| 1 |
Crosslinguistic influence in L3 acquisition across linguistic modules
|
|
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
|
| 2 |
Stable and vulnerable domains in Germanic heritage languages
|
|
|
|
In: Oslo Studies in Language ; 11 (2021), 2. - S. 503-526. - University of Oslo. - eISSN 1890-9639 (2021)
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
|
| 3 |
Bilinguals are better than monolinguals in detecting manipulative discourse
|
|
|
|
In: PLoS One (2021)
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
|
| 5 |
Internal and External Factors in Heritage Language Acquisition : Evidence From Heritage Russian in Israel, Germany, Norway, Latvia and the United Kingdom
|
|
|
|
In: Frontiers in Education ; 5 (2020). - 20. - Frontiers Media. - eISSN 2504-284X (2020)
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
|
| 6 |
Acceptable Ungrammatical Sentences, Unacceptable Grammatical Sentences, and the Role of the Cognitive Parser
|
|
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
|
| 7 |
The Bottleneck Hypothesis in L2 acquisition: L1 Norwegian learners’ knowledge of syntax and morphology in L2 English
|
|
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
|
| 8 |
Universal linguistic hierarchies are not innately wired. Evidence from multiple adjectives
|
|
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
|
| 9 |
Differences in use without deficiencies in competence: passives in the Turkish and German of Turkish heritage speakers in Germany
|
|
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
|
| 10 |
Bilinguals’ Sensitivity to Grammatical Gender Cues in Russian: The Role of Cumulative Input, Proficiency, and Dominance
|
|
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
|
| 11 |
Exploring the role of cognitive control in syntactic processing
|
|
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
|
| 13 |
The Bottleneck Hypothesis in second language acquisition: A study of L1 Norwegian speakers's knowledge of syntax and morphology in L2 English
|
|
|
|
Abstract:
The Bottleneck Hypothesis (Slabakova, 2008; 2013) aims to partially answer the question of why certain properties of language are harder or easier to acquire in a second language (L2). Based on a comparison of the different linguistic modules, the hypothesis holds that functional morphology is the bottleneck and consequently, the most challenging part of L2 acquisition. It is argued that the reason for this is, first, that differences between languages are located in functional morphology, i.e., what is known as the Borer–Chomsky Conjecture (Baker, 2008; Chomsky, 1995); secondly, that functional morphology bundles a variety of semantic, syntactic and morphophonological features which affect the acceptability and the meaning of the whole sentence. Feature Reassembly (Lardiere, 2009) and mismatches in feature realization are responsible for most of the acquisition challenges. The study presented in this article tests the predictions of the Bottleneck Hypothesis by investigating L1 Norwegian speakers’ knowledge of core syntax and functional morphology in L2 English. It is predicted that Norwegian learners make fewer errors with syntactic operations than with functional morphology, and that knowledge of core syntax improves faster than knowledge of functional morphology as the speakers become more advanced. We tested two constructions that do not match in English and Norwegian: subject–verb agreement, obligatory in the L2, and Verb-Second (V2) word order, obligatory in the L1. The former represents knowledge of functional morphology and the latter knowledge of syntax. This is the first experimental study designed to directly test the hypothesis. To anticipate our main finding, participants experienced more challenges with agreement than with verb movement, as they were had trouble identifying ungrammatical agreement. This lack of sensitivity was established not only at the lower proficiency levels, but also among the more advanced speakers. In addition, there was a stronger correlation between verb movement and proficiency scores than between agreement and proficiency scores. This fact suggests that learners develop considerably faster in their knowledge of English verb movement. We conclude that our findings lend support to the Bottleneck Hypothesis.
|
|
URL: https://eprints.soton.ac.uk/407199/
|
|
BASE
|
|
Hide details
|
|
|
| 14 |
Differences in use without deficiencies in competence: passives in the Turkish and German of Turkish heritage speakers in Germany
|
|
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
|
| 15 |
On the Directionality of Cross-Linguistic Effects in Bidialectal Bilingualism
|
|
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
|
| 16 |
On the directionality of cross-linguistic effects in bidialectal bilingualism
|
|
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
|
| 18 |
Grammatical Gender in American Norwegian Heritage Language: Stability or Attrition?
|
|
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
|
|
|
