Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-fscjk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T08:34:40.123Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

KNOWLEDGE OF NATIVELIKE SELECTIONS IN A L2

The Influence of Exposure, Memory, Age of Onset, and Motivation in Foreign Language and Immersion Settings

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  13 December 2013

Pauline Foster ,
Cylcia Bolibaugh  and
Agnieszka Kotula
Pauline Foster*
Affiliation:
St. Mary’s University College
Cylcia Bolibaugh
Affiliation:
St. Mary’s University College
Agnieszka Kotula
Affiliation:
St. Mary’s University College
*
*Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Pauline Foster, St. Mary’s University College, School of Arts and Humanities, Waldegrave Road, Twickenham, Middx TW1 4SX, U.K. E-mail: pauline.foster@smuc.ac.uk
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

It is well established that part of native speaker competence resides in knowledge of conventionalized word combinations, or nativelike selections (NLSs). This article reports an investigation into the receptive NLS knowledge of second language (L2) users of English in both the United Kingdom and Poland and the influence of a variety of independent variables on this knowledge. Results indicate that only an early start (< 12 years old) in an immersion setting guarantees nativelikeness. Long exposure in late starters brings moderate gains in both settings but not to nativelike levels; positive feelings toward the L2 and motivation to interact in it bear little to no relationship with NLS; phonological short-term memory (pSTM) is the only predictor of NLS ability in immersion late starters, with no effect found in a foreign language setting. Our results suggest that NLS is subject to age effects and that, for late starters, a good pSTM and L2 immersion are necessary for the acquisition of this dimension of L2 knowledge.

Type
Articles
Information
Studies in Second Language Acquisition , Volume 36 , Issue 1 , March 2014 , pp. 101 - 132
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2013 

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. (2012). Age of onset and nativelike L2 ultimate attainment of morphosyntactic and phonetic intuition. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 34, 187–214.Google Scholar
Abrahamsson, N., & Hyltenstam, K. (2008). The robustness of aptitude effects in near-native second language acquisition. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 30, 481–509.Google Scholar
Altenberg, B. (1990). Speech as linear composition. In Caie, G., Haastruup, K., Jakobsen, A., Neilsen, J. E., Sevaldsen, J., Specht, H., & Zettersen, A. (Eds.), Proceedings from the Fourth Nordic Conference for English Studies (Vol. 1, pp. 133–143). Copenhagen: Department of English, University of Copenhagen.Google Scholar
Baddeley, A. D. (2000). Working memory and language processing. Advances in Cognitive Science, 4, 1–10.Google Scholar
Baddeley, A. D., & Hitch, G. J. (1974). Working memory. The Psychology of Learning and Motivation, 8, 47–89.Google Scholar
Bardel, C., Gudmundson, A., & Lindqvist, C. (2012). Aspects of lexical sophistication in advanced learners’ oral production: Vocabulary acquisition and use in L2 French and Italian. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 34, 269–290.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bardovi-Harlig, K., & Bastos, M. T. (2011). Proficiency, length of stay, and intensity of interaction and the acquisition of conventional expressions in L2 pragmatics. Intercultural Pragmatics, 8, 347–384.Google Scholar
Bates, E. (1994). Modularity, domain specificity and the development of language. Discussions in Neuroscience, 10, 136–149.Google Scholar
Beckner, C., Blythe, R., Bybee, J., Christiansen, M. H., Croft, W., Ellis, N. C.,... Schoenemann, T. (2009). Language is a complex adaptive system: Position paper. Language Learning, 59, 1–26.Google Scholar
Bialystok, E. (2002). On the reliability of robustness: A reply to DeKeyser. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 24, 481–488.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Birdsong, D. (2005). Interpreting age effects in second language acquisition. In Kroll, J. & De Groot, A. (Eds.), Handbook of bilingualism: Psycholinguistic perspectives (pp. 109–127). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Birdsong, D. (2006). Age and second language acquisition and processing: A selective overview. Language Learning, 56, 9–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bley-Vroman, R. (1989). What is the logical problem of language acquisition? In Gass, S. & Schachter, J. (Eds.), Linguistic perspectives on second language acquisition (pp. 41–62). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Bolibaugh, C., & Foster, P. (2013). Memory-based aptitude for nativelike selection: The role of phonological short-term memory. In Long, M. & Granena, G. (Eds.), Sensitive periods, language aptitude, and ultimate L2 attainment (pp. 205–230). Amsterdam: Benjamins.Google Scholar
Bybee, J. (2001). Phonology and language use. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Cobb, T. (n.d.). Compleat Lexical Tutor ( Version 6.2) [Online resource]. Retrieved fromhttp://www.lextutor.ca/Google Scholar
Conway, C. M., Baurnschmidt, A., Huang, S. S., & Pisoni, D. B. (2010). Implicit statistical learning in language processing: Word predictability is the key. Cognition, 114, 356–371.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Conway, C. M., Karpicke, J., & Pisoni, D. B. (2007). Contribution of implicit sequence learning to spoken language processing: Some preliminary findings with normal-hearing adults. Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education, 12, 317–334.Google Scholar
Cook, V. J. (1997). Inside language. London: Arnold.Google Scholar
Dechert, H. (1983). How a story is done in a second language. In Færch, C. & Kasper, G. (Eds.), Strategies in interlanguage communication (pp. 175–195). London: Longman.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. (2012). Age effects in second language learning. In Gass, S. & Mackey, A. (Eds.), The Routledge handbook of second language acquisition (pp. 442–460). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
DeKeyser, R., & Koeth, J. (2011). Cognitive aptitudes for L2 learning. In Hinkel, E. (Ed.), Handbook of research in second language teaching and learning (Vol. 2, pp. 395–406). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Dörnyei, Z., Durow, V., & Zahran, K. (2004). Individual differences and their effect on formulaic sequence acquisition. In Schmitt, N. (Ed.), Formulaic sequences (pp. 87–106). Amsterdam: Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle 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 (pp. 589–630). Malden, MA: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Ellis, N. C. (1996). Sequencing in SLA: Phonological memory, chunking, and points of order. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 18, 91–126.Google Scholar
Ellis, N. C. (1997). The epigenesis of language: Acquisition as a sequence learning problem. In Wray, A. & Ryan, A. (Eds.), British studies in applied linguistics: Vol. 12. Evolving models of language (pp. 41–57). Bristol, UK: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
Ellis, N. C. (2002). Frequency effects in language processing: A review with implications for theories of implicit and explicit language acquisition. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 24, 143–188.Google Scholar
Ellis, N. C. (2003). Constructions, chunking, and connectionism: The emergence of second language structure. In Doughty, C. J. & Long, M. H. (Eds.), Handbook of second language acquisition (pp. 33–68). Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Ellis, N. C. (2008). Phraseology: The periphery and the heart of language. In Meunier, F. & Granger, S. (Eds.), Phraseology in language learning and teaching (pp. 1–13). Amsterdam: Benjamins.Google Scholar
Ellis, N. C., & Schmidt, R. (1997). Morphology and longer distance dependencies: Laboratory research illuminating the A in SLA. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 19, 145–171.Google Scholar
Ellis, N. C., Simpson-Vlach, R., & Maynard, C. (2008). Formulaic language in native and second language speakers, corpus linguistics and TESOL: Psycholinguistics, corpus linguistics, and TESOL. TESOL Quarterly, 42, 375–396.Google Scholar
Ellis, N. C., & Sinclair, J. (1996). Working memory in the acquisition of vocabulary and syntax: Putting language in good order. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 49A, 234–250.Google Scholar
Erman, B., & Warren, B. (2000). The idiom principle and the open-choice principle. Text, 20, 29–62.Google Scholar
Eubank, L., & Gregg, K. R. (1999). Critical periods and (second) language acquisition: Divide et impera. In Birdsong, D. (Ed.), Second language acquisition and the critical period hypothesis (pp. 65–99). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Fitzpatrick, T., & Wray, A. (2006). Breaking up is not so hard to do: Individual differences in L2 memorization. Canadian Modern Language Review, 63, 35–57.Google Scholar
Flege, J., Munro, M., & MacKay, I. (1995). Factors affecting degree of perceived foreign accent in a second language. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 97, 3125–3134.Google Scholar
Forsberg, F. (2008). Le langage préfabriqué: Formes, fonctions et fréquences en français parlé L2 et L1 [Prefabricated language: Forms, functions, and frequencies of spoken French L2 and L1]. Bern: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
Forsberg, F. (2010). Using conventional sequences in L2 French. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, 48, 25–51.Google Scholar
Foster, P. (2009). Lexical diversity and native-like selection: The bonus of studying abroad. In Daller, H., Malvern, D., Meara, P., Milton, J., Richards, B., & Treffers-Daller, J. (Eds.), Vocabulary studies in first and second language acquisition: The interface between theory and application (pp. 91–106). Basingstoke: Palgrave-Macmillan.Google Scholar
Foster, P., Bolibaugh, C., & Kotula, A. (2013). Robustness in critical period effects on L2 grammaticality judgement: A partial replication of DeKeyser 2000. Manuscript in preparation.Google Scholar
Foster, P., & Tavakoli, P. (2009). Lexical diversity and lexical selection: A comparison of native and non-native speaker performance. Language Learning, 59, 866–896.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Freed, B., Dewey, D., Segalowitz, N., & Halter, R. (2004). The Language Contact Profile. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 26, 349–357.Google Scholar
French, L. M., & O’Brien, I. (2008). Phonological memory and children’s second language grammar learning. Applied Psycholinguistics, 29, 463–487.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gathercole, S. E. (2006). Nonword repetition and word learning: The nature of the relationship. Applied Psycholinguistics, 27, 513–543.Google Scholar
Gathercole, S. E., Willis, C. S., Emslie, H., & Baddeley, A. D. (1992). Phonological memory and vocabulary development during the early school years: A longitudinal study. Developmental Psychology, 28, 887–898.Google Scholar
Goldberg, A. E. (2006). Constructions at work: The nature of generalization in language. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Granger, S. (1998). Learner English on computer. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Gray, L. (1999) Practice makes perfect: Idiomatic English: A workbook for mastering adjective phrases, noun phrases, prepositional phrases, verb phrases. Chicago: Passport Books.Google Scholar
Heinrich, L., & Schoonen, R. (2008). Lexical features of parental academic language input: The effect on vocabulary growth in monolingual Dutch children. In Daller, H., Malvern, D., Meara, P., Milton, J., Richards, B., & Treffers-Daller, J. (Eds.), Vocabulary studies in first and second language acquisition: The interface between theory and application (pp. 1–22). Basingstoke: Palgrave-Macmillan.Google Scholar
Hoey, M. (2005). Lexical priming. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Hopper, P. (1988). Emergent grammar and the a priori grammar postulate. In Tannen, D. (Ed.), Linguistics and context: Connecting observation and understanding (pp. 117–134). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.Google Scholar
Howarth, P. (1998). Phraseology and second language proficiency. Applied Linguistics, 19, 24–44.Google Scholar
Hummel, K. M. (2009). Aptitude, phonological memory, and second language proficiency in nonnovice adult learners. Applied Psycholinguistics, 30, 225–249.Google Scholar
Johnson, J., & Newport, E. (1989). Critical period effects in second language learning. Cognitive Psychology, 21, 60–99.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Karpicke, J., & Pisoni, D. (2004). Using immediate memory span to measure implicit learning. Memory & Cognition, 32, 956–964.Google Scholar
Kim, K., Relkin, N., Lee, K., & Hirsch, J. (1997). Distinct cortical areas associated with native and second languages. Nature, 388, 171–174.Google Scholar
Kormos, J. (2013). New conceptualizations of language aptitude in second language attainment. In Granena, G. & Long, M. (Eds.), Sensitive periods, language aptitude and ultimate language attainment (pp. 113–152). Amsterdam: Benjamins.Google Scholar
Langacker, R. W. (2000). A dynamic usage-based model. Stanford, CA: CSLI.Google Scholar
Laufer, B., & Nation, P. (1995). Vocabulary size and use: Lexical richness in L2 written production. Applied Linguistics, 16, 307–322.Google Scholar
Laufer, B., & Waldman, T. (2011). Verb-noun collocations in second language writing: A corpus analysis of learners’ English. Language Learning, 61, 647–672.Google Scholar
Lee, J. (1998). Is there a sensitive period for L2 collocational knowledge? (Unpublished master’s thesis). University of Hawaiʻi, Honolulu.Google Scholar
Lenneberg, E. H. (1967). Biological foundations of language. New York: Riley.Google Scholar
Long, M. H. (2007). Problems in SLA. New York: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Lutz, J. G. (1983). A method for constructing data which illustrate three types of suppressor variables. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 43, 373–377.Google Scholar
MacWhinney, B. (2006). Emergentism—Use often and with care. Applied Linguistics, 27, 729–740.Google Scholar
Malvern, D., & Richards, B. (2002). Investigating accommodation in language proficiency interviews using a new measure of lexical diversity. Language Testing, 1, 85–104.Google Scholar
Marriott, H. (1995). Acquisition of politeness patterns by exchange students in Japan. In Freed, B. F. (Ed.), Second language acquisition in a study abroad context (pp. 197–224). Amsterdam: Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McCarthy, M. (1990). Vocabulary. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Meara, P. (1998). Review of second language vocabulary acquisition: A rationale for pedagogy. Applied Linguistics, 19, 289–292.Google Scholar
Möhle, D., & Raupach, M. (1983). Planen in der Fremdsprache [Planning in a foreign language]. Bern: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
Multhaup, K. S., Balota, D. A., & Cowan, N. (1996). Implications of aging, lexicality, and item length for the mechanisms underlying memory span. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 3, 112–120.Google Scholar
Munro, M., Flege, J., & MacKay, I. (1996). The effects of age of second language learning on the production of English vowels. Applied Psycholinguistics, 17, 313–334.Google Scholar
Nation, P., & Waring, R. (1997). Vocabulary size, text coverage and word lists. In Schmitt, N. & McCarthy, M. (Eds.), Vocabulary: Description, acquisition and pedagogy (pp. 6–19). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Nattinger, J. R., & DeCarrico, J. S. (1992). Lexical phrases in language teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Nesselhauf, N. (2005). Collocations in a learner corpus. Amsterdam: Benjamins.Google Scholar
Papagno, C., & Vallar, G. (1992). Phonological short-term memory and the learning of novel words: The effect of phonological similarity and item length. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 44, 47–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Patkowski, M. (1980). The sensitive period for the acquisition of syntax in a second language. Language Learning, 30, 449–472.Google Scholar
Pawley, A., & Syder, F. (1983). Two puzzles for linguistic theory: Nativelike selection and nativelike fluency. In Richards, J. & Schmidt, R. (Eds.), Language and communication (pp. 91–106). London: Longman.Google Scholar
Pinker, S. (1994). The language instinct. London: Penguin.Google Scholar
Regan, V. (1998). Sociolinguistics and language learning in a study abroad context. Frontiers, 4, 61–90.Google Scholar
Robinson, P. (2005). Aptitude and second language acquisition. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 25, 45–73.Google Scholar
Robinson, P., & Ellis, N. (2008). Conclusion: Cognitive linguistics, second language acquisition and L2 instruction—Issues for research. In Robinson, P. & Ellis, N. (Eds.), Handbook of cognitive linguistics and second language acquisition (pp. 489–545). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Satterfield, T. (2008). Language acquisition recapitulates language evolution? Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 31, 532–533.Google Scholar
Schumann, J. (1978). The pidginization process: A model for SLA. Rowley, MA: Newberry House.Google Scholar
Service, E., & Kohonen, V. (1995). Is the relation between phonological memory and foreign language learning accounted for by vocabulary acquisition? Applied Psycholinguistics, 16, 155–172.Google Scholar
Siegal, M. (1995). Individual differences and study abroad: Women learning Japanese in Japan. In Freed, B. F. (Ed.), Second language acquisition in a study abroad context (pp. 225–244). Amsterdam: Benjamins.Google Scholar
Silverberg, S., & Samuel, A. G. (2004). The effect of age of second language acquisition on the representation and processing of second language words. Journal of Memory and Language, 51, 381–398.Google Scholar
Sinclair, J. (1991). Corpus, concordance, collocation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Singleton, D. (2005). The Critical Period Hypothesis: A coat of many colours. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, 43, 269–285.Google Scholar
Skrzypek, A. (2009). Phonological short-term memory and L2 collocational development in adult learners. In Roberts, L., Véronique, G. D., Nilsson, A, & Tellier, M. (Eds.), EUROSLA yearbook (Vol. 9, pp. 160–184). Amsterdam: Benjamins.Google Scholar
Spadaro, K. (2013). Maturational constraints on lexical acquisition in a second language. In Granena, G. & Long, M. (Eds.), Sensitive periods, language aptitude and ultimate language attainment (pp. 113–152). Amsterdam: Benjamins.Google Scholar
Stevens, G. (2006). The age-length-onset problem in research on second language acquisition among immigrants. Language Learning, 56, 671–692.Google Scholar
Stilwell-Peccei, J. (2006). Child language: A resource book for students. London: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tomasello, M. (2003). Constructing a language: A usage-based theory of language acquisition. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Towell, R., Hawkins, R., & Bazergui, N. (1996). The development of fluency in advanced learners of French. Applied Linguistics, 17, 84–119.Google Scholar
Tzelgov, J., & Henik, A. (1991). Suppression situations in psychological research: Definitions, implications, and applications. Psychological Bulletin, 109, 524–536.Google Scholar
Van Lancker Sidtis, D. (2004). When novel sentences spoken or heard for the first time in the history of the universe are not enough: Towards a dual process model of language. International Journal of Communication Disorders, 39, 1–44.Google Scholar
Van Lancker-Sidtis, D., & Rallon, G. (2004). Tracking the incidence of formulaic expressions in everyday speech: Methods for classification and verification. Language and Communication, 24, 207–240.Google Scholar
Warren, B. (2005). A model of idiomaticity. Nordic Journal of English Studies, 4, 35–54.Google Scholar
Weber-Fox, C. M., & Neville, H. J. (1999). Functional neural subsystems are differentially affected by delays in second language immersion: ERP and behavioral evidence in bilinguals. In Birdsong, D. (Ed.), Second language acquisition and the critical period hypothesis (pp. 23–28). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Weinert, R. (1995). The role of formulaic language in second language acquisition: A review. Applied Linguistics, 16, 181–205.Google Scholar
Wray, A. (2008). Formulaic language: Pushing the boundaries. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Wray, A., & Perkins, M. R. (2000). The functions of formulaic language: An integrated model. Language and Communication, 20, 1–28.Google Scholar
Wuillemin, D., & Richardson, B. (1994). Right hemisphere involvement in processing later-learned languages in multilinguals. Brain and Language, 46, 620–636.Google Scholar