Cover not available

In:Research on Second Language Processing and Processing Instruction: Studies in honor of Bill VanPatten
Edited by Michael J. Leeser, Gregory D. Keating and Wynne Wong
[Studies in Bilingualism 62] 2021
► pp. 3–24

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

Chapter 1
Input processing in second language acquisition

The pioneering work of Bill VanPatten

ORCiD logo with link | Florida State University
ORCiD logo with link | San Diego State University
 | The Ohio State University
Published online: 17 March 2021
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/sibil.62.01lee
Abstract
In this chapter, we highlight Bill VanPatten’s numerous contributions to the fields of second language acquisition (SLA) and instructed second language acquisition (ISLA), and to the language teaching profession. We begin with an overview of his major professional achievements, followed by an exploration of his early work and the origins of his model of input processing. We underscore the significant contribution that his model of input processing makes to theory building in SLA and subsequently discuss his pioneering instructional innovation, processing instruction, along with the prolific body of research it has inspired. After briefly noting the importance of his work on acquisition and processing more broadly, we conclude with an overview of the individual chapters included in the volume.
Article outline
  • Introduction
  • Over three decades of influential research
    • Input processing
    • Instruction targeting processes – Not products or “rules”
    • Other areas of influence
  • The present volume
    • Part I.Research on sentence processing
    • Part II.Research on input processing
    • Part III.Research on processing instruction
  • Current and future directions in PI research
  • References
References (86)
References
Angelovska, T., & Benati, A. (2013). Processing instruction and the age factor: Can adults and school-age native speakers of German process English simple past tense correctly? In J. F. Lee & A. Benati (Eds.), Individual differences and processing instruction (pp. 131–152). London, UK: Equinox.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bardovi-Harlig, K. (2020). One functional approach to L2 acquisition: The concept-oriented approach. In B. VanPatten, G. D. Keating, & S. Wulff (Eds.), Theories in second language acquisition: An introduction (3rd ed.) (pp. 40–62). New York, NY: Routledge. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
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
(2004). The effects of structured input activities and explicit information on the acquisition of the Italian future tense. In B. VanPatten (Ed.), Processing instruction: Theory, research, and commentary (pp. 207–225). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2005). The effects of processing instruction, traditional instruction, and meaning-output instruction on the acquisition of the English past simple tense. Language Teaching Research, 9, 67–93. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Benati, A. G., & Lee, J. F. (2008). Grammar acquisition and processing instruction: Secondary and cumulative effects. Bristol, UK: Multilingual Matters. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2010). Processing instruction and discourse London, UK: Continuum.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, 179–194. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Carpenter, H., Seon Jeon, K., MacGregor, D., & Mackey, A. (2006). Learners’ interpretations of recasts. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 28, 209–236. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Carroll, S. (2004). Commentary: Some general and specific comments on input processing and processing instruction. In B. VanPatten (Ed.), Processing instruction: Theory, research, and commentary (pp. 293–309). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Chaudron, C. (1985). Intake: On models and methods for discovering learners’ processing of input. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 7, 1–14. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Comer, W. J., & de Benedette, L. (2010). Processing instruction and Russian: Issues, materials, and preliminary experimental results. Slavic and East European Journal, 54, 118–146.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2011). Processing instruction and Russian: Further evidence is IN. Foreign Language Annals, 44, 646–673. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Corder, S. P. (1967). The significance of learners’ errors. International Review of Applied Linguistics, 5, 161–170. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cox, J. G. (2017). Explicit instruction, bilingualism, and the older adult learner. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 39, 29–58. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cox, J. G., & Sanz, C. (2015). Deconstructing PI for the ages: Explicit instruction vs. practice in young and older adult bilinguals. IRAL, 53, 225–248. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
DeKeyser, R., Salaberry, R., Robinson, P., & Harrington, M. (2002). What gets processed in processing instruction? A commentary on Bill VanPatten’s “Processing Instruction: An Update.” Language Learning, 52, 805–823. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ellis, N., & Wulff, S. (2020). Usage-based approaches to L2 acquisition. In B. VanPatten, G. D. Keating, & S. Wulff (Eds.), Theories in second language acquisition: An introduction (3rd ed.) (pp. 63–82). New York, NY: Routledge. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Faerch, C., & Kasper, G. (1980). Processes and strategies in foreign language learning and communication. The Interlanguage Studies Bulletin – Utrecht, 5, 47–118.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Farley, A. P. (2001). The effects of processing instruction and meaning-based output instruction. Spanish Applied Linguistics, 5, 57–94.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2004). 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: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Fernández, C. (2008). Reexamining the role of explicit information in processing instruction. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 30, 277–305. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gass, S. M., & Mackey, A. (2020). Input, interaction, and output in L2 acquisition. In B. VanPatten, G. D. Keating, & S. Wulff (Eds.), Theories in second language acquisition: An introduction (3rd ed.) (pp. 192–222). New York, NY: Routledge. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Glimois, L. (2019). The effects of input flood, structured input, explicit information, and language background on beginner learners’ acquisition of a target structure in Mandarin Chinese (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Harrington, M. (2004). Commentary: Input processing as a theory of processing input. In B. VanPatten (Ed.), Processing instruction: Theory, research, and commentary (pp. 79–92). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Henry, N., Culman, H., & VanPatten, B. (2009). More on the effects of explicit information in instructed SLA: A partial replication and a response to Fernández (2008). Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 31, 559–575. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Henry, N., Jackson, C. N., & DiMidio, J. (2017). The role of explicit instruction and prosodic cues in processing instruction. The Modern Language Journal, 101, 294–314. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Issa, B. I., & Morgan-Short, K. (2019). Effects of external and internal attentional manipulations on second language grammar development: An eye-tracking study. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 41, 389–417. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Issa, B., Morgan-Short, K., Villegas, B., & Raney, G. (2015). An eye-tracking study on the role of attention and its relationship with motivation. In L. Roberts, K. McManus, N. Vanek, & D. Trenkic (Eds.), EUROSLA Yearbook (pp. 114–142). Amsterdam, Netherlands: John Benjamins.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ito, K., & Wong, W. (2019). Processing instruction and the effects of input modality and voice familiarity on the acquisition of the French causative construction. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 41, 443–468. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Jegerski, J., Keating, G. D., & VanPatten, B. (2016). On-line relative clause attachment strategy in heritage speakers of Spanish. International Journal of Bilingualism, 20, 254–268. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Jegerski, J., & VanPatten, B. (2014). Research methods in second language psycholinguistics. New York, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Keating, G. D., & Farley, A. P. (2008). Processing Instruction, meaning-based output instruction, and meaning-based drills: Impacts on classroom L2 acquisition of Spanish object pronouns. Hispania, 91, 639–650.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Keating, G. D., Jegerski, J., & VanPatten, B. (2016). Online processing of subject pronouns in monolingual and heritage bilingual speakers of Mexican Spanish. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 19, 36–49. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Krashen, S. D. (1981). Second language acquisition and second language learning. Oxford, UK: Pergamon Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(1982). Principles and practice in second language acquisition. New York, NY: Pergamon Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(1985). The input hypothesis: Issues and implications. New York, NY: Longman.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kuhn, T. S. (1977). Objectivity, value judgement, and theory choice. In The essential tension: Selected studies in scientific tradition and change. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lee, J. F., & Doherty, S. (2019). Native and nonnative processing of active and passive sentences: The effects of processing instruction on the allocation of visual attention. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 41, 853–879. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lee, J. F., & VanPatten, B. (1995). Making communicative language teaching happen. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2003). Making communicative language teaching happen (2nd ed.). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Leeser, M. J., & DeMil, A. J. (2013). Investigating the secondary effects of processing instruction in Spanish: From instruction on accusative clitics to transfer-of-training effects on dative clitics. Hispania, 96, 748–762. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mackey, A., Gass, S., & McDonough, K. (2000). How do learners perceive interactional feedback? Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 22, 471–497. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Nassaji, H. (2017). Grammar acquisition. In S. Loewen & M. Sato (Eds.), The Routledge handbook of instructed second language acquisition (pp. 205–222). New York, NY: Routledge. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Perpiñán, S., Marín, R., & Moreno Villamar, I. (2019). The role of aspect in the acquisition of ser and estar in locative contexts by English-speaking learners of Spanish. Language Acquisition, 27, 35–67. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Pienemann, M., & Lenzing, A. (2020). Processability theory. In B. VanPatten, G. D. Keating, & S. Wulff (Eds.), Theories in second language acquisition: An introduction (3rd ed.) (pp. 162–191). New York, NY: Routledge. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Santamaria, K. D., & Sunderman, G. L. (2015). Working memory in processing instruction: The acquisition of L2 French clitics. In Z. Wen, M. Borges Mota, & A. McNeil (Eds.), Working memory in second language acquisition and processing: Theory, research and practice (205–223). Bristol, UK: Multilingual Matters. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Sanz, C. (2004). Computer delivered implicit versus explicit feedback in processing instruction. In B. VanPatten (Ed.), Processing instruction: Theory, research, and commentary (pp. 241–256). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Sanz, C., & Morgan-Short, K. (2004). Positive evidence vs. explicit rule presentation and explicit negative feedback: A computer assisted study. Language Learning, 54, 35–78. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Uludag, O., & VanPatten, B. (2012). The comparative effects of processing instruction and dictogloss on the acquisition of the English passive by speakers of Turkish. International Review of Applied Linguistics, 50, 189–212. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
VanPatten, B. (1982). Why communication practices sometimes fail. Hispania, 65, 403–407. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(1985). The acquisition of ser and estar by adult classroom learners: A preliminary investigation of transitional stages of competence. Hispania, 68, 399–406. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(1986). Second language acquisition research and the learning/teaching of Spanish: Some research findings and their implications. Hispania, 69, 202–216. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(1987). Classroom learners’ acquisition of ser and estar: Accounting for the data. In B. VanPatten, T. R. Dvorak, & J. F. Lee (Eds.), Foreign language learning: A research perspective (pp. 61–76). Rowley, MA: Newbury House.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(1988). How juries get hung: Problems with the evidence for the effects of a focus on form. Language Learning, 38, 243–260. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(1990). Attending to form and content in the input: An experiment in consciousness. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 12, 287–301. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(1996). Input processing and grammar instruction: Theory and research. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2002). Processing instruction: An update. Language Learning, 52, 755–803. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2003). From input to output: A teacher’s guide to second language acquisition. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2004a). Input processing in second language acquisition. In B. VanPatten (Ed.), Processing instruction: Theory, research, and commentary (pp. 5–31). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(Ed.). (2004b). Processing instruction: Theory, research, and commentary. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2007). Input processing in adult SLA. In B. VanPatten & J. Williams (Eds.), Theories in second language acquisition: An introduction (pp. 115–135). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2015a). Input processing in adult SLA. In B. VanPatten & J. Williams (Eds.), Theories in second language acquisition: An introduction (2nd ed.) (pp. 113–134). New York, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2015b). Foundations of processing instruction. International Review of Applied Linguistics, 53, 91–109. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2017). Situating instructed language acquisition: Facts about second language acquisition. Instructed Second Language Acquisition, 1, 45–60. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2020). Input processing in adult L2 acquisition. In B. VanPatten, G. D. Keating, & S. Wulff (Eds.), Theories in second language acquisition: An introduction (3rd ed.) (pp. 105–127). New York, NY: Routledge. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
VanPatten, B., & Benati, A. G. (2010). Key terms in second language acquisition. London, UK: Continuum.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
VanPatten, B., & Cadierno, T. (1993). Explicit instruction and input processing. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 15, 225–243. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
VanPatten, B., Collopy, E., Price, J. E., Borst, S., & Qualin, A. (2013). Explicit information, grammatical sensitivity, and the first-noun principle: A cross-linguistic study in processing instruction. The Modern Language Journal, 97, 506–527. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
VanPatten, B., & Jegerski, J. (Eds.) (2010). Research in second language processing and parsing. Amsterdam, Netherlands: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
VanPatten, B., Keating, G. D., & Leeser, M. J. (2012). Missing verbal inflections as a representational problem: Evidence from self-paced reading. Linguistic Approaches to Bilingualism, 2, 109–140. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
VanPatten, B., & Lee, J. F. (1988). Exploring the relationship between second language acquisition and foreign language learning. Issues and Developments in English and Applied Linguistics, 3, 69–74.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
VanPatten, B., & Oikkenon, S. (1996). Explanation versus instructed input in processing instruction. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 18, 495–510. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
VanPatten, B., & Rothman, J. (2014). Against “rules.” In A. Benati, C. Laval, & M. J. Arche (Eds.), The grammar dimension in instructed second language acquisition: Theory, research, and practice (pp. 15–35). London, UK: Bloomsbury.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
VanPatten, B., & Smith, M. (2015). Aptitude as grammatical sensitivity and the initial stages of learning Japanese as a L2: Parametric variation and case marking. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 37, 135–165. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2019). Word-order typology and the acquisition of case marking: A self-paced reading study in Latin as a second language. Second Language Research, 35, 397–420. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
VanPatten, B., Williams, J., Keating, G. D., & Wulff, S. (2020). The nature of theories. In B. VanPatten, G. D. Keating, & S. Wulff (Eds.), Theories in second language acquisition: An introduction (3rd ed.) (pp. 1–18). New York, NY: Routledge. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
VanPatten, B., & Wong, W. (2004). Processing instruction and the French causative: A replication. In B. VanPatten (Ed.), Processing instruction: Theory, research, and commentary (pp. 97–118). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
White, J. P., & DeMil, A. J. (2013a). Primary and secondary effects of PI. International Journal of Language Studies, 7, 59–88.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2013b). Transfer-of-training effects in processing instruction: The role of form-related explicit information. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 35, 519–544. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Wong, W. (2004a). The nature of processing instruction. In B. VanPatten (Ed.), Processing instruction: Theory, research, and commentary (pp. 33–63). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2004b). Processing instruction in French: The roles of explicit information and structured input. In B. VanPatten (Ed.), Processing instruction: Theory, research, and commentary (pp. 187–200). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2010). Exploring the effects of discourse-level structured input activities with French causative. In A. G. Benati & J. F. Lee (Eds.), Processing instruction and discourse (pp. 198–216). London, UK: Continuum Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2015). Input, input processing, and output: A study with discourse-level input and the French causative. IRAL, 53, 181–202. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2018). Input vs intake. In H. Nassaji (Ed.), TESOL Encyclopedia of English language teaching. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley-Blackwell. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Wong, W., & Ito, K. (2018). The effects of processing instruction and traditional instruction on L2 online processing of the causative construction in French: An eye-tracking study. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 40, 241–268. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cited by (1)

Cited by one other publication

Borro, Ilaria & Silvia Scolaro
2021. Optimal and appropriate input in a second language: The potential of (modified-)elaborated input in distance and classroom learning. EuroAmerican Journal of Applied Linguistics and Languages 8:2 ► pp. 53 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 1 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.

Mobile Menu Logo with link to supplementary files background Layer 1 prag Twitter_Logo_Blue