Goo and Mackey (this issue) outline several apparent design flaws in studies that have compared the impact of different types of corrective feedback (CF). Furthermore, they argue that SLA researchers should stop comparing recasts to other types of CF because they are inherently different kinds of phenomena. Our response to their article addresses (a) the claim that the recast-learning relationship has been “settled,” (b) the misleading representation of our views on uptake, (c) the characterization of the CF comparison studies as being weak and invalid, and (d) Goo and Mackey’s recommendations concerning the most appropriate approach to investigating the effect of feedback on second language learning.

In his 2007 study “Effects of Textual Enhancement and Topic Familiarity on Korean EFL Students’ Reading Comprehension and Learning of Passive Form,” Lee demonstrated that learners were better able to correct written sentences that contained incorrect English passive forms after exposure to texts flooded with enhanced (versus nonenhanced) passive forms. But with enhanced forms, learners did worse on comprehension tests, which arguably demonstrated a trade-off: More attention to forms resulted in less to meaning. In this study, a conceptual replication of Lee’s using eye-movement data, I assessed how English passive construction enhancement affects English language learners’ (a) learning of the form (via pre- and posttest gains on passive construction tests) and (b) text comprehension. In contrast to Lee’s results, I found enhancement did not significantly increase form correction gain scores, nor did enhancement significantly detract from comprehension. There was no trade-off effect. Form learning and comprehension did not correlate. By recording learners’ eye movements while reading, I found enhancement significantly impacted learners’ noticing of the passive forms through longer gaze durations and rereading times. Thus, enhancement in this study functioned as intuitively and originally (Sharwood Smith, 1991, 1993) proposed; it promoted noticing, but, in this case, without further explicit instruction, it appeared to have done little else.

This study examines frequency, contextual diversity, and contextual distinctiveness effects in predicting produced versus not-produced frequent nouns and verbs by early second language (L2) learners of English. The study analyzes whether word frequency is the strongest predictor of early L2 word production independent of contextual diversity and distinctiveness and whether differences exist in the lexical properties of nouns and verbs that can help explain beginning-level L2 word production. The study uses machine learning algorithms to develop models that predict produced and unproduced words in L2 oral discourse. The results demonstrate that word frequency is the strongest classifier of whether a noun is produced or not produced in beginning L2 oral discourse, whereas contextual diversity is the strongest classifier of whether a verb is produced or not produced. Post hoc tests reveal that nouns are more concrete, meaningful, imageable, specific, and unambiguous than verbs, which indicates that lexical properties may explain differences in noun and verb production. Thus, whereas distributional properties of nouns may allow lexical acquisition on the basis of association through exposure alone (i.e., nouns may adhere to frequency effects), the abstractness and ambiguity found in verbs make them difficult to acquire based solely on repetition. Therefore, verb acquisition may follow a principle of likely need characterized by contextual diversity effects.

In a recent study, Lew-Williams and Fernald (2007) showed that native Spanish speakers use grammatical gender information encoded in Spanish articles to facilitate the processing of upcoming nouns. In this article, we report the results of a study investigating whether grammatical gender facilitates noun recognition during second language (L2) processing. Sixteen monolingual Spanish participants (control group) and 18 English-speaking learners of Spanish (evenly divided into high and low Spanish proficiency) saw two-picture visual scenes in which items matched or did not match in gender. Participants’ eye movements were recorded while they listened to 28 sentences in which masculine and feminine target items were preceded by an article that agreed in gender with the two pictures or agreed only with one of the pictures. An additional group of 15 Italian learners of Spanish was tested to examine whether the presence of gender in the first language (L1) modulates the degree to which gender is used during L2 processing. Data were analyzed by comparing the proportion of eye fixations on the objects in each condition. Monolingual Spanish speakers looked sooner at the referent on different-gender trials than on same-gender trials, replicating results reported in past literature. Italian-Spanish bilinguals exhibited a gender anticipatory effect, but only for the feminine condition. For the masculine condition, participants waited to hear the noun before identifying the referent. Like the Spanish monolinguals, the highly proficient English-Spanish speakers showed evidence of using gender information during online processing, whereas the less proficient learners did not. The results suggest that both proficiency in the L2 and similarities between the L1 and the L2 modulate the usefulness of morphosyntactic information during speech processing.

Eye-trackers are becoming increasingly widespread as a tool to investigate second language (L2) acquisition. Unfortunately, clear standards for methodology—including font size, font type, and placement of interest areas—are not yet available. Although many researchers stress the need for ecological validity—that is, the simulation of natural reading conditions—it may not be prudent to use such a design to investigate new directions in eye-tracking research, and particularly in research involving small lexical items such as articles. In this study, we examine whether two different screen layouts can lead to different results in an eye-tracking study on the L2 acquisition of Italian gender. The results of an experiment with an ecologically valid design are strikingly different than the results of an experiment with a design tailored to track eye movements to articles. We conclude that differences in screen layout can have significant effects on results and that it is crucial that researchers report screen layout information.