In:Interlanguage: Forty years later
Edited by ZhaoHong Han and Elaine Tarone
[Language Learning & Language Teaching 39] 2014
► pp. 105–126
Chapter 5. The limits of instruction
40 years after “Interlanguage”
Published online: 30 April 2014
https://doi.org/10.1075/lllt.39.07ch5
https://doi.org/10.1075/lllt.39.07ch5
This chapter argues that Selinker’s (1972) claim that instruction does not significantly affect interlanguage development is essentially correct. Reviewing general research on instructed second language acquisition as well as some recent research of my own, I argue that instructed SLA to date has failed to consider underlying constraints and processes in interlanguage development. In addition, I argue that the fundamental problem in instructed SLA is its overall focus on the acquisition of “rules”; that is, rules are not acquired from the input. Instead, learners process morpho-phonological units in the speech stream and assemble language over time. Rules, if they exist, evolve; they cannot be the object of instruction or input processing.
References (42)
Alonso-Ovalle, L., Fernández-Solera, S., Frazier, L., & Clifton Jr., C. (2002). Null vs. overt pronouns and the topic-focus articulation in Spanish.
Rivista Di Linguistica
, 14(2), 151–169.
Atkinson, D. (Ed.) (2011).
Alternative Approaches to Second Language Acquisition
. New York, NY: Routledge.
Block, D. (2003).
The Social Turn in Second Language Acquisition
. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.
Boeckx, C. (2011). Approaching parameters from below. In A. Di Sciullo & C. Boeckx (Eds.),
The Biolinguistic Enterprise: New Perspectives on the Evolution and Nature of the Human Language Faculty
(pp. 205–221). Oxford: OUP.
de Graaff, R. (1997).
Differential Effects of Explicit Instruction on Second Language Acquisition
. The Hague: HAG.
Doughty, C. (2003). Instructed SLA: Constraints, compensation, and enhancement. In C. Doughty & M.H. Long (Eds.),
The Handbook of Second Language Acquisition
(pp. 256–310). Oxford: Blackwell.
Ellis, R. (2005). Measuring implicit and explicit knowledge of a second language: A psychometric study.
Studies in Second Language Acquisition
, 27, 141–172.
Hulstijn, J. (2005). Theoretical and empirical issues in the study of implicit and explicit second-language learning.
Studies in Second Language Acquisition
, 27, 129–140.
Kanno, K. (1998). Consistency and variation in second language acquisition.
Second Language Research
, 14, 376–388.
Keating, G.D., VanPatten, B., & Jegerski, J. (2011.) Who was walking on the beach? Anaphora resolution in Spanish heritage speakers and adult second language learners.
Studies in Second Language Acquisition
, 33, 193–221.
Kessler, J., Liebner, M. & Mansouri, F. (2011.) Teaching. In M. Pienemann & J. Kessler (Eds.),
Studying Processability Theory
(pp. 149–156). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Krashen, S. D. (1982).
Principles and Practice in Second Language Acquisition
. New York, NY: Pergamon Press.
Montalbetti, M. (1984).
After Binding: On the Interpretation of Pronouns
. Unpublished PhD dissertation, MIT.
Norris, J.M., & Ortega, L. (2000). Effectiveness of L2 instruction: A research synthesis and quantitative meta-analysis.
Language Learning
, 50, 417–528.
Pérez-Leroux, A.T., & Glass, W. (1999). Null anaphora in Spanish second language acquisition: Probabilistic versus generative approaches.
Second Language Research
, 15, 220–249.
Robinson, P. (1995). Aptitude, awareness and the fundamental similarity of implicit and explicit second language learning. In R. Schmidt (Ed.),
Attention and awareness in foreign language learning
(pp. 303–358). Honolulu, HI: University of Hawai’i at Manoa.
Rothman, J., & VanPatten, B. (2013). On multiplicity and mutual exclusivity: The case for different SLA theories. In M.P. García-Mayo, M.J. Gutiérrez-Mangado, & M. Martínez Adrián (Eds.),
Contemporary Approaches to Second Language Acquisition
(pp. 243–256). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Skehan, P. (2012). Language aptitude. In S.M. Gass & A. Mackey (Eds.),
The Routledge Handbook of Second Language Acquisition
(pp. 381–395). New York, NY: Routledge.
Smith, M. C. & VanPatten, B. (in press). Instructed SLA as parameter setting: Evidence from earliest-stage learners of Japanese as L2. In C. Laval & M.J. Arche (Eds.),
The Grammar Dimension in Instructed Second Language Acquisition: Theory, Research, and Practice
. London: Bloomsbury Academic.
Spada, N., & Tomita, Y. (2010). Interactions between type of instruction and type of language feature: A meta-analysis.
Language Learning
, 60, 263–308.
Sproat, R. (1998.) Morphology as component of module: Mapping principle approaches. In A. Spencer & A.M. Zwicky (Eds.),
The Handbook of Morphology
(pp. 335–348). Oxford: Blackwell.
Toribio, A.J. (2000). Setting parametric limits on dialectal variation in Spanish.
Lingua
, 10, 315–341.
Truscott, J., & Sharwood Smith, M. (2011). Input, intake, and consciousness: The quest for a theoretical foundation.
Studies in Second Language Acquisition
, 33, 497–528.
(2004.) The effectiveness of grammar instruction: Analysis of a meta-analysis.
English Language & Teaching
, 28, 17–29.
VanPatten, B. (2004). Input processing in SLA. In B.VanPatten (Ed.),
Processing Instruction: Theory, Research, and Commentary
(pp. 1–31). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
(2010). The two faces of SLA: Mental representation and skill.
International Journal of English Language Studies
10, 1–18.
(2011). Stubborn syntax: How it resists explicit teaching and learning. In C. Sanz & R. Leow (Eds.),
Implicit and Explicit Language Learning: Conditions, Processing, and Knowledge
(pp. 9–21). Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.
(2013). Mental representation and skill in instructed SLA. In J. Schwieter (Ed.),
Innovations in SLA, Bilingualism, and Cognition: Research and Practice
. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
(in press) Aptitude as grammatical sensitivity: Recent research on processing instruction. In C. Sanz & B. Lado (Eds.),
Individual Differences, L2 Development and Language Program Administration: From Theory to Application
. Washington DC: Georgetown University Press.
(forthcoming). Input processing by novice learners: Issues in the nature of processing and in research methods. In Z-H. Han & R. Rast (Eds.),
First Exposure to a Second Language: Learners’ Initial Input Processing
. Cambridge: CUP.
VanPatten, B., & Cadierno, T. (1993). Explicit instruction and input processing.
Studies in Second Language Acquisition
, 15, 225–243.
VanPatten, B., & Fernández, C. (2004). The long-term effects of processing instruction. In B. VanPatten (Ed.),
Processing Instruction: Theory, Research, and Commentary
(pp. 273–289). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
VanPatten, B. (2010). The two faces of SLA: Mental representation and skill.
International Journal of English Language Studies
10:1–18.
VanPatten, B. & Rothman, J. (in press). What does current generative theory suggest about the explicit-implicit debate? In R. Rebuchat (Ed.),
Explicit and Implicit Learning of Languages
. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
VanPatten, B., Borst, S., Collopy, E., Qualin, A., & Price, J. (2013). Explicit information, grammatical sensitivity, and the First-noun Principle: A cross-linguistic study in processing instruction.
The Modern Language Journal
, 97, 504–525.
VanPatten B, Keating G, & Leeser M (2012). Missing verbal inflections as a representational problem: Evidence from self-paced reading.
Linguistic Approaches to Bilingualism
, 2(2): 109–140.
Cited by (4)
Cited by four other publications
Han, ZhaoHong
GRAUS, JOHAN & PETER–ARNO COPPEN
VanPatten, Bill
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 26 november 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.
