Language-Learning Aptitude and Working Memory for Language
In the context of L2 learning, language-learning aptitude can be defined as a complex set of abilities that enable some learners to acquire new language material more quickly and with greater ease than others (Dornyei, 2005). Thus, an individual’s performance on a test of language-learning aptitude is expected to predict how fast and with how much ease she/he will learn an L2 relative to other individuals. Tests of aptitude were originally designed for selection and placement purposes; in current L2-learning research, however, tests of aptitude are primarily used to investigate the construct in relation to L2-learning success under different instructional conditions (Erlam, 2005), L2 learners’ age profiles (Harley & Hart, 1997; Robinson, 2001), and other individual difference variables, such as general cognitive ability (Ehrman & Oxford, 1995; Sasaki, 1996).
The Modern Language Aptitude Test or MLAT (Carroll & Sapon, 2002) probably constitutes the most widely used measure, both for practical placement purposes and to achieve research objectives. Although the MLAT has justly been critiqued (for recent reviews, see Dornyei, 2005; Dornyei & Skehan, 2003), it has also been endorsed as one of the best instruments available (Sparks & Ganschow, 2001) whose validity has been amply demonstrated (Carroll, 1990).
According to the classic model of language-learning aptitude developed by John B. Carroll (Carroll, 1962, 1990), the construct comprises the following four components: phonetic coding ability, grammatical sensitivity, inductive language-learning ability, and associative memory. Whilst the MLAT is intended to measure these four components of language-learning aptitude, its subtests are not necessarily direct operationalisations. In accordance with psychometric tradition (Carroll, 1962, 1993), the MLAT was developed on the basis of empirical data gleaned from large-scale factor-analytic studies, so the test itself preceded the more detailed theoretical conceptualisation of the construct.
Carroll’s four-component model of language-learning aptitude was updated in the wake of empirical studies conducted in the 1980s (Skehan, 1986,1989) which led to the proposal that the components of grammatical sensitivity and inductive language-learning ability be subsumed under a single label, that is, language-analytic ability. This reconceptualisation was motivated by the correlation between these two components and further justified by the theoretical claim that the two components appear to differ only in their degree of emphasis, rather than in qualitative terms (Dornyei, 2005; Skehan, 1998). Put differently, the notion of language-analytic ability potentially comprises the capacity to internally derive knowledge about language, e.g. through the discovery of patterns in the input, and the application of knowledge about language, whether derived internally or assimilated from external sources. In several recent discussions of the construct of aptitude, the notion of language-analytic ability in the sense of a learner’s ability to identify and extrapolate linguistic patterns has been adopted (Dornyei & Skehan, 2003; Erlam, 2005; Ranta, 2002; Skehan, 2002).
There is as yet relatively little published research which has directly sought to link either language-learning aptitude as whole or specific components of this construct with metalinguistic knowledge (Jessner, 1999, 2006). This is somewhat surprising, since the notion of metalinguistic knowledge arguably shares many characteristics with language-analytic ability in particular. Both of these concepts would appear to require the explicit representation and use of linguistic categories and relations between such categories. Even though metalinguistic knowledge is typically operationalised via the L2 and language-analytic ability as represented in the MLAT draws on the learner’s LI, one can reasonably hypothesise a relationship between metalinguistic skills and language-analytic skills, as demonstrated by the work of Alderson et al. (1997), Ranta (2002), and Roehr (2008b).
In sum, this work suggests that, first, metalinguistic knowledge is a multicomponential construct comprising the ability to describe and explain aspects of the L2 and L2 language-analytic ability (Roehr, 2008b); and second, that there is, at the very least, a relationship between metalinguistic knowledge and (components of) language-learning aptitude (Alder-son et al., 1997; Ranta, 2002). The latter issue, in particular, deserves further investigation because pertinent findings will enhance our understanding of the nature of metalinguistic knowledge itself and the role of such knowledge in L2 learning.With years of experience in making delicate Discount Louis Vuitton Handbags , we are waiting to provide the crowning touch to your style. Just feel free to shop Louis Vuitton Lunar GM shoulderbag M95970 in acajou here.
Processing your request, Please wait....
