The role of input in SLA

1
The role of input in SLA

• Adapted from Franceschina, F.

2
Types of evidence

• Positive evidenceDo they like cats?

3
Types of evidence

• Negative evidence
• Direct
• Explicit(correction, instruction)Like they
  cats?
• Implicit (recasts)A Does they like cats?
  (wrong)B Do they like cats? I think so.
• IndirectAbsence of x

4
Type / amount of input

• Delayed input
• Bilingual/multilingual input
• Modified input (motherese, foreign talk, etc.)
• Classroom/naturalistic input

5
How 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, i.e., they have to be able to assign a
  structure to the strings of speech they hear.
• This happens at many levels- phonological-
  syntactic- semantic, etc.

6
Failure-driven learning

• Assumption 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)

7
Theories 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)

8
Morpheme studies

• Brown (1973)
• deVilliers and deVilliers (1973)
• Burt and Dulay (1973)
• Bailey, Madden and Krashen (1974)
• Staubler (1984)

9
The 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

10
Phonetic 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
11
Browns 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
12
The 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)

13

• 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

14

• 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.

15

• However, there are some subjunctive clauses
  (namely those containing modal verbs or adjuncts)
  where this does not 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).

16
Subjunctives Subjunctivemodal Subjunctive adjuncts
L2 learners (n27) 50.75 86 87.4
Spanish NS (n12) 2.5 85 91.66
17
Input vs intake

• Corder (1967)
• Krashen (1982, 1985) and many others

18
Focus on form

• A definition
• treatment of form in the context of performing a
  communicative task
• (Ellis et al. 2002 419)

19
Form, 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

20
Types of focus on form (Ellis et al., 2002 429)
21
The 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

22
Interaction 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)

23
Reading

• 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)