View
213
Download
0
Category
Preview:
Citation preview
GROUP 5
ANNIS LUTHFIANA 2201410051
AULYA PURNAWIDHA D. 2201410053
FITA ARIYANA 2201410075
CHAPTER 7
LINGUISTIC ASPECTS OF
INTERLANGUAGE
BY: ROD ELLIS
Languages vary in whether they have relative
clauses structures. This linguistic difference
influences the ease with which learners are able to
learn relative clauses.
TYPOLOGICAL UNIVERSALS: RELATIVE CLAUSES
In language like English, a relative clause can
be attached to the end of matrix clause:
The police have caught the man who
bombed the hotel.
Or they can be embedded in the main clause:
The man who bombed the hotel has been
caught by the police.
Linguistic have shown that languages are
more likely to permit relative clauses
with a subject pronoun than with an
object pronoun. It is called accessibility
hierarchy.
For example:
the use of who rather than the use of
whom
Relative pronoun function
Example
Subject The writer who won the Booker prize is my lofelong friend.
Direct object The writer whom we met won the Booker prize.
Indirect object The writer to whom I introduced you won the Booker prize
Object of preposition The writer with whom we had dinner won the Booker prize.
Genitive The writer whose wife we met won the Booker prize
Object of comparative The writer who I have written more books than has won the Booker prize.
The accesibility hierarchy serves as
an example of how SLA and
linguistics can assist each other.
Linguistic facts can be used to
explain and even predict
acquisition.
The results of empirical studies of
L2 acquisition can be used to
refine our understanding of
linguistic facts.
Effects of relative clause structure on L2 acquisition
◦It is easier to learn a L2 with relative clauses if you
already know them from your L1.
◦There are two ways to use relative clauses in English:
attached to the end of a sentence or interrupting a main
clause.
Learners of L2 English tend to use the first possibility.
Noam Chomsky`s theory of Universal grammar:
Example: (Reflexives)
UNIVERSAL GRAMMAR
governed by a set of highly abstract principles.Language
Only local binding
English
Local and long-distance binding
Japanese
Result: Japanese Learners of L2 English do have to
learn that reflexives in English permit only local
binding. The question if they are able to do so could
not be answered clearly. Not even by a number of
studies. It is not absolutely clear, although very
important.
Children learning their L1 must rely on innate knowledge of a language.
Poverty of stimulus insufficiency which enables children to
discover the rules of a language.
Input Positive evidence: what is gramatical
their parents do not generally correct their
grammatical mistakes
Negative evidence: what is ungrammatical
LEARNABILITY
The input seriously undetermines learning,
it does not provide the information needed
for learning to be successful
Children must have prior knowledge of
what is grammatically possible and
impossible and that this is part of their
biological endowment.
The Critical Period Hypothesis
states that there is a period when language acquisition is easy and
complete, and beyond which it is difficult and incomplete.
People who lost their linguistic capabilities: as a result of an
accident, were able to regain them totally before puberty but
were unable to do so afterwards.
The Critical Period Hypothesis
There is a considerable evidence that supports the claim that L2
learners who begin lerning as adults are unable to achieve native-
speaker competence in either grammar or pronunciation
(Immigrants in the United States).
Not all learners are subject to critical periods. Some achieve
native-speaker ability from an adult start.
The relative lack of success of most L2 learners in comparison
to L1 learners suggests that there may be radical differences in
the way first and second languages are acquired.
Complete Access
No Access
Partial Access
Dual Access
Access to UG
Chomskyan linguisticsUnmarked structures are those that are governed by UG and which, therefore require only
minimal evidence for acquisition.
Markedness
For example, ‘local binding’ of reflexives is considered unmarked in relation to
‘long-distance binding’.
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.
It has been proposed that learners are much more likely to transfer unmarked structures from their L1 than their marked structures.
For example:
English contrasts the sounds /t/ & /d/Word initially (tin/din) , word medially (betting/bedding), finally (wet/wed)
German, however, only contrasts these two sounds word initially and medially
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.
Cognitive Versus Linguistic Explanations
Recommended