Teachers of English to Speakers of Other Languages, Inc.

(TESOL)

Neurolinguistics and Second Language Acquisition

Author(s): Andrew D. Cohen
Source: TESOL Quarterly, Vol. 16, No. 3 (Sep., 1982), pp. 305-306
Published by: Teachers of English to Speakers of Other Languages, Inc. (TESOL)
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3586629
Accessed: 04-05-2018 09:10 UTC

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide
range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and
facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at
http://about.jstor.org/terms

Teachers of English to Speakers of Other Languages, Inc. (TESOL) is collaborating with

JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to TESOL Quarterly

This content downloaded from 89.164.174.45 on Fri, 04 May 2018 09:10:24 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
 TESOL QUARTERLY
Vol. 16, No. 3
September 1982

Neurolinguistics and Second Language

Acquisition
Andrew D. Cohen, Coordinator

The following three papers were presented at the TESOL Research

Committee's Fourth State of the Art Symposium, TESOL/Detroit, 1981.
The purpose of the symposium was twofold: 1) to demystify our concep-
tions about the neurolinguistic literature, i.e., to provide a knowledge
base about the field, and 2) to stimulate further research related to the
issues addressed. Three research experts from within the ranks of TESOL
were given a year to critically review the growing body of literature on
neurolinguistics and its relation to second language learning and teaching.
Their efforts were carefully orchestrated so that the three papers would
provide a comprehensive and yet focused treatment of some of the major
issues in this growing field.
In this first paper, Seliger considers three broad issues: 1) the lan-
guage functions performed by the right hemisphere after language has
become centralized in the left hemisphere, 2) the linguistic role of the
right hemisphere after lateralization, and 3) the role of right hemisphere
functions in the language acquisition process as opposed to the language
maintainance process. He claims that the right hemisphere has many
functions which may play an important role in second language acquisition.
He also notes that since the hemispheres interact at both the cortical and
subcortical levels, it is best not to teach to one hemisphere exclusively.
In the second paper, Genesee focuses on the growing body of literature
dealing with neurolinguistic investigations of bilinguals. He begins with
clinical studies of bilingual aphasia and reports that the two languages
of the bilingual do not appear to be subserved by different neuropsycho-
logical substrates. He then examines the experimental studies of bilingual-
ism dealing with the extent of right hemisphere involvement in second
language processing. On the basis of this examination, he reports the follow-
ing: 1) there may be greater right hemisphere involvement in language
processing in bilinguals who acquire their second language late, 2) there
may also be greater right hemisphere involvement in bilinguals who learn
their second language in informal contexts, and 3) there is little evidence
that either stage or level of second language proficiency plays an important
Andrew D. Cohen is Associate Professor of Applied Linguistics at Hebrew Univer-
sity, Jerusalem, Israel. Herbert W. Seliger is Professor of Linguistics at Queens College,
C.U.N.Y. Fred Genesee is Associate Professor of Psychology at McGill University.
Thomas Scovel is Assistant Professor of Linguistics at the University of Pittsburg.
805

This content downloaded from 89.164.174.45 on Fri, 04 May 2018 09:10:24 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
306 TESOL Quarterly

role in differential hemispheric proce

lack of consistency across research st
structures investigated (usually lexica
In the final paper, Scovel warns ag
linguistics to second language pedag
searchers and language teachers use
ported on by neuropsychologists to w
the classroom. He also suggests that w
are in studies available in the literatu
subjects are required to do, where i
neurological evidence, and whether
or another portion of the brain would
results. He concludes that: 1) neuropsy
bilinguals, not language learners-th
experimental tasks are often more co
have dealt only with hemispheric late
sions of the brain, and 4) even if it
one or more portions of the brain,
success at language learning.
If these papers appear critical of th
in mind that they were written in the
ing. The authors wish to discourage t
complex problems.

This content downloaded from 89.164.174.45 on Fri, 04 May 2018 09:10:24 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms