8/18/2019 How languages are learned (Oxford) – Chapter 4: Learner Language
1/10
.
.
l
Letirner preferences
Reid,
J.
(ed.). 1995. Learning Sty es in the ESLIEFL C assroom.
New
York:
Heinle
Heinle.
Oxford, R. 1990.
Langnage
Learning Strategies: What Every Teacher Shou d
Know.
New
York:
Newbury
House.
Wesche,
M.
B. 1981. 'Language aptitude measures in streaming, marching
studen tswith methods, and diagnosis oflearningproblems' in K. Diller (ed.):
Individua Differences and Universttfs in
Lttnguage
Learning Aptitude. Ro\vley
Mass.:
Newbury
House. pp.
119-39.
Yorio, C. 1986. 'Consumerism in second language learning and reaching.'
Canaditm Afodern Language Review 42/3: 668-87.
Age ofttcquisition
Burstall,
C.
1975. 'French
in
the primary school: The British experiment.'
Czn,1dianl11odern
Language
Review
3115: 388-402.
Johnson,
J. and
E. Newport. 1989. 'Critical period effects
in
second language
learning: The influence
of
maturationalstate on rhe acquisirion ofEnglish as
a
second
language.'
Cognitive Psychology
21:
60-99.
Long,
M. H.
1990. 'Maturadonal constraints
on
language development.'
Studies in Second Language Acquísition 1213:
251-85.
Patkowsl
8/18/2019 How languages are learned (Oxford) – Chapter 4: Learner Language
2/10
8/18/2019 How languages are learned (Oxford) – Chapter 4: Learner Language
3/10
an
e f f ~ r t
to understand ho\V learners process second language data.
Error
analysts was based on the
assumption
that, like child language,
second
language learner language is a sysrem in its own righr--one
which
is rule
governed
and prcdicrable.
Larry Selinker gave rhe name inter dnguage to learners' developing
second
language knowledge (Selinker 1972). Analysis of a learner's interlanguage
shows that t has sorne cha.racrcristics influe nced by rhe learner's previously
learned
l ~ n ~ u a g e ~ ) ,
sorne characreristics
of
the sccond language,
and
sorne
~ h a r a c t e n s n c s wh1ch seem to
be
very general
and
tend to
occur
in
all
or most
i n t e r l a ~ g u a g e
systems. lnrerlanguages are systemaric,
but
rhey are also
dynan11c,
continually evolving as learners receive more
input and
revise their
hyporheses about the second language.
In
the activity that follows, we will
look at son1e characreristics of nterlanguage.
Activíty
The Great Íoy Robbery
The,following rexts were written
by
two learners ofEnglish, one a French
speaiung secondary school student, the other a Chinese-s peákingadu lt Iearner.
In,both cases, th e learners saw a cartoon film entitled The Great Toy Robbery
(Nanonal Film Board of Canada). Afrer v1ewrng the film, srudents were asked
to
retcll the srory
in
wriring, as
i
hey were telling
ir
to
so
meo
ne
who had
noc
seen rhe film.
Read the textsand examine the errots made by each learner.
Do
theymake rhe
same kinds
of
errors?
In what
ways
do
the two inrerlanguages differ?
Learner 1: French -lirst language,
secondary
schoo student
During
a sunny day, a
cowboy
go in the desert with his horse. he has a
big har. His
horse eat a
flour. In
the same rime, Santa Clause
go in a
cirv
to gi:'e sorne
surprises. He
has a
red costume
and a
red packet
surpnses. You have rhree robbers in che mounrain
who
seesSanta Clause
with aking
of glaces that ir permirted
us
rosee ar a long distance. Every
robbers have a horse.
They
go in the way
of
Santa Clause,
not
Santa
Clause
but
his
of
surprises. Afrer rhey
will
go
in
a city
and they
goma
saloon. [
(unpublished data from P M. Lighrbown
and
B Barkrnan)
Learner 2: Chinese first language, adult
T ~ i s year Christmas comes soon Santa Claus ride a one horse
open
;Ie1gh to sem presenr
forchildren.
on thebackofhis body has big packet.
ir have a lor of oys. in the way he meer rhree robbers. Theywant to rake
his big packet. Santa Claus no
wayand
no bodyhelp, so onlya way give
rhem, rhen rhree robbers ride their horse dashing through the rown.
There ha
ve saloon,
theygo
to
drinksome
beer and open the bigpackent.
They plays toys in the Bar. They meet a cow boy in rhe saloon.
(unpublished
data from M.
J Martens)
Manyerror types arecommon to both learners. Both make errorsof ubject-verb
agreemenr (for example, 'a cowboy go'
and
'three robbers in che
mounrain
who
sees' by learne r 1 and Sama Claus ride' and
they
plays' by learner 2).
Such errors are clearly
not due
ro
firsr language interference.
l"hey
reflect
learners' understanding
of
rhe second language system irself rather rhan
an
attempt
to
rransfer characrerisrics of rheir 6rst language. These are referred
to
as deveiopmental errors beca use rhey are errors which might very well be made
by
children acquiring English as rheir first language. Somerimes rhese are
errors of overgenera ization, that is, errors caus ed by rrying to use a rule in a
conrext where it does
not
belong, for example, rhe .s ending on the verb in
'they plays'. Sometimes the errors are betrer describ ed as simplijication where
elemenrs
of
a sentence are lefr
out,
far example,
or
where ali verbs have rhe
same form regardless of person,
number,
or tense.
One
can also see, especially in learner 2's text, che influence of classroom
experience. n
example
is the
use
offormulaic
expressions such as 'one horse
open
sleigh'
which
is
taken
verbatim from a well-known
Christmas
song,
which h s no
doubt
been raught
and
sung in the learner's
ESL
class.
The
vivid
'dashing through the rown' probably comes from the same source.
Far rhose who are familiar with ilie English spoken by native speakers of
French. sorne
of
he errors made by che firsr learn erwill readily
be
recognized
as probably based on French. Similarly, those familiar with rhe English of
Chinese speakers may recognize errors made by che Chinese le arner as being
due ro
the learner's
attempt
to use patterns
of
Chinese in English sentences.
These
are called transfer or 'interference' errors. Ir is clear, however,
thar
ir is
very ofren difficulr to determine rhe source of errors. Thus error analysis
has
the advanrage
of
permirting a description
of
sorne systematic aspects
of
learner language,
but
ir does not always give us clear insights into whar causes
learners
ro
do
whar they
do.
Furrhermore, as Jacquelyne Schachrer
poinred
out
in a
197
4arcicle, learners sometimes avo id using cerra.in features oflanguage
which the y perceive to
be
diflicult far them. This 'avoiliance' may lead
to
rhe
absence of certain errors, but it also leaves thc analysr without informarion
about rhc learners' developing inrerlanguage.
That
is, rhe absence
of
particular features will be difficulr for che researcheror teacher
to
observe,
but
this phenomenon of'avoidance' may also be a
part
of he learner's sysrematic
second language performance.
66
8/18/2019 How languages are learned (Oxford) – Chapter 4: Learner Language
4/10
76
Le11rner
language
Developmental sequences
Research on second language acquisition has reveaied rhar
second
lano-uage
learners, like first anguage learners, pass
rhrough
sequen_ces
of e v e l o p ~ e n r ~
Furrhermor e, in a given language, many
of
hese developmenral sequences are
sirnilar for firsr
and
second language learners. Even
among
second language
learn.ers, rhese developmenra1 sequen ces are similar: \vhar is learned early
by
one is learned early
by
orhers, even \vhen rhey come from differenr first
language backgrounds
and
differenr learning environments.
Among
first language learners, rhis is perhaps nor so unexpecred beca use rheir
language Iearning is parrly ried to rheir cognirive deve opmenr, r har is, ro rheir
learning
abour
rhe relarionships
among
people, evenrs,
and
objecrs
around
them. But among
second language learners, \vhose experíences
with
rhe
language
may
vary qu íre wíde y and \vhose cognirive
development
is
essentially stable, ir
is more
remarkable that developmentaI sequences are so
simílar. Furrh ermore, alrhough learners obviously need ro
haveopportunities
ro hear
or
read ccrraín things before rhey begin
ro
use rhem, ir
is not
always
the
case rhat rhose features
of
rhe Ianguage
which
are heard mosr frequenrly
are easiesr to learn. For example, virtually every English sentence has
one
or
rr ore arricles ('a' or 'rhe'),
bur
many learners have grear difficulty using rhese
forms correcdy. Finally,
although the
Iearners' firsr language does have
an
influence,
many
aspects
of
rhese developmenral srages are similar among
learners from
many
differenr first language b ackgrounds.
In
the nexr section, rhe srages
of
acquisirion for specific grammarical features
are
presented
for
second
language learners.
In
Chapter 1 we sa\v sorne
developmenral sequences for English child language acquisirion ofgrammarical
m o r p h e m e ~
negarion, and quesrions. Researchers inseco nd languageacquisirion
have exan11ned son1e
of
rhese same fearures,
as
\vell as others.
Grammatical morphemes
Several srudies ro examine rhe
deveiopmenr of
grammarical
morphemes
have
?een
carried out i t h
l e a r ~ e r s
\vho have learned English as a
second
language
in a natural (non-1nstrucnonal)
environmenr.
These
srudies
\Vere done
\virh
learn_:rs
ofdifferenr
ages
and ti-om
ditTerenr first language backgrounds. Like
the
firsr language researchers, rhe
second
language researchers Iookéd ar
learners' use
ofgrammarical morphemes such as
plural,
-ing,
past tense, etc.
Theyrookspeech
samples from a large
number oflearnersar one poinr
in
time
and
seo red each
morpheme
foraccuracy in rhe learners' speech.
This\vas done
by i d e n r i t ~ i n g every obligarory conrext for each morpheme and
dividing
the
:ium?er
of
correcdy supplíed
morphemes
by rhe rotal
number
rhar should
Learner .inguage
creared
as
rhe accuracy score for rhis
morpheme. These
seores were
then
ranked frorn highest
to
lo\vesr, giving an accuracy order for rhe
morphemes.
The overall results of he srudies suggesred an orderwhich, while not the same
as
rhe developmenral sequence
found
in rhe first language srudies, \V::t. i similar
amono- second lanauage learners frorn differenr first language backgro unds.
t I o -
For example,
most
srudies showed a
higher
degree
of
accuracy
tor
plural
rhan
for possessive; for -ingrhan for -edpasr.
This
suggesrs rhar chis accuracy
order
is
nor
determined
entirely
byrhe
learners' firsr language. Ho\vever, a
rhorough
review
of
l rhe morpheme acquisitio n' srudies suggesrs rhar rhe Iearners' first
language has a
more imporranr
influence
on
acquisition
~ q u c n c e s
rhan sorne
researchers
would
claim. For example, learners whose first language has a
possessive -s form
which
resembles the English such as
German)
seem to
acquire this form earlier rhan rhose whose firsr Ianguage has a very different
\vay
of
forming rhe possessive (such as French or Spanish).
There
are
orher
unanswered questions in rhe
morpheine
acquisition literature. For examp e,
sorne
of
he similariries
and
differences observed in different sntdies seem to
be
dueto
the
\Vay
rhe language samples were collected. Neverrheless, there are
sorne very srrong
patterns
of
similarity \vhich
cannot be
explained
by rhe
influence
of
rhe firsr language alone (see Larsen-Freeman
and
Long 1991).
Negation
Anorher exarnple
of
rhe interacrion bet\veen developmenral sequences
and
first lanauacre influence is
in
the acc¡uisirion
of
negarion in Enelish.
See
b , V
Schumann
1979 for a review
of
research on negation in second language
learning.)
To
a large exrent, rhe acquisition
of
negarive sentences
by second
language learners follo
vs
a parh rhat ooks nearly identical to
the
srages we sa\v
in Chapter
1
for first language acquis tion. Wbar is differenr, ho\vever, is rhat
second language learners from different first language backgro unds behave
some\vhat differendy
zuithin
those stages.
Stage 1
The
negarive
element
( usua1ly 'no '
or
'nor')
is
typically p ::tced befo re rhe verb
or
the
element beíng
negared.
Often,
ir occurs as the first \vord
in
rhe
utterance because the subject of rhe senrence is not rhere.
No
bicycle.
No
have
any
sand. I
not
like
it.
No is
preferred by
most
learners in rhis early stage, perhaps because
it
is
the
negative tOrm rhat is easiest
ro
hear
and
recognize in rhe speech rhey are
exposed to. Iralian
and
Spanish speakers
may prefer
'no' beca use
ir
corresponds
ro rhe negative form in Italian
and
Spanish.
77
67
8/18/2019 How languages are learned (Oxford) – Chapter 4: Learner Language
5/10
Stage 2
Ar rhis stage, 'no'
and not may
:alternare wirh 'don'r'. However, 'don'r'
is nor
marked for person, number, or tense and it may even be used befare modals
like 'can' and 'should':
He don'r like ir. l don'r can sing.
Stage
3
Learners begin ro place the negative elemen r after auxiliaryverbs like 'are', 'is',
and
'can'.
But
ar this srage, rhe 'don'r'
form
is
srill
nor
fuHy
analyscd:
You can nor go there.
He
was
nor
happy.
She
don'r ike rice.
Stage4
Do
is
marked fortense, person, andnurn ber,
andmost
interlanguagesentences
appear to be jusr like rhose of he rarget language:
lt
doesn'r work. We didn'r have supper.
For sorne rime, however, learners may continue to mark tense, person, and
number
on
borh rhe auxiliary and rhe verb:
I didn t wenr there. She doesn'rwants to go.
This
sequence
of
stages is descriptive
of
he second language developmenr
of
most second language learners. However, although it is true th at virrually all
learners ofEnglish seem ro pass rhrough a srage
offorming
negacive senrences
by placing 'no' before rhe verb, sorne leamers may sray longer in rhar stage
than others.
If
a learner's native language forrns the negative in just rhat way
(for cxomple, Spanish No tienen muchos libros', No have many books'), ir
may
take longer for rhe Iearner to notic e thar native speakers ofEnglish do ot
form rhe negative in rhar way. Similarly, once German speakers reach srage 3
and
begin ro place rhe negative marker after rhe auxiliary, rhey
may
also
sometimes
place ir afrer lexical verbs (for examp e,
German
'Sie kommen
nicht nach Hause',
They
come
not
home ).
Questions
v1anfred Picnemann and his .coHeagues have developed a framework for
describing secon
8/18/2019 How languages are learned (Oxford) – Chapter 4: Learner Language
6/10
8
Learner
anl;uage
a phase
of
asking questions wirhour inversion. However, once rhey reach
srage 4 and ask English quesrions
wirh
subjecr-auxiJiary inversion, rhey may
assume rhar
subject-verb
inversion is also possible.
Thus,
alongside correcr
quesrions such as 'Can I play?' one may hear quesrions such as 'Play you
baseball?'
Activity
Learners' questions
The quesrions in rhe charr on page 81 \vere asked by srudenrs in a grade 5
imensive ESL class in Quebec, Canada.
The
children (aged 10-12) are all
French-speaking
and
have lirde con raer \virh English ourside rheir English
class. In their English classes they spend mosr of heir
time
in communicative
acriviries,
and
rheir teachers rarely correcr rheir errors or focus
on
specific
poinrs
of grammar.
In manyways,
rhese srudents have
an
experienceof rheir
second language
which
is similar ro rhar of Iearners in
an
informal language
Iearning
serring.
These questions were recorded while rhe children \vere playing
a
picrure
idenrificarion game.
Their interlocutor
\Vas
looking
ar
a
picture
\Vhich was a
duplicare of one of rhe four pictures
\vhich rhe
studenrs cou d see. The
children
asked rhese questions in arder ro
garher informarion
\Vhich
would
permir rhem ro guess
which
picrure rhe interlocutor was holding.
Activity
More about questions
Anocher
group of French-speaking learners from rhe same learning context
described in rhe acrivity above \Vere asked ro judge \Vhether sorne quesrions
\.Vere correcr
or
noL
Mosr
of rhese learners
produced
srage 2
and
3 questions
\vhen rhey participared in rhe oral quesrions
game
shown. above.
The
rask \vas a 'preference rask' in \vhich learners\vere presenred \virh pairs
of
quesrions
and
asked ro
judge wherher only
one or rhe
orher
was correcr
or
vvherher theywere borh correcr or
borh
incorrect.Theyalso
had
rhe oprion of
saying I don'r know.'
Sorne
of he questions rhe srudenrs
judged
are
shown in
rhe charr pn page 82.
Deterrriine rhe developmenra1 srage
corresponding
ro each quesrion and
wherher
rhe quesrion
is
correcr
or not.
Remernber, sorne stage 3 questions are
actually grammarica11y correcr qu esrions. Then, decide
which
quesrions you
think rhese learners,
who produced
mosdy stage 2 and 3 quesrions, \vere
\villing
to
accept and which rhey rejecred.
Learner anguage
Based
on the
information
in Table
4.1, can you identify which
suge of second
language question
deve opment
each
question
fits into?
Learner 1
Stage
1
Does a dog
is
black and white?
1
2 3 4
5
6
2 Where the dog is? 2 3 4
5
6
3 Does the boy throw a ball
r
2 3 4
5
6
4 How many spot the dog has?
2 3 4
5
6
5
lt is five questio ns?
2 3 4
5
6
Learner2
6 Do
you see a dog? 2 3
4
5
6
7
Do the dog has a shoe?
2 3 4
5
6
8 The boy
throw
a ball ora shoe? 2 3 4
5
6
9
The
ball
is
on the
air?
2 3 4
5
6
10 The
dog has a Httle
spot
black
2 3 4
5
6
learner 3
11
What is
the dog doing?
2 3 4
5
6
12
Are
the children running? 2 3 4
5
6
13 Is the shoe on the grass 2 3
4
5
6
14
How
many
spots does the
dog have?
2 3 4
6
15 Did
the dog
catch
the shoe?
2
3 4 5
6
Answerkey
Leamer
/:
Questions I 2, and 4 are stage 3: 'does'
and
'where' and 'how many'
appear
simply
to
be
'fronted' to forma question. Question
5
is stage
2:
t h e ~ e h a s
been
no adjustment
ro rhe
word arder of
a
dedarative senrence;
only the
nsing
intonation identifies
the sentence
as a
question. Question
3
is
a b t trlcky.
t
looks
Jike
a
correct
question,
but
it m;;i.y
be 'correct
far the
wrong reason'.
The evidence
from chis
learner's other questions
suggests that
'does' is
just the forrn that
is
placed in
front
of a sentence to
make
a
question.
That
woutd
rnake Que_stlon 3 a
stage 3 question, just like Question lf the learner had used other o ~ m s of do' or
other auxHiaries to form yes/no questions, it would be a stage 4 quest1on.
Learner 2: Questions
6 and 7 are
stage 3: here, 'do' seems to
have
been
placed
at
the
front
of the
sentence. Questions
8, 9,
and
O
are
stage 2.
Learner 3: Questions
1
and
14 are stage 5: a
wh-question w Lh both
inversion
of
the subject
and rhe auxiliary
and
the
second verb
("doing') p aced correcdy
after
the subject.
Questions
2,
13
and 5 are stage 4:
correct
subject-verb lnversion in
'yes/no' questlons. t
is dear
that these
questions
are different f;-om the 'does'
questions
asked y Learner 1 because there are severa different a.uxl iary verbs in
the 'yes/no' questions.
P
hotocopíable
©
Oxfor d Universicy Press
81
69
8/18/2019 How languages are learned (Oxford) – Chapter 4: Learner Language
7/10
Question
Stage
Correct/
Accepted/
2, 3, 4, 5
incorrect rejected
1
\/Vhy do
children ike McDona d's?
2 Are you a good student?
3
Are
the students watching TV?
4 Can l take
the
dog outside?
5
Can the children speak Spanish?
6 What can we
watch
on TV
tonight?
7
What
is
your brother
doing
8 When are you going to eat
breakfast
9
o the teache rs like to cook?
10
Do
they líke pepperoni
pizza?
11 The
teachers
like to cook?
12
The chHdren can speak Spanish?
13
vVhy
fish
can
live
in
water?
14 What
your
brother is
doing?
5 Why chHdren like McDonald's?
Answerkey
Questions 2, 4, 6, 8, O
are
correct.
at
stages 4, 4, 5, 5, and 3 respectively. The
students overwhe mingly accepted these. -
Questions 1, 3, 5, 7,
9
are
also
correct,
at stages 5, 4, 5, 5, and 3 respectively.
The
student overwhehningly rejeaed these.
Questions
l , l 2.
13,
l
4, and
15
are incorrect questions,
at stages
2, 2,
3, 3, and 3
respectively. S tudents overwhelrning y accepted these.
Photocopiab e
©Oxford Universicy Press
What can the rcsults of his preference task mean? l hey produced most y
scage
2 and 3
oral questions, why
8/18/2019 How languages are learned (Oxford) – Chapter 4: Learner Language
8/10
8
earner language
ar the top, bur rhe opposire was nor necessarily true. Research on rhis aspect
of second Ianguage developmenr has shown rhar ifa learner can use
one
of rhe
strucrures ar rhe bottom
of
rhe lisr, he or she will
probably
be able to use any
rhat precede ir.
On
rhe orher hand, a learn erwho can produce sentences wirh
relarive clauses in rhe sub jecr
or
direct objecr posirions will nor necessarily be
able to use relatives in anyorher posirion.
Reference to
past
Anocher rype ofdevelopmencal sequence has also
been
described. In this case,
the
sequence
reflects learners' changing abiliry
co
express the same meaning.
One example of his is the developmenr of reference ro past events. Adolescenr
and
adulr learners often have
importanr
rhings to say abour pasr evenrs,
but
their kno\vledgeo(the rargerlanguageíimits their abíiiry
to
do this. Anumber
of researchers, observing learners from different first language backgrounds
and
acquiring a variery of second languages, have observed a pattern which
is
simila r across learners.
In rhe beginning, learners with very limired language may simply refer ro
events in rhe
order
in which rhey
occurred
or menrion a
time
ar place
to show
rhat
rhe evenr occurred in the past.
My son come. He
work
in restaurant.
January. lr's very cold.
Vier Nam. \Ve work roo hard.
Later, learners start
to
artach a grammarical morpheme which shows that rhe
verb is marked tOr rhe past.
The
people worked in the fields.
E ven aft:er t:hey begin marking ~ l S c rense on verbs, however, learners
may
sriil
make errors such as rhe overgeneralizat:ion of rhe regular -ed ending.
She
rided
her
bicycle.
Anorher aspecr oflearning
hü\V
ro refer to
the
past has been shown in studies
by
Karhleen Bardovi-Harlig
and
her colleagues.
They
found thar learners are
more Iikely
to mark
pasr tense on sorne verbs than on others. For examp e,
learners seem to recognize che need ro mark pasr tense more easily in sent:ences
s,pch as 'I broke rhe vase' and
My
sisrer fixed it with glue' t:han in senrences
such
as
She
seemed happy last week' or My farher belonged to a club'
(Bardovi-Harlig and Reynolds 1995).
Bardovi-Harlig has suggested rhar rhese differences are due to the kinds of
meanings expressed by rhe dit1erent: verbs. Learners seem ro find ir easier to
mark past tense \vhen referring to completed evenrs t:han \Vhen referring to
earner anguage
srares and acrivities which may l a s ~
tOr
extended periods wirhour a clear
end-point.
Movement
through
developmental sequences
We
have seen in rhis secrion rhar in second Ianguage acquisirion there are
systemaric and predictable srages, or sequences, of acquisition. We have seen
examples
of
rhis in the developmenr
of
grammatic:il m0rphemes, negarives,
questions, relarive clauses, and reference to pas t.
It is
importanr
ro
emphasize,
however, rha r developmenra l srages are not like closed rooms< Learners do not
Ieave one behind \vhen rhev enrer another. In examining a language sample
from an individual earner, shou d not expecr ro find
a l
and only examples
of behaviours from
one
srage. On the contrary, at a given poinr in rime,
learners may use senrences rypical of severa diffe rent stages. Ir is perhaps
better ro
rhinkof
asrageas being characrerized
by
rhe emergen ceand increasing
frequency
of
a particular form rather rhan by rhe disappear1nce
of an
earlier
one. Even when a more advan::ed stage comes to dominare in a learner's
speech, conditíons of tress
or
complexiry in a communicarive interacrion can
cause the learner to 'slip back' to an earlier stage.
New ways of ooki.ng at first language influence
Researchers rejecred rhe interpretarion of contrastive analysis \vhich made
'transfer'
or
'interference' che expla nation for all of a learner's difficulties \vírh
rhe targer language. This was no doubr due in part
to
the facr t:har conrrasrive
analvsis \vas closelv :issoci:ired \virh behaviourisrvie\vs ofb.nguage acquisirion.
In
~ j e c t i n g
beh:I\;iourism, some researchers al so discarded conrrasrive analysis
as a source
of
valuable
information
about learners' language.
There is no doubt: in che minds of most researchers and teachers, ho\vever,
thar learners draw on t:heir kno\vledge
of
orher b nguo.ges as they rry to
discover rhecomplexities
of
he
ne\V
language Eheyare learning. We have seen
someways in which thefirs rlanguage inreracts \vith deve opmenral sequences,
When
learners reach a certain stage
and
perceive a similarity to [heír firsr
lanauaae t:hev rnayli naer lono-erarthat srage (forexamn,,le, the Spanish speaker's
00 •
0 b
V
necration) or add a subsrage (for example, the German spcaker's inversion of
subject and lexical verbs ín quesrions) to the sequencc \vhich, overall, is very
similar across Iearners, regardless
of
their first Ianguage. They
may
learn a
second language rule but restrict its app icarion (fnr e'G1mple, the French
speaker's rejection of subject-auxiliary inversion -..vith noun subjects).
The
first lancruage rnav influence learners' inrerL:lnguage in orher\vays as well.
Th, . , . . . , h , . ' ' ~ ' ... ..,
f_
.... . . ~ ~ · ' " - . . : ~ - . . T
. ••
~ 1 · · - - ~ C -L---L--- ¡____ L-.-J
85
71
8/18/2019 How languages are learned (Oxford) – Chapter 4: Learner Language
9/10
appeared
to
be caused at least in part by learners perceprion rhar a fearure in
the rarger language was so disrant and d ifferent from theír first language rhar
they preferred notro try ir (Schachter 1974)1
Other researchers have also found evidence ofl earner s sensiriviry ro degrees
of distance
or
difference and a reluctance t o an:empt a rransfer over roo great
a distan ce. In one very revealing smdy,
Hlkan
Ringbom ( 1986) found that
the inrerference errors made in English
by
both Finnish-Swedish and
Svvcdish-Finnish bilinguals \.Vere most often traceable to Swedish, nor
Finnish.
The
fact that Swedish and English are closely related languages
which
actualiy do share
many characterisrics seems ro have led learners to rake
a chance thar a word
or
a senrence srructure thar worked in S\.vedish would
have
an
English equivalent. Finnish, on rhe orher hand, belongs
to
a
comp etdy differcnt language family. This knowledge led learners to avoid
using Finnish as aso urce ofpossible transfer,
vvhether
rheír own first language
was Swedish
or
Finnish.
The risk-taking associared with this perception of similariry has its limits,·
however. s we nored earlier, learners seem to know rhar idiomaric or
metaphorical uses
of
words are ofren quite unique ro a particular language.
Eric Kellerman (1986) found that many Dutch learners of English were
reluctant to accept certain idiomatic expressions
or
unusua1 uses of words
such as Thc: wave
broke on
the shore
but
accepted
'He
broke rhe cup even
though both
are srraighrforward translations
of
sentences wirh the
Dutch
verb breken
Another way in which learners first language can affect second language
acquisition
is
in ma king ir difficult for them ro no ice that something they are
saying
is
absent from rhe language
as
ir is used by more proficient speakers.
Lydia White ( 1989) drew a ttention
to
rhe difficulties learners may have when
sorne fearure of rheir inrerlanguage and their first language are based on
patterns which are very similar bur nor idenrical. When the learner s
interlanguage form does
not
cause any difficulry in communicating meaning,
the learner may find it difficult
to
ger rid ofit. Lydia Whire gives the exampl e
of
the
restrictions on adverb placement in French and English. French
and
English share considerable flexibiEty in where adverbs can be placed in simpl e
senrcnces
(.see
further discussion and references in
Chapter
6). However,
as
the examples in Table 4.3 show, there are sorne differences. English, but not
French , allows SAVO order; French, but nor English, allows SVAO.
Second language learners have dífficulty in boch direcrions. It seems fairly
easy for French-speaking learners of English ro norice the new form and to
add SVAO
to
thcir repenoite and for English-speaking learners ofFrench
to
add SAYO,
but
they have far grearer difficulry gettin g rid of he form which
does not occur in rhe target language. English-speaking learners of French
make rhe SAVO error, and French-speaking learners of English make rhe
SVAOerror.
Curre nt views of irst language inRuence emphasize that there
is
an
important
interaction involvingthe first language (or other previously learned languages),
sorne universal knowledge or processes,
and
the samples
of
he rarger language
which learners encounter in rhe input. In Chaprer 6, \Ve will look at ho\v
instrucrion and metalinguistic information may also contribute to this
inreracrion.
Table 4 3: dverb placement in
French
andEnglish
S = Subject V=
Verb
Ü=Übject
A=Adverb
ASVO
Ofren, Mary drinks tea.
Souvent, Marie boit du thé.
SVOA
Mary drinks tea often.
Marie boit
du
thé souvent.
SAVO
Mary often drinks tea.
*Marie souvent boit du thé.
SVAO
*Mary drinks often tea.
Marie boit souvent
du
rhé.
Note:
The asterisk means ch;ir the sentence is uot grammaricaL
Summary
The
focus in this chapter has been
on
seco nd language acquisirion by people
who, alrhough rhey may receive sorne instruction, also have
c o n s i ~ e r a b l e
exposure ro theír second language in natural setrings-at work, n the
schoolyard, in rhe supermarket, or rhe neighbourh ood laund romat: In
e n e ~ a l ,
researchers have found rhat learners who receive grammar-ba sed 1nstrucnon
srill pass rhrough the same developmen tal sequences
and
make the same types
0
errors
as
rhose \vho acquire láÍ1guage in natural settings. For example, in
sorne of he mo st exrensive work
on
acquisirion sequen ces, Jürgen Meiseland
his colleagues Manfred Pienem ann and H aral d Clahsen found veryco nsistent
patterns in rhe acquisirionof Getman byspeakers of everal o m a n c e l a n g ~ g e s
who had lirtle or no instruction in German as a second language (Me1sel,
Clahsen, and Pien emann 1981 ). Pienema nn la ter found very similar patterns
in rhe acquisirion of German \.vord order b y speakers of English v h o s e o n ~ y
exposure to che language
\vas
in rheir universiry German classes in Australia
72
8/18/2019 How languages are learned (Oxford) – Chapter 4: Learner Language
10/10
,
1
1
88
Learner language
(Pienemann 1989).
In Chaprer
6 we will focus
on
rhe second language
acquisirion
oflearners
in classroom serti ngs. Firsr, however, we \vill look ar che
classroom irself. In Chaprer 5, we will explore rhe many
vays
in which
researchers
ha
ve soughr to understand rhe classroom environmenr for second
language acquisirion.
Sources andsuggestionsfar urther reading
General
discussion
offearner
fanguage
Cook, V 1991. Second Language Learning and Language Teaching. London;
Edward Arnold.
Ellis, R.
1997.
Second Language Acquisition. Oxford: Oxford Universiry
Press.
Ellis, R
1994. The Study
of
Second Language Acquisition.
Oxford; Oxford
Universiry Press.
Larsen-Freeman,
D.
and
M. H.
Long. 1991. n lntroduction
to
Second
Language
Acquisition. New York: Longman.
Lightbown,
P.
i\11
1985.
Great
expectarions: Second language acquisition
research and classroom reaching.' Applied Linguistics612:
173-89.
The concept ofinterlanguage
Corder, S. P. 1967.
The
significance oflearners' errors.'
fnteniationa
Review
of
Applied Linguistics 512-3:
161-9.
Selinker, L. 1972. 'Interlanguage.' International Review
ofApplied
Linguistics
10/2; 209-3
Develop1nent11 sequences in second language acquisition
Bardovi-Harlig, K. and D. Reynolds. 1995.
The
role oflexical aspecr in the
acguisirion
of
rense
and
aspecr.' TESOL Quarterly
2911: 107-3
lvleísel,
J.
M. 1986. 'Reference to pasr evenrs and actions in rhe developmenr
of
na rural second language acquisirion' in C. Pfaff (ed.):
First
and Second
Language Acquisition
Processes.
Cambridge , Mass.: Ne\.vbury House.
Meísel, J. M., H. Clahsen, and M. Pienemann.
1981.
On derermining
developn1enral srages in natural second language acquisirion.'
Studies
in
Second LanguageAcquisition 312: 109-35.
Pienemann, IvL 1989. 'Is language teachable? Psycholinguistic experiments
and
hyporheses.' Applied Linguistics 10/1; 52-79.
Learner language
Pienemann, M.,
M.
Johnston,
and
G. Brindley. 1988. 'Consrrucring an
acquisirion-based
procedure
for
s ~ ~ a n g u a g e
assessmenr.' Studies in
Second LanguageAcquisition 1012: 217-43.
Schumann,
J.
1979. "The acquisirion
of
Englísh negJtion by speakers of
Spanish: a review
of
rhe lirerarure' in R. W..
i\ndersen
(ed.):
The Acquisition
and
Use
of
Spanish
and ngfish as Fírst and Second Langrtt1ges. Washington,
D.
C.: TESOL.
pp. 3-32.
Zobl,
H.
1982.
A direcríon for conrrasrive analysis; rhe compararive srudy of
developmentalsequences.' TESOL Quarterly
1612:
169-83.
Fírst language injluence
Kellerman, E. 1986. '.An eye for an eye: crosslinguisdc constrainrs on rhe
development of rhe L2 lexicon.' in E. Kellerman and M. Sharwood Smirh
(eds.): Crosslinguistic
lnfluence in Second
Language
.Acquisition.
Ne\.V York:
Pergamon, pp. 35-48.
Odlin, T. 1989. Language ·n-ansfir. Cambridge: Cambridge Universíry Press.
Ringbom,H. 1986. Crosslinguisric
influenceand the foreign language
e ~ t r n i n g
process' in E. Kellerman and M. Sharwood Smirh (eds.): Crosslinguistic
Inf/uence
in
Second Language
Acquisition.
New
York:
Pergamon,
pp.
150-72.
Schachter, J.
1974.
An error in error analysis.' Language
Leaming 2412:
205-14.
Relative cÚluse hierarchy
Doughry, C.
1991.
Second language insrrucrion
Top Related