scholarly journals Reviewing some similarities and differences in L1 and L2 lexical development

2009 ◽  
pp. 17-38 ◽  
Author(s):  
Florence Chenu ◽  
Harriet Jisa
Keyword(s):  
Lexical Development ◽  
Similarities And Differences ◽  
L1 And L2

scholarly journals Interference in Native and Non-Native Sentence Processing

2017 ◽  
Vol 20 (4) ◽  
pp. 712-721 ◽  
Author(s):  
IAN CUNNINGS
Keyword(s):  
Sentence Processing ◽  
Language Comprehension ◽  
Memory Retrieval ◽  
Primary Source ◽  
Careful Consideration ◽  
L2 Processing ◽  
Target Article ◽  
Different Populations ◽  
Similarities And Differences ◽  
L1 And L2

The primary aim of my target article was to demonstrate how careful consideration of the working memory operations that underlie successful language comprehension is crucial to our understanding of the similarities and differences between native (L1) and non-native (L2) sentence processing. My central claims were that highly proficient L2 speakers construct similarly specified syntactic parses as L1 speakers, and that differences between L1 and L2 processing can be characterised in terms of L2 speakers being more prone to interference during memory retrieval operations. In explaining L1/L2 differences in this way, I argued a primary source of differences between L1 and L2 processing lies in how different populations of speakers weight cues that guide memory retrieval.

On the lexical development of L1 and L2 speakers

1991 ◽  
Vol 9 (3) ◽  
pp. 80-84 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jan Vorster ◽  
Timothy Reagan
Keyword(s):  
Lexical Development ◽  
L1 And L2

COMPARING THE L1 AND L2 MENTAL LEXICON

2001 ◽  
Vol 23 (1) ◽  
pp. 41-69 ◽  
Author(s):  
Brent Wolter
Keyword(s):  
Native Speaker ◽  
Research Question ◽  
Mental Lexicon ◽  
The Body ◽  
Word Knowledge ◽  
Lexical Development ◽  
Individual Word ◽  
Tentative Model ◽  
L1 And L2

This paper explores the possibility that, contrary to the findings of past studies, the L1 and L2 mental lexicon may in fact be structurally similar, with depth of individual word knowledge determining a given word's degree of integration into the mental lexicon. The paper begins by reviewing the body of evidence relevant to the research question, and then presents the design and results of an investigation comparing nonnative and native speaker patterns of responses in light of depth of word knowledge scores. In discussing the results of the study, a tentative model for the process by which words are integrated into the mental lexicon is proposed, and the long-standing belief that a shift from predominantly syntagmatic to predominantly paradigmatic responses is indicative of lexical development is challenged.

Beginning and intermediate L2 writer’s use of N-grams: an association measures study

2020 ◽  
Vol 58 (1) ◽  
pp. 51-74 ◽  
Author(s):  
James Garner ◽  
Scott Crossley ◽  
Kristopher Kyle
Keyword(s):  
First Language ◽  
Placement Test ◽  
Writing Proficiency ◽  
Statistical Association ◽  
Writing Quality ◽  
Lexical Development ◽  
Association Measures ◽  
N Gram ◽  
L1 And L2 ◽  
Korean Learners

AbstractAcommon approach to analyzing phraseological knowledge in first language (L1) and second language (L2) learners is to employ raw frequency data. Several studies have also analyzed n-gram use on the basis of statistical association scores. Results from n-gram studies have found significant differences between L1 and L2 writers and between intermediate and advanced L2 writers in terms of their bigram use. The current study expands on this research by investigating the connection between bigram and trigram association measures and human judgments of L2 writing quality. Using multiple statistical association indices, it examines bigram and trigram use by beginner and intermediate L1 Korean learners of English in English placement test essays. Results of a logistic regression indicated that intermediate writers employed a greater number of strongly associated academic bigrams and spoken trigrams. These findings have important implications for understanding lexical development in L2 writers and notions of writing proficiency.

State-of-the-Art Review Article

2005 ◽  
Vol 38 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-17 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jane Setter ◽  
Jennifer Jenkins
Keyword(s):  
Foreign Language ◽  
State Of The Art ◽  
First Language ◽  
Review Article ◽  
Political Issues ◽  
Social Lives ◽  
Computer Based ◽  
Similarities And Differences ◽  
L1 And L2

This article is organised in five main sections. It begins by outlining the scope of pronunciation teaching and the role of pronunciation in our personal and social lives. The second section surveys the background to pronunciation teaching from its origins in the early twentieth century to the present day, and includes a discussion of pronunciation models and of the role of the first language (L1) in the acquisition of second language (L2) pronunciation. Then a third section explores recent research into a range of aspects involved in the process: the effects of L1 and L2 similarities and differences; the role of intelligibility, accent attitudes, identity and motivation; the part played by listening; and the place of pronunciation within discourse. This section concludes with a discussion of a number of controversies that have arisen from recent pronunciation research and of research into the potential for using computer-based technology in pronunciation teaching. The fourth section explores a range of socio-political issues that affect pronunciation teaching when the L2 is learnt as an international rather than a foreign language, and the fifth section moves on to consider the implications of all this for teaching.

Some Assumptions about Second Language Text Comprehension

1987 ◽  
Vol 9 (3) ◽  
pp. 307-326 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dieter Wolff
Keyword(s):  
Second Language ◽  
Information Processing ◽  
Experimental Design ◽  
Cognitive Processes ◽  
Text Comprehension ◽  
Empirical Investigation ◽  
First Language ◽  
Similarities And Differences ◽  
L1 And L2 ◽  
Language Text

In an empirical investigation, the results of which are reported elsewhere in greater detail (Wolff, 1985), an attempt was made to discover more about the strategies and processes specific to second language (L2) comprehension. On the assumption that information processing is of a universal cognitive nature, no differences in the cognitive processes themselves involved in first language (L1) and L2 comprehension were expected. It was, however, expected that differences would emerge in the way common strategies and processes were applied in the decoding of texts and utterances. We assumed that the differences would be of degree and not of kind, and that the extent and exploitation of these processes in L2 comprehension could be distinguished from L1 comprehension. The experimental design closely followed that developed by L1 comprehension research. A text was presented to an informant followed by the instruction to recall it. We adopted this type of experiment for two reasons: (a) It has proved its reliability in L1 research, and (b) our results could be compared to those obtained in L1 research. The similarities and differences between L1 and L2 results were thus quite easy to analyze.

Individual differences and retrieval interference in L2 Processing

2016 ◽  
Vol 20 (4) ◽  
pp. 704-705 ◽  
Author(s):  
SILVINA MONTRUL ◽  
DARREN S. TANNER
Keyword(s):  
Individual Differences ◽  
Language Comprehension ◽  
Deficit Model ◽  
L2 Processing ◽  
Novel Approach ◽  
On Line ◽  
Bilingual Processing ◽  
Similarities And Differences ◽  
Retrieval Interference ◽  
L1 And L2

Cunnings’ keynote article outlines a novel approach to native/non-native differences in on-line language comprehension by proposing that L2 speakers are more susceptible to cue-based retrieval interference than natives. Cue-based, parallel access approaches to processing have been prominent in monolingual studies for around 15 years now, but have barely been applied to L2/bilingual processing. We are particularly excited about the possibilities that this approach offers for understanding L1, L2 and bilingual processing, as well as individual differences. In this commentary, we focus on two issues: 1) whether the existing evidence for cue-based retrial mechanisms in L2 processing support a deficit model, as Cunnings seems to claim, and 2) how individual differences may explain both similarities and differences in L1 and L2 processing.

Convergence and divergence in the acquisition of French liaison by native and non-native speakers

2013 ◽  
Vol 4 (2) ◽  
pp. 161-189 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sophie Wauquier ◽  
Ellenor M. Shoemaker
Keyword(s):  
Second Language ◽  
Learning Strategies ◽  
Native Speakers ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Production Studies ◽  
Convergence And Divergence ◽  
Similarities And Differences ◽  
L1 And L2 ◽  
Existing Data

This article presents an overview of empirical findings to date concerning the acquisition of liaison in French as a first and second language (L1 and L2, respectively). We present data culled from production studies as well as from psycholinguistic experimentation involving various paradigms. Our aim is to highlight both the similarities and differences in the learning strategies and developmental paths followed by these two groups of learners, including particular examination of how representations of liaison in a learner’s phonological grammar may develop and change throughout the course of development. We conclude with a discussion of areas where existing data are lacking and potential avenues for future research.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document