CROSS-LINGUISTIC TRANSFER OF SPELLING SKILLS IN SPANISH-SPEAKING ADULT ESL LEARNERS

Spelling is an important literacy skill, and learning to spell is an important component of learning to write. Learners with strong spelling skills also exhibit greater reading, vocabulary, and orthographic knowledge than those with poor spelling skills (Ehri & Rosenthal, 2007; Ehri & Wilce, 1987; Rankin, Bruning, Timme, & Katkanant, 1993). English, being a deep orthography, has inconsistent sound-to-letter correspondences (Seymour, 2005; Ziegler & Goswami, 2005). This poses a great challenge for learners in gaining spelling fluency and accuracy. The purpose of the present study is to examine cross-linguistic transfer of English vowel spellings in Spanish-speaking adult ESL learners. The research participants were 129 Spanish-speaking adult ESL learners and 104 native English-speaking GED students enrolled in a community college located in the South Atlantic region of the United States. The adult ESL participants were in classes at three different levels of English proficiency: advanced, intermediate, and beginning. An experimental English spelling test was administered to both the native English-speaking and ESL participants. In addition, the adult ESL participants took the standardized spelling tests to rank their spelling skills in both English and Spanish. The data were analyzed using robust regression and Poisson regression procedures, Mann-Whitney test, and descriptive statistics. The study found that both Spanish spelling skills and English proficiency are strong predictors of English spelling skills. Spanish spelling is also a strong predictor of level of L1-influenced transfer. More proficient Spanish spellers made significantly fewer L1-influenced spelling errors than less proficient Spanish spellers. L1-influenced transfer of spelling knowledge from Spanish to English likely occurred in three vowel targets (/ɑɪ/ spelled as ae, ai, or ay, /ɑʊ/ spelled as au, and /eɪ/ spelled as e). The ESL participants and the native English-speaking participants produced highly similar error patterns of English vowel spellings when the errors did not indicate L1-influenced transfer, which implies that the two groups might follow similar trajectories of developing English spelling skills. The findings may help guide future researchers or practitioners to modify and develop instructional spelling intervention to meet the needs of adult ESL learners and help them gain English spelling competence.

EXPLICIT WRITTEN CORRECTIVE FEEDBACK AND LANGUAGE APTITUDE IN SLA: IMPLICATIONS FOR IMPROVEMENT OF LINGUISTIC ACCURACY

Most second language researchers agree that there is a role for corrective feedback in second language writing classes. However, many unanswered questions remain concerning which linguistic features to target and the type and amount of feedback to offer. This study examined two new pieces of writing by 151 learners of English as a Second Language (ESL), in order to investigate the effect of direct and metalinguistic written feedback on errors with the simple past tense, the present perfect tense, dropped pronouns, and pronominal duplication. This inquiry also considered the extent to which learner differences in language-analytic ability (LAA), as measured by the LLAMA F, mediated the effects of these two types of explicit written corrective feedback. Learners in the feedback groups were provided with corrective feedback on two essays, after which learners in all three groups completed two additional writing tasks to determine whether or not the provision of corrective feedback led to greater gains in accuracy compared to no feedback. Both treatment groups, direct and metalinguistic, performed better than the comparison group on new pieces of writing immediately following the treatment sessions, yet direct feedback was more durable than metalinguistic feedback for one structure, the simple past tense. Participants with greater LAA proved more likely to achieve gains in the direct feedback group than in the metalinguistic group, whereas learners with lower LAA benefited more from metalinguistic feedback. Overall, the findings of the present study confirm the results of prior studies that have found a positive role for written corrective feedback in instructed second language acquisition.