Reexamining the role of explicit information in processing instruction

Studies in Second Language Acquisition

Volumn 30, Issue 3, 2008, Pages 277-305

  Fernández, Claudia ^a  

^a DEPAUL UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 48249107406     PISSN: 02722631     EISSN: 14701545     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1017/S0272263108080467     Document Type: Article

References (39)

1. Alanen, R. (1995). Input enhancement and rule presentation in second language acquisition. In R. Schmidt (Ed.), Attention and awareness in foreign language learning and teaching (Tech. Rep. No. 9; pp. 259-302). Honolulu: University of Hawai'i, Second Language Teaching & Curriculum Center.
2. Allen, L. Q. (2000). Form-meaning connection and the French causative: An experiment in processing instruction. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 22, 69-84.
3. Benati, A. (2004). The effects of structured input activities and explicit information on the acquisition of the Italian future tense. in B. VanPatten (Ed.), Processing instruction: Theory, research, and commentary (pp. 207-225). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
4. Bosque, I. (1990). Indicativo y subjuntivo [Indicative and subjunctive]. Madrid: Taurus.
5. Collentine, J. G. (1993). The development of complex syntax and the selection of mood by foreign language learners of Spanish. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Texas, Austin.
6. Collentine, J. G. (1995). The development of complex syntax and mood selection abilities by intermediate-level learners of Spanish. Hispania, 78, 122-136.
7. Collentine, J. G. (1997). Irregular verbs and noticing the Spanish subjunctive. Spanish Applied Linguistics, 1, 3-23.
8. de Graaff, R. (1997). Differential effects of explicit instruction on second language acquisition. Leiden, The Netherlands: Holland Institute of Generative Linguistics.
9. DeKeyser, R. (1997) Beyond explicit rule learning: Automatizing second language morphosyntax Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 19, 195-221.
10. DeKeyser, R. (2003). Implicit and eplicit learning In C. J. Doughty & M. H. Long (Eds.), The handbook of second language acquisition (pp. 313-348). Oxford: Blackwell.
11. Doughty, C. J., & Williams, J. (1998). Pedagogical choices in focus on form. In C. J. Doughty & J. William (Eds.), Focus on form in classroom second language acquisition (pp. 197-261). New York: Cambridge University Press.
12. Ellis, R. (2002a). Does form-focused instruction affect the acquisition of implicit knowledge? Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 24, 223-236.
13. Ellis, R. (2002b). The place of grammar instruction in the second/ foreign curriculum. In E. Hinkel & S. Fotos (Eds.), New perspectives on grammar teaching in second language classrooms (pp. 17-34). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
14. Erlam, R. (2003). The effects of deductive and inductive instruction on the acquisition of direct object pronouns in French as a second language. Modern Language Journal, 87, 242-260.
15. Farley, A. (2000). The relative effects of processing instruction and meaning-based output instruction on L2 acquisition of the Spanish subjunctive. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign.
16. Farley, A. (2001). Authentic processing instruction and the Spanish subjunctive. Hispania, 84, 289-299.
17. Farley, A. (2004a). Processing instruction and the Spanish subjunctive: Is explicit information needed? In B. VanPatten (Ed.), Processing instruction: Theory, research, and commentary (pp. 227-239). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
18. Farley, A. (2004b). The relative effects of processing instruction and meaning-based output instruction. In B. VanPatten (Ed.), Processing instruction: Theory, research, and commentary (pp. 143-168). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
19. Fotos. S. (1994). Integrating grammar instruction and communicative language use through grammar consciusness-raising tasks. TESOL Quarterly, 28, 323-351.
20. Hulstijn, J. H., & de Graaff R. (1994) Under what conditions does explicit knowledge of a seceond language facilitate the acquisition of implicit knowledge? A research proposal. AILA Review, 11, 97-113.
21. Kubota, M. (1996). The effects of instruction plus feedback on Japanese university students of EFL. A pilot study. Bulletin of Chofu Gakuen Women's Junior College, 18, 59-95. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED397641).
22. Long, M. H. (1991). Focus on form: A design feature in language teaching methodology. In K. de Bot, R. Ginsberg, & C. Kramsch (Eds.), Foreign language research in cross-cultural perspective (pp. 39-52). Amsterdam: Benjamins.
23. Master, P. (1994). The effect of systematic instruction on learning the English article system. In T. Odlin (Ed.), Perspectives on pedagogical grammar (pp. 229-252). New York: Cambridge University Press.
24. Robinson, P. (1996). Learning simple and complex second language rules under implicit, incidental, rule-search and instructed conditions. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 18, 27-67.
25. Rosa, E., & Leow, K. (2004). Computerized task-based exposure, explicitness, type of feedback, and Spanish L2 development. Modern Language Journal, 88, 192-216.
26. Sanz, C., & Morgan-Short, K. (2004). Positive evidence versus explicit rule presentation and explicit negative feedback: A computer=assisted study. Language Learning, 54, 35-78.
27. Schneider, W., Eschman, A., & Zuccolotto, A. (2002). E-Prime user's guide. Pittsburgh: Psychology Software Tools Inc.
28. Scott, V. M. (1989). An empirical study of explicit and implicit teaching strategies in French. Modern Language Journal, 72, 14-22.
29. VanPatten, B. (1993). Grammar teaching for the acquisition-rich classroom. Foreign Language Annals, 26, 435-450.
30. VanPatten, B. (1996). Input processing and grammar instruction: Theory and research. Westport, CT: Ablex.
31. VanPatten, B. (2002). Processing instruction: An update. Language Learning, 52, 755-803.
32. VanPatten, B. (2004). Input processing in SLA. in B. VanPatten (Ed.), Processing instruction: Theory, research, and commentary (pp. 5-31). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
33. VanPatten, B., & Cadierno, T. (1993). Explicit instruction and input processing. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 15, 225-244.
34. VanPatten, B., & Oikkenon, S. (1996). Explanation vs. structured input in processing instruction. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 18 495-510.
35. VanPatten, B., & Wong, W. (2004). Processing instruction and the French causative: A replication. In B. VanPatten (Ed.), Processing instruction: Theory, research, and commentary (pp. 97-117). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
36. Wheatley, K. (2006). Sintaxis y morfología de la lengua española [Syntax and morphology of the Spanish language]- Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Pearson Prentice Hall.
37. Williams, J. & Evans, J (1999) What kind of focus and on which forms? In C. J Doughty & J. Williams (Eds.), Focus on form in classroom second language acquisition (pp. 139-155). New York: Cambridge University Press.
38. Wong, W. (2004a). The nature of processing instruction. in B. VanPatten (Ed.), Processing instruction: Theory, research, and commentary (pp. 33-63). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
39. Wong, W. (2004b). Processing instruction in French: The roles of explicit information and structured input. in B. VanPatten (Ed.), Processing instruction: Theory, research, and commentary (pp. 187-205). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.