1887
  1. Home
  2. e-Journals
  3. Language, Interaction and Acquisition
  4. Volume 11, Issue 2
  5. Article
Volume 11, Issue 2
  • ISSN 1879-7865
  • E-ISSN: 1879-7873
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes

Abstract

Abstract

This paper examines word formation strategies in initial SLA, with particular regard to the implicit processing of the distributional properties of the input. Learners with various L1s and no experience of the target language (n=163) took a 14-hour L2 Polish course under controlled input conditions. In an oral production task, these learners were asked to describe properties of human referents who had never appeared in the input by stating their nationality or profession. In their output, the learners most often referred to the target referents by attaching a sound cluster to a lexical morpheme borrowed from a known language. Quantitative analysis shows that indeed, within the input considered, the same cluster is characteristic of most words referring to human entities. The study concludes that learners can analyse the morphological structure of target words even after minimal exposure to the input, identifying at first the derivational formants characterised by the strongest association to the intended meaning.

© John Benjamins Publishing Company
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/lia.19012.sat
2020-11-25
2025-04-26

  • From This Site

    /content/journals/10.1075/lia.19012.sat
    dcterms_title,dcterms_subject,pub_keyword
    -contentType:Journal -contentType:Contributor -contentType:Concept -contentType:Institution
    10
    5
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Albano Leoni, F.
    (2009) Dei suoni e dei sensi: Il volto fonico delle parole. Bologna: Il mulino.
     [Google Scholar]
  2. Allan, L. G.
    (1980) A note on measurement of contingency between two binary variables in judgment tasks. Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society, 15(3), 147–149. doi:  10.3758/BF03334492
     https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03334492 [Google Scholar]
  3. Baayen, H.
    (2008) Analyzing linguistic data: A practical introduction to statistics using R. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511801686
     https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511801686 [Google Scholar]
  4. Bardel, C., & Lindqvist, C.
    (2007) The role of proficiency and psychotypology in lexical cross-linguistic influence. A study of a multilingual learner of Italian L3. InM. Chini, P. Desideri, M. E. Favilla, & G. Pallotti (eds.), Atti del VI Congresso Internazionale dell’ Associazione Italiana di Linguistica Applicata (pp.123–145). Perugia: Guerra.
     [Google Scholar]
  5. Bates, D., Maechler, M., Bolker, B., & Walker, S.
    (2015) Fitting linear mixed-effects models using lme4. Journal of Statistical Software, 67(1), 1–48. 10.18637/jss.v067.i01
     https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v067.i01 [Google Scholar]
  6. Bierwisch, M.
    (1997) Universal Grammar and the Basic Variety. Second Language Research, 13(4), 348–366. doi:  10.1177/026765839701300403
     https://doi.org/10.1177/026765839701300403 [Google Scholar]
  7. Bley-Vroman, R.
    (1983) The comparative fallacy in interlanguage studies: The case of systematicity. Language Learning, 33(1), 1–17. doi:  10.1111/j.1467‑1770.1983.tb00983.x
     https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-1770.1983.tb00983.x [Google Scholar]
  8. Booij, G.
    (2015) Word-formation in construction grammar. InP. Müller, I. Ohnheiser, S. Olsen, & F. Rainer (Eds.), Word formation. An international handbook of the languages of Europe. Vol. I (pp.188–202). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110246254‑014
     https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110246254-014 [Google Scholar]
  9. (2018) The construction of words: Introduction and overview. InG. Booij (Ed.), The construction of words, advances in construction morphology (pp.3–18). Berlin: Springer.
     [Google Scholar]
  10. Broeder, P., Extra, G., Van Hout, R., & Voionmaa, K.
    (1993) Word formation processes in talking about entities. InC. Perdue (Ed.), Adult language acquisition: Cross-linguistic perspectives: Vol. 2: results (pp.41–72). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  11. Brugman, H., & Russell, A.
    (2004) Annotating multimedia/multi-modal resources with ELAN. InM. T. Lino, M. F. Xavier, F. Ferreira, R. Costa, & R. Silva (Eds.), Proceedings of LREC 2004, Fourth International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation (pp.2065–2068). Paris: ELRA.
     [Google Scholar]
  12. Cintrón-Valentín, M. C., & Ellis, N.
    (2016) Salience in second language acquisition: Physical form, learner attention, and instructional focus. Frontiers in Psychology7. doi:  10.3389/fpsyg.2016.01284
     https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2016.01284 [Google Scholar]
  13. Crocco Galeas, G.
    (1998) The parameters of natural morphology. Padova: Unipress.
     [Google Scholar]
  14. Dabašinskienė, I.
    (2009) Easy way to language acquisition: Diminutives in Lithuanian child Language. Ad Verba Liberorum, 1(1), 11–22. doi:  10.2478/v10196‑011‑0002‑5Open access PDF
     https://doi.org/10.2478/v10196-011-0002-5 [Google Scholar]
  15. Dąbrowska, E.
    (2006) Low-level schemas or general rules? The role of diminutives in the acquisition of Polish case inflections. Language Sciences, 28(1), 120–135. doi:  10.1016/j.langsci.2005.02.005
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.langsci.2005.02.005 [Google Scholar]
  16. Dimroth, C.
    (2018) Beyond statistical learning: Communication principles and language internal factors shape grammar in child and adult beginners learning Polish through controlled exposure. Language Learning, 68(4), 863–905. doi:  10.1111/lang.12294
     https://doi.org/10.1111/lang.12294 [Google Scholar]
  17. Dimroth, C., Rast, R., Starren, M., & Watorek, M.
    (2013) Methods for studying the learning of a new language under controlled input conditions: The VILLA project. EUROSLA Yearbook, 13, 109–138. doi:  10.1075/eurosla.13.07dim
     https://doi.org/10.1075/eurosla.13.07dim [Google Scholar]
  18. Doughty, C. J. S., Williams, J.
    (1998) Focus on form in classroom second language acquisition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  19. Dressler, W. U.
    (1987) Leitmotifs in Natural Morphology. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/slcs.10
     https://doi.org/10.1075/slcs.10 [Google Scholar]
  20. Dulay, H. C., Burt, M. K., & Krashen, S. D.
    (1982) Language two. New York: Oxford University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  21. Ellis, N.
    (2002) Frequency effects in language processing. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 24(2), 143–188. doi:  10.1017/S0272263102002024
     https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263102002024 [Google Scholar]
  22. (2006) Language acquisition as rational contingency learning. Applied Linguistics, 27(1), 1–24. doi:  10.1093/applin/ami038
     https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/ami038 [Google Scholar]
  23. Ellis, N., & Ferreira–Junior, F.
    (2009) Construction learning as a function of frequency, frequency distribution, and function. The Modern Language Journal, 93(3), 370–385. doi:  10.1111/j.1540‑4781.2009.00896.x
     https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4781.2009.00896.x [Google Scholar]
  24. Fellows, I.
    (2014) Wordcloud: Word Clouds. R package version 2.5. Retrieved fromCRAN.R-project.org/package=wordcloud
     [Google Scholar]
  25. Goldberg, A. E.
    (2006) Constructions at work: The nature of generalization in language. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  26. Goldschneider, J., & DeKeyser, R.
    (2002) Explaining the ‘natural order of L2 morpheme acquisition’ in English: A meta-analysis of multiple determinants. Language Learning, 51(1), 1–50. doi:  10.1111/1467‑9922.00147
     https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9922.00147 [Google Scholar]
  27. Grzegorczykowa, R.
    (1979) Zarys słowotwórstwa polskiego: Słowotwórstwo opisowe. Warszawa: Państwowe Wydawnictwo Naukowe.
     [Google Scholar]
  28. Gullberg, M., Roberts, L., Dimroth, C., Veroude, K., & Indefrey, P.
    (2010) Adult language learning after minimal exposure to an unknown natural language. Language Learning, 60, suppl.2, 5–24. doi:  10.1111/j.1467‑9922.2010.00598.x
     https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9922.2010.00598.x [Google Scholar]
  29. Gussman, E.
    (2007) The phonology of Polish. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  30. Gvozdev, A.
    (1961) Voprosy izučenija detskoj reči. Akademija pedagogičeskich nauk RSFSR.
     [Google Scholar]
  31. Haman, E.
    (2003) Early productivity in derivation: A case study of diminutives in the acquisition of Polish. Psychology of Language and Communication, 7(1), 37–56.
     [Google Scholar]
  32. Hinz, J., Krause, C., Rast, R., Shoemaker, E. M., & Watorek, M.
    (2013) Initial processing of morphological marking in nonnative language acquisition: Evidence from French and German learners of Polish. EUROSLA Yearbook, 13, 139–175. doi:  10.1075/eurosla.13.08hin
     https://doi.org/10.1075/eurosla.13.08hin [Google Scholar]
  33. Hoffmann, T., & Trousdale, G.
    (eds.) (2013) The Oxford Handbook of Construction Grammar. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 10.1093/oxfordhb/9780195396683.001.0001
     https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780195396683.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  34. Jadacka, H.
    (2005) Kultura języka polskiego: Fleksja, słowotwórstwo, składnia (Wyd. 1). Warszawa: Wydawn. Naukowe PWN.
     [Google Scholar]
  35. Kawaguchi, S.
    (2015) The development of Japanese as a second language. InC. Bettoni, & B. Di Biase (Eds.), Grammatical development in second languages: Exploring the boundaries of processability theory (pp.149–172). EuroSLA. Retrieved fromwww.eurosla.org/monographs/EM03/4Japanese.pdf
     [Google Scholar]
  36. Kempe, V., & Brooks, P. J.
    (2005) The role of diminutives in the acquisition of Russian gender: Can elements of child-directed speech aid in learning morphology?Language Learning, 55(S1), 139–176. doi:  10.1111/1467‑9922.00154
     https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9922.00154 [Google Scholar]
  37. Kempe, V., Brooks, P. J., & Gillis, S.
    (2005) Diminutives in child-directed speech supplement metric with distributional word segmentation cues. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 12(1), 145–151. doi:  10.3758/BF03196360
     https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03196360 [Google Scholar]
  38. Kempe, V., Brooks, P. J., Gillis, S., & Samson, G.
    (2007) Diminutives facilitate word segmentation in natural speech: Cross-linguistic evidence. Memory & Cognition, 35(4), 762–773. doi:  10.3758/BF03193313
     https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03193313 [Google Scholar]
  39. Kempe, V., & MacWhinney, B.
    (1998) The acquisition of case marking by adult learners of Russian and German. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 20(3), 543–587. doi:  10.1017/S0272263198004045
     https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263198004045 [Google Scholar]
  40. Kempe, V., Ševa, N., Brooks, P. J., Mironova, N., Pershukova, A., & Fedorova, O.
    (2009) Elicited production of case-marking in Russian and Serbian children: Are diminutive nouns easier to inflect?First Language, 29(2), 147–165. doi:  10.1177/0142723708092441
     https://doi.org/10.1177/0142723708092441 [Google Scholar]
  41. Klein, W., & Perdue, C.
    (1992) Utterance structure: Developing grammars again. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/sibil.5
     https://doi.org/10.1075/sibil.5 [Google Scholar]
  42. (1997) The Basic Variety (or: Couldn’t natural languages be much simpler?). Second Language Research, 13(4), 301–347. doi:  10.1191/026765897666879396
     https://doi.org/10.1191/026765897666879396 [Google Scholar]
  43. Lenth, R.
    (2020) emmeans: Estimated Marginal Means, aka Least-Squares Means. https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=emmeans
     [Google Scholar]
  44. MacWhinney, B.
    (2000) The CHILDES project: Tools for Analyzing Talk (III). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
     [Google Scholar]
  45. Lindqvist, C., & Bardel, C.
    (2014) Exploring the impact of the proficiency and typology factors: Two cases of multilingual learners’ L3 learning. InM. Pawlak, & L. Aronin (eds.), Essential topics in applied linguistics and multilingualism (pp.253–266). Cham: Springer. 10.1007/978‑3‑319‑01414‑2_15
     https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-01414-2_15 [Google Scholar]
  46. Lüdecke, D.
    (2018) sjPlot – Data visualization for statistics in social science. Zenodo. doi:  10.5281/ZENODO.1308157
     https://doi.org/10.5281/ZENODO.1308157 [Google Scholar]
  47. Lyster, R., Saito, K., & Sato, M.
    (2013) Oral corrective feedback in second language classrooms. Language Teaching46(1). 1–40. 10.1017/S0261444812000365
     https://doi.org/10.1017/S0261444812000365 [Google Scholar]
  48. MacWhinney, B., & Bates, E.
    (1987) Competition, variation, and language learning. InB. MacWhinney (Ed.), Mechanisms of language acquisition (pp.157–193). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
     [Google Scholar]
  49. (1989) The crosslinguistic study of sentence processing. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  50. Nagórko, A.
    (2015) Polish. InP. Müller, I. Ohnheiser, S. Olsen, & F. Rainer (Eds.), Word formation. An international handbook of the languages of Europe: Vol. IV (pp.2831–2851). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
     [Google Scholar]
  51. Olmsted, H.
    (1994) Diminutive morphology of Russian children: A simplified subset of nominal declension in language acquisition. InC. E. Gribble (Ed.), Alexander Lipson: In memoriam (pp.165–209). Columbus, Ohio: Slavica Publishers.
     [Google Scholar]
  52. Palmović, M.
    (2007) The acquisition of diminutives in Croatian. InI. Savickienė, & W. U. Dressler (Eds.), The Acquisition of Diminutives (Vol.43, pp.73–88). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/lald.43.04pal
     https://doi.org/10.1075/lald.43.04pal [Google Scholar]
  53. R Core team
    R Core team (2017) R: A language and environment for statistical computing. Retrieved fromwww.R-project.org/
     [Google Scholar]
  54. Rast, R.
    (2010) The role of linguistic input in the first hours of adult language learning. Language Learning, 60, 64–84. doi:  10.1111/j.1467‑9922.2010.00601.x
     https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9922.2010.00601.x [Google Scholar]
  55. Rothstein, R. A.
    (2002) Polish. InB. Comrie, & G. G. Corbett (Eds.), The Slavonic languages (pp.686–758). London-New York: Routledge.
     [Google Scholar]
  56. Saturno, J.
    (2015) Copular structures in Polish L2. Linguistica e Filologia, 35, 69–98. doi: 10.6092/LeF_35_p69
     https://doi.org/10.6092/LeF_35_p69 [Google Scholar]
  57. (2019) Elicited imitation as a diagnostic tool of morphosyntactic processing. InR. Arntzen, G. Håkansson, A. Hjelde, & J.-U. Keßler (Eds.), Teachability and learnability across languages (pp.119–136). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/palart.6.06sat
     https://doi.org/10.1075/palart.6.06sat [Google Scholar]
  58. Saturno, J., & Watorek, M.
    (2020) The emergence of functional case marking in initial varieties of Polish L2. Language, Interaction, and Acquisition, 11(1), 29–64. 10.1075/lia.00007.sat
     https://doi.org/10.1075/lia.00007.sat [Google Scholar]
  59. Savickienė, I., & Dressler, W. U.
    (2007) The acquisition of diminutives a: A cross-linguistic perspective. Amsterdam; Philadelphia: John Benjamins. 10.1075/lald.43
     https://doi.org/10.1075/lald.43 [Google Scholar]
  60. Savickienė, I., Kempe, V., & Brooks, P. J.
    (2009) Acquisition of gender agreement in Lithuanian: Exploring the effect of diminutive usage in an elicited production task. Journal of Child Language, 36(03), 477. doi:  10.1017/S0305000908009100
     https://doi.org/10.1017/S0305000908009100 [Google Scholar]
  61. Ševa, N., Kempe, V., Brooks, P. J., Mironova, N., Pershukova, A., & Fedorova, O.
    (2007) Crosslinguistic evidence for the diminutive advantage: Gender agreement in Russian and Serbian children. Journal of Child Language, 34(01), 111–131. doi:  10.1017/S0305000906007720
     https://doi.org/10.1017/S0305000906007720 [Google Scholar]
  62. Spada, N., & Lightbown, P.
    (2008) Form-focused instruction: Isolated or integrated?TESOL Quarterly42(2). 181–207. 10.1002/j.1545‑7249.2008.tb00115.x
     https://doi.org/10.1002/j.1545-7249.2008.tb00115.x [Google Scholar]
  63. Sugisaki, K.
    (2008) Early acquisition of basic word order in Japanese. Language Acquisition, 15(3), 183–191. doi:  10.1080/10489220802142441
     https://doi.org/10.1080/10489220802142441 [Google Scholar]
  64. Valentini, A., & Grassi, R.
    (2016) Oltre la frequenza. L’impatto della trasparenza e dell’accento sull’apprendimento del lessico in L2. InL. Corrà (Ed.), Sviluppo della competenza lessicale. Acquisizione, apprendimento, insegnamento (pp.125–143). Roma: Aracne.
     [Google Scholar]
  65. VanPatten, B., & Smith, M.
    (2015) Aptitude as grammatical sensitivity and the initial stages of learning Japanese as a L2. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 37(1), 135–165. doi:  10.1017/S0272263114000345
     https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263114000345 [Google Scholar]
  66. Wickham, H.
    (2017) stringr: Simple, consistent wrappers for common string operations (Version 1.2.0). Retrieved fromhttps://CRAN.R-project.org/package=stringr
  67. Wulff, S., & Ellis, N.
    (2018) Usage-based approaches to second language acquisition. InD. Miller, F. Bayram, J. Rothman, & L. Serratrice (Eds.), Bilingual cognition and language. The state of the science across its subfields. (pp.37–56). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/sibil.54.03wul
     https://doi.org/10.1075/sibil.54.03wul [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/10.1075/lia.19012.sat
Loading
Word formation in the earliest stages of L2 Polish
Language, Interaction and Acquisition 11, 232 (2020); https://doi.org/10.1075/lia.19012.sat
/content/journals/10.1075/lia.19012.sat
/content/journals/10.1075/lia.19012.sat
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): first exposure; initial SLA; input control; Polish; usage-based; word formation

Most Cited

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