beyond deﬁcits and crical periods

Beyond Deficits and Cri1cal Periods:

A Capaci1es Approach to Second Language Acquisi1on and Bilingualism

AAAL Annual Mee1ng Boston, 25 March 2012

David Birdsong University of Texas at Aus1n

Popular views of L2 aJainment

(Late) second language (L2) learners: – have foreign accents in the L2 – make grammar errors in the L2 – make word choice errors in the L2 – process the L2 inefficiently vs. the L1 & monolinguals – hear L2 speech sounds differently from monolingual na1ves

– produce the L2 with more effort than monolinguals –  recruit different areas of the brain when using the L2


(Late) second language (L2) learners: –  have foreign accents in the L2 –  make grammar errors in the L2 –  make word choice errors in the L2 –  process the L2 inefficiently vs. the L1 & monolinguals –  hear L2 speech sounds differently from monolingual na1ves –  produce the L2 with more effort than monolinguals –  recruit different areas of the brain when using the L2

Outcomes: Drama.cally different from L1A: Non‐monolingual‐like a=ainment


(Late) second language (L2) learners: –  have foreign accents in the L2 –  make grammar errors in the L2 –  make word choice errors in the L2 –  process the L2 inefficiently vs. the L1 & monolinguals –  hear L2 speech sounds differently from monolingual na1ves –  produce the L2 with more effort than monolinguals –  recruit different areas of the brain when using the L2


Research orienta.on: “Deficit model”

Popular views of L2 aJainment (Late) second language (L2) learners:

–  have foreign accents in the L2 –  make grammar errors in the L2 –  make word choice errors in the L2 –  process the L2 inefficiently vs. the L1 & monolinguals –  hear L2 speech sounds differently from monolingual na1ves –  produce the L2 with more effort than monolinguals –  recruit different areas of the brain when using the L2


Research orienta.on: “Deficit model” Explana.on: A matura.onally‐based cri.cal period constrains ul.mate L2 a=ainment



Research orienta.on: “Deficit model” Explana.on: A matura.onally‐based cri.cal period constrains ul.mate L2 a=ainment

The face of L2 acquisi1on


•  Depersonaliza1on: lines and dots


•  Depersonaliza1on: lines and dots •  Generaliza1on: dots represent age‐cohort averages; no sense of individual behaviors


•  Depersonaliza1on: lines and dots •  Generaliza1on: dots represent age‐cohort averages, no sense of individual behaviors

•  Damna1on: inescapable downward trajectory

Characteriza1ons of L2 acquisi1on

… children are geniuses un1l they turn 7 ... then there’s a systema1c decline … a[er puberty, we fall off the map

⇒ Grim future, determinis.c failure linked to age and the brain

•  Find out what goes wrong and why

Ideological orienta1on toward valorizing / studying deficiencies

Framing the nature / narra1ve of L2A in terms of cri1cal period constraints

=> Theory of qualita1ve L1‐L2 differences in

knowledge and processing

Deficits agenda of L2A research:

What goes wrong in L2A

(Late) second language (L2) learners: –  have foreign accents in the L2 – make grammar errors in the L2 – make word choice errors in the L2 –  process the L2 inefficiently vs. the L1 & monolinguals –  hear L2 speech sounds differently from monolingual na1ves

–  produce the L2 with more effort than monolinguals –  recruit different areas of the brain when using the L2

14

Research under ‘deficits model’

Methodologically: Not always considered: ‐ facilita1ng / inhibi1ng external factors ‐ individual pre‐existent processing‐component varia1ons ‐ reciprocal L2 <‐> L1 influence ‐ assurance of L2A asymptote ‐ possible biographical correlates of individual performance

15


Risks:

=> Full picture of L2 acquisi1on and use is not known

16


Risks:

=> Full picture of L2 acquisi1on and use is not known => Descrip1ve gaps with respect to capaci1es of learners

17


Risks:

=> Full picture of L2 acquisi1on and use is not known => Descrip1ve gaps with respect to capaci1es of learners Cf. orienta.on of medical science toward morbidity vs. health

18

Rounding out the picture: a capaci1es orienta1on

Goal: As a complement to deficits orienta.on, characterize L2 aJainment at asymptote under facilita1ng condi1ons

‐ maximized L2 input and interac1on ‐ minimized L1 input and interac1on ‐ mo1va1on components ‐ psycho‐social iden1fica1on components ‐ processing components stronger in L2 than L1 ‐ ap1tude components (≠ ‘freakish’ ap1tude) esp. WM

⇒  Theory of L1‐L2 differences and similari.es in knowledge and processing along qualita+ve and quan+ta+ve dimensions

19

Complemen1ng the deficiencies orienta1on: a capaci1es orienta1on

Methodologically: Sample the most relevant popula1ons

‐ L1 aJriters ‐ incen1vized L2ers: func1onal need for L2 na1velikeness ‐ L2ers desiring socio‐cultural integra1on, L2 iden1ty ‐ L2 dominants, defined in terms of:

• propor1on of use L2 > L1 • efficiency in processing L2 > L1 • global and modular scores on Bilingual Language Profile [more later]

= People for whom known inhibi.ng factors have been reduced (cf. L1 acquisi.on)

20

Complemen1ng the deficiencies orienta1on: a capaci1es orienta1on

Ra1onale: To differen1ate and understand ‐ what L2 users do

‐ what L2 users don’t do

‐ what L2 users can’t do

‐ what L2 users can do ‐ despite known impediments ‐‐>

Impediments to L2 acquisi1on and processing

Five sources / classes of explana1ons: ‐ Brain matura1on ‐ deficient language learning mechanisms ‐ lack of neural plas1city ‐ biochemical / hormonal changes ‐ L1 entrenchment ‐ interference effects ‐ Declining impetus to become na1velike ‐ liJle psycho‐social iden1fica1on ‐ Cogni1ve aging ‐ declines in speed/efficiency in memory & aJen1on ‐ possibly related to structural or biochemical changes in the brain ‐ Experien1al ‐ inadequate input & interac1on in L2 NB: Under each source, magnitude of effects on L2 performance tends to correlate with age of acquisi.on

Emphases under the capaci1es approach

Research at UT: significant numbers of L2ers DO NOT invariably:

–  have foreign accents in the L2 (DB) – make grammar errors in the L2 (DB) – make word choice errors in the L2 –  process the L2 inefficiently (LMG) –  hear L2 speech sounds differently from na1ves (ES/DB; JB)

–  produce the L2 with more effort than na1ves –  use different areas of the brain from na1ves when using the L2 (RR/DB)

Not captured under cri1cal period / deficits approach:

L1 performance among bilinguals ≠ L1 of monolinguals

Not captured under cri1cal period / deficits approach:

L1 performance among bilinguals ≠ L1 of monolinguals Second language (L2) learners, in their L1…

–  have ‘accents’ [incl. gesture] in the L1 –  make grammar errors in the L1 –  make word choice errors in the L1 –  process the L1 inefficiently –  hear L1 speech sounds differently from monolinguals –  produce the L1 with more effort than monolinguals –  use different areas of the brain from monolinguals when using each language

…esp. if the L2 is used frequently, esp. if L2 is their dominant language. CP / matura.on can’t be source

Beyond cri1cal period and deficits:

The nature of bilingualism: –  Effects of L2 are observed in most (all?) areas of L1 acquisi1on and processing

–  “Deficits” in both the L2 and L1 are found if monolingual standard is applied

–  “Deficits” in L1 can’t be accounted for under cri1cal period approach

– Non‐monolingual‐likeness in both L1 and L2 is inherent in the nature of bilingualism

Reconsider ‘what maJers’ Ortega (2009: 27)

“If bilingualism and language ac1va1on/dominance effects operate across all ages … the puta1ve impossibility to aJain na1velikeness a[er a certain age … may turn out to mean that it is impossible for bilinguals to be monolinguals. This would be inconsequen1al both from a theore1cal and a

prac1cal viewpoint.”

Reconsider ‘what maJers’ Hyltenstam & Abrahamsson

(2003: 540)

“What is of interest is…the development of…the exact species‐specific behavior. … an individual bird…must sing exactly in the way that other birds of that

specific species sing.”

Beyond ‘falling off the map’ (Johnson & Newport 1989)

Recogni1on of individual variability in cogni1ve neuroscience

Kanai et al. 2011, Nature Reviews Neuroscience

Individual differences in trainability ‐ word iden1fica1on

(Chandrasekaran et al., 2010)

Individual differences in L2 speech sound learning (adapted from Chandrasekaran, 2011)

Cogni1ve factors • Working memory • Age: suppression; execu1ve control

Psychoacous1c /sensory factors

Phone1c ability

Experien1al factors • Musical training • Other language experience

Gene1c factors

Mo1va1on Iden1ty

Toward Different Faces of L2 Learners and Bilinguals

Collec.vely, L2 learners and bilinguals: ‐ are affected by well‐understood impediments to L2 learning ‐ do not process / produce like monolinguals in either language

Toward Different Faces of L2 Learners and Bilinguals

As individuals, L2 learners and bilinguals: ‐ have varying opportuni1es for L2 learning in terms of L2 input and use ‐ have varying orienta1ons to L2 learning in terms of iden1ty, socializa1on, and will

When Joachim was 14, he and his mother and stepfather immigrated to Toronto. He picked up English by listening to radio DJ’s and the music they played. In the late 60’s, John Kay formed the rock band Steppenwolf and was its lead singer and songwriter. Steppenwolf’s list of hits includes •  Born to Be Wild •  Magic Carpet Ride •  The Pusher •  Hey Lawdy Mama •  Rock Me Kay’s lyrics and singing are famously na+velike. Few fans know he is a late learner of (Canadian) English. The first use of the term ‘heavy metal’ is aUributed to John Kay .

From the 1970’s onward, Kay has toured and recorded as a solo ar+st as well as with members of Steppenwolf. In 2004 John Kay was inducted into Canada’s Walk of Fame, in recogni+on of his early years as a Canadian ci+zen and the beginnings of his musical career in Toronto. Kay was present at the induc+on ceremony in Toronto, and reiterated his strong affec+on for Canada.

Also in 2004, John and his wife JuUa Maue Kay formed the Maue Kay Founda+on, which supports individuals and organiza+ons engaged in the protec+on of wildlife, the environment, and human rights in Africa and around the world. www.mauekay.org www.mauekay.org

JOHN KAY Excerpt from a telephone interview of John Kay on “Feet to

the Fire” Chicago talk‐radio show, April, 2008. The topic is the 1960’s.

John Kay was born Joachim Fritz Krauledat, 12 April 1944, in Tilsit East Prussia (now Sovetsk in Kaliningrad Oblast, Russia). Joachim’s father was killed in 1945 by advancing Soviet troops. Joachim and his mother fled to Arnstadt in East Germany, then in 1948 reseUled in Hannover.

Toward Different Faces of Age and L2 Acquisi1on

How about: Rough‐skinned adults: • des1ned for L1 ‐ L2 reciprocal influence


How about: Rough‐skinned adults: • des1ned for L1 ‐ L2 reciprocal influence • given condi1ons favorable to language acquisi1on =>high levels of L2 competence, proficiency, processing; and na1ve‐likeness in some respects


How about: Rough‐skinned adults: • des1ned for L1 ‐ L2 reciprocal influence • given condi1ons favorable to language acquisi1on =>high levels of L2 competence, proficiency, processing; and na1ve‐ likeness in some respects

• geniuses in their own right

Thank you

Assessing Dominance

40

Bilingual Language Profile Birdsong, Mallonee Gertken & Amengual (2011)

I. Biographical informa1on II. Language history III. Language use IV. Language proficiency V. Language aytudes

41

Conceptualizing dominance

•  Construct derives from the nature of bilingualism

– Dominance is inherently relativistic (vs. proficiency)

•  Describes the relationship between competencies in the two languages

e.g. rela1ve proficiency, use, processing capacity, etc. in L1 vs. L2

•  Dominance is gradient

41

42

Bilingual Language Profile (BLP)

Goals: –  Address needs of academics and non‐academics in a variety of contexts

–  Concise, quick, easy ques1onnaire (for par1cipants and researchers)

– Mul1‐measure approach

–  Equal weight given to each component

–  Con1nuous measure (vs. dichotomous groups)

–  Scaled (con1nuous) answers for each item

–  Online and open‐source 42

43

•  Bilingual Dominance Scale (Dunn & Fox Tree, 2009)

•  LEAP-Q: Language Experience and Proficiency Questionnaire (Marian, Blumenfeld, & Kaushanskaya, 2007)

Other Assessment Instruments

44

Current Uses

Spanish-Catalan bilinguals (Mark Amengual) •  An experimental approach to phonetic transfer in the production

and perception of early Spanish-Catalan bilinguals –  Phone1c transfer between the L1 and L2 vowel systems of Spanish‐Catalan bilinguals

–  Dominance is grouping factor (dichotomous and con1nuous)

Anglophone late learners of French (Libby M. Gertken) •  The Use of Structural and Lexical Information in Second Language

Sentence Processing: Evidence from Syntactic Priming during Comprehension –  Processing of syntac1c ambigui1es by advanced L2 users

–  How dominance is predic1ve of interpreta1on and reac1on 1mes 44

45

BLP / OPT

Correlation Results:

•  Self‐reported proficiency on the BLP correlates significantly with performance on standardized proficiency test (r = .63, p< .01)

45

46

BLP / AQT


•  BLP Dominance scores correlate significantly with AQT Dominance scores (r = .41, p< .01)

46

47

BLP Dominance / RTs


•  BLP Dominance scores correlate significantly with Reac1on Times to Agent/Pa1ent decisions a[er processing Implausible/Plausible, Canonical/Non‐canonical sentences in French (r = .37, p< .01)

47

48

Conclusions •  Study : BLP / OPT

–  Strong correla1on between BLP proficiency scores and OPT proficiency scores suggests accurate self‐repor1ng

•  Study : BLP / AQT

–  Criterion‐based validity established by comparing dominance scores on BLP and performance on AQT

–  Can we use it as a proxy for psycholinguis1c dominance?

•  Study : BLP / Reaction Times

–  Dominance may be a more important predictor when processing complex vs. simple construc1ons

48

49

Use of the BLP Current uses: •  Intended for healthy adult and adolescent bilinguals, school levels of literacy

•  Variety of language pairs: Catalan‐Spanish, English‐Spanish, English‐French, English‐Arabic...

•  Contexts of use: immigrant, L2A, simultaneous/early bilinguals

Future uses: •  More language pairs •  More bilingual contexts: heritage learners, aJri1on

49

50

Accessing & Using the BLP Instrument / user guide / ref’s / etc •  Center for Open Educational Resources and

Language Learning (COERLL)

– hJp://www.coerll.utexas.edu/coerll/

•  Bilingual Language Profile website:

– hJps://sites.la.utexas.edu/bilingual/

50

Thank you

beyond deﬁcits and crical periods

Documents