The role of the second language in third language acquisition: the case of Germanic syntax

2007 ◽  
Vol 23 (4) ◽  
pp. 459-484 ◽  
Author(s):  
Camilla Bardel ◽  
Ylva Falk
Keyword(s):  
Second Language ◽  
Language Acquisition ◽  
Qualitative Difference ◽  
Initial State ◽  
Syntactic Structures ◽  
Considerable Evidence ◽  
Third Language ◽  
Third Language Acquisition ◽  
L3 Acquisition

In this study of the placement of sentence negation in third language acquisition (L3), we argue that there is a qualitative difference between the acquisition of a true second language (L2) and the subsequent acquisition of an L3. Although there is considerable evidence for L2 influence on vocabulary acquisition in L3, not all researchers believe that such influence generalizes to morphosyntactic aspects of the grammar. For example, Håkansson et al. (2002) introduce the Developmentally Moderated Transfer Hypothesis (DMTH), which incorporates transfer in Processability Theory (PT). They argue against syntactic transfer from L2 to L3. The present study presents counter-evidence to this hypothesis from two groups of learners with different L1s and L2s acquiring Swedish or Dutch as L3. The evidence clearly indicates that syntactic structures are more easily transferred from L2 than from L1 in the initial state of L3 acquisition. The two groups behave significantly differently as to the placement of negation, a difference that can be attributed to the L2 knowledge of the learners in interaction with the typological relationship between the L2 and the L3.

scholarly journals PERAN BAHASA INGGRIS SEBAGAI BAHASA KEDUA DALAM PEMEROLEHAN BAHASA INDONESIA SEBAGAI BAHASA KETIGA

Paramasastra ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 4 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Abdul Kholiq
Keyword(s):  
Second Language ◽  
Language Acquisition ◽  
Sentence Production ◽  
Research Subject ◽  
Third Language ◽  
Third Language Acquisition ◽  
L3 Acquisition ◽  
Cross Language ◽  
Language Influence

Cross language influence in third language (L3) acquisition is related to the first (L1) and second language (L2) acquisition. Cross-language influence in third language acquisition studies can be analyzed from the first and second language role in the third language acquisition. Each acquisition Indonesian language as L3 is always English as L2 so that the role of English in acquiring Indonesian as B3 be worth studying. It is a qualitative approach based research. This study focuses on (1) the role of English of articulation and (2) the role of English as the provider acquiring vocabulary in Indonesian as L3. Data used in this research is the conversation conducted by the researcher and research subject; and sentence production based on picture by the research subject. Data analysis result finds 1) the role of English as an addition to the mastery of the sound that is not owned B1 of pemeroleh Indonesian as L3 and English influence language sounds in pronunciation Indonesian, and 2) The role of English as a provider of vocabulary in language acquisition Indonesia as B3 is as a language bridge in language acquisition Indonesia if the Indonesian pemeroleh not master words in Indonesian. 

L2 activation and blending in third language acquisition: Evidence of crosslinguistic influence from the L2 in a longitudinal study on the acquisition of L3 English

2014 ◽  
Vol 18 (2) ◽  
pp. 252-269 ◽  
Author(s):  
LAURA SÁNCHEZ
Keyword(s):  
Longitudinal Study ◽  
Language Acquisition ◽  
Linguistic Knowledge ◽  
Third Language ◽  
Third Language Acquisition ◽  
Source Language ◽  
L3 Acquisition ◽  
Research Questions ◽  
Crosslinguistic Influence

This paper reports the findings of a four-year longitudinal study that examined the role of prior linguistic knowledge on the written L3 production of 93 Spanish/Catalan learners. Two research questions guided the study: the first asked whether a background language (L1s Spanish/Catalan, L2 German) would activate in parallel with L3 English during word construction attempts involving verbal forms, and if so, which would be the source language of blending. The second addressed the progressive readjustments of L2 activation and blending in the course of the first 200 hours of instruction. The elicitation technique was a written narrative based on a story telling task. Data were collected first when the learners were on average 9.9 years old (T1), and again at the ages of 10.9 (T2), 11.9 (T3) and 12.9 (T4). The focus of analysis was on word construction attempts that involved verbal forms. The results suggest that a background language, the L2, did indeed activate, especially at early stages of L3 acquisition.

PROCESSABILITY APPROACHES TO RECEPTIVE THIRD LANGUAGE ACQUISITION: IMPLICATIONS FOR MULTILINGUAL CLASSROOMS

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Helen Forsyth ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Language Acquisition ◽  
Language Learning ◽  
Primary Schools ◽  
Second Language Learning ◽  
Qualitative Difference ◽  
Scaling Analysis ◽  
Syntactic Structures ◽  
Third Language ◽  
Third Language Acquisition ◽  
Developmental Readiness

Existing research indicates a qualitative difference between Second Language Learning and Third Language Acquisition, and certain psycholinguistic and developmental aspects to multilingual learners merit investigation. The present paper examines stages in receptive learner acquisition of English as a Third Language at Italian-medium primary schools in South Tyrol in Italy employing a picture selection task and implicational scaling analysis. It highlights the role that processing approaches to acquisition proposing constraints on developmental readiness and cross-linguistic influence may play for the emergence of receptive competence in morpho-syntactic structures.

scholarly journals Third language acquisition: why it is interesting to generative linguists

2007 ◽  
Vol 23 (1) ◽  
pp. 95-114 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yan-kit Ingrid Leung
Keyword(s):  
Second Language ◽  
Second Language Acquisition ◽  
Language Acquisition ◽  
Present Article ◽  
Universal Grammar ◽  
Lexical Acquisition ◽  
Future Directions ◽  
Third Language ◽  
Third Language Acquisition ◽  
L3 Acquisition

The present article reviews three collections of papers edited by Cenoz and colleagues on the topic of third language (L3) acquisition from perspectives including psycholinguistics, sociolinguistics and education. Our focus is on psycholinguistics, in particular, lexical acquisition studies, and with particular reference to two central notions in the study of L3, namely, language-selectiveness and cross-linguistic influence. The article also discusses expansion of the study of L3 acquisition into the Universal Grammar/Second Language Acquisition (UG/SLA) paradigm, and closes by looking at future directions for the L3 field.

Definiteness constraint on subjects in L2 and L3 Mandarin grammars Empirical evidence concerning the source of transfer in L3 acquisition

2021 ◽  
Vol 3 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Jingting Xiang ◽  
Boping Yuan
Keyword(s):  
Second Language ◽  
Language Acquisition ◽  
Empirical Study ◽  
Empirical Evidence ◽  
First Language ◽  
Language Attrition ◽  
Third Language ◽  
Third Language Acquisition ◽  
L3 Acquisition ◽  
First Language Attrition

Abstract Recent research on third language acquisition has been focusing on identifying the source of transfer in third language (L3) acquisition. In this article, we report on an empirical study of a less-studied language combination of Mandarin, Cantonese and English, which examines how speakers of Mandarin as a first, second and third language process Mandarin indefinite and definite subjects. Our data reveals that both typologically and structurally similar and less similar languages are available for transfer in third language acquisition, thus such transfer can be facilitative as well as detrimental. We also find that the frequency and length of exposure to the second language and the vulnerability of the property under investigation may cause first language attrition, which could also influence third language acquisition.

L3 acquisition of German adjectival inflection: A generative account

2010 ◽  
Vol 27 (1) ◽  
pp. 83-105 ◽  
Author(s):  
Carol Jaensch
Keyword(s):  
Language Acquisition ◽  
Language Learners ◽  
Third Language ◽  
Third Language Acquisition ◽  
Positive Effects ◽  
L3 Acquisition ◽  
Adjectival Inflection ◽  
And Gender ◽  
Grammatical Number ◽  
Syntactic Properties

Studies testing the knowledge of syntactic properties have resulted in two potentially contrasting proposals in relation to third language acquisition (TLA); the Cumulative Enhancement Model (Flynn et al., 2004), which proposes that previously learned languages will positively affect the acquisition of a third language (L3); and the ‘second language (L2) status factor’ hypothesis (Bardel and Falk, 2007), which proposes that the primacy of the L2 can block the potential positive effects that may be transferable from the first language (L1). This article attempts to extend these hypotheses to the domain of morphosyntax, in relation to the TLA of the properties of grammatical number and gender concord marking on German attributive adjectives; these properties not present in the L1 of Japanese, or the L2 of English. Two further factors are of interest in the current study; first, the performance of the learners according to their L3 and their L2 proficiency levels, a variable not discussed in the above-mentioned studies; and, second, the role that the type of task has on the performance of these learners. Three groups of Japanese native speakers (matched for proficiency within each German group), but with differing English proficiencies, completed a carefully balanced gap-filling task, together with two oral elicitation tasks in the form of games; both of these elicited tokens of adjectival inflection. Initial results offer partial support for weaker versions of the two hypotheses mentioned above. However, neither of the L3 models tested can fully account for the results obtained, which are more consistent with a feature-based account of the organization of grammar in the domain of morphosyntax, such as that of Distributed Morphology (DM) (Halle and Marantz, 1993). DM is a model for language acquisition which — coupled with a view that the Subset Principle proposed by this account is not observed by non-primary language learners — has recently been proposed to explain the optionality observed in L2 learners’ production (Hawkins et al., 2006). The data presented here suggest that it could be extended to L3 learners’ production.

In defense of ‘copying and restructuring’

2020 ◽  
pp. 026765832097583
Author(s):  
Bonnie D Schwartz ◽  
Rex A Sprouse
Keyword(s):  
Second Language ◽  
Language Acquisition ◽  
Large Body ◽  
L2 Acquisition ◽  
Third Language ◽  
L3 Acquisition ◽  
Nonnative Language ◽  
Access Model

In her keynote article advocating the Linguistic Proximity Model for third language (L3) acquisition, Westergaard (2019) presents several arguments against ‘copying and restructuring’ in nonnative language acquisition, mechanisms central to Schwartz and Sprouse’s (1996) Full Transfer/Full Access model of second language (L2) acquisition. In this commentary, we seek to counter her arguments and also show that the results of a large body of studies on nonnative language acquisition are explained only by ‘copying and restructuring’.

Multilingual acquisition property by property: A view from a wider perspective

2020 ◽  
pp. 026765832093516
Author(s):  
Magdalena Wrembel
Keyword(s):  
Second Language ◽  
Language Acquisition ◽  
Research Data ◽  
Property A ◽  
Third Language ◽  
Third Language Acquisition ◽  
Language Research ◽  
Interesting Contribution ◽  
Methodological Refinement

This commentary discusses the recent keynote article in Second Language Research by Westergaard (2019), which is an interesting contribution to the field of language acquisition and multilingualism, especially because it attempts to provide a wider perspective by embracing first, second and third language acquisition. I address major claims put forward by Westergaard, to support them with my own research data from the domain of phonology as well as to raise some questions as to potential limitations of the approach, and to point to avenues for future theoretical and methodological refinement.

L2 Transfer in l3 Acquisition and Use

2000 ◽  
Vol 63 ◽  
pp. 83-91
Author(s):  
Silvia Vega
Keyword(s):  
Second Language ◽  
Native Speakers ◽  
Retrospective Data ◽  
Third Language ◽  
L3 Acquisition ◽  
Facilitative Role ◽  
Lexical Transfer

This study investigates the effect of the language learner's 'psychotypology', i.e. per-ception of language distance, on the extent to which he or she transfers from a second language (L2) to a third language (L3). Three native speakers of Dutch with additional knowledge of English were interviewed in their L3 French. Subsequently, retrospective comments were elicited. The French oral data was analysed for lexical transfer errors, and by means of the retrospective data lexical transfer 'successes' were also identified. It was found that L2 English outweighed LI Dutch as a transfer source. Considering the formal similarities between the English and French lexicons, this result supports the importance of a psychotypology factor to L2 transfer which was further confirmed by the retro-spective data. The incidence of transfer successes from L2 English could further point to a facilitative role of the psychotypology factor.

Turtles all the way down: Micro-cues and piecemeal transfer in L3 phonology and syntax

2020 ◽  
pp. 026765832094103
Author(s):  
John Archibald
Keyword(s):  
Second Language ◽  
Language Acquisition ◽  
First Language ◽  
Theoretical Models ◽  
Third Language ◽  
Third Language Acquisition ◽  
The One ◽  
Crosslinguistic Influence ◽  
The Way

There are several theories which tackle predicting the source of third language (L3) crosslinguistic influence. The two orthogonal questions that arise are which language is most likely to influence the L3 and whether the influence will be wholesale or piecemeal (property-by-property). To my mind, Westergaard’s Linguistic Proximity Model (LPM) is preferable to other theoretical models (say Rothman’s Typological Primacy Model) insofar as it is consistent with many aspects of L2/L3 phonological learnability that I am familiar with. Westergaard proposes a structure-based piecemeal approach to the explanation of third language acquisition (L3A). The model is driven by parsing and dictates that the first language (L1) or second language (L2) structure which is hypothesized to be most similar to the L3 structure will be the one to transfer.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document