In foreign or second language (L2) classrooms, learners often vocalize when learning new words. Indeed, previous studies have demonstrated that vocalization is effective for memorization and this is called the production effect (PE). Furthermore, PE has been observed in the learning of L2 word meanings as well. However, whether this can be applied to larger language items is unknown. Thus, the present study tested the effect of vocalization on learning L2 formulaic sequence (FS), a sequence of words such as collocations. To achieve this, the participants in the present study learned 90 verb–noun collocations and were tested on recognition of their forms and meanings both immediately and one week after the learning session. The result showed that vocalization enhances learning of forms and meanings of L2 FSs, and this effect is persistent over a one-week delay. This implies that PE is not affected by the nature of learned items and can be applied to larger units including L2 FSs such as collocations.
AckermannK.ChenY.H. (2013). Developing the Academic Collocation List (ACL): A corpus-driven and expert-judged approach. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 12, 235–247.
2.
AlaliF.A.SchmittN. (2012). Teaching formulaic sequences: The same as or different from teaching single words?TESOL Journal, 3, 153–180.
3.
ArnonI.ChristiansenM.H. (2017). The role of multiword building blocks in explaining L1–L2 differences. Topics in Cognitive Science, 9, 621–636.
4.
BaddeleyA.GathercoleS.PapagnoC. (1998). The phonological loop as a language learning device. Psychological Review, 105, 158–173.
5.
BatesD.MächlerM.BolkerB.WalkerS. (2015). Fitting linear mixed-effects models using lme4. Journal of Statistical Software, 67, 1–48.
6.
BoersF.DangT.C.T.StrongB. (2017). Comparing the effectiveness of phrase-focused exercises: A partial replication of Boers, Demecheleer, Coxhead, and Webb (2014). Language Teaching Research, 21, 362–380.
7.
BoersF.DemecheleerM.CoxheadA.WebbS. (2014). Gauging the effects of exercises on verb–noun collocations. Language Teaching Research, 18, 54–74.
8.
BoersF.LindstrombergS.EyckmansJ. (2012). Are alliterative word combinations comparatively easy to remember for adult learners?RELC Journal, 43, 127–135.
9.
ChanT.P.LiouH.C. (2005). Effects of web-based concordancing instruction on EFL students’ learning of verb–noun collocations. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 18, 231–250.
10.
ChenY. (2017). Dictionary use for collocation production and retention: A call-based study. International Journal of Lexicography, 30, 225–251.
11.
ChoiS. (2017). Processing and learning of enhanced English collocations: An eye movement study. Language Teaching Research, 21, 403–426.
12.
ConklinK.SchmittN. (2012). The processing of formulaic language. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 32, 45–61.
13.
ConwayM.A.GathercoleS.E. (1987). Modality and long-term memory. Journal of Memory and Language, 26, 341–361.
14.
DaviesM. (2008). The corpus of contemporary American English (COCA). Available at: https://www.english-corpora.org/coca (accessed December 2023).
DufourS.NguyenN. (2013). How much imitation is there in a shadowing task?Frontiers in Psychology, 4, 346.
17.
DurrantP. (2014). Corpus frequency and second language learners’ knowledge of collocations: A meta-analysis. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics, 19, 443–477.
18.
DurrantP.SchmittN. (2010). Adult learners’ retention of collocations from exposure. Second Language Research, 26, 163–188.
19.
El-dakhsD.A.S. (2018). What works better for collocation learning-explicit instruction or incidental learning? A case study of Arab female undergraduate learners of English. Electronic Journal of Foreign Language Teaching, 15, 39–54. Available at: https://e-flt.nus.edu.sg/wp-content/uploads/2020/09/el-dakhs.pdf (accessed December 2023).
20.
EllisN.C. (2012). Formulaic language and second language acquisition: Zipf and the phrasal teddy bear. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 32, 17–44.
21.
EllisN.C.BeatonA. (1993). Factors affecting the learning of foreign language vocabulary: Imagery keyword mediators and phonological short-term memory. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology Section A, 46, 533–558.
22.
EllisN.C.SinclairJ. (1996). Working memory in the acquisition of vocabulary and syntax: Putting language in good order. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 49, 234–250.
23.
EyckmansJ.BoersF.LindstrombergS. (2016). The impact of imposing processing strategies on L2 learners’ deliberate study of lexical phrases. System, 56, 127–139.
24.
FawcettJ.M.OzubkoJ.D. (2016). Familiarity, but not recollection, supports the between-subject production effect in recognition memory. Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology – Revue Canadienne de Psychologie Experimentale, 70, 99–115.
25.
FoxJ.WeisbergS. (2019). An R companion to applied regression. 3rd edition. Sage. Available at: http://tinyurl.com/carbook (accessed December 2023).
26.
GathercoleS.E.ConwayM.A. (1988). Exploring long-term modality effects: Vocalization leads to best retention. Memory and Cognition, 16, 110–119.
27.
GnevshevaK.SzakayA.JansenS. (2021). Phonetic convergence across dialect boundaries in first and second language speakers. Journal of Phonetics, 89, 101110.
28.
GyllstadH. (2007). Testing English collocations: Developing receptive tests for use with advanced Swedish learners. Lund University Press. Available at: https://lucris.lub.lu.se/ws/files/5893676/2172422.pdf (accessed December 2023).
29.
GyllstadH.WolterB. (2016). Collocational processing in light of the phraseological continuum model: Does semantic transparency matter?Language Learning, 66, 296–323.
30.
HuntR.R. (2006). The concept of distinctiveness in memory research. In Reed HuntR.WorthenJames B. (Eds.), Distinctiveness and memory (pp. 3–25). Oxford University Press.
31.
IchtM.MamaY. (2015). The production effect in memory: A prominent mnemonic in children. Journal of Child Language, 42, 1102–1124.
32.
IchtM.MamaY. (2022). The effect of vocal production on vocabulary learning in a second language. Language Teaching Research, 26, 79–98.
33.
IchtM.Ben-DavidN.MamaY. (2021). Using vocal production to improve long-term verbal memory in adults with intellectual disability. Behavior Modification, 45, 715–739.
34.
IchtM.Taitelbaum-SweadR.MamaY. (2022). Production improves visual and auditory text memory in younger and older adults. Gerontology, 68, 578–586.
35.
JACET Committee of Basic Words Revision. (2003). JACET list of 8,000 basic words: JACET 8000. Japan Association of College English Teachers. Available at: https://ci.nii.ac.jp/ncid/BB21043002 (accessed December 2023).
36.
KellyM.O.EnsorT.M.LuX.MacLeodC.M.RiskoE.F. (2022). Reducing retrieval time modulates the production effect: Empirical evidence and computational accounts. Journal of Memory and Language, 123, 104299.
37.
LauferB.GirsaiN. (2008). Form-focused instruction in second language vocabulary learning: A case for contrastive analysis and translation. Applied Linguistics, 29, 694–716.
38.
LauferB.WaldmanT. (2011). Verb–noun collocations in second language writing: A corpus analysis of learners’ English. Language Learning, 61, 647–672.
LiuD. (2010). Going beyond patterns: Involving cognitive analysis in the learning of collocations. TESOL Quarterly, 44, 4–30.
41.
MacisM. (2018). Incidental learning of duplex collocations from reading: Three case studies. Reading in a Foregn Language, 30, 48–75.
42.
MacLeodC.M.BodnerG.E. (2017). The production effect in memory. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 26, 390–395.
43.
MacLeodC.M.GopieN.HourihanK.L.NearyK.R.OzubkoJ.D. (2010). The production effect: Delineation of a phenomenon. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 36, 671–685.
44.
MatuschekH.KlieglR.VasishthaS.BaayenH.BatesD. (2017). Balancing type I error and power in linear mixed models. Journal of Memory and Language, 94, 305–315.
45.
MearaP.MiralpeixI. (2016). Tools for researching vocabulary. Multilingual Matters.
46.
MorrisC,D.BransfordJ.D.FranksJ,J. (1977). Levels of processing versus transfer appropriate processing. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 16, 519–533.
47.
Onitama. (2017). Hot Soup Processor: Version 3.5. Available at: http://hsp.tv (accessed December 2023).
48.
OzubkoJ.D.GopieN.MacLeodC.M. (2012). Production benefits both recollection and familiarity. Memory and Cognition, 40, 326–338.
49.
OzubkoJ.D.HourihanK.L.MacLeodC.M. (2012). Production benefits learning: The production effect endures and improves memory for text. Memory, 20, 717–727.
50.
PetersE. (2014). The effects of repetition and time of post-test administration on EFL learners’ form recall of single words and collocations. Language Teaching Research, 18, 75–94.
51.
PuimègeE.PetersE. (2020). Learning formulaic sequences through viewing L2 television and factors that affect Learning. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 42, 525–549.
52.
R core team. (2022). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing. Available at: https://www.R-project.org (accessed December 2023).
53.
RafieyanV. (2018). Role of knowledge of formulaic sequences in language proficiency: Significance and ideal method of instruction. Asian-Pacific Journal of Second and Foreign Language Education, 3, 1–23.
54.
RaynerK. (2009). Eye movements and attention in reading, scene perception, and visual search. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 62, 1457–1506.
55.
SeibertL.C. (1927). An experiment in learning French. Journal of Educational Psychology, 18, 294–309.
56.
ShaoY.SaitoK.TierneyA. (2023). How does having a good ear promote instructed second language pronunciation development? Roles of domain-general auditory processing in choral repetition training. TESOL Quarterly, 57, 33–63.
57.
SnoderP. (2017). Improving English learners’ productive collocation knowledge: The effects of involvement load, spacing, and intentionality. TESL Canada Journal, 34, 140–164.
58.
SweadR.T.MamaY.IchtM. (2018). The effect of presentation mode and production type on word memory for hearing impaired signers. Journal of the American Academy of Audiology, 29, 875–884.
59.
SzudarskiP. (2012). Effects of meaning-and form-focused instruction on the acquisition of verb–noun collocations in L2 English. Journal of Second Language Teaching and Research, 1, 3–37. Available at: https://pops.uclan.ac.uk/index.php/jsltr/article/view/32/15
60.
SzudarskiP.ConklinK. (2014). Short- and long-term effects of rote rehearsal on ESL learners’ processing of L2 collocations. TESOL Quarterly, 48, 833–842.
61.
TsaiM.H.H. (2020). The effects of explicit instruction on L2 learners’ acquisition of verb–noun collocations. Language Teaching Research, 24, 138–162.
62.
UchiharaT.WebbS.SaitoK.TrofimovichP. (2022). Does mode of input affect how second language learners create form–meaning connections and pronounce second language words?Modern Language Journal, 106, 351–370.
63.
VilkaitemL. (2016). Are nonadjacent collocations processed faster?Journal of Experimental Psychology. Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 42, 1632–1642.
64.
WebbS.KagimotoE. (2009). The effects of vocabulary learning on collocation and meaning. TESOL Quarterly, 43, 55–77.
65.
WebbS.NewtonJ.ChangA. (2013). Incidental learning of collocation. Language Learning, 63, 91–120.
66.
WolterB.GyllstadH. (2011). Collocational links in the L2 mental lexicon and the influence of L1 intralexical knowledge. Applied Linguistics, 32, 430–449.
67.
WolterB.YamashitaJ. (2014). Processing collocations in a second language: A case of first language activation?Applied Psycholinguistics, 36, 1193–1221.
68.
WrayA.PerkinsM. (2000). The functions of formulaic language: An integrated model. Language and Communication, 20, 1–28.
69.
YamashitaJ.JiangN. (2010). L1 influence on the acquisition of L2 collocations: Japanese ESL users and EFL learners acquiring English collocations. TESOL Quarterly, 44, 647–668.
70.
ZhangX. (2017). Effects of receptive-productive integration tasks and prior knowledge of component words on L2 collocation development. System, 66, 156–167.
71.
ZhouY.MacLeodC.M. (2021). Production between and within: Distinctiveness and the relative magnitude of the production effect. Memory, 29, 168–179.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
