Cover not available
Article published In:
Linguistic Approaches to Bilingualism
Vol. 10:6 (2020) ► pp.745–774

L1 and L2 transfer to L3 in L3 and L2 learners of Standard Arabic

| Utah State University
| University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
| University of Michigan
This study examines the influence of previously acquired languages – namely, Colloquial Arabic (CA) and English – on the acquisition of Standard Arabic (SA) by L3 and L2 learners. It reports on the role of typological and structural proximity in language transfer and whether transfer patterns change over time. The study involved 105 participants: 41 CA-L1, English-L2 learners of SA, 47 English-L1 learners of SA, and 17 Arabic-L1 speakers. The participants completed three written tasks focusing on: definite article use, verb subcategorization rules, and sentential negation. The results indicate that CA plays a positive role in L3 learners’ acquisition of SA, mainly in forms where SA and CA converge, whereas English seems to play more of a negative role for both L3 and L2 learners. Thus, structural proximity seems to play a positive role in transfer to the L3. Negative transfer, irrespective of proximity/distance, diminishes as learners advance in their study of SA.
Keywords: L3 acquisition, Arabic heritage speakers, language transfer
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Areas under study
    • 2.1Definite article
    • 2.2Verb subcategorization
    • 2.3Sentential negation
  • 3.Previous research on language transfer in Arabic
  • 4.The study
  • 5.Methods
    • 5.1Participants
    • 5.2Tasks and procedure
  • 6.Results
    • 6.1Definite article
    • 6.2Verb subcategorization rules
    • 6.3Sentential negation
  • 7.Discussion and conclusion
  • Notes
  • References
Published online: 25 February 2019
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/lab.18013.alb
References (36)
References
Abu Nasser, M., & Benmamoun, E. (2016). Quantifying lexical and pronunciation variation between three Arabic varieties. In S. Davis, & U. Soltan (Eds.), Perspectives on Arabic Linguistics, XXVI1 (pp. 187–215). DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Albirini, A. (2015). The role of the colloquial varieties in the acquisition of the standard variety: the case of Arabic heritage speakers. Foreign Language Annals, 47(3), 447–363. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2016). Modern Arabic sociolinguistics: Diglossia, variation, codeswitching, attitudes, and identity. London & New York: Routledge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Albirini, A., & Benmamoun, E. (2014). Aspects of second language transfer in the production of Egyptian and Palestinian heritage speakers. International Journal of Bilingualism, 18(3), 244–273. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2015). Factors affecting the retention of sentential negation in heritage Egyptian Arabic. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 18(3), 470–489. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Albirini, A., Benmamoun, E. & Saadah, E. (2011). Grammatical features of Egyptian and Palestinian Arabic heritage speakers’ oral production. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 331, 273–303. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Alhawary, M. T. (2003). Processability Theory: Counter-evidence from Arabic second language acquisition Data.” Al-cArabiyya, 361, 107–166.Google Scholar
(2009). Speech processing prerequisites or L1 transfer: Evidence from English and French L2 learners of Arabic. Foreign Language Annals, 421, 367–390. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2016). Arabic grammar in context. London: Routledge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2019). Arabic second language learning and effects of input, transfer, and typology. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Alosh, M., & Clark, A. (2013). Ahlan wa Sahlan. Yale University: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Amaro, J. C., Amaro, J. F., & Rothman, J. (2015). The relationship between L3 transfer and structural similarity across development. In H. Peukert (Ed.), Transfer effects in multilingual language development. Netherlands: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Aoun, J., Benmamoun, E., & Choueiri, L. (2010). The Syntax of Arabic. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Arab American Institute (2009). Arab Americans: Demographics. Retrieved from [URL]
Benmamoun, E. & Albirini, A. (2018). Is learning a standard variety similar to learning a new language? Evidence from heritage speakers of Arabic. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 41(1), 31–61. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Benmamoun, E., Abu Nasser, M., Al-Sabbagh, R., Bidaoui, A., & Shalash, D. (2014). The Location of sentential negation in Arabic varieties. Brill’s Annual of Afroasiatic Languages and Linguistics, 51, 83–116. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bos, P. (1997). Development of bilingualism: a study of school-age Moroccan children in the Netherlands. Tilburg, the Netherlands: Tilburg University Press.Google Scholar
Boumans, L. (2006). The attributive possessive in Moroccan Arabic spoken by young bilinguals in the Netherlands and their peers in Morocco. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 91, 213–231. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Brustad, K. (2000). The syntax of spoken Arabic: a comparative study of Moroccan, Egyptian, Syrian, and Kuwaiti dialects. Washington, D.C.: Georgetown University Press.Google Scholar
Brustad, K., Al-Batal, M., & Al-Tonsi, A. (2011). Al-Kitaab fii Ta Callum al-CArabiyya:A Textbook for Arabic. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.Google Scholar
Cabrelli Amaro, J., Amaro, J. F., & Rothman, J. (2015). The relationship between L3 transfer and structural similarity across development: Raising across an experiencer in Brazilian Portuguese. In H. Peukert (Ed), Transfer Effects in Multilingual Language Development. (21–52). Amsterdam, NL: John Benjamins Publishing Company. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
El Aissati, A. (1996). Language loss among native speakers of Moroccan Arabic in the Netherlands (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Nijmegen, Nijmegen, the Netherlands.Google Scholar
El-Dakhs, D. (2015). The lexical knowledge and avoidance of phrasal verbs: The case of Egyptian learners of English. International Journal of Applied Linguistics & English Literature, 5(1), 132–144. DOI logoGoogle 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 of relative clauses. International Journal of Multilingualism, 11, 3–16. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
González Alonso, J., & Rothman, J. (2017). From theory to practice in multilingualism: What theoretical research implies for third language learning. In T. Angelovska & A. Hahn (Eds.), L3 Syntactic Transfer: Models, new developments and implications. (pp. 277–298). Amsterdam, NL: John Benjamins Publishing Company. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hartsuiker, R., Pickering, M., & Veltkamp, E. (2004). Is syntax separate or shared between languages? Cross-linguistic syntactic priming in Spanish-English bilinguals. Psychological Science, 15(6), 409–414. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Khatib, M., & Ghannadi, M. (2011). Interventionist (explicit and implicit) versus non-interventionist (incidental) learning of phrasal verbs by Iranian EFL learners. Journal of Language Teaching and Research, 2 (3), 537–546. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ouhalla, J. (1993). Negation, focus and tense: The Arabic maa and laa . Rivista di Linguistica, 51, 275–300.Google Scholar
Polinsky, M. (2015). When L1 becomes an L3: Do heritage speakers make better L3 learners? Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 18(2), 163–178. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rothman, J. (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, 48(2–3), 245–273.Google Scholar
(2011). L3 syntactic transfer selectivity and typological determinacy: The typological primacy model. Second Language Research, 27(1), 107–127. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2015). Linguistic and Cognitive Motivations for the Typological Primacy Model of Third Language (L3) Transfer: Timing of Acquisition and Proficiency Considered. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 18(2), 179–190. DOI logoGoogle 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. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Schwartz, B. D., & Sprouse, R. A. (1996). L2 cognitive states and the Full Transfer/Full Access Model. Second Language Research, 121, 40–72. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Slabakova, R. (2017). The Scalpel Model of third language acquisition. International Journal of Bilingualism, 21(6), 651–665. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Westergaard, M., Mitrofanova, N., Mykhaylyk, R., & Rodina, Y. (2017). Crosslinguistic influence in the acquisition of a third Language: The linguistic Proximity Model. International Journal of Bilingualism, 21(6), 666–82. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cited by (5)

Cited by five other publications

Albirini, Abdulkafi & Elabbas Benmamoun
2022. Arabic Diglossia and Heritage Arabic Speakers. In Handbook of Literacy in Diglossia and in Dialectal Contexts [Literacy Studies, 22], ► pp. 361 ff. DOI logo
Albirini, Abdulkafi
2021. Arabic in North America. In The Cambridge Handbook of Heritage Languages and Linguistics, ► pp. 277 ff. DOI logo
Hamed, Haiam, Abdel Moneim Helmy & Ammar Mohammed
2021. 2021 International Mobile, Intelligent, and Ubiquitous Computing Conference (MIUCC), ► pp. 193 ff. DOI logo
Hamed, Haiam, AbdelMoneim Helmy & Ammar Mohammed
2022. 2022 2nd International Mobile, Intelligent, and Ubiquitous Computing Conference (MIUCC), ► pp. 11 ff. DOI logo
[no author supplied]
2021. Heritage Languages around the World. In The Cambridge Handbook of Heritage Languages and Linguistics, ► pp. 11 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 16 september 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.