scholarly journals Native language change during early stages of second language learning

Neuroreport ◽  
2015 ◽  
Vol 26 (16) ◽  
pp. 966-971 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kinsey Bice ◽  
Judith F. Kroll
NeuroImage ◽  
2001 ◽  
Vol 13 (6) ◽  
pp. 612 ◽  
Author(s):  
Li Hai Tan ◽  
John A. Spinks ◽  
Charles A. Perfetti ◽  
Peter T. Fox ◽  
Jia-Hong Gao

1971 ◽  
Vol 33 (2) ◽  
pp. 559-562 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jorma Kuusinen ◽  
Eero Salin

4 groups of 15 4-, 6-, 8-, and 10-yr.-old children learned nonsense phonological sequences that varied in grammaticality by violating 0, 1, or 2 phonological rules of Ss' native language. The youngest age group made fewer errors in learning the most nongrammatical phonological sequences than in learning grammatical ones. With the 10- and 8-yr.-olds an opposite trend was found. The differences were not statistically significant. Implications for second language learning were discussed.


2012 ◽  
Vol 15 (2) ◽  
pp. 185-208 ◽  
Author(s):  
Arina Banga ◽  
Esther Hanssen ◽  
Robert Schreuder ◽  
Anneke Neijt

The present study investigates linguistic relativity. The units of writing investigated are e and en, which are used to represent units of language in Dutch, Frisian, and Afrikaans. Dutch has homographic forms in the plural suffix -en and the linking element of noun-noun compounds en. Frisian does not have homography of this kind, while Afrikaans has a different homography. This raises the question whether second language learners of Dutch consistently interpret the linking en in Dutch noun-noun compounds as plural in the way that native speakers do. Plurality ratings for Dutch modifiers obtained from native Dutch speakers are compared with ratings from Frisian-Dutch bilinguals and Afrikaaners learning Dutch as L2. Significant differences relating to orthography are observed. We therefore argue that differing orthographic conventions in one’s native language (L1) can lead to different interpretations for the same everyday words written in Dutch (L2). Orthography thus provides an example of linguistic relativity. Keywords: linguistic relativity; second language learning; morphology; compounding; linking element; plurality; homography; Dutch; Frisian; Afrikaans


2019 ◽  
Vol 7 (2) ◽  
pp. 77
Author(s):  
Rudha Widagsa ◽  
Sri Wiyanah ◽  
Primasari Wahyuni

Generally, word stress tends to be ignored and is not considered a serious problem in Indonesian EFL; most teachers only focus on lexical and grammatical aspects of English. In fact, the prosodic features existing in English greatly affect meaning. This research, therefore, is intended to find out how Indonesian Learners of English (ILE) produce the English word stress. The stressed syllables were identified by using the highest pitch in each word. This research involved 20 respondents whose mother tongue is Indonesian. PRAAT software was applied to analyze the recordings, including measuring the pitch of each word. Word stress is indicated by the highest pitch of each word. The lowest pitch indicates weak stress. The result illustrated that ILE produces inappropriate word stress in second language learning. Most of them are not able to distinguish between strong and weak stressed syllables. This is because in their native language, prosodic features, such as word stress, do not prevail. Thus, English word stress production was heavily influenced by Indonesian features of stress. From the 36 words that become the instrument of this research, less than 50% were pronounced correctly, in most cases, and the highest pitch fell on last syllables. The absence of prosodic features in Indonesian language and limited knowledge on English phonetics drive the ILE to pronunciation error.�


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document