1887
  1. Home
  2. e-Journals
  3. Pedagogical Linguistics
  4. Online First Articles
  5. Online First Article
image of Unified pedagogical linguistics
EPUB
PDF

Abstract

This article argues that generative and usage-based theories of Second Language Acquisition (SLA), which are often treated as incompatible, offer complementary insights for language teaching. While generative approaches can draw on formal linguistic theory to identify linguistic properties that are likely to cause difficulty for learners, usage-based models based on frequency, analogy and schematisation shed light on how learners can engage with the input to eventually overcome these difficulties. Drawing on recent theoretical discussions and classroom-based empirical studies, I argue that both traditions are therefore well-equipped to address two fundamental questions related to language pedagogy: properties should be taught, and should these be taught? I illustrate how this synergy can be applied to inform the teaching of complex grammatical features, such as article semantics and -questions, through both formal linguistic analysis and usage-based instructional design. By reframing SLA debates around a shared pedagogical goal, this article hopes to encourage more dialogue across traditionally distinct theoretical frameworks and contribute towards closing the gap between linguistic theory and classroom practice.

© John Benjamins Publishing Company
Available under the CC BY 4.0 license.
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/pl.25015.ham
2025-10-02
2026-06-10

  • From This Site

    /content/journals/10.1075/pl.25015.ham
    dcterms_title,dcterms_subject,pub_keyword
    -contentType:Journal -contentType:Contributor -contentType:Concept -contentType:Institution
    10
    5
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

/deliver/fulltext/10.1075/pl.25015.ham/pl.25015.ham.html?itemId=/content/journals/10.1075/pl.25015.ham&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah

References

  1. Badger, R.
    (2006) Investigating agonism in linguistics. Journal of Pragmatics, (), –. 10.1016/j.pragma.2005.10.004
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2005.10.004 [Google Scholar]
  2. Bayram, F., & Rothman, J.
    (2020) Formal Linguistics and Language Education: A View from Bilingualism Research. In: Trotzke, A. & Kupisch, T. (Eds.), Formal Linguistics and Language Education. Educational Linguistics (pp–). Springer, Cham. 10.1007/978‑3‑030‑39257‑4_2
     https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-39257-4_2 [Google Scholar]
  3. Buescher, K., & Strauss, S.
    (2018) Conceptual frameworks and L2 pedagogy. InTyler, A., Ortega, L., Uno, M. & Park, H. (Eds). Usage-inspired L2 Instruction: Researched pedagogy. (pp.–) John Benjamins Publishing Company. 10.1075/lllt.49.05bue
     https://doi.org/10.1075/lllt.49.05bue [Google Scholar]
  4. Bybee, J. L., & Eddington, D.
    (2006) A usage-based approach to Spanish verbs of ‘becoming’. Language, (), –. 10.1353/lan.2006.0081
     https://doi.org/10.1353/lan.2006.0081 [Google Scholar]
  5. Chomsky, N.
    (2014) The minimalist program. MIT press. 10.7551/mitpress/9780262527347.001.0001
     https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/9780262527347.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  6. (2017) Language architecture and its import for evolution. Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews, , –. 10.1016/j.neubiorev.2017.01.053
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neubiorev.2017.01.053 [Google Scholar]
  7. Crain, S., Koring, L., & Thornton, R.
    (2017) Language acquisition from a biolinguistic perspective. Neuroscience and biobehavioral reviews, (), –. 10.1016/j.neubiorev.2016.09.004
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neubiorev.2016.09.004 [Google Scholar]
  8. Christiansen, M. H., & Chater, N.
    (2009) The myth of language universals and the myth of universal grammar. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, (), –. 10.1017/S0140525X09990641
     https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X09990641 [Google Scholar]
  9. Dąbrowska, E.
    (2015) What exactly is Universal Grammar, and has anyone seen it?. Frontiers in psychology, , . 10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00852
     https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00852 [Google Scholar]
  10. De Bot, K., Lowie, W., & Verspoor, M.
    (2007) A dynamic systems theory approach to second language acquisition. Bilingualism: Language and cognition, (), –. 10.1017/S1366728906002732
     https://doi.org/10.1017/S1366728906002732 [Google Scholar]
  11. De Bot, K.
    (2015) Moving where? A reaction to Slabakova et al. (2014). Applied Linguistics, (), –. 10.1093/applin/amu074
     https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amu074 [Google Scholar]
  12. DeKeyser, R.
    (2017) Knowledge and skill in ISLA. InLowen, S., & Sato, M. (Eds). The Routledge handbook of instructed second language acquisition. (pp.–). Routledge. 10.4324/9781315676968‑2
     https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315676968-2 [Google Scholar]
  13. Ellis, N. C.
    (2002a) Frequency effects in language processing: A review with implications for theories of implicit and explicit language acquisition. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, (), –. 10.1017/S0272263102002024
     https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263102002024 [Google Scholar]
  14. (2005) At the interface: Dynamic interactions of explicit and implicit language knowledge. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, , –. 10.1017/S027226310505014X
     https://doi.org/10.1017/S027226310505014X [Google Scholar]
  15. (2015) Implicit and explicit language learning: Their dynamic interface and complexity. InRebuschat, P. (Eds.). Implicit and Explicit Learning of Languages. (pp.–) John Benjamins Publishing Company. 10.1075/sibil.48.01ell
     https://doi.org/10.1075/sibil.48.01ell [Google Scholar]
  16. (2022) Second language learning of morphology. Journal of the European Second Language Association, (). 10.22599/jesla.85
     https://doi.org/10.22599/jesla.85 [Google Scholar]
  17. Eskildsen, S. W.
    (2015) What counts as a developmental sequence? Exemplar-based L2 learning of English questions. Language Learning, (), –. 10.1111/lang.12090
     https://doi.org/10.1111/lang.12090 [Google Scholar]
  18. Evans, N., & Levinson, S. C.
    (2009) The myth of language universals: Language diversity and its importance for cognitive science. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, (), –. 10.1017/S0140525X0999094X
     https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X0999094X [Google Scholar]
  19. Gil, K. H., Marsden, H., & Whong, M.
    (2019) The meaning of negation in the second language classroom: Evidence from ‘any’. Language Teaching Research, (), –. 10.1177/1362168817740144
     https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168817740144 [Google Scholar]
  20. Hammond, T., & Gil, K. H.
    (2023a) Interrogative chunks, derivational complexity and L1 transfer at the initial state of L2 French. InBUCLD 47: Proceedings of the 47th annual Boston University Conference on Language Development (pp.–). Cascadilla Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  21. (2023b) Fixed wh-expressions in classroom second language acquisition: databases of computational properties or utterance schemas?. Journal of the European Second Language Association, (), –. 10.22599/jesla.100
     https://doi.org/10.22599/jesla.100 [Google Scholar]
  22. Hammond, T. & Gil, K. H.
    (2025) Formulaic expressions and functional categories in classroom SLA: Evidence from a longitudinal corpus. Instructed Second Language Acquisition, (), –. 10.3138/isla‑2025‑0014
     https://doi.org/10.3138/isla-2025-0014 [Google Scholar]
  23. Hess, E. K., & Amory, M.
    (2022) Promoting Korean learners’ conceptual development of honorifics through concept-based language instruction. Language Teaching Research, (). 10.1177/13621688221135567
     https://doi.org/10.1177/13621688221135567 [Google Scholar]
  24. Horbowicz, P., & Nordanger, M.
    (2021) Epistemic constructions in L2 Norwegian: A usage-based longitudinal study of formulaic and productive patterns. Language and Cognition, (), –. 10.1017/langcog.2021.9
     https://doi.org/10.1017/langcog.2021.9 [Google Scholar]
  25. (2025) Managing the flow of talk: A longitudinal case study of the multiword expression ‘det er sant’ in L2 Norwegian interactions. Applied Linguistics, (), –. 10.1093/applin/amae006
     https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amae006 [Google Scholar]
  26. Hwang, H.-B., Coss, M. D., Sato, M., Cárcamo, B., Nguyen, M. X. N. C., Dao, P., … Ortega, L.
    (2024) (Re)Examining the research–practice interface: International perspectives, multiple methods, persistent challenges, and novel directions. Language Teaching, (), –. 10.1017/S0261444824000181
     https://doi.org/10.1017/S0261444824000181 [Google Scholar]
  27. Ionin, T.
    (2007) DST vs. UG: Can DST account for purely linguistic phenomena?. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, (), –. 10.1017/S1366728906002756
     https://doi.org/10.1017/S1366728906002756 [Google Scholar]
  28. Ionin, T., Ko, H., & Wexler, K.
    (2004) Article semantics in L2 acquisition: the role of specificity. Language Acquisition(): –. 10.1207/s15327817la1201_2
     https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327817la1201_2 [Google Scholar]
  29. Ionin, T., Zubizarreta, M. L., & Bautista Maldonado, S.
    (2008) Sources of linguistic knowledge in the second language acquisition of English articles. Lingua(): –. 10.1016/j.lingua.2006.11.012
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lingua.2006.11.012 [Google Scholar]
  30. Jakubowicz, C.
    (2011) Measuring derivational complexity: New evidence from typically developing and SLI learners of L1 French. Lingua, (), –. 10.1016/j.lingua.2010.10.006
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lingua.2010.10.006 [Google Scholar]
  31. Johns, T.
    (1991) From printout to handout: Grammar and vocabulary teaching in the context of data-driven learning. English Language Research Journal, , –.
     [Google Scholar]
  32. Krashen, S. D.
    (1985) The input hypothesis: Issues and implications. Longman ELT.
     [Google Scholar]
  33. Langacker, R. W.
    (1987) Foundation of Cognitive Grammar (Vol. 1). Theoretical Prerequisites. Stanford University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  34. (2013) Essentials of cognitive grammar. Oxford University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  35. Lesonen, S., Steinkrauss, R., Suni, M., & Verspoor, M.
    (2020) Lexically specific vs. productive constructions in L2 Finnish. Language and Cognition, (), –. 10.1017/langcog.2020.12
     https://doi.org/10.1017/langcog.2020.12 [Google Scholar]
  36. Lieven, E., Salomo, D. & Tomasello, M.
    (2009) Two-year-old children’s production of multiword utterances: A usage-based analysis. Cognitive Linguistics, (), –. 10.1515/COGL.2009.022
     https://doi.org/10.1515/COGL.2009.022 [Google Scholar]
  37. Long, M.
    (1996) The role of the linguistic environment in second language acquisition. InW. C. Ritchie & T. K. Bhatia, (Eds.), Handbook of Second Language Acquisition (pp.–). New York, NY: Academic Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  38. Lopez, E., & Sabir, M.
    (2019) Article pedagogy: Encouraging links between linguistic theory and teaching practice. RELC journal, (), –. 10.1177/0033688217730143
     https://doi.org/10.1177/0033688217730143 [Google Scholar]
  39. Lyons, C.
    (1999) Definiteness. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511605789
     https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511605789 [Google Scholar]
  40. Marsden, H., & Slabakova, R.
    (2019) Grammatical meaning and the second language classroom: Introduction. Language Teaching Research, (), –. 10.1177/1362168817752718
     https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168817752718 [Google Scholar]
  41. Masuda, K., Ohta, A. S., & Tsujihara, R.
    (2025) Concept-based language instruction: Usage-based linguistics and sociocultural theory in teaching Japanese. Taylor & Francis. 10.4324/9781032628615
     https://doi.org/10.4324/9781032628615 [Google Scholar]
  42. Michel, M., Atkinson, D., Ribeiro, A. C., Alexopoulou, T., Cappellini, M., Eskildsen, S. W., … & Zheng, Y.
    (2025) Forging common ground in second language acquisition and teaching: A combined synergy statement. The Modern Language Journal, (), –. 10.1111/modl.12983
     https://doi.org/10.1111/modl.12983 [Google Scholar]
  43. Moro, A.
    (2016) Impossible languages. MIT press. 10.7551/mitpress/9780262034890.001.0001
     https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/9780262034890.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  44. Newmeyer, F. J.
    (2000) Language form and language function. MIT press.
     [Google Scholar]
  45. O’Grady, W.
    (2012) Three factors in the design and acquisition of language. WIREs Cognit. Sci. 3(), –. 10.1002/wcs.1188
     https://doi.org/10.1002/wcs.1188 [Google Scholar]
  46. Paradis, M.
    (2004) Neurolinguistic Theory of Bilingualism. John Benjamins, Amsterdam-Philadelphia. 10.1075/sibil.18
     https://doi.org/10.1075/sibil.18 [Google Scholar]
  47. (2009) Declarative and Procedural Determinants of Second Languages. John Benjamins. 10.1075/sibil.40
     https://doi.org/10.1075/sibil.40 [Google Scholar]
  48. Pinker, S., & Jackendoff, R.
    (2009) The reality of a universal language faculty. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, (), –. 10.1017/S0140525X09990720
     https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X09990720 [Google Scholar]
  49. Pullum, G. K., & Scholz, B. C.
    (2002) Empirical assessment of stimulus poverty arguments. The linguistic review, (), –. 10.1515/tlir.19.1‑2.9
     https://doi.org/10.1515/tlir.19.1-2.9 [Google Scholar]
  50. Qin, J., Wu, Z. & Zhong, S.
    (2023) When concept-based language instruction meets cognitive linguistics: teaching English phrasal verbs with up and out. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, (), –. 10.1515/iral‑2021‑0164
     https://doi.org/10.1515/iral-2021-0164 [Google Scholar]
  51. Qin, L., Ouyang, X., & Ren, W.
    (2023) Decoding EFL learners’ internalization of English modal verbs in concept-based language instruction: Integrating SCOBAs with languaging. Modern Language Journal, , –. 10.1111/modl.12821
     https://doi.org/10.1111/modl.12821 [Google Scholar]
  52. Rankin, T., & Unsworth, S.
    (2016) Beyond poverty: Engaging with input in generative SLA. Second Language Research, (), –. 10.1177/0267658316648732
     https://doi.org/10.1177/0267658316648732 [Google Scholar]
  53. Rankin, T., & Whong, M.
    (2020) Grammar: A linguists’ guide for language teachers. Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/9781108623360
     https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108623360 [Google Scholar]
  54. Rastelli, S.
    (2014) Discontinuity in second language acquisition: The switch between statistical and grammatical learning. Multilingual Matters.
     [Google Scholar]
  55. (2019) The discontinuity model: Statistical and grammatical learning in adult second-language acquisition. Language Acquisition, (), –. 10.1080/10489223.2019.1571594
     https://doi.org/10.1080/10489223.2019.1571594 [Google Scholar]
  56. (2024) The Frequency-Grammar Interface: Rules and regularities in first and second languages. John Benjamins Publishing Company. 10.1075/bpa.20
     https://doi.org/10.1075/bpa.20 [Google Scholar]
  57. (2025) Third-way linguistics: generative and usage-based theories are both right. Language Sciences, , . 10.1016/j.langsci.2024.101685
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.langsci.2024.101685 [Google Scholar]
  58. Rastelli, S. & Gil, K.
    (2018) No fear of George Kinglsley Zipf: Language classroom, statistics and universal grammar. Instructed Second Language Acquisition, ():–. 10.1558/isla.37291
     https://doi.org/10.1558/isla.37291 [Google Scholar]
  59. Reber, A. S.
    (2011) An epitaph for grammar: An abridged history. InSanz, C., & Leow, R. P. (Eds.). Implicit and explicit language learning: Conditions, processes, and knowledge in SLA and bilingualism, (pp.–). Georgetown University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  60. Roehr-Brackin, K.
    (2014) Explicit knowledge and processes from a usage-based perspective: The developmental trajectory of an instructed L2 learner. Language Learning, (), –. 10.1111/lang.12081
     https://doi.org/10.1111/lang.12081 [Google Scholar]
  61. Rothman, J. & Slabakova, R.
    (2018) The generative approach to SLA and its place in modern second language studies. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, ():–. 10.1017/S0272263117000134
     https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263117000134 [Google Scholar]
  62. Rothman, J., Bayram, F., Cunnings, I., & Gonzalez Alonso, J.
    (2019) Formal linguistics approaches to adult second language acquisition and processing. InSchwieter, J. & Benati, A., (Eds.), The Cambridge Handbook of Language Learning (pp.–). Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/9781108333603.002
     https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108333603.002 [Google Scholar]
  63. Römer, U.
    (2024) Usage-based approaches to second language acquisition vis-à-vis data-driven learning. TESOL Quarterly, (), –. 10.1002/tesq.3278
     https://doi.org/10.1002/tesq.3278 [Google Scholar]
  64. Sato, M., Thorne, S. L., Michel, M., Alexopoulou, T., & Hellermann, J.
    (2025) Language, people, classrooms, world: Blending disparate theories for united language education practices. The Modern Language Journal, (), –. 10.1111/modl.12976
     https://doi.org/10.1111/modl.12976 [Google Scholar]
  65. Schmidt, R. W.
    (1990) The role of consciousness in second language learning. Applied Linguistics, (), –. 10.1093/applin/11.2.129
     https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/11.2.129 [Google Scholar]
  66. Schwartz, B. D.
    (1993) On Explicit and Negative Data Effecting and Affecting Competence and Linguistic Behavior. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, (), –. 10.1017/S0272263100011931
     https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263100011931 [Google Scholar]
  67. Slabakova, R.
    (2013) What is easy and what is hard to acquire in a second language: A generative perspective. InM. García Mayo, M. Junkal Gutiérrez Mangado & M. Martínez-Adrián (Eds.), Contemporary approaches to second language acquisition (pp.–). John Benjamins Publishing Company. 10.1075/aals.9.04ch1
     https://doi.org/10.1075/aals.9.04ch1 [Google Scholar]
  68. Slabakova, R., Leal, T., & Liskin-Gasparro, J.
    (2015) Rumors of UG’s demise have been greatly exaggerated. Applied Linguistics, (), –. 10.1093/applin/amv007
     https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amv007 [Google Scholar]
  69. Slabakova, R.
    (2019) The Bottleneck Hypothesis updated. InT. Ionin & M. Rispoli (Eds.), Three Streams of Generative Language Acquisition Research: Selected papers from the 7th Meeting of Generative Approaches to Language Acquisition — North America, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign (pp.–). John Benjamins Publishing Company. 10.1075/lald.63.16sla
     https://doi.org/10.1075/lald.63.16sla [Google Scholar]
  70. Snape, N., & Yusa, N.
    (2013) Explicit article instruction in definiteness, specificity, genericity and perception. In: Whong, M., Gil, K., & Marsden, H. (Eds.), Universal Grammar and the Second Language Classroom (pp.–). Springer. 10.1007/978‑94‑007‑6362‑3_9
     https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-6362-3_9 [Google Scholar]
  71. Swain, M.
    (1985) Communicative competence: Some roles of comprehensible input and comprehensible output in its development. InGass, S. & Madden, C., (Eds). Input in second language acquisition (pp.–). Newbury House, Rowley, Mass.
     [Google Scholar]
  72. Tannen, D.
    (2002) Agonism in academic discourse. Journal of Pragmatics, , –. 10.1016/S0378‑2166(02)00079‑6
     https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-2166(02)00079-6 [Google Scholar]
  73. Thomas, M.
    (2019) Formalism and functionalism in linguistics: The engineer and the collector. Routledge. 10.4324/9780429455858
     https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429455858 [Google Scholar]
  74. Tomasello, M., & Abbot-Smith, K.
    (2002) A tale of two theories: Response to Fisher. Cognition, (), –. 10.1016/S0010‑0277(01)00172‑X
     https://doi.org/10.1016/S0010-0277(01)00172-X [Google Scholar]
  75. Tomasello, M.
    (2009) Universal grammar is dead. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, (), –. 10.1017/S0140525X09990744
     https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X09990744 [Google Scholar]
  76. Trotzke, A.
    (2023) Pedagogical linguistics: Connecting formal linguistics to language teaching. Language, (), –. 10.1353/lan.2023.a907016
     https://doi.org/10.1353/lan.2023.a907016 [Google Scholar]
  77. Trotzke, A., & Rankin, T.
    (2020) Introduction to pedagogical linguistics. Pedagogical Linguistics, (), –. 10.1075/pl.19015.tro
     https://doi.org/10.1075/pl.19015.tro [Google Scholar]
  78. Truscott, J., & Sharwood Smith, M.
    (2004) Acquisition by processing: A modular perspective on language development. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, , –. 10.1017/S1366728904001178
     https://doi.org/10.1017/S1366728904001178 [Google Scholar]
  79. Truscott, J. & Sharwood Smith, M.
    (2019) The Internal Context of Bilingual Processing. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/bpa.8
     https://doi.org/10.1075/bpa.8 [Google Scholar]
  80. Truscott, J., & Sharwood Smith, M.
    (2024) Dangerous dichotomies and misunderstandings in L2 research. Second Language Research, (), –. 10.1177/02676583241276433
     https://doi.org/10.1177/02676583241276433 [Google Scholar]
  81. Tsai, M. H.
    (2020) Teaching L2 collocations through concept-based instruction: The effect of L2 proficiency and congruency. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, (), –. 10.1111/ijal.12311
     https://doi.org/10.1111/ijal.12311 [Google Scholar]
  82. Tyler, A. E., & Ortega, L.
    (2018) Usage-inspired L2 instruction: Some reflections and a heuristic. InTyler, A., Ortega, L., Uno, M. & Park, H. (Eds). Usage-inspired L2 Instruction: Researched pedagogy. (pp.–). John Benjamins Publishing Company. 10.1075/lllt.49.14tyl
     https://doi.org/10.1075/lllt.49.14tyl [Google Scholar]
  83. Umeda, M., Snape, N., Yusa, N., & Wiltshier, J.
    (2019) The long-term effect of explicit instruction on learners’ knowledge on English articles. Language Teaching Research, (), –. 10.1177/1362168817739648
     https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168817739648 [Google Scholar]
  84. VanPatten, B.
    (2025) Input processing in Adult L2 acquisition. InVanPatten, B., Keating, G. D., & Wulff, S. (Eds.). Theories in Second Language Acquisition: An Introduction (4th ed. (pp.–). Routledge. 10.4324/9781003491118‑4
     https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003491118-4 [Google Scholar]
  85. White, L.
    (1991) Adverb placement in second language acquisition: some effects of positive and negative evidence in the classroom. Second Language Research, (), –.
     [Google Scholar]
  86. (2023) Should linguistics be applied and, if so, how?. Language Teaching, (), –. 10.1017/S0261444822000313
     https://doi.org/10.1017/S0261444822000313 [Google Scholar]
  87. Whong, M.
    (2011) Language teaching: Linguistic theory in practice. Edinburgh University Press. 10.1515/9780748636365
     https://doi.org/10.1515/9780748636365 [Google Scholar]
  88. Whong, M., Gil, K. H., & Marsden, H.
    (2014) ‘Beyond paradigm: The ‘what’ and the ‘how’ of classroom research’, Second Language Research, (): –. 10.1177/0267658314526749
     https://doi.org/10.1177/0267658314526749 [Google Scholar]
  89. Widdowson, H. G.
    (2020) On the subject of English: The linguistics of language use and learning. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
     [Google Scholar]
  90. Yang, C., & Montrul, S.
    (2017) Learning datives: The Tolerance Principle in monolingual and bilingual acquisition. Second Language Research, (), –. 10.1177/0267658316673686
     https://doi.org/10.1177/0267658316673686 [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/10.1075/pl.25015.ham
Loading
Unified pedagogical linguistics
John Benjamins ; https://doi.org/10.1075/pl.25015.ham
/content/journals/10.1075/pl.25015.ham
/content/journals/10.1075/pl.25015.ham
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keywords: pedagogical linguistics ; generative SLA ; language teaching ; usage-based SLA

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