BEGIN:VCALENDAR
VERSION:2.0
PRODID:-//events.la.psu.edu//EN
CALSCALE:GREGORIAN
BEGIN:VTIMEZONE
TZID:America/New_York
BEGIN:STANDARD
DTSTART:20201101T020000
TZOFFSETFROM:-0400
TZOFFSETTO:-0500
RRULE:FREQ=YEARLY;BYMONTH=11;BYDAY=1SU
END:STANDARD
BEGIN:DAYLIGHT
DTSTART:20200308T020000
TZOFFSETFROM:-0500
TZOFFSETTO:-0400
RRULE:FREQ=YEARLY;BYMONTH=3;BYDAY=2SU
END:DAYLIGHT
END:VTIMEZONE
BEGIN:VEVENT
UID:14486-87ab24717b8831378404e58a20a53e28@events.la.psu.edu
DTSTAMP:20260423T023651Z
DTSTART;TZID=America/New_York:20250207T090000
DTEND;TZID=America/New_York:20250207T103000
SUMMARY:“Investigating the Interaction of Short- and Long-Term Blocking Effects
in the L2 Acquisition of the German Perfekt”
DESCRIPTION:\nBlocking concerns the effect of second language (L2) speak
ers’ prior language experience on learning linguistic cues that express
one idea (e.g. past tense) in multiple ways (e.g. adverbial cues and ver
bal morphology). Previous research provides evidence for long-term block
ing\, whereby cross-linguistic differences lead L2 speakers to rely on a
n L1 cue to the disadvantage of a new L2 cue\, as well as short-term blo
cking\, whereby the initial learning of one cue makes the later learning
of another cue more difficult (Ellis &\; Sagarra\, 2010). However\,
studies have not investigated instructed L2 speakers’ acquisition of cue
s that cannot co-occur within a sentence.\n\nIn the present study\, begi
nning L2 German speakers (N = 20) learned the present perfect tense. Unl
ike English\, in which the auxiliary verb is always have\, German uses t
wo different auxiliary verbs\, haben “have” or sein “be”\, with any give
n verb taking only one auxiliary\, as in (1) and (2).\n\n1) Er hat gesch
lafen\n\nHe has slept\n\n“He has slept”\n\n2) Er ist geflogen\n\nHe is f
lown\n\n“He has flown”\n\nUsing a pretest\, posttest\, delayed posttest
design\, three experimental groups completed a meaning-based output trea
tment that differed only in the order of auxiliary introduction: haben i
nitial\, sein initial\, and both auxiliaries simultaneously. In all thre
e groups\, long-term blocking from participants’ L1 English would promot
e haben\, which was reinforced by short-term blocking among the haben in
itial group and countered in the sein initial group. Results from a fill
-in-theblank test showed that the haben and sein initial groups were mor
e accurate on whichever auxiliary they learned first\, providing evidenc
e for short-term blocking. The haben and both\, but not the sein\, group
s\, favored haben over sein\, providing evidence for long-term blocking.
Thus\, shortterm blocking can deemphasize L1 patterns and instead draw
L2 speakers’ attention to a novel L2 cue\, promoting its acquisition.\n\
nFor more details: https://events.la.psu.edu/event/cls-speaker-series/
X-ALT-DESC;FMTTYPE=text/html:Blocking concer
ns the effect of second language (L2) speakers’ prior language experienc
e on learning linguistic cues that express one idea (e.g. past tense) in
multiple ways (e.g. adverbial cues and verbal morphology). Previous res
earch provides evidence for long-term blocking, whereby cross-linguistic
differences lead L2 speakers to rely on an L1 cue to the disadvantage o
f a new L2 cue, as well as short-term blocking, whereby the initial lear
ning of one cue makes the later learning of another cue more difficult (
Ellis & Sagarra, 2010). However, studies have not investigated instr
ucted L2 speakers’ acquisition of cues that cannot co-occur within a sen
tence.
In the present study, beginning L2 German speakers (N = 20)
learned the present perfect tense. Unlike English, in which the auxilia
ry verb is always have, German uses two different auxiliary verbs, haben
“have” or sein “be”, with any given verb taking only one auxiliary, as
in (1) and (2).
1) Er hat geschlafen
He has slept
“He
has slept”
2) Er ist geflogen
He is flown
“He has flow
n”
Using a pretest, posttest, delayed posttest design, three exper
imental groups completed a meaning-based output treatment that differed
only in the order of auxiliary introduction: haben initial, sein initial
, and both auxiliaries simultaneously. In all three groups, long-term bl
ocking from participants’ L1 English would promote haben, which was rein
forced by short-term blocking among the haben initial group and countere
d in the sein initial group. Results from a fill-in-theblank test showed
that the haben and sein initial groups were more accurate on whichever
auxiliary they learned first, providing evidence for short-term blocking
. The haben and both, but not the sein, groups, favored haben over sein,
providing evidence for long-term blocking. Thus, shortterm blocking can
deemphasize L1 patterns and instead draw L2 speakers’ attention to a no
vel L2 cue, promoting its acquisition.
For more details: https://events.la.p
su.edu/event/cls-speaker-series/
LOCATION:Foster Auditorium, 102 Paterno Library
END:VEVENT
END:VCALENDAR