Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Second Language Research
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Truscott, J.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

Reviews

Noticing in second language acquisition: a critical review

John Truscott

National Tsing Hua University

This article examines the Noticing Hypothesis – the claim that second language learners must consciously notice the grammatical form of their input in order to acquire grammar. I argue, first, that the foundations of the hypothesis in cognitive psychology are weak; research in this area does not support it, or even provide a clear interpretation for it. The problem of interpreting the hypothesis is much more acute in the area of language acquisition. Partly because the hypothesis is not based on any coherent theory of language, it is very difficult to determine exactly what it means in this context,or to draw testable predictions from it.In the absence of specific predictions, research on form-focused instruction and feedback provide indirect tests, the results of which create additional problems for the hypothesis. The various problems can be eliminated or greatly reduced if the Noticing Hypothesis is reformulated as a claim that noticing is necessary for the acquisition of metalinguistic knowledge but not competence.

Second Language Research, Vol. 14, No. 2, 103-135 (1998)
DOI: 10.1191/026765898674803209
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Applied LinguisticsHome page
Z. Han, E. S. Park, and C. Combs
Textual Enhancement of Input: Issues and Possibilities
Applied Linguistics, December 1, 2008; 29(4): 597 - 618.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 RELC JournalHome page
S. Krashen
Language Education: Past, Present and Future
RELC Journal, August 1, 2008; 39(2): 178 - 187.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Applied LinguisticsHome page
A. Mackey
Feedback, Noticing and Instructed Second Language Learning
Applied Linguistics, September 1, 2006; 27(3): 405 - 430.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Language Teaching ResearchHome page
R. Adams
L2 output, reformulation and noticing: implications for IL development
Language Teaching Research, July 1, 2003; 7(3): 347 - 376.
[Abstract] [PDF]