The effects of interlingual and intralingual subtitles on second language learning/acquisition: a state-of-the-art review

Abstract

The disciplinary field of Second Language Acquisition (SLA) has witnessed an increasing interest in the investigation of the effects of subtitled and captioned audiovisual materials on domains of language learning/acquisition. In this context, this paper seeks to provide a systematic review of recent studies related to language learning aspects aided by the instructional/experimental use of subtitled and captioned materials. The present paper draws on relevant literature in the field of SLA that interfaces with subtitling/captioning, while outlining their goals and main findings. This paper also aims to unveil which dimensions have merited scholar attention the most in the last two decades. Finally, some considerations are made regarding possible avenues for future research, taking into account the existing literature and underinvestigated issues.

Subtitling, Working Memory, and L2 Learning: A Correlational Study

“…Until the 2000s, intralingual subtitles were mostly found to be more effective in aiding L2 development (see also Matielo, D'Ely & Baretta, 2015 for a state-of-the-art review), since groups were compared to and contrasted with controls (with no subtitles available in the experiments). As for comparative studies that emerged from the 2000s on, the situation is not quite clear and presents grayer areas.…”

Exploring the Potential of Subtitled Foreign Media for the Learning of Conventional Expressions

“…Research on the potential of subtitled media as a language learning resource began in the early 1980s when foreign language teachers began to experiment with using subtitled films and television shows in their classrooms (Gambier, Caimi, & Mariotti, 2015) and has since expanded into its own field of academic study, cumulating in the 2015 release of the book, Subtitles and Language Learning (Gambier et al, 2015). The studies have encompassed many variables and been so wide-ranging in scope that, although generally quite positive (Matielo et al, 2015; Montero Perez, Van den Noortgate, & Desmet, 2013), they are difficult to compare (Bianchi & Ciabattoni, 2008;Montero Perez et al, 2013b). Studies have covered all levels of proficiency from pre-beginners (as in no experience with the language) (e.g., d 'Ydewalle & Van de Poel, 1999;Koolstra & Beentjes, 1999;Van Lommel et al, 2006;Kuppens, 2010) to advanced (e.g., Garza, 1991;Markham, 1999;Vulchanova e.…”

“…That belief, while seemingly commonsense, is incorrect. In their review of the literature, Matielo, D'Ely, and Baretta (2015) pointed out that one of the greatest contributions of a study by Koolstra and Beentjes (1999) is that "the word recognition in the no subtitles condition was not superior to the subtitled condition, suggesting that the belief that reading subtitles might distract viewers from hearing [L2] words may be just a belief" (p. 168). Dual-task experiments have provided support for this idea, demonstrating that viewers do attend to both the L1 and L2 input in parallel (Vulchanova et al, 2015;Danan, 2004).…”

“…The general consensus is a sort of linear progression from regular subtitles for beginners, followed by reversed subtitles and/or captions, until gradually no on-screen text is required (Matielo et al, 2015;Bianchi & Ciabattoni, 2008;Hayati & Mohmedi, 2011). Beginners are believed to benefit the most from L1 subtitles, or as Danan (1992) calls it, the "native language crutch," because "captions cannot compensate for an excessively wide gap" between the learner's ability and the language in the video (Bianchi & Ciabattoni, 2008, p. 70).…”

“…This study, therefore, belongs in the same category as previous studies examining all types of on-screen text (including reversed subtitling, captions, and keyword captions) and their effect on second language acquisition (SLA). Throughout this thesis, the terms "learn" and "acquire" will be used interchangeably, in the style of subtitle studies (Matielo, D'Ely, & Baretta, 2015), rather than attempting to disentangle the two ideas, which is not the purpose of the present study.…”