While there is a growing body of research on second language acquisition (SLA) in children, adolescents, young and more mature adults, much remains to be explored about how adults in later life learn a new language and how good additional language learning is for them. Our goal in this article is to survey and evaluate what is known about the linguistic, socio-affective, neurobiological and cognitive underpinnings of the second language (L2) learning process in older individuals, the extent to which L2 acquisition may be seen as contributing to healthy and active ageing, and how these phenomena are to be approached scientifically, methodologically and pedagogically. Our view is that a developmental enterprise as complex as L2 learning in senior adulthood and its effects in later life cannot be explained by a single theory or set of principles. Furthermore, we take it that L2 acquisition in the third age needs to be regarded not just as a goal in itself but as a means of promoting social interaction and integration, and that it is partly through the stimulation of social well-being that its cognitive effects may potentially be observed.

Practitioner research is a flourishing area with a significant body of theoretical and empirical research, but often researchers remain isolated, unaware of impactful work by colleagues in related fields. Exploratory Practice (EP) is one innovative form, uniting creative pedagogy and research methods. The potential contributions have hitherto been neglected. EP's emphasis on puzzling and understanding is a means of demystifying occluded practices which place learners, teachers and researchers as co-investigators at the heart of the research-practice nexus. EP's radical positioning of learners as co-researchers, alongside teachers, teacher educators and others, means crossing boundaries – (re-)negotiating identities, in language learning/teaching/researching – thus raising epistemological challenges for the field. The contribution of this state-of-the-art article is to provide a meta-analysis of these themes and challenges, critically analysing the complexities involved as the paradigms of research, practice and practitioner research shift from research-as-practice towards practice-as-research.

This review surveys and synthesizes the findings of 87 focal pieces, published primarily since 2009 and mid 2018, on the formal and informal use of social media—blogs, wikis, and social networking—for second and foreign language teaching and learning (L2TL), including studies on the use of educational sites like Livemocha and Busuu and vernacular sites like Facebook and Twitter. The article frames the review in the development of social media and the history of social computer-assisted language learning (CALL) research. Synthesis identifies common findings, including that social media can afford the development of intercultural, sociopragmatic, and audience awareness, language learner and user identities, and particular literacies. Presentation of the focal pieces and common findings is intertwined with discussion of problematic issues, and each section concludes with a summary and implications for future research and practice.

The topic of language teacher identity receives strong attention in current scholarly literature. Understanding the complexities of identities that second/foreign language teachers construct is crucial because the ways teachers perceive themselves as professionals impact teacher development (e.g., Kanno & Stuart, 2011*), interactions with peers and colleagues (e.g., Kayi-Aydar, 2015*), pedagogical choices or classroom practices (e.g., Duff & Uchida, 1997*), and access to power and ownership of language (De Costa & Norton, 2017*; Varghese et al., 2016*), ultimately undergirding or undermining second/foreign language teaching (Varghese et al., 2016*).

South Africa's history of segregation and the privileging of English and Afrikaans as the only languages of teaching and learning beyond primary schooling, make the post-apartheid period a complex one, especially in light of the Constitutional commitment to multilingualism in the 11 official languages. Research on literacy and language teaching contextualises the impact of curriculum and language policy initiatives aimed at improving learner performance. We review research concerning the transition from the study of first additional language (FAL) as subject, to the use of FAL as the language of learning and teaching (LoLT). Also considered are major studies on learner performance nationally and South Africa's comparability globally. The impact of home language (HL) literacy development on performance in English as the LoLT links to research on language development in teacher education programmes, and shows connections between the capacity of teachers to develop languages for literacy and LoLT and learner success. Research on the development of early childhood literacy in the HL demonstrates the positive impact on literacy development in the LoLT.

Writing has generally been perceived as a solitary activity, completed by the writer working alone. Yet, over the years we have witnessed a growing interest among researchers and educators in Collaborative Writing, an activity that can be simply defined as the involvement of two or more writers in the production of a single text. This interest has been driven by two main factors. The first factor is the nature of workplace writing. Studies (e.g. Ede & Lunsford 1990; Mirel & Spilka 2002) have shown that in a number of workplaces, writing is often completed in teams rather than individually. The second factor is the advent of Web 2.0 applications such as blogs, wikis, and Google Docs, which have transformed literacy practices, making the creation and sharing of texts easier and more readily acceptable (Hyland 2016; Vandergriff 2016). In the field of second language (L2) learning, interest in collaborative writing was also spurred by early research conducted by Swain and her colleagues (e.g. Swain & Lapkin 1995; Swain 1998; see also timeline for additional references) showing the language learning opportunities of communicative tasks which involve joint written output (e.g. Dictogloss).

We often hear language teachers say ‘Don't confuse me with theories, just give me practical ideas I can take into the classroom’. Many teacher educators and researchers, on the other hand, believe that (research-based) theory is more important, and should be used and implemented by practitioners. This paper will propose an approach to the use of theory and practice in teacher education that may help to resolve this dissonance. After some preliminary definitions and clarification of some common confusions, it is suggested that theory and practice in the context of language teaching are not polar opposites, but points on a continuum: any statement or guideline about teaching can be, more or less, practical or theoretical. The rest of the paper will focus on the questions how the various types of published theories or teacher theorizing can contribute to professional expertise, what is the place of practical tips or recipes, and how all these can be used or combined in teacher education courses to bring about optimal learning by novice teachers, or increased expertise on the part of the more experienced ones.

Although there is a large and increasing body of research on the use of corpus data by language teachers and learners, the language teachers in question are also the researchers reporting on their use of corpora with their own learners. There is thus a gap, which this plenary speech addresses, between this research and the practice of language teachers who are not corpus linguists. After a brief account of the successful integration of corpus data in the production of language learning resources such as dictionaries, grammars and course books, the potential benefits of having direct access to corpora by teachers and learners are discussed. Following this, a number of publications on the use of corpora in the language classroom, both in higher education and at secondary level, are examined, focussing on how easy or difficult it would be for teachers to replicate the use of corpus data in their own classrooms. This leads to a final section where possible solutions to the research–practice gap are considered, involving language teacher education, publishers of course books, and research involving the use of corpora in the classroom by language teachers who are not also corpus linguists.

Teaching English for academic purposes (EAP) and for specific purposes (ESP) are demanding areas in which to work. Teaching in these areas typically includes a range of tasks, such as investigating learner needs and specialist discourse, developing courses and materials in addition to classroom teaching. Therefore, teachers face a range of tasks which often require additional knowledge and skills. To date, the literature in EAP and ESP has tended to foreground the needs of learners and background the learning and knowledge needs of teachers. This plenary reviews themes in the literature on teacher education in ESP and reports on two research studies that investigated the practices and perspectives of experienced ESP and EAP teachers. Findings from the studies are discussed in relation to teacher education needs in this field.

This overview of seven years of research on language learning and teaching in Austria reflects a period of steady growth for the language teaching and learning research community, a development due to a national policy agenda aiming for a stronger research base in teacher education. The target languages of the teaching and learning processes investigated are primarily German, English, French, Italian, Spanish as well as several Slavic languages, reflecting the geographical, sociolinguistic and language policy situation of this increasingly multilingual country. This multilingualism means there are clearly many more first languages (L1s) than only German involved in the learning situations investigated. While all the studies reviewed here illustrate research driven by a combination of local and global concerns in connection with different theoretical frameworks, some specific clusters of research interest emerge. These are: societal and individual multilingualism, language education policy, language teacher education, language(s) in other subjects, early language learning, language acquisition and learning, literature and culture, testing and standardisation, digital media, and teaching materials.

Those who have advocated social approaches to applied linguistics have often been critical of the individualism of second language acquisition (SLA) research. This paper identifies the emergence of a more balanced view of the social and individual in recent work. Adopting Berger's (1972) metaphor of ‘ways of seeing’, it offers a history of applied linguistics based on three eras: the era of ‘the invisible learner’, the era of ‘learner-centredness’, and the era of ‘person-centredness’, which we may now be entering. It suggests dominant research methodologies have led to the particular ways of seeing language learners that are characteristic of each of the three eras. In spite of the critique of individualism, the preference for individual case studies in social approaches is leading to a new theoretical focus on the individual that may be best captured by the term ‘person-centredness’.

Getting published in academic journals is increasingly important for research students in terms of gaining employment when they complete their studies and, in the future, for tenure and promotion applications once they have obtained an academic appointment. In this paper, I discuss some of the challenges that student (and early career) writers face when submitting articles to academic journals and, in particular, how they might better understand and respond to the reports they receive on their work.

In referencing the title of Chris Candlin's (2008) plenary, this paper focuses on the continuing concern to align research and practice in applied linguistics, and more particularly in language for specific purposes (LSP) and professional communication. We examine how Candlin identified practices for trading places between research and practice and for creating synergies between them – and in so doing opened up new spaces for enquiry and understanding in the field. We identify and critically examine four approaches that Candlin developed to promote the alignment of research and practice: through particular research tools and methodologies, through the investigation of professional settings and inter-domain constructs (such as quality, trust and risk), through a concern with both rigour and relevance in relation to research and training, and through a focus on ‘critical moments of interaction’ in ‘crucial sites of engagement’ (Candlin 2008). To this end, we draw on the diverse domains and trajectories of enquiry outlined in the opening plenary symposium at the 4th Asia-Pacific Language for Specific Purposes & Professional Communication Association Conference from five standpoints: in recent impact case studies of professional communication in the Hong Kong context (Cheng 2017), in a ‘multi-perspectival’ account of Candlin's enacted philosophy of teaching and learning (Moore 2017), in examining the communicative basis of expertise (Sarangi 2017) and the concept of interdiscursivity (Jones 2017), and in the extensive fieldwork and analysis of workplace talk underlying the development of resources for new migrants in New Zealand (Holmes & Riddiford 2017). In conclusion, we pay tribute to an inspirational researcher and teacher whose influence will continue to impact applied linguistics for decades to come.

Multilingualism is widespread in the world today and English is, in many cases, one of the languages in the multilingual speaker's repertoire. English as a lingua franca (ELF) is used by multilingual speakers who can also communicate in other languages and use their multilingual and multicultural resources in creative ways. This paper aims at exploring the relationship between recent trends in multilingualism, particularly the proposal ‘Focus on Multilingualism’ and ELF. After a brief presentation of multilingualism as related to globalization and super-diversity, there will be an examination of the new trends that bring together the study of multilingualism in education and ELF. Then, similarities and differences between the two are discussed as related to the emerging paradigm that takes into consideration a new vision of language, speakers and repertoires and has translanguaging as a key concept. Translanguaging pedagogies based on the multilingual learner's repertoire are also discussed. The last section looks at achievements and challenges presented by the synergies that have been created and reinforced.

In virtually every research paper on this topic we come across we read that, in the particular context that the writer is operating, English as a medium of instruction (EMI) is on the increase. But what exactly is EMI? If we consider every classroom around the world in which learners are exposed to English language as their second language (L2) we are faced with a huge variety: English as a foreign language (EFL); Immersion, English for academic purposes; English for specific purposes, English for examination purposes, Content and language integrated learning (CLIL); content-based teaching; content-based language teaching, and so on. And then we have EMI. Here at the EMI Oxford Centre we define EMI as:

This definition was first used in Dearden (2015).

This paper firstly presents and examines the pedagogical intervention called Processing Instruction (PI). Secondly, it reviews and discusses the main findings of the empirical research conducted to measure the relative effects of PI. Current research trends within the PI research framework will be outlined. Experimental research investigating the effects of this pedagogical intervention in language teaching, and grammar instruction in particular, has primarily used listening and reading measures (so-called ‘off-line measures’) to elicit how learners comprehend and process sentences. On-line measurements, such as eye tracking and self-paced reading, have now been incorporated into PI research to measure language processing more directly. Finally, this paper provides specific guidelines and procedures for teachers on when and how to use PI.

This position paper builds on three of our earlier publications on the same subject (Jenkins & Leung 2014; Leung, Lewkowicz & Jenkins 2016; Jenkins & Leung 2017), as well as a number of conference papers we have given both jointly and individually. However, what we have not done up to this point is to propose alternatives to the large-scale standardized English tests administered by the major international examination boards, of which we have been so critical, despite the fact that we have been discussing other possibilities among ourselves for several years. The opportunity to publish a position paper on English language assessment therefore provided an ideal opportunity to present our alternatives, and this we do in the final part of the paper.

Academics are coming under increasing pressure to publish internationally. Given the global dominance of English, this very likely means publishing in English-medium journals and with publishers which publish in English. This raises the important question of the possible disadvantage of those scholars whose first language is not English and who therefore have the additional burden of having to develop adequate proficiency in an additional language, English. As a student of modern languages to university level and of other languages to rather lower levels of proficiency and as a teacher of English for academic purposes (EAP) and of English for research and publication purposes (ERPP), since I became aware of this issue, I have always believed this extra burden on the English as an additional language (EAL) academic writer to be a self-evident truth. Ken Hyland, however, in a recent book (Hyland, 2015) and an article titled ‘Academic publishing and the myth of linguistic injustice’ (Hyland, 2016a), has taken it upon himself to argue that such an assumption is ill-founded. Hyland argues that native-speakers (NSs) of English encounter the same difficulties as non-native speakers (NNSs) when it comes to academic writing, that ‘academic English is no one's first language’, and that it requires ‘deliberate learning’ by both NSs and NSs (p. 57). Native and non-native writers, Hyland implies, are on a level playing field when it comes to writing for publication, both groups having to jump the same hurdles.

Erlam & Ellis (2018) published, in Canadian Modern Language Review, an experimental study that investigated the effect of input-based tasks on the acquisition of vocabulary and markers of plurality by adolescent near-beginner learners of L2 (second language) French. The present paper reports an approximate replication of the original study with the aim of confirming or disconfirming the results.1 The research questions of both studies addressed the receptive acquisition of new vocabulary and the receptive and productive acquisition of markers of plurality resulting from instruction using input-based tasks. Both studies investigated near-beginner adolescent learners of French. The teacher, the students’ usual classroom teacher, was the same in both studies. In the replication study, a new, larger group of students were investigated, the length of the instruction was increased, involving the development of additional tasks, and productive as well as the receptive knowledge of the vocabulary items was assessed. The results of the replication study confirm and extend those of the original study. The teachers’ views about the role of input-based tasks with near-beginner learners remained constant in the two studies. The paper concludes with a discussion of the contribution that approximate replications can make to instructed second language acquisition research.