Morphological variability in L2 Italian

2017 ◽  
Vol 168 (2) ◽  
pp. 203-247
Author(s):  
Francesco Bryan Romano
Keyword(s):  
Morphological Variability ◽  
Morphological Development ◽  
L2 Acquisition ◽  
L1 Transfer ◽  
Test Conditions ◽  
Building Models ◽  
Verb Forms ◽  
Functional Features ◽  
Key Accounts ◽  
L1 English

Abstract Key accounts of morphological variability in L2 acquisition posit either deficits in the representation of abstract morphosyntactic features or the mapping between morpho-phonological forms and syntactic features due to computational limitations. This study extends previous research to L2 Italian, a richly inflected language. The production and grammatical intuitions of suppletive and affixal verb inflection were elicited from a cross-section of instructed adult L2 learners with L1 Spanish and L1 English. Although a clear production-intuition gap was found, supporting computational views, a strong regularity in the degree of variability across test conditions, L1s, and proficiency levels was also attested, supporting representational accounts. The findings suggest morphological development in L2 Italian is consistent with structure-building models that assume no L1 transfer of functional features. Imperative verb forms in L2 Italian are proposed as defaults equivalent to the bare verb forms of L2 English and non-finite defaults of L2 French and German.

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 L1 Transfer in L2 Acquisition of English Verbal Morphology by Japanese Young Instructed Learners

Languages ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. 1 ◽  
Author(s):  
Akiko Muroya
Keyword(s):  
Junior High School ◽  
First Language ◽  
Morphological Variability ◽  
Inflectional Morphology ◽  
English Studies ◽  
L2 Acquisition ◽  
Verbal Morphology ◽  
L1 Transfer ◽  
Feature Reassembly ◽  
Difficult Area

Inflectional morphology has been considered as a particularly difficult area in second language (L2) acquisition (Lardiere 2008; Slabakova 2008). This paper reports on an empirical study investigating the L2 acquisition of English verbal morphology by Japanese young instructed learners. The aim of this study is to explore how the first language (L1) plays a role in the L2 acquisition of inflectional morphology, by applying the Feature Reassembly Hypothesis (FRH, Lardiere 2008, 2009) to a Japanese−English pairing. An elicited production task was administered to Japanese junior high school aged 12–15 (n = 102) and university students aged 19–20 (n = 30). The results show a difference with respect to accuracy rates and error types from previous L2 English studies, in terms of tense−aspect morphology. The findings provide evidence for the FRH’s prediction that attributes morphological variability to L1−L2 contrasts in reassembly of feature matrices for morpholexical items.

Verb learning and the acquisition of aspect

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yumiko Nishi ◽  
Yasuhiro Shirai
Keyword(s):  
Negative Transfer ◽  
Linguistic Variation ◽  
L2 Acquisition ◽  
L1 Transfer ◽  
Verbal Form ◽  
Aspect Hypothesis ◽  
Lexical Aspect ◽  
Picture Description ◽  
L1 English

Abstract Although SLA research has extensively investigated the role of lexical aspect in L2 acquisition of tense-aspect marking, the role of L1 is not yet fully understood. This paper investigates the effect of cross-linguistic variation in lexical aspect and explores how the learning of lexical aspect interacts with the acquisition of aspectual morphology, using oral picture-description and written judgment tasks. 391 learners of Japanese (L1 English, Chinese, and Korean) participated in the study. The results show that L2 learners have problems in rejecting incorrect L2 aspectual structures (but not in accepting correct ones) when such structures involve L1–L2 discrepancy in lexical aspect. The results also confirmed a strong L1 effect at the level of surface inflected verbal form, showing significantly higher accuracy for items for which direct translation yields correct meaning than those that do not. It is argued that L1 transfer may be playing an important role in the L2 acquisition of aspect in that both positive and negative transfer collectively determine the order of acquisition predicted by the Aspect Hypothesis.

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.

scholarly journals ‘Almost people’: A Learner Corpus Account of L2 Use and Misuse of Non-numerical Quantification

2016 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Peter Crosthwaite ◽  
Lavigne L.Y. Choy ◽  
Yeonsuk Bae
Keyword(s):  
English Learners ◽  
English Speakers ◽  
L2 Proficiency ◽  
L1 Transfer ◽  
Learner Corpus ◽  
Proficiency Level ◽  
Closed Class ◽  
Corpus Data ◽  
Noun Number ◽  
L1 English

AbstractWe present an Integrated Contrastive Model of non-numerical quantificational NPs (NNQs, i.e. ‘some people’) produced by L1 English speakers and Mandarin and Korean L2 English learners. Learner corpus data was sourced from the ICNALE (Ishikawa, 2011, 2013) across four L2 proficiency levels. An average 10% of L2 NNQs were specific to L2 varieties, including noun number mismatches (*‘many child’), omitting obligatory quantifiers after adverbs (*‘almost people’), adding unnecessary particles (*‘all of people’) and non-L1 English-like quantifier/noun agreement (*‘many water’). Significantly fewer ‘openclass’ NNQs (e.g a number of people) are produced by L2 learners, preferring ‘closed-class’ single lexical quantifiers (following L1-like use). While such production is predictable via L1 transfer, Korean L2 English learners produced significantly more L2-like NNQs at each proficiency level, which was not entirely predictable under a transfer account. We thus consider whether positive transfer of other linguistic forms (i.e. definiteness marking) aids the learnability of other L2 forms (i.e. expression of quantification).

scholarly journals What does say these forms as VALGU or ŽINĖJAU, created by foreign speakers

2017 ◽  
pp. 1-25
Author(s):  
Jogilė Teresa Ramonaitė
Keyword(s):  
Mixed Type ◽  
Target Language ◽  
Similar Function ◽  
L2 Acquisition ◽  
Grammatical Development ◽  
Base Form ◽  
Verb Forms ◽  
Speech Data ◽  
Stem Type ◽  
Foreign Speakers

This paper focuses on Lithuanian L2 verb forms that do not exist in the target language. The data is drawn from the Lithuanian L2 corpus and includes spontaneous speech data by 17 speakers of different L1s and all three acquisition varieties (pre-basic, basic and post-basic). The non-existent verb forms make only a small part of the overall verb forms used, however, when distinguished from occasional mistakes, the forms that indicate grammatical development that are analysed show notable systematicity among different speakers. Five distinct and most frequent formants are analyzed in detail, namely -u, -a, -o, -(i)au, ė, that are used by several speakers with seemingly similar function. The analysis reveals specific functions and discusses different factors that have an effect on the acquisition of these formants. In many cases frequency is an important factor, however, with formants -u and -ė transparency and regularity seem to have a stronger effect and thus facilitate the acquisition. Formant -a, being nearly the most common and extremely multifunctional (i.e. rather unmarked), is incorporated into the system firstly as part of the base form and holds this position till a very advanced stage of Lithuanian L2 acquisition. Verb stem type also has an effect with the regularly suffixed verbs being acquired the easiest, while the mixed type and the primary ones cause many difficulties for the speakers. Overall, the systematicity discovered shows the creative structuring of the interlanguage that only occurs more actively in the post-basic variety of acquisition.

scholarly journals Effects of L1 Transfer Are Profound, Yet Native-Like Processing Strategy Is Attainable: Evidence From Advanced Learners’ Production of Complex L2 Chinese Structures

2021 ◽  
Vol 12 ◽  
Author(s):  
Fuyun Wu ◽  
Jun Lyu ◽  
Yanan Sheng
Keyword(s):  
Native Speakers ◽  
L2 Acquisition ◽  
Advanced Learners ◽  
L1 Transfer ◽  
Processing Strategies ◽  
Asymmetric Pattern ◽  
Chinese Learners ◽  
L2 Chinese ◽  
Ultimate Attainment ◽  
English Group

English as a verb-medial language has a short-before-long preference, whereas Korean and Japanese as verb-final languages show a long-before-short preference. In second language (L2) research, little is known regarding how L1 processing strategies affect the ultimate attainment of target structures. Existing work has shown that native speakers of Chinese strongly prefer to utter demonstrative-classifier (DCL) phrases first in subject-extracted relatives (DCL-SR-N) and DCLs second in object-extracted relatives (OR-DCL-N). But it remains unknown whether L2 learners with typologically different language backgrounds are able to acquire native-like strategies, and how they deviate from native speakers or even among themselves. Using a phrase-assembly task, we investigated advanced L2-Chinese learners whose L1s were English, Korean, and Japanese, because English lacks individual classifiers and has postnominal relative clause (RC), whereas Korean and Japanese have individual classifiers and prenominal RCs. Results showed that the English and Korean groups deviated from the native controls’ asymmetric pattern, but the Japanese group approximated native-like performance. Furthermore, compared to the English group, the Korean and Japanese groups favored the DCL-second configuration in SRs and ORs. No differences were found between the Korean and Japanese groups. Overall, our findings suggest that L1 processing strategies play an overarching role in L2 acquisition of asymmetric positioning of DCLs in Chinese RCs.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document