Article published in:
Written Language & Literacy
Vol. 24:1 (2021) ► pp. 81–109

Spelling patterns of plural marking and learning trajectories in French taught as a foreign language

| University of Luxembourg
| University of Luxembourg
| University Clermont Auvergne | CNRS 63000 Clermont Ferrand
| University of Luxembourg | Ministère de l’Éducation nationale, de l’Enfance et de la Jeunesse
Although French plural spelling has been studied extensively, the complexity of factors affecting the learning of French plural spelling are not yet fully explained, namely on the level of adjectival and verbal plural. This study investigates spelling profiles of French plural markers of 228 multilingual grade 5 pupils with French taught as a foreign language.Three analyses on the learner performances of plural spelling in nouns, verbs and pre- and postnominal attributive adjectives were conducted (1) to detect the pupils’ spelling profiles of plural marking on the basis of the performances in the pretest, (2) to test the profiles against two psycholinguistic theories, and (3) to evaluate the impact of the training on each spelling profile in the posttest.The first analysis confirms the existing literature that pupils’ learning of French plural is not random but ordered and emphasizes the role of the position for adjectives (pre- or postnominal) on correct plural spelling. The second analysis reveals the theoretical difficulties of predicting spelling of adjectival and verbal plural. The third analysis shows that strong and poor spellers both benefit from a morphosyntactic training and provides transparency and traceability of the learning trajectories.Together, the descriptive analyses reveal clear patterns of intra-individual spelling profiles. They point to a need for further research in those areas that have empirically provided the most inconsistent results to date and that are not supported by the theories: verbs and adjectives.
Keywords: French, spelling, written plural, silent orthographic marker, syntactic marker, processability theory, cognitive learning based theory
Article outline
  • 1.French plural markers without correspondence in phonology
    • 1.1Plural spelling development in French in L1 and L2 learners
    • 1.2The particularities of adjective plural
    • 1.3Teaching French plural spelling
  • 2.The present study
    • 2.1Learning theory 1: Learning based theory (LBT)
    • 2.2Learning theory 2: Processability theory (PT)
  • 3.Method
    • 3.1Participants
    • 3.2Materials and procedure
      • 3.2.1The training program
      • 3.2.2The pretest and posttest
      • 3.2.3Test design
      • 3.2.4Spelling patterns
  • 4.Results
    • 4.1Individual spelling patterns of plural agreement (prior to training, pretest)
    • 4.2Compatibility of the plural spelling patterns with the learning theories LBT and PT
    • 4.3Impact of the training: Intra-individual spelling patterns of plural agreement
  • 5.Discussion
    • 5.1Individual spelling patterns of plural agreement
    • 5.2Compatibility of the plural spelling patterns with the learning theories
    • 5.3Impact of the training: Intra-individual spelling patterns of plural agreement (posttest)
    • 5.4Theoretical and practical implications
    • 5.5Limitations and perspectives of the present study
  • Acknowledgements
  • References
Published online: 10 December 2021
https://doi.org/10.1075/wll.00048.wet
References
Ågren, M.
(2005) Développement de la morphologie du nombre en français langue étrangère à l’écrit: Étude transversale [Development of written French number morphology in foreign language learning]. Lund: Lunds Universiteit.Google Scholar
(2009) Morphological development in written L2 French: A processability perspective. Research in Second Language Acquisition: Empirical Evidence Across Languages, 121–151.Google Scholar
Ågren, M., Granfeld, J., & Schlyter, S.
(2012) The growth of complexity and accuracy in L2 French: Past observations and recent applications of developmental stages. In A. Housen, F. Kuiken, & I. Vedder (Eds.), Dimensions of L2 Performance and Proficiency. Complexity, Accuracy and Fluency in SLA (pp. 95–119). John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Ågren, M., & Van De Weijer, J.
(2013) Input frequency and the acquisition of subject-verb agreement in number in spoken and written French. Journal of French Language Studies, 23(3), 311–333. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Ågren, M., & van deWeijer, J.
(2013) Number problems in monolingual and bilingual French-speaking children: A production/comprehension divide. Language, Interaction and Acquisition, 4(1), 25–50. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Anderson, J. R.
(1983) The architecture of cognition. Harvard: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
(1993) Rules of mind. Hillsdale NJ: Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Arciuli, J., & Monaghan, P.
(2009) Probabilistic cues to grammatical category in English orthography and their influence during reading. Scientific Studies of Reading, 13(1), 73–93. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Arseneau, R., & Nadeau, M.
(2018) Expérimentation des dictées métacognitives: quels effets sur l’apprentissage de l’orthographe grammaticale en contexte francophone minoritaire? [Experimentation of metacognitive dictation: Effects on syntactic spelling learning in French minority context?]. Canadian Journal of Applied Linguistics, 21(2), 126–153. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Bahr, R. H., Silliman, E. R., Berninger, V. W., & Dow, M.
(2012) Typically Developing Writers in Grades 1–9. Journal of Speech, Language and Hearing Research, 551(December), 1587–1599. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Bartning, I., & Schlyter, S.
(2004) Itinéraires acquisitionnels et stades de développement en français L2. Journal of French Language Studies, 14(3), 281–299. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Betzel, D.
(2015) Zum weiterführenden Erwerb der satzinternen Großschreibung. Eine leistungsdifferenzierte Längsschnittsstudie in der Sekundarstufe I. [On the acquisition of capitalization in advanced learners: a longitudinal study in secondary level differentiating performance groups]. Baltmannsweiler: Schneider Verlag.Google Scholar
Bîlici, N., Ugen, S., Fayol, M., & Weth, C.
(2018) The effect of morphosyntactic training on multilingual fifth graders’ spelling in French. Applied Psycholinguistics, 39(6), 1319–1343. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Blondel, C., Brissaud, C., & Rinck, F.
(2016) Description des pratiques orthographiques de scripteurs ordinaires et de scripteurs en difficulté avec l’écrit à partir de l’analyse d’une dictée [Description of orthographic practices in spellers with and without difficulties on the basis of a dictation]. SHS Web of Conferences, 271, 07003. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Boivin, M.-C.
(2018) A review of the current empirical research on grammar instruction in the francophone regions. L1-Educational Studies in Language and Literature, 171, 1–48. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Brehm, L., & Bock, K.
(2013) What counts in grammatical number agreement? Cognition, 128(2), 149–169. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Brissaud, C., & Cogis, D.
(2011) Comment enseigner l’orthographe aujourd’hui? [How to teach spelling today?]. Paris: Hatier.Google Scholar
Brissaud, C., & Fayol, M.
(2018) Écrire et rédiger. Rapport scientifique. Étude de la langue et production d’écrits [Spelling and composition. Scientific report]. Paris. Retrieved from http://​www​.cnesco​.fr
Bryant, P., Nunes, T., & Bindman, M.
(1997) Children’s understanding of the Connection between Grammar and Spelling. In B. Blachman (Ed.), Foundations of Reading Acquisition and Dyslexia: Implications for Early Intervention (pp. 219–240). Mahwah, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
(2000) The relations between children’s linguistic awareness and spelling: The case of the apostrophe. Reading and Writing, 12(3), 253–276. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Catach, N.
(1980) L’orthographe française. Poitiers: Nathan.Google Scholar
Cogis, D.
(2004) Une approche active de la morphographie. L’exemple d’une séquence sur l’accord de l’adjectif. Lidil, 301, 73–86. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Dubois, J.
(1965) Grammaire structurale du français. vol.1: nom et pronom. Paris: Larousse.Google Scholar
Elalouf, M.-L., Cogis, D., & Gourdet, P.
(2011) Maitrise de la langue à l’école et au collège. Progession et contradictions dans les programmes de 2008 [Language competences at primary and secondary school. Progression and contradictions in the curricula of 2008]. Le Français Aujourd’hui, 2(173), 33–44. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Ellis, N. C.
(2008) Words and their usage: Commentary on the special issue on the bilingual mental lexicon. The Mental Lexicon, 3(3), 375–385. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Encrevé, P.
(1988) La liaison avec et sans enchainement, phonologie tridimensionelle et usages du français [Liaison with and without Enchainement, tridimensional phonology and usages of French]. Paris: Seuil.Google Scholar
Fayol, M., Hupet, M., & Largy, P.
(1999) The acquisition of subject-verb agreement in written French: From novices to experts’ errors. Reading and Writing, 11(2), 153–174. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Fayol, M., Totereau, C., & Barrouillet, P.
(2006) Disentangling the impact of semantic and formal factors in the acquisition of number inflections: Noun, adjective and verb agreement in written French. Reading and Writing, 19(7), 717–736. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Fisher, C., & Nadeau, M.
(2014) Usage du métalangage et des manipulations syntaxiques au cours de dictées innovantes dans des classes du primaire [Metalanguage usage and syntactic manipulation during innovative dictations in primary school]. Repères, 491, 169–188. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Funke, R., & Sieger, J.
(2012) Continued access to syntactic information in reading. Reading and Writing, 25(7), 1769–1794. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Gauvin, I., & Thibeault, J.
(2016) Pour une didactique intégrée de l’enseignement de la grammaire en contexte plurilingue québécois: Le cas des constructions verbales [For an integrated didactic in grammar teaching in the plurilingual context of Quebec]. Scolagram – Revue de Didactique de La Grammaire, 1–18.Google Scholar
Geoffre, T.
(2013) Vers le contrôle orthographique au cycle 3 de l’école primaire. Analyses psycholinguistiques et propositions didactiques [Controling spelling at the end of primary school. Psycholinguistic analyses and propositions for instruction]. Université Joseph Fourier, Grenoble.Google Scholar
Geoffre, T., & Brissaud, C.
(2012) L’accord sujet-verbe: acquis en fin d’école primaire, vraiment? [Subject-verb agreement: Really acquired at the end of primary school?]. SHS Web of Conferences, 11, 287–306. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Granfeld, J.
(2005) Direkt Profil et deux études sur la morphologie verbale et les stades de développement [Direkt Profil and two studies on verbal morphology and development stades]. In J. Granfeld & S. Schlyter (Eds.), Acquisition et production de la morphologie flexionnelle (pp. 65–85). Lund: Petites études de l’Institut romanes de Lund.Google Scholar
Granget, C.
(2005) Développement de l’accord verbal avec un sujet pluriel dans les récits d’apprenants germanophones scolarisés du français [Development of verbal agreement with plural subject in compositions written by German learners of French]. In J. Granfeldt & S. Schlyter (Eds.), Acquisition et production de la morphologie flexionnelle (pp. 111–123). Lund: Petites études de l’Institut romanes de Lund.Google Scholar
(2017) Variabilité des formes verbales en français L2: Une question d’alphabétisation? [Variability of verbal forms in French as L2: A question of literacy education?] Bulletin Suisse de Linguistique Appliquee, (105), 95–112.Google Scholar
Gunnarsson, C.
(2006) Fluidité, complexité et morphosyntaxe dans la production écrite en FLE [Fluidity, complexity and morphosyntax in written production in French as a foreign language]. PhD thesis. Lunds Universitet.Google Scholar
Gunnarsson, C., & Soum Favaro, C.
(2008) Liaison et production écrite: l’écrit comme moyen d’étudier un phénomène de l’oral [Liaison and written production: Looking on spelling to analyse an oral phenomenon]. In D. Alamargot, J. Bouchand, E. M. Lambert, V. M. Millogo, & C. Beaudet (Eds.), Proceedings of the International Conference “de la France au Québec: l’Ecriture dans tous ses états”. Poitiers.
Guyon, O.
(2003) Évolution des procédures d’accord nominal et verbal en français: perspective psycholinguistique [Evolution of nominal and verbal agreement procedures in French. A psycholinguistic perspective]. Les Dossiers des sciences de l’éducation, 9(1), 55–66. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Hudson, R.
(2008) Word grammar, cognitive linguistics, and second language learning and teaching. Handbook of Cognitive Linguistics and Second Language Acquisition, 89–113.Google Scholar
Kemp, N., Nilsson, J., & Arciuli, J.
(2009) Noun or verb? Adult readers’ sensitivity to spelling cues to grammatical category in word endings. Reading and Writing, 22(6), 661–685. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Largy, P., Fayol, M., & Lemaire, P.
(1996) The Homophone Effect in Written French: The Case of Verb-Noun Inflection Errors. Language and Cognitive Processes, 11(3), 217–255. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Lecoq, P.
(1996) Épreuves de compréhension syntaxico-sémantique (ECOSSE) [Tests of syntactic-semantic comprehension]. Éditions du Septention.Google Scholar
Lefrançois, P.
(2009) Évolution de la conception du pluriel des noms, des adjectifs et des verbes chez les élèves du primaire [Evolution of the concept of nominal, adjectival and verbal plural in primary school children]. Repères, (39). CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Manesse, D., & Cogis, D.
(2007) Orthographe – à qui la faute? [Orthography – whose fault is it?]. Issy-les-Moulineaux: ESF Editeur.Google Scholar
Mortamet, C.
(Ed.) (2019) L’orthographe: pratiques d’élèves, pratiques d’enseignants, représentations. Rouen, Le Havre: Presses Universitaires de Rouen et du Havre.Google Scholar
Nunes, T., Bryant, P., & Bindman, M.
(1997) Learning to spell regular and irregular verbs. Reading and Writing, 9(5–6), 427–449. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Ouellette, G.
(2010) Orthographic learning in learning to spell: The roles of semantics and type of practice. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 107(1), 50–58. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Pienemann, M.
(1998) Language Processing and Second Language Development: Processability Theory. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(Ed.) (2005) Cross-Linguistic Aspects of Processability Theory. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Pienemann, M., Keßler, J. U., & Itani-Adams, Y.
(2011) Comparing levels of processability across languages. International Journal of Bilingualism, 15(2), 128–146. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Sandra, D.
(2012) Spelling strategies in alphabetic scripts: Insights gained and challenges ahead. In G. Libben, G. Jarema, & C. Westbury (Eds.), Methodological and Analytic Frontiers in Lexical Research (pp. 110–140). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Silliman, E., Bahr, R. H., Nagy, W., & Berninger, V. W.
(2018) Language bases of spelling in writing during early and middle childhood: Grounding applications to struggling writers in typical writing development. In B. Miller, P. McCardle, & V. Connelly (Eds.), Writing Development in Struggling Learners (pp. 99–119). Leiden, Boston: Brill. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Sprenger-Charolles, L., Siegel, L. S., Béchennec, D., & Serniclaes, W.
(2003) Development of Phonological and Orthographic Processing in Reading Aloud, in Silent Reading and in Spelling: A Four Year Longitudinal Study. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 84(3), 194–217. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
St-Pierre, M.-C., & Béland, R.
(2010) Reproduction of Inflectional Markers in French-Speaking Children With Reading Impairment. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 53(2), 469–489. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Thévenin, M.-G., Totereau, C., Fayol, M., & Jarousse, J.-P.
(1999) L’apprentissage / enseignement de la morphologie écrite du nombre en français [Learning / Teaching of number morphology in written French. Revue Française de Pédagogie, 1261, 39–52. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Thibeault, J.
(2017) Regard socioconstructive sur le développement de la compétence lexicomorphogrammique qui permet l’accord du verbe en nombre chez des élèves de la fin de l’ordre élémentaire dans le Sud-Ouest ontarien [Socioconstructive perspective on the development of lexicomorphogrammatical competence of verbal agreement in primary school pupils in Ontario]. PhD thesis. Université d’Ottawa. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Totereau, C., Brissaud, C., Reilhac, C., & Bosse, M.
(2013) L’orthographe grammaticale au collège: une approche sociodifférenciée [Syntactic spelling at secondary school: a sociodifferentiated approach]. A.N.A.E. Approche Neuropsychologique Des Apprentissages de l’enfant, 1231, 164–171. Retrieved from https://​hal​.archives​-ouvertes​.fr​/hal​-00945209
Totereau, C., Thevenin, M.-G., & Fayol, M.
(1997) The development of the understanding of number morphology in written French. In C. A. Perfetti, L. Rieben, & M. Fayol (Eds.), Learning to spell: Research theory and practice across languages (pp. 97–114). Mahwah, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Treiman, R., & Bourassa, D. C.
(2000) The development of spelling skill. Topics in Language Disorders, 20(3), 1–18. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Turnbull, K., Deacon, S. H., & Kay-Raining Bird, E.
(2011) Mastering inflectional suffixes: A longitudinal study of beginning writers’ spellings. Journal of Child Language, 38(3), 533–553. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Weth, C.
(2020) Distinguishing syntactic markers from morphological markers. A cross-linguistic comparison. Frontiers in Psychology, 111, 1–11. CrossrefGoogle Scholar