Explaining 114

114 Explaining second language learning

Second language applications: Interacting, noticing,

processing, andpractising
A number of hypotheses, theories, and models for explaining second lan guage
acquisition have been inspired by the cognitive perspective.

The interaction hypothesis

Evelyn Hatch (1978), Michael Long (1983, 1996),Teresa Pica (1994), Susan
Gass (1997), and many others have argued that conversational interaction is an
essential, if not sufficient, condition for second language acquisition. These
researchers have studied the ways in which speakers modify their speech and
their interaction patterns in order to help learners participate in a conversation
or understand meaning in a new language. Long (1983) agreed with Krashen
that comprehensible input is necessary for language acquisition. However, he
focused on the question of how input could be made comprehensible. He
argued that modified interaction is the neces sary mechanism for
making"language comprehensible. That is, what learners need is opportunities
to interact with other speakers, working together to reach mutual
comprehension through negotiation for meaning. Through these interactions,
interlocutors figure out what they need to do to keep the conversation going
and make the input comprehensible to the less proficient speaker. According to
Long, there are no cases of beginner-level learners acquiring a second
language from native-speaker talk that has not been modified in sorneway.
Modified interaction does not always involve linguistic simplification. Itmay
also include elaboration, slower speech rate, gesture, or the provision of addi
tional contextual cues. Sorne examples of conversational modifications are:
1 Comprehension checks-efforts by the native speaker to ensure that the
learner has understood (for example, 'The bus leaves at 6:30. Do you
understand?').
2 Clarification requests-efforts by the learner to get i:he native speaker to
clarify something that has not been understood (for example, 'Could you
repeat please?'). These requests from the learner lead to further modifica
tions by the native speaker.
3 Se/f-repetition or paraphrase- the more proficient speaker repeats his or her
sentence either partially or in its entirety (for example, 'She got lost on her
way home from school. She was walking home from school. She gotlost.').

Long (1996) revised the interaction hypothesis, placing more emphasis on

cognitive factors such as 'noticing' and corrective feedback during inter action.
When communication is difficult, interlocutors must 'negotiate for meaning',
and this negotiation is seen as the opportunity for language
 second language learning

development. Related to this is Merrill Swain's (1985) comprehensible

output hypothesis. She argued that when learners must produce language
that their interlocutor can understand, they are most likely to see the limits of
their second language ability and the need to find better ways to express their
meaning. The demands of producing comprehensible output, she hypoth
esized, 'push' learners ahead in their development.

The noticing hypothesis

Richard Schmidt (1990, 2001) proposed the noticing hypothesis, sug gesting
that nothing is learned unless it has been 'noticed'. Noticing does not itself
result in acquisition, but it is the essential starting point. From this
perspective, comprehensible input does not lead to growth in language
knowledge unless the learner becomes aware of a particular language feature.
Schmidt's original proposal of the noticing hypothesis carne from his own
experience as a learner of Portuguese. After months of taking classes, living
in Brazil, and keeping a diary, he began to realize that certain features of
language that had been present in the environment for the whole time began
to enter his own second language system only when he had noticed them.
This was because they were brought to his attention in class or sorne other
experience made them salient. on psychological learning theories, Schmidt
hypothesized that second language learners could not begin to acquire a
language feature until they had become aware of it in the input. Susan Gass
(1988) also described a learning process that begins when learners notice
something in the second language that is different from what they expected or
that fills a gap in their knowledge of the language.
The question of whether learners must be aware that they are 'noticing'
something in the input is the object of considerable debate. According to
information processing theories, anything that uses up our 'mental 'process ing
space', even if we are not aware of it or attending to it intentionally, can
contribute to learning. From a usage-based perspective, the likelihood of
acquisition is best predicted by the frequency with which something is avail
able for processing, not by the learner's awareness of something in the input.
These questions about the importance of awareness and attention continue to
be the object of research. Severa! researchers have found ways to track
learners' attention as they engage in second language interaction. For
example, Alison Mackey, Susan Gass, and Kim McDonough (2000) had
learners watch and listen to themselves in videotaped interactions and asked
questions leading them to explore what they were thinking as they partici
pated in those interactions. Ron Leow (1997) developed crossword puzzles
that learners had to solve while thinking aloud, thus providing sorne insight
 Explaining 116
into what they noticed about language as they worked. Merrill Swain and
Sharon Lapkin (1998) recorded learners in pair work and kept track of the
116 Explaining second language learning

language features they mentioned. These research designs cannot tell us if

learners noticed things they did not mention. However, they do make it pos
sible to identify sorne things that learners were aware of and to look at how
this awareness is related to measures of their language knowledge. The extent
to which learners' noticing oflanguage features affects their second language
development will come up again in our discussion of research on second
language acquisition in the classroom in Chapters 5 and 6.

Input processing
In his research with American university students learning foreign languages,
Bill VanPatten (2004) observed many cases of students misinterpreting sen
tences. For example, as predicted by the competition model discussed earlier
in this chapter, when English speakers heard sentences in Spanish, they used
word order to interpret the relationships among the nouns in the sentence.
Thus, they interpreted 'La sigue el señor' as 'She (subject pronoun) follows
the man'. The correct interpretation is 'Her (object pronoun) follows the man'
(subject of the sentence). In other words, the correct English translation would
be 'The man follows her'. In order to understand that, students need to learn
that in Spanish, a pronoun object often precedes the verb and that, rather than
rely on the word order alone, it is essential to pay attention to whether the
form of the pronoun indicates a subject or an object.
VanPatten argued that the problem arose in part from the fact that learners
have limited processing capacity and cannot pay attention to form and
meaning at the same time. Not surprisingly, they tend to give priority to
meaning, overlooking sorne features of the language form. When the context
in which they hear a sentence helps them make sense of it, that is a good
strategy for understanding the general idea, but it may interfere with learners'
progress in acquiring the language. In Chapter 6 we will see how VanPatten
developed instructional procedures that require learners to focus on the
specific language features in order to interpret the meaning, thus pushing them
to acquire those features.

Processability theory
Jürgen Meisel, Harald Clahsen, and Manfred Pienemann ( 1981) studied the
acquisition of German by a group of adult migrant workers who had little or
no second language instruction. They analysed large samples of their speech
and described the details of developmental sequences in their production of
simple and complex sentences. They concluded that the sequence of develop
ment for features of syntax and morphology was affected by how easy these
were to process. Ease of processing was found to depend to a large extent on
the position of those features in a sentence. Features that typically occurred at
the beginning or end of a sentence were easier to process (and learn) than
those in the middle. All learners acquired the features in the same sequence,
 Explaining second languagelearning 118
even though they progressed at different rates. The researchers also found that
sorne language features did not seem to be affected by these constraints and
could be learned and used by learners who were at different developmen tal
stages. These were referred to asvariational features.
Pienemann (1999, 2003) developed processability theory on the basis of
research with learners of different languages in a variety of settings, both
instructional and informal. One important aspect of his theory is the inte
gration of developmental sequences with first language influence. He argues
that his theory explains why learners do not simply transfer features from their
first language at early stages of acquisition. Instead, they have to develop a
certain level of processing capacity in the second language before they can use
their knowledge of the features that already exist in their first language. We
saw examples of this in the acquisition of negatives and questions in Chapter
2.

lhe role of practice

One component of language learning that has seen a renewal of interest within
the cognitive perspective is practice. As we saw in discussions of the
behaviourist perspective, an approach to learning that is based on drill and that
separares practice from meaningful language use does not usually lead to
communicative competence. This does not mean, however, that practice is not
an essential component oflanguage learning. Roben DeKeyser ( 1998) asserts
that sorne classroom interpretations of behaviourism missed the point that
practice is only effective if one practises the behaviour that one wishes to
learn. As we will see in Chapter 6, the drills that characterized audiolingual
instruction often failed to make the connection between the language pat terns
being drilled and the meaning(s) associated with them.
Researchers are now looking more dosely at how practice converts dec;larative
knowledge to procedural knowledge and then to automatic performance. Note
that from the cognitive perspective, the practice needed for language
development is not mechanical, and it is not limited to the production of
language. Listening and reading are also affected by opportunities for prac
tice. Lourdes Ortega (2007) has proposed three principles for practice in the
foreign language classroom that she sees as compatible with the research
carried out from what she calls the 'cognitive-interactionist' perspective:
1 Practice should be interactive.
2 Practice should be meaningful.
3 There should be a focus on task-essential forms.
Elizabeth Gatbonton and Norman Segalowitz (1988, 2005) have devel oped an
approach to language teaching called ACCESS (Automatization in
Communicative Contexts of Essential Speech Segments). lt draws on the
cognitive perspective and is based on classroom activities which, by their
118 Explaining second language learning

nature, require learners to use meaningful units of language

repetitively in contexts where there are genuine exchanges of
meaning. The goal is to provide opportunities for using these units
with sufficient frequency that they will become automatic. Segalowitz
(2010) has emphasized the impor tance of increasing the amount of
language that can be used automatically, thus freeing more cognitive
resources for learning new things. Paul Nation (2007) has suggested
that automaticity, which he, like Segalowitz, refers to as 'fluency'
may be the most neglected aspect oflanguage teaching in contexts
where instruction focuses primarily on meaning.

The sociocultural perspective

As we saw in Chapter 1, Vygotsky's theory assumes that cognitive
develop ment, includinglanguage development, arises as a result of
social interactions. Unlike the psychological theories that view
thinking and speaking as related but independent processes,
sociocultural theory views speaking and think-
, ing as tightly interwoven. Speaking (and writing) mediares thinking,
which means that people can gain control over their mental
processes as a conse quence of internalizing what others say to them
and what they say to others. This internalizing is thought to occur
when an individual interacts with an interlocutor within his or her
zone of proximal development (ZPD)-that is, in a situation in which
the learner can perform at a higher level because of the support
(scaffolding) offered by an interlocutor.
In sorne ways, this approach may appear to restare sorne of the
hypotheses encountered elsewhere in this chapter. In fact, people
sometimes wonder whether the ZPD is the same as Krashen's i +l .
William Dunn and James Lantolf (1998) addressed this question in a
review anide, arguing that it is not possible to compare the two
concepts because they depend on very different ideas about how
development occurs. The ZPD is a metaphorical location or 'site' in
which learners co-construct knowledge in collaboration with an
interlocutor. In Krashen's i + 1, the input comes from outside the
learner and the emphasis is on the comprehensibility of input that
includes language structures that are just beyond the learner's
current developmental level. The emphasis in ZPD is on
development and how learners co-con struct knowledge based on
their interaction with their interlocutor or in prívate speech.
 Explaining second languagelearning 120
Vygotskyan theory has also been compared to the interaction
hypothesis because of the interlocutor's role in helping learners
understand and be under stood. These two perspectives differ
primarily in the emphasis they place on the interna! cognitive
processes. In the interaction hypothesis, the emphasis is on the
individual cognitive processes in the mind of the learner. lnteraction
facilitares those cognitive processes by giving learners access to the
input they need to activare interna! processes. In Vygotskyan
theory,greater importance is attached to the conversations themselves,
with learning occurring through the social interaction. Sociocultural
theory holds that people gain control of and reorganize their cognitive
processes during mediation as knowledge is internalized during social
activity.

Second language applications: Learning by talking

Extending Vygotskyan theory to second language acquisition, Jim Lantolf
(2000), Richard Donato (1994), and others are interested in showing how
second language learners acquire language when they collaborate and inter act
with other speakers. Traditionally, the ZPD has been understood to involve an
expert and a novice. However, recent work has broadened the term to include
novice-novice or learner-learner interactions. An example of this is in
Communication task B in Chapter 5 (p. 137). In that excerpt, the learners are
struggling with French reflexive verbs as they try to construct a storyline from
pictures. The example is from the work of Merrill Swain and Sharon Lapkin
(2002), who have investigated sociocultural explanations for second language
learning in Canadian French immersion programmes. Their work has its
origins in Swain's comprehensible output hypothesis and the notion that when
learners have to produce language, they must pay more attention to how
meaning is expressed through language than they ordi narily do for the
comprehension of language. Swain (1985) first proposed che comprehensible
output hypothesis based on the observation that French immersion students
were considerably weaker in their spoken and written production than in their
reading and listening comprehension. She advo cated more opportunities for
learners to engage in verbal production (i.e. output) in French immersion
classrooms. Since then, she and her colleagues have carried out extensive
research to investigate the effects of output on second language learning.
Swain's early work on the output hypothesis was influenced by cognitive
theory, but more recent work has been motivated by sociocultural theory.
Using the term collaborative dialogue, Swain and Lapkin and their col leagues
have carried out a series of studies to determine how second language learners
co-construct linguistic knowledge while engaging in production tasks (i.e.
speaking and writing) that simultaneously draw their attention to form and
meaning. fu shown in Communication task B in Chapter 5, learn ers were
testing hypotheses about the correct forms to use, discussing them together
and deciding what forms were best to express their meaning. Swain (2000)
considers collaborative dialogues such as these as the context where 'language
use and language learning can co-occur. It is language use mediat ing language
learning. Itis cognitive activity and it is social activity' (p. 97).
Therefore the difference between the sociocultural perspective and that of
other researchers who also view interaction asimportant in second language
120 Explaining second language learning

acquisition is that sociocultural theorists assume that the cognitive pro

cesses begin as an externa! socially mediated activity and eventually
become internalized. Other interactionist models assume that modified
input and interaction provide learners with the raw material that is
interpreted and analysed through interna! cognitive processes.

Summary
In the end, what all theories oflanguage acquisition are intended to
account for is the ability of human learners to acquire language within
a variety of social and instructional environments. All of the theories
discussed in this chapter and in Chapter 1 use metaphors to represent
something that cannot be observed directly.
Linguists working from an innatist perspective draw much of their
evidence from studies of the complexities of proficient speakers'
knowledge of lan guage and from analysis of their own intuitions about
language. Cognitive and developmental psychologists argue that it is
not enough to know what the final state of knowledge is and that more
attention should be paid to cor pus-based studies of the input, as well as
to the developmental steps leading up to the achievement of high levels
ofproficiency.
Recent cognitive perspectives have often involved computer
simulations or controlled laboratory experiments where people learn
specific sets of care fully chosen linguistic features, often in an
invented language. Many linguists argue that this does not entitle
psychologists to generalize to the complexities of the linguistic
knowledge that learners eventually have.
lnteractionists emphasize the role of negotiation for meaning in
conversa tional interactions. This perspective and the sociocultural
perspective provide insights into the ways in which learners can gain
access to new knowledge about the language when they have support
from an interlocutor. Sorne linguists challenge the interactionist
position, arguing that much of what learners need to know is not
 Explaining second languagelearning 122
available in the input, and so they put greater emphasis on innate
principies oflanguage that learners can draw on.
Both linguists and psychologists draw sorne of their evidence from neuro
logical research. At present, most of the research on language
representation in the brain and specific neurological activity during
language processing is inconclusive. However, advances in technology
are rapidly increasing oppor tunities to observe brain activity more
directly. Such research will eventually contribute to reinterpretations of
research that previously could examine only the observable behaviour
oflearners speaking or performing other lan guage tasks.
Educators who are hoping that language acquisition theories will give
thern insight into language teaching practice are often frustrated by the
lack of
agreement among the 'experts'. The complexities of second language acquisi
tion, like those of first language acquisition, represent puzzles that scientists
will continue to work on far a long time. Research that has theory develop
ment as its goal has important long-term significance far language teaching
and learning, but agreement on a 'complete' theory of language acquisition is
probably, at best, a long way off. Even if such agreement were reached, there
would still be questions about how the theory should be interpreted far
language teaching practice.
While sorne teachers watch theory development with interest, they must still
continue to teach and plan lessons and assess students' performance in the
absence of a comprehensive theory of second language learning. A growing
body of applied research draws on a wide range of theoretical orientations,
sometimes explicitly stated, sometimes merely implied. This research may
provide information that is more helpful in guiding teachers' reflections about
pedagogy. In Chapters 5 and 6, we will examine language acquisition research
that has focused on learning in the dassroom.

Questions for reflection

Several theories for L2 learning have been proposed i n this chapter. Is one of
them more consistent with you r own u nderstandi ng of how languages are
learned? lf so, how have you r experiences as a teacher or learner brought you
to this view?
2 Schmidt's notici ng hypothesis-that all second language learning i n adu lts
involves awareness of what is bei ng learned-is somewhat controversia!.
That is, it has been argued that it is also possi ble to learn incidental/ y,
without any awareness or even an i ntention to learn. However, second
language learners certain ly do have 'aha' moments when they suddenly
u nderstand something about how the target language works. Do you have
 any examples of noticing from you r own language learning experiences, or
from those of you r students?
3 From the perspective of the interaction hypothesis, modified i nteraction is
seen as an essential resou rce for second language learners.This is
distinguished from modified (or simplified) i n put. Can you think of sorne
examples of each? What are sorne of the featu res of modified interaction
that you think are especially hel pful to learners? Are there sorne features
that may not support learning? What are the contexts i n which second
language learners are most likely to benefit from modified interaction? Do
you think that sim plified i n put is (also) important?
122 Explaining second languagelearning

Suggestions for further reading

Dornyei, Z. 2009. The Psychology of Second Language
Acquisition. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
This overview of the theories that have been proposed to explain
second language acquisition is both comprehensive and easy to
read. Dornyei pro vides detailed treatment of the theories that are
discussed in this chapter, focusing particularly on those arising
from the research in cognitive psychology. In addition, the book
introduces the work in neurobiology that provides a new level of
explanation for language acquisition and use.

Swain, M., P. Kinnear, and L. Steinman. 201O. Sociocultural

Theory and Second Language Education: An Introduction
through Narratives. Bristol: Multilingual Matters.
In this book the authors cover the key concepts of sociocultural
theory (for example, mediation, zone of proximal development,
privare speech, collaborative dialogue) through the use of
narratives. The narratives come from the voices of language
learners and teachers from different educa tional contexts. The
book is of particular interest to readers motivated to understand
how sociocultural theory relates to the teaching and learning of
secondlanguages.
VanPatten, B. and J.Williams (eds.). 2007. Theories in Second
Language Acquisition: An lntroduction. Mahwah, NJ:
Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
VanPatten and Williams set out a list of observations that have
arisen from research studies in second language acquisition. Then,
well-known authors discuss how the theoretical framework in
which they have done their own research would explain these
observations. Por example, there are chapters on Universal
 Explaining second languagelearning 124
Grammar, sociocultural theory, skill acquisition theory, pro
cessability, and input processing. The chapters are brief (about 20
pages, induding discussion questions and readings) and written in a
style that is accessible to those with limited background in research
and theory. The final chapter, by Lourdes Ortega, provides a
concise overview of the differ ent theories and identifies sorne
ongoing challenges for explaining second language acquisition.