Focus on forms research and its application

Williams, Jessica

doi:10.1590/S1984-63982001000100003

Abstract

Vários estudos experimentais e em sala de aula sugerem que o Foco na Forma (FonF) pode facilitar o desenvolvimento da interlíngua para que se atinja precisão na língua alvo. Porém, uma vasta gama de definições, técnicas e termos similares, às vezes, toma difícil determinar realmente o que significa o termo FonF. Este artigo explora, em detalhes, possíveis interpretações dos termos foco e forma. Além disso, revisita a taxonomia apresentada em Doughty e Williams (1998) para analisar cuidadosamente alguns dos itens chaves que têm sido sugeridos para atividades de FonF, por exemplo: -planejamento, - aproximação da língua alvo, - interrupção do processo, - processos cognitivos. Finalmente, há uma consideração sobre como o efeito do FonF pode variar, dependendo de quando ele acontece durante o desenvolvimento da interlíngua.

Focus on forms research and its application

Jessica Williams

University of Iliinois at Chicago

RESUMO

Vários estudos experimentais e em sala de aula sugerem que o Foco na Forma (FonF) pode facilitar o desenvolvimento da interlíngua para que se atinja precisão na língua alvo. Porém, uma vasta gama de definições, técnicas e termos similares, às vezes, toma difícil determinar realmente o que significa o termo FonF. Este artigo explora, em detalhes, possíveis interpretações dos termos foco e forma. Além disso, revisita a taxonomia apresentada em Doughty e Williams (1998) para analisar cuidadosamente alguns dos itens chaves que têm sido sugeridos para atividades de FonF, por exemplo:

-planejamento, -

aproximação da língua alvo,

- interrupção do processo,

- processos cognitivos.

Finalmente, há uma consideração sobre como o efeito do FonF pode variar, dependendo de quando ele acontece durante o desenvolvimento da interlíngua.

Full text available only in PDF format.

Texto completo disponível apenas em PDF.

JENSEN, J.B. A investigação de formas de tratamento e a telenovela: a escalada, parte 1. Revista Brasileira de Lingüística, Petrópolis, v.4, n.2, p.43-73, 1977.
FREEMAN, D. Redefining the relationship between research and what teachers know. In: BAILEY, K.M., NUNAN, D. (Ed.). Voices from the language classroom Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996. p.88- 115.
BARDOVI-HARLIG, K.; DÕRNYEI, Z. Do learners recognize pragmatic violations? TESOL Quarterly, Bloomington, v.32, n.2, p. 233- 262, 1998.
CARROLL, S.; SWAIN, M. Explicit and implicit negative feedback: An empirical study of the learning of linguistic generalizations. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, v.l5,p. 357-86, 1993.
CELCE-MURCIA, M.; DÕRNYEI, Z.; THURRELL, S. Direct approaches in L2 instruction: A turning point in communicative language teaching? TESOL Quarterly, Bloomington, v.31, n. 1, p. 141-152,1997.
DAVIS, J. Facilitating effects of marginal glosses on foreign language reading. Modern Language Journal, v. 73, p. 41-48, 1989.
DAY, E.; SHAPSON, S. Integrating formal and functional approaches in language teaching in French immersion: An experimental study. Language Learning, v. 41, p. 25-58, 1991.
DE BOT, K. Psycholinguistics in applied linguistics: Trends and perspectives. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, v. 20, p. 224-237,2000.
DEKEYSER, R. Learning second language grammar rules: An experiment with a miniature linguistic system. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, v. 17, p. 379-410, 1995.
DOUGHTY, C. Cognitive underpinnings of focus on form. In: ROBINSON, P. (Ed.). Cognition and second language instruction Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. (No prelo)
DOUGHTY, C.; WILLIAMS, J. (Ed.). Focus on form in classroom second language acquisition Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998a.
DOUGHTY, C.; WILLIAMS, J. Pedagogical choices in focus on form. In: DOUGHTY, C.; WILLIAMS, J. (Ed.). Focus on form in classroom second language acquisition Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998b. p. 197- 261.
ELLIS, N. Rules and instances in foreign language learning: Interactions of implicit and explicit knowledge. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology, v. 5, p. 289-319,1993.
ELLIS, R. Teaching and research: Options in grammar teaching. TESOL Quarterly, v. 32, n.l, p. 39-60, 1998.
ELLIS, R. Theoretical perspective on interaction and language learning. In: ELLIS, R. (Ed.). Learning a second language through interaction Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 1999.
FOSTER, P. A classroom perspective on the negotiation of meaning. Applied Linguistics, v. 19, p. 1-23,1998.
FOSTER, P.; SKEHAN, P. The influence of source of planning and focus of planning on task-based performance. Language Teaching Research, v. 3, p. 215-245, 1999.
FOTOS, S. Consciousness-raising and noticing through focus on form: grammar task performance vs. formal instruction. Applied Linguistics, v. 14, p. 385-407, 1993.
FOTOS, S. Integrating grammar instruction and communicative language use through grammar consciousness-raising tasks. TESOL Quarterly, v. 28, p. 323-51, 1994.
FOTOS, S.; ELLIS, R. Communicating about grammar: a task-based approach. TESOL Quarterly, v. 25, p. 605-628, 1991.
GASS, S. Input, interaction and the second language learner Mahwah: Erlbaum, 1997.
GASS, S.; VARONIS, E. Miscommunication in nonnative speaker discourse In: COUPLAND, N., GILES, H.; WEIMANN, J. (Ed.). Miscommunication and problematic talk. Newbury Park, CA: Sage, 1991. p. 121-145.
GASS, S.; MACKEY, A.; ALVAREZ-TORRES, M. J.; FERNANDEZ- GARCÍA, M. The effects of task repetition on linguistic output. Language Learning, v. 49, p. 549-581, 1999.
HARLEY, B. The role of focus-on-form tasks in promoting child L2 acquisition. In: DOUGHTY, C.; WILLIAMS, J. (Ed.). Focus on form in classroom second language acquisition Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998. p. 156-174.
HOLLY, F., KING, J. Vocabulary glosses in foreign language learning materials. Language Learning, v. 21, p. 213-219, 1971.
HULSTIJN, J. Retention of inferred and given word meanings: Experiments in incidental vocabulary learning. In. ARNAUD, P.; BEJOINT, H. (Ed.). Vocabulary and applied linguistics London: MacMillan, 1992. p. 113-125.
HULSTIJN, J. When do foreign language learners look up the meaning of unfamiliar words? The influence of task and learner variables. Modem Language Journal, v. 77, p. 139-147, 1993.
HULSTIJN, J.; HOLANDER, M.; GRIEDENUS, T. Incidental vocabulary learning by advanced foreign language students: The influence of marginal glosses, dictionary use, and reoccurrence of unknown words. Modern Language Journal, v. 80, p. 327-339, 1996.
HYLAND K. Writing without conviction? Hedging in science research articles. Applied Linguistics, v. 17, p. 433-454, 1996.
IZUMI, S.; BIGELOW, M.; FUJIWARA, M.; FEARNOW, S. Testing the output hypothesis: Effects of output on noticing and second language acquisition. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, v. 21, p. 421-452, 1999.
JACOBS, G. What lurks in the margin: Use of vocabulary glosses as a strategy in second language reading. Issues in Applied Linguistics, v. 5, p. 115-137, 1994.
JACOBS, G.; DUFON, P.; FONG, C. LI and L2 glosses in L2 reading passages: Their effectiveness for increasing comprehension and vocabulary knowledge. Journal of Research in Reading, v. 17, p. 19-28, 1994.
JOURDENAIS, R.; OTA, M.; STAUFFER, S.; BOYSON, B.; DOUGHTY, C. Does textual enhancement promote noticing? A think- aloud protocol analysis. In: SCHMIDT, R. (Ed.). Attention and awareness in foreign language learning. Honolulu: University of Hawai'i Press, 1995. p. 183-216.
KUPFERBERG, L; OLSHTAIN, E. Explicit contrastive instruction facilitates the acquisition of difficult L2 forms. Language Awareness, v. 3, p. 149-165, 1996.
KO, M. Glossing in incidental and intentional learning of foreign language vocabulary and reading. University of Hawai'i Working Papers in ESL, v. 13, p. 49-94,1995.
LEOW, R. The effects of input enhancement and text length on adult readers' comprehension and intake in second language acquisition. Applied Language Learning, v. 8, p. 151-182,1997.
LIGHTBOWN, P. The importance of timing in focus on form. In: DOUGHTY, C.; WILLIAMS, J. (Ed.). Focus on form in classroom second language acquisition Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998. p. 177- 196.
LONG, M. H. Instructed interlanguage development. In: BEEBE, L. (Ed.). Issues in second language acquisition New York: Newbury House, 1998. p.113-141.
LONG, M. H. Focus on form: A design feature in language teaching methodology. In: DE BOT, K., GINSBERG, R.; KRAMSCH, C. (Ed.). Foreign language research in cross-cultural perspective Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 1991. p. 39-52.
LONG, M. H. The role of the linguistic environment in second language acquisition. In: RITCHIE, W. & BHATIA, T. (Ed.). Handbook of research on second language acquisition. New York: Academic Press, 1996. p. 413- 468.
LONG, M. H.; INAGAKI, S.; ORTEGA, L. The role of implicit negative feedback in SLA: Models and recasts in Japanese and Spanish. Modem Language Journal, v. 82, p. 357-371,1998.
LONG, M.; ROBINSON, P. Theory, research and practice. In: DOUGHTY, C.; WILLIAMS, J. (Ed.). Focus on form in classroom second language acquisition Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998. p. 15-41.
LOSCHKY, L.; BLEY-VROMAN, R. Grammar and task-based methodology. In: CROOKES, G.; GASS, S. (Ed.). Tasks and language learning, vol. 1. Clevedon, Avon: Multilingual Matters, 1993. p. 123-67.
LYSTER, R. Recasts, repetition and ambiguity in L2 classroom discourse. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, v. 20, p. 51-80, 1998.
LYSTER, R.; RANTA, L. Corrective feedback and learner uptake: Negotiation of form in communicative classrooms. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, v. 19, p. 37-66, 1997.
MACKEY, A. Input, interaction and second language development: An empirical study of question formation in ESL. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, v. 21, p. 557-587. 1999.
MACKEY, A.; PHILP, J, Recasts, interaction and interlanguage development: Are responses red herrings? Modem Language Journal, v. 82, p. 338-356, 1998.
MEHNERT, U. The effects of different lengths of time for planning on second language performance. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, V. 20, p. 83-108,1998.
MURANOI, H. Focus on form through interaction enhancement: Integrating formal instruction into a communicative task in EFL classrooms. Language Learning, v. 50, n. 4, p. 617-673, 2000.
NASAJI, H.; SWAIN, M. A Vygotskian perspective on corrective feedback in L2: The effect of random vs. negotiated help on the learning of English articles. Language Awareness (No prelo).
NOBUYOSHI, J.; ELLIS, R. Focused communication tasks and second language acquisition. ELT Journal, v. 47, p. 203-210, 1993.
OLIVER, R. Negative feedback in child NS-NNS conversation. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, v. 17, p. 459-82, 1995.
OLIVER, R. Age differences in negotiation and feedback in classroom and pairwork. Language Learning, v. 50, p. 119-151, 2000.
ORTEGA, L. Planning and focus on form in L2 oral performance. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, v. 21, p. 109-145, 1999.
OVERSTREET, M. Text enhancement and content familiarity: The focus of learner attention. Spanish Applied Linguistics, v. 2, p. 229-258,1998.
PELLETTIERI, J. Negotiation in cyberspace: The role of chatting in the development of grammatical competence. In: WARCHAUER; KERN, R. (Ed.). Network-based language teaching: Concepts and practice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000. p. 59-86.
PICA, T. Research on negotiation: What does it reveal about second language acquisition? Language Learning, v. 44, p. 493-527, 1994.
PICA, T. Second language teaching and research relationships: A North American view. Language Teaching Research, v. 1, p. 48-72, 1997.
ROBINSON, P. Learning simple and complex second language rules under implicit, incidental, rule-search and instructed conditions. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, v. 18, p. 27-68, 1996.
ROBINSON, R Automaticity and generalizability of second language learning under implicit, incidental, enhanced, and instructed conditions. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, v. 19, p. 233-247, 1997.
ROSA, E.; O'NEILLl, M. Explicitness, intake and the issue of awareness: Another piece of the puzzle. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, v. 21, p. 511-553, 1999.
SCHMIDT, R. The role of consciousness in second language learning. Applied Linguistics, v. 11, p. 17-46, 1990.
SCHMIDT, R. Consciousness and foreign language learning. In: SCHMIDT, R. (Ed.). Attention and awareness in foreign language learning Honolulu: University of Hawai'i Press, 1995. p. 1-63.
SEEDHOUSE, P. The case of the missing "no": The relationship between pedagogy and interaction. Language Learning, v. 47, p. 547-583, 1997.
SHEHADEH, A. Non-native speakers' production of modified comprehensible output and second language learning. Language Learning, v. 49, p. 627-675,1999.
SKEHAN, P. A framework for the implementation of task-based instruction. Applied Linguistics, v. 17, p. 38-62, 1996.
SKEHAN, P.; FOSTER, P. The influence of task structure and processing conditions on narrative retellings. Language Learning, v. 49, p. 93-120,1999.
SPADA, N. Form-focussed instruction and second language acquisition: A review of classroom and laboratory research. Language Teaching Abstracts, v. 30, p. 73-87,1997.
SPADA, N.; LIGHTBOWN, P. Instruction and the development of questions in theL2 classroom. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, v. 15, p. 205- 21, 1993.
SPADA, N.; LIGHTBOWN, P. Instruction, first language influence and developmental readiness in second language acquisition. Modem Language Journal, v. 83, p. 1-22,1999.
SWAIN, M. Three functions of output in second language learning. In: COOK, G.; SEEFLHOFER, B. (Ed.). Principle and practice in applied linguistics Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1995. p. 125-44.
SWAIN, M. Focus on form through conscious reflection. In: DOUGHTY, C.; WILLIAMS, J. (Ed.). Focus on form in classroom second language Acquisition Cambridge: Cambridge university Press, 1998. p. 64-81.
SWAIN , M. The output hypothesis and beyond: Mediating Acquisition through collaborative dialogue. In: LANTOLF, J. (Ed.). Sociocultural theoiy and second language learning. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000. p. 97-114.
SWAIN, M.; LAPKIN, S. Problems in output and the cognitive processes they generate: A step towards second language learning. Applied Linguistics, v. 16, p. 371-391, 1995.
SWAIN, M.; LAPKIN, S. Interaction and second language learning: Two adolescent French immersion students working together. Modern Language Journal, v. 82, p. 320-337, 1998.
TAKASHIMA, H.; ELLIS, R. Output enhancement and the acquisition of past tense. In: ELLIS, R. (Ed.). Learning a second language through interaction. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 1999. p. 173-188.
VAN DEN BRANDEN, K. Effects of negotiation on language learners' output. Language Learning, v. 47, p. 589-636, 1997.
VANPATTEN, B. Input processing and grammar instruction. New York: Ablex. 1996.
WATANABE, Y. Input, intake, and retention: Effects of increased processing on incidental learning of foreign language vocabulary. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, v. 19, p. 287-307, 1997.
WHITE, J. Getting the learners' attention: A typographical input enhancement study. In: DOUGHTY, C.; WILLIAMS, J. (Ed.). Focus on form in classroom second language Acquisition Cambridge: Cambridge university Press, 1998. p. 85-113.
WHITE, L. Adverb placement in second language acquisition: Some positive and negative evidence in the classroom. Second Language Research, v. 7, p. 133-61, 1991.
WILLIAMS, J. Learner-generated attention to form. Language Learning, v. 49, p. 583-625, 1999.
WILLIAMS, J.; EVANS, J. What kind of focus on which forms? In: DOUGHTY, C.; WILLIAMS, J. (Ed.). Focus on form in classroom second language Acquisition Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998. p. 139-155.

Publication Dates

Publication in this collection
12 June 2013
Date of issue
2001

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.

[1] JENSEN, J.B. A investigação de formas de tratamento e a telenovela: a escalada, parte 1. Revista Brasileira de Lingüística, Petrópolis, v.4, n.2, p.43-73, 1977.

[2] FREEMAN, D. Redefining the relationship between research and what teachers know. In: BAILEY, K.M., NUNAN, D. (Ed.). Voices from the language classroom Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996. p.88- 115.

[3] BARDOVI-HARLIG, K.; DÕRNYEI, Z. Do learners recognize pragmatic violations? TESOL Quarterly, Bloomington, v.32, n.2, p. 233- 262, 1998.

[4] CARROLL, S.; SWAIN, M. Explicit and implicit negative feedback: An empirical study of the learning of linguistic generalizations. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, v.l5,p. 357-86, 1993.

[5] CELCE-MURCIA, M.; DÕRNYEI, Z.; THURRELL, S. Direct approaches in L2 instruction: A turning point in communicative language teaching? TESOL Quarterly, Bloomington, v.31, n. 1, p. 141-152,1997.

[6] DAVIS, J. Facilitating effects of marginal glosses on foreign language reading. Modern Language Journal, v. 73, p. 41-48, 1989.

[7] DAY, E.; SHAPSON, S. Integrating formal and functional approaches in language teaching in French immersion: An experimental study. Language Learning, v. 41, p. 25-58, 1991.

[8] DE BOT, K. Psycholinguistics in applied linguistics: Trends and perspectives. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, v. 20, p. 224-237,2000.

[9] DEKEYSER, R. Learning second language grammar rules: An experiment with a miniature linguistic system. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, v. 17, p. 379-410, 1995.

[10] DOUGHTY, C. Cognitive underpinnings of focus on form. In: ROBINSON, P. (Ed.). Cognition and second language instruction Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. (No prelo)

[11] DOUGHTY, C.; WILLIAMS, J. (Ed.). Focus on form in classroom second language acquisition Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998a.

[12] DOUGHTY, C.; WILLIAMS, J. Pedagogical choices in focus on form. In: DOUGHTY, C.; WILLIAMS, J. (Ed.). Focus on form in classroom second language acquisition Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998b. p. 197- 261.

[13] ELLIS, N. Rules and instances in foreign language learning: Interactions of implicit and explicit knowledge. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology, v. 5, p. 289-319,1993.

[14] ELLIS, R. Teaching and research: Options in grammar teaching. TESOL Quarterly, v. 32, n.l, p. 39-60, 1998.

[15] ELLIS, R. Theoretical perspective on interaction and language learning. In: ELLIS, R. (Ed.). Learning a second language through interaction Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 1999.

[16] FOSTER, P. A classroom perspective on the negotiation of meaning. Applied Linguistics, v. 19, p. 1-23,1998.

[17] FOSTER, P.; SKEHAN, P. The influence of source of planning and focus of planning on task-based performance. Language Teaching Research, v. 3, p. 215-245, 1999.

[18] FOTOS, S. Consciousness-raising and noticing through focus on form: grammar task performance vs. formal instruction. Applied Linguistics, v. 14, p. 385-407, 1993.

[19] FOTOS, S. Integrating grammar instruction and communicative language use through grammar consciousness-raising tasks. TESOL Quarterly, v. 28, p. 323-51, 1994.

[20] FOTOS, S.; ELLIS, R. Communicating about grammar: a task-based approach. TESOL Quarterly, v. 25, p. 605-628, 1991.

[21] GASS, S. Input, interaction and the second language learner Mahwah: Erlbaum, 1997.

[22] GASS, S.; VARONIS, E. Miscommunication in nonnative speaker discourse In: COUPLAND, N., GILES, H.; WEIMANN, J. (Ed.). Miscommunication and problematic talk. Newbury Park, CA: Sage, 1991. p. 121-145.

[23] GASS, S.; MACKEY, A.; ALVAREZ-TORRES, M. J.; FERNANDEZ- GARCÍA, M. The effects of task repetition on linguistic output. Language Learning, v. 49, p. 549-581, 1999.

[24] HARLEY, B. The role of focus-on-form tasks in promoting child L2 acquisition. In: DOUGHTY, C.; WILLIAMS, J. (Ed.). Focus on form in classroom second language acquisition Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998. p. 156-174.

[25] HOLLY, F., KING, J. Vocabulary glosses in foreign language learning materials. Language Learning, v. 21, p. 213-219, 1971.

[26] HULSTIJN, J. Retention of inferred and given word meanings: Experiments in incidental vocabulary learning. In. ARNAUD, P.; BEJOINT, H. (Ed.). Vocabulary and applied linguistics London: MacMillan, 1992. p. 113-125.

[27] HULSTIJN, J. When do foreign language learners look up the meaning of unfamiliar words? The influence of task and learner variables. Modem Language Journal, v. 77, p. 139-147, 1993.

[28] HULSTIJN, J.; HOLANDER, M.; GRIEDENUS, T. Incidental vocabulary learning by advanced foreign language students: The influence of marginal glosses, dictionary use, and reoccurrence of unknown words. Modern Language Journal, v. 80, p. 327-339, 1996.

[29] HYLAND K. Writing without conviction? Hedging in science research articles. Applied Linguistics, v. 17, p. 433-454, 1996.

[30] IZUMI, S.; BIGELOW, M.; FUJIWARA, M.; FEARNOW, S. Testing the output hypothesis: Effects of output on noticing and second language acquisition. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, v. 21, p. 421-452, 1999.

[31] JACOBS, G. What lurks in the margin: Use of vocabulary glosses as a strategy in second language reading. Issues in Applied Linguistics, v. 5, p. 115-137, 1994.

[32] JACOBS, G.; DUFON, P.; FONG, C. LI and L2 glosses in L2 reading passages: Their effectiveness for increasing comprehension and vocabulary knowledge. Journal of Research in Reading, v. 17, p. 19-28, 1994.

[33] JOURDENAIS, R.; OTA, M.; STAUFFER, S.; BOYSON, B.; DOUGHTY, C. Does textual enhancement promote noticing? A think- aloud protocol analysis. In: SCHMIDT, R. (Ed.). Attention and awareness in foreign language learning. Honolulu: University of Hawai'i Press, 1995. p. 183-216.

[34] KUPFERBERG, L; OLSHTAIN, E. Explicit contrastive instruction facilitates the acquisition of difficult L2 forms. Language Awareness, v. 3, p. 149-165, 1996.

[35] KO, M. Glossing in incidental and intentional learning of foreign language vocabulary and reading. University of Hawai'i Working Papers in ESL, v. 13, p. 49-94,1995.

[36] LEOW, R. The effects of input enhancement and text length on adult readers' comprehension and intake in second language acquisition. Applied Language Learning, v. 8, p. 151-182,1997.

[37] LIGHTBOWN, P. The importance of timing in focus on form. In: DOUGHTY, C.; WILLIAMS, J. (Ed.). Focus on form in classroom second language acquisition Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998. p. 177- 196.

[38] LONG, M. H. Instructed interlanguage development. In: BEEBE, L. (Ed.). Issues in second language acquisition New York: Newbury House, 1998. p.113-141.

[39] LONG, M. H. Focus on form: A design feature in language teaching methodology. In: DE BOT, K., GINSBERG, R.; KRAMSCH, C. (Ed.). Foreign language research in cross-cultural perspective Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 1991. p. 39-52.

[40] LONG, M. H. The role of the linguistic environment in second language acquisition. In: RITCHIE, W. & BHATIA, T. (Ed.). Handbook of research on second language acquisition. New York: Academic Press, 1996. p. 413- 468.

[41] LONG, M. H.; INAGAKI, S.; ORTEGA, L. The role of implicit negative feedback in SLA: Models and recasts in Japanese and Spanish. Modem Language Journal, v. 82, p. 357-371,1998.

[42] LONG, M.; ROBINSON, P. Theory, research and practice. In: DOUGHTY, C.; WILLIAMS, J. (Ed.). Focus on form in classroom second language acquisition Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998. p. 15-41.

[43] LOSCHKY, L.; BLEY-VROMAN, R. Grammar and task-based methodology. In: CROOKES, G.; GASS, S. (Ed.). Tasks and language learning, vol. 1. Clevedon, Avon: Multilingual Matters, 1993. p. 123-67.

[44] LYSTER, R. Recasts, repetition and ambiguity in L2 classroom discourse. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, v. 20, p. 51-80, 1998.

[45] LYSTER, R.; RANTA, L. Corrective feedback and learner uptake: Negotiation of form in communicative classrooms. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, v. 19, p. 37-66, 1997.

[46] MACKEY, A. Input, interaction and second language development: An empirical study of question formation in ESL. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, v. 21, p. 557-587. 1999.

[47] MACKEY, A.; PHILP, J, Recasts, interaction and interlanguage development: Are responses red herrings? Modem Language Journal, v. 82, p. 338-356, 1998.

[48] MEHNERT, U. The effects of different lengths of time for planning on second language performance. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, V. 20, p. 83-108,1998.

[49] MURANOI, H. Focus on form through interaction enhancement: Integrating formal instruction into a communicative task in EFL classrooms. Language Learning, v. 50, n. 4, p. 617-673, 2000.

[50] NASAJI, H.; SWAIN, M. A Vygotskian perspective on corrective feedback in L2: The effect of random vs. negotiated help on the learning of English articles. Language Awareness (No prelo).

[51] NOBUYOSHI, J.; ELLIS, R. Focused communication tasks and second language acquisition. ELT Journal, v. 47, p. 203-210, 1993.

[52] OLIVER, R. Negative feedback in child NS-NNS conversation. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, v. 17, p. 459-82, 1995.

[53] OLIVER, R. Age differences in negotiation and feedback in classroom and pairwork. Language Learning, v. 50, p. 119-151, 2000.

[54] ORTEGA, L. Planning and focus on form in L2 oral performance. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, v. 21, p. 109-145, 1999.

[55] OVERSTREET, M. Text enhancement and content familiarity: The focus of learner attention. Spanish Applied Linguistics, v. 2, p. 229-258,1998.

[56] PELLETTIERI, J. Negotiation in cyberspace: The role of chatting in the development of grammatical competence. In: WARCHAUER; KERN, R. (Ed.). Network-based language teaching: Concepts and practice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000. p. 59-86.

[57] PICA, T. Research on negotiation: What does it reveal about second language acquisition? Language Learning, v. 44, p. 493-527, 1994.

[58] PICA, T. Second language teaching and research relationships: A North American view. Language Teaching Research, v. 1, p. 48-72, 1997.

[59] ROBINSON, P. Learning simple and complex second language rules under implicit, incidental, rule-search and instructed conditions. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, v. 18, p. 27-68, 1996.

[60] ROBINSON, R Automaticity and generalizability of second language learning under implicit, incidental, enhanced, and instructed conditions. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, v. 19, p. 233-247, 1997.

[61] ROSA, E.; O'NEILLl, M. Explicitness, intake and the issue of awareness: Another piece of the puzzle. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, v. 21, p. 511-553, 1999.

[62] SCHMIDT, R. The role of consciousness in second language learning. Applied Linguistics, v. 11, p. 17-46, 1990.

[63] SCHMIDT, R. Consciousness and foreign language learning. In: SCHMIDT, R. (Ed.). Attention and awareness in foreign language learning Honolulu: University of Hawai'i Press, 1995. p. 1-63.

[64] SEEDHOUSE, P. The case of the missing "no": The relationship between pedagogy and interaction. Language Learning, v. 47, p. 547-583, 1997.

[65] SHEHADEH, A. Non-native speakers' production of modified comprehensible output and second language learning. Language Learning, v. 49, p. 627-675,1999.

[66] SKEHAN, P. A framework for the implementation of task-based instruction. Applied Linguistics, v. 17, p. 38-62, 1996.

[67] SKEHAN, P.; FOSTER, P. The influence of task structure and processing conditions on narrative retellings. Language Learning, v. 49, p. 93-120,1999.

[68] SPADA, N. Form-focussed instruction and second language acquisition: A review of classroom and laboratory research. Language Teaching Abstracts, v. 30, p. 73-87,1997.

[69] SPADA, N.; LIGHTBOWN, P. Instruction and the development of questions in theL2 classroom. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, v. 15, p. 205- 21, 1993.

[70] SPADA, N.; LIGHTBOWN, P. Instruction, first language influence and developmental readiness in second language acquisition. Modem Language Journal, v. 83, p. 1-22,1999.

[71] SWAIN, M. Three functions of output in second language learning. In: COOK, G.; SEEFLHOFER, B. (Ed.). Principle and practice in applied linguistics Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1995. p. 125-44.

[72] SWAIN, M. Focus on form through conscious reflection. In: DOUGHTY, C.; WILLIAMS, J. (Ed.). Focus on form in classroom second language Acquisition Cambridge: Cambridge university Press, 1998. p. 64-81.

[73] SWAIN , M. The output hypothesis and beyond: Mediating Acquisition through collaborative dialogue. In: LANTOLF, J. (Ed.). Sociocultural theoiy and second language learning. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000. p. 97-114.

[74] SWAIN, M.; LAPKIN, S. Problems in output and the cognitive processes they generate: A step towards second language learning. Applied Linguistics, v. 16, p. 371-391, 1995.

[75] SWAIN, M.; LAPKIN, S. Interaction and second language learning: Two adolescent French immersion students working together. Modern Language Journal, v. 82, p. 320-337, 1998.

[76] TAKASHIMA, H.; ELLIS, R. Output enhancement and the acquisition of past tense. In: ELLIS, R. (Ed.). Learning a second language through interaction. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 1999. p. 173-188.

[77] VAN DEN BRANDEN, K. Effects of negotiation on language learners' output. Language Learning, v. 47, p. 589-636, 1997.

[78] VANPATTEN, B. Input processing and grammar instruction. New York: Ablex. 1996.

[79] WATANABE, Y. Input, intake, and retention: Effects of increased processing on incidental learning of foreign language vocabulary. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, v. 19, p. 287-307, 1997.

[80] WHITE, J. Getting the learners' attention: A typographical input enhancement study. In: DOUGHTY, C.; WILLIAMS, J. (Ed.). Focus on form in classroom second language Acquisition Cambridge: Cambridge university Press, 1998. p. 85-113.

[81] WHITE, L. Adverb placement in second language acquisition: Some positive and negative evidence in the classroom. Second Language Research, v. 7, p. 133-61, 1991.

[82] WILLIAMS, J. Learner-generated attention to form. Language Learning, v. 49, p. 583-625, 1999.

[83] WILLIAMS, J.; EVANS, J. What kind of focus on which forms? In: DOUGHTY, C.; WILLIAMS, J. (Ed.). Focus on form in classroom second language Acquisition Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998. p. 139-155.

Brasil

Brasil

Focus on forms research and its application

Abstract

Publication Dates