1887
Volume 131, Issue 1
  • ISSN 0019-0829
  • E-ISSN: 1783-1490
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes
Preview this article:
Zoom in
Zoomout

Repair and Completion Strategies in the Interlanguage of Advanced EFL Learners, Page 1 of 1

| /docserver/preview/fulltext/itl.131-132.07gar-1.gif

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/itl.131-132.07gar
2001-01-01
2019-08-24
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. ALLEN, P. , SWAIN, M. , Harley, B. & Cummins, J.
    (1990): Aspects of classroom treatment: Toward a more comprehensive view of second language education. In B. Harley , P. Allen , J. Cummins , and M. Swain (eds.)The Development of Bilingual Proficiency, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 57–81.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. ASTON, G.
    (1986): Trouble-shooting in interaction with learners: The more the merrier?Applied Linguistics7(2): 128–143.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. BARDOVI-HARLIG, K. & Bofman, T.
    (1989): Attainment of syntactic and morphological accuracy by advanced language learners. Studies in Second Language Acquisition11: 17–34.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. BRUTON, A. & SAMUDA, V.
    (1980): Learner and teacher roles in the treatment of oral error in group work. RELC Journal11: 49–63.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. BYGATE, M.
    (1999a): Task as a context for the framing, refraining and uriframing of language. System27: 33–48.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. (1999b): Quality of language and purpose of task: Patterns of learners' language on two oral communication tasks. Language Teaching Research3(3): 185–214.
    [Google Scholar]
  7. CELCE-MURCIA, M.
    (1991): Grarnmar pedagogy in second and foreign language teaching. TESOL Quarterly25: 459–480.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. CHAUDRON, C.
    (1988): Second language classrooms. Research on teaching and learning, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. CROOKES, G.
    (1990): The utterance and other basic units for second language discourse analysis. Applied Linguistics11 (2): 183–199.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. CROOKES, G.V. & RULON, K.
    (1985): Incorporation of corrective feedback in native speaker-non-native speaker conversation. Technical Report No. 3. Center for Second Language Classroom Research. Social Science Institute. University of Hawaii, Honolulu.
    [Google Scholar]
  11. Doughty, C. & Williams, J.
    (eds.) (1998): Focus on form in classroom second language acquisition, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  12. DUFF, P.
    (1986): Another look at interlanguage talk: taking task to taskIn R. Day (ed.)Talking to learn: Conversation in second language acquisition, Rowley, MA: Newbury House, 147–181.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. ELLIS, R.
    (1994): The study of second language acquisition, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  14. (1995): Interpretation tasks and grammar teaching. TESOL Quarterly29(1): 87–106.
    [Google Scholar]
  15. FOTOS, S.
    (1998): Shifting the focus from forms to form in the efl classroom. ELT Journal52/4: 301–307.
    [Google Scholar]
  16. GARCIA MAYO, M.P.
    (1997): Oral interaction among advanced EFL learners. Research project. The University of the Basque Country(UPV 103.130-HA087/97).
  17. GARCIA MAYO, M.P. & Pica, T.
    (2000a): L2 learner interaction in a foreign language setting: Are learning needs addressed?International Review of Applied Linguistics38 (1): 35–58.
    [Google Scholar]
  18. (2000b): ”Is the efl environment a language-learning environment?Working Papers in Educational Linguistics- University of Pennsylvania[in press].
    [Google Scholar]
  19. GASS, S.
    (1997): Input, interaction and the second language learner, Mahwah, N.J.: Erlbaum.
    [Google Scholar]
  20. GASS, S. & Selinker, L.
    (1994): Second language acquisition: An introductory course, Hillsdale, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum.
    [Google Scholar]
  21. GASS, S. & VARONIS, E.M.
    (1994): Input, interaction, and second language production. Studies in Second Language Acquisition16: 283–302.
    [Google Scholar]
  22. GASS, S. , MACKEY, A. & PICA, T.
    (1998): The role of input and interaction in second language acquisition. The Modern Language Journal82(iii): 299–307.
    [Google Scholar]
  23. GREEN, P.S. & HECHT, K.
    (1993): Pupil self-correction in oral communication in English as a Foreign Language. System21(2): 151–163.
    [Google Scholar]
  24. GUMPERZ, J.
    (1964): Linguistic and social interaction in two communities. In J. Gumperz and Hymes, D. (eds)The ethnography of communication, American Anthropologist66 (6): 137–154.
    [Google Scholar]
  25. (1970): Verbal strategies in multilingual communication. In J. Alatis, J. (ed.)Report of the Twenty-first Annual Round Table Meeting on Linguistics and Language Studies (Monograph Series on Language and Linguistics). Reprintedin R. Abrahms & Troike, R. (eds.) (1972) Language, Culture and Education, Engle-wood Cliffs NJ: Prentice Hall, 184–196.
    [Google Scholar]
  26. HARLEY, B.
    (1992): Patterns of second language development in French immersion. Journal of French Language Studies2: 159–183.
    [Google Scholar]
  27. HARLEY, B. and SWAIN, M.
    (1984): The interlanguage of immersion students and its implications for second language teaching. In A. Davies , C. Criper and A. Howatt (eds.)Interlanguage, 291–311. Edinburgh, UK: Edinburgh University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  28. HOLLIDAY, L.
    (1995): NS syntactic modifications in NS-NNS negotiations as input data for second language acquisition of syntax. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Pennsylvania.
    [Google Scholar]
  29. HULSTIJN, J.
    (1990): Appealing to consciousness in the L2 classroom. AILA Review11: 57–68.
    [Google Scholar]
  30. KASPER, G.
    (1985): Repair in foreign language learning. Studies in Second Language Acquisition7: 200–215.
    [Google Scholar]
  31. LIGHTBOWN, P. & SPADA, N.
    (1993): How languages are learnt, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  32. LINNELL, J.
    (1995): Negotiation as a context for learning syntax in a second language. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Pennsylvania.
    [Google Scholar]
  33. LONG, M.
    (1996): The role of the linguistic environment in second language acquisition. In W.C. Ritchie & T.K. Bhatia (eds.)Handbook of second language acquisition, New York: Academic Press, 413–468.
    [Google Scholar]
  34. (in press): Task-based language teaching, Oxford: Blackwell.
    [Google Scholar]
  35. LONG, M. & CROOKES, G.
    (1992): Three approaches to task-based syllabus design. TESOL Quarterly26: 27–56.
    [Google Scholar]
  36. LONG, M. & ROBINSON, P.
    (1998): Focus on form: Theory, research and practice. In C. Doughty and J. Williams (eds.)
    [Google Scholar]
  37. LYSTER, R. & ranta, L.
    (1997): Corrective feedback and learner uptake. Studies in Second Language Acquisition19: 37–66.
    [Google Scholar]
  38. MCLAUGHLIN, B.
    (1987): Theories of second language learning, London: Edward Arnold.
    [Google Scholar]
  39. (1990): Restructuring. Applied Linguistics11:113–128.
    [Google Scholar]
  40. MITCHELL, R. & MYLES, F.
    (1998): Second language learning theories, London: Edward Arnold.
    [Google Scholar]
  41. PICA, T.
    (1994): Research on negotiation: What does it reveal about second language learning conditions, processes, and outcomes?Language Learning44(3): 493–527.
    [Google Scholar]
  42. (1998): Handout on interaction, negotiation and L2 learning. The University of Pennsylvania.
  43. PICA, T. & DOUGHTY, C.
    (1985): Input and interaction in the communicative classroom: A comparison of teacher-fronted and group activities. In S. Gass & Madden, C. (eds)Input in second language acquisition, Rowley, MA: Newbury House, 115–132.
    [Google Scholar]
  44. PICA, T. , YOUNG, R. & DOUGHTY, C.
    (1987): The impact of interaction on comprehension. TESOL Quarterly21: 737–758.
    [Google Scholar]
  45. PICA, T. , HOLLIDAY, L. , Lewis, N. & Morgenthaler, L.
    (1989): Comprehensible output as an outcome of linguistic demands on the learner. Studies in Second Language Acquisition11: 63–90.
    [Google Scholar]
  46. PICA, T. , KANAGY, R. & Falodun, J.
    (1993) :Choosing and using communication tasks for second language instruction and research. In G. Grookes & Gass, S. (eds.)Tasks and language learning: Integrating theory and practice, Clevedon: Multilingual Matters, 9–34.
    [Google Scholar]
  47. PICA, T. , LINCOLN-PORTER, F. , PANINOS, F. & Linnell, J.
    (1995): What can second language learners learn from each other? Only their researcher knows for sure. Working Papers in Educational Linguistics11(1): 1–36.
    [Google Scholar]
  48. PICA, T. , LINCOLN-PORTER, F. , Paninos, F. & Linnell, J.
    (1996): Language learners' interaction: How does it address input, output and feedback needs of L2 learners?TESOL Quarterly30(1): 59–84.
    [Google Scholar]
  49. SADOW, S.A.
    (1982): Idea bank: Creative activities for the language class, Rowley, MA: Newbury House.
    [Google Scholar]
  50. SAVIGNON, S.
    (1991): Communicative language teaching: State of the art. TESOL Quarterly25(2): 261–277.
    [Google Scholar]
  51. SCHEGLOFF, E. , JEFFERSON, G. & SACKS, H.
    (1977): The preference for self-correction in the organization of repair in conversation. Language53: 361–382.
    [Google Scholar]
  52. SCHMIDT, R.W.
    (1990): The role of consciousness in second language learning. Applied Linguistics11 (2): 129–158.
    [Google Scholar]
  53. (1993): Awareness and second language acquisition. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics 1992, 13: 206–226.
    [Google Scholar]
  54. (1994): Implicit learning and the cognitive unconscious. In N. Ellis (ed.)Implicit and explicit learning of languages, London: Academic Press, 165–209.
    [Google Scholar]
  55. SPADA, N. & LIGHTBOWN, P.
    (1989): Intensive esl programs in Quebec primary schools. TESL Canada Journal7: 11–32.
    [Google Scholar]
  56. STORCH, N.
    (1998): A classroom-based study: Insights from a collaborative text reconstruction task. ELT Journal52/4: 291–300.
    [Google Scholar]
  57. SWAIN, M.
    (1985): Communicative competence: Some roles of comprehensible input and comprehensible output in its development”. In S. Gass & Madden, C. (eds.)Input in second language acquisition, Rowley, MA: Newbury House, 235–253.
    [Google Scholar]
  58. (1988): Manipulating and complementing content teaching to maximize second language learningTESL Canada Journal6: 68–83.
    [Google Scholar]
  59. (1991): French immersion and its offshoots: Getting two for one. In B.F. Freed (ed.)Foreign language acquisition research and the classroom, Lexington, MA: D.C. Heath, 91–103.
    [Google Scholar]
  60. (1993): The output hypothesis: Just speaking and writing aren't enough. The Canadian Modern Language Review50: 158–164.
    [Google Scholar]
  61. (1995): Three functions of output in second language learning. In G. Cook & Seidlhofer, B. , (eds.)Principles and practice in applied linguistics: Studies in honour of H. G. Widdowson, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 125–144.
    [Google Scholar]
  62. (1998): Focus on form through conscious reflection. In C. Doughty and J. Williams (eds.)Focus on form in classroom second language acquisition, 64–81. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  63. SWAIN, M. & LAPKIN, S.
    (1995): Problems in output and the cognitive processes they generate: A step towards second language learning. Applied Linguistics16: 371–391.
    [Google Scholar]
  64. THORNBURY, S.
    (1997): Reformulation and reconstruction tasks that promote noticing. ELT Journal51(4): 326–335.
    [Google Scholar]
  65. UR, P.
    (1996)[1981]: Discussions that work, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  66. WILLIAMS, J.
    (1995): Focus on form in communicative language teaching: Research fhidings and the classroom teacher. TESOL Journal12–16.
    [Google Scholar]
  67. (1999): Learner-generated attention to form. Language Learning49(4): 583–625.
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1075/itl.131-132.07gar
Loading
  • Article Type: Research Article
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