Syntactic creativity in second language english: Wh-scope marking in Japanese-English interlanguage

Second Language Research

Volumn 27, Issue 3, 2011, Pages 313-341

  Schulz, Barbara ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH CAROLINA   (United States)

Author keywords

interlanguage grammars; L2 acquisition of complex wh questions; L2 sentence processing; L2 syntax; universal grammar

Indexed keywords

EID: 79958051591     PISSN: 02676583     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/0267658310390503     Document Type: Article

References (42)

1. Berwick R. and Weinberg A. (1984) The grammatical basis of linguistic performance: Language use and acquisition. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
2. Bley-Vroman R. and Masterson D. (1989) Reaction time as a supplement to grammaticality judgments in the investigation of second language learners' competence. University of Hawai'i Working Papers in ESL 8, 207-37.
3. Bock K., Dell GS, Chang F., and Onishi KH (2007) Persistent structural priming from language comprehension to language production. Cognition 104: 437-58.
4. Boland J., Tanenhaus MK, Garnsey SM, and Carlson GN (1995) Verb argument structure in parsing and interpretation: Evidence from wh-questions. Journal of Memory and Language 34: 774-806.
5. Broselow E. and Finer D. (1991) Parameter setting in second language phonology and syntax. Second Language Research 7: 35-59.
6. Cheng LL-S (2000) Moving just the feature. In: Lutz U, Müller G, and von Stechow A (eds) Wh-scope marking. Amsterdam: Benjamins, 77-100.
7. Chomsky N. (1973) Conditions on transformations. In: Anderson S and Kiparsky P (eds) A Festschrift for Morris Halle. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston. Reprinted in Chomsky N. (1977) Essays on form and interpretation. New York: North-Holland, 81-160.
8. Daneman M. and Carpenter PA (1980) Individual differences in working memory and reading. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior 19: 450-66.
9. Dayal V. (1994) Scope marking as indirect WH dependency. Natural Language Semantics 2: 137-70.
10. de Villiers J., Roeper T., and Vainikka A. (1990) The acquisition of long-distance rules. In: Frazier L and de Villiers J (eds) Language processing and language acquisition. Dordrecht: Kluwer, 257-97.
11. Eckman FR (2004) Optimality theory, markedness and second language syntax: The case of resumptive pronouns in relative clauses. Studies in Phonetics, Phonology and Morphology 10: 89-110.
12. Eckman FR, Bell L., and Nelson D. (1988) On the generalization of relative clause instruction in the acquisition of English as a second language. Applied Linguistics 9: 1-20.
13. Eckman FR, Moravscik E., and Wirth J. (1989) Implicational universals and interrogative structures in the interlanguages of ESL learners. Language Learning 39: 173-205.
14. Epstein S., Flynn S., and Martohardjono G. (1996) Second language acquisition: Theoretical and experimental issues in contemporary research. Brain and Behavioral Sciences 19: 677-758.
15. Fodor JD (1998) Parsing to learn. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research 27: 339-74.
16. Gibson E. and Wexler K. (1994) Triggers. Linguistic Inquiry 25: 407-54.
17. Gutierrez MJ (2005) The acquisition of English LD wh-questions by Basque/Spanish bilingual subjects in a school context. Unpublished PhD dissertation, University of the Basque Country, Leioa, Spain.
18. Hawkins R. (2001) Second language syntax. Malden, MA: Blackwell.
19. Hopp H. (2007) Ultimate attainment at the interfaces in second language acquisition: Grammar and processing. Grodil Press: Groningen.
20. Hyltenstam K. (1984) The use of typological markedness conditions as predictors in second language acquisition: The case of pronominal copies in relative clauses. In: Andersen R (ed.) Second languages: A cross-linguistic perspective. Rowley, MA: Newbury House, 39-58.
21. Jaeger TF (2006) Probabilistic syntactic production. Unpublished PhD dissertation, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA.
22. Klein EC (1993) The null-prep phenomenon: The interaction of linguistic theory and second language acquisition data. In: Eckman FR (ed.) Confluence: Linguistics, L2 acquisition and speech pathology. Amsterdam: Benjamins, 67-78.
23. Lutz U., Müller G., and von Stechow A. (2000) Introduction. In: Lutz U, Müller G, and von Stechow A (eds) Wh-scope marking. Amsterdam: Benjamins, 1-16.
24. MacLaughlin D. (1995) Language acquisition and the Subset Principle. The Linguistic Review 12: 143-91.
25. Martohardjono G. and Gair J. (1993) Apparent UG accessibility in second language acquisition: Misapplied principles or principled misapplications. In: Eckman FR (ed.) Confluence: Linguistics, L2 acquisition and speech pathology. Amsterdam: Benjamins, 79-103.
26. McDaniel D. (1989) Partial and multiple wh-movement. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 7: 565-604.
27. McDaniel D., Chiu B., and Maxfield TL (1995) Parameters for wh-movement types: Evidence from child English. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 13: 709-53.
28. McElree B., Foraker S., and Dyer L. (2003) Memory structures that subserve sentence comprehension. Journal of Memory and Language 48: 67-91.
29. Omaki A. (2005) Working memory and relative clause attachment in first and second language processing. Unpublished MA thesis, University of Hawaii, HI, USA.
30. Omaki A. and Ariji K. (2003) Working memory capacity for sentence processing: Is it language independent? Paper presented at the 16th Second Language Research Forum, University of Arizona, Tucson, 17 October.
31. Phillips C., Kazanina N., and Abada S. (2005) ERP Effects of the processing of syntactic long-distance dependencies. Cognitive Brain Research 22: 407-28.
32. Schulz B. (2006) Wh-scope marking in English interlanguage grammars: Transfer and processing effects on the second language acquisition of complex wh-questions. Unpublished PhD dissertation, University of Hawaii, HI, USA.
33. Schwartz BD and Sprouse RA (1994) Word order and nominative case in non-native language acquisition. In: Hoekstra T and Schwartz BD (eds) Language acquisition studies in generative grammar. Amsterdam: Benjamins, 317-68.
34. Schwartz BD and Sprouse RA (1996) L2 cognitive states and the full transfer/full access model. Second Language Research 12: 40-72.
35. Takahashi D. (1993) Movement of wh-phrases in Japanese. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 11 655-78.
36. Thornton RJ (1990) Adventures in long-distance moving: The acquisition of complex wh-questions. Unpublished PhD dissertation, University of Connecticut, CT, USA.
37. Wakabayashi S. and Okawara I. (2003) Japanese learners' errors on long distance wh-questions. In: Wakabayashi S (eds) Generative approaches to the acquisition of English by native speakers of Japanese. Berlin: Mouton, 215-46.
38. White L. (1985) The pro-drop parameter in adult second language acquisition. Language Learning 35: 47-62.
39. White L. (1987) Against comprehensible input: The input hypothesis and the development of L2 competence. Applied Linguistics 8: 95-110.
40. White L. (1989) Universal Grammar and second language acquisition. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
41. White L. (1992) Subjacency violations and empty categories in L2 acquisition. In: Goodluck H and Rochemont M (eds) Island constraints. Dordrecht: Kluwer, 445-64.
42. Yamane M. (2003) On interaction of first language transfer and Universal Grammar in adult second language acquisition: wh-movement in L1-Japanese/L2-English interlanguage. Unpublished PhD Dissertation, University of Connecticut, CT, USA.