A response to Jordan's (2004) 'Explanatory Adequacy and Theories of Second Language Acquisition'

Publisher Website
Google Scholar
Abstract
In a recent paper (Jordan, Geoff Jordan takes issue with some of my claims about second language acquisition (SLA) theory. Specifically, he queries the necessity of a property theory, and he finds my discussion of explanation unsatisfactory. In this brief reply, I try to answer his criticisms. In a brief but interesting paper, Geoff Jordan (2004: 539) raises the issue of explanation in SLA theory. Jordan lists the following ‘key questions’ in discussing theories of SLA: (i) What is the domain of a theory of SLA? (ii) What counts as a good explanation of the phenomena in that domain? (iii) What criteria should be used to evaluate competing theories in the same domain? (iv) Is there any need to keep to a minimum the number of rival theories in a domain? He finds my answers ‘not entirely satisfactory’. I'm happy to agree with him. Still, I'm afraid I find his specific criticisms misplaced, and in what follows I'll try to briefly show why.

This publication has 0 references indexed in Scilit: