Monitoring and feedback in the process of language acquisition analysis and simulation

International Journal on Natural Language Computing (IJNLC) Vol. 3, No.4, August 2014
MONITORING AND FEEDBACK
IN THE PROCESS OF LANGUAGE
ACQUISITION
-ANALYSIS AND SIMULATION-Keiko
Morimoto
PhD Candidate at Osaka University Graduate School
of Language and Culture
ABSTRACT
Previously studies have shown that native Japanese and English speakers, constantly monitor their speech,
provide feedback and then correct. Japanese and English have different word orders which make speakers
of both languages monitor their own speech, give feedback and make corrections at different key surface
points. However, structurally, speakers from both languages check their speech and make correction at the
complementizers.1 From there, they continue to produce sentences. As a result, we may say that in order to
efficientlyproduce sentences ( in time and energy ),native Japanese and English speakerscheck their speech
and correct it at the sentence level.
KEYWORDS
Monitor, Feedback, UniversalGrammar, Correcting Method, Maze, Flowchart, Algorithm, Matrix Search
Counter
1.1INTRODUCTION
The purpose of this paper is to try and describe the procedure of producing the sentences which
native Japanese and English speakers use. To describe the procedure, a maze, flowchart of
algorithms and Excel VBA MACRO are used to show that the both speakers find the shortest way
possible to produce sentences. In order to simulate consciousness using computer systems
(Czora, 2001), human concepts cannot function like part of an ordinary computer program
because they are not formed automatically. Instead, simulated concepts can be used by the system
that simulates the volitional consciousness of a human being .In this paper, we claim that we can
describe the procedure via a system that simulates the volitional consciousness of a human being.
1.2MAZE
Mazes are used for reinforcement learning. According to Hacibeyoglu, reinforcement learning is
the problem faced by an agent that must learn behavior through trial and error interactions within
1Morimoto, The Monitoring and Feedback of Natural Conversation Processing
DOI : 10.5121/ijnlc.2014.3401 1

2
a dynamic environment that lacks the educational examples.
1.3 ALGORITHMS
In this paper, a flowchart of algorithms is used to show the step-by-step procedure for calculation
and data processing.
1.4 EXCELVBA MACRO
A spreadsheet process called a VBA macro written for Microsoft EXCEL is used to explain
grammatical systems that make up human language. It simulates the specific grammatical systems
that make up a major part of the language.
2.1 DATA
From our previous study regarding the monitoring and feedback of natural conversation
processing, we noticed that native speaker of Japanese and of English always monitored their own
speech and made corrections at the sentence levelswhile they were conversing with others. Here
is a sentence in Japanese and English:
A sentence according to a native Japanese speaker:
(1) Watashi-ha asu hayaku haha-to Kyotoni ikimasu,ikitaidesu-ga otenki-ga shinpaidesu.(I
will go to Kyoto with my mother first tomorrow, I want to go,but I wonder about tomorrow’s
weather.)
A sentence bya native English speaker:
(2) I take, (2)’I use the minimal framework to consider the structure.

According to Chomsky, when the speaker begins to speak, his sentence structure is already built
in his mind/brain. We may argue that the sentence (2) has a structure which is illustrated above.
An English Speaker:
3
(3) I use the minimal framework to (3)’ to consider the structure
2.2A PROBLEM
From the above examples from (1) to (3)’we can raise a question. Why do both native speakers
change and create the sentence at the sentence level even though there are differences in English
and Japanese?Are there any special reasonsto change and create sentences at the sentencelevel?
2.3 The MAZE APPLIED TO THE DATA
To consider the problem(2.2), we apply the Maze to the data and see the mechanism of the
correcting method.The maze shows that both native speakers change and create sentences at the
word and sentence level. Once they have learned, they only traverse X1to X2 to X3 to X4 to X5
to Y1 to Y2 to Y3to Y4 (Goal).The matrix search counter from Xa1.Ya2 to Xa4.Ya5 shows the
linguistic learning mistakes and the process of linguistic learning.

watashi-ha asu hayaku haha-to Kyoto-ni ikimasu, ikitaidesu-ga
ikitaidesu-ga”.Again, this means that
I take ”, but monitors his speech
I use the minimal framework to,” and he monitors his
to consider the syntax.”
4
Table 1. Maze for both Japanese and English and matrix search counter
If a Japanese speaker says,
‟
otennki-ga shinnpaidesu.”( I will go to Kyoto with my mother early tomorrow, but I wonder about
tomorrow’s weather.) In Japanese, the verb is at the end of the sentence, so this speaker says
watashi-wa----------ikimasu”, and changes the verb to
‟‟
she has saved 8 words ( watashi, ha, asu, hayaku, haha, to, ‟
Kyoto, ni ) in her speech to convey
sentence meaning. On the other hand, If an English speaker says
‟
and he changes it just after the verb(
take”), he will say
‟
‟
I use the minimal framework to consider
the structure.” That means he monitors his speech and changes it just after the verb.He has saved
the 7 words in this case. Also, he says
‟
speech andpauses just after
to”.Then he continueshis speech and says
‟
‟
In this sentence, he has saved 5 words ( I, use, the, minimal, framework)insteadof repeating again
from the beginning.
2.4 THE ALGORITHM FLOWCHART AND EXCEL VBA MACROAPPLIED
TO THE
DATA
2.4.1The following algorithm flowchart shows a sentence in Japanese and English.

n” indicates how many words the speaker uses to make a sentence.
5
2.4.2 The following program is repeated from 1 to 5 in X and 1 to 4 in Y.
Sub MacroA( ) ‘In the name of the macro
For x = 1 To 5 ‘X is repeated from 1 to 5 in the For Next syntax.
Next ‘ For was carried back to a single x
Application.Run "MacroB" ‘ X is repeated 5 times and run the macro B
ActiveSheet.PrintPreview ‘ Y is repeated from 1 to 4 and print review
End Sub ‘Macro B has been runand close the macro
Sub MacroB()
‘Macro B
For Y = 1 To 4 ‘ For Next syntax for Y
Next ‘ For was carried back to a single x
End Sub ‘Exit the macro B
2.4.3 The following program will be repeated until the number 1-9 on the stage, A1, B2, C3 from
the cell. The value of n is shown in the position Range(
K1”).
‟
Sub Input1To9 () ‘ Macro to enter on the stage anumber in the range of 1 to9
Dim i As Integer ‘ Define i as an integer
For i=1 To 9 ‘ It is imperative to repeat 1 to9 until i
Cells(i,i)=i ‘ Take the contents of what is contained in the space called
i”and stuff it into the space called
Cells(i,i)”
‟
‟
n=Cells(i,i).Value ‘The assignment of the cells (i,i) the value of the n
Range(
K1”).Value=n ‘To display the value of n in range(
K1”).
‟
‟
Next i ‘Repeat the above program i until 9
End Sub ‘ Exit the macro
In this program, the value of
‟
We also have developed a spreadsheet process to imply a computational process on the process of
language acquisition as follows:

6
Table 2. A spreadsheet process to imply a computational process
2.4.4 The definition used for words used in algorithms.
1.Start Japanese or English speaker changes his/her word or
sentence
2.Step=Step+1 Check text word
3.Counter Automatically counts occurrences
4.Goal Correct
2.4.5The following algorithm flowchart shows how a native Japanese speakers changes a word(
Kyoto) to another word(Nara).

7
Fig.5. Algorithm flowchart for Japanese
Here, a native Japanese speaker monitors, provides feedback on his speech, picks up a correct
word ( a new word: Table 1, Z ) and changes it from the previous word.
Cells(1, 2).Value = "
②
" ‘Input Value"
②
" into Cells(1, 2)
③
" ‘Input Value"
③
" into Cells(1, 3)
④
" ‘Input Value"
④
" into Cells(1, 4)
⑤
" ‘Input Value"
⑤
" into Cells(1, 5)

8
⑥
" ‘Input Value"
⑥
" into Cells(1, 6)
⑦
" ‘Input Value"
⑦
" into Cells(1, 7)
⑧
" ‘Input Value"
⑧
" into Cells(1, 8)
⑨
" ‘Input Value"
⑨
" into Cells(1, 9)
Cells(2, 1).Value = "Watasi" ‘Input Value" Watasi " into Cells(2, 1)
Cells(3, 2).Value = "ha" ‘Input Value" ha " into Cells(3, 2)
Cells(4, 3).Value = " asu " ‘Input Value" asu " into Cells(4, 3)
Cells(5, 4).Value = "hayaku" ‘Input Value" hayaku " into Cells(5, 4)
Cells(6, 5).Value = "haha" ‘Input Value" haha " into Cells(6, 5)
Cells(7, 6).Value = "to"
‘Input Value" to " into Cells(7, 6)
Cells(8, 7).Value = "Kyoto"
‘Input Value" Kyoto " into Cells(8, 7)
Cells(9, 7).Value = " ‘Input Valueinto Cells(9, 7)
Cells(10, 7).Value = Nara ‘Input Value Nara into Cells(10,7)
Cells(11, 8).Value = ni
‘Input Value ni into Cells(11, 8)
Cells(12, 9).Value = Ikimasu ‘Input Value Ikimasu into Cells(12, 9)
End Sub
Table 3. A spreadsheet process to imply a computational process on the process
2.4.6The following algorithm flowchart shows how a native English speaker changes a word
( syntax ) to another word(framework).

9
Fig.6. Algorithm flowchart for English
Here, a native English speaker monitors and feeds back his speech, then picks up a correct word (
a new word : Table 1, W ) and changes it from the previous word. The results show that both
native speakers try to change words when they monitor them and make corrections. According to
the relationship between the critical period hypothesis and monitor and feedback capability, this is
true not only for the native speakers of English and Japanese, but also the non-native speakers of
Japanese and English. They all try to change words when they monitor them and make
corrections.
Cells(1, 1).Value =
①
‘Input Value
①
into Cells(1, 1)
Cells(1, 2).Value =
②
‘Input Value
②
into Cells(1, 2)
Cells(1, 3).Value =
③
‘Input Value
③
into Cells(1, 3)
Cells(1, 4).Value =
④
‘Input Value
④
into Cells(1, 4)

10
Cells(1, 5).Value =
⑤
‘Input Value
⑤
into Cells(1, 5)
Cells(1, 6).Value =
⑥
‘Input Value
⑥
into Cells(1, 6)
Cells(1, 7).Value =
⑦
‘Input Value
⑦
into Cells(1, 7)
Cells(1, 8).Value =
⑧
‘Input Value
⑧
into Cells(1, 8)
Cells(1, 9).Value =
⑨
‘Input Value
⑨
into Cells(1, 9)
Cells(2, 1).Value = I ‘Input Value I into Cells(2, 1)
Cells(3, 2).Value = use ‘Input Value use into Cells(3, 2)
Cells(4, 3).Value = the ‘Input Value the into Cells(4, 3)
Cells(5, 4).Value = minimal ‘Input Value minimal into Cells(5, 4)
Cells(6, 5).Value = syntax ‘Input Value syntax into Cells(6, 5)
Cells(7, 6).Value = ‘Input Value into Cells(7, 5)
Cells(8, 7).Value = framework ‘Input Value framework into Cells(8, 5)
Cells(9, 7).Value = to ‘Input Value to into Cells(9, 6)
Cells(10, 7).Value = consider ‘Input Value consider into Cells(10, 7)
End Sub
2.4.7The following algorithm flowchart shows that how to make and continue two Japanese
sentences by a native Japanese speaker. This is shown in data (1).

11
Fig.7. Algorithm flowchart for Japanese
Here, native Japanese speakerscan change the verb to a verb plus a conjunction when they try to
make another sentence.

12
Cells(1, 1).Value =
①
‘Input Value
①
into
Cells(1, 1)
Cells(1, 2).Value =
②
‘Input Value
①
into Cells(1, 1)
Cells(1, 3).Value =
③
‘Input Value
③
into Cells(1, 3)
Cells(1, 4).Value =
④
‘Input Value
④
into Cells(1, 4)
Cells(1, 5).Value =
⑤
‘Input Value
⑤
into Cells(1, 5)
Cells(1, 6).Value =
⑥
‘Input Value
⑥
into Cells(1, 6)
Cells(1, 7).Value =
⑦
‘Input Value
⑦
into Cells(1, 7)
Cells(1, 8).Value =
⑧
‘Input Value
⑧
into Cells(1, 8)
Cells(1, 9).Value =
⑨
‘Input Value
⑨
into Cells(1, 9)
Cells(1, 10).Value =
⑩
‘Input Value
⑩
into Cells(1, 10)
⑪
‘Input Value
⑪
into Cells(1, 11)
⑫
‘Input Value
⑫
into Cells(1, 12)
⑬
‘Input Value
⑬
into Cells(1, 13)
Cells(2, 1).Value = Watasi ‘Input Value Watasi into Cells(2, 1)
Cells(3, 2).Value = ha ‘Input Value ha into Cells(3, 2)
Cells(4, 3).Value = asu ‘Input Value asu into Cells(4, 3)
Cells(5, 4).Value = hayaku ‘Input Value hayaku into Cells(5, 4)
Cells(6, 5).Value = haha ‘Input Value haha into Cells(6, 5)
Cells(8, 7).Value = Kyoto ‘Input Value Kyoto into Cells(8, 7)
Cells(9, 8).Value = ni ‘Input Value ni into Cells(9, 8)
Cells(10, 9).Value = ikimasu ‘Input Value ikimasu into Cells(10,9)
Cells(11, 9).Value = “” ‘Input Value“” into Cells(11,9)
Cells(12, 9).Value = Ikitaidesu ‘Input Value Ikitaidesu into Cells (12,9)
Cells(13, 10).Value = ga ‘Input Value ga into Cells (13,10)
Cells(14, 11).Value = otenki ‘Input Value otenki into Cells(14,11)
Cells(15, 12).Value = ga ‘Input Value ga into Cells(15,12)
Cells(16, 13).Value = schinpaidesu ‘Input Value schinpaidesu into Cells(16,13)
End Sub

13
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13
1 ①
②
① ① ① ① ①
⑧
⑨
⑩
⑪
⑫
⑬
2 subject wa-ta-shi
3 particle ha
4 adverb asu
5 adverb ha-ya-ku
6 noun ha-ha
7postposition to
8 noun Kyo-to
9 p.p2 ni
10 verb iki-masu
11
12 verb iki-tai-des
13
conjunction
ga
14 noun oten
-
ki
15 p.p ga
16 verb
shin-pai-desu
2.4.8The following algorithm flowchart shows 1 to 2 in X, 1 to 5 in X and is repeated from 1 to 4
in Y.This is shown in data (2) and (2)’.
2 Abbrevation p.p : postposition

14
Fig.8.Algorithm flowchart for Japanese
Here, when a native English speaker tries to make a new sentence, he only changes the verb and
then continues to make a new sentence.
The following program is shown in data (2) and (2)’
Sub MacroA( )
‘ In the name of macro
Dim A as Variant ‘Define A as a string, number and object type
For x = 1 To 2
‘ X is repeated from 1 to 2 in the For Next Syntax
Next
‘ For is carried back to a single x
Application.Run
‟
MacroB
‘ X is repeated 2 times and run the macro B
End Sub
‘The B has been run and close the macro
Sub MacroB()
‘The macro B
For Y = 1 To 2
‘For Next Syntax for Y
Next
Application. Run
‟
MacroC” ‘ Y is repeated from 1 to 2and run the macro C
End Sub ‘ Macro c has been run and close the macro
Sub MacroC( ) ‘In the name of macro
For x = 1 To 9
‘X is repeated from 1 to 9 in the For Next syntax
Next
Application.Run
‟
MacroD
‘ xis repeated 9 times and run the macro D
End Sub
‘Macro D has been run and close the macro
Sub MacroD()
‘ Macro D
For Y = 1 To 9
‘ For Next Syntax for Y
Next
‘ Y is carried back to single x
ActiveSheet.PrintPreview ‘Y is repeated from 1 to9 and print review
End Sub ‘Exit the macro D
Macro_de_hyouzi()
Cells(1, 1).Value =
①
‘Input Value
①
into Cells(1, 1)
Cells(1, 2).Value =
②
‘Input Value
②
into Cells(1, 2)

15
Cells(1, 3).Value =
③
‘Input Value
③
into Cells(1, 3)
Cells(1, 4).Value =
④
‘Input Value
④
into Cells(1, 4)
Cells(1, 5).Value =
⑤
‘Input Value
⑤
into Cells(1, 5)
Cells(1, 6).Value =
⑥
‘Input Value
⑥
into Cells(1, 6)
Cells(1, 7).Value =
⑦
‘Input Value
⑦
into Cells(1, 7)
Cells(1, 8).Value =
⑧
‘Input Value
⑧
into Cells(1, 8)
Cells(1, 9).Value =
⑨
‘Input Value
⑨
into Cells(1, 9)
Cells(3, 2).Value = take ‘Input Value take into Cells(3, 2)
Cells(8, 5).Value = framework ‘Input Valueframework into Cells(8, 5)
consider “ ‘Input Value consider into Cells(10, 7)
End Sub
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
1 ① ① ①
④
⑤
⑥
① ① ①
2 subject I
3 verb use
4 subject I
5 verb take
6 article the
7 object minimal
8 object framework
9 infinitive
marker
to
10 -
infinitive
verb
consider
11 article the
12 object syntax
2.4.9The following algorithm flowchart shows how to make and continue an infinitive sentence
by native English speaker. This is shown in data (3) and (3)’.

16
Fig.9. Algorithm flowchart for English
In this speech, a native English speaker has a PRO as a subject of an infinitiveclause, so he could
continue and repeat from the infinitive clause to complete the sentence and convey its meaning.
Cells(1, 1).Value =
①
‘Input Value
①
into
Cells(1, 1)
Cells(1, 2).Value =
②
‘Input Value
②
into Cells(1, 2)
Cells(1, 3).Value =
③
‘Input Value
③
into Cells(1, 3)
Cells(1, 4).Value =
④
‘Input Value
④
into Cells(1, 4)
Cells(1, 5).Value =
⑤
‘Input Value
⑤
into Cells(1, 5)
Cells(1, 6).Value =
⑥
‘Input Value
⑥
into Cells(1, 6)

17
Cells(1, 7).Value =
⑦
‘Input Value
⑦
into Cells(1, 7)
Cells(1, 8).Value =
⑧
‘Input Value
⑧
into Cells(1, 8)
Cells(1, 9).Value =
⑨
‘Input Value
⑨
into Cells(1, 9)
Cells(6, 5).Value = framework ‘Input Value framework into Cells(6, 5)
Cells(8, 7).Value = ‘Input Value into Cells(8, 7)
consider “ ‘Input Value consider into Cells(10, 7)
End Sub
This can be expressed briefly in the following mathematical equation
f(x)={new_word if target_word=current word
current_word+1 otherwise
We also have developed a spreadsheet process to imply a computational process on the
process of language acquisition as follows:
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
1 ① ① ①
④
⑤
⑥
⑦
⑧
⑨
2 Subject I
3 verb use
4 article the
5 object minimal
6 object framework
7 infinitive
marker
to
8
9 infinitive
marker
to
10
Infinitive
verb
consider
11 article the
12 object syntax

.In other word, when he starts
and may stop speaking to minimize
18
3.1 RESULTS
Based on our simulation of our data, we can summarize the results as follows.
1. In Japanese, the verb is at the end of the sentence, so the speaker just changes the verb in
order to continue making another statement.
2. In English, the verb is in the second position of the sentence and if the
speaker wants to change his statement, he does so just after the verb and then again from the
subject of the new sentence.
3. In English, when the speaker uses“infinitive” in his statement, he stops his statements just
after “to”, and continues his speech from there.
In results 1 to 3, both speakers efficientlysave the words to make and continue statements.
We also may illustrate these results as the speaker’s estimation of cost as follows:
The estimation of a Japanese speaker:
The speaker can not estimate how much it will cost at this point
➀
to speak, he can not estimate how much it will cost.
1) Watashi-ha asu hayaku haha-to Kyoto-ni Ikimasu
➀ ➁
1)’ Ikitaidesui-ga otenki-ga shinpaidesu.
COST
In this utterance, cost refers to the omitted utterance: “watashi-ha asu haha to Kyoto ni ikimasu”
in 1). The speaker needs time and energy to speak these 8 words. The speaker can estimate how
much it will cost to utter them at this point
➁
and may omit them to minimize the cost. As a
result, the speaker can start making another sentence from the point of of the verb
➁
changing
it from “a verb” to “ a verb+conjunction”.
The estimation of an English speaker:
The speaker cannot estimate how much it will cost at this point
. In other
➂
words, when he starts to speak, he cannot estimate how much it will cost.
2) I take
COST
➂
The speaker can estimate how much will it cost at this point
④
the cost.
2)’I take
COST
4
In this utterance, cost refers to the omitted utterance:” the minimal framework consider to the
syntax” in 2). The speaker needs time and energy
to speak these 7 words. As a result, the speaker can start to speak from the point of the subject of
the new sentence as follows:
2)’I use the minimal framework to consider the syntax.

and may stop speaking to
19
The estimation of an English speaker.
This speaker can not estimate how much it will cost at this point ı.That is:
3) I use the minimal framework to
5
COST
➅
The speaker can estimate how much it will cost at this point
➅
minimize the cost.
The estimation of an English speaker:
3) ’to consider the syntax.
COST
➆
In this utterance, cost refers to omitted utterance: “I use the minimal framework to” in 3). The
speaker needs time and energy to speak these 6 words. As a result, the speaker can start to speak
from the “to infinitive”
to continue to complete his statement.
3.2CONCLUSION
➆
From this result, we may say that when we start to acquire language, our monitoring and feedback
system is activated to correct and create our speech. In other words,we may infer that “economy”
is one of reasons (a mechanism in the Universal Grammar) that native speakers use this correcting
method ( monitoring and feedback)at the word and sentence level.
REFERENCES
[1] Chomsky, N.1965.Aspects of the Theory of Syntax. Cambridge:M.I.T.Press.
[2] Chomsky, N. 1975. Reflections on Language. New York: Pantheon Books.
[3] Chomsky, N.1981.Lecture on Government and Binding: The Pisa Lectures.Holland:Foris Publications.
Reprint. 7th Edition. Berlin and New York: Mount de Gruyter,1993.
[4] Chomsky, N. 1982. Some Concepts and Consequences of the Theory of Government and Binding
[Concepts]. Cambridge: M.I.T. Press.
[5] Chomsky, N.1986. Knowledge of Language : Its Nature, Origin, and Use.New York: Praeger.
[6] Chomsky, N. 1988. Language and Problems of Knowledge: The Managua Lectures. Cambridge,
Mass.:M.I.T.Press.
[7] Chomsky, N. 1995. The Minimalist Program. Cambridge: M.I.T.Press.
[8] Czora,G.2001. How to Simulate Consciousness Using A Computer System.Blue Oak Mountain
Technologies,Inc.
[9] Hacibeyoglu,M.2010.Reinforcement learning accelerated with natural network for maze and search
problems. Human System Interaction,2010 3rd Conference on. p.p.124-127.
[10] Lenneberg, N.1967.Biological Foundations of Language. Cambridge,Mass.: John Wiley Sons, Inc.

[11] Kodaka, T. 2010. AI application for the first time: Network Agent and Machine Learning created in C
20
language.Ohmsha.
[12] Krashen, D.1981. Second Language Acquisition and Second Language Learning. Oxford: Pergamon .
[13] Kuno, S. 1973. The Structure of the Japanese Language. Cambridge: M.I.T.Press.
[14] Mikami, A. 1963. Japanese Sentence Structure.Tokyo: Kuroshio .
[15] Mikami, A. 1972.[1953]. Gendai goh-o jyosetsu. Shintakkusu no kokoromi [The Introduction of the
grammar of the modern language: An attempt at syntax]. Tokyo: Kuroshio.
[16] Morimoto, K.1990. A Case Study of Acquisition of Japanese:Development of Verbs. Unpublished
Master’s Thesis, The Graduate Course at HyogoUniversity of Teacher Education.
[17] Morimoto, K. 2011. The Monitoring and Feedback of Natural Conversation Processing:Facets of
Foreign Language Teaching Today, Osaka University Graduate School of Language and Culture.
pp.53-65.
[18] Morimoto,K. 2012. The Relationship between the Critical PeriodHypothesis and Monitor and
Feedback Capability.Society for the Study of Language and Culture. 41st Annual Meeting.
OralPresentation.
[19] Nagai,Y.2000. Excel VBA MACRO.Gijyutsu Hyouronnsya.
[20] Radford, A.2004.Minimalist Syntax : Exploring the Structure of English.Cambridge University Press.
[21] Stutton, S.R. and Barto, G.A. 1998. Reinforcement Learning: An Introduction.M.I.T. Press.

Monitoring and feedback in the process of language acquisition analysis and simulation

More Related Content

What's hot (9)

Viewers also liked (20)

Similar to Monitoring and feedback in the process of language acquisition analysis and simulation (20)

Recently uploaded (20)

Monitoring and feedback in the process of language acquisition analysis and simulation