| Acknowledgements |
|
9 | (2) |
| Introduction |
|
11 | (6) |
|
Research into Early Second Language Acquisition |
|
|
|
|
|
17 | (2) |
|
The critical period hypothesis |
|
|
19 | (2) |
|
|
|
21 | (11) |
|
The neurological argument |
|
|
21 | (5) |
|
The cognitive explanation |
|
|
26 | (2) |
|
|
|
28 | (3) |
|
|
|
31 | (1) |
|
SLA research background to the critical period hypothesis |
|
|
32 | (10) |
|
|
|
32 | (2) |
|
|
|
34 | (4) |
|
`The younger the better in some areas' |
|
|
38 | (2) |
|
`The younger the better in the long run' |
|
|
40 | (2) |
|
Conclusions concerning the CPH and their relevance for early foreign language programmes |
|
|
42 | (1) |
|
Pedagogical considerations |
|
|
43 | (1) |
|
Early foreign learning programmes in the 1990s: Issues and implications |
|
|
44 | (7) |
|
|
|
46 | (1) |
|
Aims of instruction and comparability of programmes |
|
|
47 | (2) |
|
Key players: Teachers of young learners |
|
|
49 | (1) |
|
|
|
50 | (1) |
|
Implications for future research |
|
|
51 | (1) |
|
|
|
52 | (2) |
|
|
|
54 | (11) |
|
The Critical Period Hypothesis Reconsidered: Successful Adult Learners of Hungarian and English |
|
|
|
|
|
65 | (2) |
|
|
|
67 | (1) |
|
|
|
68 | (1) |
|
|
|
69 | (3) |
|
|
|
72 | (1) |
|
|
|
73 | (1) |
|
|
|
73 | (11) |
|
|
|
84 | (1) |
|
|
|
85 | (1) |
|
|
|
86 | (3) |
|
Hungarian Children's Foreign Language Learning Motivation |
|
|
|
|
|
89 | (1) |
|
|
|
90 | (4) |
|
|
|
94 | (6) |
|
|
|
95 | (1) |
|
The British primary French research project |
|
|
96 | (1) |
|
Foreign languages in Croatia |
|
|
97 | (3) |
|
EFL in Hungary: The Pecs project |
|
|
100 | (4) |
|
Description of the background |
|
|
100 | (2) |
|
|
|
102 | (1) |
|
|
|
102 | (2) |
|
|
|
104 | (15) |
|
Reasons for learning English |
|
|
104 | (1) |
|
The youngest learners (age 6-8) |
|
|
105 | (1) |
|
Answers of 8-11-year-olds |
|
|
105 | (1) |
|
Answers of 11-14-year-old children |
|
|
106 | (1) |
|
Comparing the three groups |
|
|
107 | (2) |
|
|
|
109 | (1) |
|
|
|
109 | (1) |
|
A comparison to Croat children |
|
|
110 | (1) |
|
The emergence of instrumental-knowledge motives |
|
|
110 | (1) |
|
Lacking integrative motives |
|
|
111 | (1) |
|
English among other school subjects |
|
|
112 | (4) |
|
Mother tongue and other foreign languages |
|
|
116 | (1) |
|
Attitudes towards classroom activities |
|
|
117 | (1) |
|
Children's suggestions and criticism |
|
|
118 | (1) |
|
|
|
119 | (3) |
|
|
|
122 | (1) |
|
|
|
122 | (3) |
|
|
|
125 | (2) |
|
Strategy Use in Hungarian Children's Classrooms Through a Story-Based Syllabus |
|
|
|
|
|
127 | (1) |
|
Background to research: Participants and data collection |
|
|
127 | (1) |
|
|
|
128 | (1) |
|
Children's use of strategies |
|
|
129 | (1) |
|
|
|
130 | (5) |
|
Two specific cognitive strategies of Hungarian learners |
|
|
135 | (3) |
|
|
|
138 | (3) |
|
|
|
141 | (1) |
|
|
|
142 | (3) |
|
Negotiated Classroom Work with Hungarian Children |
|
|
|
|
|
145 | (1) |
|
|
|
145 | (1) |
|
|
|
146 | (1) |
|
Negotiation in the classroom |
|
|
147 | (2) |
|
|
|
149 | (2) |
|
|
|
151 | (1) |
|
|
|
152 | (2) |
|
|
|
154 | (1) |
|
|
|
155 | (1) |
|
|
|
155 | (1) |
|
|
|
156 | (1) |
|
|
|
157 | (2) |
|
`Natural Born Speakers of English': Code Switching in Pair and Group Work in Hungarian Primary Classrooms |
|
|
|
|
|
159 | (1) |
|
Background to the research |
|
|
159 | (3) |
|
Second language classrooms |
|
|
162 | (1) |
|
|
|
163 | (1) |
|
Foreign language contexts |
|
|
164 | (2) |
|
Interaction in the mother tongue |
|
|
166 | (1) |
|
|
|
167 | (19) |
|
Participants and data collection |
|
|
167 | (1) |
|
|
|
168 | (1) |
|
Patterns of interaction in Hungarian FL classrooms |
|
|
169 | (1) |
|
Pupil asks peer for help and/or clarification |
|
|
170 | (3) |
|
Pupils instruct and discipline each other |
|
|
173 | (4) |
|
Pupil provides support by giving explanation |
|
|
177 | (4) |
|
Pupils correct one another |
|
|
181 | (2) |
|
|
|
183 | (3) |
|
|
|
186 | (3) |
|
|
|
189 | (1) |
|
|
|
190 | (1) |
|
|
|
191 | (4) |
|
An Observation Project of Disadvantaged EFL Classrooms |
|
|
|
|
|
195 | (1) |
|
|
|
196 | (1) |
|
|
|
197 | (2) |
|
|
|
199 | (1) |
|
|
|
199 | (3) |
|
|
|
199 | (2) |
|
|
|
201 | (1) |
|
|
|
202 | (1) |
|
|
|
203 | (1) |
|
|
|
204 | (28) |
|
|
|
204 | (1) |
|
|
|
205 | (2) |
|
|
|
207 | (6) |
|
|
|
213 | (12) |
|
|
|
225 | (1) |
|
|
|
226 | (4) |
|
Students' strengths and weaknesses |
|
|
230 | (2) |
|
Conclusions and recommendations |
|
|
232 | (5) |
|
|
|
237 | (1) |
|
|
|
238 | |
