Ellis, R. (2005). The Study of Second Language Acquisition. London: Oxford University Press.

1. Second language acquisition research: An overview

Multilingual -> “in addition to their first language they have acquired some competence in more
than one non-primary language”.

Second language -> “it is generally used to refer to any language other than the first language. In
some settings, the term ‘additional language’ may be both more appropriate and more
acceptable”.

SLA -> “the language plays an institutional and social role in the community”.

FLL -> “it takes place in settings where the language plays no major role in the community and is
primarily learnt only in the classroom”.

“The distinction between second and foreign language learning settings may be significant in that
it is possible that there will be radical differences in both what is learnt and how it is learnt”.

Naturalistic v. instructed second language acquisition

Naturalistic / spontaneous acquisition -> “the language is learnt through communication that
takes place in naturally occurring social situations” / “the learner focuses on communication and
thus learns incidentally”.

Instructed / guided acquisition -> “the language is learnt through study, with the help of
‘guidance’ from reference books or classroom instruction” / “the learner typically focuses on some
aspect of the language system”.

Competence -> “consists of the mental representations of linguistic rules that constitute the
speaker-hearer’s internal grammar. This grammar is implicit rather than explicit and is evident in
the intuitions which the speaker-hearer has about the grammaticality of sentences.

Performance -> “consists of the use of this grammar in the comprehension and production of
language. […] learners’ mental knowledge is not open to direct inspection; it can only be inferred
by examining samples of their performance”.

Usage -> “it is that aspect of performance which makes evident the extent to which the language
user demonstrated his knowledge of linguistic rules (mastering the formal properties of the
phonological, lexical, and grammatical systems)”.

Use -> “it is that aspect of performance which makes evident the extent to which the language
user demonstrates his ability to use his knowledge of linguistic rules for effective communication
(how learners convey meaning through the process of constructing discourse according to
pragmatic aspects of language).
Acquisition -> “subconscious process of ‘picking up’ a language through exposure” / “A distinction
can be made between acquisition as ‘emergence’ or ‘onset’ and as ‘accurate use’”

Learning -> “conscious process of studying a language”

General questions in second language acquisition research

1. What do second language learners acquire?

“This question was motivated by the recognition that learners often failed initially to
produce correct sentences and instead displayed language that was markedly deviant
from target language norms”.

2. How do learners acquire a second language?

“This involved considering the role played by the social situation (external factors) in
which learning took place and how the language the learner was exposed to (input)
accounted for acquisition as evident in the language the learner produced (output)” / “[…]
explanations were sought in the mental processes that the learner used to convert input
into knowledge (internal factors). Various processes have been identified. Some account
for how the learner makes use of existing knowledge (of the mother tongue, of general
learning strategies, or of the universal properties of language) to internalize knowledge of
the L2. These processes can be thought of as learning processes. They serve as the means
by which the learner constructs an interlanguage (a transitional system reflecting the
learner’s current L2 knowledge). Other processes account for how the learner makes use
of existing knowledge to cope with communication difficulties (communication
strategies)”

3. What differences are there in the way in which individual learners acquire a second
language?

“While much of the work that has taken place in SLA research is based on the assumption
that learner language provides evidence of universal learning processes, there is also a
long tradition of research that has recognized that learners vary enormously in their rate
of learning, their approach to learning, and in their actual achievements”

4. What effects does instruction have on second language acquisition?

“This research has been motivated in part by a desire to address issues of general
theoretical interest to SLA research and also by a desire to improve the efficacy of
language pedagogy. The classroom affords an opportunity to control very precisely the
nature of the input that learners are exposed to. This in turn allows the researcher to
 formulate and test very specific hypotheses regarding how particular features of an L2 are
acquired”

A framework for exploring second language acquisition

- Describing the characteristics of learner language (errors, acquisition orders and

developmental sequences, variability, pragmatic features).
- Learner-external factors relating to the social context of acquisition and to the input and
interaction which the learner experiences.
- Learner-internal mechanisms (how acquisition takes place and how learners use their
resources in communication). These mechanisms relate to the transfer of knowledge for
learner’s L1, the universal processes involved in converting input into intake and
restructuring existing L2 knowledge systems, the utilization of innate knowledge of
linguistic universals, and the processes for using L2 knowledge in performance, in
particular those involved in dealing with problems of communication.
- Question of individual learner differences and what causes them. Learners set about the
task of acquiring an L2 in different ways. They differ with regard to such general factors as
motivation and aptitude, and also in the use of various strategies such as inferencing and
self-monitoring for obtaining input and for learning from it.

A framework for investigating L2 acquisition (p. 18)

Learner language

Errors

“Much of the early work on learner errors focused on determining the extent to which L”
acquisition was the result of L1 transfer or of creative construction (the construction of unique
rules similar to those which children form in the course of acquiring their mother tongue). The
presence of errors that mirrored L1 structures was taken as evidence of transfer (interlingual),
while the presence of errors similar to those observed in L1 acquisition was indicative of
creative construction (intralingual)” / “The study of learner errors showed that although many
errors were caused by transferring L1 ‘habits’, many more were not; learners often
contributed creatively to the process of learning. They also indicated that learners appeared to
go through stages of acquisition, as the nature of the errors they made varied according to
their level of development”.

Acquisition orders and developmental sequences

“The language that learners produce provides evidence that they acquire different
morphological features in a fixed order and also that they pass through a sequence of
developmental stages in the acquisition of specific syntactical features” / “There is also
evidence to support the existence of a general pattern of development. It may begin with a
silent period, particularly in children. Many of the initial utterances that learners produce are
formulas –ready-made chunks like ‘I don’t know’ and ‘What’s this?’. Gradually learners begin
to produce more creative utterances, although to begin with these are often propositionally
reduced and morphologically simple (‘Kick’ for ‘He kicked me’). It has been suggested that
learners work on the formulas they have learnt by substituting elements in them and joining
them together to form complex structures. Slowly learners master the basic syntax of the L2,
learning the major permutations in word order found in the target language. At this stage
some morphological features are also acquired, but many do not appear until much later, if at
all” / “Evidence for a definite order in the acquisition of specific grammatical features was
provided by the morpheme studies. The assumption was that learners must have acquired
those features they performed more accurately before those they performed less accurately”
/ “[…] learners with different language backgrounds followed a remarkably similar path of
development when trying to produce structures such as English negatives and interrogatives.
The learners appeared to construct a series of transitional rules before they mastered the
target language rules. Furthermore, the developmental route they followed seemed to closely
follow that reported for the acquisition of the same structures by children learning English as
their first language” / “An important issue –for both theory building and for language
pedagogy- concerns the effect that formal instruction has on the acquisition of grammatical
features” / “[…] there is growing evidence to indicate that grammar instruction does work,
providing learners are ready to assimilate the new target rule into their mental grammars,
although instruction does not appear to enable learners to ‘beat’ a developmental sequence”

Variability

“Learner language, like the language of native speakers, appears to be inherently variable.
Learners frequently use one structure on one occasion and a different structure on another” /
“This variation is, of course, not confined to learners, as native speakers have also been shown
to vary in their choice of linguistic features” / “Learners alternate their use of linguistic forms
according to linguistic context” / “Leaners also vary according to situational context, in
particular according to who they are talking to” / A similar stylistic continuum has been found
in learner language as in native speaker speech” / “Learners are more likely to use correct
target language forms in situations and tasks that call for a careful style (formal language use)
and more likely to use transitional, learner forms in their vernacular style (informal, everyday
language use)” / “However, they often create unique form-function correspondences of a kind
not found in the target language”

Pragmatic features

“Pragmatics is the study of how the language us used in communication. It covers a wide
range of phenomena including deixis (the ways in which language encodes features of the
context of utterance), conversational implicature and presupposition (the way language is
used to convey meanings that are not actually encoded linguistically), illocutionary acts (the
use of language to perform speech acts such as stating, questioning, and directing),
 conversational structure (the way in which conversations are organized across turns), and
repair (the conversational work undertaken to deal with miscommunications of various kinds).
Pragmatics is particularly concerned with appropriateness, both with regard to what is said in
a particular context and how it is said” / “Early work in SLA research was attended to only in so
far as they helped to explain how learners acquired grammatical competence” / “Learners
have to learn when it is appropriate to perform a particular language function and also how to
encode it. The frequently experience problems with both (sociopragmatic failure or when
learners produce socially inappropriate behavior, and pragmalinguistic failure or when
learners do not express themselves in a linguistically appropriate manner)”.

Leaner-external factors

“Social factors probably have an indirect rather than a direct effect on L2 learning. In
particular, they are likely to be mediated by the attitudes that the learners hold. Social factors
shape learner’s attitudes, which, in turn, determine learning outcomes” / “The impact of social
factors on learning outcomes has been studied in relation to L2 proficiency rather than
developmental patterns, as it has been generally assumed that social factors do not directly
influence the process of L2 acquisition” / “The social factors that influence L2 acquisition are
likely to differ according to social context. A key distinction is that between a natural and an
educational setting. A general assumption is that the learning that takes place in these two
types of setting is very different, but the extent to which this is the case may well depend on
the nature of the more specific settings in which learners find themselves”

- Natural settings -> “can be distinguished according to whether the L2 serves as a native
language for the majority, whether it serves as an official language when the majority
speaks some other language, or whether it is used as linguistically heterogeneous groups
in international settings”
- Educational settings -> “can be distinguished according to whether they involve
segregation (the learners are taught the L2 or taught through the medium of the L2
separately from the majority group), mother tongue maintenance (an attempt is made to
ensure that a minority group’s L1 is taught and used in the educational setting),
submersion (the L2 learner is taught in classes where L1 speakers are dominant),
immersion (learners with a high-status L1 are taught through the medium of the L2 in
classes containing only such learners, usually by bilingual teachers), or foreign language
classrooms.

“One way in which the social context affects learning outcomes in these different settings is by
influencing the learners’ choice of reference group (target language models they prefer in majority
language settings)” / Choices can be marked (the choice is the expected one given the learners’
social position) or unmarked (it is an unexpected one) / “In official language settings, the preferred
model is often some indigenized variety of the L2, while in foreign language settings it is likely to
be a standard native-speaker variety” / “[…] a few particular studies relating to key sociolinguistic
variables such as age, sex, social class, and ethnic membership have been carried out. The general
findings are that younger learners do better than older learners (although this may also reflect
psycholinguistic factors), females outperform males, middle class learners achieve higher levels of
academic language proficiency than working class learners, and learners from an ethnic group that
is culturally similar to the target language group tend to be more successful than learners from an
ethnic group that is culturally distant” / “Schumann suggests that learners vary in the extent to
which they acculturate (adapt to the target language culture). Some learners remain at a social
distance from the target language community and, as a result, tend to pidginize (develop only a
very basic competence in the L2). Other learners assimilate and develop a high level of proficiency
in the L2” / “Giles and Byrne have developed a similar theory to account for the effect of various
social factors on L2 acquisition. They argue that the learner must be prepared to ‘converge’
towards the norms of the target language and that this only takes place if certain positive social
factors come into play. This inter-group model of L2 acquisition emphasizes the role that social
factors play in determining the kinds of interactions learners participate in (Gardner’s Socio-
educational Model of L2 Learning, or when social and cultural milieu in which learners grow up
determines the attitudes and motivational orientation that learners hold towards the target
language, its speakers, and its culture)”.

Input and interaction

“In the case of spoken input, it may occur in the context of interaction (the learner’s attempts to
converse with a native speaker, a teacher, or another learner) or in the context of non-reciprocal
discourse (listening to the radio or watching a film)” / “This study has involved the description of
the adjustments which are found in language addressed to learners (foreigner talk and teacher
talk) and also in the analysis of discourse involving L2 learners” / “It was pointed out [by
cognitivists such as Chomsky] that in many cases there was a very poor match between the kind of
language found in the input learners received and the kind of language they themselves produces.
It was argued that this could be best explained by hypothesizing a set of mental processes which
took place inside the mind of the learner and which converted the language in the input into a
form that the learner could store and handle in production” / “[…] it has been shown [by
constructivists such as Hatch] that interaction can provide learners with ‘scaffolding’ that enables
them to produce structures that would be beyond them, if left to their own resources. […] learners
acquire a language through the process of learning how to communicate in it” / “Several studies
have examined the relationship between the frequency with which different linguistic items occur
in the input and the order of acquisition of the same features” / “Krashen has proposed the Input
Hypothesis, according to which learners acquire morphological features in a natural order as a
result of comprehending input addressed to them. Long has argued that input which is made
comprehensible by means of the conversational adjustments that occur when there is a
comprehension problem is very important for acquisition” / “Other researchers have emphasized
the role of learner output in promoting acquisition. Swain has put forward the comprehensible
output hypothesis, which states that learners need opportunities for ‘pushed output’ (speech or
writing that makes demands on them for correct and appropriate use of the L2) in order to
develop certain grammatical features that do not appear to be acquired purely on the basis of
comprehending input / “Finally, other researchers (Hatch) have tried to show how the process of
constructing discourse collaboratively with an interlocutor helps learners to develop new syntactic
structures” / “There has also been considerable interest in classroom interaction on the grounds
that the opportunities for learning which it affords constitute the major determinant of acquisition
in this setting. […] Certain kinds of tasks (involving a two-way exchange of information which
promotes extensive meaning negotiation) appear to result in more modified interaction than
others ”.

Learner-internal factors -> “These factors are, of course, not directly observable. They are covert
and can be inferred by studying learner output and, to some extent, learners’ reports of how they
learn”

Language transfer

“L1 transfer usually refers to the incorporation of features of the L1 into the knowledge systems of
the L2 which the learner is trying to build” / “Both translation and borrowing (the use of the L1 to
deal with some communication problem) are examples of communication transfer, as are code-
mixing (the use of both the L1 and L2 in the construction of the same sentence) and code-
switching (the alternative use of the L1 and L2 within a discourse)” / “Initially, transfer was
understood within a behaviorist framework of learning. I was assumed that the ‘habits’ of the L1
would be carried over into the L2. In cases where the target language differed from the L1, this
would result in interference or negative transfer. In cases where the patterns of the L1 and the
target language were similar, positive transfer wound occur (this was predicted through elaborate
contrastive analyses of the native and target languages” / “The results of error analysis studies
cast doubts on the validity on the validity of these claims. Transfer often did not take place when
there were differences between the target and native languages. Also, many of the errors that
learners made appeared to reflect intralingual processes (they were the result of processes based
on the learner’s existing knowledge of the L2) rather than interference. This led to the
advancement of a minimalist position regarding L1 influence” / “Evidence for transfer in all aspects
of language –phonology, syntax, semantics, and pragmatics- is now abundant. Furthermore, there
is recognition of the fact that transfer may not always manifest itself as errors, but also as
avoidance, overuse, and facilitation” / “Kellerman has shown that learners’ perception of the
distance between their native and the target language (their psychotypology) affects whether they
transfer or not. Other studies have shown that transfer may be a developmental phenomenon in
that it occurs only when the learner reaches a ‘natural’ stage of acquisition which bears a crucial
similarity to some native language structure. Transfer may also be affected by markedness (a
marked linguistic structure is one that can be used with fewer constraints than a related unmarked
one)” / “Learners seem more likely to transfer unmarked native language features than marked
ones, particularly if the corresponding feature in their target language is marked”.

Cognitive accounts of second language acquisition

Leaning processes -> “mechanisms that learners use to notice features in the input, compare
these features with those that are currently part of their mental grammars or interlanguages, and
integrate the new features into their interlanguages”.

Communication processes -> “conscious or potentially conscious attempts on the part of the
learner to employ their available linguistic resources, for example by developing their ability to use
the L2 fluently or by compensating for inadequate knowledge when communicating a particular
message” / “In addition to transfer, learners use a variety of processes to learn an L2”.

Interlanguage theory -> “The term interlanguage was coined by Selinker to refer to the interim
grammars which learners build on their way to full target language competence” / […] one
common theme is the notion of hypothesis testing (the idea that learners form hypotheses about
what the rules of target language are and then set about testing them, confirming them if they
find supportive evidence in the input and rejecting them if they receive negative evidence” / “this
theory has also identified a number of other, more specific processes such as overgeneralization
(the extension of an L2 rule to a context in which it does not apply in the target language) and
simplification (the reduction of the target language system to a simpler form)”.

“Several theories rest on the distinction between implicit (intuitive and unconscious) and explicit
(metalingual and conscious) L2 knowledge , differing in whether these are seen as entirely distinct
and unconnected (Krashen), or whether they are hypothesized to interface (Bialystok)” .

“Other theories have been based on research that shows learner language to be highly variable.
Tarone has argued that learners construct variable interlanguage grammars consisting of different
styles. The learners’ vernacular style develops both as a result of directly processing input, and as a
result of the spread of forms from their careful style”.

“I suggest that interlanguage entails three concurrent phases, involving: (1) innovation (the
acquisition of new forms), (2) elaboration (the complexification that takes place as the learner
discovers the contextual uses of a form), and (3) revision (the adjustments that are made to the
entire system as a result of innovation and elaboration)”.

Functionalist models -> “suggest that variability is a reflex of different models of language use (L2
development occurs as learners move from processing language in pragmatic terms, such as in
topic-comment structures). They also emphasize the importance of the form-function networks
that learners are believed to construct”.

Competition Model -> “language acquisition involves the learner attending to both form and
function. There are inherent human tendencies that induce learners to perceive and process some
forms before others but also a form is more likely to be acquired if it realizes a meaning that is
transparent and important to the learner. According to this model, learners assign ‘weights’ to
different form-function mappings and the process of acquisition involves adjusting these weights
until they match those found in the input”.
“In another approach, researchers have sought to identify the operating principles which learners
use to convert input into a form which they can store. Slobin has identified a number of operating
principles which make up the ‘Language Making Capacity’ of children acquiring their L1. […] These
principles have shown to be present in the L1 acquisition of very different languages. […] The one-
to-one principle, for example, states that ‘an interlanguage system should be constructed in such a
way that the intended underlying meaning is expressed with one clear invariant surface form or
construction”.

Multidimensional Model (Meisel, Clahsen, Pienemann & Johnston) -> “accounts for the
developmental properties of interlanguage in terms of a number of processing operations, which
are organized hierarchically according to the order in which they are evident in learner’s
production. Thus, initially learners rely on non-linguistic processing devices (formulas and lexical
items that are not assigned to grammatical categories) and then move through a series of stages
until they are able to carry out more complex grammatical operations (recognizes and provides an
explanation for individual learner variation)”.

Adaptive Control of Thought (ACT) Model (Andersen) -> “sees language acquisition, like all other
kinds of learning, as a process of proceduralizing ‘declarative knowledge’(stored as facts). This
takes place through ‘practice’”.

Cognitive Theory (McLaughlin) -> “Learners routinize linguistic information that is initially only
available for use through controlled processing and this frees them to attend to new information
in the input. Also, learners restructure their rule-based representations of the L2 at certain critical
points in the learning process”.

“All these theories are based on the assumption that learners form mental representations of
‘rules’ and that these rules guide the learner in using the L2 in performance. A ‘rule’ consists of
some form of abstract generalization of a linguistic property”.

Parallel Distributed Processing Model (Rumelhart and McClelland, PDP Research Group) ->
“knowledge takes the form of a network of interconnections between ‘units’ that do not
correspond to any particular linguistic construct. Learning consists of the modification of the
strengths of these connections as a response to input stimuli and is complete when the network
corresponds to that found in native speakers. Researchers construct mathematical models of the
kinds of networks that they think can account for learning and then test them in computer
simulations. The criterion of success is whether the model produces similar stages of development
to those that have been observed in natural language acquisition”.

“In addition to acquiring knowledge of the L2, learners also need to develop control over existing
knowledge, as suggested by Anderson’s account of proceduralization and McLaughlin’s views on
controlled/automatic processing. […] Speech planning has been considered in terms of temporal
variables, such as speech rate and pause length, and hesitation phenomena” / “Faerch and Kasper
propose a basic distinction between reduction strategies (attempt to do away with the
communication problem) and achievement strategies (designed to achieve the original goal)” /
Poulisse proposes a basic distinction between conceptual strategies (attempt to get round a
problem by referring to a concept obliquely in some way) and linguistic strategies (an attempt to
get round a problem by exploiting L1 or L2 linguistic knowledge)” / “One interesting possibility is
that the acquisition of knowledge and of control occur independently, with learners differing in
the emphasis they give to each aspect”.

Linguistic universals and second language acquisition

“Mentalist theories of L2 acquisition emphasize the role of innate knowledge. This takes the form
of a language acquisition device which helps the learner to discover the rules of the target
language grammar. This device contains knowledge of linguistic universals”.

“A number of linguists have set about identifying typological universals through the study of a
large number of languages drawn from different language families” / “Other linguists –those
belonging to the generative school associated with Chomsky- have studied individual languages in
great depth in order to identify the principles of grammar which underlie and govern specific rules
(Universal Grammar)”.

Phrase Structure Principle -> “states that all languages are made up of phrases consisting of a
head and a complement. […] one option is that the head follows the complement (as in English),
while another is that the head follows the complement (as in Japanese). […] the presence of one
feature in a language implies the presence of other, related features”.

Logical problem of acquisition -> “the input to which the learner is exposed underdetermines
linguistic competence (learners are unable to discover some of the rules of the target language
purely on the basis of input because it does not supply them with all the information they need). It
follows that they must rely on other sources of information. These sources are knowledge of
linguistic universals and in the case of L2 learners, knowledge of their L1”.

‘Unlearning’ of a wrongly formulated rule -> “It is claimed that in certain cases unlearning can
only take place if the learner is supplied with negative feedback in the form of overt corrections,
such as those that occur in many language classrooms. In the case of L1 acquisition such feedback
is rare. It is argued that children are prevented from forming rules which they cannot unlearn
without negative feedback by their knowledge of linguistic universals. […]For a start, L2 learners
may be more prepared to abandon previously learnt rules than L1 learners. Also, it is not yet clear
whether they rely on other methods of learning that involve general learning processes and access
to negative feedback or whether they rely on both”.

“Knowledge of linguistic universals may help to shape L2 acquisition in a number of ways. First, it
can provide an explanation for developmental sequences. Learners may acquire rules that reflect
universal principles before they acquire rules that do not. Or they may opt for parameters that are
less marked before those that are more marked. Second, knowledge of linguistic universals may
enable the learner to go beyond the input. This can happen in the case of clusters of features
where an implicational relationship holds. […] Knowledge of linguistic universals may provide the
learner with a projection capacity. Third, knowledge of linguistic universals may also be involved in
transfer. Learners may be more prepared to transfer L1 features if these conform to universal
principles”.

The language learner

General factors and individual differences

“Learners differ in a number of ways which affect L2 acquisition, in particular their rate of
development and their ultimate level of achievement. The ways in which learners differ are
potentially infinite as they reflect the whole range of variables relating to the cognitive, affective,
and social aspects of a human being” / “The factors can be divided into those that are fixed and
immutable (beyond external control, such as age) and those that are variable, influenced by social
setting and by the actual course of L2 development”.

“Long has presented evidence to suggest that the acquisition of a native-like accent is not possible
by learners who begin learning after 6 years of age (or 12, according to Scovel)” / “There is general
agreement, however, that older learners enjoy an initial advantage in rate of acquisition. A key
theoretical issue relating to the age issue and the reason why it has attracted considerable
attention is whether adult L2 learners have continued access to the innate knowledge of linguistic
universals which guide children’s acquisition of their mother tongue”.

Language learning aptitude -> “constitutes a relatively immutable factor. This refers to the specific
ability for language learning which learners are hypothesized to possess”.

Modern Language Aptitude Test (MLAT) and Pimsleur Language Aptitude Battery -> “these tests
conceptualized aptitude in modular form. Different modules measured such skills as the learner’s
ability to perceive and memorize new sounds, to identify syntactic patterns in a new language, to
detect similarities and differences in form and meaning, and to relate sounds to written symbols”.

Motivation -> “it is an example of a factor that is clearly variable. […] Motivation can be causative
(have an effect on learning) and it can be resultative (influenced by learning). It can be intrinsic
(derive from the personal interests and inner needs of the learner) and it can be extrinsic (derive
from external sources such as material rewards)”.

Cognitive style -> “This is the term used to refer to the way people perceive, conceptualize,
organize, and recall information”.

“Field-dependent learners operate holistically, whereas field-independent learners are analytic.

The main research hypothesis is that field-independent learners will be more successful at formal,
classroom learning”.

Learner strategies -> “are conscious or potentially conscious; they represent the learner’s
deliberate attempts to learn. Oxford defines them as ‘behaviors or actions which learners use to
make language learning more successful, self-directed and enjoyable’” / “A distinction is often
drawn between learner strategies that are cognitive (relating new concepts to other information
in memory), those that are metacognitive (organizing a personal timetable to facilitate effective
study of the L2) and those that are social (seeking out opportunities to converse with native
speakers)”.

Summary and conclusion

“It is useful to distinguish two branches of enquiry within SLA research. One has as its focus
learning and the other the language learner. In the case of the former the emphasis is on
identifying the universal characteristics of L2 acquisition. In the case of the latter the aim is to
account for differences in ways in which individual learners learn an L2” / “It is also useful to
distinguish two main goals of SLA research: description and explanation. In the case of the
description, the goal is to provide a clear and accurate account of the learner’s competence and, in
particular, to uncover the regularities and systematicities in the learner’s development and control
of L2 knowledge. In the case of explanation, one goal is to reveal how learners are able to develop
knowledge of an L2 from the available input and how they use this knowledge in communication.
A second goal is to specify the factors that cause variation in individual learners’ accomplishment
of this task”.