Cited by 190EFL/ESL Teaching and LearningSecond Language Acquisition and LearningLinguistic Education and Pedagogy

Are Classroom and Naturalistic Acquisition the Same?: A Study of the Classroom Acquisition of German Word Order Rules

Ellis, Rod·1989·Studies in Second Language Acquisition

Abstract

This article reports a study of the classroom acquisition of German word order rules by adult, successful language learners. Data elicited by an information-gap task performed by 39 learners of L2 Germanat two points in time are used to describe the sequence of acquisition of three obligatory word order rules. A comparison of this sequencewith that reported for naturalistic learners of German revealed no difference, despite the fact that the order in which the rules were introduced and the degree of emphasis given to the rules in the instruction differed from the naturalistic order. The classroom learners, however, did appear to be more successful than the naturalistic learnersin that they reached higher levels of acquisition in a shorter period of time. The results of this study support the claim that the classroom and naturalistic L2 acquisition of complex grammatical features such as word order follow similar routes. They also suggest that classroom learners may learn more rapidly. These findings are discussed with reference to both theories of L2 acquisition and language pedagogy.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1017/s0272263100008159

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Acquisition sequences do not reflect instructional sequences.

    “Research by R. Ellis (1989) and Lightbown (1983), for example, shows that acquisition sequences do not reflect instructional sequences”

    From Focus on Form in Task-based Language Teaching (2000) · cites this paper as R. Ellis (1989)

  • Instruction has failed to alter developmental sequences.

    “as has the failure of instruction to alter them (R. Ellis, 1989;Håkansson & Norrby, 2010;Mackey, 1999;Pienemann, 1984).”

    From In Defense of Tasks and TBLT: Nonissues and Real Issues (2016) · cites this paper as R. Ellis, 1989

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Ellis, R.
Corresponding author
Ellis, Rod
Venue
Studies in Second Language Acquisition
Published
1989-09
Volume
11
Issue
3
Pages
305-328
ISSN
  • 0272-2631 (ISSN-L)
  • 1470-1545
OpenAlex
W2152945286
Cited by
190
References
1
Citations by year
2025: 5 · 2024: 24 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 18 · 2016: 9 · 2015: 13 · 2014: 9 · 2013: 3 · 2012: 6
FWCI
9.90
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Studies in Second Language Acquisition (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Language and Linguistics › EFL/ESL Teaching and Learning
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Second Language Acquisition and Learning
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Language and Linguistics › Linguistic Education and Pedagogy
Keywords
German word order, second language acquisition, adult language learners, information-gap tasks, acquisition sequence, acquisition rate, language teaching, German as a second language

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review