In:Bilingual Cognition and Language: The state of the science across its subfields
Edited by David Miller, Fatih Bayram, Jason Rothman and Ludovica Serratrice
[Studies in Bilingualism 54] 2018
► pp. 57–78
Chapter 4Formal linguistics and second language acquisition
Published online: 8 March 2018
https://doi.org/10.1075/sibil.54.04whi
https://doi.org/10.1075/sibil.54.04whi
Abstract
This paper motivates formal linguistic approaches to second language (L2) acquisition, particularly approaches grounded in generative grammar, and provides an overview of how such approaches have developed over time. The role of the mother tongue grammar and Universal Grammar (UG) in shaping the acquisition of linguistic representations is examined, starting with early debates on the effects of principles and parameters of UG in L2 (the UG access debate). This focus has been replaced with more nuanced analyses of the nature of interlanguage representations, for example, the nature of the initial state, the status of functional categories and features in L2 grammars, as well as potential problems at the linguistic interfaces. Discrepancies between underlying L2 competence and L2 performance are discussed, focusing on research that addresses the question of how representations are accessed and used in real time processing.
Article outline
- 1.Introduction
- 2.What is formal linguistics?
- 3.Motivation for the formal linguistic approach
- 4.Research under the formal approach
- Phase 1: Focus on principles and parameters
- Phase 2: Focus on representation
- 5.Beyond representation: Accessing and using the interlanguage representation
- 6.Conclusion
Notes References
References (67)
Archibald, J. (1992). Transfer of L1 parameter-settings: Some empirical evidence from Polish metrics. Canadian Journal of Linguistics, 37, 301–339.
Belikova, A., & White, L. (2009). Evidence for the Fundamental Difference Hypothesis or not? Island constraints revisited. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 31, 1–24.
Bley-Vroman, R. (1989). What is the logical problem of foreign language learning? In S. Gass, & J. Schachter (Eds.), Linguistic perspectives on second language acquisition (pp. 41–68). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Brown, C. (1998). The role of the L1 grammar in the L2 acquisition of segmental structure. Second Language Research, 14, 136–193.
Carroll, S. (2001). Input and evidence: The raw material of second language acquisition. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
(2007). Autonomous induction theory. In B. VanPatten, & J. Williams (Eds.), Theories in second language acquisition: An introduction (1st ed., 155–173). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Clahsen, H., & Muysken, P. (1986). The availability of universal grammar to adult and child learners: A study of the acquisition of German word order. Second Language Research, 2, 93–119.
Clahsen, H., & Felser, C. (2006). Grammatical processing in language learners. Applied Psycholinguistics, 27, 3–42.
de Bot, K. (2015). A history of applied linguistics: From 1980 to the present. New York, NY: Routledge.
Dekydtspotter, L., & Hathorn, J. (2005).
Quelque chose … de remarquable in English-French acquisition: Mandatory, informationally encapsulated computations in second language interpretation. Second Language Research, 21, 291–323.
DeKeyser, R. (2009). Cognitive-psychological processes in second language learning. In M. Long & C. Doughty (Eds.), The handbook of language teaching (pp. 119–138). Oxford: Blackwell.
Dresher, E., & Kaye, J. (1990). A computational learning model for metrical phonology. Cognition, 34,137–195.
Eckman, F. (2007). Universals, innateness and explanation in second language acquisition. In M. Penke & A. Rosenbach (Eds.), What counts as evidence in linguistics: The case of innateness (pp. 217–239). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Ellis, N., & Wulff, S. (2015). Usage-based approaches to SLA. In B. VanPatten, & J. Williams (Eds.), Theories in second language acquisition: An introduction (2nd ed., 75–93). New York, NY: Routledge.
Finer, D., & Broselow, E. (1986). Second language acquisition of reflexive-binding. In S. Berman, J.-W. Choe, & J. McDonough (Eds.), Proceedings of NELS 16 (pp. 154–168). Amherst, MA: University of Massachusetts.
Franceschina, F. (2001). Morphological or syntactic deficits in near-native speakers? An assessment of some current proposals. Second Language Research, 17, 213–247.
Goad, H., & White, L. (2004). Ultimate attainment of L2 inflection: Effects of L1 prosodic structure. In S. Foster-Cohen, M. Sharwood Smith, A. Sorace, & M. Ota (Eds.), Eurosla Yearbook, Vol 4 (pp. 119–145). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Gregg, K. R. (1996). The logical and developmental problems of second language acquisition. In W. Ritchie & T. Bhatia (Eds.), Handbook of second language acquisition (pp. 49–81). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
Gregg, K. (2003). The state of emergentism in second language acquisition. Second Language Research, 19, 95–128.
Grüter, T. (2005/2006). Another take on the L2 initial state: Evidence from comprehension in L2 German. Language Acquisition, 13, 287–317.
Hawkins, R., & Chan, C. Y.-H. (1997). The partial availability of Universal Grammar in second language acquisition: The ‘failed functional features hypothesis’. Second Language Research, 13, 187–226.
Hawkins, R., & Hattori, H. (2006). Interpretation of English multiple wh-questions by Japanese speakers: A missing uninterpretable feature account. Second Language Research, 22, 269–301.
Hawkins, R., & Liszka, S. (2003). Locating the source of defective past tense marking in advanced L2 English speakers. In R. van Hout, A. Hulk, F. Kuiken, & R. Towell (Eds.), The lexicon-syntax interface in second language acquisition (pp. 21–44). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Haznedar, B., & Schwartz, B. D. (1997). Are there optional infinitives in child L2 acquisition? In E. Hughes, M. Hughes, & A. Greenhill (Eds.), Proceedings of the 21st Annual Boston University Conference on Language Development (pp. 257–268). Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press.
Hopp, H. (2009). The syntax-discourse interface in near-native L2 acquisition: Off-line and on-line performance. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 12, 463–483.
(2014). Working memory effects in the L2 processing of ambiguous relative clauses. Language Acquisition, 21, 250–278.
(2016). The timing of lexical and syntactic processes in second language comprehension. Applied Psycholinguistics, 37, 1253–1280.
Johnson, J. & Newport, E. (1991). Critical period effects on universal properties of language: The status of subjacency in the acquisition of a second language. Cognition, 39, 215–258.
Juffs, A. (2004). Representation, processing and working memory in a second language. Transactions of the Philological Society, 102, 199–225.
Kim, E., Baek, S., & Tremblay, A. (2016). The role of island constraints in second language sentence processing. Language Acquisition, 22, 384–416.
Lardiere, D. (1998). Case and tense in the ‘fossilized’ steady state. Second Language Research, 14, 1–26.
(2000). Mapping features to forms in second language acquisition. In J. Archibald (Ed.), Second language acquisition and linguistic theory (pp. 102–129). Oxford: Blackwell.
(2009). Some thoughts on the contrastive analysis of features in second language acquisition. Second Language Research, 25, 173–227.
Liceras, J. (1989). On some properties of the “pro-drop” parameter: Looking for missing subjects in non-native Spanish. In S. Gass & J. Schachter (Eds.), Linguistic perspectives on second language acquisition (pp. 109–133). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Ma, J. H., Kim, J.-H., & Schwartz, B. D. (2007). The status of subjacency in L2 children, L2 adults and L1 children: Revisiting Johnson & Newport (1991). Paper presented at the Second Language Research Forum, University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign, October 2007.
Meisel, J. (1997). The acquisition of the syntax of negation in French and German: Contrasting first and second language acquisition. Second Language Research, 13, 227–263.
O’Grady, W. (2003). The radical middle: Nativism without Universal Grammar. In C. Doughty & M. Long (Eds.), The handbook of second language acquisition (pp. 19–42). Oxford: Blackwell.
O’Grady, W., Lee, M., & Kwak, H.-Y. (2009). Emergentism and second language acquisition. In W. Ritchie & T. Bhatia (Eds.), The new handbook of second language acquisition (pp. 69–88). Bingley: Emerald.
Omaki, A., & Schultz, B. (2011). Filler-gap dependences and island constraints in second-language sentence processing. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 33, 563–588.
Ortifelli, R., & Grüter, T. (2013). Do null subjects really transfer? In J. Cabrelli Amaro, T. Judy, & D. Pascual y Cabo (Eds.), Proceedings of the 12th Generative Approaches to Second Language Acquisition Conference (GASLA 2013) (pp. 145–154). Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Proceedings Project.
Özçelik, Ö. (2016). Acquisition of L2 Turkish prosody: The effects of purely phonological and phonosyntactic issues. In A. Gürel (Ed.), Second language acquisition of Turkish (pp. 19–48). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Pater, J. (1997). Metrical parameter missetting in second language acquisition. In S. J. Hannahs, & M. Young-Scholten (Eds.), Focus on phonological acquisition (pp. 235–261). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Pienemann, M., & Lenzing, A.. (2015). Processability Theory. In B. VanPatten, & J. Williams (Eds.), Theories in second language acquisition: An introduction (2nd ed., pp. 159–179). New York, NY: Routledge.
Prévost, P., & White, L. (2000). Missing surface inflection or impairment in second language acquisition? Evidence from tense and agreement. Second Language Research, 16, 103–133.
Ramchand, G., & Reiss, C. (Eds.). (2007). The Oxford handbook of linguistic interfaces. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Schachter, J. (1990). On the issue of completeness in second language acquisition. Second Language Research, 6, 93–124.
Schwartz, B. D., & Sprouse, R. (1996). L2 cognitive states and the full transfer/full access model. Second Language Research, 12, 40–72.
(2000). When syntactic theories evolve: Consequences for L2 acquisition research. In J. Archibald (Ed.), Second language acquisition and linguistic theory (pp. 156–186). Oxford: Blackwell.
Sorace, A. (2011). Pinning down the concept of “interface” in bilingualism. Linguistic Approaches to Bilingualism, 1, 1–33.
Sorace, A., & Filiaci, F. (2006). Anaphora resolution in near-native speakers of Italian. Second Language Research, 22, 339–368.
Vainikka, A., & Young-Scholten, M. (1996). Gradual development of L2 phrase structure. Second Language Research, 12, 7–39
White, L. (1985). The pro-drop parameter in adult second language acquisition. Language Learning, 35, 47–62.
(1989). Universal grammar and second language acquisition. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
White, L., & Juffs, A. (1998). Constraints on wh-movement in two different contexts of non-native language acquisition: Competence and processing. In S. Flynn, G. Martohardjono, & W. O’Neil (Eds.), The generative study of second language acquisition (pp. 111–129). Mahweh, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Cited by (8)
Cited by eight other publications
Bayram, Fatih, Grazia Di Pisa, Jason Rothman & Roumyana Slabakova
Kim, Sujeong, Heejeong Ko & Hyun-Kwon Yang
Slabakova, Roumyana, Tania Leal, Amber Dudley & Micah Stack
Rothman, Jason, Jorge González Alonso & Eloi Puig-Mayenco
Puig-Mayenco, Eloi, Ian Cunnings, Fatih Bayram, David Miller, Susagna Tubau & Jason Rothman
[no author supplied]
[no author supplied]
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 1 december 2025. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.
