CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 534EFL/ESL Teaching and LearningSyntax, Semantics, Linguistic VariationLanguage Development and Disorders

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 14 of the 14 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

The poverty-of-the-stimulus argument and multicompetence

Cook, V.J.·1991·Interlanguage studies bulletin (Utrecht)
DOI 10.1177/026765839100700203
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

This paper examines the consequences of the fact that human minds may know more than one language for the poverty-of-the-stimulus argument that speakers know more than they could have learnt. Qualifications to the argument are necessary because not all L2 learners attain the same compe tence as L1 speakers; types of evidence are potentially available that can be ruled out for the Ll. The way in which L2 learning has been concep tualized in terms of access to UG and of a black box metaphor makes the L2 grammar seem separate from the L1 grammar rather than one over all system contained within a single mind. What is needed is the idea of 'multicompetence' - the compound state of a mind with two grammars. Multicompetence is the norm for the human race in that most minds know more than one language. Hence the logical problem of language acquisition is how the mind acquires a grammar with one or more settings for each parameter, rather than the special case of a mind that knows only one language. This has implications for all uses of the poverty-of-the-stimulus argument, not just in L2 learning.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1177/026765839100700203

Cites

14 of 14 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Verification

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?

Citations

Cites

Show all 14 references

Research works printed but not linked: 9

  1. Chomsky, N., 1972, Language and mind
  2. Commission of the European Community, 1987, Young Europeans in 1987
  3. Cook, V.J., 1974, Linguistics, 133, 21
  4. Cook, V.J., 1985, Applied Linguistics, 6, 1
  5. Cook, V.J., 1991, a: Observational evidence and the UG theory of language acquisition
  6. Grosjean, F., 1989, Language, 36, 3
  7. Otsu, Y., Paper presented at JACET, Keio University
  8. Ritchie, W., 1978, The right roof constraint in an adult-acquired language
  9. Saleemi, A., 1988, Learnability and parameter fixation. Phd. dissertation

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Cook, V. J.
Affiliations
University of Essex (GB)
Corresponding author
Cook, V.J.
Venue
Interlanguage studies bulletin (Utrecht)
Publisher
SAGE Publications
Published
1991-06
Volume
7
Issue
2
Pages
103-117
ISSN
0165-9960 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1177/026765839100700203
OpenAlex
W2018247628
Cited by
534
References
14
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 13 · 2024: 39 · 2023: 27 · 2022: 23 · 2021: 41 · 2020: 33 · 2019: 46 · 2018: 60 · 2017: 14 · 2016: 41 · 2015: 47 · 2014: 21 · 2013: 14 · 2012: 18
FWCI
8.86
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
journals.sagepub.com/page/policies/text-and-data-mining-license (tdm)
Locations
Second language Research (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Language and Linguistics › EFL/ESL Teaching and Learning
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Language and Linguistics › Syntax, Semantics, Linguistic Variation
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Language Development and Disorders
Keywords
poverty of the stimulus, multicompetence, second language acquisition, universal grammar, language acquisition, grammatical competence, language universals

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