Cited by 75EFL/ESL Teaching and LearningPhonetics and Phonology ResearchSecond Language Acquisition and Learning

The Acquisitional Value of Recasts in Instructed Second Language Speech Learning: Teaching the Perception and Production of English /ɹ/ to Adult Japanese Learners

Saito, Kazuya·2013·Language Learning

Abstract

The current study investigated the impact of recasts together with form‐focused instruction (FFI) on the development of second language speech perception and production of English /ɹ/ by Japanese learners. Forty‐five learners were randomly assigned to three groups—FFI recasts, FFI only, and Control—and exposed to four hours of communicatively oriented lessons. Whereas many FFI activities including explicit instruction were embedded into the treatment in order for the experimental groups to notice and practice /ɹ/ in a meaningful discourse, an instructor provided recasts only to the FFI‐recast group in response to their mispronunciation of /ɹ/. Perception was measured using a two‐alternative forced choice identification task, while pronunciation performance was elicited using controlled and spontaneous production tests and assessed by 10 naïve native‐speaking listeners. According to the statistical comparisons, whereas the FFI‐only group attained perception and production improvement particularly under trained lexical conditions, the FFI‐recast group demonstrated similar but generalizable gains both in trained and untrained lexical contexts. The results indicate that (a) FFI itself impacts various domains of L2 speech learning processes (perception, controlled, and spontaneous production) and (b) recasts promote learners’ attentional shift away from lexical units as a whole to phonetic aspects of second language speech (i.e., vocabulary to sound learning).

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/lang.12015

Cites

75 of 75 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Saito (2013) found added benefits for form-focused instruction combined with recasts for L1 Japanese learners of English and their production of /ɹ/.

    “For example, Saito (2013) found added benefits for form-focused instruction combined with recasts for L1 Japanese learners of English and their production of /ɹ/.”

    From Interaction and instructed second language acquisition (2018) · cites this paper as Saito 2013

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Saito, K.
Affiliations
Waseda University (JP)
Corresponding author
Saito, Kazuya
Venue
Language Learning
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2013-07-19
Volume
63
Issue
3
Pages
499-529
ISSN
  • 0023-8333 (ISSN-L)
  • 1467-9922
OpenAlex
W1905002362
Cited by
75
References
75
Citations by year
2025: 5 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 11 · 2021: 9 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 6 · 2016: 11 · 2015: 3 · 2014: 5 · 2013: 2
FWCI
48.85
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Language Learning (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • Language Learning
  • Government of Canada Post-Doctoral Research Fellowship
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Language and Linguistics › EFL/ESL Teaching and Learning
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Phonetics and Phonology Research
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Second Language Acquisition and Learning
Keywords
recasts, form-focused instruction, second language speech perception, second language pronunciation, English language, Japanese learners of English, explicit instruction, spontaneous production, controlled production

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review