Insights into the cognition of mood selection in L2 learners of
Spanish
DeKeyser
(2007a) submits that second-language acquisition research
must identify the ideal task-design features for automatizing
grammatical abilities in practice. We therefore report the results
of a study that used meaningful computer assisted language learning
(CALL) practice to promote foreign-language learners’
proceduralization of Spanish mood-selection in relative clauses
(e.g., Busco un libro que es/sea muy interesante)
premised on skill acquisition theory (DeKeyser, 2007b). The results indicate
that, when CALL practice is deliberate, meaningful, and entails
metalinguistic feedback (Cerezo,
2010), learners process mood selection more fluently and
efficiently as practice progresses. The analysis also indicates that
elaborate practice activities (i.e., involving multiple features of
relative clauses) are more effective at promoting grammatical
proceduralization than simple activities.
Article outline
- 1.Introduction
- 2.Background literature
- 2.1Instructional considerations for Spanish subjunctive
development
- 2.2L2 knowledge construction and meaningful practice
- 2.3Employing tutorial CALL to promote subjunctive
proceduralization
- 3.Studying subjunctive learning in tutorial CALL
- 4.Research questions
- 5.Method
- 5.1Participants
- 5.2Treatment
- 5.3Instructional materials
- 5.4Tracking technologies
- 6.Analysis
- 7.Results
- 8.Discussion and conclusions
-
Notes
-
References
References (35)
Anderson, J. R.
(
1993)
Rules
of the mind. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Cerezo Ceballos, L.
(
2010)
Talking
to avatars: The computer as a tutor and the incidence of
learner’s agency, feedback, and grammatical form in
SLA (Unpublished
doctoral
dissertation). Georgetown University, Washington, DC.
Chapelle, C. A.
(
2009)
The
relationship between second language acquisition theory and
computer-assisted language
learning.
The Modern Language
Journal, 93, 741–753.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Collentine, J.
(
2010)
The
acquisition and teaching of the Spanish subjunctive: An
update on current
findings.
Hispania, 93(1), 39–51.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Collentine, J., & Collentine, K.
(
2015)
Input
and output grammar instruction in tutorial CALL with a
complex grammatical
structure.
CALICO
Journal, 32(2), 273–298.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Cunnings, I., & Finlayson, I.
(
2015)
Mixed
effects modelling and longitudinal data
analysis. In
L. Plonsky (Ed.),
Advancing
quantitative methods in second language
research (pp. 159–181). Abingdon: Routledge.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
DeKeyser, R. M.
(
2007a)
The
future of
practice. In
R. M. DeKeyser (Ed.),
Practice
in a second language: Perspectives from applied linguistics
and cognitive
psychology (pp. 287–304). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
DeKeyser, R. M.
(
2007b)
Skill
acquisition
theory. In
B. VanPatten &
J. Williams (Eds.),
Theories
in second language acquisition: An
introduction (pp. 97–113). New York, NY: Routledge.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
DeKeyser, R. M., & Prieto Botana, G.
(
2013)
The
acquisition of grammar by instructed
learners. In
K. Geeslin (Ed.),
The
handbook of Spanish second language
acquisition (pp. 449–465). New York, NY: Wiley and Sons.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Doughty, C., & Long, H. M.
(
2003)
Optimal
psycholinguistic environments for distance foreign language
learning.
Language Learning
&
Technology, 7(3), 50–80.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Farley, A.
(
2004)
Processing
instruction and the Spanish subjunctive: Is explicit
information
needed? In
B. VanPatten (Ed.),
Processing
Instruction: Theory, research, and
commentary (pp. 227–240). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Fernández, C.
(
2008)
Reexamining
the role of explicit information in processing
instruction.
Studies in
Second Language
Acquisition, 30(3), 277–305.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Fischer, R.
(
2007)
How
do we know what students are actually doing? Monitoring
students’ behavior in
CALL.
Computer Assisted
Language
Learning, 20(2), 409–442.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Geeslin, K., & Gudmestad, A.
(
2008)
Comparing
interview and written elicitation tasks in native and
non-native data: do speakers do what we think they
do?’ In
J. Bruhn de Garavito &
E. Valenzuela (Eds.),
Selected
Proceedings of the Hispanic Linguistics
Symposium (pp. 67–77). Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Proceedings Project.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Godwin-Jones, R.
(
2014)
Towards
transparent computing: Content authoring using open
standards.
Language Learning
&
Technology 18(1), 1–10.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Gudmestad, A.
(
2006)
L2
variation and the Spanish subjunctive: Linguistic features
predicting mood
selection. In
C. Klee &
T. Face (Eds.),
Selected
papers of the 7th Conference on the Acquisition of Spanish
and Portuguese as First and Second
Languages (pp. 170–184). Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Proceedings Project.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Gudmestad, A.
(
2012)
Acquiring
a variable structure: An interlanguage analysis of second
language mood use in
Spanish.
Language
Learning, 62(2), 373–402.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Han, Z.-H., Park, E., & Combs, C.
(
2008)
Textual
input enhancement: Issues and
possibilities.
Applied
Linguistics, 29(4), 597–618.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Heift, T., & Vyatkina, N.
(
2017)
Technologies
for teaching L2
grammar. In
C. Chapelle &
S. Sauro (Eds.),
Handbook
of technology and second language teaching and
learning, (pp. 25–45). New York, NY: Wiley & Sons.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Hubbard, P., & Bradin Siskin, C.
(
2004)
Another
look at tutorial
CALL.
ReCALL 16(2), 448–461.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Kim, S., Lee, J., & Thomas, M.
(
2012)
Between
purpose and method: A review of educational research on 3D
virtual worlds.
Journal of
Virtual Worlds
Research, 5(1), 1–18.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Kornell, N., Hays, M., & Bjork, R.
(
2009)
Unsuccessful
retrieval attempts enhance subsequent
learning.
Journal of
Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and
Cognition, 35(4), 989–998.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Lee, J., & Rodríguez, R.
(
1997)
The
effects of lexemic and morphosyntactic modifications on L2
reading comprehension and input
processing. In
W. Glass &
A. Pérez-Leroux (Eds.),
Contemporary
perspectives on the acquisition of
Spanish (Vol.
II, pp. 135–157). Sommerville, MA: Cascadilla Press.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Leow, R.
(
2007)
Input
in the L2 classroom: An attentional perspective on receptive
practice. In
R. DeKeyser (Ed.),
Practice
in a second language: Perspectives from applied linguistics
and cognitive
psychology (pp. 21–50). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Lyster, R., & Saito, K.
(
2010)
Oral
feedback in classroom SLA: A
meta-analysis.
Studies in
Second Language
Acquisition, 32(2), 265–302.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Morris, M., Handcock M., & Hunter D.
(
2008)
Specification
of exponential-family random graph models: Terms and
computational
aspects.
Journal of
Statistical
Software 24(4), 1–24.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Muranoi, H.
(
2007)
Output
practice in the L2
classroom. In
R. M. DeKeyser (Ed.),
Practice
in a second language: Perspectives from applied linguistics
and cognitive
psychology (pp. 51–84). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Ranta, L., & Lyster, R.
(
2007)
A
cognitive approach to improving immersion students' oral
language abilities: The awareness-practice-feedback
sequence. In
R. DeKeyser (Ed.),
Practice
in a second language: Perspectives from applied linguistics
and cognitive
psychology (pp. 141–160). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Rastegar, M.
(
2006)
Causal
modeling – Path analysis: A new trend in research in applied
linguistics.
The Linguistics
Journal, 1(3), 97–109.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Robinson, P.
(
2001)
Task
complexity, task difficulty, and task production: Exploring
interactions in a componential
framework.
Applied
Linguistics, 22(1), 27–57.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Schulze, M.
(
2008)
AI
in CALL: Artificially inflated or almost
imminent? CALICO
Journal, 25(3), 510–527.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
VanPatten, B.
(
2004)
Input
processing in
SLA. In
B. VanPatten (Ed.),
Processing
instruction: Theory, research, and
commentary (pp. 5–31). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
VanPatten, B.
(
2013)
Mental
representation and skill in instructed
SLA. In
J. Schwieter (Ed.),
Innovations
in SLA, bilingualism, and cognition: Research and
practice (pp. 3–22). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
VanPatten, B., & Benati, A.
(
2010)
Key
terms in second language
acquisition. London: Continuum.
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Vitevitch, M.
(
2008)
What
can graph theory tell us about word learning and lexical
retrieval? Journal of
Speech,
Language,
and Hearing
Research, 51(2), 408–422.
![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Cited by (1)
Cited by 1 other publications
Collentine, Karina & Joseph Collentine
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 28 june 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.