Using Explicit Instruction About L1 to Reduce Crosslinguistic Effects in L2 Grammar Learning: Evidence From Oral Production in L2 French

Abstract

This study advances previous research about the effects of explicit instruction on second language (L2) development by examining learners’ use of verbal morphology following different types of explicit information (EI) and comprehension practice. We investigated the extent to which additional EI about the first language (L1) can reduce the effects of crosslinguistic influence in L2 oral production. Sixty‐nine English‐speaking learners of L2 French undertook either: (a) a ‘core’ treatment of EI about the L2 with L2 comprehension practice, (b) the same L2 core + L1 comprehension practice, (c) the same L2 core + L1 comprehension practice + EI about L1, or (d) outcome tests only. Results showed that providing additional EI about the L1 benefitted the accuracy of oral production immediately after the instruction and then 6 weeks later. These results suggest that tailoring instruction, specifically the nature of the EI, to the nature of the learning problem can facilitate L2 learning. In particular, EI about L1 can facilitate L2 learning by increasing learners’ awareness of similarities and differences in how L1 and L2 express the same meanings.

Investigating Distribution of Practice Effects for the Learning of Foreign Language Verb Morphology in the Young Learner Classroom

“…Referential activities (a component of Processing Instruction; VanPatten, ) are input‐based tasks that require learners to notice a feature and connect it with a meaning or function to complete the activity. Numerous studies have demonstrated the effectiveness of such activities for L2 morphosyntax (e.g., DeKeyser & Botana, ; Kasprowicz & Marsden, ; Marsden & Chen, ; Shintani, ), including Marsden (), who also investigated the teaching of French inflectional verb morphology for person, number, and tense among FL learners aged 13–14 years; and McManus and Marsden (, , , ), who investigated the learning of French imparfait . Referential activities make the target grammatical feature task‐essential by removing other cues that learners could rely on (e.g., subject pronouns indicating person and number; temporal adverbs indicating tense).…”

“…Each mini-game utilized form-meaning mapping activities consisting of brief (approximately 2 minute) explicit information followed by referential reading and listening activities. Referential Marsden & Chen, 2011;Shintani, 2015), including Marsden (2006), who also investigated the teaching of French inflectional verb morphology for person, number, and tense among FL learners aged 13-14 years; and Mc-Manus and Marsden (2017Marsden ( , 2019aMarsden ( , 2019b, who investigated the learning of French imparfait. Referential activities make the target grammatical feature task-essential by removing other cues that learners could rely on (e.g., subject pronouns indicating person and number; temporal adverbs indicating tense).…”

“…Evidence suggests that practice that draws attention to linguistic features can be particularly useful for learning forms that have low salience, low communicative value, or complex relationships between first (L1) and second (L2) language (e.g., Doughty & Williams, 1998;R. Ellis, 2006;Kasprowicz & Marsden, 2018;Marsden, 2006;Marsden & Chen, 2011;McManus & Marsden, 2017, 2018, 2019a, 2019bVanPatten, 2015). However, whilst there has been extensive focus on the nature of practice required to facilitate L2 learning, an important remaining question concerns the amount and frequency of practice that is needed to maximize its effectiveness (DeKeyser, 2015;Rogers, 2017).…”

“…ENGAGING IN EXTENSIVE, REPEATED, meaningful practice is an essential component of learning, facilitating the transition from initial reliance on declarative knowledge (e.g., explicit knowledge of a grammatical rule) to proceduralized and eventually automatized knowledge that can be accessed more efficiently under time pressured contexts such as spoken interaction (DeKeyser, , ; Lightbown, ; Segalowitz, ). Evidence suggests that practice that draws attention to linguistic features can be particularly useful for learning forms that have low salience, low communicative value, or complex relationships between first (L1) and second (L2) language (e.g., Doughty & Williams, ; R. Ellis, ; Kasprowicz & Marsden, ; Marsden, ; Marsden & Chen, ; McManus & Marsden, , , , ; VanPatten, ). However, whilst there has been extensive focus on the nature of practice required to facilitate L2 learning, an important remaining question concerns the amount and frequency of practice that is needed to maximize its effectiveness (DeKeyser, ; Rogers, ).…”

Väljamõeldud morfoloogiareegli omandamine 8-aastastel lastel

“…Selle kohta, kuidas mõjutab eksplitsiitne juhendamine keeleõppimist, on saadud üsna vastakaid tulemusi. Mõne uuringu järgi pakub eksplitsiitsete juhiste esitamine õppijaile vähe, kui üldse mingeid eeliseid (vt nt Sanz, Morgan-Short 2004), teiste uuringute tulemustest on ilmnenud, et eksplitsiitne juhendamine aitab mingile kindlale keeleüksusele või tunnusele rohkem tähelepanu tõmmata ja seega suurendab õppimise tõhusust (McManus, Marsden 2019). Näiteks aitasid eksplitsiitsed juhised Fermani katses 8-aastastel lastel reegli paremini omandada, samuti parandas tulemusi saadud tagasiside.…”