• Vesna Koceva
  • Vesna Prodanovska-Poposka
Keywords: explicit instruction, acquisition, foreign language, implicit instruction, grammar


This paper presents part of the research studies that have been undertaken in order to determine which grammar instruction appears as more effective - the explicit or the implicit one. Initially, the complexity of the issue and the lack of a generally accepted conclusion of the scientists regarding the effectiveness of explicit and implicit grammar instruction is being discussed. Further on, the paper encompasses the most important studies, researches, results and conclusions that are devoted to this issue, listed in a chronological order. The authors of the cited researches are set to determine whether there is superiority of the implicit approach over the explicit one and vice versa in acquisition of the English, French, Spanish, German and Italian as foreign languages. The paper also provides a summary of the results of various studies comparing the implicit and explicit grammar instruction that were conducted in the period between 1990 and 2010. Therefore, the research has been undertaken in order to find answers to many arguable questions, such as: "Does explicit grammatical explanations and corrected feedback from a teacher influence the improvement of grammatical knowledge?"; "Do explicit explanations play a significant role in the development of linguistic and communicative competences?"; "Do students speak more precisely grammatically-wise if they are provided with explicit instruction accompanied by error correction?"; "Is exposure to input and communicative interactions a sufficient condition for achieving a high level of competence of a foreign language?"; "Do explicit grammatical explanations have a continuous positive effect, that is, does explicit knowledge facilitate the process of use and the implicit acquisition of the same structure?"; "How do explicit grammatical explanations and correction of errors affect the receptive and productive skills in a foreign language?" etc. The conclusion of the paper discusses the outcomes and conclusions from the above-said researches and studies.


A. G. Ramat, Verso l’italiano. Percorsi e strategie di acquisizione. Roma: Carocci, 2003.

C. Herron & M. Tomasello, Acquiring grammatical structures by guided induction. French Review, 65, pp. 708-718, 1992.

C. Doughty, Second language instruction does make a difference: Evidence from an empirical study on SL relativization. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 13, pp. 431-469, 1991.

D. Frantzen, The effects of grammar supplementation on written accuracy in an intermediate Spanish content. Modern Language Journal, 79, pp. 34-39, 1995.

E. Banfi & G. Bernini, Il verbo. In Ramat, A. G. Verso l’italiano. Percorsi e strategie di acquisizione. Roma: Carocci, пп. 70-115, 2003.

E. Macaro & L. Masterman, Does intensive grammar instruction make all the difference. Language Teaching Research, 10(3), pp. 297-327, 2006.

G. Pallotti, La seconda lingua. Milano: Bompiani, 1998.

H. Nassaji & S. Fotos, Current developments in research on the teaching of grammar. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 24, pp. 126-145, 2004.

J. Leeman, I. Arteagoitia, B. Fridman & C. Doughty, Intergrating attention to form with meaning: Focus on form in content-based Spanish instruction. In Schmidt, R. (Ed.), Attention and awareness in foriegn language learning. Honolulu: University of Hawai’I Press, pp. 217-259, 1995.

J. Klapper & J. Rees, Reviewing the case for explicit grammar instruction in the university foreign language learning context. Language Teaching Research, 7(3), pp. 285-314, 2003.

J. M. Norris & L. Ortega, Effectiveness of L2 instruction: A research synthesis and quantitative meta-analysis. Language Learning, 50(3), pp. 417-528, 2000.

J. Williams & J. Evans, Which kind of focus and on which kind of forms? In Doughty, C., & Williams, J. (Eds.), Focus on Form in Classroom Second Language Acquisition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 139-155, 1998. L. Heeffer, What’s grammar got to do with it? Students’ and teachers’ beliefs about the role of grammar and error correction in the EFL classroom in Flanders. M.A. thesis, Universiteit Gent, 2010.

M. Azmi Adel & H. Abu, The effects of deductive and inductive approaches of teaching on Jordanian university students’ use of the passive and active voice in English. College Student Journal, 42(2), pp. 545-553, 2008.

M. Kanda & D. Beglar, Applying Pedagogical Principles to Grammar Instrution, RELC, 35.1, pp. 105-119, 2004.

M. Swain, French immersion and its offshots: getting two for one. In Freed, B. (Ed.), Foreign Language Acquisition: Research and the Classroom. Lexington, MA: Heath, pp. 91-103, 1991.

M. Takimoto, The effects of deductive and inductive instruction on the development of language learner’s pragmatic competence. The Modern Language Journal, 92(3), pp. 369-386, 2008.

M. Tomasello & C. Herron, Feedback for language transfer errors: the garden path technique. Studies in Second Language acquisition, 11, pp. 385-395, 1989.

N. C. Ellis, Frequency effects in language acquisition: A review with implications for theories of implicit and explicit language acquisition. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 24, pp. 143-188, 2002.

P. Lightbown & N. Spada, Focus on form and corrective feedback in communicative language teaching: Effects on second language learning. SSLA, 12(4), pp. 429-448, 1990.

R. Alanen, Input enhancement and rule presentation in second language acquisition. In Schmidt, R. (Ed.), Attention and awareness in foreign language learning. Honolulu, HI: University of Hawaii Press, pp. 259-302, 1995.

R. Ellis, The place of grammar instruction in the Second/Foreign Language Curriculum. In Hinkel, E., & Fotos, S. (Eds.), New Perspectives on grammar teaching in second language classrooms, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, pp. 17-33, 2002.

R. Hammond, Accuracy versus communicative competence: the acquisition of grammar in the second language classroom. Hispania, 74, pp. 408-417, 1988.

R. Erlam, The effects of deductive and inductive instruction on the acquisition of direct object pronouns in French as a second language. The Modern Language Journal, 87(2), pp. 242-260, 2003.

S. Fotos & R. Ellis, Communicating about grammar: A task-based approach. TESOL Quarterly, 25, pp. 605-628, 1991.

T. Terrell, Acquisition in the natural approach: The binding/access framework’. The Modern Language Journal, 70, pp. 213-227, 1986.

T. Terrell, The Role of Grammar Instruction in a Communicative Approach. The Modern Language Journal, 75(1), pp. 52-63, 1991.

T. Tode, Durability problems with explicit instruction in an EFL context: the learning of the English copula ‘be’ before and after the introduction of the auxiliary ‘be’. Language Teaching Research, 11(1), pp. 11-30, 2007.

V. M. Scott, An Empirical Study of Explicit and Implicit Teaching Strategies in French. Modern Language Journal, 73, pp. 14-21, 1989.

How to Cite
Koceva, V., & Prodanovska-Poposka, V. (2019). RESEARCH STUDIES COMPARING THE EFFECTIVENESS OF EXPLICIT AND IMPLICIT GRAMMAR INSTRUCTION. Knowledge International Journal, 30(5), 1117 - 1124. Retrieved from