This article is a defence of the Full Transfer/Full Access (FT/FA) model. FT/FA hypothesizes that the initial state of L2 acquisition is the final state of L1 acquisition (Full Transfer) and that failure to assign a representation to input data will force subsequent restructurings, drawing from options of UG (Full Access). We illustrate the FT/FA model by reviewing our analysis of the developmental Turkish-German Interlanguage data of Schwartz and Sprouse (1994) and then turn to other data that similarly receive straightforward accounts under FT/FA.We also consider two other competing hypotheses, both of which accept Full Access but not Full Transfer: the Minimal Trees hypothesis (no transfer of functional categories) of Vainikka and Young-Scholten (1994; 1996) and the Weak Transfer hypothesis (no transfer of the values associated with functional categories) of Eubank (1993/94). We provide an example of (extremely robust) L2 acquisition data that highlight the inadequacy of the Minimal Trees hypothesis in...

L2 cognitive states and the Full Transfer/Full Access model:

The paper argues that grammar correction in L2 writing classes should be abandoned, for the following reasons: (a) Substantial research shows it to be ineffective and none shows it to be helpful in any interesting sense; (b) for both theoretical and practical reasons, one can expect it to be ineffective; and (c) it has harmful effects. I also consider and reject a number of arguments previously offered in favor of grammar correction.

/pdf/the-case-against-grammar-correction-in-l2-writing-classes-43x7y7h2p3.pdf

The case against grammar correction in L2 writing classes

This article argues that language teaching would benefit by paying attention to the L2 user rather than concentrating primarily on the native speaker. It suggests ways in which language teaching can apply an L2 user model and exploit the students' L1. Because L2 users differ from monolingual native speakers in their knowledge of their L2s and Lls and in some of their cognitive processes, they should be considered as speakers in their own right, not as approximations to monolingual native speakers. In the classroom, teachers can recognise this status by incorporating goals based on L2 users in the outside world, bringing L2 user situations and roles into the classroom, deliberately using the students' L1 in teaching activities, and looking to descriptions of L2 users or L2 learners rather than descriptions of native speakers as a source of information. The main benefits of recognising that L2 users are speakers in the own right, however, will come from students' and teachers' having a positive image of L2 users rather than seeing them as failed native speakers. Language professionals often take for granted that the only appropriate models of a language's use come from its native speakers. Linguists look at the intuitions of native speakers or collect quantities of their speech; language teachers encourage students to be like native speakers. This article argues that the prominence of the native speaker in language teaching has obscured the distinctive nature of the successful L2 user and created an unattainable goal for L2 learners. It recommends that L2 users be viewed as multicompetent language users rather than as deficient native speakers and suggests how language teaching can recognise students as L2 users both in and out of the classroom.

/pdf/going-beyond-the-native-speaker-in-language-teaching-1jddqjg77o.pdf

Going Beyond the Native Speaker in Language Teaching

attention to vocabulary and spelling.' First, there are practical reasons. A large vocabulary is, of course, essential for mastery of a language. Second language acquirers know this; they carry dictionaries with them, not grammar books, and regularly report that lack of vocabulary is a major problem. Spelling, especially for treacherous languages such as English, is also a problem. Our standards in spelling are 100%; a single spelling error in public can mean humiliation. On the theoretical level, the study of the acquisition of vocabulary and spelling ability can help us understand language acquisition in general. In my view, the most promising hypothesis is that vocabulary and spelling are acquired in fundamentally the same way the rest of language is acquired. If this supposition is true, these areas can be useful laboratories for the

https://www.jstor.org/stable/pdfplus/326879.pdf

We Acquire Vocabulary and Spelling by Reading: Additional Evidence for the Input Hypothesis

enties, with the ground breaking publications of Pit Corder, Burt and Kiparsky, George, and Richards (14), one of the central themes of second language research has been the study of learner errors as a reflection of hypothesis testing on the part of second language learners (8; 15; 20; 23;)1 Eventually, the attention of those working on learner errors has moved away from the analysis of errors in their own right as indications of hypothesis testing and interlanguage development to concern with questions relating to the potential effects of corrective procedures on language learning The fundamental question is: does error correction lead to learning, or are corrective moves by teachers or other caretakers ineffective? In addition, some corollary questions have also been addressed, including how and when errors should be corrected (7: p 135) Research aimed at answering these questions has been carried out in either an ethnographic or an experimental framework2 Those working within the ethnographic approach have conducted careful observational studies of corrective behaviors both in the classroom and natu-

Negative Feedback as Regulation and Second Language Learning in the Zone of Proximal Development

Word Order and Nominative Case in Non-Native Language Acquisition: A longitudinal study of (L1 Turkish) German Interlanguage

Psychologically speaking, all linguistic behavior is the overt manifestation of some type of underlying knowledge that is represented in the mind/brain of an individual. Exposure to linguistic data is necessary for growth of the system of knowledge. On the basis of only overt linguistic behavior, how can we ascertain whether the native and nonnative knowledge systems that people have are of distinct or similar types? Is there a (necessary) relationship between type of knowledge and type of linguistic exposure?The hypothesis to be defended is that negative data and explicit data result in a type of knowledge that is not to be equated with linguistic competence. The claim is not that negative and explicit data cannot give rise to knowledge; rather, the specific claim is that only positive data can effect the construction of an interlanguage grammar that is comparable to the knowledge system that characterizes the result of first language acquisition.

https://www.cambridge.org/core/services/aop-cambridge-core/content/view/S0272263100011931

On Explicit and Negative Data Effecting and Affecting Competence and Linguistic Behavior.

Language Acquisition Studies in Generative Grammar

This paper reassesses the role of Negative Evidence (NE) in nonnative language acquisition. We argue that the grammar-building process cannot make use of NE to restructure (Interlanguage) grammars ...

Bonnie D. Schwartz

Papers

L2 cognitive states and the Full Transfer/Full Access model:

Word Order and Nominative Case in Non-Native Language Acquisition: A longitudinal study of (L1 Turkish) German Interlanguage

On Explicit and Negative Data Effecting and Affecting Competence and Linguistic Behavior.

Language Acquisition Studies in Generative Grammar

Learnability and grammar reorganization in L2A: against negative evidence causing the unlearning of verb movement