علی محمد فضیلت فر

This study employed the Linguistic Proximity Model (LPM) to investigate the effect of cross-linguistic influence (CLI), target language proficiency as well as their interaction in the acquisition of L3 English past perfect, present progressive, and present perfect tenses by L1 Kirundi-L2 French bilinguals. In that perspective, 90 learners including 30 L1 Kirundi-L2 English bilinguals, 30 L1 French-L2 English bilinguals, and 30 L1 Kirundi-L2 French-L3 English trilinguals completed an Oxford Quick Placement Test, a Background Information Questionnaire, and a Grammaticality Judgment Task. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics, multivariate analysis of variance, post hoc comparisons, and independent sample tests. Results revealed that neither Kirundi nor French exerted an exclusive influence in the L3 past perfect and present progressive tenses. However, concerning the L3 present perfect, the results indicated a significantly facilitative effect from L2 French.  The results showed also a significant effect of target language proficiency: while lower-proficiency learners experienced a relatively negative influence from previous languages, higher-proficiency learners utilized their complex multicompetence to overcome difficulties linked to structural differences. Besides structural similarity reported in the already existing L3A studies, the findings herein point to L3 learners’ complex multicompetence as a new factor capable of driving CLI in the LPM framework.

Studies that have employed the Linguistic Proximity Model to account for crosslinguistic influence in third language learning so far have used child simultaneous bilinguals as participants in their research designs. This study investigated adult sequential Kirundi-French bilinguals to uncover factors driving cross-linguistic influence in learning L3 English present perfect tense using the same Linguistic Proximity Model as a theoretical framework. To achieve that goal, ninety participants including thirty L1 Kirundi, thirty L1 French, and thirty L1 Kirundi-L2 French learners of English were recruited. Those participants were selected using a stratified random sampling technique that took into account their linguistic backgrounds and their scores on the proficiency measure. Data were elicited using a background questionnaire, a quick placement test, a grammaticality judgment task, and a translation task. Descriptive statistics, independent-samples Kruskal-Wallis tests, analysis of variance, and multiple comparisons served in the data analysis. The results showed that simultaneous facilitative and non-facilitative cross-linguistic influence from French and Kirundi were operational at both lower and advanced stages of L3 development, with lower-proficiency learners experiencing negative influence from L1 Kirundi during production. These findings further support the Linguistic Proximity Model as an underlying theory for cross-linguistic influence in third-language learning. They can also serve as a guide in planning pedagogical activities for third language learners at differing stages of the target language development. 

The goal of the present study was to realize whether L1 (first language) or L2 (second language) affects the third language (L3) learning. Three mirror-image groups learning English were compared, as early learners of sequential Persian-Arabic bilinguals. The first group used L1 Persian-L2 Arabic languages. The second and the third groups used L1 Arabic-L2 Persian languages. Moreover, the first and the second groups used Persian, and the third group used Arabic as a language of communication. The Oxford Quick Placement Test (OQPT) was administered to select initial L3 English learners. Sixty English learners participated in the study. The translation task and Grammaticality Judgment Test were administered to elicit English attributive adjectives. To compare the performances of the three groups, the non-parametric equivalent of One-Way ANOVA, which was the Kruskal-Wallis test, was used. Mann-Whitney U tests were applied to recognize the probably significant differences among groups. None of the Cumulative Enhancement Model (CEM), the L1 Factor Hypotheses, the L2 Status Factor, and the Typological Primacy Model was confirmed. However, the influence of the dominant language of communication on L3 learning supported data. Groups one and two had better performances in the comprehension and production of attributive adjectives. Group three obtained the lowest mean score. This study lets us determine the influence of earlier acquired languages, Persian and Arabic, on the initial stage of learning L3 English attributive adjectives. The results indicate that the language of communication has a substantial effect on transferring from the first and second languages into the L3 language.