12. Working Memory in Processing Instruction: The Acquisition of L2 French Clitics

Longitudinal effects of working memory on L2 grammar and reading abilities

“…For the first research question, whether WM tests with and without a cognitively demanding processing task generate distinct outcomes, the results show that WC’s test yielded WM effects on L2 grammar and reading development over the course of one semester (Experiment 2), but DC’s test produced no WM effects over one year (Experiment 1) or one semester (Experiment 2). These findings are in line with L2 studies reporting: (1) WM effects with WM tests with a taxing processing measure (reading: Kormos and Safar, 2008; Leeser, 2007; Linck et al, 2012; Walter, 2004; grammar: Linck and Weiss, 2011, 2015; Santamaria and Sunderman, 2015; Sanz et al, 2014; Serafini and Sanz, 2016), (2) WM effects with WM tests without a taxing processing measure but with low proficiency learners (reading: Abu-Rabia, 2003; Harrington and Sawyer, 1992), (3) no WM effects with WM tests without a taxing processing measure (reading: Chun and Payne, 2004; grammar: Sagarra, 2000; Côté, 2016), and (4) no WM effects with WM tests with a taxing processing measure but with either high proficiency learners (grammar: Frost et al, 2013; Gilabert and Muñoz, 2010; Grey et al, 2015; Serafini and Sanz, 2016) or cognitively simple tasks (grammar: Sanz et al, 2014; Santamaria and Sunderman, 2015).…”

“…Regarding task demands, Santamaria and Sunderman (2015) found an association between WC’s test and beginners’ performance on a cognitively demanding explicit production task (filling-in-the blanks), but not on a simpler implicit interpretation task (listening to sentences and choosing the correct picture). Concerning the association of WM effects with L2 proficiency and type of WM test, there is a large body of evidence showing a strong relationship between L2 proficiency and WM effects on various L2 areas (for a review, see Mitchell et al, 2015).…”

Anomaly detection in the processing of complex syntax by early L2 learners

“…An important role of working memory in clitic processing has also been explored. In one study that investigated comprehension and production of object clitic pronouns in the context of a specific type of classroom teaching technique, termed ‘processing instructions’, low-span L2 learners of French whose L1 was English manifested greater difficulties producing clitic pronouns associated with right-dislocated sentential objects in spoken French, compared to high-span L2 learners (see Santamaria and Sunderman, 2015; VanPatten, 2005). These studies suggest that clitics offer an interesting and relevant testing ground regarding different views on the success in L2 learning including ultimate attainment, including the domains of grammar that involve long-distance dependencies.…”

The role of working memory in processing L2 input: Insights from eye-tracking

“…The role of WM in grammar learning has been investigated in a large number of studies (e.g., Ahmadian, 2015;Baralt, 2015;Ellis & Sinclair;1996;Grey, Williams & Rebuschat, 2015;Li, 2015;Martin & Ellis, 2012;O'Brien, Segalowitz, Collentine & Freed, 2006;Révész, 2012;Sagarra & Abbuhl, 2013;Santamaria & Sunderman, 2015, Tagarelli, Borges Mota & Rebuschat, 2015Williams & Lovatt, 2003). Conflicting findings have emerged with regard to its importance in implicit learning, that is, in "the process by which knowledge about the rule governed complexities of the stimulus environment is acquired independently of conscious attempts to do so" (Reber, 1989, p. 219) and in explicit learning, which is the conscious process of gaining knowledge.…”

“…Studies are also inconclusive with regard to the question whether higher WM abilities enhance the development of explicit and implicit knowledge in implicit and explicit instructional contexts 2 . Existing research findings unequivocally indicate that WM assists L2 learners in acquiring explicit knowledge, that is “facts that speakers of a language have learned” (R. Ellis, 2006, p. 95) under explicit learning conditions (Robinson, 2005; Santamaria & Sunderman, 2015). Tagarelli et al (2015), however, found that WM capacity was not associated with the development of implicit knowledge, that is, “abstract, unconscious and rule-like representations” (N. Ellis, 2007, p. 19), in an explicit learning condition.…”