SavedAdd your journal

Journals / ELT Research Journal / 2020 / Cilt: 9 - Sayı: 1

A Critical Review on The Components of Processability Theory: Identifying the Limitations

Hilal PEKER
Esma TOPRAK-CELEN
Pages
71–89
Publication Date
2020-08-06
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Based on the review of these issues, it is proposed that Processability Theory may need some modifications and amendments in near future, as there is a need for more empirical studies.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:There has been a tendency among the second language acquisition/learning theorists to make generalization about the stages that learners go through in learning a second language (L2).
📊
Key Findings & Data:Processability Theory, developed by Pienemann (1998), is one of those theories.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Based on the review of these issues, it is proposed that Processability Theory may need some modifications and amendments in near future, as there is a need for more empirical studies.
🔬Design:Review & Systematic Survey
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Processability theory · processability hierarchy · second language acquisition

Abstract

There has been a tendency among the second language acquisition/learning theorists to make generalization about the stages that learners go through in learning a second language (L2). Processability Theory, developed by Pienemann (1998), is one of those theories. It is argued in Processability Theory that learners can learn an L2 in an order that they are capable of at specific times. In other words, learners acquire/learn L2s in a predictable order, which is called ‘developmental trajectory’. This article reviews Processability Theory from a critical perspective and investigates the limitations of and ambiguities in the theory through examining previous studies. The issues discussed in this paper include the hierarchical order, hypothesis space, grammar and lexicon, operational definition of language processor and its connection to Neurolinguistics and working memory, overgeneralization of features to all languages, and lexical functional grammar. Based on the review of these issues, it is proposed that Processability Theory may need some modifications and amendments in near future, as there is a need for more empirical studies.

🔖

Cite This Article

PEKER, H., TOPRAK-CELEN, E. (2020). A Critical Review on The Components of Processability Theory: Identifying the Limitations. ELT Research Journal, Cilt: 9 - Sayı: 1, 71–89. https://ajindex.com/articles/753965

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (11)

  1. Alhawary, M. T. (2003). Processability theory: Counter-evidence from Arabic second language acquisition data. Al-’Arabiyya, 36, 107-166.
  2. Baddeley, A. D. (2015). Working memory in second language learning. In Z. Wen, M. B. Mota, & A. McNeill (Eds.), Working memory in second language acquisition and processing (pp. 17-28).
  3. Bristol, UK: Multilingual Matters. Bonilla, C. L. (2015). From number agreement to subjunctive: Evidence for processability theory in L2 Spanish. Second Language Research, 31(1), 53-74.
  4. Bresnan, J. (2001).
  5. Lexical-functional syntax. Malden, MA: Blackwell. Buyl, A., & Housen, A. (2015). Developmental stages in receptive grammar acquisition: A processability theory account. Second Language Research, 31(4), 523-550.
  6. Cooper, D. (1999). Linguistic attractors: The cognitive dynamics of language acquisition and change. Amsterdam, Netherlands: John Benjamins. Côté, S. (2020) Examining Processability Theory's predictions for grammatical gender agreement in intermediate L2 French. Int J Appl Linguist. 1(14). doi: 10.1111/ijal.12287 DeKeyser, R. (2015). Skill acquisition theory. In B. VanPatten, & J. Williams (Eds.), Theories in second language acquisition: An introduction (pp. 94-112).
  7. New York, NY: Routledge. Do, T., Utiyama, M., & Sumita, E. (2015). Machine translation from Japanese and French to Vietnamese, the difference among language families. 2015 International Conference on Asian Language Processing (IALP). doi:10.1109/ialp.2015.7451521 Dyson, B. (2009). Processability theory and the role of morphology in English as a second language development: A longitudinal study. Second Language Research, 25(3), 355-376.
  8. Eguchi, A., & Sugiura, M. (2015). Applicability of processability theory to Japanese adolescent EFL learners: A case study of early L2 syntactic and morphological development. System, 52, 115-126.
  9. Escamilla, K., & Grassi, E. (2000). A brief description of second language acquisition. From the Professional Development Resource Series, “Second Language Acquisition”, BUENO Center, University of Colorado, Boulder. Frawley, W. (1997). Vygotsky and cognitive science: Language and the unification of the social and computational mind. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
  10. Gass, S. M. (1993). Second language acquisition: Past, present, and future. Second Language Research, 9(2), 99-117.
  11. Gass, S. M., & Mackey, A. (2015). Input, interaction, and output in second language acquisition. In B. VanPatten, & J. Williams (Eds.), Theories in second lan