The DOI matches its Crossref record.
SHOULD WE TEACH CHILDREN SYNTAX?
Abstract
Two research studies on child L2 acquisition were conducted sequentially over the last year. The first study used comparative error analysis to determine whether the actual L2 errors children make can be accounted for by “creative construction” or “habit formation.” The findings provided the impetus for the second study which compared the sequence of acquisition of certain grammatical morphemes in three different groups of children, using a cross‐sectional technique. The combined findings of the two studies suggest that, given a natural communication situation, children's innate ability to organize structure accounts in a major way for their acquisition of L2 syntax. Although we believe that an L2 teacher should continue to diagnose children's L2 speech, our findings suggest that we should leave the learning of syntax to the children and redirect our teaching efforts. Practical suggestions are offered to help create speech environments in the classroom that capitalize on the child's natural language learning processes.
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
Spada, N. (1997) · Language Teaching · doi:10.1017/s0261444800012799 · Cited by 632
Doughty, C. (1991) · Studies in Second Language Acquisition · doi:10.1017/s0272263100010287 · Cited by 619
Psychological Constraints on the Teachability of Languages
Pienemann, M. (1984) · Studies in Second Language Acquisition · doi:10.1017/s0272263100005015 · Cited by 584
(2000) · eScholarship (California Digital Library) · Cited by 542
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
AN EXPLANATION FOR THE MORPHEME ACQUISITION ORDER OF SECOND LANGUAGE LEARNERS
Larsen‐Freeman, D. E. (1976) · Language Learning · doi:10.1111/j.1467-1770.1976.tb00264.x · Cited by 243
Ellis, R. (1989) · Studies in Second Language Acquisition · doi:10.1017/s0272263100008159 · Cited by 190
Some input on the easy/difficult grammar question: An empirical study
COLLINS, L., TROFIMOVICH, P., WHITE, J., CARDOSO, W., & HORST, M. (2009) · The Modern Language Journal · doi:10.1111/j.1540-4781.2009.00894.x · Cited by 158
Consciousness in second language acquisition: A review of field studies and laboratory experiments
Ellis, N. C. (1995) · Language Awareness · doi:10.1080/09658416.1995.9959876 · Cited by 81
Murakami, A., & Ellis, N. C. (2022) · Language Learning · doi:10.1111/lang.12500 · Cited by 26
Situating instructed language acquisition
VanPatten, B. (2017) · Instructed Second Language Acquisition · doi:10.1558/isla.33315 · Cited by 26
Murakami, A. (2014) · Apollo - University of Cambridge Repository · doi:10.17863/cam.16509 · Cited by 20
Syntactic Networks of Interlanguage Across L2 Modalities and Proficiency Levels
Hao, Y., Wang, X., Wu, M., & Liu, H. (2021) · Frontiers in Psychology · doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2021.643120 · Cited by 8
Janzen Ulbricht, N. (2023) · PLOS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0280543 · Cited by 3
Metadata
- Authors
- Dulay, H. C., & Burt, M. K.
- Venue
- Language Learning
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 1973-12
- Volume
- 23
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 245-258
- ISSN
- 0023-8333 (ISSN-L)
- 1467-9922
- OpenAlex
- W2057664862
- Cited by
- 614
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 91.27
- 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.