1. By Edvan Brito, Ph. D. University of Arkansas, Fayetteville
The variation of obligatory preposition-article contractions in the interlanguage of adult English- and Spanish learners of Portuguese
By Edvan Brito, Ph. D.
University of Arkansas, Fayetteville

2. Overview of Presentation
Sociolinguistic variation and second language acquisition
Purpose of study
Preposition-article contractions
Background
Data and methods
Results and discussion
Final considerations

3. Sociolinguistic variation and second language acquisition
refers to two or more ways of saying the same thing
Example: studying vs. studin
Qual é seu filme favorito? vs. Qual é seu favorito filme?
Is an important aspect of language (L1) and Interlanguage (L2/L3/L+)
Is systematic and rule-governed
Influenced by both linguistic (internal) and social (external) factors

4. Sociolinguistic variation and second language acquisition (Contd.)
Variation and SLA:
Interlanguage (IL): systematic, unstable, and creative (Cordes 1973)
Variation in terms of the IL itself vs. Variation in terms of the target language norms (Tarone, 1988)
Longitudinal studies: significance of change in L2 over time
“Learners restructure their grammars as they progress through various stages of variability, where they use different forms (target and non-target) towards categorical usage” (Young 1991, quoted in Regan 2013).

5. Purpose of study
Initial purpose: Present a longitudinal analysis of the acquisition of obligatory preposition-article contractions by ten adult English- and Spanish-speaking learners of Portuguese by looking at individual and group patterns of use of these contracted forms across three different periods of acquisition.
Analyzed contraction Forms:
prepositions de and em plus definite articles o, a, os, as: do, da, dos, das and no, na, nos, nas.

6. Purpose of study (Contd.)
Example: American Student (AS) talks to Brazilian Student (BS) about her plans after graduation.
AS: Eu ainda não não sei que o que querro quero fazer quando me graduo gradue
(...) sim (.) talvez amm vou a morrar vou morar na Argentina outra vez.
BS: (unintelligible) na Argentina.
AS: E trabalhar aí.
BS: Na sua área de formação?
AS: Quê?
BS: Você pretende trabalhar na área em que você se formou?
AS: Sim (.) mmm Buenos Aires. (.) Na Buenos Aires ou no Buenos Aires?
BS: (Em).
AS: Oh, em.
BS: Em Buenos Aires?
AS: Em. Okay. (…) Em.

7. Background
Aspects of reduced forms with which PFL instructors are familiar (N = 29) (Brito and Mamiya Hernandez, In Print)

8. Background

9. Data and methods Participants:
9 students enrolled in two first-semester courses: 4 in Elementary Portuguese I and 5 in Portuguese for Spanish Speakers I
Native languages: English, Spanish, and Arabic
Second Language: Spanish and English
Portuguese: Third or additional language
Two students have had an immersion experience in Brazil

10. Data and methods (Contd.)
Data Collection: Teletandem Sessions
De + articles o, a, os, as: 107 tokens
Em + articles o, a, os, as: 110 tokens
Coding example:
Yes1: Eu gosto do Brasil.
Yes2: Eu gosto do Portugal.
No1: Eu gosto de Angola.
No2: Eu gosto de Brasil.
Yes: Target like
No: Non-target like

11. Data and methods (Contd.)
Dependent Variables
Linguistic (Internal)
Social (External)
Preceding Word Category
Following Word Category
Gender Marking
Plural Marking
Gender
Native Language
Second Language
Immersion Experience
Teletandem Session
Speaker (random effect)
Quantitative Analysis: Multiple Regression Analysis function on Rbrul (Johnson 2009)

12. Results and Discussion: De + Articles (Total N= 107)

13. Results and Discussion: De + Articles (Total N= 107)

14. Results and Discussion: Em + Articles (Total N = 110)

15. Results and Discussion: Em + Articles (Total N = 110)

16. Final Considerations Amount of speech, especially in beginning levels.
Size of data set.
Amount of time from first to last interaction.
The role of technology/ Collecting data in CMC context.
Long-term research goals (longitudinal studies in a college environment)

17. Final Considerations
Teletandem Sessions may be analyzed as a different task in comparison with the sociolinguistic interview (conversation, reading passage, narrative…), oral examination, peer-to-peer interaction, etc.
Identity of the interviewer (observer’s paradox).
The target of interlanguage development can be idiosyncratic. We may not know the learner’s perception of the TL. (Bayley and Tarone 2012)
Difficulty in defining the speech community due to individual characteristics (learning strategies, motivation, amount of time communicating in the TL, etc.)

18. Obrigado! Thank you!
Edvan Brito