DO SECOND LANGUAGE LEARNERS NEED NEGOTIATION?

Des etudes theoriques ont montre que les apprenants en L2 doivent, pour reussir leur apprentissage, • obtenir des informations comprehensibles, • produire des enonces modifies, • concentrer l'attention sur la forme de la L2. Les recherches ont montre que les deux premiers points impliquent une participation de l'apprenant dans la negociation. L'A. examine si la negociation concerne aussi le troisieme point. Il analyse pour cela la communication dans des dyades LN/LNN en anglais

[1]  Jacquelyn Schachter,et al.  A universal input condition , 1984 .

[2]  Lloyd Holliday.  NS syntactic modifications in NS-NNS negotiations as input data for second language acquisition of syntax , 1995 .

[3]  Manfred Pienemann,et al.  Is Language Teachable? Psycholinguistic Experiments and Hypotheses , 1989 .

[4]  Teresa Pica.  Communication with second language learners: what does it reveal about the social and linguistic processes of second language learning? , 1993 .

[5]  B. Vanpatten.  Attending to Form and Content in the Input , 1990, Studies in Second Language Acquisition.

[6]  M. Swain.  Communicative competence : Some roles of comprehensible input and comprehensible output in its development , 1985 .

[7]  R. Schmidt.  The role of consciousness in second language learning , 1990 .

[8]  Shropshire Talk.  Talking to Learn , 2018 .

[9]  Lester C. Loschky,et al.  Comprehensible Input and Second Language Acquisition , 1994, Studies in Second Language Acquisition.

[10]  P. Lightbown,et al.  Focus-on-Form and Corrective Feedback in Communicative Language Teaching , 1990, Studies in Second Language Acquisition.

[11]  Stephen Krashen,et al.  The Input Hypothesis: Issues and Implications , 1986 .

[12]  Susan M. Gass,et al.  Input in second language acquisition , 1985 .

[13]  R. Schmidt.  Awareness and Second Language Acquisition , 1992, Annual Review of Applied Linguistics.

[14]  T. Pica,et al.  Comprehensible Output as an Outcome of Linguistic Demands on the Learner , 1989, Studies in Second Language Acquisition.

[15]  Guy Aston,et al.  TROUBLE-SHOOTING IN INTERACTION WITH LEARNERS: THE MORE THE MERRIER? , 1986 .

[16]  Susan M. Gass,et al.  Input, Interaction, and Second Language Production , 1994, Studies in Second Language Acquisition.

[17]  Richard Young,et al.  The Impact of Interaction on Comprehension , 1987 .

[18]  S. Krashen.  Second Language Acquisition and Second Language Learning , 1988 .

[19]  LESTER LOSCHKY,et al.  5 Grammar and Task-Based Methodology , .

[20]  T. Pica.  Interlanguage Adjustments as an Outcome of NS‐NNS Negotiated Interaction , 1988 .

[21]  Evangeline Marlos Varonis,et al.  Variation in Native Speaker Speech Modification to Non-Native Speakers , 1985, Studies in Second Language Acquisition.

[22]  Teresa Pica,et al.  Language learning through interaction: What role does gender play? , 1991 .

[23]  P. Lightbown,et al.  Input Enhancement and L2 Question Formation. , 1991 .

[24]  Michael H. Long,et al.  Group Work, Interlanguage Talk,and Second Language Acquisition. , 1985 .

[25]  Manfred Pienemann,et al.  Psychological Constraints on the Teachability of Languages , 1984, Studies in Second Language Acquisition.

[26]  Charlene J. Sato.  Origins of Complex Syntax in Interlanguage Development , 1988, Studies in Second Language Acquisition.

[27]  Lydia White.  Adverb placement in second language acquisition: some effects of positive and negative evidence in the classroom , 1991 .

[28]  Lester C. Loschky,et al.  Creating Structure-Based Communication Tasks for Second Language Development , 1990 .

[29]  C. Snow,et al.  Input and interaction in language acquisition: The changing role of negative evidence in theories of language development , 1994 .

[30]  M. Smith.  Speaking to many minds: on the relevance of different types of language information for the L2 learner , 1991 .

[31]  M. Swain.  Three functions of output in second language learning , 1995 .

[32]  Michael H. Long.  Linguistic and Conversational Adjustments to Non-Native Speakers , 1983, Studies in Second Language Acquisition.

[33]  Michael H. Long.  The Least a Second Language Acquisition Theory Needs to Explain , 1990 .

[34]  Catherine J. S Doughty.  The effect of instruction on the acquisition of relativization in English as a second language , 1988 .

[35]  Jacquelyn Schachter,et al.  THREE APPROACHES TO THE STUDY OF INPUT , 1986 .

[36]  Evangeline Marlos Varonis,et al.  Incorporated Repairs in Nonnative Discourse , 1989 .

[37]  S. Gass.  Integrating Research Areas: A Framework for Second Language Studies1 , 1988 .

[38]  Kevin R. Gregg.  Linguistic Perspectives on Second Language Acquisition: Second language acquisition theory: the case for a generative perspective , 1989 .

[39]  Evangeline Marlos Varonis,et al.  Miscommunication in native/nonnative conversation , 1985, Language in Society.

[40]  Teresa Pica,et al.  ADULT ACQUISITION OF ENGLISH AS A SECOND LANGUAGE UNDER DIFFERENT CONDITIONS OF EXPOSURE , 1983 .

[41]  Teresa Pica,et al.  What Can Second Language Learners Learn from Each Other? Only Their Researcher Knows for Sure , 1995 .

[42]  Michael H. Long.  The Role of the Linguistic Environment in Second Language Acquisition , 1996 .

[43]  Evangeline Marlos Varonis,et al.  Non-native/Non-native Conversations: A Model for Negotiation of Meaning , 1985 .

[44]  C. Doughty.  Second Language Instruction Does Make a Difference , 1991, Studies in Second Language Acquisition.

[45]  Michael H. Long.  INPUT, INTERACTION, AND SECOND‐LANGUAGE ACQUISITION , 1981 .

[46]  Patricia A. Duff.  Another Look at Interlanguage Talk: Taking Task to Task , 1985 .

[47]  T. Pica.  Classroom interaction, negotiation, and comprehension: Redefining relationships , 1991 .