Language Learning Research at the Intersection of Experimental, Computational, and Corpus‐Based Approaches

Abstract

Language acquisition occupies a central place in the study of human cognition, and research on how we learn language can be found across many disciplines, from developmental psychology and linguistics to education, philosophy, and neuroscience. It is a very challenging topic to investigate given that the learning target in first and second language acquisition is highly complex, and part of the challenge consists in identifying how different domains of language are acquired to form a fully functioning system of usage (Ellis, 2017). Correspondingly, the evidence about language use and language learning is generally shaped by many factors, including the characteristics of the task in which the language is produced (Alexopoulou, Michel, Murakami, & Meurers, 2017).

Collocational Processing in L1 and L2: The Effects of Word Frequency, Collocational Frequency, and Association

“…It is also crucial to acknowledge the importance of previous work at the intersection of experimental and corpus‐based approaches to our understanding of the use and processing of multiword sequences. For example, Rebuschat, Meurers, and McEnery (2017) brought together researchers in cognitive psychology, corpus linguistics, and developmental psychology. This type of multimethod approach is particularly useful for research into the processing and learning of multiword sequences.…”

Corpus Linguistics, Learner Corpora, and SLA: Employing Technology to Analyze Language Use

“…Although specialized journals such as The International Journal of Learner Corpus Research ( IJLCR ) and book series such as Task-Based Language Teaching ( TBLT ) play an important role for each research community, especially for methodologically oriented contributions, interdisciplinary and outward-looking venues for research should be promoted. It was in this spirit that the workshop sponsored by Language Learning reported in Rebuschat et al (2017) was held.Flexibility: Reach productive compromises in the face of disagreement. Don't limit the scope of your analyses a priori but be ready to embrace and encompass the perspective of the other field, if it proves useful.…”

“…The road to further collaboration between corpus linguistics and SLA has already been paved by corpus studies that aim to contribute to the theory of SLA (for an overview, see Myles, 2015), and corpus linguistics has been covered in major language learning reference works (e.g., Leclercq, Edmonds, & Hilton, 2014; Mackey & Gass, 2012). We believe there is strong potential for conceptual and methodological innovation in research on L2 learning (e.g., Rebuschat, Meurers, & McEnery, 2017). However, the convergence of any two fields should be attempted with care, given the different goals that gave rise to each of the fields and the different pathways that the two disciplines have taken (Gablasova, Brezina, & McEnery, 2017b).…”

Interdisciplinary approaches to researching L2 lexical acquisition, processing, and use: An introduction to the special issue

“…Building on earlier vocabulary research that underscores the complex, multifaceted nature of lexical knowledge (Nation, 2013; Perfetti, 2007; Read, 2000), the articles in this special issue heed growing calls to use sensitive measures and interdisciplinary approaches in studying different facets of L2 vocabulary knowledge and use (Godfroid, 2020). In a recent introduction to a special issue of Language Learning , Rebuschat, Meurers, and McEnery (2017) argued that the study of ‘a complex phenomenon like language acquisition can significantly benefit from insights, tools, and methods from many disciplines, yet it is still relatively rare to find studies that combine multiple approaches’ (p. 7). In L2 vocabulary studies, Read warns researchers against oversimplification: ‘[w]hether we focus on individual lexical items or the mental lexicon as a whole, we are setting out to describe something that is inherently ill-defined, interdimensional, variable and thus resistant to neat classification’ (Read, 2004: 224).…”

“…Such interdisciplinary approaches facilitate the creation of a new, deeper understanding of what it means to acquire L2 lexical knowledge and how this knowledge is stored and accessed, establishing more precise theoretical accounts of acquisition, learning, processing, and use. Novel methods of data collection and analysis, combined with researchers adopting open science practices of sharing data and instruments, increase the robustness and transparency of the findings, make them more accessible for replications and suitable for meta-analyses, and bring L2 vocabulary research in line with current science research standards (Brysbaert and Stevens, 2018; Lindstromberg, 2016; Lindstromberg and Eyckmans, 2017; Marsden, Morgan-Short, Thompson, and Abugaber, 2018; Marsden and Plonsky, 2018; Porte, 2012; Rebuschat et al, 2017). Below we elaborate on the theoretical, empirical, and methodological contributions of the five articles included in this special issue and detail new insights into different aspects of L2 lexical acquisition and processing offered by these interdisciplinary and methodologically innovative studies.…”