Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-rdxmf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-24T16:02:12.010Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Laboratory studies on multilingual cognition and further language development

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  21 December 2016

Cristina Sanz  and
Jessica G. Cox
Cristina Sanz
Affiliation:
Georgetown University, Washington DC, U. S. [email protected]
Jessica G. Cox
Affiliation:
Franklin & Marshall College, Lancaster PA, U. S. [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Multilingualism is now seen as the norm rather than the exception in an age of migration and supranational entities, and where minority language rights and the consequent educational policies have become more common. The field of applied linguistics reflects that transition: second language acquisition (sla) research is slowly being replaced by research on multilingualism, which includes third language (L3) acquisition. Indeed, there is a growing list of studies that are ‘normalizing’ third language acquisition by studying bilinguals learning a new language but not considering bilingualism a variable (e.g. Stafford, Sanz & Bowden 2012; Lado et al. 2014; Pérez-Vidal 2014; Cox & Sanz 2015). In this modern global context, researchers have produced empirical research on L3 acquisition that can be divided into three main categories depending on its focus: (a) classroom studies conducted in bilingual communities and schools with students learning a third language as part of the school curriculum (Cenoz 2013); (b) research on cross-linguistic influence investigating sources of transfer from L1 or L2 into the L3 (e.g. Sanz, Park & Lado 2014) and other possible directions for transfer (González Alonso et al. 2016); and (c) laboratory research – that is, studies outside of classroom or immersion contexts, in which dependent and independent variables can be tightly controlled by the researcher – conducted within a cognitive approach, the focus of this timeline. Despite its potential diminished ecological validity, this last strand is characterized by the robustness of its design and its improved overall validity, and by the manipulation of external conditions and the measurement of internal variables related to cognition.

Type
Research Timeline
Information
Language Teaching , Volume 50 , Issue 1 , January 2017 , pp. 65 - 79
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2016 

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

Cenoz, J. (2013). The influence of bilingualism on third language acquisition: Focus on multilingualism. Language Teaching 46.1, 71–86.Google Scholar
Cox, J. & Sanz, C. (2015). Deconstructing PI for the ages: Explicit instruction vs. practice in young and older adult bilinguals. IRAL: International Review of Applied Linguistics 53.2, 225–248.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
González Alonso, J. G., Rothman, J., Berndt, D., Castro, T. & Westergaard, M. (2016). Broad scope and narrow focus: On the contemporary linguistic and psycholinguistic study of third language acquisition. International Journal of Bilingualism, doi: 10.1177/1367006916653685.Google Scholar
Klein, E. C. (1995). Second versus third language acquisition: Is there a difference? Language Learning 45.3, 419–466.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lado, B. & Sanz, C. (2015). Methods in multilingualism research. In King, K. & Lai, Y.-J. (eds.), Encyclopedia of language and education (vol. 10). Amsterdam: Springer.Google Scholar
Lado, B., Bowden, H. W., Stafford, C. A. & Sanz, C. (2014). A fine-grained analysis of the effects of negative evidence with and without metalinguistic information in language development. Language Teaching Research 18.3, 20–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pérez Vidal, C. (ed.) (2014). Study abroad and language acquisition: Context and contact matters. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Sanz, C., Park, H. I. & Lado, B. (2014). A functional approach to cross-linguistic influence in ab initio L3 acquisition. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition 18.2, 236–241.Google Scholar
Stafford, C. A., Sanz, C. & Bowden, H. (2012). Optimizing language instruction: Matters of explicitness, practice, and cue learning. Language Learning 62.3, 741–768.CrossRefGoogle Scholar