In this study the relative importance of linguistic knowledge, metacognitive knowledge, and fluency or accessibility of this linguistic knowledge in both first language (L1; Dutch) and second language (L2; English)

The authors report results of a study into the role of components of first-language (L1; Dutch) and second-language (L2; English) reading comprehension. Differences in the contributions of components of L1 and L2 reading comprehension are analyzed, in particular processing speed in L1 and L2. Findings indicate that regression weights of the L1 and L2 components are different. Although correlations between most processing speed components and reading comprehension are substantial, there are no unique contributions to the explanation of either L1 or L2 reading comprehension when linguistic and metacognitive knowledge are accounted for. In addition, L1 reading comprehension is shown to have a large contribution to L2 reading comprehension, supporting theories of L1-L2 transfer of reading skills. Results are discussed from a developmental perspective.Empirical reading research is often directed toward the role of underlying skill components, such as word and sentence decoding, vocabulary and grammar knowledge, and strategic reading skills. There is debate on the relative importance of such components of skilled reading comprehension. In theories of first-language (L1) reading, the role of lower order reading processes for higher order text comprehension has received considerable attention (cf. ). Lower order processes refer to the level of letter and word recognition, whereas higher order processes refer to comprehension of the content of text. Most researchers agree with the view expressed by Gough and Tunmer (1986) that efficient word recognition processes are necessary but not sufficient for the successful execution of reading tasks. They are necessary because they allow the reader to allocate optimal attention to the interpretation of meanings communicated in the text. They are not sufficient because text comprehension comprises other components as well, such as world and topic knowledge, knowledge of conceptual schemas (e.g., means-end relationships), metacognitive skills, and strategic skills.In theories of second-language (L2) reading, the relation between efficient lower order processing and higher order reading comprehension has also been a point of contention (cf.

This study investigated the relationship between reading comprehension development of 389 adolescents in their dominant language (Language 1 [L1], Dutch) and a foreign language (Language 2 [L2], English). In each consecutive year from Grades 8 through 10, a number of measurements were taken. Students' reading comprehension, their linguistic knowledge (vocabulary and grammar knowledge) and processing efficiency (speed of word recognition and sentence comprehension) in both languages, and their metacognitive knowledge about reading were assessed. The relative strengths of the effects of these components of reading were analyzed to distinguish among 3 hypotheses about the relationship between L1 and L2 reading comprehension: the transfer hypothesis, the threshold hypothesis, and the processing efficiency hypothesis. The transfer hypothesis predicts a strong relationship between L1 and L2 reading comprehension and a strong effect of metacognitive knowledge on L2 reading comprehension, whereas the threshold and processing efficiency hypotheses predict a more important role of language-specific knowledge and processing skills. Results support the transfer hypothesis, although language-specific knowledge and fluency also contribute to L2 reading performance.

Segalowitz and Segalowitz distinguish between "speedup" (mean reaction time [RT] and mean standard deviation of responses in an RT task decrease to the same degree) and "automatization" (mean standard deviation decreases more than mean RT). The coefficient of variation, which is the standard deviation divided by the mean RT, decreases in the case of automatization while remaining unchanged in the case of speedup. We present data that are collected in two studies. The first one is a longitudinal study spanning 2 years and comprising four RT tasks, both in second language (L2) English and first language Dutch (N > 200). The second study is an English L2 word training study. Students (N = 41) performed a lexical decision task before and after training. Convincing evidence for automatization was not found in either study. The main problems in testing the Segalowitz and Segalowitz hypothesis is that gains in knowledge itself and gains in processing it cannot be adequately disentangled in the RT tasks currently used, characterized by a speed-accuracy trade-off. Although conceptually skill acquisition can be distinguished from knowledge accumulation, in reality, knowledge accumulation forms part of skill acquisition because, in real L2 learning, exposure to new words goes hand in hand with exposure to words encountered previously.Adult human beings routinely perform many actions, perhaps most, in their daily lives. The mental or physical actions we perform routinely do not require much of our attention; we perform them quickly, often in parallel with other routines. The acquisition of skills takes considerable time and requires much practice, whereas the attrition of skilled behavior among elderly people is a gradual process also (unless caused by sudden incidences like accidents or strokes). First (L1) and second language (L2) acquisition, both in the oral and written modalities, are prime examples of slow and gradual forms of skill acquisition. We become aware of this when we observe young children in struggling to master the production of clusters of speech sounds and, at a later age, learning to read written words. In addition, when we try to learn an L2, our experience is that the acquisition of L2 skills requires an investment of considerable time and effort. The hallmark of skilled behavior is automaticity, a central notion in cognitive psychology. LaBerge and Samuels (1974) considered obligatory execution as the prime characteristic of automaticity. Since their seminal study, many researchers have questioned the unitary notion of automaticity, defining it in different ways, including ballistic processing, parallel processing, attention-free processing, effortless processing, unconscious processing, and fast processing. These characteristics do not always coincide, however (Bargh, 1992;Segalowitz, 2003). There are various well-known theories of skill acquisition in the psychological literature. Among the theories best known are Anderson's adaptive control of thought theory (Anderson, 1983;Anderson &Leb...

In this article we present an analysis of the relationship between L3 reading comprehension and its constituent skills for bilingual Dutch students for whom English is a third language (L3) compared to monolingual D utch students for whom English is a second language (L2). An analogous analysis is made for their D utch reading comprehension, D utch being their L2 and L1 respectively. Participants are 13/ 14 year-old secondary school students. The point of departure in the analyses is a regression model in which reading proficiency is decomposed into three types of constituent components: linguistic knowledge (vocabulary and grammar), speed of processing linguistic knowledge (lexical access and sentence comprehension ), and metacognitive knowledge (of text characteristics and strategies for reading and writing). U sing structural equation mo deling, we determined the contribution of constituent skills to D utch L2 and L1, and English L3 and L2 reading comprehension. The results showed that, despite differences between the two groups in D utch and English reading comprehension, no differences between the groups were found in the pattern of regression weights on the three types of constituent skills. Possible implications of these findings are discussed.