Abstract Questionable research practices (QRPs) comprise a gray area of researcher decisions that may be reasonable in some situations but dubious in others. Recent works in this area have sought to catalog and estimate the presence of QRPs in applied linguistics (e.g., Isbell et al., 2022 ; Larsson et al., 2023 ). Building on those studies, we reintroduce the notion of QRPs in this introductory article to the present special issue, linking recent work in this area to related movements toward research ethics, open science, and methodological reform. We then outline the remainder of the special issue that follows. In doing so we highlight the ways in which these papers — both individually and in the aggregate — expand and advance the conceptual and methodological scope of research on QRPs. We conclude by reflecting on and considering next steps for this vibrant research agenda.

Abstract The L1-transfer pattern may be different between bilinguals and monolinguals as the former has multiple L1 candidates to transfer. This study compared how Mandarin monolingual learners (MDN), Shanghainese-Mandarin bilingual learners (SHM), and Japanese natives produce Japanese stops in word-reading and paragraph-reading tasks. The L2 Japanese learners varied in the years of learning (1–3 years). Shanghainese differs from Mandarin in that the word-medial voiced stops are prevoiced, which may allow facilitative transfer to Japanese voiced stops. As a result, SHM in general showed more target-like pronunciation of voiced stops than MDN. Regarding the L2 experience, third-year SHM produced more target-like word-medial voiced stops, whereas first-year SHM produced less target-like word-initial voiceless and word-medial voiced stops. These results suggest that the overlap between the target L2 and one of the learners’ L1s may lead to finer phonetic realization, but the facilitative transfer is subject to bilingual learners’ L2 experience.

Abstract Previous research has given much attention to how native speakers of English and, to a lesser extent, speakers of World Englishes, choose between will and be going to to talk about the future. There is, however, a lack of research investigating how learners of English as a Foreign Language choose between these future markers at different proficiency levels. We collected 3,616 instances of will and be going to from the Trinity Lancaster Corpus, which consists of spoken language from low-intermediate to advanced learners of English from various mother tongue backgrounds. These future marker observations were annotated for constraints known to probabilistically influence the choice of variant and then analyzed using mixed-effects logistic regression. Results show that learners are sensitive to more constraints than native speakers, suggesting that the forms serve more distinct functions. As learners become more proficient, they consider fewer constraints and thereby better approximate native speakers.

Abstract The study reported on in this paper uses data from a large, pseudolongitudinal corpus of second language (L2) learner writing to investigate how L2 knowledge of verb-argument constructions (VACs) develops from low-beginner to upper-intermediate proficiency levels. The focus is on learners from two L1 backgrounds (L1 German and L1 Spanish) and on a subset of VACs that contain modal auxiliaries in combination with lexical verbs (e.g., subject-modal-verb, as in I can cook). For each VAC, L1, and proficiency level, frequency lists of verbs were created and compared across datasets. Reference data on the same constructions was extracted from a corpus of L1 writing. Results suggest that modal VACs become more frequent, less predictable, more productive, and more aligned with L1 production as learner proficiency increases. The findings of this study help to expand our understanding of the processes that underlie L2 construction acquisition.

Abstract Different models of L3 acquisition have different predictions about the cross-linguistic effects of previous learning. The ‘Cumulative Enhancement Model’ predicts that both L1 and L2 have cumulative facilitative effects on L3, but L2 the Status Factor (L2SF) claims that L2 has stronger effects on L3 acquisition. Similarly, while the Typological Primacy Model claims that among the already acquired languages, a typologically similar language transfers more properties to L3, the Linguistic Proximity Model predicts a transfer of structurally similar properties from the previously learnt languages. On the other hand, the Scalpel Model, besides considering linguistic similarity, gives importance to factors such as frequency of use and nature of the input, language dominance, and learning context. The current paper contributes to this debate by presenting data collected from two groups of Balochi learners of English in Balochistan (Pakistan) who were taught British English (BrE) aspiration contrast in plosives at the allophonic level after they had acquired Pakistani English (PakE) as adult L2 learners. Thus, Balochi was L1, PakE L2, and BrE L3 of the learners. After teaching for more than a year, the learners were tested for accuracy in VOTs for BrE plosives. The results support the L2SF and Scalpel Model.

Abstract Integrating corpus-based analyses with instructed SLA, this study explores how lexical bundles can be used to teach prepositions to EFL learners. It first identifies lexical bundles occurring most frequently with preposition errors in a learner corpus of L1-Korean high school student writing. It then uses the 10 identified bundles to compare three different types of instructional treatment: one hundred L1-Korean high school EFL students received either implicit instruction (teaching each bundle as a unit with no emphasis on embedded prepositions) or one of two types of explicit instruction (focusing on embedded prepositions with or without input enhancement). The explicit-instruction-with-input-enhancement group showed the greatest improvement, followed closely by the implicit-instruction group; the other explicit group showed the least improvement. These results suggest that textual enhancement can facilitate L2 preposition acquisition and that recurrent sequences such as lexical bundles can serve as a useful pedagogical means to teach linguistic forms.

Abstract We studied the perception of segmental boundaries in native English and Japanese accents in terms of foreign accentedness, intelligibility and discrimination accuracy. Five American English vowels /ɪ, æ, ɑ, ə, ɝ/ and seven consonants /r, l, v, θ, f, t, k/ were extracted from English and Japanese words produced by an American English-Japanese bilingual speaker, and manipulated, with the acoustic properties shifting gradually from 100% Japanese to 100% American English using segmental foreign accent and gradation techniques. Perception tests were conducted online with native American English speakers, and groups of Japanese speakers with either low or high English proficiency. All three groups showed a negative correlation between the degree of foreign accent and intelligibility. Also, there was a greater reduction in intelligibility due to acoustic deviation from the native norm in consonants than in vowels. The results suggest that more standard-like accent does not necessarily improve intelligibility, thus highlighting the importance of FA research in terms of segmental accuracy.

Abstract The present study examines the acquisition of definite noun phrases (NPs) in L2 English. Both English and Spanish have a definite article, but Japanese lacks articles, though definite anaphoric and definite non-anaphoric are present to some degree through the optional use of sono (the/that). A self-paced reading task was administered to assess real-time processing in the comprehension of different types of definite NPs by L2-English learners. The self-paced reading results show processing of definite NPs is influenced by proficiency level rather than L1 transfer effects. We discuss our findings in reference to the Morphological Congruency Hypothesis and the Lexical Learning/Lexical Transfer model and suggest that our data support the latter but not the former.