Cover not available
Part of
L3 Development After the Initial State
Edited by Megan M. Brown-Bousfield, Suzanne Flynn and Éva Fernández-Berkes
[Studies in Bilingualism 65] 2023
► pp. 8–28

Grammatical mapping in L3 acquisition

A theory of development

 | University of Applied Sciences Burgenland
 | Massachusetts Institute of Technology
In this chapter, we focus on the question of how development may take place in multilingual (L3) acquisition and the role of prior knowledge in this process. The theoretical paradigm called Grammatical Mapping (GM) (Lust, 2012 for L1 acquisition) supposes an active, albeit unconscious, creative involvement of the learner in the construction of the specific language grammar constrained and guided by Universal Grammar (UG). We propose that the GM paradigm provides a valid and principled account of the process of multilingual acquisition as well. By means of presenting concrete examples from our previous experimental research, we will illustrate how the three essential predictions deriving from this paradigm also bear out in the multilingual scenario. Similar to L1 acquisition, UG’s structure-dependent and invariant principle(s) are shown to be at work in multilingual development. Moreover, based on error analyses of multilingual learners’ errors and reformations in elicited productions, we present tangible indications that multilingual learners draw upon previously known language grammars while engaged in linguistic computation – analysis, dissociation and integration – of target language-specific components. Our contribution to the GM paradigm is the specification of the manner in which multilingual learners draw upon previous knowledge in the construction of new target grammar, thus extricating explicit from implicit linguistic knowledge. We expect that the application of this paradigm onto multilingual experimental data may shed light on the degree to which domain-specific innate principles guide and constrain language acquisition in general.
Keywords: complementizer phrase, cross-linguistic influence, error analysis, error reformations, grammatical mapping, initial state, multilingual development, paradigm, structure-dependence, transfer, universal grammar
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Toward a comprehensive theory of language acquisition
  • 3.Grammatical mapping (GM) (Lust, 2012)
    • 3.1GM for multilingual acquisition: What constitutes the initial state
    • 3.2GM for multilingual acquisition: What constitutes development and the role of previous linguistic experience
    • 3.3GM for multilingual acquisition: Empirical predictions
  • 4.Discussion of supporting evidence
  • 5.Final remarks
  • Notes
  • References
Published online: 9 October 2023
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/sibil.65.01fer
References (56)
References
Amaral, L., & Roeper, T. (2014). Multiple grammars and second language representation. Second Language Research, 30(1), 3–36. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Angelovska, T., & Hahn, A. (Eds.). (2017). L3 syntactic transfer: Models, new developments and implications. John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Baker, M. C. (2008). The macroparameter in a microparametric world. In T. Biberauer (Ed.), The limits of syntactic variation (pp. 351–373). John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Berkes, É., & Flynn, S. (2012a). Further evidence in support of the Cumulative-Enhancement Model: CP structure development. In J. Cabrelli, S. Flynn & J. Rothman (Eds.), Third language acquisition in adulthood (pp. 143–164). John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2012b). Free relatives as a key to the mapping of grammatical functions. Paper presented at the EuroSLA22, Poznań, Poland.
(2013). Multilingualism: New perspectives on syntactic development. In W. C. Ritchie & T. K. Bhatia (Eds.), Handbook of bilingualism and multilingualism (2nd ed., pp. 137–167). John Wiley & Sons.Google Scholar
(2015). Multilingual acquisition of English: Development of grammar through study of null anaphora. In M. P. Safont Jordà & L. Portolés Falomir (Eds.), Learning and using multiple languages: Current findings from research on multilingualism (pp. 112–133). Cambridge Scholars.Google Scholar
(2016). Multi-competence and syntax. In V. Cook & L. Wei (Eds.), Handbook of linguistic multi-competence (pp. 206–226). Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Berwick, R., Pietroski, P., Yankama, B., & Chomsky, N. (2011). Poverty of the stimulus revisited. Cognitive Science, 35, 1207–1242. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Boser, K., Lust, B., Santelmann, L., & Whitman, J. (1992). The syntax of CP and V-2 in early German child grammar: The Strong Continuity Hypothesis. North East Linguistics Society, Vol. 22(1), Article 5.Google Scholar
Caponigro, I. (2002). Free relatives as DPs with a silent D and a CP complement. In V. Samiian (Ed.), Proceedings of WECOL 2000 (pp. 140–150). California State University.Google Scholar
Chomsky, N. (1971). Problems of knowledge and freedom. Pantheon Books.Google Scholar
(1980). Rules and representations. Columbia University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(1981). Lectures on government and binding. The Pisa lectures. Foris.Google Scholar
(1995). The minimalist program. The MIT Press.Google Scholar
(2016). Minimal computation and the architecture of language. Chinese Semiotic Studies, 12(1), 13–24. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cook, V., & Newson, M. (2007). Chomsky’s Universal Grammar: An introduction (3rd ed.). Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar
Crain, S., & Nakayama, M. (1987). Structure dependence in grammar formation. Language, 63(3), 522–543. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Diessel, H., & Tomasello, M. (2005). A new look at the acquisition of relative clauses. Language, 81, 1–25. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Epstein, S. D., Flynn, S., & Martohardjono, G. (1996). Second language acquisition: Theoretical and experimental issues in contemporary research. Behavioural and Brain Sciences, 1, 677–758. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fernández-Berkes, É., & Flynn, S. (2020). Where DLC meets multilingual syntactic development. In J. Lo Bianco & L. Aronin (Eds.), Dominant language constellations: A new perspective on multilingualism (pp. 57–74). Springer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2021). Vindicating the need for a principled theory of language acquisition. Linguistic Approaches to Bilingualism, 11(1), 30–36. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Flynn, S. (1983). A study of the effects of principal branching direction in second language acquisition: The generalization of a parameter of Universal Grammar from first to second language acquisition (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Cornell University.
(1987). A parameter-setting model of L2 acquisition: Experimental studies in anaphora. Reidel. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(1989). Spanish, Japanese and Chinese speakers’ acquisition of English relative clauses: New evidence for the head-direction parameter. In K. Hyltenstam & L. K. Obler (Eds.), Bilingualism across the lifespan: Aspects of acquisition, maturity, and loss (pp. 116–131). Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2019). Foreword. In M. J. Gutierrez-Mangado, M. Martínez-Adrián, & F. Gallardo-del-Puerto (Eds.), Cross-linguistic influence: from empirical evidence to classroom practice (pp. vii–xiv). Springer.Google Scholar
(2021). Microvariation in multilingual situations: The importance of property-by-property acquisition: Pros and cons. Second Language Research, 37(3), 481–488. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Flynn, S., & Berkes, É. (2017). Toward a new understanding of syntactic CLI: Evidence from L2 and L3 acquisition. In T. Angelovska & A. Hahn (Eds.), L3 syntactic transfer: Models, new developments and implications (pp. 35–61). John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Flynn, S., & Foley, C. (2004). On the developmental primacy of free relatives. In A. Csirmaz, A. Gualmini, & A. Nevin (Eds.), Plato’s Problems: Papers on Language Acquisition (pp. 59–69). MITWPL.Google Scholar
Flynn, S., Foley, C., & Vinnitskaya, I. (2004). The Cumulative-Enhancement Model for language acquisition: Comparing adults’ and children’s patterns of development. International Journal of Multilingualism, 1(1), 3–17. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Flynn, S., & Lust, B. (1980). Acquisition of relative clauses in English: Developmental changes in their heads. In W. Harbert & J. Herschensohn (Eds.), Cornell Working Papers in Linguistics 1 (pp. 33–42). Cornell University.Google Scholar
(2002). A minimalist approach to L2 solves a dilemma of UG. In V. Cook (Ed.), Portraits of the L2 user (pp. 95–120). Multilingual Matters. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Flynn, S., & O’Neil, W. (Eds.). (1988). Linguistic theory in second language acquisition. Kluwer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Flynn, S., Vinnitskaya, I. & Foley, C. (2008). Complementizer phrase features in child L1 and adult L3 acquisition. In The Role of Features in Second Language Acquisition. J. M. Liceras, H. Zobl & H. Goodluck (eds). 519–533. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Foley, C. (1996). Knowledge of the syntax of operators in the initial state: The acquisition of relative clauses in French and English (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Cornell University.
Fries, C. C. (1945). Teaching and learning English as a foreign language. University of Michigan Press.Google Scholar
Gair, J., Flynn, S., & Brown, O. (1997). Why Japanese object to L2 objects. In S. Somashekar, K. Yamakoshi, M. Blume, & C. Foley (Eds.), Cornell University Working Papers in Linguistics 15 (pp. 101–111). Cornell University.Google Scholar
Guasti, M. T. (2009). Universal Grammar approaches to language acquisition. In S. Foster-Cohen (Ed.), Language Acquisition (pp. 87–108). Palgrave Macmillan. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hamburger, H. (1980). A deletion ahead of its time. Cognition, 8, 389–416. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hauser, M. D., Chomsky, N., & Tecumseh, F. W. (2002). The faculty of language: What is it, who has it and how did it evolve? Science, 298, 1569–1579. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lado, R. (1957). Linguistics across cultures. University of Michigan Press.Google Scholar
Lee, K.-O. (1991). On the first language acquisition of relative clauses in Korean: The universal structure of COMP (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Cornell University.
Lust, B. (2006). Child language: Acquisition and growth. Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2010). Directionality in the architecture of the language faculty: Integrating with real time. In H. Yamashita, Y. Hirose, & J. Packard (Eds.), Processing and producing head-final structures. Springer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2012). Tracking universals requires grammatical mapping. In K. K. Grohmann & A. Shelkovaya (Eds.), Linguists of tomorrow: Selected papers from the 1st Cyprus Postgraduate Student Conference in Theoretical and Applied Linguistics (pp. 105–130). Cambridge Scholars.Google Scholar
Lust, B., Solan, L., Flynn, S., Cross, C., & Schuetz, E. (1986). A comparison of null and pronoun anaphora in first language acquisition. In B. Lust (Ed.), Studies in the Acquisiton of Anaphora (Vol. I, pp. 245–277). Reidel. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Michigan English Placement Test c.f.© (2018). Cambridge Michigan Language Assessments. [URL]
Mróz, M. (2010). Bilingual language acquisition: Focus on relative clauses in Polish and English. Wydawnictwa Uniwersytetu Warszawskiego.Google Scholar
Murasugi, K. (1991). Noun phrases in Japanese and English: A study in syntax, learnability and acquisition (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Connecticut.
Packard, J. L. (1988). The first language acquisition of prenominal modification with de in Mandarin. Journal of Chinese Linguistics, 16(1), 31–53.Google Scholar
Puig-Mayenco, E., González Alonso, J., & Rothman, J. (2020). A systematic review of transfer studies in third language acquisition. Second Language Research, 36(1), 31–64. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Reali, F., & Christiansen, M. (2005). Uncovering the richness of the stimulus: Structure dependence and indirect statistical evidence. Cognitive Science, 29, 1007–1028. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rothman, J. (2010). L3 syntactic transfer selectivity and typological determinacy: The Typological Primacy Model. Second Language Research, 27(1), 107–127. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Slabakova, R. (2023). A shared linguistic system of multilingual representations. In M. M. Brown-Bousfield, S. Flynn, & É. Fernández-Berkes (Eds.), L3 development after the initial state (pp. 29–48). John Benjamins. (this volume). DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Somashekar, S. (1999). Developmental trends in the acquisition of relative clauses: Cross-linguistic experimental study of Tulu (Unpublished doctoral dissertation. Cornell University.
White, L. (1989). Universal Grammar and second language acquisition. John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cited by (3)

Cited by three other publications

Cabuk-Balli, Sakine
2023. Gauging sensitivity to grammaticality violations of adpositional phrases. In L3 Development After the Initial State [Studies in Bilingualism, 65], ► pp. 205 ff. DOI logo
Desmarais, Martin
2023. Comparing two notions of transfer in third language phonological acquisition. In L3 Development After the Initial State [Studies in Bilingualism, 65], ► pp. 76 ff. DOI logo
Zhang, Linxi, Alfonso Morales-Front & Cristina Sanz
2023. Dynamics in cross-linguistic influence. In L3 Development After the Initial State [Studies in Bilingualism, 65], ► pp. 121 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 5 july 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.