Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-42gr6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-23T08:39:45.429Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

INCIDENTAL ACQUISITION OF GRAMMATICAL FEATURES DURING READING IN L1 AND L2

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 October 2015

Denisa Bordag ,
Amit Kirschenbaum ,
Andreas Opitz ,
Maria Rogahn  and
Erwin Tschirner
Denisa Bordag*
Affiliation:
University of Leipzig
Amit Kirschenbaum
Affiliation:
University of Leipzig
Andreas Opitz
Affiliation:
University of Leipzig
Maria Rogahn
Affiliation:
University of Leipzig
Erwin Tschirner
Affiliation:
University of Leipzig
*
*Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Denisa Bordag, Herder-Institut, University of Leipzig, Beethovenstr. 15, 04107 Leipzig, Germany. E-mail: denisav@uni-leipzig.de
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The present study explores the initial stages of incidental acquisition of two grammatical properties of verbs (subcategorization and [ir]regularity) during reading in first language (L1) and second language (L2) German using an adjusted self-paced reading paradigm. The results indicate that L1 speakers are superior to L2 speakers in the incidental acquisition of grammatical knowledge (experiments on subcategorization), except when the new knowledge interferes with previously acquired knowledge and mechanisms (experiments on [ir]regularity): Although both populations performed equally well regarding the acquisition of the subcategorization of verbs from the input (i.e., whether the verbs are transitive or intransitive), they differed with respect to the regularity status of new verbs. L1 speakers (in contrast to L2 learners) seem to disprefer irregularly conjugated verb forms in general, irrespective of their conjugation in the previous input. The results further show that the syntactic complexity of the context and morphological markedness positively affect the incidental acquisition of new words in the L2, triggering learners’ shift of attention from the text level to the word level.

Type
Articles
Information
Studies in Second Language Acquisition , Volume 38 , Issue 3 , September 2016 , pp. 445 - 483
Check for updates
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2015 

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

Arya, D. J., Hiebert, E. H., & Pearson, P. D. (2011). The effects of syntactic and lexical complexity on the comprehension of elementary science texts. International Electronic Journal of Elementary Education, 4, 107–125.Google Scholar
Beck, I. L., McKeown, M. G., & McCaslin, E. S. (1980). Vocabulary development: The rationale and design of a program to teach vocabulary to fourth-grade students (LRDC Publication 1980/25). Pittsburgh, PA: University of Pittsburgh, Learning Research and Development Center.Google Scholar
Berman, R. A. (1993). Marking of verb transitivity by Hebrew-speaking children. Journal of Child Language, 20, 641–669.Google Scholar
Berman, R. A. (1994). Developmental perspectives on transitivity: A confluence of cues. In Levy, Y. (Ed.), Other children, other languages: Issues in the theory of language acquisition (pp. 189–241). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Bordag, D., Kirschenbaum, A., Opitz, A., & Tschirner, E. (2014). To store or not to store, and if so, where? An experimental study on incidental vocabulary acquisition by adult native speakers of German. In Torrens, V. & Escobar, L. (Eds.), The processing of lexicon and morphosyntax (pp. 128–147). Newcastle, UK: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.Google Scholar
Bordag, D., Kirschenbaum, A., Tschirner, E., & Opitz, A. (2015). Incidental acquisition of new words during reading in L2: Inference of meaning and its integration in the L2 mental lexicon. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 18, 372–390. http://doi.org/10.1017/S1366728914000078 Google Scholar
Bowerman, M. (1990). Mapping thematic roles onto syntactic functions: Are children helped by innate linking rules? Linguistics, 28, 1253–1290.Google Scholar
Britton, B. K., Glynn, S. M., Meyer, B. J., & Penland, M. J. (1982). Effects of text structure on use of cognitive capacity during reading. Journal of Educational Psychology, 74, 51–61.Google Scholar
Bybee, J. (1995). Regular morphology and the lexicon. Language and Cognitive Processes, 10, 425–455.Google Scholar
Bybee, J., & Newman, J. (1995). Are stem changes as natural as affixes? Linguistics, 33, 633–654.Google Scholar
Cabrera, M., & Zubizarreta, M. L. (2005). Overgeneralization of causatives and transfer in L2 Spanish and L2 English. In Eddington, D. (Ed.), Selected proceedings of the 6th Conference on the Acquisition of Spanish and Portuguese as First and Second Languages (pp. 15–30). Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press.Google Scholar
Chung, H. (1995). Effects of elaborative modification on second language reading comprehension and incidental vocabulary learning (Unpublished master’s thesis). University of Hawaiʽi at Mānoa, Honolulu.Google Scholar
Clahsen, H. (1999). Lexical entries and rules of language: A multidisciplinary study of German inflection. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 22, 991–1013.Google Scholar
Clahsen, H., Rothweiler, M., Woest, A., & Marcus, G. F. (1992). Regular and irregular inflection in the acquisition of German noun plurals. Cognition, 45, 225–255.Google Scholar
Conway, C. M., & Christiansen, M. H. (2006). Statistical learning with and between modalities. Psychological Science, 17, 905–912.Google Scholar
Crossley, S. A., Louwerse, M. M., McCarthy, P. M., & McNamara, D. S. (2007). A linguistic analysis of simplified and authentic texts. Modern Language Journal, 91, 15–30.Google Scholar
Cummins, S., & Roberge, Y. (2005). A modular account of null objects in French. Syntax, 8, 44–64.Google Scholar
Dale, E. (1965). Vocabulary measurement: Techniques and major findings. Elementary English, 42, 395–401.Google Scholar
DeKeyser, R. (2005). What makes learning second-language grammar difficult? A review of issues. Language Learning, 55, 1–25.Google Scholar
DWDS corpus of the German language [Online corpus]. Retrieved from http://www.dwds.de/ Google Scholar
E-Prime 2.0 [Computer software]. (2012). Pittsburgh, PA: Psychology Software Tools, Inc. Retrieved from http://www.pstnet.com Google Scholar
Ellis, N. C. (1994). Implicit and explicit language learning: An overview. In Ellis, N. C. (Ed.), Implicit and explicit learning of languages (pp. 1–31). London, UK: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Ellis, N. C. (2007). The weak interface, consciousness, and form-focused instruction: Mind the doors. In Fotos, S. & Nassaji, H. (Eds.), Form-focused instruction and teacher education: Studies in honour of Rod Ellis (pp. 17–33). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Embick, D., & Marantz, A. (2005). Cognitive neuroscience and the English past tense: Comments on the paper by Ullman et al. Brain and Language, 93, 243–247.Google Scholar
Folia, V., Uddén, J., De Vries, M., Forkstam, C., & Petersson, K. M. (2010). Artificial language learning in adults and children. Language Learning, 60, 188–220.Google Scholar
Fournier, D., Roberge, Y., & Troberg, M. (2003, March). Transitivity as coercion. Paper presented at the Workshop on Polysemy and Conceptual Representation, Siegen, Germany.Google Scholar
Givón, T. (1985). Function, structure and language acquisition. In Slobin, D. (Ed.), The crosslinguistic study of language acquisition (pp. 1008–1025). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Givón, T. (1995). Functionalism and grammar. Amsterdam, The Netherlands: Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Godfroid, A., & Uggen, M. S. (2013). Attention to irregular verbs by beginning learners of German. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 35, 291–322.Google Scholar
Goldschneider, J. M., & DeKeyser, R. M. (2001). Explaining the natural order of L2 morpheme acquisition in English: A metaanalysis of multiple determinants. Language Learning, 55, 27–77.Google Scholar
Grabe, W. (2009). Reading in a second language. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Gropen, J., Pinker, S., Hollander, M., Goldberg, R., & Wilson, R. (1989). The learnability and acquisition of dative alternation in English. Language, 65, 203–257.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Halle, M., & Marantz, A. (1993). Distributed morphology and the pieces of inflection. In Hale, K. & Keyser, S. J. (Eds.), The view from building 20: Essays in linguistics in honor of Sylvain Bromgerger (pp. 111–176). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Halle, M., & Marantz, A. (1994). Some key features of Distributed Morphology. MIT Working Papers in Linguistics, 21, 275–288.Google Scholar
Hamrick, P., & Rebuschat, P. (2012). How implicit is statistical learning? In Rebuschat, P. & Williams, J. (Eds.), Statistical learning and language acquisition (pp. 365–382). Berlin, Germany: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Haspelmath, M. (1993). More on the typology of inchoative/causative verb alternations. In Comrie, B. & Polinsky, M. (Eds.), Causatives and transitivity (pp. 87–120). Amsterdam, The Netherlands: Benjamins.Google Scholar
Hawkins, J. A., & Cutler, A. (1988). Psycholinguistic factors in morphological asymmetry. In Hawkins, J. A. (Ed.), Explaining language universals (pp. 280–317). Oxford, UK: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Hulstijn, J. H. (1989). Implicit and incidental second language learning: Experiments in the processing of natural and partly artificial input. In Dechert, H. W. & Raupach, M. (Eds.), Interlingual processes (pp. 49–73). Tübingen, Germany: Narr.Google Scholar
Isel, F., Gunter, T. C., & Friederici, A. D. (2003). Prosody-assisted head-driven access to spoken German compounds. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 29, 277–288.Google Scholar
Jegerski, J. (2014). Self-paced reading. In Jegerski, J. & VanPatten, B. (Eds.), Research methods in second language psycholinguistics (pp. 20–49). New York, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar
Juffs, A. (1996). Learnability and the lexicon: Theories and second language acquisition research. Amsterdam, The Netherlands: Benjamins.Google Scholar
Kameenui, E. J., Dixon, D. W., & Carnine, D. W. (1987). Issues in the design of vocabulary instruction. In McKeown, M. G. & Curtis, M. E. (Eds.), The nature of vocabulary acquisition (pp. 129–145). New York, NY: Psychology Press.Google Scholar
Keuleers, E., & Brysbaert, M. (2010). Wuggy: A multilingual pseudoword generator. Behavior Research Methods, 42, 627–633.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Larsen-Freeman, D. (2010). Not so fast: A discussion of L2 morpheme processing and acquisition. Language Learning, 60, 221–230.Google Scholar
Leikin, M., & Assayag-Bouskila, O. (2004). Expression of syntactic complexity in sentence comprehension: A comparison between dyslexic and regular readers. Reading and Writing, 17, 801–822.Google Scholar
Leow, R. P. (2000). A study of the role of awareness in foreign language behavior. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 22, 557–584.Google Scholar
Leung, J. H., & Williams, J. N. (2012). Constraints on implicit learning of grammatical form-meaning connections. Language Learning, 62, 634–662.Google Scholar
Marslen-Wilson, W., & Tyler, L. K. (1998). Rules, representations, and the English past tense. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 2, 428–435.Google Scholar
Marslen-Wilson, W., & Tyler, L. K. (2007). Morphology, language and the brain: The decompositional substrate for language comprehension. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 362, 823–836.Google Scholar
McClelland, J. L., & Rumelhart, D. E. (1981). An interactive activation model of context effects in letter perception: I. An account of basic findings. Psychological Review, 88, 375–407.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Messiant, C. (2008). A subcategorization acquisition system for French verbs. In Proceedings of the 46th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics on Human Language Technologies: Student Research Workshop (pp. 55–60). Stroudsburg, PA: Association for Computational Linguistics. Retrieved from http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=1564166 Google Scholar
Montrul, S. (1997). Transitivity alternations in second language acquisition: A cross-linguistic study of English, Spanish and Turkish (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). McGill University, Montreal.Google Scholar
Montrul, S. (2000). Transitivity alternations in L2 acquisition: Toward a modular view of transfer. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 22, 229–273.Google Scholar
Nagy, W. E., Anderson, R. C., & Herman, P. A. (1987). Learning word meanings from context during normal reading. American Educational Research Journal, 24, 237–270.Google Scholar
Nation, P. (Ed.). (1994). New ways in teaching vocabulary. New ways in TESOL series: Innovative classroom techniques. Retrieved from http://www.eric.ed.gov/ERICWebPortal/recordDetail?accno=ED388055 Google Scholar
Neubauer, K., & Clahsen, H. (2009). Decomposition of inflected words in a second language. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 31, 403–435.Google Scholar
Paribakht, T. S., & Wesche, M. (1993). Reading comprehension and second language development in a comprehension-based ESL program. TESL Canada Journal, 11, 9–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Paribakht, T. S., & Wesche, M. (1997). Vocabulary enhancement activities and reading for meaning in second language vocabulary acquisition. In Coady, J. & Huckin, T. (Eds.), Second language vocabulary acquisition: A rationale for pedagogy (pp. 174–200). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Parker, K., & Chaudron, C. (1987). The effects of linguistic simplifications and elaborative modifications on L2 comprehension. University of Hawaiʽi Working Papers in ESL, 6, 107–133.Google Scholar
Perruchet, P., & Pacton, S. (2006). Implicit learning and statistical learning: One phenomenon, two approaches. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 10, 233–238.Google Scholar
Peters, E., Hulstijn, J. H., Sercu, L., & Lutjeharms, M. (2009). Learning L2 German vocabulary through reading: The effect of three enhancement techniques compared. Language Learning, 59, 113–151.Google Scholar
Pinker, S. (1989). Learnability and cognition: The acquisition of argument structure. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Pinker, S. (1991). Rules of language. Science, 253, 530–535.Google Scholar
Pinker, S. (1997). How the mind works. New York, NY: Norton.Google Scholar
Plaut, D. C., & Gonnerman, L. M. (2000). Are non-semantic morphological effects incompatible with a distributed connectionist approach to lexical processing? Language and Cognitive Processes, 15, 445–485.Google Scholar
Prévost, P., & White, L. (2000). Missing surface inflection or impairment in second language acquisition? Evidence from tense and agreement. Second Language Research, 16, 103–133.Google Scholar
Read, J. (1989, August). Towards a deeper assessment of vocabulary knowledge. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the International Association of Applied Linguistics, Sydney, Australia.Google Scholar
Reichle, E. D., Warren, T., & McConnell, K. (2009). Using EZ Reader to model the effects of higher level language processing on eye movements during reading. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 16, 1–21.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rieder, A. (2002). A cognitive view of incidental vocabulary acquisition: From text meaning to word meaning. Views, 11, 53–71.Google Scholar
Rieder, A. (2003). Implicit and explicit learning in incidental vocabulary acquisition. Views, 12, 24–39.Google Scholar
Robinson, P. (2001). Task complexity, cognitive resources, and syllabus design: A triadic framework for examining task influences on SLA. In Robinson, P. (Ed.), Cognition and second language instruction (pp. 287–318). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Robinson, P. (2007). Task complexity, theory of mind, and intentional reasoning: Effects on L2 speech production, interaction, uptake and perceptions of task difficulty. IRAL-International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, 45, 193–213.Google Scholar
Robinson, P., & Gilabert, R. (2007). Task complexity, the Cognition Hypothesis and second language learning and performance. IRAL—International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, 45, 161–176.Google Scholar
Rumelhart, D. E., & McClelland, J. L. (1982). An interactive activation model of context effects in letter perception: II. The contextual enhancement effect and some tests and extensions of the model. Psychological Review, 89, 60–94.Google Scholar
Saffran, J. R. (2001). The use of predictive dependencies in language learning. Journal of Memory and Language, 44, 493–515.Google Scholar
Schmidt, R. (1990). The role of consciousness in second language learning. Applied Linguistics, 11, 129–158.Google Scholar
Schmidt, R. (2012). Attention, awareness, and individual differences in language learning. Perspectives on Individual Characteristics and Foreign Language Education, 6, 27–50.Google Scholar
Schütze, H. (1994). A connectionist model of verb subcategorization. In Ram, A. & Eiselt, K. (Eds.), Proceedings of the Sixteenth Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society (pp. 784–788). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Seidenberg, M. S., & Gonnerman, L. M. (2000). Explaining derivational morphology as the convergence of codes. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 4, 353–361.Google Scholar
Shokouhi, H. S., & Maniati, M. (2009). Learners’ incidental vocabulary acquisition: A case on narrative and expository texts. English Language Teaching, 2, 13–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Simensen, A. M. (1987). Adapted readers: How are they adapted. Reading in a Foreign Language, 4, 41–57.Google Scholar
Smolka, E., Khader, P. H., Wiese, R., Zwitserlood, P., & Rösler, F. (2013). Electrophysiological evidence for the continuous processing of linguistic categories of regular and irregular verb inflection in German. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 25, 1284–1304.Google Scholar
Stockall, L., & Marantz, A. (2006). A single route, full decomposition model of morphological complexity: MEG evidence. The Mental Lexicon, 1, 85–123.Google Scholar
Storkel, H. L., Armbruster, J., & Hogan, T. P. (2006). Differentiating phonotactic probability and neighborhood density in adult word learning. Journal of Speech, Language and Hearing Research, 49, 1175–1192.Google Scholar
Toth, P. D. (2000). The interaction of instruction and learner-internal factors in the acquisition of L2 morphosyntax. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 22, 169–208.Google Scholar
Ullman, M. T. (2001a). The declarative/procedural model of lexicon and grammar. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 30, 37–69.Google Scholar
Ullman, M. T. (2001b). The neural basis of lexicon and grammar in first and second language: The declarative/procedural model. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 4, 105–122.Google Scholar
Ullman, M. T., & Pierpont, E. I. (2005). Specific language impairment is not specific to language: The procedural deficit hypothesis. Cortex, 41, 399–433.Google Scholar
Ullman, M. T., Corkin, S., Coppola, M., Hickok, G., Growdon, J. H., Koroshetz, W. J., & Pinker, S. (1997). A neural dissociation within language: Evidence that the mental dictionary is part of declarative memory, and that grammatical rules are processed by the procedural system. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 9, 266–276.Google Scholar
Webb, S. (2008). The effects of context on incidental vocabulary learning. Reading in a Foreign Language, 20, 232–245.Google Scholar
Wesche, M., & Paribakht, T. S. (1994, March). Enhancing vocabulary acquisition through reading: A hierarchy of text-related exercise types. Paper presented at the American Association for Applied Linguistics conference, Baltimore, MD. Abstract retrieved from http://www.eric.ed.gov/ERICWebPortal/recordDetail?accno=ED369291 Google Scholar
Wesche, M., & Paribakht, T. S. (1996). Assessing second language vocabulary knowledge: Depth versus breadth. Canadian Modern Language Review, 53, 13–40.Google Scholar
Wortschatz Projekt [Online corpus]. Retrieved from http://wortschatz.uni-leipzig.de/ Google Scholar
Wunderlich, D. (2006). Towards a structural typology of verb classes. Advances in the Theory of the Lexicon, 13, 57–166.Google Scholar
Zobl, H. (1983). Markedness and the projection problem. Language Learning, 33, 293–313.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zobl, H. (1985). Grammars in search of input and intake. In Gass, S. & Madden, C. (Eds.), Input in second language acquisition (pp. 329–344). Rowley, MA: Newbury House.Google Scholar
Zyzik, E. (2006). Transitivity alternations and sequence learning: Insights from L2 Spanish production data. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 28, 449–485.Google Scholar