Cover not available
Article published In:
ITL - International Journal of Applied Linguistics
Vol. 79/80 (1988) ► pp.77–112

Morpheme Data Analysis in Second Language Acquisition Research

Renewing an Old Debate and Raising New Issues

| University of Pennsylvania
This article will review options which confront second language acquisition researchers in their analysis of a learner’s morpheme production. It will first critically examine several different procedures which can be used to compute production accuracy, particularly when assigning values to morpheme oversuppliance, substitution, and regularization, and then review various ways in which morpheme suppliance scores can be computed within individual linguistic contexts or on overall basis, across a speaker’s corpus.
Conversations with 18 native Spanish speaking adult acquirers of English L2 will be used to highlight the often contradictory results obtained when one procedure is chosen over another to quantify the same corpus of morphemes, and to set forth problems which arise when comparisons are made of learners whose morpheme production accuracy has not been computed under the same procedures. Finally, the argument will be made that issues arising from procedural choices in morpheme data analysis are also relevant to research on other dimensions of second language acquisition.
Published online: 1 January 1988
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/itl.79-80.04pic
References (48)
Bibliography
Andersen, R. 1977. The impoverished state of cross-sectional morpheme acquisition/accuracy methodology. Working Papers on Bilingualism 141 : 47–82.Google Scholar
1978. An implicational model for second language research. Language Learning 28 : 221–282. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 1984. What’s gender good for, anyway? In R. Andersen (ed.). Second Languages : A Cross-Linguistic Perspective. Rowley, MA : Newbury House.Google Scholar
Bailey, N.C., C. Madden, and S.D. Krashen. 1974. Is there a natural sequence in adult second language learning? Language Learning 271 : 235-44 DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bickerton, D. 1975. The nature of a creole continuum. Language 491 : 640–69. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bley-Vroman, R. 1983. The comparative fallacy in interlanguage studies : the case of systematicity. Language Learning 331 : 1–17. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Brown, R.. 1973. A first Language. Cambridge : Harvard University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dickerson, L.J. 1975. The learner’s interlanguage as a system of variable rales, TESOL Quarterly, vol. 9, no. 4, 401–407. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dulay, H. and M. Burt. 1973. Should we teach children syntax? Language Learning 231 : 245-258. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dulay H. and M. Burt. 1974a. Natural sequences in child second language acquisition. Language Learning 241 : 37–53. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 1974b. A new perspective on the creative construction process in child second language acquisition. Language Learning 241 : 253–278. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fathman, A. 1975. The relationship between age and second language productive ability. Language Learning 251 : 245–54. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
1978. ESL and EFL learning : Similar or dissimilar? In Blatchford, C. and J. Schacter (eds.), On TESOL ‘78 : EFL Policies, Programs, Practices. Washington, D.C. : TESOL.Google Scholar
Felix, S. 1977. Repetitive orders in child language. Lingua 241 : 25–52. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Faerch, C. and G. Kesper. 1983. Strategies in Interlanguage Communication. London : Longman.Google Scholar
Hakuta, K. 1976. A case study of a Japanese child learning English as a second language. Language Learning 261 : 321–51. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hakuta, K and H. Cancino. 1977. Trends in second language acquisition research. Harvard Educational Review 471 : 294–316. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Harley, B.. 1984. Age as a factor in acquisition of French as a second language in an immersion setting. In R. Andersen (ed.). Second Languages : A Cross-Linguistic Perspective. Rowley, MA : Newbury House.Google Scholar
Hatch, E.. 1983. Psycholinguistics. Rowley, Mass.: Newbury House.Google Scholar
Huebner, T.. 1983. A Longitudinal Analysis of the Acquisition of English. Ann Arbor : Karoma.Google Scholar
1984. System and variability in interlanguage syntax. Language Learning 351 : 141–63. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hyltenstam, K.. 1977. Implicational patterns in interlanguage syntax variation. Language Learning 271 : 382–412. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kessler, D. and I. Idar. 1977. The acquisition of English syntac structures by a Vietnamese child. Paper presented at the National Association for Bilingual Education. Annual Convention, New Orleans, Louisiana. In H. Dulay, M. Burt and S. Krashen, Language two; 1982. Oxford University Press.
Krashen, S. 1978b. The monitor model for second language acquisition. In Gingras, R. (ed.), Second Language Acquisition and Foreign Language Teaching. Arlington, CA.Google Scholar
. 1979. A response to McLaughlin, ‘the monitor model : some methodological considerations’. Language Learning 281 : 309–32.Google Scholar
. 1981. Second Language Acquisition and Second Language Learning. Oxford : Pergamon Press.Google Scholar
Krashen, S., J. Butler, R. Birnbaum, and J. Robertson. 1978. Two studies in language acquisition and language learning. ITL Review of Applied Linguistics 39-401 : 73–92. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 1978 Two studies in language acquisition and language learning. IRAL 161 : 17–22.Google Scholar
Krashen, S., N. Houch, P. Guinchi, S. Bode, R. Birnbaum, and G. Strei. 1978. Difficulty order for grammatical morphemes for adult second language performers using free speech. TESOL Quarterly 111 : 338–41.Google Scholar
Krashen, S., C. Madden, and N Bailey. 1978. Theoretical aspects of grammatical sequencing. In Burt, M. and H. Dulay (eds.), New Directions in Second Language Learning and Teaching and Bilingual Education. Washington, D.C. : TESOL.Google Scholar
Larsen-Freeman, D.. 1975. The acquisition of grammatical morphemes by adult ESLstudents. TESOL Quarterly 91 : 409–19. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lightbown, P. 1983. Explaining relationship between developmental and instructional sequences in second language acquisition. In Seliger, H. and M. Long (eds.), Classroom Research on Sexond Language Acquisition. Rowley, Mass. : Newbury House.Google Scholar
Long, M. and C. Sato. 1984. Methodological issues in interlanguage studies : an interactionist perspective. In A. Davies, C. Griper, and A. Howatt (eds.). Interlanguage. Edinburgh : Edinburgh University Press, 253–79.Google Scholar
Meisel, J. 1977. Linguistic simplifications : a study of immigrant workers’ speech and foreigner talk. In Corder, S. and R. Roulet (eds.) The Notion of Simplification, Interlanguages and Pidgins and Their Relation to Second Language Pedagogy. Geneva.Google Scholar
Meisel, J., H. Clashen, and M. Piennemann. 1981. On determining developmental stages in naturalistic second language acquisition. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 31 : 109–35. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pica, T. 1982. Second Language Acquisition in Different Language Contexts. Ph. D. Dissertation, University of Pennsylvania.Google Scholar
1983. Adult acquisition of English under different conditions of L2 exposure. Language Learning 33,4 : 465–497. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pienemann, M. and M. Johnston. 1986. Factors influencing the development of language proficiency. Paper commissioned by the Committee of Review of the Adult Migrant Education Program, Sydney, Australia.
Richards, J. 1974. Error analysis and second language strategies, in J. Schumann and N. Stenson (eds.) New Frontiers in Second Language Learning. Rowley, Mass. : Newbury House, 32–53.Google Scholar
Selinker, L. 1972. Interlanguage. International Review of Applied Linguistics 101 : 209–231. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Stauble, A.M. A comparison of a Spanish-English and Japanese-English second language continuum : negation and verb morphology. In R. Andersen (ed.). Second Languages : A Cross-Linguistic Perspective. Rowley, MA : Newbury House.
Staubte, A.M. A comparison of a Spanish-English and Japanese-English second language continuum : negation and verb morphology. In R. Andersen (ed.). Second languages : A cross-Linguistic Perspective. Rowley, MA : Newbury House.
Tarone, E.. 1985. Variability in interlanguage use : a study of style-shifting in morphology and syntax. Language Learning 351 : 373–404. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Taylor, B. 1975. The use of overgeneralization and transfer learning strategies by elementary and intermediate students in ESL. Language Learning 321 : 53–68.Google Scholar
Wolfram, Walt. 1985. Variability in tense marking : a case for the obvious. Language Learning 321 : 229–54. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wolfson, Nessa. 1982. On tense alternation and the need for analysis of native speaker usage in second language acquisition. Language Learning 321 : 53–68. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Young, R. 1985. The acquisition of a verbal repertoire in a second language. Ms., University of Pennsylvania.Google Scholar
Zobl, H.. 1983. Markedness and the projection problem. Language Learning 33, 3 : 293–314. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cited by (2)

Cited by two other publications

Boulouffe, Jacqueline
2009. Une place pour la pédagogie en didactique des langues. Revue québécoise de linguistique 21:1 ► pp. 13 ff. DOI logo
Rahkonen, Matti & Taina Juurakko
1998. Logit analysis in L2 research: measuring L1 and L2/Ln effects. International Journal of Applied Linguistics 8:1 ► pp. 81 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 6 august 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.