Feature dependency and the poverty of the stimulus in the acquisition of L2 German plural allomorphy

Archibald, John

doi:10.1075/lald.67.05arc

Cited by 19 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 34 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…She demonstrated that L1 English speakers could redeploy the [posterior] feature that was used for a fricative contrast (/s/–/ʃ/) to acquire the L2 Czech palatal stop contrast (/c/–/ɟ/). The L1 feature could be redeployed to create a new L2 structural representation (see Archibald (in press) for more evidence of the availability of feature geometry in L2 grammars). This is a very different notion of redeployment than that referred to by YCX, and one that is not connected to the notion of equivalence classification at all.…”

Section: Learnabilitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Phonological redeployment and the mapping problem: Cross-linguistic E-similarity is the beginning of the story, not the end

Archibald

2021

Second Language Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this research note I want to address some misunderstandings about the construct of redeployment and suggest that we need to fit these behavioural data from Yang, Chen and Xiao (YCX) into a broader context. I will suggest that these authors’ work is not just about the failure of three models to predict equivalence classification. Equivalence classification is not the end of the story but only the beginning. We need to look at what cues are detected in the input, which subset of the input becomes intake, and how this intake is parsed onto phonological structures. The empirical results of YCX should not be viewed as some sort of non-result inasmuch as none of the proposed predictors of Mandarin equivalence classification foresaw that the Russian prevoiced stops and short-lag stops would be equated with the Mandarin short-lag stops. Rather, the empirical results need to be contextualized by considering such factors as cue reweighting as part of the learning theory which maps intake onto phonological representations. In this light, the results are not a repudiation of phonological redeployment, but help to shed light on the parsing of the acoustic signal, the importance of robust burst-release cues, and the non-local nature of L2 phonological learning (as opposed to noticing).

show abstract

Section: Learnabilitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Phonological redeployment and the mapping problem: Cross-linguistic E-similarity is the beginning of the story, not the end

Archibald

2021

Second Language Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Phonological parsing via an integrated I-language

Archibald

2022

LAB

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Schwartz and Sprouse (2021) argue against property-by-property Transfer (Westergaard, 2021a, b) and for wholesale transfer (Rothman, 2015) into a third language grammar by questioning the cognitive plausibility of “extracting a proper subpart from the … grammar and using that proper sub-system as the basis for a new cognitive state.” I will argue that the insights from the approaches of López (2020); Lightfoot (2020); Dresher (2018), and Westergaard (2021a) when applied to empirical data from L3 English data from L1 Arabic/L2 French speakers, give us reason to question Schwartz and Sprouse’s defence of wholesale transfer, and its typological underpinnings. We can set the study of L3A in a larger context which can unify domains such as the acquisition of phonology and syntax via a unified approach to parsing. By invoking an underspecified, minimal UG, primary linguistic data, and domain-general third factors which act in concert to parse the E-language to select structures, we can capture the underlying similarity of first, second, and third language acquisition. Parsing proceeds in an error-driven fashion, structure by structure, drawing on the Integrated I-language and UG options found in a Repository. In essence, this approach renders the wholesale/property-by-property distinction a false dichotomy.

show abstract

Chapter 11. “And yet it moves”

Archibald

2024

Language Acquisition and Language Disorders

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The study of Lx phonology is under-represented in the GenSLA literature. I argue that this is largely because the complex learnability issues in the phonological domain have been under-appreciated. Drawing on examples from features and syllables, I illustrate that the acquisition of phonology is subject to poverty of the stimulus effects. Consequently, it follows that phonological representations are learned and not merely noticed in the environment. Furthermore, phonological grammars are shown to be generative, and hierarchical. By adopting abstract representational models we can both describe and explain learner behaviour. I explore the role of phonology in morphological and syntactic interfaces, and conclude with a discussion of real-world implications with regard to pronunciation training, and broader societal concerns.

show abstract

Feature dependency and the poverty of the stimulus in the acquisition of L2 German plural allomorphy

Cited by 19 publications

References 34 publications

Phonological redeployment and the mapping problem: Cross-linguistic E-similarity is the beginning of the story, not the end

Phonological redeployment and the mapping problem: Cross-linguistic E-similarity is the beginning of the story, not the end

Phonological parsing via an integrated I-language

Chapter 11. “And yet it moves”

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About