Intensifying constructions in French-speaking L2 learners of Dutch: longitudinal results
(2017) Morphology Days 2017 — Location: Louvain-la-Neuve, Belgium (23.November.2017)
Files
Presentation_MD_18112017.pdf
Open Access - Adobe PDF
- 987.56 KB
Details
- Authors
Hendrikx, Isa 
- Abstract
- Intensification can be expressed cross-linguistically by several morphological and syntactic constructions (among others, Kirschbaum 2002; Hoeksema 2011, 2012; Zeschel 2012; Rainer 2015). The diversity of constructions available to express a single function implies a form-function asymmetry; alongside marked language-specific preferences for particular types of intensification complicate the acquisition of intensifying constructions for second language learners. In this contribution we will explore the longitudinal impact of Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL) on the acquisition of intensifying constructions in an L2 . Our research is situated within the theoretical framework of usage-based Construction Grammar and Construction Morphology (cf. Tomasello 2003; Booij 2010; Goldberg 2010 among others). Second language acquisition is presumed to be complex because of the competition between L1 and L2 constructions (Ellis & Cadierno 2009). This study focuses on one specific case of such constructional competition, namely the expression of adjectival intensification in the interlanguage of French-speaking learners of Dutch or English. More specifically, we will address three research questions: (i) To what extent can we observe variation in the use of intensifying constructions between the native and learner language? (ii) Does more input provided through a Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL) approach lead to a more native-like acquisition of intensifying constructions? (iii) What developments can we observe in the learners’ use of intensifying constructions from a longitudinal point of view (over the course of two academic years)? The data for this study come from a corpus of the written productions in the form of fictional e-mails on the subject of a party or holidays. We compare texts written in 2015 and in 2017 by the same French-speaking secondary school pupils (aged 16-18), in CLIL and non-CLIL settings learning Dutch (CLIL n=132; non-CLIL n=100) or English (CLIL n=90; non-CLIL n=90) as a foreign language, and control groups of 63 native speakers of Dutch and 68 native speakers of English of about the same age. All instances of intensifying constructions observed in this corpus are subjected to a collostructional analysis, which expresses the degree of attraction/repulsion of a lexeme to an intensifying construction in the form of pbin-values (Stefanowitsch and Gries 2003; Gries 2007; Ellis and Ferreira Junior 2009; Hoffmann 2011). We already conducted a covarying collexeme analysis (Gries 2007) on the 2015 data, and showed its benefits: idiosyncratic uses of intensifying constructions are easily identified in the L1 corpora, and misuse (spelling mistakes, grammatical mistakes and semantic misuse) is efficiently detected in the learner corpora (Hendrikx et. al 2017). The first analysis showed amongst others that intensifying compounds are significant collostructions in the L1 corpora, e.g. bloedheet lit. ‘blood-hot’ (pbin=2,668 in native Dutch) and crystal clear (pbin= 2.792 L1 English) while non-CLIL learners use those particular constructions rarely or not at all. The collostructional analysis also unveiled erroneous [Intensifier + Adjective] collocations in the learner corpora: for instance, *veel leuk ‘many nice’ (pbin 1,533 for non-CLIL learners). In the present study, the collostructional analysis will be utilized to investigate longitudinal developments in the learners’ acquisition of intensifying constructions. References: Booij, G. (2010). Construction Morphology. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Ellis, N., & Cadierno, T. (2009). Constructing a Second Language. Introduction to the Special Section. Annual Review of Cognitive Linguistics 7, 111-139. Ellis, N. & Ferreira-Junior, F. (2009). Constructions and their acquisition: Islands and the distinctiveness of their occupancy. Annual Review of Cognitive Linguistics 7. 187-220. Goldberg, A. (2010) [2006]. Constructions at Work. The nature of Generalization in Language. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Gries, Stefan Th. (2007). Coll.analysis 3.2a. A program for R for Windows 2.x. Hendrikx, I., Van Goethem, K., & Meunier, F. (2017). The expression of intensification in the interlanguage of French-speaking CLIL and non-CLIL learners of English. Oral presentation at Cogling7, January 5th and 6th, 2017. Radboud University, Nijmegen The Netherlands. Hiligsmann, Ph., Van Mensel, L., Galand, B., Mettewie, L., Meunier, F., Szmalec, A., Van Goethem, K., Bulon, A., De Smet, A., Hendrikx, I. & Simonis, M. (2017). Content and Language Integrated Learning: linguistic, cognitive and educational perspectives. Cahiers du Girsef. Hoeksema, J. (2011). Bepalingen van graad in eerste-taalverwerving. TABU, 39(1/2), 1 - 22. Hoeksema, J. (2012). Elative compounds in Dutch: Properties and developments. In Oebel, G. (Eds.), Intensivierungskonzepte bei Adjektiven und Adverben im Sprachvergleich, (pp. 97-142). Hamburg: Verlag Dr. Kovac. Hoffmann, T. (2011). Preposition Placement in English: A Usage-Based Approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Kirschbaum, I. (2002). Schrecklig Nett Und Voll Verrückt Muster Der Adjektiv-Intensivierung Im Deutschen. Thesis. Düsseldorf, Universität, Diss 2002. Düsseldorf. Rainer, F. (2015) 77. Intensification. In Peter O. Müller (Ed.), Word-Formation: An International Handbook of the Languages of Europe. Berlin/Boston: De Gruyter Mouton. Riegel, M., Pellat, J.-C., Rioul, R. (1994). Grammaire méthodique du français. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France. Stefanowitsch, A. & Gries, S. (2003). Collostructions: Investigating the interaction of words and constructions. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics 8:2, 209-243. Tomasello, M. (2003). Constructing a language: A Usage-Based Theory of Language Acquisition. Boston: Harvard University Press. Zeschel, A. (2012). Incipient Productivity. A Construction-Based Approach to Linguistic Creativity. Berlin, Boston: De Gruyter Mouton. Retrieved 25 Jan. 2017, from http://www.degruyter.com/view/product/180582
- Affiliations
Citations
Hendrikx, I. (2017). Intensifying constructions in French-speaking L2 learners of Dutch: longitudinal results. Morphology Days 2017, Louvain-la-Neuve, Belgium. https://hdl.handle.net/2078.5/91311