Hostname: page-component-7dd5485656-glrdx Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-10-30T17:03:00.187Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

In Search of Systematicity in Interlanguage Production

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  07 November 2008

Jacquelyn Schachter
Jacquelyn Schachter
Affiliation:
University of Southern California
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This study evaluates a working hypothesis held by a number of second-language researchers that second-language learners progress in their acquisition of target language structure by observing regularities in their input, implicitly forming hypotheses, testing those hypotheses against further input, and revising some while dropping others as a result of their fit with the input. The study considers four possible sources for variability encountered in learner language: (1) the situation(s) in which particular forms are produced; (2) the learner's encoding and decoding capabilities; (3) the target language itself, whereby systematicity at one level may leave variability at another; and (4) the analyst and procedural decisions that may effect the perception of variability. The study concludes that the analyst's task must match in complexity that of the language learner if the fullness of the learner's accomplishments is to be captured accurately.

Information

Type
Articles
Information
Studies in Second Language Acquisition , Volume 8 , Issue 2 , June 1986 , pp. 119 - 133
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1986

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

REFERENCES

Andersen, R. 1984. The one to one principle of interlanguage construction. Language Learning 34; 77–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bialystok, E. 1981. A differentiation approach to the development of language proficiency. Paper presented at the Troisième Colloque International “Acquisition d'une langue étrangère: perspectives de recherche”, Université de Paris VIII, St. Denis.Google Scholar
Bloom, L. 1970. Language development: Form & function in emerging grammars. Research monograph #59. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Bloom, L. 1981. The importance of language for language development: Linguistic determinism in the 1980's. Paper presented to the New York Academy of Sciences Conference on Native Languages and Foreign Language Acquisition.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bolinger, D. 1977. Meaning and form. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Brown, P. & Fraser, C.. 1979. Speech as a marker of situation. In Scherer, K. & Giles, H. (eds.), Social markers in speech. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Brown, R. 1973. A first language: The early stages. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cazden, C., Cancino, H., Rosansky, E., & Schumann, J.. 1975. Second language acquisition sequences in children, adolescents, and adults. Final Report, U.S. Dept. of Health, Education, and Welfare, National Institute of Education; Office of Research Grants, Project #730 744, Grant #NE–6–00–3–0014.Google Scholar
Dulay, H. & Burt, M.. 1978. Some remarks on creativity in language acquisition. In Ritchie, W. (ed.), Second language acquisition research. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Ellis, R. 1985. Sources of variability in interlanguage. Applied Linguistics 6; 118–131.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gundel, J. & Tarone, E.. 1983. Language transfer and the acquisition of pronominal anaphora. In Gass, S. & Selinker, L. (eds.), Language transfer in language learning. Rowley, MA: Newbury House.Google Scholar
Hakuta, K. 1975. Becoming bilingual at age five: The story of Uguisu. Honors thesis. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University.Google Scholar
Hatch, E. & Wagner-Gough, J.. 1976. Explaining sequence and variation in second language acquisition. Language Learning 4 (special issue).Google Scholar
Krashen, S. 1981. Second language acquisition & second language learning. Oxford: Pergamon Press.Google Scholar
McLaughlin, B., Rossman, T., & McLeod, B.. 1983. Second language learning: An information-processing perspective. Language Learning 33; 35–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Newmeyer, F. J. 1983. Grammatical theory. Its limits and its possibilities. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Schachter, J. 1983. A new account of language transfer. In Gass, S. & Selinker, L. (eds), Language transfer in language learning. Rowley, MA: Newbury House.Google Scholar
Schachter, J. & Hart, B.. 1979. An analysis of learner production of English structures. In Georgetown University papers on languages & linguistics. No. 15.Google Scholar
Schachter, P. 1978. English propredicates. Linguistic Analysis 4; 187–224.Google Scholar
Tarone, E. 1979. Interlanguage as chameleon. Language Learning 29; 181–192.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tarone, E. 1985. Variability in interlanguage use: A study of style-shifting in morphology and syntax. Language Learning 35; 373–404.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tarone, E.Frauenfelder, U., & Selinker, L.. 1976. Systemalicity/Variability in interlanguage systems. Language Learning 4 (special issue); 93–134.Google Scholar