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.

Grammaticality judgments reflect a compound product of both grammatical and processing factors. But because they interact in a symbiotic way, very often grammatical and processing constraints are difficult to separate. According to generally accepted grammatical theory, (a) Who do you think John told Mary he fell in love with? and (b) Who do you think John told Mary fell in love with Sue? are equally grammatical. We have observed, however, that native speakers strongly accept sentences like (a) as grammatical but react quite variably to sentences like (b). A possible explanation is that native English speakers exhibit a processing preference, in searching for the extraction site for the wh- word, for object position over subject position. Proficient nonnative judgmental data offer additional support for a processing account. Nonnatives whose L1 grammars do not bias them toward objects also show preferences similar to those of natives. We provide a processing account based on Frazier's Minimal Attachment principle.

This article reviews the second language research on age-related differences, as well as first language work needed to disambiguate some of the findings. Five conclusions are drawn, (a) Both the initial rate of acquisition and the ultimate level of attainment depend in part on the age at which learning begins. (b) There are sensitive periods governing language development, first or second, during which the acquisition of different linguistic abilities is successful and after which it is irregular and incomplete. (c) The age-related loss in ability is cumulative (not a catastrophic one-time event), affecting first one linguistic domain and then another, and is not limited to phonology, (d) The deterioration in some individuals begins as early as age 6—not at puberty as is often claimed. (e) Affective, input, and current cognitive explanations for the reduced ability are inadequate. The capacity for language development is maturationally constrained, and its decline probably reflects a progressive loss of neural plasticity, itself possibly associated with increasing myelination.

This study explores the question of whether or not learners can consciously attend to both form and meaning when processing input. An experimental procedure is presented in which three levels of learners in four groups were asked to process information under four different conditions: attention to meaning alone; simultaneous attention to meaning and an important lexical item; simultaneous attention to meaning and a grammatical functor; and simultaneous attention to meaning and a verb form. Results suggest that learners, in particular early stage learners, have great difficulty in attending to both form and content. These results raise important questions for current discussions of the role of consciousness in input processing.

In this article, the motivation for Universal Grammar (UG), as assumed in the principles and parameters framework of generative grammar (Chomsky, 1981a, 1981b), is discussed, particular attention being paid to the logical problem of first language acquisition. The potential role of UG in second language (L2) acquisition is then considered. Three different positions are reviewed: (a) the claim that UG is not available to L2 learners; (b) the claim that UG is fully available; and (c) the claim that the L2 learner's access to UG is mediated by the mother tongue. This raises the issue of what kind of evidence can be used to decide between these three positions. Recent experimental research which argues for one or another of these positions by investigating the L2 status of the Subjacency Principle is reviewed, and the implications of this research are discussed.

Research in both first and second language reading has undertaken the study of discourse structure and the influence of the rhetorical organization of the text on readers' passage comprehension. A considerable amount of research has also examined the effect of text adjuncts of various kinds on passage comprehension. The present study explored the effect of providing novice foreign language readers information about the rhetorical structure of an expository text as a text adjunct. Two passages were tested under each of three conditions: no framework, minimal framework, and expanded framework. Results indicate that an expanded framework is an effective text adjunct for the comprehension of expository prose.

This study investigated first language (L1) orthographic influence on cognitive processing involved in second language (L2) reading. Using a fundamental unit of representation, three orthographic systems (i.e., alphabet, syllabary, and logography) can be categorized into two types: morphography and phonography. Previous L1 reading research has suggested that different strategies are used for phonological recoding by morphographic and phonographic readers. This study tested the possibility that these L1 recoding strategies are transferred and utilized in L2 reading. A cross-linguistic experiment involving adult L2 learners of English with contrasting L1 orthographic backgrounds (Arabic, Japanese, Spanish, and English—for native control) was conducted. The results indicate that reading among phonographic readers (Arabic, Spanish, and English) is seriously impaired when essential phonological information is inaccessible. Similar phonological inaccessibility, in contrast, apparently does not affect the reading performance of Japanese, or morphographic, readers. Further, the study demonstrated, first, that phonological inaccessibility exerts differential effects on the reading processes of phonographic and morphographic readers and, second, that L2 readers from different L1 orthographic backgrounds utilize their L1 strategies in reading English as an L2. Hence, the findings of the study verify cognitive strategy transfer during L2 reading.

This study investigates second language acquisition of English noun phrases in discourse, examining the effect of discourse markedness and structural markedness on the development of noun phrase use. English L2 noun phrase forms are examined within three universal discourse contexts: current, known, and new reference to topics. The targeted noun phrases forms include ø anaphora, pronouns and nouns with markers of definiteness and indefiniteness, including left dislocation and existential phrases. Based on expectedness within discourse, the least marked discourse context is reference to a current topic, and the most marked context is the introduction of a new referent as topic. Based on formal complexity, ø anaphora is the least marked structural form, and left-dislocated and existential noun phrases are the most marked. Free production and elicited imitation recall tasks, involving picture sequences that manipulated the three discourse contexts, were used to test Japanese learners' acquisition of noun phrase forms. They were evaluated by comparison with NS production. The results support predictions that L2 learners distinguish between discourse contexts, acquiring more targetlike forms in the least marked context first, and that they acquire the least marked structural forms earlier than the more marked ones.

Topical structure analysis (TSA), a text-based approach to the study of topic in discourse, has been useful in identifying text-based features of coherence. It has also been used to distinguish between essays written by groups of native English speakers with varying degrees of writing proficiency (Witte, 1983a, 1983b). More recently, TSA has distinguished between higher and lower rated ESL essays, but with different results from those found with native speakers of English (Connor & Schneider, 1988). The present study replicated the previous ESL study of two groups of essays written for the TOEFL Test of Written English with three groups of essays. Findings indicate that two topical structure variables, proportions of sequential and parallel topics in the essays, differentiate the highest rated group from the two lower rated groups. We offer explanations for the results and propose that all occurrences of a particular type of topic progression do not contribute equally to the coherence of a text.

Speech rate (articulation rate and pauses) was examined for its relation to communicative success. Native English speakers (NSs) were paired with other NSs and with non-native speakers (NNSs). The subjects viewed a short film, the content of which they were to relay to their two partners independently. Communicative success was measured through comprehension questions addressed to the listeners at the completion of the task. Analyses indicated that although a slight majority of NSs slowed their speech rate for NNSs, they did not adjust articulation rate, but did significantly increase pause time. Neither speech rate nor articulation rate varied over the course of the narrations. Contrary to intuition, the subjects who successfully communicated the story to NNSs did not adjust their speech rate, while those who had difficulty communicating with NNSs increased pause time significantly. The implications of the findings are discussed, and suggestions for further research are made.

This article discusses the relationship of first language (L1) and second language (L2) acquisition. First, different approaches to comparing L1 and L2 development are summarized. Then, I argue for a particular version of the fundamental difference hypothesis. Finally, I illustrate the hypothesis with some evidence from the acquisition of German syntax. It is claimed that the Universal Grammar (UG) approach provides a theoretical framework to explain differences between L1 and (adult) L2 development. In particular I argue that the observed L1/L2 differences can be accounted for by assuming that adult L2 learners cannot use principles of UG as a learning device in the same way as L1 learners use them.

This article examines the role played by functional approaches to linguistics in understanding second language acquisition (SLA). Central premises and tenets of functional approaches are described, and several key theoretical problems with functional efforts are detailed. The problem of referential management (the selection of nominal vs. pronominal NPs) in second language discourse production is examined. The general conclusions are drawn that (a) functional approaches to linguistics have a significant role to play in SLA studies, but (b) functional universals are insufficiently grounded theoretically and empirically at this point to contribute more than heuristic guidance to SLA theory.

The developing oral English of approximately 100 second language learners (four intact classes) was examined in this study. The learners were native speakers of French (aged 10–12 years) who had received a 5-month intensive ESL course in either grade 5 or grade 6 in elementary schools in Quebec. A large corpus of classroom observation data was also analyzed.

Substantial between-class differences were found in the accuracy with which students used such English structures as progressive -ing and adjective–noun order in noun phrases. There was some evidence that these differences (which were not correlated with performance on listening comprehension tests) were due to differences in teachers' form-focused instruction. These findings are discussed in terms of current competing views of the role of form-focused instruction in second language learning.

Studies of first and second language acquisition have indicated that when verbal morphemes first appear, they tend to mark aspectual distinctions in non-native-like ways. This study tested the hypothesis that in L2 acquisition, verbal morphemes initially mark lexical aspect—the temporal features inherent in the semantics of a predicate, independent of the time line—regardless of their function in the target language. To reduce the subjectivity that has weakened previous studies, operational tests—which entailed inserting a base-form verb phrase into a frame and then judging whether the result is acceptable—were used to determine lexical aspect for each of over 550 verb tokens in the corpus, based on an interlanguage sample from a native speaker of Spanish. The results of a chi-square test allow rejection of the null hypothesis—that lexical aspect and morphology are independent—at the .001 confidence level. Past marking was found to correlate with punctual aspect, -ing with durative.

A number of recent studies in L1 listening comprehension have shown that background knowledge plays a crucial role in the comprehension process. The purpose of the present article is threefold: (a) to review the literature on background knowledge, (b) to present the findings of pertinent L1 and L2 research, and (c) to report the results of a preliminary study of L2 listening comprehension and background knowledge.

This article examines the implications of connectionist models of cognition for second language theory. Connectionism offers a challenge to the symbolic models which dominate cognitive science. In connectionist models all knowledge is embodied in a network of simple processing units joined by connections which are strengthened or weakened in response to regularities in input patterns. These models avoid the brittleness of symbolic approaches, and they exhibit rule-like behavior without explicit rules. A connectionist framework is proposed within which hypotheses about second language acquisition can be tested. Inputs and outputs are patterns of activation on units representing both form and meaning. Learning consists of the unsupervised association of pattern elements with one another. A network is first trained on a set of first language patterns and then exposed to a set of second language patterns with the same meanings. Several simulations of constituent-order transfer within this framework are discussed.