Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-dsjbd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-30T18:52:16.571Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Assignment of grammatical gender by native speakers and foreign learners of French

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 December 1999

V. M. Holmes*
Affiliation:
University of Melbourne
B. Dejean De La Bâtie
Affiliation:
University of Melbourne
*
V. M. Holmes, Department of Psychology, University of Melbourne, Parkville, Victoria 3052, Australia. Email: [email protected]

Abstract

This study compared the skill in gender attribution of foreign learners and native speakers of French. Accuracy and fluency of gender attribution by the foreign learners were assessed in spontaneous written production. Both groups performed on-line gender assignment to real nouns whose gender was regular or exceptional, given their ending, and to invented nouns with nonword stems and real-word endings. The pattern of results indicated that the native speakers' gender attributions were primarily based on rapidly evoked lexical associations, with gender-ending correspondences playing a significant but subsidiary role. The foreign learners were less able to summon lexical associations, relying heavily on ending-based rules. Overall, none of the foreign learners attained the same level of performance as any of the native speakers. We conclude that instruction in which students learn nouns in the context of distinctive lexical associates could profitably be supplemented by explicit instruction in gender-ending regularities.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1999

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

Andersen, R. (1984). What’s gender good for anyway? In Andersen, R. (Ed.), Second languages: A cross-linguistic perspective (pp. 77100). Rowley, MA: Newbury House.Google Scholar
Bates, E., Devescovi, A., Pizzamiglio, L. D’Amico, S., & Hernandez, A. (1995). Gender and lexical access in Italian. Perception and Psychophysics, 57, 847862.Google Scholar
Carroll, S. (1989). Second-language acquisition and the computational paradigm. Language Learning, 39, 535594.Google Scholar
Clark, E. V. (1985). The acquisition of Romance, with special reference to French. In Slobin, D. (Ed.) The crosslinguistic study of language acquisition: 1. The data (pp. 687782). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Content, A., Mousty, P., & Radeau, M. (1990). Brulex: Une base de données lexicales informatisée pour le français écrit et parlé. L’Année Psychologique, 90, 551566.Google Scholar
Corbett, G. G. (1991). Gender. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Derwing, B. L. (1992). Orthographic aspects of linguistic competence. In Downing, P., Lima, S. D., & Noonan, M. (Eds.), The linguistics of literacy (pp. 193210). Amsterdam: Benjamin.Google Scholar
Desrochers, A., & Brabant, M. (1995). Interaction entre facteurs phonologiques et sémantiques dans une épreuve de catégorisation lexicale. Revue Canadienne de Psychologie, 49, 240262.Google Scholar
Desrochers, A., & Paivio, A. (1990). Le phonème initial des noms inanimés et son effet sur l’identification du genre grammatical. Revue Canadienne de Psychologie, 44, 4457.Google Scholar
Desrochers, A., Paivio, A. & Desrochers, S. (1989). L’effet de la fréquence d’usage des noms inanimés et de la valeur prédictive de leur terminasion sur l’identification du genre grammatical. Revue Canadienne de Psychologie, 43, 6273.Google Scholar
Dumas, G., Swain, M., & Selinker, L. (1973). L’apprentissage du français comme langue seconde en classe d’immersion dans un milieu torontois. Working Papers on Bilingualism, 1, 6682.Google Scholar
Ehri, L. C., & Wilce, L. S. (1980). The influence of orthography on readers’ conceptualization of the phonemic structure of words. Applied Psycholinguistics, 1, 371385.Google Scholar
Forster, K. I., & Forster, J. C. (1990). Users’ guide to the DMASTR display system: Laboratory software for mental chronometry. Tucson: University of Arizona.Google Scholar
Lapkin, S., & Swain, M. (1977). The use of English and French cloze tests in a bilingual education program evaluation: Validity and error analysis. Language Learning, 27, 279314.Google Scholar
MacWhinney, B., Leinbach, J. Taraban, J., & McDonald, R. (1989). Language learning: Cues or rules? Journal of Memory and Language, 28, 255277.Google Scholar
Sokolik, M. E., & Smith, M. E. (1992). Assignment of gender to French nouns in primary and secondary language: A connectionist model. Second Language Research, 8, 3958.Google Scholar
Surridge, M. E. (1993). Gender assignment in French: The hierarchy of rules and the chronology of acquisition. International Review of Applied Linguistics, 31, 7795.Google Scholar
Taft, M., & Hambly, G. (1985). The influence of orthography on phonological representations in the lexicon. Journal of Memory and Language, 24, 320335.Google Scholar
Taft, M., & Meunier, F. (1998). Lexical representation of gender: A quasi-regular domain. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 27, 2345.Google Scholar
Tucker, G. R., Lambert, W. E., & Rigault, A. (1977). The French speaker’s skill with grammatical gender: An example of rule-governed behavior. The Hague: Mouton.Google Scholar
Tucker, G. R., Lambert, W. E., Rigault, A., & Sigalowitz, N. (1968). A psychological investigation of French speakers’ skill with grammatical gender. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 7, 312316.Google Scholar