What is easy and what is hard to acquire in a second language?
What is easy and what is hard to acquire in a second language?
In looking at differential difficulties at the different linguistic modules and interfaces, this paper argues for the Bottleneck Hypothesis (Slabakova 2008). It is argued that narrow syntactic knowledge comes before accurate knowledge of morphology in production and comprehension of a second language. Functional morphology is uniformly hard: it is harder for low-educated native speakers than for non-native speakers. In processing complex syntax, low-educated native speakers who have had little exposure to complex constructions may be at a disadvantage compared to non-native speakers. It is also argued that once the inflectional morphology is learned, learners are aware of all its semantic consequences, taught and untaught. Even at the syntax-discourse interface, acquisition of properties unavailable from the L1 is possible. At the semantics-pragmatics interface, L2 learners transfer universal properties like Gricean maxims. The rationale of the Bottleneck Hypothesis is as follows: (1) inflectional morphology reflects syntactic and semantic differences between languages; (2) narrow syntactic operations and meaning calculation are universal; (3) in order to acquire syntax and meaning in a second language, the learner has to go through the inflectional morphology; (4) hence, morphology is the bottleneck of acquisition.
978-1-57473-434-8
280-294
Cascadilla Proceedings Project
Slabakova, Roumyana
1bda11ce-ce3d-4146-8ae3-4a486b6f5bde
2010
Slabakova, Roumyana
1bda11ce-ce3d-4146-8ae3-4a486b6f5bde
Slabakova, Roumyana
(2010)
What is easy and what is hard to acquire in a second language?
Bowles, Melissa, Ionin, Tania, Montrul, Silvina and Tremblay, Annie
(eds.)
In Proceedings of the 10th Generative Approaches to Second Language Acquisition Conference (GASLA 2009).
Cascadilla Proceedings Project.
.
Record type:
Conference or Workshop Item
(Paper)
Abstract
In looking at differential difficulties at the different linguistic modules and interfaces, this paper argues for the Bottleneck Hypothesis (Slabakova 2008). It is argued that narrow syntactic knowledge comes before accurate knowledge of morphology in production and comprehension of a second language. Functional morphology is uniformly hard: it is harder for low-educated native speakers than for non-native speakers. In processing complex syntax, low-educated native speakers who have had little exposure to complex constructions may be at a disadvantage compared to non-native speakers. It is also argued that once the inflectional morphology is learned, learners are aware of all its semantic consequences, taught and untaught. Even at the syntax-discourse interface, acquisition of properties unavailable from the L1 is possible. At the semantics-pragmatics interface, L2 learners transfer universal properties like Gricean maxims. The rationale of the Bottleneck Hypothesis is as follows: (1) inflectional morphology reflects syntactic and semantic differences between languages; (2) narrow syntactic operations and meaning calculation are universal; (3) in order to acquire syntax and meaning in a second language, the learner has to go through the inflectional morphology; (4) hence, morphology is the bottleneck of acquisition.
Text
GASLA10Proceedings.pdf
- Version of Record
More information
Published date: 2010
Venue - Dates:
10th Generative Approaches to Second Language Acquisition Conference (GASLA 2009), Urbana, United States, 2009-03-13 - 2009-03-15
Organisations:
Modern Languages and Linguistics
Identifiers
Local EPrints ID: 357364
URI: http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/id/eprint/357364
ISBN: 978-1-57473-434-8
PURE UUID: 1957795a-29e4-48d5-ac82-db235583f269
Catalogue record
Date deposited: 24 Sep 2013 13:33
Last modified: 15 Mar 2024 03:48
Export record
Contributors
Editor:
Melissa Bowles
Editor:
Tania Ionin
Editor:
Silvina Montrul
Editor:
Annie Tremblay
Download statistics
Downloads from ePrints over the past year. Other digital versions may also be available to download e.g. from the publisher's website.
View more statistics