LEADER 05609nam 2200673Ia 450 001 9910779405903321 005 20230803020402.0 010 $a1-299-44019-3 010 $a90-272-7206-9 035 $a(CKB)2550000001018345 035 $a(EBL)1161969 035 $a(OCoLC)836403330 035 $a(SSID)ssj0000856730 035 $a(PQKBManifestationID)11510189 035 $a(PQKBTitleCode)TC0000856730 035 $a(PQKBWorkID)10818387 035 $a(PQKB)10240350 035 $a(MiAaPQ)EBC1161969 035 $a(Au-PeEL)EBL1161969 035 $a(CaPaEBR)ebr10682150 035 $a(CaONFJC)MIL475269 035 $a(EXLCZ)992550000001018345 100 $a20130208d2013 uy 0 101 0 $aeng 135 $aur|n|---||||| 181 $ctxt 182 $cc 183 $acr 200 00$aSensitive periods, language aptitude, and ultimate L2 attainment$b[electronic resource] /$fEdited by Gisela Granena ; Mike Long, University of Maryland 210 $aAmsterdam $cJohn Benjamins Publishing Company$d2013 215 $a1 online resource (311 p.) 225 1 $aLanguage learning & language teaching,$x1569-9471 ;$vvolume 35 300 $aDescription based upon print version of record. 311 $a90-272-1311-9 320 $aIncludes bibliographical references and index. 327 $aSensitive periods, language aptitude, and ultimate L2 attainment; Editorial page; Title page; LCC data; Table of contents; List of contributors; Introduction and overview; References; Maturational constraints on child and adult SLA; 1. Maturational constraints on language learning; 2. What is meant by a sensitive period for language development?; 3. Eight reasons for the lack of consensus on maturational constraints; 3.1 Phonology; 3.2 Lexis; 3.3 Morpho-syntax; 3.4 Language use; 3.5 Background questionnaire; 4. Positive developments over the past decade, and future research programs 327 $aReferencesMaturational constraints on lexical acquisition in a second language; 1. Introduction; 2. Method; 2.1 Selection of NNS participants; 2.2 Test materials; 2.3 Coding data; 2.4 Reliability and validity; 3. Results; 3.1 Word associations; 3.2 Written test of lexical use; 3.3 General trends in use of core vocabulary; 3.4 General trends in use of multi-word units; 4. Conclusions; References; Age of acquisition effects or effects of bilingualism in second language ultimate attainment?; 1. Introduction; 2. Review of the literature 327 $a2.1 Conceptual frameworks on bilingualism effects and supporting empirical research2.2 Counter-evidence to bilingualism effects on L2 ultimate attainment?; 3. Discussion; 3.1 Assumptions about monolingualism among native controls and about bilingualism among L2 speakers; 3.2 Bilingualism effects or different communicative contexts; 3.3 Differential effects as a function of linguistic domain; 4. Conclusions; References; Cognitive aptitudes for second language learning and the LLAMA Language Aptitude Test*; 1. Introduction; 2. The LLAMA aptitude test; 2.1 LLAMA B: Vocabulary learning 327 $a2.2 LLAMA D: Sound recognition2.3 LLAMA E: Sound-symbol association; 2.4 LLAMA F: Grammatical inferencing; 3. The LLAMA aptitude test in SLA research: An overview; 4. The LLAMA aptitude test: An exploratory validation study; 4.1 Participants; 4.2 Instruments and procedure; 4.3 GAMA; 4.4 Probabilistic SRT task; 4.5 Operation span (OSPAN) test; 4.6 Letter span test; 4.7 Digit-symbol correspondence test; 4.8 Simon task; 4.9 Data analysis; 4.10 Results; 4.10.1 Reliability; 4.10.2 Validity: An exploratory approach; 4.11 Discussion; 4.12 Conclusions and directions for further research; References 327 $aNew conceptualizations of language aptitude in second language attainment1. Introduction; 2. Definitions and constructs of aptitude; 3. Aptitude, working memory and phonological short-term memory; 4. Aptitude in L1 and L2, and its role in ultimate attainment; 5. Aptitude and language learning processes; 6. The stability of language learning aptitude; 7. Redefining aptitude in ultimate attainment; References; Optimizing post-critical-period language learning; 1. Introduction; 2. Defining language aptitude; 3. Defining high-level attainment; 4. Hi-LAB constructs; 5. Hi-LAB measures 327 $a6. Validity studies 330 $aResearch in second language acquisition has long posited that learners' individual differences affect ultimate attainment. This chapter reviews studies that examine how learners with differing cognitive aptitudes respond to instructional treatments. Most of these studies showed significant aptitude-by-treatment interactions (ATI), which suggest that the effectiveness of a particular type of instruction depends on stable, cognitive abilities, such as language analysis or working memory. From our review of this literature, we conclude that, although some interactions have been shown, there is st 410 0$aLanguage learning and language teaching ;$vv. 35. 606 $aCommunicative competence in children 606 $aLanguage awareness 606 $aSecond language acquisition 615 0$aCommunicative competence in children. 615 0$aLanguage awareness. 615 0$aSecond language acquisition. 676 $a401/.93 701 $aGranena$b Gisela$01567477 701 $aLong$b Michael H$0245327 801 0$bMiAaPQ 801 1$bMiAaPQ 801 2$bMiAaPQ 906 $aBOOK 912 $a9910779405903321 996 $aSensitive periods, language aptitude, and ultimate L2 attainment$93838912 997 $aUNINA