Investigating the Interaction of Short- and Long-Term Blocking Effects in the L2 Acquisition of the German Perfekt
Research Poster Arts & Humanities 2025 Graduate ExhibitionPresentation by Alexis Wilt
Exhibition Number 62
Abstract
Blocking concerns the effect of second language (L2) speakers’ prior language experience on learning linguistic cues expressing one meaning (e.g. past tense) through multiple cues (e.g. adverbs and verbal morphology). Long-term blocking occurs when L2 speakers prefer a common L1-L2 cue over a new L2 cue because of differences between languages. Short-term blocking occurs when initially learning one cue makes the later learning of another cue more difficult (Ellis & Sagarra, 2010). In the present study, beginning L2 German speakers (N = 20) learned the present perfect tense. Whereas all English verbs take the auxiliary “have”, each German verb takes either “haben” “to have” or “sein” “to be”. This allows us to investigate blocking during L2 learning of cues that cannot co-occur within a sentence. Using a pretest, posttest, delayed posttest design, three experimental groups completed a meaning-based output treatment differing only in the order of auxiliary introduction: “haben” initial, “sein” initial, and both auxiliaries simultaneously. In all three groups, long-term blocking from participants’ L1 English promoted “haben”. Results from a fill-in-the-blank task 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” across all tasks, providing evidence for long-term blocking. Thus, short-term blocking can deemphasize L1 patterns and instead draw L2 speakers’ attention to a novel L2 cue, promoting its acquisition.
Importance
In German, each verb takes the auxiliary “haben” “have” or “sein” “be” to form the present perfect. Unlike German, all English verbs form the present perfect with the auxiliary “have”. Therefore, English speakers tend to overuse “haben” with verbs that require “sein” (Sippel & Jackson, 2015). By introducing “haben” first or both auxiliaries together, pedagogical sequencing may further draw their attention to “haben”. Thus, these two most common pedagogical sequencings may result in even greater overuse of “haben”. This study investigated which sequencing, either “haben” first, both simultaneously, or the uncommon but theoretically motivated sequencing of introducing “sein” first, would result in the most accurate acquisition of both auxiliaries among beginning German learners.