Shallow processing: a consequence of bilingualism or second language learning?

2006 ◽  
Vol 27 (1) ◽  
pp. 53-56
Author(s):  
Susanne E. Carroll
Keyword(s):  
Second Language ◽  
Language Learning ◽  
Language Processing ◽  
Semantic Representation ◽  
First Language ◽  
L2 Acquisition ◽  
Long Distance ◽  
L2 Learners ◽  
Shallow Structure Hypothesis ◽  
The One

Clahsen and Felser (CF) review ground-breaking work comparing selected types of language processing in monolingual children and adults, on the one hand, and in monolingual first language (L1) adults and adult second language (L2) learners, on the other. They argue that children behave essentially like adults, but that adult L2 learners, even high-proficiency ones, do not. Thus, there is a principled difference to be made among types of learners; there is continuity of mechanism and process to be observed in monolingual development but L2 acquisition exhibits certain fundamental differences. In particular, L2 learners construct shallow syntactic structures (essentially failing to compute trace chains) when processing long-distance filler-gap dependencies. According to the shallow structure hypothesis (SSH), learners immediately interpret incoming words in a minimal semantic representation by assigning thematic roles to argument expressions and associating modifiers to their hosts. They are not mapping detailed and complete syntactic representations onto semantic representations.

scholarly journals Perceived foreign accent in first language attrition and second language acquisition: The impact of age of acquisition and bilingualism

2011 ◽  
Vol 34 (2) ◽  
pp. 361-394 ◽  
Author(s):  
HOLGER HOPP ◽  
MONIKA S. SCHMID
Keyword(s):  
Second Language ◽  
Second Language Acquisition ◽  
Age Of Onset ◽  
First Language ◽  
Target Language ◽  
Foreign Accent ◽  
L2 Acquisition ◽  
L2 Learners ◽  
The One ◽  
The Impact

ABSTRACTThis study investigates constraints on ultimate attainment in second language (L2) pronunciation in a direct comparison of perceived foreign accent of 40 late L2 learners and 40 late first language (L1) attriters of German. Both groups were compared with 20 predominantly monolingual controls. Contrasting participants who acquired the target language from birth (monolinguals, L1 attriters) with late L2 learners, on the one hand, and bilinguals (L1 attriters, L2ers) with monolinguals, on the other hand, allowed us to disentangle the impacts of age of onset and bilingualism in speech production. At the group level, the attriters performed indistinguishably from controls, and both differed from the L2 group. However, 80% of all L2ers scored within the native (attriter) range. Correlational analyses with background factors further found some effects of use and language aptitude. These results show that acquiring a language from birth is not sufficient to guarantee nativelike pronunciation, and late acquisition does not necessarily prevent it. The results are discussed in the light of models on the role of age and cross-linguistic influence in L2 acquisition.

Wie Zijn 'Onze' Leerders?

1999 ◽  
Vol 62 ◽  
pp. 87-97
Author(s):  
Anne-Mieke Janssen-van Dieten
Keyword(s):  
Second Language ◽  
Language Learning ◽  
Native Speakers ◽  
Language Teachers ◽  
The Other ◽  
Learning And Teaching ◽  
Highly Educated ◽  
Other Hand ◽  
L2 Learners ◽  
The One

There is an increasing awareness that the number of non-native speakers in the category of 'adult, highly educated, advanced L2-learners' is rapidly increasing. This paper presents an analysis of what it means to teach them a second language - whether it is Dutch or any other second language. It is argued that, on the one hand, conceptions about language learning and teaching are insufficiendy known, and that, on the other hand, there are many widespread misconceptions that prevent language teachers from catering adequately for people's actual communicative needs, and from providing tailor-made solutions to these problems.

scholarly journals When timing is everything: Age of first-language acquisition effects on second-language learning

2007 ◽  
Vol 28 (3) ◽  
pp. 537-549 ◽  
Author(s):  
RACHEL I. MAYBERRY
Keyword(s):  
Second Language ◽  
Language Learning ◽  
First Language ◽  
L2 Acquisition ◽  
Linguistic Structure ◽  
Specific Effects ◽  
Sensory Motor ◽  
L1 Acquisition ◽  
L1 And L2 ◽  
Motor Modality

The present paper summarizes three experiments that investigate the effects of age of acquisition on first-language (L1) acquisition in relation to second-language (L2) outcome. The experiments use the unique acquisition situations of childhood deafness and sign language. The key factors controlled across the studies are age of L1 acquisition, the sensory–motor modality of the language, and level of linguistic structure. Findings consistent across the studies show age of L1 acquisition to be a determining factor in the success of both L1 and L2 acquisition. Sensory–motor modality shows no general or specific effects. It is of importance that the effects of age of L1 acquisition on both L1 and L2 outcome are apparent across levels of linguistic structure, namely, syntax, phonology, and the lexicon. The results demonstrate that L1 acquisition bestows not only facility with the linguistic structure of the L1, but also the ability to learn linguistic structure in the L2.

Parsing the L2 input, an overview

2010 ◽  
Vol 1 (2) ◽  
pp. 189-205 ◽  
Author(s):  
Leah Roberts
Keyword(s):  
Language Learning ◽  
Real Time ◽  
First Language ◽  
Syntactic Analysis ◽  
L2 Acquisition ◽  
Syntactic Knowledge ◽  
L2 Learners ◽  
Syntactic Ambiguities ◽  
Syntactic Dependencies

The acquisition of second language (L2) syntax has been central to the study of L2 acquisition, but recently there has been an interest in how learners apply their L2 syntactic knowledge to the input in real-time comprehension. Investigating L2 learners’ moment-by-moment syntactic analysis during listening or reading of sentence as it unfolds — their parsing of the input — is important, because language learning involves both the acquisition of knowledge and the ability to use it in real time. Using methods employed in monolingual processing research, investigations often focus on the processing of temporary syntactic ambiguities and structural dependencies. Investigating ambiguities involves examining parsing decisions at points in a sentence where there is a syntactic choice and this can offer insights into the nature of the parsing mechanism, and in particular, its processing preferences. Studying the establishment of syntactic dependencies at the critical point in the input allows for an investigation of how and when different kinds of information (e.g., syntactic, semantic, pragmatic) are put to use in real-time interpretation. Within an L2 context, further questions are of interest and familiar from traditional L2 acquisition research. Specifically, how native-like are the parsing procedures that L2 learners apply when processing the L2 input? What is the role of the learner’s first language (L1)? And, what are the effects of individual factors such as age, proficiency/dominance and working memory on L2 parsing? In the current paper I will provide an overview of the findings of some experimental research designed to investigate these questions.

Cross-linguistic influence in the interpretation of boundary crossing events in L2 acquisition

2016 ◽  
Vol 14 (1) ◽  
pp. 161-182 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rosa Alonso Alonso
Keyword(s):  
Second Language ◽  
Second Language Acquisition ◽  
Language Acquisition ◽  
First Language ◽  
Horizontal Axis ◽  
Boundary Crossing ◽  
Motion Events ◽  
L2 Acquisition ◽  
L2 Learners ◽  
Bounded Space

This paper analyses the interpretation of boundary-crossing events in second language acquisition (SLA) to determine whether L2 learners are able to select the target-like option for the interpretation of motion events or whether, on the contrary, their choice reflects cross-linguistic influence (CLI) of their L1. The two groups participating in the study – thirty Spanish learners of L2 English and sixteen English first language (L1) speakers – were subjected to an experiment involving an interpretation task with L2 boundary-crossing events pictures. Findings indicate that Spanish L2 learners selected three possible constructions (manner verb + path satellite, path in verb + manner in satellite and a combination of both) in clear contrast to English L1 speakers who only selected one construction (manner verb + path satellite). CLI has also been found to regulate the type of boundary-crossing event selected, primarily in cases of motion INTO a bounded space in the horizontal axis.

scholarly journals On L1 attrition and the linguistic system

2009 ◽  
Vol 9 ◽  
pp. 212-244 ◽  
Author(s):  
Monika S. Schmid
Keyword(s):  
Second Language ◽  
Language Learning ◽  
Language Proficiency ◽  
Native Speaker ◽  
First Language ◽  
Quantitative Difference ◽  
Highly Active ◽  
L2 Learners ◽  
The Difference ◽  
Native Language Proficiency

One of the most puzzling observations for linguists is the difference between learning a language from birth and later in life: while all normally developing children can attain full native language proficiency, there is considerable variability in ultimate attainment among older speakers who attempt to acquire a second language (L2). There is an ongoing controversy in linguistic research on whether this discrepancy is due to a maturationally constrained window of linguistic development making language learning difficult or impossible after puberty, or to general cognitive factors linked to the fact that the later an L2 is established, the stronger the competition it has to overcome from the more deeply entrenched first language (L1). Studies attempting to resolve this controversy have so far focussed exclusively on the development of L2 skills. New insights may be provided by investigating the first language skills of migrants who have become dominant in the L2 (referred to as L1 attriters). Such speakers learned their L1 as monolinguals during childhood, and were therefore not impeded by maturational constraints in the acquisitional process. Having lived in an L2 environment for a long period of time, however, their seldom-used L1 shows signs of the influence of their highly active L2. A systematic comparison of L1 attriters and L2 learners may therefore be able to shed some light on the question of whether there is a qualitative or merely a quantitative difference between L1 acquisition in childhood and L2 acquisition later in life: If being a native speaker is maturationally constrained, even attrited L1 systems should remain native-like. But if the persistent problems of L2 learners are due to issues such as lack of practice and exposure, and competition between their two language systems, bilinguals who use their second language dominantly should become more similar to L2 speakers.

scholarly journals How adult second language learning differs from child first language development

1996 ◽  
Vol 19 (4) ◽  
pp. 721-723 ◽  
Author(s):  
Harald Clahsen ◽  
Pieter Muysken
Keyword(s):  
Second Language ◽  
Language Development ◽  
Language Learning ◽  
Second Language Learning ◽  
First Language ◽  
Alternative View ◽  
L2 Acquisition ◽  
Target Article ◽  
Theoretical Developments

AbstractWe argue that the model developed in Epstein et al.'s target article does not explain differences between child first language (LI) acquisition and adult second language (L2) acquisition. We therefore sketch an alternative view, originally developed in Clahsen and Muysken (1989), in the light of new empirical findings and theoretical developments.

The shallow structure hypothesis of second language sentence processing: What is restricted and why?

2006 ◽  
Vol 27 (1) ◽  
pp. 49-52
Author(s):  
Margaret Gillon Dowens ◽  
Manuel Carreiras
Keyword(s):  
Second Language ◽  
Sentence Processing ◽  
Processing Speed ◽  
Native Speakers ◽  
First Language ◽  
Direct Form ◽  
L2 Learners ◽  
Shallow Structure Hypothesis ◽  
On Line ◽  
Shallow Structure

Clahsen and Felser (CF) analyze the performance of monolingual children and adult second language (L2) learners in off-line and on-line tasks and compare their performance with that of adult monolinguals. They conclude that child first language (L1) processing is basically the same as adult L1 processing (the contiguity assumption), with differences in performance being due to cognitive developmental limitations. They argue that differences in L2 performance, however, are more qualitative and not explained by shortage of working memory (WM) resources, differences in processing speed, transfer of L1 processing routines, or incomplete acquisition of the target grammar. They propose a shallow structure hypothesis (SSH) to explain the differences reported in sentence processing. According to this, the syntactic representations computed by L2 learners during comprehension are shallower and less detailed than those computed by native speakers and involve more direct form-function mappings.

Relevance Theory and the in second language acquisition

2004 ◽  
Vol 20 (3) ◽  
pp. 193-211 ◽  
Author(s):  
Vlad Žegarac
Keyword(s):  
Second Language ◽  
Second Language Acquisition ◽  
First Language ◽  
Relevance Theory ◽  
The Other ◽  
Human Communication ◽  
L2 Learners ◽  
The One ◽  
Teaching Learning

This article considers the implications of Sperber and Wilson’s (1986/95) Relevance Theory for the acquisition of English the by second language (L2) learners whose first language (L1) does not have an article system. On the one hand, Relevance Theory provides an explicit characterization of the semantics of the, which suggests ways of devising more accurate guidelines for teaching/learning than are available in current textbooks. On the other hand, Relevance Theoretic assumptions about human communication together with some effects of transfer from L1 provide the basis for a number of predictions about the types of L2 learners’ errors in the use of the.I argue that data from previous research (Trenkić, 2002) lend support to these predictions, and I try to show that examples drawn from the data I have collected provide evidence for the view that L2 learning is not influenced only by general pragmatic principles and hypotheses about L2 based on transfer from L1, but that learners also devise and test tacit hypotheses which are idiosyncratic to them.

scholarly journals Investigating the acquisition of the Split-IP parameter and the V2 parameter in second language Afrikaans

2006 ◽  
Vol 22 (1) ◽  
pp. 64-94 ◽  
Author(s):  
Simone Conradie
Keyword(s):  
Second Language ◽  
English Learners ◽  
Universal Grammar ◽  
First Language ◽  
L2 Acquisition ◽  
L2 Learners ◽  
English Speaking ◽  
Parameter Resetting ◽  
L1 And L2 ◽  
Parameter Values

Researchers who assume that Universal Grammar (UG) plays a role in second language (L2) acquisition are still debating whether L2 learners have access to UG in its entirety (the Full Access hypothesis; e.g. Schwartz and Sprouse, 1994; 1996; White, 1989; 2003) or only to those aspects of UG that are instantiated in their first language (L1) grammar (the No Parameter Resetting hypothesis; e.g. Hawkins and Chan, 1997). The Full Access hypothesis predicts that parameter resetting will be possible where the L1 and L2 differ in parameter values, whereas the No Parameter Resetting hypothesis predicts that parameter resetting will not be possible. These hypotheses are tested in a study examining whether English-speaking learners of Afrikaans can reset the Split-IP parameter (SIP) (Thráinsson, 1996) and the V2 parameter from their L1 ([-SIP], [-V2]) to their L2 ([+SIP], [+V2]) values. 15 advanced English learners of Afrikaans and 10 native speakers of Afrikaans completed three tasks: a sentence manipulation task, a grammaticality judgement task and a truth-value judgement task. Results suggest that the interlanguage grammars of the L2 learners are [+SIP] and [+V2] (unlike the L1), providing evidence for the Full Access hypothesis.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document