In this paper w e describe a n experiment in explicit instruction that compares traditional form-focused instruction a n d what w e call processing instruction. Traditional instruction involves explanation a n d output practice of a grammatical point. Processing instruction involves explanation a n d practice/experience processing input data, taking learner strategies in input processing a s t h e starting point for determining what explicit instruction should look like. Pretest a n d posttest measures involving both a sentence-level interpretation (comprehension) task a n d a sentence-level production task were submitted to a n analysis of variance. Results reveal significant gains in both comprehension a n d production for subjects w h o experienced processing instruction. For those experiencing traditional instruction, significant gains were m a d e in production only.

No abstract

The overall aim of this paper is to discuss how Talmy’s (1985, 2000) typological framework and Slobin’s (1996) thinking for speaking hypothesis can be fruitful for the investigation of how adult language learners come to express motion events in an L2. We report an empirical study which compares the expression of the semantic components of Path and Manner of motion by three groups of informants: (a) learners whose L1 and L2 belong to different typological patterns (Danish learners of Spanish; (b) learners whose L1 and L2 share the same typological pattern (Italian learners of Spanish); and (c) Spanish native speakers. Based on previous research on L1 acquisition, it was hypothesized that the Danish learner group would exhibit a higher degree of elaboration of the two semantic components than the other informant groups. The results of the study, however, show a limited role for the L1 thinking for speaking patterns in advanced second language acquisition.

No abstract

The present study extends previous research (VanPatten & Cadierno, 1993a, 1993b) and compares the relative effects of two types of instruction (i.e., traditional instruction and processing instruction) on the acquisition of Spanish past tense verb morphology. Traditional instruction involved grammar explanation and output‐based practice, while processing instruction involved grammar explanation and input‐based practice aimed at redirecting learners'strategies in processing input data. Sixty‐one classroom learners of Spanish were assigned to one of three instructional treatments: traditional instruction, processing instruction, and no instruction. Pretest and posttest measures consisting of one interpretation (comprehension) and one production task were submitted to a Multivariate Analysis of Variance. Results revealed significant gains in both comprehension and production for subjects in processing instruction, while subjects in traditional instruction had significant gains only in production.