Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-fbnjt Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-17T17:31:36.415Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

BRIDGING THE GAP

Cognitive and Social Approaches to Research in Second Language Learning and Teaching

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 March 2014

Jan H. Hulstijn
Affiliation:
University of Amsterdam
Richard F. Young*
Affiliation:
University of Wisconsin-Madison
Lourdes Ortega
Affiliation:
Georgetown University
Martha Bigelow
Affiliation:
University of Minnesota
Robert DeKeyser
Affiliation:
University of Maryland
Nick C. Ellis
Affiliation:
University of Michigan
James P. Lantolf
Affiliation:
The Pennsylvania State University
Alison Mackey
Affiliation:
Georgetown University and Lancaster University
Steven Talmy
Affiliation:
University of British Columbia
*
*All correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Richard F. Young, Department of English, University of Wisconsin-Madison, 600 N. Park St., Madison, WI 53706, USA. E-mail: rfyoung@wisc.edu

Abstract

For some, research in learning and teaching of a second language (L2) runs the risk of disintegrating into irreconcilable approaches to L2 learning and use. On the one side, we find researchers investigating linguistic-cognitive issues, often using quantitative research methods including inferential statistics; on the other side, we find researchers working on the basis of sociocultural or sociocognitive views, often using qualitative research methods including case studies and ethnography. Is there a gap in research in L2 learning and teaching? The present article developed from an invited colloquium at the 2013 meeting of the American Association for Applied Linguistics in Dallas, Texas. It comprises nine single-authored pieces, with an introduction and a conclusion by the coeditors. Our overarching goals are (a) to raise awareness of the limitations of addressing only the cognitive or only the social in research on L2 learning and teaching and (b) to explore ways of bridging and/or productively appreciating the cognitive-social gap in research. Collectively, the nine contributions advance the possibility that the approaches are not irreconcilable and that, in fact, cognitive researchers and social researchers will benefit by acknowledging insights and methods from one another.

Type
State of the Art
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2014 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Abrahamsson, N., & Hyltenstam, K. (2008). The robustness of aptitude effects in near-native second language acquisition. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 30, 481509.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Allwood, C. M. (2012). The distinction between qualitative and quantitative research methods is problematic. Quality & Quantity, 46, 14171429.Google Scholar
Alvesson, M., & Skoldberg, K. (2009). Reflexive methodology: New vistas for qualitative research (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
Bataille, G. (1993). Literature and evil (Bolt, L. A., Trans.). Albany: SUNY Press. (Original work published 1957, French: La littérature et le mal)Google Scholar
Behrens, H. (2009). Usage-based and emergentist approaches to language acquisition. Linguistics, 47, 383411.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beretta, A., Crookes, G., Gregg, K. R., & Long, M. H. (1994). A comment from some contributors to Volume 14, Issue 3. Applied Linguistics, 15, 347.Google Scholar
Bergen, B., & Chang, N. (2012). Embodied construction grammar. In Trousdale, G. & Hoffmann, T. (Eds.), Oxford handbook of construction grammar. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Bhabha, H. (2004). The location of culture (reprint edition with a new preface by the author). New York: Routledge. (Original work published 1994)Google Scholar
Bigelow, M. (2007). Social and cultural capital at school: The case of a Somali teenage girl with limited formal schooling. In Faux, N. R. (Ed.), Low-educated adult second language and literacy acquisition proceedings of symposium (pp. 722). Richmond, VA: Literacy Institute at Virginia Commonwealth University.Google Scholar
Bigelow, M. (2010). Mogadishu on the Mississippi: Language, racialized identity and education in a new land. Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar
Bigelow, M. (2011). (Con)texts for cultural and linguistic hybridity among Somali diaspora youth. The New Educator, 7, 2743.Google Scholar
Bigelow, M., delMas, R., Hansen, K., & Tarone, E. (2006). Literacy and the processing of oral recasts in SLA. TESOL Quarterly, 40, 665689.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bigelow, M., & King, K. A. (in press). The power of print literacy among Somali youth. Writing Systems Research.Google Scholar
Bigelow, M., & Tarone, E. (2004). The role of literacy level in second language acquisition: Doesn’t who we study determine what we know? TESOL Quarterly, 38, 689700.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Block, D. (1996). Not so fast: Some thoughts on theory culling, relativism, accepted findings and the heart and soul of SLA. Applied Linguistics, 17, 684689.Google Scholar
Block, D. (2003). The social turn in second language acquisition. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.Google Scholar
Boivin, N. (2008). Material cultures, material minds: The impact of things on human thought, society, and evolution. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Bratman, M. (1992). Shared cooperative activity. The Philosophical Review, 101, 327341.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bronson, M. C., & Watson-Gegeo, K. A. (2008). The critical moment: Language socialization and the (re)visioning of first and second language learning. In Duff, P. A. & Hornberger, N. H. (Eds.), Encyclopedia of language and education: Vol. 8. Language socialization (2nd ed., pp. 4355). New York: Springer.Google Scholar
Bybee, J. (2010). Language, usage, and cognition. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Bygate, M. (2005). Applied linguistics: A pragmatic discipline? A generic discipline? Applied Linguistics, 26, 568581.Google Scholar
Casasanto, D. (2011). Different bodies, different minds: The body specificity of language and thought. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 20, 378383.Google Scholar
Cavalcanti, M. C. (1983). The pragmatics of FL reader-text interaction: Key lexical items as source of potential reading problem (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Lancaster.Google Scholar
Chapelle, C. (Ed.). (2013). The encyclopedia of applied linguistics. Oxford, UK: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar
Clark, A. (1998). Being there: Putting brain, body, and world together again. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Clark, A. (1999). An embodied cognitive science? Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 3, 345351.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clark, H. H. (1996). Using language. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Cohen, R. S., & Schnelle, T. (Eds.). (1985). Cognition and fact: Materials on Ludwik Fleck. Dordrecht: D. Reidel.Google Scholar
Cook, V., & Bassetti, B. (Eds.). (2011). Language and bilingual cognition. New York: Psychology Press.Google Scholar
Corson, D. (1997). Critical realism: An emancipatory philosophy for applied linguistics? Applied Linguistics, 18, 166188.Google Scholar
Coventry, K. R., & Garrod, S. C. (2004). Saying, seeing and acting: The psychological semantics of spatial prepositions. Hove, UK: Psychology Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Croft, W., & Cruise, A. (2004). Cognitive linguistics. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Crookes, G. (2005). Resources for incorporating action research as critique into applied linguistics graduate education. Modern Language Journal, 89, 467475.Google Scholar
Cumming, A. (2013). Multiple dimensions of academic language and literacy development. Language Learning, 63(S1), 130152.Google Scholar
Darwin, C. (1928). The origin of species. London: Everyman’s Library. (Original work published 1859)Google Scholar
de Bot, K., Lowie, W., & Verspoor, M. (2007). A dynamic systems theory to second language acquisition. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 10, 721.Google Scholar
de Saussure, F. (1983). Course in general linguistics (Harris, R., Trans.). La Salle, IL: Open Court (Original work compiled by C. Bally & A. Sechehaye, 1916, in French: Cours de linguistique générale)Google Scholar
Duff, P., & Talmy, S. (2011). Language socialization approaches to second language acquisition: Social, cultural, and linguistic development in additional languages. In Atkinson, D. (Ed.), Alternative approaches to second language acquisition (pp. 95116). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Dylan, B. (1975). Tangled up in blue. On Blood on the tracks [Album]. New York: Sony Music Entertainment.Google Scholar
Edge, J. (2004). Of displacive and augmentative discourse, new enemies, and old doubts. TESOL Quarterly, 34, 717721.Google Scholar
Ellis, N. C. (1998). Emergentism, connectionism and language learning. Language Learning, 48, 631664.Google Scholar
Ellis, N. C. (2005). At the interface: Dynamic interactions of explicit and implicit language knowledge. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 27, 305352.Google Scholar
Ellis, N. C. (2008). The dynamics of second language emergence: Cycles of language use, language change, and language acquisition. Modern Language Journal, 41, 232249.Google Scholar
Ellis, N. C., & Larsen-Freeman, D. (2006). Language emergence: Implications for applied linguistics (Introduction to the special issue). Applied Linguistics, 27, 558589.Google Scholar
Ellis, N. C., & Larsen-Freeman, D. (Eds.). (2009). Language as a complex adaptive system. Boston, MA: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar
Ellis, N. C., O’Donnell, M. B., & Römer, U. (2013). Usage-based language: Investigating the latent structures that underpin acquisition. Language Learning, 63(S1), 2551.Google Scholar
Ellis, R. (2010). Cognitive, social, and psychological dimensions of corrective feedback. In Batstone, R. (Ed.), Sociocognitive perspectives on language use and language learning (pp. 151165). New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
ESF Standing Committee for the Social Sciences. (2013). The good, the bad, and the ugly: Understanding collaboration between the social sciences and the life sciences (Strategic Workshop Report). Strasbourg, France: European Science Foundation. Retrieved from http://www.esf.org/hosting-experts/scientific-review-groups/social-sciences/activities/strategic-activities/the-good-the-bad-and-the-ugly.htmlGoogle Scholar
Evans, G. W., & Schamberg, M. A. (2009). Childhood poverty, chronic stress, and adult working memory. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 106, 65456549.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fleck, L. (1979). Genesis and development of a scientific fact (Trenn, T. J. & Merton, R. K., Eds.; Bradley, T. F. & Trenn, T. J., Trans.). Chicago: Chicago University Press. (Original work published 1935, German: Entstehung und Entwicklung einer wissenschaftlichen Tatsache: Einführung in die Lehre vom Denkstil und Denkkollektiv)Google Scholar
Fox, B., Wouk, F., Hayashi, M., Fincke, S., Sorjonen, M.-L., Laakso, M., & Hernandez, W. F. (2009). A cross-linguistic investigation of the site of initiation in same-turn self-repair. In Sidnell, J. (Ed.), Conversation analysis: Comparative perspectives (pp. 60103). New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Frith, C. (2010). What is consciousness for? Pragmatics and Cognition, 18, 497551.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Frith, C. D., & Frith, U. (2008). Implicit and explicit processes in social cognition. Neuron, 60, 503510.Google Scholar
Frith, U., & Frith, C. D. (2010). The social brain: Allowing humans to boldly go where no other species has been. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society, 365, 165175.Google Scholar
Gardner, R. C. (1985). Social psychology and second language learning: The role of attitude and motivation. London: Arnold.Google Scholar
Gass, S. M., & Mackey, A. (2000). Stimulated recall methodology in second language research. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Gelfand, M. J., Raver, J. L., Nishii, L., Leslie, L. M., Lun, J., Lim, B. C.,... Yamaguchi, S. (2011). Differences between tight and loose cultures: A 33-nation study. Science, 332, 11001104.Google Scholar
Giddens, A. (1976). New rules of sociological method: A positive critique of interpretative sociologies. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
Giddens, A. (1984). The constitution of society: Outline of the theory of structuration. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Giroux, H. A. (1992). Language, difference, and curriculum theory: Beyond the politics of clarity. Theory into Practice, 31, 219227.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gregg, K. R., Long, M. H., Jordan, G., & Beretta, A. (1997). Rationality and its discontents in SLA. Applied Linguistics, 18, 539559.Google Scholar
Grégoire, A. (1937–1947). L’Apprentissage du langage [The acquisition of language] (Vols. 1–2). Liège-Paris: E. Droz.Google Scholar
Habermas, J. (1971). Knowledge and human interests. Boston, MA: Beacon Press. (Original work published 1968, German: Erkenntnis und Interesse)Google Scholar
Habermas, J. (1984). The theory of communicative action: Vol. 1. Reason and the rationalization of society (McCarthy, T., Trans.). Boston, MA: Beacon Press. (Original work published 1981, German: Theorie des kommunikativen Handelns: Band 1. Handlungsrationalität und gesellschaftliche Rationalisierung)Google Scholar
Haraway, D. (1988). Situated knowledges: The science question in feminism and the privilege of partial perspective. Feminist Studies, 14, 575599.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hofweber, T. (2013). Logic and ontology. In Zalta, E. N. (Ed.), The Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy (Spring 2013 ed.). Retrieved from http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/spr2013/entries/logic-ontology/Google Scholar
Holbrook, J. B. (2013). What is interdisciplinary communication? Reflections on the very idea of disciplinary integration. Synthese, 190, 18651879.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Holland, J. H. (1998). Emergence: From chaos to order. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Holmes, J., Gathercole, S. E., & Dunning, D. L. (2009). Adaptive training leads to sustained enhancement of poor working memory in children. Developmental Science, 12, F9F15.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Howe, K. R. (2003). Closing methodological divides: Toward democratic educational research. New York: Kluwer.Google Scholar
Howe, K. R. (2004). A critique of experimentalism. Qualitative Inquiry, 10(4), 4261.Google Scholar
Howe, K. R. (2012). Mixed methods, triangulation, and causal explanation. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 6, 8996.Google Scholar
Hulstijn, J. H. (2013). Is the second language acquisition discipline disintegrating? Language Teaching, 46, 511517.Google Scholar
Janesick, V. J. (1994). The dance of qualitative research design: Metaphor, methodolatry, and meaning. In Denzin, N. K. & Lincoln, Y. S. (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (1st ed., pp. 209219). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
Janesick, V. J. (2011). “Stretching” exercises for qualitative researchers (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
Jordan, G. (2004). Theory construction in second language acquisition. Amsterdam: Benjamins.Google Scholar
Kasper, G., & Wagner, J. (2011). A conversation-analytic approach to second language acquisition. In Atkinson, D. (Ed.), Alternative approaches to second language acquisition (pp. 117142). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Kirschner, S. R. (2013). The many challenges of theorizing subjectivity. Culture & Psychology, 19, 225236.Google Scholar
Kuhl, P. K. (2007). Is speech-learning gated by the “social brain”? Developmental Science, 10, 110120.Google Scholar
Kuhn, T. S. (1977). The essential tension: Selected studies in scientific tradition and change. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kuhn, T. S. (1996). The structure of scientific revolutions (3rd ed.). Chicago: University of Chicago Press. (Original work published 1962)Google Scholar
Lambert, W. E. (1972). Language, psychology, and culture. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
Langacker, R. W. (2000). A dynamic usage-based model. In Barlow, M. & Kemmer, S. (Eds.), Usage-based models of language (pp. 163). Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications.Google Scholar
Lantolf, J. P., & Poehner, M. E. (2014). Sociocultural theory and the pedagogical imperative in L2 education: Vygotskian praxis and the research/practice divide. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Lantolf, J., & Thorne, S. (2006). Sociocultural theory and the genesis of second language development. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Lee, N., Mikesell, L., Joaquin, A. D. L., Mates, A. W., & Schumann, J. (2009). The interactional instinct: The evolution and acquisition of language. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Leontiev, A. N. (2004). Los principios del desarrollo mental y el problema del retraso mental [The principles of mental development and the problem of mental retardation]. In Cecchini, M. (Ed.), Luria, Leontiev, Vigotsky: Psicologia y pedagogia (pp. 8198). Madrid: Ediciones Akal.Google Scholar
Leopold, W. F. (1939–1949). Speech development of a bilingual child: A linguist’s record (Vols. 1–4). Evanston, IL: Northwestern University Press.Google Scholar
Lewis, M. M. (1936). Infant speech: A study of the beginnings of language. London: K. Paul, Trench, Trübner.Google Scholar
Lightbown, P. M. (2000). Classroom SLA research and second language teaching. Applied Linguistics, 21, 431462.Google Scholar
Lugones, M. (2003). Pilgrimages/Peregrinajes: Theorizing coalition against multiple oppressions. New York: Rowman & Littlefield.Google Scholar
Lugones, M. (2006). On complex communication. Hypatia, 21, 7585.Google Scholar
Luria, A. R. (1976). Cognitive development: Its cultural and social foundations. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Lyotard, J.-F. (1988). The differend: Phrases in dispute (Van Den Abbeele, G., Trans.). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press. (Original work published 1983, French: Le différend)Google Scholar
MacIntyre, P. D. (2002). Motivation, anxiety and emotion in second language acquisition. In Robinson, P. (Ed.), Individual differences and instructed language learning (pp. 4568). Amsterdam: Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mackey, A. (2012). Input, interaction and corrective feedback in L2 learning. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
MacWhinney, B. (1991). The CHILDES project: Tools for analyzing talk. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
MacWhinney, B. (Ed.). (1999). The emergence of language. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Maritain, J. (2005). An introduction to philosophy. Lanham, MD: Rowland & Littlefield.Google Scholar
McNamara, T. (2012). Poststructuralism and its challenges for applied linguistics. Applied Linguistics, 33, 473482.Google Scholar
Moll, H., & Tomasello, M. (2007). Cooperation and human cognition: The Vygotskian intelligence hypothesis. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B, 362, 639648.Google Scholar
Norton, B. (1997). Language, identity, and the ownership of English. TESOL Quarterly, 31, 409430.Google Scholar
Novack, G. (1978). Polemics in Marxist philosophy. New York: Pathfinder.Google Scholar
Ortega, L. (2011). SLA after the social turn: Where cognitivism and its alternatives stand. In Atkinson, D. (Ed.), Alternative approaches in second language acquisition (pp. 167180). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Page, S. E. (2008). The difference: How the power of diversity creates better groups, firms, schools, and societies. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Page, S. E. (2010). Diversity and complexity. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Pascale, C.-M. (2011). Cartographies of knowledge: Exploring qualitative epistemologies. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
Pennycook, A. (2001). Critical applied linguistics: A critical introduction. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Pennycook, A. D. (2010). Critical and alternative directions in applied linguistics. Australian Review of Applied Linguistics, 33(2), 118.Google Scholar
Philips, S. U. (2004). The organization of ideological diversity in discourse: Modern and neotraditional visions of the Tongan state. American Ethnologist, 31, 231250.Google Scholar
Philp, J., & Mackey, A. (2010). Interaction research: What can socially informed approaches offer to cognitivists (and vice versa)? In Batstone, R. (Ed.), Sociocognitive perspectives on language use and language learning (pp. 210228). New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Pienemann, M. (1984). Psychological constraints on the teachability of languages. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 6, 186214.Google Scholar
Pienemann, M. (1987). Determining the influence of instruction on L2 speech processing. Australian Review of Applied Linguistics, 10, 83113.Google Scholar
Pienemann, M. (1998). Language processing and second language development: Processability theory. Amsterdam: Benjamins.Google Scholar
Popper, K. R. (1959). The logic of scientific discovery. London: Hutchinson.Google Scholar
Preston, D. R. (1989). Sociolinguistics and second language acquisition. Oxford, UK: Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar
Quine, W. V. (1969). Ontological relativity and other essays. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
Révész, A., & Gilabert, R. (2013, March). SLA methodological advances in TBLT research: Measurement of task demands and processes. Colloquium organized at the annual conference of the American Association for Applied Linguistics, Dallas, TX.Google Scholar
Robinson, P. (2001). Task complexity, task difficulty, and task production: Exploring interactions in a componential framework. Applied Linguistics, 22, 2757.Google Scholar
Robinson, P., & Ellis, N. C. (Eds.). (2008). A handbook of cognitive linguistics and second language acquisition. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Robinson, P., & Gilabert, R. (2007). Task complexity, the Cognition Hypothesis and second language learning and performance. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 45, 161176.Google Scholar
Rosch, E., Varela, F., & Thompson, E. (1991). The embodied mind. Boston, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Rosenshine, B., & Furst, N. (1973). The use of direct observation to study teaching. In Travers, R. M. W. (Ed.), Second handbook for research on teaching (pp. 122183). Chicago: Rand McNally.Google Scholar
Sady, W. (2012). Ludwik Fleck. In Zalta, E. N. (Ed.), The Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy (Summer 2012 ed.). Retrieved from http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/sum2012/entries/fleck/Google Scholar
Schegloff, E. A. (1993). Reflection on quantification in the study of conversation. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 26, 99128.Google Scholar
Schmidt, R. (1990). The role of consciousness in second language learning. Applied Linguistics, 11, 129158.Google Scholar
Sfard, A. (1998). On two metaphors for learning and the dangers of choosing just one. Educational Researcher, 27(2), 413.Google Scholar
Skehan, P., & Foster, P. (2007). Complexity, accuracy, fluency and lexis in task-based performance: A meta-analysis of the Ealing research. In Daele, S. V., Housen, A., Kuiken, F., Pierrard, M., & Vedder, I. (Eds.), Complexity, accuracy, and fluency in second language use, learning, and teaching. Brussels: University of Brussels Press.Google Scholar
Slobin, D. I. (1997). The origins of grammaticizable notions: Beyond the individual mind. In Slobin, D. I. (Ed.), The crosslinguistic study of language acquisition (Vol. 5, pp. 265323). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Spivey, M. (2006). The continuity of mind. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Storch, N. (2013). Collaborative language learning. In Chapelle, C. (Ed.), Encyclopedia of applied linguistics (pp. 725730). Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar
Tarone, E. (2007). Sociolinguistic approaches to second language acquisition research—1997–2007. Modern Language Journal, 91(s1), 837848.Google Scholar
Tarone, E., Bigelow, M., & Hansen, K. (2009). Literacy and second language oracy. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Tomasello, M. (1999). The cultural origins of human cognition. Boston, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Tomasello, M. (2003). Constructing a language. Boston, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Tomasello, M. (2008). The origins of human communication. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Tomasello, M., & Stahl, D. (2004). Sampling children’s spontaneous speech: How much is enough? Journal of Child Language, 31, 101121.Google Scholar
Tompkins, J. (1988). Fighting words: Unlearning to write the critical essay. Georgia Review, 42, 585590.Google Scholar
Trousdale, G., & Hoffmann, T. (Eds.). (2013). Oxford handbook of construction grammar. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Tulviste, P. (1991). The cultural-historical development of verbal thinking (Hall, M. J., Trans.). Commack, NY: Nova Science.Google Scholar
van Lier, L. (1994). Forks and hope: Pursuing understanding in different ways. Applied Linguistics, 15, 328346.Google Scholar
Varela, F. J., Thompson, E., & Rosch, E. (1991). The embodied mind: Cognitive science and human experience. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Vygotsky, L. S. (1997). The collected works of L. S. Vygotsky (Rieber, R. W. & Wollock, J., Eds.; Vol. 3). New York: Plenum.Google Scholar
Watkins, C. (2000). The American Heritage dictionary of Indo-European roots (2nd ed.). Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin.Google Scholar
Weir, R. H. (1962). Language in the crib. The Hague: Mouton.Google Scholar
Wertsch, J. V. (1985). Vygotsky and the social formation of mind. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Wertsch, J. V. (1998). Mind as action. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
White, L. (2007). Linguistic theory, Universal Grammar, and second language acquisition. In VanPatten, B. & Williams, J. (Eds.), Theories in second language acquisition (pp. 3755). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Widdowson, H. (2012). Closing the gap, changing the subject. In Huttner, J., Mehlmauer-Larcher, B., Reichl, S., & Schiftner, B. (Eds.), Theory and practice in EFL teacher education: Bridging the gap (pp. 315). Bristol, UK: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
Wittgenstein, L. (2001). Philosophical investigations (Anscombe, G. E. M., Trans.; 3rd ed.). Oxford, UK: Basil Blackwell. (Original work published 1953, German: Philosophische Untersuchungen)Google Scholar
Young, R. F. (2009). Discursive practice in language learning and teaching. Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar
Yurkovets, I. (1984). The philosophy of dialectical materialism. Moscow: Progress Press.Google Scholar
Zanotto, M. S., Cameron, L., & Cavalcanti, M. C. (2008). Applied linguistic approaches to metaphor. In Zanotto, M. S., Cameron, L., & Cavalcanti, M. C. (Eds.), Confronting metaphor in use: An applied linguistic approach (pp. 18). Amsterdam: Benjamins.Google Scholar
Zhang, X. (2014). The teachability hypothesis and concept-based instruction: Topicalization in Chinese as a second language (Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, in preparation). The Pennsylvania State University, University Park.Google Scholar
Zhang, Y. (2001). Second language acquisition of Chinese grammatical morphemes: A processability perspective (Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation). The Australian National University, Canberra.Google Scholar