Influence of Learner’s First Language on Second Language Development.doc

外文文献：Influence of Learners First Language on Second Language DevelopmentLiu Shuyan（School of Foreign Languages, Beihang University, Beijing 100191）Abstract: A significant relation can be detected between the first language and the second language and some researchers mention that the closer the second language is to the first language, the easier it is. The effects played by the first language do exist during the course when learners acquire their second language. The relation between the first language and the second language has been explored in this article from two aspects: the possible effects of first language orthographic features influences on word recognition processing in English as a second language and the phonological system of first language constraints second language learners ability of produce the sound of the target language especially in the early period of learning.Key words: the first language (L1)；the second language (L2)；orthographic features；phonological system；behaviorist learning theory.It is popular belief that second language acquisition is strongly influenced by the learners first language. The role of the first language in the learning of second language draws not only the attention of the foreign language learning research, but the second language teaching research. Beebe (1988:15-39) points out that there lies the significant relation between the mother tongue and the second language and he argues that we are inclined to assume that the nearer the second language is to our first language, the easier it is. For example, a Frenchman about to learn Italian has a very different character from that encountered by a Hungarian learns English. French and Italian are cognate or sister languages; English and Hungarian are not even relative with each other. French and Italian are very similar in structure, and by far the greater part of their vocabularies bear strong resemblances. To a certain extent one may conclude that it is possible to speak and understand Italian while thinking in French. Compared with a French learning Italian, when a Hungarian studies English, there is no possible morphological identity as well as lexis and syntax between Hungarian words and English words. The long words, the various functions and the general lack of any recognizable similarities between the two languages force the Hungarian learners to a slow and laborious procedure of learning at the beginning. From the above example，it is not hard for us to know that the effects played by L1 do exist during the course when learners acquire their second language. The following paragraphs will illustrate the effects played by L1 from two dimensions of the process in second language learning.On the one hand, the possible effects of first language orthographic features influences on word recognition processing in English as a second language. Akamatsu (1999) argues that the ESL readers L1 orthographic structure influences the mechanisms underlying word recognition in ESL. The effect would be larger for the ESL participants whose L1 is not alphabetic than the ESL participants whose L1 is alphabetic. In another word, if one is sensitive to alphabetic orthography and efficient in processing alphabetic words, then the visual distortion of words should not affect ones processing of sequences of letters in words (Akamatsu, 1999). Several studies on bilingual word recognition have reported the possible effects of L1 on the basic process of reading in L2. Koda (1988) points out that in processing the component letters of English words, L2 readers with a non-alphabetic L1 background are less efficient than those with an alphabetic L1 background. After investigating the word recognition process of advanced ESL learners whos L1 was Arabic, Spanish, and Japanese, Koda (1988) includes that although the Japanese groups were more efficient in general visual processing than Spanish speakers and the Arabic speakers, the Japanese readers had difficulty translation alphabetic symbols into spoken units. Koda (1988) also examines the word recognition mechanism, using ESL readers with the same L1 backgrounds as Brown and Haynes study. Koda makes the conclusion that because the Japanese orthography is less recoverable than the Arabic and the Spanish orthographies, the Japanese readers were seriously inhibited by the visual information. On the other hand, the phonological system of first language constraints second language learners ability of producing the sound of the target language especially in the early period of learning. Ellis (1985:18-41) holds the argument that the foreign accent of the second language learners is the clearest support for the influence of first on second. Wooley (1999) stated that from the studies of speech perception in L2 the phonological system of the native language restricts the L2 learners ability to perceive and produce the sounds of the target language. For example, according to Wooley (1999), native speakers of Japanese have difficulty perceiving the /r/-/l/ contrast of English. Towards Chinese, especially some from south part of China, you can identify where they are from when you have a talk with them. One of the reasons that interferes L2 learners producing the sound of the target language is that the sound system of English has his own characteristics such as tune, stress, and syllable. Language specific processing is not restricted to segmental phenomena; the roles played by stress and syllable structure in language processing differ among language and differentially affect L2 learners. According to Cutler (1992) stress in English plays a large role in disambiguation and segmentation of continuous speech but second language learners will find it difficult to utilize this information as effectively as the native speakers. From the influence of L1 on L2 mentioned above, we may conclude that the role of the L1 in SLA is both positive and negative. However, in fact little evidence can be traced to clearly illustrate the positive effects of L1 on L2. And very few literature researches could be found to support the good influence. Even if it is so, learners, especially when learn-ers L1 and L2 are cognate, may not deny the existence of the positive effects. In contrast with this, lots of researchers examined the negative effects of L1 on L2. Ellis (1985:18-41) argues that the process of SLA is often characterized in popular opinion as that of overcoming the effects of L1, of slowly replacing the features of the L1 that intrude into theL2 with those of the target language and so of approximating ever closer to native-speaker speech. Ringbom (1987) argues that on the whole the mother tongue was regarded merely as an obstacle, not as an aid to L2-learning. In order to give further demonstration of the role L1 on L2, the following two famous theories, behaviorist learning theory and error analysis, which have great influence on the field of SLA must be mentioned. On the one hand, the two theories are used to provide theory supports about what have been discussed above concerned with two dimensions effects played by L1 on L2; on the other hand, further discussion will be conducted to detect the influence of L1 on L2 from the theory aspect. About the behaviorist learning theory, up to the end of the 1960s, there were few studies to examine the process of SLA empirically. The dominant discussion happen in psychology school and two key notions are identified in these discussions: habit and errors (Beebe, 1988). Ellis (1985:18-41) pointes out that behaviorist psychology set out to explain behavior by observing the response that took place when particular stimuli were present, and attributed two important characteristics to habits: observable and automatic. As Fries (1954) argues that habits were performed163March 2009Vol. 6 No. 1College English spontaneously without awareness and were difficult to get rid of unless environmental changes led to the changes of stimuli. Ellis (1998:15-63) argues that theories of habit formation were theories of learning in general. If in the acquisition of L1 children were said to master their mother tongue by imitating and by this way they build up knowledge of habits. From the behaviorist point of view, the imitation and reinforcement can be identified as stimulus and response. It was also believed that SLA could proceed in a similar way. Ellis (1985:18-41) concluded that there were two reasons why habit formation theory dominated the discussion of both first and second: one is habit formation provided a theoretical account of how the learners L1 influence the process of L2; the other is that it explained the phenomenon of errors made by L2 learners to some extent. Therefore, learning a second language meant overcoming a habit which was formed when learning the second language is required. The set of habits formed from learning of L1 is seen as interfering with the acquisition of L2 (Beebe, 1988:15-39).According to behaviorist learning theory, old habits get in the way of learning new habits. Ellis (1985:18-41) points out that the notion of interference has a central place in behaviorist learning theory to account for SLA. Interference is the result of previous learning preventing the learning of new habits. In SLA it works as follows. When the first and the second language share a meaning but express it in different ways, according to the behaviorist learning theory that this kind of transfer attribute to negative character, errors will result. However, if the transfer is positive, that is, the first and the second language share a meaning and express it in the same way. In this case no errors will occur (Ellis, 1998:15-63). The following we provide a brief discussion of the theory of errors. Beebe (1988:15-39) argues that to study the learners processing of the second language, errors committed by learners must be detected. The theory of errors is put forward by Schachter (1974). After conducting the experiment, asking the students from Arabic, Persian, Chinese, Japanese to combine two simple sentences into one complex sentence, Schacher (1974) makes the conclusion that though Arabic and Persion have rules similar to English for combining simple sentences into complex sentences, students from Arabic and Persian make more mistakes than those from Chinese and Japanese.So far, the hypotheses offered by Ellis can be questioned from two dimensions: firstly, old habits mentioned on the above paragraph are one-sided in that he emphasizes the negative effects of habits when L1 influences L2, with-out saying much about the facilitating effects. Secondly, can we say that when transfer is negative, errors will occur? Here though the transfer is negative, errors may not result, for the complexity of the task is unknown and the starting point of the learners is also unsure. Specific transfer scope needs to be presented. In all, not all errors in learning language are due to transfer, and not all instances of transfer lead to errors.In behaviorist accounts of SLA, errors are considered undesirable and are the result of non-learning, but there is an agreement that errors should be avoided (Ellis,1998:15-63). To avoid errors attempts were made to predict when they could occur. Concerned with predict potential errors, another famous theory must be mentioned, that is Contrastive Analysis. Ringbom(1987:33-71) points out that the contrastive projects started at the Center for Applied Linguistics in Washington in the early 1960s on the basis of behaviorist transfer theory. After the Georgetown Round Table Conference in 1968 little American work was done in the field of contrastive linguistics. Meanwhile, in Europe, contrastive analysis proved to be a fertile field. Numerous projects were conducted for comparison and contrast. As the aim of making these analyses is hard to achieve, researchers gradually abandon it, too.Ellis (1985:18-41) examines Contrastive Analysis from two aspects: a psychological aspect and a linguistic aspect. And he notes that the psychological aspect was based on behaviorist learning theory and the linguistic aspect, in the first place at least, on the structuralist linguistics. Towards the psychological rationale, Contrastive Analysis Hypothesis must be mentioned. Ringbom (1987) points out that the psychological rational takes the form of the contrastive analysis hypothesis which exist a strong and a weak form. The strong form of the hypothesis was common at that time but latter research began to show that many of the errors produced by L2 learners could not be traced to the L1. Therefore, the strong form of the hypothesis has few supporters today. As to the weak form of the hypothesis, it claims only to be diagnostic. That is, it is used to identity errors which are the result of interference. In fact, the weak form exerts subtle influence on explaining the role played by L1 on L2.In view of the psychological aspect of Contrastive Analysis, a question should be mentionedto what extent does the interference from L1 to L2 happen? That is, what are the conditions under which interference could take place and under which interference could not happen. Besides the linguistic variables, Ringbom (1987) argues that two non-linguistic setting should be considered: one is classroom setting; the other is naturalistic setting. In the naturalistic SLA learners have the chance of contacting target language. However, in the classroom setting, SLA learners will always use their L1 between class and this maybe strengthens the inhibition.As for the linguistic aspect of contrastive analysis, a comparison of two languages can be carried out using any several different models of grammar. Ellis (1985:18-41) argues that how an effective comparison can be executed if languages do not have any categories in common. In fact, this issue is ignored by the previous researchers who conduct studies within the same language family. To solve this problem, Chomshy provided a theory of grammar as a model which offered a sounder theoretical basis for contrastive analysis (Ringbom, 1987). However, contrastive analysts soon realize that except for the model problem, there were degrees of similarity and