Production-based training benefits the comprehension and production of grammatical gender in L2 German

Valérie Keppenne,Carrie N. Jackson,Elise W. M. Hopman

doi:10.1017/s014271642100014x

Valérie Keppenne, Carrie N. Jackson + Show 1 more

Open Access

https://doi.org/10.1017/s014271642100014x

Copy DOI

Abstract

AbstractOngoing debate exists regarding the role of production-based versus comprehension-based training for L2 learning. However, recent research suggests an advantage for production training due to benefits stemming from the opportunity to compare generated output with feedback and from the memory mechanisms associated with language production. Based on recent findings with an artificial language paradigm, we investigated the effects of production-based and comprehension-based training for learning grammatical gender among beginning L2 German learners. Participants received production-based or comprehension-based training on grammatical gender assignment and gender agreement between determiners, adjectives, and 15 German nouns, followed by four tasks targeting the comprehension and production of the target nouns and their corresponding gender marking on determiners and adjectives. Both groups were equally accurate in comprehending and producing the nouns. For tasks requiring knowledge of grammatical gender, the production-based group outperformed the comprehension-based group on both comprehension and production tests. These findings demonstrate the importance of language production for creating robust linguistic representations and have important implications for classroom instruction.

Highlights

An important question in instructed second language (L2) acquisition is which type of instruction is most beneficial for acquiring an L2
Based on Hopman and MacDonald’s (2018) experimental design, the present study investigates whether production-based training is more beneficial than comprehension-based training for comprehending grammatical forms when learning a more complex morphosyntactic agreement paradigm in a natural language, namely grammatical gender agreement in L2 German
There are no differences between production-based instruction (PBI) and comprehension-based instruction (CBI) on immediate posttests for production, but PBI is more effective than CBI on delayed posttests. These findings indicate that training benefits may be modality specific, that is, comprehension or production, when measured immediately after training, but that PBI is more effective than CBI when measured over an extended period of time

Summary

Introduction

An important question in instructed second language (L2) acquisition is which type of instruction is most beneficial for acquiring an L2. A recent study (Hopman & MacDonald, 2018) compared the effectiveness of comprehension-based tasks versus production-based tasks for the learning of simple morphosyntactic agreement in an artificial language paradigm and showed clear advantages for production-based over comprehension-based training on posttest measures testing the comprehension of the target morphosyntactic agreement features The authors attribute this finding to language production drawing on a different type of memory processing than language comprehension, thereby strengthening the relevant agreement features in memory. Defining CBI and PBI As the terms CBI and PBI suggest, the main difference between the two lies in the types of learning activities used, that is, whether the learner is required to produce target L2 structures during training Underlying these two contrasting methods are different assumptions regarding how to encourage learners to attend to and process new grammatical forms in a manner that facilitates acquisition. Would seem to have a potentially significant role in the development of syntax and morphology. (Swain, 1995, p. 128)

Methods

Results

Discussion

Conclusion