Volume 8, Issue 5
  • ISSN 1879-9264
  • E-ISSN: 1879-9272
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes



Cross-linguistic influence (CLI) is one of the key phenomena in bilingual and second language learning. We propose a method for quantifying CLI in the use of linguistic constructions with the help of a computational model, which acquires constructions in two languages from bilingual input. We focus on the acquisition of case-marking cues in Russian and German and simulate two experiments that employ a picture-choice task tapping into the mechanisms of sentence interpretation. Our model yields behavioral patterns similar to human, and these patterns can be explained by the amount of CLI: the negative CLI in high amounts leads to the misinterpretation of participant roles in Russian and German object-verb-subject sentences. Finally, we make two novel predictions about the acquisition of case-marking cues in Russian and German. Most importantly, our simulations suggest that the high degree of positive CLI may facilitate the interpretation of object-verb-subject sentences.


Article metrics loading...

Loading full text...

Full text loading...


  1. Alishahi, A., & Stevenson, S.
    (2008) A computational model of early argument structure acquisition. Cognitive Science, 32, 789–834. doi: 10.1080/03640210801929287
    https://doi.org/10.1080/03640210801929287 [Google Scholar]
  2. (2010) A computational model of learning semantic roles from child-directed language. Language and Cognitive Processes, 25, 50–93. doi: 10.1080/01690960902840279
    https://doi.org/10.1080/01690960902840279 [Google Scholar]
  3. Anderson, J. R.
    (1991) The adaptive nature of human categorization. Psychological Review, 98, 409–429. doi: 10.1037/0033‑295X.98.3.409
    https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.98.3.409 [Google Scholar]
  4. Bar-Shalom, E., & Snyder, W.
    (1996) Optional infinitives in Russian and their implications for the pro-drop debate. InM. Lindseth & S. Franks (Eds.), Formal Approaches to Slavic Linguistics: The Indiana Meeting (pp.38–47). Ann Arbor, MI: Michigan Slavic Publications.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Behrens, H.
    (2006) The input-output relationship in first language acquisition. Language and Cognitive Processes, 21, 2–24. doi: 10.1080/01690960400001721
    https://doi.org/10.1080/01690960400001721 [Google Scholar]
  6. Bernolet, S., Hartsuiker, R. J., & Pickering, M. J.
    (2013) From language-specific to shared syntactic representations: The influence of second language proficiency on syntactic sharing in bilinguals. Cognition, 127, 287–306. doi: 10.1016/j.cognition.2013.02.005
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2013.02.005 [Google Scholar]
  7. Born, R.
    (1985) Error types and negative transfer in compositions of third, fourth, and fifth semester German students. Die Unterrichtspraxis/Teaching German, 18, 246–253. doi: 10.2307/3530457
    https://doi.org/10.2307/3530457 [Google Scholar]
  8. Cappelle, B.
    (2006) Particle placement and the case for “allostructions”. Constructions, Special Volume 1. Retrieved fromjournals.linguisticsociety.org/elanguage/constructions/article/view/22.html
    [Google Scholar]
  9. De Angelis, G., & Selinker, L.
    (2001) Interlanguage transfer and competing linguistic systems in the multilingual mind. InJ. Cenoz, B. Hufeisen, & U. Jessner (Eds.), Crosslinguistic Influence in Third Language Acquisition: Psycholinguistic Perspectives (pp.42–58). Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Dittmar, M., Abbot-Smith, K., Lieven, E. V. M., & Tomasello, M.
    (2008) German children’s comprehension of word order and case marking in causative sentences. Child Development, 79, 1152–1167. doi: 10.1111/j.1467‑8624.2008.01181.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8624.2008.01181.x [Google Scholar]
  11. Gass, S. M.
    (1987) The resolution of conflicts among competing systems: A bidirectional perspective. Applied Psycholinguistics, 8, 329–350. doi: 10.1017/S0142716400000369
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0142716400000369 [Google Scholar]
  12. Goldberg, A. E.
    (1995) Constructions: A Construction Grammar Approach to Argument Structure. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. Goldberg, A. E., Casenhiser, D. M., and Sethuraman, N.
    (2004) Learning argument structure generalizations. Cognitive Linguistics, 15, 289–316. doi: 10.1515/cogl.2004.011
    https://doi.org/10.1515/cogl.2004.011 [Google Scholar]
  14. Goldin-Meadow, S., So, W. C., Özyürek, A., & Mylander, C.
    (2008) The natural order of events: How speakers of different languages represent events nonverbally. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 105, 9163–9168. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0710060105
    https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0710060105 [Google Scholar]
  15. Grauberg, W.
    (1971) An error analysis in German of first-year university students. InG. Perren & J. L. M. Trim (Eds.), Applications of Linguistics (pp.257–263). London: The University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  16. Grosjean, F.
    (1998) Studying bilinguals: Methodological and conceptual issues. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 1, 131–149. doi: 10.1017/S136672899800025X
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S136672899800025X [Google Scholar]
  17. Grünloh, T., Lieven, E. V. M., & Tomasello, M.
    (2011) German children use prosody to identify participant roles in transitive sentences. Cognitive Linguistics, 22, 393–419. doi: 10.1515/cogl.2011.015
    https://doi.org/10.1515/cogl.2011.015 [Google Scholar]
  18. Hanson, S., Aroline, E., & Carlson, M. T.
    (2014) The roles of first language and proficiency in L2 processing of Spanish clitics: Global effects. Language Learning, 64, 310–342. doi: 10.1111/lang.12050
    https://doi.org/10.1111/lang.12050 [Google Scholar]
  19. Higby, E., Vargas, I., Pérez, S., Ramirez, W., Varela, E., Campoverde, G., …, Obler, L. K.
    (2016) The bilingual’s mental grammar system: Language-specific syntax is shared by both languages. Poster presented atCognitive Neuroscience Society Annual Meeting, April 4, New York, NY.
    [Google Scholar]
  20. Hulk, A.
    (2004) The acquisition of the French DP in a bilingual context. InP. Prévost & J. Paradis (Eds.), Language Acquisition and Language Disorders (pp.243–274). Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
    [Google Scholar]
  21. Isabelli, C. A.
    (2008) First Noun Principle or L1 Transfer Principle in SLA?Hispania, 91, 465–478. doi: 10.2307/20063732
    https://doi.org/10.2307/20063732 [Google Scholar]
  22. Janssen, B. E.
    (2016) The Acquisition of Gender and Case in Polish and Russian: A Study of Monolingual and Bilingual Children. Amsterdam: Uitgeverij Pegasus.
    [Google Scholar]
  23. Janssen, B. E., Meir, N., Baker, A., & Armon-Lotem, S.
    (2015) On-line comprehension of Russian case cues in monolingual Russian and bilingual Russian-Dutch and Russian-Hebrew children. InE. Grillo & K. Jepson (Eds.), Proceedings of the 39th Annual Boston University Conference on Language Development (pp.266–278). Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  24. Jarvis, S.
    (2000) Methodological rigor in the study of transfer: Identifying L1 influence in the interlanguage lexicon. Language Learning, 50, 245–309. doi: 10.1111/0023‑8333.00118
    https://doi.org/10.1111/0023-8333.00118 [Google Scholar]
  25. Jarvis, S., & Pavlenko, A.
    (2008) Crosslinguistic Influence in Language and Cognition. New York, NY: Routledge. doi: 10.4324/9780203935927
    https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203935927 [Google Scholar]
  26. Jeong, H., Sugiura, M., & Sassa, Y.
    (2007) Cross-linguistic influence on brain activation during second language processing: An fMRI study. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 10, 175–187. doi: 10.1017/S1366728907002921
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S1366728907002921 [Google Scholar]
  27. Jordens, P.
    (1977) Rules, grammatical intuitions and strategies in foreign language learning. Interlanguage Studies Bulletin, 2, 5–76.
    [Google Scholar]
  28. Kempe, V., & MacWhinney, B.
    (1998) The acquisition of case marking by adult learners of Russian and German. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 20, 543–587. doi: 10.1017/S0272263198004045
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263198004045 [Google Scholar]
  29. Kilborn, K., & Cooreman, A.
    (1987) Sentence interpretation strategies in adult Dutch-English bilinguals. Applied Psycholinguistics, 8, 415–431. doi: 10.1017/S0142716400000394
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0142716400000394 [Google Scholar]
  30. Kim, S., O’Grady, W., & Cho, S.
    (1995) The acquisition of case and word order in Korean: A note on the role of context. Language Research, 31, 687–695.
    [Google Scholar]
  31. Lee, J. F., & Malovrh, P. A.
    (2009) Linguistic and non-linguistic factors affecting OVS processing of accusative and dative case pronouns by advanced L2 learners of Spanish. InJ. Collentine, M. García, B. Lafford, & F. Marcos-Marín (Eds.), Selected Proceedings of the 11th Hispanic Linguistics Symposium (pp.105–116). Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Proceedings Project.
    [Google Scholar]
  32. Lenth, R. V.
  33. MacWhinney, B.
    (2000) The CHILDES Project: Tools for Analyzing Talk (3rd ed.). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
    [Google Scholar]
  34. (2012) The logic of the unified model. InS. Gass & A. Mackey (Eds.), The Routledge Handbook of Second Language Acquisition (pp.211–227). London: Routledge. doi: 10.4324/9780203808184.ch13
    https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203808184.ch13 [Google Scholar]
  35. Matusevych, Y., Alishahi, A., & Backus, A.
    (2016a) Learning Constructions from Bilingual Exposure: Computational Studies of Argument Structure Acquisition. Utrecht: LOT.
    [Google Scholar]
  36. (2016b) Modelling verb selection within argument structure constructions. Language, Cognition and Neuroscience, 31, 1215–1244. doi: 10.1080/23273798.2016.1200732
    https://doi.org/10.1080/23273798.2016.1200732 [Google Scholar]
  37. (2017) The impact of first and second language exposure on learning second language constructions. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 20, 128–149. doi: 10.1017/S1366728915000607
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S1366728915000607 [Google Scholar]
  38. McDonald, J. L.
    (1987) Sentence interpretation in bilingual speakers of English and Dutch. Applied Psycholinguistics, 8, 379–413. doi: 10.1017/S0142716400000382
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0142716400000382 [Google Scholar]
  39. Meisel, J. M.
    (1986) Word order and case marking in early child language. Evidence from simultaneous acquisition of two first languages: French and German. Linguistics, 24, 123–184. doi: 10.1515/ling.1986.24.1.123
    https://doi.org/10.1515/ling.1986.24.1.123 [Google Scholar]
  40. Miller, G. A.
    (1995) WordNet: A lexical database for English. Communications of the ACM, 38, 39–41. doi: 10.1145/219717.219748
    https://doi.org/10.1145/219717.219748 [Google Scholar]
  41. Miller, M.
    (1979) The Logic of Language Development in Early Childhood. Berlin: Springer-Verlag. doi: 10.1007/978‑3‑642‑67408‑2
    https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-67408-2 [Google Scholar]
  42. Mimica, I., Sullivan, M., & Smith, S.
    (1994) An on-line study of sentence interpretation in native Croatian speakers. Applied Psycholinguistics, 15, 237–261. doi: 10.1017/S0142716400005348
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0142716400005348 [Google Scholar]
  43. Morett, L. M., & MacWhinney, B.
    (2013) Syntactic transfer in English-speaking Spanish learners. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 16, 132–151. doi: 10.1017/S1366728912000107
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S1366728912000107 [Google Scholar]
  44. Morgenstern, A., & Parisse, C.
    (2012) The Paris Corpus. Journal of French Language Studies, 22, 7–12. doi: 10.1017/S095926951100055X
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S095926951100055X [Google Scholar]
  45. Morgenstern, A., Parisse, C., Sekali, M., Bourdoux, F., & Caet, S.
    (2004) French Paris Corpus [Electronic database]. Retrieved fromchildes.psy.cmu.edu/data/Romance/French-MOR/Paris.zip
  46. O’Shannessy, C.
    (2011) Competition between word order and case-marking in interpreting grammatical relations: A case study in multilingual acquisition. Journal of Child Language, 38, 763–792. doi: 10.1017/S0305000910000358
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0305000910000358 [Google Scholar]
  47. Palmberg, R.
    (1976) A select bibliography of error analysis and related topics. Interlanguage Studies Bulletin, 1, 340–389.
    [Google Scholar]
  48. Perek, F.
    (2015) Argument Structure in Usage-based Construction Grammar: Experimental and Corpus-based Perspectives. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company. doi: 10.1075/cal.17
    https://doi.org/10.1075/cal.17 [Google Scholar]
  49. Pléh, C., Jarovinskij, A., & Balajan, A.
    (1987) Sentence comprehension in Hungarian-Russian bilingual and monolingual preschool children. Journal of Child Language, 14, 587–603. doi: 10.1017/S0305000900010308
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0305000900010308 [Google Scholar]
  50. Protassova, E.
    (2004) Russian Protassova Corpus [Electronic database]. Retrieved fromchildes.psy.cmu.edu/data/Slavic/Russian/Protassova.zip
  51. Salamoura, A., & Williams, J. N.
    (2007) Processing verb argument structure across languages: Evidence for shared representations in the bilingual lexicon. Applied Psycholinguistics, 28, 627–660. doi: 10.1017/S0142716407070348
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0142716407070348 [Google Scholar]
  52. Schaner-Wolles, C.
    (1989) Strategies in acquiring grammatical relations in German: Word order or case marking. Folia Linguistica, 23, 131–156.
    [Google Scholar]
  53. Schmid, H.-J.
    (2016) A framework for understanding linguistic entrenchment and its psychological foundations. InH.-J. Schmid (Ed.), Entrenchment and the Psychology of Language Learning: How We Reorganize and Adapt Linguistic Knowledge (pp.9–36). Washington, DC: De Gruyter Mouton and American Psychological Association. doi: 10.1515/9783110341423‑002
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110341423-002 [Google Scholar]
  54. Schmitz, K.
    (2006) Indirect objects and dative case in monolingual German and bilingual German/Romance language acquisition. InD. Hole, A. Meinunger, & W. Abraham (Eds.), Datives and Other Cases: Between Argument Structure and Event Structure (pp.239–268). Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company. doi: 10.1075/slcs.75.11sch
    https://doi.org/10.1075/slcs.75.11sch [Google Scholar]
  55. Shook, A., & Marian, V.
    (2013) The bilingual language interaction network for comprehension of speech. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 16, 304–324. doi: 10.1017/S1366728912000466
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S1366728912000466 [Google Scholar]
  56. Smolík, F.
    (2015) Word order and information structure in Czech 3-and 4-year-olds’ comprehension. First Language, 35, 237–253. doi: 10.1177/0142723715596098
    https://doi.org/10.1177/0142723715596098 [Google Scholar]
  57. Theakston, A. L., Lieven, E. V. M., Pine, J. M., & Rowland, C. F.
    (2001) The role of performance limitations in the acquisition of verb-argument structure: an alternative account. Journal of Child Language, 28, 127–152. doi: 10.1017/S0305000900004608
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0305000900004608 [Google Scholar]
  58. VanPatten, B.
    (1996) Input Processing and Grammar Instruction in Second Language Acquisition. Norwood, NJ: Ablex Publishing Corporation.
    [Google Scholar]
  59. (2012) Input processing. InS. Gass & A. Mackey (Eds.), The Routledge Handbook of Second Language Acquisition (pp.268–281). London: Routledge. doi: 10.4324/9780203808184.ch16
    https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203808184.ch16 [Google Scholar]
  60. (2015a) Foundations of processing instruction. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, 53, 91–109. doi: 10.1515/iral‑2015‑0005
    https://doi.org/10.1515/iral-2015-0005 [Google Scholar]
  61. (2015b) Input processing in adult SLA. InB. VanPatten & J. Williams (Eds.), Theories in Second Language Acquisition: An Introduction (2nd ed., pp.113–134). New York, NY: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  62. von Stutterheim, C.
    (2004) German Caroline Corpus [Electronic database]. Retrieved fromchildes.psy.cmu.edu/data-xml/Germanic/German/Caroline.zip
  63. Weinreich, U.
    (1968) Languages in Contact: Findings and Problems (6th ed.). The Hague: Mouton Publishers.
    [Google Scholar]
  64. Yasunaga, D., Yano, M., Yasugi, Y., & Koizumi, M.
    (2015) Is the subject-before-object preference universal? An event-related potential study in the Kaqchikel Mayan language. Language, Cognition and Neuroscience, 30, 1209–1229. doi: 10.1080/23273798.2015.1080372
    https://doi.org/10.1080/23273798.2015.1080372 [Google Scholar]
  65. Yokoyama, S., Kim, J., Uchida, S., Miyamoto, T., Yoshimoto, K., & Kawashima, R.
    (2013) Cross-linguistic influence of first language writing systems on brain responses to second language word reading in late bilinguals. Brain and Behavior, 3, 525–531. doi: 10.1002/brb3.153
    https://doi.org/10.1002/brb3.153 [Google Scholar]
  66. Yoshimura, Y., & MacWhinney, B.
    (2010) The use of pronominal case in English sentence interpretation. Applied Psycholinguistics, 31, 619–633. doi: 10.1017/S0142716410000160
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0142716410000160 [Google Scholar]
  67. Zhao, X., & Li, P.
    (2010) Bilingual lexical interactions in an unsupervised neural network model. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 13, 505–524. doi: 10.1080/13670050.2010.488284
    https://doi.org/10.1080/13670050.2010.488284 [Google Scholar]

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): case marking; computational model; cross-linguistic influence
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