Cover not available
Part of
Meaning and Structure in Second Language Acquisition: In honor of Roumyana Slabakova
Edited by Jacee Cho, Michael Iverson, Tiffany Judy, Tania Leal and Elena Shimanskaya
[Studies in Bilingualism 55] 2018
► pp. 181–202

Chapter 7
Testing the predictions of the Scalpel Model in L3/Ln acquisition

The acquisition of null and overt subjects in L3 Chinese

 | University of Southampton
 | University of Southampton
The Scalpel Model (SM) (Slabakova, 2017) argues that neither the L1 nor the L2 has a privileged status in L3 acquisition so transfer can occur from either the L1 or the L2 and on a property-by-property basis. We tested these predictions by examining the acquisition of Chinese null and overt subjects by twenty-five L3 Chinese learners divided into two groups: L1 English-L2 Spanish-L3 Chinese learners and L1 English-L2 non-null subject language-L3 Chinese learners. Results from a Written Production Task and a Pronoun Interpretation Task showed transfer from both background languages but for different properties supporting that transfer can, indeed, be partial in L3 acquisition. We argue that existing structural similarities between the background and the target languages are important as well.
Keywords: L3 acquisition, transfer, null and overt subjects, Chinese
Article outline
  • The Scalpel Model
  • Null and overt subjects
    • Null subjects (NS)
    • Overt subjects (OS)
  • Hypotheses
  • The study
    • Participants
    • Pre-test
    • Methodology
    • Data analyses
  • Results
    • Written production task
    • Pronoun interpretation task
  • Discussion
  • Conclusion
  • Notes
  • References
  • Appendix
Published online: 16 November 2018
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/sibil.55.07cle
References (30)
References
Amaral, L., & Roeper, T. (2014). Multiple grammars and second language representation. Second Language Research, 30(1), 3–36.DOI logoGoogle 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
Cabrelli Amaro, J., Flynn, S., & Rothman, J. (Eds.). (2012). Third language acquisition in adulthood. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Clements, M. (2017). Exploring the role of previously acquired languages in third language (L3) acquisition: A feature-based account (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Southampton.Google Scholar
Chomsky, N. (1981). Lectures on government and binding. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
(1986). Knowledge of language: Its nature, origin, and use. New York, NY: Praeger.Google Scholar
(1995). The minimalist program. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
(2007). Approaching UG from below. In U. Sauerland, & H. M. Gärtner (Eds.), Interfaces + Recursion = Language? (pp. 1–29). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google 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, 1(1): 3–16.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Goodall, G. (2001). The EPP in Spanish. In Davies, W. D. and S. Dubinsky (Eds.), Objects and other subjects: Grammatical functions, functional categories and configurationality (pp. 193–223). Dordrecht: Kluwer.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Grosjean, F. (1989). Neurolinguists, beware! The bilingual is not two monolinguals in one person. Brain and language, 36(1), 3–15.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Huang, Y. (2000). Anaphora: A cross-linguistic approach. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Kanno, K. (1997). The acquisition of null and overt pronominals in Japanese by English speakers. Second Language Research 13(3), 265–87.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Montalbetti, M. (1984). After binding (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). MIT.Google Scholar
Mykhaylyk, R., Mitrofanova, N., Rodina, Y., & Westergaard, M. (2015). The linguistic proximity model: The case of verb-second revisited. In E. Grillo & K. Jepson (Eds.), BUCLD 39: Proceedings of the 39th annual Boston University Conference on Language Development (pp. 337–349). Sommerville, MA: Cascadilla Press.Google Scholar
Na Ranong, S., & Leung, Y. I. (2009). Null objects in L1 Thai-L2 English-L3 Chinese: An empiricist take on a theoretical problem. In Y. I. Leung (Ed.), Third language acquisition and Universal Grammar (pp. 162–191). Bristol: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
Rizzi, L. (1986). Null objects in Italian and the theory of pro. Linguistic Inquiry, 17, 501–57.Google Scholar
Rothman, J. (2009). Pragmatic deficits with syntactic consequences? L2 pronominal subjects and the syntax–pragmatics interface. Journal of Pragmatics, 41(5), 951–973.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(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 Teaching (IRAL), 48, 245–273.Google Scholar
(2011). L3 syntactic transfer selectivity and typological determinacy: The typological primacy model. Second Language Research, 27(1), 107–128.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2015). Linguistic and cognitive motivations for the typological primacy model of third language (L3) transfer: Timing of acquisition and proficiency in the previous languages. Bilingualism, Language & Cognition, 18(2), 179–190.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Schwartz, B., & Sprouse, R. (1996). L2 cognitive states and the full transfer/full access model. Second Language Research, 12(1), 40–72.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sheehan, M. (2006). The EPP and null subjects in Romance (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Newcastle upon Tyne.Google Scholar
Slabakova, R. (2017). The scalpel model of third language acquisition. International Journal of Bilingualism, 21(6): 651–665.Google Scholar
Taraldsen, K. T. (1978). The scope of wh-movement in Norwegian. Linguistic Inquiry, 623–640.Google 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, 1–17. Online access.Google Scholar
Zhao, L. (2009). L2 acquisition of the interpretation of embedded null arguments in Chinese. In M. Bowles, T. Ionin, S. Montrul, & A. Tremblay (Eds.), Proceedings of the 10th Generative Approaches to Second Language Acquisition Conference (GASLA 2009) (pp. 77–85). Sommerville, MA: Cascadilla Press.Google Scholar
(2012). Interpretation of Chinese overt and null embedded arguments by English-speaking learners. Second Language Research, 28(2), 169–190.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Zhao, X. (2008). The syntax and interpretation of overt and null arguments in Chinese and their acquisition by second language learners (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Cambridge.Google Scholar
Cited by (2)

Cited by two other publications

Luan, Xiaoyu, Masakazu kuno, Ayaka Sugawara, Yayoi Kawasaki & Eriko Sugimori
2024. The effect of previously acquired languages on third language acquisition. Heliyon 10:4 ► pp. e26202 ff. DOI logo
Cherici, Alessia
2023. The role of L1 and L2 in the acquisition of null subjects by Chinese learners of L3 Italian. International Journal of Multilingualism 20:3 ► pp. 735 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 23 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.