Interaction Hypothesis
The interaction hypothesis (Long, 1981; updated 1996) proposes that meaning negotiation during conversational interaction facilitates SLA by making input comprehensible and directing learner attention to gaps between interlanguage and target forms.
Michael Long's interaction hypothesis extended Krashen's input hypothesis by emphasising that conversational interaction — not just exposure — drives acquisition. When communication breaks down, speakers negotiate meaning through clarification requests, confirmation checks, and recasts. These episodes of negotiation push both parties to modify input, making it more comprehensible.
The 1996 revision highlighted three mechanisms: (1) interactionally-modified input that resolves meaning; (2) feedback that makes learners notice the gap between their output and target norms; (3) pushed output — when communication pressure forces learners to restructure their utterances toward more target-like forms.
The interaction hypothesis bridges Krashen (input-focused) and Swain (output-focused) views. It argues that interaction is uniquely powerful because it combines comprehensible input with immediate, contextualised feedback — conditions rarely replicated by passive listening alone.
Check your understanding
Your score:
FAQ
What is "negotiation of meaning" in the interaction hypothesis?
It's the conversational work speakers do when communication breaks down — clarification requests ("Can you say that again?"), confirmation checks ("You mean X?"), and recasts (rephrasing what the learner said correctly). These episodes make input comprehensible and provide implicit feedback.
What is a recast and why does it matter?
A recast is when a more proficient speaker reformulates a learner's utterance correctly without interrupting the flow of conversation. For example, if a learner says "Yesterday I go to school", the partner might respond "Oh, you went to school yesterday?" Recasts provide corrective input while maintaining communicative intent.
How does Long's hypothesis differ from Krashen's?
Krashen says comprehensible input is sufficient for acquisition; interaction is optional. Long says interaction is the mechanism that makes input comprehensible and triggers acquisition — it's not just a delivery vehicle but the process itself.