- Home
- e-Journals
- Language, Interaction and Acquisition
- Previous Issues
- Volume 3, Issue, 2012
Language, Interaction and Acquisition - Volume 3, Issue 2, 2012
Volume 3, Issue 2, 2012
-
Perspective discursive et influence translinguistique: Exprimer le contraste d’entité en français et en italien L2
Author(s): Sandra Benazzo, Cecilia Andorno, Grazia Interlandi and Cédric Patinpp.: 173–201 (29)More LessThis paper aims to study perspective-taking in L2 discourse at the level of utterance information structure. Many studies have shown how principles of discourse organization partly reflect lexico-grammatical structures available in a given language, and how difficult it is to reorganize L1 discursive habits when acquiring an L2 in adulthood. In this study we compare how L2 learners of Romance languages (French, Italian), with either a Romance or a Germanic language as an L1, organize the information structure of utterances relating contrasting events. Native speakers of Germanic and Romance languages show systematic differences in the selection of the information unit — referential entities or predicate polarity — on which the contrast is highlighted (Dimroth et al. 2010) ; moreover, they differ in the lexical, prosodic and morpho-syntactic means used to achieve this goal. Our data show that L2 learners can adopt the target language perspective in the selection of the information unit to contrast, when the input offers clear evidence for it. However, their choice of linguistic means reveals both the influence of the L1 and the role of more general acquisitional principles, which are still active at the advanced level.
-
Tracing trajectories: Motion event construal by advanced L2 French-English and L2 French-German speakers
Author(s): Mary Carroll, Katja Weimar, Monique Flecken, Monique Lambert and Christiane von Stutterheimpp.: 202–230 (29)More LessAlthough the typological contrast between Romance and Germanic languages as verb-framed versus satellite-framed (Talmy 1985) forms the background for many empirical studies on L2 acquisition, the inconclusive picture to date calls for more differentiated, fine-grained analyses. The present study goes beyond explanations based on this typological contrast and takes into account the sources from which spatial concepts are mainly derived in order to shape the trajectory traced by the entity in motion when moving through space: the entity in V-languages versus features of the ground in S-languages. It investigates why advanced French learners of English and German have difficulty acquiring the use of spatial concepts typical of the L2s to shape the trajectory, although relevant concepts can be expressed in their L1. The analysis compares motion event descriptions, based on the same sets of video clips, of L1 speakers of the three languages to L1 French-L2 English and L1 French-L2 German speakers, showing that the learners do not fully acquire the use of L2-specific spatial concepts. We argue that encoded concepts derived from the entity in motion vs. the ground lead to a focus on different aspects of motion events, in accordance with their compatibility with these sources, and are difficult to restructure in L2 acquisition.
-
Typological constraints in foreign language acquisition: The expression of voluntary motion by upper intermediate and advanced Russian learners of English
Author(s): Tatiana Iakovlevapp.: 231–260 (30)More LessThis study examines the impact of typological constraints on second language acquisition. It explores the hypothesis of a conceptual transfer from first to foreign language (L1 to L2). Based on Talmy’s (2000) distinction between Verb- and Satellite-framed languages, corpus-based analyses compare descriptions of voluntary motion events along three paths (up, down, across), elicited in a controlled situation from native speakers (Russian, English) and Russian learners at two levels (upper- intermediate and advanced) acquiring English in a classroom setting. Results show that in spite of considerable differences between Russian and English native speakers’ performance, particularly with respect to the relative variability in their lexicalization patterns, idiosyncratic forms and structures produced by L2 learners rarely mirror motion conceptualization in their first language, which suggests the absence of a substantial transfer from L1.
-
Linguistic encoding of motion events in English and French: Typological constraints on second language acquisition and agrammatic aphasia
Author(s): Efstathia Soroli, Halima Sahraoui and Carol Sacchettpp.: 261–287 (27)More LessLanguages show differences in how they encode motion in discourse: Verb-framed languages lexicalize Path in the verb, leaving Manner peripheral or implicit; Satellite-framed languages lexicalize Manner together with Path adjuncts. The present study investigates: 1) the extent to which such typological constraints affect the verbalizations of second language learners (English learners of French) and of aphasic speakers (English and French speakers with agrammatism) — who typically show dissociations between lexical and syntactic knowledge — in comparison to controls (English and French native speakers); as well as 2) the role of language-independent factors (level of acquisition, syndrome type). Despite some similarities between learners and speakers with aphasia due to language-independent factors, the findings suggest typologically constrained verbalizations in all groups, as well as diverging strategies that may reflect distinct underlying conceptualization processes.
-
Thinking for Speaking and linguistic relativity among bilinguals: Towards a new research agenda
Author(s): Jeanine Treffers-Dallerpp.: 288–300 (13)More LessThis article evaluates how the different papers in this special issue fill a gap in our understanding of cognitive processes that are being activated when second language learners or bilinguals prepare to speak. All papers are framed in Slobin’s (1987) Thinking for Speaking theory, and aim to test whether the conceptualisation patterns that were learned in early childhood can be relearned or restructured in L2 acquisition. In many papers the focus is on identifying constraints on this restructuring process. Among these constraints, the role of typological differences between languages is investigated in great depth. The studies involve different types of learners, language combinations and tasks. As all informants were given verbal rather than non-verbal tasks, the focus is here on the effects of conceptual transfer from one language on another, and not on the effects of language on non-linguistic cognition. The paper also sketches different avenues for further research in this field and proposes that researchers working in this field might want to take up the challenge of investigating whether speakers of different languages perceive motion outside explicitly verbal contexts differently, as this will enable us to gain an understanding of linguistic relativity effects in this domain. Studying which teaching methods can help learners to restructure their conceptualisation patterns may also shed new light on the aspects of discourse organization and motion event construal that are most difficult for learners.
Most Read This Month
Article
content/journals/18797873
Journal
10
5
false
