The role of the linguistic environment in second language acquisition

This article presents a study of corrective feedback and learner uptake (i.e., responses to
 feedback) in four immersion classrooms at the primary level. Transcripts totaling 18.3 hours of
 classroom interaction taken from 14 subject-matter lessons and 13 French language arts lessons
 were analyzed using a model developed for the study and comprising the various moves in an
 error treatment sequence. Results include the frequency and distribution of the six different
 feedback types used by the four teachers, in addition to the frequency and distribution of different
 types of learner uptake following each feedback type. The findings indicate an overwhelming
 tendency for teachers to use recasts in spite of the latter's ineffectiveness at eliciting
 student-generated repair. Four other feedback types—elicitation, metalinguistic feedback,
 clarification requests, and repetition—lead to student-generated repair more successfully
 and are thus able to initiate what the authors characterize as the negotiation of form.

https://www.cambridge.org/core/services/aop-cambridge-core/content/view/S0272263197001034

Corrective feedback and learner uptake

This article reviews insights into second-language (L2) learning that have been revealed through over a decade of research on the social interaction and negotiation of L2 learners and their interlocutors, begining with the seminal work of Hatch (1978a, 197810) and Long (1980 et passim), and withereferenceto a corpus of informal, experimental, and classroom data from published studies. This research illustrates ways in which negotiation contributes to condi- tions, processes, and outcomes ofL2 learningby facilitating learners' comprehension and structural segmentation of L2 input, access to lexical form and meaning, and production of modified output. The research points out areas in which negotiation does not appear to assist L2 learning, especially with respect to the learner's need to access L2

Research on Negotiation: What Does It Reveal about Second-Language Learning Conditions, Processes, and Outcomes?.

The efficacy of various kinds of error feedback for improvement in the accuracy and fluency of l2 student writing

Acknowledgements Introduction PART ONE - BACKGROUND Introduction 1. Second language acquisition research: an overview PART TWO - THE DESCRIPTION OF LEARNER LANGUAGE Introduction 2. Learner errors and error analysis 3. Developmental patterns: order and sequence in second language acquisition 4. Variability in learner language 5. Pragmatic aspects of learner language PART THREE - EXPLAINING SECOND LANGUAGE ACQUISITION: EXTERNAL FACTORS Introduction 6. Social factors and second language acquisition 7. Input and interaction and second language acquisition PART FOUR - EXPLAINING SECOND LANGUAGE ACQUISITION: INTERNAL FACTORS Introduction 8. Language transfer 9. Cognitive accounts of second language acquisition 10. Linguistic universals and second language acquisition PART FIVE - EXPLAINING INDIVIDUAL DIFFERENCES IN SECOND LANGUAGE ACQUISITION Introduction 11. Individual learner differences 12. Learning strategies PART SIX - CLASSROOM SECOND LANGUAGE ACQUISITION Introduction 13. Classroom interaction and second language acquisition 14. Formal instruction and second language acquisition PART SEVEN - CONCLUSION Introduction 15. Data, theory, and applications in second language acquisition research Glossary Bibliography Author index Subject index

第二语言习得研究 = The study of second language acquisition

Input Enhancement and L2 Question Formation.

Consider the experiences of a grade-12 student who has studied French for a total of 13 years in Alberta, the first few years of which were in a total immersion program where all instruction was in French. She travels to Montreal for the first time. To her great shock, she finds that she is unable to use her French very much because the bilingual speakers she comes into contact with switch to English the minute they hear her speak. She comments, “I quickly realized … that my French is not the same as Quebecois French” (Haynes, 2001). This experience of communicative failure in the second language (L2) puts a human face on the research findings that characterize the oral production of French immersion students as being “non-nativelike.” Immersion researchers have studied the effectiveness of different types of pedagogical interventions designed to overcome the limitations of immersion instruction. These interventions have included enriching the input learners are exposed to (Harley, 1989b), drawing learners' attention to non-salient features of the L2 (Lyster, 1994), increasing the amount of student output (Kowal & Swain, 1997), and providing unambiguous feedback on learners' non-targetlike utterances (Lyster, 2004). This chapter examines the issue of the non-nativelike quality of immersion students' L2 production from the perspective of the language practice that occurs in early immersion classrooms. In this discussion, we highlight the value of using cognitive skill-learning theory (Anderson, 1983) as a framework for sequencing instructional activities aimed at improving the formal accuracy of the otherwise fluent speech of immersion students.

Practice in a Second Language: A cognitive approach to improving immersion students' oral language abilities: The Awareness-Practice-Feedback sequence

Goo and Mackey (this issue) outline several apparent design flaws in studies that have compared the impact of different types of corrective feedback (CF). Furthermore, they argue that SLA researchers should stop comparing recasts to other types of CF because they are inherently different kinds of phenomena. Our response to their article addresses (a) the claim that the recast-learning relationship has been “settled,” (b) the misleading representation of our views on uptake, (c) the characterization of the CF comparison studies as being weak and invalid, and (d) Goo and Mackey’s recommendations concerning the most appropriate approach to investigating the effect of feedback on second language learning.

/pdf/counterpoint-piece-the-case-for-variety-in-corrective-3qttdhoess.pdf

Counterpoint piece: the case for variety in corrective feedback research

Many believe that the best way to learn a language is to study it in a country where that language is widely spoken. Underlying this belief is the assumption that study in a naturalistic setting will provide learners with ample opportunities for exposure to the target language and interaction with native-speakers of that language. This article reports the findings from a longitudinal study of the quantity and quality of exposure experienced by 17 Chinese graduate students at a Canadian university. Exposure was measured using a computerized log that participants completed once a month for one week, over a six-month period. Our findings show a general trend toward receptive rather than interactive use of English, and considerable variation among individuals in terms of the amount and type of language use. The discussion explores possible reasons for participants’ relatively low amount of oral interaction in English in this naturalistic setting.
	 Resume: L’opinion selon laquelle le meilleur moyen d’apprendre une langue est d’etudier dans un pays ou cette langue est parlee par un grand nombre de locuteurs est tres repandue. Une telle croyance repose sur la supposition que l’etude de la langue dans ses conditions naturelles expose largement l’apprenant a la langue cible et lui offre de nombreuses occasions d’interagir avec les locuteurs natifs. Cet article fait etat des resultats d’une etude longitudinale portant sur la quantite et la qualite de l’exposition a la langue de 17 etudiants chinois inscrits aux cycles superieurs dans une universite canadienne. L’exposition a ete mesuree au moyen d’un journal informatise que les participants ont rempli pendant une semaine chaque mois, sur une periode de six mois. Les resultats montrent une tendance generalisee a l’usage receptif plutot qu’interactif de l’anglais, et des variations considerables entre les individus en ce qui concerne le nombre d’occurrences et le type de langage utilise. La discussion porte sur les raisons qui pourraient expliquer la quantite plutot faible d’interactions orales en anglais dans ces conditions naturelles.

Leila Ranta

Papers

Corrective feedback and learner uptake

Input Enhancement and L2 Question Formation.

Practice in a Second Language: A cognitive approach to improving immersion students' oral language abilities: The Awareness-Practice-Feedback sequence

Counterpoint piece: the case for variety in corrective feedback research

How Much Exposure to English Do International Graduate Students Really Get?: Measuring Language Use in a Naturalistic Setting