Adult L2 Acquisition Research Articles

To Inflect or Not to Inflect Is the Question Indeed: Infinitives in Second Language (L2) Portuguese

In light of the predictions of two competing approaches to adult L2 acquisition – Full Access (FA) (e.g., White 1989, 2003; Schwartz & Sprouse 1996) and Failed Features (FF) (e.g., Hawkins & Chan 1997; Liceras & Díaz, 1999) – the present study examines the acquisition of inflected infinitives by English and Spanish/English bilingual adult learners of L2 Portuguese. Target-like acquisition of inflected infinitives requires the resetting of both a syntactic parameter (the Null Subject Parameter) and a morphological parameter (the Infl-parameter) for these learners. Since FF approaches maintain a post-critical period failure to acquire new L2 features lacking from the L1, target-like acquisition is predicted to not be possible. Conversely, FA approaches, which maintain adult parameter resetting is possible, predict that native-like competence of inflected infinitives is attainable, but not inevitably so. The data we present support FA approaches, demonstrating that advanced adult learners achieve native-like interpretative knowledge of Portuguese inflected infinitives. We also consider the role of L1 transfer and its possible implications, as they differ for both groups.

Input type and parameter resetting: Is naturalistic input necessary?

It has been argued that extended exposure to naturalistic input provides L2 learners with more of an opportunity to converge of target morphosyntactic competence as compared to classroom-only environments, given that the former provide more positive evidence of less salient linguistic properties than the latter (e.g., Isabelli 2004). Implicitly, the claim is that such exposure is needed to fully reset parameters. However, such a position conflicts with the notion of parameterization (cf. Rothman and Iverson 2007). In light of two types of competing generative theories of adult L2 acquisition – the No Impairment Hypothesis (e.g., Duffield and White 1999) and so-called Failed Features approaches (e.g., Beck 1998; Franceschina 2001; Hawkins and Chan 1997), we investigate the verifiability of such a claim. Thirty intermediate L2 Spanish learners were tested in regards to properties of the Null-Subject Parameter before and after study-abroad. The data suggest that (i) parameter resetting is possible and (ii) exposure to naturalistic input is not privileged.

Determination und Referenz im frühen L2 Erwerb Französisch

To date, processes of early foreign/second language acquisition (eL2) throughout primary education (age 6–10) are not addressed in their own right within the field of SLA research (1). However, recent findings stemming from newer eL2 corpora raise questions about the specific nature of eL2 development as compared to (well documented) adult L2 and (unbalanced) 2L1 acquisition (2). Exploratory studies of the eL2 determiner system (3) as displayed in referential processes in eL2 interaction by the young learners (4) reveal features of the specific quality of eL2 development (referring expressions, determiners) and also point out the need for further studies in the field of situated eL2 learning, in particular as regards questions of methodology as well as on the general level of SLA theory building (5).

THE ACQUISITION OF SPANISH: MORPHOSYNTACTIC DEVELOPMENT IN MONOLINGUAL AND BILINGUAL L1 ACQUISITION AND ADULT L2 ACQUISITION

THE ACQUISITION OF SPANISH: MORPHOSYNTACTIC DEVELOPMENT IN MONOLINGUAL AND BILINGUAL L1 ACQUISITION AND ADULT L2 ACQUISITION. Silvina A. Montrul. Amsterdam: Benjamins, 2005. Pp. xvi + 413. $150.00 cloth, $49.95 paper.This book presents and analyzes the morphosyntactic development of Spanish in monolingual and bilingual first language (L1) acquisition and in adult SLA. Based on the principles and parameters model of generative grammar, the book addresses the nature of linguistic knowledge and examines the development of grammatical aspects such as morphology, syntax, and lexical semantics in monolingual, bilingual, and second language (L2) learners. The author argues that the underlying linguistic competence of L1 and L2 speakers is constrained by the nature of the language the learners entertain, as guided by principles of Universal Grammar. Throughout the book, the author considers different approaches concerning the nature and development of linguistic knowledge such as the continuity hypothesis—including both weak and strong versions—(Pinker, 1989), the maturation hypothesis (Radford, 1990), and the no continuity view. The author supports the continuity hypothesis by arguing that principles and parametric options continue to be available throughout the acquisition process in the monolingual, bilingual, and adult grammatical systems. In other words, the author argues that linguistic representation is fundamentally similar among the grammars of child L1, child bilingual, and adult L2 learners, and that all of these are similar to the adult target grammar.

Possible manifestations of shallow processing in advanced second language speakers

The proposal by Clahsen and Felser (CF) has the potential of marking a turning point in second language (L2) acquisition research. Contrary to much L2 research to date, it suggests that some of the differences between native and (advanced) nonnative speakers may be at the level of grammatical processing, rather than grammatical representations. Accounting for L2 speakers' divergent behavior does therefore not necessarily involve positing “representational deficits”: L2 speakers can, and indeed do, attain target representations of the L2, but may compute incomplete (“shallow”) syntactic parses in comprehension. Such shallow processing is often accompanied by reliance (or overreliance) on lexical, semantic, and pragmatic information, which can lead to seemingly trouble-free comprehension in ordinary communication. It is only when speakers are faced with sentence ambiguities, which impose a greater than normal processing load, that the differences between adult L2 language acquirers and child first language (L1) acquirers become apparent: both child and adult language learners have difficulty in integrating structural and nonstructural information in on-line comprehension, but although children prioritize structural information, adult learners privilege nonstructural lexical–semantic information. CF's proposal opens up new perspectives on the nature of ultimate attainment in adult L2 acquisition; at the same time it raises some questions that, in my view, are of crucial importance for future research.

Possible manifestations of shallow processing in advanced second language speakers

The proposal by Clahsen and Felser (CF) has the potential of marking a turning point in second language (L2) acquisition research. Contrary to much L2 research to date, it suggests that some of the differences between native and (advanced) nonnative speakers may be at the level of grammatical processing, rather than grammatical representations. Accounting for L2 speakers' divergent behavior does therefore not necessarily involve positing “representational deficits”: L2 speakers can, and indeed do, attain target representations of the L2, but may compute incomplete (“shallow”) syntactic parses in comprehension. Such shallow processing is often accompanied by reliance (or overreliance) on lexical, semantic, and pragmatic information, which can lead to seemingly trouble-free comprehension in ordinary communication. It is only when speakers are faced with sentence ambiguities, which impose a greater than normal processing load, that the differences between adult L2 language acquirers and child first language (L1) acquirers become apparent: both child and adult language learners have difficulty in integrating structural and nonstructural information in on-line comprehension, but although children prioritize structural information, adult learners privilege nonstructural lexical–semantic information. CF's proposal opens up new perspectives on the nature of ultimate attainment in adult L2 acquisition; at the same time it raises some questions that, in my view, are of crucial importance for future research.

How language learners comprehend and produce language in real time

This paper does a fine job of advancing discussion concerning a question that is indeed quite underrepresented in the literature, that is, how language learners comprehend and produce language in real time. The paper is firmly rooted in the dual mechanism approach to language processing and takes as its starting point the assumption that normal adult processing is characterized by two systems, one that is lexically based and one that is essentially combinatorial. The authors cite evidence that both first language (L1) learners and adult native speakers show evidence of dual mechanism processing and that, in particular, children's sentence processing shows early reliance on structure-based interpretation and less ability to employ lexical/pragmatic information in the resolution of language ambiguity. One way to view this preference is that L1 learners might know, broadly speaking, considerably more about their language than they do about the world in which they live. Adult second language (L2) learners might be said to be in exactly the opposite situation. It is therefore hardly surprising that adult L2 speakers rely strongly on lexical/pragmatic cues in sentence processing. In the early stages of adult L2 acquisition, the demands of real-time processing make use of such nonsyntactic inference crucial. The question that strikes me as key is whether, as L2 speakers become more proficient, they are weaned from this reliance such that their processing reflects the interaction between syntactic and lexical processing that is characteristic of adult native speakers. When and if they do, we could say that their L2 processing is, both internally and externally, nativelike.

How language learners comprehend and produce language in real time

This paper does a fine job of advancing discussion concerning a question that is indeed quite underrepresented in the literature, that is, how language learners comprehend and produce language in real time. The paper is firmly rooted in the dual mechanism approach to language processing and takes as its starting point the assumption that normal adult processing is characterized by two systems, one that is lexically based and one that is essentially combinatorial. The authors cite evidence that both first language (L1) learners and adult native speakers show evidence of dual mechanism processing and that, in particular, children's sentence processing shows early reliance on structure-based interpretation and less ability to employ lexical/pragmatic information in the resolution of language ambiguity. One way to view this preference is that L1 learners might know, broadly speaking, considerably more about their language than they do about the world in which they live. Adult second language (L2) learners might be said to be in exactly the opposite situation. It is therefore hardly surprising that adult L2 speakers rely strongly on lexical/pragmatic cues in sentence processing. In the early stages of adult L2 acquisition, the demands of real-time processing make use of such nonsyntactic inference crucial. The question that strikes me as key is whether, as L2 speakers become more proficient, they are weaned from this reliance such that their processing reflects the interaction between syntactic and lexical processing that is characteristic of adult native speakers. When and if they do, we could say that their L2 processing is, both internally and externally, nativelike.

The Acquisition of French in Different Contexts: Focus on Functional Categories

Edited by Philippe Prévost and Johanne Paradis (Language Acquisition and Language Disorders, 32). Amsterdam — Philidelphia, John Benjamins 2004. vii+381 pp. Hb 13200; €110.00. This volume of studies, as the editors claim in their introduction, does indeed fill an ‘empirical gap’ in work on the acquisition of European languages. Although the theoretical framework is strictly defined, the robustness of the research in the varying contexts should entail that the volume also appeals to those who investigate the acquisition of French from other theoretical perspectives. All the studies within the volume are dedicated to a generative framework and concentrate on the acquisition of functional categories within that framework. The editors and authors of individual chapters are all well-established researchers within this field. The studies within the volume cover a range of linguistic contexts: first language (L1) acquisition, second language (L2) acquisition, bilingual first language acquisition and specifically language impaired acquisition (SLI). In all the contexts the research is predominantly with young children, although some of the L2 acquisition studies make comparisons between adult L2 and child L1 acquisition of certain grammatical structures (Hawkins and Franceschina, Granfeldt and Schlyter). The research throughout the volume focuses on a clustering of grammatical aspects, primarily the Determiner Phrase (DP) functional category and the functional categories implicated in the verbal domain. Within a generative approach, the acquisition of functional categories has been the dominant line of inquiry for the last decade. The questions over the years and across different linguistic contexts have been ‘strikingly similar’ and the issues discussed in this volume are no exception. The focus is on the presence or absence of functional categories in developing grammars and what properties they may have once they have been projected. The editors tentatively and perhaps optimistically suggest in their introduction that because the researchers are investigating similar issues and syntactic properties in a range of acquisition contexts, it may be possible to build a unified theory of the process of functional category acquisition. After a concise but informative introduction to the volume and the field of inquiry, the book is divided into two sections, one on LI acquisition and SLI acquisition and the other on L2 acquisition and bilingualism. Each individual chapter presents a thorough summary of the grammatical aspect being investigated, then outlines the research methods used. The research reported in this volume generally used robust methods of participant selection and research methodology. The majority of the studies are longitudinal with a small number of participants, however some are comparative (Hamann, Paradis and Crago) and some make use of data from grammaticality judgements (Labelle and Valois, Hawkins and Franceschina). Results are presented clearly in tables and charts and most of the chapters make appropriate use of comparative statistics. Significantly, within this volume there is the introduction of important new directions in research in this field of inquiry, for example, the semantics/syntax interface in acquiring functional categories (Prévost) and the use of prosodic analysis to support specifically syntactic arguments (De Cat). The collection of studies is an important contribution to work in this field. The volume will prove useful for all researchers investigating the acquisition of French but particularly for those working from within a generative framework.

The Acquisition of Spanish: Morphosyntactic Development in Monolingual and Bilingual L1 Acquisition and Adult L2 Acquisition

The Acquisition of Spanish: Morphosyntactic Development in Monolingual and Bilingual L1 Acquisition and Adult L2 Acquisition

'Is' Als Voorloper Van Finietheid

The acquisition of fmiteness, more particularly the morphological marking of finiteness is a well-known obstacle in L2 acquisition by adult learners. This paper deals with an interlanguage stage in the acquisition of Dutch by Turkish and Moroccan learners producing a remarkable pattern that occurs neither in the target language, nor in the learners' native language. These learners use lexical markers (free morphemes) as precursors of fully inflected thematic verbs. In this pattern, the lexical marker is (copula 3SG) is linked either to an infinitival, an inflected form, or to a second, identical form is. This pattern is considered from different perspectives: functional-semantic, syntactic, and developmental. It is argued that this lexical marker is deprived of meaning and that its function is primarily syntactic. The inference is that syntax precedes morphology, especially free morphology in adult L2 acquisition.

Prosodic constraints on allophonic distribution in adult L2 acquisition

Data from three American teenagers acquiring German during an exchange year show uneven acquisition patterns with respect to allophonic variation. Acquisition of [ ç ] / [ x ], as in [ dıç ] dich 'you' and [bax] Bach 'stream', is early, but acquisition of final obstruent devoicing is not acquired at all during the data collection period. In pairs of words exhibiting alternations, such as [ kınt ] ~ [ kındɐ ] Kind / Kinder 'child / children' the final /d/ is either realized as *[ d ] or the obstruent is voiceless in both positions: [ kınt ] ~ *[ kıntɐ ]. Factors such as markedness (Eckman, 1977) and similarity (Flege, e.g., 1995) fail to account for these acquisition patterns. An account based on learners' transfer of their American English intervocalic flapping (of /t/ and /d /) captures these facts and tentatively provides evidence in support of the Asymmetry Hypothesis (Young-Scholten, 1994). Flapping itself is not necessarily transferred in a direct way, but the domain of application larger than that of final devoicing is; transfer is thus taken to have the indirect effect of leading learners to erroneously surmise that a voiced alvealor stop in the input could be derived from underlying /t/. That the [ kınt ] ~ *[ k*ıntɐ] pattern is found only for alvealor stops supports this conclusion.

On the syntax-semantics interface in Dutch: Adult and child L2 acquisition compared

Article On the syntax-semantics interface in Dutch: Adult and child L2 acquisition compared was published on June 16, 2004 in the journal International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching (volume 42, issue 2).

Discourse integration and indefinite subjects in child English

Adult and child L2 acquisition of syntax-semantics interface phenomena must be compared with monolingual L1 acquisition of the same phenomena in order to assess the possible effects of interference and transfer. However, this L1A touchstone can also be misleading because non-grammatical mechanisms that interact with such interface phenomena may be independently undergoing development in child cognition. This can affect linguistic performance, and perhaps also the acquisition of linguistic competence. The purpose of this paper is to investigate one such cognitive factor that has recently been hypothesized to affect monolingual children's comprehension of the specific reading of indefinite subjects and objects. The hypothesis is based on experimental research with Dutch children. We will examine English children, focusing on the indefinite subject in the single-clause English sentence.

L'expression de la localisation et du mouvement dans les descriptions et les récits en L1 et en L2

Henriëtte Hendriks, Marzena Watorek, Patrizia Giuliano : L'expression de la localisation et du mouvement dans les descriptions et les récits en L1 et en L2. Recent research in language acquisition suggests that an important factor causing the difference between child L1 and adult L2 acquisition is the capacity to engage in complex verbal tasks. Thus, the construction of discourse (with its conceptual and linguistic complexities) seems constrained in the adult L2 case mainly by a lack of linguistic means; in the child L1 case by the gradual development of conceptual and communicative capacities. We tested this hypothesis by analysing reference to space in two tasks, a narrative and a description, as produced by child L1 and adult L2 learners of various source and target languages. Results confirm the hypothesis, and show that whereas both types of learners adapt to language-specific means available in the target, children have more problems conceptually with the task, whereas adults can compensate for their linguistic problems, given their understanding of the communicative situation.

MORPHOLOGICAL AND SYNTACTIC TRANSFER IN CHILD L2 ACQUISITION OF THE ENGLISH DATIVE ALTERNATION

This experimental study compares the acquisition of the English to- and for-dative alternation by L1 English, L1 Japanese, and L1 Korean children. It is well known that there are restrictions on the verbs that can enter into the dative alternation—for example, you can show the results to someone and show someone the results; and you can demonstrate the results to someone but you cannot *demonstrate someone the results. L1 children sometimes overextend the double-object variant to verbs that disallow it. One question we investigate is whether L2 children, like L1 children, overextend the double-object variant. A second question we probe is whether L2 children, like L2 adults, transfer properties of the L1 grammar. Japanese disallows all double-accusative constructions. Korean disallows them with analogues of to-dative verbs; but with analogues of for-dative verbs, Korean productively allows them—more broadly, in fact, than English—if the benefactive verbal morpheme cwu- is added. Results from an oral grammaticality judgment task show (a) that all groups allow illicit to-dative double-object forms and (b) that the Japanese—but not the Koreans—allow illicit for-dative double-object forms. This bifurcation, we argue, stems from the fact that Korean (but not Japanese) has an overt morphological licensor for double objects. We thus find evidence of both (a) overgeneralization, like in L1 acquisition, and (b) L1 influence, like in adult L2 acquisition, in this case from the (syntactic) argument-changing properties of overt morphology.

Second Language Acquisition and Linguistic Theory (review)

Reviewed by: Second language acquisition and linguistic theory ed. by John Archibald John M. Lipski Second language acquisition and linguistic theory. Ed. by John Archibald. Malden, MA &Oxford: Blackwell, 2000. Pp. 256. The seven essays in this volume represent the application of contemporary linguistic theories to second language acquisition. Cynthia Brown’s ‘The interrelation between speech perception and phonological acquisition from infant to adult’ describes child (L1) and adult (L2) phonological development in an effort to understand the difficulty in acquiring a fully native L2 phonology. Using a model of feature geometry, and incorporating experimental data from Chinese, Korean, and Japanese speakers’ acquisition of English, Brown demonstrates that children rapidly acquire phonological structures that resist subsequent incorporation of nonnative contrasts. These early-acquired L1 restrictions persist and affect phonological perception during adult L2 acquisition, thereby limiting full acquisition of certain new phonological contrasts. Martha Young-Scholten and John Archibald study ‘Second language syllable structure’ using a hierarchical model of syllable organization, sonority scales, and feature geometry. Early child phonological acquisition routinely produces CV syllables through truncation while adult L2 phonology may employ epenthesis and substitutions to achieve patterns compatible with the L1. At times the acquisition of certain segments and contrasts (e.g. /1/ vs /r/) must occur before new phonological patterns (e.g. onset clusters) can emerge. ‘Mapping features to forms in second language acquisition’ by Donna Lardiere takes a minimalist approach to the development of L2 syntax. Assuming the minimalist view that syntactic patterns derive from morpholexical feature specifications, L queries whether L2 learners must acquire enough of the target language’s morphology in order to project the relevant functional categories or whether they approach the task with a preexisting set of possibilities. Unlike L1 and early L2 acquisition, in which morphological endings may be omitted but are rarely used incorrectly when present, adult L2 language shows a much higher frequency of morphological mismatches. Lardiere argues that—at least in the L2 case—there is no direct correlation between the acquisition [End Page 183] of specific morphological paradigms and the development of relevant syntactic patterns. ‘Second language acquisition: From initial to final state’ by Lydia White examines various notions about the roles of UG vs. the L1 in the acquisition of a second language. After reviewing several possible configurations, White questions the need to dwell on dichotomies, seeking instead to establish common ground among competing theories when dealing with data which are subject to multiple interpretations. Another survey of formal models applied to L2 acquisition is ‘When syntactic theories evolve: Consequences for L2 acquisition research’ by Bonnie Schwartz and Rex Sprouse. The authors review several proposals regarding the role of UG in constraining possible interlanguage grammars and the issue of poverty of the stimulus and end with a call to temper an ever-changing formal syntax with closer attention to actual interlanguage data. Alan Juffs examines the semantic-syntactic interface in adult L2 acquisition in ‘An overview of the second language acquisition of links between verb semantics and morphosyntax’. Juffs reviews theories that map semantic patterns onto particular classes of verbs and the relationships that might exist between L2 acquisition and theories of universal grammar. There is a growing body of evidence that universal semantic notions shape the morphosyntax of verb classes during L2 acquisition. Juffs concludes that both L1 transfer and universal syntactic/semantic configurations come into play in forming emergent L2 grammars. The final essay is Gary Libben’s ‘Representation and processing in the second language lexicon: The homogeneity hypothesis’. Libben offers evidence that there is a single lexicon for all monolingual and bilingual speakers, including adult L2 learners. When the bilingual lexicon is activated, all items linked by meaning or form are simultaneously available. The choice of languages is not a function of the lexicon (although lexical items are tagged for language) but rather lies outside of the lexical processing domain. Bilingual interactions, including code-switching, arise when the use of lexical items tagged for both languages lowers activation thresholds. In adult L2 speakers, cross-language equivalences are stronger than same-language synonyms since in the...

Triggers in L2 acquisition: The case of Spanish N‐N compounds

Spanish has left‐headed compounds which are not as productive as their left‐headed counterparts in other languages. This presence or absence of productivity has been attributed to a binary parameter according to which N‐N compounding, as opposed to nominal constructions in which the head noun takes a complement as in ‘the destruction of the city’, would be the superset or marked option. Furthermore, the idiosyncratic nature of Spanish N‐N compounding has been attributed to the make‐up of Spanish Nouns. Specifically, it has been proposed that Spanish Nouns have a ‘word marker’ which triggers L1 acquisition of these constructions. Based on the results of two picture tests intended to elicit actual command of N‐N compounding strategies, as well as word order patterns and gender marking patterns, we argue that: 1) N‐N compounding is not a marked construction; 2) adult L2 acquisition of Spanish N‐N compounds is triggered by head directionality (a processing trigger) rather than by the ‘word marker’ (a representational trigger) which is supposed to trigger L1 acquisition of these compounds.

Missing Surface Inflection or Impairment in second language acquisition? Evidence from tense and agreement

In this article, two accounts of the variable use of inflection in adult second language (L2) acquisition are examined. The Missing Surface Inflection Hypothesis (MSIH) proposes that L2 learners have unconscious knowledge of the functional projections and features underlying tense and agreement. However, learners sometimes have a problem with realization of surface morphology, such that they resort to non-finite forms (e.g. Haznedar and Schwartz, 1997; Prévost and White, 1999). The Impaired Representation Hypothesis (IRH) claims that L2 inflection is essentially impaired, due to lack of functional categories, features or feature strength (e.g. Eubank, 1993/94; Meisel, 1997). These views make different predictions for adult L2 acquisition. Spontaneous production data from two adult learners of French and two adult learners of German are examined. The data show that finite forms do not occur in non-finite contexts, that learners exhibit syntactic reflexes of finiteness and that inflected forms largely show accurate agreement. These results suggest that adult L2 learners represent finiteness and agreement at an abstract level, rather than being impaired in this domain, supporting the MSIH.

THE ACQUISITION OF SPATIAL RELATIONS IN A SECOND LANGUAGE.Angelika Becker and Mary Carroll. Amsterdam: Benjamins, 1997. Pp. xii + 212. $45.00 cloth.

This volume, the third in the Studies in Bilingualism series from the European Science Foundation's research on adult immigrants' L2 acquisition, begins with the observation that we have widely accepted the idea that learners' varieties and the transitions from one variety to the next are systematic, yet we have little research that records this systematicity. This study does exactly that by following for 30 months 10 L2 learners' developing linguistic means for indicating spatial relations. Carroll reports on two Italian speakers acquiring English; Becker on four Italian speakers and a Turkish speaker acquiring German; and Giacobbe, Perdue, and Porquier on two Spanish speakers and a Moroccan Arabic speaker acquiring French. To elicit the core data, the researchers asked the learners to describe pictures and to provide stage directions for a scene they had viewed to someone who had not seen it.