FLA 515
Lafford
Suggested Sources for Critical Papers (revised)
Here are some articles/chapters that you might want to use for your critical paper. If you
choose a source not included in the list below you will need to provide me with a copy of
the article/chapter you review when you turn in your critical papers.

What is Second Language Acquisition (SLA)? (What is the object of our study?
What are some of the major approaches to SLA data?)
Corder, S. P. 1967. The significance of learner’s errors. International Review
of Applied Linguistics 5:160-70.
Gass, S. et al. 1998. Ahistoricity revisited: Does SLA have a history?
Studies in Second Language Acquisition 20:407-21.
Kramsch, C. 2000. Second language acquisition, applied linguistics and the
teaching of foreign languages. Modern Language Journal 84.3:311-26.
Lado, R. 1957. The necessity for a systematic comparison of languages and
cultures. Linguistics across cultures, 1-8. Ann Arbor: The University of
Michigan Press.
Nemser, W. 1971. Approximative systems of foreign language learners.
IRAL 9:115-23.
Selinker, L. 1972. Interlanguage. International Review of Applied
Linguistics 10:209-30.
Thomas, M. 1998. Programmatic ahistoricity in second language
acquisition theory. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 20:
387-405.

What are the processes involved in SLA? (role of the individual, context of the
language acquisition process, linguistic, cognitive and sociocultural approaches to
the study of SLA processes)
Role of the Individual: non-linguistic
Demographic factors: (learner as member of a larger demographic group)
Age: Critical Period Hypothesis
Ioup, G., E. Boustagui, M. el Tigi and M. Moselle. 1994. Reexamining the critical
period hypothesis: a case study of successful adult SLA in a naturalistic
environment. SSLA 16:73-98.
FLA 515
-2-
Lafford
Krashen, S. 1982. Accounting for child-adult differences in second language
rate and attainment. Child-adult differences in second language acquisition, ed.
S. D. Krashen, R. C. Scarcella and M. H. Long, 202-26. Rowley, MA: Newbury
House
Moyer, A. 1999. Ultimate attainment in L2 phonology: the critical factors of age,
motivation and instruction. SSLA 21:81-108.
Sex:
Ehrman, M. and R. Oxford. 1989. Effects of sex differences, career choice, and
psychological type on adult language learning strategies. Modern Language
Journal 73.1:1-13.
Gass, S. and E. M. Varonis. 1986. Sex differences in NNS/NNS interactions.
Talking to learn: conversations in second language acquisition, ed. R. Day,
327-51. Rowley, MA: Newbury House.
Ludwig, J. 1983. Attitudes and expectations: a profile of female and male
students of college French, German and Spanish. Modern Language Journal 67:
216-27.
Meunier L. 1994. Native genderlects and their relation to gender issues in second
language classrooms: the sex of our students as a sociolinguistic variable. Faces
in a crowd: the individual learner in the multi-section classroom, ed. C. Klee,
47-77. Boston, MA: Heinle & Heinle.
Internal factors: (learner as an individual)
Personality/Learning styles
Dewaele, J-M. and A. Furnham. 1999. Extraversion: the unloved variable
in applied linguistic research. Language Learning 49.3:509-44.
Ehrman, M. and R. Oxford. 1989. Effects of sex differences,
career choice, and psychological type on adult language learning
strategies. Modern Language Journal 73.1:1-13.
Ehrman, M. and R. Oxford. 1995. Cognition plus: correlates of
language learning success. Modern Language Journal 79:67-89.
FLA 515
-3-
Lafford
Meunier, L. 1998. Personality and motivational factors in electronic networking.
New Ways of Learning and Teaching: Focus on Technology and Foreign
Language Education, ed. J. Muyskens, 145-97. AAUSC Series: American
Association of University Supervisors, Coordinators, and Directors of Foreign
Language Programs. Boston, MA: Heinle & Heinle.
Robinson, P. 2001. Individual differences, cognitive abilities, aptitude
complexes and learning conditions in second language acquisition. Second
Language Research 17.4:368-92.
Wakamoto, N. 2000. Language learning strategy and personality variables:
Focusing on extroversion and introversion. IRAL 38:71-81.
Background Knowledge
Barry, S. and A. A. Lazarte. 1995. Embedded clause effects on recall: does
high prior knowledge of content domain overcome syntactic complexity in
students of Spanish? Modern Language Journal 79:491-504.
Gass, S. and E. M. Varonis. 1986. The effect of familiarity on the
comprehensibility of nonnative speech. Language Learning 34.1:65-89
Hauptman, P. 2000. Some hypotheses on the nature of difficulty and ease in
second language reading: an application of schema theory. Foreign Language
Annals 33.6:622-31.
Anxiety/attitudes
Bacon, S. and M. Finnemann. 1990. A study of the attitudes, motives, and
strategies of university foreign language students and their disposition to authentic
oral and written input. Modern Language Journal 74:459-73.
Dodick, D. 1996. A study of attitudes and motivation of high school foreign
language students. The Canadian Modern Language Review 52.4: 577-95.
Gardner, R.C. and P. McIntyre. 1993. A Student's Contributions to SecondLanguage Learning, II: Affective Variables. Language Teaching 26.1: 1-11
Young, D. J. 1992. Language anxiety from the foreign language specialists’
perspective: interviews with Krashen, Omaggio Hadley, Terrell, and Rardin.
Foreign Language Annals 25.2:157-72.
FLA 515
-4-
Lafford
Learning styles/strategies
Oxford, R. and M. Nykios. 1989. Variables affecting choice of language
learning strategies by university students. Modern Language Journal
73.3:291-300.
Reid, J. M. 1987. The learning style preferences of ESL students. TESOL
Quarterly 21.1:87-111.
Role of the individual: linguistic
How do learners learn? (epistemological approaches)
Cognitive Approaches: UG vs. connectionism
Ellis, N. 1996. Sequencing in SLA: phonological memory, chunking, and points
of order. SSLA 18:91-126.
Schachter, J. 1988. Second language acquisition and its relationship to universal
grammar. Applied Linguistics 9:219-35.
How do the similarities or differences between L1 and L2 affect the acquisition
process?
L1 vs. L2
Eckman, F. 1977. Markedness and the contrastive analysis hypothesis.
Language Learning 27.2:315-30.
Rutherford, W. 1982. Markedness in L2 acquisition. Language Learning 32.1:
85-108.
What role does context play in SLA?
Pica, T. 1983. Adult acquisition of English as a second language under
different conditions of exposure. Language Learning 33.4:465-97.
Input
Ellis, R. 1999. Input-based approaches to teaching grammar: a review of
classroom-oriented research. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics 19:64-80.
Krashen, S. 1985. The input hypothesis. The input hypothesis: issues and
implications, 1-32. New York: Longman.
FLA 515
-5-
Lafford
McLaughlin, B. 1978. The Monitor Model: some methodological
considerations. Language Learning 28:309-32.
Attention/Noticing/Focus-on-form/Saliency
Bayley, R. 1994. Interlanguage variation and the quantitative paradigm:
past tense marking in Chinese-English. Research methodology in second
-language acquisition, ed. Elaine E. Tarone, Susan M. Gass and
Andrew D. Cohen, 157-81. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates
Publishers.
Collentine, J. 1997. The effects of irregular stems on the detection of verbs in
the subjunctive. Spanish Applied Linguistics 1.1:3-21.
Fotos, S. 1993. Consciousness raising and noticing through focus on form: grammar
task performance vs. formal instruction. Applied Linguistics 14:385Leow, R. P. 1998. Toward operationalizing the process of attention in SLA:
Evidence for Tomlin and Villa's (1994) fine-grained analysis of attention.
Applied Psycholinguistics 19.1:133-59.
Leow, R. P. 2000. A study of the role of awareness in foreign language
behavior: Aware versus unaware learners. SSLA 22.4:557-84.
Robinson, P. 1995. Review Article: Attention, memory and the ‘Noticing
Hypothesis.’ Language Learning 45.2:283-331.
Tomlin, R. S. and V. Villa. 1994. Attention in cognitive science and second
language acquisition. SSLA 15:183-203.
Truscott, J. 1998. Noticing in second language acquisition: a critical review.
Second Language Research 14.2:103-35.
Wolfram, W. 1989. Systematic variability in second-language tense marking.
The dynamic interlanguage: empirical studies in second language variation, ed.
M.R. Eisenstein, 187-97. New York: Plenum.
Modality
Leow, R. P. 1995. Modality and intake in second language acquisition. SSLA
17:79-89.
Mecartty, F.H. 2001. The effects of modality, information type and language
experience on recall by foreign language learners of Spanish. Hispania 84.2:
265-78.
FLA 515
-6-
Lafford
Murphy, V. 1997. The effect of modality on a grammaticality judgment
task. Second Language Research 13.1:34-65.
Input Processing
VanPatten, B. 1989. Can learners attend to form and context while processing
input? Hispania 72:409-17.
VanPatten, B. 1993. The case for psycholinguistics. Beyond methods:
components of second language teacher education, ed. Kathleen
Bardovi-Harlig and Beverly Hartford, 1-17. New York: McGraw-Hill.
VanPatten, B. and T. Cadierno. 1993. Explicit instruction and input
processing. SSLA 15:225-43.
VanPatten, B. and T. Cadierno. 1995. Formal instruction from a processing
perspective: an investigation into the Spanish past tense. Modern Language
Journal 79:179-93.
VanPatten, B. and S. Oikkenon. 1996. Explanation versus structured input in
processing instruction. SSLA 18:495-510.
Intake
Leow, R. P. 1993. To Simplify or Not to Simplify: A Look at Intake. SSLA 15.
3:333-55.
Leow, R. P. 1995. Modality and intake in second language acquisition. SSLA
17:79-89.
Leow, R. P. 1997. Simplification and Second Language Acquisition. World
Englishes 16.2:291-96.
Leow, R. P. 1997. The Effects of Input Enhancement and Text Length on Adult
L2 Readers' Comprehension and Intake in Second Language Acquisition. Studies
in Second Language Acquisition 8.2:151-82.
Acquisition principles
Andersen, Roger W. 1984. The one to one principle of interlanguage construction.
Language Learning 34.4:77-95.
FLA 515
-7-
Lafford
Andersen, R. W. 1990. Models, processes, principles and strategies: second
language acquisition inside and outside of the classroom. Second language
acquisition—foreign language learning, ed. B. VanPatten and J. Lee, 45-68.
Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
Andersen, R. and Y. Shirai. 1994. Discourse motivations for some
cognitive acquisition principles. SSLA 16:133-56.
Effect of Task
Leow, R. P. 1996. Grammaticality judgment tasks and second-language
Development. Georgetown University Round Table on Languages and
Linguistics, 126-39.
Winitz, H. 1996. Grammaticality judgment as a function of explicit and
implicit instruction in Spanish. Modern Language Journal 80:32-46.
Immersion
Lyster, R. 1994. The effect of functional-analytic teaching on aspects of French
immersion students’ sociolinguistic competence. Applied Linguistics 15.3:263
-87.
URL: information on immersion programs in the US: www.cal.org/db/2way
Tarone, E. and M. Swain. 1995. Sociolinguistic perspectives on second
language use in immersion classrooms. Modern Language Journal 79.2:166-78.
Output
Kellerman, E. 1985. If at first you do succeed… Input in second language
acquisition, ed. Susan M. Gass and Carolyn G. Madden, 345-53.
Rowley, MA: Newbury House.
Swain, M. 1993. The Output Hypothesis. Canadian Modern Language Review
50:158-64.
Focus on form/noticing
Izumi, S., M. Bigelow, M. Fujiwara and S. Fearnow. 1999. Testing the output
hypothesis; effects of output on noticing and second language acquisition.
SSLA 21:421-52.
Leow, R. P. 1997. Attention, awareness, and foreign language behavior.
Language Learning 47.3:467-505.
FLA 515
-8-
Lafford
Leow, R. 2000. Attention, awareness, and focus on form research: A critical
review. Form and meaning: Multiple perspectives, ed. J. Lee & A. Valdman,
69-96. Boston: Heinle & Heinle.
Ortega, L 1999. Planning and focus on form in L2 oral performance.
SSLA 21:109-48.
Robinson, P. 1995. Review article: attention, memory and the “Noticing”
Hypothesis. Language Learning 45.2:283-331.
Salaberry, R. and N. López-Ortega. 1998. Accurate L2 production across
language tasks: focus on form, focus on meaning and communicative control.
Modern Language Journal 82.4:515-31.
Tomlin, R. and V. Villa. 1994. Attention in cognitive science and second
language acquisition. SSLA 16:283-302.
Input vs. Intake
Leow, R. P. 1993. To Simplify or Not to Simplify: A Look at Intake.
SSLA 15.3:333-55.
Leow, R. P. 1995. Modality and intake in second language acquisition.
SSLA 17:79-89.
Interaction
Braidi, S. 1995. Review article: reconsidering the role of interaction and input
in second language acquisition. Language Learning 45.1:141-75.
Doughty, C. and T. Pica. 1986. “Information Gap” Tasks: do they
facilitate second language acquisition? TESOL Quarterly 20.2:305-25.
Dunn, W. E. and J. P. Lantolf. 1998. Review article: Vygotsky’s zone
of proximal development and Krashen’s I + 1: incommensurable constructs;
incommensurable theories. Language Learning 48.3:411-42.
García, P. and Y. Asención. 2001. Interlanguage development of Spanish
learners: Comprehension, production and interaction. The Canadian Modern
Language Review 57.3:377-401
García Mayo, M. del P. and T. Pica. 2000. L2 learner interaction in a
foreign language setting: Are learning needs addressed? IRAL 38:35-58.
FLA 515
-9-
Lafford
Gass, S. and E. Varonis. 1994. Input, interaction and second language
production. SSLA 16:283-302.
Long, M. H. and P. A. Porter. 1985. Group work, interlanguage talk
and second language acquisition. TESOL Quarterly 19.2:207-28.
McLaughlin, B. 19??. Theory and research in second language learning:
an emerging paradigm. Language Learning 331-50.
Nakahama, Y., A. Tyler and L. Van Lier. 2001. Negotiation of
Meaning in conversational and information gap activities: A comparative
discourse analysis. TESOL Quarterly 35.3:377-45.
Pica, T. 1987. Second-language acquisition, social interaction and the
classroom. Applied Linguistics 8.1:3-21.
Pica, T. 1996. Language learner’s interaction: How does it address the input,
output and feedback needs of language learners? TESOL Quarterly 30:59-84.
Varonis, E. M. and S. Gass. 1985. Non-native/non-native conversations: a model
for negotiation of meaning. Applied Linguistics 8:95-110.
Feedback
Ayoun, D. 2001. The role of negative and positive feedback in the second
language acquisition of the passé compose and imparfait. Modern Language
Journal 85.2:226-43.
Lyster, F., and L. Ranta. 1997. Corrective feedback and learner uptake:
Negotiation of form in communicative classrooms. Studies in Second
Language Acquisition 19:37-66.
Mackey, A., S. and K. McDonough. 2000. How do learners perceive
interactional feedback? SSLA 22:471-97.
Nichols, H., P. M. Lightbown and N. Spada. 2001. Language Learning
51.4:719-58.
Communication strategies
De Keyser, R. M. 1991. Foreign language development during a semester
abroad. Foreign language acquisition research and the classroom, ed. B.
Freed, 104-119. Boston: D.C. Heath.
FLA 515
-10-
Lafford
Dörnyei, Z. and M. L. Scott. 1997. Review Article: Communication
strategies in a second language: definitions and taxonomies. Language Learning
47.1:173-210.
Faerch, C. L. and G..Kaspar. 1984. Two ways of defining communication
strategies. Language Learning 34:45-63.
Kaspar, G. 1985. Repair in foreign language teaching. SSLA 7:200-15.
Kormos, J. 1999. Monitoring and self-repair in L2. Language Learning
49.2:303-42.
Lafford, B. A. 1995. Getting into, through and out of a simple survival
situation: a comparison of communicative strategies used by students studying
Spanish-abrod and ‘at home.’ Second language acquisition in a study abroad
context, ed. B. F. Freed, 97-121. Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins.
Liskin-Gasparro, J. 1996. Circumlocution, communication strategies, and the
ACTFL proficiency guidelines: an analysis of student discourse. Foreign
Language Annals 29.3:317-30.
Poulisse, N. Bongaerts, T and E. Kellerman. 1987. The use of retrospective verbal
reports in the analysis of compensatory strategies. Introspection in second
language research, ed. C. Faerch and G. Kaspar, 213-29. Clevedon:
Multilingual Matters.
Tarone, E. 1980. Communication strategies, foreigner talk, and repair in
interlanguage. Language Learning 30.2:417-31.
Sociocultural approaches
Dunn, W. E. and J.P. Lantolf. 1998. Vygotsky’s Zone of Proximal
Development and Krashen’s i+1: incommensurable constructs; incommensurable
theories. Language Learning 48.3:411-42.
Ferris, D. R. 1997. The influence of teacher commentary on student revision.
TESOL Quarterly 31.2:315-39.
Sans, C. and B. Van Patten. 1998. On input processing, processing
instruction and the nature of replication tasks: a response to Salaberry.
Canadian Modern Language Review 54.2:263-73.
FLA 515
-11-
Lafford
Salaberry, R. 1998. On input processing, true language competence, and
pedagogical bandwagons: a reply to Sanz and VanPatten. Canadian
Modern Language Review 54.2:274-85.

What are the products of the SLA processes?
Phonology
Elliot, R. 1995. Foreign language phonology: field independence, attitude and the
success of formal instruction in Spanish pronunciation. Modern Language
Journal 79:530-42.
MacDonald, D., G. Yule and M. Powers. 1994. Attempts to improve English
L2 pronunciation: the variable effects of different types of instruction. Language
Learning 44.1:75-100..
Major, R. 1987. A model for interlanguage phonology. Interlanguage phonology:
the acquisition of a second language sound system, ed. G. Ioup and
S. H. Weinberger, 101-24. New York: Newbury House/Harper & Row.
Zampini, M. 1994. The role of native language transfer and task formality in the
acquisition of Spanish spirantization. Hispania 77.3:470-81.
Morphology
Tense/aspect
Bardovi-Harlig, K. 1995. A narrative perspective on the development of the
tense/aspect system in SLA. SSLA 17.2.263-91.
Bardovi-Harlig, K. 1997. Another piece of the puzzle: the emergence of the
present perfect. Language Learning 47.3:375-422.
Bardovi-Harlig, K. 1998. Narrative structure and lexical aspect: conspiring
factors in second language acquisition of tense-aspect morphology. SSLA
20:471-508.
Bardovi-Harlig, K. 1999. From morpheme studies to temporal semantics:
tense/aspect research in SLA. SSLA 21:341-82.
Cadierno, T. 1995. Formal Instruction from a processing perspective: an
investigation into the Spanish past tense. Modern Language Journal 79:179-93.
Salaberry, R. 1998. The development of aspectual distinctions in L2 French
classroom learning. Canadian Modern Language Review 54.4:508-42.
FLA 515
-12-
Lafford
Shirai, Y. and A. Kurono. 1998. The acquisition of tense-aspect marking in Japanese
as a second language. Language Learning 8.4:245-79.
Subjunctive
Terrell, T. D., B. B. and C.P. 1987. The subjunctive in Spanish interlanguage:
accuracy and comprehensibility. Foreign Language Learning, ed. B.VanPatten,
T. R. Dvorak and J. F. Lee, 19-32. New York: Newbury House.
Semantics/Lexicon
Ellis, R. et al., 1994. Classroom interaction, comprehension and the acquisition of
L2 word meanings. Language Learning 44.3: 449-91
Guntermann, G. 1992. An analysis of interlanguage development over time: Part
I, POR and PARA. Hispania 75:177-87.
Guntermann, G. 1992. An analysis of interlanguage development over time: Part
II, SER and ESTAR. Hispania 75:1294-303.
Lafford, B. and J. Ryan. 1995. The acquisition of lexical meaning in a study
abroad context: the Spanish prepositions POR and PARA. Hispania 75:528-47.
Ryan, J.and B Lafford. 1992. Acquisition of lexical meaning in a study
abroad environment: SER and ESTAR and the GRANADA Experience.
Hispania 75:714-22.
Sanaoui, R. 1995. Adult learners’ approaches to learning vocabulary in second
languages. Modern Language Journal 79.1:15-28.
Tinkham, T. 1997. The effects of semantic and thematic clustering
on the learning of second language vocabulary. Second Language
Research 13.2:138-63.
Syntax
Braidi, S. 1995. Reconsidering the role of interaction and input in SLA.
Language Learning 45.1:141-75.
FLA 515
-13-
Lafford
Discourse/pragmatics
Discourse
Flowerdew, J. and S. Tauroza. 1995. The effect of discourse markers on
second language lecture comprehension. SSLA 17:435-58.
Siskin, H. J. 1987. Achieving communicative competence through gambits and
routines. Foreign Language Annals 20.5:393-401
Pragmatics
Cohen, A. D. and E. Olshtain. 1981. Developing a measure of sociocultural
competence the case of apology. Language Learning 31.1:113-34.
Di Pietro, R. J. 1987. Strategic Instruction. London: Cambridge UP.
Kasper, G. 1997. Can pragmatic competence be taught? Second Language
Teaching & Curriculum Center. NFLRC NetWork#6.
www.lll.hawaii.edu/nflrc/NetWorks/NW6/NW6references.html
Kasper, G. 1997. The role of pragmatics in language teacher education.
Beyond methods: components of second language teacher education, ed.
K. Bardovi-Harlig and B. Hartford, 113-36. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Kaspar, G. 2001. Four perspectives on pragmatic development. Applied
Linguistics 22.4:502-30.
Kasper, G. and M. Dahl. 1991. Research methods in interlanguage pagmatics.
SSLA 13:215-47.
Kasper, G. and R. Schmidt. 1996. Developmental issues in interlanguage pragmatics.
SSLA 18:149-69.
Koike, D. 1989. Pragmatic competence and adult L2 Acquisition: speech acts in
interlanguage. Modern Language Journal 73:279-89.
Olshtain, E., and A.D. Cohen. 1991. Teaching Speech Act Behavior to Nonnative
Speakers. Teaching English as a second or foreign language, ed. M.
Celce-Murcia, 154-65. New York: Newbury House.
FLA 515
-14-
Lafford
Wildner-Bassett. M. E. 1990. Coexisting discourse worlds: the development of
pragmatic competence inside and outside the classroom. Second language
acquisition/foreign language learning, ed. B. VanPatten and J. Lee, 140-52.
Philadelphia: Multilingual Matters Ltd.
Wildner-Bassett. M. E. 1994. Intercultural pragmatics and proficiency: ‘polite’ noises
for cultural appropriateness. IRAL 32.1:3-17

How can the insights of SLA research be applied to Foreign/Second Language
teaching and language policy issues?
L2 Pedagogy
Bardovi-Harlig, K. 1997. The place of second language acquisition theory in
language teacher preparation. Beyond methods: components of second language
teacher education, ed. K. Bardovi-Harlig and B. Hartford, 18-41. New York:
McGraw-Hill.
Van Patten, B. 1992. Second language acquisition research and foreign language
teaching, Part 1. Association of Departments of Foreign Languages Bulletin 23:
52-56.
Whitley, M. S. 1993. Communicative language teahcing: an imcomplete
revolution. Foreign Language Annals 26.2:137-54.
Language Policy Issues
Research articles cited in or chapters from:
Krashen, S. 1999. Condemned without a trial: bogus arguments against
bilingual education. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
Wiley, T. 1996. Language Planning and Policy. Sociolinguistics and
language teaching, ed. S. L. McKay and N. H. Hornberger, 103-47.
New York: Cambridge University Press.
CALL (Computer Assisted Language Learning) (Also see recent issues of Language
Learning and Technology www.llt.msu.edu)
Beauvois, M. H. 1997. Computer-mediated communication (CMC): technology for
improving speaking and writing. Technology-enhanced language learning,
ed. M. Bush, 165-84. Lincolnwood, IL: National Textbook Company.
FLA 515
-15-
Lafford
Blake, R. 1998. The role of technology in second language learning. Learning
foreign and second languages: perspectives in research and scholarship, ed. H.
Byrnes, 208-37. New York: MLA
Collentine, J. and K. Collentine. 1997. The compatibility of computer
-mediated communication solutions with beginning level foreign language
curricula. Computer Assisted Language Learning 105:411-25. .
Chapelle, C. A. 1997. CALL in the year 2000: still in search of research paradigms?
Language Learning & Technology 1.1:19-43.
Chapelle, C. A. 1999. Research questions for a CALL research agenda: a reply
to Rafael Salaberry. Language Learning & Technology 3.1:108-13.
Meunier, L. 1996. Human factors in a computer assisted foreign language environment:
the effects of gender, personality and keyboard control. CALICO Journal 13.2:
47-72.
Salaberry, R. 1999. CALL in the year 2000: still developing the research agenda
Language Learning & Technology 3.1:104-107.