The role of L1 transfer in the interpretation of articles with definite plurals in L2 english

Language Learning

Volumn 60, Issue 4, 2010, Pages 877-925

  Ionin, Tania ^a   Montrul, Silvina ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS AT URBANA CHAMPAIGN   (United States)

Author keywords

Articles; Crosslinguistic influence; Determiners; Generics; Kind reference; Noun phrases; Plurals; Semantics; Specific reference; Universal Grammar

Indexed keywords

EID: 78449295716     PISSN: 00238333     EISSN: 14679922     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-9922.2010.00577.x     Document Type: Article

References (67)

1. Bates, E., & Elman, J. (1996). Learning revisited. Science, 274, 1849-1850.
2. Birdsong, D. (1989). Metalinguistic performance and interlinguistic competence. Berlin Springer-Verlag.
3. Bley-Vroman, R. (1989). What is the logical problem of foreign language learning? In S. Gass & J. Schachter (Eds.), Linguistic perspectives on second language acquisition (pp. 41-68). Cambridge Cambridge University Press.
4. Bley-Vroman, R. (1990). The logical problem of foreign language learning. Linguistic Analysis, 20, 3-49.
5. Carlson, G. (1977). Reference to kinds in English. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Massachusetts at Amherst
6. Chapelle, C., & Douglas, D. (2006). Assessing language through computer technology. Cambridge, UK Cambridge University Press.
7. Chater, N., & Manning, C. D. (2006). Probabilistic models of language processing and acquisition. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 10, 335-344.
8. Chierchia, G. (1998). Reference to kinds across languages. Natural Language Semantics, 6, 339-405.
9. Choi, I.-C., Kim, K. S., & Boo, J. (2003). Comparability of a paper-based language test and a computer-based language test. Language Testing, 20, 295-320.
10. Chomsky, N. (1981). Lectures on government and binding. Dordrecht Foris.
11. Dayal, V. (2004). Number marking and (in)definiteness in kind terms. Linguistics and Philosophy, 27, 393-450.
12. Dechert, H., & Raupach, M. (Eds.). (1989). Transfer in language production. Norwood, NJ Ablex.
13. DeKeyser, R. (1998). Beyond focus on form: Cognitive perspectives on learning and practicing second language grammar. In C. Doughty & J. Williams (Eds.), Focus on form in second language acquisition (pp. 42-63). New York Cambridge University Press.
14. DeKeyser, R. (2003). Implicit and explicit learning. In C. Doughty & M. Long (Eds.), Handbook of second language acquisition (pp. 313-348). Oxford Blackwell.
15. Dekydtspotter, L., & Sprouse, R. A. (2001). Mental design and (second) language epistemology: Adjectival restrictions of wh-quantifiers and tense in English-French interlanguage. Second Language Research, 17, 1-35.
16. Ellis, N. C. (2006). Selective attention and transfer phenomena in L2 acquisition: Contingency, cue competition, salience, interference, overshadowing, blocking, and perceptual learning. Applied Linguistics, 27, 164-194.
17. Ellis, R. (2005). Measuring implicit and explicit knowledge of a second language: A psychometric study. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 27, 141-172.
18. Gabriele, A. (2005). The acquisition of aspect in a second language: A bidirectional study of learners of English and Japanese. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, CUNY, New York
19. Gass, S., & Selinker, L. (Eds.). (1992). Language transfer in language learning. Amsterdam Benjamins.
20. Gelman, S., & Raman, L. (2003). Preschool children use linguistic form class and pragmatic cues to interpret generics. Child Development, 74, 308-325.
21. Gregg, K. (1989). Second language acquisition theory: The case for a generative perspective. In S. Gass & J. Schachter (Eds.), Linguistic perspectives on second language acquisition (pp. 15-40). Cambridge, UK Cambridge University Press.
22. Hawkins, J. A. (2004). Efficiency and complexity in grammars. Oxford Oxford University Press.
23. Hawkins, R., & Chan, Y. C. (1997). The partial availability of Universal Grammar in second language acquisition: The "failed functional features hypothesis. Second Language Research, 13, 187-226.
24. Hawkins, R., Al-Eid, S., Almahboob, I., Athanasopoulos, P., Chaengchenkit, R., Hu, J., et al. (2006). Accounting for English article interpretation by L2 speakers. In S. Foster-Cohen, M. Medved Krajnovic, & J. Mihaljević Djigunović (Eds.), EUROSLA Yearbook 6 (pp. 7-25). Amsterdam Benjamins.
25. Huebner, T. (1983). A longitudinal analysis of the acquisition of English. Ann Arbor, MI Karoma.
26. Ionin, T., Ko, H., & Wexler, K. (2004). Article semantics in L2-acquisition: The role of specificity. Language Acquisition, 12, 3-69.
27. Ionin, T., & Montrul, S. (2009). Article use and generic reference: Parallels between L1- and L2-acquisition. In M. García-Mayo & R. Hawkins (Eds.), Second language acquisition of articles: Empirical findings and theoretical implications (pp. 147-173). Amsterdam Benjamins.
28. Ionin, T., Montrul, S., & M. Crivos, M., 2010). A bidirectional study of the acquisition of plural NP interpretation in English and Spanish. Manuscript submitted for publication.
29. Ionin, T., Zubizarreta, M. L., & Bautista Maldonado, S. (2008). Sources of linguistic knowledge in the second language acquisition of English articles. Lingua, 118, 554-576.
30. Kim, C. (2005). The Korean plural marker tul and its implications. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Delaware
31. Kratzer, A. (1995). Stage-level and individual-level predicates. In G. Carlson & F. Pelletier (Eds.), The generic book (pp. 125-175). Chicago University of Chicago Press.
32. Krifka, M., F. Pelletier, F., Carlson, G., Ter Meulen, A., Link, G., & Chierchia, G. (1995). Genericity: An introduction. In G. Carlson & F. Pelletier (Eds.), The generic book (pp. 1-125). Chicago University of Chicago Press.
33. Kwon, S.-N., & Zribi-Hertz, A. (2004). Number from a syntactic perspective: Why plural marking looks "truer" in French than in Korean. In O. Bonami & P. Cabreo Hofherr (Eds.), Empirical issues in formal syntax and semantics 5 (pp. 133-158). Paris: Syntax and Semantics Conference.
34. Lardiere, D. (2009). Some thoughts on the contrastive analysis of features in second language acquisition. Second Language Research, 25, 173-227.
35. Longobardi, G. (1994). Reference and proper names. Linguistic Inquiry, 25, 609-665.
36. Longobardi, G. (2001). How comparative is semantics? A unified parametric theory of bare nouns and proper names. Natural Language Semantics, 9, 335-369.
37. Lyons, C. (1999). Definiteness. Cambridge Cambridge University Press.
38. Master, P. (1987). A cross-linguistic interlanguage analysis of the acquisition of the English article system. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, UCLA.
39. Montrul, S., & Ionin, T. (in press). Transfer effects in the interpretation of definite articles by Spanish heritage speakers. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition.
40. Montrul, S., & Yoon, J. (2009). Putting parameters in their proper place: A response to Lardiere. Second Language Research, 25, 291-311.
41. Müller, A. (2002). The semantics of generic quantification in Brazilian Portuguese. PROBUS, 14, 279-298.
42. Murphy, S. (1997). Knowledge and production of English articles by advanced second language learners. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Texas at Austin
43. Nemoto, N. (2005). On mass denotations of bare nouns in Japanese and Korean. Linguistics, 43, 383-413.
44. Odlin, T. (1989). Language transfer: Cross-linguistic influence in language learning. Cambridge Cambridge University Press.
45. Oh, E. (2006). Second language acquisition of English double object construction by Korean speakers. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Southern California
46. Partee, B. H. (1987). Noun phrase interpretation and type-shifting principles. In J. Groenenijk et al. (Eds.), Studies in discourse representation theory and the theory of generalized quantifiers (pp. 115-143). Dordrecht Foris.
47. Pérez-Leroux, A., Munn, A., Schmitt, C., & DeIrish, M. (2004). Learning definite determiners: Genericity and definiteness in English and Spanish. In A. Brugos, L. Micciulla, & C. Smith (Eds.), BUCLD 28 Proceedings Supplement. Retrieved May 19, 2010, from
48. Schachter, J. (1990). On the issue of completeness in second language acquisition. Second Language Research, 6, 93-124.
49. Schmitt, C., & Munn, A. (1999). Against the Nominal Mapping Parameter: Bare nouns in Brazilian Portuguese. In P. Tamanji, M. Hirotani, & N. Hall (Eds.), Proceedings of NELS 29 (pp. 339-353). Amherst, MA GLSA.
50. Schwartz, B. D. (1998). The second language instinct. Lingua, 106, 133-160.
51. Schwartz, B. D., & Sprouse, R. A. (1994). Word order and nominative case in non-native language acquisition: A longitudinal study of (L1 Turkish) German interlanguage. In T. Hoekstra & B. D. Schwartz (Eds.), Language acquisition studies in generative grammar: Papers in Honor of Kenneth Wexler from the 1991 GLOW Workshops (pp. 317-368). Amsterdam Benjamins.
52. Schwartz, B. D., & Sprouse, R. A. (1996). L2 cognitive states and the Full Transfer/Full Access model. Second Language Research, 12, 40-72.
53. Serratrice, L., Sorace, A., Filiaci, F., & Baldo, M. (2009). Bilingual children's sensitivity to specificity and genericity: Evidence from metalinguistic awareness. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 12, 239-257.
54. Sharwood Smith, M. (1981). Consciousness-raising and the second language learner. Applied Linguistics, 2, 159-169.
55. Slabakova, R. (2006). Learnability in the second language acquisition of semantics: A bidirectional study of a semantic parameter. Second Language Research, 22, 498-523.
56. Slabakova, R. (2008). Meaning in the second language. Berlin Mouton de Gruyter.
57. Slabakova, R., & Montrul, S. (2003). Genericity and aspect in L2 acquisition. Language Acquisition, 11, 165-196.
58. Sorace, A., & Filiaci, F. (2006). Anaphora resolution in near-native speakers of Italian. Second Language Research, 22, 339-368.
59. Sprouse, R. (2006). Full transfer and relexification: Second language acquisition and Creole genesis. In C. Lefebvre, L. White, & C. Jourdan (Eds.), L2 acquisition and Creole genesis (pp. 168-181). Amsterdam Benjamins.
60. Stockwell, R., Bowen, D., & Martin, J. (1965). The grammatical structures of English andSpanish. Chicago University of Chicago Press.
61. Taylor, C., Kirsch, I., Eignor, D., & Jamieson, J. (1999). Examining the relationship between computer familiarity and performance on computer-based language tasks. Language Learning, 49, 219-274.
62. Thomas, M. (1989). The acquisition of English articles by first- and second-language learners. Applied Psycholinguistics, 10, 335-355.
63. Trenkic, D. (2008). The representation of English articles in second language grammars: Determiners or adjectives? Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 11, 1-18.
64. Tsimpli, I., & Dimitrakopoulou, M. (2007). The Interpretability hypothesis: Evidence from wh-interrogatives in second language acquisition. Second Language Research, 23, 215-242.
65. Vergnaud, J.-R., & Zubizarreta, M. L. (1992). The definite determiner and the inalienable constructions in French and English. Linguistic Inquiry, 23, 595-652.
66. Wexler, K., & Manzini, R. (1987). Parameters and learnability in binding theory. In T. Roeper & E. Williams (Eds.), Parameter setting (pp. 41-76). Dordrecht Reidel.
67. White, L. (2003). Second language acquisition and Universal Grammar. Cambridge Cambridge University Press.