Processing instruction effects regardless of input modality and developmental processing constraints? A school lab classroom study on the morphosyntactic acquisition of L2-English

Authors

  • Tanja Angelovska University of Salzburg
  • Dietmar Roehm University of Salzburg

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.1558/isla.40640

Keywords:

L2 processing, processing instruction, input processing, morphosyntax

Abstract

We investigated whether Austrian L2-English learners would benefit more from written or auditory processing instruction (PI) on the third person singular -(e) s tense form. The instruction and all three tests (pre-test, immediate post-test and delayed post-test two weeks after the instruction) were conducted in school lab classrooms. Using accuracy scores and reaction times for the interpretation tasks and accuracy scores for a gap-filling task, this study extrapolates the instructional effects according to modality type. We aimed to find out whether (a) the modality of the PI affects its efficacy regardless of the imposed develop-mental processing constraints of the target feature and how (i.e. resulting in faster or slower and more or less accurate processing); (b) whether any differences in gains could be attributed to the modality of the assessment task; and (c) whether any gained positive effects of instruction (regardless of modality) are maintained over time.

Author Biographies

  • Tanja Angelovska, University of Salzburg

    Tanja Angelovska is an Associate Professor for English Linguistics and Language Teaching at the University of Salzburg. Her research areas include psycholinguistics and L2/ L3 acquisition. She has led and been involved in several projects investigating the acquisition, processing and use of English as a second and third language across various age groups and language combinations. She is associate member of the Centre for Research and Enterprise in Language (University of Greenwich), the Centre for Applied Research and Innovation in Language Sciences and Education (University of Portsmouth) and the Language Acquisition, Multilingualism, & Cognition (LAM-C) Laboratory (Wilfrid Laurier University), Brain & Cognition Lab (Texas A&M University, USA), and editorial board member of Journal of Multilingual Theories and Practices, Instructed Second Language Acquisition and Journal of Monolingual and Bilingual Speech. She has published in Language Awareness, International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching and Applied Linguistics Review, and she is
    co-author of Second Language Acquisition: A Theoretical Introduction to Real World Applications (2016, Bloomsbury) and co-edited L3 Syntactic Syntactic Transfer (2017, John Benjamins). 

  • Dietmar Roehm, University of Salzburg

    Dietmar Roehm acquired extensive expertise in the areas of signal analysis and modelling of EEG data, eye-tracking, language processing and architecture of languages as a Senior Research Fellow at the MPI for Human Cognitive and Brain Sciences (Leipzig)
    and as a visiting researcher at the UMass Amherst. His research focuses on languagerelated brain oscillations, language comprehension and on the role of prediction in (sign) language processing and disorders of language. More recently, he also has a focus on L2/L3 learning and processing (with English/German as a second/third language) across various age groups. Since 2014 he is Full Professor for Psycho-/Neuro- and Clinical Linguistics at the Department of Linguistics, principle investigator in the Centre for Cognitive Neuroscience (University of Salzburg) and head of the research group Neurobiology of Language. In addition, he is an Associate Member of the Language Acquisition, Multilingualism, & Cognition (LAM-C) Laboratory, Wilfrid Laurier University, Waterloo, Canada.

References

Angelovska, T. and Benati, A. (2013) Processing instruction and the age factor: can adults and school-age native speakers of German process English simple past tense correctly? In: A. Benati and J. Lee (eds) Individual Differences and Processing Instruction 131–153. London: Equinox.

Beaman, C. P. (2002) Inverting the modality effect in serial recall. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology 55(2): 371–89. https://doi.org/10.1080/02724980143000307

Benati, A. (2001) A comparative study of the effects of processing instruction and output-based instruction on the acquisition of the Italian future tense. Language Teaching Research 52: 95–127. https://doi.org/10.1177/136216880100500202; https://doi.org/10.1191/136216801678766877

Benati, A. and Angelovska, T. (2015) The effects of processing instruction on the acquisition of English past simple tense: age and cognitive tasks demands. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching 53(2): 249–69. https://doi.org/10.1515/iral-2015-0012

Benati, A., Lee, J. F. and Houghton, S. D. (2008) From processing instruction on the acquisition of English past tense to secondary transfer-of-training effects on English third person singular present tense. In A. G. Benati and J. F. Lee (eds) Grammar Acquisition and Processing Instruction: Secondary and Cumulative Effects 88–120.

Clevedon: Multilingual Matters. https://doi.org/10.21832/9781847691057-006

Boersma, P. and Weenink, D. (2014 [1992]) Praat: Doing Phonetics by Computer. Retrieved 5 January 2020 from http://www.fon.hum.uva.nl/praat

Cadierno, T. (1995) Formal instruction from a processing perspective: an investigation into the Spanish past tense. Modern Language Journal 79(2): 179–93. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4781.1995.tb05430.x

Cowan, N., Saults, J. S. and Brown, G. D. A. (2004) On the auditory modality superiority effect in serial recall: separating input and output factors. Journal of Experimental Psychology 30(3): 639–44. https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.30.3.639

Dennis, I. (1977) Component problems in dichotic listening. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology 29(3): 437–50. https://doi.org/10.1080/14640747708400620

Farley, A. P. and McCollam, K. (2004) Learner readiness and L2 production in Spanish: processability theory on trial. Estudios de Linguistica Aplicada 22(4): 47–69.

Frankish, C. (1985) Modality-specific grouping

effects in short-term memory. Journal of Memory and Language 24: 200–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/0749-596X(85)90024-5

Frick, R. W. (1989) Recency and the modality effect in immediate ordered recall. Canadian Journal of Psychology 43: 494–511.

Greenslade, T., Bouden, L. and Sanz, C. (1999) Attending to form and content in processing L2 reading texts. Spanish Applied Linguistics 3: 65–90.

Hahn, A. and Felix, W. S. (1985) Natural processes in classroom second-language learning. Applied Linguistics 6(3): 223–38. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/6.3.223

Hama, M. and Leow, R. P. (2010) Learning without awareness revisited: extending Williams (2005). Studies in Second Language Acquisition 32(3): 465–91. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263110000045

Ito, K. and Wong, W. (2019) Processing instruction and the effects of input modality and voice familiarity on the acquisition of the French causative construction. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 41(2): 443–68. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263118000281

Keppel, G. (1991) Design and Analysis: A Researcher’s Handbook (3rd edn). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

Kerz, E., Wiechmann, D. and Riedel, F. B. (2017) Implicit learning in the crowd: investigating the role of awareness in the acquisition of L2 knowledge. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 39(4): 711–34. https://doi.org/10.1017/S027226311700002X

Lee, J. F. (2014) Processing instruction: where research meets practice. In A. Benati, C. Laval and M. Arche (eds) The Grammar Dimension in Instructed Second Language Learning 58–81. London: Bloomsbury Academic.

Lund, R. J. (1991) A comparison of second language listening and reading comprehension. Modern Language Journal 75(2): 196–204. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4781.1991.tb05350.x

Mavrontoni, M. and Benati, A. (2013) The effects of processing instruction and traditional instruction on two different school-age learners: the case of English present simple tense, third person singular. In J. F. Lee and A. Benati (eds) Individual Differences and Processing Instruction 185–210. Sheffield, UK: Equinox.

Park, G.-P. (2004) Comparison of L2 listening and reading comprehension by university students learning English in Korea. Foreign Language Annals 37(3): 448–58. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1944-9720.2004.tb02702.x

Peirce, J., Gray, J. R., Simpson, S., MacAskill, M., Höchenberger, R., Sogo, H., Kastman, E. and Lindeløv, J. K. (2019, February) PsychoPy3: Experiments in Behavior Made Easy. Retrieved 5 May 2019 from https://link.springer.com/article/10.3758/s13428-018-01193-y

Penney, C. G. (1980) Order of report in bisensory verbal short-term memory. Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology 34(2): 190–5. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0081038

Pienemann, M. (1989) Is language teachable? Psycholinguistic experiments and hypotheses. Applied Linguistics 10(1): 52–79. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/10.1.52

Pienemann, M. (1998) Language Processing and Second Language Development – Processability Theory. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/sibil.15

Pienemann, M. (2015) An outline of processability theory and its relationship to other approaches to SLA. Language Learning 65(1): 123–51. https://doi.org/10.1111/lang.12095

Reinders, H. and Benson, P. (2017) Research agenda: language learning beyond the classroom. Language Teaching 50(4): 561–78. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0261444817000192

Roehm, D. and Angelovska, T. (2019) Neurolinguistic accounts of L2 learning and teaching. In J. I. Liontas (ed.), TESOL Encyclopedia of English Language Teaching Updates. Hoboken. NJ: Wiley.

Treisman, A. M. (1969) Strategies and models of selective attention. Psychological Review 76(3): 282–99. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0027242

VanPatten, B. (1990) Attending to form and content in the input: an experiment in consciousness. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 12(3): 287–301. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263100009177

VanPatten, B. (1996) Input Processing and Grammar Instruction: Theory and Research. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.

VanPatten, B. (2004) Input processing in second language acquisition. In B. VanPatten (ed.) Processing Instruction: Theory, Research, and Commentary 5–31. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781410610195

VanPatten, B. (2014) Input processing in adult second language acquisition. In B. VanPatten and J. Williams (eds) Theories in Second Language Acquisition (2nd edn) 113–34. New York: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203628942

VanPatten, B. (2015) Foundations of processing instruction. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching 53(2): 91–109. https://doi.org/10.1515/iral-2015-0005

VanPatten, B. and Cadierno, T. (1993) Explicit instruction and input processing. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 15(2): 225–43. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263100011979

VanPatten, B. and Wong, W. (2004) Processing instruction and the French causative: another replication. In B. VanPatten (ed.) Processing Instruction: Theory, Research, and Commentary 97–118. New York: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781410610195

Williams, J. N. (2005) Learning without awareness. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 27(2): 269–304. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263105050138

Wode, H. (1981) Learning a Second Language: An Integrated View of Language Acquisition. Tübingen: Gunter Narr.

Wong, W. (2001) Modality and attention to meaning and form in the input. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 23(3): 345–68. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263101003023

Wong, W. (2004) The nature of processing instruction. In B. VanPatten (ed.) Processing Instruction: Theory, Research, and Commentary 33–65. New York: Routledge.

Wong, W. and Ito, K. (2018) The effects of processing instruction and traditional instruction on L2 online processing of the causative construction in French: an eyetracking study. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 40(2): 241–68. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263117000274

Downloads

Published

2020-10-16

Issue

Vol. 4 No. 2 (2020): Special issue: Processing instruction: new methods and research trends

Section

Articles

How to Cite

Angelovska, T., & Roehm, D. . (2020). Processing instruction effects regardless of input modality and developmental processing constraints? A school lab classroom study on the morphosyntactic acquisition of L2-English. Instructed Second Language Acquisition, 4(2), 180–202. https://doi.org/10.1558/isla.40640