Aspect selection in adult L2 Spanish and the competing systems hypothesis: when pedagogical and linguistic rules conflict.

Native-like use of preterit and imperfect morphology in all contexts by English learners of L2 Spanish is the exception rather than the rule, even for successful learners. Nevertheless, recent research has demonstrated that advanced English learners of L2 Spanish attain a native-like morphosyntactic competence for the preterit/imperfect contrast, as evidenced by their native-like knowledge of associated semantic entailments (Goodin-Mayeda and Rothman 2007, Montrul and Slabakova 2003, Slabakova and Montrul 2003, Rothman and Iverson 2007). In addition to an L2 disassociation of morphology and syntax (e.g., Bruhn de Garavito 2003, Lardiere 1998, 2000, 2005, Prévost and White 1999, 2000, Schwartz 2003), I hypothesize that a system of learned pedagogical rules contributes to target-deviant L2 performance in this domain through the most advanced stages of L2 acquisition via its competition with the generative system. I call this hypothesis the Competing Systems Hypothesis. To test its predictions, I compare and contrast the use of the preterit and imperfect in two production tasks by native, tutored (classroom), and naturalistic learners of L2 Spanish.

Sometimes they use it, sometimes they don’t: an epistemological discussion of L2 morphological production and its use as a competence measurement

The main goal of all approaches to adult second language acquisition (SLA) is to accurately describe and explain the overall acquisition process. To accomplish this, SLA researchers must come to agree on some key issues. In this commentary, I defend the necessity of the competence/performance distinction and how this relates to why an examination of morphological production presents challenges for SLA research. I suggest that such a methodology is meaningful only when it is dovetailed with procedures that test for related syntactic/semantic knowledge.

Heritage speaker competence differences, language change and input type: inflected infinitives in Heritage Brazilian Portuguese

It has been argued that colloquial dialects of Brazilian Portuguese (BP) have undergone significant linguistic change resulting in the loss of inflected infinitives (e.g., Pires, 2002, 2006). Since BP adults, at least educated ones, have complete knowledge of inflected infinitives, the implicit claim is that they are transmitted via formal education in the standard dialect. In the present article, I test one of the latent predictions of such claims; namely, the fact that heritage speakers of BP who lack formal education in the standard dialect should never develop native-like knowledge of inflected infinitives. In doing so, I highlight two significant implications (a) that heritage speaker grammars are a good source for testing dialectal variation and language change proposals and (b) incomplete acquisition and/or attrition are not the only sources of heritage language competence differences. Employing the syntactic and semantic tests of Rothman and Iverson (2007), I compare heritage speakers' knowledge to Rothman and Iverson's advanced adult L2 learners and educated native controls. Unlike the latter groups, the data for heritage speakers indicate that they do not have target knowledge of inflected infinitives, lending support to Pires' claims, suggesting that literacy plays a significant role in the acquisition of this grammatical property in BP.

Input type and parameter resetting: is naturalistic input necessary?

It has been argued that extended exposure to naturalistic input provides L2 learners with more of an opportunity to converge of target morphosyntactic competence as compared to classroom-only environments, given that the former provide more positive evidence of less salient linguistic properties than the latter (e.g., Isabelli 2004). Implicitly, the claim is that such exposure is needed to fully reset parameters. However, such a position conflicts with the notion of parameterization (cf. Rothman and Iverson 2007). In light of two types of competing generative theories of adult L2 acquisition – the No Impairment Hypothesis (e.g., Duffield and White 1999) and so-called Failed Features approaches (e.g., Beck 1998; Franceschina 2001; Hawkins and Chan 1997), we investigate the verifiability of such a claim. Thirty intermediate L2 Spanish learners were tested in regards to properties of the Null-Subject Parameter before and after study-abroad. The data suggest that (i) parameter resetting is possible and (ii) exposure to naturalistic input is not privileged.

Linguistic epistemology and the notion of monolingualism

This article has several interrelated goals, all of which relate to an attempt at understanding why monolingualism is taken to be the default norm in linguistic inquiry (from sociolinguistics to formal linguistic theorizing). With others, I will take the position that comparing instances of multilingualism to so-called monolingualism is an unfair and inevitably inaccurate comparison since, among other variables, the social environments and access to input of multilinguals compared to monolinguals is most often unavoidably different (cf. Cruz-Ferreira 2006; Edwards 2004). Additionally, I will attempt to demonstrate that even so-called monolinguals have access to a variety of grammars related to different registers of speech and, therefore, are not truly monolingual in the sense that they poses one monolithic grammatical competence. Taken together, the present discussion questions both the default status of monolingualism as well as the functional adequacy of the term monolingualism.