Rank Key 4-grams

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50

P 05 F2 1
FROM L2 TO L1
A LEXICAL DECISION TASK
P 0 01 AND
0 01 AND THE
REACTION TIME AND ERROR
IN A LEXICAL DECISION
THE PRIME AND THE
JOHNSON AND NEWPORT 1989
TIME AND ERROR RATE
THE INPUT PRACTICE GROUP
THE HERITAGE AND L2
PRIME AND THE TARGET
NATIVE SPEAKERS OF RUSSIAN
THE OUTPUT PRACTICE GROUP
BETWEEN THE PRIME AND
FROM L1 TO L2
THE L1 LEMMA MEDIATION
05 F2 1 60
THE ONE-STEM VERB SYSTEM
THE HILE 1 GROUP
IN THE CRITICAL CONDITION
AND LATE L2 LEARNERS
USE OF L2 WORDS
THE UNIVERSITY OF ARIZONA
LATE L2 LEARNERS AND
ANALYSIS P 0 05
THE DECLARATIVE PROCEDURAL MODEL
HERITAGE AND L2 GROUPS
GROUP OUTPERFORMED THE HILE
OUTPERFORMED THE HILE 1
CHINESE ENGLISH BILINGUAL SPEAKERS
THE HILE 2 GROUP
REAL AND NONCE VERB
ON THE ILR SCALE
BETWEEN REGULAR AND IRREGULAR
1 GROUP MEAN DIFFERENCE
IN THE STUDY PHASE
PROCESSING OF INFLECTIONAL MORPHOLOGY
AT THE SAME PROFICIENCY
LEARNERS AND HERITAGE SPEAKERS
DE GROOT AND NAS
INSTRUCTION IN VERB CONJUGATION
POST HOC TUKEY COMPARISONS
HILE 1 GROUP MEAN
05 F2 1 120
DEGREE OF SEMANTIC RELATEDNESS
REACTION TIMES AND ERROR
AMERICAN LEARNERS OF RUSSIAN
REGULAR AND IRREGULAR VERBS

Keyness Frequency
281
125
118
116
109
105
100
95
95
95
95
95
95
91
90
90
88
86
86
86
86
81
81
81
81
81
81
78
76
76
76
76
71
71
71
67
67
67
67
67
67
67
67
67
67
67
67
67
67
67

59
36
33
37
23
22
25
20
20
20
20
20
20
23
19
19
31
18
18
18
18
17
17
17
17
17
17
20
16
16
16
16
15
15
15
19
14
14
14
14
14
14
14
14
14
14
14
14
14
14

51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102

L2 LEARNERS OF RUSSIAN
SEMANTIC AND SYNTACTIC INFORMATION
WITH AGE OF ARRIVAL
IN THE SECOND LANGUAGE
GROOT AND NAS 1991
05 F 2 1
TYPES OF WORD PAIRS
P 05 F 2
TWO TYPES OF WORD
DIFFERENCE IN ERROR RATE
AND NONCE VERB GENERATION
THE SAME PROFICIENCY LEVELS
HERITAGE SPEAKERS OF RUSSIAN
THE CRITICAL PERIOD HYPOTHESIS
TIMES AND ERROR RATES
BETWEEN L2 WORDS AND
JOHNSON AND NEWPORT S
INTEGRATED INTO THE LEXICAL
IN THE L1 L2
GOLLAN ET AL 1997
DEGREE OF SEMANTIC OVERLAP
THE PRIME AND TARGET
L1 LEMMA MEDIATION HYPOTHESIS
IN THE TEST PHASE
L2 LEARNERS AND HERITAGE
IN AN EPISODIC TASK
OF THE CONJUGATIONAL PATTERN
THE STEM AND THE
ON THE GRAMMAR TEST
IN THE L2 LEXICON
DIFFERENCE IN READING TIME
P 0 01 POST
OF L2 VOCABULARY ACQUISITION
CHECKS AND CLARIFICATION REQUESTS
AND THE LIHE GROUP
05 F2 1 30
BOTH REGULAR AND IRREGULAR
BOTH PARTICIPANT AND ITEM
0 01 POST HOC
MANNER OF MOTION VERBS
THE TIME OF TESTING
INTO THE LEXICAL ENTRY
THE USE OF L2
DIRECTIONS FOR WHICH INTERACTION
LEXICAL DEVELOPMENT IN L2
AND L2 PROCESSING OF
THOSE DIRECTIONS FOR WHICH
01 AND THE LIHE
MODERN LANGUAGE APTITUDE TEST
THE SAME CHINESE TRANSLATION
MARKING ON THE NOUN
NS-NS INTERACTION AND FTD

67
67
67
63
62
62
62
62
62
62
62
62
62
62
62
60
57
57
57
57
57
57
57
57
57
52
52
52
52
52
52
52
52
52
52
52
52
52
52
52
51
48
48
48
48
48
48
48
48
48
48
48

14
14
14
28
13
13
13
13
13
13
13
13
13
13
13
16
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
18
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10

103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154

AN INTEGRATED PART OF
SEMANTIC SYNTACTIC AND MORPHOLOGICAL
GROUP MEAN DIFFERENCE 2
ASPIRATION TO PROFESSIONAL PURSUIT
PARTICIPANT AND ITEM ANALYSES
PRIMING FROM L2 TO
PRESENTATION LISTS WERE CONSTRUCTED
THE LEXICAL DECISION TASK
THE ORAL PROFICIENCY INTERVIEW
NATIVE SPEAKERS OF ENGLISH
IN THE EPISODIC TASK
PERCEPTUAL SALIENCE SEMANTIC COMPLEXITY
GROWTH IN L2 PROFICIENCY
THE L2 AND HERITAGE
OF THE STEM AND
L2 WORDS AND CONCEPTS
WERE RELATED IN MEANING
THE DIRECT OBJECT CLITIC
A HIGHLY INFLECTED LANGUAGE
SUBJECTS IN CONDITION 2
TO THE NUMBER MORPHEME
COGNITIVE AND PERCEPTUAL ABILITIES
THE SEMANTIC TRANSFER HYPOTHESIS
THE SAME KOREAN TRANSLATION
THE SAME L1 TRANSLATION
L2 AND HERITAGE GROUPS
01 POST HOC TUKEY
TO THE SAME-TRANSLATION PAIRS
CONGRUENT AND INCONGRUENT COLLOCATIONS
HIGHLY PROFICIENT L2 LEARNERS
SPEAKERS AND L2 LEARNERS
PARTICIPANT ANALYSIS P 0
IN THE SEMANTIC CONDITION
ON THE STUDY LIST
IN THE U S
LATE L2 LEARNERS OF
VANPATTEN CADIERNO 1993A 1993B
ORIENTATION TO THE SOCIAL
VANPATTEN AND CADIERNO 1993A
AND CADIERNO 1993A 1993B
THE WRITTEN GRAMMAR TEST
IN THE L2 L1
THE LIHE GROUP MEAN
THE DIFFERENCE IN ERROR
PRIMING IN LEXICAL DECISION
WAS NOT SIGNIFICANT BOTH
LIHE GROUP MEAN DIFFERENCE
ACQUISITION OF L2 COLLOCATIONS
THE ORDER OF ACQUISITION
AT THE LEMMA LEVEL
IN THE SENSE THAT
AS IN EXPERIMENT 1

48
48
48
48
48
48
48
45
43
43
43
43
43
43
43
43
43
43
43
43
43
43
43
43
43
43
43
43
43
43
43
43
43
43
43
43
43
43
43
43
43
43
43
43
43
43
43
43
42
40
39
39

10
10
10
10
10
10
10
22
14
38
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
13
12
41
20

155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
197
198
199
200
201
202
203
204
205
206

SAME AS IN EXPERIMENT
IN LATE L2 LEARNERS
THE INTERACTIONAL STRUCTURE OF
NOT SIGNIFICANT BOTH FS
OF AN L2 WORD
L2 L1 PRIMING WAS
ITEM ANALYSIS P 0
IN THE INCONGRUENT CONDITION
THE RULES AND PROBABILITIES
IN THE LEXICAL ENTRY
IN THE RECAST CONDITION
THE MODIFICATION OF INTERACTION
OF FOREIGN LANGUAGE PROFICIENCY
THE ROLE OF L1
THE AJ- AND ACOMPARED TO NATIVE SPEAKERS
THAN TO THE DIFFERENT-TRANSLATION
VANPATTEN AND CADIERNO'S 1993A
LEXICAL DECISION TASK WITH
TO THE SOCIAL MAINSTREAM
DE DIEGO BALAGUER ET
DIEGO BALAGUER ET AL
CRITICAL AND CONTROL CONDITIONS
CONDUCTED TO ASSESS THE
CORRELATION BETWEEN AGE OF
AND ITEM ANALYSES F
RULES AND PROBABILITIES MODEL
NATIVE SPEAKERS AND L2
SETS OF WORD PAIRS
MARKING ON THE VERB
WITHIN THE LEXICAL ENTRY
REGULARITY SYNTACTIC CATEGORY AND
SYNTACTIC CATEGORY AND FREQUENCY
PRODUCTIVE USE OF L2
ALSO A SIGNIFICANT INTERACTION
VERBS F 3 52
AGE OF FIRST EXPOSURE
FREQUENCY IN THE INPUT
GROUP MEAN DIFFERENCE 3
L2 WORDS AND THEIR
FOR REGULAR AND IRREGULAR
THE TWO LEXICAL SYSTEMS
HERITAGE AND LATE L2
IN BOTH PARTICIPANT AND
IN ERROR RATE BETWEEN
OF PRIME TARGET RELATION
L2 LEARNERS RELY ON
OF THE CANDIDATE S
ERROR RATE IN THE
F 1 1 38
EFFECT WAS FOUND IN
THE CRITICAL AND CONTROL

38
38
38
38
38
38
38
38
38
38
38
38
38
38
38
38
38
38
38
38
38
38
38
38
38
38
38
38
38
38
38
38
38
38
38
38
38
38
38
38
38
38
38
38
38
38
38
38
38
38
38
38

11
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8

207
208
209
210
211
212
213
214
215
216
217
218
219
220
221
222
223
224
225
226
227
228
229
230
231
232
233
234
235
236
237
238
239
240
241
242
243
244
245
246
247
248
249
250
251
252
253
254
255
256
257
258

EARLIER STUDY JIANG 2002

ON THE NOUN AND
L1 AND L2 PROCESSING
IN THE MENTAL LEXICON
THE SAME AMOUNT OF
BOTH COMPREHENSION AND PRODUCTION
SIGNIFICANT DIFFERENCE AMONG THE
THE DEGREE OF SEMANTIC
THE DIFFERENCE WAS SIGNIFICANT
IN L1 AND L2
P 0 05 AND
NONCE VERB GENERATION BY
NATIVE SPEAKERS AND THE
PROCESSING OF VERBAL MORPHOLOGY
QUESTIONS STATEMENTS AND IMPERATIVES
REGULAR SEMI-REGULAR AND IRREGULAR
THAT THE HILE 2
PRIMING FROM L1 TO
PROCEDURE WAS THE SAME
REQUIRED INFORMATION EXCHANGE TASKS
STIMULUS TYPE F 1
SIGNIFICANT BOTH FS 1
SINGLE-TASK AND DUAL-TASK CONDITIONS
SELECTION AND PLACEMENT OF
STUDENTS FROM MAINLAND CHINA
SENSITIVE TO GRAMMATICAL IDIOSYNCRASIES
OF ACQUISITION OF GRAMMATICAL
OF HIGH-LEVEL LANGUAGE APTITUDE
THE HARD SOFT CONSONANT
NS GROUP OUTPERFORMED THE
THE L1 L2 DIRECTION
OF ACCOMMODATION IN THE
OF THE 20 ITEMS
THE DEGREE OF REGULARITY
P 0 001 F2
POPULATIONS WITH THE SAME
THE FOUR VERB CLASSES
OF THE PLURAL MORPHEME
OF THE TEST MATERIALS
VERB CLASSES F 3
THE USE OF ACCOMMODATION
FOR THE DIRECT OBJECT
F 2 1 42
THE WARM UP PHASE
THE VISUAL SHAPE OF
F 1 1 42
FORMS IN THE PARADIGM
GRADUATE STUDENTS FROM MAINLAND
ASYMMETRY IN CROSS-LANGUAGE PRIMING
HERITAGE L2 AND NATIVE
AND COMPREHENSION CHECKS AND
AND CADIERNO'S 1993A 1993B

38
38
37
37
36
36
35
35
35
34
34
33
33
33
33
33
33
33
33
33
33
33
33
33
33
33
33
33
33
33
33
33
33
33
33
33
33
33
33
33
33
33
33
33
33
33
33
33
33
33
33
33

8
8
12
19
17
11
13
12
12
22
13
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7

259
260
261
262
263
264
265
266
267
268
269
270
271
272
273
274
275
276
277
278
279
280
281
282
283
284
285
286
287
288
289
290
291
292
293
294
295
296
297
298
299
300
301
302
303
304
305
306
307
308
309
310

FORSTER AT THE UNIVERSITY

FOUR VERB CLASSES F
CADIERNO 1995 VANPATTEN CADIERNO
COMPREHENSION CHECKS AND CLARIFICATION
COUNTERBALANCED PRESENTATION LISTS WERE
BOTH SUBJECT AND ITEM
BETWEEN CONGRUENT AND INCONGRUENT
TWO SETS OF WORD
A SIGNIFICANT INTERACTION OF
TO THE DIFFERENT-TRANSLATION PAIRS
EFFECT OF THE CONDITION
A READING COMPREHENSION TASK
ERROR CORRECTION DURING ORAL
A SELF-PACED READING TASK
TO ASSESS THE DIFFERENCES
THREE TYPES OF VERBS
A SIGNIFICANT DIFFERENCE AMONG
THE SYLLABLE STRUCTURE OF
ITEMS IN TOP GROUP
THE NS GROUP OUTPERFORMED
05 F2 1 78
2 X 2 DESIGN
THE PROCEDURE WAS THE
2 2 AND 3
THE MODERN LANGUAGE APTITUDE
WORDS SHARE THE SAME
X2X2
THE L2 L1 DIRECTION
L2 LEARNERS OF SWEDISH
LISTS WERE CONSTRUCTED EACH
AND HERITAGE SPEAKERS OF
3 ITEMS IN TOP
IN A SELF-PACED READING
IN THE EPISODIC SYSTEM
IN THE ACQUISITION PROCESS
3 3 ITEMS IN
IN THE HIGH-NOISE CONDITION
ASSESS THE DIFFERENCES IN
IN THE WORD-FINAL POSITION
IN THE SYNTACTIC CONDITION
2X2X
IN THE PREVIOUS EXPERIMENTS
NATIVE AND NONNATIVE SPEAKERS
WAS SIGNIFICANT F1 1
L1 AND L2 SPEAKERS
THE SAME AS IN
ORDER OF ACQUISITION OF
ARE PRESENTED IN TABLE
L2 LEARNERS DO NOT
AND THE OTHER FOR
VERB CLASS F 4
STUDIES OF TYPE 15

33
33
33
33
33
33
33
33
33
33
33
33
33
33
33
33
33
33
33
33
33
33
33
33
33
33
33
33
33
33
33
33
33
33
33
33
33
33
33
33
33
33
33
32
32
32
31
31
30
29
29
29

7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
15
10
10
16
11
25
9
10
6
6

311
312
313
314
315
316
317
318
319
320
321
322
323
324
325
326
327
328
329
330
331
332
333
334
335
336
337
338
339
340
341
342
343
344
345
346
347
348
349
350
351
352
353
354
355
356
357
358
359
360
361
362

WHEN THEY WERE ADMITTED

WITH THE SAME AMOUNT
YEAR OF THE PROGRAM
WORDS AND CONCEPTS ARE
STUDYING AT THE UNIVERSITY
VERB SUB-CATEGORIZATION ELICITED A
SUMMATIVE AND FORMATIVE COHORTS
SUBJECTS IN CONDITION 1
SUBJECT AND ITEM ANALYSES
WERE ALL GRADUATE STUDENTS
THE SHALLOW STRUCTURE HYPOTHESIS
THE SAME TOTAL AMOUNT
THE GRAMMATICALITY JUDGMENT TASK
THE SUMMATIVE AND FORMATIVE
THE TWO LEARNER GROUPS
THE TWO ENGLISH WORDS
THE DUAL-SYSTEM APPROACH AND
THE RELATIVE UTILITY OF
THE L2 LEXICON AND
THE L1 OR L2
THE L2 LEXICAL ENTRY
THE L2 PRIME IS
THE PRIMING EFFECT IN
THE ORDER OF FUNCTOR
THE NOUN AND GENDER
TWO-WAY EXCHANGE OF INFORMATION
THAT LATE L2 LEARNERS
TWO COUNTERBALANCED PRESENTATION LISTS
THAT L2 L1 PRIMING
USE OF FORMATIVE ASSESSMENT
UNIVERSITY OF ARIZONA AT
TYPE F 1 54
THE AID OF FORMAL
THEIR DEGREE OF SEMANTIC
THE VARIABLE OF INTEREST
THE TWO MEMBERS OF
THINKING FOR SPEAKING' HYPOTHESIS
TUKEY COMPARISONS REVEALED THAT
TRANSLATION PRIMING WAS FOUND
THREE GROUPS OF SUBJECTS
SIGNIFICANT L2 L1 PRIMING
F 2 1 49
EXPERIMENT INVOLVED A 2
EVEN IN HIGHLY PROFICIENT
FASTER THAN TO THE
FOR THE FORMATIVE COHORT
FOR SUBJECTS IN CONDITION
FOR BOTH PRODUCTION AND
ERROR RATE AND REACTION
EACH OF THE 20
DISTINCTION BETWEEN REGULAR AND
DIRECTIONS TO THE TASK

29
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
29

6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6

363
364
365
366
367
368
369
370
371
372
373
374
375
376
377
378
379
380
381
382
383
384
385
386
387
388
389
390
391
392
393
394
395
396
397
398
399
400
401
402
403
404
405
406
407
408
409
410
411
412
413
414

EARLY AND LATE L2

EFFECTIVENESS OF L2 INSTRUCTION
EFFECT OF TARGET LANGUAGE
EFFECT OF PRIME TARGET
FORMAL INSTRUCTION IN VERB
IN LEXICAL ACCESS AND
IN L2 LEXICAL ACCESS
IN EXPERIMENT 1 EXCEPT
IN REACTION TIME AND
IN THE UNMATCHED CONDITION
IN THE MODELLING CONDITION
IN THE CRITICAL AND
IN A MASKED PRIMING
HIGHLY PROFICIENT AMERICAN LEARNERS
FROM MAINLAND CHINA STUDYING
FORSTER AND DAVIS 1984
HILE 2 GROUP OUTPERFORMED
IN A BOOTSTRAPPING FASHION
HOC TUKEY COMPARISONS REVEALED
HOC TUKEY COMPARISONS CONDUCTED
ADULT L2 VOCABULARY ACQUISITION
ACQUISITION AND PROCESSING OF
ACCURACY SCORES IN THE
AGE OF ARRIVAL AND
AND DISCUSSION THE RESULTS
ANALYSES F 1 1
AID OF FORMAL INSTRUCTION
A LEXICAL ENTRY IN
001 F2 2 69
0 05 AND ITEM
0 001 F2 2
05 AND ITEM ANALYSIS
2 GROUP OUTPERFORMED THE
1995 VANPATTEN CADIERNO 1993A
05 F2 1 58
AND ITEM ANALYSIS P
BOTH REACTION TIME AND
BOTH CONGRUENT AND INCONGRUENT
BETWEEN ERROR CORRECTION AND
COMPLEXITY MORPHOPHONOLOGICAL REGULARITY SYNTACTIC
DIFFERENCES AMONG THE GROUPS
CORRELATED WITH AGE OF
CONFIRMATION AND COMPREHENSION CHECKS
BEFORE A PREDICATE NOUN
APTITUDE FOR IMPLICIT LEARNING
AND L2 MORPHOLOGICAL PROCESSING
AND L2 LEARNERS OF
ARE NOT SENSITIVE TO
AT THIS STAGE IS
AT THE SECOND STAGE
ARIZONA AT THE TIME
OF YES NO QUESTIONS

29
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
29

6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6

415
416
417
418
419
420
421
422
423
424
425
426
427
428
429
430
431
432
433
434
435
436
437
438
439
440
441
442
443
444
445
446
447
448
449
450
451
452
453
454
455
456
457
458
459
460
461
462
463
464
465
466

OF VOCABULARY ACQUISITION IN
OF THEIR L1 TRANSLATIONS
ON THOSE DIRECTIONS FOR
PARTICIPANTS RESPONDED TO THE
OVER THE LATERAL ELECTRODES
ORDER OF FUNCTOR ACQUISITION
OF ITS L1 TRANSLATION
OF INSTRUCTION AND EXPOSURE
OF INFLECTED WORD FORMS
OF MODELS AND RECASTS
OF THE ORAL PROFICIENCY
OF THE INFLECTED WORD
OF THE CONDITION WAS
SAME TOTAL AMOUNT OF
SALIENCE SEMANTIC COMPLEXITY MORPHOPHONOLOGICAL
RUSSIAN AT THE SAME
SEMANTIC COMPLEXITY MORPHOPHONOLOGICAL REGULARITY
SIGNIFICANT INTERACTION OF THE
SHARE THE SAME L1
SHARE THE SAME CHINESE
PRIMING EFFECT IN THE
PORTIN LEHTONEN LAINE 2007
PORTIN ET AL 2007A
PRIMING EFFECTS IN THE
REGULAR SEMIREGULAR AND IRREGULAR
READ SENTENCES FOR COMPREHENSION
PROPENSITY SCORE MATCHING PROCEDURE
OF ARIZONA AT THE
L1 AND L2 MORPHOLOGICAL
KRASHEN SELIGER AND HARTNETT
INVOLVEMENT OF EXPLICIT KNOWLEDGE
IN THE WARM UP
L2 L1 PRIMING IN
L1 LEMMA MEDIATION STAGE
L1 LEMMA MEDIATION IN
INTERACTION BETWEEN ERROR CORRECTION
INPUT PRACTICE GROUP RECEIVED
INPUT AND MODIFIED INTERACTION
INTERACTION OF THE TWO
INVOLVED A 2 X
INTERAGENCY LANGUAGE ROUNDTABLE ILR
INCORRECT VERB SUB-CATEGORIZATION ELICITED
L2 LEARNERS AT THE
MAINLAND CHINA STUDYING AT
MAIN EFFECT OF PRIME
MY EARLIER STUDY JIANG
MORPHOPHONOLOGICAL REGULARITY SYNTACTIC CATEGORY
OF 550 OR HIGHER
MODIFIED INPUT AND MODIFIED
LOWER PROFICIENCY L2 LEARNERS
LATE L2 LEARNERS AT
OF ACHIEVEMENT AND PROFICIENCY

29
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
29

6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6

467
468
469
470
471
472
473
474
475
476
477
478
479
480
481
482
483

LITTLE OR NO FORMAL
LISTENING READING AND EITHER-SKILL
AT THE UNIVERSITY OF
IN A SECOND LANGUAGE
OF EXPOSURE TO THE
PRESENTED ON THE SCREEN
WAS ALSO A SIGNIFICANT
THE CHOICE OF THE
WAS THE SAME AS
DIFFERENCE AMONG THE FOUR
A2X2
A MAIN EFFECT FOR
THE PROCESSING OF THE
P 0 01 THE
THE ACQUISITION OF L2
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION THE
WITH RESPECT TO THE

29
29
28
28
28
28
27
27
27
26
26
26
25
24
24
24
-32

6
6
31
24
10
9
12
16
11
8
8
9
11
10
13
11
4