The End State in L2A: Factors, Facts & Fallacies
description
Transcript of The End State in L2A: Factors, Facts & Fallacies
![Page 1: The End State in L2A: Factors, Facts & Fallacies](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062501/56815bb1550346895dc9b17e/html5/thumbnails/1.jpg)
1
The End State in L2A: Factors, Facts & Fallacies
Cognitive Science SeminarUniversity of Texas
9 October 2009
David BirdsongDept. of French & Italian
[paper handout to accompany slides][slides to be posted on blackboard]
![Page 2: The End State in L2A: Factors, Facts & Fallacies](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062501/56815bb1550346895dc9b17e/html5/thumbnails/2.jpg)
2
L2A research Sample of journals
CognitionJMLJCNNature NeuroscienceBBSBrain & Language Language Applied PsycholinguisticsTICSBilingualism: Language and CognitionStudies in Second Language Acquisition Second Language Research
![Page 3: The End State in L2A: Factors, Facts & Fallacies](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062501/56815bb1550346895dc9b17e/html5/thumbnails/3.jpg)
3
L2A research Programs/Labs
McGillGeorgetownIllinoisMPI-NijmegenEssexCNRS ParisAmsterdam GroningenHeidelberg
![Page 4: The End State in L2A: Factors, Facts & Fallacies](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062501/56815bb1550346895dc9b17e/html5/thumbnails/4.jpg)
4
L2A research Recent Ph.D’s at UT - F&I
Robert Reichle (December 2008)“Syntactic focus structure processing: Behavioral and electrophysiological evidence from L1 and L2 French”
Elenor Shoemaker (May 2009)“Acoustic cues to speech segmentation in spoken French: native and non-native strategies”
![Page 5: The End State in L2A: Factors, Facts & Fallacies](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062501/56815bb1550346895dc9b17e/html5/thumbnails/5.jpg)
5
Context: the ‘Deficit Model’ tradition
Bley-Vroman (1989: 44): Insignificant
incidence of nativelikeness in late L2AL2A: “ineluctable failure”
fossilized non-nativeness=> Fundamental Difference Hypothesis
![Page 6: The End State in L2A: Factors, Facts & Fallacies](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062501/56815bb1550346895dc9b17e/html5/thumbnails/6.jpg)
6
Context: the ‘Deficit Model’ tradition
Johnson & Newport (1989: 255): for AoA > 15 “later AOA determines that one will
not become native[like] or near-native[like] in a [2nd] language” <= maturationally-based CPH/L2A
![Page 7: The End State in L2A: Factors, Facts & Fallacies](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062501/56815bb1550346895dc9b17e/html5/thumbnails/7.jpg)
7
Context: the ‘Deficit Model’ tradition
Long (1989: 280): “The ability to attain native- like phonological abilities [in an L2] is beyond anyone beginning later than age 12, no matter how motivated they might be or how much opportunity they might have. Native-like morphology and syntax only seem to be possible for those beginning before age 15.”<= Maturational
constraints
![Page 8: The End State in L2A: Factors, Facts & Fallacies](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062501/56815bb1550346895dc9b17e/html5/thumbnails/8.jpg)
8
Context: the ‘Deficit Model’ tradition
Hyltenstam & Abrahamsson (2003: 575): If we look at “overall L2 proficiency” we will find that “perfect proficiency” and “absolute nativelike command of an L2 may in fact never be possible for any [late L2] learner” <= Deficient language- learning mechanisms
NB: B-V, J&N, Long, H&A criterion = monolingual nativeNB: All approach deficit from end state (= ultimate attainment) perspective
![Page 9: The End State in L2A: Factors, Facts & Fallacies](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062501/56815bb1550346895dc9b17e/html5/thumbnails/9.jpg)
9
Context: the ‘Deficit Model’ traditionW/r/t L2 processing => representation by late learners
Tsimpli & Dimitrakopoulou (2007: 217): Uninterpretable features (e.g. +/- case) “difficult to identify and analyse in the input” <= “persistent, maturationally-based L1 effects on adult L2 grammars” => role of detection in unlearnability of uF; cf. Lardiere (2009) NB: criterion = monolingual native; S’s not always at end state
![Page 10: The End State in L2A: Factors, Facts & Fallacies](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062501/56815bb1550346895dc9b17e/html5/thumbnails/10.jpg)
10
Context: the ‘Differences Model’
W/r/t L2 processing by late learners
Clahsen & Felser (2006: 564): L2 processingnativelike in some areas of grammar; however even in high-proficient L2ers “differences persist in the domain of complex syntax” i.e, in “real-time computation of complex hierarchical representations” => consider explanations: deficient L2 grammar (representational deficit vis à vis native); L1 transfer; cognitive resource limitations; maturational constraints
NB: C&F criterion = monolingual native; not all S’s at end state
![Page 11: The End State in L2A: Factors, Facts & Fallacies](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062501/56815bb1550346895dc9b17e/html5/thumbnails/11.jpg)
11
Context: the ‘Differences Model’
W/r/t L2 processing by late learners
Cutler (2003, inter alia): In segmental, subsegmental and suprasegmental perception, L2ers listen through L1 ears; see also Peperkamp, Sebastian-Galles, Dupoux, etc.
![Page 12: The End State in L2A: Factors, Facts & Fallacies](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062501/56815bb1550346895dc9b17e/html5/thumbnails/12.jpg)
12
Context: Meisel (2009)
Meisel (2009: 8) “Changes in the L[anguage] M[aking] C[apacity] in the course of childhood development make it impossible for the L2 learner to acquire a complete native grammatical competence of the target language”
Meisel (2009: 13) FDH “does not entail that L2 acquisition becomes totally or partially impossible. Rather, the claim is that L2 knowledge is of a different kind” <= source of knowledge is different
![Page 13: The End State in L2A: Factors, Facts & Fallacies](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062501/56815bb1550346895dc9b17e/html5/thumbnails/13.jpg)
13
Current aL2A work under ‘DM’
Methodologically:(Usually) studied: - L2 high-proficients
Understudied: - L2 dominants
(Often) not considered: - facilitating / inhibiting external factors - individual info processing differences - reciprocal L2 <-> L1 influence - AoA as comparison condition or control variable
- assurance of L2A asymptote - incidence (#’s) of nativelike processers => Incomplete empirical picture of nature +
extent of native / L2 differences
![Page 14: The End State in L2A: Factors, Facts & Fallacies](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062501/56815bb1550346895dc9b17e/html5/thumbnails/14.jpg)
14
Current aL2A work under ‘DM’
Programmatically:Data: - varied behavioral & brain-based studies - varied methods & tasks
Domains: - range of processing and knowledge domains Focus: - non-nativelike processing at group level
Orientation: - deterministic differences
Goal: - theory of qualitative L1-L2 differences in knowledge / processing => Empirical gaps w/r/t upper limits of (late) L2A
![Page 15: The End State in L2A: Factors, Facts & Fallacies](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062501/56815bb1550346895dc9b17e/html5/thumbnails/15.jpg)
15
‘Upper Limits Model’
Complementing the DM perspective:Programmatically & methodologically Distinguish:
- what adult L2ers do- what adult L2ers don’t do- what adult L2ers can do- what adult L2ers can’t do
Populations: - L2 dominants (two types)- L1 attriters- (L2 high-proficients)- incentivized L2ers: functional need for L2 nativelikeness- L2ers desiring socio-cultural integration, L2 identity
![Page 16: The End State in L2A: Factors, Facts & Fallacies](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062501/56815bb1550346895dc9b17e/html5/thumbnails/16.jpg)
16
‘ULM’Programmatically:Integrate:
- individual differences w/r/t internal factors e.g. WM componentsRationale: - claims that only freakish aptitude => nativelikeness [more later]- WM correlates with level of ultimate attainment in some tasks
Integrate: - facilitating / inhibiting external conditions
Rationale: - in comparing L1A and L2A end state, level the playing field in terms of facilitating conditions [more later] - ‘normal’ adult L2A conditions = abnormal for LA generally
Integrate: - AoA / AoT as control, predictor variablesRationale: - we know the effects of age and +/- their sources [more later]- to see what can L2ers do in spite of age influences
![Page 17: The End State in L2A: Factors, Facts & Fallacies](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062501/56815bb1550346895dc9b17e/html5/thumbnails/17.jpg)
17
‘ULM’Programmatically:Goals:
- Establish end state processing profiles:- L2 dominants - defined by L2 vs L1 relative use- defined psycholinguistically (independent processing measures)- late vs. early dominants- unstable dominants
- Establish upper bounds of L2ers’ processing & knowledge:- vis à vis natives - vis à vis early bilinguals / early L2ers- in their own right (v. comparative fallacy)- keeping in mind L2<->L1 influence (L1 of a monolingual ≠ L1 of a bilingual)
- Integrate above into theory of L2 knowledge & processing at the limits
![Page 18: The End State in L2A: Factors, Facts & Fallacies](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062501/56815bb1550346895dc9b17e/html5/thumbnails/18.jpg)
18
‘ULM’
Perspectives:
Analogy: Track team with ankle weights: What would happen if we took off the weights?
Analogy: Ghetto vs. suburbs HS exit exam scores: We know that the achievements will differ, but the story shouldn’t stop there.
![Page 19: The End State in L2A: Factors, Facts & Fallacies](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062501/56815bb1550346895dc9b17e/html5/thumbnails/19.jpg)
19
‘ULM’Perspectives:X freakish talent (WM capacity, LTM, musical ability)
X freakish accomplishments (Hale, “Christopher”)
√ normals working within their limits
√ give acquisition the same chance it has in younger populations…- one can’t take away age effects- one can minimize L1 effects- one can provide benign external conditions…and see what happens
=> relevance to claims, assumptions; CPH/L2A, FDH, ‘access’
![Page 20: The End State in L2A: Factors, Facts & Fallacies](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062501/56815bb1550346895dc9b17e/html5/thumbnails/20.jpg)
20
UT Cog Sci Presentation
L2 end state attainment:Approach ultimate attainment neutrally: deficits &
differences alongside upper limits
FACTS about end-state attainment, as mediated by age of acquisition and age of testing
FACTORS that constrain vs. enable L2 acquisition, and their nature
FALLACIES w/r/t end state, e.g. CPH/L2A
Q: Under DM: Evidence for maturation-based differences?Q: Under ULM: What can (late) L2-dominants do?
![Page 21: The End State in L2A: Factors, Facts & Fallacies](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062501/56815bb1550346895dc9b17e/html5/thumbnails/21.jpg)
21
Distinctions: AoA ≠ AoT ≠ maturational state
AoA = Age of Acquisition (Immersion, Onset)= macro-variable, encompassing inter alia: - degree of L1 entrenchment- L1 proficiency- state of system plasticity- state of cognitive development- degree of (neuro-)cognitive decline (adults)- suite of neurobiological variables
AoA = proxy for initial state of L2A
NB: AoA-related effectsNB: “The age factor” = convenient but underspecific
label
![Page 22: The End State in L2A: Factors, Facts & Fallacies](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062501/56815bb1550346895dc9b17e/html5/thumbnails/22.jpg)
22
Distinctions: AoA ≠ AoT ≠ maturational state
AoT = Age at Testing = macro-variable, encompassing inter alia: degree of L1 entrenchmentL1 proficiency L2 proficiencystate of system plasticitystate of cognitive developmentdegree of (neuro-)cognitive decline [see Supplements]suite of neurobiological variablesalso: socio-psychological identification w/ L2 & L1also: frequency of L2/L1 use
AoT = proxy for current state of L2 knowledge and processing
NB: AoT-related effects
![Page 23: The End State in L2A: Factors, Facts & Fallacies](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062501/56815bb1550346895dc9b17e/html5/thumbnails/23.jpg)
23
AoTAdvanced AoT:
- More profound impact in L2 processing than in L1 processing. L2 processing more vulnerable because:
- greater reliance on fluid intelligence than in L1 use
- less-routinized procedures than in L1 use
Open question: - AoT (& AoA)-related effects = less severe among L2 dominants?
![Page 24: The End State in L2A: Factors, Facts & Fallacies](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062501/56815bb1550346895dc9b17e/html5/thumbnails/24.jpg)
24
Distinctions: AoA ≠ AoT ≠ maturational state
Maturational state: > (vs. // vs. X)// degree of L1 entrenchment // L1 proficiency// L2 proficiency> state of system plasticity > state of cognitive development > degree of (neuro-)cognitive decline> suite of neurobiological variablesX socio-psychological identification w/ L2 & L1X frequency of L2/L1 use
// experientially correlates with aging AoA & AoT> biologically aging-related, pre-/post- ‘maturation’ AoA & AoT
X intrinsically unrelated to aging AoT only
![Page 25: The End State in L2A: Factors, Facts & Fallacies](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062501/56815bb1550346895dc9b17e/html5/thumbnails/25.jpg)
25
DistinctionsUltimate Attainment in L2
= end state (asymptotic) knowledge and processing
≠ only nativelikeness
= any level at end state, up to & including nativelike
![Page 26: The End State in L2A: Factors, Facts & Fallacies](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062501/56815bb1550346895dc9b17e/html5/thumbnails/26.jpg)
26
DistinctionsNature, causes & domains of non-
nativelike ultimate attainment (Hopp, 2007)
Nature: REPRESENTATIONAL * COMPUTATIONAL / \ / | \
Cause: impairment * L1 impairment * inefficiency * L1 [FT/FA] / \ | | |
Domain: module * interface parsing * info * inter- routes integration ference [FFF] [uF] [DP] [lim cap] [CM] [SS] [MSI]
![Page 27: The End State in L2A: Factors, Facts & Fallacies](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062501/56815bb1550346895dc9b17e/html5/thumbnails/27.jpg)
27
DistinctionsAge, end state, upper limits:
Computational (in)efficiency• => default to lexis/plausibility in complex computationsL1 influence• developmental & at AoA / AoT• as alternative to / complement to impairmentPerceptual components of processing <-> grammar• detection of uF• as precondition for interpretation (e.g. in French liaison)
Nature: REPRESENTATIONAL * COMPUTATIONAL / \ / | \
Cause: impairment * L1 impairment * inefficiency * L1 [FT/FA]/ \ | | |
Domain: module * interface parsing * info * inter- routes integration ference [FFF] [uF] [DP] [lim cap] [CM] [SS][MSI]
![Page 28: The End State in L2A: Factors, Facts & Fallacies](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062501/56815bb1550346895dc9b17e/html5/thumbnails/28.jpg)
28
DistinctionsHeuristics:
Universal Learnability versus Selective Processability
- Universal Learnability: anything can be learned by someone
- Selective Processability: some things can’t be processed by anyone
![Page 29: The End State in L2A: Factors, Facts & Fallacies](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062501/56815bb1550346895dc9b17e/html5/thumbnails/29.jpg)
29
DistinctionsThe AoA function, shapes:
straight line stretched ‘7’inverted ‘V’stretched ‘Z’
The AoA function, timing of deflection:coinciding with known maturational epochscoinciding with ages unrelated to maturation
The AoA function, steepness => # of nativelike-ers
![Page 30: The End State in L2A: Factors, Facts & Fallacies](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062501/56815bb1550346895dc9b17e/html5/thumbnails/30.jpg)
30
Slope predicts incidence of nativelikeness:
shallow slope => high rate of nativelikeness
AoA20 Years
Range ofScores of NativeControls
![Page 31: The End State in L2A: Factors, Facts & Fallacies](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062501/56815bb1550346895dc9b17e/html5/thumbnails/31.jpg)
31
Slope predicts incidence of nativelikeness:
steep slope => low rate of nativelikeness
Range ofScores of NativeControls
AoA20 Years
![Page 32: The End State in L2A: Factors, Facts & Fallacies](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062501/56815bb1550346895dc9b17e/html5/thumbnails/32.jpg)
32
FACTS of Biological Aging & their relationship to L2 processing
by late L2ers
![Page 33: The End State in L2A: Factors, Facts & Fallacies](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062501/56815bb1550346895dc9b17e/html5/thumbnails/33.jpg)
33
Age and ProcessingSupplement I
Park et al. (2001)
QuickTime™ and aTIFF (LZW) decompressor
are needed to see this picture.
![Page 34: The End State in L2A: Factors, Facts & Fallacies](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062501/56815bb1550346895dc9b17e/html5/thumbnails/34.jpg)
34
Age and ProcessingSupplement I break-out
Park (2000)
![Page 35: The End State in L2A: Factors, Facts & Fallacies](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062501/56815bb1550346895dc9b17e/html5/thumbnails/35.jpg)
35
Cognitive Aging Effects
Effects in language processing: • processing speed• working memory capacity• lexical retrieval• linear over AoT/AoA, starting at 20 years of age• prior to AoT/AoA: increase then decline (inverted “V”)plateau then decline (stretched “7”)• linkage of processing behaviors to biological aging (Bäckman & Farde, 2005)
=> L2 processingconstraints on input processing at AoA/AoToutput performance decrements at AoTdepressed levels of processing at L2 end state
![Page 36: The End State in L2A: Factors, Facts & Fallacies](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062501/56815bb1550346895dc9b17e/html5/thumbnails/36.jpg)
36
Constraining FACTORS 1-Neuro-biology/anatomy/chemistry/cognition:
post-puberty, with increasing age (AoA & AoT):• ‘use it then lose it’ (Pinker, 1994)
• pathological increases in cortisol levels
• declines in neurotransmitter levels: ACH dopamine, etc.Supplement II
• declining regional brain volumes (Raz, 2005)Supplement III
![Page 37: The End State in L2A: Factors, Facts & Fallacies](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062501/56815bb1550346895dc9b17e/html5/thumbnails/37.jpg)
37
Biological Aging Effects
Declines in neurotransmitter levels: ACH, dopamine, etc.Supplement II
Neurotransmitter declines in L2 processing: • variety of cognitive functions underlying L2 processing - working memory capacity & executive function- attention & inhibitory processes (L1 suppression)- coordination/proceduralization in syntax• linear over AoT/AoA, starting at 20 years of age• prior to AoT/AoA: increase, then decline (inverted “V”)plateau, then decline (stretched “7”)
![Page 38: The End State in L2A: Factors, Facts & Fallacies](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062501/56815bb1550346895dc9b17e/html5/thumbnails/38.jpg)
38
Biological Aging Effects Declines in regional brain volume
Supplement III
Effects in L2 processing: • variety of cognitive functions underlying L2 processing - executive function- LTM- coordination/proceduralization in syntax• linear over AoT/AoA, starting at 20 years of age• prior to AoT/AoA:increase then decline (inverted “V”)possible plateau (stretched “7”)• not reliable linkage of behavior to biological sources -effects more associated w/neurochemistry than w/structure-uncertain timing of decrease thresholds => associated cognitive decrements
![Page 39: The End State in L2A: Factors, Facts & Fallacies](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062501/56815bb1550346895dc9b17e/html5/thumbnails/39.jpg)
39
Constraining FACTORS
2-Cognitive development:
• Adult working memory bandwidth lets in too much linguistic information to process at once => incomplete processing of, e.g., sequences of morphemes: “less is more” (Newport, various)
![Page 40: The End State in L2A: Factors, Facts & Fallacies](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062501/56815bb1550346895dc9b17e/html5/thumbnails/40.jpg)
40
Constraining FACTORS
2-Cognitive development: post-concrete operations• Analytic/metalinguistic/explicit input & learning • Literacy => L2 vis à vis L1 learning & processing: ? effortful? inefficient √ different [cognitive, neural] resources
![Page 41: The End State in L2A: Factors, Facts & Fallacies](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062501/56815bb1550346895dc9b17e/html5/thumbnails/41.jpg)
41
Constraining FACTORS
3-L1 entrenchment: L1 representations are increasingly defined with use =>• developing representations/categories assimilate to old (Flege, various)• competition between old and developing
representations (MacWhinney, various) • [Hebbian] learning inhibits related new learning (Elman, various)
![Page 42: The End State in L2A: Factors, Facts & Fallacies](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062501/56815bb1550346895dc9b17e/html5/thumbnails/42.jpg)
42
Facilitating FACTORS
Enabling via 1- Subtraction of constraint
• minimize L1 influence via L1 attrition or L2 dominance [More to come]
![Page 43: The End State in L2A: Factors, Facts & Fallacies](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062501/56815bb1550346895dc9b17e/html5/thumbnails/43.jpg)
43
Facilitating FACTORS
Enabling via
2- Offsetting the effects of limiting factors
• training on L2 perception • training on L2 pronunciation
![Page 44: The End State in L2A: Factors, Facts & Fallacies](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062501/56815bb1550346895dc9b17e/html5/thumbnails/44.jpg)
44
Facilitating FACTORS
Enabling via:3-Individual variation • aptitude components (phonological) working memory• health / genetic / lifestyle hypertension: inverted “U” function ACH, testosterone, estrogen, dopamine, cortisol [early & late]• attitude & affect motivation; L2 ‘identity’; ‘passing for’ • L2 use / practice / rehearsal / education
![Page 45: The End State in L2A: Factors, Facts & Fallacies](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062501/56815bb1550346895dc9b17e/html5/thumbnails/45.jpg)
45
Facilitating FACTORS
NB:
Some factors trump others e.g., neurobiology = irrelevant
if low desire for attainment; v.
• passing for a native
• ID with L2 culture & speakers
![Page 46: The End State in L2A: Factors, Facts & Fallacies](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062501/56815bb1550346895dc9b17e/html5/thumbnails/46.jpg)
46
Facilitating FACTORS
NB:
Distinguish necessary from sufficient conditions: A given factor may be necessary but not sufficient for nativelike attainment
![Page 47: The End State in L2A: Factors, Facts & Fallacies](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062501/56815bb1550346895dc9b17e/html5/thumbnails/47.jpg)
47
FACTS of Upper Limits: can do
Uncontroversially a given late (AoA > 12) L2 learner can: perform like monolinguals across multiple complex behavioral measures of grammatical knowledge & lexical knowledge &global pronunciation
can: perform like monolinguals on a range of brain-based measures of L2 processing e.g., ERP components, regional brain activity [more to come]
![Page 48: The End State in L2A: Factors, Facts & Fallacies](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062501/56815bb1550346895dc9b17e/html5/thumbnails/48.jpg)
48
FACTS of Upper Limits: cannot do
Uncontroversially late learner GROUPS cannot: perform like monolinguals on ‘challenging’ online and offline tasks/structures/items; various processing tasks involving parsing, suprasegmental perception, etc.
![Page 49: The End State in L2A: Factors, Facts & Fallacies](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062501/56815bb1550346895dc9b17e/html5/thumbnails/49.jpg)
49
FACTS of Upper Limits: cannot do?
Controversially a given late L2 learner cannot: perform like monolingualson certain on-line processing tasks involving sentence parsing, suprasegmental perception, etc. (quantitative & qualitative differences)
![Page 50: The End State in L2A: Factors, Facts & Fallacies](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062501/56815bb1550346895dc9b17e/html5/thumbnails/50.jpg)
50
Aside: AoA gradient and rate of nativelikeness
![Page 51: The End State in L2A: Factors, Facts & Fallacies](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062501/56815bb1550346895dc9b17e/html5/thumbnails/51.jpg)
51
Slope predicts incidence of nativelikeness:
shallow slope => high rate
AoA20 Years
Range ofScores of NativeControls
![Page 52: The End State in L2A: Factors, Facts & Fallacies](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062501/56815bb1550346895dc9b17e/html5/thumbnails/52.jpg)
52
Slope predicts incidence of nativelikeness:
steep slope => low rateRange ofScores of NativeControls
AoA20 Years
![Page 53: The End State in L2A: Factors, Facts & Fallacies](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062501/56815bb1550346895dc9b17e/html5/thumbnails/53.jpg)
53
FACTORS underlying FACTSFACTORS that modulate observed slopes (FACTS):
• Frequency of L2 use• Degree of L1 entrenchment• Degree of L1 vs. L2 dominance• Neuro- biological/cognitive/anatomical / chemical state• Identification with TL’ers• Motivation to learn / ‘pass for’ native TL’er• FL/L2 learning aptitude, e.g., pitch perception, auditory discrimination• Sub-domain of language e.g., pronunciation. vs. agreement• General cognitive abilities/aptitudes, e.g., phonological working memory• Felicitous feature-wise L1-L2 pairing• ‘Easy’ vs. ‘hard’ tasks (e.g., off-line vs. on-line)
![Page 54: The End State in L2A: Factors, Facts & Fallacies](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062501/56815bb1550346895dc9b17e/html5/thumbnails/54.jpg)
54
FACTORS underlying FACTS
Posited FACTORS /mechanisms underlying FACTS of age effects in L2 processing = consistent with common sense and empirical research
Each is plausibly at work in some fashion in L2A
Contribution of each may vary over time course of L2 learning and use
Contribution of each may differ from individual to individual
In the aggregate, some account for more variance than others
![Page 55: The End State in L2A: Factors, Facts & Fallacies](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062501/56815bb1550346895dc9b17e/html5/thumbnails/55.jpg)
55
FACTORS, FACTS, FALLACIESPosited FACTORS/mechanisms underlying FACTS of age effects in L2 processing = consistent with common sense and empirical research
Each is plausibly at work in some fashion in L2A FALLACY: there is a single source of age effects
Contribution of each may vary over time course of L2 learning/useFALLACY: contributions are static over time
Contribution of each may differ from individual to individual FALLACY: one size fits all (genetic, deterministic account)FALLACY: nothing one can do about slope of declines FALLACY: we should study groups (and “general failure”)
In the aggregate, some account for more variance than others FALLACY: assume no interaction between/among factors
![Page 56: The End State in L2A: Factors, Facts & Fallacies](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062501/56815bb1550346895dc9b17e/html5/thumbnails/56.jpg)
56
THE AOA FUNCTION IN END-STATE L2 ATTAINMENT
(Processing & Knowledge)
![Page 57: The End State in L2A: Factors, Facts & Fallacies](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062501/56815bb1550346895dc9b17e/html5/thumbnails/57.jpg)
57
Successful AgingCotman (2000)
![Page 58: The End State in L2A: Factors, Facts & Fallacies](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062501/56815bb1550346895dc9b17e/html5/thumbnails/58.jpg)
58
Age functions in L2A…Context: Two types of evidence pro/contra CPH in L2A:
1) late-learner nativelikeness at end state (v. supra & infra). Long (1990): a single late learner at nativelike levels would falsify CPH/L2A learning circuitry no longer plastic because neurobiological maturation is completed
![Page 59: The End State in L2A: Factors, Facts & Fallacies](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062501/56815bb1550346895dc9b17e/html5/thumbnails/59.jpg)
59
Age functions in L2A…Context: Two types of evidence pro/contra CPH in L2A:
2a) characteristics of age function Pulvermüller & Schumann (1994): unbounded AoA effects past puberty would falsify CPH/L2Aongoing age effects are inconsistent with presumed completion of neurobiological maturation
![Page 60: The End State in L2A: Factors, Facts & Fallacies](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062501/56815bb1550346895dc9b17e/html5/thumbnails/60.jpg)
60
Age functions in L2A…Context: Two types of evidence pro/contra CPH in L2A:
2b) characteristics of age function Johnson & Newport (1989): function levels off at AoA 17; supports CPH/L2A ongoing age effects are inconsistent with presumed completion of neurobiological maturationRecall: biology said to be deterministically linked to non-nativelikeness among late L2 learners (v. supra).
![Page 61: The End State in L2A: Factors, Facts & Fallacies](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062501/56815bb1550346895dc9b17e/html5/thumbnails/61.jpg)
61
Age functions in L2ACan CPH(s) for L2A be reconciled with the FACTS, i.e. with observed geometry & timing of AoA - attainment functions? Observed geometry of declining attainment - function may be straight line, curvilinear or discontinuous; in all cases declines persist over AoA
Observed timing of start of decline - infancy- childhood- around puberty- post puberty
Observed timing of end of decline (?)
![Page 62: The End State in L2A: Factors, Facts & Fallacies](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062501/56815bb1550346895dc9b17e/html5/thumbnails/62.jpg)
62
Observed AoA-L2 attainment distribution
(Flege et al., 1995)
![Page 63: The End State in L2A: Factors, Facts & Fallacies](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062501/56815bb1550346895dc9b17e/html5/thumbnails/63.jpg)
63
Observed AoA-L2 attainment distribution
(Flege et al., 1999)
![Page 64: The End State in L2A: Factors, Facts & Fallacies](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062501/56815bb1550346895dc9b17e/html5/thumbnails/64.jpg)
64
Observed AoA-L2 attainment distribution
(Flege et al., 1999)
QuickTime™ and a decompressor
are needed to see this picture.
![Page 65: The End State in L2A: Factors, Facts & Fallacies](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062501/56815bb1550346895dc9b17e/html5/thumbnails/65.jpg)
65
Observed AoA-L2 attainment function
(Flege et al., 1999)
QuickTime™ and a decompressor
are needed to see this picture.
![Page 66: The End State in L2A: Factors, Facts & Fallacies](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062501/56815bb1550346895dc9b17e/html5/thumbnails/66.jpg)
66
Observed AoA-L2 attainment function
(Birdsong & Flege, 2000)
• Accuracy over AoA
QuickTime™ and aPhoto - JPEG decompressor
are needed to see this picture.
![Page 67: The End State in L2A: Factors, Facts & Fallacies](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062501/56815bb1550346895dc9b17e/html5/thumbnails/67.jpg)
67
Birdsong & Flege (2000)
Age at Testing AoA in U.S. Length of Residence(Years) (Years) (Years)
10 KNS 16-26 6-10 10-1610 SNS
10 KNS 21-31 11-15 10-1610 SNS
10 KNS 26-36 16-20 10-1610 SNS
![Page 68: The End State in L2A: Factors, Facts & Fallacies](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062501/56815bb1550346895dc9b17e/html5/thumbnails/68.jpg)
68
Birdsong & Flege (2000)Low Frequency Regular Noun Plural
There are five a. knuckli on each hand. b. knuckle c. knuckles d. knackle
e. knuckleses
High Frequency Irregular Verb Past
Yesterd ay t he little girl a. swim for t he fir st t ime.b. swamc. swimmedd. swimse. swammed
Phrasal Verbs
The mot her must look in on t he babyThe st udent s must come up wit h t he right answer
![Page 69: The End State in L2A: Factors, Facts & Fallacies](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062501/56815bb1550346895dc9b17e/html5/thumbnails/69.jpg)
69
Observed AoA-L2 attainment function
Negative correlation of AoA and attainment measures
Over full AoA span: Significant linear correlations. Range: -.45 to -.77; median -.64.
![Page 70: The End State in L2A: Factors, Facts & Fallacies](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062501/56815bb1550346895dc9b17e/html5/thumbnails/70.jpg)
70
Observed AoA-L2 attainment function
Over full AoA span vs. disaggregated analyses
1.J&N ‘89 = significant overall; sig. early, random late
2.B&M ‘01 = significant overall; ceiling early, sig. late
![Page 71: The End State in L2A: Factors, Facts & Fallacies](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062501/56815bb1550346895dc9b17e/html5/thumbnails/71.jpg)
71
Observed AoA-L2 attainment function
Overall vs. disaggregated analyses3: DeKeyser (2000) = significant overall; ns
early, ns late
![Page 72: The End State in L2A: Factors, Facts & Fallacies](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062501/56815bb1550346895dc9b17e/html5/thumbnails/72.jpg)
72
Observed AoA-L2 attainment function
Summary of FACTS • Over all AoA:
-significant declines-persist indefinitely (not bounded, no
‘period’)• Late AoA:
-declines: typically significant• Early AoA:
-Inconsistent findings: somefunctions flat, some random, some declining ab initio
Small sample size => caution in interpretation; restricts applicable models
![Page 73: The End State in L2A: Factors, Facts & Fallacies](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062501/56815bb1550346895dc9b17e/html5/thumbnails/73.jpg)
73
Theoretical CPs
QuickTime™ and aTIFF (Uncompressed) decompressor
are needed to see this picture.
![Page 74: The End State in L2A: Factors, Facts & Fallacies](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062501/56815bb1550346895dc9b17e/html5/thumbnails/74.jpg)
74
Theoretical CP
QuickTime™ and aTIFF (LZW) decompressor
are needed to see this picture.
![Page 75: The End State in L2A: Factors, Facts & Fallacies](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062501/56815bb1550346895dc9b17e/html5/thumbnails/75.jpg)
75
Theoretical CPs
![Page 76: The End State in L2A: Factors, Facts & Fallacies](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062501/56815bb1550346895dc9b17e/html5/thumbnails/76.jpg)
76
Age function in L2A = critical period function?
Definitional logic: if critical period, then: • Finite, bounded effects, confined to a period
- (minimal criterion: discontinuity in the age function)
If attainment is conditioned by maturation, then: •The age function should look different pre- vs. post-maturation
- discontinuity is synchronized with end of some developmental epoch,
pre-maturation- classical L2 literature: discontinuity
synchronized with end of maturation
![Page 77: The End State in L2A: Factors, Facts & Fallacies](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062501/56815bb1550346895dc9b17e/html5/thumbnails/77.jpg)
77
Age function in L2A = critical period function?
(highly simplified schematics)
Stretched “7” Stretched “L” ceiling, then decline decline, then floor
![Page 78: The End State in L2A: Factors, Facts & Fallacies](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062501/56815bb1550346895dc9b17e/html5/thumbnails/78.jpg)
78
Maturationally-Based L2 Critical Period
Geometric and Temporal Features à la (J&N 1989; Pinker, 1994)
1 = peak sensitivity 2 = beginning of offset 3 = end of offset 4 = baseline
sensitivity NB: 3 coincides with end of maturation
NB: 4 age effects do not persist
12
3
4
STRETCHED “Z”(Johnson & Newport, 1989)(Pinker, 1994)
![Page 79: The End State in L2A: Factors, Facts & Fallacies](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062501/56815bb1550346895dc9b17e/html5/thumbnails/79.jpg)
79
STRETCHED “Z” (Newport, 1991)
![Page 80: The End State in L2A: Factors, Facts & Fallacies](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062501/56815bb1550346895dc9b17e/html5/thumbnails/80.jpg)
80
Johnson & Newport (1989)[Stevens (2004) rendering]
QuickTime™ and aTIFF (LZW) decompressor
are needed to see this picture.
![Page 81: The End State in L2A: Factors, Facts & Fallacies](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062501/56815bb1550346895dc9b17e/html5/thumbnails/81.jpg)
81
Johnson & Newport (1989) Early arrivals Late arrivals
Flat segment at right end of stretched “L” (like stretched “Z” in earlier slide) = FALLACY
![Page 82: The End State in L2A: Factors, Facts & Fallacies](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062501/56815bb1550346895dc9b17e/html5/thumbnails/82.jpg)
82
Age function in L2A = critical period function?
Stretched “L”: little evidence for floor effect Stretched “7”: evidence for ceiling effect; but can persist up to AoA = 27.5 years (B&M 2001)
![Page 83: The End State in L2A: Factors, Facts & Fallacies](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062501/56815bb1550346895dc9b17e/html5/thumbnails/83.jpg)
83
Age function in L2A = critical period function?
Minimal necessary feature of gradient: Discontinuity at some point [not beyond end of maturation] in the overall age function. (Stevens, Bialystok & colleagues, inter alia)
![Page 84: The End State in L2A: Factors, Facts & Fallacies](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062501/56815bb1550346895dc9b17e/html5/thumbnails/84.jpg)
84
Single linear model vs. “elbow” model Re-analysis of results of Flege et al. (1995) (thanks to Jan-Pieter de Ruiter)
QuickTime™ and aPhoto - JPEG decompressor
are needed to see this picture.
![Page 85: The End State in L2A: Factors, Facts & Fallacies](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062501/56815bb1550346895dc9b17e/html5/thumbnails/85.jpg)
85
FALLACY: any deflection = CP evidence
1- non-linearity / discontinuity must be observed in models other than disaggregation
2- must consider magnitude of deflection3- deflection point must // hypothesized source of
effect
QuickTime™ and aPhoto - JPEG decompressor
are needed to see this picture.
![Page 86: The End State in L2A: Factors, Facts & Fallacies](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062501/56815bb1550346895dc9b17e/html5/thumbnails/86.jpg)
86
Age function in L2A = critical period function? - Linear model applied over all AoA & supported - Other models:
-variable timing of declines-mild declines, mild deflections off straight line(elbow possibly more pronounced in “7” than in “L”)
- All models:
-variable slopes-persistent age effects post maturation
![Page 87: The End State in L2A: Factors, Facts & Fallacies](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062501/56815bb1550346895dc9b17e/html5/thumbnails/87.jpg)
87
Age function in L2A = critical period function?
Conceptual:
- Maturation constrains the offset of age effects? (“L” or “Z” geometry)
- Maturation determines the onset of age effects? (“7” geometry)
- “ Maturational effects” functions = consistent with other plausible mechanisms/factors in declining attainment
- If maturation is the (only) source of age effects, there should be no L1 effects (cf. J&N 1989 vs B&M 2001)
![Page 88: The End State in L2A: Factors, Facts & Fallacies](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062501/56815bb1550346895dc9b17e/html5/thumbnails/88.jpg)
88
Age function in L2A = critical period function?
√ Evidence of “7” geometry i.e. “window of opportunity”, “optimal age” = ceiling [‘age non-effect’]
√ Evidence of “7” geometry with window ending prior to late adolescence [end of window due to ?]
![Page 89: The End State in L2A: Factors, Facts & Fallacies](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062501/56815bb1550346895dc9b17e/html5/thumbnails/89.jpg)
89
Age function in L2A = critical period function?
X “7” geometry of ceiling (‘window of opportunity’) observed in one instance to extend past end of maturation (AoA = 27.5)
X Little evidence of floor in “L” or “Z” geometry at any AoA
![Page 90: The End State in L2A: Factors, Facts & Fallacies](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062501/56815bb1550346895dc9b17e/html5/thumbnails/90.jpg)
90
Age functions in L2A…Vary in geometry: shape - linear - curved, discontinuous - threshold-with-cascade, etc.- BUT invariably declines persist over AoA
Vary in geometry: slope- slope of decline modulated by external factors(e.g., L1-L2 pairing, contact with / use of L2)- slope of decline modulated by internal factors (e.g., motivation, identification, aptitude)
![Page 91: The End State in L2A: Factors, Facts & Fallacies](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062501/56815bb1550346895dc9b17e/html5/thumbnails/91.jpg)
91
Age functions in L2A…Vary in timing of decline- infancy- childhood- around puberty- post puberty
Geometry and timing vary by language (sub) domain & task- morphosyntactic knowledge (surface/abstract)- pronunciation - perception- on-line parsing
+ features therein + task
![Page 92: The End State in L2A: Factors, Facts & Fallacies](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062501/56815bb1550346895dc9b17e/html5/thumbnails/92.jpg)
92
Age functions in L2AWhat mechanisms are compatible with observed geometry & timing of AoA - attainment functions?
Shape, slope, and timing may be ‘consistent with’:- cognitive developmental state accounts- neurological development accounts- neurocognitive decline accounts- entrenchment / dominance accounts- (?) social-psychological / identification / motivation accounts
NB: separable language domains => distinct AoA functions, e.g., declines in pronunciation start early; declines in various aspects of syntax & morphology start at different times“Multiple critical periods”
![Page 93: The End State in L2A: Factors, Facts & Fallacies](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062501/56815bb1550346895dc9b17e/html5/thumbnails/93.jpg)
93
Age functions in L2A…
Implications
Straw men defeated:
- no leveling off ≠> ‘end of maturation’ accounts
- no leveling off ≠> (late) dismantling of dedicated language-learning mechanism accounts
- varying onsets of decline by language sub-domain ≠> monolithic notions of ‘language’ learning
![Page 94: The End State in L2A: Factors, Facts & Fallacies](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062501/56815bb1550346895dc9b17e/html5/thumbnails/94.jpg)
94
Looking ahead:Under DM
Add to / Evaluate evidence for qualitative neurofunctional changes with maturation and the locus of their effects in the grammar and at interfaces cf. Meisel 2009 NB: What counts as ‘qualitative’?NB: Proficiency vs AoA w/r/t convergenceAbutalebi (in press); Indefrey et al. 2005; Paradis 2009; Saur et al. 2009; Ullman (various) ->SEE SUPPLEMENT IV
![Page 95: The End State in L2A: Factors, Facts & Fallacies](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062501/56815bb1550346895dc9b17e/html5/thumbnails/95.jpg)
95
Looking ahead:Under ULM
What can L2-dominants do?
![Page 96: The End State in L2A: Factors, Facts & Fallacies](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062501/56815bb1550346895dc9b17e/html5/thumbnails/96.jpg)
96
L2 dominance & nativelikeness
Upper limits of late attainment as observed in L2-dominants vs. balanced bilinguals
Flege, MacKay & Piske (2002). Italian L1/English L2 bilinguals: (1) L1-dominants, (2) balanced bilinguals, (3) L2-dominants. Detectable accents among (1) & (2). BUT: (3) = like native controls
![Page 97: The End State in L2A: Factors, Facts & Fallacies](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062501/56815bb1550346895dc9b17e/html5/thumbnails/97.jpg)
97
L2 dominance & nativelikeness
Upper limits + ASYMMETRY in late attainment
Golato (2002): All S’s were English L1, late L2 French English dominants parse French words like French natives and English words like English natives French dominants (late L2 dominants) parse both English and French words like French monolinguals (open-syllable segmentation routine)
![Page 98: The End State in L2A: Factors, Facts & Fallacies](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062501/56815bb1550346895dc9b17e/html5/thumbnails/98.jpg)
98
L2 dominance & nativelikeness
L2-dominants do not become nativelike Hyltenstam et al. (2009): Early AoA Spanish L1 adoptees, Swedish L2.
10 behavioral measures including VOT, speech perception in noise, GJT, cloze, formulaic language. 1/4 subjects nativelike across the board; lowest AoA.
![Page 99: The End State in L2A: Factors, Facts & Fallacies](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062501/56815bb1550346895dc9b17e/html5/thumbnails/99.jpg)
99
L2 ultimate attainment versus BS ultimate attainment
ULM versus DM
Hyltenstam & Abrahamsson(2003: 540)“What is of interest is…the developmentof…the exact species-specific behavior. … an individual bird…must sing exactlyin the way that other birds of that specific species sing.”
![Page 100: The End State in L2A: Factors, Facts & Fallacies](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062501/56815bb1550346895dc9b17e/html5/thumbnails/100.jpg)
100
THANK YOU
Power point presentation to be posted on blackboard
![Page 101: The End State in L2A: Factors, Facts & Fallacies](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062501/56815bb1550346895dc9b17e/html5/thumbnails/101.jpg)
101
New h&a
• Dismiss L1 effects (how can you without comparison of results at leavel of measure, direction, etc) with other L1?
• What biological / maturational mechanism is plausibly at work at age 3 ; ie what underlies the deficit (line up mat with EACH)
• Specify maturation NATURE: cellular? LAD?• Cognitive, pruning but pasticity (W&T)• Ignore L2 effects in L1 (no NS spanish controls) • Small N• Convergence of facts, factors and fallacies
![Page 102: The End State in L2A: Factors, Facts & Fallacies](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062501/56815bb1550346895dc9b17e/html5/thumbnails/102.jpg)
102
Aside: L1-likeness in late L2A
Neurofunctional similarities L1-L2
Abutalebi et al. (2005); Green (2005); Stowe & Sabourin (2006): In terms of ‘where’ (fMRI) and ‘when’ (ERP), L1-L2 processing similarities (patterns of brain activation) among L2 high-proficients, even late learners.[more to come]
![Page 103: The End State in L2A: Factors, Facts & Fallacies](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062501/56815bb1550346895dc9b17e/html5/thumbnails/103.jpg)
103
Bill and The Keynotes
![Page 104: The End State in L2A: Factors, Facts & Fallacies](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062501/56815bb1550346895dc9b17e/html5/thumbnails/104.jpg)
104
Bill and The KeynotesAGE NOTWITHSTANDING
Our song grammar AND our learning mechanism - not deficient
![Page 105: The End State in L2A: Factors, Facts & Fallacies](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062501/56815bb1550346895dc9b17e/html5/thumbnails/105.jpg)
105
Bill and The KeynotesAGE NOTWITHSTANDING
Our song grammar AND our learning mechanism - not deficient
We are different from other conspecific birds- at the group level- at the individual level
![Page 106: The End State in L2A: Factors, Facts & Fallacies](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062501/56815bb1550346895dc9b17e/html5/thumbnails/106.jpg)
106
Bill and The KeynotesAGE NOTWITHSTANDING
Our song grammar AND our learning mechanism - not deficient
We are different from other conspecific birds- at the group level- at the individual level
We converge on the same song - we harmonize well
- we CAN sing in unison
![Page 107: The End State in L2A: Factors, Facts & Fallacies](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062501/56815bb1550346895dc9b17e/html5/thumbnails/107.jpg)
107
Bill and The KeynotesAGE NOTWITHSTANDING
Our song grammar AND our learning mechanism - not deficient
We are different from other birds- at the group level- at the individual level
We converge on the same song - we harmonize well
- we CAN sing in unison
We are not yet at end state
![Page 108: The End State in L2A: Factors, Facts & Fallacies](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062501/56815bb1550346895dc9b17e/html5/thumbnails/108.jpg)
108
Bill and The KeynotesAGE NOTWITHSTANDING
YOU AIN’T HEARD NOTHIN’ YET!
![Page 109: The End State in L2A: Factors, Facts & Fallacies](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062501/56815bb1550346895dc9b17e/html5/thumbnails/109.jpg)
109
Bill and The Keynotes
![Page 110: The End State in L2A: Factors, Facts & Fallacies](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062501/56815bb1550346895dc9b17e/html5/thumbnails/110.jpg)
110
Bill … AND THE ‘OTHER’ KEYNOTES
![Page 111: The End State in L2A: Factors, Facts & Fallacies](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062501/56815bb1550346895dc9b17e/html5/thumbnails/111.jpg)
111
H A R A L D
![Page 112: The End State in L2A: Factors, Facts & Fallacies](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062501/56815bb1550346895dc9b17e/html5/thumbnails/112.jpg)
112
ALAN
![Page 113: The End State in L2A: Factors, Facts & Fallacies](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062501/56815bb1550346895dc9b17e/html5/thumbnails/113.jpg)
113
![Page 114: The End State in L2A: Factors, Facts & Fallacies](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062501/56815bb1550346895dc9b17e/html5/thumbnails/114.jpg)
114
ALAN
![Page 115: The End State in L2A: Factors, Facts & Fallacies](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062501/56815bb1550346895dc9b17e/html5/thumbnails/115.jpg)
115
ALAN
![Page 116: The End State in L2A: Factors, Facts & Fallacies](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062501/56815bb1550346895dc9b17e/html5/thumbnails/116.jpg)
116
H A R A L D
![Page 117: The End State in L2A: Factors, Facts & Fallacies](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062501/56815bb1550346895dc9b17e/html5/thumbnails/117.jpg)
117
M I K E
![Page 118: The End State in L2A: Factors, Facts & Fallacies](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062501/56815bb1550346895dc9b17e/html5/thumbnails/118.jpg)
118
David
![Page 119: The End State in L2A: Factors, Facts & Fallacies](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062501/56815bb1550346895dc9b17e/html5/thumbnails/119.jpg)
119
Otis Redding
“HARD TO HANDLE” (1968)Proverb: “Actions speak louder than words”
![Page 120: The End State in L2A: Factors, Facts & Fallacies](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062501/56815bb1550346895dc9b17e/html5/thumbnails/120.jpg)
120
Causal mechanisms & mediating factors:
Posited factors/mechanisms underlying age effects in L2 processing = consistent with common sense and empirical research
Each is plausibly at work in some fashion in L2A
Contribution of each may vary over time course of L2 learning and use
Contribution of each may differ from individual to individual
In the aggregate, some account for more variance than others
![Page 121: The End State in L2A: Factors, Facts & Fallacies](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022062501/56815bb1550346895dc9b17e/html5/thumbnails/121.jpg)
121