Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-sxzjt Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-23T15:41:40.395Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

BENEFITS AND DRAWBACKS OF CONTROLLED LABORATORY STUDIES OFSECOND LANGUAGE ACQUISITION

The Keck Second Language Learning ProjectThe research presented here was supported by a grant from the William M. Keck Foundation. In designing and carrying out this study, we have received valuable help and advice from Michael Posner, Morti Gernsbacher, Linda Forrest, Bruce McCandliss, Paul Compton, Will Godwin, and Russel Tomlin. We also acknowledge the technical assistance of Ruth Rush, Marina Tackett, Shu-sen Yang, Zhu Qin, and Iaan Valentine. In addition, we thank Jan Hulstijn, Robert DeKeyser, and an anonymous reviewer for helpful comments on an earlier draft.The results reported in this paper come from the first author's dissertation. An abbreviated version of portions of this paper was presented at the AILA Congress, Jyväskylä, Finland, August 6, 1996.

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 June 1997

Lynne R. Yang
Affiliation:
SUNY Buffalo
T. Givón
Affiliation:
University of Oregon

Abstract

A consistent finding in second language acquisition research has been that in the early stages of acquisition learners often receive simplified input. This finding has led researchers to question whether or not simplified input has a facilitative effect on the acquisition process. This study examines the effects of simplified input in early L2 acquisition by experimentally manipulating language input to two groups of learners and then assessing their acquisition longitudinally within a controlled laboratory setting. The impetus for the study described here was Givón's (1990) competition hypothesis that posits that, in early L2 acquisition, vocabulary and grammar compete for memory, attention, and processing capacity. Because one can communicate with vocabulary in absence of grammar but not vice versa, it was proposed that learners receiving pidgin input would acquire vocabulary more efficiently than learners challenged with the dual task of acquiring vocabulary and grammar simultaneously. Furthermore, it was hypothesized that once vocabulary processing skills were automated, learners would acquire grammar more rapidly. Results of a variety of measures reveal that the dual task of acquiring vocabulary and grammar does not hinder either and that the longer the exposure to grammatical input the greater the advantage in real-time grammar processing abilities. Converging evidence from all measures of language learning provides strong support for the usefulness and viability of laboratory study of SLA.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
© 1997 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.)