Abstract
Although both incidental and intentional instructions provide a medium for acquiring the communicative language, they suffer from a number of oversimplifications. Whereas the majority of studies in these paradigms have addressed second language (L2) grammatical development, there has been a growing interest in the effect of these types of instruction on pragmatic development, conversation gambits, and speech acts. The purpose of the present paper is to compare these types of instruction in promoting learning of discussion techniques. Learner performance was analyzed on the basis of the mean occurrence of discussion techniques (giving opinions and presenting series of arguments) in implicitly and explicitly instructed group using independent t-test. The quality of leaner language produced in each group was further analyzed in terms of complexity measuring the complexity of utterances and length of the turns. The results were all in favor of intentional instruction.
Highlights
IntroductionAlong with the pedagogical developments, there was considerable growth in the relatively new field of second language acquisition, where the focus was on the premise that naturalistic exposure to language and use of language, which drives forward interlanguage (the structural development of language), was a prerequisite for the development of language [1]
Along with the pedagogical developments, there was considerable growth in the relatively new field of second language acquisition, where the focus was on the premise that naturalistic exposure to language and use of language, which drives forward interlanguage, was a prerequisite for the development of language [1]. both implicit and explicit instructions provide a medium for acquiring the communicative language, they suffer from a number of oversimplifications
Both implicit and explicit instructions provide a medium for acquiring the communicative language, they suffer from a number of oversimplifications
Summary
Along with the pedagogical developments, there was considerable growth in the relatively new field of second language acquisition, where the focus was on the premise that naturalistic exposure to language and use of language, which drives forward interlanguage (the structural development of language), was a prerequisite for the development of language [1] Both implicit and explicit instructions provide a medium for acquiring the communicative language, they suffer from a number of oversimplifications. “According to the non-interface position, implicit and explicit L2 knowledge involve different parts of the brain and are accessed for performance by different processes, either automatic or controlled in its pure form. There has been no empirical research for the reason that researchers have failed to give due consideration to implicit and explicit construct
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
