The interaction of L2 and L3 levels of proficiency in third language acquisition

Abstract

Level of proficiency (LoP), unlike other factors, such as L2 status (Cenoz 2001) or linguistic proximity (Westergaard et al. 2016), has not been widely investigated in terms of third language acquisition (TLA). However, it is possible that LoP in L2 (Tremblay 2006), L3 (Wrembel 2010) and the interaction between these factors (Sypiańska and Cal in press) might play an important role in TLA. This study, thus, aims to further examine the aforesaid possibilities by analysing the influence of L2 and L3 LoP and their interaction on the production of L3 vowels in a group of L1 Polish/L2 English/L3 Spanish speakers who differ in terms of LoP in their foreign languages. A MANOVA was conducted to compare the main effects of L2LoP, L3LoP and vowel as well as the interaction effect between these factors on the production of L3 Spanish vowels. The results indicate an influential role of L2LoP and L3LoP and their interaction depending on the vowel being analysed. Low proficiency in one of the languages allowed the other, more proficient one, to impact the production of the L3 Spanish vowels. This interplay of factors expands the understanding of how the L2 and L3 proficiency condition the developing L3.

Third language phonological acquisition: Understanding sound structure in a multilingual world

“…These early studies mostly relied on impressionistic analysis, but inspired more academic interest in this field and led to the area being more systematically researched currently (Cabrelli Amaro & Wrembel, 2016). Well‐known developments in the study of SLA such as cross‐linguistic influence (CLI) (Sharwood‐Smith & Kellerman, 1986) and diary studies for example, Williams and Hammarberg (1998) laid the foundations for advances in 3LA (Cabrelli Amaro & Wrembel, 2016; Cal & Sypiańska, 2020).…”

“…Although models such as the SLM(‐r) and PAM could potentially be extended to the context of L3 phonological acquisition, L3 perception and production still differ from those of L2 due to complicated sources of language interactions (Gut, 2009; Wrembel et al., 2019). For example, Chen and Han (2019) find that participants' L3 Mandarin production is modulated by both L2 English and L1 Cantonese while Cal and Sypiańska (2020) find that participants' L3 Spanish production is only influenced by L2 English. It is therefore possible that 3LA is influenced by the L1, L2, or both.…”

“…Previous studies have proposed factors contributing to cross‐linguistic transfer in L3 phonological acquisition such as the L2 status (Llama et al., 2010; Wrembel, 2010), the L3 experience (Luo et al., 2020), typological proximity (Cabrelli Amaro & Rothman, 2010; Liu et al., 2019), and the level of proficiency (LoP) (Cal & Sypiańska, 2020). The following sub‐sections discuss these factors separately.…”

“…In other words, lower proficiency in either the L2 or L3 makes (input of) the other, more proficient language, become the source of transfer onto L3 phonological categories (Cal & Sypiańska, 2020). Moreover, the interactions between L2LoP and L3LoP are also likely to influence part of L3 production.…”

“…Moreover, the interactions between L2LoP and L3LoP are also likely to influence part of L3 production. For example, the production of the L3 Spanish vowel /a/ was conditioned by both L2LoP and L3LoP in Cal and Sypiańska (2020). Additionally, L3 phonological categories are likely to be influenced by L2 and input from the L3 equally if L2LoP and L3LoP are at the same level.…”