Linguistic distance and crosslinguistic influence: Commentary

This commentary addresses three issues that arise in the context of linguistic distance and crosslinguistic differences, namely how linguistic distance is defined, how linguistic distance translates into linguistic knowledge, and what the relationship is between linguistic distance and crosslinguistic influence. As far as distance is concerned, articles in this issue differ as to whether they adopt external or internal measures of language distance, raising the question of how externally defined language relatedness translates into the internalized grammar of an individual learner. As for crosslinguistic differences, there is an assumption in some of the articles that the more different/typologically apart the languages are, the harder the second language (L2) will be to acquire and the greater the prospect of first language (L1) transfer. In contrast, several articles show that typological closeness does not necessarily facilitate acquisition, while distance does not impede it. Discrepancies and commonalities between the various approaches are discussed.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Second language Research
Published
2025-11-11
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1177/02676583251393995
Citations
1
Primary Topic
Categorization, perception, and language
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
2.12
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Linguistic distance and crosslinguistic influence: Commentary

Lydia White
1 citations
Second language Research
Categorization, perception, and language
2.12
article

Linguistic distance and crosslinguistic influence: Commentary

Lydia White
article en
1 citations

Abstract

This commentary addresses three issues that arise in the context of linguistic distance and crosslinguistic differences, namely how linguistic distance is defined, how linguistic distance translates into linguistic knowledge, and what the relationship is between linguistic distance and crosslinguistic influence. As far as distance is concerned, articles in this issue differ as to whether they adopt external or internal measures of language distance, raising the question of how externally defined language relatedness translates into the internalized grammar of an individual learner. As for crosslinguistic differences, there is an assumption in some of the articles that the more different/typologically apart the languages are, the harder the second language (L2) will be to acquire and the greater the prospect of first language (L1) transfer. In contrast, several articles show that typological closeness does not necessarily facilitate acquisition, while distance does not impede it. Discrepancies and commonalities between the various approaches are discussed.

Second language Research
McGill University (CA)
Openalex Percentile: Top 10%
Categorization, perception, and language
2.12
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Linguistic distance and crosslinguistic influence: Commentary — Lydia White · Second language Research (2025) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS