Abstarct An important skill for L1 language teachers when teaching grammar is the ability to produce and quickly evaluate arguments that underpin a grammatical analysis. Previous research has revealed that the strongest arguments in favour of a particular grammatical analysis are based on linguistic manipulations (LM) rather than on rules of thumb (RoT). This makes it critical for teachers to be able to handle arguments based on LM. If LM are considered too difficult to process compared to RoT, however, (student) teachers may avoid grammatical argumentation based on LM altogether, and they might struggle to evaluate their pupils’ LM-based grammatical argumentation. The current study has therefore examined whether LM impose a higher cognitive load on Dutch student teachers than RoT, using grammatical discussion tasks in which participants (N = 298) evaluated arguments based on RoT and on LM. Multilevel analyses indicate that LM are indeed more difficult to process than RoT, as measured by response times, correct classifications, and perceived difficulty ratings. This effect is partly influenced by student teachers’ need for cognition and their willingness to engage in grammar.

中文翻译：

---

进行大量语言推理：L1 学生教师如何在讨论语法时处理经验法则和语言操作

摘要 在教授语法时，L1 语言教师的一项重要技能是能够产生并快速评估支持语法分析的论点。先前的研究表明，支持特定语法分析的最有力论据是基于语言操作 (LM) 而不是经验法则 (RoT)。这使得教师能够处理基于 LM 的论点变得至关重要。如果 LM 被认为与 RoT 相比太难处理，但是，（学生）教师可能会完全避免基于 LM 的语法论证，并且他们可能难以评估学生基于 LM 的语法论证。因此，当前的研究检查了 LM 是否比 RoT 对荷兰学生教师施加了更高的认知负荷，使用语法讨论任务，其中参与者 (N = 298) 根据 RoT 和 LM 评估论点。多层次分析表明，从响应时间、正确分类和感知难度等级来衡量，LM 确实比 RoT 更难处理。这种影响部分受到实习教师的认知需求和他们从事语法研究的意愿的影响。