Commentary from the flower garden: Responding to Gregg, 2000

James P. Lantolf

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

8 Scopus citations

Abstract

I begin my necessarily brief commentary on Gregg (2000) with a confession: I am not, nor have I ever been, a practising postmodernist. I freely admit, however, that some of the ideas that have emerged from this project are sufficiently interesting to take seriously. I wrote my 1996 article to stir up the waters and to explore what a postmodernist perspective might do for, and to, second language acquisition (SLA). It can be useful for any discipline to have its accepted way of doing business interrogated and even disturbed. Judging from Gregg's response, I seem to have succeeded. In what follows I limit my comments to some specific points that appear to have raised most of Gregg's hackles.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)72-78
Number of pages7
JournalSecond Language Research
Volume18
Issue number1
DOIs
StatePublished - Jan 2002

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Education
  • Linguistics and Language

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'Commentary from the flower garden: Responding to Gregg, 2000'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

  • Cite this