Language Learning Aptitude

The word aptitude refers to ones potential for learning new knowledge or
new skills, and with regard to language aptitude, it refers to ones ability to
learn another language. When it comes to LLA, there is no talk about aptitude for
learning ones first language, at least not for children without cognitive deficits. J.
B. Carroll is a name often associated with LLA. He characterized aptitude as the
ability to learn quickly. Therefore we can say that a learner with high aptitude
may learn with greater ease and speed but that other learners may also be
successful if they persevere.
Aptitude is of crucial importance for language learning but it has not always
been a focus of investigation, mostly because the construct is somewhat elusive
and clearly multi-componential, so measuring is not always clear cut. But in those
studies where its been included, aptitude has been shown to be an important
differentiating factor. Skehan stated that aptitude is actually the best predictor of
language learning success.
The most widely used aptitude tests over several decades have been the
Modern Language Aptitude Test (MLAT) (Carroll and Sapon) and the
Pimsleur Language Aptitude Battery (PLAB) (Pimsleur). Recently Paul Meara
and his colleagues developed tests that are taken on a computer. They are based
on several components and J. B. Carroll came up with what Skehan called the
standard four component view of language aptitude.
1. phonemic coding ability the ability to discriminate among foreign
sounds and to encode them in a manner such that they can be recalled
later
2. grammatical sensitivity the ability to recognize the functions of words
in sentences
3. inductive language learning ability refers to the ability to abstract
and understand rules about a foreign language using the samples of that
language
4. memory and learning refers to the ability to make and recall
associations between words and phrases in a native and a second
language.

However, Skehan questioned Carrolls decision to separate grammatical

sensitivity and inductive language-learning ability, which is why he suggested
that these be combined into one ability: language analytic ability.
One example of a LLA test is Carroll and Sapons MLAT. This test consists of
five subtests:
1. Part One: Number Learning the student is taught, on tape, the Kurdish
number system from 1 to 4, plus the tens and hundreds forms of these
numbers, then tested by hearing numbers which are combinations of these
elements, e.g., 312, 122, 41, etc. The test aims at measuring associative
memory
2. Part Two: Phonetic Script sub-test measures phonemic coding ability. The
student learns a system of phonetic notations for some English phonemes.
He is then tested on this learning, e.g., Underline the word you hear: Tik;
Tiyk; Tis; Tiys.
3. Part Three: Spelling Clues this is a high speed test that measures both
native language vocabulary and phonemic coding ability. The student is
given clues to the pronunciation of a word (e.g., ernst for earnest) and
is then asked to choose a synonym from a list of alternatives
4. Part Four: Words in Sentences this tests grammatical sensitivity. In a
typical item, two sentences are presented, with one word in the first
sentence underlined. In the second sentence five words are underlined.
The student has to decide which of the underlined words in the second
sentence fulfils the same function as the underlined word in the first
sentence
5. Part Five: Paired Associates the student studies a written KurdishEnglish
vocabulary list, practices the stimulusresponse pairs seen, and is then
tested by means of multiple-choice items. This is a test of associative
memory
Even though early studies have shown that there is a connection between
MLAT or PLAB and performance in foreign language learning, these studies were
conducted at a time when second language teaching was based on grammar
translation or audio-lingual methods. But with the adoption of a more
communicative approach to teaching, many teachers and researchers believe
that the abilities targeted by those tests are actually irrelevant to the process of
language acquisition. However, others suggest that some of the abilities
measured by aptitude test can predict the success even in settings where the
emphasis is on communicative interaction. For example, Leila Ranta discovered

that children who were good at analyzing language were the most successful
learners in an English second language program in which activities almost never
involved direct attention to grammar.
In a Canadian language program for adult learners of French, Marjorie
Wesche studied the progress of students who were placed in instructional
programs that were either compatible or incompatible with their aptitude profile
and information about their learning experiences. In the compatible groupings,
students who were high on analytic ability, but average on memory, were
assigned to teaching that focused on grammatical structures, and learners with
good memory but average analytic skills were placed in class where the teaching
was organized around the functional use of the second language in specific
situations. In the incompatible groupings, students were placed in classes that
did not correspond to their aptitude profiles. There was a high level of student
and teacher satisfaction when students were matched with compatible teaching
environments and matched students were able to attain significantly higher
levels of achievement than those who were mismatched. Because there are few
schools that could offer such choices to students, teachers should form their
teaching activities to accommodate learners with different aptitude profiles.
There are also discussions whether or not aptitude is connected to
intelligence. There are arguments for and against that connection. Those who
are against it claim that there are many approaches to intelligence and that
many psychologists believe that there are multiple types of intelligence, although
many others also claim that there is support for a notion of general intelligence.
Also, some statistical investigations have shown that language aptitude cannot
be explained simply on the basis of IQ scores.
Another term connected to aptitude is family background. Some British
studies found that there is a correlation between second language aptitude and
social class and paternal education. These two elements were found mixed in
with vocabulary development in a factor termed family background, which not
only correlates with second language aptitude, but also with foreign language
achievement. Studies show that children from more privileged classes and with
higher parental education are more likely to be rewarded with good grades in
schools and are more likely to be able to use foreign skills abroad. However,
some claim that because of that, family background is only good to get an idea of
how likely a student is to get good grades and use a foreign language, but it falls
short when it comes to understanding and predicting the ability in the abstract.

More recent measures of aptitude have been devised by Grigorenko,

Sternberg, and Ehrman. They approach aptitude testing from a perspective of
intelligence that takes as its base abilities that are necessary in daily life, as
opposed to those needed for successful school learning. Their test is called
CANAL-FT (Cognitive Ability for Novelty in Acquisition of Language). It is
grounded in cognitive theory, it is dynamic and simulation-based. There are five
knowledge acquisition processes which are important in their test:
1. selective encoding distinguishing between more and less relevant
information
2. accidental encoding understanding the background or secondary
information
3. selective comparison determining the relevance of old information for
a current task
4. selective transfer applying decoded or inferred rules in new contexts
and/or tasks
5. selective combination

synthesizing various bits of information

gathered through selective and accidental encoding

This test includes four areas of language (lexical, morphological, semantic,
and syntactic) and two modes of input and output (visual and oral). It is based on
the gradual learning of an artificial language Ursulu. The participants have no
knowledge of the language, but by the end of the test they have mastered
enough lexical, morphological, semantic and syntactic knowledge to cope with a
small story in Ursulu. The test consists of five sections:
1. learning meanings of neologisms from context: participants get 24
brief paragraphs written in English but with some terms in Ursulu. Then
they have to answer questions and try to guess the meaning of some
words.
2. understanding the meaning of passages: participants get passages
that differ in terms of the density of unknown words. Later they get
questions.
3. continuous paired-associate learning: participants get 60 word pairs,
half of them visually, half of them orally and are then tested at irregular
intervals.
4. sentential inference: participants receive 20 sets of three to five
sentences in the Ursulu language with their translations, either visually or
orally. After analyzing a couple of sentences they get a new sentence and
five possible meanings, so they have to recognize the right one.

5. learning language rules: participants are given some vocabulary, some

grammar and some examples of how the language works. Then they are
expected to learn some of the most evident rules of the language

Another important question is where aptitude comes from. That is, is it innate
or

does

it

develop?

McLaughlin

suggested

that

prior

language-learning

experience has a positive effect on language learning and that positive effect can
manifest itself as better learning or as better use of language-learning strategies,
which would say that aptitude develops. However, Harley and Hart did not find
support for that. Their study compared two groups of students in grade 11. One
group started learning L2 (French) in grade 1, the other one in grade 7. The first
group did not perform better than the second one, which would say that
language-learning experience did not affect aptitude and therefore cannot be
made that aptitude develops as a function of language-learning experience.

Ehrman, Madeline E., and Rebecca L. Oxford. Cognition Plus: Correlates of

Language Learning Success. The Modern Language Journal 79.1 (1995): 67.
Web.
Gass, Susan M., and Larry Selinker. Second Language Acquisition an Introductory
Course. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 2000. Print
Lightbown, Patsy, and Nina Spada. How Languages Are Learned. Oxford: Oxford
UP, 2006. Print.