Dutch compound constructions in additional language acquisition: a diasystematic-constructionist approach

In this talk, we present the results of a study on the acquisition of Dutch compound constructions by French-speaking learners in Belgium. Additionally, we compare learners enrolled in Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL) programs with learners following traditional second language instruction. Languages are known to vary significantly with respect to their preferences for analytic or synthetic constructions (Schlücker 2019). For instance, Germanic languages tend to use compounds more frequently than Romance languages (Van Goethem 2009; Booij 2010; Schlücker 2019). Van Goethem (2009), for instance, has demonstrated that Dutch has a stronger tendency towards [A+ N] compounding than French (e.g. Du. hoogspanning vs Fr. haute tension ‘high voltage’). Based on the cross-linguistic similarities and differences between the preferences for compound or phrasal constructions in Dutch and French and on the beneficial effect of CLIL on SLA, as already demonstrated in the case of intensifying constructions (Hendrikx 2019), we assume that the CLIL learners’ L2 use of Dutch will integrate more features typical of L1 Dutch use of compounds. We will take into consideration the formal make-up of the compounds, their semantic classification, their frequency and productivity, and possible mistakes in the learner data (for instance, non-target-like phrasal constructions). The data for this study come from a corpus of written productions in the form of fictional e-mails, collected within the context of a research project on CLIL in French-speaking Belgium (cf. Hiligsmann et al. 201, Meunier et al. 2020). From the theoretical point of view, the study takes a Diasystematic Constructionist approach (DCxG) (Höder 2012, 2018; Boas & Höder 2018, 2021), which conceptualizes the linguistic competence of multilingual speakers as an “interlingual network of constructions with different degrees of schematicity” (Höder 2012: 255). Although Höder’s framework has mainly been applied to issues of language contact (cf. Boas & Höder 2018), we believe it is highly relevant to SLA: the understanding that in language production a bilingual’s two languages are simultaneously activated and often processed in parallel engenders a more organic view of SLA (Höder, Prentice & Tingsell 2021; Van Goethem & Hendrikx 2021). Hence, the aim of this study is to demonstrate how the DCxG framework can reveal the cognitive restructuring processes taking place in the minds of young learners. References Boas, Hans C. & Höder, Steffen. (Eds). 2018. Constructions in Contact. Constructional perspectives on contact phenomena in Germanic languages. Amsterdam / Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company. Boas, Hans C. & Höder, Steffen. (Eds). 2021 (forthc.). Constructions in Contact 2. Language change, multilingual practices, and additional acquisition. Amsterdam / Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company. Booij, Geert. 2010. Construction Morphology. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Hendrikx, Isa. 2019. The acquisition of intensifying constructions in Dutch and English by French-speaking CLIL and non-CLIL students: Cross-linguistic influence and exposure effects [Unpublished PhD thesis]. Université catholique de Louvain. Hiligsmann, Philippe, Van Mensel, Luk, Galand, Benoît, Mettewie, Laurence, Meunier, Fanny, Szmalec, Arnaud, Van Goethem, Kristel, Bulon, Amélie, De Smet, Audrey, Hendrikx, Isa, & Simonis, Morgane. 2017. Assessing Content and Language Integrated Learning in the French-speaking Community of Belgium: linguistic, cognitive and educational perspectives. Cahiers du GIRSEF, 109, 1- 24. Höder, Steffen. 2012. Multilingual constructions: a diasystematic approach to common structures. In: K. Braunmüller & C. Gabriel (Eds), Multilingual individuals and multilingual societies (pp. 241-257). Amsterdam / Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company. Höder, Steffen. 2018. Grammar is community-specific. Background and basic concepts of Diasystematic Construction Grammar. In H. Boas & S. Höder (Eds), Constructions in Contact. Constructional perspectives on contact phenomena in Germanic languages, 37-70. Amsterdam / Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company. Höder, Steffen, Prentice, Julia & Tingsell, Sofia. 2021 (forthc.). Additional language acquisition as emerging multilingualism: A Construction Grammar approach. In Hans C. Boas & Steffen Höder (eds.) Constructions in Contact 2: Language change, multilingual practices, and additional acquisition. Amsterdam / Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company. Meunier, Fanny, Hendrikx, Isa, Bulon, Amélie, Van Goethem, Kristel & Naets, Hubert. 2020. MulTINCo: Multilingual Traditional Immersion and Native Corpus. Better-documented multi-literacy practices for more refined SLA studies. In L. Van Mensel & Ph. Hiligsmann (eds.) Assessing CLIL: A multidisciplinary approach [special issue]. Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism. Schlücker, Barbara. (ed.). 2019. Complex lexical units: compounds and multi-word expressions. Berlin: De Gruyter. Van Goethem, Kristel. 2009. Choosing between A+N compounds and lexicalised A+N phrases: The position of French in comparison to Germanic languages. Word Structure, 2, 241-253. Van Goethem, Kristel & Hendrikx, Isa. 2021 (forthc.). Intensifying constructions in second language acquisition: A diasystematic -constructionist approach. In Hans C. Boas & Steffen Höder (eds.) Constructions in Contact 2: Language change, multilingual practices, and additional acquisition. Amsterdam / Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company