ABSTRACT
As we have seen, a CL approach aims to explain language as speakers actually use it. The form language takes is understood as a reflection of human cognition which arises from human beings’ rich cognitive capabilities and our embodied experience with the world. Conceptualization is equated with meaning, thus meaning is at the heart of CL analyses. This is a very different way of conceptualizing the nature of language from the traditional models which are generally assumed to be by descriptive grammars and ELT/FL teaching materials. A CL approach challenges us to profoundly rethink our assumptions about the nature of language. Moreover, Michael Tomasello's work on L1 learners constructing their language and Nick Ellis's forceful arguments for the compatibility of a CL theory of language and the psychological theory of associative learning, challenge us to rethink many assumptions about the way language is processed and learned. In particular, Ellis’ usage-based arguments, which combine input frequency with principled explanations of learner perceptions of saliency (and hence potential for learner awareness of specific forms) begin to allow predictions about which elements of the L2 are most likely to be learned implicitly and which appear to need explicit intervention.
