THE INTERACTION OF INSTRUCTION AND LEARNER-INTERNAL FACTORS IN THE ACQUISITION OF L2 MORPHOSYNTAX

2000 ◽  
Vol 22 (2) ◽  
pp. 169-208 ◽  
Author(s):  
Paul D. Toth
Keyword(s):  
Native Speaker ◽  
Universal Grammar ◽  
First Language ◽  
Judgment Task ◽  
L2 Acquisition ◽  
Internal Factors ◽  
L1 Transfer ◽  
Verb Classes ◽  
Grammaticality Judgment ◽  
English Speaking

This study considers the role of instruction, second language (L2) input, first language (L1) transfer, and Universal Grammar (UG) in the development of L2 morphosyntactic knowledge. Specifically, it investigates the acquisition of the Spanish morpheme se by English-speaking adult learners. Participants included 91 university students and 30 Spanish native-speaker controls. Learners received form-focused, communicative instruction on se for one week and were tested before, immediately following, and 24 days after the treatment period. Assessment consisted of a grammaticality judgment task and two production tasks using se in a variety of verb classes. The results showed that se had been added to many learners' grammars, but also that L1-derived forms and overgeneralization errors had not been completely preempted. These findings are taken as evidence that the development of L2 grammars is affected by a number of independent, yet cooperating, knowledge sources, which thus supports a modular account of L2 acquisition.

scholarly journals From a simple to a complex aspectual system: Feature reassembly in L2 acquisition of Chinese imperfective markers by English speakers

2020 ◽  
pp. 026765832091143
Author(s):  
Yanyu Guo
Keyword(s):  
Judgment Task ◽  
Matching Task ◽  
Semantic Features ◽  
L2 Acquisition ◽  
Advanced Learners ◽  
Imperfective Aspect ◽  
Grammaticality Judgment ◽  
Feature Reassembly ◽  
L1 Influence ◽  
English Speaking

This article reports on an empirical study on the acquisition of Chinese imperfective markers ( zai, - zheP and - zheR) by English-speaking learners at three proficiency levels. Compared to English, Chinese has a richer imperfective aspect in terms of markers (forms) and features (meanings). Results are presented from a grammaticality judgment task, a sentence–picture matching task and a sentence completeness judgment task. We find that advanced learners are successful in reassembling additional semantic features (e.g. the [+durative] feature of zai and the [+atelic] feature of -zheP) when the first language (L1) and second language (L2) functional categories to which the to-be-added features belong are the same. However, advanced learners have problems in differentiating between the interpretations of the progressive zai and the resultant-stative - zheR, and are not sensitive to the incompleteness effect of - zheP, which indicates that discarding L1-transferred features is arduous for learners. Our findings, in general, support the predictions of the Feature Reassembly Hypothesis (Lardiere, 2009). In addition, there is some evidence obtained for L1 influence, which persists at an advanced stage.

The acquisition of object movement in Dutch: L1 transfer and near-native grammars at the syntax–discourse interface

2018 ◽  
Vol 35 (4) ◽  
pp. 479-504 ◽  
Author(s):  
Liz Smeets
Keyword(s):  
Native Speakers ◽  
First Language ◽  
Judgment Task ◽  
L2 Acquisition ◽  
Value Judgment ◽  
L1 Transfer ◽  
Object Movement ◽  
Target Performance ◽  
Discourse Interface ◽  
L1 English

This article investigates near-native grammars at the syntax–discourse interface by examining the second language (L2) acquisition of two different domains of object movement in Dutch, which exhibit syntax–discourse or syntax–semantics level properties. English and German near-native speakers of Dutch, where German but not English allows the same mapping strategies as Dutch in the phenomena under investigation, are tested on two felicity judgment tasks and a truth value judgment task. The results from the English participants show sensitivity to discourse information on the acceptability of non-canonical word orders, but only when the relevant discourse cues are sufficiently salient in the input. The acquisition of semantic effects on object movement was native-like for a large subset of the participants. The German group performed on target in all experiments. The results are partially in line with previous studies reporting L2 convergence at the syntax–discourse interface, but suggest that input effects should also be taken into account. Furthermore, the differences between the first language (L1) English and the L1 German group suggests that non-target performance at the syntax–discourse interface is not caused by general bilingual difficulties in integrating discourse information into syntax. The article elaborates on factors that contribute to (in)complete acquisition at the syntax–discourse interface.

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.

Interpretation of English reflexives by adolescent speakers of Serbo-Croatian

1994 ◽  
Vol 10 (2) ◽  
pp. 125-156 ◽  
Author(s):  
Susan Bennett
Keyword(s):  
Second Language Acquisition ◽  
Sentence Comprehension ◽  
Native Speakers ◽  
Native Speaker ◽  
Universal Grammar ◽  
Task Type ◽  
L2 Acquisition ◽  
Long Distance ◽  
L1 Transfer ◽  
Multiple Choice Questionnaire

This article addresses the question of L1 transfer in L2 acquisition of reflexive binding. It incorporates recent research on Binding Theory which focuses on the relationship between morphological complexity of anaphors and the occurrence of long-distance binding of reflexives (cf. Yang, 1983; Pica, 1987; Hellan, 1988; Battistella, 1989; Huang and Tang, 1989; Cole et al., 1990; Progovac, 1992). Reflexives typically fall into two categories: simple (X0) reflexives that may take long-distance antecedents and complex (XP) refle xives that may not. Acquisition of the English binding pattern by native speakers of Serbo-Croatian requires recognition of the morphological com plexity of English reflexives. Prior to reanalysis, learners are predicted to transfer the L1 X0anaphor type and incorrectly assign long-distance antece dents to English XP reflexives.The interpretation of English reflexives by native speakers of Serbo- Croatian was investigated using two types of written sentence comprehension tasks. A picture identification task and a multiple-choice questionnaire were administered to intermediate ( n = 20) and advanced (n = 20) L2 learners and a group of English native speaker controls (n = 20). Results consistent across task type support the transfer hypothesis and suggest learners have access to Universal Grammar in second language acquisition.

Markedness and the acquisition of the English dative alternation by L2 speakers

1987 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
pp. 20-55 ◽  
Author(s):  
Roger Hawkins
Keyword(s):  
Universal Grammar ◽  
Judgment Task ◽  
Developmental Sequence ◽  
L2 Acquisition ◽  
Grammaticality Judgment ◽  
Dative Alternation ◽  
Diffi Cult ◽  
Base Form ◽  
Sentence Construction ◽  
Definition Of

A recent series of articles by Mazurkewich (1984a; 1984b; 1985) has suggested that the English dative alternation is acquired by L2 speakers in the sequence: [_ NP PP] → [_ NP NP]. This order of difficulty, it is argued in those papers, reflects an aspect of Universal grammar (UG): [_ NP PP] construc tions are part of core grammar and are therefore unmarked in UG, while [_ NP NP] constructions are peripheral and are therefore marked in UG. According to Mazurkewich, 'markedness' as defined by UG directly explains order of difficulty: constructions that are deemed marked in UG are more diffi cult for L2 speakers to acquire than unmarked constructions. The present study reexamines the acquisition of the English dative alternation across a wider range of dative verbs than was considered by Mazurkewich. A group of French L 1 subjects were given two different tasks: a grammaticality judgment task and a sentence construction task. It was found that although the results confirm an order of difficulty: [_ NP PP] → [_ NP NP], this developmental sequence conceals a more complex set of stages in the acquisition of the dative alternation involving features like the syntactic distributional subclass of the verb in ques tion, whether the dative object involved is a lexical NP or a pronoun, and the syllabic structure of the base form of the verb. These features, it turns out, interact to produce a multistaged developmental sequence. This finding calls into question the usefulness of a UG definition of markedness in explaining the L2 acquisition of the English dative alternation. An alternative account is pro posed in terms of the familiar psycholinguistic notion of 'learning complexity' which seems to offer a better account of the acquisition process.

scholarly journals Advanced learners’ comprehension of discourse connectives: The role of L1 transfer across on-line and off-line tasks

2015 ◽  
Vol 31 (3) ◽  
pp. 389-411 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sandrine Zufferey ◽  
Willem Mak ◽  
Liesbeth Degand ◽  
Ted Sanders
Keyword(s):  
Language Learners ◽  
Native Speakers ◽  
First Language ◽  
Judgment Task ◽  
Advanced Learners ◽  
L1 Transfer ◽  
Grammaticality Judgment ◽  
On Line ◽  
Reading Experiment ◽  
Discourse Connectives

Discourse connectives are important indicators of textual coherence, and mastering them is an essential part of acquiring a language. In this article, we compare advanced learners’ sensitivity to the meaning conveyed by connectives in an off-line grammaticality judgment task and an on-line reading experiment using eye-tracking. We also assess the influence of first language (L1) transfer by comparing learners’ comprehension of two non-native-like semantic uses of connectives in English, often produced by learners due to transfer from French and Dutch. Our results indicate that in an off-line task transfer is an important factor accounting for French- and Dutch-speaking learners’ non-native-like comprehension of connectives. During on-line processing, however, learners are as sensitive as native speakers to the meaning conveyed by connectives. These results raise intriguing questions regarding explicit vs. implicit knowledge in language learners.

The acquisition of Mandarin dative constructions by L2 and heritage learners

2017 ◽  
Vol 6 (2) ◽  
pp. 251-275
Author(s):  
Chunsheng Yang ◽  
Han Luo
Keyword(s):  
Learning Outcomes ◽  
Native Speakers ◽  
First Language ◽  
Heritage Learners ◽  
L2 Acquisition ◽  
L1 Transfer ◽  
Grammaticality Judgment ◽  
L2 Chinese ◽  
Chinese Teaching ◽  
Linguistic Universal

AbstractThis study examines the acquisition of Mandarin dative constructions by second language (L2) and heritage learners of Mandarin Chinese. Three groups of speakers (L2, heritage, and native, 20 in each group) participated in this study by completing a questionnaire consisting of sentence translation and grammaticality judgment tasks on Mandarin dative constructions. In both tasks, native speakers outperformed the heritage learners, who in turn outperformed the L2 learners. The variance of performance in the two tasks across groups can be attributed to several factors, including linguistic universal, first language (L1) transfer, and individual difference. This study shows that L2 acquisition is a complex system and no single factor can fully explain or predict L2 learning outcomes. The findings of this study also have important pedagogical implications for L2 Chinese teaching.

Transfer and unlearning of topic prominence by Chinese learners of English

2021 ◽  
Vol 0 (0) ◽  
Author(s):  
Hui Chang ◽  
Lilong Xu
Keyword(s):  
Second Language ◽  
Universal Grammar ◽  
L2 Acquisition ◽  
L1 Transfer ◽  
Chinese Speakers ◽  
English Only ◽  
Cognitive States ◽  
Chinese Learners ◽  
Topic Constructions ◽  
Chinese Learners Of English

Abstract Chinese allows both gapped and gapless topic constructions without their usage being restricted to specific contexts, while English only allows gapped topic constructions which are used in certain contexts. In other words, Chinese uses ‘topic prominence’, whereas English does not. The contrast between English and Chinese topic constructions poses a learnability problem for Chinese learners of English. This paper uses an empirical study investigating first language (L1) transfer in the case of Chinese learners of English and the extent to which they are able to unlearn topic prominence as they progress in second language (L2) English. Results of an acceptability judgment test indicate that Chinese learners of English initially transfer Chinese topic prominence into their English, then gradually unlearn Chinese topic prominence as their English proficiency improves, and finally unlearn Chinese topic prominence successfully. The results support the Full Transfer Theory (Schwartz, Bonnie & Rex Sprouse. 1996. L2 cognitive states and the Full Transfer/Full Access model. Second Language Research 12. 40–72) and the Variational Learning Model (Yang, Charles. 2004. Universal Grammar, statistics or both? Trends in Cognitive Sciences 8. 451–456), but contradict the proposal that the topic prominence can never be transferred but may be unlearned from the beginning in Chinese speakers’ acquisition of English (Zheng, Chao. 2001. Nominal Constructions Beyond IP and Their Initial Restructuring in L2 Acquisition. Guangzhou: Guangdong University of Foreign Studies Ph.D. dissertation). In addition, the type of topic constructions that is used and whether or not a comma is added after the topic have an effect on learners’ transfer and unlearning of topic prominence. It is proposed that the specification of Agr(eement) and T(ense) as well as the presence of expletive subjects in English input can trigger the unlearning of topic prominence for Chinese learners of English.

Plural marking in the second language: Atomicity, definiteness, and transfer

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-30
Author(s):  
Sea Hee Choi ◽  
Tania Ionin
Keyword(s):  
Second Language ◽  
English Learners ◽  
Judgment Task ◽  
Native Languages ◽  
L1 Transfer ◽  
Mass Nouns ◽  
Count Nouns ◽  
Grammaticality Judgment ◽  
L2 Learners ◽  
Plural Marking

Abstract This paper examines whether second language (L2)-English learners whose native languages (L1; Korean and Mandarin) lack obligatory plural marking transfer the properties of plural marking from their L1s, and whether transfer is manifested both offline (in a grammaticality judgment task) and online (in a self-paced reading task). The online task tests the predictions of the morphological congruency hypothesis (Jiang 2007), according to which L2 learners have particular difficulty automatically activating the meaning of L2 morphemes that are incongruent with their L1. Experiment 1 tests L2 learners’ sensitivity to errors of –s oversuppliance with mass nouns, while Experiment 2 tests their sensitivity to errors of –s omission with count nouns. The findings show that (a) L2 learners detect errors with nonatomic mass nouns (sunlights) but not atomic ones (furnitures), both offline and online; and (b) L1-Korean L2-English learners are more successful than L1-Mandarin L2-English learners in detecting missing –s with definite plurals (these boat), while the two groups behave similarly with indefinite plurals (many boat). Given that definite plurals require plural marking in Korean but not in Mandarin, the second finding is consistent with L1-transfer. Overall, the findings show that learners are able to overcome morphological incongruency and acquire novel uses of L2 morphemes.

L1 transfer, proficiency, and the recognition of L2 verb-noun collocations: A perspective from three languages

2019 ◽  
Vol 0 (0) ◽  
Author(s):  
Senyung Lee
Keyword(s):  
Native Speakers ◽  
First Language ◽  
Judgment Task ◽  
Advanced Learners ◽  
L1 Transfer ◽  
English Only ◽  
Mixed Effects Modeling ◽  
L1 Influence ◽  
Native Speakers Of English ◽  
The Relationship

Abstract This study investigated the effect of first language (L1) transfer in the recognition of second language (L2) collocations and unacceptable word combinations across low-intermediate to advanced learners of English, and the relationship between proficiency and the recognition of L2 collocations. The study targeted learners from two different L1 backgrounds and native speakers of English in order to disentangle the effect of L1 transfer from the effect of intralingual factors. Four types of English verb-noun combinations were included: English-Korean-Mandarin, English-only, Korean-only, and Mandarin-only phrases. A phrase acceptability judgment task and a phrase recognition report were used. The performances of 92 participants were analyzed using mixed effects modeling. The results from both Korean and Mandarin groups revealed no L1 influence in the recognition of unacceptable L2 word combinations, even at low levels of proficiency. The results also showed that L2 proficiency predicts learners’ ability to rule out grammatical-but-unacceptable L2 word combinations, but not the ability to recognize L2 collocations

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document