1887
  1. Home
  2. Books
  3. Domains and Directions in the Development of TBLT
  4. Chapter

The Cognition Hypothesis, second language task demands, and the SSARC model of pedagogic task sequencing

image of The Cognition Hypothesis, second language task demands, and the SSARC model of pedagogic task sequencing

This chapter first summarises the basic pedagogic claim of the Cognition Hypothesis, that the cognitive demands of tasks be sequenced from simple to complex for learners, and describes a theoretically motivated model for syllabus designers and teachers to follow in planning and implementing such task sequences. This is followed by a description of the Triadic Componential Framework of task characteristics, which makes distinctions between task complexity, task conditions, and task difficulty. Next, I discuss the extent to which individual differences in cognitive and affective factors may mediate the effects of task complexity and task conditions on learning, interaction, and language production, and I argue for the need to research the interactions between task complexity/condition and task difficulty. The chapter concludes by identifying some points of contrast between the claims of the Cognition Hypothesis and Peter Skehan`s Trade-Off Hypothesis, and the differences in their intended scope of application to pedagogy.

  • Affiliations: 1: Aoyama Gakuin University

References

  1. Achard, M
    (2008) Teaching construal: Cognitive pedagogical grammar. In P. Robinson & N. Ellis (Eds.), Handbook of cognitive linguistics and second language acquisition (pp.431–455). London: Routledge.
     [Google Scholar]
  2. Achard, M. & Niemeier, S
    (Eds.) (2004) Cognitive linguistics, second language acquisition and foreign language teaching. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. doi: 10.1515/9783110199857
     https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110199857 [Google Scholar]
  3. Ackerman, P
    (2003) Aptitude complexes and trait complexes. Educational Psychologist, 38, 85–93. doi: 10.1207/S15326985EP3802_3
     https://doi.org/10.1207/S15326985EP3802_3 [Google Scholar]
  4. Altman, H
    (Ed.) (1972) Individualizing the foreign language classroom. Rowley, MA: Newbury House.
     [Google Scholar]
  5. Andersen, R
    (1984) The one-to-one principle of interlanguage construction. Language Learning, 34, 77–95. doi: 10.1111/j.1467‑1770.1984.tb00353.x
     https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-1770.1984.tb00353.x [Google Scholar]
  6. Andersen, R. & Shirai, Y
    (1996) The primacy of aspect in first and second language acquisition - The pidgin-creole connection. In W. Ritchie & T. Bhatia (Eds.), Handbook of second language acquisition (pp.527–570). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  7. Astington, J. , & Baird, J
    (Eds.) (2005) Why language matters for theory of mind. Oxford: Oxford University Press. doi: 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195159912.001.0001
     https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195159912.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  8. Bandura, A
    (1997) Self-efficacy: The exercise of control.New York, NY: W.H. Freeman & Co.
     [Google Scholar]
  9. Baralt, M
    (2013) The impact of cognitive complexity on feedback efficacy during online versus face to face interactive tasks. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 35, 689–726. doi: 10.1017/S0272263113000429
     https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263113000429 [Google Scholar]
  10. Baralt, M. , Gilabert, R. , & Robinson, P
    (2014a) (Eds.), Task sequencing and instructed second language learning.London: Bloomsbury Academic.
     [Google Scholar]
  11. (2014b) An introduction to theory and research in task sequencing and instructed language learning. In M. Baralt , R. Gilabert , & P. Robinson (Eds.), Task sequencing and instructed second language learning (pp.1–34). London: Bloomsbury Academic.
     [Google Scholar]
  12. Bardovi-Harlig, K
    (2007) One functional approach to second language acquisition: The concept-oriented approach. In B. VanPatten & J. Williams (Eds.), Theories in second language acquisition (pp.57–76). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
     [Google Scholar]
  13. Bartsch, K. & Wellman, H
    (1995) Children talk about the mind. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  14. Behrens, H
    (2001) Cognitive-conceptual development and the acquisition of grammatical morphemes: The development of time concepts and verb tense. In M. Bowerman & S. Levinson (Eds.), Language acquisition and conceptual development (pp.450–474). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi: 10.1017/CBO9780511620669.017
     https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511620669.017 [Google Scholar]
  15. Berman, R
    (2004) Between emergence and mastery: The long developmental route of language acquisition. In R. Berman (Ed.), Language development across childhood and adolescence (pp.9–35). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/tilar.3.05ber
     https://doi.org/10.1075/tilar.3.05ber [Google Scholar]
  16. Berman, R. , & Slobin, D
    (Eds.) (1994) Relating events in narrative: A crosslinguistic developmental study. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
     [Google Scholar]
  17. Bialystok, E
    (1994) Analysis and control in the development of second language proficiency. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 16, 157–168. doi: 10.1017/S0272263100012857
     https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263100012857 [Google Scholar]
  18. Bowerman, M. & Levinson, S
    (Eds.) (2001) Language acquisition and conceptual development. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi: 10.1017/CBO9780511620669
     https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511620669 [Google Scholar]
  19. Brambor, T. , Clark, W. & Golder, M
    (2006) Understanding interaction models: Improving empirical analyses. Political Analysis, 14, 63–82. doi: 10.1093/pan/mpi014
     https://doi.org/10.1093/pan/mpi014 [Google Scholar]
  20. Bylund, E
    (2011) Language-specific patterns in event conceptualization: Insights from bilingualism. In A. Pavlenko (Ed.), Thinking and speaking in two languages (pp.108–142). Bristol: Multilingual Matters.
     [Google Scholar]
  21. Cadierno, T. & Robinson, P
    (2009) Language typology, task complexity and the development of L2 lexicalization patterns for describing motion events. Annual Review of Cognitive Linguistics, 6, 245–276. doi: 10.1075/arcl.7.10cad
     https://doi.org/10.1075/arcl.7.10cad [Google Scholar]
  22. Candlin, C
    (1984) Syllabus design as a critical process. In C. Brumfit (Ed.), General English syllabus design (pp.29–46). Oxford: Pergamon.
     [Google Scholar]
  23. Carassa, A. , Aprigliano, A. & Geminiani, G
    (2000) Describers and explorers: A method for investigating cognitive maps. In S. O’Nuallain (Ed.), Spatial cognition (pp.33–43). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/aicr.26.05car
     https://doi.org/10.1075/aicr.26.05car [Google Scholar]
  24. Carroll, J
    (1993) Human cognitive abilities: A survey of factor-analytic studies. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi: 10.1017/CBO9780511571312
     https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511571312 [Google Scholar]
  25. Carroll, J. & Sapon, S
    (1959) Modern Language Aptitude Test. Washington, DC: Second Language Testing Incorporated.
     [Google Scholar]
  26. Collis, J. & Messick, S
    (Eds.) (2001) Intelligence and personality: Bridging the gap in theory and measurement. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
     [Google Scholar]
  27. Cornell, E. , Heth, D. & Alberts, D
    (1994) Place recognition and way finding by children and adults. Memory and Cognition, 22, 633–643. doi: 10.3758/BF03209249
     https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03209249 [Google Scholar]
  28. Costa, P. & McCrae, R
    (1985) The NEO Personality Inventory Manual.Odessa, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources.
     [Google Scholar]
  29. Cowan, N
    (2005) Working memory capacity. New York, NY: Psychology Press. doi: 10.4324/9780203342398
     https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203342398 [Google Scholar]
  30. Craik, F. & Lockhart, R
    (1972) Levels of processing: A framework for memory research. Journal of Verbal learning and Verbal Behavior, 11, 671–684. doi: 10.1016/S0022‑5371(72)80001‑X
     https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-5371(72)80001-X [Google Scholar]
  31. Crombie, W
    (1985) Process and relation in discourse and language learning. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  32. Cronbach, L
    (1975) Beyond the two disciplines of scientific psychology. American Psychologist, 30, 116–127. doi: 10.1037/h0076829
     https://doi.org/10.1037/h0076829 [Google Scholar]
  33. Cronbach, L. & Snow, R
    (1977) Aptitudes and instructional methods. New York, NY: Irvington.
     [Google Scholar]
  34. de Bot, K. , Lowie, W. & Verspoor, M
    (2007) A dynamic systems theory of second language acquisition. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 10, 7–21. doi: 10.1017/S1366728906002732
     https://doi.org/10.1017/S1366728906002732 [Google Scholar]
  35. Deary, I
    (2000) Looking down on human intelligence: From psychometrics to the brain. Oxford: Oxford University Press. doi: 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198524175.001.0001
     https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198524175.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  36. Deissel, H
    (2004) The acquisition of complex sentences. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi: 10.1017/CBO9780511486531
     https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511486531 [Google Scholar]
  37. DeKeyser, R
    (2001) Automaticity and automatization. In P. Robinson (Ed.), Cognition and second language instruction (pp.125–151). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi: 10.1017/CBO9781139524780.007
     https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139524780.007 [Google Scholar]
  38. Dornyei, Z
    (2002) The motivational basis of language learning tasks. In P. Robinson (Ed.), Individual differences and instructed language learning (pp.137–158). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/lllt.2.10dor
     https://doi.org/10.1075/lllt.2.10dor [Google Scholar]
  39. (2005) The psychology of the language learner. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
     [Google Scholar]
  40. Doughty, C
    (2001) Cognitive underpinnings of focus on form. In P. Robinson (Ed.), Cognition and second language instruction (pp.206–257). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi: 10.1017/CBO9781139524780.010
     https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139524780.010 [Google Scholar]
  41. Doughty, C. & Williams, J
    (1998) Pedagogical choices in focus on form. In C. Doughty & J. Williams (Eds.), Focus on form in classroom second language acquisition (pp.197–262). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  42. Ehret, B. , Gray, W. & Kirschenbaum, R
    (2000) Contending with complexity: Developing and using a scaled world in applied cognitive research. Human Factors, 2, 8–23. doi: 10.1518/001872000779656606
     https://doi.org/10.1518/001872000779656606 [Google Scholar]
  43. Eisenstein, M
    (Ed.) (1989) The dynamic interlanguage. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. doi: 10.1007/978‑1‑4899‑0900‑8
     https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4899-0900-8 [Google Scholar]
  44. Ellis, N
    (1998) Emergentism, connectionism and second language learning. Language Learning, 48, 631–664. doi: 10.1111/0023‑8333.00063
     https://doi.org/10.1111/0023-8333.00063 [Google Scholar]
  45. (2003) Constructions, chunking, and connectionism: The emergence of second language structure. In C. Doughty & M. Long (Eds.), The handbook of second language acquisition (pp.63–103). Oxford: Blackwell. doi: 10.1002/9780470756492.ch4
     https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470756492.ch4 [Google Scholar]
  46. Ellis, N. & Larsen-Freeman, D
    (2006) Language emergence: Implications for Applied Linguistics—Introduction to the special issue. Applied Linguistics, 27, 558–589. doi: 10.1093/applin/aml028
     https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/aml028 [Google Scholar]
  47. Ellis, N. & Robinson, P
    (2008) An introduction to Cognitive Linguistics and Second Language Acquisition. In P. Robinson & N. Ellis (Eds.), Handbook of cognitive linguistics and second language acquisition (pp.3–24) London: Routledge.
     [Google Scholar]
  48. Ellis, R
    (1993) The structural syllabus and second language acquisition. TESOL Quarterly, 27, 91–113. doi: 10.2307/3586953
     https://doi.org/10.2307/3586953 [Google Scholar]
  49. (2003) Task-based language teaching and learning. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  50. (Ed.) (2005) Planning and second language task performance. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/lllt.11
     https://doi.org/10.1075/lllt.11 [Google Scholar]
  51. Filopovic, L
    (2007) Talking about motion—A crosslinguistic investigation of lexicalization patterns. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/slcs.91
     https://doi.org/10.1075/slcs.91 [Google Scholar]
  52. Fine, S
    (1974) Functional job analysis: An approach to technology for manpower planning. Personnel Journal, 11, 813–818.
     [Google Scholar]
  53. Fleishman, E. , & Quaintenance, M
    (1984) Taxonomies of human performance: The description of human tasks. New York, NY: Academic Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  54. Fries, C
    (1952) The structure of English. New York, NY: Harcourt Brace and Company.
     [Google Scholar]
  55. Furnham, E. & Ribchester, T
    (1995) Tolerance of Ambiguity: A review of the concept, its measurement and applications. Current Psychology, 14, 179–199. doi: 10.1007/BF02686907
     https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02686907 [Google Scholar]
  56. Gagne, R. , Wager, W. , Golas, K. & Keller, J
    (2005) Principles of instructional design, (5th ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Thomson.
     [Google Scholar]
  57. Garcia Mayo, M.P
    (Ed.) (2007) Investigating tasks in formal language learning. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
     [Google Scholar]
  58. Gilabert, R
    (2005) Task complexity and L2 oral narrative production. Unpublished Ph.D dissertation. University of Barcelona, Department of Applied Linguistics, Spain.
     [Google Scholar]
  59. (2007) The simultaneous manipulation along the planning time and +/- Here-and-Now dimensions: Effects on oral L2 production. In M.P. Garcia Mayo (Ed.), Investigating tasks in formal language learning (pp.44–68). Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
     [Google Scholar]
  60. Gilabert, R. , Baron, J. & Llanes, M
    (2009) Manipulating task complexity across task types and its influence on learners. International Review of Applied Linguistics, 47, 367–395. doi: 10.1515/iral.2009.016
     https://doi.org/10.1515/iral.2009.016 [Google Scholar]
  61. Goldman, A
    (2006) Simulating minds. Oxford: Oxford University Press. doi: 10.1093/0195138929.001.0001
     https://doi.org/10.1093/0195138929.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  62. Grange, J. & Houghten, G
    (Eds.) (2014) Task switching and cognitive control. Oxford: Oxford University Press. doi: 10.1093/acprof:osobl/9780199921959.001.0001
     https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:osobl/9780199921959.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  63. Han, Z. , & Cadierno, T
    (Eds.) (2010) Linguistic relativity in SLA: Thinking for speaking. Bristol: Multilingual Matters.
     [Google Scholar]
  64. Han, Z. & Odlin, T
    (Eds.) (2006) Studies of fossilization in second language acquisition. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
     [Google Scholar]
  65. Healy, A. & Kole, J
    (2013) Rehearsal. In P. Robinson (Ed.), The Routledge encyclopedia of second language acquisition (pp.553–555). New York, NY: Routledge.
     [Google Scholar]
  66. Hoffman, R. & Militello, L
    (2009) Perspectives on cognitive task analysis. New York, NY: Psychology Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  67. Hollnagel, E
    (2003) (Ed.), Handbook of cognitive task design. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. doi: 10.1201/9781410607775
     https://doi.org/10.1201/9781410607775 [Google Scholar]
  68. Housen, A. , Kuiken, F. , & Vedder, I
    (Eds.) (2012) Dimensions of L2 performance and proficiency: Complexity, accuracy and fluency in SLA. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/lllt.32
     https://doi.org/10.1075/lllt.32 [Google Scholar]
  69. Huebner, T
    (1983) A longtitudinal analysis of the acquisition of English. Ann Arbor, MI: Karoma.
     [Google Scholar]
  70. Hulstijn, J
    (2001) Intentional and incidental second language vocabulary learning: A reappraisal of rehearsal, elaboration and automaticity. In P. Robinson (Ed.), Cognition and second language instruction (pp.349–381). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  71. (2003) Incidental and intentional learning. In C. Doughty & M. Long (Eds.), Handbook of second language acquisition (pp.631–678). Oxford: Blackwell.
     [Google Scholar]
  72. Ishikawa, T
    (2007) The effects of increasing task complexity along the -/+ Here-and-Now dimension. In M.P. Garcia Mayo (Ed.), Investigating Tasks in Formal Language Learning (pp.136–156). Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
     [Google Scholar]
  73. (2008) Task complexity, reasoning demands and second language speech production. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation. Aoyama Gakuin University, Department of English, Tokyo, Japan.
     [Google Scholar]
  74. Kim, Y
    (2009) The effects of task complexity on learner-learner interaction. System, 37, 254–268. doi: 10.1016/j.system.2009.02.003
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2009.02.003 [Google Scholar]
  75. Kim, Y. & Tracy-Ventura, N
    (2011) Task complexity, language anxiety and the development of the simple past. In P. Robinson (Ed.), Second language task complexity: Researching the Cognition Hypothesis of language learning and performance (pp.39–60). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/tblt.2.18ch11
     https://doi.org/10.1075/tblt.2.18ch11 [Google Scholar]
  76. Kuiken, F. , & Vedder, I
    (2007) Cognitive task complexity and linguistic performance in French L2 writing. In M. Garcia Mayo (Ed.), Investigating tasks in formal language learning (pp.117–135). Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
     [Google Scholar]
  77. Langdon, R. , Coltheart, M. , Ward, P. & Catts, S
    (2002) Disturbed communication in schizophrenia: The role of pragmatics and poor theory-of-mind. Psychological Medicine, 32, 1273–1284. doi: 10.1017/S0033291702006396
     https://doi.org/10.1017/S0033291702006396 [Google Scholar]
  78. Larsen-Freeman, D. & Cameron, L
    (2007) Complex systems and applied linguistics.Oxford: Oxford University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  79. Larsen-Freeman, D. & Long, M
    (1991). An introduction to second language acquisition research.London: Longman.
     [Google Scholar]
  80. Lee, E. & Rescorla, L
    (2002) The use of psychological state terms by late talkers at age 3. Applied Psycholinguistics, 23, 623–641. doi: 10.1017/S014271640200406X
     https://doi.org/10.1017/S014271640200406X [Google Scholar]
  81. Lesgold, A
    (2001) The nature and methods of learning by doing. American Psychologist, 56, 964–973. doi: 10.1037/0003‑066X.56.11.964
     https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.56.11.964 [Google Scholar]
  82. Levkina, M. & Gilabert, R
    (2014) Task sequencing in the L2 development of spatial expressions. In M. Baralt , R. Gilabert & P. Robinson (Eds.), Task sequencing and instructed second language learning. (pp.37–71). London: Bloomsbury Academic.
     [Google Scholar]
  83. Li, Ping & Shirai, Y
    (2000) The acquisition of lexical and grammatical aspect. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. doi: 10.1515/9783110800715
     https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110800715 [Google Scholar]
  84. Lohman, D
    (2000) Complex information processing and intelligence. In R. Sternberg (Ed.), Handbook of Intelligence (pp.285–340). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi: 10.1017/CBO9780511807947.015
     https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511807947.015 [Google Scholar]
  85. Lohman, H. & Tomasello, M
    (2003) The role of language in the development of false belief Understanding: A training study. Child Development, 74, 1130–1144. doi: 10.1111/1467‑8624.00597
     https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8624.00597 [Google Scholar]
  86. Long, M
    (1985) A role for instruction in second language acquisition: Task-based language teaching. In K. Hyltenstam & M. Pienemann (Eds.), Modeling and assessing second language acquisition (pp.77–99). Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
     [Google Scholar]
  87. (1991) Focus on form: A design feature in language teaching methodology. In K. de Bot , R. Ginsberg & C. Kramsch (Eds.), Foreign language research in cross-cultural perspectives (pp.39–52). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/sibil.2.07lon
     https://doi.org/10.1075/sibil.2.07lon [Google Scholar]
  88. (2003) Stabilization and fossilization in interlanguage. In C. Doughty & M. Long (Eds.), Handbook of second language acquisition (pp.487–536). Oxford: Blackwell. doi: 10.1002/9780470756492.ch16
     https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470756492.ch16 [Google Scholar]
  89. (2006) Problems in SLA. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
     [Google Scholar]
  90. (2014) Second language acquisition and task-based language teaching. Oxford: Blackwell.
     [Google Scholar]
  91. Long, M. & Crookes, G
    (1992) Three approaches to task-based syllabus design. TESOL Quarterly, 26, 27–56. doi: 10.2307/3587368
     https://doi.org/10.2307/3587368 [Google Scholar]
  92. Long, M. & Robinson, P
    (1998) Focus on form: Theory, research, and practice. In C. Doughty & J. Williams (Eds.), Focus on form in classroom second language acquisition (pp.15–41). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  93. MacIntyre, P
    (2002) Motivation, anxiety and emotion in second language acquisition. In P. Robinson (Ed.), Individual differences and instructed language learning (pp.45–64). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/lllt.2.05mac
     https://doi.org/10.1075/lllt.2.05mac [Google Scholar]
  94. Mackey, A
    (2007) (Ed.), Conversational interaction in SLA. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  95. Mackey, A. , Philp, J. , Egi, T. , Fujii, A. & Tatsumi, T
    (2002) Individual differences in working memory, noticing of interactional feedback and L2 development. In P. Robinson (Ed.), Individual differences and instructed language learning (pp.181–210). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/lllt.2.12mac
     https://doi.org/10.1075/lllt.2.12mac [Google Scholar]
  96. Malicka, A
    (2014) The role of task sequencing in monologic oral production. In M. Baralt , R. Gilabert & P. Robinson (Eds.), Task sequencing and instructed second language learning. (pp.71–93). London: Bloomsbury Academic.
     [Google Scholar]
  97. Malle, B
    (2004) How the mind explains behavior. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  98. Martin, K. & Ellis, N
    (2012) The roles of phonological STM and Working Memory in L2 grammar and vocabulary learning. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 34, 379–414. doi: 10.1017/S0272263112000125
     https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263112000125 [Google Scholar]
  99. Matthews, G. & Deary, I
    (1998) Personality traits.Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  100. McCormick, E
    (1979) Job Analysis: Methods and Applications. New York, NY: AMACOM Publishing.
     [Google Scholar]
  101. Meisel, J
    (1987) Reference to past events and actions in the development of natural second language acquisition. In C. Pfaff (Ed.), First and second language acquisition processes (pp.206–224). Cambridge, MA: Newbury House.
     [Google Scholar]
  102. Michel, M
    (2013) Effects of task complexity on the use of conjunctions in oral L2 task performance. Modern Language Journal, 97, 178–195. doi: 10.1111/j.1540‑4781.2013.01431.x
     https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4781.2013.01431.x [Google Scholar]
  103. Michel, M.C. , Kuiken, F. & Vedder, I
    (2007) The influence of complexity in monologic versus dialogic tasks in Dutch L2. International Review of Applied Linguistics, 45 (3), 241–259. doi: 10.1515/iral.2007.011
     https://doi.org/10.1515/iral.2007.011 [Google Scholar]
  104. Monsell, S
    (2003) Task switching. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 7 (3), 134–140. doi: 10.1016/S1364‑6613(03)00028‑7
     https://doi.org/10.1016/S1364-6613(03)00028-7 [Google Scholar]
  105. Munoz, C
    (Ed) (2006) Age and the rate of second language acquisition. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
     [Google Scholar]
  106. Niwa, Y
    (2000) Reasoning demands of L2 tasks and L2 narrative production: Effects of individual differences in working memory, intelligence and aptitude. Unpublished M.A. dissertation. Aoyama Gakuin University, Department of English, Tokyo, Japan.
     [Google Scholar]
  107. Nixon, S
    (2005) Mental state verb production and sentential complements in four-year-old children. First Language, 25, 19–39. doi: 10.1177/0142723705046898
     https://doi.org/10.1177/0142723705046898 [Google Scholar]
  108. North, R. & Riley, V
    (1989) WINDEX: A predictive model of operator workload. In G. McMillan , D. Beevis , E. Sala , M. Strub , R. Sutton & L. Van Breda (Eds.), Applications of human performance models to systems design (pp.81–89). New York, NY: Plenum. doi: 10.1007/978‑1‑4757‑9244‑7_6
     https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4757-9244-7_6 [Google Scholar]
  109. Nuevo, A
    (2006) Task complexity and interaction: L2 learning opportunities and interaction. Unpublished Ph.D dissertation. Georgetown University, Washington DC.
     [Google Scholar]
  110. Nyborg, H
    (Ed.) (2003) The scientific study of general intelligence. New York, NY: Pergamon.
     [Google Scholar]
  111. Odlin, T
    (2008) Conceptual transfer and meaning extensions. In P. Robinson & N. Ellis (Eds.), Handbook of Cognitive Linguistics and Second Language Acquisition (pp.306–340). London: Routledge.
     [Google Scholar]
  112. Ortega, L
    (2009) Sequences and processes in language learning. In M. Long & C. Doughty (Eds.), Handbook of language teaching (pp.81–107). Oxford: Blackwell. doi: 10.1002/9781444315783.ch6
     https://doi.org/10.1002/9781444315783.ch6 [Google Scholar]
  113. Ortega, L. & Byrnes, H
    (Eds.) (2008) The longtitudinal study of advanced L2 capacities. New York, NY: Routledge.
     [Google Scholar]
  114. Pang, F. & Skehan, P
    (2014) Self-reported planning behaviour and second language performance. in narrative retellings. In P. Skehan (Ed.), Processing perspective on task performance. (pp.95–124). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/tblt.5.04pan
     https://doi.org/10.1075/tblt.5.04pan [Google Scholar]
  115. Parks, D. & Boueck, G
    (1989) Workload prediction, diagnosis and continuing challenges. In G. McMillan , D. Beevis , E. Sala , M. Strub , R. Sutton & L. Van Breda (Eds.), Applications of human performance models to systems design (pp.47–64). New York, NY: Plenum. doi: 10.1007/978‑1‑4757‑9244‑7_4
     https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4757-9244-7_4 [Google Scholar]
  116. Pavlenko, A
    (Ed.) (2011) Thinking and speaking in two languages. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
     [Google Scholar]
  117. Pavlenko, A. & Jarvis, S
    (2007) Crosslinguistic influence in language and cognition. New York, NY: Routledge.
     [Google Scholar]
  118. Perdue, C
    (Ed.) (1993a) Adult language acquisition: Cross-linguistic perspectives, Vol. 1: Field methods.Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  119. (Ed.) (1993b) Adult language acquisition: Cross-linguistic perspectives, Vol. 2: The results.Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  120. Pica, T. , Kanagy, R. & Falodun, J
    (1993) Choosing and using communication tasks for second language teaching and research. In G. Crookes & S. Gass (Eds.), Tasks in language learning: Integrating theory and practice (pp.9–34). Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
     [Google Scholar]
  121. Plough, I. & Gass, S
    (1993) Interlocutor and task familiarity: Effects on interactional structure. In G. Crookes & S. Gass (Eds.), Tasks and language learning: Integrating theory and practice (95–122). Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
     [Google Scholar]
  122. Prabhu, N.S
    (1987) Second language pedagogy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  123. Putz, M. , Niemeier, S. & Dirven, R
    (2001) (Eds.)Applied Cognitive Linguistics I1: Language pedagogy. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
     [Google Scholar]
  124. Révész, A
    (2009) Task complexity, focus on form and second language development. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 31, 437–470. doi: 10.1017/S0272263109090366
     https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263109090366 [Google Scholar]
  125. (2011) Task complexity, focus on L2 constructions, and individual differences: A classroom-based study. Modern Language Journal, 95, 162–181. doi: 10.1111/j.1540‑4781.2011.01241.x
     https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4781.2011.01241.x [Google Scholar]
  126. Rezaei, S. & Kashani, A
    (2011) Task complexity, language proficiency and task-based writing. Saarbrucken: VDM Verlag Dr. Muller.
     [Google Scholar]
  127. Riegeluth, C
    (Ed.) (1999a) Instructional-design theories and models: A new paradigm of instructional theory, Vol. II. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
     [Google Scholar]
  128. (1999b) The elaboration theory: Guidance for scope and sequence. In C. Riegeluth (Ed.), Instructional-design theories and models: A new paradigm of instructional theory, Vol. II (pp.425–453). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
     [Google Scholar]
  129. Riegeluth, C. & Carr-Chelman, A
    (2009) Understanding instructional theory. In C. Riegeluth & A. Carr-Chelman (Eds.), Instructional-design theories and models: Building a common knowledge base, Vol. III (pp.3–26). New York, NY: Routledge.
     [Google Scholar]
  130. Ringbom, H
    (2006) Cross-linguistic similarity in foreign language learning. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
     [Google Scholar]
  131. Robinson, P
    (1995) Task complexity and second language narrative discourse. Language Learning, 45, 99–140. doi: 10.1111/j.1467‑1770.1995.tb00964.x
     https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-1770.1995.tb00964.x [Google Scholar]
  132. (1996) Connecting tasks, cognition and syllabus design. In P. Robinson (Ed.), Task complexity and second language syllabus design: Data-based Studies and Speculations (pp. 1–16). Brisbane: University of Queensland Working Papers in Applied Linguistics.
     [Google Scholar]
  133. (1997) Generalizability and automaticity of second language learning under implicit, incidental, enhanced and rule-search conditions. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 19, 223–247. doi: 10.1017/S0272263197002052
     https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263197002052 [Google Scholar]
  134. (2001a) Task complexity, task difficulty, and task production: Exploring interactions in a componential framework. Applied Linguistics, 22, 27–57. doi: 10.1093/applin/22.1.27
     https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/22.1.27 [Google Scholar]
  135. (2001b) Task complexity, cognitive resources, and syllabus design: A triadic framework for examining task influences on SLA. In P. Robinson (Ed.), Cognition and second language instruction (pp.287–318). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi: 10.1017/CBO9781139524780.012
     https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139524780.012 [Google Scholar]
  136. (2001c) Individual differences, cognitive abilities, aptitude complexes, and learning conditions in SLA. Second Language Research, 17, 368–392. doi: 10.1191/026765801681495877
     https://doi.org/10.1191/026765801681495877 [Google Scholar]
  137. (2002a) Learning conditions, aptitude complexes and SLA: A framework for research and pedagogy. In P. Robinson (Ed.), Individual differences and instructed language learning (pp.113–133). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/lllt.2.08rob
     https://doi.org/10.1075/lllt.2.08rob [Google Scholar]
  138. (2002b) Individual differences in intelligence, aptitude and working memory during adult incidental second language learning: A replication and extension of Reber, Walkenfeld and Hernstadt (1991). In P. Robinson (Ed.), Individual differences and instructed language learning (pp.211–266). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/lllt.2.13rob
     https://doi.org/10.1075/lllt.2.13rob [Google Scholar]
  139. (2002c) (Ed.), Individual differences and instructed language learning. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/lllt.2
     https://doi.org/10.1075/lllt.2 [Google Scholar]
  140. (2003a) Attention and memory during SLA. In C. Doughty & M. Long (Eds.), Handbook of second language acquisition (pp.631–678). Oxford: Blackwell. doi: 10.1002/9780470756492.ch19
     https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470756492.ch19 [Google Scholar]
  141. (2003b) The Cognition Hypothesis, task design and adult task-based language learning. Second Language Studies, 21, (2), 45–107. www.hawaii.edu/sls/uhwpesl/21(2)/Robinson.pdf
     [Google Scholar]
  142. (2005a) Cognitive complexity and task sequencing: A review of studies in a Componential Framework for second language task design. International Review of Applied Linguistics, 43,1–32. doi: 10.1515/iral.2005.43.1.1
     https://doi.org/10.1515/iral.2005.43.1.1 [Google Scholar]
  143. (2005b) Aptitude and second language acquisition. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 25, 45–73. doi: 10.1017/S0267190505000036
     https://doi.org/10.1017/S0267190505000036 [Google Scholar]
  144. (2005c) Cognitive abilities, chunk-strength, and frequency effects in implicit artificial grammar and incidental L2 learning: Replications of Reber, Walkenfeld and Hernstadt (1991) and Knowlton and Squire (1996) and their relevance for SLA. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 27, 235–268. doi: 10.1017/S0272263105050126
     https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263105050126 [Google Scholar]
  145. (2007a) Criteria for classifying and sequencing pedagogic tasks. In M.P. Garcia Mayo (Ed.), Investigating tasks in formal language learning (pp.7–27). Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
     [Google Scholar]
  146. (2007b) Aptitudes, abilities, contexts and practice. In R. DeKeyser (Ed.), Practice in second language learning: Perspectives from applied linguistics and cognitive psychology (pp.256–286). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  147. (2007c) Task complexity, theory of mind, and intentional reasoning: Effects on speech production, interaction, uptake and perceptions of task difficulty. International Review of Applied Linguistics, 45, 193–214.
     [Google Scholar]
  148. (2009) Syllabus design. In M. Long & C. Doughty (Eds.), Handbook of language teaching (pp.294–310). Oxford: Blackwell. doi: 10.1002/9781444315783.ch17
     https://doi.org/10.1002/9781444315783.ch17 [Google Scholar]
  149. (2011a) (Ed.), Second language task complexity: Researching the Cognition Hypothesis of language learning and performance. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/tblt.2
     https://doi.org/10.1075/tblt.2 [Google Scholar]
  150. (2011b) Second language task complexity, the Cogntition Hypothesis, language learning, and performance. In P. Robinson (Ed.), Second language task complexity: Researching the Cognition Hypothesis of language learning and performance (pp.3–37). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/tblt.2.05ch1
     https://doi.org/10.1075/tblt.2.05ch1 [Google Scholar]
  151. (2011c) Task-based language learning: A review of issues. Language Learning, 61 (S1), 1–36. doi: 10.1111/j.1467‑9922.2011.00641.x
     https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9922.2011.00641.x [Google Scholar]
  152. (2012a) Individual differences, aptitude complexes, SLA processes, and aptitude test development. In M. Pawlak (Ed.), New perspectives on individual differences in second language learning and teaching (pp.57–77). New York, NY: Springer. doi: 10.1007/978‑3‑642‑20850‑8_4
     https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-20850-8_4 [Google Scholar]
  153. (2012b) Abilities to learn: Cognitive abilities. In N. Seel (Ed.), Encyclopedia of the sciences of learning (pp.17–20). New York, NY: Springer.
     [Google Scholar]
  154. (2013) Aptitude in second language acquisition. In C. Chapelle (Ed.), The encyclopedia of applied linguistics (pp. 129–133). Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.
     [Google Scholar]
  155. Robinson, P. , Cadierno, T. & Shirai, Y
    (2009) Time and motion: Measuring the effects of the conceptual demands of tasks on second language production. Applied Linguistics, 28, 533–554. doi: 10.1093/applin/amp046
     https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amp046 [Google Scholar]
  156. Robinson, P. & Ellis, N
    (Eds.) (2008a) Handbook of cognitive linguistics and second language acquisition. New York, NY: Routledge.
     [Google Scholar]
  157. (2008b) Cognitive Linguistics, Second Language Acquisition and instruction—Issues for research. In P. Robinson & N. Ellis (Eds.), Handbook of cognitive linguistics and second language acquisition (pp.489–546). New York, NY: Routledge.
     [Google Scholar]
  158. Robinson, P. & Gilabert, R
    (2007) (Eds.), Task complexity, the Cognition Hypothesis and second language instruction.[Special issue] International Review of Applied Linguistics, 45(3). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
     [Google Scholar]
  159. Robinson, P. & Ha, M
    (1993) Instance theory and second language rule learning under explicit conditions. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 15, 413–438. doi: 10.1017/S0272263100012365
     https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263100012365 [Google Scholar]
  160. Roeser, R. , Shavelson, R. , Kupermintz, H. & Lau, S
    (2002) The concept of aptitude and multidimensional validity revisited. Educational Assessment, 8 (2), 191–205. doi: 10.1207/S15326977EA0802_06
     https://doi.org/10.1207/S15326977EA0802_06 [Google Scholar]
  161. Sachs, J
    (1983) Talking about the there and then: The emergence of displaced reference in parent-child discourse. In K. Nelson (Ed.), Children`s language, Vol. 4 (pp.1–28). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
     [Google Scholar]
  162. Samuda, V. & Bygate, M
    (2008) Tasks in second language learning.Houndmills: Palgrave MacMillan.
     [Google Scholar]
  163. Sato, C
    (1990) The syntax of conversation in interlanguage development. Tübingen: Gunter Narr.
     [Google Scholar]
  164. Schank, R
    (1999) Dynamic memory revisited. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi: 10.1017/CBO9780511527920
     https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511527920 [Google Scholar]
  165. Schank, R. & Abelson, R
    (1977) Scripts, plans, goals and understanding. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
     [Google Scholar]
  166. Schank, R. , Berman, T. & Macpherson, K
    (1999) Learning by doing. In C. Reigeluth (Ed.), Instructional-design theories and models: A new paradigm of instructional theory, Vol. II, (pp.161–182). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
     [Google Scholar]
  167. Schneider, W. , Schumann-Hengsteler, R. , & Sodian, B
    (2005) (Eds.), Young children`s cognitive development: Interrelationships among executive functioning, working memory, verbal ability, and theory of mind. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
     [Google Scholar]
  168. Schmidt, R
    (2001) Attention. In P. Robinson (Ed.), Cognition and second language instruction (pp.3–32). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi: 10.1017/CBO9781139524780.003
     https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139524780.003 [Google Scholar]
  169. Schmiedtova, B. , von Stutterheim, C. , & Carroll, M
    (2011) Language specific patterns in event construal of advanced second language speakers. In A. Pavlenko (Ed.), Thinking and speaking in two languages (pp.66–107). Bristol: Multilingual Matters.
     [Google Scholar]
  170. Seel, N
    (2012) Schema development. In N. Seel (Ed.), Encyclopedia of the sciences of learning (pp.2936–2939). New York, NY: Springer. doi: 10.1007/978‑1‑4419‑1428‑6_365
     https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4419-1428-6_365 [Google Scholar]
  171. Segalowitz, N
    (2003) Automaticity and second languages. In C. Doughty & M.H. Long (Eds.), The Handbook of Second Language Acquisition, pp.382–408. Oxford: Blackwell. doi: 10.1002/9780470756492.ch13
     https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470756492.ch13 [Google Scholar]
  172. (2013) Automaticity. In P. Robinson (Ed.), The Routledge encyclopedia of second language acquisition (pp.53–57). New York, NY: Routledge.
     [Google Scholar]
  173. Sheen, Y
    (2008) Recasts, language anxiety, modified output and L2 learning. Language Learning, 58, 833–874. doi: 10.1111/j.1467‑9922.2008.00480.x
     https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9922.2008.00480.x [Google Scholar]
  174. Shirai, Y
    (1999) The prototype hypothesis of tense aspect acquisition. In P. Robinson (Ed.), Representation and process: Proceedings of the 3rd Pacific Second Language Research Forum, Vol 1. (pp. 151–164). Tokyo: PACSLRF.
     [Google Scholar]
  175. Shuell, T
    (1980) Learning theory, instructional theory and adaptation. In R. Snow , P. Federico & W. Montague (Eds.), Aptitude, learning and instruction, Vol. 2: Cognitive process analyses of learning and problem solving (pp.277–302). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
     [Google Scholar]
  176. Skehan, P
    (1989) Individual differences in second language acquisition. London: Arnold.
     [Google Scholar]
  177. (1998) A cognitive approach to language learning. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  178. (2002) Theorizing and updating aptitude. In P. Robinson (Ed.), Individual differences and instructed language learning (pp.69–94). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/lllt.2.06ske
     https://doi.org/10.1075/lllt.2.06ske [Google Scholar]
  179. (2012) Language aptitude. In S. Gass & A. Mackey (Eds.), The Routledge handbook of second language acquisition (pp.381–395). New York, NY: Routledge.
     [Google Scholar]
  180. (2014a) (Ed.), Processing perspectives on task performance. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/tblt.5
     https://doi.org/10.1075/tblt.5 [Google Scholar]
  181. (2014b) The context for researching a processing perspective on task performance. In P. Skehan (Ed.), Processing perspectives on task performance. (pp.1–26). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/tblt.5.01ske
     https://doi.org/10.1075/tblt.5.01ske [Google Scholar]
  182. (2014c) Limited attentional capacity, second language performance and task-based pedagogy. In P. Skehan (Ed.), Processing perspectives on task performance. (pp.211–262). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/tblt.5.08ske
     https://doi.org/10.1075/tblt.5.08ske [Google Scholar]
  183. Skehan, P. & Foster, P
    (2001) Cognition and tasks. In P. Robinson (Ed.), Cognition and second language instruction (pp.183–205). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi: 10.1017/CBO9781139524780.009
     https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139524780.009 [Google Scholar]
  184. Slobin, D
    (1993) Adult language acquisition: A view from child language study. In C. Perdue (Ed.), Adult language acquisition: Crosslinguistic perspectives, Vol. 2: The results (pp.239–252). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  185. (1996) From 'thought and language' to 'thinking for speaking'. In J. Gumperz & S. Levinson (Eds.), Rethinking linguistic relativity (pp.70–96). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  186. (2003) Language and thought online: Some cognitive consequences of linguistic relativity. In D. Gentner & S. Goldin Meadow (Eds.), Language in mind: Advances in the investigation of language and thought (pp.157–191). Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  187. Snow, R
    (1987) Aptitude complexes. In R. Snow & M. Farr (Eds.), Aptitude, learning and instruction, Vol. 3: Conative and affective process analysis, (pp.11–34). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
     [Google Scholar]
  188. (1994) Abilities in academic tasks. In R. Sternberg & R. Wagner (Eds.), Mind in context: Interactionist perspectives on human intelligence, (pp.3–37). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  189. Snow, R. & Farr, M
    (1987) (Eds.), Aptitude, learning and instruction Vol. 3: Conative and affective process analysis. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
     [Google Scholar]
  190. Snow, R. , Federico, P. & Montague, W
    (1980) (Eds.), Aptitude, learning and instructionVols 1 & 2. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
     [Google Scholar]
  191. Snow, R. , Kyllonen, P. & Marshalek, B
    (1984) The topography of ability and learning correlations. In R. Sternberg (Ed.), Advances in the psychology of human intelligence (pp.47–103). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
     [Google Scholar]
  192. Sokal, R
    (1974) Classification: Purposes, principles, progress, prospects. Science, 185, 1115–1123. doi: 10.1126/science.185.4157.1115
     https://doi.org/10.1126/science.185.4157.1115 [Google Scholar]
  193. Spilsbury, G. , Stankov, L. & Roberts, R
    (1990) The effects of a task’s difficulty on its correlation with intelligence. Personality and Individual Differences, 11, 1069–1077. doi: 10.1016/0191‑8869(90)90135‑E
     https://doi.org/10.1016/0191-8869(90)90135-E [Google Scholar]
  194. Stanovitch, K
    (2000) Who is rational? Studies of individual differences in reasoning. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
     [Google Scholar]
  195. Talmy, L
    (2000) Towards a cognitive semantics, Vol. 1: Concept structuring systems.Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  196. (2008) Aspects of attention in language. In P. Robinson & N. Ellis (Eds.), Handbook of cognitive linguistics and second language acquisition (pp. 27–38) London: Routledge.
     [Google Scholar]
  197. Trebits, A
    (2015) Sources of individual differences in L2 narrative production: The contribution of input, processing, and output anxiety. Applied Linguistics, 36. first published onlineApril 8, 2014 doi: 10.1093/applin/amu006
     https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amu006 [Google Scholar]
  198. Trim, J. & North, B
    (Eds.) (2001) Common European Framework of Reference for Languages: Learning, teaching and assessment. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  199. Tyler, A
    (2008) Cognitive linguistics and second language instruction. In P. Robinson & N. Ellis (Eds.), Handbook of cognitive linguistics and second language acquisition (pp.456–488) London: Routledge.
     [Google Scholar]
  200. (2012) Cognitive linguistics and second language learning. New York, NY: Routledge.
     [Google Scholar]
  201. Tyler, A. & Evans, V
    (2003) The semantics of English prepositions: Spatial scenes, embodied meaning and cognition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi: 10.1017/CBO9780511486517
     https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511486517 [Google Scholar]
  202. Van den Branden, K
    (2006) (Ed.)Task-based language education. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi: 10.1017/CBO9780511667282
     https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511667282 [Google Scholar]
  203. Van Ek, J
    (1976) The threshold level for modern language learning in schools. London: Longman.
     [Google Scholar]
  204. Van Geert, P
    (2008) The Dynamic Systems approach in the study of L1 and L2 acquisition: An introduction. Modern Language Journal, 92, 179–199. doi: 10.1111/j.1540‑4781.2008.00713.x
     https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4781.2008.00713.x [Google Scholar]
  205. von Stutterheim, C. , Flecken, M. & Carroll, M
    (2013) Introduction: Conceptualizing in a second language. International Review of Applied Linguistics, 51, 77–85.
     [Google Scholar]
  206. von Stutterheim, C. & Klein, W
    (1987) A concept-oriented approach to second language studies. In C. Pfaff (Ed.), First and second language acquisition processes (pp.191–205). Rowley, MA: Newbury House.
     [Google Scholar]
  207. von Stutterheim, C. & Nuese, R
    (2003) Processes of conceptualisation in language production: Language specific perspectives and event construal. Linguistics, 41, 851–888.
     [Google Scholar]
  208. Wen, Z. , Mota, M. & McNeill, A
    (Eds.) (2015) Working Memory in second language acquisition and processing. Bristol: Multilingual Matters.
     [Google Scholar]
  209. Wilkins, D
    (1976) Notional syllabuses. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  210. Williams, J
    (1999) Attention, memory and inductive learning. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 21, 1–48. doi: 10.1017/S0272263199001011
     https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263199001011 [Google Scholar]
  211. Williams, R
    (1977) A behavioral typology of educational objectives for the cognitive domain. Educational Technology, 17, 418–431.
     [Google Scholar]
  212. Willis, D
    (1990) The lexical syllabus: A new approach to language teaching. London: Collins.
     [Google Scholar]
  213. Wood, R
    (1986) Task complexity: Definition of the construct. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 37, 60–82. doi: 10.1016/0749‑5978(86)90044‑0
     https://doi.org/10.1016/0749-5978(86)90044-0 [Google Scholar]
  214. Yule, G. & MacDonald, M
    (1990) Resolving referential conflicts in L2 interaction: The effect of proficiency and interactive role. Language Learning, 40, 539–556. doi: 10.1111/j.1467‑1770.1990.tb00605.x
     https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-1770.1990.tb00605.x [Google Scholar]

References

  1. Achard, M
    (2008) Teaching construal: Cognitive pedagogical grammar. In P. Robinson & N. Ellis (Eds.), Handbook of cognitive linguistics and second language acquisition (pp.431–455). London: Routledge.
     [Google Scholar]
  2. Achard, M. & Niemeier, S
    (Eds.) (2004) Cognitive linguistics, second language acquisition and foreign language teaching. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. doi: 10.1515/9783110199857
     https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110199857 [Google Scholar]
  3. Ackerman, P
    (2003) Aptitude complexes and trait complexes. Educational Psychologist, 38, 85–93. doi: 10.1207/S15326985EP3802_3
     https://doi.org/10.1207/S15326985EP3802_3 [Google Scholar]
  4. Altman, H
    (Ed.) (1972) Individualizing the foreign language classroom. Rowley, MA: Newbury House.
     [Google Scholar]
  5. Andersen, R
    (1984) The one-to-one principle of interlanguage construction. Language Learning, 34, 77–95. doi: 10.1111/j.1467‑1770.1984.tb00353.x
     https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-1770.1984.tb00353.x [Google Scholar]
  6. Andersen, R. & Shirai, Y
    (1996) The primacy of aspect in first and second language acquisition - The pidgin-creole connection. In W. Ritchie & T. Bhatia (Eds.), Handbook of second language acquisition (pp.527–570). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  7. Astington, J. , & Baird, J
    (Eds.) (2005) Why language matters for theory of mind. Oxford: Oxford University Press. doi: 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195159912.001.0001
     https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195159912.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  8. Bandura, A
    (1997) Self-efficacy: The exercise of control.New York, NY: W.H. Freeman & Co.
     [Google Scholar]
  9. Baralt, M
    (2013) The impact of cognitive complexity on feedback efficacy during online versus face to face interactive tasks. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 35, 689–726. doi: 10.1017/S0272263113000429
     https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263113000429 [Google Scholar]
  10. Baralt, M. , Gilabert, R. , & Robinson, P
    (2014a) (Eds.), Task sequencing and instructed second language learning.London: Bloomsbury Academic.
     [Google Scholar]
  11. (2014b) An introduction to theory and research in task sequencing and instructed language learning. In M. Baralt , R. Gilabert , & P. Robinson (Eds.), Task sequencing and instructed second language learning (pp.1–34). London: Bloomsbury Academic.
     [Google Scholar]
  12. Bardovi-Harlig, K
    (2007) One functional approach to second language acquisition: The concept-oriented approach. In B. VanPatten & J. Williams (Eds.), Theories in second language acquisition (pp.57–76). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
     [Google Scholar]
  13. Bartsch, K. & Wellman, H
    (1995) Children talk about the mind. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  14. Behrens, H
    (2001) Cognitive-conceptual development and the acquisition of grammatical morphemes: The development of time concepts and verb tense. In M. Bowerman & S. Levinson (Eds.), Language acquisition and conceptual development (pp.450–474). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi: 10.1017/CBO9780511620669.017
     https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511620669.017 [Google Scholar]
  15. Berman, R
    (2004) Between emergence and mastery: The long developmental route of language acquisition. In R. Berman (Ed.), Language development across childhood and adolescence (pp.9–35). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/tilar.3.05ber
     https://doi.org/10.1075/tilar.3.05ber [Google Scholar]
  16. Berman, R. , & Slobin, D
    (Eds.) (1994) Relating events in narrative: A crosslinguistic developmental study. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
     [Google Scholar]
  17. Bialystok, E
    (1994) Analysis and control in the development of second language proficiency. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 16, 157–168. doi: 10.1017/S0272263100012857
     https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263100012857 [Google Scholar]
  18. Bowerman, M. & Levinson, S
    (Eds.) (2001) Language acquisition and conceptual development. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi: 10.1017/CBO9780511620669
     https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511620669 [Google Scholar]
  19. Brambor, T. , Clark, W. & Golder, M
    (2006) Understanding interaction models: Improving empirical analyses. Political Analysis, 14, 63–82. doi: 10.1093/pan/mpi014
     https://doi.org/10.1093/pan/mpi014 [Google Scholar]
  20. Bylund, E
    (2011) Language-specific patterns in event conceptualization: Insights from bilingualism. In A. Pavlenko (Ed.), Thinking and speaking in two languages (pp.108–142). Bristol: Multilingual Matters.
     [Google Scholar]
  21. Cadierno, T. & Robinson, P
    (2009) Language typology, task complexity and the development of L2 lexicalization patterns for describing motion events. Annual Review of Cognitive Linguistics, 6, 245–276. doi: 10.1075/arcl.7.10cad
     https://doi.org/10.1075/arcl.7.10cad [Google Scholar]
  22. Candlin, C
    (1984) Syllabus design as a critical process. In C. Brumfit (Ed.), General English syllabus design (pp.29–46). Oxford: Pergamon.
     [Google Scholar]
  23. Carassa, A. , Aprigliano, A. & Geminiani, G
    (2000) Describers and explorers: A method for investigating cognitive maps. In S. O’Nuallain (Ed.), Spatial cognition (pp.33–43). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/aicr.26.05car
     https://doi.org/10.1075/aicr.26.05car [Google Scholar]
  24. Carroll, J
    (1993) Human cognitive abilities: A survey of factor-analytic studies. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi: 10.1017/CBO9780511571312
     https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511571312 [Google Scholar]
  25. Carroll, J. & Sapon, S
    (1959) Modern Language Aptitude Test. Washington, DC: Second Language Testing Incorporated.
     [Google Scholar]
  26. Collis, J. & Messick, S
    (Eds.) (2001) Intelligence and personality: Bridging the gap in theory and measurement. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
     [Google Scholar]
  27. Cornell, E. , Heth, D. & Alberts, D
    (1994) Place recognition and way finding by children and adults. Memory and Cognition, 22, 633–643. doi: 10.3758/BF03209249
     https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03209249 [Google Scholar]
  28. Costa, P. & McCrae, R
    (1985) The NEO Personality Inventory Manual.Odessa, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources.
     [Google Scholar]
  29. Cowan, N
    (2005) Working memory capacity. New York, NY: Psychology Press. doi: 10.4324/9780203342398
     https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203342398 [Google Scholar]
  30. Craik, F. & Lockhart, R
    (1972) Levels of processing: A framework for memory research. Journal of Verbal learning and Verbal Behavior, 11, 671–684. doi: 10.1016/S0022‑5371(72)80001‑X
     https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-5371(72)80001-X [Google Scholar]
  31. Crombie, W
    (1985) Process and relation in discourse and language learning. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  32. Cronbach, L
    (1975) Beyond the two disciplines of scientific psychology. American Psychologist, 30, 116–127. doi: 10.1037/h0076829
     https://doi.org/10.1037/h0076829 [Google Scholar]
  33. Cronbach, L. & Snow, R
    (1977) Aptitudes and instructional methods. New York, NY: Irvington.
     [Google Scholar]
  34. de Bot, K. , Lowie, W. & Verspoor, M
    (2007) A dynamic systems theory of second language acquisition. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 10, 7–21. doi: 10.1017/S1366728906002732
     https://doi.org/10.1017/S1366728906002732 [Google Scholar]
  35. Deary, I
    (2000) Looking down on human intelligence: From psychometrics to the brain. Oxford: Oxford University Press. doi: 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198524175.001.0001
     https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198524175.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  36. Deissel, H
    (2004) The acquisition of complex sentences. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi: 10.1017/CBO9780511486531
     https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511486531 [Google Scholar]
  37. DeKeyser, R
    (2001) Automaticity and automatization. In P. Robinson (Ed.), Cognition and second language instruction (pp.125–151). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi: 10.1017/CBO9781139524780.007
     https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139524780.007 [Google Scholar]
  38. Dornyei, Z
    (2002) The motivational basis of language learning tasks. In P. Robinson (Ed.), Individual differences and instructed language learning (pp.137–158). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/lllt.2.10dor
     https://doi.org/10.1075/lllt.2.10dor [Google Scholar]
  39. (2005) The psychology of the language learner. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
     [Google Scholar]
  40. Doughty, C
    (2001) Cognitive underpinnings of focus on form. In P. Robinson (Ed.), Cognition and second language instruction (pp.206–257). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi: 10.1017/CBO9781139524780.010
     https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139524780.010 [Google Scholar]
  41. Doughty, C. & Williams, J
    (1998) Pedagogical choices in focus on form. In C. Doughty & J. Williams (Eds.), Focus on form in classroom second language acquisition (pp.197–262). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  42. Ehret, B. , Gray, W. & Kirschenbaum, R
    (2000) Contending with complexity: Developing and using a scaled world in applied cognitive research. Human Factors, 2, 8–23. doi: 10.1518/001872000779656606
     https://doi.org/10.1518/001872000779656606 [Google Scholar]
  43. Eisenstein, M
    (Ed.) (1989) The dynamic interlanguage. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. doi: 10.1007/978‑1‑4899‑0900‑8
     https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4899-0900-8 [Google Scholar]
  44. Ellis, N
    (1998) Emergentism, connectionism and second language learning. Language Learning, 48, 631–664. doi: 10.1111/0023‑8333.00063
     https://doi.org/10.1111/0023-8333.00063 [Google Scholar]
  45. (2003) Constructions, chunking, and connectionism: The emergence of second language structure. In C. Doughty & M. Long (Eds.), The handbook of second language acquisition (pp.63–103). Oxford: Blackwell. doi: 10.1002/9780470756492.ch4
     https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470756492.ch4 [Google Scholar]
  46. Ellis, N. & Larsen-Freeman, D
    (2006) Language emergence: Implications for Applied Linguistics—Introduction to the special issue. Applied Linguistics, 27, 558–589. doi: 10.1093/applin/aml028
     https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/aml028 [Google Scholar]
  47. Ellis, N. & Robinson, P
    (2008) An introduction to Cognitive Linguistics and Second Language Acquisition. In P. Robinson & N. Ellis (Eds.), Handbook of cognitive linguistics and second language acquisition (pp.3–24) London: Routledge.
     [Google Scholar]
  48. Ellis, R
    (1993) The structural syllabus and second language acquisition. TESOL Quarterly, 27, 91–113. doi: 10.2307/3586953
     https://doi.org/10.2307/3586953 [Google Scholar]
  49. (2003) Task-based language teaching and learning. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  50. (Ed.) (2005) Planning and second language task performance. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/lllt.11
     https://doi.org/10.1075/lllt.11 [Google Scholar]
  51. Filopovic, L
    (2007) Talking about motion—A crosslinguistic investigation of lexicalization patterns. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/slcs.91
     https://doi.org/10.1075/slcs.91 [Google Scholar]
  52. Fine, S
    (1974) Functional job analysis: An approach to technology for manpower planning. Personnel Journal, 11, 813–818.
     [Google Scholar]
  53. Fleishman, E. , & Quaintenance, M
    (1984) Taxonomies of human performance: The description of human tasks. New York, NY: Academic Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  54. Fries, C
    (1952) The structure of English. New York, NY: Harcourt Brace and Company.
     [Google Scholar]
  55. Furnham, E. & Ribchester, T
    (1995) Tolerance of Ambiguity: A review of the concept, its measurement and applications. Current Psychology, 14, 179–199. doi: 10.1007/BF02686907
     https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02686907 [Google Scholar]
  56. Gagne, R. , Wager, W. , Golas, K. & Keller, J
    (2005) Principles of instructional design, (5th ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Thomson.
     [Google Scholar]
  57. Garcia Mayo, M.P
    (Ed.) (2007) Investigating tasks in formal language learning. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
     [Google Scholar]
  58. Gilabert, R
    (2005) Task complexity and L2 oral narrative production. Unpublished Ph.D dissertation. University of Barcelona, Department of Applied Linguistics, Spain.
     [Google Scholar]
  59. (2007) The simultaneous manipulation along the planning time and +/- Here-and-Now dimensions: Effects on oral L2 production. In M.P. Garcia Mayo (Ed.), Investigating tasks in formal language learning (pp.44–68). Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
     [Google Scholar]
  60. Gilabert, R. , Baron, J. & Llanes, M
    (2009) Manipulating task complexity across task types and its influence on learners. International Review of Applied Linguistics, 47, 367–395. doi: 10.1515/iral.2009.016
     https://doi.org/10.1515/iral.2009.016 [Google Scholar]
  61. Goldman, A
    (2006) Simulating minds. Oxford: Oxford University Press. doi: 10.1093/0195138929.001.0001
     https://doi.org/10.1093/0195138929.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  62. Grange, J. & Houghten, G
    (Eds.) (2014) Task switching and cognitive control. Oxford: Oxford University Press. doi: 10.1093/acprof:osobl/9780199921959.001.0001
     https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:osobl/9780199921959.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  63. Han, Z. , & Cadierno, T
    (Eds.) (2010) Linguistic relativity in SLA: Thinking for speaking. Bristol: Multilingual Matters.
     [Google Scholar]
  64. Han, Z. & Odlin, T
    (Eds.) (2006) Studies of fossilization in second language acquisition. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
     [Google Scholar]
  65. Healy, A. & Kole, J
    (2013) Rehearsal. In P. Robinson (Ed.), The Routledge encyclopedia of second language acquisition (pp.553–555). New York, NY: Routledge.
     [Google Scholar]
  66. Hoffman, R. & Militello, L
    (2009) Perspectives on cognitive task analysis. New York, NY: Psychology Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  67. Hollnagel, E
    (2003) (Ed.), Handbook of cognitive task design. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. doi: 10.1201/9781410607775
     https://doi.org/10.1201/9781410607775 [Google Scholar]
  68. Housen, A. , Kuiken, F. , & Vedder, I
    (Eds.) (2012) Dimensions of L2 performance and proficiency: Complexity, accuracy and fluency in SLA. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/lllt.32
     https://doi.org/10.1075/lllt.32 [Google Scholar]
  69. Huebner, T
    (1983) A longtitudinal analysis of the acquisition of English. Ann Arbor, MI: Karoma.
     [Google Scholar]
  70. Hulstijn, J
    (2001) Intentional and incidental second language vocabulary learning: A reappraisal of rehearsal, elaboration and automaticity. In P. Robinson (Ed.), Cognition and second language instruction (pp.349–381). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  71. (2003) Incidental and intentional learning. In C. Doughty & M. Long (Eds.), Handbook of second language acquisition (pp.631–678). Oxford: Blackwell.
     [Google Scholar]
  72. Ishikawa, T
    (2007) The effects of increasing task complexity along the -/+ Here-and-Now dimension. In M.P. Garcia Mayo (Ed.), Investigating Tasks in Formal Language Learning (pp.136–156). Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
     [Google Scholar]
  73. (2008) Task complexity, reasoning demands and second language speech production. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation. Aoyama Gakuin University, Department of English, Tokyo, Japan.
     [Google Scholar]
  74. Kim, Y
    (2009) The effects of task complexity on learner-learner interaction. System, 37, 254–268. doi: 10.1016/j.system.2009.02.003
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2009.02.003 [Google Scholar]
  75. Kim, Y. & Tracy-Ventura, N
    (2011) Task complexity, language anxiety and the development of the simple past. In P. Robinson (Ed.), Second language task complexity: Researching the Cognition Hypothesis of language learning and performance (pp.39–60). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/tblt.2.18ch11
     https://doi.org/10.1075/tblt.2.18ch11 [Google Scholar]
  76. Kuiken, F. , & Vedder, I
    (2007) Cognitive task complexity and linguistic performance in French L2 writing. In M. Garcia Mayo (Ed.), Investigating tasks in formal language learning (pp.117–135). Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
     [Google Scholar]
  77. Langdon, R. , Coltheart, M. , Ward, P. & Catts, S
    (2002) Disturbed communication in schizophrenia: The role of pragmatics and poor theory-of-mind. Psychological Medicine, 32, 1273–1284. doi: 10.1017/S0033291702006396
     https://doi.org/10.1017/S0033291702006396 [Google Scholar]
  78. Larsen-Freeman, D. & Cameron, L
    (2007) Complex systems and applied linguistics.Oxford: Oxford University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  79. Larsen-Freeman, D. & Long, M
    (1991). An introduction to second language acquisition research.London: Longman.
     [Google Scholar]
  80. Lee, E. & Rescorla, L
    (2002) The use of psychological state terms by late talkers at age 3. Applied Psycholinguistics, 23, 623–641. doi: 10.1017/S014271640200406X
     https://doi.org/10.1017/S014271640200406X [Google Scholar]
  81. Lesgold, A
    (2001) The nature and methods of learning by doing. American Psychologist, 56, 964–973. doi: 10.1037/0003‑066X.56.11.964
     https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.56.11.964 [Google Scholar]
  82. Levkina, M. & Gilabert, R
    (2014) Task sequencing in the L2 development of spatial expressions. In M. Baralt , R. Gilabert & P. Robinson (Eds.), Task sequencing and instructed second language learning. (pp.37–71). London: Bloomsbury Academic.
     [Google Scholar]
  83. Li, Ping & Shirai, Y
    (2000) The acquisition of lexical and grammatical aspect. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. doi: 10.1515/9783110800715
     https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110800715 [Google Scholar]
  84. Lohman, D
    (2000) Complex information processing and intelligence. In R. Sternberg (Ed.), Handbook of Intelligence (pp.285–340). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi: 10.1017/CBO9780511807947.015
     https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511807947.015 [Google Scholar]
  85. Lohman, H. & Tomasello, M
    (2003) The role of language in the development of false belief Understanding: A training study. Child Development, 74, 1130–1144. doi: 10.1111/1467‑8624.00597
     https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8624.00597 [Google Scholar]
  86. Long, M
    (1985) A role for instruction in second language acquisition: Task-based language teaching. In K. Hyltenstam & M. Pienemann (Eds.), Modeling and assessing second language acquisition (pp.77–99). Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
     [Google Scholar]
  87. (1991) Focus on form: A design feature in language teaching methodology. In K. de Bot , R. Ginsberg & C. Kramsch (Eds.), Foreign language research in cross-cultural perspectives (pp.39–52). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/sibil.2.07lon
     https://doi.org/10.1075/sibil.2.07lon [Google Scholar]
  88. (2003) Stabilization and fossilization in interlanguage. In C. Doughty & M. Long (Eds.), Handbook of second language acquisition (pp.487–536). Oxford: Blackwell. doi: 10.1002/9780470756492.ch16
     https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470756492.ch16 [Google Scholar]
  89. (2006) Problems in SLA. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
     [Google Scholar]
  90. (2014) Second language acquisition and task-based language teaching. Oxford: Blackwell.
     [Google Scholar]
  91. Long, M. & Crookes, G
    (1992) Three approaches to task-based syllabus design. TESOL Quarterly, 26, 27–56. doi: 10.2307/3587368
     https://doi.org/10.2307/3587368 [Google Scholar]
  92. Long, M. & Robinson, P
    (1998) Focus on form: Theory, research, and practice. In C. Doughty & J. Williams (Eds.), Focus on form in classroom second language acquisition (pp.15–41). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  93. MacIntyre, P
    (2002) Motivation, anxiety and emotion in second language acquisition. In P. Robinson (Ed.), Individual differences and instructed language learning (pp.45–64). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/lllt.2.05mac
     https://doi.org/10.1075/lllt.2.05mac [Google Scholar]
  94. Mackey, A
    (2007) (Ed.), Conversational interaction in SLA. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  95. Mackey, A. , Philp, J. , Egi, T. , Fujii, A. & Tatsumi, T
    (2002) Individual differences in working memory, noticing of interactional feedback and L2 development. In P. Robinson (Ed.), Individual differences and instructed language learning (pp.181–210). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/lllt.2.12mac
     https://doi.org/10.1075/lllt.2.12mac [Google Scholar]
  96. Malicka, A
    (2014) The role of task sequencing in monologic oral production. In M. Baralt , R. Gilabert & P. Robinson (Eds.), Task sequencing and instructed second language learning. (pp.71–93). London: Bloomsbury Academic.
     [Google Scholar]
  97. Malle, B
    (2004) How the mind explains behavior. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  98. Martin, K. & Ellis, N
    (2012) The roles of phonological STM and Working Memory in L2 grammar and vocabulary learning. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 34, 379–414. doi: 10.1017/S0272263112000125
     https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263112000125 [Google Scholar]
  99. Matthews, G. & Deary, I
    (1998) Personality traits.Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  100. McCormick, E
    (1979) Job Analysis: Methods and Applications. New York, NY: AMACOM Publishing.
     [Google Scholar]
  101. Meisel, J
    (1987) Reference to past events and actions in the development of natural second language acquisition. In C. Pfaff (Ed.), First and second language acquisition processes (pp.206–224). Cambridge, MA: Newbury House.
     [Google Scholar]
  102. Michel, M
    (2013) Effects of task complexity on the use of conjunctions in oral L2 task performance. Modern Language Journal, 97, 178–195. doi: 10.1111/j.1540‑4781.2013.01431.x
     https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4781.2013.01431.x [Google Scholar]
  103. Michel, M.C. , Kuiken, F. & Vedder, I
    (2007) The influence of complexity in monologic versus dialogic tasks in Dutch L2. International Review of Applied Linguistics, 45 (3), 241–259. doi: 10.1515/iral.2007.011
     https://doi.org/10.1515/iral.2007.011 [Google Scholar]
  104. Monsell, S
    (2003) Task switching. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 7 (3), 134–140. doi: 10.1016/S1364‑6613(03)00028‑7
     https://doi.org/10.1016/S1364-6613(03)00028-7 [Google Scholar]
  105. Munoz, C
    (Ed) (2006) Age and the rate of second language acquisition. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
     [Google Scholar]
  106. Niwa, Y
    (2000) Reasoning demands of L2 tasks and L2 narrative production: Effects of individual differences in working memory, intelligence and aptitude. Unpublished M.A. dissertation. Aoyama Gakuin University, Department of English, Tokyo, Japan.
     [Google Scholar]
  107. Nixon, S
    (2005) Mental state verb production and sentential complements in four-year-old children. First Language, 25, 19–39. doi: 10.1177/0142723705046898
     https://doi.org/10.1177/0142723705046898 [Google Scholar]
  108. North, R. & Riley, V
    (1989) WINDEX: A predictive model of operator workload. In G. McMillan , D. Beevis , E. Sala , M. Strub , R. Sutton & L. Van Breda (Eds.), Applications of human performance models to systems design (pp.81–89). New York, NY: Plenum. doi: 10.1007/978‑1‑4757‑9244‑7_6
     https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4757-9244-7_6 [Google Scholar]
  109. Nuevo, A
    (2006) Task complexity and interaction: L2 learning opportunities and interaction. Unpublished Ph.D dissertation. Georgetown University, Washington DC.
     [Google Scholar]
  110. Nyborg, H
    (Ed.) (2003) The scientific study of general intelligence. New York, NY: Pergamon.
     [Google Scholar]
  111. Odlin, T
    (2008) Conceptual transfer and meaning extensions. In P. Robinson & N. Ellis (Eds.), Handbook of Cognitive Linguistics and Second Language Acquisition (pp.306–340). London: Routledge.
     [Google Scholar]
  112. Ortega, L
    (2009) Sequences and processes in language learning. In M. Long & C. Doughty (Eds.), Handbook of language teaching (pp.81–107). Oxford: Blackwell. doi: 10.1002/9781444315783.ch6
     https://doi.org/10.1002/9781444315783.ch6 [Google Scholar]
  113. Ortega, L. & Byrnes, H
    (Eds.) (2008) The longtitudinal study of advanced L2 capacities. New York, NY: Routledge.
     [Google Scholar]
  114. Pang, F. & Skehan, P
    (2014) Self-reported planning behaviour and second language performance. in narrative retellings. In P. Skehan (Ed.), Processing perspective on task performance. (pp.95–124). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/tblt.5.04pan
     https://doi.org/10.1075/tblt.5.04pan [Google Scholar]
  115. Parks, D. & Boueck, G
    (1989) Workload prediction, diagnosis and continuing challenges. In G. McMillan , D. Beevis , E. Sala , M. Strub , R. Sutton & L. Van Breda (Eds.), Applications of human performance models to systems design (pp.47–64). New York, NY: Plenum. doi: 10.1007/978‑1‑4757‑9244‑7_4
     https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4757-9244-7_4 [Google Scholar]
  116. Pavlenko, A
    (Ed.) (2011) Thinking and speaking in two languages. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
     [Google Scholar]
  117. Pavlenko, A. & Jarvis, S
    (2007) Crosslinguistic influence in language and cognition. New York, NY: Routledge.
     [Google Scholar]
  118. Perdue, C
    (Ed.) (1993a) Adult language acquisition: Cross-linguistic perspectives, Vol. 1: Field methods.Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  119. (Ed.) (1993b) Adult language acquisition: Cross-linguistic perspectives, Vol. 2: The results.Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  120. Pica, T. , Kanagy, R. & Falodun, J
    (1993) Choosing and using communication tasks for second language teaching and research. In G. Crookes & S. Gass (Eds.), Tasks in language learning: Integrating theory and practice (pp.9–34). Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
     [Google Scholar]
  121. Plough, I. & Gass, S
    (1993) Interlocutor and task familiarity: Effects on interactional structure. In G. Crookes & S. Gass (Eds.), Tasks and language learning: Integrating theory and practice (95–122). Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
     [Google Scholar]
  122. Prabhu, N.S
    (1987) Second language pedagogy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  123. Putz, M. , Niemeier, S. & Dirven, R
    (2001) (Eds.)Applied Cognitive Linguistics I1: Language pedagogy. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
     [Google Scholar]
  124. Révész, A
    (2009) Task complexity, focus on form and second language development. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 31, 437–470. doi: 10.1017/S0272263109090366
     https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263109090366 [Google Scholar]
  125. (2011) Task complexity, focus on L2 constructions, and individual differences: A classroom-based study. Modern Language Journal, 95, 162–181. doi: 10.1111/j.1540‑4781.2011.01241.x
     https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4781.2011.01241.x [Google Scholar]
  126. Rezaei, S. & Kashani, A
    (2011) Task complexity, language proficiency and task-based writing. Saarbrucken: VDM Verlag Dr. Muller.
     [Google Scholar]
  127. Riegeluth, C
    (Ed.) (1999a) Instructional-design theories and models: A new paradigm of instructional theory, Vol. II. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
     [Google Scholar]
  128. (1999b) The elaboration theory: Guidance for scope and sequence. In C. Riegeluth (Ed.), Instructional-design theories and models: A new paradigm of instructional theory, Vol. II (pp.425–453). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
     [Google Scholar]
  129. Riegeluth, C. & Carr-Chelman, A
    (2009) Understanding instructional theory. In C. Riegeluth & A. Carr-Chelman (Eds.), Instructional-design theories and models: Building a common knowledge base, Vol. III (pp.3–26). New York, NY: Routledge.
     [Google Scholar]
  130. Ringbom, H
    (2006) Cross-linguistic similarity in foreign language learning. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
     [Google Scholar]
  131. Robinson, P
    (1995) Task complexity and second language narrative discourse. Language Learning, 45, 99–140. doi: 10.1111/j.1467‑1770.1995.tb00964.x
     https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-1770.1995.tb00964.x [Google Scholar]
  132. (1996) Connecting tasks, cognition and syllabus design. In P. Robinson (Ed.), Task complexity and second language syllabus design: Data-based Studies and Speculations (pp. 1–16). Brisbane: University of Queensland Working Papers in Applied Linguistics.
     [Google Scholar]
  133. (1997) Generalizability and automaticity of second language learning under implicit, incidental, enhanced and rule-search conditions. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 19, 223–247. doi: 10.1017/S0272263197002052
     https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263197002052 [Google Scholar]
  134. (2001a) Task complexity, task difficulty, and task production: Exploring interactions in a componential framework. Applied Linguistics, 22, 27–57. doi: 10.1093/applin/22.1.27
     https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/22.1.27 [Google Scholar]
  135. (2001b) Task complexity, cognitive resources, and syllabus design: A triadic framework for examining task influences on SLA. In P. Robinson (Ed.), Cognition and second language instruction (pp.287–318). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi: 10.1017/CBO9781139524780.012
     https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139524780.012 [Google Scholar]
  136. (2001c) Individual differences, cognitive abilities, aptitude complexes, and learning conditions in SLA. Second Language Research, 17, 368–392. doi: 10.1191/026765801681495877
     https://doi.org/10.1191/026765801681495877 [Google Scholar]
  137. (2002a) Learning conditions, aptitude complexes and SLA: A framework for research and pedagogy. In P. Robinson (Ed.), Individual differences and instructed language learning (pp.113–133). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/lllt.2.08rob
     https://doi.org/10.1075/lllt.2.08rob [Google Scholar]
  138. (2002b) Individual differences in intelligence, aptitude and working memory during adult incidental second language learning: A replication and extension of Reber, Walkenfeld and Hernstadt (1991). In P. Robinson (Ed.), Individual differences and instructed language learning (pp.211–266). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/lllt.2.13rob
     https://doi.org/10.1075/lllt.2.13rob [Google Scholar]
  139. (2002c) (Ed.), Individual differences and instructed language learning. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/lllt.2
     https://doi.org/10.1075/lllt.2 [Google Scholar]
  140. (2003a) Attention and memory during SLA. In C. Doughty & M. Long (Eds.), Handbook of second language acquisition (pp.631–678). Oxford: Blackwell. doi: 10.1002/9780470756492.ch19
     https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470756492.ch19 [Google Scholar]
  141. (2003b) The Cognition Hypothesis, task design and adult task-based language learning. Second Language Studies, 21, (2), 45–107. www.hawaii.edu/sls/uhwpesl/21(2)/Robinson.pdf
     [Google Scholar]
  142. (2005a) Cognitive complexity and task sequencing: A review of studies in a Componential Framework for second language task design. International Review of Applied Linguistics, 43,1–32. doi: 10.1515/iral.2005.43.1.1
     https://doi.org/10.1515/iral.2005.43.1.1 [Google Scholar]
  143. (2005b) Aptitude and second language acquisition. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 25, 45–73. doi: 10.1017/S0267190505000036
     https://doi.org/10.1017/S0267190505000036 [Google Scholar]
  144. (2005c) Cognitive abilities, chunk-strength, and frequency effects in implicit artificial grammar and incidental L2 learning: Replications of Reber, Walkenfeld and Hernstadt (1991) and Knowlton and Squire (1996) and their relevance for SLA. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 27, 235–268. doi: 10.1017/S0272263105050126
     https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263105050126 [Google Scholar]
  145. (2007a) Criteria for classifying and sequencing pedagogic tasks. In M.P. Garcia Mayo (Ed.), Investigating tasks in formal language learning (pp.7–27). Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
     [Google Scholar]
  146. (2007b) Aptitudes, abilities, contexts and practice. In R. DeKeyser (Ed.), Practice in second language learning: Perspectives from applied linguistics and cognitive psychology (pp.256–286). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  147. (2007c) Task complexity, theory of mind, and intentional reasoning: Effects on speech production, interaction, uptake and perceptions of task difficulty. International Review of Applied Linguistics, 45, 193–214.
     [Google Scholar]
  148. (2009) Syllabus design. In M. Long & C. Doughty (Eds.), Handbook of language teaching (pp.294–310). Oxford: Blackwell. doi: 10.1002/9781444315783.ch17
     https://doi.org/10.1002/9781444315783.ch17 [Google Scholar]
  149. (2011a) (Ed.), Second language task complexity: Researching the Cognition Hypothesis of language learning and performance. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/tblt.2
     https://doi.org/10.1075/tblt.2 [Google Scholar]
  150. (2011b) Second language task complexity, the Cogntition Hypothesis, language learning, and performance. In P. Robinson (Ed.), Second language task complexity: Researching the Cognition Hypothesis of language learning and performance (pp.3–37). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/tblt.2.05ch1
     https://doi.org/10.1075/tblt.2.05ch1 [Google Scholar]
  151. (2011c) Task-based language learning: A review of issues. Language Learning, 61 (S1), 1–36. doi: 10.1111/j.1467‑9922.2011.00641.x
     https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9922.2011.00641.x [Google Scholar]
  152. (2012a) Individual differences, aptitude complexes, SLA processes, and aptitude test development. In M. Pawlak (Ed.), New perspectives on individual differences in second language learning and teaching (pp.57–77). New York, NY: Springer. doi: 10.1007/978‑3‑642‑20850‑8_4
     https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-20850-8_4 [Google Scholar]
  153. (2012b) Abilities to learn: Cognitive abilities. In N. Seel (Ed.), Encyclopedia of the sciences of learning (pp.17–20). New York, NY: Springer.
     [Google Scholar]
  154. (2013) Aptitude in second language acquisition. In C. Chapelle (Ed.), The encyclopedia of applied linguistics (pp. 129–133). Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.
     [Google Scholar]
  155. Robinson, P. , Cadierno, T. & Shirai, Y
    (2009) Time and motion: Measuring the effects of the conceptual demands of tasks on second language production. Applied Linguistics, 28, 533–554. doi: 10.1093/applin/amp046
     https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amp046 [Google Scholar]
  156. Robinson, P. & Ellis, N
    (Eds.) (2008a) Handbook of cognitive linguistics and second language acquisition. New York, NY: Routledge.
     [Google Scholar]
  157. (2008b) Cognitive Linguistics, Second Language Acquisition and instruction—Issues for research. In P. Robinson & N. Ellis (Eds.), Handbook of cognitive linguistics and second language acquisition (pp.489–546). New York, NY: Routledge.
     [Google Scholar]
  158. Robinson, P. & Gilabert, R
    (2007) (Eds.), Task complexity, the Cognition Hypothesis and second language instruction.[Special issue] International Review of Applied Linguistics, 45(3). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
     [Google Scholar]
  159. Robinson, P. & Ha, M
    (1993) Instance theory and second language rule learning under explicit conditions. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 15, 413–438. doi: 10.1017/S0272263100012365
     https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263100012365 [Google Scholar]
  160. Roeser, R. , Shavelson, R. , Kupermintz, H. & Lau, S
    (2002) The concept of aptitude and multidimensional validity revisited. Educational Assessment, 8 (2), 191–205. doi: 10.1207/S15326977EA0802_06
     https://doi.org/10.1207/S15326977EA0802_06 [Google Scholar]
  161. Sachs, J
    (1983) Talking about the there and then: The emergence of displaced reference in parent-child discourse. In K. Nelson (Ed.), Children`s language, Vol. 4 (pp.1–28). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
     [Google Scholar]
  162. Samuda, V. & Bygate, M
    (2008) Tasks in second language learning.Houndmills: Palgrave MacMillan.
     [Google Scholar]
  163. Sato, C
    (1990) The syntax of conversation in interlanguage development. Tübingen: Gunter Narr.
     [Google Scholar]
  164. Schank, R
    (1999) Dynamic memory revisited. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi: 10.1017/CBO9780511527920
     https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511527920 [Google Scholar]
  165. Schank, R. & Abelson, R
    (1977) Scripts, plans, goals and understanding. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
     [Google Scholar]
  166. Schank, R. , Berman, T. & Macpherson, K
    (1999) Learning by doing. In C. Reigeluth (Ed.), Instructional-design theories and models: A new paradigm of instructional theory, Vol. II, (pp.161–182). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
     [Google Scholar]
  167. Schneider, W. , Schumann-Hengsteler, R. , & Sodian, B
    (2005) (Eds.), Young children`s cognitive development: Interrelationships among executive functioning, working memory, verbal ability, and theory of mind. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
     [Google Scholar]
  168. Schmidt, R
    (2001) Attention. In P. Robinson (Ed.), Cognition and second language instruction (pp.3–32). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi: 10.1017/CBO9781139524780.003
     https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139524780.003 [Google Scholar]
  169. Schmiedtova, B. , von Stutterheim, C. , & Carroll, M
    (2011) Language specific patterns in event construal of advanced second language speakers. In A. Pavlenko (Ed.), Thinking and speaking in two languages (pp.66–107). Bristol: Multilingual Matters.
     [Google Scholar]
  170. Seel, N
    (2012) Schema development. In N. Seel (Ed.), Encyclopedia of the sciences of learning (pp.2936–2939). New York, NY: Springer. doi: 10.1007/978‑1‑4419‑1428‑6_365
     https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4419-1428-6_365 [Google Scholar]
  171. Segalowitz, N
    (2003) Automaticity and second languages. In C. Doughty & M.H. Long (Eds.), The Handbook of Second Language Acquisition, pp.382–408. Oxford: Blackwell. doi: 10.1002/9780470756492.ch13
     https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470756492.ch13 [Google Scholar]
  172. (2013) Automaticity. In P. Robinson (Ed.), The Routledge encyclopedia of second language acquisition (pp.53–57). New York, NY: Routledge.
     [Google Scholar]
  173. Sheen, Y
    (2008) Recasts, language anxiety, modified output and L2 learning. Language Learning, 58, 833–874. doi: 10.1111/j.1467‑9922.2008.00480.x
     https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9922.2008.00480.x [Google Scholar]
  174. Shirai, Y
    (1999) The prototype hypothesis of tense aspect acquisition. In P. Robinson (Ed.), Representation and process: Proceedings of the 3rd Pacific Second Language Research Forum, Vol 1. (pp. 151–164). Tokyo: PACSLRF.
     [Google Scholar]
  175. Shuell, T
    (1980) Learning theory, instructional theory and adaptation. In R. Snow , P. Federico & W. Montague (Eds.), Aptitude, learning and instruction, Vol. 2: Cognitive process analyses of learning and problem solving (pp.277–302). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
     [Google Scholar]
  176. Skehan, P
    (1989) Individual differences in second language acquisition. London: Arnold.
     [Google Scholar]
  177. (1998) A cognitive approach to language learning. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  178. (2002) Theorizing and updating aptitude. In P. Robinson (Ed.), Individual differences and instructed language learning (pp.69–94). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/lllt.2.06ske
     https://doi.org/10.1075/lllt.2.06ske [Google Scholar]
  179. (2012) Language aptitude. In S. Gass & A. Mackey (Eds.), The Routledge handbook of second language acquisition (pp.381–395). New York, NY: Routledge.
     [Google Scholar]
  180. (2014a) (Ed.), Processing perspectives on task performance. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/tblt.5
     https://doi.org/10.1075/tblt.5 [Google Scholar]
  181. (2014b) The context for researching a processing perspective on task performance. In P. Skehan (Ed.), Processing perspectives on task performance. (pp.1–26). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/tblt.5.01ske
     https://doi.org/10.1075/tblt.5.01ske [Google Scholar]
  182. (2014c) Limited attentional capacity, second language performance and task-based pedagogy. In P. Skehan (Ed.), Processing perspectives on task performance. (pp.211–262). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/tblt.5.08ske
     https://doi.org/10.1075/tblt.5.08ske [Google Scholar]
  183. Skehan, P. & Foster, P
    (2001) Cognition and tasks. In P. Robinson (Ed.), Cognition and second language instruction (pp.183–205). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi: 10.1017/CBO9781139524780.009
     https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139524780.009 [Google Scholar]
  184. Slobin, D
    (1993) Adult language acquisition: A view from child language study. In C. Perdue (Ed.), Adult language acquisition: Crosslinguistic perspectives, Vol. 2: The results (pp.239–252). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  185. (1996) From 'thought and language' to 'thinking for speaking'. In J. Gumperz & S. Levinson (Eds.), Rethinking linguistic relativity (pp.70–96). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  186. (2003) Language and thought online: Some cognitive consequences of linguistic relativity. In D. Gentner & S. Goldin Meadow (Eds.), Language in mind: Advances in the investigation of language and thought (pp.157–191). Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  187. Snow, R
    (1987) Aptitude complexes. In R. Snow & M. Farr (Eds.), Aptitude, learning and instruction, Vol. 3: Conative and affective process analysis, (pp.11–34). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
     [Google Scholar]
  188. (1994) Abilities in academic tasks. In R. Sternberg & R. Wagner (Eds.), Mind in context: Interactionist perspectives on human intelligence, (pp.3–37). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  189. Snow, R. & Farr, M
    (1987) (Eds.), Aptitude, learning and instruction Vol. 3: Conative and affective process analysis. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
     [Google Scholar]
  190. Snow, R. , Federico, P. & Montague, W
    (1980) (Eds.), Aptitude, learning and instructionVols 1 & 2. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
     [Google Scholar]
  191. Snow, R. , Kyllonen, P. & Marshalek, B
    (1984) The topography of ability and learning correlations. In R. Sternberg (Ed.), Advances in the psychology of human intelligence (pp.47–103). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
     [Google Scholar]
  192. Sokal, R
    (1974) Classification: Purposes, principles, progress, prospects. Science, 185, 1115–1123. doi: 10.1126/science.185.4157.1115
     https://doi.org/10.1126/science.185.4157.1115 [Google Scholar]
  193. Spilsbury, G. , Stankov, L. & Roberts, R
    (1990) The effects of a task’s difficulty on its correlation with intelligence. Personality and Individual Differences, 11, 1069–1077. doi: 10.1016/0191‑8869(90)90135‑E
     https://doi.org/10.1016/0191-8869(90)90135-E [Google Scholar]
  194. Stanovitch, K
    (2000) Who is rational? Studies of individual differences in reasoning. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
     [Google Scholar]
  195. Talmy, L
    (2000) Towards a cognitive semantics, Vol. 1: Concept structuring systems.Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  196. (2008) Aspects of attention in language. In P. Robinson & N. Ellis (Eds.), Handbook of cognitive linguistics and second language acquisition (pp. 27–38) London: Routledge.
     [Google Scholar]
  197. Trebits, A
    (2015) Sources of individual differences in L2 narrative production: The contribution of input, processing, and output anxiety. Applied Linguistics, 36. first published onlineApril 8, 2014 doi: 10.1093/applin/amu006
     https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amu006 [Google Scholar]
  198. Trim, J. & North, B
    (Eds.) (2001) Common European Framework of Reference for Languages: Learning, teaching and assessment. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  199. Tyler, A
    (2008) Cognitive linguistics and second language instruction. In P. Robinson & N. Ellis (Eds.), Handbook of cognitive linguistics and second language acquisition (pp.456–488) London: Routledge.
     [Google Scholar]
  200. (2012) Cognitive linguistics and second language learning. New York, NY: Routledge.
     [Google Scholar]
  201. Tyler, A. & Evans, V
    (2003) The semantics of English prepositions: Spatial scenes, embodied meaning and cognition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi: 10.1017/CBO9780511486517
     https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511486517 [Google Scholar]
  202. Van den Branden, K
    (2006) (Ed.)Task-based language education. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi: 10.1017/CBO9780511667282
     https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511667282 [Google Scholar]
  203. Van Ek, J
    (1976) The threshold level for modern language learning in schools. London: Longman.
     [Google Scholar]
  204. Van Geert, P
    (2008) The Dynamic Systems approach in the study of L1 and L2 acquisition: An introduction. Modern Language Journal, 92, 179–199. doi: 10.1111/j.1540‑4781.2008.00713.x
     https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4781.2008.00713.x [Google Scholar]
  205. von Stutterheim, C. , Flecken, M. & Carroll, M
    (2013) Introduction: Conceptualizing in a second language. International Review of Applied Linguistics, 51, 77–85.
     [Google Scholar]
  206. von Stutterheim, C. & Klein, W
    (1987) A concept-oriented approach to second language studies. In C. Pfaff (Ed.), First and second language acquisition processes (pp.191–205). Rowley, MA: Newbury House.
     [Google Scholar]
  207. von Stutterheim, C. & Nuese, R
    (2003) Processes of conceptualisation in language production: Language specific perspectives and event construal. Linguistics, 41, 851–888.
     [Google Scholar]
  208. Wen, Z. , Mota, M. & McNeill, A
    (Eds.) (2015) Working Memory in second language acquisition and processing. Bristol: Multilingual Matters.
     [Google Scholar]
  209. Wilkins, D
    (1976) Notional syllabuses. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  210. Williams, J
    (1999) Attention, memory and inductive learning. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 21, 1–48. doi: 10.1017/S0272263199001011
     https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263199001011 [Google Scholar]
  211. Williams, R
    (1977) A behavioral typology of educational objectives for the cognitive domain. Educational Technology, 17, 418–431.
     [Google Scholar]
  212. Willis, D
    (1990) The lexical syllabus: A new approach to language teaching. London: Collins.
     [Google Scholar]
  213. Wood, R
    (1986) Task complexity: Definition of the construct. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 37, 60–82. doi: 10.1016/0749‑5978(86)90044‑0
     https://doi.org/10.1016/0749-5978(86)90044-0 [Google Scholar]
  214. Yule, G. & MacDonald, M
    (1990) Resolving referential conflicts in L2 interaction: The effect of proficiency and interactive role. Language Learning, 40, 539–556. doi: 10.1111/j.1467‑1770.1990.tb00605.x
     https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-1770.1990.tb00605.x [Google Scholar]

  • From This Site

    /content/books/9789027267825-tblt.8.04rob
    dcterms_subject,pub_keyword
    -contentType:Journal
    10
    5
/content/books/9789027267825-tblt.8.04rob
dcterms_subject,pub_keyword
-contentType:Journal
10
5
Chapter
content/books/9789027267825
Book
false
Loading
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was successful
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error