Introduction and Overview

Wen, Zhisheng; Mota, Mailce Borges; McNeill, Arthur

doi:10.21832/9781783093595-004

Cited by 10 publications

(13 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…We now have a flourishing research tradition exploring the role of working memory in SLA and aptitude (Wen & Skehan 2011; Biedroń 2012; Biedroń & Szczepaniak 2012; Wen 2014; Wen et al 2015; Wen 2016). Central to this is the fractionated view of working memory, of a system containing a central executive, and various buffer systems (phonological, visuo-spatial, episodic) and the existence of IDs in each of these multiple components (Baddeley 2003, 2012, 2015; cf.…”

Section: Tomorrow: Re-conceptualizing Fl Aptitude and Re-orienting Fumentioning

confidence: 99%

Foreign language aptitude theory: Yesterday, today and tomorrow

Biedroń²,

2016

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Foreign language (FL) aptitude generally refers to a specific talent for learning a foreign or second language (L2). After experiencing a long period of marginalized interest, FL aptitude research in recent years has witnessed renewed enthusiasm across the disciplines of educational psychology, second language acquisition (SLA) and cognitive neuroscience. This paper sets out to offer a historical and an updated account of this recent progress in FL aptitude theory development and research. As its subtitle indicates, the paper centres on three major issues: following the introduction and clarification of basic concepts, Section 1 traces the early conceptions of FL aptitude dominated by John Carroll's pioneering work. Section 2 summarizes and examines more recent theoretical perspectives and FL aptitude models proposed by researchers from multiple disciplines that have significantly broadened the conventional research traditions associated with Carroll's original conception. Based on the research synthesis of current FL aptitude models, Section 3 suggests the directions FL aptitude theory and research might take in coming years. We conclude that a working memory perspective on FL aptitude presents one promising avenue for advance, as does the development of new aptitude tests to predict speed of automatization, implicit learning and greater control over an emerging language system. In addition, it is argued that issues of domain-specificity versus domain-generality for aptitude tests may lead to aptitude theory and research becoming more central in applied linguistics.

show abstract

Section: Tomorrow: Re-conceptualizing Fl Aptitude and Re-orienting Fumentioning

confidence: 99%

Foreign language aptitude theory: Yesterday, today and tomorrow

Biedroń²,

2016

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“… 1. For comprehensive overviews of the main proposed theories and models of WM, see Baddeley (2007); Conway, Jarrold, Kane, Miyake, & Towse (2007); Miyake and Friedman (2012); Sagarra (2013); Wen, Mota, & McNeill (2015); and Williams (2012). …”

Section: Notesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Different models of WM vary in their specific theoretical conceptualization (Miyake, 2001; Miyake & Shah, 1999; Sagarra, 2013) 1 but generally agree that WM is a limited-capacity construct that regulates online processing, storage, and retrieval. While these models have valuably contributed to our understanding of WM, the domain-specific, multiple-resource model (Baddeley, 1986, 2000, 2003, 2007, 2010; Baddeley & Hitch, 1974; Baddeley & Logie, 1999) remains dominant in the field (Miyake, 2001; Wen, Mota, & McNeill, 2015). This model posits a “nonunitary” view of WM with specialized processing and storage components that comprise a domain-general construct (i.e., executive function, EF) responsible for various attentional functions (e.g., inhibiting, switching, and retrieving information), and two domain-specific storage systems, the phonological loop (i.e., phonological working memory, PWM) that handles phonological and verbal information and has a span of about 1 to 2 seconds (Baddeley, 1986, 2003), and the visuospatial sketchpad, in charge of visual and spatial information.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evidence for the Decreasing Impact of Cognitive Ability on Second Language Development as Proficiency Increases

Serafini

Sanz

2015

Stud Second Lang Acquis

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study investigated whether the role of working memory capacity varies over the course of second language (L2) morphosyntactic development. Eighty-seven beginning, intermediate, and advanced university L2 Spanish learners completed two nonverbal tasks measuring executive function (EF) and phonological working memory (PWM) in their native language (English) and two tasks measuring knowledge of ten grammatical structures in Spanish at three points during and after a semester of instruction. Robust relationships between both working memory components, especially PWM, and L2 performance, emerged only for lower level learners, particularly at the start of instruction and 3.5 months later. Findings demonstrate that the facilitative effects of cognitive ability appear to lessen with increasing L2 proficiency and empirically support a developmental perspective of L2 learning.

show abstract

“…In contrast to the claims of qualitatively different parsing routines in the L1 and L2 made by the SSH, others argue that L1 and L2 sentence processing is fundamentally similar, and maintain that purported differences result from inefficient lexical access routines or from an increased burden on capacity-limited cognitive resources (McDonald, 2006; Hopp, 2006, 2010). More generally, the role that individual differences in working memory play in explaining individual differences in L2 attainment has also been widely debated (Juffs, 2004; Juffs & Harrington, 2011; Harrington & Sawyer, 1992; Linck, Osthus, Koeth & Bunting, 2014; Sagarra, 2013; Wen, Mota & McNeill 2015). Many researchers investigating the role of working memory in L2 acquisition and processing have been influenced by Baddeley and colleagues’ model of working memory (e.g., Baddeley, 1986, 2000, 2007; Baddeley & Hitch, 1974), and assume a characterisation of individual differences in working memory in terms of capacity limitations.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Parsing and Working Memory in Bilingual Sentence Processing

2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A growing body of research has investigated bilingual sentence processing. How to account for differences in native (L1) and non-native (L2) processing is controversial. Some explain L1/L2 differences in terms of different parsing mechanisms, and the hypothesis that L2 learners adopt ‘shallow’ parsing has received considerable attention. Others assume L1/L2 processing is similar, and explain L1/L2 differences in terms of capacity-based limitations being exceeded during L2 processing. More generally, the role that working memory plays in language acquisition and processing has garnered increasing interest. Based on research investigating L2 sentence processing, I claim that a primary source of L1/L2 differences lies in the ability to retrieve information constructed during sentence processing from memory. In contrast to describing L1/L2 differences in terms of shallow parsing or capacity limitations, I argue that L2 speakers are more susceptible to retrieval interference when successful comprehension requires access to information from memory.

show abstract

Introduction and Overview

Cited by 10 publications

References 0 publications

Foreign language aptitude theory: Yesterday, today and tomorrow

Foreign language aptitude theory: Yesterday, today and tomorrow

Evidence for the Decreasing Impact of Cognitive Ability on Second Language Development as Proficiency Increases

Parsing and Working Memory in Bilingual Sentence Processing

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About