Language Acquisition (2) PDF

Language Acquisition (2) Dr Thorsten Brato Department of English and American Studies VL Introduction to English Linguistics: English in Use  Recap We commonly differentiate between First language acquisition (FLA)  Language acquisition is a process which can ta...

Language Acquisition (2) Dr Thorsten Brato Department of English and American Studies VL Introduction to English Linguistics: English in Use  Recap We commonly differentiate between First language acquisition (FLA)  Language acquisition is a process which can take place at any period of one's life. In the sense of first language acquisition, however, it refers to the acquisition (unconscious learning) of one's native language (or languages in the case of bilinguals) during the first 6 or 7 years of one's life […] (Hickey 2011) Second language acquisition (SLA)  The term ‘second-language acquisition’ (or SLA) is used to cover any language or languages acquired after the first language (or ‘mother tongue’) […] (Burridge & Stebbins 2020: 571) Last week’s focus was on FLA, in this lecture we will look at SLA 2  Recap Two major approaches Observational Logical Language acquisition is a dynamic process, but follows predictable pathways Acquisition of Phonology Lexis Grammar 3  Today's lecture 1 Introduction 4 Interlanguage 2 Foundations of SLA 5 Functional approaches 3 SLA frameworks 4  1 Introduction SLA – a more detailed definition  Second Language Acquisition (SLA) refers both to the study of individuals and groups who are learning a language subsequent to learning their first one as young children, and to the process of learning that language. (Saville-Troike & Barto 2017: 2) These additional languages are either referred to as second (L2), third (L3),… language or more broadly target language (TL) – a cover term for any language that is the aim of learning How this target language is acquired may differ strongly Informal L2 learning – naturalistic context Formal L2 learning – language is taught in an institutionalised setting (e.g. the classroom) SLA is a highly interdisciplinary field, drawing mainly on Linguistics Psychology Pedagogy 5  1 Introduction The different meanings of L2 Language for specific Second Language (SL) Foreign Language (FL) purposes (LSP) Official (often) Not used in the learner’s Learning focuses on a Societally dominant immediate social very limited context Used in education, context e.g. hotel management, workplace, media Relevant for travel or aviation, agriculture SL users may be business immigrants or people in Curricular former colonies No direct practical application 6  1 Introduction The different meanings of L2  Self-study Activity Think about your language acquisition and learning career. Given the information in the previous slides, how would you rate the languages you acquired in terms of order (L1, L2, …), acquisition context and status (second, third, … language for foreign language). 7  2 Foundations of SLA First vs. second language development L1 L2 Initial state Innate capacity Innate capacity? L1 knowledge World knowledge Interaction skills Intermediate states Child grammar Learner language Basic processes Maturation Transfer Necessary conditions Input Input Reciprocal interaction Facilitating conditions Feedback Aptitude Motivation Instruction … Final state (Saville-Troike & Native competence Multilingual competence Barto 2017: 17) 8  2 Foundations of SLA L1 vs. L2 learning: Initial state L1 L2 Children are born Is there innate capacity to learn a second language? Some linguists and psychologists argue that the genetic predisposition to learn with an innate language remains throughout life  differences in L1 and L2 outcomes are due to capacity to acquire other factors Others believe that the innate capacity is lost after childhood  subsequent languages language are learned like mathematics or history Prior knowledge of L1 is a major component of L2 learning How does language work? How does a specific work? (How) can this be transferred to the L2? Real-world knowledge Cognitive developments General interactional functions Requesting, commanding, promising, and apologising 9  2 Foundations of SLA L1 vs. L2 learning: Intermediate state – Processes L1 L2 Largely systematic  Largely systematic  Predictable sequence of phenomena Predictable Interlanguage (IL, also learner language)  Cognitive maturity sequence of has often been achieved, so it cannot be a good explanation phenomena Cross-linguistic influence (transfer) of L1 on L2 Child grammar  Positive transfer: L1 structure is used in L2 utterance and is Correlated with correct/appropriate in the L2 cognitive abilities Facilitates L2 learning An L1 structure or rule that also works for L2 does not to be learned In both English and Spanish exterior have the meaning “outside”  eases lexical comprehension (but pronunciation differs, of course) 10  2 Foundations of SLA L1 vs. L2 learning: Intermediate state – Necessary conditions L1 L2 Language input is Language input is absolutely necessary absolutely necessary Face-to-face social interaction facilitates SLA, but is not a necessary Requires direct, condition reciprocal Some individuals can reach a fairly high level of proficiency in L2 from interaction with radio, television, or written text other people 11  2 Foundations of SLA L1 vs. L2 learning: Intermediate state – Facilitating conditions L1 L2 Occurs without Level of development can be facilitated or inhibited by social and instruction individual factors Is not significantly Feedback, including correction of L2 learners’ errors influenced by Aptitude, including memory capacity and analytic ability correction of Motivation or need and desire to learn immature forms or Instruction or explicit teaching in school settings motivation 12  2 Foundations of SLA L1 vs. L2 learning: Final state L1 L2 Native linguistic competence “[C]an never be totally native linguistic competence” (Saville-Troike & Barto 2017: 21) Basic phonological, grammatical and lexical Some learners may reach a near-native competence and interactional skills acquisition Most learners’ progress ceases at some point in completed by age 6 their learning career Acquisition of more complex features may L2 includes instances of L1 interference or “creative proceed into adulthood structures different from any that would be produced by a native speaker of the L2” (Saville-Troike & Barto 2017: 21)  Fossilisation  Self-study Activity Assuming that you learned English as a foreign language, can you think of examples of negative transfer or even fossilisation on the levels outlined above. 13  3 SLA frameworks Overview Timeline Linguistic Psychological Social 1950s and Structuralism Behaviourism Sociocultural theory before 1960s Transformational Neurolinguistics Ethnography of Generative Grammar Information processing communication Variation theory 1970s Functionalism Humanistic models Acculturation theory Accommodation theory 1980s Principles and Parameters Connectionism Social psychology Model 1990s Minimalist Program Processability Interactionist approaches 2000s Interfaces Complexity Theory Computer-Mediated Communication (Saville-Troike & Barto 2017: 26) 14  3 SLA frameworks Linguistic Internal Focus External Focus Based on the works of Chomksy and his followers Functionalism dates back to the 1920s and the Focus is on competence – the underlying Prague School knowledge of language every speaker has Focus on performance – language as a system Generative Grammar (GG): of communication Answer to behaviourist approaches, which Functional typology could not explain linguistic creativity Similarities between L1 and L2 ease learning; Principles and Parameters and Minimalist differences complicate it Program: Function-to-form mapping Extension of GG, but more abstract notions Grammaticalisation Linguistic interferences Construction grammar Some “modules” (e.g. syntax, semantics) are Functional approaches clearly dominate in more problematic for L2 learners and may European contexts account for developmental delays 15  3 SLA frameworks Psychological Languages and the brain Learning processes Learner differences Neurolinguistics Not used in the Why are some learners At the interface of learner’s immediate more successful than biology, psychology and social context others? linguistics Relevant for travel or Emotional involvement Critical period with a business Attitude neurolinguistic basis Curricular Motivation No direct practical Anxiety application Biological differences Age Sex 16  3 SLA frameworks Social Microsocial Macrosocial SLA in the immediate social context Ethnography of Communication Variation in learner language Social Psychology Sociolinguistics Status of L1 and L2 Accommodation Theory Circumstances of learning Native speakers may change their speech Informal vs. formal when addressing L2 speakers Naturalistic vs. intstructed Input and interaction Comprehensible input Foreigner Talk Scaffolding 17  4 Interlanguage Introduction Interlanguage (IL) can be defined as “[i]ntermediate states or interim grammars of learner language as it moves toward the target L2.” (Saville-Troike & Barto 2017: 212) Introduced by Larry Selinker in 1972, IL can be seen as third language system different from L1 and L2 and has these characteristics Systematic: At any point or stage of development the user follows internalised rules of grammar that he or she is capable of at the time Dynamic: The system changes frequently resulting in a succession of interim grammars Variable: Despite it being systematic, it differs depending on context and patterns of language use Reduced system: Reduced form: Less complex grammatical structures in the IL compared to the TL Reduced function: Smaller range of communicative needs 18  4 Interlanguage Typical processes and differences to FLA Language transfer Positive and negative transfer Strategies of second language learning How do learners approach the L2 materials and the task of L2 learning Strategies of second language communication Ways that learners try to communicate with others in the L2 Overgeneralization of the target language linguistic material L2 rules that are learned are applied too broadly Fossilization Older learners usually fossilize earlier than younger speakers (McLaughlin 1987 :61, cited in Saville-Troike & Barto 2017: 44) 19  5 Functional approaches Functional typology  A functional approach that involves classification of languages and their features into categories (or types; hence “typology”) with a major goal being to describe patterns of similarities and differences among them, and to determine which types and patterns occur more or less frequently or are universal in distribution. (Saville-Troike & Barto 2017: 199): Page) Applied most fruitfully in the accounting for developmental stages Markedness “A feature is “unmarked” if it occurs more frequently than a contrasting element in the same category, if it is less complex structurally or conceptually, or if it is more “normal” or “expected” along some other dimension.” (Saville-Troike & Barto 2017: 59) 20  5 Functional approaches Markedness examples Phonology Syllables of the type CV (e.g. /miː/, /bə.ˈnɑ.nə) are most common across the languages of the world Complex syllables such as /striːt/ are therefore marked Syntax Basic word order is SVO ("Jane drank tea") or SOV (e.g. Turkish "Jane çayı içti" – "Jane tea drank") in most languages OSV, e.g. Haitian Creole "Te a, Jane te bwè" – "Tea the Jane drank") would be marked Discourse In English the unmarked answer to the question “How are you” is “Fine.” A marked counterpart would provide more information, e.g. "I’m completely drained after that exhausting week." 21  5 Functional approaches Markedness Differential Hypothesis The Markedness Differential Hypothesis (Eckman 1977, cited in Saville-Troike & Barto 2017: 59f.) Feature in L1 Feature in L2 Prediction Marked Unmarked L2 feature will be easy to learn L1 feature will not transfer to L2 Unmarked Marked L1 feature will transfer to L2 22  5 Functional approaches Usage-based approaches Tomasello (2003) introduced the usage-based approach (construction grammar) to SLA, which following Wulff and Ellis (2018: 37) is based on these assumptions: 1. The linguistic input learners receive is the primary source for their second language (L2) learning. 2. The cognitive mechanisms that learners employ in language learning are not exclusive to language learning, but are general cognitive mechanisms associated with learning of any kind. Usage-based approaches assume that language is formulaic and based on constructions Form-function mappings conventionalised in a speech community Constructions occur on different levels (cf. Wulff & Ellis 2018: 38f.) Morphology, e.g. -aholic (‘being addicted to something’) Words, e.g. nut (‘a fruit consisting of a hard or tough shell around an edible kernel’) Idioms, e.g. It’s driving me nuts! (‘It is greatly frustrating me’) Syntactic frames, e.g. SVO (Nick gave me a cake) 23  5 Functional approaches Construction grammar Constructions are stored in multiple forms, differing in level of complexity nut and –s are simple constructions forming the more complex construction nuts abstraction (also schematization) Thank you is fully lexicalised formula and therefore less abstract than e.g. the combination of ([good + (time of day)] as in Good afternoon or Good evening, which is less abstract than [Adjective + Noun phrase), e.g. happy camper or grand finale 24   Keywords Behaviourism Language for specific purposes Competence Markedness construction Markedness Differential Hypothesis Construction grammar Near-native First language acquisition Negative transfer foreign language Neurolinguistics Fossilisation Performance Functional typology Positive transfer Function-to-form-mapping Second language acquisition Interference Target language Interlanguage Learner language Transfer L2, L3, Lx usage-based 27   References Burridge, Kate & Tonya N. Stebbins. 2020. For the love of language: An introduction to linguistics, 2nd edn. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Hickey, Raymond. 2021. English Linguistics in Essen. https://www.uni-due.de/ELE/index.html. (1 July, 2021.) Saville-Troike, Muriel & Karen Barto. 2017. Introducing Second Language Acquisition, 3rd edn. Cambridge University Press. Tomasello, Michael. 2003. Constructing a language: A usage-based theory of language acquisition. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press. Wulff, Stefanie & Nick C. Ellis. 2018. Usage-based approaches to second language acquisition. In David Miller, Fatih Bayram, Jason Rothman & Ludovica Serratrice (eds.), Bilingual Cognition and Language, 37–56. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 28