Roger W. Andersen

Bio: Roger W. Andersen is an academic researcher from University of California, Los Angeles. The author has contributed to research in topics: Second-language acquisition & Language acquisition. The author has an hindex of 5, co-authored 5 publications receiving 594 citations.

Discourse Motivations for Some Cognitive Acquisition Principles

Abstract: This paper offers an alternative interpretation for what has been called the defective tense hypothesis, the primacy of aspect hypothesis, or simply the aspect hypothesis in the literature on first and second language acquisition of tense and aspect. The aspect hypothesis states that first and second language learners will initially be influenced by the inherent semantic aspect of verbs or predicates in the acquisition of tense and aspect markers associated with or affixed to these verbs. Our account focuses on the observation that adult native speakers also appear to adhere to this primacy of inherent semantic aspect in the relative quantitative distribution of tense-aspect markers in their speech. We argue that a small set of cognitive operating principles and the notion of prototypicality account for this behavior in learners. Moreover, we argue that these principles are a consequence of how learners and native speakers alike organize information and their perspectives on it in ongoing discourse.

The one to one principle of interlanguage construction

Abstract: Studies of pidginization have often characterized the minimal nonnative linguistic systems that result from the process of pidginization in negative terms, as the absence of morphosyntactic features of the native target language. Such negative definitions (1) fail to explain what pidgins are like and how they get that way and (2) fail to provide a means for describing and explaining continual linguistic development of nonnative interlanguage systems beyond the minimal skeletal systems characteristic of the earliest stage of interlanguage development. This paper suggests that one important principle of interlanguage construction can account for both minimal "pidginized" interlanguage systems and more developed interlanguage systems. The One to One Principle of interlanguage construction specifies that an interlanguage system should be constructed in such a way that an intended underlying meaning is expressed with one clear invariant surface form or construction. Evidence for this principle is drawn from recent second language acquisition research on Dutch, English, French, German, Spanish, and Swedish as second languages.

An implicational model for second language research

Abstract: This paper offers a model for dealing with individuals as well as groups, variability as well as systematicity in L2 research. This model consists of a revised version of the Ordering-Theoretic Method (Bart and Krus 1973; Dulay and Burt 1974b) in conjunction with implicational analysis as used in sociolinguistics. After a brief introduction to implicational analysis, I describe and illustrate the model presented here with data on the use of 13 grammatical morphemes in English by 89 Spanish-speaking learners. In the analysis of the data I follow Krashen and his colleagues in separating morphemes into V and NP; free and bound morphemes, as well as DeCamp's (1973:144) view that general implicational scales are ‘…surface composites resulting from simultaneous operation of simple grammatically-relevant underlying scales.’ The conclusions of this study support Krashen's (1977)‘Natural Order’for the acquisition of grammatical morphemes, Larsen-Freeman's (1976) work on frequency as an explanation for morpheme orders, and Rosansky's (1976) work on frequency as an explanation for morpheme orders, and Rosansky's (1976a,b) criticism of cross-sectional methodology for failing to deal with individual variation in the data, but rejects Rosansky's claim that her cross-sectional analysis of her data does not agree with the longitudinal analysis of one of her subjects and thus invalidates her strongest argument against cross-sectional methodology.

Expanding schumann's pidginization hypothesis1

Abstract: Schumann (1978b), in addressing criticism of his Pidginization Hypothesis for second language acquisition, elaborates further on the relationship between pidginization-creoluation-decreolization and second language acquisition and revises and improves on his model. I propose a further revision and expansion of Schumann's model that distinguishes socio-cultural aspects of the pidginization cycle from the acquisitional processes of pidgmization, creolization and decrolization and that relates a wider range of language acquisition phenomena to each other. This expanded version of Schumann's model puts creolization back into the model and also adds depidgnization and first language acquisition to it Pidginization/depidginization, creolization/decreolization and first and second language acquisition are herein considered related acquisitional phenomena which develop under different circumstances as specific instances of the more general co-occuring but opposing processes of nativization and denativization.

All of the Above

Abstract: Universals —everybody wants them! After all, explanation is superior to description in science, or so they say, and something called universals stands a good chance of providing a principled explanation for observable linguistic phenomena, whether cross-linguistically valid generalizations about properties of language, about linguistic performance, or about first or second language acquisition. For some time, generative theoreticians have had a de facto patent on universals as they apply to language and its use and acquisition, with Greenbergian linguistic typologists as well as functionalists and psycholinguists of various persuasions in close competition. A special issue on universals and second language acquisition must pay serious attention to the case for universals as they might apply to second language acquisition (SLA) within each of these traditions. It is for this reason that this issue includes as many different representative perspectives as is possible, given the limitations of space.

Principles and Practice in Second Language Acquisition

Abstract: This text explores the relationship between second language teaching practice and what is known about the process of second language acquisition and summarizes the current state of second language acquisition theory.-- Draws general conclusions about the application of theory to methods and materials and describes the characteristics that effective materials should include.-- Concludes that language acquisition occurs best when language is used for the purpose for which it was designed: communication.

Efficiency and complexity in grammars

Abstract: 1. Introduction 2. Linguistics Forms, Properties and Efficient Signaling 3. Defining the Efficiency Principles and their Predictions 4. More on Form Minimization 5. Adjacency Effects Within Phrases 6. Minimal Forms in complements/Adjuncts and Proximity 7. Relative Clause and Wh-movement Universals 8. Symmetries, Asymmetric Dependencies and Earliness Effects 9. Conclusions Abbreviations References Index of Authors Index of Languages Subject Index

Language Is a Complex Adaptive System: Position Paper

Abstract: Language has a fundamentally social function. Processes of human interaction along with domain-general cognitive processes shape the structure and knowledge of language. Recent research in the cognitive sciences has demonstrated that patterns of use strongly affect how language is acquired, is used, and changes. These processes are not independent of one another but are facets of the same complex adaptive system (CAS). Language as a CAS involves the following key features: The system consists of multiple agents (the speakers in the speech community) interacting with one another. The system is adaptive; that is, speakers’ behavior is based on their past interactions, and current and past interactions together feed forward into future behavior. A speaker's behavior is the consequence of competing factors ranging from perceptual constraints to social motivations. The structures of language emerge from interrelated patterns of experience, social interaction, and cognitive mechanisms. The CAS approach reveals commonalities in many areas of language research, including first and second language acquisition, historical linguistics, psycholinguistics, language evolution, and computational modeling.

Explaining the “Natural Order of L2 Morpheme Acquisition” in English: A Meta-analysis of Multiple Determinants

Abstract: This meta-analysis pools data from 25 years of research on the order of acquisition of English grammatical morphemes by students of English as a second language (ESL). Some researchers have posited a “natural” order of acquisition common to all ESL learners, but no single cause has been shown for this phenomenon. Our study investigated whether a combination of 5 determinants (perceptual salience, semantic complexity, morphophonological regularity, syntactic category, and frequency) accounts for the variance in acquisition order. Oral production data from 12 studies, together involving 924 participants, were pooled to obtain weighted accuracy scores for each of 6 grammatical functors. Results of a multiple-regression analysis showed that a large portion of the total variance in acquisition order was explained by the combination of the 5 determinants. Several of these determinants, it was argued, can be seen as part of a broad conceptualization of salience. Since the article was originally published, a number of meta-analyses have appeared in the applied linguistics literature (e.g., Masgoret & Gardner, 2003; Norris & Ortega, 2000; Ortega, 2003), and a book on meta-analysis in applied linguistics research is forthcoming (Norris & Ortega, in press). Meanwhile, research on the acquisition of Hebrew as a second language has begun to provide cross-linguistic evidence for how different aspects of salience contribute to ease or difficulty of second language acquisition (DeKeyser, Alfi-Shabtay, Ravid, & Shi, 2005) and how salience interacts with age of learning (DeKeyser, Ravid, & Alfi-Shabtay, 2005).