Cover not available
Article published In:
Linguistic Approaches to Bilingualism
Vol. 3:4 (2013) ► pp.415–447

Gender agreement in L3 English by Basque/Spanish bilinguals

| Universidad del País Vasco (UPV/EHU)
| Universidad del País Vasco (UPV/EHU)
This study investigates knowledge of the nominal agreement domain in L3 English by Basque/Spanish bilinguals. Gender agreement has been claimed to be an interpretable feature in English and could be claimed to be so for Basque, whereas Spanish shows uninterpretable gender agreement. Under current representational and computational accounts posited to explain variability in L2 learner production, interpretable features are acquirable. The participants in the present study (n=34) were Basque/Spanish bilinguals of two proficiency levels in English (intermediate and advanced) and a control group of English native speakers (n=17). They completed two oral production tasks (elicitation and picture narration tasks). Results from both tasks indicate that Basque/Spanish bilinguals seem to have acquired gender agreement in L3 English but still have production problems which could be explained on the basis of linguistic features (animacy) and gender attraction effects of the Spanish head noun as well as the different proficiency levels.
Keywords: Basque, English, gender, (un)interpretable features, L3 acquisition
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Background
    • 2.1Feature availability in a second language (L2)
    • 2.2Gender and possession
    • 2.3Previous research on the acquisition of L2 gender agreement
  • 3.Hypotheses and research questions
  • 4.The present study
    • 4.1Participants
    • 4.2Materials and procedure
  • 5.Results
  • 6.Discussion
  • 7.Conclusions
  • Notes
  • References
Published online: 11 October 2013
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/lab.3.4.02ima
References (63)
References
Adger, D. (2003). Core syntax: A minimalist approach. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Alexiadou, A., Haegeman, L., & Stavrou, M. (2007). Noun phrase in the generative perspective. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ambadiang, T. (1999). La flexión nominal. Género y número. In I. Bosque, & V. Demonte (Eds.), Gramática descriptiva de la lengua española (pp. 4843–4913). Madrid: Espasa.Google Scholar
Antón-Méndez, I. (2010). Whose? L2 English speakers’ possessive pronoun gender errors. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 14(3, 318–331. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Artiagoitia, X. (2009). Jabetza-genitiboaren sintaxia eta erkatze anizkuna (The syntax and the multiple comparison of the genitive-possession). University of the Basque Country manuscript.Google Scholar
. (2011). Generoaz. Euskararen sareko gramatika, 3 March 2011, retrieved on 29 December 2011, from [URL] Google Scholar
Barber, H., Salillas, E., & Carreiras, M. (2004). Gender or genders agreement? In M. Carreiras, & C. Clifton (Eds.), The on-line study of sentence comprehension. Eyetracking, ERPs and beyond (pp. 309–327). New York: Psychology Press.Google Scholar
Bardel, C., & Falk, Y. (2007). The role of the second language in third language acquisition: The case of Germanic syntax. Second Language Research, 23(4, 459–484. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bernstein, J. (1993). Topics in the syntax of nominal structure across Romance. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, City University of New York.Google Scholar
Bruhn de Garavito, J., & White, L. (2002). L2 acquisition of Spanish DPs: The status of grammatical features. In A.T. Pérez-Léroux, & J. Liceras (Eds.), The acquisition of Spanish morphosyntax: The L1/L2 connection (pp. 153–178). Dordrecht: Kluwer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cardinaletti, A. (1998). On the deficient/strong opposition in possessive systems. In A. Alexiadou, & C. Wilder (Eds.), Possessors, predicates, and movement in the DP (pp. 17–54). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Chomsky, N. (1995). The minimalist program. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Dewaele, J.-M., & Véronique, D. (2001). Gender assignment and gender agreement in advanced French interlanguage: A cross-sectional study. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 4(3, 275–297. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Epstein, S. D., Flynn, S., & Martohardjono, G. (1996). Second language acquisition: Theoretical and experimental issues in contemporary research. Behavioral and Brain Science, 191, 677– 758. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Eubank, L. (Ed.). (1991). Point counterpoint: Universal grammar in the second language. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ezeizabarrena, M.J. (2005). Development in early Basque-Spanish language mixing. Paper presented at V International Symposium on Bilingualism. Barcelona, 20–23 March.Google Scholar
Fernández-García, M. (1999). Patterns of gender agreement in the speech of second language learners. In J. Gutiérrez-Rexach, & F. Martínez-Gil (Eds.), Advances in Hispanic Linguistics: Papers from the 2nd Hispanic Linguistics Symposium (pp. 3–15). Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press.Google Scholar
Finneman, M. D. (1992). Learning agreement in the noun phrase: The strategies of three firstyear Spanish students. International Review of Applied Linguistics, 301, 121–136. 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 Review of Multilingualism, 1(1, 1–14.Google Scholar
Franck, J., Vigliocco, G., Antón-Méndez, I., & Collina, S. (2008). The interplay of sound and syntax in sentence production: A cross-linguistic of form effects on agreement. Language and Cognitive Processes, 23(3, 329–374. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
García Mayo, M.P., & Rothman, J. (2012). L3 morphosyntax in the generative tradition: From the initial state and beyond. In J. Cabrelli Amaro, S. Flynn, & J. Rothman (Eds.), Third language acquisition in adulthood (pp. 3–32). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
García Mayo, M.P., & Villarreal Olaizola, I. (2011). 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
Goad, H., & White, L. (2006). Ultimate attainment in interlanguage grammars: A prosodic approach. Second Language Research, 22(3, 243–268. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Haegeman, L.M.V. (1994). Introduction to government and binding theory. Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar
Harris, J. (1991). The exponence of gender in Spanish. Linguistic Inquiry, 22(1, 27–62.Google Scholar
Hawkins, R. (1998). Explaining the difficulty of gender attribution for speakers of English. Paper presented at 8th Annual EUROSLA Conference. Paris .Google Scholar
Hawkins, R., & Chan, C.Y.-H. (1997). The partial availability of Universal Grammar in second language acquisition: The “failed functional features hypothesis.” Second Language Research, 13(3, 187–226. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hawkins, R., & Franceschina, F. (2004). Explaining the acquisition and non-acquisition of determiner-noun gender concord in French and Spanish. In P. Prévost, & J. Paradis (Eds.), The acquisition of French in different contexts (pp. 175–206). Amsterdam: Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hawkins, R., & Hattori, H. (2006). Interpretation of English multiple wh-questions by Japanese speakers: A missing uninterpretable feature account. Second Language Research, 22(3, 269–301. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hawkins, R., & Tsimpli, I.M. (2009). Explaining target- and non-target performance in the acquisition of gender concord by L2 speakers. Paper presented at International Symposium on Bilingualism. Utrecht, July 8–11.Google Scholar
Holderness, J., & Hughes, A. (1997). 100+ Ideas for children: Topic-based activities. Newcastle: Macmillan/Heinemann.Google Scholar
Iverson, M. (2009). Competing SLA hypotheses assessed: Comparing heritage and successive Spanish bilinguals of L3 Brazilian Portuguese. In A. Pires, & J. Rothman (Eds.), Minimalist inquiries into child and adult language acquisition: Case studies across Portuguese (pp. 221– 243). Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Jaensch, C. (2009). L3 enhanced feature sensitivity as a result of higher proficiency in the L2. In Y.-K.I. Leung (Ed.), Third language acquisition and universal grammar (pp. 115–143). Clevedon: Multilingual Matters. 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
. (2008). Feature assembly in second language acquisition. In J. Liceras, H. Zobl, & H. Goodluck (Eds.), The role of formal features in second language acquisition (pp. 107–140). New York: LEA.Google Scholar
Leung, Y.K.I. (2007). Second language (L2) and third language (L3) French article acquisition by native speakers of Cantonese. International Journal of Multilingualism, 4(2, 117–149. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. (2009). Third language acquisition and universal grammar. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
MacWhinney, B. (2000). The CHILDES project: Tools for analyzing talk. 3rd Edition. Mahwah, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Manterola, J., & Ezeizabarrena, M.J. (2004). La mezcla de códigos (euskera-castellano) en el habla inflantil: una prueba más de la separación gramatical temprana. In C. Pastor (Ed.), Perspectivas interdisciplinares de la lingüística aplicada. Tomo I: Adquisición y aprendizaje (pp. 187–201). Valencia: Asociación Española de Lingüística Aplicada.Google Scholar
McCarthy, C. (2008). Morphological variability in the comprehension of agreement: An argument for representation over computation. Second Language Research, 24(4, 459–486. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Meisel, J.M. (1991). Principles of Universal Grammar and strategies of language use. In L. Eubank (Ed.), Point counterpoint: Universal Grammar in second language acquisition (pp. 231–276). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Meyer, A.S., & Bock, K. (1999). Representations and processes in the production of pronouns: Some perspectives from Dutch. Journal of Memory and Language, 41(2, 281–301. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Muñoz, C. (1994). A case of frequency-based markedness. Atlantis, XVI(1–2), 165–177.Google Scholar
. (2005). The development of the personal pronoun system in learners of English: “Your family? Her mother, my sister, his father.” Paper presented at EUROSLA. Dubrovnik (Croatia), September 14–17.Google Scholar
Osterhout, L., Bersick, M., & McLaughlin, J. (1997). Brain potentials reflect violations of gender stereotypes. Memory and Cognition, 25(3, 273–285. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Prévost, P., & White, L. (2000). Missing surface inflection hypothesis or impairment in second language acquisition? Evidence from tense and agreement. Second Language Research, 16(2, 103–133. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Picallo, C., & Rigau, G. (1999). El posesivo y las relaciones posesivas. In I. Bosque, & V. Demonte (Eds.), Gramática descriptiva de la lengua española (pp. 793–1023). Madrid: Espasa.Google Scholar
Rothman, J. (2010). On the typological economy of syntactic transfer: Word order and relative clause attachment preference in L3 Brazilian Portuguese. International Review of Applied Linguistics, 48(2–3), 243–271.Google Scholar
Rothman, J., & Cabrelli Amaro, J. (2010). What variables condition syntactic transfer? A look at the L3 initial transfer. Second Language Research, 26(2, 189–218. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rothman, J., Iverson, M., & Judy, T. (2011). Some notes on the generative study of L3 acquisition. Second Language Research, 27(1, 5–19. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sagarra, N., & J. Herschensohn (2011). Proficiency and animacy effects on L2 gender agreement processes during comprehension. Language Learning, 61(1, 80–116. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Santesteban, M., Foucart, A., Pickering, M.J., & Branigan, H. (2010). Is selection of possessive pronouns/adjectives in L2 affected by L1 syntax? Poster presented at the 16th Annual Conference on Architectures and Mechanisms for Language Processing (AMLaP). York, UK.Google Scholar
Slabakova, R. (2009). What is easy and what is hard to acquire in a second language? In M. Bowles, T. Ionin, S. Montrul, & A. Tremblay (Eds.), Proceedings of the 10th Generative Approaches to Second Language Acquisition Conference (GASLA) (pp. 280–294). Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Proceedings Project.Google Scholar
Syndicate, U.C.L.E. (2001). Quick placement test. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Tsimpli, I.A., & Dimitrakopoulou, M. (2007). The Interpretability hypothesis: Evidence from wh-interrogatives in second language acquisition. Second Language Research, 23(2), 215– 242. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Vergnaud, J.R., & Zubizarreta, M.L. (1992). The definite determiner and the inalienable constructions in French and English. Linguistic Inquiry, 23(4, 595–652.Google Scholar
White, J. (2008). Speeding up acquisition of his and her: Explicit L1/L2 contrasts help. In J. Philip, R. Oliver, & A. Mackey (Eds.), Child’s play? Second language acquisition and the younger learner (pp. 193–228). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
White, J., & Ranta, L. (2002). Examining the interface between metalinguistic task performance and oral production in a second language. Language Awareness, 11(4, 259–290. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
White, J., Muñoz, C., & Collins, L. (2007). The his/her challenge: Making progress in a ‘regular’ L2 programme. Language Awareness, 16(4), 278–299. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
White, L. (1989). Universal grammar and second language acquisition. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. (2003). Second language acquisition and universal grammar. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
White, L., Valenzuela, E., Kozkowska MacGregor, M., & Leung, Y.K.I. (2004). Gender and number agreement in nonnative Spanish. Applied Psycholinguistics, 25(1, 105–133. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Zobl, H. (1985). Grammars in search of input and intake. In S.M. Gass, & C.G. Madden (Eds.), Input in second language acquisition (pp. 329–344). Rowley, MA: Newbury House.Google Scholar
Cited by (6)

Cited by six other publications

Basterretxea Santiso, Gorka
2024. ‘Aquí toman mucho sopa’: Linguistic variables as predictors of non-standard gender agreement production in Basque Spanish. Open Linguistics 10:1 DOI logo
Delgado-Garza, Paloma & María del Pilar García Mayo
2024. Can we train young EFL learners to ‘notice the gap’? Exploring the relationship between metalinguistic awareness, grammar learning and the use of metalinguistic explanations in a dictogloss task. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching DOI logo
Guerrero-Gomez, Janire, María Orcasitas-Vicandi & Marta Kopinska
2024. Enhancing young EFL learners’ written skills: the role of repeated pre-task planning. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching DOI logo
Azkarai, Agurtzane
2023. L1 use and patterns of interaction of young EFL learners in a collaborative writing task. Language Teaching for Young Learners 5:1 ► pp. 7 ff. DOI logo
Mayo, María del Pilar García & María Luquin
2023. Does repeated pre-task planning have an impact on form-focused LREs?. Language Teaching for Young Learners 5:2 ► pp. 149 ff. DOI logo
MEISEL, JÜRGEN M.
2018. Early child second language acquisition: French gender in German children. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition 21:4 ► pp. 656 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 21 october 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.