Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-t5tsf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-19T15:28:06.088Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

LANGUAGE APTITUDE AND GRAMMATICAL DIFFICULTY

An EFL Classroom-Based Study

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  07 January 2016

Şebnem Yalçın  and
Nina Spada
Şebnem Yalçın*
Affiliation:
Boğaziçi University
Nina Spada
Affiliation:
University of Toronto
*
*Correspondence concerning this manuscript should be addressed to Şebnem Yalçın, Boğaziçi University Faculty of Education, Department of Foreign Language Education, Bebek 34342 İstanbul, Turkey. E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This study investigates the relationship between foreign language aptitude and the learning of two English structures defined as easy or difficult to learn. Using a quasiexperimental design, 66 secondary-level learners of English as a foreign language from three intact classes were provided with four hours of instruction on the passive (a difficult structure) and the past progressive (an easy structure). Language aptitude was measured using the LLAMA Aptitude Test (Meara, 2005). Language outcomes were measured with a written grammaticality judgment and an oral production task. The results revealed that one of the aptitude components, grammatical inferencing, contributed to learners’ gains on the passive but not the past progressive on the written measure. Another component of aptitude, associative memory, contributed to learners’ gains on the past progressive on the oral measure. The results provide support for the claim that different components of aptitude contribute to the learning of difficult and easy L2 structures in different ways. There is also support for the proposal that different components of aptitude may be involved at different stages of language acquisition (Skehan, 2002).

Type
Articles
Information
Studies in Second Language Acquisition , Volume 38 , Special Issue 2: Cognitive Perspectives on Difficulty and Complexity in SLA , June 2016 , pp. 239 - 263
Check for updates
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

REFERENCES

Abrahamsson, N., & Hyltenstam, K. (2008). The robustness of aptitude effects in near-native second language acquisition. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 30, 481–509.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brown, J. D., & Hudson, T. (2002). Criterion-referenced language testing. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Bulté, B., & Housen, A. (2012). Defining and operationalising L2 complexity. In Housen, A., Kuiken, F., & Vedder, I. (Eds.). Dimensions of L2 performance and proficiency: Complexity, accuracy and fluency in SLA (pp. 21–46). Amsterdam, The Netherlands: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Carroll, J. B. (1981). Twenty-five years of research in foreign language aptitude. In Diller, K. C. (Ed.), Individual differences and universals in language learning aptitude (pp. 83–113). Rowley, MA: Newbury House.Google Scholar
Carroll, J. B. (1990). Estimating item and ability parameters in homogeneous tests with the person characteristic function. Applied Psychological Measurement, 14, 109–125.Google Scholar
Carroll, J. B., & Sapon, S. (1959). The modern languages aptitude test. San Antonio, TX: Psychological Measurement.Google Scholar
Collins, L., Trofimovich, P., White, J., Cardoso, W., & Horst, M. (2009). Some input on the easy/difficult grammar question: An empirical study. The Modern Language Journal, 93, 336–353.Google Scholar
de Graaff, R. (1997). The eXperanto experiment: Effects of explicit instruction on second language acquisition. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 19, 249–275.Google Scholar
DeKeyser, R. M. (1998). Beyond focus on form: Cognitive perspectives on learning and practicing second language grammar. In Doughty, C. & Williams, J. (Eds.), Focus on form in classroom language acquisition (pp. 42–63). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
DeKeyser, R. M. (2000). The robustness of critical period effects in second language acquisition. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 22, 509–544.Google Scholar
DeKeyser, R. M. (2005). What makes learning second-grammar difficult? A review of issues. Language Learning, 55 (suppl.), 1–25.Google Scholar
DeKeyser, R. M. (2012). Interactions between individual differences, treatments, and structures in SLA. Language Learning, 62 (suppl. 2), 189–200.Google Scholar
Doughty, C., & Williams, J. (1998). Issues and terminology. In Doughty, C. and Williams, J. (Eds.), Focus on form in classroom second language acquisition (pp. 1–11). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Dörnyei, Z. (2005). The psychology of the language learner: Individual differences in second language acquisition. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Dörnyei, Z., & Skehan, P. (2003). Individual differences in second language learning. In Doughty, C. & Long, M. H. (Eds.), The handbook of second language acquisition (pp. 589–630). Oxford, UK: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Ehrman, M. E., & Oxford, R. (1995). Cognition plus: Correlates of language learning success. The Modern Language Journal, 79, 67–89.Google Scholar
Ellis, R. (2009). Measuring implicit and explicit knowledge of a second language. In Ellis, R., Loewen, S., Elder, C., Erlam, R., Philp, J., and Reinders, H. (Eds.), Implicit and explicit knowledge in second language learning, testing and teaching (pp. 27–30). Bristol, UK: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
Erlam, R. (2005). Language aptitude and its relationship to instructional effectiveness in second language acquisition. Language Teaching Research, 9, 147–171.Google Scholar
Field, A. P. (2009). Discovering statistics using SPSS Statistics, 3rd ed. London: Sage.Google Scholar
Goldschneider, J. M., & DeKeyser, R. M. (2001). Explaining the “Natural Order of L2 Morpheme Acquisition” in English: A meta-analysis of multiple determinants. Language Learning, 51, 1–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Granena, G. (2013). Cognitive aptitudes for second language learning and the LLAMA language aptitude test. In Gisela, G. & Long, M. (Eds.), Sensitive periods, language aptitude, and ultimate attainment (pp. 105–130). Amsterdam, The Netherlands: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Granena, G., & Long, M. (2013). Age of onset, length of residence, language aptitude, and ultimate L2 attainment in three linguistic domains. Second Language Research, 29, 311–343. doi:10.1177/0267658312461497 CrossRefGoogle 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. Modern Language Journal, 84, 390–405.Google Scholar
Harley, B., & Hart, D. (1997). Language aptitude and second language proficiency in classroom learners of different starting ages. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 19, 379–400.Google Scholar
Harley, B., & Hart, D. (2002). Age, aptitude and second language learning on bilingual exchange. In Robinson, P. (Ed.), Individual differences and instructed language learning (pp. 301–330). Amsterdam, The Netherlands, and Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Harrington, M., & Sawyer, M. (1992). L2 working memory capacity and L2 reading skill. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 14, 25–38. doi: 10.1017/S0272263100010457 Google Scholar
Hinkel, E. (2004). Tense, aspect and the passive voice in L1 and L2 academic texts. Language Teaching Research, 8, 5–29.Google Scholar
Housen, A. (2014). Difficulty and complexity of language features and second language instruction. The encyclopedia of applied linguistics, 1–7. Oxford, UK: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar
Housen, A., Pierrard, M., & Van Daele, S. (2005). Structure complexity and the efficacy of explicit grammar instruction. In Housen, A. & Pierrard, M. (Eds.), Investigations in instructed second language acquisition (pp. 235–269). Brussels: Mouton DeGruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hulstijn, J., & de Graaff, R. (1994). Under what conditions does explicit knowledge of a second language facilitate the acquisition of implicit knowledge? A research proposal. AILA Review, 11, 97–112.Google Scholar
Hwu, F., & Sun, S. (2012). The aptitude-treatment interaction effects on the learning of grammar rules. System, 40, 505–521.Google Scholar
Kirby, S. (2010). Passives in first language acquisition: What causes the delay? University of Pennsylvania Working Papers in Linguistics, 16, 109–117.Google Scholar
Kormos, J., & Sáfár, A. (2008). Phonological short-term memory and foreign language performance in intensive language learning. Bilingualism: Language and cognition, 11, 261–171.Google Scholar
Li, S. (2013). The interactions between the effects of implicit and explicit feedback and individual differences in language analytic ability and working memory. Modern Language Journal, 97, 634–654.Google Scholar
Li, S. (2015a). The associations between language aptitude and second language grammar acquisition: A meta-analytic review of five decades of research. Applied Linguistics, 36, 385–408.Google Scholar
Li, S. (2015b). The differential roles of two aptitude components in mediating the effects of two types of feedback on the acquisition of an opaque linguistic structure. In Sanz, C. and Lado, B. (Eds.) Individual differences, L2 development, and language program administration: From theory to application (pp. 32–52). Boston, MA: Cengage Learning.Google Scholar
Linck, J. A., Hughes, M. M., Campbell, S. G., Silbert, N. H., Tare, M., Jackson, S. R., ... and Doughty, C. J. (2013). Hi-LAB: A new measure of aptitude for high-level language proficiency. Language Learning, 63, 530–566.Google Scholar
Meara, P. (2005). LLAMA language aptitude tests. Swansea: Lognostics.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: Psycholinguistics studies on training and retention (pp. 339–364). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Osaka, M., & Osaka, N. (1992). Language-independent working memory as measured by Japanese and English reading span tests. Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society, 30, 287–289.Google Scholar
Pimsleur, P. (1966). The Pimsleur language aptitude battery. New York, NY: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.Google Scholar
Ranta, L. (2005). Learners’ analytic ability and oral production in a second language: Is there a connection? In Housen, A. & Pierrard, M. (Eds.), Investigations in instructed second language acquisition (pp. 99–130). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Révész, A. (2007). Focus on form in task-based language teaching: Recasts, task complexity, and L2 learning (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Columbia: Teachers College.Google Scholar
Révész, A. (2009). Task complexity, focus on form, and second language development. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 31, 437–470. Columbia University, New York, USA.Google Scholar
Robinson, P. (2001). Individual differences, cognitive abilities, aptitude complexes and learning conditions in second language acquisition. Second Language Research, 17, 368–392.Google Scholar
Robinson, P. (2002). Effects of individual differences in intelligence, aptitude, and working memory on adult incidental SLA: A replication and extension of Reber, Walkenfield, and Hernstad (1991). In Robinson, P. (Ed.), Individual differences and instructed language learning (pp. 211–265). Amsterdam, The Netherlands: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Robinson, P. (2012). Individual differences, aptitude complexes, SLA processes and aptitude test development. In Pawlak, M. (Ed.), New perspectives on individual differences in language learning and teaching (pp. 57–76). Oxford, UK: Springer.Google Scholar
Rysiewicz, J. (2008), Cognitive profiles of (un)successful FL learners: A cluster analytical study. The Modern Language Journal, 92, 87–99. doi: 10.1111/j.1540-4781.2008.00688.x Google Scholar
Sasaki, M. (1996). Second language proficiency, foreign language aptitude, and intelligence. New York, NY: Lang.Google Scholar
Sheen, Y. (2007a). The effect of focused written corrective feedback and language aptitude on ESL learners’ acquisition of articles. TESOL Quarterly, 41, 255–283.Google Scholar
Sheen, Y. (2007b). The effect of corrective feedback, language aptitude and learner attitudes on the acquisition of English articles, In Mackey, A. (Ed.), Conversational interaction in second language acquisition (pp. 301–322). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Schmidt, R. (1995). Consciousness and foreign language learning: A tutorial on the role of attention and awareness in learning. In Schmidt, R. (Ed.), Attention and awareness in foreign language learning (pp. 1–63). Honolulu: University of Hawaii, Second Language Teaching & Curriculum Center.Google Scholar
Skehan, P. (1986). The role of foreign language aptitude in a model of school learning. Language Testing, 3, 188–221.Google Scholar
Skehan, P. (2002). Theorising and updating aptitude. In Robinson, P.. (Ed.), Individual differences and instructed language learning (pp. 69–93). Amsterdam, The Netherlands: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Skehan, P. (2010). Language aptitude. In Gass, S. & Mackey, A. (Eds.), Handbook of Second Language Acquisition (pp. 381–395). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Skehan, P. (2015). Foreign language aptitude and its relationship with grammar: A critical overview. Applied Linguistics, 36, 367–384.Google Scholar
Spada, N. (1997). Form-focussed instruction and second language acquisition: A review of classroom and laboratory research. Language Teaching, 30, 73–87.Google Scholar
Spada, N., & Tomita, Y. (2010). Interactions between type of instruction and type of language feature: A meta-analysis. Language Learning, 60, 263–308.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Spada, N., Jessop, L., Suzuki, W., Tomita, Y., & Valeo, A. (2014). Isolated and integrated form-focused instruction: Effects on different types of L2 knowledge. Language Teaching Research, 18, 453–473.Google Scholar
Sparks, R. L., Patton, J., Ganschow, L., & Humbach, N. (2011). Subcomponents of second-language aptitude and second-language proficiency. The Modern Language Journal, 95, 253–273.Google Scholar
Sternberg, R. J. (1999). Theory of successful intelligence. Review of General Psychology, 4, 292–316.Google Scholar
Swan, M. (1995). Practical English usage. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Trofimovich, P., Ammar, A., & Gatbonton, E. (2007). How effective are recasts? The role of attention, memory, and analytical ability. In Mackey, A. (Ed.), Conversational interaction in second language acquisition: A series of empirical studies (pp. 171–195). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Ullman, M. T. (2004). Contributions of memory circuits to language: The declarative/procedural model. Cognition, 92, 231–270.Google Scholar
Yalçın, Ş. (2012). Individual differences and the learning of two grammatical features with Turkish learners of English. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Toronto, Canada.Google Scholar
Yalçın, Ş., Çeçen, S., & Erçetin, G. (forthcoming). The relationship between aptitude and working memory: An instructed SLA context. Manuscript submitted for publication.Google Scholar
Yilmaz, Y. (2012). Relative effects of explicit and implicit feedback: The role of working memory capacity and language analytical ability. Applied Linguistics, 34, 344–368.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wesche, M. (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 (pp. 119–154). Rowley, MA: Newbury House.Google Scholar
VanPatten, B., & Smith, M. (2015). Aptitude as grammatical sensitivity and the initial stages of learning Japanese as a L2: Parametric variation and case marking—corrigendum. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 37, 175–176.Google Scholar
VanPatten, B., Collopy, E., Price, J. E., Borst, S. & Qualin, A. (2013). Explicit information, grammatical sensitivity, and the first-noun principle: A cross-linguistic study in processing instruction. The Modern Language Journal, 97, 506–527.Google Scholar
Supplementary material: File

Yalçın and Spada supplementary material

Yalçın and Spada supplementary material 1

Download Yalçın and Spada supplementary material(File)
File 95.3 KB
Supplementary material: File

Yalçın and Spada supplementary material

Yalçın and Spada supplementary material 2

Download Yalçın and Spada supplementary material(File)
File 1.6 MB
Supplementary material: File

Yalçın and Spada supplementary material

Yalçın and Spada supplementary material 3

Download Yalçın and Spada supplementary material(File)
File 24.9 KB