Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 422

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 6 of the 6 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

SOCIOCULTURAL THEORY AND L2: State of the Art

Lantolf, James P.·2006·Studies in Second Language Acquisition
DOI 10.1017/s0272263106060037
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

This article considers the implications of two central constructs of sociocultural theory (SCT) for second language (L2) development: mediation and internalization. It first discusses Vygotsky's general theoretical claim that human mental activity arises as a consequence of the functional system formed by our biologically specified mental capacities and our culturally constructed symbolic artifacts. It then examines some of the L2 research that has investigated the extent to which L2 users are able to deploy their new language for cognitive mediation. Specific attention is given to the mediational function of L2 private speech and to the synchronization of gestures and speech from the perspective of Slobin's thinking for speaking framework, a framework that interfaces quite well with Vygotsky's theory. The second general topic addressed, internalization, is intimately connected to the first. It is argued that internalization of the features of a L2 takes place through imitation, especially as occurs in private speech. Imitation, based on recent neuroscience and child development research, is seen as an intentional and potentially transformative process rather than as rote mimicking. The research documents that L2 children and adults rely on imitation in their private speech when they encounter new linguistic affordances. What remains to be established is the connection between the linguistic features of private speech and those deployed by L2 speakers in their social performance. Finally, the article proposes that the study of how L2 learners internalize and develop the capacity to use conceptual and associated linguistic knowledge should move to the forefront of SCT L2 research and argues that a productive way of realizing this agenda is through the union of SCT and cognitive linguistics.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1017/s0272263106060037

Cites

6 of 6 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

Show all 6 references

Research works printed but not linked: 126

  1. Long, M.H. (1996).The role of the linguistic environment in second languageacquisition. In W. C. Ritchie & T. K. Bhatia (Eds.),Handbook of second language acquisition (pp.413–468).San Diego:Academic Press. · DOI · Paper page
  2. Pavlenko, A. (1997).Bilingualism and cognition.Unpublished doctoral dissertation,Cornell University,Ithaca, NY.
  3. Talmy, L. (2000).Toward a cognitive semantics: Vol. 2. Typology and process inconcept structuring.Cambridge, MA:MIT Press. · DOI · Paper page
  4. Negueruela, E. & Lantolf, J.P. ,(in press).A concept-based approach to teaching Spanish grammar. In R. Lafford & M. R. Salaberry (Eds.),Spanish second language acquisition: The state of the art.Washington, DC:Georgetown University Press.
  5. Lakoff, G. & Johnson, M. (1980).Metaphors we live by.Chicago:University of Chicago Press.
  6. Arbib, M.A. (2002).The mirror system, imitation, and the evolution of language.In K. Dautenhahn & C. L. Nehaniv (Eds.),Imitation in animals and artifacts (Complex adaptive systems)(pp.229–280).Cambridge, MA:MIT. · DOI
  7. Harris, R. (1980).The language makers.Ithaca, NY:Cornell University Press.
  8. Lantolf, J.P. & Pavlenko, A. (1995).Sociocultural theory and second language acquisition.Annual Review of Applied Linguistics,15,38–53. · DOI · Paper page
  9. McCafferty, S.G. (1998).Nonverbal expression and L2 private speech.Applied Linguistics,19,73–96. · doi:10.1093/applin/19.1.73
  10. Valsiner, J. & van der Veer, R. (2000).The social mind: Construction of the idea.New York:Cambridge University Press.
  11. Lantolf, J.P. & Yáñez-Prieto, C. (2003).Talking yourself into Spanish: Intrapersonal communication andsecond language learning.Hispania,86,97–109. · DOI
  12. Lantolf, J.P. (2004a).Overview of sociocultural theory. In O. St. John , K. van Esch , & E. Schalkwijk (Eds.),New insights in second language learning and teaching (pp.13–34).Bern:Peter Lang.
  13. Swain, M. & Lapkin, S. (2001).Focus on form through collaborative dialogue: Exploring taskeffects. In M. Bygate , P. Skehan , & M. Swain (Eds.),Researching pedagogic tasks in second language learning, teachingand testing (pp.99–118).London:Longman.
  14. Saville-Troike, M. (1988).Private speech: Evidence for second language learning strategiesduring the ‘silent period.’ Journal of Child Language,15,567–590. · DOI
  15. Lantolf, J.P. & Genung, P.B. (2002).“I'd rather switch than fight:” Anactivity-theoretic study of power, success, and failure in a foreignlanguage. In C. Kramsch (Ed.),Language acquisition and language socialization: Ecologicalperspectives (pp.175–196).London:Continuum.
  16. Winegar, L.T. (1997).Can internalization be more than a magical phrase? Notestoward the constructive negotiation of this process. In C. Lightfoot & B. D. Cox (Eds.),Sociogenetic perspectives on internalization (pp.25–43).Mahwah, NJ:Erlbaum.
  17. McCafferty, S.G. (2004).Space for cognition: Gesture and second language learning.International Journal of Applied Linguistics,14,148–165. · DOI
  18. Swain, M. & Lapkin, S. (2000).Task-based second language learning: The uses of the firstlanguage.Language Teaching Research,4,251–274. · DOI · Paper page
  19. Arievitch, I. & van der Veer, R. (1995).Furthering the internalization debate: Gal'perin'scontribution.Human Development,38,1113–1126. · doi:10.1159/000278304
  20. Johnson, J. & Rosano, T. (1993).Relation of cognitive style to metaphor interpretation and secondlanguage proficiency.Applied Psycholinguistics,14,159–175. · DOI
  21. McNeill, D. (1992).Hand and mind: What gestures reveal about thought.Chicago:University of Chicago Press.
  22. Ushakova, T. (1994).Inner speech and second language acquisition: Anexperimental-theoretical approach. In J. P. Lantolf & G. Appel (Eds.),Vygotskian approaches to second language research (pp.135–156).Westport, CT:Ablex.
  23. Swain, M. (2001).Examining dialogue: Another approach to content specification and tovalidating inferences drawn from test scores.Language Testing,18,275–302. · DOI
  24. Bruner, J.S. (1966).On cognitive growth II. In J. S. Bruner , R. R. Oliver , & P. Greenfield (Eds.),Studies in cognitive growth (pp.30–67).New York:Wiley.
  25. Lantolf, J.P. (Ed.)(2000b).Sociocultural theory and second language development.Oxford:Oxford University Press.
  26. Negueruela, E. , Lantolf, J.P. , Jordan, S.F. , & Gelabert, J. (2004).The ‘private function’ of gesture in second languagespeaking activity: A study of motion verbs and gesturing in English andSpanish.International Journal of Applied Linguistics,14,113–147. · doi:10.1111/j.1473-4192.2004.00056.x
  27. Wells, G. (1999).Dialogic inquiry: Toward a sociocultural practice and theory ofeducation.New York:Cambridge University Press. · DOI · Paper page
  28. Tomasello, M. (2003).Constructing language: A usage-based theory of languageacquisition.Cambridge, MA:Harvard University Press.
  29. Luria, A.R. (1982).Language and cognition.New York:Wiley.
  30. Scollon, S. (1999).Not to waste words or students: Confucian and Socratic discourse inthe tertiary classroom. In E. Hinkel (Ed.),Culture in second language teaching and learning (pp.13–27).New York:Cambridge University Press.
  31. Vygotsky, L.S. (1987). In R. W. Reiber & A. S. Carton (Eds.),The collected works of L. S. Vygotsky: Vol. 1. Problems of generalpsychology—Including the volume Thinking and Speech.New York:Plenum Press.
  32. Pavlenko, A. & Lantolf, J.P. (2000).Second language learning as participation and the (re)constructionof selves. In J. P. Lantolf (Ed.),Sociocultural theory and second language learning (pp.155–178).Oxford:Oxford University Press.
  33. Ferreira, M. (2005).A concept-based approach to writing instruction: From abstractconcept to concrete performance.Unpublished doctoral dissertation,The Pennsylvania State University,University Park.
  34. Swain, M. , Brooks, L. , & Tocalli-Beller, A. (2002).Peer-peer dialogue as a means of second language learning.Annual Review of Applied Linguistics,22,171–185. · DOI · Paper page
  35. Engeström, Y. (1999).Activity theory and individual social transformation. In Y. Engeström , R. Miettinen , & R. L. Punamaki (Eds.),Perspectives on activity theory (pp.1–15).New York:Cambridge University Press. · DOI · Paper page
  36. Gibbs, R.W., Jr. (1999).Taking metaphor out of our heads and putting it into the culturalworld. In R. W. Gibbs, Jr. & G. J. Steen (Eds.),Metaphor in cognitive linguistics (pp.145–156).Amsterdam:Benjamins. · DOI · Paper page
  37. McNeill, D. & Duncan, S. (2000).Growth points in thinking for speaking. In D. McNeill (Ed.),Language and gesture (pp.141–161).New York:Cambridge University Press. · DOI · Paper page
  38. Vygotsky, L.S. (1997). In R. W. Reiber (Ed.),The collected works of L. S. Vygotsky: Vol. 4. The history of thedevelopment of higher mental functions.New York:Plenum Press.
  39. Negueruela, E. (2003).A sociocultural approach to the teaching and learning of secondlanguages: Systemic-theoretical instruction and L2 development.Unpublished doctoral dissertation,The Pennsylvania State University,University Park.
  40. McNeill, D. (1997).Growth points cross-linguistically. In J. Nuyts & E. Pederson (Eds.),Language and conceptualization (pp.190–121).New York:Cambridge University Press. · doi:10.1017/cbo9781139086677.008
  41. McCafferty, S.G. (2002).Gesture and creating zones of proximal development in secondlanguage learning.Modern Language Journal,86,192–203. · DOI
  42. Clark, A. (1998).Magic words: How language augments human computation. In P. Carruthers & J. Boucher (Eds.),Language and thought: Interdisciplinary themes (pp.162–184).New York:Cambridge University Press. · DOI · Paper page
  43. Irujo, S. (1993).Steering clear: Avoidance in the production of idioms.IRAL,31,205–219. · DOI
  44. Lantolf, J.P. (2001).Sociocultural theory and SLA. In R. B. Kaplan (Ed.),Handbook of applied linguistics (pp.109–119).Oxford:Oxford University Press.
  45. Danesi, M. (1992).Metaphorical competence in second language acquisition and secondlanguage teaching: The neglected dimension. In J. E. Alatis (Ed.),Language, communication, and social meaning (pp.489–500).Washington, DC:Georgetown University Press.
  46. Littlemore, J. & Low, G. ,(in press).Metaphoric competence, second language learning and communicativelanguage ability.Applied Linguistics,27. · DOI · Paper page
  47. Kövecses, Z. & Szabó, P. (1996).Idioms: A view from cognitive linguistics.Applied Linguistics,17,326–355. · DOI · Paper page
  48. Tchigaeva, S. (2004).Postgraduate students' reading of disciplinary academic textsin a second language: An activity theoretical analysis of textual actionsand interactions.Unpublished doctoral dissertation,Hong Kong Polytechnic University.
  49. Slobin, D.I. (1996).From “thought and language” to “thinking forspeaking.” In S. Gumperz & S. Levinson (Eds.),Rethinking linguistic relativity (pp.70–96).New York:Cambridge University Press.
  50. Flavell, J. (1966).Le language privé [Private language].Bulletin de Psychologie,19,698–701. · DOI
  51. Lantolf, J.P. (2003).Intrapersonal communication and internalization in the secondlanguage classroom. In A. Kozulin , V. S. Ageev , S. Miller , & B. Gindis (Eds.),Vygotsky's theory of education in cultural context (pp.349–370).New York:Cambridge University Press. · DOI
  52. Shore, B. (1996).Culture in mind: Cognition, culture, and the problem ofmeaning.Oxford:Oxford University Press. · DOI · Paper page
  53. Lantolf, J.P. (Ed.)(1994).Sociocultural theory and second language learning [Specialissue].Modern Language Journal,78 (4)418–420. · DOI
  54. Frawley, W. (1997).Vygotsky and cognitive science: Language and the unification of thesocial and computational mind.Cambridge, MA:Harvard University Press. · DOI
  55. Pavlenko, A. (1996).Bilingualism and cognition: Concepts in the mental lexicon.Cornell working papers in linguistics, vol. 14 (second languageacquisition & bilingualism),39–73.
  56. McCafferty, S.G. (1994).The use of private speech by adult ESL learners at different levelsof proficiency. In J. P. Lantolf & G. Appel (Eds.),Vygotskian approaches to second language research (pp.117–134).Westport, CT:Ablex.
  57. Luria, A.R. (1979). In M. Cole & S. Cole (Eds.),The making of mind: A personal account of Soviet psychology.Cambridge, MA:Harvard University Press.
  58. Speidel, G.E. & Nelson, K.E. (1989).A fresh look at imitation in language learning. In G. E. Speidel & K. E. Nelson (Eds.),The many faces of imitation in language learning (pp.1–22).New York:Springer-Verlag. · doi:10.1007/978-1-4612-1011-5_1
  59. Meltzoff, A.N. & Gopnik, A. (1989).On linking nonverbal imitation, representation, and languagelearning in the first two years of life. In G. E. Speidel & K. E. Nelson (Eds.),The many faces of imitation in language learning (pp.23–52).New York:Springer-Verlag. · DOI
  60. Lantolf, J.P. (2000a).Second language learning as a mediated process.Language Teaching,33,79–96. · DOI · Paper page
  61. Boers, F. (2000).Metaphor awareness and vocabulary retention.Applied Linguistics,21,553–571. · DOI · Paper page
  62. Frawley, W. & Lantolf, J.P. (1985).Second language discourse: A Vygotskyan perspective.Applied Linguistics,6,19–44. · DOI · Paper page
  63. Hall, J.K. (1997).A consideration of SLA as a theory of practice.Modern Language Journal,81,301–306. · DOI
  64. Ellis, R. (1997).SLA research and language teaching.Oxford:Oxford University Press.
  65. Ratner, C. (2002).Cultural psychology: Theory and method.New York:Kluwer/Plenum. · DOI
  66. Swain, M. & Lapkin, S. (2002).Talking it through: Two French immersion learners' response toreformulation.International Journal of Educational Research,37,285–304. · DOI · Paper page
  67. Giora, R. (1997).Understanding figurative and literal language: The graded saliencehypothesis.Cognitive Linguistics,8,183–206. · DOI · Paper page
  68. Baldwin, J.M. (1895/1915).Mental development in the child and the race.New York:McMillan. · DOI
  69. Ohta, A.S. (2000).Rethinking recasts: A learner-centered examination of correctivefeedback in the Japanese classroom. In J. K. Hall & L. Verplaeste (Eds.),The construction of second and foreign language learning throughclassroom interaction (pp.47–73).Mahwah, NJ:Erlbaum.
  70. Koski, L. , Wohlschlager, A. , Bekkering, H. , Woods, R.P. , Dubeau, M.C. , Mazziotta, J.C. , et al.(2002).Modulation of motor and premotor activity during imitation oftarget-directed actions.Cerebral Cortex,12,847–855. · DOI · Paper page
  71. Kozulin, A. (1990).Vygotsky's psychology: A biography of ideas.Cambridge, MA:Harvard University Press.
  72. Dennett, D. (1998).Reflections on language and mind. In P. Carruthers & J. Boucher (Eds.),Language and thought: Interdisciplinary themes (pp.284–294).New York:Cambridge University Press. · DOI
  73. Boers, F. (2003).Applied linguistics perspectives on cross-cultural variation inconceptual metaphor.Metaphor and Symbol,18,231–238. · DOI
  74. Lantolf, J.P. & Frawley, W. (1984).Second language performance and Vygotskyan psycholinguistics:Implications for L2 instruction. In A. Manning , P. Martin , & K. McCalla (Eds.),The tenth LACUS forum 1983 (pp.425–440).Columbia, SC:Hornbeam Press.
  75. Heiser, M. , Iacoboni, M. , Maeda, F. , Marcus, J. , & Mazziotta, J.C. (2003).The role of Broca's area in imitation.European Journal of Neuroscience,17,1123–1128. · DOI · Paper page
  76. Scollon, R. (2001).Mediated discourse: The nexus of practice.London:Routledge. · DOI · Paper page
  77. Poehner, M.E. (2005).Dynamic assessment of advanced L2 learners of French.Unpublished doctoral dissertation,The Pennsylvania State University,University Park.
  78. Luria, A.R. (1976).Cognitive development: Its cultural and social foundations.Cambridge, MA:Harvard University Press.
  79. Centeno-Cortés, B. (2003).Private speech in the second language classroom: Its role ininternalization and its link to social production.Unpublished doctoral dissertation,The Pennsylvania State University,University Park.
  80. Stetsenko, A. (2005).Activity as object-related: Resolving the dichotomy of individualand collective planes of activity.Mind, Culture, and Activity: An International Journal,12,70–88. · DOI · Paper page
  81. Swain, M. & Lapkin, S. (1998).Interaction and second language learning: Two adolescent Frenchimmersion students working together.Modern Language Journal,83,320–338. · DOI · Paper page
  82. Speidel, G.E. (1989).Imitation: A bootstrap for language to speak? In G. E. Speidel & K. E. Nelson (Eds.),The many faces of imitation in language learning (pp.151–180).New York:Springer Verlag. · DOI
  83. Lantolf, J.P. & Thorne, S.L. (2005).Sociocultural theory and the genesis of second languagedevelopment.Oxford:Oxford University Press.
  84. Kövecses, Z. (2002).Metaphor: A practical introduction.Oxford:Oxford University Press. · DOI · Paper page
  85. Ohta, A.S. (2001).Second language acquisition processes in the classroom: LearningJapanese.Mahwah, NJ:Erlbaum. · DOI · Paper page
  86. Arievitch, I. & van der Veer, R. (2004).The role of nonautomatic processes in activity regulation: FromLipps to Galperin.History of Psychology,7,154–182. · DOI
  87. Kuczaj, S.A., II. (1983).Crib speech and language play.New York:Springer-Verlag. · DOI
  88. Boers, F. & Demecheleer, M. (2001).Measuring the impact of cross-cultural differences on learners'comprehension of idioms.ELT Journal,55,255–262. · DOI
  89. Vygotsky, L.S. (1978). In M. Cole , V. John-Steiner , S. Scribner , & E. Souberman (Eds.),Mind in society: The development of higher psychologicalprocesses.Cambridge, MA:Harvard University Press.
  90. Newman, F. & Holzman, L. (1993).Lev Vygotsky: Revolutionary scientist.London:Routledge.
  91. Gibbs, R.W., Jr. (1994).The poetics of mind: Figurative thought, language, andunderstanding.New York:Cambridge University Press.
  92. Sokolov, A. (1972).Inner speech and thought.New York:Plenum Press. · DOI · Paper page
  93. DiCamilla, F. , Antón, M. , & Lantolf, J.P. (2003).Sociocultural theory and the acquisition of Spanish as a secondlanguage. In M. R. Salaberry & B. Lafford (Eds.),The acquisition of Spanish as a second language (pp.262–284).Washington, DC:Georgetown University Press.
  94. Weir, R. (1976).Playing with language. In J. Bruner , A. Jolly , & K. Sylva (Eds.),Play: Its role in development and evolution (pp.609–618).New York:Basic Books.
  95. Özyürek, A. (2002).Speech-gesture relationship across languages and in second languagelearners: Implications for spatial thinking and speaking. In B. Skarabela,S. Fish, & A. H.-J. Do, Proceedings of the 26th Boston University conference on languagedevelopment,26,500–509.
  96. Centeno-Cortés, B. & Jimémez-Jiménez, A.F. (2004).Problem-solving tasks in a foreign language: The importance of L1 inprivate verbal thinking.International Journal of Applied Linguistics,14,7–35. · DOI · Paper page
  97. Vocate, D.R. (1994).Self-talk and inner speech: Understanding the uniquely humanaspects of intrapersonal communication. In D. R. Vocate (Ed.),Intrapersonal communication: Different voices, different minds(pp.3–31).Mahwah, NJ:Erlbaum.
  98. Lantolf, J.P. ,(in press).Sociocultural theory and English language teaching. In J. Cummins (Ed.),International handbook of English language education.New York:Springer.
  99. Yorio, C. (1989).Idiomaticity as an indicator of second language proficiency.In K. Kyltenstam & L. K. Obler (Eds.),Bilingualism across the lifespan: Aspects of acquisition, maturity,and loss (pp.55–72).New York:Cambridge University Press. · DOI
  100. Tomasello, M. (1999).The cultural origins of human cognition.Cambridge, MA:Harvard University Press. · DOI · Paper page
  101. Nicholas, H. , Lightbown, P.M. , & Spada, N. (2001).Recasts as feedback to language learners.Language Learning,51,719–758. · DOI · Paper page
  102. Slobin, D.I. (2000).Verbalized events: A dynamic approach to linguistic relativity anddeterminism. In S. Niemeier & R. Dirven (Eds.),Evidence for linguistic relativity (pp.107–138).Amsterdam:Benjamins. · DOI · Paper page
  103. Lantolf, J.P. & Appel, G. (Eds.).(1994).Vygotskian approaches to second language research.Westport, CT:Ablex.
  104. Wertsch, J.V. (1998).Mind as action.Oxford:Oxford University Press. · DOI · Paper page
  105. Diaz, R.M. & Berk, L.E. (Eds.)(1992).Private speech: From social interaction to self-regulation.Mahwah, NJ:Erlbaum.
  106. Kita, S. (Ed.)(2003).Pointing: Where language, culture, and cognition meet.Mahwah, NJ:Erlbaum. · DOI · Paper page
  107. Lantolf, J.P. (1997).Language play and the acquisition of L2 Spanish. In W. R. Glass & A.-T. Perez-Leroux (Eds.),Contemporary perspectives on the acquisition of Spanish: Vol. 2.Production, processing and comprehension (pp.3–35).Somerville, MA:Cascadilla Press.
  108. Littlemore, J. (2001).Metaphoric competence: A possible language learning strength ofstudents with a holistic cognitive style.TESOL Quarterly,35,459–491. · doi:10.2307/3588031
  109. Meltzoff, A.N. (2002).Elements of a developmental theory of imitation. In A. N. Meltzoff & W. Prinz (Eds.),The imitative mind: Development, evolution, and brain bases(pp.19–41).New York:Cambridge University Press. · DOI · Paper page
  110. Cazden, C. (1976).Play with language and meta-linguistic awareness: One dimension oflanguage experience. In J. Bruner , A. Jolly , & K. Sylva (Eds.),Play: Its role in development and evolution (pp.603–608).New York:Basic Books.
  111. Lightbown, P. & Spada, N. (1993).How languages are learned.Oxford:Oxford University Press.
  112. Kecskes, I. & Papp, T. (2000).Foreign language and mother tongue.Mahwah, NJ:Erlbaum. · DOI · Paper page
  113. Bachman, L.F. (1990).Fundamental considerations of language testing.Oxford:Oxford University Press.
  114. Irujo, S. (1986).Don't put your leg in your mouth: Transfer in the acquisitionof idioms in a second language.TESOL Quarterly,20,287–304. · DOI · Paper page
  115. Gillette, B. (1994).The role of learner goals in L2 success. In J. P. Lantolf & G. Appel (Eds.),Vygotskian approaches to second language research (pp.195–214).Westport, CT:Ablex.
  116. Kellerman, E. & van Hoof, A.-M. (2003).Manual accents.IRAL,41,251–269. · doi:10.1515/iral.2003.011
  117. Swain, M. (2000).The output hypothesis and beyond: Mediating acquisition throughcollaborative dialogue. In J. P. Lantolf (Ed.),Sociocultural theory and second language learning (pp.97–115).Oxford:Oxford University Press.
  118. Lantolf, J.P. & Poehner, M.E. (2004).Dynamic assessment of L2 development: Bringing the past into thefuture.Journal of Applied Linguistics,1,49–75. · DOI · Paper page
  119. Lantolf, J.P. (2004b).Sociocultural theory and L2 learning: An exegesis. In E. Hinkel (Ed.),Handbook of second language research (pp.335–354).Mahwah, NJ:Erlbaum.
  120. Ahmed, M. (1994).Speaking as cognitive regulation: A Vygotskian perspective ondialogic communication. In J. P. Lantolf & G. Appel (Eds.),Vygotskian approaches to second language research (pp.157–172).Westport, CT:Ablex.
  121. McCafferty, S.G. & Ahmed, M.K. (2000).The appropriation of gestures of the abstract by L2learners. In J. P. Lantolf (Ed.),Sociocultural theory and second language learning (pp.199–218).Oxford:Oxford University Press.
  122. Slobin, D.I. (2003).Language and thought online: Cognitive consequences of linguisticrelativity. In D. Gentner & S. Goldin-Meadow (Eds.),Language in mind: Advances in the study of language andthought (pp.157–192).Cambridge, MA:MIT Press. · DOI · Paper page
  123. Yaroshevsky, M. (1989).Lev Vygotsky.Moscow:Progress Press.
  124. Appel, G. & Lantolf, J.P. (1994).Speaking as mediation: A study of L1 and L2 text recalltasks.Modern Language Journal,78,437–452. · DOI
  125. Lantolf, J.P. (1999).Second culture acquisition: Cognitive considerations. In E. Hinkel (Ed.),Culture in second language teaching and learning (pp.28–46).New York:Cambridge University Press.
  126. Cole, M. (1996).Cultural psychology: A once and future discipline.Cambridge, MA:Belknapp Press.

Cited by

Metadata

Authors
Lantolf, J. P.
Venue
Studies in Second Language Acquisition
Publisher
Cambridge University Press (CUP)
Published
2006-02-10
Volume
28
Issue
1
Pages
67-109
ISSN
  • 0272-2631 (ISSN-L)
  • 1470-1545
DOI
10.1017/s0272263106060037
OpenAlex
W2166197715
Cited by
422
References
6
FWCI
96.09
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
www.cambridge.org/core/terms (unspecified)

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.