Working Papers in Educational Linguistics, Spring 2002 (original) (raw)
Related papers
The Importance of Negative Evidence in Instructed Second Language Acquisition
In Dai Wei-yang, Leung Yiu-nam and Michael Jenks (Eds.). New Perspectives on English Instruction: Teaching, Learning, and Assessing, Crane Publishing., 2009
Recent pedagogical theories have dismissed the role of explicit grammar instruction as well as isolated presentation of metalinguisitics information. Instead they promote methods for integrating grammar in communicative language teaching, so that learners are able to notice the properties of target structures in a meaningful and natural context. Against such trends, this paper argues that acquisition of L2 transitivity requires explicit and pre-emptive, rather than implicit and reactive, negative evidence which specifically provides L2 learners contrastive knowledge between L1 and L2. L2 transitivity is a fairly complex issue because in order to handle this linguistic aspect, learners need to acquire not only accurate lexical semantics and syntax, but also pragmatic appropriateness. Unlike grammatical accuracy, which is straightforwardly related to a specific form, appropriateness (i.e., a correct form in the right place) is often related to the ability to distinguish subtle semantic differences of forms in context, a skill not easily acquired from casual observation of input; therefore it is implausible that learners could acquire such knowledge without being instructed. Their task would become more complex if L1 and L2 express the same real-world event differently (e.g., transitively or intransitively). Empirical data is provided from L2 English and L2 Japanese studies, which show that even advanced learners fail to notice the mismatch between their interpretation and the native interpretation of an identical syntactic structure. This suggests that instruction should not only provide positive evidence, but also explicitly present specific differences between L1 and L2: negative evidence.
Negative Evidence and Second Language Acquisition
2012
Negative evidence in second language acquisition (SLA) is a kind of language input that lets the learner know that a particular language form is not acceptable in accordance with the target like norms, and, hence, it gives some information about the learner's incorrect language and what is needed for correction (Gass, 2002, Mitchell and Miles,2004, ).The forms of negative evidence in second language classroom contexts may vary,ranging from the teacher's formal correction to the teacher's informal repeating/rephrasing of the learner's language. Despite the common consensus of the significance of language input for the acquisition of any language, there is a controversy about the benefit of negative evidence in SLA. This article explores the nature of negative evidence to which second language learners are exposed through interactional feedback in classroom contexts, and how this classroom interactional feedback (CIF) is related to secondlanguage acquisition. Hence, it reviews a few significant studies on negative evidence:some researchers (Mackey, 1999 ; Ellis & He, 1999; Ellis, 2006; Song & Suh, 2008 ) have examined the efficacy of overall classroom interaction in relation to modified input and modified output while others (Bigelow, Delmas, Hansen & Tarone , 2006; Ellis, 2006; Jayathilake,2009 ; Lyster, 1998; Lyster & Ranta, 1997 Mackey, Kanganas & Oliver , 2007; Nabei &Swain, 2002; Panova & Lyster, 2002 ; Sheen, 2007;) have explored the benefits of CIF in relation to various types and frequencies of CIF and learner responses to CIF. Accordingly, this paper, while reviewing and defining the key terms used in the literature, is a critique of the major findings of the existing research on the benefits of negative evidence for second language acquisition. Key Words: Input, Classroom Interactional Feedback(CIF), NegativeEvidence, University Students
Negative Evidence and its Impact on the Iranian EFL Young Learners' Performance in Grammar Tests
International Journal of English Language and Translation Studies, 2021
This study examined the effect of negative evidence on young learners' performance on grammar test. Gass (1997) asserted that negative evidence, also known as "negative feedback", offers the learner with information about the inaccuracy of a second language (L2) form and is often understood with the employment of corrective feedback (CF) in response to the learner's non-target like L2 utterances. Using a pretest-posttest and control group experimental design, the researcher examined the effect of negative evidence on young learners' performance on grammar test. The participants of the study were 40 Iranian elementary EFL learners randomly divided into two experimental and control groups and each group consisted of 20 learners. The experiment lasted 16 sessions, two sessions in a week. In both experimental group and control group grammatical points were explained in the same way. Both groups participated in three grammar quizzes after the completion of grammar teaching. The participants in experimental group received feedback about the errors they made in the quizzes. These feedbacks were both implicit and explicit. Those in the control group received no feedback. Finally, a test of grammar was conducted as the post test of study. The participants score on the pre-test and post-test was compared. Finally, the result of the analysis indicated that students' level of Grammar increased in experimental group who received negative evidence. Therefore, providing students with negative evidence is helpful in improving their grammar proficiency.
The role of negative and positive evidence in adult phonological learning
One of the great mysteries of language development is how children acquire language so efficiently while adults are never able to reach the same level of proficiency. Adding to this mystery is that child learners rarely receive negative evidence regarding the nature of the grammatical structure of their language, but adults are more likely to receive and use such evidence (in classes, corrections, etc.) (Baker, 1979). The present study tests the role of negative evidence in adult language learners, who were exposed to an artificial grammar characterized by round vowel harmony, a phonological process whereby vowels agree in the feature round. Participants were exposed to either positive evidence only (Positive Evidence Condition), or both negative and positive evidence (Positive Evidence Condition). In two experiments, participants in the Positive Evidence Condition outperformed participants in the Negative Evidence Condition, specifically for test items tat measured extension of learned items to novel items. These results suggest that negative evidence may hinder adult grammatical rule learning.
Journal of Child Language, 2003
We propose that parental reformulations of erroneous child utterances provide children with information about the locus of an error and hence the error itself. Since the meanings of the child utterance and the adult reformulation are the same although the forms are different, children infer that adults must be offering a correction. Analyses of longitudinal data from five children (three acquiring English and two acquiring French) show that (a) adults reformulate their children's erroneous utterances and do so significantly more often than they replay or repeat error-free utterances; (b) their rates of reformulation are similar across error-types (phonological, morphological, lexical, and syntactic); (c) they reformulate significantly more often to younger children, who make more errors, and these reformulations decrease significantly with age. Evidence that children attend to such reformulations comes from three measures: (a) their explicit repeats of such reformulations in their next turn; (b) their acknowledgements (yeah or uh-huh as a preface to their next turn, or a repeat of any new information included in the reformulation); and (c) their explicit rejections of reformulations where the adult has misunderstood them.
Linguistic Approaches to Bilingualism, 2022
When second language learners are faced with acquiring a grammar that is a subset of their native language grammar, direct positive evidence is unavailable. We question whether learners can instead use indirect positive evidence: evidence drawn from errors in the learner’s L1 made by native speakers of the learner’s L2. We examine if naïve English-speaking learners of Mandarin can determine from plural omission errors in Mandarin speakers’ English productions that Mandarin marks plural in a subset of conditions under which English does. Participants were exposed to indirect positive evidence via an English-medium dialogue where a native Mandarin-speaking interlocutor produced all contextually plural nouns as singulars. Subsequently, participants learnt 12 Mandarin-like nouns in singular contexts, after which their word learning was tested using both singular and plural pictures as prompts. 40% of participants correctly deduced that strings to which they had assigned singular interpretations were also appropriate in plural contexts. Follow-up questions revealed that they noticed the errors in the dialogue and used these to inform their understanding of plural marking in Mandarin. This result suggests that indirect positive evidence may be an effective tool for real language learners to acquire a grammar that is a subset of their native grammar.
Negative Evidence and Second Lanaguage Acqusition
Negative evidence in second language acquisition (SLA) is a kind of language input that lets the learner know that a particular language form is not acceptable in accordance with the target like norms, and, hence, it gives some information about the learner's incorrect language and what is needed for correction (Gass, 2002, Mitchell and Miles, 2004, ).The forms of negative evidence in second language classroom contexts may vary, ranging from the teacher's formal correction to the teacher's informal repeating/rephrasing of the learner's language. Despite the common consensus of the significance of language input for the acquisition of any language, there is a controversy about the benefit of negative evidence in SLA. This article explores the nature of negative evidence to which second language learners are exposed through interactional feedback in classroom contexts, and how this classroom interactional feedback (CIF) is related to second language acquisition. Hence, it reviews a few significant studies on negative evidence: some ) have explored the benefits of CIF in relation to various types and frequencies of CIF and learner responses to CIF. Accordingly, this paper, while reviewing and defining the key terms used in the literature, is a critique of the major findings of the existing research on the benefits of negative evidence for second language acquisition.
Tamkang Studies of Foreign Languages and Literatures, 2007
This paper will propose a methodological approach for the study of an aspect of writing development in children that is especially important for academic literacy: strategies of self-correction and revision. The study of these literacy skills in beginning writers should also help us better understand the role of metalinguistic awareness in all aspects of literacy development. In second language (L2) writing, researchers are presented with the additional opportunity to examine how metalinguistic awareness intervenes in the development of L2 learners' grammatical knowledge. Related issues are: the effects of corrective feedback (and, more generally, the role of negative evidence) and form-focused instruction. The proposed categories of analysis in the present study, ”text-level of correction attempt” and ”effectivity of attempt,” might be especially useful in studies of literacy cross-linguistically that in addition involve contrasting writing systems (e.g. alphabetic and morpho-s...