The impact of explicit instruction on different types of linguistic properties

References

1. Akakura, M.
   (2012) Evaluating the effectiveness of explicit instruction on implicit and explicit L2 knowledge. Language Teaching Research, 16(1), 9–37. 10.1177/1362168811423339
   https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168811423339 [Google Scholar]
2. Baayen, R. H.
   (2008) Analyzing linguistic data: A practical introduction to statistics using R. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511801686
   https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511801686 [Google Scholar]
3. Bader, M. , & Häussler, J.
   (2010) Toward a model of grammaticality judgments. Journal of Linguistics, 46(2), 273–330. 10.1017/S0022226709990260
   https://doi.org/10.1017/S0022226709990260 [Google Scholar]
4. Birner, B.
   (1996) The discourse function of inversion in English. New York / London: Routledge.
   [Google Scholar]
5. Bresnan, J.
   (1994) Locative inversion and the architecture of Universal Grammar. Language, 70(1), 72–131. 10.2307/416741
   https://doi.org/10.2307/416741 [Google Scholar]
6. Chomsky, N.
   (1981) Lectures on government and binding. Dordrecht: Foris.
   [Google Scholar]
7. Costa, J.
   (2004) Subject positions and interfaces. The case of European Portuguese. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
   [Google Scholar]
8. Culicover, P. , & Winkler, S.
   (2008) English focus inversion. Journal of Linguistics, 44(03), 625–658. 10.1017/S0022226708005343
   https://doi.org/10.1017/S0022226708005343 [Google Scholar]
9. de Graaff, R.
   (1997) The experanto experiment: Effects of explicit instruction on second language acquisition. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 19(2), 249–276. 10.1017/S0272263197002064
   https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263197002064 [Google Scholar]
10. de Graaff, R. , & Housen, A.
    (2009) Investigating the effects and effectiveness of L2 instruction. In M. Long & C. J. Doughty (Eds.), The handbook of language teaching (pp.726–755). Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell. 10.1002/9781444315783.ch38
    https://doi.org/10.1002/9781444315783.ch38 [Google Scholar]
11. DeKeyser, R. M.
    (1995) Learning second language grammar rules: An experiment with a miniature linguistic system. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 17(3), 379–410. 10.1017/S027226310001425X
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S027226310001425X [Google Scholar]
12. DeKeyser, R. M.
    (1998) Beyond focus on form: Cognitive perspectives on learning and practicing second language grammar. In C. J. Doughty & J. Williams (Eds.), Focus on form in classroom second language acquisition (pp.42–63). Cambridge / New York: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
13. Ellis, R.
    (2002a) Does form-focused instruction affect the acquisition of implicit knowledge? A review of the research. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 24(2), 223–236. 10.1017/S0272263102002073
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263102002073 [Google Scholar]
14. Ellis, R.
    (2002b) The place of grammar instruction in the second/foreign language curriculum. In E. Hinkel & S. Fotos (Eds.), New perspectives on grammar teaching in second language classrooms (pp.14–34). London: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
15. Ellis, R.
    (2005) Measuring implicit and explicit knowledge of a second language: A psychometric study. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 27(2), 141–172. 10.1017/S0272263105050096
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263105050096 [Google Scholar]
16. Ellis, R. , Loewen, S. , Elder, C. , Philp, J. , Reinders, H. , & Erlam, R.
    (2009) Implicit and explicit knowledge in second language learning, testing and teaching. Bristol: Multilingual Matters.
    [Google Scholar]
17. Gass, S. , Svetics, I. , & Lemelin, S.
    (2003) Differential effects of attention. Language Learning, 53(3), 497–546. 10.1111/1467‑9922.00233
    https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9922.00233 [Google Scholar]
18. Green, P. , & MacLeod, C. J.
    (2016) SIMR: an R package for power analysis of generalized linear mixed models by simulation. Methods in Ecology and Evolution, 7(4), 493–498. 10.1111/2041‑210X.12504
    https://doi.org/10.1111/2041-210X.12504 [Google Scholar]
19. Holler, S. , & Hartmann, J.
    (2012) Locative inversion in English: Implications of a rating study. In S. Featherston & B. Stolterfoht (Eds.), Empirical approaches to linguistic theory: Studies in meaning and structure (pp.241–265). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. 10.1515/9781614510888.241
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9781614510888.241 [Google Scholar]
20. Hopp, H.
    (2007) Ultimate attainment at the interfaces in second language acquisition: Grammar and processing. (PhD thesis), University of Groningen, the Netherlands.
    [Google Scholar]
21. Housen, A. , Pierrard, M. , & Van Daele, S.
    (2005) Rule complexity and the effectiveness of explicit grammar instruction. In A. Housen & M. Pierrard (Eds.), Investigations in instructed second language acquisition (pp.207–241). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110197372.2.235
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110197372.2.235 [Google Scholar]
22. Hulstijn, J. , & de Graaff, R.
    (1994) Under what conditions does explicit knowledge of a second language facilitate the acquisition of implicit knowledge? A research proposal. AILA Review, 11, 97–112.
    [Google Scholar]
23. Ionin, T. , Ko, H. , & Wexler, K.
    (2004) Article semantics in L2 acquisition: The role of specificity. Language Acquisition, 12(1), 3–69. 10.1207/s15327817la1201_2
    https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327817la1201_2 [Google Scholar]
24. Ionin, T. , Montrul, S. , & Santos, H.
    (2011) An experimental investigation of the expression of genericity in English, Spanish and Brazilian Portuguese. Lingua, 121(5), 963–985. 10.1016/j.lingua.2010.12.008
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lingua.2010.12.008 [Google Scholar]
25. Kim, J.-E. , & Nam, H.
    (2016) Measures of implicit knowledge revisited: Processing modes, time pressure, and modality. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 39(3), 431–457. 10.1017/S0272263115000510
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263115000510 [Google Scholar]
26. Levin, B.
    (1993) English verb classes and alternations: A preliminary investigation. Chicago / London: The Chicago University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
27. Levin, B. , & Rappaport Hovav, M.
    (1995) Unaccusativity at the syntax-lexical semantics interface. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
    [Google Scholar]
28. Linck, J. , & Cunnings, I.
    (2015) The utility and application of mixed-effects models in second language research. Language Learning, 65, 185–207. 10.1111/lang.12117
    https://doi.org/10.1111/lang.12117 [Google Scholar]
29. Lozano, C. , & Mendikoetxea, A.
    (2010) Interface conditions on postverbal subjects: A corpus study of L2 English. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 13(04), 475–497. 10.1017/S1366728909990538
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S1366728909990538 [Google Scholar]
30. Macaro, E. , & Masterman, L.
    (2006) Does intensive explicit grammar instruction make all the difference?Language Teaching Research, 10(3), 297–327. 10.1191/1362168806lr197oa
    https://doi.org/10.1191/1362168806lr197oa [Google Scholar]
31. Mendikoetxea, A.
    (2006) Some notes on the syntactic, semantic and pragmatic properties of locative inversion in English. In M. Carretero , L. H. Downing , J. Lavid , E. M. Caro , S. P. D. Ayala , & E. Sánchez-Pardo (Eds.), A Pleasure of Life in Words. A Festschrift for Angela Downing. Madrid: Universidad Complutense.
    [Google Scholar]
32. Norris, J. M. , & Ortega, L.
    (2000) Effectiveness of L2 instruction: A research synthesis and quantitative meta-analysis. Language Learning, 50(3), 417–528. 10.1111/0023‑8333.00136
    https://doi.org/10.1111/0023-8333.00136 [Google Scholar]
33. Pereira, C.
    (1998) Inversão locativa em português. (MA dissertation), Universidade do Porto, Portugal.
    [Google Scholar]
34. Pienemann, M.
    (1984) Psychological constraints on the teachability of languages. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 6(2), 186–214. 10.1017/S0272263100005015
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263100005015 [Google Scholar]
35. Pienemann, M.
    (1989) Is language teachable? Psycholinguistic experiments and hypotheses. Applied Linguistics, 10(1), 52–79. 10.1093/applin/10.1.52
    https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/10.1.52 [Google Scholar]
36. Prentza, A. , & Tsimpli, I.
    (2013) The interpretability of features in second language acquisition: Evidence from null and postverbal subjects in L2 English. Journal of Greek Linguistics, 13, 323–365. 10.1163/15699846‑13130204
    https://doi.org/10.1163/15699846-13130204 [Google Scholar]
37. Reinhart, T.
    (2006) Interface strategies: Optimal and costly computations. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. 10.7551/mitpress/3846.001.0001
    https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/3846.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
38. Robinson, P.
    (1996) Learning simple and complex second language rules under implicit, incidental, rule-search, and instructed conditions. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 18(1), 27–67. 10.1017/S0272263100014674
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263100014674 [Google Scholar]
39. Rothman, J.
    (2010) Theoretical linguistics meets pedagogical practice: Pronominal subject use in Spanish as a second language. Hispania, 93(1), 52–65.
    [Google Scholar]
40. Rothman, J. , & Slabakova, R.
    (2017) The generative approach to SLA and its place in modern second language studies. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 1–26. 10.1017/S0272263117000134
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263117000134 [Google Scholar]
41. Schmidt, R.
    (1990) The role of consciousness in second language learning. Applied Linguistics, 11, 129–158. 10.1093/applin/11.2.129
    https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/11.2.129 [Google Scholar]
42. Schmidt, R.
    (2001) Attention. In P. Robinson (Ed.), Cognition and second language instruction. (pp.3–32). Cambridge / New York: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9781139524780.003
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139524780.003 [Google Scholar]
43. Sheehan, M.
    (2010) ‘Free’ inversion in Romance and the null subject parameter. In T. Biberauer , A. Holmberg , I. Roberts , & M. Sheehan (Eds.), Parametric variation: Null subjects in minimalist theory (pp.231–262). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
44. Slabakova, R.
    (2002) The compounding parameter in second language acquisition. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 24(4), 507–540. 10.1017/S0272263102004011
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263102004011 [Google Scholar]
45. Slabakova, R.
    (2008) Meaning in the second language. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110211511
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110211511 [Google Scholar]
46. Sorace, A.
    (2006) Gradience and optionality in mature and developing grammars. In G. Fanselow , C. Fery , M. Schlesewsky , & R. Vogel (Eds.), Gradience in grammars: Generative perspectives (pp.106–123). Oxford: Oxford University Press. 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199274796.003.0006
    https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199274796.003.0006 [Google Scholar]
47. Sorace, A.
    (2011) Pinning down the concept of ‘interface’ in bilingualism. Linguistic Approaches to Bilingualism, 1, 1–33. 10.1075/lab.1.1.01sor
    https://doi.org/10.1075/lab.1.1.01sor [Google Scholar]
48. Sorace, A.
    (2016) Referring expressions and executive functions in bilingualism. Linguistic Approaches to Bilingualism, 6(5), 669–684. 10.1075/lab.15055.sor
    https://doi.org/10.1075/lab.15055.sor [Google Scholar]
49. Spada, N. , & Tomita, Y.
    (2010) Interactions between type of instruction and type of language feature: A meta-analysis. Language Learning, 60(2), 263–308. 10.1111/j.1467‑9922.2010.00562.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9922.2010.00562.x [Google Scholar]
50. Suzuki, Y. , & DeKeyser, R. M.
    (2017) The interface of explicit and implicit knowledge in a second language: Insights from individual differences in cognitive aptitudes. Language Learning, 67(4), 747–790. 10.1111/lang.12241
    https://doi.org/10.1111/lang.12241 [Google Scholar]
51. Teixeira, J.
    (2018) L2 acquisition at the interfaces: Subject-verb inversion in L2 English and its pedagogical implications. (PhD thesis), Universidade Nova de Lisboa, Portugal.
    [Google Scholar]
52. Teixeira, J.
    (2019a) From a Romance null subject grammar to a non-null subject grammar: The syntax of pronominal subjects in advanced and near-native English. In I. Feldhausen , M. Elsig , I. Kuchenbrandt , & M. Neuhaus (Eds.), Romance Languages and Linguistic Theory 15: Selected papers from ‘Going Romance’ 30, Frankfurt (pp.256–274). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/rllt.15.13tei
    https://doi.org/10.1075/rllt.15.13tei [Google Scholar]
53. Teixeira, J.
    (2019b) Is the syntax-discourse interface a locus of permanent optionality? The case of locative inversion in L2 English. In R. Slabakova , L. Corbet , L. Domínguez , A. Dudley , & A. Wallington (Eds.), Explorations in second language acquisition and processing (pp.120–137). Newcastle Upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.
    [Google Scholar]
54. Valenzuela, E. , & McCormack, B.
    (2013) The syntax-discourse interface and the interface between generative theory and pedagogical approaches to SLA. In M. Whong , K.-H. Gil , & H. Marsden (Eds.), Universal Grammar and the second language classroom (pp.101–114). Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands. 10.1007/978‑94‑007‑6362‑3_6
    https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-6362-3_6 [Google Scholar]
55. VanPatten, B. , & Rothman, J.
    (2015) What does current generative theory have to say about the explicit-implicit debate?In P. Rebuschat (Ed.), Implicit and explicit learning of languages (pp.89–116). Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing. 10.1075/sibil.48.05van
    https://doi.org/10.1075/sibil.48.05van [Google Scholar]
56. Ward, G. , Birner, B. , & Huddleston, R.
    (2002) Information packaging. In R. Huddleston & G. K. Pullum (Eds.), The Cambridge grammar of the English language (pp.1363–1447). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/9781316423530.017
    https://doi.org/10.1017/9781316423530.017 [Google Scholar]
57. White, L.
    (1991) Adverb placement in second language acquisition: Some effects of positive and negative evidence in the classroom. Second Language Research, 7(2), 133–161.
    [Google Scholar]
58. Whong, M.
    (2013) Applied Generative SLA: The need for an agenda and a methodology. In M. Whong , K.-H. Gil , & H. Marsden (Eds.), Universal Grammar and the second language classroom (pp.231–247). Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands. 10.1007/978‑94‑007‑6362‑3_12
    https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-6362-3_12 [Google Scholar]
59. Whong, M. , Gil, K.-H. , & Marsden, H.
    (2014) Beyond paradigm: The ‘what’ and the ‘how’ of classroom research. Second Language Research, 30(4), 551–568. 10.1177/0267658314526749
    https://doi.org/10.1177/0267658314526749 [Google Scholar]