Research on Instructed Second Language Acquisition Abroad (2010-2019)

doi:10.12002/j.bisu.372

Abstract

Abstract:

As a sub-branch of second language acquisition, instructed second language acquisition has been gaining increasing attention. This paper provides a review of the development of instructed second language acquisition in the past ten years (2010-2019). Based on a quantitative content analysis of papers published in four international journals of applied linguistics, namely Language Learning, The Modern Language Journal, Applied Linguistics, and TESOL Quarterly, the following results pertaining to general development, research perspectives, research focuses, and research methods were identified: (1) The number of high-level research articles fluctuated on an international basis; (2) most of the studies were conducted from the sociocultural perspective, although explorations using the sociocognitive framework were on the increase; (3) teaching methodologies, classroom-based interaction, feedback, and identity attracted the most attention; and (4) most of the studies were empirical, with the qualitative method dominating and the mixed-method approach on the rise. Longitudinal methods accounted for a larger proportion, but cross-sectional methods were emerging. The research subjects were mainly college students, yet the targets tended to include middle-school and pre-school students, as well as teacher-student combinations. Future research will use more scientific research methods, the research contents will be more technology based, and the research targets will be more diverse. The results described in this paper are significant to the research on instructed second language acquisition in China.

Keywords: instructed second language acquisition; research perspective; research focus; research method; review

摘要：

作为二语习得研究的子域,课堂二语习得研究在近年来受到广泛关注。本文采用定量内容法,选取2010—2019年在Language Learning、The Modern Language Journal、Applied Linguistics和TESOL Quarterly 4种主要国际应用语言学期刊上刊发的课堂二语习得相关文献为研究对象,从总体趋势、研究视角、研究热点、研究方法4个层面进行了述评。研究结果显示：（1）国外课堂二语习得高水平研究成果呈曲折变化趋势;（2）基于社会文化视角的研究占主导,社会认知理论范式下的探索日趋增多;（3）教学法、课堂互动、反馈、学生身份成为研究热点;（4）研究方法以实证研究为主,定性研究方法使用频繁,混合研究不断增多;纵向研究的占比较高,并出现跨截面研究;受试以大学生为主,并逐渐呈现出向中小学生、学龄前儿童以及师生结合扩展的趋势。未来的课堂二语习得研究方法将更加科学化,研究内容凸显信息化,研究对象呈现多样化和交互性。希望本文对我国的课堂二语习得研究选题提供一些参考。

关键词: 课堂二语习得, 研究视角, 研究热点, 研究方法, 述评

CLC Number:

H319.3

Xu Yani, Yang Lianrui, Yang Xiangmei. Research on Instructed Second Language Acquisition Abroad (2010-2019)[J]. Journal of Beijing International Studies University, 2022, 44(1): 25-41.

徐亚妮, 杨连瑞, 杨向梅. 国外课堂二语习得研究动态（2010—2019）[J]. 北京第二外国语学院学报, 2022, 44(1): 25-41.

Figures/Tables 7

References 64

[1]	Atkinson D. Toward a sociocognitive approach to second language acquisition[J]. The Modern Language Journal, 2002, 86(4):525-545.
[2]	Boers F, & Lindstromberg S. Optimizing a Lexical Approach to Instructed Second Language Acquisition[M]. Basingstoke:Palgrave Macmillan, 2009.
[3]	Bowles M A, Adams R J Toth, & P D . A comparison of L2-L2 and L2-heritage learner interactions in Spanish language classrooms[J]. The Modern Language Journal, 2014, 98(2):497-517.
[4]	Bucholtz M, & Hall K. Identity and interaction:A sociocultural linguistic approach[J]. Discourse Studies, 2005, 7(4-5):585-614.
[5]	Creswell J W. Research Design:Qualitative,Quantitative,and Mixed Methods Approaches[M]. 3^rd Ed. Thousand Oaks:Sage Publications, 2009.
[6]	Dávila L T. “J’aime to be Funny!”:Humor,learning,and identity construction in high school English as a second language classrooms[J]. The Modern Language Journal, 2019, 103(2):502-514.
[7]	Davin K J. Classroom dynamic assessment:A critical examination of constructs and practices[J]. The Modern Language Journal, 2016, 100(4):813-829.
[8]	Dewaele J M, Magdalena A F Saito, & K . The effect of perception of teacher characteristics on Spanish EFL learners’ anxiety and enjoyment[J]. The Modern Language Journal, 2019, 103(2):412-427.
[9]	Ellis R. Instructed Second Language Acquisition[M]. Oxford:Basil Blackwell, 1990.
[10]	Ellis R. Second language acquisition,teacher education and language pedagogy[J]. Language Teaching, 2010, 43(2):182-201.
[11]	File K A, & Adams R. Should vocabulary instruction be integrated or isolated?[J]. TESOL Quarterly, 2010, 44(2):222-249.
[12]	Fushino K. Causal relationships between communication confidence,beliefs about group work,and willingness to communicate in foreign language group work[J]. TESOL Quarterly, 2010, 44(4):700-724.
[13]	Galante A, & Thomson R I. The effectiveness of drama as an instructional approach for the development of second language oral fluency,comprehensibility,and accentedness[J]. TESOL Quarterly, 2017, 51(1):115-142.
[14]	Gass S, Mackey A Ross-Feldman, & L . Task-based interactions in classroom and laboratory settings[J]. Language Learning, 2011, 61(S1):189-220.
[15]	Hartshorn K J, Evans N W, Merrill P F, et al. Effects of dynamic corrective feedback on ESL writing accuracy[J]. TESOL Quarterly, 2010, 44(1):84-109.
[16]	Herazo J D, Davin K J, & Sagre A. L2 dynamic assessment:An activity theory perspective[J]. The Modern Language Journal, 2019, 103(2):443-458.
[17]	Jong N D, & Perfetti C A. Fluency training in the ESL classroom:An experimental study of fluency development and proceduralization[J]. Language Learning, 2011, 61(2):533-568.
[18]	Kartchava E, & Ammar A. Learners’ beliefs as mediators of what is noticed and learned in the language classroom[J]. TESOL Quarterly, 2014, 48(1):86-109.
[19]	Kayi-Aydar H. Social positioning,participation,and second language learning:Talkative students in an academic ESL classroom[J]. TESOL Quarterly, 2014, 48(4):686-714.
[20]	Khajavy G H, Ghonsooly B, Fatemi A H, et al. Willingness to communicate in English:A microsystem model in the Iranian EFL classroom context[J]. TESOL Quarterly, 2016, 50(1):154-180.
[21]	King J. Silence in the second language classrooms of Japanese universities[J]. Applied Linguistics, 2013, 34(3):325-343.
[22]	Lee G, & Wallace A. Flipped learning in the English as a foreign language classroom:Outcomes and perceptions[J]. TESOL Quarterly, 2018, 52(1):62-84.
[23]	Lilja N, & Piirainen-Marsh A. Connecting the language classroom and the wild:Re-enactments of language use experiences[J]. Applied Linguistics, 2019, 40(4):594-623.
[24]	Loewen S. Introduction to Instructed Second Language Acquisition [M]. New York:Routledge, 2015.
[25]	Loewen S, & Sato M. The Routledge Handbook of Instructed Second Language Acquisition[M]. New York:Routledge, 2017.
[26]	Majlesi A R. Instructed vision:Navigating grammatical rules by using landmarks for linguistic structures in corrective feedback sequences[J]. The Modern Language Journal, 2018, 102(S1):11-29.
[27]	Miller E R, & Zuengler J. Negotiating access to learning through resistance to classroom practice[J]. The Modern Language Journal, 2011, 95(S1):130-147.
[28]	Moore A R. Interpersonal factors affecting queer second or foreign language learners’ identity management in class[J]. The Modern Language Journal, 2019, 103(2):428-442.
[29]	Nguyen H T. Interactional practices across settings:From classroom role-plays to workplace patient consultations[J]. Applied Linguistics, 2018, 39(2):213-235.
[30]	Peng J E, & Woodrow L. Willingness to communicate in English:A model in the Chinese EFL classroom context[J]. Language Learning, 2010, 60(4):834-876.
[31]	Pomerantz A, & Bell N D. Humor as safe house in the foreign language classroom[J]. The Modern Language Journal, 2011, 95(S1):148-161.
[32]	Reed D K. The effects of explicit instruction on the reading performance of adolescent English language learners with intellectual disabilities[J]. TESOL Quarterly, 2013, 47(4):743-761.
[33]	Rothoni A. The complex relationship between home and school literacy:A blurred boundary between formal and informal English literacy practices of Greek teenagers[J]. TESOL Quarterly, 2018, 52(2):331-359.
[34]	Saito K. The acquisitional value of recasts in instructed second language speech learning:Teaching the perception and production of English /ɹ/ to adult Japanese learners[J]. Language Learning, 2013, 63(3):499-529.
[35]	Saito K, & Lyster R. Effects of form-focused instruction and corrective feedback on L2 pronunciation development of /ɹ/ by Japanese learners of English[J]. Language Learning, 2012, 62(2):595-633.
[36]	Sato M. Beliefs about peer interaction and peer corrective feedback:Efficacy of classroom intervention[J]. The Modern Language Journal, 2013, 97(3):611-633.
[37]	Sato M. Interaction mindsets,interactional behaviors,and L2 development:An affective-social-cognitive model[J]. Language Learning, 2017, 67(2):249-283.
[38]	Sato M, & Loewen S. Metacognitive instruction enhances the effectiveness of corrective feedback:Variable effects of feedback types and linguistic targets[J]. Language Learning, 2018, 68(2):507-545.
[39]	Shahri M N N. Constructing a voice in English as a foreign language:Identity and engagement[J]. TESOL Quarterly, 2018, 52(1):85-109.
[40]	Shao K Q, Yu W H, & Ji Z M. An exploration of Chinese EFL students’ emotional intelligence and foreign language anxiety[J]. The Modern Language Journal, 2013, 97(4):917-929.
[41]	Shin J, Dronjic V , & Park B. The interplay between working memory and background knowledge in L2 reading comprehension[J]. TESOL Quarterly, 2019, 53(2):320-347.
[42]	Shintani N, Ellis R, & Suzuki W. Effects of written feedback and revision on learners’ accuracy in using two English grammatical structures[J]. Language Learning, 2014, 64(1):103-131.
[43]	Simard D, & Jean G. An exploration of L2 teachers’ use of pedagogical interventions devised to draw L2 learners’ attention to form[J]. Language Learning, 2011, 61(3):759-785.
[44]	Tight D G. Perceptual learning style matching and L2 vocabulary acquisition[J]. Language Learning, 2010, 60(4):792-833.
[45]	Toth P D. Social and cognitive factors in making teacher-led classroom discourse relevant for second language development[J]. The Modern Language Journal, 2011a, 95(1):1-25.
[46]	Toth P D. Teacher-led and learner-led discourse in task-based grammar instruction:Providing procedural assistance for morphosyntactic development[J]. Language Learning, 2011b, 61(S1):141-188.
[47]	van Batenburg E S L, Oostdam R J, van Gelderen A J S, et al. Oral interaction in the EFL classroom:The effects of instructional focus and task type on learner affect[J]. The Modern Language Journal, 2019, 103(1):308-326.
[48]	Vungthong S, Djonov E, & Torr J. Images as a resource for supporting vocabulary learning:A multimodal analysis of Thai EFL tablet Apps for primary school children[J]. TESOL Quarterly, 2017, 51(1):32-58.
[49]	Waring H Z. “Any Questions?” :Investigating the nature of understanding-checks in the language classroom[J]. TESOL Quarterly, 2012, 46(4):722-752.
[50]	Waring H Z. Doing being playful in the second language classroom[J]. Applied Linguistics, 2013, 34(2):191-210.
[51]	Yeldham M. Second language listening instruction:Comparing a strategies-based approach with an interactive,strategies/bottom-up skills approach[J]. TESOL Quarterly, 2016, 50(2):394-420.
[52]	Yoshida R. How do teachers and learners perceive corrective feedback in the Japanese language classroom?[J]. The Modern Language Journal, 2010, 94(2):293-314.
[53]	高一虹, 李莉春, 吕王君. 中、西应用语言学研究方法发展趋势[J]. 外语教学与研究, 1999(2):8-16.
[54]	胡增宁. 后现代视角下的二语习得研究——认知派和社会派论战与对话[J]. 外语教学理论与实践, 2018(1):57-63.
[55]	李燕飞, 冯德正. 多元读写教学法的系统功能语言学阐释[J]. 外语教学理论与实践, 2019(2):8-14.
[56]	梁文霞, 朱立霞. 国外二语课堂实证研究20年述评[J]. 外语界, 2007(5):58-67.
[57]	刘学惠. 课堂环境下的第二语言习得:理论框架与分析单位[J]. 外语与外语教学, 2005(10):54-58.
[58]	刘正光, 冯玉娟, 曹剑. 二语习得的社会认知理论及其理论基础[J]. 外国语, 2013, 36(6):42-52.
[59]	史兴松, 万文菁. 国内外商务英语研究方法探析(2007—2017)[J]. 外语界, 2018(2):20-28.
[60]	文秋芳. 评析二语习得认知派与社会派20年的论战[J]. 中国外语, 2008, 5(3):13-20.
[61]	吴文, 甘勇. 社会文化视野下二语习得研究25年[J]. 北京第二外国语学院学报, 2011, 33(6):75-83.
[62]	徐锦芬, 曹忠凯. 国内外外语/二语课堂互动研究[J]. 外语界, 2010(3):51-59.
[63]	徐锦芬, 雷鹏飞. 基于动态系统理论的课堂二语习得研究:理论框架与研究方法[J]. 外语教学理论与实践, 2017(1): 9,22-29.
[64]	徐锦芬, 雷鹏飞. 社会文化视角下的外语课堂研究[J]. 现代外语, 2018, 41(4):563-573.

地域	国家
欧洲	英国（10篇）,瑞典（8篇）,西班牙（5篇）,荷兰（5篇）,芬兰（3篇）,匈牙利（2篇）,冰岛（1篇）,丹麦（1篇）,比利时（1篇）,希腊（1篇）,土耳其（1篇）
北美洲	美国（38篇）,加拿大（11篇）,哥斯达黎加（1篇）
亚洲	中国（10篇）,日本（8篇）,新加坡（6篇）,韩国（4篇）,越南（3篇）,伊朗（2篇）,沙特阿拉伯（2篇）
大洋洲	澳大利亚（7篇）,新西兰（6篇）
南美洲	巴西（2篇）,智利（1篇）

地域	国家
欧洲	英国（10篇）,瑞典（8篇）,西班牙（5篇）,荷兰（5篇）,芬兰（3篇）,匈牙利（2篇）,冰岛（1篇）,丹麦（1篇）,比利时（1篇）,希腊（1篇）,土耳其（1篇）
北美洲	美国（38篇）,加拿大（11篇）,哥斯达黎加（1篇）
亚洲	中国（10篇）,日本（8篇）,新加坡（6篇）,韩国（4篇）,越南（3篇）,伊朗（2篇）,沙特阿拉伯（2篇）
大洋洲	澳大利亚（7篇）,新西兰（6篇）
南美洲	巴西（2篇）,智利（1篇）

截面研究方法	纵向研究方法	横截面研究方法	跨截面研究方法	总计
篇数	74	37	2	113
占比	65.49%	32.74%	1.77%	100%

截面研究方法	纵向研究方法	横截面研究方法	跨截面研究方法	总计
篇数	74	37	2	113
占比	65.49%	32.74%	1.77%	100%