Interaction and syntactic priming: English L2 speakers' production of dative constructions

Studies in Second Language Acquisition

Volumn 28, Issue 2, 2006, Pages 179-207

  McDonough, Kim ^a  

^a NORTHERN ARIZONA UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 33646059188     PISSN: 02722631     EISSN: 14701545     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1017/S0272263106060098     Document Type: Article

References (106)

1. Arnold, E., Wasow, T., Losongco, A., & Ginstrom, R. (2000). The effect of structural complexity and discourse status on constituent ordering. Language, 76, 28-55.
2. Ayoun, D. (2001). The role of negative and positive feedback in the second language acquisition of the passé composé and imparfait. Modern Language Journal, 85, 226-243.
3. Bley-Vroman, R., & Yoshinaga, N. (1992). Broad and narrow constraints on the English dative alternation: Some fundamental differences between native speakers and foreign language learners. University of Hawai'i Working Papers in ESL, 11, 157-199.
4. Bock, K. (1986). Syntactic persistence in language production. Cognitive Psychology, 18, 355-387.
5. Bock, K. (1989). Closed-class immanence in sentence production. Cognition, 31, 163-186.
6. Bock, K. (1990). Structure in language: Creating form in talk. American Psychologist, 45, 1221-1236.
7. Bock, K. (1995). Sentence production: From mind to mouth. In J. Miller & P. Eimas (Eds.), Speech, language & communication (pp. 181-216). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
8. Bock, K., & Griffin, Z. (2000). The persistence of structural priming: Transient activation or implicit learning? Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 129, 177-192.
9. Bock, K., & Loebell, H. (1990). Framing sentences. Cognition, 35, 1-39.
10. Bock, K., Loebell, H., & Morey, R. (1992). From conceptual roles to structural relations: Bridging the syntactic cleft. Psychological Review, 99, 150-171.
11. Boyland, J., & Anderson, J. (1998). Evidence that syntactic priming is long-lasting. In M. Gernsbacher (Ed.), Proceedings of the 20th annual meeting of the Cognitive Science Society (p. 1205). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
12. Branigan, H., Pickering, M., & Cleland, A. (1999). Syntactic priming in written production: Evidence for rapid decay. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 6, 635-640.
13. Branigan, H., Pickering, M., & Cleland, A. (2000). Syntactic co-ordination in dialogue. Cognition, 75, B13-B25.
14. Branigan, H., Pickering, M., Liversedge, S., Stewart, A., & Urbach, T. (1995). Syntactic priming: Investigating the mental representation of language. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 24, 489-506.
15. Branigan, H., Pickering, M., Stewart, A., & McLean, J. (2000). Syntactic priming in spoken production: Linguistic and temporal interference. Memory & Cognition, 28, 1297-1302.
16. Campbell, A., & Tomasello, M. (2001). The acquisition of English dative constructions. Applied Psycholinguistics, 22, 253-267.
17. Chang, F., Bock, K., & Goldberg, A. (2003). Can thematic roles leave traces of their places? Cognition, 90, 29-49.
18. Chang, F., Dell, G., Bock, K., & Griffin, Z. (2000). Structural priming as implicit learning: A comparison of models of sentence production. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 29, 217-229.
19. Childers, J., & Tomasello, M. (2001). The role of pronouns in young children's acquisition of the English transitive construction. Developmental Psychology, 37, 739-748.
20. Chung, T., & Gordon, P. (1998). The acquisition of Chinese dative constructions. Proceedings of the Annual Boston University Conference on Language Development, 22, 109-120.
21. Dodson, K., & Tomasello, M. (1998). Acquiring the transitive construction in English: The role of animacy and pronouns. Journal of Child Language, 30, 797-821.
22. Ellis, N. (1998). Emergentism, connectionism, and language learning. Language Learning, 48, 631-664.
23. Ellis, N. (2002a). Frequency effects in language acquisition: A review with implications for theories of implicit and explicit language acquisition. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 24, 143-188.
24. Ellis, N. (2002b). Reflections on frequency effects in language acquisition: A response to commentaries. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 24, 297-339.
25. Ellis, N. (2005). At the interface: Dynamic interactions of explicit and implicit language knowledge. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 27, 305-352.
26. Ellis, R. (1991). The interaction hypothesis: A critical evaluation. In E. Sadtano (Ed.), Language acquisition and the second/foreign language classroom (pp. 179-211). Singapore: Regional English Language Centre.
27. Fox Tree, J., & Meijer, P. (1999). Building syntactic structure in speaking. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 28, 71-92.
28. Friederici, A., Schriefers, H., & Lindenberger, U. (1998). Differential age effects on semantic and syntactic priming. International Journal of Behavioral Development, 22, 813-845.
29. Gass, S. M. (1997). Input, interaction, and the second language learner. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
30. Gass, S. M. (2003). Input and interaction. In C. Doughty & M. H. Long (Eds.), Handbook of second language acquisition (pp. 224-255). Oxford: Blackwell.
31. Goldberg, A. (1992). The inherent semantics of argument structure: The case of the English distransive construction. Cognitive Linguistics, 3, 37-74.
32. Goldberg, A. (1995). Constructions: A construction grammar approach to argument structure. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
33. Goldberg, A., & Bencini, G. (2005). Support from language processing for a constructional approach to grammar. In A. Tyler, M. Takada, Y. Kim, & D. Marinova (Eds.), Language in use: Cognitive and discourse perspectives on language and language learning (pp. 3-18). Washington, DC: Georgetown University.
34. Gries, S., & Wulff, S. (2005). Do foreign language learners also have constructions? Evidence from priming, sorting and corpora. Annual Review of Cognitive Linguistics, 3, 182-200.
35. Griffin, Z., & Weinstein-Tull, J. (2003). Conceptual structure modulates structural priming in the production of complex sentences. Journal of Memory and Language, 49, 537-555.
36. Groefsema, M. (2001). The real-world colour of the dative alternation. Language Sciences, 23, 525-550.
37. Gropen, J., Pinker, S., Hollander, M., & Goldberg, R. (1991). Affectedness and direct objects: The role of lexical semantics in the acquisition of verb argument structure. Cognition, 41, 153-195.
38. Gropen, J., Pinker, S., Hollander, M., Goldberg, R., & Wilson, R. (1989). The learnability and acquisition of the dative alternation in English. Language, 65, 203-257.
39. Han, Z. (2002). A study of the impact of recasts on tense consistency in L2 output. TESOL Quarterly, 36, 543-572.
40. Hare, M., & Goldberg, A. (1999). Structural priming: Purely syntactic? In M. Hahn & S. Stones (Eds.), Proceedings of the 21st annual meeting of the Cognitive Science Society (pp. 208-211). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
41. Hartsuiker, R., & Kolk, H. (1998). Syntactic persistence in Dutch. Language and Speech, 41, 143-184.
42. Hartsuiker, R., Kolk, H., & Huiskamp, P. (1999). Priming word order in sentence production. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 52A, 129-147.
43. Hartsuiker, R., Pickering, M., & Veltkamp, E. (2004). Is syntax separate or shared between languages? Psychological Science, 15, 409-414.
44. Hartsuiker, R., & Westenberg, C. (2000). Word order priming in written and spoken sentence production. Cognition, 75, B27-B39.
45. Hawkins, R. (1987). Markedness and the acquisition of the English dative alternation by L2 speakers. Second Language Research, 3, 20-55.
46. Huttenlocher, J., Vasilyeva, M., Cymerman, E., & Levine, S. (2002). Language input and child syntax. Cognitive Psychology, 45, 337-374.
47. Huttenlocher, J., Vasilyeva, M., & Shimpi, P. (2004). Syntactic priming in young children. Journal of Memory and Language, 50, 182-195.
48. Inagaki, S. (1997). Japanese and Chinese learners' acquisition of the narrow-range rules for the dative alternation in English. Language Learning, 47, 637-669.
49. Iwashita, N. (2001). The effect of learner proficiency on interactional moves and modified output in nonnative-nonnative interaction in Japanese as a foreign language. System, 29, 267-287.
50. Iwashita, N. (2003). Negative feedback and positive evidence in task-based interaction. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 25, 1-36.
51. Izumi, S., & Nishimura, A. (2002). Accuracy and explicit knowledge in second language performance: The case of dative alternation for Japanese ESL learners. Sophia Linguistica: Working Papers in Linguistics, 49, 161-189.
52. Jackendoff, R. (1990). On Larson's treatment of the double-object construction. Linguistic Inquiry, 21, 427-456.
53. Larson, R. (1988). On the double object construction. Linguistic Inquiry, 19, 335-391.
54. LeCompagnon, B. (1984). Interference and overgeneralization in second language learning: The acquisition of English dative verbs by native speakers of French. Language Learning, 34, 39-67.
55. Leeman, J. (2003). Recasts and second language development: Beyond negative evidence. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 25, 37-63.
56. Lieven, E., Pine, J., & Baldwin, G. (1997). Lexically-based learning and early grammatical development. Journal of Child Language, 19, 287-310.
57. Loebell, H., & Bock, K. (2003). Structural priming across languages. Linguistics, 41, 791-824.
58. Loewen, S., & Philp, J. (in press). An in-depth analysis of recasts in the adult L2 classroom. Modern Language Journal.
59. Lombardi, L., & Potter, M. (1992). The regeneration of syntax in short term memory. Journal of Memory and Language, 31, 713-733.
60. Long, M. H. (1996). The role of the linguistic environment in second language acquisition. In W. Ritchie & T. K. Bhatia (Eds.), Handbook of language acquisition: Vol. 2. Second language acquisition (pp. 413-468). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
61. Long, M. H., Inagaki, S., & Ortega, L. (1998). The role of implicit negative feedback in SLA: Models and recasts in Japanese and Spanish. Modern Language Journal, 82, 357-371.
62. Mackey, A. (1999). Input, interaction, and second language development: An empirical study of question formation in ESL. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 21, 557-587.
63. Mackey, A. (2000, March). Interactional feedback on L2 morpho-syntax: Learners' perceptions and developmental outcomes. Paper presented at the American Association of Applied Linguistics conference, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.
64. Mackey, A. (in press). Interaction and second language development: Perspectives from SLA research. In R. DeKeyser (Ed.), Practice in second language learning: Perspectives from linguistics and psychology. New York: Cambridge University Press.
65. Mackey, A., & Oliver, R. (2002). Interactional feedback and children's L2 development. System, 30, 459-477.
66. Mackey, A., & Philp, J. (1998). Conversational interaction and second language development: Recasts, responses, and red herrings? Modern Language Journal, 82, 338-356.
67. Matthews, D., Lieven, E., Theakston, A., & Tomasello, M. (2005). The role of frequency in the acquisition of English word order. Cognitive Development, 20, 121-136.
68. Mazurkewich, I. (1984). The acquisition of the dative alternation by second language learners and linguistic theory. Language Learning, 34, 91-109.
69. McDonough, K. (2005). Identifying the impact of negative feedback and learners' responses on ESL question development. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 27, 79-103.
70. McDonough, K., & Mackey, A. (in press). Responses to recasts: Repetitions, primed production, and linguistic development. Lanaguge Learning.
71. Nicol, J. (1996). Syntactic priming. Language and Cognitive Processes, 11, 675-679.
72. Nobuyoshi, J., & Ellis, R. (1993). Focused communication tasks and second language acquisition. ELT Journal, 47, 203-210.
73. Pica, T. (1988). Interlanguage adjustments as an outcome of NS-NNS negotiated interaction. Language Learning, 38, 45-73.
74. Pica, T. (1994). Research on negotiation: What does it reveal about second-language learning conditions, processes, and outcomes? Language Learning, 44, 493-527.
75. Pickering, M., & Branigan, H. (1998). The representation of verbs: Evidence from syntactic priming in language production. Journal of Memory and Language, 39, 633-651.
76. Pickering, M., Branigan, H., Cleland, A., & Stewart, A. (2000). Activation of syntactic information during language production. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 29, 205-216.
77. Pickering, M., Branigan, H., & McLean, J. (2002). Constituent structure is formed in one stage. Journal of Memory and Language, 46, 586-605.
78. Pickering, M., & Garrod, S. (2004a). The interactive-alignment mode: Developments and refinements. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 27, 212-219.
79. Pickering, M., & Garrod, S. (2004b). Toward a mechanistic psychology of dialogue. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 27, 169-226.
80. Pienemann, M., & Johnston, M. (1987). Factors influencing the development of language proficiency. In D. Nunan (Ed.), Applying second language acquisition research (pp. 45-141). Adelaide, Australia: National Curriculum Resource Centre, AMEP.
81. Pine, J., Lieven, E., & Rowland, C. (1998). Comparing different models of the development of the English verb category. Linguistics, 36, 807-830.
82. Pinker, S. (1989). Learnability and cognition: The acquisition of argument structure. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
83. Potter, M., & Lombardi, L. (1990). Regeneration in the short-term recall of sentences. Journal of Memory and Language, 29, 633-654.
84. Potter, M., & Lombardi, L. (1998). Syntactic priming in immediate recall of sentences. Journal of Memory and Language, 38, 265-282.
85. Savage, C., Lieven, E., Theakston, A., & Tomasello, M. (2003). Testing the abstractness of children's linguistic representations: Lexical and structural priming of syntactic constructions in young children. Developmental Sciences, 6, 557-567.
86. Sawyer, M. (1996). L1 and L2 sensitivity to semantic constraints on argument structure. Boston University Conference on Language Development Proceedings, 20, 646-657.
87. Schachter, J. (1986). Three approaches to the study of input. Language Learning, 36, 211-225.
88. Schachter, J. (1991). Corrective feedback in historical perspective. Second Language Research, 7, 89-102.
89. Scheepers, C. (2003). Syntactic priming of relative clause attachments: Persistence of structural configuration in sentence production. Cognition, 89, 179-205.
90. Schmidt, R. (1995). Consciousness and foreign language learning: A tutorial on the role of attention and awareness in learning. In R. Schmidt (Ed.), Attention and awareness in foreign language learning (Tech. Rep. No. 9, pp. 1-63). Honolulu: University of Hawai'i Press.
91. Schmidt, R. (2001). Attention. In P. Robinson (Ed.), Cognition and second language instruction (pp. 3-32). New York: Cambridge University Press.
92. Shehadeh, A. (2001). Self- and other-initiated modified output during task-based interaction. TESOL Quarterly, 35, 433-457.
93. Snyder, W. (2001). On the nature of syntactic variation: Evidence from complex predicates and complex word-formation. Language, 77, 324-342.
94. Snyder, W., & Stromswald, K. (1997). The structure and acquisition of English dative constructions. Linguistic Inquiry, 28, 281-317.
95. Stromswald, K., & Synder, W. (1995). The acquisition of datives, particles, and related constructions: Evidence for a parametric account. Boston University Conference on Language Development Proceedings, 19, 621-628.
96. Swain, M. (1985). Communicative competence: Some roles of comprehensible input and comprehensible output in its development. In S. M. Gass & C. Madden (Eds.), Input in second language acquisition (pp. 235-253). Rowley, MA: Newbury House.
97. Swain, M. (1993). The output hypothesis: Just speaking and writing aren't enough. Canadian Modern Language Review, 50, 158-164.
98. Swain, M. (1995). Three functions of output in second language learning. In G. Cook & B. Seidlhofer (Eds.), Principle and practice in applied linguistics: Studies in honour of H. G. Widdowson (pp. 125-144). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
99. Swain, M. (2000). The output hypothesis and beyond: Mediating acquisition through collaborative dialogue. In J. Lantolf (Ed.), Sociocultural theory and second language learning (pp. 97-114). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
100. Swain, M., & Lapkin, S. (1995). Problems in output and the cognitive processes they generate: A step towards second language learning. Applied Linguistics, 16, 371-391.
101. Tomasello, M. (2000). Do young children have adult syntactic competence? Cognition, 74, 209-253.
102. Trahey, M. (1996). Positive evidence in second language acquisition: Some long term effects. Second Language Research, 12, 111-139.
103. Trahey, M., & White, L. (1993). Positive evidence and preemption in the second language classroom. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 15, 181-204.
104. Whong-Barr, M., & Schwartz, B. (2002). Morphological and syntactic transfer in child L2 acquisition of the English dative alternation. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 24, 579-616.
105. Williams, R. (1994). A statistical analysis of English double object alternation. Issues in Applied Linguistics, 5, 37-58.
106. Wolfe-Quintero, K. (1998). The connection between verbs and argument structures: Native speaker production of the double object dative. Applied Psycholinguistics, 19, 225-257.