Pascual y Cabo and Rothman (2012) and Kupisch and Rothman (2018) argue against the use of term incomplete to characterize the grammars of heritage speakers, claiming that it reflects a negative evaluation of the linguistic knowledge of these bilingual speakers. We examine the reasons for and against the use of “incomplete” across acquisition contexts and argue that its use is legitimate on both theoretical and empirical grounds. Our goal is to present arguments for using the term, not to evaluate the scientific validity of incomplete acquisition over other possible accounts. Although our conclusion is that the term should not be abandoned, we advocate a position whereby researchers consider the possible negative impact of the terminology they use and how they use it. This position aims to resolve the tension between the need to prioritize scientific effectiveness and the need to avoid terminology that can be negatively misconstrued by the general public.

Herein, we provide counterargumentation to some of Domínguez, Hicks, and Slabakova's claims that the term incomplete acquisition is conceptually necessary on theoretical grounds for describing the outcome grammars of heritage language bilingualism. Specifically, we clarify their claim that previous challenging of the term in our and others’ work is primarily based on a misconceived belief that incompleteness is intended to describe heritage speakers. We contextualize and problematize their appropriation of descriptive constructs in the adjacent fields of child L1, child 2L1, and adult L2 acquisition as a basis for supporting their general thesis. Relatedly, we conclude that a fundamental blurring of development and ultimate attainment issues is at the core of what, in our view, is flawed reasoning. While we empathize with the well-intentioned spirit of Domínguez et al.’s article—to provide a forum for respectful discussion—we invite the field to engage more directly with the inherent quandary of labeling the coherent grammars of heritage bilinguals in their own right as “incomplete” on the basis of differences to standard varieties.

Although researchers argue that studying semantically related words simultaneously (semantic clustering) inhibits vocabulary acquisition, recent studies have yielded inconsistent results. This study examined the effects of semantic clustering while addressing the limitations of previous studies (e.g., confounding of semantic relatedness with other lexical variables). Furthermore, the study investigated the effects of spacing because spacing might facilitate the learning of semantically related items by alleviating interference. In this study, 133 Japanese university students studied 48 English-Japanese word pairs under two conditions: massed and spaced. Half the words were semantically related to each other while the other half were not. Although there were no significant differences between semantically related and unrelated items in posttest scores, semantically related items led to more interference errors than unrelated items. Furthermore, contrary to the authors’ hypothesis that spacing is particularly beneficial for semantically related items, spacing benefited unrelated items more than it did related items.

This study investigated the underlying structure of a set of eight cognitive tests from the two most recent language aptitude test batteries: the LLAMA (Meara, 2005) and the Hi-LAB (Linck et al., 2013) to see whether they had any underlying constructs in common. The study also examined whether any of the observed constructs could predict L2 speaking proficiency in terms of complexity, accuracy, or fluency. Participants were 135 college-level students learning Spanish as an L2 in the United States. Results showed that the LLAMA and the Hi-LAB include tests that tap the same constructs. Specifically, the tests from the two batteries loaded onto three different factors, interpreted as “Explicit Aptitude,” “Implicit Memory Ability,” and “Implicit Learning Ability.” The results further showed that Implicit Memory Ability was a significant predictor of L2 speed fluency and interacted with Implicit Learning Ability as a predictor of lexical complexity. This finding suggested that L2 learners with greater Implicit Memory Ability may be better at accessing and retrieving previously learned or known information effortlessly. In the case of lexical complexity, the effect of Implicit Memory Ability depended on the level of Implicit Learning Ability.

The present study proposed and tested a revision of the self-guides outlined in the L2 motivational self system (Dörnyei, 2005, 2009). Covering the previous conceptualization and measurement issues, ideal L2 self and ought-to L2 self were bifurcated by own and other standpoints, and reoperationalized based on the fundamental tenets of self-discrepancy theory (Higgins, 1987) and regulatory focus theory (Higgins, 1997). Confirmatory factor analysis supported the fitness of the model and its superiority over three alternative models based on data collected from 257 international students learning English as a second language at a major North American university. Multiple regression results showed that ought L2 self/own was the strongest predictor of motivated behavior. Ideal L2 self/own, ought L2 self/other, and ideal L2 self/other were the next predictors in order of strength. Furthermore, ideal L2 self/own predicted an eager strategic inclination in L2 behavior, whereas ought L2 self/own predicted a vigilant strategic inclination, supporting the core principle of the regulatory focus theory that individuals with different regulatory orientations pursue their goals in qualitatively different manners.

Second language (L2) anxiety has been the object of constant empirical and theoretical attention for several decades. As a matter of both theoretical and practical interest, much of the research in this domain has examined the relationship between anxiety and L2 achievement. The present study meta-analyzes this body of research. Following a comprehensive search, a sample of 97 reports were identified, contributing a total of 105 independent samples (N = 19,933) from 23 countries. In the aggregate, the 216 effect sizes (i.e., correlations) reported in the primary studies yielded a mean of r = −.36 for the relationship between L2 anxiety and language achievement. Moderator analyses revealed effects sizes to vary across different types of language achievement measures, educational levels, target languages, and anxiety types. Overall, this study provides firm evidence for both the negative role of L2 anxiety in L2 learning and the moderating effects of a number of (non)linguistic variables. We discuss the findings in the context of theoretical and practical concerns, and we provide direction for future research.

The role of attention has been central to theoretical and empirical inquiries in second language (L2) acquisition. The current eye-tracking study examined how external and internal attentional manipulations (Chun, Golomb, &Turk-Browne, 2011) promote L2 grammatical development. Participants (n = 55) were exposed to Spanish direct-object pronouns under external or internal attentional manipulations, which were implemented through textual input enhancement or structured input practice, respectively. Results for both manipulations indicated that (a) learner attentional allocation to the form was affected; (b) L2 gains were evidenced, although only the internal manipulation led to above-chance performance; and (c) L2 gains were related to attention allocated to the form under the external manipulation and to a lesser extent the internal manipulation. Overall, findings may inform theoretical perspectives on attention and elucidate cognitive processes related to L2 instruction.

This study examined whether social bias manipulation can influence how naïve multiage listeners evaluate second language (L2) speech. Sixty native English-speaking listeners (Montreal residents) rated audio recordings of 40 Quebec French speakers of L2 English for five dimensions of oral performance (accentedness, comprehensibility, segmental accuracy, intonation, flow) using 1,000-point continuous scales. Immediately before rating, 20 listeners heard critical comments about Quebec French speakers’ English language skills, while 20 heard positive comments. Twenty listeners (baseline group) received no manipulation. Compared to baseline listeners, positively oriented listeners (younger and older) rated four of five dimensions more favorably. However, listeners’ behavior diverged under negative bias. Compared to age-matched baseline listeners, younger listeners upgraded speakers while older listeners downgraded speakers for all targeted measures. Findings cast doubt on the relative stability of L2 speech ratings and point to the importance of social context and generational differences in untrained rater assessments of L2 speaking performance.

Two eye-tracking experiments tested (a) whether L2 learners benefit from the consistency of input modality (auditory instead of written processing instruction [PI] training) and (b) whether they benefit from training using the same voice as the test voice. Results confirmed a robust effect of PI training on picture-selection accuracy, yet the improvement did not differ between training modalities. Eye-tracking data revealed resilient looks to the incorrect (first noun = agent) picture even after training, demonstrating the challenge in tuning to the grammatical forms while processing auditory L2 input. The effect of voice familiarity was larger for the male voice, which had longer duration for the later cue (à Marie/Pierre) than the female voice. Auditory PI training can be as effective as written PI training, but it does not immediately enhance learners’ sensitivity to grammatical cues. However, learners may benefit from hearing a salient grammatical cue toward the end of the sentence.

This study is the first to examine contributions of proficiency subskills to pragmatic development. We used the latent growth curve modeling to reveal the causal relationships between proficiency subskills and pragmatic competence in 109 American learners of Chinese across two data points over three months abroad in China. Proficiency was measured by a standardized Chinese proficiency test with separate scores for listening, speaking, reading, and writing. Pragmatic competence was measured by a computerized oral discourse completion task assessing speech acts. Findings showed that pragmatic competence accrued along with increased proficiency. Changes of proficiency explained 54.1% of the variance in changes of pragmatic competence. Listening and speaking contributed more to pragmatic development than reading and writing did, indicating that when pragmatic competence is measured by an online spoken task, speaking and listening have stronger impacts.