1887
  1. Home
  2. e-Journals
  3. Australian Review of Applied Linguistics
  4. Volume 34, Issue 2
  5. Article
Volume 34, Issue 2
  • ISSN 0155-0640
  • E-ISSN: 1833-7139
PDF

Abstract

This article presents a cognitively-oriented account of the qualitative differences between ENL (English as a native language) and ELF (English as a lingua franca) users. Based on the declarativeprocedural model of second language acquisition, it examines the linguistic and sociolinguistic implications of ELF users’ dependence on their declarative memory system, with its corresponding explicit knowledge and controlled processes of cognition subserving the production of their output in English. In contrast, it points to ENL speakers’ output being sustained by both their procedural and declarative memory systems, with their corresponding implicit and explicit knowledge types that interact through automatic and controlled processes. Given the differences in the underlying cognitive resources and processes in output production, it concludes that the prevailing practice of assessing ELF users’ output in relation to ENL norms is simply irrelevant.

© 2011 John Benjamins Publishing Company
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/aral.34.2.02alp
2011-01-01
2024-12-10

  • From This Site

    /content/journals/10.1075/aral.34.2.02alp
    dcterms_title,dcterms_subject,pub_keyword
    -contentType:Journal -contentType:Contributor -contentType:Concept -contentType:Institution
    10
    5
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Alptekin, C.
    (2002) Towards intercultural communicative competence in ELT. ELT Journal, 56, 57–64. doi: 10.1093/elt/56.1.57
     https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/56.1.57 [Google Scholar]
  2. (2010) Redefining multicompetence for bilingualism and ELF. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 20, 95–110. doi: 10.1111/j.1473‑4192.2009.00230.x
     https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1473-4192.2009.00230.x [Google Scholar]
  3. Alptekin, C. & ErÇetin, G.
    (2009) Assessing the relationship of working memory to L2 reading: Does the nature of comprehension process and reading span make a difference?System, 37, 627–639. doi: 10.1016/j.system.2009.09.007
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2009.09.007 [Google Scholar]
  4. (2010) The role of L1 and L2 working memory in literal and inferential comprehension in L2 reading. Journal of Research in Reading, 33, 206–219. doi: 10.1111/j.1467‑9817.2009.01412.x
     https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9817.2009.01412.x [Google Scholar]
  5. Bex, T.
    (2008) ‘Standard’ English, discourse grammars and English language teaching. In M. A. Locher & J. Strassler (Eds.), Standards and norms in the English language (pp.221–238). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
     [Google Scholar]
  6. Bowden, H. W. , Gelfand, M. P. , Sanz, C. & Ullman, M. T.
    (2010) Verbal inflectional morphology in L1 and L2 Spanish: A frequency effects study examining storage versus composition. Language Learning, 60, 44–87. doi: 10.1111/j.1467‑9922.2009.00551.x
     https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9922.2009.00551.x [Google Scholar]
  7. Breiteneder, A.
    (2009) English as a lingua franca in Europe: An empirical perspective. World Englishes, 28, 256–269. doi: 10.1111/j.1467‑971X.2009.01579.x
     https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-971X.2009.01579.x [Google Scholar]
  8. Bybee, J. L.
    (2006) From usage to grammar: The mind’s response to repetition. Language, 82, 711–733. doi: 10.1353/lan.2006.0186
     https://doi.org/10.1353/lan.2006.0186 [Google Scholar]
  9. Canagarajah, A. S.
    (2007) Lingua franca English, multilingual communities, and language acquisition. The Modern Language Journal, 91, 923–939. doi: 10.1111/j.1540‑4781.2007.00678.x
     https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4781.2007.00678.x [Google Scholar]
  10. Clahsen, H. & Felser, C.
    (2006) Grammatical processing in language learners. Applied Psycholinguistics, 27, 3–42. doi: 10.1017/S0142716406060024
     https://doi.org/10.1017/S0142716406060024 [Google Scholar]
  11. Clahsen, H. , Felser, C. , Neubauer, K. , Sato, M. & Silva, R.
    (2010) Morphological structure in native and nonnative language processing. Language Learning, 27, 21–43. doi: 10.1111/j.1467‑9922.2009.00550.x
     https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9922.2009.00550.x [Google Scholar]
  12. Clyne, M. & Sharifian, F.
    (2008) English as an international language: Challenges and possibilities. Australian Review of Applied Linguistics, 31, 1–28. doi: 10.2104/aral0828
     https://doi.org/10.2104/aral0828 [Google Scholar]
  13. Cook, V. J.
    (1999) Going beyond the native speaker in language teaching. TESOL Quarterly, 27, 185–210. doi: 10.2307/3587717
     https://doi.org/10.2307/3587717 [Google Scholar]
  14. DeKeyser, R. M.
    (1997) Beyond explicit rule learning: Automatizing second language morphosyntax. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 27, 195–221.
     [Google Scholar]
  15. (2000) The robustness of critical period effects in second language acquisition. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 27, 499–533.
     [Google Scholar]
  16. (2003) Implicit and explicit learning. In C. J. Doughty & M. H. Long , (Eds.), The handbook of second language acquisition (pp.313–348). Malden, MA: Blackwell. doi: 10.1002/9780470756492.ch11
     https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470756492.ch11 [Google Scholar]
  17. (2009) Cognitive-psychological processes in second language learning. In M. H. Long & C. J. Doughty (Eds.), The handbook of language teaching (pp.119–138). Oxford: Blackwell. doi: 10.1002/9781444315783.ch8
     https://doi.org/10.1002/9781444315783.ch8 [Google Scholar]
  18. DeKeyser, R. M. & Juffs, A.
    (2005) Cognitive considerations in L2 learning. In E. Hinkel (Ed.), Handbook of research in second language teaching and learning (pp.437–454). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
     [Google Scholar]
  19. Durrant, P. & Schmitt, N.
    (2009) To what extent do native and non-native writers make use of collocations?International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, 27, 157–177.
     [Google Scholar]
  20. Ellis, N. C.
    (2005) At the interface: Dynamic interactions of explicit and implicit knowledge. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 27, 305–352. doi: 10.1017/S027226310505014X
     https://doi.org/10.1017/S027226310505014X [Google Scholar]
  21. (2006) Selective attention and transfer phenomena in L2 acquisition: Contingency, cue competition, salience, interference, overshadowing, blocking, and perceptual learning. Applied Linguistics, 27, 164–194. doi: 10.1093/applin/aml015
     https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/aml015 [Google Scholar]
  22. Ellis, N. C. & Cadierno, T.
    (2009) Constructing a second language: Introduction to the special section. Annual Review of Cognitive Linguistics, 27, 111–139. doi: 10.1075/arcl.7.05ell
     https://doi.org/10.1075/arcl.7.05ell [Google Scholar]
  23. Ellis, R. , Loewen, S. , Elder, C. , Erlam, R. , Philp, J. & Reinders, H.
    (2009) Implicit and explicit knowledge in second language learning, testing and teaching. Bristol: Multilingual Matters.
     [Google Scholar]
  24. Field, J.
    (2008) Bricks or mortar: Which parts of the input does a second language listener rely on?TESOL Quarterly, 27, 411–432. doi: 10.1002/j.1545‑7249.2008.tb00139.x
     https://doi.org/10.1002/j.1545-7249.2008.tb00139.x [Google Scholar]
  25. Grosjean, F.
    (2008) Studying bilinguals. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  26. Halford, G. S. , Phillips, S. , Wilson, W. H. , McCredden, J. M. , Andrews, G. , Birney, D. , Baker, R. & Bain, J. D.
    (2007) Relational processing is fundamental to the central executive and is limited to four variables. In N. Osaka , R. H. Logie & M. D’Esposito (Eds.), The cognitive neuroscience of working memory (pp.261–280). Oxford: Oxford University Press. doi: 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198570394.003.0016
     https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198570394.003.0016 [Google Scholar]
  27. Harrington, M.
    (2004) Commentary: Input processing as a theory of processing input. In B. VanPatten (Ed.), Processing instruction: Theory, research, and commentary (pp.79–92). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
     [Google Scholar]
  28. Harrington, M. & Sawyer, M.
    (1992) L2 working memory capacity and L2 reading skill. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 14, 25–38. doi: 10.1017/S0272263100010457
     https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263100010457 [Google Scholar]
  29. House, J.
    (2009) Introduction: The pragmatics of English as a lingua franca. Intercultural Pragmatics, 27, 141–145.
     [Google Scholar]
  30. Hulstjin, J.
    (2002) Towards a unified account of the representation, processing and acquisition of second language knowledge. Second Language Research, 27, 193–223. doi: 10.1191/0267658302sr207oa
     https://doi.org/10.1191/0267658302sr207oa [Google Scholar]
  31. Hyltenstam, N. & Abrahamsson, N.
    (2000) Who can become native-like in a second language? All, some, or none?Studia Linguistica, 27, 150–166. doi: 10.1111/1467‑9582.00056
     https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9582.00056 [Google Scholar]
  32. Jenkins, J.
    (2000) The phonology of English as an international language. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  33. (2007) The author replies. TESOL Quarterly, 27, 414–415. doi: 10.1002/j.1545‑7249.2007.tb00072.x
     https://doi.org/10.1002/j.1545-7249.2007.tb00072.x [Google Scholar]
  34. Kachru, B.
    (Ed.) (1992) The other tongue: English across cultures (2nd ed). Urbana, IL: University of Illinois Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  35. Kuiper, K. , Columbus, G. & Schmitt, N.
    (2009) The acquisition of phrasal vocabulary. In S. Foster-Cohen (Ed.), Language acquisition (pp.216–240). New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan. doi: 10.1057/9780230240780_10
     https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230240780_10 [Google Scholar]
  36. Leeser, M. J.
    (2007) Learner-based factors in L2 reading comprehension and processing grammatical form: Topic familiarity and working memory. Language Learning, 57, 229–270. doi: 10.1111/j.1467‑9922.2007.00408.x
     https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9922.2007.00408.x [Google Scholar]
  37. Mackey, A. , Adams, R. , Stafford, C. & Winke, P.
    (2010) Exploring the relationship between modified output and working memory capacity. Language Learning, 60, 501–533. doi: 10.1111/j.1467‑9922.2010.00565.x
     https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9922.2010.00565.x [Google Scholar]
  38. Mauranen, A.
    (2009) Chunking in ELF: Expressions for managing interactions. Intercultural Pragmatics, 27, 217–233.
     [Google Scholar]
  39. McLaughlin, J. , Tanner, D. , Pitkanen, I , Frenck-Mestre, C. , Inoue, K. , Valentine, G. & Osterhout, L.
    (2010) Brain potentials reveal discrete stages of L2 grammatical learning. Language Learning, 60, 123–150. doi: 10.1111/j.1467‑9922.2010.00604.x
     https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9922.2010.00604.x [Google Scholar]
  40. Morgan-Short, K. , Sanz, C. , Steinhauer, K. & Ullman, M.T.
    (2010) Second language acquisition of gender agreement in explicit and implicit training conditions: An event-related potential study. Language Learning, 27, 154–193. doi: 10.1111/j.1467‑9922.2009.00554.x
     https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9922.2009.00554.x [Google Scholar]
  41. Munro, M. J. , Derwing, T. M. & Morton, S. L.
    (2006) The mutual intelligibility of L2 speech. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 27, 111–131.
     [Google Scholar]
  42. Nayar, P. B.
    (1997) ESL/EFL dichotomy today: Language politics or pragmatics?TESOL Quarterly, 27, 9–37. doi: 10.2307/3587973
     https://doi.org/10.2307/3587973 [Google Scholar]
  43. Papadopoulou, D.
    (2005) Reading-time studies of second language ambiguity resolution. Second Language Research, 27, 98–120. doi: 10.1191/0267658305sr254oa
     https://doi.org/10.1191/0267658305sr254oa [Google Scholar]
  44. Paradis, M.
    (2004) A neurolinguistic theory of bilingualism. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/sibil.18
     https://doi.org/10.1075/sibil.18 [Google Scholar]
  45. (2009) Declarative and procedural determinants of second languages. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/sibil.40
     https://doi.org/10.1075/sibil.40 [Google Scholar]
  46. Pickering, L.
    (2006) Current research on intelligibility in English as a lingua franca. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 27, 219–233.
     [Google Scholar]
  47. Pinker, S. & Ullman, M. T.
    (2002) The past and future of the past tense. TRENDS in Cognitive Sciences, 27, 456–463. doi: 10.1016/S1364‑6613(02)01990‑3
     https://doi.org/10.1016/S1364-6613(02)01990-3 [Google Scholar]
  48. Prodromou, L.
    (2008) English as a lingua franca: A corpus-based analysis. London: Continuum.
     [Google Scholar]
  49. Sabourin, L. & Haverkort, M.
    (2003) Neural substrates of representation and processing of a second language. In R. van Hout , A. Hulk , F. Kuiken & R. Towell , (Eds.), The lexicon-syntax interface in second language acquisition (pp.175–195). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/lald.30.09sab
     https://doi.org/10.1075/lald.30.09sab [Google Scholar]
  50. Seidlhofer, B.
    (2001) Closing a conceptual gap: The case for a description of English as a lingua franca. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 27, 133–158. doi: 10.1111/1473‑4192.00011
     https://doi.org/10.1111/1473-4192.00011 [Google Scholar]
  51. (2004) Research perspectives on teaching English as a lingua franca. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 27, 209–239.
     [Google Scholar]
  52. (2009a) Accommodation and the idiom principle in English as a lingua franca. Intercultural Pragmatics, 27, 195–215.
     [Google Scholar]
  53. (2009b) Common ground and different realities: World Englishes and English as a lingua franca. World Englishes, 27, 236–245. doi: 10.1111/j.1467‑971X.2009.01592.x
     https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-971X.2009.01592.x [Google Scholar]
  54. Sun, R. , Sluarz, P. & Terry, C.
    (2005) The interaction of the explicit and the implicit in skill learning: A dual process approach. Psychological Review, 27, 159–192. doi: 10.1037/0033‑295X.112.1.159
     https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.112.1.159 [Google Scholar]
  55. Ullman, M. T.
    (2001) The neural basis of lexicon and grammar in first and second language: The declarative/procedural model. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 27, 105–122.
     [Google Scholar]
  56. (2004) Contributions of memory circuits to language: The declarative vs. procedural model. Cognition, 27, 231–270. doi: 10.1016/j.cognition.2003.10.008
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2003.10.008 [Google Scholar]
  57. (2005) A cognitive neuroscience perspective on second language acquisition: The declarative/procedural model. In C. Sanz (Ed.), Mind and context in adult second language acquisition: Methods, theory and practice (pp.141–178). Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  58. Van Hell, J. G. & Tokowicz, N.
    (2010) Event-related brain potentials and second language learning: Syntactic processing in late L2 learners at different L2 proficiency levels. Second Language Research, 26, 43–74. doi: 10.1177/0267658309337637
     https://doi.org/10.1177/0267658309337637 [Google Scholar]
  59. Walter, C.
    (2004) Transfer of reading comprehension skills to L2 is linked to mental representations of text and to L2 working memory. Applied Linguistics, 25, 315–339. doi: 10.1093/applin/25.3.315
     https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/25.3.315 [Google Scholar]
  60. (2007) First- to second-language reading comprehension: Not transfer, but access. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 27, 14–32. doi: 10.1111/j.1473‑4192.2007.00131.x
     https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1473-4192.2007.00131.x [Google Scholar]
  61. Wray, A.
    (2002) Formulaic language and the lexicon. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi: 10.1017/CBO9780511519772
     https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511519772 [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/10.1075/aral.34.2.02alp
Loading
  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): controlled/automatic processes; declarative/procedural memory systems; ELF; ENL

Most Cited

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