论文部分内容阅读
【Abstract】In second language acquisition （SLA） field， people gradually notice the influence of individual differences on language learning and ultimate attainment. The relationship between working memory capacity （WMC） and SLA has been analyzed from many perspectives. In this paper， we only focus on second language speaking rather than the whole SLA. Based on past studies， two research questions are designed in this paper. To answer the questions， Further researches need to pay more attention on this question.
【Key words】Working Memory Capacity； Second Language； Speech； Age
【作者簡介】Liu Liu （1994.5- ）. Female. The Han Nationality. Xi’an local citizen. Work in XHIS， AP， DP and MYP Mandarin teacher. The University of Georgia： TESOL and World Language Education master. Research direction： language acquisition and teaching methods.
Background Knowledge
WMC and its components
Working Memory （WM） is defined as a temporary storage of information， it can also manipulate the information to facilitate cognitive development. Baddeley and Hitch （1974） propose a multicomponent working memory system. As model shows， in this proposed system， there are three main components. Phonological loop is “a temporary verbal-acoustic storage system” Visuospatial sketchpad is a “visual subsystem for storage and manipulation”. Central executive is “a limited capacity attentional system” （Baddeley， 2003）. However， later experiments found that the quantity of the stored information exceed the information stored in phonological loop and visuospatial. Baddeley（2003） proposed a new component， the episodic buffer. As it shows， it is “a limited capacity system that depends heavily on executive processing”， but it focuses more on the “storage of information rather than attentional control” （Baddeley， 2003）.
Second Language Acquisition
From the perspective of linguistics， language can be divided into six major disciplines： morphology （grammar）， phonology （sounds）， syntax （sentences）， semantics （meaning）， discourse （text）， pragmatics （ language in use）. （Ortega， 2009， p.2）. We think language is made by these six parts， and each of them has an influence on language acquisition. So the research on SLA focuses on the factors affect these six parts. The major factors include age， cross linguistic influence， linguistic environment， cognition， language aptitude， motivation， individual differences and social dimensions of language learning. The major topics of Age are learning rate， Critical Period hypothesis，Adult-children differences and a ceiling to second language learning： ultimate attainment on L2 morphosyntax and L2 phonology.The major topics of Cross linguistic Influences are L1-L2 differences and similarities，L1 transfer： positive and negative，Interlanguage development.The major topics of Linguistic environment are 稟cculturation，Interaction and acquisition，Input and Output modification.The major topics of Cognition are Long term Memory and L2 vocabulary knowledge，Working memory and Intention， attention， awareness and L2 learning.The major topics of Language aptitude are aptitude and age，Memory capacity as a privileged component of L2 aptitude and Aptitude and learning rate.The major topics of Motivation are L2 Attitudes and Dynamic motivation： time context and behavior.The major topics of Individual differences are Personality and L2 learning，Learning styles，Learning strategies，Foreign language anxiety and Willingness to communicate.The major topics of differences are Extraversion and speaking styles and Self-regulation theory.The major topics of language learning are Vygotskian sociocultural theory，Zone of Proximal Development ，Self-regulation and language mediation，Language socialization and L2 learners’ identity . WMC as a privilege in language learning.
This paper will talk about the red part. On the processing of language learning， working memory serves as temporarily storing information and encoding new information to long-term memory. In that case， people with better WMC are perceived as better language learners. “Thus， WMC is posited to help predict learning rate and ultimate levels of attainment in the L2” （Ortega， 2009， p.90）. Scott， M. L. （1994） found that younger language learners have better performance on reading span test than older language learners. Meanwhile， younger language learners consistently learn better than older language learners after the same period of one year and a half of living abroad， which proves the relationship between memory capacities and language proficiency.
Research Questions
Since past studies predict WMC as a privilege in language learning， this paper is aimed to analyze the relationship between WMC and second language speaking. Besides， among the various methods on improving second language oral proficiency， will improvement in WMC be an effective way to increase second language speaking proficiency？
These are the research questions：
1. Is there any relationship between WMC and second language speaking？
2. Will improvement in working memory capacity increases second language speaking proficiency？
Evidence
Q1. Relationship between WMC and second language speaking
The phonological loop and second language speaking
Baddeley （2003） proposed that the phonological loop could be broken into two subcomponents. In current studies， Using bivariate correlations to examine the data， Haughey （2002） found that students with better phonological memory have better performance on the game. Besides， O’brien， Irena， et al （2007） researched how phonological memory predicts second language oral fluency gains in adults. Their results show that phonological memory is a predictor of L2 speech fluency. What’s more， “phonological memory plays a significant role when language production is effortful and a lesser role when language has become automatized” （O’brien， Irena， et al， 2007）.We can see that phonological loop serves as decoding and encoding visual and auditory information， it is also a predictor on second language speech output.
The Visuo-Spatial Sketchpad and second language speaking
Another slave system in working memory is responsible for temporarily storing and manipulating visual and spatial information. As Baddeley （2003） proposed， this system had less relevance with language disorder than the phonological loop. However， this system was involved in everyday reading tasks and helped with representation on reading materials. Besides， Baddeley （2003） also conducted a study of grammatical capacity of people with Williams syndrome. The studies showed that this system also played an important role in language comprehension. The central executive and second language speaking
The master system in working memory is working for controlling attention. Baddeley （2003） regarded the CE system as the most important and complex system in working memory. Baddeley also found that CE was able to divide attention between two important targets， switching between tasks and interface with long term memory. In that case， “executive processes are probably one of the principal factors determining individual differences in working memory span， these kind of individual differences influence language comprehension ability and language learning capacity.
The episodic buffer and second language speaking
Baddeley （2012） concluded that the episodic buffer mainly serves as binding information. Binding is a multi-faced function rather than a unitary one. The specific type of binging decides its function. In terms of second language speaking， episodic buffer plays an important role on collection information from sensory sources.
Q2. Will improvement in working memory capacity increases second language speaking proficiency？
Measuring WMC and Assessing Second Language Speaking Proficiency
Various studies use different methods to measure WMC and second language proficiency. An effective testing method is very crucial to analyze the relationship between WMC and second language speaking proficiency.
One important feature of working memory is its limited capacity. Oberauer， Jarrold， Farrell
and Lewandowsky
（2016） analyze what limits working memory capacity （WMC）. They examine three main hypotheses on the limitation of WMC.As all three hypotheses are challenged in this study， the last approach might be the best explanation of WMC limit. It can also explain that why people need to work hard to develop second language speaking proficiency， the limited capacity of WM constrains encoding and retrieving information.
Even though the capacity of working memory is limited， it “underpins our capacity for thinking” . A NWR test use non-sense words with sounds to “assess the individual’s ability to encode new phonological sequences” . For the complex working memory tests， the widely used on is Reading Span test . “The RST assesses an individual’s ability to simultaneously read and comprehend a set of sentences and then recall a target word for each” . The Listening Span test requires participants to listen the sentence and examines their ability on listening and speaking. However， Juffs and Harrington （2011） mentioned that this test still need prior knowledge on language， Operation Span might be more dependent on measuring the ability. Participants were give simple arithmetic equations and try to recalled the final words in each equation. Similar measurements “include alphabet span， running item span and other tasks involving letters and digits” . Backward Digit Span task is regarded as minimal language knowledge participation. “In this task a sequence of spoken random digits are presented and the participant in the study repeats the numbers in reverse order” . Iwashita et al. （2008） conducted a study which divides the overall speaking performance into grammatical accuracy and complexity， vocabulary， pronunciation， and fluency. Each part has an influence on the overall speaking performance， and these five parts can generally represent the overall speaking proficiency.
Effects of WMC on second language speaking
Besides， Mota （2003） divide the overall second language speaking performance into fluency， accuracy， complexity and vocabulary. And using the reading span test to examine the relationship between WMC and each four part of L2 speech production. The results showed that WMC had a significant relationship with fluency in L2 speech production. The correction between WMC and accuracy in L2 speech production was negative. Individuals with a larger WMC won’t make less syntactic， morphological， lexical or narrative errors in speech. What’s more， the results also showed that there was a positive correlation between WMC and the complexity in L2 speech production. Finally， this study predicted there was a negative association between the span test and weighted lexical density. It showed that individuals with a larger WMC used a small number of frequent words rather than dense words.
Another big field in the intersections between WMC and second language speaking is individual differences. Just
【Key words】Working Memory Capacity； Second Language； Speech； Age
【作者簡介】Liu Liu （1994.5- ）. Female. The Han Nationality. Xi’an local citizen. Work in XHIS， AP， DP and MYP Mandarin teacher. The University of Georgia： TESOL and World Language Education master. Research direction： language acquisition and teaching methods.
Background Knowledge
WMC and its components
Working Memory （WM） is defined as a temporary storage of information， it can also manipulate the information to facilitate cognitive development. Baddeley and Hitch （1974） propose a multicomponent working memory system. As model shows， in this proposed system， there are three main components. Phonological loop is “a temporary verbal-acoustic storage system” Visuospatial sketchpad is a “visual subsystem for storage and manipulation”. Central executive is “a limited capacity attentional system” （Baddeley， 2003）. However， later experiments found that the quantity of the stored information exceed the information stored in phonological loop and visuospatial. Baddeley（2003） proposed a new component， the episodic buffer. As it shows， it is “a limited capacity system that depends heavily on executive processing”， but it focuses more on the “storage of information rather than attentional control” （Baddeley， 2003）.
Second Language Acquisition
From the perspective of linguistics， language can be divided into six major disciplines： morphology （grammar）， phonology （sounds）， syntax （sentences）， semantics （meaning）， discourse （text）， pragmatics （ language in use）. （Ortega， 2009， p.2）. We think language is made by these six parts， and each of them has an influence on language acquisition. So the research on SLA focuses on the factors affect these six parts. The major factors include age， cross linguistic influence， linguistic environment， cognition， language aptitude， motivation， individual differences and social dimensions of language learning. The major topics of Age are learning rate， Critical Period hypothesis，Adult-children differences and a ceiling to second language learning： ultimate attainment on L2 morphosyntax and L2 phonology.The major topics of Cross linguistic Influences are L1-L2 differences and similarities，L1 transfer： positive and negative，Interlanguage development.The major topics of Linguistic environment are 稟cculturation，Interaction and acquisition，Input and Output modification.The major topics of Cognition are Long term Memory and L2 vocabulary knowledge，Working memory and Intention， attention， awareness and L2 learning.The major topics of Language aptitude are aptitude and age，Memory capacity as a privileged component of L2 aptitude and Aptitude and learning rate.The major topics of Motivation are L2 Attitudes and Dynamic motivation： time context and behavior.The major topics of Individual differences are Personality and L2 learning，Learning styles，Learning strategies，Foreign language anxiety and Willingness to communicate.The major topics of differences are Extraversion and speaking styles and Self-regulation theory.The major topics of language learning are Vygotskian sociocultural theory，Zone of Proximal Development ，Self-regulation and language mediation，Language socialization and L2 learners’ identity . WMC as a privilege in language learning.
This paper will talk about the red part. On the processing of language learning， working memory serves as temporarily storing information and encoding new information to long-term memory. In that case， people with better WMC are perceived as better language learners. “Thus， WMC is posited to help predict learning rate and ultimate levels of attainment in the L2” （Ortega， 2009， p.90）. Scott， M. L. （1994） found that younger language learners have better performance on reading span test than older language learners. Meanwhile， younger language learners consistently learn better than older language learners after the same period of one year and a half of living abroad， which proves the relationship between memory capacities and language proficiency.
Research Questions
Since past studies predict WMC as a privilege in language learning， this paper is aimed to analyze the relationship between WMC and second language speaking. Besides， among the various methods on improving second language oral proficiency， will improvement in WMC be an effective way to increase second language speaking proficiency？
These are the research questions：
1. Is there any relationship between WMC and second language speaking？
2. Will improvement in working memory capacity increases second language speaking proficiency？
Evidence
Q1. Relationship between WMC and second language speaking
The phonological loop and second language speaking
Baddeley （2003） proposed that the phonological loop could be broken into two subcomponents. In current studies， Using bivariate correlations to examine the data， Haughey （2002） found that students with better phonological memory have better performance on the game. Besides， O’brien， Irena， et al （2007） researched how phonological memory predicts second language oral fluency gains in adults. Their results show that phonological memory is a predictor of L2 speech fluency. What’s more， “phonological memory plays a significant role when language production is effortful and a lesser role when language has become automatized” （O’brien， Irena， et al， 2007）.We can see that phonological loop serves as decoding and encoding visual and auditory information， it is also a predictor on second language speech output.
The Visuo-Spatial Sketchpad and second language speaking
Another slave system in working memory is responsible for temporarily storing and manipulating visual and spatial information. As Baddeley （2003） proposed， this system had less relevance with language disorder than the phonological loop. However， this system was involved in everyday reading tasks and helped with representation on reading materials. Besides， Baddeley （2003） also conducted a study of grammatical capacity of people with Williams syndrome. The studies showed that this system also played an important role in language comprehension. The central executive and second language speaking
The master system in working memory is working for controlling attention. Baddeley （2003） regarded the CE system as the most important and complex system in working memory. Baddeley also found that CE was able to divide attention between two important targets， switching between tasks and interface with long term memory. In that case， “executive processes are probably one of the principal factors determining individual differences in working memory span， these kind of individual differences influence language comprehension ability and language learning capacity.
The episodic buffer and second language speaking
Baddeley （2012） concluded that the episodic buffer mainly serves as binding information. Binding is a multi-faced function rather than a unitary one. The specific type of binging decides its function. In terms of second language speaking， episodic buffer plays an important role on collection information from sensory sources.
Q2. Will improvement in working memory capacity increases second language speaking proficiency？
Measuring WMC and Assessing Second Language Speaking Proficiency
Various studies use different methods to measure WMC and second language proficiency. An effective testing method is very crucial to analyze the relationship between WMC and second language speaking proficiency.
One important feature of working memory is its limited capacity. Oberauer， Jarrold， Farrell
and Lewandowsky
（2016） analyze what limits working memory capacity （WMC）. They examine three main hypotheses on the limitation of WMC.As all three hypotheses are challenged in this study， the last approach might be the best explanation of WMC limit. It can also explain that why people need to work hard to develop second language speaking proficiency， the limited capacity of WM constrains encoding and retrieving information.
Even though the capacity of working memory is limited， it “underpins our capacity for thinking” . A NWR test use non-sense words with sounds to “assess the individual’s ability to encode new phonological sequences” . For the complex working memory tests， the widely used on is Reading Span test . “The RST assesses an individual’s ability to simultaneously read and comprehend a set of sentences and then recall a target word for each” . The Listening Span test requires participants to listen the sentence and examines their ability on listening and speaking. However， Juffs and Harrington （2011） mentioned that this test still need prior knowledge on language， Operation Span might be more dependent on measuring the ability. Participants were give simple arithmetic equations and try to recalled the final words in each equation. Similar measurements “include alphabet span， running item span and other tasks involving letters and digits” . Backward Digit Span task is regarded as minimal language knowledge participation. “In this task a sequence of spoken random digits are presented and the participant in the study repeats the numbers in reverse order” . Iwashita et al. （2008） conducted a study which divides the overall speaking performance into grammatical accuracy and complexity， vocabulary， pronunciation， and fluency. Each part has an influence on the overall speaking performance， and these five parts can generally represent the overall speaking proficiency.
Effects of WMC on second language speaking
Besides， Mota （2003） divide the overall second language speaking performance into fluency， accuracy， complexity and vocabulary. And using the reading span test to examine the relationship between WMC and each four part of L2 speech production. The results showed that WMC had a significant relationship with fluency in L2 speech production. The correction between WMC and accuracy in L2 speech production was negative. Individuals with a larger WMC won’t make less syntactic， morphological， lexical or narrative errors in speech. What’s more， the results also showed that there was a positive correlation between WMC and the complexity in L2 speech production. Finally， this study predicted there was a negative association between the span test and weighted lexical density. It showed that individuals with a larger WMC used a small number of frequent words rather than dense words.
Another big field in the intersections between WMC and second language speaking is individual differences. Just