Applicability of processability theory to Japanese adolescent EFL learners: A case study of early L2 syntactic and morphological development

Abstract Processability theory (PT) predicts that all L2 learners follow fixed developmental schedules due to psycholinguistic constraints, accounting for the development of syntax and morphology within the same framework. Recent studies, however, report some counterevidence on morphological development. The theory has not been tested sufficiently in EFL contexts. This study examined the applicability of PT to Japanese adolescent EFL learners. Through four communicative tasks, we elicited spontaneous spoken data from 14 Japanese secondary students and cross-sectionally analyzed 15 syntactic and 6 morphological structures using implicational scaling. The study identified four major findings. First, PT prediction is applicable to early EFL learning. Second, there are two different developmental paths and language learners' syntactic development tends to emerge before morphological development. Third, morphological development, particularly phrasal plural-marking, is not always well-mapped to PT prediction. Fourth, formulae seem to play an important role in scaffolding productive use of grammatical structures. These findings indicate that PT needs to be modified to account for the developmental gap between syntax and morphology. They also suggest that L2 instructors should consider language learners’ morphological development more in task-based language teaching. Further research should include elaborate analyses of morphological development and the role of formulae in acquiring grammatical structures.

[1]  Michael H. Long.  Second Language Acquisition and Task-Based Language Teaching , 2014 .

[2]  J. Bresnan.  Lexical-Functional Syntax , 2000 .

[3]  Jan Svartvik,et al.  A __ comprehensive grammar of the English language , 1988 .

[4]  James R. Nattinger,et al.  Lexical Phrases and Language Teaching , 1992 .

[5]  Satomi Kawaguchi,et al.  Extending processability theory , 2005 .

[6]  Bronwen Patricia Dyson.  Processability Theory and the role of morphology in English as a second language development: a longitudinal study , 2009 .

[7]  Manfred Pienemann,et al.  Language Processing and Second Language Development: Processability theory , 1998 .

[8]  C. Felser,et al.  Morphological Structure in Native and Nonnative Language Processing , 2010 .

[9]  Patti Spinner.  Second Language Assessment and Morphosyntactic Development. , 2011 .

[10]  R. Young,et al.  Variation and the Interlanguage Hypothesis , 1988, Studies in Second Language Acquisition.

[11]  Gisela Håkansson,et al.  Transfer and typological proximity in the context of second language processing , 2002 .

[12]  S. Pfenninger.  Age effects on the acquisition of nominal and verbal inflections in an instructed setting , 2011 .

[13]  J. Sinclair,et al.  Towards an analysis of discourse , 1977 .

[14]  Michael H. Long,et al.  An introduction to second language acquisition research , 1990 .

[15]  R. Weinert.  The Role of Formulaic Language in Second Language Acquisition: A Review , 1995 .

[16]  K. Bailey.  The Research Manual: Design and Statistics for Applied Linguistics , 1991 .

[17]  Alan Tonkyn,et al.  Measuring spoken language: a unit for all reasons , 2000 .

[18]  Manfred Pienemann,et al.  Constructing an Acquisition-Based Procedure for Second Language Assessment , 1988, Studies in Second Language Acquisition.

[19]  Anke Lenzing,et al.  The Development of the Grammatical System in Early Second Language Acquisition: The Multiple Constraints Hypothesis , 2013 .

[20]  Alison Mackey,et al.  INPUT, INTERACTION, AND SECOND LANGUAGE DEVELOPMENT , 1999, Studies in Second Language Acquisition.

[21]  B. MacWhinney.  The CHILDES project: tools for analyzing talk , 1992 .

[22]  Allison Mackey,et al.  Targeting Morpho-Syntax in Children's ESL: An Empirical Study of the Use of Interactive Goal-Based Tasks. , 1994 .

[23]  Loan Hong Thi Dao.  Foreign language acquisition: Processes and constraints , 2007 .

[24]  Nan Jiang.  Selective Integration of Linguistic Knowledge in Adult Second Language Learning , 2007 .

[25]  Satomi Kawaguchi,et al.  Exploring the typological plausibility of Processability Theory: language development in Italian second language and Japanese second language , 2002 .

[26]  Nick C. Ellis,et al.  Formulaic Language and Second Language Acquisition: Zipf and the Phrasal Teddy Bear , 2012, Annual Review of Applied Linguistics.

[27]  G. Jia,et al.  Acquisition of english grammatical morphology by native mandarin-speaking children and adolescents: age-related differences. , 2007, Journal of speech, language, and hearing research : JSLHR.

[28]  Carrie L. Bonilla.  From number agreement to the subjunctive: Evidence for Processability Theory in L2 Spanish , 2015 .

[29]  Richard Young.  Functional Constraints on Variation in Interlanguage Morphology , 1993 .

[30]  L. Dao,et al.  Reassessing the applicability of Processability Theory: The case of nominal plural , 2011 .

[31]  Steven Pinker,et al.  Words and rules , 1998 .

[32]  Ann M. Peters,et al.  The Units of Language Acquisition , 1983 .

[33]  Manfred Pienemann,et al.  Cross-linguistic aspects of processability theory , 2005 .

[34]  G. Pallotti,et al.  An operational definition of the emergence criterion , 2007 .

[35]  Nick C. Ellis,et al.  FREQUENCY EFFECTS IN LANGUAGE PROCESSING , 2002, Studies in Second Language Acquisition.

[36]  Hideki Sakai,et al.  An analysis of Japanese university students’ oral performance in English using processability theory , 2008 .

[37]  Yanyin Zhang.  5. Processing and formal instruction in the L2 acquisition of five Chinese grammatical morphemes , 2005 .

[38]  Alison Mackey,et al.  The Routledge handbook of second language acquisition , 2012 .

[39]  Anne Cutler,et al.  A theory of lexical access in speech production , 1999, Behavioral and Brain Sciences.

[40]  W. Levelt,et al.  Speaking: From Intention to Articulation , 1990 .

[41]  Satomi Kawaguchi.  Argument structure and syntactic development in Japanese as a second language , 2005 .

[42]  E. Blom,et al.  Effects of input properties, vocabulary size, and L1 on the development of third person singular –s in child L2 English , 2012 .

[43]  Timothy M. Hall,et al.  L2 Learner-Made Formulaic Expressions and Constructions , 2010 .

[44]  R. Dekeyser.  WHAT MAKES LEARNING SECOND-LANGUAGE GRAMMAR DIFFICULT? AREVIEW OF ISSUES , 2005 .

[45]  Alison Mackey,et al.  An empirical study of children's ESL development , 1993 .

[46]  K. Hakuta.  PREFABRICATED PATTERNS AND THE EMERGENCE OF STRUCTURE IN SECOND LANGUAGE ACQUISITION1 , 1974 .

[47]  Yanyin Zhang,et al.  Acquisition of L2 English morphology: A family case study , 2010 .

[48]  Alex Housen,et al.  Complexity, accuracy and fluency in second language acquisition , 2009 .