SLA Literature Research Articles

The ‘Attractive’ Progressive – Why use the -<i>ing</i> Form in English as a Lingua Franca?

In SLA literature, the 'extended' use of the progressive in L2 English production has often been considered a 'problem'. The studies have been based on elicited data and explanations for such use have ranged from first language interference to target language input. In this paper, my aim is to look into the use of the progressive in authentic spoken L2 English from a fresh, more communicative perspective, namely that of English as a lingua franca. The main focus is on finding out whether the use of the progressive is really 'extended', and if so, does this cause problems in communication. At the end, an explanation for the characteristic use of the progressive in ELF is attempted. The data for the study comes from an academic ELF speech corpus, ELFA.

The Comparative Fallacy in SLA Literature

Learners’ language has been described as transitional competence (Corder, 1967) and interlanguage (Selinker, 1972), and it has been categorized as a natural language (Adjemian, 1976). This indicates that learners possess their own languages. However, the question remains whether or not learners’ language has been explained and understood on its own, and not merely compared to target-language (TL) norms in the SLA literature (Cook, 1999). Bley-Vroman (1983) asserts that comparing learners’ language to TL norms may preclude researchers from an understanding of the systematic nature of a learner’s system, which in turn results in the comparative fallacy. He also warns that “[t]he comparative fallacy can have very serious effects on the validity of empirical studies in the way that it influences the interpretation and classification of data” (p. 15).

SUBSTRATE INFLUENCE IN CREOLES AND THE ROLE OF TRANSFER IN SECOND LANGUAGE ACQUISITION

This article discusses how research on language transfer in the field of SLA can help to explain the origins of substrate influence in creoles and provide answers to more difficult questions concerning the distribution and verification of substrate features. First, it argues against the view that both SLA and transfer are not involved in the genesis of pidgin and creole languages. Then the view is presented that, as described in the SLA literature, transfer is not just a consequence of second language learning but also of second language use, and it serves as a communication strategy when the need arises. Such a strategy may be used by speakers of either a prepidgin or an already established pidgin when its functional use is being rapidly extended. Sociolinguistic perspectives on transfer in SLA, described next, throw some light onto the question of why substrate features remain in pidgins and creoles. Research on transfer in SLA also provides important insights into the specific factors that may have affected substrate influence in creoles. Evidence is presented that some transfer constraints discovered in SLA research—rather than other proposed factors such as so-called functional expendability—still provide the best explanation for the absence of particular substrate features in creoles. Finally, it is shown that tests proposed for verifying instances of L1 influence in interlanguage could be adapted for verifying instances of substrate influence in creoles.

Do Learners Notice Enhanced Forms while Interacting with the L2?: An Online and Offline Study of the Role of Written Input Enhancement in L2 Reading

The benefits of enhanced written input, premised on the roles of attention and awareness (notic- ing) in second/foreign language (L2) learning, have produced mixed results in SLA literature. One plausible explanation may be offline data elicitation procedures typically used to measure the impact (or lack thereof) of enhancement. Employing a more robust online research design to address this issue, think-aloud protocols were gathered to establish that first-year college-level participants (38) indeed noticed targeted linguistic forms (Spanish formal imperatives) while reading an enhanced or unenhanced text. Their performances on immedi- ate and delayed recognition and written production tasks were subsequently submitted to both quantitative and qualitative analyses. Results indicated no significant benefits of written input enhancement over unen- hanced written input for (1) the amount of reported noticing of Spanish formal imperatives, (2) readers' com- prehension, or (3) readers' intake. Theoretical, methodological, and pedagogical implications are discussed.

Conceptions of language and language learning

This paper questions whether the notion of learner beliefs as conceived in the SLA literature is adequate to capture the complexity of learners' thinking about language learning. It proposes as an alternative, an analytical framework based on three levels: conception, approach and belief. The notion of conceptions of language and language learning is proposed as higher level category conditioning specific beliefs. The notion of approaches to learning is proposed as a category describing the level at which beliefs are made manifest in specific contexts of learning. These categories are illustrated with reference to the authors' data drawn from interviews with university students in Hong Kong.

Conversational Interaction and Second Language Development: Recasts, Responses, and Red Herrings?

This article examines the effects of negotiated interaction on the production and development of question forms in English as a second language (ESL). The study focused on one feature of interaction, recasts, which have recently been the topic of interactional work in the SLA literature (Long, 1996; Long, Inagaki, & Ortega, this issue; Lyster & Ranta, 1997; Oliver, 1995). The study compared groups of learners who received interactionally modified input with learners who received the same input containing intensive recasts in order to investigate: (a) the effect of recasts on learners' short term interlanguage (IL) development, and (b) the nature and content of learners' responses to recasts. The results suggest that for more advanced learners, interaction with intensive recasts may be more beneficial than interaction alone in facilitating an increase in production of targeted higher‐level morphosyntactic forms. These positive developmental effects were found for recasts even though, as is generally acknowledged in the discourse, recasts were usually not repeated and rarely elicited modification by the learners. This study, therefore, suggests that recasts may be beneficial for short term IL development even though they are not incorporated in learners' immediate responses. In fact, the responses may be red herrings.

Transferability and linguistic substrates

This article considers the issue of transferability, a well-known concept in the SLA literature but not one so frequently investigated in language contact research. Three principles can help to identify effects of transferability in language contact: similar distributional range in L1 and L2; multiple geographic occurrences; and high likelihood in certain geographic areas. The article shows the applicability of the principles to language contact in the British Isles (especially Ireland) with a detailed discussion of absolute constructions, structures which show interesting relations between syntax and discourse, and which also seem susceptible to crosslinguistic influence. Although counterarguments are possible to make, they do not account for the known facts. Moreover, the evidence for the transferability of absolutes in Hiberno-English strengthens the case for crosslinguistic influence in a totally different language contact situation, the Indian subcontinent. The most general conclusion to be drawn from the discussion is that SLA research and language contact studies can be mutually enriching. The former can provide principles to establish the likelihood of transfer of particular structures, while the latter can expand the range of data that will contribute to a sound theory of transferability.

Variation theory and second language acquisition (review)

REVIEWS163 Variation theory and second language acquisition. By Hugh Douglas Adamson. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press, 1988. Pp. viii, 92. $10.95. Reviewed by René Coppieters, Pomona College The rationale for VT&SLA springs from what A perceives as an ongoing shift within SLA. The psycholinguistic tradition, understood here primarily as the influence of early First Language Acquisition studies on SLA, is, according to A, rapidly adopting 'theoretical constructs and analytic tools from sociolinguists ' (vi). Furthermore, 'the field is in danger of being split into two camps— psycholinguists and sociolinguists, who both study language acquisition, but who are unable to integrate their findings. This book is, I hope, a first step towards ... a unifying theory' (ibidem). VT&SLA is centered around an outline of relevant studies in the sociolinguistics and SLA literature. Unfortunately, and unwittingly proving that the split he fears is indeed taking place, A completely ignores all studies based on the more recent developments in theoretical linguistics. ' There is no recognition here of the work of Stephen Pinker (e.g. 1984) in first-language acquisition (FLA), or that of Lydia White and Suzanne Flynn (cf. White 1982 and, most recently, Flynn 1987 on the possible role of Universal Grammar in SLA), to mention just a few relevant examples.2 As a result, rather than confronting traditions in need of dialogue, if not reconciliation, A restricts himself to discussing works—more exactly, parts of works—which are, in fact, already compatible . This exclusion is particularly problematic for SLA, which has, in recent years, taken considerable advantage of the opportunities for productive research offered by ongoing developments in linguistic theory (for a recent overview , see Lightbown & White 1987). The basic issue tackled by A is how to analyze variation in the speech of second language learners. The unifying theme is methodology. Within the constraints mentioned above, A's discussion is informative and well organized. It includes a review of the early first- and second-language morpheme-acquisition studies; an overview ofthe techniques developed by sociolinguists for the analysis of variation; an outline of the possible similarities between the speech of second-language learners and pidgins and créoles; an essay on the psychological reality of linguistic rules, in particular variable rules; a discussion of the variable rule notation to express the results of 'prototype' studies; and a short discussion of Krashen's monitor model (see, for instance, Krashen 1981) in relation to variation theory.3 In each case, A presents his analyses in the context of specific and detailed examples. 1 The last theoretical work discussed in VT&SLA is Chomsky 1965. A also refers to Bresnan 1978, although her views in that article are not discussed or reflected in his book. 2 White 1982 is mentioned in VT&SLA, but A does not review her work or take her concerns into consideration. 3 A also includes an experimental study, conducted by himself and his co-worker Mary Ciske. Using adult second language acquirers as subjects, they tested (with some success) Bickerton's 1981 claim that children use the contrast between the presence or absence of an article to mark the [± specific] distinction for NPs. Cf. Cziko 1986 for a thorough evaluation of Bickerton's thesis in first-language acquisition. 164LANGUAGE, VOLUME 66, NUMBER 1 (1990) If VT&SLA's strong point is a clear review of relevant studies on variation, its weak point is the lack of a consistent and explicit framework in which the important questions alluded to would find their place. Indeed, on many critical issues in linguistics VT&SLA offers sometimes dogmatic and often nebulous opinions which are neither properly justified nor sufficiently integrated. In Ch. 1, A points out that 'constructing an average order of acquisition requires abstracting away from the speech data of individuals, and in this sense it is like describing langue, or the competence of the ideal speaker-hearer' (6). What is the rationale, then, for this abstraction, which he otherwise strongly condemns, and what does it represent? A rather meekly answers: 'However, such abstracting is commonly done in psychological studies involving groups, and it results in a description that is closer to the actual speech data than are the very abstract descriptions of Saussure and Chomsky' (6). A ignores here the issue of the interpretation...