Relationship between Working Memory Capacity and Second Language Speaking

Liu Liu

【Abstract】In second language acquisition （SLA） field， people gradually notice the influence of individual differences on language learning and ultimate attainment. The relationship between working memory capacity （WMC） and SLA has been analyzed from many perspectives. In this paper， we only focus on second language speaking rather than the whole SLA. Based on past studies， two research questions are designed in this paper. To answer the questions， Further researches need to pay more attention on this question.

【Key words】Working Memory Capacity； Second Language； Speech； Age

【作者簡介】Liu Liu （1994.5- ）. Female. The Han Nationality. Xian local citizen. Work in XHIS， AP， DP and MYP Mandarin teacher. The University of Georgia： TESOL and World Language Education master. Research direction： language acquisition and teaching methods.

Background Knowledge

WMC and its components

Working Memory （WM） is defined as a temporary storage of information， it can also manipulate the information to facilitate cognitive development. Baddeley and Hitch （1974） propose a multicomponent working memory system. As model shows， in this proposed system， there are three main components. Phonological loop is “a temporary verbal-acoustic storage system” Visuospatial sketchpad is a “visual subsystem for storage and manipulation”. Central executive is “a limited capacity attentional system” （Baddeley， 2003）. However， later experiments found that the quantity of the stored information exceed the information stored in phonological loop and visuospatial. Baddeley（2003） proposed a new component， the episodic buffer. As it shows， it is “a limited capacity system that depends heavily on executive processing”， but it focuses more on the “storage of information rather than attentional control” （Baddeley， 2003）.

Second Language Acquisition

From the perspective of linguistics， language can be divided into six major disciplines： morphology （grammar）， phonology （sounds）， syntax （sentences）， semantics （meaning）， discourse （text）， pragmatics （ language in use）. （Ortega， 2009， p.2）. We think language is made by these six parts， and each of them has an influence on language acquisition. So the research on SLA focuses on the factors affect these six parts. The major factors include age， cross linguistic influence， linguistic environment， cognition， language aptitude， motivation， individual differences and social dimensions of language learning. The major topics of Age are learning rate， Critical Period hypothesis，Adult-children differences and a ceiling to second language learning： ultimate attainment on L2 morphosyntax and L2 phonology.The major topics of Cross linguistic Influences are L1-L2 differences and similarities，L1 transfer： positive and negative，Interlanguage development.The major topics of Linguistic environment are 稟cculturation，Interaction and acquisition，Input and Output modification.The major topics of Cognition are Long term Memory and L2 vocabulary knowledge，Working memory and Intention， attention， awareness and L2 learning.The major topics of Language aptitude are aptitude and age，Memory capacity as a privileged component of L2 aptitude and Aptitude and learning rate.The major topics of Motivation are L2 Attitudes and Dynamic motivation： time context and behavior.The major topics of Individual differences are Personality and L2 learning，Learning styles，Learning strategies，Foreign language anxiety and Willingness to communicate.The major topics of differences are Extraversion and speaking styles and Self-regulation theory.The major topics of language learning are Vygotskian sociocultural theory，Zone of Proximal Development ，Self-regulation and language mediation，Language socialization and L2 learners identity .

WMC as a privilege in language learning.

This paper will talk about the red part. On the processing of language learning， working memory serves as temporarily storing information and encoding new information to long-term memory. In that case， people with better WMC are perceived as better language learners. “Thus， WMC is posited to help predict learning rate and ultimate levels of attainment in the L2” （Ortega， 2009， p.90）. Scott， M. L. （1994） found that younger language learners have better performance on reading span test than older language learners. Meanwhile， younger language learners consistently learn better than older language learners after the same period of one year and a half of living abroad， which proves the relationship between memory capacities and language proficiency.

Research Questions

Since past studies predict WMC as a privilege in language learning， this paper is aimed to analyze the relationship between WMC and second language speaking. Besides， among the various methods on improving second language oral proficiency， will improvement in WMC be an effective way to increase second language speaking proficiency？

These are the research questions：

1. Is there any relationship between WMC and second language speaking？

2. Will improvement in working memory capacity increases second language speaking proficiency？

Evidence

Q1. Relationship between WMC and second language speaking

The phonological loop and second language speaking

Baddeley （2003） proposed that the phonological loop could be broken into two subcomponents. In current studies， Using bivariate correlations to examine the data， Haughey （2002） found that students with better phonological memory have better performance on the game. Besides， Obrien， Irena， et al （2007） researched how phonological memory predicts second language oral fluency gains in adults. Their results show that phonological memory is a predictor of L2 speech fluency. Whats more， “phonological memory plays a significant role when language production is effortful and a lesser role when language has become automatized” （Obrien， Irena， et al， 2007）.We can see that phonological loop serves as decoding and encoding visual and auditory information， it is also a predictor on second language speech output.

The Visuo-Spatial Sketchpad and second language speaking

Another slave system in working memory is responsible for temporarily storing and manipulating visual and spatial information. As Baddeley （2003） proposed， this system had less relevance with language disorder than the phonological loop. However， this system was involved in everyday reading tasks and helped with representation on reading materials. Besides， Baddeley （2003） also conducted a study of grammatical capacity of people with Williams syndrome. The studies showed that this system also played an important role in language comprehension.

The central executive and second language speaking

The master system in working memory is working for controlling attention. Baddeley （2003） regarded the CE system as the most important and complex system in working memory. Baddeley also found that CE was able to divide attention between two important targets， switching between tasks and interface with long term memory. In that case， “executive processes are probably one of the principal factors determining individual differences in working memory span， these kind of individual differences influence language comprehension ability and language learning capacity.

The episodic buffer and second language speaking

Baddeley （2012） concluded that the episodic buffer mainly serves as binding information. Binding is a multi-faced function rather than a unitary one. The specific type of binging decides its function. In terms of second language speaking， episodic buffer plays an important role on collection information from sensory sources.

Q2. Will improvement in working memory capacity increases second language speaking proficiency？

Measuring WMC and Assessing Second Language Speaking Proficiency

Various studies use different methods to measure WMC and second language proficiency. An effective testing method is very crucial to analyze the relationship between WMC and second language speaking proficiency.

One important feature of working memory is its limited capacity. Oberauer， Jarrold， Farrell

and Lewandowsky

（2016） analyze what limits working memory capacity （WMC）. They examine three main hypotheses on the limitation of WMC.As all three hypotheses are challenged in this study， the last approach might be the best explanation of WMC limit. It can also explain that why people need to work hard to develop second language speaking proficiency， the limited capacity of WM constrains encoding and retrieving information.

Even though the capacity of working memory is limited， it “underpins our capacity for thinking” . A NWR test use non-sense words with sounds to “assess the individuals ability to encode new phonological sequences” . For the complex working memory tests， the widely used on is Reading Span test . “The RST assesses an individuals ability to simultaneously read and comprehend a set of sentences and then recall a target word for each” . The Listening Span test requires participants to listen the sentence and examines their ability on listening and speaking. However， Juffs and Harrington （2011） mentioned that this test still need prior knowledge on language， Operation Span might be more dependent on measuring the ability. Participants were give simple arithmetic equations and try to recalled the final words in each equation. Similar measurements “include alphabet span， running item span and other tasks involving letters and digits” . Backward Digit Span task is regarded as minimal language knowledge participation. “In this task a sequence of spoken random digits are presented and the participant in the study repeats the numbers in reverse order” .

Iwashita et al. （2008） conducted a study which divides the overall speaking performance into grammatical accuracy and complexity， vocabulary， pronunciation， and fluency. Each part has an influence on the overall speaking performance， and these five parts can generally represent the overall speaking proficiency.

Effects of WMC on second language speaking

Besides， Mota （2003） divide the overall second language speaking performance into fluency， accuracy， complexity and vocabulary. And using the reading span test to examine the relationship between WMC and each four part of L2 speech production. The results showed that WMC had a significant relationship with fluency in L2 speech production. The correction between WMC and accuracy in L2 speech production was negative. Individuals with a larger WMC wont make less syntactic， morphological， lexical or narrative errors in speech. Whats more， the results also showed that there was a positive correlation between WMC and the complexity in L2 speech production. Finally， this study predicted there was a negative association between the span test and weighted lexical density. It showed that individuals with a larger WMC used a small number of frequent words rather than dense words.

Another big field in the intersections between WMC and second language speaking is individual differences. Just & Carpenter （1992） proposed that “the nature of a persons language comprehension depends on his or her working memory capacity” （p.124）.In terms of age， Jenkins， Myerson et al （1999） examined the effects of secondary tasks on verbal and spatial working memory on school-age children， young adults and older children. This meta-analysis examined both age and individual differences in memory span. This study concluded that “the ability to inhibit irrelevant information” contributed to the age and individual differences in working memory.

Whats more， the effect of WMC on second language speaking will change by individual differences. For people with larger or smaller memory spans， or people with higher or lower second language proficiency， improvement on WMC has different influences on their speaking performance. Reichle et al. （2016） proposed that increase in WMC will attribute to second language proficiency is not applied to all learners. This effect is more signicant to individuals with lower spans. Gilabert and Munoz （2010） found the correlation between differences in WMC and performance on L2 proficiency was significant in high proficiency group rather than lower proficiency group.

Certain studies also examine how different aspects of WM improve L2 proficiency. Mackey et al. （2002） indicated that higher WM individuals had a more concentrated attention， it leads to better performance on interaction and communication. The evidence in this parts further proves the correlation between WMC and second language speaking. However， the individual differences on WMC in these studies are contributed by age or the environment， there are few designed experiments try to make a difference on WMC， which cant provide enough support for our research question two.

Educational implications

Investigating the role of WMC in second language speaking can help learners know why it is hard to improve speaking ability. It can break some common fallacies and provide some scientific implications on developing speaking.

Firstly， efforts on improving WMC in order to increase L2 speech production seems effortless.However， the speaking span test can predict the fluency and complexity of speech， WMC can be a partially indicator of second language speaking. Secondly， WMC plays an important role in vocabulary learning. The process of interaction requires attention and information storage. Different people have different speed of acquisition， choosing materials for learners to practice speaking need to consider the individual differences. Otherwise， the high cognitive load will contribute to fail learning. Thirdly， lower proficiency students need less cognitively demanding tasks. Only higher proficiency students can benefit a high working memory ， lower proficiency students show lower performance in concentrating attention and storing information during practicing speaking. Fourthly， higher proficiency students need higher cognitively demanding tasks to attain a native-like level proficiency. Fifthly， for lower WMC learners， scaffolding and multiple aids are very important. If learners have deficits in phonological loop， using visual aid can help communication in L2 speaking. At last， adults need higher cognitively demanding tasks and more phonological input. Although current study can not prove that improving WMC would be a good method to help second language speaking， it informs us with the importance of individual differences on learning rate and ultimate attainment of second language speaking proficiency.

Conclusions：

“Disorders in working memory may impact on language processes” Deficits in phonological loop contributes to impaired phonological memory， the storage and traces of phonological knowledge will be effected. Deficits in the central executive system contributes to attentional problem， which is very important in speaking output. Deficits in episodic buffer contributes to problems on binding information， it makes activating prior knowledge and making decisions very tough.

Current research provides abundant evidence on the correlation between WMC and second language speaking. However， “will improvement in working memory capacity increases second language speaking proficiency？” still wait to be answered. Besides， while various studies research the individual difference and age in WMC， there are few study examines the intersections of these two factors. Further researches can focus on the interaction of age and individual differences.

References：

[1]Ortega，L（2009）.Understanding Second Language Acquisition.Routledge，2013.

[2]Baddeley，A.，Gathercole，S.，&Papagno;，C.（1998）.The phonological loop as a language learning device.Psychological review，105（1），158.

[3]Gilabert，R.&Munoz;，C.（2010）.Differences in Attainment and Performance in a Foreign Language：The Role of Working Memory Capacity.International Journal of English Studies，10（1），19-42.

[4]Jenkins，L.，Myerson，J.，Hale，S.，&Fry;，A.F.（1999）.Individual and developmental differences in working memory across the life span.Psychonomic Bulletin&Review;，6（28），28-40.

[5]Juffs，A.，&Harrington;，M.（2011）.Aspects of working memory in L2 learning.Language Teaching，44（2），137-166.

[6]Just，M.A.，&Carpenter;，P.A.（1992）.A capacity theory of comprehension：individual differences in working memory.Psychological review，99（1），122.

[7]Haughey，J.P.（2002）.Impact of Phonological Working Memory on English as a Second Language Studetns Vocabulary Learning.McNair Scholars Journal，5（1），57-63.

[8]Iwashita，N.，Brown，A.，McNamara，T.，&O;Hagan，S.（2008）.Assessed levels of second language speaking proficiency：How distinct？.Applied linguistics，29（1），24-49.

[9]Obrien，I.&Segalowitz;，N.&Freed;，B.&Collentine;，J.（2007）.Phonological memory predicts second language oral fluency gains in adults.Studies in Second Language Acquisition，29（4），557-581.

[10]Young，D.J.（1990）.An investigation of students perspectives on anxiety and speaking.Foreign Language Annals，23（6），539-553.