Analysis of Second Language Acquisition (SLA) Speech Perception Model & the Perception of Second Language Prosody

This paper provides a critical review on the major models of speech perception in second language (L2) acquisition. It is argued that some new models, such as L2LP and ASP, have more explanatory power for L2 speech perception. However, due to the different theoretical frameworks, objectives and hypotheses in these models, it is difficult to integrate these models into one which is universally applicable. Although most of these models were proposed for accounting for the perception of L2 segments, they can also be applied in the perception of L2 prosody. When these models are used in examining L2 speech prosody, the prosodic systems of both L1 and L2 should be thoroughly investigated first.

Download Full-text

Word Prosody in Second Language Acquisition

The Oxford Handbook of Language Prosody ◽

10.1093/oxfordhb/9780198832232.013.39 ◽

2020 ◽

pp. 593-604

Author(s):

Allard Jongman ◽

Annie Tremblay

Keyword(s):

Second Language ◽

Second Language Acquisition ◽

Explanatory Power ◽

Auditory Training ◽

Lexical Tone ◽

L2 Acquisition ◽

Pitch Direction ◽

L2 Learners ◽

Word Prosody ◽

L1 And L2

The production and perception of a second language (L2) will be affected by any differences between native language (L1) and L2 lexical stress and lexical tone. This chapter first discusses L1 effects on the perception of L2 words that differ in stress, comparing the explanatory power of phonological (stress-parameter-based) and phonetic (cue-based) approaches for L2 learners’ performance in word recognition. Equally, it discusses L1 effects on the production of stress in L2 words, from both a phonological and a phonetic perspective. The discussion then moves on to the L2 acquisition of lexical tone, focusing on differences in the way native speakers and L2 learners make use of lower-level acoustic-phonetic and higher-level linguistic information, their weighting of tonal cues (pitch height and pitch direction), and the role of contextual phonetic and prosodic information. Special attention is paid to major typological differences between L1 and L2 (non-tonal vs. tonal; level tones vs. contour tones). Finally, the efficacy of short-term auditory training in the acquisition of new tonal categories is evaluated. Throughout, the chapter addresses the influence of factors such as age of acquisition and proficiency.

Download Full-text

Developmental dynamics in L1 and L2 acquisition: Processability Theory and generative entrenchment

Bilingualism Language and Cognition ◽

10.1017/s1366728998000017 ◽

1998 ◽

Vol 1 (1) ◽

pp. 1-20 ◽

Cited By ~ 26

Author(s):

MANFRED PIENEMANN

Keyword(s):

Second Language ◽

Second Language Acquisition ◽

Language Processing ◽

Universal Grammar ◽

Mathematical Concept ◽

Structural Features ◽

L2 Acquisition ◽

Generative Entrenchment ◽

Processability Theory ◽

L1 And L2

This paper has two major objectives: (1) to summarise Processability Theory, a processing-oriented approach to explaining language development and (2) to utilise this theory in the comparison of development in LI and L2 acquisition. Proponents of the Fundamental Difference Hypothesis (between L1 and L2) assume that L1 development can be explained with reference to Universal Grammar (UG) which, in their view, is inaccessible to L2 learners. Instead, they claim that a second language develops on the basis of language processing strategies.I will show that the fundamentally different developmental paths inherent in first and second language acquisition can both be explained on the basis of the same language processing mechanics (as specified in Processability Theory). I will demonstrate that the developmental differences between L1 and L2 are caused by the qualitatively different early structural hypotheses which propagate through the acquisition process. The concept of “propagation of structural features” will be viewed as “generative entrenchment,” a logical-mathematical concept, which has proved to be highly productive in examining other kinds of developmental processes.

Download Full-text

First- and Second-Language Acquisition and CILC

The Oxford Handbook of Language Contact ◽

10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199945092.013.9 ◽

2020 ◽

pp. 214-240

Author(s):

Eva Duran Eppler ◽

Gabriel Ozón

Keyword(s):

Second Language ◽

Second Language Acquisition ◽

Language Acquisition ◽

Language Contact ◽

Language Change ◽

L2 Acquisition ◽

Language Variation And Change ◽

Language Data ◽

L1 And L2

This chapter explores the contested role of L1 and L2 acquisition in contact-induced linguistic change (CILC). We first identify three factors underlying these controversies (field of research; theoretical approach; and methodological limitations/advances), before discussing two elements language change and language acquisition have in common (i.e., isolated individuals cannot accomplish either, and both have to be studied through natural language data, with its attendant high degree of variation). We go on to define key terms and concepts for the role of L1 and L2 acquisition in contact-induced language change, including first and second language acquisition (L1A and L2A), bilingual first language acquisition, language variation and change, language contact and contact-induced language change. In the main section we discuss the role of L1A and L2A in CILC, and examine different language-acquisition scenarios, in particular their potential for leading to CILC. We use these different language-acquisition types as testing grounds for the motivations behind (i.e., causes for, and triggers of) language change, and arrive at tentative conclusions about which of these language-acquisition scenarios is more likely to play a role in CILC, and why.

Download Full-text

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

Second language Research ◽

10.1177/026765830101700403 ◽

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.

Download Full-text

Linguistic universals, markedness and learnability: comparing two different approaches

Interlanguage studies bulletin (Utrecht) ◽

10.1177/026765838900500202 ◽

1989 ◽

Vol 5 (2) ◽

pp. 127-140 ◽

Cited By ~ 5

Author(s):

Lydia White

Keyword(s):

Second Language ◽

Second Language Acquisition ◽

Language Acquisition ◽

Universal Grammar ◽

The Other ◽

L2 Acquisition ◽

Subset Principle ◽

Similarities And Differences ◽

L1 And L2 ◽

Language Learnability

There are currently two different linguistically-based approaches to universals in second language acquisition, one stemming from typological universals (Greenberg, 1966) and the other from Chomskyan Universal Grammar. Associated with each approach is a concept of markedness. Typologists define markedness implicationally; current theories of language learnability define markedness in terms of the Subset Principle. Although coming from very different perspectives, these two definitions of markedness coincide in a number of predictions they make for L1 and L2 acquisition. Similarities and differences between these two approaches to markedness and acquisition are discussed in this paper.

Download Full-text

Linguistic Input and Conversational Strategies in L1 and L2

Studies in Second Language Acquisition ◽

10.1017/s0272263100000048 ◽

1980 ◽

Vol 2 (2) ◽

pp. 1-16 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

Barry McLaughlin

Keyword(s):

Second Language ◽

Second Language Acquisition ◽

Language Acquisition ◽

L2 Acquisition ◽

Linguistic Input ◽

L1 And L2 ◽

The Relationship ◽

Do So

There has been a great deal of discussion in the literature on second-language acquisition about the relationship between first-(L1) and second-language (L2) acquisition. I believe that the dust is beginning to settle and that it is now possible to move beyond this debate. I would like to do so in this paper, and examine in particular the role of linguistic input in L1 and L2 and the nature of conversational strategies in both processes.

Download Full-text

Language Ideology and Second Language Learning

ITL - International Journal of Applied Linguistics ◽

10.2143/itl.155.0.2032360 ◽

2008 ◽

Vol 155 ◽

pp. 95-115 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

Theresa McGarry

Keyword(s):

Second Language ◽

Second Language Acquisition ◽

Language Acquisition ◽

Language Learning ◽

Language Ideology ◽

Second Language Learning ◽

Classroom Practices ◽

Explanatory Power

AbstractThe increasing recognition of the concept language ideology and the corresponding increasing use of the term have not yet been matched by applications in the field of second language acquisition. However, applications of the concept in analysis of actual classroom practices have shown it to have considerable explanatory power. Greater consideration of language ideology in SLA is necessary not only to achieve greater understanding of the role of ideology in various areas but also to show connections between these areas that may yield important generalizations and to impel the application of the concept in areas where it has been neglected by highlighting its uneven treatment.

Download Full-text

Longitudinal Developments in Bilingual Second Language Acquisition and First Language Attrition of Speech: The Case of Arnold Schwarzenegger

Languages ◽

10.3390/languages6020061 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 6 (2) ◽

pp. 61

Author(s):

Lisa Kornder ◽

Ineke Mennen

Keyword(s):

Second Language ◽

Second Language Acquisition ◽

Voice Onset Time ◽

First Language ◽

Onset Time ◽

Speech Development ◽

Dynamic Interactions ◽

First Language Attrition ◽

Second Formant ◽

L1 And L2

The purpose of this investigation was to trace first (L1) and second language (L2) segmental speech development in the Austrian German–English late bilingual Arnold Schwarzenegger over a period of 40 years, which makes it the first study to examine a bilingual’s speech development over several decades in both their languages. To this end, acoustic measurements of voice onset time (VOT) durations of word-initial plosives (Study 1) and formant frequencies of the first and second formant of Austrian German and English monophthongs (Study 2) were conducted using speech samples collected from broadcast interviews. The results of Study 1 showed a merging of Schwarzenegger’s German and English voiceless plosives in his late productions as manifested in a significant lengthening of VOT duration in his German plosives, and a shortening of VOT duration in his English plosives, closer to L1 production norms. Similar findings were evidenced in Study 2, revealing that some of Schwarzenegger’s L1 and L2 vowel categories had moved closer together in the course of L2 immersion. These findings suggest that both a bilingual’s first and second language accent is likely to develop and reorganize over time due to dynamic interactions between the first and second language system.

Download Full-text

APTITUDE AND SECOND LANGUAGE ACQUISITION

Annual Review of Applied Linguistics ◽

10.1017/s0267190505000036 ◽

2005 ◽

Vol 25 ◽

pp. 46-73 ◽

Cited By ~ 121

Author(s):

Peter Robinson

Keyword(s):

Second Language ◽

Second Language Acquisition ◽

Language Acquisition ◽

Language Learning ◽

Cognitive Abilities ◽

Theoretical Frameworks ◽

Aptitude Tests ◽

Advanced Level ◽

Learning Success ◽

And Performance

Recent second language acquisition (SLA) research into the cognitive abilities implicated in implicit, incidental, and explicit learning, and in learning and performance on tasks differing in their information processing demands has prompted new theoretical frameworks for conceptualizing L2 aptitude. This research is reviewed and related to measures of abilities operationalized in existing aptitude tests, as well as to measures of abilities that are the focus of more recent research in cognitive psychology. Finally, prospects for developing aptitude tests to serve the purposes of predicting both early and advanced level language learning success are discussed in the light of the SLA findings and aptitude frameworks reviewed.

Download Full-text

Second language acquisition: Theoretical and experimental issues in contemporary research

Behavioral and Brain Sciences ◽

10.1017/s0140525x00043521 ◽

1996 ◽

Vol 19 (4) ◽

pp. 677-714 ◽

Cited By ~ 163

Author(s):

Samuel David Epstein ◽

Suzanne Flynn ◽

Gita Martohardjono

Keyword(s):

Second Language ◽

Second Language Acquisition ◽

Universal Grammar ◽

Functional Categories ◽

L2 Acquisition ◽

Psycholinguistic Research ◽

Explanatory Theory ◽

Parameter Values ◽

Theoretical Issues

AbstractTo what extent, if any, does Universal Grammar (UG) constrain second language (L2) acquisition? This is not only an empirical question, but one which is currently investigable. In this context, L2 acquisition is emerging as an important new domain of psycholinguistic research. Three logical possibilities have been articulated regarding the role of UG in L2 acquisition: The first is the “no access” hypothesis that claims that no aspect of UG is available to the L2 learner. The second is the “partial access” hypothesis that claims that only LI instantiated principles and LI instantiated parameter-values of UG are available to the learner. The third, called the “full access” hypothesis, asserts that UG in its entirety constrains L2 acquisition.In this paper we argue that there is no compelling evidence to support either of the first two hypotheses. Moreover, we provide evidence concerning functional categories in L2 acquisition consistent with the claim that UG is fully available to the L2 learner (see also Flynn 1987; Li 1993; Martohardjono 1992; Schwartz & Sprouse 1991; Thomas 1991; White 1989). In addition, we will attempt to clarify some of currently unclear theoretical issues that arise with respect to positing UG as an explanatory theory of L2 acquisition. We will also investigate in some detail certain crucial methodological questions involved in experimentally testing the role of UG in L2 acquisition and finally, we will present a set of experimental results of our own supporting the “Full Access” hypothesis.

Download Full-text