Hostname: page-component-76d6cb85b7-rxvq6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-07-16T18:26:13.280Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A BIBLIOMETRIC ANALYSIS OF SECOND LANGUAGE ACQUISITION BETWEEN 1997 AND 2018

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  25 October 2019

Xian Zhang Open the ORCID record for Xian Zhang [Opens in a new window]
Xian Zhang*
Affiliation:
University of North Texas
*
*Correspondence regarding this article should be addressed to Xian Zhang, University of North Texas, UNT Discovery Park, 3940 North Elm, Suite B201, Denton, TX 76203-5017. E-mail: xian.zhang@unt.edu
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This study used the bibliometric method to examine the field of second language acquisition (SLA) between 1997 and 2018 to provide a systematic overview of the field and to discover major trends in SLA. Based on citation/cocitation information and keywords retrieved from Web of Science, this study performed three types of bibliometric analyses to identify the prominent scholarly documents, authors, research institutions, geographic regions, and research topics that have been highly influential in the field of SLA over the last two decades. The scientific network maps and the keyword analysis revealed a number of significant changes as well as new trends in the field.

Information

Type
State of the Scholarship
Information
Studies in Second Language Acquisition , Volume 42 , Issue 1 , March 2020 , pp. 199 - 222
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2019 

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

Footnotes

Xian Zhang is an assistant professor in applied linguistics at the department of linguistics, University of North Texas. His research interests primarily lie on second language acquisition, sociocultural theory, cognition, corpus linguistics, and language assessment.

This study is supported by the MOE Project of Key Research Institute of Humanities and Social Sciences at Universities in P. R. China (Project No. 17JJD740004) and the National Key Research Center for Linguistics and Applied Linguistics of Guangdong University of Foreign Studies.

References

REFERENCES

Al-Hoorie, A. H., & Vitta, J. P. (2019). The seven sins of L2 research: A review of 30 journals’ statistical quality and their CiteScore, SJR, SNIP, JCR Impact Factors. Language Teaching Research, 23, 727–744. doi: 10.1177/1362168818767191.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Anthony, L. (2018). AntConc (Version 3.5.6) [Computer Software]. Tokyo, Japan: Waseda University. Available from http://www.laurenceanthony.net/software.Google Scholar
Benson, P., Chik, A., Gao, X., Huang, J., & Wang, W. (2009). Qualitative research in language teaching and learning journals, 1997–2006. The Modern Language Journal, 93, 79–90. doi: 10.1111/j.1540-4781.2009.00829.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Biber, D., Conrad, S., & Cortes, V. (2004). If you look at ...: Lexical bundles in university teaching and textbooks. Applied Linguistics, 25, 371–405. doi: 10.1093/applin/25.3.371.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bichteler, J., & Eaton, E. A. (1980). The combined use of bibliographic coupling and cocitation for document retrieval. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 31, 278–282. doi: 10.1002/asi.4630310408.Google Scholar
Brumback, R. A. (2009). Impact factor wars: Episode V—the empire strikes back. Journal of Child Neurology, 24, 260–262. doi: 10.1177/0883073808331366CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Callon, M., Courtial, J. P., Turner, W. A., & Bauin, S. (1983). From translations to problematic networks: An introduction to co-word analysis. Information, 22, 191–235. doi: 10.1177/053901883022002003.Google Scholar
Creese, A., & Blackledge, A. (2010). Translanguaging in the bilingual classroom: A pedagogy for learning and teaching?. The Modern Language Journal, 94, 103–115. doi: 10.1111/j.1540-4781.2009.00986.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chang, Y. W., Huang, M. H., & Lin, C. W. (2015). Evolution of research subjects in library and information science based on keyword, bibliographical coupling, and co-citation analyses. Scientometrics, 105, 2071–2087. doi: 10.1007/s11192-015-1762-8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chiu, W. T., & Ho, Y. S. (2007). Bibliometric analysis of tsunami research. Scientometrics, 73, 3–17. doi: 10.1007/s11192-005-1523-1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Conklin, K., & Schmitt, N. (2008). Formulaic sequences: Are they processed more quickly than nonformulaic language by native and nonnative speakers?. Applied Linguistics, 29, 72–89. doi: 10.1093/applin/amm022CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Coxhead, A. (2000). A new academic word list. TESOL Quarterly, 34, 213–238. doi: 10.2307/3587951CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Courtial, J. (1994). A coword analysis of scientometrics. Scientometrics, 31, 251–260.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
de Bellis, N. (2009). Bibliometrics and citation analysis: From the science citation index to cybermetrics. Lanham, MD: Scarecrow Press.Google Scholar
de Bot, K. (2015). A history of applied linguistics: From 1980 to the present. New York, NY: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
de Bot, K., Lowie, W., & Verspoor, M. (2007). A dynamic systems theory approach to second language acquisition. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 10, 7–21. doi: 10.1017/S1366728906002732CrossRefGoogle Scholar
DeKeyser, R. (2007). Skill acquisition theory. In VanPatten, B. & Williams, J. (Eds.), Theories in second language acquisition: An introduction (pp. 97–112). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Dörnyei, Z. (2005). The psychology of the language learner: Individual differences in second language acquisition. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Dörnyei, Z. (2009). The psychology of second language acquisition. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Egbert, J. (2007). Quality analysis of journals in TESOL and applied linguistics. TESOL Quarterly, 41, 157–171. doi: 10.2307/40264335.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ellis, N. C., & Ferreira-Junior, F. (2009). Construction learning as a function of frequency, frequency distribution, and function. The Modern Language Journal, 93, 370–386. doi: 10.1111/j.1540-4781.2009.00896.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ellis, N. C., Simpson‐Vlach, R., & Maynard, C. (2008). Formulaic language in native and second language speakers: Psycholinguistics, corpus linguistics, and TESOL. TESOL Quarterly, 42, 375–396. doi: 10.1002/j.1545-7249.2008.tb00137.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ellis, R. (2008). The study of second language acquisition (2nd ed.). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Firth, A., & Wagner, J. (1997). On discourse, communication, and (some) fundamental concepts in SLA research. The Modern Language Journal, 81, 285–300. doi: 10.1111/j.1540-4781.1997.tb05480.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Garfield, E. (1955). Citation indexes for science. Science, 122, 108–111.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Garfield, E. (2006). The history and meaning of the journal impact factor. JAMA, 295, 90–93. doi: 10.1001/jama.295.1.90.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gass, S. (2009). A historical survey of SLA research. In Ritchie, W. C. & Bhatia, T. K. (Ed.), The new handbook of second language acquisition (pp. 3–28). Bingley, UK: Emerald Group.Google Scholar
Gass, S. M., & Mackey, A. (2007). Input, interaction, and output in second language acquisition. In VanPatten, B. & Williams, J. (Eds.), Theories in second language acquisition: An introduction (pp. 173–196). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Glänzel, W., & Moed, H. F. (2002). Journal impact measures in bibliometric research. Scientometrics, 53, 171–194. doi: 10.1023/A:1014848323806.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Herdina, P., & Jessner, U. (2002). A dynamic model of multilingualism. Clevedon, UK: Multilingual Matters.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hirsch, J. E. (2005). An index to quantify an individual’s scientific research output. Proceedings of the National academy of Sciences, 102, 16569–16572. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0507655102.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Holden, G., Rosenberg, G., & Barker, K. (2005). Tracing thought through time and space: A selective review of bibliometrics in social work. In Holden, G., Rosenberg, G., & Barker, K. (Eds.), Bibliometrics in social work (pp. 1–34). New York, NY: Routledge.Google ScholarPubMed
Hyland, K. (2008). As can be seen: Lexical bundles and disciplinary variation. English for Specific Purposes, 27, 4–21. doi: 10.1016/j.esp.2007.06.001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jung, U. O. (2004). Paris in London revisited or the foreign language teacher’s top-most journals. System, 32, 357–361. doi: 10.1016/j.system.2004.04.003CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kremmel, B., Brunfaut, T., & Alderson, J. C. (2015). Exploring the role of phraseological knowledge in foreign language reading. Applied Linguistics, 38, 848–870. doi: 10.1093/applin/amv070Google Scholar
Lantolf, J. P. (1994). Sociocultural theory and second language learning: Introduction to the special issue. The Modern Language Journal, 78, 418–420. doi: 10.2307/328580.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lantolf, J. P., & Poehner, M. E. (2014). Sociocultural theory and the pedagogical imperative in L2 education: Vygotskian praxis and the research/practice divide. Madison, NY: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lantolf, J. P., & Thorne, S. L. (2006). Sociocultural theory and the genesis of second language development. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Larsen-Freeman, D. (1997). Chaos/complexity science and second language acquisition. Applied Linguistics, 18, 141–165. doi: 10.1093/applin/18.2.141.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Larsen-Freeman, D. (2018). Looking ahead: Future directions in, and future research into, second language acquisition. Foreign Language Annals, 51, 55–72. doi: 10.1111/flan.12314.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Laufer, B., & Hulstijn, J. (2001). Incidental vocabulary acquisition in a second language: The construct of task-induced involvement. Applied Linguistics, 22, 1–26. doi: 10.1093/applin/22.1.1CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Law, J., & Whittaker, J. (1992). Mapping acidification research: A test of the co-word method. Scientometrics, 23, 417–461. doi: 10.1007/BF02029807.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lei, L., & Liao, S. (2017). Publications in linguistics journals from Mainland China, Hong Kong, Taiwan, and Macau (2003–2012): A bibliometric analysis. Journal of Quantitative Linguistics, 24, 54–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lei, L., & Liu, D. (2019a). Research trends in applied linguistics from 2005 to 2016: A bibliometric analysis and its implications. Applied Linguistics, 40, 540–561. doi: 10.1093/applin/amy003.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lei, L., & Liu, D. (2019b). The research trends and contributions of System’s publications over the past four decades (1973–2017): A bibliometric analysis. System, 80, 1–13. doi: 10.1016/j.system.2018.10.003.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leydesdorff, L., & Wagner, C. (2009). Is the United States losing ground in science? A global perspective on the world science system. Scientometrics, 78, 23–36. doi: 10.1007/s11192-008-1830-4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McCain, K. W. (1990). Mapping authors in intellectual space: A technical overview. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 41, 433–443. doi: 10.1002/(SICI1097-4571(199009)41:6<433::AID-ASI11>3.0.CO;2-Q).3.0.CO;2-Q>CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Meara, P. (2006). Emergent properties of multilingual lexicons. Applied Linguistics, 27, 620–644. doi: 10.1093/applin/aml030.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Norris, J. M., & Ortega, L. (2000). Effectiveness of L2 instruction: A research synthesis and quantitative meta‐analysis. Language Learning, 50, 417–528. doi: 10.1111/0023-8333.00136CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nation, I. S. P. (2001). Learning vocabulary in another language. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ortega, L. (2011). SLA after the social turn: Where cognitivism and its alternatives stand. In Atkinson, D. (Eds.), Alternative approaches to second language acquisition (pp. 179–192). Madison, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar
Persson, O., Danell, R., & Schneider, J. W. (2009). How to use Bibexcel for various types of bibliometric analysis. Celebrating Scholarly Communication Studies: A Festschrift for Olle Persson at his 60th Birthday, 5, 9–24.Google Scholar
Pilkington, A., & Meredith, J. (2009). The evolution of the intellectual structure of operations management—1980–2006: A citation/co-citation analysis. Journal of Operations Management, 27, 185–202. doi: 10.1016/j.jom.2008.08.001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pritchard, A. (1969). Statistical bibliography or bibliometrics. Journal of Documentation, 25, 348–349.Google Scholar
Plonsky, L. (2013). Study quality in SLA: An assessment of designs, analyses, and reporting practices in quantitative L2 research. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 35, 655–687. doi: 10.1017/S0272263113000399CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Plonsky, L., & Gass, S. (2011). Quantitative research methods, study quality, and outcomes: The case of interaction research. Language Learning, 61, 325–366. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9922.2011.00640.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Plonsky, L., & Oswald, F. L. (2014). How big is “big”? Interpreting effect sizes in L2 research. Language Learning, 64, 878–912. doi: 10.1111/lang.12079.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rayson, P., & Garside, R. (2000). Comparing corpora using frequency profiling. In Proceedings of the workshop on comparing corpora (pp. 1–6). Hong Kong: Association for Computational Linguistics.Google Scholar
Roemer, R. C., & Borchardt, R. (2015). Meaningful metrics: A 21st-century librarian’s guide to bibliometrics, Altmetrics, and research impact. Chicago, IL: American Library Association.Google Scholar
Schmidt, R. W. (1990). The role of consciousness in second language learning. Applied Linguistics, 11, 129–158. doi: 10.1093/applin/11.2.129CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schmitt, N., & Carter, R. (2004). Formulaic sequences in action: An introduction. In Schmitt, N. (Ed.), Formulaic sequences (pp. 1–22). Amsterdam, The Netherlands: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Simpson-Vlach, R., & Ellis, N. C. (2010). An academic formulas list: New methods in phraseology research. Applied Linguistics, 31, 487–512. doi: 10.1093/applin/amp058CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Small, H. (1973). Co-citation in the scientific literature: A new measure of the relationship between two documents. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 24, 265–269. doi: 10.1002/asi.4630240406.Google Scholar
Stapleton, P., & Shao, Q. (2018). A worldwide survey of MATESOL programs in 2014: Patterns and perspectives. Language Teaching Research, 22, 10–28. doi: 10.1177/1362168816659681.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Swain, M., & Watanabe, Y. (2012). Languaging: Collaborative dialogue as a source of second language learning. In Chapelle, C. (Eds.), The encyclopedia of applied linguistics. Oxford, UK: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar
Swales, J. (1986). Citation analysis and discourse analysis. Applied Linguistics, 7, 39–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tomasello, M. (2003). Constructing a language: A usage-based theory of language acquisition. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Tseng, W. T., Dörnyei, Z., & Schmitt, N. (2006). A new approach to assessing strategic learning: The case of self-regulation in vocabulary acquisition. Applied Linguistics, 27, 78–102. doi: 10.1093/applin/ami046CrossRefGoogle Scholar
van Leeuwen, T. N., Moed, H. F., Tijssen, R. J., Visser, M. S., & van Raan, A. F. (2001). Language biases in the coverage of the Science Citation Index and its consequences for international comparisons of national research performance. Scientometrics, 51, 335–346. doi: 10.1023/A:101054971.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
van Raan, A. F. (2005). Fatal attraction: Conceptual and methodological problems in the ranking of universities by bibliometric methods. Scientometrics, 62, 133–143. doi: 10.1007/s11192-005-0008-6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
van Raan, A., & Tijssen, R. (1993). The neural net of neural network research: An exercise in bibliometric mapping. Scientometrics, 26, 169–192. doi: 10.1007/BF02016799.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
VanPatten, B. (2007). Input processing in adult second language acquisition. In VanPatten, B. & Williams, J. (Eds.), Theories in second language acquisition: An introduction (pp. 115–136). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
VanPatten, B., & Williams, J. (2002). Research criteria for tenure in second language acquisition: Results from a survey of the field. Unpublished manuscript. University of Illinois at Chicago, Chicago, IL.Google Scholar
Vygotsky, L. S. (1997). The collected works of L. S. Vygotsky: Volume 4: The history of the development of higher mental functions. New York, NY: Plenum.Google Scholar
Waltman, L., & van Eck, N. J. (2013). A smart local moving algorithm for largescale modularity-based community detection. European Physical Journal B, 86, 471.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Waltman, L., & van Eck, N. J. (2017). VOSviewer manual. Retrieved from http://www.vosviewer.com/documentation/Manual_VOSviewer_1.6.6.pdf.Google Scholar
Waltman, L., van Eck, N. J., & Noyons, E. C. M. (2010). A unified approach to mapping and clustering of bibliometric networks. Journal of Informetrics, 4, 629–635. doi: 10.1016/j.joi.2010.07.002.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wang, L., & Zhang, L. J. (2019). Peter Skehan’s influence in research on task difficulty in second language learners’ acquisition of oral and written language. In Wen, E. & Ahmadian, W. (Eds.), Researching L2 task performance and pedagogy: In honor of Peter Skehan. Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
White, H. D. (2004). Citation analysis and discourse analysis revisited. Applied Linguistics, 25, 89–116. doi: 10.1093/applin/25.1.89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
White, H. D., & McCain, K. W. (1998). Visualizing a discipline: An author co-citation analysis of information science, 1972–1995. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 49, 327–355. doi: 10.1002/(SICI)1097-4571(19980401)49:4<327::AID-ASI4>3.0.CO;2-4.Google Scholar
Wilson, A. (2013). Embracing Bayes factors for key item analysis in corpus linguistics. In Bieswanger, M. & Koll-Stobbe, A. (Eds.), New approaches to the study of linguistic variability. Frankfurt: Peter Lang D.Google Scholar
Wray, A. (2002). Formulaic language and the lexicon. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Supplementary material: File

Zhang supplementary material

Zhang supplementary material 1

Download Zhang supplementary material(File)
File 14.2 KB
Supplementary material: File

Zhang supplementary material

Zhang supplementary material 2

Download Zhang supplementary material(File)
File 175.3 KB
Supplementary material: File

Zhang supplementary material

Zhang supplementary material 3

Download Zhang supplementary material(File)
File 133.9 KB