Chapter 6Formal Approaches to

SLA Joanna – N98C0026 楊鎧綺

Gass, S. M., & Selinker, L. (2008). Second language acquisition: An introductory course Gass, S. M., & Selinker, L. (2008). Second language acquisition: An introductory course (3rd ed.). New York: Routledge.(3rd ed.). New York: Routledge.

6.1Introduction – p 159-160

-The relationship on the area of research that has dominated the theoretical study of second language acquisition over the year, Universal Grammar.

6.2 Universal Grammar UG – Universal Grammar -p160 - 163

Chomsky’s Noam Theory

How does UG relate to language acquisition?

I want to go. I wanna go.

6.2.1 - p 163

Initial State –

The unconscious linguistic

knowledge that learners have before

receiving L2 input

6.2.1.1 - p164

Fundamental Difference Hypothesis –

The claim that child first language and

adult second language acquisition are

different.

6.2.1.2 - p 165

Access to UG Hypothesis –

The claim that the innate language

facility is operative in second language learners.

L1 as the base

1.Full Transfer/Full Access

2.Minimal Trees Hypothesis

3.Valueless Features

6.2.1.2 - L2 UG-Based

4.The Initial Hypothesis of Syntax

5.Full Access/No Transfer

6.2.2 UG Principles 6-13 The boy who is standing over there is happy.

6-14 Is the boy who is standing over there ____ happy?

6-15 Is the boy who ______ standing over there is happy?

ECP – Empty Category Principle (Chomsky,1981)

6.2.3 UG parameters a) the omission of subject pronouns

b) the inversion of subjects and verbs in declarative sentences

c) that-trace effects-that is, the extraction of a subject out of a clause that contains a complementizer.

6.2.4 Falsification

- Kaleidoscope factor - Assume a no-access to UG position, as we have seen with regard to the Fundamental Difference

Hypothesis

Attribute the results to methodological problems

Attribute the result to an undefined performance component

Attribute the results to mapping factors or; Assume he theory is false

6.3 Transfer : the UG perspective

- White (1992) – Provided detail on this issue. –P176

6.3.1 Levels of representation – p176 6-25 Visiting relatives can be boring. 6-26 When I visit relatives, I am bored. 6-27 Relatives who visit me can be boring.

6.3.2 Clustering -P177 - How multiple properties of language do or do not behave in a like fashion.

6.3.3 Learnability

(6-28) The man is drinking slowly his coffee.

6.4 Phonology - 178

6.4.1 Markedness Differential Hypothesis -179

6.4.2 Similarity/Dissimilarity : Speech Learning Model - 183

- Similarity Differential Rate Hypothesis

6.4.3 Optimality Theory – Eckman , Elreyes,and Iverson -184

(2003)

1) the target language has two contrasting sounds, neither of which is present in the native language (2)the target language has two contrasting sounds, one of which is present in the native language and (3)the target language has two contrasting sounds, both of which are present in the native language , but which do not contrast.

6.4.4 Ontogeny Phylogeny Model – p 186

- Chronological corollary : interlanguage develops

chronologically in the following manner :

(a) L2 increases, (b) L1 decreases, and (c) U increases and then decreases (p85). this is demonstrated in Figures 6-1to 6-6.

- Stylistic corollary : IL varies stylistically in the following manner : (a) L2 increases (b) l1 decreases (c) U increases and then decreases (p.93)

-Similarity corollary: In similar phenomena, IL develops chronologically in the following manner:

(a) L2 increases slowly

(b) L1 decreases slowly

(c) U increases slowly and then decreases slowly

- Markedness corollary : In marked phenomena, IL develops chronologically in the following manner:

(a) second language increases slowly

(b) first language decreases [at a normal rate] and then decrease slowly (c) U increases rapidly and decreases slowly . Thus, except for the earliest stages, the role of U is much greater than L1, compared to less-marked phenomena.

6.5 Conclusion & Discussion - 189

1.What is the concept of language UG and relationship to SLA? Would these relate to the concept of language universals?

2. What way can U affect the develop of IL grammars in terms of the nature of how grammatical knowledge relates to input?

How does this concept relate to Kellerman’s

notion of transfer discussed in chapter 5 ? 3. What might the function of the use or nonuse of pronouns be ? Why are pronouns obligatory in English and not so in other languages? How can our knowledge of parameter clusterings help language teachers?