- Home
- e-Journals
- Journal of Second Language Studies
- Previous Issues
- Volume 4, Issue 1, 2021
Journal of Second Language Studies - Volume 4, Issue 1, 2021
Volume 4, Issue 1, 2021
-
Examining L1 influence in L2 word recognition
Author(s): Nan Jiangpp.: 1–18 (18)More LessAbstractThe present study examined L1 influence in visual L2 word recognition in the area of letter case. Whether an English word is displayed in upper- or lower-case letters may be of little significance to English native speakers, but many ESL speakers from east Asia have found it more difficult to recognize words printed in upper-case letters. Two experiments were conducted to explore two questions: (a) whether there was indeed a case effect in L2 word recognition in that ESL speakers took longer in responding to upper-case words, and (b) whether this case effect only occurred for ESL speakers whose first languages employed a script other than the Roman alphabet. The participants included English native speakers, ESL speakers whose L1s employed the Roman alphabet (the Romance ESL group) and ESL speakers whose L1s did not. They were asked to perform a lexical decision task on English words displayed in either upper- or lower-case letters. In both experiments, a reliable case effect was found for the latter ESL group only. This L1-related case effect raised both theoretical and pedagogical issues to be explored in future research.
-
The differential impact of the timing of form-focused instruction on the acquisition of the past counterfactual conditional and framing expressions for English questions
Author(s): Hussein Sulyman Saeed and Hayo Reinderspp.: 19–47 (29)More LessAbstractThis study compared the effect of the timing of form-focused instruction (FFI) on the acquisition of the past counterfactual conditional (PCC) and framing expressions (FEs) for English questions. Sixty-three EFL adult learners received a total of six hours of isolated or integrated FFI on the target features. Acquisition was measured by means of cloze tests and interviews. The results obtained from a mixed-design ANOVA indicated that the learners in the two experimental groups made significant gains on the two language measures. A dependent t-test revealed that the two target structures responded differentially to the timing of form-focused instruction. We discuss some of the theoretical and pedagogical implications of these findings.
-
Interplay between perceived cross-linguistic similarity and L2 production
Author(s): Georgios Georgioupp.: 48–64 (17)More LessAbstractThe present study aims to investigate the relationship between perceived cross-linguistic similarity and second language (L2) production. To this purpose, Egyptian Arabic learners of Greek in Cyprus who took part in a previous cross-linguistic perceptual study, completed a production test with respect to the Cypriot Greek vowels. The findings showed that perceived cross-linguistic similarity was linked with L2 production since along with the consideration of first language (L1)-L2 acoustic differences, it predicted most of the L2 vowel productions. Also, many L2 vowels were considerably longer than the corresponding L1 vowels. This can be interpreted as an L1 transfer since Egyptian Arabic vowels are longer in duration than the Cypriot Greek vowels. An interesting finding was that the production of the L2 vowels had only partial overlap with the productions of the L1 vowels, a finding that provides support for the hypotheses of the Speech Learning Model.
-
Eye-tracking as a window into assembled phonology in native and non-native reading
Author(s): Katherine I. Martin and Alan Juffspp.: 65–95 (31)More LessAbstractThe past 30 years of reading research has confirmed the importance of bottom-up processing. Rather than a psycholinguistic guessing game (Goodman, 1967), reading is dependent on rapid, accurate recognition of written forms. In fluent first language (L1) readers, this is seen in the automatic activation of a word’s phonological form, impacting lexical processing (Perfetti & Bell, 1991; Rayner, Sereno, Lesch & Pollatsek, 1995). Although the influence of phonological form is well established, less clear is the extent to which readers are sensitive to the possible pronunciations of a word (Lesch & Pollatsek, 1998), derived from the varying consistency of grapheme-to-phoneme correspondences (GPCs) (e.g., although ‘great’ has only one pronunciation, [ɡɹeɪt], the grapheme
within it has multiple possible pronunciations: [i] in [plit] ‘pleat’, [ɛ] in [bɹɛθ] ‘breath’; Parkin, 1982). Further, little is known about non-native readers’ sensitivity to such characteristics. Non-native readers process text differently from L1 readers (Koda & Zehler, 2008; McBride-Chang, Bialystok, Chong & Li, 2004), with implications for understanding L2 reading comprehension (Rayner, Chace, Slattery & Ashby, 2006). The goal of this study was thus to determine whether native and non-native readers are sensitive to the consistency of a word’s component GPCs during lexical processing and to compare this sensitivity among readers from different L1s.
-
Developing “conceptual knowledge” descriptors for CEFR-based proficiency levels
Author(s): Ioannis Galantomospp.: 96–120 (25)More LessAbstractThis article proposes a framework for the integration of “conceptual knowledge” descriptors’ into CEFR (Common European Framework of Reference for languages)-based proficiency levels. Research on the difficulties faced by second language (L2) learners when learning an additional language has shown that apart from the pure linguistic and communicative errors, a further type of error, namely conceptual errors hinders communication in the target language. Conceptual errors are a manifestation of ill-developed conceptual knowledge, that is the ability to express oneself in an L2 while using the L2 conceptual system. Although there exists a number of studies linking conceptual knowledge and its constituent parts to native-like fluency, relatively little is present in the CEFR. Hence, the goal of this paper is twofold, first to introduce and clarify “conceptual knowledge” and second (and most importantly) to develop conceptual knowledge descriptors’ and sample activities for each CEFR level ranging from A2 to C2.
-
Conceptual meaning in Italian speaking learners’ expression of temporality in L2 English
Author(s): Samantha Austen and Scott Jarvispp.: 121–153 (33)More LessAbstractThis study explores conceptual meaning in the construal of distinct temporal concepts by L1 Italian speakers, and considers the possibility that L1 constrained perspectives may influence the L2 English production of these speakers in the form of Conceptual Transfer (CT). Adopting a Cognitive Linguistics framework, think aloud reports are used as a data collection technique capable of accessing the meanings that both L1 Italian and L1 English speakers seek to convey in relation to the target concepts in English. Analysis of the think aloud reports revealed distinctly different approaches by the two language groups in the construal of these concepts. Results of this initial exploratory study point to cross-linguistic difference in the temporal meanings expressed, a role for L1 constrained construal in second language acquisition, the potential for CT based on this and the potency of think aloud reports in revealing this and other relevant factors.
-
Improving second language reading comprehension through reading strategies
Author(s): Deborah June Yapp, Rick de Graaff and Huub van den Berghpp.: 154–192 (39)More LessAbstractEffective readers consciously or unconsciously use reading strategies to help them process information on what they read. All readers can benefit from reading strategy instruction but, empirical research on which strategies are effective is lacking. Less is known about reading strategy effectiveness in a second language (L2). This meta-analysis of 46 L2 reading strategy studies analysed ten reading strategies, also in combination with a range of pedagogical approaches, and found an overall mean effect size of 0.91, underscoring the benefits of multi strategy teaching. Effect sizes were calculated for each strategy, as well as the combination of strategy with approach, instructor type, intervention duration and type of test used. Some strategies were more effective than others. Also, differences in effect sizes are dependent on the approach used. Some pedagogical approaches are effective for some strategies but not with all. We recommend further research in L2 reading strategy interventions and instruction.
-
Review of Lenzing, Nicholas & Roos (2019): Widening Contexts for Processability Theory: Theories and Issues
pp.: 193–200 (8)More LessThis article reviews Widening Contexts for Processability Theory: Theories and Issues
Most Read This Month
