The Role of Consciousness in Second Language Acquisition

Despite the existence of a vast growing literature on second language acquisition (SLA) research and a heated debate among second language (L2) researchers about the applicability of research to practice, there is scanty empirical evidence in this area (Nassaji, 2012). Accordingly, this paper reports on a study investigating in-service teachers' perspectives on the interface between SLA research and L2 teaching. A total number of 119 English language teachers responded to a questionnaire which collected both qualitative and quantitative data. The results revealed teachers' familiarity with SLA research. Although they held positive views towards the relevance of SLA research to language teaching practice, a low percentage of them indicated that they seek insights from research articles. Lack of time and ability were the most frequently reported reasons for not conducting SLA research. Similarly, teachers' lack of time and the difficulty associated with SLA research articles were the most frequently reported reasons for not reading these articles. Majority of the teachers appeared to conceive of teachers' and researchers' works as related and connected. However, in almost all cases a considerably higher percentage of MA teachers than their BA counterparts viewed SLA research as more relevant and useful for teaching purposes. Teachers also expressed their expectations from SLA research to address practical issues. Further, they highlighted practical aspects of SLA research as more relevant to their practice.

SLA Research and Language Teachingby Rod Ellis Hong Kong: Oxford University Press, 1997, 280 pp. Reviewed by David Pinto University of California, Los Angeles In SLA Research and Language Teaching Rod Ellis addresses the existing gap between Second Language Acquisition (SLA) research and language teaching in the classroom. After initially demonstrating its how the gap has developed and is noting continuing expansion, he attempts to bridge this gap. The book di- vided into six parts: Background; Making Research Accessible; The Application of Theory; Second Language Acquisition Research in the Classroom; The Teacher as Researcher; Conclusion. It is aimed at language teachers who are interested in what found SLA it research has to say about language learning but who, perhaps, have difficult to apply the findings to the classroom. Ellis examines some of the research findings of the last twenty years along with factors affecting their adoption in classroom teaching practices. explicit He presents the notions of implicit and knowledge and introduces a model is for using the research in this area to build a structural syllabus that as compatible with instructed language acquisition, opposed to naturalistic acquisition. To further bridge the gap, he suggests that teachers carry out research in their the criticisms of own classrooms and defends this practice against SLA academics. In the first part of the book Ellis examines the gap between SLA research and language teaching and also presents some ideas for bridging this gap. It seems that most SLA research in the 1960's focused on language pedagogy. There were two main approaches - research to investigate the relative effectiveness of differ- ent teaching methods and empirical study of how learners acquired an L2. The latter approach involved looking at individual learners and their errors. Teachers could easily relate to these studies which tended to be more rewarding than studies of methods in that they opened the way for further research. (p. 5). As a result, its studies of L2 learning continued and SLA was born As SLA grew, opposed it became more of an academic pursuit in own right as to a support for the practice of language teaching. There are large bodies (e.g. of research that have nothing to do with the classroom research on Universal Grammar). Other role of input fields of SLA have closer ties to the classroom. The study of the in and interaction L2 in acquisition and the study of form-focused in- struction both address issues of extreme relevance to language teachers. the However, methods they have adopted order to satisfy the demands of academia have knowledge, made their findings of questionable relevance to the classroom. As an academic discipline, SLA seeks to contribute to technical Issues in Applied Linguistics ISSN 1050-4273 Vol. 10 1999, Regents of the University of California No.

This article argues for a reconceptualization of Second Language Acquisition (SLA) research that would enlarge the ontological and empirical parameters of the field. We claim that methodologies, theories, and foci within SLA reflect an imbalance between cognitive and mentalistic orientations, and social and contextual orientations to language, the former orientation being unquestionably in the ascendancy. This has resulted in a skewed perspective on discourse and communication, which conceives of the foreign language speaker as a deficient communicator struggling to overcome an underdeveloped L2 competence, striving to reach the “target” competence of an idealized native speaker (NS). We contend that SLA research requires a significantly enhanced awareness of the contextual and interactional dimensions of language use, an increased “emic” (i.e., participant‐relevant) sensitivity towards fundamental concepts, and the broadening of the traditional SLA data base. With such changes in place, the field of SLA has the capacity to become a theoretically and methodologically richer, more robust enterprise, better able to explicate the processes of second or foreign language (S/FL) acquisition, and better situated to engage with and contribute to research commonly perceived to reside outside its boundaries.

This article argues for a reconceptualization of Second Language Acquisition (SLA) research that would enlarge the ontological and empirical parameters of the field. We claim that methodologies, theories, and foci within SLA reflect an imbalance between cognitive and mentalistic orientations, and social and contextual orientations to language, the former orientation being unquestionably in the ascendancy. This has resulted in a skewed perspective on discourse and communication, which conceives of the foreign language speaker as a deficient communicator struggling to overcome an underdeveloped L2 competence, striving to reach the “target” competence of an idealized native speaker (NS). We contend that SLA research requires a significantly enhanced awareness of the contextual and interactional dimensions of language use, an increased “emic” (i.e., participant‐relevant) sensitivity towards fundamental concepts, and the broadening of the traditional SLA data base. With such changes in place, the field of SLA has the capacity to become a theoretically and methodologically richer, more robust enterprise, better able to explicate the processes of second or foreign language (S/FL) acquisition, and better situated to engage with and contribute to research commonly perceived to reside outside its boundaries.

This chapter examines the relationship between second language acquisition (SLA) research and learner corpus research (LCR). It has the dual aim of examining the usefulness of learner corpora for second language acquisition research and of outlining the importance of SLA theory for the design and analysis of learner corpora. In the early stages of LCR, the focus was on description rather than interpretation. This focus has gradually shifted, however, and efforts have been made in the LCR community towards a better grounding in SLA theory (Granger 2012a). Despite such evolution, second language researchers have been rather slow in taking advantage of learner corpora and their associated computerised methodologies (Myles 2005), and LCR is not always fully informed by SLA research, making collaboration between the two fields sometimes more of a wish than a reality (Hasselgard 1999). The chapter will take stock of bidirectional moves (more LCR in SLA and more SLA theory in LCR) by providing a survey of some SLA studies informed by learner corpus data, and it will argue the theoretical and empirical case for the need for SLA research methodologies to move into the digital age and for LCR to take full account of developments in SLA theorising. Of central concern to both fields is the need for good learner data, as argued by SLA theorists and LC researchers alike: ‘It seems self-evident that one of the most precious resources in SLA research, alongside a clear conceptual framework, is a good quality dataset to work on’ (Myles and Mitchell 2004: 173). ‘There is nothing new in the idea of collecting learner data. Both FLT and SLA researchers have been collecting learner output for descriptive and/or theory building purposes since the disciplines emerged’ (Granger 2004: 123–4). Learner corpora seem to provide the ideal meeting ground to discuss the data needs of both fields. This chapter is written from the perspective of SLA theory. On the one hand, it considers why learner corpora are essential to advance and enhance our endeavours towards a better understanding of the nature of second language (L2) learner development and, on the other hand, it specifies what kind of corpora are needed if we are to bring answers to some of the current questions SLA theory is investigating, before providing illustrations from recent studies.

This research paper highlights the issue of the lack of connection between second language acquisition (SLA) theory and research, particularly with regard to language pedagogy and its practical implementation in language teaching materials/textbooks. Based on a theoretical review of the major theoretical perspectives in SLA, the paper underscores that a gap exists between the theory developers (who develop theories through research) and the practitioners (who bear the responsibility for the implementation of theoretical knowledge) in the fields of SLA and materials development. This lack of cohesion between the theory developers and the practitioners causes the development of ineffective English language teaching (ELT) materials which, consequently, fail to make a substantial contribution to effective English language teaching and learning. The paper highlights that it is important to explore SLA theory and research and ensure its implementation in ELT materials. Similarly, there is a need to carry out research about the implementation of SLA theory in materials development and instructed language learning. Such research will be a significant contribution to the field of materials development and will open new horizons in language pedagogy from both theoretical and practical perspectives.

Japanese has figured frequently in second language acquisition (SLA) research, but more often than not it appears as the first language (L1) rather than the target. In this article, first I discuss the problems addressed and the insights obtained in these studies. I then consider two issues. One is what the field of SLA research should include. I suggest that it should include two categories, namely Core SLA Research, where second language (L2) linguistic knowledge is investigated, and Broad SLA research, where researchers study factors that influence the development of L2 knowledge. The other issue is what we can expect in Core SLA research concerning the L2 acquisition of Japanese. This article illustrates how studies of the L2 acquisition of Japanese can contribute to our understanding of SLA.

In recent years, a number of researchers in the field of second language acquisition have voiced discontent regarding the tendency of second language acquisition (SLA) research to be conducted within a framework of cognitive science (Firth and Wagner, 1997; Atkinson, 2002; Johnson, 2004). Watson-Gegeo (2004) expresses this same discontent, and goes beyond it to call for a new SLA paradigm, the ‘language socialization paradigm’. In this article, I point out the various ways in which Watson-Gegeo has misunderstood the nature of cognitive science research in general, and SLA research in particular, and show why her call should go unheeded.

Oxford, The Study of Second Language Acquisition by Rod UK: Oxford University Press, 1994. vii + 824pp. Scarlett L. Ellis. Reviewed by Robbins University of California, Los Angeles of second language acquisition (SLA) research, now more is expanding rapidly and widening the scope both of its research interests and perspectives (e.g., cognitive, grammatical, neural, pragmatic, and socio-interactive aspects of language learning and use) and of its applicability to other fields (e.g., anthropology, cognitive psychology, second/foreign language teaching, sociology, theoretical linguistics). With three journals devoted primarily to SLA research (e.g., Language Learning, Second Language Research, Studies in Second Language Acquisition) and numerous others regularly publishing articles on the topic (e.g., Applied Language Learning, Applied Linguistics, Issues in Applied Linguistics, TESOL Quarterly), the task of presenting a comprehensive review of the literature on SLA has become a daunting one indeed. Ellis' The Study of Second Language Acquisition is an attempt to accomplish just that task. Ellis claims that the acceptance of SLA as a discipline in its own right depends upon its status as a defined field of inquiry and the existence of a body of research and knowledge related to it (p. 3). With this volume, he sets out to satisfy these defining criteria and thereby to establish SLA as a discipline in its own right. He first delimits the range and scope of the field of SLA research and then comprehensively reviews the existing SLA literature in a logically organized fashion so as to demonstrate the conceptual coherence of this broad, multi-perspective, and somewhat The field than 25 years old, diverse field. The Study of Second Language Acquisition is aimed primarily at future second/foreign language teachers who, Ellis argues, would benefit substantially from knowledge of SLA research. This book can provide teachers with invaluable insights and help them to make their assumptions about SLA explicit and, as a consequence, to more effectively evaluate their pedagogic practices (p. 4). The text is also aimed at introductory level SLA students and SLA researchers in need of a reference text. The text consists of 15 chapters organized into seven parts and is supplemented by an extensive glossary, a bibliography, and author and subject indices. Ellis sets out in Part One to define the field of SLA research by considering the basic questions which it seeks to answer and to Issues in Applied Linguistics ISSN 1050-4273 Vol. 6 No. Regents of the University of California

Reviews An Introduction to Second Language Acquisition Research by Diane Larsen-Freeman and Michael H. Lx)ng. London and New York: Longman, 199L xvii + 398 pp. Reviewed by Charlene G. Polio Michigan State University Over the past few years, applied linguistics has been trying answer the question: what is applied linguistics? (See discussions on this question in Issues in Applied Linguistics, 1990, Second language acquisition (SLA) has avoided the potentially polemic question: what is SLA? While there is little to doubt that SLA is a field in its own right (see Gass, in press; Larsen-Freeman, 1991), what constituted mainstream SLA, or the core of the field, may not be agreed upon. As the field grows and fragments, this issue needs to be addressed. Nowhere is the issue of defining the field of SLA as pertinent as in the writing of an introductory SLA textbook. Ten years ago, such a task would not have been as formidable. Today, one must first ask what should be included and in what depth should it be covered? The most recent effort to introduce newcomers to the field of SLA is Larsen-Freeman and Long's Introduction to Second Language Acquisition Research. In evaluating such an effort, one must consider what the authors chose to include and what to exclude. Were any essential research or concepts omitted and/or was any research on the fringes made to seem part of the field? Will students who use this book have a perspective, consistent with others in the field, on what SLA is? Have the authors fulfilled their responsibility to those using the book to present a balanced view of a field that is fast finding researchers disagreeing on basic issues and theoretical frameworks? I believe that Larsen-Freeman and Long's book can be evaluated quite positively with regard to these questions. A summary of the book, with attention to these issues, follows. The book consists of eight chapters. The first is a lucid introduction, explaining, very briefly, what the field is and that, while teachers' expectations from SLA must, at this point, be modest (p. 3), there is some relation to language teaching. They take an appropriate middle ground, saying neither that SLA research must serve only to benefit language teaching, nor that those ties should be severed (see Newmeyer and Weinberger, 1988 for this latter view).

This paper provides a critical overview of Second Language Acquisition (SLA) research on corrective feedback (CF), laying the groundwork for a clear foundation. To this end, it has scrutinised different CF techniques, drawing upon influential taxonomies by Allwright and Bailey (1991), Lyster and Ranta (1997) and Ellis (2009), clarifying the distinction between errors and mistakes to ensure a comprehensive understanding. This review rigorously analysed SLA research on CF through the lens of ongoing controversies surrounding its role and practical application by reviewing around 97 sources. Adopting a comparison of early and recent studies as an insightful criterion, the overview established a timeline and compared methodologies, theoretical frameworks, and findings. Applying Hendrickson's (1978) framework, commonly employed in EC and SLA research, the paper addresses key controversial questions. Accordingly, it is critical to review whether CF is effective in SLA or not (should errors be corrected), what type of CF is the most effective, who should do the correction, which errors to correct, and the ideal timing for providing CF. Hence, the analysis focused on providing a nuanced understanding of the multifaceted and often questioned role of CF in SLA. The overview reveals that a clear understanding of the existence and role of errors, along with a positive attitude toward EC, enables teachers to recognise CF as an essential component of SLA, particularly in teaching English as a foreign language. It also shows that recently, researchers are making a shift of focus from dealing with whether CF works to investigating which CF works best

Teachability and Learnability across Languages addresses key issues in second, foreign and heritage language acquisition, as well as in language teaching. Focusing on a Processability Theory perspective, it brings together empirical studies of language acquisition, language teaching, and language assessment. For the first time, a research timeline for the role of instruction in language learning is presented, showing how the field of second language acquisition (SLA) research has developed over the last four decades since Pienemann’s work on learnability and syllabus construction over the 1980s. The book includes studies of child and adult second as well as foreign language acquisition research, covering a wide range of target languages including English, German, Hungarian, Japanese, Norwegian, Polish, Spanish, Swedish, and Turkish. In addition, future extensions of PT are discussed. This volume is designed for advanced students in international programs of SLA and Applied Linguistics as well as for SLA researchers and second and foreign language teachers.

The field of second language acquisition (SLA), a relatively new field of academic study, traces its roots only to the second half of the last century. The field of SLA has roots in various disciplines and areas of study, including the fields of child first language (L1) acquisition, linguistics, psychology, and language pedagogy. Thus, SLA has moved well beyond a one-sided focus on learner internal mechanisms, be they linguistic or cognitive. A great deal of SLA research has concentrated on differences between L1 and second language (L2) acquisition in terms of ultimate attainment. Some SLA researchers argue that learning is based on experience of language usage. More recent SLA research conducted within a cognitivist approach has been designed to provide online measures of processing and interpretation of the L2 and has thus shifted somewhat away from the analysis of naturalistic corpora.

During the last 25 years, second language acquisition (SLA) research hasmade considerable progress, but is still far from proving a solid basis for foreign language teaching, or from a general theory of SLA. In addition, its status within the linguistic disciplines is still very low. I argue this has not much to do with low empirical or theoretical standards in the field—in this regard, SLA research is fully competitive—but with a particular perspective on the acquisition process: SLA researches learners' utterances as deviations from a certain target, instead of genuine manifestations of underlying language capacity; it analyses them in terms of what they are not rather than what they are. For some purposes such a “target deviation perspective” makes sense, but it will not help SLA researchers to substantially and independently contribute to a deeper understanding of the structure and function of the human language faculty. Therefore, these findings will remain of limited interest to other scientists until SLA researchers consider learner varieties a normal, in fact typical, manifestation of this unique human capacity.

SLA research in postmethod era: Neglects, misunderstandings and alternatives