Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-r5fsc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-27T16:56:24.719Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Second language acquisition of English questions: An elicited production study

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 January 2013

LUCIA POZZAN  and
ERIN QUIRK
LUCIA POZZAN*
Affiliation:
University of Pennsylvania
ERIN QUIRK
Affiliation:
City University of New York
*
ADDRESS FOR CORRESPONDENCE Lucia Pozzan, Psychology Department and Institute for Research in Cognitive Science, University of Pennsylvania, 3401 Walnut Street, Philadelphia, PA 19104. E-mail: lpozzan@sas.upenn.edu
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The present study investigates the role of the syntactic properties of the first and the target language on second language (L2) learners’ production of English main and embedded clause questions. The role of the first language (L1) was investigated by comparing the production of L2 learners whose L1s (Chinese and Spanish) differ from English and each other in terms of word order in main and embedded clause questions. The role of the target language was investigated by comparing L2 learners’ production of yes/no and adjunct and argument wh-questions. The results indicate that the L1 is not a predictor of L2 learners’ production patterns for either main or embedded clause questions. The linguistic properties of the target language, on the contrary, predict learners’ accuracy and inversion profiles. In line with data from the English L1 acquisition literature, L2 learners produced higher inversion rates in main clause yes/no than in wh-questions, and particularly low inversion rates with why-questions. In line with data from nonstandard varieties of English and preliminary evidence from L1 acquisition, L2 learners produced higher nonstandard inversion rates in embedded clause wh-questions than in yes/no questions. Taken together, these results highlight that L2 production is affected and constrained by the same factors at play in L1 acquisition and dialectal variation.

Type
Articles
Information
Applied Psycholinguistics , Volume 35 , Issue 6 , November 2014 , pp. 1055 - 1086
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2013 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Ambridge, B., Rowland, C., Theakston, A., & Tomasello, M. (2006). Comparing different accounts of inversion errors in children's non-subject wh-questions: What experimental data can tell us? Journal of Child Language, 33, 519–557.Google Scholar
Alexiadou, A., & Anagnostopoulou, E. (1998). Parametrizing AGR: Word order, V-movement and EPP-checking. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory, 16, 491–539.Google Scholar
Anderson, R. (1983). Transfer to somewhere. In Gass, S. M. & Selinker, L. (Eds.), Language transfer in language learning (pp. 177–201). Rowley, MA: Newbury House.Google Scholar
Argyri, E., & Sorace, A. (2007). Crosslinguistic influence and language dominance in older bilingual children. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 10, 77–99.Google Scholar
Baauw, S. (1998). Subject–verb inversion in Spanish wh-questions: Movement as symmetry breaker. In Linguistics in the Netherlands, 15, 1–12.Google Scholar
Bellugi, U. (1971). Simplification in children's language. In Huxley, R. & Ingram, E. (Eds.), Language acquisition: Models and methods (pp. 95–119). New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Berk, S. (2003). Why “why” is different. In Beachley, B., Brown, A., & Conlin, F. (Eds.), Proceedings of BUCLD, 27 (pp. 127–137). Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press.Google Scholar
Bever, T. G. (1970). The cognitive basis for linguistic structures. In Hayes, J. R. (Ed.), Cognition and development of language (pp. 279–362). New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
Bley-Vroman, R. (1990). The logical problem of foreign language learning. Linguistic Analysis, 20, 3–49.Google Scholar
Bley-Vroman, R. (1997). Features and patterns in foreign language learning. Paper presented at SLRF 17, University of Michigan, East Lansing, MI.Google Scholar
Bloom, L., Merkin, S., & Wooten, J. (1982). Wh-questions: Linguistic factors that contribute to the sequence of acquisition. Child Development, 53, 1084–1092.Google Scholar
Brown, R. (1968). The development of wh questions in child speech. Journal of Verbal Learning and Behavior, 7, 279–290.Google Scholar
Brown, R., Cazden, C., & Bellugi, U. (1973). The child's grammar from I to III. In Ferguson, C. & Slobin, D. (Eds.), Studies of child language development (pp. 295–333). New York: Holt, Rinehart, & Winston.Google Scholar
Cancino, H., Rosansky, E. J., & Shumann, J. H. (1975). The acquisition of the English auxiliary by native Spanish speakers. TESOL Quarterly, 9, 421–430.Google Scholar
Cardinaletti, A. (2007). Subjects and questions: Some new generalizations. In Camacho, J., Flores-Ferrán, N., Sánchez, L., Déprez, V., & Cabrera, M. J. (Eds.), Romance linguistics 2006 (Vol. 287, p. 57). New York: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Clancy, P. M. (1989). Form and function in the acquisition of Korean wh-questions. Journal of Child Language, 16, 323–347.Google Scholar
de Villiers, J. G. (1991). Why questions? In Maxfield, T. & Plunkett, B. (Eds.), University of Massachusetts occasional papers in linguistics: The acquisition of wh (pp. 155–174). Amherst, MA: GLSA.Google Scholar
Eckman, F., Moravscik, E., & Wirth, J. (1989). Implicational universals and interrogative structure in the interlanguage of ESL learners. Language Learning, 39, 173–205.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Epstein, S. D., Flynn, S., & Martohardjono, G. (1996). Second language acquisition: Theoretical and experimental issues in contemporary research. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 1, 677–758.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Erreich, A. (1984). Learning how to ask: Patterns of inversion in yes–no and wh-questions. Journal of Child Language, 11, 592–597.Google Scholar
Escutia, M. (2002). Spanish learners’ production of English embedded interrogative clauses. Circulo de Linguistica Aplicada a la Comunicación. Madrid: Universidad Complutense de Madrid.Google Scholar
Eubank, L. (1993). On the transfer of parametric values in L2 development. Language Acquisition, 3, 183–208.Google Scholar
Eubank, L. (1996). Negation in early German–English interlanguage: More valueless features in the L2 initial state. Second Language Research, 12, 73–106.Google Scholar
Fathman, A., & LoCoco, V. (1989). Word order contrasts and production in three target languages. In Dechert, H. & Raupach, M. (Eds.), Transfer in language production (pp. 159–170). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.Google Scholar
Felix, S. (1976). Wh-pronouns in first and second language acquisition. Linguistische Berichte, 44, 52–64.Google Scholar
Filppula, M. (1999). The grammar of Irish English: Language in Hibernian style. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Finegan, E. (1999). Language: Its structure and use. Ft Worth, TX: Harcourt.Google Scholar
Fries, C. C. (1945). Teaching and learning English as a foreign language. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.Google Scholar
Gleitman, L. R., Newport, E. L., & Gleitman, H. (1984). The current status of the motherese hypothesis. Journal of Child Language, 11, 43–79.Google Scholar
Goodall, G. (1991). On the status of SPEC of IP. Paper presented at WCCFL X, Arizona State University, Tempe.Google Scholar
Green, L. (2002). African American English: A linguistic introduction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Green, L., & Roeper, T. (2007). Node labels and features: Stable and unstable dialects and variation in acquisition. Linguistic Variation Yearbook, 7, 1–26.Google Scholar
Greenberg, J. (1963). Some universals of grammar with particular reference to the order of meaningful elements. In Greenberg, J. (Ed.), Universals of language (pp. 73–113). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Guasti, M. T., Thornton, R., & Wexler, K. (1995). Negation in children's questions: The case of English. In MacLaughlin, D. & McEwen, S. (Eds.), Proceedings of the 19th Annual Boston University Conference on Language Development (pp. 228–239). Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press.Google Scholar
Hawkins, R. (2003). Representational deficit’ theories of (adult) SLA: Evidence, counterevidence and implications. Paper presented at EUROSLA, Edinburgh.Google Scholar
Hawkins, R., & Hattori, H. (2006). Interpretation of English multiple wh-questions by Japanese speakers, a missing uninterpretable feature account. Second Language Research, 22, 269–301.Google Scholar
Haznedar, B. (2003). The status of functional categories in child second language acquisition: Evidence from the acquisition of CP. Second Language Research, 19, 1–41.Google Scholar
Henry, A. (1995). Belfast English and Standard English: Dialect variation and parameter setting. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Huddleston, R., & Pullum, G. K. (2002). The Cambridge grammar of English. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
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 (pp. 39–58). Rowley, MA: Newbury House.Google Scholar
Irwin, J. V., & Weston, A. J. (1975). The paired stimuli monograph. Acta Symbolica, 6, 1–76.Google Scholar
Jackson, H. (1981). Contrastive analysis as a predictor of errors, with reference to Punjabi learners of English. In Fisiak, J. (Ed.), Contrastive linguistics and the language teacher. Oxford: Pergamon Press.Google Scholar
Jansen, B., Lalleman, J., & Muysken, P. (1981). The alternation hypothesis: Acquisition of Dutch word order by Turkish and Moroccan foreign workers. Language Learning, 31, 315–336.Google Scholar
Johnston, M. (1985). Syntactic and morphological progression in learner English. Canberra: Department of Immigration and Ethnic Affairs.Google Scholar
Kay, P. (1980). On the syntax and semantics of early questions. Linguistic Inquiry, 11, 426–429.Google Scholar
Kellerman, E. (1995). Crosslinguistic influence: Transfer to nowhere? Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 15, 125–150.Google Scholar
Klein, W., & Perdue, C. (1993) Utterance structure. In Perdue, C. (Ed.), Adult language acquisition: Cross-linguistic perspectives (Vol. 2). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Kleinmann, H. (1977). Avoidance behavior in adult second language acquisition. Language Learning, 27, 93–107.Google Scholar
Klima, E. S., & Bellugi, U. (1966). Syntactic regularities in the speech of children. In Lyons, J. & Wales, R. J. (Eds.), Psycholinguistic papers: The proceedings of the 1966 Edinburgh Conference (pp. 183–219). Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.Google Scholar
Ko, H. (2005). Syntax of why-in-situ: Merge into [Spec, CP] in the overt syntax. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory, 23, 867–916.Google Scholar
Kuczaj, S. A., & Brannick, N. (1979). Children's use of the wh question modal auxiliary placement rule. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 28, 43–67.Google Scholar
Labov, W. (1972). Language in the inner city: Studies in the Black English vernacular. Philadelphia, PA: University of Pennsylvania Press.Google Scholar
Labov, W., & Labov, T. (1978). Learning the syntax of questions. In Campbell, R. & Smith, P. (Eds.), Recent advances in the psychology of language. New York: Plenum Press.Google Scholar
Lado, R. (1957). Linguistics across cultures: Applied linguistics for language teachers. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.Google Scholar
Lardiere, D. (1998) Case and tense in the “fossilized” steady state. Second Language Research, 14, 1–26.Google Scholar
Lardiere, D. (2007). Ultimate attainment in second language acquisition: A case study. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Lardiere, D. (2008). Feature assembly in second language acquisition. In Liceras, J. M., Zobl, H., & Goodluck, H. (Eds.), The role of formal features in second language acquisition. New York: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Lardiere, D. (2009). Some thoughts on the contrastive analysis of features in second language acquisition. Second Language Research, 25, 173–227.Google Scholar
Lee, S.-Y. (2008). Argument–adjunct asymmetry in the acquisition of inversion in wh questions by Korean learners of English. Language Learning, 58, 625–663.Google Scholar
Lightbown, P. (1978). Question form and question function in the speech of young French L2 learners. In Paradis, M. (Ed.), Aspects of bilingualism. Columbia, SC: Hornbeam.Google Scholar
Lin, J. W. (1992). The syntax of Zenmeyang “how” and Weishenme “why” in Mandarin Chinese. Journal of East Asian Linguistics, 1, 293–331.Google Scholar
Mackey, A., Pienemann, M., & Doughty, C. (1992). The value of interactional tasks in eliciting morphosyntactic structures. Language Acquisition Research Centre Occasional Papers, 2.Google Scholar
Major, R. C. (1986). The ontogeny model: Evidence from L2 acquisition of Spanish. Language Learning, 36, 453–504.Google Scholar
Markman, V. (2008). Pronominal copula constructions are what? Reduced specificational pseudoclefts! In Chang, C. & Haynie, H. (Eds.), Proceedings of the 26th West Coast Conference on Formal Linguistics (pp. 366–374). Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Proceedings Project.Google Scholar
McCloskey, J. (2006). Questions and questioning in a local English. In Zanuttini, R., Campos, H., Herburger, E., & Portner, P. H. (Eds.), Crosslinguistic research in syntax and semantics: Negation, tense, and clausal architecture (pp. 87–126). Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.Google Scholar
McClure, E. (1981). Formal and functional aspects of the codeswitched discourse of bilingual children. In Durán, R. P. (Ed.), Latino language and communicative behavior (pp. 69–94). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.Google Scholar
McDonald, J. L. (2000). Grammaticality judgments in a second language: Influences of age of acquisition and native language. Applied Pyscholinguistics, 21, 395–423.Google Scholar
Odlin, T. (1990). Word-order transfer, metalinguistic awareness and constraints on foreign language learning. In VanPatten, B. & Lee, J. (Eds.), Second language acquisition—Foreign language learning (pp. 95–117). Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
Oller, J., & Ziahosseiny, S. (1970). The contrastive analysis hypothesis and spelling errors. Language Learning, 20, 183–189.Google Scholar
Park, H. (2000). When-questions in second language acquisition. Second Language Research, 16, 44–76.Google Scholar
Pienemann, M., & Johnston, M. (1987). Factors influencing the development of language proficiency. In Nunan, D. (Ed.), Applying second language acquisition research (pp. 45–141). Adelaide: National Curriculum Resource Centre, AMEP.Google Scholar
Pienemann, M., Johnston, M., & Brindley, G. (1988). Constructing an acquisition-based procedure for second language assessment. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 10, 217–224.Google Scholar
Rehak, K. M., & Juffs, A. (2011). Native and non-native processing of morphologically complex English words: Testing the influence of derivational prefixes. In Granena, G., Koeth, J., Lee-Ellis, S., Lukyanchenko, A., Prieto Botana, G., & Rhoades, E. (Eds.), Selected proceedings of the Second Language Research Forum 2010: Reconsidering SLA research, dimensions, and directions (pp. 125–142). Cambridge, MA: Cascadilla Press.Google Scholar
Ringbom, H. (1987). The role of the first language in foreign language learning. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
Rizzi, L. (1990). Relativized minimality. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Rizzi, L. (2001). On the position “int(errogative)” in the left periphery of the clause. In Cinque, G. & Salvi, G. (Eds.), Current studies in Italian syntax: Essays offered to Lorenzo Renzi (pp. 287–296). Amsterdam: Elsevier.Google Scholar
Rowland, C. F. (2007). Explaining errors in children's questions. Cognition, 104, 106–134.Google Scholar
Rowland, C. F., & Pine, J. M. (2000). Subject–auxiliary inversion errors and wh-question acquisition: “What children do know?” Journal of Child Language, 27, 157–181.Google Scholar
Rutherford, W. E. (1983). Language typology and language transfer. In Gass, S. & Selinker, L. (Eds.), Language transfer in language learning. Rowley, MA: Newbury.Google Scholar
Rutten, N. C. M. A. (1995). Inversión en oraciones interrogativas Españolas: Un estudio sobre la accesibilidad de la GU para estudiantes de Español cuya lengua materna es el Holandés. Master's thesis, Utrecht University.Google Scholar
Sarma, J. (1991). The acquisition of wh-questions in English. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Connecticut.Google Scholar
Santelmann, L., Berk, S., Austin, J., Somashekar, S., & Lust, B. (2002). Continuity and development in the acquisition of inversion in yes/no questions: Dissociating movement and inflection. Journal of Child Language, 29, 813–842.Google Scholar
Schachter, J. (1990). On the issue of completeness in second language acquisition. Second Language Research, 6, 93–124.Google Scholar
Schwartz, B. D. (1998). The second language instinct. Lingua, 106, 133–160.Google Scholar
Schwartz, B. D., & Sprouse, R. A. (1996). L2 cognitive states and the full transfer/full access model. Second Language Research, 12, 40–72.Google Scholar
Selinger, H. (1978). Implications of a multiple critical periods hypothesis for second language learning. In Ritchie, W. (Ed.), Second language acquisition research. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Sjöholm, K. (1995). The influence of crosslinguistic, semantic, and input factors on the acquisition of English phrasal verbs: A comparison between Finnish and Swedish learners at an intermediate and advanced level. Åbo, Finland: Åbo Akademi University Press.Google Scholar
Spada, N., & Lightbown, P. (1999). Instruction, first language influence and developmental readiness in second language acquisition. Modern Language Journal, 83, 1–22.Google Scholar
Stockwell, R. P., Bowen, J. D., & Martin, J. W. (1965). The grammatical structures of English and Spanish. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Stromswold, K. (1990). Learnability and the acquisition of auxiliaries. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, MIT.Google Scholar
Suñer, M. (1994). V-movement and the licensing of argumental wh-phrases in Spanish. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory, 12, 335–372.Google Scholar
Taylor, B. P. (1975a). Adult language learning strategies and their pedagogical implications. TESOL Quarterly, 9, 391–399.Google Scholar
Taylor, B. P. (1975b). The use of overgeneralization and transfer learning strategies by elementary and intermediate students in ESL. Language Learning, 25, 73–108.Google Scholar
Thornton, R. (2004). Why continuity. In Brugos, A., Micciulla, L., & Smith, C. (Eds.), 28th Boston University Conference on Language Development (pp. 620–632). Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press.Google Scholar
Thornton, R. (2008). Why continuity. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory, 26, 107–146.Google Scholar
Toribio, J. A. (2000). Setting parametric limits on dialectic variation in Spanish. Lingua, 110, 315–341.Google Scholar
Torrego, E. (1984). On inversion in Spanish and some of its effects. Linguistic Inquiry, 15, 103–130.Google Scholar
Tsimpli, I.-M. (2003). Features in language development. Paper presented at EuroSLA, Edinburgh.Google Scholar
Tsimpli, I.-M., & Dimitrakopoulou, M. (2007). The interpretability hypothesis: Evidence from wh-interrogatives in second language acquisition. Second Language Research, 23, 215–242.Google Scholar
Vainikka, A., & Young-Scholten, M. (1994). Direct access to X-bar theory: Evidence from Korean and Turkish adults learning German. In Hoekstra, T. & Schwartz, B. D. (Eds.), Language acquisition studies in generative grammar (pp. 265–316). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Vainikka, A., & Young-Scholten, M. (1996). Gradual development of L2 phrase structure. Second Language Research, 12, 7–39.Google Scholar
Vainikka, A., & Young-Scholten, M. (2005). The roots of syntax and how they grow: Organic grammar, the basic variety and processability theory. In Unsworth, S., Parodi, T., Sorace, A., & Young-Scholten, M. (Eds.), Paths of development. Amsterdam: Benjamins.Google Scholar
Vainikka, A., & Young-Scholten, M. (2011). The acquisition of German: Introducing organic grammar. Berlin: de Gruyter Mouton.Google Scholar
Valian, V., Lasser, I., & Mandelbaum, D. (1992). Children's early questions. Paper presented at the 17th Annual Boston University Conference on Language Development.Google Scholar
White, L., Spada, N., Lightbown, P. M., & Ranta, L. (1991). Input enhancement and L2 question formation. Applied Linguistics, 12, 416–432.Google Scholar
Wode, H., Bahns, J., Bedey, H., & Frank, W. (1978). Developmental sequence: An alternative approach to morpheme order. Language Learning, 28, 175–185.Google Scholar
Youhanaee, M. (2007). On the second language acquisition of L2 syntactic features and their projection domains. Pazhuhesh-e zabanha-ye-Khareji, 32, 187–210.Google Scholar
Zagona, K. (2000). The syntax of Spanish. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Zobl, H. (1979). Nominal and pronominal interrogation in the speech of adult francophone ESL learners: Some insights into the workings of transfer. SPEAQ Journal, 3, 69–93.Google Scholar
Zobl, H. (1982). A direction for contrastive analysis: The comparative study of developmental sequences. TESOL Quarterly, 16, 183–196.Google Scholar
Zobl, H. (1992). Prior linguistic knowledge and the conservatism of the learning procedure: Grammaticality judgments of unilingual and multilingual learners. In Gass, S. & Selinker, L. (Eds.), Language transfer in language learning (rev. ed., pp. 177–196). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Zobl, H. (1995). Converging evidence for the “acquisition–learning” distinction. Applied Linguistics, 16, 35–56.Google Scholar