The 'Comparative Logic' and why we need to explain interlanguage grammars
The 'Comparative Logic' and why we need to explain interlanguage grammars
In this paper we argue that Bley-Vroman’s Comparative Fallacy, which warns against comparisons between native speakers and learners in second-language acquisition (SLA) research, is not justified on either theoretical or methodological grounds and should be abandoned as it contravenes the explanatory nature of SLA research. We argue that for SLA to be able to provide meaningful explanations, grammatical comparisons with a baseline (usually of native speakers although not always the case) are not only justified but necessary, a position which we call the ‘Comparative Logic’. The methodological choices assumed by this position ensure that interlanguage grammars are analysed in their own right and respecting their own principles. Related issues, such as why we focus on the native speaker and why investigating deficits in linguistic-cognitive SLA is essential in our field are discussed as well.
Universal Grammar, comparative fallacy, control group, interlanguage, native speaker
Dominguez, Laura
9c1bf2b4-b582-429b-9e8a-5264c4b7e63f
Arche, M.J.
b0bdd219-6c46-4f9e-a91f-0a4156483d51
25 October 2021
Dominguez, Laura
9c1bf2b4-b582-429b-9e8a-5264c4b7e63f
Arche, M.J.
b0bdd219-6c46-4f9e-a91f-0a4156483d51
Dominguez, Laura and Arche, M.J.
(2021)
The 'Comparative Logic' and why we need to explain interlanguage grammars.
Frontiers in Psychology, 12, [717635].
(doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2021.717635).
Abstract
In this paper we argue that Bley-Vroman’s Comparative Fallacy, which warns against comparisons between native speakers and learners in second-language acquisition (SLA) research, is not justified on either theoretical or methodological grounds and should be abandoned as it contravenes the explanatory nature of SLA research. We argue that for SLA to be able to provide meaningful explanations, grammatical comparisons with a baseline (usually of native speakers although not always the case) are not only justified but necessary, a position which we call the ‘Comparative Logic’. The methodological choices assumed by this position ensure that interlanguage grammars are analysed in their own right and respecting their own principles. Related issues, such as why we focus on the native speaker and why investigating deficits in linguistic-cognitive SLA is essential in our field are discussed as well.
Text
Dominguez Arche Comparative Logic FINAL
- Accepted Manuscript
More information
Accepted/In Press date: 13 September 2021
Published date: 25 October 2021
Additional Information:
Publisher Copyright:
Copyright © 2021 Domínguez and Arche.
Copyright:
Copyright 2021 Elsevier B.V., All rights reserved.
Keywords:
Universal Grammar, comparative fallacy, control group, interlanguage, native speaker
Identifiers
Local EPrints ID: 451575
URI: http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/id/eprint/451575
ISSN: 1664-1078
PURE UUID: d2d24c80-7bf4-4a56-9c04-65ca6f65e0d9
Catalogue record
Date deposited: 12 Oct 2021 16:31
Last modified: 17 Mar 2024 03:01
Export record
Altmetrics
Contributors
Author:
M.J. Arche
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
