Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-r6qrq Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-26T19:54:27.779Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

THE EFFECTS OF TEXTUAL ENHANCEMENT ON THE ACQUISITION OF TWO NONPARALLEL GRAMMATICAL FEATURES BY SPANISH-SPEAKING LEARNERS OF ITALIAN

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 March 2016

Paolo Della Putta
Paolo Della Putta*
Affiliation:
University of Modena and Reggio Emilia, Italy
*
*Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Paolo Della Putta, Department of Education and Human Sciences, University of Modena and Reggio Emilia, via Allegri 9, 41121, Reggio Emilia, Italy. E-mail: paolo.dellaputta@unimore.it
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This article investigates the learning of two syntactic structures in Italian—Pre-possessive Determiner Article (PPDA) and Differential Object Marking—that each pose specific learning difficulties for Spanish-speaking learners of Italian (SSLI), resulting from the asymmetrical relationship with corresponding structures in the learners’ L1 (Spanish). The article also examines to what extent these difficulties can be alleviated by means of a relatively implicit type of form-focused instruction (Textual Enhancement, or TE). SSLI tend to omit the article before the possessive determiner (e.g., *mia macchina) and overuse the Prepositional Accusative (PA, the Romance languages’ instance of Differential Object Marking) in canonical SVO sentences (e.g., *conosco a Marco). Although both structures pose learning difficulties to SSLI, the learning path that leads SSLI to acquire these two features is different: SSLI have to learn to add PPDA to their interlanguage and they have to unlearn PA, a property of their L1. Sixty-eight instructed SSLI were divided in two groups. Group A read five texts where the absence of PA was textually enhanced; group B read the same texts where the presence of PPDA was enhanced. The participants took a timed grammatical judgment test before, shortly after, and two months after the instructional treatment. The results show that the effects of the TE are different for PA and PPDA, which indicates that features to be unlearned are more difficult and require more explicit instructional intervention.

Type
Articles
Information
Studies in Second Language Acquisition , Volume 38 , Special Issue 2: Cognitive Perspectives on Difficulty and Complexity in SLA , June 2016 , pp. 217 - 238
Check for updates
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2016 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Abutalebi, J. (2008). Neural aspects of second language representation and language control. Acta Psychologica, 128, 466–478.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Abutalebi, J., Della Rosa, P., Ding, G., Weekes, B., Costa, A., & Green, D. (2013). Language proficiency modulates the engagement of cognitive control areas in multilinguals. Cortex, 49, 905–911.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Alanen, R. (1995). Input enhancement and rule presentation in second language acquisition. In Schmidt, R. (Ed.), Attention and awareness in second language acquisition (pp. 259–299). Honolulu: University of Hawai’i Press.Google Scholar
Ayoun, D. (2003). Parameter setting in language acquisition. London, UK: Continuum.Google Scholar
Balasch, S. (2011). Factors determining Spanish differential object marking within its domain of variation. In Michnowicz, J. & Dodsworth, R. (Eds.), Selected proceedings of the 5th workshop on Spanish sociolinguistics (pp. 113–124). Sommerville, MA: Cascadilla Proceedings Project.Google Scholar
Balasch, S. (2014). Spanish variable object marking: Dealing with dependence among linguistic and social factors. Journal in Research Design and Statistics in Linguistics and Communication Sciences, 1, 27–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bowles, M., & Montrul, S. (2008). The role of explicit instruction in the L2 acquisition of the a-personal. In Bruhn de Garavito, J. & Valenzuela, E. (Eds.), Selected proceedings of the 10th Hispanic linguistic symposium (pp. 25–35). Sommerville, MA: Cascadilla Proceedings Project.Google Scholar
Carroll, S. (2001). Input and evidence: The raw material of second language acquisition. Amsterdam, The Netherlands: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
De Angelis, G. (2005a). Interlanguage transfer of function words. Language Learning, 55, 379–414.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
De Angelis, G. (2005b). Multilingualism and non-native lexical transfer: An identification problem. International Journal of Multilingualism, 2, 1–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
De Graaff, R., & Housen, A. (2009). Investigating the effects and effectiveness of L2 instruction. In Long, M. & Doughty, C. (Eds.), The handbook of language teaching (pp. 736–755). Oxford, UK: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Della Putta, P. (2015). “Hai visto a tuo amico?” L’effetto dell’input su due tratti caratteristici dell’interlingua italiana di ispanofoni. [Did you see your friend? The effect of input on two typical features of Spanish-speakers’ Italian interlanguage.] In Favilla, E. & Nuzzo, E. (Eds.), Grammatica applicata: Apprendimento, patologie e insegnamento (pp. 231–255). Milano, Italy: Studi AItLA.Google Scholar
Ellis, R. (2002). Does form-focused instruction affect the acquisition of implicit knowledge? A review of the research. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 24, 223–236.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ellis, R. (2006a). Researching the effects of form-focussed instruction on L2 acquisition. AILA Review, 19, 18–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ellis, R. (2006b). Measuring implicit and explicit knowledge of a second language: A psychometric study. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 27, 141–172.Google Scholar
Ferrario, G. (2013). L’italiano degli immigrati ispanofoni. L’influenza della lingua1 nell’apprendimento di lingue affini. [Italian of Spanish immigrants. The influence of the first language on the learning of closely related languages.] Italiano Lingua Due, 5, 314–340.Google Scholar
Gabriele, A. (2009). Transfer and transition in the SLA of aspect. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 31, 371–402.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gass, S., & Mackey, A. (2002). Frequency effects and second language acquisition. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 24, 249–260.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Godfroid, A., Boers, F., & Housen, A. (2013). An eye for words: Gauging the role of attention in incidental L2 vocabulary acquisition by means of eye tracking. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 35, 483–517.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Guijarro-Fuentes, P. (2011). Feature composition in differential object marking. EUROSLA Yearbook, 11, 138–164.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Guijarro-Fuentes, P., & Marinis, T. (2009). The acquisition of the personal preposition a by Catalan-Spanish and English-Spanish Bilinguals. In Collentine, J., García, M., Lafford, B., & Marín, F. M. (Eds.), Selected proceedings of the 11th Hispanic linguistic symposium (pp. 81–92). Sommerville, MA: Cascadilla Proceedings Project.Google Scholar
Gutiérrez, X. (2013). The construct validity of grammaticality judgement tests as measures of implicit and explicit knowledge. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 35, 423–449.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Han, Z., Park, E., & Combs, C. (2008). Textual enhancement of input: Issues and possibilities. Applied Linguistics, 29, 597–618.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Iemmolo, G. (2010). Topicality and differential object marking: Evidence from Romance and beyond. Studies in Language, 34, 239–272.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Inagaki, S. (2001). Motion verbs with goal PPs in the L2 acquisition of English and Japanese. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 23, 153–170.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jarvis, S., O’Malley, M., Jing, L., Zhang, J., Hill, J., Chan, C., & Sevostyanova, N. (2013). Cognitive foundations of crosslinguistic influence. In Schwieter, J. (Ed.), Innovative research and practices in second language acquisition and bilingualism (pp. 287–307). Amsterdam, The Netherlands: Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jiang, N. (2012). Conducting reaction time research. New York, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar
Judy, T. (2011). L1/L2 parametric directionality matters. EUROSLA Yearbook, 11, 165–190.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Larrañaga, P., Treffers-Daller, J., Tidball, J., & Ortega, M. (2012). L1 transfer in the acquisition of manner in Spanish by native speakers of English. International Journal of Bilingualism, 16, 117–138.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lefebvre, C., White, L., & Jordan, C. (2006). Introduction. In Lefevbre, C., White, L., & Jordan, C. (Eds.), L2 acquisition and creole genesis (pp. 1–14). Amsterdam, The Netherlands: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mackey, A., & Gass, S. (2005). Second language research. Mahwah, NJ: Laurence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Norris, J. M., & Ortega, L. (2000). Effectiveness of L2 instruction: A research synthesis and quantitative meta-analysis. Language Learning, 50, 417–528.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Robinson, P. (2003). Attention and memory during SLA. In Doughty, C. J. & Long, M. (Eds.), The handbook of second language acquisition (pp. 631–678). New York, NY: Blackwell Publishing.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ringbom, H. (2007). Cross-linguistic similarity in foreign language learning. Clevedon, UK: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
Ringbom, H., & Jarvis, S. (2009). The importance of cross-linguistic similarity in foreign language learning. In Long, M. & Doughty, C. J. (Eds.), The handbook of language teaching (pp. 106–118). New York, NY: Blackwell Publishing.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schmid, S. (1994). L’italiano degli spagnoli. Interlingue di immigrati nella svizzera tedesca. [Italian of Spaniards. Interlanguage of immigrants in German-speaking Switzerland.] Milano, Italy: FrancoAngeli.Google Scholar
Schmidt, R. (2001). Attention. In Robinson, P. (Eds.), Cognition and second language instruction (pp. 3–32). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Segalowitz, N. (2007). Access fluidity, attention control, and the acquisition of fluency in a second language. TESOL Quarterly, 41, 181–186.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sharwood-Smith, M. (2011). Language acquisition as a side effect of language processing. Language, Interaction, Acquisition, Special Issue on “Processing of Input in SLA,” 4, 171–188.Google Scholar
Shook, D. (1994). FL/L2 reading, grammatical information, and the input-to-intake phenomenon. Applied Language Learning, 52, 57–93.Google Scholar
Simard, D. (2009). Differential effects of textual enhancement formats on intake. System, 37, 124–135.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Slabakova, R. (2006). Learnability in the second language acquisition of semantics: a bidirectional study of a semantic parameter. Second Language Research, 22, 498–523.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Spada, N., & Tomita, Y. (2010). Interactions between type of instruction and type of language feature: A meta-analysis. Language Learning, 60, 263–308.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Trahey, M., & White, L. (1993). Positive evidence and preemption in the second language classroom. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 15, 181–204.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
VanPatten, B. (1989). Can learners attend to form and content while processing input? Hispania, 72, 409–417.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
White, L. (1991). Adverb placement in second language acquisition: Some effects of positive and negative evidence in the classroom. Second Language Research, 7, 133–161.Google Scholar
Winke, P. (2013). The effects of input enhancement on grammar learning and comprehension: A modified replication of Lee, 2007, with eye-movement data. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 35, 323–352.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yin, B., & Kaiser, E. (2011). Chinese speakers’ acquisition of telicity in English. In Granena, G., Koeth, J., Lee-Ellis, S., Lukyanchenko, A., Botana, G. P., & Rhoades, E. (Eds.), Selected proceedings of the 2010 second language learning forum (pp. 182–198). Sommerville, MA: Cascadilla Proceedings Project.Google Scholar
Supplementary material: File

Della Putta supplementary material

On-line items

Download Della Putta supplementary material(File)
File 18.7 KB