Arab World English Journal (AWEJ) Volume 12. Number1  March 2021                                               Pp.270 -292
DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.24093/awej/vol12no1.19

Full Paper PDF 

Structured Input vs. Structured Output Task’s Effects on the Acquisition of the English
Causative Forms: Discourse-Level

Najat Alabdullah
Ministry of Education, Kuwait
Kuwait, Kuwait City
Email: najatalabdullah@gmail.com

 

Received: 11/8/2020               Accepted: 2/22/2021             Published:3/24/2021

 

Abstract:
This research paper presents a quasi-experimental empirical study investigating the effects of structured input and structured output tasks on the acquisition of English causative forms. This research is framed on VanPatten’s (1996) input processing theory. The grammatical form chosen for this investigation is affected by a processing strategy called the First Noun Principle. There are three variables included that make this study significant.  These variables are having participants that are young learners who speak Arabic as an L1 and using discourse-level instrumentation. These variables make this study significant because the studies that investigated the effectiveness of structured input practice with these variables are in the minority. The study’s main questions are: (i) What are the short-term effects of structured input and structured output on the acquisition of English causative forms as measured with discourse-level interpretation tasks? (ii) What are the short-term effects of structured input and structured output on the learners’ ability to acquire the English causative forms as measured with discourse-level production tasks?  Participants were school-age learners (aged 12-13) from an Arabic background with Arabic as an L1 who studied English as a second language in Kuwait. A pre and post-test procedure was adopted in this study. Two instructional groups were created, which are: (i) structured input; (ii) structured output. Discourse-level tasks were used in the study to assess the effectiveness of the two instructional treatments. Results were analyzed using descriptive statistics and ANOVA. The main findings support the view that discourse-level structured input tasks are a useful pedagogical intervention in helping young L2 learners from an Arabic background with Arabic as an L1 to process, interpret and produce accurate English causative forms. The main findings have theoretical and pedagogical implications for language learning and teaching.
Keywords: Arabic L1, discourse-level instrumentation, first noun principle, processing instruction,
young learners, structured input, structured output, causative form

Cite as: Alabdullah,N . (2021). Structured Input vs. Structured Output Task’s Effects on the Acquisition of the English Causative Forms: Discourse-Level.  Arab World English Journal, 12 (1) 270 -292.DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.24093/awej/vol12no1.19

References

Benati, A. (2004a). The effects of structured input and explicit information on the acquisition of Italian future tense. In B. VanPatten (Ed.). Processing instruction: Theory, research, and commentary, (pp.207-255.) Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

Benati, A. (2004b). The effects of processing instruction and its components on the acquisition of gender agreement in Italian. Language Awareness 13, 67-80. Doi: 10.1080/09658410408667087

Benati, A. (2010). Grammar Instruction and Processing Instruction in second   language acquisition. Journal of Applied Linguistics26, 43-58.

Benati, A. (2013). Issues in Second Language Teaching. Sheffield, UK: Equinox Publishing Ltd. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/modl.12198

Benati, A. (2017). The role of input and output tasks in grammar instruction: Theoretical, empirical and pedagogical considerations.
Studies in Second

Language Learning and Teaching, 7(3), 377-396. DOI: 10.14746/ssllt.2017.7.3.2

Benati, A. (2019). Classroom-oriented research: Processing Instruction (findings and

implications). Language Teaching, 52(3) 343-359. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0261444817000386

Benati, A. (2020). The effects of structured input and traditional instruction on the

acquisition of the English causative passive forms: An eye-tracking study measuring

accuracy in responses and processing patterns. Language Teaching Research.

DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1362168820928577

Benati, A., & Batziou M. (2019a) The effects of structured-input and structured-output

tasks on The acquisition of English causative. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, 57, 265-288.
https://doi.org/10.1515/iral-2016-0038

Benati, A., & Batziou M. (2019b) Discourse and long-term effects of structured-input and

structured-output tasks in combination and isolation on the acquisition of passive

English causative forms. Accepted and forthcoming in Language Awareness, 28(2),   1-18.

Benati, A., & Lee, J. (2008). Grammar acquisition and processing instruction:  Secondary and cumulative effects. Bristol: Multilingual Matters.

Benati, A., & Lee, J. (2010). Processing instruction and discourse. London, England:  Continuum.

Benati, A., Lee, J., & Hikima, N. (2010). Exploring the effects of processing instruction on discourse-level interpretation tasks with the Japanese passive construction. In A. Benati, & J. F. Lee (Eds.), Processing instruction and discourse (pp.148-177). London, England: Continuum.

Benati, A., Lee, J., & McNulty, E. (2010). Exploring the effects of processing instruction on a discourse-level guided composition with the Spanish subjunctive after the adverb cuando. In A. Benati, & J. F. Lee (Eds.), Processing instruction and discourse (pp.97-147) London: Continuum.

Benati, A., & Lee, J. (2015). Processing instruction: New insights after twenty years of theory, research and application [Special issue]. International Review of Applied Linguistics, 53(2), 87-257.

Cheng, A. C. (2002). The effects of processing instruction on the acquisition of ser and estar. Hispania, 85, 308-323.

Cheng, A. C. (2004). Processing instruction and Spanish ser and estar: Forms with semantic- aspectual value. In B. VanPatten, (Ed.), Processing instruction: Theory, research, and commentary (pp.119-141) Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

Faerch, C., & Kasper, G. (1986). Cognitive Dimensions of Language Transfer. In E.  Kellerman, & M. S. Sharwood Smith, (Eds.),
Crosslinguistic Influence in Second

Language Acquisition (pp. 49-65). New York, USA: Pergamon Press.

Farley, A.P. (2004). The relative effects of processing instruction and meaning-based output instruction’. In B. VanPatten, (Ed.), Processing instruction: Theory, research, and commentary (pp. 227-239). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Fillmore, L. W. (1976). The second time around: Cognitive and social strategies in second language acquisition, (Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation). Stanford University, Stanford, California.

Klein, W. (1986). Second Language Acquisition. Cambridge, England: Cambridge  University Press.

Lee, J. (2004). On the generalizability, limits, and potential future directions of

processing instruction research. In B. VanPatten, (Ed.), Processing instruction:

 Theory, research, and commentary (pp.311-323). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

Lee, J., & Benati, A. (2007). Delivering processing instruction in classrooms and in

virtual contexts: Research and practice. London, England: Equinox.

Lee, J., & Benati, A. (2009). Research and perspectives on processing instruction. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.

Lee, J., & VanPatten, B. (1995). Workbook to accompany making communicative  language teaching happen. New York, USA: McGraw-Hill.

LoCoco, V. (1987). Learner comprehension of oral and written sentences in German and Spanish: the importance of word order.
In B. VanPatten, T. Dvorak, & J. F. Lee, (Eds.), Foreign Language Learning: A Research Perspective (pp.119-129). Rowley, MA: Newbury House.

Sanz, C. (1997). Experimental tasks in SLA research: Amount of production, modality, memory, and production processes.” In A. T. Pérez-Leroux, & W. R. Glass (Eds.), Contemporary perspectives on the acquisition of Spanish: Production, processing and comprehension (pp. 41-56).
Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press.

Sanz, C. (2004). Computer delivered implicit versus explicit feedback in processing instruction. In B. VanPatten, (Ed.), Processing instruction: Theory, research, and commentary (pp.241-255). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

Sanz, C., & Morgan-Short, K. (2004). Positive evidence versus explicit rule presentation and explicit negative feedback: A computer-assisted study. Language Learning, 54(1), 35-78. DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-9922.2004.00248.x

VanPatten, B. (1996). Input processing and grammar instruction: Theory and research. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.

Van Patten, B. (2002). Processing instruction: An update. Language Learning, 52(4), 755- 803.

VanPatten, B. (2004). Processing instruction: Theory, research, and commentary.

Mahwah, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates

VanPatten, B. (2015). Foundations of processing. International Review of Applied  Linguistics, 53, 91-109.

VanPatten, B., & Cadierno, T. (1993). Explicit instruction and input processing. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 15, 225-241.

VanPatten, B., & Oikennon, S. (1996). Explanation vs. structured input in processing   instruction. Studies in Second Language Acquisition,18, 495-510.

VanPatten, B., & Sanz, C. (1995). From input to output: Processing instruction and communicative tasks. In F.R. Eckman, D. Highland, P.W. Lee, & J. Mileham,
R. Weber (Eds.), Second language acquisition theory and pedagogy  (pp.169-185). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

VanPatten, B., & Wong, W. (2004). Processing instruction and the French causative: Another replication. In B. VanPatten (Ed.), Processing instruction: Theory, research, and commentary (pp.99-120) Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

Wong, W. (2004). Processing instruction in French: The roles of explicit information and structured input. In B. VanPatten (Ed.), Processing instruction: Theory, research, and commentary (pp. 187-205) Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

Wong, W., & Ito, K. (2018). The effects of processing instruction and traditional instruction on L2 online processing of the causative construction in French: An eye-tracking study. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 40(2), 241-268. Doi:10.1017/S0272263117000274

Share on facebook
Facebook
Share on twitter
Twitter
Share on linkedin
LinkedIn
Share on tumblr
Tumblr
Share on reddit
Reddit
Share on email
Email
Share on stumbleupon
StumbleUpon
Share on digg
Digg
Received: 11/8/2020  
Accepted: 2/22/2021
Published: 3/24/2021   
https://dx.doi.org/10.24093/awej/vol12no1.19 
Share on facebook
Share on twitter
Share on linkedin
Share on tumblr
Share on digg
Share on email
Share on reddit
Share on stumbleupon
Share on vk

Najat Alabdullah pursued her Bachelor degree in English Language linguistics from Kuwait University (2012). She worked as a translator in the Foreign Relations Department in the Ministry of Social Affairs in Kuwait (2013-2016). Also, she worked as a teacher in the Ministry of Education in Kuwait (2012-2013/2016-2021). In addition, she pursued her MA TESOL from the American University of Sharjah (2018-2020). https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8075-4504