L3 acquisition of Portuguese clefts by L1-Mandarin
L2-English speakers
This study explored the trajectory of
L3
acquisition (L3A) of three structurally
different clefts in European
Portuguese (EP) by L1-Mandarin
Chinese (MC) L2-English
learners, within the framework of the Feature Reassembly
Hypothesis (Lardiere, 2008, 2009). This study also considers
the predictions of L3A models that differ with respect to
the role of the previously acquired languages on the
acquisition of a target L3. Regarding the analyzed
structures, L1 factor models (e.g., Na Ranong & Leung, 2009) would
predict an early acquisition of pseudoclefts,
and a delay in acquiring é-que
clefts and standard
clefts. Models such as the Cumulative-Enhancement
Model (Flynn et al., 2004), the Typological Primacy
Model (Rothman, 2011), the Scalpel Model
(Slabakova,
2017) and the Linguistic Proximity
Model (Westergaard et al., 2017) would predict a
facilitating L2 effect on the acquisition of standard
clefts and pseudoclefts. 60 MC speakers across three proficiency levels
and 21 EP speakers completed an acceptability judgment
task (AJT) centered on EP clefts. The learners
also performed an AJT of English clefts
at a later time. The results suggested a scale of difficulty
(standard cleft > pseudocleft
> é-que cleft) in
development up to advanced stages. The syntactic structure
of standard clefts, essentially the left peripheral focus,
could be mapped from the L2 onto the L3 lexical items before
L3ers reach low-intermediate (B1), while the association of a [+
focus] feature on specific L3 items appears to cause
difficulty in acquiring é-que
clefts until the learners reach a more advanced
(C1) level. The
results supported a facilitating L2 effect on the
acquisition of standard clefts, which contradicts
predictions that would be made by L1 factor models.
Article outline
- 1.Introduction
- 2.Clefts in European
Portuguese, MC, and English
- 2.1Clefts in European
Portuguese
- 2.1.1É-que
cleft
- 2.1.2Standard
cleft
- 2.1.3Pseudocleft
- 2.2Clefts in MC
- 2.2.1Shì … de cleft constructions
- 2.2.1.1Shì XP V O de cleft (hereinafter, V O de
cleft)
- 2.2.1.2Shì XP V de O cleft (hereinafter, V de O
cleft)
- 2.2.2(subject) V (O) de (X) shì NP pseudocleft construction
- 2.2.3Bare-shì subject cleft construction
- 2.3A note on English
clefts
- 3.Feature Reassembly Hypothesis and
third/additional language acquisition
- 4.The current study
- 4.1Working hypotheses
- 4.1.1Hypothesis 1: É-que
clefts will display a delayed
development
- 4.1.2Hypothesis 2: Learners show acquisition of standard clefts at earlier stages
- 4.1.3Hypothesis 3: Learners show acquisition of pseudoclefts at earlier
stages
- 4.2Methodology
- 4.3Participants
- 4.4Experimental design
- 4.5Results
- 4.5.1Results of the experimental EP
task
- 4.5.2Results of the complementary English
task
- 5.Discussion
- 6.Conclusion
-
Notes
-
References
References (62)
References
Aoun, J. & Li, Y.-H. A. (2003). Essays
on the representational and derivational nature of
grammar. The MIT Press. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
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 logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Berkes, É., & Flynn, S. (2012). Further
evidence in
support. In J. Cabrelli, S. Flynn & J. Rothman (Eds.), Third
language acquisition in
adulthood (pp. 143–164). John Benjamins. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Cheng, L. L.-S. (2008). Deconstructing
the shi…de
construction. Linguistic
Review, 25(3/4), 235–266. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Chomsky, N. (1977). On
wh-movement. In P. Culicover, T. Wasow, & A. Akmajian (Eds.), Formal
syntax (pp. 71–132). Academic Press.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Chomsky, N. (1995). The
minimalist
program. The MIT Press.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Cinque, G. (1993). A
null theory of phrase and compound
stress. Linguistic
Inquiry 24(2), 239–297.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Comrie, B. (Ed.). (2018). The
world’s major
languages (3rd
ed.). Routledge. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Costa, J., & Duarte, I. (2001a). Minimizando a estrutura: Uma análise
unificada das construções de clivagem em
Português [Minimizing the structure: a unified
analysis of the cleft constrcutions in
Portuguese.]. In Actas
do XVI Encontro Nacional da Associação Portuguesa de
Linguística, (pp. 627–638). APL/Colibri.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Costa, J. & Duarte, I. (2001b). Cleft
strategies in Portuguese: A unified
approach. Paper
presented at The 11th
Colloquium on Generative
Grammar, Zaragoza,
Spain.
Del Maschio, N., & Abutalebi, J. (2019). Language
organization in the bilingual and multilingual
brain. In J. W. Schwieter & M. Paradis (Eds.), The
handbook of the neuroscience of
multilingualism (pp. 197–213). ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Dikken, M. D., Meinunger, A., & Wilder, C. (2000). Pseudoclefts
and ellipsis. Studia
Linguistica, 54(1), 41–89. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
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 logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Fernández-Berkes, É. & Flynn, S. (2023). Grammatical
mapping in L3 acquisition: A theory of
development. In M. M. Brown-Bousfield, S. Flynn, & É. Fernández-Berkes (Eds.), L3
development after the initial
state (pp. 8–28). John Benjamins. (this
volume).![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
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 logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Friedmann, N., Belletti, A. & Rizzi, L. (2009). Relativized
relatives: Types of intervention in the acquisition
of A-bar
dependencies. Lingua 119(1), 67–88. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Heggie, L. (1993). The
range of null operators: Evidence from
clefting. Natural
Language & Linguistic
Theory, 11(1), 45–84. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Hermas, A. (2014). Multilingual
transfer: L1 morphosyntax in L3
English. International
Journal of Language
Studies, 8(2), 1–24.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Heycock, C., & Kroch, A. (1999). Pseudocleft
connectedness: Implications for the LF interface
level. Linguistic
Inquiry, 30(3), 365–397. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Heycock, C., & Kroch, A. (2002). Topic,
focus, and syntactic
representations. In L. Mikkelsen & C. Potts (Eds.), Proceedings
of WCCFL [West Coast Conference on Formal
Linguistics] (Vol. 21, pp. 101–125). Cascadilla Press.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Higgins, F. R. (1979). The
pseudo-cleft construction in
English. Garland.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Hole, D. (2011). The
deconstruction of Chinese shì… de
clefts
revisited. Lingua, 121(11), 1707–1733. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Hu, G. (2005). English
language education in China: Policies, progress, and
problems. Language
policy, 4(1), 5–24. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Huang, C.-T. J. (1988). Shuo shi he
you [On ‘be’ and ‘have’ in
Chinese]. Bulletin of
the Institute of History and Philology, Academia
Sinica 59 (part
1), 43–64.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Huang, C.-T. J. (1998). Logical
relations in Chinese and the theory of
grammar. Garland.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Huang, C.-T. J., Li, Y., & Li, Y. (2009). The
syntax of
Chinese. Cambridge University Press. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Kayne, R. S. (1994). The
antisymmetry of
syntax. The MIT press.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Kiss, K. É. (1998). Identificational
focus versus information
focus. Language, 74, 245–273. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Kou, K. (2021). The
L2 acquisition of European Portuguese sluicing by L1
Mandarin Chinese
speakers (Unpublished
master’s
thesis). University of Lisbon.
Lardiere, D. (2008). Feature
assembly in second language
acquisition. In J. M. Liceras, H. Zobl, & H. Goodluck (Eds.), The
role of formal features in second language
acquisition (pp. 106–140). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Lardiere, D. (2009). Some
thoughts on a contrastive analysis of features in
second language
acquisition. Second
Language
Research, 25(2), 173–227. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Li, X. (2021). Acquisition
of European Portuguese cleft structures by L1
Mandarin
learners (Unpublished
master’s
thesis). University of Lisbon.
Lobo, M. (2006). Assimetrias em construções de clivagem
do português: Movimento vs. geração na
base [Asymmetries in Portuguese cleft
constructions: Movement vs. base
generation]. In F. Oliveira & J. Barbosa (Eds.), XXI
Encontro Nacional da APL. Textos
selecionados (pp. 457–473). Lisboa: APL/Colibri.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Lobo, M., Santos, A. L., & Soares-Jesel, C. (2016). Syntactic
structure and information structure: The acquisition
of Portuguese clefts and
be-fragments. Language
Acquisition, 23(2), 142–174. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Lobo, M., Santos, A. L., Soares-Jesel, C., & Vaz, S. (2019). Effects
of syntactic structure on the comprehension of
clefts. Glossa: A
Journal of General
Linguistics, 4(1), 1–23. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Ministry of Education (2001) English Curriculum Standards for Compulsory Education. Beijing Normal University Publishing Group, Beijing.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Na Ranong, S., & Leung, Y-k. I. (2009). Null
objects in L1 Thai-L2 English-L3 Chinese: An
empiricist take on a theoretical
problem. In Y-k. I. Leung (Ed.), Third
language acquisition and Universal
Grammar (pp. 162–191). Multilingual Matters. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Paris, M.-C. (1979). Nominalization
in Mandarin
Chinese (Unpublished
manuscript). Université Paris 7.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Paul, W. (2002). Proxy
categories in phrase structure theory and the
Chinese VP. Cahiers
de Linguistique – Asie
Orientale, 31, 137–174. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Paul, W. (2005). Low
IP area and left periphery in Mandarin
Chinese. Recherches
Linguistiques de
Vincennes, 33, 111–134. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Paul, W., & Whitman, J. (2008). Shi…de
focus clefts in Mandarin
Chinese. Linguistic
Review 25(3/4), 413–451. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Reeve, M. (2011). The
syntactic structure of English
clefts. Lingua, 121(2), 142–171. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
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), 245–273. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Rothman, J. (2011). L3
syntactic transfer selectivity and typological
determinacy: The Typological Primacy
Model. Second
Language
Research, 27, 107–127. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Rothman, J. (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 logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Schütze, C. T. (2016). The
empirical base of linguistics grammaticality
judgments and linguistic
methodology. Language Science Press. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Schütze, C. T., & Sprouse, J. (2014). Judgment
data. In R. Podesva & D. Sharma (Eds.), Research
methods in
linguistics (pp. 27–50). Cambridge University Press. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Slabakova, R. (2017). The
scalpel model of third language
acquisition. International
Journal of
Bilingualism, 21(6), 651–665. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
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).![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Soares, C. (2006). La syntaxe de la périphérie gauche en
portugais européen et son
acquisition [The syntax of left periphery in
European Portuguese and its
acquisition] (Unpublished
doctoral
dissertation). University of Paris 8.
Ullman, M. (2001). The
neural basis of lexicon and grammar in first and
second language: The Declarative/procedural
Model. Bilingualism:
Language and
Cognition, 4(2), 105–122. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Vercauteren, A. M. W. (2010). Como é que é com o é que? Análise
de estruturas com é que em variedades não standard
do português
europeu [How about “é que”? Analysis of “é
que” structures in non-standard varieties of
European
Portuguese] (Unpublished
master’s
thesis). NOVA University of Lisbon.
Westergaard, M. (2019). Microvariation
in multilingual situations: The importance of
property-by- property
acquisition. Second
Language
Research, 37(3), 379–407. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Westergaard, M., Mitrofanova, N., Mykhaylyk, R., & Rodina, Y. (2017). Crosslinguistic
influence in the acquisition of a third language:
The Linguistic Proximity
Model. International
Journal of
Bilingualism, 21, 666–682. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)