Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-jn8rn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-28T11:45:57.589Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Review of Child Second Language Acquisition (SLA): Examining Theories and Research

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  15 May 2017

Rhonda Oliver  and
Agurtzane Azkarai
Rhonda Oliver
Affiliation:
Curtin [email protected]
Agurtzane Azkarai
Affiliation:
Curtin University, Universidad del País Vasco/Euskal Herriko Unibertsitatea (UPV/EHU)[email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Within the field of second language acquisition (SLA), there has been much less research undertaken with children than with adults, yet the two cohorts are quite distinct in characteristics and in their learning processes. This article provides a review of child SLA research, particularly the research with a pedagogical focus. We describe a series of studies, including those informed by different theoretical perspectives (interactionist and sociocultural), in different instructional settings (i.e., second language, foreign language, immersion, and content and language integrated learning [CLIL] contexts) and using different research methodologies (longitudinal, case study, experimental, and naturalistic). We begin by highlighting the importance of age as a factor in SLA research, presenting studies that have focused on the differences existing between younger and older learners. We also consider interventions that can support language learning—including form-focused instruction and the use of tasks. We finish by presenting a proposed change in the way that research with children is conducted.

Type
Research Article
Information
Annual Review of Applied Linguistics , Volume 37 , September 2017 , pp. 62 - 76
Check for updates
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press, 2017 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Abrahamsson, N., & Hyltenstam, K. (2008). The robustness of aptitude effects in near-native second language acquisition. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 30 (4), 481–509.Google Scholar
Alderson, P. (2008). Children as researchers: Participation rights and research methods. In Christensen, P. & James, A. (Eds.), Research with children: Perspectives and practices (pp. 276–290). London, UK: Routledge.Google Scholar
Alerby, E., & Kostenius, C. (2011). Damned taxi cab—How silent communication in questionnaires can be understood and used to give voice to children's experiences. International Journal of Research and Method in Education, 34 (2), 117–130.Google Scholar
Antón, M., & DiCamilla, F. (1998). Socio-cognitive functions of L1 collaborative interaction in the L2 classroom. Canadian Modern Language Review, 54, 314–342.Google Scholar
Azkarai, A., & García Mayo, M. P. (2016). Task repetition effects on L1 use in EFL child task-based interaction. Language Teaching Research. doi:10.1177/1362168816654169Google Scholar
Azkarai, A., & Imaz Agirre, A. (2016). Negotiation of meaning strategies in child EFL mainstream and CLIL settings. TESOL Quarterly, 50 (4), 844–870.Google Scholar
Azkarai, A., & Oliver, R. (2016). Negative feedback on task repetition: ESL vs. EFL child settings. Language Learning Journal. doi:10.1080/09571736.2016.1196385Google Scholar
Bouffard, L. A., & Sarkar, M. (2008). Training 8-year-old French immersion students in metalinguistic analysis: An innovation in form-focused pedagogy. Language Awareness, 17 (1), 3–24.Google Scholar
Brinton, D. (2003). Content-based instruction. In Nunan, D. (Ed.), Practical English language teaching (pp. 199–224). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
Butler, Y. G., & Zeng, W. (2014). Young foreign language learners’ interactions during task-based paired assessments. Language Assessment Quarterly, 11, 45–75.Google Scholar
Butler, Y. G., & Zeng, W. (2015). Young learners’ interactional development in task-based paired-assessment in their first and foreign languages: A case of English learners in China. Education 3–13, 44 (3), 292–321.Google Scholar
Bygate, M. (2001). Effects of task repetition on the structure and control of oral language. In Bygate, M., Skehan, P., & Swain, M. (Eds.), Task-based learning: Language teaching, learning, and assessment (pp. 23–48). London, UK: Longman.Google Scholar
Cameron, L. (2001). Teaching languages to young learners. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Chaudron, C. (1988). Second language classrooms. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Choi, S. Y., & Li, S. (2012). Corrective feedback and learner uptake in a child ESOL classroom. RELC Journal, 43 (3), 331–351.Google Scholar
Christensen, P., & Prout, A. (2002). Working with ethical symmetry in social research with children. Childhood, 9 (4), 477–497.Google Scholar
Coppock, K. (2010). Children as peer researchers: Reflections on a journey of mutual discovery. Children and Society, 25 (6), 435–446.Google Scholar
Coyle, D. (2007). Content and language integrated learning: Towards a connected research agenda for CLIL pedagogies. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 10, 543–562.Google Scholar
Dalton-Puffer, C. (2011). Content and language integrated learning: From practice to principles. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 31, 182–204.Google Scholar
Day, E., & Shapson, S. (1991). Integrating formal and functional approaches to language teaching in French Immersion: An experimental study. Language Learning, 41, 25–58.Google Scholar
DeKeyser, R. M. (2013). Age effects in second language learning: Stepping stones toward better understanding. Language Learning, 63 (1), 52–67.Google Scholar
Dulay, H., & Burt, M. (1974). A new perspective on the creative construction process in child second language acquisition. Language Learning, 24 (2), 253–278.Google Scholar
Edelenbos, P., Johnstone, R. M., & Kubanek, A. (2006). The main pedagogical principles underlying the teaching of languages to very young learners: Languages for the children of Europe: Published research, good practice and main principles (Final Report of the EAC 89/04, Lot 1 Study). Brussels, Belgium: European Commission.Google Scholar
Ellis, R. (1984). Formulaic speech in early classroom second language development. In Handscombe, J., Orem, R., & Taylor, B. (Eds.), On TESOL ’83: The question of control (pp. 53–65). Washington, DC: TESOL.Google Scholar
Ellis, R. (2003). Task-based language learning and teaching. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Ellis, R. (2016). Focus on form: A critical review. Language Teaching Research, 20 (3), 405–428.Google Scholar
Ellis, R., & Heimbach, R. (1997). Bugs and birds: Children's acquisition of second language vocabulary through interaction. System, 2, 247–259.Google Scholar
Enever, J., Moon, J., & Raman, U. (Eds.) (2009). Young learner English language policy and implementation: International perspectives. Reading, UK: Garnet Education.Google Scholar
García Mayo, M. P., & Imaz Agirre, A. (2016). Task repetition and its impact on EFL children's negotiation of meaning strategies and pair dynamics: An exploratory study. The Language Learning Journal, 44 (4), 451–466.Google Scholar
García Mayo, M. P., Imaz Agirre, A., & Azkarai, A. (in press). Task repetition in EFL child oral interaction. In Ahmadian, M. & García Mayo, M. P. (Eds.), Recent perspectives on task-based language learning and teaching. Berlin, Germany: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
García Mayo, M. P., & García Lecumberri, M. L. (2003). Age and the acquisition of English as a foreign language. Clevedon, UK: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
García Mayo, M. P., & Lázaro Ibarrola, A. (2015). Do children negotiate for meaning in task-based interaction? Evidence from CLIL and EFL settings. System, 54, 40–54.Google Scholar
Harley, B. (1998). Issues in designing form-focused L2 tasks for children. In Doughty, C. & Williams, J. (Eds.), Focus on form in classroom language acquisition (pp. 156–174). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Holland, S., Renold, E., Ross, N., & Hillman, A. (2010). Power, agency and participatory agendas: A critical exploration of young people's engagement in participative qualitative research. Childhood, 17, 360–375.Google Scholar
Hyder, T. (2002). Making it happen: Young children's rights in action. In Franklin, B. (Ed.), The new handbook of children's rights: Comparative policy and practice (pp. 311–327). London, UK: Routledge.Google Scholar
Ito, S. (1997). Nenshoosha nihongo gakushuusha no koobun shuutoku: Juudanteki jiree kenkyuu. Hokkaidoo Daigaku Ryuugakusei Sentaa Kiyoo, 1, 68–82.Google Scholar
Iwasaki, J. (2008). Acquiring Japanese as a second language (JSL) in a naturalistic context. In Philp, J., Oliver, R., & Mackey, A. (Eds.), Second language acquisition and the younger learner: Child's play? (pp. 231–254). Amsterdam, The Netherlands: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Jia, G., & Aaronson, D. (2003). A longitudinal study of Chinese children and adolescents learning English in the United States. Applied Psycholinguistics, 24, 131–161.Google Scholar
Jia, G., & Fuse, A. (2007). Acquisition of English grammatical morphology by native Mandarin-speaking children and adolescents: Age-related differences. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 50, 1280–1299.Google Scholar
Kellett, M. (2010). Small shoes, big steps! Empowering children as active researchers. American Journal of Community Psychology, 46 (1–2), 195–203.Google Scholar
Lansdown, G. (2002). Promoting children's participation in democratic decision-making. Florence, Italy: Innocenti Research Centre, UNICEF.Google Scholar
Lasagabaster, D., & Sierra, J. M. (2010). Immersion and CLIL in English: More differences than similarities. ELT Journal, 64 (4), 367–375.Google Scholar
Lenneberg, E. H. (1967). Biological foundations of language. New York, NY: Wiley.Google Scholar
Lewis, G. (2004). The internet and young learners. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Lightbown, P., Halter, R., White, J., & Horst, M. (2002). Comprehension-based learning: The limits of “do it yourself.” Canadian Modern Language Review, 58 (3), 427–464.Google Scholar
Lightbown, P., & Spada, N. (1990). Focus-on-form and corrective feedback in communicative language teaching: Effects on second language learning. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 12 (4), 429–448.Google Scholar
Lightbown, P., & Spada, N. (1993). How languages are learned. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Long, M. H. (1983). Native speaker/non-native speaker conversation and the negotiation of comprehensible input. Applied Linguistics, 4 (2), 126–141.Google Scholar
Long, M. H. (1996). The role of the linguistic environment in second language acquisition. In Ritchie, W. C. & Bhatia, T. K. (Eds.), Handbook of second language acquisition (pp. 413–168). New York, NY: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Lyster, R. (1998). Recasts, repetition and ambiguity in L2 classroom discourse. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 20, 51–81.Google Scholar
Lyster, R. (2001). Negotiation of form, recasts and explicit correction in relation to error types and learner repair in immersion classrooms. Language Learning, 51, 265–301.Google Scholar
Lyster, R. (2004). Differential effects of prompts and recasts in form-focused instruction. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 26, 399–432.Google Scholar
Lyster, R., & Mori, H. (2006). Interactional feedback and instructional counterbalance. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 28 (2), 269–300.Google Scholar
Lyster, R., & Ranta, L. (1997). Corrective feedback and learner uptake: Negotiation of form in communicative classroom. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 19, 37–66.Google Scholar
Mackey, A., & Gass, S. (2005). Second language research: Methodology and design. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Mackey, A., Kanganas, A. P., & Oliver, R. (2007). Task familiarity and interactional feedback in child ESL classrooms. TESOL Quarterly, 41 (2), 285–312.Google Scholar
Mackey, A., & Oliver, R. (2002). Interactional feedback and children's L2 development. System, 30, 459–477.Google Scholar
Mackey, A., Oliver, R., & Leeman, J. (2003). Interactional input and the incorporation of feedback: An exploration of NS-NNS and NNS-NNS adult and child dyads. Language Learning, 53, 35–66.Google Scholar
Mackey, A., & Philp, J. (1998). Conversational interaction and second language development: Recasts, responses, and red herrings? The Modern Language Journal, 82, 338–356.Google Scholar
Mackey, A., & Silver, R. E. (2005). Interactional tasks and English L2 learning by immigrant children in Singapore. System, 33, 239–260.Google Scholar
Muñoz, C. (Ed.). (2006a). Age and the rate of foreign language learning. Clevedon, UK: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
Muñoz, C. (2006b). The effects of age on foreign language learning: The BAF Project. In Muñoz, C. (Ed.), Age and the rate of foreign language learning. (pp. 1–40) Clevedon, UK: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
Muñoz, C. (2007). Age-related differences and second language learning practice. In DeKeyser, R. M. (Ed.), Practice in a second language (pp. 229–255). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Muñoz, C. (2008). Symmetries and asymmetries of age effects in naturalistic and instructed L2 learning. Applied Linguistics, 29, 578–596.Google Scholar
Muñoz, C. (2014a). Contrasting effects of starting age and input on the oral performance of foreign language learners. Applied Linguistics, 35 (4), 463–482.Google Scholar
Muñoz, C. (2014b). Exploring young learners’ foreign language learning awareness. Language Awareness, 23 (1–2), 24–40.Google Scholar
Myles, F., & Mitchell, R. (2012). Learning French from ages 5, 7 and 11: An investigation into starting ages, rates and routes of learning amongst early foreign language learner (ESRC Impact Report, RES-062-23-1545). Swindon, UK: Economic and Social Research Council.Google Scholar
Nicholas, H., & Lightbown, P. M. (2008). Defining child second language acquisition, defining roles for L2 instruction. In Philp, J., Oliver, R., & Mackey, A. (Eds.), Second language acquisition and the younger learner: Child's play? (pp. 27–51). Amsterdam, The Netherlands: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Nikolov, M. (1999). “Why do you learn English?” “Because the teacher is short.” A study of Hungarian children's foreign language learning motivation. Language Teaching Research, 3 (1), 33–56.Google Scholar
Nikolov, M. (Ed.). (2016). Assessing young learners of English: Global and local perspectives. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer.Google Scholar
Nikolov, M., & Mihaljević Djigunović, J. (2006). Recent research on age, second language acquisition, and early foreign language learning. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 26, 234–260.Google Scholar
Nikolov, M., & Mihaljević Djigunović, J. (2011). All shades of every color: An overview of early teaching and learning of foreign languages. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 31, 95–119.Google Scholar
Nikolov, M., Mihaljević Djigunović, J., Mattheoudakis, M., Lundberg, G., & Flanagan, T. (Eds.). (2007). Teaching modern languages to young learners: Teachers, curricula and materials. Strasbourg, France: Council of Europe.Google Scholar
Ojima, S., Matsuba-Kurita, H., Nakamura, N., Hoshino, T., & Hagiwara, H. (2011). Age and amount of exposure to a foreign language during childhood: Behavioral and ERP data on the semantic comprehension of spoken English by Japanese children. Neuroscience Research, 70, 197–205Google Scholar
Oliver, R. (1995). Negative feedback in child NS-NNS conversation. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 17, 459–481.Google Scholar
Oliver, R. (1998). Negotiation of meaning in child interactions. The Modern Language Journal, 82 (3), 372–386.Google Scholar
Oliver, R. (2000). Age differences in negotiation and feedback in classroom and pairwork. Language Learning, 50 (1), 119–151.Google Scholar
Oliver, R. (2002). The patterns of negotiation for meaning in child interactions. The Modern Language Journal, 86 (1), 97–111.Google Scholar
Oliver, R. (2009). How young is too young? Investigating negotiation of meaning and corrective feedback in children aged five to seven years. In Mackey, A. & Polio, C. (Eds.), Multiple perspectives on interaction: Second language interaction research in honour of Sue M. Gass (pp. 135–156). London, UK: Routledge.Google Scholar
Oliver, R., & Grote, E. (2010). The provision and uptake of different types of recasts in child and adult ESL learners: What is the role of age and context? Australian Review of Applied Linguistics, 33 (3), 26.1–26.22.Google Scholar
Oliver, R., & Mackey, A. (2003). Interactional context and feedback in child ESL classrooms. The Modern Language Journal, 87 (4), 519–533.Google Scholar
Paradis, J. (2007). Second language acquisition in childhood. In Hoff, E. & Shatz, M. (Eds.), Blackwell handbook of language development (pp. 387–406). Malden, MA: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Philp, J., Oliver, R., & Mackey, A. (Eds.). (2008). Second language acquisition and the young learner: Child's play? Amsterdam, The Netherlands: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Pienemann, M. (1998). Language processing and second-language development: Processibility theory. Amsterdam, The Netherlands: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Pinter, A. (2006). Verbal evidence of task related strategies: Child versus adult interactions. System, 34, 615–630.Google Scholar
Pinter, A. (2007). Some benefits of peer-peer interaction: 10-year-old children practising with a communication task. Language Teaching Research, 11, 189–207.Google Scholar
Pinter, A. (2014). Child participant roles in applied linguistics research. Applied Linguistics, 35 (2), 168–183.Google Scholar
Pinter, A., Kuchah, K., & Smith, R. (2013). Researching with children. ELT Journal, 67 (4), 484–487.Google Scholar
Pinter, A., & Zandian, S. (2014). “I don't ever want to leave this room”: Benefits of researching “with” children. ELT Journal, 68 (1), 64–74.Google Scholar
Pinter, A., & Zandian, S. (2015). “I thought it would be tiny little one phrase that we said, in a huge big pile of papers”: Children's reflections on their involvement in participatory research. Qualitative Research, 15 (2), 235–250.Google Scholar
Roberts, H. (2008). Listening to children and hearing them. In Christensen, P. & James, A. (Eds.), Research with children: Perspectives and practices (pp. 260–275). London, UK: Routledge.Google Scholar
Sample, E., & Michel, M. (2014). An exploratory study into trade-off effects of complexity, accuracy and fluency in young learners’ oral task repetition. TESL Canada Journal, 31, 23–46.Google Scholar
Sato, C. (1984). Phonological processes in second language acquisition: Another look at interlanguage syllable structure. Language Learning, 34 (4), 43–57.Google Scholar
Schwartz, B. D. (2004). Why child L2 acquisition? In Kampen, J. van & Baauw, S. (Eds.), Proceedings of GALA 2003 (pp. 47–66). Utrecht, The Netherlands: LOT [The Netherlands Graduate School of Linguistics].Google Scholar
Shintani, N. (2012). Repeating input-based tasks with young beginner learners. RELC Journal, 43 (1), 39–51.Google Scholar
Skelton, T. (2008). Research with children and young people: Exploring the tensions between ethics, competence and participation. Children's Geographies, 6 (1), 21–36.Google Scholar
Snow, C., & Hoefnagel-Höhle, M. (1978). The critical period for language acquisition: Evidence from second language learning. Child Development, 49, 1114–1128.Google Scholar
Stoller, F. L. (2008). Content-based instruction. In Deusen-Scholl, N. Van & Hornberger, N. H. (Eds.), Encyclopedia of language and education (2nd ed.): Vol. 4. Second and foreign language education (pp. 59–70). Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany: Springer Science+Business Media.Google Scholar
Storch, N. (2002). Patterns of interaction in ESL pair work. Language Learning, 52 (1), 119–158.Google Scholar
Swain, M. (1985). Communicative competence: Some roles of comprehensible input and comprehensible output in its development. In Gass, S. & Madden, C. (Eds.), Input and second language acquisition (pp. 235–253). Rowley MA: Newbury House.Google Scholar
Swain, M. (1998). Focus on form through conscious reflection. In Doughty, C. & Williams, J. (Eds.), Focus on form in classroom second language acquisition (pp. 64–81). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Swain, M., & Lapkin, S. (1998). Interaction and second language learning: Two adolescent French immersion students working together. The Modern Language Journal, 82, 320–337.Google Scholar
Swain, M., & Lapkin, S. (2000). Task-based second language learning: The uses of the first language. Language Teaching Research, 4, 251–274.Google Scholar
Tarone, E., & Swain, M. (1995). A sociolinguistic perspective on second language use in immersion classrooms. The Modern Language Journal, 79, 166–178.Google Scholar
Tedick, D. J., & Young, A. I. (2016). Fifth grade two-way immersion students’ responses to form-focused instruction. Applied Linguistics, 37 (6), 784–807.Google Scholar
Thompson, R., & Jackson, S. (1998). Ethical dimensions of child memory research. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 12, 218–224.Google Scholar
Tognini, R., & Oliver, R. (2012). L1 use in primary and secondary foreign language classrooms and its contribution to learning. In Alcón Soler, E. & Jordá, M. P. Safont (Eds.), Discourse and learning across L2 instructional contexts (pp. 53–78). Amsterdam, The Netherlands: Rodopi.Google Scholar
Unsworth, S. (2005). Child L1, child L2 and adult L2 acquisition: Differences and similarities. In Brugos, A., Micciulla, L., & Smith, C. E. (Eds.), Proceedings of the 28th annual Boston University conference on language development (pp. 633–644). Somerville, MA: Cascadilla.Google Scholar
Unsworth, S., de Bot, K., Persson, L., & Prins, T. (2012, December 13). Foreign languages in primary school project. Proceedings of the foreign languages in primary schools projects: Presentation results FLiPP-research. Amersfoort, The Netherlands.Google Scholar
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
White, L., Spada, N., Lightbown, P., & Ranta, L. (1991). Input enhancement and L2 question formation. Applied Linguistics, 12 (4), 416–423.Google Scholar
Wong-Fillmore, L. (1976). The second time around: Cognitive and social strategies in second language acquisition (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Stanford University, Palo Alto, CA.Google Scholar
Woodhead, M., & Faulkner, D. (2008). Subject, objects or participants? Dilemmas of psychological research with children. In Christensen, P. & James, A. (Eds.), Research with children: Perspectives and practice (pp. 10–39). New York, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar