Features or parameters: which one makes second language acquisition easier,and more interesting to study?

Abstract

While agreeing with Lardiere that the `parameter-resetting' approach to understanding second language acquisition (SLA) needs rethinking, it is suggested that a more construction-based perspective runs the risk of losing deductive and explanatory power. An alternative is to investigate the constraints on feature assembly/re-assembly in second language (L2) grammars. A model of grammatical organization is adopted from Ramchand and Svenonius (2008) in which properties of the conceptual—intentional (C—I) module of mind are universal, and variation between languages is determined by the extent to which such properties are grammaticalized or determined by context. Predictions are then made about the degree of difficulty involved in determining the appropriate mapping from the C—I module to grammar or context when a learner's first language (L1) is similar to or different from the L2.

Keywords

features in L2 articles universal syntax/semantics cline of L2 difficulty

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Anderssen, M. 2005: The acquisition of compositional definiteness in Norwegian. Unpublished PhD thesis, University of Tromsø.

-- 2007: The acquisition of compositional definiteness in Norwegian . Nordlyd (University of Tromsø working papers on language and linguistics) 34(3), 252-75.

Chomsky, N. 2004: Beyond explanatory adequacy. In Belletti, A. , editor, Structures and beyond: the cartography of syntactic structures, volume 3. New York: Oxford University Press, 104-31.

Cowper, E. 2005: The geometry of interpretable features: Infl in English and Spanish. Language 81, 10-46.

Franceschina, F. 2001: Against an L2 morphological deficit as an explanation for the differences between native and non-native grammars. In Foster-Cohen, S. and Nizegorodcew, A. , editors, EUROSLA Yearbook. Volume 1, John Benjamins, 143-58.

Harley, H. and Ritter, E. 2002: Person and number in pronouns: a feature-geometric analysis . Language 78, 482-526.

Ionin, T. , Ko, H. and Wexler, K. 2004: Article semantics in L2 acquisition: the role of specificity . Language Acquisition 12: 3-69.

Jackendoff, R. 2002: Foundations of language. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Kwon, S.-N. and Zribi-Hertz, A. 2004: Number from a syntactic perspective: why plural marking looks `truer' in French than in Korean. In Bonami, O. and Cabredo Hofherr , P., editors, Empirical issues in formal syntax and semantics 5, 133-58.

10.

Ramchand G. and Svenonius, P. 2008: Mapping a parochial lexicon onto a universal semantics . In Biberauer, M.T. , editor, Limits of syntactic variation. John Benjamins: Amsterdam, 219-45. Available online at http://ling.auf.net/lingbuzz/000346 (December 2008).

11.

Rappaport, G. 2001: Extraction from nominal phrases in Polish and the theory of determiners. Journal of Slavic Linguistics 8, 159-98.

12.

Sabourin, L. , Stowe, L. and de Haan J. 2006: Transfer effects in learning a second language grammatical gender system. Second Language Research 22, 1-29.

13.

Schaeffer, J. and Matthewson, L. 2005: Grammar and pragmatics in the acquisition of article systems . Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 23, 53-101.

14.

Slabakova, R. and Gajdos, J. 2008: The Combinatory Variation Hypothesis in the second language . In Gavarró, A. and João Freitas, M., editors, Proceedings of the Generative Approaches to Language Acquisition conference. Barcelona. Cambridge Scholars Publishing.

15.

van Eijk, J. and Williams, L. 1981: Lillooet legends and stories. Mt. Currie, BC: Ts'zil Publishing.

16.

White, L. , Valenzuela, E. , Kozlowska-Macgregor, M. and Leung, I.Y. -K. 2004: Gender and number agreement in nonnative Spanish. Applied Psycholinguistics 25, 105-33.