The Output Hypothesis: From Theory to Practice
- January 2017
- University of Pennsylvania
- This person is not on ResearchGate, or hasn't claimed this research yet.
Discover the world's research
- 25+ million members
- 160+ million publication pages
- 2.3+ billion citations
- J SECOND LANG WRIT
- Julia Schlam Salman
- STUD SECOND LANG ACQ
- Susan M. Gass
- D Lapivererv
- M J Lvvsver
- APPL LINGUIST
- Recruit researchers
- Join for free
- Login Email Tip: Most researchers use their institutional email address as their ResearchGate login Password Forgot password? Keep me logged in Log in or Continue with Google Welcome back! Please log in. Email · Hint Tip: Most researchers use their institutional email address as their ResearchGate login Password Forgot password? Keep me logged in Log in or Continue with Google No account? Sign up
- DOI: 10.22606/jaer.2020.53005
- Corpus ID: 225347509
The Output Hypothesis and Its Implications for Language Teaching
- Published 1 August 2020
- Linguistics, Education
- Journal of Agricultural Engineering Research
One Citation
Ai application in foreign language literature: chatgpt's impact and skill enhancement, 41 references, output hypothesis： its history and its future, comprehensible output, from occurrence to acquisition:an agenda for acquisitional research, testing the output hypothesis, does output promote noticing and second language acquisition, the input hypothesis: issues and implications, the roles of modified input and output in the incidental acquisition of word meanings, identifying the impact of negative feedback and learners' responses on esl question development, feedback, noticing and instructed second language learning, a study on input enhancement,output and noticing, integrating language and content teaching through collaborative tasks, related papers.
Showing 1 through 3 of 0 Related Papers
Breadcrumbs Section. Click here to navigate to respective pages.
The Output Hypothesis: Theory and Research
DOI link for The Output Hypothesis: Theory and Research
Click here to navigate to parent product.
In the 1980s, the word “output” was used to indicate the outcome, or product, of the language acquisitiondevice.Outputwas synonymouswith “what the learner/system has learned.” In the decades that have followed, therefore, it is perhaps not surprising that the second language learning literature has been slow to take on the concept of output as part of the process of learning, not simply the product of it. In this chapter, my intent is to provide a description of the “the output hypothesis”: the context in which itwasproposed, supporting researchand theoretical underpinnings, and future directions. This review will show that though an uphill battle, there has been a shift in meaning from output as a noun, a thing, or a product to output as a verb, an action, or a process.
- Privacy Policy
- Terms & Conditions
- Cookie Policy
- Taylor & Francis Online
- Taylor & Francis Group
- Students/Researchers
- Librarians/Institutions
Connect with us
Registered in England & Wales No. 3099067 5 Howick Place | London | SW1P 1WG © 2024 Informa UK Limited
Last updated 27/06/24: Online ordering is currently unavailable due to technical issues. We apologise for any delays responding to customers while we resolve this. For further updates please visit our website: https://www.cambridge.org/news-and-insights/technical-incident
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings .
Login Alert
- > Journals
- > Studies in Second Language Acquisition
- > Volume 21 Issue 3
- > TESTING THE OUTPUT HYPOTHESIS
Article contents
Testing the output hypothesis.
Effects of Output on Noticing and Second Language Acquisition
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 01 September 1999
This study addresses one of the functions of output proposed by Swain (1993, 1995, 1998). In particular, the activity of producing the target language may, under certain circumstances, prompt L2 learners to recognize some of their linguistic problems and bring to their attention something they need to discover about their L2. Two research questions were posed: (a) Does output promote noticing of linguistic form? and (b) Does output result in improved performance on the target form? In treatment phase 1, participants reconstructed a short passage after being exposed to it, followed by a second exposure to the same input material and a second reconstruction opportunity. In phase 2, participants wrote on given topics, followed by the presentation of a model written by a native speaker. Participants wrote a second time on the same topic. To test the noticing function of output, participants underlined parts of the sentences they thought were “particularly necessary” for subsequent (re)production. The control group was exposed to the same input materials but was not required to produce any output. Although phase 1 tasks resulted in noticing and immediate incorporation of the target form, the posttest performance failed to reveal their effects. In contrast, phase 2 tasks resulted in improvement on posttest 2. The results are discussed in terms of the efficacy of output in promoting noticing and learning and the conditions that may be required for output to be useful for SLA.
Access options
This article has been cited by the following publications. This list is generated based on data provided by Crossref .
- Google Scholar
View all Google Scholar citations for this article.
Save article to Kindle
To save this article to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected] is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle .
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.
- Volume 21, Issue 3
- Shinichi Izumi (a1) , Martha Bigelow (a1) , Miho Fujiwara (a1) and Sarah Fearnow (a1)
- DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263199003034
Save article to Dropbox
To save this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you used this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your Dropbox account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox .
Save article to Google Drive
To save this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you used this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your Google Drive account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive .
Reply to: Submit a response
- No HTML tags allowed - Web page URLs will display as text only - Lines and paragraphs break automatically - Attachments, images or tables are not permitted
Your details
Your email address will be used in order to notify you when your comment has been reviewed by the moderator and in case the author(s) of the article or the moderator need to contact you directly.
You have entered the maximum number of contributors
Conflicting interests.
Please list any fees and grants from, employment by, consultancy for, shared ownership in or any close relationship with, at any time over the preceding 36 months, any organisation whose interests may be affected by the publication of the response. Please also list any non-financial associations or interests (personal, professional, political, institutional, religious or other) that a reasonable reader would want to know about in relation to the submitted work. This pertains to all the authors of the piece, their spouses or partners.
IMAGES
VIDEO
COMMENTS
The Output Hypothesis has been examined broadly in terms of its role in second language acquisition since it was first proposed by Swain. This paper introduces the Output Hypothesis with regard to its basic claims, related research both from home and abroad.
The Output Hypothesis IU this svctioU, wv will outliUv thv erolv that output plays iU svcoUd laUguagv acquisitioU. IU paerticulaer, wv will focus oU thv fvatuervs of output, pushvd output, aUd thv mvchaUisms iUiolivd iU UvgotiatioU foer mvaUiUg which facilitatv svcoUd laUguagv lvaerUiUg.
This study examines the role and effectiveness of output – in particular, the noticing function of language output – in developing the writing skills of an English as a Foreign Language (EFL) student from Saudi Arabia. The notice function enables the student to identify lexis and grammar problems in his writing.
We discuss the three functions of output, the notion of pushed output, and the practice of negotiation for meaning, and we provide two illustrative teaching units to show how insights taken...
One theory of language acquisition is the comprehensible output hypothesis. Developed by Merrill Swain, the comprehensible output (CO) hypothesis states that learning takes place when learners encounter a gap in their linguistic knowledge of the second language (L2).
The output hypothesis, a theoretical model of second-language acquisition, proposes that second-language learners must produce the language they are learning in order to obtain a level of proficiency similar to that of native speakers.
The review mainly includes three aspects. First, it is about research on the functions of the output hypothesis. Second, it introduces the applications of the output hypothesis theoretically and practically. At last, it introduces the generation, development and application of the production-oriented approach based on the output hypothesis.
The Output Hypothesis has been examined broadly in terms of its role in second language acquisition since it was first proposed by Swain. This paper introduces the Output Hypothesis with regard to its basic claims, related research both from home and abroad.
This review will show that though an uphill battle, there has been a shift in meaning from output as a noun, a thing, or a product to output as a verb, an action, or a process.
To test the noticing function of output, participants underlined parts of the sentences they thought were “particularly necessary” for subsequent (re)production. The control group was exposed to the same input materials but was not required to produce any output.