Book contents
- Frontmatter
- Contents
- List of Figures and Tables
- Preface and Acknowledgements
- Part I What Formulaic Sequences Are
- Part II A Reference Point
- Part III Formulaic Sequences in First Language Acquisition
- Part IV Formulaic Sequences in a Second Language
- 8 Non-native Language: Overview
- 9 Patterns of Formulaicity in Children Using a Second Language
- 10 Patterns of Formulaicity in Adults and Teenagers Using a Second Language
- 11 Formulaic Sequences in the Second Language Acquisition Process: A Model
- Part V Formulaic Sequences in Language Loss
- Part VI An Integrated Model
- Notes
- References
- Index
9 - Patterns of Formulaicity in Children Using a Second Language
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 07 October 2009
- Frontmatter
- Contents
- List of Figures and Tables
- Preface and Acknowledgements
- Part I What Formulaic Sequences Are
- Part II A Reference Point
- Part III Formulaic Sequences in First Language Acquisition
- Part IV Formulaic Sequences in a Second Language
- 8 Non-native Language: Overview
- 9 Patterns of Formulaicity in Children Using a Second Language
- 10 Patterns of Formulaicity in Adults and Teenagers Using a Second Language
- 11 Formulaic Sequences in the Second Language Acquisition Process: A Model
- Part V Formulaic Sequences in Language Loss
- Part VI An Integrated Model
- Notes
- References
- Index
Summary
Introduction
Our basic and recurrent question in this chapter is whether the use of formulaic sequences by children learning an L2, as reported in the research literature, can be accounted for in terms of the agenda model presented in Figure 6.3. The full set of studies covered in this chapter is listed in Table 9.1, and the ages of the learners are represented in Figure 9.1. In all the cases of interest to us, the children had already established their L1 before they were exposed to the L2, and so are older than an equivalent L1 learner would be.
Very Young Children in L2 Daycare/Nursery
Because age is so tied into rapid physical, emotional and cognitive development in early childhood, we should expect the youngest learners to provide the closest match with the first language model, whether this be for neurological, cognitive or environmental reasons. We begin, then, with the youngest children. Virve and Karen were both under two years of age when their respective studies began, and were exposed to L2 in their daycare setting. Takahiro was two-and-a-half and attended an L2 medium nursery.
How Did the Learners Get Things Done?
We saw in Chapters 6 and 7 that ‘getting things done’ is an agenda of great importance to the infant, who is relatively helpless in meeting its own needs. Virve, Karen and Takahiro were not helpless infants: they could walk and feed themselves, and they already had a linguistic means of expressing their needs, their L1. On the other hand, they were still much less self-sufficient than an older child or adult. What strategies did they employ in trying to meet their needs through the agency of another?
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- Formulaic Language and the Lexicon , pp. 150 - 171Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2002