Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-2brh9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-27T19:24:04.686Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The path I took

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  23 September 2016

Susan Gass
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

A professional journey is always part personal and mine is no exception. How does an individual from the Midwest of the United States get involved with language? It is something I have pondered for a long time along with the additional question of how that involvement translated into a profession. I hardly see it as a profession; rather, it was a life-long love of language that took me down a professional path.

Type
First Person Singular
Information
Language Teaching , Volume 49 , Issue 4 , October 2016 , pp. 578 - 591
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2016 

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

Bailey, N., Madden, C. & Krashen, S. (1974). Is there a ‘natural sequence’ in adult second language learning? Language Learning 24, 235–243.Google Scholar
Brown, G. (1999). Changing views of language in applied linguistics. Plenary presented at British Association of Applied Linguistics conference.Google Scholar
Cook, V. J. (1991). The poverty-of-the-stimulus argument and multi-competence, Second Language Research 7, 103–117.Google Scholar
Cook, V. J. (2016). Premises of multi-competence. In Cook, V. & Wei, L. (eds.) The Cambridge handbook of multi-competence. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1–2.Google Scholar
Cook, V. J. & Wei, L. (2016). The Cambridge handbook of multi-competence. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
de Bot, K. (2015). A history of applied linguistics: From 1980 to the present. London: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dulay, H. & Burt, M. (1973). Should we teach children syntax? Language Learning 23, 245–258.Google Scholar
Dulay, H. & Burt, M. (1974a). Natural sequences in child second language acquisition. Language Learning 24, 37–53.Google Scholar
Dulay, H. & Burt, M. (1974b). You can't learn without goofing. In Richards, J. (ed.), Error analysis: Perspectives on second language acquisition. London: Longman, 95–123.Google Scholar
Gass, S. (1983). Second language acquisition and language universals. In R. DiPietro, W. Frawley & A. Wedel (eds.), The first Delaware symposium on language studies: Selected papers. Newark: University of Delaware Press, 249‒260.Google Scholar
Gass, S. (1984). A review of interlanguage syntax: Language transfer and language universals. Language Learning 34.2, 115‒132.Google Scholar
Gass, S. (1988). Second language acquisition and linguistic theory: The role of language transfer. In Flynn, S. & O'Neil, W. (eds.), Linguistic theory in second language acquisition. Dordrecht: Reidel, 384‒403.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gass, S. (1989). Language universals and second language acquisition. Language Learning 39, 497‒534.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gass, S. with Behney, J. & Plonsky, L. (2013). Second language acquisition: An introductory course (4th edn.). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Gass, S. & Ard, J. (1980). L2 data: Their relevance for language universals. TESOL Quarterly 14, 443‒452.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gass, S. & Ard, J. (1984). Second language acquisition and the ontology of language universals. In Rutherford, W. (ed.), Second language acquisition and language universals, Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 33‒68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gass, S. & Mackey, A. (2014). Input, interaction and output in second language acquisition. In VanPatten, B. & Williams, J. (eds.), Theories in second language acquisition (2nd edn.). New York: Routledge, 180‒206.Google Scholar
Gass, S. & Mackey, A. (2015). Second language research: Methodology and design (2nd edn.). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Gass, S. & Madden, D. (eds.) (1985). Input in second language acquisition. Rowley, MA: Newbury House.Google Scholar
Gass, S. & Schachter, J. (1989). Introduction . In Gass, S. & Schachter, J. (eds.), Linguistic perspectives on second language acquisition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1‒9.Google Scholar
Gass, S. & Selinker, L. (1983). Language transfer in language learning. Rowley, MA: Newbury House.Google Scholar
Gass, S., Fleck, C., Leder, N. & Svetics, I. (1998). Ahistoricity revisited: Does SLA have a history? Studies in Second Language Acquisition 20, 407‒421.Google Scholar
Hulstijn, J., Young, R., Ortega, L., Bigelow, M., DeKeyser, R., Ellis, N., Lantolf, J., Mackey, A. & Talmy, S. (2014). Bridging the gap: Cognitive and social approaches to research in second language learning and teaching. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 36, 361‒421.Google Scholar
Indefrey, P. (2006). A meta-analysis of hemodynamic studies on first and second language processing: Which suggested differences can we trust and what do they mean? Language Learning 56 (suppl.1), 279‒304.Google Scholar
Kellerman, E. (1979). Transfer and non-transfer: Where we are now. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 2, 37–57.Google Scholar
Krashen, S. (1977). Some issues relating to the monitor model. In Brown, H., Yorio, C. & Crymes, R. (eds.), On TESOL '77: Teaching and learning language: Trends in research and practice. Washington, DC: Teachers of English to Speakers of Other Languages, 144–158.Google Scholar
Krashen, S. (1982). Principles and practice in L2 acquisition. London: Pergamon.Google Scholar
Lado, R. (1957). Linguistics across cultures. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.Google Scholar
Lee, J., Jang, J. & Plonsky, L. (2015). The effectiveness of second language pronunciation instruction: A meta-analysis. Applied Linguistics 36, 345‒366.Google Scholar
Li, S. (2010). The effectiveness of corrective feedback in SLA: A meta-analysis. Language Learning 60, 309‒365.Google Scholar
Linck, J., Osthus, P., Koeth, J. & Bunting, M. (2014). Working memory and second language comprehension and production: A meta-analysis. Psychonomic Bulletin Review 21, 861‒883.Google Scholar
Mackey, A. & Goo, J. (2007). Interaction research in SLA: A meta-analysis and research synthesis. In Mackey, A. (ed.), Conversational interaction in L2 acquisition: A series of empirical studies. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 407‒453.Google Scholar
Mackey, A., Abbuhl, R. & Gass, S. (2012). Interactionist approach. In Gass, S. & Mackey, A. (eds.), Handbook of second language acquisition. New York: Routledge, 7‒23.Google Scholar
Norris, J. M., Plonsky, L., Ross, S. J. & Schoonen, R. (2015). Guidelines for reporting quantitative methods and results in primary research. Language Learning 65, 470‒476.Google Scholar
Norris, J. & Ortega, L. (2000). Effectiveness of L2 instruction: A research synthesis and quantitative meta-analysis. Language Learning 50, 417‒528.Google Scholar
Oswald, F. L. & Plonsky, L. (2010). Meta-analysis in second language research: Choices and challenges. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics 30, 85‒110.Google Scholar
Papi, M. & Teimouri, Y. (2014). Language learner motivational types: A cluster analysis study. Language Learning 64, 493‒525.Google Scholar
Plonsky, L. (2011). The effectiveness of second language strategy instruction: A meta-analysis. Language Learning 61, 993‒1038.Google Scholar
Plonsky, L. (2012). Replication, meta-analysis, and generalizability. In Porte, G. (ed.), Replication research in applied linguistics. New York: Cambridge University Press, 116‒132.Google Scholar
Plonsky, L. (2013). Study quality in SLA: An assessment of designs, analyses, and reporting practices in quantitative L2 research. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 35, 655‒687.Google Scholar
Plonsky, L. (2014). Study quality in quantitative L2 research (1990–2010): A methodological synthesis and call for reform. The Modern Language Journal 98, 450‒470.Google Scholar
Plonsky, L. (2015). Quantitative considerations for improving replicability in CALL and applied linguistics. CALICO Journal 32, 232‒244.Google Scholar
Plonsky, L. (ed.) (2016). Advancing quantitative methods in second language research. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Plonsky, L. & Brown, D. (2015). Domain definition and search techniques in meta-analyses of second language research (Or why 18 meta-analyses of feedback have different results). Second Language Research 31, 267‒278.Google Scholar
Plonsky, L. & Gass, S. (2011). Quantitative research methods, study quality and outcomes: The case of interaction research, Language Learning 61, 325‒366.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Plonsky, L. & Oswald, F. L. (2012). How to do a meta-analysis. In Mackey, A. & Gass, S. M. (eds.), Research methods in second language acquisition: A practical guide. London: Basil Blackwell, 275‒295.Google Scholar
Plonsky, L. & Oswald, F. L. (2014). How big is ‘big’? Interpreting effect sizes in L2 research. Language Learning 64, 878‒912.Google Scholar
Russell, J. & Spada, N. (2006). Corrective feedback makes a difference: A meta-analysis of the research. In Norris, J. & Ortega, L. (eds.), Synthesizing research on language learning and teaching. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 133‒164.Google Scholar
Sharwood Smith, M. (1978). Strategies, language transfer and the simulation of the second language learner's mental operations. Unpublished manuscript.Google Scholar
Shintani, N., Li, S. & Ellis, R. (2013). Comprehension-based versus production-based grammar instruction: A meta-analysis of comparative studies. Language Learning 63, 296‒329.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Spada, N. & Tomita, Y. (2010). Interactions between type of instruction and type of language feature: A meta-analysis. Language Learning 60, 1‒46.Google Scholar
Spinner, P. & Gass, S. (in press). L2 acquisition and linguistics: A bidirectional perspective. Linguistics Vanguard 1, 227–233. DOI: 10.1515/lingvan-2014-1010 Google Scholar
Spolsky, B. (1968). Linguistics and language pedagogy – Applications or implications? In Alatis, J. E. (ed.), Twentieth annual round table meetings on languages and linguistics. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press, 143–155.Google Scholar
Thomas, M. (1998). Programmatic ahistoricity in L2 acquisition theory. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 20, 387‒405.Google Scholar
Thomas, M. (2013). The doctorate in second language acquisition: An institutional history. Linguistic Approaches to Bilingualism 3, 509‒531.Google Scholar
Ushioda, E. & Dörnyei, Z. (2012). Motivation. In Gass, S. & Mackey, A. (eds.), The Routledge handbook of second language acquisition. New York: Routledge, 396‒409.Google Scholar
Williams, J. N. (2012). Working memory and SLA. In Gass, S. & Mackey, A. (eds.), Handbook of second language acquisition. New York: Routledge, 427‒441.Google Scholar
Wode, H. (1977). On the systematicity of L1 transfer in L2 acquisition. Proceedings from 1977 L2 Research Forum (SLRF). Los Angeles: University of California, Department of Applied Linguistics, 160–169.Google Scholar
Zobl, H. (1980). The formal and developmental selectivity of L1 influence on L2 acquisition. Language Learning 30, 43–57.Google Scholar