Article published in:
Tense-Aspect-Modality in a Second Language: Contemporary perspectives
Edited by Martin Howard and Pascale Leclercq
[Studies in Bilingualism 50] 2017
► pp. 105–143

Is it really easier to acquire a closely-related language?

A study on the expression of iteration and continuation in L2 French

| University of Paris 8
| University of Turin
While the impact of cross-linguistic influence in the L2 use of verb morphology has been widely recognized, less is known about its role when optional temporal markers are involved. By means of a retelling task (The Finite Story), our study compares the use of optional markers of continuation and iteration in the production of French native speakers and Italian and German learners of French, at intermediate and advanced proficiency levels. Besides some common developmental tendencies shared by both Italian and German learners, such as an earlier use of lexical markers (adverbs: toujours, encore, de nouveau) over morpho-syntactic ones (verbal periphrasis of continuity, iterative prefix re-V), the results show a negative effect of partial, and therefore misleading, similarities between Italian and French (Fr. encore = It. ancora, Fr. toujours = It. sempre). In comparison to German learners, Italian learners tend to underuse structures not available in their L1 (continuative use of toujours), and to overuse structures available in both native and target languages but dispreferred by target language speakers (continuer à + Vinf for continuation, à/de nouveau for iteration). The Italian L1 data thus reveal both the absence of a facilitative effect of linguistic proximity at the intermediate level, and the negative effects of a presumed similarity at the advanced level.
Published online: 15 February 2017
https://doi.org/10.1075/sibil.50.05ben
References

References

Amiot, D.
2002 Re- préfixe aspectuel ? In Temps et aspect: De la grammaire au lexique [Cahiers Chronos 10], V. Lagae, A. Carlier & C. Benninger (eds), 1–20. Amsterdam: Rodopi.Google Scholar
Andersen
1983 Transfer to somewhere. In Language Transfer in Language Learning, S. Gass & L. Selinker (eds), 177–201. Rowley MA: Newbury House.Google Scholar
Andorno C.
2005 Additive and restrictive particles in Italian as a second language. Embedding in the verbal utterance structure. In The Structure of Learner Varieties, H. Hendriks (ed.), 405–460. Berlin: De Gruyter. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Andorno, C. & Benazzo, S.
2014 L’acquisition L2 de langues proches : l’Expression de la continuation et de l’itération en français et en italien L2. In Marqueurs discursifs dans les langues romanes: Une approche contrastive, M. Borreguero Zuloaga & S. Gómez-Jordana Ferary (eds), 424–448. Limoges: Lambert Lucas.Google Scholar
Apotheloz, D.
2005 Re- et les différentes manifestations de l’itérativité. Pratiques 125–126: 48–71.Google Scholar
Bardovi-Harlig, K.
2000 Tense and Aspect in Second Language Acquisition: Form, Meaning, and Use. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Baroni, M.
2007 I sensi di ri-: Un’indagine preliminare. In Miscellanea di studi linguistici offerti a Laura Vanelli da amici e allievi padovani, R. Maschi, N. Penello & P. Rizzzolatti (eds), 163–171. Udine: Forum.Google Scholar
Benazzo, S.
2003 The interaction between verb morphology and temporal adverbs of contrast. A longitudinal study in French, English and German L2. In Information Structure, Linguistic Structure and the Dynamics of Language Acquisition [Studies in Bilingualism 26], C. Dimroth & M. Starren (eds), 187–210. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Benazzo, S., Andorno, C., Interlandi, G. & Patin, C.
2012 Perspective discursive et influence translinguistique: Exprimer le contraste d’entité en français et en italien L2. Language, Interaction and Acquisition 3(2): 173–201. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Benazzo, S., Dimroth C., Perdue, C. & Watorek, M.
2004 Le rôle des particules additives dans la construction de la cohésion discursive en langue maternelle et en langue étrangère. Langages 155: 76–105. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Benazzo, S. & Starren, M.
2007 L’émergence de moyens grammaticaux pour exprimer les relations temporelles en L2. Acquisition et Interaction en Langue Etrangère 25: 129–158.Google Scholar
Bertinetto, P.M.
1991 Il verbo. In Grande grammatica italiana di consultazione, Vol. II, L. Renzi & G. Salvi (eds), 13–62. Bologna: Il Mulino.Google Scholar
Borillo, A.
1984 La négation et les modifieurs temporels: Une fois de plus encore. Langue Française 62: 37–58. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Carroll, M. & Lambert, M.
2003 Information structure in narratives and the role of grammaticised knowledge. A study of adult French and German learners of English. In Information Structure and the Dynamics of Language Acquisition [Studies in Bilingualism 26], C. Dimroth & M. Starren (eds), 267–287. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Carroll, M. & von Stutterheim, C.
2006 The impact of grammaticalised temporal categories on ultimate attainment in advanced L2-acquisition. In Educating for Advanced Foreign Language Capacities. Constructs, Curriculum, Instruction, Assessment, H. Byrnes (ed), 40–53. Washington DC: Georgetown University Press.Google Scholar
Cenoz, J.
2001 The effect of linguistic distance, L2 status and age on cross-linguistic influence in third language acquisition. In Cross-linguistic Influence in Third Language Acquisition, J. Cenoz, B. Hufeisen & U. Jessner (eds), 8–20. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
Comrie, B.
1976 Aspect: An Introduction to Verbal Aspect and Related Problems. Cambridge: CUP.Google Scholar
Coseriu, E.
1952 Sistema, norma y habla. Montevideo: U. de la República.Google Scholar
De Angelis, G.
2007 Third or Additional Language Acquisition. Clevedon: Multilingual MattersGoogle Scholar
Dietrich, R., Klein, W. & Noyau, C.
(eds) 1995 The Acquisition of Temporality in a Second Language [Studies in Bilingualism 7]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Dimroth, C.
2002 Topics, assertions, and additive words: How L2 learners get from information structure to target-language syntax. Linguistics 40(4): 891–923. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2006 The Finite Story. Nijmegen: Max-Planck-Institute for Psycholinguistics. http://​corpus1​.mpi​.nl​/ds​/imdi​_browser​?openpath​=MPI560350%23
Dimroth, C., Andorno, C., Benazzo, S. & Verhagen, J.
2010 Given claims about new topics. How Romance and Germanic speakers link changed and maintained information in narrative discourse. Journal of Pragmatics 42(12): 3328–3344. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Eckman, F.
1996 A functional-typological approach to second language acquisition theory. In The Handbook of Second Language Acquisition, W. Ritchie & T.K. Bhatia eds), 195–211. San Diego CA: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Ellis, N.C.
2006 Selective attention and transfer phenomena in L2 Acquisition: Contingency, cue competition, salience, interference, overshadowing, blocking, and perceptual learning. Applied Linguistics 27(2): 164–194. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Jarvis, S. & Pavlenko, A.
2007 Crosslinguistic Influence in Language and Cognition. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Fabricius-Hansen, C.
1983 Wieder éin wieder? Zur Semantik von wieder. In Meaning, Use and Interpretation of Language, R. Bäuerle, C. Schwarze & A. von Stechow (eds), 97–120. Berlin: De Gruyter. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Giacalone Ramat, A. & Crocco Galèas G.
(eds) 1995 From Pragmatics to Syntax: Modality in Second Language Acquisition. Tübingen: Narr.Google Scholar
Giuliano P.
2012 Discourse cohesion in narrative texts: The role of additive means in Italian L1 and L2. In Comparative Perspectives on Language Acquisition, M. Watorek, S. Benazzo & M. Hickmann (eds), 375–401. Bristol: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
Hammarberg, G.
2001 Roles of L1 and L2 in L3 production and acquisition. In Cross-linguistic Influence in Third Language Acquisition, J. Cenoz, B. Hufeisen & U. Jessner (eds), 8–20. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
Kellerman E.
1977 Towards a characterisation of the strategy of transfer in second language learning. Interlanguage Studies Bulletin 21: 58–145.Google Scholar
1978 Giving learners a break: Native language intuitions about transferability. Working Papers in Bilingualism 15: 59–92.Google Scholar
1983 Now you see it now you don’t. In Language Transfer in Language Learning, S. Gass & L. Selinker (eds), 112–134. Rowley MA: Newbury House.Google Scholar
Klein, W.
1994 Time in Language. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Klein, W. & Perdue, C.
1997 The basic variety (or: Couldn’t natural languages be much simpler?). Second Language Research 13(4): 301–347. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Klein W. & von Stutterheim C.
1991 Text structure and referential movement. Sprache und Pragmatik 22: 1–32.Google Scholar
Klein, W. & von Stutterheim C.
2002 Quaestio and L-perspectivation. In Perspective and Perspectivation in Discourse [Human Cognitive Processing 9], C.F. Graumann & W. Kallmeyer (eds), 59–88. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Kratzer, A.
2004 Telicity and the meaning of objective case. In The Syntax of Time, J. Guéron & J. Lecarme, (eds) 389–423. Cambridge MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
Labov W.
1972 Language in the Inner City. Philadelphia PA: University of Pennsylvania Press.Google Scholar
Mosegaard Hansen, M.B.
2002 La polysémie de l’adverbe encore. Travaux de Linguistique 44: 143–165. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2004 La polysémie de l’adverbe toujours. Travaux de Linguistique 49(2): 39–55. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Murcia-Serra, J.
2003 Acquiring linkage between syntactic, semantic and informational roles in narratives by Spanish learners of German. In Information Structure and the Dynamics of Language Acquisition [Studies in Bilingualism 26], C. Dimroth & M. Starren (eds), 289–309. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Nederstigt, U.
2003 Auch and noch in Child and Adult German. Berlin: De Gruyter. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Noyau, C., de Lorenzo, C., Kihlstedt, M., Paprocka, U., Sanz, G. & Schneider, R.
2003 Two dimensions of the representation of complex event structures: granularity and condensation. Towards a typology of textual production in L1 and L2. In The Structure of Learner Language, H. Hendriks (ed.), 157–201. Berlin: De Gruyter.Google Scholar
Odlin, T.
2003 Cross-linguistic influence. In The Handbook of L2 Acquisition, C.H. Doughty & M.H. Long (eds), 436–486. London: Blackwell. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Perdue, C., Benazzo, S. & Giuliano, J.
2002 When finiteness gets marked: The relation between morphosyntactic development and use of scopal items in adult language acquisition. Linguistics 40(4): 849–890. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Reinhart T.
1984 Principles of Gestalt perception in the temporal organization of narrative texts. Linguistics 22(6): 779–809.Google Scholar
Riégel, M., Pellat, J.C. & Rioul, R.
1994 Grammaire méthodique du français. Paris: PUF.Google Scholar
Ringbom, H. & Jarvis, S.
2009 The importance of cross-linguistic similarity in foreign language learning. In The Handbook of Language Teaching, M.H. Long & C.J. Doughty (eds), 106–118. London: Blackwell. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Salaberry R. & Shirai Y.
(eds) 2002 The L2 Acquisition of Tense and Aspect Morphology [Language Acquisition and Language Disorders 27]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Schmiedtová, B., von Stutterheim, C. & Carroll, M.
2010 Implications of language-specific patterns in event construal of advanced L2 speakers. In Naming the World in Two Languages. Languages and Cognition in the Bilingual Mind, A. Pavlenko (ed), 29–65. Bristol: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
Slobin, D.I.
1991 Learning to think for speaking. Native language, cognition and rhetorical style. Pragmatics 1: 7–26. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Starren, M.
2001 The Second Time. The Acquisition of Temporality in Dutch and French as a Second Language. Utrecht: LOT.Google Scholar
von Stechow, A.
1996 The different readings of wieder ‘again’: A structural account. Journal of Semantics 13: 87–138. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
von Stutterheim, C. & Klein, W.
1987 A concept-oriented approach to second language studies. In First and Second Language Acquisition Processes, C. Pfaff (ed.), 191–205. Rowley MA: Newbury House.Google Scholar
von Stutterheim, C., Andermann, M., Carroll, M., Flecken, M. & Schmiedtová, B.
2012 How grammaticized concepts shape event conceptualization in the early phases of language production. Insights from linguistic analysis, eye tracking data and memory performance. Linguistics 50(4): 833–869. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
van der Auwera, J.
1998 Phasal adverbials in the languages of Europe. In Adverbial Constructions in the Languages of Europe, J. van der Auwera (ed.) 25–145. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Van Patten, B.
2004 Input processing in SLA. In Processing Instruction. Theory, Research, and Commentary, B. VanPatten (ed.), 5–31. Mahwah NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Vegnaduzzo, M.
2000 Ancora and additive words. In Adverbs and Adjunction, A. Alexiadou & P. Svenonius (eds), 177–200. Potsdam: Institut für Linguistik, Potsdam University.Google Scholar
Vendler, Z.
1957 Verbs and times. The Philosophical Review 66(2): 143–160. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Cited by

Cited by 2 other publications

Fuchs, Robert & Valentin Werner
2018. Tense and aspect in Second Language Acquisition and learner corpus research. International Journal of Learner Corpus Research 4:2 ► pp. 143 ff. Crossref logo
Fuchs, Robert & Valentin Werner
2020.  In Tense and Aspect in Second Language Acquisition and Learner Corpus Research [Benjamins Current Topics, 108], ► pp. 2 ff. Crossref logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 30 january 2021. 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.