Comprehension and Production Processes in Second Language Learning: In Search of the Psycholinguistic Rationale of the Output Hypothesis
Abstract
The output hypothesis claims that production makes the learner move from ‘semantic processing’ prevalent in comprehension to more ‘syntactic processing’ that is necessary for second language development. The purpose of this article is to illuminate the psycholinguistic mechanisms that underlie this claim by reviewing previous literature in language acquisition and cognitive psychology on the comprehension and production processes in language use and language learning. In speech comprehension, the interactive and compensatory nature of the human comprehension system can both promote comprehension and hinder language development for second language learners, unless the learners are somehow pushed to attend to form–meaning connections during input processing. In elucidating the mechanisms by which output promotes SLA, it is argued, by drawing on Levelt's (1989, 1992, 1993) speech production model, that the processes of grammatical encoding during production and monitoring to check the matching of the communicative intention and the output enable language learners to assess the possibilities and limitations of their interlanguage capability. This may, under certain conditions, serve as an internal priming device for consciousness raising for the learners, which in turn creates an optimal condition for language learning to take place. It is argued that understanding of the constraints and potentials for learning created by input and output processing is crucial for devising pedagogical tasks that effectively promote interlanguage development.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
The present analysis supports the comprehensible output hypothesis proposal that comprehensible output contributes to L2 acquisition, in that as learners try to produce comprehensible output, various means of construction described in Section 4 potentially come into play in the development of accuracy and fluency.
“The present analysis supports such proposals in that, as learners try to produce comprehensible output, the various means of construction described in Section 4 potentially come into play in the development of accuracy and fluency ~De Bot, 1996;Izumi, 2003!+”
From AT THE INTERFACE: DYNAMIC INTERACTIONS OF EXPLICIT AND IMPLICIT LANGUAGE KNOWLEDGE (2005) · cites this paper as Izumi, 2003
Cited by
Sorted by citations
AT THE INTERFACE: DYNAMIC INTERACTIONS OF EXPLICIT AND IMPLICIT LANGUAGE KNOWLEDGE
Ellis, N. C. (2005) · Studies in Second Language Acquisition · doi:10.1017/s027226310505014x · Cited by 893 · see citing works
Eye tracking as a measure of noticing: A study of explicit recasts in SCMC
Smith, B. (2012) · Language Learning & Technology · doi:10.64152/10125/44300 · Cited by 177 · see citing works
- Authors
- Izumi, S.
- Corresponding author
- Izumi, S.
- ORCID
- Izumi, S.
- Venue
- Applied Linguistics
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2003-06-01
- Volume
- 24
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 168-196
- ISSN
- 0142-6001 (ISSN-L)
- 1477-450X
- OpenAlex
- W2040527302
- Cited by
- 238
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 7 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 11 · 2021: 8 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 10 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 9 · 2016: 14 · 2015: 13 · 2014: 26 · 2013: 21 · 2012: 24
- FWCI
- 40.90
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Applied Linguistics (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
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neurobiology of Language and Bilingualism
- Keywords
- output hypothesis, second language acquisition, speech understanding, speech production, grammatical encoding, monitoring, interlanguage development, consciousness raising, semantic processing, syntactic processing, form-meaning connections, teaching tasks
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