The two types of learning methods that will be frequently discussed in this chapter are the implicit type and explicit type of learning. More often than not, the types of teaching methods used correspond directly with the learning methods acquired by the participants, which is to say that explicit teaching will usually involve explicit learning as well. Implicit teaching and learning functions in a similar way as well. It is important to define these two types of learning methods to make sure that both the reader and the chapter are of the same understanding about these two methods. Implicit learning occurs when learners direct more attention and effort into deciphering a language, forming their own generalisations based on their own analysis. Explicit learning occurs when the learner is taught the metalinguistic grammar rules of a language from a third party, usually through formal instruction.
Figure 1 Graph of performance against proficiency
There is much research that have obtained results which show that implicit training triggers native-like neurochemical changes in the L2 learner’s brain, as opposed to explicit training which does not. Based on the results of a study on the differential effects of explicit and implicit second language training on the achievement of native-like brain activation patterns for L2 syntactic processing carried out by Morgan-Short, Steinhauer, Sanz and Ullman (2012), the L2 that was tested was an artificial language with a syntax similar to the syntax structure present in Romance languages. The artificiality of the L2 introduced in this study acted as a control, allowing for a large range of easily controllable factors, such as amount of exposure and the dissimilarity of the language to the speaker’s L1. The language, however, is simple in terms of syntax and structure, hence it lacks the sophistication of the languages in the world, which were subjected to the natural evolution of language. The nature of the training program also did not directly affect the performance of the group, with both groups displaying no significant difference in performance at either low or high proficiency.
Figure 2 Flowchart of presence of event-related potentials based on the type of learning method employed
However, the neurological aspects are significantly affected, suggesting the difference in cognitive systems employed to learn by participants of the respective group. In contrast, electrophysiological (ERP) measures revealed striking differences between the groups’ neural activity at both proficiency levels in response to syntactic violations. ERPs reflect real-time scalp-recorded electrophysiological brain activity of cognitive processes that are time-locked to the presentation of target stimuli. According to Park (2012), the P600 reflects syntactic processing and the N400 component reflects semantic processing. According to Morgan-Short et al (2012), the ERPs activated in the brains of the participants in the implicit learning group closely follow a pattern typical of native speakers. N400 is activated only by participants of the implicit training group, even at a low proficiency. This suggests that implicit training allows for a subconscious understanding of semantic and syntactic structures in the target L2. Although the P600 is reminiscent of native-like processing, this response pattern as a whole is not. Thus, only implicit training led to an electrophysiological signature typical of native speakers. Overall, the results suggest that adult foreign language learners can come to rely on native-like language brain mechanisms, but that the conditions under which the language is learned may be crucial in attaining this goal.
Although this study demonstrates the distinct effects of the types of training involved, the next study explores an alternative situation, whereby the neural mechanism is not always affected by the type of learning method involved.
Batterink and Neville (2013) found that the neural mechanism tapped when using a language is directly linked to the proficiency of the speaker and is not affected by the method of learning the language.
Figure 3
In their study, participants with English as their L1 were introduced to a miniature novel language (French). These participants were divided into two groups whereby one group (implicit learning) was not told of the tasks that will be carried out and another group (explicit learning) was informed of the underlying grammar of the novel language and also informed of the grammaticality judgement tasks after the training phase.
Before the analysis of the results, the participants were divided into 3 groups:
- Group 1 – implicit low proficiency (focused on vocabulary only)
- Group 2 – implicit high proficiency (focused on vocabulary and grammar)
- Group 3 – explicit high proficiency
Even though the participants from Group 2 did not perform as well as those in Group 3, it was observed that the same neural mechanisms were elicited in the judgement tasks; similar to that of native speakers. This shows that explicit knowledge can be acquired through multiple learning methods and is needed to make grammaticality judgements. The similarity in the neural mechanisms tapped also shows that attention and awareness are integral to acquiring L2 syntactic rules since the process is still malleable in adults and is affected by the environmental input. Therefore, learning conditions affect the proficiency of the L2 learners, which in turn allows their neural mechanism to function similarly to native speaker.
In studying conditions affecting proficiency in a language, the opportunity for consolidation of patterns and rules of a new language for L2 learners is also important. To study the importance of the opportunity for consolidation, Gaskell et. al. (2014) performed a study on the effect of sleep on language processing. Their study tested the consolidation of phonotactic constraints and its impact on the current mental lexicon.
The participants of their study were exposed to one block of 48 sequences of 4 consonant-vowel-consonant syllables in the pre-interval session. The distribution of the letters were as such:
onset – /h/,/n/,/m/,/g/,/k/,/s/ if vowel is /æ/, and /f/ if the vowel is /I/
coda – /ŋ/,/n/,/m/,/g/,/k/,/f/ if vowel is /æ/, and /s/ if the vowel is /I/.
The participants then had their interval activities, either a 90-minute nap or a 105-minute movie. Following the interval, the participants were exposed to 2 sets of 48 sequences, a recognition test and a generalisation test.
The participants performed uniformly well for the recognition test. On the other hand, the sleep group outperformed the other group, showing familiarity with the phonotactic rules in the syllables that were exposed to them and also the ability to generalise these rules. However, the participants in the sleep group were unable to explain the rules that they had engaged in the generalisation test.
The implicit knowledge that the sleep group acquired shows that the integration of recent experiences into the mental schema had occurred during sleep since the no-sleep participants did not have the same capabilities as the sleep group. However, from the results of the two tests, first order constraints (syllabic position of isolated phonemes – tested by the positioning of /h/ and /ŋ/) did not require sleep for integration while second order constraints (phoneme combination – tested by the positioning of /f/ and /s/ according to the vowels) requires sleep to allow an opportunity for consolidation. From this study, it can be seen that on top of the learning strategies, learners of L2 also requires sufficient rest so that there is an opportunity for the mental schema to be updated.
In conclusion, one needs to consider the target languages in question before drawing a firm conclusion about the benefits of explicit or implicit training methods. The results by Morgan-Short et al(2012) and the results by Batterink et al (2013) might seem contradictory but it is extremely difficult to draw a direct comparison between the results of the the respective study. Firstly, the former study explores the teaching methods of an artificial language which is not as sophisticated as French, which was used in the latter study. When considering the cognitive effects of learning a second or foreign language, closely studying the neurochemical changes and neural patterns in the brains of the L2 learners is extremely useful in charting the process of learning and developing new methods to achieve native-like fluency in a language.
After having discussed the cognitive aspects of L2 language learning, one also needs to consider the social factor so let us now take a look at the sociolinguistics factors that also play a major role in the learning conditions on L2 learning.