Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 195

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Second Language Acquisition and Its Relationship to Universal Grammar

SCHACHTER, J.·1988·Applied Linguistics

Abstract

For almost twenty years (following Corder 1967) much study of second language acquisition has been carried out with the assumption or outright claim that the basic processes underlying both first and second language acquisition are the same. Recent formulations of this notion make use of the currently evolving theory of Universal Grammar, arguing from the module-specific assumption of linguistic knowledge and arguing that adults are faced with the logical problem of language acquisition, just as children are. Such formulations need to be examined seriously in light of the fundamental differences in the two language acquisition cases, including those just mentioned. Four major areas of difference between the first and second language acquisition cases will be presented and explored: completeness, equipotentiality, previous knowledge, and fossilization. It will be argued that these differences are sufficient to remove the possibility that the underlying processes can possibly be the same in the two cases. The role of Universal Grammar in explaining how second language acquisition occurs will turn out to be much more modest than present claims indicate, with parameter setting, or resetting, as currently envisioned, an impossibility.

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 · 10.1093/applin/9.3.219

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.

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

Cited by

Metadata

Authors
SCHACHTER, J.
Venue
Applied Linguistics
Published
1988-09-01
Volume
9
Issue
3
Pages
219-235
ISSN
  • 0142-6001 (ISSN-L)
  • 1477-450X
OpenAlex
W2054682371
Cited by
195
References
0
FWCI
49.47
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.