Chapter 2. Bilingualism, second language acquisition, and language contact

2020 ◽  
pp. 36-56
Author(s):  
Kimberly L. Geeslin ◽  
Travis Evans-Sago
Keyword(s):  
Second Language ◽  
Second Language Acquisition ◽  
Language Acquisition ◽  
Language Contact

The Development of Metropolitan Languages in Post-Colonial Contexts: Language Contact and Language Change and the Case of Portuguese in Maputo

1996 ◽  
Vol 19 (2) ◽  
pp. 183-213
Author(s):  
Christopher Stroud
Keyword(s):  
Second Language ◽  
Second Language Acquisition ◽  
Language Acquisition ◽  
Language Contact ◽  
Language Change ◽  
Social Contexts ◽  
Speech Community ◽  
Post Colonial ◽  
Contact Linguistics ◽  
The Social

This article explores briefly some phenomena of potential indigenization of the Portuguese spoken in Mozambique. Data for the study has been taken from work that is currently underway in Maputo, Mozambique, that was originally initiated to investigate contact varieties of Portuguese and to probe their educational implications. Speech samples comprise formal interviews and non-formal encounters from a socio-demographically representative sample of informants. The article first provides an inventory of some non-standard European Portuguese variants that are found in this data, and subsequently focusses upon a discussion of what contribution different linguistic processes make to indigenization, specifically the role played by processes of second language acquisition in a context of massive and diffuse language contact and change. Special attention is also paid to the social contexts in which different manifestations of language contact are found, and the importance of linguistic ideology for the form that language contact takes in particular cases is explored. The article concludes with the suggestion that the salient characteristics of types of non-native speech community such as Maputo require a reconceptualization of models and methods of contact linguistics and second language acquisition, and that this in turn carries implications for the terms of reference and analysis to which indigenization need be related.

World Englishes, Second Language Acquisition, and Language Contact

2015 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rajend Mesthrie
Keyword(s):  
Second Language ◽  
Second Language Acquisition ◽  
Language Acquisition ◽  
Language Learners ◽  
Language Contact ◽  
Second Language Learners ◽  
World Englishes ◽  
Target Language ◽  
Political Dimension ◽  
Second Languages

Although areas of potential overlap between the fields of Second Language Acquisition (SLA) and World Englishes (WE) may seem obvious, they developed historically in isolation from each other. SLA had a psycholinguistic emphasis, studying the ways in which individuals progressed towards acquisition of a target language. WE studies initially developed a sociolinguistic focus, describing varieties that arose as second languages in former British colonies. This chapter explores the way in which each field could benefit from the other. The SLA emphasis on routes of development, overgeneralization, universals of SLA, and transfer in the interlanguage has relevance to characterizing sub-varieties of WEs. Conversely, the socio-political dimension of early WE studies and the notion of macro- or group acquisition fills a gap in SLA studies which sometimes failed to acknowledge that the goal of second language learners was to become bilingual in ways that were socially meaningful within their societies.

Second Language Acquisition and Syntactic Theory in the 21st Century

2010 ◽  
Vol 30 ◽  
pp. 248-269 ◽  
Author(s):  
Juana M. Liceras
Keyword(s):  
Second Language ◽  
Second Language Acquisition ◽  
Language Acquisition ◽  
Language Contact ◽  
Second Language Learners ◽  
Universal Grammar ◽  
Minimalist Program ◽  
Science Field ◽  
Syntactic Theory ◽  
Syntactic Properties

Syntactic theory has played a role in second language acquisition (SLA) research since the early 1980s, when the principles and parameters model of generative grammar was implemented. However, it was the so-called functional parameterization hypothesis together with the debate on whether second language learners activated new features or switched their value that led to detailed and in-depth analyses of the syntactic properties of many different nonnative grammars. In the last 10 years, with the minimalist program as background, these analyses have diverted more and more from looking at those syntactic properties that argued for or against the various versions of the UG-access versus non-UG-access debate (UG for Universal Grammar) and have more recently delved into the status of nonnative grammars in the cognitive science field. Thus, using features (i.e., gender, case, verb, and determiner) as the basic units and paying special attention to the quality of input as well as to processing principles and constraints, nonnative grammars have been compared to the language contact paradigms that underlie subsequent bilingualism, child SLA, creole formation, and diachronic change. Taking Chomsky's I-language/E-language construct as the framework, this article provides a review of these recent developments in SLA research.

Two Types of Functional Transfer in Language Contact

2012 ◽  
Vol 5 (2) ◽  
pp. 187-215 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jeff Siegel
Keyword(s):  
Second Language ◽  
Second Language Acquisition ◽  
Language Acquisition ◽  
Language Contact ◽  
Source Language ◽  
Contact Language ◽  
Syntactic Properties ◽  
Semantic Properties ◽  
Functional Alteration ◽  
Grammatical Functions

The aim of this article is to examine one kind of cross linguistic influence, or transfer, in language contact situations. This is “functional transfer”, defined as applying the grammatical functions of a morpheme from one language to a morpheme in another language that does not normally have these functions. With regard to language contact, most reported instances of this kind of transfer concern the creation of a new grammatical morpheme in an expanded pidgin or creole, resulting from the use of a lexical morpheme of the lexifier (here the recipient language, RL) with semantic and syntactic properties of a grammatical morpheme of the substrate language(s) (here the source language(s), SL).Another kind of functional transfer, however, results in an already existing grammatical morpheme in the RL being used with semantic properties, but not syntactic properties, of a grammatical morpheme in the SL that speakers perceive as equivalent. Thus, the two types of functional transfer differ in that the first entails morphological augmentation while the second involves functional alteration of an existing morpheme.Other differences between the two types of transfer are that certain constraints appear to apply to the first type but not to the second. In addition, the first type of transfer, as opposed to the second, does not commonly occur in the process of second language acquisition. Explanations proposed for these distinctions concern different strategies used for morphological expansion in the development of a contact language. Different contact languages can be placed along a continuum based on the prevalence and type of functional transfer.

First- and Second-Language Acquisition and CILC

2020 ◽  
pp. 214-240
Author(s):  
Eva Duran Eppler ◽  
Gabriel Ozón
Keyword(s):  
Second Language ◽  
Second Language Acquisition ◽  
Language Acquisition ◽  
Language Contact ◽  
Language Change ◽  
L2 Acquisition ◽  
Language Variation And Change ◽  
Language Data ◽  
L1 And L2

This chapter explores the contested role of L1 and L2 acquisition in contact-induced linguistic change (CILC). We first identify three factors underlying these controversies (field of research; theoretical approach; and methodological limitations/advances), before discussing two elements language change and language acquisition have in common (i.e., isolated individuals cannot accomplish either, and both have to be studied through natural language data, with its attendant high degree of variation). We go on to define key terms and concepts for the role of L1 and L2 acquisition in contact-induced language change, including first and second language acquisition (L1A and L2A), bilingual first language acquisition, language variation and change, language contact and contact-induced language change. In the main section we discuss the role of L1A and L2A in CILC, and examine different language-acquisition scenarios, in particular their potential for leading to CILC. We use these different language-acquisition types as testing grounds for the motivations behind (i.e., causes for, and triggers of) language change, and arrive at tentative conclusions about which of these language-acquisition scenarios is more likely to play a role in CILC, and why.

HANDBOOK OF SECOND LANGUAGE ACQUISITION.William C. Ritchie & Tej K. Bhatia (Eds.). San Diego: Academic Press, 1996. Pp. vii + 758. $69.95 cloth.

1998 ◽  
Vol 20 (3) ◽  
pp. 429-430
Author(s):  
Carolyn G. Madden
Keyword(s):  
Second Language ◽  
Second Language Acquisition ◽  
Language Acquisition ◽  
Language Contact ◽  
Universal Grammar ◽  
First Language ◽  
Academic Press ◽  
History Of ◽  
Work Done ◽  
Theoretical Issues

Handbook of Second Language Acquisition is what its title suggests, a very thorough guide through the field of SLA. Indeed, the first chapter, an overview, is quite extensive in summarizing the history of SLA and the current issues in SLA. In addition to the lengthy overview, the handbook is divided into seven major sections: I. Research and theoretical issues in second language acquisition, II. Issues of maturation and modularity in second language acquisition, III. Second language speech and the influence of the first language, IV. Research methodology and applications, V. Modality and the linguistic environment in second language acquisition, VI. The neuropsychology of second language acquisition and use, and VII. Language contact and its consequences. These sections are thorough, well researched, and accessible. Section I includes one chapter by Gregg, which sets the tone and bias of the text with his claim that theoretical considerations that are central to SLA are those that address the issue of knowledge; that is, competence within the Chomskyan framework of Universal Grammar. Gregg makes it clear that he is not suggesting that other theories of acculturation or variation are uninteresting but rather that what is central to developing a theory of SLA is a theory that explains competence as the work done within the principles and parameter framework, not, for example, one that explains communicative competence. Section II, the core of the text, consists of six chapters on the various models, approaches, and frameworks of SLA. The first two chapters, by White and Flynn, support the principles and parameters framework for SLA and are followed by a well-reasoned challenge by Schachter.

Creolization and admixture

2011 ◽  
Vol 26 (1) ◽  
pp. 89-110 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ingo Plag
Keyword(s):  
Second Language ◽  
Second Language Acquisition ◽  
Language Acquisition ◽  
Sri Lanka ◽  
Case Studies ◽  
Significant Role ◽  
Crucial Role ◽  
Good Predictor ◽  
Language Contact ◽  
Selection Process

Proponents of a ‘feature pool’ approach to creolization (e.g. Mufwene 2001, Aboh & Ansaldo 2006) have claimed that the emergence of the new grammar is driven by the syntax-discourse prominence, markedness, and frequency of available features, with typological similarity or dissimilarity of the languages involved playing a crucial role in the competition and selection process. This paper takes a closer look at the predictions of a feature pool-based approach to creolization and tests whether these predictions are borne out by the facts. Three case studies from the Surinamese creoles and Sri Lanka Malay show that the feature pool approach suffers from a number of conceptual, theoretical, and empirical problems. The typology alone of the languages involved in the contact is not a good predictor for the outcome of language contact. The feature pool approach neglects processing constraints: one can only select from what one can process. ‘Creolization’, as in the case of the emergence of the Surinamese Creoles, is not ‘exceptional’, but happens in contact situations in which second language acquisition plays a significant role. The processing restrictions inherent in second language acquisition play an important role in shaping the structural outcome. ’Admixture’, as in the case of Sri Lanka Malay, is not ‘exceptional’ either, but happens in different situations and shows different processes at work. And these processes allow structural outcomes that are very different from those found under the conditions of second language acquisition.

Theorizing language contact, spread, and variation in status planning

2006 ◽  
Vol 16 (2) ◽  
pp. 159-174 ◽  
Author(s):  
Minglang Zhou
Keyword(s):  
Second Language ◽  
Theoretical Model ◽  
Second Language Acquisition ◽  
Language Acquisition ◽  
Language Contact ◽  
Language Shift ◽  
Language Identity ◽  
Input And Output ◽  
Language Spread ◽  
The Individual

A theoretical model, managed community second language acquisition (SLA), is proposed to provide a comprehensive view of nine studies of language contact, spread, variation, and attitudes of Chinese, which are shaped by nearly a century of language planning. The model has been reformulated on the basis of the individual SLA modle and it is intended to make the notions of macroacquisition and planning acquisition operational. It has two linguistic factors (input and output) and two sociolinguistic factors (language identity and language marketability) that can be managed or manipulated in status planning. The two sociolinguistic factors, language identity and marketability, appear to have played the most significant roles in language spread, variation, and attitudes in status planning, at least in China. This model also serves as the basis to make a theoretical distinction between interference and borrowing, a distinction that helps to sort out the consequences of language contact and provides indexes of language shift under status planning conditions.

scholarly journals Documenting L2 input and interaction during study abroad: Approaches, instruments and challenges

2021 ◽  
pp. 026765832110306
Author(s):  
Rosamond Mitchell
Keyword(s):  
Second Language ◽  
Second Language Acquisition ◽  
Language Acquisition ◽  
Study Abroad ◽  
Language Contact ◽  
Self Report ◽  
Sociocultural Development ◽  
L2 Development ◽  
Corpus Creation ◽  
Popular Language

A major rationale for study abroad (SA) from the perspective of second language acquisition is the presumed opportunity available to sojourners for naturalistic second language (L2) “immersion”. However, such opportunities are affected by variations in the linguistic, institutional and social affordances of SA, in different settings. They are also affected by the varying agency and motivation of sojourners in seeking second language (L2) engagement. For example, many sojourners prioritize mastering informal L2 speech, while others prioritize academic and professional registers including writing. Most will operate multilingually, using their home language, a local language, and/or English as lingua franca for different purposes, and the types of input they seek out, and language practices they enter into, vary accordingly. Consequently, while researchers have developed varied approaches to documenting L2 engagement, and have tried to relate these to measures of L2 development, these efforts have so far seen somewhat mixed success. This article reviews different approaches to documenting SA input and interaction; first, that of participant self-report, using questionnaires, interviews, journals, or language logs. Particular attention is paid to the popular Language Contact Profile (LCP), and to approaches drawing on Social Network Analysis. The limitations of all forms of self-report are acknowledged. The article also examines the contribution of direct observation and recording of L2 input and interaction during SA. This is a significant alternative approach for the study of acquisition, but one which poses theoretical, ethical and practical challenges. Researchers have increasingly enlisted participants as research collaborators who create small corpora through self-recording with L2 interlocutors. Analyses in this tradition have so far prioritized interactional, pragmatic and sociocultural development, in learner corpora, over other dimensions of second language acquisition (SLA). The theoretical and practical challenges of corpus creation in SA settings and their wider use to promote understandings of informal L2 learning are discussed.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document