ABSTRACT
If a primary aim of instructed SLA is the development of implicit or procedural knowledge for communicative competence in L2 learners, it then remains to consider the most effective methods to achieve that goal. It might seem logical that communicating and interacting in the L2 classroom can help learners achieve this goal; however, the role of interaction in ISLA has been controversial (R. Sheen, 2005; Swan, 2005). Some early theoretical perspectives on ISLA, based on behaviorism, advocated the formation of good production habits through numerous repetitive drills and the avoidance of linguistic errors. In general, these mechanical drills did not provide opportunities for learners to engage in meaningful communication; in fact, free oral production was not encouraged because learners might make linguistic errors, which would reinforce bad L2 habits (Jin & Cortazzi, 2011). Another early perspective on L2 learning, sometimes referred to as a traditional approach, proposed that communicative competence could be achieved through explicit L2 instruction and step-by-step accumulation of knowledge of grammar rules and vocabulary. This point of view supported grammar translation activities in which learners used their explicit knowledge of grammatical rules and lexical items to translate sentences from the L2 to the L1 or vice versa (Jin & Cortazzi, 2011; Nassaji & Fotos, 2011). However, as has been discussed, the assumption that explicit instruction by itself will result in implicit, proceduralized knowledge is contentious. In many cases, explicit instruction results primarily in explicit knowledge of the information that was taught. Consequently, there has been an effort to introduce into the classroom types of instruction that are more likely to lead to implicit knowledge and communicative competence. One of these methods is meaning-focused interaction.
