Publication Date
In 2025 | 0 |
Since 2024 | 0 |
Since 2021 (last 5 years) | 0 |
Since 2016 (last 10 years) | 0 |
Since 2006 (last 20 years) | 2 |
Descriptor
Language Dominance | 4 |
Language Processing | 4 |
Grammar | 3 |
Second Language Learning | 3 |
Adults | 2 |
Children | 2 |
Comparative Analysis | 2 |
Evidence | 2 |
Interference (Language) | 2 |
Native Speakers | 2 |
Second Languages | 2 |
More ▼ |
Publication Type
Opinion Papers | 4 |
Journal Articles | 3 |
Reports - Descriptive | 1 |
Speeches/Meeting Papers | 1 |
Education Level
Adult Education | 2 |
Audience
Location
Laws, Policies, & Programs
Assessments and Surveys
What Works Clearinghouse Rating
Birdsong, David – Applied Psycholinguistics, 2006
Clahsen and Felser (CF) deserve praise for their superlative synthesis of literature relating to grammatical processing, as well as for their original contributions to this area of research. CF "explore the idea that there might be fundamental differences between child L1 and adult L2 processing." The researchers present evidence that adult second…
Descriptors: Evidence, Language Dominance, Grammar, Second Languages

van Themaat, Willem A. Verloren – Language Problems and Language Planning, 1983
It is argued that, contrary to some theories, there can be considerable creativity and thought brought to the use of a second language. Examples are drawn from authors who have made full use of the stylistic resources of their second languages. (MSE)
Descriptors: Bilingualism, Creativity, Interference (Language), Language Dominance
Clahsen, Harald; Felser, Claudia – Applied Psycholinguistics, 2006
The core idea that we argued for in the target article was that grammatical processing in a second language (L2) is fundamentally different from grammatical processing in one's native (first) language (L1). Our major source of evidence for this claim comes from experimental psycholinguistic studies investigating morphological and syntactic…
Descriptors: Evidence, Language Dominance, Cues, Semantics
James, Carl – 1978
A contrastive analysis (CA) does not require commitment to directionality. Even asymmetrical interlingual correspondence can be handled by adirectional statements. If well executed, a CA is capable of handling three pairs of L2 learning phenomena: (1) going from language A to language B and vice versa; (2) productive and receptive command; and (3)…
Descriptors: Contrastive Linguistics, Grammar, Interference (Language), Language Dominance