ¡

uollfeBoJ Jo, suollseno

'suolusod asagt01 lue^eleJ r{JJEesaJ au¡os auruJexe pue s8untes ruooJsstlo ur pauJeel tseq aJE

sa8rn8ue¡ ,/v\ol{ tnoge s,&\el^ luaJeJlp aurruexa ill¡vr arr,r tarderlo lxou erp uI

'acllr¿¡d ¡errSo8epadurvr.o ¡nol lnoge suorsrf,ep e>l¿ru nof d¡aq leru r{f,rceseJ elefs-llerus srqt ur 8ur-8t8ua ruo.r3 ure8 nol uoltetu¡oJul aql 'an8ea¡1oc EJo leql ro ruooJSSEIr u,&\o

¡nol ur suonJeJetur agr aqrJ3sep pur a Jesqo ol sloot esaqrJo auo lno l¡t olnof a8¿¡nooua elN 'Suntas ruooJsselJ aql ur sruapnls pue sJaq)Eet uae.&\teq

aoeld a>¡er rer{l suorlreJerur erp Jo stf,edse tuaJoglp aqrrf,sJp pue elJesgo olpasn eq uer ter{t serruouoxel pue str"r{rJo sa¡duexa papr,ro.rd oslr e^Er{ e/[r

'Sururea¡ a8en8-ue¡ u8laroj Jo puof,as or drqsuonelal slr pue lxotuoJ ¡errl¡od puB 'lrJntlnf,'lerf,os repeorq agt Sururuexa asoql sE IIa.& sr (sadlr uorlsanb pue 1leqpeeJeAuJeJJof, 'a'l) sa;nrea3 prrSoSepad rgllads Sululru¿xa sarpnls Jo sarJBuI

-runs PePnpur e^er{ alN'lno Perrr"f ueag sEq uons^Jesgo uIoorssBlf, r{llq^\ur sl¿1d ruereglp Jo salduexa papr,tord pue snroJ leuoltf,nrlsul IpJa o rraqr

Jo sr.uJal ul JeJIp sruooJSSEIJ ^\or{ Jo saldurexa pue suondrrcsap paruasard

e^Er.l e^r 'pata;dratul pue pegrJosap ag uef uon)nJtsur a8en8uel puo3as JoseJnlea3 tueJeJtlp qllq¡ ur sfervr aqr;o euros pa \er^al a,req arn ratder{l srqr uI

lrerurung

'8ulurca¡ a8en8ur¡ puoras flarerulrp pue arncrrd ruooJsself, spage uoneru-roJsuert ¡erulodolcos lerfl papnlruor JnC 'sSurpug asaqr Jo srseg erp uO'ssa¡o¡d eql ur sllpls uorsuJgardruoc pue 'fcerncre 'fcuang rlaqr pado¡a,rap

ruoo.¿ss?fr a&an&ual puoras aqt ut Sutqtaal puo Sututaal Suxarasqo IEI

152 Obseruing learning and teaching in the second knguage classroom

Suggestions for further readingSpada, N. and M. Fróhlich. 1995. 7he Communicatiue Orientation

of Language Teaching Obseruation Scheme: Coding Conuentions andApp li catio ns. Sydney: Macmillan.

This book describes the origins and purposes of the CommunicativeOrientation of Language Teaching (COLT) observation scheme. COIIdescribes the pedagogical practices and verbal interactions that take placebetween teachers and students with the aim of describing the instructionas being more or less communicatively oriented. It also provides detailedguidelines and illustrations for using COLI including how to collect data,how to code the data, and how to analyse it. Also included are descrip-tions of how COLT has been used in second/foreign language classroomsthroughout the world.

Toohe¡ K. 2000. Learning English at School: Identi4t, Social Relations andClassroom Practice. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.

This book addresses a common educational practice in many countriesin the world in which children from minority language backgrounds are

taught in mainstream English-medium classes. Through a longitudinaldescription of a group of children learning English from kindergarren rothe end of Grade 2 ín a Canadian school, the reader is introduced to arange ofsocial and critical perspectives on education and how they can beapplied to child second language learning. The book provides importantinsights and useful guidance about how teachers and schools can supportminority language children in their efforts to become educated throughthe medium of English.

W'ajnryb, R. 1992. Classroom ObseruationThshs: A Resource Boohfor Language

Teachers and Tlainers. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

This book is mainly addressed to teachers to illustrate how they can use

observation to learn about their own teaching. Readers are guided througha variety of different tasks and shown how to observe, analyse, and refecton various aspects ofinstruction including learners, language, lessons, andteaching strategies.

uauo sarPnls aseql 'slf,aJa asaql SuunsBauJo slE,/v\ pug pu¿ sluauuoJr^uetuaJaglp ur llrelrruls Surureal nagr leru reqr salgerre ryrcads ,flruepr orl¡ensn sr sarpnls ¡eluarurradxa3o po8 aq1 'Sulurea¡ aeuangur feru ler{r selq¿

-IJE al{rJo IoJluof, InJeJm 8un¡o,rur 'ptuarurradxe eq osp leur tr 'Jelel'roH'a,rndrrcsep l¡¡enuassa ag leu q3JeeseJ a,rnelltuenb 'g .rardeq3 ur

^\es a^\

ryserpnrs a.trteu¡enb grdap-ul ol alrrelrlu¿nb a¡rcs-a8rel ruo5 'saqceo;ddeqiftaseJJo a8u¿¡ ¿ esn ol paau arrL'acltl¿¡d uooJsself ro3 s¡esodord ssesse oJ

'8ulurea1 pue 8ur-r{reat uee^uag sdlqsuonelar salegnse^ul l¡eogrcads ltql rlf,Jeesar q8norqr sr

(¿sruooJSSEIl ur Sururea¡ a8en8ue¡ eloruo¡d or lernt rsag aqr sr rer{lN, uonsanbaqt Je rsue or fe,Lr.l¡uo aql rng 'sar.roeqt asar{t tueueldrul or padola,rap uaaqaAEr{ slcrJeteu pue spoqrau Sunpear eJoru ualg 'ruooJssel3 eqr ur egen8

-u?l puof,as e uJ¿al or &,tl rsaq aqr ro3 pasodo.rd ueaq eler{ serJoar{l luryq

Eulgceal roJ spsodord

pua eqt ur rqSrr tr la3 9elgEr{rEel sr leq,/( qrEel 5

euo JoJ o1!\1 taD 7>lpr Eral €

e",u",a,{l{"J:;;rr'i:l l:J Í:arr s¡esodord

asaqr ua.tl8 a^Eq er'l' slaq¿l aql 'ssauelnraga .rraqt ssess¿ ot d¡ag reqr s8ur

-pug r{fJeesal ssnfsrp pur'a3r}f,EJd ruoorsse¡e otur peltlsue¡l ta8 s¡esodordar{r

^\oq eteJtsnill ol uonf,EJatur uooJssel3 ruor3 saldruexa apu.ord '8un1cear

a8en8ue¡ u8laro3 pue puof,es ro3 s¡rsodord xrs aurturxa a¡r tatdrqr srqr uI

A er^eJd

WOOUSSVff,EHI NI DNINUVE-I

EDVNCNVT CNOfflS

t54 Second language learning in the ckssroom

involve large numbers of learners in an effort to avoid the possibility thatthe unusual behaviour of one or two individuals might lead to a misleadingconclusion about learners in general.

Qualitative research, including ethnographies and case studies, often involvessmall numbers, perhaps one class or only one or two learners in that class.

The emphasis is not on what is most general but rather on a thorough under-standing ofwhat is particular about what is happening in this classroom. As

pointed out byAnn Burns (2010) and others, while quantitative and qualita-tive research are important in assessing theoretical proposals, action research

carried out by teachers in their own classrooms is also essential to answer spe-

cific local questions. In this chapter we focus mainly on experimental studies.These are studies that were designed to test hypotheses about how teachingaffects second language learning. Readers are encouraged to follow up withfurther reading but also to explore related questions through research activi-ties within their own teaching and learning environments.

I Get it rightfrom the beginning'Get it right from the beginning' is probably the proposal that character-izes more second and foreign language instruction than any other kind.Although communicative language teaching has come to dominate in some

environments, the structure-based approaches discussed in Chapter J, espe-

cially grammar translation, remain widespread.

The grammar translation approach has its origin in the teaching of classi-

cal languages (for example, Greek and Latin). Students were presented withvocabulary lists, often accompanied by translation equivalents, and grammarrules. The original purpose of this approach was to help students read lit-erature rather than to develop fuency in the spoken language. It was also

thought that this approach provided students with good mental exercise tohelp develop their intellectual and academic abilities.

In a rypical grammar translation activiry students read a text together lineby line and are asked to translate it from the target language into their nativelanguage. Students may answer comprehension questions based on thepassage, often in their first language. The teacher draws attention to a specificgrammar rule that is illustrated by the text (for example, a certain verb form).Following this, the students are given an exercise in which they are asked

to practise the grammar rule, for example, by filling in the blanks with theappropriate verb form in a series of decontextualized sentences that may ormay not be related to the text they have read and translated.

Audiolingual instruction arose in part as a reaction to the grammar transla''1

tion approach. The argument was that, unlike grammar translation teachinglin which students learned about the language, audiolingual teaching would

's8uqr Jarpo orJo repu¿,r\

spuru Jrer{r allr{^{ 'Aenttue ruagr teadar l¡n¡ssarrns ill^\ uBalu safua}ues aql

rEr{,/v\ EaPI ou a^EL{ oqa sruePnls auJos (PaaPuI 'Sulles are larp rEr{1l\ rnoqB

>lun{r or Jo pa lolul ra8 ot uoseeJ ou e^Er{ sruePnls eql 'uollllada; a'rn¿

(uern¡reg'g pue unoqrqS¡1'W A tuoryel¿P Patlsllqndu¡)'ruol4tr 'rrra; lra,r aJB aJeql ssvr:)'tuory 'rvral .(ta,r eJB eJal{l r

¿;otera8tr3ar eql uI saoletuol lue aJaqt arv ssv'Ic

¿roteraSt.tSar aqt uI saoteruot fue aJel{r eJV r'ruory 'aptr¡ fra,t s,eJeql ssvr)'IuoIAtr 'a¡rr¡¡ Lra,r s arar{I J

¿rotera8u3ar aqt uI Jeunq fur araqr s1 ssvr:)

¿rotera8trje; aqr uI rertng fue araqr q 'aru rage leada¡ r('a8en8ue¡ uSraro3 e se qsr¡8ug30 sreureel pp-rca'L7¡3o dnor8 y)

7z|duruxg

¡g.ra,r ruasard a¡duils eqlJo asn lfaJJof,

eqt set\ pareDeru rErLA 'lue^rlerrl stm (3op e a eq lou PIP ro PIP aq rEI{r rf,EJ

eqt ua^e ro) 8op slq qruv\ acuar¡adxa IEeJ s.ruePnrs aql 'asrc sIrP uI {¡rca¡3

(uerulreg 'g PuE uz'roqrq8rl '1z.{ A ruo{ E}EP Peqsllqndu¡)

(¡op am les uer a^\ rnq 'oN =) ¡arlP a¡ rnad uo sIE{u 'uoN I s

(¡8op r e^eq rusaop a¡1 =) ¡uanp ap sed e,u ¡1 zs

[uaq] 'o¡ Is

¿8op rnol qsrrr,r nof ,'(rp lra,rg r'8op l¡r¡ rs

'r{se \ I J'8op fur Surgse.t

'qn I 'qn (qn PUB euoq aulof I 'I{n 'uoouJeuB ar{r uI '.qn PUV I s

('sqra,r gsl18ug3o tuasa¡d

a¡durs aql uo peseg aslrraxe ue ut Pa^lo^ul sluaPnls p¡o-real-g 1io dnor8 y)t a\duaxg

.'sutuut8aq eqr ruo5 rq8u rr toD, PuB uaddeg laqr a-ro3aq sllgeq PEq asaql

lua,ra¡d or Jaueq sr lr os 'sllqeq oluofeq PInoJ (PIes sI ll 's¡oJJe aql 'sJoJJa

a>lEru ot uaqr ^\ollE

plno,&\ sryr lEr{l suJesuo:3o rno l¡aar3 leads sraurea¡ Sutu

-ul8aq Sulrra¡ pro E sraqf,ta¡ d¡snoaueruods a8¿nBuEI eql asn flartl sluaPnts,a8en8ue¡ pJo aqr uo sl slsrqdrua aqr g8noqr uala'ter{t luePIAa sr r1 'Surgcrar

¡en8urolpne pageJ ,/r\oleq sa¡duexa ag1 'ssf¡eue elllseJluof, Pue usIJnoI

-^Brieq uo PesEg sernr qreoldde pn8urtorpnE aI{} lBql 1ú3s arrr '7 lardeq3 u1

'Fzgg opel :9961 sloorg) a8en8ue¡ agr >pads f¡enrce ol sluaPnrs PEal

ruoo$cryJ aql utSurutaal aSan&ual puotag t9t

r56 Second knguage learning in the ckssroom

ftE?W:TIT€Soox tS

ox'TH6 -D¿5|<

\-¡1¡g tpfi 19

cN{ THE DESK

Research findingsMany adult learners, especially those with good metalinguistic knowledge

oftheir own language, express a preference for structure-based approaches.

Learners whose previous language learning experience was in grammar

translation classes may also prefer such instruction. As we saw in Chapter 3,

learners' beliefs about the kind of instruction that is best can influence their

satisfaction and success. The grammar translation approach is useful for the

study of grammar and vocabulary and can be valuable for understanding

important cultural texts. The audiolingual approach with its emphasis on

speaking and listening was used successfully with highly motivated adult

liarners-in intensive training programmes for government personnel in the

United States. However, there is little classroom research to support such

approaches for students in ordinary school programmes that must serve the

needr of students who bring different levels of motivation and aptitude to

the classroom. In fact, it was the frequent failure of traditional grammar

translation and audiolingual methods to produce fluency and accuracy in

second language learners that led to the development of more communica-

tive approaches to teaching in the first place.

Supporters of communicative language teaching have argued th-at language

is nát learned by the gradual accumulation of one grammatical feature aftel

anorher. They suggesi that errors are a natural and valuable part ofthe lan-

guage learning process. Furthermore, they believe that the motivation ol

i."rn.tr is often stifled by an insistence on correctness in the earliest staget

perelosr-paf,uauadxJ PEr{ sruePnls uoltrnrlsul Jo adlr 3qr rBqr PalsaSSnss8ulpuy aseql 'uaqr paonpord sJaureal ruooJssrlr aseql I{rrI{^\ gllm frernorea^nslsJ er{r PuE aJaql

^\"s e¡rr sacuanbas pruatudola^aP aqr uee \leg seJue

-reglp pa.{\oqs srpsar ¿gL'gy'd'7 ntdeq3 aas) srauftal a8en8utl PuoraspelfnJlsurun 3o aSrn8uelJelul eqt uI pelJesqo sauregd;oru ¡ecrreurtue.r8 3ouorlrslnb¡e aqr qrv'r parrduor ser'r (8ezz- a,Ltsse¡8o.rd eqr PuB t- IeJnld 'a¡druexaro3) sauaqdJou Ief,neuJruer8 qsr18ufl ul"tJef 3o uotttstnbfe (sJauJeal aql

'ZpuE 1 sa¡duexE ur.ry\ES a^\ IIIJp acnc¿¡d

u¡anBd pue uonpader etorJo sadlr aqr ul parrdlr¡rrrd l¡errdlr saruue¡8o¡deseqt ur sruopnrs 'epEuEJ 'cagan| ul 9I-I1 pa8e sraureel Suupads-qruatguo pesnfoJ suone8rlsa,rul egl 'tuarudo¡ar'ap a8en8ue¡rotul uo uollsnJtsulpn8ur¡orpne Jo pega ar{r otul suoneSllsarrul ltuollras-ssoJo PuE ¡eulpnrr8-uol3o sarres E lno parrref, (q9ege} u.,rtoqrr¡811 lsre¿'sg¿61 elel eqr qI

lr¿P u¿a$?d \an8uq otpnv :, I t?ws

.191tpnr5)

uorlrn.rlsul pasuq-8u¡rreeru pue -tuJoJ Jo suolleurgruoo ruaraglP 8ur¡laoa¡

sruapnlsJo sdno¡8 uaa,t\teq óuarcgo;d a8enSurl Puof,esJo ruarudo¡a,rap eql

1o suosrrcduof, pue '(71 lpnrg) saruue¡8o¡d pn8ul¡olpne ut sraurea¡ e8enS

-uEI puolas Jo tuarudo¡a,tap a8en8ue¡rarul ar{l Jo salPnls a,utdtrosap aPnPuI

esaql 'qr¿ordd¿ ,suluur8aq aqt ruot3 rq8rr lI la), eqr ol Paruauo llSuorrs sl

teql uoltfnJtsurJo srage eqt ssass¿ ot sn llru¡ad oP l{fJeeseJ uroorsst¡c a8en8

-uEI puooes uorS s8ulpug aruos'sseleqleuoN'Poseq-eJnlf,nns l¡a,usnlf,xa eJ¿

teql suroorsselr pug or tlnJSIp sI lI 'Plro¡a Jr{l Jo sued raqro ul Suryceat

a8un8ue¡ e^nrf,IunuruJoc 3o uotldope pea.rdsapl.&\ eqr qrl^\ 'Pueq JeIPo eql

u6 'Suruearu uo slseqdrua ue sare¡d Sulqf,eer aqt aJar{^/r\ sluooJsselJ (r'ra3 l-ra,r

.ro) ou err erer{l s8ullras asaql ul pue 'Sutqreat a8en8ue¡ or saqoeordde Paseq-aJnlonrrs l¡rueunuopard spug auo aJal{./v\ PIJolv\ aqr3o srrrd lueru are araqt

esnef,aq sl s¡ll 'sdno¡3 uost¡rduoc ¡ado¡d PuU ot sJeI{fJEesaJ ro3 lsea tousr tr 'Jela,rroH 'eAreJaJ laqt uoncnrlsurJo adlr aqr ro3 ldaoxa srcadsar ¡¡e ur

JEIIruls aJE ltql sdno¡8 a¡eduoc ot ,(¡rssarau aq PFo,/t\ 1I 'srsaqlodlg lelp lset

o¡'sa8ers f¡rea aqr ut Suluearu uo st stseqdrua eqr ueq.^a PaAaII{f,e esoqr ueqr

stlnseJ raueq or peel'unr 3uo¡ aqr ul '¡l,v'Sulureal a8en8ue¡ puoras3o sa8ers

l1.rra aqr ur uroJ uo slsegdrua u¿ ragraq^\ rser ol rln3glp sl u 'f¡areunrroJufl

',8uruul8ag aqr ruo5 rq8u rr la9, sraureel rEI{t erns 8ur1tu JoJ IIEf, eqr r"el{a¡l ure8e a3uo 'sJoJJa

Jo uoIlEzIIISsoj l¡ree ot PEel III^I uollsnJlsur lr¡rTdxa

put uonf,aJJof tnoqtl,r\ ,tuopae{, qfnur oot sJauJrel Surrtro¡e reqr an8re

lagl 'Surueaur uo snf,oJ a^Isnloxe uE salBJoAPe reqr Surgoear a8en8ue¡ a,rtr

-sf,runruruoJ Jo uoIsJeA aIP or PalsEaJ AA¿r{ SJolEfnPe PUE sJJr{3J¿as3J auos

',r()e JnJ)e, eJ o3aq,lcuang,

do¡a,rap ol sJeuJeel a8e¡nooua ol Jeuag sI tI t¿ql an8.rr ¡esodold ,Suruut8aqar{1 ruo5 rr¡8u rr ra9, al{rJo srueuoddo asaql 'Surulea¡ a8en8uel PuolasJo

utootssplr aql ut &uruna1 a8an&ury puotag L9I

158 Second knguage learning in the classroom

pattern practice drills-resulted in a developmental sequence that appearedto be different from that of learners in more natural learning environments.

For a time after their instruction had focused on it, learners reliably pro-duced a particular grammatical morph.eme in its obligatory contexts. Forexample, after weeks of drilling on present progressive, students usually sup-plied both the auxiliary be and the -ing ending (for example, 'He's playingball'). However, they also produced one or more of the morphemes in placeswhere they did not belong ('He's want a cookie'). The same forms were pro-duced with considerably less accuracy in obligatory contexts when theywereno longer being practised in class and when the third person singular simplepresent -s was being drilled instead. At this point, many students appearedto revert to what looked like a developmentally earlier stage, using no tensemarking at all (for example, 'He play ball'). These findings provided evi-dence that an almost exclusiye focus on accuracy and practice of particulargrammatical fbrms does not mean that learners will be able to use the formscorrecdy outside the classroom drill setting, nor that they will conrinue rouse them correctly once other forms are introduced. Not surprisingly, thisinstruction, that depended on repetition and drill of decontextualized sen-

tences, did not seem to favour the development of comprehension, fluency,or communicative abilities either.

Study I 5 : Grammar p las communicatiue practiceIn one of the earliest experimental studies ofcommunicative language teach-ing, Sandra Savignon (I972) studied the linguistic and communicative skillsof 48 college students enrolled in French language courses at an Americanuniversity. The students were divided into three groups: a'communicative'group, a'culture' group, and a control group. All groups received about fourhours per week of audiolingual instruction where the focus was on the prac-tice and manipulation of grammatical forms. In addition, each group had a

special hour of different activities. The 'communicative' group had one hourper week devoted to communicative tasks in an effort to encourage practicein using French in meaningful, creative, and spontaneous ways. The 'culture'group had an hour devoted to activities, conducted in English, designed to'foster an awareness of the French language and culture through films, music,and art'. The control group had an hour in the language laboratory doinggrammar and pronunciation drills similar to those they did in their regularclass periods.

Tests to measure learners' linguistic and communicative abilities wereadministered before and after instruction. The tests oflinguistic competenceincluded a variery of grammar tests, teachers' evaluations of speaking skills,and course grades. The tests of communicative competence included meas-

ures of fuency and of the abiliry to understand and transmit information ina variety of tasks, which included: discussion with a native speaker of French,

a8en8uq puof,es tegr srsaSSns tl asnmag ¡esodo.rd prsJe orluof, E sr srql'(6Se t 'l86I) urqser) uagdarg sr ¡rsodord sryt qtra pererrosse f¡aso¡c rsorusr erueu esoqa lEnpr^rpur agr '7 rardeqC ur parou sy'Surpear Jo/pue Sulual-sr¡ gSno.rgr tndul a¡qrsuaqarduor ot pasodxa aJE sreureal uaqrrr are¡d se>1er

uo¡lsmbce a8rn8uq rrqr srsaqtodlq aqr uo paseq sr (pEeJ pu¿ "' uatsr¡ tsn[,

??a¿ Pu? " ' ualw rn[ e'¡esodord ,pue aql

ur rq8rr lr lJC, eql or uonEIeJ ur lrelep aJour ur passnf,srp aq IIIr\ uononJlsurpesnf,oJ-Jerurue.r8 pue acrtce¡d alnef,runururoJ Jo suonnglJtuof, ar{I'lou sr

uonf,nJtsur paseq-uJoJ leqr lou 'snoa8elue,tpe sr uononJtsur paseq-8uru¿eur

teqr ruarun8Je er{r JoJ r¡oddns srago lpnrs slgt 'sp;orrr Jer{ro uI 'rueuoduoraonce¡d elnef,runuruJol leuorrrppr ueJo af,uasg¿.ro aruese¡d aqlJo suJel ur

l¡uo paragp lagl 'uonrnrtsur pasnloJ-¡euu¡e.18 te¡n8a; rlaqt elraf,oJ or pen

-unuo3 stuaprus ¡r 'fpnrs uou8l,reg aql ur reqr azrsrqdrua ot turuodul sl t1

'Suluearu Surssa¡dxa pue SulpuersJepun uo sl srsegdrue erp eJeI{ \ slxeruof uIarllce¡d a¡,nrfrunruruof JoJ sarlrunlJoddo uo-r3 rgauaq sJauJeal r"qr ef,uapnaapl,rord sJrpnls asaqr ruoU sllnseJ eql 'uollBf,Iunulluor ro3 o8pa¡mou>l JlaqlSursn ur sef,ueqf, a>let or luelrnloJ pu? perlqlqul IeeJ ol sraurral speal uarJo

l¡r¡n¡cr uo ssegdrua tuooJsself, aq1 'a8en8uel ra8.rtr eq] rnoge,t\ou>I sruap

-nls teqzvr auruJJarap ol lFr5t¡p lra,r uatSo sI rI 'rf,BJ u1 'a8pa¡.tou¡ cnsln8urpue lrerncrp Jo sla al q8rq do¡a,rap sJeureal reqr eeluertn8 tou op Sulgcear

or sagcrorddt pe$q-ernrrnns l¡arrtsnlf,xa ro f¡reulrd reqr u,l.lor{s osp seq

arual;adxg 'a8rn8ur¡ puof,as e ul l¡a,rrrcaga suolluelul pur sa8essaru ;tagtatef,rununuof, 01 elqeun uauo aJ? uoltfnJlsul uoltelsueJt-Jetutue¡3 ro ¡rn8-urlorpnE 8ur¡lara¡ sJauJBaT 'suoIrEtIruII luel¡odut seg ¡esodord ,SutuulSagaql ruo5 rgSu rr reD, aqr uo paseg uolr3nJtsul leql sJauJrel pur sJeqJeat

Jo suonrnlul egr uoddns ol afuapl^e ap¡.nord e^oqe pa.&al^al sarpnrs eqlqrreeser agl Sunerdrerul

'lc¿¡n:oe onsmSu{3o seJn$eur uo IIa^\ ssal op or sJouJ¿el

esnef, rou plp uorreJrunruurof, Jaa{ JoJ sauun}¡oddo rEI{l efuept,ra al{l se/'r

qcro.rdde ,SuruulSag aqr tuo5 rg8rr rr rag, el{rJo lxaluor al{t ur luet¡odrulaJoru ueAE 'a8en8ue¡ puof,as e ur setttllqe uoll¿f,Iunuuor do¡a,rap ot Álunl-¡oddo luarlgns sluepnls a¡'t8 tou op tuJoJ pue lrerncce uo l¡uo sn3oJ teqlserurue¡8o¡d a8en8ue¡ puof,as regr ruaun8Jr aql JoJ uoddns sE stlnseJ eseql

paterdratur uou8lreg 'lpnrs aqr roj padola,tap slsar elltBoluntuuroo JnoJ aqr

uo sdno¡8 o,/$l raqro aqr uEI{t raq8lq l¡rueoglu8¡s Paross dno¡8 e^IleJlunur-ruof, er{l fe,l,ervrog 'saJnseeul acualadu¡or rnstnSull eql uo sdno¡8 ueer't.taq

saJuaraglp rueog¡u8¡s ou eJe r aJal{l (uoltf,nrlsulJo porrad er{r3o Pua aW tV

'r.{f,ueJ{ ur sanIAI}fE Suro8uo Sulgl-rcsap pue 'sallllllf,? tuef,eJ

s auo JoJlesauo lnogr srcr3 Suruodal 'q3uaJCJo.ra>1eads a,rrteu t Surrvtal^Jelul

utoo.tstap acp ut &utu"taa1 a8anSual puotag 69r

r60 Second knguage learning in tbe classroom

learners do not need to produce language in order to learn it, excepr perhapsto get other people to provide input by speaking to them. According to thisview, it is enough to hear (or read) and understand the target language.

Read Example 3 to get a feel for how this theory of classroom second languagelearning can be implemented in a classroom. This description shows thatone way to obtain comprehensible input is to provide learners with listeningand reading comprehension activities with no (or very few) opportunities tospeak or interact with the teacher or other learners in the classroom.

Example 3It is time for English class at a primary school in a French-speaking com-munity in New Brunswick, Canada. The classroom looks like a miniaturelanguage lab, with about thirry small desks, on each of which there is a cas-sette player and a set of large earphones. Around rhe room, shelves and racksdisplay scores of books. Each book is packaged with an audiocassette thatcontains a recording of its content. The materials are not strictly graded, butsome sets of books are very simple, and other sets are grouped so that theyare gradually more challenging. There are pre-school childrent books witha picture and a word or two on each page; illustrated stories with a few sen-

tences per page; picture dictionaries; ESL textbooks for children; illustratedscience books about animals, weather, vehicles, etc. Students (aged B-10)enter the classroom, select the material they want, and take it to their indi-vidual workspace. They insert the cassette, put on their earphones, and opentheir books. They hear and read English for the next 30 minutes. For some ofthe time the teacherwalks around the classroom, checking that the machinesare running smoothly, but she does not interact with the students concern-ing what they are doing. Some of the students are listening with closed eyes;

others read actively, mouthing the words silently as they follow each line witha finger. The classroom is almost silent except for the sound of tapes beinginserted and removed or chairs scraping as students go to the shelves to selectnew tapes and books.

Research findingsResearch relevant to the 'Just listen ... and read' proposal includes studies ofcomprehension-based teaching and extensive reading (Day et al.2011). \7ewill also look at some comprehension-based instruction in which the inputis manipulated in ways that are intended to increase the likelihood that stu-dents will pay attention to language form as well as meaning.

Sndy 1 6: Comprehension- based insnuction for cbildrenExample 3 was a description of a real programme implemented in experi-mental classes in a French-speaking region in Canada. From the beginningof their ESL instruction at age eight, students only listened and read duringtheir daily 3O-minute ESL period. There was no oral practice or interaction

leqr punoJ ar{S 'peal l¡enrre tuapnls r{f,Ea qooq er{rJo suJat ur passass" aq

p¡noc Sulureel teqr os seJnseaur l.repgeco,r pazrpnpr^rpul pado¡a,rap rsroH

'u1v\o rlel{l uo uaql PEaJ Pu¿ euoq qoog >loor

sluapnls 'pol;ad >lea1v\-xrs e JeAO drerqr¡ ssEIf, E ur elqelre^E eperu aJe.& leqlsrepeer pe5lldurs asor{r sluapnts(sself,'ISA reln8ar rreqlJo sanrlnf,¿ aqr oluorlrppe u1 's¡ale¡ louangord pue spuno.rSlceq a8enSu¿l lera^as paluasarda;stuedlrlued lZ¿qL 'EpBu€J 'leaJtuory ur aJtue3 Álunruruo¡ E ur erurueJ8-ord 1gg u¿ ur pelloJue aJa^\ oqrrl sruerSrulrur llnpe Suou¡e ruarudo¡a,rapl.rrlnqero,rjo lpnrs e ur srapear pegrldurrs pasn (ggg¿) rsroH esrlrery 'eldrurs

ureural a/rs Surrrrr* pue lre¡nqef,o arlt allq/v\ 'lueluor arel.ldo¡dde-e?epue Sunsaratur JaJo sJallrJr{r pue 'sef,ucruo; 'sargdrrSorq 'sfrsstlr l¡e¡allpagldurs eseql 'elqelle,re l¡Sulsearf,ur ere sreureel'ISE llnpe .ro3 pau8lsapllprcads sJep¿al paperS tng (ool Sur8ua¡egc sr uonrsrnbf,r a8en8ue¡ puooas

3o sa8ers l¡rea ur stpp€ roJ Ierrereru Surpear Sulpurg '8uÉua¡erp sr aSen8

-uBI puof,es r Sururea¡ stuapnrs loor{Js l¡erul¡d JoJ I?rJelEu Surpear Surpulgswoot "tot8uryoa¿ :/ I [pus

'uorlfEJalur ruooJssEls Pu? 'ú>lf,EgPeej Jagf¿al 'slueu-odruoc Sulu¡¡'r pue Suqeads rarpo osle rng uonrnJtsul ¡en8ulorpne lluotou papnlJur arurue.rSo¡d .re1n8a.r eql eJer{,ll sesse¡f, ur aJe l, sluepnts asoql'8ultr¡zvt ul l¡elcadsa 'sse¡8o.rd ¡alea¡8 eperu p?q aruur¡8o¡d re¡n8a; eqr uIsruapntsJo sdno¡8 aruos 'seJns¿eru Jeqlo uO 'au¡ru¿¡8o¡d;e¡n8ar aql ur sruap

-nts sE IIa^\ sE ruroSrad ol panunuoc lagr 'uoltcnpord I"JoJo saJnspau¡ euros

uo pue seJnseeru uolsuaqardruof, uO 'arun ler{r rnog8norgr auruerSord l¡uo-uolsuaqa;duof, eql ur panunuof, peq stuepnts aruos 'B epEJD ut arazrr laqrueq.&'JelEI s;eaf aarqr passesseal eJa \ sant¡tge a8rn8uel qsl¡8uE (sluJpnls eql

'6OOZ 'lE le l{rr^oruAo¡-:2007 '¡e ra ur*oqrq8r1) sasse¡r rraql ulr¡sÉug ua>1ods pasrrce;d Jaleu perl aruue¡8o¡d ¡etuarul;adxa aql ur sreur?el

ap g8noqr uela 'Suupads ro3 os¡e tng uorsuaqa¡druoc.roS l¡uo rou anJl s¿,44

srql 'auJuJerSord re¡n8al erp ur sJauJeel (ueqr arour sespJ euJos ur pue) se

qsl¡8ug r{f,nru sE ^/r\au1 euuBrSo.rd paseq-uolsuarla.lduof, eq} uI sJeuJeel

's¡eef orrrt ra¡ry lep ¡ad satnulru 0E persel r¿rp sesse1f, prq serurueJSo;d qroqur sluapnls eql 1¡V 'qceordde ¡en8uuolpne ue f¡uleu se,tr l{f,Irl.,lr 'atutu¿.18

-o.rd 1gg re¡n8ar aqt ur stuepms Jo rer{r qrpr Suturral rrrqr paredruoo puearurue¡8o¡d paseq-uorsuaqerdruoc sr{l ur uJrplrrlo Jo spoJpunq 3o ruarudo-le^ep a8rn8ue¡ puof,as aqr pare8rrsa,rul sanSral¡of, raq pue urttoqrq8rl lsre¿

'JeAo3 >lf,eg

s,>looq E aplsul padel 'sp.ror'r ,/rcJ E Jo slua¡e,unba uoIlEISuEJt ot JeJeJ PInoJlarp l¡euorserro 'qsl¡8ug pu? r{ruaJC uI rellruls ere IEI{I spro \ ateuSoc 8ul-zlu8ooar fg ¡o sa.rntcrd aqr Sulsn dq Sulurau¡ re passan8 faql 'sraureel ral{toJo raqf,eel eqr qrlry\ qsrlSug ul uollJeratul ou l¡¡enrrr,r perl faqr rnq qooq puesedet ruorS rndur raleads-allteu pe^Iaf,eJ sJeuJ?el 'sng1 'rroddns pfluqf,alpu¿ leuonezlueS¡o papl.to.rd lnq ,r{reat, tou plp sral{f,eeJ'¡p re qslSug ul

utootssqJ aqt ut 8urutua1 a8unSual yuotag r9t

r62 Second language learning in the ckssroom

there was vocabulary growth attributable to reading, even over this shortperiod, and that the more students read, the more words they learned. She

concluded that substantial vocabulary growth through reading is possible,but that students must read a great deal (more than just one or two booksper semester) to realize those benefits. As we saw in Chapter 2, when weinteract in ordinary conversations, we tend to use mainly the 1,000 or 2,000most frequent words. Thus, reading is a particularly valuable source of newvocabulary. Students who have reached an intermediate level of proficiencymay have few opportunities to learn new words in everyday conversation. Itis in reading a variety of texts that students are most likely to encounter newvocabulary. The benefit of simplified readers is that students encounter a

reasonable number of newwords. This increases the likelihood that they canfigure out the meaning of new words (or perhaps be motivated to look themup). If the new words occur often enough, students may remember themwhen they encounter them in a new context.

Other research that explores the 'Just listen ... and read' proposal includesstudies in which efforts have been made to draw second language learners'

attention to language forms in the input, for example, by providing high-frequenry exposure to specific language features through an input food,highlighting the features through enhanced input, and/or providing pro-cessing instruction. All of these are described in more detail below but theemphasis in all cases is on getting learners to notice language forms in theinput, not on getting them to practise producing the forms. The next threestudies are examples of this research.

Stady 18: InputfloodMartha Tiahey and Lydia \,X/hite (1993) carried out a study with youngFrench-speaking learners (aged 10-12) in intensive ESL classes in Quebecsuch as those described in Chapter 5, Study 10. The goal of the research was

to determine whether high-frequency exposure to a particular form in theinstructional input would lead to better knowledge and use of that formby the students. The linguistic form investigated was adverb placement inEnglish (see Chapter 2, p. 58). For approximately 10 hours over a two-weekperiod, learners read a series ofshort texts in which theywere exposed to liter-ally hundreds of instances of adverbs in English sentences-so many that the

investigators referred to this study as an 'input food'. There was no teachingof adverb placement, nor was any error correction provided. Instead, stu-dents simply read the passages and completed a variety of comprehensionactiYities based on them.

Although learners benefited from this exposure to sentences with adverbs

in all the correct positions, their learning was incomplete. They improvedin their acceptance of sentences with word order that is grammatical inEnglish but not in French ('The children quickly leave school'). However,

'GOOZ arrr.¡,1\ pue 'unoqrq8rl'eped5) sJauruJalep a¡tlssassod l3eJJof, ar{t pug or raqraSor paTo^\ ueqr puEa¡nr a¡duls e ua¡r8 araz'r lar¡r uag,u ssarSo¡d a¡oru aperu sJauftel rer{l punoJelrq¿\'r{fJeasal ruanbasqns u¡ :ossassod ar{rJo.lapua8 Jr{r qf,turu ol Jaurur-Jelep alrssassod agl asooql ot 1(oq uJeal lou plp sluepnts ''rta 'sJeltal ¡eudeo'adó p¡oq3o asn aqt fq parqS¡q8l{ ara,,n sturoJ er{r q8norp ua^a'sr IBIII'sra-uruJeleP a¡trssassod ot uorluJllP (sJeuJ¿el er{f

^,\BJP ol UrlTdxa lFualcgns

selr\ lue(uaJurr{ua eqr Jer{ler{ { suortsanb errqrh\ 'sSurpug asaqt SunardraturuI 'uraqr uae \req ef,uereJlP eFtrl sBld erar{r reqr PUE sruJoj asJqrJo esn PUEaSpa¡mou1 rrer{t ur pa,rordul sdno;8 qtoq teqr punoJ er{S 'luetuorutqualnoqlra slxat Jluss er{l P?JJ orl^\ sJauJ¿elJo lBr{1 gtv'r saSessed pacuegua f¡ec-qderSodÁ ar{t pEaJ per{ oq,/!\ sreureelJo a:ueuro;rad aqr pa.redruof, etrqr6

'sxet ar{t pear laqr sE sJaurruJatep

a,ussassod aql a:nou ol sreureal aql peal pFo,&\ srql teqr ser'r srsegrodfil aq1'sJeDal ¡rudec ur uaurJ^/\ Jo 'pazrfrlell 'paul1;apun 'adlr p¡oq ur s¿,l.r lr 'slxelaql ur peftedd¿ ¡aulu¡atap a rssassod ¿ eult l¡a,ra 'sl terll 'peppr selv\ luaru-eruequa ¡ecrqde.rSodlr ter{} sr poog rndur Eerrqr6 put laqera pue lpnls srqluae^\lag e uaJeJIp ¡oleu aq1 'porrad >leJ

^.-o^\r E JaAo poplrto.rd sJnr^nfe

uolsuaqardruof, pue slerJet¿ru Sulpear3o a8elced e g8norqr sJeuruJJerap alrs

-sassod3o sparpunq or arnsodxe3o sJnol{ g1 l¡arrurxordde pa,rra:ar sluapnrs'sessrlr TSg a^rsuetul ul ZI-I1 pa8e sreur¿el Suurads-r¡ruarg fq G5 'd'f,rardeq3 eas :.Jar{, pue ,slq, f¡ngrcads) sJauruJelep a,ussassod3o uolrlslnbf,Eeql peuruexa (866I) etrqr6 euueof 'tndut Parueque Sutrt¡o,rut fpnrs e u1

'paurEal aq p¡no,,rr laqr rBqr saf,uer{f, aqt Sutsearcur snql 'a8en8ue¡ Puof,as aqr

ur saJnleeJ ol uonuelte (sJauJ?el me.rp rg8rru reqr sSulqr 3o lral¡e,r B ol JaJaJ

ot ,tueurorurqua lndur, rurar aql peulor (eGGl) qrltus poo,llrel{S IeeI{3rI{tndut pacuaqul :6 I tp"tS

',pue eqr ur rq8u 1l tag, uollres eqt uI ¡erep oJour uI passnf-srp sr srql 'tuarudo¡e,rep prnunuoo (sJauJeal ro3 lressarau aq leru a8en8ue¡

puof,as aqt ur Imrrtuu¡e¡8 lou sr lerllv\ rnoge uolleurJoJut llolldxa aJo(u 'snql'(oSrn8ue¡ rsJg Jraqt pue) a8en8uelralur rrJrp ur luasa¡d eJE tEI{r sluorueloJoa8en8ur¡ ra8rer aqr ur ef,uesqt er{l arltou or sJauJeel r¡urrad ot g8noue tousr ef,uepr^e e plsod '(¡ecrtrrurue¡8 rou sr lerllv\ lnog? uolteruro3ul) af,uepllee,rnrSau ueqr ar'13 01 slrej l '(a8en8uel Puoes aqt uI ¡ectteruurerS sl req^{tnoqr uorlrrrJroSur) aruapr,ra a,rnlsod qrlu'r sJeuJea¡ sap¡,rord rndul aSen8uel

or e¡nsodxa g8nogr¡e regr pan8re (I66I) errqA\ eplq'T..rerdrq3 uI perou

rya8rn8uq tsrg rrarp uo peseg rorra uBJo pu ra8 ol rueqr pral lou p¡p lnq'a8en8ue¡rarur Jrarp ol

^,\.eu Sulqrauos ppe tuaql d¡aq p¡nor poog tndur aqr

reqr srsaS8ns r¡sr¡8ug ur lerrleuue¡8un a¡e uoll¡sod slql ur sqra^pe teql azlu-8ooa¡ or lllrgeur ,sluapnts eql '(,¡ooq:s fppmb ar'ea¡ uarPllqr eql) qsl¡8uEur tou tnq qf,uaJC ur lefueruruer8 are reqr sa¡uetuas lda3f,¿ ot panurruor faqt

utoo¿stplJ aqt ut Sututaal a7un&ual puotag t9r

r64 Second knguage learning in the classroom

Enhoncing the input

Study 20: Processing instructionBill VanPatten (2004) and his colleagues have investigated the effects of pro-cessing instruction, another approach to comprehension-based learning. Inprocessing instruction, learners are put in situations where they cannot com-prehend a sentence by depending solely on context, prior knowledge, or otherclues. Rather they must focus on the language itself. In one ofthe first studies,adult learners of Spanish as a foreign language received instruction on differ-ent linguistic forms, for example, object pronouns (VanPatten and Cadierno1993). As noted in Chapter 4, VanPatten found that English-speaking learn-ers of Spanish tended to treat the object pronouns, which precede the verb inSpanish, as if they were subject pronouns. Thus, a sentence such as La sigue

el señor (literally'her (object) follows the man (subject)') was interpreted as

'She follows the man.

Two groups were compared in the stud¡ one receiving processing instruc-tion, the other following a more traditional approach. The processinginstruction group received explicit explanations about object pronouns anddid some actiyities that drew their attention to the importance of noticingthat object pronouns could occur before the verb. Then, through a variety offocused listening and reading exercises, learners had to pay attention to howthe target forms were used in order to understand the meaning. For example,they heard or read La sigue el señor andhad to choose which picture-a manfollowing a woman or a woman following a man-corresponded to the sen-

tence. A second group of learners also received explicit information aboutthe target forms but instead of focusing on comprehension practice throughprocessing instruction, they engaged in production practice, doing exercises

to practise the forms being taught. After the instruction, learners who had

received the comprehension-based processing instruction not only did better

,Ar

,ffi

'E JetdEr{J ur V>ls"r uorl¿f,runruruoJ ur uonr?JalurluaPnls-tuaPnls eqr I.uou PuB g ruooJss¿lJ ruo{ }drJf,suBJl aql ur Jnor^¿r{ag

luepnrs-rer{reat eql Surllrapun ,/v\ar^ Ief,naJoerp eqt sl slql 'ol Surpuaueare fegr Surueatu aqr f.r.rec leqt-saJntf,nJls lpf,neruuer8 agr pue spJo,l.r.

al{t-sruroJ a8en8url agr arrnbrr ot sJeuJeel speel uoneno8au 'slseqrodÁ1uollreralul eqt ot Surproroy '(ffgf) Sulgcear a8en8ue¡ paseg->lset ura¡duexa ro3 '¡to8 rr¡ncrued r gsrldruoccr ot rarpaSot Sunlrorvt aJE sJauJeal ar{luarl,/ú. enJt l¡eloadsa sl sFlL 'Surpurrs:apun Fntnru lE aATJJE ol ruaqt sr¡rurad

reqr fe,tr e ur ''ote 'suolurdo 'srq8noqr 'suorluelur rlagr r$rre¡c pue ssa.rdxa ot'sr ltr{l '8ulu¿aru ro3 alenoSau or pa¡adulor are.(eqr <uorloeJJlur ul a8e8ua otlr¡unr.roddo aqr ua,rr8 ar¿ sreureel uer{ \ teqr an8re laql 'stuepnts Jer{ro puesJar{f,Bal r{lr^r suonorJatur leuorlesJeluof pur rndur a¡qrsuaqardrum qloqol ssaJJEJo aruel¡odrur agr azrseqdua ¡esodord,>lpr s,ta'I, ar{rJo sar¿f,o^pv

qlw slaT E

'suorletnurl asogt Suruocra,ro ul d¡aq

puonrppe paau leu fagr fr¡noglp rnoqrr¡a uaqr pu¿rsrepun seleursself,

Pue sJal{fBal JIaI{1 sJal{./y\ suollsnlls uI eJE sJauJEa¡3¡'psodo.rd ¡¡tr slel, eql

Jo uorssntrsrp oqr ur aas III^\ e^\ s¿ fa e,e\oH '(7 rardeg3 aas) a8enSur¡rarulJreqrJo suonetrrurl eqt ees or ur8aq laqr regr a8en8uel acnpord ol eAeI{ sruep

-ms ueqa sr tr ltr{t sanS¡e eqs 'slseqrodfq rndrno a¡grsuarla.rduor (186I)s,ult^\S IITJJaI/\ sr saqceordde pesug-uolsuaqa;druoc ot asuodsa¡ Jerpouv

'uotrnporda8en8ue¡ puoras u,{\o Jrarp ur seJnleal esegl asn ot alqr aq plno^\ lagt rrqrsefuer{r erp peseeJlul Suruearu ta¡d¡alur ol JJpJo ur saJntBeJ crtsrn8ur¡ cgtc-ads uo l¡a.r or stuepnts 8urc.ro3 terp pe \oqs qf,Jeesal s.uatltdut¡'q8noua sr

rndul alqrsuagarduroc rrqr slsaqrodlg aqr a8ua¡eqc acuagradxe pue r{)reeseJ

elqtJeprsuof, 'ssalar{ua aN 'saoncB¡d pc€o8epad (s.ral{3eal uooJsself Josluauodruor alqenle^ a¡e Suruearu ro3 Sulpea.r pue Suluats{ e ItcV'uonrs-mbre a8en8uelJo uorr¿punoJ aqr sr a8en8ue¡ ¡n33uruearu3o uolsuaqarduro3

'sJauJBel PDUE^PE

eroru ro3 8uru.rea1 jo spur¡ rerpo or ruaualddns E se pue Sururea¡ ur8aq or&rnl rua¡¡arxe uE se uees ag rsag drru sanr^nfe pes¿q-uorsuarlarduoo rerpie^a^roq 'slsa88ns osle ef,uapr^e eql 'puelsrapun fagr a8rn8ue¡ ot a;nsodxapauretsns a Eqlar{Ul ssarSord a¡geJeplsuof a>leru uEf, sJeuJeel leqr s.&\oqs uoll-rsrnbcr aSen8ue¡ puofas or saqreordde paseg-uorsuagardruor uo qf,Jease¿

rff,Jeesar aqt Sunardratu¡

'qs"l uorDnpord uo IIa,t\ sE paru-roSrad

os¡e faqr 'dno¡8 uonrnpord ar{t ur sJeuJ¿el ueqr $lser uolsuaqardruoo eql uo

ruoo$sqr arp ut Sutuwal a&an&ual puotag s9r

r66 Second language learning in tlte ckssroom

Negotiation for meaning is accomplished through a variety of modificationsthat naturally arise in interaction, such as requests for clarification or confir-mation, repetition with a questioning intonation, etc.

Look for negotiation for meaning in the examples below and compare thiswith the examples given for the'Get it right from the beginning'proposal.

Example 4(A group of ).2-year-old ESL students are discussing a questionnaire aboutpets with their teacher.)

s And what is 'feed'?

r Feed?Tofeedthedog?s Yes, but when I dont have a ...r Ifyou dont have a dog, you skip the question.

Example 5(Students from Classroom B, as they settle in at the beginning of the day.)

T How are you doing this morning?sr I'm mad!sz \X/hy?

r Oh boy. Yeah, why?

s 1 Because this morning, my father say no have job this morning.T Your father has no more job this morning? Or you have no job?

s I My father.

How different these examples are from the essentially meaningless interac-tion often observed in classrooms where the emphasis is on 'getting it rightfrom the beginning'. Such genuine exchanges of information must surelyenhance students' motivation to participate in language learning activities.

But do they, as advocates of this position claim, lead to successful language

acquisition? Note, for example, that, although the conversation proceeded ina natural way, the student in Example 4 never did find out what'feed' meant.

Research findingsMost of the early research that examined the 'Lett talk' proposal was descrip-tive in nature, focusing on such issues as: How does negotiation in classrooms

differ from that observed in natural settings? How do teacher-centred andstudent-centred classrooms differ in terms of conversational interaction?Do task types contribute to different kinds of interactional modifications?

Several studies also examined relationships between modifications in conver-sational interaction and comprehension.

In the mid-1990s researchers began to directly explore the effects of interac-tion on second language production and development over time. Most of

'uonrsrnb)E a8en8ue¡ JoJ pnuessa sr lrqr Suruearu JoJ uorl-ello8au slqt f¡asrcard sr lr leql anSre ¡esodo.rd ;¡er s,reT, aqtJo srauoddng'8u¡uearu JoJ uon?no8au sapn¡cur ltr{t af,rlf,E¡d a¡llecrunuJruof aurnua8Jer{lo r{f,ea JaJo uEf, legr 'rndur ¡erneuuer8 elEJnf,f,B aql qrr^\ Jer{ro rlJea

apnord sle,ut¡e touuBr sJauJEel g8nogr¡e teql papnpuor Jalrod pue 3uo1'llEJe^O 'sroJra ra^/deJ alnpo.rd lagr teql ernsue ol sarun il¿ lB (Jar{leale'r)

Ieporu 8uu¡eads-a,urru E 01 pesodxa eg ot peeu sJauJeal regr ruarunSft aqtuonsanb orur pelleo lr asnef,eg t¡nsa; SunsaJalur ue se,l\ srql 'raleads e nruro peru¿Ape uE r{tr^\ prp legr ueqr ;a>1eads le^al-Jterpeurratur reqroue r{rrr*sJoJJa aJouJ lue a>leru tou prp sJeuJeel lalel-ererpauJJatur

(sr teql 'stxetuof,

ssoJf,¿ saf,uaJaJlP ou Pa,/\\or{s qcaads JauJ¿el rErF Punoj PuE slJBls eslEj PuEs;o;ra lrepqmo^ pue prrrerururrSJo rJgunu eqt peuruexa JerJod pue 3uo1

'ra8uol parsel sJauJeel pef,ue^p" qrrr'r suop-esJeluof, arp asntf,ag l¡rred 's¡aut¡¿d Ia el-arerpeuJelur qtr^\ ueql sJauJeel

Ia^el-paJu" p" qtra >llel eJoru parnpord sraurra¡ 'os[V 'sJa>l"ads a,uteu qtvrrplp laqr uer{} sJauJEal Jar{}o qlr^\ aroru pa>llel sJaureal regr puno3 fag¡ 'srrcd

uonesJe uol ur sla^el frualcgord ssoJf,e saf,ueJa5lp aqr 8uls,(pue 'suonesJe-uof, ur sraleads aln¿u-uou put e^neuJo qcaads aqr paredruo) JJlJod pue3uo1 'qsr18uE

3o raleads alneu E I{rl.ry\ raqtout pue 1a>lteds Ie^al-peJue^peuE r{lrlrr Jar{roue 're>1eads Ie^al-aterpatuJetul JOr{touE tpl^\ uolresJe^uol E petlraleads la^al-alerpauJalur uE 'a¡druexa roC 'sle^al earqr JI{l Jo I{rEe uroüra>1eads E r.{tL![ suorssnosrp ate¡edas ul patedtrtued raurml IEnpI^Iput I{]EA

'qsr¡3ug3o

sJeuJeal paf,u" pE Jo elerperuJalur aJe \ sra>1eads a^Il¿u-uou ag1'sra>¡eads

qsl¡8uE alneu xrs pue 'qsuedg ser'r a8¿n8uel lsry asoq,& qsr¡8ug3o sra>1eads

alneu-uou ¿1 :sruedrclued 91 aJa./( aJeql's¡led ul >lstr E Sutur;o3rad sra

-ureal tlnpe fq parnpord aSen8ue¡ eql paurruexa (E86I) r:uod EIrInEd pue3uo1 ¡aegcrry 'uonJeJalur JeuJEal uo selpnrs a,rtrdlnsap f¡rca agr jo auo uI

sra.ur?q o7 3u141w srauruaT : I Z tpryS

'psodo.rd ,pue eqt ur rq8rr rl rJ), arp qrv't aurlur eJour sr srsar¡rodlq uorlfeJelur parepdn eqr or luelalal qf,Jeesal .rardrgc

srql ur JatBI ees III¡I am se 'lJeJ u1 'Suturau pue tuJoJ uae.üteg suoltf,auuof,a>leru ol sraurea¡ Surdlaq ur aloJ ¡ennrc e le¡d or percIlag sI teql aJnrEeJ auo sE

pagriuapr ueeq ser{ >prqpaal e^nf,arJoJ '8ulurca1 oTEIIIIf,EJ or l¡a1r¡ lsour are

lerlt uonf,eratur Jo seJnlreJ pue (uolrualle 'aldluexe ro3) Sulurea¡ a8en8ue¡

puooas ot alnqrJluof, ler{l sal}IJedeo raurea¡ sale¡8alur uoIsJeA parrpdn aqr

'(€g6t 3uo1) ruaudo¡a,rep aSen8uel puof,as satouo¡d uolrreJalul lruolres-raluor teqr 8u¡rers uorsre ¡tutSuo eqr qrl^\ paredruo3 '(7 -rardeq3 aas)

srsaqrodlq uonrerelur eW Jo uorsral perepdn (9G6) s,3uo1 ¡aeqcry.q lqpate rtoru aJE pue s8untas froreroqe¡ uI lno paIJJ¿f, uaoq a^EI{ selpnts osaql

utoottspp aql ut Sututaal a&an&ual puotag L9I

168 Second language learning in the classroom

Study 22: Learner language andproficiency leuelGeorge Yule and Doris Macdonald (1990) investigated whether the rolethat different proficienry-level learners play in a two-way communicationtask led to differences in their interactive behaviour. They set up a task thatrequired ñvo learners ro communicate information about the location ofdif-ferent buildings on a map and the route to ger there. One learner, referred toas the 'sender', had a map with a delivery roure on it, and this speaker's jobwas to describe the delivery route ro rhe 'receiver' so that he or she could drawthe delivery route on a similar map. The task was made more challenging bythe fact that there were minor differences between the two maps.

To determine whether there would be any difference in the interactionsaccording to the relative proficiency of the 40 adult participants, differ-ent types of learners were paired together. One group had high-proficiencylearners in the 'sender' role and low-proficiency learners in the 'receiver' role;the other group had low-proficiency'senders' paired with high-proficiency'receivers'.

\lhen low-proficiency learners were senders, interactions were considerablylonger and more varied than when high-proficiency learners were the senders.The explanation for this was that high-proficiency senders tended to act as

if the lower-level receiver had little contribution to make in the completionof the task. As a result, the lower-level receivers were almost forced to play a

passive role and said very little. \X/hen lowerJevel learners were the sendershowever, much more negotiation for meaning and a greater variety of interac-tions between the two speakers took place. Based on these findings, Yule andMacdonald suggest that teachers should sometimes place more advanced stu-dents in less dominant roles in paired activities with lower-level learners.

Study 23: Zhe dynamics ofpair uorhIn a longitudinal study with adult ESL learners in an Australian universiryNeomy Storch (2002) observed the patterns of interaction between 10 pairsof students completing different tasks over one semester. She identified fourdistinct patterns of interaction: 'collaborative' interaction consisted of twolearners fully engaged with each other's ideas; 'dominant-dominant' inter-action was characterized by an unwillingness on the part of either learnerto engage and/or agree with the othert contributions; 'dominant-passive'consisted of one learner who was authoritarian and another who was willingto yield to the other speaker; and 'expert-novice' interaction consisted ofone learner who was stronger than the other but actively encouraged andsupported the other in carrying out the task. To investigate whether the fourrypes of interaction led to differences in learning outcomes, Storch iden-tified learning events that occurred during the interactions (for example,learning that the definite article is used with the names of some countries).Then she looked at whether that language knowledge was maintained in

JoJ slxaluoJ alBJauaS pFo.{r l?ql auo se uasor{f, sE^\ 3rdol aql dJlunof Jrer{lur suJalgoJd lrluaruuoJrlue passnf,srp lagr gcrqm ur sanrlnf,E leuonf¿Jelurur paSe8ua s¡uepnrs 'puelreql ur sesselr a8enSue¡ u8laro3 e se gsr¡3ug ursellr^n3e dnorS-¡eus pue -.rred3o esn eql pare8rrsa,rur (VOOZ) q8nouoqcla¡rury 'srsaqtodlq uolrceralur erpJo uorsral petepdn aql ol tue^elal lpnrs e u1

uoo¿sstp x?ql ? ut uotlJ?talu, Jaut?"1-¿auJ?aT :97 [?wS

'tuaudo¡a,rap Zjot spEJI uorlreratur peterlo8au reqr slsaqrodlg aqr.roj rroddns se pata;dratur aJE stlnseJ esaql 'qser luaul¿aJt aql JerJe qruourauo paJatsrurup¿ slset-tsod pafe¡ap aqr uo paure¡ureru sB^\ sJolo?Jatul eqrro3 ruaudo¡a^ep ur eseeJf,ur tuecglu8ls eqr ter{r salou os¡e la>1ce¡rq .a¡rrr¡ l.ra,r.

pa8uegc orfv\ 'sJauJEa¡ dnor8 IoJruoJ arp or relrturs eJa.&\ spardr.ro5 ar{t pu¿sre^Jesgo ag1 '(¡orruo3 pue'spardlrcg's.rauasgg 'a'r) uoncerarur ul aSe8ua

tou pp oq^, sJauJeel ueqr ruarudola^ap uorteruJo3 uollsanb Jreqt ur ssa¡8o¡d

PeurElsns eJou PslEJtsuouep sJrp?JJun Jotf,¿Jalul puE sJolf,BJerul qrog

'slset aql ¡e para¡druoctnq qs¿l er{t Jo fu¿ ul aledlclued rou prp orl,{a sJeureel jo dnorS lorruo3 E

oslB sB,/v\ eJeql 'are1d >1oot Suruselu JoJ uollenoSau ou snq] pue JnDo lou plpsu^\op>leaJq uonef,runururof ter{l Jauueru palletap e r{fns ur pardl.rcs prc pe5-r¡druls ueeq ptr{ rrqr aBrnBuEI pesn s;aleads elrleu er{r tnq sra>1eads a neueql qrl^\ $lsel arues aqt tno parJJef, ,spaldrrcg, aqr '7 dnorg ur sraureal 'le,na.

lue ur toeJalur rou pp laqr rnq >lsel er{t tno palrrer lagr se ra>1eeds alneu eql

Pue JauJ"al aqt or uelsrl or Pa>lsE eJe,/r^. ,'sJe^Jesqo, aqr 'E dnorS ur sJauJEe-I

('sarpeeJufl Jotf,eJelul eql sE ol paJJaJaJ JJa \ snqt pue sruJoJ uonsanbjo uon-lsrnbce Jrar{r ur perue^pe se lou a.rartr laqt rnq 1 dno;g ur sJauJeel se lndulpa5lporu atues er{l palraf,al ¿ dnorS ur sJeuJea-I 'sJeuftal ar{r JoJ Suluraur

'$rrcp ot rq8nos laqr se a8en8uel rrar{r pa5poru or{ \ 'sra>1eads e neu r{1r,&

s>lsel aqr lno parJJEf ,'sJolreJetul, se oJ peJJaJeJ'1 dno.r3 ur sJeuJ?al aql'sdno¡8 alg otur pepplp ueql eraly\ ÁtyL'Z.rerdeq3 ur paqrJ3sap s? 'suorl-senb Sulu¡tal ur peqleal peg laqr a8ets aqr3o suJJal ur passasse eJe.&\ sJauJ¿al

aqt 'DISEI agr ur Suned¡on¡ed ot JorJ¿ 'suonsanb acnpord ol sJauJeel JoJ slxal-uoc apu'ord or pau8lsap are,4a S>lsEl aql 'gsr¡8ug 3o sra>1eads e^nBu r{tr^rSulcuanbas a¡nl¡rd pue uorralduoc l¡ots 'alduexa -lo3 '$lset eln€f,runruurorrueraglp ur a3¿3ua ol -ISg

Jo sreur"el rlnpe pe>lse (666D falce¡¡ uosrlyruautdo¡anap aSanSuq puoras?u" uolltpratuJ :re [?n4S

'a8pali'rou13ouonfnJtsuof,-of, aqr ul a8e8ua l¡n3ssaccns uec faqr 'drqsuone¡ar ef,rlou

-l¡adxa ue ur eJe sJauJeal pue f¡a,urerog¿llol suonlunJ >1rom rrcd uaq^\ tBr{rtrrrclf, ar{r pue (r/ rarderl3 aes) ruarudola,up a,rnruSoc 3o ,,lroeqt s,Qslo8l¡ro; rroddns sE srr{} sle¡d¡elur qlJots 'tseal aqr paurelur"ur s¡r¿d a,rrssed-tueu-ltuop pue lueurruop-lueunuop aqr ur paredl¡lued oq./( sJeuJEeT 'aru¡ Je oa8pa¡,lou1 Z-I JrerpJo eJou paurelureu s¡¡¿d acl,rou-l¡adxa pue a^nrJogel

loo aql ur paredlcnred ogz'r sreureel rBr{r punoJ r{Jrors ¡ser ruanbesqns E

ruoo$spp at¡l ut Sututaal a&arcSuq yuotag 69r

t70 Second language learning in the classroom

the use of conditional clauses such as 'If people didnt leave water runningwhile brushing their teeth, they would save an estimated 5-10 gallons each

time' (p. 213).Learners were audio-recorded as they discussed the environ-mental problems.

The recorded conversations were examined to see the extent to which stu-dents used interactional features that are believed to facilitate second language

learning, for example, negative feedback (i.e. clarification requests, explicitcorrection, and recasts) and modified output (i.e. a learnert more accurarcl

complex reformulation ofhis or her previous utterance). Learners were tested

on their abiliry to produce conditional clauses in a pre-test, an immediatepost-test, and a delayed post-test.

McDonough found that learners who had used more negative feedback and

modified output in their interactions significantly improved in the accu-

racy of their conditional clauses. Those who made less use of these features

did not. McDonough also explored opinions about the usefulness of pairwork and small-group activities, asking whether such activities contributedto learning. She found that the students did not perceive pair- and grouP-

activities as useful for learning English. This was true both for students whoseemed to have made effective use of the interaction for learning and those

who had not. The fact that learners were sceptical of the benefits of group-and pair-work activities suggests a need to take account of learners' beliefs

about learning (see Chapter 3) and to share with them our reasons for using

these activities.

Interpreting the research

Research based on the interaction hypothesis has investigated factors thatcontribute to the quality and quantity of interactions between second

language learners. It has provided some useful information for teaching.

Certainly, the studies by Long and Porter, Yule and Macdonald, and Storch

contribute to a better understanding of how to organize group and pair workmore effectively in the classroom. The Mackey and McDonough studies are

two examples of research that have measured second language development

in relation to different aspects of conversational interaction. Mackey's study

used one-on-one pair-work activities between trained native speakers and

non-native speakers focusing on a single grammatical feature in a laboratorycontext. Thus it is difficult to relate the findings to the kind of interactions

that take place in classrooms. The McDonough study helps to fill this gap

because it is a classroom study that also demonstrates the benefits of interac-

tion on second language learning over time.

Recentl¡ a number of laboratory studies have also examined the effects ofl

different interactional features on specific aspects ofsecond language learn-i

ing over time. Several studies have shown that implicit corrective feedbackl

'&l¡q" a8en8ue¡ puof,as pue sllDIS f,ruapef,B rreqt qroq dole.nap ilyur stuepnlsreql peunsse l¡durs sr tr 'uonf,nJtsu paseg-luetuof JoJ slxeluof lueur u1

s8urpug rlrrtasa¿

'o¡4] JO

rc¿(, e urpr^r aprru l¡ensn sr a8¿n8ue¡ lrrroleru aqr 01 uonrsu€rl Jr{1 lnq'.,nou1 fpea-r¡e laqr a8en8ue¡ e30 esn euJos 1y\ollE tEqt saruu¡e¡8o¡d uonef,npa

F.Srlllq ol ssef,f,e a,reg leu stuapnls rar{to 'a8en8ue¡ Ál¡oleu aqr g8no.rgrlluo 8ul¡oor{Js ot sseJJE eAEr{ ueuo stuapnls 'uone¡Snurur Jo serJlunol uI'uonernpe;o a8en8ue¡ aql se uasoqo sr a8¿n8uel auo os 'sa8en8uel IEOoI IIE uralq"lr¿Ae lou aJe slerJJleru leuonef,npa 'sJar{to u1 :a.,vrod FruoloJ snol,ra¡d e

3o a8en8ue¡ aqr sr Surloogcs jo e8en8uel l¡uo rr{l (sernunof, aruos ur 'a¡druexeJoC 'alqEIrEAE sr uorldo raqto ou ta J^{oq 'suortenlrs leuorruJnpa lueu uJ'a8en8ue¡ puo3es B ur uononJtsur poseg-ruetuof elrarer or (ruagr JoJ asoor{f,

slua¡ed .uaqr ro) Jsoor{f, stuapnls 'saruu¡e¡8o¡d fIfC pue uorsrauul uI

'erun e(ues aqr re a8rn8u?l eql pue tuatuof, JatlEuJ rralgns aqt 8ul-uJeel ',auo JoJ o^\1, la8 u¿¡ sluapnls rrr{r sr rpeordde srq¡Jo uortetoadxa aq1'e8en8ur¡ aruor{ (stuapnts or uonrppe ul sa8en8ue¡ aJour Jo o./r\-l ur uonf,nJtsurSul.rego lq raqrrry srqr puarxa slooqls ueadorng aql sE rlrns saurue¡8o¡d

Ieuorlrf,npa rar{ro 'g rardeq3 ul g lpnrg ur paqrrf,sap adornE ur sarurue¡8

-ord (1¡3) Sururea¡ pater8arul-a8enSur¡ pue rueruof, el{r pue saruru¿¡8o¡d

uorsJeurrur 'a¡durxa ro3 's8ulDas IruollJnJtsul Jo óalre,t lea¡8 r uI petuaru-aldrur s¡ r1 'aBenBuEI rer{t ur rq8ner rall¿ur reafgns lpnrs faqr se a8en8uel

u8laro3 Jo puof,es e a¡lnbce sJauJral 'Surgcear aSen8ut¡ peseq-ruJruof, uI

auo ¿o{oml pg ,'8ulu.ree¡ a8rnSue¡ puof,as uo >lreqpaal elnrarrof, rrcrldxa

eJouJo sloaga aqr pare8nsa^ur e^eq leqt uorllsod (pue eqr ul rq8rr lI leg, eqtor Palsler sJrPnls luoorssBlJ lE >lool III¡I a¡,r rardegr srql uI ratel '8urgt arues

aqr 3uúes jo le,r rarpoue lsnl se Jaqler rng uroJ a8en8ue¡ rraql rlerrof, olldu¡eur uE sE sJeuJEa¡ aqr lq pallac;ed ag rou letu stse¡a¡ (sJaqf,Eat eql 'uoll-f,nJlsur Jelleru-relgns g8norgr Suru¿au Surssa¡dxa uo sI snf,oJ lruolrfnJrsuleqt uaq.4 'g .rardeq3 ur pauJeel a,t\ sV'Ja^a,l.loq 'es?J al{t sfe,r'r¡e tou sI srql'f:e¡nrre uo snfoJ E pue uonf,nJlsul rrruuer8 ¡euoltlpeJt ol peruorsnf,f,E aJJ \sraureal rEqL egr asnrreq pef,rlou uaeq a eq or l¡a1t arour ere.&\ (ryrqpaa;e nJaJJof Jo sruJoJ raqro pur) slsEJaJ 'lpnts uoorsse¡r suBnouoOlIAJ uI

'(tOOZ rpedg pur 'uz'roqrg8rl 'se¡oqer¡)lpualssuor tseral sr ruJoJ auo l¡uo3l l¡-re¡ncrrred '>lrorvr. rred uI ruaIIBS aJouJ

ere stsef,ar esnef,eq aq feru s¡lt '(/002 oo3 pue da1:eyrq) Suluas frort.loqelaqt ul tsa8uoJls aJ? slsef,al JoJ sr3eJe a,ulsod eq] reqr sruJguol qf,Jeesal sII{l

Jo ^/v\ar^al tueseJ v'lBrsgaueq sr suorlBnlrs >porvl-rrcd ul (stsmar 'alduexa.roj)

utoo"tssyp aql ut &urutaa1 aSan&ual Vuocag tLt

172 Second language learning in the chssroom

In recent years, researchers have sought to examine this assumption morecritically.

Study 26: French immersionprograrnrnes in CanadaResearch in Canadian French immersion programmes is often cited insupport of the'Get rwo for one' proposal. Most immersion programmes areoffered in primary and secondary schools, but some universities also offercontent-based instruction that expands opportunities for students to use

their second language in cognitively challenging and informative courses.tü/hat have the studies shown?

In terms of populariry and longeviry French immersion has been a grearsuccess. Thousands of English-speaking Canadian families have chosen thisoption since its first implementation in the 1960s (Lambert and Tucker1972), both in areas where French is spoken in the wider communiry and inthose where French is rarely heard outside the classroom. Numerous studieshave shown that French immersion students develop fluenc¡ high levels oflistening comprehension, and confidence in using their second language.They also maintain a level of success in their academic subjects that is com-parable to that of their peers whose education has been in English (Genesee

1987). Over the years, however, educators and researchers began ro expressconcern about students' failure to achieve high levels ofperformance in someaspects of French grammar, even after several years of full-day exposure to thesecond language in these programmes.

Some researchers argue that the difficulry French immersion learners experi-ence in their L2 production shows that comprehensible input is not enough(Harley and Swain l9B4). They claim that the learners engage in too littlelanguage production because the classes are largely teacher-centred. Studentsare observed to speak relatively little and rarely required to give extendedanswers. This permits them to operate successfully with their incompleteknowledge of the language because they are rarely pushed to be more preciseor more accurate. tü/hen students do speak, communication is usually sat-

isfactory in spite of numerous errors in their speech because the learners'interlanguages are infuenced by the same first language, the same learningenvironment, and the same limited contact with the target language outsidethe classroom. Teachers also tend to understand students' interlanguage, so

there is rarely aneed to negotiate for meaning. Such successful communica-tion makes it difficult for an individual learner to work out how his or her use

ofthe language differs from the target language.

Another explanation for students' lack of progress on certain language fea-tures is their rarity in French immersion instruction. For example, MerrillSwain (1988) observed that even history lessons, where past tense verbsmight be expected to occur, were often delivered in the 'historical present'(for example, 'The ships go down to the Caribbean; they pick up sugar and

stxel eql pEeJ ol aruoo stuapnts euJrl aql lq ter{t os rq8ner-ard l¡¡enuassa are

laqr 'parelsueJl tou eJp slxel aqr, elrq,tr'regt pa,uasgo uosugof 'uorsuaqard-uor rrer{l tsrsst ol asaurr{J ur stJeql pue satou f.reruaua¡ddns qlr,l.r. stuapntspeprr\ord pue (serJpuonf,rp

lEn8urllg Jo asn arp pa8eJno3ua 'JEruruErS aqr

pegllduls 'peo¡ ,{.re1nqe)o^ eqt parnpeJ 13 rT 'stxet puaqarduof, stuapn}sd¡ag or sar8ale.ns 3o lrarrr,r e palo¡dua s.raqf,Eat 'srgt roj aresuaduoo o¿'gsll8uE ur sllDls lcerarrl fue tnoqrr.u looqrs lrepuo:as jo ,reaf rsrg er{r oreruef, sluepnrs lue14¡ 'slez'r ¡etululru ur lluo qsrlSug ur rarpo r{f,Ea qtr^\ puereqf,Eot eqt qtr^\ pelrtrelur sluepnls reqt pue sraqf,EelJo qraads eqt ur pereu-ruoperd xrry puc JSaurqC ter{r pal"J^eJ serpnls uJooJSSEIf IEuonE^JasqO

'(asaurg3 pur qsl¡8uEjo uorreurquor e)

(xrry, pue 'eseurr{J 'qslSuE jo palsrsuof, leqt >llet Jer{feel se,/\l. uJar{rJo auo'seruue¡8o¡d uors¡au¡rul qsrpug aseqt ur ssa¡8o¡d cnsrn8url arenbape aleruol sreureel Jo lllrgrur eqr ot petngrrtuor sJnor^Er{eg crSo8epad lera^as teqlpan8re a¡1 lcuarcgord qsrpuE u,,'to Jrer{t ur suonelruIllJo asneleq tueluooagt Surra,rrlap lla,rrrrage ur sauprll¡p (sreqreet pa^rasgo osle eH d¡nyssac

-f,ns runln3u.rnr ¡a,ra¡,fiePuof,as aqr ^\olloJ

01 PePeeu fruarcyo.rd gsr¡8ug aqr

pe>ptl sluepnts ter{t patou eH 'seuur€r8ord qcns roJ spuptuep aqt taeru oluarsls Fuonernpe agrSo lrr¡q¿ ar{r rnoqe sureruor pasrer (¿661) uosuqofqrra¡ 's¡ooqcs frepuoras 8uo¡ 3uo¡1 ur sesselr uorsreururr qsr¡3ug arrlur sJnorlerleq Sulu.ree¡ pue Surgoeal uo r{fJ¿asal er{t Jo atuos Sulr'terlal uI

'usr¡en8urlrq qsrlSuE

-eseurr{J Jo 1a,o1 g8¡q e Sululrtureu jo po8 s lueururelo8 SuqE 3uo¡1 et¡r

rllr^\ luJlsrsuor Suraq se uaas osle eJa,,'r laql 'lrrunuruoo I¿uorlEuJatur eqlul l¡eclruapele pue l¡euorssa3ord paacrns ol ueJpl¡{f, rrarp patur,l.r or{,l.r

slua¡ed asaurr{J qrrr'r re¡ndod a¡artl. saruue¡8o¡d uorsJeuruJl qsr¡8ug are¡

asaql '(91-¿ saperS) Iooqrs l.repuocas re qsr¡8ug ur pue (9-1 saperS)

Iooqrs .&eul¡d ur aseuolue3 ur perpnrs stuepnrs 3o lruofeur aqr qlrqr'r ur

auo or asauotue3 ur ro gsr¡8uE ur lla,rtsn¡cxe JeIpIe palpnts sluapnrs qllq¡aur euo ruo5 peloru 8uo¡ 3uo¡1 ul ruatsfs puonernpe eqt s096I aqr uI

Suoy 3uo17 ut ssa"qs n?un uorsrautu? awT :/e t?us

'(lesodo.rd ,pue aql ur rq8lr tl ta3, aqr aas) sarnlraJ

a8en8ue¡ re¡nrnred uo uonf,nJlsu pasn)oJ-ruroJ ruorj rgaueq plp srau#el

'serpn¡s ¡etuarulradxa euros u1 'a8enSue¡ ar{lJo seJnlea3 :rreru8e.rd Sulpn¡cur

'ruro; aBenBuEI uo pesnroJ terp uononrrsur lg patuaua¡druor eg ol papeauuonf,nJtsur Jeuerrr rralqns reqr parsaSSns se,l\ rr 'l¡8utsea.rru1 'a8e arues agr josraleads alrleu Suoru¿ uonfeJaturJo prldÁ Jq plno,/v\ reqr sa¡lrs gceads agr

ol ssaof,E eAEr{ tou plp a8en8uel aqr ol a¡nsodxa ruooJsstlf, l¡uo rplm sJaurcal

reqr parou (566ü ul" \S IIuraW puE euorel euIEI[ d¡erurdordde tI asn touplp sluepnrs (uononJlsur uorsJauul Jo s¡eaf JaUE ua^a teqr sasself ut ,(1art.t

os pesn se,&\ pnpr^rpur uE ssaJppt l¡arr¡od or snoa unouo¡d uos¡ad puores aql

Jo asn aql reqt punoJ Oeeü rars/1fo¿ '(,"' pue¡8ug or >prq rr aler laqr

ruoo¿sspp at¡t ut Sututaal a&an&ury puocag 8.Lt

t74 Second knguage learning in the chssroom

for themselves the more able students at least are sufficiently familiar withthe content to be able to deal with them' (p.177).Although these strategieshelped students understand the content, they may not have helped themlearn to use the syntactic and discourse structures in the second language toestablish form-meaning relationships. Therefore it is not surprising that thestandards of reading in English at age 15 were reported to be significantlylower than those for Chinese. At the same time, however, the educationaloutcomes for Hong Kong students in content subjects continued to be high,comparable to, and in some areas superior to, achievements in other devel-oped countries. In addition, the levels of Chinese Ll reading proficiencyremained high.

In spite of professional development efforts to help teachers achieve the dualgoals of language and content instruction, Philip Hoare and Stella Kong(2008) find that many teachers in the Hong Kong immersion programmescontinue to have difficulty implementing immersion pedagogy. They attrib-ute this in part to the pressure teachers feel in a society where performanceon examinations is paramount. To ensure that their students do well on thecontent exams, teachers often feel that they must teach in Chinese or in a

simplified English that does not give students access to the language that is

appropriate for highJevel academic work.

Study 28: Dual immersionIn recent years, legislation has limited the availabiliry of bilingual educationfor most minoriry language students in the United States. In most states,

English language learners' education must take place entirely in English, orwith only minimal support for learning through their first language. As wesaw in Chapter 1, the result ofthis approach is often subtractive bilingualism.Children gradually lose their first language or fail to develop it for academicpurposes. In addition, they often fall behind in their academic work because

they do not yet have the English language skills needed for dealing with thegradeJevel subject matter.

Some jurisdictions allow 'dual immersion' as an exception to the strictenforcement of instruction through English only. In dual immersion, minor-iry language students learn English in classrooms where English-speakingchildren also learn the minority language students' home language. Patsy

Lightbown (2007) observed classroom interaction and learning outcomesin a school where an equal number of native English- and native Spanish-speaking students shared the classrooms. Starting in kindergarten, half theirinstruction was delivered in English by an English native speaker and half inSpanish by a native speaker of that language. Teachers coordinated closelyto ensure that the subject matter instruction in the two languages was com-plementary rather than redundant. Students' performat.. ot a variety ofmeasures administered through Grade 3 showed that the programme was

9Lt

>lJo1!\ ot Peq Jar{lEer aqr rErfl tuaPne sE,/r\ 1I (uossal salPnrs FI)os ¿ tuoS ErEP

uone^rasqo eqr q 'qruaJC uanrr^\ arnpord ol pue puersrapun or ÁIIqe<stuepnts pJssasse pue 'sleuetBru leuonfnJtsul pasfpue 'salll^Ilf,e leuoll-3nJlsur pe^rasqo lar¡r 'sse¡c ¡azra¡-lrepuof,as r{JuaJ{ euo Jo fpnts asec e u1

'a8en8ue¡ puof,as Jlaqr uI uollf,nJlsul Jeneur rralgns qrrrvr Surdorli¡ncglp auos peq slurpnls ¡p l¡rea¡ 'gsrpug ro I{ruaJC 'sa8en8ue¡ I?IrSos€PBueJJo euo ur selv\ uorl?f,nPa Jleql 'eJnllnf llnul uI suossal IEuoISEffo JoJ

ldecxa 'uer¡'(¿-g pa?e) 7 operD ot uaue8rapuDl lrlo5 'tntttlnul 'a8en8urllsrg rrar{r ur peref,npe uaaq peq uarpllqr eql 'uarpllqr llnul qrr,l a8en8ue¡

pue srralgns ¡ooqrs3o Sururea¡ pue Sulqf,Ear aqr pe^rasgo (ZOOO umoqrq8rllsrr¿ pue eped5 eurN 'EpEuE3 'raqen| ul &lunu¡ruor ¡eut8l.roge uE uI

satautp.¿to¿dpasvq-rualuor ut ua¿n?qr qnu¡ :67 fpwg

'(1'd) ,g¡ agr ur

rusrrcn8ur¡lq Jo snlels a,rn¿8au aql er¿f,IpBJJ ol leltualod agr seq, qceorddesrqr reql srsaSSns aqs 'sluepnrs a8en8ut¡ lrlrounu qr¡m Suturea¡ aSen8uel

puofesJo sluerue ell{f,e pue sa8ualltql aql arer¡s fagr aJaq.lrr'sau¡u¡e¡8o¡d

uorsraruurr pnp ul sluepnrs e8rn8ue¡ lrl¡ofuru er{r roJ srgeuag PunoJ osle

(1OOZ) ,ftra1-ur¡oqpurl ull¡re¡ 'a8en8uel auoq rraqr g8norqr Suru.rea¡

anunuof ot salllunlJoddo ua>1or l¡uo arrrarar faqr aragrtr saurue;8ord pn8-ur¡q .lrxa f¡rra, .ro f¡uo qsl¡8ug uI esoql roJ uer{r sa8en8ue¡ aruol{ (stuaPnlsaqt rroddns ler{r seuue¡8o¡d ul sluaPnts a8rnSue¡ Áuoulru ro¡ 'a8pa¡rrroulrJll?ur nalqns pue Sulurea¡ a8rn8uey qsr¡8ug qtoq uI 'satuof,lno raueq slurg

-uof, qf,reaser egl '(9002 'F ta aaseuaD :8002 uEL{Euer{S PuE lsn8ny) sarer5

perrun eqr ul sraurtal a8en8uel qsr¡8uE Sulrecnpa or sarpeordde tuoraglPJoJ af,ueplla aqr peullurxe eAEL{ s,!\el^eJ r{sJtasal IEJeAas 's.real luaoal u1

'(1OOZ 'lE re prel(oH) sanr¡rge a8en8ue¡ Puores PImq ol qrll{1'r uo

uorrepuno3 Suorls ? sl a8tn8uey auoq s p¡n{) ¿3o ruarudolaleP Penulruof, ar{l

regr a¡dlrul.rd agr uo pesrq are ¡e fagr rnq 'padola,raP uaaq e Eq uolsraurrul

IEnp Jo slaporu rueragrp Jo requnu e '.paepul 'a8en8uq lr¡rouru aql tuo5stuapnls Jo Jaqwnu pnuetsgns e a Eq or a¡qrssod tou $ ll oJaq \ s8ulllas ulpe.r.ra3a.rd sl qcrordde srgl 'a8en8u¿l Puooas rlal{r ul uoltrnrtsul l¡rea rraql

¡e llreau a raf,eJ sruepnls Suqeads-qsr¡8ug aqr JJaI{^\ 'sI l¿ql 'saruu¡e¡8o¡duorsJeurrur r{rueJC uEIpEueJ erp salquaseJ rEI{t a8en8ue¡ Ál¡outru eqr uo

srseqdrua ^l1tea ue qll^\ sarultaruos lnq 'qsr¡8uE jo Sururea¡ pur Sulqoear aql

or paro^ap eurrl aJoru tlll^\ ueuo 'f¡ruaraglp ParngIJlsIP aJE aurllJo lunouJeer{l pue sruepnls Jo Jequnu ar¡l 'satutue¡8o¡d uols;arurul FnP Jotllo uI

'a8enSue¡ eruol{ rlaqt ro3 uoddns apl¡,ftar'st,,'t aJar{t erer{z'r sassel3 pn8ul¡19 IBuoItISuErl ur .ro l¡uo qslpug ul Jarllle sE^{

uorlf,nJlsur osoq./v\ stuaPnrs ol algslls E lou eJe.&\ reqr sle-,'r ur sllDls a8en8uel

gsruedg rraqr do¡a,rap ol panulluof osle stuaPnls tegr rlEJ eql sernraru¿l¡odrur

re¡ncnrrd 39 'Sulpear ur sse¡8o¡d plder f¡¡e¡radsa aperu sluaPnls Surleads

-qsruedg pue 'sl1r¡s aStn8uel qst8ug 1o ruarudo¡a^eP rleql ro; IEIf,Seueg

LuootssplJ aqt ur Surutual a&unSuq puotag

176 Second language learning in tlte classroom

very hard to help students understand a text on beluga whales. He did thisin many ways-by paraphrasing, repeating, simplifying, checking for com-prehension, gestures, etc. Despite his efforts it was clear that most studentsunderstood very little of the text. In their French language classes, these samestudents also lacked the terminology they needed to talk about grammaticalgender in relation to adjective agreemenr.

lVhen the students' performance on a wide range of measures was examinedto assess their knowledge of French (for example, vocabulary recognition,reading comprehension, writing), it was evident that the students áid rrothave the French language skills they needed ro cope with the demands oftypical secondary-level instruction. Furthermore, even though many of thestudents were able to speak French informally outside class, their oral abili-ties were limited when they had to discuss more complex academic subjectmatter. As we saw in Chapter 1, teachers are sometimes misled by students'ability to use the language in informal settings, concluding that their aca-demic difficulties could not be due to language problems.

The students' lack of age-appropriate academic French is a serious problem.Solving it will involve complex educational, social, and cultural questions.One pedagogical element that might contribute to a solution is a betterbalance between language and subject matter instruction, focusing on thelanguage that the students need to succeed in school. Another possibiliry isthat further development of the learners' Ll literacy would better preparethem for second language and subject matter learning. There is another goodreason to support students' development of Inuktitut. There are increasingconcerns that Inuktitut will be lost as future generations shift to English orFrench as their preferred language. An educational system that encouragesthe development of both first and second languages may ensure the survivalof this heritage language (Thylor, Caron, and McAlpine 2000).

Interpreting the research

Content-based language teaching has many advantages. In general, itincreases the amount of time for learners to be exposed to the new language.It creates a genuine need to communicate, motivating students to acquirelanguage in order to undersrand the content. For older students, there is theadvantage of contenr that is cognitively challenging and interesting in a waythat is often missing in foreign language insrruction, especiallywhere lessonsare designed around particular grammatical forms.

Nevertheless, there are also some problems with content-based instruction.Our research with Inuit children adds further evidence to Jim Cummins'(1984) claim that students need 5-7 years before their abiliry to use rhelanguage for cognitively challenging academic material has reached an age-appropriate level. For students from disadvantaged minority groups, this

'apntrtde a8en8url 'lrrruaplSo esuas (srauJeel eql 'uorle^Irour sE r{fns slolre3uo puadap or s¡eadde soJnt¿g IpuorlEIJ¿A esar{rJo uonrslnble (sJeuJ?J'I 'eurrl.Kue rc rq8ner aq uer-sruau lre¡ngeoo^ Fnpr^lpur 'a¡duexa ro3-a8en8ue¡jo snadsr Jar{lo urelJaf rrr{r urEIf, osle ,,r.rar^ srqr Sulr¡oddns sJar.lf,Jease¿

:eaq,(aqr gcaadsjo ureeJls Jr{t uI stuaruela JagrueruaJ

pue af,rlou or lrrlrge Surdo¡a,lap (sJeuJeel uo ued ul rseel r¿ peseg aq lerulagr regr srsaSSns (7 raldeq3 aas) l-roeqr lrr¡rqessarord rng 'paurc¡dxa f¡n3ueJg lou seg sa8ers ar{lJo esner Surl¡;apun aq1 'sruarsfs a8en8ue¡rarur rraqlorur parer8arur í11ry lou a.re larp asnecag JatEI urerfl esn ol eseef, tnq 'sself, uIuaqr rg8nel uaag e,reg larp JaUE saJntonJts uIElJaf, arnpord leru sruapnrs

',8uruul8aq aqr ruo5 rq8rr u laD, uI 1v\ES eÁ\ sy '7 a8erg te sI teql( a.rrnb¡e

or fpear are laqr eroJeg E a8rrg or ra8 pue ¿ a8erg g8norqr ssed ol a Er{ sre

-ureal esnef,eq 1ro.,'r rou ¡l,tr 1 a8rrg rE sraureel ot u¡aued repJo-pJo \ 7 a8erg

B r{Jeal ol lduaue lue (9961) uutrueueld or Surproccy 'I{rr€asJr slr{r uo

paseg ere ¿ rardeq3 ur ,l\ES e.t.r' reql suonsanb qsr¡8ug3o sa8ers ¡eruaudo¡a,r.apaql 'sernlseJ ¡eruarudo¡a,raP PelleqEl arE aseql 'rped pluarudo¡a,rap a¡qe

-rcrpa.rd e Suop dola.tap (xa1du-ror pue a¡durs qrog) saeuaruas uI rapro pro.4

crseq 'eldurexa ro3 'sarntlnns rlrs¡n8ull atuos teql eJuePIAa sap¡,rord qJJeesaJ

Jraql 'peJrnbreun urpural ot uleas 'Sulgreat a lsualul Jo allsuatxa JeUe uele

's8urgr Jeqlo seeJer{.{\l¡ryssacrns rq8ner aq ueo s8uryr eruos teql suaas uauorr lq,,'r uleldxa ol perrr a.r,eq san8eallor slq pue (886I) uuBuraueld peuuew

alquqr?4 s? wqm qrpal I

a'en'ue¡ pue sanlrralqo lueluof I{roq e^EI{ reqr suosselrt ,*"r^,t':;"'11:,/v\or{s leqr saruu¡r¡80¡d uowf,nPa Jer{f,Eal pado¡a,rap PuE tlf,JEeseJ euoP a^Er{

OOO) uor{S r{Eroqaq pue 'r3o¡ ua¡g l.re¡4J 'errrenaqrE euef'a¡druexa;o¿'Surqcear a8en8ue¡ ¡rrs sr Surgrear a8en8ue¡ peseg-luaruor rer{r llef,ar ol peeu

aqt pas$Jls e eq uollfnJrsul pe$g-tuetuof, 3o stuauodo¡d 's¡Bal tuJf,er uI

'rcrpard rq8rur aSen8ue¡ agr ur But¡ooqos jo sreal rlal{r teqlÁtetntte:nsrn8uq3o s¡arra¡ g3¡g er{rJo uoqs II¿J ueuo.{agr 'aBenBuEI Puoresaql ur óuang eruos qtl./ü ar?Jrunruuror 01 elge aJE uollf,nJtsul a8en8url paseq

-tueluof, ur sluepnls q8nogt¡e 'tanaltoll 'a8en8uel teql uI lualuoJ Jetleur

rcafgns Sururee¡ enurluoo or pue aSen8ue¡ etuor{ al{rJo tuaudo¡a,LaP enult-uol ol dno¡8 a8en8uel I{fEa tuo5 stuepnls.{\oll¿ sauue¡8o¡d uolsJaulurl

¡enp 'f1re¡lrurs 'sraere3 Jrluápef," Jreqt Jo esJnof, IInJ eql ¡a,ro a8en8uel lsJg

.uagr g8norqr uon3nJlsul Jatteur rcafgns Jo tunorur leltuetsqns e aAIeJeJ

laqr reqr filuomatou osle sI tl pu" '¡eueu¡ rcalqns Sutu;ea1 uI IIe^,\ oP or

ruees-8uo;q 3uo¡1 ur pu¿ epEuEJ ul-seuruJe¡8o¡d uots¡eururl uI stuePnls

a8en8ue¡ lrlrolelnq '1 rardeq3 ur tustpn8ulllq a^prertqns Jo uolssnlsrP eqr

ur 1y\Bs e^\ sE 'stfaJe Surrse¡ aABI{ uef, 8ur¡ooqcs qrrrrr sduS ol Sulruor ur fe¡ap

uootstplr ao¡t ut &urutaa1 aSan&ual puotag LLI

178 Second knguage learning in the classroom

and the qualiry of instruction, including how learners' identities and culturesare acknowledged in the classroom.

In Example 6 below, we see a teacher trying to help students with the wordorder of questions. The students seem to know what the teacher means, butthe level oflanguage the teacher is offering them is beyond their current stageof development. Students are asking Stage 3 questions, which the teacherrecasts as Stage 5 questions. The students reacr by simply answering the ques-tion or accepting the teacher's formulation.

Exarnple 6Students in an intensive ESL class (1l-I2-year-old French speakers) inter-viewing a student who had been in the same class in a previous year (see

Classroom B in Chapter 5).

s1 Myléne, where you put your'Kid of the \Weeli poster?r tVhere did you put your poster when you gor it?s2 In my room.

(Two minutes later)

s3 Beatrice, where you put your 'Kid of the \7eeli poster?r \[here did you put your poster?s4 My poster was on my wall and it fell down.

In Example 7 , the student is using the 'fronting' strategy that is rypical ofStage 3 questions. The teacher's corrective feedback leads the student toimitate a Stage 4 question.

Exampb 7(The same group of students engaged in'Famous person'interviews.)

sr Isyourmotherplaypiano?T 'Is your mother play piano?' OK.'Well, can you say'Is your mother

play piano?' or'Is your mother a piano player?'s r 'Is your mother a piano player?'sz No.

In Example 8, the teacher draws the studentt attention to the error and also

provides the correct Stage 4 question. This time, however, the feedback is notfollowed by an imitation or a reformulation of the question, but simply byan answer.

'uJeal 01 lpea.r f¡eruaudola,r.ap lou are lagr reqrrl. rg8nrr ag louueo sreurcJl'seJntJnJls rnsrn8ul¡ auros JoJ rrgt s¡saqrodlg agr roj rroddns sE sllnsJJ srrl

sla.rd¡alur uueueuerd 'acuanbas ptuarudola,rap aqr ur a8els e ,dr¡s, ol alqtrou ara,Ll lagl 'sl teql 'g a8etg orur l¡uo pe oru ro selnr ¿ a8erg esn ol panurl-uof, JeqlrJ salnJ 7 a8erg uo uonf,nJlsur pa^reoal oq,,rt sJauJeal asoqr ,ra,tarrto¡1

'¿ a8etg ruorS a8ers srqt olur l¡sra pa,roru salnJ g a8erg uo uonrnJlsurpelrafeJ orÍv\ sJeuJral eql 'suonf,nJlsuof, fz pua E a8rr5 JoJ sesrrJexa puesep.r Ief,nerurue;8 troqdxa qu^\ pap¡,rord aJa.&\ sJJuJEal arurr srqt Surrnp pur$laa \ o \t re^o aoe¡d >1oor uorlrnJrsur ag¡ dla,urcadse.r 7 aSerg pur E a8ergI{tr^\ pater3osse selnJ arp rqSner aJe.&\ rapJo pJo e uEruJeS 3o uolusmbceJIOI{I ur ¿ a8erg tE eJe l. oq^\ uEruJeD Jo sluapnrs Áls¡a,rrun urrleJrsnv Josdno¡8 or'r¡'ruarudola^ap3o acuanbas IEJnlEu aqr ur aSers e ,dn¡s, ol sJauJeal

pannurad uonf,nrlsur reqtaq \ pare8nsarlur (886I) uueureuard pa5uel Iu"t?q q [poa¿ :gE [pntg

'srsaqrodlq sryl parsat a Er{ ler{r sarpnts aruos aunuexe sn lel 'txau

auror f¡¡e.rnreu plno \ terl \ rlreer pue la^el ¡eruaudo¡a,rap (sraureal eql ssesse

ol sr uon¿pueruuroJeJ er{I 'esJnof, ¡eruaudolanap ,leJnleu, aqr a8uegc louue3uollrnJlsur 'sasrflaxa ¡ecrSo8epad panlrlsar Áea ur Jo slsat uo suuo3 pef,ue peeJou af,npord or alqt aq leru uaureal q8noqt[E 'aJourJar{trn{ 'eppaq]s Furelur(sJeuftel aql ot Surprocrr rq8ner lsaq aJE seJnleal ¡eruaudola,rap 'ruaudo¡a,rap

(sJauJeel aqr ur slulod snorre tr f¡nSssaccns tg8ner eg uEf, a8en8ue¡ arp JosaJnleej PuorlerJe^ elrqd\ lEql srseSSns ,{\er^ ,algErlf,sal sr leq^\ r{3EaJ, aql

s8ulpug rlf,ruasa¡

¿>lsep rar{rrel eql aprseq foq eqr s1 s

¿>lsap sraqf,eal eqt aprsag loq aqr s1 J¿>lsap reqreer eqr rprsag sl loq aqr oq s

(aue8 ¡eas pue aplH,)g aqduuxg

'lln3SIP lra,t pug sraleadsr{3uary reqr Surgrauos 's, a^rssessod aqr el¿lrurr lou saop ruepnrs eqr reqrtela,l\oq'aloN 'suonsanb 7 a8er5 Sulcnpo;d ulSaq or lprar tsorule sr luapnlsaql terp srseSSns uonf,BJatur aql'satetnul ruapnrs aqt teqr uouraJJof, 7 a8rrge sapnord reqf,Eal aql pue 'uonsanb E a8er5 E $lse ruepnts ar{r 6 alduexE uJ

)or '¡a,ra1-rr¡ds y r s

,¿1e,ra1-rr1ds E asnoq alrJno^EJ rnol s1, 'JEep salun o^\t ,sl, Sulles rr,:on I

¿¡a,ra1-r¡ds E sr asnoq alrrno eJ r"Jt+ ::(sacuarajard asnoq tnoqe Jagto l{f,¿e Suvrrarrrrarul)

g aTduoxE

ruoorsspp aql ut Sututaal a8an&ual puotag 6LT

180 Second knguage learning in the ckssroom

Study 31: Readies, unreadies, and recasts

Alison Mackey and Jenefer Philp (1998) investigated whether adult ESL

learners who were at different stages in their acquisition of questions couldadvance in their production of these forms if they received implicit nega-

tive feedback (i.e. recasts) in conversational interaction. fu described inChapter 5, recasts are paraphrases of a learner's incorrect utterance thatinvolve replacing one or more of the incorrect components with a correct

form while maintaining a focus on meaning. The researchers were interested

in discoveringwhether adult learners who received modified interaction withrecasts were able to advance in their production ofquestion forms more than

learners who received modified interaction without recasts. Furthermore,they wanted to explore whether learners who were at more advanced stages

of question development ('readies') would benefit more from interactionwith recasts than learners at less advanced stages of question development('unreadies'). The results revealed that the'readies' in the interaction plus

recasts group improved more than the 'readies' in the interaction withoutrecasts group. However, the 'unreadies'who were exposed to recasts did notshow more rapid improvement than those who were not exposed to recasts.

Study 32: Deuelopmental stage andfirst l"anguage influenceNina Spada and Patsy Lightbown (1999) have also investigated the acqui-

sition of questions in relation to learners' developmental 'readiness'.

French-speaking students (aged ll_12) in intensive ESL classes received

high-frequency exposure to question forms that were one or two stages

beyond their developmental level. Learners who were judged on oral pre-

tests to be at Stage 2 or 3 were given high frequency exposure to Stage 4 and

5 questions in the instructional input.

The materials that contained the more advanced question forms were

designed ro engage the learners mainly in comprehension practice. There was

no student production and thus no corrective feedback, nor was there any

explicit instruction on question formation. The researchers wanted to know

whether Stage 3 learners (i.e. those considered to be developmentally'ready')would benefit more from the high-frequency exposure to Stage 4 and 5 ques-

tions than the Stage 2 learners, who were not yet developmentally'ready'.

Learners'performance on an oral post-test measure indicated no advantage for

the Stage 3 learners. In fact, there was little progress for either group. However,

on a task that required learners to judge the grammaticaliry of written ques-

tions there was evidence that all students had some knowledge of Stage 4 and

5 questions. A more detailed examination of the learners' performance on this

task showed that students tended to accept Stage 4 and 5 questions when the

subject ofthe sentence was a pronoun (for example, 'Are you a good student?' or''When are you going to eat breakfast?'). \W4ren the subject of the sentence was

a noun, however, there was a tendenry for students to reject higher stage ques-

tions (for example, Are the students watching TV?' or 'V/hat is your brother

' (ySSt uolllruEH :886I uoslaN pue'¡ag'uErU>Irg :8002umoqrq8ll pue reuury) rq8ner a.rar'r lagr la^al aqt puolaq sesnelf, rllt€laresn ol ,/vror{ uJeel ua,ra lagr seouetsur auos uI .Lrau1 fprarp laql (s)auo agr

pue rq8ner euo aqr uaa^\taq (s)uorrrsod asnell elnelar arp arrnbce os¡e larp'tq8net sr l€q.lvr ureal lluo rou faqr 'le^al tuaJJnJ .rreqt puolaq sa8rrs ¡era,LasaJ€ tpr{l sasnElf a,urrlar rq8nrt are (uorrrsod rralqns ur lluo sosnelf eArtEIeJ Jsn

or{./v\ asoqt 'aldruexa ro3) s;au.rea¡ la^el-aol uar{^\ rEr{r rsaSSns serpnts asaql

Jo stpsed 'sesnelf, e^neleJJo uorlrsrnbce Jrerp ur ssa.lSo¡d (sJeuJeel a8en8ue¡

puof,es egrrosep or (¿ raldeq3 aas) lgcre.rarq lrr¡rgrssecrr eqr pasn e Erl terpserpnts Iera^es sepnlrur srql 'ueu llpruaurdo¡elep sr teq^\ qrear ot ler3ge-ueg sr rl ]er{t rurclf, eqr ot af,uapr^a-Jetunof JaJo ot s¡eadde r{JJ"esJJ aruos

'uolllnJlsul Pesnf,oJ Pe Iaf,aJ oq-/'r sJeuJEa¡ se a8uegr ptuarudola,rapr{fntu sE ^&\oqs tou plp lagr <pua eqr ur 'puB ',uor}lnJtsur, ou tng ,a;nsodxa,pasraJJur pe raf,er laqr 'snq1 'lndur Jqr ur suollsanb a8ers-rer¡8rg pauroJlpca;ror 3o lcuanbarS ,{3lq

" or pasodxa f¡duls aJa./\^. sJeuJ¿a1 'suortsanb

uo uortfnJtsul IcrTdxa ou s8,4 . ararp lpnrs ter{l ur 'aJoruJar{tJnC 'seuo3tnoSururea¡ ot Surtnqr;tuof ur ssaurpear ¡eruaudola€p qlv( rl¿¡arul leu a8en8

-uEI rsJg (sJauJeel eql zvroq srvroqs lPnls u^\ogrq3r1 pue eped5 eg1 'ruerrodurosp sr lndur ¡euonf,EJetur/FuollonJtsurJo adlr aqt rerp srsaSSns (serpeaJun,er{r uEr{r slsef,eJ tuou aJolu Pargeuaq (serPEeJ, arp lBrit rf,EJ er{I 'sseJf,ns Jororrrpard l¡uo erp lou sr sseurpear pruaudole^ep ttrp IBe er rnq srsaqrodfglrr¡rqer¡rear ar{l ro3 r¡oddns eruos ra5o os¡e fpnrs d¡q¿ pur la>lceyaq aqt Josrlnsal er{I'tou pp fpear, tou aJa \ oq.u sJeuJeal seeJeq,t\'ruarudo¡a,rap3oa8els lxau eqt otur pe^oru ,lptar, JJa^\ or{,^ sJeuJeal reqr pa^\oqs slpsal aql',lprarun, pue lpear, qrog aJe.&\ oq-/rr. sJauJral o] uollrnJlsut ltct¡dxa tsoruaqr papv'o.rd uuBr.uauar¿ 'serPnls aeJrp eqr sso¡re lndur IEuorlf,EJelur/lBuorl-)nJlsurjo sadlr aqt arrduror am;1 'sle,Lrxa¡duo3 ur sseulpear pruaurdola,rap

(sJauJ¿el qlr^\ tf,?Jalur u?J eluengur a8en8ur¡ tsJg pue rnduljo adlr se gonssrotre; raqto ta^a/$.oH 'lerl5Juag eq uer eSen8ue¡ puo?es aqr ur Jar{unJssa¡8o¡d or lpea.r l¡eruaudolalep eJE laqr uagr'l sJaureal or rndul ¡ruon-f,EJatur Jo leuonf,nJrsur 8una8¡er reqr rsaSSns serpnls esaql Jo stFSaJ ar{I

qrrDesar aqt Sunardralul

'suoltsanb IIE ol uorsre^ur3o a8pelmoulJrer{l azrpJeua8 or lrr¡rqeul (sJeuJeal ar{r JoJ a¡q¡suodsa-r ag or sueas afuengula8en8ue¡ rsrg lpnrs srql uI 'srolreJ raqro lq palra5e aq ¡rrs feru acueuro3radJrerp tnq 'sa8els paf,ue pe eJouJ otul ruol{l e^ou leru .ssaurpeeJ, Irtueur-dolarrap (sJeuJ¿JI r{Jteru ol parun uonf,nJtsur rer{r alef,rpul srln$J aseql

'(,¿asnoq ftu ol auro3 aI{ uEJ, = ¿rou zaqJ

¿xuaa f-lna¿'aldruexa .ro3) parlur.rad sl uors¡a,rul 'JaAe \oq 'ncafgns unouo¡drprlv\ suorlsanb gcua.rg u1 '(,¿asnoq lru or eruos ugof ur3, = ¿xou zzqJ fiuaa uaaf-lna¿*'a1durcxa ro3) peuelur tou aJ? uollsod nalgns uI sunou qurrr suonsanb

'r{f,uaJC ur 'sr lEr{I '¿ .rardeq3 ur,/$ES e1'r leql a8en8ue¡ rs.rg JIeI{r uI alnJ uonsanbE ot petelar ag or sreadde arueurro3rad (stuapnts aqr uI urened q{L '(,¿8ulop

utoo$tap aql ut Sututual a8an&ual puocag IBI

t82 Second language barning in the classroom

At first glance, this research seems to contradict Pienemannt claim thatlearners should be taught what is 'next'. However, it is also possible thatthe developmental paths of different linguistic features are based on differ-ent sorts of processing abilities. For example, Catherine Doughty (1991)

suggested that once learners have learned to use relative clauses in one posi-tion (usually the subject position), there is no constraint on their abiliry tolearn the others. \X/hat all the studies of relative clause teaching and learninghave in common is that learners acquire the relative clauses in an order verysimilar to the accessibility hierarchy. That is, whether or not they learn whatis taught, they make progress by learning subject, then direct object, thenindirect object, and so on.

The 'Teach what is teachable' position is of great potential interest to syl-

labus planners as well as teachers. However, it must be emphasized that adescription of a learnert developmental path is not in itself a template for a

syllabus. There are numerous practical reasons for this, not least the fact thatonly a small number of language features have been described in terms of adevelopmental sequence. \,X/hile Pienemannt work on processabiliry theory(see Chapter 4) provides insights into the principles that may make some

features more difficult than others, those principles are not easily translatedinto instructional sequences.

As Patsy Lightbown (1993) has suggested, the 'Teach what is teachable'

research is important primarily for helping teachers understand why stu-

dents dont always learn what they are taught-at least not immediately.

The research also shows that instruction on language that is 'too advanced'

may still be helpful by providing learners with samples of language that theywill be able to incorporate into their interlanguage when the time is right.However, many other factors need to be taken into consideration in choosing

language features to focus on. \We will return to this point after we discuss the

final proposal for language teaching, 'Get it right in the end.'

6 Get it right in the endProponents of the'Get it right in the end'proposal recognize an importantrole for form-focused instruction, but they do not assume that everythinghas to be taught. Like advocates of the'Lett talk', 'Two for one', and the'Justlisten ... and read' positions, they have concluded that many language fea.

tures-from pronunciation to vocabulary and grammar-will be acquired

naturally iflearners have adequate exposure to the language and a motivationto learn. Thus, while they view comprehension-based, content-based, task-

based, or other types of essentially meaning-focused instruction as crucialfor language learning, they hypothesize that learners will do better if theyalso have access to some form-focused instruction. They argue that learners

will benefit in terms of both efficiency of their learning and the level of pro-ficienry they will eventually reach.

srql ur To,,vr orl^\ sreqf,Eel ',lo¡aq sa¡duexa aqt ur aes III^\ a,&\ sV raleadsruangord eJou EJo rer{r uroU sJeJIp asn e8en8u¿l Jrerp./y\or{ af,¡ou ol paausraureal eqr reqr f¡durs rule¡e lar¡1 '8uo¡rtr ¡o rg8rr sl Surqraruos fgm ulrldxe01 elqe aq or parcadxa sJeuJeel eJ? Jou 'suoneue¡dxa cnsn8ur¡etaru e^lolursltrrr¡e tou seop uorlrsod sn{l ul poolsJepun sr lr se uonf,nJlsu pasnf,oJ-ruJog

'uonfeJalur puz rndur ruenbasgns ur saJntea3 ra8;er aqref,Ilou ol sJauJeel ./r\oll3 IIL/I\ uollsnJlsul PasnloJ aqr f¿ql rsaSSns laqr taqrr¿'rr{8ner sr lr sE uoos se ruroJ E Sulsn ur8aq ¡1vrr laqr teqt Jo s.ro;;a 8ur1euruou sJeuJEa¡ tua,rard ¡lr'r sturod a8en8ur¡ re¡ncrued uo SulsnroS teqt ur¿lrtou op psodord srr{t Jo s¡auoddns eql ta J \oH 'aSueqr jo acuereadde ueol tsnl lou' 'srualsls a8en8ur¡ralur Jreqt ur sa8uer¡c ol ptal l¡¡entue,ra uecuo snf,oJ sJJuJEal req,/v\ 1¿r{r anSJ¿ ,Pue aql ur 1q3u rr leD, Jo stuauodor¿

'gslSuE ur a1eru ueqtJo ¡e f¡enr.u.,' teql rorJe ue or ume.rp Sulagsr uonueu? (sluepnts eqt tel puv ¡uossel .¡etuue¡8 ¡erldlr e lpreq sl spll

ielqrrroH rs

¿tqBU'elgrrroH'Sunsn8srq r¡Ápn¡ es

Á1:nl spunos tI 'rer{r op lüef, a,l.t.

.oN J

oN €s

'sa1eo pooS serurlauJos sa>leru raqroru l¡,aq r¿poo8 aro3ag zs'sa>lBluJeuv r¿se>lEru rauv rs

¿qra^pe ¡no lnd or aoe¡d reqrouv ret apuuxE

'(se>leo poo8 saleru Jer{totuftu serullaruos, :prrog eqr uo pace¡d ueeg sEI{ eruerues SuIAolloJ eql'saf,uet-ues 1v\eu ruJoJ ol PaJePJoeJ aJE sefualuas ul sPJol( aql eJer{,& &l,ulre ue urpaSr8ua arc laqr '91 a¡druexg u1 'qsr13uE Sururea¡ are s;aleads qf,uarC plo-rceÁ-7¡y dnor8 e a;agrrr ruoorsselo E ruo5 ue>let are ZIpue 'I I '0I saldruexE

'u^^.o Jrer{l uo sJoJJa erp Ja^ofsrP

ot sJeuJ¿el .ro3 alqlssodurr l¡¡enr.rr,r eq illr\r tl '<u^\op>leeJg uonef,runuluroo

Jo pull lu¿ ot peel ot l¡a>¡¡ rou are srorra arp esnef,eg 'a8en8uel parel{s r¿q}ruory JeJsuerrJo llnsar aqr l¡rred aJB tetp srorre a>leru ¡rm laqr 'a8en8uel rsrgeluEs erF aJBr{s ssBlf E ur sJeuJeel uaqzn'aldruExa Jo{ 'luel¡odrur l¡¡eloadsa aq

ol patcadxa sr-peqpeeJ a nf,eJJof Jo uolrrnJrsul pesnooJ-ruro3-aoueprn8qllr{¡a ur suonenrrs3o raqunu e aJE arer{I f¡ucl¡dxa arrnb rg8ner eg ot poeuleu pue rq8ner eg tsnru a8en8ue¡3o st¡adse eruos teql EepI aqr saztserldua

tr reqr ur 'rela \oq '¡esodord ,alqerlJeer sl rer¡,l\ I{JEaL eqr ruo5 srag¡p ¡esod-o.rd slgl 'tunof,f,e orul (tuaurdola^epJo a8ers) ssaurpeer sluapnts aql e>pt

or slrrJ Surqcrar aqr JI rq8ner aq touuef, s8urqr aruos tEI{l ,/v\el^ (alqel{realsr leq^\ r{f?al, arp Jo satBf,o Pe gr¡rrr ae.r8r osp ¡esodord slgr 3o ser?f,o^Pv

ruoo¿stplJ ar,p ut Sututaal a8an7ual yuotag E8I

t84 Second language learnirug in the classroom

approach look for the right moment to creare increased awareness on rhepart of the learner-ideall¡ ar a rime when the learner is motivated to saysomething and wants to say it as clearly and correctly as possible.

Examplc 11(The students are practising following instructions; one student instrucrs,the others colour.)

sl Make her shoes brown.T Now, her shoes. Are those Momt shoes or Dadt shoes?

s2 Momt.r Mom's. How do you know itt Mom's?s I Because it's her shoes.

As we saw in Chapter 4, French-speaking learners of English have difficulrywith'his' and'her' because French possessives use rhe grammatical gender ofthe object possessed rather than the natural gender ofthe possessor in select-ing the appropriate possessive form. The teacher is aware ofthis and-brief¡without interrupting the activity-helps the learners notice the correct form.

Example 12(The students are playing'hide and seek'with a doll in a doll's house, askingquestions until they find out where 'George' is hiding. Although a model forcorrect questions has been written on the board, the game becomes quitelively and students spontaneously ask questions that reflect their interlan-guage stage.)

s 1 Is George is in the living room?r You said 'is' tvvo times, dear. Listen to you-you said'Is George is

in?' Look on the board. 'Is George in the' and then you say the nameof the room.

s 1 Is George in the living room?r Yeah.

s1 I win!

Note that the teacher's brief intervention does not distract the student fromhis pleasure in the game, demonstrating that focus on form does not haye rointerfere with genuine interaction.

Proponents of 'Get it right in the end' argue that it is sometimes necessary

to draw learners' attention to their errors and to focus on certain linguistic(vocabulary or grammar) points. However, it is different from the 'Get itright from the beginning' proposal in acknowledging that it is appropriatefor learners to engage in meaningful language use from the very beginning oftheir exposure to the second language. They assume that much of languageacquisition will develop naturally out of such language use, without formalinstruction that focuses on the language itself.

slsel-lsod 3r{1 IIE uo PunoJ sBlv\ srql 'rou PrP or{1v\ sraureel eql Paurojrsdlnol¡ecrreuerp ruauare¡d gJe^pe uo uonf,nJlsul ucrldxa pelraf,eJ oq \ sJeuJEa-I

'senrlnf,e aonce¡d aqr Surrnp ryeq-peeJ a^nf,aJJoo sE IIa^! sE aJnronJrs r{f,Ea r{tr^\ palerJosse selnJ ar{tJo Sulqreatucrldxa etuos papnllul slql 'porrad >¡aazu.-o,/üt e JJAo suoltsenb ro sgrar'pe uouonf,nJtsurJo sJnor{ rqSra l¡arerurxo¡dde pa^refal sdno¡3 ptuarurradxa ag¡'uonf,nrtsur pasnf,oJ-ruro3 ¡eroads arp roJ pasn oq o] slEIrarEU polSo8epadSoles E Jar{JEal gcea a,l,e8 sJar{rJEesJJ ar{I 'uonf,nJlsur Jrer{lJo ¡ecldlr e.ra,&\ leqlsarlr^nf,e elnef,runuruJoc re¡n8ar eqr ur aredlcn¡ed or panunuof, sruopnls

IIE'stueruuedxe aqrSo porrad aqr rnoq8norrT 'uonfn;rsut ptcads jo por.rad

erp JerJE pue aJoJeq parset aJa¡a sdno¡8 uosl¡edtuo¡ pue letuaul.radxa qrog

'(¿ rardrq3 aas) sa8ers ¡eruaudo¡a,rapor pre8ar grrm llre¡ncrr-rrd 'a¡qe¡¡EAE aJa,^a etrp uostredruof, olqrJaplsuof,

pur eJnt?Jelrl aqr ur pale8usa,rut l¡a,rrsualxa ueeg e^Er{ laqr asnereg.,(pnrs

puoles erp roJ parcales ara^\ suonsen| 'qruar¿ pue qsl¡8ug ul raglp ruaru-are1d q.ra pE .roJ salnr

^\oq plol f¡rrcr¡dxa ]ou are,r faqr 31 (a8en8ue¡ rsry

.rrarp) rlcuarC qllr\\ luelsrsuof, selnJ tueruef,eld qra,tpe Sutsn ul tslsrad ppo,&sraureal lpql sE,^ó, srsagrod,(q aql '(,pear pue "' ualsll lsnf, uI ¿1 fpnrg pur¿ rardeq3 aas) passnrsrp ueeq lpear¡e e^el{ rEI{r I{ruarC pue gsr¡8uE ueaataqseruereglp aqr Jo asnerag uolt¿Sllsa,rul roJ tuaruaoeld qra.Lpe porrales

JtrqlN erpÍ1 (pnrs rsry er{r ul 'uolr¿ruloj uonsanb put luaruaf,e¡d q.ra,rpe

or lcadsa¡ qtv'r paultuBxe eJa.^a >lleqpea; alllf,aJJor pue uoltf,nJrsul PasnJoJ-ruJoJJo slrege agr 'sasse¡c30 JJqunu Jalltrus e qlvvr selPnts ¡etuarutradxa u1

'lrxalduoc pue loerncce cttstn8ul¡ gttrtrsrua¡go;d aAEq ol panulruof, feqt 'ra,ra,Lro¡1 'qsl18ug uI eJuePguor e IlEf,Iu

-nurruol pue uorsuaqe¡druo¡ Sutuarsrl poo8 pado¡a,rap sJeuJeel 'sJSs?lJ aseql

u1 'rndur a¡g¡suar¡arduoo paIJEA pur I{IIJ Jo uorsl,ro¡d aql PuB 'uollf,eJalulsnoaueluods JoJ seltlunr¡oddo 'tuJo; uttlt JeqtEJ Sutuearu uo Pasnf,oJ rEI{l

sanr^uf,E uo se/r\ Surrlcear arf Jo stseqdrua aql 'IUJOJ a8en8uel uo Pasnrojf¡a.ru sraqcerl rer{r pa^rasqo (y66t '066t) epedg EuIN PuB u.t.r.oqrq8rl

fste¿ 'sasse¡J ge ut sluapnrs ggg'1 rsoru¡e 3un1o.tut sarPnts a,rttdttcsap u1

.SAIIIAIlf,E E^I133

-relul a^Ilsf,Iunlu[UosJo '{1¿ ]f-¡'v q8norqr qsr¡8uE Suru.rea¡ lep ¡oogcs lra,ra

Jo tsoru ruads (¿1-g1 pa8e) sruapnts <9 ePerD ro I ePErD rer{lla uI sqluoua g JoC 'caqan| ur sassEIJ -ISE e^Isuotul ut Sunedrctl¡ed sluaPnts 8ur¡eads

-r{ruer{ 3o qsrlSug Surdola,rap eqt uo >llzqpoeJ a^It3errof, PUE uolllnrlsulpesnroJ-ruJoJJo srlaga aqr pare8rrsa ul eAEg srer{Jreesar's086I aql af,uIS

TSg antsuaiu! ut stuautt¿adxa sncol-u-to¿ :Eg t?us

'serpnls ¡etuaur:adxa pue a,rttduf,sep qroq sJpnloul

slgl '¡esodord srqr ot palelar senssl pJulruexa sEI{ tlf,reaser Jo FaP rear8 ys8urpug rIJrBeseU

ruoo"tssqr aql ut Sututaal a8an&ual puotag 18r

186 Second language learning in the classroom

(immediately following instruction and six weeks later). In the follow-uptests a year late¡ however, the gains made by the learners who had receivedthe adverb instrucrion had disappeared and their performance on this struc-ture was like that of uninstructed learners (\íhite 1991).

In the question study the instructed group also made significantly greatergains than the uninstructed group on the written tasks immediately follow-ing instruction. Furthermore, they maintained their level of knowledge onlater testing (six weeks and six months after instruction). The instruction alsocontributed to improvement in oral performance that was sustained overtime (\Vhite, Spada, Lightbown, and Ranta 199I).

The difference in long-term effects of the two studies may be due to a differ-ence in the availabiliry of the target forms in the classroom input to whichlearners were exposed. Analysis oT.lasrroo- language rho*.ithat adverbswere extremely rare in classroom speech, giving learners little opportunityto maintain their newly-acquired knowledge through conrinued exposureand use. In contrast, there were hundreds of opportunities to hear and use

questions every day in the classroom. Once learners had been given somefocused instruction, it seems they were able to continue to advance in theirknowledge and use of questions (Spada and Lightbown 1993).

In several of the studies carried out in intensive ESL programmes, there is

evidence of the strong influence of the learner's first language on their secondlanguage development. In Study 32, we described the tendenry of intensiveESL learners to reject inversion in questions when the subject is a noun but toaccept inversion when the subject is a pronoun, consistent with their first lan-guage. The infuence of the learners' first language in their acquisition of thepossessive determiners 'his' and'her'was observed with this group of learners(see Chapter 2 and Study 1B). This led to the question of whether form-focused instruction that includes explicit contrastive information about howthe first and second language differ would help in their development of ques-tion formation and possessive determiners. In a study to explore this, learnerswho received instruction on possessive determiners improved more in theirknowledge and use of this feature than did learners who received instructionon question forms. This finding appeared to be related to differences betweenthe form-meaning connections of these two features. That is, a misused pos-sessive determiner ('Het going home with her mother') is more likely to leadto a communication breakdown than an ill-formed question (for example,'V{here he's going?'). Results like these point to the importance of consider-ing how instruction may affect language features in different ways (Spada,Lightbown, and \ü/hite 2005 ; \Vhite 2008).

As we saw in the discussion of the 'Get two for one' proposal, there isgrowing evidence that learners in content-based programmes such as Frenchimmersion need more opportunities to focus on form and receive corrective

af,nrrJd papmg Jo Surr{f,"J1 pesn)o; lue rnoqrvrr uonf,nJtsur re¡n8er ;laqrr{rra panunuof sesstlf uosl¡rdtuo¡ olyu eql ur sluapnts 's;aad pue sJer{f,Eel

ruou >lleqpeeJ a^nreJJo3 pue stxetuoo IEr.uJoJur pue IEuJJoJ jo lrarre.t e ur

sle¡d-a¡or pepnlrur rer{r salll^rrf,r a¡n¡t¡d papln8 ur paSeSua pue uonf,nrrsurrlcrldxa ua,rr8 a¡artl sasself ¡zluaurrradxe ar{r ur sruapnls 'arun sn{t Surrnq'polrad 1aa \-e g e ra^o srnor{ ZI rnoqe JoJ acr¡d loor uoprnJtsur agl

'slxeluoJ er¿udo¡ddr ur (sraqro ot uoDIppE ur) sru.ro3 asagl azluSooar

pue acnpord or lrrlrqr rraqt uo petsel aJa \ sJaureal al{r letel l{ruow auo ule8e

pue 'JaW l¡arerparurur (uonf,nJlsur ot JorJd 'sra>pads uee \taq af,ue$lp IErJosro 'ssauaulod ¡ngroadsar3o re>lreu B sE pesn st. snoa eltywlruenlrues pue ól¡eru-JoJur arerrpur ol pasn $ al 'ltnpl^lpur uE Sulssarppr uI'snoa pua ru sunouo¡duos¡ad puofes Jo esn aqt uaa,&\rag uonf,urlsrp Jr{r se.{l ,(pnrs slq uI paulruexasernlea3 ureru ar{tJo aug '(p¡o s.real E1 rnoqe) sluapnrs uoISraIuuJI l{tuar{ B

eprr3 Jo sesself, aerqt ul suoIlEIrEA a¡lrs rrrsn8ulolf,os Jo asn pue a8pa¡zttou¡

aql uo uorl3nlsur pasnroJ-ruroJ Jo spage alp pouruex) (r/66I) rars.{1 fo¡uots¿aututx qruaq ut sut¿otrtlnnSuqopos uo Sutsnto¿ :gg t?ws

'(eqf 'd) ¡onsanb ur s8urpue

unou er{}Jo af,ut^alJr a.trtclpard alir qsllq¿tsa or sruepnlsJo lrt¡ofuru aqr roJ

Ársuatul pue ólruenb luarf,Uns uI alqplrt^E rou l¡drurs seru, s8ulpua unou uolndul agr, 'a;o3araq1 rapua8 ot drqsuonelar rlaqr pue s8urpua unou aqt uer{lspJo./ruo Suruearu agr Sulqcear auJn aJour luads s;aqceor rBI{1 luEeuI slqr PuEsanr^nfe Sulqeear Jerel Jr{r ur paf,npoJlul szzvr l;rpgef,ol ,t\eu qf,ntu ool teqtsr snpJo uonela¡d.ratur sla¡reg 'sunou ¡aau ol Sulu.rea¡ Jlar{t azII?JauaB olsJeuJEal alqEua rou pIP uoltfnJlsul eqr te^e,/v\oH 'uol¡fnJlsul aAIefaJ lou PrPoq.^a asoqr uer{t sunou JEIIITuEJ JoJ suollf,ulrsrp rapua8 eteJnff,B Sulcnpord

pue SurzluSof,al lE Jalrag qf,nru eJal( uolrf,nJlsul pe Iaf,aJ oq./ú sJJuJEe-I 'JatEI

sqluoru a,rg urc8e ueql PuE uollf,nJlsul rage flarerpauJrul PaJalsIuIluPE aJe \slsal aurts er{r pue ue8aq uolr3nJrsul eqt eJoJaq srsat Suqeads pue Suluarsr¡

er,r rapua8 ¡rcneuluer83o a8par'rou>l JIaIF uo Palsel-aJd a¡a,l¡. sluePnrs eql

'(aurTnrseu JoJwapq al vnaa- pue'aululrua¡ rclaaaphtq E u\aila-

'aldurxa ;o3) rapua8 rnoqe sanlf, epl^ord s8utpua unou uleuet ^roq

rg8ner os¡e

aJa,tl stuapnts '(r/ Jo trl 'un Jo aun) sapprc auIInJSeu PUE sulurruoJ uea \lagesoorlf, or uaqr pelnbar q)rq^\ pue suoltf,ullslp Jepue8 or uoltualte JIaI{t

^\BJPot pegrporu ara./d ler{l (ldt I, 'a¡drurxa ro3) saue8 suaJPIIql uo Paseq seItI^IlrElueru tno parJJEf, uaJplrqo asegr polred lee,{a-a g e ra,ro r(rp E sotnultu 0Z JoC

:apue8 ¡erneuurrrS-stuepus uolsJeururl l{fuaJ{ ro3 ua¡qord tualsts.rad e

aq or u.rvrou>I sI IEI{I eJnleal a8en8ue¡ ? uo uollfnJrsu PasnfoJ ua,u8 erarrr (p¡o

s.real g-¿) uaJplrql Z ¿per) Jo sassell xrs 'seuuerSo¡d uots¡aruul qf,uerC ur

uorpllqr Sunol Lpl^r uorDnnsurJo srf,ega ar{r pauluexa (866I) lalre¡l rr8rrguo?sraututt qrua¿{ ry upuaS uo Susnto¡ :vg [Pus

'paqsr¡druorf,E aq rsaq

uef, srql ^\or{ Jo uonsanb eqr pa.ro¡dxa eAeI{ salpnls Jo Jagulnu V lleqPeaJ

ruoo.tssqJ aqt ut 8urutaa1 a&an&ual puotag LBI

1BB Second language learning in the classroom

in using sociolinguistically appropriate forms. On the immediate post-test,learners in the experimental classes performed significantly befter than learn-

ers in the comparison classes on both written and oral production tasks andthe multiple-choice test, and these benefits were maintained when learners

were tested a month later.

Study 36: Focusing on aerbforms in content-based science clnssroomsCatherine Doughty and Elizabeth Varela (1998) carried out a study with a

group of ESL learners in their science classes. One class of middle-school stu-dents ( 1 I-I4 years old) from a variety offirst language backgrounds received

corrective feedback on past tense and conditional verb forms in English.For several weeks, while students were engaged in oral and written workrelated to a series of science reports, the teacher provided corrective feed-

back on their errors in past tense and conditional forms-both explicitly andimplicitly. Students' ability to use these forms was assessed before and after

the experimental period and again two months later. Their performance was

compared to that of a group of students who were in another science class

doing the same science reports but who did not receive correctiye feedback

on the verb forms.

Students who received the corrective feedback made more Progress in using

past and conditional forms than the comparison group both immediatelyafter the period of focused feedback and two months later. Their progress

was assessed in terms of both increased accuracy and the presence of inter-language forms that showed students were doing more than repeating forms

they had heard.

Study 37: Recasts andprornpts in French immersion classrooms

In Chapter 5, we saw some of Roy Lyster's descriptive research on the dif-ferent types ofcorrective feedback provided by teachers in Canadian French

immersion programmes and learners' immediate responses (uptake) to thatfeedback. More recentl¡ Lyster (2004) explored the effects of form-focused

instruction and feedback typ. on second language learning in an experimen-

tal study with Grade 5 students in French immersion classes. There were

three experimental groups and a comparison group. The experimental groups

received approximately nine hours of explicit instruction over a five-week

period, during which their attention was drawn to grammatical gender and

the fact that word endings can give a clue to grammatical gender in French(see Study 34). Students in two of the experimental groups also received cor-

rective feedback in the form of either recasts or prompts when they produced

errors in grammatical gender. These feedback rypes differ in that recasts

provide learners with the correct model, whereas prompts signal the need

for a correction and require the student to produce the target form through

clarification requests, elicitation, and metalinguistic clues (see Chapter 5

for definitions and examples of these different rypes of feedback). The third

roJ sarlruntroddo a¡dn¡nu eqr rtr{} epnpuor sJer.lrJBesJr er{I 'rfuors aqr 3ouorsJal lsal-lsod eql uo alBJnf,fe eJou r{Jnru aJa.&r sJeuJeal qtog 'lsat-tsod rsE palfnJlsuoo JeuJEel r{f,Ea teqr sarJols aqr pue lsal-a¡d e se raqteSot pelEeJJ

sJauJeal o^\t Jr{l regr Aors ¡eur8r.ro eqr pasn sJer{f,J¿esal a rT, 'saJnleeJ asJnol-srp Jo '¡ecneruruer8 '¡erxa¡ uo pasnro3 feqr JaqleqaJo sruJal ur papof, aJaasTU-I aql 'g >lsEJuorlr3runuruoJ 'g ratdeg3 ur patuasa:d sl lpnrs srql tuo5

IFt a^rleroqtllor (sraureel erpJo ld¡acxa uV'(7.62 'd) ,asn a8en8ur¡ rreql uoDagar pue (paf,npord lagr a8en8uq aqr rnoqe >llel sreur¿al araqa anSo¡elpagr3o r.redfur, '(sg¡1) saposrda pare¡ar-a8en8uplroJ papor pue pegrrrsuert'poprof,ar selv\ rlf,reesar er{l Jo saseqd Ip ur pmnpo;d srau;ea1 trr{l >llrr eql

' uorsJaA ParEInr.uJoJaJaqt lnoqe lpt a^rreJogtllo3 Jrarp uo peseg serJols ¡eulSlro Jrer{r or suorsrlaJ

apeu ,(aqr rar{taqa pue euo patrlnr.uro3er eqt pu¿ uorsral ¡eur8rro rlaqtuae^ tag seruaraJlp lnoge pef,nou sluapnls rBI{^\ tno pug or peruB./$. up¡de1pue urE.{\S '&lupe 8ul¡llou Jrar{r Jo Ile3ar parelnlults B ul ued 1oor osltstuapnts aq1 l.lors er{t3o uorsra porelnruJoJeJ E LIlIld ueulrl'l peg laqr req,,vr

paredruor sluapnls aqr 'll,urre ,Sullllou, B uI telr I d¡a,ure.roqr¡¡oc lrorsE eloJ,&\ lagr se sluepnls uorsJelurul rlf,uaJ{ L epeJ1 o^\t Jo ruaurdo¡a,rapa8en8ue¡ eqr pe^resqo (ZOO) upldel uoretls puE ulervis IIIrreW'en8o¡erp u¡

s¡nr¡o Suru¡ea¡ a8rnSue¡ ltrp Bepl aqr pue,üoaqr Frnrlnrolros fq pere^Iroryan&oryatp amtproqrllor q8notqt untuo swol :g€ [pus

'erns¿eru I"ro alp uo f¡.repu¡s paruro3rad sdno¡8 aarqr ¡¡e lgmuosual aqr eq feru snqt pue arnreal ra8rer aqr uo uoltuaur paznrnpl^¡pulr{]r1v\ sJauJEel IIB PaPr^oJd sa¡crrre;o uonslnf,nJE JBalf, al{r uo srseqdue sgl'eururueJ ro eurlnf,srru reqtra s¿ patardrarul aq ppol leqt ,elf,rue plrQlq, e

Pesn seunauJos sJeuJEel rEI{l ul\oqs PBI{ qfJEaseJ snol¡ta¡d asnBseg a¡qrssod

se llrea¡e se leads ol stuapnrs pa8ernocua JeqJJEasaJ alp 'BIBP aqt3o loernleaql eJnsua ol JePJo uI 'suorssas euo-uo-euo a^Isuelul eaJr{t uI JeI{JJEasaJ eqlr{rl^\ letu sruapnls asaql dpnrs ar{r Jo rrrd sgr ut patrdlctued sruapnrs 3oa¡drues-gns perf,elas l¡ruopuer e lluo 'qstt pro Jo aJnleu Sutu¡nsuo¡-arutter{r Jo asnef,ag 'sr lerll 'rf,ege >lser e se Sulpug sltp stardratur .rarsr(1 'qser

IEJo er{r uo af,urruJoJ.rad ,sraurea¡Jo suJel ur sdno¡8 ¡etuautradxe aeJqr eqr

uee^uaq salueJaglp ruecgruS¡s ou eJe^\ eJar{t te^e^&\oH 'saJnsraru uaulJl(aqr uo dno¡8 slsef,er + uollrnJlsul eqt uEI{t Jauaq l¡ruecgru8ls plp dnor8srdruo¡d + uononJtsur ar{r 'uolrlppe uI 'Japua8 polteruue¡8 Sulu8tss¿ utdno¡8 uosl¡edu¡oc arp ueqr alEJnf,f,E aroru lpurcgru8rs a.razrr (uorlrnrtsutpa^ref,er or{,&\ esoqt 'a'r) sdnorS ptuarutradxa eeJl{t ¡e srsar-rsod aql uO

'JatBI sgluoru aerqt urc8e pue lege l¡alelparurul 'lueruteaJl IEuonJnJlsuI aqleroJeq parsar Ip a;ar*.lagr pue fpnrs agr rnoq8norl{l uolDnrlsul pas¿q-luet-uof Jo arurue¡8o¡d uolsJeurrul qruaJ{ re¡n8a; Jrer{r Panunuoc sdnor8 ¡¡ypeqpaal elnf,aJJof, Jou uonrnJrsul Jaqlrau pe Iaf,eJ dno-13 uosl;edruoc aqlpue '<>peqpeeJ e^nf,aJJof, ou rng uoltf,nJlsul aql pa^raf,eJ dno¡8 ¡etuaulradxa

ruoz$stp aql w Sututaal a&an&ual puotag 68I

r90 Second language learning in the classroom

learners to engage in collaborative talk on the language features in questionled them to a greater understanding oftheir correcr use.

Study 39: Focus onform in tash-based instructionIn a descriptive study investigating the importance of the teacher's role intask-based instruction, Virginia Samuda (2001) explored ways of guidingadult ESL learners' attention to form-meaning relationships by focusing onexpressions of possibiliry and probabiliry (for example, 'mighr', 'could', 'irtpossible'). In a task design that took learners through a'meaning to form tomeaning progression', learners were first asked to work in groups to speculateon the identity of an unknown person (for example, age, gender, occupation)by looking at a set of objects thought to have come from that persont pocket.In carrying out this task, learners were observed to produce expressions ofprobabiliry and possibiliry such as 'It's possible that he smokes' and 'maybeit's a girl', but few instances of modal auxiliaries (for example, 'must', '-"y')were used.

In the second phase ofthe task, the students were asked to come rogether as a

whole group to tell each other what they had decided. During this phase, theteacher acted as a co-communicator and maintained the focus on meaningbut gradually shifted to form by using the language that the learners hadproduced on their own and providing them with alternative ways of express-

ing uncertainry. Initiall¡ this was done implicitly. For example if a learnersaid something like ''We think uh 50 per cenr he smokes', the teacher said'So you're not certain that he smokes?' After each group had presented, theteacher provided a more explicit focus. She drew the learners' attention toother ways of expressing possibiliry and probabiliry by overtly talking aboutlanguage form as shown in the excerpt below (p. 131).

sr Businessmanr Businessman ninety? OK So you're 90 per cent certain he's a

businessman, right? Heret another way to say this. You think itt 90per cent certain, so you think he must be a businessman. He must bea businessman (writes it on the board). So this (points to 'must be' onboard) is showing how certain how sure you are. Not 100 per cent,but almost 100 per cent. 90 per cent.

In the final stage of the task, the students prepared and presented a posterbased on their conclusions about the identity of the unknown person tothe whole class. During this time, the teacher responded to the content andnot the form of their work. 'When the researcher examined the differencesbetween expressions of probabiliry and possibility that the students used inthe first stage of this task and compared it with the final stage, there was evi-dence of improvement in that many more instances of modal auxiliaries werepresent in the learners' speech.

purur ur daa;¡ #elnrle pue Sururea¡ alnJ uo srseqdua s¡! ql!/v\ qreo.rdde

uopelsueJl Jetuu€JB eqr,o Flldlr aJe sasrf,Jexe ¡er¡letuua8 qlns esnelaq

¡esodold .Suruur8eq eql uo4 rq8¡.r r¡ teg, aLp sluesaJdeJ rqJe^ aqllo turoJ

tf,eJJo) eqr qrl/v\ s)u€lq aql ur llrJ, sE qrns órruDe ue'a¡durexe JoJ 'uorsnlf,uof,

l€qt peqf,EeJ nol r*oq ure¡dxa pue stuesardar lr ¡esodord Surqreat aqr ql/v\lr¡,r¡rre qf€a qlle¡'sa!l!^!lle ¡errSo8epad ¿ ¡ ¡o suorrduf,sep rerrq eJe

^ oleg

stEsodordtu¡qtee¡ qllrn se!l!^!p€ l€)ltoteped qrle¡ ,l.ttltrf,v

'seruF ruaraJlp rE rreqp 'Suluearu pue uroJuo snf,oJ e apr,,'ord qroq lar¡r r€ql ll¿J ar{l ol anP l¡a>il¡ 'uoncnrrsur3o sadlro.&tt ar{t 3o órretuarua¡druo: aql ot rurod lpnrs srqr Jo slpsal II"rJ o Jr{l

'lsat JEruuJe¡B uau¡rneqt uo sJauJ"al parrrSarul aqr pauroJradrno 1gg per"losl pellaf,ar oryú sJa

-ur¿al aqr PuP >lsEr uonBf,runuruoc IEJO eqr uo srJurEal Icc ParElosr aql

paru.ro3radrno 1gg pater8elur pe ralar oq^\ sraureal rEIp ur .IVI Joj ¡¡oddnsaruos peltelal osle s8urpug aql 'etun relo saJns¿aul a8en8ue¡ qroq uo l¡rueo-glu8rs pa,r.ordur sasstlr I{{ pel¿losr pue parzr8arul aqr qloq uI sreurraT

'1g¿ pere.rSarur pelra3er orfü sraureel

aql ueql tsat J¿unuEJS uenl¡r"r ¿ uo a8pa¡r'rou¡ laqt SulralrteJ t? Jatlaq aJar\

(1gg pare¡osra'r) arnrerd a¡.neclunuuof, uJog parercdas aJa./v\ lerp saIlI^IIJE

¡euue¡8 ur aJnlJnJls arussed aqr 3o a8pa¡r'rou>l JIeI{r paurelqo orl.&\ sJauJeel

Jaqtaqa aro¡dxa or parue,llaqr ,{¡re¡rulg 'ICC patrlosl pe^lereJ oI{1ú sJeuJeel

erp urr{r >lsr} uorlef,runuJuJo3 IBJo ue uo a8pa¡lr.ou>l teql Sur,rar¡la¡ le Janag

aram (1gg pere;8atul 'a'¡) uolrrerarul alllmlunuruJor ut Sult¿dtcltred a¡rgrrr

a,rrssrd aqr 3o aSpa¡rrroDl Jrarp PaurErgo og,4a sJeuJsal Jeqlaq,&\ uI PelseJalulaJa./!\ sJeq3fteser ar{r 'snql '(7 rardeq3 aas) ¡emrnar Suunp PaIE IDE asoqlsE áruts er{l aJe ssa¡o.ld Sulurea¡ aqr Sulrnp pate^Irf,E aJE IBI{I sassa¡o.rd a¡¡l-ru3oo aql JI peuJ¿el a^¿q ar'r Sulgrauros Jegrüaua.r ot l¡a1l¡ eJour eJE a^\

reqt Eapl arll pue lroaqr Sulssaco¡d arel¡do¡ddB-JaJsueJl lq paruro3ul sem

uoltsenb srql 'a8pa¡r'rou>l ZT Jo spuDl luaraJtlp or peal rq8nu uoll3nrlsuljo sadlr o,l\t aql Jar{reqa s¿ \ r{fJraseJ aqt Sune.tnotu uorlsanb puof,as V

'JerEI $leal\ aarqt urc8e pue 'uoltonJtsul JatJe f¡arrrpauul 'uollJnJlsuleJoJag u3o a8pa¡lLorDl Jrel{r uo palsal eJe.&\ sJeuJeal pup uoltonJlsuof a,uss¿d

er{l sBly\ aJnrEaJ ra8rcr ag¡ 'uollf,nJlsul Pesnf,oJ-luJoJ P313losl pue parerSarulsE 01 peJJaJar a.re lag¡ 'acllce¡d allteflunurruoo IuoU pareredas Jo saltllltf,ea^Il?3runruruof, ur PePPague sB^\ luJoJ ol uolluell? JaI{reI{^\ Jo suJal uIparaglp IEI{I uolrrnnsulJo sJnol{ ZI qru'r pepl^o¡d a¡aztr sJeureel lsg llnPe

Ia^rl-ar¿rpaurerur Jo sass¿lr ol.r'L'(ZrcZ '¡e ra rpedg) ruroj ot uolluotte

.sJauJEal ./\^.eJp ol acuanbas lEuonf,nJtsur aql uI Jr.un Jeueg e ag leru araql

Jer{rar{ \ auruJtxe or lpnrs E rno paIJJEJ ul"et r{fJeesal Jer{ PuE epedg eur¡uo?pn4su? ?aswo!-u,totlo &uruu atil :0, t?o8

utoo"tssqJ aqt ut 8urutua1 a&anSual puotag I6I

r92 Second language learning in the classroom

that in some cases,an activity is compatible with more than one teachingproposal. For example, if the sentences in the'Fill in the blanks' activity camefrom an earlier draft of a letter written for a communicative activity, it mightbe consistent with the'Get it right in the end' proposal because it integratesattention to language form in a meaning-based activity.

I Role-play a conversation between a travel agent and a tour¡st.

2 Memorize a dialogue about buying airline tickets.

3 Underline the past tense verbs while reading a story.

4 Arrange illustrations in the correct sequence after listening to a story.

5 Work with a partner to write a story based on a cartoon strip.

ó Rearrange a set of scrambled words to form correct questions.

7 Debate or discuss a topic that was featured in a newspaper article.

8 Watch an episode of Sesome Street.

9 Demonstrate and describe the steps in a science experiment.

| 0 lnterview a mystery guest and try to discover his or her occupation.

I I Play a game of 'Simon Says'.

l2 Work in small groups to choose the ideal candidate for a job.

Interpreting the research

The overall results of the studies described above provide support for thehypothesis that form-focused instruction and corrective feedback can helplearners improve their knowledge and use of particular grammatical features.There is also compelling evidence that more explicit attention to form is par-ticularly useful within communicative and content-based second and foreignlanguage programmes. This has been confirmed in reviews and meta-analy-ses of many studies that have investigated the contribution of form-focusedinstruction to L2 learning (Norris and Ortega 2000; Spada 2011). Someresults also show, however, that the effects of instruction are not always

long-lasting. This may be related to whether there is continued exposure roa linguistic feature in the regular classroom input after the experimental treat-ment ends.

-We have also seen that form-focused instruction may be more effective withsome language features than with others. For example, the successful learn-ing of the tuluous distinction in Lyster's (1994) study could be due to thefact that learning tu and uous is essentially a matter of learning two impor-tant vocabulary items and thus may have been less difficult to learn thansyntactic features that affect meaning in less obvious ways. In the intensiveESL research, learners may have been more successful after instruction on

uolrnJtsul Zauory slFSaJ a8pa¡nou11o adlr t¿q^Uo uoltsanb aql ot ra^\sue

rcell e eAEr{ luo,lr e,&\ 'sselaqlauoN '(1r rnoqr 1urqt, 01 aurn Surrteq lnoqtr,l.rlplcrnb a8pa¡rrroul -rraqt elarJtor ol sraureel a¡lnba.r teqr qser pa;nsse;d-arunpue $1s31 uorlssrunuJurof IEJo s3 r{f,ns aSpa¡nou1 zT e nrnlur (sJsuJrel olurder or saJnseaur a8en8uel jo lrarre,r ¡alra¡8 E papnllur serl qf,Jeasal tueoaJ

,(¡areunr-rog 'stsel rcruru¿¡8 rulod-ara;cslp 'aldruexa JoJ '8ursn aSpay'rou1

l¡¡lTdxa peJnseauJ eAEr{ serpntsSo lrrroleu aqt ur ssarSo.rd,sraureal ssass¿ otpasn srset eql reqr rlEJ eql ol anp erc uonrnJrsul ZT JoJ srre5a elllsod Sutrrloqs

sasl¡eue-eraru ruo5 slFSeJ ar{r teqr an3-re lagr 'aroruJar{lJn¿ d¡uo a8pa¡ltou1ucr¡dxa ot peel uel uonfnJtsul Z'I r¿ql rupp sJar{f,J?aseJ pue slsrJoer{r aruos

'pasl¡eueun pue elnrnlur eq ol peJaprsuof,sr a8pa¡zrroul ucl¡drul seerar{^,\,'pasfpue pue snorf,suor sE peglrrsap f¡¡mldlrsr a8pa¡rv'ou1 lcr¡dxE 'a8pa¡zrrou>l trcr¡dur snsJe^ urr¡dxa se ro'r.rardeg3 ulpessnJsrp se 'uolllslnbf,E snsJe^ Sururee¡ pue lrJnpolo¡d sns¡a,r elneJelf,apsE or parraJer l¡snorre,r ueeq e^Erl a8pa¡mou1 Zl uI sarueraglp esaql 'uolr-cnpord aSen8ue¡ snoaueluods pue ¡n;Suluealu uI selnJ arp asn ot ll¡ge aqr

tou tnq reruuer8 3o selnr arp Jo a8paproul poo8 l¡le; E ol peal or l1a1r1 sl

a¡n¡e.rd e^nrf,runuruJof, rnoqlrlv\ Surqcmr ¡eutue¡3 peseq-elnJ uct¡dxa regrr'rouq saSrn8ur¡ u8raro;/puof,es Jo sJar{f,Eel 'sI lEqI 'sJeqf,Eel fueru 3o acua

-r¡adxa aqr qlLlr seleuoser pue Surn8urul sr a8pa¡,r,r.oul Z'IJo spuDl rueraglpol peel 1¿g parerSarur puB paltlosr reqt Sulpug aql 'uoltrnrtsur pastg-Iserurqtv( ruJoJ ol uonualre (sluepnls rra:lp lle,rtrJege urf sJel{feel moq 8ur

-lpJrsnlll'1g¿ pare,r8arurSo a¡druexa poo8 3 sI sreureal'ISE llnP" grl¡llpnrss€pnrrres 'Bu1una171ur eruaraJlp e e>leru os¡e leru uotDnJrsul PasnroJ-LuroJ

3o Sunun aqr terp rapulureJ E sl ICC pet¿losl pur paterSatul uo I{rJEesaU

'sarnleal aSen8ue¡3o sadó qloq ro3 8uturca¡

paroruord uoltJnnsul rror¡dxa reqr uoda¡ (O t OZ) etlruolPuE Eped5 'ra,rar*og

'seJnl¿al a8en8ue¡ ,a¡drurs, pue ,xa¡druof, uo uoltf,nJlsulJo adfr3o stfeJe aqr

jo srsf¡uuu-eleru ruef,eJ p uI 'uolrfnJlsul JoJ ta8rcl rartag e ag feu ,¡zrn¡d rr

e>pu ol unou BJo pue aqr r€ t- uB tnd, sE qlns ,grunqtJo alnl, a¡durs E pueqJeqto aqt ug 'rndur eqr uI a¡nsodxa eI^ salfllJe tnoge SuturBJI Jo Jarrag

aq leu sJauJeel 'sng1 'urea¡ pue ql"ar or rplgllp f¡snot.totou PuE tlertsgrpue xa¡duor r{toq sr r¡sr¡8uE ut u¡atsds alJIlrE aqr 'a¡druwe roC 'sral{to ueqlxa¡duoc aJouJ eJE saJnteal a8en8uel auJos qll^\ patelfosse salnJ al{r f¡eurg

'sJoJJO paseq-aSen8wl lsJg s(Jal{to qfre efJoJuIaJ pue aSen8ue¡

]sJg aur¿s eqt aJEI{s sJauJeal eJar{^\ sruooJsself, a8en8ur¡ Puof,as uI PesEeJfuI aq

lru ó¡ncg¡p aql 'Zapue IT uea lteq selllrellruls Sulpealsru erc aral{l uaq/!\

l¡-re¡nrlrred 'a8en8ue¡ lsJg (sreureel aqr lq pef,uengur are teqt asoql ere elor

plrnrc e &¡d &ru uo¡r¡n¡lsu pasnoo1-ruJoJ qrII{ { roJ saJnleal a8en8ue¡.raqrg

'suortsenb qtr./( uer{t sJauluJalep anlssassod qllry\ uollf,auuo¡ Sutuearu

-ruJoJ ¡a8uo¡ts E sr eJJr{r asnefaq suorlsanb ueql sJaulutatap a,rtssassod

utootttylJ aqt ut Sututual a8an&ual puotag e6t

194 Second language learning in the classroom

until valid and reliable tests of both implicit and explicit knowledge are usedin a larger number of studies (Ellis et al. 2009).

Similar issues have been raised about research on corrective feedback but thecentral focus of this work has been on investigating whether certain types ofcorrective feedback are more effective than others. The results from Lystertstudy in French immersion programmes suggests that learners benefit morefrom feedback that pushes them to self-correct (i.e. prompts) than from feed-back that provides the correct form (i.e. recasts). Research in other contexrs,however, has produced different results. For example, the majority oflabora-tory studies ofcorrectiye feedback report benefits for recasts over other typesof corrective feedback including prompts (Mackey and Goo 2007). These

conficting findings are likely related to differences in conrext-the labora-tory is a more controlled environment than the classroom, where there are

competing demands on learners' attention. As a result, learners may noticecertain rypes of feedback in the one-on-one laboratory interactions morethan they do in the classroom in communicative or content-based classes,

where the primary focus is on meaning.

As discussed in Chapter 5, the specific pedagogicalactiviq, in which correc-tive feedback is provided also plays an important role in terms of whetherlearners recognizeit as corrective feedback. The timing ofcorrective feedbackmay also be importantinL2learning. To date little research has exploredwhether it is preferable, for example, to provide feedback during or aftercommunicative practice. One study of this issue was carried out by JamesHunter (2012). He investigated the effectiveness of feedback that the teacher

provided afier students had participated in student-led conversations. Hisfindings show that such an approach can result in a higher proportion ofrepair than feedback provided in whole-class teacher-led activities.

Recently there have been a number of meta-analyses of studies investigat-ing the effectiveness of L2 corrective feedback on L2 oral production. Theresults are mixed, with some reporting benefits for recasts over other rypes offeedback (Li 2010) and others reporting advantages for prompts over recasts(Lyster and Saito 20 1 0). Until there is greater consensus on the contributionsof different types of corrective feedback on L2learning, a prudent approachwould be to provide learners with a variety of different rypes of correctiyefeedback and to keep in mind the counterbalance hypothesis presented inChapter 5, which suggests that more explicit corrective feedback may be

effective in contexts where the learners' attention is focused on meaning/conrent while implicit feedback may be sufficient to attract learners' atten-tion in contexts where the focus of instruction is typically on language form.

feru s¡au.rea¡ 'stsecarSo ruJoj ar{l sa>lrt JoJJe uo llEqPJaJ ual{^\ 'aJoluJegun{'r¡ les or /(oq rou ',(es,,bqr tel{/'r uo l¡ernreu sI snJoJ (sluePnls aql 'uollf,t-Jalur FuonesJe uo uI uoll¿f,Iunrutuo3 (leJnleu, alelnuls ol srduane pue

Surueaur sazseqdua ,lpr s,ta'L asnef,eg 'sJoJJe JIeIpJo allds ut f¡1n3ssa:rns

alef,runluluof, ot Luaqt ,l\olle spunor8¡erq Sururee¡ pue aBrnSuEI Parer{s

.sluepnls eJeI{,& sasself, uI anrt f¡ucadsa q slql 'ruroJ uo sn)oJ ou sI aJeqrJI

aSrn8ue¡ perrclrslqdos pue etBJnJf,E eJour Suumbce uo ssa¡8o¡d.{\ols e>lelu

leru s¡eu¡¿al teqr srvrol{s osle r{rJeesal eqr te,rarrrog 'a8en8ue¡ puoros E uI suoll

-EsJe^uoJ e8euru ot ll¡lqe aqr put a:ualadruor a lleslunu¡luof, Pas¿aJf,ul olp"el uEJ sanr^nf,B paled pur dnor8 uI suollf,¿Jalul IsuollesJeluof, uI a8r8ua

ol sJauJeal JoJ salrlunrJoddg 'suJeJuoJ JEIItuls sasler ¡esodord ;pr s,re'I, eql

'uonf,nJlsurJo luauoduof, E se seJnleeJ aSen8ur¡ ol uolluallr PaPFBapnllur faqr uaqrtr InJssamns rsour ere sagreordde Paseq-uolsuagardruo3.rndur a¡q¡suagardruoo ur Suturaru uo snro3 l¡duls sraurea¡ a8en8ue¡ Puof,as

JIJlesrrJo arm 3>lBr IIy( uoluslnbre aSenSuel ]¿qr slsaqlodlq aqr ro3 r:oddnspug rou op a^{'saruu¡e¡8o¡d paseg-uorsuagardruoc uI uollf,nPold pue uots

-uaqarduo: qtoq ur ssa¡8o¡d olqeJeplsuor e)pru sJauftal reqt ef,uePFa

poo8 sr aJer{r elqrtys¡esodord (auo JoJ o^\t leg, Pue (PEeJ PUE "' uarsll

rsn[, aqr Jo suoISJa^ eulaJlxe uorlsanb olul sllef sIqI 'uollf,nJlsut Pasnf,oJ-ruroJ ou ro alull re5o lttlt saurue¡8o¡d ul a8en8ue¡ ar{r Jo sarnpnJls f,IsEq

qrl¡^ lrp:glp aleq ol enunuof, sJauJBal lBql ef,uapr^e Sulsea¡cul sr aJer{I

'JBJ ool auo8 arreq leur uorln¡o,rar

a^nr)runlutuof,, eqt 'aruepln8 Pu¿ suollrueldxa onsln8ullelsu PuB toJJa uo

¡l¿qpeal 'srsl¡eue elllsEJluof, tno 8uv'rorql ul 'PuEI{ rel{ro aqr ug ñualrg-o;d rraqt patlnbce e^sq sJeurEe¡ a8enSue¡ puof,es InJsssf,f,nsJo ólroleru agr

frrvr aqr or puodsarror lou saop ,SutuurSaq aql uor3 rq8rr ll reD, reqr srsa8

-8ns aruap¡ra eqr rnq 'pasn eg 01 anulluof, IIII$ sei{leordde ¡tn8urlolPnt PuEuoDEISupJl JEuIIUEJD 'sesself, 3o sreal JaUe ue^a 'SuollesJa^uoc lreulpro ut

aledlclu¿d or elqeun pue pelertsnry sreuJ¿el fueu a,tea¡ sPoqreu asaqr l¿ql

-s8ulpug tlf,rcaser pue aouauadxa puosrad uo5-,&\ou>l osle a,&t, t3 e \oH

.s;a>1eads JBenSue¡ puof,as luerf,go.rd l¡g8rq parnpord wq uorlrnrlsur ¡en8ull-orpne l1-repurS 'sesself, r{fns ur ecual¡adxa JreqlJo rno pado¡a,rep aSenSur¡

uSlaro3 e ut lcualcgord paeue,rpe asoq,/ú slrnPl^lPul lJru aA¿I{ snJo lsolu PUE

poqraru pardde l¡aplzu, tsoru eqt rqnoP ou sI uoIlEIsuEJl JEIuurerS 'p¡:o,terp Jo slool{3s el{r uI 'poqteru Sulgcrar el{r Jo ssa¡prr8ar Sulurea¡ a8en8ue¡

puofes ur Peaf,f,ns III^[ sJeurcal pag13 f¡euorrdacxs eruos reqr l!\oul a/N

'r{f,JeaseJ uooJSSEIJ ruo;3 rroddns lsou¡ aqt eAIef,sJ uoll-f,EJalur Pas"g-rualuo3 PuE o^Ileflunlutuof, uIqlIA\ luJoJ Ol Uolluarre apytord

tEql saqf,eoJddy .pepuauruof,al eq rou um auo¡e Surusaru uo snsoJ a^lsnlf,xa

rsotult uE SultuasaJdar asoqr Jo uIJoJ uo snf,oJ ellsnlsxo lsolule u¿ Surluesa¡

-dar qusodord reqr ruepl^e suraes lI 'op ol >lJo^t l{f,nru llrls sI ererp q8noqrry

slesodord aqr tutssassy

s6ru¿ooJssqJ atp ut Sututaal a7an8uq puotag

196 Second language learning in the classroom

interpret it as a continuation of the conversation rather than focus on form.Thus, programmes based on the'Let's talk' approach are incomplete on theirown, and learners' gains in confidence and conversational skills may not bematched by their development of more accurate and complex language.

It is important to emphasize that the evidence to support a role for form-focused instruction and corrective feedback does not suggest a return to the'Get it right from the beginning' approach. Research has shown that learn-ers do benefit considerably from communicative interaction and instructionthat is meaning-based. The results of research in French immersion, othercontent-based language teaching, and communicative ESL are strongindicators that learners develop higher levels of fluency through primarilymeaning-based instrucdon than through rigidly grammar-based instruction.The problem is that certain aspects oflinguistic knowledge and performanceare not fully developed in such programmes.

Research investigating the 'Teach what is teachable' proposal is not yet at apoint where it is possible to say to teachers: 'Here is a list of linguistic features

and the order in which they will be acquired. You should teach them in thisorder'. The number of features that researchers have investigated in experi-mental studies within this framework is far too small. On the other hand,there has been no strong evidence that teaching according to the develop-mental sequences is necessary or even desirable or that it will improve thelong-term results in language learning. \Vhat is mostvaluable about this pro-posal is that it serves to help teachers set realistic expectations about the ways

in which learners' interlanguage may change in response to instruction. Theimplications of 'Teach what is teachable' may be seen primarily in the factthat genuine progress in second language development must be measured

in ways that include, but are not limited to, increased accvfacy in language

production.

According to the 'Get it right in the end' proposal, classroom activitiesshould be built primarily on creating opportunities for students to express

and understand meaningful language. However, this proposal is based on thehypothesis that form-focused instruction and corrective feedback are also

essential for learners' continued growth and development. The challenge isto find the balance between meaning-based and form-focused activities. Theright balance is likely to be different according to the characteristics of thelearners. The learners' age, metalinguistic sophistication, prior educationalexperiences, motivation, and goals, as well as the similariry of the target lan-guage to a language aheady known need to be taken into account whendecisions are made about the amount and type of form focus to offer.

Classroom data from a number of studies offer support for the view thatform-focused instruction and corrective feedback provided within the

context of communicative and content-based programmes are more effective

'suorlEluarJo o.&\t aseql uae^\taq ef,uEpq rsegar{l Pug or sr a8uallBr{J aql 'rar.F?u 'uonfnrtsur pasEg-SuruEeu puB pes¿q-ruJoJ uee ueg Jsooq) ol ÁBssa3eu tou sr lr tng 'SurrIJBar a8en8ue¡ puof,asur uonoeJJof,-JoJJe pue tuJoJ ot uorlualte3o uoncelar atalduoc e ur palpseJsaurneuros srr{ spoqretu Sulgrear a8en8ue¡ a nelrunururof,Jo uorlrnpoJruraql (aun erues eql lV'ruooJsselt aq] ur asn a8en8u¿l snoauetuods sapn¡rxal¡enrrl,r leqt l¡rrnoce uo slseqdure uB sr eJerF eJar#\ slueuruoJr^ue ur >lJo \IIIrs sJer{Jear lue¡¡ 'slxaluof leuonef,npe Jrar{t ul spua;l Suqle,rard agt tsurESEoB regr sacnce¡d ruooJsself, tno l¡t ol tprgrp aq uec lr 'aJoruJer{lJng (¿srqrrnoqe oB ol lez'l a nreJe lsow aql l¡uar s srr{l Jr Japuo,^a 1,

,les pur sacn-ce;d rer¡rueJ uroü >peq dars or ls¿a s&rrr¡e lou sr lI 'po8 rraqr gsr¡durorce01 rseq^ror{JoesuesJEalf,Ea EqsJer{3eetIIeter{lasrf er{l ,{p.reqsrlr,luelxaauros ot ann aq feru slgr g8noqr¡y'acnce¡d uooJsself, tuaJJnf, Jrar{l ruJguof,llduls qf,reeseJ uo peseq suonepueuruoral rer{r IaaJ &ru laqr pue ,snf,oJ

Surutau¡ PuE snf,oj ruJoJ ef,uBlBg o] Peau aql Jo aJE.l!\E eJE sJaqf,Eal lury,q

lreululng

'looqls lE leea E sJnor{ ^\eJ

e ro3 a8en8uel u8laroS e 8uúpnrs sluef,salope pue 'aBenBuEI u.lur.o rrer{} aru^\

PuE P"aJ touu?f, oqrtr sturrSluurr JaPIo pue ra8unol qloq 'ruauuoJr^uee8en8ue¡ puof,as r ul Surlooqrs rrarp Suluur8aq uarpp{f, Sunof 'a8en8ue¡qug Jo l{unoJ e Sururea¡ srsrn8ur¡ peureJl 'fts to3 arel¡do.ldd¿ eq ppo,/üsaqceordde tueJeglp aun| 'asJnor Jo 'sonsrJetf,EJer{f, Jeurcel ur sefuaJoJlplunoJf,? olur a>lEt tsnlu snf,oj uroj apl,ro.rd ol ,/Vt.orl

Pue uagd\ lnogE suolsrf,acl

'a8en8ue¡ lnoqe suonsanb >1se 01 tueql Sur8e¡nocua lq pue '<>lJeqpaaJ

r{rl^\ Jeqro qcea apt,rord uec lagr qllqrYt ur slxaluof, Surdo¡a,rap fq 'saltr,rnoealnef,runuruJof, ur esn laqr surroj ar{r or uonueDe Jraqr A\eJp ler{l seFr^rpeSullea.rc lg ssacord aql ur r.red aler ol sJeuJeel a8e¡no¡ua ot InJesn eq osle

u?J tI 'sruJo3 esar{rJo asn aql ur uonfnJtsul papln8 atuos epl^oJd pue sruap-nts Jrarp Jo ruaudo¡a,l,ap a8en8ur¡ puo3es aqt ur aSrarua ol Suruur8aq rsnleJE teql seJnlm3 a8en8ur¡3o eJE.lr\E aJoru a{uof,ag or lrr os¡e tq8nu sJer{ftal'a8en8ue¡ ra8rer aqr ruog sragrp a8enSue¡ tsrg sraur¿el e ur aJntrnrls rEIn-crurd E

^\oq lnoqe uoneuJoJur e^nseJtuof, ap¡,rord ot aletrseq tou ppoqs

laql 'punorSlceq a8en8uel rsJU arues aqr aJer{s lagr uagm 3ur{eru ere ssEIf,

E uI sJauJee¡;o lrrroleru aqt reqt sJoJJe Jo a;ez're ,{¡elcadsa ag osp plnoqssJeqJeaJ'uorluellB PasnloJ lnoqlra ef,nou ol lou u¡aas sJeuJEel lEql sJoJJe

luatsrs¡ed lceJJof, ot arerrsaq rou ppor{s sJer{f,¿el 'elduJexe Joü 'sef,uels[unJJrJ

ureuaf, ur >lleqpeeJ e nf,aJJof, pue uonfnJtsur pesnf,oJ-urJoJ'pepm8 apr,rord

(p¡noqs pue) ueo srer{f,"el a8en8uel puof,es regr en8re ppo^\ e^t'snql 'euopÁtetntte ro 'fruang 'uolsuegerdruof, uo slseqdure e rsnlf,xa f¡enl.llzt e olparr{urT eJ" ler{t sarurue¡3o¡d ueqr Sulureal a8en8ue¡ puof,Js Sullou¡o¡d ul

tuootssvlr aql ut Sututaal a&an&ual puocag L6I

198 Second language learning in the classroom

Classroom-based research on second language learning and teaching has

given us partial answers to many questions. Through continuing researchand experience, researchers and teachers will fill in more details, always rec-ognizing that no single answer will be adequate for all learning environments.Among the questions we will continue to ask are these:

. How can classroom instruction provide the right balance of meaning-based and form-focused instruction ?

. \Vhich features of language will respond best to form-focused instruc-tion, and which will be acquired without explicit focus if learners haveadequate access to the language?

. \Vhich learners will respond well to metalinguistic informationand which will require some other way of focusing amention onlanguage form?

. tülhen is it best to draw learners' attention to form-before, after, orduring communicative practice?

. How should correctiye feedback on language form be offered?

. $lhen should learners be allowed to focus their attention on the contentoftheir utterances?

Continued classroom-centred research, including the action research byteachers in their own classrooms, will provide further insights into these andother important issues in second language teaching and learning.

Questions for reflectionI Keeping in mind that individual learner differences play an important role in

second language learning, do you think a particular learner profile might be

more compatible with one of the teaching proposals than another?

2 lf you were going to experiment with a new approach to teaching in yourclassroom,which of the six proposals described in this chapter would you

choose?Why?

3 This chapter concludes with the suggestion that'Get it right in the end' is

the best approach.ls this consistent with your own views?Why/why notl

'uSrsep unlnf,rrrnf, or perelar sanssrJo a8ue.r ¡n; eql uo sarerogela 1oogsrql pue 'seapr aql sJf,nportur (tO0O uoneN 'runlnf,rrrn: ¿ ua^e Jo 'sngel-¡ls e 'uossal EJo sruetuJle eql sE uaes aq osp lew spueJts JnoJ aqt 'Sulureay,fie¡nqeco,r ur r{f,Jeasal suoneN uo paseg llpulSrrg 'Sururea¡ uoo.r-ss?lf, uo qf,rEasar qtrrtr alqlrrdruor sr tegr Surqcear a8en8uel or grrorddrpaou¿pq e tuasa¡da.r laqr .raqraSo¡ 'ruaudo¡a,rep louang pue '8ulurra1pasnroS-a8enSur¡'rndrno pasnroS-Surueaur'lndur pasncoS-Sulutaru :eJE

spuerls rno3 aql 'auue¡8o¡d Surqceer a8en8ue¡ E ur-ef,uet;odul ¡enbaJo pue-lenuassa sE uees eJE ter{l (spueJts, rno3 pasodord srq uoneN InBd

' a8pa¡rn o¿ :>lJoÁ,r\aN'u&1saq urynrt¿tn) a&an&uaT'0I02 'rersl¡ere¡4¡'f pue U 'S 'I ruor¡ra¡

'arllre¡d pue l.roaqr uaa,r\tag epeul suonJauuoo InJasn Jqrur tuapne sr Jaqf,Jeasal pue Jar{f,eet qroq se acuar¡adxa s Joglne aq1 d¡sno

-auetlnurs tualuor pue a8rn8ue¡ Surrlcear 3o sa8ua¡pgf, er{l or suonnlosrq8nos s¿q reqr >1.rorrr prr.udrueJo sapef,ep sazrsaqruls rars/1 lo¿ 'epeue3ur sau¡tue¡8o¡d uors¡aruur qf,uaJC uI r{f,Jeasal uo snroJ allsnlf,xJ lourng lrerulrd E r{ll,4N 'sruooJSSEIr pe$q-ruaruoc ur Suru¡eal pue Surqcear

a8en8ue¡3o slsfpue pue uoltdrnsep elrsuaqa¡duoc e saptzro;d looq srql' surur lua g ugof : rueple $trry' q r ? o.t ddV p a t uap q urun o ) V

: ruaruo ) q7n o.r t¡t a8anSuaT 3u! r/ na¿ pua SututaaT' L007,'¿'rars,(1'a¡rt¡e¡d u,e\o Jrar.ll ot uonEIaJ

ul paruesard seapr aqr uo llegal ol sJap?eJ atelllour 01 slEIJatEIu 8ul¡cearpue 'seDrArtJE '$ls¿tJo esn e^rsuelxe sr aJaql pue suoneJePlsuof, ¡eolrce.rdol Ief,rlaJoer{r tuo5 seloru rardeqc rpeg '8ulu;ee1 Sutssasse pue '8uruueld's¡¡1s a8en8u€l aql Surdo¡a,rap 'tuatsls a8en8uel aqr Surqceal 'Suturua¡

pue Surqoea] roJ >lro \erue{ e :suoltres rnoJ orul papr,rlp sl r1 'sa8en8ue¡

u8lerojTpuoras 3o Suru.real put Sulqcear eqt or ruE^alal s¡ldol 3o a8ue.r

aPr^\ e sJa^of rI 'JerPEar uooJssslf eqr JoJ >looq ef,ueJajal Injasn 3 sI sIqI'ssar¿ ólsra,rrun pJoJxO

:proJXO 'ruoo$sq) a8rnSuaT aqt ur SututaaT pua Sutqtaa¿'0002 'I'atpa¡¡'l8o8epad a8en8uel roJ suonef,rldur slr

pu¿ r.lf,reaser ar{r uee,&\tag ep¿ru are $luII '>loog eqr rnoq8norql 'plro.^a eqlpunoJe Sulqcear a8en8ue¡ Sune8nsa,rur aJE orlld sJorrfnpa pue sJEIoI{JS

Jo >lro.{l, eqt seqsrlqnd gr¡qm 'quaasa¿ Su1cpaa¿ a&an&uaT purnol el{l joJolrpa sE puB Jar{fJEesal e se sa,uloads.rad ¡enp srq tuo5 >ls"l aqr sagreo;ddesrllg 'sarpnts Jo reqrunu tse^ E uro{ s8urpug eqr pue spoqraur al{r qroqslder^ar ag '3ulurea1 a8rnSue¡ puof,as ul Sulqcrat Jo aloJ aqr areS¡rsa,tur

or l¡ecglrads pau8rsap sr terlr qf,reaseJ uo sasnf,oJ sITIg '.erunlo^ slqr uI' ¡1a.r,u1ce¡g -fallA, :Vntr

'uapplA¡ 'l8o&apa¿ aSan&uaT pua r1uaasa¿ &u1qna¿ aSan&ul7 'Zl0T, 'U'sIIg

tulpear rerlrrry roJ suorrsaSSn5

66tutoo¿ssplJ aql m &uru"taa1 a8un&uq puotag

per"rrrurJo tsrl e8r¿l E ezllBurelul uer{t erou op srauJtal a8en8ue¡ teqr aruaP

-l,ta apnord srar.{lo fueur pue sa¡druexa asar¡1 'f.r8ue sI rulq or a>1ods 1 reqrueur aql Jo 'ü,^ .ol orur peplJ log-aloc at¡¡, les oq^\ sJeuJBe¡ e8enSuel Puof,asr{rr^\ puE ',rq8¡r aprsdn tr pauJru I rnq u11\oP aPlsdn s3^\ lI, pur ',dols l,uec

1 pue dn Surcclq ur(I, s? r{Jns sarualues sueJpllql uI luaPl^e sl sIlL '$lro1y\

rualsls a8en8ue¡ eqt ,/$oq 3o Sulpuersrepun Suldo¡e,rap JIaI{I uo Paseg ere

sarueluas aseql 'eroJaq pJraq aAEI{ lou p¡noc laqr leqt sef,ualuas ¡a,rou luruacnpo;d sreu;ra1 aSen8uel puoles pue lsJg esnmag 'uotlet¡rut q8norqr l¡ureurpeurrel a¡e saBenSuEI rtqr ruatunS.re el{l roJ r¡oddns pug or TFIUIP sI rI

uoDellurl r¡tnorqrl¡uTPur Peureel eJ? setBnSwT I

qf,JBasal ruorySuru¡eaT :seepl re¡ndod eql uo tulrcaga¿

¿s.ratdeqr Surparald aqt ur p€eJ arr.nol req,r,r {q PauJUuol -ro pe8ueqr uaaq

uo¡t¡srnbre a8en8ue¡ puof,as uoqe s^ et^ Jnol e,re¡1 'r*ou a,rtB p¡noa,r no{ esoql pue

uaqr a,re8 no¡( sasuodsa"l aqr a.reduo3'ute8e al¡euuo¡fanb aqt erc¡duor pue ¡reqoBterdeqr stqt Sutpea.r anurluof, nol a.rolag'SuluJeel a8en8ue¡ moq€ s€aPl *¡ndodeuos qtfv\ paa.r8e nol l¡8uo.rrs

^ oq elef,lPul ol nol Pe¡se a/v\'uolDnPoJlul aql ul

suo¡u¡do JnoÁ rv\al^eu ^ll^llf,v

'suoluldo .re¡ndod

asaqr tnoqe s \aIA u^\o JnoJo auos Sulreqs'>looq snp ut PessnfslP JAEq a,tt

regr Áoarp pue I{fJEasaJ perEIoJ al{t Jo eu¡os ezlJeuruns PUE uorlfnPoJlulaqr ur ol papuodsat nol regr sluauralrts B I 3I{r ol uJnleJ ar'r tarderp slql uI

/$.eIAaJd

CIflIISIAflUCNINUVfl-I flDVNDNV-I

INOSV SVflCII UVfNdOd

202 Popular ideas about language learning reuisited

and memorized sentences. They also identify patterns in the language andextend them to new contexts.

Ifwe use a narrow definition of imitation (the immediate repetition of all orpart of another speakert utterance) we find that some children imitate a greatdeal as they acquire their first language. Even these children, however, do notimitate everything they hear. Instead, they selectively imitate certain wordsor structures that they are in the process of learning. Furthermore, childrenwho do little overt imitation learn language as quickly and as well as thosewho imitate more. Thus, this rype of imitation may be an individual learningstrategy but it is not a universal characteristic oflanguage learners.

Some second language learners also find it useful to imitate samples of the newlanguage. Classroom researchers have observed students who repeat what theyhear others sa¡ and some advanced learners who are determined to improvetheir pronunciation find it helpful to spend time carefully listening to and imi-tating language in a language laboratory or tutorial. However, for beginninglearners, the imitation and rote memorization that characterizes audiolingualapproaches to language teaching is not effective if learners do not also use thesentences and phrases they are practicing in meaningful interaction. Learnersneed to do more than recite bits of accurate language in drills and dialogues.

Nevertheless, recent findings from corpus linguistics have provided a newappreciation for formulaic language use. \7e know from the discussion ofusage-based theories discussed in Chapter 4 that a great deal of natural lan-guage use is predictable on the basis of the frequency with which words orphrases occur together. Learners create strong associations between language

features that tend to occur together. Thus, language is partlylearned in chunkslarger than single words. However, this internalization of the input does notdepend on the learner's imitation of all or part of another persont utterancein a rote-repetition fashion. it is the combined exposure to language features

in the input and their use in meaningful exchanges that leads to learning.

2 Parents usually correct young children when they makegrammatical errors

There is considerable variation in the extent to which parents correct theirchildrent speech. The variation is based partly on the childrens age andpartly on the parents' social, linguistic, and educational background. \Mhen

children are very young, parents rarely comment on grammatical errors,

although they may correct lapses in politeness or the choice of a word thatdoesnt make sense. As children reach school age, parents may correct thekinds of non-standard speech that they hope their children will outgrow, forexample, 'Me and Fred are going outside now'.

Extensive observations of parents and children show that, as a rule, parents

tend to focus on meaning rather than form when they correct children's

Sururea¡ ol alo ep uef JauJEal aql erun qJnru .^aor{ '8uru.rea1 ro3 saruara3ardpue sa¡lrs (sJauJeal lenpr^rpur qtr.&\ stf,EJalur uonf,nJtsur aqt ,ta.oq .apntnde

8ulu.real a8en8uel sE r{rns sef,ueraJlp lenpr^rpur raqlo Jo ro a8e qtr^! aruoorer¡r sa8ueqf, Jo uonJagal e eq leu tJ 'uJeal ol petplrloru lou aJE sJauJeala8enSue¡ puof,es rppe ler{l ef,uep4e sB ue>pt eq rou ppoqs srgl'uonrsrnbceaSen8ue¡ lsJg ur op uarplrql terp lrrrnooe pur louang eqr e^arqle ,(1arctsrppe se a8en8uel puofes r Sururea¡ ur8aq oqlr sJruJerl reqr .alduexa ro3ru.ou1 a¿¡'8ururea1 a8en8ue¡ ur sa8ua¡eqc rearS :atunof, u) sJauJ"al palE^notufn8ry ua^e'sarunaruog lpr8rr oor slqt rardJatur tou tsnru a./\4.lng 'tuop oq./(asoqt uerll lauag op o] puar uJeel ol lue.&\ oq,^a sJeuJeol teqt searSe auol;a,rg

uope no(u sr

uoplslnbre e8en8ue¡ puoras ul ssef,rnsJo ronlpard rseq ar{l 7'luouJuoJrlua Suru.rea¡ agr or Surrq stuapnts leql senrlrge luoJeJrp Jrlt a8e8uaol slezvr pug ot sl pnuessa sr rErLA'a8en8uel puofas e Suru;ea1 lnoqe efroqJou al¿r{ sdno¡3 ór¡ounu ¡o tue¡8nuu¡l ruog sluapn}s (stxatuof,

leuone3npe.{ueru u1 'paaDns or llllqe rrrueprlr ar{r e^Eq lou op laqr trqr spuno.r8 agruo a8en8uel Jer{toue ur?al ol sauunl¡oddo ruory pepnlf,xa aq rou ppoqsstuepnrs 'stsat|1 lq parnseau lou are reqt sanrlrgt put sllDls tuaragrp lueurteat? e sello ur Sururea¡ a8en8ur¡ ]Erp pellerer eg lsnru U 'lueuodtul tsotr {

'a8paproul clrsln8urpraru u¿ql Jer{tEJ sllpls uorlef,runururo:

IEro uo sl srsegdua aqtJr anrl l¡ercadsa q qql 'sJeureal a8enSuel InJssalf,nsog urf sanrTrgt Fnlfellalu jo lral;r,L apr,r\ E r{¡r1'r sJeuJEel teqt u,r\oqs srr{r{JJ¿esaJ 'pezlsegdua sr asn e8en8uel e nf,EJetur aJeq,4a sruooJSSEIJ ur pues8untas Sulurea¡ a8enSuel IEJnlEu ur '.ra,rarvro11 'lle^\ sE stsauo spur¡ Jaqro uo

Ila,ry\ op leru stsarbI ,ro ile \ op oqm aldoa¿ '(sa¡nr ¡eruru¿¡3 'a¡druexa ro3)

e8en8uel agtryoqaBuruJEel uo sl srseqdrua aql aJeq,4 sruooJss€ll ur ssaf,fnsJororrpard pooS e ueuo sr stsar|1fq parnseeu sr teqt a:ua8r¡1arur;o pur>t eql

sreurual a8en8ue¡ poo8 eru aydoadluaSrqaturtq8g g

'sreel ro3 sruJoJ IeJneruu¡r¡8un urElJJJ Sursn ul tsrs¡ad leru sraurra¡a8en8url puo)as 'aruep¡n8 put >llBqpaal elnf,arrof, lnoqlr^\ 'regr srsaSSns

efuaprle aql 'putq Jeqlo eqr uO 'JoJJe uo >lfeqpaa; Jo uonf,nJlsu FruJoJlue rnoqrlr't aSrn8ue¡ 3o ¡eap rea-r8 e a¡lnboe uEf, srlnpe pu¿ uarpllql qroq'pu"r{ auo ar{r uO 'xa¡duor aJour sr sJauJ¿al a8en8ue¡ puoles JoJ asrf ar{I

ptqpaal rrcrldxa ou ro eprll r¡u.r aSenBuEI ar{lJo ruroJ tlnpeaqr armbcr or alqe ag or ;eadde leqr 'flareunuo¿ 'aBenBuEI rrer{r jo (surar-ted uolleuotur aql 'sauaqdrotu pc¡reuruer8 aqr tapJo prom aqr) aJnlonJlsJrseq aqt uJeal ol JapJo ur 1reqpaal e^nf,eJJof, lualsrsuor uo puadap louu?f,uaJPIrI{f, IEI{] sI sn sller slql IEILA 'uoll?f,IunuluJof, tllur\ aJeJJeluI rou oP

ler{l sJoJJe ol tJEeJ ueuo lou op laqr tng 'í>lJrtueJ epnJ E Jo 'slf,EJ ar{lJo ruaru-ot¿ls loeJJof,ur u¿ 'e3roqf, pJolv\ lfeJJoour uE lf,eJJof feu feqr 'sng1 'graads

paunnatSutu"taal a8an&uq tnoq? saap wlndo¿ e0z

204 Popular ideas about language learning reuisited

the new language, and what opportunities the learner has to use the language

outside the classroom.

Teachers have no influence over learners' intrinsic motivation for learning asecond language. Students come to classrooms from different backgrounds

and life experiences, all of which have contributed to their motivation tolearn and their attitudes toward the target language and the communitywithwhich it is associated. The principal way that teachers can influence learners'

motivation is by making the classroom a supportive environment in whichstudents are stimulated, engaged in activities that are appropriate to their age,

interests, and cultural backgrounds, and, most importantl¡ where students

can experience success. This in turn can contribute to positive motivation,leading to sdll greater success.

5 The earlier a second language is introduced in school

programmes, the greater the likelihood of success in learning

The decision aboutwhen to introduce second or foreign language instructionmust depend on the objectives of the language programme in the particularsocial context of the school. tWhen the objective is native-like performance

in the second language, then it may be desirable to begin exposure to the

language as early as possible, as long as learners have extensive exposure toand opportunities to use the second language in a variety of contexts. The

research evidence is fairly strong that those who begin second language learn-

ing at an early age are most likely to eventually be indistinguishable fromnative speakers.

However, even in cases where native-like proficiency is targeted, it is impor-tant to recognize certain disadvantages ofan early start for second language

learning. 'ülhen an early start means that children have little opportunity to

conrinue to develop their first language, the resulting subtractive bilingual-ism may have lasting negative consequences.

For children from minoriry-language backgrounds, programmes promotingthe development of the first language both at home and at school may be

more important for long-term success in the second language than an early

start in the second language itself. Research shows that a good foundation inthe child's first language, including the development of literacy, is a sound

base to build on. Children who can begin their schooling in a language they

already knowwill have more self-confidence, will be able to learn more efFec-

tively in the early school years, and will not lose valuable time in a period oflimbo during which they struggle just to understand what is happening inthe classroom.

For many children, there is no opportuniry to have their early schooling intheir first language. They are members of small minority groups where it is

not practical for schools to offer them an educational Programme in their

'luaJeJIP ag tsnlusa8en8ue¡ aqt regr 'lpcarroour sauJrleruos 'etunsse leqr esnerJg sJItIJelIuJIsJo

a8elue,l,pe e>pr or 3u¡¡¡e3 'Surreulrul¡csp l¡ra,r.o eg uEf, sJeuJEa'I 'tuaqt or rnoparurod are laqr sselun senrJelrruls Jo a8etue,r.pe e>lel 01 alqt aq sler't¡e touleru s¡eu¡eal 'rl¿J uI 'seruetues a8enSuel-rsrg orur spJo^\ aSen8ue¡-puoras

Sunrnd3o ssa¡o¡d e flduls tou sr Suru¡ea¡ a8en8uel puoles 'JEIIIuls aJE rel{lstoadse esoqr ueqr lr¡nrgrp aroul qtl^\ Jo ralel parrnbce ag l¡;essarau tou

fipr a8en8uel tsr5 er.p ruo5 ruara5lp are rrr{] a8en8ue¡ puof,as aqr3o sreadry

'sJoJJe arues er{t e>leru oq.& sJauJeel Jer{}o qrl.{\ toeluof, ur l¡ruanba.rS

aJ¿ sJauJ¿JI uagru. l¡ercadsa 'aruol¡a^o or rlnf,srp aq ltru larp 'sa8en8ue¡puofas pu" rsJg er{r uae \rag ll.re1¡ru¡s ¡errred aruosJo uolldac¡ad (sJeuJral,{q pasnec aJE sJoJJa uaq/tya8enSuel JauJEal uI sJoJJaJo sofJnos roleru arp3oauo sl a8¿nBuEI a nEU arp ruo5 suraned3o reJsuBrr aqr 'pueq raqro aqr uO

'xerufsSo sa¡drcurrd f,rseg eulos sE IIe,^ se 'sprorrL aleuSo¡ 'raqeqd¡e aqr

Sulpn¡rur-Aou1 fpearp sreureal rEI{r qrnu sI arrqt '(qruarg pue qsrurdg

'ueruJag pue qsrÉuE 'a¡duexa ro3) sursnor aso¡r fla,rrreler are sa8en8ue¡ aqr

31 'Sururea¡ a8en8url u8ra.ro3 ro puoresJo sr¡adse lueu ol llar'nlsod alnqlrl-uof, uer sa8rn8uq eJour Jo euoJo a8pay'rou1 teqt azuSooal plnoqs e^\'tsJld

aSenSuey tsrg rlar{r ruory ef,uaraJratq ol anpar¿ eTE(u sreurEel aSunSue¡ Puores ]eql sa)Plsru¡ eqlJo lsotr\l 9

'srql rnoge rg8rr uagoare laqr (¡peg 'ssarSord qcnur 8ur>lrru lnoqlunr ,s.real.roj, Sullpnrs uaeg a^¿q

laqr reqr IeeJ srauffal sE 'uollensn{ ot sPeal uar3o gceordde ,peai-dl.rp, sltl¡'sra>¡eads a8en8ue¡ puof,as parup p? arnpord tou III^\-srea,( rg8ra ro uelas

JoJ us^a->lae,&\ E sJnor{ o1v\l Jo aug 'a8en8uEl Puof,as E uJEel ol se>lEl lI8uo¡ ,noq Jo ser?urlsa rnsllear uo paseg eq ppor{s saruu¿¡8o¡d Iooqts ¡¡V

'e8rn8ue¡ ¡ eu eqt or a¡nsodxa e^Isualul eJoruJo porrad E sePnloul esJno3

a8en8uel u8ra.roS agr3l anrr l¡¡etcadsa sl slql 'uollrnrtsulJo >lea./'r ¿ sJnol{ /(eJ

e l¡uo Sulrago sau¡rur¡8o¡d ul (plo srca,t ¿-9 te 'a¡druexa ro3) rar¡rea ur8aqor{,&\ esoq} qrrr'r fpprnb dn qum or olqe are (sp¡o-rea,(-g 1 'a¡druexa -ro3) uarp

Tr{J raplo 'rare¡ Sulq:ear a8en8ue¡ puoras uÉaq or luel)Ue erou aq uEf, tI'a8rn8ue¡ rs.rg s,ppll ar¡r Suldola.tap pue Sulureluleu¡ ot luaut¡uuor 8uo¡ts

B sr aJar{l eJar{^\ pue 'sruepnls IIe JoJ IIHS elltef,Iuntutuof, JISEq sl aurur¡8o¡d

Ipuonmnpe aqr 3o po8 aqr uaqr6 'tuaJaJIP atmb st uollsnlls aql 'sluePnls

¡e lg aoueuroS.rad a>lll-a^Irru tou s pata8Jet sI t¿ql fcuarogo.rd 30 la^el eqleJaql( uonJnJtsul a8en8ut¡ puof,es JoJ ro uollf,nJlsul a8en8ue¡ u8ra.ro3 rog

'uoJa pue erun salet Suturta¡ a8en8utl puores reqr PuelsJaPun oI{^\ Pu¿'a8en8uq etuoq aql urclurtru ot stua¡¿d a8e¡norua oqn lrpeglP s,uaiPllqlerp rradsar oq \ sJolBf,npa a^Itlsuas oAEII ot IEIJnJf, sI 1I 'uaJPIIqJ esel{r JoC

'puno.r$loeq rrer{iJo ssa¡pre8ar (uarpllqf, II¿ roJ uoltef,nPaJo a8rn8ue¡ a¡8urs

e pJrepueru seq uonelst8el araq.{ suollrlpslrnl ur ertl¡ fagr .ro 'e8en8ur¡ rsry

patTslaat Bututaal aSan&uq ffioqu s?apt nlndo¿ 902

206 Popular ideas about language learning reuisited

However, the first language is not the only infuence on second language

learning. Learners from different backgrounds often make the same kinds oferrors, and some of these errors are remarkably similar to those made by firstlanguage learners. In such cases, secondJanguage errors are evidence ofthelearners' efforts to discover the structure ofthe target language itselfratherthan attempts to transfer patterns from their first language.

7 the bestwayto learn newvocabularyis through reading

This statement is true but it does not tell the whole story. Children expandtheir vocabulary dramatically during their school years, and reading is themajor source of this growth. Second language learners can also increase theirvocabulary knowledge through reading, but few second language learners

will read the amount oftarget language text that a child reads in the course ofmore than a decade of schooling.

Research evidence suggests that second language learners benefit from oppor-tunities to read material that is interesting and important to them. However,those who also receive guidance from instruction and develop good strate-gies for learning and remembering words will benefit more than those whosimply focus on getting the main ideas from a text. \What is perhaps moststriking in the research is the evidence that in order to successfully guess themeanings of new words in a text, a reader usually needs to know more than90 per cent of the words in that text.

8 It is essential for learners to be able to pronounce att theindiüdual sounds in the second language

Research on pronunciation has shown that second language speakers' abiliryto make themselves understood depends more on their abiliry to reproduce

the phrasing and stress patterns-the 'melody' of the language-than ontheir abiliry to articulate each individual sound. Another important empha-sis in current research is the undeniable fact that most languages of the worldare spoken in many different varieties. Thus, it no longer seems appropriateto insist that learners be taught only one language variery or that only native

speakers ofa particular variety are the best teachers. Rather, learners need tolearn to understand and produce language varieties that will permit them toengage in communicative interaction with the interlocutors they are most

likely to encounter.

9 Once learners know 1,000 words and the basic structure of asecond language, they can easily participate in conversationswith native speakers

It is true that most conversational language involves only a relatively limitednumber of words and sentence types. However, learners will find it easier to

qseads rrar{r .úrporu ot sltnSurlrg lueng pur sra>lrads a nru Jo suoge eqrruo5 rgauag sraurre¡ aSenSue¡ puoras rer{r rqnop ou sr aJar.{t 'etun Jrues ar{l lV'saJnlmJ xa¡druo:, ol .a1drurs,3o arnoerd pue 'Suuapro'uoltetuesaJd pare¡oslaql sallolur srqr uaqr* l¡re¡ncltrtd-,a¡drurs, ag ol sruJal rnsln8ull ur pe^ref,-¡ad a¡e ler{l saJnlf,n¡ls ol a¡nsodxe (sJauJeel lJrJlsal ot alqeJrsap Jou,(ressacauJer{rleu sr 1r ler{l srsaSSns srql 'sJar{ro eJoJoq parrnbre aJE saJnlf,nJls urElJJf,

'sraurea¡ or paruasa.rd sl a8en8ue¡./v\or{ Janeu ou reqr u.{\or{s srr{ rlf,Jeese¿

sauo xaldruocaroJaq ssrnlruls atentue¡ eldturs rlrsal pForls srerl]eal II

'rsEI eqr eroJeq 3uo1 uano8ro3ueag a^Er{ IIr{\ lrun rsJg arp ur peur¿al sernteal a8en8ue¡ aql 'tueqt Sulsn pue

'Suleas 'Surreaq enunuof ol senrunuoddo rnor¡rvrn'rer{t lla>lll osle sr lI 'esn

a8en8ue¡ puJou ur lseJluof, pue aledruoo seJnteal a8en8url tueJegrp ^/\or{

Ja^of,srp or lr¡unrroddo ue grml sJeuftel aprnord lou saop auln ? lB eJnlf,nJrs

auo Jo a¡lroe¡d pu¿ uorl?luasard pare¡osl s¡ll 'rqSner l¡snol,rard sauo eqlasnre.ld ol sJauJeal JoJ saurunlJoddo ere.r lluo qll^\'aJnrEeJ rxau eql uo e oruueql pue 'sllun luanbesqns IEJa es ur lr ef,JoJureJ pue rlun rsJg eql ur aJnlea3

a8rn8ue¡ re¡nrued E a3nporlur teqt qoogrxatJo uonezlue8ro aqr ur uaas aq

uEf, srr{I'salnJJo uollelnrunlf,¿ uE sr ruaudola,Lap a8en8ue¡ puof,Js reql uoF-drunsse aslej ar{r uo p:szq are Sulqcrat or saq:eo.rdde poseq-ernlJnns atuos

'rg sacald eqr IIE lllun SuunpnrlsaJpue Surrsnlpea¡ 'a8en8uelJatur Sunslxa ue orul su;aned pue suroS a8en8

-uel ^/y\eu Surter8arur 30 sassaco¡d se lo^ur 1r 'Jerpsu 'JarpouE JauE alnJ auo

Sulppe lsnf lou sr ruaurdo¡a,tap a8en8url 'owlr retel e tB (¿lBI{t qrrm Sulopar,nof l¿Llrtr, alll suorrsanb acnpord uaqr pue .¿qs1¡8uE u aqto"td,(es no.{ opA¡\oH, Jo ,¿l¿ql s(l¿r.LA, SB r{3ns suollsanb sIBInLuJOJ lf,eJJOf, ¡se feur sJauJeal

rvroq 'e¡duexa JoJ '1$.es a¿¡'a8en8uelJelur Jreqt otur a8rn8ue¡ aqr rnog¿ uoll-EruJoJur ¡ttau 8u¡le¡od¡ocul aJE sJeuJeal fegl rtrogs leru ¡f a8efs le lce¡nc¡e uraurlrep aq¿'z a8zrg re ure8e f¡are;nf,f,? rr ef,npord pue '/a8erg re (r1 rduautfaqr uaqlt srorra a{Eru .lo) u.ro3 ar¡r a:npord or IIeJ '(uro3 rBI{r paureala,,teq faqr rrqr SurrsaSSns) x a8erg re l¡atrrncce LuroJ Jelnf,n¡ed e esn leu¡sJeuJEa'I 'tuaudo¡a,rap srl uI reaur¡ fldruls lou sI Sulu.rea¡ a8en8uel puoles

Jeqloue ol uo 3uro3 eJoJeq euo IPEa aslpsJd Plnoqs sreureel

puB rarup B lE euo se[nr ImIrEIrIurpJS tueseJd Plnoqs sretlrEel 0I

'tJeJJor aJE saJnlf,nJrs ef,ueruas aqr pu" spJol\ eql uaq.{! ue^a 's8ulpuers;apun-srur Jo u^\oP>leaJq uortef,runuruJof ot PEal sarulleruos suollf,EJarul3o sadlrasaql ul sef,uaJaglp leJnrlnf, ag1 'stsanbeJ a>IEIu ro 'azt8o¡ode 'lcedsat r*oqss;opads,/rrorl sE s8ulqr r{Jns uo uonualle Jlerp snooJ ot uaqr JoJ Injesn sI rI'a¡durexa rog 'a8en8ue¡ rvrau aqrJo sernleeJ f,Ileru8rrd aqr3o auoslo Surpuers

-rapun ue eler.l os¡r faqr 3l poorsJapun sa^lasueql aleru ot pue puersJopun

patTs1rtat SuTutaal aSunSuq moq? raapx wlndo¿ LOZ

208 Popukr ideas about knguage learningreuisited

to help them understand. The language used in modified interaction maycontain avariety of linguistic structures, some 'simple' and some 'complex'.However, it also includes a range of adjustments that enable second languagelearners to engage in interactions with native and more advanced speakers

of the second language more easily-more repetition, slower rate ofdeliver¡paraphrasing, etc.

Teachers must also be aware, however, that some linguistic forms are so rarein classroom language that learners have little opportunity to hear, use, andlearn them if the teacher does not make a point of providing them. These

are not necessarily difficult or complex forms. As we saw in Chapter 6, some'simple' language forms turn out to be extremely rare in classroom language,even in content-based instruction.

12 Learners' effors should be corrected as soon as they are madein order to prevent the formation of bad habits

Errors are a natural part oflanguage learning. This is true ofthe developmentof a child's first language as well as of second language learning by childrenand adults. Errors refect the patterns of learners' developing interlanguagesystems-showing gaps in their knowledge, overgeneralization of a secondlanguage rule, or an inappropriate transfer ofa first language pattern to thesecond language.

Teachers have a responsibiliry to help learners do their best, and this includesthe provision of explicit, form-focused instruction and feedback on error.-When errors are persistent, especially when they are shared by almost all stu-dents in a class, it is important to bring the problem to their attention. Thisdoes not mean that learners should be expected to adopt the correct formor pattern immediately or consistently. If the error refects a developmentalstage, the instruction or feedback may be useful only when the learner is ready

for it. It may be necessary to repeat feedback on the same error many times.

Of course, excessive feedback on error can have a negative effect on motiva-tion; teachers need to be sensitive to their students' reactions to correction.The amount and rype of correction that is offered will also vary according tothe specific characteristics of the students, as well as their relationship withthe teacher and with each other. Children and adults with little educationin their first language will not benefit greatly from sophisticated metalin-guistic explanations, but university students who are advanced learners ofthe language may find such explanations of great value. Immediate reactionto errors in an oral communication setting may embarrass some studentsand discourage them from speaking while others welcome such correctionas exacdy what is needed to help them notice a persistent error at just themoment when it occurs.

esoql lseJJol or dlaq PIno^! IEI{] uoIlEluJoJuI I{rI^{ Jal{lo qf,Ee oPI^oJd lluEu-lPJo louuEf sla^al JEIItuls le srauJEal IEI{I te^a,&\oq

(s,/v\orls osp I{fJEasaJ aql'sJo>ltads eln¿u ot Jo slalel pefue^pe eJoul tE sJeuJeal ot Suqeads ueq.^a oP

faqr ueqr lcuarcgordSo slercl rellruls tB sleureel or 8uq¡er uarl.Lr qcaads rlaqrur sJorJa a.¡oru fue acnpord rou op sJeuJeel r¿qr u^\oqs seq qcreasar 'f¡3ur-sr¡d¡ns teq^eauos 'plnof Ja^a ssEIJ paJruaf,-Jaqf,¿al E uetlt suollesJaluor uISurr¿dlrrr¡ed pur 3ur¡eads ul acltce¡d eJour JEJ sapr.tord >1ro¡vr dno.l8 pue rred

'peqrleru llarelrdorddr are sreuJtel pue pau8rsap IIa¡a eJE satrl^Irre al{l JI

'pau8rsap,(1rado.rd ere Dlsel agr jr l¡ercadsa 'saBelue^PESIP

aqt q8la.,r,rrno rEJ >lro,4^ dno¡3 pur rredSo stgaueq eqt 'sselel{ue^eN 'sauo e>lII

-ra8¡el aJour qll^\ su.ralted a8en8ue¡;arul JIaIF are¡dar ol ruaql pee¡ iq8nurugt Sulueeu .to; uottetto8eu JoJ paau aqt Sutreutrulla 'lle¡a lra.t raqto qrrapuelsJapun or f1a>1r1 are laqr 'fcuarcgordjo le^al aru¿s eql l¡q8nor lB are PuEpuno.rS¡ceq a8enSue¡ lsJU erues erlt uJoU au¡oJ sJauJeal uer{,44'aJouJJI{unC'rndul rf,aJJoful aruos apIAoJd feru faqr 'raqro I{)Ea qll&\ lferelul sJauJeel

uaq.Lr 'sng1 'sJauJeel Jer{ro qtvrrBunce¡alul a¡e.{aql ueq,&\ (u¡aoP lnqs, lou aJe

rndur uor3 uJral ot tuJr{r ^\olle

IBI{I sassaf,o;d a¡lrtuSoc ag1 'ruarudole^eP

a8en8ue¡ Jleql ot tndul se selJes PeaJ PuE reaq sraureal reqr aBenBuEI aql

sa{p}sFu s(retllo rlrEe fdo) faql '(sannrlr? rred ¡o dno¡8q (aldurpxe roJ) f¡aer¡ ]J?relur ol Pe ^.o[P

ere sraureal uarl4N 7I

'PaJelsBLu lou a,req lar¡rseJntfnJls pue sruJo3 3o &arre,r lea¡8 e or pasodxa are flurcuac suooJSSEIf,

aprslno a8en8ue¡ puof,Js e a¡lnbce l¡nlssarrns oq1ü sJeuJ?el rEI{r JaquJuaJ

ppoqs a/N dpueururopard ua,ra ro l¡a.trsn¡oxa slBlJelsru qf,ns asn 01 sluaP

-nls ot af,r^iasslp E Jq plno^\ rI rng 'lsea tuaas s8ulrp JaIFo eJal{.,ur lxeluof,e ur luaruela euo etplosl terp splJat¿ru sn)oJ-.^aoJJeu asn ol alel¡do¡dde sl

r¡ 'uralqord lualsls¡ad e Jo uollfaJJof, JoJ Peeu 3 sI eJer{l slaeJ JeI{f,EJr el{r

uaq,4 Jo 'erurl tsJg eqr JoJ Paf,nPoJrul sI eJntEaJ a8enSue¡;e¡ncltrrd ¿ ual{lN

'fcuapuadep JIeI{r sPueua a8en8

-uel arp o1 a¡nsodxa dars-lq-dars or stuapnts Sullf,Irtsad fpuapuadapul ueql

pue aou"prn8 s.ragceat aql rpr.^¿\ rsJg slqr op laql 'ruoorsself, el{l ePISrno esn

a8en8ue¡ ,ro3 pareda;d aq or Suro8 l¡enrua,ra are lagl3l IelJeleru ,Jllueqlne,ro <lEeJ, qrrm Sulpap ro3 salSate;ts do¡e,up ot PJau osp sluaPnlS 'pa8ua¡eqo

l¡rualrgns lou aJE sruapnrsJl uont^rloruJo ssol B aq l¡parqnopun ilI-& arerll'sa¡uanbasuoc a¡ne8au IEJeAes a,l,eq leu l'rau sI regr 3ul¡rou Jo eprll uleluoo

t"qr asoqr ot slelJateru a8tn8ue¡ Puof,as uooJSS?¡l Supctnsar 'snql ',PeJ31

-sEuJ, lou a,rrq farp seJnlfnJls pue fre¡nqef,o uleluof leql slxel ualllJlr\ Jo

pJoJo Suruearu ¡eraua8 aqr puaqardtuof u?f, sJeuJeal-lxaruoc ¡n3Sutueaur¿ ua,u8-lng 'esJnof,Jo rndur alglsuaqa;druor aprlold uEf, aJnPJJord t r¡rn5

rg8nur uaeq ÍPeerIE e eq faqt sarntcnrls ettntuelorfluo sluePnls esodxa rerp slelrareru esn Pporls srerlf,¿el EI

patTs1rtat BuTutaal a8un&ury floqo s?a?t wlndo¿ 607,

210 Popular ideas about language learning reuisited

errors. Nonetheless, tasks can be devised in such a way that learners workingtogether can discover not only how to express or interpret meaning but alsohow to discover the correct patterns in the second language. In order for thisto happen, the tasks must be carefully planned to give learners access ro rhenew language they need.

Group and pair work is a valuable addition to rhe variety of activities thatencourage and promote second language development. Used in combina-tion with individual work and teacher-centred activities, it plays an essentialrole in language teaching and learning.

15 Students learn what they are taughtTeachers know from experience that students dont learn ever¡.thing they aretaught! Fortunatel¡ learners also learn a grear deal that no one ever reaches

them. They are able to use their own internal learning abilities to discover manyofthe patterns and associations that underlie the language they are learning. Inthis sense, students learn much more than they are explicitly taught.

Some teaching methods rypically give learners the opportunity to learn only a

restricted number ofwords and sentence types. Even when the language teach-ing method provides much richer language input, the fact that somethingis taught or made available in the input does not mean learners will acquireit right away. For example, some aspects of the second language emerge andevolve according to developmental sequences, and learners may be more likelyto learn certain language features when they are developmentally ready. Thus,attempts to teach aspects of language that are too far away from the learner's

current stage of development can be frustrating. Other language features, forexample, vocabulary can be taught at any time, as long as the learners are inter-ested in the opportunity to learn and the teaching methods are appropriate tothe learner's age, interests, needs, experiences, and learning styles.

16 Teachers should respond to students' errors by correcdyrephrasing what they have said rather than by explicidypointing out the error

This kind offeedback, referred to as 'recasts' has been found to be by far themost common type offeedback in second language classrooms. This has beenshown to be true for learners at different ages and in different instructionalsettings-from audiolingual to communicative and content-based instruc-tion. A recast has the advantage of not interrupting the fow of interaction.It is seen as indirect and polite, a way of giving students the information theyneed without embarrassing them.

Research in classes with a general focus on grammar and accurate language

use shows that learners are responsive to this kind of feedback. Research inwhich learners interact individually with interlocutors has also shown that

'paseg-luatuof 'SurqJEe] a8en8ue¡ ellleflunluruof sE r{Jns sarpeordde -raqrg'loot a^nef,runuJuror e se a8rn8uel eqr esn uEf, sJeuJrel eJoJeq peuJ€al eq olpaeu reqt uoneuJJoJurJo sllg eleJ¿das sB ¡o salnJ JEuJrrrE.rSSo ras e se a8en8ue¡

tEeJl ol PePuar a,reg Sunpear a8en8ue¡ ol sageeoJddE Peseq-sJnlf,nJls Jluos

aSen8ue¡ asn ot ,t.oq Sururea¡ ro3

tou lnq a8entuu¡ lnoge uruel ol sare¡d PooS are stuooJsssl3 8I

'Surqoeat a8enSuel osle sr uonfnJlsul peseq-lualuof, r€qt puruul daal ot paau sJer{feet pue sruapnls qlog 'ila1't se sEeJE eseqt ur a¡o.rdrur

uBf, stuapnls 'arueprn8 qtr^\ (teqr ulr\ol{s aAEI{ uollf,nJtsul Paseq-luatuofeql or PaPPE s?1v\ uollsnJlsul Pasn3oJ-tuJoJ Jo ]ualuala ue qf,Iq^^. uI salPnls

pruaurrradxE 'asuJr JoJ sqJe^ Jo rapua8 JoJ sunou Suqreru ur ,(rt¡nrt 8ut-Aarqf,E tnoqlrt\ uorsJeururr qluaJC ur s¡eef puads uEJ sluaPnls 'aldruexaroJ 'snr{I 'Surueatu qtr^\ ereJratur l1¡ensn rou op lerlt sJrnleg a8rn8ue¡ uo,{¡etntte Jo sEeJE ul l¡enadsa 'a8en8ur¡ puof,es JIar{} Jo stcadse uIEtJaJ uIa,ro¡drur 01 enurluof, IIII!\ sluePnrs lBql eJnsue lou seoP uollfBJelul luooJssslf,

ur uorrrunJ ol pue lueluor al{r PurrsJaPun or lrl¡qe aq} lrr{r Selar'rorl 'puno3osle J Eq sJeqlJ¿esal pue sJaI{fE{'a8en8uel ¡aau aqt ut a¡uatadtuof aAIl

-Eorunruruoc ¡eraue8 puu 'fre¡nqeoo,r's¡¡r{s uolsuaqardruor dola,rap sesself,

uorsJeunur Pu? PasEq-lueluof, uI sluePnls lEI{l PauJyuof s"I{ I{JJeaseu

'sassclr a8tn8ue¡

u8raroj pue puof,as uI algEIIE^E l¡ecldlr sl qolqt\ tEI{t uer{l PaITEA eJour sI

sralgns Jrruap¿Jt Sulurza¡ uI Jetunooue sluaPnls tEI{l seJnleeJ a8enSue¡ puefre¡nqeco,r3o a8ue¡ eqr 'úuotllppB uI 'Jalleru rcalgns Jalpo uI uollf,nJlsul uo

rno Surso¡ tnoqlr^\ 'a8enSur¡ eqt qll^\ tf,Bluof, uI etull arou puads ol Álunt-¡oddo eqr qrr^\ perrlf,osse uarJo osle sI uoltfnJlsul Pesrg-rueruo3 'a8rnSue¡

eqt uJrel ol peeu alerparurul 'aulnua8 E saleaJ3 tI :sluaPnls aqr or enlel tue

-Jar{ur uE ser{ Surqrear a8rn8uq roJ pasn sI ler{r IEIJeleru eqt ual{^\ Pas¿Jr3uIsr uone^notrAJ 'snoJeurnu eJE uoltf,nJlsur paseg-tuatuot Jo se8erue,rpe aq1

aSen8ue¡ puores rrelll ur rq8nel sr reltetu ]refqns eqr

aJaq^a sasselJ u¡ r(¡snoauellnufs (lrors¡q PuE ef,uelf,s (eldruexa

roJ) tueluof, rltueP"f,e pue aten8uel tpoq ureel uef, sluaPnls l,I

',Jauag llles ue¡ nol ,v'oq nol Surzvtoqs ru(I PuE 'Sulles a¡¿ nor( 13q.tt PuersJePun IIulqr I, 'luapnts aqr or sles leql-uolssardxa ¡ene3 ¡o 'a¡nlsa8 'af,IolJo auol

-luapnrs:qr or 8uu¡eu8rs3o poqreu E seq JeI{rBat erFJI e^lrf,ega aroru aq ol

punoJ ueeq 3A"r{ stsEJeJ 'suoll¿nlls eseql uI 'tuJoJJo uol}f,3JJof, sB ueIP JeI{leJ

Sulueau3o uolleruJ5uof sE ruer{l J¿eq ol uraas sJeuJeal 'parardlalurslur eq

of ¡eadde uauo slsef,al 'SJauJEel ¡a8unof qllll\ uollfnJlsul a^Itef,IunuIuIo3 uI

pue (sasse¡r uolsJatulul 'a¡durexa;oj) uolrcnrlsul Pesrg-lualuoo ul ta^a,troH'uo pasnroJ sI 1)eqpaal arp seJntral a8en8uel qllqrn l¡rcexa rtrourl sle."rp

lou leu sJauJeel r¡8noqr uala '>lf,EqPaal aAIlf,eJJof, sE Pa^Iaf,Jad a¡e slsrlaJ

patTs1rtat 3u7ur.aa1 aSan&uq ffi oq? wap wlndo¿ IT7.

2t2 Popular ideas about knguage learning reuisited

and task-based instruction start from the principle that we learn languageby using it to achieve a goal, for example, understanding a stor¡ makinga medical appointment, writing a science report, or joining the fun on theplayground. \lith this in mind, classroom activities are designed to preparestudents to continue learning outside the classroom, by giving them experi-ence in language uses that are like those they will encounter there.

As we saw in Chapter 6, some theorists argue that second language instructioncan only lead to knowledge aboutlanguage (explicit knowledge) and questionwhether instruction can lead to the ability to use the language spontaneouslyand fluently (implicit knowledge) in a wide range of communicative contexts.Contemporary approaches to L2 instruction target the development of both

rypes of L2 abiliry by ensuring that students use the language in meaningfulinteraction inside the classroom and that they learn effective strategies for usingthe language outside the classroom when they have opportunities to do so.

AcTlvlTY Support your op¡n¡on

Choose two or three of the'popular ideas' that you find especially important.For each of these, identify and discuss how one or more of the research

studies you have read about in this book has strengthened your agreement/disagreement with the statement or has led you to change your views.

ConclusionKnowing more about second language acquisition research will not tell youwhat to do in your classroom tomorrow morning. tü/e hope, however, thatthis book has provided you with information that encourages you to refecton your experience in teaching.'We hope, in addition, that this refection willcontribute to a better understanding ofyour responsibilities as a teacher andyour students' abilities and responsibilities as language learners.

As we have seen, language learning is aflected by many factors. Among these

are the personal characteristics and experiences ofthe learner, the social andcultural environment both inside and outside the classroom, the structure ofthe native and target languages, opportunities for interaction with speakers

of the target language, and access to corrective feedback and form-focusedinstruction. It is clear that teachers do not have control over all these factors.Nevertheless, a better understanding of them will permit teachers and learn-ers to make the most of the time they spend together in the twin processes ofteaching and learning a second language.

Jrer{t ur JEaq laqr a8en8ue¡ aqr readar PuE etetlrur sJauJeal uaq,^ '^\eI^ slqlor Surpromy'stIqEI{Jo tuaruqsllgersa aqr q8norgr are¡d salet 'pgre,r-uou

Jo IEqTJA rar{ral{^\ 'Sururea¡ IIE tBql f.roaqr ¡ror8o¡ogclsd y :rusrrnol,ruqeq

'daar1s¡drqs se qf,ns srrcd ¡tutulu aldruexa

roJ 'spunos aSen8uel qsm8utrsrp ot llllqe aql :uoneu¡ru¡rtsrp Lror¡pnu

'asn pSSulueauJo slxJluoo tuou PUP Jeqro l{ree ruoguonelosr ul su¡artrd af,uetuesJo uoltrzlJoruaru PuE'acrl¡e¡d'uolltlada¡aqr q8norqr srlq"r{Jo uolteruroJ aqr sazrseqdua qceotdde leuoll3nrlsulsrql 'srseqtodfq srsl¡eut e^IlseJtuor agr l¡eroadsa 'srrlsln8url lrJnlf,nJls

uo pue Sulureal3o lroaqt lslrnolleqoq aqt uo Pes?g sr reqr Sulrpear

e8tn8ue¡ u8ta.ro3 ro puoras or qceorddr uy :r¡cuorddu ¡un8u¡o¡pnra

fpoq pue spu"q aql3o suonou q8norqr passa.rdxa

¡e ,fuelnqrcol qf,u E pue aJntJnJtsJo salnJ xaldruoc qutr'aBenBuEI anJl e sI

rI JEaP aJE or{ l sJeqlo qll,^a lf,eJalul oq.^a JoJEaP aJE ol{-/v\ suef,IJellrv qlJoNluetu lq pasn a8en8uel ¡e.rnrsa8 eql :(-ISV) a8unEuel ut¡5 uec¡reury

'tsrg aqr Sulso¡ rnoqrv'r a8en8uel puocas e Sutueal :rus¡¡en8u¡¡Iq a pIPPlt

'sasuodsa¡ rlaqt lq uotsuaga;druof JIeIp ¡aotls oslr lnquarsr¡ f¡uo rou sluapnts qJIq^\ ut anbtuqcar Sulgeear y :8urua¡srl e ptle

'luaruuoJrlua Surgrear u./(o Jlar{l or lglfáds PuB Ielol a¡¿ suorlsanb

pue s¡eo8 qJJEesaJ aql 'sJaqtear Jal{ro qtl^\ uoIlEJoqEIIos ul Jo suJooJss?lf

u,!\o Jlaql uI uauo 'sJatloeal lq lno PeIJJEf, r{JJEaseU :qJJBasaJ uollf,u

'eruanbes ptuarudo¡a,reP B or rua¡e,rmba sr JePJo

f¡e.rn:o¿ ur ler{l paJJaJuI a^EI{ sJaI{lJEJsaJ eruos 's a¡.rssassod Sutsn ul urgls- ¡e.rn1d Sursn ul al¿Jnff,E aJoru ueuo aJE sJauJeel 'a¡druexa;og 'a8en8uel

JeuJEel ur sruJoJ ¡tcnnuruerS3o fre;ncce s IlEIeJ er{I :JaPJo -(re¡ncru

'uosr¡eduor3o nalgo elp roJ ureql ,rr\olle sa8en8ue¡ Ja^\eJ elll{^r'srrafgns

aruetuas JoJ sasneP e^IleleJ ruro¡p saBenBuEI lsolu 'a¡dtuexa.to3 lg:re.ralq&qlgrssale aqr ot SurproJJV'selor prtteruruer8 ruaJeJtlP uI sunou

{po- ol sesn€¡3 elneler asn sa8en8u¿l ruereJICI '(LL6I) elruro3 PUE

uruea) fq pado¡e,rap srsnrlr eAItEIarJo 8un¡uer y :fqcrera¡q lr¡¡¡q¡ssame

'Tooq qw ux ru2q1 asn 2m sE surral aql rf,eHal ol PaPuerul arE

suolllugap ag1 .Surgcrar aSenSue¡ puof,as pue r{fr?eser uonrsrnbfB aSrnSue¡

puooas ul Surureu IBf,IuI{:at :o pt:ads E el€q reqr suJatl suleluor frtssolS eq1

,TUVSSO-ID

214 Glossary

surrounding environment and are positively reinforced for doing so, habitformation (or learning) occurs.

bilingual education: Schooling in which students receive instruction intwo (or more) languages, usually their home language and a secondlanguage.

bilingualism: The abiliry ro use more than one language. The word itselfdoes not specify the degree ofproficiency in either language.

brain imaging: A variety of techniques that allow researchers to observeand track activity in the brain.

child-directed speech: The language that caretakers address to children.In some cases, this language is simpler than that which is addressed toadults. In some cultures, it is also slower, higher pitched, more reperitive,and includes a large number of questions.

chunk: A unit of language that is often perceived or used as a single unit.Chunks include formulaic expressions such as Tbank yu or What's that?butalso bits of language that frequently occur together, for example, ice cream

cone or signifcant dffirence.

classroom observation scheme: A tool (often in the form of a grid) thatconsists of a set of predetermined categories used to record and describeteaching and learning behaviours.

cognate: Aword in one language that comes from the same origin as a

word in another language and has the same meaning, for example, 'nation'in English and nation in French or uACd and uache (cow) in Spanish andFrench. Thetermfalse cognate is used to refer to words that may come fromthe same origin but have evolved to have different meanings, for example,librairie (bookstore) in French does not have the same meani ng as library inEnglish.

cognitive: Relating to how the human mind receives, processes, stores, andretrieves information. The focus is on internal learning mechanisms that are

believed to be used for learning in general, not just language learning alone.

cognitive maturity: The abiliry to engage in problem-solving, deduction,and complex memory tasks.

collaborative dialogue: A conversation between learners in which theywork together to solve a problem, for example, reconstructing a story theyhave heard. \fhile the focus is on the task, learners may also focus on theelements of language that they need to complete the task.

communicative competence: The abiliry to use language in a variety ofsettings, taking into account relationships between speakers and differences

al{r teqt elg€ue^ eÉurs ar{rJo sruJal ur lluo dnor8 ¡eruaruuadxa aqt ruo{sreJlp lEqt sJeuJeeljo dnor8 e 'serpnts ¡rtuauuadxa u1 :dnorE IoDuoJ

'rueJagrp aJE ter{t esoqt uer{l a8rn8ue¡ rsJg eqrJo asoqrot JEIIruls er? ler{t su¡aued a8enSue¡ la8¡el 8ul¡lnboe fr¡nrgrp ssel e^Br{

ill^ sreuJeal lrqt uoltelredxa aql :(HVl) s¡saqrodfq slsf¡eue e rlspnuol'a8en8uel puof,as JrJr{l ul 'cla 'sf,rleruaqreu 'lrorsrq

'af,ueros lpnrs sruapnls 'sarurue¡8o¡d uors¡aruul ul 'a¡druexa JoC 'sluloda8en8ue¡ uerp Jeql€J Jaueru rralgns punoJe pazrueS;o eJE suossel r{f,rq,4 uruonf,nrtsur a8en8ur¡ puores :['Igf) Eu¡qnm¡ aten8uu¡ pespg-lualuor

'adorng ur sloor{f,s lrepuooesul l¡rerulrd padola,r.ap ueag ser{ regr Surg:ear a8en8ue¡ poseg-tualuof,or qoeordde uV :(-II'I3) Eu¡urea¡ palur8elu¡-atenSuu¡ pue lualuor

'rar{ro eqt

Jo uonelnre aqr or peal IIrr\ auoJo acuasa.rd aqr reqt sl rr f¡a1l¡ arouagr ';arpaSol uees Jo pJear{ aJE slrun ueuo eJoru aql 'raqraSor paJalunof,ue

are faqr sE puru eql ur perfauuooJalur auof,aq reqr strunJo u¡atslsxe¡druoc e se (a8en8ur¡ 8ulpn1:ul) a8pa¡noq3o lroaqr V :usruonrauuor

u o sr u orf, n'r su r J o r"r r* u, i:ffi t":tfJ:;ffi';:ffi;i:::3o óalre,r E agrJJsap ot urJat ¡eraua8 V :uorlonJlsú pesug-uorsuagardruor

'srsegrodfq rndur a¡qrsuaqa;duoc (lS6I)s,ueqser) ot asuodsa¡ ur srsagtodlq sqr pasodord (gge t) urc.r\S '(uaurrzvr rop.ro) e8en8ue¡ Sulonpord sJeureel uo spuadap uon¡srnbce a8en8uel puof,es

Iryssarrns reqr s¡saqrodf,{ rql :srsaqlodfq lndlno a¡q¡suaqa.rduoc

'acuauadxa¡a8peproul ¡or¡d ¡o'uoneruJoJul lenrxatuof, 'sarntsaS;o esnereg

ued ul a¡glsuarlarduror aq leu lI 'puersJepun uer JeurBel E lrr{t aSen8uel

ot raJar or ueqseDl uaqdarg lq pef,nporrur rurer V :¡ndu¡ a¡g¡suaqa.rdruoc

'ef,ueuJoJJed uor3 aJnleu str JeJur ol e^Bq

arn ,(¡rcalp a¡uatadruor elJesgo louutf, e¡a esneJeg '8urlr¡¡L.ro '8ulpea;'Suluats¡ '3ur¡eads JoJ Jal{teq,/v\-a8en3ue1 sasn f1¡entre uos.lad r ferrr

aqr sr q3rq./1\'acueruro3.rad rpvrr perserluof, sl slql 'e8en8ue¡io a8pa¡r'rou1ot JeJaJ ol ruJat sr{t pesn llsuog3 ruroN tslnSurl :arualadruo¡

'uorlrlosr ur sruJoJ pclterurue.t33o uolre¡ndrueu pue acnc¿¡d eql ueqrJar{lEJ uonfeJelur ul Sulueau30 uorleJrunruruof, eql sazlsegdura Sulrlceal

or rpeordde sn¡1 'sSunras elnelrunruruoo tuaJeglp ur salJas a8en8ue¡ e

rrgt sasodrnd pue suorrrunJ ar{t osp rng 'a8rn8uel BJo sruroJ pue seJntrnrrsagrjo a8palz'rou1 e l¡uo tou sa^lolur Sulurua¡ a8en8ue¡ InJsserrns reqr

asnua¡d ,ql uo peseq sr ¿-Il !(¡T]) Eurgcear etentue¡ e rlerrunruruof,

'lc¿.lnrce ¡ecneturuerSJo llel e3o artds ul sa8essau¡ le,,ruo¡or lrr¡rqe aqr sr parardJatu uaeg seurneruos seq ruJer eql 'suonenlrs ur

,0asso1g stz

216 Glossary

researcher is investigating. Performance of the control group is used to showthat the variable in question is the best (or only) explanation for changes inthe experimental group. Also sometimes referred to as 'comparison group'.

corpus (plural: corpora): A principled collection of oral or writtenlanguage samples that can usually be accessed and explored with computer-based tools. Some of the most famous corpora contain millions ofwordsfrom, for example, newspapers. Samples of the language produced bylearners have also been collected for second language acquisition research.

corpus linguistics: An approach to the study of language that is based onthe analysis oflanguage corpora. See corpus.

corrective feedback An indication to a learner that his or her use of thetarget language is incorrect.

correlation: A statistical procedure that compares the relative frequency orsize of different variables in order to determine whether there is a

relationship between them.

counterbalance h¡rothesis: The hypothesis that learners' attention willbe drawn to classroom events that are different from those they are

accustomed to.

critical period hypothesis (CPH): The proposal that there is a limitedperiod during which language acquisition can occur.

cross-linguistic infuence: The effect on knowledge of one language bythe knowledge of another. This term is preferred over previous terms such as

interference to indicate that knowledge of one language can be beneficial tolearning another. The term also refects the fact that the infuence can go

from a known language to the one being learned but also from the newlanguage to one already known.

cross-sectional study: A study in which participants at different ages and/orstages of development are studied. This contrasts with longitudinal studies.

declarative knowledge: Information that we have and know we have. Anexample would be a rule such as 'the verb must agree with the subject toform a correct sentence'. In some skill learning theories, it has been

hypothesized that all learning begins with declarative knowledge. Thiscontrasts with p ro c edura I hnow ledge.

descriptive study: Research that does not involve any manipulation,change, or inrervention in the phenomenon being studied. The researcher's

goal is to observe and record what is happening. This contrasts withexperimental study.

lou sr e8¿nguBl raBJEr erF aJaq^\ ueluof, 3 uI 'Sultles uooJSSEIs e uI fllBnsn

'a8en8ue¡ e3o Sururcal eqr ot sre3ar slgl :tu¡u.rea¡ atentue¡ u8¡e.ro¡

'llel relpBol sI llElrau8raroSSo,{¡o8arrc ¡elrads V'sJeureal e8rn8ue¡ Puores or ssarPPE s;a>leads

e IrEu aruos IEI{I a8en8ue¡ pe5lldurls ro PeglPotu aql rller raut¡a.ro¡

'a8en8ue¡ (rsJg, euo ueqt arour aAEI{ ol PIES aq

&ru pue r{lJlq uro5 a8zn8ue¡ auo u"qt arolrr uJeel uaJPIrI{r lutyr¡ 'P3uJEel

rsrg a8en8ue¡ eq1 :(a8en8ue¡ arrnru 'an8uol reqtoul '11) atenEuu¡ rsrg

'su¿d olul rt 8u¡rercdas

lrprgrp a BI{ pue 8uv'rerp alol{ .\ aql ees or PauITf,uI Jrour ere (ruapuadap

pleg pa¡ec) sreqro '8urrv''erp perrclduoc e ur sarn85 uaPPIq aql

rno ryrd or >lcrnb l¡a¡. a.re (ruapuadapul PIeg Pell¿3) a¡doad eruos 'sI letll'seeJl aql ro tsaJoJ el{l aas ot buapuar JIeI{l uI raJIP oli./'r aldoad aglJf,seP

ol pasn ueeg s"q uollrullslP sIII :ruePuadap p¡ag¡ruapuadapul PIeU

'Sutnas leuollef,npa uE uI

alq€rJr^ a¡8urs e ett8rlsalur ot eperu uaaq sEI{ tdruaue uE r{JII{^! uI LIf,J€aseJ

ot JaJeJ ot esues Iefluqf,el-uou 3 ur Pesn sI tuJel aql '>looq slql u1 'lpnls

¡etuarutradxa ,Jutnua8, E sE ParuJat aq or lpnrs e ltu¡¡ad lErP suonlPuo)

ar{]Jo IIE elEaJtr 01 rlnlstp ueuo sr ll 'r{f,rEaseJ lEuonEfnPe uI 'lsarelul

3o (s)alqerre^ el{tJo ef,uasge ¡o acuasa¡d aqr ur l¡uo rar{lo r{f,Ee ruo5 reJIP

reqr sdno.rS (loJluof,, pue (leluarurradxa, aleq p¡nor'r.,(pnls ¡etuarurradxal¡r:urs V'elqEIrE^ reqloue uo salgelr"^ cg¡cads aJour ro euoJo l¡edul

aq] rnoqe slsaqrodfq E lsel ol pau8rsap I{3J"esed :r(pnls ¡utuaru¡.radxa

'suortdl;osap s,Ja Jasqo aql etBPII"^ ol sJagrueru dno-r8 qurvr

uonrllnsuo3 sE IIa \ sE uonr^JasgoSo spor.rad e^Isuelxa sa¡lnba¡ I{JJEasJJ

agl 'a,urcads.¡ad uzrro sll ulqlllr{ uor3 lttunuulof, Jo dno¡8 E PuersJaPuno1 $laes Ja^lasgo eqt qlrq,/!\ ur r{fJeesar ar'lrdrDsaq :fqdu.rtouqra

'8ur¡rads ur ssans pare.raSSrxa.ro (Sururt.rapun ro adlr ploq)

tuJuref,urqua ¡mlqderSodlr or sruau¡ruo¡ ollsrn8ulltletu rtcl¡dxa uor38ul8ue¡ ,lnl¡dxa ssel Jo JJoru ag UEJ lI 'sJeuJeel ol lualps eJoru seJnlraJ

a8en8ur¡ eruos a>leu 01 uoga uE uI PeJellE sI lEI{r rndul :1ndul PerrrBrlua

'a8en8ue¡ aqr jo a8pa¡moul rel{ ro srq feldsrP ol rrureel aqr ra8 or

(¿nr1s mo[ n ¿nolor pq6 'a¡duexa ro3) suonsanb asaqr >lsr ueuo sragral'raldsuE aqr s^\oDI lpear¡e ra>l$ aql qlll{¡a ol uo¡tsanb y :uorNenb fu¡dslp

'uolusnboe30 raPJo ¡o se3¿1s pruarudola,LeP Pallelosly.Sulurea¡ a8en8ue¡ ul paJnb:e a.rr (uone8au 'a¡durexa ro3) aSen8url

EJo seJnltal uIEtJaJ l{llq1'r uI JJPJo eg1 :acuanbas ¡eluaurdo¡a,rap.uonualJalul

leuorDnJlsur Jo 'uollelDoru JauJEal 'uolleue^ tndul3ossa¡prt8ar 'a¡uenbas;e1n:nred e ul do¡arrap 'san8ea¡¡or slq PuE uuer[euald

or Surprore 'qclglrr a8en8uel e3o stcedse asoql :samleal ¡uruarudo¡e,rap

LIZ ,kassolg

218 Glossary

widely used in the communiry (for example, learning French in China).This is sometimes contrasted with 'second language learning', where thelanguage being learned is used in the communiry (for example, learningItalian in Florence).

form-focused instruction: Instruction that draws attention to the formsand structures of the language within the context of communicativeinteraction. This may be done by giving metalinguistic information, simplyhighlighting the form in question, or by providing corrective feedback.

formulaic Expressions or phrases that are often perceived and learned as

unanalysed wholes. For example, a child or second language learner mayfirst hear ''What's that?' as a single unit of language rather than as three

units.

fossilization: This term is used to describe a persistent lack of change ininterlanguage patterns, even after extended exposure to or instruction inthe target language.

function words: 'Words that are used mainly as linking or supportingwords for nouns, verbs, adjectives, and adverbs. For example, prepositions('to', 'for', 'by') and articles ('d, 'the') are two rypes of function words. Th.yhave little or no meaning when they occur alone, but they have an

important effect on the meanings of the words they accompany.

generalization: Extending a pattern learned in one context to another

one. See also overgeneralization.

genuine question: A question to which the asker does not know the

answer in advance (for example , What did you do last weekend?). Also called'referential' or'information questions. Contrasts with display question.

grammar translation: An approach to second language teaching

characterized by the explicit teaching of grammar rules and the use oftranslation exercises.

grammatical morphemes: Morphemes are the smallest units of language

that carry meaning. A simple word is a morpheme (for example, 'book')'

but when we talk about 'grammatical morphemes' we are usually referring

to smaller units that are added to words to alter their meaning (for example,

the -s in 'books' indicates plural) or function words (for example, the) whichare ordinarily attached to another word.

grammaticality judgement A test or task in which participants are asked

to make a decision about whether a sentence is grammatically correct or not.

h¡Aotüesis (plural: hypotheses): A statement of a possible fact that can be

tested through research. Most empirical research starts from one or more

hypotheses and involves the design of a study that can either show stlpportfor the hypothesis or disprove it.

puE r{3eeds JIaI{1 rglPotu sJe>leeds Jagro qllq.{\ uI asoql uauo (suolltsJe uof,

ul a8e8ua ot saltlunlJoddo uo PuE saIrIIgE aleuul (slauJeal uo qlogposeg sr uoltlslnbre a8en8uq regr srsaqrodlq aql :slsatpodfq uopce.ralu¡

'Sulqoear a8rn8uq Pesrq-lu3luo3apnpul l¡¡ensn tou oP sassel3 -ISE e^Isualul 'satuureJSoJd uolsJerutul

or lseJluof, u1 'Sulqrear a8en8ue¡ a IlsslunuruJoc l¡rueuluopardsI sasself, eseql uI Pa^rasgo qoeo-rdde pclSoStpad aq1 'polrad

reqr Sulrnp uoltrnrtsul'ISA or slep ¡ry elo^aP pue rca(Iooqls 3uo ulaurlJo lJolq qruotu-J^5 euo ePISB 1as qfJEesarISE e^Isualul uI Pe lasgo

sess"lo ar{rJo rsory 'auIll JJotu q3nuJ aPl^o;d sasselc -TSE aAISuaruL

laa1v\ qf,Ee uolllnJlsul -ISgJo o-lt\l Jo JnoI{ u3 l¡uo a,req dno.l8 a3¿

srql ur sruapnls caqan| rsoyq'a8enSu¿l Pumes e se qsr¡8ug urcal sluePnls

Sur4eads-gcuerC plo-rca Á-U-Ol ererld\ :aqan| ur gceoldde leuollrnrtsulue ot JeJaJ ot Pasn sl -ISg (eAISueluI, 'looq srql uI :TSg aarsuelul

'dno¡3

r?r{rJo sragluaw e{ll aJou ag or arrsep 3 ue^a pue dnorS aSenSur¡ raSJBl

arir jo ólunuluof, pue aJntlnf, arfl lnoge aJoru ^\ou>l

ol eJISaP e uo Paseq,, r"gr Sururea¡ aSenSue¡ puoJes JoJ uo¡E^now :uopte rloru a,r¡lerEalu¡

'qof;arraq e la8 ol rePro uI a8tn8uq egr urral or Peau aql

sE qf,ns'¡ecncerd l¡pnuassa sr lEI{l uonelllory ¡uolle l}oru l¿lueurn.rlsur

'uollrstnbct a8en8ue¡ JoJ rualf,Sns sl lndula¡grsuaqardurof, JaI{tJIf$ or PeleleJ suorlsanb aro¡dxa or sl:alo¡d l{fJeeseJ

ur pesn uaaq sEr{ rI .sreuJBel ol lndul eqt ur JrruEaJ a8en3url re¡ncrrred

e3o sa¡drurxaJo raqunu aSrr¡ e Surpnord ro3 anbluqcar y :poog rndu¡

'lueuruoJl^ua aqt uI (ua>1ods

Jo ualtlrlr\ raqrra) or pasodxa sI rauJEel aqr rBqr a8rnSue¡ aq1 :rndu¡

'a8en8ue¡jo uotllslnbce agr -roj l1¡ecgrcads pau8tsaP ert rer{r

seJntf,nJls IEruaru qlL!\ uJog arz sSulag uElunr{ tegr srsaqrodlr{ 3r{1 uo Paseq

a.upads¡ad [EJrreJoeqr aql $ sn{l 'I{sJEesaJ uorttslnbcr a8en8ue¡ uI :lsDeuul

'as¡a Surqratuos uo snf,oJ JoJ elqelle^E uollueue

a¡ou¡ Sur,rra¡ ':ttetuolne aruooeg uolluatls pallnbar lsJU rB q3ry^\ s8u¡qr,a:ll¡e¡d pue a:uarradxa pateadar qrv!\ rng 'arull sIuBS aqr re Surr¡rfrarra

ot uonuJlle led f¡ec laqf pur PefIuII aJE sef,Jnosa¡ a,rtltuSoo (sJauftel

r?r{r Eepr aqt uo paseq.{-roaqr ¡ecr8o¡orlclsd y :8u¡ssa¡o¡d uoperuroJul

'sJeuJtal a8en8uq PuoJesJo sPaeu

Jqr 13eu 01 slBrJslErrr pue aSenSuel FuonJnJlsur Jrer{l rsnfpe sJaq)Eel PUE

a8rn8uel tsJg arues aqr aJrqs saruue¡8o¡d uoISJauIluI uI sluePnls 'l¡rcldfa.r8ená.re¡ puof,as Jraqt ur sarpnls Fllos pu' sr'€ueqrEu w grns srcafqns

lpnrs sruapnls ,sr tegl .uo¡fnJlsul Paseg-luaruoo u,r tg8ne_t sr a8tn8uel

puofes 3 r{3¡l \ ul au¡(uer8o;d ¡euolteonpe uv :auru¡e¡Eo¡d uorsJerurur

úassolg 6rz

220 Glossary

their interaction patterns to match the learners' communicationrequirements. The innate abilities are not seen as being specific to language

or language acquisition.

interlanguage: A learner's developing second language knowledge. It mayhave characteristics ofthe learnerb first language, characteristics ofthesecond language, and some characteristics that seem to be very general andtend to occur in all or most interlanguage systems. Interlanguages are

systematic, but they are also dynamic. They change as learners receive moreinput and revise their hypotheses about the second language.

interlocutor: A participant in a conversation.

language acquisition/language learning: In this book, these two terms are

most often used interchangeably. However, for some researchers, mostnotably Stephen Krashen acquisition represents 'unconscious' internalizationof language knowledge,which takes place when attention is focused onmeaning rather than language form, and learningis described as a'conscious'process that occurs when the learnert objective is to learn about the language

itself, rather than to understand messages conveyed through the language.

language-related episodes (LREs): Parts of conversational interactions inwhich language learners talk about the language forms they are using andengage in self- and peer-correction.

longitudinal study: A study in which the same learners are studied over a

period of time. This contrasts with a cross-sectional study.

meaning-based instruction: See communicative language teaching.

meta-analysis (plural: meta-analyses): A statistical procedure that allowsresearchers to combine the findings from a large number of quantitativestudies in order to assess the overall patterns of findings on a similar topic.

metalinguistic awareness: The abiliry to treat language as an object, forexample, being able to define a word, or to say what sounds make up thatword.

mitigation: In pragmatics, a phrase or tone ofvoice used to reduce orsoften the possible negative impact ofwhat is said.

modified inpuc Adapted speech that adults use to address children andnatiye speakers use to address language learners so that they will be able tounderstand. Examples of modified input include shorter, simpler sentences,

and basic vocabulary.

modified interaction: Adapted conversation patterns that proficientspeakers use in addressing language learners so that the learner will be able

to understand. Examples of interactional modifications includecomprehension checks, clarification requests, and self-repetitions.

'elq"ts aJou¡ sr taleads a ItEu aJnteu aqlJoJ lseal t¿ 'acualadruof, sEeJaI{/'t an8rre; Jo uoltuetleul ol anP suoItEIJs ol

roalqns sr erueruJoJra¿ 'a8en8uel esn 01 lrtllq" rno sellraPun teqr a8pe¡r'rour1

aql sr r{f,rryr\'arualadruol qlr^\ PalseJruo: l¡ensn sI sf,uEluJoJJa¿ 'Sulrurnr

'Sulpea; 'Suqeads 'Surualstl ul a8en8ue¡ asn a¡vr lervr ag1 :erueruro¡.rad

' goro.rdde ¡en8ur¡orpne aqr

3o ¡erldl¿'sruJoJ cltsn8ul¡;elnorued tuasa¡da.r ol uasol{J soJuatuas asrlo¿¡d

or pe>lse ar€ sreuJeel r{rlq1n ur anbluqcar Sutr¡oear V :llIJP ecpcerd uJeDEd

',rq8nog,3o ppalsul .palnq, uI s? 'qJeA Jeln8aur ue uoButpua pa';ep8a; ¿ Surund 'aldurrxa .ro3 '8uo¡aq lou seop lr aJaqd\ lxetuoJ E uI u¡au¿d

ro elnr E esn ol 8uúrr3o rlnser el{r sI rorreJo adlr slql :uolluzlfuJeuaS¡a,ro

'acuanbas pruarudola,rap ees :uopls¡nbcu¡o .rapro

'txeluof, regl uI qra^ aI{}Jo uroS parlnbaraqr pesn rou sEI{ lnq '¡ee,&\ tse-LJo esn eqt lq esual rsed aql JoJ lxatuof,lroreSrlqo uB petEeJJ seq .ra>pads el{l (,JEf E tual JaqloJg Áu 'laarrr lse1,

af,ualues aqr ut 'aldruexa JoC 'tfeJJof ag o] sI ssuetues aqr3l pa-rrnbeJ sI luJoJ

¡mrteuruer8 repcnred e eJaq./v\ af,ualuas E uI saJBId :$xaluoc l¡oruE¡go

'lndul aqt uIJo eJErv'B

aruo3eg Jo (pef,nou, rsJg e^EI{ laqr r1clq.,ra. reqr l¡uo urcel sJauJEa¡ a8en8ur¡

rErF (rprurq3s preqrDl lq pasodo.rd 'srsaqrodfq aql :srserpodfq tu¡rpou

'uonf,EJelul PsglPour oslE e3s 'uollEflunurluof, uI

u,t.ropltaJq e ¡rrda¡ ot sanbturpal Jarpo asn PuE graads Jlaql ol sluaulsnlpealeu or{^\ s.ra>pads uaa^uaq uoltf?Jetul :Surrruau¡.ro¡ uopupoteu

'ruar{l roJ l Surpr,rord3o pealsul ruroS rq8¡.r eqr PuUor sluapnrs aprn8 or qeas eqs Jo aI{ 'uollf€Jelul aql uI Pe^lo^ul sr Jel{f¿al

eJI 'poolsJapun sI Suruearu aJag \ txeluof, E uI tuJo3 llaJJof, aqr PJE,t\ol>lJo,{\ sJJuJpe¡ e8en8ue¡ qrl{¡a uI uolt3eJalul uV :rr¡JoJJo uoperlo8au

'a¡uanbas ptuarudo¡ar'ap ees :raPro IPmlEu'sa8en8ue¡ lsoru Jo,sra>leads

a^rleU, Suoue uoIlEIJeA ePIl\ sl eJerlt asnsseq dnor8 f,Iluouof,aolfos

¡o uor8al olqdeJSoa8 rgtcads 3 ull{lv!\ PoolsJePun eg sftz'r¡e lsnu

,re>¡eads a IIBU, uoltou aq¡ 'aBenBuEI aqr3o ¡rutur¡8 f,IsEg el{r uo ea¡3¿

or pual laqr rnq 'asn e8en8uelSo sradse rrrsr¡lrs pue lrelnqerolJo sluJel uI

ragrp sra>lrads a,rrre¡ 'a8en8ue¡ teqr uI tuanyord f¡ry aq or PauaaP sI oI{^\

pue a8e l¡:ea ue uo.t3 aBenBuEI E PeuJEal set{ oqlr\ uos¡ad y :ra>pads eapeu

ra>1eads e^Iteu EJo ter{r ruo{ alqeqsm8unstput sI leqr aouerurolradJo Ia^ele le a8en8uel pumas e acnpord pue puaqardu¡or ol &lllq" aql :aTI-e Deu

'sauraqd;oru prtteruurrr8 aag :aruaqd.rou

[tassolg rzz

222 Glossary

phonemic Small differences in language sounds that can change meaningwithin a particular language. For example, the consonants p and b arephonemic in English, but not in Arabic.

pragmatics: Aspects of language use that go beyond vocabulary andgrammar to include rules of how to use language appropriately in differentcontexts and with different speakers. It also includes an understanding ofthe implied as well as the explicit meaning of language.

private speech: The language we use when we are talking ro ourselves, notexpecting anyone to hear or respond.

procedural knowledge Knowledge that underlies fluent or automaticperformance. It is contrasted with declarative knowledge.

processability theory: Manfred Pienemann's theory of learners' developingability to process linguistic elements in different senrence positions.

processing instruction: An approach to instruction in which learners aregiven explicit information about the language feature to be learned andtheir practice activities involve the comprehension (not production) ofsentences or texts that cannot be understood without a focus on thelanguage itself, The approach was developed by Bill VanPamen.

qualitative research: An approach that uses detailed descriptions of thephenomena being studied rather than counting or measuring the exactamount of some specific variable or variables. Qualitative research requiresextensive observation and insightful interpretation.

quantitative research: An approach that requires precise counts ornumeric measurements ofvariables. In a quantitative stud¡ both thevariable that is believed to affect learning and the learning itself aremeasured or'quantified'. Quantitative research requires careful selection ofthe measurements that will be used to represenr the variables being studied.

rate oflearning: The speed with which learners progress in their languagedevelopment.

recase To repeat a learner's incorrect utterance, making changes that convertit to a correct phrase or sentence. 'Recast' is also used as a noun, that is, arecast is the interlocutor's modified/corrected form of the learner's utrerance.

register: A style or way of using language that is rypical of or appropriatefor a particular setting. For example, speaking and writing usually requiredifferent registers; the register used in writing a research report is differentfrom that used in writing a letter to a friend.

restructuring: Cognitive activify that is seen as causing changes in the wayinformation is organized in the brain, even though no new information hasbeen learned.

aqt eprsrno ur a8e8ua rq8rur sJauJeal esoql ot JEIIruls ($lset, aJE sanr^nferuoorsself, r{rlq^\ ur uonf,nrlsul :[-IgJ) Eu¡gcuar aSunEue¡ pesuq-{spr

'a8en8ue¡ (quno; Jo prrqt.ro) puooas e ro a8en8ue¡

rsJg ar{r sr lr rer{ler{ r 'pau;ea¡ Suraq aSenSuEI er{I :a8un8ue¡ raErer

'spunos pnplrupur Jo uonelcunuo¡darp urr{t raqrer '(uorreuolur pue ssaJls '3'a) a8en8uel erpJo uqrfgr

pue fpo¡au aql eAIoAur regr a8en8uel EJo spunos rr{l :spluau¡Eesp¡dns

'parlnbre sl a8en8uel puof,as ? s¿

a8en8ue¡ rsrg erp Surso¡ llara¡duor -ro llprrre¿ :rusr¡enEur¡Iq e lrf,prrqns

'saJnteeJ prrteruuerS 3o lrrxaldurocur eseaJlur pnprr8 E sr uonezrueS.ro arp JoJ srseq eql 'suossel Jo 1ooqlxal

E ur l?rraleur 8ur¡uanbas rcSutztue8to ro3 anbluq:ar y :Eu¡oe.rt ¡e.rnlrn.rls'sallarJel f,ruJouooaorf,os pue'¡euol8a.r'f,ruqle

snoJeurnu sB IIe,t se 'ltar¡e,r pJepuers u1v\o stl sBI{ I{f,Ba qslSug uEIpuI pu"'qs¡¡8ug uErpEuEJ 'gs¡¡8uE r{snrrg 'qs¡¡8uE uef,rreruv'a¡durtxa rog 'saoe¡d

ruereJlp uI ruaraJlp aq leru saSrn8url ua>¡ods llaprm3o &ar¡e,r prepuersaql '(Sunserprorg Sulpn¡our) 8uu¡eads crlqnd IEruroJ pue Suntrrnr IBturoJur pesn l¡¡ecldlr sI reqr a8enSue¡ ua,tr8 e jo Áet¡err aq1 :&arre,r preprrers

'lenpr^rpur arp lqpazrTruJetur sr r{f,rr{,l aSpa¡.la.ou1 lf,nJlsuoo lpulol sJeuJeel 'uollef,tunrutuo¡Surrnp ler{r $ rurelr JqI'uonreJerul ace;-or-ef,EJ ur anSoprp uo ruapuadap

sr tr 'sr rerp 'palerperu l¡plros sI lel{l ssaco¡d E sB Pa,t\el^ st Sulureal'lBnpl^¡pul uaql IEIJos tsr5 sr Suturea¡ IIE lEI{t uolldunsse er{t uo Pesrg

$ reqr Sururea¡ pue a8pa¡zvtonl JoJ uoneue¡dxa uy :Lroeqr [pJnl[nJorJos'(,leprarsal

oB a¡1 frpor oB 1,) asuar 'ragrunu 'uosrad3o ssalp-re8a.r qre^ BJo ruro1 arues

aqt Sursn 'a¡druexa JoJ 'ef,ualues EJo sruaua¡a tno SuneaT :uoDeJ5¡¡dru¡s

'azrs Jraqt sB IIe.&\ s" safuaJeJlp eqlJo louarslsuoc eql or enp sI ,ef,u¿Jylu8ls,rraql 'e8rrl ro llerus eg uE3 serueraglp I{lnS 'aoueq: lq pauadd¿q a^eq o}

f¡e1¡un eJE 'slser lzf,nsnelsJo ke\rc¡e ot Sutprooce ',{rl.l^ sdno¡8 uea uagsef,uaJaglp ol sJaJeJ lrr{l ruJal Ff,rur{3al E sr sql :ef,uaJeju[P ruurg¡u8¡s

' uoneuolur Jo su.rallrd aJe rlf, IrlA{',s¡rtuatuSasrt dns,

qrl/( perserruo3 'aSen8uel EJo spunos lenpl^lpul eq1 :¡uluauSas

'a8en8ue¡ qunoJro prrqr aqr or reJer l¡enrre leru u 'snql 'paur¿a¡ a8en8ue¡ tsrg aq] u¿qt

raqro a8en8ue¡ fue ot srajer ruret eqr (>loog slqr uI :(ZT) aEen8ue¡ Puoras'eoueluas ata¡duorul s ra>pads arpJo uolsurdxa aqr ro ,fte1nqeco,r Sulssrru

3o uolsvtord eqr ePnllur,ftu r1 :aleeds JaqrouEJo ssaf,fns e^IlEf,IunuJluofagt rroddns ol sasn rolnrolratul ue teql a8en8ut¡ aq1 :Eum¡ogrcs

fuassolg 8,27,

224 Glossary

second or foreign language classroom. Tasks may be complex, for example,creating a school newspaper, or more limited, for example, making a phonecall to reserve a train ticket.

teacher talk: See modified input and foreigner talk.

transfer: The infuence of a learnert first language knowledge in thesecond language. Also called'interference'. The term'cross-linguisticinfluence' is now preferred by many researchers. It better reflects thecomplex ways in which knowledge of the first language may affect learners'knowledge and use of another.

transfer-appropriate processing (TAP) : Cognitive psychologists have

observed that when we learn something new, we also internalize some aspects

of the circumstances and thinking processes that were present when welearned it. The TAP hypothesis is that knowledge is easier to retrieve ifwe are

returned to or can recreate those circumstances and thinking processes.

universal gramm¡ü (UG): Innate linguistic knowledge which, it ishypothesized, consists of a set of principles common to all languages. Thisterm is associated with Chomsky's theory of language acquisition.

uptake: This term is sometimes used in a general sense to refer to what alearner notices and/or retains in second language input or instruction.Lyster and Ranta's (1997) definition refers to a learnert observable

immediate response to corrective feedback on his/her utterances.

variabls An element or characteristic that can be measured or defined.Variables can differ in different groups or change over time within a groupor individual. Some examples ofvariables that are commonly examined inlanguage acquisition research include the amount of time a person has been

learning the language, scores on aptirude tests, and performance onmeasures of language knowledge.

variational features: In contrast to the developmental features in theframework developed by Pienemann and his colleagues, variational features(for example, vocabular¡ some grammatical morphemes) can be learned at

any point in the learnerb development.

variety: Away of speaking and using language that is typical of a particularregional, socioeconomic, or ethnic group. The term'dialect' is sometimesused. Some language varieties are stigmatized as 'uneducated' but each

language variety has its own rules and patterns that are as complex andsystematic as those of the so-called 'standard' language. Among the moststudied non-standard varieties of English are British Cockney and African-American Vernacular English.

willingness to communicate (\WTC): The predisposition of learners

toward or away from communicating in a second/foreign language. Several

'CdZ s,JauJeel aqt ur uonreralur 8ul-rnp pue qSnorqr are¡dsa>pt Sulu;ea1 'l.roerp s,llsro8l¡ uI 'JolnoolJalur uE r{tr,r\ uonf,EJetur ruory

r¡oddns sr aJaql esnef,aq ecueru;ojradJo Ie el raq8rq ejo a¡qedec sr JauJEal E

qrFI^A ur ,ace¡d, ¡eorrogdztau aql :(CI¿Z) luaurdo¡a,rap prurxo.rd lo euoz

'l¡oruaru uJer-iloqs, pelpf,os[V'snJoJ ur lpua;rnr sr reqr uolltruJoJur Jo uoneruJoJur 1v\au ssaco¡d

f¡anrrre e \ qllq^\ ur ,aoeds, a,rrtruSo¡ aql :(nL4¡,.) lrouau Suptron

'lEuonEADoIU

pue '¡euonenrrs 'lenpl^lpur 'lerios Sulpn¡rul fIlN ol alnqrJluof, sroDe3

ttassolg SZZ

'ssard u?8rr{frwJo&rsre,rru¡ :11¡¡ 'roqry uuy 'saqraaJ.tot sulnn&utT snúoy :ruoo"tstal)

&uru.taa7 a8anSuaT aqt ur andto7Suln '0rcT, 'U'g (rauueg

'17IZ-06l óLe 'P '3f,ualrsJo fuapeoy>lroÁ

^\eN :>lro ,/daN ztuangto truapacV 4to¡ ma¡¡ aqlto tl?uuv 'uotfinnbtV

a7an&uaT u8tato¿ put aSun&uuT aatxa¡¡:('pa) zuur¿¡'g ut ,sar8alerls

¡enrdacrad pue 'Jnuerues 'ltt¿ru8e¡¿ :e,utcadsrad tst¡euotlcunJ E lrroüuortrsrnbce a8rn8ue¡-puoras, 'I 86I rbuu¡r'¿j([c¿W 'g PUE 'y 'g (sarug

'L;-Stt, 'dd 'ssa.r¿ órsra.ttu¡pro3xo :proJxo z&an&uaT "rautaaT Suts[luuV '$pa) uazmlPlrtg 'D Pue

slllg 'd ur ,a8en8url raureel3o sasl¡eue paseg-rarndruo3, '1002 'W .naolreg

' 17 0e- G LZ : € | g I u oxtx stn btV a8anSua7 pu ora S

ux sat?nls'luaudo¡arap rneurSerd30 fpnrs ¡eurpnuSuol v qlEt rlluaPef,E

Jo salnr aqr Sururtal ,'€.G6I 'ProprBH'S'g PuE'X'EI¡eH-I^oPrBB'113./vDIrEIg :ProJxO 'an ?u? Buruaa¡\¡'ru.r0¿

: u o tl t s m b ty a&a n&ua 7 pu o t a g u t e a dsv ? uv a s u aJ' 0 0 0 Z'X'8ureH-r,loPreg' EI L- LL9 :V ¡ 6y &uru"raa7

a&an&uu7,'scrleur8r.rd ¡euouslnbce ro3 rpua8e I{JJ¿asaJ y :scneur8rrd

a8rn8ue¡rarul Jo a8enSuelrerur eqr 8ur.ro¡dxg,' 6 6 6 I'>l'8¡re¡¡-¡,top.reg' a8pa¡rn o¡ :>lr oÁ ./rcN' u a uta a

7 afla nflua 7 -y u o t a 5 ut

Sur r t¡X¡ p ua Bulpa a¿ S u T dol a a a e' g002' ('sPa) uPTPrrBqS'I Pue' q'rsn8ny

dtl¡,4N qro¡.&\aN' r'pa oddV patatSatu¡ uy : úo rua¡¡¡ pua &urutua7' t 66I'¿'f

(uos.rapuy

'B6-L9l 'dd :a/n.rg ep uornory :uePratsurv 'uotltsmbtyaSan&uaT puotag

pzpn4sul ut suoqaStlsartu¡ :('spa) PrErraI¿ 'ntr PuE uasnoH 'y ur ¡sr¡8uE30

sJauJtel qr-ryfq sesnelf, e^nEIaJJo uotllsrnbre aqt tnogr aJour-saJnl3nJlscrrsm8ur¡ pelrctu Surqcra¿, '1002 'u¡aoqrrlSn'W U PuE y (reruury

' 1B-eS : ¡ ¡ Et7 stunn&utT

pallddylo maxnaY lauoxj?u¿ajuJ,'a8en8ue¡ Puofes e uI sJalsnlf lu?uosuof,

Jo uorrrnpord puz'uorldac.rad'ruau8pnl ¿gL,' t¡OZ ¿'g'8.raguarly'Sulpear ral{unJ.ro3 parsaSSns uaaq e^Er{

1"q1 esoql se ile./r^. s€ lxal 3q1 uI PalIf, slJo1v\ eql IIE raqraSor sSur-rq lsII sn{I

I.HdVUDOITgIg

228 Bibliography

Beretta, A. 201 1. 'The language learning brain' in M. Long and

C. Doughry (eds.): The Handbooh of Language Teaching. Oxford:'$liley-Blackwell. pp.65-80.

Berko Gleason,J. 'The childt learning of English morphology.' Word 14,150-77.

Berko Gleason,J. and N. Bernstein-Ratner (eds.). 2009. The Deuelopment

of Language7th edn. NewYork Ailyn and Bacon.

Bialystok, E. 2001. Bilingualisrn in Deuelopment: Language, Literacy, and

Cognition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Bialystok E .2009. 'Effects of bilingualism on cognitive and linguisticperformance across the lifespan' in I. Gogolin and U. Neumann (eds.):

Streifa ll Zweisp rac h igh e it-Th e Bi lingua lis m C ontrou ersy. Wiesbaden,Germany: VS Verlag fur S ozialwissenschaften . pp. 5 3 -68'

Bley-Vroman, R. 1990. 'The logical problem of foreign language learning.'

Linguistic Analysis 20ll-2: 347 .

Bloom, L.l99l. Language Deuelopmentfom Two to Tltree. Cambridge:

Cambridge Universiry Press.

Bloorn, L. and M. Lahey. 1978. Language Deuelopment and Language

D is o rders. New York John'Sfliley.

Bongaerts, T. 1999. 'Ultimate attainmenr in L2 pronunciation: The case

ofvery advanced lateL2learners' in D. Birdsong (ed'): Second Language

Acquisition and the Critical Period Hypothesls. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence

Erlbaum and Associates. pp. 133-59.

Brools, N. 1960. Language and Language Learning. NewYork:Harcourt Brace.

Brown, R.1973. A First Language: The Early Sages. Cambridge, MA:Harvard University Press.

Burns, A- 2010. DoingAction Research in English Language Teaching: AGuidr for Practitioners. New York Routledge.

Burstall, C.1975. 'French in the primary school: The British experiment.'

Canadian Modern Language Reuiew 3l I 5: 388402.

Carroll, J. 199 1 . 'Cognitive abilities in foreign language aptitude:

Then and nov/ in T. Parry and C. Stansfield (eds.): Language Aptitude

Reconsidered. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice hall.

Carroll, J. and S. Sapon. 1959. The Modern Languages Aptitude Tbst.

San Antonio, TX: Psychological Corporation'

'ssard rruapBf,v :>lro^ .4^¿ N .?l

1 tl ) ?l la[ag-u.tayo¡71¡ ato r(prug nlun&uqotpb¿ V:axuag 'LL6I'S (ssnrnJ

'sreuery ¡en8unnpyq :uopa^al3 'a"q[ssot3 ar¡t

ut uWyl) pnSuutg :,(So8rya¿ pu? ¿amo¿ u&un&ua7'0002 .Í.suluum3

'srauery pn8urp¡nyr¡ :uopa^elJ 'lSo8upa¿ puutuau¿stastv u! sansq :uoxtprn?g lauadg pua wvTanSu1tg '7g6I .[,sulturun)

' 9 09- LB,

: E ¡ 97 r(1taua"Ó rc SE¿,'alduexa rlnul uV :uorlrsrnbce

a8en8ue¡ puolas pue uonf,EJetur elnef,runuJuro3, '7.66I .W.o8e.r3

'69-19I :e-T1g stusm&utT yalddVto maxnaü

l?uottryunluJ (.sJorJa (sraur8olJo aouecyluS¡s eyL,.Lg6l a .s ÍepJo)

'uonefnPg raPPoH :uoPuoT'upa qttT Sutqtaa¿ aSan&uaT puu &urutaa7 a8an&uu7 ?uoras '8002 71.{oof,

' IZ-I 07, ; g ¡ 1r7 tc un n&utT

paqddylo mat(taü /puoxi?u¿aru1,'qsr¡8uE3o srasn Z'I ur fcuapuadap-ernlf,nrts pue ruarun8Je snlnruns-aqr-3o-lrra,rod ag1,'8002 .¡'{oof,

' BV-|, 7, :Z l, I' 2 r ua, r S pt ua ut dop n a g,' u ondac ta d

qcaads aSen8ue¡-puof,es pu¿ -tsJgJo seJnseeu¡ urerg :fcuejur ur acuar¡adxaa8enSue¡puof,asJo nedrul, 'I I0Z'HnX'X U pue 'q'g'foguo3

'08-999:r/lCg[ltauanl TOS{J <'uollf,nJlsul z'I ur erulrJo uolrnglrrslp eqr pu" atulJ,

'666y'epvds'N puE 6u,noqrq8¡1't\J U 'ratlpH'H'U "f (su¡¡¡o3

' €, €-9 0 I : 1 ¡ gV r(1 t a u a

"Ó rc S E¿,'8urureal a8rn8ue¡pue órsuarur rE >lool alrsualur uV ' I I 0Z 'atH¿N'[ pue '1 (sur¡¡o3

', 6-eV : 1 ¡79 SututaaT aSanfluaT,'l8o¡oqd-roru produar3o uoIlISInb3Eaqr ur radsr ltrrxal put acuangul ITJo selor ar{L '2002'1'su¡¡¡o3

xdse'qcreag'sndro3¡sndJof, An'of, 'sun¡ocznr,,'rru77:drrg

.ra¡dureg uop¿f,ollo3 prre af,rrpproruoD plr.nqo3 suIIIof,

'rc-609 :E¡E7 [1"rat"ra"ó IOSE¿ ,'a8en8ue¡ puof,es E ur lueuralarr{f,ef,rruepert uo r{rrtasarJo slsagtuls y ¿8uo¡ ¡1'oH, '686I ¿ n(ra¡¡¡o3

' 60Z-0 6I :7 ¡ 77 [&op q ils¿ 1 tlt o g yua a&an&uaflo putnof ,'Át1et;u'

pue 'sru.rou 'txaluo:3o sDega agl :aBrnSuEI puoles e ur aleorunruruof,or ssauSuq¡r¿6,'e007. 'a.rfru¡cc¡4J'6¡ U pu"'""T"9'C'S "U rluaur?l)

'gg-92:1¡gE a3an3ua7

('JeuuDIS 'C 'g fq ((Jorltqag pqre¡,,Jo,&\el^a¡, '616I 'N'Á1sruog3

'ssar¿ órsra,rru¡ a8prrqrue3 :aSplrquea'sa8an8urTn q t g to ua 4 a a dg ot t ¡ s lpuE to s# q r p aJ nt a ru atala¿ V

: u o xt? n unu o,,t¿

Su1rpaa¿'966I 'ulmpoo9 'IAI'[puE (uolurrg "Í{'C

('I l relf,ml l-erlaD

[t¡druflouqry 6ZZ

230 Bibliography

Dalton-Puffe r, C. 200 6.'Questions in CLIL classrooms: Strategic

questioning to encourage speaking' in A. Martinez-Flor and E. Uso (eds.):

New Perspectiues on Teaching the Language Processing Skills. Amsterdam:

Mouton de Gruyter. pp.187-213.

Day, R.,J. Bassett, B. Bowler, S. Parminter, N. Bullard, N. Prentice,M. Furr, M. Mahmood, D. Stewart, and T Robb. 2011. BringingExtensiue Reading into the Classroom. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

DeKeyser, R. M. 1998. 'Beyond focus on form: Cognitive Perspectives onlearning and practicing second language grammar' in C. J. Doughry and

J. \lilliams (eds.): Focus on Form in Ckssroom Second Language Acquisition.

Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. pp. 42-63.

DeKeyser, R. M. 2000. 'The robustness of critical period effects insecond language acquisition.' Studies in Second Language Acquisition22l4:493-533.

DeKeyser, R. M. 2001. Automaticiry and automatization' in P Robinson(ed.): Cognition and Second Language Instruction. Cambridge: CambridgeUniversiry Press. pp. 125-51.

DeKeyser, R. M. 2007.'Introduction: Situating the concept of practice' inR. DeKeyser (ed.): Practice in a Second Lnngudge: Perspectiuesfom AppliedLinguistics and Cognhiue Psychology. Cambridge: Cambridge UniversiryPress. pp. 1-18.

deVilliers,J. G. and P. A. deVilliers,lg73' A cross-sectional study of the

acquisition of grammatical morphemes.' Journal of Psycholinguistic Research

213:267-78.

Derwing, T. M. and M.J. Munro.2009' 'Putting accent in its place:

Rethinking obstacles to communication.' Language Teaching 42 I 4: 47 6-90.

Derwing, T M. and M. Rossiter. 2003.'The effects of pronunciationinstruction on the accuracy, fuenc¡ and complexity of L2 accented

speech.' App lied Language Learning I 3 I I : I -17 .

Donato, R.1994. 'Collective scaffolding in second language learning' in

J. Lantolf and G. Appel (eds.): VygoxkianApproaches to Second Language

Research. Norwood, NJ: Ablex. pp.33-56.

Dórnyei, 2.2007a. Motiuational Strategies in the Language Classroom.

Cambridge: Cambridge Universiry Press.

Dórnyei, Z. 200Ib. Teach ing and Researc h ing Motiuation. Harlow:

Longman.

Dórnyei, 2.2005. The Psychologt of the Language Learner: IndiuidualDffirences in Second LanguageAcquisition. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence

Erlbaum and Associates.

' gg t- 6t I'dd'¡amlcelg-falyN:VW 'ueppt ü '&u1cyna¿ a8unSuaTto Woq?upH aql :gpa) 3uo1 .¡1 '7,q

pue lrq8noq 'f 'f, rl ,Sururea¡ pesnro;-ruroJ pue pe$q-a8esn ur3ur¡dues pue lcuanbar¿ :rndur aqr Surznundo, '6002 .3 .N.slilg

'zs-90€.:ztL7,uotsnnbcV a&anSuaT puocag u! saryruS,'a8pa¡rtou1 a8en8ue¡ rnlldrur

pue rrcl¡dxa3o suonf,eJerur clrueulg :af,EJralur eqt tV 'S0OT.D.N.slilg

.eu-€.9.dd' IIa-{DITEI g : proJXO' u o t I t n rc b ty a8anSuaT p u o t a g to ry

o q ? u? H a q1 :

$pa)3uo1 '¡1 'htr pue lrg8noq 'f 'f .rl (ernlf,nns a8en8ue¡ puof,asJo acuaS¡arua

ar r, :ursruonf,euuof pue'8ul1unqf, ,suonrnJtsuo3,'e00Z D.N,sIIIfl

'88 I -87 I :Z l rZ u oxtxsxnbtV aBanSuYT Puoras w sat?ruS

,'uonrslnble a8en8uel lcr¡dxa pue rrol¡dul Jo serJoe{p .ro1 suoneclldrurtltl4A 1r\er^Jr y :uolrrsnbce a8en8uel ur slf,aJe buanbarg, '2007,.J.N .sIIIfl

'89-t8.'dd'ssar¿ &rsra,rru¡ a8prrque3 :a8plrqure)'uoxpnusu¡ aSan&uuT ?uoras ?up

uoutuSoS:('pa) uosurqo¡ A ul ,a8en8ue¡ ro3l.rouraytr, 'I002 .f, .N.slilA

' OZ- I : I I 6 stuun&urT patl ddV,' a?en?uu¡

puooas e se qsl¡8uE3o uorlrslnbr¿ eqt ur uononJrsur esnelf, e^nEIaJJouonezrleraua8 aqr uO, '886I 'uosleN'(I put .llrg'T (g (uuurlcg

'uosJsed

:uorsog 1a?ory ¿06 aql :t"4au.¿/a7 aSrn&uaT c¡s1puE ntalqtsuaqatdutoSruaru o ) 3u 7 4 a ¡1¡' 100 Z'r.roq5' [' q pre.rEoA'I4I " f 'e¡.r.ruraqcg

' Zr-I l, :E ¡ gy SurutaaT a3an3ua7 r'salroal{l elq¿rnsuauruorul

:stfnJlsuof, alqeJnsueruruof,ul : I +r sueqsur) pue ruarudola,raq

Ieurrxord Jo auoT s lxsro3út,' gG¡.;¡ JIorurJ'd'[ put'fl '¿C\,uun(I

' Le-909 :E¡67 [\taua"Ó IOSE¿, drr8ung uI sruoorssels

uorsJaruurr ur uonefruntutuorJo lqderSouqle aV,'9661 A .Jnq¡

'Bg-rI1 'dd 'ssar¿ órsra,rru¡ a8prrque3 :a8prrqrue3'WS utoo$tal) ux uttol uo tnroi:('spa) suBrTIrlN 'f pur lrq8no6l 'f

ul ,ruJoJ uo snroJ a^nef,runurulo3, '866I '¿lalp 'g puB 'C ,ftqEnoq

' 69-It, :, I €I uoxttsxrcbtV a7an&uaT

?uzJas ux sax?ws ('uon¿zr^n¿lerlsJo lpnrs ¡rclrrdura uE tuog af,uappg:eJuera5lp E a>leru saop uonrnrtsul e8en8uel puoras, 'I66I ')'frgEnoq

' 0e9-6BS'dd'¡ampzlg :proJXO' uotu nnbtV a8an&uuT puotag toyooq?u?H aql :$pa) 3uo1 '¡1 'ntr pu? lrq8noq 'f ') rl ,Sururee¡ a8en8ue¡

puof,as ur saruaraglp Ienpr^rpul,'9007, 'uBrlaIS ?J pue '7'rcÁutgq'ssar¿ Álsrartlun pJoJxO

:proJxo' u o t y n n b cV a7a n&u a 7 p u o t a g to r(3 op q tG¿ a q1' 6007,' Z.raluroq

tcldatSouqq ttT

232 Bibliography

Ellis, N. C., R. Simpson-Vlach, and C. Maynard. 2008. 'Formulaic

language in native and second language speakers: Psycholinguistics, corpus

linguistics, and TESOL .' TES O L Quarterly 42 I 3: 37 5-96.

Ellis, R. 2012. Language Tbaching Research and Language Pedagoglt. Malden,MA: \Wiley-Blackwell.

Ellis, R and G. Barkhuizen.2005. Analysing Learner Language. Oxford:Oxford University Press.

Ellis, R., S. Loewen, C. Elder, R. Erlam,J. Philp' and H. Reinders. 2009.

Implicit and Explicit Knowledge in Second Language Learning: Testing andTeaching. Bristol, UK: Multilingual Matters.

Erard, M.2012. Babel No More: Tlte Search for the World's MostExtraordinary Language Learners. NewYork Free Press.

Erlam, R. 2005. 'Language aptitude and its relationship to instructional

effectiveness in second language acquisition.' Language Teaching Research

912:147-171.

Ganschow, L. and R. L. Sparls .2001.'Learning difficulties and foreign

language learning: A review of research and instruction.' Language Tbaching

3412:79-98.

Gardner, D.2004. 'Vocabulary input through extensive reading:

A comparison ofwords found in children's narrative and expository

reading materials.' Applied Linguistics 251 l: l-37 .

Gardner, H.1993. Muhiple Intelligences: The Theorlt in Practice. NewYork:Basic Books.

Gardner, R. C. andW. E. Lambert.lg72.Attitud.es andMotiuation inSecond Language Learning. Rowle¡ MA: Newbury House.

Gass, S. M. 1982. 'From theory to practice' in M. Hines and'W'. Rutherford (eds.): OnTESOL '81' \Washington, DC: TESOL.pp.129-139.

Gass, S. M. 198S. 'Integrating research areas: A framework for second

language studies.' Applied Linguistics9I2: l9B-217 -

Gass, S. M.1997. Input, Interaction, and the Second Language Learner.

Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum andAssociates.

Gatbonton, E. and N. Segalowitz. 1988. 'Creative automatization:Principles for promoting fuencywithin a communicative framework.'

TE S O L Quarterly 22 I 3 : 47 3-9 2.

Gatbonton, E. and N. Segalowitz.2005- 'Rethinking communicative

language teaching: A focus on access to fuenry.' Canadian Modzrn

Language Reuiew 6l I 3: 325-53.

'lI8. 16Z 'dd'ssar¿

&rs;a,rru¡ qS.rnqurpE :q8rnqurpE' a&an8uapatu¡ : ('spa) ue,l\oH'V pue

'radrr3 'J 'sar^Eq 'y ul ,Sulqcear a8enSue¡ puores JoJ suorleorldur su pursluapnls uorsreurur3o a8en8ue¡ralur aql, '786I 'ur-B¡as'I I pue 'g'fal¡eH

'rzL-991'dd 'ssa,r¿

Ársrar'ru¡ a8prrqrue3 :aBprrqrue3'uotltunbtV a3an3uu7 puotag uoolssal)u! ru¿oi uo snrol:('spe) suErllr/N'Ipue lrq8nocl 'f ur ponrsrnbct ¿1p¡gc Sunouro¡d ur $lset ruroJ-uo-snroJJo alor eql '866I 'g'fa¡.re¡¡

' Lg-e,T,l :y ¡yy &utu"rta7 a7un&uaT

,'a8en8ue¡ puof,as ¿ ur uonf,nJlsur uouezrlrreleJ ruo5 aluoppg ¿lerulxerupur lruorraJlplun uolrez¡p;aua8 ¡euorreor¡dtul \,', GGI'¿

(uot¡ruru¡q

'gg-I9T,te l0e wnas?üulnn&ul ot¡ t[s¿ to putnof,'s¡epuarod urerg petelar-lue a ruo5 aruepl^E

¿Sulssarord a8enSue¡-puoras ur rueJeJlp ErEI{1¡., 'I002 V '"t.I"H' gZ- rcZ

: 7 ¡ g g r{1 t at ta"ó rc S E¿,'s¡eluatu8aserdn

s 3o Sutqcear aqr

el¿Anoru or r{rr¿ase¿ :Ar¡ql8r¡arul pu¿ ssarts llerurr¿, t7002'e'T'urIBH' B- IZV

: g ¡ E 1 r(au\ c1 t [s¿ a at sua opt dru o 3,'lpnts,ftore.roldxe uy:a8en8uel puof,es e ul lrr¡qe uonercunuo¡d

uo salers o8a ul sa8urqc pelnpul l¡¡eruaunredxa3o spagJ tqL,'ZL6I'la ors'I pu¿'¡¡nC'f, (uouue.lg

¡'¡ureqq¡eH-rleg'g'V (Brorn)

' LL-g g : 1 ¡ 7V Qnuu"ó lO SE¿ ('uollelltour tuepnrs uo

sar8at¿¡ts leuonrlrtoru Jo srraga agrSo uorreSllse^ul palualJo-ruooJsself, V: sreurcal a8en8ue¡ Sunenlro¡/q,' g g g ¿'rafur g q' Z pue' ['W

(xnueloilr-n3

's6-e8t:llzzputnof¿7V[ ('urooJssel3 a8en8ue¡ a^Ile]IunulruoJ el{r ur JoIAeI{eq

Jo rolruoru prnrlnl asauedef y:o1lr{Jo safa ag¡, '0002 "I'q (.rea.rg

' gg-¡ : y ¡ 6 &urutra7 a8anSuzT ('stueuruJelepaldrr¡nu3o srsf¡eue-etaru y:qsr¡8ug ul uo¡llstnbce auagdroru Z'IJo t¿Pro

IErntBu agr Surure¡dxg,' I 002'rasfayeq'W'U pu"'¡4J'f (rap¡eurlrsPlog

'sser¿ &rs.ra,rru¡ :8pl-rqrue3 :e8prrqur 3'atuaplrt7quaav¿ lo s1saqtutg y : aautaaT a8anSuaT c¡ s43uE Suuutn?l' 9002' ('tPt)

rrelrslrrl)'(I pue's.rapuneg'¡4J 7¡¡'lreaf -urloqPulf 'y' g (eesauag

'esnoH frnqrvra¡qroÁ,&\eN'sa&anSuaT om¿ qSnotr'p SututraT' Lg 6I'{.'aeseuag

' 0B- L9T, :7 ¡ 97 SututaaT a&an&uoT

,'Sururea¡ a8en8ue¡ puoJas ut acua8q¡atulJo elor eyL,'9L6I g (aassuag

'lIt-GgV :g ¡69 [1tuw"ó IOSE¿ .'uone8rtsa,rurrllsrn8urTol¡os y :frtrncJe uollelf,unuotd 71PuE uolr¿Ilge dno¡8

f,rur{ra (sreureaT, 'E002 'pÉpw'I I PuE (rlrl^oruuor¡ tI "g'uoluoqrsg

,ft,¡dru&ouqtg Ee7,

234 Bibliography

Hatch, E.1978. 'Discourse analysis and second language acquisition inE. Hatch (ed.): Second Language Acquisition: A Book of Readizgs. Rowle¡MA: Newbury. pp. 401-35.

Heath, S. B. 1983. rYays uithWords. Cambridge: Cambridge UniversityPress.

Hedge, T 2000. Tbaching and Learning in the Language Classroom. Oxford:Oxford University Press.

Hoare, P. and S. Kong. 2008. 'Late immersion in Hong Kong: Still stressed

but making progress?' in T \(4 Forrune and D. J. Tedick (eds.): Pathways toMuhi lingualism: Emerging Perspectiues on Immersion Educatioz. Clevedon:Multilingual Matters. pp. 242-66.

Horst, M. 2005. 'Learning L2 vocabulary through extensive reading:A measurement study.' Canadian Modern Language Reuieu 6ll3:355-82.

Horwitz, E. K., M. B. Horwia,andJ. Cope. 1986. 'Foreign language

class room anxiety.' M o d.e r n L anguage Jo urna I 7 0 I 2: | 25 -32.

Howard, E. R.,J. Sugarman, D. Christian, K. Lindholm-Leary, andD. Rogers. 2007 . Guiding Principles for Dual Language Educatioru Znd edn.'Washington, DC: Center for Applied Linguistics. http: //www. cal. org/twi/guidingprinciples. htm

Hu, M. and I. S. P. Nation. 2000. 'Unknown vocabulary density andreading comprehension.' Reading in a Foreign Language f3lL 403-30.

Hulstijn, J. and B. Laufer. 2001. 'Some empirical evidence for theinvolvement load hypothesis in vocabulary acquisition.' Language Learning5rl3:539-58.

HunterrJ. 2012. 'Small talk developing fuenc¡ accuracy, and complexityin speaking.' ELT Journal 661 l: 3041

Itard, J. -M. -G. 1 9 62. Th e Wi ld B oy of Au ey ro n ( L'e nfant s auu age ). N ew York:Meredith.

Jarvis, S. andd Pavlenko. 2008. Crosslinguistic Influence in Language andCognitio n. New York Routledge.

Johnson, J. and E. Newport. 1989. 'Critical period effects in second

language learning: The influence of maturational state on the acquisition ofEnglish as a Second Language.' Cognitiue Psychology 2llI: 60-99.

Johnson, R. K. 1997. 'The Hong Kong education system: Late immersionunder stress' in R. K. Johnson and M. Swain (eds.): Immersion Education:International Perspectiuet Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

pp.17I-89.

' g0S- Lgrz ig I L, SuxuwaT aSan&uaT

.'Jorler{eq a8en8ue¡ u8laro3 pue'ssaua.re,re'uonuellv' L66I'¿'¿ (ao.oa1

' 1t-C' dd'sserd oluoroJ3o lrrsra.tru¡

:EpBuEJ 'oluo;ol 'salpnry prrydruE :apauaS ux uoxwrn?g a7un8uaT puotagqrua.ti:('pa) uqdq 'S ur (tuaula alqle pue sepntruv:slapou qruer{

aro3 rceduoc3o fpnrs esEJ, '866I 'fa¡re¡¡ 'g pue 'treH 'O "S'u[xdBT'ssar¿ llsra,r.run pJoJxO :proJxo '&ututaa7

a&an&uaT puotag puo ttoaql f¿nxlnropos 'OO0Z '('pr) U '[ ]¡orue1Lrnqr'ra¡ :y¡n¡ fay'ro¡' rya ruua dxE ua q rup7'8 a qL

:uatp11q3to uoxflrn?g pn3u71!g 'lL6I.n>1prnL.U .5l pue .g IN.lraqruuT'rzz-1il'dd

'salerrossv pur urneglrg afuer^\¿T :[¡ 'qe.aa.ge¡,1 'luautdoprtag ppos ?ua' a nuru&o 3' tg s7n3u77 to sua dsV : utsq an&u u r g p o o t/?/ ! eD : ('spa) uosuorev' C

pur'llp¿ 'tr ü <laruoH

¿ ur (se^nradsrad ptcos pue sapnrnre suJrplILIf, uosa¡uar¡adxa Iernrlnrrg pur pn8urlrqJo srleJa ¿qL,' LgGl'f '¿N rrraqure'I

'lllH-^ Er3rl ü

qroÁ.^aaN 'qno"rddV tfituang y :&mcltaa¿ a&an&uaT 'r.1gGI'U 'opn'I''9-0r/r/ tYl€'L

putnof aSan&uaT u.tayory,'srsaqrodlq rndur aqt roJ ef,uepl^e IEuoIrIppV:Surpear lq 3ul¡ads pue l.re¡nqeco¡. e¡tnble a¿N, '686I 'g (uaqsery

'ueu8uol:uopuoT 'suouarydu.tJ ?ua sanssJ :nsa[pod,(¡I tndu¡ aql'l86I 's (uaqsury

'uoue8;a¿ :pJoJXO

'uorlrsmbcV a8an&uaT puocag ux arxppt¿ ?ua sa1d1cu1t¿'286I 'S (ueqsery

'7,6-gLI :7¡gglautnofa7anSuaT u¿a?ory ('sseJ3ns or drysuonelal JIoI{r pur Sulunal ,ftr¡nqeco,r

or sagceordde (sluepnrs, '666I 'u¡ó'ogrqSn'W A pue'¡'oqeg-c¡foy

IrurqJsa/Jsa/dde1¡3r¡p¡ron¡¡u'ldu'r'r.,'v'r ¡ ¡ :dnq'sulutluag ur¡of:uepralsuv' ilnpnus aruansn'E66 I'enPrad'J PUE',1l\'uIe[)I

'8r-9e 'dd'uorue8ra¿

:>lJoÁ llraN' u o t u stn b cV aSpn7 ua 7 y u o c a g u t a t u a n¡fu ¡ t 4 s m&u q s s o t2 : (' spe)

qtltus poo.^arer{S 'htr puB uturalle) 'E ur rrorrxal ZT aquo ruaurdo¡arrap

aqr uo srulprlsuoJ onsln8urTssor3 :ala ue ro; afa uV '986I 'g (ueru.ra¡¡ay

' 66-t9 : ¡ ¡ g hmbul tusmSurT ('Jeuruler)

Iesralrun pue lrr¡rqrssacoe ase;qd unoN, 'LL6l'e¡.lrouo3 'g Pue 'g (ueuaa¡¡

' 1 ruaue¡ddns I Zg SuxutaaT a8an&uu7,' e8en8uel

puores e ur luarudolaleq rneru3et¿,'7gg7 'aso¿'U'¡¡ pue'g'radsey

te¡da$onqry 9t.c

236 Bibliography

Li, S. 2010. 'The effectiveness of corrective feedback in Sl,A: A meta-

analysis.' Language Learning 60 I 2: 309-365.

Lieven, E. and M. Tomasello. 2008. 'Children's first language from a usage

perspective' in P. Robinson and N. C. Ellis (eds.): Handbooh of CognitiueLinguistics and Second Language Acquisition. New York Routledge.

pp. 168-96.

Lightbown, P. M. I983a. Acquiring English L2 in Quebec classrooms'

in S. Felix and H..W'ode (eds.): Language Deuelopment at the Crossroads.

Tübingen: GunterNarr. pp. l5l-75.Lightbown, P. M. 1983b. 'Exploring relationships between developmental

and instructional sequences in L2 acquisition' in H.'W. Seliger and

M. H. Long (eds.): Classroom-Oriented Research in Second Language

Acquisition. Rowle¡ MA: Newbury House. pp.21745.

Lightbown, P. M. 1998. 'The importance of timing in focus on forrnin C. Doughty andJ. \{illiams (eds.): Focus on Form in Classroom

S e c o n d Language Ac q u i s i t i o n. Camb ridge : Camb ridge University Press.

pp. t77-96.

Lightbown, P. M. 2007 .'Fair trade: Two-way bilingual education.'Estudios de Lingüística Inglesa Ap licada 7 : 9-34.

Lightbown, P. M. 2008a. 'Easy as pie? Children learning languages.'

ConcordiaWorhing Papers in Applied Linguistics 1:l-25.http : //doe. concordia. calcopal/index. php/copal/volumes. html

Lightbown, P. M. 2008b. 'Thansfer appropriate processing as a model forclassroom second language acquisitio n' in Z. F{an (ed.) : Un de rs tan ding

Second Language Process. Clevedon, UK: Multilingual Matters. pP. 2744.

Lightbown, P. M. 2012.'Intensive L2 instruction in Canada: -Vhy notimmersion?' in C. Muñoz (ed.): Intensiue Exposure Experiences in Second

Language Le arning. Bristol, UK: Multilingual Matters' pp. 25 -44.

Lightbown, P. M. and N. Spada" 1990. 'Focus on form and corrective

feedback in communicative language teaching: Effects on second language

learning.' Studies in Second Language Acquisition I2l4: 429-48.

Lightbown, P. M. and N. Spada. L994.'Aninnovative program forprimary ESL in Quebec.' TESOL Quarterly2Sl3:563-79'

Lightbown, P. M., R. Halter,J. L.White, and M. Horst. 2002.'Comprehension-based learning: The limits of "do it yourself".' Canadian

Modern Language Reuiew 58 I 3: 427 -64.

Lindholm-Leary, K. 2001. Dual Language Education. Clevedon, UK:Multilingual Matters.

'T,O7-S9Z i1l1g uoxitsxnbty a7anSup7 puoras ux sax?us ,'srsl¡eue-elaru y:VIS uoorsself, ur IrEqPeeJ FrO, '0102'orIPS'X PuE ¡'rars,(1

'D-Lg, ill6l uovxttrcbtV a7an8uaT

puoJas w sax?ws ('surooJSSEIJ alllef,Iunururoo uI rr¡JoJJo uo¡reno8a¡:e>¡erdn reur¿al pue >lleqpaeJ a^Iloerro3, 'L66I "erlue¿'T Pue ¡ '.rars,(1

'00e-697, iZlSZ uouxsxnbty aSan8ua7 ?uoras u? saryas ('ef,utleqratunof,

Ieuonf,nrtsur pue >lleqpaal lruoltf,Erarul'9002'Irohl'H PuE'¿ 6rarsfi

'sunue fua g uqof : ruepra $wv' 0p p or ddy p a t uap q ¿arun o ) V:iuaiuo) c¡&no.tc¡t a8an&uoT &ulqcaa¿ pua Sutut?a7 '

L00Z \, (rarf1

'Zer/-66€, :g l9Z uorilsrnbtV a8unSuvT ?uoras ux sax?ru5 ú'uollf,nJlsul PasnroJ-ruroJ ur stsef,ar pue srdruo.rd1o slrege IEnuereJICI, '7002'U'ralsf1

'I8-I I iI l0Z uoxixstnbtV aSon&u?7 ?uoras ry saryus ('asrno3slPruooJssplf, ¿1 ur llnBrqru¿ PuE uo¡tnadat 'slsef,a¡, '866I 'U r.rarfl

'Lg-egzte t9ln7lsry3u17 paqddV,'acuatadu¡oc cnsn8ul¡otros (sluaPnls uolsJauJurl qluarC

3o srcadse uo Surgcear cril¡rue-¡uuorr3unJJo DeJa eI{L '766I 'U (.rersft

' L0- 9 09 : g ¡ 61,(1 t at tanÓ I O S E ¿,'lcuarcgo.I d qsr¡3uE

parrurTJo sruepnls JoJ IIe,l.rEH uI sasst¡f, loor{fs q8rg clqnd ut uoltedlrp;rd

¡dnd uo aruF llervi pue suaned Suluo¡lsanb (srJqJtal;o rcage aql, '886I't*qZ'S pur (rauo¿

1 b>¡r¡aq'3'sa4oo.r3'D'{torg'3 ('f (8uo1

'Sg-g9Z 'dd 'asno11frnqua¡ :y¡zr¿

'la¡mo¡ 'uorunnbty a8an&uuT yuotag u! clstllsaü ?atuauo-ruoo¿ssrl) :('spa)

3uo1 '¡1 'W pue ra8qag '¿4.'H ut ,suottsanb (sJeqf,salJo suolpunJ PUE

sruJoC :asrnorslp 1¡er rau8raroj ruooJssel3, '886I 'orBS'J PuE 'nI'Euof- gz- L07. :7 ¡ 6 1 [1 u Ua"Ó rc S E ¿,' u ottrsrnbce aSenSue¡ Puosas

pue 'ller a8en8ue¡rarul '1ro,,n dno;g, '886I 'Jarrod'd PuE'H'I^I €uo1

'g9-e IV 'dd 'ssar¿ f,IruaPErV :>lroÁ .&\aN 'uotltvnbtV aSun&uaT

puoeagto qooq?upH:('spa) EIIeI{g IPuE arI{311U '7¡¡ ut ,uotltsrnbceaSen8ue¡ puoras uI lueuluorl.tua cttsrn8ull eIPJo eloJ eI{L '966I'W'E tI

' IT9T,1 :7 ¡ V scunn&ulT pa11 ddV.'lndut e¡q¡suaqarduof, Jo uollello8au aqr

pue uon€sreluor ra>1eads a Ileu-uou/.ra1eads aAIlEN, '986I 'H'nI'8usI' rz0 l-l 6 : ¡ ¡ E 6 putnof aSan&uaT uD? oW ('uollf, aJJof, JoJJa PUE uollf, nJ]sul

¡etutue¡8 rnoqe sJeIIaq (srauJ"el a8enSuz¡ Puores, '6002'uarl3 Xpue (uqy'g'usrr¡ns¡u¡e¡'y'uosduroqt .y'Iaü U'n'S "S

rua,raeol

'9t-99s |il06putnof a&an&u?7 ufipory ('sseualllf,eJa PuE'sseullclTdxa'scrlsualceleqc

:sself, Z'I qsr¡8ug rlnPe eqt uI slsere¡, '9002'dlqd'[PuB'5 (uaaleol

,QdatSouqry LeT,

238 Bibliography

Maclntyre, P, 1995. 'How does anxiety affect second language learning?A reply to Sparks and Gansch ow.' Modern Language Journal7g l I: 90-9 .

Macke¡ A.1999. 'Input, interaction and second language development:An empirical study of question formation in ESL.' Studies in Second

Language Acquisition 2ll4: 557-87 .

Mackey, d and J. Goo. 2007 .'Interaction research in SLA: A meta-analysis and research synthesis.' in A. Mackey (ed.): ConuersationalInteraction in Second Language Acquisition: A Series of Empirical Studies.

Oxford: Oxford Universiry Press. pp. 407-452.

Mackeyr d andJ. Philp. 1998. 'Conversational interaction and secondlanguage development: Recasts, responses and red herrings.' ModernLanguage Journal 821 3: 338-56.

Macke¡ A., S. M. Gass, and K. McDonough. 2000. 'How do learners

perceive interactional feedback?' Studies in Second Language Acquisition2214:471497.

Mac-Whinn ey, B. 1997 .'Second language acquisition and the competitionmodel' in A. M. B. de Groot and J. F. Kroll (eds.): Tutoriak in Bilingualism:Psycholinguistic Perspectiu¿s. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum andAssociates. pp. 113-44.

MacWhinney, B. 2000. The C H ILDES Proj ect: Tbo k for AnalyzingTdlh (zvolumes). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum andAssociates.http: //childes.psy. cmu. edu/

MasgoretrA. M. and R. C. Gardnen2003, Attitudes, motivation, andsecond language learning: A meta-analysis of studies conducted by Gardnerand associat es.' Language Learning 531 l: 123-63 .

McCormick, D. E. and R. Donato. 2000. 'Teacher questions as scaffoldedassistance in an ESL classroom' in J. K. Hall and L. Verplaetse (eds.): Second

and Foreign Langaage Learning through Classroom Interaction. Mahwah, NJ:Lawrence Erlbaum and Associates. pp. 183-201,.

McDonough, K. 2004.'Learner-learner interaction during pair and small

Broup activities in a Thai EFL context.' System 32:207-24.

Mclaughlin, B. 1987. Tlteories of Second Language Learning. London:Edwardfunold.

Mclaughlin, B. 1990. 'Restructuring.' Applied Linguistics 11/1: I 13-28.

Meara, P. M. 19S0. 'Vocabulary acquisition: A neglected aspect of language

learning.' Language Tbaching and Linguistics Abstracts 13:22146.

Meara, P. M. 2005. 'Designing vocabulary tests for English, Spanish

and other languages' in C. Butler, M. dos Angeles Gómez-Gonzales, and

puoras ux uoxlauvA:('sPa) ra>lullrs "I Pu¿ 'uolserd 'c <uePPEI{ 'J'ssED 'S ur (sraureal aStn8ue¡ puof,es ¡tuondacxE, '686I 'T'Jalgo

' ZZ- L0 €,

: 7 ¡ g E,(1 t auu"b I O S E ¿ (' sraur"al aSen8uel

poo8 uo sa,rn¡ads¡ad 8ur8ueg3, '1gg¿ ',br¡oo¡ 'X Pu" 'g (uouo¡

'I€-6 tI l6Z [1"tat"tanl TOSEJ '8utu;ra1

a8rn8ur¡ pue'tuerulsa,rul'ltnuapl IEIf, oS,' 9 66I' g(ar.r¡a¿ uouoN

'829-Lr' te l0SSututaaT a8anSuuT .'slsr(¡eue-etaru o^Itelltuenb pur srsagrufs qJJ?eseJ V

:uonrnrlsur ZT jo sseua^pleJg, '996¿ 'eEauo '-I PuP '¡41 'f 's¡rro¡' 89-6I L iV I I S Suxu¿?a7 a7an&uaT ('sraurEal a8tn8ue¡ or

>peqpeeJ se $sef,a¿, '1gg¿'cpeds'N PuE'uroqrqS¡1'W U "H (seloqrrN

' gz-f I : I lrI aruaxrs aruilu8o2

,'Sururra¡ a8en8ue¡ uo sruleJtsuof IEuoIleJntEI tr, '066I 'g'uodala¡' S€y-6rzz' dd :

E ¡ g9 mama¿ a&an&u?7 u¿a?oq uax?aury

,'epEuEJ ur r{f,uerg e^Isuelul, 't002 '('sPe) u¡erurag ') PUE 'f (uana¡

'aSpapno¿ qroÁ./deN'u8lsae rurywx¿tnJ a8anSuuT'0I02 'ratslpce¡4J'f pue A'S'I (uope¡

'T,l-I tlllSuupaa¿pua&urutaa7 a8an&uaT ut uoxi?(touuJ ('sPuerls JnoJ aql 'LOOZ ¿'S'I

(uoIrBN

'ssar¿ ótsra.tlu¡ a8plrqrue3 :a8prrque3z&an&uuT "raqpuv ux ,CtapqanlTSuxu'taa7'I002 A '5 '¡ 'uo¡re¡

' g t- e €,2 : 7 ¡ g7 Q nt tanj q ua a s a¿ 3u qpa a¿ (' lxalu of,

urorS sprornr Sulurta-L '186I 'uosraPuv 'U PuE (u"turaH

V A r'g 2¡¡'lEe¡' LZ-9 I e

: g ¡ yy 3u7 q w a¿ aSan&uuT ('qf, reeser uollel)unuord ur lrr¡r glSnlarur

put luef,f,EJo suonEpunoJ erll '1 19¿ 'Eupa.lec 'w 'I Pue 'f '¡41 (orun¡4J

' 0r--l' dd'srauetr l pn8ur¡n¡n14¡ :)n'uoPe^alC'&ututua7 aSan7uaT u7wo¡lo axay aql puv a7V,(Pe) zognry '3 ut ,naford

dvg aql :Sulurea¡ a8en8uel u8la.ro3 uo e8e jo slraJa agl, '9002'3 2or;rn14J

't€-60I :Zl€ uoxtxstnbty a&un&ua7 ?unasw saxpruS,'uorlrsrnbce a8en8uel Puofas IEJnleu ul sa8¿ls ¡eruaudo¡a,rap

Sulururarap uO, 'I 86I 'urrerueuerd 'I tr pue rues{EIJ 'H "I I 'f '¡as¡a¡4¡

'asno11 ,finq/mN :VI/^{ 'a8plrgue3 'tassaro"t¿ uotunnbtV aSan&uaT

?uoras ?uu istt¿ :(pe) yzlrJ 'O ul ,uotttsmbre e8enSuel Puof,es lernleuJoruerudo¡a,rap aqr uI suolt)E Pue stuale rsed or af,uereJe¡, '/86I 'W 'f 6¡as¡a¡4¡

' t B- 692'dd 7s1oot71n'oc'srllsouSo¡'a,vtr'r7¡:drrr1

'surue lua g uqof : ruep.ra $IJJV's a nq J a d s "t a¿ n aa u,(q

?u? puotirunl :an a8anSuuTto ntruautq aql:('spa) zeryns-le^oq 'S

,0¡dañouqry 6€,7

240 Bibliography

Language Acquisition, Vol. II: Psycholinguistic Issues. Clevedon: MultilingualMatters. pp.I4I-59.

Odlin, T 2003. 'Cross-linguistic influence' in C. J. Doughty andM. H. Long (eds.): The Handbook of Second LanguageAcquisition. Oxford:Blackwell. pp.436-86.

Ohta, A. 2000. 'Rethinking recasts: A learner-centered examinationof corrective feedback in the Japanese classroom' in J. K. Hall andL. Verplaetse (eds.): Second and Foreign Language Learning throughClassroom Interaction. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum andAssociates.pp.47-7t.

Oliver, R. andA. Mackey. 2003. 'Interactional context and feedback inchild ESL classrooms.' Modern Language Journal 87 I 4: 5 19-33.

Ortega, L.2007. 'MeaningfulL2 practice in foreign language classrooms:A cognitive-interactionist SLA perspectiye' in R. DeKeyser (ed.): Practicein a Second Ldnguage: PerspectiuesfomApplied Linguistics and CognitiuePsychologt Cambridge: Cambridge Universiry Press. pp. IB0-207.

Paradis,J., E Genesee, and M. B. Crago. 2011. Dual Language

Deuelopment and Disorders: A Handbook on Bilingualism and Second

Language Learning2ndedn. Baltimore: Paul H. Brookes.

Patkowski, M. 1980. 'The sensitive period for the acquisition of syntax in a

second language.' Language Learning 30 I 2: 449-7 2.

Pearson, B. Z. 2008 . Raising a Bilingual Child: A Step-by Sap Guide forParents. NewYork Living Language (Random House).

Piaget,J. 1951. Play DreAms, and Imitation in Childho¿l. NewYork:Norton. (Originally published as Laformation du synnbole chez I'enfant.

Neuchátel: Delchaux et Niestlé.)

Pica, T. 1983. 'Methods of morpheme quantification: Their effect onthe interpretation of second language data.' Studies in Second Langudge

Acquisition 61 1: 69-7 B.

Pica, T 1994. 'Research on negotiation: tVhat does it reveal about second

language acquisition? Conditions, processes, and outcom es' Langaage

Learning 441 3: 493*527 .

Pienemann, M. 1988. 'Determining the infuence of instruction on L2speech processing.' AIIA Reuiew 5ll:40-72.

Pienemann ,M. 1999. Language Processing and Second Language

Deuelopment: Processability Theory. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

Ir77,

' V S-ge : 1 ¡ 7 st tt nn&uu o t¡ tG¿ paa ddV

,'sluared3eapJo uaJplrq: Sulreaq oz'ltJo serpnts as¿J :lndur paprJlsergryt Sururea¡ a8rn8uel, 'I86I 'uosuqof'W pue (p.reg 'g ('f (sqceg

'y¡'uorg8r rg' G 00 Z-H ) lg¿ SVflJNI,'uoltrslnbce a8tn8ue¡ pllr{rJo lpnrs aqr ur suozrror{ 1treN, '6002 'C',(o¿

'tr/S-67r/'dd 'a8pe¡rno¡ qroÁ ^\a ¡¡'uorlrunbty a8anSuaT puoras pup

nusmSut7 arturuSoSto ryoq?uvH:('spa) slllg 'f, 'N PuE uosulqo¡ A uI-rr3J?eseJ JoJ senssr-uonf,nJlsur Zj, pua'uolllslnble a8en8ur¡ puofas

'srnsln8url arr,rluSo3 :uorsnlruo3, '8002 'slllfl'C 'N put ¿'uosu¡go¿'sunue luag ugof :rueprasuty'&ututua7

a8un&uaT yattnutul ?u? saruata{tq pnpnryq'2007, '('pt) a'uosurqo¿'ZL-1g;1'dd'ssar¿ uorue8ra¿

qroÁ.&\eN 'uorlrunbty a8an&uaT puotag ut atuanSfu¡ tgs7n3u71sso.t3

:('spa) qtFus poolv\reqs 'htr pue ueurella) 'g ul ,ssaco.rd Sulurea¡

e8en8ue¡ uSlaro3 er{r pur aruengur crrs¡n8ul¡ssor3, '986I '¡1 'ruoqEury' gg-Z^'dd'ueuSuoT :uopuo'I's1stlaua nttE' ('pa) spregcry'[

ul ,srsl¡eur rorre ol rprorddr e^nstnuor-uou V '7¿61 .[(spreqc¡¿

'elureH PUE aluraH:>lroÁ^/\aN 'ruoo$sq) Tig/7sl aW ut sa{ag&uru.r?a7';GGI '('pt) '['plaU

'08-6E I 'dd 'suru¡eluag ugof :ureprelsurv '&ututua7 aSan&uaT paunttsu¡pua satuaufie pn?x(tx?uJ:('pa) uosurqo¿ A ul ruoorssel3 elll¿f,Iunultuof

aqr ur órtqe orrl¡zue a8en8uz¡ ,sreurealJo elor aql, 'Z0OT,'-l (¿lrre¿

'tl7-l6l igl6Z sruauor1¿to lautnof (?\el^er V izaue uI luef,f,e u8raroj3oaa:3ap Suncage srorf,EC, '1gg¿ 'eta¡g 'g '[ pue ',fuyce¡41 'V 'U 'I 'I 'otlsld

'r/rc-rce 'dd'suruefuag uqof :ruepraruy '&urutaa7 qtaadg a3un3ua7 puoras u!

atuauadxE aSan&uuT:('spa) orunry 'ntr pue uqog 'O ur ,uoorss¿lc a8en8ue¡

u8raro3 aqr ro; r{f,ftaser s a8alg 'g saruef3o suonecl¡duI,' L00Z I'e{sld' IIEH -ef, nuar¿ /lllrrel¡l

: [¡ 5a,rr¡¡ alppes .radd¡

'up¿ qtrz sfiaÁpoqrs ?up aruoH aql SututaaT pua aSan&uaT '9007,'L'rad¡¿

'rnour,tof'aoer g'tJnof, JeH

qroÁ ./rcN rúasa g apnlg dV a7an&ua7 rn7 sut¿ a tll' 99 Gl ¿'rne¡sru¡¿' erz- Ll', iZ | 0 I u oxtx sxn btV a&an&u?T ?u or aS

ur taryus <'tuerussess¿ a8en8ur¡ puof,es JoJ eJnpa3oJd paseg-uorrrs¡nbcrue 8un¡n¡lsuo3, '886i 'fa¡pu¡.rg'g pu? 'uoruqof '¡4¡ ('W (uuerueuerd

' V I L- 6 L9'dd'¡a.,'qrelg :projxo

'uotusmbw a7an&uaT puotaglo Tooq?u?H aq1 :$pa) 3uo1 '¡1 'W PuEóg8noq '['] rt ,bpede¡ Sursseoo¡d a8rn8uel, '€002'W (uueuraua¡¿

[qdatSouqry

242 Bibliography

SamudarV 2001. 'Guiding relationships berween form and meaningduring task performance: The role of the teacher' in M. Bygate, P. Skehan,and M. Swain (eds.): Researching Pedagogic Tasks: Second Language Learning,Teac hing, and Testing. London: Longman. pp. I 19-40.

Savignon, 5.1972. Communicatiue Competence: An Experiment in Foreign-language Teaching. Philadelphia, PA: Center for Curriculum Development.

SchachterrJ.IgT4. An error in error analysis.' Language Learruing2412:205-14.

SchachterrJ. 1990. 'On the issue of completeness in second languageacquisition.' Second Language Research 6 I I : 93-124.

Schieffelin, B. 1990. The Giue andThke of Eueryday Life: Language

Socialization of Kaluli Children. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Schleppegrell,M.2004. The Langaage of Schooling. Mahwah, NJ:Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Schmidt, R. 1990. 'The role of consciousness in second language learning.'Applied Linguistics | | I l: 17 -46.

Schmidt, R. 200 1 . 'Attention in P Robinson (ed.): Cognition and Second

Language Instruction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. pp. 3-32.

Schulz, R. A. 2001. 'Cultural differences in student and teacher

perceptions concerning the role of grammar teaching and correctivefeedback USA-Colombia.' M o dern Language Journal 8 5 I 2: 244-58.

Schumann, J. 1979. 'The acquisition of English negation by speakers ofSpanish: a review of the literature' in R. \L Andersen (ed.): The Acquisitionand Use of Spanish and English as First and Second Languages. 'Washington,

DC: TESOL.

Schwartz, B.1993. 'On explicit and negative data effecting and affectingcompetence and linguistic behavior.' Studies in Second Language Acquisition15l2: t47-163.

Segalowitz, N. 2010. Cognitiue Basu of Second Language Fluency.

NewYork Routledge.

Seidlhofer, B. 201 l. UnderstandingEnglish as a Lingua Franca. Oxford:Oxford University Press.

Selinker, L. I97 2.'Interlangua ge.' International Reuiew of App liedLinguistics I0 I 2: 209-31.

Setter, J. and J. Jenkins. 2005.'Pronunciation.' Language Téaching

381 l: l-17 .

'rz-907,tT,19ruoxtxsxnbJv a3?n3uu7 puotag m sax?us ('suJooJssEIJ Z-I ur suonsanb jo

ruaurdola,rep eql pue uorrrnJlsul, '966I 'rrraogrgEn.W U pue .¡.epedg

'uBIIrruc¿W :laupl5'suottaryddvpua suoriuattuo7 3u7po2 :auaqrs uoxjpautqo SuTqtua¿ a&an&uaTlo

uoxtwuauo anuartunutÍao) aql'166I 'Ilrtlltgrd 'I I PuE 'N .epedg

' 9 €- tZZ :7 ¡ yV 3u 7 q n a¿ a&anSua 7 (' r{rrresal ernlnJ pue r uasa;d

'lsed uo suorpaga¡ :uononrtsur pasnf,oJ-ruroJ puolag, 'I I0Z .N (uped5

' BZ-VI U ty I Grz ruarudopnaq pltr¡3

,'Sulurea¡ a8en8ur¡ puof,es ruo5 af,uapl,,rg :uortrsrnbce a8en8ue¡ro3 porrad Ierrlrrf, ¿qL,'gL6I.elrlgHleEuuJeoH .I tr pue .O .¡aous

' a,a n,u a 7 p1 ! D lo 4 o o q ?

u ? H a qr: (' sp a

) ;:Í;?il#H;: ',lri]:ü ?ur (sesntJ l¡essacau pue 'sefueJaJ¡p ¡eruaudola^ep pue Fnpr^rpur

'Ár¡esra,uun '3urunl-aur¿ :rndul3o lpnrs agr ur sanssl, '966I .J (,llous

'lle,/vDlrelg :proJXO,(tTtapp o¡a¡ pua &urutaa7aSan&uaT :juanas uto pug¡ aq1'E66i 'IIdruIsI'W'I pue 'N'rIrFuS

'salrrf,osry pue urneglJE aJuer,r\ET :f¡ 'qemqe7q'l-I slo¡ 'a8an&uaTto [pwg tgsTn&ulssotJ ac['L661-SB6I 'I.1¡ ,ulgols

'B\z-t^'dd' uolsur¿N pue'uer{eur¡¡'r1o¡1 qro¡,1r, a 6¡' I u a ru do1 a n a q a8a n&u a 7

?l?qJto saryas:('spa) ulqols 'I 'CI pue uosn8rag 'V'l ul ,reunurr83o rueurdola^ap eqr ro3 saus¡nba¡a¡d a,uuuSo J,

' g L6I 'I '6¡ 'qqols'sr3or3-lrnrua3-u ora¡ddy qro¡ r'ra N u o x np rl a g I u q ¿

^' LS 6 I g' g (.rauu¡x5

'PIourV Pr¿1r{Pg :uoPuoT'&ututua7 aSun&uaT puotag ut satuata[tq !?n?!(ttpuJ'696I A .*.p{S

'surrue lua g uqof :y¿'erqd¡ape¡yrl'&u1t¡caa¿ a&tnSuaT ur a"rod-to7 an oi moH 'rz0OZ'(pe) '¡4¡ 'f ..r¡e¡cu¡5

'o3ulerodrof,rla'esef,rru//:drrq 'ue8ryc1yr¡;o lrrsra.r.run ar{lJo srua8a¿ ag1:JW 'roqrv uuv'(ESVf 1y¡l tlsu&uE ua4odg nruapwVlo sndtoS uu37c¡t7¡,r¡

aql '6661 'se1p¡as 'I4l '[ pue (suaag '[ 'sEÍl¡.rg 'f 'S ") '¡ (uosdrur5

'r€.-e¡T:Zlze qr¿?atay Sulqtaa¿ a8anSuaT ('uroorssrlllsg eW ur>llEqpaal a nrerror ualrrJ,r\ puB IEroJo srf,aJe IErruoraJICI, '0I02 X.uaaqs

'00t-€,9Tt8,18c¡uaasa¿ &u1r,paa¿ a7an&u?1 ?uoJas,'s8uutas leuonf,nJlsur ssoJf,E sruooJSSEIf,

a^nrf,runruruoc ul a>prdn JauJEel pue >lleqpaeJ a uf,arro3, '9002 f,(ueaqs'6L-g9I :Zlgl uoxixsxnbty a3an3u?7 ?uoras ux sax?nts ('sesrq lef,rreroeql

:V-IS parlnrlsul ur luaruaf,uer{ua rndu1, 'e66I'W'qr¡u¡S poo¡arurls

,ft1dru&ouqry trTZ

244 Bibliography

Spada, N. and P. M. Lightbovm. 1999. 'Instruction, Ll infuence anddevelopmental readiness in second language acquisition.' Modern Language

JournalS3ll: I-22.

Spada, N. and P. M. Lightbown. 2002.'Ll andL2 in the education ofInuit children in northern Quebec: Abilities and perceptions.' Langtageand Education 161 3: 21240.

Spada, N. andY. Tomita. 2010. 'Interactions between type of instructionand rype of language feature : A meta-analysis.' Language Learning6012:146.

Spada, N., P. M. Lightbown, andJ. L.'White. 2005.'The importanceof form/meaning mappings in explicit form-focussed instruction inA. Housen and M. Pierrard (eds.): Inuestigations in Instructed Second

Language Acquisition. Amsterdam: Mouton de Gruyter. pp. 199-234.

Spada, N. andM. Santos Lima. 2010. 'EFL and ESL teacher and learner

views about integrated and isolated form-focused instruction.' Proceedings

of the IX International Conference of the Brazilian Association of Canadian

Studies: Porto Alegre, Brazil.

Spada, N., K. Barkaoui, C. Peters, M. So, and d Valeo ,2009.'Developing a questionnaire to measure learners' preferences for isolated

and integrated form-focused instruction.' System, 37 I I : 7 0-Bl.

Spada, N., L.Jessop,\ü[. Suzuki,Y. Tomita, anddValeo. 2009. The

Contributions of Isolated and Integrated Form-Focused Instructionon DifferentAspects of L2 Knowledge and Use. Paper presented at the

American Association for Applied Linguistics: Denver, CO.

Spielmann, G. and M. J. Radnofslcy. 2001. 'Learning language undertension: New directions from a qualitative study.' Mod.ern LanguageJournal

8512:259-78.

Storch, N. 2002. 'Patterns of interaction in ESL pair work.' Language

Learning52lI: ll9-58.

Swain, M. 1985. 'Communicative competence: Some roles ofcomprehensible input and comprehensible output in its development'

in S. Gass and C. Madden (eds.): Input in Second Language Acquisition.

Rowle¡ MA: Newbury House. pp. 235-53.

Swain, M. 198S. 'Manipulating and complementing content teaching tomaximize second language learning.' TESL Canada Journal 6 I l: 68-83.

Swain, M. 2000. 'The output hypothesis and beyond: Mediatingacquisition through collaborative dialogue'inJ. P. Lantolf (ed.):

Sociocubural Theory and Second Language Learning. Oxford: OxfordUniversiry Press. pp. 94-114.

'Ir-gZZ ;ZltI uorlxsxnbty a3un3ua7 ?uoras w tax?us ,.Sursseoordrndul pue uonf,nrlsur u:l¡dxg, '€66I .ourrlpuC .I pu" .g .uenu¿uu¡

'Ig,-9'dd 'saterf,ossvpue tunrglrg aruer^l.E I:[¡ 'qenqeyr¡ 'tta1uaruruo7 ?up 'tfr?asay 'ttoaql :uotltntlsu¡ Suxstarot¿

:('pe) uarre¿ur¡'g q ,VIS ul Sulssaco¡d lndu1, 'rz001.g6ua$e¿ue¡

'6e-609 tvtr€uotUvnbtV a&un&uaT puotag ux sax?us,'ruerSord Surprar pue Suluers¡ e ul

uoIlBIf, unuo ñ 71 3o ruaurdolartap aql :a3nf,Brd paseq-uolsuaga;duo3,'599¿'tuo5'H PuE'¡alPH'H "lI (u¡üogrqSn'W

u'a'qc¡,rougo.r¡

paqddy;Bu,urudprorn,ü-,p;lli;Í!i"ii?::':(:3:#ípuof,es pue a^ntu ur Surssaro¡d proru.-ua>1ods, '1002 ¿

(qcr,rourgo.r¡

'1207-IBI:T,l9Iuotlrsmbty aSan&uaT puotag ry saryus ('ruooJsstlr a8enSue¡ puoles eqlu¡ uorldruaard pue eruepl^a e rlrsod, '866I 'erlrltf,'-I pu?'I4I'fe{BJI

'sJeuBW ¡rn8ur¡rr¡n¡rr¿ :uopJ al3 zJxpl¿¿ utoo"tsspl)

?u" tuotrylav ppos ,(rytuap¡ :lootps w qsnSuE Sututpa7 ' o00z 1¡ .faqoo¡

3pd'srsaqr-qr{d-90 I 1 6¿-olnse¡-etltuoJI I I Z6g6Z I L08 I /ueensrlg/ef, 'otuororn dre.rgrT'arrdsr¡¡:sdrrq'otuorol

3o lrrsra,lru¡ 'srsaqr paqsl¡qndu¡ 'uorleJrunrutuo3 Z'I ur tuawtsalulreurca'I :uorrrnrtsul pasnroC-rrrrogJo alo¡ erll 'I 1g¿ ¡tr¡tuo¡

' 9 6-egT :Y ¡ E ru u7 un3u11 1g

puy uotprnpg pn&ufllg,'oeqan| f,nf,rv ur asn put ÁUq" aSen8ue¡

pa,uarrad;o suralled, 'ggg¿'au¡dl\frry'T pue (uo.ru3'I I "C'.ro¡fu¡

'ssar¿ &rs.ra,uun proJxo:proJxo z&un&ua7 uutuaT &uuo1d*E '6OOZ 'ulqzral¡as 'g pue 'g (auore¡

'8Lt-99r t7,t6L

pumof a8un&u?7 uD?oW ('sruooJsselJ uorsJarurur ul asn a8en8utl-puof,asuo a.r.¡t:eds¡ad rrrsrn8ul¡orf,os V '166I 'u¡e,ras'I I pue 'g (euo.re¡

'sraDEW ¡enSunr¡nyr¡: Iolslr g' sa ru1 atn¡¡ t¡&n oil/ I u o x p n? o"tl uI uV : u o uw np E a8a n&upT ?

u o r a Spua ttoaql prrulwoxros'0I02 'ueruu¡ars'T pue (reauurv

U "I tr'ur-E¡as

' r0e-987, :r-c I Le qrwatau lyuott?rn?fl

to putnof puzxlnu#lul ('uoItEInuJoJa¡ ol asuodsal (sJauJeal uolsJauruJlr{ruerC orn¿:q8norgr u 8uq¡e¡, '7,007,'undtl1''S pue'¡r\¡ rure,rg

'9t-gtt, :E ¡7g putnof a7un&uaT ura?ory

, raqtaSot 8uq¡ozvt sluepnts uorsJeruurr rlJueJC luaJselope ozvt¡ :Sulurea¡

e8enSuq puoras pur uonrtretul '866I 'u¡rydu1'S pue'I ['u¡u¡as

,ft1dat&ouqq svz

246 Bibliography

VanPatten, B. andJ.tülilliams (eds.). 2007. Theories in Second Ldnguage

Acquisition: An Introduction.Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum andAssociates.

Vygotslry, L. S. 1978. Mind in Society. Cambridge, MA: HarvardUniversity Press.

'Wajnryb, R.1992. Classroom ObseruationTashs: A Resource BoohforLanguage Teac h ers and Trainers. Cambridge: Cambridge Universiry Press.

'W'alker, R. 2010. Tbaching the Pronunciation of English as a Lingua Franca.

Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Vatson-Gegeo, K. L 1992. 'Thick explanation in the ethnographic studyof child socialization: A longitudinal study of the problem of schoolingfor Kwara ae (Solomon Islands) children' in \í. A. Corsaro and P. J. Miller(eds.): Interpretiue Approaches to Childreni Socialization. Special issue of NewDirectionsfor Child Deuelopment 58: 5l-66.

Werker, J. E, W'. M. W'eikum, and K. A. Yoshida. 2006. 'Bilingualspeech processing in infants and adults' in P. McCardle and E. Hoff(eds.):Childhood Bilingualism: Research on Infancy through School Age. Clevedon:Multilingual Matters. pp. 1-l B.

Wesche, M. B. 1981. 'Language aptitude measures in streaming, matchingstudents with methods, and diagnosis of learning problems' in K. Diller(ed.): Indiuidual Dffirences and Uniuersals in Language LearningAptitude.Rowle¡ MA: Newbury House. pp. 119*39.

rü7hite, J. 1998. 'Getting the learners' attention: A rypographical inputenhancement study' in C. Doughry and J.

\Williams (eds.): Focus on Form inClassroom SIA. Cambridge: Cambridge Universiry Press. pp. 85-113.

White,J. 2008. 'speeding up acquisition of his/her. Explicit LllL2contrasts help'inJ. Philp, R. Oliver, andA. Mackey (eds.): Second Language

Acquisition and the Younger Learner: Child's PlayiAmsterdam: JohnBenjamins. pp. 193-228.'White,J. and P. M. Lightbown.l9B4. 'fuking and answering in ESL

classes.' Canadian Modern Language Reuiew 4012:228-44.

White, L.1987. Against comprehensible input: the input hypothesis and

the development of L2 competence .' Applied Llnguistics B: 95-110.

\ü7hite L. 1989. Uniuersal Grammar and Second LanguageAcquisition.

Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

White, L. 1991. Adverb placement in second language acquisition: Some

effects of positive and negative evidence in the classroom.' Second Language

Research T 12: 133-61 .

' lB-09 I tZ I 9 uoxtcxnbtV aSan&uaT ?uoras ux sar?as,'srualsls

a8en8uel;arul pue a8uegc orrsrn8utljo lapour e^r.^a aql 'rg6l'g''lquz' Lt-er/ :1 ¡ gg SututaaT a8an&uuT ,'uollrsrnbce Z-I uo

aruangur 113o lrr,rrnalas ptuaudola^aP PuE IEruroJ eq1. '086I '1¡'lqvz'ssar¿ llsra,uun proJxo :proJxo 'yooqpupH

,¿aqrpal úalnqaco¡ V :a7papouy ?toA 'G007, 'g '3 (uerurevrurq

'9t-6tS :V¡gy8uru.raa7

aSan&uaT ('aloJ a^nJEJaruI pue bualcgo-rd3o lf,age erT, :uoIlJEJelut. Z-Iur slrrguor lelruaraJar 8ut,rlosa¡, '066I 'PPuoPf,tI J'(I Pu¿'g'eInL

'OI-71Z i, | 6€ arxiror¿ otut [.roaq1 (¿peuraruoreq srotef,npe ppoqs :sa8en8ue¡ fpuegSo sso-I, '0002 'T (arourllld Euo4(\

'BZ-71T 'dd 'ssar¿ rrruapef,V :>lroÁ.^aeN

uotn?qag a8anSuaT pua [.t117qy a&rn&uaT ux sarua¿agxe pnru(tryul:('spa) ra¡drua;¡ 'CI pue '3ue7¡, Á'S-'lA.'arourlll{ '['J tl ¡otttsnbcea8enSue¡ puof,es ur seruaraglp lBnpr^rpul ,'6L61'1

(a.rourfiIü tuo4(l

're-|rz'dd'e Lesatuanglo [wapacV 4"to¡ ma¡¡ arpto slpuuv qro ./deN 'uotvunbtya&an&uaT

uStato¿ pua aSan&uuT aa1ta¡¡ :('pe) alurlN'H u_l ,uoplslnbce a8rn8ue¡

Jo 1nrarl pagrun V :spsralrun ¡euotttsmbce a8en8uel, 'I 86I 'H '"Por1(\

' n- rcI'dd'asno¡1 l.rnqrc¡ :y¡t¡'falzu,o¡

s&uryaa¿lo 4oog V:uoxtrcmbtyaSan&u?7 ?uoras:('pa) rpe¡1 'ntr 'E ul

.uonrsrnbce Z'I f,rlsrprnlru uI seruanbas ¡eruarudola^aq,' g L(rI'¡¿.'"Po¿S.

'T,e-gr,tilzlsutnn&utT pa!1 ddy,' uor.tr.slnbce 71 u,(tentre rlt¡eluls Pue tueuaf, uel{ua

rndu1, 'I66I '¿tuEU'T pue'ulogrq8¡1'¡4J ¿ (upeds'N ''T'allrld(\

'ssar¿ ólsre.tru¡ a8p¡rqrue3 :a8puqrue3t?ururug ps¿aaxul) ?uv uoxlxsxnbcV a8an&ua7 ?uoras '8.007,'1 (arF[¿C\

[qdat3o71qq L'Z

9z (saa'IIHI)urarsls eSuBr{f,xg ¿l¿C agengu¿'I pilr{J

ü€-f uonrsmb¡¿ a8en8uel p¡rgcZtn' L-92 qraads parrarrp-p¡rqc

sf,nslJelf,¿J"r{f,

Jeuftel 2at sJeuJ"al Jo sf,JlsrJelf,?J?r{f,

lndur peUrporulgreads parca.rrp-plJrp rrr lIEt re{?teref,

z-rf (&uarcyo.rda8enSuzl rrruopef," r nruSof,) dTVJ

31rc'€tt 8u¡8erurfrr a8en8ue¡ pue Suruonrury

UI?Jq

€9 spro.u,pe,v\orroq,l-ül,r uorsraurur ¡enp

rf Sulgcl.tr.s apoc

9 uoltrsmbf,? a8en8ue¡ p¡rqc€-o€ rusrTenSurlg pooqpp{l

3ürz rusl¡en8urtlq31rc \Lt serurue¡8o¡d uonef,npe IEnBulIq

z-r€ (s¡rrsuoDe)runu¡rrroc Teuos:ed;arur rlspq) SlIg

olt't--o6 srrureel Jo sJaIIsq

t-(.ot 'LS 8u1u:ea¡ a8enSue¡ puores ur6r-ir uolrrsrnbce a8en8ur¡ rs;g ur

qreorddepn8urlolpne os1u aas ?€rc usrrnor Er{ag

96 realord .rorre¿ a8y ruolarreg

8( 'l' (sarnrEeJ rlmulpJo) aruEplo^E

6-3or Anperuorne6oz s¡erreteur f,lruar{rne

Ég srauea¡,lrolpne?Ítz' 9 uopeuyulrrsrp,Gor¡pne

31.rc'S6t

' 6-lSt'lot'99 qreordde ¡en8urrorpnrg*l,g .sraurea¡

(sapntnr?

Srzz'6gr'l-tgr 'LLr 'lrr srsaqrodlq 8ur¡nou

6_s o r saunosa; *".lrJ;lir,"

9-ll (sq:a,r3o) rcadse

L--og' gL Surureal e8en8ue¡'apnrrrdr

9or'ror 'oor '98 'lg óaxueB€rc '€z (15y) a8en8uq u8rg uerr.reury

lg uonenunuo.rd uo toage 'lor{ol1e

9--26 nurce¡¡oi"hr stserarSo uoneta.rd:atur pue

6-96 se?en?uel puof,es ur uorlrnrlsur pueüÉ-l uortrsrnb:¿ a8enSuel p¡q:

9St '96 'f6 sreur"al rlnpea3e

9or srsaqrodfil ratlg e^ntraJr

9Or ltraJ3Sgr'l9t'6-9l ruatuareld grar'pe

L-92 u onte tatur p¡q>-rlnpelrraqnd osla aas 9-(.6'lg srau.rea¡ tuerselope

?trc'i.l ursqen8urnq a plpp?6-g rsar ,8mr, aqr rno,{.rr

z--oetstdr¡rsu¿¡t uoDf,Elatur tuapnts-JJq3eal

zr-nz uorurdo ¡nol r¡oddnsroz suotutdo ¡nol .¡tLana.¡

L_SLa¡uauadxo Sulurea¡ a8en8ue¡ uo tf,3gel

66 ssac¡ns Surureel a8en8urlpue satruaraglP PnPplPu¡ uo rf,euar

ü-€ Sulu;ra1eSen'uel rnoqe sr ua."a."¿;

;:.'.:".tT*Surg:ar qlr^{ sanrlrlf,¿ ¡errSo8epad qoeru

ro3 uonen o'au

=Í:í',,'x#ií:teJualuas ot P"al sanf, ,,rrrrJ¡p

^oq ," 1oo¡

lf Sururea¡

e8enSur¡ puof,rs roJ sueluoJ a.ro¡dxa

l,or ¡epo¡4¡ rorluotrAl ar{t eurüexel-üzr s¡xatuoo 3ururca¡ e¡¿druo¡z-rl suonsanb,s;aureal asl¡eue

| -ft e?enBuq :aurea¡ asl¡eue

B €rc' s 9rt","rrl',. itjlil]i31rc'lSt qf,r?eser uonf,"

Sltz'l6t'9or sseqrodfg SurureolTuonrsmbce

Bltz 'g-9t rap:o óe;ncceSltz' rgr'l-il lqrre.rarq lr¡¡qrssacce

Lrr (sruoru8a5 qcaadg

IBltuassa Jo slxaluo] 3^r]¿f,runluu¡o]ur uopuzwruolnv) SSEIIV

16'o6'tL'oL-69 a3enBuel puof,es ur 'lueroe

'Jrqrunu aSed aql .rag.e .3, lg ur'toqs ere sornue lrrssolS

XECINI

250 Index

childrenfirst language 5-34second language 9z-9

choice motivation 87-8chunks ro, fir, 2oz, zr4g see also formulaic

language

clarification requ€sts rr4, r4o, r88

classrooms

classroom instruction and individualdifferences 9z-6

classroom learning 39classroom observation schemes iz9-49,

214g

and learning pragmatics 67-8methods of teaching and learning 153-99

motivation in the classroom 88-9closed questions r47co-construction Ir9code switching 3rcognates 61, zr4gcognitive development, and the

interactionist perspective 24-tcognitive linguistics z8-9, rro-rr, rr3-r8cognitive maturity 37-8, zt4gcognitive psychology ro8-r8collaboration

collabo¡ative dialogues rt9, t89, zr4g

collaborative interaction r68see a lso learner-learner interactions;

pair workcommunicative confidence 86

CLIL (content and language-integratedlearning) r47, t7r, ztjg

CLI (communicative language teaching) zrSg

and aptitude testing 8ocompared to structure-based inst¡uction

r56-7and phonolory 68

and pragmatics 67reacher-student i n teraction transcripts

rj2-1use ofdisplay questions r4t-6

Communicative Orientation of languageTeaching (COLI) rzq

competence, linguistic vs communicativet58-9, zr5g

compedtion model rrr-r3comprehensible input ro6, r65-7r

and authentic materials zog, zrjg'just listen ... and read' ry9-65and modified interaction rr4and the Monitor Model ro6-7

comprehensible output hypothesis Í4, rrg,165, zr5g

comprehension-based instruction ry9-r65,ztrg

comprehension checks rr4conditional mood r7o, r88

connectionism z8-9, zt5gcontent-based language teaching (CBLT)

zr5g see also immersion programmescontent and language-integrated learning

(CLIL) ryZ, r7r,2rrgfocus on usage r24, 127-9,2rt_ll'get two for one' r7t-7and increasing the time available for

language study r48

learning verb forms in science class r88

and pragmatics 67and recasts (not noticing) r4r

Contrastive Analysis Hypothesis (C,AH)

41-t, 47, 57, 68, ro4, zr5gcontrol groups rj7, 2rjgcorpus linguistics 72, zoz, zt6gcorrective feedback z169 see also recxts

clarification requests r4ocontextual importance r43

effect on oral production r94elicitation r4rerror correction in communicarive

instructional settings r27-8explicit correction t4o, zo8, zro-rtand first ianguage acquisition zoz-3and'get it right in the end'r8z-95and the innatist perspective Io5

and the interaction hypothesis r67learner beliefs about 9rmetalinguistic feedback r4o-r, 41-4, rg-4negative feedback in learner-learner

interactions r7o, r7lpositive reinforcement 14

repetition r4rself-correction vs other correction I94srudying corrective feedback in the

classroom r39-45timing of corrective feedback r94uptake rl9, 14r, r4z, t88, zz4gwritten corrective feedback 144-5

correlation 77-8, z16g

counterbalance hypothesis r43, z16g

Critical Period Hypothesis (CPH) zz-4,

9z-6, z169

cross-cultural research, into fi¡st language

acquisition z6-9crossJinguistic influence 59-6o, zt6g see

also Contrxtive Analysis Hypothesis(CAH)

bi-directional 59-6o

(ügC) Surqcear aSenSue¡ paseg-lurtuof, :(Ill) Surqr¿er aSen8ue¡

a nef,runruruot osq aas SuynJru uo snroJuollrnJlsul PJsnf,oJ-ruJoJ aat utJoJ uo snf,oJ

z€ 3o uorrerardJelur ua>Ietsnü

l,Í saqreordde rlnef runruruo:)ur l¡e¡nr¡e aro3aq Sulu;ea1

8rr ÁIf,It"tuotnE sE

lcuang)ruengur crlsrnSu¡-sson aas o9-LS

Sururea¡ a8en8url puotres uo ef,uangur09-61 (Duangur JusmSurl

-sso:r) a8en8uel puoras lq paruangurloz'9Lt'SLt'fLt

'L6'l--ze suonentrs tuer8runur ur r1

Jo lueuJdole eP PanuDuof Jo elwuodrurtt-\ ,(1¡eteut? Jo uortrsrnbre

?Ln (a8en3uela,uteu 'an8uol raqlou 'r1) a3en3ue1 rs:g

3l,rz '€g sa/rsSurureal rurpuodap p¡agTtuapuadapq plrg

olr s?laleJ

IregPeeJ r lttrrrro3 rrr PBqPraJÉ9 sareuSoc as¡e3

9-üg uors;arronx:ztz' (. 6r a8paytr.ou¡ l¡rldxa

3 Ltz'l-f3t sarpnrs Teruaurrradxa3-Lg uorteallour a Dnf,axa3 Ltz'tS-6tt fqde:Sougra

o6-69'rL'ol, uorrerlgre dnor8 rruqraotr uo >If,?qPreJ rarp"al

zü s¡o¡.¡a p]ry1 ot J€purssJauJsJ] a8en8uel puocas fq Jp¿ru srolJe

lzl tpeotdde srslpue ro.r.ra

orr'95'tt ssarSo.rd3o uSrs e ag uergl 'lü óuen5ord tou 'of,uepro e

or Jnp og deru sro:ra3o a3uJsqe

>ll"qPaeJ a rDe.r.rof, os/p 'as

sJotJe

9-lzr s8untas uonrsrnbrr ¡ernleul-iz a,urcads¡ad rs¡uop:erarur aqr pue

oz a,rlloads.rad tspeuur Jr{r pue6r-ir a¡l¡ads.rad rs¡rnor,reqaq rr{r put

6-gtr'gzr'69'gÉ rwr.rodurr (aun) a.rnsodxaJo lunoure

rndulÍsruoorsself, osla aas aBen?u¿l 'tuaruuotrlua

3Ln'€-z9r lueruecu?qua tndur/ rndur pof,u?r{ua

r/ (C'IE) ecuer3 en8ur¡ e se rlsrt8uEÉg rsar sa.rnSg papprqu¡a

ggr'rh uo¡rerlct1a

olr '16 srxrluof,'ISE s 'ICE

'6-96'16 Sururea¡ a8en8uel ro3 uzis l¡.reo

xa?uI

l-iLr uorsraruur ¡enpSoz'git uonf,nlsur or qreordde ,paa3 drrp,

g-1.fi s¡up a¡lr¿-rd u¡olr¿d

9ir suonsanb le¡dsrp elrllup/rr saqreordde rsunor^eqaq pueg-Llr sJlpp uraled pnSur¡orpne

31rc' 6-Slt'orr r,rorrrr.rl r"l5li!zg saSen8trel puoras Sulu;re1 ur

o€-62 uorrrsrnb:e a8en8ue¡ rs-rg utslelop ptre srrprosrp

sa8en8ue¡ 3o sauau?A,rJ slf,eprp

96t 'zg-LLt,e]qer{f,Ert sr t¿rl1y\ r{rÉr, pueLS-SV Álynut? uo¡trsmbr¿ aSen8ue¡ puocas

l-ül sasnep e nEIrrJozr-or uoDEurJoJ uoDsanb

69 uonenunuordL-99 scneut3etd

É-zl s¡au¡ru¡a¡ap a,rrssassod

6-9l'ot uolt¿3aul,-91 (ruaudo¡a.r.ap

a8en8ue¡ puocas) g8norqr tuetua ourg-LSr'g-9t'6-1, saruaqd:our ¡eoneruuzr8

r--ogr 'L\ a8en8uelpuof,as uo aruangur a8en8uel rsrg

zt-9 ,(11etaua? uonrsmbf,? aSen8uel rs.rg

of-62 s(epp pu¿ sraprosrp

g-LSradÁ uorrcn¡¡sur or Sulprof,re rueraglp

3 Ltz' L Lt sarnl?{ ¡eruarudole,rapfl s¡o¡.ra ¡eruarudola,rep

li sanlre¡urs a8en8uel-sso-rc

?€tz 'S-tS lgrrc;arq Ár¡rgrssacce3l,rz saruanbes Teruauldola,rap

39rc'lh sarpnrs e,rndr:rsapo€-62 ruaudola,rap a8en8ue¡ pa&¡ap

z8 uoDf,nJlsur a Df,nPaP39tz '16r ' Ltt '6ot eSpa¡r"rou¡ r^u¿re]rrp

Lz'tz nuand yap8-lz uo'f''J,,u,

1? l1ilxl il:Éz srsar¡rodf¡1 polrrd TErnrrJ eqr pu?

uerPlrqrJ?rP39rc '99

(8 srrpnts puorlras-ssorl69 uonenunuord pue

9rr AUg¿dBr Surssarord pw9-Soz' 9gt't8r' l9r' LV'S-W

'zü ,sro:.ra, Sursner JáJsueJl a8en8ue¡ rsrg

9l-8t sesnEll

aane¡er',tsed o¡ Jf,ueJaJar,'suonsenb

'sa¡ussassod'uo¡re8au3o tuauldola ep

Surrragre saSenSw¡ tsrg ¡urreJrpogr sa8ets ¡eruarudo¡a,tap pur

t9z

252 Ind.ex

and the behaviourist perspective r8-r9and the competition model rrr'get it right in the end' r8z-95and lack ofaccvfacy rg,negotiation for meaning u4, rz8, t3o,

165-6, zzrgand pronunciation 7o

foreigner talk 39, zrTgForeign tanguage Classroom Anxiety Scale 85

foreign language le:rr ning zt7 gform-focused instruction zrSg see ako

corrective feedbackbeneficial in content-based instruction r73

and'get it right in the end'r8z-95useful in some circumstances 196-7

formulaic language ztSg see also chunksat early stages oflearning 56and information-processing model ro9much language learned as rrrin second language errors 44and uh- questions 12

fossilization 43, t57, zrSgfronting, question formation ry 49-5t, r78function words 7, 43, ztSggende¡ grammatical,29, 523, t87'Geme'zz-3generalisation 42, 44, ztSggenuine qu€stions ryo,45-9, ztSggestural (sign) language z3

'get it right from the beginning'154-9,t66, t95

'get it right in the end' r8z-95'get two for one' r7r-7grammar

in babies'first utterances 7grammatical gender 29,521, t87gammadcality judgements 9i, 106, zrSggrammatical morphemes, child

acquisition of 7-9, zr8ggrammatical morphemes, second

language acquisition of 46-8learner beliefs about grammar instrucdon 9robligatory contexts 46-8, t58, zzrg

grammar translation methods 8o, tz6,154-9, r95,2r8g

grammaticality judgement 9j, 106, 2rg1group work r7o,2o9 see also p^r wotkhabits r4, ro4human input, need for 6, z8

identiry 7o, 89-9oimitation

and first language acquisition rt-r9and the behaviourist perspective r4-r9and second languages 4i, zor-L

immersion programmes 79-80, r28, r4z, t7r,172-5, t87-g,2rgg

immigrantsimportance of continued development of

Lr 3z-3, 97, r74, r75, 176, zo4second language acquisition 79, 89-go,

94,9t' r7rimplicit knowledge r93

individual differences 75-rorinductive instruction 8r-zinformation-processing model ro8-ro, zrgginformation questions (genuine questions)

13o, 145-9inhibition 8+-tInitiation/Response/Evaluation (IRE)

exchanges rz6innatist perspecrive on child language

acquisition 2o-4, ro4*7, zrgginprr zrgg see aáa comprehensible input;

modified inputfloodúz-1, zrggarnount of exposure (time) important 38,

69, tz8, t48-9enhanced input/input enhancement 16z-3frequency ofencounters with new

material is important 6zin the innatist perspective on child

language acquisition zrinput flood t623, ztgginput hypothesis ro6input processing rr6the 'logical problem of second language

acquisition ro5

structured input 8r-zinstruction (teaching)

age and second language instruction 96-9amount and distribution of time available

r48'drip feed'vs intensive r48, zo5explicit instruction and pragmatics 67-8explicit instruction and pronunciation

70-rexplicit instruction and vocabulary

learning 64and the innatist perspective ro5

instructed vs uninstructed learners 46-7instructional programmes and aptitude

profiles 8rinstructional seftings rz4-9 see also

classrooms

teachabiliry hypothesis r77-82instrumental motivation 87, ztgginregrated Form-focused instruction r9rintegrative motivation 87, zrggintelligence 79-80, zoj

8-188uru.real a?en8url puotros ur rlqerrel sB

6-99 sacrreerd leuone DouJ .s]Jqrealü-foz ssamns 3o :otctpa:d t sle.,lrTe rou

g-l,g uorrradsortal uoll?Aporu

8OZ UOIIfeJJOf, e rSSaJxa PrrEgl, Surqcreasa.r ur senprlglp

:3eneue¡ r' g rrr rr',a,:otrtTrlil:il3rc2' g-91' 6-L lnnevsusu.rS'satuaqd:ou

gtt' L-9ot (r+ z) ¡apo¡l¡ rotluoryS9r'6lr 'lrr rndtno paglpotü

rndul pegrporu :I*qpaal a ltrarroloqa aas Sozz'lrr uon¡¿¡alur paypouJ

6€ lTer :ar¡rearürr lndul a¡g¡suaqarduroo pue

9zr s8urlas uoDrs¡nbor pJnt?u urrndur pegrporu :Ireqpaal r ntrarrof,

os1a aas Sozz'irr uonc¿¡elul pegporuol,r suoD¡e¡atur JeuJeel-Jeuleel ur

?Lrc'6ln¡u rauSraroS

3 Lrc' É-z9t lndul pef,u?I{ua

9h't-lLr (ffg¡)Surqrear e8en8uel peseq-tuetuof, ur

g-Lzr (fi))Surgeuar a8en8ue¡ a ltsf,runruruoJ ur

L1z rpeads por)arrp-plqlg-Loz 1o slyeueq

Sozz lndur pegryoruo8

OVtru) rsa¡ apnrrrdy a8en8uel u:apoy4¡

Sozz'L9'99 uorre8ruuuonetrurr oqa aas l-fot Lrcnurru

€r s.ra¡ooqcs-a.rd urgf s;aureal replo pue

t-egt' Étt'r--oür ¡reqpaaS rnsrn8utptaurr€ usr¡en8urtrg pue

Sozz sseue¡e¡tte r¡rs¡n8u¡Teraru

Sozz' e6t srsf ¡euu-eraur--og lrreedtr l¡ou¡au¡ 8ur¡.lo¡'t

ol, spro.,'r rtlau 3ur¡at.¡la¡ü-€ot uonezr¡oruaru

or-6or

¡aporu Surssacord uoneruro3ur rql pu",Gouatu

Sulueau uo snf,oJrrs uo sn3oJ'SurueauBozz

'6h'96 '65'gg '6'g-1, serpnrs Teurpnrr8uo¡rl, se qsrfug 'ecuer3 rn8urt

rl,-f9r ¡Ter s,re1,

t6r'9ot uorr¡s¡nbcz s,r Suturea¡oü-gf suorrrpuor Sururea¡

6oz'oL-L9t' 6-S€t' gzt'6rr suorDe¡elul lauJ€el-rauleal

€.sT, xzpul

l,-ll, spoqrau qf,rersalI--O8I urBsl ol ssaurPsJJ

9-üg lrrTeuos-rad

ü-€3 sa¡lrs Suru:ea¡o Lt't--o6 sJarleg JauJ?al

€-og apnrnde Suru.rea¡ a8en8ue¡

o9-61, aoua8rqerur

o6-69'oL uonErIStB dno;8 pue lrrruaplz6 uopcn.nsur ruooJsself, pue

6-Lg'oL uont rtoru pu? sepnrnte

9--26 e?eg-Ll '(lptaua?

sf Dsrjetf, ElErlf JeuJ¿e]

Lz ¡t or.lYzr.lzrt os a8enSue¡,

Sozz'69r (sE¡1) saposrda pare¡ar-a8rn8urlf-og apnrnde Sururral a8en8url

af,uanuuronsrn8urT-sso¡r osTo aas 69 af,u"lsrp a8rn8uel

oÉ-Gz lG-pp pu" srrprosrp a8en8uels¡¡urnb¡s

¡eruarudo¡arlap aas J¿pJo uorlrslnb:e aSen8uel

Ig srau;ea¡ f,llaql$¿uDlS9-6St ,ptu pue "' uarsq rsnf,

r6r uontrnJlsul pJsnroJ-rüJoJ pJtelosrLoz 'og-gL (rua¡ronb arueSqerur) |¡

o6-69 (8uru.real ur;eurea¡3o) turunsr urÉ9 f:e1nqe:or' leuon?uraluriz,saerdope leuou¿uJelul,

uoDf,eJatur rrs slotnf, ollalur

9-19 sorreruSe.rd a8rn8uel.rarurg-1,fi puruurSaq aqr tuo{ tq3¡.r u ra8, pue

ft,\¡enua?Sozz a8en8uel.rarur

Jf, uJnuur trltsFSuJl-ssoJf ,rJ af,uaJeJJalur

61, Surgr.reasa; uagr'r'

tunof,f,E otu¡ Sunras prf,os J>l"r ol paaurndur pagrpou rrr uonreretur pegporu

6oz 'oL-69t '6-Stt' gzt' 6tt suonf,?laluI JauJEal*JauJEa]

l9-6fi sagerordde

.ppar pue ''' uatsrl tsnl, urJo >pEI

l-üz uonrsrnbr¿ a8enSuel p¡qr'ar'n¡ads¡ad Teruarudo¡a,rap /tsruorpeJatur

36rz'ol-69t'L9t 'S9t 'grr 'frr slsagrodfq uonr?raur

g-lz uonlsmbcea8en8uel tsJg ur uorltrpJetu¡3o arueuodur

tL-S9t'tu üonf,?Jalur l¿uo]t"sJa uof,6gt'6u sanSoplp a neroq?ilor

uollf,?JelutSoz'gtt

sloporu uonf,nJrsul ,paal drrp, srr, alrsuelul36rz 'z9r'8trISE a rsualur

rL uoner¡unuo.rd3o ¡eo8 se'ft¡rqr8rqarul

254 Index

Motivation Orientation of LanguageTeaching (MOLT) 88

multicompetence (as better goal than nativeabiliry) 96

multiple intelligences 8onadve language sra first languagenarive-like abiliry 68, 7r, 96, zzrgnative speaker J, 24, 42, 5t, 67, 69, 7t, 94,

96, 97, u4, 126, t4S, zzrgnatural acquisition settings rz3-9natural order hypothesis ro6, zxg see also

developmental sequences

negationchild acquisition of 9-rosecond language learning 48-9

negat¡ve feedback ¡¿r clarification requests:

corrective feedbacknegotiation for meaning il4, r28, Vo, t6j-6,

2218

negotiation of form r19, zztg see also

form-focused instructionneurological research rr3

noticing hypothesis ttj, r77, t83-4, r89, zzrgobject pronouns 164

obligatory contexts 46-8, r58, zztgobservation

ethnography r49-5robservation schemes rz9-48

open quesdons r47order of acquis ition zztg see developmental

sequences

overgeneralization errors zzrgand the behaviourist perspective r8-I9in first language acquisition rzand the information processing model loin pronunciation 68-9in second language learning generally 44

pair work 168-9, r7o, zo9paraphrasing lr4, r47 see abo recxtsparent-child interaction z6-7past tense 55-6, r73pattern practice drills ry7-8, zztgpatterns in language, learning r8peer group, learning from t9 see also

learner-learner i nteractionsperception ofsounds 69, 7operceptually-based learning styles 83

performance rz, 4j,7r,79,8j,94, 96, ro7,rt7, 186, zztg

personal characteristics of learners see Iearnercharacteristics

personaliry 84-6phonemic distincdons zzzg

infants' abiliry 6

second language learners 69

phonology 68-7r, zo6polyglot savant 8lpositive reinforcement r4possessive determiners 46-8, 521, 163

power relationships 7o, 89

Practiceand the behaviourist perspective r4-r9and cognitive perspectiv€s rr7

pragmatics zzzgimportance of lear ning zo7interlanguage pragmadcs 6t-6polite pronouns ry3, t87registers (different language for different

situations) 4, ry3, t87, zzzgand second language learning 65-8

pre-school years, and language acquisitiont2-r3

private speech fi8 ) r4z, 2zzgprocedural knowledge rc9, rr7, ry3, zzzgprocessabiliry theory t6-r7, r77, t8z, zzzgprocessing capacity rt6processing instrucdon ú2, 164-5, zzzgproficiency

and bilingualism 3r-zdifHculties in researching 78-9learner language and proficiency level

r67-8

Promptsclarification Íequests rr4, r4o, r88

elicitation r4r, r88

encouraging self-correction ú8-9, 194

pronunciation 68-7rpsychological theories see behaviourism;

information processing modelpuberty 94-5questions

child acquisition of ro-rz, 19

display questions r3osecond language learning 49-jt, t8oteacher questioning in the classroom 145-9

rate oflearning 96,97, zzzgreadiness to learn r8o-rreading

efFect ofliteracy on first languagedevelopment r3

'just listen ... and read' ry9-65and practice n7problems in learning to read z9-3oreading as a source ofvocabulary growth

61-4, zo6reading material for learners 16r-z

fecasts 2229

comparison offeedback that corrects vs

PromPts r94in content-based classrooms 139-45

6-glt' gzr' 69' gt tueuodurr a8en8uelr"rau ur (arurf) arnsodxa3o lunourc

Sunuul,-9,sargeg'srf,ualurs,rlgderSa¡ar,

gz (g f,ruorDelJ lou srj¿runq aq olspaau uonrsrnbre a8enSue¡ p¡qr ro3 rndul

z/ Sulldru¿s roJ sloor paseg--rarnduool3o¡ouqcar

otz'zg-LLt <alqegleet sr ter{.n rlf,?rt,

(ffSf) Surqrear a8en8ur¡ pasuq->ls'Er f sporlrauJ uonelsueJl .l¿ruureiS:uorl3nJtsur p:snroJ-ruJoJ :3ulu¿aru

uo snf,oJ f(J'ISl) Surqoear a8en8uelprseq-ruaruor :(¡-13) Surgceer

e8enSuel e nerruntuulor :qeeo.rdde

¡en8uttotpne aar urooJssep'SurgrearStzz' 6t. >l1er rrl{rerl

6-99 sar¡r:erd puone rlou,srrgrear6-Stt

uJooJsse]f, aqt ur Suluortsanb raqrealSh'Se-6zt suonf,?retur raurea]-Jeqf,eal

üoz uolle,rnoru ur a¡or

sJar{f,841

3l.zz'oít'S9r'L9 (¡19¡) Surgrear e8en8uq paseq-Ise¡

3l.zz e?eníueln?rctSezz'ol,'89 spruru8ase¡dns

Slzz 'LLt 't Lt 'É-zt ruslpn8urlrq eluf,Blqnszt sporp)ru uorsJerugns

suonf,EJJlur JauJEal

-Jertr¿)l aas suorltrEJJtur tuaPnls-tusPnlsB€zzBurpzt? prnDnrrs

iür sts¿¡¡¡ urtL'oL'69'99 lSolouoqd3o r:td se

90? Poorsl)Pun3¡asrnof SuueuJ ur aJueilodul1

(rrposo.rd) ssa.rrs

9or'lg (lralxut) ssarrs

6gr s¡erar porelntunsStzz'lt lrarre,L prrpuers

sa¡uanbas ¡eruarudo¡a,rap a¿s sa8ets

oÉ-62 s.rap.rosrp a8en8ue¡ pue qcaads

r--olr e8uegf, pf,nrlodorf,os

8-L8r sluroJ f,Ilsln8ulTolf,osÉr-zr a8en8ue¡

Jo sruroJ ¡enos Surureal sralooqcs-a.rd

sf,IlsInSuIIoIfosBezz' 69r' 9h' 6t-gl.{-roaqr ¡ernrprorcos

ol-6fr e3¿n8uel'uollezlplf,osl-üz e,ut:eds¡ad tsruon¡r.¡alur Jrlt pue

uollf,sJaluI lelfoso€ spn8urlrg snoruellnurs

r9r srepeer pag¡dru¡s

s97, xa?uJ

3€zz'ftt'fF uorrergrldrurs6tt 'Ltt urooJsself, ur Jo esn (ef,uelrs

Bfzz'6gt '6fi aruaragrp rumgru8rs€z a8en8uel u8rs

r-og .&oruaru ruJet-tJor{s

o[ s¡en8u¡rq pnuanb:s9-46'r--az

(srsar¡rodl¡1 porred pf, nrr3) por.rad alltrsuesfrr uolrnadar-31as

ü6r uon¡a.r¡o¡ Jor{lo sA uoDfJJJof,-JIas3€zz 'oL'g9 spruaru8as

tt-€tuoursrnb:e a8zn8uel tsry pue 's:ral looqrs

Blzz'6\t ;3rn3ue1 puorasBlzz'L-9h '8rr 'lz SurploJprs

a8en8urlf,rcpruroJ rrr (aSen8ue¡ rrepur.roS) saunnor

Szzz' ot-6ot 8ur¡nl:n¡s¡¡g-1,1, srrtsuatrrJ"r{f JOuJ?)l Surfpnrs ro3

zl, sanssr SurlduresSf-6zt

suoDf,EJalur ruJpnrs-Jar{feer Surqc;easa;

69r (lpnrs aqrSuncage rar{l:eesal) xopered reqrleeselSzzz'lSt' 6zr' 9g rpreasrr a¡u¿tnu¿nb

Szzz 'lSt '6lt '6zt'98 q:rmsar aanrllpnb6ü-6zr sauaqrs uone rasqo

98 srrpnts ¡eurpnrr8uo¡ü-€fi sarpnrs Teluaurradxa

rl-6ir lgde:8ougr:/_\t

sdno.¡3 uosr.¡eduroc Surpug ur lr¡n:grp39rc'lbr sarpnrs a,rndrnsap

39tz' 9g s)rpnts leuor]fas-ssoJf,39rc 'zoz'zl srnsrn8ur¡ sndror

gL uopelarro:6ü-6zr saruarps uolle Jesgo (ruoorsselc)

Bltz'lSt r{rJEJsaJ uonresPoqleu r{frEás3r

99 rJnr"al ¡lleru8e¡d se'stsenbJJsrdruo¡d Íuon?¡rrur oqa aas tlt uorlnada¡

z-tgt'S-lS sosnelf, a DEIar

Szzz'Lgr '€l,r 'ür (suonenusrurrarrP,*

""1T' l#:'JJll :1ffi I 6-Stt'oÉr (suorrsanb aurnuaS¡ suonsanb ler]uergrr

9-ll tsed 01 aruargrrfFr (rrposo.rd) ssals

o8r .ssrPFrun, PUE .serpBeJ, Jo-t

rr--orz {rsgPaTJo PUH uoruruof lsoru16r a¡nou lou ftru srauJeel

t/t 'oLt suor¡ftJalul JaUJEJI-JJUJ?JI uI6-9gr sruoo;sself, uorsJar¡JrrJr ur

256 Indrx

ofbeginning instrucdon in secondlanguage y,96-9, zo4-5

of corrective feedback r94of form-focused instruction r9r

transfer zz4g see cross-linguistic infuencetransfer-appropriate processing (TAP) rro,

191,2249'two for one' r7r-7rypographical enhancemenrs of input 163

UG (Universal Grammar) zo, to4-j,224guptake r39, t4r, 142, t88, zz4gusage-based learning rro-nusage-based perspectives on child language

acquisition z8-9variables, personal zz4g see learner

characteristicsvariational features rt6, 177-9, zz4gvarieties of languages 14, jr, 7r, 206, zz4g'Yictor'zzvisual learners 83

vocabularyalnount needed for conversation 6r,

t6z, 206can be taught any dme r78first language development of r4growth through reading t6zlearning strategies 64second language learning 6o-4

wút time r47wh-words rc-rz, 49-jIwillingness to communicate (\lTC) 86, zz4gword identification 6vz

retrieval of word meanings ro9word order

adverb placement t8-9basic word o¡der and predictable

development paths ry7, ry\, r79word order and meaning rrr-rz

working memory czpacit¡ 8o-t, zz5g'wug test' 8-9younger the better (for starting second

language instruction) y, 96-9, zo4-5zone of proximal development (ZPD) zS,

tr8, zz5g

OXFORDlJNIVERSITY IRBSS

www.oup.com/elt

lsBN 97a 0 t9 454126-A

il]il11ilililffiil[[illr

3iijfld.lk'oxfordenglishtestinq.com