Explicit vs. Implicit Exposure to Grammar: Complexity and ‎Accuracy in Negation and Interrogatives

Ali Ansari, Mohammad Hamed Hoomanfard


This paper is an attempt to report the processes happening to two participants developing their interlanguage. Most of the focus is on the acquisition of negation and question forms. It is reported how accurate and complex the negatives and questions they produce are. Some other interesting points other than negatives and questions are referred to during the discussion. All these are done comparatively since one of these participants is exposed to explicit grammar rules while the other one is not exposed to any predetermined explicit grammar rule. Results indicated that the one explicitly exposed to grammar comes with more accuracy and speed of speech while the other one comes with less accuracy and longer pauses in speech and, in return, more structurally complex sentences he comes to.


explicit vs. implicit exposure, grammar, complexity, ‎accuracy, negation, interrogatives

Full Text:



Anderson, R. (1983). Transfer to somewhere. In S. Gass and L. Selinker (Eds.), ‎Language Transfer in Language Learning (pp. 177-201). Rowley, MA: Newbury ‎House.‎

Berko, J. (1958). The child’s learning of English morphology. Word, 14, 150-177.‎

Berry, D. C., & Dienes, Z. (1993). Implicit learning: Theoretical and empirical issues. ‎London: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.‎

Brown, R. (1973). A First Language. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.‎

Cleeremans, A., & Jiménez, L. (2002). Implicit learning and consciousness: A graded, ‎dynamic perspective. In R. M. French & A. Cleeremans (Eds.), Implicit learning and ‎consciousness: An empirical, computational and philosophical consensus in the ‎making. Hove, UK: Psychology Press.‎

Comrie, B. (2003). Typology and language acquisition: the case of relative clauses. In A. ‎Ramat (Ed.). Typology and Second Language Acquisition (pp. 19-37). Berlin: de ‎Grutyer.‎

Dabaghi, A. V. and Basturkmen, H. (2009). The effectiveness of implicit and explicit ‎error correction on learners’ performance. System, 37, 82-98.‎

Eckman, F. (2007). Hypotheses and methods in second language acquisition: testing the ‎noun phrase accessibility hierarchy on relative clauses. Studies in Second ‎Language Acquisition, 29, 321-327.‎

Fu, Q., Fu, X., & Dienes, Z. (2008). Implicit sequence learning and conscious awareness. ‎Consciousness and Cognition, 17, 185–202.‎

Greenberg, J. H. (1963). Some universals of grammar with particular reference to the ‎order of meaningful elements. In J. H. Greenberg (Ed.), Universals of Language(pp. ‎‎73-113). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.‎

Kanno, K. (2007). The role of an innate acquisition device in second language ‎acquisition. In M. Nakayama, R. Mazuka, and Y. Shirari(Eds.), Handbook of East ‎Asian Psycholinguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.‎

Lewis, M. W., & Anderson, J. R. (1985). Discrimination of operator schemata in problem ‎solving: Learning from examples. Cognitive Psychology, 17, 26–65.‎

Lightbown, P. (1983). Exploring relationships between developmental and ‎instructional sequences in L2 acquisition. In H. Seliger and M. H. Long(Eds.), ‎Classroom Oriented Research in Second Language Acquisition (pp. 217-243). ‎Roeley, MA: Newbury House.‎

Lightbown, P., & Spada, N. (2006). How Languages are Learned. Oxford: Oxford ‎University Press.‎

Reber, A.S., (1976). Implicit learning of synthetic learners: the role of instructional set. ‎Journal of Experimental Psychology, Human Learning and Memory, 6, 88–94.‎

Reber, A.S., 1993. Implicit Learning and Tacit Knowledge: An Essay of the Cognitive ‎Unconscious. Oxford University Press: Oxford.‎

Reber, A.S., Allen, R., (1978). Analogy and abstraction strategies in synthetic grammar ‎learning: a functional interpretation. Cognition, 6, 189–221.‎


  • There are currently no refbacks.

Copyright (c) 2019 Journal of Applied Linguistics and Language Research