This article is intended to establish a framework for the formulation of a comprehensive theory of second language learning in which theories of first and second language learning may combine to form a unified theory. It proceeds through a critical assessment of currently one of the foremost theories, the monitor model (Krashen, 1982). Each of Krashen's five hypotheses is considered, and counteropinions, fortified with the results of research, are presented. The article concludes with a call for a more comprehensive theory that accounts for the diverse ways in which people develop their ability to use a second language.

Models of the second language acquisition process have not specifically elaborated on the nature of the learner's perception and processing of target language input, a process known as intake. They have typically failed to specify the mechanisms or variables involved in the intake process or to distinguish between the stages of processing input from perception, to comprehension, to assimilation into an interlanguage grammar. Research and theoretical models from L1 psycholinguistic literature have been neglected. Recent L1 and L2 research on language processing are compared, and experimental methods for eliciting data to confirm them are discussed.

This paper offers an examination of classroom language learning from the perspectives of research and teaching. It addresses two questions: (1) What are the specific contributions of the classroom to the process of language development?; and (2) In what ways might the teacher exploit the social reality of the classroom as a resource for the teaching of language? The paper explores the classroom as a special social situation and identifies certain aspects of classroom language learning that seem to be neglected by current research. It offers also new directions for research and proposals for language teaching deduced from particular social and psychological characteristics of classroom life.

This paper is intended as a programmatic contribution to the work of a number of scholars in second language acquisition (SLA) who are attempting to explain various facts about SLA in terms of an interaction between native-language transfer and language universals (Gass & Selinker, 1983). In the present paper, some of the theoretical assumptions and consequences of the Markedness Differential Hypothesis (MDH) (Eckman, 1977) are discussed in comparison with the Contrastive Analysis Hypothesis. Crucial differences between the two hypotheses are presented, and empirical evidence in favor of the MDH is reviewed. Pedagogical implications of the MDH are then taken up, and a strategy for interlanguage-intervention is discussed in light of an empirical study. Finally, several problems for the MDH which have been proposed in the literature are considered.

The aim of this paper is to demonstrate the role played by linguistic universals in second language acquisition. Research reported here focuses on the acquisition of dative structures and dative questions in a passive context in English by French and Inuit (Eskimo) students. Data were also elicited from native English-speaking students to serve as the norm. The data are interpreted within the theory of markedness and core grammar, as well as Case theory. The results of the testing, showing that unmarked forms are acquired before marked ones, are consistent with the predictions made by the theory of markedness and the property of adjacency which is crucial for Case assignment.

The paper begins to explore the nature of the cognitive processing involved in foreign language learning. The notion of a “discourse world” as a set of elements against the background of which a unit of talk makes sense is introduced, and the claim is made that several such “discourse worlds” may be seen to coexist in classroom discourse, in part because of participants' “awareness” (on some level) of why they are there. The notion of a discourse world is then given a psychological interpretation in terms of frame-theory, and the view is argued that the simultaneous activation of several such frames is central to the business of understanding language, and to language learning. The classroom, it is argued, offers rich opportunities for the training of such multi-level perception of foreign language input, with consequent gains in learning. From this perspective Krashen's Monitor Theory is found implausible.

This study builds upon prior research dealing with the nature of discourse involving non-native speakers. In particular, we examine variables influencing native speaker foreigner talk and the form that speech modification takes. The data bases are (1) 80 taped telephone interviews between NNSs at two distinct proficiency levels, (interviewer) and NSs (interviewee), and (2) 20 NS-NS interviews. We consider five variables: 1) negotiation of meaning, 2) quantity of speech, 3) amount of repair (following a specific NNS request for repair), 4) elaborated responses, and 5) transparent responses. We find that the speech of NSs changes as a function of an NNS's ability to understand and be understood. We further suggest a general cognitive principle—transparency—underlying aspects of both foreigner talk and second language acquisition.

Un bilan des recherches consacrées à l'apprentissage de l'intonation française montre que cet aspect est souvent négligé. Pourtant l'étude de l'interlangue intonative est intéressante à plus d'un titre. Suite à l'élaboration d'une procédure d'observation, on présente les premières données relatives à l'étude d'un corpus de 25 énoncés français lus par 3 groupes de 15 étudiants anglophones. Cette étude a permis de montrer l'existence d'un ordre d'acquisition des formes linguistiques étudiées ainsi qu'un processus de fossilisation de ces dernières.

The primary goal of this research was to compare the improvement in the second language skills of listening, speaking, reading, and writing among fourth semester French students enrolled in a content course taught in French and similar level students enrolled in a traditional fourth semester French course where the focus was primarily on the teaching of the language itself. The research used a non-equivalent pretest-posttest design and the results were analyzed using an analysis of covariance to determine mean gain scores of intact experimental and control sections of fourth semester students on the MLA Cooperative French Test. Results showed significant improvement for the experimental group in three of the four skills (listening, speaking, writing) and in two (listening and writing) for the control group. When compared to each other, the experimental group significantly outperformed the control group in the speaking skill while the latter significantly outperformed the experimental group in the writing skill. Attitudinal results showed a significantly more positive attitude toward the study of French among the experimental group. The study is important because it challenges the conventional assumptions regarding the way L2 skills are acquired and improved, and offers the student a valuable time and money saving option since he or she might be able to study a specific content while simultaneously improving L2 skills.

Studies have shown that less fluent non-native readers cannot make full use of semantic-level cues. Non-natives direct proportionately more attention than natives to syntactic and graphophonic information. This study asked whether a similar difference would be found between native and non-native listeners. Three groups were tested: native English-speakers and advanced and intermediate non-natives. After hearing a text, subjects were given a 55-item cloze test. It was hypothesized that with a subject's increased proficiency in the language, processing would show progressively greater attention to semantic than to syntactic or phonological cues. The cloze test was scored using a diagnostic scoring procedure developed by Clarke and Burdell (1977). Results confirmed the hypothesis. Semantically acceptable responses increased progressively for intermediate, advanced, and native groups, while responses based on syntactic structure decreased.

This article takes a social-theoretical view of the reality created by a foreign language in the classroom. It examines the interaction of teacher and learners in their various activities along a continuum that extends from instructional to natural discourse and is determined by the way participants present themselves to one another and negotiate turns-at-talk, topics, and repairs. Suggestions are made for broadening and diversifying the discourse options in the classroom to enrich the social context of the language learning experience.

Although this is not standard SSLA practice, weare pleased to publish these two complementary reviews of a collective volume that, while it focuses on creolization and pidginization, addresses issues relevant to the social context of second language acquisition. Seldom dowe have the opportunity of having two leading specialists in a particular field apply to the same work different theoretical perspectives and varying familiarity with areas of the field.

Schachter (1974) drew attention to the importance, in error analysis, of examining not only the L2 forms actually produced by the learners of a foreign language in their attempts to express themselves in L2, but also the L2 forms they seem consistently to avoid using. She also noted the close interrelation between such avoidance phenomena and the Contrastive Analysis approach to L2 teaching and learning: avoidance is the reverse side of negative transfer, since learners tend to avoid using in L2 those structures that have no parallel in their L1 and therefore provide them with no pattern for transfer. Of course, as Kleinmann (1977) has pointed out, “avoidance” implies that the structure in question is known to (i.e., can be passively recognized by) the learners, but not freely used by them; failure to use a structure or word that is unknown to the learners is an indication merely of ignorance, not of learning difficulty. Now a prime constructive purpose of error analysis is (or should be) to identify the sources of a learner's difficulties, as a necessary preliminary to helping him or her overcome them. Hence the importance of genuine avoidance phenomena that, when properly identified, can throw light on what would otherwise remain hidden recesses of uncertainty in the learner's mind. Levenston (1971) has convincingly argued, with numerous illustrations, that avoidance (“under-representation” in his terminology) of various English “clause (or group) structures” by Hebrew-speaking learners of English can be explained by the lack of Hebrew “translation-equivalents” for the English structures in question and the learners' consequent choice of less appropriate but more L1-equivalent structures. However, since Levenston was concerned not with avoidance phenomena as such, but rather with the evidence they provide of L1 interference with L2 learning and their stylistic effect on the learner's L2, he took the phenomena in question as established facts (on the basis, presumably, of his own teaching experience), without attempting to examine their frequency and extent.

One way of characterizing communication in the FL classroom is in terms of what at a given time is in primary focus. Adopting a basic distinction between transactions with a focus on the FL code (meta transactions) and transactions with a focus on socio-literary or other non-linguistic content (content transactions), I argue that meta talk constitutes a largely neglected area of classroom research and address two aspects of this, each of which highlights significant aspects of meta talk: (1) The occurrence of scaffolded constructions, i.e., syntagms distributed over several turns at speech; and (2) the norms holding for talk about talk, i.e., what counts as an argument about the FL code. Following an exemplification from Danish classroom data (English and German as L2), I conclude by discussing the learning and pedagogical potential of each of these types of meta talk.

Much work in the field of second language acquisition (SLA) has focused on the linguistic adjustments made by native speakers (NSs) when speaking to non-native speakers (NNSs) of that language. Modifications of speech to NNSs are usually assumed to be an attempt to make the target language more comprehensible. The study of second language teachers' classroom discourse has contributed to a thorough description of such modifications, which in general may be termed foreigner talk (FT).

Repair, defined in this paper as modifications of trouble sources which have manifested themselves in the discourse, is an important activity in FL learning and communication, both in educational and non-educational contexts. It is argued that studies of repair in the FL classroom should include all repair activity rather than focus on one specific repair type, viz., the teacher's correction of learners' errors. In this study the four repair types suggested by Schegloff, Jefferson, and Sacks (1977) are analyzed, and a further distinction is made according to whether the trouble source is produced by the teacher or a learner. It is shown that different preferences for repair patterns vary with the type of classroom activity (language-centered vs. content-centered activities), and it is discussed how these preferences relate to repair in non-educational learner-native speaker discourse.

Two questions are fundamental to research on second language learning in instructional settings: (1) Does second language instruction have a positive influence on acquisition? and (2) If so, what factors in instruction make a difference, how, and for whom? This paper considers theory and research on second language classroom behavior that is aimed toward answering the second question, given evidence that the answer to the first one is affirmative.

Theory suggests that the provision of comprehensible input, a focus on formal aspects of the target language, and the learner's opportunity to practice the target language, all may contribute to L2 development. Empirical research is reviewed to explore what modifications of teacher speech might influence comprehensibility, whether amount of exposure to target forms is related to learners' development, and which instructional behaviors might lead to productive practice with and knowledge about the target language.