Cover not available
Article published In:
Journal of Second Language Studies
Vol. 1:2 (2018) ► pp.334–357

The influence of L1 frequency in instructed second language learning of L2 idioms

| Arizona State University

This study investigates the influence of L1 frequency on the acquisition of L2 idioms with an experiment employing structured input instruction based on the input processing model. Intermediate L2 Korean learners completed a pretest, computer-assisted instructional treatment session, and posttest. The tests included production, interpretation, and meaning tasks, which manipulated amount of context and idiom type (i.e., Shared L1-L2 idioms, which have linguistic representations in both languages and are subgrouped by high or low L1 frequency, and L2 Only idioms, which have no L1 equivalent). The results show that high L1 frequency had a consistently facilitatory effect on the learning of equivalent L2 idioms, but that context had the strongest effect on the learning of L2 idioms that have no counterpart in the L1.

Keywords: idiom, acquisition, frequency, context, Korean
Article outline
  • 1.Literature review: Frequency effects on formulaic language acquisition
  • 2.The study
    • 2.1Participants
    • 2.2Materials
    • 2.3Treatment
    • 2.4Pre- and posttests
    • 2.5Procedure
    • 2.6Variables
  • 3.Results
  • 4.Discussion
  • 5.Conclusion
  • Acknowledgements
  • References
Published online: 27 August 2018
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/jsls.17007.tur
References
Boers, F.
(2000a) Metaphor awareness and vocabulary retention. Applied Linguistics, 211, 533–571. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2000b) Enhancing metaphoric awareness in specialised reading. English for Specific Purposes, 19(2), 137–147. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2009) Applied linguistics perspectives on cross-cultural variation in conceptual metaphor. Metaphor and Symbol, 18(4), 231–238. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Boers, F., & Demecheleer, M.
(2001) Measuring the impact of cross-cultural differences on learners’ comprehension of imageable idioms. ELT Journal, 55(3), 255–262. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Boers, F., & Littlemore, J.
(Eds.) (2003) Cross-cultural differences in conceptual metaphor: Applied linguistics perspectives [Special Issue]. Metaphor and Symbol. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Boers, F., & Lindstromberg, S.
(Eds.) (2008) Cognitive approaches to teaching vocabulary. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Bortfeld, H.
(2003) Comprehending idioms cross-linguistically. Experimental Psychology, 501, 217–230. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Brown, C.
(1993) Factors affecting the acquisition of vocabulary: Frequency and saliency of words. In T. Huckin, M. Haynes, & J. Coady (Eds.), Second language reading and vocabulary learning (pp. 263–286). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.Google Scholar
Bybee, J.
(2007) Frequency of use and the organization of language. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2008) Usage-based grammar and second language acquisition. In P. Robinson & N. C. Ellis (Eds.), Handbook of cognitive linguistics and second language acquisition (pp. 216–236). New York, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar
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(3), 403–443. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Charteris-Black, J.
(2002) Second language figurative proficiency: A comparative study of Malay and English. Applied Linguistics, 23(1), 104–133. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Chen, Y. -C.
(2016) Teaching figurative language to EFL learners: An evaluation of metaphoric instruction. The Language Learning Journal. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cieślicka, A. B.
(2011) Suppression of literal meanings in L2 idiom processing: Does context help? Studies in Second Language Acquisition and Teaching, 1(1), 13–36. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cieślicka, A. B., Heredia, R. R., & Olivares, M.
(2014) The eyes have it: How language dominance, salience, and context affect eye movements during idiomatic language processing. In L. Aronin & M. Pawlak (Eds.), Essential topics in applied linguistics and multilingualism: Studies in honor of David Singleton (pp. 21–42). Berlin: Springer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Conklin, K., & Schmitt, N.
(2012) The processing of formulaic language. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 321, 45–61. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Davies, M.
(2008) Corpus of contemporary American English. Available at [URL]
Durrant, P., & Schmitt, N.
(2010) Adult learners’ retention of collocations from exposure. Second Language Research, 26(2), 163–188. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ellis, N. C.
(2002) Frequency effects in language processing. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 24(2), 143–188. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2008) Usage-based and form-focused language acquisition: The associative learning of constructions, learned attention, and the limited L2 endstate. In P. Robinson & N. C. Ellis (Eds.), Handbook of cognitive linguistics and second language acquisition (pp. 372–405). New York, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar
(2016) Frequency in language learning and language change. In H. Behrens & S. Pfänder (Eds.), Experience counts: Frequency effects in language (pp. 239–254). Berlin: De Gruyter.Google Scholar
Ellis, N. C., & Cadierno, T.
(2009) Constructing a second language: Introduction to the special section. Annual Review of Cognitive Linguistics, 71, 111–139. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ellis, R.
(Ed.) (2005) Planning and task performance in a second language. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
File-Muriel, R. J.
(2010) Lexical frequency as a scalar variable in explaining variation. Canadian Journal of Linguistics, 55(1), 1–15. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gass, S. M.
(1997) Input, interaction and the second language learner. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Goldberg, A.
(2006) Constructions at work: The nature of generalization in language. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Goldschneider, J. M., & DeKeyser, R. M.
(2001) Explaining the ‘natural order of L2 morpheme acquisition’ in English: A meta-analysis of multiple determinants. Language Learning, 51(2), 1–50. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Granger, S., Dagneaux, E., Meunier, F., & Paquot, M.
(2009) International corpus of learner English (version 2). Louvain-la-Neuve: Presses universitaires de Louvain.Google Scholar
Gyllstad, H., & Wolter, B.
(2016) Collocational processing in light of the phraseological continuum model: Does semantic transparency matter? Language Learning, 66(2), 296–323. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Jiang, N.
(2000) Lexical representation and development in a second language. Applied Linguistics, 211, 47–77. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Jiang, N., & Nekrasova, T.
(2007) The processing of formulaic sequences by second language speakers. The Modern Language Journal, 911, 433–445. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Laufer, B., & Goldstein, Z.
(2004) Testing vocabulary knowledge: Size, strength and computer adaptiveness. Language Learning, 541, 399–436. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Levelt, W. J. M.
(1989) Speaking: From intention to articulation. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
Lowie, W., & Verspoor, M.
(2004) Input versus transfer? The role of frequency and similarity in the acquisition of L2 prepositions. In M. Achard & S. Niemeier (Eds.), Cognitive linguistics, second language acquisition, and foreign language teaching (pp. 77–93). Berlin: De Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Madlener, K.
(2016) Effects of type and token frequency manipulations in instructed second language learning. In H. Behrens & S. Pfänder (Eds.), Experience counts: Frequency effects in language (pp. 133–173). Berlin: De Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Paquot, M.
(2015) L1 frequency in foreign language acquisition: Recurrent word combinations in French and Spanish EFL learner writing. Second Language Research [Epub ahead of print March 5, 2016]. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
R Core Team
(2014) R: A language and environment for statistical computing. Vienna, Austria: R Foundation for Statistical Computing. [URL]
Robinson, P.
(2001) Task complexity, task difficulty and task production: Exploring interactions in a componential framework. Applied Linguistics, 221, 27–57. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sanz, C., & Morgan-Short, K.
(2004) Positive evidence versus explicit rule presentation and explicit negative feedback: A computer-assisted study. Language Learning, 54(1), 35–78. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Siyanova-Chanturia, A., Conklin, K., & van Heuven, W. J. B.
(2011) Seeing a phrase ‘time and again’ matters: The role of phrasal frequency in the processing of multi-word sequences. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Language, Memory, and Cognition, 37(3), 776–784.Google Scholar
Sonbul, S.
(2015) Fatal mistake, awful mistake or extreme mistake? Frequency effects on off-line/on-line collocation processing. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 18(3), 419–437. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Tomasello, M.
(2003) Constructing a language: A usage-based theory of language acquisition. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Türker, E.
(2016a) The role of L1 conceptual knowledge and frequency in the acquisition of L2 metaphorical expressions. Second Language Research, 32(1), 25–48. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2016b) Idiom acquisition by second language learners: The influence of cross-linguistic similarity and context. The Language Learning Journal. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
VanPatten, B.
(1996) Input processing and grammar instruction: Theory and research. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.Google Scholar
(2003) Processing instruction. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
(2004) Input processing in second language acquisition. In B. VanPatten (Ed.), Processing instruction: Theory, research, and commentary (pp. 5–31). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2007) Input processing in adult SLA. In B. VanPatten & J. Williams (Eds.), Theories in second language acquisition (pp. 115–135). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Webb, S.
(2007) The effects of repetition on vocabulary knowledge. Applied Linguistics, 281, 46–65. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wolter, B., & Gyllstad, H.
(2011) Collocational links in the L2 mental lexicon and the influence of L1 intralexical knowledge. Applied Linguistics, 32(4), 430–449. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2013) Frequency of input and L2 collocational processing: A comparison of congruent and incongruent collocations. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 35(3), 451–482. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wolter, B., & Yamashita, J.
(2014) Processing collocations in a second language: A case of first language activation. Applied Psycholinguistics, 36(5), 1193–1221. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Yamashita, J., & Jiang, N.
(2010) L1 influence on the acquisition of L2 collocations: Japanese ESL users and EFL learners acquiring English collocations. TESOL Quarterly, 44(4), 647–668. DOI logoGoogle Scholar