Cover not available
Article published In:
Language, Interaction and Acquisition
Vol. 11:2 (2020) ► pp.232–267

Word formation in the earliest stages of L2 Polish

The use of derivational morphology in reference to human entities

 | Università degli Studi di Bergamo
This paper examines word formation strategies in initial SLA, with particular regard to the implicit processing of the distributional properties of the input. Learners with various L1s and no experience of the target language (n=163) took a 14-hour L2 Polish course under controlled input conditions. In an oral production task, these learners were asked to describe properties of human referents who had never appeared in the input by stating their nationality or profession. In their output, the learners most often referred to the target referents by attaching a -k(-) sound cluster to a lexical morpheme borrowed from a known language. Quantitative analysis shows that indeed, within the input considered, the same -k(-) cluster is characteristic of most words referring to human entities. The study concludes that learners can analyse the morphological structure of target words even after minimal exposure to the input, identifying at first the derivational formants characterised by the strongest association to the intended meaning.
Keywords: initial SLA, word formation, input control, first exposure, usage-based, Polish
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
    • 1.1Theoretical background
    • 1.2The target structure: Polish nominal inflection
  • 2.Research questions and hypotheses
  • 3.Methodology
    • 3.1The VILLA project
    • 3.2Participants
    • 3.3The question & answer task
    • 3.4Input: Word-final clusters
      • 3.4.1The word-final -k(-) cluster in the input
      • 3.4.2Form-function association in the VILLA input
  • 4.Results
    • 4.1Learner output: Quantitative results
      • 4.1.1Variation by target noun
      • 4.1.2Input exposure and cross-linguistic influence
      • 4.1.3Inferential statistics
    • 4.2Learner output: Qualitative overview
  • 5.Discussion
    • 5.1Primitive and derived words
    • 5.2Measures of form-function association: Function
    • 5.3Measures of form-function association: Form
    • 5.4Limitations and suggestions for future work
  • 6.Summary and conclusion
  • Acknowledgements
  • Notes
  • References
Published online: 25 November 2020
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/lia.19012.sat
References (67)
References
Albano Leoni, F. (2009). Dei suoni e dei sensi: Il volto fonico delle parole. Bologna: Il mulino.Google Scholar
Allan, L. G. (1980). A note on measurement of contingency between two binary variables in judgment tasks. Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society, 15(3), 147–149. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Baayen, H. (2008). Analyzing linguistic data: A practical introduction to statistics using R. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 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 M. Chini, P. Desideri, M. E. Favilla, & G. Pallotti (eds.), Atti del VI Congresso Internazionale dell’ Associazione Italiana di Linguistica Applicata (pp. 123–145). Perugia: Guerra.Google Scholar
Bates, D., Maechler, M., Bolker, B., & Walker, S. (2015). Fitting linear mixed-effects models using lme4. Journal of Statistical Software, 67(1), 1–48. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bierwisch, M. (1997). Universal Grammar and the Basic Variety. Second Language Research, 13(4), 348–366. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bley-Vroman, R. (1983). The comparative fallacy in interlanguage studies: The case of systematicity. Language Learning, 33(1), 1–17. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Booij, G. (2015). Word-formation in construction grammar. In P. Müller, I. Ohnheiser, S. Olsen, & F. Rainer (Eds.), Word formation. An international handbook of the languages of Europe. Vol. I (pp. 188–202). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2018). The construction of words: Introduction and overview. In G. Booij (Ed.), The construction of words, advances in construction morphology (pp. 3–18). Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar
Broeder, P., Extra, G., Van Hout, R., & Voionmaa, K. (1993). Word formation processes in talking about entities. In C. Perdue (Ed.), Adult language acquisition: Cross-linguistic perspectives: Vol. 2: results (pp. 41–72). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Brugman, H., & Russell, A. (2004). Annotating multimedia/multi-modal resources with ELAN. In M. T. Lino, M. F. Xavier, F. Ferreira, R. Costa, & R. Silva (Eds.), Proceedings of LREC 2004, Fourth International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation (pp. 2065–2068). Paris: ELRA.Google Scholar
Cintrón-Valentín, M. C., & Ellis, N. (2016). Salience in second language acquisition: Physical form, learner attention, and instructional focus. Frontiers in Psychology 71. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Crocco Galeas, G. (1998). The parameters of natural morphology. Padova: Unipress.Google Scholar
Dabašinskienė, I. (2009). Easy way to language acquisition: Diminutives in Lithuanian child Language. Ad Verba Liberorum, 1(1), 11–22. DOI logo Open access PDFGoogle Scholar
Dąbrowska, E. (2006). Low-level schemas or general rules? The role of diminutives in the acquisition of Polish case inflections. Language Sciences, 28(1), 120–135. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dimroth, C. (2018). Beyond statistical learning: Communication principles and language internal factors shape grammar in child and adult beginners learning Polish through controlled exposure. Language Learning, 68(4), 863–905. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dimroth, C., Rast, R., Starren, M., & Watorek, M. (2013). Methods for studying the learning of a new language under controlled input conditions: The VILLA project. EUROSLA Yearbook, 131, 109–138. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Doughty, C. J. S., Williams, J. (1998). Focus on form in classroom second language acquisition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Dressler, W. U. (1987). Leitmotifs in Natural Morphology. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dulay, H. C., Burt, M. K., & Krashen, S. D. (1982). Language two. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Ellis, N. (2002). Frequency effects in language processing. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 24(2), 143–188. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2006). Language acquisition as rational contingency learning. Applied Linguistics, 27(1), 1–24. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ellis, N., & Ferreira–Junior, F. (2009). Construction learning as a function of frequency, frequency distribution, and function. The Modern Language Journal, 93(3), 370–385. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fellows, I. (2014). Wordcloud: Word Clouds. R package version 2.5. Retrieved from [URL]
Goldberg, A. E. (2006). Constructions at work: The nature of generalization in language. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Goldschneider, J., & DeKeyser, R. (2002). 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
Grzegorczykowa, R. (1979). Zarys słowotwórstwa polskiego: Słowotwórstwo opisowe. Warszawa: Państwowe Wydawnictwo Naukowe.Google Scholar
Gullberg, M., Roberts, L., Dimroth, C., Veroude, K., & Indefrey, P. (2010). Adult language learning after minimal exposure to an unknown natural language. Language Learning, 60, suppl. 2, 5–24. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gussman, E. (2007). The phonology of Polish. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Gvozdev, A. (1961). Voprosy izučenija detskoj reči. Akademija pedagogičeskich nauk RSFSR.Google Scholar
Haman, E. (2003). Early productivity in derivation: A case study of diminutives in the acquisition of Polish. Psychology of Language and Communication, 7(1), 37–56.Google Scholar
Hinz, J., Krause, C., Rast, R., Shoemaker, E. M., & Watorek, M. (2013). Initial processing of morphological marking in nonnative language acquisition: Evidence from French and German learners of Polish. EUROSLA Yearbook, 131, 139–175. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hoffmann, T., & Trousdale, G. (eds.). (2013). The Oxford Handbook of Construction Grammar. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Jadacka, H. (2005). Kultura języka polskiego: Fleksja, słowotwórstwo, składnia (Wyd. 1). Warszawa: Wydawn. Naukowe PWN.Google Scholar
Kawaguchi, S. (2015). The development of Japanese as a second language. In C. Bettoni, & B. Di Biase (Eds.), Grammatical development in second languages: Exploring the boundaries of processability theory (pp. 149–172). EuroSLA. Retrieved from [URL]Google Scholar
Kempe, V., & Brooks, P. J. (2005). The role of diminutives in the acquisition of Russian gender: Can elements of child-directed speech aid in learning morphology? Language Learning, 55(S1), 139–176. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kempe, V., Brooks, P. J., & Gillis, S. (2005). Diminutives in child-directed speech supplement metric with distributional word segmentation cues. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 12(1), 145–151. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kempe, V., Brooks, P. J., Gillis, S., & Samson, G. (2007). Diminutives facilitate word segmentation in natural speech: Cross-linguistic evidence. Memory & Cognition, 35(4), 762–773. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kempe, V., & MacWhinney, B. (1998). The acquisition of case marking by adult learners of Russian and German. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 20(3), 543–587. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kempe, V., Ševa, N., Brooks, P. J., Mironova, N., Pershukova, A., & Fedorova, O. (2009). Elicited production of case-marking in Russian and Serbian children: Are diminutive nouns easier to inflect? First Language, 29(2), 147–165. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Klein, W., & Perdue, C. (1992). Utterance structure: Developing grammars again. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(1997). The Basic Variety (or: Couldn’t natural languages be much simpler?). Second Language Research, 13(4), 301–347. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lenth, R. (2020). emmeans: Estimated Marginal Means, aka Least-Squares Means. [URL]
MacWhinney, B. (2000). The CHILDES project: Tools for Analyzing Talk (III). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Lindqvist, C., & Bardel, C. (2014). Exploring the impact of the proficiency and typology factors: Two cases of multilingual learners’ L3 learning. In M. Pawlak, & L. Aronin (eds.), Essential topics in applied linguistics and multilingualism (pp. 253–266). Cham: Springer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lüdecke, D. (2018). sjPlot – Data visualization for statistics in social science. Zenodo. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lyster, R., Saito, K., & Sato, M. (2013). Oral corrective feedback in second language classrooms. Language Teaching 46(1). 1–40. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
MacWhinney, B., & Bates, E. (1987). Competition, variation, and language learning. In B. MacWhinney (Ed.), Mechanisms of language acquisition (pp. 157–193). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
(1989). The crosslinguistic study of sentence processing. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Nagórko, A. (2015). Polish. In P. Müller, I. Ohnheiser, S. Olsen, & F. Rainer (Eds.), Word formation. An international handbook of the languages of Europe: Vol. IV (pp. 2831–2851). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Olmsted, H. (1994). Diminutive morphology of Russian children: A simplified subset of nominal declension in language acquisition. In C. E. Gribble (Ed.), Alexander Lipson: In memoriam (pp. 165–209). Columbus, Ohio: Slavica Publishers.Google Scholar
Palmović, M. (2007). The acquisition of diminutives in Croatian. In I. Savickienė, & W. U. Dressler (Eds.), The Acquisition of Diminutives (Vol. 431, pp. 73–88). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
R Core team. (2017). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. Retrieved from [URL]
Rast, R. (2010). The role of linguistic input in the first hours of adult language learning. Language Learning, 601, 64–84. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rothstein, R. A. (2002). Polish. In B. Comrie, & G. G. Corbett (Eds.), The Slavonic languages (pp. 686–758). London-New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Saturno, J. (2015). Copular structures in Polish L2. Linguistica e Filologia, 351, 69–98. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2019). Elicited imitation as a diagnostic tool of morphosyntactic processing. In R. Arntzen, G. Håkansson, A. Hjelde, & J.-U. Keßler (Eds.), Teachability and learnability across languages (pp. 119–136). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Saturno, J., & Watorek, M. (2020). The emergence of functional case marking in initial varieties of Polish L2. Language, Interaction, and Acquisition, 11(1), 29–64. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Savickienė, I., & Dressler, W. U. (2007). The acquisition of diminutives a: A cross-linguistic perspective. Amsterdam; Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Savickienė, I., Kempe, V., & Brooks, P. J. (2009). Acquisition of gender agreement in Lithuanian: Exploring the effect of diminutive usage in an elicited production task. Journal of Child Language, 36(03), 477. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ševa, N., Kempe, V., Brooks, P. J., Mironova, N., Pershukova, A., & Fedorova, O. (2007). Crosslinguistic evidence for the diminutive advantage: Gender agreement in Russian and Serbian children. Journal of Child Language, 34(01), 111–131. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Spada, N., & Lightbown, P. (2008). Form-focused instruction: Isolated or integrated? TESOL Quarterly 42(2). 181–207. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sugisaki, K. (2008). Early acquisition of basic word order in Japanese. Language Acquisition, 15(3), 183–191. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Valentini, A., & Grassi, R. (2016). Oltre la frequenza. L’impatto della trasparenza e dell’accento sull’apprendimento del lessico in L2. In L. Corrà (Ed.), Sviluppo della competenza lessicale. Acquisizione, apprendimento, insegnamento (pp. 125–143). Roma: Aracne.Google Scholar
VanPatten, B., & Smith, M. (2015). Aptitude as grammatical sensitivity and the initial stages of learning Japanese as a L2. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 37(1), 135–165. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wickham, H. (2017). stringr: Simple, consistent wrappers for common string operations (Version 1.2.0). Retrieved from [URL]
Wulff, S., & Ellis, N. (2018). Usage-based approaches to second language acquisition. In D. Miller, F. Bayram, J. Rothman, & L. Serratrice (Eds.), Bilingual cognition and language. The state of the science across its subfields. (pp. 37–56). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cited by (1)

Cited by one other publication

Xia, Lixin
2021. 2021 7th International Conference on Education and Training Technologies, ► pp. 96 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 19 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.