This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Carroll, S. E. Search for Related Content Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

Putting ‘input’ in its proper place

University of Potsdam

Every theory of second language acquisition (SLA) hypothesizes that learners come to know the properties of a language by being exposed to instances of it in meaningful conversation. Within SLA, the standard analysis of the ‘input question’ appears to be that input equals objective properties of the stimulus array less the effects of selective attention (the intake). In this paper, I offer a critique of the standard analysis. I claim that it is not interpretable in the absence of a theory of mental representation, theories of speech perception and language parsing, and a theory of language learning. I show that it cannot account for aspects of signal detection, phonetic or phonological learning. The standard treatment is essentially pretheoretical. I define an alternative position which distinguishes input to speech processing and input to language-learning mechanisms, drawing on the Autonomous Induction Theory – a novel theory of learning which is compatible with a modular view of processing and a view of linguistic cognition based on Universal Grammar (UG).

Second Language Research, Vol. 15, No. 4, 337-388 (1999)
DOI: 10.1191/026765899674928444


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

				S. Unsworth Age and input in the acquisition of grammatical gender in Dutch Second Language Research, July 1, 2008; 24(3): 365 - 395. [Abstract] [PDF]

				H. G. Ying Relevance mapping: a study of second language learners' processing of syntactically ambiguous sentences in English Second Language Research, July 1, 2004; 20(3): 232 - 255. [Abstract] [PDF]

				J. Archibald Interfaces in the prosodic hierarchy: New structures and the phonological parser International Journal of Bilingualism, March 1, 2004; 8(1): 29 - 50. [Abstract] [PDF]

				M. Pienemann Issues in second language acquisition and language processing Second Language Research, July 1, 2002; 18(3): 189 - 192. [PDF]

				J. Hulstijn Towards a unified account of the representation, processing and acquisition of second language knowledge Second Language Research, July 1, 2002; 18(3): 193 - 223. [Abstract] [PDF]

				S. E. Carroll Induction in a modular learner Second Language Research, July 1, 2002; 18(3): 224 - 249. [Abstract] [PDF]

				R. Hawkins The theoretical significance of Universal Grammar in second language acquisition Second Language Research, October 1, 2001; 17(4): 345 - 367. [Abstract] [PDF]