The compounding parameter in second language acquisition

Studies in Second Language Acquisition

Volumn 24, Issue 4, 2002, Pages 507-540

  Slabakova, Roumyana ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF IOWA   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84937380434     PISSN: 02722631     EISSN: 14701545     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1017/S0272263102004011     Document Type: Article

References (88)

1. Andersen, S. R. (1992). A-morphous morphology. New York: Cambridge University Press.
2. Ayoun, D. (1996). The Subset Principle in second language acquisition. Applied Psycholinguistics, 17, 185-213.
3. Baker, C. L. (1979). Syntactic theory and the projection problem. Linguistic Inquiry, 10, 533-581.
4. Berent, G. (1994). The Subset Principle in second-language acquisition. In E. Tarone, S. Gass, & A. Cohen (Eds.), Research methodology in second-language acquisition (pp. 17-39). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
5. Berent, G., Samar, V., Gass, S., & Plough, I. (1994, October). Second language acquisition of English anaphors and pronominals: Adult learner evidence for the Subset Principle. Paper presented at the 14th Second Language Research Forum, Montreal.
6. Berwick, R. (1985). The acquisition of syntactic knowledge. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
7. 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.
8. Borer, H., & Wexler, K. (1987). The maturation of syntax. In T. Roeper & E. Williams (Eds.), Parameter setting (pp. 123-172). Dordrecht: Reidel.
9. Braine, M. (1971). On two types of models of the internalization of grammars. In D. Slobin (Ed.), The ontogenesis of grammars (pp. 152-188). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
10. Brown, R., & Hanlon, C. (1970). Derivational complexity and the order of acquisition in child speech. In J. Hayes (Ed.), Cognition and the development of language (pp. 11-54). New York: Wiley and Sons.
11. Carrier, J., & Randall, J. (1992). The argument structure and syntactic structure of resultatives. Linguistic Inquiry, 23, 173-234.
12. Chomsky, N. (1995). The Minimalist Program. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
13. Chomsky, N. (2000). Minimalist inquiries: The framework. In R. Martin, D. Michaels, & J. Uriagareka (Eds.), Step by step: Essays on minimalist syntax in honor of Howard Lasnik (pp. 88-155). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
14. Chomsky, N., & Halle, M. (1968). The sound pattern of English. New York: Harper & Row.
15. Crain, S., & Thornton, R. (1998). Investigations in Universal Grammar. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
16. Den Dikken, M. (1995). Particles: On the syntax of verb-particle, triadic, and causative constructions. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
17. Finer, D. (1991). Binding parameters in second language acquisition. In L. Eubank (Ed.), Point counterpoint: Universal Grammar in the second language (pp. 351-374). Amsterdam: Benjamins.
18. Finer, D., & Broselow, E. (1986). Second language acquisition of reflexive binding. In S. Berman, J. Choe, & J. McDonough (Eds.), Proceedings of NELS 16 (pp. 154-168). Amherst, MA: GLSA Publications.
19. Fodor, J. (1983). Modularity of mind. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
20. 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). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
21. Hale, K., & Keyser, S. J. (1993). On argument structure and the lexical expression of syntactic relations. In K. Hale & S. J. Keyser (Eds.), The view from Building 20 (pp. 53-109). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
22. Harris, J. W. (1991a). The exponence of gender in Spanish. Linguistic Inquiry, 22, 27-62.
23. Harris, J. W. (1991b). The form classes of Spanish substantives. In G. Booij & J. van Marle (Eds.), Yearbook of morphology 4 (pp. 65-88). Dordrecht: Kluwer.
24. Hermon, G. (1992). Binding theory and parameter setting. The Linguistic Review, 9, 145-181.
25. Hirakawa, M. (1990). A study of the L2 acquisition of English reflexives. Second Language Research, 2, 33-52.
26. Hoekstra, T. (1988). Small clause results. Lingua, 74, 101-139.
27. Hornstein, N., & Lightfoot, D. (1981). Introduction. In N. Hornstein & D. Lightfoot (Eds.), Explanation in linguistics (pp. 9-31). London: Longman.
28. Hyams, N. (1986). Language acquisition and the theory of parameters. Dordrecht: Reidel.
29. Kayne, R. (1984). Connectedness and binary branching. Dordrecht: Foris.
30. Keenan, E., & Comrie, B. (1977). Noun phrase accessibility and Universal Grammar. Linguistic Inquiry, 8, 63-99.
31. Krashen, S. (1981). Second language acquisition and second language learning. Oxford: Pergamon Press.
32. Krashen, S. (1982). Principles and practice in second language acquisition. Oxford: Pergamon Press.
33. Krashen, S. (1985). The input hypothesis: Issues and implications. London: Longman.
34. Larson, R. (1988). On the double object construction. Linguistic Inquiry, 19, 335-391.
35. Larson, R. (1990). Double objects revisited: A reply to Jackendoff. Linguistic Inquiry, 21, 589-632.
36. Liceras, J. M. (1989). On some properties of the "pro-drop" parameter: Looking for missing subjects in non-native Spanish. In S. Gass & J. Schachter (Eds.), Linguistic perspectives on second language acquisition (pp. 109-133). New York: Cambridge University Press.
37. Liceras, J. M., & Diaz, L. (2000). Triggers in L2 acquisition. Studia Linguistica, 54, 197-211.
38. Liceras, J. M., & Valenzuela, E. (1998, September). The Compounding Parameter in L2 acquisition: The Subset Principle revisited. Paper presented at Generative Approaches to Second Language Acquisition, Pittsburgh, PA.
39. Lieber, R. (1992). Deconstructing morphology. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
40. Long, M. (1983). Does instruction make a difference? A review of research. TESOL Quarterly, 17, 359-382.
41. Long, M. (1988). Instructed interlanguage development. In L. Beebe (Ed.), Issues in second language acquisition: Multiple perspectives (pp. 115-141). Rowley, MA: Newbury House.
42. Long, M. (1991). Focus on form: A design feature in language teaching methodology. In K. de Bot, D. Coste, R. Ginsberg, & C. Kramsch (Eds.), Foreign language research in cross-cultural perspective (pp. 39-52). Amsterdam: Benjamins.
43. MacLaughlin, D. (1995). Language acquisition and the Subset Principle. The Linguistic Review, 12, 143-191.
44. MacWhinney, B. (1996). The CHILDES system. American Journal of Speech Language Pathology, 5, 5-14.
45. Manzini, R., & Wexler, K. (1987). Parameters, binding theory, and learnability. Linguistic Inquiry, 18, 413-444.
46. Marantz, A. (1993). Implications of asymmetries in double object constructions. In S. Mchombo (Ed.), Theoretical aspects of Bantu grammar (pp. 113-150). Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications.
47. Pesetsky, D. (1995). Zero syntax. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
48. Pienemann, M. (1985). Learnability and syllabus construction. In K. Hyltenstam & M. Pienemann (Eds.), Modelling and assessing second language acquisition (pp. 23-75). Clevedon, UK: Multilingual Matters.
49. Pienemann, M. (1988). Determining the influence of instruction on L2 speech processing. AILA Review, 5, 40-72.
50. Pienemann, M., & Johnston, M. (1987). Factors influencing the development of language proficiency. In D. Nunan (Ed.), Applying second language acquisition research (pp. 85-106). Adelaide, Australia: National Curriculum Resource Centre, Adult Migrant Education Programme.
51. Piera, C. (1995). On compounding in English and Spanish. In H. Campos & P. Kempchinsky (Eds.), Evolution and revolution in linguistic theory (pp. 302-315). Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.
52. Pinker, S. (1984). Language learnability and language development. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
53. Pinker, S. (1989). Learnability and cognition: The acquisition of argument structure. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
54. Roeper, T., Snyder, W., & Hiramatsu, K. (2002). Language acquisition in a minimalist framework: Root compounds, merger, and the syntactic-morphology interface. In I. Lasser (Ed.), The process of language acquisition: Proceedings of the 1999 conference (pp. 25-35). Frankfurt: Peter Lang.
55. Rutherford, W., & Sharwood Smith, M. (1985). Consciousness raising and Universal Grammar. Applied Linguistics, 6, 274-282.
56. Schwartz, B. (1986). The epistemological status of second language acquisition. Second Language Research, 2, 120-159.
57. Schwartz, B. (1988). A reply to Gregg: In defense of theory building. Second Language Research, 4, 157-173.
58. Schwartz, B. (1993). On explicit and negative data effecting and affecting competence and linguistic behavior. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 15, 147-163.
59. Schwartz, B., & Gubala-Ryzak, M. (1992). Learnability and grammar reorganization in L2A: Against negative evidence causing the unlearning of verb movement. Second Language Research, 8, 1-3 8.
60. Schwartz, B., & 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.
61. Schwartz (Eds.), Language acquisition studies in generative grammar (pp. 317-368). Amsterdam: Benjamins.
62. Schwartz, B., & Sprouse, R. A. (1996). L2 cognitive states and the Full Transfer/Full Access hypothesis. Second Language Research, 12, 40-72.
63. Sharwood Smith, M. (1981). Consciousness-raising and the second language learner. Applied Linguistics, 2, 159-168.
64. Sharwood Smith, M. (1991). Speaking to many minds: On the relevance of different types of language information for the L2 learner. Second Language Research, 7, 118-132.
65. Sharwood Smith, M. (1993). Input enhancement in instructed SLA: Theoretical bases. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 15, 165-179.
66. Slabakova, R. (2001). Telicity in the second language. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
67. Snyder, W. (1995). Language acquisition and language variation: The role of morphology [doctoral dissertation]. Cambridge, MA: MIT Working Papers in Linguistics.
68. Snyder, W. (2001). On the nature of syntactic variation: Evidence from complex predicates and complex word-formation. Language, 77, 324-342.
69. Snyder, W., & Stromswold, K. (1997). On the structure and acquisition of the English dative construction. Linguistic Inquiry, 28, 281-317.
70. Spada, N., & Lightbown, P. (1993). Instruction and the development of questions in L2 classrooms. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 15, 205-224.
71. Sybesma, R. (1992). Causatives and accomplishments: The case of Chinese ba [doctoral dissertation]. Leiden: Holland Institute of Linguistics.
72. Thomas, M. (1991). Universal Grammar and the interpretation of reflexives in a second language. Language, 67, 211-239.
73. Trahey, M. (1996). Positive evidence in second language acquisition: Some long-Term effects. Second Language Research, 12, 111-139.
74. Trahey, M., & White, L. (1993). Positive evidence and preemption in the second language classroom. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 15, 181-204.
75. VanPatten, B., & Cadierno, T. (1993). Explicit instruction and input processing. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 15, 225-243.
76. Wexler, K. (1981). Some issues in the theory of learnability. In C. L. Baker & J. McCarthy (Eds.), The logical problem of language acquisition (pp. 30-52). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
77. Wexler, K., & Manzini, R. (1987). Parameters and learnability in binding theory. In T. Roeper & E. Williams (Eds.), Parameter setting (pp. 41-76). Dordrecht: Reidel.
78. White, L. (1985). The pro-drop parameter in adult second language acquisition. Language Learning, 35, 47-62.
79. White, L. (1987). Against comprehensible input: The input hypothesis and the development of interlanguage competence. Applied Linguistics, 8, 95-110.
80. White, L. (1989a). The principle of adjacency in second language acquisition: Do L2 learners observe the Subset Principle? In S. Gass & J. Schachter (Eds.), Linguistic perspectives on second language acquisition (pp. 134-158). New York: Cambridge University Press.
81. White, L. (1989b). Universal Grammar and second language acquisition. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
82. White, L. (1990). Implications of learnability theories for second language learning and teaching. In M. A. K. Halliday, J. Gibbons, & H. Nicholas (Eds.), Learning, keeping, and using language (pp. 271-286). Amsterdam: Benjamins.
83. White, L. (1991a). Adverb placement in second language acquisition: Some effects of positive and negative evidence in the classroom. Second Language Research, 7, 133-161.
84. White, L. (1991b). The verb movement parameter in second language acquisition. Language Acquisition, 1, 337-360.
85. White, L. (1992). On triggering data in L2 acquisition: A reply to Schwartz and Gubala-Ryzak. Second Language Research, 8, 120-137.
86. White, L. (1996). Universal Grammar and second language acquisition: Current trends and new directions. In W. Ritchie & T. Bhatia (Eds.), Handbook of second language acquisition (pp. 85-118). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
87. White, L., Spada, N., Lightbown, P., & Ranta, L. (1991). Input enhancement and L2 question formation. Applied Linguistics, 12, 416-432.
88. Zobl, H. (1988). Configurationality and the Subset Principle: The acquisition of V? by Japanese learners of English. In J. Pankhurst, M. Sharwood Smith, & P. Van Buren (Eds.), Learnability and second languages: A book of readings (pp. 116-131). Dordrecht: Foris