Abstract

The current study focuses on how prefixes and suffixes in Arabic and English impact one’s working memory capacity to recall verbs. Further, it deals with whether or not Arabic-English bilingual speakers recall Arabic and English prefixed and suffixed verbs differently. To investigate this, the study was conducted in the form of two experiments on a group of 10 graduate students. The first experiment was on Arabic prefixed and suffixed verbs, whereas the second experiment was conducted similarly on English. The study concluded that suffixed Arabic verbs were recalled more than the prefixed ones, whereas in English the result was contrary where the participants could recall prefixed verbs more than the suffixed ones. This shows that L2 (Second Language) does not differ from L1 (First Language) in the effort exerted to recall words. Rather, the findings may suggest that it is easier to recall words in the second language, which might be due to the intensive instruction received in the second language. The study also discovered that several other factors played important roles in making the participants recall the items such as word-length effect, frequency and recency of the words.

Highlights

  • 1.1 Working Memory ModelAmong cognitive psychologists, issues related to Working Memory (WM) have been an important topic for many years

  • In the last couple of decades, both linguists and Second Language Acquisition (SLA) researchers have shown a major interest in WM functions as they have endeavored to learn more about the role of memory and information processing in Second Language Acquisition (Wen, Mota, & McNeil, 2015)

  • The study examined the different techniques used to recall the verbs in both languages, and if it required extra effort on the working memory to recall words in a second language

Read more

Summary

Introduction

1.1 Working Memory ModelAmong cognitive psychologists, issues related to Working Memory (WM) have been an important topic for many years. WM can encompass such subsystems as storage and manipulation in areas like visual and verbal imaging. In this theoretical framework, WM is tasked to monitor this information, place it or locate it into a workable pattern, i.e. process the data, dispose of the unnecessary information, and retrieve it upon command (Carroll, 2008; Field, 2004). According to Baddeley and Hitch’s original model, WM consists of three parts: the central executive, the phonological loop, which contains phonological store and the articulatory rehearsal mechanism; and the visuospatial sketchpad. Phonological loop and the visuospatial sketchpad are considered to be slave systems of the central executive part. The central executive possesses a “limited capacity pool of general processing resources” (Carroll 2008, p. 48)

Objectives
Methods
Conclusion
Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.