Principles of information organization in L2 use: Complex patterns of conceptual transfer

Abstract

We will start the discussion of this special issue by placing the present domains of investigation within the broader context of the debate on languagespecificity in conceptualization processes. The debate has gained momentum in recent years, but central issues are still theoretically controversial and empirically inconsistent. The exact nature of the interrelation between language (in the sense of a specific language and specific linguistic structures) and the conceptual processes involved in language use is not clear. We can assume, on the basis of studies in this field and the focus on patterns of actual language usage, that the nature of this interrelation is highly dynamic in that it can differ across tasks, contexts, conditions and levels of complexity. The specific contribution of L2 studies to this debate is that it allows the comparison of processes of conceptualization which relate to the use of a specific language, to those of a different language, within an individual speaker. If cognitive processes during language tasks are somehow shaped by the categories of the respective mother tongue, speakers of a second language should -depending on the level of proficiency and the specific typological profile of the L1 (source language) and L2 (target language) -show divergent patterns from target standards with respect to the selection and organization of content for expression. Cook (1981) has already put the investigation of L2 users forward as a possible window on the language -cognition interrelation: "It would be highly useful if we could, so to speak, disengage the two processes of language and cognitive development and look at people whose level of thinking is out of step with their level of language (i.d second language learners)" (Cook 1981: 255; see also Bassetti and Cook 2011).When focusing on the dynamics of the interrelation between language and cognitive processing, it is useful to draw on a language production model which spells out the different components and phases in the generation of a verbal representation of a given state of affairs. Levelt (1989) distinguishes three modBrought to you by | Max-Planck-Gesellschaft -WIB6417

Additive Linking in Second Language Discourse: Lexical, Syntactic and Discourse Organizational Choices in Intermediate and Advanced Learners of L2 German with L1 French

“…At the same time, an assertion-based organization is largely ignored, even in contexts eliciting the relevant information structure r om native speakers in a reliable way. As predicted by Flecken et al (2013; cf. Introduction), we are thus dealing with a hybrid system that involves source as well as target organizational principles.…”

“…Without such markings, a task such as describing a picture or telling a story would result in a sequence of isolated utterances rather than a connected discourse or text. Prior research (von Stutterheim et al, 2013) suggests that the selection of information units (e.g., protagonist, time) that speakers exploit to create coherence relations across utterances is at least partly dependent on the language specifi c inventories of grammatical categories (syntactic properties of subject, tense, aspect, etc.) in their language.…”

“…Flecken et al (2013) discuss a number of recent studies on the L2 acquisition of discourse organization and conclude that the acquisition of target language lexical or grammatical properties does not necessarily entail a target-like discourse organization. The task of acquiring the formal expression of a grammatical category, e.g., the progressive aspect in L2 English, is diff erent r om the task of identiy ing and applying the principles guiding the function of the progressive aspect in the temporal structure of a narration.…”

“…Furthermore, fi rst language (L1) organizational principles are assumed to be deep-rooted and L1-L2 diff erences in discourse organization are assumed to be harder to detect than surface diff erences in grammatical form. An 5 attempt by advanced L2 learners to restructure discourse in accordance with the target language's grammatical properties is thus likely to result in a hybrid system involving L1 as well as L2 organizational principles (Flecken et al, 2013).…”

Driving Along the Road or Heading for the Village? Conceptual Differences Underlying Motion Event Encoding in French, German, and French–German L2 Users

“…This leads us to conclude that longterm experience in language use (and immersion) is crucial in mastering the L2 at all levels, including processes of conceptualization, and understanding language-specific ways of attending to and construing events (see e.g., Athanasopoulos et al, 2015;. The findings thus pinpoint the role of attentional processes and the associated conceptualization patterns when processing information for expression as the crux for the learner in L2 acquisition, thus going beyond the acquisition of linguistic form alone (see also Flecken, von Stutterheim, & Carroll, 2013). This is something which, presumably, cannot be acquired through classroom teaching with relatively little L2 exposure.…”