Native Language Transfer in Vocabulary Acquisition: An Empirical Study From Connectionist Perspective

Authors

  • Li Zhang Southwest University of Political Science and Law

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.17507/jltr.1402.21

Keywords:

native language transfer, second language vocabulary acquisition, the connectionist model

Abstract

Since the 1940s, the behaviorist paradigm, contrast analysis hypothesis and mentalist model have focused much attention on explaining the L1 - L2 relationship and how it works in second language acquisition. These studies support that different linguistic features of L1 and L2 would lead to language transfer. Nevertheless, there are still some questions being asked: How does native language transfer occur? What are the effective teaching methods to help L2 learners overcome the challenges of native language transfer? This study investigates native language transfer among Chinese university students in second language vocabulary acquisition. The results show that the connectionist model can explain the cognitive process of native language transfer through a dynamic approach, and adequate language input with timely grammar correction can enhance learning efficiency. The connectionist teaching method is effective in second language vocabulary acquisition.

Author Biography

Li Zhang, Southwest University of Political Science and Law

School of Foreign Languages

References

Anthony, J. R., Epstein, L. & Yu, B. (2017). Speech sound acquisition in a 5-year-old Spanish-English bilingual child. Perspectives of the ASHA Special Interest Groups, 2(14), 15–26.

Chater, N. & Christiansen, M. H. (1999). Connectionism and natural language processing. In Garrod, S. & Martin, P. (Eds.), Language Processing (1st ed., pp. 233-272). Psychology Press Ltd, Publishers.

Christiansen, M. H., & Chater, N. (1999). Connectionist natural language processing: The state of the art. Cognitive Science, 23(4), 417–437.

Conneau, A., & Guillaume, L. (2019). Cross-lingual language model pre-training. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 32: Annual Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems 2019, 7059–7069.

Deng, Y., & Liu, R. (2018). Language and culture. Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press.

Dulay, H., & Burt, M. (1974). Natural sequences in child second language acquisition. Language Learning, 24(1), 37-53.

Dulay, H., Burt, M., & Krashen, S. (1982). Language two. Oxford University Press.

Ellis, R. (1994). The study of second language acquisition. Oxford University Press.

Fries, C. (1945). Teaching and learning English as a foreign language. University of Michigan Press.

Gass, S., & Selinker, L. (2000). Second language acquisition: An introductory course. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc., Publishers.

Gooskens, C. (2007). The contribution of linguistic factors to the intelligibility of closely related languages. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development, 28(6), 445–467.

Gooskens, C., Vincent, J. V. H., Golubović, J., Schüppert, A., Swarte, F., & Voigt, S. (2018). Mutual intelligibility between closely related languages in Europe. International Journal of Multilingualism, 15(2), 169–193.

Harris, E. E. (1954). Nature, mind and modern science. Allen and Unwin; Macmillan.

Holzen, K. V., Fennell, C., & Mani, N. (2018). The impact of cross-language phonological overlap on bilingual and monolingual toddlers’ word recognition. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 22(3), 1–24.

Hulstijn, J. H., Hollander, M., & Greidanus, T. (1996). Incidental vocabulary learning by advanced foreign language students: The influence of marginal glosses, dictionary use, and recurrence of unknown words. Modern Language Journal, 80(3), 327-339.

Hyltenstam, K. (1984). The use of typological markedness conditions as predictors in second language acquisition: The case of pronominal copies in relative clauses. In Andersen, R. (Ed.), Second languages: A cross-linguistic perspective (1st ed., pp. 39-58). Newbury House.

Islam, A., & Inkpen, D. (2008). Semantic text similarity using corpus-based word similarity and string similarity. ACM Transactions on Knowledge Discovery from Data, 2(2), 1-25.

Kellerman, E. (2008). Transfer and non-transfer: Where we are now. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 2(1), 37-57.

Kohnert, K. J., Bates, E., & Hernandez, A. E. (1999). Balancing bilinguals: Lexical-semantic production and cognitive processing in children learning Spanish and English. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 42(6), 1400–1413.

Kutsuki, A. (2021). Do bilinguals acquire similar words to monolinguals? An examination of word acquisition and the similarity effect in Japanese-English bilinguals’ vocabularies. European Journal of Investigation in Health Psychology and Education, 11(1), 168-182.

Luk, G., & Bialystok, E. (2013). “Bilingualism is not a categorical variable: Interaction between language proficiency and usage.” Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 25(5), 605–621.

McClelland, J., St. John, M., & Taraban, R. (1989). Sentence processing: A parallel distributed processing approach. Language and Cognitive Process, 4(3/4), 287-335.

Moro, F., and Suchtelen, P. I. (2017). Dominant language transfer in heritage languages: Redefining the ‘structural’, and the ‘transfer’ in ‘structural transfer’’. In Peukert, H. and Gogolin, I. (Eds.), Dynamics of linguistic diversity, (Vol. 6, pp. 143–162). Amsterdam.

O’Reilly, R. C. & Rudy, J. W. (2001). Conjunctive representations in learning and memory: Principles of cortical and hippocampal function. Psychological Review, 108(2), 311–345.

Rohde, D. L. T. and Plaut, D. C. (2003). Connectionist models of language processing. Cognitive Studies, 10(1), 10-28.

Römer, U., O’Donnell, M. B. & Ellis, N. C. (2014). Second language learner knowledge of verb—Argument constructions: effects of language transfer and typology. The Modern Language Journal, 98(4), 952-975.

Rumelhart, D. E. & McClelland, J. L. (1986). On learning the past tenses of English verbs. In Psychological and biological models (Vol. 2, pp. 216-271). Bradford Books/MIT Press.

Rumelhart, D. E. & McClelland, J. L. (1987). Learning the past tenses of English verbs: Implicit rules or parallel distributed processing? In MacWhinney, B. (Ed.), Mechanisms of language acquisition (Vol. 16, pp. 195-248). Erlbaum.

Schachter, J. (1974). An error in error analysis. Language Learning, 24(2), 205-214.

Tabor, W. (1997). Book reviews: The human semantic potential: Spatial language and constrained connectionism. Computational Linguistics, 23(3), 483-486.

Wang, M. (2009). Cross-language transfer of phonological and orthographic processing skills from Spanish L1 to English L2. Reading and Writing. 24(5), 591-614

William, C. R. (2003). Handbook of second language acquisition. Emerald Group Pub Ltd.

Wu, S., & Dredze, M. (2019). The surprising cross-lingual effectiveness of BERT. In Proceedings of the 2019 conference on empirical methods in natural language processing and the 9th international joint conference on natural language processing (pp. 833–844). Hong Kong: Association for Computational Linguistics.

Zhang, Z. B., & Dai, W. D. (2016). A new concise English grammar. Shanghai: Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press.

Downloads

Published

2023-03-02

Issue

Section

Articles