The Lexicon-syntax Interface in Second Language Acquisition (Review)
Liang Chen
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1353/lan.2006.0082
2006-01-01
Language
Abstract:Reviewed by: The lexicon-syntax interface in second language acquisition ed. by Roeland van Hout, Aafke Hulk, Folkert Kuiken, and Richard J. Towell Liang Chen The lexicon-syntax interface in second language acquisition. Ed. by Roeland van Hout, Aafke Hulk, Folkert Kuiken, and Richard J. Towell. (Language acquisition and language disorders 30.) Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 2003. Pp. vi, 232. ISBN 158811418X. $119 (Hb). This volume contains ten papers, including introductory and concluding chapters by the editors. These papers were presented at ‘The interface between syntax and the lexicon in second language acquisition’ seminar organized by the editors and held in Amsterdam in 2001. Richard Towell (1–20) first outlines the linguistic and psychological perspectives of second language acquisition (SLA) as a context against which the eight papers are then briefly introduced and evaluated. The complementary nature of such different perspectives of SLA research is highlighted. Roger Hawkins and Sara Liszka (21–44) attribute errors in tense marking made by Chinese speakers of English in their spontaneous oral production (e.g. The police CAUGHT the man and TAKE him away.) to the difficulty in assigning the formal feature [past] to the category T(ense), as such a feature is not selected in their first language (L1). Norbert Corver (45–68) analyzes second language (L2) expressions produced by Turkish L2 learners of Dutch within a minimalist interface perspective and argues that ‘L2-expressions are perfect grammatical objects, where perfection amounts to legibility of its information to the systems with which it interacts’ (66). Ineke van de Craats (69–96) uses longitudinal data of eight adults with Turkish and Moroccan Arabic L1 backgrounds learning Dutch as an L2 to explore how the grammatical knowledge of an L2 learner is encoded in the lexicon. It is argued that while these L2 learners are more aware of crosslinguistic differences in morphological and lexical properties of words, they originally assume the L1 formal feature constellation, which gradually changes in favor of the L2 ones. Nigel Duffield (97–128) proposes a dual model of competence to account for both the categorical aspects and the various types of lexical and syntactic gradient effects of our implicit grammatical knowledge. Ton Dijkstra (129–50) reviews available literature on the lexical storage and retrieval in bilinguals, which suggests (i) a largely automatic bilingual word identification system, (ii) the slower activation of L2 than L1, depending on relative L1/L2 proficiency, and (iii) the potential influence of experimental and contextual factors on patterns observed in experiments. John N. Williams (151–74) focuses on the similarities and differences between human and connectionist learning of noun classes. In particular, it is argued that while an arbitrary noun class system with masculine and feminine genders is learnable both by humans and by connectionist networks (via distributional information), gender is a persistent problem in SLA as well as in connectionist learning. Laura Sabourin and Marco Haverkort (175–96) show that differences in linguistic processing are quantitative between aphasic speakers and normative speakers, but are qualitative between native speakers and second language learners. David W. Green (197–218) reviews current research on the representation and processing of lexicon and grammar in L2 and claims that they ‘marginally favor the convergence hypothesis’, that is, ‘as proficiency in L2 increases, the networks mediating L2 converge with those mediating language use in native speakers of that language’ (212), rather than the differential representation hypothesis (i.e. an L2 learner’s representation and processing of the lexical and grammatical knowledge of the target language differ from that of a native speaker of that language). Roeland van Hout, Aafke Hulk, and Folkert Kuiken (219–26) highlight the lexicon as the driving force of language acquisition in their concluding remarks. They suggest that varieties in methodology, learners and languages, linguistic domains, contexts and tasks, and perspectives all need to be considered in order to address more fully the issues in second language acquisition examined in this volume and beyond. This work represents the latest developments in the generative/psycholinguistic studies of second language acquisition. It will certainly advance our understanding of this important...