Language neutrality of the LLAMA test explored: The case of agglutinative languages and multiple writing systems

The ability to learn a foreign language, language aptitude, is known differ between individuals. To better understand second-language learning, aptitude tests, tapping into the different components of learning are widely used. For valid conclusions on comparisons learners with backgrounds, it crucial that such tests be neutral. Several studies have investigated neutrality freely available LLAMA (Granena, 2013; Rogers et al., 2016, 2017). So far, comparing number L1 including those using writing systems as Arabic and Mandarin, no significant differences participants been found. However, until now, neither agglutinative backgrounds nor first-language use multiple included. Therefore, this study selected from three backgrounds: Dutch (non-agglutinative, phonogram/Latin alphabet), Hungarian (agglutinative, Japanese phonogram/syllabic alphabet logogram/Japanese kanji). performed subsets test. Significant groups were found two these tests: implicitly recognize sounds (LLAMA_D subtest) inductive grammar (LLAMA_F), but vocabulary (LLAMA_B). Additionally, for LLAMA_B, languages learnt was covariate, confirming earlier findings some subtests seem linked experience. We discuss implications our validity LLAMA_D LLAMA_F subtests.