Pre-proposal presentation: a final paper.

Juan Esteban Gallego Cano

Juan Pablo Hincapie
Valentina Bedoya

Angela Patricia Velásquez Hoyos

Mg. in English Didactics

Research foundations
Licenciatura en Bilingüismo con énfasis en inglés
Facultad de Bellas Artes y Humanidades
Universidad Tecnológica de Pereira
Pereira
November, 2019
 TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM 3

1.1 Theory 3
1.2 Problematic situation 3
1.3 Purpose of the implementation 4

2. CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK 5
2.1 Interlanguage 5
2.2 Language proficiency 5
2.3 Metacognition 6
2.4 Metalinguistic awareness 7
2.5 Multilingualism 7
2.6 Third Language acquisition. 8

3. LITERATURE REVIEW 10

LIST OF REFERENCES 15

2
 1. STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM

1.1 Theory

This monographic project dives into the topic of third language acquisition, a subject that
is gaining attraction in recent years, since having domain of the English language is seen as a
prime necessity in matters of the job market competitiveness; however, the arise of a globalizing
culture has caused proficiency in just English (or any other second language) plus the mother
language proof to be insufficient; this is driving more and more people to the decision of
acquiring a third language to increase their professional possibilities.

Taking this into consideration, it is necessary to be aware of the process of acquiring a

third language, and the influence that the second language has over it.

Current studies on this matter lean towards the topic of interference of previously learned
languages in the process of acquisition of a third language. Focused more on the influence of
linguistic factors taken from such previous languages.

A present issue regarding the study of third language acquisition is that opinions are quite
torn within the academic community when it comes to the process of acquiring a third language.
On one hand, there is the population that sees and approaches the process of third language
acquisition as being the same as learning a second language with the only variation of the target
language being different.

On the other hand, another significant portion of scholars and researchers that take third
language acquisition as an independent process from previously learnt languages, stating that the
former have an effect on the learning of a new language.

1.2 Problematic situation

Despite the existence of some research projects, there is still a gap in the impact that 2nd
language learning / acquisition has on learning a 3rd language.

Following this trend, this monograph seeks to understand the problem of scarcity of

3
theoretical and implementation information regarding L3 learning in one single paper.

This scarcity causes teachers and in case students to ignore the processes under learning a
L3, besides the implication this process has in terms of inter, intra and cross linguistic
interferences and how to tackle them.

1.3 Purpose of the implementation

The proposal regarding this issue is to develop a monograph in which different theories
and perspectives are exposed by means of an organized paper that exposes trends, cases of study
and research that works in the future, as a way of setting the starting point for further studies in
the region.

This proposal is innovative and important in this field as the information that exists
regarding third language acquisition is minimum in the country. Besides that, it has relevance as
more and more people want to study a third language or additional languages, making it so, a
pioneer work to establish a point to start analyzing this issue based on other cases around the
world.

This proposal involves different elements: professional growth, students' responses and
linguistic outcomes for it considers real cases regarding linguistic performances around the world
that benefit teachers when teaching students who already speak a second language. This
understanding provides insight of the inner process of the students and how teachers should teach
more efficiently.

The results should shed light on how to proceed when addressing these type of cases
based on the compilation of theoretical, methodological and cases of study of teaching and
learning a third or additional language.

4
 2. CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK

2.1 Interlanguage

Interlanguage is a technical term that alludes to foreign language learners´ linguistic

ability that does not match that of native speakers, but behaves as a systematic knowledge of
language (Selinker, 1972). It means that this ability is an intermediate stage between the L1 and
the L2 that works as an organized and systematic way of organizing the new knowledge. It is
independent of both the learners´ native language and the target language. As a consequence,
Nemser (1971) points out that it is merely a successive approximation to the target language that
takes place when learning a new language. The approximation fits the necessity of the new
language, providing students the tools to fulfil communicative tasks by an approximative system.

As part of this approximative system, Richards (2002) encounters 3 major elements that
constitute interlanguage: borrowing patterns from the mother tongue; extending patterns from the
target language; and expressing meanings using words and grammar already known. These three
compound the new definition can be best describe what interlanguage is. We could, so say that
interlanguage is an approximative and systematic scheme that L2 learners use to approach the
new language using the tools they already know.

2.2 Language proficiency

In matters of language learning, the role of Language proficiency has been surrounded by
controversy, for it has been questioned by several authors that constantly debate the parameters
in which it should be measured, making the a simple definition difficult to draw out; for instance,
Verhoeven (1992) defines language proficiency as the scale measurement of fluency where the
language produced by non-native users of the language is contrasted against the idealized edge of
native speakers of a specific language.

5
 Contrasting this idea, Rao (2016) sees language proficiency as the elementary focus on
the aspects of comprehension and communication as the main portrayal of capacity in a specific
language, yet, making the distinction between the concepts of proficiency and fluency: where
proficiency refers to the mastery of one’s performance in the different skills comprehended by
the language being evaluated, whereas fluency is rather intended as the eloquence and
smoothness reflected by one’s performance of the language in the production aspects of it;
hence, reassuring that it is possible to be proficient without being fluid.

Both authors considered, it can be concluded that language proficiency refers to the level
of dexterity shown by an individual’s performance on a language taken from two different
perspectives: one that evaluates the performance of the non-native speakers as opposed to the
standardized prospects of fluency for native speakers of such language; and a comprehensive
perspective where proficiency level is determined by the individual’s competence in the target
language.

2.3 Metacognition

An aspect that has proven itself to be very effective in facilitating learning is

Metacognition, often referred to as “thinking about thinking”, and its applicability does not shy
away from the learning process for a foreign language. The definition of metacognition has
expanded massively into numerous different aspects through the years, making the definition on
its own lose coherence. Veenman (2006) offers a more concise definition for this process,
explaining it as the higher-order thinking processing skill that enables the knowledge about and
regulation-control of one’s own cognitive activities as these are performed in the learning
process, whether this “self-knowledge” is correct or incorrect and must be submitted to constant,
objective feedback for it to be of benefit to the learning process. With a different perspective to
this idea, Dunlosky (1992) refers to metacognition as an introspective task to review one’s
thought process, even though not specifically on the learning process, but in any cognitive
exercise that must lead to the adjustment of said process in the search of personal growth. We
could say then that metacognition is the inner-directed task that allows an individual to evaluate

6
and his own thought process and properly assess and regulate it in order to improve the outcome
of the task in question.

2.4 Metalinguistic awareness

In order to learn any foreign language, people need to develop a certain level of
awareness that let them to grab the linguistic knowledge more easily and rapidly. This awareness
may occupy a central part in ELT due to the continous growth of interest people have not only on
learning and as well on teaching English. The concept of metalinguistic awareness may have
multiple perspectives and points of view to consider what it implies; one of them comes from
Gombert (1992) who states that this awareness corresponds to the ability to see words as
decontextualized objects and being able to do two major tasks with them: manipulate and analyse
them apart from content and production. The manipulation and analysis of words out of the
context allow students to expand the possibilities to reorganize concepts and come up with
brand-new manners of molding language. Roehr (2007) complements Gombert´s (1992)
definition when referring to the conscious ability to think (in Gombert´s words see) about
language and it´s nature that encompasses according to Chomsky (1976) structure and
characteristics.

Thinking about language is not limited only to its structure and characteristics, but as
well about how it may work and the possible relationships among different linguistic and non-
linguistic objects inside and outside context. The latter can be considered as a new definition that
broadens what linguistic awareness implies.

2.5 Multilingualism

Although multilingualism is not a recent phenomenon, it has received a significant

increase of attention during the 21st century considering the more than 7,000 languages are
spoken around the world (Lewis, 2009, as cited by Cenoz, 2013) as well as the imperative
necessity globalization has created to speak other languages (Edwards, 2004, as cited by Cenoz,

7
2013). As a matter of fact, different countries and international bodies arouse the teaching and
learning of using multiple languages through language policies; for example, the Article 165(2)
of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) dictates that ‘Union action shall
be aimed at developing the European dimension in education, particularly through the teaching
and dissemination of the languages of the Member States’. It is not surprising, therefore, the
interest of applied linguists to conduct research in this field.

As Kemp (2009) cautions multilingual research is an ‘undergoing process’ (p. 12) where
definitions and agreements among scholars are yet necessary to reach. Authors as Li (2008), for
example, asserts that a multilingual is someone who can accomplish active or passive
communication; in contrast, de groot (2011) speaks of multilingualism as the use of three or
more languages (p.2). I agree with de groot when referring to the number of languages that the
term multilingualism encompasses; however, I would add to the discussion the contribution
made by Baker (2011, in cenoz, 2013) in relation to the proficiency expected in the case of
bilingualism:

‘A maximalist definition requiring native control of two languages is too extreme,

but that a minimalist definition that considers incipient bilingualism with minimal
competence to be considered bilingual is also problematic.’(p.6)

Indeed, the user of multiple languages must possess some degree of proficiency in order
to be regarded as a multilingual. Thus, my own definition of multilingualism involves the user’s
ability to rely on multiple codes/languages to engage successfully in communicative tasks.

2.6 Third Language acquisition.

Although scholars’ interest in third language acquisition has seemed to sprung throughout
the last decades. The earliest glances on this concept come from Braun (1937) and Vildomec
(1963) who were the first authors to express the positive aspects of the coexistence of multiple
languages in the learners repertoire, such as possessing a broader cultural awareness. In contrast,
Singh & Carroll (1979) concluded that third language acquisition is no different from second

8
language acquisition since second language was ‘any language acquired after the first’. Some of
the most recent insights into the field come from Cenoz (2013), a recurrent author in the TLA,
who recognizes the multiple advantages third language learners have over second language
learners such as having access to a broader metalinguistic awareness and mental repertoire.

9
 3. LITERATURE REVIEW

Due to globalization, the number of people interested in learning a third language has
been increasing. Knowing a second language seems nowadays not to be sufficient to fit world
requirements. This fact calls researchers attention to address third language learning and the
influence of previously learnt languages. This literature review introduces two articles which
approach this issue. The first is Inter- and Intra-Lingual Interference Effects in Learning a Third
Language by Ahukanna, Lund, and Gentile (1981), while the second is Cross-Linguistic
Influence in Third language acquisition. The case of Portuguese as a third language in Serbian
Students by Graça and Carvalhosa (2012).

The first study is about the types of interference (inter- or intra-lingual) that may appear
in learning a third language. This article addresses the interferences English and Igbo languages
may have on the process of learning French in college students in Nigeria. This study examines 3
main elements: 1) the interlinguistic interference effects traceable to Igbo, English or either Igbo
or English, or to intralingual in French, 2) the errors made according to the nature of structural
similarities in the target language; and 3) the influence of relative proficiency in the target
language susceptibility. Hence, this first article pretends to identify and assess the interference
from first and second language on learners of French.

This study was developed in the french Department, at Alvan Ikoku college of education,
in Owerri, Nigeria, involving a multilingual population of students of French as a third language
(with command of languages Igbo and English), some with no prior experience learning French,
as well as others with educational background in the target language. Nigeria being a country
that possesses over 400 languages, with English as the official language, it is not strange that
almost every student of French in already proficient in at least two other languages, yet French is
matter of study as it is taught country-wide in school as a foreign language subject. This
research states three main interrogatives: 1) How is Inter-linguistic interference effects traceable
to Igbo or English in the analyzed samples? 2) What is the nature of the errors made by the
participants regarding the structural similarities to the target language? 3) What is the influence
of relative proficiency in the target language on the susceptibility to interference?

10
 The methodology of the research consisted on the application of grammar tests
containing parallel, yet differently executed structures in Igbo or English and designed to
indicate errors likely to be caused by interference of type “Igbo, but not English”; “English, but
not Igbo”; or “both Igbo and English. The point of the grammar tests was for the subjects to
identify any structural mistakes on a French-based evaluation that unknowingly had several cases
of the forth mentioned cases of inter-linguistic interference. The test being performed by two
groups of twenty second year students of French per experiment (for a total of 40 participants) in
two different experiments with a two year difference, with the variation that one group consisted
of people with no previous instruction of French, in contrast to people with prior experience of
five years of instruction in French.

The grammar tests were administered to both groups on the same days, yet on different
periods, with the subjects being unaware that they would be tested prior to the implementation of
such tests. One hour was given for the subjects to answer the seventy-five test items; however,
the group of Experiment II was asked to spot and correct the errors found in the test, meanwhile
the group of Experiment I was only required to spot the errors. The authors of this article
highlighted the ‘exclusion of data on errors in discourse’ (p.86) as the main constraint of the
study. Such limitation responds to the nature of the data collection instrument: a written test,
intended to identify attributable interference cases. In particular, the researchers questioned if
the analyzed errors do reflect naturally occurring errors and if the interference of comprehension
is proportional to errors of production.

The findings reported by the authors are that (1) the interference cases attributable to
english on Igbo and french were the most common, in contrast to Igbo item where the
participants had the least errors, in this matter, the authors consider that some linguistic elements
and languages themselves have more interference than others; (2) the most predominant errors
were found in items that the students judged as being correct in terms of syntactic and semantic
production, ergo concluding that the students were unable to identify while containing nounces
belonging to the other languages (either English or Igbo); (3) the potential of interference
increases with the number of languages a student knows: as beginners show more interference
than more proficient users of a third language do.

11
 In the second article, Cross-Linguistic Influence in Third language acquisition. The case
of Portuguese as a third language in Serbian Students by Graça and Carvalhosa (2012), the
authors found similar results as in the previous investigation by analyzing the influence of
previous learned languages in learning a new one in this case Portuguese. These authors
contribute to the understanding of cross-linguistic influence in third language acquisition through
the analysis of a written production made by learners of Portuguese as a third language executed
based on a previously-prepared dictation. The participants of this research were thirty-seven
students, doing 1st, 2nd, 3rd and 4th year of their degrees accordingly, from the University of
Belgrade who were learning Portuguese as a third language. As mentioned above, Pinto &
Carvalhosa (2012) highlight that the research subjects had studied/were studying at least two
other foreign languages including English, Spanish, French, Italian and Russian.

This research took as sample thirty-seven written materials which the students produced
based on a dictation of a popular portuguese story. Hence, founded on the written production,
this research was intended to answer the following research questions: (1) to what extent is
cross-linguistic influence in the third language present in Serbian university students’ written
productions of a previously prepared dictation?; (2) how is cross-linguistic influence present in
their written productions?, (3) which words are most affected—content or function words?, (4)
which previously acquired language is exerting this influence?, and (5) which of the factor(s),
identified as ‘condition[ing] L2’s influence on L3? (Hammarberg, 2001, p.22., cited by Pinto &
Carvalhosa, 2012, p.174).

It is of high relevance to highlight some facts about this study: first and foremost, the
study reveals how morphosyntactic roots, and the similarities among those across languages,
play a role in Cross Linguistic influence. it is also relevant to note that the authors of the study
made the separation between the categories Cross Linguistic Influence (CLI) and spelling errors
when processing the data as a way of demonstrating that they must be regarded as two different
phenomena, since the results labeled as CLI are much more revealing of the process of an
individual who has previously studied other languages when facing a new language.

However, another matter worth noticing from this study is that at the point of the study
being carried out, the proficiency level on Portuguese of the subjects might have not been
enough to perform the task they were required in regard of the phonological and orthographic

12
demand of it; which could have influenced the results of the study, therefore limiting the reach of
the conclusions.

The findings reported in this article revealed in response to research question 3 that the
more affected words were content ones more than function ones. Moreover, it shed light showing
that as a possible reason for students not to obtain lower means in errors production respond to
the low level students had on their knowledge of Portuguese, so they were not yet able to process
the required phonological-orthographic correspondences. Besides this, the study revealed that the
students may have been influenced by the closest language they knew: Spanish, regarding this,
the researchers point out that reasons may be the familiarity Spanish vocabulary and verb tenses
have in common with Portuguese.

Finally, the researchers mention that they agreed that in initial language learning stages,
teaching must be carried out in the “traditional way” in order to develop in learner’s explicit
language awareness and to apply properly the grammatical rules. As a conclusive statement from
both studies, it can be said that in both, researchers highlight that third language beginner
learners are more prompted to evidence interference than do more proficient students. Moreover,
it is worth mentioning that in both articles just one of the extra learned languages showed to
exert more influence in the learning of the third language than the others for different reasons:
linguistic proximity or linguistic relevance for learners.

Both studies contribute to the existing discussion around interlinguistic influence on third
language learning by bringing into questioning what factors are likely to increase interference
cases from one language to another and what the nature of intra/inter linguistic errors is. Hence,
the researchers set the basis for similar studies pondering upon traceable effects of the linguistic
background on the learning of a third language. Though the results obtained show certain levels
of cross influence and interference of languages, it is still missing investigations regarding the
impacts proximity and language families have on the process of learning a third language.

Local study:

On the basis of the work of Czochralski (1971), Weinreich (1968), Flor (1995, p.76) and
Clyne (1980), the study titled Interferencia lingüística en el aprendizaje simultáneo de varias

13
lenguas extranjeras by Buitrago, Ramirez & Rios (2011) aimed to identify and describe the
linguistic interference present in the simultaneous learning of multiple languages as well as to
suggest pedagogical and curricular approaches to multilingual-learning-environments in the
Colombian context. The authors recalled the historical approaches to the concept of interference
highlighting flor’s (1995) favorable views on interference relating it to the code-mixing process.

This research took as participants undergraduate students and professors involved in the
English, French, Italian and German courses of the modern languages program from Universidad
de Caldas. The main instruments to collect data were interviews, surveys and written-
productions. Thus, 13 university’s professors of different foreign languages were interviewed in
order to inquiry on linguistic interference of other languages in writing production. Likewise, a
survey was conducted on 50 modern languages’ undergraduates to determine participants’
perspectives of linguistic interference on their own writing productions. Also, a set of written
productions were collected from different courses to analyze the interference nature.

In this sense, Buitrago et al (2011) reported three main findings: Firstly, the interference-
rate, significantly, increases during the simultaneous learning of multiple languages when there
are phonetic, morphological and semantic similarities among languages. Secondly, teaching
methods are closely linked to linguistic interference, that is to say that those languages taught
through the communicative language approach were more likely to experiment interference
among them in contrast to those languages taught through a grammar method. Finally, lingua
francas stimule interference cases whereas higher degrees of proficiency on that foreign language
do not. To conclude, the researchers mentioned the lack of literature on the simultaneous
learning of L2, L3, and L4.

14
 LIST OF REFERENCES

Buitrago, S. H., Ramírez, J. F. & Ríos, J. F. (2011). Interferencia lingüística en el

aprendizaje simultáneo de varias lenguas extranjeras. Revista Latinoamericana de
Ciencias Sociales, Niñez y Juventud, 2 (9), pp. 721 - 737.

Çankaya, Pınar. (2015). The Exploration of Multilingualism: Development of Research

on L3, Multilingualism and Multiple Language Acquisition.

Cenoz, J. (2001). Chapter 1. The Effect of Linguistic Distance, L2 Status and Age on
Cross-linguistic Influence in Third Language Acquisition: Psycholinguistic
Perspectives.

Cenoz, J. & Hoffmann, C.(2003) Acquiring a third language: what role does bilingualism
play? The International Journal of Bilingualism 7, 1-5.

Cenoz, J. (2004) Teaching English as a third language: the effect of attitudes and
motivation. In C. Hoffmann & J. Ytsma (eds) Trilingualism in Family, School and
Community (202-218). Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.

Cenoz, Jasone. (2013). Defining Multilingualism. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics.

33. 3-7.

Chomsky, N. (1975). Reflections on language. New York: Pantheon

De groot, A. M. B. (2011) Language and cognition in bilinguals and multilinguals: An

introduction. New York, NY: Psychology Press.

Dunlosky, J. Metcalfe, J. (2009). Metacognition. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE

publications.

Gombert, J. E. (1992). Metalinguistic development. London, UK: Harvester Weatsheaf.

Joshua G. W. Ahukanna, Lund, N., & Gentile, J. (1981). Inter- and Intra-Lingual
Interference Effects in Learning a Third Language. The Modern Language
Journal, 65(3), 281-287.

Li, W. (2008). Research perspectives on bilingualism and multilingualism.

15
Nemser W. (1971). Approximative Systems of Foreign Language Learners. International
Journal of Applied Linguistics, 92, 115-123

Pinto, Maria & Carvalhosa, André. (2012). Cross-Linguistic Influence in Third Language
Acquisition. The Case of Portuguese as a Third Language in Serbian Students.
10.1007/978-3-642-29557-7_10.

Rao, V. (2016). A brief study of English Language proficiency: Employability. Ambedkar

Nagar, Bapughat, India: Langar House.

Roehr, K. (2007). Metalinguistic Knowledge and Language Ability in University-Level

L2 Learners. Applied Linguistics, 29(2), 173-199

16