Cover not available
Part of
Interlanguage: Forty years later
Edited by ZhaoHong Han and Elaine Tarone
[Language Learning & Language Teaching 39] 2014
► pp. 105–126

Chapter 5. The limits of instruction

40 years after “Interlanguage”

| Michigan State University
This chapter argues that Selinker’s (1972) claim that instruction does not significantly affect interlanguage development is essentially correct. Reviewing general research on instructed second language acquisition as well as some recent research of my own, I argue that instructed SLA to date has failed to consider underlying constraints and processes in interlanguage development. In addition, I argue that the fundamental problem in instructed SLA is its overall focus on the acquisition of “rules”; that is, rules are not acquired from the input. Instead, learners process morpho-phonological units in the speech stream and assemble language over time. Rules, if they exist, evolve; they cannot be the object of instruction or input processing.
Published online: 30 April 2014
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/lllt.39.07ch5
References (42)
References
Alonso-Ovalle, L., Fernández-Solera, S., Frazier, L., & Clifton Jr., C. (2002). Null vs. overt pronouns and the topic-focus articulation in Spanish. Rivista Di Linguistica , 14(2), 151–169.Google Scholar
Atkinson, D. (Ed.) (2011). Alternative Approaches to Second Language Acquisition . New York, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar
Block, D. (2003). The Social Turn in Second Language Acquisition . Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.Google Scholar
Boeckx, C. (2011). Approaching parameters from below. In A. Di Sciullo & C. Boeckx (Eds.), The Biolinguistic Enterprise: New Perspectives on the Evolution and Nature of the Human Language Faculty (pp. 205–221). Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
de Graaff, R. (1997). Differential Effects of Explicit Instruction on Second Language Acquisition . The Hague: HAG.Google Scholar
Doughty, C. (2003). Instructed SLA: Constraints, compensation, and enhancement. In C. Doughty & M.H. Long (Eds.), The Handbook of Second Language Acquisition (pp. 256–310). Oxford: Blackwell. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ellis, R. (2005). Measuring implicit and explicit knowledge of a second language: A psychometric study. Studies in Second Language Acquisition , 27, 141–172. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2008). The Study of Second Language Acquisition . Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
Harley, H. & Noyer, R. (1999). Distributed morphology. Glot International , 4(4), 3–9.Google Scholar
Hulstijn, J. (2005). Theoretical and empirical issues in the study of implicit and explicit second-language learning. Studies in Second Language Acquisition , 27, 129–140. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kanno, K. (1998). Consistency and variation in second language acquisition. Second Language Research , 14, 376–388. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Keating, G.D., VanPatten, B., & Jegerski, J. (2011.) Who was walking on the beach? Anaphora resolution in Spanish heritage speakers and adult second language learners. Studies in Second Language Acquisition , 33, 193–221. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kessler, J., Liebner, M. & Mansouri, F. (2011.) Teaching. In M. Pienemann & J. Kessler (Eds.), Studying Processability Theory (pp. 149–156). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Krashen, S. D. (1982). Principles and Practice in Second Language Acquisition . New York, NY: Pergamon Press.Google Scholar
Lightbown, P.M., & Spada, N. (2013). How Languages Are Learned . Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
Montalbetti, M. (1984). After Binding: On the Interpretation of Pronouns . Unpublished PhD dissertation, MIT.Google Scholar
Norris, J.M., & Ortega, L. (2000). Effectiveness of L2 instruction: A research synthesis and quantitative meta-analysis. Language Learning , 50, 417–528. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pérez-Leroux, A.T., & Glass, W. (1999). Null anaphora in Spanish second language acquisition: Probabilistic versus generative approaches. Second Language Research , 15, 220–249. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Robinson, P. (1995). Aptitude, awareness and the fundamental similarity of implicit and explicit second language learning. In R. Schmidt (Ed.), Attention and awareness in foreign language learning (pp. 303–358). Honolulu, HI: University of Hawai’i at Manoa.Google Scholar
Rothman, J., & VanPatten, B. (2013). On multiplicity and mutual exclusivity: The case for different SLA theories. In M.P. García-Mayo, M.J. Gutiérrez-Mangado, & M. Martínez Adrián (Eds.), Contemporary Approaches to Second Language Acquisition (pp. 243–256). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Schwartz, B. (1998.) The second language instinct. Lingua , 106, 133–160. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Selinker, L. (1972.) Interlanguage. International Review of Applied Linguistics , 10, 209–230. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Skehan, P. (2012). Language aptitude. In S.M. Gass & A. Mackey (Eds.), The Routledge Handbook of Second Language Acquisition (pp. 381–395). New York, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar
Smith, M. C. & VanPatten, B. (in press). Instructed SLA as parameter setting: Evidence from earliest-stage learners of Japanese as L2. In C. Laval & M.J. Arche (Eds.), The Grammar Dimension in Instructed Second Language Acquisition: Theory, Research, and Practice . London: Bloomsbury Academic.
Spada, N., & Tomita, Y. (2010). Interactions between type of instruction and type of language feature: A meta-analysis. Language Learning , 60, 263–308. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sproat, R. (1998.) Morphology as component of module: Mapping principle approaches. In A. Spencer & A.M. Zwicky (Eds.), The Handbook of Morphology (pp. 335–348). Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Toribio, A.J. (2000). Setting parametric limits on dialectal variation in Spanish. Lingua , 10, 315–341. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Truscott, J., & Sharwood Smith, M. (2011). Input, intake, and consciousness: The quest for a theoretical foundation. Studies in Second Language Acquisition , 33, 497–528. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2004.) The effectiveness of grammar instruction: Analysis of a meta-analysis. English Language & Teaching , 28, 17–29.Google Scholar
VanPatten, B. (2004). Input processing in SLA. In B.VanPatten (Ed.), Processing Instruction: Theory, Research, and Commentary (pp. 1–31). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
(2010). The two faces of SLA: Mental representation and skill. International Journal of English Language Studies 10, 1–18.Google Scholar
(2011). Stubborn syntax: How it resists explicit teaching and learning. In C. Sanz & R. Leow (Eds.), Implicit and Explicit Language Learning: Conditions, Processing, and Knowledge (pp. 9–21). Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.Google Scholar
(2013). Mental representation and skill in instructed SLA. In J. Schwieter (Ed.), Innovations in SLA, Bilingualism, and Cognition: Research and Practice . Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
(in press) Aptitude as grammatical sensitivity: Recent research on processing instruction. In C. Sanz & B. Lado (Eds.), Individual Differences, L2 Development and Language Program Administration: From Theory to Application . Washington DC: Georgetown University Press.
(forthcoming). Input processing by novice learners: Issues in the nature of processing and in research methods. In Z-H. Han & R. Rast (Eds.), First Exposure to a Second Language: Learners’ Initial Input Processing . Cambridge: CUP.
VanPatten, B., & Cadierno, T. (1993). Explicit instruction and input processing. Studies in Second Language Acquisition , 15, 225–243. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
VanPatten, B., & Fernández, C. (2004). The long-term effects of processing instruction. In B. VanPatten (Ed.), Processing Instruction: Theory, Research, and Commentary (pp. 273–289). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
VanPatten, B. (2010). The two faces of SLA: Mental representation and skill. International Journal of English Language Studies 10:1–18.Google Scholar
VanPatten, B. & Rothman, J. (in press). What does current generative theory suggest about the explicit-implicit debate? In R. Rebuchat (Ed.), Explicit and Implicit Learning of Languages . Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
VanPatten, B., Borst, S., Collopy, E., Qualin, A., & Price, J. (2013). Explicit information, grammatical sensitivity, and the First-noun Principle: A cross-linguistic study in processing instruction. The Modern Language Journal , 97, 504–525. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
VanPatten B, Keating G, & Leeser M (2012). Missing verbal inflections as a representational problem: Evidence from self-paced reading. Linguistic Approaches to Bilingualism , 2(2): 109–140. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
White, L. (2003). Second Language Acquisition and Universal Grammar . Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cited by (5)

Cited by five other publications

Han, ZhaoHong
2021. Corrective Feedback from Behaviorist and Innatist Perspectives. In The Cambridge Handbook of Corrective Feedback in Second Language Learning and Teaching, ► pp. 23 ff. DOI logo
Han, ZhaoHong
2022. Issues of narrowness and staticity in ISLA. Instructed Second Language Acquisition DOI logo
GRAUS, JOHAN & PETER–ARNO COPPEN
2017. The Interface Between Student Teacher Grammar Cognitions and Learner‐Oriented Cognitions. The Modern Language Journal 101:4 ► pp. 643 ff. DOI logo
VanPatten, Bill
2016. Why Explicit Knowledge Cannot Become Implicit Knowledge. Foreign Language Annals 49:4 ► pp. 650 ff. DOI logo
Tarone, Elaine
2015. Second Language Acquisition in Applied Linguistics: 1925–2015 and beyond. Applied Linguistics 36:4 ► pp. 444 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 24 october 2024. 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.