Mark your calendars and save these dates because the fall line-up for UIC Talks in Linguistics has been announced. All talks are scheduled on Fridays at 3 PM and will take place in University Hall 1750, located at 601 S. Morgan Street here in Chicago. We look forward to seeing you there for some interesting talks on a wide array of linguistic topics.
September 21: Masaya Yoshida, Northwestern (Psycholinguistics)
October 19: Kay González-Vilbazo, UIC (Code-switching)
November 2: Bernie Issa, UIC (SLA)
November 16: Craig Sailor, UCLA (Syntax)
November 30: Nicholas Henriksen, Michigan (Phonology)
Titles of the talks as well as abstracts will be announced closer to the dates listed for each.
The UIC Bilingualism Forum is dedicated to research in any area related to bilingualism: theoretical linguistics, codeswitching, SLA, psycholinguistics, sociolinguistics, neurolinguistics, cognitive sciences, heritage acquisition, bilingual acquisition, etc. Presentations will be 20 minutes each with 10 minutes for discussion.
Marcel den Dikken, City University of New York
Michael Ullman, Georgetown University
Call For Papers
Deadline for submission of abstract: 12/1/2010
Acceptance response by: 1/15/2011
2 page anonymous abstract including examples and references
On January 29th, 2010 UIC will be hosting a Generative Second Language Workshop featuring:
Tania Ionin, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign “Production and interpretation of articles in second language acquisition”
Silvina Montrul, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign “Morphological Errors in L2 Learners and Heritage Language Learners: Missing Surface Inflection or simply experience?”
Roumyana Slabakova, University of Illinois “The Bottleneck Hypothesis: What is easy and what is hard to acquire in a second language”
The workshop will take place from 3 PM to 6 PM in Grant Hall 207 (703 South Morgan Street, 60607).
Tania Ionin (University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign) Production and interpretation of articles in second language acquisition
Among the learning tasks faced by second language (L2) learners is to map linguistic form to its corresponding meaning. Recent investigations into L2-acquisition at the syntax/semantics interface have shown that learners face particular difficulties when the form-meaning mappings in the learners’ first language (L1) are different from those in the L2; at the same time, these difficulties are not insurmountable, and L2-learners have been found to exhibit sensitivity to subtle syntax-semantics mappings that are not present in their L1 and not subject to explicit instruction (see Slabakova 2008 for an overview). The domain of article semantics is one area in which L2-learners have to acquire subtle form-meaning mappings. For example, L2-English learners coming from an article-less L1 (such as Russian or Korean) have to acquire the contrasts between definite, indefinite, and bare (article-less) noun phrases; and L2-English learners coming from an L1 which has articles (such as Spanish) have to reconfigure some aspects of article semantics, for example in the area of generic reference. This talk will report on several experiments probing how L2-English learners from different L1s use and interpret English articles a variety of semantic environments; these experiments aim to tease apart L1-influence from learners’ sensitivity to semantic universals. The findings show that (i) L1-transfer plays a role in how L2-English learners use and interpret English articles; and (ii) L2-learners are sensitive to subtle contrasts in meaning which are not morphologically marked in their L1, and not subject to (much) classroom instruction, such as the contrasts between specific and non-specific indefinites, and between definite and indefinite generics. It is argued that L2-learners, regardless of their L1, have access to semantic universals through Universal Grammar. Errors with article choice are shown to be due to L1-transfer and to difficulties acquiring language-specific form-meaning mappings, but not to lack of semantic knowledge. Implications of these findings for both semantic theories and theories of L2-acquisition are discussed.
Silvina Montrul (University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign)
Morphological Errors in L2 Learners and Heritage Language Learners: Missing Surface Inflection or simply experience?
Morphological variability and the source of these errors have been hotly debated in generative approaches to L2 acquisition. A recurrent finding is that postpuberty L2 learners often omit or use the wrong affix for nominal and verbal inflections in oral production, but less so in written tasks. According to the Representational Deficit View (Hawkisn & Chan 1997, Tsimpli and 2007), morphological errors arise from deficits at the level of linguistic representation due to maturational effects. But for the Missing Surface Inflection Hypothesis (Prévost & White 1999, 2000), L2 learners have intact functional projections and their parameterized features, but errors stem from problems during production only (a mapping or processing problem). Interestingly, inflectional morphology is also a problem area for heritage language speakers, who were exposed to the language earlier in life than the L2 learners. In this talk I compare knowledge of Spanish nominal and verbal morphology in L2 learners and heritage speakers and examine whether these theoretical accounts can be extended to explain the patterns of morphological variability observed in many heritage language learners. The results suggest that while the Missing Surface Inflection Hypothesis correctly characterizes the performance patterns observed in L2 acquisition, it does not correctly describe the performance of the heritage language learners tested in this study. I argue that morphological errors in the two populations seem to be related to the type of experience.
Roumyana Slabakova (University of Iowa)
The Bottleneck Hypothesis: What is easy and what is hard to acquire in a second language
In recent years, the modular view of the L2 acquisition experience and the interlanguage grammar has been gaining in importance. It is no longer controversial to argue that the different components of the L2 grammar may have different sensitive periods of acquisition. This argument is supported by evolving views of the language architecture (Minimalism, Jackendoff 2002). The current emphasis is on the relative difficulty of linguistic features and constructions, as well as on how the language architecture, input properties, and speakers’ processing resources affect developmental sequences. Based on comparison of findings on the L2 acquisition of inflectional morphology, syntax, the syntax-semantics and the syntax-context/discourse interface, the Bottleneck Hypothesis argues that the functional (inflectional) morphemes and their features are the bottleneck of L2 acquisition; acquisition of syntax and semantics (and maybe even the syntax-discourse interface) flows smoothly (Slabakova, 2006, 2008). I will present recent experimental studies supporting this view. I will also discuss a pedagogical implication of this model, namely, that an enhanced focus on practicing grammar in language classrooms will be beneficial to learners.
This Friday at UICTiL UIC’s own Kara Morgan-Short and Mandy Faretta will be presenting a talk entitled “Awareness and explicitness in second language development”. The talk will take place at 2pm in 1750 University Hall (601 South Morgan Street).
Researchers interested in second language (L2) acquisition have explored the independent but related issues of the role of awareness and the effect of explicit conditions on linguistic development. Previous research suggests that explicit conditions lead to higher levels of awareness (Rosa & Leow, 2004; Rosa & O’Neill, 1999) and that higher levels of awareness lead to greater linguistic development (Leow, 1997; Rosa & Leow, 2004). However, linguistic development has also been evidenced by learners trained under implicit conditions (Morgan-Short et al., 2007) and learners who were unaware (Williams, 2004, 2005).
The current study investigated the role of awareness and explicitness on the acquisition of L2 word order and gender agreement structures. Subjects learned an artificial language to advanced levels of proficiency under two training conditions: explicit and implicit. Assessments included judgment tasks for sentences containing word order and gender agreement violations and matched control sentences. Level of awareness was coded based on students’ written responses to a written judgment task and a debriefing
Results showed that for gender agreement there was a positive relationship between explicit training and a higher level of awareness. A higher level of awareness, however, did not lead to greater accuracy on judgment tasks. For phrase structure, although no relationship was found between training condition and level of awareness, higher levels of awareness were found to lead to greater accuracy. These findings suggest that there are complex interactions between levels of awareness, type of training and linguistic structure that should be more fully explored by future research.
Georgetown University is holding GURT 2009 on March 13-15th. While the conference’s main focus is SLA, the full title is Georgetown University Round Table: Implicit and Explicit Conditions, Processes, and Knowledge in SLA and Bilingualism. So, GURT is a great destination for those interested in Bilingual Acquisition as well as SLA.
Plenary Speakers include Ellen Bialystok, Nick Ellis, Arthur Reber, Bill VanPatten, and Michael Ullman. Check out the website at:
Coming up in March the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign is hosting their 10th annual Generative Approaches to Second Language Acquisition Conference. The invited speakers are Antonella Sorace, Roumyana Slabakova, and Alan Juffs.
GASLA-10 will take place from March 13th-15th. See the website for more details.
The UIC Bilingualism Forum is dedicated to research in any area related to
bilingualism: Theoretical Linguistics, Codeswitching, SLA,
Psycholinguistics, Language Policies, Sociolinguistics, Neurolinguistics,
Cognitive Sciences, etc. Student presentations are especially encouraged.
Presentations will be 20 minutes each with 10 minutes for discussion.
CALL FOR PAPERS
Deadline for submission: 02/09/2009
Acceptance response in February 2009