Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-dzt6s Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T07:16:17.121Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

PROCESSABILITY IN SCANDINAVIAN SECOND LANGUAGE ACQUISITION

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  25 September 2001

Esther Glahn
Affiliation:
University of Copenhagen
Gisela Håkansson
Affiliation:
Lund University
Björn Hammarberg
Affiliation:
Stockholm University
Anne Holmen
Affiliation:
Danish University of Education
Anne Hvenekilde
Affiliation:
University of Oslo
Karen Lund
Affiliation:
Danish University of Education

Abstract

This paper reports on a test of the validity of Pienemann's (1998) Processability Theory (PT). This theory predicts that certain morphological and syntactic phenomena are acquired in a fixed sequence. Three phenomena were chosen for this study: attributive adjective morphology, predicative adjective morphology, and subordinate clause syntax (placement of negation). These phenomena are located at successive developmental stages in the hierarchy predicted by PT. We test whether they actually do appear in this predicted hierarchical order in the L2 of Danish, Norwegian, and Swedish learners. The three languages mentioned are very closely related and have the same adjective morphology and subordinate clause syntax. We can, therefore, treat them as one language for the purposes of this study. Three analyses have been carried out: The first follows Pienemann's theory and is concerned only with syntactic levels; the second is a semantic analysis of the acquisition of number versus that of gender; the third analysis studies the various kinds of mismatches between the inflection of the noun, the controller, and the adjective. The results are the following: The first test supports PT as it has been described by Pienemann. The second analysis shows that there is an acquisitional hierarchy such that number is acquired before gender (in adjectives), and the mismatch analysis raises questions about the fundamental assumptions of the theory.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
2001 Cambridge University Press

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.)