Word-Level and Sentence-Level Automaticity in English as a Foreign Language (EFL) Learners: A Comparative Study

Abstract

The present study aimed to investigate second language (L2) word-level and sentence-level automatic processing among English as a foreign language students through a comparative analysis of students with different proficiency levels. As a multidimensional and dynamic construct, automaticity is conceptualized as processing speed, stability, and accuracy which are indexed by reaction time, coefficient variation and accuracy rate. Sixty students (39 undergraduate students and 21 graduate students) who majored in English participated in this study. They completed the lexical semantic classification task, the sentence construction task, the sentence verification task under two different modalities (visually- and aurally-presented situations). Multivariate analyses were conducted to examine the differences between the students with different proficiency levels pertaining to their L2 performance. The results indicated that the processing speed was not found to be a good indicator of automatic language processing. Moreover, both levels of students appeared to reach a plateau in word-level processing but there were some variations in students' sentential processing. Finally, the findings showed that automatic language processing seemed to be module-specific and non-sharable across different modalities and skills.

Contributions of declarative and procedural memory to accuracy and automatization during second language practice

“…First of all, the analysis showed that the pattern of CV scores across practice was compatible with L2 automatization in comprehension, i.e., both CV and RT significantly decreased across practice, and there was a significant correlation between them. This supports findings of previous studies using the CV to investigate automatization of L2 syntax (e.g., Lim and Godfroid, 2015; Ma et al, 2017).…”

“…For the sentence completion task, a cross-sectional comparison of the three groups found significant CV decreases as a function of language proficiency together with significant CV/RT correlations for both intermediate and advanced L2 learners. In a similar study, Ma et al (2017) compared low and high proficiency Chinese learners of English in a sentence plausibility task and also found a significantly lower CV in high-proficiency learners. Overall, the results of cross-sectional studies seem to suggest significant decreases in the CV index (i.e., an increase in automatization) as a function of proficiency at least for some of the tasks tapping the development of L2 grammar.…”

“…SLA studies that have used the CV index have investigated L1/L2 differences in lexical access (e.g., Akamatsu, 2008; Phillips, Segalowitz, O'Brien & Yamasaki, 2004; Segalowitz & Segalowitz, 1993; Segalowitz, Segalowitz & Wood, 1998; Segalowitz, Trofimovich, Gatbonton & Sokolovskaya, 2008) and, more recently, L2 grammar learning (e.g., Hulstijn, Van Gelderen & Schoonen, 2009; Lim & Godfroid, 2015; Ma, Yu & Zhang, 2017; Suzuki, 2017; Suzuki & Sunada, 2018). In general, CV studies on lexical access have found consistent evidence of automatization, whilst the evidence for L2 grammar learning has been mixed.…”