The present meta‐analysis examined the overall average correlation (weighted for sample size and corrected for measurement error) between passage‐level second language (L2) reading comprehension and 10 key reading component variables investigated in the research domain. Four high‐evidence correlates (with 18 or more accumulated effect sizes: L2 decoding, L2 vocabulary knowledge, L2 grammar knowledge, first language [L1] reading comprehension), and six low‐evidence correlates (L2 phonological awareness, L2 orthographic knowledge, L2 morphological knowledge, L2 listening comprehension, working memory, metacognition) were included in the study. For the four high‐evidence correlates, a series of moderator analyses were also carried out to examine the effects of age, L2 proficiency, L1–L2 script and language distance, and measurement characteristics. The results showed that L2 grammar knowledge (r = .85), L2 vocabulary knowledge (r = .79), and L2 decoding (r = .56) were the three strongest correlates of L2 reading comprehension. The six low‐evidence correlates had moderate‐to‐strong mean correlations, with L2 listening comprehension being the strongest correlate (r = .77) and metacognition (r = .32) being the weakest correlate. Age, some measurement characteristics, and L1–L2 language distance were found to be significant moderators for some reading components.

This study investigated first language (L1) influence on the acquisition of second language (L2) collocations using a framework based on Kroll and Stewart (1994) and Jiang (2000), by comparing the performance on a phrase‐acceptability judgment task among native speakers of English, Japanese English as a second language (ESL) users, and Japanese English as a foreign language (EFL) learners. The test materials included both congruent collocations, whose lexical components were similar in L1 and L2, and incongruent collocations, whose lexical components differed in the two languages. EFL learners made more errors with and reacted more slowly to incongruent collocations than congruent collocations. ESL users generally performed better than EFL learners (lower error rate and faster speed), but they still made more errors on incongruent collocations than on congruent collocations. Interestingly, however, the L1 effect was not apparent on the ESL users' reaction time. The results suggested that (a) both L1 congruency and L2 exposure affect the acquisition of L2 collocations with the availability of both maximizing this acquisition; (b) it is difficult to acquire incongruent collocations even with a considerable amount of exposure to L2; and (c) once stored in memory, L2 collocations are processed independently of L1. Possible differences in acquiring congruent and incongruent collocations are discussed.

This study investigated the effects of word frequency, collocational frequency, L1 congruency, and L2 proficiency, on L2 collocational processing. Two groups of L1 Japanese speakers of English (intermediate and advanced) and one group of English native speakers (NSs) performed an online acceptability judgment task on four types of adjective-noun constructions: (1) congruent collocations, (2) English-only collocations, (3) Japanese-only collocations, and (4) baseline items. Response times were analyzed using mixed-effects modeling and correlations. In contrast to NSs, nonnative speakers (NNSs) processed congruent collocations significantly faster than English-only collocations. As for frequency, all three groups demonstrated sensitivity to both word-level and collocation-level frequency. However, the distributions differed across the three groups. We concluded that age/order of acquisition effects (Carroll & White, 1973) provided the best explanation for the congruency results. Regarding the frequency results, we concluded that the findings conflict with claims that NNSs may process formulaic sequences differently than NSs (e.g., Wray, 2002, 2008).

This study investigated the possible influence of first language (L1) collocational patterns on second language (L2) collocational processing. A lexical decision task was used to assess whether collocational patterns acceptable in the L1 but not the L2 would still be activated when processing language entirely in the L2. The results revealed no such activation. Furthermore, L2 speakers did not produce accelerated processing for control collocations that were acceptable in the L2 but not the L1. Based on these findings, we put forth some theoretical suggestions regarding recent research indicating accelerated processing for congruent over incongruent collocations. Finally, our NS control group revealed some unexpected tendencies that cannot be easily accounted for with our current understanding of L1 language processing.

This study investigated the transfer of reading attitudes from L1 to L2, drawing on the linguistic threshold hypothesis. Participants were Japanese university‐level EFL students. Their L1 and L2 reading attitudes were estimated using a Likert scale, and their L2 proficiency was measured using a test. The study found that the students' L1 and L2 reading attitudes were different. Multiple regression analyses identified significant contributions of L1 reading attitudes in explaining L2 attitudes. The contribution of L2 proficiency was also significant in many cases but very small. Moreover, no evidence was found that the contribution of L1 reading attitude increases at higher levels of L2 proficiency. The study thus demonstrated that reading attitudes transfer from L1 to L2, but as distinct from transfer of reading abilities and strategies, the influence of L2 proficiency is much weaker and the notion of a linguistic threshold does not apply to the transfer of reading attitudes from L1 to L2.