The role of input flood and input enhancement in <scp>EFL</scp> learners' acquisition of collocations

Szudarski, Paweł; Carter, Ronald

doi:10.1111/ijal.12092

Cited by 118 publications

(187 citation statements)

References 44 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

157

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…However, this small improvement was not significantly different from the improvement experienced by the control group, which led him to conclude that the reading only condition did not lead to much improvement. Similarly, in a later study Szudarski and Carter (2014) …”

mentioning

confidence: 67%

“…Results showed that the number of encounters had a positive effect on learning. The 15-exposure group had significantly higher gains than any of the other groups but significant differences were also found between the five and ten encounter groups and the control group, which led them to 11 conclude that five or more encounters may be necessary to learn the form of collocations incidentally.However, Szudarski and Carter (2014), in their comparison of input flood and input enhancement conditions, compared the acquisition of collocations appearing six times vs.those appearing 12 times in the texts and found that more encounters did not necessarily lead to better results at all levels of collocational competence. …”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Learning L2 collocations incidentally from reading

Pellicer‐Sánchez

2015

Language Teaching Research

136

113

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Previous studies have shown that intentional learning through explicit instruction is effective for the acquisition of collocations in a second language (L2) (e.g. Peters, 2014Peters, , 2015, but relatively little is known about the effectiveness of incidental approaches for the acquisition of L2 collocations. The present study examined the incidental acquisition of collocational knowledge when learners encounter adjective-pseudoword collocations while reading. Forty-one L2 learners read a story containing six target collocations in a classroom setting. One week after the reading they were interviewed about their knowledge of the form, meaning and collocation of the target items (at recall and recognition levels). Participants were randomly assigned to one of two experimental groups, i.e. the 4-repetition group and the 8-repetition group. Results showed that collocational knowledge can be learnt incidentally from reading; that it is learnt at a similar rate to other lexical components such as form and meaning of individual words;and that the frequency manipulation in this study did not seem to have a significant effect on the acquisition of any of the aspects examined. KeywordsIncidental learning, collocations, vocabulary, multi-word units, reading 2 I IntroductionVocabulary is an essential component of language and it has a tendency to occur in multiword units (Schmitt, 2010), i.e. lexical units which consist of more than one word (McCarthy, 1990). However, despite the importance of mastering knowledge of different types of multi-word units for achieving high levels of language proficiency and fluency in a second language (L2) (e.g. Boers, Eyckmans, Kappel, Stengers, Demecheleer, 2006;Granger, 1998;Stengers, Boers, Housen, Eyckmans, 2011), research into the teaching and learning of multi-word units is still scarce.Vocabulary teaching traditionally tended to focus on individual words (Schmitt, 2010) and consequently, vocabulary learning studies also focused on examining the best approaches to teach and learn single words. However, vocabulary instruction research has recently started to examine the acquisition of lexical items beyond the single word, and collocation has been one of the types of multi-word units examined. Mackin (1978) already noted that learners of English could learn collocations from repeated exposures in reading or by explicit teaching in the classroom. Recent studies on the learning of collocations have indeed been conducted around these two main approaches: explicit/intentional learning and incidental learning. Intentional learning is the learning that occurs when there is a particular intention to learn a set of items (Nation, 2001), whereas incidental vocabulary learning is the learning that occurs when learners' attention is focused on understanding messages without a particular intention to learn a set of words (Ellis, 1999). The majority of empirical studies on the acquisition of collocations have examined intentional learning through explicit teaching/learning (e.g. Boers, Deme...

show abstract

mentioning

confidence: 67%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Learning L2 collocations incidentally from reading

Pellicer‐Sánchez

2015

Language Teaching Research

136

113

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…A number of studies have compared L2 learners' rate of acquisition of MWEs under various reading conditions (Pellicer-Sánchez, 2015;Webb, Newton, & Chang, 2013), including reading where target MWEs are typographically enhanced (Boers, Demecheleer, He, Deconinck, Stengers, & Eyckmans, 2016;Sonbul & Schmitt, 2013;Szudarski & Carter, 2014) and/or glossed (Bishop, 2004;Peters, 2009Peters, , 2012. Separate to this strand of research into reading-based MWE acquisition, some studies have examined factors that influence the effectiveness of deliberate MWEfocused instruction and learning (e.g., Alali & Schmitt, 2012;Boers, Eyckmans, & Stengers, 2007;Boers, Dang, & Strong, 2016;Eyckmans, Boers, & Lindstromberg, 2016;Laufer, 2010;Laufer & Girsai, 2008;Peters, 2016;Szudarski & Conklin, 2014;Webb & Kagimoto, 2011).…”

Section: "Mining" Input For Multiword Expressions To Fuel An Output Taskmentioning

confidence: 99%

Re-telling a story in a second language: How well do adult learners mine an input text for multiword expressions?

Hoang

Boers

2016

SSLLT

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Adult second language (L2) learners have often been found to produce discourse that manifests limited and non-native-like use of multiword expressions. One explanation for this is that adult L2 learners are relatively unsuccessful (in the absence of pedagogic intervention) at transferring multiword expressions from input texts to their own output resources. The present article reports an exploratory study where ESL learners were asked to re-tell a short story which they had read and listened to twice. The learners' re-tells were subsequently examined for the extent to which they recycled multiword expressions from the original story. To gauge the influence of the input text on these learners' renderings of the story, a control group was asked to tell the story based exclusively on a series of pictures. The results of the experiment suggest that multiword expressions were recycled from the input text to some extent, but this stayed very marginal in real terms, especially in comparison with the recycling of single words. Moreover, when learners did borrow expressions from the input text, their reproductions were often non-target-like.

show abstract

“…Asadi Amirabadi, Biria, and Sedaghat (2014) concluded that the combination of input flood and input enhancement were more effective than the techniques separately in long-term retention of conditional structures by Iranian EFL learners. Likewise, Szudarski and Carter (2014) reported that input flood and input enhancement together were effective in the acquisition of collocations at the level of form recall and form recognition by Polish EFL learners. Hamed Mahvelati and Mukundan (2012) investigated the relative effectiveness of explicit (consciousness-raising approach) versus implicit (input flood) collocation instruction with regard to learners' knowledge of both lexical and grammatical collocations.…”

Section: Review Of the Related Literaturementioning

confidence: 96%

Learning the English Passive Voice: A Comparative Study on Input Flooding and Input Enhancement Techniques

Rashtchi

Etebari

2018

ILR

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The purpose of this study was to compare the effect of input flooding and input enhancement on grammar knowledge of passive voice among Iranian EFL learners. Preliminary English Test (PET) was administered to 75 learners who were in six intact classes in a language institute in Tehran. Sixty female low-intermediate learners whose scores fell within the range of ±1 standard deviation were selected. These classes were then randomly assigned to receive two different treatments. Three classes in the experimental group one (Input Enhancement Group) were exposed to passive structures through input enhancement guidelines, and the three classes in the experimental group two (Input Flooding Group) received the same materials drawing on the guidelines in line with input flooding procedures. It should be noted that the 15 discarded participants were present in the classes, but their scores were not considered in the data analysis. The reason for selecting six classes was the limited number of students in each class. However, the classes were taught by the same teacher to control teacher variable. The results of the pretest showed that the groups were homogeneous regarding their knowledge about the English passive voice. After the treatment, the participants sat for the posttest, which was identical to the pretest to measure their gain of the passive structures. The results indicated that both input flooding and input enhancement significantly affected the grammar knowledge of the passive voice. However, there was no statistically significant difference between the effects of input flooding and input enhancement in improving the knowledge of passive voice of the participants.

show abstract

The role of input flood and input enhancement in EFL learners' acquisition of collocations

Cited by 118 publications

References 44 publications

Learning L2 collocations incidentally from reading

Learning L2 collocations incidentally from reading

Re-telling a story in a second language: How well do adult learners mine an input text for multiword expressions?

Learning the English Passive Voice: A Comparative Study on Input Flooding and Input Enhancement Techniques

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About