Acquisition by processing: A modular perspective on language development

Abstract

The paper offers a model of language development, first and second, within a processing perspective. We first sketch a modular view of language, in which competence is embodied in the processing mechanisms. We then propose a novel approach to language acquisition (Acquisition by Processing Theory, or APT), in which development of the module occurs as a natural product of processing activity, without any acquisition mechanisms as such. The approach is illustrated and explicated through examples of the development of content words, derivational morphology, the functional category I with its variable features, and Case and thematic roles, as well as apparent cross-linguistic variation in processing strategies and the status of bootstrapping in the model. We then examine some possible applications to issues in second language acquisition – noticing the gap, the initial state, transfer, and the apparent limits of SLA – and finally offer a broader perspective on the model: its scope, its relations to other approaches, and its possible limits.

Whose? L2-English speakers' possessive pronoun gender errors

“…In this instance, only spontaneous speech production may be affected, while off-line tasks may result in very low error rates. The third possible reason for persistent errors is somewhat different from the previous two in that, while the first two are related to acquisition of L2 features, the third is related to processes that play in L1 -what has traditionally been labeled L1 transfer, and which Truscott and Sharwood Smith (2004) attribute to competition between two automatic procedures. In this case, the first language requires the implementation of an automatic procedure that is difficult to switch off when speaking the L2 (e.g., word order when the two languages differ).…”

“…Here, I would like to consider four different bilingual production models in more detail: De Bot's (1992) "Speaking" model adapted for multiple languages, the Declarative/Procedural model (Ullman, 2005), the Acquisition by Processing Theory (Truscott & Sharwood Smith, 2004), and Hartsuiker, Pickering and Veltkamp's proposal (2004). These models were devised within different frameworks, for different reasons, and to account for different kinds of evidence.…”

Unveiling linguistic competence by facilitating performance

“…It seems possible that syntax is not as economical if L1 knowledge and L2 knowledge compete in the course of syntactic derivation. In regard to L2 acquisition, Truscott and Sharwood-Smith (2004) speculate that when a syntactic representation for an L2 sentence is being built, competition for inclusion in the representation between L1 knowledge and L2 knowledge can occur. However, L1 knowledge has an "enormous advantage over its L2 counterpart" for its "extremely high resting level due to constant use over a long period" and thus "routinely wins the competition" (p. 14).…”

The Two Faces of SLA: Mental Representation and Skill

“…Nonetheless, while three ingredients are required for acquisition (input, parsers/processors, UG), what remains to be worked out are the details of how these work together (e.g., Carroll, 2001;Truscott & Sharwood Smith, 2004), as well as how other factors work (or do not work) with them (e.g., Gass, 2003). In addition, while the three ingredients may be present, complete acquisition is not guaranteed.…”