Louise Jansen

Reassessing the Applicability of Processability Theory: The case of nominal plural

This article identifies empirical evidence (Dao, 2007; in preparation) conflicting with Processability Theory’s (PT) prediction that in acquisition of English as a second language (ESL), plural-marking emerges first in bare nouns and only later in numeric expressions. Specifically, it presents results from Dao’s (2007) cross-sectional study of ESL in 36 Vietnamese learners, which was designed to test PT’s predictions that inflections emerge in lexical contexts before agreement in phrasal contexts, but found that emergence occurred in the reverse order. The article explores whether Dao’s findings invalidate PT’s crosslinguistic principles or whether there is a problem in applying these to language-specific empirical contexts. The exploration reveals weaknesses in the description of PT’s principles, as these are based on implicit assumptions, which may be invalid in specific first language / second language (L1/L2) typological contexts and thus lead to incorrect predictions. The findings are explained by reference to L1 transfer represented in the framework of one of PT’s feeder theories: Levelt’s (1989) Theory of Speaking as modelled in Weaver++ (Levelt et al., 1999). Our L1 transfer account is in line with PT’s Developmentally Moderated Transfer Hypothesis.

Second language acquisition: from theory to data

Clahsens (1988) and Clahsen and Muyskens (1989) claim that subject–verb agreement and verb-second are unrelated in the acquisition of German second language acquisition (SLA) has met a number of counterpositions; for example: Pienemann and Johnston (1987) and Pienemann (1988; 1998), Jordens (1988), Eubank (1992; 1994) and Vainikka and Young-Scholten (1994; 1996). The conflicting claims source essentially the same data. The presentation and analysis of these data is scrutinized and a number of inconsistencies and methodological questions are identified. The paper argues that, when it comes to underpinning theoretical claims, more rigour in data description should be exercised.