# data[].attributes.body
- Linguistic environment (seen as the crucial determining factor);
- Language producing machine;
- Language made available to the learner in the form of stmuli (occuring feedback);
- Patterns internalized by the learner and immitation of these patterns;
- Regulate the stimuli by grading the input into a series of steps (constitutes the right level of difficulty);
- The roles of the feedbacks:
1. Indicates when the L2 utterances produced by the learner are correct and so reinforces them.
2. Indicates when the utterances are ill formed by correcting them.
- This view seeks to explain progress purely in terms of what happens outside the learner;

# data[].attributes.body
-  Internal processing mechanisms ;
- View the learner as 'grand initiator';
- Exposure to language cannot account satisfactorily for acquistion;
- Input is seen as a trigger which activates the internal mechanism;
- This view seeks to emphasizes learner-internal factors;

# data[].attributes.headline
Input 3: interactionist view (ELLIS, 1986)

# data[].attributes.subject
Input 3: interactionist view (ELLIS, 1986)

# data[].attributes.body
- Input factors innate ◀▶ mechanisms
- Acquisiton of language is seen as the result of an interaction between the learner's mental abilities and the linguistic enviromenment.
- The learner's processing mechanisms both determine and are determined by the nature of the input (the quality of the input affects and is affected by the nature of the internal mechanisms);
- Interaction between external and internal factors: manifestation in the verbal interactions in which the learner and his interlocutor participate;
- The important data are not just the itterances produced by the learner, but the discourse whuci learner and caretker jointly construct.

# data[].attributes.body
- The main feature of this phase were the studies of naturalistic L2 learners;
-  One of the main findings was that learners followed a more-or-less universal and invariable route in acquiring both grammatical morphemes such as plural-s and 3rd person-s and syntactical constructions such as negatives and interrogatives;
-  L2 acquisition seemed to involve a natural process of creative construction, and transfer from the L1 was minimal;
-  not all SLA researchers were so ready to advance pedagogic applications.;

# data[].attributes.headline
Phase 2 - Expansion period (ELLIS, 2021)

# data[].attributes.subject
Phase 2 - Expansion period (ELLIS, 2021)

# data[].attributes.body
- In this period SLA reached out to a range of established disciplines: linguistics, sociolinguistics and discourse analysis;
-  This phase was more theory-then-research;
- Researchers did not always include an implications/applications section in their published papers;
- Was during this period that the first proposal for task-based language teaching  appeared;

# data[].attributes.body
-  It reflected the impact that constructs taken from cognitive psychology had on thinking about L2 acquisition;
-  Information-processing theories are premised on an input-output view of learning;
-  Researchers borrowed from different strands of research in cognitive psychology, leading to alternative views about the role of consciousness in language learning;
-  The non-interface (Krashen, 1981), strong-interface (DeKeyser, 1998), and weak interface (R. Ellis, 1994) positions led to very different proposals regarding the role and nature of explicit grammar instruction;
-  Claims that L2 acquisition cannot be explained in purely cognitive terms, that learners are complex social beings, and that L2 acquisition is best understood by studying how individual learners both respond to and shape their social context;

# data[].attributes.body
-  Sociocultural theory emphasizes the role that mediation plays in the initial development and subsequent internalization of new knowledge:
. It recognizes the ‘mind’ as a central component in learning.
. It emphasizes the importance of interaction in L2 acquisition but it differs from these theories in how it conceptualizes the role of interaction.
-  Whereas cognitive-interactionist theories see interaction as a source of input and output that is processed through internal cognitive mechanisms, sociocultural SLA views development as originating in the interactions that learners participate in with others or, in the case of private speech, with themselves.

# data[].attributes.headline
Phase 5 - Recent Developments (ELLIS, 2021)

# data[].attributes.subject
Phase 5 - Recent Developments (ELLIS, 2021)

# data[].attributes.body
-  Complex Dynamic Systems Theory:

. This represents a coming together of Complexity Theory (Larsen-Freeman & Cameron, 2008) and Dynamic Systems Theory (de Bot, Lowie, & Verspoor, 2007), which share a set of fundamental precepts, for example, that language systems are non-linear, highly variable, individualistic, nonpredictable and always open to change.

-  This theory emphasizes the need to take account of the interconnectedness of social, cognitive and psychological factors and thus offers an all-embracing framework for investigating both the use and acquisition of an L2 and individual learner differences.

- Ellis (2021)  sees Complex Dynamic Systems Theory not as a testable theory but as a useful metaphor of the wholeness of L2 acquisition.
- The ‘multilingual turn’ – a more inclusive construct than ‘social turn’;
- The multilingual turn shares with Complex Dynamic Systems Theory a view of the L2 learner as complex and heterogeneous – a view that is far removed from that of the reified non-native speaker of much earlier SLA research.