This paper offers a number of refinements to Jarvis’s (2000) methodological framework for investigating cross-linguistic effects. According to the original framework, there are three potential consequences of cross-linguistic effects, and any compelling argument for or against the presence of such effects must be based on a consideration of all three consequences. These consequences can be thought of as types of evidence, or premises for transfer, and their investigation requires performance comparisons between individuals, groups, and languages. The present paper has two purposes. The first is to characterize the foundations of a classification scheme that highlights the relationships among these three types of evidence and also indicates that there is yet a fourth type of evidence for cross-linguistic effects that has not yet been taken account of within the framework. The second purpose of this paper is to show that these four types of evidence constitute what can be described as a comparison-based argument for transfer, but that there also exist other valid arguments for transfer, such as what I refer to as the detection-based argument. I describe both the comparison- and detection-based arguments and the types of evidence they entail in relation to number of recent investigations into cross-linguistic influence.
2020. What would disprove interdependence? Lessons learned from a study on biliteracy in Portuguese heritage language speakers in Switzerland. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism 23:5 ► pp. 550 ff.
Brown, Amanda & Marianne Gullberg
2012. Multicompetence and native speaker variation in clausal packaging in Japanese. Second Language Research 28:4 ► pp. 415 ff.
2018. Acquisition of motion events in L2 Spanish by German, French and Italian speakers. The Language Learning Journal 46:3 ► pp. 241 ff.
Ivaska, Ilmari & Silvia Bernardini
2020. Constrained language use in Finnish: A corpus-driven approach. Nordic Journal of Linguistics 43:1 ► pp. 33 ff.
Jarvis, Scott
2016. Clarifying the Scope of Conceptual Transfer. Language Learning 66:3 ► pp. 608 ff.
Kim, Hyunwoo, Yunchuan Chen & Xueyan Liu
2022. Bilingual processing of verbal and constructional information in English dative constructions: effects of cross-linguistic influence. Cognitive Linguistics 33:4 ► pp. 701 ff.
Kristensen, Line Burholt & Marie-Louise Lind Sørensen
2023. På, i, for, or til: A comparative analysis of prepositions in the writing of L1 and L2 Danish users. Nordic Journal of Linguistics► pp. 1 ff.
2020. L1 Influence vs. Universal Mechanisms: An SLA-Driven Corpus Study on Temporal Expression. In Learner Corpus Research Meets Second Language Acquisition, ► pp. 39 ff.
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 29 march 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.