(PDF) Second language acquisition: Key c

(PDF) Second language acquisition: Key concepts, questions, research methods
About
Press
Papers
We're Hiring!
Outline
Title
Abstract
Introduction
Research Methods
References
All Topics
Languages and Linguistics
Language Acquisition
Second language acquisition: Key concepts, questions, research methods
Michał B. Paradowski
2025, Przyswajanie języka drugiego. In: U. Topczewska, A. Jopek-Bosiacka, A. Leńko-Szymańska, M. Szupica-Pyrzanowska (Eds.), Lingwistyka stosowana. Kompendium, t. III: Od języka do języków (pp. 47-71). Warsaw: Wydawnictwo Naukowe Scholar
visibility
description
12 pages
Sign up for access to the world's latest research
check
Get notified about relevant papers
check
Save papers to use in your research
check
Join the discussion with peers
check
Track your impact
Abstract
This chapter offers a comprehensive overview of second language (L2) acquisition (SLA) as both a complex phenomenon and a research discipline in its own right. While researchers’ interest in SLA processes dates back to the 1950s, the phenomenon itself had fascinated scholars since antiquity. The discipline investigates how learners internalise the systems of successive languages after mastering the first one, and how they use them in the process of understanding and producing utterances. Unlike first language acquisition, SLA is influenced by a broader range of factors both internal – such as aptitude, motivation, and language transfer – and external – including the context of acquisition and the quality and quantity of exposure to target language data (input).
The chapter explores key issues in SLA and the factors determining success or failure in the learning process: the nature of interlanguage, i.e. the dynamic linguistic system created by the learner, the phases of its development, the sources of errors and their systematic nature, the role of the age of onset and the validity of the critical period hypothesis, the impact of previously acquired languages (positive and negative cross-linguistic influence), individual differences, and the role of explicit versus implicit knowledge and pedagogical intervention in the development of L2 competence. It presents various theoretical frameworks that undertake analyses of SLA mechanisms, including the generative perspective, Processability Theory, and social and emergentist approaches, as well as methods used in contemporary empirical research. Knowledge of SLA carries important implications for language teaching, enabling the tailoring of instructional methods to learners’ individual needs and supporting them more effectively in the development of linguistic competence. The chapter concludes with implications for pedagogy.
Related papers
Avances en la legislación peruana respecto al feminicidio en los últimos 10 años (2009-2018): una revisión de la literatura científica
niels chara estrada
2021
RESUMEN Según el Programa Nacional Contra la Violencia Familiar y Sexual - MIMP (2019), solo en el año 2018 se han registrado 149 feminicidios, convirtiéndose en la cifra más alta desde el año 2009. El presente trabajo realiza un análisis sobre los avances de la legislación peruana respecto al feminicidio entre los años 2009-2018, en tal sentido se efectúa una revisión sistemática de los estudios teóricos publicados en las bases de datos electrónicas especializadas de revistas científicas DOAJ, Redalyc y SciELO entre los años 2009 y 2018, para lo cual se han considerado operadores booleanos específicos sobre feminicidio y femicidio así como criterios de inclusión y exclusión relacionados a su relevancia por la calidad de su contenido que aborden de forma parcial o total tópicos de la legislación peruana respecto al feminicidio y que no tengan acceso restringido. Los resultados obtenidos mostraron que el tipo penal de feminicidio ha sufrido múltiples modificatorias en la legislación ...
Download free PDF
View PDF
chevron_right
Keragaman genetik cendawan entomopatogen Metarhizium anisopliae (Metsch.) berasal dari tanah pertanaman kelapa sawit berdasarkan penanda RAPD
maryani cyccu tobing
Jurnal Entomologi Indonesia, 2023
ABSTRAK Metarizhium anisopliae (Metsch.) adalah cendawan entomopatogen yang umum menyerang kumbang Oryctes rhinoceros (Linnaeus). Cendawan ini adalah salah satu yang berpotensi dalam mewujudkan pengelolaan hama berkelanjutan karena ramah terhadap lingkungan. Tujuan penelitian ini adalah mengisolasi cendawan M. anisopliae dari berbagai sampel tanah pertanaman kelapa sawit dan melihat keragaman genetiknya berdasarkan penanda random amplification of polymorphic DNA (RAPD). Metode yang dilakukan dalam penelitian ini adalah identifikasi M. anisopliae secara morfologi dan molekuler (ITS), dan pengujian keragaman genetik menggunakan penanda RAPD. Lima belas isolat M. anisopliae berasal dari lima belas perkebunan rakyat kelapa sawit di Sumatera Utara diuji keragaman genetiknya. Berdasarkan karakter morfologinya semua isolat diidentifikasi sebagai Metarhizium sp. Hasil sekuens dengan primer ITS menunjukkan semua isolat M. anisopliae yang yang berasal dari tanah memiliki homologi 85-99% dengan strains M. anisopliae dan M. brunneum rujukan dari database bank gen National Center Biotechnology Information (NCBI). Delapan primer RAPD menghasilkan 39 pita yang mana 38 pita (98,44%) dari pita tersebut polimorfik. Kisaran jarak genetik atau ketidaksamaan genetik antara isolat M. anisopliae adalah 0,051 sampai 0,520%. Analisis pengelompokan RAPD menggunakan metode Neighbour-Joining Tree yang membentuk tiga kelompok.
Download free PDF
View PDF
chevron_right
Incidence and growth of methylcholanthrene-induced tumors in mice with altered immunological status
Matko Marušić
Cancer Immunology Immunotherapy, 1986
BALB/c mice were treated s.c. with 3-methylcholanthrene (MCA), and tumor incidence and growth were followed for 9 months. Immunological status of mice was altered by various treatments. Thymectomized, lethally irradiated, bone marrow reconstituted mice served as Tcell deficient recipients. In order to suppres natural killer (NK)-cell/macrophage functions some mice were injected with silica particles; to enhance these functions some mice were given Corynebacterium parvum (CP). Silica and CP were given simultaneously with MCA to test their influence on the presumed function of surveillance of tumor incidence, and also 2 months after MCA to test their influence on the growth of greater numbers of transformed host cells. Almost all mice developed tumors at the inoculation site and at the end of the observation period there was no difference in tumor incidence among 9 experimental groups. However, in T-cell deficient mice we observed shorter tumor duration and earlier death than in normal mice. Silica particles appeared to enhance tumor growth but the differences compared to normal controls were not significant. A single injection of CP simultaneously with MCA caused earlier tumor appearance but also slowed its growth. In contrast, CP given 2 months after MCA significantly delayed the appearance of the tumors. In regard to the tumor growth immunosuppression had stronger effects in males than in females; the opposite was true for immunostimulation treatments. We concluded that immunological status does not influence long-term tumor incidence, but that both T-cell and NK-cell/macrophage compartments strongly influence the parameters of growth of chemically induced tumors, i.e., the immune and natural resistance mechanisms do not influence the frequency of de novo arising tumors but both can slow down tumor growth.
Download free PDF
View PDF
chevron_right
Mathematical descriptions of hybridoma culture kinetics: II. The relationship between thiol chemistry and the degradation of serum activity
Michael Glacken
Biotechnology and Bioengineering, 1989
The growth rate of the hybridoma cell line ATCC‐CRL‐1606 in low serum medium declines rapidly with time after inoculation. To characterize this phenomenon, the stability of the growth‐promoting activity of serum was investigated. The activity of serum was found to de grade with time, and was stabilized by alterations in the medium formulation that acted to lower the oxidation/reduction potential. This included both the addition of thiols and the elimination of disulfides from the medium. Additionally, cysteine and other thiols were shown to stimulate growth in low serum, low cell density cultures, suggesting that thiols may be rate‐limiting in low serum medium. Stimulation of growth by thiol addition was less significant at high cell levels, implying that the cells themselves may be acting to reduce their environment. A hypothesis is presented based on these results which suggests that the actual rate‐limiting moieties in low serum cultures may be dithiols.
Download free PDF
View PDF
chevron_right
The Role of TKS5 in Chromosome Stability and Bladder Cancer Progression
axel john
International Journal of Molecular Sciences, 2022
TKS5 promotes invasion and migration through the formation of invadopodia in some tumour cells, and it also has an important physiological function in cell migration through podosome formation in various nontumour cells. To date, the role of TKS5 in urothelial cells, and its potential role in BC initiation and progression, has not yet been addressed. Moreover, the contribution of TKS5 to ploidy control and chromosome stability has not been reported in previous studies. Therefore, in the present study, we wished to address the following questions: (i) Is TKS5 involved in the ploidy control of urothelial cells? (ii) What is the mechanism that leads to aneuploidy in response to TKS5 knockdown? (iii) Is TKS5 an oncogene or tumour-suppressor gene in the context of BC? (iv) Does TKS5 affect the proliferation, migration and invasion of BC cells? We assessed the gene and protein expressions via qPCR and Western blot analyses in a set of nontumour cell strains (Y235T, HBLAK and UROtsa) and a set of BC cell lines (RT4, T24, UMUC3 and J82). Following the shRNA knockdown in the TKS5-proficient cells and the ectopic TKS5 expression in the cell lines with low/absent TKS5 expression, we performed functional experiments, such as metaphase, invadopodia and gelatine degradation assays. Moreover, we determined the invasion and migration abilities of these genetically modified cells by using the Boyden chamber and wound-healing assays. The TKS5 expression was lower in the bladder cancer cell lines with higher invasive capacities (T24, UMUC3 and J82) compared to the nontumour cell lines from human ureter (Y235T, HBLAK and UROtsa) and the noninvasive BC cell line RT4. The reduced TKS5 expression in the Y235T cells resulted in augmented aneuploidy and impaired cell division. According to the Boyden chamber and wound-healing assays, TKS5 promotes the invasion and migration of bladder cancer cells. According to the present study, TKS5 regulates the migration and invasion processes of bladder cancer (BC) cell lines and plays an important role in genome stability.
Download free PDF
View PDF
chevron_right
Achievements and gaps in Orang Asli studies
Geoffrey Benjamin
Akademika: Journal of Social Science and Humanities 34: 7–45, 1989
This paper is now more than 30 years out of date. The original abstract (1989) is therefore no longer relevant, unless you are interested in the history of Orang Asli studies. If, on the other hand, you are interested in the present situation of the Orang Asli themselves, this paper will no longer be of much use. ORIGINAL ABSTRACT: Published materials on Orang Asli religions have achieved a very high standard, and work on Orang Asli socio-economic organisation has been substantial. Significant studies have also been done on the biology, epidemiology and linguistics of a few selected populations. However, these and other topics (such as archaeology, linguistics, basic ethnology, history, technology and ecology) remain under-studied. The gaps are discussed critically, and it is argued that they result, in large part, from the lack of reliable ethnological schemata. Several possible schemata are proposed, based variously on linguistic, biological and archaeological, and socio-historical criteria. It is also proposed that research gaps would be closed more quickly if different workers undertook overlapping research and exchanged field-notes among themselves. The paper includes an extensive bibliography of Orang Asli studies.
Download free PDF
View PDF
chevron_right
DAMPAK MALOKLUSI TERHADAP SENDI TEMPORO MANDIBULAR
Fahmi R
Download free PDF
View PDF
chevron_right
Energias renovables
Mauricio Torres
Download free PDF
View PDF
chevron_right
Memorias de braceros: olvido y abandono en el norte de México
Luis Alfonso Herrera Robles
Este libro es el resultado de una investigación acción participativa de dos años (2009-2011). En él, se encuentran las memorias de casi medio centenar de trabajadores agrícolas, que de manera temporal, cruzaron la frontera en el período que comprende el año de 1942 hasta 1964.
Download free PDF
View PDF
chevron_right
Nicolau Maquiavel – O Príncipe
Iroh Seth
Freqüentemente, é costume dos que desejam para si as boas graças de um Príncipe, dar-lhe as coisas que lhe são mais caras, ou com as quais o vêem agradar-se; deste modo, inúmeras vezes, eles são mimoseados com cavalos, armas, tecidos bordados a ouro, pedras valiosas e demais ornamentos dignos de sua grandeza. Querendo eu ofertar a Vossa Magnificência uma prova qualquer de minha obrigação, não encontrei, entre as minhas posses, nada que mais prezado me seja ou que tanto estremeça. quanto o conhecimento das ações dos grandes homens adquiridos por uma longa experiência das coisas atuais, e uma repetida lição das antigas; as. quais, tendo eu, com muito afinco, detidamente estudado, examinado-as, remeto agora a Vossa Magnificência, reduzidas a pequeno volume. E não obstante considere esta obra indigna da Presença de Vossa Magnificência, não menos confio em que, por humanidade desta, deva vir a ser aceita, visto que não lhe posso fazer regalo maior do que lhe propiciar a faculdade de adquirir em tempo mui breve o aprendizado de tudo quanto, em tão dilatados anos e à custa de tantos atropelos e perigos, hei conhecido. Não enfeitei esta obra e não a enchi de períodos sonoros nem de palavras empoladas e floreios ou de nenhuma espécie de lisonja ou ornamento externo com que usam muitos descrever ou enfeitar as próprias obras; pois não desejei que nenhum outro fosse seu ornato e a torne agradável a não ser a variedade da matéria e a gravidade do assunto. Menos desejo que por presunção se tenha o fato de um homem de baixa e ínfima condição discorrer e regular a respeito do governo dos príncipes; visto como, aqueles que desenham os contornos dos países postam-se na planície para apreender a natureza dos montes, e para apreender a das planícies sobem aos montes, do mesmo modo que para bem aquilatar a natureza dos povos é preciso ser príncipe. e para aquilatar a dos príncipes é preciso ser povo. Receba. portanto, Vossa Magnificência este pequeno presente na tenção em que o mando. Se for esta obra considerada e lida cuidadosamente, conhecerá Vossa Magnificência o meu sincero desejo que atinja aquela grandeza que a Fortuna e demais qualidades lhe asseguram. E se Vossa Magnificência, do píncaro de sua altura, voltar alguma vez os olhos para baixo, conhecerá quão sem motivo aturo uma enorme e continuada má fortuna. O PRÍNCIPE CAPíTULO I DE QUANTAS ESPÉCIES SÃO OS PRINCIPADOS. E QUANTAS SÃO AS MANEIRAS EM QUE SE ADQUIREM Todos os Estados, os domínios todos que existiram e existem sobre os homens, foram e são repúblicas ou principados. Os principados. ou são hereditários. e seu senhor é príncipe pelo sangue.de longa data. ou são novos. São os novos inteiramente novos, tal como Milão com Francesco Sforza. ou tais membros juntados a um Estado que recebe por herança um príncipe. talo reino de Nápoles ao rei da Espanha. Tais domínios assim recebidos são. seja habituado a sujeição a um príncipe, seja livre, e são adquiridos com tropas alheias ou próprias, graças à fortuna ou à virtú. CAPíTULO II DOS PRINCIPADOS HEREDITÁRIOS Não cuidarei das repúblicas, porque falei delas em outros sítios1. Farei referência 1 Refere-se aqui Maquiavel à sua obra Discorst sopra Ia prima decadi Ttto Livto.
View PDF
chevron_right
translated document; please cite as:
Paradowski, M.B. (2025). Przyswajanie języka drugiego. In: U. Topczewska, A. Jopek-Bosiacka, A. Leńko-Szymańska & M. Szupica-Pyrzanowska
(Eds.), Lingwistyka stosowana. Kompendium, vol. III: Od języka do języków (pp. 47-71). Warsaw: Wydawnictwo Naukowe Scholar.
DOI: 10.7366/978836809140302

Second language acquisition
Michał B. Paradowski

Introduction
Most people in the world speak two or more languages. The topic of their acquisition, both of
the native (L1) and second/foreign language 1 (L2/LX), was of interest already to the ancients
(see e.g. McCarthy, 2001; Thomas, 2013). However, the beginnings of scientific writing on the
latter process are usually traced to the late 1950s and early 1960s, when the first systematic
hypotheses, theories and models began to be proposed. Research in this initial period was
largely descriptive and pedagogically oriented and was motivated by a search for more
effective teaching methods. Over time, however, it moved away from an orientation towards
practical applications towards basic research aimed at explaining the nature of learner language
and the factors influencing it.
Second and subsequent language acquisition 2 (SLA and TLA) is both a phenomenon and a
research discipline in its own right. As a field, SLA seeks to explain how learners create
(internalise) the system(s) of subsequent languages after the first language has already been
acquired to at least some extent, and how they use these systems in the course of understanding
and producing utterances – it is therefore interested in both the processes of language learning,
and the outcome/product of these processes. Thus, it focuses on successive rather than
simultaneous bilingualism/multilingualism. The origins of SLA can be found in the disciplines
of linguistics, psychology, social psychology, sociology and pedagogy; it also draws on
cognitive science and neuroscience.
SLA focuses on the learner and the learning process rather than on teaching. There is,
however, its branch, instructed SLA (ISLA), which does not lose sight of the search for optimal
methods of L2 learning and teaching and investigates how manipulation of the language to
which the learner is exposed, pedagogical intervention (especially geared towards elements of
language subsystems; e.g. grammar-oriented formal instruction) or self-directed learning are
able to accelerate or otherwise affect the development of different elements of communicative
competence.
Issues of interest to SLA
The process of L2 acquisition is a complex one, much more so than L1 acquisition, due to the
role played by a much wider range of linguistic, psycholinguistic and contextual factors that
influence both the characteristics of the development of the learner’s language system, socalled interlanguage (Selinker, 1972), and ultimate attainment. SLA seeks to find answers to
interrelated questions about the characteristics of the interlanguage system, the factors that
In the literature, a distinction can be encountered between second language (SL), which is actively used in
everyday communication and dominates the learner’s environment (e.g. through upbringing in a bilingual family,
in a migration context, or in a multilingual society), and foreign language (FL), with which contact in everyday
life and the immediate environment is limited and occurs primarily through formal instruction (e.g. in a language
course or using a smartphone app). This distinction is contextual, but as it does not change the nature of the
underlying SLA processes (it may at most affect their speed, end result, and the learner’s affective state; VanPatten
& Benati, 2015:2), it will not be adhered to here. Similarly, by convention, L2 (sometimes the abbreviations Ln
and LX are also used) will mean any language acquired after the first; therefore, it may be de facto consecutively
second, third, fourth, and so on. Part of SLA research focuses on the acquisition of heritage language – acquired
in childhood at home, but with little presence in a setting where another language dominates.
In this chapter, the terms L2 acquisition, learning, and development will be used synonymously.

translated document; please cite as:
Paradowski, M.B. (2025). Przyswajanie języka drugiego. In: U. Topczewska, A. Jopek-Bosiacka, A. Leńko-Szymańska & M. Szupica-Pyrzanowska
(Eds.), Lingwistyka stosowana. Kompendium, vol. III: Od języka do języków (pp. 47-71). Warsaw: Wydawnictwo Naukowe Scholar.
DOI: 10.7366/978836809140302

shape its development, and the reasons why most learners do not achieve native-level
proficiency. Here, one can distinguish on the one hand internal perspectives that try to explain
the nature of the linguistic knowledge internalised by learners in light of what the learner brings
to the learning process (including factors influencing the shape of interlanguage such as
cognitive mechanisms or knowledge of the L1; the speed and efficiency of its acquisition –
individual variables such as aptitude or affective factors such as motivation or anxiety; as well
as biological factors potentially affecting L2 processing, such as maturation and ageing). In
parallel, SLA pays attention to external factors such as the language the learner is exposed to
and uses when communicating, the situational context, micro- and macro-social factors,
teaching techniques, or even teacher characteristics. One can also single out studies that aim to
uncover the cognitive processes behind L2 processing, most often in the area of processing
sentences, vocabulary, and phonology, in the hope that this knowledge will contribute to a
fuller understanding of the mental representations and language acquisition process of
bilinguals.
What is linguistic knowledge?
One of the fundamental questions in SLA concerns what concretely is being acquired, i.e. the
nature of subconscious mental representations (primarily concerning grammatical knowledge,
i.e. so-called linguistic competence, but also more generally communicative competence,
including lexical competence – both single words as well as collocations and other multi-word
expressions, phonological competence, pragmatic competence, and sociolinguistic competence
– knowledge of variants used in different situational contexts). For example, the generative
perspective assumes that humans are born equipped with a set of abstract rules/constraints that
narrow down the range of potential grammars of human languages, i.e. Universal Grammar
(UG; Bacon, c. 1240; Chomsky, 1965:6) – in other words, that learners already subconsciously
‘know’ at the start what is and what is not possible in natural language, which restricts the
hypotheses they form. In this approach, explanations of the SLA process focus on the nature
of the interaction of Universal Grammar with linguistic data from the environment.
What are the constraints on language acquisition?
Theories of language acquisition in the generative paradigm assume that the range of possible
trajectories of language acquisition and potential ‘errors’ is limited by universal properties of
languages, either ‘programmed’ in universal grammar or on the basis of typological universals
that assume implicational scaling (VanPatten & Benati, 2015:56). According to the latter, if a
language contains (typologically rarer; marked) feature Y, then it also contains (generally
typologically more frequent) feature X. The typologically rarer elements generally at once are
acquired later and with more ‘errors’ along the way. Other researchers believe that the order in
which constructs are assimilated is determined by their complexity and, consequently, their
processing difficulty: more difficult constructs will only be mastered after those lower in the
complexity/difficulty hierarchy have been assimilated (see e.g. O’Grady, 2003; Pienemann,
e.g. 1998). In contrast, according to the Bottleneck Hypothesis (Slabakova, 2013), the main
source of difficulty for learners is functional morphology, while semantics and syntax are
easier.
The speed and success of SLA (although to a lesser extent the shape of its trajectory) can also
be influenced by the context of acquisition, which determines the available quantity and quality
of linguistic data present in the environment. For example, the informal context of naturalistic
language acquisition through immersion and interaction (as a result of growing up in a
bilingual/multilingual community or family, or migration) may be relatively deficient in the
more advanced constructions that may be part of teaching materials and formal context present

in a pedagogical intervention, such as in language courses (classroom, hybrid or remote) or in
self-directed learning when using traditional textbooks or digital technologies. The context may
also provide more or less frequent contact and opportunities for interaction with more advanced
speakers of the target language. A specific context for language acquisition of interest to SLA
is the acquisition of a foreign language during study abroad, where participants often come into
contact both with incidental language acquisition from the environment and with study during
language courses offered by the host institution.
What is the initial state of L2 acquisition?
Several possibilities have been considered theoretically for the initial state of the L2 acquisition
process. The most important alternatives are i) as in the case of L1 acquisition, universal
language properties and the (language-specific or general cognitive) mechanisms guiding their
acquisition (the so-called Full Access position) and ii) all L1 properties copied ‘wholesale’ into
the system of the newly acquired language (Full Transfer; e.g. Schwartz & Sprouse, 1996). In
the latter scenario, it will then be up to the learner to overwrite those properties of the L1
grammar that behave differently from the L2 system with the correct ones (what in the
paradigm of approaches postulating universal grammar has often been called ‘parameter
resetting’). So far, more evidence supports the first position.
We will return to this issue when discussing the acquisition of the third language.
To what extent are the mechanisms of L1 and L2 acquisition and processing similar, and to
what extent do they differ?
While many similarities can be observed between the processes of L1 and L2 acquisition and
learning, e.g. in the presence of similar developmental sequences of individual grammatical
constructions, the differences between the two are far more pronounced, especially when the
latter process involves individuals more than a few years old. Most of these are summarised in
the Fundamental Difference Hypothesis (Bley-Vroman, 1989), which, together with
knowledge from subsequent research, makes it possible to identify a number of aspects typical
of SLA processes. Here, it is necessary to start with a different initial state, including familiarity
with—and therefore transfer from—the first language; the variability in learning outcomes,
with frequent arrest of development (see next section) and generally failure to achieve nativelevel competence; and the uncertainty of linguistic intuitions. The process of L2 acquisition
also potentially involves other—general cognitive—mechanisms that are also used in the
learning of other types of knowledge. L2 learners are also generally characterised by greater
cognitive maturity, knowledge of the world, of speech acts (such as requests or apologies) and
of rules of effective communication. Consequently, an important role in this process is played
by conscious learning and feedback, e.g. correcting mistakes. Finally, the process of L2
acquisition is also influenced by context (where exposure to language is often limited to the
lessons), language aptitude (which influences progress in older but not younger learners;
DeKeyser, 2000), and affective factors.
What is the role of age of onset and length of language immersion? Why do most L2 learners
fail to achieve full grammatical and/or phonological competence? Is there a ‘critical
period’?
Barring situations where a second language comes into play and begins to dominate the first,
L1 is almost invariably mastered effortlessly and successfully during the first few years of life
(although the development of some of the more complex structures can still be observed in
later years). Meanwhile, L2 learners, even in the same class or under similar environmental
conditions, reach very different levels of proficiency (both holistically and at the level of

individual skills and language subsystems). Moreover, most do not reach the level of native
speakers, which is most easily noticeable in the ‘foreign accent’. Hence, one of the fundamental
questions in SLA concerns the issue of the possibility of reaching so-called ultimate attainment,
or native proficiency, as well as the role of age of onset (in the case of migration, age of arrival
in a target-language speaking country) and length of language immersion in L2 acquisition; in
other words, whether these factors influence i) the speed of language acquisition and ii)
ultimate attainment.
One attempt to explain the phenomenon of the infrequent attainment of nativelike proficiency
by (older) L2 learners was the Critical Period Hypothesis (CPH). Originally posited in relation
to L1 acquisition, and later adapted to the context of SLA by Penfield and Roberts (1959) and
Lenneberg (1967), it assumed the existence of a period after which the mechanisms of language
acquisition (e.g. access to Universal Grammar) become unavailable, and learning will have to
rely on other, general cognitive processes. The main limitation of the studies cited in support
of the claim of the impossibility of reaching native-speaker levels is that they are unable to
categorically state that participants have indeed reached the end of interlanguage development,
that it is already irretrievably ‘fossilised’ and could not change with further exposure to and
communication in the language (see e.g. Han, 2011). Research in the field of first language
attrition, 3 a phenomenon often seen in migrants, shows that mental representations of
languages are never formed ‘finitely’.
Current research shows that achieving competence in the L2 at the same level as native
speakers is possible. For example, work in the Universal Grammar paradigm indicates that
parameters can be ‘reset’; in the area of phonology, on the other hand, it is more common to
speak not so much of a ‘critical period’ as of an anticorrelation of the probability of mastering
a pronunciation close to the model pronunciation with the age at which language learning
commenced (the later one starts learning, the less often one observes the attainment of a
pronunciation indistinguishable from native speakers, but there is no specific ‘cut-off point’,
vide e.g. Birdsong, 1992, and a number of other variables influence the outcome; Birdsong,
2005). The question remains as to why this is so rare. It may be because older learners no longer
have access to the mechanisms present during effortless L1 acquisition, or because subsequent
language acquisition is influenced by familiarity with and dominance of already known
languages (e.g. Herschensohn, 2007) and by individual and contextual factors (e.g. Moyer,
2004).
What does the development of the L2 system look like? How systematic/predictable is its
trajectory? Where do ‘errors’ come from?
Persons acquiring a new language (whether L1 or L2) do not simply replicate the language they
hear in the environment, but develop their own creative intermediate language. However, it is
not random; for example, learning to form grammatical structures (in both L1 and L2) follows
fairly predictable stages. These manifest themselves in the form of so-called developmental
sequences observed in the acquisition of specific constructions such as sentence formation,
negation and questions (VanPatten & Benati, 2015:28) 4, as well as acquisition orders (e.g.,
verb inflection suffixes), explained by form properties such as frequency of occurrence,
salience, and unambiguity (Goldschneider & DeKeyser, 2001). Importantly, external factors
such as pedagogical intervention and error correction seem to have little effect on the sequence
This is one of the reasons why many researchers prefer the term L2 development to acquisition.
Sometimes this leads to situations where originally correctly used forms are temporarily replaced by
ungrammatical ones, only to return to correct constructions over time (U-shaped development); one classic
example of this is irregular verb forms in English.

of stages that learners go through (although see e.g. Zhang et al., 2015), at least in the case of
implicit knowledge development. Subsequent stages only become ‘available’ once earlier
stages have been completed (which is often visualised in the form of implicational scales,
where structure Y in the vast majority of cases appears only after structure X has been
mastered) – although some researchers have begun to question the existence of an invariant,
common order for all learners (see e.g. Tarone & Liu, 1995). Teaching, however, can accelerate
the rate of transition through the successive stages to the target construction, which is often
also influenced by previously mastered languages.
At the same time, some studies suggest that learners acquire (syntactic) linguistic knowledge
beyond that which they have been taught and exposed to (Sprouse, 1996) – e.g. knowledge of
what is ungrammatical in language. The question ‘How does this happen?’ falls under the socalled logical problem of language acquisition, i.e. the (contentious) poverty of the stimulus
argument, often explained by the existence of Universal Grammar and its interaction with
linguistic data from the environment.
Individuals acquiring a new language do not move from using one form or construction to the
next abruptly. The stages of development of the language system sometimes overlap, so that at
almost every step learners show variability in their use of the L2 (e.g. using forms/constructions
from different stages of acquisition, a correct and an incorrect form, etc.). In addition to
transitional periods of free variation at the beginning of each stage, when learners use different
forms to express the same meaning, researchers’ interest also focuses on systematic variation,
where two different structures seemingly used for the same purpose are de facto used in
different functions, meanings or linguistic contexts (just as in nature it is practically impossible
to find situations where two different species occupy the same ecological niche).
What role in L2 acquisition is played by linguistic data from the environment, production
and interaction? Why does the frequency of particular linguistic forms in the environment
fail to fully explain when a feature is going to be mastered?
It is considered that critical to the development of a language system is input, 5 i.e. samples of
language to which the learner is exposed orally or in writing, primarily as a result of
communication, and whose meaning the learner seeks to understand (as opposed to, for
example, mechanical drills; VanPatten & Williams, 2015:9). Some approaches to SLA (e.g.
generativism; the Production/Output Hypothesis; Swain, 1985; or Autonomous Induction
Theory; Carroll, 2001) assume that the learner builds their interlanguage as a result of the
interaction of mechanisms of innate linguistic knowledge (e.g. in the form of constraints
imposed by Universal Grammar) with examples of constructions and forms extracted from
input. In contrast, the competing connectionist perspective does not postulate the existence of
innate linguistic mechanisms, but proposes that an input-compatible grammar emerges over
time from ‘statistical’ analyses of linguistic data from the environment and constructions used
by the learner themselves. According to this theory, what looks like knowledge of abstract rules
is actually the result of repeated exposure to regularities; hence, a much greater role will be
played by the frequency of occurrence of particular forms. Given the crucial role of input in L2
acquisition, many teaching models focus on drawing learners’ attention to easily overlooked
or difficult features of language (e.g., input enhancement by highlighting forms in written text,
or input flooding exposing the learner to multiple examples of the use of a given form; Wong,
2005).
In the literature, one encounters a distinction between the threshold data available in the environment – input,
and intake, i.e. that linguistic information which effectively becomes part of the learner’s developing linguistic
competence.

In addition to input, some researchers postulate an important role in the process of language
acquisition for language production (output; e.g. Swain, 1985), especially in situations where
the learner has to make an effort to be understood (pushed output), as they then have to move
from the level of purely semantic analysis (the meaning of an utterance, for which contextual
information is often sufficient to understand without having to process the grammatical layer)
to morpho-semantic analysis of formal features of the language and to test their hypotheses
about the target language (Swain, 1985:252). However, findings from other studies suggest
that while language production can serve to develop oral fluency and support vocabulary and
pronunciation development, evidence for the effect of production on morpho-syntactic
development is harder to come by (VanPatten & Benati, 2015:42-3). In turn, the Interaction
Hypothesis (e.g. Long, 1981) assumes that when a communication problem is encountered,
negotiation of meaning results in changes in the language directed at the learner and can help
draw their attention to key forms through feedback, including corrective feedback (e.g. Long,
1983).
What role is played by explicit and implicit learning? What are the optimal proportions of
attention given in teaching to the formal layer of language vis-à-vis the learner’s
understanding of the meaning of the material presented? Can pedagogical intervention in
the form of developing language awareness, correcting ‘errors’ or manipulating input affect
the development of the language system? If so, which intervention methods are (more)
effective?
Linguistic knowledge can be of an explicit/declarative nature – metalinguistic knowledge
‘about’ linguistic facts, which learners are aware of, which can be taught (via consciousnessraising) e.g. in the form of grammar rules, and attempted to be memorised. Its disadvantage is
that it is not readily available in spontaneous communication. For this, one needs what is called
implicit or procedural knowledge, i.e. subconscious knowledge ‘of’ the language that enables
one to communicate in it fluently and correctly in communicative contexts, which is usually
manifested in the case of our native language (in which we are also able to determine whether
an utterance is grammatical or not, but not necessarily explain why it is not). The development
of implicit knowledge, however, requires long practice.
Explicit learning aims at consciously (intentionally or not – here lies another controversy),
analytically detecting regularities in threshold data and discovering the rules explaining them
by making and testing hypotheses; thus acquired knowledge can be described in our own words
(Ellis, 2009). Implicit learning, on the other hand, takes place subconsciously, incidentally,
without any learning intention, while the learner is focused on communication and acquires
new linguistic forms ‘along the way’, as it were.
There is a consensus among researchers that—like L1 acquisition—L2 acquisition must rely
primarily on implicit processes and that such knowledge is the goal of SLA, as it is what enables
its spontaneous use. Controversy surrounds the role of instruction and the question of whether
thus acquired knowledge can transform/automate into or develop implicit knowledge (the socalled interface position), especially since most older learners of a foreign language try to
consciously learn forms, constructions and rules and some pedagogical interventions seem to
help. However, classroom teaching alone is not sufficient to achieve a native level of
competence. On the other hand, it is well known that teaching directed only at comprehension
of utterances without paying attention to language forms and structures (meaning-focused
instruction, such as in some iterations of the task-based language teaching—TBLT—approach)
is not sufficient for learners to reach the expected level of correctness, as can be seen in the
stabilisation of the language of many learners acquiring it through immersion. Hence, there
also seems to be a need for a pedagogical intervention that draws the learner’s attention to these

elements in the threshold data (form-focused instruction/Focus on Form(s); 6 Long, 1996) and
allows the learner to notice the difference between the constructions they use and their model
versions that appear in the environment, because otherwise the learner may process the input
solely in search of meaning and not acquire the grammatical forms present (Schmidt, 1990,
2001). Hence, pedagogical methods such as the aforementioned multiplication of linguistic
data (input flooding; Wong, 2005), input enhancement (Sharwood Smith, 1991), processing
support (Processing Instruction; VanPatten, 1993), illustration of learned forms and content
with gestures, or correction of errors made by the learner (recasts). Research is also looking at
the impact of intervals between repetitions of material, and the use of artificial intelligence
tools in independent language learning.
Theories based on the distinction between explicit and implicit knowledge generally assume
that the two types of knowledge develop independently, sometimes only allowing for the
possibility that explicit knowledge can support the processes of acquiring implicit knowledge.
Some researchers postulate that teaching plays a negligible role in L2 acquisition (VanPatten
& Benati, 2015:54) and cite studies suggesting that pedagogical intervention is unable to alter
the trajectory of the acquisition of particular forms and constructions (e.g., to cause certain
developmental stages to be ‘skipped’). Results that suggest otherwise generally make use of
tests of conscious explicit knowledge (see Suzuki, 2017; Roehr-Brackin, 2024) administered
shortly after teaching (immediate post-tests); in longer-term studies that use delayed post-tests,
the effects of pedagogical intervention often disappear (VanPatten & Benati, 2015:50). In
contrast, teaching applied at the right moment, when students are developmentally ‘ready’ for
it, seems to be able to indirectly accelerate progression through the successive stages, increase
the frequency of application of an already mastered rule, or extend the context of its application
(Pienemann, 1998) and reach further levels of competence in the long term. In turn, the skilllearning theory adapted to the context of language acquisition assumes that learners are able to
gradually move from explicitly acquired declarative knowledge to implicit processes through
adequate practice and exposure to data, automatising procedural knowledge (DeKeyser, 1998).
Meta-analyses (Norris & Ortega, 2000; Goo et al., 2015; Huang, 2015; Shintani et al., 2013;
Shintani, 2015; Kang et al., 2019; Sok et al., 2019) have shown that language teaching can be
effective, although not every type of teaching and not in every area is equally effective. Current
research therefore seeks to determine under which conditions teaching is helpful.
How is the acquisition of the target language influenced by previously acquired languages?
What does the language knowledge system look like in an L2 learner?
The shape and trajectory of interlanguage development are also influenced by the
characteristics of the learner’s L1, most quickly noticeable in the so-called ‘foreign accent’.
For some time, it was thought that the difficulties encountered by the L2 learner were mainly
due to interference, i.e. negative transfer of forms, constructions and conceptualisations that
differ in the L2 from those in the L1. Nowadays, transfer or—more appropriately—crosslinguistic influence (Sharwood Smith, 1983; because it can manifest itself not only in the
‘copying’ of forms, but also, for example, in preferences or the avoidance of forms considered
difficult) is considered to be just one of many factors having a selective effect on L2
development. Of greater interest are conditions responsible for its occurrence or lack thereof
(Paradowski, 2017:41-58), such as linguistic (e.g. typological proximity between languages,
typicality of constructions, or their salience in input), psychological (e.g. perceived similarity
The amount of attention given to L2 grammatical features can be placed on a continuum between focus on forms
(FonFs), where the syllabus is structured around grammatical structures, and focus on form (FonF), where
teaching is focused on communication, and linguistic elements are discussed as necessary (Loewen & Sato,
2017b:5).

between languages), other individual variables (e.g. age, language aptitude, working memory
capacity), developmental (e.g. proficiency level) or contextual factors.
From this perspective, the most interesting context is that of third language acquisition (TLA),
because then the source of transfer (in the initial stages of language acquisition) can
theoretically be both L1 and L2 (Paradowski, 2017:30-41). Here, two general types of
proposals can be distinguished. On the one hand, there are ‘wholesale’ transfer models
assuming that transfer (at least with regard to morpho-syntactic competence) will only occur
from one language: the first one (e.g. Schwartz & Sprouse, 1994, 1996; Hawkins & Chan,
1997), the second (L2 Status Factor; e.g. Bardel & Falk, 2007, 2012), the one that is closer
typologically (Typological Primacy Model; TPM; e.g. Rothman & Cabrelli Amaro, 2010), the
dominant one in use and the environment (Contact Language of Communication; LCM; e.g.
Fallah, Jabbari & Fazilatfar, 2016), or an intermediate position between the last two
(Abbreviated Grappling Period Model; Sprouse & Schwartz, 2023). On the other hand, there
are several proposals for selective transfer (property-by-property models), potentially selecting
a different source language for each aspect of the grammar: the Cumulative Enhancement
Model (e.g. Flynn, Foley & Vinnitskaya, 2004); the Linguistic Proximity Model (Mykhaylyk
et al., 2015; Westergaard, 2021); the Developmentally Moderated Transfer Hypothesis
(Håkansson, Pienemann & Sayehli, 2002) or the Scalpel Model (Slabakova, 2017). While
models from the first group generate specific predictions, the problem with models belonging
to the latter category is that they are not fully falsifiable—they are difficult to verify
scientifically.
Also of interest to SLA, coinciding with research on multilingualism, is the question of the
nature of L2 learners’ language system. Useful here is the concept of multi-competence,
introduced by Vivian Cook (1995), understood as the coexistence of multiple interconnected
languages in the mind of the L2 user (a term preferred to the word ‘learner’, which suggests a
knowledge deficit), where competence in each language is different from that of monolinguals.
Is the learning process influenced by individual differences such as psychological factors?
If so, which ones and in what way?
Variability in progress and ultimate attainment in second language acquisition is also attempted
to be explained by studies that take into account individual (learner) differences (I(L)D;
Arabski & Wojtaszek, 2011).
One of the most commonly studied constructs that seems to influence progress and ultimate
attainment in the L2 is language (learning) aptitude. In the explicit version, it includes cognitive
skills ranging from perception and reproduction of sounds through analytical skills and
sensitivity to morphosyntactic regularities to working memory capacity, but recently it has also
been recognised in an implicit version (Li, 2022). Hence, some studies (e.g. DeKeyser, 2012)
try to find optimal matches between the type of teaching intervention and the student’s
dominant aptitude type (aptitude-treatment interaction).
Since achieving an advanced level of proficiency in the L2 requires a great deal of time and
energy, of interest to SLA researchers are also a number of personality traits (PiechurskaKuciel, 2020) and emotional-affective factors, such as motivation, i.e. the desire to learn the
language; attitudes towards, posture, and beliefs about the L2, learning it and its native
speakers, mindsets, engagement and investment, L2 grit (Paradowski & Jelińska, 2024),
resilience, self-regulation, self-efficacy, or learning strategies used (Pawlak & Kruk, 2022).
Important constructs are also identity, autonomy and agency. Also examined are more variable
emotional states (Dewaele & Li, 2020) such as willingness to communicate (WtC), enjoyment,

boredom, foreign language anxiety or well-being. Among social variables, the most commonly
considered is socio-economic status (SES).
A scientific obligation requires mention of the concepts of learning styles, cognitive styles and
multiple intelligence, which would appear in the literature in the past. These have been found
to be rather problematic due to a lack of empirical evidence for the existence of these constructs
(e.g. Dörnyei, 2005) and methodological problems in the studies postulating their existence
(VanPatten & Benati, 2005:47); moreover, the former are not traits, but actions applied in
learning, on top of it ones that have not been sufficiently supported by theoretical foundations
(Dörnyei, 2005:162).
The aforementioned individual variables, belonging more to the domain of educational
psychology, can influence the effectiveness of formal learning and satisfaction with its effects,
accelerating or slowing down the pace of language development and—in the long run—its
ultimate state. Nevertheless, their influence is more quantitative than qualitative, especially if
one assumes the existence of internal mechanisms responsible for input processing,
interlanguage development and developmental sequences, and the fact that the basic
characteristics of the majority of situations of natural interaction in language change relatively
little under the influence of participants’ individual differences.
Approaches and theories
Every scientific advance is primarily an advance in the development of theories attempting to
explain observed phenomena and to predict the outcomes of various conditions. The
complexity of SLA processes means that the phenomenon is approached by various
complementary approaches and theories from different epistemological perspectives:
linguistic, psychological and social.
Initially, the interests of SLA researchers focused on internal cognitive mechanisms on the
assumption that learning takes place in the learner’s mind as a result of input processing and
production in the process of communication. One of the better-known cognitive theories is the
generative perspective (Principles and Parameters), postulating the existence of principles
common to all languages (innate abstract rules/constraints that form part of Universal
Grammar) and parameters specific to each language (concerning, for example, word order,
headedness, or the option to leave out the subject of a sentence – pro-drop/null subject
parameter). This approach also proposes that the biggest difficulties for learners are caused by
phenomena at the interfaces of language modules (e.g. between vocabulary and morphology,
syntax and semantics, or semantics and pragmatics or discourse). Over time, mental
mechanisms have been complemented by interactionist approaches with the role of conscious
attention, especially in the context of noticing (Schmidt, 1990) grammatical forms in input
data. A theory of linguistic processing (Input Processing; VanPatten, 1993; Benati, 2013)
attempts to explain the psycholinguistic mechanisms and processes responsible for
transforming input into intake basing on the assumption that learners analyse the data primarily
in search of meaning. Other paradigms, e.g. cognitive linguistics, do not assume the existence
of language-specific acquisition mechanisms, but rather general cognitive processes (Wu et al.,
2024). E.g. Processability Theory (Pienemann, 1998; Håkansson, 2013) attempts to explain
developmental sequences through general psychological constraints on information processing
that create predictable hierarchies of more easily (earlier) and harder (later) acquired
constructs; Skill Acquisition Theory emphasises the role of practice/proceduralisation of
acquired knowledge in L2 development; while connectionist models and usage-based theories
postulate that linguistic knowledge is constructed gradually on the basis of regularities
observed in the input. There are also models that propose the involvement of both mechanisms

in L2 acquisition (e.g. Modular On-line Growth and Use of Language/MOGUL; Sharwood
Smith & Truscott, 2014).
Towards the end of the last century, the field began to move beyond a purely cognitive
perspective and recognise the role of social factors, both micro- and macro-social. In the former
aspect, the best known is the sociocultural approach drawing on the works of Lev Vygotsky
(1934), who argued that learning takes place in the interaction between the learner and an expert
(e.g. teacher), who together construct a Zone of Proximal Development (ZPD), where the
former masters new skills with support (scaffolding) from the latter. Macro-social factors
recognised as influencing L2 acquisition outcomes include for example identity, status, or
espoused values. E.g. Schumann’s (1978) acculturation model emphasises the importance of
the languages spoken in the learner’s community, while social-interactionist theory (Firth &
Wagner, 1997) emphasises the social roles of the interlocutors. In contrast to cognitive
perspectives, social approaches explain how context and other social factors influence not so
much the process of language acquisition, but the opportunities and affordances for learning
(Ellis, 2015:30).
Both cognitive and social aspects of learning through exposure to data from a complex
environment come together in emergentism and complexity theory/Complex Dynamic Systems
Theory (CDST; e.g. de Bot, Lowie & Verspoor, 2007; Larsen-Freeman & Cameron, 2008;
Larsen-Freeman, 2011). These perspectives view complex phenomena (such as the
development of the L2 system) as the result of interactions between multiple factors, emphasise
the role of context, the non-linear dynamic nature of phenomena, their adaptability (as the
learner’s interlanguage is responsive to the linguistic environment) and self-organisation (a
change in one place may trigger changes elsewhere).
Research methods
With theoretical advances, SLA has been using increasingly sophisticated research tools.
Traditionally, the main area of interest has been the development of complexity, accuracy, and
fluency (CAF) of structures and utterances. Since (even with the use of neuroimaging) we have
no direct insight into the processes involved in language acquisition and processing, researchers
rely on the language produced by learners and what learners understand. Traditionally, one
uses tests of linguistic intuition, where participants are asked to decide whether in their opinion
specific utterances are correct (acceptability/grammaticality judgment task; AJT/GJT) or true
in the context presented (truth-value/semantic judgment task), or asked to choose the correct
interpretation. Grammatical competence is also tested with elicited imitation tests, based on the
assumption that with a sufficiently long utterance, formal language elements will only be
correctly reconstructed by the learner if they are already known to them. In order to have full
control over the input data available to the learner, mini-courses are sometimes created of
artificial languages or mini-languages (artificial language learning).
The acquisition of pragmatics is most often tested using written and oral tasks requiring the
completion of dialogues (discourse completion tasks; DCT). In the area of phonology, students’
utterances are often recorded and then either assessed by a panel of native speakers or experts,
or analysed using specialised software (e.g. PRAAT). In the area of phonological processing,
some of the most common methods are tasks involving phoneme identification and
discrimination (auditory discrimination task and oddball paradigm).
Vocabulary research is often carried out in a language laboratory or on a computer equipped
with software measuring reaction times (RT) to presented stimuli, for example in a word
association task and lexical decision task, where the participant has to quickly determine
whether a word exists in a particular language or not. Other types of behavioural methods

include lexical/structural priming, which is used e.g. in studies of cross-linguistic influence,
and eye tracking, which measures eye movements and changes in pupil dilation and is often
used in reading research in tasks such as self-paced reading (SPR), e.g. measuring working
memory capacity (reading span task).
Also gaining in popularity in SLA research are neurolinguistic methods. One of the most
commonly used apparatuses is the electroencephalograph (EEG), which is used to analyse
event-related potentials (ERPs); in analyses of language processing primarily P600 occurring
when an ungrammatical construction is detected and N400 following an unexpected semantic
anomaly, as well as early left anterior negativity (ELAN) sometimes occurring in both
situations, and mismatch negativity (MMN) reflecting the ability to detect novel phonemes.
Due to the cost of the equipment and its maintenance, as well as the noise it generates,
functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) and positron emission tomography (PET) are
used somewhat less frequently. Some studies also use transcranial magnetic stimulation
(TMS).
The moderating effect of psychological factors is most often measured using questionnaires.
Here, particular attention is paid to the validity and reliability of the constructs measured. The
role of interaction with other users of the language, especially in the context of study abroad,
is in turn examined through social network analysis (SNA; Paradowski et al., 2022, 2024).
A separate field of research that does not directly involve participants is the analysis of learner
language corpora – computerised databases of texts, written and spoken, now increasingly
containing longitudinal data.
In addition to original studies, there are an increasing number of so-called close replications,
reproducing most of the elements of an already published study by other authors, but
supplementing it with or changing an important variable. Also noteworthy are meta-analyses
(Plonsky & Oswald, 2015), which are systematic reviews of the available literature on a
specific question, and estimate the overall effect size of a given variable. There is also
increasing emphasis on research methodology and rigour in terms of sample size, assumptions,
effect sizes and confidence intervals (in frequentist statistics)/credible intervals (in Bayesian
statistics), to permit drawing conclusions and generalise to the population level with greater
confidence.
For logistic reasons, a large proportion of SLA studies are cross-sectional, where the progress
of several groups is compared in parallel. Therefore, the importance is being emphasised of
longitudinal studies with multiple measurement points (time-series design), which among other
things permit outlining developmental trajectories, for example by means of growth curve
modelling.
In addition to quantitative research, there is also room for qualitative paradigms (GabryśBarker & Wojtaszek, 2014; Albert & Csizér, 2022), e.g. in the form of (multiple) case studies
observing several or one participant over a longer period of time, in return collecting rich-andthick information on many potentially important variables. Qualitative methods include, among
others, ethnographic research, interviews, introspective methods such as think-aloud protocol
and retrospective stimulated recall, and observation, analysis of audio and video recordings, or
conversation analysis. Qualitative research is often inductive—it does not start with
hypotheses, but tries to uncover relationships and patterns in the data collected prior. There are
also an increasing number of studies using mixed methods.

Coda
Understanding the mechanisms of second language acquisition is not only of vital
epistemological importance, but is also an important contribution to language teaching practice
and methodology (Dakowska, 2001). In order for teaching to be effective and for the teacher
to be able to make informed decisions, the process, methods and activities should be consistent
with the state of the art based on scientific evidence, rather than merely ‘intuitive’, supported
only by the teacher’s own experience of language learning and teaching (although its role
should not be disparaged). Such knowledge makes it possible to better design realistic syllabi
and materials at the right level of difficulty, to appropriately balance attention to the formal
layer of language with communicative fluency and between language reception and production,
to tailor approaches to age groups, to more effectively engage and build learners’ autonomy,
and to support them in achieving both short- and long-term goals. Finally, knowledge of crosslinguistic influences and the differences between monolingual and bilingual/multilingual
learners allows instruction to be planned for learners who already speak other foreign
languages.
The author would like to thank Anna Ewert, Danuta Gabryś-Barker and Mirosław Pawlak and
the anonymous reviewer(s) for their valuable comments on the text.
Supplementary reading:
Ellis, R. (2015). Understanding second language acquisition (2nd ed.). Oxford University
Press.
Loewen, S. (2020). Introduction to instructed second language acquisition (2nd ed.).
Routledge.
Loewen, S. & Sato, M. (2019). The Routledge handbook of instructed second language
acquisition. Routledge.
Saville-Troike, M. & Barto, K. (2016). Introducing second language acquisition (3rd ed.).
Cambridge University Press.
VanPatten, B., Keating, G.D. & Wulff, S. (2020). Theories in second language acquisition: An
introduction (3rd ed.). Routledge.
VanPatten, B., Smith, M. & Benati, A.G. (2020). Key questions in second language
acquisition: An introduction. Cambridge University Press.
Leading thematic journals:
Applied Linguistics, Computer Assisted Language Learning, Foreign Language Annals,
International Journal of Multilingualism, International Review of Applied Linguistics in
Language Teaching, Journal of Second Language Writing, Language Learning, Language
Learning and Technology, Language Teaching, Language Teaching Research, The Modern
Language Journal, ReCALL, Second Language Research, Studies in Second Language
Acquisition, Studies in Second Language Learning and Teaching, System, TESOL Quarterly.
References:
Albert, A. & Csizér, K. (2022). Investigating individual differences with qualitative research
methods: Results of a meta-analysis of leading applied linguistics journals. Studies in
Second Language Learning and Teaching, 12(2), 303–335. 10.14746/ssllt.2022.12.2.6
Anderson, J. (1993). Rules of the Mind. Lawrence Erlbaum.
Arabski, J. & Wojtaszek, A. (Eds.) (2011). Individual learner differences in SLA. Multilingual
Matters.
Bacon, R. (c. 1240). Summma grammatica. Université de Paris.
References (3)
References: Albert, A. & Csizér, K. (2022). Investigating individual differences with qualitative research methods: Results of a meta-analysis of leading applied linguistics journals. Studies in Second Language Learning and Teaching, 12(2), 303-335. 10.14746/ssllt.2022.12.2.6
Anderson, J. (1993). Rules of the Mind. Lawrence Erlbaum.
Arabski, J. & Wojtaszek, A. (Eds.) (2011). Individual learner differences in SLA. Multilingual Matters. Bacon, R. (c. 1240). Summma grammatica. Université de Paris. translated document; please cite as: Paradowski, M.B. (2025). Przyswajanie języka drugiego. In: U. Topczewska, A. Jopek-Bosiacka, A. Leńko-Szymańska & M. Szupica-Pyrzanowska (Eds.), Lingwistyka stosowana. Kompendium, vol. III: Od języka do języków (pp. 47-71). Warsaw: Wydawnictwo Naukowe Scholar. DOI: 10.7366/978836809140302
Michał B. Paradowski
University of Warsaw, Faculty Member
Michał B. Paradowski, PhD, DLitt (Dr Habil.), is an associate professor at the Institute of Applied Linguistics, University of Warsaw, a teacher and translator trainer, and a language teaching and research consultant. He gave 260+ invited lectures, seminars and workshops in Europe, America, Africa, Asia and Oceania and penned over 80 publications. His edited volumes are ‘Teaching Languages off the Beaten Track’ (2014) and ‘Productive Foreign Language Skills for an Intercultural World’ (2015); his (2017) monograph appeared under the title ‘M/Other Tongues in Language Acquisition, Instruction, and Use’.
Papers
69
Followers
2,895
View all papers from
Michał B. Paradowski
arrow_forward
Related papers
Variability in earthquake stress drop and apparent stress
German A. A Prieto
Geophysical …, 2011
Download free PDF
View PDF
chevron_right
Valores de estudantes universitários
Isabel Menezes
1989
Download free PDF
View PDF
chevron_right
«Мечец Духовный» Иоанникия и Софрония Лихудов
Jamilia Ramazanova
Download free PDF
View PDF
chevron_right
Crearea instrumentelor pedagogice: o oportunitate pentru comunitatea celor care predau
Albert Sangrà
SLOOP–SHARING LEARNING OBJECTS …
Faza 7, aflată încă în desfăşurare în momentul în care redactăm acest document, este destinată evaluării interne şi externe a instrumentelor pedagogice create.
Download free PDF
View PDF
chevron_right
Tecnologie che creano dipendenze
Marcello Esposito
392 Aggiornamenti Sociali maggio 2014 (392)(393)(394)(395)(396)(397)(398)(399)(400)(401)(402)(403)(404) approfondimenti Come è cambiato il gioco d'azzardo in Italia? È possibile tracciare un identikit del giocatore accanito? Quali fattori incentivano la ludopatia piuttosto che contrastarla? A partire dalle riflessioni dell'antropologa statunitense Natasha Dow Schüll, frutto di vent'anni di ricerca sui giocatori delle slot machine di Las Vegas, cerchiamo di avvicinarci con maggiore consapevolezza al fenomeno del gioco d'azzardo, in rapido e preoccupante aumento anche nel nostro Paese favorito, tra l'altro, dall'uso della tecnologia e di Internet. * Desidero ringraziare, per l'incoraggiamento e i commenti ricevuti su una prima stesura dell'articolo, il direttore di Vita Riccardo Bonacina e il giornalista Marco Dotti. Un ringraziamento anche a Simone Feder e agli amici della Casa del Giovane di Pavia che hanno con pazienza e gentilezza accettato la mia presenza e le mie domande. approfondimenti Gioco d'azzardo: qual è la vera posta? 393
Download free PDF
View PDF
chevron_right
The Foundation of Second Language Acquisition
Tri Westi Iriandini
2024
This paper delves into the intricate realm of second language acquisition (SLA), focusing on the challenges and significance of mastering a second language, particularly English, within the context of multilingualism. Examining global bilingualism and the specific case of Indonesia, the study explores the distinct processes of acquiring proficiency in a second language. Problem formulations encompass the world of second language acquisition, its nature, comparison between levels B1 and B2, logical issues in language learning, and the framework guiding second language acquisition. The discussion navigates through the varied landscapes of multilingualism globally, emphasizing challenges faced by individuals in acquiring proficiency, especially in English. It dissects the natural process of first language acquisition in children, contrasting it with the complexities adults encounter in learning a second language. A comparative analysis of first and second language learning stages illuminates initial, intermediate, and final states. Logical issues in language learning, such as syntactic phenomena, are scrutinized, emphasizing the role of innate knowledge in shaping linguistic competence. The framework for second language acquisition is explored through linguistic, psychological, and social perspectives, establishing connections between theoretical models and practical applications. In conclusion, the paper underscores the dual nature of language acquisition, acknowledging the ease of first language mastery contrasted with the challenges posed by subsequent language learning. The theoretical frameworks provided offer diverse perspectives, emphasizing linguistic, psychological, and social dimensions in the study of SLA. While acknowledging significant strides, the paper advocates for further research to unravel the mysteries surrounding second language acquisition and enhance language learning methodologies.
Download free PDF
View PDF
chevron_right
RETHINKING SECOND LANGUAGE ACQUISITION THEORIES
Aufani Yukzanali
Many theories on how language is acquired has been introduced since 19th century and still being introduced today by many great thinkers. Like any other theories which arose from variety of disciplines, language acquisition theories generally derived from linguistics and psychological thinking. This paper concluded that the most important implication of language acquisition theories is obviously the fact that applied linguists, methodologist and language teachers should view the acquisition of a language not only as a matter of nurture but also an instance of nature. In addition, only when we distinguish between a general theory of learning and language learning can we ameliorate the conditions L2 education. To do so, applied linguists must be aware of the nature of both L1 and L2 acquisition and must consider the distinction proposed in this study. Furthermore, no longer should mind and innateness be treated as dirty words. This will most probably lead to innovative proposals for syllabus development and the design of instructional systems, practices, techniques, procedures in the language classroom, and finally a sound theory of L2 teaching and learning.
Download free PDF
View PDF
chevron_right
Fifty Years of Second Language Acquisition Research: Critical Commentary and Proposal
Naif Alsaedi
Psiholìngvìstika, 2024
neurolinguistics to find answers related to why child first language (L1) acquisition relies on different processing methods compared to adult second language (L2) acquisition, and why an L2 can be complex for adults to learn. This paper is basically a critical appraisal of language acquisition (LA) research proposing new venues to explore. Aims. The primary goals of this article are to emphasize the need for treating the brain as a testable scientific hypothesis, rather than merely a philosophical theory and to illustrate the need to integrate L2, brain, mind and the learner at every moment to account for LA.
Download free PDF
View PDF
chevron_right
Second Language Acquisition: Reconciling Theories
Vera Lucia M D O Paiva
Open Journal of Applied Sciences, 2013
This article argues that previous attempts to explain SLA should not be disregarded. Instead, when they are put together, they provide a broader and deeper view of the acquisition process. There is evidence to support the claim that second language acquisition (SLA) is a complex adaptive system due to its inherent ability to adapt to different conditions present in both internal and external environments. Based on this understanding, widely discussed second language theories, including behaviorism, will be treated as explanations of parts of a whole, since each captures a different aspect of SLA. In order to justify this assumption, excerpts from some English language learning histories are provided to exemplify how learners describe their learning processes. The final claim is that SLA should be seen as a chaotic/complex system.
Download free PDF
View PDF
chevron_right
A Critical Debate in Second Language Acquisition (SLA) Theory
Liaquat A Channa
Firth and Wagner's publication titled " On Discourse, Communication, and (some) Fundamental Concepts in SLA " was published in 1997 in the Modern Language Journal, volume 81, no. 3. The SLA community received the publication very well. The paper came out to be the seminal publication due to its innovative ideas. The paper not only challenged the mainstream Second Language Acquisition (SLA) Theory but it also argued for reconfiguring boundaries of the theory as it could explain SLA in a balanced and comprehensive manner. The papers that supported, but they had their own perspectives, and the papers that opposed Firth and Wagner's position accompanied the Firth and Wagner's publication in the same volume and number of the Modern Language Journal. This review paper examines the important debate with the following two aims to understand (a) how new perspectives are suggested for approaching SLA phenomenon and theorizing it and (b) how such debates be considered. This review paper is divided into four parts. The first part presents Firth and Wagner's arguments in detail. The second part deals with the objections leveled against Firth and Wagner's arguments by other scholars viewing SLA from the dominant positivist narrative. The third part presents the views of those scholars who support Firth and Wagner but have their own agenda. The final part examines and sums up the debate. The review paper points out that rather than viewing the SLA theoretical debates through " either/or " or " right/wrong " binary, it may be useful to view all of them as opposing, challenging, and competing sides of the same spectrum.
Download free PDF
View PDF
chevron_right
Related topics
Teaching English as a Second Lan...
Second Language Acquisition
Language Acquisition
Second Language Teacher Education
L2 pedagogy
Second/Additional Language Learning
Language Acquisition and Develop...
Second Language Pedagogy
Second language vocabulary acqui...
Second Language Teaching
Second Language Acquisiton
English As a Second Language (ESL)
Adult Second Language Acquisition
Age and Second Language Acquisition
L2 Users
Explore
Papers
Topics
Features
Mentions
Analytics
PDF Packages
Advanced Search
Search Alerts
Journals
Academia.edu Journals
My submissions
Reviewer Hub
Why publish with us
Testimonials
Company
About
Careers
Press
Content Policy
580 California St., Suite 400
San Francisco, CA, 94104