Talk:Second-language acquisition

message: There are no cited references in the first section, is this something that should be remedied? CRHeck (talk) 15:50, 2 October 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: No - the lead section is supposed to be a summary of the rest of the article, so the claims should all be backed up by sources located further down the page. WP:LEAD has the details if you're interested. :) — Mr. Stradivarius ♪ talk ♪ 01:06, 3 October 2015 (UTC)

text: Ah okay that makes sense, thank you. :) CRHeck (talk) 16:40, 3 October 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Introduction Citations 

message: I would like to expand upon the existing information in the Age section of this page. 
Some specific information I would like to add is:
* Slightly more information on the Critical Period Hypothesis
* General differences between adult/older child learners and young children
* More detailed information on the differences between initial progress between older and younger learners
* Differences in first and second language proficiency- i.e. Can a second language be stronger than a first?
* The possible influences of Universal Grammar (UG) on age differences
* Nonbiological explanations for age differences. 
* Delay or acceleration in language development (children)
* Language attrition related to age (or a new section focused on second-language attrition, if that is better)-- Would this be an appropriate section to add for SLA, since it is more about losing, rather than acquiring, a language? I would appreciate input for this.
* Kohnert, Kathryn (2008). "Primary language impairments in bilingual children and adults." In Altarriba, J.;  Heredia, R. R.. An Introduction to Bilingualism: Principles and Processes. New York: Taylor & Francis Group. pp. 295-313. ISBN: 13:978-0-8058-5135-9 
* Gass, Susan. & Glew, Margo. (2008). Second language acquisition and bilingualism. In Altarriba, J. & Heredia, R. R., An Introduction to Bilingualism: Principles and Processes. New York: Taylor & Francis Group, LLC. pp.265-294. ISBN: 13:978-0-8058-5135-9 
* Long, Michael. H. (2007). Problems in SLA. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc. pp.43-74. ISBN:0-8058-3580-6 
* Pinter, Annamaria. (2011). Children learning second languages.Research and practice in applied linguistics. Basingstoke, UK: Palsgrave Macmillan: Centre for Applied Linguistics, University of Warwick, UK. ISBN: 978-1-4039-1185-8
* Schrauf, Robert, W. (2008). Bilingualism and aging. In Altarriba, J. & Heredia, R. R., An Introduction to Bilingualism: Principles and Processes. New York: Taylor & Francis Group, LLC. pp. 105-127. ISBN: 13:978-0-8058-5135-9 
* Nicoladis, Elena. (2008). Bilingualism and language cognitive development. In Altarriba, J. & Heredia, R. R., An Introduction to Bilingualism: Principles and Processes. New York: Taylor & Francis Group, LLC. pp. 167-181. ISBN: 13:978-0-8058-5135-9 
* Seliger, H. (1989). Deterioration and creativity in childhood bilingualism. In Hyltenstam, Kenneth & Obler, Loraine, K., Bilingualism Across the Lifespan: Aspects of Acquisition, Maturity, and Loss. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press. pp. 173-184. ISBN0-521-35225-8.
* Sharwood Smith, Michael, A. Crosslinguistic influence in language loss. In Hyltenstam, Kenneth & Obler, Loraine, K., Bilingualism Across the Lifespan: Aspects of Acquisition, Maturity, and Loss. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press. pp. 185-201. ISBN0-521-35225-8.
I would also like to add to the Sociocultural Factors section of this page. 
Specific information I am interested in adding includes:
* The role of immersion (cultural and school) in acquisition
* The impact of learning two languages in different contexts
* The influence of cultural change or language assimilation in language attrition
* The influence of attitude, motivation, and personality on acquisition (would these be best categorized as sociocultural factors?)-- or perhaps I could expand upon the Affective Factors section?
* Acculturation
* Bialystok, Ellen & Hakuta, Kenji. (1994). In other words: The science and psychology of second-language acquisition. New York, NY: BasicBooks. pp. 124-159. ISBN:0-456-07565-7
* Pinter, Annamaria. (2011). Children learning second languages.Research and practice in applied linguistics. Basingstoke, UK: Palsgrave Macmillan: Centre for Applied Linguistics, University of Warwick, UK. ISBN: 978-1-4039-1185-8
* Tokowicz, Natasha. (2015). Lexical processing and second language acquisition. New York, NY: Taylor & Francis. pp. 57-74. ISBN: 978-0-415-87755-8
* Vega, Luis, A. (2008). Social psychological approaches to bilingualism. In Altarriba, J. & Heredia, R. R., An Introduction to Bilingualism: Principles and Processes. New York: Taylor & Francis Group, LLC. pp.185-198. ISBN: 13:978-0-8058-5135-9 
Thank you! Beccabouma (talk) 04:26, 19 October 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, this sounds great! Please feel free to add all of that. :) If it gets too long then we might need to move some out to other articles - maybe Individual variation in second-language acquisition, maybe Critical period hypothesis, or maybe a new article like Age effects on second-language acquisition - but we definitely need more on age in this article, and however much you write it will find a home somewhere. The same goes for information on sociocultural factors - the more, the better, and if we have too much we can work out how to deal with it later. Also, don't be afraid to switch sections around if you think it would make the article better organised. I based the current structure on Rod Ellis's 2008 book, but other textbooks do things in other ways, and what works for a textbook doesn't necessarily work for an encyclopaedia article. Be bold. :) And yes, please do start a section on second-language attrition! Everything in SLA research is in this article's scope, so the fact that second-language attrition hasn't made it in yet is just an omission. You should have a look at the Second-language attrition article first, though. Seeing as we already have an article on the subject, the goal should be to summarize that article using summary style. However, at a glance it looks like it relies too much on primary sources (and thereby fails the "no original research" policy), so perhaps it will be easier to write a new summary here from scratch, and then expand the main article later. — Mr. Stradivarius ♪ talk ♪ 06:29, 19 October 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for the advice! Beccabouma (talk) 14:24, 19 October 2015 (UTC)

text: Beccabouma These changes look really great and I think it's time to go live. Please add them to the main article. This will also draw the attention of other editors, though I see you already are receiving the help of Mr. Stradivarius which is great. Marentette (talk) 23:30, 1 November 2015 (UTC)

text: In the age section, I would like more refs for the claims about proficiency in seq learners, as well as the final sentence about proficiency comparing the two. Marentette (talk) 23:37, 1 November 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Marentette I will work on that section some more. Thank you! I have also add some more of what I have done to my talk page and I have tried to give you access to my sandbox if you didn't already have it. I hope it worked!Beccabouma (talk) 23:57, 1 November 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Beccabouma A few other things to consider as you add these to the article. You refer to some concepts, such as schemas, that may have pages in Wikipedia. Do link any first refs to such pages. Second, it won't be easy, but Wiki likes images. Can you think of any ways to incorporate examples, images, diagrams on this page. Finally, once you have put the changes in main space,you may want to archive this part of the talk page - or delete the proposed changes from the talk page (though I'm not sure about the etiquette of that). I can track which changes you made in other ways and Wiki says be bold,just make the changes. So we don't normally clutter talk pages with a record of the changes. Marentette (talk) 13:29, 2 November 2015 (UTC)

text: Beccabouma and CRHeck. This is looking good. A few further things to consider with the goal in mind of getting this page to B-Class. First, make sure any changes you made are reflected in the lead. These are the summary paragraphs at the top of the article before the contents list. This section is very important for skimmers. Ideally the contents of the lead reflect the entire article. Second, you may want to examine the specific grading scheme used by WikiProject Linguistics. Look at the detailed requirements for B-class. I think the article now meets many of these criterion. Can you push it further on any of them? Is there anything extraneous or redundant you could remove? Any parts that you could clarify? Good work here. Marentette (talk) 23:17, 8 November 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: Expansion

message: This wiki article is very well written!
But, you may want to consider including or editing the following:
Under intro
May want to add citations in, I know that they may be cited later on in the article but it should still be cited.
In the 4th paragraph you may want to link cognitive approach, sociocultural approaches, individual factors, and affective factors. I note that these are described in greater detail later on the page however the link should appear the first time someone sees it for clarification if they need it.
Instead of saying "Differences between adult and child learners are also topics of interest" could be rephrase to "Another topic of interest to SLA research is the difference between adult and child learners".
Under Interlanguage
For clarification you can link semantic errors. 
I don't have access to the source so I am just wondering if in the overgeneralization section did you get the German children from the citation indicated (17) or is it a new citation?
Under linguistic factors
For clarification you should link linguistic. 
I know at the beginning it tells us what  L2 acquisitions is but from what I have read it never tells us about  L1 you should specify what this is (use brackets or whatever) so that people who do not make the connection can understand that it is the persons first language.
Individual variation
Under age
There might be an error in the edit by the critical period hypothesis, note 4 should be blue and linked but is not. 
The sentence  "However, in general, adult learners of a second-language rarely achieve the native-like fluency that children display, despite often progressing faster in the initial stages." should have a citation.
For clarification you could link simultaneous bilinguals, monolingual, sequential bilinguals. 
In the middle and end of the 3rd paragraph there is red template:Tokowicz is this an error in editing or should this be removed? Also this section should have citations I'm assuming you got the information from another source (if the Tokowicz is the source ignore this comment).
In the 4th paragraph you can link positive reinforcement for clarification. At the end of the 4th paragraph the sentence " Some believe that only pronunciation is affected, while others believe other abilities are affected as well" who believes this? You might want to put in a citation here.
Under strategies
I'm not sure if you used a definition or made them up yourself but if you did use a source you might want to put in a citation.
I hope this was useful!  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rae.uofa (talk • contribs) 17:03, 16 November 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Suggestions 

message: I felt that there was a lack of explaining motivation more in detail in the "socioculture" section of this wiki. Gardener's social-educational sheds lights on how much motivation can play a key role in SLA in a social context. Gardener's model is referred to as "operational" in that it focus on the acting driving forces like integrativeness and attitudes that move motivation. There is a natural effort by a L2 learner to learn the language, motivation influences this willingness. 
There is a separate wiki that discusses motivation as a factor for SLA, but it wasn't in here before, which would really give insight to a reader who want's to learn more about Gardener's model.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ppacheco23 (talk • contribs) 02:15, 21 November 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Motivation  

message: As mention before by other editors this article has some citation issues.The paragraph below contains no citations, it also mentions "Research", but does not specify what research?  Also some of the links in this article are not supported by scholarly books and articles. These links reflect more a personal opinion. The content is interesting however if someone wants to look for more information there is no reference to back it up.
Research on how exactly learners acquire a new language spans a number of different areas. Cognitive approaches to SLA research deal with the processes in the brain that underpin language acquisition, for example how paying attention to language affects the ability to learn it, or how language acquisition is related to short-term and long-term memory. Sociocultural approaches reject the notion that SLA is a purely psychological phenomenon, and attempt to explain it in a social context. Some key social factors that influence SLA are the level of immersion, connection to the L2 community, and gender. Linguistic approaches consider language separately from other kinds of knowledge, and attempt to use findings from the wider study of linguistics to explain SLA.There is also a considerable body of research about how SLA can be affected by individual factors such as age, learning strategies, and affective factors. Bellim18 (talk) 03:35, 23 March 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Hi Bellim18. :) Normally you would be right that material like this needs citations. However, this particular passage is in the lead section, and per Wikipedia's style guide on citations for the lead section, citations are optional for material in the lead that is already cited in the body of the article. If you don't find citations for any of the material in that passage further down in the article, feel free to remove it from the lead, or to find a citation for it and add it to the article body. Also, for material that does have citations further down, you can add that citation to the lead as well if you think it would be clearer. Best — Mr. Stradivarius ♪ talk ♪ 05:06, 23 March 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Also, you are quite right that the statements cited to non-scholarly sources are problematic. They should either be redrafted to cite proper academic sources, or removed. Please do go ahead and start work on them - be bold! — Mr. Stradivarius ♪ talk ♪ 05:12, 23 March 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  No citation 

message: Words like "remarkable" and "some" are too personal/opinionated. Be careful with the reuse of words as well. Below are edits I've made to this paragraph.
Although there were similarities in the order in which all learners learned second-language grammar, there were also differences among individuals and learners with different first languages. It is difficult to tell when grammatical structures have been learned, as learners may use structures correctly in some situations but not in others. 
--SugeneShin (talk) 17:15, 17 October 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sequence of acquisition edits 

message: Propose: That the content from 5 stages of second language acquisition be merged into this article as there is insufficient content in the article and only one reference such that it does not justify a stand-alone article. Please provide feedback. With thanks. Rangasyd (talk) 05:03, 10 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge from: 5 stages of second language acquisition 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Second-language acquisition. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110721173927/http://psyling.psy.cmu.edu/papers/years/1987/CMbiling.pdf to http://psyling.psy.cmu.edu/papers/years/1987/CMbiling.pdf
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:56, 25 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hi all,
I would like to add the following sections and expand on existing ones:
* under Language difficulty: introducing the Bottleneck Hypothesis (Roumyana Slabakova)
* under Learner language: add a subheading for theories of learnability and teachability
* under Interlanguage: more examples of interlanguage research, citing Virginia Yip's Interlanguage and Learnability
* under Language transfer: information on surface overlap, language dominance and cross-linguistic influence in word order (Sharon Unsworth)
* under Linguistic factors: specific language impairment and Cumulative Effects hypothesis (Johanne Paradis) and elaboration on Universal Grammar using Lydia White's UG & SLA textbook
In terms of structure, I would suggest these minor edits for page layout purposes.
 9	Factors and approaches to SAL
 9.1	Cognitive factors
 9.2	Sociocultural factors (merge sociocultural factors and approaches, or create 9.2.1 for approaches)
 9.3	Linguistic factors
— Preceding unsigned comment added by AliciaJM123 (talk • contribs) 10:10, 24 April 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank you for your edits Alicia! It's great to see someone adding quality content to the article. One thing I would watch out for is the article size - it is already a bit on the long side, so some of the subsections should probably be split into sub-articles to bring the overall length down. While I'm only semi-active on Wikipedia these days, let me know if you have any questions about editing and I'll be more than happy to answer. Best — Mr. Stradivarius ♪ talk ♪ 03:45, 2 May 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposals: Additions & Edits