References
[1]. Alanen, R. (1995). Input enhancement and rule
presentation in second language acquisition. In R. Schmidt
(Ed.), Attention and awareness in foreign language
learning (pp. 259-302). Honolulu: University of Hawai'i Press.
[2]. Allen, L. Q. (2000). Form-meaning connection and the
French causative: An experiment in processing instruction.
Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 22, 63-84.
[3]. Benati, A. (2001). A comparative study of the effects of
processing instruction and output-based instruction on the
acquisition of Italian future tense. Language Teaching
Research, 5, 95-127. http://ltr.sagepub.com/ content/9 /1/
67.abstract.
[4]. Benati, A. (2004). The effects of structured input
activities and explicit information on the acquisition of the
Italian future tense. In B. VanPatten (Ed.), Processing
instruction, Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
[5]. Braidi, S. (1999). The acquisition of second-language
syntax. London: Arnold.
[6]. Brown, H. D. (1994). An interactive approach to
language pedagogy. NJ: Prentice Hall.
[7]. Cadierno, T. (1995). Formal instruction from a
processing perspective: An investigation into the Spanish
past tense. Modern Language Journal, 79, 179-193.
[8]. Carroll, S. (2001). Input and evidence: The raw
material of second language acquisition. Philadelphia:
John Benjamins.
[9]. Celce-Murcia, M. (1991). Grammar pedagogy in
second and foreign language teaching. TESOL Quarterly,
25, 459-480.
[10]. Celce-Murcia, M., Dörnyei, Z., & Thurrell, S. (1997).
Direct approaches in L2 instruction: A turning point in
communicative language teaching? TESOL Quarterly,
31(1), 141-152.
[11]. Chaudron, C. (1985). Intake: On models and methods for discovering learners' processing input. Studies
in Second Language Acquisition, 7, 1-14.
[12]. Collentine, J. (1998). Processing instruction and the
s u b j u n c t i v e . H i s p a n i a , 8 1 , 5 7 6 - 5 8 7 .
.
[13]. Corder, S. P. (1967). The significance of learners' errors.
International Review of Applied Linguistics, 5. 161-170.
[Reprinted in S. P. Corder. (1981). Error analysis and inter
language. Oxford: Oxford.
[14]. De Keyser, R. M., & Sokalski, K. J. (1996). The
differential role of comprehension and production
practice. Language Learning, 46 (4), 613-642.
[15]. Doughty, C., & Williams, J. (Eds). (1998). Focus on
form in classroom second language acquisition.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
[16]. Ellis, N. C., & Laporte, N. (1997). Contexts of
acquisition: Effects of formal instruction and naturalistic
exposure on second language acquisition. In A. M. B. De
Groot & J. F. Kroll (Eds.), Tutorials in bilingualism:
Psycholinguistic perspectives (pp. 53-83). Mahwah, NJ:
Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
[17]. Ellis, R. (1993). Naturally simplified input,
comprehension and second language acquisition. In M. L.
Tickoo (Ed.), Simplification: Theory and application, 31, 55.
[18]. Ellis, R. (1994). The study of second language
acquisition. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
[19]. Ellis, R. (1997). SLA research and language teaching.
Oxford: Oxford University Press..
[20]. Ellis, R. (1998a). Making an impact: teaching
grammar through awareness-raising. Impact grammar.
Hong Kong: Longman.
[21]. Ellis, R. (1998b). Teaching and research: Options in
grammar teaching. TESOL Quarterly, 32, 39-60.
[22]. Erfe, J. P. (2006). Suggested structured input activities
in English grammar instruction for college freshmen.
Unpublished seminar paper, Philippine Normal University,
Manila.
[23]. Fotos, S. (1994). Integrating grammar instruction and
communicative language use through grammar
consciousness-raising tasks. TESOL Quarterly, 28, 323-351.
[24]. Fotos, S., & Ellis, R. (1991). Communicating about
grammar: A task-based approach. TESOL Quarterly, 25,
605-628.
[25]. Gass, S. M. (1982). From theory to practice. In M. Hines
& B. Rutherford (Eds.), On TESOL '81 (pp. 129-139).
Washington, DC: TESOL.
[26]. Gass, S. M. (1997). Input, interaction, and the second
language learner. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum &
Associates.
[27]. Gass, S. M. & Madden, C. G. (Eds.). (1985). Input in
second language acquisition. Rowley, MA: Newbury
House.
[28]. Gregg, K. (2001). Learnability and second language
acquisition theory. In P. Robinson (Ed.), Cognition and
second language instruction. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press, 152-178.
[29]. Kondo-Brown, K. (2001). Effects of three types of
practice after explicit explanation. University of Hawaii
Working Papers in Second Language Studies, 19, 99-27. <
http://www.hawaii.edu/sls/uhwpesl/19(1)/Kondo.pdf>
[30]. Krashen, S. D. (1981). Second language acquisition
and second language learning. New York: Prentice-Hall.
[31]. Krashen, S. D. (1982). Principles and practice in
second language acquisition. New York: Prentice-Hall.
[32]. Krashen, S. D. (1985). The input hypothesis: Issues and
applications. New York: Longman.
[33]. Krashen, S. D. (1989). The input hypothesis: An update.
In J. E. Alatis (Ed.), Georgetown university roundtable on
languages and linguistics 1991 (pp. 409-431). Washington,
D. C.: Georgetown University Press.
[34]. Krashen, S. D. (1993). The effect of formal grammar
teaching: Still peripheral. TESOL Quarterly, 26, 409-411.
[35]. Larsen-Freeman, D., & Long, M. H. (1991). An
introduction to second language acquisition research.
London: Longman.
[36]. Lee, J., & VanPatten, B. (1995). Making
communicative language teaching happen. New York:
Mc Graw-Hill.
[37]. Leow, R. (1997). The effects of input enhancement
and text length on adult L2 readers' comprehension and intake in second language acquisition. Applied Language
Learning, 8, 151-182.
[38]. Leow, R. (1998a). The effects of amount and type of
exposure on adult learners' L2 development in SLA. The
Modern Language Journal, 82, 49-68.
[39]. Leow, R. (1998b). Toward operationalizing the process
of attention in SLA: Evidence for Tomlin and Villa's (1994)
fine-grained analysis of attention. Applied Linguistics, 19,
133-159.
[40]. Lightbown, P. M., Spada, N., & White, L. (1993). The
role of instruction in SLA: Introduction. Studies in Second
Language Acquisition, 15, 143-145.
[41]. Long, M. H. (1991). Focus on form: A design feature in
language teaching. In K. deBot, R. B. Ginsberg, & C.
Kramsch (Eds.), Foreign language research in cross-cultural
perspective (pp. 123-167). Clevedon, UK: Multilingual
Matters.
[42]. Long, M., & Crookes, G. (1992). Three approaches to
task-based syllabus design. TESOL Quarterly, 27, 91-113.
[43]. Loschky, L., & Bley-Vroman, R. (1993). Grammar and
task-based methodology. In G. Crookes and S. M. Gass
(Eds.), Tasks and language learning: Integrating theory and
practice (pp. 123-167). Clevedon, UK: Multilingual Matters.
[44]. Magnan, S. S. (1991). Social attitudes: The key to
directing the evolution of grammar teaching. In J. E. Alatis
(Ed.), Georgetown university roundtable on languages and
linguistics 1991. Washington, D. C.: Georgetown University
Press, 323-334.
[45]. Morgan-Short, K. & Bowden, H. W. (2006). Processing
instruction and meaningful output-based instruction:
Effects on second language development. Studies in
Second Language Acquisition, 28, 31-65.
[46]. Nagata, N. (1998). Input vs. output practice in
educational software for second language acquisition.
Language Learning & Technology, 1(2), 23-40.
[47]. Nunan, D. (1989). Designing tasks for the
communicative classroom. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
[48]. Rosa, E. & O' Neill, M. D. (1999). Explicitness, intake,
and the issue of awareness. Studies in Second Language
Acquisition, 21, 511-556.
[49]. Salaberry, R. M. (1997). The role of input and output
practice in second language acquisition. The Canadian
Modern Language Review, 53, 422-451. http://utpjournals.
metapress.com/content/k17468w25ql61895/
[50]. Salaberry, R. M. (1998). On input processing, true
language competence, and pedagogical bandwagons:
A reply to Sanz and VanPatten. The Canadian Modern
Language Review, 54, 274-285.
[51]. Sanz, C. & VanPatten, B. (1998). On input processing,
processing instruction, and the nature of replication tasks: A
response to Salaberry. Canadian Modern Language
Review, 54, 2.
[52]. Savignon, S. J. (1991).. Communicative language
teaching: State of the art. TESOL Quarterly, 25(2), 261-277.
[53]. Schmidt, R. (1990). The role of consciousness in L2
learning. Applied Linguistics, 11, 129-158.
[54]. Schmidt, R. (1993). Awareness and second language
acquisition. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 1, 205-
225.
[55]. Schmidt, R. (1994). Deconstructing consciousness in
search of useful definitions for applied linguistics. AILA
Review, 11, 11-26.
[56]. Schmidt, R. (Ed.). (1995). Attention and awareness in
foreign language learning. Honolulu: University of Hawai'i
Press.
[57]. Schmidt, R. (2001). Attention. In P. Robinson (Ed.),
Cognition and second language instruction. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press, 3-31.
[58]. Schwartz, B. D. (1993). On explicit and negative data
effecting and affecting competence and linguistic
behavior. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 15,
147-163.
[59]. Sharwood Smith, M. (1988). Consciousness raising
and the second language student. In M. Sharwood Smith
(Ed.), Grammar and second language teaching (pp. 51-
60).
[60]. Sharwood Smith, M. (1993). Input enhancement and
instructed and instructed SLA: Theoretical bases. Studies in
Second Language Acquisition, 15, 165-179.
[61]. Shook, D. J. (1994). FL2/L2 reading, grammatical
information, and the input-to-intake phenomenon. Applied
Language Learning, 5, 57-93.
[62]. Simard, D. & Wong, W. (2001). Alertness, orientation,
and detection: The conceptualization of attentional
functions in SLA. Studies in Second Language Acquisition,
23, 103-124.
[63]. Slobin, D. J. (1985). Crosslinguistic evidence for the
language-making capacity. In D. J. Slobin (Ed.), The
crosslinguistic study of language acquisition: Vol. 2.
Theoretical issues (pp. 1157-1256). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlabum.
[64]. Spada, N. (1997). Form-focused instruction and
second language acquisition: A review of classroom and
laboratory research. Language Teaching, 29, 1-15.
[65]. Swain, M. (1985). Communicative competence:
Some roles of comprehensible input and comprehensible
output in its development. In S. M. Gass & C. G. Madden
(Eds.), Input in second language acquisition (pp. 235-253).
Rowley, MA: Newbury House.
[66]. Terrell. T. (1991). The role of grammar instruction in a
communicative approach. Modern Language Journal,
75, 52-63.
[67]. Thornbury, S. (1999). How to teach grammar. London:
Longman.
[68]. Tomlin, R.S., & Villa, V. (1994). Attention in cognitive
science and second language acquisition. Studies in
Second Language Acquisition, 16, 183-203.
[69]. VanPatten, B. (1990). Attending to content and form in
the input: An experiment in consciousness. Studies in
Second Language Acquisition, 12, 287-301.
[70]. VanPatten, B. (1994). Evaluating the role of
consciousness in second language acquisition: Terms,
linguistic features, and research methodology. AILA
Review, 11, 27-36.
[71]. VanPatten, B. (1996). Input processing and grammar
instruction: Theory and research. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
[72]. VanPatten, B. (2002). Processing instruction: An
update. Language Learning, 52, 805-823.
[73]. VanPatten, B. (2004). Input and output in establishing
form-meaning connections. In B. VanPatten, J. Williams, S. Rott, & Overstreet (Eds.), Form-meaning connections in
second language acquisition (pp. 29-48). New Jersey:
Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers.
[74]. VanPatten, B., & Cadierno, T. (1993a). Explicit
instruction and input processing. Studies in Second
Language Acquisition, 15, 225-243.
[75]. VanPatten, B., & Cadierno, T. (1993b). Input
processing and second language acquisition: A role for
instruction. The Modern Language Journal, 77, 45-57.
[76]. VanPatten, B., & Oikennon, S. (1996). Explanation vs.
structured input in processing instruction. Studies in Second
Language Acquisition, 18, 495-510.
[77]. VanPatten, B., & Sanz, C. (1995). From input to output:
Processing instruction and communicative tasks. In F. R.
Eckman, D. Highland, P. W. Lee, J. Milehan, & R. R. Weber
(Eds.), Second Language Acquisition theory and
pedagogy (pp. 169-185). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
[78]. VanPatten, B., & Wong, W. (2004). Processing instruction vs. traditional instruction (again): A replication
with the French causative. In B. VanPatten (Ed.), Processing
instruction. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
[79]. White, L. (1989). Universal Grammar and Second
Language Acquisition. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
[80]. White, J. (1998). Getting the learners' attention: A
typographical input enhancement study. In C. Doughty & J.
Williams (Eds.), Focus on form in second language
classroom acquisition (pp. 91-128), New York: New York:
Cambridge University Press.
[81]. Williams, J. (1995). Focus on form in Communicative
language teaching: Research findings and the classroom
teacher. TESOL Journal, 4, 12-16.
[82]. Wong, W. (2001). Modality and attention to meaning
and form in the input. Studies in Second Language
Acquisition, 23, 345-368.
[83]. Young, R. (1989). Input and interaction. Annual Review
of Applied Linguistics, 9,122-134.
