Jason Rothman

L3 syntactic transfer selectivity and typological determinacy: the typological primacy model

The present article addresses the following question: what variables condition syntactic transfer? Evidence is provided in support of the position that third language (L3) transfer is selective, whereby, at least under certain conditions, it is driven by the typological proximity of the target L3 measured against the other previously acquired linguistic systems (cf. Rothman and Cabrelli Amaro, 2007, 2010; Rothman, 2010; Montrul et al., 2011). To show this, we compare data in the domain of adjectival interpretation between successful first language (L1) Italian learners of English as a second language (L2) at the low to intermediate proficiency level of L3 Spanish, and successful L1 English learners of L2 Spanish at the same levels for L3 Brazilian Portuguese. The data show that, irrespective of the L1 or the L2, these L3 learners demonstrate target knowledge of subtle adjectival semantic nuances obtained via noun-raising, which English lacks and the other languages share. We maintain that such knowledge is transferred to the L3 from Italian (L1) and Spanish (L2) respectively in light of important differences between the L3 learners herein compared to what is known of the L2 Spanish performance of L1 English speakers at the same level of proficiency (see, for example, Judy et al., 2008; Rothman et al., 2010). While the present data are consistent with Flynn et al.’s (2004) Cumulative Enhancement Model, we discuss why a coupling of these data with evidence from other recent L3 studies suggests necessary modifications to this model, offering in its stead the Typological Primacy Model (TPM) for multilingual transfer.

Understanding the nature and outcomes of early bilingualism: Romance languages as heritage languages:

In this introduction to the special issue on Romance languages as heritage languages, I aim to contextualize the scope of this issue and the contribution it makes to the emerging field of linguistic studies to heritage language bilingualism. Key issues pertaining to the empirical study and epistemology of heritage language bilingualism are presented as well as a critical introduction to the individual articles that comprise this issue.

What Variables Condition Syntactic Transfer? A Look at the L3 Initial State.

This study investigates transfer at the third-language (L3) initial state, testing between the following possibilities: (1) the first language (L1) transfer hypothesis (an L1 effect for all adult acquisition), (2) the second language (L2) transfer hypothesis, where the L2 blocks L1 transfer (often referred to in the recent literature as the ‘L2 status factor’; Williams and Hammarberg, 1998), and (3) the Cumulative Enhancement Model (Flynn et al., 2004), which proposes selective transfer from all previous linguistic knowledge. We provide data from successful English-speaking learners of L2 Spanish at the initial state of acquiring L3 French and L3 Italian relating to properties of the Null-Subject Parameter (e.g. Chomsky, 1981; Rizzi, 1982). We compare these groups to each other, as well as to groups of English learners of L2 French and L2 Italian at the initial state, and conclude that the data are consistent with the predictions of the ‘L2 status factor’. However, we discuss an alternative possible interpretation based on (psycho)typologically-motivated transfer (borrowing from Kellerman, 1983), providing a methodology for future research in this domain to meaningfully tease apart the ‘L2 status factor’ from this alternative account.

Disentangling sources of incomplete acquisition: An explanation for competence divergence across heritage grammars

This article brings to light an important variable involved in explaining a type of competence divergence in an instance of bilingual acquisition: heritage speaker (HS) bilingualism. We present results of experiments with European Portuguese (EP) heritage speakers (HSs), showing that they have full morpho-syntactic and semantic competence of inflected infinitives, similar to EP monolinguals. We show this constitutes clear evidence of competence mismatches between heritage speakers of European and Brazilian Portuguese, comparing our results to Rothman’s (2007) experimental evidence that Brazilian Portuguese (BP) heritage speakers lack knowledge of inflected infinitives. These comparative results are especially relevant because inflected infinitives were argued (Pires, 2002, 2006) to have been lost in colloquial BP dialects, although educated monolinguals demonstrate target competence. Neither incomplete acquisition nor attrition hinders the acquisition of inflected infinitives by European Portuguese HSs, raising questions regarding

Linguistic and cognitive motivations for the Typological Primacy Model (TPM) of third language (L3) transfer: Timing of acquisition and proficiency considered

This article elucidates the Typological Primacy Model (TPM; Rothman, 2010, 2011, 2013) for the initial stages of adult third language (L3) morphosyntactic transfer, addressing questions that stem from the model and its application. The TPM maintains that structural proximity between the L3 and the L1 and/or the L2 determines L3 transfer. In addition to demonstrating empirical support for the TPM, this article articulates a proposal for how the mind unconsciously determines typological (structural) proximity based on linguistic cues from the L3 input stream used by the parser early on to determine holistic transfer of one previous (the L1 or the L2) system. This articulated version of the TPM is motivated by argumentation appealing to cognitive and linguistic factors. Finally, in line with the general tenets of the TPM, I ponder if and why L3 transfer might obtain differently depending on the type of bilingual (e.g. early vs. late) and proficiency level of bilingualism involved in the L3 process.

On the typological economy of syntactic transfer: word order and relative clause high/low attachment preference in L3 Brazilian Portuguese

Abstract One central question in the formal linguistic study of adult multilingual morphosyntax (i.e., L3/Ln acquisition) involves determining the role(s) the L1 and/or the L2 play(s) at the L3 initial state (e.g., Bardel & Falk, Second Language Research 23: 459–484, 2007; Falk & Bardel, Second Language Research: forthcoming; Flynn et al., The International Journal of Multilingualism 8: 3–16, 2004; Rothman, Second Language Research: forthcoming; Rothman & Cabrelli, On the initial state of L3 (Ln) acquisition: Selective or absolute transfer?: 2007; Rothman & Cabrelli Amaro, Second Language Research 26: 219–289, 2010). The present article adds to this general program, testing Rothmans (Second Language Research: forthcoming) model for L3 initial state transfer, which when relevant in light of specific language pairings, maintains that typological proximity between the languages is the most deterministic variable determining the selection of syntactic transfer. Herein, I present empirical evidence from the later part of the beginning stages of L3 Brazilian Portuguese (BP) by native speakers of English and Spanish, who have attained an advanced level of proficiency in either English or Spanish as an L2. Examining the related domains of syntactic word order and relative clause attachment preference in L3 BP, the data clearly indicate that Spanish is transferred for both experimental groups irrespective of whether it was the L1 or L2. These results are expected by Rothmans (Second Language Research: forthcoming) model, but not necessarily predicted by other current hypotheses of multilingual syntactic transfer; the implications of this are discussed.

Clitic-Doubled Left Dislocation and Focus Fronting in L2 Spanish: A Case of Successful Acquisition at the Syntax-Discourse Interface.

This experimental study tests the Interface Hypothesis by looking into processes at the syntax–discourse interface, teasing apart acquisition of syntactic, semantic and discourse knowledge. Adopting López’s (2009) pragmatic features [±a(naphor)] and [±c(ontrast)], which in combination account for the constructions of dislocation and fronting, we tested clitic left dislocation and fronted focus in the comprehension of English native speakers learning Spanish. Furthermore, we tested knowledge of an additional semantic property: the relationship between the discourse anaphor and the antecedent in clitic left dislocation (CLLD). This relationship is free: it can be subset, superset, part/whole. Syntactic knowledge of clitics was a condition for inclusion in the main test. Our findings indicate that all learners are sensitive to the semantic constraints. While the near-native speakers display native-like discourse knowledge, the advanced speakers demonstrated some discourse knowledge, and intermediate learners did not display any discourse knowledge. The findings support as well as challenge the Interface Hypothesis.

Why All Counter-Evidence to the Critical Period Hypothesis in Second Language Acquisition Is not Equal or Problematic

That adult and child language acquisitions differ in route and outcome is observable. Notwithstanding, there is controversy as to what this observation means for the Critical Period Hypothesis’ (CPH) application to adult second language acquisition (SLA). As most versions of the CPH applied to SLA claim that differences result from maturational effects on in-born linguistic mechanisms, the CPH has many implications that are amendable to empirical investigation. To date, there is no shortage of literature claiming that the CPH applies or does not apply to normal adult SLA. Herein, I provide an epistemological discussion on the conceptual usefulness of the CPH in SLA (cf. Singleton 2005) coupled with a review of Longs (2005) evaluation of much available relevant research. Crucially, I review studies that Long did not consider and conclude differently that there is no critical/sensitive period for L2 syntactic and semantic acquisition.

Terminology matters! Why difference is not incompleteness and how early child bilinguals are heritage speakers

This paper integrates research on child simultaneous bilingual acquisition more directly into the heritage language acquisition literature. The child simultaneous bilingual literature mostly focuses on development in childhood, whereas heritage speakers are often tested at an endstate in adulthood. However, insights from child simultaneous bilingual acquisition must be considered in heritage language acquisition theorizing precisely because many heritage speakers demonstrate the adult outcomes of child simultaneous bilingual acquisition. Data from child simultaneous bilingual acquisition raises serious questions for the construct of incomplete acquisition, a term broadly used in heritage language acquisition studies to describe almost any difference heritage speakers display from baseline controls (usually monolinguals). We offer an epistemological discussion related to incomplete acquisition, highlighting the descriptive and theoretical inaccuracy of the term. We focus our discussion on two of several possible causal factors that contribute to variable competence outcomes in adult heritage speakers: input and formal instruction in the heritage language. We conclude by offering alternative terminology for heritage speaker outcomes.

Poverty-of-the-Stimulus and SLA Epistemology: Considering L2 Knowledge of Aspectual Phrasal Semantics

Coupling a review of previous studies on the acquisition of grammatical aspects undertaken from contrasting paradigmatic views of second language acquisition (SLA) with new experimental data from L2 Portuguese, the present study contributes to this specific literature as well as general debates in L2 epistemology. We tested 31 adult English learners of L2 Portuguese across three experiments, examining the extent to which they had acquired the syntax and (subtle) semantics of grammatical aspect. Demonstrating that many individuals acquired target knowledge of what we contend is a poverty-of-the-stimulus semantic entailment related to the checking of aspectual features encoded in Portuguese preterit and imperfect morphology (see also Goodin-Mayeda and Rothman (2007), Montrul and Slabakova (2003), Slabakova and Montrul (2003)), namely, a [±accidental] distinction that obtains in a restricted subset of contexts, we conclude that UG-based approaches to SLA are in a better position to tap and gauge underlying morphosyntactic competence, since based on independent theoretical linguistic descriptions, they make falsifiable predictions that are amenable to empirical scrutiny, seek to describe and explain beyond performance, and can account for L2 convergence on poverty-of-the-stimulus knowledge as well as L2 variability/optionality (e.g., Lardiere (2007), Prévost and White (2000), Goad and White (2006), Slabakova (2008)).