Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Click here to sign up for SAGE Journal Email Alerts today!

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Language Teaching Research
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Adams, R.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

L2 output, reformulation and noticing: implications for IL development

Rebecca Adams

Georgetown University, rja{at}georgetown.edu

This study is a replication and extension of Swain and Lapkin’s (in press) study of the developmental effects of learners noticing differences between their own and native speaker output. In their study, task repetition, noticing and participation in stimulated recalls were all factors that might have contributed to more targetlike usage in subsequent output. The current study separated the effects of each of these factors. Fifty-six L2 Spanish learners were randomly assigned to three groups: (1) Task repetition (participants repeated the tasks without additional treatment); (2) Noticing (participants repeated the task and compared their original output to NS reformulation); and (3) Noticing + SR (same as Noticing group with the addition of a stimulated recall session). Reformulations were traced throughout the learners’ output. Analysis of the data indicates that learners noticed differences between their own essays and the reformulated writing, and that there were quantitative differences in the output of participants from different treatment groups, with learners who participated in both noticing and stimulated recall incorporating significantly more targetlike forms in the post-treatment output than learners from the other groups.

Language Teaching Research, Vol. 7, No. 3, 347-376 (2003)
DOI: 10.1191/1362168803lr127oa


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Language Teaching ResearchHome page
O. Hanaoka
Output, noticing, and learning: An investigation into the role of spontaneous attention to form in a four-stage writing task
Language Teaching Research, October 1, 2007; 11(4): 459 - 479.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
Language Teaching ResearchHome page
Y. Watanabe and M. Swain
Effects of proficiency differences and patterns of pair interaction on second language learning: collaborative dialogue between adult ESL learners
Language Teaching Research, April 1, 2007; 11(2): 121 - 142.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
Applied LinguisticsHome page
A. Mackey
Feedback, Noticing and Instructed Second Language Learning
Applied Linguistics, September 1, 2006; 27(3): 405 - 430.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]