This Article Abstract Free Full Text (Free PDF) Free Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Pienemann, M. Articles by HÅkansson, G. Search for Related Content Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

Response article Full transfer vs. developmentally moderated transfer: a reply to Bohnacker

Paderborn University and Newcastle University, pienemann{at}zitmail.upb.de

Gisela HÅkansson

Lund University

Ute Bohnacker's (2006) article on the acquisition of the verb second (V2) property in German by native speakers of Swedish (also a V2 language) is an attempted rebuttal of Håkansson et al.'s (2002) work on first language (L1) transfer and aspects of the underlying theory on which the work is based: Processability Theory (Pienemann, 1998). The article by Håkansson et al. presented empirical evidence from a similar population of learners (native language Swedish, target language German), showing that V2 is not transferred at the initial state. Unfortunately, Bohnacker misrepresents key aspects of our work on L1 transfer and, paradoxically, her own data constitute empirical evidence supporting our position, as we show in this response.

Key Words: transfer in L2 • Processability Theory • L2 vs. L3 German • verb second • initial state

References

• Bohnacker, U. 2006: When Swedes begin to learn German: from V2 to V2. Second Language Research 22, 443—86.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
• Bresnan, J. 2001: Lexical-functional syntax. Oxford. Blackwell
• Clahsen, H. and Muysken, P. 1989: The UG paradox in L2 acquisition. Second Language Research 2, 1—29.[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
• Di Biase, B. and Kawaguchi, S. 2002: Exploring the typological plausibility of Processability Theory: language development in Italian second language and Japanese second language. Second Language Research 18, 274—302.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
• Håkansson, G., Pienemann, M. and Sayehli, S. 2002: Transfer and typological proximity in the context of L2 processing. Second Language Research 18, 250—73.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
• Meisel, J., Clahsen, H. and Pienemann, M. 1981: On determining developmental stages in natural second language acquisition. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 3, 109—35.
• Pienemann, M. 1998: Language processing and second language development: Processability Theory. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
• Pienemann, M., Di Biase, B., Kawaguchi, S. and Håkansson, G. 2005: Processability, typological constraints and L1 transfer. In Pienemann, M., editor, Cross-linguistic aspects of Processability Theory. Amsterdam: Benjamins, 86—116.
• Platzack, C. 2003: The verb phrase. In Josefsson, G., Platzack, C. and Håkansson, G., editors, The acquisition of Swedish grammar. Amsterdam: Benjamins, 135—54.
• Schwartz, B.D. and Sprouse, R.A. 1996: L2 cognitive states and the Full Transfer/Full Access model. Second Language Research 12, 40—72.[Abstract/Free Full Text]

Second Language Research, Vol. 23, No. 4, 485-493 (2007)
DOI: 10.1177/0267658307080332


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?

This Article Abstract Free Full Text (Free PDF) Free Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Pienemann, M. Articles by HÅkansson, G. Search for Related Content Social Bookmarking                         What's this?