Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-nr4z6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-05-06T08:51:08.724Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Instance Theory and Second Language Rule Learning under Explicit Conditions

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  07 November 2008

Peter J. Robinson  and
Mee Aie Ha
Peter J. Robinson
Affiliation:
University of Hawai'i at Mānoa
Mee Aie Ha
Affiliation:
University of Hawai'i at Mānoa
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This study investigates the generalizability of claims by Logan (Klapp, Boches, Trabert, & Logan, 1991; Logan, 1985, 1988a, 1988b; Logan & Klapp, 1991) about the development of automaticity in the adult learning of alphabet arithmetic problems to the context of adult second language acquisition. Logan's proposal is that as individual solutions to problems accumulate in memory a transition in problem-solving procedures takes place. This transition involves the shift from an algorithm-based procedure for deducing correct solutions to direct retrieval of individual solutions or instances from memory. In the present study, second language learners of English were presented with a rule for understanding the morphological constraint on the dative alternation (Mazurkewich & White, 1984) and asked to judge the acceptability of 36 sentences presented in a training set. The sentences were controlled for frequency of presentation, one being presented eight times, one seven times, and so forth. When presented together with novel instances of the same type in a transfer set, reaction times to old instances were significantly faster. Reaction times to repetitions of the previously presented verbs in new frames and novel verbs in old frames were compared as a test of hypotheses about strategy switches in processing alternating and nonalternating verbs.

Type
Articles
Information
Studies in Second Language Acquisition , Volume 15 , Issue 4 , December 1993 , pp. 413 - 438
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1993

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

Abrahams, R. (1984). Patterns in the use of present third person ‘s’ by university level ESL students. TESOL Quarterly, 18, 55–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Anderson, J. R. (1983). The architecture of cognition. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Birdsong, D. (1989). Metalinguistic judgement and interlinguistic competence. Berlin: Springer-Verlag.Google Scholar
Bley-Vroman, R., & Masterson, D. (1989). Reaction time as a supplement to grammaticality judgement in L2 studies. University of Hawai'i Working Papers in ESL, 8 (2), 56–71.Google Scholar
Bley-Vroman, R., & Yoshinaga, N. (1992). Broad and narrow constraints on the English dative alternation: Some fundamental differences between native speakers and foreign language learners. University of Hawai'i Working Papers in ESL, 11 (1), 157–199.Google Scholar
Carlson, R. A., Khoo, B. H., Yaure, R. G., & Schneider, W. (1990a). Acquisition of a problem solving skill: Levels of organization and use of working memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 119, 193–214.Google Scholar
Carlson, R. A., Khoo, B. H., Yaure, R. G., & Schneider, W. (1990b). Working memory and skill acquisition: A reply to Halpern. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 119, 333–334.Google Scholar
Ellis, N. (1993). Rules and instances in foreign language learning: Interactions of explicit and implicit knowledge. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 5, 289–318.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eubank, L., & Beck, M. (1992, February) Is L2 knowledge rule-governed? Paper presented at the Conference on Cognitive Psychology and Second Language Acquisition, Eugene, OR.Google Scholar
Glass, A. L., & Holyoak, K. J. (1986). Cognition. New York: Random House.Google Scholar
Hulstijn, J. (1989). Implicit and incidental second language learning: Experiments in the processing of natural and partly artificial input. In Dechert, H. W. & Raupach, M. (Eds.), Interlingual processes (pp. 49–73). Tübingen: Gunter Narr.Google Scholar
Klapp, S. T., Boches, A., Trabert, M. L., & Logan, G. D. (1991). Automatizing alphabet arithmetic: Are there practice effects after automaticity is achieved? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition, 17 (2), 196–209.Google Scholar
Kramer, A. F., & Strayer, D. L. (1989). Assessing the development of automatic processing: Application of dual task and event related brain potential methodology. Biological Psychology, 26, 231–267.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Krashen, S., & Terrell, T. (1982). The natural approach. Rowley, MA: Newbury House.Google Scholar
LaBerge, D., & Samuels, S. J. (1974). Toward a theory of automatic information processing in reading. Cognitive Psychology, 6, 293–323.Google Scholar
Logan, G. D. (1985). Skill and automaticity: Relations, implications and future directions. Canadian Journal of Psychology, 39, 367–386.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Logan, G. D. (1988a). Automaticity, resources and memory: Theoretical controversies and practical implications. Human Factors, 3, 583–598.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Logan, G. D. (1988b). Towards an instance theory of automatization. Psychological Review, 95, 492–527.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Logan, G. D., & Klapp, S. T. (1991). Automatizing alphabet arithmetic problems 1: Is extended practice necessary to produce automaticity? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition, 17, 179–195.Google Scholar
Long, M. H. (1988). Instructed interlanguage development. In Beebe, L. (Ed.), Issues in second language acquisition: Multiple perspectives (pp. 115–141). Rowley, MA: Newbury House.Google Scholar
Mazurkewich, I., & White, L. (1984). The acquisition of the dative alternation: Unlearning overgeneralization. Cognition, 16, 261–283.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McLaughlin, B. (1987). Theories of second language learning. London: Edward Arnold.Google Scholar
McLaughlin, B. (1990). Restructuring. Applied Linguistics, 11, 113–128.Google Scholar
Pienemann, M. (1989). Is language teachable? Applied Linguistics, 10, 52–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pinker, S. (1989). Learnability and cognition: The acquisition of argument structure. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Pinker, S. (1991). Rules of language. Science, 235, 530–535.Google Scholar
Prabhu, N. S. (1987). Second language pedagogy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Prasada, S., Pinker, S., & Snyder, W. (1990, November). Frequency effects in response time to regular and irregular past tense verb forms. Paper presented at the 31st Annual Meeting of the Psychonomic Society, New Orleans.Google Scholar
Robinson, P. J. (1991). Rules and associations in the acquisition of the locative alternation: A connectionist model of distributional learning. Unpublished manuscript, University of Hawai'i Department of English as a Second Language, Honolulu, HI.Google Scholar
Robinson, P. J. (in press). Universals of word formation processes: Noun incorporation in the acquisition of Samoan as a second language. University of Hawai'i Working Papers in ESL, 13.Google Scholar
Schmidt, R. (1992). Psychological mechanisms underlying second language fluency. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 14, 357–385.Google Scholar
Schneider, W. (1985). Towards a model of attention and the development of automatic processing. In Posner, M. & Marin, O. S. (Eds.), Attention and performance (pp. 475–492). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Schneider, W., & Detweiler, M. (1987). A connectionist control architecture for working memory. In Bower, G. H. (Ed.), The psychology of learning and motivation (pp. 53–119). Orlando, FL: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Shiffrin, W., & Schneider, R. M. (1977). Controlled and automatic human information processing: 1, Detection, search and attention. Psychological Review, 84, 1–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Snow, M. A., Met, M., & Genesee, F. (1989). A conceptual framework for the integration of language and content in second/foreign language instruction. TESOL Quarterly, 23, 201–218.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
White, L. (1985). The pro-drop parameter in adult second language learning. Language Learning, 35, 47–62.Google Scholar
Yoshinaga, N. (1991). A learnability approach to the acquisition of the locative alternation by Japanese learners of English. Unpublished M.A. thesis, Department of English as a Second Language, University of Hawaii at Manoa, Honolulu, HI.Google Scholar