LING212
Second Language Acquisition
Florencia Franceschina
Terminology




Second language acquisition
Foreign language acquisition
Acquisition of additional languages
Bilingual language acquisition
L2 grammars
A.k.a. interlanguage grammars (ILGs)
Example: L2 speaker on Botticelli
Route of acquisition
U-shaped learning
Example: Myles et al. (1999)
Myles et al. (1999)
L1 English/L2 French
16 adolescents
Recorded 6 times over 2 years
Initially drilled in using ‘chunks’:
Quel âge as-tu?
Comment tu t’appelles?
Qu’est qu’il aime faire?
etc.
Myles et al. (1999)
Findings:
Three question types:
1. Qs formed from chunks they had been
drilled on.
2. Novel questions lacking verbs
Où la piscine?
3. Novel questions with verbs
Myles et al. (1999)
Q type
Sample
1
2
3
4
5
6
Chunk
143/186
77%
264/418
63%
47/111
42%
214/483
44%
261/622
42%
40/264
15%
V-less
41/186
22%
129/418
31%
53/111
48%
235/483
49%
287/622
46%
182/264
69%
With V
2/186
1%
25/418
6%
11/111
10%
34/483
7%
74/622
12%
42/264
16%
Route of acquisition
Fixed stages of acquisition
Example: Pienemann (1998)
Pienemann (1998)
Stages of acquisition of word order in L2 German:
1.
SVO
Die kinder spielen mim ball (the children play with the ball)
2.
Adverb pre-posing
3.
Verb separation
4.
Verb second (V2)
5.
Verb final in subordinate clauses
Da kinder spielen (there children play)
Aller kinder muss die pause machen (all children must the pause make)
Dann hat sie wieder die knoch gebringt (then has she again the bone
brought)
Er sagte dass er nach hause kommt (he said that he to home comes)
Rate of acquisition
Some learners are faster than others
Example 1: Snow and Hoefnagel-Hole (1978)
Example 2: Dulay and Burt (1974)
Snow and Hoefnagel-Hohle (1978)
L1 English / L2 Dutch
Immersion
Tasks: Pronunciation, auditory discrimination,
morphology, sentence repetition, sentence translation,
sentence judgement, story comprehension, Peabody
Picture Vocabulary Test
Findings:
 After 3 months’ residence: adults and adolescents
outperformed children on tests
 After 10 months’ residence: the children caught up
Dulay and Burt (1974)
L1 Chinese (Cantonese) / L2 English (replication
of D&B, 73, L1 Spanish / L2 English children)
115 6-8 year-olds in the US
Task: BSM
Dulay and Burt (1974): Bilingual Syntax Measure
Dulay and Burt (1974): results
Variable attainment profile


Fossilization
High levels of individual variation
Example 1: Franceschina (2001)
Example 2: Johnson and Newport (1989)
Franceschina (2001)
L1 English, L1 Italian / L2 Spanish
Nearnatives
Task: Spontaneous speech production
Findings:
 All learners were equally accurate (totally
target-like) on number agreement
 The Italian speakers were more accurate than
the English speakers on gender agreement
Johnson and Newport (1989)
L1 Chinese, L1 Korean / L2 English
46 participants
AoA: between 3-39
Minimum residence in the US: 5 years
Task: GJT testing a range of grammatical
properties
Johnson and Newport (1989) (1)
Johnson and Newport (1989) (2)
Summary
ILGs are:

Systematic
(e.g., route, within L1 groups)

Variable
(according to age of acquisition, L1, in terms of
rate of acquisition and outcome)
What determines the variable L2
outcomes?

Learner-internal factors
–
–
–
–
–
Age (Singleton and Lengyel, 1995; Birdsong, 1999)
L1 (Odlin, 1989; Gass and Selinker, 1992)
Aptitude (Sawyer and Ranta, 2001)
Motivation (Dornyei and Schmidt, 2001)
…
What determines the variable L2
outcomes?

Learner-external factors
–
–
–
Type of input (Carroll, 2001; Norris and Ortega,
2000)
Type of interaction (Gass, 1997)
…
What determines the variable L2
outcomes?
Caveat: SLA researchers do not all agree on the
exact role that the previously mentioned factors
play in determining L2 outcomes.
References
Birdsong, D. (ed.) 1999: Second Language Acquisition and the Critical Period
Hypothesis. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Carroll, S. E. 2001: Input and evidence. The raw material of SLA. Amsterdam: John
Benjamins.
Dornyei, Z. and R. Schmidt. 2001: Motivation and second language acquisition. Manoa:
University of Hawai'i at Manoa.
Dulay, H. and M. Burt. 1974: Natural sequences in child second language acquisition.
Language Learning 24, 37-53.
Franceschina, F. 2001: Where lies the difference between native and non-native
grammars? Evidence from the L2A of Spanish, in S. Foster-Cohen and A.
Nizegorodcew, eds. EUROSLA Yearbook 1. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Pp. 143158.
Gass, S. M. 1997: Input, interaction and the second language learner. Mahwah, NJ:
Lawrence Erlbaum.
Gass, S. M. and L. Selinker. (eds.) 1992: Language transfer in language learning.
Rowley, MA: Newbury House.
References
Myles, F., R. Mitchell and P. J. Hooper. 1999: Interrogative chunks in French L2: a basis
for creative construction? Studies in Second Language Acquisition 21, 49-80.
Norris, J. and L. Ortega. 2000: Effectiveness of L2 instruction: a research synthesis and
quantitative meta-analysis. Language Learning 50, 417-528.
Odlin, T. 1989: Language transfer: cross-linguistic influence in language learning.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Pienemann, M. 1998a: Language processing and L2 development. Processability theory.
Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
---- 1998b: Developmental dynamics in L1 and L2 acquisition: Processability Theory and
generative entrenchment. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition 1, 1-20.
Sawyer, M. and L. Ranta. 2001: Aptitude, individual differences and instructional design,
in P. Robinson, ed. Cognition and second language instruction. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press. Pp. 319-353.
Singleton, D. M. and Z. Lengyel. (eds.) 1995: The age factor in second language
acquisition. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
Snow, C. E. and M. Hoefnagel-Hohle. 1978: The critical period for language acquisition:
evidence from second language learning. Child Development 49, 1114-1128.
Administrative




Reading: White (2003: chapter 1). You will find
some study questions on the course website.
You can also read chapter 2, which contains
more advanced discussion.
Empirical study summary forms
Glossary cards
This term seminars will take place in weeks 2,
3, 4, 5, 7 and 8 in Bowland B61