26.529, Review: Language Acquisition: Lenzing (2013)

[The LINGUIST List via LINGUIST]

LINGUIST List: Vol-26-529. Mon Jan 26 2015. ISSN: 1069 - 4875.

Subject: 26.529, Review: Language Acquisition: Lenzing (2013)

Moderators: linguist at linguistlist.org (Damir Cavar, Malgorzata E. Cavar)
Reviews: reviews at linguistlist.org (Anthony Aristar, Helen Aristar-Dry, Sara Couture)
Homepage: http://linguistlist.org

Editor for this issue: Sara  Couture <sara at linguistlist.org>
================================================================


Date: Mon, 26 Jan 2015 14:25:47
From: Christine Palumbo [palumbo1 at email.arizona.edu]
Subject: The Development of the Grammatical System in Early Second Language Acquisition

 
Discuss this message:
http://linguistlist.org/pubs/reviews/get-review.cfm?subid=33837757

Book announced at http://linguistlist.org/issues/24/24-3481.html

AUTHOR: Anke  Lenzing
TITLE: The Development of the Grammatical System in Early Second Language Acquisition
SUBTITLE: The Multiple Constraints Hypothesis
SERIES TITLE: Processability Approaches to Language Acquisition Research & Teaching 3
PUBLISHER: John Benjamins
YEAR: 2013

REVIEWER: Christine Palumbo, University of Arizona

Review's Editor: Helen Aristar-Dry

SUMMARY

“The Development of the Grammatical System in Early Second Language
Acquisition”  is intended for postgraduate students as well as SLA
researchers. The book’s main focus is on the second language acquisition
processes of early L2 learners. It is based on the central hypothesis,
formalized as the “Multiple Constraints Hypothesis” (MCH), postulating that 
the initial mental grammatical system of L2 learners is constrained
semantically, syntactically and mnemonically. The empirical test of MCH  is
based on a cross-sectional and longitudinal database of very early L2 learners
of  English. The study demonstrates that the postulated constraints are
relaxed successively as L2 learning progresses. The author’s research broadens
the understanding of the Processability Theory (PT) hierarchy of  these early 
learners of  English. What becomes clear is the profoundly multilayered nature
of learning a second language and how PT covers this  complexity more
adequately than past theoretical explanations. The author achieves his goal of
providing thorough examination and explanation of the development of the
mental grammatical system of early L2 learners. 

Chapter 1, “Introduction”, provides a clear overview of the “Multiple
Constraints Hypothesis” (MCH), which includes what linguistic representations
are present in the  mental grammatical system of beginning learners, and how
the system develops during the course of L2 acquisition. The MCH is based on
two theoretical cornerstones, Lexical-Functional Grammar (LFG), and the
Processability Theory (PT) of grammar. The author begins to explain LFG and
the PT in this section. The careful definition of  the MCH distinguishes its
role in SLA research according to empirical data collected in a longitudinal
study of German learners of English as the L2 in a formal context. Through
these data, Lenzing demonstrates that all structures produced by the early
learners cannot be accounted for structurally within the construct of  the
learners’ L1,  thereby deciphering that  L1 transfer cannot be considered a
satisfactory explanation as stipulated by the Multiple Constraints Hypothesis.
The chapter ends with  a brief introduction of topics that will be
subsequently covered in the following sections of the book. This brief, yet
concise overview lays a solid foundation for the reader to more comprehensibly
follow the remaining chapters.

Chapter 2, “Lexical-Functional Grammar” (LFG) begins discriminating between 
LFG and the Chomskyan framework. The author notes the differences in both the
psychological and typological plausibility of the underlying designs of the
theories. These disparities are pointed out through specific examples given in
the Walpiri language, since it is a nonconfigurational language that does not
conform to the universal design of grammar. The chapter proceeds with an
in-depth explanation of the design principles of Lexical-Functional Grammar
that furthers the explanation  and discussion of non-conformance to the
Chomskyan framework. It closes in a discussion of the psychological
credibility of LFG as it sheds light on the mental representations of language
to form a model for learnability and language processing. The chapter
concludes the discussion pointing out that LFG is lexically driven and
therefore, the lexicon is an important element of the examination. The author
finishes the discussion by stating that because there are three parallel
levels of linguistic representation related by their constraints, LFG is a
powerful grammatical theory. Also important is that due to its well-defined
formalism, the validity of its typology and psychology are fortified,
particularly positioning it as a framework that provides a perfect blueprint
of the beginning L2 grammatical system posited in the book. The final
paragraph of the chapter strongly suggests that an L2 system of the
development of grammar must be seen in the context of a theory of grammar and
a theory of SLA in order to answer the question of how the L2 learner learns
language and what  psycholinguistic mechanisms take place in the early stages
of language acquisition.  Because this is important, research that
investigates the universal sequence of L2 acquisition is a leading concern,
which is why  the following chapter presents an overview of the universal
developmental sequences in L2 acquisition.

Chapter 3, “Developmental patterns in SLA”, presents an overview of research
on universal developmental sequences in SLA that focuses on the chronology of
acquisition. The chapter points out that early on, there was a  realization
that a routine order exists in L2 acquisition. This focus shifted later
towards a distinction between order and sequence implicating that L2 learners
produce interlanguage (IL) that is  different from target language structures.
A focused examination of  the Multidimensional Model (MM) and the Strategies
Approach Studies (SAS) are also presented, compared and critically analyzed.
According to the author, examining these theories that explain developmental
sequences in SLA, regardless of their limitations, were pivotal to forming a
picture of the later development of PT.  The aim of overcoming the limitations
of the MM and the SAS supported the path of PT as a powerful descriptive and
psychologically feasible theory of L2 processing. In sum, it is concluded that
there is considerable evidence for a natural order in L2 acquisition and for
the existence of different developmental stages in the acquisition process.
The  next chapter devotes itself to the principal features associated with the
Multiple Constraints Hypothesis.
 
Chapter 4, “Processability Theory” identifies two problems in SLA  that need
to be addressed: the developmental and the logical problem. Lenzing answers
these fundamental concerns  through his analysis of the Levelt Model (1989) of
speech production and then continues the chapter by outlining the
psycholinguistic basis of PT. The author discusses three components of the
Model, specifically, the  conceptualizer, the formulator and the lexicon  as
they are relevant for this context. Since the developmental path that L2
learners follow is determined, in part, by the human language processor
(Pieneman 1998:4) that is understood as “the computational mechanisms that
operate on (but are separate from) a native speaker’s linguistic knowledge”
(Pieneman 1998:5), the processing structure can only be utilized if the
procedural processes are accessible to the learner.  According to Pienemann
(2005a:3), PT closely follows the Levelt Model. The chapter continues by
displaying the processability hierarchy for English as was adapted and
modified by Pienamann, followed by a short piece on “Hypothesis Space”which
predicts the range of structures that can be produced by the learner at each
stage and its restrictions due to its constraints. Linear, non-linear and
default mapping processes as posited by Pienemann continue to be noted 
throughout the chapter outlining the developmental processes, their
constraints and relationships between levels of representation. The author
concludes that PT more thoroughly explains the observed L2 syntactic and
morphological development, which  makes this discussion  applicable to
languages other than English. In summary, Chapter 3 and 4 show evidence for a
natural order and existence of developmental stages of L2 acquisition.
Language is constrained by the human language processor. Finally, the author
concludes that by combining LFG, PT can explain a broader range of linguistic
structures that can be accounted for between their different levels of
representation.    

Chapter 5, “The role of transfer in SLA” discusses the role of the L1 in the
process of L2 development. In turn, a discussion on the importance of
examining whether early L2 learners can learn the language without resorting
to L1 linguistic knowledge, or whether they have access to the grammar
developed during L1 acquisition are investigated. The author begins by
defining that early phase of acquisition as the L2 grammar before the learner
had any experience in the L2 and as a very early L2 grammar. The view on L1
transfer in this book comes from the “Developmentally Moderated Transfer
Hypothesis” (DMTH) which is a subset of PT. Its central claim is that transfer
depends upon the learner’s language processor. The chapter follows with a
brief description of the earlier view on language transfer that begins the
historical record with “Contrastive” and “Error Analysis”, and then takes a 
look at the principal theoretical assumptions and criticisms of the main
competing approaches to L1 language transfer. It ends with the theoretical
assumptions underlying this particular position; like PT, the position implies
that transfer is looked at from a processing perspective. L1 transfer under
this domain deems the learner only able to transfer the features that s/he is
developmentally ready to process. This exposition is continued citing
longitudinal studies proving the viability and relevance of DMTH. The chapter
concludes with a common misconception of the DMTH which sets the stage for
what will follow in Chapter 7 that includes the DMTH and L1 transfer.

Chapter 6, “The Study, Design and data collection”, is a short chapter that
presents a study that examines the interlanguage development of early second
language learners in the primary years. The study is both longitudinal and
cross-sectional in design with the goal of establishing a depiction of the
learners’ interlanguage grammar, first at the one year mark, and then the
second year mark of formal instruction in English. The section first gives the
overall design and the data collection methods of the study followed by a
short description of the tasks performed at the two time points of data
collection.  After the data collection  procedures are described, two
principles of methodology are discussed. The ultimate goal is to understand L2
acquisition in terms of emergence, not accuracy. Finally, the author points
out that the instruments he uses called the ‘emergence criterion’, and the
‘distributional analysis’ are important when investigating developmental
sequences for empirical research. With these investigative instruments and the
study design and data collection methodology presented, the following chapter
presents the results of the analysis done with regard to the Multiple
Constraints Hypothesis. 

Chapter 7, “Testing the Multiple Constraints Hypothesis”, is a long and
detailed chapter that centers on the results of the data analysis done as it
relates to the hypothesis of the “Multiple Constraints Hypothesis”. The author
begins by restating the hypothesis of MCH, which constitutes that the L2
learner has limited access to constraints of processability and that this
early learner acquires the language step by step. The details of the study
with students in third and then fourth grade are analyzed and discussed. The
results are then compared to one another. The focus of the chapter leads to
the analysis of the early L2 learner in terms of syntactic transfer so that
the extent of transfer from their L1 syntactic structures can be traced. The
chapter concludes with the final results indicating that, as predicted by the
DMTH, transfer doesn’t play a major role in early L2 acquisition. The study
clearly refutes the claim of the “Full Transfer/Full Access” approach by
Schwartz and Sprouse (1994, 1996). Overall, the results of the analysis
supports the claims of the DMTH that confirmed the prediction that learners
would not be able to transfer structures that do not coincide in both the L1
and the L1, and furthermore, they reflect the constraints that were expected
of their L2 grammatical system at this point. 

In Chapter 8, “Concluding remarks”, Lenzing recaps the main conclusions from
the studies. His claims that DTMH and the Multiple Constraints Hypothesis are
innovative contributors to the SLA field of research were clearly supported.
The conclusion that there are restrictions of L1 structures and the indication
that some structures were not processed at certain stages of development  that
went beyond their level (an entirely flat c-structure) were clearly proven.
Future research might benefit, says he, to an investigation of a more precise
relationship between the levels of linguistic representation as they could
lead to further insights into specific constraints that are operating on the
L2 mental grammatical system. 

EVALUATION

This book was nominated for the Christopher Brumfit Award that commemorates a
scholar whose books on communicative methodology are a source of guidance and
inspiration. The volume is informative and well laid out, clearly leading 
readers through the cumbersome task of arguing for a theory of grammar and a
theory of SLA in order to answer the question of how the L2 learner learns
language and what  psycholinguistic mechanisms take place in the early stages
of language acquisition into English. As language teaching research and
language pedagogy are fluid processes, Lenzing ends the book with the
assertion that the field remain dynamic and that change is and should be
constant in research studies.  He states that  SLA research is ready for more
conclusive and innovative studies and contributions to early L2 acquisition in
English and potentially other languages. Also, because they are embedded in a
theory of generative grammar, as well as a theory of SLA, the findings are
pertinent to both cognitive research and to the early L2 learner. With the
utilization of the “Multiple Constraints Hypothesis” and LFG together, Lenzing
created a very clear path via the  MCH which is empirically testable due to
its falsifiable claims. The highly-inclusive approaches examined in the
studies give a broader look at interlanguage structures that will benefit the
field. In the past, the investigations have been limited to just a few
selected interlanguage structures. The methods of the data analysis of the
longitudinal studies done and the manner in which they were directly
correlated to specific theoretical frameworks lead to very conclusive and
compelling arguments. The studies’ methods and its diverse range of dialects
coupled with past research further adds to the credibility of the results. The
idea that this was initially done with early learners set the stage for
further research to examine older or more advanced learners. Furthermore,
future studies might add to the studies scope, by adding language varieties
other than the ones accomplished. Finally, as suggested by the author, more
precise measures of the constraints discussed in the MCH and the DMTH might
further contribute to SLA research.

The book has several strengths. First, the author provides a very well mapped
out explanation of the theoretical frameworks he uses in his research as well
as presenting very clear explanations of the results of the longitudinal
study. Each chapter lead to the next in a very logical, comprehensible and
concise manner. Lenzing highlights a number of issues that needed more
attention from researchers and clearly set out to add his contribution to the
field of SLA and generativist theory. For example, in Chapter 5 the author
discusses the importance of examining whether early L2 learners can learn the
language without resorting to L1 linguistic knowledge, or whether they have
access to the grammar developed during L1 acquisition which points out the
need to measure implicit knowledge. To the best of my knowledge, there is
little research on how to measure implicit knowledge. Thirdly, the author’s
findings lead the way in bridging language teaching research and teaching
practice. Insights and suggestions are provided throughout to make research
findings into practical knowledge for SLA researchers and language teachers. 

If there is a second edition, a concluding chapter with research investigating
early learner language in general would be beneficial. Also as Lenzing stated,
an analysis of different levels of linguistic representation that is  more
precise could lead to further insights into other constraints that operate on
early learners’ mental grammatical system. Critical evaluation of this work
would further contribute to  future research in the  practice of L2 language
teaching and acquisition.

To sum it up, this book is a valuable contribution to psycholinguistic
research. It adds to second language acquisition research in both theoretical
and practical aspects of early second language development. 

REFERENCES

Lenzing, L. (2013). Second language classrooms: The Development of the
Grammatical System 
in Early Second Language Acquisition. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

Schwartz, B. and Sprouse, R. (1994). Word order and nominative case in
nonnative language acquisition: a longitudinal study of (L1 Turkish) German
interlanguage. In T. Hoekstra and B. Schwartz (Eds.), Language acquisition
studies in generative grammar: papers in honor of Kenneth Wexler from the 1991
GLOW Workshops (pp. 317 -- 368). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.


ABOUT THE REVIEWER

Christine Palumbo is a Doctoral Candidate in Second Language Acquisition and
Teaching (SLAT) at the University of Arizona, a Graduate Assistant in Teaching
of English Writing Composition, and an Adjunct professor at the Center for
English as a Second Language (CESL). She has English language teaching
experience at the university level in the United States and abroad. Christine
has also been involved in the professional development of ESL/EFL teachers and
learners in Russia, Central and South America, Africa and the USA.  She majors
in Pedagogy and Minors in Professional Development of ESL/FL teachers.  Her
current research is in linguistic identity and L2 writing.



----------------------------------------------------------
LINGUIST List: Vol-26-529	
----------------------------------------------------------