Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-tf8b9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-24T18:01:22.688Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Is the Second Language Acquisition discipline disintegrating?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  25 January 2012

Jan H. Hulstijn
Jan H. Hulstijn*
Affiliation:
Amsterdam Center for Language and Communication (ACLC), University of [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

After characterizing the study of second language acquisition (SLA) from three viewpoints, I try to answer the question, raised by DeKeyser (2010), of whether the SLA field is disintegrating. In answering this question, I first propose a distinction between SLA as the relatively fundamental academic discipline and SLA as the relatively applied field of language education. Instead of portraying the field in terms of quantitative or laboratory studies on the one hand, and qualitative or anthropological studies on the other, I will look at SLA in terms of theories that differ in their empirical basis. All scientific disciplines must create room for ideas or theories that do not yet lend themselves to empirical testing, but for a discipline to develop fruitfully it is crucial that nonempirical ideas do not outnumber the empirical. The fact that the number of empirical SLA theories is large is not in itself a problem: through the practices of rational ‘normal science’ (Kuhn 1962), the best theories (in terms of coherence, testability and scope) will rightfully come out on top.

Type
Plenary Speeches
Information
Language Teaching , Volume 46 , Issue 4 , October 2013 , pp. 511 - 517
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2012 

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

Chomsky, N. (1980). Rules and representations. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Corder, S. P. (1967). The significance of learner errors. International Review of Applied Linguistics 5, 161–169.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
DeKeyser, R. M. (2010). Where is our field going? Comments from the outgoing editor of Language Learning. The Modern Language Journal 94, 646–647.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ellis, R. (1994). The study of second language acquisition. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Jordan, G. (2004). Theory construction in second language acquisition. Amsterdam: Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Krashen, S. D. (1977). The Monitor Model for second language performance. In Burt, M., Dulay, H. & Finocchiaro, M. (eds.), Viewpoints on English as a second language. New York: Regents, 152–161.Google Scholar
Kuhn, T. S. (1962). The structure of scientific revolutions. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Long, M. H. (1993). Assessment strategies for SLA theories. Applied Linguistics 14, 225–249.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McLaughlin, B. (1978). The Monitor Model: Some methodological considerations. Language Learning 28, 309–332.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mitchell, R. & Myles, F. (1998). Second language learning theories. London: Arnold.Google Scholar
Ortega, L. (2009). Understanding second language acquisition. London: Hodder Education.Google Scholar
Popper, K. R. (1959). The logic of scientific discovery. London: Hutchinson.Google Scholar
Spada, N. (2010). Review of Ortega (2009). Studies in Second Language Acquisition 32, 651–652.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Squire, L. R. & Knowlton, B. J. (2000). The medial temporal lobe, the hippocampus, and the memory systems of the brain. In Gazzaniga, M. S. (ed.), The new cognitive neurosciences. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 765–779.Google Scholar
Towell, R. & Hawkins, R. (1994). Approaches to second language acquisition. Clevedon, UK: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
VanPatten, B. & Williams, J. (eds.) (2007a). Theories in second language acquisition: An introduction. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
VanPatten, B. & Williams, J. (2007b). Introduction: The nature of theories. In VanPatten, B. & Williams, J. (eds.), 1–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar