Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t7czq Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-22T07:17:50.981Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

New conceptualizations of linguistic giftedness

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  18 March 2016

Adriana Biedroń  and
Mirosław Pawlak
Adriana Biedroń
Affiliation:
Pomeranian University, Słupsk, [email protected]
Mirosław Pawlak
Affiliation:
Adam Mickiewicz University, Kalisz, PolandandState University of Applied Sciences, Konin, [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This state-of-the art paper focuses on the issue of linguistic giftedness, somewhat neglected in the second language acquisition (SLA) literature, attempting to reconceptualize, expand and update this concept in response to latest developments in the fields of psychology, linguistics and neurology. It first discusses contemporary perspectives on foreign language aptitude, concentrating in particular on the models proposed by Skehan (1998), Robinson (2002) and Sternberg (2002). This is followed by a discussion of the definitions of talented individuals and the criteria for their selection, as well as an overview of empirical research on gifted language learners, divided into early studies with those focusing on the ultimate attainment of post-pubescent learners, and those dealing with super-learners of foreign languages. The subsequent sections touch upon such issues as the relationship between first language (L1) ability and second language (L2) aptitude, and linguistic giftedness and intelligence, memory, personality factors and language learning strategies, as well as neurolinguistic research on brain functioning in gifted learners. The paper closes with the discussion of the limitations of current research, its future directions and methodological considerations.

Type
State-of-the-Art Article
Information
Language Teaching , Volume 49 , Issue 2 , April 2016 , pp. 151 - 185
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2016 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Abrahamsson, N. & Hyltenstam, K. (2008). The robustness of aptitude effects in near-native second language acquisition. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 30.1, 481–509.Google Scholar
Abrahamsson, N. & Hyltenstam, K. (2009). Age of onset and nativelikeness in a second language: Listener perception versus linguistic scrutiny. Language Learning 59.2, 249–306.Google Scholar
Alexander, P. A. (2004). A model of domain learning: Reinterpreting expertise as a multidimensional, multistage process. In Day, D. Y. & Sternberg, R. J. (eds.), Interactive models. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum, 271–298.Google Scholar
Aronin, L. & Singleton, D. (2012). Affordances theory in multilingualism studies. Studies in Second Language Learning and Teaching 2.3, 311–331.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baddeley, A. D. (2003). Working memory and language: an overview. Journal of Communication Disorders 36, 189–208.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Baddeley, A. D., Gathercole, S. & Papagno, C. (1998). The phonological loop as a language acquisition device. Psychological Review 105, 158–173.Google Scholar
Baddeley, A. D. & Hitch, G. J. (1974). Working memory. In Bower, G. (ed.), The psychology of learning and motivation. New York, NY: Academic Press, 47–90.Google Scholar
Baron-Cohen, S., Richler, J., Bisarya, D., Gurunathan, N. & Wheelwright, S. (2003). The systemizing quotient: An investigation of adults with Asperger Syndrome or high-functioning autism, and normal sex differences. In Frith, U. & Hill, E. (eds.), Autism: Mind and brain. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 161–186.Google Scholar
Bialystok, E. & Fröhlich, M. (1978). Variables of classroom achievement in second language learning. The Modern Language Journal 62.7, 327–335.Google Scholar
Biedroń, A. (2011a). Personality factors as predictors of foreign language aptitude. Studies in Second Language Learning and Teaching 1.4, 467–489.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Biedroń, A. (2011b). Near-nativeness as a function of cognitive and personality factors. Three case studies of highly able foreign language learners. In Pawlak, M., Waniek-Klimczak, E. & Majer, J. (eds.), Speaking in contexts of instructed foreign language acquisition. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters, 99–116.Google Scholar
Biedroń, A. (2012a). Cognitive-affective profile of gifted adult foreign language learners. Słupsk: Wydawnictwo Akademii Pomorskiej w Słupsku.Google Scholar
Biedroń, A. (2012b). Memory in gifted foreign language learners. In Pawlak, M. (ed.), New perspectives on individual differences in language learning and teaching. Heidelberg–Berlin: Springer, 77–95.Google Scholar
Biedroń, A. & Szczepaniak, A. (2012a). Working-memory and short-term memory abilities in accomplished multilinguals. The Modern Language Journal 96, 290–306.Google Scholar
Biedroń, A. & Szczepaniak, A. (2012b). Polish reading span test – an instrument for measuring verbal working memory capacity. In Badio, J. & Kosecki, J. (eds.), Cognitive processes in language. Frankfurt am Main, Berlin: Peter Lang, 29–37.Google Scholar
Birdsong, D. (1992). Ultimate attainment in second language acquisition. Language 68, 706–705.Google Scholar
Birdsong, D. (2004). Second language acquisition and ultimate attainment. In Davies, A. & Elder, C. (eds.), Handbook of applied linguistics. London: Blackwell Publishing, 82–105.Google Scholar
Birdsong, D. (2005). Nativelikeness and non-nativelikeness in L2A research. IRAL 43, 319–328.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Birdsong, D. (2007). Nativelike pronunciation among late learners of French as a second language. In Bohn, O. S. & Munro, M. J. (eds.), Language experience in second language speech learning. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 99–116.Google Scholar
Block, D. (2003). The social turn in second language acquisition. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.Google Scholar
Bongaerts, T. (2005). Introduction: Ultimate attainment and the critical period hypothesis for second language acquisition. IRAL 43, 259–267.Google Scholar
Bongaerts, T., Planken, B. & Schils, E. (1995). Can late starters attain a native accent in a foreign language? A test of the Critical Period Hypothesis. In Singleton, D. & Lengyel, Z. (eds.), The age factor in second language acquisition. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters, 30–50.Google Scholar
Bongaerts, T., Mennen, S. & van der Silk, F. (2000). Authenticity of pronunciation in naturalistic second language acquisition. The case of very advanced late learners of Dutch as a second language. Studia Linguistica 54, 298–308.Google Scholar
Bongaerts, T., van Summeren, C., Planken, B. & Schils, E. (1997). Age and ultimate attainment in the pronunciation of a foreign language. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 19, 447–465.Google Scholar
Bor, D., Billington, J. & Baron-Cohen, S. (2007). Savant memory for digits in a case of synaesthesia and asperger syndrome is related to hyperactivity in the lateral prefrontal cortex. Neurocase 13.5, 311–319.Google Scholar
Bylund, E., Hyltenstam, K. & Abrahamsson, N. (2013). Age of acquisition effects or effects of bilingualism in second language ultimate attainment? In Granena, G. & Long, M. H. (eds.), Sensitive periods, language aptitude, and ultimate L2 attainment. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 69–101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carroll, J. B. (1959). Use of the Modern Language Aptitude Test in secondary schools. Yearbook of the National Council on Measurements Used in Education 16, 155–159.Google Scholar
Carroll, J. B. (1973). Fitting a model of school learning to aptitude and achievement data over grade levels. Princeton, NJ: Education Testing Service, 73–51.Google Scholar
Carroll, J. B. (1981). Twenty-five years of research on foreign language aptitude. In Diller, K. C. (ed.), Individual differences and universals in language learning aptitude. Rowley, MA: Newbury House, 83–118.Google Scholar
Carroll, J. B. (1993). Human cognitive abilities: A survey of factor-analytic studies. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Carroll, J. B. & Sapon, S. M. (1959). Modern Language Aptitude Test. San Antonio, TX: The Psychological Corporation.Google Scholar
Chee, M. W. L., Soon, C. S., Lee, H. L. & Pallier, C. (2004). Left insula activation: A marker for language attainment in bilinguals. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 101.42, 15265–15270.Google Scholar
Christiner, M. & Reiterer, S. M. (2013). Song and speech: Examining the link between singing talent and speech imitation ability. Frontiers in Psychology (Cognitive Science) 4.874, 1–11.Google Scholar
Coppieters, R. (1987). Competence differences between native and near-native speakers. Language 63, 544–573.Google Scholar
Costa, P. T. Jr. & McCrae, R. R. (1992). Revised NEO Personality Inventory (NEO-PI-R) and NEO Five-Factor Inventory (NEO-FFI). Manual. Odessa, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources.Google Scholar
Crystal, D. (1997). English as a global language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1990). Flow. The psychology of optimal experience. New York: Harper Perennial.Google Scholar
Dehaene, S., Dupoux, E., Mehler, J., Cohen, L., Paulesu, E., Perani, D., van de Moortele, P-H., Lehéricy, S. & Le Bihan, D. (1997). Anatomical variability in the cortical representation of first and second language. NeuroReport 8, 3809–3815.Google Scholar
DeKeyser, R. M. (2000). The robustness of critical period effects in second language acquisition. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 22, 499–533.Google Scholar
DeKeyser, R. M. & Koeth, J. (2011). Cognitive aptitudes for second language learning. In Hinkel, E. (ed.), Handbook of research in second language teaching and learning. New York. NY: Routledge, 395–407.Google Scholar
DeKeyser, R. M., Alfi-Shabtay, I. & Ravid, D. (2010). Cross-linguistic evidence for the nature of age effects in second language acquisition. Applied Psycholinguistics 31.3, 413–438.Google Scholar
Dewaele, J-M. (2002). Psychological and sociodemographic correlates of communicative anxiety in L2 and L3 production. The International Journal of Bilingualism 6, 23–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dewaele, J-M. (2009). Individual differences in second language acquisition. In Ritchie, W. C. & Bhatia, T. K. (eds.), The new handbook of second language acquisition. Bingley, United Kingdom: Emerald, 323–346.Google Scholar
Dewaele, J-M. & Furnham, A. (2000). Personality and speech production: A pilot study of second language learners. Personality and Individual Differences 28, 355–365.Google Scholar
Díaz, B., Baus, C., Escera, C., Costa, A. & Sebastián-Gallés, N. (2008). Brain potentials to native phoneme discrimination reveal the origin of individual differences in learning the sounds of a second language. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 105.42, 16083–16088.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Díaz, B., Mitterer, H., Broersma, M. & Sebastian-Galles, N. (2012) Individual differences in late bilinguals’ L2 phonological processes: From acoustic-phonetic analysis to lexical access. Learning and Individual Differences 22, 680–689.Google Scholar
Donaldson, B. (2011). Left-dislocation in near-native French. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 33.3, 399–432.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Doughty, C. J. (2013). Optimizing post-critical-period language learning. In Granena, G. & Long, M. H. (eds.), Sensitive periods, language aptitude, and ultimate L2 attainment. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 153–175.Google Scholar
Doughty, C. J., Campbell, S. G., Mislevy, M. A., Bunting, M. F., Bowles, A. R. & Koeth, J. T. (2010). Predicting near-native ability: The factor structure and reliability of Hi-LAB. In Prior, M. T., Watanabe, Y. & Lee, S-K. (eds.), Selected proceedings of the 2008 Second Language Research Forum. Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Proceedings Project. 10–31.Google Scholar
Dörnyei, Z. (2005). The psychology of the language learner. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Dörnyei, Z. (2009). The psychology of second language acquisition. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Dörnyei, Z. (2010). The relationship between language aptitude and language learning motivation: Individual differences from a dynamic systems perspective. In Macaro, E. (ed.), Continuum companion to second language acquisition. London: Continuum, 247–267.Google Scholar
Dörnyei, Z. & Skehan, P. (2003). Individual differences in second language learning. In Doughty, C. J. & Long, M. H. (eds.), The handbook of second language acquisition. Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing, 589–630.Google Scholar
Dreyer, C. & Oxford, R. L. (1996). Learning strategies and other predictors of ESL proficiency among Afrikaans speakers in South Africa. In Oxford, R. L. (ed.), Language learning strategies around the world: Cross-cultural perspectives. Manoa: University of Hawaii Press, 61–74.Google Scholar
Dweck, C. S. (2006). Mindset: The new psychology of success. New York, NY: Random House.Google Scholar
Ehrman, M. E. (2008). Personality and good language learners. In Griffiths, C. (ed.), Lessons from good language learners. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 83–99.Google Scholar
Ehrman, M., Leaver, B. & Oxford, R. L. (2003). A brief overview of individual differences in second language learning. System 31, 313–330.Google Scholar
Erard, M. (2012). Babel no more: In search for the world's most extraordinary language learners. New York, NY: Free Press.Google Scholar
Fein, D. & Obler, L. K. (1988). Neuropsychological study of talent: A developing field. In Obler, L. K. & Fein, D. (eds.), The exceptional brain. New York, London: The Guilford Press, 3–15.Google Scholar
Forsberg Lundell, F. & Sandgren, M. (2013). High-level proficiency in late L2 acquisition: Relationships between collocational production, language aptitude and personality. In Granena, G. & Long, M. H. (eds.), Sensitive periods, language aptitude, and ultimate L2 attainment. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 231–255.Google Scholar
Friedman, N. P., Miyake, A., Young, S. E., DeFries, J. C., Corley, R. P. & Hewitt, J. K. (2008). Individual differences in executive functions are almost entirely genetic in origin. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General 137.2, 201–225.Google Scholar
Gagné, F. (2000). A differentiated model of giftedness and talent. DGMT. Retrieved from www.curriculumsupport.education.nsw.gov.au/policies/gats/assets/pdf/poldmgt2000rtcl.pdf.Google Scholar
Gagné, F. (2005). From gifts to talents: The DGMT as a developmental model. In Sternberg, R. J. & Davidson, J. E. (eds.), Conceptions of giftedness. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press, 98–120.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Geschwind, N. & Galaburda, A. M. (1985). Cerebral lateralization. Biological mechanisms, associations, and pathology: I, II, III. A hypothesis and a program for research. Archive of Neurology 42, 428–459, 521–552, 634–654.Google Scholar
Golestani, N & Zatorre, R. J. (2004). Learning new sounds of speech: Relocation of neural substrates. Neuroimage 21, 494–506.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Golestani, N., Paus, T. & Zatorre, R. J. (2002). Anatomical correlates of learning novel speech sounds. Neuron 35, 997–1010.Google Scholar
Golestani, N., Price, C. J. & Scott, S. K. (2011). Born with an ear for dialects? Structural plasticity in the expert phonetician brain. Journal of Neuroscience 31.11, 4213–4220.Google Scholar
Golestani, N., Molko, N., Dehaene, S., LeBihan, D. & Pallier, C. (2007). Brain structure predicts the learning of foreign speech sounds. Cerebral Cortex 17.3, 575–582.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Granena, G. (2013). Reexamining the robustness of aptitude in second language acquisition. In Granena, G. & Long, M. H. (eds.), Sensitive periods, language aptitude, and ultimate L2 attainment. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 179–204.Google Scholar
Granena, G. & Long, M. H. (2013). Age of onset, length of residence, language aptitude, and ultimate attainment in three linguistic domains. Second Language Research 29.1, 311–343.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Green, J. M. & Oxford, R. L. (1995). A closer look at learning strategies, L2 proficiency and gender. TESOL Quarterly 29, 261–297.Google Scholar
Gregg, K. R. (2010). Review article: Shallow draughts: Larsen-Freeman and Cameron on complexity. Second Language Research 26.4, 549–560.Google Scholar
Griffiths, C. (2003). Patterns of language learning strategy use. System 31, 367–383.Google Scholar
Grigorenko, E. L., Sternberg, R. J. & Ehrman, M. E. (2000). A theory based approach to the measurement of foreign language learning ability: The CANAL-F theory and test. The Modern Language Journal 84, 390–405.Google Scholar
Hu, X., Ackermann, H., Martin, J. A., Erb, M., Winkler, S. & Reiterer, S. M. (2013). Language aptitude for pronunciation in advanced second language (L2) Learners: Behavioural predictors and neural substrates. Brain and Language 127.3, 366–376.Google Scholar
Hu, X. & Reiterer, S. (2009). Personality and pronunciation talent in second language acquisition. In Dogil, G. & Reiterer, S. (eds.), Language talent and brain activity. Trends in applied linguistics 1. Berlin, New York, NY: Mouton de Gruyter, 97–130.Google Scholar
Hudson, R. (2012). How many languages can a person learn? In Rickerson, E. M. & Hilton, B. (eds.), The five-minute linguist. Bite-sized essays on language and languages (2nd edn.). Sheffield: Equinox, 102–105.Google Scholar
Hyltenstam, K. (2014a). The polyglot, online project description. Centre for Research on Bilingualism, Stockholm University. retrieved from www.biling.su.se/english/research/the-program-aaa.Google Scholar
Hyltenstam, K. (2014b). Language awareness in polyglots. Paper presented at the 12th International Conference Association for Language Awareness. Achievements and Challenges, Hamar, Norway.Google Scholar
Hyltenstam, K. (2016a forthcoming). The polyglot – an initial charcterization on the basis of multiple anecdotal accounts. In Hyltenstam, K. (ed.), Second languages: Advanced proficiency and exceptional ability. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Hyltenstam, K. (2016b forthcoming). The exceptional ability of polyglots to achieve high-level proficiency in numerous languages. In Hyltenstam, K. (ed.), Second languages: Advanced proficiency and exceptional ability. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Hyltenstam, K. & Abrahamsson, N. (2003). Maturational constraints in SLA. In Doughty, C. J. & Long, M. H. (eds.), Handbook of second language acquisition. Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing, 539–589.Google Scholar
Indefrey, P. & Gullberg, M. (2006). Introduction. In Gullberg, M. & Indefrey, P. (eds.), The cognitive neuroscience of second language acquisition. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing, 1–8.Google Scholar
Ioup, G. (1989). Immigrant children who have failed to acquire native English. In Gass, S., Madden, C., Preston, D. & Selinker, L. (eds.), Variation in second language acquisition, vol. II: Psycholinguistic issues. Clevedon, UK: Multilingual Matters, 160–175.Google Scholar
Ioup, G., Boustagui, E., El Tigi, M. & Moselle, M. (1994). Re-examining the CPH: A case study of successful adult SLA in a naturalistic environment. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 16, 73–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Juffs, A. & Harrington, M. (2011). Aspects of working memory in L2 learning. Language Teaching 44.2, 137–166.Google Scholar
Kaufman, S. B., DeYoung, C. G., Gray, J. R., Jimenez, L., Brown, J. B. & Mackintosh, N. (2010). Implicit learning as an ability. Cognition 116, 321–340.Google Scholar
Kerr, B. (ed.). (2009). Encyclopedia of giftedness, creativity and talent. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kim, K. H., Relkin, N. R., Lee, K. M. & Hirsch, J. (1997). Distinct cortical areas associated with native and second languages. Nature 388.6638, 171–174.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Larsen-Freeman, D. & Cameron, L. (2008). Research methodology on language development from a complex system perspective. The Modern Language Journal 92.2, 200–213.Google Scholar
Lenneberg, E. H. (1967). Biological foundations of language. New York, NY: Wiley.Google Scholar
Linck, J. A., Hughes, M. M., Campbell, S. G., Silbert, N. H., Tare, M., Jackson, S. R. & Doughty, C. J. (2013a). Hi-LAB: A new measure of aptitude for high-level language proficiency. Language Learning 63.3, 530–566.Google Scholar
Linck, J. A., Osthus, P., Koeth, J. T. & Bunting, M. F. (2013b). Working memory and second language comprehension and production: A meta-analysis. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, doi: 10.3758/s13423-013-0565-2.Google Scholar
Long, M. H. (2005). Problems with supposed counter-evidence to the Critical Period Hypothesis. International Review of Applied Linguistics 43, 287–317.Google Scholar
Long, M. H. (2013). Maturational constraints on child and adult SLA. In Granena, G. & Long, M. H. (eds.), Sensitive periods, language aptitude, and ultimate L2 attainment. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 3–41.Google Scholar
Lopez-Barroso, D., de Diego-Balaguer, R., Cunillera, T., Camara, E., Münte, T. F. & Rodriguez-Fornells, A. (2011). Language learning under working memory constraints correlates with microstructural differences in the ventral language pathway. Cereral Cortex 21.12, 2742–2750.Google Scholar
Magogwe, J. M. & Oliver, R. (2007). The relationship between language learning strategies, proficiency, age and self-efficacy beliefs: A study of language learners in Botswana. System 35, 338–352.Google Scholar
Meara, P. M. (2005). Llamalanguage aptitude test. Swansea: Lognostics. Retrieved from www.lognostics.co.uk/tools/llama/llama_manual.pdf.Google Scholar
Mercer, S. (2012). Dispelling the myth of the natural-born linguist. ELT Journal 66.1, 22–29.Google Scholar
Miyake, A. & Friedman, N. P. (1998). Individual differences in second language proficiency: Working memory as language aptitude. In Healy, A. & Bourne, L. (eds.), Foreign language learning. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum, 339–364.Google Scholar
Morgan, G., Smith, N., Tsimpli, I. & Woll, B. (2007). Classifier learning and modality in a polyglot savant. Lingua 117.7, 1339–1353.Google Scholar
Moyer, A. (1999). Ultimate attainment in L2 phonology. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 21, 81–108.Google Scholar
Moyer, A. (2007). Empirical considerations on the age factor in L2 phonology. Issues in Applied Linguistics 15.2, 109–127.Google Scholar
Moyer, A. (2010). Do gender differences in L2 accent really exist? Paper presented at the Meeting of American Association for Applied Linguistics (AAAL), Atlanta, GA.Google Scholar
Moyer, A. (2013). Accent and the individual – foreign accent – the phenomenon of non-native speech. Cambridge. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Moyer, A. (2014). What's age got to do with it? Accounting for individual factors in second language accent. Studies in Second Language Learning and Teaching. Special issue: Age and more 4.3, 443–464.Google Scholar
Muñoz, C. (2014). The association between aptitude components and language skills in young learners. In Pawlak, M. & Aronin, L. (eds.), Essential topics in applied linguistics and multilingualism, second language learning and teaching. Heidelberg–New York: Springer, 51–68.Google Scholar
Nardo, D. & Reiterer, S. (2009). Musicality and phonetic language aptitude. In Dogil, G. & Reiterer, S. (eds.), Language talent and brain activity. Trends in applied linguistics 1. Berlin, New York, NY: Mouton de Gruyter, 213–256.Google Scholar
Nikolov, M. (2000). The Critical Period Hypothesis reconsidered: Successful adult learners of Hungarian and English. IRAL 38, 109–124.Google Scholar
Nisbet, D. L., Tindall, E. R. & Arroyo, A. A. (2005). Language learning strategies and English proficiency of Chinese university students. Foreign Language Annals 38, 100–107.Google Scholar
Novoa, L., Fein, D. & Obler, L. K. (1988). Talent in foreign languages: A case study. In Obler, L. K. & Fein, D. (eds.), The exceptional brain: Neuropsychology of talent and special abilities. New York, NY: Guilford Press, 294–302.Google Scholar
Oxford, R. L. (2011). Teaching and researching language learning strategies. Harlow: Pearson Education.Google Scholar
Oxford, R. L. & Ehrman, M. (1995). Adults’ language learning strategies in an intensive foreign language program in the United States. System 23, 359–386.Google Scholar
Papagno, C. & Vallar, G. (1995). Verbal short-term memory and vocabulary learning in polyglots. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology 38A, 98–107.Google Scholar
Pawlak, M. (2009). Grammar learning strategies and language attainment: Seeking a relationship. Research in Language 7, 43–60.Google Scholar
Pawlak, M. (2011). Research into language learning strategies: Taking stock and looking ahead. In Arabski, J. & Wojtaszek, A. (eds.), Individual learner differences in SLA. Bristol: Multilingual Matters, 17–40.Google Scholar
Perani, D. (2005). The neural basis of language talent in bilinguals. Trends in Cognitive Sciences 9, 211–213.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Pimsleur, P. (1966). Pimsleur Language Aptitude Battery. New York, NY: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.Google Scholar
Politzer, R. L. & McGroarty, M. (1985). An exploratory study of learning behaviors and their relationship to gains in linguistic and communicative competence. TESOL Quarterly 19, 103–123.Google Scholar
Reiterer, S. M. (2009). Brain and language talent: A synopsis. In Dogil, G. & Reiterer, S. (eds.), Language talent and brain activity. Trends in applied linguistics 1. Berlin, New York, NY: Mouton de Gruyter, 155–191.Google Scholar
Reiterer, S. M., Pereda, E. & Bhattacharya, J. (2011a). On a possible relationship between linguistic expertise and EEG gamma band phase synchrony. Frontiers in Psychology 2.334, 1–11.Google Scholar
Reiterer, S. M., Hu, X., Erb, M., Rota, G., Nardo, D. & Grodd, W. (2011b). Individual differences in audio-vocal speech imitation aptitude in late bilinguals: Functional neuro-imaging and brain morphology. Frontiers in Psychology 2.271, 1–12.Google Scholar
Renzulli, J. (1986). The three-ring conception of giftedness: A developmental model for creative productivity. In Sternberg, R. J. & Davidson, J. E. (eds.), Conceptions of giftedness. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 53–93.Google Scholar
Robinson, P. (2002). Learning conditions, aptitude complexes and SLA: A framework for research and pedagogy. In Robinson, P. (ed.), Individual differences and instructed language learning. Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins, 113–133.Google Scholar
Robinson, P. (2003). Attention and memory during SLA. In Doughty, C. J. & Long, M. H. (eds.), The handbook of second language acquisition. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing. 631–679.Google Scholar
Robinson, P. (2007). Aptitudes, abilities, contexts, and practice. In DeKeyser, R. M. (ed.), Practice in second language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 256–286.Google Scholar
Rota, G. & Reiterer, S. M. (2009). Cognitive aspects of pronunciation talent. In Dogil, G. & Reiterer, S. (eds.), Language talent and brain activity. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, 67–112.Google Scholar
Sabourin, L. (2003). Grammatical gender and second language processing: An ERP study. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. University of Groningen, The Netherlands.Google Scholar
Sáfár, A. & Kormos, J. (2008). Revisiting problems with foreign language aptitude. IRAL 46, 113–136.Google Scholar
Sasaki, M. (1996). Second language proficiency, foreign language aptitude, and intelligence. Quantitative and qualitative analyses. New York, NY: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
Sawyer, M. & Ranta, L. (2001). Aptitude, individual differences, and instructional design. In Robinson, P. (ed.), Cognition and second language instruction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 319–354.Google Scholar
Schneiderman, E. I. & Desmarais, C. (1988a). The talented language learner: Some preliminary findings. Second Language Research 4.2, 91–109.Google Scholar
Schneiderman, E. I. & Desmarais, C. (1988b). A neuropsychological substrate for talent in second-language acquisition. In Obler, L. K. & Fein, D. (eds.), The exceptional brain: Neuropsychology of talent and special abilities. New York, London: The Guilford Press, 103–126.Google Scholar
Schumann, J. H. (2004). The neurobiology of aptitude. In Schumann, J. H. (ed.), The neurobiology of learning: Perspectives from second language acquisition. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum, 7–23.Google Scholar
Sebastián-Gallés, N. & Díaz, B. (2012), First and second language speech perception: Graded learning. In Roberts, L. & Meyer, A. (eds.), Individual differences in second language learning. Special issue of Language Learning 62, 131–147.Google Scholar
Sebastián-Gallés, N., Soriano-Mas, C., Baus, C., Díaz, B., Ressel, V., Pallier, C., Costa, A. & Pujol, J. (2012). Neuroanatomical markers of individual differences in native and non-native vowel perception. Journal of Neurolinguistics 25, 150–162.Google Scholar
Selinker, L. (1972). Interlanguage. IRAL 10, 209–231.Google Scholar
Simonton, D. K. (2008). Creativity and genius. In John, O. P., Robins, R. W. & Pervin, L. A. (eds.), Handbook of personality: Theory and research (3rd edn.). New York: Guilford Press, 679–698.Google Scholar
Skehan, P. (1986). Where does language aptitude come from? In Meara, P. (ed.), Spoken language. London: Centre for Information on Language Teaching, 95–113.Google Scholar
Skehan, P. (1989). Individual differences in second-language learning. London: Edward Arnold.Google Scholar
Skehan, P. (1998). A cognitive approach to language learning. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Skehan, P. (2002). Theorizing and updating aptitude. In Robinson, P. (ed.), Individual differences and instructed language learning. Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins, 69–95.Google Scholar
Skehan, P. (2012). Language aptitude. In Gass, S. & Mackey, A. (eds.), The Routledge handbook of second language acquisition. Abingdon: Routledge, 381–395.Google Scholar
Smith, N. & Tsimpli, I. (1991). Linguistic modularity? A case study of ‘savant’ linguist. Lingua 84, 315–351.Google Scholar
Smith, N., Tsimpli, I., Morgan, G. & Woll, B. (2011). The signs of a savant. Language against the odds. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Snow, R. E. (1994). Abilities in academic tasks. In Sternberg, R. J. & Wagner, R. K. (eds.), Mind in context: Interactionist perspectives on human intelligence. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press, 3–37.Google Scholar
Spadaro, K. (2013). Maturational constraints on lexical acquisition in a second language. In Granena, G. & Long, M. H. (eds.), Sensitive periods, language aptitude, and ultimate L2 attainment. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 43–68.Google Scholar
Sparks, R. L. (2012). Individual differences in L2 learning and long-term L1–L2 relationships. Language Learning 62, 5–27.Google Scholar
Sparks, R. L. & Ganschow, L. (1991). Foreign language learning difficulties: Affective or native language aptitude differences? The Modern Language Journal 7, 3–16.Google Scholar
Sparks, R. L. & Ganschow, L. (2001). Aptitude for learning a foreign language. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics 21, 90–111.Google Scholar
Sparks, R. L., Javorsky, J., Patton, J. & Ganschow, L. (1998). Factors in the prediction of achievement and proficiency in a foreign language. Applied Language Learning 9.1–2, 72–107.Google Scholar
Sparks, R. L., Patton, J., Ganschow, L., Humbach, N. & Javorsky, J. (2006). Native language predictors of foreign language proficiency and foreign language aptitude. Annals of Dyslexia 56, 129–160.Google Scholar
Sternberg, R. J. (2002). The theory of Successful Intelligence and its implications for language aptitude testing. In Robinson, P. (ed.), Individual differences and instructed language learning. Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins, 13–43.Google Scholar
Sternberg, R. J. & Grigorenko, E. L. (2000). Teaching for successful intelligence. Arlington Heights, IL: Skylight Training and Publishing.Google Scholar
Takeuchi, O., Griffiths, C. & Coyle, D. (2007). Applying strategies to contexts: The role of individual, situational, and group differences. In Cohen, A. D. & Macaro, E. (eds.), Language learner strategies. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 69–92.Google Scholar
Treffert, D. A. (2011). Daniel Tammet – Brainman: Numbers are my friends. Retrieved from: www.wisconsinmedicalsociety.org/savant_syndrome/savant_profiles/daniel_tammet.Google Scholar
Tulsky, D. S., Ivnik, R. J., Price, L. R. & Wilkins, C. (2003). Assessment of cognitive functioning with the WAIS-III and WMS-III: Development of a 6-factor model. In Tulsky, D. S., Saklofske, D. H., Chelune, G. J., Heaton, R. K., Ivnik, R. J., Bornstein, R. et al. (eds.), Clinical interpretation of the WAIS-III and WMS-III. San Diego, CA: Academic Press, 147–179.Google Scholar
Uylings, H. B. M. (2006). Development of the human cortex and the concept of ‘critical’ or ‘sensitive’ periods. In Gullberg, M. & Indefrey, P. (eds.), The cognitive neuroscience of second language acquisition. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing, 59–90.Google Scholar
Van Boxtel, S., Bongaerts, T. & Coppen, P-A. (2003). Native-like attainment in L2 syntax. In Foster-Cohen, S. & Pekarek-Doehler, S. (eds.), Eurosla Yearbook 3. Philedelphia: John Benjamins, 157–181.Google Scholar
Van Boxtel, S., Bongaerts, T. & Coppen, P-A. (2005). Native-like attainment of dummy subjects in Dutch and the role of the L1. IRAL 43, 355–380.Google Scholar
Van den Noort, M., Nordby, H., Bosch, P. & Hugdahl, K. (2005). Understanding second language acquisition: Can structural MRI bring the breakthrough? Proceedings of the International Conference on Cognitive Systems. New Delhi. Retrieved from www.niitcrcs.com/iccs/papers/2005_24.pdf.Google Scholar
Vatz, K., Tare, M., Jackson, S. R. & Doughty, C. J. (2013). Aptitude-treatment interaction studies in second language acquisition: Findings and methodology. In Granena, G. & Long, M. H. (eds.), Sensitive periods, language aptitude, and ultimate L2 attainment. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins, 272–292.Google Scholar
Wechsler, D. (1997). Manual for the Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale – third edition (WAIS III). San Antonio, TX: The Psychological Corporation.Google Scholar
Wells, G. (1981). Learning through interaction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Wen, E. & Skehan, P. (2011). A new perspective on foreign language aptitude: Building and supporting a case for ‘working memory as language aptitude’. Ilha Do Desterro: A Journal of English Language, Literatures and Cultural Studies 60, 9–34.Google Scholar
Wesche, M. B. (1981). Language aptitude measures in streaming, matching students with methods, and diagnosis of learning problems. In Diller, K. C. (ed.), Individual differences and universals in language learning aptitude. Rowley, MA: Newbury House, 119–154.Google Scholar
Wharton, G. (2000). Language learning strategy use of bilingual foreign language learners in Singapore. Language Learning 50, 203–243.Google Scholar
Wong, P., Morgan-Short, K., Ettlinger, M. & Zheng, J. (2012). Linking neurogenetics and individual differences in language learning: The dopamine hypothesis. Cortex 48, 1091–1102.Google Scholar
Wong, P., Perrachione, T. & Parrish, T. (2007). Neural characteristics of successful and less successful speech and word learning in adults. Human Brain Mapping 28, 995–1006.Google Scholar
Wood Bowden, H., Steinhauer, K., Sanz, C. & Ullman, M. T. (2013). Native-like brain processing of syntax can be attained by university foreign language learners. Neuropsychologia 51, 2492–2511.Google Scholar
Ying-Chun, L. (2009). Language learning strategy use and English proficiency of university freshmen in Taiwan. TESOL Quarterly 43, 255–280.Google Scholar