Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gxg78 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T10:30:24.397Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Second Language Speech Production Research

A Methodologically Oriented Review

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  07 November 2008

Graham Crookes
Graham Crookes
Affiliation:
University of Hawaii, Manoa
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Recent SLA theory development, supported by related developments in cognitive psychology, has made the study of SL speech production, hitherto neglected, a promising area of work. Recent developments in L1 production studies have provided a gradually strengthening foundation for investigations of L2 production with both use and acquisitional concerns. This article briefly sketches the current first language position as a necessary preliminary to a critical discussion of recent SL production research with particular regard to methodology.

Type
Articles
Information
Studies in Second Language Acquisition , Volume 13 , Issue 2 , June 1991 , pp. 113 - 131
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1991

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

REFERENCES

Anderson, J. R. (1976). Language, memory and thought. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Anderson, J. R. (Ed.). (1981). Cognitive skills and their acquisition. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Anderson, J. R. (1983). The architecture of cognition. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Andre, T., & Phye, G. D. (1986). Cognition, learning and education. In Phye, G. D. & Andre, T. (Eds.), Cognitive classroom learning: Understanding, thinking and problem solving (pp. 1–19). Orlando, FL: Academic.Google Scholar
Annett, J. (1989). Training skilled performance. In Colley, A. M. & Beech, J. R. (Eds.), Acquisition and performance of cognitive skills (pp. 61–84). New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
Appel, G. (1984). Improving second language production. In Dechert, H. W., Möhle, D., & Raupach, M. (Eds.), Second language productions (pp. 186–210). Tübingen: Gunter Narr.Google Scholar
Appel, G., & Goldberg, M. (1984). Referential choice in second language narrative production. In Dechert, H. W., Möhle, D., & Raupach, M. (Eds.), Second language productions (pp. 132–155). Tubingen: Gunter Narr.Google Scholar
Atkinson, P., & Delamont, S. (1985). Bread and dreams or bread and circuses: A critique of ‘case study’ research in education. In Shipman, M. (Ed.), Educational research: Principles, policies and practice (pp. 26–45). London: Falmer Press.Google Scholar
Baars, B. J., Motley, M. T., & MacKay, D. G. (1975). Output editing for lexical status in artificially elicited slips of the tongue. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 14, 382–391.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bahns, J., Burmeister, H., & Vogel, T. (1986). The pragmatics of formulas in L2 learner speech: Use and development. Journal of Pragmatics, 10, 693–723.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bartelt, G. (in press). The ethnography of second language production. IRAL.Google Scholar
Beattie, G. W. (1980). The role of language production processes in the organization of behavior in face-to-face interaction. In Butterworth, B. (Ed.), Language production (Vol. 1, pp. 69–107). London: Academic.Google Scholar
Berg, T. (1986a). The aftermath of error occurrence: Psycholinguists evidence from cut-offs. Language and Communication 6(3), 195–213.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Berg, T. (1986b). The problems of language control: Editing, monitoring, and feedback. Psychological Research, 48, 133–144.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bialystok, E. (1978). A theoretical model of second language learning. Language Learning, 28, 69–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bialystok, E. (1982). On the relationship between knowing and using grammatical forms. Applied Linguistics, 3, 181–206.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bialystok, E., & Ryan, E. R. (1985). A metacognitive framework for the development of language skills. In Forrest-Pressley, D. L., MacKinnon, G. E., & Walker, T. G. (Eds.), Metacognition, cognition, and human performance (Vol. 1, pp. 207–252). New York: Academic.Google Scholar
Bialystok, E., & Sharwood Smith, M. (1985). Interlanguage is not a state of mind. Applied Linguistics, 5, 101–117.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bock, J. K. (1982). Toward a cognitive psychology of syntax: Information processing contributions to sentence formulation. Psychological Review, 89, 1–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bock, K. (1989). Closed-class immanence in sentence production. Cognition, 31, 163–186.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Boomer, D. S. (1965). Hesitation and grammatical encoding. Language and Speech, 8, 148–158.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Brenzel, E. (1984). Summarizing in a second language. In Dechert, H. W., Möhle, D., & Raupach, M. (Eds.), Second language productions (pp. 69–113). Tübingen: Gunter Narr.Google Scholar
Brinberg, D., & McGrath, J. E. (1985). Validity and the research process. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
Brink, P. J. (1989). Exploratory designs. In Brink, P. J. & Wood, M. J. (Eds.), Advanced design in nursing research (pp. 141–160). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
Brink, P. J., & Wood, M. J. (1989). Descriptive designs. In Brink, P. J. & Wood, M. J. (Eds.), Advanced design innursing research (pp. 123–140). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
Butterworth, B. (1980). Some constraints on models of language production. In Butterworth, B. (Ed.), Language production (Vol. 1, pp. 423–459). London: Academic.Google Scholar
Calfee, R. (1981). Cognitive science and educational practice. Review of Research in Education, 9, 3–73.Google Scholar
Carroll, D. W. (1986). Psychology of language. Pacific Grove, CA: Brooks/Cole.Google Scholar
Chafe, W. (1980). Some reasons for hesitating. In Dechert, H. W. & Raupach, M. (Eds.), Temporal variables in speech (pp. 169–180). Hague: Mouton.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chaudron, C. (1985). Intake: On models and methods for discovering learners' processing of input. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 7, 1–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chaudron, C, Crookes, G., & Long, M. H. (1988). Reliability and validity in second language classroom research (Technical Report No. 8). Honolulu: University of Hawaii, Center for Second Language Classroom Research, Social Science Research Institute.Google Scholar
Chaudron, C., & Russell, G. (1990). The validity of elicited imitation as a measure of second language competence. Manuscript submitted for publication.Google Scholar
Clahsen, H. (1987). Natural language development: Acquisitional processes leading to fluency in speech production. In Dechert, H. W. & Raupach, M. (Eds.), Psycholinguists models of production (pp. 67–75). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.Google Scholar
Clark, H. H., & Clark, E. V. (1977). Psychology and language. New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovitch.Google Scholar
Cohen, J. (1977). Power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Cohen, P. (1982). To be or not to be: Control and balancing of Type I and Type II errors. Evaluation and Program Planning, 5, 247–253.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Colley, A. M., & Beech, J. R. (1989). Acquiring and performing cognitive skills. In Colley, A. M. & Beech, J. R. (Eds.), Acquisition and performance of cognitive skills (pp. 1–16). New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
Cowles, M., & Davis, C. (1982). On the origins of the .05 level of statistical significance. American Psychologist, 37, 553–558.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Crookes, G. (1986). Tasks: A cross-disciplinary review (Technical Report No. 4). Honolulu: University of Hawaii, Social Science Research Institute, Center for Second Language Classroom Research.Google Scholar
Crookes, G. (1988). Planning, monitoring, and second language development (Technical Report No. 6). Honolulu: University of Hawaii, Social Science Research Institute, Center for Second Language Classroom Research.Google Scholar
Crookes, G. (1989). Planning and interlanguage variation. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 11, 367–383.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Crookes, G. (1990). The utterance, and other basic units for discourse analysis. Applied Linguistics, 11, 183–199.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Crooks, G. (in press). Theory formats and second language acquisition theory. University of Hawaii Working Papers in ESL, 9(3).Google Scholar
Cutler, A. (Ed.). (1982). Slips of the tongue and language production. Hague: Mouton.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Daley, J. A., & Hexamer, A. (1981). Statistical power in research in English education. Research in the teaching of English, 17, 157–164.Google Scholar
Davis, C., & Gaito, J. (1984). Multiple comparison procedures within experimental research. Canadian Psychology, 25, 1–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
De Bot, K. (1990). A bilingual production model: Levelt's Speaking’ model adapted. Manuscript submitted for publication.Google Scholar
Dechert, H. W. (1980). Contextual hypothesis-testing procedures in speech production. In Dechert, H. W. & Raupach, M. (Eds.), Towards a cross-linguistic assessment of speech production (pp. 101–121). Frankfurt: Lang.Google Scholar
Dechert, H. W. (1983). How a story is done in a second language. In Faerch, C. & Kasper, G. (Eds.), Strategies in interlanguage communication (pp. 175–195). London: Longman.Google Scholar
Dechert, H. W.. (1984). Individual variation in language. In Dechert, H. W., Möhle, D., & Raupach, M. (Eds.), Second language productions (pp. 156–185). Tübingen: Gunter Narr.Google Scholar
Dechert, H. W. (1987). Understanding producing. In Dechert, H. W. & Raupach, M. (Eds.), Psycholinguistic models of production (pp. 229–238). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.Google Scholar
Dechert, H. W., Möhle, D., & Raupach, M. (Eds.). (1984). Second language productions. Tubingen: Gunter Narr.Google Scholar
Dechert, H. W., & Raupach, M. (Eds.). (1980). Towards a cross-linguistic assessment of speech production. Frankfurt: Lang.Google Scholar
Dechert, H. W., & Raupach, M. (Eds.). (1987). Psycholinguistic models of production. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.Google Scholar
Dechert, H. W., & Raupach, M. (Eds.). (1989). Transfer in language production. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.Google Scholar
De Lisi, R. (1987). A cognitive-developmental model of planning. In Friedman, S. L., Scholnick, E. K., & Cocking, R. R. (Eds.), Blueprints for thinking (pp. 79–109). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Dell, G. S. (1985). Positive feedback in hierarchical connectionist models: Applications to language production. Cognitive Science, 9, 3–23.Google Scholar
Dell, G. S. (1986). A spreading-activation theory of retrieval in sentence production. Psychological Review, 93, 283–321.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dell, G. S. (1989). The retrieval of phonological forms in production: Tests of predictions from a connectionist model. In Marslen-Wilson, W. (Ed.), Lexical representation and process (pp. 136–165). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Denzin, N. K. (1970). The research act. Chicago, IL: Aldine.Google Scholar
Downing, J. (1984). Task awareness in the development of reading skill. In Downing, J. & Valtin, R. (Eds.), Language awareness and learning to read (pp. 27–55). New York: Springer-Verlag.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Downing, J., & Leong, C. K. (1982). Psychology of reading. New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Ellis, R. (1982). Discourse processes in classroom second language development. Unpublished doctoral thesis, University of London.Google Scholar
Ellis, R. (1985). A variable competence model of second language acquisition. IRAL, 23, 47–59.Google Scholar
Ellis, R. (1987). Interlanguage variability in narrative discourse: Style shifting in the use of the past tense. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 9, 1–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ellis, R. (1988). The role of practice in classroom learning. AILA Review, 5, 20–39.Google Scholar
Ellis, R., & Roberts, C. (1987). Two approaches for investigating second language acquisition. In Ellis, R. (Ed.), Second language acquisition in context (pp. 3–29). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
Ericsson, K. A., & Simon, H. A. (1987). Verbal reports on thinking. In Faerch, C. & Kasper, G. (Eds.), Introspection in second language research (pp. 24–53). Philadelphia: Multilingual matters.Google Scholar
Faerch, C. (1984). Strategies in production and reception-Some empirical evidence. In Davies, A., Criper, C., & Howatt, A. P. R. (Eds.), Interlanguage (pp. 49–70). Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.Google Scholar
Faerch, C., & Kasper, G. (1983). Plans and strategies in foreign language communication. In Faerch, C. & Kasper, G. (Eds.), Strategies in interlanguage communication (pp. 20–60). London: Longman.Google Scholar
Faerch, C., & Kasper, G. (1985). Procedural knowledge as a component of foreign language learners' communicative competence. In Bolte, H. & Herrlitz, W. (Eds.), Kommunikation im Sprachunterricht (pp. 169–199). Utrecht: Rijksuniversiteit.Google Scholar
Faerch, C., & Kasper, G. (1986). Cognitive dimensions of language transfer. In Kellerman, E. & Sharwood Smith, M. (Eds.), Crosslinguistic influence in second language acquisition and performance (pp. 49–65). Oxford: Pergamon.Google Scholar
Faerch, C., & Kasper, G. (1987). From product to process-Introspective methods in second language research. In Faerch, C. & Kasper, C. (Eds.), Introspection in second language research (pp. 5–23). Philadelphia: Multilingual matters.Google Scholar
Faerch, C., & Kasper, G.. (1989). Transfer in production: Some implications for the interlanguage hypothesis. In Dechert, H. W. & Raupach, M. (Eds.), Transfer in language production (pp. 173–193). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.Google Scholar
Fathman, A. K. (1980). Repetition and correction as an indication of speech planning and execution processes among second language learners. In Dechert, H. W. & Raupach, M. (Eds.), Towards a cross-linguistic assessment of speech production (pp. 77–86). Frankfurt: Lang.Google Scholar
Fitts, P. M. (1964). Perceptual-motor skill learning. In Melton, A. W. (Ed.), Categories of human learning (pp. 244–285). New York: Academic.Google Scholar
Ford, M. (1982). Sentence planning units: Implications for the speaker's representation of meaningful relations underlying sentences. In Bresnan, J. (Ed.), The mental representation of grammatical relations (pp. 797–827). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Foss, D. J., & Hakes, D. T. (1978). Psycholinguistics. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
Freiman, J. A., Chalmers, T. C., Smith, H. Jr, & Kuebler, R. R. (1978). The importance of beta, the type II error and sample size in the design and interpretation of the randomized control trial. New England Journal of Medicine, 299, 690–694.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fromkin, V. (1971). The non-anomalous nature of anomalous utterances. Language, 47, 27–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Garnsey, S. M., & Dell, G. S. (1984). Some neurolinguistic implications of prearticulatory editing in production. Brain and Language, 23, 64–73.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Garrett, M. F. (1975). The analysis of sentence production. In Bower, G. H. (Ed.), The psychology of learning and motivation (Vol. 9, pp. 133–177). New York: Academic.Google Scholar
Goldman-Eisler, F. (1958). Speech production and the predictability of words in context. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 10, 96–106.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gould, J. D. (1978). An experimental study of writing, dictating and speaking. In Requin, J. (Ed.), Attention and Performance VII (pp. 299–319). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Gregg, K. (1984). Krashen's Monitor and Occam's Razor. Applied Linguistics, 5, 79–100.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grosjean, F. (1980). Linguistic structures and performance structures: Studies in pause distribution. In Dechert, H. W. & Raupach, M. (Eds.), Temporal variables in speech (pp. 91–105). Hague: Mouton.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grotjah, Rüdiger. (1991). The Research Programme Subjective Theories: A new approach in second language research. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 13, 187–214.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Haugeland, J. (1981). The nature and plausibility of cognitivism. In Haugeland, J. (Ed.), Mind design (pp. 243–281). Montgomery, VT: Bradford Books.Google Scholar
Herriot, P. (1970). The psychology of language. London: Methuen.Google Scholar
Hockett, C. F. (1967). Where the tongue slips, there slip I. In Fromkin, V. A. (Ed.), Speech errors as linguistic evidence (pp. 93–119). Hague: Mouton.Google Scholar
Holmes, V. M. (1984). Sentence planning in a story continuation task. Language and Speech, 27, 115–134.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hölscher, A., & Möhle, D. (1987). Cognitive plans in translation. In Faerch, C. & Kasper, G. (Eds.), Introspection in second language research (pp. 113–134). Philadelphia: Multilingual matters.Google Scholar
Hopper, R., Koch, S., & Mandelbaum, J. (1986). Conversation analysis methods. In Ellis, D. G. & Donohue, W. A. (Eds.), Contemporary issues in language and discourse processes (pp. 169–186). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Hulstijn, J. H. (1982). Monitor use by adult second language learners (Doctoral dissertation, University of Amsterdam). University Microfilms International, RPD82–70028.Google Scholar
Hulstijn, J. H. (1989). A cognitive view of interlanguage variability. In Eisenstein, M. R. (Ed.), The dynamic interlanguage (pp. 17–31). New York: Plenum.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hulstijn, J. H., & Hulstijn, W. (1984). Grammatical errors as a function of processing constraints and explicit knowledge. Language Learning, 34, 23–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jackson, S. (1986). Building a case for claims about discourse structure. In Ellis, D. & Donohue, W. A. (Eds.), Contemporary issues in language and discourse processes (pp. 129–147). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Jackson, S., & Jacobs, S. (1983). Strategy and structure in conversational influence attempts. Communication Monographs, 50, 285–304.Google Scholar
Jacobs, S. (1986). How to make an argument from examples in discourse analysis. In Ellis, D. & Donohue, W. A. (Eds.), Contemporary issues in language and discourse processes (pp. 149–167). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Jarvella, R. J., & Deutsch, W. (1987). An asymmetry in producing versus understanding description of visual arrays. In Allport, A., MacKay, D., Prinz, W., & Scheerer, E. (Eds.), Language perception and production (pp. 41–59). Orlando, FL: Academic.Google Scholar
Jordens, P. (1986). Production rules in interlanguage: Evidence from case errors in L2 German. In Kellerman, E. & Sharwood Smith, M. (Eds.), Crosslinguistic influence in second language acquisition (pp. 91–109). New York: Pergamon.Google Scholar
Kellerman, E. (in press). Compensatory strategies in second language research: A critique, a revision, and some (non-)implications for the classroom. In Phillipson, R., Kellerman, E., Selinker, L., Sharwood Smith, M., & Swain, M. (Eds.) Foreign/second language pedagogy research. Clevedon, U.K.: Multilingual matters.Google Scholar
Kellerman, E., Ammerlaan, A., Bongaerts, T., & Poulisse, N. (1990). System and hierarchy in L2 compensatory strategies. In Scarcella, R., Andersen, E., & Krashen, S. (Eds.), Developing communicative competence (pp. 163–178). New York: Newbury House.Google Scholar
Kempen, G., & Hoenkamp, E. (1982). An incremental procedural grammar for sentence formulation. Cognitive Science, 11, 201–253.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kluwe, R. H. (1987). Executive decisions and regulation of problem solving. In Weinert, F. E. & Kluwe, R. H. (Eds.), Metacognition, motivation, and understanding (pp. 31–64). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Kraemer, H. C., & Thiemann, S. (1987). How many subjects? Newbury Park, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
Kraemer, H. C., & Thiemann, S. (1989). A strategy to use soft data effectively in randomized controlled clinical trials. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 57, 148–154.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Krashen, S. D. (1981). Second language acquisition and second language learning. Oxford: Pergamon.Google Scholar
Krashen, S. D. (1982). Principles and practice in second language acquisition. Oxford: Pergamon.Google Scholar
Krashen, S. D. (1985). The input hypothesis. Oxford: Pergamon.Google Scholar
Krashen, S. D. (1989). We acquire vocabulary and spelling by reading: Additional evidence for the input hypothesis. Modern Language Journal, 73(4), 440–464.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lackey, N. R., & Wingate, A. L. (1989). The pilot study: Key to research success. In Brink, P. J. & Wood, M. J. (Eds.), Advanced design in nursing research (pp. 285–292). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
Lapointe, S. G., & Dell, G. S. (1989). A synthesis of recent work in sentence production. In Carlson, G. N. & Tanenhaus, M. K. (Eds.), Linguistic structures in language processing (pp. 107–156). Boston: Kluwer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Larsen-Freeman, D. (1975). The acquisition of grammatical morphemes by adult ESL students. TESOL Quarterly, 9, 409–419.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Laver, J. D. M. (1973). The detection and correction of slips of the tongue. In Fromkin, V. A. (Ed.), Speech errors as linguistic evidence (pp. 132–143). Hague: Mouton.Google Scholar
Laver, J. D. M. (1980). Monitoring systems in the neurolinguistic control of speech production. In Fromkin, V. A. (Ed.), Errors in linguistic performance (pp. 287–305). New York: Academic.Google Scholar
Lennon, P. (1984). Retelling a story in English as a second language. In Dechert, H. W., Mohle, D., & Raupach, M. (Eds.), Second language productions (pp. 50–68). Tubingen: Gunter Narr.Google Scholar
Levelt, W. J. M. (1975). Systems, skills and language learning. In VanEssen, A. J. & Menting, J. P. (Eds.), The context of foreign-language learning (pp. 83–99). Assen, Netherlands: Van Gorcum.Google Scholar
Levelt, W. J. M. (1978). Skill theory and language teaching. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 1, 53–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Levelt, W. J. M. (1983). Monitoring and self-repair in speech. Cognition, 14, 41–104.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Levelt, W. J. M. (1989). Speaking. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
MacWhinney, B., & Anderson, J. R. (1986). The acquisition of grammar. In Gopnick, I. & Gopnick, M. (Eds.), From models to modules (pp. 3–25). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.Google Scholar
MacWhinney, B., & Osser, H. (1977). Verbal planning functions in children's speech. Child Development, 48, 978–985.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McClelland, J. L., Rumelhart, D. E., & Hinton, G. E. (1986). The appeal of parallel distributed processing. In McClelland, J. L., Rumelhart, D. E., & the PDP Research Group, Parallel distributed processing (Vol. 1, pp. 3–44). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
McDonough, S. H. (1981). Psychology in foreign language teaching. London: Allen & Unwin.Google Scholar
McLaughlin, B. (1987). Theories of second language learning. London: Edward Arnold.Google Scholar
McLaughlin, B., Rossman, T., & McLeod, B. (1983). Second language learning: An information-processing perspective. Language Learning, 33, 135–158.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McLeod, B., & McLaughlin, B. (1986). Restructuring or automaticity? Reading in a second language. Language Learning, 36, 109–123.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Merriam, S. B. (1988). Case study research in education. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
Möhle, D. (1984). A comparison of the second language speech production of different native speakers. In Dechert, H. W., Möhle, D., & Raupach, M. (Eds.), Second language productions (pp. 26–49). Tubingen: Gunter Narr.Google Scholar
Möhle, D., & Raupach, M. (1987). The representation problem in interlanguage theory. In Lörscher, W. & Schulze, R. (Eds.), Perspectives on language in performance (pp. 1158–1173). Tübingen: Gunter Narr.Google Scholar
Morrison, D. M., & Low, G. (1983). Monitoring and the second language learner. In Richards, J. C. & Schmidt, R. W. (Eds.), Language and communication (pp. 228–250). London: Longman.Google Scholar
Motley, M. T., Baars, B. J., & Camden, C. T. (1983). Experimental verbal slip studies: A review and editing model of language encoding. Communication Monographs, 50, 79–101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Neves, D. M., & Anderson, J. R. (1981). Knowledge compilation: Mechanisms for the automatization of cognitive skills. In Anderson, J. R. (Ed.), Cognitive skills and their acquisition (pp. 57–84). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Newell, A., & Rosenbloom, P. S. (1981). Mechanisms of skill acquisition and the law of practice. In Anderson, J. R. (Ed.), Cognitive skills and their acquisition (pp. 1–56). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Newell, A., & Simon, H. A. (1972). Human problem solving. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
O'Connell, D. C. (1980). Cross-linguistic investigations of some temporal variables in speech. In Dechert, H. W. & Raupach, M. (Eds.), Towards a cross-linguistic assessment of speech (pp. 23–38). Frankfurt: Lang.Google Scholar
O'Connell, D. C, & Wiese, R. (1987). The state of the art: The fate of the start. In Dechert, H. W. & Raupach, M. (Eds.), Psycholinguists models of production (pp. 3–16). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.Google Scholar
O'Malley, J. M., Chamot, A. U, & Walker, C. (1987). Some applications of cognitive theory to second language acquisition. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 9, 287–306.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pienemann, M. (1987). Psychological constraints on the teachability of languages. In Pfaff, C. (Ed.), First and second language acquisition processes (pp. 143–168). Rowley, MA: Newbury House.Google Scholar
Poulisse, N., in collaboration with Bongaerts, T., & Kellerman, E. (1990). The use of compensatory strategies by Dutch learners of English. Dordrecht: Foris.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Poulisse, N., Bongaerts, T., & Kellerman, E. (1984). On the use of compensatory strategies in interlanguage performance. Interlanguage Studies Bulletin, 8, 70–105.Google Scholar
Poulisse, N., Bongaerts, T., & Kellerman, E. (1987). The use of retrospective verbal reports in the analysis of compensatory strategies. In Faerch, C. & Kasper, G. (Eds.), Introspection in second language research (pp. 213–229). Philadelphia: Multilingual matters.Google Scholar
Raupach, M. (1980). Cross-linguistic descriptions of speech performance as a contribution to contrastive psycholinguistics. In Dechert, H. W. & Raupach, M. (Eds.), Towards a cross-linguistic assessment of speech production (pp. 9–22). Frankfurt: Lang.Google Scholar
Raupach, M. (1984). Formulae in speech production. In Dechert, H. W., Möhle, D., & Raupach, M. (Eds.), Second language productions (pp. 114–137). Tubingen: Gunter Narr.Google Scholar
Raupach, M. (1987). Procedural learning in advanced learners of a foreign language. In Coleman, J. A. & Towell, R. (Eds.), The advanced language learner (pp. 123–155). London: CILT.Google Scholar
Rehbein, J. (1987). On fluency in second language speech. In Dechert, H. W. & Raupach, M. (Eds.), Psycholin-guistic models of production (pp. 97–105). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.Google Scholar
Rochester, S. R., & Gill, J. (1973). Production of complex sentences in monologues and dialogues. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 12, 203–210.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rosenthal, R., & Rubin, D. B. (1985). Statistical analysis: Summarizing evidence versus establishing facts. Psychological Bulletin, 97, 527–529.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rowe, M. B. (1986). Wait time: Slowing down may be a way of speeding up! Journal of Teacher Education, 36, 43–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ryan, T. A. (1985). “Ensemble-adjusted p values”: How are they to be weighted? Psychological Bulletin, 97, 521–526.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ryle, G. (1949). The concept of mind. Oxford: Methuen.Google Scholar
Sajavaara, K. (1987). Second language speech production: Factors affecting fluency. In Dechert, H. W. & Raupach, M. (Eds.), Psycholinguists models of production (pp. 45–65). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.Google Scholar
Sajavaara, K., & Lehtonen, J. (1980). The analysis of cross-language communication: Prolegomena to the theory and methodology. In Dechert, H. W. & Raupach, M. (Eds.), Towards a cross-linguistic assessment of speech production (pp. 55–76). Frankfurt: Lang.Google Scholar
Santos, T. (1989). Replication in applied linguistics research. TESOL Quarterly, 23, 699–702.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schmidt, R. W., & Frota, S. N. (1986). Developing basic conversational ability in a second language: A case study of an adult learner of Portuguese. In Day, R. R. (Ed.), Talking to learn (pp. 237–326). Rowley, MA: Newbury House.Google Scholar
Scholnick, E. K., & Friedman, S. L. (1987). The planning construct in the psychological literature. In Friedman, S. L., Scholnick, E. K., & Cocking, R. R. (Eds.), Blueprints for thinking (pp. 3–38). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Seliger, H. W. (1980). Utterance planning and correction behavior: Its function in the grammar construction processes among second language learners. In Dechert, H. W. & Raupauch, M. (Eds.), Towards a cross-linguistic assessment of speech production (pp. 87–108). Frankfurt: Lang.Google Scholar
Sharwood Smith, M. (1981). Consciousness-raising and the second language learner. Applied Linguistics, 2, 159–168.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sharwood Smith, M. (1983). On first language loss in the second language acquirer: Problems of transfer. In Gass, S. & Selinker, L. (Eds.), language transfer in language learning (pp. 222–231). Rowley, MA: Newbury House.Google Scholar
Sharwood Smith, M. (1986). Comprehension versus acquisition: Two ways of processing input. Applied Linguistics, 7, 239–256.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sharwood Smith, M., & Kellerman, E. (1989). The interpretation of second language output. In Dechert, H. W. & Raupach, M. (Eds.), Transfer in language production (pp. 217–235). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.Google Scholar
Shattuck-Hufnagel, S. (1979). Speech errors as evidence for a serial-ordering mechanism in sentence production. In Cooper, W. E. & Walker, E. C. T. (Eds.), Sentence processing: Psycholinguistic studies presented to Merrill Garrett (pp. 295–342). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Shaver, J. P., & Norton, R. S. (1980). Randomness and replication in ten years of the ‘American Educational Research Journal.’ Educational Research, 9, 9–15.Google Scholar
Sigman, S. J., Sullivan, S. J., & Wendell, M. (1988). Conversation: Data acquisition and analysis. In Tardy, C. H. (Ed.), A handbook for the study of human communication (pp. 163–192). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.Google Scholar
Smith, J. K. (1989). The nature of social and educational inquiry: Empiricism versus interpretation. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.Google Scholar
Smith, M. J. (1988). Contemporary communication research methods. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.Google Scholar
Stemberger, J. P. (1985). An interactive model of language production. In Ellis, A. W. (Ed.), Progress in the psychology of language (Vol. 1, pp. 143–186). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Stemberger, J. P. (1989). Speech errors in early child language production. Journal of Memory and Language, 28, 164–188.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Swain, M. (1985). Communicative competence: Some roles of comprehensible input and comprehensible output in its development. In Gass, S. M. & Madden, C. G. (Eds.), Input in second language acquisition (pp. 235–253). Rowley, MA: Newbury House.Google Scholar
Swain, M., Dumas, G., & Naiman, N. (1974). Alternatives to spontaneous speech: Elicited translation and imitation as indicators of second language competence. Working Papers on Bilingualism, 3, 68–79.Google Scholar
Swain, M., & Lapkin, S. (1989). Canadian immersion and adult second language teaching: What's the connection? Modern Language Journal, 73, 150–159.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Swinney, D. A., & Fodor, J. D. (1989). Introduction. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 18, 1–3.Google Scholar
Tarone, E. (1982). Systematicity and attention in interlanguage. Language Learning, 32, 69–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Towell, R. (1987). Variability and progress in the language development of advanced learners of a foreign language. In Ellis, R. (Ed.), Second language acquisition in context (pp. 113–127). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
Welford, A. T. (1968). Fundamentals of skill. London: Methuen.Google Scholar
Welford, A. T. (1976). Skilled performance: Perceptual and motor skills. Glenview, IL: Scott Foresman.Google Scholar
Wiese, R. (1984). Language production in foreign and native languages: Same or different? In Dechert, H. W., Möhle, D., & Raupach, M. (Eds.), Second language productions (pp. 11–25). Tübingen: Gunter Narr.Google Scholar
Williams, J. (1990, March). Discourse marking and elaboration and the comprehensibility of second language speakers. Paper presented at SLRF '90, Eugene, OR.Google Scholar