Markedness and salience in language contact and second-language acquisition: evidence from a non-canonical contact language

Abstract

Mühlhäusler [J. Pidgin Creole Lang. 14(1999)121] has argued in his discussion of non-canonical creoles that the study of those contact varieties ‘which researchers in the past have found difficult to label’ ( ibid., p. 357) is important for our understanding of contact languages. This article argues that their study can also be relevant to our understanding of second language acquisition/use as non-canonical contact languages are often situated on a continuum between pidginization (a group-based process of collective L2 norm emergence under conditions of minimal input) and the more general processes of (untutored) second language acquisition. An example of a non-canonical contact language is Namibian Black German. In the paper data on participle regularization in Namibian Black German and other German-oriented contact varieties (e.g. Unserdeutsch, Gastarbeiterdeutsch) will be discussed. Recent work in linguistic theory has argued that the language faculty has a dual structure, consisting of a lexicon and a computational system [ Chomsky, N., 1986. Knowledge of Language: Its Nature, Origin and Use. Praeger, New York]. The formation of regular and irregular participles has been interpreted as reflecting this dual structure: regular participles show rule-based inflections, strong participles are lexical entries. The direction of language change as well as data from German L1 acquisition and elicited production experiments with native speakers have provided support for this model [Behav. Brain Sci. 22(1999)991]. The L2 data discussed in this paper suggests that the dual mechanism model cannot account for German L2 performance data or the direction of contact-induced language change. In this context, the article reviews questions of salience and markedness, access to the LAD and the relevance of general problem-solving skills in language learning.