L2 TENSE TRANSFER IN EFL LEARNING

Наука и настава у васпитно-образовном контексту (2020), (стр. 441-456)

АУТОР(И): TATJANA S. GRUJIĆ

Е-АДРЕСА: tatjanagrujic@yahoo.com

Download Full Pdf  

DOI:10.46793/STEC20.441G

САЖЕТАК:

: In second language acquisition (SLA) transfer is predominantly explored as either positive or negative influence of learners’ first language (L1) on their second/foreign language (L2) performance. Studies in this field serve not only to describe the learner’s interlanguage, but also to inform, improve and refine foreign language teaching.

However, the scope of SLA studies is such that it leaves the other transfer direction under-researched (L2 to L1), assuming that once the learner’s L1 system has fully developed, their L1 competence will not be subject to change. More recent studies of adult bilinguals have shown a bidirectional interaction between the two linguistic systems: not only does L1 influence L2, but L2 influences L1 as well.

In this study, conducted among adult students of English (B2 to C1 level language users, according to CEFR), we examine the influence of English as a foreign language upon Serbian as a native tongue in terms of tense transfer. More precisely, the study explores how the subjects interpret and translate the secondary meanings of the English past tense. The basic meaning of the past tense is to locate an event (or state) in the past. However, in its secondary meanings (backshift past in reported clauses, counterfactual present in adverbial clauses of condition and ‘past subjunctive’ when expressing wishes and regrets) it does not refer to the past time. The error analysis of students’ English to Serbian translations provides evidence of L2 influence: learners tend to use the Serbian past rather than the present tense in their translations. Pedagogical implications of this study of misuse of L1 tense include focusing on explicit corrective feedback and polishing instructional materials.

КЉУЧНЕ РЕЧИ:

L2 English to L1 Serbian tense transfer, language teaching, translation, tense semantics

ЛИТЕРАТУРА:

Sources
  • Mougham, S. W. (1988[1976]). Sixty-five short stories. London: Heinemann/Octopus. Selimović, M. (2009[1966]). Derviš i smrt. Beograd: Logos-art.
References
  • Bardovi-Harlig, K. & Dornyei, Z. (1998). Do language learners recognize pragmatic violations? Pragmatic vs. grammatical awareness in instructed L2 learning. TESOL Quarterly, 32, 233–259.
  • Bland, K. S. (2008). Grammar sense: Advance grammar and writing. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  • Celce-Murcia, M. & Larsen-Freeman, D. (1999). The grammar book: An ESL/EFL teacher’s course (2nd ed.). Boston: Heinle & Heinle.
  • Charkova, K. & Halliday, L.J. (2011). Second- and foreign-language variation in tense backshifting in indirect reported speech. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 33, 1–32.
  • Comrie, B. (1985). Tense. New York: Cambridge University Press. Comrie, B. (1986). Tense in indirect speech. Folia Linguistia, 20, 265–296.
  • Cook, V. (1991). The poverty-of-the-stimulus argument and multi-competence. Second Language Research, 7, 103–117.
  • Cook, V. (1999). Going beyond the native speaker in language teaching. TESOL Quarterly, 33, 185–209.
  • Cook, V. (еd.) (2003). Effects of the second language on the first. Clevedon, UK: Multilingual Matters.
  • Cowan, R. (2008). The Teacher’s Grammar of English. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  • Decklerck, R. & Tanaka, K. (1996). Constraints on tense choice in reported speech. Studia Linguistica, 50, 283–301.
  • Downing, А. & Locke, P. (2002). English grammar. Oxon: Routledge.
  • Ellis, R. (1994). The study of second language acquisition. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  • Grujić, T. (2012). Definisanje semantike glagolskih vremena pomoću termina ,,osnovno”, ,,pravo”, ,,izvedeno”, ,,nepravo”. Nasleđe, 22, 133–145.
  • Grujić, T. & Danilović J. (2014). Discourse analysis: a marginalized approach to teaching tenses. U B. Mišić Ilić i V. Lopičić (еds.): Jezik, književnost, marginalizacija: Jezička istraživanja, Zbornik radova (535–547). Niš: Filozofski fakultet.
  • Gvozdanović, J. (1996). Reported speech in South Slavic. In T. Janssen & W. van der Wurff (еds.): Reported Speech: forms and functions of the verb (57–74). Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
  • Jarvis, S. (2003). Probing the effects of the L2 on the L1: A case study. In V. Cook (еd.): Effects of the second language on the first (81–102). Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
  • Jarvis, S. & Pavlenko, A. (2008). Crosslinguistic Influence in Language and Cognition. New York: Routledge.
  • Jespersen, O. (1924). The philosophy of grammar. London: Allen and Unwin.
  • Kecskes, I. & Papp, T. (2000). Foreign language and mother tongue. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
  • Niezgoda, K. & Rover, C. (2001). Pragmatic and grammatical awareness. In K. R. Rose & G. Kasper (eds.): Pragmatics n language teaching (63–79). New York: Cambridge University Press.
  • Pavlenko, A. (2000). L2 influence on L1 in late bilingualism. Issues in Applied Linguistics, 11, 175–205.
  • Quirk, R., Greenbaum, S., Leech, G. & Svartvik, J. (1985).  A comprehensive grammar of the English language. London: Longman.
  • Schauer, G. A. (2006). Pragmatic awareness in ESL and EFL contexts: Contrast and development. Language Learning, 56, 269–318.
  • Schmid, M. (2002). First language attrition, use, and maintenance: The case of German Jews in anglophone countries. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
  • Su, I. (2001). Transfer of sentence processing stragegies: A comparison of L2 learners o Chinese and English. Applied Psycholinguistics, 22, 83–112.
  • Thewlis, S. (2007). Grammar dimensions: Form, meaning and use. Boston: Heinle & Heinle.
  • Thornbury, S. (1999). How to teach grammar. Harlow, Essex: Pearson Education Limited.
  • Van Hell, J. & Dijkstra, T. (2002). Foreign language knowledge can influence native language performance in exclusively native contexts. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 9, 780–789.
  • Vince, M. & Sunderland, P. (2003). Advanced language practice: English grammar and vocabulary. Oxford: Macmillan Education.