The effect of prior L1 knowledge on

the implicit and explicit learning of L2

syntax from reading a novel

Jieun Ahn
(Yonsei University)
How and to what extent is adult L2 acquisition comparable to child L1 acquisition?

vs.

Implicit L1 learning Can adults acquire L2 without awareness?

(Godfroid, 2016; Grey et al., 2014; Leung & Williams, 2011, 2014; Morg
an-short et al, 2012; Rebuschat & Williams, 2012; Williams, 2005, 2011;
Williams & Kuribara, 2008)

But..
Prior L1 knowledge (Leung & Williams, 2014)

Research gap: The role of prior L1 knowledge in t

he incidental learning of L2 syntax
Aim of the study
To investigate whether prior L1 knowledge affect the incidental learning of
L2 syntax consciously, unconsciously, or both.

Do prior L1 knowledge and awareness affect English and Korean speakers’

RQ 1 online sensitivity to word order violations under incidental learning conditions?

Do prior L1 knowledge and awareness affect English and Korean speakers’

RQ 2
offline grammatical judgments under incidental learning conditions?

4
 Exposure task: Novel reading (Godroid, Ahn, et al., 2018)

Triangulation (Rebsuchat, 2013; Rebsuchat et al., 2015)

Online knowledge: eye movements (grammatical sensitivity)

Awareness: Verbal reports Offline knowledge: GJT

Delayed testing (Grey et al., 2014; Morgan-Short et al., 2012)
5
Participants
L1 English (head-initial, right-branching) speakers (n = 40)
L1 Korean (head-final, left-branching) speakers (n = 40)

n Exposure
English experimental group 25 English vocabulary, Korean syntax
English control group 15 English vocabulary, English syntax
Korean experimental group 25 English vocabular, Korean syntax
Korean control group 15 English vocabulary, English syntax

6
Semi-artificial language: Koreanish

• English vocabulary and Korean syntax

o English = head-initial, right branching
o Korean = head-final, left branching
o Head-finality: VP, PP, CP, NP rules
o Example

English: A vague suspicion of everyone and everything filled my mind.

Korean: Everyone and everything of a vague suspicion my mind filled.

7
 Exposure task: Novel reading
The Mysterious Affair at Styles (Christie, 1920)
Practice: English (44 sentences)
Training: Koreanish (479 sentences)
Testing-Control_pre: Koreanish (20 sentences, 1 block )
Testing-Violation: German (20 sentences, 1 block)
Testing-Control_post: Koreanish (20 sentences, 1 block)
[Training text]
I injury due to the battlefield from home
had been sent. And rather a depressing
rehab facility in some months spending
after, a month’s sick leave was given. I
friends or family had no, and I John
Cavendish across ran when what do to
my mind make up to was trying.
Online knowledge measure
8
Apparatus: Eyelink Portable Duo eye-tracker (SR research)

Portable Duo camera

Host PC
9
Online measure of knowledge

(Block 25-27) Grammatical sensitivity to violations: Integrated knowledge (Jiang, 2007)

Control_pre Violation Control_post

(Koreanish) (German) (Koreanish)

Difference in sentence reading times: control – violation

10
Sentence Type Grammatical pattern Ungrammatical pattern

Offline
Simple, basic knowledge
SOV measure: GJT
Joon the paper revised.
*SVO
(Gass & Spinner, 2019; Rebuschat & Williams, 2012)
Joon revised the paper.
*VSO
Revised Joon the paper.
Simple, postposition SPP(postposition) *S[prepositionPP]V
Max the classroom in studied. Max in the classroom studied.
*SV[PPpostposition]
Max studied the classroom in.
Complex, that-clause S[SOVthat]V * S[thatSOV]V
The dean he his salary donated that lied. The dean that he his salary donated lied.
*SV[SOVthat]
The dean lied he his salary donated that.
Complex, relative S[OVrelative clause]OV *S[relative pronounOV]OV
clause Jessie a blue coat wore who the man found. Jessie who a blue coat wore the man found.
*SO[OVrelative pronoun]V
Jessie the man a blue coat wore who found.
Complex, subordinate SOVsubordinator, SOV *subordinatorSOV, SOV
clause We dinner enjoyed while, the band music played. While we dinner enjoyed, the band music played.
*SOV, SOVsubordinator
The band music played, we dinner enjoyed while.
11
Procedure

• Exposure task: reading a novel (with eye-movement recording)

• Testing task: Immediate GJT
• Debriefing interview (1st part)
Session 1

• Testing task: Delayed GJT

• Debriefing interview (2nd part)
Session 2
(2weeks later)

12
Awareness measure:
Verbal reports

13
 Verbal
Retrospective verbal reports: Awareness repots

• L1 English
n Timing Comments
Unaware 12 - I thought the words were randomly jumbled.
VP-aware 12 Exposure I noticed the subject or noun was normally at the beginning o
f the sentence, and the verb was at the end.

• L1 Korean
n Timing Comments
Unaware 5 - The rule I noticed is to place nouns at the beginning of the se
ntence.
VP-aware 10 Exposure I recognized that one of the types is to place the verb in the e
nd of the sentence.
L1-aware 9 Testing I’ve noticed that the order of some sentences was similar to m
y native language, Korean, at test.
14
 Online measure:
Grammatical sensitivity

15
Sensitivity: L1
Sensitivity

One-sample t-test on sensitivity score

English: M = -12, p = .913
Korean: M = 292, p = .023

L1 and sensitivity
Korean: suggestion of sensitivity
English: no sensitivity

16
L1 Korean: Awareness and sensitivity
Sensitivity

Verbal
reports

* *

Awareness and sensitivity

L1 aware participants showed sensitivity
 Unconscious L1 transfer

17
 Offline measure:
Grammaticality judgments

18
 GJT
Overall GJT performance

Immediate GJT Delayed GJT

Accuracy d’ Accuracy d’
L1: English
Experimental 56.93 (9.80) 0.37 (0.74) 58.91 (8.18) 0.54 (0.62)
Control 45.08 (4.64) -0.65 (0.60) 45.54 (4.59) -0.57 (0.48)
L1: Korean
Experimental 69.64 (11.79) 1.13 (0.81) 77.61 (11.81) 1.80 (1.10)
Control 49.04 (9.44) -0.17 (0.66) 48.75 (7.87) -0.07 (0.42)

• 2 (Condition: experimental, control) x 2 (L1: English, Korean) x 2 (Time: immedia

te, delayed) mixed-design ANOVA on d’ scores
 Significant 3-way interaction (p = .054)
19
 3-way interaction
GJT

Time x Condition (p = .986) Time x Condition (p = .013)

***

***
***
***
***

20
 GJT: Condition, L1, and Time

 Condition
Training (i.e., incidental exposure through a novel) was effective for both L1 groups.

 Time
Korean: knowledge significantly enhanced  English: knowledge remained unchanged

 L1
Korean experimental group > English experimental group at delayed testing

21
 L1 Korean: L1 awareness, Time, and GJT

GJT

Verbal
L1-aware > VP-aware (p = .007)
reports
L1-aware > Unaware (p = .038)

 Awareness (verbal reports)

L1-aware participants excelled in the GJ
T across time and led to improved kno
wledge consolidation.

22
Significant effects of prior L1 knowledge in incidental learning conditions

Convergence of the knowledge measures

L1 Sensitivity Grammatical judgm L1 influence

ents

English X Δ
Awareness

Korean  (L1-aware)  (K > E, Incidental learning

L1 aware x Time) of L2 syntax

23
References
Christie, A. (1920). The mysterious affair at Styles. N.p.: John Lane. Retrieved on 11 October, 2017, from Project Gutenberg,
www.gutenberg.org
Godfroid, A. (2016). The effects of implicit instruction on implicit and explicit knowledge development. Studies in Second Language
Acquisition, 38(2), 177–215.
Godfroid, A., Ahn, J., Choi, I., Ballard, L., Cui, Y, Johnston, S., Lee, S., Sarkar, A., & Yoon, H. (2018). Incidental vocabulary learning in a
natural reading context: an eye-tracking study. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 21(3), 563-584.
Grey, S., Williams, J. N., & Rebuschat, P. (2014). Incidental exposure and L2 learning of morphosyntax. Studies in Second Language
Acquisition, 36, 1–35.
Leung, J. H. C., & Williams, J. N. (2011). The implicit learning of mappings between forms and contextually-derived meanings. Studies in
Second Language Acquisition, 33, 33–55.
Leung, J. H. C., & Williams, J. N. (2014). Crosslinguistic differences in implicit language learning . Studies in Second Language Acquisition,
36, 634–662.
Morgan-Short, K., Finger, I., Grey, S., & Ullman, M. T. (2012). Second language processing shows increased native-like neural responses
after months of no exposure. PLoS One, 7(3), e32974.
Rebuschat, P. (2013). Measuring implicit and explicit knowledge in second language research. Language Learning, 63, 595–626.
Rebuschat, P., & Williams, J. N. (2012). Implicit and explicit knowledge in second language acquisition. Applied Psycholinguistics, 33,
829–856.
Rebuschat, P., Hamrick, p., Riestenber, K., Sacks, R., & Ziegler, N. (2015). Triangulating measures of awareness: A contribution to the
debate on learning without awareness. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 37, 299–334.
Williams, J. N. (2005). Learning without awareness. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 27, 269–304.
Williams, J. N. (2009). Implicit learning in second language acquisition. In W. C. Ritchie & T. K. Bhatia (Eds.), The new handbook of
second language acquisition (pp. 319–353). Bingley, UK: Emerald Press.
Contact Information
• Name: Jieun Ahn

• Position: Lecturer

• Affiliation: Yonsei University

• Email: anji9946@gmail.com