Hostname: page-component-669899f699-tpknm Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-04-25T18:51:20.173Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Adult instructed SLA of English subject properties

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 June 2016

Elisabet Pladevall Ballester
Elisabet Pladevall Ballester*
Affiliation:
Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The acquisition of subject properties in adult instructed L2 English by Spanish speakers still constitutes an area of difficulty, especially in situations of minimal exposure where explicit teaching of the syntax of subjects rarely occurs. By exploring the L2 learners’ intuitions and corrections of grammatical and ungrammatical sentences containing subject properties, this article contributes new cross-sectional data from adult learners at three stages of L2 development: beginners, intermediate, and advanced groups. The data show initial L1 transfer and subsequent developmental progress. Yet results are clearly not target-like even among advanced learners, which suggests that adult learners do not resort to parameter-resetting in instructed L2A and necessarily apply general learning mechanisms to adopt L2 structures with feature specifications different from those of their L1.

Résumé

Résumé

L’acquisition des propriétés des sujets par des hispanophones adultes se montre toujours difficile, surtout dans des situations d’exposition minimale où l’instruction explicite de la syntaxe des sujets a rarement lieu. En explorant les intuitions et les corrections des phrases grammaticales et agrammaticales chez les apprenants L2, cet article apporte de nouvelles données d’apprenants adultes à trois stades du développement de la L2: les apprenants débutants, les apprenants intermédiaires et les apprenants avancés. Les données révèlent un transfert L1 initial, suivi de progrès développemental. Cependant, les résultats indiquent que l’acquisition n’est pas optimale, même chez les apprenants avancés, ce qui suggère que les apprenants adultes n’accèdent pas le changement des paramètres pendant l’instruction L2, et qu’ils appliquent des mécanismes d’apprentissage généraux afin d’adopter des structures L2 avec des spécifications de traits différents de ceux de leur L1.

Keywords

adult instructed L2Aparameter resettingPartial Access to UGnull subjectinstruction langue seconde pour adulteschangement des paramètresaccès partiel à la grammaire universelleparamètre du sujet nulexposition minimale
Type
Articles
Information
Canadian Journal of Linguistics/Revue canadienne de linguistique , Volume 58 , Issue 3 , November 2013 , pp. 465 - 486
Copyright
Copyright © Canadian Linguistic Association 2013

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Alexiadou, Artemis and Anagnostopoulou, Elena. 1998. Parametrizing AGR: Word order, V-movement and EPP checking. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 16:491–540.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dalila, Ayoun. 1999. Verb movement in French L2 acquisition. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition 2:103–125.Google Scholar
Chomsky, Noam. 1981. Lectures on government and binding. Dordrecht: Foris Publications.Google Scholar
Ellis, Rod. 2009. Measuring implicit and explicit knowledge of a second language. In Implicit and explicit knowledge in second language learning, testing and teaching, ed. Ellis, Rod, Loewen, Shawn, Elder, Catherine, Erlam, Rosemary, Philp, Jenefer, and Reinders, Hayo, 31–65. Toronto: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
Isabelli, Casilde. 2004. The acquisition of the null subject parameter properties in SLA: Some effects of positive evidence in a naturalistic learning context. Hispania 87:150–162.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hawkins, Roger. 2005. Revisiting wh-movement: The availability of an uninterpretable [wh] feature in interlanguage grammars. In Proceedings of the 7th Generative Approaches to Second Language Acquisition Conference (GASLA 2004), ed. Dekydtspotter, Laurent, A.ISprouse, Rex, and Liljestrand, Audrey, 124–137. Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press.Google Scholar
Hawkins, Roger and Yuet-hung Chan, Cecilia. 1997. The partial availability of Universal Grammar in second language acquisition: The failed functional features hypothesis. Second Language Research 13:187–226.Google Scholar
Hawins, Roger and Hattori, Hajime. 2006. Interpretation of English multiple vWi-questions by Japanese speakers: A missing uninterpretable feature account. Second Language Research 22:269–301.Google Scholar
Hilles, Sharon. 1991. Access to Universal Grammar in second language acquisition. In Point counterpoint: Universal Grammar in the second language, ed. Eubank, Lynn, 305–338. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Jaeggli, Osvaldo. 1982. Topics in Romance syntax. Dordrecht: Foris.Google Scholar
Jaeggli, Osvaldo and Hyams, Nina. 1988. Morphological uniformity and the setting of the null-subject parameter. In Proceedings of the 18th Annual Meeting of the North East Linguistic Society (NELS), ed. Blevins, James and Carter, Juli, 238–253. Amherst, MA: Graduate Linguistic Student Association (GLSA).Google Scholar
Jaeggli, Osvaldo and Safir, Kenneth. 1989. The null subject parameter and parametric theory. In The null subject parameter, ed. Jaeggli, Osvaldo and Safir, Kenneth, 1–44. Dordrecht: Kluwer.Google Scholar
Lakshmanan, Usha. 1991. Morphological uniformity and null subjects in child second language acquisition. In Point counterpoint. Universal Grammar in the second language, ed. Eubank, Lynn, 389–410. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lakshmanan, Usha. 1994. Universal Grammar in child second language acquisition. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Liceras, Juana Muñoz. 1989. On some Properties of the ‘pro-drop’ parameter: Looking for missing subjects in non-native Spanish. In Linguistic perspectives on second language acquisition, ed. Gass, Susan M. and Schachter, Jacquelyn, 109–133. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Liceras, Juana Muñoz. 1996. La adquisición de las lenguas segundas y la gramática universal. Madrid: Editorial Sintesis.Google Scholar
Liceras, Juana Muñoz. 1998. On the specific nature of non-native grammars: The whys, whens, wheres and … hows. In Issues in second language acquisition and learning, ed. Fernández-González, Juan and Santiago-Guervós, José de, 58–96. Valencia: Universitat de Valencia Servei de Publicacions.Google Scholar
Liceras, Juana Muñoz. 2003. Monosyllabic place holders in early child language and the L1/L2 ‘Fundamental Difference Hypothesis’. In Theory, practice and acquisition: Papers from the 6th Linguistics Symposium and the 5th Conference on the Acquisition of Spanish and Portuguese, ed. Kempchinsky, Paula and Pineros, Carlos-Eduardo, 258–283. Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press.Google Scholar
Liceras, Juana Muñoz and Díaz, Lourdes. 1999. Topic-drop versus pro-drop: Null subjects and pronominal subjects in the Spanish L2 of Chinese, English, French, German and Japanese speakers. Second Language Research 15:1–40.Google Scholar
Liceras, Juana Muñoz, Fernández-Fuertes, Raquel, and Pérez-Tattam, Rocío. 2008. Null and overt subjects in the developing grammars (L1 English/L1 Spanish) of two bilingual twins. In A portrait of the young in the new multilingual Spain, ed. Pérez, Carmen, Bel, Aurora, and Juan, Maria, 111–135. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
Lozano, Cristóbal. 2002. The interpretation of overt and null pronouns in non-native Spanish. Durham Working Papers in Linguistics 8:53–66.Google Scholar
Lozano, Cristóbal. 2006. Focus and split intransitivity: The acquisition of word order alternations in non-native Spanish. Second Language Research 22:145–187.Google Scholar
Manzini, M. Rita and Roussou, Anna. 2000. A minimalist theory of A-movement and control. Lingua 110:409–147.Google Scholar
Mobaraki, Mohsen, Vainikka, Anne, and Young-Scholten, Martha. 2008. The status of subjects in child L2 English. In Current trends in child second language acquisition: A generative perspective, ed. Haznedar, Belma and Gavruseva, Elena, 55–80. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Montrul, Silvina A. 2004. The acquisition of Spanish: Morphosyntactic development in monolingual and bilingual L1 acquisition and adult L2 acquisition. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Montrul, Silvina A. 2004. Psycholinguistic evidence for split intransitivity in Spanish second language acquisition. Applied Psycholinguistics 25:239–267.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Montrul, Silvina A. and Rodriguez Louro, Celeste. 2006. Beyond the syntax of the Null Subject Parameter. In The acquisition of syntax in Romance languages, ed. Torrent, Vicenç and Escobar, Linda, 401–418. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Ordόñez, Francisco and Treviño, Estela. 1999. Left dislocated subjects and the pro-drop parameter: A case study of Spanish. Lingua 107:39–68.Google Scholar
Park, Hyeson. 2004. A minimalist approach to null subjects and objects in second language acquisition. Second Language Research 20:1–32.Google Scholar
Pesetsky, David and Torrego, Esther. 2001. T-to-C Movement: Causes and consequences. In Ken Hale: A life in language, ed. Kenstowicz, Michael, 326–355. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Pesetsky, David and Torrego, Esther. 2004. Tense, case, and the nature of syntactic categories. In The syntax of time, ed. Guéron, Jacqueline and Lecarme, Jacqueline, 495–538. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Phinney, Marianne. 1987. The pro-drop parameter in second language acquisition. In Parameter setting, ed. Roeper, Thomas and Williams, Edwin, 221–238. Dordrecht: Reidel.Google Scholar
Pladevall Ballester, Elisabet. 2010. Child L2 development of syntactic and discourse properties of Spanish subjects. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition 13:185–0216.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pladevall Ballester, Elisabet. 2012. Child L2 English acquisition of subject properties in an immersion bilingual context. Second Language Research 28:217–241.Google Scholar
Platzack, Christer. 2004. Agreement and the person phrase hypothesis. Working Papers in Scandinavian Syntax 73: 83–112.Google Scholar
Ritter, Elizabeth. 1995. On the syntactic category of pronouns and agreement. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 13:405–443.Google Scholar
Rizzi, Luiggi. 1982. Issues in Italian syntax. Dordrecht: Foris.Google Scholar
Rizzi, Luiggi. 1986. Null objects in Italian and the theory of pro. Linguistic Inquiry 17:501–557.Google Scholar
Rothman, Jason and Iverson, Michael. 2007a. Input type and parameter resetting: Is naturalistic input necessary? International Review of Applied Linguistics 45:285–319.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rothman, Jason and Iverson, Michael. 2007b. The syntax of null subjects in L2 Spanish: Comparing two L2 populations under different exposure. Revista Española de Lingüística Aplicada/Spanish Journal of Applied Linguistics 20: 185–214.Google Scholar
Saflr, Kenneth. 1982. Inflection, government and inversion. The Linguistic Review 1:417–467.Google Scholar
Saflr, Kenneth. 1985. Syntactic chains. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Schwartz, Bonnie D. 2003. Child L2 acquisition: Paving the Way. In Proceedings of the 27th Annual Boston University Conference of Language Development (BUCLD), ed. Beachley, Barbara, Brown, Amanda, and Colin, Frances, 26–50. Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press.Google Scholar
Schwartz, Bonnie D. 2004. Why child L2 acquisition? In Proceedings of Generative Approaches to Language Acquisition (GALA) 2003, vol. 1, ed. Kampen, Jacqueline van and Baauw, Sergio, 47–66. Utrecht: LOT (Landelijke Onderzoekschool Taalwetenschap) Publications.Google Scholar
Schwartz, Bonnie D. and Sprouse, Rex. 2000. When syntactic theories evolve: Consequences for L2 acquisition research. In Second language acquisition and linguistic theory, ed. Archibald, John, 156–186. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Slabakova, Rouymana. 2006a. Is there a critical period for semantics? Second Language Research 22:302–338.Google Scholar
Slabakova, Rouymana. 2006b. Learnability in the L2 acquisition of semantics: A bidirectional study of a semantic parameter. Second Language Research 22: 498–523.Google Scholar
Tsimpli, Ianthi-Maria and Dimitrakopoulou, Maria. 2007. The Interpretability Hypothesis: Evidence from wVi-interrogatives in second language acquisition. Second Language Research, 23:215–242.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tsimpli, lanthi-Maria and Mastropavlou, Maria. 2007. Feature interpretability in L2 acquisition and SLI: Greek clitics and determiners. In The role of formal features in second language acquisition, ed. Liceras, Juana, Zobl, Helmut, and Goodluck, Helen, 143–183. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Tsimpli, Ianthi-Maria and Roussou, Anna. 1991. Parameter Resetting in L2? University College London Working Papers in Linguistics 3:149–169.Google Scholar
Wakabayashi, Shigenori. 2002. The acquisition of non-null subjects in English: A minimalist account. Second Language Research 18:28–71.Google Scholar
White, Lydia. 1985. The ‘pro-drop’ parameter in adult second language acquisition. Language Learning 35:47–62.Google Scholar
White, Lydia. 1986. Implications of parametric variation for adult second language acquisition: An investigation of the ‘pro-drop’ parameter. In Experimental approaches to second language acquisition, ed. Cook, Vivian, 55–72. Oxford: Pergamon Press.Google Scholar
White, Lydia. 2003. Second language acquisition and Universal Grammar. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar