# data[].attributes.body
The main characteristic of this phase were the studies of naturalistic L2 learners. It was a research-then-theory approach. The theoretical influence came from the L1 research. Children and adult both learn L2 in a considerably universal and fixed way.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
London Things to do, Lifestyle, Food & Drink News | The Resident

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
All the latest things to do, lifestyle, home and garden, food and drink news for London from The Resident.

# data[].attributes.body
These four major areas of enquiry developed in this period:  language transfer, linguistic universals, second language pragmatics, and input/interaction. It was more theory-then-research.  Task-based language teaching was first proposed.

# data[].attributes.body
The input refers to receptive skills language learners use, that is, the comprehensible language they are exposed to while listening or reading. Whereas the output is the language they produce/express verbally or by writing.

# data[].attributes.body
" Any spoken or written language input can be simplified or modified for the sake of comprehension through providing less difficult vocabulary items and complex syntactic structures which are beyond readers’ acquired language proficiency" (BAHRANI; SOLTANI, 2012, p. 40). These modifications happen when a mother interacts with the child (motherese), when the language is being taught in a language classroom, among other situations which modify the syntax and the lexicon of the L2.

# data[].attributes.body
In order to make input more comprehensible, there may be some changes in the language being used. So, interactionally modified input is a type of language in which the meaning is negotiated.

# data[].attributes.body
This kind of language input happens as a response to prior comprehensible language. It also has a root on interaction, but it is the consequence of the interactionally modified input.

# data[].attributes.headline
SLA - Coming of age (late 1990s onwards)

# data[].attributes.subject
SLA - Coming of age (late 1990s onwards)

# data[].attributes.body
This period reflected the impact that constructs taken from cognitive psychology had on thinking about L2 acquisition.   Interest in implicit and explicit learning led to a refinement of Krashen’s (1981) earlier ‘acquisition’ and ‘learning’ distinction. Some controversies argued were: conscious learning x implicit learning;  language learning (especially by adults) involved skill-learning x language learning as an essentially implicit process; also explicit/declarative x implicit/procedural knowledge.   It recognizes the ‘mind’ as a central component in learning. Like cognitive-interactionist theories, it emphasizes the importance of interaction in L2 acquisition.

# data[].attributes.headline
SLA - Social turn and Sociocultural SLA (1990s onwards)

# data[].attributes.subject
SLA - Social turn and Sociocultural SLA (1990s onwards)

# data[].attributes.body
By the end of the 1990s, SLA researchers (e.g. Firth & Wagner, 1997) turned to poststructuralist accounts that emphasized learners’ own agency in constructing social opportunities for learning and the importance that social identity played in this. This began what became called the ‘social turn’ in SLA (Block, 2003) and the 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.
The role of interaction was emphasized by the sociocultural theory. According to it, the focus is on the role that mediation plays in the initial development and subsequent internalization of new knowledge. Unlike other social theories, it recognizes the ‘mind’ as a central component in learning.

# data[].attributes.headline
SLA - Recent developments (2000s and 2010s)

# data[].attributes.subject
SLA - Recent developments (2000s and 2010s)

# data[].attributes.body
According to the Complex Dynamic Systems Theory (Complexity Theory combined with Dynamic Systems Theory),  language systems are non-linear, highly variable, individualistic, nonpredictable and always open to change. It's necessary 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.
The ‘multilingual turn’ leads to proposals for redirecting SLA to the investigation of multicompetences (Cook, 1992) and the translanguaging that occurs amongst mixed groups of language users who draw on multiple linguistic resources (May, 2013).