Email this article Motion events in English as a fourth language: a linguistic analysis of a selected episode in multilingual learner narratives
Abstract
Abstract - This article reports on a study that investigated the description of motion events in narrative texts written by 13-14 and 17-18 year olds learning English as a fourth language at schools where multilingualism is a key objective. The focus was placed on the learners’ references to the animate beings featured in the story and their use of verbs and satellites in order to describe the movement situations elicited from the image selected for analysis from the wordless picture story the teenagers had to retell in words. The main objective of the study was to draw a comparison between the two age or proficiency-level groups within a functional-pragmatic framework. The learners’ narrative and linguistic choices in their motion-event constructions were analysed, with a number of comments made on the basis of the participants’ other languages. Findings revealed preferences and tendencies that were partly similar and partly different in the two school grades. The predominant figures turned out to be the same at both proficiency levels, with the use of superordinates to fill lexical gaps identified as one of the main communication strategies and the more frequent use of personal pronouns characterising the higher-level texts. With the exception of the motion undertaken by one figure, the motion events depicted were described with similar verbs, and a non-target like use of the satellites after and behind was noticed in both age groups. The article is argued to constitute the basis for further investigations into motion events in multilingual learners’ texts.
Riassunto - L’articolo costituisce uno studio sulla descrizione degli eventi di moto in testi narrativi prodotti da giovani di 13-14 e 17-18 anni apprendenti di inglese come quarta lingua. Il lavoro si concentra sui riferimenti degli alunni alle entità in movimento con funzione di Figura e sul loro uso di verbi e Satelliti indicanti i percorsi delle entità negli estratti selezionati per l’analisi (Talmy 1985). L’obiettivo principale dello studio consiste nell’effettuare, attraverso un approccio di tipo funzionale-pragmatico, un confronto fra i testi prodotti dai due gruppi di alunni dei due livelli scolastici. Vengono analizzate le scelte narrative e linguistiche degli apprendenti nella codificazione degli eventi di moto, considerando anche caratteristiche delle altre lingue parlate dagli alunni. L’analisi rivela preferenze e tendenze in parte uguali e in parte diverse nei testi prodotti nei due gruppi. Dall’analisi emerge che: (1) i due gruppi esprimono una preferenza per le stesse figure; (2) una delle principali strategie di comunicazione è l’uso di iperonimi per colmare lacune lessicali; (3) l’impiego di pronomi personali si rivela più copioso nei testi prodotti dagli alunni di 17-18 anni; (4) gli eventi di moto vengono descritti dai due gruppi con gli stessi verbi, ad eccezione di una figura; (5) in entrambi i livelli si utilizzano i satelliti after e behind in maniera non attinente alla lingua di arrivo. Il contributo si presenta come base per ulteriori indagini sulla lessicalizzazione di eventi di moto in testi scritti da apprendenti di inglese in contesti plurilingui.
References
Aitchison J. 2003, Words in the mind: An introduction to the mental lexicon (3rd ed.), Blackwell, Oxford.
Aksu-Koç A.A. 1994, Development of linguistic forms: Turkish, in Berman R.A. and Slobin D.I., Relating events in narrative: A crosslinguistic developmental study, Lawrence Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ, pp. 329-386.
Alcaraz Mármol G. 2013, Learning verbs of movement in a foreign language: Spanish students of English in a formal context, in “Revista de Lingüística y Lenguas Aplicadas” 8, pp. 154-160.
Beavers J. 2008, On the nature of goal marking and delimitation: Evidence from Japanese, in “Journal of Linguistics” 44[2], pp. 283-316.
Berman R.A. and Slobin D.I. 1994, Relating events in narrative: A crosslinguistic developmental study, Lawrence Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ.
Bialystok E. 1990, Communication strategies: A psychological analysis of second-language use, Basil Blackwell, Oxford.
Bialystok E., Craik F.I.M. and Luk G. 2012, Bilingualism: Consequences for mind and brain, in “Trends in Cognitive Sciences” 16[4], pp. 240-250.
Brown H.D. 2000, Principles of language learning and teaching (4th ed.), Longman, New York.
Cardini F.E. 2008, Manner of motion saliency: An inquiry into Italian, in “Cognitive Linguistics” 19[4], pp.
-569.
Chen L. and Pan N. 2009, Development of English referring expressions in the narratives of Chinese-English bilinguals, in “Bilingualism: Language and Cognition” 12[4], pp. 429-445.
Clark E.V. 1993, The lexicon in acquisition, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Costa A. and Sebastián-Gallés N. 2014, How does the bilingual experience sculpt the brain? In “Nature Reviews: Neuroscience” 15 [5], pp. 336-345.
Crossley S.A., Subtirelu N. and Salsbury T. 2013, Frequency effects or context effects in second language word learning: What predicts early lexical production? In “Studies in Second Language Acquisition” 35, pp. 727-755.
De Angelis G. and Selinker L. 2001, Interlanguage transfer and competing linguistic systems in the multilingual mind, in Cenoz J., Hufeisen B. and Jessner U. (eds.), Cross-linguistic influence in third language acquisition: Psycholinguistic perspectives, Multilingual Matters, Clevedon, pp. 42-58.
De Bot K. and Jaensch C. 2013, What is special about L3 processing? In “Bilingualism: Language and Cognition” available on CJO, pp. 1-15.
Della Rosa P.A., Videsott G., Borsa V.M., Canini M., Weekes B.S., Franceschini R. and Abutalebi J. 2013, A neural interactive location for multilingual talent, in “Cortex” 49[2], pp. 605-608.
European Commission 2013, European Survey on Language Competences and European benchmark.
http://ec.europa.eu/languages/languages-of-europe/language-competence_en.htm (9.09.2013).
Feiz P. 2011, Traveling through space in Persian and English: A comparative analysis of motion events in elicited narratives, in “Language Sciences” 33[3], pp. 401-416.
Fisher R. 2005, Teaching children to learn (2nd ed.), Nelson Thornes, Cheltenham.
Franceschini R. 2011, Multilingualism and multicompetence: A conceptual view, in “The Modern Language Journal” 95[3], pp. 344-355.
Franceschini R. and Irsara M. 2013, Didaktische Hinweise, in Provincial Service and Committee for the Evaluation of the Ladin Schools, & Language Study Unit of the Free University of Bozen-Bolzano (eds.), Resultac dl’analisa linguistica 5a tlasses scoles autes: Ergebnisse der Sprachkompetenz-Studie 5. Oberschulklassen: Risultati dell’analisi linguistica 5e classi scuole secondarie di secondo grado, Athesia, Bolzano-Bozen, pp. 34-41.
Griessler M. 2001, The effects of third language learning on second language proficiency: An Austrian example, in “International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism” 4[1], pp. 50-60.
Grosjean F. 2010, Bilingual: Life and reality. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA.
Hendriks H. 2002, Using nouns for reference maintenance: A seeming contradiction in L2 discourse, in Giacalone Ramat A. (ed.), Typology and second language acquisition, Walter de Gruyter, Berlin, pp. 291-326.
Herdina P. and Jessner U. 2002, A dynamic model of multilingualism: Perspectives of change in psycholinguistics, Multilingual Matters, Clevedon.
Hickman M. and Hendriks H. 1999, Cohesion and anaphora in children’s narratives: a comparison of English, French, German, and Mandarin Chinese, in “Journal of Child Language” 26[2], pp. 419-452.
Hickman M. 2004, Coherence, cohesion and context: Some comparative perspectives in narrative development, in Strömqvist S. and Verhoeven L. (eds.), Relating events in narrative: Typological and contextual perspectives (Vol. 2), Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, NJ, pp. 281-306.
Irsara M. 2012, Comparative constructions in English, Italian and Ladin: Cross-linguistic observations and didactic considerations, in “Quaderni Patavini di Linguistica 2010” 26, pp. 39-82.
Irsara M. 2013, Awareness across languages: From English as and like to Ladin, in Kofler D., Peterlini H.K. and Videsott G. (eds.), Brückenbau(e)r: Festschrift für / Miscellanea per / Publicaziun en onour de / Article collection in honour of Siegfried Baur, Edizioni alphabeta Verlag, Meran, pp. 288-294.
Maguire M.J., Hirsh-Pasek K. and Golinkoff R.M. 2006, A unified theory of word learning: Putting verb acquisition in context, in Hirsh-Pasek K. and Golinkoff R.M. (eds.), Action meets word: How children learn verbs, Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp. 364-391.
Mayer M. 1969, Frog, where are you? Pied Piper, New York.
Pallotti G. and Rosi F. 2011, Osservare l’interlingua a scuola, in “Educazione Interculturale” 9[3], pp. 339-354.
Paradis M. 2004, A Neurolinguistic theory of bilingualism, Benjamins, Amsterdam.
Pfenninger S. E. 2014, Quadrilingual advantages: do-support in bilingual vs. multilingual learners, in “International Journal of Multilingualism” 11[2], pp. 143-163.
Pulverman R., Hirsh-Pasek K., Golinkoff R.M., Pruden S. and Salkind S.J. 2006, Conceptual foundations for verb learning: Celebrating the event, in Hirsh-Pasek K. and Golinkoff R.M. (eds.), Action meets word: How children learn verbs, Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp. 134-159.
Shorrocks D. 1991, The development of children’s thinking and understanding, in Brumfit C., Moon J. and Tongue R. (eds.), Teaching English to children: From practice to principle, Collins ELT, London, pp. 260-274.
Slobin D.I. 1996a, Two ways to travel: Verbs of motion in English and Spanish, in Shibatani M. and Thompson S.A. (eds.), Grammatical constructions: Their form and meaning, Clarendon Press, Oxford, pp. 195-220.
Slobin D.I. 1996b, From “thought and language” to “thinking for speaking”, in Gumperz J.J. and Levinson
S.C. (eds.), Rethinking linguistic relativity, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp. 70-96.
Slobin D.I. 2004, The many ways to search for a frog: Linguistic typology and the expression of motion events, in Strömqvist S. and Verhoeven L. (eds.), Relating events in narrative: Typological and contextual perspectives (Vol. 2), Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, NJ, pp. 219-257.
Stolova N.I. 2014, Cognitive linguistics and lexical change: Motion verbs from Latin to Romance, Benjamins, Amsterdam.
Strömqvist S. and Verhoeven L. 2004, (eds.), Relating events in narrative: Typological and contextual perspectives (Vol. 2), Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, NJ.
Talmy L. 1985, Lexicalization patterns: Semantic structure in lexical forms, in Shopen T. (ed.), Language Typology and syntactic description, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp. 57-149.
Talmy L. 1991, Path to realization: A typology of event conflation, in Sutton L.A., Johnson C. and Shields R. (eds.), Proceedings of the 17th Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society, Berkeley Linguistics Society, Berkeley, CA, pp. 480-519.
Talmy L. 2000, Toward a cognitive semantics (Vol. 2), MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
Talmy L. 2007, Lexical typologies, in Shopen T. (ed.), Language typology and syntactic description: Grammatical categories and the lexicon (Vol. 3) (2nd ed.), Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp. 66-168.
Ziegler G. 2013, Multilingualism and the language education landscape: challenges for teacher training in Europe, in “Multilingual Education” 3[1], pp. 1-23.
Full Text: pdf
Refbacks
- There are currently no refbacks.
