Exploring Syntactic Priming as a Measure of Implicit Language Aptitude

Abstract

This study investigates the validity of syntactic priming as a measure of implicit language aptitude. Syntactic priming refers to the tendency to reproduce a linguistic structure due to a previous exposure to the structure. The validity of the construct was verified by collating evidence for divergent validity—whether it is dissociable from explicit aptitude; convergent validity—whether it is correlated with other measures of implicit aptitude; and predictive validity—whether it is predictive of learning attainment. One hundred sixty-six university EFL learners completed three tests of implicit aptitude: syntactic priming, sequence learning, and LLAMA_D; three tests of explicit aptitude: LLAMA_B, _E, and _F; and three tests of L2 proficiency: untimed grammaticality judgment, metalinguistic knowledge, and elicited imitation. The results showed that syntactic priming was dissociable from explicit aptitude, but it failed to converge with the other measures of implicit aptitude, and it also failed to predict L2 proficiency. The results also showed that priming was negatively correlated with sequence learning and that sequence learning was a negative predictor of learners’ metalinguistic knowledge. On the other hand, the construct validity of explicit aptitude was strong. The results suggest the multidimensionality of implicit aptitude and the need for more research into the construct validity of syntactic priming as a cognitive ability for implicit learning.

Mapping the predictive role of MLAT subtests for L2 achievement through regression commonality analysis

“…However, this theoretical dichotomy is still a matter of investigation. For example, several researchers have found that measures such as LLAMA_D are in fact part of the general LLAMA factor more aligned with explicit aptitude (see Li & Qian, 2021; Zhao et al, 2023). Although the idea of implicit aptitude may be found to be an important contribution to SLA theory, this line of research is new and not yet well developed.…”

Aptitude for Explicit and Implicit Learning

“…Having said this, the fact that the SRT task and LLAMA D differ in terms of sensory modality, draw on different stimulus domains, assess the process versus the product of learning and are not statistically associated does not necessarily mean that they cannot be part of the same construct. Indeed, a lack of correlation between assumed measures of implicit aptitude has been reported in several recent studies (Buffington et al, 2021;Godfroid & Kim, 2021;Li & Qian, 2021). If the primary abilities involved in implicit aptitude are relatively disparate in nature, a lack of association between measures tapping these primary abilities would be less surprising.…”

Scrutinizing LLAMA D as a measure of implicit learning aptitude

“…An additional factor analysis further revealed that LLAMA B, E, and F constituted a factor with intelligence (measured by an IQ test), while LLAMA D constituted a separate factor with implicit learning skills (measured by SRT), which was taken as evidence that LLAMA D is a measure of implicit language learning aptitude (see also Granena, 2019, for a similar finding, where LLAMA D aligned with conceptual priming). After this finding by Granena, researchers have started to use LLAMA D as a test of implicit learning aptitude, and the number of such studies has been increasing (e.g., Artieda & Muñoz, 2016; Forsberg Lundell & Sandgren, 2013; Granena, 2013b, 2016, 2019; Granena & Long, 2013; Lee, 2018; Li & Qian, 2021; Ma et al, 2018; Martens et al, 2016; Montero et al, 2018; Moorman, 2017; Mueller, 2017; Rodríguez Silva, 2017; Saito, 2017, 2019; Saito et al, 2019; Suzuki, 2021; Yalçın et al, 2016; Yalçın & Spada, 2016; Yi, 2018). The areas of these studies range from phonology (Saito et al, 2019) to collocations (Yi, 2018) to grammar (Yalçın & Spada, 2016), covering beginners (Artieda & Muñoz, 2016) as well as advanced learners (Forsberg Lundell & Sandgren, 2013).…”