Hostname: page-component-669899f699-vbsjw Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-05-07T02:46:34.429Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Explicit information and practice type can affect the L2 acquisition of plural marking

Empirical insights from web-based contrastive instruction

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  16 September 2024

Matt Lucas Open the ORCID record for Matt Lucas [Opens in a new window]
Matt Lucas*
Affiliation:
Faculty of Foreign Language Studies, Kansai University, Osaka, Japan
*
Email: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Previous research has indicated that explicit information (EI) about either the first language (L1) or second language (L2) along with task-essential practice can facilitate L2 learning (e.g., Fernández, 2008; McManus, 2022). However, little research has examined L1–L2 contrastive EI with L1/L2 practice. Targeting plural-marking accuracy, the present study sought to fill this gap by exposing 127 Japanese intermediate learners of English to six online treatment sessions across four conditions: (1) non-contrastive EI (pluralization rule explanation) + L2 practice, (2) contrastive EI + L2 practice, (3) as per Condition 2 + additional L1 practice (application of L2 pluralization to L1 through the Japanese suffix –tachi), and (4) using prepositions as a control, non-contrastive EI (prepositional rule explanation) + L2 practice. Accuracy was tested at pre/post/delayed intervals using an acceptability judgement task (reading) and a picture description task (writing). Statistical analyses demonstrated greater gains from the contrastive variables in the immediate post-test, with L1 practice appearing especially beneficial, despite improvements diminishing in the delayed post-test. Supplementary data from retroactive interviews and questionnaire responses indicated favourable orientations towards the intervention. The study advances understanding of how EI and practice type can be used to maximize L2 learning through web-based practices tailored to the nature of the learning problem.

Keywords

Cross-linguistic contrastsgrammarJapanese EFL learnersmixed methodsweb-based instruction
Type
Research Article
Information
Studies in Second Language Acquisition , Volume 46 , Issue 4 , September 2024 , pp. 1013 - 1044
Check for updates
Open Practices
Open data Open materials
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2024. Published by Cambridge University Press

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.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Ammar, A., & Lightbown, P. M. (2005). Teaching marked linguistic structures – more about the acquisition of relative clauses by Arab learners of English. In Housen, A. & Pierrard, M. (Eds.), Current issues in instructed second language learning (pp. 167–198). Berlin, Germany: de Gruyter. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110197372.2.167Google Scholar
Ammar, A., Lightbown, P. M., & Spada, N. (2010). Awareness of L1/L2 differences: Does it matter? Language Awareness, 19(2), 129–146. https://doi.org/10.1080/09658411003746612CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Alonso-Aparicio, I. (2018). The impact of prior knowledge on second language grammar practice. In Tyler, A. E., Ortega, L., Uno, M. & Park, H. I. (Eds.), Usage-inspired L2 instruction: Researched pedagogy (pp. 143–164). Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/lllt.49.07aloCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Avery, N., & Marsden, E. (2019). A meta-analysis of sensitivity to grammatical information during self-paced reading: Towards a framework of reference for reading time effect sizes. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 41(5), 1055–1087. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263119000196CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ballinger,  S., Lau, S. M. C., & Quevillon Lacasse, C. (2020). Cross-linguistic pedagogy: Harnessing transfer in the classroom. The Canadian Modern Language Review, 76(4), 265–277. https://doi.org/10.3138/cmlr-76.4.001-enCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bardovi-Harlig, K., & Comajoan-Colomé, L. (2022). The relation of second language acquisition, instructed second language acquisition, and language teaching from the lens of second language tense-aspect. Language Teaching, 55(3), 289–345. https://doi.org/10.1017/S026144482200009XCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2021). Thematic analysis. A practical guide. London, UK: Sage.Google Scholar
Cenoz, J., & Gorter, D. (2022). Pedagogical translanguaging. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009029384CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cunnings, I. (2022). Working memory and L2 sentence processing. In Schweiter, J. W. & Wen, Z. (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of working memory and language (pp. 593–612). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108955638.033CrossRefGoogle Scholar
de la Fuente, M. J., & Goldenberg, C. (2022). Understanding the role of the first language (L1) in instructed second language acquisition (ISLA): Effects of using a principled approach to L1 in the beginner foreign language classroom. Language Teaching Research, 26(5), 943–962. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168820921882CrossRefGoogle Scholar
DeKeyser, R. (1995). Learning second language grammar rules: An experiment with a miniature linguistic system. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 17(3), 379–410. https://doi.org/10.1017/S027226310001425XCrossRefGoogle Scholar
DeKeyser, R. (2005). What makes second-language grammar difficult? A review of issues. Language Learning, 55(1), 1–25. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0023-8333.2005.00294.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dougiamas, M. (2002). Moodle Pty Ltd. Australia, Perth. https://moodle.orgGoogle Scholar
Ellis, N. C. (2006). Selective attention and transfer phenomena in L2 acquisition: Contingency, cue competition, salience, interference, overshadowing, blocking, and perceptual learning. Applied Linguistics, 27(2), 164–94. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/aml015CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ellis, N. C. (2008). Implicit and explicit knowledge about language. In Hornberger, N. H. (Ed.), Encyclopedia of language and education (pp. 1878–1890). Boston, MA: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-30424-3_143CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ellis, N. C. (2022). Second language learning of morphology. Journal of the European Second Language Association, 6, 34–59. https://www.euroslajournal.org/articles/10.22599/jesla.85/CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ellis, N. C., & Sagarra, N. (2010). The bounds of adult language acquisition: Blocking and learned attention. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 32(4), 553–580. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263110000264CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ellis, N. C., & Wulff, S. (2019). Cognitive approaches to L2 acquisition. In Schwieter, J. W. & Benati, A. (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of language learning (pp. 41–61). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108333603.003CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fernández, C. (2008). Reexamining the role of explicit information in processing instruction. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 30(3), 277–305. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263108080467CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fukuta, J., & Yamashita, J. (2023). The complex relationship between conscious/unconscious learning and conscious/unconscious knowledge: The mediating effects of salience in form–meaning connections. Second Language Research, 39(2), 425–446. https://doi.org/10.1177/02676583211044950CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gass, S. M. (1982). From theory to practice. In Hinds, M. & Rutherford, W. (Eds.), On TESOL (pp. 129–140). Washington, DC: TESOL.Google Scholar
Godfroid, A. (2021). Implicit and explicit learning and knowledge. In Mohebbi, H. & Coombe, C. (Eds.) Research questions in language education and applied linguistics. springer texts in education. Cham, Switzerland: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-79143-8_142Google Scholar
Gries, S. T. (2015). Polysemy. In Dąbrowska, E. & Divjak, D. S. (Eds.), Handbook of cognitive linguistics (pp. 472–490). Berlin, Germany: de Gruyter. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110292022-023CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gutierrez-Mangado, M. J., Martínez-Adrián, M., & Gallardo-del-Puerto, F. (2019). Cross-linguistic influence: From empirical evidence to classroom practice. Cham, Switzerland: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-22066-2CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hall, G., & Cook, G. (2012). Own-language use in language teaching and learning. Language Teaching, 45(3), 271–308. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0261444812000067CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Henry, N., Culman, H., & VanPatten, B. (2009). More on the effects of explicit information in instructed SLA: A partial replication and a response to Fernández (2008). Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 31(4), 559–575. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263109990027CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Henry, N., Jackson, C. N., & DiMidio, J. (2017). The role of prosody and explicit instruction in processing instruction. The Modern Language Journal, 101(2), 294–319. https://doi.org/10.1111/modl.12397CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Horst, M., White, J. L., & Bell, P. (2010). First and second language knowledge in the language classroom. International Journal of Bilingualism, 14(3), 331–349. https://doi.org/10.1177/1367006910367848CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jarvis, S., & Pavlenko, A. (2010). Cross-linguistic influence in language and cognition (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203935927Google Scholar
Jiang, N. (2007). Selective integration of linguistic knowledge in adult second language learning. Language Learning, 57(1), 1–33. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9922.2007.00397.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kasprowicz, R., & Marsden, E. (2018). Towards ecological validity in research into input-based practice: Form spotting can be as beneficial as form-meaning practice. Applied Linguistics, 39(6), 886–911. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amw051CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kline, P. (2000). The handbook of psychological testing (2nd ed.). London, UK: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315812274Google Scholar
Kupferberg, I. (1999). The cognitive turn of contrastive analysis: Empirical evidence. Language Awareness, 8(3–4), 210–222. https://doi.org/10.1080/09658419908667130CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kupferberg, I., & Olshtain, E. (1996). Explicit contrastive instruction facilitates the acquisition of difficult L2 forms. Language Awareness, 5(3–4), 149–165. https://doi.org/10.1080/09658416.1996.9959904CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kurumada, C., & Grimm, S. (2019). Predictability of meaning in grammatical encoding: Optional plural marking, Cognition, 191, 103953, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2019.04.022CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lado, R. (1957). Linguistics across cultures. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0008413100025196Google Scholar
Landis, J. R., & Koch, G. G. (1977). The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics, 33(1), 159–174. https://doi.org/10.2307/2529310CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lee, S.-M. (2023). The effectiveness of machine translation in foreign language education: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 36(1-2), 103–125. https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2021.1901745CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leow, R. P. (2015). Explicit learning in the L2 classroom: A student-centered approach. New York, NY: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315887074CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Loewen, S., & Plonsky, L. (2016). An A-Z of applied linguistics research methods. New York, NY: Palgrave.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lucas, M. W. (2018). Not all nouns are created equal: Japanese EFL learners, written English, and plural marking of loanwords and non-loanwords. The Asian EFL Journal Quarterly, 20(6), 114–144. Retrieved from https://www.asian-efl-journal.com/main-editions-new/volume-20-issue-6-june-2018-quarterly-journal/Google Scholar
Lucas, M. W. (2020). Cross-linguistic influence and plural marking: Enhancing error recognition and written accuracy among Japanese EFL learners through web-based awareness-raising. Language Awareness, 29(2), 155–177. https://doi.org/10.1080/09658416.2020.1737096CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lucas, M. W. (2022). Exploring web-based contrastive instruction to enhance deictic referencing accuracy in L2 spoken performance. The Journal of Asia TEFL, 19(3), 937–961. https://doi.org/10.18823/asiatefl.2022.19.3.11.937Google Scholar
Lucas, M. W., & Yiakoumetti, A. (2019). Cross-linguistic awareness-raising practices can enhance written performance in EFL classes in Japanese universities. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 22(8), 958–973. https://doi.org/10.1080/13670050.2017.1325833CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mackey, A., & Gass, S. M. (2016). Second language research: Methodology and design. New York, NY: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003188414Google Scholar
MacWhinney, B. (2005). A unified model of language acquisition. In Kroll, J. F. & de Groot, A. M. B. (Eds.), Handbook of bilingualism: Psycholinguistic approaches (pp. 49–67). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
MacWhinney, B. (2008). A unified model. In Ellis, N. C., & Robinson, P. (Eds.), Handbook of cognitive linguistics and second language acquisition (pp. 341–372). New York, NY: Erlbaum. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203938560Google Scholar
MacWhinney, B. (2012). The logic of the unified model. In Gass, S. M. & Mackey, A. (Eds.), The Routledge handbook of second language acquisition (pp. 211–227). New York, NY: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203808184Google Scholar
MacWhinney, B. (2017). Entrenchment in second-language learning. In Schmid, H. (Ed.), Entrenchment and the psychology of language learning: How we reorganize and adapt linguistic knowledge (pp. 343–366). Berlin: de Gruyter. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110341423-016Google Scholar
Malovrh, P. A., & Lee, J. F. (2022). The effects of prior knowledge on explicit rule formation among L2 Spanish learners receiving structured input through guided-inductive instruction, Ampersand, 106(4), 818–836. https://doi.org/10.1111/modl.12810Google Scholar
McManus, K. (2019). Awareness of L1 form-meaning mappings can reduce crosslinguistic effects in L2 grammatical learning. Language Awareness, 28(2), 114–138. https://doi.org/10.1080/09658416.2019.1620756CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McManus, K. (2022). Crosslinguistic influence and second language learning (1st ed.). New York, NY: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429341663Google Scholar
McManus, K., & Marsden, E. (2017). L1 explicit instruction can improve L2 online and offline performance. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 39(3), 459–492. https://doi.org/10.1017/S027226311600022XCrossRefGoogle Scholar
McManus, K., & Marsden, E. (2018). Online and offline effects of L1 practice in L2 grammar learning: A partial replication. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 40(2), 459–475. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263117000171CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McManus, K., & Marsden, E. (2019a). Using explicit instruction about L1 to reduce crosslinguistic effects in L2 grammar learning: Evidence from oral production in L2 French. The Modern Language Journal, 103(2), 459–480. https://doi.org/10.1111/modl.12567CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McManus, K., & Marsden, E. (2019b). Signatures of automaticity during practice: Explicit instruction about L1 processing routines can improve L2 grammatical processing. Applied Psycholinguistics, 40(1), 205–234. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0142716418000553CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Michaud, G., & Ammar, A. (2022). Explicit instruction within a task: Before, during, or after? Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 45(2), 442–460. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263122000316CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mizumoto, A. (2015). Langtest (Version 1.0). [Web application] https://langtest.jp/shiny/npt/Google Scholar
Mizumoto, A., & Plonsky, L. (2016). R as a lingua franca: Advantages of using R for quantitative research in applied linguistics. Applied Linguistics, 37(2), 284–291. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amv025CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nakanishi, K., & Tomioka, S. (2004). Japanese plurals are exceptional. Journal of East Asian Linguistics 13(2), 113–40. https://doi.org/10.1023/B:JEAL.0000019058.46668.c1CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Norris, J., & Ortega, L. (2000). Effectiveness of L2 instruction: A research synthesis and quantitative meta-analysis. Language Learning, 50(3), 417–528. https://doi.org/10.1111/0023-8333.00136CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pawlak, M. (2019). Tapping the distinction between explicit and implicit knowledge: Methodological issues. In Lewandowska-Tomaszczyk, B. (Ed.), Contacts and contrasts in educational contexts and translation (pp. 45–60). Cham, Switzerland: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-04978-2_3CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Plonsky, L., Marsden, E., Crowther, D., Gass, S. M., & Spinner, P. (2020). A methodological synthesis and meta-analysis of judgment tasks in second language research. Second Language Research, 36(4), 583–621. https://doi.org/10.1177/0267658319828413CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Plonsky, L., & Oswald, F. L. (2014). How big is “big”? Interpreting effect sizes in L2 research. Language Learning, 64(4), 878–912. https://doi.org/10.1111/lang.12079CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Roehr-Brackin, K. (2018). Metalinguistic awareness and second language acquisition. New York, NY: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315661001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rusk, B., Paradis, J., & Järvikivi, J. (2020). Comprehension of English plural-singular marking by Mandarin-L1, early L2-immersion learners. Applied Psycholinguistics, 41(3), 547–577. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0142716420000089CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sanz, C., & Morgan-Short, K. (2004). Positive evidence versus explicit rule presentation and explicit negative feedback: A computer-assisted study. Language Learning, 54(1), 35–78. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9922.2004.00248.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sasayama, S., Garcia Gomez, P., & Norris, J. M. (2021). Designing efficient L2 writing assessment tasks for low-proficiency learners of English. ETS Research Report Series, 2021(1), 1–31. https://doi.org/10.1002/ets2.12341CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sato, M. (2022). Mixed methods research in ISLA. In Gurzynski-Weiss, L. & Kim, Y. (Eds.), Instructed second language acquisition research methods (pp. 79–102). Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/rmal.3.04satCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shintani, N., & Ellis, R. (2010). The incidental acquisition of English plural –s by Japanese children in comprehension-based lessons: A process-product study. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 32(4), 607–637. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263110000288CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shirai, Y. (2018). Connectionism and second language acquisition (1st ed.). New York, NY: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203118085CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Spada, N., & Lightbown, P. M. (2008). Form-focused instruction: Isolated or integrated? TESOL Quarterly, 42(2), 181–207. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.1545-7249.2008.tb00115.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Spada, N., Lightbown, P. M., & White, J. L. (2005). The importance of form/meaning mappings in explicit form-focussed instruction. In Housen, A. & Pierrard, M. (Eds.), Current issues in instructed second language learning (pp. 199–234). Berlin, Germany: de Gruyter. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110197372.2.199Google Scholar
Sparks, R. (2022). Exploring L1–L2 relationships: the impact of individual differences. Bristol, UK: Multilingual Matters. https://doi.org/10.21832/9781800411807Google Scholar
Spinner, P., & Gass, S. M. (2019). Using judgments in second language acquisition research (1st ed.). New York, NY: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315463377CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stafford, C. A., Bowden, H. W., & Sanz, C. (2012). Optimizing language instruction: Matters of explicitness, practice, and cue learning. Language Learning, 62(3), 741–768. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9922.2011.00648.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Swan, M. & Smith, B. (2001). Learner English: A teacher’s guide to interference and other problems. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511667121CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tamura, Y. (2023). Is cats one word or two? L2 learners’ processing of number marking in English from the viewpoints of form–meaning mapping. Second Language Research. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1177/02676583231188933CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tashakkori, A. & Johnson, R. B., & Teddlie, C. (2021). Foundations of mixed methods research: Integrating quantitative and qualitative approaches in social and behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
Tolentino, L. C., & Tokowicz, N. (2014). Cross-language similarity modulates effectiveness of second language grammar instruction. Language Learning, 64(2), 279–309. https://doi.org/10.1111/lang.12048CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Trofimovich, P., & McDonough, K. (2011). Applying priming methods to L2 learning, teaching and research: Insights from psycholinguistics. Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/lllt.30CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tsang, A. (2017). Judgement of countability and plural marking in English by native and non-native English speakers. Language Awareness, 26(4), 343–359. https://doi.org/10.1080/09658416.2017.1410553CrossRefGoogle Scholar
VanPatten, B. (2015). Input processing in adult SLA. In VanPatten, B. & Williams, J. (Eds.), Theories in second language acquisition: An introduction (pp. 113–134). New York, NY: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203628942Google Scholar
Woll, N., & Paquet, P.-L. (2021). Developing crosslinguistic awareness through plurilingual consciousness-raising tasks. Language Teaching Research. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1177/13621688211056544CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Supplementary material: File

Lucas supplementary material

Lucas supplementary material
Download Lucas supplementary material(File)
File 892.2 KB