Article published in:
A cross-theoretical and cross-linguistic perspective on the L2 acquisition of case systems / L'acquisition de systèmes casuels en L2 : des études à travers plusieurs théories et langues
Edited by Kristof Baten and Saartje Verbeke
[Language, Interaction and Acquisition 11:1] 2020
► pp. 130–162

The acquisition of German declension in additive and concept-based approaches to instruction via computer-based cognitive tutors

| Emory University, Oxford College
This study examines the different learning outcomes of two computer-based cognitive tutors using two approaches to instructing German declension: an additive, bottom-up approach, which focuses on a stepwise introduction of each case, and a concept-based, top-down approach, which focuses on developing students’ conceptual understanding of the functions related to each case form and the case marking system as a whole. The results indicate that both groups learned, but what and how they learned differed depending on the method of instruction. The additive group showed general gains in production and a slight increase in their ability to correctly interpret object-first sentences. The concept-based group showed larger gains, but in fewer areas. Specifically, the production of adjective endings increased, although there were no differences in determiner production or accuracy. The concept-based group also had a larger gain in their ability to interpret non-SVO word order sentences. This study shows how concept-based approaches to grammar can outperform additive ones, and that the development of these concepts can prepare students for future learning.
Keywords: German, case marking, declension, morphology, concept-based instruction, cognitive tutors, instruction, SLA
Keywords: allemand, marquage de cas, déclinaison, morphologie, enseignement basé sur une approche conceptuelle, tuteurs cognitifs, enseignement, acquisition des langues étrangères
Published online: 04 June 2020
https://doi.org/10.1075/lia.00010.wal
References

References

Arnett, C., & Jernigan, H.
(2014) A cognitive grammar account of case for L2 students of German. German as a Foreign Language, 1, 68–93.Google Scholar
Arnett, C., & Lysinger, D.
(2013) A cognitive grammar approach to teaching the Russian case system. Russian Language Journal/Русский язык, 63, 135–168.Google Scholar
Baten, K.
(2013) The acquisition of the German case system by foreign language learners. Amsterdam: Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(2016) A study on explicit instruction and its relation to knowing/using linguistic forms and individual learner readiness. EUROSLA Yearbook, 16, 116–143. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Baten, K., & Lochtman, K.
(2014) Das deutsche Kasussystem im Fremdsprachenerwerb: Ein Forschungsüberblick. MUTTERSPRACHE, 124(1), 1–25.Google Scholar
Bley-Vroman, R.
(1989) What is the logical problem of foreign language learning? In S. Gass and J. Schachter (Eds.) Linguistic perspectives on second language acquisition (pp. 41–48). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Clahsen, H. & Muysken, P.
(1996) How adult second language learning differs from child first language development: Commentary on Epstein et al. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 19, 721–23. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Davydov, V. V.
(1990) Types of generalization in instruction: Logical and psychological problems in the structuring of school curricula. Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.Google Scholar
De Rycker, A., & De Knop, S.
(2017) Integrating Cognitive Linguistics and foreign language teaching: Historical background and new developments. Journal of Modern Languages, 19(1), 30–46.Google Scholar
Ellis, N. C.
(2008) Usage-based and form-focused language acquisition: The associative learning of constructions, learned-attention, and the limited L2 endstate. In P. Robinson & N. C. Ellis (Eds.), Handbook of cognitive linguistics and second language acquisition (pp. 372–405). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Epstein, S., Flynn, S., & Martohardjono, G.
(1996) Second language acquisition: Theoretical and experimental issues in contemporary research. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 19, 677–714. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Fillmore, C. J.
(1967) The case for case. In E. Bach and R. T. Harms (Eds.), Universals in Linguistic Theory, (pp. 1–88). New York, NY: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.Google Scholar
Goad, H., & White, L.
(2004) Ultimate attainment of L2 inflection: Effects of L1 prosodic structure. EUROSLA Yearbook, 4(1), 119–145. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Goldberg, A. E.
(1995) Constructions: A construction grammar approach to argument structure. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Jackson, C. N.
(2007) Information, word order, and case markings during comprehension by L2 Learners of German. The Modern Language Journal, 91(3), 418–432. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Jordens, P.
(1992) The cognitive function of case marking in German as a native and a foreign language. In S. Gass & L. Selinker (Eds.), Language transfer in language learning (pp. 138–175). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Kempe, V. & MacWhinney, B.
(1998) The acquisition of case marking by adult learners of Russian and German. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 20(4), 543–587. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(1999) Processing of morphological and semantic cues in Russian and German. Language and Cognitive Processes, 14(2), 129–171. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
[ p. 158 ]
Köpcke, K. & Zubin, D.
(1983) Die kognitive Organisation der Genuszuweisung zu den einsilbigen Nomen der deutschen Gegenwartssprache. Zeitschrift für germanistische Linguistik II, 166–182.Google Scholar
(1984) Sechs Prinzipien für die Genuszuweisung im Deutschen: Ein Beitrag zur natürlichen Klassifikation. Linguistische Berichte, 93, 26–50.Google Scholar
Liamkina, O.
(2005) The role of explicit meaning-based instruction in foreign language pedagogy: Applications of Cognitive Linguistics to teaching the German dative case to advanced learners (Doctoral dissertation). Available from Dissertations and Theses database (UMI No. 3193301).Google Scholar
Liamkina, O. & Ryshina-Pankova, M.
(2012) Grammar dilemma: Teaching grammar as a resource for meaning making. The Modern Language Journal 96(2), 270–289. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Lipka, L.
(1976) Topicalization, case grammar and lexical decomposition in English. Archivum Linguisticum, 7, 118–141.Google Scholar
Long, M. H.
(1991) Focus on form: A design feature in language teaching methodology. In K. de Bot, R. B. Ginsberg, & C. Kramsch (Eds), Foreign language research in cross-cultural perspective (pp. 39–52). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Lysinger, D.
(2015) The case for hidden meaning: An application of cognitive linguistics in the Russian classroom. In K. Masuda, C. Arnett, & A. Labarca (Eds.), Cognitive Linguistics and Sociocultural Theory: Applications for second and foreign language teaching (pp. 233–258). Berlin: de Gruyter. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
MacWhinney, B.
(1978) The acquisition of morpho-phonology. Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development, 43(1).Google Scholar
MacWhinney, B. J., Leinbach, J., Taraban, R., & McDonald, J. L.
(1989) Language learning: Cues or rules? Journal of Memory and Language, 28, 255–277. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Meisel, J. M., Clahsen, H., & Pienemann, M.
(1981) On determining developmental stages in natural second language acquisition. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 3, 109–135. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Mills, A.
(1986) The acquisition of gender: A study of English and German. Berlin: Springer-Verlag. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Negueruela, E., & Lantolf, J.
(2006) Concept-based instruction and the acquisition of L2 Spanish. In R. Salaberry and B. A. Lafford (Eds.) The art of teaching Spanish: Second language acquisition from research to praxis (pp. 79–102). Buffalo, NY: University of Buffalo Center for Cognitive Science.Google Scholar
Pallotti, G.
(2007) An operational definition of the emergence criterion. Applied Linguistics, 28 (3), 361–382. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Pienemann, M.
(1998) Language processing and second language development: Processability theory. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Plonsky, L. & Oswald, F.
(2014) How big is “big”? Interpreting effect sizes in L2 research. Language Learning, 64(4), 878–912. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Rankin, T.
(2014) Word order and case in the comprehension of L2 German by L1 English speakers. EUROSLA Yearbook, 14, 201–224. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Ritterbusch, R., LaFond, L., & Agustin, M.
(2006) Learner difficulties with German case: Implications from an action research study. Die Unterrichtspraxis/Teaching German, 39, 30–45. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Robinson, P.
(1995) Attention, memory, and the ‘noticing’ hypothesis. Language Learning, 45, 283–331. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
[ p. 159 ]
(2007) Task complexity, theory of mind, and intentional reasoning: effects on L2 speech production, interaction, uptake and perceptions of task difficulty. International Review of Applied Linguistics, 45(3), 193–213. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Salimi, A., & Dadashpour, S.
(2012) Task complexity and language production dilemmas (Robinson’s Cognition Hypothesis vs. Skehan’s Trade-off Model). Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 46, 643–652. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Schmidt, R.
(1990) The role of consciousness in second language learning. Applied Linguistics, 11, 129–158. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(1994) Deconstructing consciousness in search of useful definitions for applied linguistics. AILA Review, 11, 11–26.Google Scholar
(1995) Consciousness and foreign language learning: A tutorial on the role of attention and awareness in learning. In R. Schmidt (Ed.) Attention and awareness in foreign language learning (pp. 1–63). Honolulu, HI: Second Language Teaching and Curriculum Center, University of Hawai’i.Google Scholar
Schwartz, B. D., & Sprouse, R.
(1994) Word order and nominative case in nonnative language acquisition: a longitudinal study of (L1 Turkish) German interlanguage. Language Acquisition Studies in Generative Grammar, 31(4), 71–89.Google Scholar
Thielmann, W.
(2007) Fallstudie: Kasus in Sprachtheorie und Sprachvermittlung. Zielsprache Deutsch, 34(3), 11–34.Google Scholar
Tracy, R.
(1986) The acquisition of case morphology in German. Linguistics, 24(1), 47–78. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
van Compernolle, R. A., Gomez-Laich, M. P., & Weber, A.
(2016) Teaching L2 Spanish sociopragmatics through concepts: A classroom-based study. The Modern Language Journal, 100(1), 341–361. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
VanPatten, B. & Borst, S.
(2012) The roles of explicit information and grammatical sensitivity in Processing Instruction: Nominative-Accusative case marking and word order in German L2. Foreign Language Annals, 45(1), 92–109.Google Scholar
VanPatten, B., Collopy, E., Price, J. E., Borst, S., & Qualin, A.
(2013) Explicit information, grammatical sensitivity, and the first-noun principle: A cross-linguistic study in Processing Instruction. The Modern Language Journal, 97(2), 506–527. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Walter, D. R., & van Compernolle, R. A.
(2017) Teaching German declension as meaning: a concept-based approach. Innovation in Language Learning and Teaching, 11(1), 68–85. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
White, L.
(1986) Markedness and parameter setting: some implications for a theory of adult second language acquisition. In F. R. Eckman, E. A. Moravcsik, & J. R. Wirth (Eds) Markedness (pp. 309-327). Boston, MA: Springer. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Zubin, D. & Köpcke, K.
(1981) Gender: a less than arbitrary grammatical category. Chicago Linguistic Society 17, 439–449.Google Scholar
[ p. 160 ]