Hostname: page-component-76c49bb84f-6sxsx Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-07-09T00:27:12.020Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Grammatically Judgments and Second Language Acquisition

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  07 November 2008

Rod Ellis
Rod Ellis
Affiliation:
Temple University Japan
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

This article takes a critical look at grammaticality judgment tasks in second language acquisition research. It begins by examining the theoretical assumptions that underlie grammaticality judgment tasks, pointing out that previous studies have reported considerable differences between the results obtained from grammaticality judgment tasks and from other, production-oriented tasks. A description of the design features of grammaticality judgment tasks that have been used to date is then provided. There follows an account of a small-scale study designed to investigate the nature of learner judgments. Twenty-one adult advanced Chinese learners of English were asked to judge sentences designed to test their knowledge of dative alternation. The results indicated that the learners rarely used the “not sure” option in the test. Eight of these subjects were then administered a reduced version of the original test as a think-aloud task 1 week later. The results showed that these learners were inconsistent in 22.5% of their judgments. The think-aloud protocols showed that they resorted to a variety of strategies in making judgments. The article concludes by arguing that grammaticality judgment tasks elicit a particular kind of performance that needs to be understood much more thoroughly before it is used as a basis for investigating second language acquisition.

Information

Type
Articles
Information
Studies in Second Language Acquisition , Volume 13 , Issue 2 , June 1991 , pp. 161 - 186
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1991

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

Arthur, B. (1980). Gauging the boundaries of second language competence: A study of learner judgements. Language Learning, 30, 177–194.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bialystok, E. (1979). Explicit and implicit judgements of L2 grammatically. Language Learning, 29, 81–103.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bley-Vroman, R., Felix, S., & loup, G. (1988). The accessibility of Universal Grammar in adult language learning. Second Language Research, 4, 1–32.Google Scholar
Burt, M., Dulay, H., & Hernandez, E. (1973). Bilingual syntax measure. New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.Google Scholar
Carroll, J., Bever, T., & Pollack, C. (1981). The non uniqueness of linguistic intuitions. Language, 57, 368–382.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chaudron, C. (1983). Research on metalinguistic judgements: A review of theory, methods and results. Language Learning, 33, 343–377.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cohen, A. (1987). Using verbal reports in research on language learning. In Faerch, C. & Kasper, G. (Eds.), Introspection in second language research (pp. 82–95). Clevedon, U.K.: Multilingual matters.Google Scholar
Cook, V. (forthcoming). The head parameter in 12 learning.Google Scholar
Ellis, R., & Rathbone, M. (1987). The acquisition of German in a classroom context. Mimeograph, London: Ealing College of Higher Education, London.Google Scholar
Gass, S. (1983). The development of L2 intuitions. TESOL Quarterly, 17, 273–291.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gass, S. (1984). The empirical basis for the Universal Hypothesis in interlanguage. In Davies, A., Criper, C., & Howatt, T. (Eds.), Interlanguage (pp. 3–21). Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.Google Scholar
Giles, H., & Powesland, P. (1975). Speech styles and evaluation. London: Academic.Google Scholar
Hawkins, R. (1987). Markedness and the acquisition of the English dative alternation by L2 speakers. Second Language Research, 3, 20–55.Google Scholar
Hulstijn, J. H. (1984). Difficulties in the acquisition of two word order rules by adult learners of Dutch. In Anderson, R. (Ed.), Second languages: A crosslinguistic perspective (pp. 61–73). Rowley, MA: Newbury House.Google Scholar
Kellerman, E. (1985). Dative alternation and the analysis of data: A reply to Mazurkewich. Language Learning, 55, 91–101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kellerman, E. (1986). An eye fr an eye: Crosslinguistic constraints on the development of the L2 lexicon. In Kellerman, E. & Sharwood Smith, M. (Eds.), Crosslinguistic influence in second language acquisition (pp. 35–48). Oxford: Pergamon.Google Scholar
Liceras, M. J. (1983). Markedness, contrastive analysis and the acquisition of Spanish syntax by English speakers. Unpublished doctoral thesis, University of Toronto.Google Scholar
Mazurkewich, I. (1984a). The acquisition of the dative alternation by second language learners and linguistic theory. Language Learning, 34, 91–109.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mazurkewich, I. (1984b). Dative questions and markedness. In Eckman, F., Bell, L., & Nelson, D., (Eds.), Universals of second language acquisition (pp. 119–131). Rowley, MA: Newbury House.Google Scholar
Mazurkewich, I. (1985). Syntactic markedness and language acquisition. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 7, 15–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Naiman, N. (1974). The use of elicited imitation in second language acquisition research. Working Papers on Bilingualism, 2, 1–37.Google Scholar
Schachter, J. (1974). An error in error analysis, language Learning, 24, 205–214.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schachter, J. (1989). A new look at an old classic. Second Language Research, 5, 30–42.Google Scholar
Sharwood Smith, M. (1988). Modularity in second language research. Polyglot, 9, (Fiche 2, Dl).Google Scholar
Skehan, P. (1989). Language testing Part II. Language Teaching, 22, 1–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tanaka, S. (1987). The selective use of specific exemplars in second language performance: The case of dative alternation. Language Learning, 37, 63–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tarone, E., & Parrish, B. (1985). Task-related variation in interlanguage: The case of articles. Paper presented at the Annual TESOL Conference, Anaheim, CA.Google Scholar
White, L. (1985). The ‘pro-drop’ parameter in adult second language acquisition. Language Learning, 35, 47–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
White, L. (1987). Argument structure in second language acquisition. Paper presented at the Conference on Interlanguage, La Trobe University, Melbourne.Google Scholar