The Role of Noticing and Attention in the Acquisition of L2 Grammatical Knowledge

Abstract: The discussion in the literature on the question of how L2 grammatical knowledge is acquired has been influenced by the issue of noticing and attention. This article gives an overview of the important role of noticing and attention in L2 acquisition.

Key words: Noticing Attention L2 acquisition

1 The role of noticing in L2 acquisition

Schmidt (1990) put forward the \"Noticing Hypothesis\". The Noticing Hypothesis holds that， for L2 grammar acquisition to take place， it is not necessary to learn metalinguisitc principles or rules， but that learners must notice'' critical features in utterances. In the case of subject-verb agreement， for instance， learners must notice the co-occurrence of certain subject and verb forms. According to Schmidt (1995: 20)， \"What learners notice in input is what becomes intake for learning.\" Schmidt also states that noticing is a necessary condition for L2 acquisition\".

Schmidt (1990) claims that the following factors may influence noticing in the input:

Instruction: Instruction may play an important role in priming learners to notice features by establishing expectations about language.

Frequency: When the item does appear more frequently in the input， the likelihood that an item will be noticed and integrated into the interlanguage system is increased.

Perceptual Salience: The more prominent a language form in input， the greater the chance it will be noticed (cf. Skehan， 1998).

Skill Level: Skill level includes how well individuals are able to routinize previously met structures. This processing ability in turn determines how ready learners are to notice new forms in the input. Another relevant factor Schmidt identifies is an individual''s ability to attend to both form and meaning in L2 processing. Noticing ability varies; some learners are better \"input processors\"， as they have a larger working memory capacity or due to their superior speed of analytical processing within working memory (cf. Skehan， 1998).

Task Demands: This refers to the way in which an instructional task causes learners to notice particular features that are necessary in order to carry out that task (Schmidt， 1990). To achieve this， language features may be made intentionally prominent or the task be designed to \"force\" learners to process the language (R.Ellis， 1997). Also， Skehan points out that noticing may be more or less likely depending on whether the level of processing that the task demands is low， such as in the exchange of familiar information， or high， as in a task that requires imaginative and abstract decision-making.

Comparing: Only by recognizing that new language features are at variance with their current interlanguage version will learners integrage those features into their developing interlanguage system (R.Ellis， 1997). Similarly， Schmidt Frota (1986) suggest that noticing alone is not enough for input to become intake. Rather， it requires learners to make a comparison between their observed input and typical output based on their existing interlanguage system， that is， they must consciously \"notice the gap\". In doing so， learners are able to reflect on what is noticed， endeavor to understand its significance， and experience insight (Schmidt， 1990).

Schmidt''s noticing hypothesis and its role in language acquisition has attracted some support as well as criticism. Ellis (1994， 1997)， Lewis (1993) and Skehan(1998) considered noticing to be an important initial process in interlanguage development while Sharwood-Smith (1981)， Rutherford (1981)and McLaughlin(1987) differ from Schmidt in that they consider that noticing a feature in input may be a conscious or an unconscious process.

Some empirical research has been carried out so far in relation to the role of noticing in L2 acquisition. A study by Schmidt Frota (1986) questions the assumption that language acquisition is a purely subconscious process; since the learner clearly noticed some of the grammatical structures he seemed to have acquired. Altman found that while half her verbalization of Hebrew verbs could be traced to diary entries of noticing， it was not possible to identify the source of the other half and they may have become intake subconsciously.

2 The role of attention in L2 acquisition

Schmidt (2000) defines noticing'' as the subjective correlate of what psychologists call attention， roughly equivalent to clear perception'' and detection within selective attention''. Over the past two decades， researchers in the field of cognitive psychology and second language acquisition (SLA) have become increasingly interested in the concept of attention.

Attention is generally regarded a necessary precondition for successful learning. Tomlin Villa (1994) suggest that there are four conceptions of attention in SLA. That is， it is a limited capacity system; it constitutes a process of selection; it involves controlled rather than automatic processing of information; and it must involve a process of coordination among competing stimuli and responses. In this process， attention must be established， maintained， discontinued， and redirected in order to perform different actions.

Posner Petersen (1990) describe attention in terms of three networks: alertness， orientation， and detection. Alertness refers to a general state of readiness to receive input. The higher the level of alertness， the faster the speed of selecting information for processing will be. If selection is too quick， however， the quality of processing may suffer. Orientation refers to the alignment of attentional resources to a particular stimulus from among a host of stimuli. Orienting attention to a stimulus facilitates the processing of that stimulus. Orientation differs from alertness in that a learner might for example be ready to learn (alertness) but not know whether to focus on form or meaning (orientation). Detection is probably the most important network in attention; it refers to the cognitive registration of a stimulus. Once a stimulus is detected， it becomes available for further processing.

Reviewing the psychological literature on attention， Schmidt (2000) concludes that although there may be some forms of learning without attention， it is known that preparatory attention and voluntary orienting vastly improve encoding:

Since many features of L2 input are likely to be infrequent， non-salient， and communicatively redundant， intentionally focused attention may be a practical necessity for successful language learning. Language learners who take a totally passive approach to learning， waiting patiently and depending on involuntary attentional processes to trigger automatic noticing， are likely to be slow and unsuccessful learners ( Schmidt 2000).

One of the most influential studies on attention in SLA was conducted by VanPatten (1990)， who investigated the notion of attention as a limited resource. More specifically， the study examined whether learners were able to consciously attend to both form and meaning when processing input. Results showed that the content only and lexical groups significantly outperformed the form and morphology groups. This led VanPatten to conclude that it was difficult， especially for beginners， to notice content and form at the same time. VanPatten''s findings have led SLA researchers to try and find ways to help learners focus on both form and meaning. One such way is input enhancement， which refers to the manipulation of certain aspects of the input (e.g.， form) to make them more salient and thereby more noticeable to learners (Sharwood-Smith， 1993).

3 Summary

The discussion in the literature on the question of how L2 grammatical knowledge is acquired has been influenced by the issue of noticing and attention. Noticing and attention are necessary condition for L2 acquisition.

References:

\\[1\\] Ellis， R. 1994. The Study of Second Language Acquisition. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

\\[2\\]Ellis， R. 1997. SLA Research and Language Teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

\\[3\\]McLaughlin， B. (1987). Theories of Second Language Learning. Baltimore， MD: Edward Arnold.

\\[4\\]Posner， M. I.， Petersen， S. E. (1990). The attention system of the human brain. Annual Review of Neuroscience， 13， 25-42.

\\[5\\]Schmidt， R. (1990). The role of consciousness in second language learning. Applied Linguistics 11，129-158.

\\[6\\]Schmidt， R. (1993). Awareness and second language acquisition. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics， 13， 206-226.

\\[7\\]Schmidt， R. (1995). Consciousness and foreign language learning: A tutorial on the role of attention and awareness. In R. Schmidt (Ed.)， Attention and awareness in foreign language teaching and learning (Technical Report No. 9) Honolulu: University of Hawai''i at Manoa.

\\[8\\]Schmidt， R.2000. Attention'' in P. Robinson (ed.): Cognition and Second Lanuguage Instruction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

\\[9\\]Schmidt， R.， Frota， S. (1986). Developing basic conversational ability in a second language. A case study of an adult learner of Portuguese. In R. Day (Ed.)， Talking to learn: Conversation in second language acquisition， (pp. 237-326) Rowley， MA: Newbury House.

\\[10\\]Skehan， P. (1998). A cognitive approach to language learning. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

\\[11\\]Sharwood-Smith， M. (1981). Consciousness-raising and the second language learner. Applied Linguistics II， 159-169.

\\[12\\]Sharwood Smith， M. (1993). Input enhancement in instructed SLA: Theoretical bases. Studies inSecond Language Acquisition， 15， 165-179.Sperling， G. A. (1960). The information available in brief visual presentation. PsychologicalMonographs， 74， 1-27

\\[13\\]Tomlin， R. S.， Villa， V. (1994). Attention in cognitive science and second language acquisition. Studies in Second Language Acquisition， 16， 183-203.

\\[14\\]VanPatten， B. (1990). Attending to form and content in the input: An experiment in consciousness. Studies in Second Language Acquisition， 12， 287-301.