scholarly journals SECOND LANGUAGE ACQUISITION RESEARCH IN THE LABORATORY

1997 ◽  
Vol 19 (2) ◽  
pp. 131-143 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jan H. Hulstijn
Keyword(s):  
Second Language ◽  
Second Language Acquisition ◽  
Language Acquisition ◽  
Research Methods ◽  
Reaction Times ◽  
Laboratory Research ◽  
Grammaticality Judgment ◽  
Within Subjects ◽  
Experimental Treatments ◽  
Subject Assignment

This paper discusses some possibilities and limitations of laboratory research methods for testing theories of second language acquisition. The paper includes a review of 20 experimental lab studies. The review focuses on the motivation for conducting lab studies, the use of artificial or semiartificial language structures, and various design features (including pre- and posttesting, number of subjects, random subject assignment, between- and within-subjects comparisons, treatment materials and procedures). The paper calls for lab studies addressing issues central to SLA theory (“learning” vs. “acquisition”) and ends with some methodological recommendations, concerning the length of experimental treatments, the use of grammaticality judgment tasks, the measurement of reaction times, and the use of retrospective interviews.

Grammatically Judgments and Second Language Acquisition

1991 ◽  
Vol 13 (2) ◽  
pp. 161-186 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rod Ellis
Keyword(s):  
Second Language ◽  
Second Language Acquisition ◽  
Language Acquisition ◽  
Small Scale ◽  
Think Aloud ◽  
Grammaticality Judgment ◽  
Dative Alternation ◽  
Think Aloud Protocols ◽  
Chinese Learners ◽  
Theoretical Assumptions

This article takes a critical look at grammaticality judgment tasks in second language acquisition research. It begins by examining the theoretical assumptions that underlie grammaticality judgment tasks, pointing out that previous studies have reported considerable differences between the results obtained from grammaticality judgment tasks and from other, production-oriented tasks. A description of the design features of grammaticality judgment tasks that have been used to date is then provided. There follows an account of a small-scale study designed to investigate the nature of learner judgments. Twenty-one adult advanced Chinese learners of English were asked to judge sentences designed to test their knowledge of dative alternation. The results indicated that the learners rarely used the “not sure” option in the test. Eight of these subjects were then administered a reduced version of the original test as a think-aloud task 1 week later. The results showed that these learners were inconsistent in 22.5% of their judgments. The think-aloud protocols showed that they resorted to a variety of strategies in making judgments. The article concludes by arguing that grammaticality judgment tasks elicit a particular kind of performance that needs to be understood much more thoroughly before it is used as a basis for investigating second language acquisition.

Performance consistency in second language acquisition and language testing research: a conceptual gap

2001 ◽  
Vol 17 (4) ◽  
pp. 442-456 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dan Douglas
Keyword(s):  
Second Language ◽  
Second Language Acquisition ◽  
Language Acquisition ◽  
Research Methods ◽  
Common Ground ◽  
Language Testing ◽  
Research Articles ◽  
Language Test ◽  
Validity And Reliability ◽  
Special Case

Arguing from the premise that a language test is a special case of a second language acquisition (SLA) elicitation device, I suggest that SLA and language testing share much common ground in terms of research methods, which have similar properties in that they are both used to make systematic observations of language performances from which inferences can be made about the state of a learner’s interlanguage ability underlying the performance. However, I also argue that whereas the concept of demonstrating validity and reliability has been integrated into how language testing research is conducted, SLA researchers have generally failed to recognize the need to demonstrate these qualities. I compare examples of SLA and language testing research articles in terms of their treatment of validity and reliability and argue: • that it is important for SLA researchers to provide evidence that the methods they employ to elicit data are appropriate for the purposes intended; • that the procedures provide stable and consistent data; and, consequently • that the interpretations they make of the results are justified.

Beyond form-focused instruction: Reflections on past, present and future research

2010 ◽  
Vol 44 (2) ◽  
pp. 225-236 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nina Spada
Keyword(s):  
Second Language ◽  
Second Language Acquisition ◽  
Language Acquisition ◽  
Language Teaching ◽  
Laboratory Research ◽  
Optimal Time ◽  
Future Research ◽  
The Past ◽  
L2 Learning

In 1997 I published a paper in Language Teaching entitled ‘Form-focused instruction and second language acquisition: A review of classroom and laboratory research’. The paper reviewed the results of studies investigating the effects of form-focused instruction (FFI) on second language (L2) learning. It was organized around seven questions, including: whether FFI is beneficial to L2 learning; whether particular types of FFI are more beneficial; whether there is an optimal time to provide FFI; and whether different language features benefit more from FFI. In this paper I revisit these questions and reflect on how research on FFI and L2 learning has evolved over the past twelve years.

What absolute beginners learn from input

2018 ◽  
Vol 2 (2) ◽  
pp. 112-136
Author(s):  
Susanne E. Carroll ◽  
Angela George
Keyword(s):  
Second Language ◽  
Second Language Acquisition ◽  
Language Acquisition ◽  
Research Agenda ◽  
Learning Problems ◽  
Laboratory Research ◽  
Learning Mechanisms ◽  
Laboratory Findings ◽  
Foundational Research

Absolute beginners rapidly solve several word learning problems after minimal exposure to second language speech. In this article, we report on laboratory research that supports this claim. Explaining second language acquisition is a goal of foundational research. While our findings are consistent with the generativist enterprise, generativists have been content to describe what learners have acquired while avoiding discussion of the ‘how’. We describe a specific generativist approach (the Autonomous Induction Theory) that directly addresses the role of specific learning mechanisms proposed by cognitive psychology. In contrast to alternative non-generative approaches, the Autonomous Induction Theory offers a constrained theory of language acquisition. Both the data from laboratory settings and the theoretical explanations of how adult learners learn have potential implications for language teaching. One should not, however, make teaching recommendations directly from laboratory results. Rather, the findings should be reinterpreted as a research agenda for the classroom, one that recognises its complexities. In this paper, we make several proposals as to how to get from laboratory findings to a classroom-based research agenda.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document