Paperback
-
SHIP THIS ITEMIn stock. Ships in 3-7 days. Typically arrives in 3 weeks.PICK UP IN STORE
Your local store may have stock of this item.
Available within 2 business hours
Related collections and offers
Overview
Product Details
| ISBN-13: | 9781847691095 |
|---|---|
| Publisher: | Channel View Publications |
| Publication date: | 12/23/2008 |
| Series: | Second Language Acquisition , #35 |
| Pages: | 328 |
| Product dimensions: | 6.10(w) x 9.20(h) x 0.80(d) |
About the Author
Currently at Newcastle Universityin England, Martha Young-Scholten works on morpho-syntax and phonology. She is well known for joint work with Anne Vainikka on uninstructed adults' development of morpho-syntax in German. Prosodic structure, orthographic input and the phonological awareness of low-literate immigrant adults are some of the lines of research she pursues in the second language acquisition of phonology.
Read an Excerpt
Input Matters in SLA
By Thorsten Piske, Martha Young-Scholten
Multilingual Matters
Copyright © 2009 Thorsten Piske and Martha Young-Scholten and the authors of individual chaptersAll rights reserved.
ISBN: 978-1-84769-111-8
CHAPTER 1
Input Frequency and the Acquisition of the Progressive
ANDREAS ROHDE
Introduction
The progressive form has proved to be very salient in native English-speaking INPUT so that it is generally expected to figure very early in L2 learner data. However, the fact that the progressive form has a number of different functions may render the acquisition process rather complex and the mere fact that the progressive is correctly formed in L2 acquisition does not entail that its uses are in fact target-like. In the first part of this chapter, the development of the progressive form is sketched for four German children acquiring English during a six-month stay in California. Two main functions of the progressive are under scrutiny: as a marker of grammatical aspect with both present and past reference, and as a marker of future tense without marking grammatical aspect. The data are compared with input data from American children the German children were in contact with. The distribution of the functions over the six months varies considerably, suggesting that each function of the progressive is tackled separately. In the second part, the focus is on LEXICAL ASPECTor AKTIONSART and the ASPECT HYPOTHESIS. In relation to the results of the first part, it is investigated to what extent the PRODUCTION data reflect the distribution of –ing inflected verb types in the input data with regard to the verbs' inherent verbal aspect.
The Role of Input in Second Language Acquisition
In the days of behaviourism, both L1 and L2 language acquisition were mainly seen as a process of the learner's imitation (Lado, 1957; Skinner, 1957). This is why the input any language learner was exposed to was of primary importance. L2 learners' output was viewed as a more or less faithful mirror of the language which NATIVE SPEAKERS of the TARGET LANGUAGE provided (Gass & Selinker, 2001: 259ff). Once language acquisition was increasingly regarded as a creative construction process (Dulay & Burt, 1974b), researchers became more interested in the internal mechanisms of the learner and in the developmental sequences that could be identified for linguistic structures (for L1 acquisition see Bloom, 1970; Brown, 1973; for L2 acquisition see Bailey et al., 1974; Dulay & Burt, 1973, 1974a, 1974b; for L2 negation see Wode, 1976; for L2 questions see Wode, 1981). The input the learners received was only of marginal interest, all the more so because the POVERTY OF THE STIMULUS was and is regarded as a characteristic feature of the input, leading to the logical problem of language acquisition (White, 1989). But input (also known as PLD = PRIMARY LINGUISTIC DATA) has been considered essential by generative approaches for some time (see Carroll, 2001; Schwartz, 1993; Schwartz & Gubala-Ryzak, 1992). Non-generative approaches from the 1970s on have also considered input (and social exchange) as crucial (e.g. Krashen's INPUT HYPOTHESIS, Swain's OUTPUTHYPOTHESIS, Long's INTERACTION HYPOTHESIS, CONNECTIONISM – for an overview see Mitchell & Myles, 2004).
The present study's background is a functional non-generative approach to L2 acquisition, that is, it is not assumed that linguistic knowledge is available from the outset. Rather, this knowledge is determined by general learning mechanisms 'operating on the rich data provided by human interaction' (Ellis, 1994: 369). In this study, learner input proves to play a two-fold role. First, it will be shown that both input frequency and saliency trigger the use of the progressive form by German learners of English. Second, however, the polysemous nature of the progressive in the input makes it difficult for the learners to subconsciously attribute a clear-cut function to the progressive form, leading to a rather complex developmental sequence which does not lead to L2 mastery at the end of a six-month stay.
The Progressive Form in English
The progressive form in English has a number of different functions which range from marking grammatical aspect to marking future tense to expressing stylistic nuances. In the following, two main functions of the progressive form in English are briefly discussed as they play a major role for the data these learners produce. The first concerns the progressive as a grammatical aspectual category, the second is the progressive's function as a marker for future tense.
The progressive as a marker of grammatical aspect
The prototypical and most frequent function of the progressive is to mark grammatical aspect, that is, give information about the internal structure of the action or event expressed. According to Quirk et al., the main semantic features of the progressive are:
imperfectivity: the action or event are not complete.
duration: actions and events are not punctual.
boundedness: the duration of states expressed in the progressive is limited. (Compare 'We are living in London' in contrast to 'We live in London'). (Quirk et al., 1985)
As a grammatical aspectual category, the progressive can be used across all tenses. In the past tense, for example, the progressive is often used when the background of an event (1) or an implicit reference point is given (2):
(1) I was reading when the doorbell rang.
(2) She was writing her first novel at the time.
In connection with the present perfect, the progressive can be used to make subtle semantic differences which, however, are not important for the present study as this combination is not featured in the learner data used for the analysis.
The progressive as a marker of future tense
There are two uses of the progressive with future reference. The first one regards the periphrastic CONSTRUCTION going to + V, which expresses 'future fulfilment of present intention' (Quirk et al., 1985: 214). This function is not discussed as it is a specific use where the -inginflection appears in the contracted form gonna, which as frozen form is likely not analysed by the learner as going to.
(3) I'm going to see Deirdre in Berlin tomorrow.
(4) She's going to leave in a couple of days.
Accordingly, the second use of the progressive with future reference can be referred to as 'future arising from present arrangement, plan, or programme' (Quirk et al., 1985: 215). Here, the progressive form is used without any additional verb:
(5) I'm finishing my work after dinner.
(6) Megan and I are leaving for Berlin tomorrow.
It will be shown that this latter use of the progressive for marking future tense is quite prominent in the learners' production discussed in this chapter. It has to be noted here that German, the L1 of the learners analysed in this chapter, does not mark grammatical aspect with an auxiliary. In German, the difference between habituality ('I read a book') and ongoing processes ('I am reading a book') is not marked morphologically. The context usually makes clear whether an action is habitual or in progress. If the difference has to be made explicit, temporal adverbs, such as nun (now) or gerade (just now) have to be added ('Ich lese ein Buch' vs. 'Ich lese gerade/nun ein Buch').
In the input, -ing is phonetically more SALIENT than the other verb inflections -s and -ed, as -ing (be it in its full form or as [IN]) always consists of two sounds, thus changing the prosodic structure of the verb. In addition, forms of the auxiliary be used with the present participle makes the progressive form apparently easy – that is, salient – for the learner to identify in the input. As a consequence, ing figures very early in production data from learners. This observation has been supported by numerous studies, from the morpheme order studies of the 1970s (see Introduction above) to more recent studies in L2 Processability Theory (Pienemann, 2006; Pienemann et al., 2006). However, it cannot be concluded that the progressive form is target-like just because -ing inflected verbs occur in L2 data from early on. We will in fact see that the developmental sequence for the progressive form is a long drawnout process.
The Aspect Hypothesis
As stated above, the progressive primarily represents a grammatical aspectual category in English. Grammatical aspect has to be clearly distinguished from the lexical or inherent aspect of the verb (this phenomenon is also referred to as aktionsart [aktions = action; art = manner'] (see Andersen & Shirai, 1994; Comrie, 1976). According to Vendler (1967), the following types of lexical aspect can be distinguished:
(i) Achievement – that which takes place instantaneously, and is reducible to a single point in time, this point being the necessary endpoint or goal (e.g. start, recognize, die, reach the summit, etc). These verbs or predicates are referred to as 'telic' (Greek telos = 'aim').
(ii) Accomplishment – that which has some duration, but has a necessary endpoint or goal (e.g. run a mile, make a chair, build a house, write a book, etc). These verbs and predicates are also referred to as 'telic'.
(iii) Activity – that which has duration, but without a necessary endpoint (e.g. run, walk, play, sing, etc). These verbs and predicates are referred to as atelic.
(iv) State – that which has no dynamics, and continues without additional effort or energy being applied (e.g. see, love, hate, want, etc). These verbs are referred to as atelic (Shirai & Kurono, 1998: 247 ff.) (see Table 1.1).
The Aspect Hypothesis (AH) predicts that verbal inflections in both early L1 and L2 acquisition redundantly mark the lexical aspect inherent in the verb or predicate rather than tense or grammatical aspect. These predictions of the AH have been shown in L2 acquisition for a variety of languages and language combinations (Andersen & Shirai, 1994; Rohde, 1997; Salaberry & Shirai, 2002). This study will exclusively focus on the development of the progressive form, thus the other verbal inflections will be ignored.
In L2 English, the -ing inflection is prototypically affiliated with activities and accomplishments whereas -ed is mainly found with achievements, and the 3rd person singular – s is predominantly associated with states (Housen, 2002; Rohde, 1996, 1997).
Data and Procedure
The data of four children, aged four to nine, are reviewed. These children spent six months in a small town in California and acquired English in naturalistic contexts without any formal instruction involved. Their L2 development was documented in the form of diary data/spontaneous notes. Additional data come from selected tape recordings that were made to complement the diary data (Rohde, 1996, 1997; Wode, 1981). The input data discussed in this chapter are taken from seven selected tape recordings that have been exhaustively transcribed to include interlocutors. The data comprise spontaneous speech from nine American children aged six to nine.
Two developmental sequences will be shown for the German children's L2 acquisition of the progressive form with respect to its function. In the first part of the study, the development of the progressive form with its functions as both a grammatical aspectual category and as a means of marking future tense is presented. In the second sequence shown, the link between the ing inflection and the highlighted lexical aspect is investigated within the framework of the Aspect Hypothesis. It will be shown that each function of the progressive form is tackled separately so that the learner data only reflect the input distribution to a limited extent. It will be suggested that due to the fact that the children highlight different functions of the progressive in each month of L2 exposure, the predictions for the developmental sequence of -ing inflected verbs according to the Aspect Hypothesis are not entirely met and may have to be slightly modified. The data will also be discussed with regard to the Distributional Bias Hypothesis (see later section), which makes predictions about the distribution of lexical aspect in L1 speech.
The Learners: The Development of Uses of the Progressive Form. Results and Discussion
In this section, the data of the six-month stay are presented in chronological order divided into monthly samples of L2 exposure, starting with the second month as there are no instances of the progressive form documented earlier.
Month 2
(7) H/D I'm pitching really fast.
(8) H/D I'm stealing (H is stealing a base in a baseball match).
(9) H/D It's car coming.
(10) H/D Hey, look John. I'm riding my bike like this.
(11) L/T Heiko's sleeping.
(12) H/T Where are you kicking?
(13) H/T He play on your team.
In (7), the 9-year-old Heiko goes outside to practice pitching. Strictly speaking, this utterance refers to a future event, that is, something that the boy intends to do. (8) is taken from a baseball match where the form stealing had been heard in the input numerous times before. (9) gives an example of a verb that at first exclusively appears in the progressive. (10), (11) and (12) are examples which include typical verbs appearing in the progressive. However, all three verbs are also used in their base forms in a target-like fashion. (13) is an instance where the progressive form would be appropriate but where the verb remains in its base form.
Month 3
(14) L/T You wanna ... I'm helping.
(15) L/T No, I don't want playing.
(16) H/D For what you're looking?
(17) H/D What do you do? / What are you doing? (after a long pause)
(18) H/T I'm working on it.
(19) B/D I'm freezing.
(20) L/T I caught one. He swim.
(21) L/T I throw out.
(22) L/T He swim.
The examples above demonstrate a number of interesting tendencies. (14) suggests one of the first uses of the progressive with future reference as Lars announces his offer rather than commenting on his helping. In (15) the use of -ing may be influenced by the German infinitive and 1st/3rd person plural ending -en which is often pronounced as [In]. Another interesting observation is the use of the verb swim. (20) and (22) as well as later instances (see below) suggest that the function of the progressive as a grammatical aspectual category has not been fully grasped yet. This is especially conspicuous for the verb swim. This is corroborated by (17) in which Heiko obviously is in doubt as to which form is the appropriate one in the context.
Month 4
(23) H/D You can't jump this far. I was jumping that far.
(24) H/D It start to raining.
(25) H/T Yes, he was watching Inga. He likes to watch Inga.
(26) H/T We was out bassfishing last night [...] caught a bass and then we was fixing our fishing poles and do that.
(27) H/T I go up to Yellow Jacket when he mading the hamburger.
(28) L/T Who's winning?
(29) L/T This one is still swimming, too.
(30) L/T It's not swimming any more, there it swims [...] there it swim.
(31) L/D Why you not was keeping this little one over there, Henning?
(32) L/D Inga swim. And you don't.
Lars' utterances containing the verb swim reveal that the present progressive is still causing problems for the learner. In (32), it remains uninflected. In (29), it is inflected. However, (29) is a reply to the utterance 'This one is still swimming' by a young American friend and is thus directly taken from the input. A couple of minutes later in the same situation (30), Lars again shows how uncertain he is when it comes to the appropriate inflection, producing -ing, -s and no inflection. The particular verb swim may be causing problems as it is very similar to the German 'schwimmen'. The inflected swimming resembles the German infinitive and 1st/3rd person plural forms 'schwimmen' and may lead Lars to leave the verb uninflected. Along the same lines, (24) may be a result of TRANSFER from German, too. Heiko inflects the verb rain as in German you would find the infinitive 'regnen' in this particular case. Again, -ing seems to be used as both a verb inflection to mark grammatical aspect and as an infinitive marker.
In the fourth month of L2 exposure, the progressive is extended to past contexts (23, 25, 26, 27, 31). However, rather than marking past progressive, the use of the progressive replaces simple past. In Rohde (1997) I have argued that the use of the progressive in these contexts may be more transparent for the learners than simple past. Past is encoded in the auxiliary and the verb receives the -ing inflection which is more salient than the realisations of -ed. (26) suggests that Heiko gives a chronological account of the events, therefore, fixing is not target-like in this context.
(Continues...)
Excerpted from Input Matters in SLA by Thorsten Piske, Martha Young-Scholten. Copyright © 2009 Thorsten Piske and Martha Young-Scholten and the authors of individual chapters. Excerpted by permission of Multilingual Matters.
All rights reserved. No part of this excerpt may be reproduced or reprinted without permission in writing from the publisher.
Excerpts are provided by Dial-A-Book Inc. solely for the personal use of visitors to this web site.
Table of Contents
Introduction - Martha Young-Scholten and Thorsten PiskePart 1 : Matters of Input
1. Input Frequency and the Acquisition of the Progressive - Andreas Rohde
2. Processing Matters in Input Enhancement - Bill VanPatten
3. Input and Second Language Development from a Dynamic Perspective - Marjolijn Verspoor, Wander Lowie and Kees de Bot
4. The Comprehension Hypothesis Extended - Stephen Krashen
5. Output Matters Too - Nel de Jong
6. Learner Attitudes towards Comprehension-based Language Learning - John Stephenson
7. The Hidden Paradox of Foreign Language Instruction, or: Which are the Real Foreign Language Learning Processes? - Werner Bleyhl
Part 2: Input Matters in Phonology
8. Input as a Critical Means to an End: Quantity and Quality of Experience in L2 Phonological Attainment - Alene Moyer
9. Give Input a Chance! - James E. Flege
10. Orthographic Input and Second Language Phonology - Benedetta Bassetti
11. Second Language Speech Learning with Diverse Inputs - Ocke-Schwen Bohn and Rikke Bundgaard-Nielsen
12. Phonetic Input in Second Language Acquisition: Contrastive Analysis of Native and Non-native Sounds - Anja Steinlen
13. Developing Non-native Pronunciation in Immersion Settings - Henning Wode
Bibliography
Glossary