Cover not available

Article published In: Review of Cognitive Linguistics
Vol. 22:1 (2024) ► pp.36–69

Get fulltext from our e-platform
JBE logo with link
PDF logo with download linkDownload PDF
EPUB logo with download linkDownload EPUB
authorization required

What foreign language learners make of grammatical descriptions depends on description type, proficiency, and context

 | Southwest Jiaotong University
Published online: 30 May 2023
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/rcl.00149.jac
Abstract
Most usage-based research emphasizes the importance of implicit, input-driven learning in naturalistic environments, but recent studies have adopted usage-based grammatical descriptions for instructed learning in classrooms. These descriptions are intended to draw learners’ deliberate attention to relevant usage patterns in the input and thereby support intake. Most of these studies compare usage-based descriptions to other types of descriptions for their efficiency, while little attention has been paid to the ways in which learners understand and apply such descriptions. This study examines what foreign language learners understand of usage-based grammatical descriptions of target structures. In an experimental forced choice task, Chinese learners of German received usage-based descriptions of case structures and then classified target instances in variable contexts. A multivariate regression analysis indicated that choices were influenced by interactions of the type of description with participants’ target-language proficiency and the semantic and lexical target contexts. This is discussed in terms of noticing and category formation. This study argues that learners are able to use grammatical descriptions as some kind of auxiliary model for recognizing and categorizing target patterns. The descriptions thus make learners aware of the mechanisms underlying implicit learning and help them exploit these mechanisms for explicit learning.
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Instructed and input-driven language learning and their interaction
  • 3.The current study
    • 3.1Method
      • Target structures
      • Participants
      • Material and procedure
      • Predictions
      • Statistical analysis
    • 3.2Results
  • 4.Discussion
  • 5.Conclusion
  • Note
  • References
References (92)
References
Achard, M. (2004). Grammatical instruction in the natural approach: A cognitive grammar view. In M. Achard & S. Niemeier (Eds.), Cognitive Linguistics, second language acquisition, and foreign language teaching (pp. 165–194). Berlin: De Gruyter. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Achard, M., & Niemeier, S. (2004). Cognitive Linguistics, second language acquisition, and foreign language teaching. Berlin: De Gruyter. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Baten, K. (2008). Der Regelkomplex der Wechselpräpositionen mit Blick auf den DaF-Unterricht. Deutsch als Fremdsprache, 45(1), 22–26. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bates, D., Mächler, M., Bolker, B., & Walker, S. (2015). Fitting linear mixed-effects models using Lme4. Journal of Statistical Software, 67(1), 1–48. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Boers, F. (2004). Expanding learners vocabulary through metaphor awareness: What expansion, what learners, what vocabulary? In M. Achard & S. Niemeier (Eds.), Cognitive Linguistics, second language acquisition, and foreign language teaching (pp. 211–232). Berlin: De Gruyter. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bybee, J. (2010). Language, usage and cognition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2013). Usage-based theory and exemplar representations of constructions. In T. Hoffman & G. Trousdale (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of Construction Grammar (pp. 49–69). New York, NY: Oxford University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bybee, J., & Hopper, P. (Eds.). (2001). Frequency and the emergence of linguistic structure. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Clark-Gareca, B., & Gui, M. (2018). Chinese and American EFL teachers’ beliefs about curricular and pedagogical practices: Cross-cultural similarities and differences. Language and Intercultural Communication, 19(2), 137–151. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cobb, T., & Boulton, A. (2015). Classroom applications of corpus analysis. In D. Biber & R. Reppen (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of English Corpus Linguistics (pp. 478–497). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
De Knop, S. (2008). Sociocultural conceptualizations: Schemas and metaphorical transfer as metalinguistic learning strategies for French learners of German. In M. Pütz & J. Neff-van Aertselaer (Eds.), Developing contrastive pragmatics: Interlanguage and cross-cultural perspectives (pp. 47–66). Berlin: De Gruyter. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2020). Expressions of motion events in German: An integrative constructionist approach for FLT. CogniTextes, 201. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
De Knop, S., & Dirven, R. (2008). Motion and location events in German, French and English: A typological, contrastive and pedagogical approach. In S. de Knop & R. Dirven (Eds.), Cognitive approaches to pedagogical grammar: A volume in honour of René Dirven (pp. 295–324). Berlin: De Gruyter. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
DeKeyser, R. M. (1997). Beyond explicit rule learning: Automatizing second language morphosyntax. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 19(2), 195–221. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2003). Implicit and explicit learning. In C. J. Doughty & M. H. Long (Eds.), The handbook of second language acquisition (pp. 313–347). Oxford: Blackwell. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2015). Skill acquisition theory. In B. VanPatten & J. Williams (Eds.), Theories in second language acquisition (2nd ed.) (pp. 94–112). New York, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Diessel, H. (2019). The grammar network: How linguistic structure is shaped by language use. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Diessel, H., & Hilpert, M. (2016). Frequency effects in grammar. In Oxford research encyclopedia of linguistics. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Dolgova, N., & Tyler, A. (2019). Applications of usage-based approaches to language teaching. In X. Gao (Ed.), Second handbook of English language teaching (pp. 940–961). Cham: Springer. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Doughty, C. J. (2003). Instructed SLA: Constraints, compensation, and enhancement. In C. J. Doughty & M. H. Long (Eds.), The handbook of second language acquisition (pp. 257–310). Malden, MA: Blackwell. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Draye, L. (2014). German two-way prepositions and related phenomena. In N. Delbecque, K. Lahousse & W. Van Langendonck (Eds.), Non-nuclear cases (pp. 95–126). Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ellis, N. C. (2005). At the Interface: Dynamic interactions of explicit and implicit language knowledge. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 27(2), 305–352. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2006). Selective attention and transfer phenomena in L2 acquisition: Contingency, cue competition, salience, interference, overshadowing, blocking, and perceptual learning. Applied Linguistics, 27(2), 164–194. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2015). Implicit and explicit language learning: Their dynamic interface and complexity. In P. Rebuschat (Ed.), Implicit and explicit learning of languague (pp. 3–23). Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ellis, N. C., & Ferreira-Junior, F. (2009a). Construction learning as a function of frequency, frequency distribution, and function. Modern Language Journal, 93(3), 370–386. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2009b). Constructions and their acquisition: Islands and the distinctiveness of their occupancy. Annual Review of Cognitive Linguistics, 7(1), 187–220. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ellis, N. C., Römer, U., & O’Donnell, M. B. (2016). Usage-based approaches to language acquisition and processing: Cognitive and corpus investigations of Construction Grammar. Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ellis, N. C., & Wulff, S. (2020). Usage-based approaches to L2 acquisition. In B. VanPatten, G. D. Keating & S. Wulff (Eds.), Theories in second language acquisition: An introduction (pp. 63–82). New York, NY: Routledge. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ellis, R. (2004). The definition and measurement of L2 explicit knowledge. Language Learning, 54(2), 227–275. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Erlam, R. (2020). Explicit knowledge and grammar explanation in second language instruction. In C. A. Chapelle (Ed.), The concise encyclopedia of Applied Linguistics (pp. 455–459). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley Blackwell. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Evers-Vermeul, J., & Tribushinina, E. (Eds.). (2017). Usage-based approaches to language acquisition and language teaching. Berlin: De Gruyter. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Funk, H., Kuhn, C., & Winzer-Kiontke, B. (2019). Studio 21: Das Deutschbuch: Deutsch als Fremdsprache A2. Berlin: Cornelsen.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Godfroid, A. (2021). Implicit and explicit learning and knowledge. In H. Mohebbi & C. Coombe (Eds.), Research questions in language education and Applied Linguistics: A reference guide (pp. 823–829). Cham: Springer. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Goldberg, A. E. (2006). Constructions at work: The nature of generalization in language. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Goo, J., Granena, G., Yilmaz, Y., & Novella, M. (2015). Implicit and explicit instruction in L2 learning: Norris & Ortega (2000) revisited and updated. In P. Rebuschat (Ed.), Implicit and explicit learning of languages (pp. 443–482). Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gries, S. Th. (2021). (Generalized Linear) Mixed-effects modeling: A learner corpus example. Language Learning, 71(3), 757–798. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Grotjahn, R. (Ed.). (2014). Der C-Test: Aktuelle Tendenzen. The C-Test: Current trends. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Han, Z., & Finneran, R. (2013). Re-engaging the interface debate: Strong, weak, none, or all? International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 24(3), 370–389. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hoey, M. (2005). Lexical priming: A new theory of words and language. New York, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hoffmann, T., & Trousdale, G. (2013). The Oxford handbook of Construction Grammar. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hu, G. (2002). Psychological constraints on the utility of metalinguistic knowledge in second language production. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 24(3), 347–386. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Jach, D. (2021). Revisiting German two-way prepositions: Towards a usage-based account of case. Zeitschrift Für Sprachwissenschaft, 40(2), 95–133. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2022). Korpus Einfaches Deutsch: Materialgrundlage für die daten-getriebene Lehre von Deutsch als fremder Bildungssprache auf niedrigem Sprachniveau. In Y. Li, F. Liu, & Z. Wang (Eds.), Didactica, Cultura, Lingua – Perspektiven des Deutschen (pp. 231–244). München: Iudicium.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Johns, T. (1991). Should you be persuaded: Two samples of data-driven learning materials. Empirical Language Research, 41, 1–16.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Johnson, K. (2008). Quantitative methods in linguistics. Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Johnson, M. (2018). The embodiment of language. In A. Newen, L. De Bruin & S. Gallagher (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of 4E cognition (pp. 622–640). Oxford: Oxford University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kim, H., Hwang, H., & Rah, Y. (2017). Young EFL students’ reliance on path-breaking verbs in the use of English argument structure constructions. Journal of Cognitive Science, 18(3), 341–366. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kolb, P. (2008). Disco: A multilingual database of distributionally similar words. In A. Storrer, A. Geyken, A. Siebert & K.-M. Würzner (Eds.), Proceedings of the 9th KONVENS (2008) in Berlin (pp. 37–44). Tübingen: De Gruyter.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kövecses, Z. (2016). Conceptual metaphor theory. In E. Semino & Z. Demjén (Eds.), The Routledge handbook of metaphor and language (pp. 13–27). London: Routledge.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Krashen, S. D. (1981). Second language acquisition and second language learning. Oxford: Pergamon.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lam, Y. (2009). Applying Cognitive Linguistics to teaching the Spanish prepositions por and para. Language Awareness, 18(1), 2–18. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Langacker, R. W. (1999). Assessing the cognitive linguistic enterprise. In T. Janssen & G. Redeker (Eds.), Cognitive Linguistics: Foundations, scope, and methodology (pp. 13–59). Berlin: De Gruyter. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2008). Cognitive Grammar: A basic introduction. New York, NY: Oxford University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Leys, O. (1989). Aspekt und Rektion räumlicher Präpositionen. Deutsche Sprache, 171, 97–113.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Li, C. N., & Thompson, S. A. (1981). Mandarin Chinese: A functional reference grammar. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lightbown, P. M., & Spada, N. (2013). How languages are learned. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Loewen, S. (2020). Instructed second language acquisition. In C. A. Chapelle (Ed.), The concise encyclopedia of applied linguistics (pp. 580–582). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley Blackwell.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Loewen, S., & Sato, M. (2019). Instructed second language acquisition and English language teaching: Theory, research, and pedagogy. In X. Gao (Ed.), Second handbook of English language teaching (pp. 1131–1148). Cham: Springer. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Long, M. (1991). Focus on Form. In K. de Bot, R. B. Ginsberg, & C. Kramsch (Eds.), Foreign language research in cross-cultural perspective (pp. 39–52). Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
MacWhinney, B. (2012). The logic of the unified model. In S. M. Gass & A. Mackey (Eds.), The Routledge handbook of second language acquisition (pp. 211–227). London: Routledge.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2018). A unified model of first and second language learning. In M. Hickmann, E. Veneziano, & H. Jisa (Eds.), Sources of Variation in First Language Acquisition: Languages, Contexts, and Learners (pp. 287–312). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Min, L., & Nerlich, M. (2004). Studienweg Deutsch: Band 1. Beijing: Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ninio, A. (1999). Pathbreaking verbs in syntactic development and the question of prototypical transitivity. Journal of Child Language, 26(3), 619–653. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Norris, J. M., & Ortega, L. (2001). Does type of instruction make a difference? Substantive findings from a meta-analytic review. Language Learning, 51(S1), 157–213. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ortega, L., Tyler, A. E., Park, H. I., & Uno, M. (Eds.). (2016). The usage-based study of language learning and multilingualism. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Paradis, M. (2004). A neurolinguistic theory of bilingualism. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Paul, H. (1920). Deutsche Grammatik: Band IV: Syntax. Halle: Max Niemeyer.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
R Core Team. (2021). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. [URL]
Raatz, U., & Klein-Braley, C. (1981). The C-Test–A modification of the cloze procedure. In T. Culhane, C. Klein-Braley & D. K. Stevenson (Eds.), Practice and problems in language testing IV. Proceedings of the fourth international language testing symposium of the Interuniversitäre Sprachtestgruppe held at the University of Essex (pp. 113–138). Colchester: University of Essex.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Reber, A. S. (1989). Implicit learning and tacit knowledge. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 118(3), 219–235. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Rebuschat, P. (2013). Measuring implicit and explicit knowledge in second language research. Language Learning, 63(3), 595–626. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Roche, J., & EL-Bouz, K. (2018). Raum für Grammatik. Zeitschrift für Interkulturellen Fremdsprachenunterricht, 23(2), 86–99.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2020). Zur Räumlichkeit temporaler Präpositionen – kognitionsdidaktischer Ansatz. Zeitschrift für Interkulturellen Fremdsprachenunterricht, 25(1), 1395–1405.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Roehr-Brackin, K. (2014). Explicit Knowledge and Processes From a Usage-Based Perspective: The Developmental Trajectory of an Instructed L2 Learner. Language Learning, 64(4), 771–808. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2018). Metalinguistic Awareness and second language acquisition. New York, NY: Routledge. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Rousse-Malpat, A., Steinkrauss, R., Wieling, M., & Verspoor, M. (2022). Communicative language teaching: structure-based or dynamic usage-based? Journal of the European Second Language Association, 6(1), 20–33. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Rys, J., Willems, K., & De Cuypere, L. (2014). Akkusativ und Dativ nach Wechselpräpositionen im Deutschen. Eine Korpusanalyse von versinken, versenken, einsinken und einsenken in. In I. Doval & B. Lübke (Eds.), Raumlinguistik und Sprachkontrast: Neue Beiträge zu spatialen Relationen im Deutschen, Englischen und Spanischen (pp. 217–234). München: Iudicium.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Schmid, H.-J. (2018). Unifying entrenched tokens and schematized types as routinized commonalities of linguistic experience. In B. Hampe & S. Flach (Eds.), Yearbook of the German Cognitive Linguistics Association, 61 (pp. 167–182). Berlin: De Gruyter. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Schmidt, R. W. (1990). The role of consciousness in second language learning. Applied Linguistics, 11(2), 129–158. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2012). Attention, awareness, and individual differences in language learning. In W. M. Chan, K. N. Chin, S. Bhatt & I. Walker (Eds.), Perspectives on individual characteristics and foreign language education (pp. 27–50). Berlin: De Gruyter. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Smith, M. B. (1995). Semantic motivation Vs. arbitrariness in grammar: Toward a more general account of the DAT/ACC contrast with German two-way prepositions. In I. Rauch & G. F. Carr (Eds.), Insights in Germanic linguistics: Methodology in transition (pp. 293–323). Berlin: De Gruyter. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Spada, N., & Tomita, Y. (2010). Interactions between type of instruction and type of language feature: A meta-analysis. Language Learning, 60(2), 263–308. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Sylla, B. (1999). Zum Problem der Kasuswahl nach Wechselpräpositionen. Deutsch als Fremdsprache, 36(3), 150–155. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Tomasello, M. (1992). First verbs: A case study of early grammatical development. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2003). Constructing a language: A usage-based theory of language acquisition. Cambridge, MA: Havard University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Tyler, A. (2010). Usage-based approaches to language and their applications to second language learning. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 301, 270–291. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Tyler, A. E., Ortega, L., Uno, M., & Park, H. I. (Eds.). (2018). Usage-inspired L2 instruction: Researched pedagogy. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Willems, K., De Cuypere, L., & Rys, J. (2018). Case alternation in argument structure constructions with prepositional verbs: A case study in corpus-based constructional analysis. In H. C. Boas & A. Ziem (Eds.), Constructional approaches to syntactic structures in German (pp. 85–130). Berlin: De Gruyter. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Wilmots, J., & Moonen, E. (1997). Der Gebrauch von Akkusativ und Dativ nach Wechselpräpositionen. Deutsch als Fremdsprache, 34(3), 144–149. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Zwarts, J. (2006). Case marking direction: The accusative in German PPs. In J. Bunting, S. Desai, R. Peachey, C. Straughn & Z. Tomkova (Eds.), Proceedings from panels of the 42nd meeting of the Chicago Linguistic Society, 42(2), (pp. 93–107). Chicago, IL: Chicago Linguistic Society.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mobile Menu Logo with link to supplementary files background Layer 1 prag Twitter_Logo_Blue