L2 Performance and Incidental SLA

  • Craig Lambert


This chapter provides a theoretical foundation for the connection between L2 production on tasks and second language acquisition (SLA). The chapter focuses primarily on functional category development from a usage-based perspective as this area of development is the most relevant to the effect of specific tasks factors on development, but the impact of meaning-focused language use on language representation has been discussed for nearly three decades (Bybee, 1985, 2006; Langacker, 1987, 2000, 2008).


  1. Bybee, J. (1985). Morphology: A study of the relation between meaning and form. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bybee, J. (2006). From usage to grammar: The mind’s response to repetition. Language, 82, 711–733.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bybee, J. (2008). Usage-based grammar and second language acquisition. In P. Robinson & N. Ellis (Eds.), Handbook of cognitive linguistics and second language acquisition (pp. 216–236). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  4. De Bot, K., & Larsen-Freeman, D. (2011). Researching second language development from a dynamic systems perspective. In M. Verspoor, K. de Bot, & W. Lowie (Eds.), A dynamic approach to second language development: Methods and techniques (pp. 5–23). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. DeKeyser, R. (2001). Automaticity and automatization. In P. Robinson (Ed.), Cognition and second language instruction (pp. 125–151). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Ellis, N. (2002). Frequency effects in language processing: A review with implications for theories for implicit and explicit language acquisition. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 24, 143–188.Google Scholar
  7. Erlam, R., Loewen, S., & Philp, J. (2009). The roles of output-based and input-based instruction in the acquisition of L2 implicit and explicit knowledge. In R. Ellis, S. Loewen, C. Elder, R. Erlam, J. Philp, & H. Reinders (Eds.), Implicit and explicit knowledge in second language learning, testing and teaching (pp. 241–261). Bristol, UK: Multilingual Matters.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Hasher, L., & Chromiak, W. (1977). The processing of frequency information: An automatic mechanism? Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 16, 173–184.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Langacker, R. (1987). Foundations of cognitive grammar: Theoretical prerequisites. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
  10. Langacker, R. (2000). A dynamic usage-based model. In M. Barlow & S. Kemmer (Eds.), Usage-based models of language (pp. 1–63). Stanford: CSLI.Google Scholar
  11. Langacker, R. (2008). Cognitive grammar as a basis for language instruction. In P. Robinson & N. Ellis (Eds.), Handbook of cognitive linguistics and second language acquisition (pp. 27–38). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  12. Larsen-Freeman, D. (1997). Chaos/complexity science and second language acquisition. Applied Linguistics, 26, 141–165.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Larsen-Freeman, D. (2010). The dynamic co-adaptation of cognitive and social views: A complexity theory perspective. In R. Batstone (Ed.), Sociocognitive perspectives on language use and language learning. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  14. MacWhinney, B. (2001). The competition model: The input, the context, and the brain. In P. Robinson (Ed.), Cognition and second language instruction (pp. 69–90). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. MacWhinney, B. (2008). A unified model. In P. Robinson & N. Ellis (Eds.), Handbook of cognitive linguistics and second language acquisition (pp. 341–371). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  16. Pawley, A., & Snyder, F. (1983). Two puzzles for linguistic theory: Native-like selection and native-like fluency. In J. Richards & R. Schmidt (Eds.), Language and communication (pp. 191–225). London: Longman.Google Scholar
  17. Pickering, M., & Ferreira, V. (2005). Structural priming: A critical review. Psychological Bulletin, 134, 427–459.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Posner, M., & Snyder, C. (1975). Attention and cognitive control. In G. Bower & J. Spence (Eds.), Psychology and learning motivation (Vol. 3, pp. 55–85). San Diego, CA: Academic.Google Scholar
  19. Sinclair, J. (1991). Corpus, concordance, collocation. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  20. Tomasello, M. (2000a). First steps toward a usage-based theory of language acquisition. Cognitive Linguistics, 11, 61–82.Google Scholar
  21. Tomasello, M. (2000b). The item-based nature of children’s early syntactic development. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 4, 156–163.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Craig Lambert
    • 1
  1. 1.Curtin UniversityPerthAustralia

Personalised recommendations