ADVERTIMENT. Lʼaccés als continguts dʼaquesta tesi doctoral i la seva utilització ha de respectar els drets de la persona autora. Pot ser utilitzada per a consulta o estudi personal, així com en activitats o materials dʼinvestigació i docència en els termes establerts a lʼart. 32 del Text Refós de la Llei de Propietat Intel·lectual (RDL 1/1996). Per altres utilitzacions es requereix lʼautorització prèvia i expressa de la persona autora. En qualsevol cas, en la utilització dels seus continguts caldrà indicar de forma clara el nom i cognoms de la persona autora i el títol de la tesi doctoral. No sʼautoritza la seva reproducció o altres formes dʼexplotació efectuades amb finalitats de lucre ni la seva comunicació pública des dʼun lloc aliè al servei TDX. Tampoc sʼautoritza la presentació del seu contingut en una finestra o marc aliè a TDX (framing). Aquesta reserva de drets afecta tant als continguts de la tesi com als seus resums i índexs.
ADVERTENCIA. El acceso a los contenidos de esta tesis doctoral y su utilización debe respetar los derechos de la persona autora. Puede ser utilizada para consulta o estudio personal, así como en actividades o materiales de investigación y docencia en los términos establecidos en el art. 32 del Texto Refundido de la Ley de Propiedad Intelectual (RDL 1/1996). Para otros usos se requiere la autorización previa y expresa de la persona autora. En cualquier caso, en la utilización de sus contenidos se deberá indicar de forma clara el nombre y apellidos de la persona autora y el título de la tesis doctoral. No se autoriza su reproducción u otras formas de explotación efectuadas con fines lucrativos ni su comunicación pública desde un sitio ajeno al servicio TDR. Tampoco se autoriza la presentación de su contenido en una ventana o marco ajeno a TDR (framing). Esta reserva de derechos afecta tanto al contenido de la tesis como a sus resúmenes e índices.
WARNING. The access to the contents of this doctoral thesis and its use must respect the rights of the author. It can be used for reference or private study, as well as research and learning activities or materials in the terms established by the 32nd article of the Spanish Consolidated Copyright Act (RDL 1/1996). Express and previous authorization of the author is required for any other uses. In any case, when using its content, full name of the author and title of the thesis must be clearly indicated. Reproduction or other forms of for profit use or public communication from outside TDX
AN INSTRUCTED SECOND LANGUAGE ACQUISITION CONTEXT
Dakota J. Thomas-Wilhelm
The Acquisition of Atomicity &
Countability by Speakers of
Mandarin in an Instructed Second Language Acquisition Context
Doctoral Dissertation Volume I
IT'S DEFINITELY ATOMIC:
Dakota J. Thomas-Wilhelm
Doctorat de Filologia Anglesa
Departament de Filologia Anglesa i Germanística Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona
Supervisor: Elisabet Pladevall Ballester
2020
I T ’ S DEFINITELY ATOMIC :
T HE A CQUISITION OF A TOMICITY &
C OUNTABILITY BY S PEAKERS OF M ANDARIN IN AN I NSTRUCTED S ECOND L ANGUAGE
A CQUISITION C ONTEXT
Dakota J. Thomas-Wilhelm
Doctoral Dissertation Volume I
Departament de Filologia Anglesa i Germanística Univeristat Autònoma de Barcelona
Supervisor: Elisabet Pladevall Ballester
2020
I T ’ S DEFINITELY ATOMIC :
T HE A CQUISITION OF A TOMICITY &
C OUNTABILITY BY S PEAKERS OF M ANDARIN IN AN I NSTRUCTED S ECOND L ANGUAGE
A CQUISITION C ONTEXT
Dakota J. Thomas-Wilhelm
Doctoral Dissertation Volume I
Departament de Filologia Anglesa i Germanística Univeristat Autònoma de Barcelona
Supervisor: Elisabet Pladevall Ballester
2020
THIS DISSERTATION IS DEDICATED TO MY GREAT-GREAT GRANDFATHER,LESTER THOMAS,
WHO WAS THE LAST THOMAS TO GRADUATE FROM A 4-YEAR UNIVERSITY IN 1912
PRIOR TO MY PURSUIT FOR HIGHER/HIGHEST EDUCATION.
“Education is the most powerful weapon which you can use to change the world.”
–NELSON MANDELA
This dissertation has not previously been submitted for any degree other than Doctor of Philosophy in English Studies at the Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona. It is hereby confirmed that the dissertation comprises my original work, except where otherwise stated. All contributions from external sources have been acknowledge and explicitly referenced. Some of the information contained in this dissertation was presented at various conferences throughout the years. A comprehensive list of conference presentations can be found in Appendix M.
Publications
Thomas-Wilhelm, D. J. (2020). When research meets instruction: Teaching second-language English articles and noun-types. AL Forum: The Newsletter of the Applied Linguistics Interest Section. http://newsmanager.commpartners.com/tesolalis/issues/2020-03-06/5.html
A portion of this dissertation has also been written into a journal article co-authored with Dr.
Elisabet Pladevall-Ballester and submitted for publication to Language Teaching Research in August 2020.
Signature: ____________________________ Date:__________________
Dakota J. Thomas-Wilhelm
As a struggling second language learner for over 10 years, my interest in the study of second language acquisition and different methods of instruction has grown with every passing year of my less-than-successful acquisition and attempt to become fluent in L2 Spanish. Additionally, if it had not been for all of my wonderful and enthusiastic second language acquisition professors over the years, I would have never found such a welcoming home for my research within linguistics. This dissertation is the product of four years of specialized study under the supervision and advisement of Dr. Elisabet Pladevall Ballester. Thank you for the countless Skype calls, WhatsApp messages, and coffees in the cafetería when at the Autònoma. Eli has fostered this process by encouraging support, providing helpful guidance, and reviewing and challenging the work that went into the research and writing of this dissertation. Without her challenging critiques and substantial feedback, this dissertation would not be what it is today. Thank you for believing in me.
I would also like to thank the Departament de Filologia Anglesa i Germanística and the Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona for giving me the opportunity to pursue my project and data collection while residing halfway around the world. I would also like to thank English as a Second Language Programs at the University of Iowa, specifically Maureen Burke, for providing me with time, space, and participants in order to successfully collect all the data for this project over an 18-month time span.
Your cooperation and support are invaluable.
This dissertation would also not have been possible without the supervision, encouragement, and support of my Comissió de Doctorat: Dr. Elisabet Pladevall Ballester, Dr. Mireia Llinàs i Grau, and Dr. Susagna Tubau. Without their feedback, guidance, and challenges each year, this project would not be what it is today. Thanks are also due to my former professors in the Master’s in Theoretical and Applied Linguistics program at Universitat Pompeu Fabra. Without the support and
encouragement of Carmen Pérez-Vidal and Pilar Prieto, who fostered such a wonderful research atmosphere during my time at the Pompeu, I might have never pursued a doctoral degree.
I would also like to thank my close linguist friends, Eloi Puig-Mayenco and Jennifer Ament, who had such a profound impact on my studies as a young Master’s student at Universitat Pompeu Fabra that I chose to start a PhD, following in their footsteps. I also must give thanks to my closest cunning linguist friend, Chelsea Brooks. Your countless WhatsApp messages and Instagram memes always made everything seem right when the world sometimes felt so wrong. Thanks are also due to my dear friend and colleague, Jessica Klimesh, who serves as the proofreader of my life. Thank you for your proofreading help, as well as the countless times I tapped you with specific vocabulary questions. To my colleague and friend, Sarah Lowen, thank you for the invaluable support throughout this process and helping to design the cover of this dissertation.
Thank you to the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champagne, for opening their doors to me for a semester-long research stay in 2018. The valuable knowledge that I gained from Dr. Tania Ionin, Dr. Jill Jegerski, and Dr. Jonathan E. MacDonald helped to deepen my theoretical knowledge and grow this dissertation into and even more theoretically-sound project.
It goes without mention that thanks must be given to mi familia Española—Núria, Carlos, Néstor, and Gael—who have provided me with a home in Barcelona every February, May, and June over the past four years. Without their kindness and support, Barcelona would have never become my second home in the way that it is now. Muchas gracias por todo. Ni el inglés, ni el español, ni el catalán tienen palabras suficientes para expresar mi gratitud por todo lo que han hecho por mí. Ellos no eran solo mi familia española, pero mi familia. Su apoyo significa mucho.
Finally, the most thanks go to my family—mom, dad, and everyone. Without your love and support, I would have never had the strength to finish this project. The text messages, phone calls, and instant messages of motivation always kept me going. And, of course, Jeffrey. Although I could write another 100,000 words to give you thanks, I think this quote by Lady Gaga will do:
“There can be a hundred people in the room, and 99 don’t believe in you, but one does.” It goes without saying but thank you for your unconditional love and support. Thank you for late nights playing video games so that I would continue working on my project. Thank you for taking me to walk the dogs and clear my head. And, of course, thank you for getting, chilling, and pouring countless glasses of Sauvignon Blanc. Without you, I have no doubt in my mind, I would have never seen this project to its end.
Recent Generative Second Language Acquisition (GenSLA) research has tried to account for the assembly of syntactic and semantic features of L2-English articles (Cho & Slabakova, 2014) and nouns (Choi & Ionin, 2017; Choi, Ionin, & Zhu, 2018), but has done little to turn these results into practical teaching pedagogy (Whong, Gil, & Marsden, 2013a; Whong, Marsden, & Gil, 2013).
Furthermore, traditional language pedagogy is not guided by theoretical principles, and GenSLA has yet to thoroughly investigate the role of instruction in acquisition. Therefore, the primary goal of this dissertation is to test previous proposals (Lopez, 2017; Sabir, 2018; Snape & Yusa, 2013) that make recommendations for innovating teaching material (Marsden & Slabakova, 2019) by investigating the acquisition of L2-English articles and noun types by L1-Mandarin speakers in different instructional contexts with the hopes of contributing to the limited number of Instructed Second Language Acquisition (ISLA) studies motivated by GenSLA theoretical findings. We attempt to do this and explore the overarching question of whether or not creating a teaching and learning environment tha tiks informed by both GenSAL research and ISLA pedagogy is beneficial. Following the previous research by Snape and Yusa (2013), Lopez (2017), and Sabir (2018), this dissertation seeks to contribute to this limited field by creating a new instructional context informed by the findings and theories within GenSLA, termed linguistically-informed instruction. Informed by the Feature Reassembly Hypothesis (Lardiere, 2008, 2009a, 2009b), the Bottleneck Hypothesis (Slabakova, 2008, 2009a, 2009b), and the Cline of Difficulty (Slabakova, 2009a), this new instructional pedagogy teaches L2-English articles and noun types through semantic universals: [±definite] for articles and [±atomic] and [±count] for nouns. We investigate the effects of instruction through four primary research questions:
(1) To what extent will L1 features be present in the participants’ L2-English articles and noun types prior to intervention, as measured by the potential differences
between the L2 learners’ and native speakers’ performances?
(2) Does type of instruction mediate the reassembly of L1 article and noun type features for the L2?
(3) What type of instruction will lead to greater gains in the reassembly of L1 article and noun type features for the L2 at both immediate and delayed post-test?
(4) What is the effect of task type on overall improvement and its interaction with type of instruction?
To evaluate the effect of instruction, three L1-Mandarin, L2-English participant groups were established: (i) a group which received one hour of linguistically-informed instruction, (ii) a group which received one hour of instruction using their traditional textbook, and (iii) a group which received no extra instruction. The participants were tested prior to intervention, immediately following intervention, and three weeks following intervention using an elicited-sentence imitation task, an acceptability judgment task, and a forced-choice elicitation task. Our results found that L1-Mandarin, L2-English speakers displayed non-native patterns in their assembly of L2 article and noun type features prior to instruction. At immediate and delayed post-test, we found that both linguistically-informed and traditional instruction learners began to reassemble their L1 features for the L2. Our analysis also revealed that linguistically-informed learners made greater gains in linguistic knowledge than the traditional instruction learners and learners with no extra instruction. Finally, we found an interaction between instructional intervention and task type, revealing that linguistically-informed instruction may be the most beneficial in building up short- term implicit knowledge. The overall significance of our results suggests that if linguistically- informed instruction were implemented in a systematic way throughout a course, it may lead to greater gains than traditional instruction when teaching complex linguistic concepts.
VOLUME I
AUTHOR’S DECLARATION OF ORIGINALITY ... VII ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ... IX ABSTRACT ... XI LIST OF TABLES ... XVII LIST OF FIGURES ... XXI LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS ... XXXIII
CHAPTER 1: GENERAL INTRODUCTION & RESEARCH AIMS ... 1
1.1|RATIONALE ... 2
1.2|RESEARCH QUESTIONS ... 4
1.3|ORGANIZATION OF THE DISSERTATION ... 6
CHAPTER 2: LINGUISTIC BACKGROUND ... 9
2.1|LINGUISTIC PROPERTIES OF ARTICLES ... 10
Definiteness ... 11
2.2|LINGUISTIC PROPERTIES OF NOUN TYPES ... 17
Countability ... 17
2.2.1.1 | A Single Domain Approach ... 19
2.2.1.2 | A Blind Lexicon Approach ... 20
2.2.1.3 | A Typological Approach ... 20
Atomicity ... 22
Number ... 23
2.3|THE NOUN PHRASE AND DETERMINER PHRASE ... 25
2.4|CROSSLINGUSTIC VARIATION:ARTICLES &NOUN TYPES IN MANDARIN ... 28
Expression of Definiteness ... 28
Mandarin Nominal Phrases ... 34
2.5|SUMMARY &LINGUISTICS ITEMS TO BE ANALYZED IN THE DATA ... 36
Appropriate Noun Phrase Construction ... 36
2.5.1.1 | Countable Nouns ... 36
2.5.1.2 | Uncountable Nouns ... 37
2.5.1.3 | Flexible Nouns ... 37
Appropriate Noun Morphology ... 38
Linguistic Items to be Analyzed in the Data ... 38
2.5.3.1 | Definite & Indefinite Noun Phrases ... 39
2.5.3.2 | Plural & Singular Noun Morphology ... 40
CHAPTER 3: GENERATIVE SECOND LANGUAGE ACQUISITION ... 43
3.1|SLA AND PRINCIPLES &PARAMETERS ... 43
Full Transfer / Full Access ... 45
Partial Transfer / Full Access ... 46
3.1.2.1 | The Minimal Trees Hypothesis ... 47
3.1.2.2 | The Valueless Features Hypothesis ... 48
Full Transfer / Partial Access ... 48
3.1.3.1 | The Fundamental Difference Hypothesis ... 49
3.1.3.2 | No Parameter Resetting Hypothesis ... 50
Full Access / No Transfer ... 51
No Transfer / No Access ... 52
3.2|THE ACQUISITION OF FEATURES ... 55
Feature Reassembly Hypothesis ... 56
Bottleneck Hypothesis ... 60
3.3|THEORETICAL ASSUMPTIONS IN THE PRESENT STUDY ... 64
CHAPTER 4: INSTRUCTED SECOND LANGUAGE ACQUISITION ... 67
4.1|THE ACQUISITION &LEARNING DISTINCTION ... 68
4.2|THE NATURE OF L2KNOWLEDGE ... 70
The Acquisition of L2 Knowledge ... 72
The Interface Hypothesis ... 73
The Measurement of L2 Knowledge ... 75
4.3|INSTRUCTION IN THE SECOND LANGUAGE CLASSROOM ... 77
Arguments in Support of Instruction ... 79
Standard (Traditional) Instruction ... 82
Linguistically-Informed Instruction ... 84
CHAPTER 5: SECOND LANGUAGE ACQUISITION OF ENGLISH ARTICLES & NOUN TYPES .. 87
5.1|SECOND LANGUAGE ACQUISITION OF ARTICLES ... 88
Previous Research on Second Language Article Acquisition & Misuse ... 88
Classroom Intervention & Second Language Article Acquisition ... 107
5.2|SECOND LANGUAGE ACQUISITION OF NOUN TYPES ... 123
Previous Research on Second Language Noun Type Acquisition & Misuse ... 124
5.3|SECOND LANGUAGE ACQUISITION OF ARTICLES &NOUN TYPES ... 132
5.4|SUMMARY OF PREVIOUS FINDINGS &RESEARCH GAPS TO EXPLORE ... 133
CHAPTER 6: METHODOLOGY ... 145
6.1|GENERAL RESEARCH DESIGN ... 145
6.2|PARTICIPANTS ... 147
Experimental Group: Linguistically-Informed Instruction ... 147
Experimental Group: Traditional Instruction ... 148
Experimental Group: No Extra Instruction ... 148
Baseline Group: Native Speakers of English ... 148
6.3|DATA COLLECTION INSTRUMENTS ... 149
Biodata & Language Use Questionnaire ... 149
English Proficiency Test... 150
Experimental Tasks ... 150
6.3.3.1 | Elicited Sentence Imitation Task ... 153
6.3.3.2 | Acceptability Judgment Task ... 156
6.3.3.3 | Forced-Choice Elicitation Task ... 159
6.4|GENERAL PROCEDURE ... 163
Research Ethics ... 163
Pilot Study Data Collection ... 164
Experimental Study Data Collection ... 165
6.5|THE INTERVENTIONS ... 167
“Traditional Grammar Instruction” Intervention ... 167
Linguistically-Informed Instruction Intervention ... 168
6.5.2.1 | Conceptualization: Inspiration & Roadblocks ... 168
6.5.2.2 | Designing Linguistically-Informed Materials ... 170
6.5.2.3 | The Final Product: LIMs for Mandarin Learners of English ... 173
6.6|DATA DOWNLOAD,TRANSFORMATION,TRIMMING,&ANALYSIS ... 174
6.7|REVISITING THE RESEARCH QUESTIONS,HYPOTHESES,&PREDICTIONS ... 176
CHAPTER 7: RESULTS ... 184
7.1|ELICITED-SENTENCE IMITATION TASK ... 186
Research Question 1: Presence of L1-Mandarin Features in L2 English ... 187
Research Question 2: Within Group Analysis of L2 Feature Reassembly ... 196
7.1.2.1 | Linguistically-Informed Instruction ... 197
7.1.2.2 | Traditional Instruction ... 208
7.1.2.3 | No Extra Instruction ... 220
7.2|ACCEPTABILITY JUDGMENT TASK ... 247
Research Question 1: Presence of L1-Mandarin Features in L2 English ... 247
Research Question 2: Within Group Analysis of L2 Feature Reassembly ... 257
7.2.2.1 | Linguistically-Informed Instruction ... 257
7.2.2.2 | Traditional Instruction ... 269
7.2.2.3 | No Extra Instruction ... 279
Research Question 3: Between Group Analysis of L2 Linguistic Gains ... 290
7.3|FORCED-CHOICE ELICITATION TASK ... 304
Research Question 1: Presence of L1-Mandarin Features in L2 English ... 304
Research Question 2: Within Group Analysis of L2 Feature Reassembly ... 316
7.3.2.1 | Linguistically-Informed Instruction ... 317
7.3.2.2 | Traditional Instruction ... 328
7.3.2.3 | No Extra Instruction ... 339
Research Question 3: Between Group Analysis of L2 Linguistic Gains ... 351
7.4|RESEARCH QUESTION 4:WITHIN &BETWEEN GROUP ANALYSIS OF TASK EFFECT ... 363
7.5|SUMMARY ... 375
CHAPTER 8: DISCUSSION ... 377
8.1|RESEARCH QUESTION 1:PRESENCE OF L1FEATURES IN THE L2 ... 377
8.2|RESEARCH QUESTION 2:L2FEATURE REASSEMBLY (WITHIN GROUPS) ... 382
Effects of Linguistically-Informed Instruction ... 383
Effects of Traditional Instruction ... 388
Effects of No Extra Instruction ... 390
8.3|RESEARCH QUESTION 3:L2FEATURE REASSEMBLY (BETWEEN GROUPS) ... 393
8.4|RESEARCH QUESTION 4:INTERACTION OF TYPE OF INSTRUCTION AND TASK TYPE ... 396
CHAPTER 9: CONCLUSION ... 403
9.1|MAIN FINDINGS:ANSWERING THE RESEARCH QUESTIONS ... 404
9.2|CONTRIBUTIONS TO GENSLARESEARCH AND ISLAPEDAGOGY ... 406
9.3|LIMITATIONS &FUTURE RESEARCH ... 408
9.4|AFINAL REMARK ... 410
REFERENCES ... 411
TABLE 2.1.DISTRIBUTION OF UNIVERSAL SEMANTIC FEATURES ON ENGLISH NOUN TYPES ... 25
TABLE 2.2.INTERPRETATION OF SEMANTICALLY-AMBIGUOUS NOUNS IN THE NOUN PHRASE CONSTRUCTION ... 37
TABLE 3.1.INITIAL STATE AND BEYOND: HYPOTHESES COMPARED (SOME TEXT ADAPTED FROM WHITE,2003B, P.94) ... 53
TABLE 5.1.ARTICLE GROUPING CROSS-LINGUISTICALLY:TWO-ARTICLE LANGUAGES ... 89
TABLE 5.2.CLOZE TEST RESULTS BY PARTICIPANT GROUP FROM IONIN ET AL.(2008) ... 99
TABLE 5.3.DATA COLLECTION PROCEDURE FOR SNAPE AND YUSA (2013, P.172) ... 109
TABLE 5.4.DATA COLLECTION PROCEDURE FOR LOPEZ (2017, P.8) ... 112
TABLE 5.5.DATA COLLECTION PROCEDURE FOR UMEDA ET AL.(2017, P.8) AND SNAPE AND UMEDA (2018, P.177) ... 114
TABLE 5.6.TYPES AND TOKENS IN THE ACCEPTABILITY JUDGMENT TASK FROM UMEDA ET AL.(2017, P.6) ... 116
TABLE 5.7.PARTICIPANTS’ LANGUAGE LEVEL AND LANGUAGE BACKGROUND INFORMATION FROM SABIR (2018, P. 148) ... 117
TABLE 5.8.DATA COLLECTION PROCEDURE FOR SABIR (2018) ... 118
TABLE 5.9.PARTICIPANTS’ LANGUAGE LEVEL FROM ABUMELHA (2018, P.198) ... 120
TABLE 5.10.DATA COLLECTION PROCEDURE FOR ABUMELHA (2018) ... 121
TABLE 5.11.SUMMARY OF L2-ENGLISH ARTICLE ACQUISITION STUDIES ... 135
TABLE 5.12.SUMMARY OF L2-ENGLISH ARTICLE INSTRUCTIONAL INTERVENTION STUDIES ... 138
TABLE 5.13.SUMMARY OF L2-ENGLISH NOUN TYPE ACQUISITION STUDIES ... 141
TABLE 5.14.SUMMARY OF L2-ENGLISH ARTICLE AND NOUN TYPE STUDIES ... 143
TABLE 6.1.RESEARCH DESIGN AND DATA COLLECTION TIMES FOR ALL NON-NATIVE SPEAKER (NNS) PARTICIPANT GROUPS ... 146
TABLE 6.2.DESCRIPTIVE STATISTICS OF THE PARTICIPANTS IN THE EXPERIMENTAL STUDY ... 150
TABLE 6.3.NUMBER OF GRAMMATICAL AND UNGRAMMATICAL SENTENCES IN EACH VERSION OF THE ESIT AND AJT ... 152 TABLE 6.4.EXAMPLE STIMULI FROM THE ESIT ... 156
TABLE 6.5.SAMPLE ITEMS FROM THE AJT ... 159
TABLE 6.6.TEST ITEMS FOR FCET ... 162
TABLE 7.1.MEANS AND STANDARD DEVIATIONS FOR ELICITED-SENTENCE IMITATION SCORES FOR NSS AND NNSS
LEARNERS AT T0 ... 188
TABLE 7.2.MEANS AND STANDARD DEVIATIONS FOR ELICITED-SENTENCE IMITATION SCORES FOR LING LEARNERS
(N =30) AT T0,T1, AND T2 ... 197
TABLE 7.3.MEANS AND STANDARD DEVIATIONS FOR ELICITED-SENTENCE IMITATION SCORES FOR TRAD LEARNERS
(N =18) AT T0,T1, AND T2 ... 209
TABLE 7.4. MEANS AND STANDARD DEVIATIONS FOR ELICITED-SENTENCE IMITATION SCORES FOR NOEX
LEARNERS (N =17) AT T0,T1, AND T2 ... 220
TABLE 7.5.MEAN GAIN SCORES OF ELICITED-SENTENCE IMITATION SCORES FOR ALL LEARNERS ... 232
TABLE 7.6.MEANS AND STANDARD DEVIATIONS FOR ACCEPTABILITY RATINGS FOR NSS AND L2 LEARNERS AT T0 ... 248
TABLE 7.7.MEANS AND STANDARD DEVIATIONS FOR ACCEPTABILITY RATINGS FOR LING LEARNERS (N =30) AT T0, T1, AND T2 ... 258
TABLE 7.8.MEANS AND STANDARD DEVIATIONS FOR ACCEPTABILITY RATINGS FOR TRAD LEARNERS (N =18) AT T0,T1, AND T2 ... 270
TABLE 7.9.MEANS AND STANDARD DEVIATIONS FOR ACCEPTABILITY RATINGS FOR NOEX LEARNERS (N =17) AT
T0,T1, AND T2 ... 280
TABLE 7.10.MEAN GAIN SCORES OF ACCEPTABILITY RATINGS FOR ALL LEARNERS ... 291
TABLE 7.11.MEANS AND STANDARD DEVIATIONS FOR FORCED-CHOICE SCORES FOR NSS AND L2 LEARNERS AT T0 ... 305
TABLE 7.12.MEANS AND STANDARD DEVIATIONS FOR FORCED-CHOICE ELICITATION SCORES FOR LING LEARNERS (N =30) AT T0,T1, AND T2 ... 318
TABLE 7.13.MEANS AND STANDARD DEVIATIONS FOR FORCED-CHOICE ELICITATION SCORES FOR TRAD LEARNERS
(N =18) AT T0,T1, AND T2 ... 329
TABLE 7.14.MEANS AND STANDARD DEVIATIONS FOR FORCED-CHOICE ELICITATION SCORES FOR NOEX LEARNERS
(N =17) AT T0,T1, AND T2 ... 340
TABLE 7.15.MEAN GAIN SCORES AND STANDARD DEVIATIONS OF FORCED-CHOICE SCORES FOR ALL LEARNERS . 351
TABLE 7.16.MEAN PERCENTAGE GAINS BY TASK AND TIME PERIOD FOR ALL LEARNERS ... 363
TABLE 8.1.SUMMARY OF THE RESULTS FOR NNSS, WHERE ✓ REFERS TO SIMILAR PERFORMANCE TO NSS, AND ✗
REFERS TO SIGNIFICANTLY LESS ACCURATE PERFORMANCE ... 378
TABLE 8.2.SUMMARY OF THE RESULTS FOR LING LEARNERS, WHERE ✓* REFERS TO SIGNIFICANT IMPROVEMENT,✓
REFERS TO NON-SIGNIFICANT IMPROVEMENT, ✗ REFERS TO NO IMPROVEMENT OR NON-SIGNIFICANT DECREASE, AND ✗* REFERS TO SIGNIFICANT DECREASE ... 384
TABLE 8.3.SUMMARY OF THE RESULTS FOR TRAD LEARNERS, WHERE ✓* REFERS TO SIGNIFICANT IMPROVEMENT,
✓ REFERS TO GENERAL IMPROVEMENT,✗ REFERS TO NO IMPROVEMENT, AND ✗* REFERS TO SIGNIFICANT
DECREASE ... 388
TABLE 8.4.SUMMARY OF THE RESULTS FOR NOEX LEARNERS, WHERE ✓* REFERS TO SIGNIFICANT IMPROVEMENT,
✓ REFERS TO GENERAL IMPROVEMENT,✗ REFERS TO NO IMPROVEMENT, AND ✗* REFERS TO SIGNIFICANT
DECREASE ... 391
List of Figures
FIGURE 2.1.NOUN TYPE DISTINCTIONS AND THEIR POTENTIAL ENVIRONMENTS (ADOPTED AND ADAPTED FROM
TESCHNER AND EVANS (2007, P.126,FIGURE 5C)) ... 27
FIGURE 3.1.FULL TRANSFER /FULL ACCESS (WHITE,2003B, P.61) ... 46
FIGURE 3.2.THE FUNDAMENTAL DIFFERENCE HYPOTHESIS (BLEY-VROMAN,1990,1996,2009) ... 49
FIGURE 3.3.LICERAS’S (1996) APPROACH TO SECOND LANGUAGE ACQUISITION. ... 51
FIGURE 3.4.FULL ACCESS /NO TRANSFER (WHITE,2003B, P.90) ... 52
FIGURE 3.5.CLINE OF DIFFICULTY IN GRAMMATICAL FEATURE ACQUISITION (SLABAKOVA,2009B) ... 61
FIGURE 3.6.CLINE OF DIFFICULTY IN GRAMMATICAL FEATURE ACQUISITION IN SIX LEARNING SITUATIONS (CHO &
SLABAKOVA,2014, P.166) ... 62
FIGURE 4.1.THE INTERFACE HYPOTHESIS AND ITS POSITIONS ... 73
FIGURE 5.1.A PROPOSED CLINE OF DIFFICULTY FOR L1-NAJDI ARABIC SPEAKERS FROM ABUMELHA (2018, P.196) ... 119 FIGURE 6.1.DIRECTIONS FOR THE ESIT ... 154
FIGURE 6.2.DIRECTIONS FOR THE AJT ... 157
FIGURE 6.3.A SAMPLE ITEM FROM THE AJT ... 158
FIGURE 6.4.DIRECTIONS FOR THE FCET ... 161
FIGURE 6.5.A SAMPLE ITEM FROM THE FCET ... 163
FIGURE 6.6.DATA PROCESSING PROCEDURE ... 175
FIGURE 7.1.VIOLIN PLOTS OF MEAN ELICITED-SENTENCE IMITATION SCORES FOR ENGLISH NSS AND L2 LEARNERS
AT T0 ... 189
FIGURE 7.2.EFFECT PLOT FOR ELICITED-SENTENCE IMITATION SCORES FOR L1 BY NOUN_TYPE AT T0 IN CONTEXT
1 ... 191
FIGURE 7.3. EFFECT PLOT FOR ELICITED-SENTENCE IMITATION SCORES FOR L1 BY NOUN_TYPE AT T0 FOR
CONTEXT 2 ... 192
FIGURE 7.4. EFFECT PLOT FOR ELICITED-SENTENCE IMITATION SCORES FOR L1 BY NOUN_TYPE AT T0 FOR
CONTEXT 3 ... 193
FIGURE 7.5. EFFECT PLOT FOR ELICITED-SENTENCE IMITATION SCORES FOR L1 BY NOUN_TYPE AT T0 FOR
CONTEXT 4 ... 194
FIGURE 7.6. EFFECT PLOT FOR ELICITED-SENTENCE IMITATION SCORES FOR L1 BY NOUN_TYPE AT T0 FOR CONTEXT 5 ... 195
FIGURE 7.7.VIOLIN PLOTS OF MEAN ELICITED-SENTENCE IMITATION SCORES FOR LING LEARNERS IN CONTEXT1 ... 199
FIGURE 7.8.EFFECT PLOT FOR ELICITED-SENTENCE IMITATION SCORES OF TESTING_TIME BY NOUN_TYPE FOR
LING LEARNERS IN CONTEXT 1 ... 200
FIGURE 7.9.VIOLIN PLOTS OF MEAN ELICITED-SENTENCE IMITATION SCORES FOR LING LEARNERS IN CONTEXT2 ... 201
FIGURE 7.10.EFFECT PLOT FOR ELICITED-SENTENCE IMITATION SCORES OF TESTING_TIME BY NOUN_TYPE FOR
LING LEARNERS IN CONTEXT 2 ... 202
FIGURE 7.11.VIOLIN PLOTS OF MEAN ELICITED-SENTENCE IMITATION SCORES FOR LING LEARNERS IN CONTEXT3 ... 203 FIGURE 7.12.EFFECT PLOT FOR ELICITED-SENTENCE IMITATION SCORES OF TESTING_TIME BY NOUN_TYPE FOR
LING LEARNERS IN CONTEXT 3 ... 204
FIGURE 7.13.VIOLIN PLOTS OF MEAN ELICITED-SENTENCE IMITATION SCORES FOR LING LEARNERS IN CONTEXT4 ... 205
FIGURE 7.14.EFFECT PLOT FOR ELICITED-SENTENCE IMITATION SCORES OF TESTING_TIME BY NOUN_TYPE FOR LING LEARNERS IN CONTEXT 4 ... 206
FIGURE 7.15.VIOLIN PLOTS OF MEAN ELICITED-SENTENCE IMITATION SCORES FOR LING LEARNERS IN CONTEXT5 ... 207
FIGURE 7.16.EFFECT PLOT FOR ELICITED-SENTENCE IMITATION SCORES OF TESTING_TIME BY NOUN_TYPE FOR
LING LEARNERS IN CONTEXT 5 ... 208
FIGURE 7.17.VIOLIN PLOTS OF MEAN ELICITED-SENTENCE IMITATION SCORES FOR TRAD LEARNERS IN CONTEXT1 ... 210
FIGURE 7.18.EFFECT PLOT FOR ELICITED-SENTENCE IMITATION SCORES OF TESTING_TIME BY NOUN_TYPE FOR
TRAD LEARNERS IN CONTEXT 1 ... 211
FIGURE 7.19.VIOLIN PLOTS OF MEAN ELICITED-SENTENCE IMITATION SCORES FOR TRAD LEARNERS IN CONTEXT2 ... 212
FIGURE 7.20.EFFECT PLOT FOR ELICITED-SENTENCE IMITATION SCORES OF TESTING_TIME BY NOUN_TYPE FOR
TRAD LEARNERS IN CONTEXT 2 ... 213
FIGURE 7.21.VIOLIN PLOTS OF MEAN ELICITED-SENTENCE IMITATION SCORES FOR TRAD LEARNERS IN CONTEXT3 ... 214
FIGURE 7.22.EFFECT PLOT FOR ELICITED-SENTENCE IMITATION SCORES OF TESTING_TIME BY NOUN_TYPE FOR TRAD LEARNERS IN CONTEXT 3 ... 215
FIGURE 7.23.VIOLIN PLOTS OF MEAN ELICITED-SENTENCE IMITATION SCORES FOR TRAD LEARNERS IN CONTEXT4 ... 216
FIGURE 7.24.EFFECT PLOT FOR ELICITED-SENTENCE IMITATION SCORES OF TESTING_TIME BY NOUN_TYPE FOR
TRAD LEARNERS IN CONTEXT 4 ... 217
FIGURE 7.25.VIOLIN PLOTS OF MEAN ELICITED-SENTENCE IMITATION SCORES FOR TRAD LEARNERS IN CONTEXT5 ... 218
FIGURE 7.26.EFFECT PLOT FOR ELICITED-SENTENCE IMITATION SCORES OF TESTING_TIME BY NOUN_TYPE FOR
TRAD LEARNERS IN CONTEXT 5 ... 219
FIGURE 7.27.VIOLIN PLOTS OF MEAN ELICITED-SENTENCE IMITATION SCORES FOR NOEX IN CONTEXT 1 ... 221
FIGURE 7.28.EFFECT PLOT FOR ELICITED-SENTENCE IMITATION SCORES OF TESTING_TIME BY NOUN_TYPE FOR
NOEX LEARNERS IN CONTEXT 1 ... 222
FIGURE 7.29.VIOLIN PLOTS OF MEAN ELICITED-SENTENCE IMITATION SCORES FOR NOEX IN CONTEXT 2 ... 223
FIGURE 7.30.EFFECT PLOT FOR ELICITED-SENTENCE IMITATION SCORES OF TESTING_TIME BY NOUN_TYPE FOR
NOEX LEARNERS IN CONTEXT 2 ... 224
FIGURE 7.31.VIOLIN PLOTS OF MEAN ELICITED-SENTENCE IMITATION SCORES FOR NOEX IN CONTEXT 3 ... 225
FIGURE 7.32.EFFECT PLOT FOR ELICITED-SENTENCE IMITATION SCORES OF TESTING_TIME BY NOUN_TYPE FOR NOEX LEARNERS IN CONTEXT 3 ... 226
FIGURE 7.33.VIOLIN PLOTS OF MEAN ELICITED-SENTENCE IMITATION SCORES FOR NOEX IN CONTEXT 4 ... 227
FIGURE 7.34.EFFECT PLOT FOR ELICITED-SENTENCE IMITATION SCORES OF TESTING_TIME BY NOUN_TYPE FOR NOEX LEARNERS IN CONTEXT 4 ... 228
FIGURE 7.35.VIOLIN PLOTS OF MEAN ELICITED-SENTENCE IMITATION SCORES FOR NOEX IN CONTEXT 5 ... 229
FIGURE 7.36.EFFECT PLOT FOR ELICITED-SENTENCE IMITATION SCORES OF TESTING_TIME BY NOUN_TYPE FOR NOEX LEARNERS IN CONTEXT 5 ... 230
FIGURE 7.37.BAR PLOT OF MEAN ELICITED-SENTENCE IMITATION GAIN SCORES FOR ALL LEARNER GROUPS IN
CONTEXT 1 ... 233
FIGURE 7.38.EFFECT PLOT FOR ELICITED-SENTENCE IMITATION SCORES OF LEARNER_TYPE BY TESTING_TIME BY
NOUN_TYPE IN CONTEXT 1 ... 235
FIGURE 7.39.BAR PLOT OF MEAN ELICITED-SENTENCE IMITATION GAIN SCORES FOR ALL LEARNER GROUPS IN
CONTEXT 2 ... 236
FIGURE 7.40.EFFECT PLOT FOR ELICITED-SENTENCE IMITATION SCORES OF LEARNER_TYPE BY TESTING_TIME BY
NOUN_TYPE IN CONTEXT 2 ... 238
FIGURE 7.41.BAR PLOT OF MEAN ELICITED-SENTENCE IMITATION GAIN SCORES FOR ALL LEARNER GROUPS IN
CONTEXT 3 ... 239
FIGURE 7.42.EFFECT PLOT FOR ELICITED-SENTENCE IMITATION SCORES OF LEARNER_TYPE BY TESTING_TIME BY NOUN_TYPE IN CONTEXT 3 ... 241
FIGURE 7.43.BAR PLOT OF MEAN ELICITED-SENTENCE IMITATION GAIN SCORES FOR ALL LEARNER GROUPS IN
CONTEXT 4 ... 242
FIGURE 7.44.EFFECT PLOT FOR ELICITED-SENTENCE IMITATION SCORES OF LEARNER_TYPE BY TESTING_TIME BY
NOUN_TYPE IN CONTEXT 4 ... 243
FIGURE 7.45.BAR PLOT OF MEAN ELICITED-SENTENCE IMITATION GAIN SCORES FOR ALL LEARNER GROUPS IN
CONTEXT 5 ... 244
FIGURE 7.46.EFFECT PLOT FOR ELICITED-SENTENCE IMITATION SCORES OF LEARNER_TYPE BY TESTING_TIME BY
NOUN_TYPE IN CONTEXT 5 ... 246
FIGURE 7.47.VIOLIN PLOTS OF MEAN ACCEPTABILITY RATINGS FOR ENGLISH NSS AND L2 LEARNERS AT T0 ... 250
FIGURE 7.48.EFFECT PLOT FOR ACCEPTABILITY RATINGS FOR L1 BY NOUN_TYPE AT T0 IN CONTEXT 1 ... 252
FIGURE 7.49.EFFECT PLOT FOR ACCEPTABILITY RATINGS FOR L1 BY NOUN_TYPE AT T0 IN CONTEXT 2 ... 253
FIGURE 7.50.EFFECT PLOT FOR ACCEPTABILITY RATINGS FOR L1 BY NOUN_TYPE AT T0 IN CONTEXT 3 ... 254
FIGURE 7.51.EFFECT PLOT FOR ACCEPTABILITY RATINGS FOR L1 BY NOUN_TYPE AT T0 IN CONTEXT 4 ... 255
FIGURE 7.52.EFFECT PLOT FOR ACCEPTABILITY RATINGS FOR L1 BY NOUN_TYPE AT T0 IN CONTEXT 5 ... 256
FIGURE 7.53.VIOLIN PLOTS OF MEAN ACCEPTABILITY RATINGS FOR LING LEARNERS IN CONTEXT1 ... 259
FIGURE 7.54.EFFECT PLOT FOR ACCEPTABILITY RATINGS OF TESTING_TIME BY NOUN_TYPE FOR LING LEARNERS IN CONTEXT 1 ... 261
FIGURE 7.55.VIOLIN PLOTS OF MEAN ACCEPTABILITY RATINGS FOR LING LEARNERS IN CONTEXT2 ... 262
FIGURE 7.56.EFFECT PLOT FOR ACCEPTABILITY RATINGS OF TESTING_TIME BY NOUN_TYPE FOR LING LEARNERS IN CONTEXT 2 ... 263
FIGURE 7.57.VIOLIN PLOTS OF MEAN ACCEPTABILITY RATINGS FOR LING LEARNERS IN CONTEXT3 ... 264
FIGURE 7.58.EFFECT PLOT FOR ACCEPTABILITY RATINGS OF TESTING_TIME BY NOUN_TYPE FOR LING LEARNERS IN CONTEXT 3 ... 265
FIGURE 7.59.VIOLIN PLOTS OF MEAN ACCEPTABILITY RATINGS FOR LING LEARNERS IN CONTEXT4 ... 266
FIGURE 7.60.EFFECT PLOT FOR ACCEPTABILITY RATINGS OF TESTING_TIME BY NOUN_TYPE FOR LING LEARNERS IN CONTEXT 4 ... 267
FIGURE 7.61.VIOLIN PLOTS OF MEAN ACCEPTABILITY RATINGS FOR LING LEARNERS IN CONTEXT5 ... 268
FIGURE 7.62.EFFECT PLOT FOR ACCEPTABILITY RATINGS OF TESTING_TIME BY NOUN_TYPE FOR LING LEARNERS IN CONTEXT 5 ... 269
FIGURE 7.63.VIOLIN PLOTS OF MEAN ACCEPTABILITY RATINGS FOR TRAD LEARNERS IN CONTEXT1 ... 271
FIGURE 7.64.EFFECT PLOT FOR ACCEPTABILITY RATINGS OF TESTING_TIME BY NOUN_TYPE FOR TRAD LEARNERS IN CONTEXT 1 ... 272
FIGURE 7.65.VIOLIN PLOTS OF MEAN ACCEPTABILITY RATINGS FOR TRAD LEARNERS IN CONTEXT2 ... 273
FIGURE 7.66.EFFECT PLOT FOR ACCEPTABILITY RATINGS OF TESTING_TIME BY NOUN_TYPE FOR TRAD LEARNERS IN CONTEXT 2 ... 274
FIGURE 7.67.VIOLIN PLOTS OF MEAN ACCEPTABILITY RATINGS FOR TRAD LEARNERS IN CONTEXT3 ... 274
FIGURE 7.68.EFFECT PLOT FOR ACCEPTABILITY RATINGS OF TESTING_TIME BY NOUN_TYPE FOR TRAD LEARNERS IN CONTEXT 3 ... 275
FIGURE 7.69.VIOLIN PLOTS OF MEAN ACCEPTABILITY RATINGS FOR TRAD LEARNERS IN CONTEXT4 ... 276
FIGURE 7.70.EFFECT PLOT FOR ACCEPTABILITY RATINGS OF TESTING_TIME BY NOUN_TYPE FOR TRAD LEARNERS IN CONTEXT 4 ... 277
FIGURE 7.71.VIOLIN PLOTS OF MEAN ACCEPTABILITY RATINGS FOR TRAD LEARNERS IN CONTEXT5 ... 278
FIGURE 7.72.EFFECT PLOT FOR ACCEPTABILITY RATINGS OF TESTING_TIME BY NOUN_TYPE FOR TRAD LEARNERS IN CONTEXT 5 ... 279
