Abstract
Psychologically speaking, all linguistic behavior is the overt manifestation of some type of underlying knowledge that is represented in the mind/brain of an individual. Exposure to linguistic data is necessary for growth of the system of knowledge. On the basis of only overt linguistic behavior, how can we ascertain whether the native and nonnative knowledge systems that people have are of distinct or similar types? Is there a (necessary) relationship between type of knowledge and type of linguistic exposure?The hypothesis to be defended is that negative data and explicit data result in a type of knowledge that is not to be equated with linguistic competence. The claim is not that negative and explicit data cannot give rise to knowledge; rather, the specific claim is that only positive data can effect the construction of an interlanguage grammar that is comparable to the knowledge system that characterizes the result of first language acquisition.
Publisher
Cambridge University Press (CUP)
Subject
Linguistics and Language,Language and Linguistics,Education
Reference60 articles.
1. A reply to Gregg: In defence of theory building;Schwartz;Second Language Research,1988
2. Subjacency Violations and Empty Categories in Second Language Acquisition
3. On triggering data in L2 acquisition: A reply to Schwartz and Gubala-Ryzak;White;Second Language Research,1992
4. Adverb placement in second language acquisition: Some effects of positive and negative evidence in the classroom;White;Second Language Research,1991
Cited by
193 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献