Exploring Pienemann’s Processability Theory: A Psycholinguistic Perspective on Second Language Development

The Common European Framework of Reference for Languages (CEFR) has become widely recognised in language education as a framework for describing learners’ language proficiency and establishing expected learning outcomes. While proficiency frameworks provide useful information about what learners are able to do with a language, second language development may also be examined from the perspective of how learners gradually develop the ability to process and produce linguistic structures. This concept paper introduces Pienemann’s Processability Theory (PT), a psycholinguistic theory of language acquisition which explains development in relation to the processing procedures available to learners at a particular stage. According to PT, learners progress through a developmental sequence in which increasingly complex linguistic structures become processable over time. The paper discusses the central assumptions and developmental hierarchy of PT, with particular attention to morphological development in English. It also considers how PT provides another perspective for understanding and profiling learner language alongside more familiar proficiency frameworks such as the CEFR. Although PT has been investigated across different languages and learner populations, research adopting the framework remains relatively limited in Malaysia. Recent studies involving Malaysian learners have begun to demonstrate how PT can be used to examine the development of English and Malay morphology. By introducing PT in an accessible manner, this paper highlights its potential contribution to second language acquisition research and language education, particularly for understanding the developmental processes underlying learners’ grammatical production.

Processability Theory, second language acquisition, psycholinguistics, language processing, morphological development, learner language

1. Abd Haris @ Mohd Nasir, N. D. (2024). Investigating the acquisition of English morphology among Malay-English bilingual secondary school students under different home language exposure [Master's thesis, International Islamic University Malaysia]. IIUM Repository. https://studentrepo.iium.edu.my/entities/publication/1c2c8227-3a65-4c0e-8f4a-f5d168fd2f9a [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

2. Bettoni, C., & Di Biase, B. (2015). Processability Theory: Theoretical bases and universal schedules. In C. Bettoni & B. Di Biase (Eds.), Grammatical development in second languages: Exploring the boundaries of Processability Theory (pp. 19–80). EuroSLA. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

3. Bonilla, C. L. (2015). From number agreement to the subjunctive: Evidence for Processability Theory in L2 Spanish. Second Language Research, 31(1), 53–74. https://doi.org/10.1177/0267658314537291 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

4. Council of Europe. (2020). Common European framework of reference for languages: Learning, teaching, assessment—Companion volume. Council of Europe Publishing. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

5. Di Biase, B. (2002). Focusing strategies in second language development: A classroom-based study of Italian L2 in primary school. In B. Di Biase (Ed.), Developing a second language: Acquisition, processing and pedagogy of Arabic, Chinese, English, Italian, Japanese, Swedish (pp. 95–120). Language Australia. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

6. Di Biase, B. (2008). Focus-on-form and development in L2 learning. In J.-U. Keßler (Ed.), Processability approaches to second language development and second language learning (pp. 197–219). Cambridge Scholars. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

7. Di Biase, B., Kawaguchi, S., & Yamaguchi, Y. (2015). The development of English as a second language. In C. Bettoni & B. Di Biase (Eds.), Grammatical development in second languages: Exploring the boundaries of Processability Theory (pp. 85–116). EuroSLA. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

8. Kaplan, R. M., & Bresnan, J. (1982). Lexical-functional grammar: A formal system for grammatical representation. In J. Bresnan (Ed.), The mental representation of grammatical relations (pp. 173–281). MIT Press. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

9. Levelt, W. J. M. (1989). Speaking: From intention to articulation. MIT Press. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

10. Mohamed Salleh, R. T. A., Di Biase, B., & Ramlan, W. N. M. (2020). The acquisition of English grammar among Malay-English bilingual primary school children. GEMA Online Journal of Language Studies, 20(4), 166–185. https://doi.org/10.17576/gema-2020-2004-10 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

11. Mohamed Salleh, R. T. A., Di Biase, B., & Kawaguchi, S. (2021). Lexical and morphological development: A case study of Malay-English bilingual first language acquisition. Psychology of Language and Communication, 25(1), 29–61. https://doi.org/10.2478/plc-2021-0003 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

12. Mohamed Salleh, R. T. A., Di Biase, B., & Kawaguchi, S. (2023a). The bilingual development of plural marking in a Malay-English child. In S. Kawaguchi, B. Di Biase, & Y. Yamaguchi (Eds.), Processability and language acquisition in the Asia-Pacific region (pp. 165–191). John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/palart.9.07moh [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

13. Mohamed Salleh, R. T. A., Di Biase, B., Kawaguchi, S., & Syed Uzir, S. F. A. (2023b). Exploring the effectiveness of DMFonF on English vocabulary and grammatical plural constructions among Malaysian preschoolers. GEMA Online Journal of Language Studies, 23(4), 56–78. https://doi.org/10.17576/gema-2023-2304-04 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

14. Mohamed Salleh, R. T. A., Kawaguchi, S., & Syed Uzir, S. F. A. (2026). Verb production in Malay-English bilingual preschoolers: A Processability Theory framework. GEMA Online Journal of Language Studies, 26(3), 741–758. https://doi.org/10.17576/gema-2026-2603-15 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

15. Pallotti, G. (2007). An operational definition of the emergence criterion. Applied Linguistics, 28(3), 361–382. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amm018 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

16. Pienemann, M. (1984). Psychological constraints on the teachability of languages. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 6(2), 186–214. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263100005015 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

17. Pienemann, M. (1998). Language processing and second language development: Processability Theory. John Benjamins. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

18. Pienemann, M., & Håkansson, G. (1999). A unified approach towards the development of Swedish as L2: A processability account. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 21(3), 383–420. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263199003022 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

19. Pienemann, M., & Lenzing, A. (2025). Processability Theory. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009375931 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

20. Wan Adnan, W. N. A., & Lotfie, M. M. (2018). The use of adverbials in the verbal production of Malay ESL learners: A Processability approach. LSP International Journal, 4(1), 1–22. https://doi.org/10.11113/lspi.v4n1.43 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

• Assessment of the Role of Artificial Intelligence in Repositioning TVET for Economic Development in Nigeria
• Teachers’ Use of Assure Model Instructional Design on Learners’ Problem Solving Efficacy in Secondary Schools in Bungoma County, Kenya
• “E-Booksan Ang Kaalaman”: Development, Validation, and Utilization of Electronic Book in Academic Performance of Grade 9 Students in Social Studies
• Analyzing EFL University Students’ Academic Speaking Skills Through Self-Recorded Video Presentation
• Major Findings of The Study on Total Quality Management in Teachers’ Education Institutions (TEIs) In Assam – An Evaluative Study