TRANSITIVITY ALTERNATIONS in L2 ACQUISITION Toward a Modular View of Transfer

Studies in Second Language Acquisition

Volumn 22, Issue 2, 2000, Pages 229-273

  Montrul, Silvina ^a  

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

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84937332283     PISSN: 02722631     EISSN: 14701545     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1017/S0272263100002047     Document Type: Article

References (87)

1. Aksu-Koç, A., & Slobin, D. (1985). The acquisition of Turkish. In D. Slobin (Ed.), The crosslinguistic study of language acquisition (pp. 839-878). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
2. Allen, S. (1996). Aspects of argument structure in Inuktitut. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
3. Amberber, M. (1996). Transitivity alternations, event types, and light verbs. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, McGill University, Montreal.
4. Ard, J., & Gass, S. (1987). Lexical constraints on syntactic acquisition. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 9, 233-252.
5. Baker, M. (1996). On the structural position of themes and goals. In J. Rooryck & L. Zaring (Eds.), Phrase structure and the lexicon (pp. 7-34). Dordrecht: Kluwer.
6. Baker, M. (1997). Thematic roles and syntactic structure. In L. Haegeman (Ed.), Elements of grammar: Handbook of generative syntax (pp. 55-89). Dordrecht: Kluwer.
7. Balcom, P. (1997). Why is this happened Passive morphology and unaccusativity. Second Language Research, 13, 1-9.
8. Berman, R. (1993). Marking of verb transitivity by Hebrew-speaking children. Journal of Child Language, 20, 642-669.
9. Berman, R. (1994). Developmental perspectives on transitivity: A confluence of cues. In Y. Levi (Ed.), Other children, other languages (pp. 189-241). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
10. 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). New York: Cambridge University Press.
11. Bley-Vroman, R., & Yoshinaga, N. (1991). Broad and narrow constraints on the English dative alternation: Some fundamental differences between native speakers and foreign language learners. University of Hawaii Working Papers in ESL, 11, 157-199.
12. Bowerman, M. (1982). Evaluating competing linguistic models with language acquisition data: Implications of developmental errors with causative verbs. Quaderni di Semantica, 3, 5-66.
13. Bowerman, M. (1990). Mapping thematic roles onto syntactic functions: Are children helped by innate "linking rules" Linguistics, 28, 1253-1289.
14. Bowerman, M. (1997, April). Predicate semantics and lexicosyntactic development: A crosslinguistic perspective. Plenary paper presented at the GALA 97 Conference on Language Acquisition, Edinburgh, UK.
15. Braine, M. D., Brody, R. E., Fisch, S. M., & Weisberger, M. J. (1990). Can children use a verb without exposure to its argument structure Journal of Child Language, 17, 313-342.
16. Brown, C. (1998). The role of the L1 grammar in the L2 acquisition of segmental structure. Second Language Research, 14, 136-193.
17. Burzio, L. (1986). Italian syntax: A government and binding approach. Dordrecht: Reidel.
18. Carpenter, R. (1993). The semantics of GET. Unpublished Masters thesis, University of Toronto.
19. Chen, D. (1996). L2 Acquisition of English psych verbs by native speakers of Chinese and French. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, McGill University, Montreal.
20. Chierchia, G. (1989). A semantics for unaccusatives and its syntactic consequences. Unpublished manuscript, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY.
21. Chomsky, N. (1970). Remarks on nominalization. In R. Jacobs & P. Rosenbaum (Eds.), Readings in English transformational grammar (pp.184-221). The Hague: Mouton.
22. Chomsky, N. (1995). The Minimalist Program. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
23. Cinque, G. (1988). On si constructions and the theory of Arb. Linguistic Inquiry, 19, 521-581.
24. Dowty, D. (1979). Word meaning and Montague grammar. Dordrecht: Reidel.
25. Epstein, S., Flynn, S., & Martohardjono, G. (1996). Second language acquisition: Theoretical and experimental issues in contemporary research. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 19, 677-714.
26. Eubank, L., & Gregg, K. (1999). Critical periods and (second) language acquisition: Divide et impera. In D. Birdsong (Ed.), Second language acquisition and the critical period hypothesis (pp. 65-100). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
27. Gass, S. (1996). Second language acquisition and linguistic theory: The role of language transfer. In W. Ritchie & T. Bhatia (Eds.), Handbook of second language acquisition (pp. 317-345). New York: Academic Press.
28. Göksel, A. (1993). Levels of representation and argument structure in Turkish. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, School of Oriental and African Studies (SOAS), University of London.
29. Grondin, N., & White, L. (1996). Functional categories in child L2 acquisition. Language Acquisition, 5, 1-34.
30. Haegeman, L. (1985). The get passive and Burzios generalization. Lingua, 66, 53-67.
31. Hale, K. (1996). Can UG and L1 be distinguished in L2 acquisition Commentary on Epstein et al. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 19, 728-730.
32. Hale, K., & Keyser, S. J. (1993). On argument structure and the lexical representation of syntactic relations. In K. Hale & S. J. Keyser (Eds.), The view from Building 20 (pp. 51-109). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
33. Harley, H. (1995). Subjects, events, and licensing. Doctoral dissertation, Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Cambridge, MA: MIT Working Papers in Linguistics.
34. Haspelmath, M. (1993). More on the typology of inchoative/causative verb alternations. In B. Comrie & M. Polinsky (Eds.), Causatives and transitivity (pp. 87-120). Amsterdam: Benjamins.
35. Hirakawa, M. (1995). L2 acquisition of English unaccusative constructions. In D. MacLaughlin & S. McEwen (Eds.), Proceedings of the 19th Boston University Conference on Language Development (pp. 291-302). Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press.
36. Hirakawa, M. (1998). Deep versus surface unaccusativity in L2 Japanese. In S. Montrul & R. Slabakova (Eds.), Proceedings of the 1997 Generative Approaches to Second Language Acquisition Conference (McGill Working Papers in Linguistics, Vol. 13, pp. 61-71). Montreal: McGill University Linguistics Department.
37. Hochberg, J. (1986). Childrens judgments of transitivity errors. Journal of Child Language, 13, 317-334.
38. Inagaki, S. (1997). Japanese and Chinese learners acquisition of the narrow-range rules for the dative alternation in English. Language Learning, 47, 637-669.
39. Jackendoff, R. (1990). Semantic structures. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
40. Jackendoff, R. (1997). The architecture of the language faculty. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
41. Jonz, J. (1990). Another turn in the conversations: What does cloze measure TESOL Quarterly, 24, 61-83.
42. Ju, M. (2000). Overpassivization errors by second language learners: The effects of conceptualizable agents in discourse. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 22, 85-111.
43. Juffs, A. (1996). Learnability and the lexicon. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
44. Juffs, A. (1998). The acquisition of semantic-syntax correspondences and verb frequencies in ESL materials. Language Teaching Research, 2, 93-123.
45. Kellerman, E. (1985). If at first you dont succeed. . . . In S. Gass & C. Madden (Eds.), Input in second language acquisition (pp. 345-353). Rowley, MA: Newbury House.
46. Lakoff, G. (1968). Some verbs of change and causation. In S. Kuno (Ed.), Mathematical linguistics and automatic translation (Report NSF-20, Aiken Computation Laboratory). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University.
47. Levin, B., & Rappaport Hovav, M. (1994). A preliminary analysis of causative verbs in English. Lingua, 92, 35-77.
48. Levin, B., & Rappaport Hovav, M. (1995). Unaccusativity at the syntax semantics interface. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
49. Lewis, G. (1967). Turkish grammar. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
50. Lord, C. (1979). Dont you fall me down: Childrens generalizations regarding cause and transitivity. Papers and Reports on Child Language Development, 19, 81-89.
51. Maldonado, R. (1988). Energetic reflexives in Spanish. Proceedings of the Fourteenth Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistic Society, 153-165.
52. Marantz, A. (1997). No escape from syntax: Dont try morphological analysis in the privacy of your own lexicon (Penn Working Papers in Linguistics, Vol. 4). Philadelphia: Department of Linguistics, Pennsylvania University.
53. Maratsos, M. P., Gudeman, R., Gerad-Ngo, P., & DeHart, G. (1987). A study in novel word learning: The productivity of the causative. In B. MacWhinney (Ed.), Mechanisms of language acquisition (pp. 89-113). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
54. Montrul, S. (1997). Transitivity alternations in second language acquisition: A crosslinguistic study of English, Spanish, and Turkish. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, McGill University, Montreal.
55. Montrul, S. (1999a). Causative errors with unaccusative verbs in L2 Spanish. Second Language Research, 15, 191-219.
56. Montrul, S. (1999b). Se o no se: A look at transitive and intransitive verbs in L2 Spanish. Spanish Applied Linguistics, 3, 145-194.
57. Moore, M. (1993). Second language acquisition of lexically constrained transitivity alternations: Acquisition of the causative alternation by second language learners of English. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of South Carolina, Columbia.
58. Nishida, C. (1994). The Spanish reflexive clitic as an aspectual class marker. Linguistics, 32, 425-458.
59. Oshita, H. (1997). The unaccusative trap: L2 acquisition of English intransitive verbs. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Southern California, Los Angeles.
60. Parodi, T., Schwartz, B., & Clahsen, H. (1997). On the L2 acquisition of the morphosyntax of German nominals. Essex Research Reports in Linguistics, 15, 1-43.
61. Parsons, T. (1990). Events in the semantics of English: A study in subatomic semantics. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
62. Perlmutter, D. (1978). Impersonal passives and the unaccusative hypothesis. Proceedings of the Fourth Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistic Society, 4, 157-189.
63. Pesetsky, D. (1995). Zero syntax: Experiencers and cascades. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
64. Pinker, S. (1989). Learnability and cognition: The acquisition of argument structure. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
65. Pustejovsky, J. (1995). The generative lexicon. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
66. Pye, C. (1994). A crosslinguistic approach to the causative alternation. In Y. Levi (Ed.), Other children, other languages (pp. 243-263). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
67. Rappaport Hovav, M., & Levin, B. (1998). Building verb meaning. In M. Butt & W. Geuder (Eds.), The projection of arguments: Lexical and compositional factors (pp. 97-134). Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications.
68. Rosen, C. (1984). The interface between semantic roles and initial grammatical relations. In D. Perlmutter & C. Rosen (Eds.), Studies in relational grammar 2 (pp. 38-77). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
69. Schachter, J. (1988). Second language acquisition and its relationship to Universal Grammar. Applied Linguistics, 9, 219-235.
70. Schwartz, B., & Sprouse, R. (1994). Word order and nominative case in nonnative language acquisition. In T. Hoekstra & B. Schwartz (Eds.), Language acquisition studies in generative grammar (pp. 317-368). Amsterdam: Benjamins.
71. Schwartz, B., & Sprouse, R. (1996). L2 cognitive states and the Full Transfer/Full Access model. Second Language Research, 12, 40-72.
72. Slabakova, R. (1997). Bulgarian aspect in phrase structure. Linguistics, 35, 673-704.
73. Sorace, A. (1995). Acquiring linking rules and argument structures in a second language: The unaccusative/unergative distinction. In L. Eubank, L. Selinker, & M. Sharwood Smith (Eds.), The current state of interlanguage (pp. 153-175). Amsterdam: Benjamins.
74. Travis, L. (1991). Inner aspect and the structure of VP. Cahiers de Linguistique de lUniversité de Qué-bec a` Montréal, 1, 132-146.
75. Travis, L. (1994). Event phrase and a theory of functional categories. In P. Koskinen (Ed.), Proceedings of the 1994 Annual Conference of the Canadian Linguistic Association (Toronto Working Papers in Linguistics, pp. 559-570). Toronto: University of Toronto.
76. Vendler, Z. (1967). Linguistics in philosophy. New York: Cornell University Press.
77. Webelhuth, G. (Ed.). (1995). Government and binding theory and the Minimalist Program. Oxford: Blackwell.
78. White, L. (1987). Markedness and second language acquisition: The question of transfer. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 9, 261-286.
79. White, L. (1989). Universal Grammar and second language acquisition. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
80. White, L. (1991a). Argument structure in second language acquisition. French Language Studies, 1, 189-207.
81. White, L. (1991b). The verb-movement parameter in second language acquisition. Language Acquisition, 1, 337-360.
82. White, L. (1992). Universal Grammar: Is it just a new name for old problems In S. Gass & L. Selinker (Eds.), Language transfer in language learning (pp. 217-232). Amsterdam: Benjamins.
83. White, L., Montrul, S., Hirakawa, M., Chen, D., Bruhn de Garavito, J., & Brown, C. (1998). Zero morphology and the T/SM restriction in the L2 acquisition of psych verbs. In L.-M. Beck (Ed.), Morphology and the interface in L2 knowledge (pp. 257-282). Amsterdam: Benjamins.
84. White, L., Brown, C., Bruhn de Garavito, J., Chen, D., Hirakawa, M., & Montrul, S. (1999). Psych verbs in second language acquisition. In E. Klein & G. Martohardjono (Eds.), Second language acquisition and generative grammar (pp. 173-199). Amsterdam: Benjamins.
85. Wong, S. (1983). Overproduction, underlexicalization, and unidiomatic usage in the make causatives of Chinese speakers: A case of flexibility in interlanguage analysis. Language Learning and Communication, 2, 151-163.
86. Yip, V. (1995). Interlanguage and learnability. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
87. Zobl, H. (1989). Canonical typological structure and ergativity in English L2 acquisition. In S. Gass & J. Schachter (Eds.), Linguistic perspectives on second language acquisition (pp. 203-221). New York: Cambridge University Press.