Chapter published in:
L3 Syntactic Transfer: Models, new developments and implications
Edited by Tanja Angelovska and Angela Hahn
[Bilingual Processing and Acquisition 5] 2017
► pp. 277–298

From theory to practice in multilingualism

What theoretical research implies for third language learning

| UiT The Arctic University of Norway, University of Reading
| University of Reading, UiT The Arctic University of Norway
This paper aims to show how insights from formal linguistic theory and empirical acquisition work can inform teaching practice in the multilingual classroom. Potential differences will arise depending on multilingual learners’ language history, particularly in the divide between true L2 and L3 learners. We show how one can use the predictions of the L3 initial stages models to predict potential areas of difficulty specifically for multilingual learners. With this knowledge, we argue, it is possible to create interventions that help learners overcome potential initial difficulties. We illustrate our line of argumentation by extending insights from published work comparing L2 and L3 acquisition, and provide an example of one such intervention that could be used to induce grammatical change (predicted) for erroneous initially transferred representations made by L3 learners.
Keywords: formal linguistic theory, L3 initial stages, L3 acquisition, transfer
Published online: 15 August 2017
https://doi.org/10.1075/bpa.5.13gon
References

References

Al-Kasey, T., & Pérez-Leroux, A. T.
(1998) Second language acquisition of Spanish null subjects. In S. Flynn, G. Martohardjono, & W. O’Neil (Eds.), The generative study of second language acquisition (pp. 161–185). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google 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. Crossref.Google Scholar
(2012) Behind the L2 status factor: A neurolinguistic framework for L3 research. In J. Cabrelli Amaro, S. Flynn, & J. Rothman (Eds.), Third language acquisition in adulthood (Studies in Bilingualism 46) (pp. 61–78). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Bardel, C., & Sánchez, L.
(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). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Berkes, É., & Flynn, S.
(2012) Further evidence in support of the Cumulative-Enhancement Model. In J. Cabrelli Amaro, S. Flynn, & J. Rothman (Eds.), Third language acquisition in adulthood (Studies in Bilingualism 46) (pp. 143–164). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Borer, H., & Wexler, K.
(1987) The maturation of syntax. In T. Roeper & E. Williams (Eds.), Parameter setting (pp. 123–172). Dordrecht: Reidel. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Bruhn de Garavito, J.
(2013) Why theory and research are important for the practice of teaching. In J. W. Schwieter (Ed.), Innovative research and practices in second language acquisition and bilingualism (Language Learning & Language Teaching 38) (pp. 85–106). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Cabrelli Amaro, J.
(2015) Does the source of transfer affect the rate of L3 morphosyntactic development? Paper presented at the 40th Boston University Conference in Language Development. Boston, MA.
Camacho, J.
(2014) Null Subjects. Cambridge: CUP.Google Scholar
De Angelis, G.
(2007) Third or additional language acquisition. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
De Angelis, G., & Dewaele, J.-M.
(Eds.) (2011) New trends in crosslinguistic influence and multilingualism research. Bristol: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
de Bot, K., & Jaensch, C.
(2015) What is special about L3 processing? Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 18(2), 130–144. Crossref.Google Scholar
Eisenstein, M.
(1980) Childhood bilingualism and adult language learning aptitude. Applied Psychology, 29(1–2), 159–172. Crossref.Google Scholar
Epstein, S., Flynn, S., & Martohardjono, G.
(1996) Second language acquisition: Theoretical and experimental issues in contemporary research. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 19(4), 677–714. Crossref.Google Scholar
Falk, Y., & Bardel, C.
(2010) The study of the role of the background languages in third language acquisition. The state of the art. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching (IRAL), 48(2–3), 185–220. Crossref.Google Scholar
(2011) Object pronouns in German L3 syntax: Evidence for the L2 status factor. Second Language Research, 27(1), 59–82. Crossref.Google 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. Crossref.Google Scholar
Felix, S., & Hahn, A.
(1985) Natural processes in classroom second-language learning. Applied Linguistics, 6(3), 223–238. Crossref.Google 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. International Journal of Multilingualism, 1(1), 3–16. Crossref.Google Scholar
Foote, R.
(2009) Transfer and L3 acquisition: The role of typology. In Y. I. Leung (Ed.), Third language acquisition and Universal Grammar (pp. 89–114). Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
García Mayo, M. del P., & Rothman, J.
(2012) L3 morphosyntax in the generative tradition: From the initial state and beyond. In J. Cabrelli Amaro, S. Flynn, & J. Rothman (Eds.), Third anguage acquisition in adulthood (Studies in Bilingualism 46) (pp. 9–32). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Giancaspro, D., Halloran, B., & Iverson, M.
(2015) Transfer at the initial stages of L3 Brazilian Portuguese: A look at three groups of English/Spanish bilinguals. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 18(2), 191–207. Crossref.Google Scholar
González Alonso, J., & Rothman, J.
(2016) Coming of age in L3 initial stages transfer models: Deriving developmental predictions and looking towards the future. International Journal of Bilingualism. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Haegeman, L., & Ihsane, T.
(2001) Adult Null Subjects in the non-pro-drop Languages: Two diary dialects. Language Acquisition, 9(4), 329–346. Crossref.Google Scholar
Hermas, A.
(2010) Language acquisition as computational resetting: Verb movement in L3 initial state. International Journal of Multilingualism, 7(4), 343–362. Crossref.Google Scholar
Hilles, S.
(1986) Interlanguage and the pro-drop parameter. Second Language Research, 2, 33–52. Crossref.Google Scholar
Iverson, M.
(2010) Informing the age of acquisition debate: L3 as a litmus test. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching (IRAL), 48(2–3), 221–243. Crossref.Google Scholar
Judy, T.
(2011) L1/L2 parametric directionality matters: More on the null subject parameter in L2 acquisition. EUROSLA Yearbook, 11(1), 165–190. Crossref.Google Scholar
Judy, T., & Rothman, J.
(2010) From a superset to a subset grammar and the Semantic Compensation Hypothesis: Subject pronoun and anaphora resolution evidence in L2 English. In K. Franich, K. M. Iserman, & L. L. Keil (Eds.), BUCLD 34: 34th Boston University Annual Conference on Language Development (pp. 197–208). Sommerville, MA: Cascadilla Press.Google Scholar
Klein, W., & Perdue, C.
(1997) The basic variety (or: Couldn’t natural languages be much simpler?). Second Language Research, 13(4), 301–347. Crossref.Google Scholar
Krashen, S. D.
(1982) Principles and practice in second language acquisition. Oxford: Pergamon Press.Google Scholar
Leung, Y. I.
(2001) The initial state of L3A: Full transfer and failed features? In C. Higgins & H. Nguyen (Eds.), The past, present and future of second language research: Selected Proceedings of the 2000 Second Language Research Forum (pp. 55–75). Sommerville, MA: Cascadilla Press.Google Scholar
Liceras, J. M.
(1983) Markedness, contrastive analysis and the acquisition of Spanish syntax by English speakers. Unpublished PhD dissertation, University of Toronto.Google Scholar
Long, D., & Rothman, J.
(2013) Generative approaches and the competing systems hypothesis: Formal acquisition to pedagogical application. In J. W. Schwieter (Ed.), Innovative research and practices in second language acquisition and bilingualism (Language Learning & Language Teaching 38) (pp. 63–84). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Lozano, C.
(2002) The interpretation of overt and null pronouns in non-native Spanish. In H. Marsden, S. Pourcel, & M. Whong-Bharr (Eds.), Durham working papers in linguistics 8 (pp. 53–66). Sommerville, MA: Cascadilla Press.Google Scholar
Montrul, S., Dias, R., & Santos, H.
(2011) Clitics and object expression in the L3 acquisition of Brazilian Portuguese: Structural similarity matters for transfer. Second Language Research, 27(1), 21–58. Crossref.Google Scholar
Na Ranong, S., & Leung, Y. I.
(2009) Null objects in L1 Thai-L2 English-L3 Chinese: An empiricist take on a theoretical problem. In Y. I. Leung (Ed.), Third language acquisition and Universal Grammar (pp. 162–91). Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
Pérez-Leroux, A. T., & Glass, W. R.
(1999) Null anaphora in Spanish second language acquisition: Probabilistic versus generative approaches. Second Language Research, 15(2), 220–249. Crossref.Google Scholar
Phinney, M.
(1987) The pro-drop parameter in second language acquisition. In T. Roeper & E. Williams (Eds.), Parameter setting (pp. 221–238). Dordrecht: Reidel. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Platzack, C.
(1996) The initial hypothesis of syntax: A minimalist perspective on language acquisition and attrition. In H. Clahsen (Ed.), Generative perspectives on language acquisition (Language Acquisition and Language Disorders 14) (pp. 369–414). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Rothman, J.
(2008) Aspect selection in adult L2 Spanish and the Competing Systems Hypothesis: When pedagogical and linguistic rules conflict. Languages in Contrast, 8(1), 74–106. Crossref.Google Scholar
(2009) Pragmatic deficits with syntactic consequences? L2 pronominal subjects and the syntax-pragmatics interface. Journal of Pragmatics, 41(5), 951–973. Crossref.Google Scholar
(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 (IRAL), 48(2–3), 245–273. Crossref.Google Scholar
(2011) L3 syntactic transfer selectivity and typological determinacy: The Typological Primacy Model. Second Language Research, 27(1), 107–127. Crossref.Google Scholar
(2013) Cognitive economy, non-redundancy and typological primacy in L3 acquisition: Evidence from initial stages of L3 Romance. In S. Baauw, F. Drijkoningen, & M. Pinto (Eds.), Romance languages and linguistic theory 2011 (Romance Languages and Linguistic Theory 5) (pp. 217–247). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle 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. Crossref.Google Scholar
Rothman, J., Alemán Bañón, J., & González Alonso, J.
(2015) Neurolinguistic measures of typological effects in multilingual transfer: Introducing an ERP methodology. Frontiers in Psychology, 6(1087), 1–14. Crossref.Google Scholar
Rothman, J., & Cabrelli Amaro, J.
(2010) What variables condition syntactic transfer? A look at the L3 initial state. Second Language Research, 26(2), 189–218. Crossref.Google Scholar
Rothman, J., Cabrelli Amaro, J., & de Bot, K.
(2013) Third language acquisition. In J. Herschensohn & M. Young-Scholten (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of second language acquisition (pp. 372–393). Cambridge: CUP. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Rothman, J., & Halloran, B.
(2013) Formal linguistic approaches to L3/Ln acquisition: A focus on morphosyntactic transfer in adult multilingualism. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 33, 51–67. Crossref.Google Scholar
Rothman, J., & Iverson, M.
(2007) On parameter clustering and resetting the null-subject parameter in L2 Spanish: Implications and observations. Hispania, 90(2), 328–341.Google Scholar
Rothman, J., Iverson, M., & Judy, T.
(2011) Some notes on the generative study of L3 acquisition. Second Language Research, 27(1), 5–19. Crossref.Google Scholar
Schwartz, B. D.
(1996) Now for some facts, with a focus on development and an explicit role for the L1. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 19(4), 739–740. Crossref.Google Scholar
Schwartz, B. D., & Sprouse, R. A.
(1996) L2 cognitive states and the Full Transfer/Full Access model. Second Language Research, 12(1), 40–72. Crossref.Google Scholar
Singleton, D.
(1987) Mother and other tongue influence on learner French. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 9(3), 327–346. Crossref.Google Scholar
Slabakova, R.
(2016b) The scalpel model of third language acquisition. International Journal of Bilingualism. Crossref.Google Scholar
(2015) Is there a firewall between declarative knowledge and procedural knowledge of the functional morphology? A response to Paradis. Foreign Language Teaching and Research, 47, 1–5.Google Scholar
(2016a) Second language acquisition. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
Ullman, M. T.
(2005) A cognitive neuroscience perspective on second language acquisition: The declarative/procedural model. In C. Sanz (Ed.), Mind and context in adult second language acquisition: Methods, theory and practice (pp. 141–178). Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.Google Scholar
VanPatten, B.
(2005) Processing Instruction. In C. Sanz (Ed.), Mind and context in adult second language acquisition: Methods, theory, and practice (pp. 267–281). Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.Google Scholar
(2010) Some verbs are more perfect than others: Why learners have difficulty with ser and estar and what it means for instruction. Hispania, 93(1), 29–38.Google Scholar
(2015) Foundations of processing instruction. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, 53(2), 91–109. Crossref.Google Scholar
Westergaard, M., Mitrofanova, N., Mykhaylyk, R., & Rodina, Y.
(2016) Crosslinguistic influence in the acquisition of a third language: The Linguistic Proximity Model. International Journal of Bilingualism. Epub ahead of print, May 19 2016 doi: CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Whong, M., Gil, K.-H., & Marsden, H.
(Eds.) (2013) Universal Grammar and the second language classroom. Dordrecht: Springer. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(2014) Beyond paradigm: The “what” and the “how” of classroom research. Second Language Research, 30(4), 551–568. Crossref.Google Scholar
Williams, S., & Hammarberg, B.
(1998) Language switches in L3 production: Implications for a polyglot speaking model. Applied Linguistics, 19(3), 295–333. Crossref.Google Scholar
Cited by

Cited by 5 other publications

Albirini, Abdulkafi, Eman Saadah & Mohammad T. Alhawary
2020. L1 and L2 transfer to L3 in L3 and L2 learners of Standard Arabic. Linguistic Approaches to Bilingualism 10:6 ► pp. 745 ff. Crossref logo
Angelovska, Tanja
2019.  In The TESOL Encyclopedia of English Language Teaching, ► pp. 1 ff. Crossref logo
Angelovska, Tanja, Dietmar Roehm & Sabrina Weinmüller
2020. Uncovering transfer effects of dominance and proficiency in L3 English acquisition using the visual moving window paradigm and grammaticality judgments. Applied Linguistics Review 0:0 Crossref logo
Hahn, Angela & Tanja Angelovska
2017.  In L3 Syntactic Transfer [Bilingual Processing and Acquisition, 5], ► pp. 299 ff. Crossref logo
Rothman, Jason, Jorge González Alonso & Eloi Puig-Mayenco
2019.  In Third Language Acquisition and Linguistic Transfer, Crossref logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 22 november 2021. 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.