Using L2 Properties in Native Grammars

What Constitutes Evidence for Representational Change

Bibliographic Data

ID19487514
AuthorsLiz Smeets (0000-0002-5285-6703, York University, corresponding author)
Year2026
Volume11
Issue5
Pages96
Publication date2026-05-09
Peer ReviewedYes
Open AccessYes
TypeARTICLE
VenueLanguages (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 2226-471X • E-ISSN: 2226-471X
PublisherMDPI AG (PUBLISHER • IT)
DOI10.3390/languages11050096
OpenAlexW7162321910
LanguageEN
Citations received1
References cited38

A major question in L1 attrition research is whether cross-linguistic influence from a speaker’s second language onto their first constitutes only a temporary, superficial effect or whether it can also lead to a structural change, often discussed as a distinction between effects on language processing as opposed to changes to the mental representation of grammatical properties. Some have argued that L1 grammars of adult L2 speakers are entirely impervious to change, while others stated that some of the available findings can be interpreted as grammatical representations themselves being vulnerable. This paper contributes to the question of how we can distinguish between these two types of attrition. I argue that it is challenging to use behavioral differences across tasks as well as experimental results showing optionality between L1 and L2 options to distinguish between a superficial and a structural change. Instead, situations where properties of an attriter’s L1 grammar converge on the L2 constitute the clearest case of structural change as these cannot be explained as temporary effects of L2 influence. Using data from an earlier study on attrition found in Romanian native speakers living in Italy, I furthermore challenge the claim that L2 convergence only occurs in rare situations where attriters lose contact with the L1. To better understand the contexts in which attrition at the level of representation may be possible, I suggest that future studies focus on (1) a variety of linguistic properties where the L1 allows a grammatical construction or interpretation also in situations where it is not used in the L2, (2) properties where options from both the L1 and the L2 are less likely to co-exist in an attritred grammar and (3) consistently include analyses of individual response patterns

Focus (optics) · Grammar · Interpretation (philosophy) · Mental representation · Representation (politics) · Rule-based machine translation · Set (abstract data type) · Similarity (geometry) · Variety (cybernetics) · EFL/ESL Teaching and Learning · Language Development and Disorders · Phonetics and Phonology Research

Tools

Open DOIOpen Access