Dil Öğrenme Yatkınlığının Tanımlanmasında İşler Bellek ve Açık/Örtük Bilgi Türlerinin Rolü

Year 2015, Volume: 32 Issue: 2, 1 - 17, 01.07.2015

Şebnem Yalçın , Sevdeğer Çeçen , Gülcan Erçetin

Abstract

Bu çalışmada, denetimli ve bilinçli işlenen açık bilgilerin saklandığı bildirimsel bellek ve farkındalık göstermeden otomatik

olarak işlenen örtük bilgilerin saklandığı yöntemsel bellek türlerinin dil işlevlerini gerçekleştirmedeki katkılarının

incelenmesiyle dil öğrenme yatkınlığının tanımlanması amaçlanmaktadır. Araştırmada bir devlet üniversitesine devam

etmekte olan 72 katılımcıya işler belleği, açık/örtük bilgiyi, dil yatkınlığını ve dil yeterliliğini ölçen testler uygulanmıştır.

Korelasyon analizleri dil testlerinin kendi aralarında anlamlı ilişkiler gösterdiğini ve işler bellek ile dil yatkınlığı arasında

anlamlı ilişkiler olduğunu ortaya koymuştur. Temel bileşenler analizinde işler bellek ve dil yatkınlığı aynı faktöre yüklenirken

dil testleri de bir arada tek bir faktöre yüklenmiştir. Çalışmanın sonuçları, ergenlikten sonra formel ortamlarda ikinci dil

öğrenen bir katılımcı grubunda dil öğrenme yatkınlığının işler bellekle ilişkisini ortaya koyarak güncel dil yatkınlık

modellerini desteklemektedir.

Keywords

Dil öğrenme yatkınlığı, işler bellek, örtük bilgi, açık bilgi

References

• Abrahamsson, N., ve Hyltenstam, K. (2008). The robustness of aptitude effects in nearnative second language acquisition. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 30, 481-509.
• Abrahamsson, N., ve Hyltenstam, K. (2009). Age of onset and nativelikeness in a second language: Listener perception versus linguistic scrutiny. Language Learning, 59, 249-306.
• Aguado, K. (2002). Language learning aptitude and foreign language learning. In W. M. Chan, K. N. Chin, S. K. Bhatt, ve I. Walker (Eds.), Perspectives on individual characteristics and foreign language education (pp. 51-79). Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.
• Alptekin, C., ve Erçetin, G. (2009). Assessing the relationship of working memory to L2 reading: Does the nature of comprehension process and reading span task make a difference? System, 37, 627-639.
• Alptekin, C., ve Erçetin, G. (2010). The role of L1 and L2 working memory in literal and inferential comprehension in L2 reading. Journal of Research in Reading, 33, 206-219.
• Alptekin, C, ve Erçetin, G. (2011). Effects of working memory capacity and content familiarity on literal and inferential comprehension in L2 reading. TESOL Quarterly, 45, 235-266.
• Alptekin, C., Erçetin, G., ve Özemir, O. (2014). Effects of variations in reading span task design on the relationship between working memory capacity and second language reading. The Modern Language Journal, 98, 536-552.
• Baddeley, A. D. (2003). Working memory and language: An overview. Journal of Communication Disorders, 36, 189-208.
• Bley-Vroman, R. (1991). The logical problem of foreign language learning. Linguistic Analysis, 20, 3-49.
• Bowles, M. (2011). Measuring implicit and explicit linguistic knowledge: What can heritage language learners contribute? Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 33, 247-271.
• Carroll, J. B. (1981). Twenty-five years of research in foreign language aptitude. In K. C. Diller (Ed.), Individual differences and universals in language learning aptitude (pp. 83-113). Rowley, MA: Newbury House.
• Carroll, J. B., ve Sapon, S. (1959). The modern language aptitude test. San Antonio, TX: Psychological measurement.
• Daneman, M., ve Carpenter, P.A. (1980). Individual differences in working memory and reading. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 19, 450-466.
• DeKeyser, R. M. (1997). Beyond explicit rule learning: Automatizing second language morphosyntax. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 19, 195-221.
• DeKeyser, R. M. (2000). The robustness of critical period effects in second language acquisition. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 27, 205-239.
• DeKeyser, R. (2003). Implicit and explicit learning. In C. J. Doughty ve M. H. Long (Eds.), Handbook of second language acquisition (pp. 313-348). Oxford, MA: Blackwell.
• DeKeyser, R. (2009). Cognitive-psychological processes in second language learning. In M. H. Long ve C. J. Doughty (Eds.), The handbook of language teaching (pp. 119-138). Malden, MA: Blackwell.
• DeKeyser, R. (2012). Interactions between individual differences, treatments, and structures in SLA. Language Learning, 62 (suppl. 2), 189-200.
• DeKeyser, R., ve Juffs, A. (2005). Cognitive considerations in L2 learning. In E. Hinkel (Ed.), Handbook of research in second language teaching and learning (pp. 437-454). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
• Dornyei, Z. (2005). The psychology of the language learner: Individual differences in second language acquisition. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
• Dornyei, Z. (2010). The relationship between language aptitude and language learning motivation: Individual differences from a dynamic perspective. In E. Macaro (Ed.), Continuum companion to second language acquisition (pp. 247-267). London: Continuum.
• Dornyei, Z., ve Skehan, P. (2003). Individual differences in second language learning. In C. Doughty ve M. H. Long (Eds.), Handbook of second language acquisition (pp. 589-630). Oxford, MA: Blackwell.
• Ehrman, M. E., ve Oxford, R. (1995). Cognition plus: Correlates of language learning success. The Modern Language Journal, 79, 67-89.
• Ellis, N. C. (2005). At the interface: Dynamic interactions of explicit and implicit language knowledge. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 27, 305-352.
• Ellis, R. (2009). Implicit and explicit learning, knowledge and instruction. In R. Ellis, S. Loewen, C. Elder, R. Erlam, J. Philp, ve H. Reinders (Eds.), Implicit and explicit knowledge in second language learning, testing and teaching (pp. 325). Bristol: Multilingual Matters.
• Ellis, R., Loewen, S., Elder, C., Erlam, R., Philp, J., ve Reinders, H. (Eds.). (2009). Implicit and explicit knowledge in second language learning, testing and teaching. Bristol: Multilingual Matters.
• Ergetin, G., ve Alptekin, A. (2013). The explicit/implicit knowledge distinction and working memory: Implications for second-language reading comprehension. Applied Psycholinguistics, 34, 727-753.
• Field, A. (2009). Discovering statistics using SPSS. London: Sage Publications.
• Granena, G. (2012). Age differences and cognitive aptitudes for implicit and explicit learning in ultimate second language attainment. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Maryland.
• Granena, G. (2013). Cognitive aptitudes for second language learning and the LLAMA language aptitude test. In G. Gisela ve M. Long (Eds.), Sensitive periods, language aptitude, and ultimate attainment (pp. 105-130). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Granena, G., ve Long, M. (2013). Age of onset, length of residence, language aptitude, and ultimate L2 attainment in three linguistic domains. Second Language Research, 29, 311-343.
• Han, Y., ve Ellis, R. (1998). Implicit knowledge, explicit knowledge, and general language proficiency. Language Teaching Research, 2, 1-23.
• Harrington, M., ve Sawyer, M. (1992). L2 working memory capacity and L2 reading skill. Studies in Second Language Learning. 14, 25-38.
• Hulstijn, J. H. (2002). Towards a unified account of the representation, processing and acquisition of second language knowledge. Second Language Research, 18, 193-223.
• Hulstijn, J. H. (2005). Theoretical and empirical issues in the study of implicit and explicit second language learning: Introduction. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 27, 129-140.
• Hummel, K. (2009). Aptitude, phonological memory, and second language proficiency in novice adult learners. Applied Psycholinguistics, 30, 225-249.
• Jiang, N. (2007). Selective integration of linguistic knowledge in adult second language learning. Language Learning, 57, 1-33.
• Juffs, A., ve Harrington, M. (2011). Aspects of working memory in L2 learning. Language Teaching, 44, 137-166.
• Kiss, C., ve Nikolov, M. (2005). Developing, piloting, and validating an instrument to measure young learners’ aptitude. Language Learning, 55, 99-150.
• Kormos, J. (2013). New conceptualizations of language aptitude in second language attainment. In G. Gisela ve M. Long (Eds.), Sensitive periods, language aptitude, and ultimate attainment (pp. 131-152). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
• Leeser, M. J. (2007). Learner-based factors in L2 reading comprehension and processing grammatical form: Topic familiarity and working memory. Language Learning, 57, 229-270.
• Linck J. A., Hughes, M. M., Campbell, S.G., Silbert, N. H., Tare, M., Jackson, S. R., Smith, B. K., Bunting, M. F., ve Doughty, C. J. (2013). Hi-LAB: A new measure of aptitude for high-level language proficiency. Language Learning, 63, 1-37.
• Meara, P. (2005). LLAMA language aptitude tests. Swansea: Lognostics.
• Miyake, A., ve Friedman, N. P. (1998). Individual differences in second language proficiency: Working memory as language aptitude. In A. F. Healy ve L. E. Bourne (Eds.), Foreign language learning: Psycholinguistics studies on training and retention (pp. 339-364). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
• Paradis, M. (2004). A neurolinguistic theory of bilingualism. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
• Paradis, M. (2009). Declarative and procedural determinants of second languages. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
• Petersen, C. R., ve Al-Haik, A. R. (1976). The development of the defense language aptitude battery. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 36, 369-380.
• Pimsleur, P. (1966). Testing foreign language learning. In A. Valdman (Ed.), Trends in language teaching (pp. 175- 214). New York: McGraw-Hill Company.
• Pinker, S., ve Ullman, M. T. (2002). The past and future of the past tense. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 6, 456-463.
• Robinson, P. (2002). Learning conditions, aptitude complexes and SLA: A framework for research and pedagogy. In P. Robinson (Ed.), Individual differences and instructed language learning (pp. 113-133). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
• Robinson, P. (2012). Individual differences, aptitude complexes, SLA processes and aptitude test development. In M. Pawlak (Ed.), New perspectives on individual differences in language learning and teaching (pp. 57-76). Oxford: Springer.
• Sawyer, M., ve Ranta, L. (2001). Aptitude, individual differences, and instructional design. In P. Robinson (Ed.), Cognition and second language instruction (pp. 319-353). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Skehan, P. (2002). Theorising and updating. In P. Robinson (Ed.), Individual differences and instructed language learning (pp. 69-93). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
• Skehan, P. (2012). Language aptitude. In S. M. Gass ve A. Mackey (Eds.), The Routledge handbook of second language acquisition (pp. 381-395). New York, NY: Routledge.
• Spada, N. (2015). SLA research and L2 pedagogy: Misapplications and questions of relevance. Language Teaching, 48, 69-81.
• Squire, L. R. (1992). Memory and the hippocampus: A synthesis from findings with rats, monkeys, and humans. Psychological Review, 99, 195-231.
• Suzuki, Y., ve DeKeyser, R. (2015). Comparing elicited imitation and word monitoring as measures of implicit knowledge. Language Learning, 65, 860-895.
• Tabachnick, B. G., ve Fidell, L. S. (2007). Using multivariate statistics. Boston: Pearson.
• Ullman, M. T. (2001). The neural basis of lexicon and grammar in first and second language: The declarative/procedural model. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 4, 105-122
• Ullman, M. T. (2004). Contributions of memory circuits to language: The declarative/procedural model. Cognition, 92, 231-270.
• Ullman, M. T. (2005). A cognitive neuroscience perspective on second language acquisition: The declarative/procedural model. In C. Sanz (Ed.), Mind and context in adult second language acquisition: Methods, theory and practice (pp. 141-178). Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.
• Walter, C. (2004). Transfer of reading comprehension skills to L2 is linked to mental representations of text and to L2 working memory. Applied Linguistics, 25, 315-339.
• Winke, P. (2013). An investigation into second language aptitude for advanced Chinese Language learning. The Modern Language Journal, 97, 109-130.
• Yalçın, Ş., Çeçen,S., ve Erçetin, G. (2016). The relationship between aptitude and working memory: an instructed SLA context. Language Awareness, 25, 144158.