Hostname: page-component-68945f75b7-qvshk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-08-05T19:04:55.723Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

LEFT DISLOCATION IN NEAR-NATIVE FRENCH

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 July 2011

Bryan Donaldson
Bryan Donaldson*
Affiliation:
University of Texas at Austin
*
*Address correspondence to: Bryan Donaldson, Department of French and Italian, University of Texas at Austin, HRH 2.114A, Mailcode B7600, Austin, TX 78712; e-mail: bdonaldson@austin.utexas.edu.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The present study is concerned with the upper limits of SLA—specifically, mastery of the syntax-discourse interface in successful endstate learners of second-language (L2) French (near-native speakers). Left dislocation (LD) is a syntactic means of structuring spoken French discourse by marking topic. Its use requires speakers to coordinate syntactic and pragmatic or discursive knowledge, an interface at which L2 learners have been shown to encounter difficulties (e.g., Sorace, 1993; Sorace & Filiaci, 2006). The data come from (a) an 8.5-hr corpus that consists of recordings of 10 dyadic conversations between near-native and native speakers of French and (b) two contextualized paper and audio tasks that tested intuitions and preferences regarding LD. Analyses of the near-native speakers’ production of LDs, the syntactic properties of their LDs, and their use of LDs to promote different types of discourse referents to topic status suggest that their mastery of this aspect of discourse organization converges on that of native speakers.

Type
Research Articles
Information
Studies in Second Language Acquisition , Volume 33 , Issue 3 , September 2011 , pp. 399 - 432
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2011

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

Abrahamsson, N., & Hyltenstam, K. (2009). Age of onset and nativelikeness in a second language: Listener perception versus linguistic scrutiny. Language Learning, 59, 249–306.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ashby, W. J. (1981). The loss of the negative particle ne in French: A syntactic change in progress. Language, 57, 674–687.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ashby, W. J. (1982). The drift of French syntax. Lingua, 57, 29–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ashby, W. J. (1988). The syntax, pragmatics, and sociolinguistics of left- and right-dislocations in French. Lingua, 75, 203–229.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ashby, W. J. (2001). Un nouveau regard sur la chute du ne en français parlé tourangeau: S’agit-il d’un changement en cours? [Another look at ne deletion in the spoken French of Tours: Is it a change in progress?]. French Language Studies, 11, 1–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bardovi-Harlig, K. (1999a). Exploring the interlanguage of interlanguage pragmatics: A research agenda for acquisitional pragmatics. Language Learning, 49, 677–713.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bardovi-Harlig, K. (1999b). Researching method. In Bouton, L. F. (Ed.), Pragmatics and language learning (Vol. 8, pp. 237–264). Urbana-Champaign, IL: Division of English as an International Language.Google Scholar
Bardovi-Harlig, K. (2003). Understanding the role of grammar in the acquisition of L2 pragmatics. In Martínez, A., Usó Juan, E., & Fernández Guerra, A. (Eds.), Pragmatic competence and foreign language teaching (pp. 25–44). Castelló de la Plana, Spain: Publicacions de la Universitat Jaume I.Google Scholar
Bardovi-Harlig, K., & Hartford, B. S. (2005). Institutional discourse and interlanguage pragmatics research. In Bardovi-Harlig, K. & Hartford, B. (Eds.), Interlanguage pragmatics: Exploring institutional talk (pp. 7–36). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barnes, B. K. (1985). The pragmatics of left-detachment in spoken standard French. Amsterdam: Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bartning, I. (1997). L’apprenant dit avancé et son acquisition d’une langue étrangère: Tour d’horizon et esquisse de la variété [The so-called advanced learner and his acquisition of a foreign language: Overview and sketch of the variety]. Acquisition et Interaction en Langue Étrangère, 9, 9–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beeching, K. (2001). Repair strategies and social interaction in spontaneous spoken French: The pragmatic particle enfin. Journal of French Language Studies, 11, 23–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Belletti, A., Bennati, E., & Sorace, A. (2007). Theoretical and developmental issues in the syntax of subjects: Evidence from near-native Italian. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory, 25, 657–689.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Birdsong, D. (1992). Ultimate attainment in second language acquisition. Language, 68, 706–755.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Birdsong, D., & Molis, M. (2001). On the evidence for maturational constraints in second-language acquisition. Journal of Memory and Language, 44, 235–249.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blanche-Benveniste, C., & Jeanjean, C. (1987). Le français parlé: Transcription & édition [Spoken French: Transcription and written representation]. Paris: Didier Erudition.Google Scholar
Bley-Vroman, R. (1989). What is the logical problem of foreign language learning? In Gass, S. M. & Schachter, J. (Eds.), Linguistic perspectives on second language acquisition (pp. 41–68). New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bohnacker, U., & Rosén, C. (2008). The clause-initial position in L2 German declaratives. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 30, 511–538.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cadiot, P. (1992). Matching syntax and pragmatics: A typology of topic and topic-related constructions in spoken French. Linguistics, 30, 57–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Camacho, J. (1999). From SOV to SVO: The grammar of interlanguage word order. Second Language Research, 15, 115–132.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Canale, M. (1983). From communicative competence to communicative language pedagogy. In Richards, J. C. & Schmidt, R. (Eds.), Language and communication (pp. 2–27). London: Longman.Google Scholar
Canale, M., & Swain, M. (1980). Theoretical bases of communicative approaches to second language teaching and testing. Applied Linguistics, 1, 1–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carroll, S. (1982). Les dislocations ne sont pas si populaires que ça [Dislocations are not as popular as one might think]. In Lefebvre, C. (Ed.), La syntaxe comparée du français standard et populaire (pp. 211–246). Quebec: Gouvernement du Québec, Office de la langue française.Google Scholar
Chafe, W. L. (1976). Givenness, contrastiveness, definiteness, subjects, topics, and point of view. In Li, C. N. (Ed.), Subject and topic (pp. 26–55). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Coppieters, R. (1987). Competence differences between native and near-native speakers. Language, 63, 544–573.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Coveney, A. (2002). Variability in spoken French: A sociolinguistic study of interrogation and negation. Bristol, UK: Elm Bank.Google Scholar
De Cat, C. (2007). French dislocation: Interpretation, syntax, acquisition. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
de Fornel, M. (1988). Constructions disloquées, mouvement thématique et organisation préférentielle dans la conversation [Dislocated constructions, topic movement, and preferential organization in conversation]. Langue française, 78, 101–128.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Delais-Roussarie, E., Doetjes, J., & Sleeman, P. (2004). Dislocation. In Corblin, F. & de Swart, H. (Eds.), Handbook of French semantics (pp. 501–528). Stanford, CA: Center for Study of Language and Information.Google Scholar
Dewaele, J.-M. (1999). Word order variation in French interrogative structures. Review of Applied Linguistics, 125–126, 161–180.Google Scholar
Dewaele, J.-M., & Regan, V. (2002). Maîtriser la norme sociolinguistique en interlangue française: Le cas de l’omission variable de “ne” [Mastering sociolinguistic norms in French interlanguage: The case of variable omission of ne]. Journal of French Language Studies, 12, 123–148.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Donaldson, B. (2008). Discourse competence in near-native speakers of French. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Indiana University, Bloomington.Google Scholar
Ferdinand, A. (2002). Acquisition of syntactic topic marking in L2 French. In Broekhuis, H. & Fikkert, P. (Eds.), Linguistics in the Netherlands (pp. 49–59). Amsterdam: Benjamins.Google Scholar
Filiaci, F. (2003). The acquisition of the properties of Italian null and overt subjects by English native speakers. Unpublished master’s thesis, University of Edinburgh.Google Scholar
Fónagy, I. (1985). J’aime, je connais: Verbes transitifs à objet latent [I like, I know: Transitive verbs with latent objects]. Revue Romane, 20, 3–35.Google Scholar
Fradin, B. (1990). Approche des constructions à détachement: Inventaire [An approach to detachment constructions: Inventory]. Revue Romane, 25, 3–34.Google Scholar
Freed, B., Dewey, D., Segalowitz, N., & Halter, R. (2004). The language contact profile. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 26, 349–356.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Geluykens, R. (1992). From discourse process to grammatical construction: On left dislocation in English. Amsterdam: Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
George, K. (1993). Alternative French. In Sanders, C. (Ed.), French today: Language in its social context (pp. 155–170). New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gregory, M. L., & Michaelis, L. A. (2001). Topicalization and left dislocation: A functional opposition revisited. Journal of Pragmatics, 33, 1665–1706.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hendricks, H. (2000). The acquisition of topic marking in L1 Chinese and L1 and L2 French. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 22, 369–397.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Herschensohn, J. (2000). The second time around: Minimalism and SLA. Amsterdam: Benjamins.Google Scholar
Hertel, T. J. (2003). Lexical and discourse factors in the second language acquisition of Spanish word order. Second Language Research, 19, 273–304.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hopp, H. (2009). The syntax-discourse interface in near-native SLA: Off-line and on-line performance. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 12, 463–483.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hopp, H. (2010). Ultimate attainment in L2 inflection: Performance similarities between nonnative and native speakers. Lingua, 120, 901–931.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hopper, P. (1979). Aspect and foregrounding in discourse. In Givón, T. (Ed.), Discourse and syntax (pp. 213–241). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Howard, M. (2006). Variation in advanced French interlanguage: A comparison of three (socio)linguistic variables. Canadian Modern Language Review, 62, 379–400.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hyltenstam, K., & Abrahamsson, N. (2003). Maturational constraints in SLA. In Doughty, C. J. & Long, M. H. (Eds.), The handbook of second language acquisition (pp. 539–588). Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Ioup, G., Boustagui, E., El Tigi, M., & Moselle, M. (1994). Reexamining the critical period hypothesis: A case study of successful adult SLA in a naturalistic environment. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 16, 73–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Itakura, H. (2001). Describing conversational dominance. Journal of Pragmatics, 33, 1859–1880.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jefferson, G. (1984). Transcript notation. In Atkinson, J. M. & Heritage, J. (Eds.), Structures of social interaction (pp. ix–xvi). New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Jefferson, G. (2004). Glossary of transcript symbols with an introduction. In Lerner, G. H. (Ed.), Conversation analysis: Studies from the first generation (pp. 13–31). Amsterdam: Benjamins.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
Kerr, B. J. (2002). Variant word-order constructions: To teach or not to teach—Evidence from learner narratives. In Gass, S. M., Bardovi-Harlig, K., Magnan, S. S., & Walz, J. (Eds.), Pedagogical norms for second and foreign language learning and teaching (pp. 183–198). Amsterdam: Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kuno, S. (1972). Functional sentence perspective. Linguistic Inquiry, 3, 269–320.Google Scholar
Lambrecht, K. (1981). Topic, antitopic, and verb agreement in non-standard French. Amsterdam: Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lambrecht, K. (1994). Information structure and sentence form: Topic, focus, and the mental representations of discourse referents. Amsterdam: Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lebel, E. (1991). Le statut remarquable d’un pronom inaperçu [The remarkable status of an unnoticed pronoun]. La linguistique, 27, 91–109.Google Scholar
Long, M. H. (1990). Maturational constraints on language development. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 12, 251–285.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Manetta, E. (2007). Unexpected left dislocation: An English corpus study. Journal of Pragmatics, 39, 1029–1035.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Marinova-Todd, S. H. (2003). Comprehensive analysis of ultimate attainment in adult second language acquisition. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
Ochs Keenan, E., & Schieffelin, B. (1976). Foregrounding referents: A reconsideration of left dislocation in discourse. In Thompson, H. et al. . (Eds.), Proceedings of the second annual meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society (pp. 240–257). Berkeley, CA: Berkeley Linguistics Society.Google Scholar
Perdue, C., Deulofeu, J., & Trévise, A. (1992). The acquisition of French. In Klein, W. & Perdue, C. (Eds.), Utterance structure: Developing grammars again (pp. 225–300). Amsterdam: Benjamins.Google Scholar
Piller, I. (2002). Passing for a native speaker: Identity and success in second language learning. Journal of Sociolinguistics, 6, 179–206.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Prince, E. F. (1981). Toward a taxonomy of given-new information. In Cole, P. (Ed.), Radical pragmatics (pp. 223–255). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Prince, E. F. (1992). The ZPG letter: Subjects, definiteness, and information-status. In Thompson, S. & Mann, W. (Eds.), Discourse description: Diverse analyses of a fund-raising text (pp. 295–325). Amsterdam: Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Prince, E. F. (1997). On the functions of left dislocation in English discourse. In Kamio, A. (Ed.), Directions in functional linguistics (pp. 117–144). Amsterdam: Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Prince, E. F. (1998). On the limits of syntax, with reference to left dislocation and topicalization. In Culicover, P. & McNally, L. (Eds.), Syntax and semantics (pp. 281–302). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Regan, V., Howard, M., & Lemée, I. (2009). The acquisition of sociolinguistic competence in a study abroad context. Clevedon, UK: Multilingual Matters.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rehner, K., Mougeon, R., & Nadasdi, T. (2003). The learning of sociolinguistic variation by advanced FSL learners. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 25, 127–156.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reinhart, T. (1981). Pragmatics and linguistics: An analysis of sentence topics. Philosophica, 27, 53–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Robertson, D., & Sorace, A. (1999). Losing the V2 constraint. In Klein, E. C. & Martohardjono, G. (Eds.), The development of second language grammars: A generative approach (pp. 317–361). Amsterdam: Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rothman, J. (2009). Pragmatic deficits with syntactic consequences? L2 pronominal subjects and the syntax-pragmatics interface. Journal of Pragmatics, 41, 951–973.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sax, K. J. (2003). Acquisition of stylistic variation in American learners of French. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Indiana University, Bloomington.Google Scholar
Schwartz, B. D., & Sprouse, R. A. (1994). Word order and nominative case in nonnative language acquisition: A longitudinal study of (L1 Turkish) German interlanguage. In Hoekstra, T. & Schwartz, B. D. (Eds.), Language acquisition studies in generative grammar (pp. 317–368). Amsterdam: Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schwartz, B. D., & Sprouse, R. A. (1996). L2 cognitive states and the full transfer/full access model. Second Language Research, 12, 40–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sleeman, P. (2004). Guided learners of French and the acquisition of emphatic constructions. International Review of Applied Linguistics, 42, 129–151.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sorace, A. (1985). Metalinguistic knowledge and language use in acquisition-poor environments. Applied Linguistics, 6, 239–254.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sorace, A. (1993). Incomplete vs. divergent representations of unaccusativity in nonnative grammars of Italian. Second Language Research, 9, 22–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sorace, A. (2003). Near-nativeness. In Doughty, C. J. & Long, M. H. (Eds.), The handbook of second language acquisition (pp. 130–152). Oxford: Blackwell.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sorace, A. (2005). Selective optionality in language development. In Cornips, L. & Corrigan, K. P. (Eds.), Syntax and variation: Reconciling the biological and the social (pp. 55–80). Amsterdam: Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sorace, A., & Filiaci, F. (2006). Anaphora resolution in near-native speakers of Italian. Second Language Research, 22, 339–368.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Trévise, A. (1986). Is it transferable, topicalization? In Kellerman, E. & Sharwood Smith, M. (Eds.), Crosslinguistic influence in second language acquisition (pp. 186–206). New York: Pergamon.Google Scholar
Tsimpli, I., & Sorace, A. (2006). Differentiating interfaces: L2 performance in syntax-semantics and syntax-discourse phenomena. In Bamman, D., Magnitskaia, T., & Zeller, C. (Eds.), Proceedings of the 30th annual Boston University Conference on Language Development (Vol. 2, pp. 653–664). Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press.Google Scholar
Valdman, A. (2003). The acquisition of sociostylistic and sociopragmatic variation by instructed second language learners: The elaboration of pedagogical norms. In Blyth, C. S. (Ed.), The sociolinguistics of foreign language classrooms: Contributions of the native, near-native, and nonnative speaker (pp. 57–78). Boston: Heinle and Heinle.Google Scholar
White, L. (2003). On the nature of interlanguage representation: Universal Grammar in second language. In Doughty, C. & Long, M. (Eds.), The handbook of second language acquisition (pp. 19–42). Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
White, L., & Genesee, F. (1996). How native is near-native? The issue of age and ultimate attainment in the acquisition of a second language. Second Language Research, 12, 233–265.CrossRefGoogle Scholar