Volume 174, Issue 2
  • ISSN 0019-0829
  • E-ISSN: 1783-1490



This study contributes to the explicit implicit debate by investigating to which extent adult learners of Hungarian develop knowledge of new grammar rules, and the proficiency to use them, through listening activities complemented with explicit grammar instruction or not.

In a quasi-experimental study, we compared the acquisition of three specific rules of Hungarian grammar by 80 Flemish adult students in two conditions. Both methods involved listening activities, but in one condition explicit rule explanation and practice was given and in the other one, meaningful activities were created without grammar explanation. The findings indicate that for teaching simple rules, compared to more complex grammar features, listening activities and exposure to comprehensible input have a significantly positive effect on grammar acquisition at the basic level. The explicit condition did not have an added beneficial effect. Exposure to L2 is the main driver of language development.

Available under the CC BY 4.0 license.

Article metrics loading...

Loading full text...

Full text loading...



  1. Bakró-Nagy, M., Lahdelma, T. & Maticsák, S.
    (1999) Hungarologische Beitrage, Vol.121.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Cohen, J.
    (1988) Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed). L. Erlbaum Associates.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. 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]
  4. Dixon, L. Q., Zhao, J., Shin, J.-Y., Wu, S., Su, J.-H., Burgess-Brigham, R., Gezer, M. U., & Snow, C.
    (2012) What we know about second language acquisition: A synthesis from four perspectives. Review of Educational Research, 82(1), 5–60. 10.3102/0034654311433587
    https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654311433587 [Google Scholar]
  5. Doughty, C. J.
    (2003) Instructed SLA: Constraints, compensation, and enhancement. InC. J. Doughty & M. H. Long (Eds.), The handbook of second language acquisition (pp.256–310). Blackwell Publishing Ltd. 10.1002/9780470756492.ch10
    https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470756492.ch10 [Google Scholar]
  6. Dörnyei, Z.
    (2009) The psychology of second language acquisiton, Oxford, Oxford University press, 131–177.
    [Google Scholar]
  7. Ellis, N.
    (2009) Optimizing the input: Frequency and sampling in usage-based and form-focused learning. InM. H. Long & C. J. Doughty (Eds.), The handbook of language teaching (pp.139–158). Wiley-Blackwell. 10.1002/9781444315783.ch9
    https://doi.org/10.1002/9781444315783.ch9 [Google Scholar]
  8. (2015) Implicit AND explicit language learning- Their dynamic interface and complexity. InRebuschat (ed.) Studies in Bilingualism (SiBil), vol. 48. (Implicit and Explicit Learning of Languages) (pp.3–23). John Benjamins Publishing Company. 10.1075/sibil.48.01ell
    https://doi.org/10.1075/sibil.48.01ell [Google Scholar]
  9. Ellis, N. & Collins, L.
    (2009) Input and second language acquisition: The roles of frequency, form, and function. Introduction to the special issue. The Modern Language Journal (Boulder, Colo.), 93(3), 329–335. 10.1111/j.1540‑4781.2009.00893.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4781.2009.00893.x [Google Scholar]
  10. Ellis, R., & Loewen, S.
    (2007) Confirming the operational definitions of explicit and implicit knowledge in ellis (2005): Responding to Isemonger. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 29(1), 119–126. 10.1017/S0272263107070052
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263107070052 [Google Scholar]
  11. Ellis, R., & Shintani, N.
    (2014) Exploring language pedagogy through second language acquisition research. Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Elvin, J. & Escudero, P.
    (2019) Cross-linguistic influence in second language speech: Implications for learning and teaching. In: Cross-Linguistic Influence: From Empirical Evidence to Classroom Practice (pp.1–20). Springer International Publishing. 10.1007/978‑3‑030‑22066‑2_1
    https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-22066-2_1 [Google Scholar]
  13. Field, J.
    (2008) Listening in the language classroom. Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  14. Gass, S. M.
    (1997) Input, interaction, and the second language learner. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
    [Google Scholar]
  15. Godfroid, A.
    (2015) The effects of implicit instruction on implicit and explicit knowledge development. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, vol. 38, 177–215. 10.1017/S0272263115000388
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263115000388 [Google Scholar]
  16. Goo, J., Granena, G., Yilmaz, Y., & Novella, M.
    (2015) Implicit and explicit instruction in L2 learning: Norris & Ortega (2000) revisited and updated. InP. Rebuschat (ed.), Studies in Bilingualism (Vol.481, pp.443–482). John Benjamins Publishing Company. 10.1075/sibil.48.18goo
    https://doi.org/10.1075/sibil.48.18goo [Google Scholar]
  17. Hassall, T.
    (2015) Individual variation in L2 study-abroad outcomes: A case study from Indonesian pragmatics. Multilingua, 34(1), 33–59. 10.1515/multi‑2013‑0050
    https://doi.org/10.1515/multi-2013-0050 [Google Scholar]
  18. Hernández, T. A.
    (2008) The effect of explicit instruction and input flood on students’ use of Spanish discourse markers on a simulated oral proficiency interview. Hispania, 91(3), 665–675. www.jstor.org/stable/40648169
    [Google Scholar]
  19. (2011) Re-examining the role of explicit instruction and input flood on the acquisition of Spanish discourse markers. Language Teaching Research, 15(2), 159–182. 10.1177/1362168810388694
    https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168810388694 [Google Scholar]
  20. Housen, A. & Pierrard, M.
    (2005) Investigations in instructed second language acquisition. InInvestigations in instructed second language acquisition (vol.251). Mouton de Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110197372.0.1
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110197372.0.1 [Google Scholar]
  21. Hulstijn, J. H., & 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, vol. 11, 97–112
    [Google Scholar]
  22. Hulstijn, J. H.
    (1995) Not all grammar rules are equal: giving grammar instruction its proper place in foreign language teaching. InR. Schmidt (Ed.). Attention and awareness in foreign language learning (pp.359–386). (Technical report; No. 9). Second Language Teaching & Curriculum Center, University of Hawaii at Manoa.
    [Google Scholar]
  23. Kamiya, N.
    (2018) Proactive Versus Reactive Focus on Form. InJ. I. Liontas, T. International Association, & M. Delli Carpini (ed.), The TESOL Encyclopedia of English Language Teaching (pp.1–6). John Wiley & Sons, Inc. 10.1002/9781118784235.eelt0093
    https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118784235.eelt0093 [Google Scholar]
  24. Kang, E. Y., Sok, S., & Han, Z.
    (2019) Thirty-five years of ISLA on form-focused instruction: A meta-analysis. Language Teaching Research, 23(4), 428–453. 10.1177/1362168818776671
    https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168818776671 [Google Scholar]
  25. Keresztes, L.
    (1999) A practical Hungarian grammar. Debreceni Nyári Egyetem.
    [Google Scholar]
  26. Korchmáros, V. M.
    (2006) Hungarian: Step by step. Hungarian grammar-not only for Hungarians. Hungarian & Central-European International Studies Center-University of Szeged.
    [Google Scholar]
  27. Lichtman, K.
    (2016) Age and learning environment: Are children implicit second language learners?Journal of Child Language, 43(3), 707–730. 10.1017/S0305000915000598
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0305000915000598 [Google Scholar]
  28. (2021) What about fluency? Implicit vs. explicit training affects artificial mini-language production. Applied Linguistics, 42(4), 668–691. 10.1093/applin/amaa054
    https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amaa054 [Google Scholar]
  29. Lichtman, K., & VanPatten, B.
    (2021) Was Krashen right? Forty years later. Foreign Language Annals, 54(2), 283–305. 10.1111/flan.12552
    https://doi.org/10.1111/flan.12552 [Google Scholar]
  30. Lightbown, P., & Spada, N.
    (2021) How languages are learned (Fifth edition). Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  31. McKinley, J., & Rose, H.
    (Eds.) (2019) The Routledge handbook of research methods in applied linguistics (1st ed.). Routledge. 10.4324/9780367824471
    https://doi.org/10.4324/9780367824471 [Google Scholar]
  32. McManus, K.
    (2022) Crosslinguistic influence and second language learning. Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  33. 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, 60(1), 154–193. 10.1111/j.1467‑9922.2009.00554.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9922.2009.00554.x [Google Scholar]
  34. Muñoz, C.
    (ed.) (2006) Age and the rate of foreign language learning. Multilingual Matters. 10.21832/9781853598937
    https://doi.org/10.21832/9781853598937 [Google Scholar]
  35. Norris, J. M., Davis, J. McE, & Timpe, V.
    (2017) Second language educational experiences for adult learners. New York, NY: Routledge. 10.4324/9781315230801
    https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315230801 [Google Scholar]
  36. 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]
  37. Pienemann, M.
    (1988) Determining the influence of instruction on L2 speech processing. AILA Review, vol.5/1, 40–72. 10.1017/S0272263100011967
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263100011967 [Google Scholar]
  38. Piggott, L.
    (2019) First meaning then form. A longitudinal study on the effects of delaying and reducing form-focused instruction for young adolescent EFL learners. LOT, Netherlands Graduate School.
    [Google Scholar]
  39. Plonsky, L., Marsden, E., Crowther, D., Gass, S. & Spinner, P.
    (2020) A methodological synthesis and meta-analysis of judgment tasks in second language research. Second Language Research, 36(4), 583–621. 10.1177/0267658319828413
    https://doi.org/10.1177/0267658319828413 [Google Scholar]
  40. Rashtichi, M., & Yousefi, L. M.
    (2016) Reading input flooding and listening input flooding: Do they affect Iranian EFL learners’ grammar knowledge. International Journal of Humanities and Cultural Studies, issue 2016, 2389–2398.
    [Google Scholar]
  41. Rebuschat, P.
    (2015) Implicit and explicit learning of languages. John Benjamins. 10.1075/sibil.48
    https://doi.org/10.1075/sibil.48 [Google Scholar]
  42. Richardson, J. T. E.
    (2011) Eta squared and partial eta squared as measures of effect size in educational research. Educational Research Review, 6(2), 135–147. 10.1016/j.edurev.2010.12.001
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2010.12.001 [Google Scholar]
  43. Ringbom, H. & Jarvis, S.
    (2009) Chapter 7. The importance of cross-linguistic similarity in foreign language learning. InLong, M. H., & Doughty, C. J. (2011), The handbook of language teaching. Wiley-Blackwell. 10.1002/9781444315783.ch7
    https://doi.org/10.1002/9781444315783.ch7 [Google Scholar]
  44. Robinson, P.
    (Ed.) (2013) The Routledge encyclopedia of second language acquisition. Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  45. Rogers, J. & Révész, A.
    (2019) Experimental and quasi-experimental designs. InThe Routledge Handbook of Research Methods in Applied Linguistics (1st ed., pp.133–143). Routledge. 10.4324/9780367824471‑12
    https://doi.org/10.4324/9780367824471-12 [Google Scholar]
  46. Rousse-Malpat, A., Koote, L., Steinkrauss, R., & Verspoor, M.
    (2021) Parlez-vous francais? Effects of structure-based versus dynamic-usage-based approaches on oral proficiency. Language Teaching Research, 136216882110402. 10.1177/13621688211040298
    https://doi.org/10.1177/13621688211040298 [Google Scholar]
  47. Rousse-Malpat, A., & Verspoor, M.
    (2012) Measuring effectiveness in Focus on Form versus Focus on Meaning. Dutch Journal of Applied Linguistics, 1(2), 263–276. 10.1075/dujal.1.2.07rou
    https://doi.org/10.1075/dujal.1.2.07rou [Google Scholar]
  48. (2018) Foreign language instruction from a dynamic usage-based (DUB) perspective. InTyler, A. E., Ortega, L., Uno, M., & Park, H. I. (Eds.). Usage-inspired L2 Instruction: Researched pedagogy (Vol.491, pp.55–73). John Benjamins Publishing Company. 10.1075/lllt.49.03rou
    https://doi.org/10.1075/lllt.49.03rou [Google Scholar]
  49. Rulik, I.
    (2009) Hibaelemzés köztes nyelvi keretben. Teaching Hungarian as L2, vol.1, 106–136. https://epa.oszk.hu/01400/01467/00006/pdf/THL2_2009_1-2_106-136.pdf
    [Google Scholar]
  50. Sanz, C., & Morgan-Short, K.
    (2004) Positive evidence versus explicit rule presentation and explicit negative feedback: A computer-assisted study. Language Learning, 54(1), 35–78. 10.1111/j.1467‑9922.2004.00248.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9922.2004.00248.x [Google Scholar]
  51. Sato, M. & Loewen, S.
    (2019) Chapter 3. Methodological strengths, challenges, and joys of classroom-based quasi-experimental research: Metacognitive instruction and corrective feedback. InR. M. DeKeyser & G. Prieto Botana (Eds.), Language Learning & Language Teaching (Vol.521, pp.31–54). John Benjamins Publishing Company. 10.1075/lllt.52.03sat
    https://doi.org/10.1075/lllt.52.03sat [Google Scholar]
  52. Scheffler, P.
    (2011) Grammar and meaning in early adult foreign language instruction. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 21(2), 183–201. 10.1111/j.1473‑4192.2010.00266.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1473-4192.2010.00266.x [Google Scholar]
  53. Schmidt, R.
    (Ed.) (1998) Attention and awareness in foreign language learning (Nachdr.). Second Language Teaching & Curriculum Center.
    [Google Scholar]
  54. Schulz, R.
    (2001) Cultural differences in student and teacher perceptions concerning the role of grammar instruction and corrective feedback: USA-Colombia. The Modern Language Journal (Boulder, Colo.), 85(2), 244–258. 10.1111/0026‑7902.00107
    https://doi.org/10.1111/0026-7902.00107 [Google Scholar]
  55. Schurz, A., & Coumel, M.
    (2020) Grammar teaching in ELT: A cross-national comparison of teacher-reported practices. Language Teaching Research, 136216882096413. 10.1177/1362168820964137
    https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168820964137 [Google Scholar]
  56. Spada, N.
    (2015) SLA research and L2 pedagogy: Misapplications and questions of relevance. Language Teaching, 48(1), 69–81. 10.1017/S026144481200050X
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S026144481200050X [Google Scholar]
  57. Spada, N., & Tomita, Y.
    (2010) Interactions between type of instruction and type of language feature: a meta-analysis. Language Learning, vol. 60, 263–308. 10.1111/j.1467‑9922.2010.00562.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9922.2010.00562.x [Google Scholar]
  58. Tilma, C., & de Bot, K.
    (2014) The dynamics of foreign versus second language development in Finnish writing. Jÿvaskyla University Printing House.
    [Google Scholar]
  59. Vandergrift, L., & Goh, C. C. M.
    (2011) Teaching and Learning Second Language Listening: Metacognition in Action (1st ed.). Routledge. 10.4324/9780203843376
    https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203843376 [Google Scholar]
  60. Walk, A. M. M., & Conway, C. M.
    (2015) Implicit statistical learning and language acquisition. Experience-dependent constraints on learning. InRebuschat (ed.) Studies in Bilingualism (SiBil), vol. 48. (Implicit and Explicit Learning of Languages) (pp.191–212). John Benjamins Publishing Company. 10.1075/sibil.48.09walwww.nyariegyetem.hu/magunkrol.php
    https://doi.org/10.1075/sibil.48.09wal [Google Scholar]

Data & Media 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