首页> 外文学位 >Processing of lexical and morphological cues in a study abroad context.
【24h】

Processing of lexical and morphological cues in a study abroad context.

机译:在国外研究中处理词汇和形态线索。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例

摘要

Acquiring a second language as an adult can be a difficult task, and much research has been conducted to explain the obstacles associated with adult second language acquisition (SLA). Some research has suggested biological (see Birdsong, 2006; DeKeyser & Larsen-Hall, 2005, for a summary), external (Lantolf, 2000; Long, 1996; Swain, 2000), and internal (VanPatten, 2004; Ellis, 2007) factors to account for these difficulties. The Associative-Cognitive theory (Ellis, 2007) suggests that there is no default mechanism determining what cues are processed, and that it is both linguistic characteristics (cue salience, reliability and redundancy) and language experience (early learned cues in the L1 and L2 affect the learning of later learned cues) that guide the processing of L2 cues. There is mounting evidence that native speakers of a morphologically poor language such as English learning a morphologically richer language such as Spanish or Italian as adults use lexical cues (adverbs) before morphological cues (verbs) when both cues provide information about temporal reference within a sentence (Bardovi-Harlig, 1992; Cadierno, Glass, Lee, & VanPatten, 1991; Lee, 1999, 2002; Jiang, 2004; Leeser, 2004; Musumeci, 1989; Rossomondo, 2003); Sagarra & Ellis, personal communication; VanPatten, 1996, 2004). Similarly, native speakers of a morphologically rich language learning another morphologically rich language show preference for morpholoical over lexical cues (Ellis & Sagarra, submitted; Jiang, Novokshanova, Masuda, & Wang, 2008; Liu, Bates, & Li, 1992). In addition to these linguistic and language experience factors, instructors' overuse of lexical items (Dracos, 2009) and underuse of certain morphological forms (Goodall, 2008) poses an additional obstacle for classroom learners' processing of redundant cues.;Previous research suggests that classroom learners with higher working memory capacity are better able to process redundant morhological cues, even at early stages of acquisition (Leeser, 2007; Sagarra, 2007; Sagarra & Ellis, personal communication), than those with lower working memory capacity. Immersion experience and inhibitory control are two other factors that can help classroom learners focus on morphological cues because naturalistic settings expose learners to great amounts of morphological cues and help them suppress their L1 (Linck, Kroll, & Sunderman, 2009). While there is no direct evidence about what role immersion experience and inhibitory control play in the L2 processing of such cues, studies indicate that in a study abroad setting, better working memory (Lafford, 2006; Tokowicz, Michael, & Kroll, 2004; Sunderman & Kroll, 2009) and inhibitory control (Linck, Hoshino, & Kroll, 2008; Linck, Kroll, & Sunderman, 2009) facilitate the L2 processing of linguistic features, suggesting that an immersion experience, working memory capacity, and inhibitory control can also assist in the L2 processing of morphological cues. The goal of this dissertation is to investigate the effects of these three factors on how Anglophone learners of Spanish process temporal adverbs and verbs to assign temporal reference. Heeding these studies, the predictions are that immersion experience, working memory capacity, and inhibitory control will help classroom learners to rely on morphological cues.;To test these predictions, English-Spanish adult classroom learners with (n = 36) and without (n = 24) an immersion experience completed 6 screening tasks (a language background questionnaire, a language contact profile (study abroad only), a test of Spanish proficiency, proficiency self-ratings, a verb recognition test, and tense recognition test), an eyetracking task, a working memory test, and an inhibitory control test. The eyetracking task followed a counterbalanced within-subjects design in which participants read 146 sentences in Spanish at their own pace (6 practice, 40 experimental, 100 fillers) and answered a comprehension question after each sentence. All experimental sentences contained a past tense adverb (lexical cue), but half had past tense verbs (morphological cue) (half adverb-verb, half verb-adverb) and half had present tense verbs (half adverb-verb, half verb-adverb). The working memory test consisted of a modified version of Water's & Caplan's (1996b) reading span test and asked participants to read a set of sentences, judge their plausibility, and remember the last word of each sentence. Finally, inhibitory control was measured with the Simon test, which required participants to ignore the position of a target stimulus in order to respond only to its color.;The results for the screening tests revealed that the sample pool was homogeneous in terms of L2 proficiency and knowledge of the target verbs and tenses. The findings of the eyetracking task indicated that classroom learners without an immersion experience use lexical cues to reslve a tense conflict, whereas those with an immersion experience show a decreased reliance on lexical cues accompanied by an increased reliance on morphological cues. These data suggest that an immersion experience helps classroom learners acquire native-like processing patterns. This relates to the Associative-Cognitive theory by showing that both linguistic and language experience based factors affect SLA. The results of the reading span test revealed that working memory capacity modulates the processing of morphological cues in study abroad learners but not in non-study abroad learners. When in the study abroad setting, the learners with higher working memory capacity are able to focus on the morphological cues when lexical cues are absent. Finally, the results of the Simon test showed that inhibitory control was not a determinant factor in the processing of lexical or morphological cues for any of the groups. This may be attributed to the data being collected after the study abroad group learners had returned from their immersion experience. Taken as a whole, the findings of this dissertation suggest that immersion experience and the combination of immersion experience and working memory help adult classroom learners attend to morphological cues in the input.
机译:以成年人的身份学习第二语言可能是一项艰巨的任务,并且已经进行了大量研究来解释与成人第二语言习得(SLA)相关的障碍。一些研究表明生物学的(见Birdsong,2006; DeKeyser和Larsen-Hall,2005,作总结),外部的(Lantolf,2000; Long,1996; Swain,2000)和内部的(VanPatten,2004; Ellis,2007)。这些困难的因素。联想认知理论(Ellis,2007年)表明,没有默认机制可以确定要处理的线索,它既是语言特征(线索显着性,可靠性和冗余度)又是语言经验(L1和L2中的早期学习线索)会影响以后学习的线索的学习),从而指导L2线索的处理。越来越多的证据表明,成年人在英语中学习诸如英语或西班牙语之类的语言上较丰富的语言时,英语成人会使用词法提示(副词),而这两种提示都提供了句子中与时态参照有关的信息(Bardovi-Harlig,1992; Cadierno,Glass,Lee,&VanPatten,1991; Lee,1999,2002; Jiang,2004; Leeser,2004; Musumeci,1989; Rossomondo,2003); Sagarra&Ellis,个人交流; VanPatten,1996,2004)。同样,母语丰富的语言学习者又学习了另一种形态丰富的语言,显示他们偏爱词法提示而不是词汇提示(Ellis和Sagarra,已提交; Jiang,Novokshanova,Masuda,和Wang,2008; Liu,Bates,和Li,1992)。除了这些语言和语言体验因素外,教师过度使用词汇项目(Dracos,2009年)和某些形态形式的使用不足(Goodall,2008年)也为课堂学习者处理多余线索提供了额外的障碍。具有较低工作记忆能力的课堂学习者比那些具有较低工作记忆能力的学习者,即使在获取的早期阶段,也能够更好地处理多余的病态线索(Leeser,2007; Sagarra,2007; Sagarra&Ellis,个人交流)。浸入体验和抑制控制是可以帮助课堂学习者专注于形态学线索的另外两个因素,因为自然主义的环境使学习者暴露于大量的形态学线索并帮助他们抑制他们的L1(Linck,Kroll,&Sunderman,2009)。尽管没有直接证据表明沉浸体验和抑制控制在此类线索的二语处理中起什么作用,但研究表明,在国外的研究环境中,更好的工作记忆(Lafford,2006; Tokowicz,Michael,&Kroll,2004; Sunderman (&Kroll,2009)和抑制控制(Linck,Hoshino,&Kroll,2008; Linck,Kroll,&Sunderman,2009)促进了语言特征的L2处理,这表明沉浸体验,工作记忆能力和抑制控制也可以协助L2处理形态学线索。本文的目的是研究这三个因素对英语学习者如何处理时间副词和动词来分配时间指称的影响。根据这些研究,预测是沉浸式体验,工作记忆能力和抑制控制将帮助课堂学习者依靠形态学线索。为了测试这些预测,英语-西班牙语成人课堂学习者有(n = 36)和没有(n = 36) = 24)沉浸式体验完成了6项筛查任务(语言背景问卷,语言联系资料(仅出国学习),西班牙语水平测试,水平自我评估,动词识别测试和时态识别测试),眼动追踪任务,工作记忆力测试和抑制性对照测试。眼神追踪任务遵循主题内部平衡设计,参与者以自己的步调阅读146个西班牙语句子(6个练习,40个实验性,100个填充词),并在每个句子后回答一个理解性问题。所有实验句子都包含一个过去式副词(词汇提示),但是一半具有过去式动词(形态学提示)(一半副词-动词,一半动词-副词),一半则具有现在时动词(一半副词-动词,一半动词-副词) )。工作记忆测试由沃特和卡普兰(Water's&Caplan)(1996b)阅读跨度测试的修改版组成,要求参与者阅读一组句子,判断其合理性,并记住每个句子的最后一个单词。最后,用西蒙(Simon)测试测量抑制性对照,该测试要求参与者忽略目标刺激的位置以仅对其颜色做出反应;筛选测试的结果表明,样品池在L2水平方面是均匀的并了解目标动词和时态。眼动追踪任务的发现表明,没有沉浸式体验的课堂学习者会使用词汇提示来解决紧张的冲突,而具有沉浸式体验的人则表现出对词汇线索的依赖减少,而对形态线索的依赖性增加。这些数据表明,沉浸式体验可以帮助课堂学习者获得类似母语的处理模式。通过显示基于语言和语言经验的因素都会影响SLA,这与联想认知理论有关。阅读跨度测试的结果表明,工作记忆能力调节出国留学的学习者对形态学线索的处理,而不是留学以外的学习者的学习。在出国留学的环境中,具有较高工作记忆能力的学习者可以在没有词汇提示的情况下专注于形态提示。最后,西蒙测试的结果表明,抑制控制不是任何组的词汇或形态学线索处理的决定因素。这可能归因于出国留学小组学习者从沉浸式体验返回之后收集的数据。总体而言,本文的研究结果表明,沉浸式体验以及沉浸式体验与工作记忆的结合有助于成人课堂学习者从输入中获得形态学提示。

著录项

  • 作者

    LaBrozzi, Ryan M.;

  • 作者单位

    The Pennsylvania State University.;

  • 授予单位 The Pennsylvania State University.;
  • 学科 Language Linguistics.;Language Modern.
  • 学位 Ph.D.
  • 年度 2009
  • 页码 238 p.
  • 总页数 238
  • 原文格式 PDF
  • 正文语种 eng
  • 中图分类
  • 关键词

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号