The Effect of L2 Onset on L2 and L3 learning: The Case of Native Speakers of Burkinabe languages

The Effect of L2 Onset on L2 and L3 learning: The Case of Native Speakers of Burkinabe languages Alain Hien Ryan Spring Tohoku University Tohoku University Graduate School of International Culture Studies Institute of Excellence in Higher Education Sendai-shi, Aoba-ku, Kawauchi 41 Sendai-shi, Aoba-ku, Kawauchi 41 alain.hien@ymail.com springuistics@gmail.com Abstract L1 Burkinabe speakers generally become native- level speakers of French by adulthood, as French is the official second language of their country and is used in their daily life, but learn English as a foreign language is later in their lives. However, as their L2 and L3 contain grammatical markings that are sometimes more similar to each other and sometimes more similar to the L1, such as with progressive/perfective constructions, it is unclear how this multi-lingual environment will influence the acquisition of such constructions. In the present paper, we examine a number of factors thought to influence L1 Burkinabe learners’ ability to acquire progressive constructions in L2 French and L3 English to see if onset age (as proposed by the critical period hypothesis) or the number of years spent learning (often offered as an alternative explanation) influences acquisition, as well as if the acquisition of L2 French influences that of L3 English (as per L3 acquisition research). Multi-variate regression analyses showed that the number of years studying French was the best predictor of French progressive marking ability, but that onset age of L2 French was the best predictor of L3 English progressive marking ability, having a strong negative effect due to negative transfer from L2 French. 1 Introduction The critical period hypothesis (CPH) has long been a point of controversy for second language acquisition (SLA) studies (Ellis, 1997; Johnson and Newport, 1989; Li and Shirai, 2000; etc.). According to many empirical studies that support the CPH, the onset age at which one begins to learn a language is the most influential factor for L2 learners to be able to acquire more difficult syntactic and phonetic features of an L2 that vary greatly from those of their L1 (Johnson and Newport, 1989; Schouten, 2009; etc.). However, other studies contest that the evidence for the CPH is not as exact as thought and suggest that, for example, the number of years that one studies an L2 is more influential on final acquisition (Strid, 2017; Birdsong and Molis, 2001; Marinova-Todd, 2003; etc.). However, there is one further complication for language acquisition that many of the aforementioned studies do not take into consideration – how the CPH or number of years of study affect language acquisition in a multi- lingual environment. Many researchers attest that language similarity, namely the similarity between an L1 or L2 and a target L3 can influence the acquisition of the target language (Cenoz, 2001; Leung, 2009; Li and Shirai 2000). For example, Leung (2009) and Cenoz (2001) found in their studies that positive transfer from the learners’ L2 was the main source of influence on L3 learning. Studies such as Bayona (2009) and Chin (2009) have also made similar claims …

Content truncated to 500 words