Abstract
This study investigates whether sequences in which grammar topics are presented in textbooks for German as a foreign language (henceforth GFL) match empirically determined, universal acquisition sequences. Moreover, it explores what patterns course books display regarding a set of grammar structures that are particularly interesting from an L1-perspective. From the literature we know that some grammar phenomena such as verb placement display a general acquisition pattern irrespective of the learners’ L1. In addition, we find L1-specific research such as studies on the acquisition of case assignment for Dutch learners of German. The current study considers a range of Dutch, Finnish, and global textbooks for young adolescent learners (13–15 years) at a beginner level to identify the sequence in which they introduce simple and complex verbal structures, tense, case, and pronouns. Across all these domains, the results display mainly similarities. When differences are found, these are often related to language-specific characteristics of the L1 and the typological distance between the L1 and L2 German, namely when Finns learn German pronouns and separable verbs. Overall, the analyzed teaching materials introduce the majority of the grammar issues in accord with the acquisition sequences but more L1-specific empirical research is necessary. We argue that analyses of grammar sequences in textbooks can be used as input for both SLA/FLA empirical research and theory development, especially concerning the teachability of grammar.
References
Teaching materials
Aro, A., N. Ikonen, P. Jaakamo & T. Viholainen. 2011a. Studio Deutsch. Übungen 1. Helsinki, Finland: Otava.Search in Google Scholar
Aro, A., N. Ikonen, P. Jaakamo & T. Viholainen. 2011b. Studio Deutsch. Übungen 2. Helsinki, Finland: Otava.Search in Google Scholar
Burg Van Der, C., Ch. Divendal, G. Franssen & van der Ch. Linden. 2010. Salzgitter heute 1. (t)/havo/vwo. Textbuch+Arbeitsbuch A+B. Amersfoort, Netherlands: ThiemeMeulenhof.Search in Google Scholar
Busse, Ch., A. Kulmala, K. Launosalo, P. Litmanen & O. Verkama. 2012. Echt! Übungen 2. Helsinki, Finland: Otava.Search in Google Scholar
Custers, Ch., J. Heyse & B. Kirsten. 2008. Neue Kontakte. 1–2 vmbo thv. Textbuch+Arbeitsbuch A+B. Groningen, Netherlands: Noordhoff.Search in Google Scholar
Custers, Ch., J. Heyse & B. Kirsten. 2009. Neue Kontakte 3. havovwo. Textbuch+Arbeitsbuch A+B. Groningen, Netherlands: Noordhoff.Search in Google Scholar
Divendal, Ch., G. Franssen, I. Nützel, de E. Jager, Y. Van Rossum-Schweineberg & H. Karner. 2011. Salzgitter heute 2. (t)/havo/vwo. Textbuch+Arbeitsbuch A+B. Amersfoort, Netherlands: ThiemeMeulenhof.Search in Google Scholar
Esterl, U., E. Körner, A. Einhorn, A. Kubicka & E.M. Jenkins-Krumm. 2010. Team Deutsch 1. Tekstboek. Amsterdam, Netherlands/Antwerpen, Belgium: Intertaal. (originally publiced 2008, Klett).Search in Google Scholar
Esterl, U., E. Körner, A. Einhorn, A. Kubicka & E.M. Jenkins-Krumm. 2011. Team Deutsch 2. Tekstboek. Amsterdam, Netherlands/Antwerpen, Belgium: Intertaal. (originally publiced 2009, Klett).Search in Google Scholar
Funk, H., M. Koenig, U. Koithan & Th. Scherling. 2002. Geni@l. Deutsch als Fremdsprache für Jugendliche. Kursbuch A1+Arbeitsbuch. Berlin/München/Wien/Zürich/New York: Langenscheidt.Search in Google Scholar
Funk, H., M. Koenig, U. Koithan & Th. Scherling. 2003. Geni@l. Deutsch als Fremdsprache für Jugendliche. Kursbuch A2+Arbeitsbuch. Berlin/München/Wien/Zürich/New York: Langenscheidt.Search in Google Scholar
Haapala, M., H. Hübner, M. Seppänen, H. Syrjö & H. Toiviainen. 2012a. Super 8. Übungsbuch. Helsinki, Finland: Sanoma Pro.Search in Google Scholar
Haapala, M., H. Hübner, M. Seppänen, H. Syrjö & H. Toiviainen. 2012b. Super 9. Übungsbuch. Helsinki, Finland: Sanoma Pro.Search in Google Scholar
Harshagen, L., den Marcel Hollander, A. Krijgsman, M. Mitzschke, Y. Schyns, A. Vinzelberg & C. Wittenberg. 2007. TrabiTour. havo/vwo A–F. Houten, Netherlands: EPN.Search in Google Scholar
Kopp, G. & S. Büttner. 2004. Planet 1. Kursbuch für Jugendliche. Kursbuch+Arbeitsbuch. Ismaning, Germany: Hueber.Search in Google Scholar
Kopp, G., S. Büttner & J. Albert. 2005. Planet 2. Kursbuch für Jugendliche. Kursbuch+Arbeitsbuch. Ismaning, Germany: Hueber.Search in Google Scholar
Kulmala, A., K. Launosalo, P. Litmanen, D.H. Schmitz & O. Verkama. 2008. Echt! Übungen 1. Helsinki, Finland: Otava.Search in Google Scholar
Kuronen, K., M. Mononen, I. Halonen, S. Kuzay & C. Schröder. 2012a. Kompass Deutsch Neu 8. Übungen. Helsinki, Finland: Sanoma Pro.Search in Google Scholar
Kuronen, K., M. Mononen, I. Halonen & A. Wenke. 2012b. Kompass Deutsch Neu 7. Übungen. Helsinki, Finland: Sanoma Pro.Search in Google Scholar
Meijvogel, E., G. Baas & E. Lehrner-Te Lindert. 2007. Na Klar! 1 havo/vwo. Textbuch+Arbeitsbuch. ’s-Hertogenbosch, Netherlands: Malmberg.Search in Google Scholar
Meijvogel, E., G. Baas & E. Lehrner-Te Lindert. 2008. Na Klar! 2 havo. Textbuch+Arbeitsbuch. ’s-Hertogenbosch, Neherlands: Malmberg.Search in Google Scholar
Verhoeven, S. & M. Zwahlen. 2003. Mach ’s gut. Basisvorming. Deel 1 havo/vwo en vmbo-T. Tekstboek+werkboek. Baarn, Netherlands: NijghVersluys.Search in Google Scholar
Verhoeven, S., F. Linnemann & van der Hendrika Wal. 2004. Mach ’s gut. Basisvorming. Deel 2 havo/vwo. Tekstboek+werkboek. Baarn, Netherlands: NijghVersluys.Search in Google Scholar
Secondary sources
Abel, B. 1988. Wie kulturspezifisch sind regionale Lehrwerke? Die regionalen Ausgaben des Lehrwerks Deutsch konkret. Jahrbuch Deutsch als Fremdsprache 14. 238–258.Search in Google Scholar
Aguado, K. 2012. Progression, Erwerbssequenzen und Chunks. Zur Lehr- und Lernbarkeit von Grammatik im Fremdsprachenunterricht. AkDaF Rundbrief 64. 7–22.Search in Google Scholar
Ballestracci, S. 2005. Zum Daf-Erwerb ausgewählter grammatischer Strukturen der deutschen Sprache bei italophonen Studierenden der Pisaner Fakultät der Lingue e Letteratura Straniere. Pisa: Department for Linguistics.Search in Google Scholar
Bardel, C. & Y. Falk. 2007. The role of the second language in third language acquisition: The case of Germanic syntax. Second Language Research 23. 459–484.10.1177/0267658307080557Search in Google Scholar
Becker, A. 2005. The semantic knowledge base for the acquisition of negation and the acquisition of finiteness. In H. Hendriks Ed., The structure of learner varieties, 263–314. Berlin, New York: De Gruyter.10.1515/9783110909593.263Search in Google Scholar
Boss, B. 2004. Wann ich Freizeit habe, ich koche gern. Zum Erwerb der deutschen Inversion und Nebensatzwortstellung durch australische Studierende. Deutsch als Fremdsprache 41(1). 28–32.10.37307/j.2198-2430.2004.01.06Search in Google Scholar
Clahsen, H., J. Meisel & M. Pienemann. 1983. Deutsch als Zweitsprache. Der Spracherwerb ausländischer Arbeiter. Tübingen/Germany: Narr.Search in Google Scholar
CVE (2012). Moderne vreemde talen VWO. Syllabus Centraal examen 2014. http://www.examenblad.nl/examenstof/syllabus-2014-moderne-vreemde/2014/f=/moderne_vreemde_talen_def_versie_vwo_2014.pdf (Accessed 1 June 2015).Search in Google Scholar
Diehl, E. 1999. Schulischer Grammatikerwerb under der Lupe. Das Genfer DiGS-Projekt. Bulletin suisse de linguistique appliquee 70. 7–26.Search in Google Scholar
Diehl, E., H. Christen, S. Leuenberger, I. Pelvat & Th. Studer. 2000. Grammatikunterricht: Alles für der Katz? Untersuchungen zum Zweitspracherwerb Deutsch. Tübingen, Germany: Niemeyer.Search in Google Scholar
Dimroth, Ch. & S. Haberzettl. 2007. Je:Alterdesto besser. Lernen Kinder Deutsch als Zweitsprache schneller als Deutsch als Erstsprache?. In B. Ahrenholz, U. Bredel, W. Klein, M. Rost-Roth & R. Skiba (eds.), Empirische Forschung und Theoriebildung. Beiträge aus der Soziolinguistik, Gesproche-Sprache-Forschung und Zweitspracherwerbsforschung, 227–239. Berlin Lang.Search in Google Scholar
Draaijer, E. & M. Reen. 1994. Mondeling geproduceerde datief- en accusatiefvormen bij leerders van Duits. Levende Talen 492. 415–420.Search in Google Scholar
Ellis, C., S. Conradie & K. Huddlestone. 2012. The acquisition of grammatical gender in L2 German by learners with Afrikaans, English or Italian as their L1. Stellenbosch Papers in Linguistics 41. 17–27.10.5774/41-0-131Search in Google Scholar
Ellis, R. 1989. Are classroom and naturalistic acquisition the same? A study of the classroom acquisition of German word order rules. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 11. 305–328.10.1017/S0272263100008159Search in Google Scholar
Ellis, R. 2015. Researching acquisition sequences: Idealization and de-idealization in SLA. Language Learning 65. 181–209.10.1111/lang.12089Search in Google Scholar
Fandrych, Ch. & E. Tschirner. 2007. Korpuslinguistik und Deutsch als Fremdpsrache. Ein Perspektivenwechsel. Deutsch als Fremdsprache 44. 195–204.10.37307/j.2198-2430.2007.04.02Search in Google Scholar
Finnish National Board of Education. 2004. National core curriculum for basic education. http://www.oph.fi/download/47671_core_curricula_basic_education_1.pdf [12.12.2015].Search in Google Scholar
Funk, H. & M. Koenig. 1991. Grammatik Lehren und Lernen. Berlin: Langenscheid.10.37307/j.2194-1823.1991.05.14Search in Google Scholar
Goldschneider, J.M. & R. DeKeyser. 2001. Explaining the “natural order of L2 morpheme acquisition” in English. A meta-analysis of multiple determinants. Language Learning 51. 1–50.10.1111/1467-9922.00147Search in Google Scholar
Graaff, R. de & A. Housen. 2009. Investigating the effects and effectiveness of L2 instruction. In M. Long & C. Doughty (eds.), The Handbook of Language Teaching, 726–755. Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell.10.1002/9781444315783.ch38Search in Google Scholar
Guerrettaz, A.M. & B. Johnston. 2013. Materials in the classroom ecology. The Modern Language Journal 97. 779–796.10.1111/j.1540-4781.2013.12027.xSearch in Google Scholar
Haberzettl, S. 2001. Der Erwerb der Verbstellungsregeln in der Zweitsprache Deutsch durch Kinder mit russischer und türkischer Muttersprache. Tübingen, Germany: Max Niemeyer Verlag.Search in Google Scholar
Haberzettl, S. 2006. Progression im ungesteuerten Erwerb und im gesteuerten Erwerb. In B. Ahrenholz Ed., Kinder mit Migrationshintergrund. Spracherwerb und Fördermöglichkeiten, 203–220. Freiburg: Fillibach.Search in Google Scholar
Jordens, P. 1983. Das deutsche Kasussystem im Fremdspracherwerb: Eine psycholinguistische und fehleranalytische Untersuchung zum interimsprachlichen Kasusmarkierungssystem niederländisch- und englischsprachiger Deutschstudierender. Tübingen, Germany: Narr.Search in Google Scholar
Jordens, P., K. de Bot & H. Trapman. 1989. Linguistic aspects of regression in German case marking. Studies in second language qcquisition 11. 179–204.10.1017/S0272263100000607Search in Google Scholar
Karlsson, F. & A. Chesterman. 1999. Finnish: Essential Grammar. London: Routledge.Search in Google Scholar
Klein, W. 1984. Zweitspracherwerb. Eine Einführung. Frankfurt am Main: Hain.Search in Google Scholar
Klein, W. & Ch. Dimroth. 2003. Der ungesteuerte zweitspracherwerb Erwchsener.: Ein Überblick über den Forschungsstand. In U. Maas & U. Mehlem (eds.), Qualitätsanforderungen für die Sprachförderung im Rahmen der Integration von Zuwanderern, 127–161. Osnabrück: IMIS.Search in Google Scholar
Klein Gunnewiek, L. 2000. Sequenzen und Konsequenzen. Zur Entwicklung niederländischer Lerner im Deutschen als Fremdsprache. Amsterdam: Rodopi.10.1163/9789004487413Search in Google Scholar
Koeppel, R. 2010. Deutsch als Fremdsprache: Spracherwerblich reflektierte Unterrichts- praxis. Baltmannsweiler: Schneider Verlag Hohengehren.Search in Google Scholar
Krashen, S. 1985. The input hypothesis: Issues and implications. London: Longman.Search in Google Scholar
Kwakernaak, E. 1996. Grammatik im Fremdsprachenunterricht. Geschichte und Innovationsmöglichkeiten am Beispiel Deutsch als Fremdsprache in den Niederlanden. Amsterdam: Rodopi.Search in Google Scholar
Kwakernaak, E. 2007. Grammatikprogression und der GER. Babylonia 4(07). 84–90.Search in Google Scholar
Lightbown, P.M. 1998. The importance of timing in focus on form. In C. Doughty & J. Williams (eds.), Focus on Form in Classroom Second Language Acquisition, 177–196. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Search in Google Scholar
Long, M.H. 1990. The least a second language acquisition theory needs to explain. TESOL Quarterly 24. 649–666.10.2307/3587113Search in Google Scholar
Lowie, W & M. Verspoor. 2015. Variability and variation in second language acquisition orders: A dynamic reevaluation. Language Learning 65. 63–88.10.1111/lang.12093Search in Google Scholar
Maijala, M. 2010. Grammatische Unterrichtsinhalte in Lehrwerken Deutsch als Fremdsprache. Zielsprache Deutsch 3. 17–44.Search in Google Scholar
Maijala, M. & M. Tammenga-Helmantel. 2017. Grammar exercise types in Dutch, Finnish and global teaching materials for German. The Language Learning Journal. DOI: 10.1080/09571736.2017.130944910.1080/09571736.2017.1309449Search in Google Scholar
Meisel, J., H. Clahsen & M. Pienemann. 1981. On determining developmental stages in second language acquisition. Studies in second language acquisition 3. 109–135.10.1017/S0272263100004137Search in Google Scholar
Meriläinen, L. 2010. Syntactic transfer in the written English of Finnish students: Persistent grammar error or acceptable lingua franca English?. Apples – Journal of Applied Language Studies 4/1. 51–64.Search in Google Scholar
Murakami, A. 2013. A dynamic approach to the longitudinal development of L2 English grammatical morphemes based on a learner corpus. Paper presented at EUROSLA 23, August 2013, Amsterdam.Search in Google Scholar
Norris, J. & L. Ortega. 2000. Effectiveness of L2 instruction: A research synthesis and quantitative meta-analyses. Language learning 50. 417–528.10.1111/0023-8333.00136Search in Google Scholar
Nyqvist, E.-L. (2013). Species och artikelbruk i finskspråkiga grundskoleelevers inlärarsvenska. En longitudinell undersökning i årskurserna 7–9. Dissertation University of Turku. https://www.doria.fi/handle/10024/91519Search in Google Scholar
Oates, T. 2014. Why textbooks count. A policy paper. Paper, University of Cambridge.Search in Google Scholar
Pfaff, C. 1984. On input and residual L1 transfer effects in Turkish and Greek children’s German. In R.W. Andersen Ed., Second languages. A cross-linguistic perspective, 271–298. Rowley, MA: Newbury.Search in Google Scholar
Pienemann, M. 1984. Psychological constraints on the teachability of languages. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 6. 186–214.10.1017/S0272263100005015Search in Google Scholar
Pienemann, M. 1987. Determining the influence of instruction on L2 speech processing. Australian Review of Applied Linguistics 10. 83–113.10.1075/aral.10.2.07pieSearch in Google Scholar
Pienemann, M. 1989. “Is language teachable?” Psycholinguistic experiments and hypotheses. Applied Linguistics 10. 52–79.10.1093/applin/10.1.52Search in Google Scholar
Pienemann, M. & G. Hakansson. 1999. A unified approach towards the development of Swedish as L2: A processability account. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 21(3). 383–420.10.1017/S0272263199003022Search in Google Scholar
Pienemann, M., M. Johnston & G. Brindley. 1988. Constructing an acquisition-based procedure for second language assessment. Studies in second language acquisition 10. 217–243.10.1017/S0272263100007324Search in Google Scholar
Pienemann, M. & J. U. Kessler (eds.). 2011. Studying processability theory: An introductory textbook, vol. 1. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing.10.1075/palart.1.01devSearch in Google Scholar
Ringbom, H. 1987. The Role of the First Language in Foreign Language Learning. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.Search in Google Scholar
Ringbom, H. 2007. Cross-linguistic similarity in foreign language learning. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.10.21832/9781853599361Search in Google Scholar
Sajavaara, K. & J. Lehtonen (eds.). 1977. Constrastive papers. Jyväskylä Contrastive Studies 4. Jyväskylä: University of Jyväskylä.Search in Google Scholar
Spada, N. & Y. Tomita. 2010. Interactions between type of instruction and type of language feature: A meta-analysis. Language learning 60. 263–308.10.1111/j.1467-9922.2010.00562.xSearch in Google Scholar
Tammenga-Helmantel, M. 2012. Zur Bestimmung des Stellenwerts von Grammatik in DaF-Lehrwerken – Am Beispiel von Schulbüchern in der niederländischen Unterstufe. Deutsch als Fremdsprache 49. 67–77.10.37307/j.2198-2430.2012.02.02Search in Google Scholar
Tomlinson, B. 2012. Materials development for foreign language learning and teaching. Language Teaching 45. 143–179.10.1017/S0261444811000528Search in Google Scholar
Tschirner, E. 1996. Scope and sequence: Rethinking beginning foreign language instruction. The Modern Language Journal 80(1). 1–14.10.1111/j.1540-4781.1996.tb01132.xSearch in Google Scholar
Tschirner, E. 1999. Lernergrammatiken und Grammatikprogression. In B. Skibitzki & B. Wotjak (eds.), Linguistik und Deutsch als Fremdsprache. Festschrift für Gerhard Helbig, 227–240. Tübingen: Niemeyer.Search in Google Scholar
Vainikka, A. & M. Young-Scholten. 1996. Studies on Language Acquisition: Acquisition of German: Introducing Organic Grammar. Berlin: De Gruyter.Search in Google Scholar
Verspoor, M., M. Schmid & X. Xu. 2012. A dynamic usage based perspective on L2 writing. Journal of Second Language Writing 21. 239–263.10.1016/j.jslw.2012.03.007Search in Google Scholar
Winkler, S. 2011. Progressionsfolgen im DaF-Unterricht. Eine Interventionsstudie zur Vermittlung der deutschen (S)OV-Wortstellung. In N. Hahn & Th. Roelcke (eds.),Materialien Deutsch als Fremdsprache Band 85 (FaDaF-Jahrestagung Freiburg/Br. 2010). Göttingen, Germany: Universitätsverlag Göttingen.Search in Google Scholar
Winkler, S. 2012. Für eine psycholinguistisch orientierte Fremdsprachendidaktik. Anmerkungen auf Grundlage einer exemplarischen Studie zum Negationserwerb im Deutschen. Manuscript, University of Osnabrück, Germany.Search in Google Scholar
Zhang, X. & J.P. Lantolf. 2015. Natural or artificial: Is the route of L2 development teachable?. Language Learning 65. 152–180.10.1111/lang.12094Search in Google Scholar
© 2018 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston
Articles in the same Issue
- Frontmatter
- Receptive vocabulary size and its relationship to EFL language skills
- Teasing out the role of age and exposure in EFL learners’ lexical profiles: A comparison of children and adults
- Sequences in German grammar teaching: An analysis of Dutch, Finnish, and global textbooks
- Exploring patterns of article use by advanced Korean learners of English and Spanish
Articles in the same Issue
- Frontmatter
- Receptive vocabulary size and its relationship to EFL language skills
- Teasing out the role of age and exposure in EFL learners’ lexical profiles: A comparison of children and adults
- Sequences in German grammar teaching: An analysis of Dutch, Finnish, and global textbooks
- Exploring patterns of article use by advanced Korean learners of English and Spanish