Third language vocabulary acquisition: The influence of Serbian and Hungarian as native languages on the English language

Ivana Cvekić

doi:10.23963/cnp.2016.1.1.4

Ivana Cvekić Alpen-Adria-Universität Klagenfurt, Department of English

DOI: https://doi.org/10.23963/cnp.2016.1.1.4

Keywords: bilingualism, learning strategies, vocabulary, third language acquisition

Abstract

This paper examines the influence of bilingualism on the use of vocabulary learning strategies during the acquisition of a third language. More precisely, it debates whether having a knowledge of two languages is beneficial for the awareness and frequency of strategy use. In this analysis, the use of learning strategies of pupils bilingual in Hungarian and Serbian language is compared to their monolingual peers of Serbian language while acquiring English as a third language. Since third language acquisition (TLA) is a relatively new and unexplored area, little research has been done on this specific topic. This particular study is situated in Serbia and used a 5-point Likert scale questionnaire as a way of collecting data consisting of two parts. The first part was based on three questionnaires on vocabulary strategies proposed by Gu and Johnson (1996), and Schmitt (1997), and on Oxford’s (1990) Strategy Inventory for Language Learning. The second part consisted of pupils’ suggestions and thoughts on learning strategies, together with their background information. Further discussion focuses on the use of bilinguals’ vocabulary strategies and their frequency compared to monolinguals’.

Author Biography

Ivana Cvekić, Alpen-Adria-Universität Klagenfurt, Department of English

I am a finishing student of Master's studies in Applied linguistics at the Alpen Adria University. I am also working as a tutor for a course Introduction to Linguistics II at the same university. My main areas of focus are multilingualism, third language acquisition (TLA), psycholinguistics and sociolinguistics.

References

Chomsky, N. 1957. Syntactic Structures. The Hague: Mouton.

Cohen, A., D., and Aphek, E. 1981. “Easifying second language learning.” in Studies in Second Language Acquisition 3, 2, 221-236.

Cook, L., K., and Mayer, R., E. 1983. “Reading Strategies Training for Meaningful Learning from Prose.” in Cognitive Strategy Research, edited by M. Pressley and J. Levin. New York: Springer Verlag.

Gu, Y., and Johnson, R., K. 1996. Vocabulary learning strategies and language learning outcomes. UK: University of Hong Kong.

Hammarberg, B. 2001. “Roles of L1 and L2 in L3 production and acquisition.” in Cross-linguistic influence in third language acquisition: Psycholinguistic perspectives, edited by J. Cenoz, B. Hufeisen and U. Jessner, 21-41. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.

Nation, I.S.P. 1990. Teaching and Learning Vocabulary. New York: Newbury House.

O’Malley, J.M., and Chamot, A.U. 1990. Learning Strategies in Second Language Acquisition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Oxford, R. and Scarcella, R. 1994. “Second language vocabulary learning among adults: state of the art in vocabulary instruction.” In System, 22, 2: 231-43.

Oxford, R.L. 1990. Language Learning Strategies: What Every Teacher Should Know. Boston: Newbury House.

Oxford, R.L. 2011. Teaching and Researching Language Learning Strategies. Harlow: Longman.

Schmitt, Norbert. 1997. “Vocabulary Learning Strategies.” In Vocabulary Description Acquisition and Pedagogy, edited by Schmitt and McCarthy. Cambridge University Press.

Schmitt, Norbert. 2002. Vocabulary in language teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Wei, L. 2003. “Activation of lemmas in the multilingual mental lexicon and transfer in third language acquisition.” In Bulletin VALS-ASLA 78,edited by J. Cenoz, 1–11.