Intensifying constructions in second language acquisition: a diasystematic-constructionist approach

Van Goethem, Kristel;Hendrikx, Isa
(2021) Constructions in Contact 2. Language change, multilingual practices, and additional language acquisition — ISBN: [9789027208620], 375-428, published

Files

VanGoethemHendrikxIntensifyingconstructionsDCxGpreprint.pdf
  • Open Access
  • Adobe PDF
  • 1.48 MB
Download

Details

Authors
Abstract
In this study, we analyze the acquisition of Dutch intensifying constructions by French-speaking learners in Belgium. Additionally, we compare learners enrolled in Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL) programs with learners following traditional second language instruction. We focus on intensification of adjectives and show that French and Dutch share a wide range of morphological and syntactic intensifying constructions, while at the same time displaying certain language-specific patterns. Based on the cross-linguistic similarities and differences and on the expected beneficial effect of CLIL input on SLA, we assume that the CLIL learners’ L2 use of Dutch will integrate more features (both formal and semantic) typical of L1 Dutch intensification. The study takes a Diasystematic Constructionist approach (DCxG) (Höder 2012, 2014a, 2014b, 2018), which conceptualizes the linguistic competence of multilingual speakers as an “interlingual network of constructions with different degrees of schematicity” (Höder 2012: 255). Within this framework, we analyze the acquisition of intensifying constructions at three different levels of schematicity. The results of our study indicate that, despite cross-linguistic differences between particular native- and target-language intensifying constructions, additional input (through CLIL) does indeed facilitate the acquisition of intensifying constructions, since the CLIL students use intensifying constructions overall in a more target-like manner, compared with their non-CLIL peers. The CLIL effect is apparent throughout the different levels of abstraction, although the differences between both learner groups are not always statistically significant and the effect sizes are often small. Interestingly, the results allow us to unveil specific reorganizational processes that occur in the ‘diasystem’ of French-speaking learners of Dutch, such as the generalization or overgeneralization of particular schematic patterns and the inaccurate tagging of specific intensifiers. References Höder, S. (2012). Multilingual constructions: a diasystematic approach to common structures. In: K. Braunmüller & C. Gabriel (Eds), Multilingual individuals and multilingual societies (pp. 241-257). Amsterdam / Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company. Höder, S. (2014a). Constructing diasystems: Grammatical organisation in bilingual groups. In: T. A. Åfarli & B. Maehlum (Eds), Studies in Language Companion Series 154 (pp. 137-152). Amsterdam / Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company. Höder, S. (2014b). Convergence vs. divergence from a diasystematic perspective. In K. Braunmüller, S. Höder & K. Kühl (Eds), Stability and divergence in language contact: Factor and mechanisms (pp. 39-60). Amsterdam / Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company. Höder, S. (2018). Grammar is community-specific. Background and basic concepts of Diasystematic Construction Grammar. In H. Boas & S. Höder (Eds), Constructions in Contact. Constructional perspectives on contact phenomena in Germanic languages (pp. 37-70). Amsterdam / Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
Affiliations

Citations

  • APA
  • Chicago
  • FWB

Van Goethem, K., & Hendrikx, I. (2021). Intensifying constructions in second language acquisition: a diasystematic-constructionist approach. In Hans C. Boas & Steffen Höder (ed.), Constructions in Contact 2. Language change, multilingual practices, and additional language acquisition (pp. 375-428). JohnBenjamins Publishing Co. https://doi.org/10.1075/cal.30