Studies on oral error correction: do they provide counterevidence against nativist arguments?

Abstract

ABSTRACTAmong focus-on-form studies, oral corrective feedback (CF) has probably received the greatest attention. The majority of studies in this area appear to support a positive role for oral CF in improving interlanguage development. However, theorists adopting a nativist view of second language acquisition continue to question its effectiveness. The present article reconsiders the claims and criticisms put forward by nativists, and reviews the oral CF research with particular attention to the target forms where correction has been shown to have an effect. Two broad constructs – ‘consciousness’ and ‘syntax’ – emerge from this review as being areas where differences of definition offer some explanation for the difference of views on the value of oral CF. We conclude that the research results do not conclusively support the effectiveness of oral CF for second language acquisition; what nativists consider to be fundamental language knowledge to be acquired (‘syntax’) is different from the language forms where second language learning has been shown to be enhanced by oral corrective feedback (OCF). Yet few empirical studies have examined the arguments put forward by nativists on how ‘syntax’ is acquired. Old conflicts are still there and have not been resolved; from our discussion, we draw out implications for future studies.