Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-vvkck Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-25T10:15:14.743Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

FORMAL VERSUS INFORMAL L2 LEARNING

HOW DO INDIVIDUAL DIFFERENCES AND WORD-RELATED VARIABLES INFLUENCE FRENCH AND ENGLISH L2 VOCABULARY LEARNING IN DUTCH-SPEAKING CHILDREN?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  08 April 2021

Vanessa De Wilde Open the ORCID record for Vanessa De Wilde [Opens in a new window] ,
Marc Brysbaert Open the ORCID record for Marc Brysbaert [Opens in a new window]  and
June Eyckmans
Vanessa De Wilde*
Affiliation:
Ghent University, Artevelde University of Applied Sciences Ghent
Marc Brysbaert
Affiliation:
Ghent University
June Eyckmans
Affiliation:
Ghent University
*
*Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Vanessa De Wilde, Department of Translation, Interpreting and Communication, Ghent University, Groot-Brittanniëlaan 45, 9000 Ghent, Belgium. E-mail: vanessa.dewilde@ugent.be
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

A second language can be learned inside and outside the classroom. In this study we investigated the English and French vocabulary knowledge of 110 Dutch-speaking children (age 10–12), who received 100 hours of instruction in French, whereas their contact with English came from out-of-school exposure only. We examined the role of individual differences (out-of-school exposure and gender) and word-related variables (cognateness, frequency, and language). The children completed a receptive vocabulary test in English and French and filled in a questionnaire. The results showed that the children had a larger vocabulary knowledge in English than in French, illustrating the power of contextual language learning. Word learning was influenced by the amount of exposure, word frequency, and cognateness. Additionally, English words were easier to learn than French words for the participants we tested. Our results point to the need for out-of-school exposure to supplement language learning in the classroom.

Type
Research Article
Information
Studies in Second Language Acquisition , Volume 44 , Issue 1 , March 2022 , pp. 87 - 111
Check for updates
Open Practices
Open materials Open data
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2021. Published by Cambridge University Press

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.)

Footnotes

We thank Emma Boone and Elise Vanhoecke for help with testing. We thank the schools, the teachers, and the pupils and their parents for participating in the project.

The experiment in this article earned Open Materials and Open Data badge for transparent practices. The materials and data are available at both https://osf.io/5y4x3/ and on the Iris Database https://www.iris-database.org/

References

REFERENCES

Bates, D., Mächler, M., Bolker, B., & Walker, S. (2015). Fitting linear mixed-effects models using lme4. Journal of Statistical Software, 67, 1–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bisson, M.-J., van Heuven, W. J. B., Conklin, K., & Tunney, R. J. (2014). The role of repeated exposure to multimodal input in incidental acquisition of foreign language vocabulary: Repeated exposure in incidental FL acquisition. Language Learning, 64, 855–877.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Brysbaert, M. (2019). How many participants do we have to include in properly powered experiments? A tutorial of power analysis with reference tables. Journal of Cognition, 2, 16.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Brysbaert, M. (2020). Basic statistics for psychologists (2nd ed.). Macmilan International.Google Scholar
Brysbaert, M., Mandera, P., & Keuleers, E. (2018). The word frequency effect in word processing: An updated review. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 27, 45–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brysbaert, M., & New, B. (2009). Moving beyond Kučera and Francis: A critical evaluation of current word frequency norms and the introduction of a new and improved word frequency measure for American English. Behavior Research Methods, 41, 977–990.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bybee, J. L., & Hopper, P. J. (Eds.). (2001). Frequency and the emergence of linguistic structure (Vol. 45). John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Courtney, L., Graham, S., Tonkyn, A., & Marinis, T. (2017). Individual differences in early language learning: A study of English learners of French. Applied Linguistics, 38, 824–847.Google Scholar
De Wilde, V., Brysbaert, M., & Eyckmans, J. (2020a). Learning English through out-of-school exposure. Which levels of language proficiency are attained and which types of input are important? Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 23, 171–185.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
De Wilde, V., Brysbaert, M., & Eyckmans, J. (2020b). Learning English through out-of-school exposure: How do word-related variables and proficiency influence receptive vocabulary learning? Language Learning, 70, 349–381.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Doughty, C., & Williams, J. (1998). Focus on form in classroom second language acquisition. The Cambridge Applied Linguistics Series. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Dunn, L., & Dunn, L. (2007). Peabody picture vocabulary test (4th ed.). American Guidance Service.Google Scholar
Dunn, L., Dunn, L., & Theriault-Whalen, C. (1993). EVIP: Échelle de vocabulaire en images Peabody. Pearson Canada Assessment.Google Scholar
d’Ydewalle, G., & Van de Poel, M. (1999). Incidental foreign-language acquisition by children watching subtitled television programs. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 28, 227–244.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Elgort, I., Brysbaert, M., Stevens, M., & Van Assche, E. (2018). Contextual word learning during reading in a second language: An eye-movement study. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 40, 341–366.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Elley, W. B., & Mangubhai, F. (1983). The impact of reading on second language learning. Reading Research Quarterly, 19, 53–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ellis, N. C. (1998). Emergentism, connectionism and language learning. Language Learning, 48, 631–664.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ellis, N. C. (2002). Frequency effects in language processing. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 24, 143–188.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Enever, J. (Ed.). (2011). ELLiE—Early language learning in Europe. British Council.Google Scholar
Firth, A., & Wagner, J. (1997). On discourse, communication, and (some) fundamental concepts in SLA research. The Modern Language Journal, 81, 285–300.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ford-Connors, E., & Paratore, J. R. (2015). Vocabulary instruction in fifth grade and beyond: Sources of word learning and productive contexts for development. Review of Educational Research, 85, 50–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
González Fernández, B., & Schmitt, N. (2015). How much collocation knowledge do L2 learners have? The effects of frequency and amount of exposure. ITL—International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 166, 94–126.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gooskens, C., van Heuven, V. J., Golubović, J., Schüppert, A., Swarte, F., & Voigt, S. (2018). Mutual intelligibility between closely related languages in Europe. International Journal of Multilingualism, 15, 169–193.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goriot, C., van Hout, R., Broersma, M., Lobo, V., McQueen, J. M., & Unsworth, S. (2021). Using the Peabody picture vocabulary test in L2 children and adolescents: Effects of L1. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 24, 546–568.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hall, C. J. (2002). The automatic cognate form assumption: Evidence for the parasitic model of vocabulary development. IRAL—International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, 40, 69–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hannibal Jensen, S. (2017). Gaming as an English language learning resource among young children in Denmark. CALICO Journal, 34, 1–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Haycock, K. (2001). Closing the achievement gap: Helping all students achieve. Educational Leadership, 58, 6–11.Google Scholar
Horst, M., Cobb, T., & Meara, P. (1998). Beyond a clockwork orange: Acquiring second language vocabulary through reading. Reading in a Foreign Language, 2, 207–223.Google Scholar
Housen, A., Janssens, S., & Pierrard, M. (2001). Frans en Engels als vreemde talen in Vlaamse scholen. VUBPress.Google Scholar
Hulstijn, J. H. (2003). Incidental and intentional learning. In Doughty, C. J. & Long, M. H. (Eds.), The handbook of second language acquisition (pp. 349–381). Blackwell Publishing Ltd. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hulstijn, J. H. (2011). Language proficiency in native and nonnative speakers: An agenda for research and suggestions for second-language assessment. Language Assessment Quarterly, 8, 229–249.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jaekel, N., Schurig, M., Florian, M., & Ritter, M. (2017). From early starters to late finishers? A longitudinal study of early foreign language learning in school. Language Learning, 67, 631–664.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Keuleers, E. (2013), vwr: Useful functions for visual word recognition research. R-package version 0.3.0.Google Scholar
Koolstra, K. M., & Beentjes, J. W. J. (1999). Children’s vocabulary acquisition in a foreign language through watching subtitles television programs at home. Education Technology Research and Development, 47, 51–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kuppens, A. H. (2010). Incidental foreign language acquisition from media exposure. Learning, Media and Technology, 35, 65–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lefever, S. (2010). English skills of young learners in Iceland: “I started talking English when I was 4 years old. It just bang … just fall into me.”. Reijkjavik, Iceland: Presented at the Menntakvika Conference.Google Scholar
Lindgren, E., & Muñoz, C. (2013). The influence of exposure, parents, and linguistic distance on young European learners’ foreign language comprehension. International Journal of Multilingualism, 10, 105–129.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Muñoz, C., Cadierno, T., & Casas, I. (2018). Different starting points for English language learning: A comparative study of Danish and Spanish young learners: Different starting points. Language Learning, 68, 1076–1109.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nakagawa, S., & Schielzeth, H. (2013). A general and simple method for obtaining R2 from generalized linear mixed-effects models. Methods in Ecology and Evolution, 4, 133–142.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
New, B., Pallier, C., Brysbaert, M., & Ferrand, L. (2004). Lexique 2: A new French lexical database. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 36, 516–524.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Palmberg, R.. (1985). How much English vocabulary do Swedish-speaking primary-school pupils know before starting to learn English at school? In Ringbom, H. (Ed.), Foreign language learning and bilingualism (Vol. 105, pp. 89–97). Publications of the Research Institute of the Åbo Akademi Foundation.Google Scholar
Pavia, N., Webb, S., & Faez, F. (2019). Incidental vocabulary learning through listening to songs. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 41, 745–768.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pellicer-Sanchez, A., & Schmitt, N. (2010). Incidental vocabulary acquisition from an authentic novel: Do things fall apart. Reading in a Foreign Language, 1, 31–55.Google Scholar
Peters, E. (2018). The effect of out-of-class exposure to English language media on learners’ vocabulary knowledge. ITL—International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 169, 142–168.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Peters, E., Noreillie, A., Heylen, K., Bulté, B., & Desmet, P. (2019). The impact of instruction and out‐of‐school exposure to foreign language input on learners’ vocabulary knowledge in two languages. Language Learning, 69, 747–782.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Peters, E., & Webb, S. (2018). Incidental vocabulary acquisition through viewing L2 television and factors that affect learning. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 40, 1–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Puimège, E., & Peters, E. (2019). Learners’ English vocabulary knowledge prior to formal instruction: The role of learner-related and word-related variables: Vocabulary knowledge prior to formal instruction. Language Learning, 69, 943–977.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schepens, J., Dijkstra, T., & Grootjen, F. (2012). Distributions of cognates in Europe as based on Levenshtein distance. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 15, 157–166.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sylvén, L. K., & Sundqvist, P. (2012). Gaming as extramural English L2 learning and L2 proficiency among young learners. ReCALL, 24, 302–321.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Uchihara, T., Webb, S., & Yanagisawa, A. (2019). The effects of repetition on incidental vocabulary learning: A meta‐analysis of correlational studies. Language Learning, 69, 559–599.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Van der Slik, F. W. P. (2010). Acquisition of Dutch as a second language. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 32, 401–432.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
van Heuven, W. J. B., Mandera, P., Keuleers, E., & Brysbaert, M. (2014). Subtlex-UK: A new and improved word frequency database for British English. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 67, 1176–1190.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Vanhove, J., & Berthele, R. (2015). The lifespan development of cognate guessing skills in an unknown related language. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, 53, 1–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vidal, K. (2011). A comparison of the effects of reading and listening on incidental vocabulary acquisition. Language Learning, 61, 219–258.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Overheid, Vlaamse (2018). Peiling Frans in het basisonderwijs [Survey into French in primary education]. http://eindtermen.vlaanderen.be/peilingen/basisonderwijs/peilingen/files/frans/Peiling_Frans2018_digitaal.pdf Google Scholar
Webb, S. (2007). The effects of repetition on vocabulary knowledge. Applied Linguistics, 28, 46–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Webb, S. (2015). Extensive viewing. Language learning through watching television. In Nunan, D. & Richards, J. C. (Eds.), Language learning beyond the classroom (pp. 159–168). Routledge.Google Scholar
Yanagisawa, A., Webb, S., & Uchihara, T. (2020). How do different forms of glossing contribute to L2 vocabulary learning from reading? A meta-regression analysis. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 42, 411–438.CrossRefGoogle Scholar