This study examines the acquisition of the inflectional system by a Turkish child learner of English. Results from longitudinal data collected over 18 months are reported, presenting counterevidence for recent hypotheses on early L2 acquisition according to which missing functional items reflect missing functional categories (e.g., Vainikka & Young-Scholten, 1994, 1996a, 1996b). Despite robust evidence for the early production of copula be, auxiliary be, and overt subjects, the child L2 data analyzed in this paper do not show any evidence for tense and agreement morphology in the early stages of L2 development. In other words, although some functional elements related to IP are missing, the learner is able to perform other morphological and syntactic operations involving the functional projection IP. These findings lead us to question whether the lack of functional elements entails the lack of functional categories.

This paper explores the possibility that, contrary to the findings of past studies, the L1 and L2 mental lexicon may in fact be structurally similar, with depth of individual word knowledge determining a given word's degree of integration into the mental lexicon. The paper begins by reviewing the body of evidence relevant to the research question, and then presents the design and results of an investigation comparing nonnative and native speaker patterns of responses in light of depth of word knowledge scores. In discussing the results of the study, a tentative model for the process by which words are integrated into the mental lexicon is proposed, and the long-standing belief that a shift from predominantly syntagmatic to predominantly paradigmatic responses is indicative of lexical development is challenged.

This article reports the findings of a study in which transfer of verb properties was investigated via syntactic data elicited from second language (L2) learners. It was hypothesized that a learner's first language (L1) would influence the acquisition of verbs in those L2 semantic classes where so-called L1-L2 translation equivalents could be found. To investigate lexical transfer, the performance of Hindi-Urdu speakers on tests of English causatives was compared with that of Vietnamese speakers, because there are significant differences between causativization patterns in Hindi-Urdu and Vietnamese. To account for proficiency-based variation in performance, learners were placed in one of three levels of lexical proficiency in English, and Mann-Whitney comparisons were made between Hindi-Urdu and Vietnamese speakers at corresponding proficiency levels. It was found that the performance of the Hindi-Urdu and Vietnamese groups differed significantly in several semantic contexts. Generally, the results suggest that there is some transfer of semantic information from the L1 verb lexicon to the emerging L2 verb lexicon. More specifically, the findings suggest that verb properties are transferred selectively and that transfer plays a role in the difficulty or ease involved in the shedding of overgeneralized lexical rules.

This paper critically examines Tomlin and Villa's (1994) fine-grained analysis of attention and Leow's (1998) attempt to operationalize their model. Our position is that whereas Tomlin and Villa have moved the attention research forward by describing the nature of attentional processes and by pointing out that detection is a critical function of SLA, their claim that alertness and orientation are not necessary for detection to occur is currently unsupportable and does not reflect the complex nature of SLA. We argue that Leow's efforts to provide empirical support for this model fall short of that goal. Additionally, we cast doubt on Tomlin and Villa's position that awareness is not required for the detection of L2 data by arguing that the issue of awareness as well as the role of attentional functions must be viewed from a more interactive perspective in terms of the nature of the task, the nature of the linguistic item, and individual learner differences. We conclude by proposing research orientations that may help advance the discussion on this topic.

Aimed at pre- and in-service ELT professionals, Research methods for English language teachers introduces basic premises of research in language learning and teaching. The authors approach qualitative and quantitative research from a reflective perspective, emphasizing techniques that guide and shape action research. The book presents an effective, reader-friendly survey of theoretical principles, data collection processes, and analytic procedures.

The topic of this book, part of a new series published by Benjamins entitled Pragmatics and beyond, is negotiated interaction. It begins with a lengthy introduction to the subject matter, and then presents an empirical study of negotiated interaction in English as a foreign language classrooms in Morocco. The first two chapters (a third of the text) seek to operationalize interaction and define the role of negotiated interaction in second language acquisition (SLA). These chapters are useful in the sense that they provide a fairly comprehensive review of the literature prior to 1991. However, the field has come a long way since that time, and a decade of crucial work is missing from this 1999 book.

The relationship between brain structure and language has been of interest since the nineteenth century, as is evidenced by phrenology studies. In modern times, neurolinguistics has tried to investigate this relationship more objectively and scientifically. In their book Language and the brain, Obler and Gjerlow define neurolinguistics as “the study of how the brain (neuro) permits us to have language (linguistics)” (p. 1). As the definition indicates, the book addresses neurolinguistics in a simple, nontechnical manner. Except for chapter 2, “The Brain,” the book presents a readable yet comprehensive account of the important issues in neurolinguistics.

The past decade has seen an increasing interest within the second language (L2) field in drawing on psycholinguistic, neurolinguistic-neurobiological, and cognitive psychological theories when explaining various aspects of L2 acquisition and use (e.g., Schmidt, 1995; Schuman, 1997; Skehan, 1998). Although Sydney Lamb's account of the neurocognitive basis of language does not focus specifically on second languages, its general analysis of how the brain's linguistic system operates and develops provides highly relevant background knowledge to these recent L2 research directions.

This volume presents comprehensive research on English refusals, focusing primarily on L2 use and secondarily on second language acquisition. Twenty-four dyads were video-taped performing open role plays in response to eight situations (two suggestions, two offers, two invitations, and two requests) designed to elicit a refusal. Each dyad consisted of an English NS and NNS, the latter being native speakers of Japanese with low to intermediate English proficiency.

Partington has produced an attractive and useful introduction to the field of applied corpus linguistics, a field that has been around for 40 years (since the Brown corpus) but is only now coming into its own in the United States. The volume is attractive for three main reasons: it is clearly and pleasantly written, it quotes extensively and appropriately from the earlier general and applied linguistics literature, and it contains an impressive range of examples consisting of concordance lines followed by commentary and analysis.

David Andrews's examination of the Russian language's evolution in post–Cold War North America is based on two intriguing premises that will surely be of interest to cultural historians, general linguists, specialists in bilingualism, as well as, more obviously, Slavic linguists.

One of the growing challenges facing foreign language educators in many societies is that created by the presence of “native speakers” in second language classrooms. Especially in countries with significant immigration patterns, such as Canada, the United States, and Australia, there are growing numbers of students enrolled in courses in languages other than English (LOTEs) with which they have some background familiarity or knowledge. All too often, these students have been seen as something of a problem in the foreign language classroom, especially in K–12 settings. Background speakers constitutes an important and valuable first step in changing such perceptions.