We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
To save content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about saving content to .
To save content items to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
This chapter reviews the role played by linguistic evidence from the Romance languages in shaping contemporary semantic research. The discussion focuses on a selection of phenomena that have important ramifications for the form–meaning mapping (presupposition, anaphora, (in)definiteness, deixis, tense, negation). For each phenomenon some particularly remarkable cases are discussed, for which research into Romance languages has substantially contributed to theoretical models and analytical advances in the field of semantics. At the same time, a number of outstanding issues are singled out, for which Romance data may prove decisive in future research. From the non-exhaustive overview provided in this chapter, two conclusions emerge most clearly. First, Romance linguistics has proven to be very influential for semantic research thanks to the wide display of microvariation within the Romance family, which represents an ideal testing ground for theories of the form–meaning interface. Second, the diachronic depth that can be reached in examining Romance data is instrumental in opening up new perspectives for research into the historical development of semantic categories.
Drawing from classroom examples of ‘focus on form’, this chapter demonstrates how ‘form’ covers more than just grammar. Referring to second language acquisition research, it explores why a focus on form may be particularly important in the foreign language learning context and why the adolescent learner may be particularly able to benefit from opportunities to focus on features of language. The chapter presents a wide range of options of opportunities to focus on form, including an emphasis on the importance of giving explanations and on the potential for learners to learn from the feedback they get when using the language to communicate. The chapter draws on examples from a range of language classrooms and, also includes examples of the types of planned exercises teachers use to draw learner attention to form.
This chapter reviews corrective feedback studies that focused on the effectiveness of oral corrective feedback on specific morphosyntactic targets in English as a second language. Specifically, this chapter addressed the question of whether the grammatical complexity of the target structure investigated affects the effectiveness of corrective feedback as an instructional intervention. Not only was complexity defined on the basis of formal criteria, but it also incorporated a semantic component from the perspective of the redundancy and transparency of the form–meaning mapping. Eleven studies published between 2006 and 2018 qualified for the research synthesis. The overall findings indicated that, in general, corrective feedback is more effective for simpler grammatical features. The chapter concludes that type of language feature is a relevant dimension to consider in the effectiveness of corrective feedback. The chapter calls for future research on the role of grammatical complexity using categorization methods that consider both formal and semantic complexity features.
Recommend this
Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this to your organisation's collection.