Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-b6zl4 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-24T17:45:59.365Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Acquisition Theory and Experimental Design

A Critique of Tomasello and Herron

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  07 November 2008

Maria-Luise Beck  and
Lynn Eubank
Maria-Luise Beck
Affiliation:
University of North Texas
Lynn Eubank
Affiliation:
University of North Texas
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

In their recent contribution on the Garden Path Technique, Tomasello and Herron (1989) suggested that the experimental results they obtained on this means of providing negative feedback lend support to a “cognitive comparison model” of second language (L2) acquisition, and they further hypothesize that it may be useful in eliminating other L2 overgeneralizations. The results Tomasello and Herron (henceforth TH) present are clearly interesting, for they appear to show that negative evidence—here, a special type of error correction—may be crucial in L2 learning. As promising as the TH results may be, however, there is reason to believe that they also should be viewed with caution. In the following, we provide some of the reasons why caution should be taken.

Type
Response
Information
Studies in Second Language Acquisition , Volume 13 , Issue 1 , March 1991 , pp. 73 - 76
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1991

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

Bley-Vroman, R. (1989). What is the logical problem of foreign language learning? In Gass, S. & Schachter, J. (Eds.), Linguistic perspectives on second language acquisition (pp. 41–68). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brown, J. D. (1988). Understanding research in second language learning. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Burmeister, H., Ufert, D., & Wode, H.. (1979). Zur Leistungsfähigkeit experimenteller Datenerhebungsverfahren bei Untersuchungen zum natürlichen Zweitsprachenerwerb. Linguistische Berichte, 64, 95–104.Google Scholar
Clark, H. H. (1973). The language-as-a-fixed-effect fallacy: A critique of language statistics in psychological research. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 12, 335–359.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ellis, R. (1986). Understanding second language acquisition. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
McGuigan, F. J. (1983). Experimental psychology: Methods of research. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
Nelson, K. E. (1987). Some observations from the perspective of the rare event cognitive comparison theory of language acquisition. In Nelson, K. E. & van Kleek, A. (Eds.), Children's language (Vol. 6, pp. 239–331). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Pinker, S. (1989). Learnability and cognition. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Tomasello, M., & Herron, C.. (1989). Feedback for language transfer errors. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 11, 385–395.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
White, L. (1989). Universal Grammar and L2 acquisition. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar