BEGIN:VCALENDAR VERSION:2.0 PRODID:-//Sabre//Sabre VObject 4.5.8//EN CALSCALE:GREGORIAN BEGIN:VTIMEZONE TZID:Europe/Zurich X-LIC-LOCATION:Europe/Zurich TZURL:http://tzurl.org/zoneinfo/Europe/Zurich BEGIN:DAYLIGHT TZOFFSETFROM:+0100 TZOFFSETTO:+0200 TZNAME:CEST DTSTART:19810329T020000 RRULE:FREQ=YEARLY;BYMONTH=3;BYDAY=-1SU END:DAYLIGHT BEGIN:STANDARD TZOFFSETFROM:+0200 TZOFFSETTO:+0100 TZNAME:CET DTSTART:19961027T030000 RRULE:FREQ=YEARLY;BYMONTH=10;BYDAY=-1SU END:STANDARD END:VTIMEZONE BEGIN:VEVENT UID:news435@germanistik.philhist.unibas.ch DTSTAMP;TZID=Europe/Zurich:20221005T103852 DTSTART;TZID=Europe/Zurich:20221027T101500 SUMMARY:Are first and second language acquisition “fundamentally differen t”? DESCRIPTION:It is often asserted that the acquisition of morphosyntax in th e first language and in late L2 learning are “fundamentally different” (e.g. Bley-Vroman 1989\, 2009): L1 acquisition is often assumed to be uni formly successful\, with all learners converging rapidly on the same gramm ar\, while late L2 learners show vast individual differences in attainment and rarely achieve native-like proficiency (e.g. DeKeyser 2000\, DeKeyser et al. 2010\, Johnson and Newport 1989). This has led many researchers to conclude that first and second language acquisition rely on different lea rning mechanisms. Specifically\, the acquisition of L1 grammar is supposed to rely (almost) exclusively on implicit learning\, which is assumed to b e diminished in adults. As a result\, adults need to compensate by relying on explicit learning\, as evidenced by robust correlations between L2 lea rning achievement and language aptitude.\\r\\nIn this talk\, I argue that the fundamental difference between first and second language acquisition i s found mostly in the eyes of beholder. I show that there are considerable individual differences in L1 ultimate attainment. These are particularly striking if we consider speakers with low academic attainment and heritage language learners. Furthermore\, I present findings suggesting that L1 ul timate attainment is also strongly correlated with performance on aptitude tests – in fact\, this relationship may be even stronger than in the L2 . I conclude that L1 and L2 acquisition rely on the same learning mechanis ms (albeit not necessarily to the same extent). X-ALT-DESC:

It is often asserted that the acquisition of morphosyntax in the first language and in late L2 learning are “fundamentally different ” (e.g. Bley-Vroman 1989\, 2009): L1 acquisition is often assumed to be uniformly successful\, with all learners converging rapidly on the same gr ammar\, while late L2 learners show vast individual differences in attainm ent and rarely achieve native-like proficiency (e.g. DeKeyser 2000\, DeKey ser et al. 2010\, Johnson and Newport 1989). This has led many researchers to conclude that first and second language acquisition rely on different learning mechanisms. Specifically\, the acquisition of L1 grammar is suppo sed to rely (almost) exclusively on implicit learning\, which is assumed t o be diminished in adults. As a result\, adults need to compensate by rely ing on explicit learning\, as evidenced by robust correlations between L2 learning achievement and language aptitude.

\n

In this talk\, I argue that the fundamental difference between first and second language acquisi tion is found mostly in the eyes of beholder. I show that there are consid erable individual differences in L1 ultimate attainment. These are particu larly striking if we consider speakers with low academic attainment and he ritage language learners. Furthermore\, I present findings suggesting that L1 ultimate attainment is also strongly correlated with performance on ap titude tests – in fact\, this relationship may be even stronger than in the L2. I conclude that L1 and L2 acquisition rely on the same learning me chanisms (albeit not necessarily to the same extent).

DTEND;TZID=Europe/Zurich:20221027T120000 END:VEVENT END:VCALENDAR