Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-q99xh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-25T20:46:40.808Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Reading between the words: The effect of literacy on second language lexical segmentation

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 May 2016

NAOMI HAVRON  and
INBAL ARNON
NAOMI HAVRON*
Affiliation:
Hebrew University of Jerusalem
INBAL ARNON
Affiliation:
Hebrew University of Jerusalem
*
ADDRESS FOR CORRESPONDENCE Naomi Havron, Department of Psychology, Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Mount Scopus, Jerusalem 91905, Israel. E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

There is evidence that the ability to segment an utterance into words improves with literacy, yet previous research makes it difficult to disentangle the effect of literacy from that of age or cognitive abilities. We tested the hypothesis that literacy increases lexical segmentation in a second language in a unique sample of adult illiterates learning to read in their second language, controlling for cognitive abilities and using a task that taps language processing rather than only metalinguistic awareness. Participants’ segmentation was correlated with first language reading at the beginning of an intensive literacy course for illiterate adults. At the end of the course, those learning to read for the first time benefited more in terms of their segmentation abilities. We discuss implications for models of second language learning.

Type
Articles
Information
Applied Psycholinguistics , Volume 38 , Issue 1 , January 2017 , pp. 127 - 153
Check for updates
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2016 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Abbot-Smith, K., & Tomasello, M. (2006). Exemplar-learning and schematization in a usage-based account of syntactic acquisition. Linguistic Review, 23, 275–290.Google Scholar
Ardila, A., Bertolucci, P. H., Braga, L. W., Castro-Caldas, A., Judd, T., Kosmidis, M. H., et al. (2010). Illiteracy: The neuropsychology of cognition without reading. Archives of Clinical Neuropsychol- ogy, 25, 689–712.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ardila, A., Rosselli, M., & Rosas, P. (1989). Neuropsychological assessment in illiterates: Visuospatial and memory abilities. Brain and Cognition, 11, 147–166.Google Scholar
Arnaud, P. J. L., & Savignon, S. J. (1997). Rare words, complex lexical units and the advanced learner. In Coady, J. & Huckin, T. (Eds.), Second language vocabulary acquisition (pp. 157–173). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Arnon, I. (2010). Starting big: The role of multiword phrases in language learning and use. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Stanford University.Google Scholar
Arnon, I., & Christiansen, M. H. (2014). Chunk-based language acquisition. In Brooks, P. J. & Kempe, V. (Eds.), Encyclopedia of language development (pp. 88–91). Thousand Oakes, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
Arnon, I., & Clark, E. V. (2011). Why brush your teeth is better than teeth—Children's word production is facilitated in familiar sentence-frames. Language Learning and Development, 7, 107–129.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Arnon, I., & Priva, U. C. (2013). More than words: The effect of multiword frequency and constituency on phonetic duration. Language and Speech, 56, 349–371.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Arnon, I., & Priva, U. C. (2014). Time and again: The changing effect of word and multiword frequency on phonetic duration for highly frequent sequences. Mental Lexicon, 9, 377–400.Google Scholar
Arnon, I., & Ramscar, M. (2012). Granularity and the acquisition of grammatical gender: How order-of-acquisition affects what gets learned. Cognition, 122, 292–305.Google Scholar
Arnon, I., & Snider, N. (2010). More than words: Frequency effects for multiword phrases. Journal of Memory and Language, 62, 67–82.Google Scholar
Baayen, R. H., Davidson, D. J., & Bates, D. M. (2008). Mixed-effects modeling with crossed random effects for subjects and items. Journal of Memory and Language, 59, 390–412.Google Scholar
Bannard, C., & Matthews, D. (2008). Stored word sequences in language learning: The effect of familiarity on children's repetition of four-word combinations. Psychological Science, 19, 241–248.Google Scholar
Bassetti, B. (2007). Bilingualism, biliteracy and metalinguistic awareness: Word awareness in English and Japanese users of Chinese as a second language. Birkbeck Studies in Applied Linguistics, 2, 1–21.Google Scholar
Bates, D., Maechler, M., Bolker, B., & Walker, S. (2015). lme4: Linear mixed-effects models using Eigen and S4. R package version 1.1-8 [Computer software]. Retrieved from http://CRAN.R-project.org/package=lme4 Google Scholar
Bialystok, E. (1986). Factors in the growth of linguistic awareness. Child Development, 15, 498–510.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bialystok, E., Craik, F. I., Green, D. W., & Gollan, T. H. (2009). Bilingual minds. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 10, 89–129.Google Scholar
Bod, R. (2006). Exemplar-based syntax: How to get productivity from examples. Linguistic Review, 23, 291–320.Google Scholar
Boers, F., & Lindstromberg, S. (2012). Experimental and intervention studies on formulaic sequences in a second language. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 32, 83–110.Google Scholar
Castro-Caldas, A., Petersson, K. M., Reis, A., Stone-Elander, S., & Ingvar, M. (1998). The illiterate brain: Learning to read and write during childhood influences the functional organization of the adult brain. Brain, 121, 1053–1063.Google Scholar
Chaney, C. (1989). I pledge a legiance tothe flag: Three studies in word segmentation. Applied Psycholinguistics, 10, 261–281.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cheung, H., & Chen, H. C. (2004). Early orthographic experience modifies both phonological awareness and on-line speech processing. Language and Cognitive Processes, 19, 1–28.Google Scholar
Christensen, R. H. B. (2015). Ordinal-regression models for ordinal data. R package version 2015.6-28 [Computer software]. Retrieved from http://www.cran.r-project.org/package=ordinal/ Google Scholar
Correa, J., & Dockrell, J. E. (2007). Unconventional word segmentation in Brazilian children's early text production. Reading and Writing, 20, 815–831.Google Scholar
DeKeyser, R. M. (2000). The robustness of critical period effects in second language acquisition. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 22, 499–533.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
DeKeyser, R. M., Alfi-Shabtay, I., & Ravid, D. (2010). Cross-linguistic evidence for the nature of age effects in second language acquisition. Applied Psycholinguistics, 31, 413–438.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Deutsch, A., Frost, R., & Forster, K. I. (1998). Verbs and nouns are organized and accessed differently in the mental lexicon: Evidence from Hebrew. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 24, 1238–1255.Google Scholar
Elman, J. L. (1993). Learning and development in neural networks: The importance of starting small. Cognition, 48, 71–99.Google Scholar
Frost, R., Forster, K. I., & Deutsch, A. (1997). What can we learn from the morphology of Hebrew? A masked-priming investigation of morphological representation. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 23, 829.Google ScholarPubMed
Gollan, T. H., Weissberger, G. H., Runnqvist, E., Montoya, R. I., & Cera, C. M. (2012). Self-ratings of spoken language dominance: A Multilingual Naming Test (MINT) and preliminary norms for young and aging Spanish–English bilinguals. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 15, 594–615.Google Scholar
Gombert, J. E. (1994). How do illiterate adults react to metalinguistic training? Annals of Dyslexia, 44, 250–269.Google Scholar
Hoff, E. (2006). How social contexts support and shape language development. Developmental Review, 26, 55–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Holden, M. H., & MacGinitie, W. H. (1972). Children's conceptions of word boundaries in speech and print. Journal of Educational Psychology, 63, 551.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Huttenlocher, J. (1964). Children's language: Word–phrase relationship. Science, 143, 264–265.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Israeli Central Bureau of Statistics. (2014). Statistical abstract of Israel (chap. 8). Jerusalem: Author.Google Scholar
Itai, A., & Wintner, S. (2008). Language resources for Hebrew. Language Resources and Evaluation, 42, 75–98.Google Scholar
Jaeger, T. F. (2008). Categorical data analysis: Away from ANOVAs (transformation or not) and towards logit mixed models. Journal of Memory and Language, 59, 434–446.Google Scholar
Jarvis, S. (2009). Lexical transfer. Bilingual Mental Lexicon: Interdisciplinary Approaches, 70, 99.Google Scholar
Johnson, J. S., & Newport, E. L. (1989). Critical period effects in second language learning: The influence of maturational state on the acquisition of English as a second language. Cognitive Psychology, 21, 60–99.Google Scholar
Jurafsky, D., Bell, A., Gregory, M., & Raymond, W. D. (2001). Probabilistic relations between words: Evidence from reduction in lexical production. Typological Studies in Language, 45, 229–254.Google Scholar
Kapatsinski, V., & Radicke, J. (2009). Frequency and the emergence of prefabs: Evidence from monitoring. Formulaic Language, 2, 499–520.Google Scholar
Karmiloff-Smith, A., Grant, J., Sims, K., Jones, M. C., & Cuckle, P. (1996). Rethinking metalinguistic awareness: Representing and accessing knowledge about what counts as a word. Cognition, 58, 197–219.Google Scholar
Kavé, G. (2005). Standardization and norms for a Hebrew naming test. Brain and Language, 92, 204–211.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kosmidis, M. H., Tsapkini, K., & Folia, V. (2006). Lexical processing in illiteracy: Effect of literacy or education? Cortex, 42, 1021–1027.Google Scholar
Kosmidis, M. H., Zafiri, M., & Politimou, N. (2011). Literacy versus formal schooling: Influence on working memory. Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology, 26, 575–582.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kurvers, J. (2015). Emerging literacy in adult second-language learners: A synthesis of research findings in the Netherlands. Writing Systems Research, 7, 1–21.Google Scholar
Kurvers, J., & Uri, H. (2006). Metalexical awareness: Development, methodology or written language? A cross-linguistic comparison. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 35, 353–367.Google Scholar
Kurvers, J., van Hout, R., & Vallen, T. (2009). Print awareness of adult illiterates: A comparison with young pre-readers and low-educated adult readers. Reading and Writing, 22, 863–887.Google Scholar
Levin, I., Ravid, D., & Rapaport, S. (1999). Developing morphological awareness and learning to write: A two-way street. In Nunes, T. (Ed.), Learning to read: An integrated view from research and practice (pp. 77–104). Amsterdam: Springer.Google Scholar
Lieven, E. V., Pine, J. M., & Barnes, H. D. (1992). Individual differences in early vocabulary development: Redefining the referential–expressive distinction. Journal of Child Language, 19, 287–310.Google Scholar
Lieven, E. V., Salomo, D., & Tomasello, M. (2009). Two-year-old children's production of multiword utterances: A usage-based analysis. Cognitive Linguistics, 20, 481–507.Google Scholar
Long, M. H. (1990). Maturational constraints on language development. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 12, 251–285.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lu, C. H., & Proctor, R. W. (1995). The influence of irrelevant location information on performance: A review of the Simon and spatial Stroop effects. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 2, 174–207.Google Scholar
MacCallum, R. C., Zhang, S., Preacher, K. J., & Rucker, D. D. (2002). On the practice of dichotomization of quantitative variables. Psychological Methods, 7, 19.Google Scholar
Marian, V., Blumenfeld, H. K., & Kaushanskaya, M. (2007). The Language Experience and Proficiency Questionnaire (LEAP-Q): Assessing language profiles in bilinguals and multilinguals. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 50, 940–967.Google Scholar
McCauley, S. M., & Christiansen, M. H. (2011). Learning simple statistics for language comprehension and production: The CAPPUCCINO model. Paper presented at the 33rd Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society, Boston.Google Scholar
McCauley, S. M., & Christiansen, M. H. (2014). Language learning as language use: A computational model of children's language comprehension and production. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Meisel, J. M. (2009). Second language acquisition in early childhood. Zeitschrift Für Sprachwissenschaft, 28, 5–34.Google Scholar
Meunier, F. (2012). Formulaic language and language teaching. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 32, 111–129.Google Scholar
Miller, K., Frosch, C., Kelly, M. K., & Zhang, H. (2001). What words look like: Preschool children's understanding of orthographic regularities in Chinese and English. Unpublished manuscript.Google Scholar
Mor, B. (2012). The combined effect of bilingualism and ADHD on inhibitory functioning. Unpublished MA dissertation, University of Haifa.Google Scholar
Morais, J., Bertelson, P., Cary, L., & Alegría, J. (1986). Literacy training and speech segmentation. Cognition, 24, 45–64.Google Scholar
Newport, E. L. (1990). Maturational constraints on language learning. Cognitive Science, 14, 11–28.Google Scholar
Olivers, C. N. L., Huettig, F., Singh, J. P., & Mishra, R. K. (2014). The influence of literacy on visual search. Visual Cognition, 22, 74–101.Google Scholar
Olson, D. R. (1996). The world on paper: The conceptual and cognitive implications of writing and reading. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Onderdelinden, L., van der Craats, I., & Kurvers, J. (2009). Word concept of illiterates and low-literates: Worlds apart? LOT Occasional Series, 15, 35–48.Google Scholar
Ostrosky-Solís, F., & Lozano, A. (2006). Digit span: Effect of education and culture. International Journal of Psychology, 41, 333–341.Google Scholar
Petersson, K. M., Reis, A., & Ingvar, M. (2001). Cognitive processing in literate and illiterate subjects: A review of some recent behavioral and functional neuroimaging data. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 42, 251–267.Google Scholar
Pettitt, N. M., & Tarone, E. (2015). Following Roba: What happens when a low-educated adult immigrant learns to read. Writing Systems Research, 7, 20–38.Google Scholar
Ravid, D. (2001). Learning to spell in Hebrew: Phonological and morphological factors. Reading and Writing, 14, 459–485.Google Scholar
Ravid, D., & Malenky, A. (2001). Awareness of linear and nonlinear morphology in Hebrew: A developmental study. First Language, 21, 25–56.Google Scholar
Ravid, D., & Tolchinsky, L. (2002). Investigating literacy development and language acquisition. Reply to commentaries on “Developing linguistic literacy: A comprehensive model.” Journal of Child Language, 29, 489–494.Google Scholar
Robinson, P. (2005). Cognitive abilities, chunk-strength, and frequency effects in implicit artificial grammar and incidental L2 learning: Replications of Reber, Walkenfeld, and Hernstadt (1991) and Knowlton and Squire (1996) and their relevance for SLA. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 27, 235–268.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schneider, W., Eschman, A., & Zuccolotto, A. (2012). E-Prime user's guide. Pittsburgh, PA: Psychology Software Tools.Google Scholar
Share, D. L., & Levin, I. (1999). Learning to read and write in Hebrew. In Harris, M. & Hatano, G. (Eds.), Learning to read and write: A cross-linguistic perspective (pp. 89–111). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Siegelman, N., & Arnon, I. (2015). The advantage of starting big: Learning from unsegmented input facilitates mastery of grammatical gender in an artificial language. Journal of Memory and Language, 85, 60–75.Google Scholar
Siyanova, A., & Schmitt, N. (2008). L2 learner production and processing of collocation: A multi-study perspective. Canadian Modern Language Review/La Revue canadienne des langues vivantes, 64, 429–458.Google Scholar
Siyanova-Chanturia, A., Conklin, K., & van Heuven, W. J. (2011). Seeing a phrase “time and again” matters: The role of phrasal frequency in the processing of multiword sequences. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 37, 776.Google Scholar
Taguchi, N. (2007). Chunk learning and the development of spoken discourse in a Japanese as a foreign language classroom. Language Teaching Research, 11, 433–457.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tarone, E., & Bigelow, M. (2005). Impact of literacy on oral language processing: Implications for second language acquisition research. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 25, 77–97.Google Scholar
Tarone, E., Bigelow, M., & Hansen, K. (2007). The impact of alphabetic print literacy level on oral second language acquisition. In Faux, N. (Ed.), Low-educated second language and literacy acquisition: Research, policy, and practice. Proceedings of the second annual forum of the Literacy Institute (pp. 99–122). Richmond, VA: Virginia Commonwealth University, Literacy Institute.Google Scholar
Tremblay, A., Derwing, B., Libben, G., & Westbury, C. (2011). Processing advantages of lexical bundles: Evidence from self-paced reading and sentence recall tasks. Language Learning, 61, 569–613.Google Scholar
Tsai, C.-H., McConkie, G. W., & Zheng, X. J. (1998). Lexical parsing by Chinese readers. Poster presented at the Advanced Study Institute on Advances in Theoretical Issues and Cognitive Neuroscience Research of the Chinese Language, University of Hong Kong. Retrieved from http://research.chtsai.org/papers/cht_asi.html Google Scholar
Vainikka, A., & Young-Scholten, M. (2007). The role of literacy in the development of L2 morphosyntax from an Organic Grammar perspective. In Low-educated second language and literacy acquisition: Research, policy, and practice: Proceedings of the second annual forum of the Literacy Institute (pp. 123–148). Richmond, VA: Virginia Commonwealth University, Literacy Institute.Google Scholar
Valian, V., & Levitt, A. (1996). Prosody and adults’ learning of syntactic structure. Journal of Memory and Language, 35, 497–516.Google Scholar
van der Craats, I. (2011). A LESLLA corpus: L1 obstacles in the learning of L2 morphosyntax. In Schöneberger, C., van de Craats, I., & Kurvers, J. (Eds.), Low-educated adult second language and literacy acquisition. Proceedings of the 6th symposium (pp. 33–48). Nijmegen, Netherlands: Centre for Language Studies.Google Scholar
Vanlancker-Sidits, D. (2003). Auditory recognition of idioms by native and nonnative speakers of English: It takes one to know one. Applied Psycholinguistics, 24, 45–58.Google Scholar
Veldhuis, D. (2012). Effects of literacy and frequency of occurrence on the offline segmentation and online processing of language. Paper presented at the Anéla 2012 Applied Linguistics Conference.Google Scholar
Veldhuis, D., & Kurvers, J. (2012). Offline segmentation and online language processing units: The influence of literacy. Written Language & Literacy, 15, 165–184.Google Scholar
Wechsler, D. (2008). Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale—Fourth Edition (WAIS–IV). San Antonio, TX: NCS Pearson.Google Scholar
Wong-Fillmore, L. (1991). Second language learning in children: A model of language learning in social context. In Bialystok, E. (Ed.), Language processing by bilingual children (pp. 49–69). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Wood, D. (2002). Formulaic language in acquisition and production: Implications for teaching. TESL Canada Journal, 20, 1–15.Google Scholar
Wood, D. (2009). Effects of focused instruction of formulaic sequences on fluent expression in second language narratives: A case study. Canadian Journal of Applied Linguistics, 12, 39–58.Google Scholar
Wray, A. (1999). Formulaic language in learners and native speakers. Language Teaching, 32, 213–231.Google Scholar
Wray, A. (2000). Formulaic sequences in second language teaching: Principle and practice. Applied Linguistics, 21, 463–489.Google Scholar
Wray, A. (2002). Formulaic language and the lexicon. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Wray, A. (2009). Future directions in formulaic language research. Journal of Foreign Languages, 32, 2–17.Google Scholar
Wray, A. (2013). Formulaic language. Language Teaching, 46, 316–334.Google Scholar
Wray, A., & Fitzpatrick, T. (2010). Pushing speakers to the extreme: The artificial use of prefabricated material in conversation. Innovation in Language Learning and Teaching, 4, 37–51.Google Scholar
Xhafaj, D., & Mota, M. B. (2011). Can metalinguistic awareness explain a connection between L1 literacy and L2 proficiency level in literate adults? Ilha do Desterro, 60, 189–246.Google Scholar