IfiN G U A G B ON LEARNING ENGLISKi DOBS IT
INCREASE
t h e' USE OF INFERENCING
AS A READING STRATEGY AND
PRCFICIBNCY IN READING AND EiGURiNG
VOCABULARY MEANINGS FROM CONTEXT?
This study aims to answer the following question; does knowing another f o r e i g n language increase reading c o m p r e h e n s i o n and guess i n g v o c abu lar y meanings from context as well as increasing the use of inferencing as a reading s t ra t eg y in i n termediate level EFL students
enrol l e d in Bilkent U n i v e r s i t y School of English
Language ( B U S E D ?
The reading c o m p r e h e n s i o n was ass e s s e d through a multi p l e ch o i c e test the s u b j e c t s had to complete after
reading p a ssage and v o c a b u l a r y inferencing was
asses s e d in a matching e x e r c i s e where the subjects h£id to match the un known wor d s from the pa ssage v-Jith their
definitions. The number of s t r a t e g i e s used were
measu r e d in a m u l t i p l e choice q u e s t i o n n a i r e adapted
from a st udy co n d u c t e d by Barnett (198Sa), The
subjects p a r t i c i p a t i n g in the study were 41 students
enrol l e d in BUSEL.
The fi n d i n g s of the study d e m o n strat e that this
specific group of subje c t s did not use their k n o w l e d g e
of another f o reign language as additional information
to make inferences from while reading in English. This
finding be c o m es apparent in the fact that their
p e r f o r m a n c e in the reading c o m p r e h e n s i o n and vocabulary tests a d m i n i s t e r e d as a part of this study were not
s i g n i f i c a n t l y better than the p e r f o r m a n c e of the
they did not report using a higher number of reading s t r a t e g i e s which s ug g e s t s that knowing another foreign langut^ge did not increase use of reading stra tegie s and s p e c i f i c a l l y inferencing while reading in English.
L EA R N I N G ENGLISH: DOES IT INCREASE THE USE OF INFERENCING AS A RE A D I N G S T R A T E G Y AND PRO F I C I E N C Y IN READING AND FIGUR I NG V O C A B U L A R Y M EA NIN GS FROM CO NTE XT?
A THES I S
S U BM I T T E D TO THE INSTITUTE OF E C ONO MIC S AND SOCIAL SCIEN CE S OF B I L K E N T U N IVE R S I T Y
IN PA R T IA L F U LF I L L M E N T OF THE R E QUI REMEN TS FOR THE DEGREE OF MA S T E R OF ARTS
IN THE T E A C HI N G OF E N G L I S H AS A FOREIGN LANG UAG E
BY
A Y S E G U L DAL O G L U A U G U S T 1991
ѣ
4 ûte Ь
·> Г ц U О
B ILKENT UNIVE R S I TY
I NSTITUTE OF E CO N O M I C S AND SOC IAL SC IENCE S MA THESIS E X A M I N A T I O N RESULT FORM
July 31, 1991
The e x a m in i n g co m m i t t e e a p p o i n t e d by the
Institute of E c o n om i cs and social Sci e n c e s for the thesis ex a m i n a t i o n of the MA TEFL student
Aysegul Dalo g l u
has read the thesis of the student. The c o m m i t t e e has decided that the thesis
of the student is s a t i s f a c t o r y .
Thesis title
Thesis Advisor
C o mm i t t e e Member
: Influence of Knowing Another
F o r e i g n Languag e on Learning
English: Does it Increase the Use
of Inferencing as a Fieading
S t r a t e g y and P r o f i c i e n c y in fieading and Figuring Voc a b u l a r y Meanings from C ontext?
Dr, James Stalker
Bilkent University, MA TEFL Progr^^'^ Dr. Lionel Kaufman
Bilkent University, MA TEFL Program Mr. W i lliam Ancker
We c e r t i f y that we have read this thesis and that in our c o m b i n e d op i n i o n it is fully adequate, in scop e and in q u ality as a thesis for the degree of
Master of
Arts-w d l u i i r , G h r L ·
W illia m Ancker (Committee Member)
A pp r o v ed for the
Institute of Econ o mi c s £tnd Social Sci enc es
Ali K a r a o s m a n o g l u
1. 0 Introduct ion p. 1
1. 1 Ba c k g r o u n d and Ooals of the Study p. 1
1.1.1 Ba c k g r o u n d of the Study p. 1
1.1.2 Goals of the Study p. 2
1.2 Statement of R e s e a r c h Topic p, 3
1.2.1 The R es e a r c h Qu e s t i o n p. 3
1.2.2 D i s c u s si o n of the research Topic p. 3
1.3 H y po t he s e s p „ 6 1.3. 1 N u 11 Hypot hes i s p. 6 1.3.2 Experimental H y p o t h e si s p. 6 1.3.3 Id e nt i f i c a t io n of V a ri ables p. 6 1.4 Overv i e w of M e t h o d o l o g y p. 6 1.5 O r g a n i s a t i o n of Thesis p. 8 2.0 Re v i ew of L i t e r a t u r e p. 9 2. 1 Introduct ion p. 9 1 A .. « a'» M J .
Cogni t i v e Theory of Learning Ande r so n ' s Stages of Skill A c q ui s i t i o n p, 9 p. 10 O O o L ■ o :.. ■ o :. 111 Langua g e C o m p r e h e n s i on Processes in Cogni t i v e Theory p, 11 'T·' '7 1 Perceptual Proce s s i n g p. 11 o r ? Parsing p. 12 2 .tL . H M >J* 3 U ti l i s a t i o n
Types of Learn i n g S t r at egi es in Cogn i ti v e Theory
p. 12 p. 14 -.I*
i< L M a :. ■ .^1 M1 Types of Learn i n g S t rat egi es p, 14
2 · 2« ”''1 1. 1 M e t a c o g n i t i v e S t r a t e gi es p. 15
O •*:r
a :.. M a :. H M1.2 Cogn i ti v e S t r a t e g i e s
Inferencing as a Strate gy for Langua g e L e arning p. 15 p. 16 2.3. 1 Def i n it i on of Inferencing p. 16 - j. - L M .„.1 H a i Inferencing in L i t e r atur e p. 17 “ :;· -:p C a r t o n ’s D o m a i n of Inferencing p. 13 2 .3.4 B i a l ys t o k ' s Do m a i n of Inferencing p. 18
2.3.4. 1 Inferencing from Implicit Knowledge p. 19
2.3.4. Inferencing from Other K now ledge p. 19
2.3.4. .^*1 Inferencing from Context p. 21
2. 4
2.4. 1 Theories of ReadingReading in Native and Foreign
Languages
p. 22 p. 22
2.4.2 M
« Reading S t r a t e g i e s p. 23
2.4,3 N Influence of Prior K n o wledg e on
Reading C o m p r e h e n s i o n p. 24
r j*
a L M v J mM L an g u a ge Learn i n g Strate gie s
«=: o •C. M w M O cr. ■‘:·· •C. ■ w ■ ·_< 2.5.4 2 . 6 3. 0 3. 1 ·-' · -J:· · 1 3 . 3 . 1 . 1 3 . 3 . 1 . 2 o . o . 1H ~r *“.r '*:> 1 ·«.· . · » ' a a:« . X -:·· -:r o /1 •••T ••.T o KT ·_ * a ·.«' a a :. . 0 · a · « ' a O a · » ' a a 1 3.3.4 3.4 -:r ura 4. 0 4. 1 4. 2 4.2. 1 4.3 4.3. 1 4. 3.2 4.3.3 4.3.4 4.3.4.1 4.3.4.2 4.3. 4 . 3 4.3.5 K nown
The Ramsay Study
The Nation and M c L a u g l i n Study The IMayak et. al. Study
I m p lications of These Stud ies to the Current Study
C o nc l u s i o n s M e t h o d o l o g y Introduct ion Subjects Mat e r i al s The P r e - R eading Q u e s t i o n n a i re The Pu r po s e and S t r u c t u r e Kinds of F o r e i g n Lan gua ge Prior K n o w l e d g e
The Reading P a s s a g e and Rela ted Test
The S e l e c t i o n of the Reading Passage P r e - Te s ti n g F a m i l i a r i t y w ith the Content of the Reading Passag e The C o m p r e h e n s i o n Q u e s tio ns The V oc a b u l a r y Q u e s t ions
Pr e - te s ti n g the V o c a b u l a r y Items The P o s t - R e a d i n g Q u e s t i o n n a i re The F-'urpose of the f-’o s t-R eadin g Q u e s t i o n n a i r e S t r u c t u r e of the P o s t-R e a d i n g Q u e s t i o n n a i r e P r e - T e st i n g the Study Pro c ed u r e s / Data C o l l e c t i o n Analytical P r o c e d u r e s A na l ys i s of the Dat£^ Introduct ion Fiesults A n a ly s is of the Data
A nalyzing the R e sults of the EKperi m en t a l Group
Level of P r o f i c i e n c y for a Particular Lan g u ag e
Level of P r o f i c i e n c y in Different L an g u a g e s
Ranking the Experimental Group Su bj e c t s
Influence of F o reign L a n gu age The Fr e n c h Subgroup
The German Subgroup Italian Su bgroup
R a nking the Experimental Group
P* 26 P- 26 P· 27 P- 28 P· 29 P- 29 P- 31 p. 31 P" “!*0 S-'X-p. 34 P- 34 p. 34 P· 37 P· 38 P- 39 P- 39 P- 40 p. 40 p. 41 p. 42 P- 43 p. 43 P- 45 P· 48 P* 49 P- 50 P· 51 p. 51 P· 52 p. 53 P> 57 P- 57 P- 58 P- 58 p. 60 P- 60 p. 62 P- 63
4 a C' ■ 4.3.7 4.3.8 4.4 S u b je c t s Bas e d on C o m p r e h e n s i on and V o c a b u l a r y S c ores
C om p a r i s o n of the Experimental Sroup to 10 Best Control Group Subje cts Exami n i n g the Co r r e l at ion Between the Three M e a s u r e m e n ts Used in the Study
E xcluding S u b j e c t s with Some
K no w l e d g e of Another Foreign Language from the Control Group
C on c l u s i o n s 65 67 69 70 70 5. O 5. 1 cr■ 4:» 5.2. 1 5.3 5.4 5. 5i 5.6 D i s c u s s i o n of Results Introduct ion S ummary of Thesis D i s cu s s i o n D is c u s s i o n Asses s me n t Pedagogical of Previous Research of Results of the Study
Implications of the Study Im p lications for Future R e s ear ch
P· P· P' P' P· P' P' p. 72 72 72 73 73 76 78 79 Bi bliog r a p h y A p pe n d i c e s 80 83 Appendix A Appendix B Appendix C Appendix D P· P· P· P· 84 87 91 92
LIST OF TABLES Table 4.1 Table 4.2 Table 4,3 table 4.4 Table 4.5 Table 4.6 Table 4.7
Average Scores of the Experimental
and Control Groups p. 53
Test £^nd S t r a t e g y Use Re sults of
the E x perimental Group p. 55
Test and S t r a t e g y Use Re sults of
the Control Group p. 56
Ranked A v e r a g e Scores of the
E x perimental Group p, 60
Subje ct s with Fre n ch as First F o reign L a n g u a g e Ran ked by the
V o c a b u l a r y Score p. 61
Subje ct s with Ge r m a n as First F o reign L a n g u a g e fianked by the
V o c a b u l a r y Sco r e p. 63
Subje ct s with Italian as First F o reign L a n g u a g e Rank ed by the
V o c a b u l a r y Score p. 63
Table 4,8 Table 4.9
"able 4. 10
A v erage Sc o r e s of the La nguag e
S u b g r o u p s p
Flanked V o c a b u l a r y and C o m p r e h e n s i o n
Scores of the E x p erimental Group p.
Av e ra g e Sc a r e s of the Highest Ranking 10 Control Group Subjects
and the Exper i m e n t al Group P·
64 67
A C K N O W L E D G E M E N T
I wou ld like to e x p r e s s my deep g r atit ude to my
advisor Dr. James C. Stalker for his guidance,
feedback, £^nd e?ncourageme3nt while writing this thesis.
I wou ld like to thank Dr. Lionel Kau fman and Mr.
William Ancker for their valuab le c o mment s and
professional assistance.
Also, I owe special thanks to my col l e a g u e s at
BUSEL whose p at i e n c e and f l e x i b i l i t y contri but ed
INTRODUCTION
1. 1__ B A C K 6 R 0 U N D AND G O A L S OF THE STUDY
1.1.1 B a c k g r o u n d of the Study
Improving reading sk i l l s is often seen as the
major goal of i nstitutions which prepare student s to
study in En g l is h med i u m universities. The emphasis on
this skill in E n gl i s h medium un i v e r s i t i e s such as
Bilkent U ni v e r s i t y is ma i n l y due to the fact that e d u c a t i o n is c arried out t h r o ugh books written in
E nglish and most of the p r ofessional literature is
p u b l i s h e d in English. Since the stud e n t s can use their
native language, Turkish, in their daily a c t iv ities and since most of the t e a c h e r s are bilingual, speaking
p r o f i c i e n c y in En g l i s h is less emphasised. Listening
p r o f i c i e n c y is most important in follow ing lectures and
taking notes. The w r iting skill is important for the
students in writing papers and answering exam
questions. Reading, however, is an essential skill
which the s t u de n t s have to use both during their studies and after they start to enga ge in their profes s i o na l fields b e cause it p rov ides a means for
keeping up with the related literature. Therefore,
Bilkent U n i v e r s i t y School of E n g l i s h Language ( B U S E D , the E n g l i s h language p r e p a r a t o r y school within Bilkent
reading skill starts after the s tud ent s achieve a ce r t a i n level of p r o f i c i e n c y in general English and takes place in reading and ESP classes.
L a n g u a ge p r e p a r a t o r y i n s titutions are constantly searching for ways to develop m e thods that would make
language teaching e f f i c i e n t and beneficial to the
students. Since the s t u d e n t s want to com p l e t e this
intensive language stu d y as q u i ckl y as possibl e to be
ckble to start their st u d i e s in their specific
departments,, the main aim of such i nstitutions is to
give them the skills that are essential for their
u n i v e r s i t y s t udies and Therefore, this study focused
on finding a p o ss i b l e s o l u t i o n to this issue by e xploring the relati o n s h i p between knowl edg e of more than one fo r e i g n language and the reading strat egies used to see if either of these increases the reading proficiency.
1.1.2 Goals of the Study
The pu r po s e of t his stu d y was to ex plo re whether knowledge of other f o r e i g n languages can cont ribut e to
learning English. L e arner s t r ateg ies in general and
the Wctys in whic h readers a p p r o a ch receding tasks along with the specific s t r a t e g i e s they use are becoming
central issues to language teaching in general and
learners use, knowledge of other foreign languages, and reading and v o c a bu l a r y proficiency, it could pr ovide a
basis for new ap p r o a c h e s to teaching reading and to
language teach in g in general. 1.2 S T A T E M E N T OF R E S E A R C H TOPIC
1.2.1 The Resecirch Q u e s t i o n
This study f o cused on the f ollowing question: Does knowing another f o r e i g n language increase the use of the inferencing s t r a t e g y when reading in English as a f o r e i g n Icmguage?
1.2.2 D i s c u s s i o n of the Resea r c h Topic
In the literature of second language learning,
c og n i t i v e theor i e s imply that there is some kind of active mental process involved in learning a foreign
language. Dul ay and Burt (1977) argue that second
language learning, similar to first language learning, may be p e r c e i v e d as a " c r é â t ive-constructive" process
where learners g en e r a t e a sys tem of rules and
s t r uc t u r e s in u n d e r s t a n d i ng and learning the target
language t h r o u g h a developing grammar. Therefore, if
we accept the view that the second language system is
"created", that is, built upon su bs y s t e m s and units
t h r o u g h an a ct i v e c o gn i t i v e process, it would depend on
active p a r t i c i p a t i o n of the learner, and moreover, it
s t r a t e g i e s learners use for this purpose (B i a l y s t o k , 1978).
Based on the view that a fo reign language is learned t h r ou g h a c r e a t i v e process which requires
active p a r t i c i p a t i o n of the learner, the purpo se of
this study was to see if meaningful inferences improve
the second language learner's a b ility to u n d e r s t a n d a
w r itten text- The term " inferencing" was first defined
by Carton (1971) as "attributes and c ont ext s that are
familiar and are ut i l i z e d in recognizing what is not
familiar" (p. 45). Later, the definit ion of
inferencing was broa d e n e d amd inferencing s tra tegy was defined as "the use of a v a i l a b l e information to derive
explicit linguistic hypotheses. The informant ion used
for this pu r po s e may be linguistic or n o n ~ l i n g u i s t i c ,
it may be taken f rom the speaker or from the
environment, a^nd it may relate to the s truct ure or the
meaning of the language" (Seliger amd Long, 1983, p.
105). The second d e f i n i t i o n was used as a reference
point for this study. Therefore, the strate gy described deals with one aspect of creati ve language learning
which the learners use when faced with an u nfamiliar
item or structure. They try to u n d er stand the language
by relating it to their knowledge of other la^nguaiges
and of the situation.
are g r o u p e d under thr e e main c a t eg ori es in second
language learning literature: 1. Intralingual
inferences: inferences based on the nature of the
target language. For example, if the learner has
learned that adverbs are formed by adding ~ly to the adjective, when he/she e n c o u n t e r s the word "directly",
the learner can infer that it is an adverb. 2.
Interlingual inferences: inferences based on the
r e l a t i o n s h i ps to other languages. For example,
learners can make use of cognates. 3: Extralingual
inferences: inferences based on the content and the
context of the message. For example, if the learner has f a m i l i a r i t y with the content of a reading passage,
he/she can infer the meaning of some voc abu lary items
from the overall meaning (Carton, 1971). This study
fo c us e d on inferences that fall under the second group
in C a r t o n ’s definition, spec i f i c a l l y , the ones that
make use of knowledge of another fo rei gn language.
P r e v io u s research p r o v i d e s support for the view that knowing another f o r e i g n language helps students in
learning English. This is e s p e c i a l l y true if the
language is a related language because the learners can
find c o g n a t e s and similar syntactic structures. Also,
knowing a nother foreign language prov i d e s learners with m e t a - l i n g u i s t i c awareness. This knowle dge en ables the
language and inferencing depends on this skill (Seliger and Long, 1983).
1■5 H Y P O T H E S E S
1.3.1 Null H y p o th e si s
Knowing another f o r e i g n language does not have a
significant influence on reading c o m p r e h e n s i o n and
figuring v o c a b u l a r y m e a n i n g s from context, nor does it affect the number of str a t e g i e s used while reading in Eng 1 ish.
1.3.2 Experimental H y p o t h e s i s
Knowing another f o r e i g n language increases reading c o m p r e h e n si on and figuring v o cab ulary meaning s from
context £xnd increases the number of s t r a tegie s used
while reading in English.
1.3.3 Identi f ic a t io n of Variables
In this study, the independent v ari abl e is knowing
another f o r e ig n language. However, this foreign
language is limited to E u r o p e a n languages related to
E nglish so that inferences can be made th rough cogn ates
and similar syntactic structures. The dependent
vari a b l e s are reading comprehension, figuring
voc a b u l a r y m ea n i n gs f rom context, and the number and the types of reading s t r a t e g i e s used.
1.4__O V E R VI E W QF N E T H O D Q L Q B Y
in the in termediate level (L4) o-F cl asses at BUSEL.
The s u b j e c t s all read the same reading passage and
a n s w e r e d the same c o m p r e h e n s i on questions. The
e x perimental group co n s i s t e d of those students who were learning E ng l i s h as their second f ore ign language and a l re a d y knew another language related to English such
as French, Italian, or German. The control group
c on s i s t e d of students who were learning English as
their only f o reign language. The subj ect s were grouped
based on their answers to a q u es ti o n n a i re which asked
if they knew another language and to what extent.
Also, the same qu e s t i o n n a i r e co n t r o l l e d for e x t r a
lingual inferencing by asking about their previous
knowledge on the topic of the reading passage.
Reading c o m p r e h e n s i o n and figuring vocabu lary
meani n g s were a s s es s e d t h rough tests admi n i s t e r e d as a
part of the study. Reading c o m p r e h e n s i on was measured
by asking the subje c t s to answer five multipl e choice
q u e s t i o n s after reading a passage. The voc abula ry te?st
was in the form of matching ten items from the reading
pa s s a g e with twelve definitions. The number and the
va r i e t y of stra t e g ie s u sed while reading in English were a s s e s s e d in a p o s t - r e a d i n g qu e s t i o n n a i re devised
by Barnett (1988a) whi c h the s ubjec ts filled out
immediately after they read the pass age and answered
eight m ul t i p l e choice ques t i o n s describing the mental
p rocesses they e ng a g e d in while reading in English.
The results of the tests and the post-reading
q u e s t i o n n a i r e were s t a t i s t i c a l l y a n alyse d to see if
there was a s i gn i ficant influence from knowing another
foreign langu^ige on the dependent variables.
The e xp e c t e d result of the study was that students in the experimental group would demonstr ate a higher p r o f i c i e n c y in the reading c o m p r eh ension and vocabulary q uestions due to a broader source of past knowledge to
do inferencing from. Also, they would use a higher
number and a wider v a r i e t y of reading strategies. However, the a p p l i c a t i o n of this study was limited to a
p o p u l a t i o n of i n termediate level studen ts in EFL
s i t u a t i o n s and fo c us e d on the use of only one kind of reading strategy, inferencing.
1.5__ Q R 6 A N 1 Z A T I Q N ÜF T H ESIS
The thesis is o rg a n i s e d in the following way:
Chapter 1: I n tr o duction Chapter 2: Review of L i t e r a t u r e Chapter 3: M e t ho d o l o g y Chapter 4: A n a ly s i s of Data Chapter 5: D i s c u ss i o n of Fîesults A p p e n d i c e s
REVIEW OF LITER ATU RE
2.1 INTRODUCTION
This study aims to determine whether knowledge of another f o r e i g n language increases reading p rofic ien cy and the a bi l i t y to infer voc ab ula ry meanings from
context in addition to increasing the amount and the
variety of stra t e g ie s used in this process. Previous
research related to this topic p r ovide s support for
this view and states that learners with prior
e x pe r i e n c e in learning foreign languages pe rformed
better when faced with the task of learning another language, in this case learning English.
2.2 C Q 6 N I T I V E THEORY OF L A N 6 U A G E LE ARNING
The fo cus of this study is based on the cog nitiv e
theory of f o reign language learning. However, before
co n s i d e r i ng how f oreign language learning occurs within the c o g n i ti v e theory framework, it is necessary to view
how c o g n i t i v e theory a p p l i e s to leauTiing in general.
A nd e r s o n (1983, 1985) d escribes three stages of skill
a c q u i s i t i o n which can also be a ppl ied to foreig n
language learning. This theory assumes that learners
learn the rules that u n d e r l i e p erf o r m a n c e of a complex
skill first. Then, when they become competent in these
2.2.1 A n d e r s o n ’s Stages of Skill Acquisition:
The first stage of this c ognitive theory of skill a c q u i s i t i o n is labeled the cognitive stage. During this
stage, the learners are instructed how to do a task.
They can observe, by listening and watching others
performing a task, to try to figure it out themselves
or do it themselves. Therefore, there is a conscious
attempt by the learner to acquire the knowledge
ass o c i a t e d with a specific task and to be able to
define it. When applied to second language learning, a
learner in this stage shows an attempt to learn from obs e r v a t i o n when to use an unanailysed group of words
a p p r o p r i a t e l y . However, the knowledge in this stage is
inadequate for comm u n i c a t i ng ef fecti vel y becaiuse it usually has many errors.
The sec o nd stage is the as s ocia tiv e stage and two
main changes occur from the previous stage. The first
change is that the learner begins to identify and
correct the errors of the previous stage. The second
change is that co n n e c t i o n s between various elements of
the skill are tied to each other. The knowledge
acquired in the p r e v i o u s stage is applied to the
demands of the situation. This stage co rre spond s to
fluent c o m m u n i c a t i o n in the f o reign language but the learner tries to remember the grammatical rules of the language w hen u n c er t a i n about some a spects and the
learner can still make some errors in the use of the language.
The thi r d and the last stage is the autonomous stage where pe r f or m an c e of the skill becomes "virtually
automatic". The skill is p r o d u ce d e f f o r tles sly by the
learner and it is no longer a c o nscio us process. In
the case of foreign language learning, the errors do not inhibit c o m m u n i c a t i o n any longer.
2.2.2 L a ng u a g e C o m p r e h e n s i o n Proc ess es in Cognitive Theory
L a n g u a ge c o m p r e h e n s i o n is viewed in cog nitive theory as c o n sisting of "active and pa ssive pr ocesses in which individuals c o nstruct meaning from aural and w ri t t e n information" (O’Ma l l e y and Chamot, 1990., p.33). A n d e r s o n (1983), in his d e s c r iption of comprehension, views aural and w r itten texts to be so similar to each other that they can be regarded as one and defines
c o m p r e h e n s i o n as three i n terrelated processes:
perceptual processing, parsing, and uti 1 iz£^tion.
2.2.2.1. Perceptual P r o c e s s i n g
In perceptual processing, the learner focuses on
the text and tries to retain some pieces in short term memory. During this process, the individual starts to ana l y z e the language by s e l e c t i v e l y comp rehen d!ng some of its pieces.
2.2. 2.2 F-arsing
In parsing, the individual tries to construct
meaningful re p re s e n t a t io n s of the text by using the
words and the phrases. This process is done by first
"decoding" the individual words by matching the word
with its rep r e s en t at io n in the long term memory. The
result of this decoding is a "lexical access", which is a match between the short term memory and a type of dictionary in the long term memory which identifies the
meanings of individual words (O'Malley and Chamot,
1990) . Anothcîr basic unit of com p r e h e n s i on is a
"proposition" which is a meaning based r e p r e s entat ion in the long term me m o r y and includes the sequencing of
words. A l th o u g h this représentât ion is an abstraction,
it is used to recreate the original s eq uen ce or the
intended meaning of the sequence. When the learner
e s ta b lishes a pr o p o sitional représentât ion of a phrase, this meaning is integrated into other p r o p o sitio ns to
lead to a more c o m p r e h e n s i v e understa ndi ng of the text (O'Malley and Chamot, 1990).
2 . 2.2.3 U t i li z at i o n
Utilization, the thi r d process of comprehension, consists of relating a mental représentât ion of the
meaning in the text to d eclarative knowledge in the
long term memory. This d e c l a rative knowledge exists in
the key element of c o m p r e h e n s i o n and this interaction between the existing k nowledge in the long term memory
and the new knowledge f a c i l ita tes comprehension.
R i c h a r d s (1983) identifies two types of
d e c l a r a t i v e knowledge used to identify the meaning of
propositions: real w o rld knowledge and linguistic
knowledge. Real world k nowledge consists of facts,
e x p e r i e n c e s and impressions about the topic and they
give meaning to the incoming knowledge. It is possible
to show two types of declar a t i v e knowledge to make this point clear; "Scripts" consist of special schemata of
"situation specific knowledge about goals,
participants, and p r o c e d u r e s in real life situations"
and "story grammars" relate to s c hema ta of organi zat ion
of s t ories and na r ratives (O’Malley and Chamot, 1990,
p.36). Therefore, the reader can use his real world
knowledge and follow the w r itten text knowing what to expect or by relating it to his own life to comprehen d it efficiently.
Lin g u i st i c k nowledge can also be stored in the form of s c he m a t a and p r o p o s i t i o n s but it makes use of
w ord m e a n i n gs and grammatical and syntactic rules.
This linguistic knowledge can be examin ed in two
perspectives: analyzed k nowledge and cognitiv e control. The a n a l y z e d knowledge d imension includes variables such as unit s of speech, r e l a t ions hips between forms
and fneanings, and a w a r e n e s s of syntax. The cognitive
control is r e sp o nsible for the sel e c t i o n and
co o r d i n a t i o n of i nformation to solve a specific
linguistic task (Bialystok, 1986).
Therefore, it is possib le to summarise
co m p r e h e n s i on as an a c t i v e and con s t r u c t i v e process. The individuals go th r o u g h different stages and each of
these st ag e s as sists the individual in inferring
meani n g s and relating information to existing
knowledge.
2.2.3 Types of Learning Str ate gies in Cogn itive
Theory
Viewing f oreign language acq u i s i t i o n thr ough a
c ognitive th e o r y allows learning s t r ategi es to play a
major role in the pr o c e s s of learning. Learning
strategies, acco r d i n g to W e i n s t ein and Mayer (1986),
have learning f a c i l i t a t i o n as a goal and the goal of
strat e g y use is to "affect the learner's motivational
or a f f e c ti v e state, or the way in which the learner
selects, acquires, organises, or integrates new
knowledge" (p.315). Therefore, learning s t r a teg ies are
the a t t e m p t s of the learner to gain linguistic
com p e t e n c e in the target language. Learning strat egi es
can be g r o u p e d under thr e e cat e g ories on the level or
the type of pro c e s s i n g involved: m e t a cogn iti ve
strategies.
2.2.3. 1 lietacognitive S t r a t e g i e s
M e t a c o g n i t i ve s t r a t e g i e s involve planning for, monitoring, and evaluating the success of a learning
activity. M e t a c o g n i t i ve s t r a t e g ies can be applied to
both rece p ti v e and p r o d u c t i v e language tasks. These
s t r a t e g i e s can be s u m m a r i z e d as follows: paying
s e l e c t i v e atte n t io n to certiiin a spects of a task,
planning the o r g a n i z a t i o n of a discourse, monitoring or
reviewing a t t e n ti o n to a task, and evaluating the
c o m p r e h e n s i o n after a receptive langu£^ge activit y or
checking the product after a p r o duc tive language
a ct i v i t y (O’Malley and Chamot, 1990). 2 . 2.3.2 C o gn i t i ve S t r a t e g i e s
C o g n i t i v e stra t e g i e s of learning operate on the incoming information by manipu l ating it to increase
learning. Wein s t ei n and Mayer (1986) group these
s t r a t e g i e s under three broc^d headings: rehearsal,
organization, and e l a b o r a t i o n processes. Fiehearsal
s tr a t e g y involves repeating the linguistic item so that
it is m a i n t a i n e d in the long term memory. Organization
is group in g words, terminology, or conce pts depending
on their semantic or syntactic characteristics.
Elciboration p rocesses include s t r at egies such as
summarizing, deduction (applying rules of the language
information to fi gu r e out an unf amili ar concept),
e l a b o r a t i o n (combining new ideas with known
i n f o r m a t i o n ) , and inferencing (using information in
texts to g ue s s m ea n in g s of linguistic items, predict
outcomes, or compl e te missing parts). The use of the
inferencing strat e gy is the focus of this study, 2.3__ INFERENCING AS A S T R A T E G Y FOR L A N G U A G E L E A RNI NB 2.3.1 D e f i n i t i o n of Inferencing
The verb "to infer" is defined by We b s t e r " s New
C o l le g i a t e D i ct i o n a r y (1979) as "to derive a c o ncl usion from facts or premises; to involve as a normal outcome of thought; to suggest; to hint". The noun form of this verb, "inference" is defined by the same dicti ona ry as
"the act or p r ocess of inferring; the act of passing
from one proposition, s t atement or judgement consid ered as true to others who s e truth is believed to follow
from that of the former; the act of passing from
statistical sample data to g e n e r ali zatio ns" (p. 585).
The noun "inference" is used in the En gl i s h language
teaching literature as a verb but the verb,
"inferencing" does not exist in the dictionary.
However, the term "inferencing" takes a different
meaning as it is used in this specific context. Apart
from this, the noun "inference" has been given a
specific m ea n i n g in the E n glish language teaching
in the context to g u ess at or to construct a meaning for an u n kn o wn linguistic structure.
2.3 . 2 Inferencing in L i t e r a t u r e
The term " i n f e r e n c i n g " in f oreig n language
teaching literature was first used by Ca rton (1971) who
defined it as "attributes and contexts that are
familiar are u t i li z e d in recognizing what is not
familiar" (p. 45). In this definition, the
u n f a m i l i a r i ty was res t r i c t e d to a lexical item and the
concept repres e nt e d by that specific lexical item had
to be known by the inferencer. O ’Malley and Chamot
(1990) define inferencing as "using information in oral
text to guess the m e aning of new linguistic items,
predict outcomes, or c o m p l e t e missing parts" (p. 45).
A lt h o u g h their de f inition is r e s tricted to oral texts, they ex t e nd the domain of inferencing to the context and the content of the message.
Later, Bialystok deve l o p e d C a r t o n ’s defini tio n of inferencing strategy to be used within the frame?work of
the c o g n i t i v e theory of language learning. The broader
defi n i t i o n of the term is "use of a vai l a b l e information to derive explicit hypotheses. The information used for
this p u r p o s e may be linguistic or non-1inguistic, it
may be take n from the speaker or from the environment, and it may relate to the s t r u c tu re or the meaning of
Therefore, this s tr a t e g y describes one aspect of
language learning in the cogn i t iv e theory of language
a c q u i s i t i o n w h ich may be used when actual meanings or
e x p r e s s i o ns are not familiar. In this case, learners
attempt on the basis of their knowledg e of language (native or foreign), of the situa tion or the context,
or any other information to find a solut ion to the
linguistic p r o b l e m they face.
2.3.3 C a r t o n ’s Domain of Inferencing
Based on these definitions, the domain of
inferencing is very broad and it can apply to many deductive and logical processes. However, Carton (1971) has identified three c a t e g o r i e s of inferences based on the type of information used in the field of foreign
language teaching. The first category, intra-1ingual
inferences, c o nt a in s inferences based on the l e a r n e r ’s k nowledge of the target language. The second category, inter— lingual inferences, includes inferences based on
Ih® relati on s h i p of the u n known fe©
languages, for ex ample t h rough cognates. The third
c at e g o r y is ex t r a -lingual inferences which are formed
on the basis of the content of the message. 2.3.4 B i a l y s t o k ’s Domain of Inferencing
B i a l y s to k has e x t e n d e d C a r t o n ’s distinctions and propo s e s thr e e types of inferences depending on the
implicit knowledge, inferencing from other knowledge,
and inferencing from context (Bialystok, 1978).
2.3.4.1 Inferencing f r o m Implicit Kn owled ge
Implicit knowledge refers to "unanalysed,
intuitive information the learner has about the target language, even though that information cannot be stated
in the form of rules, principles, or regularities" <p.
71). However, the p r e s e n c e of this knowledge becomes
apparent in the l e a r n e r ’s use of grammatical utter ances
and the a bility to judge g r a m m a t i c a l l y correct
sentences. Inferencing from implicit k nowledge is
similar to C a r t o n ’s " intra-1ingual inferences". In
both cases, a hyp o t h e s i s is te sted based on the
knowledge of the target language and "the deduction is
guided by an un d er s t a n d i ng of a linguistic regularity. The information derived in this manner may relate to
syntax, s e m a nt i cs and p h o nology" (Bialystok, 1978, p-
74). Therefore, if a learner of En glish figures out
that an adverb ends w ith ~ 1 v . when he encounters the
word "slowly", he can r e alise that it functions as an adverb and it is de rived from the a dje c t i v e "slow" by looking at th e ending it has.
2 . 3.4.2 Inferencing f rom Other K n o w led ge
Bial ys t ok defines "other knowledge" as knowledge of the wor ld and/or k n o w l e d g e of the subject matter,
most useful for inferencing (Seliger and Long, 1983). However, if the learner relies too much on knowledge of
other languages, he might make some errors which are
referred to as "interference" in error analysis
(Richards, 1973). The most beneficial use of
inferencing from other knowledge occurs in the use of
cognates to interpret and convey meaning. However, the
use of c o g n a t e s is limited to languages that are
members of the same family. Research shows that French
learners who knew Italian were more successful in a
reading c o m p r e h e n s i o n test in F re n c h than their
c o u n t e r p a rt s who were not fluent in Italian (Bialystok
and Fröhlich, 1977). Apart from this, Bialystok states
that "words that appear to be cog n a t e s by virtue of their s u r f a c e forms do not n e c e s sarily share sufficient
semantic featu r es to permit them to be used
interchangeably" (Seliger and Long, 1983, p.108).
When using know l e d g e of another language,
Bialystok c o nt r as t s inferencing and transfer. When a
language item is direc t l y app lie d to the target
language f rom another language, the s tra tegy used is
called transfer. When the learner modifies the
knowledge of a specific item from another language to
c o nform to the target language, the strateg y used is
inferencing, and Bial y s t o k believes that consistent
c o m m u n i c a t i o n in the target language (Bialystok, 1978). In addition, a l e a r n e r ’s m e t a l ingu istic awareness of language is another s o u r c e of other knowledge to do inferencing from. Bial y s t o k claims that
e x p e r t i s e with language is a c cu mul ated
through exp er i en c e w ith more languages, but
this knowledge itself is not related to a
specific language. Thus, a learner with a
great deal of m e t a l i n g u i s t i c knowledge will
know more about language and how to use
language than will a learner with a less
developed c a p a c i t y in this area. This
linguistic skill must be related to the l e a r n e r ’s ability to u n d e r s t and and abstract
the re gularities in language, and it is on
these a bilities that inferencing depends,
(qtd.in Seliger and Long, 1983, p.l09)
Based on this, it is p o s s i b l e to conclude that a
learner of E n glish who knows other languages from the
same family of languages will have more knowledge to do inferencing from.
2 . 3. 4 . 3 Inferencing from Context
The third kind of inferencing Bialystok discusses is inferencing from context. The context refers to both the language and the physical env ironment in which a p ar ticular utterance occurs. The linguistic a spects of context are shared m e a n i n g s and points that become clear to the p a r t i c i p a n t s as the interaction continues.
The physical aspects refer to the non-1inguistic
concr e t e items in the d iscourse which can be specified
as the facial expressions, gestures, activities, and
inferencing from to carry out the desired communication.
2.4 THEORI E S QF READING
Interactive theor i e s of reading p os tul ate that readers a ct i v e ly pr ocess and interpret texts through
assigning meaning as well as retrieving meaning.
Therefore, the meaning the reader gets out of a written
material is a result of the interaction between the
text and the r e a d e r ’s cogn i t i v e p r o cessi ng capacities.
As stated by Smith et al. (1976), reading is the
"active p r o ce s s of constr u c t i n g meaning from language
p r e s e n t e d by graphic s y mbols (letters) s yste m a t i c a l l y
arranged" (p.265). In his d e f inition of proficient
readers, G o o d m a n claims that
readers maint a i n constant focus on
c o n s tr u ct i n g the meaning thro ughout the
process, always seeking the most direct path
to meaning, always using s t r ate gies
for-reducing uncertainty, always being se lective about the use of the cues a v ailab le and
drawing deeply on prior conceptual and
linguistic competence. (qtd. in Carrel 1,
Devine, and Eskey, 1988, p. 12)
Therefore, in the reading process, when it is
successful, there is ac t i v e p a r t i c i p a t i on of the reader to get the most out of the reading text by using the a p p r o p r i a t e strategies.
2.4.1 R e ading in Native and F o r eig n Languages
which sugge s ts that this skill is not sp ecifi cal ly tied to the language but o n c e it is mastered, it can be
a p p l i e d to all the languages the reader knows
(Bialystok, 1978). However, this degree of transfer
depends on the s im i l a r i t y between the two languages.
Berman (1984) states that a reading text becomes more
difficult when the language and the structural
p r o p e r t i e s the student does not know contrast with each
other. W hen there is s i m i l a r i t y between the languages,
the reader can transfer this knowledge with the use of a p pr o p r i a t e strategies.
2.4.2 Reading Strat e g i e s
Since the late 1970's, research has sho wn that
s t u d e n t s who make use of reading s t r a teg ies and skills
de mo n s t r a t e higher reading comprehension. Reading
s t r a t e g i e s refer to the "mental o p e rat ions involved
when readers approa c h a text e f f e c t i v e l y and maxke sense
of what they read (Barnett, 1988a, p. 150). For the
p u r p o s e s of this study, the d efinition of reading s tr a t e g i e s was res t ri c t e d to those s t r ategi es that are used to gain meaning f rom a print text and excludes those s t r a t e g i e s that can be c l a s s i f i e d as graphophonic s t r a t e g i e s which rely heavily on sound and letter correspondences.
among the e f f ec t iv e p r oblem solving techniques which lead to higher reading comprehension: guessing word
meanings from context, recognising word families and
cognates, skimming, scanning, reading for meaning,
predicting, activating general knowledge, and making
inferences. She claims as well that readers use these
str a t e g i e s on two levels: text level s t r at egies (those
that are related to the reading p as s a g e as a whole or
to the large parts of the passage) and word level
str a t e g i e s (using context or cognate s to guess word meanings, identifying grammatical cat e g o r i e s of words, and using r eference words to guess meaning).
2.4.3 Influence of Prior K now l e d g e on Reading
C o m p r e h e n s i o n
There is c o n t r a d i c t o r y research on the influence of prior know le d g e on reading c o m p r e h e n s i o n in foreign
language contexts. In a study of su b j e c t s who learned
E n glish as a second language, Carrel 1 (1983) concluded
that un l i k e native readers, n o n -native readers did not
show any significant effect of prior knowledge when they were ask e d to recall a p a ssage they read in their
second language. Lee (1986) repl ica ted the study with
only one m o d i f i c a t i o n which was to ask the subjects to
recall the passage in their native language. Lee's
findi n g s differ from those of Carrel 1 becciuse the
show c o n t r a d i c t i ng results due to the language used in
the recall process. S u p p o r t i n g L e e ’s findings, Swaffar
(1988) reports s t udies of A n d e r so n (1983, 1985) which
show that prior know l e d g e accounts for the fact that learners coul d remember the main idea of the passage even though they could not replicate sentences from it. He also f o und that prior f a m i l i ari ty with the subject
matter not only increases content recall, but also
increases language recognition, concept recall, and
inferential reasoning (Swaffar, 1988).
This discussion of impact of background knowledge on reading c o m p r e h e n s i o n relates to schema theory which
refers to the abstract knowledge struc ture which is
gained t h r o ug h experience, stored in the memory and is used in the process of assim i l atin g new information
(Perkins and Brutten, 1988). Therefore, when readers
have prior f a m i l i a r i t y with the content of a reading p a ss a g e which they can retrieve t hrough the existing schema, they can apply this knowledge to figuring out
the u n k n o w n s they are fatced with. This would be
additional information whi c h can be used in making
inferences. Because only one type of inferencing is
the focus of this study, it would be best to control
for other vari a b l es f rom which the readers can make
passage t h r o u g h which the inferences are observed, fa m i l i a r i t y with the content of the text needs to be c o n t r o l l e d for so that only inferences from other languages known can be observed.
In a d d i t i o n to prior knowledge on the topic of reading passage, personal interest on the topic plays a
major role in reading comprehension. Studies on native
speakers of En g li s h show that if the subject of the
reading p a s s a g e is of personal interest to the readers, their reading c o m p r e h e n s i o n scores are higher than cases whe re they do not have any p a r t icula r interest in
the topic <Baldwin et al., 1985). Therefore, the
reading p a s s a g e chosen for this study needs to be on a topic whi ch would arouse the interest of the subjects
so that they will be moti v ate d to achieve full
comprehension.
.iC ■ wJ L A N 6 U A 6 E L E A R N I N6 S T R A T E G IES DE P E N D I N G ON THE
NUMBER OF L AN G U A G E S KNOWN
Li t t le research has been done to ex plore the
influence of knowing other languages on learning
another f or e i g n language. Three st udies that have
dealt with this specific issue show that people with
m u l t i p l e languages have different language acquisition
s t r a t e g i e s t han people w ith single language skills. 2.5.1 The R a m s a y Study
co m p a r a t i v e study on 10 multilingual and 10 monolingual
adults, reports that subje c t s with multiple language
skills p e r f o r m e d better in learning an unfamiliar
language than subjects who had not e x p eri enc ed learning
a language before. He e x p l a i n s the reason for this
difference by stating that "successful learners sampled
more informational reso u r c e s and found effective
leairning str a te g ie s sooner than did less successful
learners" (Ramsay, 1980, p. 94). Another reason was
the way the "successful learners" a p p roa ched the task.
For example, he reports that successful learners
prac t i c e d aloud and o r a l i s e d the stages they were going
through. In addition, subje c t s with multipl e language
skills were less co n s c i o u s of making mistakes which
e n ab l e d them to try different stra teg ies and verbalize
more when learning the u n f amiliar language- The "less
successful learners", however, had deficie ncies in
knowing where to start the task and discovering how the rule system of this unf a m i l i a r language might operate. 2.5.2 The Nation and M c L a u g h l i n Study
In a c o m p a ra t iv e s t udy where the subjects were asked to learn an artificial linguistic system. Nation
and M c L a u g hl i n (1986) c o n c l u d ed that "multi 1inguals
have s t r a te g ie s that help them alloca te processing
r e sources more e ff i c i e n t l y under c onditions in which there were no explicit i n s tructions for learning" (qtd.
in Nayak et al., 1990, p.22). 2.5.3 The Nayak et. al. Study
In their study on m u ltilingual and monolingual adults, Nayak et al. (1990) c o n c l u d e d that multilingual
subjects p er f o r m e d better in learning the rules of
syntax than monolingual adults when faced with an
artificial linguistic system. In this study, both the
monolingual and m u ltilingual s u b j e c t s were randomly
assigned either to a "memory" or "rule discovery"
condition. In the me m o r y condition, the subjects were
asked to m em o r i s e the given material. In the rule
discovery condition, the subje c t s were asked to figure out the c omplex set of rules which gov e r n e d the given
language. The aim of the study was to see if subjects
with m u l t i p l e language skills were better in
discovering the rule sy s t e m of the language. The
results of the Nayak et. al. stu dy showed that
multilingual subje c ts did not p er for m better than the
monolingual s u b j ec t s in
learning the vocabulary of the
artificial linguistic system. However, they performed
s i g n i f i c a n t l y better when they were asked to figure out the synt a ct i c rules and they were able to complete this
task in a shorter time. Therefore, this study was able
to de m o n s tr a te that m u ltilingual people had skills that en abled t hem to discover the rule sys tem s of a given
2.5.4 Implications of These Studies to the Current Study
The three studies d iscussed above conclude that multilingual people are better than monoli ngual s when c^sked to discover the rule s ystems of unfamiliar languages and that they use a wider v ariety and more
effective st r ategies when dealing with languages.
However, all of these s t udies co nc e n t r a t e d on a
learning situ at i o n where there was only one task. That
is, they did not deal with sit uat ion s where languages
learning is a c on t i n u o u s p r ocess as in reality.
Therefore, analyzing the extent to which these apply to achieving p r o f i c ie n cy in a language such as En glish is
the focus of this p r esent study. In addition, two of
the studies discussed abo v e p r e s ent ed the subj ect s with
artificial linguistic systems, which may be perceived
as puzzles. Therefore, learners may not be able to
apply these str at e g i e s when faced with a whole language sy s t e m they have to acquire.
2.6 CONCL U S IO N S
Based on the resea r c h done related to the topic of
this study, it is p o s s i b l e to con c l u d e that cognitive
theory e xp l a i ns s e c o n d language learning as a
c o n t i n u o u s process whi c h requires the active
str a t e g i e s in this active p a r t i c ipat ion and inferencing
is one of them. In doing inferencing, they apply their
current knowl e dg e of the language, other languages they
know, and their knowledge of the wor ld and the subject
matter to figu r e out the unknowns they are faced with. The interactive theory of reading also requires active pa r t i c i p a t i o n of the reader t h rough the use of various
st r ategies to c o m pr e h e n d the reading passage and
inferencing is also a reading strategy. Knowle dge of more than one fo r ei g n language is one source of knowledge on which inferences can be based and this is
the focus of the current study. However, since
knowledge of the subject matter of the reading passage
and personal interest in the topic can be sources of
knowledge to make inferences from, the researcher will control the s e v a ri a b l e s during the co ur s e of the study.
Also, because inferencing o p era tes only when the
languages in q u e st i o n are from the same language
family, only thoiui® tiiubjaictii
who know languages
that areM E T H O D O L O G Y
3.1 INTRODUCTION
This study aims to determine whether knowing
another foreign language increases reading
co m p r e h e n s i on and to test if knowing another related
fo reign language i ncreases both the amount and the
variety of reading s t r a t e g i e s used when reading in
English. The c og n i t i v e theory of language learning
provi d e s the view that learners form hypotheses based
on their present know l e d g e and apply these to
fa m i l i a r i z e the ms e l v e s with new information they
encounter. Apart f rom this, they use various
strategies, one of whi c h is inferencing which
c o ns t i t u t e s the focus of this study.
In a d d i ti o n to this, research directly related to the specific p urpose of this study shows that knowing other f o reign languages increases the number and the
v a ri e t y of stra t eg i e s when reading in a f o r e i g n
language (Ramsay, 1980; Nayak et.al., 1990). Previous
research provid e s support for the view that use of these a p p r o p r i a t e s t r a t e g i e s which involve inferencing from other avai la b le know l e d g e leads to higher reading
comprehension. B e c a u s e of these, this study was
c o n s t r u c t e d in a way that would enable subjects to make inferences from the other f o reign language they know in
from context by asking them to read a passage in En glish whi ch is the f o reign language they are learning
currently. The reading s t r ategies they used were
asses s e d in a q u e s t i o n n a i re to see if they were making use of this additional foreign language which was
viewed as additional information to make inferences
from wit h in the c ognitive theory framework of language acquisition.
Therefore, this study was c o n s t r u c t e d to see if
there was a significant influence from knowing other
foreign languages besides English (the independent
variable) on reading comprehension, figuring out
voca b u l a r y meanings, and increasing the number of
stra t e g i e s used (the dependent variables). The
p re d i c t a b l e e x t r a n eo u s vari a b l es were co n t r o l l e d as much as po s s i b l e during the study to enable gathering accurate results.
3.2 SUB J E CT S
The s u bj e c t s who p a r t i c i p a t ed in this study were
stude n t s at Bilkent U n i v e r s i ty School of English
Langu a g e ( B U S E D , an institution which aims to prepare students to study in an E n glish me dium university,
s p e c i f i c a l l y Bilkent University. Stu den ts at BUSEL are
placed in one of eight levels depending on their
high intermediate level. The students who suc ceed on the final exam given at the end of the year are c o n s i d e r e d to be pro f i c i e n t enough to start their u n i v e r s i t y studies in English.
The study was c a r r i e d out in the classes of the
BUSEL teach e r s who agreed to cooper ate with the
researcher. The resea r c h was c o ndu cted in three L4
cl a s s e s and a total of 41 students p a r t i ci pat ed in the
study. The subjects were in the age range of 18 to 22.
All s u b j e ct s comp le t ed the p r e - reading questionnaire,
read t h e target passage, and answered the q u es tio ns in
the p o s t - r ea d i n g questionnaire. Then, based on their
a n swers to the p r e- r eading questionnaire, the subjects who knew at least one other E u r opea n fo reign language besides En gl i sh were p l a c e d in the experimental group and the others were pla c e d in the control group, resulting in 31 subje c t s in the control group and 10 subje c t s in the e x perimental group.
All of the e x p erimental group subjects reported learning their European based f o reign language before learning E ng l i s h and the reason for learning this language was to be able to study in a high school that
p ro v i d e d e d uc a t i on in this language. Therefore, their
E u ro p e a n language is referred to as their first foreign language and English as their second foreign language
in this study.
It is believed that these subjects comp o s e d a
rep r e s e n t a t iv e sample of the L4 level students at BUSEL because s u bj e ct s s e l ec t i o n was not based on volunteers.
In addition, the study was a d m in ister ed during class
time so stude nt s who aittend class regularly were
r epresented in the study. Also, the considerable
number of subjects in the control group increased the
r e l i a b i 1 i 1 ity of the study. However, co opera tio n from
the teacher was required so that class time could be
used. All of the teach e r s who were c o ntact ed for this
purpose ag r e e d to coop e r a t e which made the task of data
c ol l ection easier and more efficient for the
r e s e a r c h e r . 3.3 M A T E RIALS
The m a t e r i a l s used in this study con s i s t e d of a pre-reading questionnaire, a reading pa ssage followed by c o m p r e h e n s i o n and voccibulary questions, and a p o s t reading questionnaire.
3.3.1 The Pre-Reading Q u e s t i o n n ai re
3.3.1.1 P u r p o s e and S t r u c t u r e
The p u r p os e of this q u e s t i o n n a i re was to gather-
data about the students. Therefore, it asked questions
about their age, the nature and duration of their
En glish study, as well as where they started learning
group of s u bj e ct s p a r t i c i p a t e d in the study and their answers sh ow e d that nearly all of them had started learning En glish as a school requirement and had prior learning e x p e r i en c e in the language before they were
enrol l e d at BUSEL. Therefore, it was assured that the
random s e l ec t i o n of s u b j e c t s led to a homogeneous g r o u p .
The subje ct s were asked as well if they knew
another f o r ei g n language besides English, and if they did, they w ere asked to assess their p r o fic iency level
in this language. This self-rating scale and the
crit e r i o n for deciding p r o f i c i e n c y in the language were
a dapted from a study by Nayak et al. (1990) on
monolingual and multilingual adults. The Nayak et. al.
study aimed to assess if people with multiple language
skills e m p l oy e d different language learning strat egi es than do people with s i n g l e language skills when faced w ith a m i n i a tu r e linguistic system incorporating a
reference word under instructions to "memorize" or
instructions to "discover rules". In this study,
language pr o f i ci e nc y was m e a s u r e d on a self-rating scale and subjects with p r o f i c ien cy in three or more
languages were co n s i d e r e d to be multilingual. Even
though t hey had not a d m i n i s t e r e d any pilot studies to
proved to be reliable in their study. Their results showed that multilingual subjects were more able to
adjust their learning s t r ategies according to the
requirements of the task and used more strategies than monolingual adults in figuring out the rule systems of
the unfamiliar language they were faced with. Since
this s e l f- rating met h o d was seen to be reliable by
Nayak et. al. (1990) and was proven to be so by the
results of their study, the same sca le was assumed to be reliable for the present study as well.
The pr e -r e a d in g q u e s t i o n n a i re used in this study included two sets of scales allowing for two foreign languages to be rated on skills of speaking and reading
and writing. The first s c ale asked their ev aluation of
speaking p r o f i ci e n c y in this language and the second scale asked their ev a l u a t i o n of reading and writing
proficiency. This language p r o f i c i e n c y was measured on
a seven point s el f - rating scale with 1 standing for "No Ability" and 7 standing for "Completely Fluent" with
regard to the skills d iscussed above. Subjects with
ratings of 4 and above were c o n s i dered to be proficient in that specific language and those subjects were
placed in the experimental group. Subjects with
ratings of 3 and below on the self- rat ing scale were
not c o n s i d e r e d to be proficient in that language and
