Perspectives on Individual Characteristics and Foreign Language Education 2012
DOI: 10.1515/9781614510932.27
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Chapter 2. Attention, awareness, and individual differences in language learning

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

14
302
1
41

Year Published

2014
2014
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
7
2
1

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 269 publications
(358 citation statements)
references
References 41 publications
14
302
1
41
Order By: Relevance
“…The rationale for exploring the effect of teaching on learners' pragmatic development, as Rose (2005) notes, has been underscored by Noticing Hypothesis (Schmidt, 1990), contending that simple exposure to the target language is not enough since there are pragmatic functions and relevant contextual factors which are often not salient to learners and so less likely to be noticed even after exposure for a long period of time. Unlike Krashen (1985) and Reber (1989) who claim that unconscious learning processes are better than conscious ones and are responsible for most L2 production, some other second language acquisition researchers argue that making certain forms noticeable through consciousness raising (CR) and drawing learners' attention to these forms can help learners in the language acquisition process (R. Ellis, 1995;Rod Ellis, 2008;Schmidt, 1990Schmidt, , 1993aSchmidt, , 1993bSchmidt, , 1995Schmidt, , 2001Schmidt, , 2012Smith, 1993). In earlier research on CR, the focus was on grammar instruction and learning (Fotos, 1993(Fotos, , 1994Smith, 1993), while Rose (1994) proposed pragmatic consciousness raising (PCR) as an important approach towards teaching pragmatics.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The rationale for exploring the effect of teaching on learners' pragmatic development, as Rose (2005) notes, has been underscored by Noticing Hypothesis (Schmidt, 1990), contending that simple exposure to the target language is not enough since there are pragmatic functions and relevant contextual factors which are often not salient to learners and so less likely to be noticed even after exposure for a long period of time. Unlike Krashen (1985) and Reber (1989) who claim that unconscious learning processes are better than conscious ones and are responsible for most L2 production, some other second language acquisition researchers argue that making certain forms noticeable through consciousness raising (CR) and drawing learners' attention to these forms can help learners in the language acquisition process (R. Ellis, 1995;Rod Ellis, 2008;Schmidt, 1990Schmidt, , 1993aSchmidt, , 1993bSchmidt, , 1995Schmidt, , 2001Schmidt, , 2012Smith, 1993). In earlier research on CR, the focus was on grammar instruction and learning (Fotos, 1993(Fotos, , 1994Smith, 1993), while Rose (1994) proposed pragmatic consciousness raising (PCR) as an important approach towards teaching pragmatics.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Extra linguistic refers to language situations outside of linguistic environment, but in language learning, extra linguistic element is still taken into account as it gives information about motivation, emotion, attitude, personality and others, which has been proven to help a student to master a certain language (Schmidt, 2010). In this study, it is predicted that students; attitude is going to influence the second language learning among the foreign students in five universities in Malaysia.…”
Section: International Journal Of Asian Social Sciencementioning
confidence: 96%
“…However, due to all characteristics of second and especially foreign language learning explicit knowledge is more likely to be developed, and learners seem to have some benefits from it (see Bialystok, 1978;DeKeyser, 1997;Ellis, N., 2005;Ellis, R. 1997;Lightbown et al, 1993;Lightbown & Spada, 2008;Muranoi, 2000;Schmidt, 2010), while metalinguistic knowledge appears to be of very limited use (see Han & Ellis, 1998). Therefore, it seems that efforts should be primarily made in terms of implicit knowledge development.…”
Section: Literature Reviewmentioning
confidence: 99%