Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-gtxcr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-23T15:03:19.573Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

ACQUISITION OF DUTCH AS A SECOND LANGUAGE

The Explanative Power of Cognate and Genetic Linguistic Distance Measures for 11 West European First Languages

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  29 June 2010

Frans W. P. Van der Slik
Frans W. P. Van der Slik*
Affiliation:
Radboud University and University of the Free State
*
*Address correspondence to: Frans W. P. Van der Slik, Department of Linguistics, Radboud University, P.O. Box 9103, 6500 HD Nijmegen, The Netherlands; e-mail: f.v.d.slik@let.ru.nl.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This study reports on the impact of 11 West European first languages on the acquisition of Dutch. Using data from nearly 6,000 second-language learners, it was found that the mother tongue had a rather large impact on two language skills—namely, oral and written proficiency—as measured by the scores received by these learners on the State Examination of Dutch as a Second Language. Multilevel analyses showed that the effect of the mother tongue can adequately be modeled by means of the cognate linguistic distance measure, adopted from McMahon and McMahon (2005). The explanative power of the genetic linguistic distance measure (Cavalli-Sforza, Menozzi, & Piazza, 1994), on the other hand, was rather poor. Additionally, learner characteristics (age of arrival, length of residence, hours studying Dutch, education, and gender) and context characteristics (quality of schooling in the country of origin and multilingual country of origin) explained part of the variation in Dutch speaking and writing skills.

Type
Research Articles
Information
Studies in Second Language Acquisition , Volume 32 , Issue 3 , September 2010 , pp. 401 - 432
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2010

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Anderson, P. (1982). Self-esteem in the foreign language: A preliminary investigation. Foreign Language Annals, 15, 109–114.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Arabski, J. (Ed.). (2006). Cross-linguistic influences in the second language lexicon. Clevedon, UK: Multilingual Matters.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bialystok, E. (2007). Language acquisition and bilingualism: Consequences for a multilingual society. Applied Psycholinguistics, 28, 393–397.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Birdsong, D. (1992). Ultimate attainment in second language acquisition. Language, 68, 705–755.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Birdsong, D. (2004). Second language acquisition and ultimate attainment. In Davies, A. & Elder, C. (Eds.), Handbook of applied linguistics (pp. 82–105). Oxford: Blackwell.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Birdsong, D. (2006). Age and second language acquisition and processing: A selective overview. Language Learning, 56, 9–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bongaerts, T., Mennen, S., & Van der Slik, F. W. P. (2000). Authenticity of pronunciation in naturalistic second language acquisition: The case of very advanced late learners of Dutch as a second language. Studia Linguistica, 54, 298–308.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bongaerts, T., Planken, B., & Schils, E. (1995). Can late starters attain a native accent in a foreign language? A test of the critical period hypothesis. In Birdsong, D. (Ed.), Second language acquisition and the critical period hypothesis (pp. 161–181). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Cavalli-Sforza, L. L., Menozzi, P., & Piazza, A. (1994). The history and geography of human genes. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Chiswick, B. R., & Miller, P. W. (2003). The complementarity of language and other human capital: Immigrant earnings in Canada. Economics of Education Review, 22, 479–480.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chiswick, B. R., & Miller, P. W. (2005). Linguistic distance: A quantitative measure of the distance between English and other languages. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development, 26, 1–11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chiswick, B. R., & Miller, P. W. (2007). Modeling immigrants’ language skills. Retrieved June 29, 2009, from http://ftp.iza.org/dp2974.pdf.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chiswick, B. R., & Miller, P. W. (2008). A test of the critical period hypothesis for language learning. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development, 29, 16–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Cole, N. S. (1997). The ETS gender study: How females and males perform in educational setting. Princeton, NJ: ETS.Google Scholar
Crystal, D. (1987). The Cambridge encyclopedia of language. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Cummins, J. (1993). Bilingualism and second language learning. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 13, 51–70.Google Scholar
De Bot, K., Evers, R., De Quay, P., & Van der Slik, F. W. P. (2005). Engelse taalvaardigheid in de onderbouw: Nederland vergeleken met zes andere Europese landen [English language proficiency in junior high school: The Netherlands compared to six other European countries]. Levende Talen Tijdschrift, 6, 3–17.Google Scholar
De Bot, K., Lowie, W., & Verspoor, M. (2005). Second language acquisition: An advanced resource book. London: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dunn, M. T. A., Reesink, G., Foley, R. A., & Levinson, S. C. (2005). Structural phylogenetics and the reconstruction of ancient language history. Science, 309, 2072–2075.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dyen, I., Kruskal, J. B., & Black, P. (1992). An Indo-European classification: A lexicostatistical experiment. Transactions of the American Philosophical Society, 82, 1–132.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ellis, R. (1994). The study of second language acquisition. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Estabrooke, I. V., Mordecai, K., Maki, P. M., & Ullman, M. T. (2002). The effect of sex hormones on language processing. Brain and Language, 83, 143–146.Google Scholar
Eurostat. (2008). [Database]. Retrieved April 17, 2008, from http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/Google Scholar
Flege, J. E., Yeni-Komshian, G. H., & Liu, S. (1999). Age constraints on second-language acquisition. Journal of Memory and Language, 41, 78–104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gass, S. M. (1997). Input, interaction, and the second language learner. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Gooskens, C. (2007). The contribution of linguistic factors to the intelligibility of closely related languages. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development, 28, 445–467.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gooskens, C., & Heeringa, W. (2004). Perceptive evaluation of Levenshtein dialect distance measurements using Norwegian dialect data. Language Variation and Change, 16, 189–207.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gordon, R. G. Jr. (Ed.). (2005). Ethnologue: Languages of the world (15th ed.). Dallas, TX: SIL International.Google Scholar
Gray, R. D., & Atkinson, Q. D. (2003). Language-tree divergence times support the Anatolian theory of Indo-European origin. Nature, 426, 435–439.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Grimes, J. E., & Grimes, B. F. (1993). Ethnologue language family index. Dallas, TX: Summer Institute of Linguistics.Google Scholar
Hakuta, K., Bialystok, E., & Wiley, E. (2003). Critical evidence: A test of the critical period hypothesis for second-language acquisition. Psychological Science, 14, 31–38.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hart-Gonzalez, L., & Lindemann, S. (1993). Expected achievement in speaking proficiency. Washington, DC: School of Language Studies, Foreign Services Institute, Department of State.Google Scholar
Haspelmath, M., Dryer, M., Gil, D., & Comrie, B. (Eds.). (2005). The world atlas of language structures. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Heeringa, W. (2004). Measuring dialect pronunciation differences using Levenshtein distances. Groningen, The Netherlands: Grodil Press.Google Scholar
Hox, J. J. (2002). Multilevel analysis: Techniques and applications. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hulsen, M. E. H. (2000). Language loss and language processing: Three generations of Dutch migrants in New Zealand. Nijmegen, The Netherlands: Madeleine Hulsen.Google Scholar
Jarvis, S., & Pavlenko, A. (2008). Crosslinguistic influence in language and cognition. London: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Johnson, J. S., & Newport, E. L. (1989). Critical period effects in second language learning: The influence of maturational state on the acquisition of English as a second language. Cognitive Psychology, 21, 60–99.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Johnson, J. S., & Newport, E. L. (1991). Critical period effects on universal properties of language: The status of subjacency in the acquisition of a second language. Cognition, 39, 215–258.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kessler, B. (1995). Computational dialectology in Irish Gaelic. In Abney, S. P. & Hinrichs, E. W. (Eds.), Proceedings of the Seventh Conference of the European Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics (pp. 60–66). Dublin: EACL.Google Scholar
Kellerman, E., & Sharwood Smith, M. (Eds.). (1986). Cross-linguistic influence in second language acquisition. Oxford: Pergamon.Google Scholar
Kimura, D. (1999). Sex and cognition. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Krashen, S. (1985). The input hypothesis: Issues and implications. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Kreft, I., & De Leeuw, J. (1998). Introducing multilevel modeling. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kuijper, H., Bergsma, A., & Bechger, T. (2004). Staatsexamen NT2. Het gewenste niveau. Deel 1 behoeftepeiling programma II [State Examination for Dutch as a second language: Part I a needs inquiry for program II]. Arnhem, The Netherlands: Cito.Google Scholar
Lado, R. (1957). Linguistics across cultures: Applied linguistics for language teachers. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.Google Scholar
Long, M. H. (1996). The role of linguistic environment in second language acquisition. In Ritchie, W. & Bhatia, T. (Eds.), Handbook of second language acquisition (pp. 413–468). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Maccoby, E. E., & Jacklin, C. N. (1974). The psychology of sex differences. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
McClave, J. T., & Sincich, T. (2005). Statistics (9th ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
McCloskey, D. (1998). The rhetoric of economics. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press.Google Scholar
McMahon, A., & McMahon, R. (2005). Language classification by numbers. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moberg, J., Gooskens, C., Nerbonne, J., & Vaillette, N. (2007). Conditional entropy measures intelligibility among related languages. In Dirix, P., Schuurman, I., Vandeghinste, V., & Van Eynde, F. (Eds.), Computational linguistics in The Netherlands 2006: Selected papers from the 17th CLIN meeting (pp. 51–66). Utrecht, The Netherlands: LOT.Google Scholar
NT2 State Examination. (2008). [Database]. Retrieved August 14, 2008, from http://www.expertisecentrumnt2.nl/staat/staat2008/Google Scholar
O’Grady, R. T., Goddard, I., Bateman, R. M., DiMichelle, W. A., Funk, V. A., Kress, W. J., et al. (1989). Genes and tongues. Science, 243, 1651.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. (2008). [Database]. Retrieved July 14, 2008, from http://pisa2000.acer.edu.au/index.php.Google Scholar
Odlin, T. (1989). Language transfer: Cross-linguistic influence in language learning. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rasbash, J., Steele, F., Browne, W., & Prosser, B. (2004). A user’s guide to MLwiN version 2.0. London: Institute of Education.Google Scholar
Ruhlen, M. (1987). A guide to the world’s languages. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Salthouse, T. A. (2009). When does age-related cognitive decline begin? Neurobiology of Aging, 30, 507–514.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Schwartz, B. D., & Sprouse, R. A. (1996). L2 cognitive states and the full transfer/full acess model. Second Language Research, 12, 40–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Scovel, T. (1988). A time to speak: A psycholinguistic enquiry into the critical period of human speech. Rowley, MA: Newbury House.Google Scholar
Snijders, T., & Bosker, R. (1999). Multilevel analysis: An introduction to basic and advanced multilevel modeling. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
Spolsky, B. (1989). Conditions for second language learning. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Statline. (2008). [Database]. Retrieved August 12, 2008, from http://statline.cbs.nl/Google Scholar
Stockwell, R. P., & Bowen, J. D. (1965). Sounds of English and Spanish: A systematic analysis of contrasts between the sound systems. Chicago: Chicago University Press.Google Scholar
Stockwell, R. P., Bowen, J. D., & Martin, J. W. (1965). The grammatical structures of English and Spanish. Chicago: Chicago University Press.Google Scholar
Swadesh, M. (1952). Lexico-statistic dating of prehistoric ethnic contacts. Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society, 96, 453–463.Google Scholar
Ullman, M. T. (2005). A cognitive neuroscience perspective on second language acquisition: The declarative/procedural model. In Sanz, C. (Ed.), Mind and context in adult second language acquisition (pp. 141–178). Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.Google Scholar
van de Craats, I. (2007). Obstacles on highway L2. In Faux, N. (Ed.), Low-educated second language and literacy acquisition: Research, policy and practice (pp. 149–163). Richmond: The Literacy Institute at Virginia Commonwealth University.Google Scholar
van de Craats, I., Kurvers, J., & Young-Scholten, M. (2006). Low-educated second language and literacy acquisition: Proceedings of the inaugural symposium Tilburg 2005. Utrecht: LOT.Google Scholar
Van der Slik, F. W. P., Driessen, G., & De Bot, C. L. J. (2006). Ethnic and socioeconomic class composition and language proficiency: A longitudinal multilevel examination in Dutch elementary schools. European Sociological Review, 22, 293–308.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Van Tubergen, F., & Kalmijn, M. (2005). Destination-language proficiency in cross-national perspective: A study of immigrant groups in nine Western countries. American Journal of Sociology, 110, 1412–1457.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Verhelst, N. D., Glas, C. A. W., & Verstralen, H. H. F. M. (1995). One-parameter logistic model OPLM. Arnhem, The Netherlands: Cito.Google Scholar
Weinreich, U. (1953). Languages in contact: Findings and problems. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Willingham, W. W., & Cole, N. S. (1997). Gender and fair assessment. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar