L1 variation in object pronominalisation, and the import of pragmatics

Probus ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 31 (2) ◽  
pp. 299-322
Author(s):  
Anna Gavarró
Keyword(s):  
Language Acquisition ◽  
First Language ◽  
Alternative Analysis ◽  
Null Objects ◽  
Object Clitics ◽  
Third Person ◽  
Pragmatic Account ◽  
Language And Cognition ◽  
Referential Expressions ◽  
Crosslinguistic Influence

Abstract Much work on referential expressions in monolingual and bilingual acquisition rests on the assumption that early grammars licence null objects even when they are not possible in the corresponding target grammar, in virtue of discourse-pragmatic licencing. This proposal has been made mainly with reference to third person object pronominalisation. Less attention has been given to other pronouns. Here, I show how the pragmatic account of third person object pronouns (along the lines of Serratrice et al. [2004, Crosslinguistic influence in the syntax-pragmatics interface: Subjects and objects in English-Italian bilingual and monolingual acquisition. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition 7(3). 182–205], in the spirit of Hulk and Müller [2000, Bilingual first language acquisition at the interface between syntax and pragmatics. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition 3(3). 227–244], Müller and Hulk [2001, Crosslinguistic influence in bilingual language acquisition: Italian and French as recipient languages. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition 4(1). 1–21]) does not extend to clitics instantiating other person specifications or other grammatical functions. I present an alternative analysis, in terms of the Unique Checking Constraint (Wexler [1998, Very early parameter setting and the unique checking constraint: A new explanation for the optional infinitive stage. Lingua 106. 23–79]) that offers a generalisation over other clitics, in particular indirect object clitics and first person object clitics, which are generally preserved in child grammar – as witnessed by two experiments run on Catalan L1 reported here.

Modality and Mood in First Language Acquisition

2015 ◽  
Author(s):  
Maya Hickmann ◽  
Dominique Bassano
Keyword(s):  
Language Acquisition ◽  
Developmental Process ◽  
First Language ◽  
Epistemic Modality ◽  
Linguistic Variation ◽  
First Language Acquisition ◽  
Acquisition Sequence ◽  
Phases Of Development ◽  
Language And Cognition

This chapter aims to provide a large overview of research focusing on the development of modality and mood during first language acquisition. This overview synthesizes results concerning both early and later phases of development, within and across a large number of languages, and including some more peripheral categories, such as evidentials and tense–aspect markings. Results recurrently show the earlier acquisition of agent-oriented modality as compared to epistemic modality. However, cross-linguistic variation has raised some questions about this acquisition sequence, suggesting that language-specific properties may partially impact timing during acquisition. In addition, findings about later phases show a long developmental process whereby children gradually come to master complex semantic and pragmatic modal distinctions. The discussion highlights the contribution of these conclusions to current theoretical debates, such as the role of input factors and the relation between language and cognition during ontogenesis.

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.

PROCEEDINGS OF THE GRONINGEN ASSEMBLY ON LANGUAGE ACQUISITION.Charlotte Koster and Frank Wijnen (Eds.). Groningen, The Netherlands: Centre for Language and Cognition Groningen, 1996. Pp. 389.

1997 ◽  
Vol 19 (4) ◽  
pp. 519-520
Author(s):  
Robert Yates
Keyword(s):  
Language Acquisition ◽  
Language Learners ◽  
First Language ◽  
The Other ◽  
First Language Acquisition ◽  
Experimental Setting ◽  
Lively Discussion ◽  
Socially Constructed ◽  
Verb Forms ◽  
Language And Cognition

This volume contains 34 papers presented at the Groningen Assembly on Language Acquisition in September 1995. According to the editors, the conference was designed to promote “a lively discussion about the merits and constraints of different approaches to language acquisition.” Not surprisingly, in a conference that explicitly mentions it is continuing in the tradition of GALA 1993, Generative Approaches to Language Acquisition, 23 of the papers in one way or the other deal with the innate properties of language and their status in language acquisition, whereas 7 papers have a connectionist perspective. Only 2 of the connectionist papers provide data from language learners. Two papers describe aspects of first language acquisition without an obvious theoretical allegiance. Only 1 paper considers how children make use of negative input provided in an experimental setting for learning about irregular verb forms. There is not a single paper on how interaction with caregivers influences language acquisition or how language is socially constructed.

Bilingual first language acquisition at the interface between syntax and pragmatics

2008 ◽  
Vol 8 ◽  
pp. 52-78
Author(s):  
Natascha Müller
Keyword(s):  
Computational Complexity ◽  
Language Acquisition ◽  
Language Contact ◽  
Complex Analysis ◽  
First Language ◽  
Romance Languages ◽  
First Language Acquisition ◽  
Language Fluency ◽  
Language Mixing ◽  
Crosslinguistic Influence

The present article provides an overview of some recent research in bilingual first language acquisition with special reference to Romance languages. It addresses two language contact phenomena, language mixing at the lexical level and crosslinguistic influence at the syntactic level. For both contact phenomena, there is evidence that they are unrelated to language dominance (as measured in terms of MLU). Language mixing is negatively correlated with the number of utterances per minute, a measure for language fluency. Cross-linguistic influence at the syntactic level is due to computational complexity which is caused for example by the invasive interplay of pragmatics and syntax. This kind of interplay will be discussed on the basis of the presence or absence of the null-subject property, comparing Italian and German, and by studying the presence or absence of object clitics, comparing French and German. Since cross-linguistic influence affects bilingual individuals to different degrees (sometimes referred to as individual variation), we discuss the assumption that the degree to which the influence manifests itself differs as a function of fluency (measured in words produced per minute). The more fluent the child is in the language with the computationally complex analysis, the less the effect of cross-linguistic influence. In sum, the language which exhibits influence is determined by computational complexity as defined, for example, by the invasive interplay between pragmatics and syntax. The degree of manifestation of the influence depends on fluency in the computationally complex language.

EXPLORING CROSSLINGUISTIC INFLUENCE IN GENDER MARKING IN SPANISH

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-22
Author(s):  
Aarnes Gudmestad ◽  
Amanda Edmonds
Keyword(s):  
Second Language Acquisition ◽  
Language Acquisition ◽  
Language Development ◽  
First Language ◽  
Methodological Framework ◽  
L1 Influence ◽  
Quantitative Analyses ◽  
Crosslinguistic Influence ◽  
Cross Language

Abstract In the current study, we examined the role of first-language (L1) influence on the additional-language development of grammatical gender marking in Spanish. The participants were L1 speakers of English or French (N = 215), who were learning Spanish and who were at three instructional levels. The data came from their use of gender marking in noun-modifier pairs in an argumentative essay. We adopted the unified methodological framework developed by Scott Jarvis and we applied insights from variationist second language acquisition to contribute to the discussion about whether learners’ L1 impacts variability in targetlike gender marking in additional-language Spanish. Specifically, we designed our study to investigate four types of evidence that Jarvis identified (intragroup homogeneity, intergroup heterogeneity, cross-language congruity, and intralingual contrasts), and we used variationist methods to account for other factors that are known to impact variable use of gender marking. The quantitative analyses supported each type of evidence, consequently demonstrating that these learners’ L1 influenced their variable use of gender marking in Spanish. We concluded by reflecting on the contributions that the current study has made to the understanding of gender marking in additional-language Spanish and to research on L1 influence more generally.

Object clitic use and intuition in the Spanish of heritage speakers from Brazil

2021 ◽  
pp. 026765832110176
Author(s):  
Julio César López Otero ◽  
Alejandro Cuza ◽  
Jian Jiao
Keyword(s):  
Language Acquisition ◽  
Heritage Language ◽  
Language Use ◽  
Semantic Features ◽  
Heritage Speakers ◽  
Null Objects ◽  
Heritage Language Acquisition ◽  
Object Clitics ◽  
Left Dislocation ◽  
Spanish Heritage Speakers

The present study examines the production and intuition of Spanish clitics in clitic left dislocation (CLLD) structures among 26 Spanish heritage speakers (HSs) born and raised in Brazil. We tested clitic production and intuition in contexts in which Spanish clitics vary as a function of the semantic features of the object that they refer to. Results showed overextension of object clitics into contexts in which null objects were expected. Furthermore, we found higher levels of overextension among the HSs with lower patterns of heritage language use. Results are discussed along the lines of the model of heritage language acquisition and maintenance.

Development of object clitics in child L2 French

2012 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
pp. 140-162 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jonas Granfeldt
Keyword(s):  
Second Language Acquisition ◽  
Language Acquisition ◽  
First Language ◽  
Bilingual Children ◽  
L2 Acquisition ◽  
Developmental Sequences ◽  
Object Clitics ◽  
L2 Learners ◽  
L2 Development ◽  
Specific Proposal

It has been argued that the study of child L2 development can inform different maturational accounts of language acquisition. One such specific proposal was put forward by Meisel (2008), arguing for a cut-off point for monolingual or bilingual first language acquisition — (2)L1 — type of development at 3–4 years. The paper analyses the longitudinal development of object clitics in child L2 French (L1 Swedish) and compares the developmental sequence in child L2 learners (n = 7) with different Ages of Onset of Acquisition (AoA) (from 3;0 to 6;5) to the adult L2 sequence that was found in previous studies (Granfeldt & Schlyter 2004). The study also includes age-matched simultaneous bilingual children (n = 3) and monolingual controls (n = 5). The results show that some of the child L2 learners with an AoA over 4 years display structures that are typical of adult L2 acquisition, whereas these structures were not found in the simultaneous bilingual children or in the child second language acquisition (cL2) children with an AoA under 4 years. It is suggested that differences in developmental sequences are due to a combination of AoA and the level of L1 linguistic development at the onset of L2 acquisition.

Crosslinguistic influence at the syntax–pragmatics interface: Subjects and objects in English–Italian bilingual and monolingual acquisition

2004 ◽  
Vol 7 (3) ◽  
pp. 183-205 ◽  
Author(s):  
LUDOVICA SERRATRICE ◽  
ANTONELLA SORACE ◽  
SANDRA PAOLI
Keyword(s):  
Language Acquisition ◽  
First Language ◽  
Noun Phrases ◽  
First Language Acquisition ◽  
Bilingual Child ◽  
Null Subject ◽  
Object Use ◽  
Syntactic Function ◽  
Discourse Pragmatics ◽  
Crosslinguistic Influence

The findings from a number of recent studies indicate that, even in cases of successful bilingual first language acquisition, the possibility remains of a certain degree of crosslinguistic influence when the choice between syntactic options is affected by discourse pragmatics. In this study we focussed on the use of referring expressions, prime candidates to test the interaction between syntax and pragmatics, and we compared the distribution of subjects and objects in the Italian and English of a bilingual child (1;10–4;6) with that of two groups of MLUw-matched monolinguals. All arguments were coded for syntactic function and for a number of discourse pragmatic features predicted to affect their realisation. Our main prediction was that unidirectional crosslinguistic influence might occur for the English–Italian bilingual child with respect to pronominal subject and object use after the instantiation of the C system. Specifically we predicted that in Italian the bilingual child might use overt pronominal subjects in contexts where monolinguals would use a null subject, and that he might use postverbal strong object pronouns in Italian instead of preverbal weak pronominal clitics. Conversely, we did not expect the overall proportion of overt objects, whether noun phrases or pronouns, to vary crosslinguistically as objects are always obligatorily overt in both languages regardless of discourse pragmatics. Our results confirmed these predictions, and corroborated the argument that crosslinguistic influence may occur in bilingual first language acquisition in specific contexts in which syntax and pragmatics interact.

SLA AND FIRST LANGUAGE ACQUISITION

1999 ◽  
Vol 19 ◽  
pp. 3-21 ◽  
Author(s):  
Susan Foster–Cohen
Keyword(s):  
Second Language ◽  
Second Language Acquisition ◽  
Language Acquisition ◽  
First Language ◽  
First Language Acquisition ◽  
Cambridge University ◽  
Key Indicator ◽  
Language Studies ◽  
Language And Cognition ◽  
Bilingual Individual

In a brief article published some years ago (Foster-Cohen 1993), I suggested that fruitful collaboration between the fields of first and second language acquisition was underexploited. I also suggested that second language researchers were, in general, better at keeping themselves informed of developments in first language studies than first language researchers were at paying attention to second language issues. I think it fair to say that there are some signs this is changing. One is the now established existence of the journal Language Acquisition (Lawrence Erlbaum Associates), started in 1990, which publishes work in both first and second language acquisition with a view to understanding the nature of language acquisition in general. Its preference for papers that address issues in formal linguistic theory complements well Applied Psycholinguistics (Cambridge University Press), which has always published material relevant to both fields, but which also goes well beyond acquisition issues in its brief. A second factor seems to be a gentle but insistent re-examination of issues in bilingualism and a growing awareness that bilingual studies, second language studies, and first language studies overlap in important ways in the study of the bilingual individual. One key indicator of this shift is the appearance of a new journal Bilingualism: Language and Cognition (Cambridge University Press).

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document