The DOI matches its Crossref record; 8 of the 8 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
NEGOTIATION AND ORAL ACQUISITION OF L2 VOCABULARY: The Roles of Input and Output in the Receptive and Productive Acquisition of Words
Abstract
This experimental study investigates the differential effects of three conditions (nonnegotiated premodified input, negotiation without “pushed output” [Swain, 1985], and negotiation plus pushed output) on L2 learners' vocabulary comprehension and acquisition (receptive and productive). Analyses of variance performed on the data indicated that: (a) negotiated interaction had a positive effect on the comprehension of L2 words; (b) only negotiated interaction that incorporated pushed output appeared to have promoted both receptive and productive acquisition of words as well as an increase in productive word retention; and (c) negotiated interaction plus output did not promote receptive acquisition more than negotiation without output, but it was more effective in promoting productive acquisition. The findings of this study provide empirical evidence for the important role of negotiation in facilitating the comprehension and acquisition of L2 vocabulary, which suggests that output plays a key role within the negotiation process for productive lexical acquisition.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
The Role of Consciousness in Second Language Learning1
SCHMIDT, R. W. (1990) · Applied Linguistics · doi:10.1093/applin/11.2.129 · Cited by 5,435 · cited 3×
“Both comprehension (in the form of comprehensible input) and production are linked to the concept of attention in L2 development (e.g., Long, 1990; Robinson, 1995; Schmidt, 1990, 1993, 1994, 1995).”
BackgroundResultSWAIN, M., & LAPKIN, S. (1995) · Applied Linguistics · doi:10.1093/applin/16.3.371 · Cited by 1,407
Awareness and Second Language Acquisition
Schmidt, R. (1992) · Annual Review of Applied Linguistics · doi:10.1017/s0267190500002476 · Cited by 825
INPUT, INTERACTION, AND SECOND LANGUAGE DEVELOPMENT: An Empirical Study of Question Formation in ESL
Mackey, A. (1999) · Studies in Second Language Acquisition · doi:10.1017/s0272263199004027 · Cited by 772
Assessing Second Language Vocabulary Knowledge: Depth Versus Breadth
Wesche, M., & Paribakht, T. S. (1996) · The Canadian Modern Language Review · doi:10.3138/cmlr.53.1.13 · Cited by 673
THE ROLES OF MODIFIED INPUT AND OUTPUT IN THE INCIDENTAL ACQUISITION OF WORD MEANINGS
Ellis, R., & He, X. (1999) · Studies in Second Language Acquisition · doi:10.1017/s0272263199002077 · Cited by 449
A Classroom Perspective on the Negotiation of Meaning
FOSTER, P. (1998) · Applied Linguistics · doi:10.1093/applin/19.1.1 · Cited by 437
Neuman, S. B., & Koskinen, P. (1992) · Reading Research Quarterly · doi:10.2307/747835 · Cited by 362
Cited by
Oral corrective feedback in second language classrooms
Lyster, R., Saito, K., & Sato, M. (2013) · Language Teaching · doi:10.1017/s0261444812000365 · Cited by 741
Predicting second language writing proficiency: the roles of cohesion and linguistic sophistication
Crossley, S. A., & McNamara, D. S. (2012) · Journal of Research in Reading · doi:10.1111/j.1467-9817.2010.01449.x · Cited by 331
de la Fuente, M. J. (2006) · Language Teaching Research · doi:10.1191/1362168806lr196oa · Cited by 240
Task effectiveness and word learning in a second language: the involvement load hypothesis on trial
Keating, G. D. (2008) · Language Teaching Research · doi:10.1177/1362168808089922 · Cited by 223
Comparing Focus on Form and Focus on FormS in Second-Language Vocabulary Learning
Laufer, B. (2006) · The Canadian Modern Language Review · doi:10.3138/cmlr.63.1.149 · Cited by 212
Metadata
- Authors
- de la Fuente, M. J.
- Venue
- Studies in Second Language Acquisition
- Publisher
- Cambridge University Press (CUP)
- Published
- 2002-03
- Volume
- 24
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 81-112
- ISSN
- 0272-2631 (ISSN-L)
- 1470-1545
- OpenAlex
- W2163703049
- Cited by
- 305
- References
- 8
- FWCI
- 10.58
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
