Cover not available
Part of
Transfer Effects in Multilingual Language Development
Edited by Hagen Peukert
[Hamburg Studies on Linguistic Diversity 4] 2015
► pp. 111–128

Lexical cross-linguistic influence in third language development

| Stockholm University
This chapter is an overview of the study of lexical cross-linguistic influence (CLI) in oral production at different stages of third language development. The character of CLI in the developing vocabulary is illustrated with data from learners of French and Italian as foreign languages in Sweden. Different types of formal vs. meaning-based CLI are displayed and discussed in relation to the proficiency level of background languages and target language. Linking research into CLI to more general views on vocabulary learning, the study shows that CLI in L3 production is predominantly formal in early stages of development and that meaning based CLI shows in later stages. New data that confirm results from earlier studies pointing in this direction are presented.
Keywords: cross-linguistic influence, proficiency, Romance languages, third language learning, word knowledge
Published online: 29 April 2015
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/hsld.4.05bar
References (55)
References
Anderson, R.C. & Freebody, P. 1982. Vocabulary knowledge. In Comprehension and Teaching: Research Reviews, J.T. Guthrie (ed.), 77–117. Newark DE: International Reading Association.Google Scholar
Aronin, L., Fishman, J.A., Singleton, D. & O’ Laoire, M. 2013. Current multilingualism: A new linguistic dispensation. In Current Multilingualism, D. Singleton, Fishman, J.A., Aronin, L., O’ Laoire, M. (eds), 3-23. Berlin: Mouton/De Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Aronin, L. & Singleton, D. 2008. Multilingualism as a new linguistic dispensation. International Journal of Multilingualism 5(1): 1–16. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Auer, P. & Wei, L. 2007. Introduction: Multilingualism as a problem? Monolingualism as a problem? In Handbook of Mulitingualism and Multilingual Communication, P. Auer & L. Wei (eds), 1-13. Berlin: Mouton/De Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bardel, C. In progress. The intermediate and advanced levels of Italian L3. Lexical aspects.
Bardel, C., Gudmundson, A., & Lindqvist, C. 2012. Aspects of lexical sophistication in advanced learners’ oral production: Vocabulary acquisition and use in L2 French and Italian. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 34, 269-290. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bardel, C. & Lindqvist, C. 2007. The role of proficiency and psychotypology in lexical cross-linguistic influence. A study of a multilingual learner of Italian L3. In Atti del VI Congresso di Studi dell’Associazione Italiana di Linguistica Applicata, Napoli, 9-10 febbraio 2006, M. Chini, P. Desideri, M.E. Favilla & G. Pallotti (eds), 123-145. Perugia: Guerra Editore.Google Scholar
Bardel, C. & Falk, Y. 2012. The L2 status factor and the declarative/procedural distinction. In Third language acquisition in adulthood, J. Cabrelli Amaro, S. Flynn & J. Rothman (eds), 61-78. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cenoz, J. 2001. The effect of linguistic distance, L2 status and age on cross-linguistic influence in third language acquisition. In Cross-linguistic influence in third language acquisition, J. Cenoz, B. Hufeisen & U. Jessner (eds), 8–20. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
Cenoz, J., Hufeisen, B. & Jessner, U. (eds). 2003. The Multilingual Lexion. Dordrecht: Kluwer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cook, V. 1992. Effects of the Second Language on the First. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
Cieslicka, A. 2006. On building castles on the sand, or exploring the issue of transfer in the interpretation and production of L2 fixed expressions. In Cross-linguistic Influences in the Second Language Lexicon, J. Arabski (ed.), 226-245. Clevedon: Multilingual matters.Google Scholar
Daller, H., Milton, J., & J. Treffers-Daller. 2007. Editors’ introduction. Conventions, terminology and an overview of the book. In Modelling and assessing vocabulary knowledge, H. Daller, J. Milton & J. Treffers-Daller (eds), 1-32. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
De Angelis, G. 2007. Third or Additional Language Acquisition. Clevedon: Multilingual matters.Google Scholar
Dewaele, J.-M. 1998. Lexical inventions: French interlanguage as L2 versus L3. Applied Linguistics 19(4): 471-490. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Erman, B., Denke, A., Fant, L. & Forsberg Lundell, F. 2014. Nativelike expression in long-residency L2 users: A study of multiword structures in the speech of L2 English, French and Spanish. International Journal of Applied Linguistics (IJAL). DOI logoGoogle 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.Google Scholar
Grosjean, F. 1982. Life with Two Languages. An Introducion to Bilingualism. Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
. 2010. Bilingual. Life and Reality. Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hall, C., Newbrand, D., Ecke, P., Sperr, U., Marchand, V. & Hayes, L. 2009. Learners’ implicit assumptions about syntactic frames in new L3 words: The role of cognates, typological proximity, and L2 status. Language Learning 59(1): 153-202. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hammarberg, B. (ed.). 2009. Processes in Third Language Acquisition. Edinburgh: EUP.Google Scholar
. 2010. The languages of the multilingual: Some conceptual and terminological issues. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching (IRAL) 48(2-3): 91-104.Google Scholar
Horst, M. & Collins, L. 2006. From faible to strong: How does their vocabulary grow? Canadian Modern Language Review 63: 83–106. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Jarvis, S. & Pavlenko, A. 2008. Crosslinguistic influence in language and cognition. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Laufer, B. 1997. What’s in a word that makes it hard or easy: Some intralexical factors that affect the learning of words. In Vocabulary: Description, Acquisition and Pedagogy, N. Schmitt & M. McCarthy (eds), 140–155. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
. 2000. Avoidance of idioms in a second language: the effect of L1-L2 degree of similarity. Studia Linguistica 54: 186-96. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lindqvist, C. 2009. The use of the L1 and the L2 in French L3: Examining cross-linguistic lexemes in multilingual learners’ oral production. International Journal of Multilingualism 6(3): 281–297. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2010. Lexical cross-linguistic influences in advanced learners’ French L3 oral production. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching (IRAL) 48(2-3): 131–157.Google Scholar
. 2012. Advanced learners’ word choices in French L3 oral production. In Third Language Acquisition in Adulthood, J. Cabrelli Amaro, S. Flynn & J. Rothman (eds), 255-280. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lindqvist, C. & Bardel, C. 2013. Exploring the impact of the proficiency and typology factors: Two cases of multilingual learners’ L3 learning. In Essential Topics in Applied Linguistics and Multilingualism. Studies in Honor of David Singleton, M. Pawlak & L. Aronin (eds), 253-266. Dordrecht: Springer.Google Scholar
Meara, P. 1978. Learners’ word associations in French. Interlanguage Studies Bulletin 3(1): 192–211.Google Scholar
. 2009. Connected Words: Word Associations and Second Language Vocabulary Acquisition [Language Learning & Language Teaching 25]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Muñoz, C. 2006. Influence translinguistique et changement de code dans la production orale d’une L4. AILE 24: 75-99.Google Scholar
Nation, P. 2001, Learning Vocabulary in another Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Navés, T., Miralpeix, I. & Luz Celaya, M. 2005. Who Transfers More … and What? Crosslinguistic influence in relation to school grade and language dominance in EFL. International Journal of Multilingualism 2: 113-134. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Paradis, M. 2004. A Neurolinguistic Theory of Bilingualism [Studies in Bilingualism 18]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2009. Declarative and Procedural Determinants of Second Languages [Studies in Bilingualism 40]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Read, J. 2004. Plumbing the depths: How should the construct of vocabulary knowledge be defined? In Vocabulary in a Second Language. Selection, Acquisition and Testing [Language Learning & Language Teaching 10], P. Bogaards & B. Laufer (eds), 209–227. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ringbom, H. 1978. The influence of the mother tongue on the translation of lexical items. Interlanguage Studies Bulletin, Utrecht 3(1): 80-101.Google Scholar
. 1986. Cross-linguistic influence and the foreign language learning process. In Crosslinguistic Influence in Second Language Acquisition, E. Kellerman & M. Sharwood Smitsh (eds), 150-162. Oxford: Pergamon.Google Scholar
. 1987. The Role of the First Language in Foreign Language Learning. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
. 2001. Lexical transfer in L3 production. In Cross-linguistic Influence in Third Language Acquisition: Psycholinguistic Perspectives, J. Cenoz, B. Hufeisen & U. Jessner (eds), 59-68. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
. 2007. Cross-linguistic Similarity in Foreign Language Learning. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
Sharwood Smith, M. & Kellerman, E. 1986. Crosslinguistic influence in second language acquisition: An introduction. In Crosslinguistic influence in second language acquisition, E. Kellerman & M. Sharwood Smith (eds.), 1–9. New York: Pergamon Press.Google Scholar
Singleton, D. 1987. Mother and other tongue influence on learner French. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 9: 327-346. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 1999. Exploring the Second Language Mental Lexicon. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Singleton, D. & Ó Laoire, M. 2006. Psychotypologie et facteur L2 dans l’influence translexicale. Une analyse de l’influence de l’anglais et de l’irlandais sur le français L3 de l’apprenant. AILE 24: 101-117.Google Scholar
Stedje, A. 1977. Tredjespråksinterferens i fritt tal – en jämförande studie. In Papers from the Conference on Contrasted Linguistics and Error Analysis, Stockholm & Åbo, 7–8 February, R. Palmberg & H. Ringbom (eds), 141-158. Åbo: Åbo Akademi.
Söderman, T. 1993. Word associations of foreign language learners and native speakers: the phenomenon of a shift in response type and its relevance for lexical development. In Near-native Proficiency in English, H. Ringbom (ed.), 91–182. Åbo: Åbo Akademi, English Department Publications.Google Scholar
Vildomec, V. 1963. Multilingualism. Leyden: A.W. Sythoff.Google Scholar
Wilks, C. & Meara, P. 2007. Implementing graph theory approaches to the exploration of density and structure in L1 and L2 word association networks. In Modelling and assessing vocabulary knowledge, H. Daller, J. Milton & J. Treffers-Daller (eds), 167–181. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Williams, S. & Hammarberg, B. 2009. Language switches in L3 production: Implications for a polyglot speaking model. In Processes in Third Language Acquisition, B. Hammarberg (ed.) 28–73. Edinburgh: EUP. Originally 1998 in Applied Linguistics 19(3): 295–333.Google Scholar
Wolter, B. & Gyllstad, H. 2011. Collocational links in the L2 mental lexicon and the influence of L1 intralexical knowledge. Applied Linguistics 32(4): 430-49. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cited by (3)

Cited by three other publications

Lorenz, Eliane, Yevheniia Hasai & Peter Siemund
2021. Multilingual lexical transfer challenges monolingual educational norms: not quite!. Multilingua 40:6 ► pp. 791 ff. DOI logo
Fuster, Carles & Hannah Neuser
2020. Exploring intentionality in lexical transfer. International Journal of Multilingualism 17:4 ► pp. 516 ff. DOI logo
Fuster, Carles & Hannah Neuser
2021. The role of morphological similarity in lexical activation and unintentional transfer. International Journal of Bilingualism 25:6 ► pp. 1597 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 24 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.