Experience, aptitude and individual differences in native language ultimate attainment

Abstract

Several recent studies have demonstrated that some native speakers do not fully master some fairly basic grammatical constructions of their language, thus challenging the widely-held assumption that all native speakers converge on the same grammar. This study investigates the extent of individual differences in adult native speakers' knowledge of a range of constructions as well as vocabulary size and collocational knowledge, and explores the relationship between these three aspects of linguistic knowledge and four nonlinguistic predictors: nonverbal IQ, language aptitude, print exposure and education. Individual differences in grammatical attainment were comparable to those observed for vocabulary and collocations; furthermore, performance on tests assessing speakers' knowledge of these three aspects of language was correlated (rs from 0.38 to 0.57). Two of the nonlinguistic measures, print exposure and education, were found to contribute to variance in all three language tests, albeit to different extents. In addition, nonverbal IQ was found to be relevant for grammar and vocabulary, and language aptitude for grammar. These findings are broadly compatible with usage-based models of language and problematic for modular theories.

Experience, Aptitude, and Individual Differences in Linguistic Attainment: A Comparison of Native and Nonnative Speakers

“…When IQ is excluded from the model, the only significant predictor of performance is language analysis, which accounts for 21% of the variance. Moreover, when only performance on the six most difficult structures is considered, we do get a small but significant effect of language analytic ability in addition to an effect of nonverbal IQ (see Dąbrowska, ).…”

“…Finally, I conduct two sets of regression analyses. The first set examines the role of factors that were previously shown to predict performance on the grammar, vocabulary, and collocations tasks in native speakers: namely, education, print exposure, nonverbal IQ, and language aptitude (see Dąbrowska, 2018), as well as age, which-as we will see-shows a different pattern of relationships with linguistic abilities in the two language groups. The second set of regressions examines the relationship between linguistic abilities and some additional predictors that are relevant only for nonnative speakers: namely, age of first exposure, AoA, education in native language, education in English, use of English, and LoR.…”

“…Note, however, the study described in Dąbrowska (), which used a different measure of grammatical abilities, did find a small but significant effect of education in the same group of L1 speakers of English. In the earlier study, the dependent variable was the proportion of correct responses (adjusted for guessing) in the experimental conditions (i.e., Passives, Postmodified Subjects, Object Clefts, Object Relatives, and the two quantifier constructions).…”

“…However, this is not possible due to multicollinearity: As can be seen from Table S3 in the Supporting Information online, age at testing is strongly associated with both AoA and LoR. 3 Note, however, the study described in Dąbrowska (2018), which used a different measure of grammatical abilities, did find a small but significant effect of education in the same group of L1 speakers of English. In the earlier study, the dependent variable was the proportion of correct responses (adjusted for guessing) in the experimental conditions (i.e., Passives, Postmodified Subjects, Object Clefts, Object…”

Reduced Competition Effects and Noisier Representations in a Second Language

“…Adults who learn a new language typically fail to reach the same level of proficiency that first language (L1) speakers do (Hartshorne, Tenenbaum, & Pinker, 2018; although see Dąbrowska, 2018). Even learners who live in countries that predominantly use the second language (L2) sometimes produce errors that L1 speakers avoid.…”