Prior Linguistic Knowledge Influences Implicit Language Learning

Prior Linguistic Knowledge Influences Implicit Language Learning Janny H.C. Leung (jannyleung@hku.hk) School of English, The University of Hong Kong, 735 Run Run Shaw Tower, Centennial Campus, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong John N. Williams (jnw12@cam.ac.uk) Department of Theoretical and Applied Linguistics, University of Cambridge 9 West Road, Cambridge CB3 9DP, United Kingdom Natural language learning is a case in point – some believe that linguistic universals constrain both first and second language acquisition (Chomsky, 2006; Hawkins, 2004) and that in both cases the theoretically interesting learning processes operate at the implicit level. Even those who dispute the nature of such linguistic universals would accept that second language acquisition (SLA) is heavily influenced by first language (L1) knowledge, or L1-based processing strategies (MacWhinney, 2008; Ellis & Sagarra, 2011). Second language (L2) learners approach SLA with existing linguistic knowledge and habits they have gathered from their first language acquisition experience. Cross-linguistic influence is well documented in the SLA literature, much of which is concerned with identifying the ways in which elements from one language get incorporated into another, accounting for errors, contrastive analysis, and interaction of transfer effects with other factors. Ellis (1994/2001: 300) argues that no theory of SLA “can be considered complete” if it ignores the learner’s prior linguistic knowledge. In a similar vein, if IL is posited as an underlying mechanism of language acquisition, one must also consider whether and how the influences of prior linguistic experience on learning take place implicitly. In the SLA literature, cross-linguistic influences are sometimes thought of in terms of hypothesis testing and learner strategies (Corder, 1981; Tomasello & Herron, 1989), implying a certain degree of intention and awareness in the process. Although it is difficult to imagine that such influences involve only explicit processes, there does not seem to be empirical effort to demonstrate such influences operating at the implicit level during learning. Moreover, cross-linguistic influence is found to be subject to general constraints such as language proficiency, sociolinguistic factors, markedness, prototypicality, language distance and psychotypology, and developmental factors (Ellis, 1994/2001). The interaction of such constraints with domain general learning mechanisms begs for research. Abstract We report three experiments that explore the effect of prior linguistic knowledge on implicit language learning. Native speakers of English and native speakers of Cantonese participated in implicit learning (IL) experiments that involved different learning materials. In Experiment 1, both participant groups showed evidence of learning a mapping between articles and noun animacy. In Experiment 2, neither group showed learning of the mapping between articles and a linguistically anomalous concept (the number of capital letters in an English word or the number of strokes in a Chinese character). In Experiment 3, the Chinese group, but not the English group, showed evidence of learning a mapping between articles and a concept derived from the Chinese classifier system. It was concluded that first language knowledge affected implicit language learning, and that IL, at least when natural language learning is concerned, is not a completely unconstrained domain-general mechanism. Keywords: implicit learning; form-meaning connections; vocabulary learning; second language acquisition; cross-linguistic influence Introduction Traditional implicit learning (IL) (as contrasted with explicit learning, EL) research has sought to minimise the effect of prior knowledge, either by using artificial grammars (e.g., Reber, 1967) or artificial event sequences (e.g., serial reaction time experiments; e.g., Nissen & Bullemer, 1987). Perruchet and Pacton (2006: 237) suggest that even arbitrary materials may not be “neutral” enough, for they may interact with related situational knowledge. It is typically assumed that domain general mechanisms underlie IL, but in many real life situations the learner may bring relevant domain- specific prior knowledge or dispositions, so the question arises as to whether, or how, these impact upon the IL process. Our earlier work has begun to show that learning processes supporting implicit language learning