What Is the Role of the L1 in Acquiring a Foreign Language?

According to Rod Ellis, the role of the native language in second language acquisition has been the most consistently researched topic in SLA due to the “complexity of transfer phenomena.” In the late 1950s, behavioral psychologists attempted to explain language 20

learning in terms of habits formed by environmental stimuli and their corresponding responses. 21 The conclusion of such explanation is that language behavior is a result of the learner’s imitation of the stimulus and the corrective feedback provided by observers. Psychologists concluded 22 that, once established, these habits (namely, the L1) can either help or hinder the development of new habits (namely the L2) depending on the similarities between the two languages. 23

The behavioral study of language led researchers to consider the similarities and differences between the native and target languages. In 1953, Uriel Weinreich proposed the concepts of transfer and interference. The former occurs when the habits established by the

This will be discussed further under psychological factors affecting learning in 2.2.3.

19

Ellis, Understanding Second Language Acquisition, 117.

20

These early Behaviorist theories eventually gave way to Generative theories of language acquisition such as

21

Chomsky’s Universal Grammar, which suggest that we have an inborn capability and template for language. Later, Emergentist theories returned to behavioral psychology and claimed that humans use their natural learning

mechanisms in conjunction with the examples and stimuli set forth by the environment in order to acquire language. The Generative theories focus on morphology and phonology; the Emergentist, syntax and pragmatics. Generative versus Emergentist theory of first language acquisition is a hotly debated topic among SLA scholars and researchers; however, they are not entirely incompatible ideas since both depend on the type of input a learner receives from the environment.

Corrective feedback can be implicit or explicit. Implicit feedback can include social cues such as a confused

22

expression or questions such as “Wait, what do you mean?” Explicit feedback can be form-focused or meaning- focused. Form-focused corrective feedback can be metalinguistic in nature (“Use the imperfect tense here.”); meaning-focused corrective feedback attempts not to disrupt the flow of conversation by recasting (A: “I lost my road.” B: “What did you do after you lost your way?”) or repeating with emphasis (A: “What are that?” B: “What is that? Well, that is…”).

Ellis, Understanding Second Language Acquisition, 117.

native language lead to “correct” usage in the L2; the latter occurs when the L1 leads to

“incorrect” usage in the target language. Evidence for transfer and interference often manifests 24 based on the advantages and disadvantages of learners of different L1s when learning the same target language based on language distance between each L1 and the desired L2. For example, 25 languages that have similar roots often share cognates which help learners acquire vocabulary.

Furthermore, learners whose L1 has the same graphemes as the L2 have a huge

advantage over learners whose L1 is based on a different graphemic system. The addition of a 26 new alphabet or writing system provides another layer of processing in the learner’s mind. Consider the difference between an English speaking student in beginning Greek and in beginning Latin; it would be much easier for this learner to read Latin aloud than Greek on the first day because the learner must first mentally “transliterate” the Greek graphemes in order to

This is further described by Prator’s Hierarchy of Difficulty, which ranks the difficulty learners experience with a

24

give aspect of the L2 according to its relationship to the L1 (See Brown, Principles of Language Learning and

Teaching, 255–256). Also consider Lado’s 1957 Contrastive Analysis Hypothesis. This theory claims that, by

identifying differences between the L1 and L2, we can predict which errors will occur due to interference. This was largely debunked by the 1970’s with the work of Wardhaug and of Dulay and Burt which concluded that errors were more often caused by the development of the target language system than interference from the L1; nevertheless, the importance of comparing the L1 and the L2 has remained under the guise of Error Analysis. Ellis, Understanding

Second Language Acquisition, chapter 6; Foley and Flynn, “The Role of the Native Language;” Krashen, Second Language Acquisition and Second Language Learning, chapter 5.

Language distance also brings up the issue of psychotypology. While language distance refers to the actual

25

differences between languages according to construction and root languages, psychotypology refers to the learner’s

perception of the difference. This psychological factor is fluid and subject to constant change based on the learner’s

growing knowledge of the target language. See Ellis, Understanding Second Language Acquisition, 128; see also Ringbom and Jarvis “The Importance of Cross-Linguistic Similarity in Foreign Language Learning,” 106–109. Another version of interference comes from the use of an interlanguage. Generally, an interlanguage refers to the system that a learner has developed for the target language during or prior to learning (this will be discussed in 2.2.4). When a learner has already developed one or more foreign languages, the interlanguage can become an even greater source of interference (or transfer). The influence of an interlanguage is highly complex and dependent on the relationship between the learner’s L1, L2 (as well as any other languages acquired), and the target language, thus it will not be discussed here. Ellis briefly discusses the cross-linguistic influence of these languages proposed by Sharwood-Smith and Kellerman in 1986 on pg. 119 of Understanding Second Language Acquisition. Cf. Ringbom and Jarvis, “The Importance of Cross-Linguistic Similarity in Foreign Language Learning,” 109–110.

Ellis, discusses this issue of transference in chapter 6 of Understanding Second Language Acquisition.

identify the phonetic construction of the word in terms which the learner’s mind already understands. The meaning of the words in both Latin and Greek may yet entirely elude the learner, but the English speaker is already predisposed to process the Latin alphabet more easily than the Greek until a new habit/behavior pattern is formed around the Greek system. A similar 27 graphemic base also makes it easier for learners to recognize cognates because they have the advantage of both sonic and visual similarity whereas learners with a different graphemic base only have the former. 28

Although an educator cannot change the fundamental relationship between students’ L1 and the target language, understanding cross-linguistic similarities can be immensely useful in the classroom. If the L1 and L2 are related, outlining the parallels for students can aid learners in mentally connecting the new linguistic concepts with the habits established by their native language. However, if the relationship between L1 and L2 is very close, it might be more helpful for the instructor to note the differences. For example, when teaching Scandinavians another Scandinavian language, it would be natural to “focus on the differences in pronunciation and the most common false friends” rather than to point out the overwhelming similarities between the languages. On the other hand, if L1 and L2 are very distant in relation, recognizing loanwords 29 can facilitate effective learning. When multilingual learners are proficient in an L2 that has a

Not only is this the case because of the extra mental processes involved but also because of the psychological

27

block it causes for some learners. Ringbom and Jarvis note that “Anglophone learners of Greek have likewise been found to disregard the similarities between English and Greek due to the perceived distance between the

languages” (“The Importance of Cross-Linguistic Similarity in Foreign Language Learning,” 109).

This difference is especially impactful for learners with a visual learning style. The different graphemic system

28

can act as a mental barrier for such learners.

Ringbom and Jarvis, “The Importance of Cross-Linguistic Similarity in Foreign Language Learning,” 115.

closer relationship to the target language than their native language, it can be helpful to compare the similar L2 with the target language and to leave the L1 largely out of the picture. For

example, if an English speaker is learning Ancient Greek, understanding the genitive absolute can be daunting; however, if this learner already understands Latin grammar, comparing the Greek construction to Latin’s ablative absolute can help connect the dots by using an existing pattern. 30

If French, Spanish, and the other Romance languages are “children” of Latin, perhaps English can be considered an “adopted child.” Thus, there are a wealth of derivatives, cognates, and loanwords as well as many similarities between the structure of Latin and English to use as pedagogical tools. English is a particularly odd amalgamation of German, Latin, and French due to its Germanic roots, Roman occupation during the Imperial Period, and the Norman Conquest of 1066. In addition to linguistic developments as a result of language contact, the perceived intellectual supremacy of Latin and French as linguae francae resulted in loan words,

derivatives, and the preference for terminology with Romance roots to convey social authority. In the classroom, activities that draw attention to these similarities help students learn Latin vocabulary as well as assist learners in achieving a broader English lexicon. Additionally, Latin’s role as the language of intellectuals during the Renaissance (when practices for creating legal and scientific terminology solidified) ensured Latin’s prevalence in the modern professional world in

For multilingual learners, allowing the languages to interact within the interlanguage (see 2.2.4) can create a

30

complex neural network for the learner to use in developing new languages with various comparisons and contrasts as well as a nuanced ambiguity tolerance (a learner’s willingness to accept new rules that contradict the existing language system). Of course, this also creates space for interference among languages. For example, a learner of both Latin and Greek may confuse the use of the accusative and dative of respect.

the form of useful universal terms inkhorn expressions. This relationship provides learners of all ages and levels with exposure to fossilized technical Latin terms and phrases through media such as television dramas; educators can use this publicity of Latin to engage students and show them the real-life application of learning a dead language, even if it is just for fun. A Latin education 31 also helps budding legal and medical practitioners understand terms they will encounter during their professional education; advertising this can draw more students to the Latin classroom and increase the engagement of those present.

Educators can also use the similarity between the structures of English and Latin as a tool for effectively communicating grammar to their students. Although English has dropped many of its inflections in favor of reliance on word order, the language still uses some of the same

identifiers as a highly inflected language. Consider the basic noun formation in English and Latin. In order to form the possessive, each language adds an ending to the stem of the noun to demonstrate the function of the word: thus, boy/puer becomes boy’s/pueri. Just as Latin declines its nouns in full paradigms, we can see remnants of such English declensions in the personal

Consider the prevalence of Latin in medical and legal television dramas. Doctors discuss body parts in terms of

31

their technical names. It would be silly and unbelievable for a radiologist looking at an X-ray to talk about a “cross- ways break of the top arm bone” instead of a “transverse fracture of the humerus” or a comminuted break of the “forearm bone on the pinky side” instead of the ulna. ER dramas frequently show doctors ordering tests or surgeries “stat,” meaning “immediately” from the Latin statim. Dr. Temperance Brennan from Bones and her band of

“squints” always spout Latin terminology to demonstrate their intelligence, specialization, and disconnect from the realm of “normal people” such as Agent Booth and Angela. Furthermore, it is impossible to watch a legal drama such as the various spinoffs of Law & Order or How To Get Away With Murder (or even the Legally Blonde films) without running into some legalese Latin terminology such as pro bono, habeas corpus, or sub poena. Although not through technical terminology, the current prevalence of dramas based on magic also enhances the general exposure to Latin. The Harry Potter franchise, occult horror films such as The Conjuring, The Exorcist, Deliver Us From Evil, and The Devil Inside, and television shows such as The Magicians, Charmed, Supernatural, The Chilling Adventures

of Sabrina, and Buffy the Vampire Slayer often use Latin spells to invoke magic. These are a part of the popular

pronoun as it undergoes ending changes according to function. Teachers can draw attention to 32 similarities such as these when introducing Latin conjugation paradigms. Although English speakers usually do not conceive of these tense signs and stem changes as inflectional or as a form of conjugation in their own language, by pointing out how English tenses using helping verbs and endings is similar to Latin tenses using tense signs and stem changes, teachers can make the concept of conjugating verbs more familiar and a bit more palatable to students.

2.2.3 What Psychological Factors Affect Language Learning?

In an introductory foreign language classroom where the students are in same age group and share the same L1, it is plain to see that all students still do not progress at the same pace. Some students seem to have a natural talent for language; others struggle to pass the class despite their best efforts. This disparity is due to the psychological factors that affect language

acquisition. These factors can be divided into three principal types: cognitive, conative, and affective. Cognitive factors influence how the learner stores and processes information; conative factors impact the learner’s ability to establish goals and put forth the effort necessary to achieve those goals; affective factors are part of the learner’s surroundings that determine whether or not the learner will be able to respond to stimuli positively or negatively. 33

Cognitive Factors

One of the most intriguing of these psychological factors is a learner’s language aptitude. The dominant figure researching this cognitive factor was J. B. Carroll, a cognitive psychologist

Subjective: who; Possessive: whose; Objective: whom.

32

Ellis, Understanding Second Language Acquisition Theory, 37. See Ellis’ chapter 3 for a full discussion of

33

who began designing tests about language aptitude in the 1950s. Carroll defined language 34 aptitude as “the amount of time a student needs to learn a given task, unit of instruction, or curriculum to an acceptable criterion of mastery under optimal conditions of instruction and student motivation.” In addition to designing various L2 aptitude tests, Carroll concluded that 35 language aptitude was composed of four abilities: 1) phonetic coding ability, which allows learners to code unfamiliar sounds for later recall, 2) grammatical sensitivity, which allows learners to recognize the grammatical functions of words and clauses in a sentence, 3) inductive language learning ability, which allows learners to identify general patterns based on input and to produce language based on those patterns, and 4) associative learning, which allows learners to make connections between the verbal elements of the L1 and L2 in order to remember new vocabulary. Results of Carroll’s studies suggest that learners can have a high aptitude in some 36 aspects and low aptitude in others; this is one factor explaining the variability of classroom results despite environmental variables remaining consistent.

Much research has been conducted regarding language aptitude, and a popular subject has been the ability to train memory and to develop analytical skills. Theorists have debated back and forth whether language aptitude is fixed at birth or it is a “muscle” that can be exercised and strengthened with enough time and effort. Although a wealth of material has been published on this subject, no conclusive solution has been found. However, this venture has led to an 37

Skehan, “Language Aptitude,” 381.

34

Ellis, Understanding Second Language Acquisition Theory, 39

35

Ellis, Understanding Second Language Acquisition Theory, 40 and Skehan, “Language Aptitude,” 381–382.

36

See Ellis, Understanding Second Language Acquisition Theory, chapter 3 and Skehan, “Language Aptitude.”

increased focus on working memory, a multi-component memory system based on attention, visual information, oral information, and the combination of information from different

sources. Working memory is conceived of as a capacity that learners have in different amounts; 38 learners with a large capacity for working memory can store more linguistic data, recall it in better detail, and make more effective connections with information stored in long-term memory than learners with a small capacity for working memory.

Information regarding aptitude and working memory can be used in education to achieve several aims. Understanding a student’s strengths and weaknesses can help with counseling and 39 remediation. For example, an educator might explain (in simpler terms) that a student’s

difficulties with oral-aural activities are due to lower aptitude for phonetic coding or that another student with a high aptitude for associative learning might learn vocabulary more efficiently using derivates or direct connections to the L1 than by identifying L2 terms by pictures on flashcards. Of course, understanding language aptitude can also aid instructors in creating

differentiated lesson plans and in adapting their methods of teaching toward the strengths of their students, both on a class-wide and an individual scale. Pedagogical methods designed to reach students of varying aptitudes have merged with those designed to tackle different learning styles since addressing visual, auditory, and kinesthetic learning styles is a simpler process than

addressing the complexities of language aptitudes that require far more individualized attention to diagnose and more effort differentiate classroom practices and activities.

Ellis, Understanding Second Language Acquisition Theory, 45.

38

See Skehan, “Language Aptitude,” 390–392 for further on this matter.

Another important cognitive factor of language acquisition is learner beliefs about language. This factor is based on the idea that learners form “mini theories” about the nature of the L2 and about their role as a student. The learner’s “mini theories” about the target language 40 include a variety suppositions that influence performance. For example, if a student is obligated to take a language as part of graduation requirements, this individual may or may not accept that the class—and by extension, the language itself—has any value or applicability to life. This is especially likely if the requirements dictate that a specific language must be taken. As the following discussion of agency will demonstrate, a learner’s ability to choose a language and to take ownership of the act of language learning is an important factor in the cognitive effort the student will put into the task. The learner’s view of a language or a topic within that language also influences the student’s belief about the language and about their individual ability regarding acquisition. Consider two students from the same class with the same general backgrounds and language aptitudes: although the objective complexity of a task does not change based on the student, the practical difficulty of focusing and understanding the lesson is affected by each student’s disposition. This is one reason why a positive classroom environment is important for the cultivation of successful students. 41

Learner beliefs also heavily influence a learner’s self-efficacy as a learner of the target language. Fostering self-efficacy in students begins with the understanding the sociolinguistic 42

Ellis, Understanding Second Language Acquisition Theory, 38.

40

The importance of the classroom environment will be discussed in depth under Conative Factors in 2.2.3 and