Input and Second Language Acquisition: The Roles of Frequency, Form, and Function Introduction to the Special Issue (original) (raw)

Abstract

sparkles

AI

This special issue focuses on the role of input in second language acquisition, particularly the importance of frequency, form, and function in the learning of linguistic constructions. It emphasizes the need for detailed corpus studies and experimental data to understand how learners acquire language through oral input, addressing factors such as frequency distributions, salience, and the reliability of form-function mappings. The issue includes diverse approaches in both instructed and natural contexts, contributing valuable insights to the field of applied linguistics.

FAQs

sparkles

AI

What role does input frequency play in L2 acquisition effectiveness?add

The research indicates that input frequency affects phonology, morphology, and syntax processing, enhancing overall language comprehension. Specifically, it demonstrates that increased exposure to frequent constructions strengthens their accessibility for learners.

How does type frequency impact learners' acquisition of language constructions?add

Findings show that high type frequency promotes generalization of constructions, aiding in the formation of abstract linguistic categories. In contrast, high token frequency tends to preserve specific irregular forms.

What factors contribute to learners' difficulty in acquiring grammatical particles?add

The analysis indicates that grammatical particles often exhibit low salience, overshadowed by more prominent adverbials in input. As a result, their learning is impeded due to reduced perceptibility and associational redundancy.

How do recency effects influence language processing in L2 learners?add

The paper reveals that recency, alongside frequency, affects memory schemata activation, notably in syntactic priming. This suggests that recent exposure to particular structures enhances likelihood of their use in subsequent speech.

What implications does Zipf's law have for language acquisition patterns?add

Zipf's law indicates that learners encounter an uneven frequency distribution, wherein certain verbs dominate. This phenomenon aids in the acquisition of verb-argument constructions by concentrating early learning on high-frequency exemplars.

Loading...

Loading Preview

Sorry, preview is currently unavailable. You can download the paper by clicking the button above.

References (50)

  1. Andersen, R. W. (1993). Four operating principles and input distribution as explanations for underdevel- oped and mature morphological systems. In K. Hyltenstam & A. Viborg (Eds.), Progression and regression in language (pp. 309-339). New York: Cambridge University Press.
  2. Anderson, J. R. (1989). A rational analysis of human memory. In H. L. I. Roediger & F. I. M. Craik (Eds.), Varieties of memory and consciousness: Essays in honour of Endel Tulving (pp. 195-210). Hills- dale, NJ: Erlbaum.
  3. Anderson, J. R., & Schooler, L. J. (2000). The adaptive nature of memory. In E. Tulving & F. I. M. Craik (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of memory (pp. 557- 570). London: Oxford University Press.
  4. Bates, E., & MacWhinney, B. (1987). Competition, vari- ation, and language learning. In B. MacWhinney (Ed.), Mechanisms of language acquisition (pp. 157- 193). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
  5. Bernolet, S., Hartsuiker, R., & Pickering, M. (2007). Shared syntactic representations in bilinguals: Ev- idence for the role of word-order repetition. Jour- nal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 33, 931-949.
  6. Bock, J. K. (1986). Syntactic persistence in language pro- duction. Cognitive Psychology, 18, 355-387.
  7. Boyd, J., & Goldberg, A. E. (2009). Input effects within a constructionist framework. Modern Language Jour- nal , 93, 418-429.
  8. Bybee, J., & Hopper, P. (Eds.). (2001). Frequency and the emergence of linguistic structure. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
  9. Bybee, J., & Thompson, S. (2000). Three frequency ef- fects in syntax. Berkeley Linguistic Society, 23, 65- 85.
  10. Collins, C., Trofimovich, P., White, J., Cardoso, W., & Horst, M. (2009). Some input on the easy/difficult grammar question: An empirical study. Modern Language Journal , 93, 336-353.
  11. Elio, R., & Anderson, J. R. (1981). The effects of category generalizations and instance similarity on schema abstraction. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Hu- man Learning & Memory, 7 (6), 397-417.
  12. Elio, R., & Anderson, J. R. (1984). The effects of in- formation order and learning mode on schema abstraction. Memory & Cognition, 12, 20-30.
  13. Ellis, N. C. (1998). Emergentism, connectionism and language learning. Language Learning , 48, 631- 664. Ellis, N. C. (2002). Frequency effects in language processing: A review with implications for theo- ries of implicit and explicit language acquisition. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 24, 143- 188. Ellis, N. C. (2003). Constructions, chunking, and con- nectionism: The emergence of second language structure. In C. Doughty & M. H. Long (Eds.), Handbook of second language acquisition (pp. 33- 68). Oxford: Blackwell.
  14. Ellis, N. C. (2006a). Cognitive perspectives on SLA: The associative cognitive CREED. AILA Review, 19 , 100-121.
  15. Ellis, N. C. (2006b). Language acquisition as rational contingency learning. Applied Linguistics, 27 , 1- 24. Ellis, N. C. (2006c). Selective attention and transfer phe- nomena in SLA: Contingency, cue competition, salience, interference, overshadowing, blocking, and perceptual learning. Applied Linguistics, 27 , 164-194.
  16. Ellis, N. C. (2008a). The dynamics of language use, language change, and first and second language acquisition. Modern Language Journal , 41, 232- 249. Ellis, N. C. (2008b). Usage-based and form-focused lan- guage acquisition: The associative learning of con- structions, learned-attention, and the limited L2 endstate. In P. Robinson & N. C. Ellis (Eds.), Hand- book of cognitive linguistics and second language ac- quisition (pp. 372-405). London: Routledge.
  17. Ellis, N. C., & Cadierno, T. (in press). Constructing a second language. Special section. Annual Review of Cognitive Linguistics, 7 .
  18. Ellis, N. C., & Ferreira-Junior, F. (2009). Construction learning as a function of frequency, frequency dis- tribution, and function. Modern Language Journal , 93, 370-385.
  19. Gass, S. M. (1997). Input, interaction, and the second lan- guage learner . Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
  20. Goldberg, A. E. (1995). Constructions: A construction grammar approach to argument structure. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
  21. Goldberg, A. E. (2003). Constructions: A new theoretical approach to language. Trends in Cognitive Science, 7 , 219-224.
  22. Goldberg, A. E. (2006). Constructions at work: The na- ture of generalization in language. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  23. Goldberg, A. E., Casenhiser, D. M., & Sethuraman, N. (2004). Learning argument structure generaliza- tions. Cognitive Linguistics, 15, 289-316.
  24. Goldschneider, J. M., & DeKeyser, R. (2001). Explaining the "natural order of L2 morpheme acquisition" in English: A meta-analysis of multiple determinants. Language Learning , 51, 1-50.
  25. Gries, S. T., & Wulff, S. (2005). Do foreign language learners also have constructions? Evidence from priming, sorting, and corpora. Annual Review of Cognitive Linguistics, 3, 182-200.
  26. Izquierdo, J. (2007). Multimedia environments in the for- eign language classroom: Effects on the acquisition of the French perfective and imperfective distinction. Un- published doctoral dissertation, McGill University, Montreal, Canada.
  27. Lakoff, G. (1987). Women, fire, and dangerous things: What categories reveal about the mind. Chicago: Uni- versity of Chicago Press.
  28. Langacker, R. W. (1987). Foundations of cognitive gram- mar: Vol. 1. Theoretical prerequisites. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
  29. Lightbown, P. M. (1992). Getting quality input in the second/foreign language classroom. In C. Kram- sch & S. McConnell-Ginet, (Eds.), Text and context: Cross-disciplinary and cross-cultural perspectives on language study (pp. 187-197). Lexington, MA: D.C. Heath.
  30. MacWhinney, B. (1987). The competition model. In B. MacWhinney (Ed.), Mechanisms of language acqui- sition (pp. 249-308). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
  31. McDonough, K., & Kim, Y. (2009). Syntactic priming, type frequency, and EFL learners' production of wh-questions. Modern Language Journal , 93, 386- 398. McDonough, K., & Trofimovich, P. (2008). Using prim- ing methods in second language research. London: Routledge.
  32. Ninio, A. (1999). Pathbreaking verbs in syntactic development and the question of prototypical transitivity. Journal of Child Language, 26 , 619- 653. Ninio, A. (2006). Language and the learning curve: A new theory of syntactic developemnt. Oxford: Oxford Uni- versity Press.
  33. Ortega, L., & Iberri-Shea, G. (2005). Longitudinal re- search in second language acquisition: Recent trends and future directions. Annual Review of Ap- plied Linguistics, 25, 26-45.
  34. Pickering, M. J. (2006). The dance of dialogue. The Psy- chologist, 19 , 734-737.
  35. Pickering, M. J., & Garrod, S. C. (2006). Alignment as the basis for successful communication. Research on Language and Computation, 4, 203-228.
  36. Rescorla, R. A. (1968). Probability of shock in the pres- ence and absence of CS in fear conditioning. Jour- nal of Comparative and Physiological Psychology, 66 , 1-5. Rescorla, R. A., & Wagner, A. R. (1972). A theory of Pavlovian conditioning: Variations in the effective- ness of reinforcement and nonreinforcement. In A. H. Black & W. F. Prokasy (Eds.), Classical condi- tioning II: Current theory and research (pp. 64-99). New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts.
  37. Robinson, P., & Ellis, N. C. (Eds.). (2008). A handbook of cognitive linguistics and second language acquisition. London: Routledge.
  38. Rosch, E., & Mervis, C. B. (1975). Cognitive representa- tions of semantic categories. Journal of Experimen- tal Psychology: General , 104, 192-233.
  39. Rosch, E., Mervis, C. B., Gray, W. D., Johnson, D. M., & Boyes-Braem, P. (1976). Basic objects in natural categories. Cognitive Psychology, 8, 382-439.
  40. Shanks, D. R. (1995). The psychology of associative learn- ing . New York: Cambridge University Press.
  41. Swain, M. (1988). Manipulating and complementing content teaching to maximize second language learning. TESL Canada Journal , 6 (1), 68-83.
  42. Tomasello, M. (2003). Constructing a language. Boston: Harvard University Press.
  43. Williams, J. N., & Kuribara, C. (2008). Comparing a na- tivist and emergentist approach to the intial stage of SLA: An investigation of Japanese scrambling. Lingua, 118, 533-553.
  44. Wulff, S., Ellis, N. C., Römer, U., Bardovi-Harlig, K., & LeBlanc, C. (2009). The acquisition of tense- aspect: Converging evidence from corpora and telicity ratings. Modern Language Journal , 93, 354- 369. Year, J., & Gordon, P. (2009). Korean speakers' acquisi- tion of the English ditransitive construction: The role of verb prototype, input distribution, and fre- quency. Modern Language Journal , 93, 389-417.
  45. Zipf, G. K. (1935). The psycho-biology of language: An intro- duction to dynamic philology. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
  46. Zyzik, E. (2006). Transitivity alternations and sequence learning: Insights from L2 Spanish production data. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 28, 449-485. Forthcoming in The Modern Language Journal, 93.4
  47. Shigeo Kato. "Suppressing Inner Speech in ESL Reading: Implications for the Developmental Changes in Second Language Word Recognition Process."
  48. Dongping Zheng, Michael Young, Manuela Wagner, & Robert Brewer. "Negotiation for Action: English Language Learning in Game-Based Virtual Worlds."
  49. Mary O'Donnell. "Finding Middle Ground in Second Language Reading: Pedagogic Modifications that Increase Comprehensibility and Vocabulary Acquisition While Preserving Authentic Text Features." N. Anthony Brown. "Argumentation and Debate in Foreign Language Instruction: A Case for the Traditional Classroom Facilitating Advanced-Level Language Uptake." Eve Zyzik & Charlene Polio. "Don Quixote Meets Ser and Estar : Multiple Perspectives on Language Learning in Spanish Literature Classes."
  50. Jennifer Bown. "Self-Regulatory Strategies and Agency in Self-Instructed Language Learning: A Situated View." Corinne Etienne & Kelly Sax. "Stylistic Variation in French: Bridging the Gap Between Research and Textbooks."