Cover not available
Part of
Widening Contexts for Processability Theory: Theories and issues
Edited by Anke Lenzing, Howard Nicholas and Jana Roos
[Processability Approaches to Language Acquisition Research & Teaching 7] 2019
► pp. 49–72

Chapter 3
Productive and receptive processes in PT

In this study, we investigate whether Processability Theory (Pienemann, 1998, 2005) accounts for reception data, and whether productive and receptive processing routines emerge simultaneously. Sixty-one learners of English as a second language (ESL learners) participate in an oral interview and self-paced reading (SPR) task targeting five stages of PT. Two analyses are performed: Implicational scaling and a comparison of individuals’ performance on the oral interview versus the SPR. The implicational table demonstrates that the SPR data do not clearly reflect the PT order, and the comparison data demonstrate that individuals’ performance on the oral production task does not match their performance on the SPR task. The results suggest that PT as currently formulated may not account for receptive data, and that productive and receptive processes may not always emerge simultaneously.
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.The current study
  • 3.The Procedural Skills Hypothesis
  • 4.The current study
    • 4.1Participants
    • 4.2Oral interview
    • 4.3Self-paced reading task
    • 4.4Implicational scaling
  • 5.Results
    • 5.1Group scores on self-paced reading
    • 5.2Implicational scaling results
    • 5.3Production versus comprehension: Individual results
  • 6.Discussion
  • 7.Conclusion
  • Acknowledgements
  • Notes
  • References
Published online: 28 November 2019
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/palart.7.03spi
References (24)
References
Bonilla, C. (2015). From number agreement to the subjunctive: Evidence for Processability Theory in L2 Spanish. Second Language Research 31(1), 53–74. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Brysbaert, M., & New, B. (2009). Moving beyond Kucera and Francis: A critical evaluation of current word frequency norms and the introduction of a new and improved word frequency measure for American English. Behavior Research Methods 41(4), 977–990. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Buyl, A., & Housen, A. (2015). Developmental stages in receptive grammar acquisition: A Processability Theory account. Second Language Research 31(4), 523–550. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Clahsen, H., & Hong, U. (1995). Agreement and null subjects in German L2 development: New evidence from reaction-time experiments. Second Language Research 11, 57–87. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Di Biase, B., & Kawaguchi, S. (2002). Exploring the typological plausibility of Processability Theory: Language development in Italian second language and Japanese second language. Second Language Research 18(3), 274–302. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Di Biase, B., Kawaguchi, S., & Yamaguchi, Y. (2015). The development of English as a second language. In C. Bettoni & B. Di Biase (Eds.), Grammatical development in second languages: Exploring the boundaries of Processability Theory (pp. 85–116). Paris: European Second Language Association.Google Scholar
Ellis, R. (2008). The study of second language acquisition (2nd ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Hatch, E., & Farhady, H. (1982). Research design and statistics for applied linguistics. Rowley, MA: Newbury House.Google Scholar
Hulstijn, J. H. (2015). Discussion: How different can perspectives on L2 development be? Language Learning 65(1), 210–232. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Just, M. A., Carpenter, P. A., & Woolley, J. D. (1982). Paradigms and processes in reading comprehension. Journal of experimental psychology: General 111(2), 228. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Keatinge, D., & Keßler, J-U. (2009). The acquisition of the passive voice in English as a foreign language: Production and perception. In D. Keatinge & J.-U. Keßler (Eds.), Research in second language acquisition: Empirical evidence across languages (pp. 41–68). Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars.Google Scholar
Keating, G., & Jegerski, J. (2015). Experimental designs in sentence processing research: A methodological review and user’s guide. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 37(1), 1–32. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Meisel, J., Clahsen, H., & Pienemann, M. (1981). On determining developmental stages in natural second language acquisition. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 3(2), 109–135. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pienemann, M. (1998). Language processing and second language development: Processability Theory. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2005). An introduction to Processability Theory. In M. Pienemann (Ed.), Cross–linguistic aspects of Processability Theory (pp. 1–60). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pienemann, M., Di Biase, B., & Kawaguchi, S. (2005). Extending Processability Theory. In M. Pienemann (Ed.), Cross-linguistic aspects of Processability Theory (pp. 199–251). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pienemann, M. (2009). A brief introduction to Processability Theory. In J.-U. Keßler (Ed.), Processability approaches to second language development and second language learning (pp. 9–29). Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars.Google Scholar
Pienemann, M., Keßler, J.-U., & Itani-Adams, Y. (2011). Comparing levels of processability across languages. International Journal of Bilingualism 15(2), 128–146. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rickford, J. (2002). Implicational scales. In J. K. Chambers, P. Trudgill, & N. Schilling-Estes (Eds.), The handbook of language variation and change (pp. 142–167). Malden, MA: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Sakai, H. (2008). An analysis of Japanese university students’ oral performance in English using Processability Theory. System 36, 534–549. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Spinner, P. (2011). Second language assessment and morphosyntactic development. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 33(4), 529–561. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. (2013). Language production and reception: A Processability Theory study. Language Learning 63(4), 704–739. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Spinner, P., & Jung, S. (2018). Production and comprehension in Processability Theory: A self-paced reading study. Studies in Second Language Acquisition. 40 (2), 295-318. DOI logo
VanPatten, B., & Smith, M. (2015). Aptitude as grammatical sensitivity and the initial stages of learning Japanese as an L2. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 37(1), 135–165. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cited by (2)

Cited by two other publications

Schmiderer, Katrin & Barbara Hinger
2023. L’INTERLINGUA PRODUTTIVA E RICETTIVA DI STUDENTI DI ITALIANO LS IN UN CONTESTO DI SCUOLA SECONDARIA AUSTRIACA. Italiano LinguaDue 15:2 ► pp. 43 ff. DOI logo
Keßler, Jörg‐U. & Anke Lenzing
2022. Grammar in Foreign and Second Language Classes. In The TESOL Encyclopedia of English Language Teaching, ► pp. 1 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 29 july 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.