The prior language knowledge of learners for whom the target language is not the first foreign language poses a different starting learning situation that should merit pedagogical attention. The present paper seeks to contribute to the question of which pedagogical considerations can be made in regard to the role of prior language knowledge beyond instructed L2 grammar acquisition. Moreover, it fills a significant gap expanding the limited existing pedagogical options that instructors have at their disposal when it comes to teaching in classrooms where one foreign language is simultaneously chronologically first to some and second to others. Starting with (combinations of) existing theoretical accounts and associated pedagogical aspects (such as explicit information, negative evidence, metalinguistic explanations, grammar consciousness raising, and input enhancement), a recently developed method (Hahn & Angelovska, 2017) is discussed. The method acknowledges equally the three phases of input, practice and output and is applicable in instructed L2 grammar acquisition and beyond.
Angelovska, T. (2017). (When) do L3 English learners transfer from L2 German? Evidence from spoken and written data by L1 Russian speakers. In T. Angelovska & A. Hahn (Eds.), L3 syntactic transfer: Models, new developments and implications (Bilingual Processing and Acquisition 5). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Angelovska, T., & Benati, A. G. (2013). Processing instruction and the age factor: Can adults and school-age native speakers of German process English simple past tense correctly? In J. F. Lee & A. Benati (Eds.), Individual differences and Processing Instruction (pp. 131-152). Sheffield: Equinox.
Angelovska, T., & Hahn, A. (2014). Raising language awareness for learning and teaching L3 grammar. In A. Benati, C. Laval, & M. Arche (Eds.), The grammar dimension in instructed second language learning (pp. 185-207). London: Bloomsbury Academic.
Bardel, C., & Falk, Y. (2007). The role of the second language in third language acquisition: The case of Germanic syntax. Second Language Research, 23(4), 459-484.
Bardel, C., & Falk, Y. (2012). Behind the L2 status factor: A neurolinguistic framework for L3 research. In J. Cabrelli Amaro, S. Flynn, & J. Rothman (Eds.), Third language acquisition in adulthood (Studies in Bilingualism, 46) (pp. 61-78). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Benati, A. (2016). Input manipulation, enhancement and processing: Theoretical views and empirical research. Studies in Second Language Learning and Teaching, 6(1), 65-88.
Benati, A., & Angelovska, T. (2015). The effects of processing instruction on the acquisition of English simple past tense: Age and cognitive task demands. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching (IRAL), 53(2), 249-269.
Benati, A., & Lee, J. (Eds.). (2015). Processing instruction: New insights after twenty years of theory, research and application. IRAL (Special issue), 53(2).
Benati, A., & Schwieter, J. (2017). Input processing and processing instruction: Pedagogical and cognitive considerations for L3 acquisition. In T. Angelovska & A. Hahn (Eds.), L3 syntactic transfer: Models, new developments and implications (Bilingual Processing and Acquisition 5) (pp. 253-275). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Berkes, É., & Flynn, S. (2012). Further evidence in support of the cumulativeenhancement model: CP structure development. In J. Cabrelli Amaro, S. Flynn, & J. Rothman (Eds.), Third language acquisition in adulthood (Studies in Bilingualism 46) (pp. 143-164). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Cabrelli Amaro, J., & Rothman, J. (2015). The relationship between L3 transfer and structural similarity across development: Raising across an experiencer in Brazilian Portuguese. In H. Peukert (Ed.), Transfer effects in multilingual language development (Hamburg Studies on Linguistic Diversity 4) (pp. 21-52). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Cenoz, J. (2003). The additive effect of bilingualism on third language acquisition: A review. International Journal of Bilingualism, 7, 71-87.
De Angelis, G. (2007). Third or additional language acquisition. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
De Angelis, G. (2012). Teachers’ beliefs about the role of prior language knowledge in language learning. International Journal of Multilingualism, 8(3), 216-234.
Dewaele, J.-M. (2010). Multilingualism and affordances: Variance in self-perceived communicative competence and communicative anxiety in French L1, L2, L3 and L4. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, 48, 105-129.
Ellis, R. (1997). SLA research and language teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Ellis, R. (2005). Measuring implicit and explicit knowledge of a second language. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 27, 141-117.
Erechko, A. (2003). On subject-verb inversion in Russian. In M. van Koppen, J. Sio, & M. de Vos (Eds.), Proceedings of ConSOLE X (pp. 1-14). Leiden: SOLE.
Falk, Y. (2011). Object pronouns in German L3 syntax: Evidence for the L2 status factor. Second Language Research, 27(1), 59-82.
Falk, Y., & Bardel, C. (2010). The study of the role of the background languages in third language acquisition. The state of the art. International Review of Applied Linguistics, 48(2-3), 185-219.
Fallah, N., Jabbari, A. A., & Fazilatfar, A. M. (2016). Source(s) of syntactic CLI: The case of L3 acquisition of English possessives by Mazandarani-Persian bilinguals. Second Language Research, 32(2), 225-245.
Flynn, S., Foley, C., & Vinnitskaya, I. (2004). The Cumulative-Enhancement Model for language acquisition: Comparing adults’ and children’s patterns
of development in first, second and third language acquisition of relative clauses. The International Journal of Multilingualism, 1(1), 3-16.
Fotos, S. (1993). Consciousness-raising and noticing through focus on form: Grammar task performance versus formal instruction. Applied Linguistics, 14, 385-407.
González Alonso, J., & Rothman, J. (2017). From theory to practice in multilingualism: What theoretical research implies for third language learning. In T. Angelovska & A. Hahn (Eds.), L3 syntactic transfer: Models, new developments and implications (Bilingual Processing and Acquisition 5) (pp. 277-298). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Grey, S., Williams, J. N., & Rebuschat, P. (2014). Incidental exposure and L3 learning of morphosyntax. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 36 , 611-645.
Hahn, A., & Angelovska, T. (2017). Input-Practice-Output: A method for teaching L3 English after L2 German with a focus on syntactic transfer. In T. Angelovska & A. Hahn (Eds.), L3 syntactic transfer: Models, new developments and implications (Bilingual Processing and Acquisition 5) (pp. 299-319). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Haider, H. (2010). The syntax of German. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Haukås, Å. (2016) Teachers’ beliefs about multilingualism and a multilingual pedagogical approach. International Journal of Multilingualism, 13(1), 1-18.
Hermas, A. (2010). Language acquisition as computational resetting: Verb movement in L3 initial state. International Journal of Multilingualism, 7(4), 343-362.
Hermas, A. (2014a). Multilingual transfer: L1 morphosyntax in L3 English. International Journal of Language Studies, 8(2), 1-24.
Hermas, A. (2014b). Restrictive relatives in L3 English: L1 transfer and ultimate attainment convergence. Australian Journal of Linguistics, 34(3), 361-87.
Holmberg, A. (2012). Verb second. In T. Kiss & A. Alexiadou (Eds.), Syntax – An international handbook of contemporary syntactic research (pp. 342-383). Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.
Hufeisen, B., & Neuner, G. (Eds.). (2003). Mehrsprachigkeitskonzept – Tertiarsprachen – Deutsch nach Englisch. Strasbourg: Council of Europe.
Larsen-Freeman, D. (2003). Teaching language. From grammar to grammaring. Boston: Heinle & Heinle.
Larsen-Freeman, D. (2014). Teaching grammar. In M. Celce-Murcia, D. Brinton, & M. A. Snow (Eds.), Teaching English as a second or foreign language (4th ed.) (pp. 256-270). Boston, MA: National Geographic Learning/Cengage.
Larsen-Freeman, D. (2015). Research into practice: Grammar learning and teaching. Language Teaching, 48, 263-280.
Lee, J., & Van Patten, B. (2003). Making communicative language happen. New York: McGraw Hill.
Lee, S.-K., & Huang, H. (2008). Visual input enhancement and grammar learning: A meta-analytic review. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 30, 307-331.
Montrul, S., De La Fuente, I., Davidson, J., & Foote R. (2012). The role of experience in the acquisition and production of diminutives and gender in Spanish: Evidence from L2 learners and heritage speakers. Second Language Research, 29(1), 87-118.
Morgan-Short, K., Finger, I., Grey, S., & Ullman, M. T. (2012). Second language processing shows increased native-like neural responses after months of no exposure. PLoS ONE, 7(3), e32974.
Muñoz, C. (2011). Is input more significant than starting age in foreign language acquisition? International Review of Applied Linguistics (IRAL), 49(2), 113-133.
Muñoz, C., & Singleton, D. (2011). A critical review of age-related research on L2 ultimate attainment. Language Teaching, 44(1), 1-35.
Mystkowska-Wiertelak, A., & Pawlak, M. (2012). Production-oriented and comprehension-based grammar teaching in the foreign language classroom. Heidelberg – New York: Springer.
Nunan, D. (1993). Introducing discourse analysis. London: Penguin.
Peyer, E., Kaiser, I., & Berthele, R. (2010). The multilingual reader: Advantages in understanding and decoding German sentence structure when reading German L3. International Journal of Multilingualism, 7, 225-239 .
Rankin, T. S. (2013). Verb movement in generative SLA and the teaching of word order patterns. In M. Whong, K.-H. Gil, & H. Marsden (Eds.), Universal grammar and the second language classroom (pp. 57-76). Heidelberg: Springer.
Rausch, D. J., Naumann, J., & Jude, N. (2011). Metalinguistic awareness mediates effects of full biliteracy on third-language reading proficiency in Turkish-German bilinguals. The International Journal of Bilingualism, 16(4), 402-418.
Robertson, D., & Sorace, A. (1999). Losing the V2 constraint. In E. Klein & G. Martohardjono (Eds.), The development of second language grammars: A generative approach (pp. 317-361). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Rothman, J. (2010). On the typological economy of syntactic transfer: Word order and relative clause high/low attachment preference in L3 Brazilian Portuguese. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching (IRAL), 48(2-3), 245-273.
Rothman, J. (2011). L3 syntactic transfer selectivity and typological determinacy: The typological primacy model. Second Language Research, 27(1), 107-127.
Rothman, J. (2013). Cognitive economy, non-redundancy and typological primacy in L3 acquisition: Evidence from initial stages of L3 Romance. In S. Baauw, F. Drijkoningen, & M. Pinto (Eds.), Romance languages and linguistic theory 2011 (Romance Languages and Linguistic Theory 5) (pp. 217-47). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Rothman, J. (2015). Linguistic and cognitive motivations for the Typological Primacy Model (TPM) of third language (L3) transfer: Timing of acquisition and proficiency considered. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 18(2), 1-12.
Rutherford, W., & Sharwood Smith, M. (1985). Consciousness-raising and universal grammar. Applied Linguistics, 6, 274-282.
Sanz, C. (2000). Bilingual education enhances third language acquisition: Evidence from Catalonia. Applied Psycholinguistics, 21, 23 - 44.
Sanz, C., Lin, H.-J., Lado, B., Stafford, C. A., & Bowden, H. W. (2016). One size fits all? Learning conditions and working memory capacity in ab initio language development. Applied Linguistics, 37(5), 669-692.
Schwartz, B. D. (1993). On explicit and negative data effecting and affecting competence and linguistic behavior. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 15, 147-163.
Schwartz, B. D., & Gubala-Ryzak, M. (1992). Learnability and grammar reorganization in L2A: Against negative evidence causing the unlearning of verb movement. Second Language Research, 8(1), 1-38
Selinker, L. (1972). Interlanguage. International Review of Applied Linguistics, 10, 209-231.
Sharwood Smith, M. (1991). Speaking to many minds: On the relevance of different types of language information for the L2 learner. Second Language Research, 7, 118-132.
Sharwood Smith, M. (2009, May). A MOGUL perspective on consciousness and input processing. Plenary presentation given at the 2009 Conference on Second Language Processing and Parsing: State of the Science, Texas State University, USA. Retrieved from http://www.academia.edu/9425301/A_MOGUL_perspective_on_consciousness_and_input_processing
Sharwood Smith, M., & Truscott, J. (2014). Explaining input enhancement: A MOGUL perspective. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching (IRAL), 52(3), 253-281.
Shook, D. J. (1994). FL/L2 reading, grammatical information, and the input-tointake phenomenon. Applied Language Learning, 5, 57-93.
Simard, D., & Wong, W. (2004). Language awareness and its multiple possibilities for the L2 classroom. Foreign Language Annals, 37(1), 96-110.
Slabakova, R. (2016). The scalpel model of third language acquisition. International Journal of Bilingualism. Advance online publication. doi: 10.1177/1367006916655413
Truscott, J., & Sharwood Smith, M. (2004). Acquisition by processing: A modular approach to language development. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 7(1), 1-20.
Ur, P. (2013). Language-teaching method revisited. ELT Journal, 67(4), 468-474.
VanPatten, B. (2012). Input processing. In S. M. Gass & A. Mackey (Eds.), The handbook of second language acquisition (pp. 268-281). New York: Routledge.
VanPatten, B. (2015). Processing perspectives on pedagogical intervention. In J. W. Schwieter (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of bilingual processing (pp. 200-215). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Weinreich, U. (1953). Languages in contact: Findings and problems. The Hague: Mouton.
Westergaard, M. (2003). Unlearning V2: Transfer, markedness and the importance of input cues in the acquisition of word order in English by Norwegian children. In S. H. Foster-Cohen & S. Pekarek Doehler (Eds.), EUROSLA yearbook (Vol. 3, pp. 77-101). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Westergaard, M. (2009). The acquisition of word order. Micro-cues, information structure, and economy (Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today 145). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
White, L. (1991). Adverb placement in second language acquisition: Some effects of positive and negative evidence in the classroom. Second Language Research, 7, 133-161.
Whong, M., Gil, K., & Marsden, H. (Eds.). (2013). Universal grammar and the second language classroom. Dodrecht: Springer.
Whong, M., Gil, K. H., & Marsden, H. (2014). Beyond paradigm: The ‘what’ and the ‘how’ of classroom research. Second Language Research, 30(4), 551-568.
Whong, M., Marsden, H., & Gil, K.-H. (2013). How we can learn from acquisition: The acquisition-learning debate revisited. In J. Cabrelli Amaro, T. Judy, & D. Pascual y Cabo (Eds.), Proceedings of the 12th Generative Approaches to Second Language Acquisition Conference (pp. 203-210). Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Proceedings Project.
Williams, J. (2005). Form-focused instruction. In E. Hinkel (Ed.), Handbook of research in second language teaching and learning (pp. 671-691). Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Wong, W. (2003). Textual enhancement and simplified input: Effects on L2 comprehension and acquisition of non-meaningful grammatical form. Applied Language Learning, 13, 109-132.
Wong, W. (2005). Input enhancement: From theory and research to the classroom. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Wright, T. (2002). Doing language awareness: Issues for language study in language teacher education. In H. Trappes-Lomax & G. Ferguson (Eds.), Language in language teacher education (pp. 113-130). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Zobl, H. (1980). The formal and developmental selectivity of L1 influence on L2 acquisition. Language Learning, 30, 43-57.
1.1 The Author hereby warrants that he/she is the owner of all the copyright and other intellectual property rights in the Work and that, within the scope of the present Agreement, the paper does not infringe the legal rights of another person. The owner of the copyright work also warrants that he/she is the sole and original creator thereof and that is not bound by any legal constraints in regard to the use or sale of the work.
1.2. The Publisher warrants that is the owner of the PRESSto platform for open access journals, hereinafter referred to as the PRESSto Platform.
2. The Author grants the Publisher non-exclusive and free of charge license to unlimited use worldwide over an unspecified period of time in the following areas of exploitation:
2.1. production of multiple copies of the Work produced according to the specific application of a given technology, including printing, reproduction of graphics through mechanical or electrical means (reprography) and digital technology;
2.2. marketing authorisation, loan or lease of the original or copies thereof;
2.3. public performance, public performance in the broadcast, video screening, media enhancements as well as broadcasting and rebroadcasting, made available to the public in such a way that members of the public may access the Work from a place and at a time individually chosen by them;
2.4. inclusion of the Work into a collective work (i.e. with a number of contributions);
2.5. inclusion of the Work in the electronic version to be offered on an electronic platform, or any other conceivable introduction of the Work in its electronic version to the Internet;
2.6. dissemination of electronic versions of the Work in its electronic version online, in a collective work or independently;
2.7. making the Work in the electronic version available to the public in such a way that members of the public may access the Work from a place and at a time individually chosen by them, in particular by making it accessible via the Internet, Intranet, Extranet;
2.8. making the Work available according to appropriate license pattern Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0) as well as another language version of this license or any later version published by Creative Commons.
3. The Author grants the Publisher permission to reproduce a single copy (print or download) and royalty-free use and disposal of rights to compilations of the Work and these compilations.
4. The Author grants the Publisher permission to send metadata files related to the Work, including to commercial and non-commercial journal-indexing databases.
5. The Author represents that, on the basis of the license granted in the present Agreement, the Publisher is entitled and obliged to:
5.1. allow third parties to obtain further licenses (sublicenses) to the Work and to other materials, including derivatives thereof or compilations made, based on or including the Work, whereas the provisions of such sub-licenses will be the same as with the Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0) Creative Commons sub-license or another language version of this license, or any later version of this license published by Creative Commons;
5.2. make the Work available to the public in such a way that members of the public may access the Work from a place and at a time individually chosen by them, without any technological constraints;
5.3. appropriately inform members of the public to whom the Work is to be made available about sublicenses in such a way as to ensure that all parties are properly informed (appropriate informing messages).
6. Because of the royalty-free provision of services of the Author (resulting from the scope of obligations stipulated in the present Agreement), the Author shall not be entitled to any author’s fee due and payable on the part of the Publisher (no fee or royalty is payable by the Publisher to the Author).
7.1. In the case of third party claims or actions for indemnity against the Publisher owing to any infractions related to any form of infringement of intellectual property rights protection, including copyright infringements, the Author is obliged to take all possible measures necessary to protect against these claims and, when as a result of legal action, the Publisher, or any third party licensed by the Publisher to use the Work, will have to abandon using the Work in its entirety or in part or, following a court ruling in a legal challenge, to pay damages to a third party, whatever the legal basis
7.2. The Author will immediately inform the Publisher about any damage claims related to intellectual property infringements, including the author’s proprietary rights pertaining to a copyrighted work, filed against the Author. of liability, the Author is obliged to redress the damage resulting from claims made by third party, including costs and expenditures incurred in the process.
7.3. To all matters not settled herein provisions of the Polish Civil Code and the Polish Copyright and Related Rights Act shall apply.