The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Against Comprehensible Input: the Input Hypothesis and the Development of Second-language Competence
Abstract
S. D. Krashen argues that language acquisition is caused by learners understanding input which is slightly beyond their current stage of knowledge, by means of context and other extra-linguistic cues, and that, while we should not try to provide input which specifically aims at the next stage, ‘comprehensible’ input is particularly beneficial. In this article I will suggest that there are a number of problems with Krashen's input hypothesis, as currently formulated. Firstly, by concentrating on meaning and context, he misses the fact that certain aspects of grammar development in the learner are largely internally driven, and independent of context or meaning. Secondly, he overestimates the role and benefits of simplified input. Thirdly, Krashen feels that we can never really be sure what input is relevant to what stage, but this is due to the imprecision of his formulation: once one incorporates a detailed theory of language, it is possible to come up with a theory to identify precisely what aspects of input trigger development. Finally, there are circumstances where the secondlanguage (L2) input will not be able to show the learner how to retreat from certain non-target forms: the input hypothesis is geared to handling additions to intermediate grammars, rather than losses. I will argue that second-language acquisition theory should indeed include an input hypothesis, and, consequently, that we should try and tighten up Krashen's formulation to deal with these objections, rather than abandoning it.
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
Cited by
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
“…constructing a theory of the language they are learning, starting with certain innate assumptions about the abstract representation of language, looking for certain crucial data, and adding, deleting, and reorganizing rules also requiring reference to abstract structures (Hyams 1986; White 1987).”
BackgroundThe Role of the Linguistic Environment in Second Language Acquisition
Long, M. H. (1996) · Handbook of Second Language Acquisition · doi:10.1016/b978-012589042-7/50015-3 · Cited by 3,927
Pica, T. (1994) · Language Learning · doi:10.1111/j.1467-1770.1994.tb01115.x · Cited by 1,200
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
Three Approaches to Task-Based Syllabus Design
Long, M. H., & Crookes, G. (1992) · TESOL Quarterly · doi:10.2307/3587368 · Cited by 866
Awareness and Second Language Acquisition
Schmidt, R. (1992) · Annual Review of Applied Linguistics · doi:10.1017/s0267190500002476 · Cited by 825
Spada, N. (1997) · Language Teaching · doi:10.1017/s0261444800012799 · Cited by 632
HOW DO LEARNERS PERCEIVE INTERACTIONAL FEEDBACK?
Mackey, A., Gass, S., & McDonough, K. (2000) · Studies in Second Language Acquisition · doi:10.1017/s0272263100004010 · Cited by 630
ONE SIZE FITS ALL?: Recasts, Prompts, and L2 Learning
Ammar, A., & Spada, N. (2006) · Studies in Second Language Acquisition · doi:10.1017/s0272263106060268 · Cited by 541
Instructed SLA: Constraints, Compensation, and Enhancement
Doughty, C. J. (2003) · The Handbook of Second Language Acquisition · doi:10.1002/9780470756492.ch10 · Cited by 519
INTERACTIONAL FEEDBACK AND INSTRUCTIONAL COUNTERBALANCE
Lyster, R., & Mori, H. (2006) · Studies in Second Language Acquisition · doi:10.1017/s0272263106060128 · Cited by 506
The Structural Syllabus and Second Language Acquisition
Ellis, R. (1993) · TESOL Quarterly · doi:10.2307/3586953 · Cited by 482
Classroom Interaction, Comprehension, and the Acquisition of L2 Word Meanings
Ellis, R., Tanaka, Y., & Yamazaki, A. (1994) · Language Learning · doi:10.1111/j.1467-1770.1994.tb01114.x · Cited by 432
Communicating about Grammar: A Task-Based Approach
Fotos, S., & Ellis, R. (1991) · TESOL Quarterly · doi:10.2307/3587079 · Cited by 408
Task-Based Language Teaching: Theory and Practice
Ellis, R., Skehan, P., Li, S., Shintani, N., & Lambert, C. (2019) · doi:10.1017/9781108643689 · Cited by 407
Comprehensible Input and Second Language Acquisition: What is the Relationship?
Loschky, L. (1994) · Studies in Second Language Acquisition · doi:10.1017/s0272263100013103 · Cited by 241
Ellis, R. (1989) · Studies in Second Language Acquisition · doi:10.1017/s0272263100008159 · Cited by 190
Vanderplank, R. (1990) · System · doi:10.1016/0346-251x(90)90056-b · Cited by 83
Does intensive explicit grammar instruction make all the difference?
Macaro, E., & Masterman, L. (2006) · Language Teaching Research · doi:10.1191/1362168806lr197oa · Cited by 54
(2014) · TSpace (University of Toronto) · Cited by 53
The Effect of Instructional Conditions on Students’ Vocabulary Retention
Kitajima, R. (2001) · Foreign Language Annals · doi:10.1111/j.1944-9720.2001.tb02086.x · Cited by 31
Reconsidering the Role of Interaction and Input in Second Language Acquisition
Braidi, S. M. (1995) · Language Learning · doi:10.1111/j.1467-1770.1995.tb00965.x · Cited by 27
Pourmousavi, Z., & Mohamadi Zenouzagh, Z. (2020) · Asian-Pacific Journal of Second and Foreign Language Education · doi:10.1186/s40862-020-00088-w · Cited by 17
Metadata
- Authors
- WHITE, L.
- Venue
- Applied Linguistics
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 1987-06-01
- Volume
- 8
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 95-110
- ISSN
- 0142-6001 (ISSN-L)
- 1477-450X
- OpenAlex
- W2155125816
- Cited by
- 478
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 51.08
- 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.
