scholarly journals Acquisition of the Tap-Trill Contrast by L1 Mandarin–L2 English–L3 Spanish Speakers

Languages ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 3 (4) ◽  
pp. 42 ◽  
Author(s):  
Matthew Patience
Keyword(s):  
Spanish Speakers ◽  
English Speakers ◽  
Developmental Patterns ◽  
Reading Task ◽  
Target Segment ◽  
L2 Spanish ◽  
L1 English ◽  
Single Substitution

The goals of this study were to investigate the developmental patterns of acquisition of the Spanish tap and trill by L1 Mandarin–L2 English–L3 Spanish speakers, and to examine the extent to which the L1 and the L2 influenced the L3 productions. Twenty L1 Mandarin–L2 English–L3 Spanish speakers performed a reading task that elicited production of rhotics from the speakers’ L3 Spanish, L2 English, and L1 Mandarin, as well as the L2 English flap. The least proficient speakers produced a single substitution initially, generally [l]. The same non-target segment was produced for both rhotics, mirroring the results of previous studies investigating L1 English–L2 Spanish speakers, indicating that this may be a universal simplification strategy. In contrast to previous work on L1 English speakers, the L1 Mandarin–L2 English–L3 Spanish speakers who had acquired the tap did not tend to use it as the primary substitute for the trill. Overall, the L1 was a stronger source of cross-linguistic influence. Nonetheless, evidence of positive and negative L2 transfer was also found. The L2 flap allophone facilitated acquisition of the L3 tap, whereas non-target productions of the L2 /ɹ/ were also observed, revealing that both previously learned languages were possible sources of cross-linguistic influence.

Contrasting Preterite and Imperfect use among advanced L2 learners: Judgments of iterated eventualities in Spanish

2013 ◽  
Vol 51 (3) ◽  
pp. 243-270 ◽  
Author(s):  
M. Rafael Salaberry
Keyword(s):  
Native Speakers ◽  
Spanish Speakers ◽  
English Speakers ◽  
Classroom Environments ◽  
L2 Acquisition ◽  
Specific Component ◽  
Frequency Effects ◽  
Fine Grained ◽  
Grammaticality Judgments ◽  
L1 English

AbstractThere are numerous studies that analyze the second language (L2) acquisition of aspect (e.g., see overviews and summaries in Ayoun and Salaberry 2005; Bardovi-Harlig 2000; Labeau 2005; Salaberry, 2008; Salaberry and Shirai 2002). The present study focuses on a specific component of tense-aspect: the iteration of eventualities (iterativity and habituality) conveyed with the use of Spanish Preterite and Imperfect respectively. The analysis is based on data from monolingual Spanish speakers and L1 English speakers with near-native competence in the L2 with the use of contextualized grammaticality judgments. The findings of the study show that near-native speakers of L2 Spanish do not distinguish fine-grained representations of aspectual knowledge (iterativity versus habituality), even though they demonstrate native-like judgments with more prototypical uses of aspect. The discussion of the findings points to possible effects of mapping of meaning and form in the L2, as well as possible instructional effects paired with frequency effects prompted by classroom environments.

scholarly journals Failed gender agreement in L1 English L2 Spanish: Syntactic or lexical problem?

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alena Kirova ◽  
José Camacho
Keyword(s):  
Critical Period ◽  
Reaction Times ◽  
Spanish Speakers ◽  
Gender Agreement ◽  
Gender Assignment ◽  
Syntactic Features ◽  
L2 Spanish ◽  
And Control ◽  
L1 English ◽  
Do So

According to representational accounts (Hawkins & Franceschina, 2004), the inability to acquire abstract syntactic features after a critical period explains L2 difficulties with gender, while according to lexical accounts (Grüter et al. 2012; Hopp 2012), gender assignment issues – the inability to assigned to a target-like class accounts for these difficulties. We explore three potential agreement cues: 1) semantic gender relating to sex (e.g. ‘girl’ vs. ‘boy’) 2) morphophonological transparency cues, and 3) syntactic agreement cues. Semantic and morphophonological cues may facilitate gender agreement only for a subset of nouns, whereas agreement cues can do so for all nouns, including opaque gender nouns that do not have semantic gender. Seventeen low proficiency and sixteen high proficiency L1 English L2 Spanish speakers and seventeen native Spanish controls judged the grammaticality of 60 experimental sentences. We compared participants’ gender agreement accuracy and reaction times (RTs) on experimental items with and without semantic gender, and with and without transparent gender morphemes. Semantic gender did not serve as a cue for gender assignment/agreement; instead, it slowed down RTs in high proficiency and control participants. Morphophonological cues significantly increased accuracy and decreased RTs in all groups. Finally, agreement cues did not seem to help low proficiency learners, since their accuracy on opaque nouns was barely above chance. This suggests that they did not effectively use agreement cues to assign gender. By contrast, high proficiency learners exhibited native-like accuracy on opaque nouns. These findings support the lexical accounts of gender agreement difficulties, against the representational accounts.

scholarly journals The Effects of L1 English Constraints on the Acquisition of the L2 Spanish Alveopalatal Nasal

2021 ◽  
Vol 12 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sara Stefanich ◽  
Jennifer Cabrelli
Keyword(s):  
English Learners ◽  
English Speakers ◽  
Perceptual Cues ◽  
L2 Acquisition ◽  
Advanced Learners ◽  
Acoustic Quality ◽  
Potential Difficulty ◽  
L2 Spanish ◽  
L1 English

This study examines whether L1 English/L2 Spanish learners at different proficiency levels acquire a novel L2 phoneme, the Spanish palatal nasal /ɲ/. While alveolar /n/ is part of the Spanish and English inventories, /ɲ/, which consists of a tautosyllabic palatal nasal+glide element, is not. This crosslinguistic disparity presents potential difficulty for L1 English speakers due to L1 segmental and phonotactic constraints; the closest English approximation is the heterosyllabic sequence /nj/ (e.g., “canyon” /kænjn/ ['khæn.jn], cf. Spanish cañón “canyon” /kaɲon/ [ka.'ɲon]). With these crosslinguistic differences in mind, we ask: (1a) Do L1 English learners of L2 Spanish produce acoustically distinct Spanish /n/ and /ɲ/ and (1b) Does the distinction of /n/ and /ɲ/ vary by proficiency? In the case that learners distinguish /n/ and /ɲ/, the second question investigates the acoustic quality of /ɲ/ to determine (2a) if learners' L2 representation patterns with that of an L1 Spanish representation or if learners rely on an L1 representation (here, English /nj/) and (2b) if the acoustic quality of L2 Spanish /ɲ/ varies as a function of proficiency. Beginner (n = 9) and advanced (n = 8) L1 English/L2 Spanish speakers and a comparison group of 10 L1 Spanish/L2 English speakers completed delayed repetition tasks in which disyllabic nonce words were produced in a carrier phrase. English critical items contained an intervocalic heterosyllabic /nj/ sequence (e.g., ['phan.jə]); Spanish critical items consisted of items with either intervocalic onset /ɲ/ (e.g., ['xa.ɲa]) or /n/ ['xa.na]. We measured duration and formant contours of the following vocalic portion as acoustic indices of the /n/~/ɲ/ and /ɲ/ ~/nj/ distinctions. Results show that, while L2 Spanish learners produce an acoustically distinct /n/ ~ /ɲ/ contrast even at a low level of proficiency, the beginners produce an intermediate /ɲ/ that falls acoustically between their English /nj/ and the L1 Spanish /ɲ/ while the advanced learners' Spanish /ɲ/ and English /nj/ appear to be in the process of equivalence classification. We discuss these outcomes as they relate to the robustness of L1 phonological constraints in late L2 acquisition coupled with the role of perceptual cues, functional load, and questions of intelligibility.

The syntax–discourse interface in near-native L2 acquisition: Off-line and on-line performance

2009 ◽  
Vol 12 (4) ◽  
pp. 463-483 ◽  
Author(s):  
HOLGER HOPP
Keyword(s):  
Word Order ◽  
Native Speakers ◽  
First Language ◽  
English Speakers ◽  
L2 Acquisition ◽  
Reading Task ◽  
On Line ◽  
Discourse Interface ◽  
Ultimate Attainment ◽  
L1 English

This study investigates ultimate attainment at the syntax–discourse interface in adult second-language (L2) acquisition. In total, 91 L1 (first-language) English, L1 Dutch and L1 Russian advanced-to-near-native speakers of German and 63 native controls are tested on an acceptability judgement task and an on-line self-paced reading task. These centre on discourse-related word order optionality in German. Results indicate that convergence at the syntax–discourse interface is in principle possible in adult L2 acquisition, both in off-line knowledge and on-line processing, even for L1 English speakers, whose L1 does not correspond to L2 German in discourse-to-syntax mappings. At the same time, non-convergence of the L1 Dutch groups and differences in the L2 groups' performance between tasks suggest that asymmetries in L1–L2 discourse configurations and computational difficulties in mapping discourse onto syntax constrain L2 performance.

L3 syntactic transfer selectivity and typological determinacy: The typological primacy model

2010 ◽  
Vol 27 (1) ◽  
pp. 107-127 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jason Rothman
Keyword(s):  
Present Article ◽  
English Learners ◽  
First Language ◽  
Brazilian Portuguese ◽  
The Other ◽  
English Speakers ◽  
Third Language ◽  
Proficiency Level ◽  
L2 Spanish ◽  
L1 English

The present article addresses the following question: what variables condition syntactic transfer? Evidence is provided in support of the position that third language (L3) transfer is selective, whereby, at least under certain conditions, it is driven by the typological proximity of the target L3 measured against the other previously acquired linguistic systems (cf. Rothman and Cabrelli Amaro, 2007, 2010; Rothman, 2010; Montrul et al., 2011). To show this, we compare data in the domain of adjectival interpretation between successful first language (L1) Italian learners of English as a second language (L2) at the low to intermediate proficiency level of L3 Spanish, and successful L1 English learners of L2 Spanish at the same levels for L3 Brazilian Portuguese. The data show that, irrespective of the L1 or the L2, these L3 learners demonstrate target knowledge of subtle adjectival semantic nuances obtained via noun-raising, which English lacks and the other languages share. We maintain that such knowledge is transferred to the L3 from Italian (L1) and Spanish (L2) respectively in light of important differences between the L3 learners herein compared to what is known of the L2 Spanish performance of L1 English speakers at the same level of proficiency (see, for example, Judy et al., 2008; Rothman et al., 2010). While the present data are consistent with Flynn et al.’s (2004) Cumulative Enhancement Model, we discuss why a coupling of these data with evidence from other recent L3 studies suggests necessary modifications to this model, offering in its stead the Typological Primacy Model (TPM) for multilingual transfer.

Interfaces in the interpretation of mood alternation in L2 Spanish

2014 ◽  
Vol 14 ◽  
pp. 173-200 ◽  
Author(s):  
Aoife K. Ahern ◽  
José Amenós-Pons ◽  
Pedro Guijarro-Fuentes
Keyword(s):  
Similar Pattern ◽  
English Speakers ◽  
Control Group ◽  
L2 Spanish ◽  
L1 English ◽  
Current Feature ◽  
Degree Of Similarity ◽  
Mood Choice

In this paper, we present the results of one written task testing the interpretation of mood choice in if-conditional constructions in L2 Spanish: a linguistic task of conditional utterances containing both regular and irregular indicative and subjunctive forms was completed by 48 L1 French and 40 L1 English speakers, and by an L1 Spanish control group (n = 35). Results show a similar pattern in the answers of both experimental groups despite the varying degree of similarity and disparity among the languages. We adopt a cognitive pragmatic perspective for the analysis of the results in connection with the various kinds of effects created by mood alternation in the constructions studied. Furthermore, in relation to current SLA debates (Lardiere 2008, 2009), our findings demonstrate that feature re-assembly in L2 Spanish is not trouble-free, as simple current feature accounts would advocate, even if those features exist in the learners’ L1.

DO LEARNERS LIGHTEN UP?

2016 ◽  
Vol 39 (4) ◽  
pp. 801-832 ◽  
Author(s):  
Megan Solon
Keyword(s):  
First Language ◽  
Native English Speakers ◽  
Spanish Speakers ◽  
English Speakers ◽  
Native Spanish Speakers ◽  
Learning Situation ◽  
L2 Acquisition ◽  
Speech Learning ◽  
Phonetic Realization ◽  
L1 English

This study explores the second language (L2) acquisition of a segment that exists in learners’ first language (L1) and in their L2 but that differs in its phonetic realization and allophonic patterning in the two languages. Specifically, this research tracks development in one aspect of the production of the alveolar lateral /l/ in the L2 Spanish of 85 native English speakers from various levels of study and compares L2 productions to those of native Spanish speakers as well as to learners’ L1 English. Additionally, laterals produced in specific contexts are compared to examine learners’ acquisition of L2 allophonic patterning, as Spanish contains a subset of the lateral allophones that exist in English. Results suggest development toward nativelike norms in the phonetic details of Spanish /l/ and in allophonic patterning. These findings have implications for existing theoretical accounts of L2 speech learning, which cannot adequately account for the learning situation examined.

Assessing the effect of lexical aspect and grounding on the acquisition of L2 Spanish past tense morphology among L1 English speakers

2010 ◽  
Vol 14 (2) ◽  
pp. 184-202 ◽  
Author(s):  
MAXIMO RAFAEL SALABERRY
Keyword(s):  
Repeated Measures ◽  
Native Speakers ◽  
Relative Effect ◽  
Target Language ◽  
English Speakers ◽  
Past Tense ◽  
Lexical Aspect ◽  
English Speaking ◽  
L2 Spanish ◽  
L1 English

The present study compares the relative effect of inherent lexical aspect and discursive grounding on the use of L2 Spanish Preterit and Imperfect. The study is based on the analysis of responses to a written 40-item discourse-based forced-choice task among 286 English-speaking learners of Spanish. The analysis of data (repeated measures ANOVA) reveals that as learners gain more experience with the target language, the effect of both lexical aspect and grounding on past tense marking increases. That is, contrary to previous predictions, learners constantly move towards prototypical associations of lexical-narrative factors with morphological markers as knowledge of the second language increases. Second, grounding is the construct that most clearly distinguishes learners from native speakers.

The Role of Functional Categories in L2 Spanish: Persistence of L1 CP Values in IL

2012 ◽  
Vol 5 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Laurie A. Massery ◽  
Claudio Fuentes
Keyword(s):  
Surface Structures ◽  
English Speakers ◽  
Functional Categories ◽  
Syntactic Structures ◽  
Syntactic Development ◽  
L2 Spanish ◽  
Syntactic Differences ◽  
L1 English

AbstractEnglish irrealis modality is usually captured by syntactic structures that often exclude overt complementizers that and for and include indicative or infinitival morphology. The Spanish equivalents to English structures of irrealis modality, however, typically require the overt subordinate marker que (‘that’) followed by a [+finite] subordinate verb. These syntactic differences between English and Spanish produce asymmetrical surface structures caused by functional categories (FCs). The primary goal of this study is to examine the role of FCs, and more specifically, complementizers (CPs), in the syntactic development of L1 English speakers with L2 Spanish. The results of our data suggest that L1 CP properties (i.e. CP = Ø) persisted in learners’ interlanguage (IL) systems, following the work of Schwartz & Sprouse (1996). As a result, learners at all levels of instruction intuitively perceived English-like [-overt] CP structures as more grammatical than their [+overt] CP counterparts, even at advanced levels of acquisition.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document