Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-sxzjt Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-16T17:55:01.116Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

INCIDENTAL FOCUS ON FORM AND SECOND LANGUAGE LEARNING

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  22 July 2005

Shawn Loewen
Shawn Loewen
Affiliation:
University of Auckland
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Incidental focus on form overtly draws learners' attention to linguistic items as they arise spontaneously—without prior planning—in meaning-focused interaction. This study examined the effectiveness of incidental focus on form in promoting second language (L2) learning. Seventeen hours of naturally occurring, meaning-focused L2 lessons were observed in 12 different classes of young adults in a private language school in Auckland, New Zealand. A total of 491 focus-on-form episodes (FFEs) were identified and used as a basis for individualized test items in which participants who participated in specific FFEs were asked to recall the linguistic information provided in them. The results revealed that learners were able to recall the targeted linguistic information correctly or partially correctly nearly 60% of the time 1 day after the FFE, and 50% of the time 2 weeks later. Furthermore, successful uptake in a FFE was found to be a significant predictor of correct test scores. These results suggest that incidental focus on form might be beneficial to learners, particularly if they incorporate the targeted linguistic items into their own production.This research was supported, in part, by a scholarship from the Foundation for Science, Research, and Technology, New Zealand. The author would like to thank the teachers and participants who kindly gave of their time to participate in this study. The author would also like to thank Rod Ellis, Catherine Elder, Helen Basturkmen, Rosemary Erlam, Jenefer Philp, and the anonymous SSLA reviewers for their valuable input and feedback on this study. Earlier versions of this paper were presented at the annual meeting of the American Association of Applied Linguistics in 2002 (Salt Lake City, UT) and at AILA 2002 (Singapore).

Type
Research Article
Information
Studies in Second Language Acquisition , Volume 27 , Issue 3 , September 2005 , pp. 361 - 386
Copyright
© 2005 Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Bachman, L., & Palmer, A. (1996). Language testing in practice. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Bialystok, E. (1994). Analysis and control in the development of second language proficiency. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 16, 157–168.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brown, J. D. (1996). Testing in language programs. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Davies, A., Brown, A., Elder, C., Hill, K., Lumley, T., & McNamara, T. (1999). Dictionary of language testing. Cambridge: University of Cambridge Local Examinations Syndicate.
de Bot, K. (1996). The psycholinguistics of the output hypothesis. Language Learning, 46, 529–555.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Doughty, C. (2001). Cognitive underpinnings of focus on form. In P. Robinson (Ed.), Cognition and second language instruction (pp. 206–257). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Doughty, C., & Williams, J. (1998). Focus on form in classroom second language acquisition. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Douglas, D. (2001). Performance consistency in second language acquisition and language testing research: A conceptual gap. Second Language Research, 17, 442–456.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ellis, R. (2001). Investigating form-focused instruction. Language Learning, 51(Suppl. 1), 1–46.Google Scholar
Ellis, R. (2004). The definition and measurement of L2 explicit knowledge. Language Learning, 54, 227–275.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ellis, R., Basturkmen, H., & Loewen, S. (2001a). Learner uptake in communicative ESL lessons. Language Learning, 51, 281–318.Google Scholar
Ellis, R., Basturkmen, H., & Loewen, S. (2001b). Preemptive focus on form in the ESL Classroom. TESOL Quarterly, 35, 407–432.Google Scholar
Ellis, R., Loewen, S., & Basturkmen, H. (1999). Focussing on form in the classroom (Occasional Papers, Number 13). Auckland, New Zealand: The University of Auckland, Institute of Language Teaching and Learning.
Gass, S. M. (1997). Input, interaction, and the second language learner. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Gass, S. M., & Mackey, A. (2000). Stimulated recall methodology in second language research. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Genesee, F. (1987). Learning through two languages. Boston: Heinle & Heinle.
Gravetter, F., & Wallnau, L. (1991). Essentials of statistics for the behavioral sciences. St. Paul, MN: West.
Greenhouse, J., Bromberg, J., & Fromm, D. (1995). An introduction to logistic regression with an application to the analysis of language recovery following a stroke. Journal of Communication Disorders, 28, 229–246.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hatch, E., & Lazaraton, A. (1991). The research manual: Design and statistics for applied linguistics. Rowley, MA: Newbury House.
Hosmer, D., & Lemeshow, S. (2000). Applied logistic regression ( 2nd ed.). New York: Wiley.CrossRef
Hulstijn, J. H. (1995). Not all grammar rules are equal: Giving grammar instruction its proper place in foreign language teaching. In R. Schmidt (Ed.), Attention and awareness in foreign language learning (pp. 359–386). Honolulu, HI: University of Hawai‘i Press.
La Pierre, D. (1994). Language output in a cooperative learning setting: Determining its effects on second language learning. Unpublished master's thesis, University of Toronto (OISE), Toronto, Canada.
Laufer, B., & Nation, I. S. P. (1999). A vocabulary-size test of controlled productive ability. Language Testing, 16, 33–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lightbown, P. (1998). The importance of timing in focus on form. In C. Doughty & J. Williams (Eds.), Focus on form in classroom second language acquisition (pp. 177–196). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Loewen, S. (2002). The occurrence and effectiveness of incidental focus on form in meaning-focused ESL lessons. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, The University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand.
Loewen, S. (2003). Variation in the frequency and characteristics of incidental focus on form. Language Teaching Research, 7, 315–345.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Loewen, S. (2004). Uptake in incidental focus on form in meaning-focused ESL lessons. Language Learning, 54, 153–187.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Long, M. (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.
Long, M. (1996). The role of the linguistic environment in second language acquisition. In W. Ritchie & T. Bhatia (Eds.), Handbook of second language acquisition (pp. 413–468). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
Long, M., Inagaki, S., & Ortega, L. (1998). The role of implicit negative feedback in SLA: Models and recasts in Japanese and Spanish. Modern Language Journal, 82, 357–371.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Long, M., & Robinson, P. (1998). Focus on form: Theory, research, and practice. In C. Doughty & J. Williams (Eds.), Focus on form in classroom second language acquisition (pp. 15–41). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Lyster, R. (1998a). Negotiation of form, recasts, and explicit correction in relation to error types and learner repair in immersion classrooms. Language Learning, 48, 183–218.Google Scholar
Lyster, R. (1998b). Recasts, repetition, and ambiguity in L2 classroom discourse. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 20, 51–81.Google Scholar
Lyster, R., & Ranta, L. (1997). Corrective feedback and learner uptake: Negotiation of form in communicative classrooms. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 19, 37–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nabei, T., & Swain, M. (2001). Learner awareness of recasts in classroom interaction: A case study of an adult EFL participant's second language learning. Language Awareness, 11, 43–63.Google Scholar
Nicholas, H., Lightbown, P., & Spada, N. (2001). Recasts as feedback to language learners. Language Learning, 51, 719–758.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Oliver, R. (1995). Negative feedback in child NS-NNS conversation. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 17, 459–481.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Oliver, R. (2000). Age differences in negotiation and feedback in classroom and pairwork. Language Learning, 50, 119–151.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pica, T. (2002). Subject-matter content: How does it assist the interactional and linguistic needs of classroom language learners? Modern Language Journal, 86, 1–19.Google Scholar
Pica, T., Kanagy, R., & Falodun, J. (1993). Choosing and using communication tasks for second language instruction and research. In G. Crookes & S. M. Gass (Eds.), Tasks and language learning: Integrating theory and practice (pp. 9–34). Clevedon, UK: Multilingual Matters.
Richards, J. C., & Rodgers, T. S. (2001). Approaches and methods in language teaching ( 2nd ed.). New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRef
Ross, S. (1992). Accommodative questions in oral proficiency interviews. Language Testing, 9, 173–186.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Saito, H. (1999). Dependence and interaction in frequency data analysis in SLA research. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 21, 453–475.Google Scholar
Savignon, S. J. (2000). Communicative language teaching. In M. Byram (Ed.), Routledge encyclopedia of language teaching and learning (pp. 124–129). London: Routledge.
Schmidt, R. (1990). The role of consciousness in second language learning. Applied Linguistics, 11, 129–158.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schmidt, R. (1995). Consciousness and foreign language learning: A tutorial on the role of attention and awareness in learning. In R. Schmidt (Ed.), Attention and awareness in foreign language learning (Tech. Rep. No. 9, pp. 1–63). Honolulu, HI: University of Hawai‘i Press.
Schmidt, R. (2001). Attention. In P. Robinson (Ed.), Cognition and second language instruction (pp. 3–32). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Skehan, P. (1998). A cognitive approach to language learning. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Slimani, A. (1989). The role of topicalization in classroom language learning. System, 17, 223–234.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Spada, N. (1997). Form-focussed instruction and second language acquisition: A review of classroom and laboratory research. Language Teaching, 30, 73–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Swain, M. (1985). Communicative competence: Some roles of comprehensible input and comprehensible output in it development. In S. M. Gass & C. G. Madden (Eds.), Input in second language acquisition (pp. 235–252). Rowley, MA: Newbury House.
Swain, M. (1995). Three functions of output in second language learning. In G. Cook & B. Seidlhofer (Eds.), Principles and practice in the study of language (pp. 125–144). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Swain, M. (2000). The output hypothesis and beyond: Mediating acquisition through collaborative dialogue. In J. Lantolf (Ed.), Sociocultural theory and second language learning (pp. 97–114). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Swain, M. (2001). Examining dialogue: Another approach to content specification and to validating inferences drawn from test scores. Language Testing, 18, 275–302.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Swain, M., & Lapkin, S. (1995). Problems in output and the cognitive processes they generate: A step towards second language learning. Applied Linguistics, 16, 371–391.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
VanPatten, B. (1990). Attending to content and form in the input: An experiment in consciousness. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 12, 287–301.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Williams, J. (2001). The effectiveness of spontaneous attention to form. System, 29, 325–340.CrossRefGoogle Scholar