Word Prosody in Second Language Acquisition

2020 ◽  
pp. 593-604
Author(s):  
Allard Jongman ◽  
Annie Tremblay
Keyword(s):  
Second Language ◽  
Second Language Acquisition ◽  
Explanatory Power ◽  
Auditory Training ◽  
Lexical Tone ◽  
L2 Acquisition ◽  
Pitch Direction ◽  
L2 Learners ◽  
Word Prosody ◽  
L1 And L2

The production and perception of a second language (L2) will be affected by any differences between native language (L1) and L2 lexical stress and lexical tone. This chapter first discusses L1 effects on the perception of L2 words that differ in stress, comparing the explanatory power of phonological (stress-parameter-based) and phonetic (cue-based) approaches for L2 learners’ performance in word recognition. Equally, it discusses L1 effects on the production of stress in L2 words, from both a phonological and a phonetic perspective. The discussion then moves on to the L2 acquisition of lexical tone, focusing on differences in the way native speakers and L2 learners make use of lower-level acoustic-phonetic and higher-level linguistic information, their weighting of tonal cues (pitch height and pitch direction), and the role of contextual phonetic and prosodic information. Special attention is paid to major typological differences between L1 and L2 (non-tonal vs. tonal; level tones vs. contour tones). Finally, the efficacy of short-term auditory training in the acquisition of new tonal categories is evaluated. Throughout, the chapter addresses the influence of factors such as age of acquisition and proficiency.

scholarly journals Analysis of Second Language Acquisition (SLA) Speech Perception Model & the Perception of Second Language Prosody

2019 ◽  
Vol 64 ◽  
pp. 334-351
Author(s):  
Jing CHU ◽  
Chunsheng YANG ◽  
Guofa LIU
Keyword(s):  
Second Language ◽  
Speech Perception ◽  
Second Language Acquisition ◽  
Explanatory Power ◽  
L2 Acquisition ◽  
Theoretical Frameworks ◽  
Speech Prosody ◽  
New Models ◽  
Perception Model ◽  
L1 And L2

This paper provides a critical review on the major models of speech perception in second language (L2) acquisition. It is argued that some new models, such as L2LP and ASP, have more explanatory power for L2 speech perception. However, due to the different theoretical frameworks, objectives and hypotheses in these models, it is difficult to integrate these models into one which is universally applicable. Although most of these models were proposed for accounting for the perception of L2 segments, they can also be applied in the perception of L2 prosody. When these models are used in examining L2 speech prosody, the prosodic systems of both L1 and L2 should be thoroughly investigated first.

Developmental stages in receptive grammar acquisition: A Processability Theory account

2015 ◽  
Vol 31 (4) ◽  
pp. 523-550 ◽  
Author(s):  
Aafke Buyl ◽  
Alex Housen
Keyword(s):  
Second Language ◽  
Second Language Acquisition ◽  
Developmental Stages ◽  
L2 Acquisition ◽  
English Grammar ◽  
Grammar Acquisition ◽  
L2 Learners ◽  
Processability Theory ◽  
Grammar Knowledge ◽  
The Relationship

This study takes a new look at the topic of developmental stages in the second language (L2) acquisition of morphosyntax by analysing receptive learner data, a language mode that has hitherto received very little attention within this strand of research (for a recent and rare study, see Spinner, 2013). Looking at both the receptive and productive side of grammar acquisition, however, is necessary for a better understanding of developmental systematicity and of the relationship between receptive and productive grammar acquisition more widely, as well as for the construction of a comprehensive theory of second language acquisition (SLA). In the present exploratory study, the receptive acquisition of L2 English grammar knowledge is studied cross-sectionally within a Processability Theory (PT) framework (Pienemann, 1998, 2005b), a theory of L2 grammar acquisition which makes explicit predictions about the order in which L2 learners learn to productively process different morphosyntactic phenomena. Participants are 72 francophone beginning child L2 learners (age 6–9) acquiring English in an immersion program. The learners’ ability to process six morphosyntactic phenomena situated at extreme ends of the developmental hierarchy proposed by PT was tested by means of the ELIAS Grammar Test, a picture selection task. Overall, the developmental orders obtained through implicational scaling for the six target phenomena agreed with PT’s predictions, suggesting that similar mechanisms underlie the acquisition of receptive and productive L2 grammar processing skills.

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.

Developmental dynamics in L1 and L2 acquisition: Processability Theory and generative entrenchment

1998 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-20 ◽  
Author(s):  
MANFRED PIENEMANN
Keyword(s):  
Second Language ◽  
Second Language Acquisition ◽  
Language Processing ◽  
Universal Grammar ◽  
Mathematical Concept ◽  
Structural Features ◽  
L2 Acquisition ◽  
Generative Entrenchment ◽  
Processability Theory ◽  
L1 And L2

This paper has two major objectives: (1) to summarise Processability Theory, a processing-oriented approach to explaining language development and (2) to utilise this theory in the comparison of development in LI and L2 acquisition. Proponents of the Fundamental Difference Hypothesis (between L1 and L2) assume that L1 development can be explained with reference to Universal Grammar (UG) which, in their view, is inaccessible to L2 learners. Instead, they claim that a second language develops on the basis of language processing strategies.I will show that the fundamentally different developmental paths inherent in first and second language acquisition can both be explained on the basis of the same language processing mechanics (as specified in Processability Theory). I will demonstrate that the developmental differences between L1 and L2 are caused by the qualitatively different early structural hypotheses which propagate through the acquisition process. The concept of “propagation of structural features” will be viewed as “generative entrenchment,” a logical-mathematical concept, which has proved to be highly productive in examining other kinds of developmental processes.

Structural Minimality, CP and the initial state in second language acquisition

2002 ◽  
Vol 18 (4) ◽  
pp. 348-392 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rakesh M. Bhatt ◽  
Barbara Hancin-Bhatt
Keyword(s):  
Second Language ◽  
Second Language Acquisition ◽  
Language Acquisition ◽  
Empirical Evidence ◽  
Current Debate ◽  
L2 Acquisition ◽  
Initial State ◽  
L2 Learners ◽  
Partial Transfer ◽  
Entire Array

This article considers the current debate on the initial state of second language acquisition (L2) and presents critical empirical evidence from Hindi learners of English as an L2 that supports the claim that the CP (complementizer phase) is initially absent from the grammar of L2 learners. Contrary to the predictions of Full Transfer (Schwartz and Sprouse, 1994; 1996), the data we present suggest that L2 learners start out without a CP and then graduate to a stage where overt expressions of CP (complementizer phase) are in fact manifest. Although the lack of evidence of CP appears to support the Minimal Trees/Partial Transfer (MT/PT) hypothesis (Vainikka and Young-Scholten, 1996a; 1996b), we show that the MT/PT hypothesis also fails to honour all the empirical facts.To account for the patterns in our data, we propose Structural Minimality - that clausal projections are IPs - as a hypothesis on the initial state of L2 acquisition. We argue that the Structural Minimality hypothesis accounts for the entire array CP-acquisition facts in Hindi-speaking learners of English as an L2.

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.

L2 Perception and Production of Japanese Lexical Pitch

2020 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
pp. 106-136
Author(s):  
Tim Joris Laméris ◽  
Calbert Graham
Keyword(s):  
Second Language ◽  
Native Speakers ◽  
Perceived Similarity ◽  
L2 Acquisition ◽  
Advanced Learners ◽  
Production Study ◽  
L2 Phonology ◽  
Word Prosody ◽  
L2 Perception ◽  
L1 And L2

Adults are known to have difficulties acquiring suprasegmental speech that involves pitch (f0) in a second language (L2) (Graham & Post, 2018; Hirata, 2015; Wang, Spence, Jongman & Sereno, 1999; Wong & Perrachione, 2007). Previous research has suggested that the perceived similarity between L1 and L2 phonology may influence how easily segmental speech is acquired, but this notion of ‘similarity’ may also apply to suprasegmental speech (So & Best, 2010; Wu, Munro & Wang, 2014). In this paper, the L2 acquisition of Japanese lexical pitch was assessed under a ‘Suprasegmental Similarity Account’, which is a theoretical framework inspired by previous models of segmental and suprasegmental speech (Best & Tyler, 2007; Flege, 1995; Mennen, 2015) to account for the L2 acquisition of word prosody. Eight adult native speakers of Japanese and eight adult English-native advanced learners of Japanese participated in a perception and production study of Japanese lexical pitch patterns. Both groups performed similarly in perception, but non-native speakers performed significantly worse in production, particularly for ‘unaccented’ Low–High–High patterns. These findings are discussed in light of the ‘Suprasegmental Similarity Account’.

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.

Missing Surface Inflection or Impairment in second language acquisition? Evidence from tense and agreement

2000 ◽  
Vol 16 (2) ◽  
pp. 103-133 ◽  
Author(s):  
Philippe Prévost ◽  
Lydia White
Keyword(s):  
Second Language ◽  
Second Language Acquisition ◽  
Adult Learners ◽  
Surface Morphology ◽  
Production Data ◽  
Functional Categories ◽  
L2 Acquisition ◽  
Spontaneous Production ◽  
L2 Learners ◽  
Abstract Level

In this article, two accounts of the variable use of inflection in adult second language (L2) acquisition are examined. The Missing Surface Inflection Hypothesis (MSIH) proposes that L2 learners have unconscious knowledge of the functional projections and features underlying tense and agreement. However, learners sometimes have a problem with realization of surface morphology, such that they resort to non-finite forms (e.g. Haznedar and Schwartz, 1997; Prévost and White, 1999). The Impaired Representation Hypothesis (IRH) claims that L2 inflection is essentially impaired, due to lack of functional categories, features or feature strength (e.g. Eubank, 1993/94; Meisel, 1997). These views make different predictions for adult L2 acquisition. Spontaneous production data from two adult learners of French and two adult learners of German are examined. The data show that finite forms do not occur in non-finite contexts, that learners exhibit syntactic reflexes of finiteness and that inflected forms largely show accurate agreement. These results suggest that adult L2 learners represent finiteness and agreement at an abstract level, rather than being impaired in this domain, supporting the MSIH.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document