The Effect of Formal Instruction on Monitored and on Spontaneous Naturalistic Interlanguage Performance: A Case Study

Abstract

M The role of grammar instruction in second language acquisition is one of the most controversial issues in second language teaching and second language learning research. Advocates of formal instruction (e.g., Seliger, 1979; Sharwood Smith, 1981) argue that focusing on the formal characteristics of L2 input data facilitates hypothesis formulation and testing. In this respect, formal instruction is a shortcut to learning and enhances formal accuracy. On the other hand, critics (e.g., Krashen, 1982) maintain that grammar knowledge is of limited use and can even be counterproductive in spontaneous communication. Two theories of L2 learning that make explicit claims about the role of formal instruction are Krashen's (1982) and Bialystok's (1979) models. Krashen maintains that the knowledge language learners get through formal instruction is available for use only in monitored situations, when the user focuses on form, and that it cannot be used in spontaneous production, when the focus is on meaning. Bialystok's theory claims that formal instruction followed by formal practice is beneficial for both spontaneous and controlled performance. Studies on the effect of grammar instruction on formal accuracy in language use (e.g., Pica, 1983; Schumann, 1978) have arrived at incongruous findings. Schumann looked at the effects of formal instruction on the development of English negation in an adult learning ESL in a naturalistic environment. The instruction had a major effect on monitored elicited language use but not on spontaneous production. Schumann reported that his subject appeared to have very low motivation to learn English and that his attitude toward the English-speaking community was negative. He concluded that the subject's interlanguage did not develop because he was socially and psychologically separated from the Englishspeaking community and that instruction was not strong enough to overcome pidginization caused by social and psychological distance. However, he did not explain why formal instruction affected monitored performance but not spontaneous production. Pica (1983) examined the contribution of formal instruction to second language acquisition by studying the spontaneous production of English grammatical morphology by adult learners learning English in three different contexts: formal, naturalistic, and mixed. Her findings showed that formal instruction promotes accuracy in language use but that it may lead to overuse of the learned pattern. Pica's study provides valuable insights into the effect of analyzed knowledge on formal accuracy in spontaneous language use. However, with respect to Krashen's and