A Unified Model for L1 and L2

1
A Unified Model for L1 and L2

• Brian MacWhinney
• HKIEd, Carnegie Mellon

2
Thanks to ...

• Elizabeth Bates Michèle Kail Kerry Kilborn
• Csaba Pléh Klaus Köpcke Maryellen MacDonald
• Julia Evans Natasha Tokowicz Ovid Tzeng
• Ping Li Igor Farkas Arturo Hernandez
• Yoshinori Sasaki Richard Wong Antonella
  Devescovi
• Reinhold Kliegl Jeff Sokolov Beverly Wulfeck
• Vera Kempe Janet McDonald Hasan Taman
• Elena Pizzuto Stan Smith Dan Slobin
• Roman Taraban Patricia Brooks Zhou Jing
• Yuki Yoshimura Melita Kovacevic Joe Stemberger
• Chris Jones Jared Leinbach Christophe Parisse
• Yvan Rose Kees De Bot Phil Pavlik
• Nora Presson Yanping Dong Anat Prior
• Yanhui Zhang Sue-mei Wu
• NIMH (25 years) NSF (10 years) MacArthur (3 years)

3
Economic Assumptions

• Competence in English is crucial for success in
  the global economy.
• But most of the population of the world does not
  speak English as L1. So English is L2. Other
  L2s have parallel roles.
• It is not enough to restrict L2 competence to the
  elite, since work is becoming increasingly based
  on language skills.
• Different social and economic configurations will
  require differing levels of L2 competence.

4
Position 1 Early Immersion

• There is a Critical Period for language learning.
• There is a learning/acquisition dichotomy. Late
  bilinguals can never achieve full L2 competence.
• Therefore, we must start immersion L2 programs at
  the pre-primary level.
• And spend billions of dollars in exposure, but
  not really teaching.

5
Position 2 Focus on community

• There is a Critical Period and a
  learning/acquisition dichotomy.
• However, immersion will not work and can conflict
  with other goals in early childhood education.
• Pre-college education should be in the native
  language.
• Full bilingualism is only possible if the
  community becomes bilingual.

6
Position 3 Focus on quality

• There is no critical period for second language
  learning, although there are important age
  effects.
• Critical period effects are due to entrenchment
  and competition.
• What is important is not the timing of learning,
  but the quality of exposure.
• We may still need billions of dollars, but in
  teaching, not just exposure.
• Languages can be learnt and taught. There is no
  real learning/acquisition dichotomy.

7
The Positions

• Position 1 -- UG Chomsky, Lenneberg, Krashen,
  Long, Hurford, Pinker, Newport, Meisel
• Position 2 -- Sociolinguistics Fishman, Swain,
  Ervin-Tripp, Gumperz
• Position 3 -- Emergentism Bates, Ellis,
  Bialystok, Snow, MacWhinney, Ringbom

8
7 Pillars of UG

• Critical Period -- todays focus
• Grammar Gene
• Speech is Special
• Modularity
• Poverty of the Stimulus
• Sudden Evolution of Language
• Centrality of Recursion

9
7 pillars of emergentism

1. L1-L2 competition and entrenchment
2. Gradual evolution
3. Modules are made not born
4. Polygenic emergent genome
5. Speech relies on mammalian abilities
6. Learning on input
7. Emergence of recursion

10
Which will stand?
11
Entrenchment vs. Critical Periods

• Critical Periods are linked to infancy.
• Observed drop is not precipitous.
• Lateralization is not linked to CP.
• Language is not a unitary ability.
• Golf, ballet are also age-related.
• No mechanism has been discovered.
• UG-related syntactic patterns are not strongly
  fossilized - Birdsong

12
Critical Periods

• Bee dance, cricket song
• Does the ability need a trigger?
• When does it start and end?

13
L1 CP? L2 CP
Lenfant Sauvage by François Truffaut Truffaut
as Dr. Jean Itard
14
How many CPs?

• 6 mos -- deaf children
• 2 -- Early bilingual impacts
• 5 -- Output phonology Flege
• 8 -- Korean adoptees, literacy, orthography
• 13 -- Hemispherectomies, synaptic pruning
• 15 -- Shift in learning, growth of strategies
• 20 -- Beginning of decline
• 40 -- Social difficulties

15
Where is the critical drop?

• Newport Johnson Hakuta actual

16
A real CP - Hubel Weisel
17
What we know

• Critical periods are basic to embryology.
• Critical periods for binocular vision in cats
  periods for exposure to song in birds precocial
  bird attachment
• Animals have many instincts but is language an
  instinct?
• Kuhl and Werker brain locks in on early sounds
• Bosch, Juszyck Auditory system builds early
  contrasts
• Rosenzweig rats in rich environments get bigger
  brains.

18
A bridge too far

• No evidence for early brain effects
• Mozart for babies
• Linda Acredolo and Baby Signs
• Mobiles, language while you sleep
• Suzuki method
• There is nothing wrong with early L2 learning,
  but no evidence that it is indispensable
• Early bilingualism ? Early L2 learning

19
CP for holding pens?
20
Chopsticks?
21
Multiple language abilities

• Bulgarian grad student who wrote at the top of
  the class, but had a noticeable accent.
• Hungarian diplomat with perfect English, but
  nothing to say.
• Japanese grad student with perfect interaction
  and comprehension, but impossible definite
  articles and slow test-taking.
• Fossilization for specific German nouns vs.
  fossilization for some past tenses.

22
How can we decide?

• Neurological evidence for a Critical Period
• Immigrant studies
• Proof of success in native acquisition for age of
  arrival well past the Critical Period.
• Proof of failure after some early age of arrival.
• L2 Classroom studies
• Big correlational analyses (questionable method)
• Randomized clinical trials (if we could get
  funding)
• Microgenetic method studies (my current
  preference)
• experiments -- can we teach r/l?
• online methods
• TalkBank video methods

23
Mechanisms of UG

• Genes
• Modules
• Principles, Parameters, Rules

24
Mechanisms of Emergence

• Entrainment, physical and social
• Adaptation, selection
• Competition, strength, reinforcement
• Maps, topology, short connections
• Self-organized criticality
• Resonance
• Homeostasis, homeorhesis, feedback

25
Why the shift to emergentism?

• Without advanced methods, emergentist cognitive
  science was not possible
• We didnt have CHILDES, TalkBank
• Audio, video analysis was primitive
• We couldnt simulate - PDP, SOM, ART
• We couldnt image the brain - ERP, fMRI
• We couldnt study learning in vivo - PSLC.
• With these advances, emergentism is becoming the
  default stance.

26
Unified Competition Model
chunking
maps
buffers
resonance
transfer
codes
mental models
27
L1 and L2

• The learning goals are the same.
• The available mental processes are the same.
• However, the specific challenges are different.

28
L1 Learning Challenges

• Segmenting out words
• Organizing phonological gestures
• Bootstrapping syntax
• Conversational sequencing

29
L2 Challenges

• Maximizing positive transfer
• Avoiding negative transfer
• Overcoming age effects
• Using resonance to overcome entrenchment
• Proceduralizing declarative structures -
  Ullman/Paradis

30
Component Theories

1. Competition interactive activation, Bayes
2. Maps SOM, entrenchment
3. Transfer A relation between maps
4. Chunking chunking theory, fluency
5. Buffers processing load, CAPS
6. Resonance memory theory, Pimsleur, coding
7. Mental model perspective, embodiment
8. Codes sociolinguistics, identification

31
1. Cue Competition

• Whodunit?
• The tiger pushes the bear.
• The bear the tiger pushes.
• Pushes the tiger the bear.
• The dogs the eraser push.
• The dogs the eraser pushes.
• The cat push the dogs.
• Il gatto spingono i cani.

32
Cues vary across languages

• English The pig loves the farmer
• SV gt VO gt Agreement
• German Das Schwein liebt den Bauer.
• Den Bauer liebt das Schwein
• Case gt Agreement gt AnimacygtWord Order
• Spanish El cerdo quiere al campesino.
• Al campesino le quiere el cerdo.
• "Case" gt Agreement gt Clitic gt Animacy gt Word Order

33
Cues
34
Central Claim

• Cue validity predicts cue strength
• (Bayesian statistics)
• p(function)form - comprehension
• p(form)function - production
• Cue validity measured in corpora
• Cue strength measured in experiments

35
Cues Compete
The bear the tigers chases.
Tigers-as-Agent
Bear-as-Agent
competes
preverbal position
SV agreement
Initial Position
36
L1/L2 Competition
I often go ... / Je vais souvent ...
V Adv
Adv V
competes
speaking English
speaking French
ADV 1st
ADV 2nd
Heavy Adv
37
Strength measured in experiments
38
English Children
39
Hungarian Children
40
Italian Children
41
English L1, Dutch L2
Dissertations by Janet McDonald and Kerry Kilborn
42
Dutch L1, English L2
43
Findings - 22 studies

• Validity predicts Strength.
• Children and L2 learners pick up frequent cues
  first, then they settle on reliable cues.
• For timed tasks, strong fast cues dominate.
• L2 learners attempt transfer, but then learn
  cues, as in L1. They gradually reach L1 levels
  of cue strength.

44
2. Maps

• Maps are central to the processing theory. They
  control transfer, entrenchment, and embodied
  encoding.
• Maps are emergent
• Neural systems Jacobs Jordan 1992
• Children Karmiloff-Smith 1997
• Robots Nolfi 1996, Tani 2002

45
Self-organizing lexical maps
Li, Farkas, MacWhinney - Neural network -
computer simulation - L1 lexical learning -
CHILDES input - no initial organization -
short connections
46
Gradual Emergence
50, 150, 250, 500 words
47
Refining competition
48
Bilingual self-organization
Chinese Phonology
Chinese Semantics
49
Maps implement entrenchment

• Strong items dominate over weak.
• Late L2 items are parasitic on pre-existing L1
  forms and maps

50
Module Entrenchment
Simultaneous Bilingualism
LX
LY
balanced
Successive Bilingualism
L1
L2
dominates
51
3. Transfer

• Mapability
• Item-based (want X) patterns will not transfer
• Grammatical semantics can be a difficult map
• Phonology, semantics, pragmatics all map and
  transfer
• Markedness
• Unmarked pattern-based will Adv V
• Marked pattern-based is weak Adv V S
• Semantic/phonological prototypes transfer
• Filtering
• Japanese r/l second formant transitions.
• English learners of tones.

52
Examples

• taco -gt taco
• wenn (if) -gt when
• tell me a story -gt say me a story
• install a new version -gt install new version

53
The Culprits

• Entrenchment
• Transfer (crosstalk)
• Learning your own errors
• Strategy blockage
• Social culprits
• Aging

54
Social Culprits

• Overcommitment
• too much email, too many committees
• Declining L2 contact environment
• Avoidance of L2 input
• Allegiance to L1

55
Aging

• Loss of Auditory Acuity - age effects
• Loss of Motor Control - Parkinsonism
• Cell death -- both cortical and white matter
• Declining transmission speed
• Declining hippocampal storage
• Trauma

56
Fighting back

1. Undoing transfer
2. Unblocking social barriers
3. Unblocking strategy barriers
4. Increasing differentiation and resonance

57
Overcoming Parasitism
turtle
tortuga
turtle
tortuga
58
ERP evidence of transfer - P600

• The cat likes to eat. vs The cat likes to
  eating.

59
L1 supports L2
Su abuela cocina/cocinando muy bien. Her aunt
cooks/cooking very well.
60
L1 (English) blocks attention
El/los libros son muy interestantes. The/the
books are very interesting.
61
L2 cares, L1 oblivious
Ellos fueron a una/un fiesta. They went to a/a
party.
62
Behavioral Data
63
4. Chunking

• Task Repeat ??????
• Learn gonggòngqìche bus ????
• Syllables plus tone encodings fill working memory
• Chunk gonggòng is linked to public
• Chunk qìche is linked to motor car
• Supportive links to characters
• Compound is a weak chunk, weak tone sequence
• Embed weak chunk in sit ___ go frame ?
  (????) ?

64
Translation Disfluency

• Do you want to take a bus to Nanjing next week?
• Ni xiang xià ge xingqi zuò gonggòngqìche qù
  Nánjing ma?
• Chinese requires temporal before verb.
• About to say Ni xiang zuò
• Pause .
• Insert xià ge xingqi
• Continue
• Result Non-fluency

65
Chunks mesh into slots

• sit (vehicle slot) go
• (adverb slot) V
• (topic slot) comment
• Fluent plan emerges from coordination of
  individual item-based patterns

66
PSLC studies of Fluency

• Online Dictation -- French, Chinese
• Yuki Yoshimuras CMU dissertation on Fluency in
  Japanese L2 - sentence repetition after reading
  and listening.

67
Repetition and WM
68
Omissions
69
Adding Novel Words
70
Friederici

• German Natives show
• for semantic violations N400
• for syntactic violations ELAN P600
• L2 Russian natives - 5 years in Germany
• for semantic violations N400
• for syntactic violations no ELAN, but P600
• Brocanto and mini-Nihongo Learners ELAN and P600
• fMRI Conclusion L1 and L2 use same areas, but L2
  relies more on Brocas

71
5. Buffers

• Competition occurs in buffers
• Incrementalism, role-slot filling
• This is developed in
• MacWhinney (1987)
• Kempen Hoenkamp (1987)
• Levelt (1990)
• OGrady (2006)

72
6. Resonance

• Graduated interval recall
• Multimodal consolidation
• Self-organized criticality

73
Graduated interval recall

• Pimsleur 67

74
Neural Basis
Wittenburg et al. 2002
75
Consolidation Circuits
Dynamic
Consolidation
Scaffold
76
Chinese Resonance
77
Consolidation and Time

• Bones, muscles, cell walls, mitochondria, and
  immune system becomes stronger after periods of
  use and breakage.
• These systems respond to pressures across time
  frames. (slow muscles, fast muscles)
• Neurons work the same way.

78
Math Models Pavlik 2006
ttime from practice ddecay rate nnumber of
presentations mmemory activation abase decay
rate cscales effect of activation on
decay umaximal study benefit vrise to asymptote
speed
79
Four Pools

• Pool 1 item is strong, then wait
• Pool 2 item is weak enough to make practice
  efficient but strong enough to make drilling more
  efficient
• Pool 3 item is weak and retrieval will fail, so
  study practice is more efficient
• Pool 4 unpracticed items
• Algorithm selects items in this order 2, 3, 4,
  1
• Learned items are removed from pools

80
Optimization really helps
81
7. Mental models

• We build up mental models through
  perspective-taking.
• Comprehensible input -- L2 speaker can construct
  a coherent mental model.
• L2 conversation-based teaching has to make sure
  the mental model is on track.
• Frames, scaffolds, can support this.

82
8. Codes

• Code-switching
• L2 is a code choice
• Codes involve perspective taking in mental models
• Role of video in learning, identification

83
The Unified Model

• Competition is central.
• Both L1 and L2 are emergent.
• Item-based constructions compete in L1 and L2
  learning.
• Transfer arises from entrenchment in maps.
• Fluency develops through chunk meshing.
• Resonance and spacing produce robust learning.
• Conversation supports perspective switching and
  model construction.

84
Conclusions

• The Unified Model integrates our understanding of
  first and second language acquisition.
• Language learning relies on emergentist
  processes.
• Language can be taught and learned.
• Age-related effects arise from entrenchment and
  social commitment, not UG.

85
Links

• http//psyling.psy.cmu.edu/papers
• http//psyling.psy.cmu.edu/talks

86
Aphasics - Word Order
87
Aphasics - Agreement