On the development of narrative structure in child L1 and adult L2 acquisition

Strömqvist, Sven; Day, Dennis

doi:10.1017/s0142716400009528

Cited by 9 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 11 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In contrast, L2 acquisition of narrative follows a different path, as adult speakers already have a fully acquired system of referential choices in their L1 to draw upon in their learning and greater general cognitive abilities (Montanari, 2002;Strömqvist & Day, 1989). However, they may transfer some linguistic elements from their L1 (Hendriks, 2005; see also Jarvis & Pavlenko, 2008 for a general approach to transfer).…”

Section: The Role Of Reference Forms In Narrative Discoursementioning

confidence: 99%

Reference control in the narratives of adult sign language learners

Bel

Ortells

Morgan

2014

International Journal of Bilingualism

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Aims and Objectives: Learning to control reference in narratives is a major step in becoming a speaker of a second language, including a signed language. Previous research describes the pragmatic and cognitive mechanisms that are used for reference control and it is clear that differences are apparent between first and second language speakers. However, some debate exists about the reasons for second language learners' tendency for over-redundancy in reference forms especially in the use of pronouns. In this study we tested these proposed reasons for L2 differences. Methodology: Narratives by 11 native signers and 13 adult advanced-learners of Catalan sign language were analysed for person reference. Data: Analysis focused on forms for introduction, reintroduction and maintenance of characters. Findings:The results indicate both groups used reference forms according to information saliency principles in similar ways. Differences between the groups were in the use of pronominal signs, where the learners adopted an over-redundancy strategy in line with one hypothesis in the previous studies on second language acquisition in spoken languages. Significance: The results are discussed in terms of the vulnerable syntax-pragmatics interface in developing bilinguals

show abstract

Section: The Role Of Reference Forms In Narrative Discoursementioning

confidence: 99%

Reference control in the narratives of adult sign language learners

Bel

Ortells

Morgan

2014

International Journal of Bilingualism

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Generally, little is known about narrative development in Swedish-speaking children. Apart from the studies using MAIN described below, a number of studies of Swedish-speaking children’s narratives have been published (Nordqvist, 2001; Reuterskiöld, Hansson, & Sahlén, 2011; Reuterskiöld Wagner, Sahlén, & Nettelbladt, 1999; Strömqvist & Day, 1993; Viberg, 2001). However, only Nordqvist (2001) analysed narrative macrostructure.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comprehension and production of narrative macrostructure in Swedish: A longitudinal study from age 4 to 7

Lindgren

2019

First Language

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article reports results from a longitudinal study from age 4 to 7 of comprehension and production of narrative macrostructure in Swedish monolingual children ( N = 17). Baby Birds/ Baby Goats from the Multilingual Assessment Instrument for Narratives (LITMUS-MAIN) were used to elicit narratives and ask comprehension questions at age 4;4, 5;10 and 7;4. Results showed a steep development from age 4;4 to 5;10 in both comprehension and production of macrostructure, but only some further development in comprehension to age 7;4. For the measures studied, children seem to reach a plateau around age 6. Consistent differences between comprehension and production (higher scores in comprehension) and between stories (higher scores on Baby Goats) were found across time points.

show abstract

“… 3. Another earlier study, Strömqvist and Day (1993), compared the performance on a total score of referential cohesion of Swedish monolingual 3- to 5-year-olds ( N = 8) and 5- to 8-year-olds ( N = 8) to adult L2 learners ( N = 5) and adult native speakers ( N = 6). However, referent introductions were not analysed separately, making it impossible to compare the results to those of the present study. …”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Character introductions in oral narratives of Swedish–German bilingual preschoolers

2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Closely related Swedish and German both mark information status of referents morphologically, though little is known about its acquisition. This study investigates character introductions in the narratives of 4- and 6-year-old Swedish–German bilinguals ( N = 40) in both languages, elicited with MAIN Cat/Dog. We analyse effects of age group, language and animacy (human vs nonhuman characters) on the type of referring expression (indefinite NP and pronoun), as well as effects of language proficiency and exposure on the use of indefinite NPs for each language. We also explore which syntactic constructions indefinite NPs occur in. A significant difference was found between the two age groups, but not between languages. No effect was found of language skills or exposure. Four-year-olds used more pronouns and a lower proportion of indefinite NPs than 6-year-olds. Pronouns were more frequent for the human character than for nonhuman animate characters. Whilst animacy (humanness) promoted the use of pronouns, it did not affect the choice of morphological form for lexical NPs (indefinite/definite). The age groups differed in how indefinite NPs were used. Four-year-olds produced fewer narrative presentations (where a character is introduced as part of a typical story opening, e.g. Once upon a time there was a cat) than 6-year-olds, and more labellings (with only an NP, or a clausal predicative, e.g. That’s a cat). Qualitative analyses suggest that the children’s indefinite NPs in labelling constructions can be both referential (when setting the narrative scene), and type-denoting (when naming referents in individual pictures). Whilst the children’s abilities to introduce story characters develop measurably from 4 to 6 years in Swedish and German, appropriateness of character introductions not only depends on whether an indefinite NP is chosen, but also on the syntactic construction this indefinite NP is used in.

show abstract

On the development of narrative structure in child L1 and adult L2 acquisition

Cited by 9 publications

References 11 publications

Reference control in the narratives of adult sign language learners

Reference control in the narratives of adult sign language learners

Comprehension and production of narrative macrostructure in Swedish: A longitudinal study from age 4 to 7

Character introductions in oral narratives of Swedish–German bilingual preschoolers

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About