The theoretical significance of Universal Grammar in second language acquisition

Second Language Research

Volumn 17, Issue 4, 2001, Pages 345-367

  Hawkins, Roger ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF ESSEX   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84992792153     PISSN: 02676583     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/026765830101700404     Document Type: Article

References (44)

1. Bley-Vroman, R. 1989: What is the logical problem of foreign language learning? In Gass, S. and Schachter, J., editors, Linguistic perspectives on second language acquisition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 41-68.
2. Bley-Vroman, R., Felix, S. and Ioup, G. 1988: The accessibility of universal grammar in adult language learning. Second Language Research 4, 1-32.
3. Bruhn de Garavito, J. and White, L. 2000: L2 acquisition of Spanish DPs: the status of grammatical features. Unpublished manuscript, McGill University, Montreal.
4. Carroll, S. 1999: Putting ‘input’ in its proper place. Second Language Research 15, 337-388.
5. Carroll, S. 2000: Input and evidence: the raw material of second language acquisition. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
6. Chomsky, N. 1986: Barriers. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
7. Chomsky, N. 1998: Minimalist inquiries: the framework. MIT Working Papers in Linguistics 15, 1-56.
8. Clahsen, H. and Muysken, P. 1986: The availability of universal grammar to adult and child learners: a study of the acquisition of German word order. Second Language Research 2, 93-119.
9. Corder, S. P. 1967: The significance of learners’ errors. International Review of Applied Linguistics 5, 161-170.
10. Crain, S. and Lillo-Martin, D. 1999: An introduction to linguistic theory and language acquisition. Malden, MA: Blackwell.
11. Dekydtspotter, L. and Sprouse, R. 2000: Syntax-semantics composition in English-French interlanguage: a reply to Newmeyer on grammatical design and second language epistemology. Unpublished manuscript, Indiana University, Bloomington, IN.
12. Dekydtspotter, L., Sprouse, R. and Anderson, B. 1997: The interpretive interface in L2 acquisition: the process-result distinction in English-French interlanguage grammars. Language Acquisition 6, 297-332.
13. Dekydtspotter, L., Sprouse, R. and Anderson, B. 1998: Interlanguage A-bar dependencies: binding construals, null prepositions and universal grammar. Second Language Research 14, 341-358.
14. Dulay, H., Burt, M. and Krashen, S. 1982: Language two. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
15. Du Plessis, J., Solin, D., Travis, L. and White, L. 1987: UG or not UG, that is the question: a reply to Clahsen and Muysken. Second Language Research 3, 56-75.
16. Epstein, S., Flynn, S. and Martohardjono, G. 1996: Second language acquisition: theoretical and experimental issues in contemporary research. Brain and Behavioural Sciences 19, 677-714.
17. Eubank, L. 1994: Optionality and the initial state in L2 development. In Hoekstra, T. and Schwartz, B., editors, Language acquisition studies in generative grammar. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 369-388.
18. Felix, S. 1985: More evidence on competing cognitive systems. Second Language Research 1, 47-72.
19. Hawkins, R. 1998: Explaining the difficulty of French gender attribution for speakers of English. Paper presented at the 8th annual EUROSLA conference, Paris.
20. Huang, C-T. 1982: Logical relations in Chinese and the theory of grammar. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, MIT, Cambridge, MA.
21. Johnson, J. and Newport, E. 1991: Critical period effects on universal properties of language: the status of subjacency in the acquisition of a second language. Cognition 39, 215-258.
22. Lardiere, D. 1998a: Case and tense in the ‘fossilized’ steady state. Second Language Research 14, 1-26.
23. Lardiere, D. 1998b: Dissociating syntax from morphology in a divergent L2 end-state grammar. Second Language Research 14, 359-375.
24. Lardiere, D. 2000: Mapping features to forms in second language acquisition. In Archibald, J., editor, 102-129.
25. Li, X. 1998: Adult L2 accessibility to UG: an issue revisited. In Flynn, S., Martohardjono, G. and O’Neil, W., editors, 89-110
26. Martohardjono, G. 1993: Wh-movement in the acquisition of a second language: a cross-linguistic study of 3 languages with and without overt movement. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY.
27. Martohardjono, G. 1998: Measuring competence in L2 acquisition: commentary on part II. In Flynn, S., Martohardjono, G. and O’Neil, W., editors, 151-157.
28. Newmeyer, F. 1998: Language form and language function. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
29. Roberts, I. 1997: Comparative syntax. London: Arnold.
30. Saito, M. and Fukui, N. 1998: Order in phrase structure and movement. Linguistic Inquiry 29, 439-474.
31. Schachter, J. 1990: On the issue of completeness in second language acquisition. Second Language Research 6, 93-124.
32. Schwartz, B. and Sprouse, R. 1994: Word order and nominative Case in nonnative language acquisition: a longitudinal study of (L1 Turkish) German interlanguage. In Hoekstra, T. and Schwartz, B., editors, Language acquisition studies in generative grammar: papers in honor of Kenneth Wexler from the 1991 GLOW workshops. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 317-368.
33. Schwartz, B. and Sprouse, R. 2000: When syntactic theories evolve: consequences for L2 acquisition research. In Archibald, J., editor, Second language acquisition and linguistic theory. Malden, MA: Blackwell.
34. Selinker, L. 1972: Interlanguage. International Review of Applied Linguistics 10, 209-231.
35. Uziel, S. 1993: Resetting Universal Grammar parameters: evidence from second language acquisition of subjacency and the empty category principle. Second Language Research 9, 49-83
36. Vainikka, A. and Young-Scholten, M. 1994: Direct access to X’-theory: evidence from Korean and Turkish adults learning German. In Hoekstra, T. and Schwartz, B., editors, Language acquisition studies in generative grammar: papers in honor of Kenneth Wexler from the 1991 GLOW workshops. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 265-316.
37. Vainikka, A. and Young-Scholten, M. 1996: Gradual development of L2 phrase structure. Second Language Research 12, 7-39.
38. Vainikka, A. and Young-Scholten, M. 1998: the initial state in the L2 acquisition of phrase structure. In Flynn, S., Martohardjono, G. and O’Neil, W., editors, The generative study of second language acquisition. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum, 17-34.
39. van Buren, P. and Sharwood Smith, M. 1985: The acquisition of preposition stranding by second language learners and parametric variation. Second Language Research 1, 18-46.
40. White, L. 1985: The acquisition of parameterized grammars: subjacency in second language acquisition. Second Language Research 1, 1-17.
41. White, L. 1992: Subjacency violations and empty categories in second language acquisition. In Goodluck, H. and Rochemont, M., editors, Island constraints: theory, acquisition and processing. Dordrecht: Kluwer, 445-464.
42. White, L. and Juffs, A. 1998: Constraints on wh-movement in two different contexts of nonnative language acquisition: competence and processing. In Flynn, S., Martohardjono, G. and O’Neil, W., editors, The generative study of second language acquisition. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum, 111-129.
43. Zobl, H. 1980: Developmental and transfer errors: their common bases and (possibly) differential effects on subsequent learning. TESOL Quarterly 14, 469-479.
44. Zobl, H. 1982: A direction for contrastive analysis: the comparative study of developmental sequences. TESOL Quarterly 16, 169-183.