

Author: Miyazaki S.
Publisher: John Benjamins Publishing Company
E-ISSN: 1569-9838|11|1|39-60
ISSN: 0957-6851
Source: Journal of Asian Pacific Communication, Vol.11, Iss.1, 2001-01, pp. : 39-60
Disclaimer: Any content in publications that violate the sovereignty, the constitution or regulations of the PRC is not accepted or approved by CNPIEC.
Abstract
Although much of the work in the study of negotiation of meaning subsequent to Krashen (1982, 1985) support the notion that negotiation of meaning leads to comprehensible input, which in turn results in acquisition, I question the prevailing assumption based on four reasons. Firstly, negotiation studies show a tendency to under-estimate the role of adjustment. Secondly, it is questionable whether the negotiation for comprehensible input plays a crucial role in language acquisition where the input obtained by the learner is merely simplified input, not optimal input. Thirdly, the study of negotiation of meaning focuses upon meaning in the narrow sense of the word. Limiting the study of negotiation to lexical inadequacies does not guarantee an understanding of successful acquisition. I agree with Neustupný that interactive competence is an ingredient for acquisition. This notion embraces three areas of competence: sociocultural, sociolinguistic and linguistic which are inseparable for understanding language acquisition. Lastly, the relationship between negotiation and acquisition needs to be considered in terms of language learning strategies. The above four points indicate that the framework of negotiation for language acquisition needs to be reconstructed through a focus on the adjustment of inadequacies.
Related content




三大理论框架下的二语习得研究Second Language Acquisition Studies under Three Theoretical Frames
By 冯丽娟
Modern Linguistics, Vol. 2, Iss. 2, 2014-05 ,pp. :



