Cover not available
Article published In:
Journal of Immersion and Content-Based Language Education
Vol. 6:1 (2018) ► pp.85–112
Refereed Article

CLIL at the linguistic interfaces

 | University of the Basque Country
 | University of the Basque Country
This study explores the effect of CLIL on the acquisition of nominal morphology (syntax-morphology interface) and article use (syntax-semantics-discourse-interface), linguistic areas that have been scarcely investigated in CLIL settings. Here we compare article omission and overuse errors in an oral production task performed by L1 Basque-Spanish learners of L3 English in two CLIL and non-CLIL groups matching in age at testing time and amount of exposure. Results indicate that as regards nominal morphology, CLIL and non-CLIL learners are equal in terms of the omission of the definite and the indefinite article, but CLIL learners learn to solve article overuse more quickly than non-CLIL learners. Taking together these results and the findings from our previous study (Martínez-Adrián & Gutiérrez-Mangado, 2015a), which revealed the non-existence of CLIL benefits with respect to the acquisition of verbal morphology, we conclude that while the syntax-morphology interface seems to be unaffected by CLIL, CLIL can aid in the acquisition of features from the syntax-semantics-discourse interface.
Keywords: content and language integrated learning (CLIL), syntax-morphology interface, syntax-semantics-discourse interface, article omission, article overuse, verbal and nominal morphology
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.CLIL and research findings
  • 3.The acquisition of interface properties
  • 4.Research questions
  • 5.Methodology
    • 5.1Participants
    • 5.2Instruments and data collection and analysis
  • 6.Results
    • 6.1Oxford proficiency test
    • 6.2Oral narrations
      • 6.2.1Accuracy in the use of definite and indefinite articles
      • 6.2.2Article omission
      • 6.2.3Article overuse
  • 7.Discussion and conclusion
  • Acknowledgements
  • Notes
  • References
Published online: 26 January 2018
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/jicb.17002.gut
References (99)
References
Admiraal, W., Westhoff, G., & de Bot, K. (2006). Evaluation of bilingual secondary education in the Netherlands: Students’ language proficiency in English. Educational Research and Evaluation, 121 (1), 75–93.Google Scholar
Agathopoulou, E. (2003). On functional features in second language acquisition of nominal compounds: Evidence from the Greek-English interlanguage. In J. Liceras, H. Zobl, & H. Goodluck (Eds.), Proceedings of the 6th Generative Approaches to Second Language Acquisition Conference (GASLA 2002) (pp. 1–8). Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Proceedings Project.Google Scholar
Agustín Llach, M. P., & Canga Alonso, A. (2016). Vocabulary growth in young CLIL and traditional EFL learners: Evidence from research and implications for education. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 26 (2), 211–227. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Allan, D. (1992). Oxford Placement Test. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Basterrechea Lozano, M., & García Mayo, M. P. (2013). Language-related episodes during collaborative tasks: A comparison of CLIL and EFL learners’ interaction in diverse educational settings. In K. McDonough & A. Mackey (Eds.), Second language interaction in diverse educational settings (pp. 25–44). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Burkhardt, P. (2005). The syntax-discourse interface: Representing and interpreting dependency. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Canga Alonso, A. (2013). The receptive vocabulary of Spanish 6th grade primary school students in CLIL instruction: A preliminary study. Latin American Journal of Content and Language Integrated Learning (LACLIL), 6 (2), 22–41. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Canga Alonso, A., & Arribas García, M. (2015). The benefits of CLIL instruction in Spanish students’ productive vocabulary knowledge. Encuentro: Revista de investigación e innovación en la clase de idiomas [Encounter: Journal of Research and Innovation in the Language Class], 24 1, 15–31.Google Scholar
Cenoz, J., & Valencia, J. (1994). Additive trilingualism: Evidence from the Basque country. Applied Psycholinguistics, 15 1, 195–207. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Coyle, D. (2007). Content and language integrated learning: Toward a connected research agenda for CLIL pedagogies. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 10 1, 543–562. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dalton-Puffer, C. (2008). Outcomes and processes in Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL): Current research from Europe. In W. Delanoy, & L. Volkmann (Eds.), Future perspectives for English language teaching (pp. 139–57). Heidelberg: Carl Winter.Google Scholar
(2011a). Content and language integrated learning: From practice to principles. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 31 1, 182–204. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2011b). Foreword. In Y. Ruiz de Zarobe, J. Sierra & F. Gallardo del Puerto (Eds.), Content and foreign language integrated learning: Contributions to multilingualism in European contexts (pp. 9–10). Bern: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
Dekeyser, R. (2010). Practice for second language learning. Don’t throw out the baby with the bath water. International Journal of English Studies, 10 (1), 155–165. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dekydstpotter, L., & Sprouse, R. (1997). The interpretive interface in L2 acquisition: The process-result distinction in English-French interlanguage grammars. Language Acquisition, 6 1, 297–332. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dekydstpotter, L., Sprouse, R. & Swanson, K. (2001). Reflexes of mental architecture in second language acquisition: The interpretation of discontinuous combien extractions in English-French interlanguage. Language Acquisition, 9 1, 175–227. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Eurydice. (2006). Content and language integrated learning at school in Europe. Brussels: Eurydice European Unit.Google Scholar
Gallardo del Puerto, F., Gómez Lacabex, E., & García Lecumberri, M. L. (2009). Testing the effectiveness of content and language integrated learning in foreign language contexts: The assessment of English pronunciation. In Y. Ruiz de Zarobe & R. M. Jiménez Catalán (Eds.), Content and language integrated learning: Evidence from research in Europe (pp. 63–80). Clevedon, UK: Multilingual Matters. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
García Mayo, M. P. (2003). Age, length of exposure and grammaticality judgments in the acquisition of English as a foreign language. In M. P. García Mayo & M. L. García Lecumberri (Eds.), Age and the acquisition of English as a foreign language (pp. 94–114). Clevedon, UK: Multilingual Matters. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2007). Investigating tasks in foreign language learning. Clevedon, UK: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
(2009a). Article choice in L2 English by Spanish speakers: Evidence for full transfer. In M. P. García Mayo, & R. Hawkins (Eds.), Second language acquisition of articles (pp. 13–37). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2009b). El uso de tareas y la atención a la forma del lenguaje en el aula AICLE. [Homework and attention to language form in the CLIL classroom]. In V. Pavón Vázquez, & J. Ávila López (Eds.), Aplicaciones didácticas para la enseñanza integrada de lengua y contenidos (AICLE/CLIL/Émile) [Pedagogical applications for integrated language and content teaching] (pp. 55–73). Córdoba, Spain: Consejería de Educación de la Junta de Andalucía.Google Scholar
(2012). The relevance of attention to form in communicative classroom contexts. ELIA- Estudios de Lingüística Inglesa Aplicada [Studies in English Applied Linguistics], 11 1, 11–45.Google Scholar
García Mayo, M. P., & García Lecumberri, M. L. (2003). Age and the acquisition of English as a foreign language. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
García Mayo, M. P., & Villareal Olaizola, I. (2010). The development of suppletive and affixal tense and agreement morphemes in the L3 English of Basque-Spanish bilinguals. Second Language Research, 27 (1), 129–149. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gass, S., & Mackey, A. (2007). Input, interaction, and output: An overview. AILA Review, 19 1, 3–17. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Goldschneider, J. M., & De Keyser, R. M. (2001). Explaining the ‘natural order of L2 morpheme acquisition’ in English: A meta-analysis of multiple determinants. Language Learning, 51 (1), 1–50. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gutiérrez Mangado, M. J., & Martínez Adrián, M. (2009). On the absence of transfer effects in the L3 English article system. Paper presented at the International Symposium on Bilingualism, 7, Utrecht (The Netherlands), July 8–11.
(2013). The acquisition of L3 English articles by Basque-Spanish bilinguals. Paper presented at the AESLA conference, La Laguna, Tenerife, 18–20 April.
(2014). The effect of CLIL on linguistic interfaces. Paper presented at the AESLA conference, Sevilla, 3–5 April.
(2015). Article omission and misuse: A comparison of L2 and L3 English learners. Paper presented at the AEDEAN conference, Bilbao, 11–13 November.
(in press). The use of L3 English articles by Basque-Spanish bilinguals. Revista Española de Lingüística Aplicada (RESLA) [Spanish Journal of Applied Linguistics].
Harley, B. (1993). Instructional strategies and SLA in early French immersion. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 15 (2), 245–259. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(1994). Appealing to consciousness in the L2 classroom. AILA Review, 11 1, 57–68.Google Scholar
Haznedar, B. (2001). The acquisition of the IP system in child L2 acquisition. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 23 1, 1–39. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Haznedar, B., & Schwartz, B. D. (1997). Are there optional infinitives in child L2 acquisition? In E. Hughes, M. Hughes, & A. Greenhill (Eds.), Proceedings of the 21st Annual Boston University Conference on Language Development, 21 1, (pp. 257–268). Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press.Google Scholar
Huebner, T. (1983). A longitudinal analysis of the acquisition of English. Ann Arbor, MI: Karoma Press.Google Scholar
(1985). System and variability in interlanguage syntax. Language Learning, 35 1, 141–163. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Iglesias Diéguez, K., & Martínez-Adrián, M. (in press). The influence of CLIL on receptive vocabulary: A preliminary study. Journal of English Studies.
Ionin, T., & Wexler, K. (2002). Why is ‘is’ easier than ‘-s’?: Acquisition of tense/agreement morphology by child second language learners of English. Second Language Research, 18 (2), 95–136. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ionin, T., Ko, H., & Wexler, K. (2004). Article semantics in L2 acquisition. The role of specificity. Language Acquisition, 12 (1), 3–69. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ionin, T., Zubizarreta, M. L., & Maldonado, S. B. (2008). Sources of linguistic knowledge in the second language acquisition of English articles. Lingua, 118 1, 554–576. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ionin, T., Zubizarreta, M. L., & Philippov, V. (2009). Acquisition of article semantics by child and adult L2-English learners. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 12 (3), 337–361. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Iverson, M., Kempchinsky, P. & Rothman, J. (2008). Interface vulnerability and knowledge of the subjective/indicative distinction with negated epistemic predicates in L2 Spanish. EUROLSA Yearbook, 8 1, 135–163. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Jackendoff, R. (2002). Foundations of language. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Jiménez Catalán, R. M., Ruiz de Zarobe, Y., & Cenoz, J. (2006). Vocabulary profiles of English foreign language learners in English as a subject and as a vehicular language. Vienna English Working Papers (VIEWS), 15 (3), 23–27.Google Scholar
Jiménez Catalán, R. M., & Ruiz de Zarobe, Y. (2009). The receptive vocabulary of EFL learners in two instructional contexts: CLIL versus non-CLIL. In R. M. Jiménez Catalán & Y. Ruiz de Zarobe (Eds.), Content and language integrated learning. Evidence from research in Europe (pp. 81–92). Bristol: Multilingual Matters. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Jiménez Catalán, R. M., & Agustín Llach, M. P. (2017). CLIL or time? Lexical profiles of CLIL and non-CLIL EFL learners. System, 66 1, 87–99. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lardiere, D. (1998). Dissociating syntax from morphology in a divergent L2 end-state grammar. Second Language Research, 14 (4), 359–375. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Larsen-Freeman, D. (1975). The acquisition of grammatical morphemes by adult ESL students. TESOL Quarterly, 9 1, 409–430. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lasagabaster, D. (2008). Foreign language competence in content and language integrated courses. The Open Applied Linguistics Journal, 1 1, 30–41. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lasagabaster, D., & Sierra, J. M. (2009). Immersion and CLIL in English: More differences than similarities. ELT Journal, 64 1, 376–395.Google Scholar
Lázaro Ibarrola, A. (2012). In what aspects are CLIL learners better than EFL learners? The case of morphosyntax. International Journal of English Studies, 12 (1), 79–96.Google Scholar
Lázaro Ibarrola, A., & García Mayo, M. P. (2012). L1 use and morphosyntactic development in the oral production of EFL learners in a CLIL context. International Review of Applied Linguistics, 50 1, 135–160.Google Scholar
(2015). Using form-focused tasks to integrate language across the immersion curriculum. System, 54 1, 4–13. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mcwhinney, B. (2000). The CHILDES project: Tools for analyzing talk (3rd ed.). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Manterola, J. (2012). Synchronic ubiquity of the Basque -a: A look from diachrony. In U. Etxeberria, R. Etxepare, & M. Uribe-Etxebarria (Eds.), Noun phrases and nominalization in Basque: Syntax and semantics (pp. 179–205). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2015) Euskararen morfologia historikorako: artikuluak eta erakusleak [Towards a history of Basque morphology: Articles and demonstratives]. (Unpublished doctoral thesis), University of the Basque Country, Vitoria-Gasteiz, Spain.Google Scholar
Marsh, D. (2002). CLIL/EMILE-The European dimension: Actions, trends and foresight potential. Brussels: European Comission.Google Scholar
(2009). Foreword. In Y. Ruiz de Zarobe & R. M. Jiménez Catalán (Eds.), Content and language integrated learning: Evidence from research in Europe (pp. vii–viii). Bristol: Multilingual Matters. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Martínez-Adrián, M., & Gutiérrez-Mangado, M. J. (2009). The acquisition of English syntax by CLIL learners in the Basque Country. In Y. Ruiz de Zarobe & R. M. Jiménez Catalán (Eds.), Content and language integrated learning: Evidence from research in Europe (pp. 176–196). Clevedon, UK: Multilingual Matters. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2015a). Is CLIL instruction beneficial both in terms of general proficiency and specific areas of grammar? Journal of Immersion and Content-Based Language Education, 3 (1), 51–76. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2015b). L1 use, lexical richness, accuracy and complexity in CLIL and non-CLIL learners. Atlantis, 37 (2), 175–197.Google Scholar
Martínez-Adrián, M., Gallardo del Puerto, F., & Gutiérrez-Mangado, M. J. (2013). Phonetic and syntactic transfer effects in the English interlanguage of Basque/Spanish bilinguals. Vigo International Journal of Applied Linguistics (VIAL), 10 1, 51–84.Google Scholar
Mayer, M. (1969). Frog, where are you? New York, NY: Dial Books for Young Readers.Google Scholar
Montrul, S. (2011). Multiple interfaces and incomplete acquisition. Lingua, 121 1, 591–604. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Muñoa, I. (2011). Key factors to be considered by CLIL teachers. In Y. Ruiz de Zarobe, J. Sierra, & F. Gallardo (Eds.), Content and foreign language integrated learning: Contributions to multilingualism in European contexts (pp. 293–316). Bern: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
Muñoz, C. (2006). Age and the rate of foreign language learning. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
(2007). CLIL: Some thoughts on the psycholinguistic principles. Revista Española de Lingüística Aplicada [Spanish Journal of Applied Linguistics], 20 1, 17–26.Google Scholar
Murphy, S. (1997). Knowledge and production of English articles by advanced second language learners. (Unpublished doctoral thesis), Austin: University of Texas.Google Scholar
Navés, T., & Victori, M. (2010). CLIL in Catalonia: An overview of research studies. In D. Lasagabaster & Y. Ruiz de Zarobe (Eds.), CLIL in Spain: Implementation, results and teacher training (pp. 30–54). Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars.Google Scholar
Parodi, T., Schwartz, B. D., & Clahsen, H. (1997). On the L2 acquisition of the morphosyntax of German nominals. Essex Research Reports in Linguistics, 15 1, 1–43.Google Scholar
Prévost, P., & White, L. (2000). Missing surface inflection or impairment in second language acquisition? Evidence from tense and agreement. Second Language Research, 16 (2), 103–133. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ramchand, G., & Reiss, C. (2007). The Oxford handbook of linguistic interfaces. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Robertson, D. (2000). Variability in the use of the English article system by Chinese learners of English. Second Language Research, 16 (2), 135–172. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rodríguez-Ordóñez, I. & Sainzmaza-Lecanda, L. (in press). Bilingualism effects in Basque subject pronoun expression: Evidence across the Basque-Spanish bilingual continuum. Linguistic Approaches to Bilingualism.
Rothman, J., Judy, T., Guijarro-Fuentes, P., & Pires, A. (2010). On the (un)-ambiguity of adjectival modification in Spanish Determiner Phrases. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 32 (1), 47–77. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rothman, J., & Slabakova, R. (2011). The mind-context divide: Acquisition at the linguistic interfaces. Lingua, 121 (4), 568–576. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ruiz de Zarobe, Y. (2008). CLIL and foreign language learning: A longitudinal study in the Basque country. International CLIL Research Journal, 1 (1), 60–73.Google Scholar
(2010). Written production and CLIL: An empirical study. In C. Dalton-Puffer, T. Nikula, & U. Smit (Eds.), Language use in CLIL (pp. 191–209). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ruiz de Zarobe, Y., & Lasagabaster, D. (2010). CLIL in a bilingual community: The Basque autonomous region. In D. Lasagabaster & Y. Ruiz de Zarobe (Eds.), CLIL in Spain: Implementation, results and teacher training (pp. 12–29). Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars.Google Scholar
Slabakova, R. (2008). Meaning in the second language. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2013). What is easy and what is hard to acquire in a second language. In M. P. García Mayo, M. J. Gutiérrez Mangado, & M. Martínez Adrián (Eds.), Contemporary approaches to second language acquisition (pp. 5–28). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Smit, U. (2007). Introduction. Special issue of VIEWS Vienna English Working Papers 16 (3), 3–5.Google Scholar
Snape, N. (2005). The certain uses of articles in L2-English by Japanese and Spanish speakers. In L. Carey, A. Nayudu, M. Sheehan, & L. Van Espen. (Eds.), Durham and Newcastle Working Papers in Linguistics, 11 1, 155–168.Google Scholar
Sorace, A. (2011). Pinning down the concept of ‘‘interface’’ in bilingualism. Linguistic Approaches to Bilingualism, 1 1, 1–33. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sorace, A., & Filiaci, F. (2006). Anaphora resolution in near-native speakers of Italian. Second Language Research, 22 (3), 339–368. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sorace, A., & Serratrice, L. (2009). Internal and external interfaces in bilingual language development: Revisiting the processing vs. representation distinction. The International Journal of Bilingualism, 13 (2), 195–210. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Thomas, M. (1989). The acquisition of English articles by first- and second-language learners. Applied Psycholinguistics, 10 (3), 335–355. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Tsimpli, M. I., & Sorace, A. (2006). Differentiating interfaces: L2 performance in syntax-semantics and syntax-discourse phenomena. In D. Bamman, T. Magnitskaia, & C. Zaller (Eds.), Proceedings of the 30th Annual Boston University Conference on Language Development (pp. 653–664). Cascadilla Press: Somerville, MA.Google Scholar
Villarreal Olaizola, I., & García Mayo, M. P. (2009). Tense and agreement morphology in the interlanguage of Basque-Spanish bilinguals. In Y. Ruiz de Zarobe & R. Jiménez Catalán (Eds.), Content and language integrated learning (CLIL): Evidence from research in Europe (pp. 157–175). Clevedon, UK: Multilingual Matters. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
White, L. (2003a). Fossilization in steady state L2 grammars: Persistent problems with inflectional morphology. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 6 (2), 129–141. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2003b). Second language acquisition and Universal Grammar. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2009). Grammatical theory: Interfaces and L2 knowledge. In W. C. Ritchie & T. K. Bathia (Eds.), The new handbook of SLA (pp. 49–68). Bingley: Emerald.Google Scholar
(2011). Second language acquisition at the interfaces. Lingua, 121 (4), 577–590. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Xanthou, M. (2011). Current trends in L2 vocabulary learning and instruction. Is CLIL the right approach? Advances in research on language acquisition and teaching: Selected Papers. Retrieved from <[URL]>
Zdorenko, T., & Paradis, J. (2008). The acquisition of articles in child second language English: fluctuation, transfer or both? Second Language Research, 24 (2), 227–250. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2012). Articles in child L2 English: When L1 and L2 acquisition meet at the interface. First Language, 32 (1–2), 38–62. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cited by (3)

Cited by three other publications

Gallardo del Puerto, Francisco & María Basterrechea
2024. The role of proficiency and pair formation method in language-related episodes: A study of young CLIL learners’ interaction. Language Teaching Research 28:3 ► pp. 1087 ff. DOI logo
Lee , Jang Ho, Hansol Lee & Yuen Yi Lo
2023. Effects of EMI-CLIL on secondary-level students’ English learning: A multilevel meta-analysis. Studies in Second Language Learning and Teaching 13:2 ► pp. 317 ff. DOI logo
Martínez-Adrián, María & María Nieva-Marroquín
2023. Exploring the pseudo-longitudinal development of specific morphosyntactic features and syntactic complexity in CLIL young learners. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching 61:3 ► pp. 1197 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 9 january 2025. 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.