scholarly journals Imperfect Spanish Meanings Acquisition by Advanced Russian Learners. Evidence from Acceptability Judgements Data

2021 ◽  
Vol 87 ◽  
pp. 17-37
Author(s):  
Iban Mañas ◽  
Elisa Rosado ◽  
Natalia Fullana ◽  
Svetlana Alexeeva
Keyword(s):  
Native Speakers ◽  
First Language ◽  
Control Group ◽  
General Tendency ◽  
L1 Transfer ◽  
Grammatical Aspect ◽  
Proficiency Level ◽  
On Line ◽  
Advanced Proficiency ◽  
Acceptability Judgments

This study explores the difficulties on grammatical representation descriptions of Spanish Imperfect meanings by 54 first language Russian learners of Spanish with advanced proficiency levels and a control group of 18 Spanish native speakers. The results from the on-line acceptability judgments task the participants carried out indicated that interpretations of aspectual meanings typical of the Spanish Imperfect had been formed in the non-native speaker’s grammar. Moreover, a general tendency to over-accept non-adequate Preterite sentences was observed in non-native Spanish speaker groups. Furthermore, the findings revealed that progressive meaning represented a greater challenge for Russian learners of Spanish with upper-intermediate proficiency level, whereas at more advanced levels the perceptions of this meaning became closer to that of Spanish native speakers. However, the accuracy and sensitivity scores on lexical aspectual classes evidenced a persistent difficulty for non-native speakers in non-prototypical lexical-grammatical aspect combinations, which suggested a possible remaining effect of L1 transfer

scholarly journals Why is “John Ran to the House” the Same as “John Went to the House Running” in Arabic?

2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (3) ◽  
pp. 189
Author(s):  
Hanan M. Kabli
Keyword(s):  
Native Speakers ◽  
First Language ◽  
Native English Speakers ◽  
Judgment Task ◽  
Boundary Crossing ◽  
English Speakers ◽  
Control Group ◽  
L1 Influence ◽  
Advanced Proficiency ◽  
Group Control Group

The study explores how Arabic has the same conflation pattern characteristics as English even though it belongs to Verb-framed Languages. A focused-group approach is used to evaluate the effect of the first language (L1) and the potential role of proficiency in the acquisition of the English directional preposition ‘to’ with manner-of-motion to goal construction. One group consists of Saudi speakers at two levels of development; an intermediate and advanced proficiency levels; whereas, the second group (control group) comprises of English native speakers. Acceptability Judgment Task associated with video animation clips is designed to elicit participants’ judgments in the depicted event. Results indicated that the intermediate Saudi speakers accept the directional preposition ‘to’ with and without boundary-crossing event, as is the case of their L1, which was opposite for the advanced and native English speakers for the without boundary-crossing event. The advanced Saudi speakers accept the constructions of encoding the manner with the motion and expressing the manner as the complement depicting an appropriate description of the event, reflecting L1 influence. All the group’s judgment varies based on the acceptance to conflate the manner with the motion overexpressing manner as a complement in an event without boundary-crossing.

scholarly journals Advanced learners’ comprehension of discourse connectives: The role of L1 transfer across on-line and off-line tasks

2015 ◽  
Vol 31 (3) ◽  
pp. 389-411 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sandrine Zufferey ◽  
Willem Mak ◽  
Liesbeth Degand ◽  
Ted Sanders
Keyword(s):  
Language Learners ◽  
Native Speakers ◽  
First Language ◽  
Judgment Task ◽  
Advanced Learners ◽  
L1 Transfer ◽  
Grammaticality Judgment ◽  
On Line ◽  
Reading Experiment ◽  
Discourse Connectives

Discourse connectives are important indicators of textual coherence, and mastering them is an essential part of acquiring a language. In this article, we compare advanced learners’ sensitivity to the meaning conveyed by connectives in an off-line grammaticality judgment task and an on-line reading experiment using eye-tracking. We also assess the influence of first language (L1) transfer by comparing learners’ comprehension of two non-native-like semantic uses of connectives in English, often produced by learners due to transfer from French and Dutch. Our results indicate that in an off-line task transfer is an important factor accounting for French- and Dutch-speaking learners’ non-native-like comprehension of connectives. During on-line processing, however, learners are as sensitive as native speakers to the meaning conveyed by connectives. These results raise intriguing questions regarding explicit vs. implicit knowledge in language learners.

L1 transfer, proficiency, and the recognition of L2 verb-noun collocations: A perspective from three languages

2019 ◽  
Vol 0 (0) ◽  
Author(s):  
Senyung Lee
Keyword(s):  
Native Speakers ◽  
First Language ◽  
Judgment Task ◽  
Advanced Learners ◽  
L1 Transfer ◽  
English Only ◽  
Mixed Effects Modeling ◽  
L1 Influence ◽  
Native Speakers Of English ◽  
The Relationship

Abstract This study investigated the effect of first language (L1) transfer in the recognition of second language (L2) collocations and unacceptable word combinations across low-intermediate to advanced learners of English, and the relationship between proficiency and the recognition of L2 collocations. The study targeted learners from two different L1 backgrounds and native speakers of English in order to disentangle the effect of L1 transfer from the effect of intralingual factors. Four types of English verb-noun combinations were included: English-Korean-Mandarin, English-only, Korean-only, and Mandarin-only phrases. A phrase acceptability judgment task and a phrase recognition report were used. The performances of 92 participants were analyzed using mixed effects modeling. The results from both Korean and Mandarin groups revealed no L1 influence in the recognition of unacceptable L2 word combinations, even at low levels of proficiency. The results also showed that L2 proficiency predicts learners’ ability to rule out grammatical-but-unacceptable L2 word combinations, but not the ability to recognize L2 collocations

Native and Nonnative Speakers' Processing of a Miniature Version of Japanese as Revealed by ERPs

2005 ◽  
Vol 17 (8) ◽  
pp. 1229-1244 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jutta L. Mueller ◽  
Anja Hahne ◽  
Yugo Fujii ◽  
Angela D. Friederici
Keyword(s):  
Sentence Processing ◽  
Native Speakers ◽  
Event Related Potential ◽  
L2 Acquisition ◽  
Behavioral Skills ◽  
Word Category ◽  
L2 Processing ◽  
Proficiency Level ◽  
Before And After ◽  
On Line

Several event-related potential (ERP) studies in second language (L2) processing have revealed a differential vulnerability of syntax-related ERP effects in contrast to purely semantic ERP effects. However, it is still debated to what extent a potential critical period for L2 acquisition, as opposed to the attained proficiency level in the L2, contributes to the pattern of results reported in previous ERP studies. We studied L2 processing within the model of a miniature version of a natural language, namely Japanese, specifically constructed to assure high proficiency of the learners. In an auditory ERP experiment, we investigated sentence processing of the “Mini-Japanese” in Japanese native speakers and German volunteers before and after training. By making use of three different types of violation, namely, word category, case, and classifier violations, native and nonnative ERP patterns were compared. The three types of violation elicited three characteristic ERP patterns in Japanese native speakers. The word category violation elicited an anteriorly focused, broadly distributed early negativity followed by a P600, whereas the case violation evoked a P600 which was preceded by an N400. The classifier violation led solely to a late left distributed negativity with an anterior focus. Although the P600 was similar for Japanese natives and learners, the N400 and the anterior negativities were not present in the learner group. The differences across groups suggest deviant neural processes in on-line syntactic and thematic processing in the L2 learners despite high behavioral skills.

PARSING STRATEGIES IN L1 AND L2 SENTENCE PROCESSING

2003 ◽  
Vol 25 (4) ◽  
pp. 501-528 ◽  
Author(s):  
Despina Papadopoulou ◽  
Harald Clahsen
Keyword(s):  
Sentence Processing ◽  
Relative Clause ◽  
Native Speakers ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Native Languages ◽  
Advanced Learners ◽  
L2 Learners ◽  
On Line ◽  
L1 And L2 ◽  
Lexical Cues

To contribute to a better understanding of second language (L2) sentence processing, the present study examines how L2 learners parse temporarily ambiguous sentences containing relative clauses. Results are reported from both off-line and on-line experiments with three groups of advanced learners of Greek whose native languages (L1s) were Spanish, German, or Russian as well as from corresponding experiments with a control group of adult native speakers of Greek. We found that, despite their nativelike mastery of the construction under investigation, the L2 learners showed relative-clause attachment preferences that were different from those of the native speakers. Moreover, the L2 learners did not exhibit L1-based preferences in their L2 Greek, as might be expected if they were directly influenced by L1 attachment preferences. We suggest that L2 learners integrate information relevant for parsing differently from native speakers, with the L2 learners relying more on lexical cues than the native speakers and less on purely structurally based parsing strategies.

scholarly journals Response article Full transfer vs. developmentally moderated transfer: a reply to Bohnacker

2007 ◽  
Vol 23 (4) ◽  
pp. 485-493 ◽  
Author(s):  
Manfred Pienemann ◽  
Gisela HÅkansson
Keyword(s):  
Empirical Evidence ◽  
Native Speakers ◽  
Native Language ◽  
First Language ◽  
Target Language ◽  
Verb Second ◽  
Initial State ◽  
L1 Transfer ◽  
Underlying Theory ◽  
Key Aspects

Ute Bohnacker's (2006) article on the acquisition of the verb second (V2) property in German by native speakers of Swedish (also a V2 language) is an attempted rebuttal of Håkansson et al.'s (2002) work on first language (L1) transfer and aspects of the underlying theory on which the work is based: Processability Theory (Pienemann, 1998). The article by Håkansson et al. presented empirical evidence from a similar population of learners (native language Swedish, target language German), showing that V2 is not transferred at the initial state. Unfortunately, Bohnacker misrepresents key aspects of our work on L1 transfer and, paradoxically, her own data constitute empirical evidence supporting our position, as we show in this response.

The SLA of Variable Structures

2007 ◽  
Vol 153 ◽  
pp. 25-51 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kimberly L. Geeslin ◽  
Pedro Guijarro Fuentes
Keyword(s):  
Native Speakers ◽  
Previous Analysis ◽  
First Language ◽  
General Interest ◽  
Linguistic Features ◽  
L1 Transfer ◽  
Growing Body ◽  
L2 Spanish ◽  
Ser And Estar

AbstractThis study examines the acquisition of copula choice, more particularly the contrast between ser and estar ('to be') in Spanish by native speakers of Portuguese. Our research differs from previous work because the first language of the participants included also contains a copula contrast. Our previous analysis of data collected in adult L1 Spanish and Portuguese L2 Spanish, and data collected in Portuguese from adult L1 Portuguese, demonstrated important differences between these groups (Geeslin & Guijarro-Fuentes, 2006). The frequency of copula selection can be seen to be a result of L1 transfer, but the predictors of copula choice do not transfer directly from L1 to the L2. We argue that one of the key focuses of investigation should be the distinction between obligatory and variable contexts (Geeslin & Guijarro-Fuentes, 2004). Moreover, one must examine the linguistic features associated with variation between these three groups. In response, the current study analyzes those contexts where copula selection is unanimous for some or all of the participants in contrast with those where all speakers exhibit variation. We aim to determine whether or not those contexts that allow variation are the source of differences between the natives and the non-natives. This study is of general interest not only to those working on L2 Spanish, but also to the growing body of research on the acquisition of variable structures in SLA.

Perspective and Proficiency in L2 Referential Communication

1987 ◽  
Vol 9 (2) ◽  
pp. 171-199 ◽  
Author(s):  
Theo Bongaerts ◽  
Eric Kellerman ◽  
Andy Bentlage
Keyword(s):  
Native Speakers ◽  
First Language ◽  
Referential Communication ◽  
Experimental Setting ◽  
Comparable Group ◽  
Proficiency Level ◽  
Language Studies ◽  
Communication Task ◽  
Dyadic Communication ◽  
Repeated Use

In this paper we examine some aspects of second language referential communication in an experimental setting. The research method employed is an adapted version of a dyadic communication task originally devised by Krauss and Weinheimer (1964) and subsequently used in a long series of first language studies with anglophone children and adults. The task requires subjects, who are visually separated but allowed to converse freely, to reach agreement on the ordering of a set of abstract, non-conventional shapes over a number of trials. The learners appear to behave like native speakers in many ways: They can carry out the task successfully, they shorten references on repeated use, they need less time in subsequent trials, and most importantly, they tend to prefer to describe the shapes from an analogical perspective rather than from a literal one. The differences between learners and anglophone native speakers are mainly quantitative in nature. For instance, the learners need more time and more words for the task. Also, their final references tend to be longer and structurally more complex. However, the same was true for a comparable group of Dutch native speakers. Furthermore, one learner group showed behavior that was aberrant and could not be related to proficiency level.

The syntax–discourse interface in near-native L2 acquisition: Off-line and on-line performance

2009 ◽  
Vol 12 (4) ◽  
pp. 463-483 ◽  
Author(s):  
HOLGER HOPP
Keyword(s):  
Word Order ◽  
Native Speakers ◽  
First Language ◽  
English Speakers ◽  
L2 Acquisition ◽  
Reading Task ◽  
On Line ◽  
Discourse Interface ◽  
Ultimate Attainment ◽  
L1 English

This study investigates ultimate attainment at the syntax–discourse interface in adult second-language (L2) acquisition. In total, 91 L1 (first-language) English, L1 Dutch and L1 Russian advanced-to-near-native speakers of German and 63 native controls are tested on an acceptability judgement task and an on-line self-paced reading task. These centre on discourse-related word order optionality in German. Results indicate that convergence at the syntax–discourse interface is in principle possible in adult L2 acquisition, both in off-line knowledge and on-line processing, even for L1 English speakers, whose L1 does not correspond to L2 German in discourse-to-syntax mappings. At the same time, non-convergence of the L1 Dutch groups and differences in the L2 groups' performance between tasks suggest that asymmetries in L1–L2 discourse configurations and computational difficulties in mapping discourse onto syntax constrain L2 performance.

The acquisition of object movement in Dutch: L1 transfer and near-native grammars at the syntax–discourse interface

2018 ◽  
Vol 35 (4) ◽  
pp. 479-504 ◽  
Author(s):  
Liz Smeets
Keyword(s):  
Native Speakers ◽  
First Language ◽  
Judgment Task ◽  
L2 Acquisition ◽  
Value Judgment ◽  
L1 Transfer ◽  
Object Movement ◽  
Target Performance ◽  
Discourse Interface ◽  
L1 English

This article investigates near-native grammars at the syntax–discourse interface by examining the second language (L2) acquisition of two different domains of object movement in Dutch, which exhibit syntax–discourse or syntax–semantics level properties. English and German near-native speakers of Dutch, where German but not English allows the same mapping strategies as Dutch in the phenomena under investigation, are tested on two felicity judgment tasks and a truth value judgment task. The results from the English participants show sensitivity to discourse information on the acceptability of non-canonical word orders, but only when the relevant discourse cues are sufficiently salient in the input. The acquisition of semantic effects on object movement was native-like for a large subset of the participants. The German group performed on target in all experiments. The results are partially in line with previous studies reporting L2 convergence at the syntax–discourse interface, but suggest that input effects should also be taken into account. Furthermore, the differences between the first language (L1) English and the L1 German group suggests that non-target performance at the syntax–discourse interface is not caused by general bilingual difficulties in integrating discourse information into syntax. The article elaborates on factors that contribute to (in)complete acquisition at the syntax–discourse interface.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document