Evidence that "implicit learning" (subconscious language acquisition) results in L1-like brain processing: A comment on Morgan-Short, Steinhauer, Sanz & Ullman (2012)

Stephen Krashen
November, 2013

Morgan-Short, Steinhauer, Sanz and Ullman (2012) recently reported that adults using an artifical second language had different electrophysiological (ERP) responses depending on the way the language was initially presented to them.  At higher stages of competence, those who were initially "immersed" in the language  ("implicit" training," consisting of "meaningful examples" of the language) had "L1-like"  ERP responses suggesting "L1-like brain processing for syntax." This was not present for subjects whose initial exposure to the language consisted of explicit presentation of rules with examples.

This is a remarkable result: The initial exposure to the language was only 13.5 minutes for each group, and was followed by two rounds a few days apart of identical "practice sessions"  consistenting of comprehension and production activities, with feedback /correction provided. The sessions were continued until all subjects reached a predetermined level of proficiency.

At the conclusion of the study, the groups did not differ in their mastery of the artificial language.  Morgan-Short et. al. state that in some studies, implicit and explicit methods produced similar results, and also state that they "are not aware of any clear empirical evidence suggesting an advantage for implicit training," an astonishing statement in light of the many studies done over the last 45 years showing an advantage for implicit learning, usually termed "acquired" competence (as contrasted with consciously learned competence) and hypothesized to be the result of receiving comprehensible input.  

Implicit learning has been shown to be superior to explicit learning for studies contrasting comprehension-based methods with traditional methods for beginning foreign language teaching and intermediate foreign and second language teaching, as well as studies showing the superiority of self-selected reading over traditional instruction for intermediate second and foreign language students.

I present a list of these studies below: all included comparison groups subjects and subjects were high school age or older.  In addition, there are a multitude of studies that confirm these results using multivariate techniques and case histories.

It thus appears to be the case that comprehension-based methods are superior because they stimulate natural language acquisition mechanisms.

References

Morgan-Short, K., Steinhaur, K., Sanz, C. and Ulmann, M. 2012. Explicit and Implicit Second Language Training Differentially Affect the Achievement of Native-like Brain Activation Patterns. J Cogn Neurosci. 2012 April; 24(4): 933–947.  http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3558940/#APP2

BEGINNING FOREIGN LANGUAGE

Asher, J. 1965. The strategy of the total physical response: an application to learning Russian. International Review of Applied Linguistics 3: 291-300.

Asher, J. 1969. The total physical response approach to second language learning. Modern Language Journal 53: 3-17.

Asher, J. 1972. Children's first language as a model for second language learning. Modern Language Journal 56: 133-139.

Asher, J., Kusudo, J. and De La Torre, R. 1974, Learning a second language through commands: the second field test. Modern Language Journal 58: 24-32.

Dziedzic, J. 2012. A comparison of TPRS and traditional instruction, both with SSR. International Journal of Foreign Language Teaching 7(2): 4-6.

Hammond, R. 1989. Accuracy versus communicative competency: The acquisition of grammar in the second language classroom. Hispania 71: 408-417

Isik, A. 2000. The role of input in second language acquisition: more comprehensible input supported by grammar instrution or more grammar instruction? ITL: Review of Applied Linguistics 129-130: 225-74.

Kunihara A, S. and Asher, J. 1965. The strategy of the total physical response: an application to learning Japanese. International Review of Applied Linguistics 4: 277-289.

Nicola, N. 1989. Experimenting with the new methods in Arabic. Dialog on Language Instruction. 6: 61-71.

Swaffer, J. and Woodruff, M. 1978. Language for comprehension: Focus on reading. Modern Language Journal 6:27-32.

Varguez, K. 2009. Traditional and TPR Storytelling instruction in the Beginning High School Spanish Classroom. International Journal of Foreign Language Teaching 5 (1): 2-11.

Watson, B. 2009. A comparison of TPRS and traditional foreign language instruction at the high school level. International Journal of Foreign Language Teaching 5 (1): 21-24.

Winitz, H. 1996. Grammaticality judgments as a function explitict and implicit instruction in Spanish. Modern Language Journal 80 (1): 32-46.

Wolfe, D. and Jones, G. 1982. Integrating total physical response strategy in a level 1 Spanish class. Foreign Language Annals 14: 273-80.

INTERMEDIATE  FOREIGN LANGUAGE: SHELTERED

Burger, S. 1989. Content-based ESL in a sheletered psychology course: Input, output, and outcomes. TESL Canada Journal 6:45-59.

Edwards, H., Wesche, M., Krashen, S., Clement, R., and Kruidenier, B. 1984. Second language acquisition through a subject-matter learning: A study of sheltered psychology classes at the University of Ottawa. Canadian Modern Language Review 41: 268-282.

Hauptman, P., Wesche, M., and Ready, D. 1988. Second language acquisition through subject-matter teaching: a follow-up study at the University of Ottawa. Language Learning 38: 433-71.

Lafayette, R. and Buscaglia, M. 1985. Students learn language via a civilization course – a comarison of second language acquisition environments. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 7: 323-42.

Sternfeld, S. 1993. Immersion in first-year language instruction for adults. In J. Oller (Ed.) Methods That Work. Boston: Heinle and Heinle.

INTERMEDIATE FOREIGN LANGUAGE: SUSTAINED SILENT READING

Bell, T. 2001. Extensive reading: Speed and comperhension. The Reading Matrix, 1 (1)

Beglar, D., Hunt, A., and Kite, Y. 2012. The effect of pleasure reading on Japanese university EFL learners’ reading rates. Language Learning, 62, 665–703.

Hitosugi, C. I., and Day, R. 2004. Extensive reading in Japanese.  Reading in a Foreign Language 16 (1).  http://nflrc.hawaii.edu/rfl/April2004/abstracts.html#hitosugi

Hafiz, F., and I. Tudor. 1990. Graded readers as an input medium in L2 learning. System 18(1): 31-42.

Lao, C.Y. and Krashen, S. 2000. The impact of popular literature study on literacy development in EFL: More evidence for the power of reading. System 28: 261-270.

Lee, S.Y. 2007. Revelations from three consecutive studies on extensive reading. RELC Journal 38 (2), 150-170.

Lee, S. Y. and Hsu, Y. Y. 2009.  A three-year longitudinal study of in-class sustained silent reading with Taiwanese vocational college students. Indonesian Journal of English Language Teaching, 5(1): 15-29.

Lituanas, P. M., Jacobs, G. M., and Renandya, W. A. 1999. A study of extensive reading with remedial reading students. In Y. M. Cheah & S. M. Ng (Eds.) Language instructional issues in Asian classrooms (pp. 89-104). Newark, DE: International Development in Asia Committee, International Reading Association.

Liu, C.K. 2007. A reading program that keeps winning. Selected Papers from the Sixteenth International Symposium on English Teaching, English Teachers’ Association – Republic of China. Taipei: Crane Publishing Company.

Mason, B. 2006. Free voluntary reading and autonomy in second language acquisition: Improving TOEFL scores from reading alone. International Journal of Foreign Language Teaching 2(1), 2-5.

Mason, B. and Krashen, S. 1997. Extensive reading in English as a foreign language. System 25: 91-102.

Robb, T. N. & Susser, B. 1989. Extensive reading vs skills building in an EFL Context. Reading in a Foreign Language, 5, 2, 239-51.

Rodrigo, V., Krashen, S., and Gribbons, B. 2004. The effectiveness of two comprehensible-input approaches to foreign language instruction at the intermediate level. System 32(1): 53-60.

Sheu, S. P-H. 2004. Extensive reading with EFL learners at beginning level. TESL Reporter, 36(2), 8-26.

Sims, J. 1996. A new perspective: Extensive reading for pleasure. The Proceedings of the Fifth International Symposium on English Teaching, pp. 137-144. Taipei: Crane Publishing Company.

Smith, K. 2006. A comparison of “pure” extensive reading with intensive reading and Extensive Reading with Supplementary Activities. International Journal of Foreign Language Teaching (IJFLT), 2(2): 12-15.

Smith, K. 2007. The effect of adding SSR to regular instruction. Selected Papers from the Sixteenth International Symposium on English Teaching, English Teachers’ Association – Republic of China. Taipei: Crane Publishing Company.

Smith, K. 2011. Integrating one hour of in-school weekly SSR: Effects on proficiency and spelling. International Journal of Foreign Language Teaching, 7(1): 1-7.

Tudor, I., and Hafiz, F. 1989. Extensive reading as a means of input to L2 learning. Journal of Research in Reading 12(2): 164-178.

Tsang, W-K., 1996. Comparing the effects of reading and writing on writing performance. Applied Linguistics 17(2): 210-233.

Yuan, Y. P., and Nash, T. 1992. Reading subskills and quantity reading. Selected papers from The Eighth Conference on English Teaching and Learning in the Republic of China, pp. 291-304. Taipei: Crane.