Universal Grammar: Hypothesis space or grammar selection procedures? Is UG affected by Critical Periods?

1998 ◽  
Vol 21 (4) ◽  
pp. 612-614
Author(s):  
Gita Martohardjono ◽  
Samuel David Epstein ◽  
Suzanne Flynn
Keyword(s):  
Second Language Acquisition ◽  
Language Acquisition ◽  
Universal Grammar ◽  
The Other ◽  
Critical Periods ◽  
L2 Acquisition ◽  
Selection Procedures ◽  
Hypothesis Space ◽  
Knowledge States ◽  
Acquisition Strategies

Universal Grammar (UG) can be interpreted as a constraint on the form of possible grammars (hypothesis space) or as a constraint on acquisition strategies (selection procedures). In this response to Herschensohn we reiterate the position outlined in Epstein et al. (1996a, r), that in the evaluation of L2 acquisition as a UG- constrained process the former (possible grammars/ knowledge states) is critical, not the latter. Selection procedures, on the other hand, are important in that they may have a bearing on development in language acquisition. We raise the possibility that differences in first and second language acquisition pertaining to both attainment of the end-state and course of development may derive from differences in selection procedures. We further suggest that for these reasons age effects in the attainment of nativelike proficiency must necessarily be separated from UG effects.

Linguistic universals, markedness and learnability: comparing two different approaches

1989 ◽  
Vol 5 (2) ◽  
pp. 127-140 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lydia White
Keyword(s):  
Second Language ◽  
Second Language Acquisition ◽  
Language Acquisition ◽  
Universal Grammar ◽  
The Other ◽  
L2 Acquisition ◽  
Subset Principle ◽  
Similarities And Differences ◽  
L1 And L2 ◽  
Language Learnability

There are currently two different linguistically-based approaches to universals in second language acquisition, one stemming from typological universals (Greenberg, 1966) and the other from Chomskyan Universal Grammar. Associated with each approach is a concept of markedness. Typologists define markedness implicationally; current theories of language learnability define markedness in terms of the Subset Principle. Although coming from very different perspectives, these two definitions of markedness coincide in a number of predictions they make for L1 and L2 acquisition. Similarities and differences between these two approaches to markedness and acquisition are discussed in this paper.

Universals, innateness and explanation in second language acquisition

2004 ◽  
Vol 28 (3) ◽  
pp. 682-703 ◽  
Author(s):  
Fred Eckman
Keyword(s):  
Second Language ◽  
Second Language Acquisition ◽  
Language Acquisition ◽  
Universal Grammar ◽  
Higher Order ◽  
The Other ◽  
Language Typology ◽  
Domain Specific ◽  
Other Hand ◽  
Typological Approach

This paper considers the question of explanation in second language acquisition within the context of two approaches to universals, Universal Grammar and language typology. After briefly discussing the logic of explaining facts by including them under general laws (Hempel & Oppenheim 1948), the paper makes a case for the typological approach to explanation being the more fruitful, in that it allows more readily for the possibility of ‘explanatory ascent’, the ability to propose more general, higher order explanations by having lower-level generalizations follow from more general principles. The UG approach, on the other hand is less capable of such explanatory ascent because of the postulation that the innate, domain-specific principles of UG are not reducible in any interesting way to higher order principles of cognition (Chomsky 1982).

scholarly journals Is There a "Logical Problem" of Second Language Acquisition?

1985 ◽  
Vol 2 (2) ◽  
pp. 29 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lydia White
Keyword(s):  
Second Language ◽  
Second Language Acquisition ◽  
Language Acquisition ◽  
Input Data ◽  
Universal Grammar ◽  
L2 Acquisition ◽  
Logical Problem ◽  
Acquisition Process ◽  
Generative Theory ◽  
Complex Knowledge

Arguments for universal grammar (DO) in generative theory are based on the so called "logical problem of language acquisition." The nature of the problem becomes apparent when we consider the end product of the acquisition process and compare this to the input data, which do not seem sufficiently rich or precise to allow the learner to work out all the complexities of the adult grammar, unless one assumes the availability of certain innate principles (DO). In this paper, I will suggest that this orientation is also useful when one comes to consider second language acquisition. If we focus on the successful second language (L2) learner, it would appear that he or she will also achieve complex knowledge of the L2 which goes well beyond the input. This suggests that DO might have a role to play in L2 acquisition as well, and raises the question of whether the way that DO has operated in the Ll has any effects in L2 acquisition. I will briefly look at current L2 research that presupposes a DO framework, as well as suggesting some directions for further research.

Theories of second language acquisition: three sides, three angles, three points

2005 ◽  
Vol 21 (4) ◽  
pp. 393-414 ◽  
Author(s):  
Margaret Thomas
Keyword(s):  
Second Language ◽  
Second Language Acquisition ◽  
Language Acquisition ◽  
Cognitive Bias ◽  
Sociocultural Theory ◽  
The Other ◽  
Theory Construction ◽  
L2 Acquisition ◽  
Point Evaluation ◽  
Evaluation Metric

Three recent books take up different positions in the on-going debate about how, and out of what, to construct a theory of second language (L2) acquisition. Johnson (2004) advocates a ‘dialogically based approach’, inspired by Vygotsky’s sociocultural theory and Bakhtin’s ‘dialogized heteroglossia’, with which she would replace what she views as a prevailing ‘cognitive bias’ in the field. Block (2003) similarly supports a ‘more interdisciplinary and socially informed orientation’ to second language acquisition. But Block wants to reform rather than replace certain assumptions of what he represents as the best existing theory of second language acquisition, namely, Susan Gass’ Input-Interaction-Output model (IIO model). Jordan (2004), on the other hand, argues forcefully that theorizing about second language acquisition must be based on a rationalist epistemology. He provides a set of ‘Guidelines’ for theory construction, including six assumptions foundational to rationalist inquiry in general, and a five-point evaluation metric against which rival theories can be judged. He also passes on a list of six ‘practices to be avoided’. Jordan encourages the cultivation of many, varied, theories so long as they observe the rationalist Guidelines. He goes on to criticize a broad sample of L2 research, commenting on whether specific proposals do or do not adhere to the Guidelines. This article reviews all three scholars’ positions in this important debate, which has the potential to sharpen second language theorists’ sense of what they are doing and how they should do it.

Contributions of the study of Japanese as a second language to our general understanding of second language acquisition and the definition of second language acquisition research

2003 ◽  
Vol 19 (1) ◽  
pp. 76-94 ◽  
Author(s):  
Shigenori Wakabayashi
Keyword(s):  
Second Language ◽  
Second Language Acquisition ◽  
Language Acquisition ◽  
First Language ◽  
The Other ◽  
Linguistic Knowledge ◽  
L2 Acquisition ◽  
Definition Of

Japanese has figured frequently in second language acquisition (SLA) research, but more often than not it appears as the first language (L1) rather than the target. In this article, first I discuss the problems addressed and the insights obtained in these studies. I then consider two issues. One is what the field of SLA research should include. I suggest that it should include two categories, namely Core SLA Research, where second language (L2) linguistic knowledge is investigated, and Broad SLA research, where researchers study factors that influence the development of L2 knowledge. The other issue is what we can expect in Core SLA research concerning the L2 acquisition of Japanese. This article illustrates how studies of the L2 acquisition of Japanese can contribute to our understanding of SLA.

Universal Grammar and critical periods: A most amusing paradox

1996 ◽  
Vol 19 (4) ◽  
pp. 735-735
Author(s):  
Philip Lieberman
Keyword(s):  
Second Language ◽  
Second Language Acquisition ◽  
Language Acquisition ◽  
Universal Grammar ◽  
First Language ◽  
Critical Periods ◽  
Sensitive Periods ◽  
Neural Bases

AbstractEpstein et al. take as given that, (1) a hypothetical Universal Grammar (UG) exists that allows children effortlessly to acquire their first language; they then argue (2) that critical or sensitive periods do not block the UG from second language acquisition. Therefore, why can't we all effortlessly “acquire” Tibetan in six months or so? Data concerning the neural bases of language are also noted.

How native is near-native? The issue of ultimate attainment in adult second language acquisition

1996 ◽  
Vol 12 (3) ◽  
pp. 233-265 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lydia White ◽  
Fred Genesee
Keyword(s):  
Second Language Acquisition ◽  
Critical Period ◽  
Native Speakers ◽  
Universal Grammar ◽  
Critical Periods ◽  
L2 Acquisition ◽  
Period Effects ◽  
Native Speakers Of English ◽  
And Performance ◽  
Native Group

A number of studies have reported that there is a negative correlation between age of L2 acquisition and performance on a variety of measures of L2 ability, and that individuals who begin learning an L2 after approximately 15 years of age fail to attain native-like levels of competence. These results have been interpreted as support both for the hypothesis that there is a critical period for L2 acquisition and for the hypothesis that there is a maturational decline in access to Universal Grammar (UG). We argue that extant results are not an adequate test of the critical periods hypothesis because they are based on the performance of learners who have not necessarily achieved native-like proficiency in the L2. In this study, we develop criteria to establish whether an L2 speaker has achieved native-like proficiency. We compare the performance of three groups (near-native speakers of English, non-native speakers and controls) on two tasks designed to tap aspects of UG which have been claimed to be subject to critical period effects. We found no significant differences between our near-native group and native speakers on either of the tasks. We conclude that native-like competence in an L2 is achievable, even by older L2 learners.

On evaluating arguments for special nativism in second language acquisition theory

1996 ◽  
Vol 12 (4) ◽  
pp. 398-419 ◽  
Author(s):  
Fred R. Eckman
Keyword(s):  
Second Language ◽  
Second Language Acquisition ◽  
Language Acquisition ◽  
Null Hypothesis ◽  
Universal Grammar ◽  
Research Programme ◽  
L2 Acquisition ◽  
L2 Learning ◽  
Interlanguage Grammars ◽  
Second Language Acquisition Theory

This article attempts to evaluate several arguments that have been put forth in favour of special nativism in SLA. Specifically, the cases for each of the following claims are considered: 1) that Universal Grammar (UG) being implicated in L2 acquisition is the null hypothesis; 2) that any theory of SLA necessarily needs a theory of grammar; and 3) that showing that interlanguage grammars are underdetermined by the available input implies that UG must be accessible in L2 learning. In each case, it is argued that the arguments for special nativism are not compelling, and that it is therefore reasonable to consider a research programme in SLA theory that is based on general nativism.

scholarly journals The Role of Presuppositionality in the Second Language Acquisition of English Articles

2010 ◽  
Vol 41 (2) ◽  
pp. 213-254 ◽  
Author(s):  
Heejeong Ko ◽  
Tania Ionin ◽  
Ken Wexler
Keyword(s):  
Second Language ◽  
Second Language Acquisition ◽  
Language Acquisition ◽  
Universal Grammar ◽  
Experimental Results ◽  
L2 Acquisition ◽  
Experimental Findings ◽  
English Articles ◽  
L1 Acquisition

This article investigates the role of presuppositionality (defined as the presupposition of existence) in the second language (L2) acquisition of English articles. Building upon the proposal in Wexler 2003 that young English-acquiring children overuse the with presuppositional indefinites, this article proposes that presuppositionality also influences article (mis)use in adult L2 acquisition. This proposal is supported by experimental results from the L2 English of adult speakers of Korean, a language with no articles. The experimental findings indicate that presuppositional indefinite contexts trigger overuse of the with indefinites in adult L2 acquisition, as in child L1 acquisition (cf. Wexler 2003). The effects of presuppositionality are teased apart from the effects of other semantic factors previously examined in acquisition, such as scope (Schaeffer and Matthewson 2005) and specificity (Ionin, Ko, and Wexler 2004). The results provide evidence that overuse of the in L2 acquisition is a semantic rather than pragmatic phenomenon. Implications of these findings for overuse of the in L1 acquisition are discussed. This article also has implications for the study of access to Universal Grammar in L2 acquisition, as well as for the number and type of semantic universals underlying article choice crosslinguistically.

Contrastive Analysis, Error Analysis, Markedness Theory, Universal Grammar and Monitor Theory and their Contributions to Second Language Learning

2018 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
pp. 12
Author(s):  
Mohamed Fathy Khalifa
Keyword(s):  
Second Language ◽  
Second Language Acquisition ◽  
Language Acquisition ◽  
Error Analysis ◽  
Language Learning ◽  
Universal Grammar ◽  
Natural Order ◽  
Contrastive Analysis ◽  
L2 Acquisition ◽  
L2 Learning

Theories of second language acquisition (SLA) play an important role in second language (L2) learning. These theories can help both language teachers and their students to understand L2 language learning process. There are various theories and approaches of SLA which try to explain how L2 learning takes place. Each theory accounts for L2 acquisition from a different perspective. This paper describes and compares five theories of L2 acquisition: Contrastive Analysis (CA), Error Analysis (EA), Markedness Theory, Universal Grammar (UG) and Monitor Theory, explains their contributions to L2 learning and shows the criticism of each theory. First, in Contrastive Analysis, the weak and strong hypotheses and types of language transfer are explained. Second, in Error Analysis, attitudes towards errors and aims, process and models of Error Analysis are described. Third, in Markedness Theory, the role of typological markedness in the explanation of L2 learning, the Markedness Differential Hypothesis (MDH) and the Structural Conformity Hypothesis (SCH) are explained. Fourth, in Universal Grammar, it is shown that L2 acquisition occurs on the basis of first language (L1) acquisition: L2 acquisition is a matter of setting the correct L2 parameters. The Language Acquisition Device (LAD) and L2 access to UG are explained. Finally, in Monitor Theory, it is suggested that comprehensible input is crucial for L2 acquisition and the five hypotheses of the theory are explained: (a) The Input Hypothesis, (b) The Learning-Acquisition Hypothesis, (c) The Monitor Hypothesis, (d) The Natural Order Hypothesis and (e) The Affective Filter Hypothesis. 

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document