Article published in:
Implicit and Explicit Learning of Languages
Edited by Patrick Rebuschat
[Studies in Bilingualism 48] 2015
► pp. 91–116

What does current generative theory have to say about the explicit-implicit debate?

| Michigan State University
| University of Reading and Artic University of Norway (UiT)
Taking a generative perspective, we divide aspects of language into three broad categories: those that cannot be learned (are inherent in Universal Grammar), those that are derived from Universal Grammar, and those that must be learned from the input. Using this framework of language to clarify the “what” of learning, we take the acquisition of null (and overt) subjects in languages like Spanish as an example of how to apply the framework. We demonstrate what properties of a null-subject grammar cannot be learned explicitly, which properties can, but also argue that it is an open empirical question as to whether these latter properties are learned using explicit processes, showing how linguistic and psychological approaches may intersect to better understand acquisition.
Published online: 24 September 2015
https://doi.org/10.1075/sibil.48.05van
Cited by

Cited by other publications

Bayram, Fatih & Jason Rothman
2020.  In Formal Linguistics and Language Education [Educational Linguistics, 43], ► pp. 11 ff. Crossref logo
Martin, Ines A. & Carrie N. Jackson
2016. Pronunciation Training Facilitates the Learning and Retention of L2 Grammatical Structures. Foreign Language Annals 49:4 ► pp. 658 ff. Crossref logo
McManus, Kevin & Emma Marsden
2017. L1 EXPLICIT INSTRUCTION CAN IMPROVE L2 ONLINE AND OFFLINE PERFORMANCE. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 39:3 ► pp. 459 ff. Crossref logo
Pinto, Manuela & Shalom Zuckerman
2019. Coloring Book: A new method for testing language comprehension. Behavior Research Methods 51:6 ► pp. 2609 ff. Crossref logo
Rastelli, Stefano & Kook-Hee Gil
2018. No fear of George Kingsley Zipf. Instructed Second Language Acquisition 2:2 ► pp. 242 ff. Crossref logo
Schenck, Andrew
2020. Using meta-analysis of technique and timing to optimize corrective feedback for specific grammatical features. Asian-Pacific Journal of Second and Foreign Language Education 5:1 Crossref logo
Sepehrinia, Sajjad, Majid Nemati & Ali Akbar Khomijani Farahani
2019. Studies on oral error correction: do they provide counterevidence against nativist arguments?. The Language Learning Journal 47:3 ► pp. 354 ff. Crossref logo
Snape, Neal
2020.  In Formal Linguistics and Language Education [Educational Linguistics, 43], ► pp. 155 ff. Crossref logo
Teixeira, Joana
2019. The impact of explicit instruction on different types of linguistic properties. ITL - International Journal of Applied Linguistics Crossref logo
Umeda, Mari, Neal Snape, Noriaki Yusa & John Wiltshier
2019. The long-term effect of explicit instruction on learners’ knowledge on English articles. Language Teaching Research 23:2 ► pp. 179 ff. Crossref logo
VanPatten, Bill
2016. Why Explicit Knowledge Cannot Become Implicit Knowledge. Foreign Language Annals 49:4 ► pp. 650 ff. Crossref logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 27 december 2020. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.

References

References

Anderson, J.
(2000) Learning and memory (2nd ed.). New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons.Google Scholar
Bruhn de Garavito, J.
(2011) Subject/object asymmetries in the grammar of bilingual and monolingual Spanish speakers: Evidence against connectionism. Linguistic Approaches to Bilingualism, 1, 111–148 CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Carminati, M.N.
(2002) The processing of Italian subject pronouns. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Massachusetts at Amherst.
Carroll, S.E.
(2001) Input and evidence: The raw material of second language acquisition. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Chomsky, N.
(2007) Of minds and language. Biolinguistics, 1, 9–27.Google Scholar
Corder, S.P.
(1967) The significance of learners’ errors. IRAL, 4, 161–170.Google Scholar
de Graff, R.
(1997) Differential effects of explicit instruction on second language acquisition. Leiden, The Netherlands: Holland Institute of Generative Linguistics.Google Scholar
De Jong, N.
(2005) Can second language grammar be learned through listening? An experimental study. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 27, 205–234. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Ellis, N.C.
(1998) Emergentism, connectionism and language learning. Language Learning, 48, 631–664. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(2002) Reflections on frequency effects in language processing. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 24, 297–339.Google Scholar
Ellis, R.
(2005) Measuring implicit and explicit knowledge of a second language: A psychometric study. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 27, 141–172. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Fodor, J.
(1983) The modularity of mind: An essay on faculty psychology. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
Gregg, K.R.
(2003) SLA theory: Construction and assessment. In C. Doughty & M. Long (Eds.), The handbook of second language acquisition (pp. 831–865). Oxford: Blackwell. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Guasti, M.T.
(2004) Language acquisition: The growth of grammar. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
Harley, H. & Noyer, R.
(1999) Distributed morphology. Glot International, 4(4), 3–9.Google Scholar
Henshaw, F.
(2011) Effects of feedback timing in SLA: A computer assisted study on the Spanish subjunctive. In C. Sanz & R.P. Leow (Eds.), Implicit and explicit language learning: Conditions, processes, and knowledge in SLA and bilingualism (pp. 85–99). Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.Google Scholar
Hustijn, J.
(2005) Theoretical and empirical issues in the study of implicit and explicit second language learning. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 27, 129–140.Google Scholar
Jackendoff, R.
(2002) Foundations of language. Oxford: Oxford University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Jegerski, J., VanPatten, B. & Keating, G.D.
(2011) L2 processing of anaphoric pronouns: L1 transfer at the syntax-discourse interface. Second Language Research, 27, 481–507. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Kanno, K.
(1998) Consistency and variation in second language acquisition. Second Language Research, 14, 376–388. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Krashen, S.D.
(1981) Second language acquisition and second language learning. Oxford: Pergamon.Google Scholar
Leow, R.P., Johnson, E., & Zárate-Sández, G.
(2011) Getting a grip on the slippery construct of awareness: Toward a finer grained methodological perspective. In C. Sanz & R.P. Leow (Eds.), Implicit and explicit language learning: Conditions, processes, and knowledge in SLA and bilingualism (pp. 61–72). Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.Google Scholar
Liceras, J.M., Díaz, L., & Maxwell, D.
(1998) Null arguments in non-native grammars: the Spanish L2 of Chinese, English, French, German, Japanese and Korean speakers. In E. Klein & G. Martohardjono (Eds.), The development of second language grammar: A generative approach (pp. 113–149). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Montalbetti, M.
(1984) After binding: On the interpretation of pronouns. Unpublished PhD dissertation. MIT.
O’Grady, W.
(2008) Does emergentism have a chance? In H. Chan, H. Jacob, & E. Kapia (Eds.), BUCLD 32: Proceedings of the 32nd annual Boston University Conference on Language Development (pp. 16–35). Sommerville, MA: Cascadilla.
Pérez-Leroux, A.T. & Glass, W.
(1999) Null anaphora in Spanish second language acquisition: Probabilistic versus generative approaches. Second Language Research, 15, 220–249. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Pinker, S.
(1994) The language instinct: How the mind creates language. New York, NY: Harper Collins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Pritchett, B.L.
(1992) Gramatical competence and parsing performance. Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago.Google Scholar
Pullum, G., & Scholz, B.
(2002) Empirical assessment of stimulus poverty arguments. The Linguistic Review, 19, 9–50.Google Scholar
Radford, A.
(2001) Syntax: A minimalist introduction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Robinson, P.
(1995) Aptitude, awareness and the fundamental similarity of implicit and explicit second language learning. In R. Schmidt (Ed.), Attention and awareness in foreign language learning (pp. 303–358). Honolulu, HI: University of Hawai’i at Manoa.Google Scholar
Rothman, J.
(2008) Why not all counter-evidence to the critical period hypothesis is equal or problematic: Implications for SLA. Language and Linguistics Compass, 2,1063–1088. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(2009) Pragmatic deficits with syntactic consequences: L2 pronominal subjects and the syntax-pragmatics interface. Journal of Pragmatics, 41, 951–973. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Rothman, J. & Iverson, M.
(2007) The syntax of null subjects in L2 Spanish: Comparing two L2 populations under different exposure. Revista Española de Lingüística Aplicada, 20, 185–214.Google Scholar
Rothman, J. & VanPatten, B.
(2013) On multiplicity and mutual exclusivity: The case for different SLA theories. In M.P. García-Mayo, M.J. Gutiérrez-Mangado, & M. Martínez Adrián (Eds.), Contemporary approaches to second language acquisition (pp. 243–256). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Schmidt, R.W.
(1992) Psychological mechanisms underlying second language fluency. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 14(4), 357–385. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Segalowitz, N.
(2003) Automaticity and second languages. In C. Doughty & M.H. Long (Eds.), The handbook of second language acquisition (pp. 382–408). Oxford: Blackwell. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Selinker, L.
(1972) Interlanguage. IRAL, 10, 209–231. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Shin, N.L. & Cairns, H.S.
(2009) Subject pronouns in child Spanish and continuity of reference. In J. Collentine, M. García, B. Lafford, & F.M. Marín (Eds.), Selected proceedings of the 11th Hispanic Linguistics Symposium (pp. 155–164). Somerville, MA: Cascadilla.Google Scholar
Slabakova, R.
(2008) Meaning in the second language. Berlin: De Gruyter. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Smith, M. & VanPatten, B.
forthcoming). Why parameters still matter in SLA: A study on the earliest stages of Japanese L2.
Snyder, W.
(2007) Child language: The parametric approach. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Spada, N., & Tomita, Y.
(2010) Interactions between type of instruction and type of language feature: A meta-analysis. Language Learning, 60, 263–308. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Toribio, A.J.
(2000) Setting parametric limits on dialectal variation in Spanish. Lingua, 10, 315–341. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
VanPatten, B.
(2010) The two faces of SLA: Mental representation and skill. International Journal of English Language Studies, 10, 1–18.Google Scholar
(2011) Stubborn syntax: How it resists explicit teaching and learning. In C. Sanz & R.P. Leow (Eds.), Implicit and explicit language learning: Conditions, processes, and knowledge in SLA and bilingualism (pp. 9–21). Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.Google Scholar
in press). Mental representation and skill in instructed SLA. In J. Schwieter (Ed.) Innovations in SLA, bilingualism, and cognition: Research and practice Amsterdam John Benjamins
VanPatten, B., Keating, G.D., & Leeser, M.J.
(2012) Missing verbal inflections as a representational problem: Evidence from self-paced reading. Linguistic Approaches to Bilingualism, 2, 109–140. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
VanPatten, B. & Williams, J.
(Eds.) (2015) Theories in Second Language Acquisition. 2nd edition. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
White, L.
(2003) Second language acquisition and universal grammar. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Whong, M. Gil, K.H. & Marsden, H.
(Eds.) (2013) Universal grammar and the second language classroom. New York, NY: Springer CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Yang, C.
(2004) Universal Grammar, statistics, or both? Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 8, 451–456. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Yang, C. & Roeper, T.
(2011) Minimalism and language acquisition. In C. Boeckx (Ed.), The Oxford handbook of linguistic minimalism (pp. 551–573). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar