Chapter published in:
Cross-theoretical Explorations of Interlocutors and their Individual Differences
Edited by Laura Gurzynski-Weiss
[Language Learning & Language Teaching 53] 2020
► pp. 4–16

Introducing cross-theoretical explorations of interlocutors and their individual differences

| Indiana University
Published online: 21 January 2020
https://doi.org/10.1075/lllt.53.01gur
References

References

Arabski, J., & Wojtaszek, A.
(Eds.) (2011) Aspects of culture in second language acquisition and foreign language learning. New York, NY: Springer Science & Business Media. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Atkinson, D.
(2011) A sociocognitive approach to second language acquisition: How mind, body, and world work together in learning additional languages. In D. Atkinson (Ed.), Alternative approaches to second language acquisition (pp. 143–166). New York, NY: Routledge. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Bayley, R., & Preston, D.
(Eds.) (1996) Second language acquisition and linguistic variation. Amsterdam, Netherlands: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Block, D.
(2003) The social turn in second language acquisition. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.Google Scholar
Cook, V.
(1999) Going beyond the native speaker in language teaching. TESOL Quarterly, 33(2), 185–209. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Dörnyei, Z., & Ryan, S.
(2015) The psychology of the language learner revisited. New York, NY: Routledge. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Douglas Fir Group
(2016) A transdisciplinary framework for SLA in a multilingual world. Modern Language Journal, 100(Supplement 2016), 19–47. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Drew, P.
(2005) Conversation analysis. In K. Fitch & R. Sanders (Eds.), Handbook of language and social interaction (pp. 71–102). New York, NY: Taylor & Francis.Google Scholar
Duff, P. A.
(2007) Second language socialization as sociocultural theory: Insights and issues. Language Teaching, 40(4), 309–319. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Ellis, N. C., & Larsen-Freeman, D.
(2006) Language emergence: Implications for applied linguistics. Applied Linguistics, 27, 558–589. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Firth, A., & Wagner, J.
(1997) On discourse, communication, and (some) fundamental concepts in SLA research. Modern Language Journal, 81(3), 285–300. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Frawley, W., & Lantolf, J.
(1985) Second-language discourse: A Vygotskyan perspective. Applied Linguistics, 61, 19–44. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Gass, S. M.
(2003) Input and interaction. In C. Doughty & M. H. Long (Eds.), The handbook of second language acquisition (pp. 224–225). Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Gass, S. M., & Mackey, A.
(2007) Input, interaction, and output in second language acquisition. In B. VanPatten & J. Williams (Eds.), Theories in second language acquisition: An introduction (pp. 175–199). New York, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar
Geeslin, K. L.
(2000) A new approach to the study of the SLA of copula choice. In R. Leow & C. Sanz (Eds.), Spanish applied linguistics at the turn of the millennium (pp. 50–66). Medford, MA: Cascadilla Press.Google Scholar
(2003) A comparison of copula choice in advanced and native Spanish. Language Learning, 53(4), 703–764. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(2011) Variation in L2 Spanish: The state of the discipline. Studies in Hispanic and Lusophone Linguistics, 4(2), 461–518. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Geeslin, K. L., & Long, A. Y.
(2014) Sociolinguistics and second language acquisition: Learning to use language in context. New York, NY: Routledge. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Gurzynski-Weiss, L.
(2013) Instructor characteristics and classroom-based SLA of Spanish. In K. L. Geeslin (Ed.), The handbook of Spanish second language acquisition (pp. 530–546). Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(2017a) L2 instructor individual characteristics. In S. Loewen & M. Sato (Eds.), The Routledge handbook of instructed second language acquisition (pp. 451–467). New York, NY: Routledge. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(Ed.) (2017b) Expanding individual difference research in the interaction approach: Investigating learners, instructors, and other interlocutors. Amsterdam, Netherlands: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(2017c) Instructor individual characteristics and L2 interaction. In L. Gurzynski-Weiss (Ed.), Expanding individual difference research in the interaction approach: Investigating learners, instructors, and other interlocutors (pp. 151–172). Amsterdam, Netherlands: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Gurzynski-Weiss, L., Geeslin, K. L., Daidone, D., Linford, B., Long, A. Y., Michalski, I., & Solon, M.
(2018) L2 classrooms as multifaceted sources of input: The synergy of variationist and usage-based approaches (pp. 293–313). In A. Tyler, L. Ortega, M. Uno, & H. I. Park (Eds.), Usage-inspired L2 instruction: Researched pedagogy. Amsterdam, Netherlands: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Gurzynski-Weiss, L., Long, A. Y., & Solon, M.
(Eds.) (2017) TBLT and L2 pronunciation: Do the benefits of tasks extend beyond grammar and lexis? [Special issue]. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 39(2). CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Han, Z.
(2016) A “reimagined SLA” or an expanded SLA? A rejoinder to The Douglas Fir Group. Modern Language Journal, 100(4), 736–740. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Hatch, E. M.
(1978) Second language acquisition. Rowley, MA: Newbury House.Google Scholar
Hulstijn, J. H., Young, R. F., Ortega, L., Bigelow, M., DeKeyser, R., Ellis, N. C., & Talmy, S.
(2014) Bridging the gap: Cognitive and social approaches to research in second language learning and teaching. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 36(3), 361–421. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Jackson, D. O., & Burch, A. R.
(Eds.) (2017) Complementary perspectives on task-based classroom realities [Special issue]. TESOL Quarterly, 51(3). CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Kasper, G., & Wagner, J.
(2011) A conversation-analytic approach to second language acquisition. In D. Atkinson (Ed.), Alternative approaches to second language acquisition (pp. 117–142). New York, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar
Lantolf, J. P.
(2011) The sociocultural approach to second language acquisition. In D. Atkinson (Ed.), Alternative approaches to second language acquisition (pp. 24–47). New York, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar
Lantolf, J. P., & Aljaafreh, A.
(1995) Second language learning in the zone of proximal development: A revolutionary experience. International Journal of Educational Research, 23(7), 619–632. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Lantolf, J. P., & Pavlenko, A.
(1995) Sociocultural theory and second language acquisition. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 15, 108–124. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Lantolf, J., & Thorne, S. L.
(2006) Sociocultural theory and the genesis of second language development. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Lantolf, J., Thorne, S. L., & Poehner, M. E.
(2015) Sociocultural theory and SLA. In B. VanPatten & J. Williams (Eds.), Theories in second language acquisition: An introduction (pp. 207–226). New York, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar
Larsen-Freeman, D.
(1997) Chaos/complexity science and second language acquisition. Applied Linguistics, 18(2), 141–165. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(2010) The dynamic co-adaption of cognitive and social views: A chaos/complexity theory perspective. In R. Batstone (Ed.), Sociocognitive perspectives on second language use/learning (pp. 40–53). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
(2011) A complexity theory approach to second language development/acquisition. In D. Atkinson (Ed.), Alternative approaches to second language acquisition (pp. 48–72). New York, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar
(2015) Complexity Theory. In B. VanPatten & J. Williams (Eds.), Theories in second language acquisition (pp. 227–244). New York, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar
(2017) Complexity Theory: The lessons continue. In L. Ortega & Z.-H. Han (Eds.), Complexity theory in language development: In celebration of Diane Larsen-Freeman (pp. 11–50). Amsterdam, Netherlands: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Larsen-Freeman, D., & Cameron, L.
(2008) Complex systems and applied linguistics. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Long, M. H.
(1996) The role of the linguistic environment in second language acquisition. In W. C. Ritchie & T. K. Bhatia (Eds.), Handbook of language acquisition (pp. 413–468). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.Google Scholar
(2006) Problems in second language acquisition. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Mackey, A.
(1999) Input, interaction, and second language development: An empirical study of question formation in ESL. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 21(4), 557–87. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(2012) Input, interaction, and corrective feedback in L2 learning. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Ortega, L.
(2013) SLA for the 21st century: Disciplinary progress, transdisciplinary relevance, and the bi/multilingual turn. Language Learning, 63(s1), 1–24. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(2014) Trying out theories on interlanguage: Description and explanation over 40 years of L2 negation research. In Z. Han & E. Tarone (Eds.), Interlanguage: Forty years later (pp. 173–202). Amsterdam, Netherlands: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Pawlak, M.
(Ed.) (2012) New perspectives on individual differences in language learning and teaching. New York, NY: Springer. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(2017) Overview of learner individual differences and their mediating effects on the process and outcome of L2 interaction. In L. Gurzynski-Weiss (Ed.), Expanding individual differences in the interaction approach: Investigating learners, instructors, and other interlocutors (pp. 19–40). Amsterdam, Netherlands: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle 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
Robinson, P.
(Ed.) (2002) Individual differences and instructed language learning. Amsterdam, Netherlands: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Schmidt, R. W.
(1990) The role of consciousness in second language learning. Applied Linguistics, 11(2), 129–158. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Schmidt, R.
(2001) Attention. In P. Robinson (Ed.), Cognition and second language instruction (pp. 3–32). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Schmidt, R., & Frota, S.
(1986) Developing basic conversational ability in a second language: A case study of an adult learner of Portuguese. In R. Day (Ed), Talking to learn: Conversation in second language acquisition (pp. 237–326). Rowley, MA: Newbury House.Google Scholar
Sheen, Y.
(2011) Corrective feedback, individual differences and second language learning. New York, NY: Springer. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Swain, M.
(1995) Three functions of output in second language learning. In G. Cook & B. Seidlhofer (Eds.), Principles and practice in the study of language: Studies in honor of H. G. Widdowson (pp. 125–44). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
(2005) The output hypothesis: Theory and research. In E. Hinkel (Ed.), Handbook on research in second language teaching and learning (pp. 471–84). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Tarone, E.
(2007) Sociolinguistic approaches to second language acquisition research 1997–2007. Modern Language Journal, 91, 837–848. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Vygotsky, L. S.
(1978) Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
White, L.
(1989) Universal grammar and second language acquisition. Amsterdam, Netherlands: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(2000) Second language acquisition and universal grammar. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
(2015) Linguistic theory, Universal Grammar, and second language acquisition. In B. VanPatten & J. Williams (Eds.), Theories in second language acquisition: An introduction (pp. 34–53). New York, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar