(SLA) LINGUISTIC ASPECTS OF INTERLANGUAGE

Name    : Safitri Dyah Utami

NIM       : 2201411058

Class      : 103-104

Second Language Acquisition

LINGUISTIC ASPECTS OF INTERLANGUAGE

Typological universals: relative clauses

In the study of relative clauses, we can find a good example of how linguistic enquiry can shed light on interlanguage development. The effects of relative clause structure on L2 acquisition are:

1.       We have known that the languages vary in whether they have relative clause structures. The languages, like English and Arabic that have the linguistic difference can influence the ease with which the learners are able to learn relative clause. It makes the learners easier to learn than learners whose L1 does not, like Chinese and Japanese. Consequently, they are less likely to avoid them.

2.       In languages like English, the linguistic structure influences how acquisition proceeds. It is because the fact that relative clauses may or may not interrupt the main clause. A relative clause can be attached to the end of a matrix clause, for example:

The police have caught the man who bombed the hotel.

                Or, they can be embedded in the main clause, for example:

The man who bombed the hotel has been caught by the police.

3.       Languages are more likely to permit relative clauses with a subject (for example, ‘who’) than with an object pronoun (for example, ‘whom’). English is the language that permits the full range of relative pronoun functions. It can be illustrated in a hierarchy of relativization that is known as the accessibility hierarchy. The accessibility hierarchy is implicational in the sense that the presence of a relative pronoun function low in the order in a particular language implies the presence of all the pronoun functions above it but not those bellow it.

This is the accessibility hierarchy for relative clauses – relative pronoun function:

1.            Subject, e.g. The writer who won the Booker prize is my lifelong friend.

2.            Direct object, e.g. The writer whom we met won the Booker prize.

3.            Indirect object, e.g. The writer to whom I introduced you won the Booker prize.

4.            Object of preposition, e.g. The writer with whom we had dinner won the Booker prize.

5.            Genitive, e.g. The writer whose wife we met won the Booker prize.

6.            Object of comparative, e.g. The writer who I have written more books than has won the Booker prize.

Universal Grammar

Based on Noam Chomsky, language is governed by a set of highly abstract principles that provide parameters which are given particular settings in different languages. A general principle of language is that it permits co-reference by mans of some form of reflective.

•             Local binding: where a reflexive can only co-refer to a subject within the same clause, like English.

•             Long-distance binding: where the reflexive co-refers to a subject in another clause, is prohibited.

The study proves that the learners whose L1 permits both local and long-distance binding of reflexives can learn that a language like English permits only local binding may seem a rather trivial matter, for example, Japanese learners.

Learnability

According to Chomsky, the input in children learning their first language is insufficient to enable them to discover the rules of the language they are trying to learn – the poverty of the stimulus. The input consists of:

•             Positive evidence: it provides information only about what is grammatical in the language.

•             Negative evidence: input that provides direct evidence of what is ungrammatical in a language.

But, the input does not provide the information needed for learning to be successful.

A logical problem in the case of first language acquisition:

•             The children must have prior knowledge of what is grammatically possible and impossible and this is part of their biological endowment.

The Critical Period Hypothesis

The critical period hypothesis states that there is a period during which language acquisition is easy and complete and beyond which it is difficult and typically incomplete. One study clarifies that age of arrival is a much better predictor of ultimate achievement than the number of years of exposure to the target language. There is considerable evidence to support the claim that the second language learners who begin learning as adults are unable to achieve native-speaker competence in either grammar or pronunciation. However, the other study finds that there is some evidence that not all learners are subject to critical periods. Some are able to achieve native speaker ability from an adult start.

Access to UG

Theoretical positions of no agreement in access to UG for the adult L2 learners:

1.       Complete access: Full target language competence is possible and that there is no such thing as a critical period.

2.       No access: UG is not available to adult L2 learners. They will normally not be able to achieve full competence and their interlanguages may manifest ‘impossible’ rules (rules that would be prohibited by UG)

3.       Partial access: L2 acquisition is partly regulated by UG and partly by general learning strategies.

4.       Dual access: Adult L2 learners make use of both UG and general learning strategies

However, it assumes that adult learners can only be successful providing they rely on UG.

Markedness

The study of markedness means the uncertainty regarding the contribution of linguistic theory to the study of L2 acquisition is also evident in another area of linguistic enquiry.

Hypothesis relating to markedness:

•             The learners acquire less marked structures before more marked ones.

•             Learners are much more likely to transfer unmarked structures from their L1 than they are marked structured.

Cognitive versus linguistic explanations

There is no consensus on whether L2 acquisition is to be explained in terms of a distinct and innate language faculty or in terms of general cognitive abilities. It allows for modularity – the existence of different components of language that are learned in different ways, some through UG and others with the assistance of general cognitive abilities.