Article published In:
Linguistic Approaches to Bilingualism: Online-First Articles

How syntactic gradience in L1 affects L3 acquisition

A longitudinal study

 | Adam Mickiewicz University
 | Adam Mickiewicz University
 | Adam Mickiewicz University
 | Adam Mickiewicz University
The article reports on a longitudinal study of syntactic cross-linguistic influence (CLI) among L1 Polish learners of L2 English and L3 Norwegian. The study mainly aimed to determine the influence of gradience in L1 on third language acquisition. To this end, four syntactic properties were tested, two of which exhibit similarity between Polish and Norwegian (subject-oriented possessive pronouns and adverb placement), and the other two – between English and Norwegian (definite and indefinite articles). A group of 24 learners of Norwegian participated in an acceptability judgment task, which was administered at three data collection times in all three languages. It aimed not only to determine the presence (and sources) of CLI, but also to observe how gradience in L1 affects the assessment of equivalent properties in L3. In order to assess the role played by gradience, the trilinguals’ performance was compared to that of a control group of English-Norwegian bilinguals. The data were analyzed with mixed-effects ordinal logistic regression modelling, which showed statistically significant differences in the ratings of articles between the two groups. We attribute this finding to gradient acceptability characterizing subject-oriented pronouns and adverb placement in Polish, which is a potential source of non-facilitative CLI.
Keywords: L3 acquisition, cross-linguistic influence, acceptability judgments, syntactic gradience, longitudinal
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Syntactic gradience and its status in Ln acquisition studies
  • 3.The (morpho)-syntactic properties under investigation
    • 3.1Subject-oriented possessive and reflexive possessive pronouns
    • 3.2Adverb placement
    • 3.3Definite and indefinite articles
  • 4.Literature review
  • 5.The study
    • 5.1Research questions and hypotheses
    • 5.2Participants
    • 5.3Stimuli
    • 5.4Procedure
  • 6.Results
    • 6.1Descriptive statistics
      • 6.1.1L1 Polish
      • 6.1.2L2 English
      • 6.1.3L3 Norwegian
      • 6.1.4English-Norwegian control group
    • 6.2Cross-linguistic influence
    • 6.3Proficiency effects
    • 6.4Gradient acceptability in L1 Polish
  • 7.Discussion
  • 8.Conclusions
  • Data availability statement
  • Acknowledgements
  • Notes
  • References
Available under the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) 4.0 license.

For any use beyond this license, please contact the publisher at [email protected].

Published online: 22 December 2023
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/lab.23011.zyc
References (43)
References
Agebjörn, A. (2021). Swedish noun-phrase structure in Russian-speaking learners: An explorative study of L1 influence and input-frequency effects. Journal of the European Second Language Association, 5 (1), 16–29. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Amaral, L., & Roeper, T. (2014). Multiple grammars and second language representation. Second Language Research, 30 (1), 3–36. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Arıbaş, D. Ş., & Cele, F. (2021). Acquisition of articles in L2 and L3 English: The influence of L2 proficiency on positive transfer from L2 to L3. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development, 42 (1), 19–36. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bardel, C., & Falk, Y. (2007). The role of the second language in third language acquisition: The case of Germanic syntax. Second Language Research, 23 (4), 459–484. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bardel, L., & Sánchez, C. (2017). The L2 status factor hypothesis revisited: The role of metalinguistic knowledge, working memory, attention and noticing in third language learning. In T. Angelovska, & A. Hahn (Eds.), L3 syntactic transfer: Models, new developments and implications. (pp. 85–101). John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cho, J. (2022). Online processing and offline judgments of L2-English articles. Linguistic Approaches to Bilingualism, 12 (3), 280–309. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Christensen, R. H. B. (2022). ordinal – Regression models for ordinal data. R package version 2022.11–16. [URL]
Dewaele, J.-M., & Wei, L. (2013). Is multilingualism linked to higher tolerance of ambiguity. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 16 1, 231–240. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Falk, Y., Lindqvist, C., & Bardel, C. (2015). The role of L1 explicit metalinguistic knowledge in L3 oral production at the initial state. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 18 (2), 227–235. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Flynn, S., Foley, C., & Vinnitskaya, I. (2004). The cumulative-enhancement model for language acquisition: Comparing adults’ and children’s patterns of development in first, second and third language acquisition of relative clauses. International Journal of Multilingualism, 1 (1), 3–16. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Francis, E. J. (2022). Gradient Acceptability and Linguistic Theory. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Goodall, G. (Ed.). (2021). The Cambridge Handbook of Experimental Syntax. Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gračanin-Yuksek, M., Lago, S., Fatma Şafak, D., Demir, O., & Kırkıcı, B. (2020). The interpretation of syntactically unconstrained anaphors in Turkish heritage speakers. Second Language Research, 36 (4), 475–501. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Helland, H. P. (2017). An empirical L2 perspective on possessives: French/Norwegian. Oslo Studies in Language, 9 (2), 75–104. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hermas, A. (2010). Language acquisition as computational resetting: Verb movement in L3 initial state. International Journal of Multilingualism, 7 (4), 343–362. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2018). Sources of article semantics in L3 English: Definiteness and specificity. Linguistics Journal, 12 (1), 139–168.Google Scholar
Hestvik, A. (1992). LF movement of pronouns and anti-subject orientation. Linguistic Inquiry, 23 1, 557–594.Google Scholar
Huebner, T. (1983). A longitudinal analysis of the acquisition of English. Karoma Press.Google Scholar
Ionin, T., Choi, S. H., & Liu, Q. (2022). What transfers (or doesn’t) in the second language acquisition of English articles by learners from article-less native languages? Linguistic Approaches to Bilingualism, 12 (2), 133–162. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Jadacka, H. (2013). Kultura języka polskiego: Fleksja, słowotwórstwo, składnia. Wydawnictwo Naukowe PWN.Google Scholar
Jaensch, C. (2008). L3 acquisition of articles in German by native Japanese speakers. In R. Slabakova, J. Rothman, P. Kempchinsky, & E. Gavruseva (Eds.), Proceedings of generative approaches to second language acquisition (pp. 81–89). Cascadilla Press.Google Scholar
Jensen, I. N., Mitrofanova, N., Anderssen, M., Rodina, Y., Slabakova, R., & Westergaard, M. (2021). Crosslinguistic influence in L3 acquisition across linguistic modules. International Journal of Multilingualism, 20 (3), 717–734. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Jin, F. (2009). Third language acquisition of Norwegian objects: Interlanguage transfer or L1 influence? In Y-K. I. Leung (Ed.), Third language acquisition and Universal Grammar. (pp. 144–61). Multilingual Matters. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lago, S., Stutter Garcia, A., & Felser, C. (2018). The role of native and non-native grammars in the comprehension of possessive pronouns. Second Language Research, 35 (3), 319–349. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lemhöfer, K., & Broersma, M. (2012). Introducing LexTALE: A quick and valid Lexical Test for Advanced Learners of English. Behavior Research Methods, 44 1, 325–343. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lenth, R., Bolker, B., Buerkner, P., Giné-Vázquez, I., Herve, M., Jung, M., Love, J., Miguez, F., Riebl, H., & Singmann, H. (2023). Estimated marginal means, aka least-squares means. R package version 1.8.7. [URL]
Li, P., Zhang, F., Yu, A., & Zhao, X. (2020). Language History Questionnaire (LHQ3): An enhanced tool for assessing multilingual experience. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 23 (5), 938–944. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Master, P. (1997). The English article system: Acquisition, function, and pedagogy. System, 25 1, 215–232. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mertins, B. (2021). On the interpretation of possessives in Czech: An experimental approach. Oslo Studies in Language, 12 (2), 97–126. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Nikolaeva, L. (2014). The secret life of pronouns [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
R Core Team. (2022). R: A language and environment for statistical computing [Computer software]. R Foundation for Statistical Computing. [URL]
Rothman, J. (2010). On the typological economy of syntactic transfer: Word order and relative clause high/low attachment preference in L3 Brazilian Portuguese. International review of applied linguistics in language teaching, 48 (2–3). DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2011). L3 syntactic transfer selectivity and typological determinacy: The typological primacy model. Second Language Research, 27 (1), 107–127. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2015). Linguistic and cognitive motivations for the Typological Primacy Model (TPM) of third language (L3) transfer: Timing of acquisition and proficiency considered. Bilingualism: language and cognition, 18 (2), 179–190. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Schindler, S., Drożdżowicz, A., & Brøcker, K. (Eds.). (2020). Linguistic intuitions: Evidence and method. Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Schwartz, B. D., & Sprouse, R. A. (2021). The Full Transfer/Full Access model and L3 cognitive states. Linguistic Approaches to Bilingualism, 11 (1), 1–29. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sharwood Smith, M., & Kellerman, E. (1986). Crosslinguistic influence in second language acquisition: An introduction. In Crosslinguistic Influence in Second Language Acquisition. Pergamon.Google Scholar
Slabakova, R. (2017). The scalpel model of third language acquisition. International Journal of Bilingualism, 21 (6), 651–665. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sorace, A., & Keller, F. (2005). Gradience in linguistic data. Lingua, 115 1, 1497–1524. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Vikner, S. (1995). Verb movement and expletive subjects in the Germanic languages. Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Westergaard, M., Mitrofanova, N., Mykhalyk, R., & Rodina, Y. (2017). Crosslinguistic influence in the acquisition of a third language: The Linguistic Proximity Model. International Journal of Bilingualism, 21 (6), 666–682. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Westergaard, M. (2021a). L3 acquisition and crosslinguistic influence as co-activation: Response to commentaries on the keynote ‘Microvariation in multilingual situations: The importance of property-by-property acquisition’. Second Language Research, 37 (3), 501–518. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2021b). Microvariation in multilingual situations: The importance of property-by-property acquisition. Second Language Research, 37 (3), 379–407. DOI logoGoogle Scholar