L’espressione del movimento da parte
di apprendenti con L1 francese e inglese
Simona Anastasio
Université de Lille
C:\Users\simona\Desktop\Lyon ReAL2\SFL-plogo4.jpg C:\Users\simona\Desktop\convegni\logop8.png
C:\Users\simona\Desktop\convegni\upl.png
C:\Users\simona\Desktop\convegni\cnrs.jpg
C:\Users\simona\Desktop\convegni\Aarhus\csm_labo_ST5063_STL_c3106ce7d2.png
1
Immagine che contiene testo Descrizione generata automaticamente

Piano
►Introduzione
►
►Quadro teorico
►Gli eventi di moto
►Il Thinking for Speaking e il transfer
►Movimento in L2
►
►Lo studio
►Obiettivi della ricerca
►Domande di ricerca
►Metodologia
►Risultati
►
► Conclusioni e riflessioni
►
•
2
S. Anastasio - Université de Lille

This is the outline of my talk.
First we have an introduction and the theoretical background.
Then I will present a case study and some suggestions for future motion event studies


► Introduzione
3
S. Anastasio - Université de Lille

4
>
Spazio come dominio fondamentale della cognizione umana
>
L’essere umano fa esperienza continua di vita e linguistica di situazioni spaziali (Klein 1989)
>
Tutte le lingue forniscono ai parlanti dei mezzi per parlare dello spazio, in particolare del
cambiamento
di localizzazione nello spazio
( = movimento)
>
La codifica dello spazio può variare da lingua
a lingua
C:\Users\simona\AppData\Local\Microsoft\Windows\INetCache\IE\LTGVQ52P\Punto_esclamativo[1].png
S. Anastasio - Université de Lille

So, Space represents a crucial domain for human cognition  and all human beings experience spatial
representations in their everyday life.
We know that all languages provide theur speakers with linguistic means to talk about space and in
particular change in space, that is motion.
As such, one might suppose that languages treat space in a universal way, but this is not the case
since literature clearly shows that languages differ in the ways the express motion.


► Quadro teorico
5
S. Anastasio - Université de Lille

•Cos’è il movimento (in linguistica) (1)
•
•Cambiamento di localizzazione di un’entità nello spazio e nel tempo (Talmy 1985)
•
•
•
•
•A ……………………………………………… B
• t1         t2
6
S. Anastasio - Université de Lille

Motion is defined as change of location from a spatial position A to a different position B,
whereby the moving figure was located at position A at time T1 and then located at position B at
another time

•Cos’è il movimento (in linguistica) (2)
•
•Componenti interne:
§ Movimento: presenza di dislocazione nell’evento
§ Figura: entità in movimento o propensa al movimento
§ Sfondo: punto di riferimento rispetto al quale la Figura si muove
§ Percorso: cuore semantico di un evento di moto, i.e. traiettoria seguita dalla Figura in
movimento
•
•Componenti secondarie (Co-events):
§ Maniera: modo in cui un entità si muove o è mossa
§ Causa: forza esterna che provoca il movimento di un’entità
•
•
•Ex: Maria spinge la sedia fuori dalla cucina Figura Maniera + Causa Perc Sfondo
7
S. Anastasio - Université de Lille

There are 4 internal components in a ME:
§Motion: the change of location
§Figure: a moving or conceptually movable entity
§Ground: an entity with respect to which the Figure moves
§Path the trajectory followed by the moving entity.
There are also two main co-events in a ME:
§Manner, that is the manner in which the Figure moves
§Cause: the cause that can determine the change of location of an entity.

Eventi di moto: Talmy (1983, 1985, 2000)
Classificazione tipologica (= locus del Percorso):
8
Lingue a quadro satellitare
(lingue germaniche e slave)
Lingue a quadro verbale
(lingue romanze)
The bottle floated into the cave
Maniera                 Traiettoria
La botella  entró a la cueva flotando
traiettoria maniera
Ex. S
Ex. V
S. Anastasio - Université de Lille

The starting point of this trend of research is Talmy’s proposals concerning the linguistic
typology of motion event. There are crucial cross-linguistic differences in the way languages
lexicalise motion. Talmy proposes a two-way language typology:
-Satellite framed languages (including Germanic and Slavic languages )
-Verb framed languages (including Romance languages).
In S-Languages, speakers tend to express Motion and Manner /Cause in the main verb and Path outside
it, by means of the so-called ‘satellites (prepositions or particles). For example ‘the bottle
floated into the cave.
On the contrary V-framed speakers tend to code Path and Motion in the verb root, while Manner, if
expressed, appears in a separate constituent, such as a gerund or an adverbial as in the ex. La
botella enttrò à la cueva flotando.

Gradiente basato sulla Maniera del Movimento
Eventi di moto: Slobin (2004, 2006)
9
Lingue a bassa salienza di maniera (lingue V-)
Lingue ad alta salienza di maniera (lingue S-)

Talmy’s typology is certainly one of the most applied model in Cognitive linguistics. As such, it
has been extensively discussed in the literature over the years.
For example, Slobin proposes a cline of languages based on Manner salience in ME.
Slobin argues that some languages are more manner-salient than others, in that their speakers refer
to manner of motion more often than those of other languages. Slobin suggests that satellite-framed
languages tend to be manner salient because manner in those languages is expressed in the
obligatorily used main verb rather than through optional elements such as participles, and so
manner can be easily specified.
S-languages are more Manner salient than V-languages since they have a large repertoire of Manner
Motion verbs and their speakers tend to pay attention to this component ans consequently to express
it linguistically.

10
« Le caratterizzazioni tipologiche spesso riflettono delle tendenze e non delle differenze assolute
tra le lingue »
(Berman & Slobin, 1994: 118)
S. Anastasio - Université de Lille

Berman & Slobin suggest that it is too risked to fit languages in a dichotomy since typological
characterization reflect tendencies tarher than absoulte difference between languages

•Variazioni intratipologiche nello stesso gruppo di lingue (considerate come vicine
tipologicamente)
•
ØLingue S-:  Islandese vs Svedese (Ragnasdóttir & Strömqvist 2004: 126-127)
•
•Ex. Islandese
• Og svo datt hundurinn og strakurinn ofan-ì-sjò
• And then fallPSTdog.DEF and boy.DEF up-into sea. ACC
• ‘E poi il cane e il bambino cadono giù dall’alto nel mare’
•
•Ex. Svedese
• Pojken ramla ner
• Boy fall.PST down
• ‘Il bambino cade giù’
•
•
11
S. Anastasio - Université de Lille

In fact, many studies have shown that some languages are in-between the two Talmyan types, offering
hybrid lexicalization strategies for ME.
Apart from inter-typological variation, intra-typological variation is also attested, even in
closely related languages.
For ex. Within the S-Languages, Icelandic shows a great variety of Manner verbs than Swedish. It
also describes Path in a more detailed way than Swedish, probably because Icelandic keeps the cases
from the old Nordic, while Swedish lost this linguistic resource. Icelandic is ‘more satellite’
than swedish

•
ØLingue V-: Italiano vs Francese (Simone 1997; Cini, 2008; Iacobini & Fagard, 2011; Anastasio,
2018, 2019)
Ø
•Ex. Italiano
1. La rana scappa via dal barattolo      verbi sintagmatici
•
•2. La rana scappa dal barattolo
•
•
•Ex. Francese:
•1. La grenouille s’échappe du bocal
•*La grenouille s’échappe au loin du bocal’
•
Ø
•
•
•
12
S. Anastasio - Université de Lille

Within V-languages, as you can see in the example, Italian allows for two different types of motion
patterns to express a ME. In 1) we have a verb followed by a directional particle (via). In 2. we
have just a motion verb (scappa) lexicalising Path. The satellite construction in Italian seem to
provide a more detailed Path in Italian than in French.
In the French Example, on the contrary, we do not find this flexicibility, since only the
verb-pattern by means of ‘s’échapper’ is possible.
Actually, French also displays a flexible typological system, through the variable distribution of
spatial information within a clause. This is evident when other spatial components are encoded in
the main verb, while the Path appears outside it, in a different constituent (e.g., elle fait
quelques petites glissades [Manner] pour arriver [Path] sur le ponton gauche ‘she does a few slides
in order to get to the bridge on the left’,

•
àSoluzione: considerare dei continua di lingue basati sul grado di salienza delle component
spaziali
• (e.g., Slobin 2006; Ibarretxe-Antuñano 2009; Spreafico 2008, 2009; Beavers et al. 2010; Hendriks
& Hickmann 2011; Anastasio 2018, 2019, 2021)
•
13
«Le caratterizzazioni tipologiche spesso riflettono delle tendenze e non delle differenze assolute
tra le lingue » (Berman & Slobin, 1994 :118)
S. Anastasio - Université de Lille

these intratypological differences have led some authors to propose clines of salience for motion
semantic components.
This suggests that the whole typology can be seen as a cline rather than a dichotomy

Thinking for Speaking (TfS) e transfer
•Lo spazio come dominio che si presta ad approfondire il dibattito lingua-cognizione.
•
•à Cosa succede quando dobbiamo verbalizzare un evento di moto?
•
•Ipotesi del TfS (Slobin 1991, 1996):
•Le specificità delle lingue influiscono su come i parlanti organizzano il pensiero quando devono
verbalizzarlo per diverse caratteristiche :
•
• a) appropriate alla concettualizzazione dell’evento da verbalizzare;
• b) facilmente codificabili ed accessibili e quindi linguisticamente privilegiate in una certa
lingua.
•
•Le proprietà strutturali delle lingue hanno delle ripercussioni sulla prospettiva (stile retorico)
adattata dai parlanti nella verbalizzazione degli eventi.
•
•
•
14
S. Anastasio - Université de Lille

Talmy’s dichotomy has represented a fertile ground for applied linguistics, such as language
acquisition, translation and interpreting, and we hope, for language learning.
During first language acquisition, children quickly learn to attend to aspects of a motion event.
Once internalized, attention to particular domains of experience becomes particularly resistant to
re-structuring in adult L2 acquisition (Slobin 1996). This resistance may easily
imply transfer of L1 spatial representation into the L2 production,
In the construal of a motion event in a L2, the learner’s task consists of recognizing and learning
target-like ways to talk about motion (Cadierno 2017). In the case of transition from an S-language
L1 to a V-language L2, learners must focus less on Manner. In the opposite transition, learners
must pay more attention to Manner and to a detailed Path.
But what really happens? Motion is considered as a prone domain for cross-linguistic difference,
especially if motion in the target language (TL) is not organized in the same way as in the L1.

Thinking for Speaking (TfS) e transfer
•Acquisizione L1
•
•Sin dalla più tenera età parlanti nativi di diverse lingue prestano attenzione a determinati
aspetti della realtà a seconda delle categorie lessico-grammaticali tipiche della L1.
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•Bowerman & Choi (2003) in Valentini (2021)
15
L1
17-20 mesi
Inglese
Put (in vs on)
mettere i giocattoli nella stanza vs mettere  giocattoli sul tavolo
Distinzione immediata tra inserimento vs contatto
Coreano
Kkita vs nehta
mettere il cappuccio sulla penna
aderenza o meno al nuovo sfondo
S. Anastasio - Université de Lille

Talmy’s dichotomy has represented a fertile ground for applied linguistics, such as language
acquisition, translation and interpreting, and we hope, for language learning.
During first language acquisition, children quickly learn to attend to aspects of a motion event.
Once internalized, attention to particular domains of experience becomes particularly resistant to
re-structuring in adult L2 acquisition (Slobin 1996). This resistance may easily
imply transfer of L1 spatial representation into the L2 production,
In the construal of a motion event in a L2, the learner’s task consists of recognizing and learning
target-like ways to talk about motion (Cadierno 2017). In the case of transition from an S-language
L1 to a V-language L2, learners must focus less on Manner. In the opposite transition, learners
must pay more attention to Manner and to a detailed Path.
But what really happens? Motion is considered as a prone domain for cross-linguistic difference,
especially if motion in the target language (TL) is not organized in the same way as in the L1.

Thinking for Speaking (TfS) e transfer
•Acquisizione L2
ØTfS L1 come impronta indelebile anche in apprendenti L2 di livello avanzato (von Stutterheim 2013;
Han & Cadierno 2013)
•
à fenomeni di transfer o crosslinguistic influence (CLI) (Kellerman & Sharwood Smith 1986; Odlin,
1989, 2003, 2005; Jarvis & Pavlenko 2010; MacManus 2021 per una panoramica più recente)
à
•CLI, as defined by Jarvis and Pavlenko (2010: 1), involves the search for similarities/differences
between one’s prior linguistic knowledge (from the L1 or any other previously acquired languages)
and knowledge of the new language (Anastasio, 2022: 5)
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
16
S. Anastasio - Université de Lille

Talmy’s dichotomy has represented a fertile ground for applied linguistics, such as language
acquisition, translation and interpreting, and we hope, for language learning.
During first language acquisition, children quickly learn to attend to aspects of a motion event.
Once internalized, attention to particular domains of experience becomes particularly resistant to
re-structuring in adult L2 acquisition (Slobin 1996). This resistance may easily
imply transfer of L1 spatial representation into the L2 production,
In the construal of a motion event in a L2, the learner’s task consists of recognizing and learning
target-like ways to talk about motion (Cadierno 2017). In the case of transition from an S-language
L1 to a V-language L2, learners must focus less on Manner. In the opposite transition, learners
must pay more attention to Manner and to a detailed Path.
But what really happens? Motion is considered as a prone domain for cross-linguistic difference,
especially if motion in the target language (TL) is not organized in the same way as in the L1.

Thinking for Speaking (TfS) e transfer
•Fattori determinanti (ma non esclusivi) per il transfer:
•
• livello linguistico (lessico, morfologia, fonologia, pragmatica)
•
• marcatezza e frequenza delle strutture (Eckman 1996)
•
• livello di competenza in L2
•
• psicotipologia, ossia valutazione presunta/soggettiva del grado di vicinanza/distanza tra le
lingue in contatto
•(Kellerman 1977; Rothman & Cabrelli-Amaro 2010)
•
•
•
17
S. Anastasio - Université de Lille

Talmy’s dichotomy has represented a fertile ground for applied linguistics, such as language
acquisition, translation and interpreting, and we hope, for language learning.
During first language acquisition, children quickly learn to attend to aspects of a motion event.
Once internalized, attention to particular domains of experience becomes particularly resistant to
re-structuring in adult L2 acquisition (Slobin 1996). This resistance may easily
imply transfer of L1 spatial representation into the L2 production,
In the construal of a motion event in a L2, the learner’s task consists of recognizing and learning
target-like ways to talk about motion (Cadierno 2017). In the case of transition from an S-language
L1 to a V-language L2, learners must focus less on Manner. In the opposite transition, learners
must pay more attention to Manner and to a detailed Path.
But what really happens? Motion is considered as a prone domain for cross-linguistic difference,
especially if motion in the target language (TL) is not organized in the same way as in the L1.

Movimento in L2 (1)
•Compito dell’apprendente: riconoscere ed apprendere (nuovi) strumenti, tipici della L2, per
parlare del movimento à imparare a ri-parlare per pensare (Slobin 1996)
•
•Idealmente nel passaggio da :
•
Ø lingua S- >> lingua V-: meno attenzione alla Maniera
•
Ø lingua V- >> lingua S-:  attenzione per la maniera e per un Percorso dettagliato
Ø
•Ma cosa accade realmente ?
•Movimento come dominio fertile per fenomeni di transfer
• (Jarvis & Pavlenko 2010)
Ø
•
18
S. Anastasio - Université de Lille

Talmy’s dichotomy has represented a fertile ground for applied linguistics, such as language
acquisition, translation and interpreting, and we hope, for language learning.
During first language acquisition, children quickly learn to attend to aspects of a motion event.
Once internalized, attention to particular domains of experience becomes particularly resistant to
re-structuring in adult L2 acquisition (Slobin 1996). This resistance may easily
imply transfer of L1 spatial representation into the L2 production,
In the construal of a motion event in a L2, the learner’s task consists of recognizing and learning
target-like ways to talk about motion (Cadierno 2017). In the case of transition from an S-language
L1 to a V-language L2, learners must focus less on Manner. In the opposite transition, learners
must pay more attention to Manner and to a detailed Path.
But what really happens? Motion is considered as a prone domain for cross-linguistic difference,
especially if motion in the target language (TL) is not organized in the same way as in the L1.

Movimento in L2 (2)
•3 criteri per classificare la ricerca sugli eventi di moto :
§tipo di movimento: volontario vs provocato
§tipo di partecipanti (bambini, bilingui, adulti)
§tipi di dati (produzione scritta/orale, gestualità, percezione)
•
•
•3 criteri per classificare gli studi sulla produzione in L2:
§Tipo di transfer: unidirezionale vs bidirezionale
§Relazione tipologica tra la coppia di lingue
§Livello di competenza nella lingua target (LT)
•
•
•
19
S. Anastasio - Université de Lille

In terms of the expression of motion, we can distinguish three main criteria for classifyng the
existing reserach on ME in L2:
§the type of motion studied: voluntary vs caused-motion (spontaneous vs produced by an external
force)
§the type of participants (bilinguals, adults learners)
§the type of data (production, gesture, reception).
Since data on production (alone or with gesture) are still the most predominant, studies based on
production can be classified according to 3 main criteria:
§the type of transfer examined: unidirectional vs bidirectional
§the typological relationship between language pears
§the proficiency   this classification needs to be taken with care, since scholars may use
different methods for assessing L2 learner’s proficiency.

Qualche studio sugli eventi di moto in L2
•Studi su apprendenti principianti (Becker & Carroll 1997, Progetto ESF ):
•
ØUtilizzo rapido dei mezzi linguistici di base della LT.
•Ex: apprendenti di lingua V- codificano il Percorso nella radice verbale (entrer in francese)
• apprendenti di una lingua S- ricorrono presto a delle partielle extraverbali per esprimere il
Percorso (up, down  in inglese)
•
ØFenomeni di transfer visibili per parlare del movimento provocato (Hendriks et al. 2008: 30)
•Ex: Popi tiré/-tiré *une sac et *ascende le toit
• ‘Popi monte sur le toit en tirant le sac’
•
20
S. Anastasio - Université de Lille

So, motion has been largely investigated in SLA.
For ex., generally studies on beginners show that learners soon adopt the minimal spatial
linguistic devices of the TL (see results of the ESF Project). Although using idiosyncratic forms,
learners of a V-language (i.e. French in the ESF Project) tend to code Path in the main verb (such
as in French arriver ‘arrive’), while learners of a S-language resort to directional particles (up,
away) to express it (Becker and Carroll 1997). From the intermediate level on, learners resort to
more target-like spatial patterns.
Hendriks et al. (2008) and Hendriks and Hickmann (2011) indicate that transfer phenomena are
already perceptible in beginners’ productions in L2 French especially when they have to talk about
caused motion.

•Studi su apprendenti di livello intermedio/avanzato:
•
ØTransfer visibile a livello intermedio à satellization of locative constructions non tipiche della
TL (spagnolo L2 di L1 danese e inglese in Cadierno 2004, Cadierno & Ruiz 2006)
•
ØTransfer visibile a livello avanzato (inglese e tedesco L2 con francese L1 in Carroll et al. 2012)
attraverso l’uso di espressioni locative (ex. A car is driving on a road = A car is driving along a
road)
•
ØTransfer visibile nel caso di lingue in contatto con variazioni intertipologiche (italiano L2 di
apprendenti con L1 germanofona vs romanza Bernini et al. 2006; Spreafico & Valentini 2009)
•
•
21
S. Anastasio - Université de Lille

Cadierno (2004) and Cadierno and Ruiz (2006), comparing intermediate and advanced English and
Danish learners of L2 Spanish, show that CLI is predominant
at the intermediate level (i.e. satellization of locative constructions), whereas advanced
participants manage to restructure their L1 thinking for speaking pattern when talking about motion
in the L2.
CLI is also attested at advanced learners. Carroll et al. show that advanced French leaners of L2
English and French tend to reproduce spatial patterns of their L1 instead of adopting TL
preferences  by using locative expressions typical of their L1
Some research about motion events in L2 Italian by learners with typologically different L1
(V-framed vs S-framed; see Bernini et al. 2006; Spreafico and Valentini 2009) illustrates that L1
transfer shows up in the use of satellite constructions or the transitive use of TL motion verbs by
L1 Germanic subjects.

Allo stadio attuale (1)
22
•Variabilità dei risultati
•
§lingue in contatto (L1/L2)
§tipo di movimento (volontario vs provocato)
§task utilizzato (più o meno controllato)
§livello di competenza
§input
•
•(cf. Cadierno 2004, 2017; Cadierno & Ruiz 2006, Hendriks et al. 2008; Hendriks & Hickman 2011,
etc.)
•
Ø ma parte degli studi convengono sull’idea che è difficile ristrutturare la concettualizzazione
spaziale della L1
•
S. Anastasio - Université de Lille

In sum, studies have stressed that learners’ difficukties in motion event construal are mainly
related to objective differences between languages and to the proficiency.
Nevertheless, results are not easy to compare due to differences in :
a)The language peers,
b)The type of motion investigated
c)The task employed (more or less controlled)
d)The population examined,
e)The type of input populations are exposed to

Allo stato attuale (2)
• Variabile molto considerata: differenze oggettive tra le lingue
•
•
• Variabile poco considerata: impatto della prossimità tipologica e genetica tra lingue
• (ad eccezione di Benazzo and Andorno 2017; Anastasio 2019, 2021, 2022; Hijazo-Gascón 2021)
C:\Users\simona\AppData\Local\Microsoft\Windows\INetCache\IE\LTGVQ52P\Punto_esclamativo[1].png
23
S. Anastasio - Université de Lille

Up to now research has adressed much attention to the actual differences between languages, but
very few consider the impact of the L1 when the learners’ languages in contact are typologically
close (however, see Benazzo and Andorno 2017; Anastasio 2019, 2021, Hijazo-Gascón 2021) and can,
however lack equivalent form-function categories.


► Lo studio
►
24
S. Anastasio - Université de Lille

Here to put Research issue

•
1.Analisi di concettualizzaione ed espressione di eventi di moto in un compito orale prodotto da
apprendenti di italiano L2 che differiscono per :
•
•a) L1 (inglese, francese)
•b) varietà / livello di competenza (intermedio vs. avanzato; cf. Bartning & Schlyter 2004)
•
•2. Identifazione ed analisi di fenomeni di transfer in relazione a:
•
• a) varietà / livello di competenza
• b) proprietà tipologiche della coppia di lingua (lingua S- >> lingua V; lingua V- >> lingua V-)
•
25
Obiettivi della ricerca
S. Anastasio - Université de Lille

 Two main goals guide our study.
Specifically, we mean to (a) examine the developmental trajectory followed by learners in encoding
motion events (the focus and locus of information),
(b) assess the role of cross-linguistic influence (CLI) according to their L2 proficiency
(intermediate vs advanced; Bartning & Schlyter 2004) and to the typological properties of languages
in contact (S-languages vs V-languages)

•DR1. In che modo gli apprendenti di italiano L2 si avvicinano alle scelte preferenziali
(lessicali, sintattiche, semantiche) dei nativi italofoni nella codifica del movimento?
•
•DR2. A partire da che varietà di apprendimento gli apprendenti sembrano essere più native-like
rispetto alla codifica del movimento?
1.
•DR3. In che misura gli apprendenti risentono ancora della concettualizzazione spaziale tipica
della L1?
• Ristrutturazione possible?
•
26
Domande di ricerca (DR)
S. Anastasio - Université de Lille

 Two main goals guide our study.
Specifically, we mean to (a) examine the developmental trajectory followed by learners in encoding
motion events (the focus and locus of information),
(b) assess the role of cross-linguistic influence (CLI) according to their L2 proficiency
(intermediate vs advanced; Bartning & Schlyter 2004) and to the typological properties of languages
in contact (S-languages vs V-languages)

Tipologia delle lingue esaminate
•
•Costruzioni di tipo satellitaire (verbi sintagmatici: Simone 1997, 2008; Iacobini & Masini 2006;
Cini 2008)
•
•Ex. andare via
• correre via
• venir fuori
•
•
•
inglese
italiano
francese
Lingua S-
Lingue V-
go out         andar fuori     (aller dehors)
(exit)       uscire             sortir
27
S. Anastasio - Université de Lille

There are three languages studied in this research:
English    Italian and French
English is considerd as a S. Languages since it tends to express Path outside the verb.
Neverthless, English provides a set of Latinate verbs denoting path of motion, such as exit,
allowing for V-options
Italian and French are considered as V-languages but there is an important variability in how they
syntactically express motion.
For ex. Italian is considerd more satellite than French thanks to satellite constructions (SV)
which are largely exploited in spoken Italian (such as andare via, correre via, venir fuori). On
the contrary, French lacks this satellite patterns or variability is attested in other contexts.

Informatori
•2 livelli : - INTERMEDIO
- AVANZATO
28
Inglese
Francese
Italiano L2
S. Anastasio - Université de Lille

In this study we have two TL: French and Italian. For each TL, learners have a L1 which is
typologically close to or distant form the TL.
For each group of learners we have intermediate and advanced learners

Informatori
n° propos
Nativi
inglese
10
771
francese
10
580
italiano
10
599
ITALIANO L2
L1 ING INT
10
740
L1 ING AVA
10
694
L1 FRA INT
10
354
L1 FRA AVA
10
486
TOTALE
70*
4224
• Corpus DISCOSS disponibile sulla piattaforma Ortolang
https://hdl.handle.net/11403/disc-oraux-semi-spontanes
29
S. Anastasio - Université de Lille

A total of 110 informants participated in the study:
30 native speakers of English, French and Italian (10 per group) provided the reference for
comparison with L2 data;
40 learners of L2 French (20 L1English-L2French, 20 L1Italian-L2French)
and 40 learners of L2 Italian (20 L1English-L2Italian and 20 L1French-L2Italian) at two proficiency
levels (intermediate vs advanced).

lingua
età
istruzione
Altre L2
registrati
L1
Inglese
Francese
Italiano
20-35
Laurea/PhD
+
Irlanda
Francia
Italia
L2*
Inglese L1
Francese L1
18-30
Studenti universitari
+
UCC (Cork)
Université Avignon
L2* = contesto guidato di apprendimento + situazione eteroglotta
(semestre Erasmus in Italia per pochi studenti)
Livello:  a) test di grammatica e di vocabolario (Oxford Placement Text)
b) complessità morfosintattica delle narrazioni (Bartning & Schlyeter 2004)
30
S. Anastasio - Université de Lille

All the learners were university students of L2 French or Italian in their own country, namely
Irish students at University College Cork (Ireland), French students at University of Avignon
(France) and Italian students at University of Naples ‘Federico II’ (Italy).
Some of the participants also participated to a European Erasmus program or a training semester in
the L2 country. They all started to study the examined L2 as adults and have at least one other
foreign language in their linguistic repertoire.
In order to distribute the learners into levels, we initially evaluated the participants’
proficiency by two written grammar and vocabulary tests (for French, a test conceived by the
Department of French Studies at the University of Lille and for Italian the Oxford Placement Test –
OPT). However, the results of these two tests were not sufficient for the purposes of our study.
So, we also considered the degree of morpho-syntactic complexity in the oral narratives (Bartning
and Schlyter 2004). Specifically, our intermediate level includes learners whose oral performance
is characterized by evident problems in form-function correspondences with respect to verb
morphology and syntax, whereas advanced learners manage to use diverse verb morphology appropriate
to its function and context. Subordination is also employed at this level.
This French test was conceived by the Department of French as a Foreign Language (DEFI) at
University of Lille in order to measure the starting proficiency levels of foreign students. It was
also used in the Langacross I and II Project to measure the proficiency of L2 French learners.

•Questione di livelli ?
•
- Impossibilità di rispettare il livello della classe
-
1.test di grammatica e di vocabolario
• ITA L2 à Oxford Placement Test (OPT):
•Complete Beginner
•Lower Intermediate
•Intermediate,
•Upper Intermediate
•Advanced
•
31
S. Anastasio - Université de Lille

1. Mi piacciono molto ___________ spettacoli teatrali.
2. ___________ tema che Mario ha scritto è troppo difficile.
3. D'estate nei paesi meridionali la gente ___________  caldo.
4. Mi chiamo Paola. Sono ___________  Roma.
5. In luglio andiamo ___________   Sicilia.
6. ___________  ancora posto su questo autobus.
7. E'___________ attore molto conosciuto.
8. Noi___________ una buona pizzeria qui vicino.
9. I pazienti ___________  rapidamente.
10. Marina e Paola sono ragazze___________ .
11. Non posso sopportare le camicie___________ .
12. ___________  lavora per una grossa azienda.
13. Mi incontro spesso con ___________  amici.
14. Tu ___________   troppo spesso la sera.
15. ___________  mobili sono troppo rustici per me.
16. Che cosa ___________  i ragazzi oggi?
17. Metti troppe cose ___________ cassetti.
18. Ragazzi, ___________  finito la prova?
19. Giulia e Paolo si___________ conosciuti in Inghilterra.
20. Siamo ___________  a casa tutta la sera.
21. Cameriere, può portarmi ___________ vino bianco?
22. Ecco i pomodori! ___________ compro un chilo.
23. Ordina un'aranciata al bar e___________  beve in fretta.
24. Ho incontrato Teresa e l'ho ___________ .
25. Quando vedi Gianni, ___________ puoi dire di chiamarmi?
26. Devi scrivere la lettera a tuo fratello? Si', ___________ devo scrivere.
27. Nella cucina indiana ___________  molte spezie.
28. Quando ___________  a trovarci portava un regalo.
29. Ieri, quando Maria ___________  a casa, i suoi genitori avevano già pranzato.
30. Domani, quando ___________  gli amici, faremo una festa.
31. Quel vestito è più pratico ___________  bello.
32. Mario è ___________  di suo fratello.
33. Signorina, ___________  che cosa desidera?
34. Mamma, ___________  tranquilla: non faccio tardi!
35. Tu non puoi darmi le informazioni___________ ho bisogno.
36. ___________ ha suonato il campanello?
37. ___________  darmi un consiglio?
38. Mi sembra che in Italia tutto___________ bene.
39. Speravo che prima o poi lui___________ i suoi errori.
40. Credo che partirei volentieri, se___________  tempo.
41. Pensavo che lui___________ a lavorare il mese prossimo.
42. Non ti dirò niente purché tu___________ altrettanto.
43. Si comporta come se___________ il padrone.
44. Non posso ___________ vederlo, ___________ parlargli
45. ___________  l'impegno, non ha passato l'esame.
46. Credevo di incontrare Giovanna al cinema___________  non l'ho vista.
47. Che cosa facevi tu ___________  io parlavo.
48. Mario? Non ___________  voglio più sapere niente!
49. Non devi___________  con lui. Non e stata colpa sua.
50. Avrei risposto al telefono, se ___________.
51. Diceva che, se___________  a trovarci.
OPT
0-10 = Beginners 11-20 = Lower Intermediate 21-31 = Intermediate 32-40 = Upper Intermediate 41-51 =
Advanced
32
S. Anastasio - Université de Lille

•Risultati emersi dai test:
•
•2/3 degli apprendenti di livello avanzato
•
•MA contraddizioni importanti tra i livelli emersi dai test e le strutture impiegate nelle
produzioni orali
•
•Risultati tipici di avanzati vs. racconti tipici della varietà intermedia
33
S. Anastasio - Université de Lille

•2. Analisi di due parametri aggiuntivi nelle produzioni orali: morfologia verbale e complessità
sintattica
•
•Morfologia verbale: varietà delle forme verbali usate (indicativo, congiuntivo, condizionale,
corrispondeza forma-funzione, consecutio temporum)
•
•Complessità sintattica: utilizzo di enunciati semplici e multiproposizionali (presenza/assenza di
subordinate completive, temporali, relative, causali + ipotesi)
34
S. Anastasio - Université de Lille

•Come distinguere gli Intermedi dagli Avanzati?
•
•Criteri considerati :
•morfologia verbale diversificata + utilizzo variegato di subordinate nel corso dello sviluppo
linguistico in L2 (Bartning 1997; Bartning & Shlyter 2004)
•
•
•
•Morfologia per intermedi à l’OPT rivela conoscenza dei tempi verbali
•MA distinzioni fragili forma-funzione all’orale :
•
•Ex1: Il cane e il ragazzo fa [//] fare [= fanno] una passeggiata sulla lago
35
S. Anastasio - Université de Lille

•
•Morfologia per avanzati à l’OPT rivela una competenza nell’uso dei tempi verbali confermata anche
all’orale
•
•
•Ex2. poi sembrava che ci fosse un buon rapporto fra il bambino e il suo cane
•
•Ex3. mi sembra che tornino a casa
•
•Ex4: si mise una *copertura [= si mise una coperta addosso]
•
•
36
S. Anastasio - Université de Lille

•Sintassi per intermedi à preferenza per la paratassi e uso di poche subordinate
•
•Ex.5: poi quando si alza / la rana non è più qui
•Ex.6: poi nello stesso momento il cane corre / gli api sono [/] sono seguitando lui [//] a lui
•
•
•
•Sintassi per avanzati à uso diversificato di subordinate, inclusa l’espressione dell’ipotesi
•
•Ex. 7: quando il ragazzo e il cane si svegliano / vedono che la [/] la rana non è più nel boccale
•Ex.8: quindi lui cerca di andare su questa pietra / magari per vedere se il ranocchio magari sia
andato più dentro nel bosco
•
•
•
•
37
S. Anastasio - Université de Lille

•Scelta finale à grado di complessità morfosintattica nelle produzioni orali come criterio
determinante per stabilire i livelli di competenza
•
•Importanza del test grammaticale à valutazione della competenza scritta come strumento per
comprendere se alcune strutture linguistiche sono state trattate in classe
•
•
•Importanza di analizzare le produzioni orali in termini morfo-sintattici
•à valutare se l’apprendente è capace di mettre in pratica le strutture trattatte in classe in
compiti verbali orali
38
S. Anastasio - Université de Lille

Il compito
vStoria ricca di situazioni di movimento effettuati dai due personaggi principali
vCompito verbale complesso à narrazioni orali che si prestano all’analisi degli eventi di moto
(dalla fase preverbale a quella verbale, cf. Levelt 1989)
v ‘Frog story’ (Frog, where are you? , Mayer, 1969)
39
S. Anastasio - Université de Lille

All the participants accomplished a complex verbal task, that is the production of an oral
narrative.
we selected this task since: a) it allows our study to be compared with other work and b) such a
task allows us to observe discourse production from conceptualization to verbalization of a motion
event within a coherent text.
Participants were recorded individually. They were asked to look at the 24 pictures and then to
tell a naïve interlocutor what happened in the story. There was no time limit and the informant
could have access to the material during his/her oral production

• Procedura di analisi
•
§Dati transcritti secondo le convenzioni CHAT (CHILDES, Mac Whinney 2000)
§Identificazione di proposizioni contenti almeno un evento di moto:
•
•
1)Focus, informazione spaziale espresso : Percorso, Maniera, Causa
2)
2)Locus: distribuzione delle 3 component spaziali in una o più categoria sintattica: radice verbale
(tipi di verbi di movimento) vs elementi extra-verbali (particelle, avverbi, sintagmi
preposizionali)
•
3)Densità semantica (DS):
• numero di componenti semantiche espresso in una e sola proposizione
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
40
S. Anastasio - Université de Lille

All oral narratives were transcribed in CHAT format used in the CHILDES repository (MacWhinney
2000).
Once the datawere transcribed, they were divided into clauses and each motion clause was
coded and analyzed along the following parameters:
1)Focus
2)Locus
3)SD

• Procedura di analisi
•
•Qualche altra questione metodologica:
•
•
•Quale criterio per classificare la categoria dei verbi di movimento?
•
Østudi considerati: Berman & Slobin (1994), Hickmann et al. (2014), Spreafico (2009)
Øconsultazione di dizionari monilingue, sinonimi/contrary
•à classificazione dei verbi non solo sulla base della semantica, ma anche del contesto di
occorrenza
•
•
•
•
•
•
41
S. Anastasio - Université de Lille

All oral narratives were transcribed in CHAT format used in the CHILDES repository (MacWhinney
2000).
Once the datawere transcribed, they were divided into clauses and each motion clause was
coded and analyzed along the following parameters:
1)Focus
2)Locus
3)SD

42
Verbi ad 1 componente
Verbi N
Movimento generico (muoversi, andare)
Verbi P
Direzione del movimento: traiettoria verticale (salire, scendere), superamento di frontiera
(entrare, uscire), traiettoria con deissi (venire)
Verbi M
Maniera del movimento:  tipo particolare di movimento (camminare), velocità (correre), armonia
(pattinare), mezzo di trasporto (cycle), tipo di traiettoria tracciata dall’entità (zigzag)
Verbi C
Forza esterna che provoca il movimento di un entità (mettere, buttare, prendre)
Verbi con 2 componenti
Verbi P+M
Lessicalizzazione del percorso e della maniera (arrampicarsi, fuggire, scivolare)
Verbi P+C
Lessicalizzazione (anche in costruzioni perifrastiche) di traiettoria e causa (portare, far cadere,
far uscire)
Verbi C+M
Lessicalizzazione (anche in costruzioni perifrastiche) di causa e maniera (spingere, tirare, far
scivolare)
S. Anastasio - Université de Lille

•
•Procedura di analisi
•
•
•
§Per tutti gli informatori: come codificano il movimento?
§Per gli apprendenti: tendenze comuni o transfer?
•
• 2 variabili: a) prossimità/distanza tipologica b) livello di competenza
•
•
•
•
•
•Pearson’s X2 test per valutazioni statistiche tra i gruppi
•
•
•
•
•
•
43
S. Anastasio - Université de Lille

For all the participants we studied how speakers code motion?
For learners, we tried to identify possible common trends or CLI.
2 variables play an important role in the learners’ productions, i.e. typological
proximity/distance and proficiency.
In order to compare the results in different samples and to evaluate the possible homogeneity among
them, we used a statistical analysis based on the Pearson’s X2 test.


► Risultati
44
S. Anastasio - Université de Lille

•Risultati in L1
•
1.Contrasti intertipologici (Talmy + Slobin):
• Focus sul Percorso in tutte e 3 le lingue
•
•
•
•
•
•
45

ING
FRA
ITA
X2 test
P
342
262
236
0.09
M
82
37
30
0.003*
C
40
42
32
0.22
S. Anastasio - Université de Lille

With the respect to Focus, all the native speakers pay great attention to Path in very similar
proportions.

ENG => satellite-framed patterns + Maniera espressa nel verbo (P < 0.05; tiptoe, spike, tumble,
pop, sneak)
FR / ITA => verb-framed patterns: P nel verbo (tomber, sortir, cadere, uscire)
ma M raramente espresso al di fuori del verbo(il gufo volò, il bambino cascò)
46
S. Anastasio - Université de Lille

A significant statistical difference lies in the selection and the distribution of linguistic
devices to code the spatial components.
ENG => satellite-framed patterns + attention to M systematically expressed in the verb (P < 0.05;
tiptoe, spike, tumble, pop, sneak)
FR / ITA => verb-framed patterns: P in the verb (tomber, sortir, cadere, uscire)
   but M, if expressed, seldom coded outside the verb (il gufo volò, il bambino cascò)
No difference in the amount of motion verbs used. The difference lies in the types : manner motion
verbs exploited especially in English

ING => verbi di maniera (P < 0.05; tiptoe, spike, tumble, pop, sneak)
FR / ITA => verbi di P (tomber, sortir, cadere, uscire)
47

Verbi/ n° propositions
N
P
M
P+M
C
C+M
C+P
Types
 ING
211/771
(27,3%)
33
65
73
0
22
7
11
40
FR
191/580
( 33%)
9
113
13
14
17
3
22
38
ITA
178/599 (29,8%)
12
111
16
7
21
4
7
35
S. Anastasio - Université de Lille

A significant statistical difference lies in the selection and the distribution of linguistic
devices to code the spatial components.
ENG => satellite-framed patterns + attention to M systematically expressed in the verb (P < 0.05;
tiptoe, spike, tumble, pop, sneak)
FR / ITA => verb-framed patterns: P in the verb (tomber, sortir, cadere, uscire)
   but M, if expressed, seldom coded outside the verb (il gufo volò, il bambino cascò)
No difference in the amount of motion verbs used. The difference lies in the types : manner motion
verbs exploited especially in English

Italiano come più satellitare del francese :
Lingua a cornice ibrida // lingua ad alta salienza di traiettoria:
Ø Coesistenza di costruzioni verbali e satellitari (cf. Simone 1997;  Iacobini & Masini 2007; Cini
2008)

ING. The frog jumps out of the jar   à PART
IT. La rana salta via dal barattolo à PART vs.
IT. La rana scappa dal barattolo          à V
FR. La grenouille s’échappe du bocal   à V
 VARIAZIONE INTRATIPOLOGICA L1 FR / ITA fuori dal verbo
48
S. Anastasio - Université de Lille

Italian is less systematic than French with respect to locus: in fact, Path is expressed in the
verb and outside with almost the same proportion.

•
3.DS leggermente più importante in inglese
4.
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•ING: DS2, DS3 à he falls (P) out (P) of the tree (SP partenza)   (Ds3)
•FR: DS1, DS2 à ils atterrirent (P) à l’intérieur d’une marre (SP arrivo) (DS2)
•ITA : DS1, DS2   à il bambino cadde (P) da un dirupo (SP partenza) DS2)
•
49
S. Anastasio - Université de Lille

Risultati in L2: gli intermedi
Inglese
Francese
Italiano L2
Risposta ‘neutra’ al compito non correlata alle propeità tipologiche della L1
50
S. Anastasio - Université de Lille

Results about L2 story-telling productions allow us to observe not only some common tendencies
related to general acquisitional principles but also differences in learners’ developmental
trajectory due to proficiency and to L1 influence.
A common tendency found in L2 data, especially at the intermediate level, is the focus on Path
information (RQ1). In accordance with Hendriks and Hickmann (2011), learners are aware of the Path
salience in a motion event and, especially intermediate learners manage to minimally respond to the
task (traitement prototypique de la tâche, see Perdue 1993a and 1993b; Watorek 1996), independently
from the typological properties of the L1

Gli intermedi: – similarità lessicale lingue romanze
Inglese
Francese
Italiano L2
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Trasparenza lessicale
 ITA/FR vs. ING
(prossimità linguistica)
vVarietà diversificata di verbi di moto
L1 Romance > L2 Romance (IT>L2FR, FR > L2ITA)
vEffetto della trasparenza lessicale francese-italiano
      (fr. venir /it. venire)
Ma la trasparenza lessicale anche come causa di transfer lessicale/formale
Ex. Int FR > ITA L2:  e per finire il ragazzo *parte con la sua rana
51
S. Anastasio - Université de Lille

However, the effects of SL/TL proximity (French and Italian) can be observed on the lexical
dimension, since the intermediate level, L1 Romance learners present a more diversified motion verb
vocabulary than L1 English learners because of the higher degree of lexical transparency between
the two Romance languages in question (for the same result, see Cadierno and Ruiz 2006).

vRACCONTI: racconti più lunghi e ricchi di dettagli, diminuzione di prestiti, calchi (L1 o L2)
forme idiosincratiche
a.  Int Fr> Ita L2: e le api follow
b.  Int Eng  > Fr L2: le chien tombe *au fenêtre
Gli avanzati: tendenze comuni
Inglese
Francese
Italiano L2
Effetto di livello:
Percorso sviluppo interlingua INTER > ADV
52
v
vMOTION EVENTS : PROSPETTIVA SPAZIALE COMPLESSA
=> Verbi di movimento a più componenti arrampicarsi (M+P), far cadere (C+P)
=> Densità semantica : INT DS 1-2 vs. ADV DS 3-4
c. il ragazzo va al tronco dell’albero  (P) (DS1)
d. il cane e il ragazzo sono caduti (P) nell’acqua (P) (DS2)
S. Anastasio - Université de Lille

Adv learners also produce more motion verbs than int learners, very few non-target-like spatial
forms via loan words, borrowings and idiosyncratic verb forms mainly expressed by INT.
Advanced learners tend to adopt a more complex spatial perspective than intermediate learners,
since they develop diversified linguistic means conflating more than one type of spatial
information, through devices such as complex motion verbs (e.g., the French faire tomber ‘make OBJ
fall’)
SD = another sign of the developmental trajectory in L2 (Demagny 2013)
There is increase in density with proficiency level

Gli avanzati: tendenze comuni
Inglese
Francese
Italiano L2
Effetto di livello:
Percorso sviluppo interlingua INTER > ADV
53

Inglese L1
Francese L1
INT
AVA
INT
AVA
N
15
36
14
15
P
39
85
64
81
M
6
21
12
15
P+M
1
9
2
7
C
5
9
11
14
C+M
0
0
1
2
C+P
1
8
9
22

Adv learners also produce more motion verbs than int learners, very few non-target-like spatial
forms via loan words, borrowings and idiosyncratic verb forms mainly expressed by INT.
Advanced learners tend to adopt a more complex spatial perspective than intermediate learners,
since they develop diversified linguistic means conflating more than one type of spatial
information, through devices such as complex motion verbs (e.g., the French faire tomber ‘make OBJ
fall’)
SD = another sign of the developmental trajectory in L2 (Demagny 2013)
There is increase in density with proficiency level

Gli avanzati: tendenze comuni
Inglese
Francese
Italiano L2
Effetto di livello:
Percorso sviluppo interlingua INTER > ADV
54
S. Anastasio - Université de Lille

Adv learners also produce more motion verbs than int learners, very few non-target-like spatial
forms via loan words, borrowings and idiosyncratic verb forms mainly expressed by INT.
Advanced learners tend to adopt a more complex spatial perspective than intermediate learners,
since they develop diversified linguistic means conflating more than one type of spatial
information, through devices such as complex motion verbs (e.g., the French faire tomber ‘make OBJ
fall’)
SD = another sign of the developmental trajectory in L2 (Demagny 2013)
There is increase in density with proficiency level

Gli avanzati – differenze
Inglese
Francese
Italiano L2
Soltanto in L1 ING > ITA L2
=>  Transfer sintattico-semantico
• calco su una parola di una delle LS a disposizione (francese nella fattispecie) a cui si danno i
tratti sintattici/semantici della L1
•
• Ex: il cane prova a *montare l’albero
• The dog tries to climb the tree
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
55
S. Anastasio - Université de Lille

A considerable difference between this group of learners and the other ones lies in the types of
non verbal devices selected to code Path, i.e. in directional particles of SVs (X^2 (4) = 12.78, p
< 0.05; 25 occurrences in English advanced learners, i.e. 23% of non verbal means;). This
analytical or SV strategy does not appear in the data from L2 Italian intermediate learners (nor in
L1 English learners or in L1 French learners) and is only slightly employed by French advanced
learners (4 occurrences: andare fuori ‘go out’ used twice, portare via ‘take away’, cadere fuori
‘fall out’). Similarly to Italian native speakers, English learners prefer SVs in which we find the
particle via ‘away’, such as in the L2 Italian example Bambi correva via con il cane sulla testa
‘Bambi ran away with the dog on his head’

Gli avanzati – differenze
Inglese
Francese
Italiano L2
Soltanto in L1 ING > ITA L2
=>  Transfer positivo
vVerbi sintagmatici in ITA L2 (p < 0.05: andare via, andare fuori, correre via)
•       Prossimità formale per costruzioni satellitari ING-ITA
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
ADV L1 ING > ITA L2
= particelle /VS
(p< 0.05)
a. la rana sta andando fuori dal vaso
b. Bambi correva via
c. il ragazzo sta cadendo giù dall’animale
56
S. Anastasio - Université de Lille

A considerable difference between this group of learners and the other ones lies in the types of
non verbal devices selected to code Path, i.e. in directional particles of SVs (X^2 (4) = 12.78, p
< 0.05; 25 occurrences in English advanced learners, i.e. 23% of non verbal means;). This
analytical or SV strategy does not appear in the data from L2 Italian intermediate learners (nor in
L1 English learners or in L1 French learners) and is only slightly employed by French advanced
learners (4 occurrences: andare fuori ‘go out’ used twice, portare via ‘take away’, cadere fuori
‘fall out’). Similarly to Italian native speakers, English learners prefer SVs in which we find the
particle via ‘away’, such as in the L2 Italian example Bambi correva via con il cane sulla testa
‘Bambi ran away with the dog on his head’

vINTERM. : tendenze simili legate al percorso di apprendimento
§ Non ci sono effetti importanti della LS sulla LT
(p.ex. assenza significative della Maniera in apprendenti anglofoni)
§Leggero vantaggio lessicale in apprendenti L1-L2 romanze
vAVANZATI : apparizione tardiva di tranfer (L1Ing > L2IT)
§Quantità importante di mezzi linguistici per trasferire strategie lessicali dalla LS alla LT
(cf. équipe d’Heidelberg: von Stutterheim 2003; Jarvis & Pavlenko 2010)
§Ricorso al transfer se analogie strutturali LS-LT
(transfer to somewhere principle, Andersen 1983)
Conclusioni e riflessioni
57
S. Anastasio - Université de Lille

-But why does L1 impact is more evident in English learners of L2 Italian and not of L2 French?
-This can be explained by Andersen (1983)’s transfer to somewhere principle, which states that an
L1 structure can be transferred in an interlanguage only if the languages in contact share some
analogous structures. Conversely, the absence of similar particle constructions in English learners
of L2 French can be explained by the ‘transfer to nowhere’ principle, according to which if the TL
does not provide any formally equivalent structures to those of the SL, transfer would be somehow
blocked.

Effetti di lingue in contatto e/0 livello?
Distanza tipologica (S-L vs. V-L)
Ma similarità formale nelle costruzioni a satellite
 - effetto di similarità
Psycotipologia?
Frequenza debole in input
+ effetto di similarità
 Apparizione dei VS
Prossimità tipologica e genetica (V-L)
Ma differenza: costruzioni a satellite  in IT
+ effetto di similarità
(trasparenza lessicale
 verbi di moto)
- Ricerca di similarità
   assenza di VS in ita L2
LS/LT
INTER.
AVANZ.
ITA L2 : le produzioni degli anglofoni appaiono più target-like di quelle dei francofoni
ING => L2 ITA
FR => L2 ITA
58
S. Anastasio - Université de Lille

ENG The late emergence of SVs in L2 Italian may also be explained by the combination of two
factors: a) in the beginning of acquisition, English learners perceive Italian as distant from
their L1, thereby preventing the transfer of formally equivalent structures (psychotypology; see
Kellerman 1977; Kellerman and Sharwood Smith 1986); b) SVs are not taught in the Italian classroom.
In both cases, the genetic and actual proximity between French and Italian does not have a
facilitative effect in motion event construal, given that advanced English learners’ narratives are
more target-like than those produced by French learners.
FR The tendency to look for similarities in the TL (Ringborm and Jarvis 2009) can also explain the
developmental trends in L1 Romance.
L1French-L2Italian and L1Italian-L2French learners easily recognize V-patterns, which are the
preferred strategies in their SL and in their TL, preferences confirmed by the institutional input.
Once the assumed similarities are confirmed, learners make no effort to search for alternative
linguistic devices to encode the same motion concepts (i.e. SVs). So, the effect of language
proximity can be facilitative in lexical terms at intermediate stages but can also postpone the
learning of other target-like devices which are functionally similar (see also Benazzo and Andorno
2017 for the use of temporal adverbs in L2 French by Italian and German learners).

•Cosa resta da fare
•
•Più studi con:
•lingue con contrasti intra-tipologici
•parlanti plurilingue
•studi longitudinali
•uso di diversi typi di tasks
•comparazioni tra dati scritti vs dati orali (see Altca Project, Demagny & Anastasio 2022-24)
•
59
S. Anastasio - Université de Lille

 simona.anastasio@univ-lille.fr
60
S. Anastasio - Université de Lille

Riferimenti
Anastasio, S. 2022. Motion event construal in L2 French and Italian: from acquisitional
perspectives to pedagogical implications. International review of applied linguistics in language
teaching (IRAL), Special Issue Motion event construal and language learning.
https://doi.org/10.1515/iral-2022-0046
Anastasio, S. 2021. Parler de déplacement en L2. Perspectives acquisitionnelles dans une approche
translinguistique. Linguistica delle differenze 6. Roma : Aracne Editore.
Anastasio, S. 2019. L'expression du déplacement en italien L2. Perspectives typologiques et
psycholinguistiques . Language, Interaction & Acquisition 10:2, 204-228.
Anastasio, S. 2018. L’expression de la référence à l’espace en italien et en Français L2. Une étude
comparative. Phd dissertation, Université de Paris 8.
Andersen, R. 1983. Transfer to somewhere. In S. Gass and L. Selinker (ed.). Language transfer in
language learning. Rowley: Nwebury House, 177-201.
Bartning, I. & Schylter, S. 2004. Itinéraires acquisitionnels et stades de développement en
français L2. French Language Studies, Vol. 14, pp. 281-299.
Benazzo, S. & Andorno, C.. 2017. Is It Really Easier to Acquire a Closely-Related Language ? A
Study on the Expression of Iteration and Continuation in L2 French. In Martin Howard & Pascale
Leclercq (eds.), Tense-Aspect-Modality in a Second Language : Contemporary Perspectives, 105-143.
Amsterdam – Philadelphia : Benjamins
Cadierno, T. 2004. Expressing motion events in a second language: a cognitive typological
perspective. In M. Achard & S. Neimeier (éds.). Cognitive linguistics, second language acquisition
and foreign language pedagogy. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, 13-49.
Cadierno, T. 2017. Thinking for Speaking about Motion in a Second Language. In I.
Ibarretxe-Antuňano (ed.). Motion and Space across Languages : Theory and Applications. Amsterdam –
Philadelphie : J. Benjamins : 279-300.
Cadierno, T. & Ruiz, L. 2006. Motion events in Spanish L2 acquisition. Annual Review of Cognitive
Linguistics 4 (1), 183-216.
Carroll, M. et Lambert, M. 2006. Reorganizing Principles of Information Structure in Advanced L2s :
French and German Learners of English. In H. Byrnes, H. D. Weger- Guntharp et K. A. Sprang (éd.),
Educating for Advanced Foreign Language Capacities : Constructs, Curriculum, Instruction,
Assessment. Washington : Georgetown University Press : 54-73.
Carroll, M., Murcia-Serra, J., Watorek, M. et Bendiscioli, A. 2000. The Relevance of Information
Organization to Second Language Acquisition Studies : The Descriptive Discourse of Advanced Adult
Learners of German. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 22 (3) : 441-466.
Carroll, M. et Stutterheim, C. von 1997. Relations entre grammaticalisation et conceptualisation et
implications sur l’acquisition d’une langue étrangère. AILE – Acquisition et interaction en langue
étrangère 9 : 83-115..
Carroll, M., Weimar, K., Flecken, M., Lambert, M. et Stutterheim, C. von 2012. Tracing
Trajectories. Motion Event Construal by Advanced L2 French-English and L2 French-German seakers.
LIA – Language, Interaction and Acquisition 3 (2) : 202-230.
Cini, M. (ed.) 2008. I verbi sintagmatici in italiano e nelle varietà dialettali. Stato dell’arte e
prospettive di ricerca. Frankfurt am Main : P. Lang.
Hendriks, H., Hickmann, M. & Demagny, A. C. 2008. How adult English learners of French express
caused motion: a comparison with English and French natives. Acquisition et Interaction en langue
étrangère (AILE) 27, 15-41.
Hendriks., H. & Hickmann, M. 2011. Expressing voluntary motion in a second language: English
learners of French. In V. Cook & B. Bassetti (eds.). Language and bilingual cognition. Hove, UK:
Psychology Press, 315-340.
Hijazo-Gascón, A. 2021. Moving across languages: motion events in Spanish as a second language.
Berlin-Boston: Mouton De Gruyter.
Iacobini, C. & Masini, F. 2006. The emergence of verb-particle constructions in Italian: locative
and actional meanings. Morphology, Vol. 16, 2, pp. 155-188.
Jarvis, S. & Pavlenko, A. 2010. Crosslinguistic influence in language and cognition. New York and
London: Routledge.
Kellerman, E. & Sharwood Smith, M. (ed.) 1986. Crosslinguistic Influence in Second Language
Acquisition. New York – Oxford – Toronto : Pergamon Institute of English.
Klein, W. & Perdue, C. 1997. The Basic Variety (or : Couldn’t Natural Languages Be Much Simpler ?).
Second Language Research 13 (4) : 301-347.
Ringbom, H. & Jarvis, S. 2009. The Importance of Cross-Linguistic Similarity in Foreign Language
Learning. In M. H. Long et C. J. Doughty (ed.). The Handbook of Language Teaching. Oxford – Malden
– Chichester : Wiley-Blackwell , 106-118.
Simone, R. 1997. Esistono verbi sintagmatici in italiano?. In De Mauro, T. & Lo Cascio, V. (eds.).
Lessico e grammatica. Teorie linguistiche e applicazioni lessicografiche,. Roma: Bulzoni, 155-170.
Slobin, D. 1996. From ‘Thought and language’ to ‘thinking for speaking’. In J. Gumperz & S.
Levinson (eds.). Rethinking Linguistic Relativity: Vol. Studies in the social and cultural
foundations of language. New York: Cambridge University Press, 70-96.
Slobin, Dan Isaac, 2004. The many ways to search for a frog: linguistic typology and the expression
in motion events. In S. Strömqvist / L. Verhoeven (ed.), Relating Events in Narrative: Typological
and Contextual Perspectives, 2, Mahwah, NJ, LEA, 219-257.
Slobin, D. 2006. What Makes Manner of Motion Salient ? Explorations in Linguistic Typology,
Discourse and Cognition. In M. Hickmann et S. Robert (ed.). Space in Languages. Linguistic Systems
and Cognitive Categories. Amsterdam – Philadelphie : J. Benjamins , 59-81.
Stutterheim, v. C., 2003. Linguistic structure and information organization. The case of very
advanced learners. Eurosla Yearbook Vol. 3. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company, 183-206.
Talmy, L. 1985. Lexicalization patterns: Semantic Structure in Lexical Forms. In Shopen, T. (ed.).
Language typology and Syntactic Description III: Grammatical Categories and Lexicon. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press, 57-149.
Talmy, L. 2000. Toward a cognitive semantics. Cambridge MA: MIT PRESS.
Watorek, M. 1996. Le traitement prototypique : définitions et implications. Toegepaste
Taalwetenschap in Artikelen 55. 187-200.

61
S. Anastasio - Université de Lille