INPUT HYPOTHESIS FOR OR AGAINST OUTPUT HYPOTHESIS?

Resumen

Introduction

Second language acquisition research has demonstrated that only exposure to L2 input is not sufficient to facilitate language acquisition and that the limited grammar instruction fostered by communicative and proficiency-based teaching approaches facilitates lexicalization of communication and fossilization of errors. If Widdowson's view of grammar "as a necessary communicative resource" is to be accepted, instead of grammar as a collection of forms and prescriptive rules, a new approach to grammar needs to be developed, not as a static system of rules to be memorized but as a dynamic system comprised of structures with an interconnected context dependent form, meaning, and use.

According to Ellis one of the major contributions of SLA research to teacher' practice is the finding that differences between input and intake depends on the learner. Also related to the role of learners in the acquisition process, Pica establishes that the negotiation between the learners and their interlocutors gives the former time and opportunity to catalogue the input in order to be able to process it. The simple act of asking for clarification has very positive results. She also mentions Swain's recommendation to promote learners' production of comprehensible output during interaction in meaningful contexts.