Sybille Heinzmann, Robert Hilbe, Kristina Ehrsam, Lukas Bleichenbacher
Our contribution draws on quantitative data from a longitudinal mixed‐methods study to uncover different patterns of social contacts of study abroad (SA) students and the relationship of these social contacts with (a) language use, (b) target language development, and (c) contextual variables. Data were obtained by means of online questionnaires pre, during, and post sojourn. English oral proficiency gains were measured using the Oral Proficiency Interview by Computer (OPIc) test before and after the stay. Latent profile analysis yielded four profiles of social contacts, which differed in terms of the degree of integration into the community of locals or international students. Students with distinct profiles differ significantly with respect to language use but not in terms of language gains. Regression analyses indicate that comparable progress in oral proficiency was made by students across profiles of social contacts and also by those in an English as a lingua franca (ELF) context suggesting that different SA context and networking patterns are conducive to second language (L2) gains.
{"title":"Study Abroad Students’ Social Contacts in Different Linguistic Contexts and Their Relationship With English Use and Development","authors":"Sybille Heinzmann, Robert Hilbe, Kristina Ehrsam, Lukas Bleichenbacher","doi":"10.1111/lang.12674","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/lang.12674","url":null,"abstract":"Our contribution draws on quantitative data from a longitudinal mixed‐methods study to uncover different patterns of social contacts of study abroad (SA) students and the relationship of these social contacts with (a) language use, (b) target language development, and (c) contextual variables. Data were obtained by means of online questionnaires pre, during, and post sojourn. English oral proficiency gains were measured using the Oral Proficiency Interview by Computer (OPIc) test before and after the stay. Latent profile analysis yielded four profiles of social contacts, which differed in terms of the degree of integration into the community of locals or international students. Students with distinct profiles differ significantly with respect to language use but not in terms of language gains. Regression analyses indicate that comparable progress in oral proficiency was made by students across profiles of social contacts and also by those in an English as a lingua franca (ELF) context suggesting that different SA context and networking patterns are conducive to second language (L2) gains.","PeriodicalId":51371,"journal":{"name":"Language Learning","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.4,"publicationDate":"2024-09-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142321541","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Gwen Brekelmans, Bronwen G. Evans, Elizabeth Wonnacott
Substantial research suggests that high variability (multitalker) phonetic training helps second language (L2) adults improve differentiation of challenging nonnative speech sounds. Is such training also useful for L2 children? Existing studies have mixed findings and important limitations. We investigate the potential benefits of computerized phonetic training for 50 Dutch 7‐year‐olds and 39 11‐year‐olds trained on English vowel contrasts in a 2‐week study in a classroom setting. Half received multitalker, and half received single‐talker input (i.e., high variability vs. low variability; HV vs. LV), with learning evaluated by a battery of tests. Both groups improved in training; however, 11‐year‐olds improved more. Moreover, 11‐year‐olds showed generalization to novel talkers, and 7‐year‐olds did not, with Bayes factor analyses providing evidence for the null. Generalisation in 11‐year‐olds was no greater following HV than LV input, with evidence for the null on one of two tasks where generalization was found. Results are discussed in terms of the interplay between age, task demands, and talker variability.
{"title":"Training Child Learners on Nonnative Vowel Contrasts With Phonetic Training: The Role of Task and Variability","authors":"Gwen Brekelmans, Bronwen G. Evans, Elizabeth Wonnacott","doi":"10.1111/lang.12677","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/lang.12677","url":null,"abstract":"Substantial research suggests that high variability (multitalker) phonetic training helps second language (L2) adults improve differentiation of challenging nonnative speech sounds. Is such training also useful for L2 children? Existing studies have mixed findings and important limitations. We investigate the potential benefits of computerized phonetic training for 50 Dutch 7‐year‐olds and 39 11‐year‐olds trained on English vowel contrasts in a 2‐week study in a classroom setting. Half received multitalker, and half received single‐talker input (i.e., high variability vs. low variability; HV vs. LV), with learning evaluated by a battery of tests. Both groups improved in training; however, 11‐year‐olds improved more. Moreover, 11‐year‐olds showed generalization to novel talkers, and 7‐year‐olds did not, with Bayes factor analyses providing evidence for the null. Generalisation in 11‐year‐olds was no greater following HV than LV input, with evidence for the null on one of two tasks where generalization was found. Results are discussed in terms of the interplay between age, task demands, and talker variability.","PeriodicalId":51371,"journal":{"name":"Language Learning","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.4,"publicationDate":"2024-09-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142321809","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Native language (L1) attrition is ubiquitous in modern globalized society, but its cognitive/psycholinguistic mechanisms are poorly understood. We investigated lexico‐semantic L1 attrition in L1 Russian immigrants in Israel, who predominantly use their second language (L2), Hebrew, in daily life. We included Russian monolinguals as a control group. We tested two potential causal mechanisms of attrition: L2 interference versus L1 disuse. Participants completed a fill‐the‐gap task in two conditions: accuracy (producing one exactly matching word) and scope (providing as many synonyms as possible). We expected L2 interference and L1 disuse to lead to the differential reduction of accuracy and scope features, respectively. Lower scores for attriters emerged in the accuracy but not in the scope condition. Moreover, attitude towards L1 influenced attriters’ accuracy—but not scope—performance, with higher L1 preference predicting higher accuracy. We provide evidence for lexico‐semantic attrition in adult immigrants, pointing to L2 interference as the primary cause of impaired lexical retrieval.
{"title":"Lexico‐Semantic Attrition of Native Language: Evidence From Russian–Hebrew Bilinguals","authors":"Federico Gallo, Beatriz Bermúdez‐Margaretto, Anastasia Malyshevskaya, Yury Shtyrov, Hamutal Kreiner, Mikhail Pokhoday, Anna Petrova, Andriy Myachykov","doi":"10.1111/lang.12678","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/lang.12678","url":null,"abstract":"Native language (L1) attrition is ubiquitous in modern globalized society, but its cognitive/psycholinguistic mechanisms are poorly understood. We investigated lexico‐semantic L1 attrition in L1 Russian immigrants in Israel, who predominantly use their second language (L2), Hebrew, in daily life. We included Russian monolinguals as a control group. We tested two potential causal mechanisms of attrition: L2 interference versus L1 disuse. Participants completed a fill‐the‐gap task in two conditions: accuracy (producing one exactly matching word) and scope (providing as many synonyms as possible). We expected L2 interference and L1 disuse to lead to the differential reduction of accuracy and scope features, respectively. Lower scores for attriters emerged in the accuracy but not in the scope condition. Moreover, attitude towards L1 influenced attriters’ accuracy—but not scope—performance, with higher L1 preference predicting higher accuracy. We provide evidence for lexico‐semantic attrition in adult immigrants, pointing to L2 interference as the primary cause of impaired lexical retrieval.","PeriodicalId":51371,"journal":{"name":"Language Learning","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.4,"publicationDate":"2024-09-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142306399","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
This study investigates whether syntactic unification occurs during online L2 sentence comprehension using time‐frequency analysis. We measured the oscillatory power changes in native English speakers and L1‐Cantonese L2‐English speakers while they were reading well‐formed English sentences, syntactically intact nonsense sentences, and random word lists. Additionally, we conducted traditional ERP analyses to test L2 speakers’ sensitivity to NP‐internal number (dis)agreement. The results show that low‐beta power significantly increased in the L2 group when reading not only well‐formed sentences but also nonsense sentences, replicating the pattern found in the L1 group. This suggests that syntactic unification occurs in L2 comprehension as reliably as in L1 comprehension. However, L2 speakers did not show increased positivity for NP‐internal number disagreement, indicating that they have not developed native‐like sensitivity to this syntactic error. The implications of these time‐frequency and ERP data for L2 sentence processing and syntactic development are discussed.
{"title":"Neural Evidence for Syntactic Unification in Second Language Sentence Comprehension: A Time‐Frequency Analysis","authors":"Yoonsang Song, Yu Li, Patrick C. M. Wong","doi":"10.1111/lang.12676","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/lang.12676","url":null,"abstract":"This study investigates whether syntactic unification occurs during online L2 sentence comprehension using time‐frequency analysis. We measured the oscillatory power changes in native English speakers and L1‐Cantonese L2‐English speakers while they were reading well‐formed English sentences, syntactically intact nonsense sentences, and random word lists. Additionally, we conducted traditional ERP analyses to test L2 speakers’ sensitivity to NP‐internal number (dis)agreement. The results show that low‐beta power significantly increased in the L2 group when reading not only well‐formed sentences but also nonsense sentences, replicating the pattern found in the L1 group. This suggests that syntactic unification occurs in L2 comprehension as reliably as in L1 comprehension. However, L2 speakers did not show increased positivity for NP‐internal number disagreement, indicating that they have not developed native‐like sensitivity to this syntactic error. The implications of these time‐frequency and ERP data for L2 sentence processing and syntactic development are discussed.","PeriodicalId":51371,"journal":{"name":"Language Learning","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.4,"publicationDate":"2024-09-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142306396","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
We explore how general principles of learning apply to and combine with usage‐based approaches to language learning and teaching, with a focus on the effects of order of exposure to new information in second language (L2) instruction. Although the effects of input spacing and timing on memory and learning have been previously explored (see Rogers, 2020; Shintani, 2017, for an overview), the effects of order of exposure to the input remain understudied. In this study, we tested whether order of exposure to information in the L2 plays a role in L2 learning and whether an optimal order where the most reliable cues are introduced first ensures that foreign language learners are better equipped to form representations that allow flexible, yet accurate generalisations. We analysed data collected through a training study that teaches the English article system to first language (L1) speakers whose language does not have markers of definiteness.
{"title":"Order Effects in Second Language Learning","authors":"Laurence Romain, Petar Milin, Dagmar Divjak","doi":"10.1111/lang.12675","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/lang.12675","url":null,"abstract":"We explore how general principles of learning apply to and combine with usage‐based approaches to language learning and teaching, with a focus on the effects of order of exposure to new information in second language (L2) instruction. Although the effects of input spacing and timing on memory and learning have been previously explored (see Rogers, 2020; Shintani, 2017, for an overview), the effects of order of exposure to the input remain understudied. In this study, we tested whether order of exposure to information in the L2 plays a role in L2 learning and whether an optimal order where the most reliable cues are introduced first ensures that foreign language learners are better equipped to form representations that allow flexible, yet accurate generalisations. We analysed data collected through a training study that teaches the English article system to first language (L1) speakers whose language does not have markers of definiteness.","PeriodicalId":51371,"journal":{"name":"Language Learning","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.4,"publicationDate":"2024-09-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142236761","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Second language (L2) grammar learning is difficult. Two frameworks—the psycholinguistic lexical bottleneck hypothesis and the neurocognitive declarative/procedural model—predict that faster L2 lexical processing should facilitate L2 incidental grammar learning. We tested these predictions in a pretest–posttest syntactic adaptation study of English relative‐clause attachment preferences. First‐language German speakers listened to relative clauses disambiguated to the English low‐attachment preference (secretaries ofthe professorwhois/napsat home)—via either a copula (e.g., is), which should be processed rapidly (copula group; n = 48), or a lexical verb (e.g., naps), which should be processed more slowly (lexical group; n = 48). Only the copula group showed significant pretest‐to‐posttest learning. Moreover, the amount of learning was predicted by procedural learning abilities in the copula group, but by vocabulary size in the lexical group. The results, which are consistent with both frameworks, show that the L2 lexicon impacts L2 grammar learning, and reveal moderating psycholinguistic and neurocognitive variables.
第二语言（L2）语法学习十分困难。心理语言学词汇瓶颈假说和神经认知陈述/程序模型这两个框架预测，更快的第二语言词汇处理速度应有助于第二语言的语法学习。我们在一项关于英语相对句附着偏好的前测-后测句法适应研究中检验了这些预测。第一语言为德语的受试者聆听了根据英语低依附偏好（secretaries of the professor who is/naps at home）进行歧义化的相对从句--通过共轭词（如is）或词性动词（如naps），前者应被快速处理（共轭词组；n = 48），后者应被较慢处理（词性组；n = 48）。只有助动词组在测试前和测试后都有明显的学习效果。此外，在连词组中，学习量是由程序学习能力预测的，而在词法组中，学习量是由词汇量预测的。研究结果表明，L2 词汇影响 L2 语法学习，并揭示了心理语言学和神经认知变量的调节作用。
{"title":"Lexical Effects on Second Language Grammar Acquisition: Testing Psycholinguistic and Neurocognitive Predictions","authors":"Holger Hopp, Jana Reifegerste, Michael T. Ullman","doi":"10.1111/lang.12672","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/lang.12672","url":null,"abstract":"Second language (L2) grammar learning is difficult. Two frameworks—the psycholinguistic lexical bottleneck hypothesis and the neurocognitive declarative/procedural model—predict that faster L2 lexical processing should facilitate L2 incidental grammar learning. We tested these predictions in a pretest–posttest syntactic adaptation study of English relative‐clause attachment preferences. First‐language German speakers listened to relative clauses disambiguated to the English low‐attachment preference (<jats:italic>secretaries of</jats:italic> <jats:italic>the professor</jats:italic> <jats:italic>who</jats:italic> <jats:italic>is/naps</jats:italic> <jats:italic>at home</jats:italic>)—via either a copula (e.g., <jats:italic>is</jats:italic>), which should be processed rapidly (copula group; <jats:italic>n</jats:italic> = 48), or a lexical verb (e.g., <jats:italic>naps</jats:italic>), which should be processed more slowly (lexical group; <jats:italic>n</jats:italic> = 48). Only the copula group showed significant pretest‐to‐posttest learning. Moreover, the amount of learning was predicted by procedural learning abilities in the copula group, but by vocabulary size in the lexical group. The results, which are consistent with both frameworks, show that the L2 lexicon impacts L2 grammar learning, and reveal moderating psycholinguistic and neurocognitive variables.","PeriodicalId":51371,"journal":{"name":"Language Learning","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.4,"publicationDate":"2024-09-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142231598","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Recent research on second or additional language (L2) pragmatics instruction in study abroad has incorporated the technique of encouraging students to gather data about pragmatics, for example, by asking members of the host country to complete questionnaires, practice using pragmatic features, or answer questions about pragmatics (e.g., Hernández, 2021; Mir, 2021). Such studies have reported positive learning outcomes of pedagogical interventions involving this technique but have not closely examined the nature of the talk about pragmatics among students and local people. The goal of this study is to examine talk about irony in Spanish elicited through an instructional activity carried out by study‐abroad students in Mexico and their Mexican interlocutors, focusing on the information that the latter provide. The findings revealed that Mexican interlocutors provided examples of irony, metapragmatic explanations, and corrective feedback but that there was considerable individual variation.
{"title":"“That Was a Good One”: Talking About Irony in Study Abroad","authors":"Rachel L. Shively","doi":"10.1111/lang.12673","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/lang.12673","url":null,"abstract":"Recent research on second or additional language (L2) pragmatics instruction in study abroad has incorporated the technique of encouraging students to gather data about pragmatics, for example, by asking members of the host country to complete questionnaires, practice using pragmatic features, or answer questions about pragmatics (e.g., Hernández, 2021; Mir, 2021). Such studies have reported positive learning outcomes of pedagogical interventions involving this technique but have not closely examined the nature of the talk about pragmatics among students and local people. The goal of this study is to examine talk about irony in Spanish elicited through an instructional activity carried out by study‐abroad students in Mexico and their Mexican interlocutors, focusing on the information that the latter provide. The findings revealed that Mexican interlocutors provided examples of irony, metapragmatic explanations, and corrective feedback but that there was considerable individual variation.","PeriodicalId":51371,"journal":{"name":"Language Learning","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.4,"publicationDate":"2024-09-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142174484","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Caroline F. Rowland, Amy Bidgood, Gary Jones, Andrew Jessop, Paula Stinson, Julian M. Pine, Samantha Durrant, Michelle S. Peter
A strong predictor of children's language is performance on non‐word repetition (NWR) tasks. However, the basis of this relationship remains unknown. Some suggest that NWR tasks measure phonological working memory, which then affects language growth. Others argue that children's knowledge of language/language experience affects NWR performance. A complicating factor is that most studies focus on school‐aged children, who have already mastered key language skills. Here, we present a new NWR task for English‐learning 2‐year‐olds, use it to assess the effect of NWR performance on concurrent and later vocabulary development, and compare the children's performance with that of an experience‐based computational model (CLASSIC). The new NWR task produced reliable results; replicating wordlikeness effects, word‐length effects, and the relationship with concurrent and later language ability we see in older children. The model also simulated all effects, suggesting that the relationship between vocabulary and NWR performance can be explained by language experience‐/knowledge‐based theories.
{"title":"Simulating the Relationship Between Nonword Repetition Performance and Vocabulary Growth in 2‐Year‐Olds: Evidence From the Language 0–5 Project","authors":"Caroline F. Rowland, Amy Bidgood, Gary Jones, Andrew Jessop, Paula Stinson, Julian M. Pine, Samantha Durrant, Michelle S. Peter","doi":"10.1111/lang.12671","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/lang.12671","url":null,"abstract":"A strong predictor of children's language is performance on non‐word repetition (NWR) tasks. However, the basis of this relationship remains unknown. Some suggest that NWR tasks measure phonological working memory, which then affects language growth. Others argue that children's knowledge of language/language experience affects NWR performance. A complicating factor is that most studies focus on school‐aged children, who have already mastered key language skills. Here, we present a new NWR task for English‐learning 2‐year‐olds, use it to assess the effect of NWR performance on concurrent and later vocabulary development, and compare the children's performance with that of an experience‐based computational model (CLASSIC). The new NWR task produced reliable results; replicating wordlikeness effects, word‐length effects, and the relationship with concurrent and later language ability we see in older children. The model also simulated all effects, suggesting that the relationship between vocabulary and NWR performance can be explained by language experience‐/knowledge‐based theories.","PeriodicalId":51371,"journal":{"name":"Language Learning","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.4,"publicationDate":"2024-09-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142171266","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
In this Methods Showcase Article, we illustrate mixed‐effects modeling with a multinomial dependent variable as a means of explaining complexities in language. We model data on future‐time reference in second language Spanish, which consists of a nominal dependent variable that has three levels, measured over 73 participants. We offer step‐by‐step procedures for multinomial logistic regression with fixed and random effects, and we discuss the interpretation of the model and its advantages and limitations.
{"title":"Mixed‐Effects Modeling with a Multinomial Dependent Variable","authors":"Aarnes Gudmestad, Thomas A. Metzger","doi":"10.1111/lang.12667","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/lang.12667","url":null,"abstract":"In this Methods Showcase Article, we illustrate mixed‐effects modeling with a multinomial dependent variable as a means of explaining complexities in language. We model data on future‐time reference in second language Spanish, which consists of a nominal dependent variable that has three levels, measured over 73 participants. We offer step‐by‐step procedures for multinomial logistic regression with fixed and random effects, and we discuss the interpretation of the model and its advantages and limitations.","PeriodicalId":51371,"journal":{"name":"Language Learning","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.4,"publicationDate":"2024-08-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142084649","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
This study revisits the roles of different aspects of phonological vocabulary knowledge in second language (L2) listening. Japanese learners of English (n = 114) completed the TOEIC Listening test and three phonological vocabulary tests assessing (a) ability to recognize the meanings of aural forms (meaning recognition), (b) ability to recall the meanings of aural forms (meaning recall), and (c) ability to spontaneously judge the appropriate use of word meanings in sentential contexts (lexicosemantic judgment task [LJT]). Among the three measures, the LJT best predicted the participants’ ability to access the target words during real‐life L2 listening comprehension of monologues and conversations (measured via TOEIC). Structural equation modeling demonstrated that the LJT was distinct from both meaning recognition and recall and revealed their different associations with listening comprehension scores. In line with the skill acquisition theory, we propose that the LJT reflects automatized knowledge, whereas meaning recognition and recall represent declarative knowledge.
{"title":"Declarative and Automatized Phonological Vocabulary Knowledge: Recognition, Recall, Lexicosemantic Judgment, and Listening‐Focused Employability of Second Language Words","authors":"Takumi Uchihara, Kazuya Saito, Satsuki Kurokawa, Kotaro Takizawa, Yui Suzukida","doi":"10.1111/lang.12668","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/lang.12668","url":null,"abstract":"This study revisits the roles of different aspects of phonological vocabulary knowledge in second language (L2) listening. Japanese learners of English (<jats:italic>n</jats:italic> = 114) completed the TOEIC Listening test and three phonological vocabulary tests assessing (a) ability to recognize the meanings of aural forms (meaning recognition), (b) ability to recall the meanings of aural forms (meaning recall), and (c) ability to spontaneously judge the appropriate use of word meanings in sentential contexts (lexicosemantic judgment task [LJT]). Among the three measures, the LJT best predicted the participants’ ability to access the target words during real‐life L2 listening comprehension of monologues and conversations (measured via TOEIC). Structural equation modeling demonstrated that the LJT was distinct from both meaning recognition and recall and revealed their different associations with listening comprehension scores. In line with the skill acquisition theory, we propose that the LJT reflects automatized knowledge, whereas meaning recognition and recall represent declarative knowledge.","PeriodicalId":51371,"journal":{"name":"Language Learning","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.4,"publicationDate":"2024-08-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142021865","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：