Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-vvkck Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-25T12:50:29.444Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

“Bread and butter” or “butter and bread”? Nonnatives’ processing of novel lexical patterns in context

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  22 June 2022

Suhad Sonbul Open the ORCID record for Suhad Sonbul [Opens in a new window] ,
Dina Abdel Salam El-Dakhs Open the ORCID record for Dina Abdel Salam El-Dakhs [Opens in a new window] ,
Kathy Conklin Open the ORCID record for Kathy Conklin [Opens in a new window]  and
Gareth Carrol Open the ORCID record for Gareth Carrol [Opens in a new window]
Suhad Sonbul*
Affiliation:
Umm Al-Qura University, Saudi Arabia
Dina Abdel Salam El-Dakhs
Affiliation:
Prince Sultan University, Saudi Arabia
Kathy Conklin
Affiliation:
University of Nottingham, UK
Gareth Carrol
Affiliation:
University of Birmingham, UK
*
*Corresponding author. E-mail: sssonbul@uqu.edu.sa
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Little is known about how nonnative speakers process novel language patterns in the input they encounter. The present study examines whether nonnatives develop a sensitivity to novel binomials and their ordering preference from context. Thirty-nine nonnative speakers of English (L1 Arabic) read three short stories seeded with existing binomials (black and white) and novel ones (bags and coats) while their eye movements were monitored. The existing binomials appeared once in their forward (conventional) form and once in their reversed form. The novel binomials appeared in their experimentally defined forward form in different frequency conditions (two vs. four encounters) and once in the reversed form. Results showed no advantage for existing binomials over their reversed forms. For the novel binomials, the nonnative speakers read subsequent encounters significantly faster than initial ones for both frequency conditions. More importantly, the final reversed form also led to faster reading, suggesting that L2 speakers process the reversed form of a novel binomial as another encounter, ignoring the established order.

Type
Research Article
Information
Studies in Second Language Acquisition , Volume 45 , Issue 2 , May 2023 , pp. 370 - 392
Check for updates
Open Practices
Open data Open materials
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2022. Published by Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Alotaibi, S. (2020).  The effect of input mode, input enhancement and number of exposures on the learning and processing of binomials in the L2  [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. University of Nottingham.Google Scholar
Alotaibi, S., Pellicer-Sánchez, A., & Conklin, K. (2022). The effect of input modes and number of exposures on the learning of L2 binomials. ITL – International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 173, 58–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Arcara, G., Lacaita, G., Mattaloni, E., Passarini, L., Mondini, S., Beninca, P., & Semenza, C. (2012). Is “hit and run” a single word? The processing of irreversible binomials in neglect dyslexia. Frontiers in Psychology, 3, 1–11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barcroft, J. (2002). Semantic and structural elaboration in L2 lexical acquisition. Language Learning, 52, 323–363.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bates, D., Mächler, M., Bolker, B., & Walker, S. (2015). Fitting linear mixed-effects models using lme4. Journal of Statistical Software, 67, 1–4810.18637/jss.v067.i01CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blais, M.-J., & Gonnerman, L. M. (2013). Explicit and implicit semantic processing of verb particle constructions by French–English bilinguals. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 16, 829–846.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boers, F., & Lindstromberg, S. (2012). Experimental and intervention studies on formulaic sequences in a second language. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 32, 83–110.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brysbaert, M., & Stevens, M. (2018). Power analysis and effect size in mixed effects models: A tutorial. Journal of Cognition, 1, 1–20.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bybee, J. (2006). From usage to grammar: The mind’s response to repetition. Language, 82, 711–733.10.1353/lan.2006.0186CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carrol, G., & Conklin, K. (2014). Getting your wires crossed: Evidence for fast processing of L1 idioms in an L2. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 17, 784–797.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carrol, G., & Conklin, K. (2020). Is all formulaic language created equal? Unpacking the processing advantage for different types of formulaic sequences. Language and Speech, 63, 95–122.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Carrol, G., Conklin, K., & Gyllstad, H. (2016). Found in translation: The influence of the L1 on the reading of idioms in a L2. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 38, 403–443.10.1017/S0272263115000492CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Choi, S. (2017). Processing and learning of enhanced English collocations: An eye movement study. Language Teaching Research, 21, 403–426.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Christiansen, M.H., & Arnon, I. (2017). More than words: The role of multiword sequences in language learning and use. Topics in Cognitive Science, 9, 542–551.10.1111/tops.12274CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Conklin, K., & Carrol, G. (2021). Words go together like “bread and butter”: The rapid, automatic acquisition of lexical patterns. Applied Linguistics, 42, 492–513CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Conklin, K., & Schmitt, N. (2008). Formulaic sequences: Are they processed more quickly than nonformulaic language by native and nonnative speakers? Applied Linguistics, 29, 72–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ding, C., & Reynolds, B. L. (2019). The effects of L1 congruency, L2 proficiency, and the collocate-node relationship on the processing of L2 English collocations by L1-Chinese EFL learners. Review of Cognitive Linguistics, 17, 331–357.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Durrant, P., & Schmitt, N. (2010). Adult learners’ retention of collocations from exposure. Second Language Research, 26, 163–188.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ellis, N. C. (2002). Frequency effects in language processing: A review with implications for theories of implicit and explicit language acquisition. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 24, 143–188.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ellis, N. C., Simpson-Vlach, R. I. T. A., & Maynard, C. (2008). Formulaic language in native and second language speakers: Psycholinguistics, corpus linguistics, and TESOL. TESOL Quarterly, 42, 375–396.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Erman, B., & Warren, B. (2000). The idiom principle and the open choice principle. Text and Talk, 20, 29–62.Google Scholar
Godfroid, A., Ahn, J., Choi, I., Ballard, L., Cui, Y., Johnston, S., Lee, S., Sarkar, A., & Yoon, H. J. (2018). Incidental vocabulary learning in a natural reading context: An eye-tracking study. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 21, 563–584.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Godfroid, A., Boers, F., & Housen, A. (2013). An eye for words: Gauging the role of attention in incidental L2 vocabulary acquisition by means of eye-tracking. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 35, 483–517.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goldberg, A. E., & Lee, C. (2021). Accessibility and historical change: An emergent cluster led uncles and aunts to become aunts and uncles. Frontiers in Psychology, 12, 1418.10.3389/fpsyg.2021.662884CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gyllstad, H., & Wolter, B. (2016). Collocational processing in light of the phraseological continuum model: Does semantic transparency matter? Language Learning, 6), 296–323.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Irujo, S. (1986). Don’t put your leg in your mouth: Transfer in the acquisition of idioms in a second language. TESOL Quarterly, 20, 287–304.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kaye, A. S. (2009). Cultural ingredients in Arabic lexical pairs (Binomials). Word, 60, 65–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kuznetsova, A., Brockhoff, P., & Christensen, R. (2017). lmerTest package: Tests in linear mixed effects models. Journal of Statistical Software, 82, 1–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Libben, M., & Titone, D. (2008). The multidetermined nature of idiom processing. Memory and Cognition, 36, 1103–1121.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Linck, J. A., & Cunnings, I. (2015). The utility and application of mixed-effects models in second language research. Language Learning, 65, 185–207.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Majuddin, E., Siyanova-Chanturia, A., & Boers, F. (2021). Incidental acquisition of multiword expressions through audiovisual materials: The role of repetition and typographic enhancement. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 43, 985–1008.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Malkiel, Y. (1959). Studies in irreversible binomials. Lingua, 8, 113–160.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Matlock, T., & Heredia, R. R. (2002). Understanding phrasal verbs in monolinguals and bilinguals. In Herediaand, R. R. & Altarriba, J. (Eds.), Bilingual sentence processing (pp. 251–274). Elsevier.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Meara, P., & Jones, G. (1988). Vocabulary size as a placement indicator. In Grunwell, P. (Ed.), Applied linguistics in society (pp. 80–87). CILT.Google Scholar
Meara, P., & Miralpeix, I. (2017). Tools for researching vocabulary. Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
Miralpeix, I., & Muñoz, C. (2018). Receptive vocabulary size and its relationship to EFL language skills. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, 56, 1–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mollin, S. (2013). Pathways of change in the diachronic development of binomial reversibility in Late Modern American English. Journal of English Linguistics, 41, 168–203.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mollin, S. (2014). The (ir) reversibility of English binomials. John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Morgan, E., & Levy, R. (2016). Abstract knowledge versus direct experience in processing of binomial expressions. Cognition, 157, 384–402.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Nation, I. S. P. (2012). The BNC/COCA word family lists. Document bundled with Range Program with BNC/COCA Lists, 25. https://www.victoria.ac.nz/lals/about/staff/publications/paul-nation/Information-on-the-BNC_COCA-word-family-lists.pdfGoogle Scholar
Pawley, A., & Syder, F. (1983). Two puzzles for linguistic theory. In Richards, J. C. & Schmidt, R. W. (Eds.), Language and communication (pp. 191–227). Longman.Google Scholar
Pellicer-Sánchez, A. (2016). Incidental L2 vocabulary acquisition from and while reading: An eye-tracking study. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 38, 97–130.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pellicer-Sánchez, A. (2017). Learning L2 collocations incidentally from reading. Language Teaching Research, 21, 381–402.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pellicer-Sánchez, A., & Schmitt, N. (2010). Incidental vocabulary acquisition from an authentic novel: Do things fall apart? Reading in a Foreign Language, 22, 31–55.Google Scholar
Pitts, M., White, H., & Krashen, S. (1989). Acquiring second language vocabulary through reading: A replication of the Clockwork Orange study using second language acquirers. Reading in a Foreign Language, 5, 271–275.Google Scholar
Pritchett, L. K., Vaid, J., & Tosun, S. (2016). Of black sheep and white crows: Extending the bilingual dual coding theory to memory for idioms. Cogent Psychology, 3, 1135512.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Puimège, E., & Peters, E. (2020). Learning formulaic sequences through viewing L2 television and factors that affect learning. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 42, 525–549.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
R Core Team (2021). R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. https://www.R-project.org.Google Scholar
Rommers, J., Dijkstra, T., & Bastiaansen, M. (2013). Context-dependent semantic processing in the human brain: Evidence from idiom comprehension. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 25, 762–776.10.1162/jocn_a_00337CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Siyanova-Chanturia, A., Conklin, K., & van Heuven, W. J. B. (2011). Seeing a phrase “Timed and Again” matters: The role of phrasal frequency in the processing of multiword sequences. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning Memory and Cognition, 37, 776–784.Google Scholar
Sonbul, S. (2015). Fatal mistake, awful mistake, or extreme mistake? Frequency effects on off-line/on-line collocational processing. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 18, 419–437.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sonbul, S., & El-Dakhs, D. (2020). Timed versus untimed recognition of L2 collocations: Does estimated proficiency modulate congruency effects? Applied Psycholinguistics, 41, 1197–1222.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sonbul, S., & Schmitt, N. (2013). Explicit and implicit lexical knowledge: Acquisition of collocations under different input conditions. Language Learning, 63, 121–159.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Titone, D., Columbus, G., Whitford, V., Mercier, J., & Libben, M. (2015). Contrasting bilingual and monolingual idiom processing. In Heredia, R. R. & Cieślicka, A. B. (Eds.), Bilingual figurative language processing (pp. 171–207). Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tiv, M., Gonnerman, L., Whitford, V., Friesen, D., Jared, D., & Titone, D. (2019). Figuring out how verb-particle constructions are understood during L1 and L2 reading. Frontiers in Psychology, 10, 1733.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Uchihara, T., & Clenton, J. (2020). Investigating the role of vocabulary size in second language speaking ability. Language Teaching Research, 24, 540–556.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
van Hell, J. G., & Tanner, D. (2012). Second language proficiency and cross-language lexical activation. Language Learning, 62, 148–171.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Waring, R., & Takaki, M. (2003). At what rate do learners learn and retain new vocabulary from reading a graded reader? Reading in a Foreign Language, 15, 130–163.Google Scholar
Webb, S., Newton, J., & Chang, A. C. S. (2013). Incidental learning of collocation. Language Learning, 63, 91–120.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wolter, B., & Gyllstad, H. (2011). Collocational links in the L2 mental lexicon and the influence of L1 intralexical knowledge. Applied Linguistics, 32, 430–449.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wolter, B., & Gyllstad, H. (2013). Frequency of input and L2 collocational processing: A comparison of congruent and incongruent collocations. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 35, 451–482.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wolter, B., & Yamashita, J. (2018). Word frequency, collocational frequency, L1 congruency and proficiency in L2 collocation processing: What accounts for L2 performance? Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 40, 395–416.10.1017/S0272263117000237CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wray, A. (2000). Formulaic sequences in second language teaching: Principle and practice. Applied Linguistics, 21, 463–489.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yamashita, J. (2018). Possibility of semantic involvement in the L1-L2 congruency effect in the processing of L2 collocations. Journal of Second Language Studies, 1, 60–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yamashita, J., & Jiang, N. A. N. (2010). L1 influence on the acquisition of L2 collocations: Japanese ESL users and EFL learners acquiring English collocations. TESOL Quarterly, 44, 647–668.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Supplementary material: File

Sonbul et al. supplementary material

Online Appendix

Download Sonbul et al. supplementary material(File)
File 50.7 KB