Abstract
In recent years there has been a growing number of second language acquisition researchers probing the issue of language transfer (or cross-linguistic influence) from a multi-competence perspective (e.g. Brown and Gullberg 2011; Pavlenko and Jarvis 2002; Su 2010; Zareva 2010). Multi-competence, a concept proposed by Cook (1991), refers to the knowledge of two or more languages in one mind. In contrast to the traditional view of language transfer, which emphasizes uni-directional influence from L1 to L2 (e.g. Gass and Selinker 1992), the multi-competence view assumes that transfer can go in two directions and there is a complex interaction between the L2 user’s language systems. Evidence supporting the multi-competence view of second language acquisition mainly comes from two strands of research: research examining the effects of the L2 on the L1 (e.g. Bylund and Jarvis 2011; papers in Cook 2003; Dussias and Sagarra 2007) and the relationships between the L2 user’s language systems (e.g. Brown and Gullberg 2011; Mennen 2004; Pavlenko and Jarvis 2002; Su 2001). Studies of L2 influence on the L1 have shown that L2 users’ knowledge and use of their L1 is distinguishable from that of L1 monolinguals. For example, Laufer (2003) found that the collocational knowledge of Russian immigrants in Israel differed from that of Russian monolinguals. The Russian immigrants tended to use L2 knowledge to judge L1 word collocations. For instance, they recognized close the telephone as a correct collocation, a typical usage in Hebrew but regarded as incorrect in Russian. In a study of sentence parsing, Dussias and Sagarra (2007) also demonstrated that Spanish-English bilinguals with extensive L2 immersion experience applied L2-specific strategies in processing L1 ambiguous sentences. Investigations into the relationships of the L2 user’s language systems have evidenced complex patterns of interaction between the languages in the L2 user’s mind. Su (2001), for instance, explored the L1-L2 transfer of sentence processing strategies among L2 users of English and Chinese. Her results showed that L2 users at all proficiency levels carried their L1 strategies over to L2 processing, but at the same time the L2 users of higher proficiency applied the L2 strategies in L1 processing. Moreover, within-group comparisons indicated that the advanced L2 users seemed to have merged the processing strategies of their two languages and applied the combined strategies in processing both languages.