Theoretical and methodological considerations for a robust evaluation of the Linguistic Proximity Model

Abstract

When we think of the debates surrounding linguistic transfer in L3 acquisition, one of the most prominent discussions concerns whether transfer occurs in a wholesale fashion or whether it is property-by-property. One such model is the Linguistic Proximity Model (LPM, Mykhaylyk et al., 2015; Westergaard et al., 2017; Westergaard, 2021), which maintains that transfer is property-by-property, with what Westergaard refers to as Full Transfer Potential (FTP). Westergaard injects the notion of complexity at each stage of development and recognizes the need to determine how a range of variables drive outcomes across these different stages. With that said, there are a set of points in the proposal that we believe are short of explanatory logic and will benefit from further consideration; we focus on two here. The first regards the need to go beyond post-hoc explanations of non-facilitative transfer via a commitment to a testable, proposal for when the LPM predicts such transfer will occur. The second relates to the current trend of using existing data to support property-by-property versus wholesale transfer. We contend that this application of existing data is an unsound practice because these data are in fact compatible with multiple theoretical accounts.