1887
Volume 1, Issue 1
  • ISSN 2542-3835
  • E-ISSN: 2542-3843
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes

Abstract

We examine how L2 vocabulary learning is affected by the information provided to the learner during training, organization of the to-be-learned vocabulary, and working memory capacity of the learner. Native English speakers were taught Arabic vocabulary in seven sessions, during which they heard L1 (English)-L2 (Arabic) translation pairs. Training was manipulated between participants by crossing the presence vs. absence of a transliteration and thematic vs. random organization of vocabulary. Session, working memory capacity, transliteration condition, and organization condition interacted in English-Arabic translation accuracy. Participants with lower working memory capacity performed best in the transliteration-thematic organization condition, whereas participants with higher working memory performed best in the transliteration-random organization and no transliteration-thematic organization conditions. Translation RT and free recall were not related to working memory, and were best in the transliteration conditions. Results suggest that adult L2 vocabulary learning is aided by exploiting well-established spelling-sound connections to improve L2 lexical representations.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/jsls.17018.tse
2018-05-07
2019-09-22
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Aiken, L. S. , & West, S. G.
    (1991) Multiple regression: Testing and interpreting interactions. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Bassetti, B.
    (2008) Orthographic input and second language phonology. In T. Piske & M. Young-Scholten (Eds.), Input matters in SLA (pp.191–206). Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.10.21832/9781847691118‑013
    https://doi.org/10.21832/9781847691118-013 [Google Scholar]
  3. Brewer, W. F. , & Nakamura, G. V.
    (1984) The nature and functions of schemas. Center for the Study of Reading Technical Report, no.325.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Brysbaert, M. , & New, B.
    (2009) Moving beyond Kučera and Francis: A critical evaluation of current word frequency norms and the introduction of a new and improved word frequency measure for American English. Behavior Research Methods, 41(4), 977–990. doi: 10.3758/BRM.41.4.977
    https://doi.org/10.3758/BRM.41.4.977 [Google Scholar]
  5. Choi, T. H.
    (2003, July). The effects of semantic and thematic grouping on learning efficiency and retention of the L2 vocabulary. Tokyo, Japan: Pan-Pacific Association of Applied Linguistics.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Clauson, G.
    (2002) Studies in Turkic and Mongolic linguistics. New York, NY: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  7. Defense Language Institute Foreign Language Center
    Defense Language Institute Foreign Language Center (2005) Iraqi basic language survival guide. Presidio of Monterey, CA.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Degani, T. , & Tokowicz, N.
    (2010) Ambiguous words are harder to learn. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 13, 299–314. doi: 10.1017/S1366728909990411
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S1366728909990411 [Google Scholar]
  9. Degani, T. , Tseng, A. M. , & Tokowicz, N.
    (2014) Together or apart? Learning of ambiguous words. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 17, 749–765. doi: 10.1017/S1366728913000837
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S1366728913000837 [Google Scholar]
  10. Elgort, I.
    (2011) Deliberate learning and vocabulary acquisition in a second language. Language Learning, 61, 367–413. doi: 10.1111/j.1467‑9922.2010.00613.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9922.2010.00613.x [Google Scholar]
  11. Eriksen, B. A. , & Eriksen, C. W.
    (1974) Effects of noise letters upon the identification of a target letter in a nonsearch task. Perception and Psychophysics, 16, 143–149. doi: 10.3758/BF03203267
    https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03203267 [Google Scholar]
  12. Finkbeiner, M. , & Nicol, J.
    (2003) Semantic category effects in second language word learning. Applied Psycholinguistics, 24, 369–383. doi: 10.1017/S0142716403000195
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0142716403000195 [Google Scholar]
  13. Folse, K. S.
    (2004) Vocabulary myths: Applying second language research to classroom teaching. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press. doi: 10.3998/mpub.23925
    https://doi.org/10.3998/mpub.23925 [Google Scholar]
  14. Hayes-Harb, R. , & Cheng, H. -W.
    (2016) The influence of the Pinyin and Zhuyin writing systems on the acquisition of Mandarin word forms by native English speakers. Frontiers in Psychology, 7 (785). doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2016.00785
    https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2016.00785 [Google Scholar]
  15. Hu, C.
    (2008) Use orthography in L2 auditory word learning: Who benefits?Reading and Writing, 21, 823–841. doi: 10.1007/s11145‑007‑9094‑6
    https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-007-9094-6 [Google Scholar]
  16. Kaushanskaya, M.
    (2012) Cognitive mechanisms of word learning in bilingual and monolingual adults: The role of phonological memory. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 15(3), 470–489. doi: 10.1017/S1366728911000472
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S1366728911000472 [Google Scholar]
  17. Kroll, J. F. , & Stewart, E.
    (1994) Category interference in translation and picture naming: Evidence for asymmetric connections between bilingual memory representations. Journal of Memory and Language, 33, 149–174. doi: 10.1006/jmla.1994.1008
    https://doi.org/10.1006/jmla.1994.1008 [Google Scholar]
  18. Kuznetsova, A. , Brockhoff, P. B. , & Christensen, R. H. B.
    (2013) lmerTest: Tests for random and fixed effects for linear mixed effect models (lmer objects of lme4 package). R package version 2.0–3. 2013. Available from: CRAN.R–project.org/package=lmerTest
  19. Linck, J. A. , Osthus, P. , Koeth, J. T. , & Bunting, M. F.
    (2014) Working memory and second language comprehension and production: A meta-analysis. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review. doi: 10.3758/s13423‑013‑0565‑2
    https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-013-0565-2 [Google Scholar]
  20. Morris, C. D. , Bransford, J. D. , & Franks, J. J.
    (1977) Levels of processing versus transfer appropriate processing. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 16, 519–533. doi: 10.1016/S0022‑5371(77)80016‑9
    https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-5371(77)80016-9 [Google Scholar]
  21. Nelson, J. R. , Balass, M. , & Perfetti, C. A.
    (2005) Differences between written and spoken input in learning new words. Written Language & Literacy, 8, 25–44. doi: 10.1075/wll.8.2.04nel
    https://doi.org/10.1075/wll.8.2.04nel [Google Scholar]
  22. Park, M. S.
    (2015) Orthographic input and the acquisition of second language phonology: A review. Korean Journal of Linguistics, 40(3), 389–401.
    [Google Scholar]
  23. Perfetti, C. A. & Hart, L.
    (2002) The lexical quality hypothesis. In L. Verhoeven , C. Elbro , & P. Reitsma (Eds.), Precursors of functional literacy (pp.67–86). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/swll.11.14per
    https://doi.org/10.1075/swll.11.14per [Google Scholar]
  24. Powell, M. J. D.
    (June 2009) The BOBYQA algorithm for bound constrained optimization without derivatives Department of Applied Mathematics and Theoretical Physics, Cambridge University. DAMTP 2009/NA06. Retrieved2014-02-14.
    [Google Scholar]
  25. Psychological Software Tools, Inc.
    Psychological Software Tools, Inc. (2000) E-Prime [Computer software]. Pittsburgh, PA.
  26. Roediger, III, H. L. , & Karpicke, J. D.
    (2006) The power of testing memory: Basic research and implications for educational practice. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 1, 181–210. doi: 10.1111/j.1745‑6916.2006.00012.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-6916.2006.00012.x [Google Scholar]
  27. RStudio Team
    RStudio Team (2016) RStudio: Integrated Development for R. RStudio, Inc., Boston, MA. www.rstudio.com/.
  28. Stroop, J. R.
    (1935) Studies of interference in serial verbal reactions. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 18, 643–662. doi: 10.1037/h0054651
    https://doi.org/10.1037/h0054651 [Google Scholar]
  29. Tinkham, T.
    (1997) The effects of semantic and thematic clustering on the learning of second language vocabulary. Second Language Research, 13, 138–163. doi: 10.1191/026765897672376469
    https://doi.org/10.1191/026765897672376469 [Google Scholar]
  30. Tokowicz, N. , Michael, E. B. , & Kroll, J. F.
    (2004) The roles of study-abroad experience and working-memory capacity in the types of errors made during translation. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 7, 255–272. doi: 10.1017/S1366728904001634
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S1366728904001634 [Google Scholar]
  31. Turner, M. L. , & Engle, R. W.
    (1989) Is working memory capacity task dependent?Journal of Memory and Language, 28, 127–154 doi: 10.1016/0749‑596X(89)90040‑5
    https://doi.org/10.1016/0749-596X(89)90040-5 [Google Scholar]
  32. Waters, G. S. , & Caplan, D.
    (1996) The measurement of verbal working memory capacity and its relation to reading comprehension. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology-Human Experimental Psychology, 49A, 51–79. doi: 10.1080/713755607
    https://doi.org/10.1080/713755607 [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1075/jsls.17018.tse
Loading
/content/journals/10.1075/jsls.17018.tse
Loading

Data & Media loading...

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was successful
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error