Cover not available
Article published In:
Journal of Second Language Studies
Vol. 1:1 (2018) ► pp.141–165

The effects of transliterations, thematic organization, and working memory on adult L2 vocabulary learning

| University of Pittsburgh
| University of Pittsburgh
| University of Pittsburgh

We examine how L2 vocabulary learning is affected by the information provided to the learner during training, organization of the to-be-learned vocabulary, and working memory capacity of the learner. Native English speakers were taught Arabic vocabulary in seven sessions, during which they heard L1 (English)-L2 (Arabic) translation pairs. Training was manipulated between participants by crossing the presence vs. absence of a transliteration and thematic vs. random organization of vocabulary. Session, working memory capacity, transliteration condition, and organization condition interacted in English-Arabic translation accuracy. Participants with lower working memory capacity performed best in the transliteration-thematic organization condition, whereas participants with higher working memory performed best in the transliteration-random organization and no transliteration-thematic organization conditions. Translation RT and free recall were not related to working memory, and were best in the transliteration conditions. Results suggest that adult L2 vocabulary learning is aided by exploiting well-established spelling-sound connections to improve L2 lexical representations.

Keywords: second language learning, vocabulary learning, transliterations, working memory, thematic organization
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
    • 1.1The present study
    • 1.2Research questions and hypotheses
  • 2.Method
    • 2.1Participants
    • 2.2Design
    • 2.3Stimuli
    • 2.4Procedure
      • 2.4.1Training
      • 2.4.2Free recall test
      • 2.4.3English-Arabic Translation test
      • 2.4.4Waters reading span task
  • 3.Results
    • 3.1Free recall
    • 3.2Translation accuracy
    • 3.3Translation reaction times
  • 4.General discussion
  • 5.Conclusion
  • Acknowledgements
  • Notes
  • References


This article is currently available as a sample article.

Published online: 7 May 2018
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/jsls.17018.tse
References
Aiken, L. S., & West, S. G.
(1991) Multiple regression: Testing and interpreting interactions. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
Bassetti, B.
(2008) Orthographic input and second language phonology. In T. Piske & M. Young-Scholten (Eds.), Input matters in SLA (pp. 191–206). Clevedon: Multilingual Matters. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Brewer, W. F., & Nakamura, G. V.
(1984) The nature and functions of schemas. Center for the Study of Reading Technical Report, no. 325.Google Scholar
Brysbaert, M., & New, B.
(2009) Moving beyond Kučera and Francis: A critical evaluation of current word frequency norms and the introduction of a new and improved word frequency measure for American English. Behavior Research Methods, 41(4), 977–990. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Choi, T. H.
(2003, July). The effects of semantic and thematic grouping on learning efficiency and retention of the L2 vocabulary. Tokyo, Japan: Pan-Pacific Association of Applied Linguistics.Google Scholar
Clauson, G.
(2002) Studies in Turkic and Mongolic linguistics. New York, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar
Defense Language Institute Foreign Language Center
(2005) Iraqi basic language survival guide. Presidio of Monterey, CA.Google Scholar
Degani, T., & Tokowicz, N.
(2010) Ambiguous words are harder to learn. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 131, 299–314. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Degani, T., Tseng, A. M., & Tokowicz, N.
(2014) Together or apart? Learning of ambiguous words. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 171, 749–765. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Elgort, I.
(2011) Deliberate learning and vocabulary acquisition in a second language. Language Learning, 611, 367–413. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Eriksen, B. A., & Eriksen, C. W.
(1974) Effects of noise letters upon the identification of a target letter in a nonsearch task. Perception and Psychophysics, 161, 143–149. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Finkbeiner, M., & Nicol, J.
(2003) Semantic category effects in second language word learning. Applied Psycholinguistics, 241, 369–383. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Folse, K. S.
(2004) Vocabulary myths: Applying second language research to classroom teaching. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hayes-Harb, R., & Cheng, H. -W.
(2016) The influence of the Pinyin and Zhuyin writing systems on the acquisition of Mandarin word forms by native English speakers. Frontiers in Psychology, 7 (785). DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hu, C.
(2008) Use orthography in L2 auditory word learning: Who benefits? Reading and Writing, 211, 823–841. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kaushanskaya, M.
(2012) Cognitive mechanisms of word learning in bilingual and monolingual adults: The role of phonological memory. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 15(3), 470–489. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kroll, J. F., & Stewart, E.
(1994) Category interference in translation and picture naming: Evidence for asymmetric connections between bilingual memory representations. Journal of Memory and Language, 331, 149–174. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kuznetsova, A., Brockhoff, P. B., & Christensen, R. H. B.
(2013) lmerTest: Tests for random and fixed effects for linear mixed effect models (lmer objects of lme4 package). R package version 2.0–3. 2013. Available from: [URL]
Linck, J. A., Osthus, P., Koeth, J. T., & Bunting, M. F.
(2014) Working memory and second language comprehension and production: A meta-analysis. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Morris, C. D., Bransford, J. D., & Franks, J. J.
(1977) Levels of processing versus transfer appropriate processing. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 161, 519–533. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Nelson, J. R., Balass, M., & Perfetti, C. A.
(2005) Differences between written and spoken input in learning new words. Written Language & Literacy, 81, 25–44. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Park, M. S.
(2015) Orthographic input and the acquisition of second language phonology: A review. Korean Journal of Linguistics, 40(3), 389–401.Google Scholar
Perfetti, C. A. & Hart, L.
(2002) The lexical quality hypothesis. In L. Verhoeven, C. Elbro, & P. Reitsma (Eds.), Precursors of functional literacy (pp. 67–86). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Powell, M. J. D.
(June 2009) The BOBYQA algorithm for bound constrained optimization without derivatives Department of Applied Mathematics and Theoretical Physics, Cambridge University. DAMTP 2009/NA06. Retrieved 2014-02-14.Google Scholar
Psychological Software Tools, Inc.
(2000) E-Prime [Computer software]. Pittsburgh, PA.Google Scholar
Roediger, III, H. L., & Karpicke, J. D.
(2006) The power of testing memory: Basic research and implications for educational practice. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 11, 181–210. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
RStudio Team
(2016) RStudio: Integrated Development for R. RStudio, Inc., Boston, MA. [URL].
Stroop, J. R.
(1935) Studies of interference in serial verbal reactions. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 181, 643–662. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Tinkham, T.
(1997) The effects of semantic and thematic clustering on the learning of second language vocabulary. Second Language Research, 131, 138–163. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Tokowicz, N., Michael, E. B., & Kroll, J. F.
(2004) The roles of study-abroad experience and working-memory capacity in the types of errors made during translation. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 71, 255–272. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Turner, M. L., & Engle, R. W.
(1989) Is working memory capacity task dependent? Journal of Memory and Language, 281, 127–154 DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Waters, G. S., & Caplan, D.
(1996) The measurement of verbal working memory capacity and its relation to reading comprehension. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology-Human Experimental Psychology, 49A1, 51–79. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cited by

Cited by 1 other publications

Rice, Caitlin A. & Natasha Tokowicz
2020. A REVIEW OF LABORATORY STUDIES OF ADULT SECOND LANGUAGE VOCABULARY TRAINING. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 42:2 ► pp. 439 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 2 april 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.