The Role of Task-Essential Training and Working Memory in Offline and Online Morphological Processing

Melisa Dracos,Nick Henry

doi:10.3390/languages6010024

Abstract

This study investigates the effects of task-essential training on offline and online processing of verbal morphology and explores how working memory (WM) modulates the effects of training. We compare a no-training control group to two training groups who completed a multisession task-essential training focused on Spanish verbal inflections related to person–number agreement and tense. Effects of training were evaluated using an offline aural interpretation task and an online self-paced reading (SPR) assessment, administered as a pretest, posttest, and delayed posttest. Results showed that training led to more accurate interpretation of both person-number and tense information in the offline interpretation test. While higher WM was associated generally with greater accuracy, higher WM did not lead to greater gains from training. The SPR results showed that training did not increase sensitivity to subject–verb agreement or adverb–verb tense violations. However, among participants who underwent training, WM enhanced sensitivity under some conditions. These results demonstrate a role for individual differences in WM for offline and online processing, and they suggest that while task-essential training has been shown repeatedly to improve offline processing of target forms, its effects on online processing of redundant verbal morphology are more limited. Implications for L2 learning are discussed.

Highlights

Research on second language (L2) acquisition and sentence processing has established strong links between which forms are processed in the input and what is eventually acquired (Dekydtspotter and Renaud 2014; Fodor 1998; see VanPatten 2015a, 2015b)
There were no significant main effects or interactions for any of the models run. Given that both the self-paced reading (SPR) analyses and the Interpretation task analyses revealed no significant differences between the two training groups, these two groups were combined for the mixed-effects linear models addressing the effects of working memory (WM)
That training had an effect on online processing, but only among learners with a certain level of WM. These findings are consistent with Indrarathne and Kormos (2018), who found that high WM learners process forms more deeply during training, but comparisons must be made with extreme caution because (a) the effects of WM were not consistent across training groups or conditions in either study, (b) the trainings were different, and (c) the present study focused on online processing post-training, whereas Indrarathne and Kormos focused on attentional allocation during training

Summary

Introduction

Research on second language (L2) acquisition and sentence processing has established strong links between which forms are processed in the input and what is eventually acquired (Dekydtspotter and Renaud 2014; Fodor 1998; see VanPatten 2015a, 2015b). Numerous studies have addressed whether targeted interventions or training alter a learner’s processing and facilitate L2 acquisition These studies have used a range of different interventions—most notably Structured Input activities (Wong 2004)—which aim to facilitate the establishment of form–meaning connections through systematic meaningful use of a target form. The underlying theoretical assumptions are different, models of learned attention and cue blocking make similar predictions given that salient lexical and discourse cues typically overshadow verbal morphology in natural learning contexts (see, e.g., Ellis and Sagarra 2010a, 2010b) These processing-based accounts explain, in part, why morphological difficulties often persist late into development (e.g., Lardiere 1998)

Objectives

Methods

Results

Discussion

Conclusion