Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-jn8rn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-28T01:11:27.403Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The impact of first and second language exposure on learning second language constructions*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  16 September 2015

YEVGEN MATUSEVYCH ,
AFRA ALISHAHI  and
AD BACKUS
YEVGEN MATUSEVYCH*
Affiliation:
Tilburg Center for Cognition and Communication (TiCC), Tilburg University, the Netherlands
AFRA ALISHAHI
Affiliation:
Tilburg Center for Cognition and Communication (TiCC), Tilburg University, the Netherlands
AD BACKUS
Affiliation:
Tilburg University, the Netherlands
*
Address for correspondence: Yevgen Matusevych, Tilburg University, Room D 334, PO Box 90153, 5000 LE Tilburg, The Netherlandsy.matusevych@uvt.nl
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

We study how the learning of argument structure constructions in a second language (L2) is affected by two basic input properties often discussed in literature – the amount of input and the time of L2 onset. To isolate the impact of the two factors on learning, we use a computational model that simulates bilingual construction learning. In the first two experiments we manipulate the sheer amount of L2 exposure, both in absolute and in relative terms (that is, in relation to the amount of L1 exposure). The results show that higher cumulative amount of L2 exposure leads to higher performance. In the third experiment we manipulate the prior amount of L1 input before the L2 onset (that is, the time of L2 onset). Given equal exposure, we find no negative effect of the later onset on learners’ performance. This has implications for theories of order of acquisition and bilingual construction learning.

Keywords

second language acquisitionargument structure constructionsorder of acquisitiontime of onsetamount of input
Type
Research Article
Information
Bilingualism: Language and Cognition , Volume 20 , Issue 1 , January 2017 , pp. 128 - 149
Check for updates
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2015 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

*

We thank Robert DeKeyser, Marc Brysbaert, and two anonymous reviewers for their helpful comments on the earlier drafts of this article.

References

Abbot-Smith, K., & Tomasello, M. (2006). Exemplar-learning and schematization in a usage-based account of syntactic acquisition. The Linguistic Review, 23, 275–290.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ågren, M., Granfeldt, J., & Thomas, A. (2014). Combined effects of age of onset and input on the development of different grammatical structures: A study of simultaneous and successive acquisition of French. Linguistic Approaches to Bilingualism, 4, 462–493.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Akhtar, N., & Tomasello, M. (1997). Young children's productivity with word order and verb morphology. Developmental Psychology, 33, 952–965.Google Scholar
Alishahi, A., & Pyykkönen, P. (2011). The onset of syntactic bootstrapping in word learning: Evidence from a computational study. In Carlson, L., Hoelscher, C. & Shipley, T. F. (eds.), Proceedings of the 33rd Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society, pp. 587–592. Austin: Cognitive Science Society.Google Scholar
Alishahi, A., & Stevenson, S. (2008). A computational model of early argument structure acquisition. Cognitive Science, 32, 789–834.Google Scholar
Alishahi, A., & Stevenson, S. (2010). A computational model of learning semantic roles from child-directed language. Language and Cognitive Processes, 25, 50–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ambridge, B., & Brandt, S. (2013). Lisa filled water into the cup: The roles of entrenchment, pre-emption and verb semantics in German speakers’ L2 acquisition of English locatives. Zeitschrift für Anglistik und Amerikanistik, 61, 245–263.Google Scholar
Ambridge, B., Theakston, A. L., Lieven, E. V., & Tomasello, M. (2006). The distributed learning effect for children's acquisition of an abstract syntactic construction. Cognitive Development, 21, 174–193.Google Scholar
Anderson, J. R. (1991). The adaptive nature of human categorization. Psychological Review, 98, 409–429.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Auer, P. (2014). Language mixing and language fusion: When bilingual talk becomes monolingual. In Besters-Dilger, J., Dermarkar, C., Pfänder, S. & Rabus, A. (eds.), Congruence in Contact-Induced Language Change: Language Families, Typological Resemblance, and Perceived Similarity, pp. 294–334. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baayen, R. H. (2008). Analyzing Linguistic Data: A Practical Introduction to Statistics Using R. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Barr, D. J., Levy, R., Scheepers, C., & Tilly, H. J. (2013). Random effects structure for confirmatory hypothesis testing: Keep it maximal. Journal of Memory and Language, 68, 255–278.Google Scholar
Bates, D. M., Mächler, M., Bolker, B. M., & Walker, S. C. (n.d.). Fitting linear mixed-effects models using lme4. Unpublished manuscript. http://arxiv.org/pdf/1406.5823v1.pdf (retrieved June 10, 2015).Google Scholar
Belke, E., Brysbaert, M., Meyer, A. S., & Ghyselinck, M. (2005). Age of acquisition effects in picture naming: Evidence for a lexical-semantic competition hypothesis. Cognition, 96, B45–B54.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Birdsong, D. (2005). Interpreting age effects in second language acquisition. In Kroll, J. F. & de Groot, A. M. B. (eds.), Handbook of Bilingualism: Psycholinguistic Approaches, pp. 109–127. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Boas, H. C. (2010). The syntax–lexicon continuum in Construction Grammar: A case study of English communication verbs. Belgian Journal of Linguistics, 24, 54–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boyd, J. K., & Goldberg, A. E. (2009). Input effects within a constructionist framework. The Modern Language Journal, 93, 418–429.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brants, S., Dipper, S., Eisenberg, P., Hansen-Schirra, S., König, E., Lezius, W., Rohrer, C., Smith, G., & Uszkoreit, H. (2004). TIGER: Linguistic interpretation of a German corpus. Research on Language and Computation, 2, 597–620.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bryl, V., Tonelli, S., Giuliano, C., & Serafini, L. (2012). A novel FrameNet-based resource for the semantic web. In Ossowski, S. & Lecca, P. (eds.), Proceedings of the 27th Annual ACM Symposium on Applied Computing, pp. 360–365. New York: Association for Computing Machinery.Google Scholar
Brysbaert, M., & Ghyselinck, M. (2006). The effect of age of acquisition: Partly frequency related, partly frequency independent. Visual Cognition, 13, 992–1011.Google Scholar
Burchardt, A., Erk, K., Frank, A., Kowalski, A., Padó, S., & Pinkal, M. (2006). The SALSA corpus: A German corpus resource for lexical semantics. In Calzolari, N., Choukri, K., Gangemi, A., Maegaard, B., Mariani, J., Odijk, J. & Tapias, D. (eds.), Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation (LREC-2006), pp. 969–974. European Language Resources Association (ELRA). http://www.lrec-conf.org/proceedings/lrec2006/ (retrieved December 23, 2014).Google Scholar
Cain, K. (2007). Syntactic awareness and reading ability: Is there any evidence for a special relationship? Applied Psycholinguistics, 28, 679–694.Google Scholar
Cepeda, N. J., Pashler, H., Vul, E., Wixted, J. T., & Rohrer, D. (2006). Distributed practice in verbal recall tasks: A review and quantitative synthesis. Psychological Bulletin, 132, 354–380.Google Scholar
Dowty, D. (1991). Thematic proto-roles and argument selection. Language, 67, 547–619.Google Scholar
Ellis, A. W., & Lambon Ralph, M. A. (2000). Age of acquisition effects in adult lexical processing reflect loss of plasticity in maturing systems: Insights from connectionist networks. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 26, 1103–1123.Google Scholar
Ellis, N. C., O'Donnell, M. B., & Römer, U. (2014). Second language verb-argument constructions are sensitive to form, function, frequency, contingency, and prototypicality. Linguistic Approaches to Bilingualism, 4, 405–431.Google Scholar
Flege, J. E. (2009). Give input a chance. In Piske, T. & Young-Scholten, M. (eds.), Input Matters in SLA, pp. 175–190. Bristol: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
Flege, J. E., Yeni-Komshian, G. H., & Liu, S. (1999). Age constraints on second-language acquisition. Journal of Memory and Language, 41, 78–104.Google Scholar
Ghyselinck, M., Lewis, M. B., & Brysbaert, M. (2004). Age of acquisition and the cumulative-frequency hypothesis: A review of the literature and a new multi-task investigation. Acta Psychologica, 115, 43–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goldberg, A. E. (1995). Constructions: A Construction Grammar Approach to Argument Structure. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Goldberg, A. E., Casenhiser, D. M., & Sethuraman, N. (2004). Learning argument structure generalizations. Cognitive Linguistics, 15, 289–316.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Green, D. W. (1998). Mental control of the bilingual lexico-semantic system. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 1, 67–81.Google Scholar
Gries, S. T., & Wulff, S. (2005). Do foreign language learners also have constructions? Annual Review of Cognitive Linguistics, 3, 182–200.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gries, S. T., & Wulff, S. (2009). Psycholinguistic and corpus-linguistic evidence for L2 constructions. Annual Review of Cognitive Linguistics, 7, 163–186.Google Scholar
Hahn, U., & Ramscar, M. J. A. (2001). Conclusion: Mere similarity? In Hahn, U. & Ramscar, M. J. A. (eds.), Similarity and Categorization, pp. 257–272. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Hernandez, A. E., & Li, P. (2007). Age of acquisition: Its neural and computational mechanisms. Psychological Bulletin, 133, 638–650.Google Scholar
Izura, C., Pérez, M. A., Agallou, E., Wright, V. C., Marín, J., Stadthagen-González, H., & Ellis, A. W. (2011). Age/order of acquisition effects and the cumulative learning of foreign words: A word training study. Journal of Memory and Language, 64, 32–58.Google Scholar
Jia, G., & Aaronson, D. (2003). A longitudinal study of Chinese children and adolescents learning English in the United States. Applied Psycholinguistics, 24, 131–161.Google Scholar
Johnson, P. C. D. (2014). Extension of Nakagawa & Schielzeth's R2 GLMM to random slopes models. Methods in Ecology and Evolution, 5, 944–946.Google Scholar
Juhasz, B. J. (2005). Age-of-acquisition effects in word and picture identification. Psychological Bulletin, 131, 684–712.Google Scholar
Kroll, J. F., Bobb, S. C., Misra, M., & Guo, T. (2008). Language selection in bilingual speech: Evidence for inhibitory processes. Acta Psychologica, 128, 416–430.Google Scholar
Küpper-Tetzel, C. E. (2014). Understanding the distributed practice effect: Strong effects on weak theoretical grounds. Zeitschrift für Psychologie, 222, 71–81.Google Scholar
Lambon Ralph, M. A., & Ehsan, S. (2006). Age of acquisition effects depend on the mapping between representations and the frequency of occurrence: Empirical and computational evidence. Visual Cognition, 13, 928–948.Google Scholar
Langacker, R. W. (1987). Foundations of Cognitive Grammar: Theoretical Prerequisites (Vol. 1). Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
Larson-Hall, J. (2008). Weighing the benefits of studying a foreign language at a younger starting age in a minimal input situation. Second Language Research, 24, 35–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lewis, M. B., Gerhand, S., & Ellis, H. D. (2001). Re-evaluating age-of-acquisition effects: Are they simply cumulative-frequency effects? Cognition, 78, 189–205.Google Scholar
Lieven, E. V., & Tomasello, M. (2008). Children's first language acquisition from a usage-based perspective. In Robinson, P. & Ellis, N. C. (eds.), Handbook of Cognitive Linguistics and Second Language Acquisition, pp. 168–196. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Long, M. H. (1990). Maturational constraints on language development. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 12, 251–285.Google Scholar
MacWhinney, B. (2012). The logic of the unified model. In Gass, S. M. & Mackey, A. (eds.), The Routledge Handbook of Second Language Acquisition, pp. 211–227. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Marcus, M., Kim, G., Marcinkiewicz, M. A., MacIntyre, R., Bies, A., Ferguson, M., Katz, K., & Schasberger, B. (1994). The Penn Treebank: Annotating predicate argument structure. In Weinstein, C. J. (ed.), Proceedings of the 1994 ARPA Human Language Technology Workshop, pp. 114–119. San Francisco: Morgan Kaufmann.Google Scholar
Matusevych, Y., Alishahi, A., & Backus, A. (2013). Computational simulations of second language construction learning. In Demberg, V. & Levi, R. (eds.), Proceedings of the Fourth Annual Workshop on Cognitive Modeling and Computational Linguistics (CMCL), pp. 47–56. Stroudsburg: Association for Computational Linguistics.Google Scholar
McDonough, K., & Nekrasova-Becker, T. (2014). Comparing the effect of skewed and balanced input on English as a foreign language learners’ comprehension of the double-object dative construction. Applied Psycholinguistics, 35, 419–442.Google Scholar
McRae, K., Ferretti, T. R., & Amyote, L. (1997). Thematic roles as verb-specific concepts. Language and Cognitive Processes, 12, 137–176.Google Scholar
Mermillod, M., Bonin, P., Méot, A., Ferrand, L., & Paindavoine, M. (2012). Computational evidence that frequency trajectory theory does not oppose but emerges from age-of-acquisition theory. Cognitive Science, 36, 1499–1531.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Miller, G. A. (1995). WordNet: A lexical database for English. Communications of the ACM, 38, 39–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Monaghan, J., & Ellis, A. W. (2002). What exactly interacts with spelling–sound consistency in word naming? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 28, 183–206.Google Scholar
Monner, D., Vatz, K., Morini, G., Hwang, S. O., & DeKeyser, R. (2013). A neural network model of the effects of entrenchment and memory development on grammatical gender learning. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 16, 246–265.Google Scholar
Montrul, S. A. (2008). Incomplete Acquisition in Bilingualism: Re-examining the Age Factor. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Moyer, A. (2004). Age, Accent, and Experience in Second Language Acquisition: An Integrated Approach to Critical Period Inquiry. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
Moyer, A. (2005). Formal and informal experiential realms in German as a foreign language: A preliminary investigation. Foreign Language Annals, 38, 377–387.Google Scholar
Muñoz, C. (2011). Input and long-term effects of starting age in foreign language learning. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching (IRAL), 49, 113–133.Google Scholar
Muñoz, C., & Singleton, D. (2011). A critical review of age-related research on L2 ultimate attainment. Language Teaching, 44, 1–35.Google Scholar
Newell, A., & Rosenbloom, P. S. (1981). Mechanisms of skill acquisition and the law of practice. In Anderson, J. R. (ed.), Cognitive Skills and Their Acquisition, pp. 1–55. Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Oller, J. W., & Inal, N. (1971). A cloze test of English prepositions. TESOL Quarterly, 5, 315–326.Google Scholar
Palmer, M. (2009). SemLink: Linking PropBank, VerbNet and FrameNet. In Rumshisky, A. & Calzolari, N. (eds.), Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Generative Approaches to the Lexicon, pp. 9–15. Stroudsburg: Association for Computational Linguistics.Google Scholar
Palmer, M., Gildea, D., & Kingsbury, P. (2005). The proposition bank: An annotated corpus of semantic roles. Computational Linguistics, 31, 71–106.Google Scholar
Pinker, S., & Ullman, M. T. (2002). The past and future of the past tense. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 6, 456–463.Google Scholar
Pulvermüller, F., Cappelle, B., & Shtyrov, Y. (2013). Brain basis of meaning, words, constructions, and grammar. In Trousdale, G. & Hoffmann, T. (eds.), Oxford Handbook of Construction Grammar, pp. 397–416. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Pulvermüller, F., & Knoblauch, A. (2009). Discrete combinatorial circuits emerging in neural networks: A mechanism for rules of grammar in the human brain? Neural Networks, 22, 161–172.Google Scholar
Römer, U., O'Donnell, M. B., & Ellis, N. C. (2014). Second language learner knowledge of verb–argument constructions: Effects of language transfer and typology. The Modern Language Journal, 98, 952–975.Google Scholar
Ruppenhofer, J., Ellsworth, M., Petruck, M. R., Johnson, C. R., & Scheffczyk, J. (2010). FrameNet II: Extended theory and practice. https://framenet2.icsi.berkeley.edu/docs/r1.5/book.pdf (retrieved December 23, 2014).Google Scholar
Schmid, H. J. (2007). Entrenchment, salience, and basic levels. In Geeraerts, D. & Cuyckens, H. (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Cognitive Linguistics, pp. 117–138. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Schuler, K. K. (2006). VerbNet: A Broad-Coverage, Comprehensive Verb Lexicon (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Pennsylvania.Google Scholar
Sloutsky, V. M. (2003). The role of similarity in the development of categorization. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 7, 246–251.Google Scholar
Stewart, N., & Ellis, A. W. (2008). Order of acquisition in learning perceptual categories: A laboratory analogue of the age-of-acquisition effect? Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 15, 70–74.Google Scholar
Tomasello, M. (2003). Constructing a Language: A Usage-Based Theory of Language Acquisition. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Tyler, A. (2012). Cognitive Linguistics and Second Language Learning: Theoretical Basics and Experimental Evidence. New York: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ullman, M. T. (2015). The declarative/procedural model. In VanPatten, B. & Williams, J. (eds.), Theories in Second Language Acquisition: An Introduction (2nd ed.), pp. 135–158. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Wesche, M. B., & Paribakht, T. S. (2000). Reading-based exercises in second language vocabulary learning: An introspective study. The Modern Language Journal, 84, 196–213.Google Scholar
Wonnacott, E., Newport, E. L., & Tanenhaus, M. K. (2008). Acquiring and processing verb argument structure: Distributional learning in a miniature language. Cognitive Psychology, 56, 165–209.Google Scholar
Year, J., & Gordon, P. (2009). Korean speakers’ acquisition of the English ditransitive construction: The role of verb prototype, input distribution, and frequency. The Modern Language Journal, 93, 399–417.Google Scholar
Zevin, J. D., & Seidenberg, M. S. (2002). Age of acquisition effects in word reading and other tasks. Journal of Memory and language, 47, 1–29.Google Scholar
Zhao, X., & Li, P. (2010). Bilingual lexical interactions in an unsupervised neural network model. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 13, 505–524.CrossRefGoogle Scholar