Different L1s, similar paths? Motion event encoding by L1 Spanish and L1 Danish L2 users of German

The present paper analyzes how L2 German users with different levels of proficiency and a Vlanguage (Spanish) and an S-language (Danish) as L1 express the path component in the Slanguage German. Building on previous research on the encoding of motion events in an L2 (e.g. Cadierno 2004 & 2010, Filipović & Vidaković 2010, Jessen 2014, Treffers-Daller & Tidball 2016), this study sheds light on how the typological affiliation of the L1 and the level of proficiency in the L2 influence the characteristics of path encoding in L2 German. Additionally, it seeks to identify developmental patterns in both groups of L2 users. To this aim, we analyzed written descriptions of 42 video clips depicting 14 different types of paths. Data were collected from 50 L1 Spanish and 43 L1 Danish users of L2 German (from A2 to C2 level), as well as from 33 native speakers of German, Spanish, and Danish. Our analysis extends beyond the traditional aspect of information locus and encompasses three additional key aspects of path encoding in German: the constructions for encoding path, the semantic, formal, and functional differentiation of path encoding devices, and case marking in prepositional phrases. The effect of the L1, the users’ group (L1 vs. L2), and the proficiency in the L2 were statistically tested using GLMM models. The quantitative analysis was complemented by an in-depth qualitative analysis. The results show that the typological classification of the L1 alone does not fully explain the characteristics of path encoding in L2 German and the challenges associated with it. Both L2 groups show similar locus and constructional preferences for path encoding. Furthermore, they do not differ significantly in terms of errors related to the formal and/or functional distinction of path encoding devices and to case marking in PPs. Although the influence of V-language Spanish is suggested by a more frequent use of path-encoding verbs and errors in the semantics of path devices, the differences between the two L2 groups are not statistically significant at all levels of proficiency. Similarly, the typological proximity between Danish and German is no guarantee that the encoding of the path component will proceed without obstacles, since intratypological differences, e.g. regarding the construction inventory, also pose challenges for L1 Danish L2 users of German. L2 German proficiency proves to be more influential than L1 typological classification, with both L2 groups improving their alignment with the German system in all aspects of path encoding analyzed as the proficiency increases. The data analysis also provides evidence for common features of learner varieties already observed in users of other L2s, including a preference for prepositional phrases and the frequent use of the verb gehen (‘to go’) (e.g. Bernini et al. 2006, Goschler 2019, Jessen 2014, Park 2008, Yılmaz, 2018). Based on the results presented, the paper concludes with a discussion on the implications for teaching motion event constructions in L2 German, offering options that extend beyond the traditional focus on the semantics of prepositions and case marking.