How the Learning of a Second Language Affects the First Language of an Individual: The Italian of Monolingual and Multilingual Speakers

2already in the late 60s (Kloss, 1966)
2
, is connected to the process of first
language ‘attrition’. We will start from this phenomenon to proceed then into the
exploration of the effects of the L2 on the L1 when both languages are actively
used and their influence is as much as possible reciprocal. For this situation to
occur certain premises have to be considered. We will then analyze the linguistic
features involved in the reverse exchange as they have been analyzed by previous
studies, such as the heterogeneous research on the effects of the L2 on the L1
collected by Cook (2003).
To prove that the learning of a second language affects the overall
linguistic system of an individual, thus affecting also his L1, we will proceed to
introducing a study. Testing Italian monolingual and multilingual speakers,
whose L2 is English, we will demonstrate how their L1 diverges in several
aspects. Whether directly or indirectly proceeding from the learning of a second
language, these differences will strengthen the importance of further research on
the influence of the second language on the first, a phenomenon that has still
something to teach us.
2
KLOSS, H. German-American language maintenance efforts. In FISHMAN, J. A. Language
loyalty in the United States, The Hague: Mouton, 206-252, 1966.
For a complete bibliography on first language attrition see the website of the Division of
Languages and Linguistics College of Arts and Sciences Brigham Young University, Hawaii.
URL: http://w3.byuh.edu/academics/lang/attritionbiblio
32. HISTORICAL OVERVIEW
The history of research on the influence of the L2 on the L1 has still to
be written. As studies only very recently have started to consider this
phenomenon, this chapter will be limited to previous approaches to first and
second language reciprocal relation, and their considerations on the nature of the
influence they have on each other.
Starting from transfer studies and Contrastive Analysis (Weinreich,
1953), until the more recent works on interlanguage (Kellerman, 1986), the
effects that the learners’ first languages have on the languages they acquire have
been the focus of most of the works on cross-linguistics influence. Contrastive
Analysis considered this interference from the L1 as an obstacle to successful
mastery of the L2, as the major cause of errors (Balcom in Cook, 2003:168-192).
However, interference is a bidirectional phenomenon. According to
Weinreich’s definition (1953:1), interference is as a deviation from either
language the bilingual speaker possesses. The influence of the L2 on the L1 did
not attract the interest of researchers for long and two possible reasons for
neglecting this phenomenon are presented by Laufer (in Cook, 2003:19-31).
Firstly, research on second language acquisition was focusing more on the initial
stages of the process of acquisition thus dealing with non-advanced subjects. The
L2 these studies were considering was hence not developed enough for the
transfer to be detected as bidirectional.
The second possible reason was connected to the predominance of
English language in SLA research. The studies of advanced learners of English
had hence immigrants to English-speaking countries as their subjects. Their
attention was consequently focused on the development of their English as this
was of crucial importance for their integration into the new society.
Only in the framework of first language attrition was the possibility of a
bidirectional influence taken onto consideration. Investigating the gradual loss of
the L1, linguists
3
identified the increasing dominance of the L2 as one of the
3
See LAUFER, B. (in Cook, 2003:20) for an overview on the first studies on attrition that
presented the L2 as one of the co-factors responsible for L1 attrition (BERMAN, R.A. &
OLSHTAIN, E. Features on First Language Transfer in Second Language Attrition. Applied
Linguistics 4, 222-234, 1983; KAUFMAN, D. & ARONOF, M. Morphological Interaction
4factors responsible for L1 attrition. Hence, the influence of the L2, partly
responsible for the simplificatory changes affecting the L1 (Seliger & Vago,
1991), was considered negative.
The stress given to the necessity of considering the L2 speaker as a L2
user, whose language has not to be judged in comparison with native standards,
but is a new language in its own right (Cook, 2002), lead to a reconsideration of
the L1 influence on the L2. The ‘multi-competence’ (Cook, 1991) the bilingual
speaker possesses is a fusion of the two separate systems and not a sum of them.
Teaching methods have hence to consider the importance of the L1 for L2
learners, as it constitutes an important source available to them. There is hence
no need to discourage the use of it in class as instead some teaching
methodology, proceeding from the idea of coordinate bilingualism (Weinreich,
1953) does. The L2 learner can access the second language through the L1.
On the other hand, also the effects of the L2 on the L1 appeared to have
some benefits. Studies on the influence of FL learning on L1 skills, as the one
conducted by Papp (1991)
4
with Hungarian children, had already proved the
occurrence of positive changes, especially on metalinguistic awareness and
syntactic complexity. Considering instead the acquisition of a second language in
a L2 environment, the situation becomes more complex. Positive and negative
effects of the L2 on the L1 seem to merge in what is a new linguistic system, in
which the L1 is substantially different from the monolingual norm. However, as
stressed again by Cook (2003), it is difficult to judge those changes as negative
as they constitute an integral part of the positive phenomenon of multi-
competence development.
between L1 and L2 in Language Attrition. In GASS, S., MADDEN, C., PRESTON, D. and
SELINKER, L. Variation in Second Language Acquisition. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters, 1989:
202-215; WELTENS, B., DE BOT, K. and VAN ELS, T. Language Attrition in Progress.
Dordrech: Foris, 1986).
4
PAPP, T. Az anyanyelvi tudás és az eredményes idegennyelv tanulás összefüggései egy többszintú
longitudinális vizsgálat alapján. [The study of the interrelation of the mother tongue development
and foreign language learning in a multi-level longitudinal experiment]. Unpublished dissertation
for the candidate degree, The Hungarian Academy of Sciences, Budapest, 1991.
Findings reported and discussed in Kecskes &Papp (2000).
53. SITUATIONS OF INFLUENCE OF L2 ON L1
The focus of this chapter will be the analysis of the possible situations of
influence of the L2 on the L1. We will consider when the ‘reverse transfer’
happens and what makes it possible. The phenomenon of L1 attrition will be
briefly introduced, and the changes occurring in the language, proceeding from
the L2, discussed. Finally, a confrontation between language acquisition and
language loss will be presented.
As already seen, the influence of the L2 on the L1, whose effects attracted
the attention of linguists only in the case of attrition, was considered a negative
one. L1 attrition, however, is not an effect of the influence of the L2. What is true
is that when the L1 is undergoing attrition, the effects of the L2 are more visible.
The most common example of L1 attrition, is that of long-term immigrants to a
L2 country, whose L1, abandoned for many years, has no longer the strength to
supply all its own linguistic structures. Other situation of attrition may occur, as
we will discuss later.
In recent years, attention has been paid also to the effects of the L2 on a
lively, and still used in most of its complex range of applications, L1. The benefits
of learning a second language, for example, have proven that already at early
stages of FL learning, thus not involving the acquisition of the L2 in a natural
environment, the L2 modifies the general linguistic system of the individual.
In between FL learning and attrition lies the intermediate stage of L2 users
in the L2 environment, when the L1 is still used on a daily basis. We will indicate
this kind of relation as ‘coexistence’ of the L1 with the L2, and examine it in
greater depth later on. This situation is ideally the one in which the speaker is
employing both languages with a similar frequency, and possibly also with a
certain variety of uses. If the languages have only specialized areas of
employment, they clearly cannot be considered as fully developed and their
potential is restricted in use. In this case, they function more like different
registers and the speaker needs both as part of his complex linguistic system.
The influence of the L2, when it coexists with the L1, is quite consistent.
Being an intermediate stage, it has in itself positive and negative effects. Although
6the L2 is still positively modifying the speaker’s linguistic system, some minor
effects of attrition are already occurring. The effect of the L2 on the L1 seems also
to be that of reducing its lexical diversity, of increasing the difficulty with words
retrieval, and other regressive phenomena. Laufer (Cook, 2003:19-31) for
example, realized that in free expression, the percentage of non-frequent
vocabulary and the total amount of words produced by Russian immigrants to
Israel declined as the contact time with L2 increased. The difficulty of having a
situation of stability, and not the presence of L2, has to be considered as the
responsible for these changes. A minimal attrition effect on the L1, limited in its
use, is the price to pay for having the precious possibility of accessing two
language systems and with them, two cultures.
3.1. Premises for a ‘reverse transfer’ to be possible
The ‘reverse transfer’ is a subtle phenomenon, apart from code-mixing or
time pressure mistakes, the L2 user might not realize that his L1 is changing,
unless it is deeply affected by the process of attrition. However, fluency in the L2
makes the direction of transfer reverse and the speaker unconsciously starts
restructuring his L1 according to principles of the L2 (Seliger & Vago, 1991).
For this to happen, the L2 must have reached a certain degree of autonomy
from the L1. Kecskes and Papp (2000), called this level of knowledge, required
for the ‘reverse transfer’ to be possible, the ‘hypothetical threshold’.The
concept is derived from the Thresholds Theory
5
, applied to bilingualism and
suggesting the existence of two thresholds the bilingual children have to reach.
Reaching the first threshold is necessary for the consequences of bilingualism not
to be negative; the second is instead reached when the children acquire an
appropriate competence in both languages and show cognitive benefits from
bilingualism. Although it is not possible to exactly determine when this level is
5
For a review on the development of the Thresholds Theory (first put forward by TOUKOMAA,
P. & SKUTNABB-KANGAS, T. The Intensive Teaching of the Mother Tongue to Migrant
Children at Pre-school age. Tampere: University of Tampere, Department of Sociology and Social
Psychology, 1977); and by CUMMINS, J. The Influence of Bilingualism on Cognitive Growth: A
Synthesis of Research Findings and Explanatory Hypotheses. Working Papers on Bilingualism, 9:
1-43, 1976.) see Kecskes and Papp (2000).