Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-fscjk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T05:55:42.685Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Forty years later: Updating the Fossilization Hypothesis

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  22 February 2013

ZhaoHong Han
ZhaoHong Han*
Affiliation:
Teachers College, Columbia University, New [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

A founding concept in second language acquisition (SLA) research, fossilization has been fundamental to understanding second language (L2) development. The Fossilization Hypothesis, introduced in Selinker's seminal text (1972), has thus been one of the most influential theories, guiding a significant bulk of SLA research for four decades; 2012 marks its fortieth anniversary. This article revisits the Fossilization Hypothesis, starting with the earliest set of questions (still the most comprehensive) (Selinker & Lamendella 1978) and using them as a basis for updating the Hypothesis. The current understanding of fossilization is presented by introducing an alternative hypothesis, the Selective Fossilization Hypothesis (Han 2009) and, in the light of that alternative, reviewing a selection of fossilizable structures documented in the recent literature.

Type
State-of-the-Art Article
Information
Language Teaching , Volume 46 , Issue 2 , April 2013 , pp. 133 - 171
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2013

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Adjemian, C. (1976). On the nature of interlanguage systems. Language Learning 26, 297–320.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Andersen, R. W. (1983). Transfer to somewhere. In Gass, S. & Selinker, L. (eds.), Language transfer in language learning. Rowley, MA: Newbury House, 177–201.Google Scholar
Balcom, P. (1997). Why is this happened? Passive morphology and unaccusativity. Second Language Research 13.1, 1–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Belletti, A., Bennati, E. & Sorace, A. (2005). Theoretical and developmental issues in the syntax of subjects: Evidence from near-native Italian. Unpublished MS, Universities of Siena and Edinburgh.Google Scholar
Birdsong, D. (2003). Second language acquisition and ultimate attainment. In Davies, A. & Elder, C. (eds.), Handbook of applied linguistics. Oxford: Blackwell, 82–105.Google Scholar
Birdsong, D. (2006). Why not fossilization. In Han, Z.-H. & Odlin, T. (eds.), 173–188.Google Scholar
Bley-Vroman, R. (1989). The logical problem of second language learning. In Gass, S. & Schachter, J. (eds.), Linguistic perspectives on second language acquisition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 41–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bowles, M. & Montrul, S. (2009). Instructed L2 acquisition of Differential Object Marking in Spanish. In Leow, R., Campos, H. & Lardiere, D. (eds.), Little words: Their history, phonology, syntax, semantics, pragmatics and acquisition (Georgetown University Round Table on Languages and Linguistics (GURT)) 2007). Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press, 199–210.Google Scholar
Bruzzese, G. (1977). English/Italian secondary hybridization: A case study of the pidginization of a second language learner's speech. In Henning, C. (ed.), Proceedings of the Los Angeles Second Language Research Forum 1977. Los Angeles, CA: University of California, Los Angeles, 235–245.Google Scholar
Clahsen, H. & Felser, C. (2006). Continuity and shallow structures in language processing. Applied Psycholinguistics 27.1, 107–126.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Coppieters, R. (1987). Competence differences between native and non-native speakers. Language 63, 544–573.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Corder, S. P. (1967). The significance of learners’ errors. International Review of Applied Linguistics 5, 161–170.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
DeKeyser, R. (2005). What makes learning second language grammar difficult? A review of issues. Language Learning 55.S1, 1–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Doughty, C. & Long, M. (eds.) (2003). Handbook of second language acquisition. Oxford: Blackwell.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dulay, H. & Burt, M. (1974). Natural sequences in child second language acquisition. Language Learning 24, 37–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ekiert, M. (2010). Linguistic effects on thinking for writing: The case of articles in L2 English. In Han, Z.-H. & Cadierno, T. (eds.), 125–153.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ellis, N. (2006a). Selective attention and transfer phenomena in SLA: Contingency, cue competition, salience, interference, overshadowing, blocking and perceptual learning. Applied Linguistics 27.2, 164–194.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ellis, N. (2006b). Language acquisition as rational contingency learning. Applied Linguistics 27.1, 1–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ellis, R. (1985). Understanding second language acquisition. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Ellis, R. (2003). Task-based language learning and teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Ellis, R. & Barkhuizen, G. (2005). Analyzing learner language. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Farley, A. & McCollam, K. (2004). Learner readiness and L2 production in Spanish: Processability theory on trial. Estudios de Lingüística Aplicada 22, 47–69.Google Scholar
Filiaci, F. (2003). The acquisition of the properties of Italian null and overt subjects by English native speakers. M.Sc. Dissertation, University of Edinburgh, UK.Google Scholar
Flynn, S. & O'Neil, W. (eds.) (1988). Linguistic theory in second language acquisition. Dordrecht: Kluwer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Freleng, I. (1950). Canary Row. New York: Time Warner.Google Scholar
Goldschneider, J. & DeKeyser, R. (2001). Explaining the ‘natural order of L2 morpheme acquisition’ in English: A meta-analysis of multiple determinants. Language Learning 55.S1, 27–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Guijarro-Fuentes, P. & Marinis, T. (2007). Interpretation of personal: A feature by L2 Spanish learners. Paper presented at the Generative Approaches to Second Language Acquisition Conference, University of Iowa.Google Scholar
Hacohen, A. & Schaeffer, J. (2005). Subject realization in early Hebrew/English bilingual acquisition: The role of crosslinguistic influence. Unpublished MS, Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, Israel.Google Scholar
Haider, H. & Rosengren, I. (1998). Scrambling. Lund, Sweden: University of Lund.Google Scholar
Han, Z.-H. (1998). Fossilization: An investigation into advanced L2 learning of a typologically distant language. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of London.Google Scholar
Han, Z.-H. (2000). Persistence of the implicit influence of NL: The case of the pseudo-passive. Applied Linguistics 21.1, 78–105.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Han, Z.-H. (2002). ‘Novel unaccusatives’: Is detransitivization taking place? ITL Review of Applied Linguistics 135–136, 97–124.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Han, Z.-H. (2004). Fossilization in adult second language acquisition. Clevedon, UK: Multilingual Matters.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Han, Z.-H. (2006). Fossilization: Can grammaticality judgment be a reliable source of evidence? In Han, Z.-H. & Odlin, T. (eds.), 56–82.Google Scholar
Han, Z.-H. (2007). INFO: Optimizing conditions for instructed learning of Chinese as a second/foreign language. Paper presented at the 2nd International Forum on the Teaching and Learning of Chinese, Guangzhou, China.Google Scholar
Han, Z.-H. (2008a). On the role of meaning in focus on form In Han, Z.-H. (ed.), Understanding second language process. Clevedon, UK: Multilingual Matters, 45–79.Google Scholar
Han, Z.-H. (2008b). Demystifying ‘fossilization’ for foreign language teaching and learning. Plenary speech given at the 3rd International Conference on Foreign Language Teaching, Shanghai, China.Google Scholar
Han, Z.-H. (2009). Interlanguage and fossilization: Towards an analytic model. In Cook, V. & Wei, L. (eds.), Contemporary applied linguistics (Vol. I: Language Teaching and Learning). London: Continuum, 137–162.Google Scholar
Han, Z.-H. (2010). Grammatical morpheme inadequacy as a function of linguistic relativity: A longitudinal study. In Han, Z.-H. & Cadierno, T. (eds.), 154–182.Google Scholar
Han, Z.-H. (2011). Fossilization: A classic concern of SLA research. In Gass, S. & Mackey, A. (eds.), The Routledge handbook of second language acquisition. New York: Routledge, 476–490.Google Scholar
Han, Z.-H. (2012). Second language acquisition. In Banks, J. (ed.), The encyclopedia of diversity in education. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, 1910–1915.Google Scholar
Han, Z.-H. & Cadierno, T. (2010). Linguistic relativity in SLA: Thinking for speaking. Clevedon, UK: Multilingual Matters.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Han, Z.-H. & Lew, W. M. (2012). Acquisitional complexity: What defies complete acquisition in SLA. In Szmrecsanyi, B. & Kortmann, B. (eds.), Linguistic complexity in interlanguage varieties, L2 varieties, and contact languages. Berlin/New York: Walter de Gruyter, 192–217.Google Scholar
Han, Z.-H. & Odlin, T. (2006a). Introduction. In Han, Z.-H. & Odlin, T. (eds.), 1–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Han, Z.-H. & Odlin, T. (eds.) (2006b). Studies of fossilization in second language acquisition. Clevedon, UK: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
Han, Z.-H. & Selinker, L. (2005). Fossilization in L2 learners. In Hinkel, E. (ed.), Handbook of research in second language teaching and research. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum, 455–483.Google Scholar
Hawkins, R. (2001). Second language syntax: A generative introduction. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Helland, C. (2004). The interpretable–uninterpretable feature distinction and attrition in Catalan. Paper presented at the GLOW conference, Thessaloniki.Google Scholar
Higgs, T. (ed.) (1982). Curriculum, competence and the foreign language teacher. Skokie, IL: National Textbook Company.Google Scholar
Hiragawa, M. (1995). L2 acquisition of English unaccusative constructions. Proceedings from BUCLD 19, 291–302.Google Scholar
Hopp, H. (2004). Syntactic and interface knowledge in advanced and near-native interlanguage grammars. EUROSLA 4, 67–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hopp, H. (2005). Constraining second language word order optionality: Scrambling in advanced English–German and Japanese–German interlanguage. Second Language Research 21.1, 34–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hulstijn, J. & de Graaff, R. (1994). Under what conditions does explicit knowledge of a second language facilitate the acquisition of implicit knowledge? A research proposal. AILA Review 11, 97–112.Google Scholar
Ioup, G., Boustagui, E., El Tigi, M. & Moselle, M. (1994). Reexamining the critical period hypothesis: A case study of successful adult SLA in naturalistic environment. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 16.1, 73–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jakubowicz, C. (2002). Functional categories in (ab)normal language acquisition. In Lasser, I. (ed.), The process of language acquisition. Berlin: Peter Lang, 165–202.Google Scholar
Jiang, N. (2004). Morphological insensitivity in second language processing. Applied Psycholinguistics 25, 603–634.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jiang, N., Novokshanova, E., Masuda, K. & Wang, X. (2011). Morphological congruency and the acquisition of L2 Morphemes. Language Learning 61.3, 940–967.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ju, M.-K. (2000). Overpassivization errors by second language learners: The effect of conceptualizable agents in discourse. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 22, 85–111.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kachru, B. & Nelson, C. (1996). World Englishes. In McKay, S. & Hornberger, N. (eds.), Sociolinguistics and language teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 71–102.Google Scholar
Kellerman, E. (1989). The imperfect conditional. In Hyltenstam, K. & Obler, L. (eds.), Bilingualism across the lifespan: Aspects of acquisition, maturity and loss. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 87–115.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kellerman, E. (1995). Crosslinguistic influence: Transfer to nowhere? Annual Review of Applied Linguistics 15, 125–150.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Krashen, S. (1982). Principles and practice in second language acquisition: Hayward, CA: Alemany Press.Google Scholar
Lado, R. (1957). Linguistics across cultures: Applied linguistics for language teachers. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan.Google Scholar
Lardiere, D. (1998). Case and tense in the ‘fossilized’ steady state. Second Language Research 14, 1–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lardiere, D. (2007). Ultimate attainment in second language acquisition. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Larsen-Freeman, D. (2001). Teaching grammar. In Celce-Murcia, M. (ed.), Teaching English as a second or foreign language. Boston: Heinle & Heinle, 251–266.Google Scholar
Larsen-Freeman, D. (2006). Second language acquisition and the issue of fossilization: There is no end, and there is no state. In Han, Z.-H. & Odlin, T. (eds.), 189–200.Google Scholar
Lee, J. & Valdman, A. (2000). Form and meaning: Multiple perspectives. Boston, MA: Heinle and Heinle.Google Scholar
Lenneberg, E. (1967). Biological foundations of language. New York: Wiley.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Levelt, W. J. M. (1989). Speaking: From intention to articulation. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Lightbown, P. (1985). Great expectations: Second language acquisition research and classroom teaching. Applied Linguistics 6.2, 173–189.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lightbown, P. (2000). Classroom SLA research and second language teaching. Applied Linguistics 21.4, 431–462.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lightbown, P. (2003). SLA in the classroom/SLA research for the classroom. Language Learning Journal 28, 4–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Long, M. H. (2003). Stabilization and fossilization in interlanguage development. In Doughty, C. & Long, M. H. (eds.), 487–535.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lucy, J. A. (1992). Grammatical categories and cognition: A case study of the linguistic relativity hypothesis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Master, P. (1997). The English article system: Acquisition, function, and pedagogy. System 25.2, 215–232.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Montrul, S. (2004a). Convergent outcomes in second language acquisition and first language loss. In Schmid, M., Köpke, B., Keijzer, M. & Weilemar, L. (eds.), First language attrition: Interdisciplinary perspectives on methodological issues. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 259–280.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Montrul, S. (2004b). Subject and object expression in Spanish heritage speakers: A case of morpho-syntactic convergence. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition 7, 125–142.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Montrul, S. (2004c). Morphosyntactic convergence in early bilinguals: Incomplete grammars or language change? Workshop on Processes in L2 Acquisition and in Creole Genesis, Université du Québec à Montreal.Google Scholar
Montrul, S. (2005). On knowledge and development of unaccusativity in Spanish L2 acquisition. Linguistics 43.6, 1153–1190.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Montrul, S. (2006). Incomplete acquisition as a feature of L2 and bilingual grammars. In Slabakova, R., Montrul, S. & Prévost, P. (eds.), Inquiries in language development: Studies in honor of Lydia White. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 335–359.Google Scholar
Montrul, S. (2011). Multiple interfaces and incomplete acquisition. Lingua 121.4, 591–604.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Montrul, S. & Bowles, M. (2009). Back to basics: Incomplete knowledge of Differential Object Marking in Spanish heritage speakers. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition 12.3, 363–383.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Montrul, S. & Rodríguez Louro, C. (2006). Beyond the syntax of the Null Subject Parameter: A look at the discourse-pragmatic distribution of null and overt subjects by L2 learners of Spanish. In Escobar, L. & Torrens, V. (eds.), The acquisition of syntax in romance languages. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 46–124.Google Scholar
Mukattash, L. (1986). Persistence of fossilization. IRAL 14.3, 187–203.Google Scholar
Müller, N., Cantone, K., Kupisch, T. & Schmitz, K. (2002). Zum Spracheneinfluss in bilingualen Erstspracherwerb: Italienisch–Deutsch [Crosslinguistic influence in bilingual first language acquisition: Italian–German]. Linguistische Berichte 190, 157–206.Google Scholar
Müller, N. & Hulk, A. (2001). Crosslinguistic influence in bilingual language acquisition: Italian and French as recipient languages. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition 4.1, 1–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Oshita, H. (2000). What is happened may not be what appears to be happening: A corpus study of ‘passive’ unaccusatives in L2 English. Second Language Research 16.4, 293–324.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Oshita, H. (2001). The unaccusative trap in second language acquisition. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 23, 279–304.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Paradis, J. & Navarro, S. (2003). Subject realization and crosslinguistic interference in the bilingual acquisition of Spanish and English: What is the role of input? Journal of Child Language 30, 1–23.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rodríguez-Mondoñedo, M. (2008). The acquisition of Differential Object Marking in Spanish. Probus: International Journal of Latin and Romance Linguistics 20, 1–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Saporta, S. (1966). Applied linguistics and generative grammar. In Valdman, A. (ed.), Trends in language teaching. New York: McGraw-Hill, 81–92.Google Scholar
Scarcella, R. (1983). Discourse accent in second language performance. In Gass, S. M. & Selinker, L. (eds.), Language transfer in language learning. Rowley, MA: Newbury House, 309–326.Google Scholar
Schachter, J. (1996). Learning and triggering in adult L2 acquisition. In Brown, G., Malmkjaer, K. & Williams, J. (eds.), Performance and competence in SLA. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 70–88.Google Scholar
Schachter, J. & Rutherford, W. (1979). Discourse function and language transfer. In Robinett, B. & Schachter, J. (eds.), Second language learning: Contrastive analysis, error analysis, and related aspects. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press, 1–11.Google Scholar
Schaeffer, J. (2000). The acquisition of direct object scrambling and clitic placement: Syntax and pragmatics. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schouten, E. (1996). Crosslinguistic influence and the expression of hypothetical meaning. In Kellerman, E., Weltens, B. & Bongaerts, T. (eds.), EUROSLA 6: A selection of papers. Toegepaste Taalwetenschap in Artikelen (Applied Linguistics in Article Form) (Vol. 55). Amsterdam: VU Uitgeverij, 161–174.Google Scholar
Schumann, J. H. (1975). Affective factors and the problem of age in second language acquisition. Language Learning 25, 209–235.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schumann, J. (1978). The pidginization process: A model for second language acquisition. Rowley, MA: Newbury House.Google Scholar
Schwartz, B. D. & Sprouse, R. (1996). L2 cognitive states and the Full Transfer/Full Access model. Second Language Research 12.1, 40–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Scovel, T. (1969). Foreign accents, language acquisition, and cerebral dominance. Language Learning 19, 245–254.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Seliger, H. (1989). Semantic transfer constraints on the production of English passive by Hebrew–English bilinguals. In Dechert, H. & Raupach, M. (eds.), Transfer in language production. Norwood, NJ: Ablex, 21–34.Google Scholar
Selinker, L. (1972). Interlanguage. IRAL 10.2, 209–231.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Selinker, L. (2011). Some unresolved issues in an ELT new media age: Towards building an interlanguage semantics. Paper presented at the Seminar in Advanced SLA, Teachers College, Columbia University.Google Scholar
Selinker, L. & Lakshmanan, U. (1992). Language transfer and fossilization: The multiple effects principle. In Gass, S. & Selinker, L. (eds.), Language transfer in language learning. Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins, 190–216.Google Scholar
Selinker, L. & Lamendella, J. (1978). Two perspectives on fossilization in interlanguage learning. Interlanguage Studies Bulletin 3.2, 143–191.Google Scholar
Shan, C. & Yuan, B. (2008). ‘What is happened’ in L2 English does not happen in L2 Chinese. In Roberts, L., Florence, M. & David, A. H. (eds.), EUROSLA Yearbook 2008. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 164–190.Google Scholar
Shapira, R. (1978). The non-learning of English: Case study of an adult. In Hatch, E. (ed.), Second language acquisition. Rowley, MA: Newbury House, 246–255.Google Scholar
Siegel, J. (2003). Social context. In Doughty, C. & Long, M. (eds.), 178–223.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Silva-Corvalán, C. (1994). Language contact and change. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Slabakova, R. & Ivanov, I. (2011). A more careful look at the syntax–discourse interface. Lingua 121.4, 637–651.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Slobin, D. (1987). Thinking for speaking. Proceedings of the Berkeley Linguistics Society 13, 435–444.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Slobin, D. I. (1996). From ‘thought and language’ to ‘thinking for speaking’. In Gumperz, J. & Levinson, S. (eds.), Rethinking linguistic relativity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 70–96.Google Scholar
Slobin, D. (2003). Language and thought online: Cognitive consequences of linguistic relativity. In Gentner, D. & Goldin-Meadow, S. (eds.), Language in mind: Advances in the study of language and thought. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 157–192.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Slobin, D. (2007). Language and thought online: Cognitive consequences of linguistic relativity. In Evans, V., Bergen, B. & Zinken, J. (eds.), The cognitive linguistics reader. London: Equinox Publishing, 902–928.Google Scholar
Sorace, A. (1993). Unaccusativity and auxiliary choice in non-native grammars of Italian and French: Asymmetries and predictable indeterminacy. Journal of French Language Studies 3, 71–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sorace, A. (2000). Syntactic optionality in non-native grammars. Second Language Research 16.2, 93–102.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sorace, A. (2003). Near-nativeness. In Doughty, C. & Long, M. (eds.), 130–151.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sorace, A. (2005). Selective optionality in language development. In Cornips, L. & Corrigan, K. (eds.), Syntax and variation: Reconciling the biological and the social. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 111–160.Google Scholar
Sorace, A. (2011). Pinning down the concept of ‘interface’ in bilingualism. Linguistic Approaches to Bilingualism 1, 1–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sorace, A. & Filiaci, F. (2006). Anaphora resolution in near-native speakers of Italian. Second Language Research 22.3, 339–368.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sorace, A. & Keller, F. (2005). Gradience in linguistic data. Lingua 115, 1497–1524.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sorace, A. & Serratrice, L. (2006). Anaphora resolution in near-native speakers of Italian. Second Language Research 22.3, 339–368.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sorace, A. & Serratrice, L. (2009). Internal and external interfaces in bilingual language development: Beyond structural overlap. International Journal of Bilingualism 13, 195–210.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stam, G. (2010). Can an L2 speaker's patterns of thinking for speaking change? In Han, Z.-H. & Cadierno, T. (eds.), 59–83.Google Scholar
Stauble, A. (1978). Acculturation and second language acquisition. In Scarcella, R. & Krashen, S. (eds.), Research in second language acquisition. Rowley, MA: Newbury House, 43–50.Google Scholar
Tarone, E. (1983). On the variability of interlanguage systems. Applied Linguistics 4.2, 142–163.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tarone, E. (1988). Variation in interlanguage. London: Edward Arnold.Google Scholar
Tarone, E., Frauenfelder, U. & Selinker, L. (1976). Systematicity/variability and stability/instability in interlanguage systems. Language Learning 4, 93–134.Google Scholar
Terrell, T. (1991). The role of grammar instruction in a communicative approach. The Modern Language Journal 75, 52–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thep-Ackrapong, T. (1990). Fossilization: A case study of practical and theoretical parameters. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Illinois State University.Google Scholar
Trenkic, D. (2009). Accounting for patterns of article omissions and substitutions in second language production. In Hawkins, R. & Mayo, M. P. G. (eds.), Second language acquisition of articles: Empirical findings and theoretical implications. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 115–143.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tsimpli, I. & Sorace, A. (2006). Differentiating interfaces: L2 performance in syntax-semantics and syntax-discourse phenomena. In Bamman, D., Magnitskaia, T. & Zaller, C. (eds.), Proceedings of the 30th annual Boston University conference on language development. Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press, 653–664.Google Scholar
Tsimpli, T., Sorace, A., Heycock, C. & Filiaci, F. (2004). First language attrition and syntactic subjects: A study of Greek and Italian near-native speakers of English. International Journal of Bilingualism 8.3, 257–277.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
VanPatten, B. & Cadierno, T. (1993). Explicit instruction and input processing. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 15, 225–243.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
VanPatten, B., Williams, J., Rott, S. & Overstreet, M. (eds.) (2004). Form-meaning connections in second language acquisition. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vigil, N. & Oller, J. (1976). Rule fossilization: A tentative model. Language Learning 26.2, 281–295.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weinreich, U. (1953). Languages in contact. Linguistic Circle of New York, No. 1.Google Scholar
Wenk, B. (1979). Articulatory setting and defossilization. Interlanguage Studies Bulletin 4, 202–220.Google Scholar
White, L. (2003a). Fossilization in steady state L2 grammars: Persistent problems with inflectional morphology. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition 6, 129–141.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
White, L. (2003b). Second language acquisition and universal grammar. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
White, L. (2009). Grammatical theory: Interfaces and L2 knowledge. In Bhatia, T. K. & Ritchie, W. C. (eds.), The new handbook of second language acquisition. Bingley, UK: Emerald Group Publishing, 49–68.Google Scholar
White, L. (2011). The interface hypothesis: How far does it extend? Linguistic Approaches to Bilingualism 1, 108–110.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yip, V. (1995). Interlanguage and learnability: From Chinese to English. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yip, V. & Matthews, S. (1995). I-Interlanguage and typology. In Eubank, L., Selinker, L. & Smith, M. Sharwood (eds.), The current state of interlanguage. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Yuan, B. & Zhao, Y. (2005). Resumptive pronouns in English–Chinese and Arabic–Chinese interlanguages. IRAL 43.3, 219–237.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zapata, G., Sánchez, L. & Toribio, A. (2005). Contact and contracting Spanish. The International Journal of Bilingualism 9, 377–395.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zobl, H. (1980a). Developmental and transfer errors: Their common bases and (possibly) differential effects on subsequent learning. TESOL Quarterly 14, 469–479.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zobl, H. (1980b). The formal and developmental selectivity of L1 influence on L2 acquisition. Language Learning 30, 43–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar