Does the availability of orthography support L2 word learning?

Abstract

Availability of orthography during word learning has been found to facilitate learning the word’s spelling and pronunciation and has been proposed to facilitate learning its meaning. This has not been studied in second language (L2) learning yet, in which word learning often corresponds to translation learning. Therefore, an L2 word learning experiment was carried out. Grade 6 Dutch students (n = 92) were taught English words, with orthography available or absent. Words were divided into those that are spelled entirely like they sound (consistent, e.g., lilt) and those that are not (inconsistent, e.g., budgie). Students learned the words using forward translation (Dutch to English) or backward translation (English to Dutch). At post-test spelling, reading and forward as well as backward translation were measured. Results indicate that availability of orthography mainly facilitated word spelling and reading. There was a trend for orthography to affect learning the translation. Learning consistent words benefited most from orthography, especially when the post-test demanded forward translation. As forward translation requires retrieval of the word’s pronunciation, it is likely that students used orthographic mapping to better remember the pronunciations of the English words. Forward translation was easier if words were learned in the same direction, but backward translation was not affected by learning direction. Together, these results imply that orthography supports translation learning, although this is likely caused by learning the word’s pronunciation and not by establishing a direct link between orthography and word meaning.

Does Mode of Input Affect How Second Language Learners Create Form–Meaning Connections and Pronounce Second Language Words?

“…Overall results showed that learners in the RWL group recalled a significantly larger number of spoken word forms than learners in the LO group, which aligned with earlier research findings showing that reading with auditory support is an effective way to build form-meaning connection for L2 words (Brown et al, 2008;Bürki et al, 2019;Krepel et al, 2021;Malone, 2018;Webb & Chang, 2012). Also, learners in the RWL and LO groups produced L2 words in a manner that listeners perceived to be less accented and more comprehensible compared to words produced by learners assigned to the RO mode.…”

“…Unlike previous studies focusing on contextualized learning, Bisson et al (2014) had L2 beginners engage with a decontextualized activity (a letter-search task) where their attention was drawn to spellings of target words while receiving exposure to the spoken forms and pictorial information. In that study, as little as two exposures to the multimodal stimuli led to significant improvement of translation recognition accuracy (see also Krepel et al, 2021, for more evidence supporting multimodal effects on L2 vocabulary learning through a decontextualized activity using translation practice). The attested advantage of multimodal input over unimodal input aligns with the cognitive theory of multimedia learning (Mayer, 2014).…”

Investigating orthographic versus auditory cross-situational word learning with online and lab-based research

“…Similarly, Bürki et al (2019) found higher accuracy and faster response times for native French adults' learning of novel English words when the words were presented with their written forms compared to auditory presentation alone. In contrast, Krepel et al (2020) found that orthography helped primary school students with non-native word spelling and reading. These studies overall support that explicit word learning is facilitated when presented with additional sources of information or modalities, but whether the improvement in learning can be attributed to the mere presentation of orthography or whether it occurred purely because it is an additional modality remains unclear.…”

“…Previous studies have examined the role of orthographic information in word learning by presenting spoken words with or without their written forms. As reviewed by Bassetti et al, (2015) and Escudero (2015), orthographic input can either facilitate (Bürki et al, 2019;Escudero et al, 2008;Showalter & Hayes-Harb, 2013), or hinder (Bassetti, 2007;Hayes-Harb et al, 2010) word learning, while other studies have reported mixed effects or no effect at all (Escudero & Wanrooij, 2010;Krepel et al, 2020;Simon et al, 2010). For instance, Escudero et al, (2008) demonstrated that explicit learning of words containing non-native phonological contrasts was facilitated by the availability of orthography.…”

“…For young learners, word learning would be expected to occur mostly through auditory perception, but adults may often encounter new vocabulary through reading. Indeed, a plethora of explicit word learning studies use written word forms (orthographic information) for novel word stimuli (e.g., Angwin et al, 2014;Bakker et al, 2015;Krepel et al, 2020;Mestres-Misse et al, 2007). Previous research has established that our mental lexicon contains phonological and orthographic representations of speech (Escudero, et al, 2014;Pattamadilok et al, 2007;Perre & Ziegler, 2008;Taft et al, 2008;Ventura et al, 2004;Ziegler et al, 2004), both for our native as for non-native languages.…”