Second Language Acquisition A Theoretica-71780816

Second Language Acquisition : A Theoretical
Introduction to Real World

Applications by Alessandro G. Benati and Tanja Angelovska (2016) is without
doubt a help for undergraduate students and trainee teachers who need to deal with
the issue of second language acquisition (SLA). The content is very precise but, at
the same time, very clear and easy to understand and follow, even for those students
who are dealing with this topic for the first time. It can be applied in the classroom,
as a resource book or even a course book, to introduce SLA. It is true that the field
has become very complex in the past years, as the studies include many different
fields of knowledge: linguistics, psychology, sociology and education. However,
the authors of this book have been able to highlight the most important theories in
such a way that it can be an excellent resource for use in undergraduate classes.
They have also incorporated some activities for students to reflect on the topic and
to develop their critical thinking about it. Most of the activities are good and
although some are unpretentious, they are effective for students to think about this
issue. In short, all of the activities give an insight into the theory. The structure of
the book is also very well organized. It is divided into six chapters, which
summarize the main theories of SLA:
1. Introduction to second language acquisition.

2. Similarities and differences between first and second language acquisition.
3. How learners process information in second language acquisition.
4. How the internal system develops in a second language.
Copyright © 2017 Language Value, ISSN 1989-7103 222

Articles are copyrighted by their respective authors
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.6035/LanguageV.2017.9.10
Second Language Acquisition: A Theoretical Introduction to Real World Applications
5. How learners learn to communicate in a second language.

6. What we know about SLA.
The organization of each chapter follows the same order, which is very effective:
 A short summary of the chapter.

 The theoretical part with all the main authors on SLA analyzed and
contrasted.
 Some activities to check understanding and to achieve a critical
opinion on the topics, fields of knowledge, theories and issues.
 The application of the theory to the “real-world”, that is, a guide for
learners and language instructors to use these theories in an effective way
when learning or teaching a second language.
The first chapter, “Introduction to second language acquisition”, starts with a clear
definition of SLA after examining different contexts and assuming three research
methods: experimental (more pedagogical research), observational (in the
classroom) and case studies (in the classroom). The starting point answers two
questions, bearing in mind that L1 has already been acquired: first, how learners
internalize the linguistic system of L2, and, second, how learners make use of the
linguistic system. In this chapter there is a practical and straightforward summary
of the main theories of SLA from the different fields of knowledge involved in the
process of L2 learning: firstly, from a rationalist perspective, which proposes that
the learning of an L2 is innate and, as such, in opposition to behaviorism, which
was in fashion in the past; secondly, from a linguistic perspective (competences and
skills); thirdly, from a cognitive perspective; fourthly, from a psychological
approach, and finally, from a sociological perspective. The chapter continues by
analyzing the nature of language: lexicon, phonology, morphology, syntax,
pragmatics, sociolinguistics and discourse. It later continues by summarizing the
main theories in second language acquisition: Behaviorism, Universal Grammar
Theory, Monitor Theory, Interaction Hypothesis, Processability Theory, Input
Processing Theory, Skill Acquisition Theory, Emergentism, the Declarative and
Procedural Model, Complexity Theory and Sociocultural Theory. It is a reality that
SLA is an active growing field in which researchers have not yet accepted just one
Language Value 9 (1), 222-227 http://www.e-revistes.uji.es/languagevalue 223

Book and Multimedia Review
single theory, but all the main studies have been summarized in this book. After
analyzing the key elements of SLA, the authors move on to the learning process,
from declarative to procedural working memory, and to all those factors responsible
for the acquisition of linguistic features.
The second chapter, “Similarities and differences between first and second
language acquisition”, shows the differences and similarities in the acquisition of
L1 and L2 in a clear and down-to-earth manner. This chapter is significant as it
clarifies the basis of SLA from the point of view of the learner: Chomsky’s
Universal Grammar (1965 and 1981), the linguistic constraints of transfer and
markedness, the role of the brain and the matter of age. The matter of age has been
a controversial question, and Lenneberg’s (1967) “Critical period hypothesis” is
still an issue of research in this subject. The question is whether there is an optimal
age for acquiring a second language or if cognitive maturity and experience can be
assets in learning a second language. The authors analyze the misconceptions about
age from different areas of language skills: pronunciation, morphology and syntax.
The authors extend their theory to a multilingual environment, which is nowadays
becoming the reality of most learners, as most of them are living in multilingual
societies.
The third chapter, “How learners process information in second language

acquisition”, studies the way in which learners process information. Learners do not
always process all the input they are exposed to when learning another language.
Moreover, the authors indicate the limited role of instruction in a second language
due to external and internal factors. The importance of individual differences for
SLA (age, language aptitude, working memory, learning strategies, motivation and
learning styles) are reviewed in this chapter.
The fourth chapter, “How the internal system develops in a second language”, is a
key issue within SLA. It deals with the rules applied when learning a second
language, the learner language or interlanguage (Selinker, 1972), that is, language
transfer, over-generalization of target language rules, transfer of training, L2
communication strategies and L2 learning strategies. The cognitive theories of SLA
are also examined in this chapter, in spite of the difficulties this issue entails.

The fifth chapter, “How learners learn to communicate in a second language”, helps
to understand the ability a second language learner has when using his or her
communicative skills. This sociolinguistic aspect of SLA studies the different tools,
skills, and competences that a learner must master for successful communication
(Canale and Swain, 1980), which are linguistic (grammar and phonology,
phonetics, morphology, syntax, semantics, etc.), sociolinguistic (sociocultural),
discourse and strategic. First, the social aspect of language, and what this entails, is
emphasized in this chapter, and thus, it studies different approaches from a
functionalist perspective, for example, the concept-oriented approach. Second, SLA
is influenced by cultural practices and here Vygotsky’s (1978) Social-Cultural
Theory, Giles’ (1978) Accommodation Theory, and Schumann’s (1978)
Acculturation Model are summarized. Considering that our society is becoming
multilingual rather than just bilingual, the authors state the differences in meaning
in relation to the concepts of bilingualism, heritage language and multilingualism.
A final thought is given to “multilingualism competence” and the Dynamic System
Theory (Larsen-Freeman, 1997 & 2002).
The sixth, and last, chapter, “What we know about SLA”, evaluates what is known
in the field of SLA: the similarities and differences between L1 and L2 in both
children and adults. It also deals with the role of implicit and explicit knowledge,
input, interaction and output, and well as the impact of instruction in SLA. The
remark the authors make is that, in spite of an increase in research since the basis of
SLA was established, it is still a matter of continuous debate and controversy. The
reason for this is that this topic is very complex and it involves many different
fields of knowledge, as stated at the beginning of this review.
All these chapters end with a guide for learners and language instructors on how to
apply these theories in the “real world”. These sections are highly significant due to
their practicality and they give language instructors valuable as well as useful
information on how to apply the theoretical part in the learning and teaching of a
second language. Chapter six should be highlighted, as it includes some approaches
and concerns relating the teaching of a second language. The book also offers other
helpful information, for example, the figures and tables included, as well as the
final glossary, which is very useful in order to check terminology, theories,

Book and Multimedia Review
hypotheses and models concerning SLA. The authors have researched the literature
well and have included a wide range of references. Moreover, after each chapter
they provide a list of references allowing the reader to go deeper still into the topic.
All of the references are relevant, well-chosen and well cited.
I therefore think this book is a very good resource to introduce students and trainees
to the topic of SLA in such a way that it can be easily understood. This knowledge
is reinforced by the activities included and the references for further research on the
topic. Moreover, the authors cover and review all the main areas of knowledge of
this topic in an engaging, practical way for anyone dealing with this complex matter
for the first time. In short, the main strength of this book is to help learners and
teachers to tackle the numerous studies and theories on this issue. Its only slight
weakness may be the simplicity of some of the activities provided by the authors.
REFERENCES
Benati, A.G. & Angeelovska, T. 2016. Second Language Acquisition: A Theoretical

Introduction to Real World Applications. London (U.K.): Bloomsbury.
Canale, M. and Swain, M. 1980. “Theoretical bases of communicative approaches to

second language teaching and testing”. Applied Linguistics, 1, 1-47.
Chomsky, N. 1959. Aspects of Syntax. Cambridge, MA: MIT.
Chomsky, N. 1981. Lectures on Government and Binding. Dordrencht: Foris.
Giles, H. and Smith, P. 2008. “Accommodation Theory: Optimal levels of

convergence. In Giles, H. and St. Clair, R. (Eds.) Language and Social Psychology.
Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 45-65.
Larsen-Freeman, D. 1997. “Chaos/complexity science and second language

acquisition”. Applied Linguistics, 18 (2), 141-165.
Larsen-Freeman, D. 2002. “Language acquisition and language use form a

chaos/complexity theory perspective”. In Kramsch, C. (Ed.), Language Acquisition
and Language Socialization: Ecological Perspective. London: Continuum, 33-46.
Lenneberg, E.H. 1967. Biological Foundations of Language. New York: Wiley.

Schumann, J.H. 1978. The Pidgination Process: A Model for Second Language
Acquisition. Rowley, M.A.: Newbury House.
Selinker, L. 1972. “Interlanguage”. International Review of Applied Linguistics, 10,

209-231.
Vygotsky, L.S. 1978. Mind in Society: The Development of Higher Psychological

Processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Received: 6 April 2016

Accepted: 19 February 2017
Individual differences in adult second language

learning: A cognitive perspective
Vera Kempe, University of Abertay Dundee
Patricia J. Brooks, City University of New York
Abstract: What makes some people more successful language learners than others? Scholars and
practitioners of adult second language learning traditionally have cast the issue of individual differences
in
terms of such constructs as aptitude, motivation, learning strategies, learning styles, meta-linguistic
awareness, and personality traits (e.g., extraversion), as well as a range of other social and affective
variables
(Ehrman, Leaver & Oxford, 2003). These are complex constructs that often lack a clear description
of the
underlying mechanisms. In this short overview we will take a cognitive perspective and link individual
differences in adult L2 learning to individual differences in cognitive abilities. Examining cognitive factors
that
are predictive of L2-learning success can help to illuminate the mechanisms that underlie the learning
process.
At the same time, recognising and understanding the links between cognitive abilities and language
learning
may help teachers and learners to adjust their teaching methods and the learning environment in ways
that
are beneficial to individual learners. Although we are still far from being able to make specific evidence-
based
recommendations, reviewing what is known about cognitive predictors of successful language learning
may be
a useful start.
Keywords: language learning, cognition, learning strategies, adult learners
Introduction
In an attempt to gain some control over the many variables involved in language learning,
cognitive psychologists typically study isolated aspects of L2 learning such as learning of a
specific grammatical feature or a small set of novel vocabulary items. Often these studies
utilise artificial micro-languages with carefully constructed phonological properties and
grammars. This approach provides valuable insights into the basic cognitive mechanisms
involved in L2 learning but is restricted in its generalisability to more complex aspects of
learning. In our research, we pursue a more integrative approach and try to maximise
ecological validity by examining how cognitive abilities predict various aspects of L2 learning
as they take place simultaneously. Typically, our experiments require participants to learn a
small set of nouns from a morphologically rich language, Russian, in a variety of contexts over
a number of training sessions. Participants engage in various activities such as listening and
repeating short phrases, identifying referents and producing short statements. No explicit
teaching of rules takes place. At the end of training, we test the learners’ ability to generalise
aspects of grammar like gender agreement or case marking to items they have not
encountered before. We also test their incidental retention of vocabulary. Lately, we have
expanded the study of individual differences to L2 phoneme perception and production
(Kempe, Thoresen & Brooks, 2007). We then link performance in various domains of L2
learning to performance on a variety of cognitive tasks. Examining multiple
ISSN 1756-039X (Online )
© Sc ottish CILT
V Ke mp e & P J Bro o ks 16
cognitive predictors simultaneously allows us to use statistical techniques that partial out
the effects of mechanisms that are shared by the different tasks and to look at the unique
contribution of the specific cognitive mechanisms. This is important because every
cognitive task used to assess a specific cognitive ability (e.g., working memory) always
engages a number of difficult mechanisms, and it is often difficult to disentangle their
individual effects on language learning. From this research, we have gained some insights
into which cognitive abilities facilitate language learning and whether these abilities affect
different aspects of learning in different ways.
Phonological short-term memory
Phonological short-term memory (PSTM) serves to retain sequences of sounds in memory
over short periods of time. It comprises a phonological store and an articulatory rehearsal
mechanism which maintains decaying representations. To illustrate, it is this mechanism that
is engaged when someone reads out a phone number and the listener then silently rehearses
it to keep it in memory until they are ready to dial it. The capacity of PSTM can be assessed by
such tasks as the digit span task or the non-word repetition task. The digit-span task requires
individuals to reproduce sequences of digits of increasing length. The non-word repetition
task requires individuals to repeat made-up pseudo-words like bleximus.
Baddeley, Gathercole and Papagno (1998) suggested that the main function of PSTM is to
learn new words, both in first language acquisition as well as in second language acquisition.
Indeed, a sizeable body of research has confirmed that non-word repetition is a good
predictor of how well learners retain new L2 vocabulary (Ellis & Sinclair, 1996; Gupta, 2003;
Papagno, Valentine & Baddeley, 1991; Service, 1992, Service & Kohonen, 1995; Speciale, Ellis
& Bywater, 2004; Williams & Lovatt, 2005): Individuals with larger PSTM capacity tend to be
more successful in learning L2 vocabulary. One explanation of the underlying mechanism
suggests that individuals who can hold more phonological material in a short-term store are
able to pass on more material into long-term-memory. Another explanation suggests that the
same factor—the ability to generate good-quality phonological representations—underlies
both short-term storage as well as long-term retention (Service, Mauri & Luotoniemi, 2007).
In a recent study, we found that non-word repetition uniquely predicted learners’ incidental
vocabulary learning in our miniature language learning paradigm (Brooks, Kempe & Donachie,
2009) over and above the effects of other cognitive predictors such as working memory
capacity, non-verbal intelligence or prior language learning experience, thereby confirming
the previous findings from studies that had examined PSTM and vocabulary learning in
isolation. Interestingly, PSTM did not predict grammar learning when the other cognitive
predictors were taken into account, even though the simple positive correlation between
non-word repetition and our measure of grammar learning, correct production of Russian
inflections, was significant (see also Ellis & Schmidt, 1998; Williams & Lovatt, 2005). This
suggests that other cognitive predictors, while sharing certain components with PSTM, are
better able to explain grammar learning. After all, grammar learning requires the learner
Sc o ttish La ng ua g e s Re vie w 17
not just to commit sequences of sounds to long-term memory but, most importantly, to
detect regularities in those sequences.
Working memory
PSTM is one of the sub-components of working memory, i.e., of the general ability hold in
mind information required for the execution of cognitive tasks. However, in many theories
the construct of working memory comprises not only a storage system but also a processing
component engaged in allocating cognitive resources to the various tasks at hand.
Consequently, working memory is typically measured with tasks requiring both storage and
processing capacities. For example, the Reading Span task (Daneman & Carpenter, 1980)
requires individuals to read aloud sets of 2, 3, 4 or 5 semantically unrelated sentences; after
reading each set of sentences, the individual is asked to recall the last word of each sentence
in the set. The Reading Span task requires the executive processing components of working
memory to allocate resources to reading and understanding the sentences as well as storage
capacity to remember the sentence-final words. Because individuals are reading aloud, they
are unable to use articulatory rehearsal to maintain the words in PSTM.
There is evidence that working memory capacity is related to native language processing
(Just & Carpenter, 1992). Differences in working memory capacity typically manifest
themselves in the processing of grammatically complex sentences where several
interpretations have to be held in mind temporarily until an ambiguity can be resolved. For
example, in the sentence The defendant examined by the lawyer shocked the jury which
contains a reduced relative clause, the word examined initially might be misinterpreted as
the main verb in the sentence. Higher working memory capacity also increases the fluency
with which sentences are produced and the speed with which inferences are generated
during comprehension (Miyake & Friedman, 1998). It can be expected, then, that working
memory capacity should constrain L2 learning and processing in similar ways. Indeed, there is
evidence that L2 learners with high working memory capacity, as measured using the
Reading Span test, are better able to integrate multiple cues (e.g., word order and noun
animacy) when assigning semantic roles to nouns in L2 sentences (Miyake & Friedman,
1998).
In our work, we have tried to estimate the effects of working memory capacity over and
above the effects of non-verbal intelligence (see next section) and PSTM. Typically, working
memory capacity and non-verbal intelligence are positively correlated due to shared
mechanisms related to executive functioning and attention allocation (Cowan, 2000).
Mechanisms of working memory that are not shared with non-verbal intelligence pertain
mainly to information storage. We found that after accounting for the effects of non-verbal
intelligence, performance on the Reading Span task predicted not only vocabulary retention,
but also learning outcomes for those aspects of grammar that were irregular and require
memorisation, e.g., learning the gender of non-transparently gender-marked feminine
Russian nouns such as pech’ [oven] which do not end in the suffix -a that characterises the
majority of Russian feminine nouns in the citation (nominative) form (Kempe & Brooks, 2008;
Kempe, Brooks & Kharkhourin, 2010). Thus, aspects of L2 learning
that require memorisation such as individual vocabulary items or irregular grammatical

forms benefit from higher working memory capacity.
Non-verbal intelligence, sequence learning and meta-
linguistic awareness
As mentioned in the previous section, the positive correlation between working memory
capacity and non-verbal intelligence is assumed to be due to a shared central executive
component that controls the ability to allocate attentional resources to various components
of a task. However, in addition to executive control functions, non-verbal intelligence tests
also tap into something else, namely, the ability to notice and identify patterns in complex
stimuli. For example, one widely used non-verbal intelligence test, Cattell’s Culture Fair IQ test
(Cattell & Cattell, 1973), requires individuals to detect patterns among sets of geometrical
forms and then to find the correct continuation of each pattern in a set of response
alternatives. We found that this ability to detect complex patterns is a powerful predictor for
learning grammar over and above the effects of all other cognitive predictors mentioned thus
far (Brooks, Kempe & Donachie, 2009; Kempe & Brooks, 2008; Kempe et al., 2010).
Specifically, the ability to detect patterns benefits the learning of regular aspects of grammar,
e.g., learning Russian gender categories and case marking from regular markings on noun
endings. Crucially, only individuals scoring high on pattern detection were able to benefit
from rich linguistic input comprising a sufficiently large database from which to extract regular
patterns. Individuals who scored low on pattern detection actually experienced a
deterioration of performance when exposed to rich, rather than restricted input (Brooks et
al., 2006). Interestingly preliminary data suggest that regularity detection also facilitates
identification of non-native phonological contrasts such as Norwegian tone differences
(Kempe, Thoresen & Brooks, 2008).
In our most recent study (Brooks, Kempe & Donachie, 2009), we added auditory sequence
learning (Misyak & Christiansen, 2007) as an additional predictor task. Over 30 minutes of
listening time, participants were exposed to sequences of pseudo-words organised
according to an artificial grammar. Subsequently, using a forced-choice procedure,
participants were tested to see whether they could distinguish grammatical sequences of
pseudo-words from ungrammatical ones. We found that both non-verbal intelligence and
auditory sequence learning were positively correlated and contributed roughly equally to
Russian grammar learning. Despite earlier claims that artificial grammar learning and non-
verbal intelligence are not related (Reber, Walkenfeld & Hernstadt, 1991), this result is not
surprising if one takes into account that both of these tasks require pattern detection, with
non-verbal IQ tasks involving the detection of visual-spatial patterns and artificial grammar
learning involving the detection of auditory patterns.
What is the mechanism by which the ability to detect regular patterns leads to successful
learning of morphological and syntactic rules in an L2? At the end of our last study (Brooks et
al., 2009), we asked participants what they had noticed about the Russian language after six
language learning sessions. We coded their responses with respect to whether they had
become aware of the underlying grammatical regularities, thus obtaining a measure of
meta-linguistic awareness (e.g., reporting that ‘All the nouns that ended in consonants
added an -u in one context and an -a in the other.’ indicated awareness of Russian gender
and case marking). Meta-linguistic awareness of gender and case marking correlated
positively with non-verbal intelligence and with auditory sequence learning. Most
importantly, when we added meta-linguistic awareness to the set of cognitive predictors in a
statistical model of grammar learning, it superseded all the other effects. This suggests that
the better individuals are at detecting patterns of regularity, whether visual-spatial or
auditory, the more likely they are to become aware of grammatical patterns in L2 input.
Meta-linguistic awareness, in turn, drives the ability to generalise grammatical regularities to
novel words. Moreover, meta-linguistic awareness was also found to be predictive of
incidental vocabulary retention. We take this to mean that the more efficient individuals are
at grammar learning, the more resources they have available for vocabulary learning. Thus,
the well-established link between vocabulary size and grammatical abilities observed in L1
learning (Bates & Goodman, 1997) finds an interesting complement in L2 learning, which
underscores the tight coupling between grammar and vocabulary acquisition.
Prior experience with other languages
When participants come to our lab to take part in one of our training studies, they have
varying degrees of prior experience with L2 learning. We always carefully assess prior
exposure to other languages and obtain self-ratings for all the languages an individual has
previously studied. These data are then entered into the statistical models to control for
prior L2 learning. This means that all the effects mentioned here have been obtained after
effects of prior L2 learning have been taken into account. But looking at the effects of prior
language exposure is interesting in its own right. We have found consistently that individuals
try to transfer their knowledge from a previously learned language to the new language, and
in some cases this may prove helpful while in other cases it may not. For example, those
individuals who had studied Spanish or Italian, languages that also have a quite transparent
system of gender-marking on the noun, benefited from this experience and were much
more likely to learn the Russian gender categories and case marking (Kempe & Brooks,
2008), especially since these languages all share the same transparent feminine suffix -a.
Nonetheless, the cognitive abilities described here contribute to L2 learning outcomes over
and above the effects of prior language exposure.
Bringing it all together
We can briefly summarise the research on the cognitive mechanisms involved in adult L2
learning as follows: First, there is the ability to retain good-quality sequences of L2
phonological representations for short periods of time as a pre-requisite for transfer to long-
term memory. This ability is especially important for the acquisition of new vocabulary:
Individuals with superior ability for short-term retention of phonological information tend to
be better vocabulary learners. Second, information storage capacity does not just affect the
quality and durability of phonological representations but the ability to memorise other types
of novel linguistic material as well. This is particularly important for learning aspects of
linguistic structure that are irregular: Individuals with larger working memory capacity are
better able to remember irregular aspects of linguistic structure. Third, the ability to detect
patterns of regularity in the input is important for learning grammatical patterns, and, in turn,
may free resources for vocabulary learning. Interestingly, the effect of pattern detection
ability on grammar learning appears to be mediated by cognitive awareness: Individuals who
perform better at non-linguistic tests that require pattern detection are also more likely to
become aware of complex structural regularities in linguistic input.
It has been suggested previously that the somewhat vague concept of language learning
aptitude might be decomposed into a set of underlying cognitive abilities like the ones
considered here (Miyake & Friedman, 1998). Indeed, a well established test of language
aptitude, the Modern Languages Aptitude Test (Carroll & Sapon, 1959), contains a number of
tasks that, to varying degree, tap into the cognitive mechanisms described above. These
tasks, however, often share underlying mechanisms like storage, attention allocation, or
pattern detection, thus, making it difficult to assess the contribution of each cognitive
mechanism. When statistical techniques are employed to disentangle the unique effects of
these mechanisms, it turns out some of them are more relevant for some aspects of
language learning than for others. These insights might promote a more nuanced view of
individual differences in L2 learning: Rather than distinguishing between ‘good’ and ‘bad’ L2
learners in general, we may come to appreciate that some individuals may be more
successful in some aspects of L2 learning, e.g., phoneme discrimination, than in others, e.g.,
grammar learning. Thus, a better understanding of how specific cognitive abilities support
specific aspects of L2 learning may eventually enable learners to capitalise on their individual
strengths and to find ways to compensate for their weaknesses.
References:
Baddeley, A., Gathercole, S. E., & Papagno, C. (1998). The phonological loop as a language
learning device. Psychological Review, 105, 158-173.
Bates, E., & Goodman, J. C. (1997). On the inseparability of grammar and the lexicon:
Evidence from acquisition, aphasia, and real-time processing. Language and Cognitive
Processes, 12, 507-584.
Brooks, P. J., Kempe, V. & Sionov, A. (2006). The role of learner and input variables in
learning inflectional morphology. Applied Psycholinguistics, 27, 185-209.
Brooks, P. J., Kempe, V. & Donachie, A. (2009). Individual differences in adult foreign
language learning. Paper presented at the 50th Annual Meeting of The Psychonomic
Society, Boston, MA.
Carroll, J. B. & Sapon, S. (1959) The Modern Languages Aptitude Test. San Antonio, TX:
Psychological Corporation.
Cattell, R. B., & Cattell, H. E. P. (1973). Measuring intelligence with the Culture Fair tests.
Champaign, IL: The Institute for Personality and Ability Testing.
Cowan, N. (2000). The magical number 4 in short-term memory: A reconsideration of

mental storage capacity. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 24, 87-185.
Daneman, M., & Carpenter, P. A. (1980). Individual differences in working memory and
reading. Journal of Verbal Learning & Verbal Behavior, 19, 450-466.
Ehrman, M.E., Leaver B. L., & Oxford, R. L. (2003). A brief overview of individual differences
in second language learning. System, 31, 313-330.
Ellis, N., & Sinclair, S. G. (1996). Working memory in the acquisition of vocabulary and
syntax: Putting language in good order. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology A:
Human Experimental Psychology, 49A, 234-250.
Gupta, P. (2003). Examining the relationship between word learning, nonword repetition,
and immediate serial recall in adults. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology,
56A, 1213-1236.
Just, M. A. & Carpenter, P. A. (1992). A capacity theory of comprehension: Individual
differences in working memory. Psychological Review, 99, 122-149.
Kempe, V. & Brooks, P.J. (2008). Second language learning of complex inflectional systems.
Language Learning. 54, 703-746.
Kempe, V., Brooks, P. J. & Kharkhurin, A. (2010). Cognitive predictors of generalization of
Russian grammatical gender categories. Language Learning 60, 127-153.
Kempe, V., Brooks, P.J. & Christman, S. (2009). Inconsistent handedness is linked to more
successful foreign language vocabulary learning. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 16, 480-
485.
Kempe, V., Thoresen, J. C., Brooks, P. J. (2007). Differences in foreign language phoneme
perception and production. Poster presented at the 48th Annual Meeting of The
Psychonomic Society, Long Beach, CA.
Kempe, V., Thoresen, J. C., & Brooks, P. J. (2008). Norwegian toneme perception by non-
native speakers. Poster presented at the 49th Annual Meeting of The Psychonomic Society,
Chicago, IL.
Misyak, J. B., & Christiansen, M. H. (2007). Extending statistical learning farther and further:
Long-distance dependencies, and individual differences in statistical learning and language.
In D. S. McNamara & J. G. Trafton (Eds.), Proceedings of the 29th Annual Cognitive Science
Society (pp. 1307-1312). Austin, TX: Cognitive Science Society.
Miyake, A., & Friedman, N. P. (1998). Individual differences in second language proficiency:
Working memory as language aptitude. In A. F. Healy & L. E. Bourne, Jr. (Eds.), Foreign
language learning: Psycholinguistic studies on training and retention (pp. 339-364).
Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Papagno, C., Valentine, T., & Baddeley, A. (1991). Phonological short-term memory and
foreign-language vocabulary learning. Journal of Memory & Language, 30, 331-347.
Reber, A. S., Walkenfeld, F. F., & Hernstadt, R. (1991). Implicit and explicit learning:
Individual differences and IQ. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and
Cognition, 17, 888-896.
Service, E. (1992). Phonology, working memory and foreign-language learning. Quarterly
Journal of Experimental Psychology, 45A, 21-50.
Service, E., & Kohonen, V. (1995). Is the relation between phonological memory and
foreign-language learning accounted for by vocabulary acquisition? Applied
Psycholinguistics, 16, 155-172.
Service, E., Mauri, S., & Luotoniemi, E. (2007). Individual differences in phonological learning
and verbal STM span. Memory & Cognition, 35, 1122-1135.
Speciale, G., Ellis, N. C., & Bywater, T. (2004). Phonological sequence learning and short-
term store capacity determine second language vocabulary acquisition. Applied
Psycholinguistics, 25, 293-321.
Williams, J. N., & Lovatt, P. (2003). Phonological memory and rule learning. Language
Learning, 53, 177-233.
EAST ASIAN
PRAGMATICS
EAP (print) issn 2055-7752
EAP (online) issn 2055-7760
Article
Special issue of East Asian
Pragmatics: Second language
pragmatics
Introduction
Jiayi Wang and Nicola Halenko
Second language pragmatics, also known as interlanguage pragmatics, “investi-
gates how L2 learners develop the ability to understand and perform action in a
target language” (Kasper & Rose, 2002, p. 5). Being pragmatically competent in
another language is considered an essential component of being a success-ful
communicator, as outlined in a number of leading influential frameworks of
communicative competence (Bachman & Palmer, 1996; Canale & Swain, 1980;
Hymes, 1972). Tese early frameworks advocate not only the importance of
knowing the constructs of a language, but having the ability to use language in
socially appropriate ways. For instance, when requesting a favour from
someone, in addition to knowing what forms and lexis are needed to produce the
request (grammatical competence), users need to consider their linguistic
choices in light of acceptability of the request according to the local cultural
norms, the specific situation, the favour itself, and from whom they are soliciting
the favour (prag-matic competence). Both competencies are inextricably linked
and need equal attention in the language-learning process. Leech (1983) and
Tomas (1983) describe pragmatic competence as the sum of two specific
components: ‘prag-malinguistics’ (the knowledge of linguistic resources needed
for communication) and ‘sociopragmatics’ (the knowledge of sociocultural rules
which govern these resources). Second language pragmatics investigations ofen
draw on these dis-tinctions when evaluating and assessing L2 performance.
Recently, second language pragmatic investigations have begun to highlight
the interplay of interactional and intercultural competences in the language-
learning process given today’s interconnected societies within which language
users now operate. Kizu, Pizziconi, and Gyogi’s paper in this issue, which
investigates inter-
eap vol 4.1 2019 1-9 https://doi.org/10.1558/eap.38206
©2019, equinox publishing
2 east asian pragmatics
actional competence of L2 Japanese learners, is a good example of a move in
this direction. Interactional competency (see studies by Ishida, 2009; Taguchi,
2014) is characterised as learners bringing a variety of linguistic and semiotic
resources to jointly contribute to ongoing discourse and co-accomplish specific
language goals (Young, 2011). Intercultural competency, according to Fantini
and Tirmizi (2006, p. 12), is “a complex of abilities needed to perform effectively
and appropri-ately when interacting with others who are linguistically and
culturally different from oneself ” (see recent studies by McConachy, 2018 and
Sánchez-Hernández & Alcón-Soler, 2018). Tese alternatives to established
models of competency offer an additional window within which to view and
analyse what it means to be a successful language user in today’s multicultural

and multilingual society. Te prefix ‘inter’ is a defining trait of these alternative
visions by focusing on the shared, rather than on the individual, as early
competency models appeared to emphasise. Te spotlight on the co-
constructiveness of communicative action is highlighted in LoCastro’s (2003)
definition of second language pragmatics as follows: “[it is] the study of the
speaker and hearer meaning created in their joint actions that include both
linguistic and non-linguistic signals in the context of socioculturally organised
activities” (p. 15).
Te importance of language learners developing a reasonable level of prag-
matic competence is clearly underlined by Tomas (1983), who states that
pragmatic infelicities may reflect badly on you as a person when interactions fail
to adhere to expected cultural norms and linguistic practices. Despite the
potential for such high-risk consequences, pragmatics research consistently
reports L2 language users falling short of target-like pragmatic norms. So, what
are the main issues leading to this reported shortfall in pragmatic competency,
which is evident even in advanced L2 language users? First, much of the
pragmatic knowledge native speakers (NSs) possess is intuitive with no codified
rules of use (Cook, 2001). It is learned and developed through social interaction
and, assuming accessibil-ity, can be a slow process (Cohen, 2008; Taguchi,
2010). Earlier estimates have suggested up to ten years (Olshtain & Blum-Kulka,
1985), yet some researchers suggest competency may never be achieved
despite permanent residency in an L2 context (Cohen, 2008; Kasper & Rose,
2002). Second, transfer of L1 pragmatic norms may positively or negatively
affect L2 communication. Pragmatic transfer is defined by Kasper (1997, p. 119)
as the “use of L1 pragmatic knowledge to understand or carry out linguistic
action in the L2”. On the positive side, adult learners, for example, have access
to a considerable amount of pragmalinguis-tic and sociopragmatic knowledge
which can be successfully transferred to the L2, such as an understanding of
social positions of power which affect linguis-tic choice. Conversely, negative L1
transfer can also occur when language users are unfamiliar with target language
conventions and L1-L2 mapping strategies

introduction 3
are incorrectly, and unintentionally, applied. An understanding of where these
cross-cultural gaps lie is therefore critical. Studies such as Su and Chang (this
issue), which attempt to systematically outline L1 (Chinese) practices, offer par-
ticularly helpful cultural insights which can then be used to inform L2 teaching
and learning practices. Tird, it is important to note that, despite having some
pragmatic awareness, L2 users do not always manage to utilise this knowledge.
As Kasper contends, learners will ofen rely on literal interpretation of utterances
instead of utilising inference or contextual clues (1997, p. 3) due to low profi-
ciency or limited exposure to the L2. Finally, in some cases, learners may not be
willing to actively adopt L2 pragmatics practices despite an ability to do so. Tis
resistance to change has been noted in numerous studies to varying degrees
and is generally driven by prioritising the self, one’s identity, or core L1 belief
systems, for instance. Inagaki’s paper (this issue) also provides insights into the
role affec-tive factors such as motivation can play in developing pragmatic
awareness when immersed in a study abroad environment. Te notion of
willingness to commu-nicate (WTC), which the author discusses, has also
been previously linked to resistance to L2 interaction.
East Asian pragmatics and L2 learning
Pragmatics of East Asian languages as a second or foreign language is much
less researched than that of European and American languages such as
English, French, and Spanish. However, recent years have witnessed a growing
number of pragmatic studies of East Asian languages, most notably Japanese
and Chinese as a second or foreign language, though it is worth mentioning
that the latter, e.g. Japanese as a foreign language (JFL) or Chinese as a
foreign language (CFL), tends to be subsumed under the former, i.e. Japanese
as a second language (JSL) or Chinese as a second language (CSL). We adopt
the ofen-used term L2 as a generic label to refer to both henceforth. While L1
pragmatics has spawned a wealth of research on East Asian languages, e.g.
Matsumoto (1988) on L1 Japa-nese and Pan and Kádár (2011) on L1 Chinese
politeness, L2 East Asian pragmat-ics has been a relatively nascent area of
inquiry.
Japanese is the most studied East Asian language in the field of L2
pragmatics, and it has the longest history of research. Dozens of studies have
been published on teaching, learning, and assessing L2 Japanese pragmatics.
Both receptive and productive skills have been explored. For example, Cook
(2001) reported the failure of American college learners of Japanese to
distinguish polite from impo-lite speech styles when listening to the self-
introductions of three job applicants due to their misunderstanding of the
Japanese pragmatic features. Te receptive skills of listening and reading and
the productive skills of speaking and writing have been examined from various
perspectives, covering an array of pragmatic
features ranging from honorifics to sentence-final particles such as ne, from reac-
tive tokens to formulaic utterances. For instance, Taguchi’s (2015a) book-length
study examined the development of interactional competence among L2 Japa-
nese learners during their semester abroad in Japan, focusing on the learners’
change in the use of speech styles (polite and plain forms), style-shifing between
the polite and plain forms across different participant structures, and functions of
incomplete sentence endings in joint turn construction (around a communica-tion
problem, for the display of empathetic understanding, and for assisted expla-
nation). Taguchi’s (2009) edited volume is another book that is wholly dedicated
to learners of L2 Japanese, among a vast body of L2 Japanese pragmatics
research.
Chinese is the second most studied East Asian language in L2 pragmatics
next to Japanese, but in fact, the upsurge in research interest in L2 Chinese
pragmatics is more recent. Kasper (1995) edited the first and only book of
pragmatics of Chi-nese as a native and a foreign language. Tere are six chapters
in Kasper’s volume. Five chapters analyse the patterns of native Chinese
speakers’ strategies to per-form certain speech acts such as requests, refusals,
complaints, and compliments. Only one chapter is about L2 Chinese learners. It
analyses the learners’ experi-ences of developing pragmatics during their period
abroad in China, including complimenting, refusals, and requests. Te findings

suggest that “explicit teach-ing of Chinese pragmatics is advisable” (Kasper and
Zhang, 1995, p. 19), calling for more research on L2 Chinese pragmatics. At the
time of Kasper and Zhang’s (1995) study, Chinese pragmatics research was
minimal, and there were virtu-ally no studies on the acquisition and use of
Chinese pragmatics by non-native speakers. In Taguchi’s (2015b) meta-analysis
of pragmatics in Chinese as a sec-ond or foreign language, she highlights that
her exhaustive search of literature yielded only 14 data-based studies of
Chinese learners’ pragmatic competence and development published up to
2015. Kasper’s (1995) edited volume was and in fact is still the only book
devoted to L1 and L2 Chinese pragmatics. Te relative paucity of L2 Chinese
pragmatics studies was highlighted once again in Taguchi and Li’s (2017)
thematic review. Overall, prior research on L2 Chinese pragmat-ics has
investigated pragmatic development in a study abroad and a non-study abroad
context, heritage learner pragmatics, and the effectiveness of pragmatics
instruction. Tere are still many gaps to be filled, e.g. pre-departure pragmatics
instruction and learning strategy instruction, both of which are addressed in this
volume (i.e. Wang & Halenko; Taguchi, Tang, & Maa).
Before introducing the papers in this collection, it is worth taking stock of the
research specifically in East Asian pragmatics. In sharp contrast to the numerous
pragmatic studies of East Asian learners of L2 English and a growing number of
cross-cultural pragmatic studies which compare L1 East Asian languages with
L1 English, L2 pragmatics of East Asian languages, despite their increasing
popu-
introduction 5
larity around the world, is particularly under-explored. Tis special issue of East
Asian Pragmatics makes an original contribution to bridging the current divide
between East Asian pragmatics and second language acquisition research.
With so many potential cross-linguistic and cross-cultural barriers to over-
come, in addition to a range of influential variables including individual learner
differences which may affect development, the journey to achieving satisfactory
levels of pragmatic competence is not a straightforward one. Current investi-

gations into second language pragmatic development have therefore crossed a
broad spectrum of investigative contexts and users to better understand the
hows and whys of this complex area of second language acquisition. Tis special
issue presents six original papers, organised around two well-researched con-
texts, namely the ‘at-home’ environment, examining L1 users or L2 learners in a
non-immersive instructional setting (Su & Chang; Taguchi, Tang, & Maa; Zheng
& Xu), and the ‘study abroad’ environment, where learners take up temporary
residence as part of an L2 sojourn overseas (Inagaki; Kizu, Pizziconi, & Gyogi;
Wang & Halenko). As discussed earlier, the paucity of research focusing on East
Asian language users or learner groups is heavily underexplored, so this collec-
tion is a timely and much-needed series of empirical investigations. Tat this spe-
cial issue brings together the expertise of new and established researchers in the
field of second language pragmatics, who offer insights into a range of common
practices or challenges facing the East Asian language user or learner, also
makes this collection a worthwhile contribution to a neglected area of the field.
In the opening paper, Taguchi, Tang, and Maa apply strategy instruction to
two targeted pragmatic features: conversation opening/closing in L2 Chinese and
comprehension of indirect meaning in L2 Japanese. Whilst learning strategies
and strategy instruction have generated a host of L2 studies, strategy instruc-
tion for L2 pragmatics has received relatively little attention to date. At the one-
hour strategy instruction session, the researchers taught metacognitive strategies
(focus and planning, obtaining resources, and implementing plans) and cognitive
strategies (activating knowledge, reasoning, and conceptualizing) to four learn-
ers of Chinese and six learners of Japanese respectively in a US university. Te
metacognitive strategy of monitoring and evaluating was addressed afer the ses-
sion by asking the learners to keep a daily journal for the following two weeks,
which was followed by a one-to-one interview. Te qualitative investigation has
yielded mixed results. On the one hand, Chinese learners reported frequent
noticing, detection, and analysis of the target pragmatic feature of conversation
opening/closing, though opening was far more frequently reported than closing.
On the other hand, Japanese learners rarely reported noticing the target prag-
matic feature of indirect meaning. Possible reasons such as the different level of
difficulty of the target features and limited opportunities for interaction in
the at-home context were discussed. Te findings suggest that strategy instruc-
tion may not benefit pragmatic targets and strategy types equally. Te prelimi-
nary study is a first step to materialise pragmatics learning strategies in strategy
instruction and to explore whether strategy instruction can help self-directed
learning outside the classroom.
Zheng and Xu’s study examines Chinese L2 English learners’ perceptions of
pragmatic appropriacy of email requests in an at-home context. Whilst email
requests of East Asian learners of English have been explored in various
aspects, Chinese learners’ perceptions of pragmatic appropriacy remain under-
researched. Te authors developed four questionnaires, each containing five
request forms selected and adapted from authentic student emails. Te
questionnaires were completed by 224 Chinese learners who rated the requests
on a five-point Likert scale and answered an open-ended question to reflect on
their ratings. Before distributing the questionnaire to the students, the authors
asked a small group of 11 native English-speaking instructors to complete the
matched guise tests, serving as native-speaker benchmarks for discussions of
the student perception results. Te findings of the quantitative study revealed that
the Chinese L2 learn-ers were highly aware of pragmalinguistic factors, i.e. they
perceived requests mitigated by internal and external modifications as more
appropriate and polite, but they showed limited or nearly no awareness of
sociopragmatic factors, i.e. power difference and high imposition in English
requests. Te study ends with a call for more explicit L2 sociopragmatic
instruction, which is partially answered by Wang and Halenko’s study later in the
volume.
Su and Chang look at intra-linguistic pragmatic variation in Mandarin Chinese
apologies, with a focus on the effects of region and gender on the use of apology
strategies. Prior variational pragmatics research has paid relatively little attention
to East Asian languages. Tis study examined how male and female university
students in mainland China and Taiwan performed apologies in Mandarin Chi-

nese. It elicited production data from 40 students from mainland China and 34
students from Taiwan by using a computerised oral discourse completion test
(DCT) which had six experimental scenarios with varying degrees of power, dis-
tance, and severity of offence. Te responses were coded for apology strategies,
i.e. illocutionary force indicating device (IFID), intensification, taking on respon-
sibility, explanation/account, and compensation. Te results indicate that there
was no significant difference between genders, and while there were more sim-
ilarities than differences across the two regions, the mainland participants used
significantly more strategies than the Taiwanese group. Te interactional effects
between gender and region on the one hand and power relations and severity of
offence on the other were found unclear in the study.
Shifing the focus to an immersive language-learning environment, study
abroad (SA) may be seen as an ideal place to further one’s pragmatic
development
introduction 7
given the frequent exposure to contextualised, local communicative norms, and
opportunities for language practice and gaining feedback. However, empirical
studies have yielded inconclusive results, with most reporting L2 learners’ failure
to achieve target-like norms, for some of the reasons described earlier. Te stud-
ies in this issue are no exception. Te three studies featured (Wang & Halenko;
Inagaki; Kizu, Pizziconi, & Gyogi) are linked in their approach of tracking L2
learners’ longitudinal pragmatic development via SA sojourns in China, Japan,
and Australia respectively.
Wang and Halenko’s study is innovative in its inclusion of L2 Chinese pragmat-
ics instruction at the pre-departure phase of a study abroad sojourn. Tis inves-
tigation draws on qualitative data to examine British and European L2 Chinese
learners’ perceptions of the beneficial effects of input on the pragmalinguistic
(language) and sociopragmatic (culture) features of formulaic sequences before,
during, and afer a study abroad stay. Tis combination of features and methodo-
logical approach has yet to be found elsewhere in existing second language
prag-matics literature. Multi-method participant feedback from three different

time-phases suggests evidence of pragmalinguistic and sociopragmatic gains
from the input of L2 Chinese formulaic expressions, with the latter being received
particu-larly well. For instance, contextualising the formulaic input within the
broader Chinese historical and cultural arenas appeared to lead to the L2
Chinese formu-laic expressions having more meaningful value. Te participants
further reported on the practical and psychological benefits of immediate and
effective application of the everyday target expressions, which also helped build
confidence to interact more whilst overseas.
Kizu, Pizziconi, and Gyogi’s study observes the use of the Japanese particle
ne in spoken interaction as a marker for development of interactional
competence before, during, and afer a study abroad stay. Te authors further
include findings from a six-month delayed test with British learners of L2
Japanese, to measure the sustainability of use of this particle beyond the study
abroad period. Tis meth-odological design corresponds to calls for studies
tracking longer-term learner performance and is insightful for examining study
abroad effects in the absence of targeted instruction. In contrast to the positive
effects of the study abroad envi-ronment found in Wang and Halenko’s study,
however, the authors are unable to establish a link between study abroad and
more frequent production of the parti-cle ne. Te authors’ findings are able to
confirm in part that proficiency plays an important role in the acquisition and
development of certain linguistic features, as noted elsewhere and across a
range of languages.
In the final paper, Inagaki moves beyond examining linguistic performance in
SA to a focus on affective factors, namely motivation. Examples of individ-ual
learner differences such as these have been reported to play a critical role in
pragmatic development. Drawing on motivational theories such as willingness
to communicate (WTC), Inagaki’s study documents to what extent motivational
factors can explain the much-reported variational differences which can occur in
pragmatic development during SA. Te pre and post SA differences elicited via a
Pragmatics Comprehension Test and motivation questionnaire show some signs

of development in the comprehension of implicature (conventional not uncon-
ventional), which appear to be linked to perceived higher levels of confidence
also reported by the Japanese SA participants.
Collectively, these six studies document linguistic and non-linguistic aspects of
L1 pragmatic practices and L2 pragmatic development, specifically focusing on
East Asian languages. It is hoped one of the outcomes of this special issue will
be to incentivise further L1 and L2 research into pragmatic development within
and between East Asian languages, given their unique linguistic and cultural
char-acteristics, which continue to be of great appeal to a diverse range of
research communities.
References
Bachman, L. F., & Palmer, A. S. (1996). Language testing in practice: Designing
and developing useful language tests. New York: Oxford University Press.
Canale, M., & Swain, M. (1980). Teoretical bases of communicative approaches to
second language teaching and testing. Applied Linguistics, 1(1), 1-47.
Cohen, A. D. (2008). Teaching and assessing L2 pragmatics: What can we
expect from learners? Language Teaching, 41(2), 213-235.
https://doi.org/10.1017/ S0261444807004880
Cook, H. M. (2001). Why can’t learners of JFL distinguish polite from impolite
speech styles? In K. Rose and G. Kasper (Eds.), Pragmatics in language
teaching (pp. 80-102). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
https://doi.org/10.1017/ CBO9781139524797.009
Fantini, A., & Tirmizi, A. (2006). Exploring and assessing intercultural
competence, World Learning Publications, Paper 1. Available online: https://
digitalcollections.sit.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?referer=https://www.google.
co.uk/&httpsredir=1&article=1001&context=worldlearning_publications/ (accessed
27 October 2018).
Hymes, D. (1972). Models of interaction of language and social life. In J. J. Gumperz & D.
H. Hymes (Eds.), Directions in sociolinguistics: Te ethnography of communication (pp.
35-71). New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
Ishida, M. (2009). Development of interactional competence: Changes in the use of ne
in L2 Japanese during study abroad. In H. Ti Nguyen & G. Kasper (Eds.), Talk-in-

interaction: Multilingual perspectives (pp. 351-385). Honolulu: University of Hawai’i,
National Foreign Language Resource Center.
Kasper, G. (Ed.). (1995). Pragmatics of Chinese as native and target language.
Honolulu: University of Hawai’i, National Foreign Language Resource Center.
Kasper, G. (1997). Can pragmatic competence be taught? Retrieved 29 March
2009, from Honolulu, University of Hawai’i at Manoa, Second Language Teaching
and Curriculum Center., http://www.nflrc.hawaii.edu/ NetWorks/NW06/
introduction 9
Kasper, G., & Rose, K. R. (2002). Pragmatic development in a second language.
Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishers.
Kasper, G., & Zhang, Y. (1995). It’s good to be a bit Chinese: Foreign students’
experience of Chinese pragmatics. In G. Kasper (Ed.), Pragmatics of Chinese as native
and target language (pp. 1-22). Honolulu: University of Hawai’i, National Foreign
Language
Resource Center.
Leech, G. N. (1983). Principles of pragmatics. London: Longman.
LoCastro, V. (2003). An introduction to pragmatics: Social action for language
teachers. Ann Arbor: Te University of Michigan Press.
Matsumoto, Y. (1988). Reexamination of the universality of face: Politeness
phenomena in Japanese. Journal of Pragmatics, 12(4), 403-426.
https://doi.org/10.1016/0378-2166(88)90003-3
McConachy, T. (2018). Developing intercultural perspectives on language use.
Bristol: Multilingual Matters.
Olshtain, E., Blum-Kulka, S. (1985). Degree of approximation: Nonnative reactions to
native speech act behavior. In S. Gass, & C. Madden (Eds.), Input in second language
acquisition (pp. 303-325). Rowley: Newbury House.
Pan, Y., & Kádár, D. Z. (2011). Politeness in historical and contemporary Chinese.
London: Continuum.
Sánchez-Hernández, A., & Alcón-Soler, E. (2018). Pragmatic gains in the study
abroad context: Learners’ experiences and recognition of pragmatic routines. Journal
of Pragmatics, available online. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2018.08.006

Taguchi, N. (Ed.). (2009). Pragmatic competence. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter. https://doi.
org/10.1515/9783110218558
Taguchi, N. (2010). Longitudinal studies in interlanguage pragmatics. In A. Trosborg
(Ed.), Handbook of pragmatics: Vol. 7. Pragmatics across languages and cultures
(pp. 333-361). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Taguchi, N. (2014). Development of interactional competence in Japanese as a
second language: Use of incomplete sentences as interactional resources. Modern
Language Journal, 98(2), 518-535. https://doi.org/10.1111/modl.12087
Taguchi, N. (2015a). Developing interactional competence in a Japanese study
abroad context. Bristol: Multilingual Matters.
https://doi.org/10.21832/9781783093731
Taguchi, N. (2015b). Pragmatics in Chinese as a second/foreign language. Studies
in Chinese Learning and Teaching, 1(1), 3-17.
Taguchi, N., & Li, S. (2017). Introduction to a thematic review: Pragmatics research in
Chinese as a second language. Chinese as a Second Language Research, 6(1), 1-6.
Tomas, J. (1983). Cross-cultural pragmatic failure. Applied Linguistics, 4(2), 91-112.
https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/4.2.91
Young, R. (2011). Interactional competence in language learning, teaching and testing.
In E. Hinkel (Ed.), Handbook of research in second language teaching and learning
(pp. 426-443). London: Routledge.
EAST ASIAN
PRAGMATICS
Article
pragmatics
Introduction
investigates inter-


introduction 3
inquiry.

research.

popu-
introduction 5

volume.
development
introduction 7
range of languages.
References
https://doi.org/10.1017/ S0261444807004880
https://doi.org/10.1017/ CBO9781139524797.009
27 October 2018).
introduction 9
Language
Resource Center.
https://doi.org/10.1016/0378-2166(88)90003-3
London: Continuum.
org/10.1515/9783110218558
https://doi.org/10.21832/9781783093731

EAST ASIAN
PRAGMATICS
Article
pragmatics
Introduction

investigates inter-

introduction 3
inquiry.

research.

popu-
introduction 5


volume.
development
introduction 7

range of languages.
References
https://doi.org/10.1017/ S0261444807004880
https://doi.org/10.1017/ CBO9781139524797.009
27 October 2018).
introduction 9

Language
Resource Center.
https://doi.org/10.1016/0378-2166(88)90003-3
London: Continuum.
org/10.1515/9783110218558

https://doi.org/10.21832/9781783093731
Working memory and (second) language processing
Arnaud Szmalec, Marc Brysbaert, Wouter Duyck
Ghent University, Belgium
Contact:
Arnaud Szmalec
Department of Experimental Psychology
Ghent University
Henri Dunantlaan 2
B-9000 Ghent (Belgium)
arnaud.szmalec@UGent.be
Chapter submitted for:
J. Altarriba and L. Isurin (Eds.). Memory, language, and bilingualism: Theoretical
and applied approaches. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Working Memory and Language 2

Abstract
This chapter discusses the interactions between two of the most important human cognitive
functions: memory and language. First, the concept of working memory is introduced, along
with a brief summary of the evolutions that working memory theory has undergone in the last
decades. The second part of the chapter focuses on the role of (verbal) working memory in
language acquisition and processing. It is argued that working memory, and especially the
ability to temporarily represent serial-order information, is crucially involved in both native
and foreign word learning, and perhaps also in sentence and text comprehension. The third and
final part of the chapter explores the other direction of the interaction, by questioning whether
language processing can influence working memory functioning. This question is addressed
with recent behavioral and neurological evidence for a general executive control advantage in
bilinguals, which makes a strong case for the trainability of some aspects of working memory.
Keywords: working memory, language acquisition, language processing, executive control,
bilingualism
Working memory and (second) language processing
From intelligence testing to working memory
In 1887, Jacobs published a series of studies in which he reported that older children could
repeat longer strings of digits read out to them than younger children. Jacobs also reported that
intelligent children (as assessed by the teacher) could repeat more digits than less intelligent
children. This idea was picked up by Binet and Simon in the early 20th century when they
developed the first valid intelligence test. They found that 3-year old children could repeat only
sequences of two digits, whereas children of 4 years could repeat sequences of three digits, and
most healthy children of 7 years could repeat sequences of five digits. Therefore, Binet and
Simon included digit repetition in their intelligence test (Binet & Simon, 1905). Ever since, the
digit span task (as it became called) has been part of intelligence tests, because it correlates
reasonably well with the scores of other subtests of intelligence (such as arithmetic, general
information, and the discovery of similarities). The task received further impetus when Miller
(1956) argued it was a good measure of a person’s short-term memory capacity.
In the early 1970s several authors felt uneasy with the digit-span as a measure of
memory capacity. It seemed to consider short-term memory too much as a passive storage
buffer, rather than an active part of human information processing. As a result, the concept of
working memory, representing both storage and executively controlled manipulation of
information, was put forward. An important publication in this respect was the working
memory model of Baddeley and Hitch (1974). This model consisted of three parts: (i) a
modality-free central executive related to attention, (ii) a phonological loop holding
information in a speech-based form, and (iii) a visuo-spatial sketchpad for the coding of visual
and spatial information. A further milestone was the publication by Daneman and
Carpenter (1980) of an article in which they presented the reading span task as a measure of
working memory capacity. This task (also known as the complex span task) was developed to
simultaneously tax the storage and processing functions of working memory. Participants had to
read sentences (the processing component) while maintaining and retrieving the final words of
the sentences (the storage component). An example of a test item with two sentences was:
- When at last his eyes opened, there was no gleam of triumph, no shade of anger.
- The taxi turned up Michigan Avenue where they had a clear view of the lake.
After reading aloud these two sentences the participant had to retrieve the two last words
(anger, lake). The number of sentences was increased until the participants made errors.
Daneman and Carpenter (1980) observed that reading span typically varied from 2 to 5 words.
They further discovered that this span correlated much better with reading comprehension and
performance on the Scholastic Aptitude Test (SAT; a standardized test for college admission in
the US) than the traditional, passive word span (measured by presenting lists of words of
varying length to participants and asking them to repeat the lists). Subsequent reviews
confirmed the high correlations between working memory capacity and language
comprehension (Daneman & Merikle, 1996), and between working memory capacity and fluid
intelligence (Ackerman, Beier, & Boyle, 2005; Engle, Tuholski, Laughlin, & Conway, 1999).
A wide variety of immediate serial recall tasks and complex span measures are in use
today to increase our understanding of the structure and the functioning of working memory. At
the same time, the conceptualization of working memory has gone through some substantial
changes. Whereas Daneman and Carpenter (1980) considered working memory as a unitary
system with a single capacity, later research provided evidence for several subcomponents with
their own capacities. For instance, Jarrold and Towse (2006), in line with
Baddeley and Hitch’s (1974) model, argued that working memory capacity depended on (i)
processing efficiency, (ii) storage capacities for the maintenance of verbal/numerical
information and spatial information, and (iii) controlled attention needed for the coordination
and integration of storage and processing, and for the inhibition of irrelevant information. Still
other working memory theorists started to question the idea of working memory as a separate
module. Partially inspired by the work of Cowan (1988), which was further elaborated by
Oberauer (2009), they have questioned the multiple-component view of memory and argued
that short-term memory, long-term memory, and working memory are not separate structures
but differ from each other in terms of activation levels of representations in memory and the
amount of attentional control dedicated to those representations. Working memory then is seen
as an activated subset of long-term memory, with information in a directly accessible state and
shielded against interference from other memory contents through attentional control (e.g.,
Szmalec, Verbruggen, Vandierendonck, & Kemps, 2011). In this view, the same memory
processes (recall, recognition, recollection, stimulus familiarity,etc..) operate in the entire
memory system (e.g., Goethe, & Oberauer, 2008; Oztekin & McElree, 2007) and the structural
differentiation between memory subsystems is largely abandoned. This assumption is based on
a wide variety of behavioral and neurophysiological evidence showing that long-term and
working memory are in much closer interaction than initially thought (which also led to the
introduction of the Episodic Buffer in the traditional working memory model; Baddeley, 2000).
Probably one of the best examples of the close collaboration between working memory and
long-term memory is language acquisition.
How working memory supports language acquisition
Why a Working Memory for Verbal Information?

A longstanding tradition in memory research draws a distinction between verbal and
visuospatial information, on which different memory processes operate. This division was
explicitly present in the working memory model of Baddeley and Hitch (1974) and it remains
present in many recent models. The need for a visuospatial (working) memory is easy to assert
on the basis of evolutionary grounds. A visuospatial working memory provides a survival
advantage because it allows for the retention of visual and spatial information when the
information is no longer accessible from the sensory registers (see Vandierendonck and
Szmalec, 2011, for a collection of recent papers on spatial working memory theory). Such a
memory system allows an organism, for example, to keep track of its nest and to remember
where prey is hiding or where predators are likely to be waiting.
Scientists have sought for similar evolutionary factors behind the verbal part of
(working) memory: Why did humans evolve the capacity to (briefly) retain speech-based
information? What is the evolutionary purpose of working memory for speech-based
materials? It seems unlikely that verbal working memory developed to perform well in
cognitive psychology experiments, where participants are asked to recall lists of digits,
syllables, telephone numbers, words or other artificial stimuli cognitive psychologists are
interested in. What could be the etiology of verbal working memory?
An important breakthrough was published in a seminal paper by Baddeley, Gathercole,
and Papagno (1998). On the basis of a literature review, they proposed that verbal working
memory primarily represents "the processes and mechanisms by which the sound patterns of the
words of the native language are learned by the child" (p. 159). Similar perspectives on verbal
working memory had been introduced before, as in the work of Martin and Saffran (1992) who
suggested that short-term memory for verbal information was merely an emergent property of
the temporary activation of linguistic information. However, the conceptualization
of Baddeley et al. (1998) was more dynamic and open to individual differences, as typically
investigated in working memory research. As a result, Baddeley et al. (1998) have been
highly influential and stimulated a lot of new research, which is summarized below.
Verbal Working Memory and the Learning of New Words
Baddeley et al. (1998) reviewed a large amount of evidence from adults, children, and patients
in support of the idea that verbal working memory primarily is a language learning device. For
example, positive correlations were reported between measures of verbal working memory
capacity (e.g., nonword repetition) and native vocabulary knowledge in children of various ages
(Bowey, 2001; Gathercole & Adams, 1993, 1994). Further experimental evidence was found by
Gathercole and Baddeley (1990) when they taught 5- to 6-year-old children to learn unfamiliar
names (e.g., Pimas) to new toy animals. This was considered as an operationalization of
naturalistic word learning, namely the mapping of a new word form to a referent in the real
world. As expected, performance was worse for children with low nonword repetition scores
than for children with high scores. Further experiments tried to make sure that the correlation
between memory performance and learning new words was really due to constraints imposed by
working memory capacity on language learning, and not due to a third, confounded variable, or
to the fact that the working memory capacity of an individual depends on the language learning
skills of the individual (see also Gathercole, 2006). A first line of research (Duyck, Szmalec,
Kemps, & Vandierendonck, 2003; Papagno, Valentine, & Baddeley, 1991) used the dual-task
methodology to demonstrate that loading verbal working memory resulted in poorer learning of
word-nonword pairs, such as finger-vilsan (in which participants had to name the nonword
upon hearing the word, or vice versa),
but not in learning word-word pairs (e.g., frog-nail), in both adults and 11- to 13-year-old
children.
Other research examined patients with verbal short-term memory deficits, to see
whether these patients found it hard to learn new vocabulary, while at the same time retaining
the language capacities they had before the lesion. For instance, Baddeley (1993) reported a
case study of such a patient, SR, who indeed performed very poorly on a word-new word
association task (pairing English with Finnish words), unless he could associate both words by
forming very elaborate semantic associations. There is also good evidence that children with
specific language impairment have a reduced verbal working memory capacity and that the
latter is causally linked to language acquisition difficulties (Baddeley et al., 1998).

The Importance of Serial Order Memory for Novel Word Learning
More recent research has focused on the question what must be learned in a word-new word
association task (different from a word-word association task) and how working memory is
related to this. Is verbal working memory especially important for learning the new word form
itself, for associating the old with the new word form, or for mapping the semantic
representation of the old word form to the new word form? Or could it be that the effect of
verbal working memory on word - new word association is simply due to the fact that a new,
conflicting name must be given to existing information, which already has a name? In the
latter case, working memory would play a role in the learning of a new language (where
existing objects get new names) but not in the learning of new names of new objects. An
important model to describe the acquisition of new names for new objects (as happens in
children acquiring language) was proposed by Page and Norris (1998). The rationale behind
their Primacy Model of immediate serial recall can be summarized as
follows. Learning a novel word form consists of learning both a sequence of sounds (letters)
and the correct order of the sounds. Learning the new word artecey, for example, involves
learning both the identity and the order of the phonemes: ar, te, cey. According to Page and
Norris (2009), learning such a word is similar to learning the sequence of letters in a letter
span task (i.e., repeating the letters R T C in an immediate serial recall task). In other words,
the model of Page and Norris bridges the gap between verbal working memory and language
acquisition by hypothesizing that the working memory mechanisms involved in immediate
serial recall of letters are the same as those involved in the acquisition of novel word-forms. In
this view, naturalistic word-form learning consists of extracting regularities from the
auditory information in the environment. If a baby repeatedly hears the sequence ar, te, cey in
this specific order, it will develop a lexical representation for artecey, which may then be
linked to a real-world referent that is always present when the baby hears this particular
sequence of sounds.
Page and Norris (2009) argued that the above naturalistic word-learning process can be
mimicked in a laboratory setting using the Hebb repetition effect (Hebb, 1961). The Hebb
repetition effect is observed in an immediate verbal serial recall task when a particular
sequence of digits/syllables is repeated across trials. In such a situation, recall of the repeated
sequence improves over time relative to that of unrepeated sequences. In essence, Page and
Norris (2009) argued that the Hebb repetition effect showed how information related to a
sequence of items (like letters or syllables) in working memory gradually develops into a stable
long-term memory trace that has the same characteristics as a newly acquired word form. The
first empirical evidence supporting Page and Norris's computational exercise was reported by
Mosse and Jarrold (2008). They found a positive correlation between the steepness of the Hebb
learning curve and performance in a paired-associate learning task with
nonwords, in a sample of 5- to 6-year olds. More recently, Szmalec, Duyck, Vandierendonck,
Barbera Mata and Page (2009) presented the first experimental demonstration of the idea that
the verbal Hebb effect can be used as a laboratory analogue of novel word-form learning. They
presented adult participants with sequences of syllables in a standard Hebb learning paradigm
(e.g., zi-lo-ka-ho-fi-se-be-ru-mo). Then, the same participants took part in a lexical decision
experiment including nonwords that were constructed with syllables from the Hebb experiment
(ziloka, hofise, berumo). Szmalec and colleagues observed that participants were slower to
reject the Hebb-based nonwords, compared to matched control nonwords. This suggests that
the immediate serial recall of repeated Hebb sequences leads to representations in lexical
memory similar to those of existing words, just as would happen when people acquire novel
words.
The idea that the Hebb repetition effect operationalizes the memory mechanisms that
support language learning raises the question whether the Hebb effect can also be used to shed
some light on language impairment. In this context, Szmalec, Loncke, Page and Duyck (2011)
demonstrated that adults with dyslexia show impaired Hebb learning across verbal and
visuospatial stimulus modalities. On the basis of these findings, they put forward a new,
memory-based account of dyslexia, in which the various difficulties experienced by people with
dyslexia are assumed to originate from an impairment affecting the learning of serial-order
information in memory, of which Hebb repetition learning is an example. Assuming that a
newly learned word-form is simply an ordered sequence of sublexical items, the Hebb learning
account of dyslexia proposes that the lexical representation’s constituent elements are not
optimally consolidated as a single entry in long-term memory. Hence, lexical access for that
entry during reading will be impaired and normal procedures for mapping grapheme sequences
to phoneme sequences are disrupted (Whitney & Cornelissen, 2005).
Similar ideas have been proposed by Gupta (2009), who also sees a new word (or a
nonword) as a novel sequence of sounds, similar to a sequence of digits or letters to be learned
in an immediate serial recall task (or span task). Based on this assumption, Gupta hypothesized
that effects typically observed in immediate serial recall tasks should be present in the learning
of new words or nonwords as well. In a series of elegant studies, he indeed observed that the
phonemes of syllables within a newly learned word form are subject to primacy and recency
effects (Gupta, 2005; Gupta, Lipinski, Abbs, & Lin, 2005). The primacy effect refers to the
finding that the items presented first in a series are better recalled than items presented later,
independent of whether the test follows immediately after the presentation of the series or after
a distraction task that depletes short-term memory. The recency effect refers to the finding that
the items presented last are better recalled when the test immediately follows the series
presentation but not when a distraction task intervenes. The fact that the same effects are
observed in new word learning and serial recall further strengthens the claim that naturalistic
word-form learning and immediate serial recall rely on the same working memory
mechanisms. Based on these findings, Gupta (2009; Gupta & Tisdale, 2009) developed a
computational model that could simulate the various effects by making a distinction between a
lexical (word) level and a sublexical (sound) level of item representations and a serial order
mechanism that encoded the order of the lexical and sublexical elements.
A third model stressing the analogy between serial-order learning in short-term
memory tasks and language learning was developed by Burgess and Hitch (1999, 2006). An
interesting feature of this model is that it is a connectionist model consisting of nothing but
layers of nodes connected to each other. This allowed the authors to provide a common
explanatory mechanism for effects like serial position, lexicality and Hebb repetition. Further
important is that the model made an explicit distinction between serial order information for
unknown stimuli (new words) and item information for known stimuli (old words), which
were based on different processes.
Finally, the distinction between memory for item information and memory for order
information has been documented in neuroscientific and neuropsychological research as well
(Majerus, Lekeu, Van der Linden, & Salmon, 2001; Majerus, Poncelet, Elsen, & Van der
Linden, 2006; Majerus, Poncelet, Greffe, & Van der Linden, 2006; Majerus, Van der Linden,
Mulder, Meulemans, & Peters, 2004). Using a correlational approach, Majerus et al. (2006)
explored the contribution of three different short-term memory skills to novel word-form
learning in patients. These were short-term memory for serial order information, item recall,
and item recognition. The results showed that only memory for serial order played a role in
acquiring novel phonological word forms and, therefore, supported the hypothesis that the
representation of item and order information are distinct factors in word learning. Majerus et
al. (2006) further explored the item v. order distinction with fMRI. They observed that
memory for order and items activated different brain regions. Order relied on the right
intraparietal sulcus, the right cerebellum, and the bilateral premotor cortex, whereas item
memory activated two regions associated with language processing, namely the superior
temporal gyrus and the left fusiform gyrus.
Overall the above findings provide compelling evidence for a causal relation between
short-term serial recall and naturalistic word-form learning. Therefore, they reinforce the
assumption that the primary purpose of human verbal working is to support the acquisition of
language.
Verbal Working Memory and Second Language Word Learning
Evidently, the findings described in the previous sections have implications for second
language (L2) learning. One of the key requirements of L2 learning is the acquisition of new
word forms, which initially are nothing but sequences of sounds and letters. Service (1992)
was one of the first to specifically examine the relationship between nonword repetition and
learning new words in L2. She ran a longitudinal study of Finnish-speaking primary school
children learning English. At the beginning of the study, a nonword repetition task was
administered and the scores on this test were correlated with English performance levels nearly
three years later. Service observed that the nonword spans were a significant, independent
predictor of L2 proficiency. Cheung (1996) ran another early study. He correlated nonword
span with the number of trials 7 th grade participants from Hong Kong needed to acquire new
English L2 words. Cheung found the expected inverse relationship (participants with higher
nonword spans learned the words faster), at least for the participants with vocabulary sizes
lower than average, in line with the idea that verbal working memory is particularly important
for acquiring new words and less so for the processing of familiar words.
The studies of Service (1992) and Cheung (1996) have since been replicated and
extended in several studies with convergent results, a good review of which is given by
Hummel and French (2010). So, there is little doubt that verbal working memory is involved
in the acquisition of L2 words as much as it is in the acquisition of new L1 words. It also
seems reasonable to assume that the working memory processes involved in L2 and L1 word
learning are the same, although there is not much empirical evidence on this aspect yet, except
for a study by Majerus, Poncelet, Van der Linden, and Weekes (2008). At the same time, there
is fMRI evidence that for low-proficiency bilinguals order encoding may be less
efficient in L2 than in L1 (Majerus, et al, 2008), suggesting that in early stages L2 word
learning may be more difficult than L1 word learning.
Working Memory Involvement in Other Aspects of Language Processing
So far, we have reviewed evidence showing that verbal working memory (more precisely
memory for serial order and item information) supports the acquisition of novel lexical forms,
both in native and foreign languages. It is important to realize, however, that hypotheses about
the involvement of working memory in the human language system have not been restricted to
word learning. In the final section of this part, we briefly review some more ideas that have
been proposed about how working memory may be involved in the integration of individual
words into coherent sentences and discourse representations. Indeed the correlation between
working memory span measures and reading comprehension, originally discovered by
Daneman and Carpenter (1980), strongly points to the importance of working memory for text
understanding. However, it has been very difficult thus far to design paradigms that are as
convincing as those of novel word acquisition.
One of the first questions addressed by working memory proponents was whether
working memory is involved in sentence parsing (Just & Carpenter, 1992; Waters & Caplan,
1996). Sentence parsing refers to the processes needed to organize the words of a sentence into
a proposition (or set of propositions) summarizing who did what to whom. Indeed, it seems
obvious that verbal working memory (or the phonological loop in Baddeley and Hitch’s model)
is needed to retain the surface structure of a sentence until the proper syntactic interpretation
has been made. Sentences can be syntactically complex with large distances between related
parts (e.g., between the subject and the verb, as in “when the girl with the red hood, who was
dancing in the wood, saw…”). In addition, many sentences are locally ambiguous and may
require some kind of reanalysis. This is shown most clearly in so-called
garden-path sentences, such as “the horse chased past the barn fell”. For these sentences,
participants are likely to experience parsing difficulties because the structure of the sentence
does not agree with the initially preferred interpretation (i.e., “the horse that was chased” vs.
“the horse that was chasing”). Given the need to retain word order information until the correct
syntactic interpretation has been found, it seems reasonable to assume that people with high
working memory capacity will perform better on sentence parsing than people with low
capacity (e.g., Swets, Desmet, Hambrick, & Ferreira, 2007; Vallar & Baddeley, 1984). A
problem with this intuitively appealing hypothesis, however, is that syntactic comprehension
seems to be affected little by neurological conditions resulting in reduced working memory
capacity. Only for very complex sentences can an effect be shown. This finding led Caplan and
Waters (1999) to argue that sentences are interpreted by a system independent of working
memory (the so-called separate sentence interpretation resource), giving rise to a vivid
discussion about whether or not verbal working memory as traditionally measured is needed for
sentence parsing (e.g., Lauro, Reis, Cohen, Cechetto, & Papagno, 2010, for a recent
installment). O’Brien, Segalowitz, Collentine, & Freed (2006), for instance, claimed that verbal
working memory capacity (as measured with nonword repetition) predicts the development of
narrative and grammatical competences in L2, in English-speaking adults learning Spanish.
Still, it cannot be denied that the consequences of reduced memory span are much more severe
for novel word learning than for sentence parsing, suggesting that the involvement of verbal
working memory will be less for the understanding of sentences than for the learning of new
words.
In a review article on the relationship between working memory and language,
Baddeley (2003) mentioned two other possible contributions of working memory to language
understanding. He thought it likely that visuospatial working memory would be involved in

maintaining a representation of the page and its layout during reading. Readers are amazingly
accurate at localizing previously read words. This can be seen, for instance, when they make
regressions upon encountering a comprehension problem in text reading. These regressive eye
movements are usually remarkably accurate (Kennedy, Brooks, Flynn, & Prophet, 2003) and
seem to require access to a spatial map of the text. Baddeley (2003) further hypothesized that
visuospatial working memory may also be involved in the understanding of spatial
information (e.g., grammatical structures involving spatial terms such as above, below,
shorter, and so on). Both ideas, however, still need to be tested.
How language processing supports working memory
Thus far, we have summarized findings showing that working memory is crucially involved in
language acquisition. Of equal interest is the reverse question, namely whether working
memory’s processing (executive control) and storage (span/capacity) functions are also
influenced by language processing, or whether they remain unchanged. One research area that
has proven particularly fruitful in this respect concerns the consequences of bilingualism for
executive control functions.
Executive Control Advantages in Bilingualism
Recent studies point towards important cognitive benefits of being bilingual. Bialystok, Craik,
and Freedman (2007), for example, found that the age of onset of dementia is on average four
years later in bilinguals than in monolinguals. Cognitive advantages of bilingualism are
assumed to originate from the requirement to continuously control the activation of lexical
representations from the non-target language so that they do not interfere with the ongoing
language processing (Green, 1998).
There is now a good consensus that both languages of a bilingual are always to some
extent active in lexical memory and interact with each other (Brysbaert & Duyck, 2010). For
instance, it has been observed that bilinguals read native language (L1) words faster if the L2
translations are similar in form (i.e., when they are so-called cognates, such as apple and appel
in English and Dutch). This is even true when the participants are reading complete sentences
in L1 (Van Assche, Duyck, Hartsuiker, & Diependaele, 2009), which indicates that lexical
access in bilinguals is not language selective. Similarly, there is evidence for unremitting
competition between word forms from different languages in speech production. Ivanova and
Costa (2008), for example, reported that L1 speech production is slower in Spanish-Catalan
bilinguals than in monolinguals. Gollan and Acenas (2004) observed that bilinguals experience
more tip-of-the-tongue states than monolinguals (these are situations in which one cannot
retrieve the correct lexical entry for a concept).
Despite the fact that the languages of a bilingual are constantly in competition with
each other, there is little evidence for control failures, as can be concluded from the few
switching errors made. These are rare in comparison with other types of errors and hesitations
in speech. Hence, bilinguals seem to have an efficient cognitive control mechanism dealing
with the language competition in a highly interactive bilingual language processing system.
This raises questions about the nature and the functioning of such a cognitive control system,
and the extent to which this control system is specialized for language, or generalizes to other
cognitive domains.
Interest in the language control of bilinguals took off after the publication of papers by
Meuter and Allport (1999) and Costa and Santesteban (2004). In the former study, bilinguals
were required to name pictures in the language indicated by an external cue. The experiment
contained trials in which the language was the same as in the previous trial, and trials in
which the language switched. Meuter and Allport observed that bilinguals were slower in the
switch trials than in the non-switch trials, and that the switching costs were larger when the
language changed from L2 to L1 than vice versa. They interpreted the latter finding as due to
the fact that more inhibition of L1 is required when participants speak in L2 than the other way
around.
IOSR Journal Of Humanities And Social Science (IOSR-
JHSS) Volume 25, Issue 6, Series 1 (June. 2020) 26-30 e-
ISSN: 2279-0837, p-ISSN: 2279-0845.
www.iosrjournals.org
Noticing Hypothesis in Second Language Acquisition
Nguyen Thi Phuong Nhung, M.A
The Faculty of Languages and Social Science, Ba Ria - Vung Tau University,
Vietnam Corresponding Author: Nguyen Thi Phuong Nhung
ABSTRACT:
As one of the most influential theoretical underpinnings in second language acquisition (SLA),Noticing
hypothesis hasbeen receiving an increasing amount of attention from researchers in this field over the last decades.
However, there have been different perspectives on the role of Noticing.In order to provide multi-dimensional
perspectives on Noticing Hypothesis, contribute to the exploration of the Noticing Hypothesis,and reaffirm the
importance of this hypothesis in SLA, this paperwill briefly present the contents of the hypotheses by
Schmidtand Robinson before presenting Krashen’s perspective on the issue, which stood in contrast withthe
other two. Also, the comparison between these perspectives will be made. Finally, a critical review on the work
of Schmidt’s noticing hypothesis will be presented.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------
Date of Submission: 20-05-2020 Date of Acceptance: 06-06-2020
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------
I. INTRODUCTION
Noticing Hyphothesis is a concept used in second language acquisition proposed by Richard Schmidt
in 1990. Schmidt identified three aspects of consciousness which encompasses awareness, intention,
andknowledge (Schmidt, 1990). In that, noticing is considered as a low level of awareness. According to Schmidt
(1990), two levels of awareness includes awareness at the level of noticing and awareness at the level of
understanding. He claimed that while awareness at the level of noticing is the vital and sufficient condition for
language learning, awareness at the level of understanding can facilitate second language acquisition but it is
unnecessary (Schmidt,1990).Through many studies, Schmidt continually confirmed the vital role of noticing
(1990, 1993,1994,1995,2001, 2010). However, over the past years, this hypothesis has been regarded as a
controversial topic and gainedtheconcerns of many researchers on the vital role of Noticing. One of the dominant
advocates is Robinson who also highly evaluated the role of noticing to successful second language acquisition
(1995, 2003). In contrast, amongmany researchers with opposite perspectives, Krashen (1979, 1981, 1982, 1985,
1994, 2013)
In order to have a closer look at different perspectives on the role of noticing, in the scope of this paper,
the works of three researchers mentioned above will be briefly summarized. Secondly, the comparison between
thethree perspectives will be made before presenting a critical review on the work of Schmidt’s noticing
hypothesis.
Introduction to Noticing Hypothesis
TheNoticing hypothesis has its roots in two case studies of Richard Schmidt. In the first study, he found
that Wes - a U.S immigrant from Japan was a very good learner in every area of language except limited
development in morphological or syntactic accuracy. Therefore, Schmidt concluded that in thecase of adult
learning grammar, it most likely impossible to learn without consciousness (Schmidt, 2010). He also showed
evidence from his second case study to support the noticing hypothesis which was about his experience when
learning Portuguese during his five-month stay in Brazil. Although he and Frota found some frequently used forms
in the input, the acquisition started only when they consciously notice these forms in the input (Schmidt& Frota,
1986, Schmidt, 2010). He added despite being corrected many times during theconversations with native
speakers, without consciousness, corrective feedback of his mistakeswas ineffective. This refers to another
hypothesis that Schmidt called “noticing the gap”. Through this case, he put forward the idea that to avoid errors, it
is necessary for learners to consciously compare their target language input and output. Based on the findings in
these two case studies, Schmidt drawthe conclusion that “intake is what learners consciously notice”(Schmidt,
1990, p.149).
DOI: 10.9790/0837-2506012630 www.iosrjournals.org 26 |Page
Summary of each researcher’s work
Schmidt’s perspective on noticing hypothesis
Schmidtreferred Noticing to the “registration (detection) of the occurrence of a stimulus event in
conscious awareness and subsequent storage in long term” (Schmidt, 1994, p.179). He assumed that noticing “is
the elements of the surface structure of utterances in the input” rather than the underlying rule (Schmidt, 2001,
p.5). In Schmidt’s work in 2010, he confirmed that noticing strongly influences on second and foreign language
learning.
Schmidt strongly confirmed that noticing is “necessary and sufficient” for the learners to make the
conversion of input to intake (1990, p.29). In other words,a learner’s acquisitionprogress could not begin until
the learner is aware of the linguistic features of the input. Schmidt alsorefers the term “noticing” to “focal
awareness” (Atkinson &Shiffrin, 1968) “episodic awareness” (Allport, 1979, p.132) and “apperceived input”
(Grass, 1988) (cited by Schmidt, 1995, p.132). The similarity of these constructs is that they detect the degree at
which incentives are experienced subjectively. Schmidt, therefore, explained noticing refers to anindividual’s
experience which can be reported verbally and depend on the particular condition because some conscious
experiences are intrinsically hard to describe (Schmidt, 1990).
From Schmidt’s perspective, formal linguistic considerations including the instruction, frequency,
perceptual salience, skill level, and task demands can influence the input(Schmidt, 1990). In detail, an instruction
may be vital in preparing learners to notice linguistic features by forming their expectations about language. In
terms of frequency, the more frequently the language feature appears in the input, the more likely it would be
noticed and become part of the interlanguage system. A similar pattern could be experienced in perceptual
salience, which is the more prominent an item form at the input, the more likelily it would be noticed and
internalized. As regards skill level, Schmidt (1900) pointed out differences in learners’ skill levels might
determine who noticed what. When comes to task demands, thisis the way in whichan instructional taskdrives
individuals to notice specific linguistic itemsbecause it is vital to completethat task.Also, Schmidt (2001) added
that “noticing is the first step in language building, not the end of the process” (p.31).
Robinson’s perspective on noticing hypothesis
The Noticing Hypothesis has been supported by a large number of SLA researchers. One of the
advocates of this notion is Peter Robinson who shared a similar perspective on the significance of noticing. As
stated by Robinson (1995, 2003), learning can not take place without the existence of awareness at the level of
noticing. Robinson defined “noticing as detection with awareness and rehearsal in short-term
memory”(Robinson, 1995, p.318). According to Robinson, theNoticing hypothesisis regarded as a detailed
description of inherent features belonging to the “attentional mechanisms”, and their connection with
contemporary replicas of the “memory organization” (Robinson, 1995, p.283).In other words, Specifically,
Noticing is a result of the process of rehearsal, through which linguistic features in short-term memory are
encoded in long-term memory, hence, noticing is considered vital for language learning. He alsoput forward the
idea that there is a need to differentiate between short-term memory in which noticing occurs and long-term
memory. Short-term memory is regarded as a subsystem of long-term memory which is in the state of activation
(Robinson, 1995, p.318).
In his study, to expand the basic theory of noticing, he took a closer look at the essence of attention and
memory. He assumed that memory allocation and attentional capabilities could exert animpact on noticing as
well as second language learning. Robinson supposed that “noticing can be identified with what is both detected
and then further activated following the allocation of attentional resources from a central executive” (Robinson,
1995, p.297).He added the volume of short-term memory controls the amount of knowledge noticed when the
task is carried out. These variances lead to distinctive performance on specific tasks. This, therefore,
accompanies with a distinction between different learners’ rates in their second language learning development.
(Robinson, 1995, p. 320).
Krashen’s perspective on noticing hypothesis
Krashen made a clear distinction between learning and acquisition. According to Krashen, “the
acquisition is a subconscious process” which is like the process that children experience to acquire their first
language. The language acquirers, therefore, acquire the language subconsciously, they only consciously using
language for communication purposes not the structure of their utterances (Krashen, 1982, p.10). In Krashen’s
perspective, when the language has been acquired, it is kept in our mind subconsciously without our
consciousness. Also, children and adults are unaware of when acquiring language (Krashen, 1982, p.10).
Krashen posited two facts related to language acquisition. Firstly, what all language acquirers need is to
understand the messages and this process requires no effort and work. Secondly, second language acquisition
happens naturally when learners are exposed to an adequate amount of comprehensible input (Krashen, 2013,
P.2).
Through the Monitor hypothesis, Krashen postulated that formal rules or conscious learning make a little
contribution to second language acquisition. Conscious rules are only used when three conditions are met. First,
in term of time, learners need an adequate amount of time to think and use the rules. Second, learners must pay
their attention to the form. Finally, learners have to know to rule (Krashen, 1982, p.16).
Krashen also assumed learners do not have to be aware of the form of the sentences when learning
because they could correct self-correct just as they felt the need for grammar (Krashen, 1981). When we intend
to use thetarget language to convey something, just before the utterance is made, we will look through and
examine it internally and then use what we have learned consciously for error correction (Krashen, 2013, P.2).
Similarities and differences in the work of each researcher
Firstly, Schmidt highly evaluated the necessary and sufficient role of noticing in successful second
language acquisition. Similarly, Robinson shared the same perspective. He affirmed that noticing which is the
outcome of encoding in short-term memory is essential for second language learning. In the view of Schmidt,
noticing - a subsystem of awareness- is sufficient for the conversion from input to intake in second language
acquisition. However, Robinson stated Schmidtdidn’t exert any detailed explanations. Whereas, in Robinson’s
finding, he took a closer look at attentional mechanisms and their inner connection from a number of subsets of
the central executive which are deemed as great attributions to the importance of noticing (Robinson, 1995).
Identifying clearly the relationship between attention and memory, Robinson made a complementary to complete
Schmidt’s hypothesis. Meanwhile,Krashen had an oppositional perspective with the two researchers discussed
above. Although Krashen acknowledged the occurrence of noticing in the second language acquisition and
learning, he denies the role of it.As discussed above, in Krashen’s perspective, language acquisition happens
naturally without our consciousness and it, thus, store in the central executive subconsciously. While dismissing
the importance of noticing in second language acquisition, he stressed the role of understanding - a higher level
of awareness than noticing that learners acquire language and develop language skills when they understand the
utterance that is conveyed (Krashen,2003). In contrast, Schmidt highlighted the vital role of noticing but took a
poor view of theimportance of understanding because he assumed that it makes learning process easier but
unnecessary (Schmidt, 1990).Furthermore, in terms of instruction, Schmidt (1990) proposed that instruction plays
a vital role in making learners ready to notice linguistic attribute by setting up their expectations whereas in
Krashen’s study, he provided evidence to confirm that using formal instruction is not essential for theacquisition
of reading ability, vocabulary, spelling, and grammar (Krashen, 2009).
In addition, regarding detection, while it is essential to detect information for dealing with new stimuli,
Schmidt claimed that onlythe subsystem of detection which is chosen through focal attention can be “noticed,”
and that is the attentional level at which the conversion from input to intake for learning takes place (Schmidt,
2010).Robinson agreed with Schmidt and stressed the role of detection. As mentioned above, Robinson stated
detection is necessary as a first stage to intake, “but cannot be coextensive with it” (Robinson, 2008).
Finally, as discussed above in Krashen’s research, focusing on form is seen as one condition among
thethree required conditions to make conscious rules be used by second language learners. In this condition,
language learners must pay attention to the language form or correctness. Likewise, Robinson cited Long’s
finding as evidence for his ideas about focusing on form, which refers to attentional mechanisms allocation, may
be necessary to improve and indicate the way to select attention to input elements. If not, it can be not noticed,
performed, and seriously unlearned (Robinson, 2008).
Criticism of the Noticing Hypothesis
Schmidt’s noticing hypothesis received considerable supports from severalresearchers such as Ellis
(1994,1997), Skehan (1998), and Gass (1988). However, it has also been facingvarious criticisms. This part is to
present the critical analyses of some researchers from the past to recent time on the Noticing hypothesis of
Schmidt.
First of all, Tomblin and Villa (1994) expressed their disagreement with Schmidt’s idea by putting
forward the idea that attention and awareness should be separated. Also, in contrast with Schmidt, they stressed
the role of detection rather than awareness and assume awarenessin second language learning (Tomblin and Villa,
1994, as cited in Robinson, 2003).
Secondly, as mentioned above, Robinson (1995) also commented that noticing hypothesis of Schmidt
is inadequate and Schmidt did not have any clear explanation for the hypothesis which stressed the necessary
role of noticing in turninginput into intake. Therefore, Robinson researched the relationship between attention
and memory to complete Schmidt’s hypothesis.
Furthermore, Truscott (1998) made a clear evaluation on the findings of Schmidt and his critical review
is considered as the most well-argued one. He supposed that noticing is weak in a number of aspects. Firstly,
relating to the work of attention that Schmidt used to support noticing hypothesis. Truscott stated that Schmidt
claimed the essential role of attention in learning and it is identified as awareness; however it is hard to explain
whatattention means and decide the time for its allocation to a given task. Truscott postulated the relationship
between attention and consciousness which Schmidt proposed is like an assumption rather than an empirical
finding. He added the research and theory related to attention, awareness, and learning are vulnerable to contribute
to any strong claims about the association of the three. Especially, he pointed out some evidence to demonstrate
that form-focused instruction is unhelpful and ineffective. Truscott also commented noticing hypothesis of
Schmidt is also unclear in interpretation and testing which leads to difficulties when being applied in natural
language acquisition. Through his clear critical review, he concluded that the underpinning of noticing hypothesis
is vulnerable and lack of property theories. Caroll (1999) shared the same idea with Truscott that Schmidt’s
noticing hypothesis is inadequate and the absence of property theory causes problematic.
In addition, Leow (2001) pointed out the weakness of the hypothesis relates to the limitations of
Schmidt’s researches (1990) which supported the level of noticing as awareness at consciousness. Leow supposed
that his findings were not associated with the function of consciousness or awareness. This is because the
evidence, which Schmidt provided to support his hypothesis, was solely unreliable in nature.
Finally, Philp (2003),who also pointed the fault of noticing hypothesis, posited that noticing not only
depends on attentional resources but also various factor such as learner readiness, input frequency, saliency,
theinfluence of thefirst language, the degree of understanding, etc. ( Philp, 2003).
II. CONCLUSION
It is apparent that Noticing hypothesis has been facing a number of criticisms. However, regardless of
its limitations, Noticing is regarded as an important stage and exerts considerable impacts on successful second
language acquisition and learning. According to Schmidt, “people learn about the things they attend to and do
not learn much from the things they do not attend” (Schmidt, 2001, as cited by Ellis, 2015). Ellis added if there is
no Noticing, there is no learning (Ellis, 1995, p.89). Also, Noticing is considered as a factor that helps to connect
input and output as well as implicit and explicit learning. However, as Truscott stated in his research, the
theories based on Noticing hypothesis need to be much more evolved in order to exactly clarify the inherent
features of knowledge that are noticed in the input (Truscott, 1998).
A closer look at different perspectives and understanding the extent that noticing in language learning is crucial
for educators to design more effective teaching activities, courses, and programs.
REFERENCES
[1]. Cross, J. (2002, December). “Noticing in SLA: Is it a valid concept?”. Retrieved from http://www.tesl-
ej.org/ej23/a2.html
[2]. Ellis, R. (1995). Interpretation tasks for grammar teaching. TESOL quarterly, 29 (1), 87- 105.
[3]. Ellis, R. (2015). Understanding second language acquisition. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
[4]. G. S Buriro, G.S.(2013, July). Synthetic and Critical Review of a Second Language Theory: The Noticing
Hypothesis of Richard Schmidt. Retrieved from
http://ijee.org/yahoo_site_admin/assets/docs/13.17210803.pdf
[5]. Krashen, S. (1981). Second language acquisition and second language learning. Oxford: Oxford
University Press.
[6]. Krashen, S. (1982). Principles and practice in second language acquisition. New York: Pergamon Press.
[7]. Krashen, S. (1985). The input hypothesis: Issues and implications. Oxford: Pergamon Press. [8]. Krashen, S.
(2009). Input matters in SLA : The comprehension hypothesis extended (pp.81- 94). Bristol:
Multilingual Matters.
[9]. Jenefer Philp (2003). Constraints on “noticing the gap” . Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 25, pp.
99-126.
[10]. Robinson, P. (1995). Attention, memory and the noticing hypothesis. Language Learning 45(2), 283-
331.
[11]. Robinson, S. (2003, January, 11 t h). Attention and Memory during SLA. Retrieved from
http://www.researchgate.net/publication/229767846_Attention_and_Memory_during_ SLA
[12]. Schmidt, R. (1990). The role of consciousness in second language learning. Applied Linguistics 11, 129-
158.
[13]. Schmidt, R. (1994). Implicit learning and the cognitive unconscious: Of artificial grammars and SLA. In
N. Ellis (Ed.), Implicit and explicit learning of languages (pp. 165-209). London: Academic Press. [-8-]
[14]. Schmidt, R. (1995). Consciousness and foreign language learning: A tutorial on attention and awareness
in learning. In R. Schmidt (Ed.), Attention and awareness in foreign language learning (pp. 1-63).
Honolulu, HI: University of Hawaii, National Foreign Language Resource Center.
[15]. Schmidt, R. (2001). Attention. In P. Robinson (Ed.), Cognition and second language instruction (pp. 3-
32). Cambridge University Press.
[16]. Schmidt, R. (2010). Attention, awareness, and individual differences in language learning. In W. M. Chan,
S. Chi, K. N. Cin, J. Istanto, M. Nagami, J. W. Sew, T. Suthiwan & I. Walker, Proceedings of Classic 2010,
Singapore, December 2-4 (pp. 721-737). Singapore: National University of Singapore, Center for
Language Studies.
[17]. Tomlin, R. & Villa, H. (1994). Attention in cognitive science and second language acquisition. Studies in
Second Language Acquisition, 16, 183-203.
[18]. Truscott, J. (1998). Noticing in second language acquisition: a critical review. Second Language
Research, 14, 2, 102-135.
Nguyen Thi Phuong Nhung. “Noticing Hypothesis in Second Language Acquisition.” IOSR
Journal of Humanities and Social Science (IOSR-JHSS), 25(6), 2020, pp. 26-30.
Krashen Revisited: Case Study of the Role of Input, Motivation and Identity in
Second Language Learning
Francis Bailey
University of Kentucky
United States
Ahmed Kadhum Fahad
University of Thi-Qar
Iraq
Received: 3/7/2021 Accepted: 6/6/2021 Published: 6/28/2021
Abstract:
Stephen Krashen has a long and enduring legacy in the field of second language acquisition. His
“Input Hypothesis” was among the very first attempts to create a coherent theoretical account of
second language learning. Krashen argued that learners can acquire language through the process
of comprehending it. While elements of his model have been extensively critiqued, this idea has
endured and offers teachers a clear mandate to provide learners with abundant opportunities to
making meaning of the target language. Utilizing a case study of an English language learner,
Krashen’s model is challenged and enriched by considering the role that motivation and identity
play in learning. Teachers tapping into an important source of learner motivation, role models
drawn from the local community or broader society, can inspire and energize students’ studies
and help them visualize a life in which a second language plays a vital role. Building upon
Krashen’s idea of the importance of language teachers and programs creating robust reading
programs for a sustained engagement with second language print resources, the authors propose to
expand his vision and include all manner of multimedia and technologies. However, such a
program can only succeed if teachers mediate their learners’ social identities and motivations for
sustained second language learning.
Keywords: identity, Krashen, linguistic input, motivation, second language development, reading
Cite as: Bailey, F., & Fahad, A. K. (2021). Krashen Revisited: Case Study of the Role of Input,
Motivation and Identity in Second Language Learning. Arab World English Journal, 12 (2) 540 -
550. DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.24093/awej/vol12no2.36
540
Arab World English Journal (AWEJ) Volume 12. Number 2. June 2021
Krashen Revisited: Case Study of the Role of Input Bailey & Fahad
Krashen Revisited: Case Study of the Role of Input, Motivation and Identity in
Second Language Learning
Optimal input is comprehensible, compelling. There is a lot of it and the context is rich
which means the context helps you understand the new input. (Krashen, 2020)
I. Introduction
Researchers in second language acquisition (SLA) have provided a consistent message over
nearly forty years. The act of comprehending a new language, either through listening or reading,
lies at the heart of second language (L2) development. Learners use linguistic input, the oral and
written language found in books, movies and a multitude of digital sources, as the raw material
to create an understanding of the patterns of a new language system. Crucially, learners must be
able to make meaning of this input in order to use it for their own language development.
In this paper, we explore this insight and its implications for language teachers by turning
to Stephen Krashen (1982,1985), who proposed a theory of second language acquisition that put
comprehended input at the center of language learning. He connected the learning of a second
(third, etc.) language to the same cognitive processes that we see in children learning a first
language. The comprehension of contextualized input drives language learning. Since the 1980’s,
Krashen has been a fierce promoter for this perspective and a tireless advocate for the powerful
role that a well-designed second language reading program can and should play in an effective
language program.
While learning theory can provide a broad and abstract perspective on language
development, it is left to teachers to determine what it all means for their particular learners, in
specific classroom settings. In this paper, to gain insight into situated language learning and
teaching, we explore one of the authors’ own experiences of learning English in Iraq. This allows
us to examine the intersection of three issues that we believe are central to second language
acquisition: comprehended linguistic input, motivation and identity.
In the summer of 2020, the authors participated in a webinar with Stephen Krashen (Fahad
& Krashen, 2020). AUTHOR-2, the organizer of the webinar, and AUTHOR-1, the invited
discussant, had an opportunity to talk with Dr. Krashen about his ideas and explore some of their
implications for classroom teachers. In this paper, we draw upon this conversation and
Krashen’s current writings as well as AUTHOR-2’s story of his own language development in
order to gain insight into the complex and messy business of language learning and teaching.
II. Revisiting Krashen
"The best methods are therefore those that supply 'comprehensible input' in low anxiety situations,
containing messages that students really want to hear. These methods do not force early production
in the second language but allow students to produce when they are 'ready', recognizing that
improvement comes from supplying communicative and comprehensible input, and not from
forcing and correcting production." (Krashen, 1982, P.7)
Arab World English Journal www.awej.org 541
ISSN: 2229-9327
Stephen Krashen has a long and enduring legacy in the field of second language
acquisition. His “Input Hypothesis” was the very first attempt to create a coherent theoretical
account of second language learning. This theory proposed that learners develop second language
competence primarily through the process of comprehending the target language. Krashen believed
that much of language learning is subconscious and happens automatically when the learner is
focused on meaning (Krashen, 1981). Krashen drew parallels between first language learning by
children and second language acquisition by older learners, including adults. He argued that the
mental capacities used by children in learning their native language are available for second
language learning.
Krashen introduced a short-hand way to think about the type of input that actually
promotes second language development: i +1 . The symbol “i” refers to a learner’s current stage
of language development; the symbol “+1” is intended to capture the idea that learners require
input that is slightly beyond their current proficiency level in the target language. While this
concept is problematic for researchers (Ellis, 2012), many language teachers around the world
embraced this conception of language learning as it provided a clear mandate for teachers: support
your students as they attempt to make sense of new, raw linguistic material in the second
language. For educators creating new curriculum, it illuminated a path forward: build a course
or language program around students comprehending increasingly complex language structures.
While Krashen’s formulation of comprehensible input has proven controversial among
linguists, which we discuss below, the idea that linguistic input comprehended by learners drives
second language development is central to current theories of second language acquisition (Ellis
& Shintani, 2013; Gass & Selinker, 2008). The human brain is wonderfully adept at finding
patterns and regularities in data of all types, including language. As long as the learner is
motivated to attend and make sense of incoming linguistic input, the fundamental condition for
second language acquisition has been met. In this scheme, a central role of the language teacher
is to support their learners' attempts to make meaning of the new language.
Krashen also posited a component of the theory that he called the “affective filter.” If
comprehended input drives second language learning, then anything that impedes learners’ access
to input limits language development. With this component, Krashen introduced the role of
learner emotion or “affect” into his theory. The “affective filter” functions metaphorically in this
way; when a learner is feeling relaxed and safe, his filter is low and input flows easily and is
readily processed. When a learner is feeling stressed, unmotivated or fearful, the affective filter
is high and input is blocked or reduced which hinders language acquisition. While this device is
simplistic in its mechanistic conception of the role of learner emotions, it did introduce this
important variable into a theory of language learning.
Krashen’s theory challenged centuries of accepted second language pedagogy. Krashen
urged teachers to abandon traditional classroom learning activities such as translation from the
second language to student’ first language and students memorizing grammar rules, vocabulary
lists and instructional dialogues. In their place, Krashen’s Monitor Theory proposed that primary
learning activities center around learners’ engagement with oral or written language. The teacher’s
primary job is to support students’ understanding of these second language texts.
ISSN: 2229-9327
III. Challenges to Krashen’s Theory
Several of Krashen’s key tenets have been challenged since their publication in early
1980’s. One element of Krashen’s theory that has not been embraced by researchers or educators is
the idea that language production plays no significant role in language acquisition
(Swain,1995). In other words, Krashen has claimed that learners do not develop grammatical
competence by speaking and writing. However, SLA researcher, Merrill Swain, cogently argued
that language output has multiple functions in language learning, including providing learners with
an opportunity to try out their own hypotheses about the new language.
Macky (2012) provides research evidence that suggests learner interaction in the second
language can help them negotiate or clarify meaning which also facilitates second language
development. Many teachers have been skeptical of the idea that students’ language use plays no
significant role in learning based upon their own teaching experiences in the language classroom;
student language production and use are bound up in complex ways with learner motivation,
classroom engagement and the messy process of figuring out how a new language works.
Another problematic element of Krashen’s theory has been his formulation of i +1 . While
often embraced by classroom teachers, researchers have rejected the concept as ill-defined and
untestable (Ellis, 2012; McLaughlin ,1987). How do we know that understanding a challenging
new form in a language is learned when we use context to guess its meaning? What type of unit
is “+1?” Many teachers around the world have classes of forty students, or more. How would it
be possible to effectively teach to all their different i+1 levels? Krashen has captured an intuitive
sense that learners must be challenged with new linguistic material that is not too far beyond what
they can currently handle. However, in terms of a theory of learning, the concept is just too
unclear to be tested through research, which is a fatal flaw in a field devoted to empirical research.
IV. Wonderful, Messy Success
Teachers have continued to embrace the concept of “comprehensible input” as a heuristic device
for lesson planning. Krashen’s insistence that language production does not play a central role in
second language learning has also been, in our estimates, successfully challenged (Swain,1995).
We do not intend to revisit these controversies in depth in this paper.
In many ways, Krashen’s theory has been a wonderful, messy success. It has provided the
fields of second language acquisition and second language teaching with new insights into
language learning and the role that teachers can play in that complex process. In the decades since
its dissemination, it has inspired spirited debate and countless research studies that explored each
claim that Krashen made in his original formulation. While aspects of his theory have been
challenged, rejected or modified, his central insight that language input that is comprehended lies
at the heart of second language acquisition has been widely accepted in the research field.
However, this perspective has never been fully understood and accepted by classroom teachers.
We have come to believe that Krashen’s conceptions of second language development
would greatly benefit from a focus on issues of learner identity and motivation. His concept of
“affective filter” could be viewed as an attempt to explain how motivation factors into language
ISSN: 2229-9327
development. Low motivation would restrict the amount of input that is comprehended by a learner
and, thereby, limits opportunities for engagement with the massive amount of input required for
language development. The issue of learner identity and its role in second language development
is not addressed by Krashen in the original theory or his subsequent writings.
In the next section of the paper, we explore our belief that identity and motivation are
intertwined. These two concepts are central to the efforts of practicing classroom teachers to
support and nurture language learning. We begin with a story by one of the authors of this paper
of his own journey as a learner of English.
V. AUTHOR: My English Language Learning Story
I describe my learning of English as a foreign language as a self-learning journey. In the
1980’s, due to political reasons, English was not very well supported by the educational system
in my country, Iraq. The Arab nationalism and anti-colonialism culture that Saddam Hussein and
the Ba’ath party advocated for entailed that the English language was related to Western
liberalism, the enemy. Due to this and later to the United Nations’ sanctions on Iraq, the
educational system was deteriorating, and English language teaching and curriculum were very
ineffective, resulting in low English levels for almost all Iraqi high school graduates.
In Iraq, English was typically offered at the fifth elementary grade. Our school had no
English teachers since most teachers had to join the army at that time. However, since we had to
take the Baccalaureate exam at the sixth elementary stage, our school principal assigned us an
English teacher who was originally a teacher of history and knew very little about English. I barely
passed the 6th grade province-wide exam that qualified me to enter middle school. My English
literacy was close to nonexistent with a cursory knowledge of the alphabet and basic grammar
patterns.
In 1993, I was sixteen years old with limited English skills and had to pass the second more
difficult ministerial Baccalaureate comprehensive exam. I again barely passed. Besides luck in
guessing with the multiple-choice questions; I was also fortunate to have been taught with an
audio-lingual method. Our teachers coached us to follow clear rules: “If you see the auxiliary BE
verb before a blank, choose a verb with “ing,” “Memorize lists of possible irregular past forms”
and “Memorize a passage for writing the essay section.” No communicative component was
needed in this exam.
The kick start for real and lasting development of my English skills started after graduating
middle school. There was a story behind changing an English “nightmare” into a lovely dream! A
one single event made me love English and decide that it would be the primary subject for the rest
of my education. The story shows the power of one person to change one’s life.
After graduating the third intermediate grade which is a three year school after the
elementary stage, I had a GPA that qualified me to enter the Dhi Qar Teachers Training Institute, a
five-year program that prepares students to be teachers at the elementary school level. After I
finished the third year, it was time to decide on a department that would be the subject of my future
profession as a teacher.
ISSN: 2229-9327
Students had to attend a counseling session to be advised on what department to choose.
The choices needed to be either Arabic language, English language, history, math or biological
science. At that time, no student liked to go to the English language department as English was
considered a difficult subject.
Mr. Ameer Doshi, the head of the English department and the counselor of that session,
inspired me by his speech on the importance of English. He told us stories based upon his own
life of the role that English has played and the power of English to open up our minds to the
broader world. Teacher Ameer was known for his good teaching, kindness, and being close to
students. Unlike most other teachers in the school, Mr. Doshi was a strong advocate of students
and a big believer in their potential for success. After meeting Mr. Doshi, I started to have an
interest in learning English. I became convinced that English was the best fit for me. My
knowledge of English, however, was still very low.
As I started my first year in the English department, I was disappointed because I did not
understand much of anything from the classes I was taking. I started realizing that there was a
major difference between the Arabic language system and the English language systems. I thought
I had to start from there. During the summer break of that school year, I spent much time figuring
out how to improve my English. There were no computers or internet, and books were as rare as
food at that time since the country was under severe UN sanctions (1991-2003). I accidently found
an old shabby book in a corner of my mother’s room. It was a middle school English textbook and
with the aid of some friends, I got another book, a worn-out English-Arabic dictionary that was
compiled by an Iraqi English educator. Backed by my interest, need and influence from my
teacher, I became very motivated to read these books. Not only did I read the stories, I also started
memorizing all their vocabulary and analyzing their instructional exercises.
I also started realizing that I had a talent that would help me learn English. I made a plan
to memorize a list of words every day during that summer and learn some basic English grammar.
By chance again, a friend mentioned that he had some English novels and short stories that he
found in his late father’s home library. He was more than kind to lend me several books in
English. Henry James’ “A Portrait of a Lady” was my first prey! I could not believe that I was
reading such a complicated novel. It took me four months to finish it, and I knew I would have
not been able to read it without my bilingual dictionary. At this point I discovered that I had started
to forget the meaning of many English words I had blindly memorized. Yet, I also found it was a
daily occurrence to not know the meaning of many words that I came across while reading.
Extensive reading was an effective solution to this vocabulary challenge. It benefited me
in two ways. First, I was able to store more words in my long-term memory as I read them in
context. Second, it motivated my mind to look for strategies or mnemonics in memorizing words. I
was good at using the association strategy and other cognitive connections that helped me
memorize long lists of words. I think that most of my word reservoir is gained through funny
associations of English words with personal experience and events of my life. Getting my eyes
accustomed to long periods of reading greatly helped me not only to memorize words in context,
but also to gain a sense of the language. As I was writing, I felt that I was unconsciously
ISSN: 2229-9327
adopting the writing styles and grammatical structures of what I was reading. All in all, I found
that it was the combination of the motivation to learn and my active attention to my learning, as
well as my burgeoning identity as an elementary English teacher that propelled my fluency as an
English learner. It was this intersection that was central to my second language development and
love of the English language.
My English language learning journey has given me insight and determined the path that I
later took for my education and career. I decided to pursue my MA and later my doctorate in the
area of bilingual education. I graduated with my doctorate in second language studies from a U.S
university. My goal as an educator is to dedicate my time and expertise to do research, training and
other professional development services to enhance second language education in Iraq and
elsewhere.
VI. Analysis of the AUTHOR’s Story
Using the story as our data source of a L2 learner experience, we analyzed the story in terms
of Krashen’s theories and what it reveals about the nature of second language learning.
Motivation, Intrinsic and Extrinsic: The most striking significance of Krashen’s theories is
his insistence on the power of reading to promote language development. To Krashen, those who
read more are distinguished in their achievement of both their first and second languages (Krashen,
2004). However, many educators struggle with finding an answer to the question of how to
motivate students to read more and this has not been satisfactorily answered by Krashen.
Reflecting on The AUTHOR’s story, it can clearly be seen that both intrinsic and extrinsic
motivation played vital roles in his learning. The affective filter and the i+1 are inadequate to
explain the sociocultural aspects surrounding learners’ motivation to learn. The Affective Filter
Hypothesis states that a student would be limited in their ability to acquire a second language if
there were some sort of barrier, such as fear or fatigue, blocking them, even though everything is in
their favor to learn it. The ‘affect’ in the theory’s name refers to a student’s feelings, motives and
mental state. A learner who is tense, anxious, or bored may 'filter out' input, making it unavailable
for acquisition” (Lightbown & Spada, 2006, p. 37). Students’ motives and feelings about
learning another language greatly affect the way we should instruct our English language
classrooms.
In the case with the AUTHOR, we see the power of reading in English as it provided the
only readily available source of the second language. However, the limited reading materials, lack
of effective English formal education and his low basic literacy skills in English are just a few
of the challenges he faced. What looks like “intrinsic motivation” actually has social roots. The
AUTHOR’s drive to learn English was greatly influenced by his teacher, Mr. Doshi, a model of a
successful English learner, as well as family support and encouragement. The AUTHOR’s
motivation to master English was directly related to his future image of himself as a teacher of
English. This resonates well with what Donyei described as a “future L2 self” in which learners’
motivation is sparked and sustained by imagining themselves in the future as competent speakers
of English (Hadfield & Dornyei, 2013).
Part of the AUTHOR’s success in acquiring his second language was due to the inspiration
he got from his teacher, whose speech in that counselling meeting helped eliminate
ISSN: 2229-9327
the hesitation the AUTHOR had in deciding on which department to go. The affective filter theory
offers no explanation on the social factors we saw in the AUTHOR’s experience. In his critique
of Krashen’s theories, Zafar (2009) argues that the affective filter is not adequate to account for
larger social factors that impact learning. Krashen did not attempt to explain the many social
variables (Block, 2003; Lantolf & Thorne, 2006) surrounding his theory, leaving it unconvincing
when others test it empirically like what we do in this study.
The teacher in the AUTHOR’s case offered positive modeling and encouraged higher self-
efficacy for his students. According to Zimmerman (2013) self-efficacy and self-regulation often
come from observing teachers, followed by the support and encouragement of learners.
Identity: Social identity plays a central role in second language learning (Norton, 2006) and
motivation is closely connected to identity and the many sociocultural factors surrounding it. The
The AUTHOR went through different stages of identity shaping due to both internal and external
motivators. That could be explained in terms of Donyei and Chan’s (2013) perspective of identity
which he called the ‘ought-to L2 Self’. When family and friends began to refer to the AUTHOR as
“the translator” or “the teacher,” this was a source of encouragement; it also instilled in him a
feeling of uneasiness as he sought to be as others perceived him, his “ought to be” self.
That sense of identity led to a higher self-efficacy in his learning which was seen in his learning
autonomy and the learning strategies he adopted to cope with the limited resources which were
available for him. According to Donyei and Chan (2013), the ‘ought-to self’ is associated with
avoiding negative results which in the AUTHOR’s case meant not working hard enough to
acquire the English language or not being academically successful.
Learning autonomy: The social-economic and geo-political circumstances in which the
AUTHOR lived left him with limited resources to access linguistic input or decent formal learning.
Consequently, the AUTHOR’s motivation around the “ought-to self” forced him to rely upon self-
learning as the only resort and in this case proved effective.
VII. Implications for Classroom Teachers
Research into second language learning can provide a helpful guide for classroom teachers
with insights into human memory and learning processes. However, teachers are often left to
themselves to figure out the research’s implications for their own students and contexts. In this
section, we discuss three powerful implications for classroom teachers that can build upon this
research base.
Comprehended Input: Language teachers can greatly enrich their teaching practices by
increasing the amount of classroom time devoted to learner comprehension of the target language.
The texts, carefully selected for topic and complexity, provide the basic input that learners need to
grow their linguistic knowledge and skills. Teachers have two primary responsibilities in these
input type lessons. First, they must engage and work with their students to select appropriate
second language texts. These may be drawn from a diverse range of options: novels, non-fiction
texts, movies, television, radio, audio tapes, social media, computer programs and other types of
digital resources. Teachers can help their learners locate authentic or
ISSN: 2229-9327
pedagogical classroom texts which are carefully controlled for topics suitable for their learners
and language that is appropriate for their language proficiencies. This work is done by teachers
in the lesson planning phase and in class discussions with students.
Second, teachers must be prepared to facilitate the comprehension of the texts by
introducing parallel source(s) of meaning through class discussion, translation, gesture, image,
realia and so on. It is critical to keep in mind that it is not the introduction of a text that sparks
language learning but the comprehension of that text. In the language classroom, teachers and
students can work together, drawing upon whatever local resources are available, to support
meaning making (Hall, 2019).
Teachers too often neglect this critical component of classroom learning: meaning making.
This is where the art of teaching comes into play. The ability to help one’s students comprehend a
foreign text draws upon teaching competencies that highlight the particular skills and knowledge
that classroom teachers possess of their students’ second language proficiency, literacy skills,
interests and passions and local community and broader culture in which they live.
Stephen Krashen identified input in second language acquisition as the essential element in
the language learning process. He has developed and tirelessly promoted the idea of the power of a
well-planned reading program. Krashen believes that reading in a second language is a very
significant tool in bilingual education. He proposes a program, Free Voluntary Reading
(Krashen, 2011), in which language students gain access to a new linguistic system through
extensive reading. When students read in a second language it can increase literacy skills and
develop vocabulary and grammatical competence. This program can be used for young or older
learners and has two key features: 1) learners select reading materials on topics they have genuine
interest in; 2) learners have easy access to these materials.
This type of program is consistent with Krashen’s focus on the importance of exposure of
language learners to massive amounts of second language input that is comprehensible. This
approach is based upon Krashen’s belief that the most efficient path to developing second language
competence is to draw upon learners’ subconscious processing capacities. He refers to this as the
“easy way” to learn a language and contrasts this approach to the “hard way” in which learners use
conscious processing methods, such as memorizing vocabulary and grammar rules.
We can expand upon Krashen’s idea of a reading program and include all manner of
multimedia. Teachers and students can navigate together to gain access to the diverse range of
language resources that have the potential to capture learners’ attention and promote learning.
Teaching Implications
#1: Teachers should create, with their students in their language classes and programs, a robust
linguistic input program to support second language development.
#2: Teachers’ primary responsibility is to facilitate meaning making as students encounter
challenging second language oral or written texts.
#3: Teachers must continually assess student comprehension in order to determine that students
have truly understood class texts.

ISSN: 2229-9327
The nice thing about these three implications is that the classroom teacher has direct control
over each. While nothing can be done in the classroom without the cooperation of students, these
elements fall well within the normal practices of teachers, supported by schools and
communities. Teachers, with their intimate knowledge of their students, are well positioned to
select texts, facilitate meaning making, set up reading programs, and so on. However, the challenge
that many teachers face is that a sizable proportion of students are not highly motivated to study
second languages. As we saw with the AUTHOR’s story, issues of identity and motivation
became intertwined in ways that directly impact language development.
Motivating Learners: Teachers have long been in the business of motivating their learners,
using a range of rewards and punishments. The AUTHOR’s story reveals the ways that apparent
intrinsic motivation such as a strong ambition to succeed may have roots in what is usually thought
of as extrinsic motivation. Humans are profoundly social beings and even characteristics that are
thought to be part of the personality of a person may have originated in the family or broader
cultural environment.
The AUTHOR’s story reveals both the power of Krashen’s theory and its limitations from
the point of view of classroom teachers. It is clear that his self-directed reading program was
instrumental in his development of English. However, the source of his motivation can be found
in the inspirational model his teacher provided and the ways that his identity as a successful
English learner positioned him within his own family and community.
Teaching Implications
#4: Teachers should tap into an important source of learner motivation: Models drawn from the
local community or broader society to inspire and energize students’ studies and help them
visualize a life in which a second language plays a vital role.
#5: Teachers should actively engage students in dialogue and reflection around the development
of new identities as second language learners and users.
VIII. Conclusion
Language programs in schools around the world are unique in the particular learners
enrolled, the cultural context of the school and the particular moment in time the teaching and
learning take place. Local classroom teachers are responsible for shaping a learning environment
that is effective for their students. They are in debt to Krashen and the many researchers who have
contributed to our growing understanding of this enormously complex process.
And yet, teachers must reach beyond these abstract theories and create classes that are
effective for their complex, imperfect learners. Krashen’s theory points teachers toward a program
of massive, comprehended input. The AUTHOR’s story suggests ways that social context,
including teachers, family and community, play a fundamental role in the learning process by
mediating social identity and motivation required for sustained second language learning.
About the Author:
Dr. Francis Bailey is the Director of the TESL MA Program at the University of Kentucky, U.S.
He has conducted research on second language acquisition and challenges faced by English
ISSN: 2229-9327
learners due to differences between home and community ways of learning and knowing and the
academic and social demands of schools. Dr. Bailey focuses on the role that social and cognitive
processes play in second language learning and the implications for classroom teachers.
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9558-0751
References
Block, D. (2003). The social turn in second language acquisition. Georgetown University
Press. Dörnyei, Z., & Chan, L. (2013). Motivation and vision: An analysis of future L2 self
images, sensory styles, and imagery capacity across two target languages. Language learning,
63(3), 437-462.
Gass, S. & Selinker, L. (2008). Second language acquisition: An introductory course,
3rd Edition. New York, NY: Routledge
Ellis, R. ((2012). The study of second language acquisition. Oxford: Oxford University
Press. Ellis, R. & Shintani, N. (2013). Exploring language pedagogy through second
language acquisition research. Abingdon, Oxon: Routledge.
Hadfield, J. & Dornyei, Z. (2013). Motivating learning. New York: Pearson.

Hall, J. (2019). Essentials of SLA for L2 teachers: A transdisciplinary framework. New
York, NY: Routledge.
Krashen, S. D. (1981). Second language acquisition and second language learning
(Vol. 2). Oxford: Pergamon Press.
Krashen, S. D, (1982). Principles and practice in second language acquisition.
Oxford, Pergamon Press.
Krashen, S. (1985). The input hypothesis: Issues and implications. New York: Longman.
Krashen, S. D. (2004). The power of reading: Insights from the research. Santa Barbara,
CA: ABC-CLIO.
Krashen, S.D. (2011). Free voluntary reading. Santa Barbara, CA: ABC-CLIO.
Krashen, S.D. & Fahad, A. (2020). Krashen Theories on Second Language learning.
University of Kentucky. https://youtu.be/eICbusDO9Rk
Lantolf, J.P. & Thorne, S.L. (2006). Sociocultural theory and the genesis of second
language development. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Lightbown, P., & Spada, N. M. (2006). How languages are learned. Oxford: Oxford University
Press.
Mackey, A. (2012). Input, interaction and corrective feedback in L2 classrooms. Oxford: Oxford
University Press.
McLaughlin, B. (1987). Theories of Second-Language Learning. London: Edward Arnold.
Norton, B. (2006). Identity as a sociocultural construct in second language education. TESOL in
Context, 16, 22-33.
Swain, M. (1995). Three functions of output in second language learning. In G. Cook and B.
Seidlhofer (Eds.), Principle and practice in applied linguistics: Studies in honour of
H.G. Widdowson (pp. 125-144). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Zafar, M. (2009). Monitoring the 'monitor': A critique of Krashen's five hypotheses. Dhaka
University Journal of Linguistics, 2(4), 139-146.
Zimmerman, B. J. (2013). From cognitive modeling to self-regulation: A social cognitive career
path. Educational Psychologist, 48(3), 135-147.
Arab World English Journal
Sociocultural Factors of second language acquisition

According to Douglas H. Brown, culture is the context within we exist, think, feel,
and relate to others. It governs our behavior in groups, makes us aware to matters
of status, and helps us know what others expect of us and what our responsibilities
are as part of a group. Humans have a need for culture to fulfill certain biological
and psychological needs. Every day we deal with facts that might be confusing, the
organization of these facts provides order to potential chaos. The mental constructs
that enable us to be organized are a way of life that we call “culture”. However, we
tend to perceive reality within the context of our own culture. Thus, perception is
always subjective. Misunderstandings are likely to occur between members of
different cultures. What in our culture may seem conservative, it might be liberal in
another (Brown, 188, 189, 190).
As culture is a part of every human being, when we acquire a second language we
also acquire a second culture, unless the acquisition is instrumental. There are some
important aspects of the relationship between learning a second language and its
cultural context (Brown, 190).
Stereotype or generalization refers to a standardized image that we have about
other people or culture. We tend to picture other cultures in an oversimplified
manner, placing cultural differences into exaggerated categories, and then view
every person in a culture with stereotypical traits. Stereotypes are usually formed
by our cultural environment. We see reality according to our own cultural patterns,
and a differing perception is seen as strange and thus, oversimplified. When people
recognize and understand different points of view, they usually adopt a positive and
open-minded attitude toward the other culture. On the other hand, a close-minded
view often results in the maintenance of a stereotype. On an educational
environment, both learners and teachers of a second language need to understand
cultural differences. This comprehension will mostly lead to appreciation (Brown,
190, 191,192).
Stereotyping usually involves some type of attitude toward the culture or language
in question. Attitude is an aspect of the development of cognition and affect in
human beings. Gardner and Lambert’s (1972) attempted to examine the effects of
attitude in language learning. They defined motivation as a construct made up of
certain attitudes. It is important to define the attitude and the motivation learners
have toward the culture of the language they are learning. It seems clear that learners
benefit from positive attitudes and that negative attitudes may lead to decreased
motivation, thus, unsuccessful attainment of proficiency. Teachers can aid in
dispelling what are often myths about other cultures, and replace them with an
accurate understanding of the other culture as one that is different from one’s own,
yet to be respected and valued. Therefore, students will develop a desire to
understand and empathize with others, and will lead them to an intrinsic motivation
(Brown, 192, 193).
Many students in foreign language classrooms learn the language with little or no
sense of the cultural norms and patterns of the people who speak the language.
Culture learning is a process of creating shared meaning between cultures. It
continues over years of language learning, and penetrates deeply into one’s thinking,
feeling and acting. This process involves the acquisition of a second identity. The
creation of this new identity is known as acculturation. It is more acute when
language is brought into the context, culture is part of our being, but language is the
most visible expression of that culture. Drukheim (1897) explained the concept of
anomie, which is a feeling of social uncertainty or dissatisfaction. There are four
stages of culture acquisition: the first stage is a period of excitement involving the
newness of the surroundings. The second stage is called culture shock. Often there is
a sense of self-pity and anger for not understanding the new culture. The stage
three is one of gradual recovery. Individuals begin to accept the differences between
cultures. The last stage represents near or full recovery. Acceptance and assimilation
of the new culture takes place here. (Brown, 193, 194, 195, 196).
Douglas H. Brown defines social distance as the cognitive and affective proximity
of two cultures that come into contact within an individual. John Schumann
described social distance as consisting of the following parameters: (1) dominance,
(2) integration, (3) cohesiveness, (4) congruence, (5) permanence. This hypothesis
states that the greater the social distance between two cultures, the greater the
difficulty to learn its language and conversely, the smaller the social distance, the
better will be the learning situation. The implication is that successful language
learners are capable of maintaining some balance between both cultures. Since it is
hard to measure the actual distance between cultures, William Acton proposed a
measure of perceived social distance. He affirms that the social distance depends
on how and individual perceive their culture and the target language culture. Another
concept associated with social distance is optimal distance model (Brown, 1980).
It refers to acquiring a sufficient number of functions of a second language without
acquiring the correct forms. They have no reason to master the language since they
have learned to cope without sophisticated knowledge of it (Brown 196, 197, 198,
199).
Teaching intercultural competence is important to promote cultural
understanding and weaken cultural stereotypes. There are several studies that prove
the positive effects of incorporating cultural awareness in a classroom. Teachers can
use some strategies that will help students understand the target language culture
better. Geert Hofstede uses four conceptual categories to study cultural norms: (1)
Individualism; as opposed to collectivism, assumes that any person looks primarily
after their own interest and their family. On the other hand, collectivist cultures
assume that any person belongs to a group and protects the interest of its members.
(2) Power distance defines to what degree inequality is tolerated within a culture. (3)
Uncertainty avoidance is when an individual is made nervous by situations that they
do not understand; therefore try to avoid it by maintaining codes of behavior or a
belief in absolute truths. (4) Masculinity, as opposed to femininity, aims for maximal
distinction between what men are expected to do and what women are expected to do
(Brown, 200, 201, 202).
Language and culture cannot be discussed without mentioning policy and politics.
Every country has some type of policy that affects the status of its native language
and one or more foreign languages. Mostly, politics get interest on language policies
when there is some power or economic gain. The growth of English as an
international language (EIL) has raised discussions about the status of English in
its varieties of what is now called world Englishes (Kachru, 2005; McKay, 2002;
McArthur, 2001; Kachru & Nelson, 1996; Kachru, 1992, 1985). When you learn
English in India, for example, it does not involve learning about a new culture since
one is acquiring English in India. This process is called nativization or

“indigenization” (Richards, 1979). It has spread from the inner circle of countries
to an outer circle. Also, the EIL separated what we still refer to as English as a
second language (ESL), which is English within a culture where English is spoken
natively, and English as a foreign language (EFL), which is English in one’s
native culture. Questions in the field of language policies involve the decision by
some political entity to offer education in a designated language or languages. Such
decisions require a judgment on the part of the policy-making body on which
languages are deemed to be of value. (Brown, 203, 204, 207).
There is a relationship between language, thought and culture. The way an idea
or fact is stated affects the way we conceptualize the idea. We learn how to label
things depending on what we are told they are since the beginning. In other words,
language affects our cognition process. However, not only words are affected by
thought, also, Elizabeth Loftus (1976) discovered that the structure of a sentence may
vary the answer. This is because we can emphasize something in our sentence or
question. George Lakoff’s (2004) mentions framing, which emphasize the
importance of language and verbal labels in shaping the way people think. Culture
also takes part in the process. For example, conversational discourse styles and
vocabulary may be a factor of culture. Humans can be affected by advertising, the
environment and culture when observing and acquiring information (Brown 208,
209, 210).
The Whorfian Hypothesis was proposed by Edward Sapir and Benjamin Whorf.
It explains that speaking a language provides us with cognitive mind-sets (e.g.,
grammar and lexical items). The act of learning to think in another language may
require effort and mastery on that language, but one does not need to learn to think,
in general, all over again. The learner can make positive use of previous
knowledge to facilitate the process of learning a new language (Brown 211, 212,
213).
Source: Brown, H. Douglas. Principles of Language Learning and Teaching.
White Plains, NY: Pearson Longman, 2007. Print.

20 Second Language
Learning
WILLIAM LITTLEWOOD
20.1 Introduction
Debate about second language learning has been going on for many centuries
now. In the first century ad, for example, the Roman rhetorician Quintilian
discussed the optimal age for second language learning. He favored an early
start because “by nature we retain best what is learned in our tenderest years.”
Around 400 ad, St Augustine supported what we would now call intrinsic
motivation, in the belief that “free curiosity has a more positive effect on learning
than necessity and fear.” He also advocated an inductive approach to learning,
since “we cannot hope to learn words we do not know unless we have grasped
their meaning . . . by getting to know the things signified” (all quotations are from
Kelly, 1969). The same issues that occupied Quintilian and St Augustine are still
alive today, and opinions are still divided.
Usually the debate has had, to a greater or lesser degree, a practical purpose:
to improve the success of learning and the effectiveness of teaching. Thus, if
learning in our “tenderest years” leads to better retention, it may be advisable to
start teaching as early as possible; if intrinsic motivation is most effective, it
may be more important to create interesting learning conditions than to rely on
external rewards and punishments; and so on. It is therefore not surprising that
in the last 50 years, as international contacts have increased and ever more
people have needed to learn a second language, we have seen a corresponding
increase in the efforts to reach a more thorough and systematic understanding
of second language learning. In the 1950s these efforts consisted mainly in
seeking ways to explain second language learning by appealing to general
learning principles, notably those derived from behaviorist psychology (Rivers,
1964, is a classic critical survey). Gradually, as the special nature of language
learning became clearer, second language learning established itself as a field
of enquiry in its own right. Since the 1970s in particular, research into second
language learning - often referred to as “second language acquisition research”
or the abbreviated “SLA research” - has increased dramatically and even
502 William Littlewood
developed sub-fields, each with its own concepts and methods. One survey of
the overall field of SLA research (Ellis, 1994) runs to over 800 pages. Today,
then, the study of second language learning is an immensely rich and varied
enterprise. Most participants in this enterprise still see its ultimate justification in
terms of the desire to improve learning and teaching. In this respect the study of
second language learning is one important branch of the overall field of
“applied linguistics,” the purpose of which is “to solve or at least ameliorate
problems involving language” (Davies, 1999, p. 1). Since the mid-1980s,
however, an increasing amount of research in the field has moved away from
the practical purposes that first initiated it and many researchers now approach
second language learning as a problem-area in its own right. They explore it and
address theoretical problems within it independently of whether these problems
have practical significance, simply because second language learning is a
domain of human experience that merits scientific study (examples of this
development are the contributions to Ritchie and Bhatia, 1996, and the journal
Second Language Research). Of course we should not draw strict dividing
lines, because such “non-applied” research is also likely to improve the basis
for making practical decisions. Conversely, a review of classroom-oriented SLA
research since 1985 (Lightbown, 2000) cautions us against over-hasty attempts
to apply the results of this research to teaching, since they are only one
amongst several sources of knowledge that teachers draw on in shaping their
expectations and practice.
20.1.1 Some terms clarified
In this chapter the term “second language” refers to any language that is learnt
when the first language system is already in place. No distinction is made
between the “second,” “third,” or even “fourth” (etc.) language that a person
learns. This does not mean that it is irrelevant whether a person has already
learnt one or more other “second” languages before being exposed to the one
currently being learnt - indeed the ways in which language learning may be
affected by previously learnt languages other than the first language is an
area of enquiry in its own right (Cenoz, Hufeisen, & Jessner, 2001). However it
would be impossible to sustain the distinction in any review of second language
research, since this research itself rarely distinguishes between subjects who
are learning a new language for the first time and those who have already
experienced the process. It seems intuitively likely, indeed, that a large
proportion of the “second” language learners who have been studied are in
reality learning a third or fourth language.
Some writers make a distinction between a “second” language, which has
societal functions in the community where it is learnt (e.g., English in India or
English as learnt by an immigrant to the USA), and a “foreign” language, which
is learnt for contact outside the community (e.g., French as learnt in the UK). In
this article the term “second language” is used as a cover term and refers to an
additional language, which is learnt in either kind of situation.
Second Language Learning 503
Finally the term “language” itself - the goal of second language learning -
needs elaboration. In the early days of second language learning studies, this
goal was conceived primarily in terms of grammar and vocabulary - literally,
then, in terms of language elements. However, subsequent developments in
linguistics and related disciplines have led to a much wider conceptualization of
the knowledge and abilities that second language learners need to acquire
(see for example the seminal article of Canale & Swain, 1980). The goal is now
usually recognized as including various aspects of “communicative
competence,” for example:
• linguistic competence, which includes the knowledge of vocabulary,
grammar, semantics, and phonology that have been the traditional focus of
second language learning;
• discourse competence, which enables speakers to engage in continuous
discourse, e.g., by linking ideas in longer written texts, maintaining longer
spoken turns, participating in interaction, opening conversations and

closing them;
• pragmatic competence, which enables second language speakers to use their
linguistic resources in order to convey and interpret meanings in real
situations, including those where they encounter problems due to gaps in
their knowledge;
• sociolinguistic competence, which consists primarily of knowledge of how to
use language appropriately in social situations, e.g., conveying suitable
degrees of formality, directness and so on;
• sociocultural competence, which includes awareness of the background
knowledge and cultural assumptions which affect meanings and which may
lead to misunderstandings in intercultural communication.
Most research into the dynamics of second language development has
focused on linguistic and (to a lesser extent) discourse competence. In the area
of pragmatic competence, research has studied the communication strategies
used by second language speakers (Kasper & Kellerman, 1997) but rarely how
these strategies develop. In the areas of sociolinguistic and sociocultural
competence, important areas of study have been how second language
speakers perform speech acts and how misunderstandings may arise when they
transfer first language strategies and assumptions to their second language use
(Cohen, 1996).
20.1.2 Scope of this chapter
This chapter approaches the study of second language learning as part of the
broader field of applied linguistics and sees it as aiming ultimately to increase
our capacity to learn and teach second languages more effectively. Viewed from
this perspective, however, there are three important areas which are not dealt
with here. The two areas of second language research, which have
perhaps the most important implications for language pedagogy, are the ways in
which learning is affected by social factors and individual differences. These two
areas are the subjects of separate chapters in this volume (and respectively) and
will therefore not be dealt with here. This means also that this chapter does not
deal with one of the main arenas in which individual differences and social
factors play their role, namely, learners’ motivation (see Dörnyei, 2001, for an
up-to-date survey).
To those people who have grown up in situations dominated by one majority
language and learnt another language for communication abroad or with
foreign visitors, the prototypical setting for second language learning may seem
to be the classroom. A feature of second language research since the 1970s
has been that it has paid attention not only to learning in the class-room but
also to so-called “natural,” “informal,” or “untutored” learning which takes place
outside classrooms, either simultaneously with classroom learning (as in the
case of students who take vacation English courses in the UK or the USA) or
as the main source of learning (as with many immigrants or child second
language learners). From this broader perspective, the overall field of study is
the process of second language learning as it may occur in any context; the
influence of classroom instruction on this process is just one import-ant aspect of
this field of study. This is the perspective taken in this article.
Resources for conducting research are obviously more available in some
countries than in others and, equally obviously, this has affected the range of
specific languages for which we have data. Since we have far more informa-tion
about English than other languages and since English is a language, which all
readers of this handbook understand, most of the specific examples will involve
English. Of course it is hoped that the processes and principles, which these
examples illustrate, will apply equally to the learning of other languages.
The chapter is structured as follows. Section 20.2 discusses what research
has shown about some of the major processes involved in second language
learning. Section 20.3 then discusses what we know about typical sequences of
learning and what might cause them. Section 20.4 looks at how learning is
affected by classroom instruction, which focuses on formal aspects of language.
Section 20.5 outlines some of the most important theoretical posi-tions which
are currently adopted by those involved in the study of second language
learning. Section 20.6 summarizes diagrammatically the key elements and
processes of second language learning that have been mentioned in the

chapter.
20.2 Processes of Second Language Learning
One of the principles of all learning is that we make sense of new information
and ideas by relating them to our previous knowledge. There are two main kinds
of previous language knowledge which second language learners can use in
order to make sense of the new language they encounter: the first is
their knowledge of their mother tongue and the second is the knowledge they
already possess about the second language itself. In the first case it is common
to talk about “transfer” and in the second case about “generalization.” These
processes will be discussed in this section. The section will then include brief
discussion of two processes which are less creative in nature but which also
appear to play an important role in the overall second language learning
process, namely, simplification and imitation.
When a learner produces language, which conforms to native speaker norms,
it is obvious that learning has taken place but not usually possible to know what
kind of learning it was. For example, if a learner says I don’t know how to do it,
there is no way of knowing if he or she has mastered a complex set of English
rules or simply memorized a set pattern. One way of trying to catch a clearer
glimpse into the second language learner’s mind is to look not only at the
correct forms that he or she produces, but also at the errors (Corder, 1967;
James, 1998; Richards, 1974). We will see below how the study of learners’
errors has been a particularly rich source of insights into the processes by which
second language learning takes place.
20.2.1 Transfer
Particularly when the second language shares a wide range of structures with
the mother tongue, transfer is a powerful process that can already take the
learner deep into the new system (Odlin, 1989). For example, when French
native speakers begin to learn English, they already know how word order
usually signals meaning; how the logical object becomes the grammatical sub-
ject when the passive voice is used; the basic principles that underlie the uses
of the definite and indefinite articles; the main patterns for forming relative
clauses; and so on. They already possess the cognitive habit of paying attention
to (and signaling) number each time they use a noun, or tense each time they
use a verb. Sometimes of course, even within the domains just mentioned, they
may transfer knowledge which is not appropriate and leads them into error. For
example, they may say I am actor, omitting the article on the pattern of French
je suis acteur, or they may over-use the present perfect tense in Yesterday I
have sold my car under the influence of French Hier j’ai vendu ma voiture.
Overall, however, they can transfer a large body of relevant mother tongue
knowledge, which makes the second language learning process easier and
quicker. Indeed, errors such as those just mentioned illustrate even more
clearly than their correct utterances that the process of transfer is taking place.
The extent to which transfer helps French native speakers to learn English
becomes clearer if we consider the problems encountered by native speakers
of a language which does not share so many features with English. This
Chinese native speaker, for example, has learnt English for over ten years but
still shifts almost randomly between tenses as she tells of her experience last
summer: At the start of the holiday, I try hard to find a summer job. Luckily, I was
employed by an audit firm. Although I have worked for three months only, I
learnt a
lot of things. Similarly, many advanced Chinese learners experience difficulty
with the basic relative clause construction (e.g., The first feeling comes into my
mind is that I need to pay a lot of money), the use of articles (e.g., Rabbit is an
animal which is very small) or the passive (which is often avoided completely -
in one set of 17 essays on general topics, written by students with over ten
years’ English learning experience, it does not occur at all). In addition to these
aspects of learning where transfer seems to be less available to the Chinese
than to the French native speaker, there are also clear instances when transfer
does take place, sometimes leading to errors (e.g., There had stuffy air and
Although I love playing so much, but I play only in my free time, which reflect
Chinese patterns in existential constructions and concessive clauses respect-
ively). However we may assume that for the Chinese learner, too, transfer
usually performs a helpful role, for example by providing awareness of basic
word order conventions or the distinctions between major word classes.
The examples just given show the process of transfer operating at the level
of the learners’ linguistic competence. This is the domain on which most
research has concentrated. However the same process operates at higher
levels of discourse (Littlewood, 2001; Takahashi, 1996). For example, a
common transfer error in the discourse of Chinese learners of English is caused
by different conventions for using “yes” or “no” in reply to negative questions. In
this exchange, the Chinese native speaker (B) was understood by the native
English speaker (A) as meaning that she does indeed live with her parents:
A: Don’t you live with your parents then?
B: Yes.
- until B continued with the words:
B: I live on my own. I rent a flat.
- where it emerges that B is in fact transferring into English the normal Chinese
discourse strategy of replying to the speaker’s assumption (“Yes, you are right
- I don’t live with them”) rather than to the proposition itself, as is normal in
English discourse (in this case, “No, I don’t live with them”).
Until the 1960s, it was generally assumed that transfer (often labeled
negatively “interference”) was not only a hindrance to learning but also the only
major cause of error (Brooks, 1960). We will now see that in fact many errors
are not due to transfer but to another basic learning process, namely,
generalization.
20.2.2 Generalization
The ability to go “beyond the information given” in experience and make
generalizations, which can then be used to understand and create new
instances of experience, is fundamental to learning (Bruner, 1973). There are
many terms which refer to aspects of this same process but from different
theoretical perspectives, e.g., rule-formation, pattern-perception, schema-
construction or the establishment of neural networks. Any of these terms can
also be used in referring to second language learning. The process means, for
example, that second language learners do not need to learn separately, for
each verb, how it can be used to express time in the past: once they know the
underlying pattern that creates walked from walk and danced from dance,
they can also create jumped from jump and stepped from step. At the level of
sentence structure, once they have a rule that enables them to make the logical
object of one action into the subject and topic of a sentence by means of the
passive, they can do it for a whole range of other logical objects. As with
transfer, then, although we cannot actually observe generalization taking place,
we may assume that it is operating all the time and is almost always helpful to
learning. Indeed, if this were not the case, second language learners would
never be able to use the structures of the language creatively to understand or
express new meanings.
Again as with transfer, the process of generalization becomes clearest when it
leads not to correct forms but to errors, that is, when it becomes
overgeneralization. For example, the same process of generalization
that allows learners to associate jumped and jump may also lead them to hear
hoist as a past participle similar to jumped (presumably from a verb hois’ with no
final “t”), leading to the common announcement in Hong Kong that The number
one typhoon signal is hoist. Alternatively, if a learner generalizes from waited
and wanted to expected, she may say how touch-ted she feels by a movie she
has just watch-ted. Many other examples of overgeneralization can be found in
the speech and writing of second language learners. Here, for example, a
learner overgeneralizes an English rule for inverting subject and object in
questions: Tell me what can I do. Here another learner overgeneralizes in the
opposite direction: Why I tell you I am an optimistic youngster? The next learner
is familiar with the common “I am + adjective + to” pattern as in “I am eager
(willing, ready, etc.) to . . .” and uses it inappropriately with “easy to . . .”: I am so
easy to cry but always keep back my tears. Finally, this learner knows that
words like “buy” are normally followed by objects and produces the deviant
utterance Health is your wealth that you cannot buy it. All of these forms were
produced by Chinese-speaking learners of English but, in principle, could have
been produced by learners of any mother tongue, since they are based on the
learners’ previous experience with the second language itself rather than with
their mother tongue.
As with transfer, generalization and overgeneralization errors occur not only
within the learner’s developing linguistic competence but also at higher levels of
discourse. For example, the phrase What’s the matter? is often overgeneralized
by Chinese speakers in Hong Kong from situations where a person is in some
difficulty to other situations where help is requested. Thus one may enter a
travel agency in Hong Kong and be greeted not with (say) “Can I help you?”
but with What’s the matter?
20.2.3 Transfer and generalization combined
In the above two sections transfer and generalization are treated as two distinct
processes. As I indicated earlier, however, they are related in that each is a way
of using prior knowledge to make sense of what is new. We would therefore
expect to encounter many instances where previous mother tongue knowledge
and previous second language knowledge combine to offer the learner a similar
way of making sense of new second language data. Thus when a German
speaker says I would have it done to express the past condi-tional (i.e., in the
sense of “I would have done it”), is this a transfer of the German word order
rules which, in the translation equivalent, would move the past participle to the
end of the phrase (Ich hätte es gemacht)? Or is it a case of influence from the
English pattern “to have something done”? When an Italian native speaker says
I think to go to Spain, is this a case of transfer of the Italian pattern “pensare +
infinitive” or is it overgeneralization of the English pattern after verbs such as “I
want” or “I intend”? It seems likely that both influences are at work and indeed
reinforce each other.
20.2.4 Simplification
Transfer and generalization are ways of actively making sense of a new lan-
guage in terms of what is already known. A third process that often takes place,
especially in the early stages of learning, is more reductionist in nature. This is
the process of simplification, in which a speaker omits elements that are
redundant and produces something similar to the “telegraphic speech” found in
early mother tongue acquisition. For example, a Chinese native speaker in Hong
Kong saw that I had some photocopying to be done and informed me
Photocopier broken. On another occasion, after I had paid in advance for a
cup of tea at the cash desk of a canteen and was going to the wrong counter to
collect it, the cashier corrected me with an appropriate gesture and Sir! . . . tea
there. Simplification may be supported here by transfer, since the Chinese
equivalents of these utterances would not require a copula.
Such simplified utterances enable a speaker to convey essential meanings
with a minimum of linguistic competence. Indeed it is debatable whether they
are best seen as products of the speaker’s developing linguistic system or
simply as one-off strategies designed to solve an immediate communication
problem. From a developmental perspective, perhaps an important function is
that they enable the second language learner to engage in interaction at an
early stage and thus be exposed to a wider range of language.
20.2.5 Imitation
In the behaviorist perspective that dominated in the 1950s, imitation (leading
through repetition to memorization) was a cornerstone of the learning pro-cess.
In the reaction against behaviorism its importance was widely rejected
(Dulay & Burt, 1973), but it is now again generally recognized as a significant
process.
The clearest evidence for the role of imitation is provided by set phrases
(“formulaic speech”) that learners often produce as a means of coping with
common or important situations in their environment. Evidence that the phrases
result from imitation comes from the fact that the learner’s other output shows
no evidence that he or she has mastered the grammar that underlies them.
Thus a learner may regularly use phrases such as the one mentioned earlier -I
don’t know how to do it - at an early stage of learning, when he or she never
otherwise uses either the full negative “I don’t . . .” or “how + infinitive . . .” as
productive patterns.
Formulaic speech is an important feature of second language use and learn-
ing (Wray, 1999). On the one hand, like simplification, it gives speakers the
linguistic tools for coping with situations that would otherwise be beyond their
competence. On the other hand it may provide them with a memorized store of
“language samples” which they can process internally, so that the underlying
rules gradually become incorporated into their developing linguistic competence.
There is evidence that some second language learners are more disposed
than others to follow this route.
20.2.6 Conscious and unconscious learning processes
The four processes mentioned in this section - transfer, generalization, simpli-
fication and imitation - may all occur either subconsciously or consciously. In
natural situations, we may expect them to occur almost always subconsciously,
while the second language learner/speaker focuses on the meanings which are
communicated. In formal learning situations, it is of course very common for
these processes to be raised to consciousness (Rutherford, 1987). For example,
a teacher may highlight a rule so that the learners can generalize it more easily,
or a learner may consciously try to imitate, repeat, and memorize a useful
utterance in a dialogue. The relationship between conscious and unconscious
learning processes is an area of lively debate, which we will encounter again in
later sections.
20.3 Sequences of Development
As we have seen, the analysis of learners’ errors has contributed much to our
understanding of second language learning. However, since it focuses attention
mainly on structures, which learners have not yet fully acquired at a particular
time, it does not tell us much about the actual progression of learning. For
example, in the case of the learner who asked Why I tell you that I am an
optimistic youngster?, how did he reach that point and how is he likely to
develop further? If we hear a speaker use the simplified I no want it, does that
tell us anything about where he or she stands in relation to gradual

mastery of negative structures? To answer questions such as these, we need to
consider the development of individual learners over time. This was done first
in the context of first language acquisition and subsequently by second
language researchers (e.g., Bailey, Madden, & Krashen, 1974; Dulay & Burt,
1973; contributors to Hatch, 1978). A small selection of the results is presented
here.
20.3.1 Acquisition of the negative
Learners with a wide range of mother tongues have been found to follow a
similar sequence of development in acquiring the negative:
1 At first learners simply place a negative particle outside the main sentence
structure (No very good).
2 Then comes a stage when the particle is placed inside the sentence but
before the verb (I no want it; I not like that).
3 The first instances of placing the particle after the verb occur with auxiliary
verbs such as “is” and “can” (He was not happy; You can’t tell her). “Don’t”
may be used, but it is not marked for number or tense (She don’t like it).
4 Finally the particle is placed after a part of “do,” which is also marked for
number and tense (It doesn’t swim).
These stages are not clear-cut but overlap with each other. Thus a learner who
has moved to stage 3 in most of her language may sometimes also produce
forms typical of stage 2. Furthermore, there is some variation within the stages.
Some of this may result from transfer. At stage 2, for example, Spanish learners
prefer to use no whereas Norwegian learners prefer not, influenced by the
sounds of their mother tongue; also, stage 2 persists longer for many Spanish
learners than for others, presumably because their own language places the
particle before the verb (as in Carmen no es de Madrid). In general, however,
the studies show remarkable similarity in how learners gradually develop their
mastery of the negative.
20.3.2 Acquisition of the interrogative
As with negatives, there seems to be a typical sequence of stages in the devel-

opment of interrogatives. Here only wh-interrogatives will be mentioned:
1 At first learners simply place the question word in front of the sentence,
without inverting the subject and verb (Why we not live in Scotland?).
2 At the next stage inversion takes place with the copula (Where is the sun?).
3 Inversion later comes to be made with “do,” which is marked for number
and tense (What do you say?)
4 Later still, complex questions occur such as negative questions (Why can’t
he come?) and embedded questions (Tell me why you can’t do it).
20.3.3 Acquisition of morphemes
It was the so-called “morpheme studies” in first language research that drew
widespread attention to the possibility of natural developmental sequences
(Brown, 1973). This research examined the sequence in which 14 grammatical
morphemes were acquired by several children and found that the sequence was
basically the same. These findings stimulated a series of second language
studies (reported, e.g., in Dulay, Burt, & Krashen, 1982), which examined the
same phenomenon. They took large groups of learners and measured how
accurately they produced the different morphemes in their speech or writing.
This “accuracy order” was assumed to be the same as the order in which the
morphemes are acquired (an assumption which has however been questioned).
The studies found a noticeable similarity amongst the second language learners
from different language backgrounds. The accuracy order suggests that all
learners first acquire a group of morphemes comprising present progressive
“-ing,” plural “-s,” and copula “to be”; the second group consists of auxiliary “to
be” and the articles “the” and “a”; then come irregular past forms; and the fourth
group includes regular past with “-ed,” third person singular “-s,” and
possessive “-s.”
20.3.4 A built-in syllabus?
Although only a few structures have been studied from this perspective (others
include relative clauses, past tense markers, and German word order), the
results combine to suggest that for some structures at least, the sequence of
acquisition may to some extent be pre-programmed in the learner’s mind. This
reinforces the idea, already suggested by the results of error analysis, that
learners may operate with a “built-in syllabus” (Corder, 1967): that is, they not
only work on the input with processes such as generalization, transfer,
simplification, and imitation, but are also disposed to develop their internal
grammar in natural, predictable sequences. Furthermore, these same
sequences have been observed even in the spontaneous output of classroom
learners who have been taught the correct target forms, suggesting that the
internal syllabus often overrides the external syllabus which the teacher or
course-book tries to impose.
The processes discussed in Section 20.2 are not in themselves specific
enough to explain natural sequences. They do not explain, for example, why
one rule rather than another is generalized, why questions and negatives are
acquired in the particular sequence observed, or why plural “-s” is acquired
before third person singular “-s.” Various additional explanations have been
proposed. One is that a form is more likely to be learnt if it is supported by more
than one process, for example, by both generalization and transfer, or by both
transfer and simplification. A target form may also become established more
quickly if it is more frequent in the input (this has been suggested for the
morphemes discussed above), more salient perceptually in the speech that
learners hear, or more important in communication (this seems to be the case
with formulaic speech). A more technical suggestion is that the development of
some structures may be governed by psycholinguistic “processing con-straints,”
so that the achievement of one stage is a prerequisite for achieving the next
(Pienemann, 1989). This may explain the sequences of negatives and
interrogatives, in which each stage requires the learner to perform more (or
more complex) operations on the basic “subject - verb - object” pattern.
20.4 The Effects of Classroom Instruction
In the previous section it was mentioned that the learner’s “built-in syllabus”
seems in some ways to be independent of the effects of instruction: similar
errors and similar sequences have been observed in both natural and instructed
learners. This discovery led some researchers to posit that the built-in syllabus
may be powerful enough to override the effects of instruction. They raised the
question of how instruction affects learning, if indeed it does at all (Long, 1983).
It is clear that instruction has effects on learning in the case of those many
second language speakers whose ability comes only from classroom instruction,
supplemented perhaps by a limited amount of outside-class practice. In studies
which have compared learners who experience only natural exposure with
learners who experience both exposure and classroom instruction, the results
(though less conclusive) also indicate that instruction improves learning. The
issue remains, however, of exactly how classroom instruction affects the
learning process. For example, does it affect the course that learning takes? Or
does it affect only the rate of progress along a pre-determined course? To what
extent is it helpful if teachers focus learners’ attention explicitly on the forms of
the language they are learning (e.g., on its grammar and vocabulary), or should
the main focus always be on the communication of meanings? Can we identify
the conscious learning strategies which seem most helpful to learning? These
are some of the key questions, which will be considered in this section.
A teacher often asks a group of learners to repeat and practice a complex
structure during a lesson and, in that controlled situation, they become able to
produce the structure in response to the teacher’s stimulus. Intensive patterns
drills are based on this procedure. However this production often results from
conscious manipulation rather than genuine learning. Here we are concerned
not with this kind of performance but with whether the learners can still use a
structure in their spontaneous use of language some time after the instruction
has taken place.
20.4.1 The rate and course of learning
Several studies have provided evidence that instruction can accelerate the rate
of learning. In one of these (Doughty & Varela, 1998), learners were given

instruction in forming relative clauses at a stage when they were considered
ready to acquire them. They acquired the rules more quickly than learners who
were exposed to input containing the structures but received no instruction. In
another study (Pienemann, 1989), English-speaking learners of German were
taught German word-order rules. All the learners were at “stage 2” in the
developmental sequence that the researchers had observed with other students.
Some stage 2 learners were taught rules from stage 3 and others were taught
rules from stage 4. It was found that the first group benefited from instruction
and moved quickly into stage 3, but that the second group were unable to “skip”
a natural stage: they either remained at stage 2 or moved into stage 3. These
and similar findings are the main evidence for Pienemann’s “learnability” or
“teachability” hypothesis, according to which instruction (in some areas of
language at least) can accelerate the rate of learning but not cause learners to
skip a natural stage. Other areas of language may be more flexible and teachable
at any time.
20.4.2 Focus on form
The studies just mentioned already provide evidence that learning can benefit
from instruction which focuses on form (often called “consciousness-raising”).
Other important evidence comes from French immersion programs in Canada.
The students in these programs attend classes in “content” (i.e., non-language)
subjects in the medium of French. From a language learning perspective,
therefore, they are learning in a natural environment without explicit instruc-
tion. They achieve a high degree of fluency in French, to the extent that these
programs have often been cited as support for adopting a “natural approach” to
language teaching in which there is no error-correction or explicit focus on form.
However, closer examination revealed that though the students emerge as
fluent communicators, there are some aspects of French grammar that they do
not master (Harley & Swain, 1984), perhaps because these aspects are not
essential to communication in the classroom setting (where all the participants
except the teacher are fellow native English speakers). In a number of
experimental studies, aspects of grammar (e.g., the conditional and the different
uses of the past continuous and simple past tenses) have been taught explicitly
to groups of learners, whose performance has later been compared with
learners who have received no instruction. The overwhelming evidence is that
explicit focus on formal aspects of language is helpful and produces lasting
improvement in performance (Doughty & Williams, 1998; Spada, 1997).
20.4.3 Conscious learning strategies
So far in this section we have considered how learning might be affected by
action initiated by the teacher. Another line of exploration has focused
on action initiated by the learner. Many researchers have investigated the
conscious strategies that learners use in order to plan and carry out their
learning (O’Malley & Chamot, 1990; Oxford, 1990).
The so-called “good language learner” studies of the 1970s (notably Naiman
et al., 1995 [1978] ) laid the foundations for this research by investigating some
of the qualities that characterize successful language learners. These learners
are characterized above all by strategies for active involvement: for example,
they repeat silently to themselves what the teacher or other students say; they
think out their own answer to questions which the teacher puts to other
students; they pay close attention to the meaning of the language they are
practicing; and they seek opportunities to use the language outside class, for
example by reading or seeking personal contacts. Subsequent research
(surveyed in McDonough, 1999) has confirmed that sucessful learners generally
use a greater number of active learning strategies. It has identified strategies
which fall into four broad categories: metacognitive strategies (e.g., planning
one’s learning time), cognitive strategies (e.g., tech-niques for memorizing
vocabulary), affective strategies (e.g., ways to deal with frustration and increase
motivation), and social strategies (e.g., joining a group as a peripheral
participant and pretending to understand). A practical aim of this research is to
identify in more detail the strategies which lead to more successful learning, so
that these strategies can be introduced to less successful learners. It is
generally accepted, however, that the specific strat-egies which best suit one
learner will not necessarily be those that best suit another learner.
20.5 Theories of Second Language Learning
So far this chapter has presented some of the findings of second language
research together with some of the explanations that have been proposed.
These have been essentially “local” or “lower-level” explanations, in the sense
that they have tried to account for specific aspects of the learning process, such
as the kinds of error that learners make or the natural sequences of develop-
ment that have been observed, by means of specific notions such as transfer,
processing constraints, or the frequency of items in the input. In this section we
will move to a higher level and look at some of the more global explana-tions
that have been proposed for the human capacity to learn a second language.
These explanations are variously called “hypotheses,” “models,” or “theories,”
depending on the scope and depth of the explanatory power that their
proponents claim for them, but these terms will not be kept rigorously distinct
here.
Theories of second language learning fall broadly into two categories: those
which take as their starting point the cognitive processes that underlie second
language learning and those that start from the context of learning. Of course
no cognition-oriented theory can ignore the context in which the cognitive
processes are activated and no context-oriented theory can ignore the
processes which convert input into learning. It is a question of emphasis. A
complete theory would integrate satisfactorily both the cognitive and contextual
bases of learning into a single framework which would accord appropriate
weightings to both sets of factors and illuminate the relationships between
them. Such a theory is not yet available and (in view of the complexity of second
language learning and the different forms that it takes) there is even some
doubt as to whether it would be desirable or possible. What we have at
present are therefore “middle-level” rather than comprehensive theories of
second language learning.
20.5.1 Cognition-oriented theories
This section looks first at three related hypotheses, which develop a conception
of language learning as occurring through innate mechanisms which exist
specially for this purpose. It then looks at how other researchers have proposed
to account for language learning within the wider framework of cognitive
learning theory.
20.5.1.1 The creative construction hypothesis
Much of the early research in the 1970s was guided by the conception (stimu-
lated by work in first language acquisition) of a “language acquisition device,”
which facilitates a process of “creative construction” in the mind of the learner.
Partly in reaction to behaviorist ideas that second language learning is a process
of habit-formation in which the major obstacle to learning is interference from
the mother tongue, many researchers (e.g., Dulay & Burt, 1973) set out to show
that second language as well as first language learners are endowed with innate
mechanisms for processing language and creating their own internal grammar.
Some of this work was described in Sections 20.2 and 20.3 above. The
grammar that learners construct is often called their “interlanguage” (i.e., a
language located somewhere on a continuum between their mother tongue
and the target language) (Selinker, 1972) or “transitional competence” (i.e., a
competence which is in a state of transition, as it develops in the direction of
the target language) (Corder, 1967). However it does not generally become
identical with the target language, as some non-target features become “fossil-
ized” in the learner’s grammar. In this theory (variously called the “creative
construction hypothesis” or “interlanguage theory”), it is usually claimed that
many of these innate mechanisms are specific to language learning rather than
of a general cognitive nature, since the input does not contain enough evidence
for general cognitive mechanisms to work on. The input acts primarily as a
“trigger” to activate the mechanisms.
20.5.1.2 The input hypothesis
An attempt to formulate a more comprehensive theory, which incorporates the
creative construction hypothesis, is the “input hypothesis” (also called
the “monitor model”) formulated by Krashen (1982). In this model the most
important distinction is between “acquisition” and “learning.” “Acquisition” is
subconscious and guided by the learner’s innate mechanisms along natural
developmental sequences. It occurs as a result of exposure to comprehensible
input, is not accessible to conscious control or instruction, and occurs best when
the “affective filter” (e.g., level of anxiety) is low. “Learning” is conscious and
often occurs through instruction or error correction. “Acquired” language is
most important and forms the basis for spontaneous communication.
Language that has been “learnt” plays only a subsidiary role as a “monitor” of
speech or writing and can never pass through into the acquired system. Many of
the claims of this model cannot be proven (e.g., the strict separa-tion of
acquisition and learning), but it has attracted many supporters and continues to
inspire much discussion (see McLaughlin, 1987, for a detailed critique).
20.5.1.3 The Universal Grammar hypothesis
The language acquisition device, which is postulated as driving the creative
construction process, is largely a “black box.” Some of what it contains can be
hypothesized on the basis of learners’ errors and sequences of development
discussed earlier in this article - mechanisms such as transfer, procedures such
as paying attention to saliency, the constraints on learnability, and so on.
Another approach is based on the linguistic theory of “universal grammar”
(UG) associated with Noam Chomsky’s school of thought. The theory of UG
claims that there is a set of principles which govern all languages and are
already wired into the human brain when we are born. The principles
themselves are universal, but they allow for variation in the form of certain
parameters that need to be set. For example, there is a “structure-dependency”
principle, which specifies that every language is organized hierarchically, such
that each component not only forms part of a higher-level structure but also
(down to the individual morpheme) has its own internal structure. Thus a phrase
is part of the structure of the sentence, but also itself has a head element and
subordinate elements (i.e., a complement). The structure-dependency principle
has a “head parameter,” which specifies whether the head element in a
phrase is placed before or after the other elements. In some languages (e.g.,
English) the head comes first, in others (e.g., Japanese) it comes last. The child
learner’s task is to discover how this parameter should be “set” for the particular
language he or she encounters. Once it has been set, the child has information
relevant to all parts of the language to which the head parameter applies. These
principles and parameters thus explain how the child learns much more about
the language than he or she could have learnt form the input alone. They could
explain this for the second language learner, too, if they are still available “the
second time round.” Whether they are indeed still available is an area of lively
debate, often highly technical, involving issues such as whether a second
language learner acquires knowledge which would not be available directly from
the
input (e.g., because it would require negative as well as positive evidence) and
whether learning one aspect of language sometimes leads to knowledge of
some other aspect which is related to the same principle and parameter (Towell
& Hawkins, 1994, present a detailed application of UG theory to second
language acquisition).
20.5.1.4 The cognitive skill-learning model
The cognition-oriented approaches described so far in this section regard
language learning (whether first or second) as a unique form of learning which
requires explanations specific to itself. Many researchers do not accept this
view: they argue that general principles of cognitive psychology are sufficient to
account also for second language learning (Johnson, 1996). Communicat-ing
through language is regarded as a complex skill in which, as with other skills,
overt performance is based on a hierarchy of cognitive plans. Let us say, for
example, that a man intends to ask his friend to lend him his car tomorrow. At
the highest level of the hierarchy he needs to select an overall strategy (e.g.,
direct request? prepare the ground by asking if his friend will be travelling
anywhere himself?). If he decides on the first strategy, he must select one of
many possible ways of formulating a request (depend-ing on factors such
as the nature of their relationship and how much inconvenience the
request is likely to cause). Formulating the request involves selecting a

grammatical plan and, within that plan, individual components such as noun
phrases and verb phrases. These have to be filled with specific lexical items
which involve articulatory plans, which are in turn realized by appropriate motor
skills. In skilled performance, only the higher-level plans require conscious
attention (through “controlled processing”), whilst those at the lower levels are
realized subconsciously (through “automatic processing”). Since human
attention capacity is limited, fluent performance depends on the establishment of
a repertoire of lower-level plans which can be processed automatically, so
that sufficient attention can be given to higher-level decisions (e.g.,
communicative intention and meaning). At the early stages of learning, however,
conscious attention has to be devoted even to lower-level plans such as
grammatical structuring or word selection, leading to performance which is
non-fluent and/or contains errors. Learning consists of moving these lower-level
plans into the domain of automatic process-ing, so that they can unfold fluently in
response to decisions at the higher levels.
The creative construction model (together with the related input hypothesis
and UG hypothesis) sees language learning as proceeding in natural sequences
as a result of internal mechanisms which are “triggered” by input from the
environment. The cognitive skill-learning model just described sees second
language learning as a less specialized process, one which is more amenable to
control, and one in which productive performance has a clearer role. Both
models seem to capture important aspects of different people’s learning
experience and may represent alternative routes by which language may enter
a person’s communicative competence. In some kinds of situation, one kind of
learning may predominate (e.g., the creative construction model in natural
learning environments, the cognitive skill-learning in instruction), but the other will
not be excluded. In many schools, for example, high priority is given to engaging
learners in communicative activity which will activate their natural learning
mechanisms.
20.5.2 Context-oriented theories

In the theories described so far in this section, the external context performs a
necessary role but the focus is on the internal mechanisms that process the
information that it provides. This section will look at theories and hypotheses,
which shift attention to the context itself and to the ways in which it facilitates
the process of learning.
20.5.2.1 The interaction hypothesis
The “interaction hypothesis” is a development of the input hypothesis
discussed above (Long, 1985). The prerequisite for learning is still seen as
comprehensible input, but attention is now drawn to the conditions that enable
comprehensible input to be made available. The hypothesis argues that this is
most likely to occur in situations of social interaction. These provide
opportunities for the negotiation of meaning, requests for clarification, and
comprehension checks. As a result, it is more likely that the input will be tuned
to the current level of competence of the individual learner and thus become
“intake” which is available for learning. Researchers have shown that increased
opportunities for negotiation are indeed likely to lead to increased
comprehension. They have also studied the kinds of classroom interaction task
that are most likely to lead to the negotiation of meaning (e.g., pair-work tasks in
which both learners have information and must reach a decision or a solution
to a problem). However, the assumed causal link between increased
opportunities for negotiation and improvement in learning has not yet been
demonstrated empirically.
20.5.2.2 The output hypothesis
Natural second language learners often go through a “silent period” when they
listen and respond, but do not actually produce language themselves.
Nonetheless they develop knowledge of the language which can later serve as
a basis for their own production. In the input hypothesis described earlier, this
leads to the claim that acquisition occurs through processing “comprehensible
input,” in which forms occur from the learner’s next natural developmental stage.
Language production (including oral or written practice in class) is not necessary
to learning and can be simply left to develop naturally, when learners feel they
are ready. The “output hypothesis” argues (partly on the

basis of the French immersion classes mentioned earlier, in which massive input
still does not lead to accuracy in all aspects of grammar) that input is not
sufficient and that output too plays a significant role in acquisition (Swain, 1995).
The need to speak or write makes learners pay attention to aspects of grammar
which they would not need for comprehension purposes alone and thus makes
them notice gaps in their knowledge. It gives them opportunities to make
hypotheses about how the grammatical system works and (when meanings
are negotiated) they get feedback about whether these hypotheses are
correct. It stimulates them to discuss the language with others and thus
“scaffold” each other (see Section 20.5.2.3) in their efforts to understand the
language. Furthermore, from a cognitive skill-learning per-spective, output
helps to automate the cognitive plans that underlie language production.
20.5.2.3 The scaffolding hypothesis
In the interaction hypothesis, social interaction plays a mediating role: it
facilitates the provision of input, which in turn triggers acquisition. In what we will
call here the “scaffolding hypothesis,” social interaction provides the
substantive means by which learning occurs. The hypothesis is based on
sociocultural theory, which goes back to the work of Vygotsky in the 1930s and
holds that social interaction is the most important stimulus for all learning.
Two central concepts are “scaffolding” and the “zone of proximal development.”
“Scaffolding” refers to the way in which, with support from others, learners can
reach levels of achievement which they would be unable to reach
independently. This support often comes from an expert (e.g., a teacher), but
learners themselves may also provide it for each other. The “zone of pro-ximal
development” is the domain of performance that a learner cannot yet achieve
independently but is capable of achieving with the help of scaffolding. The
expectation is that what is currently possible through scaffolding will later
become possible without it. Researchers have shown how learners who help
each other during interaction may, together, produce language that neither could
produce alone. They have also shown how language items which learn-ers
produce on one occasion with the help of scaffolding may subsequently be
incorporated into their independent discourse (see the contributions to Lantolf,
2000).
20.5.2.4 The acculturation model and social identity theory
The interaction hypothesis and the scaffolding hypothesis both focus on the
immediate context in which social interaction takes place. Brief mention will
be made here of two theories which extend the perspective outward to the wider
sociopolitical context of learning. Both are concerned mainly with the experience
of immigrants in their new host country. According to the “acculturation model”
associated with John Schumann (1978), language learn-ing involves a process
of acculturation and is therefore heavily dependent on
the degree of social and psychological distance that learners perceive between
themselves and the speakers of the target language. This distance is smaller
(and the conditions for learning are correspondingly more favorable) when, for
example, the learner’s own community shares social facilities and has regular
contacts with the target language community. The “social identity model”
(Norton, 2000) is based on the mutual influences that link language and identity:
language is one means by which identity is constructed and identity affects the
ways in which we use language. This identity is seen as dynamic and, as a
person consolidates his or her identity in a new community, so his or her ability
to speak and learn the language increases.
With these last two models we have begun to consider the influence on
learning of wider social factors, which are the subject of Chapter 22 in this
volume.
20.6 Conclusion
The various elements and processes of second language learning that have
been described in this article are summarized in Figure 20.1. This diagram
reminds us at level 1 that much second language learning (particularly in the
second language environment) takes place in a wider social and sociopolitical
context where it is one aspect of acculturation and identity construction. All

second language learning (except some forms of self-instruction) takes place
in an immediate context (level 2), which contains varying degrees of social
interaction and instruction. These provide stimuli for learning which include
those mentioned at level 3 of the diagram, where “output” comprises both
spontaneous language use and controlled practice. These stimuli are processed
subconsciously and/or consciously by internal mechanisms, some of which may
be specific to language learning, others part of our general cognitive
endowment. The former produce developmental sequences, which are to some
extent predetermined, and the latter enable controlled plans to become auto-
matic and fluent. Both kinds of learning serve to develop an ever-greater store
of subconscious and conscious elements, which the learner can use for second
language communication.
It should be stressed that, in reality, the various concepts in Figure 20.1 are
not all rigidly distinct. Many are probably better conceived as the two extremes
of a continuum (e.g., subconscious and conscious, since there can be varying
degrees of consciousness) and others may be mingled in actual situations (e.g.,
instruction involves particular kinds of social interaction). The diagram should
therefore be viewed more as a simplified summary of key elements and
processes in second language learning than as an attempt to model the
actual details of social, cognitive, and psycholinguistic reality.
See also 1 Language Descriptions, 21 Individual Differences in second
Language Learning, 22 Social Influences on Language Learning.
1 The wider context
Acculturation - Identity construction
–--
2 The immediate context
Social interaction - Instruction
–--
3 Stimuli for development
Input Scaffolding Output Consciousness-raising Conscious strategies

The Importance of Language, Memory and Bilingualism in
Language Acquisition
Isa Spahiu, PhD, Yildiray Cevik, PhD
International Balkan University, Skopje, Macedonia
i.spahiu@yahoo.com, cevikyildiray@yahoo.com
Abstract
The process of learning to speak (language) is one of the most important things of early childhood. Within some
months, children move from saying single words to longer sentences and from a small vocabulary to one that
grows by six new words per day. Language is our main, principal mean of communication. Language tools mean a
lot, new opportunities for social understanding, for learning about the world, and for sharing experiences, needs
and pleasures. On the other hand, in order to understand how we learn, it is first necessary to understand
something about how do we think. Without a good memory language learning would simply be impossible and
as a result humans development as well. Memory is undoubtedly one of the most important concepts in
remembering things, in learning, because, simply, if things are not remembered, learning cannot take place.
Keywords: memory, bilingualism, language acquisition, L1, and L2.
Introduction
Human beings inherit the ability to speak, but they do not inherit the ability to speak a particular language. Thus, a
child learns to speak the language of those who bring it up from infancy that in most of cases are his/her own
parents. But we are all aware that one’s first language is acquired from the environment and from learning. The
learning of a second language is quite a different matter. Except in case where the child’s parents are bilingual,
or from different linguistic backgrounds, learning a second language becomes a deliberate or imposed activity on
the child by social, political or religious factors acting upon him. Thus, generally, the person who is able to
There are no sources in the current document. Speak two languages like Albanian and Macedonian is said to be
bilingual.
1. Language
1.1 What is language?
The main key factor of human developmental process that distinguishes (sets apart) human beings from animals
is undoubtedly language. It is in fact a very broad term to discuss. Through language in a way we reflect
ourselves, and that’s one of the reasons why it is very important and essential in every aspect of our lives. In other
words, language somehow shapes our thoughts and emotions and determines our perception of reality. It has
become a major tool of communication between different countries, groups, cultures, various companies and
organizations, communities and friends.
As we all know, we use language to communicate with each other, to express our feelings, to ask something, to
express our thoughts and stuff like that.
The importance and significance of language in humans´ lives is enormously high. It is not limited to just being a
means through which we communicate our thoughts and feelings to others, but has also become a tool for
multiculturalism as well as economic relationships.
In the developmental process of a child, language plays a very significant role as it is connected with various
aspects of a children’s growth. We are all aware that a baby is born without language, but even without a special or
formal training, by the age of four-five, the child is able to say several words and grammar of a particular
language. This is an inherited human ability (tendency), which is very important for children’s further growth.
Any discrepancy noticed in learning a language at such an early stage may indicate certain illnesses in a child.
1.2 Language acquisition and its importance in human development
The process of learning a particular language is directly related to a kind of emotional development. (Garcia M,
2007). For example, a baby looking at his/her parent’s face is responded by cooing and some words indicating
love by his/her parents. This is recorded in the baby’s mind and when he becomes older, he begins to use language
in order to express his emotions/feelings as well.
There have been made several studies and researches regarding the importance of language in the development
of human beings, what kind of role plays the same in our lives, and except the “theory” of being used as the main
tool of communication between people, why and how do we use it.
1. People may use language to induce an action in other people. (Gardner, H, 1987). But what does this
mean? The best instance would include a child asking his/her parent to hand him or her a toy that somewhere
high and he/she cannot touch and take himself/herself or a teacher asking his/her students to hand him the tests.
63
Research on Humanities and Social Sciences www.iiste.org
ISSN 2222-1719 (Paper) ISSN 2222-2863 (Online) Vol.3, No.17, 2013
2. Language is also used as a tool by one person to help that particular person remember things. Thus,
language somehow expands the cognitive abilities that are already present in human brain. For instance, a
child might not be able to remember how many days a week has, but by learning the rhyme of a short poem
concerning the days of the week, he/she will easily be able to store those facts in the memory.
3. Another use of language might involve the transfer of information, experience or knowledge from one
individual to another. (Gardner, H, 1987). For instance, a parent teaching his child how to wear his pants
and the teacher giving a lecture on a particular topic are both using a language to share their
knowledge/information with another individual? It is this kind of use of language that may lead to cultural
evolution.
4. The fourth use of language is to discuss about that particular language itself, or in other words to use
language to reflect upon language. (Gardner, H, 1987). A good example in this case would be a child
asking his mother what the word "want" means and a linguist examining the syntactic rules of various
languages. According to Gardner, this kind of use of language is also called "metalinguistic analysis”. Gardner
acknowledges the wide variety of ways in which we use language, but he believes that they all fit into one of
these four categories.
Another well known linguist who discussed the use of language in more general terms than Gardner is Andy
Clark. In his book entitled “Being There: Putting Brain, Body, and World Together Again”, Andy Clark agrees
that language is not only a tool for communicating thoughts or ideas. According to him, language is also a tool
that was created for use by humans, just as is a pair of scissors. "Just as scissors enable us to exploit our basic
manipulative capacities to fulfil new ends, language enables us to exploit our basic cognitive capacities of pattern
recognition and transformation in ways that reach out to new behavioural and intellectual horizons" (193-194).
This means that, scissors have the manipulating abilities of people hands and use them to produce a skill that
normally could not be accomplished by a human being: in other words, cutting a fairly straight line with a piece
of paper. Like these scissors, language takes human abilities that already exist-this time we have to deal with
cognitive rather than manipulative in nature, and expounds upon these in order to give this human a combination
abilities that were not achievable by the individual (or the tool) alone (Clark 193-194).
However, there is a general agreement on the importance of language in individuals’ cognition, and even in the
multiple ways we use this necessary skill. The unique ability to use language sets human beings apart from
animals, at least partly, for the uniqueness of human cognitive profile. We would definitely be a very different
species if it wasn’t for this “awesome” skill.
1.3 Human language and its uniqueness
What makes us consider human language unique?
Language is in fact unique in comparison to other forms of communication, such as the ones used by animals.
Communication systems used by other animals or other non-human beings are called closed systems that consist of
a closed number of possible things that can be expressed.

In contrast, human language is open and productive system, meaning that it allows people to produce an infinite
set of utterances from a finite set of elements, and to create new words and sentences. We can do this because
human language is based on a dual code, (Sadoski M. & Paivio A, 2001) where a finite number of meaningless
elements (e.g. sounds, letters or gestures) can be combined to form units of meaning (words and
sentences). Moreover, the symbols and grammatical rules of a particular language are arbitrary, which means that
the system may be acquired only through social interaction. On the other hand, systems of communication used
by animals, can only express a finite number of utterances that are genetically transmitted.
While some animals might learn a big number of words and symbols, none of them would able to learn as many
different signs as generally a 4 year old child knows, nor will any animal learn anything like the complex grammar
a human being speaks/knows.
Human language also differs from animal communication systems in that they employ grammatical and semantic
categories such as noun and verb, or present, past, and future to express complex meanings. Regarding the
meaning that it may convey and the cognitive operations that it builds on, human language is considered also
unique for the fact that it is able to refer to abstract concepts and to imaginary events, as well as events that
took place in the past or may happen in the future. This ability of referring to events that do not occur at the time or
place as the speech event, is called displacement, (Chafe W, 1994) and while some animal communication
systems can use displacement (such as the communication of bees that can communicate the location of sources of
nectar that are out of sight), the degree to which it is used in human language is also considered unique.
1.4 Which are the main factors that influence language development?
In general terms, the two main (basic) factors that somehow influence language development are biological and
environmental ones. (Traxcler M.J, 2012). In each of these primary categories, there are several factors that do
64
give their contribution to the development of a language.
Basic biological factor
In the biological category, many researchers claim that children are born with a kind of biological means (device)
that enables them to understand the principles of a language. In other words, this means that language is
programmed into the human brain. In this context, language development happens innately and is not influenced by
other factors.
Genetic
Children (or in general people) who genetically have certain mental or physical disorders, have obstacles which
directly influence their language development. (Traxcler M.J, (2012). For instance, children facing problems with
their hearing, they will directly have problems with the pronunciation of particular words. In this kind of factor,
we have also emotional and behavioral problems such as depression or anxiety which influence the language
development of some people.
Exposure and Stimulation
Many studies have come to a conclusion that children who are exposed to more vocabulary and more complex
grammatical structures develop faster their language then the others. In this point, stimulating activities and
workshops that have to do with language also seem to influence language development.
Opportunities for usage
Some other researches think that the use of language is a more influential factor compared to biological one or
exposure. Their views might be initiated from the fact that children who are listened to and prompted with
stimulating questions to speak often develop their own language skills faster than those that do not use language
so often. A good example in this case would be the baby of a family who seldom needs to speak as his/her own
older siblings speak for them. This influences language development a lot and often delays the natural
development of children.
2. Memory
2.1 Definition
One crucial and very important factor in language learning and human development is memory. In order to
understand how we learn, it is first necessary to understand something about how do we think. Intelligence is
considered as being fundamentally memory-based process. Learning on the other hand means the dynamic
modification of memory.
The term memory refers to a set of cognitive abilities through which we obtain information and reassemble
mentally past experiences. (Kellogg R.T, 2003). It is in fact like a source of knowledge and at the same time a
key aspect of personal identity.
Without a good memory language learning would simply be impossible and as a result, one´s development as
well. Memory is undoubtedly one of the most important concepts in remembering things, in learning, because,
simply, if things are not remembered, learning cannot take place at all.
Memory may also be analysed as an important part of what keeps society together, what shapes our culture,
and what shapes us as individuals. Everything human beings know is part of our memory: all our past experiences,
all we have done.

2.2 Types of memory
Memory is the term given to those structures and processes that are involved in the storage and subsequent
retrieval information. It is essential to all our lives. Without a memory of the past, we cannot operate in the present
or think about the future.
In a psychologist point of view, the term memory covers three important aspects of information processing:
(Kellogg R.T, 2003).
• Encoding
• Storage
• Retrieval
Encoding and Memory
When particular information comes into our memory system, it needs indeed to be changed into such a form
that our system can cope with, and in this way the same may be stored. For example the case of exchanging money
into a different currency when one travels from one country to another. Or the case where a word which is seen
(on the blackboard) might be stored if it is changed (encoded) into a sound or a meaning (semantic point of view).
There are three main ways in which information can be encoded (changed):
1. Visual way (through pictures)
2. Acoustic one (sounds)
3. Semantic (through meaning)
65
For instance, how people remember a telephone number they have looked up in the phone book? If you see it
then you are using visual coding, but if you are repeating it to yourself you are using acoustic coding (by sound).
Literature suggests that this is the so called principle coding system in short term memory (STM) is acoustic
coding. (Kellogg R.T, 2003). The case where a person is presented with a list of numbers and letters, he/she will
try to hold them in STM by rehearsing them (verbally, of course). Rehearsal is considered as a verbal process
regardless of whether the list of items is given or presented acoustically (someone reads them out), or visually
(on a list or paper).
The so called principle encoding system in long term memory (LTM) appears to be semantic coding (meaning).
(Kellogg R.T, 2003). However, information in LTM can also be coded both visually and acoustically. Storage and
Memory
This aspect of information processing concerns the nature of memory stores, in other words where the particular
information is stored, how long the memory lasts for (its duration), how much can be stored at any time (the
capacity) and what kind of information do we held. The way how we store information affects the way how we
retrieve the same. There has been a significant amount of research regarding the differences between Short Term
Memory (STM) and Long Term Memory (LTM).
Most of adults may store 5 to 9 things (items) in their short-term memory.(Miller 175-176). Miller put this idea
forward and he called it the magic number 7. He though that short-term memory capacity was 7 (plus or minus 2)
items because it only had a certain number of “slots” in which items could be stored. However, Miller didn’t
specify the amount of information that can be held in each slot. Indeed, if we can “chunk” information together we
can store a lot more information in our short-term memory. In contrast the capacity of LTM is thought to be
unlimited.
Information can only be stored for a brief duration in STM (0-30 seconds), but LTM can last a lifetime.
Retrieval and Memory
This refers to getting information out storage. If we can’t remember something, it may be because we are unable to
retrieve it. When we are asked to retrieve something from memory, the differences between STM and LTM
become very clear.
STM is stored and retrieved sequentially. (Kellogg R.T, 2003). For example, if a group of participants are
given a list of words to remember, and then asked to recall the fourth word on the list, participants go through the
list in the order they heard it in order to retrieve the information.
LTM is stored and retrieved by association. (Kellogg R.T, 2003). This is why you can remember what you
went upstairs for if you go back to the room where you first thought about it.
Organizing information can help aid retrieval. You can organize information in sequences (such as
alphabetically, by size or by time). Imagine a patient being discharged form hospital whose treatment involved
taking various pills at various times, changing their dressing and doing exercises. If the doctor gives these
instructions in the order which they must be carried out throughout the day (in sequence of time), this will help
the patient remember them.
A number of theories of memory are based on the assumption that there are three kinds of memory: sensory
memory, short-term memory and long-term one. (Pastorino E.E. 2010).
Sensory memory is a storage system that holds information in a relatively unprocessed form for fractions of a
second after the physical stimulus is no longer available. It has been suggested (e.g. Baddeley,1988) that one
function of this kind of storage is to allow information from successive eye-fixations to last for a long enough
time to be integrated and so to give continuity to our visual environment. For example, if you move a lighted
sparkler rapidly round in a sweeping arc, you will 'see' a circle of sparkling light. This is because the trace from
the point of the sparkler is momentarily left behind. However, if you move the sparkler slowly, only a partial circle
will be seen because the first part of the circumference will have laded by the time the sparkler gets back to its
starting point.
Similarly, if you watch a film, your conscious experience is of a continuous visual scene in which all of the action
appears to be moving smoothly. In fact, the film is actually being presented as a rapid series of frozen images
interspersed by fleeting moments of darkness. In order to make sense of it, your sensory store has to hold the
information from one frame of film until the next is presented. These everyday examples seem to suggest that we
are capable of storing visual images for very brief periods. It is assumed that we have separate sensory stores for
all the senses.
Short-term memory (STM) is a system for storing information for brief periods of time. Some researchers (e.g.
Atkinson and Shiffrin, 1968) see STM simply as a temporary storage depot for incoming information.
3. Bilingualism
3.1. What is bilingualism?
According to ‘The Free Dictionary’ by Farlex, bilingualism is:
66
a. The ability to speak two languages
b. The use of two languages
According to Valdez & Figueora (1994), in its simplest form, bilingualism is defined as ‘knowing’ two
languages. Still, the term ‘knowing’ is controversial because some bilinguals may be proficient in both languages
while the others may have a dominant or preferred language. Researchers suggest that native-like proficiency in
both languages, referred to as “true” bilingualism, is rare. (Grosjean, 1982). Generally, the person who is able to
speak two languages, like Albanian and Macedonian, or Chinese and Japanese, is called bilingual. Nowadays we
can find bilinguals in every corner because of different factors influencing bilingualism. But, when a person is
truly a bilingual? There are people who can write and read a second language fluently but cannot communicate
in that language. On the other hand there are some others that can communicate in a second language fluently
but are not able to use its written mode. All this issue represents a complex matter in bilingualism as a result of
language which can be acquired through a variety of modalities like: sound (speech), visual motion (signs) and
sight (writing). Consequently, we can say that a person is bilingual if he or she knows (1) two languages in the
same modality, for example, two speech-based languages such as spoken English and spoken German, or, two
sign-based languages such as American Sign Language and Japanese Sign Language, or (2) two languages based
on different modalities, e.g. spoken German and American Sign Language, or, spoken French and written Sanskrit.
(Steinberg, D.D. & Sciarini, N.V. 2006).
3.2. How do people become bilingual?
People may become bilingual either by learning a second language after acquiring the first language or by
acquiring two languages at the same time in childhood.
A lot of bilingual people grow up speaking two languages. Best example for this would be the children of
Albanian immigrants though out Europe or even in America. Often these children grow up speaking their parents’
native language (respectively Albanian) in their childhood home while speaking German or English (depending on
the country where they have migrated) at school. On the other hand, many bilinguals are not immigrants; teachers
of any foreign language in Macedonia, including English of course, would be a suitable example for this one. It is
not uncommon for us (teachers) to speak English at school or work and another language, in this case Albanian,
at home. Children can also become bilingual if their parents speak more than one language to them, or some other
important people in their life; such as grandparents or babysitters, who speak to them consistently in another
language. Semi-Turkish families in our regions would represent this case better, when the grandparents speak to
their grandchildren in Turkish, while they are taught Albanian by their parents and educated Albanian at school.
There are cases when children are grown up in families in which each parent speaks a different language; meaning
that one-parent/one-language strategy is used. In that case, the children may learn to speak to each parent in
that parents’ language. For example, if child’s father is an Albanian, he will speak to the child in Albanian;
consequently the child will communicate with the father only in Albanian. If child’s mother is Macedonian, she
will speak to the child only in Macedonian; consequently the child will communicate with his or her mother in
Macedonian. Interesting is the fact that the child will almost never mix the two exposed languages with both of
parents. Shortly, a young child who is regularly exposed to two languages from an early age will most probably
become a fluent native speaker of both languages. The exposure must involve interaction; a child growing up in an
Albanian-speaking family who is exposed to Turkish only through Turkish-language television won’t become a
Turkish - Albanian bilingual, but a child who is regularly spoken to both in Albanian and Turkish will.
It is also possible to learn a second language some time after early childhood, but the older you get; the
harder it is to learn to speak a new language as well as a native speaker. Linguists believe there is a ‘critical period’
(Krashen, S. D. 1975) (lasting roughly from birth until puberty) during which a child can easily acquire any
language that he or she is regularly exposed to. Under this view, the structure of the brain changes at puberty, and
after that it becomes harder to learn a new language. This means that it is much easier to learn a second language
during childhood than as an adult.
3.3. Is it hard for a child to acquire two languages at once?
There is no evidence to suggest that it is easier for a child to acquire one language than to acquire two
languages. As long as people are regularly speaking with the child in both languages, the child will acquire them
both easily. A child doesn’t have to be a genius or have any extra - ordinary language ability to become a bilingual;
as long as the child is exposed to two languages throughout early childhood, he or she will acquire them both.
Some people are concerned with the child’s process of learning more than one language at a time. They
think that this process is bad for the child, but according to some linguists nothing could be further from the truth.
Actually, there are a lot of advantages to knowing more than one language. Firstly, many linguists consider that
knowing a second language in fact is beneficial for the child’s cognitive development. Secondly, if the child comes
from a family that has recently immigrated to a ‘new’ country the family may speak a language other than
67
the language of that country at home and may still have strong ties to their ethnic roots. For example, Albanians
that have immigrated to Germany undoubtedly use Albanian in everyday communication because of their origin
and identity, but they for sure use German at school and at work. In this case, the child being able to speak the
language of the family national convention may be important for his or hers sense of cultural identity. To not be
able to speak the family’s language could make a child suffer inferiority and weakness with his or her own family;
speaking the family’s language gives the child a sense of identity and belonging. Thirdly, in an increasingly global
marketplace, it is a benefit for anyone to know more than one language; A Lingua Franca is always needed. And
finally, for people of any age or profession, knowing a second language encourages their cross - cultural
awareness and understanding.
3.4. Levels of bilingualism
In a sociolinguistic point of view, bilingualism can be understood on two levels: individual and societal.
(Cenoz, L. & Jessner, U, 2010)
Discussions about individual bilingualism use the individual person as a reference point and usually focus
on characteristics such as age of acquisition, level of attainment, language dominance, and ability. Often, these
characteristics are largely removed from their broader social context and do not take the terminology community
into account.
‘Societal bilingualism’ (Wodak, R,. Johnstone, B. & Kerswill, P. 2011) is a broad term used to refer to
any kind of bilingualism or multilingualism at a level of social organization beyond the individual or nuclear
family. By this definition, almost every country of the world has some level of ‘societal bilingualism’. Societal
bilingualism by no means implies that every individual in the society in question is bilingual. As Romaine points
out (2005), ‘bilingual individuals may belong to communities of various sizes and types, and they interact in many
kinds of networks within communities, not all of which may function bilingually’. An example of societal
bilingualism is the accessibility of newspapers and other print media in more than one language
In many countries nearly everybody is bilingual or multilingual. In parts of India for example, a small child
usually knows several languages. In many European countries, children are encouraged to learn a second
language - usually English. While in the U.S. is quite unusual its citizens to speak a second language, and they
are rarely encouraged to become fluent in any other language.
There are many factors that influence societal bilingualism. I will mention only three of them;
1. Education and international schools as innovation - teaching process in ordinary schools includes a
second even a third language, while in international schools the whole teaching process is done in English
(English is not the first neither the native language of students);
2. Globalization - trade, marketplace, business, technology; European Union (which uses English and French
as two parallel languages in organizations and assemblies)
3. Colonization - India is a typical example of a community that is bilingual as result of the English
colonization; nowadays in India you can find a mix of English and Hindu;
3.5. First - language and second - language relations and the transfer effect
Relations between first - language and second - language are not always the same. They depend on their genesis.
For example, French and English both belong to the Germanic family of languages and for this reason you can
find to many similarities between them. These two languages have in common the position of the article, gender,
obligatory marking of nouns for plurality, and similar syntactic structures. (Steinberg, D.D. & Sciarini, N.V. 2006).
Also another significant similarity is in terms of vocabulary. Because of the borrowing process you can find the
same words in English and French languages, e.g . vocabulary / vocabularie, similarity / similarite, difference /
difference, monumental / monumentale, comparison / comparison, etc. (Steinberg, D.D. & Sciarini, N.V. 2006).
As we can see, the similarity between these two languages is immense. For this reason, learning French as a second
-language when you already know English is much easier if you learn Japanese as a second -language. English is
better related with French than with Japanese.

Learning Japanese as a second - language when you already know English, English definitely won’t facilitate your
job. The first distinction is the writing system; English uses the Roman type of alphabet while Japanese uses
Chinese characters, then, the syntax is completely different; in English we have S - P - O word order, in Japanese
they have S - O - P(V). For this reason, the higher the similarity between two languages is, the faster the
learning will be.
On the other hand, the relation between the two languages may cause another so - problem ‘code switching’
(Steinberg, D.D. & Sciarini, N.V. 2006). Code switching happens with children or adults when the relation between
the first and the second language is high. Because of this relation the child or the adult may not think of a word in
one language and then he or she uses a phrase from the second language while speaking in the first one.
3.6. How to teach the reading of two languages?
We had examples with bilingual families and the way they teach their children how to learn two languages at the
same time (simultaneously) or when they learn a second language after the first one is already acquired
68
(sequential). But what happens when the child comes to the phase of learning the writing/reading process? Can a
child learn two different writing systems at the same time?
Psycholinguists suggest that the teaching of the reading process to be done sequentially, with the second language
following the first after a year or two. (Steinberg, D.D. & Sciarini, N.V. 2006). If parents use one -person/one -
language strategy, it will be beneficial for the child the same strategy to continue in the reading process; if the
father taught him to speak English, he should teach him how to read in English, and if the mother taught him to
speak Albanian, then the mother should teach the child how to read in Albanian. The simultaneous teaching of
reading is not advisable, not just because of the risk of the child confusing the writing systems, but because the
parents would be greatly burdened. (Steinberg, D.D. & Sciarini, N.V. 2006). It is recommended that the language
to be learned first is the one that is most important for the child’s welfare. (Steinberg, D.D. & Sciarini, N.V.
2006). Consequently, it should be the language that is used in the community and in school. After learning the
first language, it won’t be difficult for the child to learn a second language and its writing and reading process.
3.7. Why bilinguals are smarter?
Speaking two or more languages instead of one of course has its benefits, especially in this increasingly globalized
world. Business, technology, politics, science, and all other fields of life and society require a second even a third
language. This second language gives you the chance to communicate and be in touch with a wider range of
people. For this reason, bilinguals seem to have superiority over monolinguals, and turns out that they are
smarter.
Before, bilingualism or the second language is seen only as interference in child’s intellectual development.
Psycholinguists were right about the interference, but they did not realize that this interference forces the brain to
resolve internal conflict which gives to the mind a workout that strengthens its cognitive muscles. ‘Why does the
tussle between two simultaneously active language systems improve these aspects of cognition? Until recently,
researchers thought the bilingual advantage stemmed primarily from ability for inhibition that was honed by the
exercise of suppressing one language system: this suppression, it was thought, would help train the bilingual mind
to ignore distractions in other contexts. But that explanation increasingly appears to be inadequate, since studies
have shown that bilinguals perform better than monolinguals even at tasks that do not require inhibition, like
threading a line through an ascending series of numbers scattered randomly on a page’. (Bhattacharjee, Y. 2012).
Nobody ever doubted the power of language. But who would have imagined that the words we hear and the
sentences we speak might be leaving such a deep imprint? (Bhattacharjee, Y. 2012).
3.8. Personality and bilingualism
It has been reported that when people change the language they change their attitudes also. A Czech proverb says:
‘Learn a new language and get a new soul’. Seems like, the Czechs have right even though there is no real
evidence that bilinguals suffer any more from mental disorders than monolinguals In fact, this change in
personality is just a shift in behavior and attitude corresponding to a shift in situation or context, independent of
language (Grosjean, 1994).
A bilingual will choose a language according to the situation and the environment. So, the change of the language,
the attitude, and the behavior, even the change of feelings happens as a result of the environment. The major
difference between a monolingual and a bilingual in this aspect is that when bilinguals shift languages, they shift
cultures also whereas the monolinguals usually remain within the same culture. (Grosjean,1999).
4. Conclusion
The development of a human being is a complex process. It includes its physical construction and psychological
maturity. Obviously the second one is way more difficult to be achieved and the same is based and depends on
the skills and abilities of the person itself. It is a mixture of gained and born features which include values, beliefs,
emotions and expression of all the above mentioned. We all know that the expression of their inner world and their
knowledge (or the process of speaking) is a typical feature of human beings and the same distinguishes them from
other creatures, but not everyone is familiar or understands the process that they themselves go through in order to
achieve it. In this paper, we tried to describe and explain it in details in a psycholinguistic point of view. We
focused our search on the importance of language as one and the best known way of expressing ourselves and
communication, memory as the main factor of learning and remembering, and bilingualism as an advanced
form of the both above mentioned things.
Language is the main mean of communication. It is the primary way of expressing our thoughts, ideas and
emotions. Even though it looks like a simple natural process, the acquisition of a language takes time. Children
are born without a language; they acquire it parallel with their growth. Interesting is the fact that without any
particular training, a child at the age of four/five is able to say and remember several words and even construct
some simple grammatical forms (of course the child is not aware of any grammatical form and construction at
69
that age). As the child grows up, the amount of words in his vocabulary enlarges. As a more mature person, he
uses the language not only as a form of communication and ‘a builder’ of non-finite utterances, but also as an
essential process of his cognitive operations which leads him to use language in its highest usage; to reflect upon
language itself, a process that between linguists is known as ‘meta-language’.
Memory on the other hand is the crucial factor of learning a language and more than that. It is the memory which
enables us to obtain information and reassemble mentally past experiences. Memory helps us remembering things,
and as a result of that learning too. Everything we know and remember from our past experiences is due to
memory. So, better memory we have, easier would be the learning of a language and greater our development as
a person. Through its three ways of processing information (encoding, storage and retrieval), either short -
time or long - time, memory is the key factor that obtain all our information that will be used in the future for
learning new things (languages) and going through past experiences and memories.
The third and last factor (discussed in this paper) in the development of a human being is bilingualism.
Bilingualism is the ability of a person to speak two languages. This ability is either acquired in infancy or later.
Learning two languages at a time may seem very difficult for an adult, but for a child it is a ‘possible mission’. A
child may be exposed to two languages within the family (two parents - two languages) and for this reason she/he
will acquire both of them. The child will address to each parent in the language that the parent addresses the child
(one - parent; one - language strategy). But, we have larger scale of bilingualism than individual or family
bilingualism; that’s societal bilingualism. It is a result of a big advanced progressive society which requires more
skills and ways of expressing for being part of it. Being part of a ‘world society’ means to be able to speak to it.
For this reason fluency in more than one language makes you more suitable in this globalized world, and the
culture that a language brings with it empowers the bilinguals to shift not only between languages but also between
cultures.
The development of a human being has no ending. The utterances that we can produce out of our vocabulary are
endless. The greater our memory is, the easier will be the learning of a new language which would make us
bilinguals. A bilingual means an intelligent, prepared and desirable citizen of the world.
Bibliography
Gardner, H. (1987) The mind’s new science: A history of the cognitive revolution, Unites States of America:
Vincent Torre.
Sadoski M. &Paivio A. (2001). A dual coding theory of reading and writing, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Inc.
Chafe W. (1994). Discourse, Consciousness and Time, The university of Chicago Press Ltd, The USA, Garcia M.
(2007). Motivation, language learning beliefs, self-efficacy and acculturation patterns among two groups of
English learners”, Pro-Quest info and learning company, US,
Traxcler M.J, (2012). Introduction to psycholinguistics’, John Wiley & Sns Ltd, UK,
Bhattacharjee, Y. (2012) ‘Why Bilinguals are smarter’, New York:New York Times, March 17, 2012 Article
Source: http://EzineArticles.com/4552095
Cenoz, J. & Jessner, U. (2010) ‘English in Europe: The acquisition of a third language’, United Kingdom:
Lighning Source UK Ltd.
Genesee, F. (1987) Learning through of two languages: Studies of Immersion and Bilingual Education, Rowley,
MA: Newbury House.
Grosjean, F. (1994) Individual Bilingualism in The Encyclopaedia of Language and Linguistics’; Oxford:
Pergamon Press.
Grosjean, F. (1999) Individual Bilingualism’ in Concise Encyclopaedia of Educational Linguistics’; Oxford:
Elsevier.
Hakuta, K. (1986) The Mirror of Language: The Debate on Bilingualism, New York: Basic Books.
Holmes, J. (2008) An Introduction to Sociolinguistics, Malaysia: Longman. Hudson, R.A. (1980)
Sociolinguistics, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Krashen, S. D. (1975), ‘The critical period or language acquisition and its possible bases’, Annals of the New
York Academy of Sciences.
Krashen, S. & Long (eds.) (1982) Child-Adult differences in second language acquisition’, Rowley, MA:
Newbury House.
Kellogg R.T. (2003), Cognitive Psychology, Second edition, Sage Publications, Inc. California,
Steinberg, D.D. & Sciarini, N.V. (2006), An Introduction to Psycholinguistics, Great Britain: Longman.
Wodak, R., Johnstone, B., & Kerswill, P. (Eds.).(2011). The SAGE handbook of sociolinguistics. London:
SAGE Publications Ltd.
Pastorino E.E. (2010), What is psychology? Essentials, Second Edition, Cengage Learning, USA,
70
This academic article was published by The International Institute for Science,
Technology and Education (IISTE). The IISTE is a pioneer in the Open Access
Publishing service based in the U.S. and Europe. The aim of the institute is
Accelerating Global Knowledge Sharing.
More information about the publisher can be found in the IISTE’s homepage:
http://www.iiste.org
CALL FOR JOURNAL PAPERS
The IISTE is currently hosting more than 30 peer-reviewed academic journals and
collaborating with academic institutions around the world. There’s no deadline for
submission. Prospective authors of IISTE journals can find the submission
instruction on the following page: http://www.iiste.org/journals/ The IISTE editorial
team promises to the review and publish all the qualified submissions in a fast manner.
All the journals articles are available online to the readers all over the world without
financial, legal, or technical barriers other than those inseparable from gaining access
to the internet itself. Printed version of the journals is also available upon request of
readers and authors.
MORE RESOURCES
Book publication information: http://www.iiste.org/book/
Recent conferences: http://www.iiste.org/conference/
IISTE Knowledge Sharing Partners
EBSCO, Index Copernicus, Ulrich's Periodicals Directory, JournalTOCS, PKP Open
Archives Harvester, Bielefeld Academic Search Engine, Elektronische

Zeitschriftenbibliothek EZB, Open J-Gate, OCLC WorldCat,
First language acquisition
By Yassine El Khorbati
Learning a new language is not quite easy. It requires learning new rules of Grammar,
memorizing endless lists of vocabulary and acquiring many new sounds that are hard to
produce. But still, children lean the phonology, morphology, semantics, syntax, and overall
master their very first language without deliberate efforts of teaching and before they learn how
to do simpler tasks. Infants’ capacity to acquire language has provoked a lot of debate between
many researchers, mainly linguists and psychologists, who have tried to unravel the secrets of
the learning and acquisition of language.
The process of language learning in children is quite fast. However, it does not happen
overnight. Children start without any linguistic knowledge, yet, they utter their first word around
their first birthday. Around their second birthday, children are able to form short sentences, and
by the time they are five years old, they can utter long, abstract sentences and engage in more
complex conversations. The ease and speed with which children pick up language makes the
subject challenging but quite interesting (Matthews, 1996).
The goal of this research paper is to explore the phenomenon of language acquisition. It begins
by discussing different studies about the subject. After that this paper will try to cover the main
development stages of language and answer the question: How do children acquire the sounds
and words of their first language? This discussion is then followed by a description of the
phonological development of Moroccan Arabic speaking infants.
CHAPTER 1 LANGUAGE LEARNING THEORIES
The main concern of this chapter is to discuss the major theories concerning language
acquisition. The aim is here to provide some knowledge about language acquisition theories as
well as knowledge about the acquisition process before we proceed to the next chapters.
In the last decades many scholars have studied how children acquire language. Thus, a wide
range of research has emerged explaining language acquisition and investigating how learning
is accomplished.
In this chapter, four major theories concerning early language acquisition are going to be
discussed. The first two theories are proposed by Piaget and Vygotsky while the last two
theories are proposed by Skinner and Chomsky. It is important to note that these theories are
mainly influenced by two disciplines: psychology and linguistics.
PIAGET'S THEORY OF COGNITIVE DEVELOPMENT
The first theory this chapter will deal with is Piaget’s theory of cognitive development which is a
theory that focuses on understanding the nature and development of human intelligence and how
children acquire knowledge. This theory claims that children transition through four stages of
intellectual development in order to understand the world around them (Piaget, 1952) (Piaget,
1959) (Piaget, 1976).
The first stage is referred to as the sensorimotor stage and it starts at birth and ends at 2 years of
age. The main achievement during this stage is object permanence, and it is the understanding
that an object still exists even though it cannot be seen. This achievement is very important
because through knowing that objects are separate things and that they exist outside the
individual’s perception, kids begin to attach names or words to objects.
The second stage is the preoperational stage and it starts at 2 years of age and ends at 7.
During this stage, children learn to think symbolically. In other words, they learn to make a word
2 FIRST LANGUAGE ACQUISITION
or an object stand for something other than itself. However, kids at this stage tend to be
egocentric and have difficulties in seeing things from the viewpoint of others.
The third stage is called the concrete operational stage and it starts at 7 years of age and ends at
11. In this stage, major developmental changes happen. Children begin to think logically and in
an organized way. That is to say, they start to work things out in their head. Also in this stage,
children become less egocentric as they start to think about how people view a certain situation.
The last stage is the formal operational stage and it starts at 12 years of age and lasts into
adulthood. In this stage, teens develop the ability to understand abstract ideas and think
scientifically about the world.
Piaget’s theory claims that kids learn using schemas. According to this theory, a schema is a
mental representation that organizes knowledge. “In more simple terms Piaget called the schema
the basic building block of intelligent behavior - a way of organizing knowledge. Indeed, it is
useful to think of schemas as “units” of knowledge, each relating to one aspect of the world,
including objects, actions, and abstract (i.e., theoretical) concepts”. (McLeod, S. A., para. 11). To
illustrate this, a kid might have a schema about birds. If all the birds the kid has seen have
feathers and can fly. The kid will think that all birds have feathers, wings, and can fly. However,
when the kid sees a penguin for the first time, the kid will modify his previously existing schema
of birds to include this new type of bird he just saw.
Piaget also argues that once children are able to think in a certain way, they develop a
language to describe those thoughts. Thus, children’s language development is influenced by
their cognitive development.
VYGOTSKY’S ZONE OF PROXIMAL DEVELOPMENT
While Piaget puts little emphasis on social factors in his theories. Vygotsky’s theory suggests that
children learn through social and language interactions with their environment. This theory claims
that language acquisition also works this way. Vygotsky, the founder of socio-cultural theory,
argues that children develop language through social interaction with adults who already know
the language. Also, as opposed to Piaget, who believes that children do not learn from adults,
Vygotsky believes that learning happens from the outside in (Vygotsky, 1978).
Vygotsky’s theory claims that the interaction that happens between a more knowledgeable other
(MKO) and a child is what leads to learning. Vygotsky (1978) also identifies a Zone of Proximal
Development (ZPD) which is a stage where the most sensitive instruction or guidance should be
given to children because at this stage children are more sensitive to the information they receive.
Vygotsky emphasizes the importance of language and the relation it has with thinking.
According to Vygotsky, thought is a result of language. He believes that language develops
from social interactions for communication purposes. Later, language becomes internalized as
thought. That is to say, the ability to think for ourselves comes from language. Vygotsky also
emphasizes the importance of internal speech to children. He suggests that children who
engage in internal speech frequently are much more competent than children who don’t.
SKINNER’S BEHAVIORISM
Behaviorism is a theory which suggests that all behaviors are acquired through interaction with
the environment. “Behaviorism, a movement in psychology that advocates the use of strict
experimental procedures to study observable behavior (or responses) in relation to the
environment (or stimuli)”. (Microsoft® Encarta® Online Encyclopedia, para. 1). The goal of this
theory is to approach psychology from an observable, measurable way and Behaviorism had a
huge success with this strategy.

B.F. Skinner, a pioneer of behaviorism, provided one of the first explanations of language
acquisition. He argues that positive reinforcement will stimulate a behavior to be repeated while
negative reinforcement will reduce a certain behavior. Thus, children learn to associate words
with concepts through reinforcement (awards and punishment). For example, when a baby is
producing syllables, mothers reinforce the baby’s behavior if the random syllables he produces
are similar to real words. According to this theory, when the baby says ‘ma ma’, the mother
praises the baby and gives it more attention. Thus, the baby is likely to repeat this behavior over
and over. But when the baby says something that doesn’t correspond to the mother, she ignores
him. As a consequence, the baby is likely to reduce this behavior. Similarly, grammar is learnt the
same way. Thus, language acquisition, according to Skinner, is a process of habit formation
(Skinner, 1957).
However, Skinner’s theory doesn’t explain how children are able to produce words they have
never heard before or how they are able to produce unique sentences.
CHOMSKY’S UNIVERSAL GRAMMAR (UG)
Behaviorism was heavily questioned by Noam Chomsky (1959), an American linguist who
argues that children cannot learn language by simply repeating what adults say, because
children can produce new sentences that they have never heard. According to Chomsky,
children learn language not by hearing and repeating what they say, but by extracting the rules
which they apply to create new sentences. Chomsky believes that children acquire language
easily because they possess an inner ability in their minds and not because they are affected by
adult’s speech and their environment. That is to say, Chomsky (1976) believes that children are
pre-disposed to learn language. In Chomsky’s view, humans have a Language Acquisition
Device (LAD) in their brains that allows them to learn language and a Universal Grammar that
has common properties in all human minds which makes the structures of all human languages
similar (Chomsky, 1965).
According to Chomsky, Universal Grammar consists of an inner structure for processing
language which allows the production of endless types of sentences. This Universal Grammar
also allows humans to decide whether a sentence is correctly formed or not. Consequently,
when we hear Chomsky’s famous sentence “Colorless green ideas sleep furiously”, we
recognize that it is grammatically correct even though it is meaningless. But on the other hand,
when we hear the sentence “a cat mouse chases the” we recognize that it is not correct even
though we might have an idea of what it means.
One of the core ideas which Chomsky believes in is that language learning is genetically
encoded. Chomsky argues that humans are born with the ability to acquire language and that
children are genetically pre-disposed to learn grammar. That is to say, humans have a language
instinct. This language instinct contains what he called a set of Principles and Parameters which
are cross linguistically universal (Dąbrowska, 2015). Principles are a set of abstract rules. To
illustrate this, this is an example of a principle: when we see anaphoric pronouns in sentences,
they must have proper antecedents. For example, in the two following sentences John likes tea
and he likes tea, we know that John and he are the same person. But in the following sentence
he likes John’s tea we know that John and he are not the same person.
According to Chomsky, Parameters are specific switches that are either turned on or off,
depending on the language. Thus, in learning languages, people already possess the switch.
They only have to decide whether to switch it on or off. For instance, some languages, such as
English, require the subject to be openly expressed. But there are other languages that have no
problem with leaving out the subject. Another example of a parameter is the position of the head
in relative clauses. In English, relative clauses consist of the head first then the relative clause.
However, in some other languages, it is preferred to have the head at the end of the clause.
POVERTY OF THE STIMULUS
The poverty of the stimulus argument is an argument used by Chomsky to reinforce his theory of
Universal Grammar. It was introduced in ‘Rules and Representations’ in 1980. This argument
suggests that it is impossible for kids to acquire their first language solely based on listening to
adults. Chomsky argues that language is so complicated and too complex for children to learn it
from the input that they get because the input is noisy. This means that adults offer a distorted
and imperfect source of data and learning grammar from adults is nearly impossible.
Furthermore, children are not exposed to enough data to acquire every feature of language.
Yet, children learn their first language fast, effortlessly and accurately (Dąbrowska, 2015). This
suggests that the ability to learn language is innate.
CHAPTER 2 LANGUAGE DEVELOPMENT

This chapter is concerned with linguistic development in children as well as the major
phonological stages of development.
Since the time they are born, children start to learn language by listening to huge numbers of
words and sentences. Then they start to distinguish different sounds and segment the stream of
speech that they are exposed to when hearing adults speaking in order to understand each word
(Jusczyk & Aslin, 1995). When the brains and bodies of children are developed enough, they
start to pronounce words.
THE CRITICAL PERIOD HYPOTHESIS
There is a period in which a child’s language acquisition happens easily and automatically. This
period is called the critical period and it is the first few years of childhood. After this period of
brain development, it becomes difficult to acquire a language. Also, after the critical period, it
becomes nearly impossible to acquire a language with native speaker fluency. “After puberty,
mastery of the pronunciation and mastery of the grammar is unlikely to be identical to that of a
native speaker, although word learning does not appear to be as sensitive to age and remains
good throughout life” (Kuhl, 2011, p. 131). However, the time of development of different aspects
of language varies. “Studies in typically developing monolingual children indicate, for example,
that an important period for phonetic learning occurs prior to the end of the first year, whereas
syntactic learning flourishes between 18 and 36 months of age. Vocabulary development
‘‘explodes’’ at 18 months of age.” (Kuhl, 2011, p. 131)
Children usually learn their first word around their first birthday. But before that, they learn to
differentiate between the sounds of their native language and the sounds of other languages. Dr.
Patricia Kuhl examined how children respond to the sounds of their language as well as the
sounds of foreign languages by conducting an experiment where she compared a group of
American babies and a group of Japanese babies in differentiating between the sounds “/Ra/”
and “/La/”. This experiment showed that six months old American babies and six months old
Japanese babies can both distinguish between the sounds “/Ra/” and “/La/”. However, by eleven
months, the American babies became better at distinguishing between the sounds “/Ra/” and
“/La/”, while the Japanese babies became worse at the same task.
Dr. Patricia Kuhl explains this by suggesting that until about six months of age, babies can
distinguish between all human sounds. But once they reach ten or eleven months, they can only
distinguish between the sounds of their own languages. And since /l/ and /r/ are in the same
phonemic category in Japanese, Japanese babies became worse at distinguishing between the
sounds. “Japanese-learning infants have to group the phonetic units r and l into a single
phonemic category (Japanese r), whereas Englishlearning infants must uphold the distinction to
separate rake from lake.” (Kuhl, 2011, p. 132)
Dr. Patricia Kuhl believes that after birth and for a short period, babies have the ability to hear
differences between all the sounds used in the all-human languages. Dr. Kuhl refers to babies
at this period as “citizens of the world”. By the time babies are eleven months old, they are no
longer “citizens of the world”. They become “culture bound” listeners, specialists in one
language. “The baby’s task in the first year of life, therefore, is to make some progress in
figuring out the composition of the 40 odd phonemic categories in their language(s) before
trying to acquire words that depend on these elementary units.” (Kuhl, 2011, p. 132)
Although babies at this point are able to differentiate between speech sounds and can tell
whether a sound belongs to their native language or not, they are not ready to utter their first
words yet.
THE STAGES OF DEVELOPMENT
This part will look at the development children undergo throughout their early years by
discussing the five major stages of development: The prelinguistic stage, the babbling stage,
the holophrastic or one word stage, the two-word stage then, the telegraphic or multi word
stage.
THE PRELINGUISTIC STAGE
As early as two days after they are born, babies are able to discriminate between the sounds /a/
and /i/, and by three days of age they can recognize their mother’s voice. By 0;1 young infants
can distinguish between the sounds /ba/ and /pa/ and /da/ and /ta/, and from 0;1 onwards they
start making cooing sounds (Matthews, 1996).
THE BABBLING STAGE
At about four months of age, infants are able to recognize differences in speech and soon they
start developing the ability to use words.
From about six to eight months of age, children start babbling. “The babbling period begins with
the production of short utterances and progresses eventually to include production of quite long
utterances which can be characterized as sounding subjectively very much more language-like
than their predecessors.” (Moskowitz, 1970)
During this period, children start to produce consonant-vowel syllables (CV) such as [baba],
[dada] and [mama] (Matthews, 1996), and they repeat these sounds over and over until they
begin to sound like real words. At this stage, children can hear phonetic distinctions with great
accuracy and differentiate between human sounds and non-human sounds. At this stage, also,
kids are able to vary pitch, rate, and volume, they start vocalizing pleasure and displeasure and
they try to reduplicate syllables and overall play with vocals.
THE HOLOPHRASTIC STAGE
EARLY ACQUISITION OF WORDS
Finally, around the age of 1;0, children enter the holophrastic stage where they become able to
pronounce one-word utterances (Matthews, 1996). But how do kids learn words? A common
answer to this question is that kids learn words through pointing and naming. Although this
answer may be partly true, it presents many problems. For example, how do children know that
what you are pointing at and what you are saying are the same thing?
EARLY ACQUISITION OF NOUNS
In order to find an answer to our main question which is how do kids learn words, we will take a
look at the types of children’s first words. If we look at a child’s first words, we find general
nominals, names, some action words, some social words and modifiers. That is to say,
children’s early vocabulary contains a high ratio of nouns.
THE NATURAL PARTITIONS HYPOTHESIS
One of the hypotheses that try to explain why children’s first words are nouns is the natural
partitions hypothesis which claims that early nouns refer to concrete objects and children can
easily identify these concrete objects from the context. “The natural partitions hypothesis
predicts that nouns will form the child’s first referential mappings from language to the world.
The mapping between nouns and concrete entities can be achieved even at the very outset of
language understanding. These first connections provide an easy first case of a reference relation
and perhaps give the child the idea that other more opaque words must also have referents. And
once learned, nouns provide semantic and syntactic frames to aid in mapping the verb to its
meaning. In this way, the early acquisition of simple nouns may pave the way for learning verbs
and other relational terms.” (Gentner & Boroditsky, 2009, p. 27)
THEORIES OF WORD LEARNING - THEORIES OF CONSTRAINTS
Theories of constraints suggest that children have an innate word learning ability that guides
them to limit possible word meanings when learning new words.
“A tennis ball has a colour (yellow), a material (rubber), a shape (a sphere), a purpose (it’s for
tennis), an age (new or worn-out), and other characteristics (bouncy, breaks windows, etc). If
someone who spoke another language pointed to a tennis ball and said Shradditch, how would
you know which of these attributes they actually meant? It could be the name for the ball, it
could be the colour, it could be anything else at all the speaker wanted to say.” (Cook, para. 5)
According to the theories of constraint, when a child hears the word tennis ball for the first time,
he will assume that this new word refers to a whole object. This is referred to as the whole object
constraint. However, when a child hears a new word that refers to something that he already
knows, the child assumes that the new word refers to a part, a property or an action associated
with that new word. This is referred to as the mutual exclusivity constraint.
THEORIES OF WORD LEARNING - SOCIAL PRAGMATIC THEORIES
In contrast to the theories of constraints, social pragmatic theories argue that the simple
association of sound and entities is not enough for children to learn the meaning of words.
According to social pragmatic theories, children learn words in social contexts because words
become meaningful in situations where the caregiver is talking to the child about objects, actions
or events. In this respect, the social context and the caregiver are crucial for children to
understand the meaning of words.
THEORIES OF WORD LEARNING - JOINT ATTENTION
“Joint attention refers to moments when a child and adult are focused on the same thing, but for
most researchers it also includes the notion that the participants are both aware that the focus of
attention is shared.” (Baldwin, 1995). Before nine months of age, children can only engage in
dyadic joint attention. But around nine months of age, they can engage in triadic joint attention
which means they can inspect an object together with their caregiver. As soon as children can
engage in triadic joint attention, they start to learn words and enlarge their vocabulary size.
THE TWO WORD STAGE
After they acquire new words and start to pronounce them, kids move on to the next stage of
development which is the two word stage. This stage starts at around the age of 1;6 and ends
when at around the age of 2;0 (Matthews, 1996). During this stage, children produce two word
utterances with simple semantic relations.
“In some cases, early multiple-unit utterances can be seen as concatenations of individual
naming actions that might just as well have occurred alone: "mommy" and "hat" might be
combined as "mommy hat"; "shirt" and "wet" might be combined as "shirt

wet". However, these
combinations tend to occur in an order that is appropriate for the language being learned.” (The
Department of Linguistics at the University of Pennsylvania, para. 25)
Children at this stage start to use phonological processes which are patterns of sound errors to
simplify adult speech as they are learning to pronounce words.
THE TELEGRAPHIC STAGE
The telegraphic or multi-word stage is the last stage of language development. This stage starts
around the age of 2;0 and lasts until the age of 3;0. During this stage kids go beyond two words
and can now form 3 to 4 word sentences with subjects and predicates (Matthews, 1996).
Kids add ten or more words to their lexicon each day and their understanding of language
progresses and their linguistic development fastens.
REFERENCES
Baldwin, D.A. (1995). Understanding the link between joint attention and language. In C. Moore
& P. J. Dunham (Eds.), Joint attention: Its origins and role in development (pp. 131-158).
Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Cook, V., How do children learn words?. Retrieved from
http://www.viviancook.uk/Words/WordTexts/TXTHowChildrenLearn.htm
Chomsky, N. (1959). A review of B. F. Skinner‘s verbal behavior, Language 35(1): 26- 58.
Chomsky, N. (1965). Aspects of the Theory of Syntax. MIT Press.
Chomsky, N. (1975). Reflections on language. New York: Pantheon Books.
Chomsky, N. (1980). Rules and representations. New York: Columbia University Press.
Dąbrowska, E. (2015). What exactly is Universal Grammar, and has anyone seen it? Retrieved
from https://www.northumbria.ac.uk/static/5007/sasspdf/whatexactlyisUG.pdf
Jusczyk, P. W., & Aslin, R. N. (1995). Infants' detection of sound patterns of words in fluent
speech. Cognitive Psychology, 29, 1-23.

Gentner, D., & Boroditsky, L. (2009). Early acquisition of nouns and verbs: Evidence from
Navajo. In V. C. Mueller Gathercole (Ed.), Routes to Language: Studies in honor of Melissa
Bowerman (pp. 5-36). New York: Psychology Press.
Kuhl, P. K. (2011). Early language learning and literacy: Neuroscience implications for
education. Mind, Brain, and Education, 5, 128-142.
Matthews, A. (1996). Linguistic Development. Retrieved from
http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.132.9673&rep=rep1&t ype=pdf
McLeod, S. A. (2015). Jean Piaget. Retrieved from www.simplypsychology.org/piaget.html
Microsoft® Encarta® Online Encyclopedia (2000). Behaviorism. Retrieved from
http://autocww.colorado.edu/~toldy3/E64ContentFiles/PsychologyAndPsycholog
ists/Behaviorism.html
Moskowitz, A. I. (1970). The acquisition of phonology. Language-Behavior Research Laboratoy,
University of California.
Piaget, J. (1952). The origins of intelligence in children (Vol. 8, No. 5, pp. 18-1952). New York:
International Universities Press.
Piaget, J. (1959). The language and thought of the child (Vol. 5). Psychology Press. Chicago
Piaget, J. (1976). Piaget’s theory. In Piaget and his school (pp. 11-23). Springer Berlin
Heidelberg.
Skinner, B.F. (1957). Verbal Behavior. Acton, MA: Copley Publishing Group.
The Department of Linguistics at the University of Pennsylvania, First Language Acquisition.
Retrieved from http://www.ling.upenn.edu/courses/Fall_2011/ling001/acquisition.html
Vygotsky, L. (1978). Interaction between learning and development. Mind and Society, pp.79 –
First language acquisition
By Yassine El Khorbati
Learning a new language is not quite easy. It requires learning new rules of Grammar,
memorizing endless lists of vocabulary and acquiring many new sounds that are hard to
produce. But still, children lean the phonology, morphology, semantics, syntax, and overall
master their very first language without deliberate efforts of teaching and before they learn how
to do simpler tasks. Infants’ capacity to acquire language has provoked a lot of debate between
many researchers, mainly linguists and psychologists, who have tried to unravel the secrets of
the learning and acquisition of language.
The process of language learning in children is quite fast. However, it does not happen
overnight. Children start without any linguistic knowledge, yet, they utter their first word around
their first birthday. Around their second birthday, children are able to form short sentences, and
by the time they are five years old, they can utter long, abstract sentences and engage in more
complex conversations. The ease and speed with which children pick up language makes the
subject challenging but quite interesting (Matthews, 1996).
The goal of this research paper is to explore the phenomenon of language acquisition. It begins
by discussing different studies about the subject. After that this paper will try to cover the main
development stages of language and answer the question: How do children acquire the sounds
and words of their first language? This discussion is then followed by a description of the
phonological development of Moroccan Arabic speaking infants.
CHAPTER 1 LANGUAGE LEARNING THEORIES
The main concern of this chapter is to discuss the major theories concerning language
acquisition. The aim is here to provide some knowledge about language acquisition theories as
well as knowledge about the acquisition process before we proceed to the next chapters.
In the last decades many scholars have studied how children acquire language. Thus, a wide
range of research has emerged explaining language acquisition and investigating how learning
is accomplished.
In this chapter, four major theories concerning early language acquisition are going to be
discussed. The first two theories are proposed by Piaget and Vygotsky while the last two
theories are proposed by Skinner and Chomsky. It is important to note that these theories are
mainly influenced by two disciplines: psychology and linguistics.
PIAGET'S THEORY OF COGNITIVE DEVELOPMENT
The first theory this chapter will deal with is Piaget’s theory of cognitive development which is a
theory that focuses on understanding the nature and development of human intelligence and how
children acquire knowledge. This theory claims that children transition through four stages of
intellectual development in order to understand the world around them (Piaget, 1952) (Piaget,
1959) (Piaget, 1976).
The first stage is referred to as the sensorimotor stage and it starts at birth and ends at 2 years of
age. The main achievement during this stage is object permanence, and it is the understanding
that an object still exists even though it cannot be seen. This achievement is very important
because through knowing that objects are separate things and that they exist outside the
individual’s perception, kids begin to attach names or words to objects.
The second stage is the preoperational stage and it starts at 2 years of age and ends at 7.
During this stage, children learn to think symbolically. In other words, they learn to make a word
or an object stand for something other than itself. However, kids at this stage tend to be
egocentric and have difficulties in seeing things from the viewpoint of others.
The third stage is called the concrete operational stage and it starts at 7 years of age and ends at
11. In this stage, major developmental changes happen. Children begin to think logically and in
an organized way. That is to say, they start to work things out in their head. Also in this stage,
children become less egocentric as they start to think about how people view a certain situation.
The last stage is the formal operational stage and it starts at 12 years of age and lasts into
adulthood. In this stage, teens develop the ability to understand abstract ideas and think
scientifically about the world.
Piaget’s theory claims that kids learn using schemas. According to this theory, a schema is a
mental representation that organizes knowledge. “In more simple terms Piaget called the schema
the basic building block of intelligent behavior - a way of organizing knowledge. Indeed, it is
useful to think of schemas as “units” of knowledge, each relating to one aspect of the world,
including objects, actions, and abstract (i.e., theoretical) concepts”. (McLeod, S. A., para. 11). To
illustrate this, a kid might have a schema about birds. If all the birds the kid has seen have
feathers and can fly. The kid will think that all birds have feathers, wings, and can fly. However,
when the kid sees a penguin for the first time, the kid will modify his previously existing schema
of birds to include this new type of bird he just saw.
Piaget also argues that once children are able to think in a certain way, they develop a
language to describe those thoughts. Thus, children’s language development is influenced by
their cognitive development.
VYGOTSKY’S ZONE OF PROXIMAL DEVELOPMENT
While Piaget puts little emphasis on social factors in his theories. Vygotsky’s theory suggests that
children learn through social and language interactions with their environment. This theory claims
that language acquisition also works this way. Vygotsky, the founder of socio-cultural theory,
argues that children develop language through social interaction with adults who already know
the language. Also, as opposed to Piaget, who believes that children do not learn from adults,
Vygotsky believes that learning happens from the outside in (Vygotsky, 1978).
Vygotsky’s theory claims that the interaction that happens between a more knowledgeable other
(MKO) and a child is what leads to learning. Vygotsky (1978) also identifies a Zone of Proximal
Development (ZPD) which is a stage where the most sensitive instruction or guidance should be
given to children because at this stage children are more sensitive to the information they receive.
Vygotsky emphasizes the importance of language and the relation it has with thinking.
According to Vygotsky, thought is a result of language. He believes that language develops
from social interactions for communication purposes. Later, language becomes internalized as
thought. That is to say, the ability to think for ourselves comes from language. Vygotsky also
emphasizes the importance of internal speech to children. He suggests that children who
engage in internal speech frequently are much more competent than children who don’t.
SKINNER’S BEHAVIORISM
Behaviorism is a theory which suggests that all behaviors are acquired through interaction with
the environment. “Behaviorism, a movement in psychology that advocates the use of strict
experimental procedures to study observable behavior (or responses) in relation to the
environment (or stimuli)”. (Microsoft® Encarta® Online Encyclopedia, para. 1). The goal of this
theory is to approach psychology from an observable, measurable way and Behaviorism had a
huge success with this strategy.
B.F. Skinner, a pioneer of behaviorism, provided one of the first explanations of language
acquisition. He argues that positive reinforcement will stimulate a behavior to be repeated while
negative reinforcement will reduce a certain behavior. Thus, children learn to associate words
with concepts through reinforcement (awards and punishment). For example, when a baby is
producing syllables, mothers reinforce the baby’s behavior if the random syllables he produces
are similar to real words. According to this theory, when the baby says ‘ma ma’, the mother
praises the baby and gives it more attention. Thus, the baby is likely to repeat this behavior over
and over. But when the baby says something that doesn’t correspond to the mother, she ignores
him. As a consequence, the baby is likely to reduce this behavior. Similarly, grammar is learnt the
same way. Thus, language acquisition, according to Skinner, is a process of habit formation
(Skinner, 1957).
However, Skinner’s theory doesn’t explain how children are able to produce words they have
never heard before or how they are able to produce unique sentences.
CHOMSKY’S UNIVERSAL GRAMMAR (UG)
Behaviorism was heavily questioned by Noam Chomsky (1959), an American linguist who
argues that children cannot learn language by simply repeating what adults say, because
children can produce new sentences that they have never heard. According to Chomsky,
children learn language not by hearing and repeating what they say, but by extracting the rules
which they apply to create new sentences. Chomsky believes that children acquire language
easily because they possess an inner ability in their minds and not because they are affected by
adult’s speech and their environment. That is to say, Chomsky (1976) believes that children are
pre-disposed to learn language. In Chomsky’s view, humans have a Language Acquisition
Device (LAD) in their brains that allows them to learn language and a Universal Grammar that
has common properties in all human minds which makes the structures of all human languages
similar (Chomsky, 1965).
According to Chomsky, Universal Grammar consists of an inner structure for processing
language which allows the production of endless types of sentences. This Universal Grammar
also allows humans to decide whether a sentence is correctly formed or not. Consequently,
when we hear Chomsky’s famous sentence “Colorless green ideas sleep furiously”, we
recognize that it is grammatically correct even though it is meaningless. But on the other hand,
when we hear the sentence “a cat mouse chases the” we recognize that it is not correct even
though we might have an idea of what it means.
One of the core ideas which Chomsky believes in is that language learning is genetically
encoded. Chomsky argues that humans are born with the ability to acquire language and that
children are genetically pre-disposed to learn grammar. That is to say, humans have a language
instinct. This language instinct contains what he called a set of Principles and Parameters which
are cross linguistically universal (Dąbrowska, 2015). Principles are a set of abstract rules. To
illustrate this, this is an example of a principle: when we see anaphoric pronouns in sentences,
they must have proper antecedents. For example, in the two following sentences John likes tea
and he likes tea, we know that John and he are the same person. But in the following sentence
he likes John’s tea we know that John and he are not the same person.
According to Chomsky, Parameters are specific switches that are either turned on or off,
depending on the language. Thus, in learning languages, people already possess the switch.
They only have to decide whether to switch it on or off. For instance, some languages, such as
English, require the subject to be openly expressed. But there are other languages that have no
problem with leaving out the subject. Another example of a parameter is the position of the head
in relative clauses. In English, relative clauses consist of the head first then the relative clause.
However, in some other languages, it is preferred to have the head at the end of the clause.
POVERTY OF THE STIMULUS
The poverty of the stimulus argument is an argument used by Chomsky to reinforce his theory of
Universal Grammar. It was introduced in ‘Rules and Representations’ in 1980. This argument
suggests that it is impossible for kids to acquire their first language solely based on listening to
adults. Chomsky argues that language is so complicated and too complex for children to learn it
from the input that they get because the input is noisy. This means that adults offer a distorted
and imperfect source of data and learning grammar from adults is nearly impossible.
Furthermore, children are not exposed to enough data to acquire every feature of language.
Yet, children learn their first language fast, effortlessly and accurately (Dąbrowska, 2015). This
suggests that the ability to learn language is innate.
CHAPTER 2 LANGUAGE DEVELOPMENT
This chapter is concerned with linguistic development in children as well as the major
phonological stages of development.
Since the time they are born, children start to learn language by listening to huge numbers of
words and sentences. Then they start to distinguish different sounds and segment the stream of
speech that they are exposed to when hearing adults speaking in order to understand each word
(Jusczyk & Aslin, 1995). When the brains and bodies of children are developed enough, they
start to pronounce words.
THE CRITICAL PERIOD HYPOTHESIS
There is a period in which a child’s language acquisition happens easily and automatically. This
period is called the critical period and it is the first few years of childhood. After this period of
brain development, it becomes difficult to acquire a language. Also, after the critical period, it
becomes nearly impossible to acquire a language with native speaker fluency. “After puberty,
mastery of the pronunciation and mastery of the grammar is unlikely to be identical to that of a
native speaker, although word learning does not appear to be as sensitive to age and remains
good throughout life” (Kuhl, 2011, p. 131). However, the time of development of different aspects
of language varies. “Studies in typically developing monolingual children indicate, for example,
that an important period for phonetic learning occurs prior to the end of the first year, whereas
syntactic learning flourishes between 18 and 36 months of age. Vocabulary development
‘‘explodes’’ at 18 months of age.” (Kuhl, 2011, p. 131)
Children usually learn their first word around their first birthday. But before that, they learn to
differentiate between the sounds of their native language and the sounds of other languages. Dr.
Patricia Kuhl examined how children respond to the sounds of their language as well as the
sounds of foreign languages by conducting an experiment where she compared a group of
American babies and a group of Japanese babies in differentiating between the sounds “/Ra/”
and “/La/”. This experiment showed that six months old American babies and six months old
Japanese babies can both distinguish between the sounds “/Ra/” and “/La/”. However, by eleven
months, the American babies became better at distinguishing between the sounds “/Ra/” and
“/La/”, while the Japanese babies became worse at the same task.
Dr. Patricia Kuhl explains this by suggesting that until about six months of age, babies can
distinguish between all human sounds. But once they reach ten or eleven months, they can only
distinguish between the sounds of their own languages. And since /l/ and /r/ are in the same
phonemic category in Japanese, Japanese babies became worse at distinguishing between the
sounds. “Japanese-learning infants have to group the phonetic units r and l into a single
phonemic category (Japanese r), whereas Englishlearning infants must uphold the distinction to
separate rake from lake.” (Kuhl, 2011, p. 132)
Dr. Patricia Kuhl believes that after birth and for a short period, babies have the ability to hear
differences between all the sounds used in the all-human languages. Dr. Kuhl refers to babies
at this period as “citizens of the world”. By the time babies are eleven months old, they are no
longer “citizens of the world”. They become “culture bound” listeners, specialists in one
language. “The baby’s task in the first year of life, therefore, is to make some progress in
figuring out the composition of the 40 odd phonemic categories in their language(s) before
trying to acquire words that depend on these elementary units.” (Kuhl, 2011, p. 132)
Although babies at this point are able to differentiate between speech sounds and can tell
whether a sound belongs to their native language or not, they are not ready to utter their first
words yet.
THE STAGES OF DEVELOPMENT
This part will look at the development children undergo throughout their early years by
discussing the five major stages of development: The prelinguistic stage, the babbling stage,
the holophrastic or one word stage, the two-word stage then, the telegraphic or multi word
stage.
THE PRELINGUISTIC STAGE
As early as two days after they are born, babies are able to discriminate between the sounds /a/
and /i/, and by three days of age they can recognize their mother’s voice. By 0;1 young infants
can distinguish between the sounds /ba/ and /pa/ and /da/ and /ta/, and from 0;1 onwards they
start making cooing sounds (Matthews, 1996).
THE BABBLING STAGE
At about four months of age, infants are able to recognize differences in speech and soon they
start developing the ability to use words.
From about six to eight months of age, children start babbling. “The babbling period begins with
the production of short utterances and progresses eventually to include production of quite long
utterances which can be characterized as sounding subjectively very much more language-like
than their predecessors.” (Moskowitz, 1970)
During this period, children start to produce consonant-vowel syllables (CV) such as [baba],
[dada] and [mama] (Matthews, 1996), and they repeat these sounds over and over until they
begin to sound like real words. At this stage, children can hear phonetic distinctions with great
accuracy and differentiate between human sounds and non-human sounds. At this stage, also,
kids are able to vary pitch, rate, and volume, they start vocalizing pleasure and displeasure and
they try to reduplicate syllables and overall play with vocals.
THE HOLOPHRASTIC STAGE
EARLY ACQUISITION OF WORDS
Finally, around the age of 1;0, children enter the holophrastic stage where they become able to
pronounce one-word utterances (Matthews, 1996). But how do kids learn words? A common
answer to this question is that kids learn words through pointing and naming. Although this
answer may be partly true, it presents many problems. For example, how do children know that
what you are pointing at and what you are saying are the same thing?
EARLY ACQUISITION OF NOUNS
In order to find an answer to our main question which is how do kids learn words, we will take a
look at the types of children’s first words. If we look at a child’s first words, we find general
nominals, names, some action words, some social words and modifiers. That is to say,
children’s early vocabulary contains a high ratio of nouns.
THE NATURAL PARTITIONS HYPOTHESIS
One of the hypotheses that try to explain why children’s first words are nouns is the natural
partitions hypothesis which claims that early nouns refer to concrete objects and children can
easily identify these concrete objects from the context. “The natural partitions hypothesis
predicts that nouns will form the child’s first referential mappings from language to the world.
The mapping between nouns and concrete entities can be achieved even at the very outset of
language understanding. These first connections provide an easy first case of a reference relation
and perhaps give the child the idea that other more opaque words must also have referents. And
once learned, nouns provide semantic and syntactic frames to aid in mapping the verb to its
meaning. In this way, the early acquisition of simple nouns may pave the way for learning verbs
and other relational terms.” (Gentner & Boroditsky, 2009, p. 27)
THEORIES OF WORD LEARNING - THEORIES OF CONSTRAINTS
Theories of constraints suggest that children have an innate word learning ability that guides
them to limit possible word meanings when learning new words.
“A tennis ball has a colour (yellow), a material (rubber), a shape (a sphere), a purpose (it’s for
tennis), an age (new or worn-out), and other characteristics (bouncy, breaks windows, etc). If
someone who spoke another language pointed to a tennis ball and said Shradditch, how would
you know which of these attributes they actually meant? It could be the name for the ball, it
could be the colour, it could be anything else at all the speaker wanted to say.” (Cook, para. 5)
According to the theories of constraint, when a child hears the word tennis ball for the first time,
he will assume that this new word refers to a whole object. This is referred to as the whole object
constraint. However, when a child hears a new word that refers to something that he already
knows, the child assumes that the new word refers to a part, a property or an action associated
with that new word. This is referred to as the mutual exclusivity constraint.
THEORIES OF WORD LEARNING - SOCIAL PRAGMATIC THEORIES
In contrast to the theories of constraints, social pragmatic theories argue that the simple
association of sound and entities is not enough for children to learn the meaning of words.
According to social pragmatic theories, children learn words in social contexts because words
become meaningful in situations where the caregiver is talking to the child about objects, actions
or events. In this respect, the social context and the caregiver are crucial for children to
understand the meaning of words.
THEORIES OF WORD LEARNING - JOINT ATTENTION
“Joint attention refers to moments when a child and adult are focused on the same thing, but for
most researchers it also includes the notion that the participants are both aware that the focus of
attention is shared.” (Baldwin, 1995). Before nine months of age, children can only engage in
dyadic joint attention. But around nine months of age, they can engage in triadic joint attention
which means they can inspect an object together with their caregiver. As soon as children can
engage in triadic joint attention, they start to learn words and enlarge their vocabulary size.
THE TWO WORD STAGE
After they acquire new words and start to pronounce them, kids move on to the next stage of
development which is the two word stage. This stage starts at around the age of 1;6 and ends
when at around the age of 2;0 (Matthews, 1996). During this stage, children produce two word
utterances with simple semantic relations.
“In some cases, early multiple-unit utterances can be seen as concatenations of individual
naming actions that might just as well have occurred alone: "mommy" and "hat" might be
combined as "mommy hat"; "shirt" and "wet" might be combined as "shirt

wet". However, these
combinations tend to occur in an order that is appropriate for the language being learned.” (The
Department of Linguistics at the University of Pennsylvania, para. 25)
Children at this stage start to use phonological processes which are patterns of sound errors to
simplify adult speech as they are learning to pronounce words.

THE TELEGRAPHIC STAGE
The telegraphic or multi-word stage is the last stage of language development. This stage starts
around the age of 2;0 and lasts until the age of 3;0. During this stage kids go beyond two words
and can now form 3 to 4 word sentences with subjects and predicates (Matthews, 1996).
Kids add ten or more words to their lexicon each day and their understanding of language
progresses and their linguistic development fastens.
REFERENCES
Baldwin, D.A. (1995). Understanding the link between joint attention and language. In C. Moore
& P. J. Dunham (Eds.), Joint attention: Its origins and role in development (pp. 131-158).
Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Cook, V., How do children learn words?. Retrieved from
http://www.viviancook.uk/Words/WordTexts/TXTHowChildrenLearn.htm
Chomsky, N. (1959). A review of B. F. Skinner‘s verbal behavior, Language 35(1): 26- 58.
Chomsky, N. (1965). Aspects of the Theory of Syntax. MIT Press.
Chomsky, N. (1975). Reflections on language. New York: Pantheon Books.
Chomsky, N. (1980). Rules and representations. New York: Columbia University Press.
Dąbrowska, E. (2015). What exactly is Universal Grammar, and has anyone seen it? Retrieved
from https://www.northumbria.ac.uk/static/5007/sasspdf/whatexactlyisUG.pdf
Jusczyk, P. W., & Aslin, R. N. (1995). Infants' detection of sound patterns of words in fluent
speech. Cognitive Psychology, 29, 1-23.
Gentner, D., & Boroditsky, L. (2009). Early acquisition of nouns and verbs: Evidence from
Navajo. In V. C. Mueller Gathercole (Ed.), Routes to Language: Studies in honor of Melissa
Bowerman (pp. 5-36). New York: Psychology Press.
Kuhl, P. K. (2011). Early language learning and literacy: Neuroscience implications for
education. Mind, Brain, and Education, 5, 128-142.
Matthews, A. (1996). Linguistic Development. Retrieved from
http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.132.9673&rep=rep1&t ype=pdf
McLeod, S. A. (2015). Jean Piaget. Retrieved from www.simplypsychology.org/piaget.html
Microsoft® Encarta® Online Encyclopedia (2000). Behaviorism. Retrieved from
http://autocww.colorado.edu/~toldy3/E64ContentFiles/PsychologyAndPsycholog
ists/Behaviorism.html
Moskowitz, A. I. (1970). The acquisition of phonology. Language-Behavior Research Laboratoy,
University of California.
Piaget, J. (1952). The origins of intelligence in children (Vol. 8, No. 5, pp. 18-1952). New York:
International Universities Press.
Piaget, J. (1959). The language and thought of the child (Vol. 5). Psychology Press. Chicago
Piaget, J. (1976). Piaget’s theory. In Piaget and his school (pp. 11-23). Springer Berlin
Heidelberg.
Skinner, B.F. (1957). Verbal Behavior. Acton, MA: Copley Publishing Group.
The Department of Linguistics at the University of Pennsylvania, First Language Acquisition.
Retrieved from http://www.ling.upenn.edu/courses/Fall_2011/ling001/acquisition.html
Vygotsky, L. (1978). Interaction between learning and development. Mind and Society, pp.79 -
–--
4 Levels of processing
Subconscious processing - Conscious processing
–--
5 Learning processes and constraints
Language acquisition Processing constraints Cognitive skill-learning
mechanisms/Universal mechanisms
Grammar
---
6 Learning progression
Natural developmental sequences - Automation of cognitive plans
–--
7 Transitional communicative competence
Subconscious and conscious elements in the learner’s interlanguage
Figure 20.1 Elements and processes of second language learning
REFERENCES
Bailey, N., Madden, C., & Krashen,

S. (1974) Is there a “natural sequence”
in adult second language learning?
Language Learning, 24, 235-43.
Brooks, N. H. (1960) Language and
language learning: theory and
practice. New York: Harcourt.
Brown, R. (1973) A first language: the
early stages. Cambridge, MA: Harvard
University Press.
Bruner, J. S. (1973) Beyond the
information given: studies in the
psychology of know-
ing. (Selected, edited and introduced
by J. M. Anglin.) New York: Norton.
Canale, M. & Swain, M. (1980)
Theoretical bases of communicative
approaches to language teaching and
testing. Applied Linguistics, 1, 1-47.
Cenoz, J., Hufeisen, B., & Jessner, U.
(eds.) (2001) Cross-linguistic
influence in third language
acquisition:
psycholinguistic perspectives.
Clevedon, UK: Multilingual Matters.
Cohen, A. D. (1996) Speech acts. In
S. L. McKay & N. H. Hornberger
(eds.), Sociolinguistics and
language teaching (pp. 383-420).
Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press.
Corder, S. P. (1967) The significance
of learners’ errors. International Review

of Applied Linguistics, 5, 161-9.
Davies, A. (1999) An introduction to
applied linguistics. Edinburgh:
Edinburgh University Press.
Dörnyei, Z. (2001) Teaching
and
researching motivation.
London: Longman.
Doughty, C. & Varela, E. (1998)
Communicative focus on form.
In C. Doughty & J. Williams (eds.),
Focus on form in second language
acquisition (pp. 114-38).
Press.
Doughty, C. & Williams, J. (eds.)
(1998)
Focus on form in second language
acquisition. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
Dulay, H. & Burt, M. (1973) Should we
teach children syntax? Language
Learning, 24, 245-58.
Dulay, H., Burt, M., & Krashen, S. (1982)
Language two. New York: Oxford
University Press.
Ellis, R. (1994) The study of second
language acquisition. Oxford: Oxford
University Press.
Harley, B. & Swain, M. (1984) The

interlanguage of immersion students
and its implications for second
language teaching. In A. Davies,
C. Criper, & A. P. R. Howatt (eds.),
Interlanguage (pp. 291-311). Edinburgh:
Edinburgh University Press.
Hatch, E. M. (ed.) (1978) Second language
acquisition: a book of readings. Rowley,
MA: Newbury House.
James, C. (1998) Errors in language
learning and use: exploring error analysis.
London: Longman.
Johnson, K. (1996) Language teaching and
skill learning. Oxford: Blackwell.
Kasper, G. & Kellerman, E. (1997)
Communication strategies:
psycholinguistic and sociolinguistic
perspectives. London: Longman. Kelly, L.
G. (1969) 25 centuries of language
teaching: an inquiry into the science, art
and development of language teaching
methodology, 500 B.C.-1969. Rowley,
MA: Newbury House.
Krashen, S. (1982) Principles and practice
in second language acquisition. Oxford:
Pergamon.
Lantolf, J. P. (ed.) (2000) Sociocultural
theory and second language learning.
Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Lightbown, P. M. (2000) Classroom
SLA research and second language
teaching. Applied Linguistics, 21,

413-62.
Littlewood, W. (2001) Cultural awareness
and the negotiation of meaning in
intercultural communication. Language
Awareness, 10, 189-99.
Long, M. (1983) Does second language
instruction make a difference? TESOL
Quarterly, 17, 359-82.
Long, M. (1985) Input and second
language acquisition theory. In S. M.
Gass & C. G. Madden (eds.), Input in
second language acquisition (pp. 377-
93). Rowley, MA: Newbury House.
McDonough, S. H. (1999) Learner
strategies. Language Teaching, 32, 1-
18. McLaughlin, B. (1987) Theories of
second-
language learning. London: Edward
Arnold.
Naiman, N., Fröhlich, H., Stern, H., &
Todesco, A. (1995 [1978] ) The good
language learner. Clevedon,
UK: Multilingual Matters.
Norton, B. (2000) Identity and language
learning: gender, ethnicity and
educational
change. London: Longman.
Odlin, T. (1989) Language transfer: cross-
linguistic influences in language

learning.
Press.
O’Malley, J. & Chamot, A. (1990)
Learning strategies in second
language acquisition. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
Oxford, R. (1990) Language learning
strategies: what every teacher
should
know. Rowley, MA: Newbury House.
Pienemann, M. (1989) Is language
teachable? Psycholinguistic
experiments and hypotheses.
Applied Linguistics, 10, 52-79.
Richards, J. C. (1974) Error analysis:
perspectives on second
language acquisition. London:
Longman.
Ritchie, W. C. & Bhatia, T. K. (eds.)
(1996) Handbook of second
language
acquisition. San Diego: Academic
Press.
Rivers, W. M. (1964) The psychologist
and the foreign language teacher.
Chicago:
Chicago University Press.
Rutherford, W. (1987) Second
language grammar: learning and
teaching.
London: Longman.
Schumann, J. (1978) The acculturation
model for second language acquisition.
In R. Gingras (ed.), Second language
acquisition and foreign language
teaching
(pp. 27-50). Arlington, VA: Center for
Applied Linguistics.
Selinker, L. (1972) Interlanguage.
International Review of
Applied Linguistics, 10, 209-
31.
Spada, N. (1997) Form-focussed
instruction and second language
acquisition: a review of classroom and
laboratory research. Language
Teaching, 30, 73-87.
Swain, M. (1995) Three functions of
output in second language learning.
In G. Cook & B. Seidlhofer (eds.),
Principles and practice in
applied linguistics (pp. 234-50).
Takahashi, S. (1996) Pragmatic
transferability. In G. Kasper (ed.),
The development of pragmatic
competence (pp. 189-224). Special
issue of Studies in Second Language
Acquisition.
Towell, R. & Hawkins, R. (1994)
Approaches to second language
acquisition. Clevedon, UK: Multilingual

Matters.
Wray, A. (1999) Formulaic language
in learners and native speakers.
Language Teaching, 32, 213-31.
FURTHER READING
Baker, C. & Prys Jones, S. (1998)
Bilingualism and second language
acquisition. In C. Baker & S. Prys
Jones, Encyclopedia of bilingualism
and bilingual education (pp. 635-64).
Clevedon, UK: Multilingual Matters.
Cook, V. J. (2001) Second language
learning and language teaching
(3rd edn.). London: Arnold. Corder,
S. P. (1981) Error analysis and
interlanguage. Oxford: Oxford
University Press.
Ellis, R. (1997) Second language
acquisition. Oxford: Oxford University
Press.
Larsen-Freeman, D. & Long,
M. H. (1991) An introduction to
second language acquisition
research. London: Longman.
Lightbown, P. & Spada, N. (1999) How
languages are learned (2nd edn.).
Littlewood, W. (1984) Foreign and
second
language learning: language
acquisition research and its
implications for the
P-ISSN: 2709-6254 Journal of Development and Social Sciences Oct-Dec 2021, Vol. 2, No. IV
O-ISSN:2709-6262 http://doi.org/10.47205/jdss.2021(2-IV)45 [543-553]
IMPACT OF CLASSROOM ENVIRONMENT ON

SECOND LANGUAGE LEARNING
Anxiety
Zohaib Zahid
Assistant Professor, Department of English, The Islamia University of Bahawalpur, Sub-Campus
Rahim Yar Khan, Punjab, Pakistan
PAPER INFO ABSTRACT
Received: Second language learning anxiety has attained the attention of the
August 26, 2021 researchers in almost every part of the world. Pakistan is a country
Accepted:
December 12, 2021
where English is taught as a second language from the very beginning
Online: of school education. Second Language learning anxiety is a
December 15, 2021 phenomenon which has been prominently found among the learners
Keywords: because of their less proficiency in learning English language. This
Effect of Anxiety,
study has been conducted to investigate the effect of anxiety in
Proficiency,
Second Language learning and using English language in classroom, university and
Learning Anxiety, outside the classroom. There are variables that affect language
Striking Affect
learning performance of the learners but this paper has solely
*Corresponding
Author: investigated the effect of anxiety. The paper has concluded that anxiety
zohaib.zahid@i is a variable which has a striking affect in second language learning
ub.edu.pk and its use inside classrooms.
Introduction
Ever Anxiety is a trend that people often face in their daily life. Anxiety may be
defined as the nervous, troubling expectation of an intimidating but unclear event. Anxiety
is a feeling of nervous suspense (Rachman, 2004).
It has been observed by the linguists that anxiety directly affects the foreign, target
or second language learning and its use. Anxious feelings rose in the learners’ minds which
impede the proficiency of the students. These negative feelings can have both negative and
positive effects, and can encourage and facilitate as well as disturb and slow down
cognitive actions such as learning. Although there is still controversy concerning whether
language anxiety is the cause (Scovel, 2000; Spielmann & Radnofsky, 2001) or
consequence of poor language learning (Sparks, Ganschow & Javorsky, 2000), many
experimental studies have demonstrated that there is a negative relationship between
anxiety and language learning.
Literature Review
It has been described by Spielmann and Radnofsky (2001) that there numerous types
of anxieties which may be noticed in the classroom. Learners may feel cognitive
Impact of Classroom Environment on Second Language Learning Anxiety
apprehensions when they believe that the course offered to them for studies has
inadequate content and organization. Learners may also feel emotional apprehension
when they observe that they have got minimal interaction with their instructor and
classmates. Horwitz, Horwitz, and Cope (1986) have described that there is also another
type of classroom anxiety which is known as test anxiety. Test anxiety creates feelings of
the students that they will not be able to perform better in their tests and exams. Their
apprehension may be related to grammar, reading, writing or speaking skills.
Foreign Language Anxiety
The personal feelings of uneasiness, tension, edginess and nervousness are the
factors which collectively defines anxiety (Horwitz, Horwitz & Cope 1986, p. 125; from
Spielberger 1983). Howritz, Howritz and Cope (1986) introduced a term ‘Foreign
Language anxiety’. They defined foreign language anxiety that it is a separate compound
of feelings, beliefs, self-perceptions and behaviours which are closely linked to language
learning in the classroom and they arise from the individuality of language learning
phenomenon. According to them, there are the feelings of hesitation and shyness which
arise from the fear of interacting with the people and they called it communication
apprehension. There are some students which create feelings of anxiety of them due to the
fear of failure and this type of anxiety is known as test anxiety. There is another type of
anxiety which they called fear negative evaluation. Fears of negative evaluation arise by
the feelings of nervousness about others’ evaluation and anticipation that others will
evaluate them negatively (Horwitz, Horwitz & Cope 1986).
If anxiety is taken in general procedures it will create paradoxical results. The

research studies, conducted, have focused on language situation anxiety which is based on
the situation-specific perspective. Researchers investigated that language anxiety is not
only a combination of other anxieties but it is different from other types of anxiety.
Researchers found this reality after empirically grouping the conception of language
anxiety. (Horwitz, Horwitz, & Cope, 1986; MacIntyre & Gardner, 1991)
Feelings of Anxiety Caused by Competency Level
Numerous researchers have investigated that the increased feelings of anxiety will
not let the language learners to gain competence in second language if they feel anxious to
speak target language. Sometimes, the tasks given to the students may become difficult for
the learners to accomplish when the instructors have no control over the tasks. That is
why; the teachers must not always consider complete uniformity on the competition of
various tasks which are concerned to their students (Oya, Manalo & Greenwood, 2004).
It has been noted by Von Worde (2003) level of anxiety increases in oral and
listening exercises as they are related to test anxiety. The increase in language competence
is dependent upon reduction in anxiety level. It has been further investigated that the
learners who are having high levels of anxiety in speaking or communication might be
prone to comprehend communicative capability. Numerous teachers face a problem to
find different ways to reduce anxiety (MacIntyre, Baker, Clement & Donovan, 2003)
544
Journal of Development and Social Sciences (JDSS) Oct-Dec, 2021 Volume 2, Issue IV
Methods used by the learners to alleviate anxiety
Kondo and Ling (2004) investigated the methods and strategies used by the
learners to lessen the feelings of anxiety of them. They found 70 types of strategies in their
research which the learners adopt to overcome their feelings of anxiety in language
learning and use. Five general methodologies adopted by the learners were positive
thinking, preparation, relaxation, peer seeking and resignation. Preparation refers to the
methods which learners adopt to maintain and improve their strategies by conquering the
anxious feelings. Relaxation is a methodology which is used by the learners to lessen the
feelings of anxiety by keeping them cool and calm. Thinking makes learners able to
develop positive feelings about the stressful environment of language learning by reducing
the amount of anxiety. Peer seeking means that the learners try to search other learners
who are also stressful about language learning and have feelings of anxiety. Sometimes,
the students do not want to reduce their feelings of anxiety which is described as
resignation.
Pappamihiel (2002) investigated that most of the learners used a strategy

‘avoidance’ in order to reduce their feelings of anxiety in second or foreign language
learning. Avoidance was the main tool adopted by the students which means that they kept
silent during the class. The learners thought that they can better reduce feelings of anxiety
in this way. Bailey et al (1999) opined that the teenagers and the adult foreign language
learners frequently use this strategy to overcome the feelings of anxiety. Another useful
strategy used by the learners was to make friendship and close association with those
students who were better speakers of foreign language and do not feel anxiety while
speaking second or foreign language. This strategy has been found more useful as the
anxious learners may discuss the problems and feelings of anxiety with their less anxious
friends when they feel anxious in language learning class. Being active in the class is
another useful strategy which the students adopt to alleviate the feelings of anxiety and
the anxious learners believe that this is the best way to reduce the feelings of anxiety.
Material and Methods
This is a questionnaire based study in which 13 items have been addressed to the
participants for their opinion. These 13 items of the questionnaire are developed to know
the effect of anxiety on the performance of the second language learners.
Population
A total of 250 participants were selected from the two public sector universities of
southern Punjab. All the participants selected were doing their MA in English Literature
and Linguistics and were enrolled in 3 rd semester which means that they had passed one
and half years in their MA level studies. Questionnaires were distributed equally in both
the universities and the researchers could get response from 200 candidates in which 73
were male participants and 127 were female participants. The participants were chosen
randomly and all the candidates were provided equal opportunity to participate in the
study.
545
Data Analysis
All the collected data were analyzed through SPSS software in order to know the
frequency and percentage of the SLLs about their anxiety and its impact on their second
language learning. Frequency, percentage, and mean were found out through SPSS
software. Each researcher analyzed the data personally before entering it into the software
in order to understand the nature of the problem. Data have been shown by tables and
every item of the questionnaire contains separate table for clarification. Tables have been
constructed by taking gender variable because the researchers and the linguists have
investigated that the females are more inclined to learn English language than the males.
Results and Discussion
Findings of the current study have been discussed below in the form of tables. Data
have been presented separately for females and males according to their percentages.
Collective data has also been presented in the tables to analyze the data of both the
genders.
Table 1
It, sometimes, bothers me to understand the lectures delivered in English language
Agreed Disagreed Mean
SA A Total SD DA Total UD
F % F % F % F % F % F % F %
Male 36 49.3 6 8.2 42 3.48
57.5 12 16.4 5 6.8 17 23.2 14 19.2
Female 46 36.2 24 18.9 70 55.1 28 22.0 16 12.6 44 34.6 13 10.2 3.00
Total 82 41.0 30 15.0 112 56.0 40 20.0 21 10.5 61 30.5 27 13.5 3.17
A high percentage of the students agreed with the statement that they feel
difficulties in understanding the lectures when delivered in English language. The ratio of
the male students remained higher than that of females. Both Urdu and English mediums
are used in the universities of Pakistan. (National Education Policy Draft 2009)
Table 2
My position in class is disturbed due to the mistakes which I commit in English
Language
Male F % F % F % F % F % F % F % 3.52
36 49.3 9 12.3 45 61.6 9 12.3 6 8.2 15 20.5 13 17.8
Female 57 44.9 31 24.4 88 69.3 12 9.4 11 8.7 23 18.1 16 12.6 3.43
Total 93 51.5 40 20.0 133 66.5 21 10.5 17 8.5 38 19.0 29 14.5 3.46
The students agreed that their class position is disturbed due to the mistakes which
they commit while using English language. A high percentage of both the genders
supported the statement.
546
Table 3
I feel shy to speak English in the premises of the university
Male F % F % F % F % F % F % F %
37 50.7 13 17.8 50 68.5 10 13.7 2 2.7 12 16.4 11 15.1 3.51
Female 56 44.1 34 26.8 90 70.9 9 7.1 9 7.1 18 14.2 19 15.0 3.53
Total 93 51.2 47 23.5 140 70.0 19 9.5 11 5.5 30 15.0 30 15.0 3.52
Most of the participants agreed that they feel shy to speak English even in the
premises of the university where almost everyone can understand them. A high
percentage of both male and female participants accepted that they hardly speak in English
language in their respective universities.
Table 4
I do not consider the environment suitable to speak English language outside the
university
Male F % F % F % F % F % F % F %
35 47.9 15 20.5 50 68.5 5 6.8 5 6.8 10 13.6 13 17.8 3.63
Female 55 43.3 28 22.0 83 65.3 18 14.2 7 5.5 25 19.7 19 15.0 3.39
Total 90 45.0 43 21.5 133 66.5 23 11.5 12 6.0 35 17.5 32 16.0 3.48
Participants agreed that they do not find any suitable environment of speaking
English outside their universities. The ratio of male participants remained higher to
support the statement than females. Collectively, a good percentage of the participants
supported the statement.
Table 5
It makes me confused to speak English in the class
Male F % F % F % F % F % F % F %
3.89
42 57.5 9 12.3 51 69.8 3 4.1 3 4.1 6 8.2 16 21.9
Female 60 47.2 20 15.7 80 62.9 17 13.4 9 7.1 26 20.5 21 16.5 3.46
Total 102 51.0 29 14.5 131 65.5 20 10.0 12 6.0 32 16.0 37 18.5 3.62
More than 60% of the participants agreed that it is difficult for them to speak
English in the class. The ration of the male participants remained higher than the female
participants.
Table 6
I do not enjoy being taught in the medium of English
Male F % F % F % F % F % F % F %
39 53.4 6 8.2 45 61.6 6 8.2 6 8.2 12 16.4 16 21.9 3.73
Female 74 58.7 18 14.2 76 59.7 4 3.1 7 5.5 11 8.7 24 18.9 3.84
Total 113 55.5 24 12.0 121 60.5 10 10.0 13 6.5 23 11.5 40 20.0 3.80
547
The participant supported the statement that they hardly enjoy when the lecture
is delivered in English. Ratio of male participant remained higher than female participant.
Table 7
I am always discouraged by my social surroundings when I speak in English
language
Male F % F % F % F % F % F % F %
29 39.7 13 17.8 42 57.5 9 12.3 8 11.0 17 23.3 14 19.2 3.42
Female 55 43.3 16 12.6 71 55.9 19 15.0 13 10.2 32 25.2 24 18.9 3.41
Total 84 42.0 29 14.5 113 56.5 28 14.0 21 10.5 49 24.5 38 19.0 3.42
This statement was asked to know the response of the participants about their
social surrounding whether it supports them in speaking English language. Most of the
participants agreed that they are discouraged by their social environment to speak
English.
Table 8
I feel confused when I am asked to speak English in the class by my teacher
Male F % F % F % F % F % F % F %
29 39.7 16 21.9 45 61.6 7 9.6 9 12.3 16 21.9 12 16.4 3.41
Female 54 42.5 30 23.6 84 66.1 12 9.4 12 9.4 24 18.8 19 15.0 3.44
Total 83 41.5 46 23.0 129 64.5 19 9.5 21 10.5 40 20.0 31 15.5 3.43
The participants responded in negative about their speaking English in the class.
The ratio of female participants remained higher in this statement who agreed with it.
Table 9
I do not feel myself confident when I find a chance to speak with the native English
speaker
Male F % F % F % F % F % F % F %
33 45.2 9 12.3 42 57.5 14 19.2 6 8.2 20 27.4 11 15.1 3.29
Female 65 51.2 13 10.2 78 61.4 14 11.0 12 9.4 26 20.4 23 18.1 3.56
Total 98 49.0 21 10.5 120 60.0 28 14.0 18 9.0 46 23.0 34 17.0 3.46
The participants responded with high ratio that they are least confidant when they
get a chance to talk to a native English speaker. Ratio of female participants remained
higher in this statement who agreed with it.
Table 10
I believe few students speak better English in the class because of their
good schooling
F % F % F % F % F % F % F %
548
32 43.8 10 13.7 42 57.5 13 17.8 6 8.2 19 26.0 12 16.4

Male 3.33
Female 57 44.9 17 13.4 74 58.3 25 19.7 8 6.3 33 26.0 20 15.7 3.31
Total 89 44.5 27 13.5 116 58.0 38 19.0 14 7.0 52 26.0 32 16.0 3.32
The participants supported the statement that there are students in their classes
who speak better and fluent English because of their good school Education. The ratio of
female participants remained higher who agreed with the statement.
Table 11
I feel that my fellows will laugh at me if I speak in English language
Male F % F % F % F % F % F % F %
43 58.9 3 4.1 46 63.0 3 4.1 8 11.0 11 15.1 16 21.9 3.84
Female 60 47.2 23 18.1 83 65.3 13 10.2 10 7.9 23 18.1 21 16.5 3.52
Total 103 51.5 26 13.0 129 64.5 16 8.0 18 9.0 34 17.0 37 18.5 3.63
The participants highly agreed with the statement about their psychological
depression which they feel in the class. Ratio of female participants remained higher who
agreed with the statement.
Table 12
I feel anxious to write anything on white board in English because of the fear of
mistakes
Male F % F % F % F % F % F % F %
34 46.6 10 13.7 44 60.3 13 17.8 5 6.8 18 24.6 11 15.1 3.34
Female 50 39.4 19 15.0 69 54.4 24 18.9 13 10.2 37 29.1 21 16.5 3.24
Total 84 42.0 29 14.5 113 56.5 37 18.5 18 9.0 55 27.5 32 16.0 3.28
The participants agreed that they are scared from the mistakes which they commit
in English language and it stops them to write anything on board abruptly or without any
preparation. The ratio of male participants remained higher who agreed with the
statement.
Table 13
Sometimes, the behavior of a certain teacher makes me reluctant to speak English
in front of him/her
F % F % F % F % F % F % F %
35 47.9 9 12.3 44 60.2 12 16.4 4 5.5 16 21.9 13 17.8 3.45
Female 67 52.8 11 8.7 78 61.4 10 7.9 11 8.7 21 16.5 22 17.3 3.66
Total 102 51.0 20 10.0 120 60.0 22.0 11.0 15 7.5 37 18.5 35 17.5 3.58
The participants responded that the behavior of the teacher makes a difference in
their language learning. The negative behavior of the teacher stops them to perform better.
The ratio of female participants remained higher who agreed with the statement.
549
Correlation of classroom environment with anxiety
Two tables of correlation statistics have been shown below to understand the
correlation of the classroom environment with language anxiety. Pearson Correlation was
applied to the data and the results are given below.
Correlation of first 6 statements with language anxiety
Pearson
Gender 1 -.171* -.040 .009 -.097 -.178* .056
Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed) .016 .577 .899 .172 .012 .428
N 200 200 200 200 200 200 200

Pearson Correlation -.171 *
1 .192 **
.160 *
-.081 .097 .260**
Sig. (2-tailed) .016 .007 .024 .252 .170 .000
N 200 200 200 200 200 200 200
Pearson Correlation -.040 .192** 1 .020 .246** .150* .297**
Sig. (2-tailed) .577 .007 .777 .000 .034 .000
N 200 200 200 200 200 200 200
Pearson Correlation .009 .160* .020 1 .000 -.006 -.123
Sig. (2-tailed) .899 .024 .777 .997 .935 .082
N 200 200 200 200 200 200 200
Pearson Correlation -.097 -.081 .246** .000 1 -.020 .116
Sig. (2-tailed) .172 .252 .000 .997 .774 .101
N 200 200 200 200 200 200 200
Pearson Correlation -.178* .097 .150* -.006 -.020 1 .038
Sig. (2-tailed) .012 .170 .034 .935 .774 .589
N 200 200 200 200 200 200 200
Pearson Correlation Sig. (2- .056 -.123 .116
tailed) .260** .297** .038 1
.000 .000
.428 .082 .101
N .589
200 200 200 200
200 200 200
Correlation of last 7 statements with language anxiety

Gender Pearson 1 -.006 .012 .103 -.008 -.135 -.035 .064
Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed) .937 .861 .147 .913 .056 .621 .365
N 200 200 200 200 200 200 200 200
Pearson -.006 1 .135 .076 -.118 .139 .324** .338**
Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed) .937 .057 .287 .096 .050 .000 .000
N 200 200 200 200 200 200 200 200
Pearson .012 .135 1 -.039 .228** .017 .154* .094
Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed) .861 .057 .579 .001 .812 .029 .186
N 200 200 200 200 200 200 200 200
Pearson .103 .076 -.039 1 -.012 .027 -.014 .244**
Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed) .147 .287 .579 .870 .708 .845 .000
N 200 200 200 200 200 200 200 200
550
Pearson -.008 -.118 .228* -.012 1 -.129 -.151* -.089

Correlation *
Sig. (2-tailed) .913 .096 .001 .870 .069 .033 .211

N 200 200 200 200 200 200 200 200
Pearson -.135 .139 .017 .027 -.129 1 .107 -.057
Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed) .056 .050 .812 .708 .069 .131 .423
N 200 200 200 200 200 200 200 200
Pearson -.035 .324** .154* -.014 -.151* .107 1 .126
Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed) .621 .000 .029 .845 .033 .131 .077
N 200 200 200 200 200 200 200 200
Pearson .064 .338** .094 .244* -.089 -.057 .126 1
Correlation *
Sig. (2-tailed) .365 .000 .186 .000 .211 .423 .077

N 200 200 200 200 200 200 200 200
Discussion
As it has been observed from the above discussion, the students feel lot of
problems in learning and using English language due to their attitude. Their attitude
increases the amount of anxiety among them which resist them to get command on English
language. This portion of chapter specifically deals with the anxious feelings of the
students which are increased or decreased in different situations. It has been investigated
in this study that there are different aspects and ideas of the students which actually make
them anxious about learning and using English language.
The anxiety level of the students is increased because many of the students do not
have good educational background and they feel it difficult to understand the entire
lecture delivered in English language which makes them anxious about using English
language. The study has investigated that most of the students get poor grades due to the
anxiety level which is increased due to the fear that they will not be able to get good marks
and grades. They loose confidence at the beginning of the classes and remained anxious
inwardly throughout the semester.
It has been observed that the students do not use English language excessively
within the premises of the university which increase their anxiety in speaking and their
fluency is also affected to a greater extent. The limitations which the language learners
have developed may cause the feelings of anxiety among them. According to the linguists
the language learner should not miss any chance to speak in the target language as it will
decrease the amount of anxiety and make him/her feel confidant to speak target language.
It is true that the social environment does not promote the speaking of English language
in Pakistan as there is less number of people who can understand and speak English
language.
Conclusion
It is true that the learners feel difficulties in learning second language when their
anxiety level is increased due to the problems they face in the classrooms. There are
students who want to speak in English language and try to become proficient English
551
language learners but the classroom environment make them mentally depressed which
ultimately increase their anxiety about learning and using English language.
The behavior of the teachers do have a significant role in language learning class
and it may increase or decrease the anxiety of the learners. A teacher with negative
attitude can never attain better results from the students. The appreciating behavior of the
teacher can turn the tables towards positive in language learning and its use.
Good school education develops a sense of confidence among the students and the
students who get their early education from good schools feel confidant when they
perform in university class. He or she never feels shy to perform in the class.
Social environment must be encouraging for the anxious language learners as it

will provide them a chance to speak and improve their language.
A lot of research must be conducted in less developed areas of different parts of the
world to make a general conclusion about the impact of classroom environment on
language anxiety.
Recommendations
1. Educational institutes in less developed areas must promote the language

learners to reduce their anxiety level. Some courses must be taught to the learners
at the beginning of their language learning class about the impact of anxiety on
language learning and the ways through which it can be minimized.
2. Seminars must be held for the teachers about their behavior in classrooms. The
teachers must be instructed through these seminars that they should never
discourage the language learners as it will increase their anxiety.
3. Courses must be taught to the language learners to create a sense of confidence

in them.
552
Journal of Development and Social Sciences (JDSS) Oct-Dec, 2021
Volume 2, Issue IV
References
Ganschow, L., Sparks, R., Anderson, R., Javorshy, J., Skinner, S., &
Patton, J. (1994).
Differences in language performance among high-, average-,
and low-anxious college
foreign language learners. Modern Language Journal, Vol. 78,
No. 1 (Spring, 1994), pp.
41-55
Horwitz, E. K., M. B. Horwitz & J. Cope (1986). Foreign language

classroom anxiety. The
Modern Language Journal,70.2, 125-132.
Horwitz, E.K. (2001). Language anxiety and achievement.

Annual Review of Applied
Linguistics, 21, 112-126.
Kondo, D. S. and Ling, Y. Y. (2004). Strategies For Coping With

Language Anxiety: The Case
Of Students Of English In Japan. ELT Journal, 58 (3), 258-
265.
MacIntyre, P. D., & Gardner, R. C. (1991). Language anxiety: Its

relationship to other
anxieties and to processing in native and second languages.
Language Learning, 41,
513-534.
MacIntyre, P. D., & Gardner, R. C. (1991a). Methods and results

in the study of anxiety in
language learning: A review of the literature. Language
Learning, 41, 85-117.
MacIntyre, P.D., Baker, S.C., Clément, R., & Donovan, L. A. (2003).

Talking in order to learn:
willingness to communicate and intensive program.
Canadian Modern Language
Review, 59, 589-607.
Oya, T., Manalo, E., & Greenwood, J. (2004). The influence of

personality and anxiety on the
oral performance of Japanese speakers of English. Applied
Cognitive Psychology, 18(7),
841- 855
Pappamihiel, N.E. (2002). English As A Second Language
Students And English Language
Anxiety. Issues In The Mainstream Classroom. Proquest
Education Journal, 36(3), 327-
355.
Rachman, S. (2004). Anxiety (2nd ed). New York: Psychology Press Ltd.
Scovel, T. (2000). A critical review of the critical period

research. Annual Review of Applied
Linguistics, 20, 213-223
Spielberger, C. (1983). Manual for the state-trait anxiety inventory

(Form Y). Palo Alto, CA:
Consulting Psychologists Press.
Spielmann, G., & Radnofsky, M. L. (2001). Learning language

under tension: New directions
from a qualitative study. The Modern Language Journal, 85
(2), 259-278.
Von Worde, R. (2003). Students' Perspectives on Foreign
Language Anxiety. Inquiry, 8(1),
553
INTRODUCTION
MAN AND LANGUAGE
Many scientist have developed many theories that suggested the
evolution of man and believed
that man interacted with his environment for survival. The need to
satisfy basic needs of life did
prompted the early man to move from place to place in search of
food, it was also believe that man
hunted wild animals and used raw materials in satisfaction of his
basic needs of life. The wild man

interacted with the birds, animals and the wild at large in order to
live in his environment.Mans
interaction continued to develop within ages until recent times.
Man was able to distinguish sounds
and interpret meaning through sounds and through that,
communicated with his environment in
order to survive therein. Many sociologist are of the opinion that
language dates to centuries ago
and through trade,commerce,and adventures, man interacted
with itself in a way that creates
understanding to both the speakers and the listeners. Many
scholars wrote that the use of language
as means of effective communication by man started during the
adventures of man from one place
to another,languages,cultures and traditions where formed. This is
believed to be the origin of native
speakers of each language. Though they emphasized that all
languages unique to a particular region
did at one time have a root of a native speaker which have created
similarities in the language of the
world today. For example, the language of sabir,which dates 10
centuries ago was derived from

romance root meaning lingua franca which was unique to the
people of the mediterenean.sabir
brought a lot of oral heritage among speakers and was used for
communication in commerce and
diplomacy., many linguistic scholars do agree that sabir language
has traces of
English,Italian,Arabic,catalonia,and Hebrew.it was a language of
conversation by sailors who moved
fro place to place for trade or adventure, through this early
conversation languages where
developed showing its uniqueness to a particular geographical
region.in today the language of sabir
is being believe to be originated from the Mediterranean region
but the truth of sabir remains that
the language does not belong to anyone in particular, but spreads
across the Mediterranean nations.
This is evident on the way Mediterranean speaks as traces of the
sabir language in still seen until
date. Therefore language is means of communication by people
from different areas and cultures
which has created a lot of barrier today. This remains the need for
second language acquisition as

dialectical fragmentations have arisen thus creating the different
cultures and regions which we
have, which have given rise to the multilingual nation of the world.
NEED FOR LANGUAGE ACQUISATION
Language acquisition is important especially to second language
learner and the world at large.this
is due to the exploring nature of man, people are moving from one
place to another for
business,education,tourism and for adventure. There arises the
need for second language
acquisition by people. Especially in a linguistic multicultural world
where more languages are gaining
more recognition in different geographical areas due to migration.
Languages like
English,French,Arabic,Spanish and Chinese’s are becoming more
popular in the world due to the
increase in the number of users in the world. When people change
location, the need arises always
for a change in language or the need to acquire a second
language, this might be for several reasons
ranging from interactional,conversational,transactional and so on.
The truth remains that there

ought to be a need for people to communicate with a language of
a place in a social setting.language
is a mean of communication in a social environment, many
through its daily activities do interact
with people in different places thus acquisition of language for
interaction in the social setting is
required. This is one of the essence of second language
acquisition.
Gadner(1979)agreed that there is a sociocultural reason for
second language acquisition among
people, he believed that certain factors do affect language
acquisition among people in a place. He
listed them as social and cultural, individual differences and
enviroment.he strongly believed that
there exist a social reason why people see the need for second
language acquisition .the need for
interaction among people in a geographical setting bring the need
for second language acquisition.
Language teachers also believe that for there to be a production of
a target language learners
require to understand and integrate themselves into the cultural
values of the second language to

be learned.Gadner agrees with this as he believes that the cultural
background of a ;location do have
an impact on the need for acquisition of such language. Most
students of English language as a
foreign language do like the behavior of American and their
lifestyle in general and thus do have
interest in the acquisition of English language as a second
language, this is applicable to languages
like Spanish,French,Arabic and Chinese as well. Also Gadner was of
the opinion that the
environment in which one finds themselves do influence in second
language acquisition. He used
Britain and Canada as examples. He believed that in Britain most
cultural groups are mainly native
speakers of English and this will influence the acquisition of English
as a foreign language to other
culture who find themselves in a British environment. Unlike in
Canada where there are large
multicultural groups of Spanish, English and French speakers. He
pointed out that most people are
easily influenced by the environment in acquiring the second
language. Lastly he identified several

factors in individual differences like motivation, intelligent
quotient, which do play a role in
determining acquisition of second language.
STAGES IN LANGUAGE ACQUISATION
It has been established that a social reason do exist in second
language acquisition, therefore
language acquisition deals with the a process of learning a second
language. Gadner was of the
opinion that teaching second language acquisition is usually a
learning cooperation between experts
and novice, experts being the teachers while the novice the
strudents.many approaches to teaching
language have been developed over the years but linguistic
scholars believe that the integration of
these methods yields the best. Second language acquisition can
only be accessed through teaching
either by a tutor or linguistic teacher, care should be taken in the
use of methods in second language
teaching. Production of second language should not be the
immediate focus of teachers as student
are expected to learning gradually, considering that students have
outgrown their critical age of

learning, acquisition of second language is believe to be gradual in
its form to achieve the desired
goal. There exist different stages in second language acquisition,
they are:
 Pre-production stage is usually seen as the silent stage where is
learner does not speak the
second language. During the major part of teaching the second
language, the learner keeps
silent and receives from the teacher. The receptive skills of the
learner is been developed as
he becomes connected gradually with few words of the second
language. He also becomes
familiar with sound of letters numbers and alphabets and
gradually begins to receive new
information about the second language into his processing
memory.
 Early production stage is seen as the period where the learner
have received some words
and has become more connected with the words and alphabets of
the second language. His
cognitive is becoming active enough to engage in processing of the
words of the second

language and he can accommodate few words in his memory.
Now the learner can make
phrases in the second language and memorize few words also.in
this stage of second
language acquisition the receptive skills are being sharpened in
order to have a mastery of
sound enough to make simple sentences and recognize familiar
words. The learner at this
stage has about 500words to process.
 Speech emergence stage is the stage where the learner can
produce speeches in the second
language though not in clear understandings.in this stage the
second language has gained
entrance into the memory of the learner and the learner has the
ability to recognize and
process words in the second language.in this stage, the words are
spoken with little errors
included which shows that the second language has not
automatically gain permanency in
the learner.gramatically errors re still visible in usage but the
learner have a knowledge of
1000-2000 words to produce in the second language

 Intermediate and advance fluency are the last stages of second
language production.in these
stages learners of the second language have a reasonable
connection with the second
language and are able to make simple and accurate sentences in
the language.Here,they
think and speak which brings about desirable second language
production, they become
more and more entangled with the culture of the environment
and this makes them to
produce more efficiency in the language. Advance influence is
being seen with the learner
become part of the environment, they think and behave in the
way the native speakers do
and with practice and interest begin to have a fluency in speaking
the second language.
It evident to see that second language acquisition involves a
process, and the process is always
gradual but produces the desired result of speaking in the second
language.it is also important to
notice in the different stages that processing and production of
second language is dependent on

few variables, variables which are visible during the various stages
of second language acquisition.
MODELS OF LANGUAGE ACQUISATION
Crookes and Schmidt(1991) believed that models that support
second language acquisition is
based on the level of motivation that a learner receives. They
believed on the integrative and
instrumental models of second language acquisition. These
models tend to look at what drives the
learner in second language acquisition with regards to the stages
involved in second language
production They explained the two models and focused on how
they influence the production and
acquisition of second language among learners. The integrative
model did focus on the learner as
part of the society where the second language is being spoken.
The integrative model believes that a
learner is motivated to learn a second language when the learner
becomes part of the social
structure of the environment. The model exposes that for
students to be motivated to learn a
second language, they begin to behave and think in the nature of
the native speaker and thus this

stimulates the production of the second language. Also the
Whorfian thesis designed by Edward
sapir and Benjamin lee whorf do suggest in their thesis that
language determines the way speakers
conceptualize the world. Though the thesis consist of a weak and a
strong version, many linguistic
scholars like Vygotsky do believe that language and cognition are
related, they believe that many
language speakers of a second language or a native language are
being affected in their cognitive
state of the world. Though many arguments have arisen in the
discussion of language and cognition,
Crookes et al(1991)suggest that for production to be achieved in
second language, learners needs
tointergrate themselves with the environment of the native
speaks or the second language. They
used Japan as a model state to describe their model.
SECOND LANGUAGE TEACHING AND THE LEARNER
Vygotsky(1986),did believe that second language acquisition
occurs in a social environment and
should be taught using social means. He said that social nature of
the environment is another

stimulator for second language acquisition among people.in
agreement Ellis(1997)did say that the
instrumental model of second language acquisition does not help
in language learning or
production.it is believe that they natural state of the environment
or the society in which the learner
integrates itself is more second- language –productive that the
instrumental model. The
instrumental model proposes that most learner have the urge to
learn and produce in the second
language when there arises a need for the language.it was
believed that desire to obtain the second
language lies on the need for job, completion of education, an
educational requirement for
graduation,translation,high paying jobs, and so on.it is believed
that these do motivate the learners
in learning language especially second language in a particular
place. Lots of argument have been
seen between the integrative and instrumental models of second
language acquisition, though the
truth remains that a gradual process which is visible in the stages
of language learning, do produce
the desired outcome.

There is no particular effective means of second language
acquisition for learner, though is
advisable to use a combination of different methods of teaching in
teaching the learners. The goal of
language acquisition is always defined and thus should always help
teachers of second language
acquisitions in achieving the intended goals. Language is for
communication and thus should be
taught in such manner. Students should be able to speak language
at the end of second language
courses. The classroom task and activities which we design is
important to the success of second
language acquisition among students .it is most observable that
most learners of second language
do not experience fluency in the second language at the end of
their academic programs. The
questions will always arise;why?does this require re-
determination of instructional objectives to use
more classroom effective approaches that is learner-centered in
teaching second language
acquisition.
Many educational administrators have complained that most
students do not have enough
academic learning time to interact and practice in the second
language. This has cause a lot of
setback in the production of second language by learners, creative
curriculum should be developed
by experts in second language acquisition to use more learner-
based methodology in teaching.
Especially out-of-classroom activities will assist the students in
developing their speaking skills.
Visitations to malls,supermarkets,workshop
centres,casinos,fashion homes and so on will help in
creating the opportunity of the students in communicating in the
second language.styudents should
be exposed to the real life conversations that occur in the second
language so that conversations
that occur in such scenes in the second language form can be
experienced. This is the best way to
evaluate the performance of the students in the second language.
CONCLUSION
Conclusively, migration of people from different cultures and
society has given rise to the need for

second language acquisition.it is needed for interactional purposes
and transactional purposes in a
society. The teaching of second language acquisition has exposed
the beauty of language among
diverse speakers especially in English
language.arabs,Spanish,French,german citizens do have
different phonology with regards to English language speaking and
this brings about the beauty of
the language. Most languages of today have a common root
especially to a particular region, and
this brings us closer to the possibility that all languages must have
originated from one source!
Imagine the world with one common language.
REFERENCES
Crookes,G.and Schmidt R.W(1991)Motivation:Reopening the
research agenda.
Language learning,pg41(4) 459-512
Ellis,R.(1997)The study of second language acquisition.Oxford
university press
Toronto
Gadner,R.C(1982)Language attitude language learning.In E
Bouchard Ryan and
H.Giles.Attitudes towards language formation.pp132-147
Vygotsky,L.S(1986)Thought and language.Cambridge MA; MIIT
press
LANGUAGE AND THE
BRAIN
4.1 Introduction to Language Processing in the brain
My voice was regular, but my words were weirdly delivered.
Instead of saying, ‘Can you put
the kettle on?’ I’d say, ‘Can you put the kettle on?’ ‘Preheat the
kettle’, I’d say. I’d also get
simple words mixed up, such as ‘coffee seeds’ for ‘coffee beans’
(Harris, 2009).
In Interaction, we learn about the aspects of speech and language
that contribute to a person’s
social identity and he conveys his displeasure with the shift in
sound. This was plainly
undermined by his struggles, as George’s narrative of the stages of
his speech recovery also

highlighted some articulation, leading him to believe he no longer
sounded like an English
person.
Language and the Brain
The study of acquired language problems has revealed a lot about
how the brain organizes
language.
Throughout a lifetime, an individual’s language ability develops as
a result of various
sources of diversity from both heredity and the environment.
We cannot learn about how we can have words come out of our
mouths to make
coherently constructed messages since talking and understanding
other people is a natural and
unconscious process.
Aphasia is the most prevalent type of acquired disease. Damage to
the portions of the brain
that control language causes it. Aphasia can affect any or all of the
following modalities:
speaking, understanding, reading, and writing.
Finally, language disorders research can help to clarify how the
human capacity to
communicate through language is the result of interactions
between subcomponents of a
highly complex brain system.
Language in Development
The experience of neonates in the world, according to William
James, a nineteenth-century
Harvard professor is ‘buzzing perplexity’. Sound is mixed with
other information about our language, world,
and the person
we are conversing with. It is not very easy, but it is also automatic,
lightning-fast, and
almost always effortless, and it happens without us realizing it.
A variety of strategies have been used to investigate the network
of brain areas involved in
processing and creating language in order to gain a better
understanding of how this complex
process works.
4.2 How does Communicative Function Fractionate Through
Selective
Impairment?
If a stroke causes immediate brain damage in a specific area below
the left temple, the person will have
difficulties speaking. They will not be mute but will speak in short
words with apparent effort. On the other
hand, if the injury is below the top of the left ear, they will talk yet
not appear to understand what others are
saying to them. Broca s aphasia and Wernicke s aphasia are two
different language disorders. Broca s
aphasic produces very limited utterances that use essential words
rather than whole phrases. An individual
with Wernicke s aphasic produces extended, difficult-to-
understand statements in which words are arranged
in unusual ways. In some forms of acquired neurogenic diseases,
all levels of communication can be
impaired selectively. Similar patterns can also be found in children
who have difficulty learning to speak.
Specific language impairment is a communication problem that
prevents children with no hearing loss or
intellectual difficulties from developing language skills. SLI may
damage a child s ability to communicate,
listen, read, and write. Some people have trouble creating specific
speech sounds rather than linguistically

significant units. Dysarthrias are problems with the rhythm,
timing, or form of articulatory movements.
Some people with uncontrolled vocal cord spasms have raspy
speech and have trouble conveying the
emotional tones that ordinarily colour our speech. Applied
linguists can be educated to provide diagnostic
examinations on such issues. However, professional speech and
language therapists should provide
intervention and therapy rather than linguists. Someone who has
uncommon trouble controlling specific
muscles involved in articulation may sound as though they have
developed a foreign accent. This is a
pseudo-accent since it is the consequence of an adult s second
language learner pronunciation rather than the
perception of an impaired location and manner of articulation in
the listener s ear.
People who speak more than one language have communication
difficulties that show every possible link
between their linguistic systems. Some have learned deaf sign
language and have visual-gestural
communication problems. Selective impairments have been
noticed in the language’s syntax, demonstrated

by difficulties with word order and inflexions, in the semantics of
the language, as evidenced by difficulties
within and between lexical classes of words, and in the sound
system of the language, illustrated by
impaired phonological processes.
4.3 How Does Language Interact with Other Cognitive Domains, Or
is
It Independent of Them?
The relationship between language and thought is a long-observed
topic. Typically starting at toddler age,
their speech impediments express as the child learns to speak.
Losing speech ability and other cognitive
functions can be directly attributed to injury. Children with SLI can
develop normally though studies show
that their speech is disorderly and their visual comprehension can
lack. They also appear to have difficulty
comprehending speech from others, such as in rare genetic
disorders such as Down Syndrome and Prader-
Will syndrome. Learning disabilities and difficulty understanding
social aspects of language usually go hand

in hand with speech impediments, in which they can appear to
speak impolitely or rudely - usually confused
with the autism spectrum. Other mental disorders such as
schizophrenia and psychosis can cause
incoherency and trouble with speaking. These disabilities can also
result from head trauma, usually
damaging the frontal cortex.
4.4 What effects Does Maturation Have on the Manifestation of
Language Impairment?
As they get older, many people face significant memory
impairments, often manifest as difficulty finding
words. They are aware of the thoughts they wish to express, but
they are having growing trouble recalling
the particular words required to express those thoughts. This is
also a regular occurrence in healthy persons
experiencing stress, exhaustion, or other sorts of altered mental
states. Typical speech errors are defined as a
functional disturbance of the language production system that
does not impede thinking processes. For
example, someone might say ‘I caked a bake’ instead of ‘I baked a
cake .’ for example.

When you have a ‘tip of the tongue’ experience, you may have
trouble saying a word you are thinking of yet
recollecting a lot about the word you are having trouble recalling.
One may be able to say something. People
with memory difficulties, on the contrary, will continue to
communicate using grammatically correct speech
until the very end of their condition but will have growing difficulty
retrieving the specific words they
require to express precise and contentful meaning. Other
cognitive issues with monitoring, attention and
general memory of experiences and knowledge compound their
word-finding challenges.
4.5 What Can be Learned about Language by Considering
Impairments
in Speech compared with Reading and Writing?
There is a general comprehension that a small percentage of
youngsters have difficulty learning to read in
their early school years. In recent years, a great lot of research has
been done to learn more about the
neurological core of this problem and the relationship between
hereditary variables, educational concerns,

and orthographic demands, all of which appear to play a role in
specific areas of reading difficulties. The
current picture implies that this group of dyslexic children is not
homogeneous and that there are likely
several causes for their difficulties with this cognitively challenging
language exercise. Visual (eye motions
and eye dominance) and perceptual (letter form identities) issues
and the involvement of short-term memory
in coping with serially ordered information have also been
highlighted. These issues with written language
processing appear to be modality-specific and independent of
general intelligence or spoken language
ability.
On the other hand, reading challenges may be linked to a slew of
other cognitive learning issues involving
numbers and mathematics, visual-spatial skills, short-term
memory, or fine motor coordination. Children
with dyslexia, like those with SLI, grow up with minor residual
symptoms of spoken language impairments,
learn to read as they become older.
Interestingly, neurological illness can cause formerly literate
persons to lose their capacity to read or write.

Many aphasic people who have trouble producing and
understanding spoken language will also have trouble
writing. However, when their spoken language problems have
been healed, some people may experience
long-term impairments in solely reading and/or writing.
A lot has been discovered about fundamental mechanisms
involved in reading by investigating the struggles
that various people had with reading following brain damage.
Alexia (acquired reading difficulty) and agraphia (acquired writing
difficulty) are two fundamental
challenges that reflect how sounds are encoded into orthographic
forms in a language. Some written forms
directly correlate a single letter (grapheme) and the individual
sound (phoneme) associated with it in
alphabetic languages like English. This one-to-one correspondence
between the graphene and the phoneme
does not exist in other textual forms. These two reading
techniques must be utilized simultaneously while
reading in English. If we consider other written language systems
apart from English, we see various
patterns of acquired reading difficulty, reflecting how a given
language encodes the spoken form
orthographically.
4.6 What can be Learned about Language by Considering
Impairment in
People with more than one language?
The majority of what we know about the organization of language
in the brain comes from research on
people who primarily speak English. The vast majority of
individuals on the planet, on the other hand,
generally know or use many languages. People who speak more
than one language have aphasia in various
ways. We may think that if numerous languages were processed
similarly, language problems caused by
brain injury would impact every language equally. Surprisingly, the
languages are differently damaged.
There may be distinct types of aphasic symptoms, different levels
of impairment, or different recovery rates
in the many languages that an aphasic individual uses. This shows
that some people who speak many
languages may be represented in different psychophysiological
ways.
A variety of explanations have been proposed to explain the
patterns observed in bilingual aphasics;

impairment and recovery: the first language learned; the most
familiar language; the most automatic
language; the language with the strongest emotional association;
the language they use most in their daily
lives; the language in which they can read and write; the language
of the clinical environment and therapy
delivery. Although there has been much psycholinguistic research
that implies that age, method of
acquisition, and degree of competence have an impact on how a
second language is stored in the brain, there
has not been much in the way of consistent patterns of findings in
bilingual aphesis (ljalba, Obler and
Chengappa, 2004). Characteristics such as being able to speak
their weaker or less dominant language,
unexpected translation, language flipping, or mingling solely have
also been discovered in multilingual
dementia patients. The picture of how the brain organizes
language is complicated and imperfect. Different
technologies provide us with a glimpse into the inner workings of
language processing and components.
However, as evidenced by the mislabeling of children who spoke a
non-standard variation of English or

spoke English as a second language, they can be deceiving (as in
Labov, 1982). Because the word
discrimination tests included items that were not phonologically
distinguishable in their language, many of
the ‘black’; and ‘Asian and Latino’; children were labelled as
learning disabled, mentally handicapped, or
hard of hearing.
4.7 Summary
In this chapter, we looked at the different ways that studying
people with language problems
can reveal linguistic organization processes. Problems with specific
components of speaking,
listening, reading, and/or writing can be caused by both acquired
neurological disorders and
developmental challenges.
Patterns of challenges experienced by multilingual speakers
provide fascinating facts about
how the brain organizes linguistic functions.
PERCEPTIONS OF PERSONALITY FACTORS IN LANGUAGE
EDUCATION: CULTURAL PERSPECTIVE

ABSTRACT
The following are specific personality factors in second language
acquisition as identified by the well
known linguist, Brown, H.D (2007): self-esteem, willingness to
communicate, inhibition, risk-taking,
anxiety, empathy, extroversion/introversion and motivation.
These factors had also been singled out by
language scholars earlier, for example, Burt, Dulay and Krashen
(1982). The purpose of this study is to
investigate the role played by personality factors in second
language acquisition. The study was
conducted by way of library research and an open-ended
questionnaire administered to graduate
students pursuing a Master’s program related to English language
teaching and language studies. The
current thinking on the factors involved, including cultural and
religious factors, indicate that each of the
personality factors is relevant for successful second language
acquisition (SLA). They have an impact on
the learners’ varying degrees of success. It is crucially important to
understand how learners feel and
respond in their pursuit of acquiring a language besides their own
first language which they acquire on

their own natively, naturally and almost effortlessly. An
understanding of these personality factors, and
how they may make a difference, either positively or negatively, in
both the verbal and written spheres
is important in the psychology of language education.
Key words: personality factors, second language acquisition,
English
Introduction
Personality may be defined in general terms as “ The totality of
qualities and traits, as of character or
behavior, that are particular to a specific person” and “ The
pattern of collective character, behavioral,
temperamental, emotional and mental traits of a person”
(American Heritage Dictionary, 1996: 1351).
Leary (2005:3) defined personality as “the system of enduring,
inner characteristics of individuals that
contribute to consistency in their thoughts, feelings and behavior.”
Brown (2000) acknowledges that a
careful, systematic study of the role played by personality in
second language acquisition has

contributed to a much improved understanding of the language
learning process and improved
language teaching designs. Leary went on to add that human
beings have individual differences, i.e.
“personality characteristics and processes that differ across
people. Human beings are remarkably
variable in their personalities.” Individual attributes may be
viewed along a continuum of a five-point
scale: very low to very high, with low, average and high in
between.
Prominent linguists, for example, Brown (2007) and Burt, Dulay
and Krashen (1982), among others
regard the following eight specific personality factors in human
behavior which are related to SLA: self-
esteem, willingness to communicate, inhibition, risk-taking,
anxiety, empathy, extroversion/introversion
and motivation. The emphasis of this paper will be on acquiring
English as a second language.
Method of study
The study is a qualitative one which used library research:
scholarly works of linguists, academicians and

research publications on the topic under investigation. Fifteen
graduate students enrolled in a Master’s
program of a reputable Malaysian university participated in the
study. They were practicing teachers
and those aspiring to be teachers. They responded to an open
ended questionnaire (please refer to
appendix) on all the personality factors identified above. They
were requested to comment on the
relevance and importance of these factors based on their readings
and experience as teachers. They
were also asked to approach the issue from a cultural (especially,
Malaysian) and Islamic perspective.
Results and Discussion
Self-esteem
A highly acceptable definition of self-esteem, according to
Coopersmith (1967:4-5), as cited in Brown
(2007) is “the evaluation which individuals make and customarily
maintain with regard to themselves, it
expresses an attitude of approval or disapproval, and indicates the
extent to which individuals believe

themselves to be capable, significant, successful and worthy.”
According to Harmer (2001: 127), if effective learning is to take
place “a student’s self- esteem is vitally
important.” Learners need to have reasonable self confidence in
themselves as this will facilitate the
process of learning. Having positive self- worth of oneself is not
similar to being arrogant. It is actually a
good trait as the learners feel at ease with themselves. But having
high self- esteem does not mean
learners should be overconfident and stop seeking help from
teachers or resource materials when they
face learning difficulties. Learners must believe in themselves.
Having a low self- esteem could lead to
depression and doubts about their self worth.
Baumeister (2005) sums up the differences between people with
high self-esteem and low self-esteem.
The former are more willing to start a conversation even with
strangers, they are more likely to
participate actively in a group discussion, are independent and are
able to deal with failure positively.
Low self-esteem is related to less positive self- regard of oneself. It
may lead a person to being socially
withdrawn and communicate less.

Willingness to communicate
Second language (SL) learners must demonstrate the willingness
to communicate in a language which is
necessary for them educationally, socially and professionally. By
being reserved or taciturn a learner
may not acquire the ability to speak the language actively. The
spoken language of such people may be
devoid of fluency and complexity.
From a religious perspective Muslim female students may not
want to be seen as too willing to
communicate so as not give any impression that they are too
friendly, and so would rather tend to be
withdrawn. In some cultures, it is better off learning passively.
Some learners in rural areas do not see
the need to communicate in a foreign language as both the
teacher and the taught are of the same
ethnic background. A lecturer who teaches at a tertiary institution
had mentioned to the present
academician that her students spoke to her in Malay even when
she spoke to them in simple English.
The socioaffective strategy of cooperation whereby learners
interact in English and work with their

peers in a language activity may help to instill a willingness to
communicate.
Inhibition
Inhibition in psychology refers to “Conscious or unconscious
restraint of a behavioral process, a desire or
an impulse” (AHD, 1996: 929). It has been hypothesized “that the
defensiveness associated with
inhibition discourages risk-taking” (Ellis, 1985: 121) by learners,
but the latter is essential for good
progress in SLA. Ellis further adds that egocentrism causes
increased self-consciousness in the pursuit of
SLA. Building defenses can be a detriment (Brown, 2007). The fear
of native target language speakers
ought to be minimized. Inhibition is deemed a negative factor.
Reduced inhibition aids, greater
inhibition hinders the learning process.
Inhibition, though may be culture-related, has to be discouraged.
Teachers can help to lower their
students’ sense of inhibition by identifying and conducting
appropriate activities. More exposure to
authentic materials in the form of interesting reading materials
and visual aids could gradually help to

lower their inhibition. Learners should feel relaxed in their
attempts to learn and become proficient in a
language which will be of much benefit to them later.
Risk-taking
Brown (2007) opined that risk-taking was a very useful trait in SLA.
Krashen et al (1982: 75) stated that
learners ought to be prepared and “eager to try new and
unpredictable experiences.” Learners have to
be a little adventurous to try out something unfamiliar to them
without fear of getting it wrong or loss
of face in class. In SLA, learners ought to take language risks with
their pronunciation performance,
spoken skills, etc. In the absence of risk-taking, learners will fail to
get corrective feedback with regard to
their language use. Krashen et al claimed that risk-taking learners
proceeded to learn fairly quickly.
Learners should not allow their unsuccessful risk-taking attempts
to affect their morale (Haja Mohideen,
2001).
The students should not be unduly worried about the possible
negative behavior of some unsupportive

counterparts. Only constructive feedback from the teachers and
supportive peers should matter to
them. Demotivating behavior on the part of some fellow students,
or even some insensitive teachers
should, in fact, spur them to prove that they can go on to become
successful language learners too.
Malay (and Asian) learners need to remember that in class, silence
is not golden. In the Western
education system, students do not fear risk-taking. Making
mistakes is an integral part of the learning
process. No pain, no gain.
In their study comparing Indian and Malay secondary school pupils
in Form 1, Sheema Liza Idris and
Johana Yusof (2009) found that Indian students who had a good
command of the English language were
better prepared to take risks. They also concluded that the Malay
socio-culture had not adequately
prepared the Malay students for fluent use of the language thus
minimizing the risk-taking behaviour.
According to them socio-cultural factors are influential in risk-
taking practices.
Anxiety
According to Scovel (1978: 134), as cited in Brown (2000), anxiety
is associated with feelings of
uneasiness, frustration, self-doubt, apprehension, or worry.
Anxiety is one of the affective factors that
may have an influence on SLA. A study by Horwitz et al (1986) as
cited in Kees de Bot et al (2005) found
that poor foreign language performance may be attributed to
anxiety.
Scovel (1978), among others, refers to two types of anxiety:
facilitative which is helpful and debilitative
which is harmful. While excessive discomfort about an impending
task may not be very helpful, some
amount of apprehension which causes a person to be serious in
accomplishing a task is not negative, it is
positive. Learning a foreign language such as English requires
facilitative anxiety for Asian learners.
Some foreign languages may cause anxiety due to historical and
cultural factors. Such anxiety has to be
overcome by practical attitudes towards the target language.
Teachers have to be careful not to provide
feedback which may be misconstrued as negative. This will raise
their anxiety level. Kees de Bot et al

(2005) stress that low anxiety, together with motivation and
positive self-esteem, facilitates successful
SLA. On a spiritual level, anxiety may even bring people closer to
God to seek His help to overcome their
difficulty and do their part to push themselves to succeed in a
given task.
Empathy
AHD (1996: 603) defines empathy as “Identification with and
understanding of another’s situation,
feelings and motives.” Krashen et al (1982) emphasized that
learning a language required listening
carefully to others and being concerned more about
communication than about avoiding errors. Brown
(2007) stresses that for effective communication to take place, an
individual has to be able to
understand another person’s emotional and mental states, failing
which there is a big possibility of
communication breaking down.
In spoken English, for example, a word or phrase which has been
misunderstood can be quickly asked
for clarification by the hearer and it can be rephrased by the
speaker for clarity. If a speaker from UK

were to mention Boxing Day to a person who is unaware of it and
shows his/her unfamiliarity by way of
nonverbal communication, the former should empathize with the
latter and explain what the day is
about. Similarly if host in US were to offer her Muslim guests root
beer, the latter may be forgiven if
they thought the drink contained beer. For successful empathy to
take place Haja Mohideen (2001: 70)
suggests that a learner should ask oneself the following questions:
Do I express myself clearly to the
listener? Will the addressee be able to understand my accent?
Have I written coherently enough for the
teacher to understand me? Am I making sufficient effort to figure
out what my fellow interlocutor is
saying? In some countries, native English speakers are recruited to
teach the language. In Malaysia, for
example, teachers from primarily English speaking countries,
known as English teaching assistants, have
been employed in some parts of the country. There may have
been initial difficulties understanding each
other in terms of their accents and the cultural content introduced
by the visiting teachers. In such

cases, there has to be mutual empathy.
Asian and Muslim learners are empathetic towards their teachers
as they have much respect for their
guru. So, they try to cooperate with their teachers in the tasks
assigned to them. Their teachers too
need to empathize with their students in their pursuit of a foreign
language. SLA is a complex
undertaking indeed.
Extroversion/introversion
Oxford (2001) explains that extroverted individuals are those who
like interaction with people and
develop many friendships. While extroverts derive much energy
from the external world, introverts get
theirs from the internal world tending to have only a few
friendships, which however are often very
deep. It may be safe to assume that an extrovert communicates a
lot, though not always with accuracy.
Introverts may be more careful with their language use, though it
may not guarantee accurate language
use. Though their personalities are different, the teacher can
assign suitable tasks which may be shared
by both, or cater specifically to either group. Studies have not
come to a definitive conclusion which of

these two personality factors is more conducive to SLA (Ellis,
1985). Both extroversion and introversion
strengths have to be exploited by the teachers. It is believed
introvert students comprise the majority in
Asian classrooms. Therefore teachers need to accommodate these
students. It is important not to
marginalize them for their lack of verbal participation because
very often it is the extrovert students
who gain the teachers’ attention.
Our different personalities are shaped by the environment we live
in- cultural, religious, national, ethnic,
etc. In some cultures, students who are introvert are more
favorably regarded as the cliché goes: Silence
is golden. From a religious perspective (in Islam) introvert students
may be perceived as being more
modest.
Motivation
It may be reasonably assumed that motivation is a key factor for
success and lack of it failure in any
pursuit. As far as learning English is concerned, the motivation to
be proficient, or even acquire

rudimentary English would be useful to almost anyone, living in
urban or rural areas, at some time in
their lives (Davies and Pearce, 2000), given the ubiquitous
presence of the language.
The motive to learn an additional language has instrumental,
integrative, intrinsic and extrinsic
purposes. A learner may be motivated by all or some of the above.
Students and individuals may be
encouraged to acquire a language for instrumental or practical
objectives such as passing an exam,
furthering one’s job prospects and gaining a promotion. There
may be others who want to learn English
because they want to integrate with the Anglo-American culture.
Instrumental and integrative
motivation also includes attitudes towards the target language
speakers, towards the target language
itself and interest in foreign languages (Kees de Bot et al, 2005).
Learners who are intrinsically motivated are involved in activities
for their own sake and find the
involvement internally rewarding and self-fulfilling (Edward Deci,
1975) as cited in Brown (2007). In
extrinsic motivation, the learner anticipates an external reward in
the form of positive reinforcement,

money, higher grades, awards and scholarship. Harmer (2001) had
concluded that intrinsic motivation
was vitally important for success based on numerous studies. The
motivation to learn English today
crosses boundaries and overcomes prejudices. English is not the
language of the orang putih (white
people) anymore. It does not belong to any specific cultures,
societies, countries or regions (Davies and
Pearce, 2000). Islam motivates its followers to seek knowledge
even if they have to go as far as China.
There is a saying of the Prophet Muhammad which emphasizes
lifelong learning: Seek knowledge from
the cradle to the grave. The motive to achieve one’s goal is shared
by all cultures and religions.
Conclusions
We have thus far discussed key personality factors related to SLA
which can make a difference in the
learners’ attempts to acquire a non-native language. These factors
have been identified by linguists and

psychologists to make an impact. We no longer live in monolingual
societies. Countries have become
multicultural and therefore multilingual. It is to the advantage of a
country’s young people as well other
citizens to acquire another dominant language of a country. The
acquisition of languages which have an
international status will give the users the opportunity to
participate in a global environment, the
influential mass media included. Research studies have shown that
the factors identified are all closely
associated with SLA, and they can make a difference.
References
American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language Third
Edition. (1996). New York: Houghton Mifflin.
Baumeister, R.F. (2005). Self-concept, self-esteem, and identity. In
Derlega, V; Winstead, B.A. and Jones,
W.H. (Eds.), Personality: contemporary theory and research.
Belmont: Thomson.
Brown, H.D. (2000). Principles of language learning and teaching.
Fourth edition. New York: Longman.
__________ (2007). Principles of language learning and teaching.
Fourth edition. New York: Longman.
Burt, Dulay and Krashen, S.D. (1982). Language Two.

Coopersmith, S. (1967). The antecedents of self-esteem. San
Francisco: W.H. Freeman.
Davies, P. & Pearce, E. (2000). Success in English teaching.
Deci, E.L. (1975). Intrinsic motivation. New York: Plenum Press.
Ellis, R. (1095). Understanding second language acquisition.
Haja Mohideen (2001). Personality factors in second language
learning. Muslim Education Quarterly 18:
64-71.
Harmer, J. (2001). The practice of English language teaching. Third
edition. Harlow: Longman.
Horwitz, E.K., Horwitz, M.B., and Cope, J. (1986). Foreign language
classroom anxiety. Modern Language
Journal, 70, 125-132.
Johana Yusof & Sheema Liza Idris. (2009). Risk-taking in
English language learning among Indian and
Malay students of SMK Main Convent, Ipoh. In Normala, O. and
Subramaniam, G. (Eds.), English and
Asia. Kuala Lumpur: IIUM Press.
Kees de Bot., Lowie, W., & Verspoor, M. (2005). Second
language acquisition. London: Routledge.

Leary, M.R. The scientific study of personality. In Derlega, V.,
Winstead, B.A. and Jones, W.H. (Eds.),
Personality: contemporary theory and research. Belmont:
Thomson.
Oxford, R. L. (2001). Language learning styles and strategies. In
Celce-Murcia, M. (Ed.), Teaching English
as a second or foreign language. Third edition. Boston: Heinle
& Heinle.
Scovel, T. (1978). The effect of affect on foreign language learning:
A review of the anxiety research.
Language Learning 28: 129-142.
(This is a revised version of the paper presented at the 2 nd
Southeast Asia Psychology Conference, 26-28
September, 2012 at Universiti Malaysia Sabah, Kota Kinabalu,
Sabah, Malaysia)
Appendix
PERCEPTIONS OF PERSONALITY FACTORS IN LANGUAGE
EDUCATION
Name (optional)___________________________________
Age______________________
Occupation____________________________ Years of
teaching______________________
Others_________________________________________________
____________________
The following are regarded as specific personality factors in human
behavior related to second language
acquisition (Brown, 2007):
Self-esteem
Inhibition
Risk-taking
Anxiety
Empathy
Motivation
How important do you think, are these personality factors,
especially to Malaysian learners you are
teaching/going to teach from a cultural and Islamic perspective?
Write a paragraph under each
category.
Self-esteem
Inhibition
Risk-taking
Anxiety
Empathy
Motivation
Thank you for your time and effort in responding to this survey.
May Allah bless you.
Differences between Children, Teenagers and
Adults learning a second language
It is scientifically known that children ability to acquire new
languages is stronger
than at any other stage of their lives. Pronunciation comes easier,
and vocabulary
sticks during this time. Dealing with children is always handful, but
something really
positive that is worthy to point out is that they will be handling
almost the same level
of development. Children have no main motivation to learn, they
are just fueled by
curiosity and imagination, so it is easier to catch their attetion with
different activities
that can be appealing for them, creativity and enthisiasm are
important things that a
teacher must have to accomplish this.
Teenagers acquire a second language in a totally different way, as
in this part of
their lives, there will be from students in absolute apathy, along
with students who
are extremely inquisitive and curious, there is a vast amount of
personalitis during
this age, as well as several of the students are there by force and
not by choice, it
tends to be harder for them to learn the studied language, in
order to make this a lot

easier, you must create a comfortable classroom for every of the
participants. The
activities that takes place during the language learning process are
really imporant,
in order to keep them motivated.
Finally, adults will obviously have more varying levels and
difficulties, as the natural
ability to pick up a second language drops as they get older. As
adults, they must be
deliberately and consciously learn a language if they want
proficiency or fluency. As
they may have several professional and life experience, probably
even more than
the one who is teaching the language, this may turn into a
difficulty for them to keep
simple concepts at the beginning. As adults, unlike children or
teenagers, they are
learning a second language by choice, for knowledge acquisition or
work purposes,
this makes a positive point as they do not need to be pushed or be
constantly
motivated to learn like in the previous cases, which is going to
make the learning

process a lot easier in this area, which is worth to mention.
Some points that we have to keep in mind when we classify the
students by their
age, is the following:
Young children:
 They can learn through talking about themselves, families and
their lives.
 They are curious to learn and discover new concepts on their
own.
 They like to use their imagination and to discover things.
 They naturally need to touch, see, hear and interact to learn.
 Because their attention span is limited, they need engaging and
entertaining
activities in order to not lose interest.
 They like to cooperate and work in groups.
 They need support and encouragement while learning.
 Teachers need to work their students individually because they
need to be
guided.
Teenagers:
 They are in search for personal identity.

 They are in need of activities that meet their needs and learning
expectations.
 They become disruptive when they lose interest in the lesson or
feel bored.
 They need help and support from the teacher and to be
provided with
constructive feedback.
 They can draw upon a variety of resources in the learning
environment,including personal experience, the local community,
and the
Internet.
 They need the teacher to build bridges between the syllabus and
their world
of interests and experiences.
 They can learn abstract issues and do challenging activities.
 Their personal initiative and energy are moved into action
through meaningful
involvement with relevant and current content.
Adults:
 Adults are more disciplined than adolescents.
 They have a clear understanding of their learning objectives.
 They need to be involved in choosing what and how to learn.
 They prefer to rely on themselves and work on their own pace.

 They come to the classroom with a wide range of knowledge,
expectations,
and experiences.
 They are able to do a wide range of activities.
 Adults learn at various rates and in different ways according to
their
intellectual ability, educational level, personality, and cognitive
learning styles.
 They come into the classroom with diverse experiences,
opinions, thoughts,
and beliefs which need be respected.
PSYCHOLINGUISTICS
The Study of First Language Acquisition of Four Children
Age 2 – 4 Years Old
Lecturer: Dr. Imam Ghozali, M. Sc.
Created by:
Wahyu Dewi Kumalasari
11 002 071
ENGLISH LANGUAGE EDUCATION DEPARTEMENT
FACULTY OF TEACHER TRAINING AND EDUCATION
SARJANAWIYATA TAMANSISWA
2014
CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
A. Background of the study
Language acquisition is just one of psycholinguistics which is all
about
how people learn to speak and the mental processes involved.
Psycholinguistics or psychology of language is the study of the
psychological
and neurobiological factors that enable humans to acquire, use,
comprehend
and produce language. Language acquisition is the process by
which humans
acquire the capacity to perceive, produce and use words to
understand and
communicate. Language development is a complex and unique
human quality
but yet children seem to acquire language at a very rapid rate with
most
children's speech being relatively grammatical by age three
(Crain & Lillo-
Martin, 1999). However, learning a first language is something
that every
normal child does successfully without much need for formal
lessons.
Children acquisition of language has long been considered one of
the
uniquely defining characteristics of human behavior. Today, it is
still the
commonly held belief that children acquire their mother tongue
through
imitation of the parents and the people around their environment.
Many
psychologists feel that the study of the process whereby children
learn to speak
and understand language holds the key to many fundamental
problem of
behavior.
B. Focus of the Study
From the background of the study above, the writer focuses on
two
subjects. They are; the relationship between the children and
mother in first
language, and the influence of the behavior in first language
acquisition. The
subject of this research are four children from different age,
family, and
different background.
C. Significance of the Study
The result of this study will be beneficial and give contributions to
the
following:
1. For the English Department students
English department students can enrich their knowledge and
understanding about psycholinguistics especially first language
acquisition. Besides, the writer hopes that this research finding
will be
useful for language learner as means of improving their
psycholinguistic knowledge of the children utterances or children
language.
2. For the other researcher
The findings of this research can be used as a reference for further
studies dealing with psycholinguistics study, especially the use of
first
language acquisition.
CHAPTER II
THEORETICAL BACKGROUND
A. Psycholinguistics
Psycholinguistics or psychology of language is the study of the
psychological and neurobiological factors that enable humans to
acquire, use,
comprehend and produce language. Psycholinguistics covers the
cognitive
processes that make it possible to generate a grammatical and
meaningful
sentence out of vocabulary and grammatical structures, as well as
the processes
that make it possible to understand utterances, words, text, etc.
Developmental psycholinguistics studies infants' and
children's ability
to learn language, usually with experimental or at least
quantitative methods
(as opposed to naturalistic observations such as those made by
Jean Piaget in
his research on the development of children). Psycholinguistics is
interdisciplinary in nature and is studied by people in a variety of
fields, such
as psychology, cognitive science, and linguistics.
According to Taylor (1990:3) says that psycholinguistics is the
study of
language behavior: how real (rather than ideal) people learn and
use language
to communicate ideas. It means that in learning language the
people should
acquire, comprehend, produce and store language in order to
have a good
language.
Psycholinguistics is well-known as language development.
According
to Scovel (2009:4) state that the use of language and speech as a
window to the
nature and structure of the human mind is called
psycholinguistics. It also
discusses the process of children language development and
theories of firs
language acquisition and second language acquisition.
Development
psycholinguistics tries to inject some objective and system into
study of
language acquisition (Taylor, 1990:228). "In general,
psycholinguistic studies
have revealed that many of the concepts employed in the analysis
of sound
structure, word structure, and sentence structure also play a role
in language
processing. However, an account of language processing also
requires that we
understand how these linguistic concepts interact with other
aspects of human
processing to enable language production and
comprehension." (William
O'Grady, et al., Contemporary Linguistics: An Introduction.
Bedford/St.
Martin's, 2001)
B. First Language
The term first language acquisition refers to children's
natural
acquisition of the language or languages they hear from birth. It is
distinguished from second language acquisition, which begins
later, and from
foreign language learning, which typically involves formal
instruction. There is
strong evidence that children may never acquire a language if they
have not
been exposed to a language before they reach the age of 6 or 7.
Children
between the ages of 2 and 6 acquire language so rapidly that by 6
they are
competent language users. By the time children are of school-age,
they have an
amazing language ability; it is a seemingly effortless acquisition
(Cole & Cole,
1993).
First language acquisition is a rapid process. In the span of just a
few
years, newborn infants who neither speak nor understand any
language become
young children who comment, question, and express their ideas in
the language
of their community. This change does not occur all at once. First,
newborns'
cries give way to coos and babbles. Then, infants who coo and
babble start to
show signs of comprehension such as turning when they hear their
name.
Infants then become toddlers who say “bye-bye” and “all gone”
and start to
label the people and objects in their environment. As their
vocabularies
continue to grow, children start to combine words. Children's
first word
combinations, such as “all gone juice” and “read me,” are short
and are missing

parts found in adults' sentences. Gradually children's
immature sentences are
replaced by longer and more adult like sentences. As children
learn to talk,
their comprehension abilities also develop, typically in advance of
their
productive speech. As children master language, they also become
masters at
using language to communicate. One-year-olds who can only point
and label
become 2-year-olds who comment, question, and command, and
4-year-olds
who can carry on coherent conversations. Studies of middle-class,
typically
developing children acquiring English have documented that by
four years of
age children are nearly adult like in phonological properties of
their speech;
they have vocabularies of several thousand words, and they
produce most of
the types of structures observable in the speech of adults (Hoff,
2008).
C. Language Acquisition
Language acquisition is the process how people learn languages. It
begins from receive and comprehend language then producing
language (using
words) to communicate to others. Language acquisition is one of
the
quintessential human traits, because nonhumans do not
communicate by using
language. Language acquisition usually refers to first-language
acquisition,
which studies infants' acquisition of their native language.
This is distinguished
from second-language acquisition, which deals with the
acquisition (in both
children and adults) of additional languages. The capacity to
successfully use
language requires one to acquire a range of tools including
phonology,
morphology, syntax, semantics, and an extensive vocabulary.
D. First Language Acquisition

First language acquisition is a process of acquiring or learning first
language (mother tongue). There are many theories about first
language
acquisition. They are:
1. Behaviorism
One of the best-known attempts to construct a behaviorism model
of
linguistics behavior was embodied B.F.Skinner’s classic, verbal
behavior
(1957) to environmental circumstances
First Language Acquisition
Language acquisition is the process by which humans acquire the capacity to
perceive and comprehend language, as well as to produce and use words and
sentences to communicate. Language acquisition usually refers to first-language
acquisition, which studies infants’ acquisition of their native language. A first
language is the language, a person has learned from birth or within the critical period.
Children learn language from the evidence they encounter. They can acquire
any language, English, Tamil, Arabic or any human language they encounter. The
grammatical sentences that the children acquire are positive evidences. Explanations,
corrections of wrong sequences, and ungrammatical sentences are negative evidences.
The universal grammar theory claims that evidence other than positive evidence
cannot play a critical role. That is, the child must learn mainly from positive
examples of what people actually say.

Children acquire their first language despite wide differences in their
situations within single culture or across different cultures. Children attain same
grammatical competence although the inputs they get vary from one child to another.
The knowledge of language the children get clearly reflects their experience. Children
imitate what they actually hear. Imitation provides positive evidence. But imitation is
not the only means by which a child learns. Correction also makes a child learns from
its mistakes. That is, when the child makes mistakes his parents correct them. This
way a child acquire knowledge to some extent.
Linguists have difference of opinions on how a child acquire language. There
is a common view among many linguists including Chomsky is that the child has the
innate ability to learn language
IMITATION THEORY
Children learn by imitating and repeating what they hear. Positive
reinforcement and corrections also play a major role in Language acquisition.
Children do imitate adults. Repetition of new words and phrases is a basic feature of
children's speech. This is the behaviorist view popular in the 40's and 50's, but
challenged, since imitation alone cannot possibly account for all language acquisition.
Trevarthen (1984, 1994) , infants learn by imitation but the structural
foundations for imitative movements must be innate; some infants display remarkable
precision in imitation from birth but there are large individual differences; around six
months an infant can be observed imitating signal gestures and mannerisms which
have the characteristics of proto signs in proto-conversations, with a shared grammar
of action.
Gopnik, Meltzoff and Kuhl (1999) the ability to imitate is actually amazing.;
newborns have never seen their own face and in order to imitate must somehow
understand the similarity between an internal feeling and the external face they see;
babies spontaneously coordinate their own expressions, gestures, and voices with the
expressions, gestures and voices of other people; the problem of language is the
mysterious gap between the sound waves that actually reach our ears and the sounds
and words we create in our minds; we remain faced with the central problem of
language, learning what words mean.
Williams, Whiten, Suddendorf and Perrett (2001) say imitation involves
converting an action plan from the others perspective into one’s own; autistic children
may have a specific deficit in motor imitation, which, curiously, may go with
echolalia and other repetitive behaviours; autistic children may suffer from a failure
or distortion in the development of the neural mirror system
Environmental Influences on Language Acquisition
A major proponent of the idea that language depends largely on environment
was the behaviorist B. F. Skinner. He believed that language is acquired through
principles of conditioning, including association, imitation, and reinforcement.
According to this view, children learn words by associating sounds with
objects, actions, and events. They also learn words and syntax by imitating others.
Adults enable children to learn words and syntax by reinforcing correct speech.
Critics of this idea argue that a behaviorist explanation is inadequate. They
maintain several arguments:
 Learning cannot account for the rapid rate at which children acquire language.
 There can be an infinite number of sentences in a language. All these
sentences cannot be learned by imitation.
 Children make errors, such as overregularizing verbs. For example, a child
may say Billy hitted me, incorrectly adding the usual past tense suffix -ed to
hit. Errors like these can’t result from imitation, since adults generally use
correct verb forms.
 Children acquire language skills even though adults do not consistently
correct their syntax.
INNATE MECHANISM
Chomsky argues that human brains have a language acquisition device
(LAD), an innate mechanism or process that allows children to develop language
skills. According to this view, all children are born with a universal grammar, which
makes them receptive to the common features of all languages. Because of this hard-
wired background in grammar, children easily pick up a language when they are
exposed to its particular grammar.
On the back-ground of the logical problem of language acquisition and the
poverty of the stimulus, the only hypothesis not invalidated by empirical evidence
seems to be the assumption of some innate linguistic ability.
Support for the idea of a sort of Universal Grammar comes from the fact that
languages all over the world resemble each other in certain respects and it would be
rather surprising if such similarities were not determined by the neuro-biology of the
brain. In the Chomskyan tradition, UG is supposed to be rather rich in containing
universal constraints on language. This explains why language acquisition is possible
despite all variations and limitations in the learning conditions, why it can happen so
fast, and why it proceeds in similar stages over individuals and languages.
Of course, not all linguistic knowledge is innate!
We must allow for variations, especially the learning of different languages.
The answer to this problem is to think of UG as a set of principles, common to all
languages, and a set of parameters which are set differently in different languages
and will be set by exposure to the relevant input. Some languages will allow to omit
the subject (Italian, Spanish), others do not (English, Spanish). Some languages will
raise the verb to pick up inflection (French, Italian), others will lower the inflection to
the verb (English). The child will have to select the parameter setting consistent with
the language input he or she receives (English, French, Italian).So language
acquisition is a selection process from universally given possibilities (parameters)
guided by universal constraints (principles). Let’s now look at example (11) from the
perspective of UG. In English, only (11’) is a well formed sentence.
(11’) What do you think the baby drinks.
Note that the question does not ask what you think, but what the baby drinks
in yNote that the question does not ask what you think, but what the baby drinks in
your opinion.
What
therefore asks for a constituent of the lower clause.
In some dialects of German (12) is a good sentence.
(12) Wasi glaubst du wasi das Baby trinktti
(12’) What do you think what the baby drinks
The English version of (12) is (12’) and this is exactly what children say. The
point of this is that children use a structure which is not in their target language, but
which is permitted by general principles of grammar – otherwise it could not occur in
a dialect of German. So children’s systematic errors are not evidence for wild
grammars and wild hypothesis formation but show that these errors are UG
constrained. The structures in question may not be possible in the target language due
to the final parameter settings in that language, they are possible from the point of
view of the universal principles, however, and are instantiated in other languages.In
this sense children’s productions never lie outside of what UG permits. Support for
the innateness hypothesis also comes from research on the critical period for language
acquisition. Recall, that we have seen evidence from brain imaging that there are
critical period effects for acquiring phonology, morphology and syntax. Behavioral
evidence was provided by studying the linguistic performance of ‘wild’ children or
deaf children provided with hearing aids late in life and of second language learners.
The existence of such a critical period for language acquisition was important
because genetically determined biological systems like vision usually show a critical
period.
LINGUISTIC THEORY
6 Recent Advances in
Quantitative Methods in
Age-related Research
Simone E. Pfenninger and David Singleton
Introduction
The upsurge of interest in research on the age factor in foreign language
settings in recent decades has raised new methodological and assessment
issues. Although much research has been devoted to identifying age effects
and to their interaction with social-psychological, personal and affective
variables, the specific impact and contribution of different quantitative
approaches has more often than not been disregarded. This is surprising,
considering that methods in age research have evolved significantly over the
past couple of decades, and that it would therefore not have been unrealistic
to expect certain methodological innovations to have entered this domain.

Multilevel modelling (MLM) - a subgroup of linear mixed-effects regression
modelling - has for some time been finally finding its way into certain SLA
subfields. Research on the age factor, however, has only recently - and
tentatively - begun to adopt these kinds of statistical models.
This chapter discusses the benefits that MLM can furnish to any SLA
research that involves the sampling of populations, within educational estab-
lishments or naturalistic settings, and that has a particular focus on chrono-
logical age and the age of onset of acquisition in their roles as continuous and
categorical predictors. Since the emphasis here is on conceptual issues and
practical recommendations, technical details are deliberately kept to a mini-
mum and mathematical details of the methods in question will be avoided.
First, we explore some central issues in the age factor discussion, follow-
ing up on van Heuven’s discussion in Chapter 5. Secondly, we review meth-
ods that have developed in respect of linguistic approaches to the age factor
in SLA and go on to outline the benefits and advantages of mixed-effects
models, in particular regarding perceived gaps in age-related research. It is
hoped that this discussion will contribute to ensuring the consistent choice
101
Brought to you by | Universiteit Leiden / LUMC
Authenticated
Download Date | 1/11/20 3:50 PM
102 Par t 2: Future Implicat ions for SL A and L anguage Polic y
of the most insightful analysis in relation to any given dataset. Unfortunately,
given the constraints of space, it will not be possible to discuss the (very
important) complementary role of qualitative work in this area (see
Pfenninger & Singleton, 2016; Singleton & Pfenninger, 2015).
The Age Factor: Portrait of a Complex Variable
Many researchers still blithely talk about ‘the age factor’ as if it were a
simple, single, solitary factor. This is despite the fact that for many years it
has been authoritatively pointed out that such a view is almost laughably
simplistic and deeply unsatisfactory. Moreover, the notion of the age factor
being a rather more complex phenomenon than how it has customarily been
portrayed is not linked to any particular theoretical stance on, for example,
the critical period.
Thus, Montrul, who broadly favours the notion of the existence of a criti-
cal period, sees age of acquisition as a macrovariable that subsumes other
interrelated factors, such as ‘maturational state, biological age, cognitive
development, degree of first and second language proficiency, amount of first
and second language use, among others’ (Montrul, 2008: 1). For Flege (2009),
who is generally seen as a critical period sceptic, age of onset (AO) is a proxy
for a multitude of variables, including state of neurological development,
state of cognitive development, state of L1 phonetic category development,
levels of L1 proficiency, language dominance, frequency of L2/L1 use and
kind of L2 input (native speaker versus foreign accented).
The significance of initial age of learning may be difficult to determine
precisely because of the fact that it cannot be disentangled from other vari-
ables. Adopting this approach, Jia and Aaronson (2003) argue that AO is a
confounded indicator of neurobiological maturation because it co-varies with
environmental factors. Moyer, for her part, has recently had the following to
say on this matter:

… a host of interrelated variables is at play, having to do with learner ori-
entation and experience. … One valuable contribution of sociolinguistic
work in SLA has been to call attention to social, cultural, and psychological
circumstances relevant to individual L2 users - a reminder to take a more
nuanced look at what underlies age effects in SLA. (Moyer, 2013: 1)
There is also the question of whether age-related differences should really be
regarded as individual differences. The usual line is to place them alongside
individual variables like gender, aptitude, richness of environment, motiva-
tion, learning styles, learning strategies and personality (see, for example,
DeKeyser, 2012; Paradis, 2011; Zafar & Meenakshi, 2012). R. Ellis (2006),
however, excludes it from his inventory of individual differences. The
Authenticated
Recent Advances in Quantitative Methods in Age-related Research 103
reasons he gives are interesting. He states that age does not belong to any of
his four categories of individual differences: ‘“abilities” (i.e., cognitive capa-
bilities for language learning), “propensities” (i.e., cognitive and affective
qualities involving preparedness or orientation to language learning), “learner
cognitions about L2 learning” (i.e., conceptions and beliefs about L2 learn-
ing), … “learner actions” (i.e., learning strategies)’ (R. Ellis, 2006: 529). He
takes the view that age transcends these categories and potentially impacts
on all four. He also touches on the different views that have been advanced
in relation to age - and their controversial nature. He concludes: ‘[t]he ques-

tion of the role played by age in L2 acquisition warrants an entirely separate
treatment’ (R. Ellis, 2006: 530).
Ellis’s uncharacteristic wariness in relation to the age factor and his stated
reasons for such wariness speak volumes about the complexity of this vari-
able, confirming the kinds of arguments he earlier expressed very eloquently.
The inference must be that researching the age question demands both a very
comprehensive and a very delicate (in the Hallidayan sense of ‘fine-grained’)
perspective. Our view is that it necessitates both qualitative and quantitative
methodologies, and that the quantitative approach used, which is what we
focus on here, needs to go well beyond the kinds of the general linear model
(a family of statistical models that assumes a normal distribution among
other features, e.g. t-tests, ANOVA or multiple regression models; see Cohen,
1968; Plonsky, 2013) that have been employed in this area in the past.
Quantitative Research on the Age Factor I:
Where We Are Now
In age-related research, as in many other areas of SLA, quantitative
research is currently perceived as more prestigious than qualitative research,
at least in so far as it dominates empirical research in many of the most
prestigious journals (Benson et al., 2009; Richards, 2009). This trend is
reflected in the steady increase of published studies using sophisticated sta-
tistical tests as well as in the multiplication of the range of tests used (see,
for example, Lazaraton, 2005; Plonsky, 2013, 2014; Plonsky & Gass, 2011).
Age-related research has followed this trend. From the 1990s, a trend
became apparent for researchers to move beyond a focus on the influence of
the age factor on L2 attainment as a stand-alone variable, and for them to
begin to explore its interaction with other variables. This period was charac-
terized by a marked increase in the use of statistical methods: inferential
statistics such as t-tests (e.g. Jia & Fuse, 2007; Johnson & Newport, 1989;
Mora, 2006) or (multivariate) analyses of (co)variance (e.g. Flege et al., 1999;
Larson-Hall, 2008; Llanes, 2012; Llanes & Muñoz, 2013; McDonald, 2006,
2008; Muñoz, 2006; Torras et al., 2006) or multiple regression analyses (e.g.
Muñoz, 2003, 2014) or a factor analytic approach (e.g. Csizér & Kormos,
Authenticated
2009; Moyer, 2004), as well as correlations (e.g. DeKeyser et al., 2010; García
Lecumberri & Gallardo, 2003; Kinsella & Singleton, 2014; Miralpeix, 2006).
Recently, we have been able to observe the emergence of the citing of effect
sizes and confidence intervals, which can be attributed to the requirements
of a number of applied linguistics journals (see Brown, 2011; Vacha-Haase &
Thompson, 2004) - for example, Language Learning, which has tried to
steer writers away from relying too much on significant p-values by asking
them to ‘always present effect sizes and their confidence intervals for
primary outcomes’ (N. Ellis, 2000: xii).
On the other hand, quantitative methods have also been critically evalu-
ated, and numerous limitations of empirical efforts in SLA have been docu-
mented (see Lazaraton, 2005; Norris & Ortega, 2000; Oswald & Plonsky,
2010; Plonsky, 2011, 2013, 2014; Plonsky & Gass, 2011). In what follows, we
address some of the main points that have featured in this critique of estab-
lished quantitative procedures in the context of SLA research and having
particular reference to age-related studies.
Generalizability
One of the main differences between qualitative research and quantita-
tive research is that, in the latter tradition, scholars usually define their scope
more broadly and seek to make generalizations about large numbers of cases.
(Note, however, that in dynamic systems theory and other process-oriented
research agendas, scholars advise against making universal generalizations
and instead focus on ‘particular generalizations’ (Gaddis, 2002: 62, quoted in
de Bot & Larsen-Freeman, 2012: 19) without implying that they are appli-
cable beyond our own research site and data.) For example, when comparing
differences between qualitative and quantitative research in contemporary
political science, Mahoney and Goertz (2006: 238) state that ‘in quantitative
research, where adequate explanation does not require getting the explana-
tion right for each case, analysts can omit minor variables to say something
more general about the broader population’. The generalizability issue has
long been a controversial one in debates about quantitative research methods
in SLA. In Boulton (2011), we read:
Quantitative research … may be more generalizable as it irons out some
individual differences; but that is also its disadvantage as it can result in
‘over-simplicity, [making] it a blunt and meaningless instrument’ (Leakey
2011, 251). […] The methodology [in quantitative research] is limited and
constraining. (Boulton, 2011: 5)
Flynn and Foley (2009: 30) comment critically that ‘[a] commonly noted
limitation to this general approach [in quantitative works] is that the narrow
focus risks missing important contextual information or other variables’. In

Authenticated
other words, recent SLA research has become increasingly aware that the
variation between individuals is crucial and not just ‘noise’ (N. Ellis &
Larsen-Freeman, 2006: 564) and that ‘learners are more than bunches of
variables’ (Dewaele, 2009: 637).
This also affects age factor research. As mentioned above, age interacts
with social-psychological, personal and affective variables that have been
found to be under the influence of situation. In both naturalistic and institu-
tional environments, age effects need to be considered in light of macrocultural
and microcultural phenomena that can have a bearing on interpersonal rela-
tions which influence, shape, increase or decrease the impact of variables that
interact with age, such as motivation. Furthermore, recent thinking on age
suggests that external factors also need to be addressed as environmental influ-
ences that interact with age effects and possibly mediate them. It would thus
be a gross error of omission to filter out or fail to address such influences.
Randomization
Related to generalizability in classroom-based research is the problem of
randomization. As Vanhove (2015: 135) points out, intervention studies and
controlled experiments in which participants are randomly assigned to the
treatment or control group are often considered ‘the gold standard for estab-
lishing the effectiveness of language learning methods’. However, random-

ization comes with a variety of problems in age-related classroom research.
Besides the problem that random assignment to experimental conditions has
often not been implemented in classroom research, randomization has been
recently questioned in quantitative research, since (1) it is ‘the process of de-
individualization, that is, the uniqueness of each person is ignored’ (Navidinia
& Eghtesadi, 2009: 59), and (2) it is frequently neglected or not dealt with
appropriately in statistical models. In discussing the inappropriateness of
ignoring the effects of assigning whole groups of participants to the experi-
mental conditions, Vanhove (2015) discusses the various traditional ways of
dealing with background variables in randomized controlled interventions.
One common way is to group participants according to variables that are
deemed important before randomization, e.g. by assigning half of the boys to
the treatment group and half to the control group (see Oehlert, 2010, Chapter
13, quoted in Vanhove, 2015). Despite the validity of this procedure, grouping
according to background variables is rather difficult in a classroom setting,
where the participant samples are defined at the onset of the data collection
(see discussion above). A more practical solution has been to first run so-called
balance tests (e.g. t-tests or ANOVAs, or ²-tests; see Vanhove, 2015, for a
discussion of balance tests) to ensure that the different groups are comparable
in all relevant respects save for the independent variable (e.g. AO), on the basis
of the belief that randomization is a mechanism for creating samples that are
balanced with regard to potential confound variables (Vanhove, 2015); and,
Authenticated

secondly, to equate subjects on basic pretest and prior ability measures (and
then run an analysis of covariance with the selected background variables as
the covariates), as well as to equate the treatment practices as much as pos-
sible in terms of task demands (see Chaudron, 2001: 67). However, many
authors today (e.g. Mutz & Pemantle, 2013) deem balance tests ‘superfluous’,
mainly because statistical tests already take account of fluke findings due to
randomization (see also Oehlert, 2010, Chapter 2, quoted in Vanhove, 2015),
and p-values already take chance findings due to randomization into consid-
eration, which make it unnecessary to use balance tests to establish whether
a sample is indeed balanced with respect to the background variables mea-
sured. Furthermore, covariates that are not actually related to the outcome
‘decrease statistical precision since they fit noise in the data at the cost of
degrees of freedom’ (Vanhove, 2015: 139), which is why researchers have to
limit themselves to a small number of background variables.
There are also practical problems that come with randomization in
instructed settings. In his review of nine decades of classroom-based research
in The Modern Language Journal, Chaudron (2001) laments the fact that
most school contexts do not allow for the random sampling of subjects, or
even random assignment into classes or groups; thus, ‘intact groups are the
norm’ (Chaudron, 2001: 66-67). Use of intact classes (so-called group- or
cluster-randomized interventions) - whether for convenience or to preserve
ecologi-cal validity - impedes random group assignment. Thus, if
randomization occurs, it often occurs not at the individual level but at a
higher level in classroom research, which has dramatic consequences for

the outcome: ‘ignoring the fact that randomization took place at the group
level drastically affects the insights gained from the study’ (Vanhove, 2015:
142).
General linear models such as ANOVA cannot take account of the various
unmeasured aspects of the upper level units (e.g. schools or classrooms) that
affect all of the lower level measurements (e.g. measurements within subjects
or students within classrooms) similarly for a given unit. Accordingly, a t-test
(or, equivalently, an ANOVA) may well yield a statistically significant result
when there is, in fact, no effect. This has to do with the fact that there are a
variety of possible upper-level variance-covariance structures relevant to the
relationships among the lower level units, e.g. the relationship between stu-
dents within a classroom. This leads us to our next topic.
The notion of context in language learning
The classroom is a notoriously complex context. It is difficult to docu-
ment and quantify classroom processes and classroom effects; however, it is
indispensable to include reference to such processes and effects if differences
in learner outcomes are to be adequately explained (Nunan, 2005: 232).
Under classroom effects we understand a complex interplay between effects
of individual characteristics including self-confidence, personality, emotion,
Authenticated
motivation, degrees of learners’ control over their learning, perceived oppor-

tunity to communicate and willingness to communicate, and classroom
environmental conditions such as topic, task, interlocutor, receptivity to the
teacher and pedagogical approach, classroom dynamics and group size (see,
for example, Borg, 2006; Cao, 2011; Dewaele, 2009; Kozaki & Ross, 2011;
Walls et al., 2002; Wen & Clément, 2003). Kumaravadivelu (2001) states:
… all pedagogy, like all politics, is local. To ignore local exigencies is to
ignore lived experiences. … [and that] … language pedagogy, to be rele-
vant, must be sensitive to a particular group of teachers teaching a par-
ticular group of learners pursuing a particular set of goals within a
particular institutional context embedded in a particular sociocultural
milieu. (Kumaravadivelu, 2001: 539)
According to Seltman (2009: 375), it thus seems likely that students
within a classroom will be more similar to each other than to students in
other classrooms due to whatever school level characteristics are measured
(so-called cohort effects). In MacIntyre and Mercer’s (2014) words, ‘contexts
in which language learning occurs are diverse, nuanced, and they matter’
(MacIntyre & Mercer, 2014: 165, our emphasis).
The question now, of course, is how to operationalize such an ecological
perspective on the age factor in foreign language classrooms, e.g. the inter-
relationship between variables interacting with starting age in class. For a
variety of reasons, the general linear model cannot capture the complexity
of contextual effects on individual learning. For instance, Chaudron (2010:
68) laments the ‘inadequate attention to the unit of analysis (whether stu-
dents, class groups, teachers, or schools) when the statistical inferences [in
classroom studies between 1916 and 2000] have typically been made on the
assumption that the individual subjects were the unit for error rates’. This is a
serious problem, since ‘ignoring even small degrees of interrelatedness
within clusters can invalidate the analysis’ (Vanhove, 2015: 142).
Considering the shortcomings of traditional quantitative methods out-
lined in the last three sections, the main task in quantitative age research is
now to find a method that takes enough variability in the data into account
in order to be able to maximize the generalizability of the findings in age-
related research.
Centrality of time in research on the age factor
The final and perhaps most serious problem of traditional quantitative
analysis currently practised in age-related research is the centrality of time
in research on the age factor. Ortega and Iberri-Shea (2005: 26) suggested
that many, if not all, fundamental issues concerning L2 learning that SLA
researchers investigate are in part issues relating to ‘time’, and that any
Authenticated
claims about ‘learning’ (or development, progress, improvement, change,
gains, and so on) can be most meaningfully interpreted only within a fully
longitudinal perspective. Usually language researchers will not only want to
assess whether the influence of the field effect generalizes beyond the par-
ticipants sampled to the wider population, while taking into account any
random variation observed, but also want to test if results generalize both to
the wider population of people and the wider population of linguistic materi-
als (see Cunnings & Finlayson, 2015). However, as Flynn and Foley (2009:
31) point out, longitudinal studies often have the characteristics of qualita-
tive work, whereas studies with a more quantitative approach often use
cross-sectional sampling. It is also important to add that SLA research has
not been exactly to the fore in employing sophisticated procedures to analyse
truly longitudinal data (Piniel & Csizér, 2014: 165). This is a serious limita-
tion, particularly for age-related research, where, like in no other SLA
domain, many questions are fundamentally questions of time and timing.
For example, what do we know about the pace and pattern of L2 develop-
ment throughout mandatory school time (in an instructional setting) or
throughout the lifetime of L2 learners (in a naturalistic setting)? What criti-
cal transition points in L2/FL development need to be taken into account
when planning educational policy for early versus late learners?
Given, then, the centrality of time in research on the age factor, more
attention to longitudinal research practices is desirable and also to findings
gleaned from longitudinal studies (see also Ortega & Iberri-Shea, 2005: 28).
However, longitudinal data in age research are often analyzed by recourse to
the same inferential statistics that are employed in cross-sectional research
(t-tests, multivariate analysis, etc.). While ANOVA methods can provide a
reasonable basis for a longitudinal analysis in cases where the study design
is very simple, they have many shortcomings that have limited their useful-
ness in applications (see Fitzmaurice et al., 2009; Maxwell & Tiberio, 2007).
For instance, in many longitudinal studies there is considerable variation
among individuals in both the number and timing of measurements. As men-
tioned above, ANOVA cannot take account of such unbalanced data. Given
this, Ortega and Iberri-Shea (2005: 41) caution that if ‘more large-size longi-
tudinal quantitative studies are conducted in SLA, it will be important to
train ourselves in the use of statistical analytical options that are available
specifically for use with longitudinal designs and data’.
Quantitative Research on the Age Factor
II: Quo Vadis?
These findings, along with other suggestions for reform, point to the
presence of weaknesses in quantitative research on the age factor. The good
news is that even though general linear models - such as ANOVA, t-tests
Authenticated
or multiple regression models - are still widely used in second language
research in general (see, for example, Cunnings, 2012; Cunnings & Finlayson,
2015; Plonsky, 2013, 2014), there is some evidence of an increase in statistical
sophistication in terms of the types of analyses performed in age-related
studies. For instance, the class of statistical models known as multilevel
modelling (MLM) - a subclass of linear mixed-effects regression modelling
(e.g. Baayen et al., 2008; Jaeger, 2008; Quené & van den Bergh, 2008) -
appears to be increasing in this body of research. To illustrate the advantages
of these models and the problematic nature of traditional analyses, let us
compare a traditional multivariate analysis of variance described in
Pfenninger (2014) with the multilevel data analysis in Pfenninger and
Singleton (2017), using the same dataset. The following summarizes the
main research question of these studies: what is the strength of the associa-
tion between L3 English performance with starting age, on the one hand,
and with type of instruction, on the other, in learners with a long learning
experience (more than 10 years)? A total of 200 Swiss participants (89 males
and 111 females; mean age 18;9) were recruited at the end of mandatory
school time from 12 different classes in five different schools. In other words,
the sampled students were nested in a hierarchical fashion within classes
within schools. They were divided into four groups of 50 participants each
according to AO and learning constellation in primary and secondary school.
Among other tasks, each participant filled in 20 gaps in a listening compre-
hension task, which were later rated as correct or incorrect.
In Pfenninger (2014) these data were analyzed using a general linear
model, i.e. two-tailed t-tests and multivariate analysis of variance
(MANOVA), which means that the data were initially aggregated, averaging
first over participants, i.e. the four groups, and secondly over the 20 items.
That is, all of the measurements for a given age group category were assumed
to have uncorrelated errors. The results of a two-tailed t-test for independent
means and ANOVA revealed that there were significant differences between
the listening skills of (a) the four groups (F = 46.39, df = 3, p < 0.001) and (b)
the 100 early starters versus the 100 late starters (t = −2.75, p = 0.006). With
respect to the impact of age, MANOVA indicated that listening comprehen-
sion reached statistical significance, with a small effect size ( 2 = 0.038), an
earlier start emerging as advantageous. There was also a significant interac-
tion between AO and type of instruction (F = 7.89, df = 1, p = 0.005,  2 =
0.024).
However, assuming that measurements for a given age group category

have uncorrelated errors is somewhat problematic, as it could be that per-
formance correlates between students within the same class (and school) in
a way that is not observed between different classes (and schools), and it
would be beneficial to take such variance and covariance into account sta-
tistically in order not to maximize age effects (see discussion above). While
correlated data are explicitly forbidden by the assumptions of standard
Authenticated
(between-subjects) (M)AN(C)OVA and regression models (see, for example,
Seltman, 2009: 357), mixed-effects models were developed to shed light on
precisely such situations (Goldstein, 1987, 1995; Raudenbush & Bryk, 2002;
Snijders & Bosker, 1999). Rather than the data being averaged over the 50
participants per group and the 20 items, multilevel analyses require no prior
aggregation and are run on unaveraged data. This takes into account: (1)
compositional effects, which are known to mediate the trajectories of age
differences in (growth of) proficiency; and (2) the fact that some partici-
pants may generally have higher scores than others in a particular task (and
some participants might do well on all the items in a given task), and that
some items may generally yield lower scores than others. Accordingly, in
Pfenninger and Singleton (2017), a multilevel analysis of the same dataset
was used, in which the independent variable of interest, ‘age of onset’, was
taken to be a fixed effect (meaning that it was assumed that the effect did
not vary randomly within the population of classes), while the participants
sampled from a larger population of L2 learners and the language stimuli
sampled from a much larger population of linguistic materials were the
random factors. Furthermore, there were also significant random school and
class effects for all dependent variables in this study. (Remember that the
hierarchical structure of the data on all skills tested consisted of two
levels: class (level 1), and school (level 2).) This made a significant difference
in regard to results yielded by the dataset in question. When we subjected it
to a multilevel analysis, which achieves adequate estimates of variances
and therefore correct standard errors, correct inferences and correct (likeli-
hood-based) p-values, there was no longer any sign of age effects for listen-
ing comprehension ( = −2.20, SE = 0.80, t = −2.75, p = 0.130). This illustrates
how drastically clustering effects of streamed classes can minimize age
effects.
Finally, note that the model above, which contains random intercepts,
allows mean values for each participant and each item to vary. However, in
theory, we also need to include random slopes, which take account of the
fact that different classes and/or different items may vary with regard to
how sensitive they are to the manipulation at hand. For instance, it could be
that age effects are restricted to certain items or certain tasks (or certain
classes), as stipulated by the idea that the age factor represents an individual
difference variable (see discussion above). Whatever the effect of AO is, is it
the same for all subjects, items, classes and schools? Furthermore, whereas
AO might vary between classes and schools, in a longitudinal research
design, the continuous predictor ‘time’ varies within them, as each student
and each class and each school are tested at multiple points in time. As such,
students and classes and schools may not only differ in overall average pro-
ficiency, but also in their sensitivity to the change in proficiency over time.
Random slopes are required to model this type of variance (see Cunnings &
Finlayson, 2015).
Authenticated
While we could not test for AO varying across classes in the study men-
tioned above due to the fact that early and late starters were not integrated
in the same classes, MLM enabled us to investigate if AO worked similarly
across settings (i.e. schools) and items in the task or whether it was influ-
enced by characteristics of the setting and/or the items - and, if yes, whether
there were school variables that could help us understand why those out-
comes are different. In our case, likelihood ratio tests showed that school-
specific, item-specific slopes for the fixed effect AO were not necessary for
any dependent measure in this specific case (which is why we contented
ourselves with random intercept models, see Pfenninger, forthcoming). This
supports R. Ellis’s (2006) idea of excluding age from his grouping of indi-
vidual differences, as the effect of age was not different for different subjects
or items (but cf. Pfenninger & Singleton, 2016, 2017). It also illustrates nicely
that it is only through MLM that we can actually get a reliable estimate of
classroom and school effects like that.
Another relatively recent study by Admiraal et al. (2006) also demon-

strated the use of MLM with AO as one of the fixed effects. They analyzed
the effects of the use of English as the language of instruction in the first four
years of secondary education in the Netherlands on the students’ language
proficiency in English and Dutch, and on achievement in subject matter
taught through English. The study involved 584 students participating in
bilingual education and 721 students following a regular programme, who
belong to one of four cohorts in one of five schools, three of which offered
bilingual education. The participants were tested on two different occasions.
Thus, the hierarchical structure for, as an example, receptive word knowl-
edge, included four levels: occasion (i.e. the data of the dependent variables
at Time 1 and Time 2), students, cohort and school. Multilevel analyses were
performed using a multilevel repeated measures design. The vocabulary test
scores were the dependent variables, school programme (bilingual education
or regular education) and time (in terms of the number of months attending
the school programme) were the independent variables, and student charac-
teristics were the covariates. The analyses concerning the covariates were
conducted separately for students’ gender, their entry ability level, and lan-
guage background information (home language, language contact, and moti-
vation to learn English), respectively. By contrast, the hierarchical structure
of the data on reading comprehension consisted only of three levels (student,
cohort and school), since the reading comprehension test was administered
only once, which meant there was no growth curve involved. Instruction
effects for oral proficiency and reading comprehension were found, with
bilingual education leading to better results, but there were no effects for
receptive word knowledge. It is important to mention that MLM is also ideal
in longitudinal designs that use shorter inter-measurement intervals than the

studies mentioned in this chapter, i.e. studies in which change is expected to
be ongoing or repeated rather than permanent or unidirectional.
Authenticated
Other researchers have used mixed-effects data analysis to focus on bio-
logical age (rather than starting age) as a fixed effect. For instance, Haenni
Hoti and Heinzmann (2012) used a multilevel model to compare the French
listening and reading skills of two groups of Swiss learners (with previous
English instruction, n = 542, and without previous English instruction, n =
351) in Grades 5 and 6, when students were approximately 11 and 12
years old. They controlled for a large number of other variables which might
influence the scores on the achievement tests in French: biological age,
gender, cantonal affiliation, nationality, length of residency in Switzerland,
number of family languages, L1 spoken at home, literacy of the household,
type of study plan (regular or special curriculum), metacognitive, cognitive
and social learning strategies, motivation, self-concept as a learner of French,
feelings of being overburdened and fear of making mistakes, attitudes
towards French speakers and countries, parental assistance with learning
French, and German reading skills. The study showed that the biological age
of the learners played a role. With respect to listening skills, older learners’
scores were significantly lower in the French listening test than the scores
of learners who were younger at both measurement times. This study also
showed that the educational background of the household in which the
children live is important. Children of families with ample literacy resources
as measured by the number of books at home (more than 100 books) dem-
onstrated significantly higher listening skills after one year of French
instruction than children of families with limited educational resources (less
than 51 books) (Haenni Hoti & Heinzmann, 2012: 198). Thus, in Haenni
Hoti and Heinzmann’s dataset, the families and classes were not nested
hierarchically (as in Pfenninger & Singleton, 2016) but are instead crossed
at the same level of sampling, as the children came from different families.
MLM can model such crossed random effects as well (Raudenbush, 1993),
which is particularly important in naturalistic settings (as described in van
Heuven, this volume).
It is also important to note that the fixed effects component of a multi-
level model can not only feature age as a categorical factor (e.g. early AO
versus late AO), a continuous predictor (e.g. chronological age or proficiency,
if measured on a continuous scale), or a mixture of the two, but age can also
function as a control variable if it is not of primary interest and we are
mainly interested in assessing something else. One of the benefits of multi-
level models is that properties of both the participants (such as chronological
age or AO) and/or the items tested can be included in the analysis. Under
traditional methods, the inclusion of such control predictors would involve
various additional analyses (see Cunnings, 2012: 375) - for example,
ANCOVA with age as a covariate - but these linear models would not take
age effects on certain items or subjects into account. Finally, MLA can handle
unbalanced data, where not everyone is necessarily measured at the exact
same times, whereas the ANOVA design requires that all assessments at the
Authenticated
second data collection time be obtained at the same time for each individual
(not some classes measured xx months after Time 1, and others measured
after yy months).
In sum, MLM thus turns out to be a convenient method for obtaining
ecologically valid tests of age effects. It reduces arbitrariness because it more
closely reflects the power of situations as they are encountered in the stu-
dents’ daily lives: if the classes in our two AO groups differ in any important
ways, then those between-class differences are going to contaminate our
standard errors and thus our inferences (p-values). The bottom line is that
we need to collect and correctly analyze data at multiple levels to try to sepa-
rate out these kinds of effects - otherwise any differences found on the
dependent measures may be due to uncontrolled differences among the par-
ticipating groups rather than the main independent variable, e.g. AO or bio-
logical age. MLM also capitalizes on the strength of each of the traditional
methodological approaches to motivation, in its ability to incorporate indi-
vidual difference effects, experimental group effects, and the study of behav-
ioural variability and change through repeated measurement across situations
and time (see Brown & Ryan, 2007).
Limitations of Quantitative Research
Despite the obvious advantages of recent methodological improve-

ments in quantitative approaches to the age factor we have to bear in mind
that by their nature all models are flawed (because they are idealized sim-
plifications of Nature), but that some are clearly more useful than others
(Seltman, 2009: 372). Other problems of even the most sophisticated
models involve the interconnectedness of age with other variables (see, for
example, de Bot, 2008) or the causal direction of relationships (see, for
example, Dewaele, 2009; R. Ellis, 2006), both of which we will discuss in
detail in Pfenninger and Singleton (2017). What is more, even multilevel
models do not necessarily produce entirely accurate p-values (see Vanhove,
2015 for a discussion of this). Also, even though multilevel models may
show that a student’s performance in a task such as the English listening
task described above is dependent on which class he or she is in, what
exactly leads to these class differences (group dynamics, teacher personal-
ity, quality of instruction, school environment, etc.) can often not be
clarified with quantitative methods due to limitations of the research
design. In this kind of context qualitative and quantitative research can
complement each other. For example, when statistical results concerning
the effects of causes are reported, the qualitative analysis is helpful for
understanding e.g. the direction of causation in a given specific case.
This enlightening complementarity is one reason why MLM research
recom-mends itself.
Authenticated

Conclusions and Directions for Future Research
This chapter constitutes a preliminary step towards more fully under-
standing the use of multilevel models in the age factor research area. In the
examples we have discussed in this chapter, we have attempted to show that
multilevel models can provide a number of benefits to the age factor
researcher, particularly in a classroom setting, where cluster-level randomiza-
tion is the norm rather than the exception. To conclude, let us briefly sum up
the six advantages of these models that we consider most important for our
discussion here:
(1) multilevel models are ideal for a potentially generalizable study of age
effects, since they permit multiple random factors (i.e. they can model
different types of random effects structures that arise during random
population sampling) and thus take account of both participant and item
variability, allowing for ‘the simultaneous generalization of the results
on new items and new participants’ (Gagné & Spalding, 2009: 25);
(2) they can be used for assessing the impact of context-varying factors on age;
(3) they can cope with measurements within and between sampled stu-
dents that are nested in a hierarchical fashion within classes within
cohorts within schools, as they flexibly give correct estimates of treat-
ment and other fixed effects (e.g. age effects) in the presence of the cor-
related errors that arise from a data hierarchy (Seltman, 2009: 378);
(4) they are robust against missing data and imbalanced designs, obviating
the need to replace missing values using debatable imputation tech-
niques (Quené & van den Bergh, 2004, 2008), which is advantageous in
longitudinal studies as well as experimental studies, in which L2 learn-

ers may exhibit high numbers of missing responses (Cunnings, 2012);
(5) they can model time effects (Goldstein, 1987, 1995), e.g. change and
growth of EFL of different age groups over time and the success of dif-
ferent AO groups in longitudinal studies;
(6) they can handle interval-scale measures (e.g. age or proficiency, if mea-
sured on a continuous scale) through linear mixed-effects models (see
Baayen et al., 2008) as well as categorical measures (e.g. early AO versus
late AO) using mixed logit models (see Cunnings, 2012; Jaeger, 2008).
These models thus encourage us to shift from a myopic focus on a single
factor such as the age factor to examining multiple relationships among a
number of variables, including contextual variables; or in Brown’s (2011)
words: ‘you are more likely to consider all parts of the picture at the same
time, and might therefore see relationships between and among variables (all
at once) that you might otherwise have missed or failed to understand’
(Brown, 2011: 191-192).
Authenticated
We do not deny that the general linear model has several obvious attrac-
tions. However, the fact is that we often have hunches and theoretical
grounds for believing there is more to a particular picture than these models
reveal. For instance, more often than not, classroom and teacher effects have
been neglected in quantitative research for practical reasons. Thus, in quan-

titative analysis as currently practised, there are problems not only for the
age researcher but for anyone conducting classroom research on language
learning. Looking forward, research on the age factor will best be served by
a broadening and an enrichment of its methodological practices.
Acknowledgements
The writing of this article was supported by a Forschungskredit of the
University of Zurich (Grant FK-15-078), to Simone E. Pfenninger. This
grant is hereby gratefully acknowledged. Also, we are grateful to Anna
Mystkowska-Wiertelak and the anonymous reviewer for their most helpful
comments and suggestions. Any remaining errors are our own.
References
Admiraal, W., Westhoff, G. and de Bot, K. (2006) Evaluation of bilingual secondary edu-
cation in the Netherlands: Students’ language proficiency in English. Educational
Research and Evaluation 12 (1), 75-93.
Baayen H., Davidson D. and Bates, D. (2008) Mixed-effects modeling with crossed
random effects for subjects and items. Journal of Memory and Language 59, 390-
412. Benson, P., Chik, A., Gao, X., Huang, J. and Wang, W. (2009) Qualitative research in
lan-
guage teaching and learning journals, 1997-2006. Modern Language Journal 93, 79-
90. Borg, S. (2006) The distinctive characteristics of foreign language teachers.
Language Teaching Research 10, 3-32.
Boulton, A. (2011) Blending research methods: Qualitative and quantitative approaches
to researching computer corpora for language learning. Proceedings of KAMALL
2011: New Directions for Blended Learning in EFL (pp. 1-9). Daejeon, South Korea: Pai
Chai University.
Brown, J.D. (2011) Quantitative research in second language studies. In E. Hinkel (ed.)
Handbook of Research in Second Language Teaching and Learning (Vol. 2.) (pp.
190-206). New York: Routledge.
Brown, K.W. and Ryan, R.M. (2007) Multilevel modeling of motivation: A self determina-
tion theory analysis of basic psychological needs. Oxford Handbook of Methods
in Positive Psychology (pp. 530-541). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Cao, Y. (2011) Investigating situational willingness to communicate within second lan-
guage classrooms from an ecological perspective. System 39, 468-479. Chaudron, C.
(2001) Progress in language classroom research: Evidence from The Modern Language
Journal, 1916-2000. Modern Language Journal 85, 57-76.
Cohen, J. (1968) Multiple regression as a general data-analytic system. Psychological Bulletin
70, 426-443.
Csizér, K. and Kormos, J. (2009) An investigation into the relationship of L2 motivation
and cross-cultural contact among elementary school students. In M. Nikolov (ed.)
Language Learning Research: Young Learners (pp. 62-75). Bristol: Multilingual
Matters.
Authenticated
Cunnings, I. (2012) An overview of mixed-effects statistical models for second language
researchers. Second Language Research 28, 369-382.
Cunnings, I. and Finlayson, I. (2015) Mixed effects modeling and longitudinal data analy-
sis. In L. Plonsky (ed.) Advancing Quantitative Methods in Second Language
Research (pp. 159-181). New York and London: Routledge.

de Bot, K. (2008) Second language development as a dynamic process. Modern Language
Journal 92 (2), 166-178.
de Bot, K. and Larsen-Freeman, D. (2012) Researching SLD from a DST perspective. In
M.H. Verspoor, K. de Bot and W. Lowie (eds) A Dynamic Approach to Second
Language Development. Methods and Techniques (pp. 5-24). Amsterdam and
Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins.
DeKeyser, R. (2012) Interactions between individual differences, treatments, and struc-
tures in SLA. Language Learning 62 (Suppl. 2), 189-200.
DeKeyser, R.M., Alfi-Shabtay, I. and Ravid, D. (2010) Cross-linguistic evidence for the
nature of age effects in second language acquisition. Applied Psycholinguistics 31,
413-438.
Dewaele, J.-M. (2009) Individual differences in second language acquisition. In W.C.
Ritchie and T.K. Bhatia (eds) The New Handbook of Second Language Acquisition
(pp. 623-646). Bingley: Emerald.
Ellis, N.C. (2000) Editorial statement. Language Learning 50, xi-xiii.
Ellis, N.C. and Larsen-Freeman, D. (eds) (2006) Language emergence: Implications for
applied linguistics. Applied Linguistics 27 (4), 558-589.
Ellis, R. (2006) Individual differences in second language learning. In A. Davies and
C. Elder (eds) The Handbook of Applied Linguistics (pp. 525-551). Oxford: Blackwell.
Fitzmaurice, G., Davidian, M., Verbeke, G. and Molenberghs, G. (eds) (2009) Longitudinal
Data Analysis. Boca Raton, FL: Chapman & Hall/CRC Press.
Flege J.E. (2009) Give input a chance! In T. Piske and M. Young-Scholten (eds) Input
Matters (pp. 175-190). Bristol: Multilingual Matters.
Flege, J.E., Yeni-Komshian, G.H. and Liu, S. (1999) Age constraints on second language
acquisition. Journal of Memory and Language 41, 78-104.
Flynn, S. and Foley, C. (2009) Research methodology in second language acquisition from
a linguistic perspective. In W.C. Ritchie and Tej K. Bhatia (eds) The New Handbook
of Second Language Acquisition (pp. 29-43). Bingley: Emerald.
Gagné, C.L. and Spalding, T.L. (2009) Constituent integration during the processing of
compound words: Does it involve the use of relational structures? Journal of Memory
and Language 60, 20-35.
García Lecumberri, M. and Gallardo, F. (2003) English FL sounds in school learners of
different ages. In M.P. García Mayo and M.L. García Lecumberri (eds) Age and the
Acquisition of English as a Foreign Language: Theoretical Issues and Field Work.
Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
Goldstein, H. (1987) Multilevel Models in Educational and Social Research. London:
Griffin. Goldstein, H. (1995) Multilevel Statistical Models. London: Arnold.
Haenni Hoti, A. and Heinzmann, S. (2012) Foreign language reforms in Swiss primary
schools - potentials and limitations. In K. Braunmüller and Ch. Gabriel (eds)
Multilingual Individuals and Multilingual Societies (Hamburg Studies in
Multilingualism No. 13) (pp. 189-205). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Jaeger, F. (2008) Categorical data analysis: Away from ANOVAs (transformation or not)
and towards logit mixed models. Journal of Memory and Language 59, 434-446. Jia,
G. and Aaronson, D. (2003) A longitudinal study of Chinese children and adolescents
learning English in the United States. Applied Psycholinguistics 24 (1), 131-161. Jia,
G. and Fuse, A. (2007) Acquisition of English grammatical morphology by native
Mandarin speaking children and adolescents: Age-related differences. Journal of
Speech, Language, and Hearing Research 50, 1280-1299.
Authenticated

Johnson, J.S. and Newport, E.L. (1989) Critical period effects in second language learning:
The influence of maturational state on the acquisition of English as a second lan-
guage. Cognitive Psychology 21, 60-99.
Kinsella, C. and Singleton, D. (2014) Much more than age. Applied Linguistics 35 (4),
441-462.
Kozaki, Y. and Ross, S.J. (2011) Contextual dynamics in foreign language learning moti-
vation. Language Learning 61 (4), 1328-1354.
Kumaravadivelu, B. (2001) Toward a postmethod pedagogy. TESOL Quarterly 35 (4),
537-560.
Larson-Hall, J. (2008) Weighing the benefits of studying a foreign language at a younger
starting age in a minimal input situation. Second Language Research 24, 35-63.
Lazaraton, A. (2005) Quantitative research methods. In E. Hinkel (ed.) Handbook of
Research in Second Language Teaching and Learning (pp. 209-224). Mahwah, NJ:
Lawrence Erlbaum.
Leakey, J. (2011) Evaluating Computer-Assisted Language Learning. Bern: Peter Lang.
Llanes, À. (2012) The impact of study abroad and age on L2 accuracy development. In
C. Muñoz (ed.) Intensive Exposure Experiences in Second Language Learning (pp.
193-212). Bristol: Multilingual Matters.
Llanes, A. and Muñoz, C. (2013) Age effects in a study abroad context: Children and
adults studying abroad and at home. Language Learning 63 (1), 63-90. MacIntyre, P.
and Mercer, S. (2014) Introducing positive psychology to SLA. Studies in Second
Language Learning and Teaching (SSLLT) 4 (2), 153-172.
Mahoney, J. and Goertz, G. (2006) A tale of two cultures: Contrasting quantitative and
qualitative research. Political Analysis 14, 227-249.

Maxwell, S.E. and Tiberio, S. (2007) Multilevel models of change: Fundamental con-
cepts and relationships to mixed models and latent growth-curve models. In A. Ong
and M.H.M. van Dulmen (eds) Oxford Handbook of Methods in Positive Psychology
(pp. 439-452). New York: Oxford University Press.
McDonald, J.L. (2006) Alternatives to the critical period hypothesis: Processing-based
explanations for poor grammaticality judgment performance by late second language
learners. Journal of Memory and Language 55, 381-401.
McDonald, J.L. (2008) Grammaticality judgments in children: The role of age, working
memory and phonological ability. Journal of Child Language 35, 247-268. Miralpeix,
I. (2006) Age and vocabulary acquisition in English as a Foreign Language (EFL). In
C. Muñoz (ed.) Age and the Rate of Foreign Language Learning (pp. 89-106).
Montrul, S. (2008) Incomplete Acquisition in Bilingualism. Re-examining the Age Factor.
Amsterdam and Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins.
Mora, J.C. (2006) Age effects on oral fluency development. In C. Muñoz (ed.) Age and the
Rate of Foreign Language Learning (pp. 65-88). Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
Moyer, A. (2004) Age, Accent and Experience in Second Language Acquisition. An
Integrated Approach to Critical Period Inquiry. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
Moyer, A. (2013) Foreign Accent: The Phenomenon of Non-native Speech. Cambridge:
Muñoz, C. (2003) Variation in oral skills development and age of onset. In M.P. García
Mayo and M.L. García Lecumberri (eds) Age and the Acquisition of English as a
Foreign Language: Theoretical Issues and Field Work (pp. 161-181). Clevedon:
Multilingual Matters.
Muñoz, C. (2006) Accuracy orders, rate of learning and age in morphological acquisition.
In C. Muñoz (ed.) Age and the Rate of Foreign Language Learning (pp. 107-126).
Muñoz, C. (2014) Contrasting effects of starting age and input on the oral performance
of foreign language learners. Applied Linguistics 35 (4), 1-21.
Authenticated
Mutz, D. and Pemantle, R. (2013) The perils of randomization checks in the analysis of
experiments. Unpublished manuscript. See http://www.math.upenn.edu/~pemantle
/papers/Preprints/perils.pdf (accessed 31 August 2014).
Navidinia, H. and Eghtesadi, A.R. (2009) SLA research in postmethod era: Neglects, mis-
understandings and alternatives. Educational Research and Review 4 (2), 57-62.
Norris, J.M. and Ortega, L. (2000) Effectiveness of L2 instruction: A research synthesis
and quantitative meta-analysis. Language Learning 50, 417-528.
Nunan, D. (2005) Classroom research. In E. Hinkel (ed.) Handbook of Research in
Second Language Teaching and Learning (pp. 225-240). London: Routledge.
Oehlert, G.W. (2010) A First Course in the Design and Analysis of Experiments. See
http:// users.stat.umn.edu/~gary/Book.html (accessed 23 January 2016).
Ortega, L. and Iberri-Shea, G. (2005) Longitudinal research in SLA: Recent trends and
future directions. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics 25, 26-45.
Oswald, F.L. and Plonsky, L. (2010) Meta-analysis in second language research: Choices
and challenges. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics 30, 85-110.
Paradis, J. (2011) Individual differences in child English second language acquisition.
Linguistic Approaches to Bilingualism 1 (3), 213-237.

Pfenninger, S.E. (2014) The misunderstood variable: Age effects as a function of type of
instruction. Studies in Second Language Learning and Teaching, Special Issue on
Age and More (D. Singleton, ed.), 4 (3), 529-556.
Pfenninger, S.E. (2016) All good things come in threes: Early English learning, CLIL and
motivation in Switzerland. Cahiers de l’ILSL, Special Issue on Perspectives on
English in Switzerland (Patricia Ronan, ed.), 48, 119-147.
Pfenninger, S.E. (in prep.) Not so individual after all: An ecological approach to age as an
individual difference variable. Studies in Second Language Learning and Teaching,
Special Issue on Individual Differences in SLA (K. de Bot and Sz. Bátyi, eds). Pfenninger,
S.E. and Singleton, D. (2016) Affect trumps age: A person-in-context relational view of
age and motivation in SLA. Second Language Research (prepublished 15 January).
doi:10.1177/0267658315624476.
Pfenninger, S.E. and Singleton, D. (2017) Beyond Age Effects in Instructional L2
Learning: Revisiting the Age Factor. Bristol: Multilingual Matters.
Piniel, K. and Csizér, K. (2014) Changes in motivation, anxiety and self-efficacy during the
course of an academic writing seminar. In Z. Dörnyei, P.D. MacIntyre and A. Henry
(eds) Motivational Dynamics in Language Learning. Bristol: Multilingual Matters.
Plonsky, L. (2011) The effectiveness of second language strategy instruction: A meta
analysis. Language Learning 61, 993-1038.
Plonsky, L. (2013) Study quality in SLA: An assessment of designs, analyses, and report-
ing practices in quantitative L2 research. Studies in Second Language Acquisition
35, 655-687.
Plonsky, L. (2014) Study quality in quantitative L2 research (1990-2010): A methodologi-
cal synthesis and call for reform. Modern Language Journal 85, 450-470. Plonsky, L.
and Gass, S. (2011) Quantitative research methods, study quality, and outcomes: The
case of interaction research. Language Learning 61, 325-366. Quené H. and van den
Bergh, H. (2004) On multi-level modelling of data from repeated measures designs: A
tutorial. Speech Communication 43, 103-121.
Quené H. and van den Bergh, H. (2008) Examples of mixed-effects modelling with
crossed random effects and with binomial data. Journal of Memory and Language
59, 413-425.
Raudenbush, S. (1993) A crossed random effects model for unbalanced data with applica-
tions in cross-sectional and longitudinal research. Journal of Educational Statistics
18, 321-349.
Raudenbush, S. and Bryk, A. (2002) Hierarchical Linear Models: Applications and
Data Analysis Methods (2nd edn). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Authenticated
Richards, K. (2009) Trends in qualitative research in language teaching since 2000.
Language Teaching 42 (2), 147-180.
Seltman H.J. (2009) Mixed models. A flexible approach to correlated data. In Experimental
Design and Analysis, Chapter 15. See http://www.stat.cmu.edu/~hseltman/309/
Book/Book.pdf
Singleton, D. and Pfenninger, S.E. (2015) Insights from a mixed methods approach with
respect to age and long-term instructed language learning. In J. Navracsics and Sz.
Bátyi (eds) First and Second Language: Interdisciplinary Approaches (pp. 11-21).
Studies in Psycholinguistics No. 6. Budapest: Tinta Könyvkiadó.
Snijders, T. and Bosker, R. (1999) Multilevel Analysis. London: Sage.

Torras, M.R., Navés, T., Celaya, M.L. and Pérez-Vidal, C. (2006) Age and IL development
in writing. In C. Muñoz (ed.) Age and the Rate of Foreign Language Learning (pp.
156- 182). Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
Vacha-Haase, T. and Thompson, B. (2004) How to estimate and interpret various effect
sizes. Journal of Counseling Psychology 51, 473-481.
Vanhove, J. (2015) Analyzing randomized controlled interventions: Three notes for
applied linguists. Studies in Second Language Learning and Teaching 5 (1), 135-152.
Walls, R.T., Nardi, A.H., von Minden, A.M. and Hoffman, N. (2002) The characteristic
of effective and ineffective teachers. Teacher Education Quarterly 29, 37-48. Wen,
W.P. and Clément, R. (2003) A Chinese conceptualisation of willingness to com-
municate in ESL. Language, Culture and Curriculum 16 (1), 18-38.
Zafar, S. and Meenakshi, F. (2012) Individual learner differences and second language
acquisition: A review. Journal of Language Teaching and Research 3 (4), 639-646.
Bringing the ‘folk’ into applied linguistics
An introduction
Antje Wilton and Martin Stegu
University of Siegen / Vienna University of Economics and Business
As applied linguistics is mainly concerned with solving the language-related problems of
laypeople, the examination of folk views constitutes an important research field and its
relevance is illustrated in this issue of the AILA review. In this introductory article, we ad-
dress some of the more general aspects that need to be considered in the scientific
investi-gation of folk views of language and communication. Among those aspects are the
nature and significance of folk knowledge and folk attitudes for applied linguistics, the
social
construction of the roles of expert, scientist and layperson, and the connection between
folk linguistic research and other related approaches. As a general introduction into the
topic, this contribution prepares the ground for the other articles collected in this issue.
1. Why folk linguistics?
It is not an entirely new idea to consider the beliefs, views, attitudes and theories of the everyday
language user as an object in scientific investigation. In the past, researchers from various
disciplines and fields within linguistics have taken an interest in those concepts (Hoenigswald
1966, Brekle 1985, Antos 1996), but their insights were not explicitly linked in a coherent
framework of research with a common understanding of the research interests, objects and
applications. Mainstream lin-guistics continued to keep to the traditional — and ofen still
prevalent
— view of anything a non-linguist has to say about language as uninteresting, unqualified,
uninformed or even dangerous. Even if this might be true in some cases, in many others the
views
of non-linguists can be a source of valuable and important information.
Applied linguistics in particular, with its clear focus on the language-related problems of the
non-linguist, needs to take notice of investigations and findings of folk linguistic discourses. Te
growing importance and relevance of language-related problems and topics among non-linguists,
such as the many manifestations of multilingualism, the spread of languages as linguae francae,
communication in and with the new media, to name only a few, justify the initiation of a
Research
Network (ReN) on folk linguistics within AILA, the International Association of Applied
Linguistics,
and to present the network in this issue. Te authors are all members of the Research Network,
working on a variety of topics that share an interest in the nature and value of lay knowl-edge,
beliefs and theories for the development of theoretical frameworks and practical solutions for
everyday language problems. Terefore, this issue builds on earlier studies on folk linguistics and
broadens the view of what can be regarded as a folk linguistic approach to language by
presenting
and discussing theoretical as well as methodological and practical implications for the study of
non-
linguists’ views on language.
AILA Review 24 (2011), 1-14. doi 10.1075/aila.24.01wil
issn 1461-0213 / e-issn 1570-5595 © John Benjamins Publishing Company
2 Antje Wilton and Martin Stegu
Investigating folk linguistics is particularly salient for anyone calling himself or herself an ‘ap-
plied linguist’. Applied Linguistics (AL) is defined as an:
interdisciplinary field of research and practice dealing with practical problems of language and
communication that can be identified, analysed or solved by applying available theories, methods
and results of Linguistics or by developing new theoretical and methodological frameworks in

Lin-
guistics to work on these problems. Applied Linguistics differs from Linguistics in general
mainly
with respect to its explicit orientation towards practical, everyday problems related to language
and
communication.” (www.aila.info/about.html, 12.6.2011)
With this explicit orientation towards language in everyday life and in particular the problems
and
concerns of the language users, anyone working in AL is forced to consider beliefs, views and
opin-
ions of the language user as a non-linguist and to take those views seriously. From a scientific
point
of view, taking them seriously of course cannot mean taking their truth value for granted or
propa-
gating the lay language user as the true and only expert on language. Tis would make linguistics
obsolete. Rather, the aim is to consider those views as data with relevant information for the
study
of language and language use and the development of solutions for problems that the language
user encounters in an increasingly complex communicative environment. Te analysis of non-
linguists’ views, therefore, is necessarily part of an applied linguistic approach to language.
2. Folk knowledge: Nature, relevance, basic concepts
Linguistics is not the only discipline within which folk or lay views are relevant. Tere is an
exten-
sive literature dealing with folk medicine, folk botany, folk physics, folk epistemology and the
like,
and there is current popular interest in non-expert views, ofen labeled ‘myths’, compiled in
books
intending to dispel those myths.
Traditionally folk beliefs have been viewed as being in strict opposition to scientific approach-
es, but this rather simplifying and rarely considered view of a clear-cut and a priori demarcation
line between ‘folk views’ and ‘scientific theory’ has become a lay view itself. Te constructivist
turn
taught us that even scientific research findings and theories are at least partially results of
discursive constructions (cf. Knorr-Cetina 1981), and this is also valid for the differentiation
between ‘folk’ and ‘scientific’.
Tere is a very special additional affinity between AL and the differentiation just mentioned:
AL, and especially discourse and conversation analytic studies, can (and should) analyze the
specific discourse strategies by which the difference between ‘folk’ and ‘scientific’ is
constructed in
the phi-losophy of science, in individual disciplines such as linguistics as well as in non-

scientific
discourse. Te general public and the discourses in the public sphere also play a role in the
interactional and discursive construction of the distinction between ‘scientific’ and ‘lay’, or — to
take the matter fur-ther — the construction of the scientist, the expert and the non-expert or
layperson as social roles rather than as externally predefined positions. Te insight that the
process we are dealing with is social construction does not mean that the distinction between
science and folk is random and therefore irrelevant or unimportant. On the contrary, it reminds
us that the application of these categories needs to be done with more care and less apodicticity.
Te constructionist aspect of the folk view vs. science-discussion can also be illustrated by the
fact that it is by no way immediately evident whether certain views are to be classed as ‘folk’ or
as
‘scientific’ merely by looking at their form or structure independently of the content expressed
and
equally, whether laypeople only and automatically hold folk views and scientists only
scientifically
grounded views. Instead, it is more likely that the subject matter as well as the social
construction of
Bringing the ‘folk’ into applied linguistics 3
roles determine whether we are dealing with the folk or the scientific category or — very ofen —
a
hybrid form of something in between.
In general discussions about folk views, the label lay theories is very popular, especially since
Furnham’s investigation of lay theories in the social sciences (Furnham 1988). In some cases,
folk
linguistics might indeed be considered to be concerned with lay theories about language (and
com-
munication). However, a theory in its strict sense is a fairly complex structure, even when it is
‘lay’,
so that it does not seem suitable to use such a specific concept as an umbrella term for the varied
phenomena that are the objects of an investigation into folk linguistics. Terefore, we prefer to use
the generic expression ‘views’ which we mean to cover all related and similar concepts such as
at-
titudes, beliefs, opinions, subjective theories, everyday concepts and the like.
One of the most important scientific disciplines which have investigated folk views is social
psychology in an attempt to explain peoples’ behavior with respect to aspects relevant in their
daily
lives. Terefore, much inspiration for the application of the cognitive concepts in linguistics can
be
gained from social psychological research.
Within social psychology, a number of concepts have been identified which relate to the
human ability to recognize something — an object, an event, a relationship — to categorize it, to
evaluate it and to explain it. Tese concepts — such as beliefs, attitudes, opinions, subjective
theories etc. — are ofen defined in different ways or their definitions overlap, so that their
boundaries and sometimes their very nature become unclear, fuzzy or even incompatible. It is not
within the scope of this intro-duction to go into every detail of such definitions, but in order to
understand what it is that applied linguists are interested in when they investigate folk views it is
useful to give a brief overview of the most important of those concepts.
According to Goodenough (1990: 597), a belief is a combination of a proposition and a com-
mitment towards this proposition. Te proposition is based on a person’s experience of the world
and on the person’s way of perceiving and structuring the world around him or her. It is
important
to understand that categorizations of objects and events, but also of patterns and relationships,
are
necessary to make decisions and to act in a physical and social environment. A belief in this
basic
sense does not necessarily involve a particular evaluation of the proposition other than that it is
held
to be true or false by the person committing him/herself to it.
If the evaluation becomes a vital part of the construct, we are inclined to classify it as an at-
titude. An attitude is a person’s favorable or unfavorable evaluation of an object (or the like),
thus
forming a function of that person’s “beliefs about the object (…) and the evaluative aspect of
those
beliefs” (Fishbein 1965: 117). An idea central to attitude and attitude-change theory is the role of
attitudes in the shaping of actions. A positive or negative view of an object clearly influences the
person’s actions with regard to that object. Consequently, research in areas such as sociology and
social psychology, but also in applied linguistics, aims not only at discovering such attitudes but
also
investigating their influence on people’s behavior and the possibilities of changing attitudes in
order
to change behavior.
An opinion also has an evaluative aspect in that the person judges an event or an object: “Indi-
vidual opinions are judgmental outcomes of transactions between individuals and the
environments
in which they live.” (Crespi 1997: 11). As such, individual opinions are not very different from
atti-
tudes. However, it is felt that an attitude is not exactly the same as an opinion, and various
research-ers have refined the definition of opinion to clarify the differences between opinion and
attitude. According to Rockeach (1968), for instance, an opinion is the verbalization of attitudes
(referred to in Crespi 1997: 17). Tis implies that an attitude is an implicitly held stance towards
an object, which, when it is voiced, becomes an opinion. Implicitness is therefore characteristic

of
attitudes, and this would mean that access to such attitudes can be gained via the analysis of
opinions. Voicing
a belief or an attitude — uttering an opinion — brings another dimension into the

characterization
of such concepts: as long as beliefs and attitudes are held implicitly, they are certainly shaped by
the individual’s interaction with the physical and social world, but they are not shared with other
indi-viduals in that environment. Expressing opinions enables the individual to share them with
others. Sharing opinions and shaping them through various processes of social interaction can
result in what is called ‘public opinion’ (Crespi 1997) or at least ‘widespread beliefs’ (Fraser
&
Gaskell 1990). Te process of sharing might also result in the encoding of widely shared beliefs in
formalized ele-ments of language such as sayings, proverbs, received wisdoms, myths etc.
Lastly, a subjective theory is a reflexive cognitive system of an individual acting in everyday
life (“reflexive Kognitionssysteme des Alltagsmenschen”, Dann 1982: 1). From a traditional
dichoto-
mous viewpoint, subjective theories stand in opposition to objective theories, which are the
scien-
tific theories held and/or developed by (a community of) researchers. Albeit regarded as
opposites,
subjective and objective theories are thought to be structured in a similar way in that subjective
theories have an identifiable argumentative structure (ibid.: 5), which links different concepts
and
statements through argumentative relations (e.g., if-then). A subjective theory, therefore, is more
complex than a belief or an attitude, but, like attitudes, subjective theories are mostly implicitly
held
and not verbalized. Teir function is to accompany and in particular to guide actions in everyday
life, giving a sense of security to the individual (“Verhaltenssicherheit”, ibid.: 8). It is stated that
ob-
jective theories do not have this guiding function unless they are perceived as subjective theories.
More important, however, is the fact that cognitive psychology regards subjective theories as
mental structures which are relatively stable and long-lasting, not entirely immune, but fairly
resistant, to changes.
Subjective theories, attitudes, and other cognitive concepts are for the most part not entire-ly
‘subjective’ in the sense that they are totally idiosyncratic or independent of specific social and
political (discourse) contexts. On the contrary, they are shaped by the individual’s orientation in
such contexts, thus also reflecting overindividual ideological positions. In fact, some authors
prefer
the term language ideology to refer to such shared, but individually held concepts (cf.
Schieffelin,
Woolard & Kroskrity 1998). Language ideologies, therefore, can also be included in the
semantic
field we are discussing here.
From a methodological point of view, all these different cognitive concepts are accessible in at
least three ways: beliefs and attitudes that are encoded in fixed expressions such as sayings and
prov-erbs can be analyzed as elements of a language, reflecting a ‘sediment’ of shared beliefs,
irrespective of the individual speaker. Secondly, researchers can observe how people reflect and
comment on language in everyday life, thus taking a sociolinguistic field work approach (Paul
1999). Tirdly, one may deliberately make informants verbalize their views by methods of
elicitation. Te latter are ofen regarded as unreliable in that elicited views need not reflect
accurately the actual beliefs a person holds, but nevertheless an elicited opinion sheds light on
the
motives and the argumenta-tive structure/s an individual employs to position him/herself towards
a
certain issue. Preston (this issue) reviews the methodology of folk linguistic investigation, giving
examples from research on dialectal perception in the US.
Language, languages and communication are such topics — they are part of human life, they
shape, constitute and sustain social life and social and individual identity. It is only natural that
every
person, being a speaker of a language or several languages within a social environment, has
views, opinions, attitudes and theories about language, communication and interaction, just as
they
have such views on other issues of daily life. Janicki (this issue) presents among others a study
where he is especially interested in what laypeople themselves perceive as language-related
‘problems’. To iden-tify such a problem — which can be quite different in nature from a
problem
identified by a linguist
— non-linguists draw on their own knowledge about everyday language use. However, the kind
of
knowledge that informs a particular view of language is thought to be different for the linguist
and
the non-linguist. Scientific knowledge is gained by specific procedures of scientific

investigation,
analysis, evaluation and dissemination. Te results are subject to assessment by the respective re-
search community. Tese processes differ significantly from the generation of everyday
knowledge
in that they are disconnected from the course of everyday life and experience, they are not
intended to have an ad hoc impact on everyday actions (Paul 1999: 1). Individual, subjective and
unsystematic knowledge are marginalized in most scientific contexts, although we have to keep
the
usual caveat in mind that no knowledge is entirely free from subjectivity and individual
evaluation.
It is therefore useful to briefly review how everyday knowledge might be conceptualized and
how it
interacts with the formation of everyday beliefs and subsequent decision making.
3. Folk vs. scientific and expert knowledge
Traditional scientific approaches tend to favor binary distinctions, and it is very tempting to
adopt
the very comfortable dichotomy of ‘folk (= non-scientific) — scientific’. It is indeed useful and
interesting to identify and investigate the views of language and communication that are held by
people who do not have any formal training in linguistics as opposed to those that do — as done,
for example, by Niedzielski & Preston (2003). Generally, we subscribe to this distinction.
However,
we must keep in mind that in terms of the knowledge which informs any kind of view we can-
not easily uphold a dichotomous distinction. Research in the sociology of knowledge and related
disciplines has identified a number of different kinds of knowledge which, when contrasted, are
rather the ends of a continuum than absolute categories (see below). Te distinction between
the linguist and the non-linguist does not necessarily imply that folk conceptions are exclusively
informed by non-scientific knowledge, as non-linguists learn about linguistic issues from various
sources through education and the media, and a linguist’s view is not exclusively informed by
scientific insights only. Instead, linguists’ and non-linguists’ views are related and mutually
influ-
ence each other.
A strictly binary distinction might also obscure the fact that types of knowledge are ascribed
to certain social roles: an important issue in the investigation of folk beliefs is the role of the
expert,
which seems to be a position that is linked to, but not necessarily identical to the scientist in vari-
ous ways. We will return to the role of the expert below, afer giving a brief overview of the types
of
knowledge relevant for the investigation of folk linguistics.
Everyday or ordinary knowledge can be gained in various ways — resulting in the hybrid-
ity mentioned above. However, one important feature of everyday knowledge is the fact that it is
gained and used within social interaction and interaction with the environment to guide and
inform
people’s actions. Everyday knowledge has to prove its worth in everyday life, and every time an
in-
dividual makes a decision, the usefulness of this knowledge is put to the test.
Scientific knowledge, on the other hand, is usually, and to a greater extent than everyday
knowl-edge, gained under different conditions — free from the pressure of its application in
everyday social interaction. Tus linguists, investigating the structure and use of language, first of
all
engage in what Paul (1999: 1 ff.) calls “handlungsentlastete Sprachreflexion”. In any ‘applied
science’ such as applied linguistics, the knowledge gained using scientifically approved methods
and serving as a basis for theory development needs to go one step further: it is not only used to
gain insights into the situa-tion investigated, it also is the basis for the development of solutions
and
for the improvement of the very processes that are the object of investigation. Terefore, from the
initial investigation through to the development of applications, knowledge gained in applied
linguistics will always reflect the role it will play in everyday life.
Going back to the sources of everyday knowledge, it can be said that we come by our
everyday knowledge first and foremost through primary socialization. In growing up, we are
presented with our physical and social environment as an objective reality, we experience
seemingly objective ele-ments in our environment and learn about them, thus gaining knowledge
that has been passed on from generation to generation, modified to various degrees, but is
always experienced as ‘given’ and ‘objective’ and ofen remains unquestioned (Berger &
Luckmann 1966). Gaining knowledge in primary socialization means knowing something as a

fact
of the world, or as how things are done, how phenomena are explained by those who socialize
us.
In growing up, we also gain knowledge by experiencing our environment. Such experiential
knowledge is not mediated in any way by any external authority and therefore informs us first-
hand
about our world.
In an economic theory of ordinary knowledge, Hardin (2009) identifies three distinct sources
of ordinary knowledge: firstly, we can deliberately seek knowledge, for instance because we are
faced with the task of making a decision and feel under-informed about the issue at hand. Very
ofen, we seek knowledge that we evaluate as true, useful or established, because it is generated
or
transmitted by some sort of authority. Such an authority can be what is known as an ‘expert’,
whose
role we will explore in more detail below. Secondly, we might just happen to come across
knowledge. A large part of primary socialization can be described as infants happening upon
knowledge. Knowledge in this way “rains on us while we are engaged in some other enterprise.
In
this sense, much knowledge is an opportunistic by-product.” (Hardin 2009: 7). Tirdly, we might
have the feeling that knowl-edge is imposed on us, as in schooling. Tis view is reflected in those
well-known and reiterated complaints of pupils that they have to learn things that they most
likely
will never ever need again in their lives. Not surprisingly, people are less likely to accept,
integrate and use knowledge that they feel has been imposed on them. Hence an individual might
judge the value of knowledge ac-cording to its usefulness for everyday decisions and actions. To
an individual, it might seem much more economical to keep old, reliable knowledge and reject
new
knowledge, because the restructur-ing process required seems uneconomical. Tis is an important
aspect to take into account when conceptualizing someone as a layperson — the history of this
term implying someone who has to be taught and guided (see Wilton & Wochele, this
issue).
Applied linguists need to be aware of the fact a) that laypeople hold a different, but not inferior
kind of knowledge which fulfills vital func-tions in everyday decision making, and b) that efforts
to
correct seemingly incorrect lay knowledge must take resistance to knowledge that is perceived as
‘imposed’ or ‘uneconomical’ into account. Furthermore, it is unrealistic to assume that the

various
types of knowledge can always be found in their pure form. Knowledge changes and evolves
during its transmission from its source of origin to consumers of that knowledge, who in turn
might
further disseminate it (Dann 1985, Antos 1996). Knowledge also changes in the process of its
application (Stehr & Grundmann 2010), that is, in its realization as an alternative for acting
in a
particular context.
As explained above, the sources of everyday knowledge are manifold. One of the
characteristics of everyday knowledge is the fact that we do not generate most of this knowledge
ourselves, but rely on some kind of authority to provide us with knowledge. If we trust this
authority and judge the knowledge as reliable, we might come to believe that what we know
from
a particular source is true (Hardin 2009: 11). Keeping in mind that any knowledge an individual
holds is hybrid with respect to its source and nature, we will concentrate in this section on how
authority for knowledge sources is established and how this influences the categorization of
someone as an expert or a layperson.
Modern society is characterized by a differentiation of knowledge. No individual can hold all
knowledge that is theoretically available, not even all knowledge that is needed to master the
tasks
of everyday life in modern society. We might accept some fact as true and act upon the
knowledge
that we gained from a certain authority. Tis is particularly the case with issues in which we feel
we
are
not competent enough ourselves. We turn to authorities, experts on the subject in question, to
help
us make informed decisions in our everyday lives. Increasingly, the need to appeal to expert
knowl-
edge arises in areas of everyday life which are on the one hand the responsibility of the
individual,
but on the other a domain of professional expertise. Such areas are for instance the upbringing
and
education of children and personal health and well-being. By seeking advice from an authority,
people put themselves in the position of a layperson, in other words, they disqualify themselves
in
that they regard themselves unqualified with respect to the issue at hand. Experts, on the other
hand, identify areas in which they assume people have a deficit in knowledge or competence,
and
offer their expertise. Te provision of expert knowledge and competence is reflected in the
establishment of certain professions, training curricula and institutions which offer such training.
Tus, areas of everyday life which used to be in the hands of the individual are restructured and
the
knowledge, the practices and their dissemination are institutionalized and professionalized
(Dewe
1988).
Taking an objective approach, it is possible to identify scientists, experts and laypeople on the
basis of formal qualification. In any particular field, a scientist is identified by his or her
education,
university degrees, titles, research and publications, and position in a university or research insti-
tute. A layperson is identified by the lack of all formal qualification, the lack of special training
and
degrees. Te expert can also be identified by formal qualifications such as certificates (Hitzler
1994).
More ofen, however, the expert is identified as having a certain kind of specialized and exclusive
knowledge, either through intensive involvement in some field or at least in comparison to other
people in the environment (Stehr & Grundmann 2010). Following this tripartite distinction,
one
can roughly say that a researcher generates knowledge using scientific methodology. Unlike the
applied scientist, the theoretical scientist is not, however, under the immediate pressure to prove
the validity of such knowledge for the solution of everyday problems. An expert disseminates
and
applies knowledge which he/she gains from other — ofen scientific — sources and his/her own
experience. His/her expertise is judged by those who are supposed to benefit from it. A layperson
is
the receiver of such knowledge — for him/her, it has to prove its usefulness in everyday life.
However, categorization according to formal criteria is complemented by the social construc-
tion of the roles of expert and layperson. Te status of an expert is the result of an interplay of ac-
tions by the expert himself and those who seek his/her expertise. By offering expertise, the
expert
reinforces his/her own role and creates laypersons, by seeking expertise, people reinforce the
status of the expert, and their own status of laypersons. In an extreme form of the social
constructionist view, an expert need not actually possess any special knowledge, he/she only
needs to make credible to others that he/she has such knowledge. In turn, the layperson needs no
actual proof that an expert has special knowledge, the layperson only needs to believe that
someone is an expert. Tus, the role of expert is staged: the expert does not appear as someone
who is competent, but as someone who is able to create a plausible impression of being
competent
(Hitzler 1994: 27). Similarly, the role of the layperson is at least partially socially constructed. In
any
field, there are people whose personal interests and/or professional activities give them some
knowledge that is more specialized than the everyday knowledge of the layperson. Paveau (this
issue) asks whether proofreaders, writers or even lawyers with their work-related linguistic
activities are to be seen as non linguists or as linguists, even if their metalinguistic statements
are based on non-scientific positions. In her typology of non-linguists, Paveau investigates the
status of non-linguist as a discursive position, not a discrete category. Tus, the role of the non-
linguist can be discursively constructed; it is non-permanent, and can even be taken up by

linguists
themselves. 1 Terefore, the idea of a continuum or categories with permeable and negotiable
boundaries is more appropriate when it comes to language issues than a strictly dichotomous
distinction. Te prototypical researcher described above is more of a pure theoretician; the applied
linguist, who develops application-oriented theories or engages in what
Wodak (2001) calls “theoretical applied linguistics” takes up a position between the pure
scientist
and the traditional ‘language expert’ such as communication trainers, language teacher and the
like. Such ‘language experts’ are engaged in “applied applied linguistics” (Wodak 2001) or
“linguistics applied” (Widdowson 2000).
When it comes to issues which are close to our identity, self-image, and emotional
involvement, we perceive ourselves as possessing the necessary and — more importantly — the
‘right’ knowledge to deal with the issue adequately. With respect to issues about language and
communication, there are those on which people ofen and willingly turn towards an authority for
help — such as uncer-tainty about correct, i.e., standard norms of orthography, style, and the
like.
When a language is-sue affects individual and/or group identity, personal attitudes ofen
challenge
the authorities’ view, claiming that the people themselves know best what is good or true for
them.
McKenzie & Osthus (this issue) exemplify the disparity of views and the resulting mutual
distrust
between linguists and the general public by showing how the evaluation and perception of
language varieties is different for both groups. In particular, they stress two points that anyone
investigating folk views should support: a) non-linguists’ views need to be taken seriously by
scientists and b) anyone attempting to judge and/or change attitudes that are deeply rooted and
emotionally held needs to be mindful and considerate when trying to do so.
Te applied linguist is in a special position: being applied, he/she has to consider the applica-
tion of scientifically generated knowledge in everyday life by taking people’s needs seriously
and to
develop solutions for everyday linguistic problems. Te applied linguist — in his/her relay
position
between theory and everyday knowledge and practice — is predestined to occupy the position of
language expert in a positive sense of the word, turning science into expertise that is developed
in
interaction with the lay customer. He/she therefore links all three positions: a linguist is the
expert
who gives the layperson what he/she needs by applying what the scientist knows.
4. Folk linguistics issues and related approaches
For our Research Network we decided to adopt a very broad and anti-dogmatic position which is
open for all existing and potential approaches to folk linguistics issues. Tis position is reflected
in
the collection of contributions to this AILA Review. For a systematic overview of the issues, we
have to integrate both the semasiological and onomasiological point of view, i.e., we need to ask
on
the one hand what kind of research activities are conducted under the label ‘folk linguistics’ and
on
the other hand which similar activities are conducted in other research communities and under
other labels.
Furthermore, for an international perspective we need to integrate approaches developed in
non-English-speaking countries. In France, Paveau is the most prominent researcher in the

domain
of folk linguistics and she proposes the French term linguistique populaire as the French
equivalent
of folk linguistics In the German speaking area, we have two competing expressions:
Volkslinguistik
and Laienlinguistik (or Laien-Linguistik). Volkslinguistik was used by Brekle (1985), but most
con-
temporary German speaking linguists are slightly uncomfortable with this term because of the
neg-
ative connotations with Volk since World War II. Antos 1996 introduced the term Laien-
Linguistik.
Although he was primarily interested in guides for effective communication, which are very ofen
written by non-linguists for non-linguists, his much more general introduction on lay conceptions
of language and communication suggests that his own understanding of Laienlinguistik goes
beyond the scope of such guides, and might thus become the German standard equivalent of the
English term folk linguistics.
Te research field which is the nearest to folk linguistics is without any doubt language aware-
ness (cf. the international Association for Language Awareness with its regular conferences and
the journal Language Awareness). Te language awareness movement was born in the 80s in
Great
Britain, when the school authorities discovered considerable competence deficiencies in English
among many pupils. It seemed that the behaviorist approach to language teaching, which placed
an emphasis on language learning as habit formation, needed to be reviewed in the light of new
findings by research on communicative competence development. One of the proposals setting

the
agenda for language awareness research was to include reflections about language — the
language to be learned as well as the native language of the learners — in the school curriculum
(Hawkins 1987). So there is a strong affinity between language awareness research and language
acquisition and learning. In the context of the cognitive turn, language awareness became
especially important to second and foreign language teaching and learning (James & Garrett
1992). In sociolinguistics, surveys dealt with speakers of minority languages or language

varieties
and their awareness of their language and its relationship to the language of the majority (Cichon
2005). Tese two threads seem to be converging gradually, in the multilingual situation of Europe
and — more generally — in our globalised world, where language awareness is almost always
also multilingual awareness (cf. the homonymous motto of the 2006 conference of the
Association
of Language Awareness).
Te previously mentioned semasiological and onomasiological ways of analyzing a term also
have to be applied to language awareness: What is understood by language awareness by
different authors? Which similar terms refer to the same or similar phenomena (linguistic
awareness, meta-linguistic awareness, etc.)? What is the situation in other languages (in German:
Sprachbewusstsein, Sprachbewusstheit, Gnutzmann 2003, Sprachreflexion, Paul 1999; in French
conscience linguistique, éveil aux langues, Candelier 2003 etc.)?
Awareness’ seems to cover the whole field from pre-verbalized attention phenomena to more
theoretical reflections (Knapp-Potthoff 1997), showing considerable overlap with research into
folk
linguistics. Teoretically, language awareness studies could also investigate the awareness of lin-
guists, but the ordinary research object is again the non-specialist. Te main difference between
language awareness studies and the studies of folk views about language lies, once more, in the
different research communities involved, rather than in different research questions or methods.
It
might be that the language awareness researchers are more interested in the pre-verbalized phase
of awareness than folk linguistic scholars are. Te only conceptual difference between the two
fields
of research might be found in the fact that the investigation of folk linguistics puts the focus
more
explicitly on the non-linguist than is the case in language awareness research.
Future contacts between the research communities will show which are the similarities and
differences between the two approaches, although both ‘schools’ are in no way homogeneous.
As
language awareness is still mostly associated with language acquisition and learning, we prefer
the
label folk linguistics, which seems to be broader and potentially closer to the whole spectrum of
research areas applied linguists are interested in.
5. Folk linguistics and its relevance for applied linguistic issues
Research into folk linguistics need not necessarily be applied — it might be conducted with a
purely
theoretical interest in folk views about language. In our ReN and in this AILA Review, however,
we
aim to illustrate the special relevance of folk linguistics for applied linguistics. Without going
into
the detail of the ongoing discussion of which scientific activities can be considered as belonging
to AL and which can not, we start once more from a very anti-dogmatic point of view: For every
topic which has ever been mentioned in AILA-related webpages, in applied linguistics
conference
programs, in introductions to AL etc., we can potentially always identify folk as well as expert or
sci-
entific views. Laypeople have something to say about language learning, multilingualism,
language
peculiarities of other people, communication problems, language use in the media and so on.
Either they spontaneously develop opinions about certain aspects of language or communication
or they
take a certain commonplace or idiosyncratic position when asked by linguists about their views.
In
principle, then, folk linguistics is relevant for any established or potential subfield of AL. Tis
issue
presents some of the topics that are addressed within AL, taking a folk linguistic per-spective
into
account. Te articles therefore can be seen as representing examples of the encounter between FL
and AL, while at the same time their choice is determined by the individual research interests of
the members of our ReN.
As stated above, an idea central to attitude and attitude-change theory is the role of attitudes in
the shaping of actions. A positive or negative view of an object clearly influences the person’s
actions with respect to that object. Consequently, research in areas such as sociology and social
psychology, but also in applied linguistics, aims at discovering such attitudes and investigating
their
influence on people’s behavior and the possibilities of changing attitudes in order to change
behavior. In linguis-tics, this has most prominently been done in the field of second language
acquisition and foreign language learning research:
If, as research and theory suggest, attitudes influence the efforts that students expend to learn an-
other language, then teachers need a clear understanding of attitudes and attitude-change theory
in order to address these issues in the classroom. (Mantle-Bromley 1990: 373)
With a research history of about thirty years the investigation of beliefs about the nature of
second/
foreign language learning has a comparatively long tradition in applied linguistics compared with
research into other lay conceptions. From the mid-1980s onwards, there has been a growing
interest in researching what learners believe and think about the process of second and in
particular foreign language learning. Ferreira Barcelos (2003: 8) states that from the beginning,
researchers have used the term belief for different psychological constructs and, accordingly,
refined their terminology. Tis resulted in an abundance of terms such as folklinguistic theories of
learning, learner representa-tions, learners’ philosophy of language learning, metacognitive
knowledge, cultural beliefs, learning cul-ture, culture of learning (languages), conceptions of
learning and beliefs. As a consequence, the studies can be grouped into three main approaches
which are characterized by differences in methodology and the conceptualization of learner

beliefs.
Tis section briefly reviews these approaches according to Ferreira Barcelos (2003).
Ferreira Barcelos identifies three approaches, beginning with the phase of normative
approach-es. Normative approaches are characterized by their definition of beliefs as negatively
evaluated concepts, i.e., as misconceptions or myths that have to be corrected by imparting true
scientific knowledge to the learner about the nature of language learning. Te methodology
used by this approach is questionnaires that leave little or no room for an elaboration on the
questions by the learner. Te negative evaluation of the nature of learner beliefs is motivated by a
tendency of many studies to compare the identified beliefs with the ideal of the good language
learner (Ellis 2004). As with other ideals in linguistics such as the ideal native speaker (Chomsky
1965), such a comparison does injustice to the learners, evaluating learners’ beliefs as wrong,
therefore obstructing the way to effective language learning.
Tese disadvantages are partly overcome by approaches of the metacognitive type, which de-
fine belief as metacognitive knowledge about learning. In order to assess this knowledge, studies
in
the metacognitive approach use interviews in addition to questionnaires to give the learners the
op-
portunity to elaborate on their views. Although this is an advantage compared to the normative
ap-
proach, the view of the relationship between beliefs and actions of the learner is not much
different.
Studies in the third group, labeled the contextual approach, are very heterogeneous with
respect to their definitions of beliefs, their methodologies and the types of data they collect.
According to Ferreira Barcelos, their common characteristic is the implementation of data
triangulation and, in
particular, the attempt to investigate learners’ beliefs in context. Tus, the methodologies
employed
include and/or combine observation (typically in the classroom), learners’ diaries, narrative
analy-
sis, discourse and metaphor analysis. Te overall aim is to understand learners’ beliefs from the
perspective of their learning experience, thus enabling the researcher and eventually the teacher
to
assess which contextual parameters influence the learners’ experiences. One of the advantages of
such an approach is that the learner is viewed less negatively but is seen as an individual reacting
to and within a social environment. Tis view is more in line with an objective and unprejudiced
ap-proach to non-linguists’ views (see for instance Paul 1999).

Pasquale (this issue) reports on extensive studies into the beliefs of foreign language learners,
developing a taxonomy of beliefs that is guided not by the predetermined categories of

traditional
language pedagogy, but by the data themselves. Such a taxonomy gives an insight into the
learners’ beliefs and their interrelation, rather than just classifying them as positive or negative.
Language learning, however, does not only include second or foreign language learning.
One’s first language, or, as Cruz-Ferreira rightly argues (this issue), one’s first language(s), are
also
learned. In her article she explains how the monolingual bias is reflected in the views on first
language learn-ing by researchers, teachers, and other people in the child’s environment. Tis
monolingual bias is deeply entrenched, and the beliefs connected to it can do injustice to
anybody
growing up in a multilingual situation.
One area of AL where the interplay of professional, expert and lay knowledge about linguistic
issues has far-reaching consequences is language policy. Policymakers influence the way in
which
a language is represented within a certain society or speech community. Decisions to include a
minority language in the regional or national school curriculum, giving it the status of an official
language, or making available media and public services in that language have a direct impact on
the vitality and status of a language and the linguistic patterns within a society. External
regulations of language use — such as the banning of anglicisms in some German ministries and
companies and the prohibition to use certain anglicisms in France, at least in official texts, affect
not only people’s daily lives but also the development of the language. It is therefore imperative
that policy makers are well informed — also by applied linguists — about the needs and
perceptions of the society or speech community in question.
Language policies do not only affect public service or education. Many companies have lan-
guage policies of some kind (including implicit forms of language policies, for the term
“implizite
Sprachenpolitik” see Kremnitz 1990) and it is interesting to see what managers think about
languag-es and their role in international communication. Tere exist different, partially
contradictory folk opinions: on the one hand business people affirm the importance of knowing
more than one foreign language and may see this as a key intercultural business competence; on
the other hand they may argue that ‘English only’ is enough for business contacts. Business
people
who are non-native speak-ers of English may ofen believe that a policy of ‘English only’ is the
only practicable option given the multiplicity of languages business people encounter.
Sometimes
we find these contradictory af-firmations stated by the same individual, thereby exhibiting a
typical
feature of folk theories — their potential contradictoriness. Most international companies decide
on a corporate language (even if in practice it may be evaded), and these decisions are not taken
by language experts, but by top managers. Folk linguistic studies are therefore interesting in this
domain, because they show that lay people are not only the subjects or receivers of language
policies, but ofen enough the actors: decisions on language policy are frequently taken by non-
linguists who may or may not claim to be experts on linguistic issues.
In order to get empirical evidence of companies’ language needs, linguists traditionally use
questionnaires, which are (sometimes) answered by more or less language-friendly employees.
Besides telling us something about the actual needs of employees, they are also evidence of the
folk beliefs of the people interviewed — i.e., what they think they need. Such needs analyses can
be regarded as studies of folk beliefs and attitudes, even if they are not explicitly conducted
under
this label.
Going back to the language policies of the state, we need, once again, to investigate — if not
even critically question — the expert status of all those who are responsible for language policy
decisions. As argued above, there is no clear-cut demarcation line between experts and non-
experts, and we refer again to the idea of a continuum outlined above. From a professional point
of
view, the ideal expert on multilingualism would probably be a linguist who has specialized in
sociolinguistics and language policy and who also has a well-founded training in law. However,
just
as an academic qualified in political science cannot give final recommendations about the ideal
political party or government (and his personal voting behavior is not the behaviour of an expert,
but of a citizen), an academic qualified in sociolinguistics can give recommendations with his or
her
expert background, but the decisions must be taken at a political level.
As stated above, language policy might also affect the regulation of ‘correct’ language use.
Non-linguists, everyday language users, are ofen very interested in norm questions. In some
countries, such as Germany, it is very popular to seek external expert advice on questions about
correct lan-guage use (cf. the DUDEN helpline at http://www.duden.de/sprachberatung), to

criticize
fellow citi-zens for their ‘incorrect’ language use (in particular in internet fora) or even to
entertain
oneself with the linguistic and stylistic blunders of others

<http://www.bastiansick.de/start>.
For linguists, the idea of unambiguous, prescriptive norms (in the sense of something being
right or wrong in an absolute, not a situated, way) is less important, as they accept more readily
the
existence of parallel or ‘plural’ norms. Tis is not only relevant for the L1 context, but also for the
competence ideals we might have for the L2 speaker and his or her potential communication
part-
ners. Foreign language pedagogy, especially in the ELF domain, is moving towards a liberal
attitude and the native speaker norm is not considered as an absolute valid norm for language
learners any more.
However, even though science respects a plurality of norms, the everyday language user
might not have reached this liberal attitude him/herself and is irritated by performances which
are
(too) far away from native norms (Stegu & Wochele 2006).
Applied linguistics is a science predominantly conducted for the benefit of laypeople. Tere-
fore, we consider the detailed investigation of lay views of language(s) and communication as
very
important, if not essential, for applied linguists. On the one hand, linguists can learn a lot from
laypeople for their own understanding of linguistic issues; on the other hand, in order to act as
ex-
perts and advisors on linguistic issues, linguists need to know what non-linguists think of the
issues
at hand, how their knowledge is generated, and how it can be enriched in order to help them
solve
language-related problems or change negative attitudes. As space is limited, in this issue of the
AILA Review we cannot touch upon the relationship of scientist, expert, and layperson in all
fields of
AL, but we hope to be able to make the importance of folk linguistic research visible and
stimulate
inter-est in further projects within AL.
Note
1. We are aware that ‘linguist’ can be and is used in another sense in English, namely for a
person who is
particularly good at using language(s) and may or may not earn a living by using languages. As
such, he/she
might acquire the status of a language expert in the eyes of the general public. Nevertheless, in
this sense, be-
ing a linguist is more a personal quality than a professional label. In our article, however, we will
use ‘linguist’
as referring to a ‘language scientist’ in the narrow sense of the word.
References
Antos, G. 1996. Laien-Linguistik. Tübingen: Niemeyer.
Berger, P. & Luckmann, T. 1966. Te Social Construction of Reality. Garden City NY:
Anchor Books.
Brekle, H. E. 1985. “Volkslinguistik”: Ein Gegenstand der Sprachwissenschaf bzw. ihrer

Historiographie? In
Politische Sprachwissenschaf: Zur Analyse von Sprache als kulturelle Praxis, F. Januschek (ed.),
145-156.
Opladen: Westdeutscher Verlag.
Candelier, M. (ed.). 2003. Janua Linguarum. La porte des langues. L’introduction de l’éveil aux
langues dans le
curriculum. Strasbourg: Conseil de l’Europe.
Chomsky, N. 1965. Aspects of the Teory of Syntax. Cambridge MA: Te MIT Press.
Cichon, P. 2005. ‘Falsches’ und ‘fehlendes’ Sprachbewusstsein — brauchbare oder irreführende

Erklärungs-
begriffe?. Quo vadis Romania 25: 13-19.
Crespi, I. 1997. Te Public Opinion Process. Mahwah NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Dann, H. 1982. Subjektive Teorien: Irrweg oder Forschungsprogramm? Arbeitsbericht des

Sonderforschungsbe-
reichs 23, Projekt Aggression in der Schule. Konstanz: Universität Konstanz.
Dewe, B. 1988. Wissensverwertung in der Fort- und Weiterbildung. Zur Transformation

wissenschaflicher In-
formationen in Praxisdeutungen. Baden-Baden: Nomos.

Ellis, R. 2004/2008. Te Study of Second Language Acquisition. Cambridge: CUP.
Ferreira Barcelos, A. 2003. Researching beliefs about SLA: A critical review. In Beliefs about
SLA: New Re-
search Approaches, P. Kajala & A. Ferreira Barcelos (eds), 7-34. Dordrecht: Kluwer.
Fishbein, M. 1965.
A consideration of beliefs, attitudes, and their relationship. In Current Studies in Social

Psychology, I.D.
Steiner & M. Fishbein (eds), 107-120. New York NY: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.
Fraser, C. & Gaskell, G. (eds).
1990. Te Social Psychological Study of Widespread Beliefs. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Furnham, A. 1988. Lay Teories. Everyday Understanding of Problems in the Social Sciences.
Oxford: Per-
gamon Press.
Gnutzmann, C. 2003. Language Awareness, Sprachbewusstheit, Sprachbewusstsein. In

Handbuch Fremd-
sprachenunterricht (3rd edition). K.-R.Bausch,, H. Christ & H.-J. Krumm (eds.), 335-339.
Tübingen:
Francke.
Goodenough, W.H. 1990. Evolution of the human capacity for beliefs. American Anthropologist
92(3): 597-
612.
Hardin, R. 2009. How do you Know? Te Economics of Ordinary Knowledge. Princeton NJ:
Princeton Press.
Hawkins, E. 1987. Awareness of Language. An Introduction. Cambridge: CUP.
Hitzler, R. 1994. Wissen und Wesen des Experten. In Expertenwissen, R. Hitzler, A. Honer
& C. Maeder (eds),
13-30. Opladen: Westdeutscher Verlag.
Hoenigswald, D. 1966. A proposal for the study of folk-linguistics. In Sociolinguistics, W.

Bright (ed.), 16-26.
Te Hague: Mouton.
James, C. & Garrett, P. (eds). 1992. Language Awareness in the Classroom. London:
Longman.
Knapp-Potthoff, A. 1997. Sprach(lern)bewußtheit im Kontext. Fremdsprachen Lehren und

Lernen (FLuL)
26: 9-23.
Knorr-Cetina, K. 1981. Te Manufacture of Knowledge — An Essay on the Constructivist and

Contextual Na-
ture of Science. Oxford: Pergamon Press.
Kremnitz, G. 1990. Gesellschafliche Mehrsprachigkeit. Wien: Braumüller.
Mantle-Bromley, C. 1990. Positive attitudes and realistic beliefs: Links to proficiency. Te

Modern Language
Journal 72(3): 372-386.
Niedzielski, N.A. & Preston, D.R. 2003. Folk Linguistics. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Paul, I. 1999. Praktische Sprachreflexion. Tübingen: Niemeyer.
Schieffelin, B.B., Woolard, K.A. & Kroskrity, P.V. (eds). 1998. Language Ideology.
Practice and Teory. Oxford:
OUP.
Stegu, M. & Wochele, H. 2006. Kompetenz- und Fehlerbewusstheit bei der Erlernung von
Drittsprachen
(L3). In Tagungsband — Atti del convegno — Proceedings. Mehrsprachigkeit in Europa:

Erfahrungen,
Bedürfnisse, Gute Praxis. 24.-26.08.2006, Bolzano / Bozen, A. Abel, M. Stuflesser & M.

Putz, (eds.), 401-
412. Bozen/Bolzano: Europäische Akademie.
Stehr, N. & Grundmann, R. 2010. Expertenwissen. Die Kultur und die Macht von Experten,
Beratern und
Ratgebern. Weilerswist: Velbrück.
Widdowson, H. 2000. On the limitations of linguistics applied. Applied Linguistics 21: 3-25.
Wodak, R. 2001. Teories in applied linguistics. In Naturally! Linguistic Studies in Honour of

Wolfgang Ulrich
Dressler Presented on the Occasion of his 60th Birthday, C. Schaner-Wolles, J. Rennison F.

Neubart (eds),
499-505. Turin: Rosenberg & Sellier.
Authors’ addresses
Antje Wilton Martin Stegu
English and Applied Linguistics Institute for Romance Languages
University of Siegen Vienna University of Economics and Business
Adolf-Reichwein-Str. 2 Nordbergstr. 15
57068 Siegen 1090 Wien
Germany Austria
wilton@anglistik.uni-siegen.de martin.stegu@wu.ac.at
Trends of Qualitative Research in Applied Linguistics Since the New Millennium
LoNG Jixing [a],* ; ZhoU Shiyi [b]
[a] Associate professor, Guizhou Normal University, Guizhou, China.
[b] MTI student, Guizhou Normal University, Guizhou, China.
* Corresponding author.
Supported by MTI Case-Database Project of Guizhou Province
[YJSCXJH (2018) 094]; The Guizhou Provincial Education office.
Received 19 March 2019; accepted 6 June 2019

Published online 26 July 2019
Abstract
This article aims to make an overview of qualitative
research in western applied linguistics in the new
millennium. It finds that the role of qualitative research for
applied linguistics has grown to be as important as that of
quantitative research, for the research method and
perspective it brings in. Besides, a combination of
qualitative and quantitative research has gained currency.
Key words: Applied linguistics; Qualitative research;
Ethnography
Long, J. X., & Zhou, S. Y. (2019). Trends of Qualitative Research in
Applied Linguistics Since the New Millennium. Canadian Social
Science, 15 (7), 11-14. Available from:
http://www.cscanada.net/index.php/css/article/view/11200 DOI:
http://dx.doi.org/10.3968/11200
INTRODUCTION
From the 1970s on, there have been a large discussion
about research paradigms in the area of applied linguistics.
As research paradigms of applied linguistics shifted from
post-positivism to cultural construction, scholars began to
rethink their research methods. The introduction of
qualitative research to applied linguistics brought a new
theoretical basis and a new research perspective. Based on
statistics and analysis from linguistic core journals, the

article studies qualitative research of contemporary western
applied linguistics, hoping to provide possible
enlightenment for Chinese academia.
11
1. QUALITATIVE RESEARCH IN APPLIED
LINGUISTICS
1.1 Qualitative Research
Qualitative Research is a rising research method in the
field of Social Science in the 20th century. Different
from quantitative research, which based on the
methodology of natural science, qualitative research is
mainly based on the methodology of humanities and
social sciences. This kind of research is deeply
influenced by the phenomenology, hermeneutics and
psychology and it has developed a close relationship with
disciplines such as cultural anthropology, sociology, and
psychology.
Many Scholars have different views about the
definition of the qualitative research. According to
Denzin and Lincoln (2000), “Qualitative research is a
situational activity. It puts observers in an objective world
and thus the world can be understandable through a
series of explanations and practices. These practices
transform the world into a series of statements, including
study notes, interviews, dialogues, photography,

recordings, memos and other forms. That is to say,
qualitative researchers take research objects from the
natural environment to confirm its given meaning, based
on it, they further explain and analyze objective
phenomenon” (Denzin and Yvonna, 2000, pp.4-5). In
international scale, their definition is relatively common
accepted but not the absolute one. Scholars such as
Burgess, Hudelson, Creswell, Ratner, Krathwohl, Stratuss
and Corbin also have put forward their own versions. And
Chinese scholars Chen Xiangming hold his standpoint
that “the researchers will use themselves as the research
tool, aiming to an integral exploration of the society
through different data collected methods under a natural
environment, usually with an inductive method to analyze
collected materials and to form theories, it is an activity
acquiring understandable explanations about the
subjects action and meaning construction through
interactions” (Chen, 2000, p.12).
Copyright © Canadian Academy of Oriental and Occidental Culture
Trends of Qualitative Research in Applied Linguistics
Since the New Millennium
The Western academic community still has roughly the
same understanding on the connotation and characteristics

of qualitative research. It is admitted that qualitative
research focuses on the essential attributes of things.
Besides, compared with the traditional quantitative
research that emphasizes on measurement, experiment
and statistics, qualitative research gives the priority to
analysis on meaning, experience and description.
Moreover, researchers mainly obtain research data through
observation, interview, literature analysis, historical
review and other methods rather than experimental
quantitative methods. In addition, the qualitative research
pays particular attention to case studies, often using thick
descriptive to analyze specific phenomena, emphasizing
the subjective initiative of the research object as well as
the understanding and interpretation of meaning.
In a certain sense, qualitative research is actually a
reaction to the over-emphasizing quantitative research.
Just as Albert Einstein said, not everything that counts can
be counted and not everything that can be counted counts.
“The purpose of qualitative research is not to pursue the
assumptions that do not exist in reality, but to reveal the
interest relationships, value choices, and value conflicts
behind the facts seeming to be natural” (Lao, 2000). It is
generally believed that the significance of qualitative
research lays on revealing the research object’s nature in
quality , not just in quantity, through the thick description
and interpretation.
1.2 The Rise of Qualitative Research
The rise of qualitative research in applied linguistics can
be related to the paradigm shift（Kuhn，1962/1970,
p.150) in humanities and social sciences. It was the
Chicago School represented by Mead that firstly utilized
qualitative research methods into the social sciences. This
school had studied social phenomena using interviews
and participation observation methods, and had already
touched on related topics of applied linguistics. In the
1970s, new trends in linguistics such as post-positivism,
deconstructionism, and cultural criticism promoted the
paradigm shift in humanities and social sciences. So
some scholars began to reflect on quantitative research.
They found that quantitative research is too formalized,
static and simple, failing to make a detailed observation of
social phenomenon in detail. In contrast, qualitative
research, which emphasizes on research integrity, natural
scene, conclusion and analysis, can just make up for these
shortcomings of the quantitative research.
The popularization of qualitative research also due to the
development of anthropology, sociology and psychology.
The introduction of research methods and perspectives in
ethnography provide the foundation in ontology and
methodology, at the same time, the application of symbol
interaction theory and ethnomethodology in sociology as
well as psychoanalysis and action research in psychology

promote the development of qualitative research.
In general, qualitative research is most influenced by
the ethnography in cultural anthropology. The word
“Ethnography” is derived from the Greek words “ethnos”
and “graphein”, describing a certain group or a certain
minority. The early ethnography was mainly the travel
notes made by travelers or the investigation reports
written by the missionaries. After the establishment of
cultural anthropology, it became the core research method
and was seen as “an empirical and theoretical approach
inherited from anthropology whose central purpose is to
generate detailed holistic description and analysis of
cultures based on intensive fieldwork” (Barker, 2004,
p.64). Ethnography lays the foundation for qualitative
research by using certain methods such as observation and
interview as well as unique descriptions from emic and
etic perspective. The detailed, vivid and contextualized
descriptions to a particular individual or group of people
were increasingly valued by scholars in applied
linguistics.
After the 1980s, as academic circles became more
critical on quantitative research, qualitative research was
gradually adopted by more and more researchers. And

articles about qualitative research have published in core
journals in linguistic and applied linguistic. In the new
millennium, the role of qualitative research for applied
linguistics has developed to be as important as that of
quantitative research in both qualitative and quantitative
aspects. Therefore, it can be inferred that the rise of
applied linguistics research is the result of
interdisciplinary research in applied linguistics.
1.3 The Review of Qualitative Research
Research methods used by qualitative research in applied
linguistics mainly includes discourse analysis,
ethnography, historical research, personal narrative,
action research, thematic presentations and interactive
analysis, etc. But different researches will adopt
different methods in certain cases. For instance, there are
five qualitative research methods commonly used in
foreign language teaching and research: “basic or genetic
qualitative study, phenomenology, ethnography,
grounded theory and case study” (Merriam, p.8).
In general, applied linguistics had considerable
progress using these methods. As early as 1995,
Lazaraton believed that the prospects of qualitative
research in linguistics was promising, and she pointed out
that “Whether the qualitative research can win an equal
status with the quantitative research in 10 years, and with
enough attention and recognition, we are just waiting to

see” (Lazaraton, 1995, p.467). Then Lazaraton collected
all papers published on four relative core journals in
applied linguistics (TESOL Quarterly, Language
Learning, The Modern Language Journal and Studies
in Second Language Acquisition) from 1992 to 1997,
basing on them, she wrote Current trends in research
methodology and statistics in applied linguistics
(Lazaraton, 2000, p.178) to explain “now already 10%
papers belong to qualitative research”.
12
Long Jixing; Zhou Shiyi (2019).
Canadian Social Science, 15(7), 11-14
In 1999, Chinese scholars such as Gao yihong also did
researches on all papers from four core journals in applied
linguistics (TESOL Quarterly, The Modern Language
Journal, Applied Linguistics, International Review of
Applied Linguistics) from 1985 to 1997, resulted in a
paper named Developments Trends of Research
Methods in Applied Linguistics, presenting their
conclusion: “Material research is relatively developed in
Western linguistics, and in 1970s, qualitative methods
began to challenge the status of quantitative methods”
(Gao, Li, & Lü, 1999, p.8). Based on it, we can know that
at the beginning of the new millennium, the qualitative
research in applied linguistics had developments to
establish its discipline basis.
Since then, scholars such as Benson and Richards have
also made statistical analysis on the statuse of Western
qualitative research. In 2009, Scholars represented by
Benson did researches on all relative papers published from
10 core journals (included Applied Linguistics, The
Canadian Modern Language Review, Foreign
Language Annal, International Review of Applied
Linguistics, Language Learning, Language Testing,
The Modern Language Journal, Studies in Second
Language Acquisition, System, TESOL Quarterly) in
the past 10 years，their finding shows that “477 papers
belong to qualitative research, accounting for 22% of the
total number of papers” (Benson,et al., 2009, p.82). They
also found that in the new millennium, the number of
qualitative research papers published every year maintain a
stable increase, reflecting the important role of qualitative
research played in language teaching and research.
In the same year, Richards published his paper Trends
in qualitative research in language teaching since
2000 (Richards, 2009, pp.150-153), based on 15 Western
Applied Linguistic core journals (TESOL Quarterly,
The Modern Language Journal, RELC Journal, JALT
Journal, Prospect, Asian Journal of English Language

Teaching, System, ELT Journal, Language Teaching
Research, Language Learning, Journal of Second
Language Writing, International Journal of Bilingual
Education & Bilingualism, Applied Linguistics, English
for Special Purpose and International Review of
Applied Linguistics) from 2000 to 2007. He put forward
that although the qualitative research has not exceeded the
quantitative research, and there was no trend it will shift to
quantitative research as predicted by Gao Yihong in 2001,
but the qualitative research has appeared in the core journal
of foreign language teaching with great stability and is very
influential. Richard also divided these journals into two
groups: the first group are journals represented by
International Review of Applied
Linguistics，Language Learning, and ELT Journal,
etc., of which the number of qualitative research papers
does not exceed 10%; the second group are journals
represented by The Modern Language Journal，Applied
Linguistics，Prospect，ELT Journal，and Language
Teaching Research, etc., and the number of qualitative
research papers is between 20%
and 25%. In the second group, Prospect，ELT Journal，
JALT Journal and Journal of Second Language
Writing witnessed the growth of papers in qualitative
research. According to the analysis, Richards pointed out

that the current research types of qualitative research are
mainly case studies, conversational analysis and
ethnography, as for other research types such as action
research and inquiry research are still need to be
developed. Qualitative research in applied linguistics in the
new millennium have made leapfrog development, and the
role of qualitative research for applied linguistics has
grown to be as important as that of quantitative research,
though now it is small in quantity, it is growing rapidly. In
fact, many scholars used to focus on quantitative research
now begin to pay attention to the qualitative research.
1.4 The Influence of Qualitative Research
The influence of qualitative research in applied linguistics
mainly on diversifying the research methods in language
teaching and enhancing researches on identity in applied
linguistics.
“In qualitative research, ethnography is one of many
approaches that can be found with social research today,
and it now spans to a wide range of disciplines and sub-
fields” (Hammersley and Atkinson, 1995, p.129). In
recent years, it is common agreed that the most common
method using in language teaching research is also the
ethnography. For example, Evaluative criteria for
qualitative research in applied linguistics: Whose
criteria and whose research? published in 2003 by
Lazaraton explains that “Existing criteria are inadequate

for evaluating even the two forms of qualitative research—
ethnography and conversation analysis—in which applied
linguists currently engage” (Lazaraton, 2003). And
statistic data collected by Benson et al. in 2009 also shows
the principal status of ethnography. Just as mentioned
earlier, ethnography is a detailed, dynamic, and contextual
depiction of individuals or groups of people and their
culture. It adopts two views(emic and etic)to observe the
individuals or groups lifestyle. Ethnography requests
researchers spending long time with the subjects to
understand a certain culture. So in language teaching
research, teachers who spend long time with students and
have profound self-experience, are therefore suitable to
conduct researches using ethnography. In fact, teachers
always play a dual role, that is, they are both planners and
performers of teaching activities, and researchers of
teaching activities.
The application of ethnography into the language
teaching research means the teacher adopts emic and etic to
do observations and interviews. It behaves as the teacher
using extensive teaching forms to encourage students
taking part in class activities, at the same time, teachers can
use observations and situational dialogues to do researches
about dynamic language teaching, thus meeting the
demands of the students and better conducting

13
Trends of Qualitative Research in Applied Linguistics
Since the New Millennium
interactive activities, finally bought deep analysis on
educational activities and situations. The interaction
ultimately leads to a deeper analysis of teaching activities
and scenarios. For example, “A teacher intends to take a
problem student as his research object in class. He
observes the student’s class performance and writes an
observing diary. Through in-depth observation and
communication, the teacher gradually can view problems
standing on the student’s status, therefore understanding
student’s behaviors and improving the teacher-student
relationship” (Bogdan and Biklen, 1982/2003, p.232).
This is a common case in anthropology that a emic
researcher can shift to etic. The research methods of
mutual conversion between the emic and the etic now is
being used by more scholars in language teaching.
In research prospective, the main contribution of
qualitative research is to promote the research on identity in
applied linguistics. The identity research is always a hot
topic in social science since the middle of the 20 th century,

after the introduction of qualitative research, it also has
become suitable for applied linguistics. For this reason,
Richard pointed out in his paper “Trends in qualitative
research in language reaching since 2000” , explaining
that the identity research has become an important topic in
applied linguistics since 2000. Due to qualitative research,
we can understand the language learning from different
aspects.
For example, teachers, as the subject of language
teaching, their identity recognition is the core of identity
research in applied language. In essence, teachers’
identity recognition is the result of socialization.
Socialization has bought the diversification of students
and teachers, giving them cultural symbols to
differentiate from each other. Just as Bourdieu said
“actors distinguish things through cultural symbols,
while cultural symbols distinct the actor at the same
time…Culture is a sign of social hierarchy, and the
hierarchy of culture and the hierarchy of social space are
structurally with homology. Culture can never be
separated from social domination” (Zhang, 2005, pp.123-
126). The emergence of distinction will inevitably raise
people’s concerns to identity. Especially as the growth of
migration number and population flow, it is almost
common for students and teachers with different mother
tongues and different cultural backgrounds to enter the

same classroom. And comparing with traditional
acknowledges and experiences, differences can be found
in students approbation and recognition for teachers as
well as teachers’ own identity recognition. In response to
these phenomena, qualitative researchers used methods
like observations, interviews, and conversational analysis to
study the different contexts’ influence on teaching, and
they combined teachers’ family background, educational
experience, and religious beliefs to do longitudinal
research, aiming to analyze teachers’ identity recognition.
CONCLUSION
While the Western applied linguistics circles continue to
promote qualitative research and have already made many
achievements, the domestic applied linguistics circles still
seem to focus on quantitative research. It is an
indisputable fact that qualitative research has and must
have the same status as quantitative research. The
development of qualitative research in applied
linguistics in the West can provide enlightenment to
foreign language teaching research in China. Therefore, it
is believed that learning from the achievements of
qualitative research in Western applied linguistics circles
will have a far-reaching impact on the applied linguistics

research in China.
REFERENCES
Denzin, Norman K., & Yvonna, Lincoln S. (2000). Introduction:
The discipline and practice of qualitative research. In N.
K.
Denzin. & Y. S. Lincoln. (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative
research (2nd ed., pp.1-28). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Chen, X. M. (2000). Qualitative research in social sciences
(p.12). Beijing: Educational Science Press.
Lao, K. S. (2000). Exploring the possibilities for new
expressions: Review on qualitative research in social
sciences. China Education Daily, 2000-06-14.
Kuhn, T. S. (1962/1970). The structure of scientific
revolutions (2nd ed.). London: The Universtiy of Chicago
Press, Ltd. Barker, C. (2004). The SAGE dictionary of
cultural studies.
London, Thousand Oaks & New Delhi: Sage.
Merriam, Sharan. B. (2008). Qualitative research and case
study applications in education (Z. Y. Yu, Trans., p.8).
Chongqing,
China: Chongqing University Press.
Lazaraton, A. (1995). Qualitative research in applied linguistics:
A progress report. TESOL Quarterly, 29(3), 455-472.
Lazaraton, A. (2000). Current trends in research methodology
and statistics in applied linguistics. TESOL Quarterly,
34(1), 175-181.
Gao, Y. H., Li, L. C., & Lü, J. (1999). Trends in research
methods in applied linguistics: China and the west.
Foreign
Language Teaching and Research, (2): 8-16.
Benson, P., et al. (2009). Qualitative research in language
teaching and learning journals, 1997-2006. The Modern
Language Journal, 92(3), 79-90.
Richards, K. (2009). Trends in qualitative research in language
teaching since 2000. Language Teaching, 42(2), 147-
180. Hammersley, M., & Atkinson. P. (1995). Ethnography:
Principles in practice (2nd ed., p.129). London and New
York: Routledge.
Lazaraton, A. (2003). Evaluative criteria for qualitative
research in applied linguistics: Whose criteria and whose
research?.
Modern Language Journal, 87(1), 1-12.
Bogdan, R., & Biklen, S. K. (1982/2003). Qualitative
research in education (4th ed.). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
Zhang, Y. (2005). Culture and symbolic power: An
introduction to bourdieu's cultural sociology (pp.123, 126).
Beijing:
China Social Sciences Press.
Gemma Santiago Alonso and David Heredero Zorzo

chapter 4
Conclusions in
linguistics and
applied linguistics
research articles
written in Spanish
as a foreign language:
An intercultural
rhetoric study
104 ACADEMIC WRITING FROM CROSS-CULTURAL PERSPECTIVES

CONCLUSIONS IN LINGUISTICS AND APPLIED LINGUISTICS RESEARCH ARTICLES
Abstract
Te present work is a contrastive study where we analyse the conclusions

of
a corpus of 36 Linguistics and Applied Linguistics research articles written
in Spanish and Slovene, both by native speakers, as well as research

articles
written in Spanish by Slovene investigators. We focus on the structure of
this
section following the moves and steps established by Yang and Allison
(2003)
and Moritz, Meurer and Dellagnelo (2008), as well as the principles used
for
this kind of analysis settled by the field of intercultural rhetoric (Connor
and
Moreno, 2005, Moreno, 2008, Connor 2011). Te results of our investigation
reveal that there are important differences concerning conclusions in

research
articles between the two languages, which should be taken into account
when
teaching Spanish as an academic language.
Keywords: intercultural rhetoric, academic writing, corpus study,

rhetorical moves, conclusion in research articles.
Izvleček
V pričujočem prispevku je predstavljena kontrastivna študija, v kateri

analizi-
ramo sklepne razdelke v korpusu 36 znanstvenih člankov s področij
jezikoslov-
ja in uporabnega jezikoslovja, ki so jih v španščini in slovenščini napisali
rojeni
govorci, pa tudi člankov, ki so jih v španščini napisali slovenski
raziskovalci.
Struktura sklepnega razdelka je razčlenjena po potezah in korakih, kot so
jih
definirali Yang in Allison (2003) ter Moritz, Meurer in Dellagnelo
(2008),
ter v skladu z načeli analize, uveljavljene na področju kontrastivne retorike
(Connor in Moreno, 2005, Moreno, 2008, Connor 2011). Rezultati

raziskave
pokažejo pomembne razlike med jezikoma v sklepnih razdelkih
znanstvenih
člankov, ki bi jih bilo treba upoštevati pri pouku španščine kot
akademskega
jezika.
Ključne besede: medkulturna retorika, akademsko pisanje, korpusna

študija, retorične poteze, sklep znanstvenega članka
ACADEMIC WRITING FROM CROSS-CULTURAL PERSPECTIVES 105

1 INTRODUCTION
In the last few decades, a large number of studies (Cassany and Morales
2008;
Gnutzmann and Oldenburg 1991; Holmes 1997; Hyland 1996; Pérez Ruiz
2001; Swales 1990, 2004) has paid extensive attention to the delimitation of
the structure and construction of research articles (henceforth RAs), in order
to stimulate an ever more global form of scientific-academic communication.
The aforementioned investigations are oriented to identify prototypical rhe-
torical moves that constitute the different sections of RAs (Introduction, Re-
sults and Discussion, Conclusion and Summary). 1 However, we cannot
ignore
that most of the previous studies are framed within an Anglo-Saxon context,
whose impact on the global scene has highlighted the importance of the socio-
cultural context within academic-scientific writing 2 (Santiago and Heredero
2018, 272).
Our aim in the present paper is the analysis of the rhetorical conventions in
the
conclusions section of RAs written in Spanish by Slovene researchers,
compar-
ing them with those made by Slovene and Spanish researchers in their native
languages. Our work is framed in the same line as other investigations (inter
alia: Amnuai and Wannaruk 2013; Aslam and Mehmood 2014; Ciapuscio and
Otañi 2002; Fuentes Cortés 2013; Moritz, Meurer and Dellagnelo 2008; Reza
Adel and Ghorbani Moghadam 2015; Tabatabaei and Azimi 2015; Yang and
Allison 2003). All the investigations mentioned above are focused on English
as a native language tongue in contrast to English used by non-native

speakers.
Nevertheless, in our case, although we understand that English is the reference
language needed to have visibility in the international scientific community,

we believe more studies of intercultural rhetoric focused on other languages
are needed, such as Spanish, which it is also increasingly present in the
sci-
entific world.3 Hence, in our research we have been particularly interested in
those studies that include Spanish in their corpus, although it is true that they
exclusively use texts by authors for whom Spanish is their mother tongue to
observe if there are transfers of rhetorical patterns into English.4 With regard
1 Tis fact points to the existence of prototypical formalities that the scientific articles have to incorporate to satisfy a
series
of expectations necessary for their subsequent publication in scientific journals.
2 Connor (2011); Connor and Moreno (2005); Moreno (2008); Mur Dueñas (2018) and Kubota and Lehner (2004)
among
others.
3 According to the annual report of the Instituto Cervantes for 2018, the growth in the number of Spanish-language
texts
from Spanish-speaking countries in the world’s scientific production was 127.96% for the period 2003-2011. In
addition,
except for the period 2000-2003, such participation in the world’s scientific production has been growing steadily
since
1996. Despite the fact that the presence of Spanish as a scientific communication instrument remains scarce on a
global
scale, the Spanish language, with 103,773 records in 2017, is the third most common language in which journals (not
only
scientific) are published.
4 We refer, among others, to: Moreno (1997), who analyses the use of causal metatext; Ciapuscio and Otañi (2002),
which
analyses the cultural-rhetorical characteristics in the conclusions of RAs written in English, German and Spanish;
Vázquez

to contrastive rhetorical research focused on the Slovene language, Pisanski

Pe-
terlin’s work on the text-organizing metatext (2005, 2007) and the inclusion
of
previews and reviews in the text (2002) needs to be mentioned. However,
there
exist only two investigations (Heredero, Pihler and Santiago 2017;
Santiago
and Heredero 2018) that have worked with Spanish and Slovene, both focused
on differences and similarities of the introductions of Linguistic and Applied

Linguistic research articles written in Spanish by Slovene researchers,
compar-
ing them with those written in their native languages by Spanish and Slovene
researchers. Taking into account all the above, this article attempts to solve
this
gap and to contribute to the identification and establishment of rhetorical and
cultural conclusion patterns, as well as the literature on the distance between

both languages, and we consider the results could be useful for future
pedagogic
purposes for academic writing in Spanish as a foreign language.
In our analysis, the framework of intercultural rhetoric has been considered

(see
Connor 2011; Connor and Moreno 2005) to establish whether there is a trans-
fer of rhetorical patterns from the mother tongue to the foreign language (in
our case, from Slovene to Spanish), using a parallel corpus for this.
Regarding
the comparability and equivalence of the corpus within intercultural rhetoric,
we have based our work here on the contextual factors established by
Moreno
(2008).
With respect to methodology, a corpus composed of 36 RAs has been
designed,
of which 12 have been written in Spanish by native speaker experts, 12 in
Slovene by native speaker experts and 12 in Spanish by Slovene experts. For
the classification and analysis of the rhetorical moves of the corpus, on the
basis of the pioneering works of Swales (1990, 2004) and Gnutzmann and
Oldenburg (1991), we have taken into account the model in Yang and Allison
(2003) (where Results, Discussion, Conclusion and Pedagogic Implications

are
included), adding two more steps from the model in Moritz, Meurer and
Del-
lagnelo (2008).
In summary, this research investigates how conclusions of RAs produced in

Span-
ish by Slovene researchers, and Slovene and Spanish researchers in their
native
languages, are structurally organized with respect to the moves and steps of
the
proposed conclusion model. After describing our corpus data and our method of
analysis, we present the results and discussion of our research, finishing with
a
conclusion that summarizes the main findings and takes into account the peda-
gogical implications of this investigation.
(2010), which deals with the use of modal verbs; Fuentes Cortés (2013), who studies the Conclusions section in the
disci-
pline of history; or Mur Dueñas (2018), focused on the use of metadiscourse features in Business Management RAs
written
in English and in Spanish.

2 METHODOLOGY
2.1 Data selection
This is a corpus-based study using three subcorpora, created for the purposes
of
our investigation, one including RAs written in Spanish by Spanish
investigators
(Corpus ESP), one with RAs written in Slovene by Slovene experts (Corpus
SLO)
and one including RAs written in Spanish by Slovene researchers (Corpus
ELE).
Each corpus contains 12 RAs, adding up to a total of 36 for the whole corpus.
We are aware that 12 is a small number of examples, but it should be taken

into
account that there are not many RAs written in Spanish by Slovene experts.
Be-
sides that, similar previous studies (such as Moritz, Meurer and Dellagnelo
2008
or Mur Dueñas 2010) were carried on with as many RAs as in our investiga-
tion. This same corpus was also used in a previous investigation (Santiago
and
Heredero 2018) analysing Introductions.
In order to create a corpus as comparable as possible, we followed the criteria
established by Moreno (2008). Therefore, besides the genre of RA we limited

the
topic of the texts to Linguistics and Applied Linguistics. The length of the
articles
goes from 3,750 words to 10,000, and all of them were published between
2010
and 2016. This also explains the small number of texts and authors included in
the corpora, since there were not many RAs written in Spanish by Slovene
inves-
tigators during this period of time. Finally, the research articles for Corpus
ESP
and Corpus SLO were taken from three different journals, while for Corpus
ELE
we needed to take them from five journals because of the small number of this
kind of RAs, as already noted. However, the main criteria for selecting the
articles
was that the journals were indexed in the following bases: MLA, ERIH Plus
and/
or Scopus.5
2.2 Data analysis
Regarding the classification and analysis of the conclusions of each research

ar-
ticle included in the corpora, we followed the model of moves and steps estab-
lished by Yang and Allison (2003). The mentioned research analysed all
rhetorical
choices among the various sections, from Results to Conclusions (i.e.
Results,
Results and Discussion, Discussion, Conclusion or Pedagogic Implications
sec-
tions). Nevertheless, we have only taken into account the structure of the Con-
clusion section due to our interest in the fact that this summarizes “the research
5 For full details of each research article included in the corpora, check the Appendix.

by highlighting the findings, evaluating and pointing out possible lines of

future
research as well as suggesting implications for teaching and learning” (Yang
and
Allison 2003, 380). However, we found that some important steps were
missing
in this model for the purposes of our investigation. Thus, we decided to add a
few
modifications that were present in the model proposed by Moritz, Meurer and
Dellagnelo (2008), itself based on Gnutzmann and Oldenburg 1991. As result

of
this combination, the model that we used in our analysis was as follows:
Move 1. Summarizing the study

Move 2. Evaluating the study
Step 1. Indicating significance/advantage
Step 2. Indicating limitations
Step 3. Evaluating methodology
Move 3. Deductions from the research
Step 1. Making reference to previous research6
Step 2. Recommending further research
Step 3. Drawing pedagogic implications/applications7
Figure 1. Moves and steps in conclusion sections based on Yang and Allison
(2003), Moritz, Meurer and Dellagnelo (2008) and Gnutzmann and Olden-
burg (1991)
Following this model of moves and steps, each RA included in the corpora
was
manually analysed twice by each of the investigators, since our goal was “to
iden-
tify the rhetorical steps in a genre and the most salient signals leading to their
in-
terpretation” (Moreno and Swales, 2018, 42). There was a period of two
months
between the two analyses, so that the validity and reliability of the results
were
higher. Regarding Corpus SLO, since it is written in a foreign language for
both
of the investigators, an extra investigator, a native speaker of Slovene,
analysed
it. The level of analysis was usually the sentence, but we took into account
even
smaller units if we considered that they were realizing a certain step, since
“we
were aware that a segment of text might have more than one function” (Yang
and
Allison 2003, 371). We restricted the analysis to the presence of certain
structures
that realize a move or a step. Examples of every fulfilled move and step for
each
of the corpus are presented below, with the structures realizing the step shown
in bold:
6 Step added from Moritz, Meurer and Dellagnelo (2008) and Gnutzmann and Oldenburg (1991).
7 Step modified from Moritz, Meurer and Dellagnelo (2008) and Gnutzmann and Oldenburg (1991).

“Se ha llevado a cabo un análisis lingüístico de nombres de marca espa-

ñoles.” (ESP 01, 86)
“El presente trabajo ha presentado la teoría de la cooperación e implica-
turas conversacionales de Grice [...]” (ELE 06, 84)
“V naši raziskavi [...] smo preverili, kako se polprofesionalni prevajalci
znajdejo pri [...]” (SLO 05, 60)

“La acumulación de evidencias de la validez que se ha descrito hasta aquí

viene a demostrar que [...]” (ESP 11, 108)
“El análisis del léxico disponible de los estudiantes eslovenos pone de
relieve el grado de convergencia [...]” (ELE 09, 75)
“Ugotavljamo, da čeprav se starši [...]” (SLO 02, 202)
“Algunas limitaciones que presenta este estudio pueden hallarse en la
población sobre la que [...]” (ESP 02, 26)
“Además, el hecho de que la lengua española ofrezca tantas
posibilidades de expresión no facilita la tarea de delimitar conceptos y
funciones sin-
tácticas” (ELE 10, 159)
“Vzorec je sicer premajhen, da bi lahko delal posplošitve, saj je le 4 CIU-
TI anketirancev navedlo, da se ukvarja s tolmačenjem.” (SLO 04, 19)

“Asimismo, y con vistas a obtener unos datos más completos que puedan
servir para […] al análisis cuantiativo se añadirá otro de corte cualita-
tivo” (ESP 10, 149)
“[…] los problemas que pueden tener los jueces a la hora de tomar la
decisión sobre los puntos de corte […] [lo] hemos experimentado en
nuestro proceso de calibración.” (ELE 04, 320)
“Model je nastal na podlagi dolgoletnih prevajalskih izkušenj avtorice in
njenega raziskovalnega dela […]” (SLO 06, 122)

Step 1. Making reference to previous research

“En Ruiz (2014) y Ruiz (en prensa) se ofrece una completa presentación de
este modelo […]” (ESP 03, 49)
“Con esto se confirman las características de los prototipos según Kleiber
(1995) […]” (ELE 08, 161)
“Različnih izrazov sloganov ter njihovih variant in modifikacij ne
najdemo samo v časopisnih naslovih, kot to obravnavata Korošec (1978)
ter Ka-
lin Golobova (2008) […]” (SLO 08, 17)
“Con respecto a la fraseología también debería ser objeto de futuros es-

tudios el papel que desempeña […]” (ESP 05, 107)
“Sería interesante investigar la recepción de la literatura traducida entre
los lectores eslovenos […]” (ELE 07, 64)
“Vsekakor bi v zvezi z manjšalnostjo potrebovali več kvantitativnih in
statističnih analiz, zasnovanih na […]” (SLO 07, 112)
Step 3. Drawing pedagogic implications/applications
“Con la descripción detallada de la sección 3, se ha posibilitado que una

persona conocedora de la estructura de una PL pueda interpretarlas sin
necesidad […]” (ESP 06, 68)
“De este modo, esta investigación revela las palabras más disponibles
entre los españoles y que los estudiantes eslovenos desconocen y que
deben ser enseñadas en la clase de ELE en Eslovenia.” (ELE 12, 17)
“[…] je nujno, da se dejstva, da slovenščina v prevodih ni enaka slovenščini
v izvirniki, zavedamo, in da ga upoštevamo tako pri pouku prevajanja
kot pri pouku materinščine.” (SLO 10, 40)
3 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
In Table 1 it can be noticed that both the interval and average length of the ar-
ticles are similar in the corpora, despite Corpus ESP being the longest,
followed
by Corpus ELE and then Corpus SLO. Even so, although Corpus SLO is the
shortest, it does not have a relevant influence in Corpus ELE. Referring to
Con-
clusions, these are much longer in Corpus ESP or ELE (in addition to having a
much wider range) than in Corpus SLO: in Corpus ELE or ESP Conclusions
account for an average of 6.96% or 6.31% of the total length of the articles,
respectively, with 5.11% for Corpus SLO. In any case, in terms of RAs and
Con-
clusion size, we can conclude that Slovene specialists in Spanish prefer to
make more extensive Conclusions than their colleagues in their native
language, which we interpret as a rhetorical influence from Spanish.
Table 1: Length of the RAs and the Conclusions

CORPUS ESP CORPUS ELE CORPUS SLO
RAs number N=12 N=12 N=12
Interval number of words in
4,803-9,794 3,771-9,541 5,252-8,122
the RAs
Average number of words in
6,869.25 6,477.16 6,280.58
the RAs
206-1,172 146-1216 102-587
the Conclusion
Average number of words in the 434.08 451.33 321.41
Conclusion (6.31%) (6.96%) (5.11%)
With respect to Table 2, it illustrates the results and distribution of moves and
steps
for the Conclusion sections in relation to the presence of rhetorical moves in
each
of the RAs, i.e., it shows percentage of RAs in which moves and steps were used
as
well as total percentage of all moves together with the total number. The first
thing
that attracts our attention is that although Table 1 showed that Conclusion
sections
were much longer in Corpus ESP, Corpus ELE is the one that has the least moves
(58.33%) and steps (34.52%), considering total moves and steps. Likewise, the
total
number of steps in Corpus ESP is higher than in Corpus SLO or Corpus ELE, what
indicates that Spanish authors are more used to the moves and steps of the Conclu-
sion section, or at least their rhetorical strategies are closer to Anglo-Saxon
standards.
Table 2: Results and distribution of moves and steps

Move 1
5 (41.6%) 1 (8.3%) 4 (33.3%)
Summarizing the study
Move 2
12 (100%) 11 (91.6%) 12 (100%)
Evaluating the study
Move 3
11 (91.6%) 9 (75%) 12 (100%)
Deductions from the research
Total number of moves 28 (77.77%) 21 (58.33%) 28 (77.77%)
Average number of steps in RAs 4.08 2.5 3.416
Total number of steps 49 (58.33%) 29 (34.52%) 41 (48.8%)

On the other side, Move 1 (Summarizing the study) is the least favoured
move in
all corpora: Corpus ESP (41.6%), SLO (33.3%) or ELE (8.3%). Its function
is
“to provide a brief account of the main points from the perspective of the
overall
study” (Yang and Allison 2003, 382) and it does not have any steps. Our
results
coincide with Moritz, Meurer and Dellagnelo (2008) or Amnuai and
Wannaruk
(2013), and we can interpret this as the writer´s reluctance to repeat what has
been already included in the RA summary. However, this shared finding is
lim-
ited to the mentioned studies (all three in the field of Applied Linguistic). In
other fields (i.e. Natural and Social Sciences), the results have been
completely
different (Aslam and Mehmood 2014 or Tabatabaei and Azimi 2015), and
the
use of this pattern is more settled.
Table 3: Results and distribution of steps from move 2
MOVE 2 CORPUS ESP CORPUS ELE CORPUS SLO

Step 2.1
Indicating significance/ 12 (100%) 10 (83.3%) 12 (100%)
advantage
Step 2.2
4 (33.3%) 2 (16.6%) 2 (16.6%)
Indicating limitations
Step 2.3
5 (41.6%) 1 (8.3%) 4 (33.3%)
Evaluating methodology
Total number of steps 21 13 18
Unlike Move 1, Move 2 (Evaluating the study) is the rhetorical move with
the
most frequency, as we can observe in Table 3. Its objective is to evaluate the
over-
all study. The analysis distinguishes between three steps. The first step,
Indicating
significance/advantage (Step 2.1), is the most favoured in all corpora, given
that
one of the goals of any research is to point out its strengths and highlight its
find-
ings. These results seem to confirm previous investigations in contrastive
rhetoric
(inter alia: Amnuai and Wannaruk 2013; Aslam and Mehmood 2014;
Ciapuscio
and Otañi 2002; Fuentes Cortés 2013; Moritz, Meurer and Dellagnelo 2008;
Reza Adel and Ghorbani Moghadam 2015; Tabatabaei and Azimi 2015;
Yang
and Allison 2003). The second and the third steps, Indicating limitations
(Step
2.2) and Evaluating methodology (Step 2.3), are more problematic due to
the
low frequency (especially in Corpus ELE, with only two and one
occurrences,
respectively). Surprisingly, if we just focus on the total steps of move 2,
corpus
ELE is the one with the least frequency (13 steps) compared to corpus ESP (21
steps) and corpus SLO (18 steps). It is striking that although corpus ELE has
the longest Conclusions, there is no correlation with the number of moves and

steps included, which it could imply that Slovene authors who write in
Spanish
do not use these rhetorical patterns as much in their RAs. Nevertheless, we
have
to consider the number of different authors as a problem when establishing the
corpora: Corpus ESP has 18 different authors, SLO 12, while corpus ELE has
only seven, due to the lack of Slovene authors8 who publish in Spanish. In view
of this context, the disparity concerning Corpus ELE is understandable, albeit a
research limitation of the present investigation. On the other hand, a previous
investigation focusing on Introduction sections carried out with the same corpora
as in the present research (Santiago and Heredero 2018, 278-79), revealed

that
step 3.4 (Summarising methods) had a higher frequency in Corpus ELE
(91.6%)
and Corpus SLO (75%) in contrast to Corpus ESP (50%). If we compare this
with the results obtained in the step 2.3 (Evaluating methodology) of the
Conclu-
sion section, where Corpus ELE had the lowest frequency (8.3%) followed
by
Corpus SLO (33.3%), we find an inverse relationship that we could interpret
as
a reluctance by the Slovene authors to refer back to methodology.
However, our results do not differ from Yang and Allison 2003, Amnuai and
Wan-
naruk 2013, Aslam and Mehmood 2014 or Reza Adel and Ghorbani
Moghadam
2015, which suggests that this reluctance should be taken into account in
teaching/
learning academic writing, as well as by future investigators, since authors
should
distinguish methodology presentation from methodology evaluation. There
are
enough studies that have already verified the adequacy and pedagogic utility
of
Yang and Allison’s model, and steps like 2.2 or 2.3 are indispensable to
achieve
investigations capable of questioning their own validity and/or reliability.

Deductions from the
research
Step 3.1
Making reference to previous 6 (50%) 6 (50%) 7 (58.3%)
research
Step 3.2
Recommending further 6 (50%) 5 (41.6%) 4 (33.3%)
research
Step 3.3
Drawing pedagogic 11 (91.6%) 4 (33.3%) 8 (66.6%)
implications/applications
8 Te population of Slovenia is estimated at 2.08 million, according to the Statistical Office of the Republic of Slovenia
(https://www.stat.si/StatWeb/en, 26.2.2019).

With regard to move 3 (Deductions from the research), the results reveal a
high
frequency in all corpora (SLO with 19, ESP with 23 and ELE with 15), as
shown
in Table 4. This is understandable, since authors use this move to elaborate
sug-
gestions from their research results in order to “solve the problems identified
by
the research, pointing out the line of further study or drawing pedagogic
implica-
tions” (Yang and Allison 2003, 383). Nonetheless, taking into consideration
the
total number of steps, Corpus ELE has the least steps of all (ESP has 23 steps,
SLO 19 and ELE 15), which agrees with what we already mentioned for move
2.
Three steps build move 3. The results in step 3.1 (Making reference to
previous re-
search) do not show large differences among corpora (Corpus SLO 7 steps, ESP
and
ELE 6), although the percentage is just around 50%. However, we could
explain
the low number by the fact that some authors prefer to make such references in
other sections of the paper, such as the Results section. Anyway, we consider
it
relevant to compare a study’s results with those of other investigations in the
Con-
clusion section, as a way to highlight the significance of the work, framing it
within
international research lines as another of the possible findings from the research.
Something similar to the results for step 3.1 occurs with 3.2
(Recommending
further research) in all corpora (ESP 6 steps, ELE 5 and SLO 4). Once
again,
this demonstrates a partial implantation of the Anglo-Saxon model in these
aca-
demic cultures, a fact that is extrapolated to the whole model analysed in this
work. Nonetheless, our case is comparable with previous investigations (such
as
Amnuai and Wannaruk 2013, Aslam and Mehmood 2014 or Reza Adel and
Ghorbani Moghadam 2015), which considered this step optional.
Finally, step 3.3 (Drawing pedagogic implications/applications) was

partially modi-
fied on the basis of the Moritz, Meurer and Dellagnelo model (2008) and
Gnutz-
mann and Oldenburg (1991), adding ‘applications’ to the Yang and Allison
model (2003). The goal of this step is to “allow authors to state the
pedagogical
significance of the study or indicate necessity for pedagogic changes”
(Amnuai
and Wannaruk 2013, 7). For this step Corpus ESP has 11 out of 12
occurrences,
representing 91.6%, in contrast with SLO (8 out of 12, 66.6%) or ELE (4 out
of
12, 33.3%). This last step reveals cultural and rhetorical specific variations:
while
Spanish authors evaluate this step as almost indispensable, the Slovene ones
con-
sider it nonessential (as well as Persian authors in Tabatabaei and Azimi 2015
and
Reza Adel and Ghorbani Moghadam 2015, Pakistani researchers in Aslam
and
Mehmood 2014, or Thai investigators in Amnuai and Wannaruk 2013). This
fact reveals again that Spanish authors of RAs are more familiar with these
rhe-
torical patterns than Slovene authors, although we cannot forget the very
small
number of Slovene authors publishing in Spanish, a fact that is responsible
for
the disparity concerning Corpus ELE and a research limitation of the present
investigation, as mentioned before.

4 CONCLUSION
The main purpose of the present study was to identify the rhetorical organiza-
tion of the Conclusion sections of RAs written in Spanish and Slovene by
native
speakers, as well as RAs written in Spanish by Slovene authors. For the
analysis
of the different patterns of the Conclusion section, we followed the model stab-
lished by Yang and Allison (2003), Moritz, Meurer and Dellagnelo (2008)
and
Gnutzmann and Oldenburg (1991), as well as the principles used for this kind of
analysis settled by the field of intercultural rhetoric (Connor and Moreno,

2005;
Moreno, 2008; Connor 2011; Moreno and Swales 2018).
The empirical data was based on comparable corpora compiled ad hoc for our
re-
search aim. However, we are aware of some limitations, especially the low
number
of RAs in the corpora and especially the low number of Slovene authors in the
corpus ELE, due to the scarcity of Slovene authors writing in Spanish, all of
which
makes our study difficult to generalize. For this reason, further investigations
are
necessary to replicate and confirm the results presented here. Even so, we agree
with
Tabatabaei and Azimi (2015) regarding further investigations. These authors
sug-
gested there is a need to analyse all sections included within RAs in order to
establish
“the structural relation of each section to other sections”, and thus be able to “de-
termine how sections are related to each other” (Tabatabaei and Azimi 2015,
378).
In defiance of all its limitations, this study confirmed previous research based
on
the field of intercultural rhetoric (cf. Amnuai and Wannaruk 2013; Aslam
and
Mehmood 2014; Moritz, Meurer and Dellagnelo 2008; Reza Adel and
Ghorbani
Moghadam 2015; Tabatabaei and Azimi 2015; Yang and Allison 2003).
Despite
evidence of the adequacy and the pedagogic utility of Yang and Allison
model,
our results also present an unbalanced distribution of rhetoric patterns, which
shows that writers still maintain their differences during the process of
writing
their concluding sections.
Nonetheless, there were some very notable differences in the frequency of

moves
and steps in the three corpora of this analysis. Spanish writers proved to be
more
familiar with these rhetorical patterns, since corpus ESP had the most number
of
steps, followed by corpus SLO and corpus ELE (it is notable that corpus ELE has
the lowest number of steps, although it has the longest conclusions). We
cannot
forget as a possible reason for this the influence of the journals’ and
reviewers’
policies and views on the articles published in individual journals, since some
edi-
tors/reviewers might demand a certain structure, while others are perhaps more
flexible. However, all corpora (ESP, SLO and ELE) showed steps 2.2
(Indicating
limitations), 2.3 (Evaluating methodology) and move 1 (Summarizing
the study)
were the least favoured. These results may persuade Spanish and Slovene
authors

of the importance of Conclusion section when writing RAs, considering it is

an
essential part of the research in which writers can show the importance,
signifi-
cance and benefits of their findings, although we cannot forget the fact that all
these articles were indeed published and thus successfully passed the editorial
procedure. Therefore, we think it would be useful for writers to be more

familiar
the different patterns in the rhetorical organization of the Conclusion section.
This fact underlines the need for specific investigations to focus on the
teaching/
learning of rhetorical patterns within the context of Academic Writing classes.
References
Amnuai, Wirada and Anchalee Wannaruk. 2013. “Investigating Move

Structure
of English Applied Linguistics Research Article Discussions Published in
In-
ternational and Thai Journals”. English Language Teaching 5 (2): 1−13.
Aslam, Insaf and Asim Mehmood. 2014. “Genre Analysis of Conclusion
Sec-
tions of Pakistani Research Articles in Natural and Social Sciences”.
Journal of
Natural Sciences Research 4 (22): 106−12.
Cassany, Daniel and Óscar Morales. 2008. “Leer y escribir en la universidad:
Hacia la lectura y la escritura crítica de géneros científicos”. Revista

Memoralia
5: 69−82.
Ciapuscio, Guiomar E. and Isabel Otañi. 2002. “Las conclusiones de los
artículos
de investigación desde una perspectiva contrastiva”. R.I.L.L. 15: 117−33.
Connor, Ulla. 2011. Intercultural Rhetoric in the Writing Classroom.
Michigan:
Universidad de Michigan.
Connor, Ulla and Ana Isabel Moreno. 2005. “Tertium comparationis: A vital
com-
ponent in contrastive research methodology”. In Directions in Applied
Linguis-
tics: Essays in Honour of Robert B. Kaplan, edited by Paul Bruthiaux,
Dwight
Atkinson, William Eggington, 153−64. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
Fuentes Cortés, Miguel. 2013. “Las conclusiones de los artículos de
investigación
en historia”. Literatura y Lingüística 28: 215−32.
Gnutzmann, Claus and Hermann Oldenburg. 1991. “Contrastive Text Linguis-
tics in LSP Research: Theoretical Considerations and some Preliminary
Find-
ings”. In Subject oriented Texts: Language for Special Purposes and
Text Theory,
edited by Hartmut Schröder, 101−36. New York/Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.
Heredero Zorzo, David, Barbara Pihler Ciglič and Gemma Santiago Alonso.
2017. “Retórica intercultural y discurso académico: análisis contrastivo de
las
introducciones en los artículos de investigación escritas en español por
inves-
tigadores eslovenos”. Vestnik za tuje jezike 9: 83−106.
Holmes, Richard. 1997. “Genre Analysis, and the Social Sciences: An
Investiga-
tion of the Structure of Research Article Discussion Sections in Three
Disci-
plines”. English for Specific Purposes 16 (4): 321−37.

Hyland, Ken. 1996. “Writing without conviction? Helping in scientific

research
articles”. Applied Linguistics 17 (4): 433−54.
Instituto Cervantes. 2018. “El español en la ciencia y la cultura”. In El
español:
una lengua viva. Informe 2018, edited by Instituto Cervantes, 49-51.
Madrid:
Instituto Cervantes.
Kubota, Ryuko and Al Lehner. 2004. “Toward Critical Contrastive
Rhetoric”.
Journal of Second Language Writing 13: 7−27.
Moreno, Ana Isabel. 1997. “Genre Constraints across Languages: Causal
Meta-
text in Spanish and English RAs”. English for Specific Purposes 16 (3):
161−79. Moreno, Ana Isabel. 2008. “The Importance of Comparable Corpora
in Cross-
Cultural Studies”. In Contrastive Rhetoric: Reaching to Intercultural
Rhetoric, edited by Ulla Connor, Ed Nagelhout and William Rozycki,
25−41. Philadel-
phia: John Benjamins.
Moreno, Ana Isabel and John Swales. 2018 “Strengthening Move Analysis
Meth-
odology towards Bridging the Function-Form Gap”. English for Specific
Pur-
poses 50: 40−63.
Moritz, Maria Ester, José Luiz Meurer and Adriana Kuerten Dellagnelo.
2008.
“Conclusions as Components of Research Articles across Portuguese as a
Na-
tive Language, English as a Native Language and English as a Foreign
Lan-
guage: a Contrastive Genre Study”. The Specialist 29: 233−53.
Mur Dueñas, Pilar. 2018. “Promotional Strategies in Academic Writing:
State-
ments of Contribution in Spanish and ELF Research Articles”. In
Persuasion
in Public Discourse, edited by Jana Pelclová and Wei-Lun Lu, 259−78.
Am-
sterdam: John Benjamins.
Pérez Ruiz, Leonor. 2001. “Análisis retórico contrastivo: el resumen
lingüístico y
médico en inglés y español.” PhD diss., University of Valladolid.
Pisanski Peterlin, Agnes. 2002. “Analiza nekaterih metabesedilnih elementov
v
slovenskih znanstvenih člankih v dveh časovnih obdobjih”. Slavistična
revija
50 (2): 183−97.
Pisanski Peterlin, Agnes. 2005. “Text-Organising Metatext in Research
Articles:
an English-Slovene Contrastive Analysis”. English for Specific Purposes
24 (2):
307−19.
Pisanski Peterlin, Agnes. 2007. “Grammatical Forms of Text-Organising
Metatext:
A Slovene English Contrastive Analysis”. Slovene Linguistic Studies 6:
251−65. Reza Adel, Seyyed Mohammad and Rokhsareh Ghorbani Moghadam.
2015. “A
Comparison of Moves in Conclusion Sections of Research Articles in
Psychol-
ogy, Persian Literature and Applied Linguistics”. Teaching English Language
9
(2): 167−91.
Santiago Alonso, Gemma and David Heredero Zorzo. 2018. “Las
introducciones
de artículos de investigación de lingüística y lingüística aplicada escritas
por
eslovenos y sus aplicaciones didácticas para la clase de español con fines
aca-
démicos”. Colindancias, 9: 271−91.

Swales, John. 1990. Genre Analysis: English in Academic Research

Settings. Cam-
bridge: Cambridge UP.
Swales, John. 2004. Research Genres: Exploration and Applications.
Cambridge:
Cambridge UP.
Tabatabaei, Omid and Leila Azimi. 2015. “Rhetorical Conventions in the
Con-
clusion Genre: Comparing English and Persian Research Articles in the
Field
of Social Studies”. Mediterranean Journal of Social Sciences 16 (6):
372−79. Vázquez, Ignacio. 2010. “A Contrastive Analysis of the Use of Modal
Verbs in the
Expression of Epistemic Stance in Business Management Research Articles
in
English and Spanish”. Ibérica 19: 77−96.
Yang, Ruiying and Desmond Allison. 2003. “Research articles in applied
linguistics:
moving from results to conclusions”. English for Specific Purposes 22:
365−85.
Appendix
Corpus ESP
(ESP 01) Jordá-Albiñana, Begoña, Ampuero-Canellas, Olga, González-Del-
Río,
Jimena and Magal-Royo, Teresa. 2010. “Análisis lingüístico de los nombres
de
marca españoles”. Revista de Lingüística y Lenguas Aplicadas 5: 77−88.
(ESP 02) Falero Parra, Francisco Javier. 2016. “La ansiedad ante las
destrezas
orales en la clase de español lengua extranjera: una propuesta blended-
learning
con sinohablantes”. Revista de Lingüística y Lenguas Aplicadas 11:
19−33. (ESP 03) Ruiz Campillo, José Plácido. 2017. “El verbo como espacio.
Seis nuevos
temas de gramática del español”. Revista Nebrija de Lingüística
Aplicada a la
Enseñanza de Lenguas 22: 31−51.
(ESP 04) Ortego Antón, María Teresa and Fernández Nistal, Purificación.
2015.
“Aproximación a las unidades con significado en el campo de la
informática
adquirido por extensión metafórica en los diccionarios generales de inglés
y
español”. Revista de Lingüística y Lenguas Aplicadas 10: 44−54.
(ESP 05) Recio Ariza, María Ángeles. 2013. “El enfoque cognitivista en la
frase-
ología”. Revista de Lingüística y Lenguas Aplicadas 8: 103−09.
(ESP 06) Bernardos Galindo, María del Socorro, Jiménez Briones, Rocío and
Pérez Cabello de Alba, María Beatriz. 2011. “Una aplicación informática
para
la gestión de las plantillas léxicas del modelo léxico construccional”.
Revista de
Lingüística y Lenguas Aplicadas 6: 53−69.
(ESP 07) Elena, Pilar. 2011. “Bases para la comprensión organizativa del
texto”.
Revista de Lingüística y Lenguas Aplicadas 6: 125−37.
(ESP 08) Sánchez Rufat, Anna. 2016. “Las funciones diagnóstica y evaluativa
del
análisis contrastivo de la interlengua del español basado en corpus”.
Linred
13: 1−14.

(ESP 09) Penadés Martínez, Inmaculada. 2015. “Las colocaciones del tipo
verbo
más locución verbal: implicaciones teóricas y aplicadas”. Linred 12: 1−13.
(ESP 10) Quevedo−Atienza, Ángeles. 2017. “El español con fines académicos:
progreso de un estudio sobre necesidades lingüísticas de estudiantes en
pro-
gramas de movilidad”. Revista Nebrija de Lingüística Aplicada a la
(ESP 11) Llorían González, Susana. 2018. “La evaluación de la habilidad co-
municativa específica en contextos académicos: la comprensión de las
clases
magistrales”. Revista Nebrija de Lingüística Aplicada a la Enseñanza de
Lenguas
24: 93−11.
(ESP 12) Jiménez, Antonio Luis. 2017. “Jerarquía de aprendizaje: un caso
prác-
tico con «por» y «para»”. Revista Nebrija de Lingüística Aplicada a la
Enseñanza
de Lenguas 22: 1−15.
Corpus ELE
(ELE 01) Seljak Adimora, Katja. 2012. “Los valores del pretérito perfecto
compuesto y del pretérito perfecto simple en Inquieta Compañía de

Carlos
Fuentes”. Vestnik za tuje jezike 4: 33−42.
(ELE 02) Trenc, Andreja. 2012. “Construcciones impersonales con se en
español
y su tratamiento didáctico desde una perspectiva de focus on form o la
atención
a la forma”. Vestnik za tuje jezike 4: 207−26.
(ELE 03) Pihler Ciglič, Barbara. 2014. “Los marcadores verbales de
modalidad
epistémica y su papel en el desarrollo de las competencias
comunicativas”.
Linguistica 54: 381−95.
(ELE 04) Šifrar Kalan, Marjana and Andreja Trenc. 2014. “La calibración de
la
comprensión lectora dentro del examen nacional de ELE según el MCER:
algunas cuestiones de evaluación”. Linguistica 54: 309−23.

(ELE 05) Pihler, Barbara. 2010. “Paradigmas verbales en el discurso lírico de
Machado, Jiménez y Aleixandre: el criterio de la actualidad”. Verba

Hispanica
18: 175−86.
(ELE 06) Trenc, Andreja. 2014. “Las máximas conversacionales desde un
en-
foque cognitivo: algunos casos del discurso indirecto en castellano”.
Verba
Hispanica 22: 71−87.
(ELE 07) Kastelic Vukadinović, Uršula. 2016. “Las palabras culturales en las
tra-
ducciones al esloveno de las obras de Juan Rulfo y Carlos Fuentes”. Verba

(ELE 08) Šifrar Kalan, Marjana. 2016. “La universalidad de los prototipos
semánticos en el léxico disponible de español”. Verba Hispanica 24:

147−65. (ELE 09) Šifrar Kalan, Marjana. 2014. “Disponibilidad léxica en
diferentes nive-
les de español/lengua extranjera”. Studia romanica posnaniensa 41(1): 63−85.

(ELE 10) Veselko, Vita. 2017. “Sobre la oración subordinada en función de

atrib-
uto”. Verba Hispanica 25: 147−64.
(ELE 11) Skubic, Mitja. 2013. “Tempora si fuerint nubila”. Verba Hispanica
21:
117−28.
(ELE 12) Šifrar Kalan, Marjana. 2012. “Análisis comparativo de la
disponibilidad
léxica en español como lengua extranjera (ELE) y lengua materna
(ELM)”.
marcoELE 15: 1−19.
Corpus SLO
(SLO 01) Lah, Meta. 2015. “«Med prakso sem spoznal, da sem študij dobro
izbral» − Evalvacija pedagoške prakse prve generacije študentov
bolonjskega
študija francoščine”. Vestnik za tuje jezike 7: 289−04.
(SLO 02) Premrl, Darja. 2012. “Stališča staršev na Notranjskem in poglavitni
mo-
tivacijski dejavniki za vključitev otrok v programe zgodnjega učenja tujega
jezika
pred otrokovim devetim letom starosti”. Vestnik za tuje jezike 4: 189−05.
(SLO 03) Paternoster, Alenka. 2011. “Slovenska imena bitij in zemljepisna
imena
v turističnih vodnikih in virih informativne narave, prevedenih v
francoščino”.
Vestnik za tuje jezike 3: 7−22.
(SLO 04) Pokorn, Nike K. 2016. “Nič več obljubljena dežela: dinamični
premiki
na slovenskem prevajalskem trgu in področju izobraževanja prevajalcev”.
Vest-
nik za tuje jezike 8: 9−21.
(SLO 05) Rieger, Mladen. 2014. “Prevod na pogled (prima vista) - Od pop-
estritve klasičnega pouka prevajanja do Lakmusovega papirja za
prevajalske
probleme”. Vestnik za tuje jezike 6: 49−62.
(SLO 06) Kocbek, Alenka. 2017. “Deset smernic za prevajanje pravnih
besedil”.
(SLO 07) Sicherl, Eva. 2016. “Primeri slovenskih manjšalnic z vidika
evalvativne
morfologije”. Jezik in slovstvo 61−2: 101−15.
(SLO 08) Polajnar, Janja. 2013. “Neprodani in trdni. Ja, seveda, potem pa
svizec...
Osamosvajanje oglasnih sloganov v slovenskem jeziku”. Jezik in slovstvo
58
(3): 3−19.
(SLO 09) Tratar, Olga. 2014. “Pomenske spremembe pridevnika priden od
16.
stoletja do danes”. Jezik in slovstvo 59 (4): 27−46.
(SLO 10) Pisanski Peterlin, Agnes. 2015. “So prevedena poljudnoznanstvena
besedila v slovenščini drugačna od izvirnih? Korpusna študija na primeru
izražanja epistemske naklonskosti”. Slavistična revija 63 (1): 29−43.
(SLO 11) Kržišnik, Erika. 2010. “Idiomatska beseda ali frazeološka enota”.
Slavistična revija 58 (1): 83−94.

(SLO 12) Bizjak Končar, Aleksandra. 2017. “Dialoške značilnosti pridižnega
be-
sedila - jezikoslovni vidik”. Slavistična revija 65 (3): 517−36.
chapter 4
Conclusions in
linguistics and
applied linguistics
research articles
written in Spanish
as a foreign language:
An intercultural
rhetoric study

Abstract
Te present work is a contrastive study where we analyse the conclusions

of
a corpus of 36 Linguistics and Applied Linguistics research articles written
in Spanish and Slovene, both by native speakers, as well as research

articles
written in Spanish by Slovene investigators. We focus on the structure of
this
section following the moves and steps established by Yang and Allison
(2003)
and Moritz, Meurer and Dellagnelo (2008), as well as the principles used
for
this kind of analysis settled by the field of intercultural rhetoric (Connor
and
Moreno, 2005, Moreno, 2008, Connor 2011). Te results of our investigation
reveal that there are important differences concerning conclusions in

research
articles between the two languages, which should be taken into account
when
teaching Spanish as an academic language.
Keywords: intercultural rhetoric, academic writing, corpus study,

rhetorical moves, conclusion in research articles.
Izvleček
V pričujočem prispevku je predstavljena kontrastivna študija, v kateri

analizi-
ramo sklepne razdelke v korpusu 36 znanstvenih člankov s področij
jezikoslov-
ja in uporabnega jezikoslovja, ki so jih v španščini in slovenščini napisali
rojeni
govorci, pa tudi člankov, ki so jih v španščini napisali slovenski
raziskovalci.
Struktura sklepnega razdelka je razčlenjena po potezah in korakih, kot so
jih
definirali Yang in Allison (2003) ter Moritz, Meurer in Dellagnelo
(2008),
ter v skladu z načeli analize, uveljavljene na področju kontrastivne retorike
(Connor in Moreno, 2005, Moreno, 2008, Connor 2011). Rezultati

raziskave
pokažejo pomembne razlike med jezikoma v sklepnih razdelkih
znanstvenih
člankov, ki bi jih bilo treba upoštevati pri pouku španščine kot
akademskega
jezika.
Ključne besede: medkulturna retorika, akademsko pisanje, korpusna

študija, retorične poteze, sklep znanstvenega članka

1 INTRODUCTION
In the last few decades, a large number of studies (Cassany and Morales
2008;
Gnutzmann and Oldenburg 1991; Holmes 1997; Hyland 1996; Pérez Ruiz
2001; Swales 1990, 2004) has paid extensive attention to the delimitation of
the structure and construction of research articles (henceforth RAs), in order
to stimulate an ever more global form of scientific-academic communication.
The aforementioned investigations are oriented to identify prototypical rhe-
torical moves that constitute the different sections of RAs (Introduction, Re-
sults and Discussion, Conclusion and Summary). 1 However, we cannot
ignore
that most of the previous studies are framed within an Anglo-Saxon context,
whose impact on the global scene has highlighted the importance of the socio-
cultural context within academic-scientific writing 2 (Santiago and Heredero
2018, 272).
Our aim in the present paper is the analysis of the rhetorical conventions in
the
conclusions section of RAs written in Spanish by Slovene researchers,
compar-
ing them with those made by Slovene and Spanish researchers in their native
languages. Our work is framed in the same line as other investigations (inter
alia: Amnuai and Wannaruk 2013; Aslam and Mehmood 2014; Ciapuscio and
Otañi 2002; Fuentes Cortés 2013; Moritz, Meurer and Dellagnelo 2008; Reza
Adel and Ghorbani Moghadam 2015; Tabatabaei and Azimi 2015; Yang and
Allison 2003). All the investigations mentioned above are focused on English
as a native language tongue in contrast to English used by non-native

speakers.
Nevertheless, in our case, although we understand that English is the reference
language needed to have visibility in the international scientific community,

we believe more studies of intercultural rhetoric focused on other languages
are needed, such as Spanish, which it is also increasingly present in the
sci-
entific world.3 Hence, in our research we have been particularly interested in
those studies that include Spanish in their corpus, although it is true that they
exclusively use texts by authors for whom Spanish is their mother tongue to
observe if there are transfers of rhetorical patterns into English.4 With regard
1 Tis fact points to the existence of prototypical formalities that the scientific articles have to incorporate to satisfy a
series
of expectations necessary for their subsequent publication in scientific journals.
2 Connor (2011); Connor and Moreno (2005); Moreno (2008); Mur Dueñas (2018) and Kubota and Lehner (2004)
among
others.
3 According to the annual report of the Instituto Cervantes for 2018, the growth in the number of Spanish-language
texts
from Spanish-speaking countries in the world’s scientific production was 127.96% for the period 2003-2011. In
addition,
except for the period 2000-2003, such participation in the world’s scientific production has been growing steadily
since
1996. Despite the fact that the presence of Spanish as a scientific communication instrument remains scarce on a
global
scale, the Spanish language, with 103,773 records in 2017, is the third most common language in which journals (not
only
scientific) are published.
4 We refer, among others, to: Moreno (1997), who analyses the use of causal metatext; Ciapuscio and Otañi (2002),
which
analyses the cultural-rhetorical characteristics in the conclusions of RAs written in English, German and Spanish;
Vázquez

to contrastive rhetorical research focused on the Slovene language, Pisanski

Pe-
terlin’s work on the text-organizing metatext (2005, 2007) and the inclusion
of
previews and reviews in the text (2002) needs to be mentioned. However,
there
exist only two investigations (Heredero, Pihler and Santiago 2017;
Santiago
and Heredero 2018) that have worked with Spanish and Slovene, both focused
on differences and similarities of the introductions of Linguistic and Applied

Linguistic research articles written in Spanish by Slovene researchers,
compar-
ing them with those written in their native languages by Spanish and Slovene
researchers. Taking into account all the above, this article attempts to solve
this
gap and to contribute to the identification and establishment of rhetorical and
cultural conclusion patterns, as well as the literature on the distance between

both languages, and we consider the results could be useful for future
pedagogic
purposes for academic writing in Spanish as a foreign language.
In our analysis, the framework of intercultural rhetoric has been considered

(see
Connor 2011; Connor and Moreno 2005) to establish whether there is a trans-
fer of rhetorical patterns from the mother tongue to the foreign language (in
our case, from Slovene to Spanish), using a parallel corpus for this.
Regarding
the comparability and equivalence of the corpus within intercultural rhetoric,
we have based our work here on the contextual factors established by
Moreno
(2008).
With respect to methodology, a corpus composed of 36 RAs has been
designed,
of which 12 have been written in Spanish by native speaker experts, 12 in
Slovene by native speaker experts and 12 in Spanish by Slovene experts. For
the classification and analysis of the rhetorical moves of the corpus, on the
basis of the pioneering works of Swales (1990, 2004) and Gnutzmann and
Oldenburg (1991), we have taken into account the model in Yang and Allison
(2003) (where Results, Discussion, Conclusion and Pedagogic Implications

are
included), adding two more steps from the model in Moritz, Meurer and
Del-
lagnelo (2008).
In summary, this research investigates how conclusions of RAs produced in

Span-
ish by Slovene researchers, and Slovene and Spanish researchers in their
native
languages, are structurally organized with respect to the moves and steps of
the
proposed conclusion model. After describing our corpus data and our method of
analysis, we present the results and discussion of our research, finishing with
a
conclusion that summarizes the main findings and takes into account the peda-
gogical implications of this investigation.
(2010), which deals with the use of modal verbs; Fuentes Cortés (2013), who studies the Conclusions section in the
disci-
pline of history; or Mur Dueñas (2018), focused on the use of metadiscourse features in Business Management RAs
written
in English and in Spanish.

2 METHODOLOGY
2.1 Data selection
This is a corpus-based study using three subcorpora, created for the purposes
of
our investigation, one including RAs written in Spanish by Spanish
investigators
(Corpus ESP), one with RAs written in Slovene by Slovene experts (Corpus
SLO)
and one including RAs written in Spanish by Slovene researchers (Corpus
ELE).
Each corpus contains 12 RAs, adding up to a total of 36 for the whole corpus.
We are aware that 12 is a small number of examples, but it should be taken

into
account that there are not many RAs written in Spanish by Slovene experts.
Be-
sides that, similar previous studies (such as Moritz, Meurer and Dellagnelo
2008
or Mur Dueñas 2010) were carried on with as many RAs as in our investiga-
tion. This same corpus was also used in a previous investigation (Santiago
and
Heredero 2018) analysing Introductions.
In order to create a corpus as comparable as possible, we followed the criteria
established by Moreno (2008). Therefore, besides the genre of RA we limited

the
topic of the texts to Linguistics and Applied Linguistics. The length of the
articles
goes from 3,750 words to 10,000, and all of them were published between
2010
and 2016. This also explains the small number of texts and authors included in
the corpora, since there were not many RAs written in Spanish by Slovene
inves-
tigators during this period of time. Finally, the research articles for Corpus
ESP
and Corpus SLO were taken from three different journals, while for Corpus
ELE
we needed to take them from five journals because of the small number of this
kind of RAs, as already noted. However, the main criteria for selecting the
articles
was that the journals were indexed in the following bases: MLA, ERIH Plus
and/
or Scopus.5
2.2 Data analysis
Regarding the classification and analysis of the conclusions of each research

ar-
ticle included in the corpora, we followed the model of moves and steps estab-
lished by Yang and Allison (2003). The mentioned research analysed all
rhetorical
choices among the various sections, from Results to Conclusions (i.e.
Results,
Results and Discussion, Discussion, Conclusion or Pedagogic Implications
sec-
tions). Nevertheless, we have only taken into account the structure of the Con-
clusion section due to our interest in the fact that this summarizes “the research
5 For full details of each research article included in the corpora, check the Appendix.

by highlighting the findings, evaluating and pointing out possible lines of

future
research as well as suggesting implications for teaching and learning” (Yang
and
Allison 2003, 380). However, we found that some important steps were
missing
in this model for the purposes of our investigation. Thus, we decided to add a
few
modifications that were present in the model proposed by Moritz, Meurer and
Dellagnelo (2008), itself based on Gnutzmann and Oldenburg 1991. As result

of
this combination, the model that we used in our analysis was as follows:

Step 1. Making reference to previous research6
Step 3. Drawing pedagogic implications/applications7
Figure 1. Moves and steps in conclusion sections based on Yang and Allison
(2003), Moritz, Meurer and Dellagnelo (2008) and Gnutzmann and Olden-
burg (1991)
Following this model of moves and steps, each RA included in the corpora
was
manually analysed twice by each of the investigators, since our goal was “to
iden-
tify the rhetorical steps in a genre and the most salient signals leading to their
in-
terpretation” (Moreno and Swales, 2018, 42). There was a period of two
months
between the two analyses, so that the validity and reliability of the results
were
higher. Regarding Corpus SLO, since it is written in a foreign language for
both
of the investigators, an extra investigator, a native speaker of Slovene,
analysed
it. The level of analysis was usually the sentence, but we took into account
even
smaller units if we considered that they were realizing a certain step, since
“we
were aware that a segment of text might have more than one function” (Yang
and
Allison 2003, 371). We restricted the analysis to the presence of certain
structures
that realize a move or a step. Examples of every fulfilled move and step for
each
of the corpus are presented below, with the structures realizing the step shown
in bold:
6 Step added from Moritz, Meurer and Dellagnelo (2008) and Gnutzmann and Oldenburg (1991).
7 Step modified from Moritz, Meurer and Dellagnelo (2008) and Gnutzmann and Oldenburg (1991).

“Se ha llevado a cabo un análisis lingüístico de nombres de marca espa-

ñoles.” (ESP 01, 86)
“El presente trabajo ha presentado la teoría de la cooperación e implica-
turas conversacionales de Grice [...]” (ELE 06, 84)
“V naši raziskavi [...] smo preverili, kako se polprofesionalni prevajalci
znajdejo pri [...]” (SLO 05, 60)

“La acumulación de evidencias de la validez que se ha descrito hasta aquí

viene a demostrar que [...]” (ESP 11, 108)
“El análisis del léxico disponible de los estudiantes eslovenos pone de
relieve el grado de convergencia [...]” (ELE 09, 75)
“Ugotavljamo, da čeprav se starši [...]” (SLO 02, 202)
“Algunas limitaciones que presenta este estudio pueden hallarse en la
población sobre la que [...]” (ESP 02, 26)
“Además, el hecho de que la lengua española ofrezca tantas
posibilidades de expresión no facilita la tarea de delimitar conceptos y
funciones sin-
tácticas” (ELE 10, 159)
“Vzorec je sicer premajhen, da bi lahko delal posplošitve, saj je le 4 CIU-
TI anketirancev navedlo, da se ukvarja s tolmačenjem.” (SLO 04, 19)

“Asimismo, y con vistas a obtener unos datos más completos que puedan
servir para […] al análisis cuantiativo se añadirá otro de corte cualita-
tivo” (ESP 10, 149)
“[…] los problemas que pueden tener los jueces a la hora de tomar la
decisión sobre los puntos de corte […] [lo] hemos experimentado en
nuestro proceso de calibración.” (ELE 04, 320)
“Model je nastal na podlagi dolgoletnih prevajalskih izkušenj avtorice in
njenega raziskovalnega dela […]” (SLO 06, 122)

Step 1. Making reference to previous research

“En Ruiz (2014) y Ruiz (en prensa) se ofrece una completa presentación de
este modelo […]” (ESP 03, 49)
“Con esto se confirman las características de los prototipos según Kleiber
(1995) […]” (ELE 08, 161)
“Različnih izrazov sloganov ter njihovih variant in modifikacij ne
najdemo samo v časopisnih naslovih, kot to obravnavata Korošec (1978)
ter Ka-
lin Golobova (2008) […]” (SLO 08, 17)
“Con respecto a la fraseología también debería ser objeto de futuros es-

tudios el papel que desempeña […]” (ESP 05, 107)
“Sería interesante investigar la recepción de la literatura traducida entre
los lectores eslovenos […]” (ELE 07, 64)
“Vsekakor bi v zvezi z manjšalnostjo potrebovali več kvantitativnih in
statističnih analiz, zasnovanih na […]” (SLO 07, 112)
Step 3. Drawing pedagogic implications/applications
“Con la descripción detallada de la sección 3, se ha posibilitado que una

persona conocedora de la estructura de una PL pueda interpretarlas sin
necesidad […]” (ESP 06, 68)
“De este modo, esta investigación revela las palabras más disponibles
entre los españoles y que los estudiantes eslovenos desconocen y que
deben ser enseñadas en la clase de ELE en Eslovenia.” (ELE 12, 17)
“[…] je nujno, da se dejstva, da slovenščina v prevodih ni enaka slovenščini
v izvirniki, zavedamo, in da ga upoštevamo tako pri pouku prevajanja
kot pri pouku materinščine.” (SLO 10, 40)
3 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
In Table 1 it can be noticed that both the interval and average length of the ar-
ticles are similar in the corpora, despite Corpus ESP being the longest,
followed
by Corpus ELE and then Corpus SLO. Even so, although Corpus SLO is the
shortest, it does not have a relevant influence in Corpus ELE. Referring to
Con-
clusions, these are much longer in Corpus ESP or ELE (in addition to having a
much wider range) than in Corpus SLO: in Corpus ELE or ESP Conclusions
account for an average of 6.96% or 6.31% of the total length of the articles,
respectively, with 5.11% for Corpus SLO. In any case, in terms of RAs and
Con-
clusion size, we can conclude that Slovene specialists in Spanish prefer to
make more extensive Conclusions than their colleagues in their native
language, which we interpret as a rhetorical influence from Spanish.
Table 1: Length of the RAs and the Conclusions

RAs number N=12 N=12 N=12
4,803-9,794 3,771-9,541 5,252-8,122
the RAs
Average number of words in
6,869.25 6,477.16 6,280.58
the RAs
206-1,172 146-1216 102-587
the Conclusion
Average number of words in the 434.08 451.33 321.41
Conclusion (6.31%) (6.96%) (5.11%)
With respect to Table 2, it illustrates the results and distribution of moves and
steps
for the Conclusion sections in relation to the presence of rhetorical moves in
each
of the RAs, i.e., it shows percentage of RAs in which moves and steps were used
as
well as total percentage of all moves together with the total number. The first
thing
that attracts our attention is that although Table 1 showed that Conclusion
sections
were much longer in Corpus ESP, Corpus ELE is the one that has the least moves
(58.33%) and steps (34.52%), considering total moves and steps. Likewise, the
total
number of steps in Corpus ESP is higher than in Corpus SLO or Corpus ELE, what
indicates that Spanish authors are more used to the moves and steps of the Conclu-
sion section, or at least their rhetorical strategies are closer to Anglo-Saxon
standards.
Table 2: Results and distribution of moves and steps

Move 1
5 (41.6%) 1 (8.3%) 4 (33.3%)
Summarizing the study
Move 2
12 (100%) 11 (91.6%) 12 (100%)
Move 3
11 (91.6%) 9 (75%) 12 (100%)
Deductions from the research
Total number of moves 28 (77.77%) 21 (58.33%) 28 (77.77%)
Average number of steps in RAs 4.08 2.5 3.416
Total number of steps 49 (58.33%) 29 (34.52%) 41 (48.8%)

On the other side, Move 1 (Summarizing the study) is the least favoured
move in
all corpora: Corpus ESP (41.6%), SLO (33.3%) or ELE (8.3%). Its function
is
“to provide a brief account of the main points from the perspective of the
overall
study” (Yang and Allison 2003, 382) and it does not have any steps. Our
results
coincide with Moritz, Meurer and Dellagnelo (2008) or Amnuai and
Wannaruk
(2013), and we can interpret this as the writer´s reluctance to repeat what has
been already included in the RA summary. However, this shared finding is
lim-
ited to the mentioned studies (all three in the field of Applied Linguistic). In
other fields (i.e. Natural and Social Sciences), the results have been
completely
different (Aslam and Mehmood 2014 or Tabatabaei and Azimi 2015), and
the
use of this pattern is more settled.

Step 2.1
Indicating significance/ 12 (100%) 10 (83.3%) 12 (100%)
advantage
Step 2.2
4 (33.3%) 2 (16.6%) 2 (16.6%)
Indicating limitations
Step 2.3
5 (41.6%) 1 (8.3%) 4 (33.3%)
Evaluating methodology
Unlike Move 1, Move 2 (Evaluating the study) is the rhetorical move with
the
most frequency, as we can observe in Table 3. Its objective is to evaluate the
over-
all study. The analysis distinguishes between three steps. The first step,
Indicating
significance/advantage (Step 2.1), is the most favoured in all corpora, given
that
one of the goals of any research is to point out its strengths and highlight its
find-
ings. These results seem to confirm previous investigations in contrastive
rhetoric
(inter alia: Amnuai and Wannaruk 2013; Aslam and Mehmood 2014;
Ciapuscio
and Otañi 2002; Fuentes Cortés 2013; Moritz, Meurer and Dellagnelo 2008;
Reza Adel and Ghorbani Moghadam 2015; Tabatabaei and Azimi 2015;
Yang
and Allison 2003). The second and the third steps, Indicating limitations
(Step
2.2) and Evaluating methodology (Step 2.3), are more problematic due to
the
low frequency (especially in Corpus ELE, with only two and one
occurrences,
respectively). Surprisingly, if we just focus on the total steps of move 2,
corpus
ELE is the one with the least frequency (13 steps) compared to corpus ESP (21
steps) and corpus SLO (18 steps). It is striking that although corpus ELE has
the longest Conclusions, there is no correlation with the number of moves and

steps included, which it could imply that Slovene authors who write in
Spanish
do not use these rhetorical patterns as much in their RAs. Nevertheless, we
have
to consider the number of different authors as a problem when establishing the
corpora: Corpus ESP has 18 different authors, SLO 12, while corpus ELE has
only seven, due to the lack of Slovene authors8 who publish in Spanish. In view
of this context, the disparity concerning Corpus ELE is understandable, albeit a
research limitation of the present investigation. On the other hand, a previous
investigation focusing on Introduction sections carried out with the same corpora
as in the present research (Santiago and Heredero 2018, 278-79), revealed

that
step 3.4 (Summarising methods) had a higher frequency in Corpus ELE
(91.6%)
and Corpus SLO (75%) in contrast to Corpus ESP (50%). If we compare this
with the results obtained in the step 2.3 (Evaluating methodology) of the
Conclu-
sion section, where Corpus ELE had the lowest frequency (8.3%) followed
by
Corpus SLO (33.3%), we find an inverse relationship that we could interpret
as
a reluctance by the Slovene authors to refer back to methodology.
However, our results do not differ from Yang and Allison 2003, Amnuai and
Wan-
naruk 2013, Aslam and Mehmood 2014 or Reza Adel and Ghorbani
Moghadam
2015, which suggests that this reluctance should be taken into account in
teaching/
learning academic writing, as well as by future investigators, since authors
should
distinguish methodology presentation from methodology evaluation. There
are
enough studies that have already verified the adequacy and pedagogic utility
of
Yang and Allison’s model, and steps like 2.2 or 2.3 are indispensable to
achieve
investigations capable of questioning their own validity and/or reliability.

Deductions from the
research
Step 3.1
Making reference to previous 6 (50%) 6 (50%) 7 (58.3%)
research
Step 3.2
Recommending further 6 (50%) 5 (41.6%) 4 (33.3%)
research
Step 3.3
Drawing pedagogic 11 (91.6%) 4 (33.3%) 8 (66.6%)
implications/applications
8 Te population of Slovenia is estimated at 2.08 million, according to the Statistical Office of the Republic of Slovenia
(https://www.stat.si/StatWeb/en, 26.2.2019).

With regard to move 3 (Deductions from the research), the results reveal a
high
frequency in all corpora (SLO with 19, ESP with 23 and ELE with 15), as
shown
in Table 4. This is understandable, since authors use this move to elaborate
sug-
gestions from their research results in order to “solve the problems identified
by
the research, pointing out the line of further study or drawing pedagogic
implica-
tions” (Yang and Allison 2003, 383). Nonetheless, taking into consideration
the
total number of steps, Corpus ELE has the least steps of all (ESP has 23 steps,
SLO 19 and ELE 15), which agrees with what we already mentioned for move
2.
Three steps build move 3. The results in step 3.1 (Making reference to
previous re-
search) do not show large differences among corpora (Corpus SLO 7 steps, ESP
and
ELE 6), although the percentage is just around 50%. However, we could
explain
the low number by the fact that some authors prefer to make such references in
other sections of the paper, such as the Results section. Anyway, we consider
it
relevant to compare a study’s results with those of other investigations in the
Con-
clusion section, as a way to highlight the significance of the work, framing it
within
international research lines as another of the possible findings from the research.
Something similar to the results for step 3.1 occurs with 3.2
(Recommending
further research) in all corpora (ESP 6 steps, ELE 5 and SLO 4). Once
again,
this demonstrates a partial implantation of the Anglo-Saxon model in these
aca-
demic cultures, a fact that is extrapolated to the whole model analysed in this
work. Nonetheless, our case is comparable with previous investigations (such
as
Amnuai and Wannaruk 2013, Aslam and Mehmood 2014 or Reza Adel and
Ghorbani Moghadam 2015), which considered this step optional.
Finally, step 3.3 (Drawing pedagogic implications/applications) was

partially modi-
fied on the basis of the Moritz, Meurer and Dellagnelo model (2008) and
Gnutz-
mann and Oldenburg (1991), adding ‘applications’ to the Yang and Allison
model (2003). The goal of this step is to “allow authors to state the
pedagogical
significance of the study or indicate necessity for pedagogic changes”
(Amnuai
and Wannaruk 2013, 7). For this step Corpus ESP has 11 out of 12
occurrences,
representing 91.6%, in contrast with SLO (8 out of 12, 66.6%) or ELE (4 out
of
12, 33.3%). This last step reveals cultural and rhetorical specific variations:
while
Spanish authors evaluate this step as almost indispensable, the Slovene ones
con-
sider it nonessential (as well as Persian authors in Tabatabaei and Azimi 2015
and
Reza Adel and Ghorbani Moghadam 2015, Pakistani researchers in Aslam
and
Mehmood 2014, or Thai investigators in Amnuai and Wannaruk 2013). This
fact reveals again that Spanish authors of RAs are more familiar with these
rhe-
torical patterns than Slovene authors, although we cannot forget the very
small
number of Slovene authors publishing in Spanish, a fact that is responsible
for
the disparity concerning Corpus ELE and a research limitation of the present
investigation, as mentioned before.

4 CONCLUSION
The main purpose of the present study was to identify the rhetorical organiza-
tion of the Conclusion sections of RAs written in Spanish and Slovene by
native
speakers, as well as RAs written in Spanish by Slovene authors. For the
analysis
of the different patterns of the Conclusion section, we followed the model stab-
lished by Yang and Allison (2003), Moritz, Meurer and Dellagnelo (2008)
and
Gnutzmann and Oldenburg (1991), as well as the principles used for this kind of
analysis settled by the field of intercultural rhetoric (Connor and Moreno,

2005;
Moreno, 2008; Connor 2011; Moreno and Swales 2018).
The empirical data was based on comparable corpora compiled ad hoc for our
re-
search aim. However, we are aware of some limitations, especially the low
number
of RAs in the corpora and especially the low number of Slovene authors in the
corpus ELE, due to the scarcity of Slovene authors writing in Spanish, all of
which
makes our study difficult to generalize. For this reason, further investigations
are
necessary to replicate and confirm the results presented here. Even so, we agree
with
Tabatabaei and Azimi (2015) regarding further investigations. These authors
sug-
gested there is a need to analyse all sections included within RAs in order to
establish
“the structural relation of each section to other sections”, and thus be able to “de-
termine how sections are related to each other” (Tabatabaei and Azimi 2015,
378).
In defiance of all its limitations, this study confirmed previous research based
on
the field of intercultural rhetoric (cf. Amnuai and Wannaruk 2013; Aslam
and
Mehmood 2014; Moritz, Meurer and Dellagnelo 2008; Reza Adel and
Ghorbani
Moghadam 2015; Tabatabaei and Azimi 2015; Yang and Allison 2003).
Despite
evidence of the adequacy and the pedagogic utility of Yang and Allison
model,
our results also present an unbalanced distribution of rhetoric patterns, which
shows that writers still maintain their differences during the process of
writing
their concluding sections.
Nonetheless, there were some very notable differences in the frequency of

moves
and steps in the three corpora of this analysis. Spanish writers proved to be
more
familiar with these rhetorical patterns, since corpus ESP had the most number
of
steps, followed by corpus SLO and corpus ELE (it is notable that corpus ELE has
the lowest number of steps, although it has the longest conclusions). We
cannot
forget as a possible reason for this the influence of the journals’ and
reviewers’
policies and views on the articles published in individual journals, since some
edi-
tors/reviewers might demand a certain structure, while others are perhaps more
flexible. However, all corpora (ESP, SLO and ELE) showed steps 2.2
(Indicating
limitations), 2.3 (Evaluating methodology) and move 1 (Summarizing
the study)
were the least favoured. These results may persuade Spanish and Slovene
authors

of the importance of Conclusion section when writing RAs, considering it is

an
essential part of the research in which writers can show the importance,
signifi-
cance and benefits of their findings, although we cannot forget the fact that all
these articles were indeed published and thus successfully passed the editorial
procedure. Therefore, we think it would be useful for writers to be more

familiar
the different patterns in the rhetorical organization of the Conclusion section.
This fact underlines the need for specific investigations to focus on the
teaching/
learning of rhetorical patterns within the context of Academic Writing classes.
References
Amnuai, Wirada and Anchalee Wannaruk. 2013. “Investigating Move

Structure
of English Applied Linguistics Research Article Discussions Published in
In-
ternational and Thai Journals”. English Language Teaching 5 (2): 1−13.
Aslam, Insaf and Asim Mehmood. 2014. “Genre Analysis of Conclusion
Sec-
tions of Pakistani Research Articles in Natural and Social Sciences”.
Journal of
Natural Sciences Research 4 (22): 106−12.
Cassany, Daniel and Óscar Morales. 2008. “Leer y escribir en la universidad:
Hacia la lectura y la escritura crítica de géneros científicos”. Revista

Memoralia
5: 69−82.
Ciapuscio, Guiomar E. and Isabel Otañi. 2002. “Las conclusiones de los
artículos
de investigación desde una perspectiva contrastiva”. R.I.L.L. 15: 117−33.
Connor, Ulla. 2011. Intercultural Rhetoric in the Writing Classroom.
Michigan:
Universidad de Michigan.
Connor, Ulla and Ana Isabel Moreno. 2005. “Tertium comparationis: A vital
com-
ponent in contrastive research methodology”. In Directions in Applied
Linguis-
tics: Essays in Honour of Robert B. Kaplan, edited by Paul Bruthiaux,
Dwight
Atkinson, William Eggington, 153−64. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
Fuentes Cortés, Miguel. 2013. “Las conclusiones de los artículos de
investigación
en historia”. Literatura y Lingüística 28: 215−32.
Gnutzmann, Claus and Hermann Oldenburg. 1991. “Contrastive Text Linguis-
tics in LSP Research: Theoretical Considerations and some Preliminary
Find-
ings”. In Subject oriented Texts: Language for Special Purposes and
Text Theory,
edited by Hartmut Schröder, 101−36. New York/Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.
Heredero Zorzo, David, Barbara Pihler Ciglič and Gemma Santiago Alonso.
2017. “Retórica intercultural y discurso académico: análisis contrastivo de
las
introducciones en los artículos de investigación escritas en español por
inves-
tigadores eslovenos”. Vestnik za tuje jezike 9: 83−106.
Holmes, Richard. 1997. “Genre Analysis, and the Social Sciences: An
Investiga-
tion of the Structure of Research Article Discussion Sections in Three
Disci-
plines”. English for Specific Purposes 16 (4): 321−37.

Hyland, Ken. 1996. “Writing without conviction? Helping in scientific

research
articles”. Applied Linguistics 17 (4): 433−54.
Instituto Cervantes. 2018. “El español en la ciencia y la cultura”. In El
español:
una lengua viva. Informe 2018, edited by Instituto Cervantes, 49-51.
Madrid:
Instituto Cervantes.
Kubota, Ryuko and Al Lehner. 2004. “Toward Critical Contrastive
Rhetoric”.
Journal of Second Language Writing 13: 7−27.
Moreno, Ana Isabel. 1997. “Genre Constraints across Languages: Causal
Meta-
text in Spanish and English RAs”. English for Specific Purposes 16 (3):
161−79. Moreno, Ana Isabel. 2008. “The Importance of Comparable Corpora
in Cross-
Cultural Studies”. In Contrastive Rhetoric: Reaching to Intercultural
Rhetoric, edited by Ulla Connor, Ed Nagelhout and William Rozycki,
25−41. Philadel-
phia: John Benjamins.
Moreno, Ana Isabel and John Swales. 2018 “Strengthening Move Analysis
Meth-
odology towards Bridging the Function-Form Gap”. English for Specific
Pur-
poses 50: 40−63.
Moritz, Maria Ester, José Luiz Meurer and Adriana Kuerten Dellagnelo.
2008.
“Conclusions as Components of Research Articles across Portuguese as a
Na-
tive Language, English as a Native Language and English as a Foreign
Lan-
guage: a Contrastive Genre Study”. The Specialist 29: 233−53.
Mur Dueñas, Pilar. 2018. “Promotional Strategies in Academic Writing:
State-
ments of Contribution in Spanish and ELF Research Articles”. In
Persuasion
in Public Discourse, edited by Jana Pelclová and Wei-Lun Lu, 259−78.
Am-
sterdam: John Benjamins.
Pérez Ruiz, Leonor. 2001. “Análisis retórico contrastivo: el resumen
lingüístico y
médico en inglés y español.” PhD diss., University of Valladolid.
Pisanski Peterlin, Agnes. 2002. “Analiza nekaterih metabesedilnih elementov
v
slovenskih znanstvenih člankih v dveh časovnih obdobjih”. Slavistična
revija
50 (2): 183−97.
Pisanski Peterlin, Agnes. 2005. “Text-Organising Metatext in Research
Articles:
an English-Slovene Contrastive Analysis”. English for Specific Purposes
24 (2):
307−19.
Pisanski Peterlin, Agnes. 2007. “Grammatical Forms of Text-Organising
Metatext:
A Slovene English Contrastive Analysis”. Slovene Linguistic Studies 6:
251−65. Reza Adel, Seyyed Mohammad and Rokhsareh Ghorbani Moghadam.
2015. “A
Comparison of Moves in Conclusion Sections of Research Articles in
Psychol-
ogy, Persian Literature and Applied Linguistics”. Teaching English Language
9
(2): 167−91.
Santiago Alonso, Gemma and David Heredero Zorzo. 2018. “Las
introducciones
de artículos de investigación de lingüística y lingüística aplicada escritas
por
eslovenos y sus aplicaciones didácticas para la clase de español con fines
aca-
démicos”. Colindancias, 9: 271−91.

Swales, John. 1990. Genre Analysis: English in Academic Research

Settings. Cam-
bridge: Cambridge UP.
Swales, John. 2004. Research Genres: Exploration and Applications.
Cambridge:
Cambridge UP.
Tabatabaei, Omid and Leila Azimi. 2015. “Rhetorical Conventions in the
Con-
clusion Genre: Comparing English and Persian Research Articles in the
Field
of Social Studies”. Mediterranean Journal of Social Sciences 16 (6):
372−79. Vázquez, Ignacio. 2010. “A Contrastive Analysis of the Use of Modal
Verbs in the
Expression of Epistemic Stance in Business Management Research Articles
in
English and Spanish”. Ibérica 19: 77−96.
Yang, Ruiying and Desmond Allison. 2003. “Research articles in applied
linguistics:
moving from results to conclusions”. English for Specific Purposes 22:
365−85.
Appendix
Corpus ESP
(ESP 01) Jordá-Albiñana, Begoña, Ampuero-Canellas, Olga, González-Del-
Río,
Jimena and Magal-Royo, Teresa. 2010. “Análisis lingüístico de los nombres
de
marca españoles”. Revista de Lingüística y Lenguas Aplicadas 5: 77−88.
(ESP 02) Falero Parra, Francisco Javier. 2016. “La ansiedad ante las
destrezas
orales en la clase de español lengua extranjera: una propuesta blended-
learning
con sinohablantes”. Revista de Lingüística y Lenguas Aplicadas 11:
19−33. (ESP 03) Ruiz Campillo, José Plácido. 2017. “El verbo como espacio.
Seis nuevos
temas de gramática del español”. Revista Nebrija de Lingüística
Aplicada a la
(ESP 04) Ortego Antón, María Teresa and Fernández Nistal, Purificación.
2015.
“Aproximación a las unidades con significado en el campo de la
informática
adquirido por extensión metafórica en los diccionarios generales de inglés
y
español”. Revista de Lingüística y Lenguas Aplicadas 10: 44−54.
(ESP 05) Recio Ariza, María Ángeles. 2013. “El enfoque cognitivista en la
frase-
ología”. Revista de Lingüística y Lenguas Aplicadas 8: 103−09.
(ESP 06) Bernardos Galindo, María del Socorro, Jiménez Briones, Rocío and
Pérez Cabello de Alba, María Beatriz. 2011. “Una aplicación informática
para
la gestión de las plantillas léxicas del modelo léxico construccional”.
Revista de
Lingüística y Lenguas Aplicadas 6: 53−69.
(ESP 07) Elena, Pilar. 2011. “Bases para la comprensión organizativa del
texto”.
Revista de Lingüística y Lenguas Aplicadas 6: 125−37.
(ESP 08) Sánchez Rufat, Anna. 2016. “Las funciones diagnóstica y evaluativa
del
análisis contrastivo de la interlengua del español basado en corpus”.
Linred
13: 1−14.

(ESP 09) Penadés Martínez, Inmaculada. 2015. “Las colocaciones del tipo
verbo
más locución verbal: implicaciones teóricas y aplicadas”. Linred 12: 1−13.
(ESP 10) Quevedo−Atienza, Ángeles. 2017. “El español con fines académicos:
progreso de un estudio sobre necesidades lingüísticas de estudiantes en
pro-
gramas de movilidad”. Revista Nebrija de Lingüística Aplicada a la
(ESP 11) Llorían González, Susana. 2018. “La evaluación de la habilidad co-
municativa específica en contextos académicos: la comprensión de las
clases
magistrales”. Revista Nebrija de Lingüística Aplicada a la Enseñanza de
Lenguas
24: 93−11.
(ESP 12) Jiménez, Antonio Luis. 2017. “Jerarquía de aprendizaje: un caso
prác-
tico con «por» y «para»”. Revista Nebrija de Lingüística Aplicada a la
Enseñanza
de Lenguas 22: 1−15.
Corpus ELE
(ELE 01) Seljak Adimora, Katja. 2012. “Los valores del pretérito perfecto
compuesto y del pretérito perfecto simple en Inquieta Compañía de

Carlos
Fuentes”. Vestnik za tuje jezike 4: 33−42.
(ELE 02) Trenc, Andreja. 2012. “Construcciones impersonales con se en
español
y su tratamiento didáctico desde una perspectiva de focus on form o la
atención
a la forma”. Vestnik za tuje jezike 4: 207−26.
(ELE 03) Pihler Ciglič, Barbara. 2014. “Los marcadores verbales de
modalidad
epistémica y su papel en el desarrollo de las competencias
comunicativas”.
Linguistica 54: 381−95.
(ELE 04) Šifrar Kalan, Marjana and Andreja Trenc. 2014. “La calibración de
la
comprensión lectora dentro del examen nacional de ELE según el MCER:
algunas cuestiones de evaluación”. Linguistica 54: 309−23.

(ELE 05) Pihler, Barbara. 2010. “Paradigmas verbales en el discurso lírico de
Machado, Jiménez y Aleixandre: el criterio de la actualidad”. Verba

Hispanica
18: 175−86.
(ELE 06) Trenc, Andreja. 2014. “Las máximas conversacionales desde un
en-
foque cognitivo: algunos casos del discurso indirecto en castellano”.
Verba
(ELE 07) Kastelic Vukadinović, Uršula. 2016. “Las palabras culturales en las
tra-
ducciones al esloveno de las obras de Juan Rulfo y Carlos Fuentes”. Verba

(ELE 08) Šifrar Kalan, Marjana. 2016. “La universalidad de los prototipos
semánticos en el léxico disponible de español”. Verba Hispanica 24:

147−65. (ELE 09) Šifrar Kalan, Marjana. 2014. “Disponibilidad léxica en
diferentes nive-
les de español/lengua extranjera”. Studia romanica posnaniensa 41(1): 63−85.

(ELE 10) Veselko, Vita. 2017. “Sobre la oración subordinada en función de atrib-
uto”. Verba Hispanica 25: 147−64.
(ELE 11) Skubic, Mitja. 2013. “Tempora si fuerint nubila”. Verba Hispanica 21:
117−28.
(ELE 12) Šifrar Kalan, Marjana. 2012. “Análisis comparativo de la disponibilidad
léxica en español como lengua extranjera (ELE) y lengua materna (ELM)”.
marcoELE 15: 1−19.
Corpus SLO
(SLO 01) Lah, Meta. 2015. “«Med prakso sem spoznal, da sem študij dobro
izbral» − Evalvacija pedagoške prakse prve generacije študentov bolonjskega
študija francoščine”. Vestnik za tuje jezike 7: 289−04.
(SLO 02) Premrl, Darja. 2012. “Stališča staršev na Notranjskem in poglavitni mo-
tivacijski dejavniki za vključitev otrok v programe zgodnjega učenja tujega jezika
pred otrokovim devetim letom starosti”. Vestnik za tuje jezike 4: 189−05.
(SLO 03) Paternoster, Alenka. 2011. “Slovenska imena bitij in zemljepisna imena
v turističnih vodnikih in virih informativne narave, prevedenih v francoščino”.
(SLO 04) Pokorn, Nike K. 2016. “Nič več obljubljena dežela: dinamični premiki
na slovenskem prevajalskem trgu in področju izobraževanja prevajalcev”. Vest-
nik za tuje jezike 8: 9−21.
(SLO 05) Rieger, Mladen. 2014. “Prevod na pogled (prima vista) - Od pop-
estritve klasičnega pouka prevajanja do Lakmusovega papirja za prevajalske
probleme”. Vestnik za tuje jezike 6: 49−62.
(SLO 06) Kocbek, Alenka. 2017. “Deset smernic za prevajanje pravnih besedil”.
(SLO 07) Sicherl, Eva. 2016. “Primeri slovenskih manjšalnic z vidika evalvativne
morfologije”. Jezik in slovstvo 61−2: 101−15.
(SLO 08) Polajnar, Janja. 2013. “Neprodani in trdni. Ja, seveda, potem pa svizec...
Osamosvajanje oglasnih sloganov v slovenskem jeziku”. Jezik in slovstvo 58
(3): 3−19.
(SLO 09) Tratar, Olga. 2014. “Pomenske spremembe pridevnika priden od 16.
stoletja do danes”. Jezik in slovstvo 59 (4): 27−46.
(SLO 10) Pisanski Peterlin, Agnes. 2015. “So prevedena poljudnoznanstvena
besedila v slovenščini drugačna od izvirnih? Korpusna študija na primeru
izražanja epistemske naklonskosti”. Slavistična revija 63 (1): 29−43.
(SLO 11) Kržišnik, Erika. 2010. “Idiomatska beseda ali frazeološka enota”.
Slavistična revija 58 (1): 83−94.
(SLO 12) Bizjak Končar, Aleksandra. 2017. “Dialoške značilnosti pridižnega be-
sedila - jezikoslovni vidik”. Slavistična revija 65 (3): 517−36.

Jasmijn Bloemert*, Ellen Jansen and Amos Paran
Student motivation in Dutch secondary
school EFL literature lessons
https://doi.org/10.1515/applirev-2019-0041
Abstract: Foreign language curricula worldwide have seen a revival of the inclu-
sion of literary texts, promoting so-called language-literature instruction.
Responding to the plea for more empirical research in this area, specifically in
secondary education, this study investigates the student’s perspective by looking
at the relationship between their level of engagement in literature lessons in
English as a foreign language (EFL) and how they value these lessons. A total
of 365 Dutch students from six secondary schools participated in the study. Data
was collected via a four-point Likert-type questionnaire. The findings revealed
that students primarily value EFL literature lessons for improving their language
proficiency but no significant correlations were found between engagement and
language aspects. Implications for curriculum development include a tripartite
focus on language learning, literary study, as well as personal development.
Keywords: language-literature instruction, student engagement, student
perspective, foreign language learning, secondary education
1 Introduction
Ever since the Modern Language Association (2007) published a report in which
an integration of foreign language and literature curricula was advocated,
research into the use of literature in foreign language teaching has seen a
resurgence worldwide (Paran 2008; Hall 2015; Paesani 2011). Although there is
an increasing body of research in this area, focusing on the use of literature in
language courses and the use of language in literature courses (such as Barrette
et al. 2010; Macleroy 2013; and Paesani and Allen 2012), this research is either
predominantly theoretical or primarily takes place in higher educational con-
texts. In order to move this area of research forward, more empirical research is
*Corresponding author: Jasmijn Bloemert, Teacher Education, University of Groningen, Grote
Kruisstraat 2/1, Groningen 9712TS, the Netherlands, E-mail: j.bloemert@rug.nl Ellen Jansen,
Teacher Education, University of Groningen, Grote Kruisstraat 2/1, Groningen 9712TS, the
Netherlands, E-mail: e.p.w.a.jansen@rug.nl

Amos Paran, Institute of Education, University College London, 20 Bedford Way, London WC1H
0AL, UK, E-mail: a.paran@ucl.ac.uk
Brought to you by | UCL - University College London
Authenticated
2 Jasmijn Bloemert et al.
needed, especially in the context of secondary education, which is where most
foreign language teaching takes place (Paran 2008). Moreover, the current
discussions on the use of literature in foreign language teaching could benefit
from including the students’ perspective (Brown 2009; Vermunt and Verloop
1999) as part of this development. Drawing on the work of Skinner et al. (2009)
and Wigfield and Eccles (2000), it is possible to gain access to the student
perspective through examining the students’ level of engagement (an external
manifestation of motivation) as well as how students view the importance of
foreign language literature lessons (an internal manifestation of motivation).
This study investigates the relationship between student engagement and the
importance students ascribe to EFL literature lessons in secondary school class-
rooms, thus addressing the empirical research gap referred to above. Gaining
insight into what engaged students as well as disaffected ones value regarding
the inclusion of literature in foreign language literature lessons should provide
essential information for educational researchers, policy makers, and teachers.
2 Background
2.1 Language-literature instruction in foreign language
curricula
There is a growing global awareness that where literature is taught in a foreign
language, literature and language should go hand in hand in the curriculum.
This so-called language-literature instruction is defined by Paesani (2011) as “the
deliberate integration of language development and literary study at all levels of

the university curriculum” (162). Newfield and D’Abdon (2015) provide a recent
example of such integration, reconceptualising poetry as a multimodal genre in
the foreign language-literature secondary classroom. Even though this is not
new, Carter (2015) argues that this deliberate integration is carried out more
consciously now: “many of the questions first raised 30 or more years ago are
still being asked today, in many cases with greater sharpness and relevance to
the design of today’s curricula in language and literature” (317). Several frame-
works based on practitioner evidence and beliefs have been developed to
promote this integration in teaching practice, generally including a linguistic, a
cultural, and a personal enrichment approach to foreign language literature
(see for example Carter and Long 1991; Lazar 1996; Maley and Duff 2007).
Although these frameworks generally lack empirical research and validation
Authenticated
Student motivation in EFL literature lessons 3
(though see Bloemert et al. 2016), the most recent discussions have moved
beyond whether literature should be a part of foreign language curricula,
towards a discussion of how the two components should be integrated, as in
Paran’s (2008) visualisation of the intersection of literature and language teach-
ing (Figure 1). (See also Paesani 2011 for a review within the context of U.S.
institutions of higher education).
Figure 1: Paran’s (2008) quadrant of the intersection of literature and language teaching.
2.2 Students’ perspective on EFL literature classes
Previous research in a variety of educational contexts around the world suggests
that for students in the foreign language literature classroom it is language
learning that comes to the fore. In the secondary school context, linguistic
relevance and utility appeared, for example, pivotal in a study conducted by

Bloemert et al. (2019), who investigated the perception of 635 Dutch secondary
school students of their EFL literature lessons. By answering a single open
question, these students reported that the benefits of EFL literature lessons
were first and foremost to improve their English language speaking, listening,
reading, and writing skills (see also Schmidt 2004). Similar results were found in a
Higher Education context by Martin and Laurie (1993), who report that stu-
dents of French at an Australian university “are hesitant about literature as a
Authenticated
formal part of their language course” (204) because their primary objective is
linguistic and improving their language proficiency. Interestingly, Akyel and
Yalçin (1990), researching the perspectives of Turkish secondary school stu-
dents, found that there was a connection between the student’s appreciation
of EFL literature lessons and their English language proficiency.
Knowing that students perceive the foreign language literature lessons
primarily as a language learning opportunity has a major impact on the
classroom situation. For example, a foreign language literature lesson
“where the teacher focuses explicitly on language learning and activities are
specifically designed to further this aim” (Author 2008: 466) could establish
a “congruent situation” (Vermunt and Verloop 1999: 270) with a high level of
agreement and understanding between teacher and students. On the other
hand, a foreign language literature lesson with a purely literary goal where “any
focus on language is on its literary effects” (Author 2008: 467) could create
undesirable destructive frictions “which may cause a decrease in learning or
thinking skills” (Vermunt and Verloop 1999: 270). Furthermore, Brown (2009)
argues that how students perceive lessons, and to what extent it is similar or
disparate to their teachers’, has an impact on student achievement. In sum, it

is important to include students’ perceptions in the current discussions
regarding the inclusion of literary texts in the foreign language classroom.
2.3 Student engagement as an external manifestation of
motivation
Student engagement can be considered as the external “manifestation of a
motivated student” (Skinner et al. 2009: 494). In this study we follow the motiva-
tional conceptualization of behavioural and emotional engagement and disaf-
fection. Skinner et al. (2009) refer to engagement as “the quality of a student’s
connection or involvement with the endeavour of schooling and hence with the
people, activities, goals, values, and place that compose it” (494). In other
words, engagement can be understood as an intrinsic motivational factor iden-
tified by self-determination theory (Skinner et al. 2017).
Even though the growing international interest in student engagement has
resulted in diverse conceptualisations of the term (Fredricks et al. 2011), most
researchers consider engagement as a combination of a number of components,
identified as emotional, behavioural, cognitive, and social (Fredricks et al. 2004;
Philp and Duchesne 2016; for alternative interpretations of engagement see for
example Zepke 2011; Bryson 2014). The two components most often included in
Authenticated
studies of engagement are behavioural and emotional engagement (Lee 2014),
the two components also distinguished in a motivational conceptualization of
engagement (For other combinations of the four components see Lambert et al.
2017; Qiu and Lo 2017).
One notable feature of a motivational conceptualization of engagement is
that participation in the classroom includes both an emotional and a behaviou-

ral component (Skinner et al. 2009). Emotional engagement, also called affective
or psychological engagement (Lee 2014), focuses on states “that are germane to
students’ emotional involvement during learning activities such as enthusiasm,
interest, and enjoyment” (Skinner et al. 2008: 766). This includes affective
reactions, such as whether students feel good and interested and whether they
enjoy learning new things. Behavioural engagement is described by Skinner
et al. (2008) as “the students’ effort, attention, and persistence during the
initiation and execution of learning activities” (766). Indicators are, for example,
amount of effort, persistence, and active involvement (Philp and Duchesne
2016), which are expressed in trying hard to do well in school and participating
in class discussions.
Another notable feature of a motivational conceptualization of engage-ment
is the presence of its opposite, labelled disaffection (Skinner et al. 2008).
Importantly, disaffection is more than merely the absence of engage-ment,
because it “refers to the occurrence of behaviours and emotions that reflect
maladaptive motivational states” (Skinner et al. 2008: 767). Disaffected
behaviours include lack of initiation and passivity, expressed in students doing
just enough to get by and students pretending to act as if they were
participating. Disaffected emotions include feelings of sadness, bore-dom, and
anxiety, expressed by students feeling worried, discouraged or frustrated.
2.4 Students’ view of the importance of foreign language
literature lessons as an internal manifestation of motivation
In the same way that student engagement is regarded as the external manifes-
tation of a motivated student, how students view the importance of foreign
language literature lessons, can be regarded as an internal manifestation of
motivation. Knowing how students value foreign language literature is
extremely relevant in view of the different ways in which literary focus and
language learning are moving towards being integrated. This information can
Authenticated
assist teachers in creating congruent instructional environments and, from
there, create desirable constructive frictions (Vermunt and Verloop 1999).
According to Vermunt and Verloop (1999), constructive frictions “represent a
challenge for students to increase their skill in a learning or thinking strategy”
(270). In the foreign language literature lesson, by first creating a situation of
congruence through, for example, addressing specific vocabulary in a literary
text, teachers can move towards constructive frictions by bringing in elements
such as literary terminology or biographical information (Bloemert et al. 2016).
This line of reasoning is empirically supported by Brown (2009), who argued
that mismatches between teachers’ and students’ perceptions regarding abstract
L2 acquisition and concrete pedagogical practices “can negatively affect L2
students’ satisfaction with the language class and can potentially lead to the
discontinuation of L2 study” (46).
Why a student values certain aspects of foreign language literature more
than others can depend on several factors. Eccles (1983) identified four major
components of subjective values: attainment value, intrinsic value, utility value,
and cost. According to this so-called Expectancy-Value model of achievement,
the subjective task value can be understood as the following student question:
“Do I want to do this activity and why?’ (Wigfield and Cambria 2010: 2). Wigfield
and Eccles (2000) argue that these values, combined with a student’s belief
about how well he/she will do, can explain a student’s “choice, persistence and
performance” (68). Therefore, by investigating the relationship between engaged
and disaffected students and what they value in the EFL literature lesson, the
study should provide insights that seem most relevant for educational research-
ers, policy makers, and teachers focusing on the foreign language literature
curriculum.
2.5 Research questions

Although the resurgent position of literature in foreign language curricula is
increasingly accepted worldwide, in a recent symposium on research in EFL
literature education at the IATEFL Annual Conference, Paran (2018) argued that
challenges in this area of research lie in the lack of empirical research and
appropriate data collection and data analysis. In response to this plea, this study
explores EFL literature lessons in a secondary school context through the level
of student engagement as well as their ascribed importance of the subject. The
study addressed the following three research questions:
1. To what extent are students engaged during EFL literature lessons?
2. What level of importance do students ascribe to EFL literature lessons?
Authenticated
3. What is the relationship between the students’ level of engagement and the
importance they ascribe to EFL literature lessons?
3 Methods
3.1 Participants
Sixteen intact upper college EFL classes from 6 Dutch secondary schools par-
ticipated in this study. All students (n = 356, average student age 17) were native
Dutch speakers who were learning English as a foreign language and who were
considered to be at upper-intermediate (B2) proficiency levels according to the
Common European Framework of Reference (Council of Europe 2001).
In Dutch secondary education, EFL is a compulsory subject where foreign
language learning is firmly established and linked to learning outcomes by the
Common European Framework of Reference (Council of Europe 2001). However,
the required literature component within the EFL curriculum is ill-structured. The
only requirement is that teachers adhere to the following three core curric-ulum
standards:
1. Students can recognize and distinguish literary text types and use literary
terms when interpreting literary texts
2. Students can give an overview of the main events of literary history and
place the studied works in this historic perspective
3. Students can report about their reading experiences of at least three literary
works with clear arguments
(Meijer and Fasoglio 2007: 55) (our translation)
Apart from these three core curriculum standards, however, teachers have
complete freedom when it comes to the choice of literary works, the amount of
time spent on literature, and the way literature is taught and tested.
3.2 Procedure
The data collection for this study comprised a student survey with Likert-scale
statements, which was first piloted in one secondary school class (n = 28) in June
2015. Following the analyses of this pilot run, some items were reworded to
improve comprehensibility. The final version of the questionnaire was adminis-
tered in June 2016 and June 2017.
Authenticated
3.3 Data collection method and analysis
3.3.1 Measuring level of engagement
In order to measure the level of student engagement we used an instrument
based on the student survey of the ‘Engagement versus Disaffection’ (EvsD)
instrument (Skinner et al. 2009). The instrument was translated into Dutch and
adapted to EFL literature lessons. In the process of translation four items were
deleted from the original instrument due to ambiguity. (See Appendix A for the
original and which items were deleted). The students were asked to report on a
scale of 1-4 (1 = I disagree, 4 = I agree), as in the original instrument, on their
own behavioural and emotional engagement and disaffection during EFL liter-
ature lessons. Behavioural engagement was measured using 5 items that tapped
students’ attention and participation during the EFL literature lessons (Cronbach
α= 0.78). Behavioural disaffection was measured using 4 items that tapped
students’ lack of effort (Cronbach α = 0.76). Students’ emotional engagement
was assessed using 5 items that tapped whether students felt good during the
EFL literature lessons and whether they enjoyed learning new things (Cronbach
α= 0.84). Emotional disaffection was assessed using 9 items that tapped emo-
tions indicating boredom and discouragement (Cronbach α = 0.63).
3.3.2 Measuring level of importance of EFL literature
In order to measure the level of importance students ascribed to EFL literature
lessons, we used the underlying elements of the Comprehensive Approach to
Foreign Language literature learning (Bloemert et al. 2019). Table 1 presents an
overview of the underlying elements of the Comprehensive Approach including
the items in the student survey based on these elements. The students were
asked to indicate on a scale of 1-4 (1 = not important, 4 = important) to what
extent they deemed each of the underlying elements important. Descriptive
statistics were then calculated for each element.
3.3.3 Calculating relationships between engagement and importance
To calculate the relationship between engagement and importance we first
conducted an exploratory factor analysis on the items of the Comprehensive
Approach to define the underlying structure based on the students’ answers.
Secondly, we employed a correlation analysis to calculate whether level of
Authenticated

Table 1: Underlying elements of the comprehensive approach to FL literature teaching and items
in student survey.
Four Comprehensive Approach to FL Items in student survey
approaches literature teaching and learning
(Bloemert et al. )
Text . Literary terminology
approach
. Literary text types
. Setting
. Story, plot, and theme
. Characters
Context . Biographical information
approach . Historical, cultural, and social
context
. Literary history
Reader . Reading experience
approach
. Literary taste
. Personal development
Language . Grammar and syntax
approach . Vocabulary and idioms
. Language skills
. Language development and
variety
Literary terminology (such as metaphors
or personification).
Literary text types (such as short stories,
or a sonnet).
The position of time and place in English
literary works.
The story, plot and theme(s) of English

literary works.
Characters in English literary works.
The life of English literary authors.
The context of English literary works
(such as historical, cultural, or social).
English literary history (such as the
Romantic period, the Renaissance, or
Modernism)
Reporting on your personal reading
experiences with English literary works.
Developing a personal literary taste.
Personal development (such as
developing a critical outlook).
English grammar and syntax.
English vocabulary and idiom.
Developing English language skills
(reading, speaking, listening, writing).
The development of the English language
throughout the centuries (such as
language use in a certain period, region
or within a certain (sub)culture).
engagement is significantly related to the ascribed level of importance. The α
level was set at p < 0.05.
According to Plonsky and Oswald (2014), Cohen’s (1988) benchmarks for
effect sizes - in this case, r for correlations - “generally underestimate the
effects obtained in L2 research” (878). Based on an analysis of the distribution
of mean difference and correlational effects observed in 91 meta-analyses and
346 primary studies, they propose the following field-specific scale for
Authenticated
interpreting and reporting effect sizes for correlation coefficients in L2 research
which we will follow in this study: small (0.25), medium (0.40), and large (0.60).
Furthermore, Plonsky and Oswald (2014) recommend taking into consideration
eight additional factors when interpreting L2 effect sizes. We consider the
relevant factors in the interpretation of our results below.
All data were processed and analysed using SPSS 25 software.
4 Results
4.1 Research question 1: To what extent are students engaged during
EFL literature lessons?
Table 2 shows the descriptive statistics for the measures of emotional and
behavioural engagement and disaffection.
Table 2: Descriptive statistics for level of engagement & disaffection.
Scales of Skinner et al. ()
EvsD (adapted) N Minimum Maximum M (SD) α (No. of items)
Emotional engagement  . . . (.) . ()
Behavioural engagement  . . . (.) . ()
Emotional disaffection  . . . (.) . ()
Behavioural disaffection  . . . (.) . ()
We first checked whether the four scales from the EvsD instrument also formed
reliable scales with our data. As can be seen in Table 2, the coefficients ranged
between 0.627 (minimally reliable) and 0.841 (highly reliable) (Cohen et al. 2011).
For each of the four scales, students scored between 1 and 4, apart from emotional
disaffection with a maximum score of 3. Looking at engagement first, the mean
scores for emotional engagement (M = 2.71, SD = 0.78) as well as behavioural
engagement (M = 2.60, SD = 0.62) can be considered moderately high. In other

words, Dutch secondary school students are, on average, moderately engaged
during EFL literature lessons. Furthermore, the difference between the students’
emotional and behavioural engagement is significant (M = 2.71, SD = 0.78 and
M= 2.60, SD= 0.62, respectively; t(350)= 6.697. p= 0.007, d=0.1561), indicating
that students are significantly more engaged emotionally than behaviourally.
Authenticated
With regard to the students’ disaffection, results show that the students are
significantly more disaffected behaviourally than emotionally (M = 2.43, SD =
0.69 and M = 1.72, SD = 0.40, respectively; t(355) = −19.523. p = 0.000, d
=1.259). This means that students show more disaffection in their behaviour
than they appear to experience emotionally.
4.2 Research question 2: What level of importance do
students ascribe to EFL literature lessons?
In order to find out how Dutch secondary school students regard EFL literature
lessons, we investigated the perceived level of importance of the underlying
elements of the Comprehensive Approach. Table 3 presents the descriptive
statistics for the level of importance of each of the underlying elements, in
descending order.
Table 3: Descriptive statistics for level of importance of the underlying elements of the
comprehensive approach.
Element N Level of Importance M (SD)
Language skills (reading, listening, speaking, writing)  . (.)
Vocabulary and idioms  . (.)
Personal development  . (.)
Grammar and syntax  . (.)

Literary taste  . (.)
Historical, cultural, and social context  . (.)
Literary terminology  . (.)
Story, plot, and theme  . (.)
Literary history  . (.)
Setting  . (.)
Literary text types  . (.)
Characters  . (.)
Language development and variety  . (.)
Reading experience  . (.)
Biographical information  . (.)
The results in Table 3 show that the students regard Language approach ele-
ments, i. e. ‘Language skills’ (M = 3.66, SD = 0.64), ‘Vocabulary and idioms’
(M = 3.41, SD = 0.73), and ‘Grammar and syntax’ (M = 3.24, SD = 0.91) as espe-
cially important during EFL literature lessons. What also stands out is that the
Authenticated
students valued ‘Personal development’ and ‘Literary taste’ also quite highly
(respectively 3.34 and 2.92). Even though each of the 15 elements was scored
throughout the range - i. e. between 1 and 4 - indicating a wide range in the way
students regard the importance of the elements, ten of the fifteen elements were,
on average, regarded as (somewhat) important, with a score of 2.5 or above.
4.3 Research Question 3: What is the relationship between the
students’ level of engagement and the importance they ascribe to
EFL literature lessons?

In order to reduce the data for further analysis a principal components analysis
using a Varimax rotation was performed on the 15 underlying elements of the
Comprehensive Approach. Based on the scree plot and the interpretability of the
factor solution, a three-factor solution was selected, all with eigenvalues greater
than 1, explaining 54 % of the variance. Table 4 presents the pattern structure of
the exploratory factor analysis, the items loading on each factor and the reli-
ability coefficients of each factor as estimated by Cronbach’s alpha.
Table 4: Factor analysis of comprehensive approach/loadings for three factors.
No Item F F F
Factor : Literature (α = .)
 Literary history . . −.
 Historical, cultural, and social context . . .
 Setting . −. .
 Biographical information . −. .
 Story, plot, and theme . −. .
 Literary terminology . . −.
 Characters . −. .
 Literary text types . . .
 Language development & variety . . .
Factor : Language (α = .)
 Grammar and syntax −. . .
 Vocabulary and idioms −. . .
 Language skills (reading, listening, speaking, writing) . . .
Factor : Personal Development (α = .)
 Literary taste . . .
 Personal development −. . .
 Reading experience . . .
Authenticated

The first factor contained 9 items with factor loadings from 0.550 to 0.800 and
had an eigenvalue of 4.7 which explained 31 % of the total variance. We labelled
this factor Literature: the items are related to the Text approach (Items 1, 2, 3, 4,
5), Context approach (Items 6, 7, and 8), and Language approach (Item 15). The
second factor contained 3 items with factor loadings from 0.741 to 0.820 and had
an eigenvalue of 2.2, which explained 15 % of the total variance. It was labelled
Language, as the items clearly relate language areas - grammar, vocabulary, and
the four skills (items 12, 13 and 14 respectively). The third factor contained three
items (Items 9, 10, and 11), with factor loadings from 0.511 to 0.794 and had an
eigenvalue of 1.2, explaining 8 % of the variance. Because all three items were
related to the Reader approach, we named this factor Personal Development.
The Language and the Literature factors formed reliable scales, with highly
reliable coefficients of α = 0.721 and α = 0.855, respectively. Even though the
coefficient for the Personal Development factor (α = 0.578) can be considered
unacceptably low (Cohen et al. 2011), because of its content we decided not to
delete it, realizing we have to be careful in the interpretation of the results with
this factor.
Table 5 shows the descriptive statistics for the items loading on each of the
three factors. Considering the fact that we used a 4-point Likert scale, the mean
score of factor 2, Language, is considered very high (M = 3.44, SD = 0.613). This is
followed by factor 3, Personal Development, (M = 2.85, SD = 0.642); the mean
score of factor 1, Literature, was the lowest (M = 2.56, SD = 0.584) but still above
the midpoint of the scale, therefore considered positive. Furthermore, there is a
significant difference between the mean scores for the Language and Literature
factors, t(359) = 20.67, p = 0.000, d = 1.470; the Personal Development and
Literature factors, t(361) = 8.391, p = 0.000, d = 0.473; and the Personal
Development and Language factors, (360) = −14.915, p = 0.000, d = 0.940).
Table 5: Descriptive statistics for each factor.
Factor Items N Minimum Maximum M (SD)

. Literature     . (.)
. Language     . (.)
. Personal development     . (.)
Table 6 reports the results of the Pearson product-moment correlations to
examine the relationships between student engagement and the level of impor-
tance regarding EFL literature. All correlations between engagement (both
Authenticated
14
Jasmijn Bloemert et al.
Authenticated
Table 6: Correlation analysis of engagement and level of importance.
Importance Engagement & disaffection
Language Personal Literature Emotional Behavioural Emotional Behavioural
development engagement engagement disaffection disaffection
Language | . ** . . * . −. −.
Personal | . ** . ** . ** −. ** −. **
development
Literature | . ** . ** −. ** −. **
Emotional | . ** −. ** −. **

engagement
Behavioural | −. ** −. **
engagement
Emotional | . **
disaffection
Behavioural |
disaffection
* p < 0.05
** p < 0.000
emotional and behavioural) and the three factors Literature, Language, and
Personal Development were positive and the correlations between disaffection
and the three factors were negative. In other words, a higher level of engage-
ment was associated with a higher level of ascribed importance and a higher
level of disaffection was associated with a lower level of ascribed importance.
Of the three factors, the Literature factor showed the strongest positive
significant correlation with the level of emotional and behavioural engagement (r
= 0.588, p<0.000 and r = 0.482, p<0.000, respectively). The Literature factor
also showed the strongest negative significant correlation with the level of
emotional and behavioural disaffection (r = −0.271, p < 0.000 and r = −0.420,
p<0.000, respectively). Thus, of the three factors, the Literature factor has the
strongest positive relation to the level of student engagement and the strongest
negative relation to the level of student disaffection. This indicates that students
who find Literature factor elements important generally show a high level of
engagement and a low level of disaffection.
The Personal Development factor also showed small positive significant
correlations with the level of emotional and behavioural engagement (r = 0.311,
p<0.000 and r= 0.273, p<0.000, respectively). For this factor, we also found a
small negative significant correlation with the level of emotional and behaviou-
ral disaffection (r = -0.141, p < 0.008 and r = −0.241, p < 0.000, respectively). The
generally small significant correlations between level of engagement and the
Personal Development factor suggests that students who find this factor impor-
tant generally show a moderate level of engagement and disaffection.
The Language factor only showed one small significant positive correlation
with emotional engagement (r = 0.128, p < 0.017). The general lack of significant
correlations between the Language factor and level of engagement as well as
disaffection indicates that whether or not students find the Language factor
important, this does not seem to have an impact on their levels of engagement
or disaffection.
We also analyzed whether there were significant correlations between the
three factors. As Table 6 shows, there is a medium positive significant
correlation between the Personal Development factor and the Literature factor (r
= 0.412, p <0.000) and a small significant correlation between the Personal
Development factor and the Language factor (r = 0.286, p <0.000). This indi-
cates that students who find the Personal Development factor important,
generally also find the other two factors important. The lack of significant
correlation between the Language factor and the Literature factor indicates that
whether or not students value the Language factor, it does not appear to
impact how they value the Literature factor (and vice versa).
Authenticated
In sum, Dutch secondary school students indicate that they believe the
Language factor in EFL literature lessons is very important (M = 3.44 on a scale
of 1-4). These students are emotionally and behaviourally moderately engaged
and disaffected during the EFL literature lessons. The correlation analysis
revealed that whenever students value the Literature factor highly (M = 2.56)
they also show a high level of engagement and a low level of disaffection.
5 Discussion
In this study we explored Dutch secondary school students’ motivation in EFL
literature lessons. More specifically, we explored to what extent students are
engaged during EFL literature lessons, to what extent they value EFL literature
and whether there are any relationships between these two components.
Our results indicate that the way students view EFL literature lessons differs
from our interpretation, represented by the Comprehensive Approach, which
was validated with Dutch secondary school EFL teachers. An exploratory factor
analysis resulted in three factors instead of the original four factors of the
Comprehensive Approach, leading us to identify two prominent differences. The
first difference is that from a student perspective, the Text and Context
approaches within the Comprehensive Approach seem to be considered as one
(the so-called Literature factor). Secondly, the element ‘Language development
and variety’, which was originally considered to be part of the Language
approach, had the highest loading on the Literature factor. In other words, from
a student perspective this element bears a stronger relation to elements such
as ‘Literary terminology’ than to elements of the Language factor such as
‘Language skills’. What is particularly important is that these results empirically
underscore the tripartite frameworks based on beliefs and practitioner evidence
suggested by for example Carter and Long (1991), Lazar (1996), and Maley and
Duff (2007). As far as we are aware, this is the first empirical support for these
frameworks. Knowing that students do not view knowledge about the develop-
ment of the English language as beneficial for their language development has
implications for classroom practice. To make this element of EFL literature
education more relevant in the eyes of students, teachers might want to design
activities in which they create a clear link between how knowledge about the
development of the English language can benefit language development.
Our study supports the results of previous studies such as Martin and Laurie
(1993) and Bloemert et al. (2019), showing that students predominantly find
Language factor elements such as language skills, vocabulary, and grammar,

Authenticated
important in their EFL literature lessons. An argument could be made that one of
the reasons why students have a pragmatic and utilitarian perspective on EFL
literature is the way foreign languages are taught in Dutch secondary schools
and the position of literature therein. The current message students probably
receive is that learning a foreign language primarily means mastering language
skills such as reading and writing. Within this context, it is very likely that
students perceive EFL literature lessons primarily as yet another opportunity to
master these skills.
However, our results do not indicate that the students believe that language
learning is only about acquiring language skills and linguistic competence, a
position that Paran (2008: 468) calls the “isolationist position”. Both the
Personal Development factor and the Literature factor hold a mean score of
2.85 and 2.56 respectively, which means that these two factors are also regarded
as moderately important by the students. In comparison to Bloemert et al.
(2019), in which a large group of secondary school students was asked an
open question about the benefits of EFL literature education, the answers in
our current study seem more varied. For example, when students were asked to
come up with their own answers, they did not mention Literature factor ele-
ments often. As Bloemert et al. (2019) suggest, for students to answer a single
open question on the spot depends a great deal on their ability to articulate their
thoughts and their willingness to elaborate their answers in detail. However,
when presented with all 15 underlying elements of the Comprehensive Approach
to foreign language literature teaching and learning in our current study, stu-
dents rated these fairly high. This difference in results as an artefact of meth-
odological choices is also valuable to the empirical body of research into the
area of foreign language literature education because it shows that methodo-

logical choices have a demonstrative impact on the outcome of research.
The results also show that students scored each of the three factors between
a 1 and a 4, which means that students vary greatly in what they find important.
Applying these results to teaching practice, when a class is asked whether and
why they want to do a certain activity (Wigfield and Cambria 2010) a variety of
answers is to be expected based on the students’ subjective values. In order to
establish desirable situations of congruence as well as constructive frictions
(Vermunt and Verloop 1999), teachers could benefit from language-literature
instruction where the balance between the Literature, Language, and Personal
Development factors plays out differently in different lessons. These results
could also be of interest to policy makers working on guidelines for a more
integrated language-literature curriculum.
Our study shows, unsurprisingly, that students who value the Literature
factor highly generally show a high level of engagement and a low level of
Authenticated
disaffection in EFL literature classrooms. On the other hand, whether students
value the Language factor highly does not seem to have an impact on their
levels of engagement or disaffection. Due to the huge differences in literature
curricula and the large number of classes that participated in our study, the data
we collected does not provide any insights into what is actually happening in
literature classrooms, such as types of activities, how literary texts are
approached, or which literary texts are used. Nevertheless, an assumption can
be made that, based on the three Core Curriculum Standards, there is a strong
focus on the Literature factor, resembling Paran’s (2008) third quadrant, where
“literature is only discussed as literature and no overt focus is paid to language
development” (467). For students who value the Literature factor highly, this
would create a congruent instructional environment. However, it could be the
case that students who value the Language factor highly still find sufficient
attention to language in these lessons (for example, through language practice),
which could explain why there is no relation between valuing the Language
factor highly and students’ levels of engagement.
The lack of a significant relationship between the Language and Literature
factors could suggest that Carter’s (2015) observation of a dichotomy between
teachers, where language teachers are mainly concerned with “relevance and
utility” and where literature teachers are mainly concerned with “literature,
culture, and significance” (316), is also reflected in the views of our student
sample. This argument is further supported by the position of the Personal
Development factor. Our results show that students value this factor as some-
what important (M = 2.85) and we found a small but significant relation between
the value for this factor and levels of student engagement. In addition, we found
relations between the Personal Development and Literature factor and between
the Personal Development and Language factor. What these findings seem to
suggest is that students value either a literature-personal development approach
or a language-personal development approach.
Although we were able to establish several significant correlations in our
study, we must repeat that the majority of the correlations were considered
small. Nonetheless, according to Plonsky and Oswald (2014), additional factors
ought to be taken into account when interpreting effect sizes in L2 research.
With regard to our current study, an important factor is what Plonsky and
Oswald (2014) call “domain maturity and changes in effect over time” (894).
Since quantitative research into the sub-domain of foreign language literature
education is only recently emerging (Paran 2008; Paesani 2011), these effect
sizes should be considered acceptable. These relatively small effect sizes might
increase “when the psychometric properties of instruments, the standards for
Authenticated

which are generally lower in an emerging research area, are refined over time”
(Plonsky and Oswald 2014: 894).
By measuring the students’ level of engagement and disaffection during the
EFL literature lessons we not only found that the students were moderately
engaged but also that they were moderately disaffected. The significant differ-
ence between the students’ behavioural (M = 2.43) and emotional (M = 1.72)
disaffection is especially interesting considering the context of our research.
EFL literature lessons are mandatory for Dutch secondary school students,
which means that neither EFL teachers nor students can opt out. Knowing that
secondary school students show significantly more behavioural disaffection
than they appear to experience emotionally is valuable information for EFL
teachers.
6 Conclusion
Even though the language-literature divide in foreign language teaching and
learning still exists (Paran 2008), Carter (2015) argues that in the twenty-first
century “it is becoming increasingly difficult to sustain such divisions” (316).
Based on our results and the results of previous research, we can underline that
“the deliberate integration of language development and literary study”
(Paesani 2011: 162) is the way forward for foreign language curricula. Our
study has shown that students value the language component in EFL literature
lessons highly but also that the literature component is valued by decidedly
engaged students. Furthermore, the results show that the Personal Development
factor appears to be a good fit for engaged as well as disaffected students. The
results of this study also provide empirical evidence (through the students’
perspective) for the theoretical tripartite framework, which has been in place
since the early 1990s.
The findings of this study should however be interpreted with caution in
view of the several minimally reliable scales and the small (though significant)
correlation sizes. According to Plonsky and Oswald (2014) “an increase in effect
sizes might also be found when the psychometric properties of instruments, the
standards for which are generally lower in an emerging research area, are
refined over time” (894). Therefore, future empirical research in literature-lan-
guage instruction should be encouraged to improve psychometric properties of
instruments and replicate research in different teaching and learning contexts.
Given the nature of quantitative data, we were unable to deduct the why
behind the value students ascribed to EFL literature lessons. Uncovering why
Authenticated
they generally do not value for example personal reading experiences with
literary texts or biographical information will add qualitative depth to this area of
research. This links in with Brown’s (2009) plea for more studies that “explore
how and where students formulate their ideas about L2 teaching and learning”
(56), in our case, the inclusion of literature in EFL teaching and learning.
Other future directions in research in this area should include classroom
observations in combination with student motivation, to establish what is
actually happening in literature classrooms. Replications of this study in other
educational systems would be particularly welcome, to explore whether our
findings represent a particular situation in the Netherlands or whether they can
be shown to exist in other countries where literature is a compulsory part of the
FL curriculum (e. g. Switzerland). In addition, a qualitative anal-ysis of teaching,
classroom activities, and interaction in language-literature classrooms where
students show high levels of engagement could improve our insights and
therefore further research in this area.
Funding: This work was supported by the Dudoc-Alfa Sustainable Humanities
programme in the Netherlands.

Appendix A
Engagement vs Disaffection Items in student survey (adapted for EFL
(Skinner et al. ) literature teaching)
Behavioural . I try hard to do well in school. During the EFL literature lessons I try hard
engagement to do well.
. In class, I work as hard as I can. During the EFL literature lessons I work as
hard as I can.
. When I’m in class, I participate During the EFL literature lessons I
in class discussions. participate in class discussions.
. I pay attention in class. During the EFL literature lessons I pay
attention.
. When I’m in class, I listen very During the EFL literature lessons I listen
carefully. very carefully.
(continued )
Authenticated
(continued )
Engagement vs Disaffection Items in student survey (adapted for EFL
(Skinner et al. ) literature teaching)
Behavioural . When I’m in class, I just act like
disaffection I’m working.
. I don’t try very hard at school.
. In class, I do just enough to get
by.
. When I’m in class, I think about
other things.
. When I’m in class, my mind
wanders.
Emotional . When I’m in class, I feel good.
engagement
. When we work in something in
class, I feel interested.
. Class is fun.
. I enjoy learning new things in
class.
. When we work on something in
class, I get involved.
Emotional . When we work on something in
disaffection class, I feel bored.
. When I’m doing work in class, I
feel bored.
. When my teacher explains new
material, I feel bored.
. When I’m in class, I feel worried.
. When we start something new in
class, I feel nervous.
. When I get stuck on a problem, I

feel worried.
. When we work on something in
class, I feel discouraged.
. Class is not all that fun for me.
. When I’m in class, I feel bad. .
When I’m working on my
classwork, I feel mad.
. When I get stuck on a problem, it
really bothers me.
. When I can’t answer a
question, I feel frustrated.
During the EFL literature lessons I just act
like I’m working.
During the EFL literature lessons I do just
enough to get by.
During the EFL literature lessons I think
about other things.
During the EFL literature lessons my
mind wanders.
During the EFL literature lessons I
feel good.
feel interested.
The EFL literature lessons are fun.
enjoy learning new things.
get involved.
feel bored.
-
When my teachers explains new
material during the EFL literature lesson,
I feel
bored.
feel worried.
When we start something new during
the EFL literature lessons, I feel nervous.
When I get stuck on a problem during the
EFL literature lessons I feel worried.
feel discouraged.
feel mad.
When I get stuck on a problem during the
EFL literature lessons it really bothers
me. During the EFL literature lessons I
feel
frustrated when I can’t answer a question.
Authenticated
References
Akyel, A. & E. Yalçin. 1990. Literature in the EFL class: A study of goal-achievement incon-
gruence. ELT Journal 44(3). 174-180.
Barrette, C. M., K. Paesani & K. Vinall. 2010. Toward an integrated curriculum: Maximizing the
use of target language literature. Foreign Language Annals 43(2). 216-230. Bloemert, J.,
E. Jansen & W. van de Grift. 2016. Exploring EFL literature approaches in Dutch secondary
education. Language, Culture and Curriculum 29(2). 169-188. Bloemert, J., A. Paran, E.
Jansen & W. van de Grift. 2019. Students’ perspective on the benefits of EFL literature
education. The Language Learning Journal 47(3). 371-384. Brown, A. 2009. Students’ and
teachers’ perceptions of effective foreign language teaching: A comparison of ideals. The
Modern Language Journal 93(1). 46-60. doi.org/10.1111/j.1540- 4781.2009.00827.x.
Bryson, C. 2014. Understanding and developing student engagement. Milton Park, Abingdon,
Oxon; New York, NY: Routledge.
Carter, R. 2015. Epilogue: Literature and language learning in the EFL classroom. In
M. Teranishi, Y. Saito & K. Wales (eds.), Literature and language learning in the
EFL classroom. New York, NY: Palgrave MacMillan.
Carter, R. & M. N. Long. 1991. Teaching literature. Harlow: Longman.
Cohen, J. 1988. Statistical power analysis for the behavioural sciences, 2nd edn. Hillsdale, NJ:
Erlbaum.
Cohen, L., L. Manion & K. Morrison. 2011. Research methods in education, 7th edn.
London; New York: Routledge.
Council of Europe. 2001. Common European framework of reference for languages:
Learning, teaching, assessment. Retrieved from https://rm.coe.int/16802fc1bf.
Eccles, J. 1983. Expectancies, values, and academic behaviors. In J. T. Spence (ed.),
Achievement and achievement motives: Psychological and sociological approaches, 75-
146. San Francisco, CA: W. H. Freeman.
Fredricks, J., P. Blumenfeld & A. Paris. 2004. School engagement: Potential of the concept,
state of evidence. Review of Educational Research 74(1). 59-105. doi.org/10.3102/
00346543074001059.
Fredricks, J., W. McColskey, J. Meli, J. Mordica, B. Montrosse & K. Mooney. 2011. Measuring
student engagement in upper elementary through high school: a description of 21 instru-
ments.(Issues & Answers Report, REL 2011-No. 098). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of
Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Evaluation and
Regional Assistance, Regional Educational Laboratory Southeast. Retrieved from http://
ies.ed.gov/ncee/edlabs.
Hall, G. 2015. Literature in Language Education, 2nd edn. Palgrave Macmillan: Basingstoke.
Lambert, C., J. Philp & S. Nakamura. 2017. Learner-generated content and engagement in
second language task performance. Language Teaching Research 21(6). 665-680.
Lazar, G. 1996. Literature and language teaching: Exploring literary texts with the language
learner. TESOL Quarterly 30(4). 773-776. doi.org/10.2307/3587934.
Lee, J. S. 2014. The relationship between student engagement and academic performance: Is it
a myth or reality? The Journal of Educational Research 107(3). 177-185.
doi.org/10.1080/ 00220671.2013.807491.
Authenticated
Macleroy, V. 2013. Cultural, linguistic and cognitive issues in teaching the language of literature
for emergent bilingual pupils. Language, Culture and Curriculum 26(3). 300-316. Maley,
A. & A. Duff. 2007. Literature, 2nd edn. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Martin, A. M. & I.
Laurie. 1993. Student views about the contribution of literary and cultural content to language
learning at intermediate level. Foreign Language Annals 26(2). 189-207.
Meijer, D. & D. Fasoglio. 2007. Handreiking schoolexamen moderne vreemde talen havo/vwo.
[Guidelines school exam modern foreign languages]. Enschede: Stichting
Leerplanontwikkeling.
Modern Language Association. 2007. Foreign languages and higher education: New structures
for a changed world. Ad Hoc Committee on Foreign Languages. Retrieved May 20,
2014, from http://www.mla.org/flreport.
Newfield, D. & R. D’Abdon. 2015. Reconceptualising poetry as a multimodal genre. TESOL
Quarterly 49(3). 510-532.
Paesani, K. 2011. Research in language-literature instruction: Meeting the call for change?
Annual Review of Applied Linguistics 31. 161-181.
doi.org/10.1017/S0267190511000043. Paesani, K. & H. W. Allen. 2012. Beyond the language-
content divide: Research on advanced foreign language instruction at the postsecondary
level. Foreign Language Annals 45 (Suppl.1). 54-75.

Paran, A. 2008. The role of literature in instructed foreign language learning and teaching: An
evidence-based survey. Language Teaching 41(4). 465-496.
Paran, A. 2018. Using questionnaires in researching literature in language teaching and
learning. In A. Paran, S. Mourão, P. Kirchhoff, F. Klippel & C. Ludwig (eds.), Researching
Literature in the Language Classroom: Patterns and Possibilities. Panel presentation at
the 52 nd IATEFL Annual Conference, April 10-13, Brighton, United Kingdom. Philp, J. & S.
Duchesne. 2016. Exploring engagement in tasks in the language classroom. Annual Review of
Applied Linguistics 36. 50-72. doi.org/10.1017/S0267190515000094. Plonsky, L. & F.
Oswald. 2014. How Big is “Big”? Interpreting effect sizes in L2 research. Language Learning
64(4). 878-912. doi.org/10.1111/lang.12079.
Qiu, X. & Y. Y. Lo. 2017. Content familiarity, task repetition and Chinese EFL learners’ engage-
ment in second language use. Language Teaching Research 21(6). 681-698. doi.org/
10.1177/1362168816684368.
Schmidt, I. 2004. Methodische Vorgehensweisen und Schülerinteresse: Bericht über ein
empirisches Forschungsprojekt [Methodological approaches and pupil interest: report on
an empirical study]. In J. Schabert (ed.), Shakespeare Jahrbuch 140, 196-211. Bochum:
Verlag und Druckkontor Kamp Gmbh.
Skinner, E., E. Saxton, C. Currie & G. Shusterman. 2017. A motivational account of the under-
graduate experience in science: Brief measures of students’ self-system appraisals,
engagement in coursework, and identity as a scientist. International Journal of Science
Education 39(17). 2433-2459. doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2017.1387946. Skinner, E. A.,
C. Furrer, G. Marchand & T. Kindermann. 2008. Engagement and disaffection in the classroom:
Part of a larger motivational dynamic? Journal of Educational Psychology 100(4). 765-781.
doi.org/10.1037/a0012840.
Skinner, E. A., T. A. Kindermann & C. Furrer. 2009. A motivational perspective on engagement
and disaffection: Conceptualization and assessment of children’s behavioral and emo-
tional participation in academic activities in the classroom. Educational and
Psychological Measurement 69. 493-525. doi.org/10.1177/0013164408323233.
Authenticated

Vermunt, J. D. & N. Verloop. 1999. Congruence and friction between learning and teaching.
Learning and Instruction 9. 257-280. doi.org/10.1016/S0959-4752(98)00028-0.
Wigfield, A. & J. Cambria. 2010. Students’ achievement values, goal orientations, and interest:
Definitions, development, and relations to achievement outcomes. Developmental Review
30. 1-35. doi.org/10.1016/j.dr.2009.12.001.
Wigfield, A. & J. Eccles. 2000. Expectancy-value theory of achievement motivation.
Contemporary Educational Psychology 25(1). 68-81. doi.org/10.1006/ceps.1999.1015.
Zepke, N. 2011. Understanding teaching, motivation and external influences in student
engagement: How can complexity thinking help? Research in Post-Compulsory
Education 16(1). 1-13. doi.org/10.1080/13596748.2011.549721.
Brought
Applied linguistics and language teaching in the 21st
century
Vivian Cook
In Introduction to Contemporary Applied Linguistics, 2009
Vivian Cook and Li Wei (eds.)
1 General background
Since the days of Pit Corder, the founding father of British applied linguistics in the 1950s,
the discipline of applied linguistics has been usually described as ‘The theoretical and
empirical investigation of real-world problems in which language is a central issue’ (Brumfit,
1995). Similarly the members of the American Association of Applied Linguistics (AAL)
‘promote principled approaches to language-related concerns’. The International
Association of Applied Linguistics (AILA) proclaims:

‘applied linguistics is an interdisciplinary field of research and practice dealing with practical
problems of language and communication that can be identified, analysed or solved by
applying available theories, methods or results of Linguistics or by developing new
theoretical and methodological frameworks in linguistics to work on these problems’
The AILA definition is both broader in including more areas and narrower in relating applied
linguistics to linguistics proper. If you have a problem with language, send for an applied
linguist.
The broad definition of applied linguistics as problem-solving was certainly true in its
early days. Definitions of applied linguistics now are more like lists of the areas that make it
up. The Cambridge AILA 1969 Congress encompassed first language acquisition,
computational linguistics, forensic linguistics, speech therapy, neurolinguistics, second
language acquisition research, and a host more. Gradually many areas have declared
unilateral independence from applied linguistics; first languageacquisition research soon
disappeared from the fold to found its own organisations, conferences and journals, as did
Page 2 of 13
much second language acquisition research slightly later. Applied linguistics gatherings
these days are far less inclusive, though there is a growth in the Research Networks such as
Multilingualism: Acquisition and Use. The AILA Congress in 2008 had 9 papers on first
language acquisition compared with 161 on second language acquisition and 138 on foreign
language teaching; computational linguistics and forensic linguistics were no longer on the
programme, though new areas like multilingualism have been introduced. Professional
organisations for applied linguistics are nowmore like umbrella organisations, on the lines of
the British Association in science, that meet occasionally to bring together people whose
main academic life takes place within more specialist organisations; most second language
acquisition researchers for instance tend to go to conferences of the European Second
Language Association (EUROSLA), International Bilingualism Seminar, Generative
Approaches to Second Language Acquisition (GASLA), or the International Association for
Multilingualism, not to conferences named applied linguistics. Professional applied
linguistics is now a fairly restricted area. Most practitioners probably style themselves
primarily as SLA researchers, discourse analysts and the like, rather than seeing applied
linguistics as their major avocation. Journals too reflect this tendency with say
the International Journal of Applied Linguistics showing the same kind of agenda as the AILA
congress, while Language Learning, originally an applied linguistics journal, is now primarily
concerned with psychological approaches to second language acquisition, having dropped
applied linguistics from its subtitle.
The term ‘problem’ does, however, raise issues of its own. In one sense it means a
research question posed in a particular discipline; in another sense it is something that has
gone wrong which can be solved. Talking about the problem of multilingualism, say, is
ambiguous between defining it as a research area and claiming that it is in some way
defective. Calling areas problems fosters the attitude that there is something wrong with
them. Bilingualism is no more intrinsically a problem to be solved than is monolingualism.
Applied linguists have to be clear that they are solving problems within an area of language
acquisition or use, not regarding the area itself as a problem except in the research question
Page 3 of 13
sense. Language teaching is not itself a problem to be solved; it may nevertheless raise
problems that applied linguists can resolve.
A perpetual controversy has surrounded the relationship of linguistics to applied
linguistics. Despite AILA’s fond belief that linguistics is the core, many feel linguistics is only
one of the contributing disciplines. Applied linguists have explored psychological models
such as declarative/procedural memory and emergentism, mathematical models such as
dynamic systems theory or chaos theory, early Soviet theories of child development such as
Vygotsky, French thinkers such as Foucault and Bourdieu… nothing seems excluded.
Contemporary applied linguists feel free to draw on almost any field of human knowledge;
the authors in the present book for instance use ideas from philosophy, education,
sociology, feminism, Marxism, Conversation Analysis, and media studies, to take a small
sample. David Block in this volume (p.000) calls applied linguistics ‘an amalgam of research
interests’. The question is whether applied linguists have the polymathic ability to carry out
such an amalgamation of diverse disciplines, or indeed diverse approaches within these
disciplines, when the disciplines themselves are incapable of making this synthesis. It seems
inherently unsafe or indeed arrogant when the applied linguist redefines the human mind,
human language or language learning to suit the needs of an applied linguistic problem.
Linguistics nowadays plays a minimal role in applied linguistics whether in terms of

current linguistic theories or descriptive tools. Linguistic theories of the past twenty years
are barely mentioned by applied linguists. With the exception of Chomsky and to some
extent Jackendoff, the theories come from postmodernism, psychology, or sociology rather
than linguistics. Indeed some practitioners radiate hostility towards linguistics, preferring to
draw on almost any other area. One cause may be that the enthusiastic selling of the 1980s
generative model by its supporters led to the view that linguistics has nothing practical to
contribute and to a lack of interest in the many other approaches to linguistics practised
today, say the recent developments in phonetics and phonology.
Page 4 of 13
In a recent book called Methods in Applied Linguistics, the author announces ‘The
book … will not be concerned with … language data, unless it is submitted to non-linguistic
analysis’ (Dornyei, 2007: p. 19). In the west London suburb of Ealing there was a highly
successful shop in the 1960s called the Confiserie Française (French cake shop), which in fact
sold toys. The reason was a clause in its lease that prevented the new owners from changing
the name. If language disappears from applied linguistic research, the applied linguistics
shop is selling toys. It should relabel itself as teachingmethodology or applied sociology or
whichever discipline it uses as its source.
So what problems does applied linguistics solve? If you are worried about your
child’s speech, you are more likely to go to a speech therapist than to an applied linguist. If
your country is torn by civil war between people who use two scripts, you ask for a United
Nations Peacekeeping Force. If you are drafting a new law, you go to a constitutional lawyer
or a civil servant. The problem-solving successes of applied linguistics have included devising
orthographies for languages that have no written form and inventing simplified languages
for mariners; applied linguists have played a part in EU projects on translation and on
linguistic diversity. Most successes have, however, had to do with language teaching, such
as the syllabuses and methods that swept the world from the 1970s onwards, particularly
associated with the Council of Europe.
At a general level we can draw three implications from this. Needless to say, these
personal interpretations are not necessarily shared by all the contributors.
- the applied linguist is a Jack of all trades; real-world language problems can seldom be
resolved by looking at a single aspect of language. Since applied linguistics is

interdisciplinary, the applied linguist is expected to know a little about many areas,
not only of language, but also of philosophy, sociology, computer programming,
experimental design, and many more. In a sense applied linguists are not only Jack of
all trades but also master of none as they do not require the in-depth knowledge of
the specialist so much as the ability to filter out ideas relevant to their concerns. An
Page 5 of 13
applied linguist who only does syntax or discourse analysis is an applied syntactician
or an applied discourse analyst, not a member of the multidisciplinary applied
linguistics profession. In other words multidisciplinarity applies not just to the
discipline as a whole but also to the individual practitioner.
- the applied linguist is a go-between, not an enforcer, a servant, not a master. The
problems that applied linguistics can deal with are complex and multi-facetted. As
consultants to other people, applied linguists can contribute their own interpretation
and advice. But that is all. The client has to weigh in the balance all the other factors
and decide on the solution. Rather than saying ‘You should follow this way of
language teaching’, the applied linguist’s advice is ‘You could try this way of language
teaching and see whether it works for you’. Alternatively the applied linguist should
be responding to problems put forward by language teachers, not predetermining
what the problems are; the applied linguist is there to serve teacher’s needs, a
garage mechanic interpreting the customer’s vague idea of what is wrong with their
car and putting it right, rather than a car designer.
- sheer description of any area of language is not applied linguistics as such but
descriptive linguistics.Some areas concerned with the description of language are
regarded as applied linguistics, others are not. Make a corpus analysis of an area or
carry out a Conversation Analysis and you’re doing applied linguistics; describe
children’s language or vocabulary and it’s first language acquisition; make a
description of grammar and you’re doing syntax. Overall making a description is not
in itself solving a problem, even if it may contribute to the solution.
Outside language teaching, applied linguists have taken important roles behind the
scenes as advisors to diverse governmental and EU bodies, for example Hugo Baetens
Beardsmore’s work with bilingualism. But they have had little impact on public debate or
decision-making for most language problems, the honourable exceptions being the work of
David Crystal and Debbie Cameron, who may not even consider themselves primarily as
Page 6 of 13
applied linguists. Problems are not solved by talking about them at applied linguistics
conferences; the solutions have to be taken out into the world to the language users. Take
the political correctness issue of avoiding certain terms for reasons of sexism, racism and so
on. This is based on one interpretation of the relationship between language and thinking:
not having a word means you can’t have the concept, as George Orwell suggested with
Newspeak. Yet applied linguists have been reluctant to contribute their expertise to this
debate, despite the extensive research into linguistic relativity of the past decade. Public
discussion of language issues is as ill-informed about language as it was fifty years ago at the
dawn of applied linguistics.
A recent theatre piece by the Canadian director Robert Le Page called Lipsynch was
crucially concerned with language. The dialogue took place in three languages with the aid
of subtitling running along the front of the stage; it took for granted the multilingualism of
the modern world. The heroine was attempting to recover the voice of her father who had
died when she was young. All she had was a silent home movie. So she engaged a lip-reader
to find out the words, then a lipsynch actor to read them in alternative voices till she
recognised her father’s. This didn’t work until she herself uttered her father’s words. In
another scene an elderly aphasic patient delivers a monologue, judging by audience
reaction the first time that most of them had encountered this kind of discourse. At a
dinner-party, film actors and agents attempted to converse simultaneously in three
languages, to comic effect. Lipsynchmovingly showed the importance of language to
people’s lives and the language problems they encountered.
As this reminds us, language is at the core of human activity. Applied linguistics
needs to take itself seriously as a central discipline in the language sciences dealing with real
problems. Applied linguistics has the potential to make a difference.
2. The applied linguistics of language teaching
Page 7 of 13
The current volume attempts to reassert the importance of the applied linguistics of
language teaching. It assumes that the unique selling point of applied linguistics that
distinguishes it from the many domains and sub-domains of psychology, education and
language teaching is language. At its core it needs a coherent theory of language, whether
this comes from linguistics or from some other discipline, a set of rigorous descriptive tools
to handle language, and a body of research relevant to language teaching.
This is not to say that the language element has to dominate or that linguistics itself
has to feature at all but that it does not count as applied linguistics of language teaching:
(1) if there is no language element. This does not mean it could not justifiably be studied as
language teachingmethodology, applied psychology and so on. But why call it applied
linguistics if there is no language content?
(2) if the language elements are handled without any theory of language. The theory of
language does not need to come from linguistics but might be philosophy or literary
theory: crucially applied linguistics cannot treat language as if there were no traditions
of language study whatsoever. Nor can the methods of language description be based
solely on folk ideas from the school tradition of grammar or the
practical EFL teaching tradition, which would be rather like basing physics on alchemy
or folk beliefs. Doubtless some aspects of these may be interpreted in a more up-to-
date and scientific fashion, but this applies equally to alchemy.
(3) if the research base is neither directly concerned with language teaching nor related to it
in a demonstrable way. That is to say, a theory from outside language teaching cannot
be applied without a clear chain of logic showing how and why it is relevant. An idea
from mathematical theory, computer simulation or first language acquisition needs to
show its credentials by proving its link to second language teaching through L2 evidence
and argument, not imposing itself by fiat, by analogy, or by sheer computer modelling.
If one were, say, to adopt knitting theory as a foundation for the applied linguistics of
Page 8 of 13
language teaching, one would need to demonstrate how warp and weft account for the
basic phenomena of language acquisition and use by showing empirical evidence of
their applicability to second language acquisition.
Over the years the applied linguistics of language teaching has had its most
important relationships with linguistics and psychology. Applied linguists have designed
syllabuses and tests used around the world; some have ventured into coursebook
writing. Most of this has been based on general ideas about language learning, going from
the early influence of structuralism and behaviourism that led to the
audiolingual teaching method, the influence of Chomskyan ideas about the independence of
the learner’s language and of social arguments by Dell Hymes that jointly led to the
communicative syllabus and communicative language teaching, and the wave of cognitivism
in psychology that contributed totask-based learning. By and large this has been application
at a general level, not based on detailed findings about second language acquisition. It is
hard to find teaching drawing on, say, specificinformation about sequence of
phonological acquisition or studies of learners’ errors.
The dangers with this have been twofold. One is that for many years it was assumed
that the implementation of language teaching ideas was universally beneficial; the applied
linguist’s hired gun was on the side of the goodies. But it became clear that many changes in
language teaching methdodology were not culturally, politically or morally neutral.
Communicative methodology for instance required a classroom where the teacher was an
organiser rather than an authority. In countries where teachers are treated as wise elders
who know best, the image of the teacher as friendly helper ran counter to the students’
beliefs. So language teachers became prosleytes for Western individualistic views, not
seeing themselves as serving the students within their own cultural situations for their own
ends but as converting them to another role. As a Chinese minister said, ‘For English
language teaching in China we need a method that is Chinese’. The types of language
Page 9 of 13
teaching advocated by applied linguists then commonly incorporated western values rather
than being culturally neutral, if such neutrality were even possible.
Alongside this cultural bias came a growing realisation that language teaching was
inherently to do with power and politics. The choice of language to be taught was one issue:
why choose say French as the language to be taught in English schools? Choosing a language
because of its international currency reinforced the language power structure of the globe,
adding to the power of ex-colonial languages like English and Spanish or of religion-linked
languages like Arabic and Hebrew. Spreading English to the world may provide a neutral
lingua franca for the world to use or it may impose the hegemony of a hypercentral
language on the world if it fails to detach itself from the power of the native speaker.
The choice of the native speaker as the target of language teaching has indeed
become increasingly problematic. On the hand it was a matter of which native speaker: why
were dialect speakers in one country excluded, say Geordies or Glaswegians? Why were
alternative standard languages across the world excluded, say Singapore English or Indian
English? Clearly the choice of which native speaker to use was based more on status and on
power than on objective criteria, such as number of speakers or ease of learning.
On the other hand it was a matter of the value of monolingual native speakers. If
your goal is to speak English to other people who are not native speakers of English, what
has the native speaker got to do with it? While there is an argument for a form of English
that ensures mutual comprehensibility, this does not necessarily imply a status native
speaker variety. The overwhelming importance of the native speaker in language teaching
has taken away the rights of people to speak like themselves and to express their own
identities as multilinguals; Geordies or Texans can show with every word they utter that
they come from Newcastle or Houston; Frenchmen must try to avoid any sign in English that
they come from France. Hence applied linguistics has had to enter a harsher world where
the value of language teaching cannot be taken for granted as it may be a way of
establishing or reinforcing a subordinate status in the world.
Page 10 of 13
The other main danger is that applied linguistics may be losing contact with
actual teaching and so giving up much of its impact. The interest in theories from different
disciplines among applied linguists means that what they are saying gets further and further
from answering the teacher’s question ‘What do I do with my class of 14-year-olds learning
French next Monday at 10 o’clock?’ One obvious retort is that it is not the applied linguists’
job to provide detailed advice of this kind since they do not know the specifics of any
teacher’s classroom and should not over-ride the teacher’s feel for the complexity of their
situation and the needs of their students; at best applied linguists can provide general
guidance on which teachers can draw for their specific teaching situations.
But, as Michael Swan’s contribution to this volume illustrates, the applied
linguist still tends to impose theory-based solutions that ignore the reality that teachers
face in the classroom and that are unsubstantiated by an adequate body of pertinent
research evidence. The implication is still that their recommendations, currently say task-
based learning and negotiation for meaning, should apply to the whole of
language teaching rather than to the limited area and specific cultural context that is their
proper concern. In the audiolingual teaching method of the nineteen-sixties, a crucial phase
was exploitation; you teach the structure and vocabulary through dialogues and drills and
then you get the students to make them their own through role-plays, games and the like:
‘Some provision will be made for the students to apply what they have learnt in a structured
communication situation’ (Rivers, 1964). The language teaching methods advocated by
applied linguists such as communicative language teaching and task-based learning have
been a great help in developing exploitation exercises. But, as Michael Swan points out, to
exploit something it has to be there in the first place; you can’t do the communicative
activities or the tasks without having the basic vocabulary, syntax and phonology to draw
on: communicative language teaching and task-based learning presuppose a prior
knowledge of some language. The crucial question for language teachers is how to prime
the pump sufficiently for the communicative and task-based activities to take place. Applied
linguists have never solved the problem of bootstrapping posed by Steven Pinker many
Page 11 of 13
years ago: how does the child get the initial knowledge that is necessary for acquiring the
rest of the language? So applied linguistics has concerned itself with the analysis and
frequency of vocabulary but has seldom described the teaching techniques through which
new vocabulary can be taught. If you want to find out about the techniques
for teaching new elements of language, you have to turn to the teacher-training tradition
such as Ur (1996) and Harmer (2007), not to books written by applied linguists. Just as
applied linguists used to lament that linguistics had become too rarefied for any application,
so applied linguistics is becoming too rareified for languageteaching.
3. The present volume; individuals looking to the future
The present volume is then intended to show the importance of the contribution that
applied linguistics can make to language teaching. It does not start from some curently
fashionable method but from the overall purpose of language teaching and the implications
of general ideas of language. The contributions do not resemble the genre of book currently
called handbooks, which mostly have state-of-the art surveys of the field or histories of past
achievements. Rather the contributors here are individuals laying out their ideas of a future
for language teaching.
The volume starts with three chapters that try to base twenty-first century
language teaching on sound ideas about how people learn a second language. Macaro
makes suggestions for strategies-based intervention in language teaching based on the new
revitalisation of the learning strategies field. Building on the emerging consensus about non-
native speaker teachers, Llurda argues for a rebalancing of the roles of native and non-
native speaker teachers. Cook applies the multi-competence approach to suggest
that teaching has to recognise the diversity of groups of second language users.
The next three chapters (4-6) are concerned more with the classroom. Pica presents
the case for language-focussed content-based tasks, illustrated with classroom examples.
Page 12 of 13
Nation examines the advantages of simplified vocabulary in language teaching through the
lens of simplified readers. Swan appeals for applied linguists to look at language itself and
not to abrogate the distinctive skills of the course-writer.
Two chapters (7-8) look at the nature of the second language user. Han proposes a
mathematical model to account for ‘fossilised’ learners who never pass beyond a particular
stage of acquisition. Dewaele argues for multiple approaches to learner factors rather than
an analysis based only on quantity.
The final four chapters (9-12) adopt more theoretical perspectives. Byram looks to a future
of intercultural citizenship within the history of modern language education culminating in
the Common European Framework. Block puts identity research on a firm post-structural
concept of interaction, balancing the social with the psychological. Kramsch applies the
concept of thirdness, which refuses to treat the world as a series of dualities, to yield people
who can operate between two languages. Kelly Hall shows how the concept of discursive
practice leads to a classroom rooted in social activity.
These thumbnail sketches do no justice to the richness and scope of the
contributors. These papers stimulate because of the strength of their individual views of
language teaching from an applied linguistic perspective; contrast the optimism of Byram
about multilingualism in Europe with the Emperor’s Clothes views of recent

language teaching methods by Swan. These are very much individuals looking to build the
future of language teaching grounded on a solid concept of language in applied linguistics,
united by a common belief in the importance of multilingualism to individuals and to
societies.
References
Brumfit, C. J. (1995), 'Teacher professionalism and research', in G. Cook and B. Seidlhofer
(eds.) Principle and Practice in Applied Linguistics. Oxford: Oxford University
Press.
Dornyei, Z. (2007), Research Methods in Applied Linguistics. Oxford: Oxford University
Press.
Page 13 of 13
SUMMARY
INTRODUCTION: APPLIED LINGUISTICS AND LANGUAGE TEACHING
IN THE TWENTY-FIRST CENTURY
1. General Background
Applied linguistics is an interdiciplinary field of research and practice dealing with practical
problems of language and communication that can be identified, analysed or solved by
applying available theories, methods or results of Linguistics or by developing new theorical
and methodological frameworks in Linguistics to work on these problems.
The board definition of applied linguistics as problem-solving was certainly true in its early
days. The AILA congress in 2008 has 9 papers on first language acquisition compared with
161 on second language acquisition and 138 on foreign language teaching; computational
linguistics and forensic linguistics were no longer on the programme, though news areas like
multilingualism have been introduced.
Applied linguists have explored psychological models such as declarative/ procedural

memory and emergentism, mathematical models such as dynamic systems theory or chaos
theory, early Soviet theories of child development such as Vygotsky, French thinkers such as
Foucault and Bourdieu- nothing seems excluded. Contemporary applied linguists feel free to
draw on almost any field of human knowledge.
Linguistics nowadays plays a minimal role in applied linguistics whether in terms of current
linguistic theories or descriptive tools. Linguistic theories of the past twenty years are barely
mentioned by applied linguists. There are three implications from applied linguistics solve:
a)The applied linguist is a jack of all trade, b) the applied linguist is a go-between, not an
enforcer, no a master, c)sheer description of any area of language is not applied linguistics
as such but descriptive linguistic.
2. The applied linguistics of Language Teaching
This is not say that language element has to dominate or that linguistics itself has to feature
at all but that it does not count as applied linguistics of language teaching:
a. If there is no language element
b. If the language elements are handled without any theories of language
c. If the research base is neither directly concerned with language teaching nor related to it
in a demonstrable way.
Over the years the applied linguistics of language teaching has had its most important
relationship with linguistics and psychology. Applied linguistics still tends to impose theory-
based solutions that ignore the reality that teachers face in the classroom and that are
unsubstantiated by an adequate body of pertinent research evidence. Applied linguistics has
concerned itself with the analysis and frequency of vocabulary but has seldom described the
teaching techniques through which new vocabulary can be taught. Applied linguistics is
becoming too rarefied for language teaching.
3. This volume: Individuals looking to the future
This volume is the intended to show the importance of the contribution that applied
linguistics can make to language teaching. The volume starts with three chapters that try to
base twenty-first century language teaching on sound ideas about how people learn a
second language. The next three chapters (4-6) are concerned more with the classroom.
Two chapters (7-8) look at the nature of the second language user. The final four chapters
(9-12) adopt more theoretical perspective.

APPLIED LINGUISTICS AND LANGUAGE LEARNING/TEACHING
1. Introduction
There is a view, held by some linguists and applied linguists, that language teaching and
language-teacher education are the only proper concern of applied linguistics. The chapter
begins with a presentation of the arguments for and against confining applied linguists to a
concern with second-language teaching and learning.
2. Claims
In spite of the widening range of activities undertaken by applied linguistics and in spite of
the general agreement about the reach of its provenance claimed in the status of
International Association of Applied linguistic:
The Association’s purpose is to promote research in the areas of applied linguistics, for
example language learning, language teaching, language use and language planning, to
publish the results of this research and to promote international and interdiciplinary
cooperation in these areas.
And proudly asserted in Kaplan and Widdowson (1992):
The application of linguistic knowledge to real-world problems...whenever knowledge about
language is used to solve a basic language-related problem, we may say that applied
linguistics is being practiced. Applied is a technology which makes abstract ideas and
research findings accessible and relevant to the real world; it mediates between theory and
practice.
3. A Personal Account
Alice Kaplan’s 1993 evocative account of her own love story with learning and teaching
French reminds us that not all language learning is doomed. Kaplan is blunt about the
difficult task of being a language teacher.
Noam Chomsky argued that children acquire language more or less automatically by the
time they are five and whatever makes it happen can’t be duplicated by adult- it has nothing
to do with situation.
Kaplan suggests is that: ‘Language teaching methods make for a tale of enthusiasm and
scepticism, hope and hope dashed. Language learning and language teaching are problems
because they are so often ineffectual. The temptation is always to seek new and therefore
better methods of teaching, better methods of learning. What applied linguistics offers,
where its coherence lies is in its recognition that the question to ask is not how to improve
the learning, but what is it that is not being improved, in other words what it is that is
supposed to be being learned. Some of the content of a course in applied linguistics which
will be of benefit to second language teachers will offer linguistics.
4. Applied Linguistics and Institutional Problems
Language problems are the key to undestanding applied linguistics. Many of these problems
will manifest themselves in individual interactions but the applied linguistics enterprise
engages itself with such problems only when they are considered by society to be matters of
institutional concern.
Applied linguistics as an enterprise is therefore a research and development activity that
sets out to make use of theoritical insights and collect empirical data which can be use in
dealing with institutional language problems. Proceeding electicaly is legitimate because for
the applied linguist language problems involve more than language. They involve these
factors:
a. The educational
b. The social
c. The psychological
d. The anthropological
e. The political
f. Religious
g. The business
h. The planning and policy aspect
i. And, of course, the linguistic, including the phonetic
5. Optimum Age
a. Presbyterian ladies’s College
b. English Teaching in Nepal
c. Immersion language teaching
d. Factors relevant to the optimum-age problem
e. Doing applied linguistics: the process

6. Factors relevant to the ELTS Evaluating
a. Background
1. Educational (including the psychometric) factor
2. Social (and its interface with the linguistic and sociolinguistic) factors
3. Psychological (and its interface, the psycholinguistic) factors
4. Anthropological factors (for insights on cultural matters)
5. Political factors
6. Religious factors
7. Economic factors
8. Business factors
9. Planning/policy (including the ethical) factors
10. Linguistic and phonetic factors
7. Investigating the problems: the methodology of applied linguistics
Applied linguistic has developed a series of methodological approaches to collection of
relevant language data. Several of these have been referred to in earlier discussions.
Consider four areas of applied linguistics that have very direct relevance to language
learning and language teaching. The four areas are:
1. Second-language acquisition research: what are the stages of second-language learning?
2. Language proficiency testing: what are the markers of successful languagelearning?
3. Teaching of LSP: what does the learner need to know?
4. Curriculum design: what does the teacher need to know?
8. Educational Linguistics
A term modeled on educational psychology and educational sociology. It describes the
commingling of an academic discipline (linguistics) with a practical academic profession
(education). If educational linguistic was modeled on educational psychology and
educational sociology, applied linguistics, again according to Spolsky, was modeled on
applied mathematics winning out in competition with equally logical term language
engineering to cover a wide range of interests in practical applications of the knowledge that
is being developed through the growth of the modern discipline of linguistic.

The crisis of contemporary linguistics vs. applied linguistics
Roman Kvapil - Martina Siposova
DOI: 10.18355/XL.2020.13.01.12
Abstract
The role of applied linguistics and its significance as social science is justified and
legitimate at present. It surveys the increasing dialogue between linguistics and social
theory. It is characterized by various literary sources as a discipline which exploits the
results of linguistics and other scientific disciplines in practice. The article deals with
the questions of linguistics, applied linguistics, and the role of some sub-disciplines in
the system of applied linguistics. The authors analyse the term application and consider
diverse interpretations of the term applied linguistics in the broad and narrow sense of
the word.
Key words: American structuralism, applied linguistics, didactics, generative
grammar, linguistics applied, linguodidactics, politolinguistics
Introduction
The history of linguistics represents the development of the main linguistic
trends from the beginning (i.e. Ancient Greece) until present-day. Although modern
linguistics, which began to develop in the beginning of the 19th century with the focus
on Indo-European studies and lead to a complex reconstruction of the Proto-Indo-
European language, the first half of the 20th century was marked by the
structuralist school based on the work of Ferdinand de Saussure in Europe and
Edward Sapir and Leonard Bloomfield in the United States. Since the 1950s, which was
marked by turbulent development in natural sciences, the trends in linguistics lead to
the emergence of modern interdisciplines. With regard to so called scientific and
technological revolution, new linguistic disciplines have been developed. These
disciplines usually draw from two or more traditional linguistic disciplines, thus
standing on the borderline. It is important to emphasize that many research results
obtained from boundary disciplines enriched the conciseness and progress in the field
of linguistics. Therefore, alike the development and discoveries in natural sciences,

the development in the field of linguistics can be granted on condition we step out of the
comfort zone. The subject of the following study are reflections on the current position
of linguistics in the system of social sciences. The authors of the article aim to define
the concept of applied linguistics, characterize selected linguistic disciplines within the
scope of applied linguistics, and to present the model of understanding and
interpretation of applied linguistics on the background of existing theories of applied
linguistics.
The crisis in modern linguistics
The mutual influence of sciences can be traced back mainly in the 19th ct.,
e.g. the dominant position of physics and biology in the 19th ct. had an impact on
linguistics. Consequently, experimental phonetics and some biologically oriented
theories within the scope of comparative and historical grammar emerged. However,
this influence has to be viewed as unilateral. We can hardly find any evidence of the
scientific impact of contemporary linguistics on physics or biology.
Nowadays, the situation concerning the shift from traditional division of
scientific disciplines, e.g. physics, chemistry and biology led to the integration of, e.g.
mathematics and computational science. Thus, there has been a growing tendency
towards reciprocal influence of various scientific disciplines, for instance the mutual
XLinguae, Volume 13 Issue 1, January 2020, ISSN 1337-8384, eISSN 2453-711X
151
influence of mathematics and logics on linguistics. In practice, this means that not only
linguists are increasingly forced to deal with mathematical methods in linguistic
research and the application of logics in linguistics, but also mathematicians and
logicians are forced to engage in particular issues that have been solely the domain of
linguists. The most important thing for us, however, is the fact that, e. g. the
collaboration of mathematicians and linguists has raised some new issues that have not
been addressed in either mathematics or linguistics yet. Modern interdisciplinary
disciplines arise not only at the interface of linguistics and mathematics, but also by
the mutual contact between linguistics and some other social sciences, especially
psychology, sociology, philosophy and the like. Therefore, such fields as

psycholinguistics, sociolinguistics, philosophy of language, etc. are increasingly
important nowadays. In terms of interdisciplinary contacts, semantics and semiotics
have a special position, that means they are the focus of linguists, mathematicians,
logicians, but also psychologists, sociologists, philosophers and the like.
The emergence and turbulent development of new scientific disciplines
suggests that we can see a breakthrough in science as such. Obviously, this can also
be said with certainty about linguistics, in which the emergence of a large number of
modern interdisciplinary disciplines is indicative both of a crisis of traditional
linguistics and of the fact that all linguistics so far could be revised in significant ways
in the foreseeable future. It offers a certain analogy with the development of
linguistics in the 19th ct. in which there prevailed a single massive stream of
comparative and historical grammar. The culmination of this process in the late 19th
ct. led to the emergence of a young grammarians movement, so called
neogrammarians. At the turn of the 19th and 20th centuries, this stream was replaced
by a number of new directions, which were differently focused and played a different
role in its re-evaluation. However, as a whole, it marked the rise of structuralism. In
the early 20th century, Ferdinand de Saussure (1857 - 1913) introduced the idea of
language as a static system of interconnected units defined through the oppositions
between them. He (1986) distinguished between the notions of langue (language as an
abstract system) and parole (language as a concrete manifestation of this system, the
specific utterance of speech) in his formulation of structural linguistics. Moreover, he
also introduced several basic dimensions of linguistic analysis that are still
foundational in many contemporary linguistic theories, such as the distinctions
between syntagm and paradigm. Apart from linguistics, the structuralist mode of
reasoning has been applied in a diverse range of fields,
including anthropology, sociology, psychology, literary
criticism, economics and architecture. Among the most prominent thinkers associated
with structuralism there are Claude Lévi-Strauss as well as linguist Roman Jakobson.
Saussure’s Course in General Linguistics influenced many linguists between the two
world wars. It gave rise to the subsequent Prague, Moscow and Copenhagen schools
of linguistics. It was a prominent direction on a global scale until the 1960s. However,
in the late 1950s and early 1960s structural linguistics was facing serious challenges
from Noam Chomsky’s theory. The 1960s saw the rise of many new fields in
linguistics, such as Noam Chomsky’s generative grammar, William Labov’s
sociolinguistics, Michael Halliday’s systemic functional linguistics and also
modern psycholinguistics.
The current situation in linguistics suggests the distinctly interdisciplinary
nature of modern interdisciplinary disciplines, which can be understood in two ways. It
is not only that linguistic methods are always combined with the method of one or
several other disciplines, e.g. psychology, neurology, sociology, etc., thus creating new
sub-branches in the field, such as psycholinguistics, neurolinguistics,
sociolinguistics, etc. There are many interfaces, overlaps and common themes that are
the focus of interest. Moreover, in addition to the central themes we can find a number
of such questions that are of interest to two, three or more boundary disciplines. It has
152
to be pointed out that it is very difficult to set the clear-cut boundaries of various
disciplines. With some tolerance, this is possible in mathematical linguistics where the
division into quantitative, algebraic and computational linguistics has become
common. Since the issues of linguistics research have become more interrelated, it is
essential to include more sub-branches in order to deal with them. It is even neither
tenable to set precise boundaries among linguistic disciplines, nor to establish a
hierarchy. On the one hand, all this confirms the idea of a crisis of contemporary
linguistics, but on the other hand, it is undisputed that in linguistics, as in other scientific
disciplines, we simply do not even try to calculate the exact number of individual
disciplines and define their boundaries according to the positivist perspective.
Contrary, there is a tendency to recognize that transitions between disciplines are
gradual, their interrelationships are complex and establishing their hierarchy depends on
the point of view of experts in the field. Such a liberal conception of the nature of the
interdisciplinarity of various boundary disciplines undoubtedly corresponds to their
true nature and reflects the complex interrelationships that exist among them.
On the other hand, such a broad understanding can hardly be applied when dealing
with the issues of boundary disciplines comprehensively. Therefore, due to

methodological reasons, it is necessary to establish at least the provisional boundaries
of the linguistic disciplines in order to determine the subject-matters of their research as
well as to determine the aims of such disciplines.
Regarding the division of fields of study within the scope of social sciences
- contemporary linguistics, Cerny (1996, p. 461) distinguishes six broad disciplines,
to which so called lower-ranking sub-disciplines of contemporary linguistics (e.g.
pragmalinguistics, text linguistics, paralinguistics, etc.) can be assigned. Nevertheless, it
would be difficult, and even incorrect to subordinate them to each other, such as
neurolinguistics, sociolinguistics, ethnolinguistics, semiotics and the philosophy of
language. Cerny (1996) considers this division as tentative. Establishing the
distinction in social-science boundary disciples is questionable. It is important to realize
that it is not a combination of linguistics with another purely social science, in
particular psychology, neurology, or semiotics. The focus of interest of these fields of
study lies in their common issues and the subject-matters of the research.
Introduction to applied linguistics
The roots of applied linguistics can be traced back in the late 1950s. The roots
of applied linguistics are undoubtedly related to the advent of generative and
transformational grammar, which pushed the dominant descriptivism aside. The term
Applied Linguistics (AL) is an Anglo-American coinage. It was founded first at the
University of Edinburgh School of Applied Linguistics in 1956, then at the Center of
Applied Linguistics in Washington, D.C. in 1957 (BALL, 1994). Based on this, it can
be stated applied linguistics itself began to form in the context of Western linguist
thought, especially in the United States of America thanks to Chomsky, but it has
gradually boomed not only in Europe but also in other countries of the world.
The basic literature in this field include studies of Russian linguists J. D.
Apresyan, titled Ideas and methods of contemporary structural applied linguistics
(1967 ); B. J. Gorodecky’s New in foreign linguistics. Applied linguistics (1983);
V.
A. Zvegincev’s Theoretical and applied linguistics (1968); A. E. Kubrik’s
Introduction to language science (2019); R. Jakobson’s Linguistics in its relation
to other sciences (2013). Among the western-oriented linguistics, the best-known
works on applied linguistics include Concise Encyclopedia of Applied Linguistics

(2010) by
M. Berns; Applied Linguistics (2010) by G. Cook; A Handbook of Applied
Linguistics (2004) by A. Davies; Encyclopedia Dictionary of Applied Linguistics
(1998) by K.
153
Johnson and H. Johnson; Spoken Language and applied linguistics (1998) by M.
McCarthy; Introduction to Applied Linguistics (2010) by N. Schmitt. In addition to
the above-mentioned literary sources from the field of applied linguistics, there are a
number of international societies that focus their research on applied linguistics. These
include: American Association for Applied Linguistics (http://www.aaal.org), Center
for Applied Linguistics (http://www.cal.org), Canadian Association of Applied
Linguistics (http://www.aclacaal.org), Mexicana de Linguistic Aplicada
(http://www.cele.unam.mx/amla), Linguistic Association and the Latin American
Philology (http://www.mundoalfal.org), etc. Among the most well-known European
linguistic societies there are Belge de linguistique Appliquée
(http://www.abla.be), Asociación Española de Linguistic Aplicada
(http://www.aesla.uji.es), Finlandaise de linguistique Appliquée
(http://www.cc.jyu.fi), Française de linguistique Appliquée Association
(http://www.afla-asso.org), Italian Association of Linguistic Applicata
(http://www.aitla.unimo.it), Néerlandaise de linguistique Appliquée
(http://www.aila.info/about/org), Norvegienne de linguistique Appliquée
(http://www.hf.ntnu.no/anla), Suédoise de linguistique Appliquée (http: /
/www.nordiska.su.se/asla), Suisse de linguistique Appliquée (http://www.vals-
asla.ch/cms), British Association for Applied Linguistics (http://www.baal.org.uk),
Estonian Association of Applied Linguistics (http://www.eki.ee/rakenduslingvistika),
Gesellschaft für Angewandte Linguistik (http://www.gal-ev.de), Greek Applied
Linguistics Science Association (http://www.enl.auth.gr/gala), the Irish Association
for Applied Linguistics (http://www.iraal.ie).
In the early 1960s, applied linguistics had some basic features of an

independent scientific discipline, especially educational programs, its own university
institutes, its own journal. In 1964, the position of applied linguistics was also
intensively dealt with by international research organizations and the first
international trade union congress. After two years of preparation with financial support
from the Council of Europe, the International Association of Applied Linguistics
(Association Internationale de Linguistique Appliquée/AILA) was established,
and in the same year its first congress was held in Nancy, France. Both areas of interest
in applied linguistics - foreign language teaching and machine translation - were
officially recognized at the congress. National organizations of applied linguistics were
subsequently established - in 1967, Great Britain, British Association of Applied
Linguistics, and in 1968 Gesellschaft für Angewandte Linguistik in Germany.
In the 1970s, applied linguistics gained the last attributes of a constituted
scientific discipline - university textbooks and compendia (Stephen Pit Corder,
Introducing Applied Linguistics, 1973; John Patrick Brierley Allen and Stephen Pit
Corder, four-volume The Edinburgh Course in Applied Linguistics, 1973/1975).
Subsequently, national associations were established in other countries. In 1977,
American Association for Applied Linguistics (AAAL), later Austrian Verband für
angewandte Linguistik, etc. AAAL is one of the largest organizations with more than
1,200 members not only from the United States and Canada, but also from 40 other
countries around the world. It focuses on language topics, including language
learning, language acquisition and language loss, bilingualism, discourse analysis,
literacy, rhetoric, stylistics, language for specific purposes, psycholinguistics, foreign
and second language teaching, language evaluation and assessment, language policy
and language planning. Likewise, the Gesellschaft für Angewandte Linguistik lists
around 1,000 members and therefore it is one of the best-known linguistic
organizations in the German-speaking countries. There has not been established a
Slovak organization of applied linguists yet. In some applied fields, in particular in
language teaching, its function may be partially substituted by individual language
154
associations, e.g. Association of Russianists of Slovakia, Association of Germanists,

Association of Hispanists, Association of Slovak Language Teachers and the others.
Applied linguistics is based on the principles and procedures of theoretical
linguistics, especially American structuralism. Since 1960, however, its scope has
expanded to the area of language skills assessment, language policy and foreign
language teaching. The research of applied linguistics focused on real world
problems, the central theme of which is the language of society. In the United States,
applied linguistics is understood as the application of structural linguistic knowledge to
the teaching of English and foreign languages. Leonard Bloomfield (1887 - 1949), an
American linguist, whose book Language (1933) presented a comprehensive
description of American structural linguistics, contributed to the development of a
curriculum focused on teaching foreign languages, based on the adherence to
behaviorism. Another American structural linguist and language teacher, Charles
Fries (1887 - 1967), also considered as the father of Audio-Lingual Method in language
teaching, is well-known for his foundation of the English Language Institute (ELI) at
the University of Michigan in 1941. His contribution can be characterized by
conducting intensive diachronic and synchronic studies of the English language,
preparation of a series of English-language textbooks for foreigners and developing so
called scientific principles for the study of foreign languages. Bloomfield’s influence
on linguistics is so strong that the entire American linguistics from the mid-twenties to
the mid-fifties can be described as Bloomfieldian. Bloomfield’s greatest contribution is
the consistent description of grammatical phenomena. It is a very detailed and original
description of grammar which can also be applied to the methodology of foreign
language teaching. Bloomfield states that in studying a language it is not enough to
examine only its lexical and semantic component, but it is also necessary to study
grammar; combination of language forms. In his view, different language forms put in
the same position have different meanings. In 1948 The Journal of Applied
Linguistics was published, the first journal dealing with the real language problems of
the world. The activities of Bloomfield and the University of Michigan were the basis
for the establishment of an American Association for Applied Linguistics. American
structuralism is based primarily on the analysis of the morphological structure of
language. According to Leitner (1991, p. 126-127), Fries’s last major work Structure
of English (1952) is a modal of signals grammar focusing on sentence structure. Fries

used frame sentences embodying the signals by which English speakers recognize word
classes in order to define four major parts of speech (nouns, verbs, adjectives, and
adverbs). Fries’s important contribution is the principle of explicitly recognizing the
signals that mark the classes rather than the individual classes or particular signals he
identified. Charles Fries in fact used the principle of function, or combinability (the
position of a word in the sentence is the syntactic function of word). In his work
Structure of English, he speaks about of a sentence as a closed grammatical structure.
He works with the concepts, such as a frame and a substitution (Cerny, 1996, p. 207).
A sentence Tento chlieb je dobrý is a frame in which particular constituents can be
substitued by different constituents which have the same function within the sentence:
Tento chlieb je dobrý (tamten, čerstvý, včerajší atď.). Tento chlieb je dobrý (zvyk,
človek, koncert atď.). Tento chlieb je dobrý (bol, nie je, bol by atď). Tento chlieb je
dobrý (zlý, čerstvý, tvrdý, etc.). Another descriptive theory is based on immediate
constituent analysis, so called IC-analysis. It is a method of sentence analysis that was
first mentioned by Leonard Bloomfield. IC-analysis divides up a sentence into major
parts or immediate constituents, and these constituents are in turn divided into further
immediate constituents. The process continues until irreducible constituents are
reached, i.e. until each constituent consists of only a word or a meaningful part of a
word.
155
najkrajší zážitok
k našim najkrajším zážitkom
patrí k našim najkrajším zážitkom
na chalupe patrí k našim najkrajším zážitkom
Pobyt na chalupe patrí k našim najkrajším zážitkom.
A much more detailed formal description of language means is presented by Zellig S.
Harris (1909-1992). Harris followed Bloomfieldian ideas of linguistic description. His
Methods in Structural Linguistics (1951) is considered as the definitive

formulation of descriptive structural work. Harris’s contributions to linguistics include
componential analysis of long components in phonology, componential analysis of
morphology, discontinuous morphemes, and a substitution-grammar of word- and
phrase-expansions that is related to immediate-constituent analysis.
tento môj obraz je veľmi pekný
táto moja priateľka je veľmi pekná.
The outlined structure of the Harris’s model presents linguistic elements at various
places of the utterance (so-called distributionalism). Harrisian distributionalism
explicates Bloomfield’s affirmation that the form of an utterance and the meaning that it
conveys are two aspects of the same thing. Despite the positive contribution of
American descriptivism, which favours form over content, this direction in linguistics
could not avoid critical acclaim from the oncoming generative and transformational
grammar, the theory that focuses on the syntactic structure and semantic component
of language. The influence of Bloomfieldian structural linguistics declined in the late
1950s and 1960s as the theory of generative grammar developed by Noam
Chomsky came to predominate. According to Lančarič (2012, pp. 99 - 100), Noam
Chomsky’s book Syntactic Structures (1928) revolutionised linguistics. Chomsky’s
nativist (mentalistic) view considers people to be biologically endowed with
capability of learning language. That is to say language develops from the so-called
universal grammar, which is a set of principles inherited genetically by all people. It
enables them to produce and receive unlimited number of utterances. Chomsky is not
interested in the speaker’s performance (speech), but deals with the speaker’s
competence, i.e. with the principles that are incorporated in the speaker and help him
distinguish well-formed utterances from incorrect ones or decide whether some
sequences are possible or not. The only way of getting access to unused, unspoken
sentences is through introspection as well as through the use of the speaker’s intuitive
judgements concerning the acceptability of grammatical structures. Accordingly,
Chomsky tries to disclose syntactic principles that are hidden in generative grammar
and on the basis of which language generates hypothetical models of all correct
sentences. Thus, generative grammar is a set of rules which operate upon a finite
vocabulary and generates a set of syntagms.

The division of applied linguistics
The term applied linguistics is very broad and its interpretation varies in
contemporary linguistics, e.g. in Russian language - Prikladnaja lingvistika, in English
- Applied Linguistics, in German - Angewandte Linguistik. Widdowson (2006) states
that despite institutional recognition for the field of applied linguistics, consensus in
relation to what the term actually encapsulate remains a long term goal. Generally,
Western linguists associate it mainly with language (either native or foreign) teaching
and methodology. In Russia, the term applied linguistics occurred in the 1950s in
connection with the development of computer technology and the emergence of
automated information processing systems. In this sense, the
156
synonymous use of computational linguistics, engineering linguistics, machine
linguistics is often used, although these synonyms cannot be fully regarded as true
synonyms. Each of these disciplines has its own subject-matter and research methods
in applied linguistics.
Russian interpretation of the division of applied linguistics focuses on solving
practical tasks related to language research and practical use of linguistic theory in other
scientific areas. The directions of applied linguistics associated with language research
include: lexicography (the theory and practice of compiling, writing and editing
dictionaries); linguodidactics (science of language teaching and methodology);
terminology science (science of creating and systematizing terms); translation
(translation theory). The directions of applied linguistics associated with the application
itself include computer linguistics, automatic translation, automatic symbol recognition,
automatic speech decoding, automatic word processing - text linguistics, electronic
dictionaries, thesauruses, anthologies, corpus linguistics, linguistic expertise, e.g.
forensic linguistics, etc. At present, applied linguistics is also understood as a science
of practical knowledge of the language use in non-linguistic scientific disciplines and
in various fields of practical human activity (Zvegincev, 1968, p.23).
In western-oriented interpretation of applied linguistics, there is also a
controversy surrounding the substance, practice and division of applied linguistics. Al-
Khatib (2016, p.446) citing Kramsch (2000, p.317) notes, “the field of applied
linguistics speak with multiple voices. It incorporates multi-disciplinary knowledge and
is, therefore, of necessity, interdisciplinary.“ Al-Khatib (20016, p. 447) claims that
“contemporary research in applied linguistics expanded to include pedagogical
interests, political interests, socio-cultural concerns, socio-cognitive approaches,
visual semiotics, in addition to interests and applications that attempt to solve
contemporary concerns where language, in all its forms, is the main
feature.“ According to him (ibid, p. 450) “existing sub branches of the field now
include: language and education in areas of studies pertaining to first language and
additional language; clinical linguistics; neurolinguistics and the study and treatment
of speech and communication impairment; psycholinguistics and the study of
psychological factors that enable the comprehension and production of language;
language assessment and testing; the evaluation of language achievement and
proficiency both in first and additional languages; workplace communication and how
language contributes to the nature
and power relations in institutional discourse; language planning and decisions about
official status of languages and their institutional use; computational linguistics and the
use of computers in language analysis and use; forensic linguistics and linguistic
evidence in criminal and legal investigation; literary stylistics and the relationship
between linguistic choices and literary effects; critical discourse analysis and
persuasive uses of language; marketing and politics; translation and interpretation;
lexicography and the planning and compiling of bilingual and monolingual
dictionaries and thesauri; pragmatics and sociocultural and ethnographic
communication.“
In the context of the aforementioned breakthrough in the field of applied
linguistics, the question is to what extent it is possible to talk about the application of
linguistics in practice and when it is rather a realignment of linguistics with other
sciences that help linguistics solve fundamental theoretical and methodological issues of
its own research. For instance, UCD School of Languages, Cultures and Linguistics
(University College Dublin, Ireland, http://www.ucd.ie/alc/) offers study of
fundamental and applied linguistics in its educational programms. The Faculty of
Philology of Tver State University, Russia (http://filologia.tversu.ru) offers study of

fundamental and applied linguistics. In the curriculum it is declared that the direction
157
of fundamental and applied linguistics is the successor of theoretical and applied
linguistics that has been there for more than 11 years and their graduates work as
translators, managers of departments in the banking sector, business and state
companies and tourist offices and also in various analytical centers. Therefore, it
follows that applied linguistics has obtained another dimension. It is understood as the
application of language in economic sciences. Its aim is the issue of professional
economic language (translation of economic lexics from one language to another,
language in the banking sphere, language in tourism and hotel industry, language in
the commercial sphere, language in advertising, language in human resources and
management).
Such breakthrough in the field of applied linguistics can lead to various
misconceptions and can bring some chaos regarding the division of applied linguistics
into separate scientific sub-disciplines. Moreover, Widdowson (1997) proposes to
differentiate between perceptions of linguistics applied and applied linguistics. He
explains that applied linguistics can be understood as a kind of linguistics, like
historical linguistics or folk linguistics. This presumably allows its practitioners to
define an independent perspective on the general phenomenon of language and to
establish principles of enquiry without necessary reference to those which inform
linguistics. With linguistics applied we do not have this option. Whatever, we do with
linguistics; however we apply it, the informing principles which define this area of
enquiry, already pre-established, must remain intact. With regard to this, Al-Khatib
(2016) claims that linguistics applied is theory-driven application that tests the extent
of a specific linguistic feature, while applied linguistics is an autonomous and problem
oriented discipline. He (ibid.) adds, while linguistics applied is solely focused on
English language teaching (ELT) and its subcategories of English as a second language
(ESL), English as a foreign language (EFL) and English as an additional language
(EAL), applied linguistics is concerned with all contexts of language use, beyond the
classroom.
According to Lyons (1999, p. 35), “theoretical linguistics studies language
and languages with a view to constructing a theory of their structures and functions and
without regard to any practical applications that the investigation of language and
languages might have, whereas applied linguistics has its concerns in the applications
of the concepts and findings of linguistics to a variety of practical tasks including (but
not solely constrained to) language teaching.”
Division of theoretical linguistics is unambiguous. Theoretical Linguistics
focuses on the structure of English in all its manifestations, such as phonetics,
phonology, morphology, syntax, grammar at large. Further objects of its study are
semantics, pragmatics, historical linguistics as well as comparative linguistics. In the
system of classification of linguistics as a science it can be considered as the basis of
applied linguistics. Within the particular areas of applied linguistics, the narrower and
broader meaning of the concept of applied linguistics can be reflected. By the narrower
meaning of this term we understand applied linguistics as a linguistic theory applied in
linguistic fields, such as translation and interpretation, lexicography, stylistics. By the
broader meaning of the term applied linguistics we understand the realignment of
linguistics with other scientific disciplines, e.g. psychology, medicine, sociology,
mathematics, computer science.
According to Mistrik (1993, p. 263), lexicography is characterized as a branch
of linguistics that deals with the theory and practice of compiling dictionaries of
different types. In addition to its own linguistic methods of work, it currently utilises
mainly the results of modern information and communication technologies (computer
processing of lexicographic material, lexical database administration and others).
Mistrik (ibid, p. 237) also deals with so called clinical linguistics that can be viewed as
the application of linguistic theories, methods and results of descriptive linguistics to
the analysis of speech disorders, especially the application of linguistic
158
theory to the field of Speech-Language Pathology. Therefore, cooperation of a linguist
with a speech pathologist or therapist, with an audiologist, or with another specialists is

usually required. Mistrik (ibid, p. 413) views sociolinguistics as a linguistic discipline
that has gradually emerged from the sociological research of language. It focuses on the
effects of language use within and upon societies and the reciprocal effects of social
organization and social contexts on language use. Sociolinguistics overlaps
considerably with pragmatics. Ethnolinguistics is characterized as a field of
linguistics which studies the relationship between language and culture, and the way
different ethnic groups perceive the world. Mistrík (ibid, p. 132) claims that the
research of the relationship between language and culture is more likely to be
included in sociolinguistics. Altmann (2001, p.1) considers psycholinguistics (or
psychology of language) as “the study of the psychological and neurological factors
that enable humans to acquire, use, comprehend and produce language.” Mistrík (ibid,
p. 358) adds that although psychologists had already examined the language and the
influence of sociology had also been applied in linguistics, psycholinguistics as a
discipline did not become independent until the 20th century. Neurolinguistics can be
considered as an interdisciplinary field at the interface of linguistics, psychology and
neurology. It draws methods and theories from fields such as neuroscience,
linguistics, cognitive science, communication disorders and neuropsychology. It
examines the brain mechanisms of speech activity and speech changes in local brain
strokes (Mistrik, ibid, p. 296). Computational linguistics is an interdisciplinary field
concerned with understanding of written and spoken language from a computational
perspective. It is the study of computational approaches to linguistic questions. It
examines the possibilities of using electronic and information technologies to describe
and process language material (Mistrík, ibid, p. 424).
The position of ELT within the scope of applied linguistics is still open to
dispute. On the one hand, Crystal (2001, p. 23) defends the need to associate applied
linguistics with English language teaching, “the most well developed branch of applied
linguistics is the teaching and learning of foreign languages, and sometimes the term
is used as if this were the only field involved.” However, Smith (2011) refers to “a
current crisis in the relationship between applied linguistics and English language
teaching.” Smith (ibid.) identifies three substrands of the crisis that underlined the
controversy: a crisis of neglect; a crisis of unfulfilled possibilities and a crisis of faith.
The crisis of neglect refers to the inadequate treatment of the field of applied linguistics
by traditional ELT practitioners. The fossilized views, maintained by academics of the
previous decades restricted conceptualizations of the discipline to linguistic driven
notions. Thus, applied linguistics, for these academics, remains the application of
linguistic theory to practical tasks with the overall aim of improving English language
teaching. The crisis of unfulfilled possibilities marked overlooking the
interdisciplinarity progression of the principled eclecticism that applied linguistics
offered. Proponents of disciplinarity defended discipline orthodoxy within area
studies. However, contemporary scholars argue that disciplinarity, or the belief that
academic work should suffice itself by its internal standards, can no longer be valid in
the twenty-first century. Frodeman (2013) contends that living in an age where
academic autonomy is increasingly monitored by greater demands for accountability
to society would require academics to recognize interdisciplinary trends and work with
them, rather than mindlessly dismiss them. According to Grabe (2010), orthodox views
on pure disciplines were no longer sufficient for the state of knowledge required in the
twenty-first century. The crisis of faith identifies doubts in the minds of conformist
ELT proponents and disbelief in the ability of applied linguistics to embrace vast
applications of language, above the clause level, that can inform long established
theories.
159
It is inevitable to emphasize that the position of linguodidactics (theory of
foreign language teaching - mainly Russian interpretation) in the system of applied
linguistics in relation to western oriented applied linguistics and its sub-discipline -ELT
is even more indefinite and open to dispute. It has already been mentioned that
Western linguistic schools, in particular, associate applied linguistics with foreign
language teaching, including the methodology of teaching the language as native and
foreign. In Europe, didactics (from Ancient Greek “didáskō“ = I teach, educate) is the
art, or science of teaching. According to Zierer - Seel (2012), this term is stemming
from the German tradition of theorizing classroom learning and teaching. Didactics
serves as a major theory in teacher education and curriculum development, especially

in German-speaking and Scandinavian countries, as well as in the Russian Federation.
Didactics is an independent and legitimate science, it has its subject and research
methods. It is mainly related to a specific subject of education, focusing on the selection
of educational objectives, formulation of educational objectives, formulation of
teaching and learning objectives, innovation of didactic principles, elimination of
transmissive (lecure) teaching methods, enhancing activating teaching methods and
overall personality development. Generally, didactics deals with the content of
education, methods, principles and forms of teaching, and the interaction between a
teacher and a student. According to Doulik et al. (2015), within the context of
science, the didactics (general didactics) is a traditional part of general pedagogy,
from which the field didactics were step by step singled out. Doulik et al. (ibid.)
maintain that field didactics are often understood as methodologies dealing with
methods and forms of instruction of a given subject rather than dealing with
learning content and its didactic transformation. They emphasize the fact that
common features of field didactics (including foreign language didactics) can be
summarized as follows: their overlapping character is increasing, but step by step they
become self-reliant independent disciplines, not been an appendix of the field; they
have a weaker relation to the field, pedagogy and psychology, but they support
psychodidactics, neurosciences, pedagogical psychology, cultural anthropology,
sociolinguistics etc., and general didactics; they define own theoretical
paradigms, research topics and methodology; they form own scientific schools - new
doctoral study programmes are accredited in field didactics (including foreign
language didactics), as well as new possibilities of habilitation and inauguration
procedures appeared. Doulík et al. (2015) citing Píšová assert the relation linguistics
versus foreign language didactics is significantly asymmetric. The impact of
linguistics on the reflection of processes in the foreign language instruction
started with linguistic structuralism and has been running up to now within the
concept of foreign language didactics as applied linguistics. This approach is an
anachronic misconcept significantly disturbing the process of foreign language
didactics emancipation. It also shows how important the didacticians for the
foreign language didactics and other field/subject didactics are. And, there is a
disproportion in the concept of education - the subject teacher should be equipped

with other competences than the field/subject didactician. The term linguodidactics (a
general theory of foreign language teaching) was introduced in 1985 by N. M Shanskiy
(Russian linguist and linguodidactician). It was acknowledged as an international term
at the International Association of Russian Language Teachers in 1975. Some
encyclopedias (e.g. Encyklopedičeskij slovar russkogo jazyka) further characterize
linguodidactics as a science examining general principles of learning a foreign
language, the specifics of the content, methods and tools for teaching a foreign
language, depending on didactic goals, tasks and the nature of study material,
monolingualism or bilingualism, regarding the stages of learning, and the intellectual
and language level of learners. The question is, does it reflect so called subject/field
didactics (or subject-matter teaching and learning), in particular, foreign language
didactics, or mother tongue teaching, in which the
160
processing of linguistic material is conducted, or does it deal with the results of
linguistics that are applied to the didactics? Do we consider realignment of the two
individual disciplines (linguistics and didactics), or are the two disciplines
hierarchically related to each other as the main and auxiliary discipline? Can we
consider linguodidactics as applied linguistics? Which linguistic results are applied in
practice within the framework of linguodidactics? Obviously, the process of foreign
language learning and acquisition does not concern merely linguistics. It is a complex
process that relates to psychology, pedagogy as well as sociology. From this
perspective as well as from the perspective of the language learning and acquisition
processes, it can be assumed that the results of psycholinguistic theory and sociology
help to clarify the complexity of processes that take place in the process of learning and
acquisition of a native, or a foreign language. According to Rizeková (2013, p. 150),
linguodidactics is an interdisciplinary field of science in which language knowledge is
combined with didactics. The subject-matter of linguodidactics is to examine the
educational aspect of the educational process, its content, methods and ways of
applying scientific knowledge of linguistics in language teaching. Rizeková (ibid.)
claims that in the 1980s, the interest of linguists began to shift from system linguistics
towards the pragmatics of communication. She also emphasizes the fact that the focus
of linguistics research, which was aimed at the real language user and his/her
communication skills, also brought about significant changes in foreign language
didactics. Dulebová (2012, p. 67) even considers realignment of linguistics with area
studies, defining it as the so-called „lingvoreálie“ (Slovak term). Dulebová (ibid.) sees
linguistics as a leading discipline that is formed in the context of a“ communication-
pragmatic turnover in linguistics“. According to her, it is is currently in the stage of
formulating its bases and methodological procedures in order to examine the linguistic
aspects of the landscape of the country, i. e. language units referring to the specifics of a
given culture. From the point of view of the current culturological approach to foreign
language linguodidactics, foreign language didactics can be considered as an
applied discipline. It is based on its own methodology utilising the results of
theoretical linguistics. Kostrub et al. (2017, p. 30) distinguish between general
didactics and specialised didactics. Kostrub et al. (ibid.) consider linguodidactis as a
field didactics that uses the results of theoretical linguistics, psycholinguistics,
sociology and computational linguistics, thanks to which it can didactically organize
the curriculum, design its elements as well as particular lessons.
Perspectives of contemporary applied linguistics
At present we usually use the term applied linguistics without specifying its
relation to linguistics. If we consider linguistics as a science with a very broad field of
study dealing with language learning in general, then applied linguistics should be
considered as one area of linguistics (see Figure 1).
161
Fig. 1 Relationship between linguistics and applied linguistics
Therefore, if we distinguish applied linguistics as a special area of linguistic
science, the question is: what is the ratio of theoretical and applied aspects, what are
the characteristics of other linguistic fields and what is the characteristic feature of
applied linguistics? Are there purely theoretical and truly applied areas? According to
Merriam-Webster Dictionary (https://www.merriam-

webster.com/dictionary/application), the term application is an act of putting
something to use (e.g. application of new techniques). Obviously, application is
supposed to lead to something practical that serves the use and helps humankind.
Scientific disciplines are primarily applied, as the theoretical results of scientific
disciplines (e.g., physics, chemistry, mathematics) can serve to create something that
will help everyone in practice. Regarding the term application within humanities can
lead to miscellaneous interpretations. Then, applied linguistics has to be viewed as
comprising both theoretical and applied aspects. If we try to name the components of a
linguistic field, then its various disciplines (in the narrower sense), e.g. studying
grammar, vocabulary, stylistics, etc. cannot be considered in isolation from the so-called
linguistic field. On the one hand, learning vocabulary involves systematization leading
to the identification of general principles and the building of theories about the structure
of words in language, as well as comparative studies, or even typological statements
concerning some universals of human language. On the other hand, lexical research can
also be aimed at compiling dictionaries, thereby achieving some of the applied goals
(setting etymology values, formal word variations, etc.) to satisfy the practical interests
of readers of different categories, from schoolchildren to adults, from general readers to
experts - linguists). Thus, the applied problems cannot be solved without preliminary
theoretical studies leading to the formulation of general principles, and the results
obtained can therefore be used as the basis of theoretical constructions. A similar
situation occurs when compiling language grammar: we can attribute it to either
Applied Linguistics (if we mean a grammar book that will be used to teach a native or a
foreign language at school) or to the field of basic linguistics research; in both cases,
both aspects of language learning are closely interrelated and are separated only by the
ultimate goal.
It follows from the aforementioned that within linguistics there are immediate
application areas, which in turn have certain theoretical foundations and areas which
are predominantly of a theoretical or fundamental nature. It is difficult to find a suitable
name for an area that has purely fundamental nature, especially when we talk about its
essence with regard to the so-called non-application tasks that can be solved. Perhaps, it
would be appropriate to call it “basic language research“ (see Figure 2).

162
Fig. 2 Relationship between linguistics and basic language research
There are two fundamental directions in modern science: on the one hand,
profound specialization in individual sectors (as a result of discovery, new aspects that
require deeper knowledge of appropriate means), and on the other hand, the pursuit of
an interdisciplinary or multidisciplinary approach (as a result study of phenomena
whose universality has been revealed in the process of evolution of science, and as an
effort to achieve unity in plurality). In essence, it is the contradiction between the
individual and the general, which are also in dialectical unity.
The status of applied linguistics in network of sciences is characterized by the
fact that applied linguistics must be an area that uses linguistic data itself, drawing on
data from other disciplines, using interdisciplinary methods and tools to be useful to
other disciplines on its own. For instance, when elaborating a foreign language textbook
for children speaking foreign languages, it is necessary to take into account
psycholinguistic aspects (the influence of the child’s mother tongue, etc.),
psychological aspects (arrangement of material according to human memory abilities,
age characteristics, etc.), pedagogical and didactic aspects (cross-curriculum
integration, connection with subjects already completed or concurrently studied),
methodology (selection of teaching methods focused on the content of each), socio-
cultural and sociolinguistic aspects, etc. When dealing with the issues of automatic
translation, applied linguistics cannot ignore cybernetics, mathematics, computer
engineering, programming, etc. (see Fig. 3)
163
Fig. 3 Relationship between linguistics, applied linguistics and other scientific fields
The diversity of contemporary applied linguistics is primarily related to the
practical activities of humankind. The most promising application areas are hypertext
technologies, which are directly connected with the development of the global Internet
network. The level of hypertext acquisition by linguists is currently not at a
satisfactory level since hypertext research is not always seen as a natural continuation of
linguistic activity in studying and researching the principles of text organization and
understanding. The design and purposeful development of hypertext-oriented software
applications are practically impossible without utilising the basic knowledge of the
language system. Computer technology is also related to rapidly developing issues of
computer text design, which also has same linguistic potential. With the help of
software it is possible to work with the printed text of a book, magazine, newspaper and
thus compose the text with display elements into a single compact whole. Here, the
text acts as a display element and the display as part of the text.
The current trends in applied linguistics include its application to a
particular social, technical, economic or political field. Special attention has recently
been paid to political linguistics. However, the definition of this interdisciplinary
discipline is still disputable. The term itself, as stated by Macho (2012, p.18), is mainly
known in the German literature, which is considered to be a redefined term in the field
of language and political communication. The term politolinguistics has not been more
precisely determined yet. Macho (ibid.) mentions a number of authors dealing with the
terminological definition of the term, for instance, Burkhardt (1996), who understands
it very generally a linguistic discipline dealing with the research of political language,
political language of the media, as well as the language of politics and the language of
politicians. In German literature, the terms “Politiksprache“ and “Politikersprache“
have been used. Politolinguistics can be characterized as a boundary discipline
combining linguistics and political science and can be considered part of applied
linguistics. According to Burkhardt (1996, p. 75), the role of political linguistics is the
historiography of the political language in describing the historical evolution of the
language and the critical way of coping with political communication. Analysis and
criticism of the political language represents an important social and political role of
linguistics that interferes with practices of humankind. He (ibid.) distinguishes and
divides analytical methods of political linguistics into lexical-semantic and pragmatic
levels. As the above-mentioned, the
164
exact definition of the term political linguistics or the language of politics is currently
not clear-cut from the linguistic point of view. Obviously, it is not purely a linguistic
phenomenon and it would be to interpret the relationship between linguistics and
political communication unilaterally. Seresova (2017, p.17) claims that political
language can be understood as a separate act of speaking which involves a particular
activity concurrently. She (ibid., p. 18) deals with the functions of the language of
politics, the influence of the speaker on the recipient, and, in general, she looks at
linguistic acts by which, in written or oral form, the speaker attempts to influence the
political will of the state in public or within a public institution. Dulebova (2011, p.3)
describes political linguistics as interdisciplinary science emerging at the interface of
humanities and social sciences. She (ibid.) asserts that it is realized as
interdisciplinary research at the interface of linguistic fields, media studies and media
communication, sociology, politology, psychology and other humanities and social
sciences, whereas the term political linguistics is often not even explicitly used.
Contrary, Petrenko - Potapova (2014, p. 482) state that political linguistics can be
considered as the part of modern politics. They emphasize the fact that the main
principles of methodology in this research are connected with the key ideas of
structuralism and poststructuralism in the sphere of language. The interest in political
linguistics opens the field of political communication for contemporary investigations.
Stradiotová (2017, p. 137) views the relationship between linguistics and political
science through the language of a political blog. She (ibid.) claims although the use of
the internet in Slovakia did not boom until the late 1990s, the first blogs had begun to
emerge a few years earlier. Initially they had the form of reports that were
chronologically arranged. The effect of the blog was also quickly perceived and
understood by the election campaign agencies and marketing agencies whose experts
began to use it as an important means of communication between the politician and the
citizen, respectively the voter. In 2004, they used the blog in the US presidential
election campaign as well as in Germany. The nature of blogging is different. If we look
at the most popular portals that provide bloggers with space for publishing their texts
(in this case, the SME daily blog, www.sme.sk), we can see a really wide range of text
genres ranging from standard readers’ comments on political events, travelogues,
as well as personal expression of emotional experiences expressed in poetry. Based on

the analysis of selected political texts through blogs there can be various language
functions identified, such as persuading, hypothesizing, making claims, making
predictions, etc. Stefancik - Dulebova (2017, p. 7) consider the relationship between
politics and linguistics as a turnaround as they emphasize that almost half a century ago,
the communication-pragmatic turn in linguistics made it possible to expand and deepen
the research into the analysis of language and politics interaction. Linguists have been
interested in the language of totalitarian regimes, both clerical fascism and communist,
spoken and written language of verbal interaction in parliament, including speeches and
reactions to speeches (factual remarks), legislative process texts, vocabulary of political
institutions or the language used by ministers within internal communication.
Linguists have also been keen on the lexical peculiarities of the language of
ideology, political party programs, typical pre-election slogans, speeches, or New
Year’s speeches of world leaders. Zeman (2008, p.253) regards language as an
effective weapon. He (ibid.) analyzes the relationship between language and thought,
taking into account the power of language, symbols, metaphors, pejorative
meanings and non-verbal means of communication. The semantics, ways of
communication, understanding and the ability of each language to take the form that
its users need in order to achieve their goals (often political ones) are at the heart of
the cultural continuity of modern times in terms of communication. Similarly, Liskova
(2017, p. 141) emphasizes that many wars ended in victory or loss just due to the
choice of language means. She (ibid.) states that verbal expressions in
165
the media have deluged the public, and the language serves not only as a means of
information, but also a tool influencing our opinions and attitudes.
Conclusion
The position of applied linguistics in contemporary linguistic sciences is
undeniable and legitimate. There is no doubt that much research has been done in this
area, starting with the American structuralism and subsequent generative grammar. Its
structure and division has been reappraised for many years due to its interdisciplinary
character, and we convinced that the classification of applied linguistics itself, given
the current state of rapid development of sciences requiring linguistic assistance, is
complex and would require more scientific research. Therefore, it would be
appropriate to deal with it from a broader and narrower meaning of the basic term
“application“. Special attention should be paid to those fields which help linguistics to
clarify linguistic issues themselves, such as psycholinguistics, neurolinguistics,
sociolinguistics. We see these disciplines as a realignment of linguistics with other self-
existing sciences, such as linguistics and sociology, linguistics and mathematics,
linguistics and information technology, linguistics and didactics. This is a broader
meaning of the term, when the sciences themselves help to clarify some of the linguistic
issues, but they are not purely linguistic sciences. In our opinion, the term
“linguodidactics” should be viewed more cautiously with regard to its integration into
applied linguistics since it is a field of pedagogy and thus it cannot be unequivocally
characterized as a purely linguistic one. Linguodidactics can be considered as the use
of particular linguistic theories applied withing the didactic transformation of the
linguistic material, or as the arrangement of the components of the (native, second, or
foreign) language teaching process. Thus, a linguodidactician can choose whether s/he
would design grammatical and lexical curriculum following the results of American
structuralism or Chomsky’s generative grammar. To sum up, no field of scientific
endeavour is immune to criticism and thus the reappraisal of scientific research results
and subsequent statements is natural.
Bibliographic references
AL-KHATIB, H. 2016. Issue of Identity and Boundary between Applied Linguistics
and English Language Teaching. In: Arab World English Journal (AWEJ), vol. 7, n.3.
pp. 445 - 462. SCOPUS
ALTMANN, T. M. 2001. Psycholinguistics. In: Review British Journal of
Psychology, Britain: Great Britain the British Psychological Society, pp. 129 -170.
APRESYAN, Y, D. 1967. Ideyi i metody sovremennoy strukturnoy lingvistiky.
Moskva: Nauka.
BAAL. 1994. Recommendations on Good Practice in Applied Linguistics. British
Association for Applied Linguistics.
BERNS, M. 2010. Concise Encyclopedia of Applied Linguistics. Amsterdam:

Elsevier.
BURKHARDT, A. 1996. Politolinguistik. Versuch einer Ortsbestimmung. In:
KLEIN, J., DIEKMANNSHENKE, H. J. (Hrsg.): Sprachstrategien und
Dialogblockaden. Linguistische und politikwissenschaftliche Studien zur politischen
Kommunikation. Berlin - New York, pp. 75 - 100.
CERNY, J. 1996. Dejiny lingvistiky. Olomouc: Votobia.
CHARLES, C. F. 1952. The structure of English, an introduction to the contractionnof
English sentences. In: CERNY, J. 1996. Dejiny lingvistiky. Olomouc: Votobia, 207 p.
COOK, G. 2010. Applied Linguistics. Oxford: University Press.
CORDER, S. P. 1974. Error Analysis. In: ALLEN, J. P. B., CORDER, P. 1974. (Eds).
Techniques in Applied Linguistics (The Edinburgh Course in Applied Linguistics).
London: Oxford University Press.
166
CRYSTAL, D. 2001. A Dictionary of Linguistics and Phonetics. New York:
Blackwell publishers.
DAVIS, A. 2004. The Handbook of Applied Linguistics. Hong Kong: Blackwell
Publishing Ltd.
DOULIK, P. - SKODA, J. - SIMONOVA, I. 2015. Foreign Language Didactics in
Context of the Field: Case Study of the Czech Republic. In: Advance Science Letters.
USA: American Scientific Publishers.
DULEBOVA, I. 2011. Podoby sucasnej ceskej a slovenskej politickej lingvistiky. In:
Jazyk a kultura vol. 2, n. 8. Available online:
http://www.ff.unipo.sk/jak/8_2011/dulebova.pdf
DULEBOVA, I. 2012. Realie a lingvorealie alebo o otazke kulturologickeho
smerovania. In: Vyucovanie rustiny ako cudzieho jazyka vo viackulturnom priestore.
Presov: Presovska univerzita, 67 p.
FRODEMAN, R. 2013. Sustainable Knowledge: a Theory of Interdisciplinarity. USA:
Palgrave Macmillan.
GORODETSKIY, B. 1983. Novoye v zarubezhnoy lingvistike. Prikladnaya
lingvistika. Moskva: Raduga.
GRABE, W. 2002. Applied linguistics: an emerging discipline for the twentieth century.
In: KAPLAN, B. R. (Eds.) Oxford handbook of Applied Linguistics, New York: Oxford
University Press. pp. 3 -12.
GRABE, W. 2010. ‘Applied Linguistics: a twenty first century discipline’. In:
KAPLAN, R. (Eds) The Oxford Handbook of Applied Linguistics. Oxford: Oxford
University Press.
JAKOBSON, R. 2013. Linguistics in its relation to other sciences. In: KIEFER, F.,
STERKENBURG, P. van. (Eds) 2013. Eight Decades of General Linguistics. The
History of CIPL and Its Role in the History of Linguistics, vol. 1, JOHNSON, K. -
JOHNSON, H. 1998. Encyclopedia Dictionary of Applied Linguistics. New York:
Springer.
KOSIKOVA, K. et al. 2002. Vseobecny encyklopedicky slovnik. Praha: Ottovo
nakladatelstvi.
KOSTRUB, D. - TOTHOVA, R. - FERKOVA, St. 2017. Ziak, ucitel a vyucba. Presov:
Rokus.
KRAMSCH, C. 2000. Language and Culture. Shanghai: Shanghai Foreign Edcuation
Press.
KUBRIK, A. E. 2019. Vvedeniye v nauku o yazyke. Мoskva: Buki Vedi.
LANCARIC, D. 2012. Essentials of Linguisitcs. Bratislava: Z-F LINGUA.
LEITNER, G. 1991. English Traditional Grammars: an international perspective.
Amsterdam/Philadelphia: Library of Congress.
LYONS, J. 1999. Language and Linguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
MACHO, M. 2002. Terminologicke a metodologicke vychodiska skumania jazyka
politickeho diskurzu. In: XLinguae, vol. 1, Nitra: SVO, s. r. o.
McCARTHY, M. 1998. Spoken Language and applied linguistics. Cambridge:
University press.
MISTRIK, J. et al. 1993. Encyklopedia jazykovedy. Bratislava: Obzor.
PETRENKO, V. V. - POTAPOVA, A. S. 2014. Political Linguistics as a Constituent
Part of Modern Political Theory. In: Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, vol.154,
pp. 482 - 485.
RIZEKOVA, I. 2014. Vyskum v lingvodidaktickych disciplinach a pedagogicky
proces. In: Cudzie jazyky v premenach casu, 4, Bratislava: Vydavatelstvo EKONOM.
SABOL, J. - ONDRUS, S. 1987. Uvod do studia jazykov. Bratislava: SPN.

SAUSSURE, F. de. 1986. Course in general linguistics (3rd ed.). Chicago: Open Court
Publishing Company, pp. 9 -10, 15.
167
SERESOVA, K. 2017. Jazyk politiky a jeho funkcie. In: STEFANCIK, R. (ed.) 2017.
Jazyk a politika. Na pomedzi lingvistiky a politologie II. Bratislava: Vydavatelstvo
EKONOM, pp. 17-18.
SHANSKIY, N. M. 1985. Russian linguistics and linguodidactics. Moskva: Russkiy
yazyk.
SCHMITT, N. 2010. Introduction to Applied Linguistics. London: Hodder Education.
SMITH, R. 2011. Plenary address. Crisis between Applied Linguistics and English
Language Teaching. International Conference on Multiple Perceptual Frames on
English Language Teaching and Research. Centre of Applied Linguistic Research
(CALR). Arab Open University in Lebanon. Beirut, March 22.
STEFANCIK, R. - DULEBOVA, I. 2017. Jazyk a politika. Bratislava: Vydavatelstvo
EKONOM.
STRADIOTOVA, E. 2017. Jazyk politického blogu. In: STEFANCIK, R. (ed.) Jazyk a
politika. Na pomedzi lingvistiky a politologie II. Bratislava: Vydavatelstvo
EKONOM, 137 p.
WIDDOWSON, H. G. 1984. Models and fictions. In: WIDDOWSON, H. (Eds.)
Explorations in Applied Linguistics 2. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 21 - 27.
WIDDOWSON, H. G. 2000. On the limitations of linguistics applied. Applied
linguistics, 21(1), pp. 3 - 25.
WIDDOWSON, H. G. 2006. Applied linguistics and interdisciplinarity. International
Journal of Applied Linguistics, vol. 16, n. 1. Blackwell Publishing Ltd. ZIERER, K. -
SEEL, N. M. 2012. General Didactics and Instructional Design: eyeslike twins A
transatlantic dialogue about similarities and differences, about the past andthe future of
two sciences of learning and teaching. In: Springer Plus. A Springer Open Journal.
London.
ZVEGINCEV, V. A. 1968. Teoreticeckaya i prikladnaya lingvistika. Moskva:

Prosveshtcheniye.
Words: 9245
Characters: 65 487 (36,38 standard pages)
PhDr. Roman Kvapil, PhD.
Department of Romance and Slavic languages
Faculty of Applied Languages
University of Economics in Bratislava
Dolnozemská cesta 1
852 32 Bratislava
Slovakia
PaedDr. Martina Šipošová, PhD.
Department of English Language and Literature
Faculty of Education
Comenius University in Bratislava
Račianska 59
813 34 Bratislava
Slovakia
168
Syntax, Semantics, and Pragmatics & The
Philosophy of Language
By
Justin K. McCurry
Syntax, Semantics, Pragmatics & The Philosophy of Language

According to Aristotle, “Man is by nature, a social animal.” What is it about
human nature that would warrant this assertion? Aristotle seems to acknowledge that
there are other social animals, but humankind is placed in a better position: “he alone has
perception of good and bad and right and wrong and the other moral qualities, and it is
partnership in these things that makes a household and a city-state” (Rackham, 1944).
Assuming Aristotle is correct, the communication of these values is an essential for a
social group. Since people lack telepathic capabilities, meaning must be communicated by
way of “ certain kinds of marks and noises” (Lycan, 2000). The marks and noises are
aimed at relaying particular elements. The goal of the philosophy is to analyze the
phenomena involved in this process. Broadly speaking, the project of the philosophy of
language is “the study of linguistic meaning” (Devitt and Hanley, 2006). The purpose of
this essay is to survey some of the issues involved in this project.
The philosophy of language encompasses a wide range of topics and subtopics and
it would be impossible to address all of them in one essay. Instead the discussion will be
a limited to how philosophers of language analyze the relationship between language,
users of language and the world. In his introductory section of The Philosophy of
Language, A.P. Martinich demarcates language into “three areas of study: Syntax,
Semantics, and Pragmatics” (2006). Syntax, says Martinich, “is the study rules that
describe what a well-formed or grammatical sentence in purely formal terms.” He
continues:
“It describes what a sentence is in terms of rules that specify what sequences of
words are permissible…A syntactic description of language is not allowed to use the
concept of meaning or any related concept in order to explain what a grammatical
sentence is” (2006).
In other words, the primary concern of syntax is the function and expression of words
within a sentence.
Following his discussion of syntax, Martinich begins his discussion of semantics.
Martinich says that this second area studies “the meaning of words and sentences.”
According to Martinich, “a semantic theory tries to explain what meaning is, and any
theory of meaning will have to describe what is and what is not a meaningful expression
as well as the systematic relations between words and what they mean” (2006) As for
pragmatics, Martinich has this to say:
“[It] is the study of what speakers do with language. Speakers do not simply talk.
In or by speaking, they promise, marry, swear, forgive, apologize, insult, and enrage,
among many other things. Further, what is communicated not wholly conveyed by what is
said; much is implied.”
Since we use language to express ideas, beliefs, and judgments about extra linguistic
entities it is difficult to emphasize the importance of examining the nature of language.
After a discussion of the three areas of study in language, we can move into how
these areas are discussed within the philosophy of language. Syntax is concerned with both
natural languages and artificial languages. A language is natural in that it is acquired over
time. Examples include German, French, Spanish, and English. A language is artificial or
formal when it is invented for a particular purpose. Artificial language is used in
programming, mathematics, and logical reasoning. Philosophers of language use
formal language to analyze natural language, but it will help to understand the distinction
between the two.
Syntax in a natural language is the rules for how the kind of words, parts of
language, or vocabulary is organized. Consider this example:
(1) Lily reads books.
We can analyze the syntax of the sentence by distinguishing between the subject (“Lily”)
and the predicate (“reads books”). The subject of a sentence tells us what the sentence is
about while the predicate tells us what the subject is doing. In this example, the sentence is
an independent clause, because it provides a subject and predicate that forms a complete
sentence that stands on its own. The subject and predicate are also known as the parts of
the sentence. We can divide the parts of speech further by dividing the example sentence
into “syntactic claims” (Studdard, 2016). Consider these syntactic claims about the
sentence above, for example:
a. ‘Lily’ is a proper noun

b. ‘Reads books’ is verb phrase.
c. Combining a proper noun and a verb phrase in this way makes a complete
sentence
Syntax in formal languages is used to create and analyze well-formed sentences.
Propositional logic, for instance, makes use of letters in the English alphabet that express
sentences and symbols that express connectives to create sentences. Consider this
example, the proposition:
(2) Either Prince produced more albums in the 80s or Queen produced
more Albums in the 80s
can be expressed by propositional logic this way:
(3) P ⋁ Q.
P can represent the proposition that ‘Prince produced more albums in the 80s’, Q can
represent the proposition that ‘Queen produced more albums in the 80s’, and ⋁ can
represent the logical disjunction between the two propositions. Logical propositions can
be expressed using any letter in the English alphabet. The symbols for connectives such
as ‘if…then’, ‘and’, ‘it is not the case that’, and ‘if and only if’ can be expressed using
‘→’, ‘⋀’, ‘¬’, and ‘⟷’, respectively.
Whereas syntax deals with the expressions of words and sentences, semantics is
primarily concerned with “the meanings of the expressions and the things in the world
that the expressions stand for or are about. Reference, truth and meaning are the central
semantic concepts” (Cohen, 2008). Recall the fact that one can form a grammatically
correct sentence that is meaningless. For instance, consider these examples:
(4) Books read Lily.
(5) Deny read loudly.
‘Books read Lily’ has all of the elements of a grammatically correct sentence yet it
provides no information. This is because it does not pertain to matters concerning truth or
meaning. We may know what each of the individual words mean, but their arrangement
renders the overall meaning of the sentence void. In the case of ‘Deny read loudly’, it is
neither meaningful nor grammatically correct.

For now I will discuss the truth condition of a sentence, which is “the condition of
the world under which it is true.” (O’Rourke, 2011) Alternatively, the sentence is false if
the condition is not met. Consider the sentence ‘Blood is red’ as an example. Now
consider the principle of compositionality, which states, “the meaning of a complex
expression is fully determined by its structure and the meanings of its constituents”
(Szabó, 2013). In this case, the meaning of a sentence S depends on ‘Blood’ and the
property of redness are both the constituents of the sentence ‘Blood is red’. This can be
represented formally:
(6) ‘Blood is red’ is true if and only if blood is red.
It seems obvious enough. What linguists and philosophers of language are interested in is
how the proposition uses the same sentence to refer to different senses of the phrase. It
may help to illustrate the point by representing ‘Blood is red’ with S (for sentence).
(7) S is true if and only if blood is red
The same sentence is used in two different senses. As the subject, it merely refers to the
sentence. As the predicate, it refers to a particular state of affairs in the world. Consider an
example where Martha shouts “Blood is red!” and upon hearing it, Tabatha asks “Did you
just shout ‘Blood is red?’” While Martha is referring to the property of redness and its
relationship to blood, Tabatha is referring to the statement, itself. With Martha, the phrase
is being used to convey an idea about the world around her. With Tabatha, the phrase is
being mentioned, because she is merely quoting Martha. This point isn’t really profound.
What is profound is its intuitiveness: communicating this distinction is not necessary for
any fluent speaker of English. S. Marc Cohen’s comments may provide some clarity on
this point:
“As the quotation convention makes clear, we can use language to talk about language.
For the most part, this causes no problems, as the quotation convention enables us to
avoid possible confusions of use and mention: we use one expression to mention
another.” (Cohen 2008)
Another interesting feature of semantics is the discussion of self-referential
sentences. This seems to generate a number of paradoxes. Consider this example:
(8) This sentence is in English.
(9) This sentence is true.
When analyzing (8) on its own terms, any English speaker would be able to determine that
it is indeed true. There is no paradox in (8). However, the truth of (9) is not accessible.
Where we could determine (8) by seeing that the sentence is in English, we cannot do the
same with (9). We could try to analyze its truth condition by saying ’Sentence (9) is true
just in case sentence (9) is true’, but (9) seems closed off. Then there is the liar’s paradox.
Consider a proposition X which says that ‘Proposition X is not true’. Now consider this
argument:
(10) If X is true then what X says is the case
(11) X says that ‘Proposition X is not true’
So, (12) if X then it is not true that X. From there it
can go the other way:
(13) If it is not true that X, then what X says is not the case
(14) Since X says that ‘Proposition X is not true’ then it is not the case that X is
not true
So, (15) since it is not true that X, then it is true that X
Many more examples of semantic paradoxes can be given and philosophers have
written books trying to resolve some of them, but the purpose in my discussion was only
to survey some of the discussions within the literature.
At this point, I will discuss philosophical concerns within the final branch of
linguistics known as pragmatics. Pragmatics, like semantics, is concerned with the
meaning of words. Where pragmatics differs is in the fact that it is concerned with the
meaning of words within different contexts. Kepa Korta and John Perry explain
pragmatics it this way:
“Pragmatics is sometimes characterized as dealing with the effects of context. This is

equivalent to saying it deals with utterances, if one collectively refers to all the facts that
can vary from utterance to utterance as ‘context.’ The facts with which pragmatics deals
are of various sorts [such as,] facts about the objective facts of the utterance, including:
who the speaker is, when the utterance occurred, and where; facts about the speaker's
intentions… Facts about beliefs of the speaker and those to whom she speaks, and the
conversation they are engaged in; what beliefs do they share; what is the focus of the
conversation, what are they talking about… [And] Facts about relevant social institutions,
such as promising, marriage ceremonies, courtroom procedures, and the like, which affect
what a person accomplishes in or by saying what she does.” (Korta and Perry, 2015).
Korta and Perry distinguish what they call “near-side pragmatics and far-side
pragmatics.” The former is concerned with “certain facts that are relevant to determining
what is said” whereas the latter is concerned with that which happens “beyond saying:
what speech acts are performed in or by saying what is said, or what implicatures are
generated by saying what is said” (2015). For the sake of clarity, I will limit the
discussion to far-side pragmatics. This is due to they difficulty in discussing near-side
pragmatics without collapsing back into semantics, and it will be best to speak of
pragmatics on its own terms.
What are these things that happen beyond what is said? Philosophers classify this
activity as speech acts, which are acts that have performative features. Consider an
example in which a mother, upon seeing her children squabble, approaches them and says:
(16) “Cut that out!”
There are three levels of action that goes on beyond what the mother has said.
Philosophers divide these into three distinct levels of actions: “ the locutionary, the
illocutionary, and the perlocutionary act” (Brach, 2006). The locutionary act is the
mother’s utterance. The illocutionary act is the force behind the utterance, or the
significance that it means to convey. In this instance, the mother has issued a directive. The
perlocutionary act is the effect the utterance has on listeners. In this case, the children stop
arguing, perhaps from fear of incurring sanctions. Further, suppose that the mother is a
chief surgeon in a hospital and is quizzing new students on how to approach a case of
tonsillitis. Her students, for some reason or another, do not know how to handle the
situation. A brave student raises his hand and asks what he should do concerning the
inflamed tonsils. She says:
(17) “Cut that out.”
At the locutionary level, it does not differ from (16). At the illocutionary level, it is a
directive. However, the perlocutionary effect would be much different. Whereas she used
the utterance in a figuratively sense with her children, she does not intend to use it that
way with her students. They are to take the directive literally. If they take it figuratively,
then they will probably not retain their job for very long.
The purpose of this essay was to survey some of the intricacies discussed within the
philosophy of language with the emphasis on how it is approached by contemporary
thinkers. In that sense, it had more of an introductory intention. The topics presented here
are merely the tip of the iceberg. Mathematicians, philosophers, and linguists all have had a
contribution to linguistics. Much of the literature is intimidating because it contains not
only a philosophical dimension, but a mathematical, psychological and scientific
dimension as well.
10
Works Cited
1. Aristotle. Aristotle in 23 Volumes, Vol. 21, translated by H. Rackham. Cambridge,
MA, Harvard University Press; London, William Heinemann Ltd. 1944. Aristot.
Pol. 1.1253a
http://data.perseus.org/citations/urn:cts:greekLit:tlg0086.tlg035.perseus-
eng1:1.1253a
2. Lycan, William G. "Overview." Philosophy of Language: A Contemporary
Introduction. Ed. William G. Lycan. New York: Routledge, 2000. 2. Print.
3. Korta, Kepa and Perry, John, "Pragmatics", The Stanford Encyclopedia of

Philosophy (Winter 2015 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.), URL =
<http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2015/entries/pragmatics/>.
4. Brach, Kent. Speech Acts and Pragmatics. Devitt, Michael, and Richard Hanley,
Eds. The Blackwell Guide to the Philosophy of Language. Malden, MA:
Blackwell Pub., 2006. 150. Print.
5. Davies, Martin. "Foundational Issues in The Philosophy of Language." The
Blackwell Guide to the Philosophy of Language. Ed. Michael Devitt and Richard
Hanley. Malden: Blackwell Pub., 2006. 19-20. Print.
6. Yablo, Stephen. 24.251 Introduction to Philosophy of Language. Fall 2011.
Massachusetts Institute of Technology: MIT OpenCourseWare,
https://ocw.mit.edu. License: Creative Commons BY-NC-SA.
7. Cohen, S. Martin. Philosophy 453: The Philosophy of Language, Autumn Quarter
2008. University of Washington: Department of Philosophy,
11
http://faculty.washington.edu/smcohen/453/LectureNotes.html. License:
Copyright © 2008, S. Marc Cohen
8. New Oxford American Dictionary. Eds. Stevenson, Angus, and Christine A.
Lindberg. : Oxford University Press, 2010.
9. Studd, James. Introduction to Logic
10. O’Rourke, Michael. Meaning and Truth. Fall 2011
http://www.webpages.uidaho.edu/~morourke/202-phil/11-
Fall/Handouts/Philosophical/Meaning%20and%20Truth%20Conditions.html
11. Szabó, Zoltán Gendler, "Compositionality", The Stanford Encyclopedia of
Philosophy (Fall 2013 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.), URL =
<https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2013/entries/compositionality/>.
Corpora in Applied Linguistics
Corpora in Applied Linguistics:
Current Approaches
Edited by
Nikola Dobrić, Eva-Maria Graf and Alexander Onysko

Corpora in Applied Linguistics: Current Approaches
Edited by Nikola Dobrić, Eva-Maria Graf and Alexander Onysko This book first published 2016
Cambridge Scholars Publishing
Lady Stephenson Library, Newcastle upon Tyne, NE6 2PA, UK
British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data

A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library
Copyright © 2016 by Nikola Dobrić, Eva-Maria Graf, Alexander Onysko and contributors
All rights for this book reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or
by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without the prior permission of the copyright owner.
ISBN (10): 1-4438-9464-8

ISBN (13): 978-1-4438-9464-7
CONTENTS
Introduction ................................................................................................. 1 Nikola Dobrić, Eva-Maria Graf and Alexander

Onysko
Research on L2 Pragmatics at a conceptual and methodological interface .... 9 Marcus Callies
A focus on pragmatic competence: The use of pragmatic markers in a corpus of Business English
textbooks ................................................. 33 Peter Furkó
Written summarisation for academic writing skills development: A corpus based contrastive investigation of EFL student
writing ............. 53 Gyula Tankó
Refining the Scope – Substance error taxonomy: A closer look at

Substance ............................................................................................... 79 Günther Sigott, Hermann Cesnik and Nikola Dobrić
The uses and functions of metadiscourse in intercultural project discussions on language

education ............................................................ 95 Hermine Penz
Does code-switching exist in personal writing? ...................................... 121 Olga Grebeshkova
Frequency analysis of trigger words and money-related expressions in British and Serbian bank
offers ........................................................... 145 Vesna Lazović
“I use English, but if need be I’m fluent in German as well”: Croatian business professionals’ use of English and other
languages ..... 165 Branka Drljača Margić and Irena Vodopija-Krstanović
INTRODUCTION
NIKOLA DOBRIĆ, EVA-MARIA GRAF AND ALEXANDER ONYSKO

Corpora in Applied Linguistics – Current Approaches brings together contributions from the Klagenfurt Conference of Corpus-
Based Applied Linguistics (CALK14). The volume aims to extend corpus linguistic research in different areas of applied
linguistics. As such, the articles in the book discuss diverse areas of applied linguistics research based on authentic language data
and corpora.
Applied Linguistics – broadly defined as a scientific approach and means to help solve language-related problems in society
– is a branch of linguistics that benefits substantially from using corpora in its research. Even though the use of corpora has
recently led to the emergence of a separate field of Learner Corpus Research (e.g. Callies & Götz 2015; Granger, Guilquin &
Meunier 2015), other areas of applied linguistics have not yet explored the practical potential of corpora to their fullest extent.
Besides the by now classic work of Susan Hunston (2002) on Corpora in Applied Linguistics, there are only two more edited
volumes that specifically deal with the use of corpora in applied linguistics, i.e. Campoy and Luzón’s (2007) volume on Spoken
Corpora in Applied Linguistics and Hyland, Meng Huat and Handford’s (2012) volume on Corpus Applications in Applied
Linguistics. Thus, the current volume would like to draw some more attention on the vast possibilities of applying corpora in
carrying out research in applied linguistics.
The use of corpora is most closely linked with the field and method of corpus linguistics and its commitment to using
empirical ‘real’ language data for linguistic research. The field and its methods have evolved and developed immensely over the
last 50 years. According to Hunston (2002: 1), “[i]t is no exaggeration to say that corpora, and the study of corpora, have
revolutionized the study of language, and of the application of language, over the last few decades.”
Contemporary corpus linguistics, which is based on the computer aided analysis of large databases of text, had its onset in
the late 1950s and
2 Introduction
more concretely in 1961 when the texts for the Brown Corpus were collected (Francis & Kucera 1964). This first modern,
computer readable, general corpus of Standard American English contains one million words of American English texts from 15
different text categories. While the Brown Corpus set the standards for corpus compilation for years, the release of the British
National Corpus (BNC) in 1995 represented another milestone by its sheer size of 100 million words. Nowadays, electronic
accessability of texts particularly on the world wide web facilitate the compilation of large-scale corpora, such as the NOW
corpus compiled by Mark Davies, which includes English web-based newspaper contents since 2010 and grows in size by 4
million words every day. Apart from the English language (and its varieties), corpora have also become important for the study
of many languages, including languages with smaller numbers of speakers, for which corpora can be important tools of language
documentation, maintainance and revitalization (e.g. Boyce 2006). In addition, the last two decades of corpus linguistic research
have also experienced a trend towards smaller, custom-made corpora that are targeted for answering specific questions. The
contributions in the current volume are a further testimony of that.
Taking another brief look back at the development of corpus linguistics, it becomes clear that corpus-based and corpus-
driven approaches to language analysis originated from the struggle between studying idealized speaker utterances, and thus
relying on intuitions, and considering actual language use and variation in an empirical fashion. Since the 1980s, corpus
linguistics has had a constantly increasing impact on the study of language due to the following two factors: The first relates to
the growing awareness that intuition alone is not a sufficient and adequate method for providing solid linguistic evidence. The
second factor is spawned by the information revolution and the development of ever more powerful and affordable computers as
well as the rise of the Internet and new information technologies.
Today, there is a plethora of corpora of various types geared towards answering different kinds of linguistic and didactic
questions. Methodologies of corpus-based research have been thoroughly developed, including computer software and statistical
methods for dealing with quantitative data. The role of corpora is by now universally recognized as essential in contemporary
linguistics. This is not only true in certain areas of linguistic exploration such as lexicography or natural language processing,
but also other branches of linguistics are increasingly applying corpus-based methods in their empirical practice. We hope that
this
Nikola Dobric, Eva-Maria Graf and Alexander Onysko 3
volume helps to further disseminate the benefits and advantages of working with corpora in the vast field of applied linguistics.
The studies gathered in this volume explore the opportunities that both spoken and written corpora offer for answering questions
in different domains of applied linguistics such as second language learning, language testing, comparative linguistics, learner
pragmatics and specialized discourses. At the same time, the contributions also give insight into possible limitations and further
challenges of corpus-based research in these areas.
In more detail, the opening contribution by Marcus Callies on Research on L2 Pragmatics at a conceptual and
methodological interface addresses the construct of pragmatic knowledge in a foreign/second language (L2) at the conceptual
interface of pragmatics, syntax and discourse, and the methodological interface of Second Language Acquisition (SLA) research
and Learner Corpus Research (LCR). The study focuses on the pragmalinguistic component of L2 pragmatic knowledge by
examining a means of information highlighting, i.e. a specific type of cleft construction. It argues that both SLA research and
LCR can benefit from the possibilities offered by the use of learner corpora in the study of interface relations in language
acquisition: corpus and experimental data could be used as potentially converging evidence when studying interface phenomena.
A case study of learners’ use of demonstrative clefts exemplifies the crucial role of spoken learner corpora in the expansion of
the research agenda of interlanguage pragmatics in that they enable researchers to study a much broader range of different
pragmatic phenomena on the basis of authentic, continuous and contextualized data.
Peter Furkó’s article, A focus on pragmatic competence: The use of pragmatic markers in a corpus of Business English
textbooks, looks into the role of pragmatic markers (PM) in shaping ESL speakers’ communicative competence in the context of
business communication. Despite their essential role in organizing and structuring discourse and for marking speakers’ attitudes
towards the propositional content of their utterances, elements such as well, you know, of course, right, etc. take a back seat in
TEFL, TESL and, most notably, in TESP contexts. The paper discusses the major issues related to the concept of communicative
competence. In particular, the role of PMs in ESL is addressed, including difficulties that may hinder learners from acquiring the
proper use of PMs. A case study on the representation of PMs in Business English textbooks aims at mapping the functional
spectrum of PMs in the selected teaching materials. The findings show that attention towards the importance of PMs
4 Introduction
has increased in Business English textbooks over the last ten to fifteen years, which is evident by the presence of explicit
instructions and exercises on using PMs. However, if Business English textbooks are used as a corpus of utterances, the
inadequate treatment of PMs becomes obvious in view of their frequency and functional range. The paper concludes by stating
that teachers need to compensate for the inadequate input provided in textbooks of Business English.
Gyula Tankó’s article, Written summarisation for academic writing skills development: A corpus based contrastive
investigation of EFL student writing, presents findings from a corpus-based study that compares the effect of academic essay
and summary tasks on the written production of EFL learners. The study is contextualized in both the global and local concerns
for testing academic English proficiency. As such, it contributes to the findings of first studies that investigated the effect of task
type on written language production. The author analyses the syntactic and lexical characteristics of two writing tasks, an
independent argumentative essay and an integrated guided summary writing task with the aim to determine whether the task
types elicit written academic English discourse. Furthermore, the study considers the practical implications of the findings for
EAP teaching and assessment. The results show that the argumentative essay and guided summary tasks elicit language with the
characteristic features of written academic prose. At the same time, there are marked differences in the participants’ written
production on the two tasks. Based on this evidence, Tankó formulates a few recommendations for EAP teachers and assessors
with the proviso that the educational application of these results may require fine-tuning according to the varying rhetorical
traditions of academic disciplines and the impact of the students’ L1 background.
The next contribution by Günther Sigott, Hermann Cesnik and Nikola Dobrić, Refining the scope – Substance error
taxonomy: A closer look at Substance, deals with the highly complex task of identifying and describing errors in learner
language, in particular in L2 writing. The paper, which is an elaboration of the Scope – Substance error taxonomy developed in
Dobrić & Sigott (2014), aims to develop a methodology for recording annotator agreement and to determine the degree to which
annotators agree on the substance of errors after being introduced to the principles underlying the Scope – Substance error
taxonomy. Scope refers to the amount of context that is necessary in order for an error to become perceptible. Substance, by
contrast, refers to the amount of text that needs to be changed so that the error will disappear. Since agreement on error
Substance is a prerequisite for agreement on error type, which results from
the combination of Substance with Scope, the present study focuses only on Substance. The degree of agreement reached and the
problems encountered are discussed as the basis for further refining the Scope – Substance error taxonomy towards future
application in corpus annotation, teaching and assessment.
The contribution on The uses and functions of metadiscourse in intercultural project discussions on language education by
Hermine Penz investigates spoken metadiscourse during intercultural project discussions. The study contributes to fostering
research on spoken metadiscourse, which, unlike its written form, has received very little attention so far. The paper argues that
the main function of metadiscourse in the intercultural data at hand lies in achieving understanding and creating a common basis
in a context of great diversity. However, when comparing the use of metadiscourse in group discussions, which essentially could
be considered as the same activity type, differences in frequency, in particular in connection with specific functions, are
identified in the corpus. Such differences in frequency and types of metadiscourse are interpreted to reflect the interaction within
events which could be classified as the same speech activity. On the premise that speech activities are not clear cut events and
are characterised by fuzziness, the author concludes that an analysis of metadiscourse can help to uncover variation within
activity types (or genres). This is indicative of the fact that metadiscourse can be seen as a reflection of the socio-pragmatic
context.
Olga Grebeshkova’s chapter, Does code-switching exist in personal writing?, summarizes the first findings from an on-
going study of second language learners’ personal writing, and in particular of the phenomenon of code-switching. The author
sets out to answer the question to what extent personal writing, i.e. writing from an author that is addressed to the same author,
in the bilingual environment is affected by language switches. In order to do so, she has built a corpus that consists of 83
examination notes from French students taken during their Bachelor degree examinations in English and of 83 examination notes
from Russian students taken during their final English exam in the 4th year of their studies. Out of these notes, 43 contain
instances of code-switching, which the author further analyses on the basis of language content relationships of multilingual
texts and the use of intra-/inter-sentential code-switching. As a preliminary result, the data in Grebeshkova’s research manifest
the presence of code-switching in personal writing as concrete, genuine evidence of bilingual writing.
Vesna Lazović’s contribution, Frequency analysis of trigger words and money-related expressions in British and Serbian
bank offers,
6 Introduction
explores the use of trigger words and money-related expressions in British and Serbian bank offers. Based on data collected from
web pages of banks operating in two countries and offering services to people of two different cultures, the study highlights
current trends in advertising in different languages at the lexical level. In particular, it emphasizes the ways words are used to
persuade, convince and manipulate potential clients. Furthermore, it compares the frequency analysis of those expressions in
English with their translation equivalents in Serbian in order to, first, demonstrate whether different cultural background
influences advertising messages and, second, to reveal similarities and differences in the lexical approach to financial products.
The data analysis confirms that some features in advertising are universal in different languages and cultures, as is the use of
trigger words and money-saving expressions. Yet, the study also demonstrates that culture can have a significant influence on
marketing decisions and the success of marketing communications. The author concludes that more cross-cultural analyses are
required to raise awareness towards cultural differences in the perception and reception of marketing messages in the Internet
era. Only in that way can universals of register variation be established and linguistic methods and strategies across cultures
understood.
The final contribution by Branka Drljača Margić and Irena Vodopija Krstanović entitled, “I use English, but if need be I’m
fluent in German as well”: Croatian business professionals’ use of English and other languages, analyzes the use, status and
importance of English and other languages in the Croatian business environment. The larger socio-cultural context of the study
is Croatia’s recent accession to the European Union and the fact that its membership in the single market of the European Union
has offered new opportunities for business networking and has affected the use of languages for business purposes. The study
focuses on Croatian business professionals’ self-reported use of languages and their stance towards the importance of English
and other languages. The findings show a consensus about the strong convergence towards English in the Croatian context;
English is considered to be the most significant language in the business domain although other languages are also deemed
useful. In general, the study sheds light on the way in which English is used as a business lingua franca, and on how English and
other languages can contribute to ensure greater success in the global marketplace. Although the study is not concerned with
teaching, the authors conclude that their findings could have implications for English language training programmes for business
purposes, teaching of English for specific
purposes at university, and for English-medium instruction in business programmes in higher education.
References
Boyce, M.T. (2006). A Corpus of Modern Spoken Māori. Ph.D. thesis. Victoria University of Wellington.
British National Corpus (BNC). University of Oxford.
http://www.natcorp.ox.ac.uk/; last accessed May 16, 2016 Callies, M. & S. Götz. (eds.) (2015). Learner Corpora in
Language Testing and Assessment. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Campoy, M. C. & M. J. Luzón (eds.) (2007).
Spoken Corpora in Applied Linguistics. Bern: Peter Lang.
Davies, M. NOW Corpus (News on the Web). Brigham Young University. http://corpus.byu.edu/now/; last accessed May 16,
2016. Dobrić, N. & G. Sigott (2014). Towards an error taxonomy for student writing. Zeitschrift für interkulturellen
Fremdsprachenunterricht 19 (2): 111–118.
Francis, W.N. & H. Kucera (1964). Brown Corpus Manual. Brown University. http://www.hit.uib.no/icame/brown/bcm.html; last
accessed May 16, 2016.
Granger, S., G. Guilquin & F. Meunier (eds.) (2015). The Cambridge Handbook of Learner Corpus Research. Cambridge:
Hyland, K., C. Meng Huat & M. Handford (eds.) (2012). Corpus Applications in Applied Linguistics. London: Bloomsbury
Publishing. Hunston, S. (2002). Corpora in Applied Linguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
RESEARCH ON L2 PRAGMATICS
AT A CONCEPTUAL AND METHODOLOGICAL INTERFACE
MARCUS CALLIES
1. Introduction
This chapter addresses the construct of pragmatic knowledge in a foreign/second language (L2) at the conceptual interface of
pragmatics, syntax and discourse, and 2) at the methodological interface of Second Language Acquisition (SLA) research and
Learner Corpus Research (LCR). Its aim is to contribute to the growing number of studies that use spoken learner corpora to
study features of the grammar of conversation. The study focuses on the pragmalinguistic component of L2 pragmatic
knowledge by examining a means of information highlighting, i.e. a specific type of cleft construction.
2. The conceptual interface. Pragmatics in Second Language Acquisition: Going beyond

speech acts
Callies (2013) argued that the study of pragmatics as a field of inquiry within Second Language Acquisition (SLA), usually
referred to as Interlanguage Pragmatics (ILP), has traditionally adopted a narrow research focus, and that the significance of L2
pragmatic knowledge beyond the domain of speech acts has been neglected in ILP to date. Similarly, Bardovi-Harlig’s (2010)
state-of-the-art meta-analysis of published research in ILP concluded that “the dominant area of investigation within
interlanguage pragmatics has been the speech act” (2010: 219). However, recent developments suggest that there is a growing
awareness in the field that L2 pragmatics is more than speech acts and that the scope of inquiry needs to be adjusted accordingly
(LoCastro 2011: 333).
10 Research on L2 pragmatics at a conceptual and methodological interface
Pragmatic knowledge in an L2 clearly includes more than the sociopragmatic and pragmalinguistic abilities for
understanding and performing speech acts. Standard descriptions of ILP frequently use notions like “linguistic action in L2”
(Kasper 2010: 141) to refer to the general domain of inquiry. Definitions of pragmatic knowledge or competence range from 1
rather broad and general ones, e.g. “the ability to use language appropriately in a social context” (Taguchi 2009: 1) to more
detailed ones, e.g. “the knowledge of the linguistic resources available in a given language for realizing particular illocutions,
knowledge of the sequential aspects of speech acts and finally, knowledge of the appropriate contextual use of the particular
languages’ linguistic resources” (Barron 2003: 10). Callies proposed the following definition of pragmatic knowledge:
2
L2 pragmatic knowledge is the knowledge of the (pragma-) linguistic resources available in a particular language for realizing
communicative intentions, and the knowledge of the appropriate socio-contextual use of these resources. Pragmalinguistic knowledge
is a component of L2 pragmatic knowledge which relates to learners’ knowledge of the structural linguistic resources available in a
given language for realizing particular communicative effects, and knowledge of the appropriate contextual use of these resources.
(2013: 14)
There are a number of models of language proficiency that aim to capture the ability of L2 learners to use language in social
interaction, all of which acknowledge to some degree the importance to acquire pragmatic competence in L2 learning (see
Callies 2013 for discussion). The present chapter adopts a componential view of linguistic knowledge, use and development as
well as L2 proficiency that has similarities to a modular view which presupposes that a learner’s knowledge of a foreign
language consists of modules such as phonology, morphology, syntax, semantics and pragmatics. These modules have their
3
individual structural and functional properties. They interact with each other and with other cognitive systems. These
interactional processes are known as interface relations. Interface relations have received a great deal of attention in
1
The two terms are frequently used interchangeably in the literature. While Barron’s proposal draws a useful distinction between
2
pragmalinguistic and sociopragmatic knowledge, it centers around the concept of illocutionary acts, thus narrowing down the scope of
pragmatic knowledge to sociopragmatics. Note that the view adopted here does not imply a commitment to a generative approach to SLA,
3
although modularity is of central importance in this framework.

Marcus Callies 11
contemporary generative-linguistic approaches to SLA theory. In these approaches, interfaces involve interactions or mappings
4
between linguistic modules or representations. These include external ones, i.e. those where the grammar interfaces with other
domains of cognition, e.g. the conceptual-intentional and the articulatory-perceptual system (e.g. the relationship between syntax
and discourse), and internal ones, i.e. where different modules of the grammar interface with each other (the interface between
syntax and semantics or syntax and phonology). Note that in this view, discourse-pragmatics is considered an external interface.
A highly influential theoretical construct in the study of advanced learner language has been the so-called Interface
Hypothesis (IH), most recently stated in Sorace (2011). It was originally applied to the concept of ultimate attainment at the level
of near-native L2 proficiency and proposed that language structures involving an interface between syntax and other cognitive
domains are less likely to be acquired completely than structures that do not involve this interface. Thus, it claims that interfaces
are especially vulnerable for adult learners (more vulnerable than purely syntactic features) and therefore subject to greater
difficulty and delay in acquisition. Interface relations, opaque form-meaning mappings, optionality and discourse-motivated
preferences are generally assumed to be among the main areas of difficulty in advanced SLA (DeKeyser 2005). Linguistic
phenomena located at the external interfaces are expected to result in greater difficulties than internal ones because properties at
external interfaces draw on information across linguistic and non-linguistic cognitive modules and require more processing
resources. Difficulties with interface phenomena are believed to be caused by limitations in working memory as well as
processing capacity and efficiency as inherent features of bilingualism.
Outside of the generative framework, interface relations in terms of the interrelationship of grammatical and
pragmalinguistic abilities in SLA has also been discussed in ILP. In the majority of studies that have been conducted, pragmatic
competence is singled out as an individual component of communicative competence and, thus, treated and investigated as an
independent component of grammar (Kasper & Rose 2002: 159, 163). Some authors have identified a lack of research which
explores the relationship between grammatical and pragmatic abilities in SLA (Bardovi-Harlig 1999, Kasper 2001, Kasper &
Rose 2002), which is still
4
See White (2009, 2011) for overview discussions and the special issue of Lingua (121:4) published in 2011, entitled “Acquisition at the
Linguistic Interfaces” that contains studies adopting an interface-conditioned view of mental linguistic architecture framed within generative-
linguistic theory.
an unresolved issue. It is suggested that the development of pragmatic competence has to be seen as independent of the
development of grammatical competence since “high levels of grammatical competence do not guarantee concomitant high
levels of pragmatic competence” (Bardovi
Harlig 1999: 686).
Kasper (2001: 506) and Kasper and Rose (2002, chapter 5) summarize the research findings on the relationship of
interlanguage pragmatic and grammatical development which has led to two scenarios:
• pragmatics precedes grammar: learners use L2 pragmatic functions before they acquire the L2 grammatical forms that are
acceptable realizations of those functions;
• grammar precedes pragmatics: learners acquire L2 grammatical forms before they acquire their pragmalinguistic functions.
In support of the first scenario, Kasper and Rose draw on the “universal pragmatics principle” and functional approaches to SLA.
A persistent belief in traditional foreign language teaching is the primacy-of-grammar view which claims that in order to
successfully communicate in an L2 in terms of (socio)pragmatics, learners first need to have a solid knowledge of the target
language grammar. However, the universal pragmatics principle states that unlike children in L1 acquisition, L2 learners are
usually pragmatically competent in their L1, hence they bring a supposedly universal pragmatic knowledge to the task of L2
learning (Kasper & Rose 2002: 164). Moreover, functionally oriented research into the early stages of untutored SLA has found
that learners move from a pragmatic mode through a process of syntacticization or acquisitional grammaticalization to a
syntactic mode.
The grammar-precedes-pragmatics scenario comes in three forms (see Kasper & Rose 2002: 174ff.):
• grammatical knowledge does not enable pragmalinguistic use (for example learners’ (non-)use of modal verbs in mitigating
disagreement); • grammatical knowledge enables non-target-like pragmalinguistic use
(for example the overuse and pragmatic overextension of I think), and • grammatical and pragmalinguistic knowledge enable
non-target-like sociopragmatic use (for example learners’ use of information questions as indirect strategies in a number of
speech act types and contexts in which more transparent strategies would be more effective).
Marcus Callies 13
In sum, research findings suggest that there are differences as to the pragmalinguistic development of learners at different
developmental stages in the L2 learning process. However, it still remains unclear how grammatical and pragmatic knowledge in
an L2 is exactly related to each other.
3. The methodological interface.

Learner corpora in SLA research
Similar to SLA research in general, in which highly controlled (quasi-) experimental data have traditionally been favoured,
research in ILP has largely relied on elicited assessment and production data. The most typically used data collection technique
used is the discourse completion task (DCT) to elicit pseudo-oral production data about sociopragmatic behaviour in a specific
communicative context. According to LoCastro (2011: 331), this may be another reason for the dominance of research on speech
acts in ILP.
Corpora and corpus linguistic tools and methods are also increasingly used for the study of SLA, in particular in learner
corpus research (LCR), an interdisciplinary field at the crossroads of corpus linguistics, SLA research and foreign language
teaching (see Granger, Meunier & Gilquin 2015). However, its links with SLA research in general and the impact of LCR on
SLA theory in particular has been limited to date, which seems especially true for SLA research couched in a generative-
linguistic framework in which data-driven, usage-based approaches are not as appealing (Granger 2009: 14). It seems, however,
that the two fields are now coming closer together, with learner corpus researchers recognizing the importance of SLA theory
and SLA researchers gaining insights into the added value of learner corpora (Granger 2009: 14; see also Tracy Ventura & Myles
2015 and Lozano & Mendikoetxea to appear). For example, Rankin (2009) argues that the study of interface relations is a field
that should be beneficial for both LCR and (generativist) SLA. LCR has made a substantial contribution to the description of
advanced written interlanguages with a focus on lexico-grammar with some corpus-based research showing that advanced
learners typically struggle with the acquisition of optional and highly L2-specific linguistic phenomena, often located at the
interfaces, e.g. in discourse and information structure (e.g. Callies 2009a and the studies reviewed therein). This partially mirrors
recent developments in generative SLA, where the interfaces between syntax, discourse-pragmatics and semantics have been at
the center of attention.
As of yet, there are only few studies that have addressed the methodological interface between generative approaches to
SLA and learner corpus research (e.g. Lozano & Mendikoetxea 2008, 2010, to appear; Rankin 2009). These have focused on
discourse-conditioned word order alternations such as subject-verb inversion and preposing in the written production of
advanced L2 learners of English from various L1 backgrounds. Lozano and Mendikoetxea (to appear) propose to use converging
evidence in the form of corpus and experimental data when studying interface phenomena: if learners show certain kinds of
knowledge or deficits at the interfaces, this should be observed in both experimental and contextualized production data. Corpus
and experimental data should therefore be combined and contrasted to better account for the observed deficits at the syntax-
discourse interface and determine why some interfaced properties are more problematic than others.
In ILP, learner corpora – due to their very nature of being large systematic collections of authentic, continuous and
contextualized language use (spoken or written) by L2 learners stored in electronic format – can help overcome several problems
and limitations posed by the dominance of data elicitation techniques to date. Not only do learner corpora enable researchers to
study a much broader range of different phenomena, but they can also provide results that may be viewed as more reliable, valid,
and generalizable across populations without the lack of authenticity and replicability that often arises from the use of other
types of data. They can be the basis for quantitatively oriented studies that are subjected to statistical analyses and create an
opportunity for between methods triangulation and alternative views to qualitative, ethnographic studies that have been common
in pragmatics in general.
In particular, the availability of spoken learner corpora such as the Louvain International Database of Spoken English
Interlanguage (LINDSEI; Gilquin et al. 2010) has enabled researchers to study a wider range of pragmatic features of learner
language in the spoken mode. The LINDSEI consists of spoken data, i.e. transcripts of interviews between learners of English as
5
a foreign language (EFL) and English native

speaker or non-native-speaker interviewers. The learners are university undergraduates in their twenties whose proficiency level
ranges from higher intermediate to advanced (being assessed on external criteria such as institutional status). The LINDSEI
includes subcorpora of learners from eleven mother tongue backgrounds (e.g. German, French, Italian,
See the list of publications based on the LINDSEI provided by the Centre for English Corpus Linguistics in Louvain-al-Neuve, Belgium, at
5
http:// www.uclouvain.be/en-cecl-lindsei-biblio.html
Marcus Callies 15
Japanese, Polish, and Spanish) with 50 interview transcripts per subcorpus, i.e. a total of about 100,000 words per component.
Each interview lasts approximately fifteen minutes and involves three tasks: 1) a warm-up sequence in which interviewer and
interviewee talk about a set topic, 2) a free discussion, and 3) a picture description.
Using data from corpora of spoken interlanguage, it is now possible to systematically examine lexico-grammatical patterns
and syntactic structures that are part of the grammar of conversation on a broad empirical basis (see e.g. Mukherjee 2009 for a
study along these lines). Other studies have investigated individual pragmalinguistic units, e.g. discourse markers (e.g. Müller
2004, 2005; Aijmer 2004, 2009, 2011; Buysse 2012, 2015), modal particles (e.g. Belz & Vyatkina 2005) and tag questions
(Ramirez & Romero-Trillo 2005), as well as other features of turn- and discourse structure, e.g. performance phenomena like
hesitations, repetitions and disfluencies (Gilquin 2008) or filled and unfilled pauses (see e.g. Brand & Götz 2011; Götz 2013).
The present paper makes a contribution to research on the grammar of conversation in learner English and focuses on
information highlighting in discourse.
4. Case study
An area where pragmalinguistic devices abound and are of crucial importance is discourse pragmatics, the “general domain of
inquiry into the relationship between grammar and discourse” (Lambrecht 1994: 2). More specifically, I will be concerned with a
syntactic means of information highlighting located at the interface of syntax and discourse
pragmatics. This interface is often referred to as information structure or information packaging, viz. the structuring of sentences
by syntactic, prosodic, or morphological means that arises from the need to meet certain communicative demands, e.g.
emphasizing a certain point, correcting a misunderstanding, or repairing a communicative breakdown. Information highlighting
6
is clearly pragmatically motivated because, more generally speaking, it serves to express certain pragmatic functions in discourse,
e.g. intensification or contrast. Compared to their frequency of occurrence and difficulty of acquisition, there are still relatively
few corpus-based studies that have examined the linguistic means of information highlighting in
6
Deppermann (2011) provides a recent overview of the role and relevance of pragmatics for grammar, in particular as to the structuring and
packaging of information and the framing of discursive action by means of grammatical constructions such as clefts.
English interlanguage from a pragmalinguistic perspective (see e.g. Boström Aronsson 2003; Herriman & Boström Aronsson
2009; Callies 2008a, 2008b, 2009a, 2009b). More generatively-oriented studies are Lozano and Mendikoetxea (2008, 2010) who
investigate how syntactic knowledge interfaces with other cognitive systems by analyzing postverbal subjects in Italian and
Spanish EFL learners’ written production compared to English native speakers. Their findings show that while these learners
produce verb-subject constructions under the same interface conditions as native speakers, they in fact overproduce them and
make persistent errors in their syntactic encoding. These findings are interpreted as supporting proposals that these difficulties
stem from problems at coordinating syntactic knowledge with knowledge from other external systems, but they suggest that the
nature of such difficulties is not external to the syntax. Rankin (2009) also examined the interface between syntax and discourse
pragmatics by studying verb second (V2) structures in the written production of advanced German and Dutch EFL learners. The
evidence shows that the residual V2 produced by the learner groups studied is the result of a deficit at the interface rather than
the transfer of L1 V2 syntax, suggesting that the nature of V2 in the learners’ L1 combined with evidence from the L2 input
make it difficult for them to lose the V2 constraint, which remains a persistent option after the preposing of certain constituents.
L2 learners’ knowledge (that includes awareness, comprehension, and production) of discourse organization and the
(contextual) use of linguistic means of information highlighting is thus still a relatively underexplored area in SLA research, as is
the interplay of pragmalinguistic knowledge and discourse organization in general. Recent findings suggest that information
structure management is problematic even for advanced L2 learners and that such learners have only a limited awareness of the
appropriate use of lexical and syntactic focusing devices in formal and informal registers (Callies 2009a).
In what follows, I present a learner-corpus study that investigates L2 learners’ use of a specific means of information
highlighting in English, i.e. a specific type of cleft construction: demonstrative clefts. Three research questions will be
examined:
1. Are there differences in the frequencies of use of this cleft type in the speech of native speakers of English and learners of English
as a foreign language?
2. Are there differences in how native speakers and learners use this device in terms of discourse functions?
Marcus Callies 17
3. Are there differences between learners from different L1 backgrounds, and if so, how can these be explained?
The case study is a contrastive interlanguage analysis (CIA) based on corpora of spoken interlanguage. In a CIA, two types of
comparisons are combined (see e.g. Callies 2015). First, the interlanguage of a certain learner group, e.g. German learners of
English, is compared with the language of English native speakers in order to pinpoint possible differences between the two
groups. This comparison is then subsequently combined with a corresponding analysis of the interlanguage produced by a
second group of learners, e.g. French learners of English. For the present case studies, the learner data are drawn from the
German and French components of the LINDSEI (Gilquin et al. 2010). For comparable native speaker data the Louvain Corpus
of Native English Conversations (LOCNEC) was used. The LOCNEC contains transcribed interviews with native speakers of
British English (university students at Lancaster University in the UK) aged between eighteen and thirty years. The interviews
involved the same tasks, topics and stimuli that were used for the interviews in the LINDSEI. Table 1 provides an overview of
the corpora.
Name Writers’ L1
Professional status
No. of
interviews
No. of turns (only
7
interviewees)
LINDSEI-F 5504
French university 50
students
German university 50
students
LINDSEI-G 6051
LOCNEC British English

university students
50 8436
Table 1. Learner corpora used in the case study
The target structures were extracted semi-automatically using WordSmith Tools 5 (Scott 2008), followed by manual inspection
8
and filtering of false
7
In view of the manifold problems to operationalize the concept of sentence in transcribed spoken language and thus, to count the amount of
sentences in the corpora, I chose to apply the number of speech turns as a basis of comparison. To retrieve all instances of the clefts, the
8
search involved all instances of that and this followed by a form of be (‘s, is, was) and a wh-word (what, when, why, where, how).
positives. The analysis of the data consisted in a quantitative analysis of frequencies of occurrence and a qualitative study of
discourse functions. Cleft sentences are information packaging constructions that involve the splitting of a sentence into two
clauses. They are pragmatically motivated and differ from their basic counterparts in that they serve to highlight a certain phrase
or clause, the cleft constituent. The most common types are it-clefts and wh-clefts (also known as pseudo-clefts). There are also
other types of cleft constructions such as the reverse wh cleft, in which the order of wh- and cleft-clause is inverted. The vast
majority of reverse wh-clefts feature the non-contrastive, non-focal deictic demonstratives that or this as the cleft constituent, see
examples (1) and (2), and therefore this type is also referred to as demonstrative cleft in the literature (Biber et al. 1999: 961;
9
Calude 2008, 2009).
(1) <A> so you you did English and ling= and linguistics to: <\A> I did English and linguistics just because that was what I was
interested in the the interest in going into film industry has only developed since I've been at university <\B> (LOCNEC)
(2) <A> so you had to cope with those kids <\A>

 I had to cope with those kids completely on my own with no back up she said you know she w= she thought it was great having
someone to help she said right you're gonna take half the kids ..the worst half and you're going to teach them the same lesson as I'm
teaching them here's the book this is what I want you to teach them go off and do it for a year <\B> (LOCNEC)
When compared to other types of cleft constructions, demonstrative clefts only rarely occur in written language but are clearly
the most frequent variant in the spoken mode (Collins 1991: 178ff.; Oberlander & Delin 1996: 186; Weinert & Miller 1996:
176), occurring especially often in spontaneous spoken language, i.e. conversation (Biber et al. 1999: 961; Calude 2008: 86). Of
the two demonstratives, that is much more frequent than this (Oberlander & Delin 1996: 189; Weinert & Miller 1996: 188; Biber
et al. 1999: 962; Calude 2008: 79). Therefore, the majority of demonstrative clefts convey anaphoric deixis as in example (3), 10
but they can also express cataphoric deixis as in (4), function anaphorically and cataphorically simultaneously as in (5), or carry
exophoric deixis, i.e. non textual, extra-linguistic reference either in the form of shared world
9
Demonstrative clefts are given in bold print.
10
The discourse segment(s) that the demonstrative that refers to are underlined.
Marcus Callies 19
knowledge or physical/visual presence at the time of utterance, see example (6) (Calude 2008: 87ff.).
(3) <A> so what are you doing now as a major is it linguistics or is it <\A> <X> .. I I thought I'd been accepted for Chinese and
linguistics combined <\B>
<A> [ mm <\A>
 [ and that's what they told me when I first . came here but now they seem to think it's only linguistics <\B> (LOCNEC)
(4) that we're living I mean I had my had my own flat and it's very difficult to: go from having your own flat and[ <X> privacy
to <\B> <A> [ and share a kitchen <\A>
 living in somewhere much smaller <\B>
<A> mhm <\A>
 but erm <\B>
<A> but I mean Graduate College is quite okay <\A>
 yeah I know that's why I decided to pay a bit more cos I thought sharing a kitchen and a bathroom with ten people <\B>
<A> yeah <\A>
 [ I just couldn't <\B>
<A> [ especially the bathroom <\A>
 yeah no I I really couldn't have faced that <\B> (LOCNEC)
(5) <A> and you don't live there and you you've never seen something like that before .. but you you live in Sheffield <\A>
 yeah <\B>
<A> it's quite a big city isn't it <\A>
 it is quite big yeah that's why I came here cos I wanted to come to somewhere smaller <\B> (LOCNEC)
(6) and she doesn't . it's not really a glamorous picture <\B>
<A> mhm <\A>
 or anything like that .. erm the third one it looks like he's painted it again .. erm .. new hairstyle .. smiling sat up .. it makes her look more beautiful
than she is <\B>
<A> mhm <\A>
 <laughs> and in the fourth one she's telling all her friends of that's me that's how I look .. things like that <\B> (LOCNEC)
In view of their relatively fixed structure, Calude (2009) argues that demonstrative clefts show characteristics of formulaic
expressions, allowing only a narrow range of elements to occur in its structural “slots”. Prototypically, the demonstrative that
occurs as the initial element. The
copula be only occurs in simple present and simple past tense and is most commonly used in its contracted form 's. The copula is
then most frequently followed by what, less frequently by why, where, when and how as wh-words in the cleft clause (Collins
1991: 28; Oberlander & Delin 1996: 187; Weinert & Miller 1996: 188). Moreover, demonstrative clefts have a distinct function
in discourse as organizational and discourse
managing markers, and are typical of a specific register, i.e. conversation. 11
Demonstrative clefts have multiple functions as to discourse organization and management. In particular, what sets them
apart from other cleft types is their pointing function by means of the initial demonstrative pronoun (Weinert & Miller 1996:
188; Oberlander & Delin 1996: 189). They typically have extended text reference that spans over three or more turns prior to the
cleft (Calude 2008: 79f.). With that as the initial element, demonstrative clefts have a strong anaphoric and attention
marking function (Weinert & Miller 1996: 192f.) and are typically used to underline or sum up previous discourse or to make
reference to what has been said before (Collins 1991: 145f.; Weinert & Miller 1996: 192f.; Biber et al. 1999: 961ff.), while those
introduced by this have a forward-pointing function and are also used as an attention marker (Weinert 1995).
Calude (2008: 99ff.; 108) suggests four discourse functions of demonstrative clefts. For the qualitative analysis of the
discourse functions in the present case study, her taxonomy was adopted with slight modifications and two more functions
(summarizing and projecting) were added. The six functions are exemplified in turn in (7) – (12).
(7) quoting: signaling direct speech, indirect speech or self-reported thought

 erm and I I wanted to come to university and do literature <XXX> interested<?> in that .. and it was only really when I was looking
through the prospectus sort of thinking well I don't just want to do literature what can I put [ with it <\B>
<A> [ mhm mhm <\A>
 I sort of discovered the linguistics department and thought .. ah yeah that's what I've always wanted to do <\B> (LOCNEC)
One may add here that another feature that contributes to their formulaicity is that in contrast to other types of clefts, demonstrative clefts are
11
not reversible (Biber et al. 1999: 961).

Marcus Callies 21
(8) explaining: giving a reason for a point previously made; explaining how two prior utterances relate to each other (linking
function) yeah I think geography is interesting that's why I study it <laughs> (LINDSEI-G)
(9) evaluating: giving opinions, evaluations or assessments; expressing agreement, disagreement or a neutral opinion with a
previous comment
 yeah it wasn't much of a holiday really <\B>
<A> oh no <laughs> <\A>
 <laughs> <\B>
<A> it was just a a working holiday <X> <\A>
 a working holiday yeah <\B>
<A> just work <\A>
 well that's that's <X> that's exactly what what our bosses were saying exactly the same phrase said er you're here for no holiday
you work you're here to work <\B> (LOCNEC)
(10) highlighting: singling out a preceding discourse element, thereby foregrounding it and giving it special prominence
<A> since you like the cinema so much <\A>
 [ mhm <\B>
<A> [ would you like to: to do: .. later to work . in relation . to <\A>
 <X> what I'd like to do well I mean my degree is a primary school teaching degree that's what I'm aiming to do at the[i:] end <\B>
(LOCNEC)
(11) summarizing: summing up a longer stretch of previous discourse he's changed the picture so that she's erm she
looks considerably younger .. erm obviously the hair's changed the face has changed <\B>
<A> [ mhm <\A>
 [ she's she's got a slight smile erm .. and then now she's sort of erm just telling all her all of her friends sort of oh this is a picture of
me isn't it lovely and doesn't it look so much like me but er \B>
<A> <laughs> <\A>
 that's that's how I would say the story is going she's er .. she's she's eh this woman is actually quite vain <\B> (LOCNEC)
(12) projecting: drawing attention to a following stretch of discourse (only with cataphoric deixis)
 so . it was a really nice (erm) . experience . I had and . what I found most (erm) impressive and I think that's what everybody says
when . he has seen Australia is that . (erm) the distances are so huge . it's (er) that's really amazing so one day we drove for
twelve hours and there was nothing . li<?> (eh) it's only dust . around us and so . but . it was really . yes impressive <laughs>
 (LINDSEI-G)
Previous corpus-based studies of reversed wh-clefts in English interlanguage are based on subsets of the ICLE. While Herriman
and Boström Aronsson (2009) found an overrepresentation of reversed wh clefts in the writing of Swedish EFL learners when
compared to native speaker writing (93 vs. 62 instances), Callies (2009a) noted that native speakers used demonstrative clefts
slightly more often when compared to the writing of German EFL learners (27 vs. 19 instances), but this is not statistically
significant. Moreover, Callies observed that the learners showed little variation in how they used this construction: what was by
far the most commonly used wh-word in reversed wh-clefts by both groups of writers, but the native speakers employed a
broader range of wh-elements, while how, where, and when were completely absent from the learner data. They also strongly
preferred that as a deictic marker and used the copula almost exclusively in its contracted form 's, which may indicate that the
learners saw this as a formulaic expression. Non-deictic elements in reversed wh-clefts were exclusively used by native
speakers.
In view of these previous research findings and a contrastive analysis of such cleft types in French, German and English (see
further below), the following two working hypotheses can be put forward for the case study: 1) demonstrative clefts are
underrepresented in both learner corpora when compared to native speaker usage, and 2) advanced learner language is
characterized by a narrower range of the formal and functional uses of this construction.
In fact, the quantitative analysis of the frequency of occurrence of demonstrative clefts in the three corpora (Table 2) shows
that demonstrative clefts are significantly underrepresented in the L1 French component of the LINDSEI when compared to the
LOCNEC (LL= -
7.7**), but that there is no statistically significant difference between the LINDSEI-G and the LOCNEC (LL= +0.23).
Marcus C
Callies
23
Corpus
LINDSEI-F LINDSEI-G
Absolute
A
fr
requency
27
57
Normali
ized frequency
y per
thousan
nd turns
4.72
9.42
LOCNEC Table 2. Freq
7
3
8.65
quencies of occu
urrence of demo
onstrative clefts
s in the three co
orpora
When analy
yzing the dis
corpora, we
stribution of
find a high d
degree of inter
this cleft typ
pe in the two
o learner
it is merely
a handful of l
r-learner varia
ability. In both
h corpora,
earners who p
provide for alm
most 50% of a
all tokens
f (or more) of
whereas half
f the learners d
do not use this
s construction
n at all.
Figure 1. Dem
monstrative clef
fts in the LIND

SEI-F
Figure 2. Dem
monstrative clef
fts in the LIND

SEI-G
The case study thus demonstrates the usefulness of learner corpora to abstract away from individual learners to identify a corpus-
based description of a specific learner group while also providing insights into inter-learner variability. The individual
differences found for both the French and the German EFL learners have important implications for learner corpus analysis and
compilation in that they confirm that global proficiency measures based on external criteria alone are not reliable indicators of
proficiency. However, in a substantial part of LCR to date, individual differences often go unnoticed or tend to be disregarded
and are thus not reported in favour of (possibly skewed) average frequency counts.
It is interesting to compare the two learner groups and the native speakers as to the relatively fixed structure of
demonstrative clefts. Similar to the findings reported in the research literature, the deictic that and the wh-words what and why
are the most frequently occurring elements (Table 3). Demonstrative clefts primarily convey anaphoric deixis in all three
corpora. While it is not surprising that the native speakers employ the full range of options that this construction allows in terms
of the use of initial demonstratives, wh-words and deictic reference, it is indeed striking to see major differences between the two
learner groups. The way how the German learners use this construction very much resembles native speaker usage in terms of
structural variation. By contrast, demonstrative clefts are not only significantly underrepresented in the spoken language of
French learners, but the degree of formulaicity (or invariability) is also highest in the LINDSEI-F.
LINDSEI-F LINDSEI-G LOCNEC
demonstrative
26 (96%) 44 (77%)
1 (4%) 13 (23%)
12 (44%) 27 (47%)
14 (52%) 17 (30%)
0 1 (2%)
0 4 (7%)
1 (4%) 8 (14%)
that 67 (92%) this 6 (8%)
wh-word
what 30 (41%) why 15 (21%) where 11 (15%) when 6 (8%)
how 11 (15%)

Second Language Acquisition A Theoretica-71780816

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Second Language Acquisition A Theoretica-71780816

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Second Language Acquisition : A Theoretical

Introduction to Real World

1. Introduction to second language acquisition.

Copyright © 2017 Language Value, ISSN 1989-7103 222

5. How learners learn to communicate in a second language.

 A short summary of the chapter.

Language Value 9 (1), 222-227 http://www.e-revistes.uji.es/languagevalue 223

The third chapter, “How learners process information in second language

Language Value 9 (1), 222-227 http://www.e-revistes.uji.es/languagevalue 224

Language Value 9 (1), 222-227 http://www.e-revistes.uji.es/languagevalue 225

Benati, A.G. & Angeelovska, T. 2016. Second Language Acquisition: A Theoretical

Canale, M. and Swain, M. 1980. “Theoretical bases of communicative approaches to

Chomsky, N. 1959. Aspects of Syntax. Cambridge, MA: MIT.

Chomsky, N. 1981. Lectures on Government and Binding. Dordrencht: Foris.

Giles, H. and Smith, P. 2008. “Accommodation Theory: Optimal levels of

Larsen-Freeman, D. 1997. “Chaos/complexity science and second language

Larsen-Freeman, D. 2002. “Language acquisition and language use form a

Lenneberg, E.H. 1967. Biological Foundations of Language. New York: Wiley.

Language Value 9 (1), 222-227 http://www.e-revistes.uji.es/languagevalue 226

Selinker, L. 1972. “Interlanguage”. International Review of Applied Linguistics, 10,

Vygotsky, L.S. 1978. Mind in Society: The Development of Higher Psychological

Received: 6 April 2016

Individual differences in adult second language

Keywords: language learning, cognition, learning strategies, adult learners

that require memorisation such as individual vocabulary items or irregular grammatical

Cowan, N. (2000). The magical number 4 in short-term memory: A reconsideration of

EAP (print) issn 2055-7752

EAP (online) issn 2055-7760

Special issue of East Asian

Pragmatics: Second language

Jiayi Wang and Nicola Halenko

Second language pragmatics, also known as interlanguage pragmatics, “investi-

another language is considered an essential component of being a success-ful

communicator, as outlined in a number of leading influential frameworks of

request (grammatical competence), users need to consider their linguistic

choices in light of acceptability of the request according to the local cultural

the favour (prag-matic competence). Both competencies are inextricably linked

Tomas (1983) describe pragmatic competence as the sum of two specific

components: ‘prag-malinguistics’ (the knowledge of linguistic resources needed

for communication) and ‘sociopragmatics’ (the knowledge of sociocultural rules

which govern these resources). Second language pragmatics investigations ofen

draw on these dis-tinctions when evaluating and assessing L2 performance.

Recently, second language pragmatic investigations have begun to highlight

the interplay of interactional and intercultural competences in the language-

learning process given today’s interconnected societies within which language

eap vol 4.1 2019 1-9 https://doi.org/10.1558/eap.38206

©2019, equinox publishing

2 east asian pragmatics

actional competence of L2 Japanese learners, is a good example of a move in

this direction. Interactional competency (see studies by Ishida, 2009; Taguchi,

2014) is characterised as learners bringing a variety of linguistic and semiotic

resources to jointly contribute to ongoing discourse and co-accomplish specific

language goals (Young, 2011). Intercultural competency, according to Fantini

and Tirmizi (2006, p. 12), is “a complex of abilities needed to perform effectively

Sánchez-Hernández &amp; Alcón-Soler, 2018). Tese alternatives to established

models of competency offer an additional window within which to view and

analyse what it means to be a successful language user in today’s multicultural

visions by focusing on the shared, rather than on the individual, as early

competency models appeared to emphasise. Te spotlight on the co-

constructiveness of communicative action is highlighted in LoCastro’s (2003)

linguistic and non-linguistic signals in the context of socioculturally organised

activities” (p. 15).

Te importance of language learners developing a reasonable level of prag-

Sánchez-Hernández & Alcón-Soler, 2018). Tese alternatives to established

despite permanent residency in an L2 context (Cohen, 2008; Kasper & Rose,

volume (i.e. Wang & Halenko; Taguchi, Tang, & Maa).