origin of the term collocation stating that “the origin of the term collocation is the Latin verb collocare, which means to set in order/to arrange”. It is to be mentioned that the term collocation was introduced by Firth (1957) who defined it as “the company that words keep” (p.183). McCarthy (1990) argued that “the relationship of collocation is fundamental in the study of vocabulary, and collocation is an important organizing principle in the vocabulary of any language” (p.12).
1.6.2. Noticing
Today, there is a general consensus among researchers that noticing is a prerequisite for learning (e.g. Schmidt, 1990, 2001; Robinson, 1995; Schmidt & Frota, 1986). Schmidt (1990, 1995, 2001) defined noticing as the ”allocation of attentional resources to a stimulus and [the identification of] the level at which perceived events are subjectively experienced”. Schmidt also defined noticing in other words claiming that “noticing is the necessary and sufficient condition for converting input into intake” (1990, p. 129). Robinson (1995, p. 296) defined the term noticing to mean “detection plus rehearsal in short-term memory, prior to encoding in long-term memory”.
1.6.3. Reformulation
Cohen (1983, p. 4) defined reformulation as “having a native writer of the target language rewrite the learner’s essay, preserving all the learner’s ideas, making it sound as nativelike as possible”.
1.6.4. Task
The notion of task has been interpreted differently by different scholars. Among all Ellis (2003, p. 16) claimed that:
“A task is a work plan that requires learners to process language pragmatically in order to achieve an outcome that can be evaluated in terms of whether the correct or appropriate propositional content has been conveyed. To this end, it requires them to give primary attention to meaning and to make use of their own linguistic resources, although the design of the task may predispose them to choose particular forms. A task is intended to result in language use that bears a resemblance, direct or indirect, to the way language is used in the real world. Like other language activities, a task can engage productive or receptive, and oral or written skills and also various cognitive processes”.
1.6.5. Intake
Intake is defined as “a process that mediates between target language input and the learner’s internalized set of rules” (Gass, 1988, p. 206). Schmidt (1990, p. 139) claimed that intake is simply “that part of the input that the learner notices”.
1.6.6. Noticing the Gap
Noticing the gap is a process that happens when the language learner makes a comparison between his or her original language production and the teacher’s output and then perceives that his or her inter language is different from the target language (Schmidt & Frota, 1986). According to Doughty (1990, p. 21) noticing the gap is a concept used to elaborate language learners’ reflection on “the difference between what they themselves can or have said and what it is more competent speakers of the target language say instead to convey the same intention under the same social conditions”.
1.6.7. Retention
It is axiomatic that in the domain of vocabulary and collocation learning, the problem is not just learning the natural co-occurrence of words; rather it is remembering them. Remembering collocations or in other words, Collocation retention has been defined as:
“the ability to recall or remember things after an interval of time. In language teaching, retention of what has been taught (e.g. grammar rules and vocabulary) may depend on the quality of teaching, the interest of the learners, or the meaningfulness of the materials” (Richards & Schmidt, 2002, p. 457).
1.7. Summary
This chapter discussed the main framework of the study. First, it discussed the theoretical framework of the research proceeded by an introduction. Second, it attempted to mention the potential problems underlying the issue under investigation. Third, it made an attempt to present the significance and purpose of the study which aimed at initiating the importance of conducting such a research study. Fourth, the research question for which the research was done was presented. Fifth, the hypothesis of the study was mentioned. The last part of the current chapter embraced the description of the operational key terms used in the study.

Chapter Two
Review of the Literature
2.0. Introduction
Chapter two of this study concerns itself with an overview of the theoretical background of the study along with a review of the studies that have been carried out in the field. At the beginning of this chapter, it will consider feedback research into second language acquisition. In addition, this chapter will discuss psycholinguistic processes in second language acquisition and empirical studies on noticing, awareness, attention etc. These studies include those which have been conducted in EFL/ESL situation from the 1990’s to recent experimental studies. It also aims at reflecting the results of cognitive psychology and SLA research.
Recent collocational studies specially those which investigated into the role of psychological processes like noticing, awareness and attention in second language acquisition and foreign language learning are also talked over.
2.1. Feedback Research in SLA
Recent developments in the field of language and technology have led to a growing interest in conducting studies that can provide opportunities for language learning via the mistakes and errors language learners usually make in their oral or written output.
In this respect there is a renewed interest in the effect of feedback type on language acquisition and learning. Accordingly, loads of research studies have been carried out on the role of feedback in SLA, which will be discussed later in this chapter.
2.1.1. The role of feedback in SLA
Feedback on EFL/ESL students’ writing has long been a matter of concern to both language teachers and researchers. In the growing empirical literature, many methods of providing feedback for L2 writing have been challenged. These methods include: peer review (Mendoca & Johnson, 1994; Paulus, 1999; Zhang, 1995), teacher written corrections (Hedgecock & Lefkowitz, 1994; Kepner, 1991), and teacher-learner oral writing conferences (Hyland, 2000; Kassen, 1988; Shi, 1998). The aforementioned studies have questioned the validity of assumptions about second language writing. Some researchers questioned the usefulness of traditional feedback, claiming that it can be discouraging to L2 learners (Hyland, 1998). Papers given back to students are covered by marks making them seem overwhelming, and not every teacher is able to truly balance positive and negative feedback (Hedgecock & Lefkowitz, 1994). In traditional feedback methods, teachers mark only what is incorrect in learners’ work and provide them with only negative evidence (Kassen, 1988) ignoring the positive evidence necessary for refining inter language Hypothesis.
The role of