scholarly journals A systematic review of transfer studies in third language acquisition

2018 ◽  
Vol 36 (1) ◽  
pp. 31-64 ◽  
Author(s):  
Eloi Puig-Mayenco ◽  
Jorge González Alonso ◽  
Jason Rothman
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
First Language ◽  
Prima Facie ◽  
Transfer Data ◽  
Third Language ◽  
Third Language Acquisition ◽  
L3 Acquisition ◽  
Different Types ◽  
Methodological Considerations ◽  
Present Systematic Review

The present systematic review examines what factors determine when, how and to what extent previous linguistic experience (from the first language, second language or both languages) affects the initial stages and beyond of adult third language (L3) acquisition. In doing so, we address what a bird’s eye view of the data tells us regarding competing theoretical accounts of L3 morphosyntactic transfer. Data couple together to suggest that some factors are more influential than others. As discussed, the systematic review transcends the field of adult multilingualism precisely because of what it reveals, as a prima facie example in behavioral research, in terms of how different types of methodological considerations impact the way data are interpreted to support or not particular claims.

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.

Commitment in L3 relationships: Sacred vows or polyamory?

2021 ◽  
pp. 026765832098804
Author(s):  
David Stringer
Keyword(s):  
Second Language ◽  
First Language ◽  
Acquisition Process ◽  
Third Language ◽  
L3 Acquisition ◽  
Acquisition Device ◽  
Crosslinguistic Influence ◽  
The Mind ◽  
N Acquisition ◽  
Full Copy

Westergaard (2019) presents an updated account of the Linguistic Proximity Model and the micro-cue approach to the parser as an acquisition device. The property-by-property view of transfer inherent in this approach contrasts with other influential models that assume that third language (L3) acquisition involves the creation of a full copy of only one previously existing language in the mind. In this commentary, I review Westergaard’s proposal that first language (L1), second language (L2), and L3 acquisition proceed on the basis of incremental, conservative learning and her view of the parser as the engine of the acquisition process. I then provide several arguments in support of her position that crosslinguistic influence in L n acquisition may flow from any previously acquired language.

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. 

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.

Acquisition of attributive adjectives and noun adjuncts by L3 learners of French and German: further evidence for the typological primacy model (TPM)

2021 ◽  
Vol 0 (0) ◽  
Author(s):  
Maryam Jamali ◽  
Ali Akbar Jabbari ◽  
Mohammad Hasan Razmi
Keyword(s):  
Task Performance ◽  
First Language ◽  
Facilitative Effect ◽  
Third Language ◽  
L3 Acquisition ◽  
Proficiency Level ◽  
Attributive Adjective ◽  
French Group ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Attributive Adjectives

Abstract This investigation explored the impact of prior acquired languages in the acquisition of third language (L3) at initial stages. The required data were gathered via two groups of L3 learners: 27 learners of L3 French and 26 learners of L3 German during a grammaticality judgement task (GJT) and an element rearrangement task (ERT) to test the placement of noun adjuncts and attributive adjectives. Both groups had acquired Persian as the first language and English as the second language. The participants were assigned to two L2 proficiency level groups (intermediate and advanced). The findings revealed that L3 German participants outperformed L3 French learners in the attributive adjective placement in both tasks as well as the noun adjunct in the GJT task. The L3 groups showed similar levels of performance in the ERT noun adjunct task. Additionally, the effect of L2 level of proficiency was not significant. The results also indicated that the typological similarity of L2 English to German rather than French rendered a facilitative effect on task performance in the L3 German group and a non-facilitative effect in the L3 French group. This study provides evidence for the Typological Primacy Model (TPM) of L3 acquisition suggesting that L3 learners are influenced by the typological similarities of the previous languages they have already acquired.

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.

Source(s) of syntactic cross-linguistic influence (CLI): The case of L3 acquisition of English possessives by Mazandarani–Persian bilinguals

2015 ◽  
Vol 32 (2) ◽  
pp. 225-245 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nader Fallah ◽  
Ali Akbar Jabbari ◽  
Ali Mohammad Fazilatfar
Keyword(s):  
Second Language ◽  
First Language ◽  
Judgment Task ◽  
Third Language ◽  
The Third ◽  
Grammaticality Judgment ◽  
L3 Acquisition

This study investigates the role of previously acquired linguistic systems, Mazandarani and Persian, in the acquisition of third language (L3) English at the initial stages. The data have been obtained from 31 students (age 13–14 years), testing the placement of attributive possessives in a grammaticality judgment task, an element rearrangement task and an elicited oral imitation task. The participants consist of three groups: The first two groups have Mazandarani as the first language (L1) and Persian as the second language (L2), but differ from each other with respect to the language of communication, Mazandarani and Persian, respectively. The third group has Persian as the L1 and Mazandarani as the L2, with Persian as the language of communication. English and Mazandarani pattern similarly in the target structures. That is to say, possessors precede possessed nouns and possessive adjectives come before nouns. In contrast, in Persian, possessives occur post-nominally. The results of this study reveal that none of the proposals tested (e.g. the L1 Factor, Hermas, 2010, 2014a, 2014b; the L2 Status Factor, Bardel and Falk, 2007; Falk and Bardel, 2011; the Cumulative Enhancement Model (CEM), Flynn et al., 2004; the Typological Proximity Model (TPM), Rothman, 2010, 2011, 2013, 2015) could account for the results obtained. This study provides support that at the initial stages of L3 acquisition, syntactic transfer originates from the language of communication, irrespective of order of acquisition.

Transfer at the initial stages of L3 Brazilian Portuguese: A look at three groups of English/Spanish bilinguals

2014 ◽  
Vol 18 (2) ◽  
pp. 191-207 ◽  
Author(s):  
DAVID GIANCASPRO ◽  
BECKY HALLORAN ◽  
MICHAEL IVERSON
Keyword(s):  
First Language ◽  
Brazilian Portuguese ◽  
Mirror Image ◽  
Linguistic Features ◽  
Third Language ◽  
Heritage Speaker ◽  
L3 Acquisition ◽  
Object Marking ◽  
L1 English ◽  
Spanish Bilinguals

This study examines three formal linguistic acquisition models of third language (L3) acquisition in the context of Brazilian Portuguese (BP), specifically examining Differential Object Marking (DOM). The main goal is to determine which of the models is best able to predict and explain syntactic transfer in three experimental groups: mirror-image groups of first/second language (L1/L2) English/Spanish bilinguals (i) L1 English/L2 Spanish and (ii) L1 Spanish/L2 English, and (iii) heritage Spanish/English bilinguals. The data provide evidence to support the Typological Primacy Model (Rothman, 2010, 2011, 2013), which predicts Spanish transfer irrespective of its status as an L1, L2 or bilingual first language (2L1). Additionally, the heritage speaker and L1 English group results, taken together, provide evidence for Iverson's (2009) claim that comparing such populations adds independent supportive evidence that the acquisition of linguistic features or properties in an L2 acquired past puberty is not subject to a maturational critical period.

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.

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.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document