Article published in:
ITL - International Journal of Applied Linguistics
Vol. 131/132 (2001) ► pp. 139168
References
ALLEN, P., SWAIN, M., Harley, B. & Cummins, J.
(1990): Aspects of classroom treatment: Toward a more comprehensive view of second language education. In B. Harley, P. Allen, J. Cummins, and M. Swain (eds.) The Development of Bilingual Proficiency, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 57–81. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
ASTON, G.
(1986): Trouble-shooting in interaction with learners: The more the merrier? Applied Linguistics 7(2): 128–143. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
BARDOVI-HARLIG, K. & Bofman, T.
(1989): Attainment of syntactic and morphological accuracy by advanced language learners. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 111: 17–34. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
BRUTON, A. & SAMUDA, V.
(1980): Learner and teacher roles in the treatment of oral error in group work. RELC Journal 111: 49–63. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
BYGATE, M.
(1999a): Task as a context for the framing, refraining and uriframing of language. System 271: 33–48. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(1999b): Quality of language and purpose of task: Patterns of learners' language on two oral communication tasks. Language Teaching Research 3(3): 185–214. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
CELCE-MURCIA, M.
(1991): Grarnmar pedagogy in second and foreign language teaching. TESOL Quarterly 251: 459–480. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
CHAUDRON, C.
(1988): Second language classrooms. Research on teaching and learning, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
CROOKES, G.
(1990): The utterance and other basic units for second language discourse analysis. Applied Linguistics 11 (2): 183–199. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
CROOKES, G.V. & RULON, K.
(1985): Incorporation of corrective feedback in native speaker-non-native speaker conversation. Technical Report No. 3. Center for Second Language Classroom Research. Social Science Institute. University of Hawaii, Honolulu.Google Scholar
Doughty, C. & Williams, J.
(eds.) (1998): Focus on form in classroom second language acquisition, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
DUFF, P.
(1986): Another look at interlanguage talk: taking task to task In R. Day (ed.) Talking to learn: Conversation in second language acquisition, Rowley, MA: Newbury House, 147–181.Google Scholar
ELLIS, R.
(1994): The study of second language acquisition, Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
(1995): Interpretation tasks and grammar teaching. TESOL Quarterly 29(1): 87–106. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
FOTOS, S.
(1998): Shifting the focus from forms to form in the efl classroom. ELT Journal 52/4: 301–307. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
GARCIA MAYO, M.P.
(1997): Oral interaction among advanced EFL learners. Research project. The University of the Basque Country (UPV 103.130-HA087/97).Google Scholar
GARCIA MAYO, M.P. & Pica, T.
(2000a): L2 learner interaction in a foreign language setting: Are learning needs addressed? International Review of Applied Linguistics 38 (1): 35–58.Google Scholar
(2000b): ”Is the efl environment a language-learning environment? Working Papers in Educational Linguistics- University of Pennsylvania [in press].Google Scholar
GASS, S.
(1997): Input, interaction and the second language learner, Mahwah, N.J.: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
GASS, S. & Selinker, L.
(1994): Second language acquisition: An introductory course, Hillsdale, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
GASS, S. & VARONIS, E.M.
(1994): Input, interaction, and second language production. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 161: 283–302. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
GASS, S., MACKEY, A. & PICA, T.
(1998): The role of input and interaction in second language acquisition. The Modern Language Journal 82(iii): 299–307. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
GREEN, P.S. & HECHT, K.
(1993): Pupil self-correction in oral communication in English as a Foreign Language. System 21(2): 151–163. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
GUMPERZ, J.
(1964): Linguistic and social interaction in two communities. In J. Gumperz and Hymes, D. (eds) The ethnography of communication, American Anthropologist 66 (6): 137–154. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(1970): Verbal strategies in multilingual communication. In J. Alatis, J. (ed.) Report of the Twenty-first Annual Round Table Meeting on Linguistics and Language Studies (Monograph Series on Language and Linguistics). Reprinted in R. Abrahms & Troike, R. (eds.) (1972) Language, Culture and Education, Engle-wood Cliffs NJ: Prentice Hall, 184–196.Google Scholar
HARLEY, B.
(1992): Patterns of second language development in French immersion. Journal of French Language Studies 21: 159–183. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
HARLEY, B. and SWAIN, M.
(1984): The interlanguage of immersion students and its implications for second language teaching. In A. Davies, C. Criper and A. Howatt (eds.) Interlanguage, 291–311. Edinburgh, UK: Edinburgh University Press.Google Scholar
HOLLIDAY, L.
(1995): NS syntactic modifications in NS-NNS negotiations as input data for second language acquisition of syntax. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Pennsylvania.Google Scholar
HULSTIJN, J.
(1990): Appealing to consciousness in the L2 classroom. AILA Review 111: 57–68.Google Scholar
KASPER, G.
(1985): Repair in foreign language learning. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 71: 200–215. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
LIGHTBOWN, P. & SPADA, N.
(1993): How languages are learnt, Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
LINNELL, J.
(1995): Negotiation as a context for learning syntax in a second language. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Pennsylvania.Google Scholar
LONG, M.
(1996): The role of the linguistic environment in second language acquisition. In W.C. Ritchie & T.K. Bhatia (eds.) Handbook of second language acquisition, New York: Academic Press, 413–468.Google Scholar
(in press): Task-based language teaching, Oxford: Blackwell.
LONG, M. & CROOKES, G.
(1992): Three approaches to task-based syllabus design. TESOL Quarterly 261: 27–56. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
LONG, M. & ROBINSON, P.
(1998): Focus on form: Theory, research and practice. In C. Doughty and J. Williams (eds.)Google Scholar
LYSTER, R. & ranta, L.
(1997): Corrective feedback and learner uptake. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 191: 37–66. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
MCLAUGHLIN, B.
(1987): Theories of second language learning, London: Edward Arnold.Google Scholar
(1990): Restructuring. Applied Linguistics 111:113–128. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
MITCHELL, R. & MYLES, F.
(1998): Second language learning theories, London: Edward Arnold.Google Scholar
PICA, T.
(1994): Research on negotiation: What does it reveal about second language learning conditions, processes, and outcomes? Language Learning 44(3): 493–527. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(1998): Handout on interaction, negotiation and L2 learning. The University of Pennsylvania.Google Scholar
PICA, T. & DOUGHTY, C.
(1985): Input and interaction in the communicative classroom: A comparison of teacher-fronted and group activities. In S. Gass & Madden, C. (eds) Input in second language acquisition, Rowley, MA: Newbury House, 115–132.Google Scholar
PICA, T., YOUNG, R. & DOUGHTY, C.
(1987): The impact of interaction on comprehension. TESOL Quarterly 211: 737–758. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
PICA, T., HOLLIDAY, L., Lewis, N. & Morgenthaler, L.
(1989): Comprehensible output as an outcome of linguistic demands on the learner. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 111: 63–90. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
PICA, T., KANAGY, R. & Falodun, J.
(1993) :Choosing and using communication tasks for second language instruction and research. In G. Grookes & Gass, S. (eds.) Tasks and language learning: Integrating theory and practice, Clevedon: Multilingual Matters, 9–34.Google Scholar
PICA, T., LINCOLN-PORTER, F., PANINOS, F. & Linnell, J.
(1995): What can second language learners learn from each other? Only their researcher knows for sure. Working Papers in Educational Linguistics 11(1): 1–36.Google Scholar
PICA, T., LINCOLN-PORTER, F., Paninos, F. & Linnell, J.
(1996): Language learners' interaction: How does it address input, output and feedback needs of L2 learners? TESOL Quarterly 30(1): 59–84. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
SADOW, S.A.
(1982): Idea bank: Creative activities for the language class, Rowley, MA: Newbury House.Google Scholar
SAVIGNON, S.
(1991): Communicative language teaching: State of the art. TESOL Quarterly 25(2): 261–277. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
SCHEGLOFF, E., JEFFERSON, G. & SACKS, H.
(1977): The preference for self-correction in the organization of repair in conversation. Language 531: 361–382. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
SCHMIDT, R.W.
(1990): The role of consciousness in second language learning. Applied Linguistics 11 (2): 129–158. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(1993): Awareness and second language acquisition. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics 1992, 131: 206–226. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(1994): Implicit learning and the cognitive unconscious. In N. Ellis (ed.) Implicit and explicit learning of languages, London: Academic Press, 165–209.Google Scholar
SPADA, N. & LIGHTBOWN, P.
(1989): Intensive esl programs in Quebec primary schools. TESL Canada Journal 71: 11–32. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
STORCH, N.
(1998): A classroom-based study: Insights from a collaborative text reconstruction task. ELT Journal 52/4: 291–300. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
SWAIN, M.
(1985): Communicative competence: Some roles of comprehensible input and comprehensible output in its development”. In S. Gass & Madden, C. (eds.) Input in second language acquisition, Rowley, MA: Newbury House, 235–253.Google Scholar
(1988): Manipulating and complementing content teaching to maximize second language learning TESL Canada Journal 61: 68–83. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(1991): French immersion and its offshoots: Getting two for one. In B.F. Freed (ed.) Foreign language acquisition research and the classroom, Lexington, MA: D.C. Heath, 91–103.Google Scholar
(1993): The output hypothesis: Just speaking and writing aren't enough. The Canadian Modern Language Review 501: 158–164. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(1995): Three functions of output in second language learning. In G. Cook & Seidlhofer, B., (eds.) Principles and practice in applied linguistics: Studies in honour of H. G. Widdowson, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 125–144.Google Scholar
(1998): Focus on form through conscious reflection. In C. Doughty and J. Williams (eds.) Focus on form in classroom second language acquisition, 64–81. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
SWAIN, M. & LAPKIN, S.
(1995): Problems in output and the cognitive processes they generate: A step towards second language learning. Applied Linguistics 161: 371–391. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
THORNBURY, S.
(1997): Reformulation and reconstruction tasks that promote noticing. ELT Journal 51(4): 326–335. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
UR, P.
(1996)[1981]: Discussions that work, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
WILLIAMS, J.
(1995): Focus on form in communicative language teaching: Research fhidings and the classroom teacher. TESOL Journal 121–16.Google Scholar
(1999): Learner-generated attention to form. Language Learning 49(4): 583–625. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Cited by

Cited by 1 other publications

del Pilar Garcı́a Mayo, Marı́a
2002. Interaction in advanced EFL pedagogy: a comparison of form-focused activities. International Journal of Educational Research 37:3-4  pp. 323 ff. Crossref logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 15 april 2022. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.