Acquisition of Wh-questions in English by Persian Monolinguals and Iranian Arab bilinguals

Theory and Practice in Language Studies

Volumn 4, Issue 7, 2014, Pages 1421-1433

  Galbat, Marzieh ^a   Maleki, Roohollah ^b  

^a ISLAMIC AZAD UNIVERSITY   (Iran)

^b SHAHID SATTARI UNIVERSITY OF AERONAUTICAL ENGINEERING   (Iran)

Author keywords

Bilinguals; Elementary; GJT; Intermediate; Monolinguals; UG; Wh question movement

Indexed keywords

EID: 84904262439     PISSN: 17992591     EISSN: 20530692     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.4304/tpls.4.7.1421-1433     Document Type: Article

References (20)

1. Benmamoun, E. (2000). The Feature Structure of Functional Categories. New York: Oxford University Press.
2. Bley-Vroman, R. (1989). What is the logical problem of foreign language learning? In S.M. Gass and J. Schachter (eds.) Linguistic perspectives on second language acquisition. Cambridge, New York and Melbourne: Cambridge University Press. pp. 41-68.
3. Bley-Vroman, R. (1990). The logical problem of foreign language learning. Linguistic Analysis 20, pp. 3-49.
4. Bley-Vroman, R. (1996). What we have to explain in foreign language learning. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 19, p. 718.
5. Chomsky, N. (1976). Conditions on rules of grammar. Linguistic Analysis 2, pp. 303-351.
6. Chomsky, N. (1981). Lectures on government and binding. Dordrecht: Foris.
7. Epstein, S., Flynn, S. and Martohardjono, G. (1996). Second language acquisition: theoretical and experimental issues in contemporary research. Brain and Behavioral Sciences 19, pp. 677-714.
8. Hammarberg, B. (2001). "Roles of L1 and L2 in L3 Production and Acquisition". In: Cenoz, J., Hufeisen, B. & Jessner, U. (eds.) Cross-linguistic Influence in Third Language Acquisition. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters, pp. 21-41.
9. Hawkins, R. (2001). The theoretical significance of Universal Grammar in second language acquisition. Second Language Research 17, pp. 345-367.
10. Hawkins, R. & Chan, Y. (1997). The partial availability of Universal Grammar in second language acquisition: the 'failed functional feature hypothesis'. Second Language Research 13, 187-226.
11. Jaspaert, K. & Lemmens, G. (1990) Linguistic evaluation of Dutch as a third language, in: M. BYRAM&, J. LEMAN (Eds) Bicultural and Trilingual Education (Clevedon), pp. 30-57.
12. Radford, A. (1997). Syntactic theory and the structure of English: a minimalist approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
13. Radford, A. (2004). Minimalist syntax: Explaining the structure of English. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
14. Radford, A., Atkinson, M., Britain, D., Clahsen, H., & Spencer, A. (2009). Linguistics: An introduction (2nd Ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
15. Schwartz, B. D. & Sprouse, R. A. (1996). "L2 cognitive states and the Full Transfer/Full Access model. " Second Language Research, Vol.12, No. 1, pp. 40-72.
16. Vainnika, A. and Young-Scholten, M. (1994). Direct access to X'-theory: Evidence from Korean and Turkish adults learning German. In T. Hoekstra and B. Schwartz (eds.) Language acquisition studies in generative grammar. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins, pp. 265-316.
17. Vainikka, A. and Young-Scholten, M. (1996). Partial transfer, not partial access. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 19, pp. 744-5.
18. White, L. (1988). Island effects in second language acquisition. In S. Flynn and W. O'Neil (Eds.), Linguistic theory in second language acquisition. Dordrecht, Boston and London: Kluwer Academic Publishers, pp. 144-172.
19. White, L. (2003). Second Language Acquisition and Universal Grammar. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
20. Zobl, H. (1993). Prior linguistic knowledge and the conservation of the learning procedure: Grammaticality judgments of unilingual and multilingual Learners. In S. M. Gass & L. Selinker (eds.), Language Transfer in Language Learning, 176-196. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.