Miniature natural language learning in L2 acquisition research
Researchers who wish to study mechanisms underlying second language (L2) learning and factors influencing its success face a trade-off between low experimental control in studies of naturalistic language acquisition and low typological and ecological validity in studies of artificial language learning. The methodological solution we propose is a miniature natural language learning paradigm, which exposes participants to selected elements of an unfamiliar L2, in the form of meaningful dialogues, over a period of several laboratory sessions. We show how this methodology allows researchers to understand how various components of learning interact as learners are exposed to vocabulary and grammar simultaneously, and how characteristics of both the learner and the input influence learning outcomes.
Article outline
- 1.Introduction
- 2.Experimental language learning methods
- 2.1Artificial grammar learning
- 2.2Artificial language learning
- 2.2.1Artificial languages with artificial referents
- 2.2.2Artificial languages with natural referents
- 3.Miniature natural language learning
- 3.1Studying input and learner variables using miniature natural languages
- 3.2Structuring the input to facilitate language learning
- 3.3Interactions of input and learner characteristics
- 3.4Transfer of knowledge about grammatical gender
- 3.5Exploring the relationship of vocabulary and grammar learning
- 3.6Exploring the relationship between artificial grammar learning and natural language learning
- 4.Conclusions
-
References
References (107)
References
Bates, E., & Goodman, J. C. (1997). On the inseparability of grammar and the lexicon: Evidence from acquisition, aphasia and real-time processing. Language and Cognitive Processes, 12, 507–584.
Braine, M. D. S. (1963). On learning the grammatical order of words. Psychological Review, 70, 323–348.
Braine, M. D. S. (1987). What is learned in acquiring word classes—A step toward an acquisition theory. In B. MacWhinney (Ed.) Mechanisms of language acquisition (pp. 65–87). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Braine, M. D. S., Brody, R. E., Brooks, P. J., Sudhalter, V., Ross, J., Catalano, L., & Fisch, S. M. (1990). Exploring language acquisition in children through the use of a miniature artificial language: Effects of item and pattern frequency, arbitrary subclasses, and correction. Journal of Memory and Language, 29, 591–610.
Brooks, P. J., Braine, M. D. S., Catalano, L., Brody, R. E., & Sudhalter, V. (1993). Acquisition of gender-like noun subclasses in an artificial language: The contribution of phonological markers to learning. Journal of Memory and Language, 32, 76–95.
Brooks, P. J., & Kempe, V. (2013). Individual differences in adult foreign language learning: The mediating effect of meta-linguistic awareness. Memory and Cognition, 41, 281–296.
Brooks, P. J., Kempe, V., & Donachie, A. (2011). Second language learning benefits from similarities in word endings: Evidence from Russian. Language Learning, 61, 1142–1172.
Brooks, P. J., Kempe, V., & Sionov, A. (2006). The role of learner and input variables in learning inflectional morphology. Applied Psycholinguistics, 27, 185–209.
Brooks, P. J., Kwoka, N., & Kempe, V. (in press). Distributional effects and individual differences in L2-morphology learning. Language Learning
Casenhiser, D., & Goldberg, A. E. (2005). Fast mapping between a phrasal form and meaning. Developmental Science, 8, 500–508.
Cattell, R. B., & Cattell, H. E. P. (1973). Measuring intelligence with the Culture-Fair Tests. Champaign, IL: Institute for Personality and Ability Testing. Now available by request at Hogrefe <[URL]>
Conway, C. M., Bauernschmidt, A., Huang, S. S., & Pisoni, D. B. (2010). Implicit statistical learning in language processing: Word predictability is the key. Cognition, 114, 356–371.
Conway, C. M., Karpicke, J., & Pisoni, D. B. (2007). Contribution of implicit sequence learning to spoken language processing: Some preliminary findings with hearing adults. Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education, 12, 317–334.
Daneman, M., & Carpenter, P. A. (1980). Individual differences in working memory and reading. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 19, 450–466.
DeKeyser, R. M. (1995). Learning second language grammar rules: An experiment with a miniature linguistic system. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 17, 379–410.
DeKeyser, R. M. (1997). Beyond explicit rule learning: Automatizing second language morphosyntax. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 19, 195–221.
Dörnyei, Z. (2005). The psychology of the language learner: Individual differences in second language acquisition. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Duncan, J., Emslie, H., Williams, P., Johnson, R., & Freer, C. (1996). Intelligence and the frontal lobe: The organization of goal-directed behavior. Cognitive Psychology, 30, 257–303.
Ellis, N. (1993). Rules and instances in foreign language learning: Interactions of explicit and implicit knowledge. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 5, 289–318.
Ellis, N., & Schmidt, R. (1997). Morphology and longer distance dependencies: Laboratory research illuminating the A in SLA. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 19, 145–171.
Esper, E. A. (1925). A technique for the experiment investigation of associative interference in artificial linguistic material. Language Monographs, Vol. 1, 1–47.
Esper, E. A. (1933). Studies in Linguistic Behavior Organization: I. Characteristics of Unstable Verbal Reactions. The Journal of General Psychology, 8, 346–381.
Ettlinger, M., Morgan‐Short, K., Faretta‐Stutenberg, M., & Wong, P. (2015). The relationship between artificial and second language learning. Cognitive Science.
Evans, J.L., Saffran, J.R., & Robe-Torres, K. (2009). Statistical learning in children with specific language impairment. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 52, 321–335.
Gebauer, G. F., & Mackintosh, N. J. (2007). Psychometric intelligence dissociates implicit and explicit learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 33, 34 – 54.
Gerken, L., Wilson, R., & Lewis, W. (2005). Infants can use distributional cues to form syntactic categories. Journal of Child Language, 32, 249–268.
Goldberg, A. E. (1995). Constructions: A Construction Grammar approach to argument structure. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
Goldberg, A. E. (2006). Constructions at work: The nature of generalization in language. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
Goldberg, A. E., Casenhiser, D., & White, T. R. (2007). Constructions as categories of language. New Ideas in Psychology, 25, 70–86.
Gómez, R. (2002). Variability and detection of invariant structure. Psychological Science, 13 (5), 431–436.
Gómez, R. L., & Gerken, L. (1999). Artificial grammar learning by 1-year-olds leads to specific and abstract knowledge. Cognition, 70, 109–135.
Granena, G. (2013). Individual differences in sequence learning ability and second language acquisition in early childhood and adulthood. Language Learning, 63, 665–703.
Grey, S., Williams, J. N., & Rebuschat, P. (2015). Individual differences in incidental language learning: Phonological working memory, learning styles, and personality. Learning and Individual Differences, 38, 44–53.
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. The Modern Language Journal, 84, 390–405.
Grimm, A., Müller, A., Hamann, C., & Ruigendijk, E. (Eds.). (2011). Production-comprehension asymmetries in child language. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.
Gupta, P. (2003). Examining the relationship between word learning, nonword repetition, and immediate serial recall in adults. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 56A, 1213–1236.
Harris, M., Yeeles, C., Chasin, J., & Oakley, Y. (1995). Symmetries and asymmetries in early lexical comprehension and production. Journal of Child Language, 22, 1–18.
Howard, J. H., & Howard, D. V. (1997). Age differences in implicit learning of higher order dependencies in serial patterns. Psychology and Aging, 12, 634–656.
Kaufman, S. B., DeYoung, C. G., Gray, J. R., Jiménez, L., Brown, J., & Mackintosh, N. (2010). Implicit learning as an ability. Cognition, 116, 321–340.
Kempe, V., & Brooks, P. J. (2001). The role of diminutives in the acquisition of Russian gender: Can elements of child-directed speech aid in learning morphology? Language Learning, 51, 221–256.
Kempe, V., & Brooks, P. J. (2008). Second language learning of complex inflectional systems. Language Learning, 54, 703–746.
Kempe, V., Brooks, P. J., & Kharkhurin, A. V. (2010). Cognitive predictors of generalization of Russian grammatical gender categories. Language Learning, 60, 127–153.
Kempe, V., Brooks, P. J., Mironova, N., Pershukova, A., & Fedorova, O. (2007). Playing with word endings: Morphological variation in the learning of Russian noun inflections. British Journal of Developmental Psychology, 25, 55–77.
Kempe, V., Brooks, P. J., & Pirott, L. (2001). How can child-directed speech facilitate the acquisition of morphology? In M. Almgren, A. Barrena, M.-J. Ezeizabarrena, I. Idiazabal, & B. MacWhinney (Eds.), Research on child language acquisition: Proceedings of the 8th conference of the International Association for the Study of Child Language (pp. 1237–1247). Medford, MA: Cascadilla Press.
Kidd, E. (2012). Implicit statistical learning is directly associated with the acquisition of syntax. Developmental Psychology, 48, 171–184.
Kirby, S., Cornish, H., & Smith, K. (2008). Cumulative cultural evolution in the laboratory: An experimental approach to the origins of structure in human language. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 105, 10681–10686.
Kuhl, P. K. (2000). A new view of language acquisition. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 97, 11850–11857.
Lum, J. A., Conti-Ramsden, G., Morgan, A. T., & Ullman, M. T. (2014). Procedural learning deficits in specific language impairment (SLI): a meta-analysis of serial reaction time task performance. Cortex, 51, 1–10.
Lupyan, G., Rakison, D. H., & McClelland, J. L. (2007). Language is not just for talking redundant labels facilitate learning of novel categories. Psychological Science, 18, 1077–1083.
MacWhinney, B. (1983). Miniature linguistic systems as tests of the use of universal operating principles in second-language learning by children and adults. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 12, 467–478.
MacWhinney, B. (1997). Second language acquisition and the competition model. In A. M. B. de Groot, & J. Kroll (Eds.), Tutorials in bilingualism: Psycholinguistic perspectives (pp. 113–142). New York, NY: Psychology Press.
Marcus, G. F., Vijayan, S., Rao, S. B., & Vishton, P. M. (1999). Rule learning by seven-month-old infants. Science, 283, 77–80.
Martin, K. I., & Ellis, N. C. (2012). The roles of phonological short-term memory and working memory in L2 grammar and vocabulary learning. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 34, 379–413.
Meier, R. P., & Bower, G. H. (1986). Semantic reference and phrasal grouping in the acquisition of a miniature phrase structure language. Journal of Memory and Language, 25, 492–505.
Merkx, M., Rastle, K., & Davis, M. H. (2011). The acquisition of morphological knowledge investigated through artificial language learning. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 64, 1200–1220.
Miller, G. A. (1958). Free recall of redundant strings of letters. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 56, 485–491.
Misyak, J. B., & Christiansen, M. H. (2007). Extending statistical learning farther and further: Long-distance dependencies, and individual differences in statistical learning and language. In D. S. McNamara, & J. G. Trafton (Eds.), Proceedings of the 29th Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society (pp. 1307–1312). Austin, TX: Cognitive Science Society.
Misyak, J. B., & Christiansen, M. H. (2012). Statistical learning and language: an individual differences study. Language Learning, 62, 302–331.
Misyak, J. B., Christiansen, M. H., & Tomblin, J. B. (2010a). On-line individual differences in statistical learning predict language processing. Frontiers in Language Sciences, 1 (00031).
Misyak, J. B., Christiansen, M. H., & Tomblin, J. B. (2010b). Sequential expectations: The role of prediction‐based learning in language. Topics in Cognitive Science, 2, 138–153.
Miyake, A., & Friedman, N. P. (1998). Individual differences in second language proficiency: Working memory as language aptitude. In A. F. Healy, & L. E. Bourne Jr., (Eds.), Foreign language learning: Psycholinguistic studies on training and retention (pp. 339–364). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Moeser, S. D. (1969). Learning of a miniature linguistic system: Effects of external referents and order of word classes. Unpublished Master’s thesis, McGill University.
Moeser, S. D., & Bregman, A. S. (1972). The role of reference in the acquisition of a miniature artificial language. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 11, 759–769.
Moeser, S. D., & Bregman, A. S. (1973). Imagery and language acquisition. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 12, 91–98.
Monaghan, P., Christiansen, M. H., & Fitneva, S. A. (2011). The arbitrariness of the sign: Learning advantages from the structure of the vocabulary. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 140, 325–347.
Morgan, J. L., & K. Demuth (Eds.) (1996). Signal to syntax: Bootstrapping from speech to grammar in early acquisition. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Morgan, J. L., Meier, R. P., & Newport, E. L. (1987). Structural packaging in the input to language learning: Contributions of prosodic and morphological marking of phrases to the acquisition of language. Cognitive Psychology, 19, 498–550.
Mori, K., & Moeser, S. D. (1983). The role of syntax markers and semantic referents in learning an artificial language. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 22, 701–718.
Moyle, M. J., Weismer, S. E., Evans, J. L., & Lindstrom, M. J. (2007). Longitudinal relationships between lexical and grammatical development in typical and late-talking children. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 50, 508–528.
Nissen, M. J., & Bullemer, P. (1987). Attentional requirements of learning: Evidence from performance measures. Cognitive Psychology, 19, 1–32.
Perruchet, P., & Pacton, S. (2006). Implicit learning and statistical learning: One phenomenon, two approaches. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 10, 233–238.
Pinker, S. (1999). Words and rules: The ingredients of language. New York, NY: Basic Books.
Plante, E., Gómez, R., & Gerken, L. (2002). Sensitivity to word order cues by normal and language/learning disabled adults. Journal of Communication Disorders, 35 (5), 453–462.
Reber, A. S. (1967). Implicit learning of artificial grammars. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 6, 855–863.
Reber, A. S. (1993). Implicit learning and tacit knowledge: An essay on the cognitive unconscious. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
Reber, A. S., Walkenfeld, F. F., & Hernstadt, R. (1991). Implicit and explicit learning: Individual differences and IQ. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 17, 888–896.
Rebuschat, P., & Williams, J. N. (2012). Implicit and explicit knowledge in second language acquisition. Applied Psycholinguistics, 33, 829–856.
Roberts, G., Lewandowski, J., & Galantucci, B. (2015). How communication changes when we cannot mime the world: Experimental evidence for the effect of iconicity on combinatoriality. Cognition, 141, 52–66.
Robinson, P. (2005). Cognitive abilities, chunk-strength, and frequency effects in implicit artificial grammar and incidental L2 learning: Replications of Reber, Walkenfeld, and Hernstadt (1991) and Knowlton and Squire (1996) and their relevance for SLA. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 27, 235–268.
Robinson, P. (2010). Implicit artificial grammar and incidental natural second language learning: How comparable are they? Language Learning, 60 (Supplement 2), 245–263.
Romberg, A. R., & Saffran, J. R. (2013). All together now: Concurrent learning of multiple structures in an artificial language. Cognitive Science, 37, 1290–1320.
Saffran, J. R., Aslin, R. N., & Newport, E. L. (1996). Statistical learning by 8-month-old infants. Science, 274, 1926–1928.
Saffran, J. R., Newport, E. L., & Aslin, R. N. (1996). Word segmentation: The role of distributional cues. Journal of Memory and Language, 35, 606–621.
Skehan, P. (1991). Individual differences in second language learning. Studies in second language acquisition, 13, 275–298.
Smith, K. H. (1966). Grammatical intrusions in the free recall of structured letter pairs. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 5, 447–454.
Smolensky, P. (1996). On the comprehension/production dilemma in child language. Linguistic Inquiry, 27, 720–731.
Speciale, G., Ellis, N. C., & Bywater, T. (2004). Phonological sequence learning and short-term store capacity determine second language vocabulary acquisition. Applied Psycholinguistics, 25, 293–321.
Tagarelli, K., Borges-Mota, M., & Rebuschat, P. (2011). The role of working memory in implicit and explicit language learning. In Proceedings of the 33rd annual conference of the Cognitive Science Society (pp. 2061–2066).
Thompson, S. P., & Newport, E. L. (2007). Statistical learning of syntax: The role of transitional probability. Language Learning and Development, 3, 1–42.
Thumb, A., & Marbe, K. (1901). Experimentelle Untersuchungen uber die psychologischen Grundlagen der sprachlichen Analogiebildung. Leipzig: Engelmann.
Tomasello, M. (2003). Constructing a language: A usage-based theory of language acquisition. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Ullman, M. T. (2001). The neural basis of lexicon and grammar in first and second language: The declarative/procedural model. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 4, 105–122.
Ullman, M. T. (2005). A cognitive neuroscience perspective on second language acquisition: The declarative/procedural model. In C. Sanz (Ed.), Mind and context in adult second language acquisition: Methods, theory and practice (pp. 141–178). Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.
Ullman, M. T., & Pierpont, E. I. (2005). Specific language impairment is not specific to language: The procedural deficit hypothesis. Cortex, 41, 399–433.
Valian, V., & Coulson, S. (1988). Anchor points in language learning: The role of marker frequency. Journal of Memory and Language, 27, 71–86.
Valian, V., & Levitt, A. (1996). Prosody and adults’ learning of syntactic structure. Journal of Memory and Language, 35, 497–516.
Williams, J. N. (2005). Learning without awareness. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 27, 269–304.
Williams, J. N. (2010). Initial incidental acquisition of word order regularities: Is it just sequence learning? Language Learning, 60 (Supplement 2), 221–244.
Williams, J. N., & Kuribara, C. (2008). Comparing a nativist and emergentist approach to the initial stage of SLA: An investigation of Japanese scrambling. Lingua, 118, 522–553.
Wolfle, D. L. (1932). The relation between linguistic structure and associative interference in artificial linguistic material. Language, 8, Language Monograph No. 11, 5–55.
Wolfle, D. L. (1933). The relative stability of first and second syllables in an artificial language. Language, 9, 313–315.
Wonnacott, E., Newport, E. L., & Tanenhaus, M. K. (2008). Acquiring and processing verb argument structure: Distributional learning in a miniature language. Cognitive Psychology, 56, 165–209.
Yoshida, H., & Smith, L. B. (2005). Linguistic cues enhance the learning of perceptual cues. Psychological Science, 16, 90–95.
Cited by (2)
Cited by two other publications
Wen, Zhisheng (Edward) & Peter Skehan
2021.
Stages of Acquisition and the P/E Model of Working Memory: Complementary or contrasting approaches to foreign language aptitude?.
Annual Review of Applied Linguistics 41
► pp. 6 ff.
Jackson, Daniel O.
2019.
The Potential Relationship Between Openness and Explicit Versus Implicit L2 Knowledge.
Journal of Psycholinguistic Research 48:2
► pp. 289 ff.
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 26 october 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers.
Any errors therein should be reported to them.