Title: CLL lecture: The role of input in SLA
1CLL lecture The role of input in SLA
- November 2004
- Florencia Franceschina
2Types of evidence
- Positive evidenceDo you like pasta?
3Types of evidence
- Negative evidence
- Direct
- Explicit(correction, instruction)Like you
pasta? is wrong. - Implicit (recasts)A Do he likes pasta?B Does
he like pasta? I think so. - IndirectAbsence of x
4Type / amount of input
- Delayed input
- Bilingual/multilingual input
- Modified input (motherese, foreign talk, etc.)
- Classroom/naturalistic input
5How do learners make use of the L2 input?
- For learners to be able to make use of the L2
input in learning they need to be able to parse
it first. That is, they have to be able to assign
a structure to the strings of speech they hear. - This happens at many levels- phonological-
syntactic- semanticetc.
6Failure-driven learning
- The assumption is that learners parse the (L2)
input on the basis of their existing grammar. If
this grammar is insufficient/inadequate for
parsing some input, this motivates restructuring
of the grammar in an attempt to accommodate to
the available input. This process is what drives
development according to researchers such as - Berwick and Weinberg (1984)
- Carroll (2001)
- Gibson and Wexler (1994)
- Schwartz and Sprouse (1994, 1996)
- White (1987)
7Theories of the role of input in SLA
- Input Hypothesis (Krashen, 1982, 1985)
- Less is more (Newport, 1990)
- Processability Theory (Pienemann, 1998)
- Input Processing (Van Patten and Cadierno, 1993)
- Autonomous Induction Theory (Carroll, 2001)
8Morpheme studies
- Brown (1973)
- deVilliers and deVilliers (1973)
- Burt and Dulay (1973)
- Bailey, Madden and Krashen (1974)
- Staubler (1984)
- Exercise
9PoS
- Poverty of the stimulus
- Platos problem
- Underdetermination of knowledge by the input
- (Orwells problem)
10The L1 grammar as a filter
- Brown (2000)
- L1 Chinese, L1 Japanese / L2 English
- can they learn to perceive the difference between
/p/ vs /f/, /f/ vs /v/ and /l/ vs /r/? - findings the features of the L1 determine what
is achievable no signs of development in
problematic areas
11Phonetic feature contrasts
English contrasts Japanese phonemes Chinese phonemes Contrastive feature Contrastive in Japanese Contrastive in Chinese Predictions for SLA of contrasts
/p/ vs /f/ /p/, /f/ /p/, /f/ continuant yes yes Jap yes Chi yes
/f/ vs /v/ /f/ /f/ voice yes yes Jap yes Chi yes
/l/ vs /r/ /r/ /l/ coronal no yes Jap no Chi yes
12Browns results
/p/ vs /f/ /f/ vs /v/ /l/ vs /r/
L1 Japanese (n15) 94 99 61
L1 Chinese (n15) 90 96 86
English NS (n10) 100 98 96
13The role of negative evidence
- 1. Short-lived effects of instructionTrahey
(1996), Trahey and White (1993), White
(1990/1991), and White, Spada, Lightbown and
Ranta (1991) - L1 French / L2 English- Can L1
French speakers learn that the following is
ungrammatical? Cats catch often mice.-
different types of input direct instruction,
indirect instruction and input flood- findings
direct instruction was the most effective in the
short term, but none of the three methods had any
long-term effects (after 1-year)
14- 2. L2 learners can override instructionBruhn-Gar
avito (1995)- L1 French, L1 English / L2
Spanish- study of the acquisition of pronoun
reference in subjunctive clauses in L2 Spanish -
teachers and textbooks usually teach learners
about a rule about pronoun co-reference that
applies to subjunctive clauses across the board-
however, NSs do make a difference between
different types of clauses- findings L2
learners appear to behave like NSs, despite
misleading instruction
15- Subjunctive rule (as taught to L2 learners)
- The subject of an embedded subjunctive clause
must have disjoint reference from the subject of
the matrix clause - I want me/he/she to go to the party.
16- However, there are some subjunctive clauses
(namely those containing modal verbs or adjuncts)
where this doesnt hold - I hope that I/he/she will be able to speak to
John today. - I will call you when I/he/she arrive(s).
17Subjunctives Subjunctivemodal Subjunctive adjuncts
L2 learners (n27) 50.75 86 87.4
Spanish NS (n12) 2.5 85 91.66
18Input vs intake
- Corder (1967)
- Krashen (1982, 1985)
- and many others
19Focus on form
- A definition
- treatment of form in the context of performing a
communicative task - (Ellis et al. 2002 419)
20Form, forms and meaning(Long, 1991)
- Focus on forms structuralist approach
- Focus on meaning non-interventionist approach
- Focus on form communicative approach with
occasional shift of attention to form
21Types of focus on form (Ellis et al., 2002 429)
22The role of output
- Swains (1985, 1993, 1995) Output Hypothesis
proposes that output can be used to - test hypotheses about structures and meaning
- get feedback for the verification of these
hypotheses - develop automaticity
- shift from meaning- to form-focused mode
23Interaction Hypothesis(Long, 1996)
- negotiation for meaning, and especially
negotiation work that triggers interactional
adjustments by the NS or more competent
interlocutor, facilitates acquisition because it
connects the input, internal learner capacities,
particularly selective attention, and output in
productive ways (pp. 451-452)
24Reading
- Doughty, C. 2001 Cognitive underpinnings of
focus on form. In Robinson, P. (ed.) Cognition
and second language instruction. Cambridge CUP.
Pp. 206-257. - White, L. 2003 Second language acquisition and
Universal Grammar. Cambridge Cambridge
University Press. (Chapter 5)