Volume 6, Issue 1
  • ISSN 2212-8433
  • E-ISSN: 2212-8441
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes


There are two primary goals for this study – first, to analyse definiteness and article use in spontaneous writing in Swedish by 15-year-old Finnish immersion students ( = 162) and secondly, to compare their performance with that of non-immersion students at the same age ( = 67). Analyses at the group level show that immersion students usually perform significantly better than the control group, but they also reveal similar problems to what L2-Swedish non-immersion students have demonstrated in previous studies, such as omission of indefinite articles and difficulty in choosing the right definite form of the noun. Still, these inaccuracies occurred less often in the data from the immersion students. The studied constructions also show at the group level an acquisition order similar to that reported in previous studies, explainable by different aspects of complexity and cross-linguistic influence. Analyses on the individual level, however, show different acquisition orders depending on the criteria being used.


Article metrics loading...

Loading full text...

Full text loading...


  1. Axelsson, M.
    (1994) Noun phrase development in Swedish as a second language: A study of adult learners’ acquiring definiteness and the semantics and morphology of adjectives. Stockholm: Stockholm University Centre for Research and Bilingualism.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Bergroth, M.
    (2015) Kotimaisten kielten kielikylpy. Vaasan yliopiston julkaisuja. Selvityksiä ja raportteja 202 [Immersion of the National Languages]. Vaasa: University of Vaasa.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Bergroth, M. , & Björklund, S.
    (2013) Kielikylpyohjelman tutkimustuloksia Suomessa. [Results from immersion studies in Finland] In L. Tainio & H. Harju-Luukkainen (Eds.), Kaksikielinen koulu – tulevaisuuden monikielinen Suomi/Tvåspråkig skola – ett flerspråkigt Finland i framtiden [Bilingual school – a multilingual Finland of the future]. (pp.91–114). Jyväskylä: Finnish Educational Research Association. Kasvatusalan tutkimuksia 62.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Brown, R.
    (1973) A first language: The early stages. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. doi: 10.4159/harvard.9780674732469
    https://doi.org/10.4159/harvard.9780674732469 [Google Scholar]
  5. Bybee, J.
    (2008) Usage-based grammar. In P. Robinson & N. C. Ellis (Eds.), Handbook of cognitive linguistics and second language acquisition (pp.216–236). New York NY: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Collins, L. , Trofimovich, P. , White, J. , Cardoso, W. , & Horst, M.
    (2009) Some input on the easy/difficult grammar question: An empirical study. The Modern Language Journal 93 (3), 336–353. doi: 10.1111/j.1540‑4781.2009.00894.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4781.2009.00894.x [Google Scholar]
  7. DeKeyser, R.
    (2005) What makes learning second language grammar difficult? A review of issues. Language Learning, 55 (S1), 1–25. doi: 10.1111/j.0023‑8333.2005.00294.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0023-8333.2005.00294.x [Google Scholar]
  8. Ellis, N. C.
    (2016) Salience, cognition, language complexity, and complex adaptive systems. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 38 (2), 341–351. doi: 10.1017/S027226311600005X
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S027226311600005X [Google Scholar]
  9. Ellis, N. , & Robinson, P.
    (2008) An introduction to cognitive linguistics, second language acquisition, and language instruction. In P. Robinson & N. C. Ellis (Eds.), Handbook of cognitive linguistics and second language acquisition (pp.3–24). New York NY: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Ellis, R.
    (2008) The study of second language acquisition (2nd ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  11. Ellis, R. , & Barkhuizen, G.
    (2005) Analysing learner language. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Filipović, L. , & Hawkins, J. A.
    (2013) Multiple factors in second language acquisition: The CASP model. Linguistics, 51 (1), 145–176. doi: 10.1515/ling‑2013‑0005
    https://doi.org/10.1515/ling-2013-0005 [Google Scholar]
  13. Finnish National Agency for Education
    Finnish National Agency for Education (2014) Distribution of lesson hours in basic education. Retrieved fromwww.oph.fi/english/curricula_and_qualifications/basic_education
  14. Finnish National Board of Education
    Finnish National Board of Education (2014) Koulutuksen tilastollinen vuosikirja 2014 [Statistical Annuals of Education]. Helsinki: Finnish National Board of Education.
    [Google Scholar]
  15. Fraurud, K.
    (1988) Hierarchical relations between discourse referents and the interpretation of antecedentless definite noun phrases. In V. Rosén (Ed.), Papers from the tenth Scandinavian Conference of Linguistics (pp.196–210). Bergen: University of Bergen.
    [Google Scholar]
  16. Genesee, F.
    (1987) Learning through two languages. Studies of immersion and bilingual education. Rowley, MA: Newbury House.
    [Google Scholar]
  17. Glahn, E. , Håkansson, G. , Hammarberg, B. , Holmen, A. , Hvenekilde, A. & Lund, K.
    (2001) Processability in Scandinavian second language acquisition. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 23 (3), 389–416. doi: 10.1017/S0272263101003047
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263101003047 [Google Scholar]
  18. Goldschneider, J. , & DeKeyser, R.
    (2005) Explaining the “natural” order of L2 morpheme acquisition in English: A meta-analysis of multiple determinants. Language Learning, 55 (S1), 27–77. doi: 10.1111/j.0023‑8333.2005.00295.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0023-8333.2005.00295.x [Google Scholar]
  19. Hakulinen, A. , Vilkuna, M. , Korhonen, R. , Koivisto, V. , Heinonen, T. R. , & Alho, I.
    (2004) Iso suomen kielioppi [Big Finnish Grammar]. Helsinki: Society of Finnish Literature.
    [Google Scholar]
  20. Harley, B.
    (1993) Instructional strategies and SLA in early French immersion. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 15 (2), 245–260. doi: 10.1017/S0272263100011980
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263100011980 [Google Scholar]
  21. (1998) The role of focus-on-form tasks in promoting child L2 acquisition. In C. Doughty & J. Williams (Eds.), Focus on form in classroom second language acquisition (pp.156–174). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  22. Hatch, E. , & Lazaraton, A.
    (1991) The research manual: Design and statistics for applied linguistics. Cambridge: Newbury House.
    [Google Scholar]
  23. Housen, A. , & Simoens, H.
    (2016) Introduction: cognitive perspectives on difficulty and complexity in L2 acquisition. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 38 (2), 163–175. doi: 10.1017/S0272263116000176
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263116000176 [Google Scholar]
  24. Hyltenstam, K.
    (1992) Non-native features of near-native speakers. On the ultimate attainment of childhood L2 learners. In R. Harris (Ed.), Cognitive processing in bilinguals (pp.351–368). Amsterdam: Elsevier Science Publishers. doi: 10.1016/S0166‑4115(08)61505‑8
    https://doi.org/10.1016/S0166-4115(08)61505-8 [Google Scholar]
  25. Jarvis, S.
    (2002) Topic continuity in L2 English article use. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 24 (3), 387–418. doi: 10.1017/S0272263102003029
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263102003029 [Google Scholar]
  26. Jarvis, S. , & Odlin, T.
    (2000) Morphological type, spatial reference, and language transfer. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 22 (4), 535–556. doi: 10.1017/s0272263100004034
    https://doi.org/10.1017/s0272263100004034 [Google Scholar]
  27. Järvinen, E-L.
    (2010) Val av species och bestämdhetsform i ett test för finska grundskoleelever [Choice of definiteness and form of a noun in a test for Finnish pupils in comprehensive school]. In C. Falk , A. Nord & R. Palm (eds): Svenskans beskrivning 30. [Describing Swedish 30]. Stockholm: Institutionen för nordiska språk, Stockholm University: 154–163.
    [Google Scholar]
  28. Laury, R.
    (1996) Sen kategoriasta – onko suomessa jo artikkeli? [The category of se – Does Finnish already have an article?]. Virittäjä [Tuner], 100 (2), 162–180.
    [Google Scholar]
  29. Lieven, E. , & Tomasello
    (2008) Children’s first language acquisition. In: P. Robinson & N. C. Ellis (Eds.), Handbook of cognitive linguistics and second language acquisition (pp.168–196). NY: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  30. Long, M. H.
    (1990) The least a second language acquisition theory needs to explain. TESOL Quarterly, 24 (4), 649–666. doi: 10.2307/3587113
    https://doi.org/10.2307/3587113 [Google Scholar]
  31. Lyons, C.
    (1999) Definiteness. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi: 10.1017/CBO9780511605789
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511605789 [Google Scholar]
  32. Lyster, R.
    (2007) Learning and teaching languages through content: A counterbalanced approach. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/lllt.18
    https://doi.org/10.1075/lllt.18 [Google Scholar]
  33. Lyster, R. , & Ranta, L.
    (1997) Corrective feedback and learner uptake: Negotiation of form in communicative classrooms. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 19 , 37–66. doi: 10.1017/S0272263197001034
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263197001034 [Google Scholar]
  34. Nyqvist, E-L.
    (2013) Species och artikelbruk i finskspråkiga grundskoleelevers inlärarsvenska. En longitudinell undersökning i årskurserna 7–9. [Definiteness and use of articles in Swedish of Finnish L2-learners. A longitudinal study from 7th to 9th grade in comprehensive school]. A doctoral dissertation published in electronic format. Turku: University of Turku. Retrieved fromwww.doria.fi/handle/10024/91519.
    [Google Scholar]
  35. (2014) Hurdana species- och artikelfel bör motarbetas? [What kind of definiteness and article errors ought to be avoided?] In J. Lindström , S. Henricson , A. Huhtala , P. Kukkonen , H. Lehti-Eklund , & C. Lindholm : Svenskans Beskrivning 33 [Describing Swedish 33]. Nordica Helsingiensia 37 , 353–362.
    [Google Scholar]
  36. (2015) Species och artikelbruk hos vuxna svenskinlärare [Definiteness and article use by adult L2-learners of Swedish]. NordAnd 10 (2), 73–101.
    [Google Scholar]
  37. (2016) Swedish as a L3 for Finnish learners: The role of complexity, cross-linguistic influence and study materials in the case of definiteness and the use of articles. Research in Language 14 (3), 297–327. doi: 10.1515/rela‑2016‑0016
    https://doi.org/10.1515/rela-2016-0016 [Google Scholar]
  38. Odlin, T.
    (2003) Cross-linguistic influence. In C. J. Doughty & M. H. Long (Eds.), The handbook of second language acquisition (pp.436–486). Malden, MA: Blackwell. doi: 10.1002/9780470756492.ch15
    https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470756492.ch15 [Google Scholar]
  39. Pallotti, G.
    (2007) An operational definition of the emergence criterion. Applied Linguistics, 28 (3), 361–382. doi: 10.1093/applin/amm018
    https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amm018 [Google Scholar]
  40. Rahkonen, M. , & Håkansson, G.
    (2008) Production of written L2 Swedish – Processability or input frequencies?In J. -U. Kessler (Ed.), Processability approaches to second language development and second language learning (pp.135–161). Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars.
    [Google Scholar]
  41. Ringbom, H.
    (1987) The role of the first language in foreign language learning. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
    [Google Scholar]
  42. (2007) Cross-linguistic similarity in foreign language learning. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
    [Google Scholar]
  43. Sajavaara, K.
    (1983) The article errors of Finnish learners of English. Umeå Papers in English, 4 , 72–87.
    [Google Scholar]
  44. Schmidt, R. W.
    (1990) The role of consciousness in second language learning. Applied Linguistics, 2 (2), 129–158. doi: 10.1093/applin/11.2.129
    https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/11.2.129 [Google Scholar]
  45. Sipola, S.
    (2008) Den språkliga korrektheten i uppsatser på svenska [Grammatical accuracy in narratives in Swedish]. In T. Swanström (Ed.), Språkbad: Två språk i utveckling. Kielikylpy: Kaksi kieltä kehityksessä [Immersion: Two languages in development] (pp.79–91). Turku: Skrifter från Svenska institutionen vid Åbo Akademi.
    [Google Scholar]
  46. Teleman, U. , Hellberg, S. & Andersson, E.
    (1999a) Svenska Akademiens Grammatik. [Grammar of the Swedish Academy] Vol. 2 . Stockholm: Nordstedts Ordbok.
    [Google Scholar]
  47. (1999b) Svenska Akademiens Grammatik. [Grammar of the Swedish Academy] Vol. 3 . Stockholm: Nordstedts Ordbok.
    [Google Scholar]
  48. Trenkic, D.
    (2007) Variability in L2 article production: Beyond the representational deficit vs. processing constraints debate. Second Language Research, 23 (3): 289–327. doi: 10.1177/0267658307077643
    https://doi.org/10.1177/0267658307077643 [Google Scholar]
  49. Trenkic, D. , & Pongpairoj, N.
    (2013) Referent salience affects second language article use. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 16 (1), 152–166. doi: 10.1017/S1366728912000156.
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S1366728912000156 [Google Scholar]
  50. World Atlas of Language Structures
    World Atlas of Language Structures (2017) Combination definite articles / indefinite articles. Retrieved fromwals.info/combinations/37A_38A#2/25.5/148.5.
    [Google Scholar]
  51. Vilkuna, M.
    (1992) Referenssi ja määräisyys suomenkielisten tekstien tulkinnassa [Reference and definiteness in Finnish texts]. Helsinki: Society of Finnish Literature.
    [Google Scholar]

Data & Media loading...

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was successful
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error