The role of ambiguity in second language change: the case of Mozambican African Portuguese

2002 ◽  
Vol 18 (4) ◽  
pp. 325-347 ◽  
Author(s):  
Perpétua Gonçalves
Keyword(s):  
Second Language ◽  
Case Studies ◽  
Language Change ◽  
First Language ◽  
Point Of View ◽  
L2 Acquisition ◽  
Bantu Languages ◽  
European Norm ◽  
L1 Acquisition ◽  
Parameter Values

In this article, my point of departure is that language change is driven by acquisition, and I argue that the triggers for establishing the properties of language-specific grammars differ according to whether first language (L1) or second language (L2) acquisition is involved. The reason for this is that in L2 acquisition evidence about the target grammar may be ambiguous in ways which do not occur in L1 acquisition. To illustrate the argument, I present two case studies of Mozambican African Portuguese, a nonnative variety of Portuguese acquired during childhood by L1 speakers of Bantu languages. These case studies show that strings generated by the grammar of European Portuguese may trigger ‘wrong/new’ parameter values which, although nonexistent in the original grammatical system, are perfectly legitimate from the point of view of the speakers’ L1 grammars. In both cases, although the new parameter settings (NPSs) are not convergent with the target grammar, resetting is blocked because the new parameter values successfully analyse the input. The nonresetting of the ‘wrong/new’ parameter values in the direction of the target European norm can be attributed to the social context of language acquisition, where the original European model is considerably diluted, and the surface effects they set off appear to be denser since the L2 speakers are in the majority.

scholarly journals Understanding individual variation in levels of second language attainment through the lens of critical period mechanisms

2018 ◽  
Vol 21 (5) ◽  
pp. 930-931 ◽  
Author(s):  
REBECCA REH ◽  
MARIA ARREDONDO ◽  
JANET F. WERKER
Keyword(s):  
Second Language ◽  
Category Learning ◽  
Critical Period ◽  
First Language ◽  
Visual Language ◽  
Phonetic Category ◽  
Critical Periods ◽  
L2 Acquisition ◽  
Language Discrimination ◽  
L1 Acquisition

Mayberry and Kluender (2017) present an important and compelling argument that in order to understand critical periods (CPs) in language acquisition, it is essential to disentangle studies of late first language (L1) acquisition from those of second language (L2) acquisition. Their primary thesis is that timely exposure to an L1 is crucial for establishing language circuitry, thus providing a foundation on which an L2 can build. They note that while there is considerable evidence of interference from the L1 on acquisition of the L2 – especially in late L2 learners (as in our work on cascading influences on phonetic category learning and visual language discrimination, e.g., Werker & Hensch, 2015 and Weikum, Vouloumanos, Navarra, Soto-Faraco, Sebastián-Gallés & Werker, 2013, respectively) – there are other examples of ways in which the L1 can scaffold L2 acquisition. Mayberry and Kluender take this evidence of L1 scaffolding L2 as undermining the value of considering CPs as useful in understanding L2 acquisition.

scholarly journals When timing is everything: Age of first-language acquisition effects on second-language learning

2007 ◽  
Vol 28 (3) ◽  
pp. 537-549 ◽  
Author(s):  
RACHEL I. MAYBERRY
Keyword(s):  
Second Language ◽  
Language Learning ◽  
First Language ◽  
L2 Acquisition ◽  
Linguistic Structure ◽  
Specific Effects ◽  
Sensory Motor ◽  
L1 Acquisition ◽  
L1 And L2 ◽  
Motor Modality

The present paper summarizes three experiments that investigate the effects of age of acquisition on first-language (L1) acquisition in relation to second-language (L2) outcome. The experiments use the unique acquisition situations of childhood deafness and sign language. The key factors controlled across the studies are age of L1 acquisition, the sensory–motor modality of the language, and level of linguistic structure. Findings consistent across the studies show age of L1 acquisition to be a determining factor in the success of both L1 and L2 acquisition. Sensory–motor modality shows no general or specific effects. It is of importance that the effects of age of L1 acquisition on both L1 and L2 outcome are apparent across levels of linguistic structure, namely, syntax, phonology, and the lexicon. The results demonstrate that L1 acquisition bestows not only facility with the linguistic structure of the L1, but also the ability to learn linguistic structure in the L2.

Child second language acquisition from a generative perspective

2013 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
pp. 26-47 ◽  
Author(s):  
Belma Haznedar
Keyword(s):  
Second Language ◽  
Second Language Acquisition ◽  
Language Acquisition ◽  
First Language ◽  
Morphological Variability ◽  
Current Work ◽  
L2 Acquisition ◽  
Functional Architecture ◽  
L1 Influence ◽  
L1 Acquisition

This chapter reviews current work on child second language acquisition from a generative perspective. The primary goal is to identify characteristics of child L2 acquisition in relation to child first language (L1) acquisition and adult second language (L2) acquisition and to discuss its contribution to these sister fields both in typical and atypical domains. The chapter is organized into three sections, covering L1 influence in child L2 acquisition, the acquisition of functional architecture in child L2 acquisition, and the issue of morphological variability. Also included in the last section are the relatively new and fast developing areas of research in atypical child L2 acquisition research.

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.

When-questions in second language acquisition

2000 ◽  
Vol 16 (1) ◽  
pp. 44-76 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hyeson Park
Keyword(s):  
Second Language ◽  
Second Language Acquisition ◽  
Reading First ◽  
First Language ◽  
Cognitive Factors ◽  
Developmental Sequence ◽  
L2 Acquisition ◽  
Wh Questions ◽  
English Speaking ◽  
L1 Acquisition

It has been observed that when-questions are one of the last wh-questions produced by children learning English either as a first language (L1) or as a second language (L2). Explanations proposed for the late appearance of when-questions in L1 acquisition have been mostly based on cognitive factors. However, the cognition-based approach to when-questions faces problems in explaining L2 acquisition data, which show that L2 children who are cognitively more mature than L1 children follow the same developmental sequence. In this paper, I propose a possible explanation based on internal linguistic factors. According to Enç (1987), tense is a referential expression and temporal adverbials are antecedents of tense. I develop Enç's theory further and propose that in a when-question, tense is a bound variable, which is bound by the quantificational interrogative when. Thus, in order to produce when-questions, children must be at a stage where they understand bound variable readings. According to Roeper and de Villiers (1991), English-speaking children learn a bound variable reading approximately after 36 months, and the learning continues through the kindergarten years. The age at which a bound variable reading first appears corresponds to the point at which when-questions begin to occur. I propose that the complexity of the interaction between the quantificational when and tense, a bound variable, causes the delayed production of when-questions in developing grammars.

First language acquisition... second language acquisition: ‘What’s Hecuba to him or he to Hecuba?’

2001 ◽  
Vol 17 (4) ◽  
pp. 329-344
Author(s):  
Susan Foster-Cohen
Keyword(s):  
Second Language ◽  
Second Language Acquisition ◽  
Language Acquisition ◽  
Research Question ◽  
First Language ◽  
Language Learner ◽  
First Language Acquisition ◽  
L2 Acquisition ◽  
L1 Acquisition ◽  
L1 And L2

Second language (L2) research appeals to first language acquisition research frequently and standardly. It is important, however, to take stock from time to time of the uses that second language acquisition (SLA) makes of its sister field. Whether we use first language (L1) research to generate or bolster the importance of a particular research question, to argue for a fundamental similarity or a fundamental difference between the two sorts of acquisition, or to offer guidance in the formulation of research paradigms, it is important that we do so with our critical eyes open.This article examines the possible and specific relationships between L1 acquisition and SLA, with the aim of showing that a number of assumptions warrant closer inspection. It begins by examining the expressions ‘first language acquisition’ and ‘second language acquisition’, suggesting that the syntactic and lexical parallelism between the two masks important issues internal to the fields involved. It then explores problems in distinguishing L1 from L2 acquisition from three different perspectives: individual language learner histories, the data, and the mechanisms proposed to account for the two types of acquisition. Finally, it takes a brief look at the sociology of L1 and L2 studies, and suggests that second language study has yet to assume fully its rightful place in the academy.

Resetting Universal Grammar parameters: evidence from Second Language Acquisition of Subjacency and the Empty Category Principle

1993 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
pp. 49-83 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sigal Uziel
Keyword(s):  
Second Language ◽  
Second Language Acquisition ◽  
Language Acquisition ◽  
Universal Grammar ◽  
First Language ◽  
Target Language ◽  
L2 Acquisition ◽  
Empty Category ◽  
Parameter Values ◽  
Category Principle

This article is concerned with whether the principles of UG are available in adult Second Language Acquisition (SLA) as in child first language acquisi tion. My hypothesis is that these principles are fully available to the L2 learner, and that the process of L2 acquisition is, in fact, a process of parameter-reassignment or new assignment in which the L2 learner resets the parameter-values of the L1 to their values in the L2. In order to test this hypothesis, I built on previous work by Martohardjono (1991) and conducted a study which examined the acquisition of two principles of UG, Subjacency and the Empty Category Principle, by native speakers of Hebrew learning English as a second language. I made a series of predictions with respect to the patterns of acquisition for various constructions in the target language, based on the assumption that L2 grammars are systems of knowledge guided by the internal logic, or 'systematicity' specified by UG. These predictions were borne out by the results of my study, leading to the conclusion that UG is indeed available in SLA. My conclusion corroborates other studies in the field which have reached similar conclusions (e.g., Flynn, 1987; White, 1988 and Martohardjono, 1991).

‘I me Mine’ The Acquisition of Dutch Pronominal Possessives by L1 Children, L2 Children and L2 Adults

2008 ◽  
Vol 155 ◽  
pp. 23-52
Author(s):  
Elma Nap-Kolhoff ◽  
Peter Broeder
Keyword(s):  
Adult Learners ◽  
Young Children ◽  
First Language ◽  
Spontaneous Speech ◽  
L2 Acquisition ◽  
Possessive Constructions ◽  
Speech Data ◽  
L2 Learners ◽  
Dutch Language ◽  
L1 Acquisition

Abstract This study compares pronominal possessive constructions in Dutch first language (L1) acquisition, second language (L2) acquisition by young children, and untutored L2 acquisition by adults. The L2 learners all have Turkish as L1. In longitudinal spontaneous speech data for four L1 learners, seven child L2 learners, and two adult learners, remarkable differences and similarities between the three learner groups were found. In some respects, the child L2 learners develop in a way that is similar to child L1 learners, for instance in the kind of overgeneralisations that they make. However, the child L2 learners also behave like adult L2 learners; i.e., in the pace of the acquisition process, the frequency and persistence of non-target constructions, and the difficulty in acquiring reduced pronouns. The similarities between the child and adult L2 learners are remarkable, because the child L2 learners were only two years old when they started learning Dutch. L2 acquisition before the age of three is often considered to be similar to L1 acquisition. The findings might be attributable to the relatively small amount of Dutch language input the L2 children received.

Case morphology and word order in second language Turkish: Evidence from Greek learners

2011 ◽  
Vol 27 (2) ◽  
pp. 173-204 ◽  
Author(s):  
Despina Papadopoulou ◽  
Spyridoula Varlokosta ◽  
Vassilios Spyropoulos ◽  
Hasan Kaili ◽  
Sophia Prokou ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Second Language ◽  
Word Order ◽  
Second Language Learners ◽  
First Language ◽  
Matching Task ◽  
L2 Acquisition ◽  
Case Morphology ◽  
L2 Development ◽  
Order Constraints ◽  
On Line

The optional use of morphology attested in second language learners has been attributed either to a representational deficit or to a ‘surface’ problem with respect to the realization of inflectional affixes. In this article we contribute to this issue by providing empirical data from the early interlanguage of Greek learners of Turkish. Three experiments have been conducted, a cloze task, a sentence picture matching task and an on-line grammaticality judgement task, in order to investigate case morphology and its interaction with word order constraints. The findings of all three experiments point towards a variable use of case morphology, which is also observed in previous studies of Turkish as a second language (L2). Moreover, they show clearly that the learners face difficulties with non-canonical word orders as well as with the interaction of word order constraints and Case. On the other hand, the learners performed well on verbal inflections. On the basis of these findings, we argue that the developmental patterns in the early stages of L2 acquisition cannot be attributed to a global lack of functional categories but rather to more localized difficulties, which seem to be related to (a) whether the features in the L2 are grammaticalized in the first language and (b) the way these features are encoded in the morphosyntax of the first language. Moreover, we claim that processing factors and the specific properties of the morphological paradigms affect L2 development.

Long-distance wh-movement and long-distance wh-movement avoidance in L2 English: Evidence from French and Bulgarian speakers

2014 ◽  
Vol 31 (2) ◽  
pp. 179-210 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nikolay Slavkov
Keyword(s):  
Second Language ◽  
Second Language Acquisition ◽  
Language Acquisition ◽  
First Language ◽  
Processing Load ◽  
Long Distance ◽  
Canadian French ◽  
Equivalent Length ◽  
Show Evidence ◽  
L1 Acquisition

This article investigates spoken productions of complex questions with long-distance wh-movement in the L2 English of speakers whose first language is (Canadian) French or Bulgarian. Long-distance wh-movement is of interest as it can be argued that it poses difficulty in acquisition due to its syntactic complexity and related high processing load. Adopting the derivational complexity hypothesis, which has so far been applied to long-distance (LD) wh-movement in L1 acquisition and child second language acquisition, I argue that adult L2 learners also show evidence that questions with LD wh-movement are often replaced by alternative utterances with lower derivational complexity. I propose that such utterances, which are sometimes of equivalent length and with similar meaning to the targeted LD wh-structures, are avoidance strategies used by the learners as an intermediate acquisition resource. That is, such strategies are used as an escape-hatch from the derivational complexity of LD wh-movement. Overall, the results of this research indicate that the link between the number and complexity of derivational steps in a given structure is a fruitful area with strong potential in the second language acquisition field.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document