scholarly journals The Acquisition of Preposition + Article Contractions in L3 Portuguese among Different L1-Speaking Learners: A Variationist Approach

Languages ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 5 (4) ◽  
pp. 45
Author(s):  
Adriana Picoral ◽  
Ana Maria Carvalho
Keyword(s):  
Random Effect ◽  
Target Language ◽  
Definite Article ◽  
Heritage Speakers ◽  
Language Background ◽  
Third Language ◽  
L3 Acquisition ◽  
Language Groups ◽  
And Gender ◽  
The Impact

This paper sheds light on the paths of third language (L3) acquisition of Portuguese by Spanish–English speakers whose first language is Spanish (L1 Spanish), English (L1 English), or both in the case of heritage speakers of Spanish (HL). Specifically, it looks at the gradual acquisition of a categorical rule in Portuguese, where some prepositions are invariably contracted with the determiner that follows them. Based on a corpus of 1910 written assignments by Portuguese L3 learners, we extracted 21,879 tokens in obligatory contraction contexts and submitted them to a multivariate analysis. This analysis allowed for the investigation of the impact of linguistic (type of preposition and definite article number and gender) and extra-linguistic factors (course level and learner’s language background), with logistic regression modeling with sum contrasts and individual as a random effect. While results point to some clear similarities across the three language groups—all learners acquired the contractions in a u-shaped progression and used more contractions with the a preposition and fewer with the por preposition—participants acquire contractions at a higher rate when the article is singular than when it is plural, and in the case of HL speakers, more so when the article is masculine than when it is feminine. These results confirm the facilitatory role of a previously acquired language (i.e., Spanish) that is typologically similar to the target language (i.e., Portuguese) in transfer patterns during L3 acquisition.

Cross-linguistic influence in unbalanced bilingual heritage speakers on subsequent language acquisition: Evidence from pronominal object placement in ditransitive clauses

2018 ◽  
Vol 23 (6) ◽  
pp. 1410-1430
Author(s):  
Eliane Lorenz ◽  
Richard J Bonnie ◽  
Kathrin Feindt ◽  
Sharareh Rahbari ◽  
Peter Siemund
Keyword(s):  
Second Language Acquisition ◽  
Language Acquisition ◽  
Word Order ◽  
English Word ◽  
Sentence Completion ◽  
Heritage Speakers ◽  
Third Language ◽  
L3 Acquisition ◽  
Language Groups ◽  
Turkish German

Aims and objectives: The main objective of this study is to find evidence for the Linguistic Proximity Model, which allows for facilitative and non-facilitative cross-linguistic influence (CLI) from all previously known languages in third language (L3) acquisition. We target CLI in L3 English based on bilingual heritage speakers (Russian-German and Turkish-German) in comparison with second language acquisition of monolingual German speakers. Methodology: We examine the outcome of an English word order test. The participants produced sentences based on randomly ordered words. The focus of this study is the placement of direct and indirect pronominal objects with varying ditransitive verbs. Data analysis: 195 students in school years 7 and 9, separated into three language groups, participated in the study: German monolinguals ( nG7 = 47; nG9 = 64), Russian-German bilinguals ( nR7 = 19; nR9 = 30) and Turkish-German bilinguals ( nT7 = 19; nT9 = 16). The placement of pronominal objects in the sentence task is compared to results from equivalent word order tests in English, German, Russian and Turkish that were repeated with native speakers. Findings: We find some support for the Linguistic Proximity Model because the outcome shows that facilitative and non-facilitative CLI is possible from both the heritage language and the majority language. Determining factors are the background languages, the age of the participants and frequency. However, the majority language, German, displays the strongest influence of both background languages due to its dominant status. Originality: This study provides further support for the Linguistic Proximity Model, by using a sentence completion task with unbalanced bilingual heritage speakers. Significance/implications: We provide evidence for showing that both facilitative and non-facilitative influence from all previously known languages of bilingual heritage speakers is possible and verifiable. We therefore add to the field of L3 acquisition and the discussion about current models of CLI.

scholarly journals VOICE ONSET TIME IN MULTILINGUAL SPEAKERS: ITALIAN HERITAGE SPEAKERS IN GERMANY WITH L3 ENGLISH

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-25
Author(s):  
Miriam Geiss ◽  
Sonja Gumbsheimer ◽  
Anika Lloyd-Smith ◽  
Svenja Schmid ◽  
Tanja Kupisch
Keyword(s):  
Heritage Language ◽  
Voice Onset Time ◽  
Onset Time ◽  
English Speakers ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Heritage Speakers ◽  
Third Language ◽  
Bilingual Advantage ◽  
L3 Acquisition ◽  
Crosslinguistic Influence

Abstract This study brings together two previously largely independent fields of multilingual language acquisition: heritage language and third language (L3) acquisition. We investigate the production of fortis and lenis stops in semi-naturalistic speech in the three languages of 20 heritage speakers (HSs) of Italian with German as a majority language and English as L3. The study aims to identify the extent to which the HSs produce distinct values across all three languages, or whether crosslinguistic influence (CLI) occurs. To this end, we compare the HSs’ voice onset time (VOT) values with those of L2 English speakers from Italy and Germany. The language triad exhibits overlapping and distinct VOT realizations, making VOT a potentially vulnerable category. Results indicate CLI from German into Italian, although a systemic difference is maintained. When speaking English, the HSs show an advantage over the Italian L2 control group, with less prevoicing and longer fortis stops, indicating a specific bilingual advantage.

scholarly journals Bilingual advantage in early EFL pronunciation accuracy of German 4th-graders

2021 ◽  
pp. 136700692199681
Author(s):  
Teresa Kieseier
Keyword(s):  
Foreign Language ◽  
Primary Schools ◽  
Social Background ◽  
Target Language ◽  
Error Sources ◽  
Common Error ◽  
Language Background ◽  
Background Factors ◽  
Language Groups ◽  
Error Types

Aims and Objectives: We compared speech accuracy and pronunciation patterns between early learners of English as a foreign language (EFL) with different language backgrounds. We asked (1) whether linguistic background predicts pronunciation outcomes, and (2) if error sources and substitution patterns differ between monolinguals and heterogeneous bilinguals. Methodology: Monolingual and bilingual 4th-graders ( N = 183) at German public primary schools participated in an English picture-naming task. We further collected linguistic, cognitive and social background measures to control for individual differences. Data and Analysis: Productions were transcribed and rated for accuracy and error types by three independent raters. We compared monolingual and bilingual pronunciation accuracy in a linear mixed-effects regression analysis controlling for background factors at the individual and institutional level. We further categorized all error types and compared their relative frequency as well as substitution patterns between different language groups. Findings: After background factors were controlled for, bilinguals (irrespective of specific L1) significantly outperformed their monolingual peers on overall pronunciation accuracy. Irrespective of language background, the most frequent error sources overlapped, affecting English sounds which are considered marked, are absent from the German phoneme inventory, or differ phonetically from a German equivalent. Originality: This study extends previous work on bilingual advantages in other domains of EFL to less researched phonological skills. It focuses on overall productive skills in young FL learners with limited proficiency and provides an overview over the most common error sources and substitution patterns in connection to language background. Significance/Implications: The study highlights that bilingual learners may deploy additional resources in the acquisition of target language phonology that should be addressed in the foreign language classroom.

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.

Cross-linguistic influence in the child third language acquisition of grammar: Sentence comprehension and production among Turkish-German and German learners of English

2018 ◽  
Vol 23 (2) ◽  
pp. 567-583 ◽  
Author(s):  
Holger Hopp
Keyword(s):  
Sentence Comprehension ◽  
Sentence Production ◽  
Formal Models ◽  
Heritage Speakers ◽  
Third Language ◽  
Third Language Acquisition ◽  
L3 Acquisition ◽  
German Children ◽  
The One ◽  
Turkish German

Aims and Objectives/Purpose/Research Questions: This paper investigates the extent to which current formal models of third language (L3) grammatical acquisition extend to sequential child L3 acquisition. We examine whether heritage speakers learning a foreign language as an early L3 transfer grammatical properties from the heritage language or the dominant second language (L2). Design/Methodology/Approach: We used a sentence repetition task and a picture story retelling task. The tasks focussed on grammatical phenomena that were either different between English and German, that is, verb-second and adverb order, or between English and German, on the one hand, and Turkish, on the other, that is, verb-complement order as well as subject and article realization. Data and Analysis: We tested matched groups of 31 Turkish-German and 31 monolingual German children learning English in grades 3 and 4, and we compared sentence repetitions as well as oral sentence production across different grammatical phenomena using parametric statistics. Findings/Conclusions: In both tasks, the two groups perform indistinguishably from each other, and both groups show selective transfer of grammatical properties from German. These findings suggest L2 transfer from a typologically related language in sequential child L3 acquisition. Originality: This paper breaks new ground by testing the applicability of formal models of adult L3 acquisition of grammar to sequential child L3 learners. It uses aural comprehension and oral production tasks with carefully matched groups of L2 and L3 learners of English to isolate the source of grammatical transfer in L3 acquisition. Significance/Implications: The research advances our understanding of cross-linguistic influence and unravels the dynamics of grammatical transfer in early child multilingualism. It adjudicates between current models of transfer in L3 acquisition in a multiple-methods design, it shows that these models apply to early L3 acquisition of heritage speakers, and it highlights that these models need to be expanded to include factors such as dominance and proficiency in prior languages.

scholarly journals A Cross-Linguistic Study of L3 Phonological Acquisition of Stop Contrasts

SAGE Open ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
pp. 215824402098551
Author(s):  
Jiaqi Liu ◽  
Jiayan Lin
Keyword(s):  
First Language ◽  
Target Language ◽  
Phonological Acquisition ◽  
Acoustic Feature ◽  
L2 Reading ◽  
Reading Task ◽  
Third Language ◽  
Phonetic Similarity ◽  
L3 Acquisition ◽  
Initial Stage

The research reported in this article investigated how students learning Japanese or Russian as a third language (L3) perceived and produced word-initial stops in their respective target language and the link between perception and production. The participants in the study were 39 Chinese university students who spoke Mandarin Chinese as their first language (L1), English as their second language (L2), and Japanese or Russian as their L3. An L3 identification task, an L3 reading task, and an L2 reading task were used to investigate the learners’ perception and production of word-initial stops. The results demonstrated that the phonetic similarity in different stop categories between L1, L2, and L3 contributed to learners’ confusion in perception. On the contrary, L3 learners could perceive the new acoustic feature voicing lead, but found it difficult to produce L3 voiced stops. In addition, the study found a positive relationship between the perception and production of voiceless stops in the initial stage of L3 acquisition, but there was no correlation between the perception and production of voiced stops. Pedagogical implications for L3 speech learning are discussed on the basis of the results.

scholarly journals French as a third language in Norway: The influence of the prior languages in the acquisition of word order

2021 ◽  
Vol 12 (1) ◽  
pp. 125-144
Author(s):  
Kjersti Faldet Listhaug ◽  
Guro Busterud ◽  
Anne Dahl
Keyword(s):  
Word Order ◽  
L2 Proficiency ◽  
Verb Movement ◽  
Third Language ◽  
Short Sentence ◽  
L3 Acquisition ◽  
Privileged Status ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Acceptability Judgment

The present study investigated the acquisition of verb movement in L3 French by L1 speakers of Norwegian with English as their L2. To investigate the impact of previously learned languages in L3 acquisition, we looked at two sentence types with lexical verbs where Norwegian, English, and French differ in systematic ways: a) non-subject initial declarative main clauses and b) subject-initial declarative main clauses with a short sentence-medial adverbial. Students completed acceptability judgment tasks in both the L2 and the L3. Results did not indicate a privileged status for either language as a source of transfer. Rather, there were indications that both prior languages may influence L3 French. We argue that the partially overlapping surface word order with French in each prior language may cause non-target transfer into the L3. Furthermore, higher L2 proficiency was associated with less evidence of L2 transfer in the L3.

scholarly journals Multilingual lexical transfer challenges monolingual educational norms: not quite!

Multilingua ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 0 (0) ◽  
Author(s):  
Eliane Lorenz ◽  
Yevheniia Hasai ◽  
Peter Siemund
Keyword(s):  
Language Acquisition ◽  
Language Development ◽  
Foreign Language ◽  
Target Language ◽  
School Students ◽  
Language Background ◽  
Third Language ◽  
Third Language Acquisition ◽  
English Classes ◽  
Lexical Transfer

Abstract Foreign language learners frequently use words from their previously acquired language(s) in the target language, especially if these languages are related (Ringbom, Håkan. 2001. Lexical transfer in L3 production. In Jasone Cenoz, Britta Hufeisen & Ulrike Jessner (eds.), Cross-linguistic influence in third language acquisition: Psycholinguistic perspectives, 59–68. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters). Such insertions are referred to as ‘lexical transfer’, commonly divided into ‘transfer of form’ and ‘transfer of meaning’ (Bardel, Camilla. 2015. Lexical cross-linguistic influence in third language development. In Hagen Peukert (ed.), Transfer effects in multilingual language development, 111–128. Amsterdam: John Benjamins; Ringbom, Håkan. 2001. Lexical transfer in L3 production. In Jasone Cenoz, Britta Hufeisen & Ulrike Jessner (eds.), Cross-linguistic influence in third language acquisition: Psycholinguistic perspectives, 59–68. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters). Lexical transfer challenges the monolingual habitus prevailing in foreign language classes which requires students to rely exclusively on the target language and inhibit other influences. Thus, in such English classes, students should avoid the use of different languages and ideally only produce monolingual English output. In this context, the current study investigates the use of lexical transfer instances in short English texts written by bilingual (Russian/Turkish-German) and monolingual (German) secondary school students (initially attending year 7) from a longitudinal perspective. It assesses i) whether the students increasingly adhere to the imposed normative rules and ii) what influence background variables such as language background (mono- vs. bilingual), type of school (higher vs. lower academic track), gender (female vs. male), or age (four measurement points over a period of 2.5 years) exert on the use of lexical transfer instances. Apart from gender, all factors impact lexical transfer in a statistically significant way, evoking different norm-based explanations.

Crosslinguistic influence and morphological awareness in English (third language) writing

2019 ◽  
Vol 24 (4) ◽  
pp. 616-633 ◽  
Author(s):  
María Orcasitas-Vicandi
Keyword(s):  
Second Language ◽  
First Language ◽  
Morphological Awareness ◽  
Target Language ◽  
Third Language ◽  
Loan Words ◽  
Source Language ◽  
Language Writing ◽  
Crosslinguistic Influence ◽  
The Impact

Aims: The aim of the present paper is twofold. Firstly, we look into the effects of a number of factors on crosslinguistic influence (study 1). Secondly, we analyse the role played by morphological awareness in the production of crosslinguistic instances (study 2). In this way, we contribute to the understanding of how crosslinguistic and metalinguistic dimensions of third language acquisition are intertwined. Methodology: We investigate lexical adaptations of the first language and second language in third language English (i.e. adapted loan words) and combine quantitative and qualitative research methods. A quantitative analysis explores the impact of the first language, the L2 factor, typology and proficiency in the target and the source languages (study 1). A qualitative analysis then proposes a categorization of the strategies used by participants to adapt their first language and second language to the target language (study 2). Data and Analysis: Language proficiency was evaluated in 222 compositions, 74 written in each language (Basque, Spanish and English). The adapted loan words found in English compositions were classified according to their source language, word category, word class and type/token categories (study 1). In addition, the strategies used by participants were identified and analysed (study 2). Findings: The results indicate that language typology is the main predictor of the source language of crosslinguistic influence, and a variety of strategies point at morphological awareness as a key factor in the strategic use of participants’ first language and second language. Originality: By mixing quantitative and qualitative methods, this paper provides additional support to the claim that crosslinguistic influence and morphological awareness are intertwined in third language writing. Significance: The overall results show that students who are morphologically aware make crosslinguistic and morphological associations and use them strategically in their third language.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document