Language Production and Reception: A Processability Theory Study

Abstract

Pienemann's Processability Theory (PT) predicts an order of emergence of morphosyntactic elements in second language (L2) production data. This research investigates whether the same order of emergence can be detected in L2 reception data, specifically, data from a timed audio grammaticality judgment task (GJT). The results from three related studies are reported. Overall, evidence from two groups of learners of English as an L2 who took an audio GJT does not demonstrate the order of emergence predicted by PT. However, results from a production task followed the predicted order. These findings suggest that the processing routines in PT are operative during production only, raising questions about PT and the interconnectedness of the productive and receptive systems.

Production and Comprehension in Processability Theory

“…That is, it is not possible with these methodologies to measure the beginning moments of comprehension. Indeed, it is likely that the use of a variety of methodologies will be necessary to better understand how emergence in comprehension can be measured (see Buyl & Housen, 2015 and Spinner, 2013 for further discussion on measuring emergence with receptive tasks).…”

“…Unlike the previously described studies, Spinner (2013) included all PT stages, other than stage 1. She used an audio GJT with two groups of ESL learners of varied proficiency ( n = 114).…”

“…Several recent studies have explored this question, with mixed results. For example, both Spinner (2013) and Buyl (ms.) used grammaticality judgment tasks (GJTs) to investigate whether the order of acquisition predicted by PT for production also extends to receptive tasks. Neither study found the PT order to be borne out.…”

Discussion: How Different Can Perspectives on L2 Development Be?

“…Note that almost all empirical research pertains to language production. An exception is Spinner's (2013) study, which provided support for PT with respect to language production but not with respect to language reception. Input Processing theory (VanPatten, 2012) and MOGUL (Sharwood Smith & Truscott, 2014) include language reception but do not propose stages of L2 learning.…”

“…At the same time, however, it surprises me that no falsifications of its claims seem to have been obtained and published yet, given the considerable amount of research conducted under the PT framework. (Some concerns with PT were expressed in Bohnacker [2004], Dyson [2009], Glahn et al [2001], and Spinner [2013].) Is it true then that, as of today, nobody has found that a morphosyntactic phenomenon requiring information exchange between constituents emerged before a structure requiring information exchange within a constituent?…”