Learner proficiency and focus on form during collaborative dialogue

Language Teaching Research

Volumn 8, Issue 1, 2004, Pages 55-81

  Leeser, Michael J ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS AT URBANA CHAMPAIGN   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 34248710516     PISSN: 13621688     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1191/1362168804lr134oa     Document Type: Article

References (39)

1. Alanen, R. 1995: Input enhancement and rule presentation in second languageacquisition. In Schmidt, R. W., editor, Attention and awareness in foreign language learning, Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press, 259-302.
2. Basturkmen, H., Lowen, S. and Ellis, R. 2002: Metalanguage in focus on form in the communicative classroom. Language Awareness 11: 1-13.
3. Donato, R. 1994: Collective scaffolding in second languagelearning. In Lantolf, J. P. and Appel, G., editors, Vygotskian approaches to second language research, Norwood, NJ: Ablex, 33-56.
4. Doughty, C. 1991: Second language instruction does make a difference: evidence from anempirical study of ESL relativization. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 13: 431-469.
5. Doughty, C. and Williams, J. 1998: Focus on form in classroom second language acquisition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
6. Genesee, F. 1987: Learning through two languages: studies of immersion andbilingual education. Rowley, MA: Newbury House.
7. Hadley, A. 2001: Teaching language in context. Boston: Heinle and Heinle.
8. Izumi, S. 2002: Output, input enhancement, and the noticing hypothesis: an experimentalstudy on ESL relativization. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 24: 541-577.
9. LaPierre, D. 1994: Language output in a cooperative learning setting:determining its effects on second language learning. Unpublished master’sthesis, on tario Institute for Studies in Education, University of Toronto, on tario, Canada.
10. Lightbown, P. 1998: The importance of timing in focus on form. In Doughty, C. and Williams, J., editors, Focus on form in classroom second language acquisition, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 177-196.
11. Mackey, A. and Philp, J. 1998: Conversational interaction and second language development: recasts, responses, and red herrings? The Modern Language Journal 82: 338-356.
12. Musumeci, D. 1996: Teacher-learner negotiation in content-based instruction: communication at cross-purposes? Applied Linguistics 17: 286-325.
13. Nabei, T. 1996: Dictogloss: is it an effective language learning task? Working Papers in Educational Linguistics 12: 59-74.
14. Pica, T. 2002: Subject matter content: how does it assist the interactional and linguisticneeds of classroom language learners? The Modern Language Journal 86: 1-19.
15. Robinson, P. 1995: Aptitude, awareness, and the fundamental similarity ofimplicit and explicit second language learning. In Schmidt, R. W., editor, Attention and awareness in foreign language learning, Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press, 303-349.
16. Spada, N. and Lightbown, P. 1993: Instruction and the development of questions in the L2 classroom. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 15: 205-221.
17. Spada, N. and Lightbown, P. 1999: Instruction, first language influence, and developmental readiness insecond language acquisition. Modern Language Journal 83: 1-22.
18. Storch, N. 1999: Are two heads better than on e? Pair work and grammatical accuracy. System 27: 363-374.
19. Storch, N. 2002: Patterns of interaction in ESL pair work. Language Learning 52: 119-158.
20. Swain, M. 1985: Communicative competence: some roles of comprehensibleinput and comprehensible output in its development. In Gass, S. and Madden, C., editors, Input in second language acquisition, Rowley, MA: Newbury House, 235-253.
21. Swain, M. 1995: Three functions of output in second languagelearning. In Cook, G. and Seidlhofer, B., editors, Principles and practice in applied linguistics: studies inhonour of H.G. Widdowson, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 125-144.
22. Swain, M. 1996: Integrating language and content in immersion classrooms: research perspectives. Canadian Modern Language Review 52: 529-548.
23. Swain, M. 1998: Focus on form through conscious reflection. In Doughty, C. and Williams, J., editors, Focus on form in classroom second language acquisition, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 64-81.
24. Swain, M. 2000: French immersion research in Canada: recent contributions to SLA andapplied linguistics. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics 20: 199-212.
25. Swain, M. and Lapkin, S. 1995: Problems in output and the cognitive processes they generate: a step towardsecond language learning. Applied Linguistics 16: 371-391.
26. Swain, M. and Lapkin, S. 1998: Interaction and second language learning: two adolescent French immersionstudents working together. The Modern Language Journal 82: 320-337.
27. Swain, M. and Lapkin, S. 2000: Task-based second language learning: the uses of the first language. Language Teaching Research 4: 251-274.
28. Swain, M. and Lapkin, S. 2001: Focus on form through collaborative dialogue: exploringtask effects. In Bygate, M., Skehan, P. and Swain, M., editors, Researching pedagogic tasks: second language learning, teaching, and testing, New York: Longman, 99-118.
29. Swain, M. and Lapkin, S. in press: ‘Oh, I get it now!’ From production tocomprehension in second language learning. In Brinton, D. M. and Kagan, O., editors, Heritage language acquisition: a new field emerging. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
30. VanPatten, B. 1990: Attending to form and content in the input: an experiment in consciousness. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 12: 287-301.
31. VanPatten, B. 1996: Input processing and grammar instruction. New York: Ablex.
32. VanPatten, B. 2000: Processing instruction as form-meaning connections: issuesin theory and research. In Valdman, A. and Lee, J., editors, Form and meaning: multiple perspectives, Boston, MA: Heinle and Heinle, 43-68.
33. VanPatten, B. 2003: Input processing in SLA. In Van Patten, B., editor, Processing instruction: theory, research and commentary, Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum, 5-31.
34. Wajnryb, R. 1990: Grammar dictation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
35. Wesche, M. 1992: French immersion graduates at university and beyond: whatdifference has it made? In Alatis, J., editor, Georgetown University Round Table on Languages and Linguistics1992: language, communication, and social meaning, Washington, D.C.: Georgetown University Press, 208-240.
36. Williams, J. 1999: Learner-generated attention to form. Language Learning 51: 303-346.
37. Williams, J. 2001: The effectiveness of spontaneous attention to form. System 29: 325-340.
38. Williams, J. and Evans, J. 1998: What kind of focus on which forms? In Doughty, C. and Williams, J., editors, Focus on form in classroom second language acquisition, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 139-155.
39. Yule, G. and Macdonald, D. 1990: Resolving referential conflicts in L2 interaction: the effect ofproficiency and interactive role. Language Learning 40: 539-556.