Typological universals: relative clauses
Languages vary in whether they have relative clause
structures. Some languages have them, while other languages do not. The
linguistic difference influences the ease with which learners are able to learn
relative clauses. Learners whose L1 includes relative clauses find them easier
to learn than learners whose L1 does not, and they are less likely to avoid
learning them. A hierarchy of relativization, known
as the accessibility hierarchy serves an example of how SLA and linguistics can
assist each other. On the one hand, linguistic facts can be used to explain and
even predict acquisition. On the other hand, the result of empirical studies of
L2 acquisition can be used to refine our understanding of linguistic facts.
Universal Grammar
Noam Chomsky’s theory of Universal Grammar argues that
language is governed by a set of highly abstract principles that provide
parameters which are given particular settings in different languages. The question of whether learners whose L1 permits both local
and long-distance binding of reflexives can learn that a language like English
permits only local binding may seem a rather trivial matter. In fact, though it
concerns an issue of considerable theoretical importance-the extent to which a
language other than our mother tongue is fully learnable.
Learnability
Chomsky has claimed that children learning their L1 must
rely innate knowledge of language because otherwise the task facing them is an
impossible one. His argument is that the input to which children are exposed is
insufficient to enable them to discover the rules of the language they are
trying to learn (poverty of the stimulus).
The input consists not only positive
evidence (it provides information only about what is grammatical in
the language), because learners can never be sure they will not hear sentence
where the adverb is between the verb and direct object, but also negative
evidence (input that provides direct evidence of what is ungrammatical
in a language) that would make it possible for children to find out that
sentences like the one above are ungrammatical.
The Critical Period Hypothesis
The critical period hypothesis states that there is a period
during which language acquisition is easy and complete (native-speaker ability
is achieved) and beyond which it is difficult and typically incomplete. It was
grounded in research which showed that people who lost their linguistic
capabilities, for example as a result of an accident, were able to regain them
before puberty but were unable to do so afterwards.
Access to UG
- Complete access: It is argued that learners begin with the parameter settings of their L1 but subsequently learn to switch to the L2 parameter settings.
- No access: It is argued that Universal Grammar is not available to adult L2 learners. They rely on general learning strategies.
- Partial access: It is argued that learners have access to parts of Universal Grammar but not others. L2 acquisition is partly regulated by Universal Grammar and partly by general learning strategies.
- Dual access: It is argued that adult L2 learners make use of both Universal Grammar and general learning strategies (blocking the operation of Universal Grammar, causing learners to produce ‘impossible’ errors and failing to achieve full competence).
Markedness
Markedness refers to the general idea that some structures
are more ‘natural’ or ‘basic’ than other structures. In typological
linguistics, unmarked structures are those that are common in the world’s
languages. In Chomskyan linguistics, unmarked structures are those that are
governed by Universal Grammar and which, therefore require only minimal
evidence for acquisition. Marked structures are those that lie outside
Universal Grammar.
Cognitive Versus Linguistic Explanation
The answer whether linguistic universals and markedness are
seen as exerting a direct effect on L2 acquisition or whether they are seen as
having only an indirect effect, mediated by psycholinguistic mechanism of the
kind considered earlier. In short, there is no consensus on whether L2
acquisition is to be explained in terms of a distinct and innate language
faculty or in terms of general cognitive abilities issue. It should be noted
however that Universal Grammar does not claim to account for the whole of a
language or even the whole of the grammar of a language.
Questions:
- What can you infer from this statement ‘The accessibility hierarchy serves as an example of how SLA and linguistics can assist each other’?
- What is substantively meant by markedness?
