Relationship between L1 and L2 word‐level reading and phonological processing in adults learning English as a second language

Abstract

Word-level reading and phonological processing measures were administered in English and Chinese to adult ESL students whose first language (L1) was Mandarin and whose second language (L2) was English. Instructors also identified students who may be at risk for L2 reading difficulties based on specific identification criteria. L2 phonological processing measures were related to L2 word-level reading and there was a cross-linguistic relationship between L1 and L2 phonological processing measures. Students considered at risk for L2 reading difficulties also differed significantly from those students not at risk on one L1 and several L2 phonological processing measures. Results are discussed in relation to contemporary theory on the assessment and identification of reading difficulties in English language learners.Although there has been burgeoning interest and research conducted recently in the early assessment and identification of language minority children who may have literacy problems, the literacy needs of older children and adults with limited English proficiency have been relatively neglected in the research literature (August & Shanahan, 2006). For adult educators of students learning English as a second language (ESL), the assessment and identification of reading difficulties presents a significant challenge. Students come to the centres from heterogeneous linguistic and socioeconomic backgrounds with varying degrees of literacy in their first language (L1). It is also difficult to determine reliably the relative contribution of literacy experience, the impact of acquiring a second language (L2) with a similar as opposed to a dissimilar orthography as the L1 (e.g. alphabetic versus non-alphabetic, shallow versus deep) and the contribution of language proficiency to literacy acquisition in mature ESL students. Additionally, there is research to suggest that generally, educators are not very accurate in identifying those ESL students who may be at risk of reading disabilities (Limbos & Geva, 2001). Further compounding these challenges is the lack of consensus in the field of learning disabilities for operationalising a method for valid and reliable identification (Wagner, Francis & Morrison, 2005).

The Impact of Native Language Use on Second Language Vocabulary Learning by Saudi EFL Students

“…The role of native-language (L1) knowledge in second language (L2) acquisition is well-established, and development of second-language phonological inventory (e.g., Harrison & Kroll, 2007), lexical skills (e.g., Proctor et al, 2006), EFL vocabulary learners can face problems both with regard to the number of vocabulary words to be acquired, and the improvement of in depth semantic understanding of such lexical representations. Earlier studies displayed that EFL learners differ from native speakers in both the size of their lexicon and in the richness of semantic representations associated with the lexical items (e.g., Verhallen & Schoonen, 1998).…”

Irish orthography: what do teachers and learners need to know about it, and why?

“…Harrison & Krol, 2007), the needs of learners (both children and adults) learning their L2 literacy in a minority language have received relatively little attention. Lesser-used languages suffer from poor resourcing, as well as practical difficulties such as limited materials production.…”

Vocabulary Size, Phonological Awareness, and Reading Comprehension

“…Manipulation and analysis of the sound structure of spoken English, i.e., phonological awareness, is critical to L2 learners (Hu, 2013;Li et al, 2012). When short of the necessary backup in literacy development, some L2 learners were even identified as having difficulties in learning to read in English (Harrison & Krol, 2007). On the other hand, vocabulary size is suggested to be associated with language proficiency levels indexed by standardized language tests (Milton et al, 2010).…”

“…Nevertheless, a comparison in the structure of literacy-related skills between English native speakers and EFL/ESL learners has revealed that spoken language as well as orthographic experiences had a great impact on the development of phonological skills (Cheung, Chen, Lai, Wong, & Hills, 2001). Some L2 learners consequently exhibit poor reading comprehension, due to a lack of proper backup in the development of their L2 system (Harrison & Krol, 2007), since phonological processing skills have long been proved to be critical to learning alphabetic languages (Anthony, Williams, McDonald, & Francis, 2007;Bowey, 2001). Furthermore, L2 literacy research is often informed by L1 literacy studies.…”