Lexical Simplification in Second-Language Acquisition

Abstract

The following paper is an account of empirical research in lexical acquisition, an ongoing study whose preliminary findings were reported at the Neucha"tel colloquium May 1976 (Levenston and Blum 1977). A discussion of the research methodology has also been published (Levenston and Blum 1978), as well as an attempt to link this work with studies of lexical simplification in other linguistic contexts (Blum and Levenston 1977)-Before discussing in detail the current findings, it seems appropriate to summarize briefly the preceding research, of which they form an integral part.Our focus of attention is the QUALITATIVE aspect of lexical acquisition. We are interested in the semantics of interlanguage formation. Our basic claim is that L2 lexical acquisition involves processes and strategies of LEXICAL SIMPLIFICATION that operate according to UNIVERSAL PRINCIPLES. These principles derive from certain aspects of every speaker's LI semantic competence; the native speaker is able, when the need arises, to express complex meanings by indirect means. The systematic relationships between lexical items that enable him -partly -to simplify are differently realized in each language. Besides the need to memorize vocabulary in the L2, the language learner is faced with the immense task of internalizing the exact nature of these inter-relationships between lexical items (Richards 1976:81). The learner's need to simplify is thus explained by the complexity of the task of acquiring command of all aspects of the native speaker's competence; his ability to simplify derives from his own semantic competence in his first language.Empirically we seek answers to the following questions: i) What are the PROCESSES' of lexical simplification, i.e. can we account systematically for the L2 learner's PREFERENCE for certain lexical items and AVOID-ANCE of others? U ) What are the STRATEGIES of lexical simplification, i.e. what strategies do L2 learners use to communicate when certain lexical items are not available?The basic research tool is sentence completion or rather, more precisely, minimal discourse completion, since there is no requirement that the test item be limited in length to a single sentence. Learners' and native speakers' performance in the completion of such tests is compared. Items are devised which native speakers, we hypothesize, will complete with a specific word. However, unanimity of choice among native speakers is rare, except in the

The Acquisition of Colloquial Terms by Western Australian Primary School Children from Non-English-speaking Backgrounds

“…They found that learners differ from native-speakers by using more words (see Gass, 1988: 103). This supports earlier work by Blum and Levenston (1979) where learners were observed to use more words which can be generalised to different contexts.…”

Second Language Vocabulary Acquisition

“…Lexical simplification is the scope of inquiry in work by Levenston (1979) and Blum and Levenston (1979). They claim that learners avoid words which present phonological, grammatical, or semantic difficulty and prefer words which can be generalized to a wide range of contexts.…”

“…In the past five to eight years, researchers have been less concerned with the extremes of the pendular swing and have turned to investigations into the ways in which the native language (or other languages known to the learner) affect second language development (Gass andSelinker 1983,' Kellerman andSharwood Smith 1986). Blum and Levenston (1979) propose that learners avoid using words for which there are not direct translation equivalents in the native language. If there is a semantic void in the native language, learners will not readily learn the target language word which would fill that gap.…”

The Influence of First Language Lexicalization on Second Language Lexical Inferencing: A Study of Farsi-Speaking Learners of English as a Foreign Language

“…Some studies have shown that learners tend to avoid lexical items that do not have counterparts in their L1. Blum and Levenston (1979), in a study of native speakers of Hebrew versus learners of Hebrew from various linguistic backgrounds, found that the latter group avoided the words in a cloze test that had no equivalents in their L1s. Likewise, in Sjöholm's (1998) study, Swedish-speaking learners of English tended to avoid idiomatic phrasal verbs that lacked Swedish counterparts.…”