1887
Volume 2, Issue 1
  • ISSN 2542-3835
  • E-ISSN: 2542-3843
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes

Abstract

Abstract

Second language acquisition cannot take place in the absence of exposure to input. However, despite extensive L2 instruction and/or learning content subjects in L2, many struggle to communicate adequately in their L2 in social and/or academic contexts. A clearer delineation of the concept of ‘exposure’, which requires a review of relevant language acquisition theories and findings, is needed. As such, substantial bodies of work in L2 acquisition by well-known language educators, namely Jim Cummins (‘BICS’ and ‘CALP’), Stephen Krashen (‘Comprehensible Input Hypothesis’), Michael Long (Interaction Hypothesis) and Merril Swain (Output Hypothesis) are reviewed. A review is also made of relevant neuroscience research. Two educational approaches, Content-based instruction (CBI) and Language across the curriculum (LAC), are discussed in relation to the insights obtained, with special reference to contexts influenced by Confucian heritage culture (CHC). To allow subject networking to take place, school managers/L2 policy makers need to actively revamp the curriculum.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/jsls.18002.chu
2019-04-18
2019-09-17
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Andrews, S.
    (2007) Researching and developing teacher language awareness. InJ. Cummins & C. Davison (Eds.), International handbook of English language teaching (pp.945–959). Dordrecht: Springer. 10.1007/978‑0‑387‑46301‑8_63
    https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-46301-8_63 [Google Scholar]
  2. Andrews, S., Fullilove, J., & Wong, Y.
    (2002) Targeting washback – A case study. System, 30, 207–223. 10.1016/S0346‑251X(02)00005‑2
    https://doi.org/10.1016/S0346-251X(02)00005-2 [Google Scholar]
  3. Asian Scientist Newsroom
    Asian Scientist Newsroom (2011, April28). TOEFL: Singapore Third Worldwide in English Proficiency Test, Top in Asia. https://www.asianscientist.com/2011/04/academia/toefl-singapore-worldwide-english-proficiency-top-asia/ (21December 2018).
  4. August, D., & Hakuta, K.
    (Eds.) (1997) Improving schooling for language-minority children. A research agenda. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Baker, C.
    (2006) Foundations of bilingual education and bilingualism (4th ed.). Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Baker, C., & Hornberger, N. H.
    (Eds.) (2001) An introductory reader to the writings of Jim Cummins. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
    [Google Scholar]
  7. Bakhtin, M. M.
    (1935/1981) The dialogic imagination: Four essays by M. M. Bakhtin (C. Emerson & M. Holquist, Trans.). Austin, TX: University of Texas Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Berry, V., & McNeill, A.
    (2005) Raising English Language standards in Hong Kong. Language Policy4, 371–394. doi:  10.1007/s10993‑005‑2887‑z
    https://doi.org/10.1007/s10993-005-2887-z [Google Scholar]
  9. Biber, D.
    (1986) Spoken and written textual dimensions in English: Resolving the contradictory findings. Language, 62, 384–414. 10.2307/414678
    https://doi.org/10.2307/414678 [Google Scholar]
  10. Bottge, B. A.
    (1999) Effects of contextualized math instruction on problem solving of average and below-average achieving students. The Journal of Special Education, 33(2), 81–92. 10.1177/002246699903300202
    https://doi.org/10.1177/002246699903300202 [Google Scholar]
  11. Bruer, J. T.
    (1997) Education and the brain: A bridge too far. Educational researcher, 26 (8), 4–16. 10.3102/0013189X026008004
    https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X026008004 [Google Scholar]
  12. Bruton, A.
    (2011) Is CLIL so beneficial, or just selective? Re-evaluating some of the research, ScienceDirect, 39(4), 523–532.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. Bullock, A.
    (1975) A language for life: Report of the committee of inquiry appointed by the secretary of state for education and science under the chairmanship of Sir Alan Bullock. www.educationengland.org.uk/documents/bullock/bullock1975.html (21December 2018).
    [Google Scholar]
  14. Caine, R. N., & Caine, G.
    (1991) Making connections: Teaching and the human brain. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
    [Google Scholar]
  15. Calvin, W. H.
    (1997) How brains think: Evolving intelligence, then and now. London: Weidenfeld & Nicolson.
    [Google Scholar]
  16. Carless, D. R.
    (2006) Good practices in team teaching in Japan, South Korea and Hong Kong. System, 34(3), 341–351. 10.1016/j.system.2006.02.001
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2006.02.001 [Google Scholar]
  17. Cheng, L.
    (2000) Washback or backwash: A review of the impact of testing on teaching and learning. ERIC Document, ED442280.
    [Google Scholar]
  18. Cho, K. S., Ahn, K. O., & Krashen, S.
    (2005) The effects of narrow reading of authentic texts on interest and reading ability in English as a foreign language. Reading Improvement, 42(1), 58–64.
    [Google Scholar]
  19. Chu, E. Y.
    (2016) A planning error revealed: Mother Tongue education (1998–2010) in Hong Kong. European Journal of Language Policy, 8(2), 153–172. 10.3828/ejlp.2016.10
    https://doi.org/10.3828/ejlp.2016.10 [Google Scholar]
  20. Cobb, T.
    (1997) Is there any measurable learning from hands-on concordancing?System, 25(3), 301–315. 10.1016/S0346‑251X(97)00024‑9
    https://doi.org/10.1016/S0346-251X(97)00024-9 [Google Scholar]
  21. Collier, V. P.
    (1987) Age and rate of acquisition of second language for academic purposes. TESOL quarterly, 21(4), 617–641. 10.2307/3586986
    https://doi.org/10.2307/3586986 [Google Scholar]
  22. Corson, D.
    (1995) Using English words. Dordrecht: Kluwer. 10.1007/978‑94‑011‑0425‑8
    https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-011-0425-8 [Google Scholar]
  23. Coyle, D., Hood, P., & Marsh, D.
    (2010) Content and language integrated learning. Stuttgart: Ernst Klett Sprachen.
    [Google Scholar]
  24. Cummins, J.
    (1979) Cognitive/academic language proficiency, linguistic interdependence, the optimum age question and some other matters. Working Papers on Bilingualism, 19, 121–129.
    [Google Scholar]
  25. (2000) Putting language proficiency in its place: Responding to critiques of the conversational/academic language distinction. InJ. Cenoz & U. Jessner (Eds.), English in Europe: The acquisition of a third language (pp.54–83). Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
    [Google Scholar]
  26. (2007) Rethinking monolingual instructional strategies in multilingual classrooms. Canadian Journal of Applied Linguistics/Revue Canadienne de Linguistique Appliquée, 10(2), 221–240.
    [Google Scholar]
  27. Cummins, J., & Nakajima, K.
    (1987) Age of arrival, length of residence, and interdependence of literacy skills among Japanese immigrant students. InB. Harley (Eds), The development of bilingual proficiency, 3: Social context and age (pp.183–202). Final report.
    [Google Scholar]
  28. Dearden, J.
    (2015) English as a medium of instruction – A growing global phenomenon. London: British Council. https://www.britishcouncil.org/education/ihe/knowledge-centre/english-language-higher-education/report-english-medium-instruction (21December 2018).
    [Google Scholar]
  29. 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]
  30. Doiz, A., & Lasagabaster, D.
    (2004) The effect of the early teaching of English on writing proficiency. International Journal of Bilingualism, 8(4), 525–540. 10.1177/13670069040080040501
    https://doi.org/10.1177/13670069040080040501 [Google Scholar]
  31. Dupuy, B.
    (1999) Narrow listening: An alternative way to develop listening comprehension in the foreign language classroom. System24(1), 97–100.
    [Google Scholar]
  32. Dziedzic, J.
    (2012) A comparison of TPRS and traditional instruction, both with SSR. International Journal of Foreign Language Teaching, 7(2), 4–6.
    [Google Scholar]
  33. Education Bureau
    Education Bureau (2010a) Education Bureau Circular No. 139/2010 Refined English Enhancement Scheme. www.edb.gov.hk/attachment/en/edu-system/primary-secondary/applicable-to-secondary/moi/support-and-resources/refined-english-enhancement-scheme/edbcm139_2010_e.pdf (21December 2018).
    [Google Scholar]
  34. Education Bureau
    Education Bureau (2010b) Enriching our language environment, realising our vision. Hong Kong: Education Bureau, the Government of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region.
    [Google Scholar]
  35. Education Bureau
    Education Bureau (2011) Medium of instruction for secondary schools sharing session – Optimising students’ exposure to English through non-language subjects (10 December 2011). www.edb.gov.hk/en/edu-system/primary-secondary/applicable-to-secondary/moi/key-events-moi-fine-tuning-bg/moi-for-sec-sch-sharing-session/10-dec-2011/key-speech/index.html (21December 2018).
  36. Ellis, R.
    (2001) Investigating form-focussed instruction. InR. Ellis (Ed.), Form-focussed instruction and second language leaning (pp.1–46). Malden, MA: Blackwell.
    [Google Scholar]
  37. Evans, S., & Green, C.
    (2007) Why EAP is necessary: A survey of Hong Kong tertiary students. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 6(1), 3–17. 10.1016/j.jeap.2006.11.005
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2006.11.005 [Google Scholar]
  38. Fillion, B.
    (1979) Language across the curriculum: Examining the place of language in our schools. McGill Journal of Education/Revue des Sciences de l’Éducation de McGill, 14(001).
    [Google Scholar]
  39. Gass, S.
    (1997) Input, interaction, and second language learner. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
    [Google Scholar]
  40. Gonzalez, L. A.
    (1986) The effect of first language education on the second language and academic achievement of Mexican immigrant elementary school children in the United States (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.
  41. Griffin, P., & Woods, K.
    (2009) Evaluation of the enhanced native-speaking English teacher scheme in Hong Kong secondary schools 2009 Melbourne: University of Melbourne, Melbourne Consulting and Custom Programs.
    [Google Scholar]
  42. Gurney, B.
    (1989) Constructivism and professional development: A stereoscopic view. Paper presented at theAnnual Meeting of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching (62nd, San Francisco, CA, March 30-April 1, 1989).
    [Google Scholar]
  43. Harley, B.
    (1993) Instructional strategies and SLA in early French immersion. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 15(2), 245–260. 10.1017/S0272263100011980
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263100011980 [Google Scholar]
  44. Hong Kong Examinations and Assessmnt Authority (HKEAA)
    Hong Kong Examinations and Assessmnt Authority (HKEAA) 2015 Hong Kong Diploma of Secondary Education Examination – Statistics Overview. www.hkeaa.edu.hk/DocLibrary/HKDSE/Exam_Report/Examination_Statistics/dseexamstat15_1.pdf (21December 2018).
  45. Horner, D.
    (1987) Acquisition, learning and the monitor: A critical look at Krashen. System, 15(3), 339–349. 10.1016/0346‑251X(87)90008‑X
    https://doi.org/10.1016/0346-251X(87)90008-X [Google Scholar]
  46. Horst, M., & Meara, P.
    (1999) Test of a model for predicting second language lexical growth through reading. Canadian Modern Language Review, 56(2), 308–328. 10.3138/cmlr.56.2.308
    https://doi.org/10.3138/cmlr.56.2.308 [Google Scholar]
  47. Horst, M., Cobb, T., Cobb, T., & Meara, P.
    (1998) Beyond a clockwork orange: Acquiring second language vocabulary through reading. Reading in a Foreign Language, 11(2), 207–223.
    [Google Scholar]
  48. Hosoda, C., Tanaka, K., Nariai, T., Honda, M., & Hanakawa, T.
    (2013) Dynamic neural network reorganization associated with second language vocabulary acquisition: A multimodal imaging study. Journal of Neuroscience, 33(34), 13663–13672. 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.0410‑13.2013
    https://doi.org/10.1523/JNEUROSCI.0410-13.2013 [Google Scholar]
  49. Hsiao, I. H., & Brusilovsky, P.
    (2008) Modeling peer review in example annotation. InProceedings – ICCE 2008: 16th international conference on computers in education (pp.357–362). Taipei, Taiwan.
    [Google Scholar]
  50. Hu, G., Li, L., & Lei, J.
    (2014) English-medium instruction at a Chinese University: Rhetoric and reality. Language Policy, 13(1), 21–40. 10.1007/s10993‑013‑9298‑3
    https://doi.org/10.1007/s10993-013-9298-3 [Google Scholar]
  51. Jeon, M.
    (2010) Korea’s EPIK (English Program in Korea). InV. Vaish (Ed.), Globalization of language and culture in Asia: The impact of globalization processes on language (pp.161–176). London: Bloomsbury.
    [Google Scholar]
  52. Kang, E. Y.
    (2015) Promoting L2 vocabulary learning through narrow reading. RELC Journal, 46(2), 165–179. 10.1177/0033688215586236
    https://doi.org/10.1177/0033688215586236 [Google Scholar]
  53. Klesmer, H.
    (1994) Assessment and teacher perceptions of ESL student achievement. English Quarterly, 26(3), 8–11.
    [Google Scholar]
  54. Krashen, S. D.
    (1994) The input hypothesis and its rivals. InN. C. Ellis (Ed.), Implicit and explicit learning of languages (pp.45–77). New York, NY: Academic Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  55. (1996) The case for narrow listening. System, 24(1), 97–100. 10.1016/0346‑251X(95)00054‑N
    https://doi.org/10.1016/0346-251X(95)00054-N [Google Scholar]
  56. (1998) Comprehensible output?System, 26(2), 175–182. 10.1016/S0346‑251X(98)00002‑5
    https://doi.org/10.1016/S0346-251X(98)00002-5 [Google Scholar]
  57. (2004) The case for narrow reading. Language Magazine, 3(5), 17–19.
    [Google Scholar]
  58. (2013) Second language acquisition: Theory, applications, and some conjectures. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  59. Krashen, S. D., & Bland, J.
    (2014) Compelling comprehensible input, academic language and school Libraries. Children’s Literature in English Language Education, 2(2), 1–12.
    [Google Scholar]
  60. Krashen, S. D., & Terrell, T. D.
    (1983) The natural approach: Language acquisition in the classroom. ERICNumber: ED230069
    [Google Scholar]
  61. Krug, D. H., & Cohen-Evron, N.
    (2000) Curriculum integration positions and practices in art education. Studies in Art Education, 41(3), 258–275. 10.2307/1320380
    https://doi.org/10.2307/1320380 [Google Scholar]
  62. Kuhn, J., & Müller, A.
    (2014) Context-based science education by newspaper story problems: A study on motivation and learning effects. Perspectives in Science, 2(1), 5–21. 10.1016/j.pisc.2014.06.001
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pisc.2014.06.001 [Google Scholar]
  63. Lasagabaster, D.
    (2011) English achievement and student motivation in CLIL and EFL settings. Innovation in Language Learning and Teaching, 5(1), 3–18. 10.1080/17501229.2010.519030
    https://doi.org/10.1080/17501229.2010.519030 [Google Scholar]
  64. LeDoux, J.
    (1996) Emotional networks and motor control: A fearful view. Progress in Brain Research, 107, 437–446. 10.1016/S0079‑6123(08)61880‑4
    https://doi.org/10.1016/S0079-6123(08)61880-4 [Google Scholar]
  65. Leow, R. P.
    (1998) The effects of amount and type of exposure on adult learners’ L2 development in SLA. The Modern Language Journal, 82(1), 49–68. 10.1111/j.1540‑4781.1998.tb02593.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4781.1998.tb02593.x [Google Scholar]
  66. Li, P., Legault, J., & Litcofsky, K. A.
    (2014) Neuroplasticity as a function of second language learning: Anatomical changes in the human brain. Cortex, 58, 301–324. 10.1016/j.cortex.2014.05.001
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cortex.2014.05.001 [Google Scholar]
  67. Lin, A.
    (2006) Beyond linguistic purism in language-in-education policy and practice: Exploring bilingual pedagogies in a Hong Kong science classroom. Language and Education, 20(4), 287–305. 10.2167/le643.0
    https://doi.org/10.2167/le643.0 [Google Scholar]
  68. (2012) Multilingual and multimodal resources in genre-based pedagogical approaches to L2 English content classrooms. InC. Leung & B. V. Street (Eds.), English a changing medium for education (pp.79–103). Bristol: Multilingual Matters. 10.21832/9781847697721‑007
    https://doi.org/10.21832/9781847697721-007 [Google Scholar]
  69. Long, M.
    (1996) The role of the linguistic environment in second language acquisition. InW. Ritchie & T. Bhatia (Eds.), Handbook of second language acquisition (pp.413–468). San Diego CA: Academic Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  70. Lyster, R., & Ballinger, S.
    (2011) Content-based language teaching: Convergent concerns across divergent contexts. Language Teaching Research, 15(3), 279–288. 10.1177/1362168811401150
    https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168811401150 [Google Scholar]
  71. Martin-Jones, M., & Romaine, S.
    (1986) Semilingualism: A half-baked theory of communicative competence. Applied Linguistics, 7(1), 26–38. 10.1093/applin/7.1.26
    https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/7.1.26 [Google Scholar]
  72. McNeill, A.
  73. Mercer, N., & Sams, C.
    (2006) Teaching children how to use language to solve maths problems. Language and Education, 20(6), 507–528. 10.2167/le678.0
    https://doi.org/10.2167/le678.0 [Google Scholar]
  74. Met, M.
    (2013) Content-based instruction. InM. Byram & A. Hu (Eds), Routledge encyclopedia of language teaching and learning. London: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  75. Meuter, T.
    (2003) Embedded English: Integrating content and language learning in a Swiss primary school project. Bulletin VALS-ASLA, 77, 83–101.
    [Google Scholar]
  76. National Standards for Foreign Language Learning
    National Standards for Foreign Language Learning (1996) Preparing for the 21st century. Yonkers, NY: National Standards in Foreign Language Education Project
    [Google Scholar]
  77. Nguyen, P. M., Terlouw, C., & Pilot, A.
    (2006) Culturally appropriate pedagogy: The case of group learning in a Confucian Heritage Culture context. Intercultural Education, 17(1), 1–19. 10.1080/14675980500502172
    https://doi.org/10.1080/14675980500502172 [Google Scholar]
  78. O’Halloran, K. A.
    (2006) English grammar in context Book, 2: Getting inside English. Milton Keynes, UK: The Open University.
    [Google Scholar]
  79. Pang, M.
    (2016) Pedagogical reasoning in EFL/ESL teaching: Revisiting the importance of teaching lesson planning in second language teacher education. TESOL Quarterly, 50(1), 246–263. 10.1002/tesq.283
    https://doi.org/10.1002/tesq.283 [Google Scholar]
  80. Payne, J. S., & Whitney, P. J.
    (2002) Developing L2 oral proficiency through synchronous CMC: Output, working memory, and interlanguage development. Calico Journal, 20, 7–32. 10.1558/cj.v20i1.7‑32
    https://doi.org/10.1558/cj.v20i1.7-32 [Google Scholar]
  81. Pérez Cañado, M. L.
    (2012) CLIL research in Europe: Past, present, and future. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 15(3), 315–341. 10.1080/13670050.2011.630064
    https://doi.org/10.1080/13670050.2011.630064 [Google Scholar]
  82. Pérez Cañado, M. L., & Lancaster, N. K.
    (2017) The effects of CLIL on oral comprehension and production: A longitudinal case study. Language, Culture and Curriculum, 30(3), 300–316. 10.1080/07908318.2017.1338717
    https://doi.org/10.1080/07908318.2017.1338717 [Google Scholar]
  83. Pérez-Vidal, C., & Roquet, H.
    (2015) CLIL in context: Profiling language abilities. InM. Juan-Garau & J. Salazar-Noguera (Eds.), Content-based language learning in multilingual educational environments (pp.237–255). Cham: Springer.
    [Google Scholar]
  84. Perin, D.
    (2011) Facilitating student learning through contextualization: A review of evidence. Community College Review, 39(3), 268–295. 10.1177/0091552111416227
    https://doi.org/10.1177/0091552111416227 [Google Scholar]
  85. Phuong-Mai, N., Terlouw, C., & Pilot, A.
    (2005) Cooperative learning vs Confucian heritage culture’s collectivism: Confrontation to reveal some cultural conflicts and mismatch. Asia Europe Journal3(3): 403–419. 10.1007/s10308‑005‑0008‑4
    https://doi.org/10.1007/s10308-005-0008-4 [Google Scholar]
  86. Piefke, M., & Markowitsch, H. J.
    (2008) Contextualization: Memory formation and retrieval in a nested environment. InT. Marks-Tarlow, S. Vrobel, & O. E. Rössler (Eds.), Simultaneity: Temporal structures and observer perspectives (pp.130–149). Oxford: World Scientific. 10.1142/9789812792426_0009
    https://doi.org/10.1142/9789812792426_0009 [Google Scholar]
  87. Poon, A. Y. K.
    (2010) Language use, and language policy and planning in Hong Kong. Current Issues in Language Planning, 11(1), 1–66. 10.1080/14664201003682327
    https://doi.org/10.1080/14664201003682327 [Google Scholar]
  88. (2013) Will the new fine-tuning medium-of-instruction policy alleviate the threats of dominance of English-medium instruction in Hong Kong?Current Issues in Language Planning, 14(1), 34–51. 10.1080/14664208.2013.791223
    https://doi.org/10.1080/14664208.2013.791223 [Google Scholar]
  89. Prieto-Arranz, J. I., Fabra, L. R., Calafat-Ripoll, C., & Catrain-González, M.
    (2015) Testing progress on receptive skills in CLIL and non-CLIL contexts. InM. Juan-Garau & J. Salazar-Noguera (Eds.), Content-based language learning in multilingual educational environments (pp.123–137). Cham: Springer.
    [Google Scholar]
  90. Rodrigo, V., & Krashen, S.
    (1996) La aplicación del argumento de la audición enfocada en el Aula de Clase. Granada English Teaching Assocation, 4(2), 71–75.
    [Google Scholar]
  91. Rojas-Drummond, S., Mazón, N., Littleton, K., & Vélez, M.
    (2014) Developing reading comprehension through collaborative learning. Journal of Research in Reading, 37(2), 138–158. 10.1111/j.1467‑9817.2011.01526.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9817.2011.01526.x [Google Scholar]
  92. Rumlich, D.
    (2017) CLIL theory and empirical reality – Two sides of the same coin?Journal of Immersion and Content-Based Language Education, 5(1), 110–134. 10.1075/jicb.5.1.05rum
    https://doi.org/10.1075/jicb.5.1.05rum [Google Scholar]
  93. Scollon, R., Scollon, S. W., & Jones, R.
    (2012) Intercultural Communication: A Discourse Approach. Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell.
    [Google Scholar]
  94. Sheen, R.
    (2002) A response to Lightbown’s (2000) ‘Anniversary article: Classroom SLA research and second language teaching’. Applied Linguistics, 23(4), 519–528. 10.1093/applin/23.4.519
    https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/23.4.519 [Google Scholar]
  95. Shrum, J. L., & Glisan, E.
    (2015) Teacher’s handbook, contextualized language instruction. Boston, MA: Cengage Learning.
    [Google Scholar]
  96. Sigman, M., Peña, M., Goldin, A. P., & Ribeiro, S.
    (2014) Neuroscience and education: Prime time to build the bridge. Nature Neuroscience, 17(4), 497–502. 10.1038/nn.3672
    https://doi.org/10.1038/nn.3672 [Google Scholar]
  97. Song, B.
    (2006) Content-based ESL instruction: Long-term effects and outcomes. English for Specific Purposes, 25(4), 420–437. 10.1016/j.esp.2005.09.002
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2005.09.002 [Google Scholar]
  98. Skutnabb-Kangas, T., & Toukomaa, P.
    (1976) Teaching migrant children’s mother tongue and learning the language of the host country in the context of the socio-cultural situation of the migrant family. Tampereen yliopiston sosiologian ja sosiaalipsykologian laitos.
    [Google Scholar]
  99. Snow, C. E., Cancino, H., De Temple, J., & Schley, S.
    (1991) Giving formal definitions: A linguistic or metalinguistic skill. InE. Bialystok (Ed.), Language processing in bilingual children (pp.90–112). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511620652.007
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511620652.007 [Google Scholar]
  100. Swain, M.
    (1997) Collaborative dialogue: Its contribution to second language learning. Revista Canaria de Estudios Ingleses, 34(1), 115–132.
    [Google Scholar]
  101. (2000) The Output Hypothesis and beyond: Mediating acquisition through collaborative dialogue. InJ. P. Lantolf (Ed.), Sociocultural theory and second language learning (pp.97–114). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  102. Swain, M., & Lapkin, S.
    (1998) Interaction and second language learning: Two adolescent French immersion students working together. The Modern Language Journal, 82(3), 320–337. 10.1111/j.1540‑4781.1998.tb01209.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4781.1998.tb01209.x [Google Scholar]
  103. Tavares, N. J.
    (2015) How strategic use of L1 in an L2-medium mathematics classroom facilitates L2 interaction and comprehension, International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 18(3), 319–335. 10.1080/13670050.2014.988115
    https://doi.org/10.1080/13670050.2014.988115 [Google Scholar]
  104. Vygotsky, L.
    (1978) Interaction between learning and development. Readings on the Development of Children, 23(3), 34–41.
    [Google Scholar]
  105. Wang, L., & Kirkpatrick, A.
    (2013) Trilingual education in Hong Kong primary schools: A case study. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 16(1), 100–116. 10.1080/13670050.2012.689479
    https://doi.org/10.1080/13670050.2012.689479 [Google Scholar]
  106. Watanabe, Y., & Swain, M.
    (2007) Effects of proficiency differences and patterns of pair interaction on second language learning: Collaborative dialogue between adult ESL learners. Language Teaching Research, 11(2), 121–142. 10.1177/136216880607074599
    https://doi.org/10.1177/136216880607074599 [Google Scholar]
  107. Wen, Z., Mota, M. B., & McNeill, A.
    (Eds.) (2015) Working memory in second language acquisition and processing. Bristol: Multilingual Matters. 10.21832/9781783093595
    https://doi.org/10.21832/9781783093595 [Google Scholar]
  108. Xiaohui, H.
    (2010) An empirical study on the effects of comprehensible input on incidental English vocabulary recognition. Chinese Journal of Applied Linguistics (Foreign Language Teaching & Research Press), 33(6).
    [Google Scholar]
  109. Xu, F.
    (2010) The role of input and interaction in second language acquisition. Cross-cultural Communication, 6(1), 11.
    [Google Scholar]
  110. Yashima, T. & Zenuk-Nishide, L.
    (2008) The impact of learning contexts on proficiency, attitudes, and L2 communication: Creating an imagined international community. System, 36(4), 566–585. 10.1016/j.system.2008.03.006
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2008.03.006 [Google Scholar]
  111. Zafar, M.
    (2011) Monitoring the ‘monitor’: A critique of Krashen’s five hypotheses. Dhaka University Journal of Linguistics, 2(4), 139–146. 10.3329/dujl.v2i4.6903
    https://doi.org/10.3329/dujl.v2i4.6903 [Google Scholar]
  112. Zull, J. E.
    (2011) From brain to mind: Using neuroscience to guide change in education. Sterling, VA: Stylus Publication.
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1075/jsls.18002.chu
Loading
/content/journals/10.1075/jsls.18002.chu
Loading

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