The role of morphological complexity in predicting the learnability of an additional language: The case of La (additional language) Dutch

Abstract

Applied linguistics may benefit from a morphological complexity measure to get a better grip on language learning problems and to better understand what kind of typological differences between languages are more important than others in facilitating or impeding adult learning of an additional language. Using speaking proficiency scores of 9,000 adult learners of Dutch as an additional language, we reproduced the findings of the Schepens et al. (2013a) study, using a reduced morphological complexity measure. We wanted to define a reduced measure to reveal which morphological features constitute the really important learning problems. Adult language learners whose first language (L1) has a less complex morphological feature configuration than Dutch turned out to have more learning difficulties in acquiring Dutch the less complex their L1 is in relation to Dutch. The reduced measure contains eight features only. In addition, we found cognitive aging effects that corroborate the construct validity of the morphological measure we used. Generally, adult language learners’ speaking skills in Dutch improve when residing longer in the host country. However, this conclusion is only warranted when their L1 morphological complexity is at least comparable to Dutch morphological complexity. If the morphological complexity of their L1 is lower as compared to Dutch, the effect of length of residence may even reverse and have a negative impact on speaking skills in Dutch. It was observed that the negative effect of age of arrival is mitigated when adult language learners have a command of a second language (L2) with higher morphological complexity. We give morphological information for five additional target languages: Afrikaans, Chinese, English, German, and Spanish.

Syntactic awareness skills in English among children who speak Slavic or Chinese languages as a first language and English as a second language

“…The results of the current study support previous findings showing that increased morphological complexity of L2, as compared with L1, results in lower L2 learnability (Schepens et al, 2013a; van der Slik, Hout, & Schepens, 2017). Specifically, the findings may be related to the complexity and to the heavily inflected structure of the Slavic languages, in comparison to English.…”

“…This study examined the impact of the morphological complexity of their L1 and L2 on their speaking proficiency scores in Dutch. It was found that adult language learners whose first language (L1) had a less complex morphological feature configuration than Dutch had greater difficulty in acquiring Dutch the less complex their L1 was in relation to Dutch (van der Slik, Hout, & Schepens, 2017).…”

The phraseological dimension in interlanguage complexity research

“…), and it should be verified whether the measures could be used to gauge proficiency and trace language development in other foreign languages (see Pallotti and Brezina, 2019, De Clercq and Housen, 2019). This is a particularly promising avenue for research as it will make it possible to appraise the role of complexification vis-à-vis crosslinguistic influence in foreign language development (see Ehret and Szmrecsanyi, 2019; van der Slik et al, 2019).…”

“…Researchers have also recognized that interlanguage complexity can, and should, be studied in other domains of the language system, such as phonology, lexis or morphology (e.g. Bulté and Housen, 2012; De Clercq and Housen, 2019; Housen et al, 2019; Pallotti and Brezina, 2019; van der Slik et al, 2019; Wolfe-Quintero et al, 1998). However, no systematic attempt has been made to date to theorize and operationalize linguistic complexity at the level of word combinations.…”

How Does L1 and L2 Exposure Impact L1 Performance in Bilingual Children? Evidence from Polish-English Migrants to the United Kingdom

“…More specifically, when repeating Polish sentences in the SRep task, which involves accessing the mental representation of a given structure, the knowledge of English syntactic templates possibly interfered with the knowledge of Polish syntax, leading to errors in the production of syntactically complex Polish sentences. Another possible explanation is that the early acquisition of English, a language less morphosyntactically complex than Polish, “desensitized” children to the complexity of Polish inflection ( van der Slik et al, 2017 ). However, at this point the above interpretations of the negative effect of L2 exposure on the scores in L1 SRep task are only speculative.…”