Article published In: Sociocognitive Approaches to Second Language Pedagogy
Edited by Bronwen Patricia Dyson
[Australian Review of Applied Linguistics 33:3] 2010
► pp. 30.1–30.21
Learner language analytic methods and pedagogical implications
Available under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial (CC BY-NC) 4.0 license.
For any use beyond this license, please contact the publisher at rights@benjamins.nl.
Published online: 1 January 2010
https://doi.org/10.2104/aral1030
https://doi.org/10.2104/aral1030
Methods for analysing interlanguage have long aimed to capture learner language in its own right. By surveying the cognitive methods of Error Analysis, Obligatory Occasion Analysis and Frequency Analysis, this paper traces reformulations to attain this goal. The paper then focuses on Emergence Analysis, which fine-tunes learner language analysis by measuring the ‘onset’ of spoken grammar as hypothesised in Processability Theory (PT) (Pienemann, 1998, 2005a). Since doubts have been expressed regarding the emergence approach’s rigour and pedagogical relevance, a study is presented which aims to provide a more in-depth and wide-ranging account of the ‘onset’ of. English grammar. Having sketched and amplified Processability Theory’s predictions, the paper applies emergence analysis to the longitudinal development of two adolescent ESL learners. As well as exemplifying the rigour of the emergence procedures, the results show overall support for the more comprehensive predictions. The paper concludes that learner language analysis does not have a deficit emphasis on transition to the target language, as claimed by Firth and Wagner (1997, 2007). Indeed, such methods have a role in assessing developmental readiness in a learner-oriented approach to grammar teaching.
References (34)
Bley-Vroman, Robert (1983). The comparative fallacy in interlanguage studies: The case of systematicity. Language Learning, 331, 1–17.
Corder, S. (1967). The significance of learners’ errors. International Review of Applied Linguistics, 51, 161–169.
Di Biase, Bruno. (2008). Focus-on-form and development in L2 learning. In J.-U. Kessler, (Ed.), Processability approaches to second language acquisition (pp. 197–220). Newcastle, UK: Cambridge Scholars.
Dulay, Heidi; Burt, Marina (1973). Should we teach children syntax? Language Learning, 231, 245–258.
Dyson, Bronwen. (2004). Developmental style in second language processing: A study of inter-learner variation in the acquisition of English as a Second Language. Doctoral dissertation, University of Western Sydney, Australia.
. (2008). What we learn from questions: ESL question development and its implications for language assessment, Prospect, 23(1), 16–27.
. (2009a). Processability Theory and the role of morphology in ESL development: A longitudinal study. Second Language Research, 25(3), 355–376.
. (2009b). Understanding trajectories of academic literacy: How could this improve diagnostic assessment. Journal of Academic Language and Learning, 3(1), 52–69.
Falk, Yehuda(2008). Functional relations in the English auxiliary system. Linguistics, 46(5), 861–889.
Firth, A; Wagner, J (1997). On discourse, communication, and (some) fundamental concepts in SLA research. The Modern Language Journal, 811, 285–300.
Firth, Alan; Wagner, Johannes. (2007). Second/foreign language learning as a social accomplishment: elaborations on a reconceptualized SLA. The Modern Language Journal, 911, 800–819.
Hudson, Thom. (1993). Nothing does not equal zero: Problems with applying development sequence findings to assessment and pedagogy. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 151, 461–494.
Kawaguchi, Satomi. (2005). Argument structure and syntactic developments in Japanese as a second language. In M. Pienemann, (Ed.), Cross-linguistic aspects of Processability Theory (pp. 254–298). Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
Klein, Wolfgang; Purdue, Clive. (1992). Utterance structure: developing grammars again. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Lafford, Barbara. (2007). Second Language Acquisition reconceptualized?:The impact of Firth and Wagner (1997. Modern Language Journal, 911, 735–756.
Lightbown, Patsy. (1998). The importance of timing in focus on form. In C. Doughty and J. Williams (Eds.), Focus on form in classroom second language acquisition, (pp. 177–196). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Mansouri, Fethi. (2005). Agreement morphology in Arabic as a second language: Typological features and their processing implications. In M. Pienemann. (Ed.), Cross-linguistic aspects of Processability Theory (pp. 117–153). Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
Mansouri, Fethi; Duffy, Loretta (2005). The pedagogic effectiveness of developmental readiness in ESL grammar instruction. Australian Review of Applied Linguistics, 28(1), 81–99.
Meisel, Jurgen; Clahsen, Harald; Pienemann, Manfred (1981). On determining developmental stages in natural second language acquisition. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 31, 109–135.
Mondada, Lorenza; Pekarek-Doehler, Simona (2004). Second Language Acquisition as situated practice: task accomplishment in the French second language classroom. The Modern Language Journal, 88(4), 501–518.
Parodi, Teresa (2000). Finiteness and verb placement in second language acquisition. Second Language Research, 16(4), 255–381.
Pallotti, Gabrielle. (2007). An operational definition of the emergence criterion. Applied Linguistics, 28(3), 361–382.
Pienemann, Manfred (1984). Psychological constraints on the teachability of languages. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 6 (2), 186–214.
. (1989). Is language teachable? Psycholinguistic experiments and hypotheses. Applied Linguistics, 11, 52–79.
. (1998). Language processing and second language development: Processability theory. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
(Ed.) (2005a). Cross-linguistic aspects of Processability Theory. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
. (2005b). An introduction to Processability Theory. In Pienemann, Manfred. (Ed.). Cross-linguistic aspects of Processability Theory (pp. 1–60). Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
Pienemann, Manfred; Di Biase, Bruno; Kawaguchi, Satomi. (2005). Extending Processability Theory. In M. Pienemann. (Ed.), Cross-linguistic aspects of Processability Theory (pp. 199–252). Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
Pienemann, Manfred; Johnston, Malcolm; Brindley, Geoff (1988). Constructing an acquisition-based procedure for second language assessment. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 101, 217–224.
Tarone, Elaine; Liu, Guo-Qiang. (1995) Situational context, variation, and second language acquisition theory. In G. Cook and B. Seidlhofer, (Eds.), Principle and practice in applied linguistics: Studies in honour of H.G. Widdowson (pp. 107–124). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Cited by (10)
Cited by ten other publications
He, Qiaoling & Isabel Oltra-Massuet
Dyson, Bronwen
Dyson, Bronwen
Dyson, Bronwen Patricia
2016. Variation, individual differences and second language processing. Linguistic Approaches to Bilingualism 6:4 ► pp. 341 ff.
Oliver, Rhonda, Honglin Chen & Stephen Moore
Buyl, Aafke
2015. Chapter 7. Studying Receptive Grammar Acquisition within a PT Framework. In Theoretical and Methodological Developments in Processability Theory [Processability Approaches to Language Acquisition Research & Teaching, 4], ► pp. 139 ff.
Buyl, Aafke
2019. Is morpho-syntactic decoding governed by Processability Theory?. In Widening Contexts for Processability Theory [Processability Approaches to Language Acquisition Research & Teaching, 7], ► pp. 73 ff.
Yamaguchi, Yumiko
[no author supplied]
[no author supplied]
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 6 december 2025. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.
