The Efficacy of Corrective Feedback and Textual Enhancement in Promoting the Acquisition of Grammatical Redundancies

Abstract

Many second language acquisition researchers (e.g., Doughty & Williams, 1998 ; R. Ellis, 2007; Long, 1996, 2007; Lyster, Lightbown, & Spada, 1999 ; Russell & Spada, 2006 ) have advocated the use of negative feedback to promote learner noticing of errors and the internalization of correct forms. At the same time, the true efficacy of this practice is uncertain, for it not only entails additional linguistic input but may generally enhance otherwise non‐salient language features as well (Leeman, 2003). This study examined the development of the à/au/en/aux distinction before French toponyms among 136 2nd‐semester university French learners randomly assigned to an interactive, computer‐based reading lesson featuring either textually enhanced or unenhanced target forms and one of four types of corrective feedback: meaning‐focused, implicit form‐focused, non‐metalinguistic explicit form‐focused, or metalinguistic explicit form‐focused. Learners in all treatment groups showed continuous improvement in mean target item accuracy. However, no differences were observed between any of the conditions. These findings suggest no benefit for highlighting or repeated correction and explanation, at least for the structures in question. Thus, instructors who feel the need to teach these types of necessary grammatical redundancies should perhaps focus on maximizing learners’ opportunities to process them through meaningful interaction rather than concentrate on the forms themselves.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 23 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.