Restructuring vs. development

When typological closeness does not facilitate L2 acquisition

Datos Bibliográficos

ID11655713
AutoresKook-Hee Gil (0000-0002-7786-4451, University of Sheffield, autor de correspondencia)
Año2025
Volumen42
Número2
Páginas221-247
Fecha de publicación2025-12-29
Peer ReviewedSí
Open AccessSí
TipoARTICLE
RevistaSecond language Research (JOURNAL)
Identificadores de la revistaISSN: 0267-6583 • E-ISSN: 1477-0326
EditorialSAGE Publishing (PUBLISHER • US)
DOI10.1177/02676583251389463
OpenAlexW7117570663
IdiomaEN
Citas recibidas2
Referencias citadas17

This article investigates the role of typological distance and morphosyntactic variation in second language (L2) acquisition. It examines two sets of existing studies that compare learners with typologically different first languages (L1s) acquiring distinct L2 properties: Korean WH-indefinites and English experiential constructions. Both sets of studies test L1 groups where one L1 is typologically close to the L2 with micro-variation in the target property, and the other L1 is typologically distant from the L2. The findings from both studies consistently reveal that L2 acquisition is more challenging when learners must restructure their L1-based interlanguage to accommodate subtle morphosyntactic differences in the L2 (e.g. Japanese speakers learning Korean WH-indefinites or Chinese speakers learning English experiential constructions), a process referred to as ‘restructuring’. Conversely, acquisition is relatively easier when learners develop new L2 lexemes without direct L1 equivalents (e.g. English speakers learning Korean WH-indefinites or Korean speakers learning English experiential constructions), termed ‘development’. The article argues that the nature of these acquisition tasks, rather than typological distance alone, primarily influences L2 performance and developmental trajectories, highlighting that restructuring poses a greater challenge than development in L2 acquisition. These findings suggest that microvariation between typologically close languages can impede L2 learning, and that L2 acquisition research should carefully consider the specific acquisition tasks involved, moving beyond broad typological comparisons

Closeness · Experiential learning · Interlanguage · Language acquisition · Language proficiency · Restructuring · Second-language acquisition · Transfer of training · Variation (astronomy · Categorization, perception, and language · EFL/ESL Teaching and Learning · Phonetics and Phonology Research