Cover not available

In:Input Processing and Processing Instruction: The acquisition of Italian and Modern Standard Arabic
Alessandro G. Benati
[Bilingual Processing and Acquisition 11] 2021
► pp. 135–154

Get fulltext from our e-platform
JBE logo with link
PDF logo with download linkDownload Book PDF
EPUB logo with download linkDownload Book EPUB
authorization required

Chapter 7
Enhanced structured input vs. unenhanced structured input on the acquisition of modern standard Arabic gender agreement

Sentence and discourse-level tasks (with Ayah Farhat)

Published online: 8 September 2021
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/bpa.11.c7
Article outline
  • 7.1Introduction
  • 7.2Background
    • The effects of textual or aural enhanced structured input
    • Will enhanced and unenhanced structured input help learners process non-meaningful and redundant forms?
    • Can enhanced structured input help push learners to process a meaningful form over a lexical item?
    • Will enhanced and unenhanced structured input help direct learners’ attention to meaningful morphology in sentence final position?
  • 7.3Motivation and research questions in the present study
  • 7.4Design
    • Participants
    • The target feature
    • Procedure
    • Pedagogical materials
    • Assessment tasks
  • 7.5Results
    • Interpretation data sentence-level
    • Interpretation data discourse-level
    • Production data sentence-level
  • 7.6Discussions and conclusion
  • Acknowledgements
  • References
References (25)
References
Benati, A. (2001). A comparative study of the effects of processing instruction and output-based instruction on the acquisition of the Italian future tense. Language Teaching Research, 5, 95–127. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2004a). The effects of structured input and explicit information on the acquisition of Italian future tense. In B. VanPatten (Ed.), Processing instruction: Theory, research, and commentary (pp. 207–255). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2004b). The effects of processing instruction and its components on the acquisition of gender agreement in Italian. Language Awareness, 13, 67–80. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2005). The effects of PI, TI, and MOI in the acquisition of English simple past tense. Language Teaching Research, 9, 67–113. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cadierno, T. (1995). Formal instruction from a processing perspective: An investigation into the Spanish past tense. The Modern Language Journal, 79, 179–93. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Farhat, A., & Benati, A. (2018). The effects of motivation and processing instruction in the acquisition of Modern Standard Arabic gender agreement. Instructed Second Language Acquisition, 2, 60–81. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Farley, A. (2001a). Authentic processing instruction and the Spanish subjunctive. Hispania, 84, 289–299. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2004). The relative effects of processing instruction and meaning-based output instruction. In B. VanPatten (Ed.), Processing instruction: Theory, research, and commentary (pp. 143–168). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2004a). 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.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2004b). 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.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lee, J., & Benati, A. (2007a). Delivering processing instruction in classrooms and virtual contexts: Research and practice. Equinox.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2007b). Second language processing: An analysis of theory, problems and possible solutions. Continuum.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lee, J. G., & VanPatten, B. (1995). Making communicative language teaching happen. McGraw Hill.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Leow, R. (1997). The effects of input enhancement and text length on adult L2 readers’ comprehension and intake in second language acquisition. Applied Language Learning, 8, 151–182.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Meguro, Y. (2017). Textual enhancement, grammar learning, reading comprehension, and tag questions. Language Teaching Research, 23, 58–77. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Sharwood-Smith, M. (1991). Speaking to many minds: On the relevance of different types of of language information for the L2 learner. Second Language Research 7, 118–132.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Shook, D. J. (1994). What foreign language reading recalls reveal about the input-to-intake phenomenon. Applied Language Learning, 10, 39–76.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Overstreet, M. (1998). Text enhancement and content familiarity: The focus of learner attention. Spanish Applied Linguistics, 2, 229–258.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Simard, Simard D. (2009). Differential effects of textual enhancement formats on intake. System, 37, 124–135. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
VanPatten, B. (2004a). Input processing in SLA. In B. VanPatten (Ed.) Processing instruction: Theory, research, and commentary (pp. 5–31). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
VanPatten, B., & Oikennon, S. (1996). Explanation vs. structured input in processing instruction. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 18, 495–510. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
VanPatten, B., & Wong, W. (2004). Processing instruction and the French causative: Another replication. In B. VanPatten (Ed.), Processing instruction: Theory, research, and commentary (pp. 97–118). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Winke, P. (2013). The effects of input enhancement on grammar learning and comprehension. A modified replication of Lee (2007) with eye-movement data. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 35, 323–352. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Wong, W. (2002). Textual enhancement and simplified input: Effects n L2 comprehension and acquisition of non-meaningful grammatical form. Applied Language Learning, 13, 17–45.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2004). 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). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mobile Menu Logo with link to supplementary files background Layer 1 prag Twitter_Logo_Blue