Studies of Fossilization in Second Language Acquisition (Second Language Acquisition, 14) - Softcover

Softcover

ISBN 10: 1853598356 ISBN 13: 9781853598357

Verlag: Multilingual Matters, 2005

Inhaltsangabe

This volume, as a sequel to Fossilization in Adult Second Language Acquisition by Han (2004), brings together a collection of most recent theoretical and empirical studies on fossilization, a classic problem of second language acquisition. It covers a wide range of perspectives and issues. The analyses discussed herein address key concerns of many second language researchers and teachers with regard to just how far anyone can go in learning a new language.

Über diesen Titel

Über die Autorin bzw. den Autor

ZhaoHong Han is Professor of Language and Education at Teachers College, Columbia University, USA, where she researches in second language acquisition, second language teaching, and their interface. She is the author/editor/co-editor of a number of volumes, including Fossilization in Adult Second Language Acquisition (2004) and Linguistic Relativity in SLA: Thinking for Speaking (co-edited with Teresa Cadierno, 2010).

Terence Odlin is Associate Professor Emeritus of English, Ohio State University, USA and his research interests focus on language contact and language transfer. He is the author of Language Transfer (Cambridge University Press) and editor or co-editor of four other volumes. He has also published articles and chapters in several journals and edited volumes.

Auszug. © Genehmigter Nachdruck. Alle Rechte vorbehalten.

Studies of Fossilization in Second Language Acquisition

By ZhaoHong Han, Terence Odlin

Multilingual Matters

Copyright © 2006 ZhaoHong Han, Terence Odlin and the authors of individual chapters
All rights reserved.

ISBN: 978-1-85359-835-7

Contents

Acknowledgments, vi, 
Contributors, vii, 
1 Introduction ZhaoHong Han and Terence Odlin, 1, 
2 Researching Fossilization and Second Language (L2) Attrition: Easy Questions, Difficult Answers Constancio K. Nakuma, 21, 
3 Establishing Ultimate Attainment in a Particular Second Language Grammar Donna Lardiere, 35, 
4 Fossilization: Can Grammaticality Judgment Be a Reliable Source of Evidence? ZhaoHong Han, 56, 
5 Fossilization in L2 and L3 Terence Odlin, Rosa Alonso Alonso and Cristina Alonso-Vazquez, 83, 
6 Child Second Language Acquisition and the Fossilization Puzzle Usha Lakshmanan, 100, 
7 Emergent Fossilization Brian MacWhinney, 134, 
8 Fossilization, Social Context and Language Play Elaine Tarone, 157, 
9 Why Not Fossilization David Birdsong, 173, 
10 Second Language Acquisition and the Issue of Fossilization: There Is No End, and There Is No State Diane Larsen-Freeman, 189, 
Afterword: Fossilization 'or' Does Your Mind Mind? Larry Selinker, 201, 
Index, 211, 

CHAPTER 1

Introduction

ZHAOHONG HAN and TERENCE ODLIN

A quote from Ellis (1993) provides an apt point of departure for this opening chapter. Ellis notes:

[T]he end point of L2 acquisition – if the learners, their motivation, tutors and conversation partners, environment, and instrumental factors, etc., are all optimal – is to be as proficient in L2 as in L1. So proficient, so accurate, so fluent, so automatic, so implicit, that there is rarely recourse to explicit, conscious thought about the medium of the message. (Ellis, 1993: 315)

The above statement evokes at least two questions for us. The first is whether all learners wish to become as proficient in their L2 as in their L1, and the second whether they can be when the 'if' condition is met. This book is motivated by the second question, namely, whether or not learners are able to reach nativelikeness in their L2 as in their L1.

Thirty years of research has generated mixed responses to the question, from which two polarized positions can be gleaned. On the one hand, there are researchers who have long claimed that it is not possible for adult L2 learners to speak or perform like native-speakers (Gregg, 1996; Long, 1990). On the other hand, there are researchers who argue that nativelikeness is attainable by a meaningful size of L2 population (see e.g. Birdsong, 1999, 2004). The latter position appears to have gained increasing acceptance in recent years, as seen in the increased estimates about successful learners. For example, while earlier second language acquisition (SLA) research gave very low estimates – Selinker (1972) suggests 5%, Scovel (1988) estimates one in 1000 learners, and Long (1990, 1993) no learners at all, more recent research has yielded a much higher range, from 15% to 60% (see, e.g. Birdsong, 1999, 2004; Montrul & Slabakova, 2003; White, 2003).

What do we make of the gaps? The early, conservative estimates (e.g. below 5%) came from theorists and are largely extrapolated from the literature, reinforced by personal observations, whereas the more recent and optimistic assessments (e.g. over 15%) are based on empirical research results. Does this mean, then, that at least 15% of L2 learners will normally reach the end point depicted by Ellis above? The answer is clearly negative if we look closer at the design of the empirical studies that have generated those figures, where factors such as the nature of the population sampled could obviously affect any estimate. Furthermore, these studies largely involved use of a limited number of interpretation and production tasks. Thus, the conservative and the optimistic estimates are not really comparable. Nonetheless, both are revealing in that an estimate of 5% at the highest captures, albeit impressionistically, the likelihood that the vast majority of L2 learners fail to reach native-speaker competence. Optimistic estimates, such as over 15%, on the other hand, come from relatively successful performances of learners on limited measures. This seemingly contradictory picture is explained in Han (2004a) in a review of scores of theoretical and empirical studies from the last three decades.

Han argues for the need to represent L2 ultimate attainment at three levels: (a) a cross-learner level, (b) an inter-learner level, and (c) an intra-learner level. At the cross-learner level, L2 ultimate attainment shows that few, if any, are able to gain a command of the target language that is comparable to that of a native speaker of that language. At the inter-learner level, however, a great range of variation exists in that some are highly successful while others are not at all (Bley-Vroman, 1989; Lightbown, 2000). Then at the intra-learner level, an individual learner exhibits differential success on different aspects of the target language (Bialystok, 1978; Han, 2004a; Lardiere, this volume: chap. 3; Sharwood Smith, 1991). Success here means attainment of native-speaker competence (White, 2003). The notion of native-speaker competence is, of course, problematic in some respects and will be discussed further on (Cook, 1999; Davies, 2003; Han, 2004b).

The ultimate attainment of L2 acquisition, if there is such a thing, thus shows two facets: success and failure. This is different from that of first language acquisition where uniform success is observed for children reaching the age of five. On the ability of L2 learners to ultimately converge on native-speaker competence, White (2003) comments that 'native-like performance is the exception rather than the rule' (p. 263). The lack of full success among second language learners raises a fundamental question: why is it that 'most child L1 or L2 learning is successful, after all, whereas most adolescent and adult L1 or L2 learning ends in at least partial failure even when motivation, intelligence, and opportunity are not at issue and despite the availability of (presumably advantageous) classroom instruction' (Long & Robinson, 1998: 19). Even with the more optimistic estimates of success (i.e. over 15%), the difference between L1 and L2 acquisition is striking (Schachter, 1988).

As early as 1972, Selinker provided the first explanation for the above generic observation, contending that adult second language acquisition is driven by a mechanism known as the latent psychological structure. This mechanism is made up of five processes: (a) transfer, (b) overgeneralization, (c) learning strategies, (d) communication strategies, and (e) transfer of training. The five processes underlying the latent psychological structure would account, Selinker argued, for learning as well as non-learning. In regard to the latter, Selinker introduced the construct of fossilization to characterize a type of non-learning that represents a permanent state of mind and behavior, noting:

Fossilizable linguistic phenomena are linguistic items, rules, and subsystems which speakers of a particular L1 tend to keep in their IL relative to a particular TL, no matter what the age of the learner or amount of explanation and instruction he receives in the TL ... Fossilizable structures tend to remain as potential performance, re-emerging in the productive performance of an IL even when seemingly eradicated. (Selinker, 1972: 215)

Although it does not define...

Details zur Ausgabe

• Verlag: Multilingual Matters
• Erscheinungsdatum: 2005
• Sprache: Englisch
• ISBN 10: 1853598356
• ISBN 13: 9781853598357
• Einband: Taschenbuch
• Anzahl der Seiten: 224
• Herausgeber: Han Zhaohong, Odlin Terence
• Kontakt zum Hersteller: Nicht verfügbar
• Verantwortliche Person: gpsr@libri.de; gpsr@libri.de; ; Europaallee 1; Bad Hersfeld; 36244; Deutschland