10. Some reflections on the development of (meta-analytic) synthesis in second language research

2006 ◽  
pp. 323-339 ◽  
Author(s):  
Craig Chaudron
Keyword(s):  
Second Language ◽  
Language Research

Introspection in Second Language Research

1989 ◽  
Vol 73 (1) ◽  
pp. 77
Author(s):  
Mary-Ann Reiss ◽  
Claus Faerch ◽  
Gabriele Kasper
Keyword(s):  
Second Language ◽  
Language Research

Pragmatic transfer

1992 ◽  
Vol 8 (3) ◽  
pp. 203-231 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gabriele Kasper
Keyword(s):  
Second Language ◽  
Native Speakers ◽  
Interlanguage Pragmatics ◽  
Structural Factors ◽  
Pragmatic Transfer ◽  
Language Research ◽  
Linguistic Action ◽  
Core Areas ◽  
Basic Distinction ◽  
Pragmatic Knowledge

Throughout the short life of interlanguage pragmatics as a subdiscipline of second language research, it has been a virtually uncontested assumption that non-native speakers' comprehension and production of linguistic action is considerably influenced by their L1 pragmatic knowledge. The literature strongly supports this hypothesis. However, whereas there has been a lively controversy about the role of transfer in the traditional core areas of second language research (syntax, morphology, semantics), there has been little theoretical and methodological debate about transfer in interlanguage pragmatics. As a contribution to such a debate, this article seeks to clarify the concept of pragmatic transfer, proposing as a basic distinction Leech/Thomas' dichotomy of sociopragmatics versus pragmalinguistics and presenting evidence for transfer at both levels. Evidence for purported pragmatic universals in speech act realization and for positive and negative pragmatic transfer is discussed. Further issues to be addressed include the conditions for pragmatic transfer (transferability), the interaction of transfer with non-structural factors (proficiency, length of residence, context of acquisition), and the effect of transfer on communicative outcomes. The article concludes by briefly considering some problems of research method in studies of pragmatic transfer.

Second Language Acquisition Research and Language Pedagogy: A Critical View

2015 ◽  
Vol 7 (4) ◽  
pp. 1 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mohammad Reza Talebinejad ◽  
Aasa Moattarian
Keyword(s):  
Second Language ◽  
Second Language Acquisition ◽  
Language Acquisition ◽  
Teaching Practice ◽  
Structured Interview ◽  
Language Teachers ◽  
Language Pedagogy ◽  
Language Research ◽  
Class 1 ◽  
Research Findings

<p class="1"><span lang="X-NONE">Over the past several decades, a substantial body of research on second language acquisition has been provided. The current study was an attempt to investigate language teachers’ views on applying research findings in their every day practice of language teaching through a critical lens. Data for this qualitative study was collected by means of a semi structured interview with 10 language teachers teaching English at different language institutes in Iran. Analyses of data revealed that, although teachers find second language acquisition research a useful tool for their professional development; they do not usually consult bodies of research in their every day teaching practice. They report problems in applying second language research in their practice due to problems with practicality, particularity, and possibility. The findings suggest that language teachers need to be exposed to insight from SLA research and practice.</span></p>

scholarly journals STATISTICAL REPORT REFORM IN SECOND LANGUAGE RESEARCH: A CASE OF EXPERIMENTAL DESIGNS

2021 ◽  
Vol 8 (2) ◽  
pp. 1-27
Author(s):  
Eka Fadilah
Keyword(s):  
Second Language ◽  
Confidence Intervals ◽  
Experimental Studies ◽  
Experimental Designs ◽  
Effect Sizes ◽  
Language Research ◽  
Statistical Report ◽  
Reported Effect ◽  
Power Analyses

This survey aims to review statisical report procedures in the experimental studies appearing in ten SLA and Applied Linguistic journals from 2011 to 2017. We specify our study on how the authors report and interprete their power analyses, effect sizes, and confidence intervals. Results reveal that of 217 articles, the authors reported effect sizes (70%), apriori power and posthoc power consecutively (1.8% and 6.9%), and confidence intervals (18.4%). Additionally, it shows that the authors interprete those statistical terms counted 5.5%, 27.2%, and 6%, respectively. The call for statistical report reform recommended and endorsed by scholars, researchers, and editors is inevitably echoed to shed more light on the trustworthiness and practicality of the data presented.

Practice and progression in Second Language Research methods

AILA Review ◽  
2014 ◽  
Vol 27 ◽  
pp. 80-97 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alison Mackey
Keyword(s):  
Second Language ◽  
Language Learning ◽  
Corpus Linguistics ◽  
Second Language Learning ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Research Synthesis ◽  
Deep Dive ◽  
Psychology Education ◽  
Language Research ◽  
General Linguistics

Since its inception, the field of second language research has utilized methods from a number of areas, including general linguistics, psychology, education, sociology, anthropology and, recently, neuroscience and corpus linguistics. As the questions and objectives expand, researchers are increasingly pushing methodological boundaries to gain a clearer picture of second language learning. At one end for example, we see measures of cognition (e.g., brain imaging and eye tracking) and at the other end we see exploration of issues of culture and identity (e.g., ethnographies, deep dive case studies, introspective and narrative analyses). There is an emerging emphasis on research synthesis, meta-analysis, and replication. This article illustrates a few of the advancements in methods and research agendas in SLA. I will conclude by highlighting some of the ways that second language researchers can continue to incorporate, assimilate, and shape methodology, as well as pointing out some of the potential pitfalls, and overall, how these methodological innovations benefit the field.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document