Constraints on Second Language Acquisition of English Subject--Verb Agreement

2009 ◽  
Author(s):  
Henrietta Lempert
Keyword(s):  
Second Language ◽  
Second Language Acquisition ◽  
Language Acquisition ◽  
Verb Agreement ◽  
English Subject

scholarly journals The Interpretability of Features in Second Language Acquisition: Evidence from Null and Postverbal Subjects in L2 English

2013 ◽  
Vol 13 (2) ◽  
pp. 323-365 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alexandra Prentza ◽  
Ianthi-Maria Tsimpli
Keyword(s):  
Second Language ◽  
Second Language Acquisition ◽  
Language Acquisition ◽  
L2 Acquisition ◽  
English Grammar ◽  
Verb Agreement ◽  
Parameter Resetting ◽  
L1 English

We examine the microparameters of null and postverbal subjects in the Greek L1/English L2 interlanguage, exploring the role of interpretability in interlanguage representations. Our results suggest that while uninterpretable features are inaccessible in L2 acquisition, interpretable features are available and play a compensatory role. Although the abstract L1 properties of subject-verb agreement seem to transfer to the L2 representation, the effects appear scattered and transfer is not direct. We thus suggest that Greek-learner L2 English grammar exhibits non-random optionality in the properties of null and postverbal subjects, regulated by parameter-resetting (feature re-valuation) which is, however, neither the L1 (Greek) nor the target L2 (English) option.

Second language acquisition: from theory to data

2000 ◽  
Vol 16 (1) ◽  
pp. 27-43 ◽  
Author(s):  
Louise M. Jansen
Keyword(s):  
Second Language ◽  
Second Language Acquisition ◽  
Language Acquisition ◽  
Verb Second ◽  
Data Description ◽  
Verb Agreement

Clahsen's (1988) and Clahsen and Muysken's (1989) claim that subject–verb agreement and verb-second are unrelated in the acquisition of German second language acquisition (SLA) has met a number of counterpositions; for example: Pienemann and Johnston (1987) and Pienemann (1988; 1998), Jordens (1988), Eubank (1992; 1994) and Vainikka and Young-Scholten (1994; 1996). The conflicting claims source essentially the same data. The presentation and analysis of these data is scrutinized and a number of inconsistencies and methodological questions are identified. The paper argues that, when it comes to underpinning theoretical claims, more rigour in data description should be exercised.

Finiteness and verb placement in second language acquisition

2000 ◽  
Vol 16 (4) ◽  
pp. 355-381 ◽  
Author(s):  
Teresa Parodi
Keyword(s):  
Second Language ◽  
Second Language Acquisition ◽  
Language Acquisition ◽  
Universal Grammar ◽  
L2 Acquisition ◽  
Verb Agreement ◽  
Learning Tasks ◽  
Verb Placement ◽  
New Perspective ◽  
L1 Acquisition

The relationship between finiteness and verb placement has often been studied in both first language (L1) and second language (L2) acquisition and many studies claim that, while there is a correlation between finiteness and verb placement in L1 acquisition, these areas represent separate learning tasks in second language acquisition (SLA). The purpose of this article is to provide a new perspective on this elusive question, analysing data from speakers of Romance languages learning German as a second language (L2). Verbs are classified as thematic and nonthematic and analysed with respect to overt subject–verb agreement and verb placement as seen in negation patterns. A clear association between subject–verb agreement and verb placement is seen for nonthematic verbs: they are in most cases morphologically finite and show the syntactical distribution of finite verbs. These verbs are interpreted as a spell-out of agreement features, differing both from the speakers' L1 and from the L2, but conforming to a universal grammar (UG) option.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document