BackgroundOlder adults are at risk for loneliness, and interventions to promote social connectedness are needed to directly address this problem. The nature of interventions aimed to affect the distinct, subjective concepts of loneliness/social connectedness has not been clearly described. The purpose of this review was to map the literature on interventions and strategies to affect loneliness/social connectedness for older adults.MethodsA comprehensive scoping review was conducted. Six electronic databases were searched from inception in July 2015, resulting in 5530 unique records. Standardized inclusion/exclusion criteria were applied, resulting in a set of 44 studies (reported in 54 articles) for further analysis. Data were extracted to describe the interventions and strategies, and the context of the included studies. Analytic techniques included calculating frequencies, manifest content analysis and meta-summary.ResultsInterventions were described or evaluated in 39 studies, and five studies described strategies to affect loneliness/social connectedness of older adults or their caregivers in a qualitative descriptive study. The studies were often conducted in the United States (38.6%) among community dwelling (54.5%), cognitively intact (31.8%), and female-majority (86.4%) samples. Few focused on non-white participants (4.5%). Strategies described most often were engaging in purposeful activity and maintaining contact with one’s social network. Of nine intervention types identified, the most frequently described were One-to-One Personal Contact and Group Activity. Authors held divergent views of why the same type of intervention might impact social connectedness, but social contact was the most frequently conceptualized influencing factor targeted, both within and across intervention types.ConclusionsResearch to test the divergent theories of why interventions work is needed to advance understanding of intervention mechanisms. Innovative conceptualizations of intervention targets are needed, such as purposeful activity, that move beyond the current focus on the objective social network as a way to promote social connectedness for older adults.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (10.1186/s12877-018-0897-x) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

No abstract

Two cross-sectional studies (N = 70; N = 91) used a replication design to investigate the degree to which adult Francophone ESL learners' use of tense/aspect markers in past contexts supported the predictions of the aspect hypothesis (Andersen & Shirai, 1994;Bardovi-Harlig, 1994) and the degree to which it showed L1 influence. Consistent with the aspect hypothesis, the learners were significantly more successful in using simple past with telics, struggled most with statives, and, in their nontarget responses, preferred progressive for activities and present for statives. The role of the L1 was restricted to the learners' association of nontarget perfect (a French-influenced form) with telics. The interpretation of the findings takes into account methodological issues and developmental constraints.

No abstract

The purpose of this study was to determine whether it is possible to distinguish between "difficult" and "easy" constructions for second language (L2) learners by examining characteristics of the structures as they occur in aural input. In a multidimensional analysis of 3 English structures with different acquisition profiles-the simple past, possessive determiners his/her , and the progressive aspect-we examined the phonological, morphosyntactic, and lexicosemantic characteristics of the forms as they occurred in a 110,000-word corpus of instructional talk to L2 learners. We analyzed the type/token distributions of the forms, their lexical properties, and their perceptual salience. Our findings revealed key input factors that distinguished between the early-acquired progressive, on the one hand, and the later-acquired past and his/her determiners, on the other hand. These results lend support to theoretical accounts of the input-acquisition relationship and also generate hypotheses for manipulating instructional input to increase the salience of opaque constructions. WHAT CONTRIBUTES TO MAKINGA LINguistic structure easy or difficult to acquire? More The Modern Language Journal, 93, iii, (2009) 0026-7902/09/336-353 $1.50/0 C 2009 The Modern Language Journalspecifically, what can a close examination of the spoken input to which learners are exposed tell us about this easy/difficult conundrum? To address this issue, we took a multidimensional approach to the analysis of a 110,000-word corpus of teacher talk to second language (L2) learners, in contexts where the classroom constituted the

The articles in this special issue explore how the acquisition of linguistic constructions as form-function mappings is affected by the distribution and saliency of forms in oral input, by their functional interpretations, and by the reliabilities of their form-function mappings. They consider the psycholinguistics of language learning following general cognitive principles of category learning, with schematic constructions emerging from usage. They analyze how learning is driven by the frequency and frequency distribution of exemplars within construction, the salience of their form, the significance of their functional interpretation, the match of their meaning to the construction prototype, and the reliability of their mappings. These investigations address a range of morphological and syntactic constructions in instructed, uninstructed, and laboratory settings. They include both experimental and corpus-based approaches (some conducted longitudinally) and consider the relationship between input and acquisition in the short term and over time, with a particular emphasis on spoken input directed to second and foreign language learners.

English learners of French whose first language (L1) does not mark the perfective/imperfective distinction have shown verb semantic influence and an overall preference for perfective over imperfective in their use of second language (L2) tense-aspect markers. This study investigated whether learners whose L1 marks the perfective/imperfective distinction would exhibit similar acquisition profiles. Hispanophones (n = 17) and Anglophones (n = 15) at similar levels of French L2 proficiency completed a 68-item cloze task with equal numbers of perfective and imperfective contexts distributed across 4 semantic categories: stative, activity, accomplishment, and achievements. In a 20-minute retrospective interview, a subsample of the participants (8 Hispanophones, 11 Anglophones) commented on factors influencing their tense-aspect choices. An ANOVA of 1,012 predicates revealed that unlike the Anglophones, the Hispanophones did not prefer perfective over imperfective, and they were also less influenced by verb semantics. The learners' comments suggest that the Hispanophones made effective use of L1-L2 similarities, whereas the Anglophones appealed to verb semantics and partially understood pedagogical rules, which were frequently associated with inappropriate uses of the forms.English speaker: We don't make such a distinction in English, so I didn't know whether, here, in French one would say il y avait [imperfective] or il y a eu [perfective].

No abstract