Cited by 301EFL/ESL Teaching and LearningEnglish Language Learning and TeachingSecond Language Acquisition and Learning

The Relationship Between Second Language Acquisition Theory and Computer‐Assisted Language Learning

CHAPELLE, CAROL A.·2009·The Modern Language Journal

Abstract

The point of departure for this article is the contrast between the theoretical landscape within view of language teaching professionals in 1991 and that of today. I argue that the pragmatic goal of computer‐assisted language learning (CALL) developers and researchers to create and evaluate learning opportunities pushes them to consider a variety of theoretical approaches to second language acquisition (SLA), which have developed, in part, in response to the need to theorize the role of instruction in SLA. To illustrate connections between SLA and CALL, I touch on multiple theoretical perspectives grouped into four general approaches: cognitive linguistic (Universal Grammar, autonomous induction theory, and the concept‐oriented approach); psycholinguistic (processibility theory, input processing theory, interactionist theory); human learning (associative–cognitive CREED, skill acquisition theory); and language in social context (sociocultural, language socialization, conversation analysis, systemic–functional, complexity theory). I suggest that such theoretical approaches can be useful in the development and evaluation of CALL materials and tasks. Finally, I propose that the expanding use of technology changes the nature of communicative competence theory, challenges SLA theory, and increases the number of consumers for SLA research.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/j.1540-4781.2009.00970.x

Cites

3 of 3 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

  • CALL tools were initially adopted for the creation of supplementary materials before being integrated into core instructional and assessment practices, a process that typically spanned 10-15 years.

    “Chapelle (2009) noted that CALL tools were initially adopted for the creation of supplementary materials before being integrated into core instructional and assessment practices, a process that typically spanned 10-15 years.”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
CHAPELLE, C. A.
Affiliations
Iowa State University (US)
Corresponding author
CHAPELLE, CAROL A.
Venue
The Modern Language Journal
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2009-12
Volume
93
Issue
s1
Pages
741-753
ISSN
  • 0026-7902 (ISSN-L)
  • 1540-4781
OpenAlex
W2015659803
Cited by
301
References
3
Citations by year
2026: 17 · 2025: 16 · 2024: 18 · 2023: 13 · 2022: 21 · 2021: 23 · 2020: 20 · 2019: 24 · 2018: 20 · 2017: 20 · 2016: 24 · 2015: 20 · 2014: 14 · 2013: 20 · 2012: 14
FWCI
85.15
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Modern Language Journal (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Language and Linguistics › EFL/ESL Teaching and Learning
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › English Language Learning and Teaching
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Second Language Acquisition and Learning
Keywords
second language acquisition theory, computer-assisted language learning, universal grammar, interactionist theory, creeds, skill acquisition theory, sociocultural theory, language socialization, conversation analysis, systemic functional linguistics, complexity theory, communicative competence

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