- Home
- e-Journals
- Linguistic Approaches to Bilingualism
- Previous Issues
- Volume 13, Issue 5, 2023
Linguistic Approaches to Bilingualism - Volume 13, Issue 5, 2023
Volume 13, Issue 5, 2023
-
Using a contrastive hierarchy to formalize structural similarity as I-proximity in L3 phonology
Author(s): John Archibaldpp.: 614–637 (24)More LessAbstractIn this paper I argue that cross-linguistic similarity in third language acquisition is determined by a structural hierarchy of contrastive phonological features. Such an approach allows us formalize a predictive notion of I-proximity which also provides an explanatory model of L2, and L3 phonological knowledge (represented in an integrated I-grammar). The metrics of phonological similarity (i.e., structural not acoustic) are analogous to morphosyntactic similarity in that both morphosyntactic and phonological approaches can compare the outcomes of parsing the L3 input by the L1 hierarchy and by the L2 hierarchy. From this starting point I propose a conservative, incremental learning theory to guide subsequent reconstruction of the L3 grammar. Under this model, it can be argued that phonology is part of Faculty of Language Narrow (FLN). The (gradient) phonetic material comes from outside the FLN but the linguistic computational system converts it to discrete abstract elements that can be manipulated by the learner.
-
Factors that moderate global similarity in initial L3 transfer
Author(s): Jennifer Cabrelli, Carrie Pichan, Jessica Ward, Jason Rothman and Ludovica Serratricepp.: 638–662 (25)More LessAbstractMuch of the formal linguistic research on third language (L3) acquisition has focused on transfer source selection, with the overall finding that (global) structural similarity between the L1/L2 and L3 is the strongest predictor of initial transfer patterns. Recently, Cabrelli and Pichan (2021) reported data from the production of underlyingly intervocalic voiced stops in L3 Brazilian Portuguese (BP) and L3 Italian that highlight the notion that global similarity is likely moderated by other factors. Specifically, data from heritage Spanish/English bilinguals learning L3 BP reflected reliance on (non-facilitative, but globally more similar) Spanish, while L3 Italian data reflected greater reliance on (facilitative, but globally less similar) English. The current study is a first step towards identifying the source(s) of the disparity, in which we examine the roles of degree of dominance and explicit knowledge in heritage Spanish/English bilinguals. Thirty-four L3 Italian learners completed a delayed repetition task in all three languages. We report English-like patterns that contradict the L3 BP data and cannot be accounted for by degree of dominance or explicit knowledge. We connect these results to existing L3 transfer accounts and the need for further consideration of linguistic and methodological variables, particularly acoustic salience in L3 input and task modality.
-
Does your regional variety help you acquire an additional language?
Author(s): Sílvia Perpiñán and Silvina Montrulpp.: 663–692 (30)More LessAbstractThis study investigates Differential Object Marking (DOM) in Italian speakers from two dialectal areas–North and South Italy–learning Spanish. Southern Italo-Romance varieties exhibit a DOM system through a-marking, like Spanish, whereas the Northern varieties, like Standard Italian, only allow DOM with pronouns. Given the structural differences and similarities among these typologically close languages, we ask whether a stigmatized oral regional variety has the potential to transfer in the acquisition of additional languages. Participants (n = 103) completed an acceptability judgment task (AJT) and an oral production task testing DOM in [±animate, ±definite] DP contexts. The results revealed differences modulated by proficiency in the written AJT that moderately favored the Northern learners and in the oral production task that favored the Southern learners. These findings suggest that low-prestige varieties may not have the full potential to transfer at early stages of acquisition due to their inhibition in formal contexts, but that they can emerge in less formal tasks. We argue that current theoretical models that prioritize linguistic proximity as the primary source of transfer at initial stages of L3 acquisition are unable to capture revealing patterns from understudied sociolinguistic contexts that bring new light to the study of multilingualism.
-
Verb placement in L3 French and L3 German
Author(s): Guro Busterud, Anne Dahl, Dave Kush and Kjersti Faldet Listhaugpp.: 693–716 (24)More LessAbstractThis article explores cross-linguistic influence and the relationship between surface structure and underlying syntactic structure in L3 acquisition of verb placement in L1 Norwegian L2 English learners of L3 German or French, respectively. In these languages, verb placement varies systematically. Previous research has found transfer from both L1 and L2 in similar language combinations. Using an acceptability judgment task, we tested verb placement in non-subject-initial and subject-initial sentences. Findings indicate that L3 French learners performed better on non-subject-initial sentences compared to subject-initial sentences, whereas the opposite was the case in L3 German.
We argue that our findings can be explained by a generative account of verb movement and are compatible with an analysis where verbs do not move, or do not move far enough, in the L3 learners’ underlying syntactic representation. Following the assumption that verb movement is a costly operation, we argue that the syntactic operation verb movement is constrained by principles of economy in L3 acquisition, and that economy plays a role in determining cross-linguistic influence in multilingual acquisition. Our account is compatible with a uniform analysis of the acquisition of verb movement in L1, L2 and L3, and underlines the qualitative similarities in different acquisition processes.
-
Crosslinguistic influence in L3 acquisition
Author(s): Natalia Mitrofanova, Evelina Leivada and Marit Westergaardpp.: 717–742 (26)More LessAbstractThis study investigates the role of lexical vs structural similarity in L3 acquisition. We designed a mini-artificial language learning task where the novel L3 was lexically based on Norwegian but included a property that was present in Russian and Greek yet absent in Norwegian (grammatical case). The participants were Norwegian-Russian and Norwegian-Greek bilinguals as well as a group of Norwegian L1 speakers. All participants also knew some English. The morphological expression of the L3 target property was more like Russian than Greek in that case was marked on the noun itself, not on articles. The results of our study indicate that previous experience with a language that is structurally like the L3 (Russian) is facilitative, even when the L3 lexically resembles a language that lacks this grammatical property (Norwegian). Our results suggest overt that the morphological expression of the target property also plays a role: previous experience with Greek that marks the target contrast on determiners did not seem to be facilitative at early stages of acquisition. Overall, our results are in line with models of L3/Ln acquisition which assume that both previously acquired languages influence the development of the L3 and that structural, morphological and lexical similarity play a role.
Most Read This Month
