sima sadeghi gradual development of L2 phrase structure

918 views

Published on

Gradual development of functional phrase in L2 by Vainika and Young-Scholton

Published in: Technology, Education
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
918
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
8
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
8
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

sima sadeghi gradual development of L2 phrase structure

  1. 1. Dr M.Youhanaee Sima Sadeghi, PhD candidate, University of Isfahan Email: Sima_sadeghi23i@yahoo.come SLA
  2. 2. <ul><li>The initial state debate: </li></ul><ul><li>Minimal Trees (Vainikka and Young-Scholten, 1994, 1996, 1998) </li></ul><ul><li>VS </li></ul><ul><li>Full Transfer/Full Access (Schwartz and Sprouse, 1994, 1996) </li></ul>
  3. 3. <ul><li>Radford (1990 ) </li></ul><ul><li>1- L1 acquisition begins with bare VP projection </li></ul><ul><li>2- functional projections develops later </li></ul><ul><li>3- Acquisition goes in syntactically identifiable stages </li></ul><ul><li>VP  IP (TP, AgrP)  CP </li></ul>
  4. 4. <ul><li>Clashen (1994): </li></ul><ul><li>Functional projections develop one-by-one, as a result of successive application of X-Theory </li></ul>
  5. 5. <ul><li>e.g. My make a house </li></ul><ul><li>e.g. I color me </li></ul><ul><li>e.g. Know what my making ? </li></ul>
  6. 6. <ul><ul><li>Entire syntactic representation of a sentence consists of a verb phrase. Nina (2) </li></ul></ul>my Spec V obj V  VP make a house
  7. 7. <ul><li>I color me </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Nina (2;1) </li></ul></ul>I I  IP V NP V  VP color me Spec I
  8. 8. <ul><ul><li>Nina (2;4) </li></ul></ul><ul><li>1-no CP </li></ul><ul><li>2-wh -word in Spec IP </li></ul><ul><li>3-non-case marked subject </li></ul>my Spec I I  IP V V  VP making what t i
  9. 9. C C  CP that she I I  IP V DP V  VP will eat lunch
  10. 10. <ul><li>VP & IP are head final </li></ul><ul><li>e.g. Hans hat den kaffee getrunken </li></ul><ul><li>Hans has the coffee drunk </li></ul><ul><li>V2 language </li></ul><ul><li>e.g. Hans fragt ob er zu viel kaffee getrunken hat </li></ul><ul><li>Hans asks if he too much coffee drunk has </li></ul>
  11. 11. <ul><li>1- VP stage </li></ul><ul><li> </li></ul><ul><li>2- FP stage (TP or AspP) </li></ul><ul><li> </li></ul><ul><li>3- AgrP stage </li></ul>
  12. 12. <ul><li>Naturalistic L2A </li></ul><ul><li>Learner’s L1 L1 order V-final VPs </li></ul><ul><li>Korean/Turkish SOV 98% </li></ul><ul><li>Italian/Spanish early SVO 19% </li></ul><ul><li>Italian/Spanish later SVO 64% </li></ul><ul><li>. </li></ul>
  13. 13. <ul><li>a. L2 learners build up phrase structure in the same way as the children do. </li></ul><ul><li>b. In both L1 & L2 , there is an early stage without functional projection </li></ul><ul><li>c. L2A takes place in stages </li></ul><ul><li>d. Functional projection= X-Theory + Input </li></ul>
  14. 14. <ul><li>a. Oya Zigarette trinken (Turkish L1) </li></ul><ul><li>Oya cigarette drink-inf </li></ul><ul><li>Oya raucht Zigaretten </li></ul><ul><li>Oya smokes cigarettes.’ </li></ul><ul><li>b. Ja alles hier kaufen (Turkish L1) </li></ul><ul><li>Yes everything her buy-inf Ja ich kaufe alles hier </li></ul><ul><li>‘ Yes (I) buy everything here.’ </li></ul>
  15. 15. <ul><li>c. Hier Jacke ausmachen. (Korean L1) </li></ul><ul><li>here jacket off.make Hier macht sie ihre Jacke ab </li></ul><ul><li>‘ (She) is taking (her) jacket off here’ </li></ul><ul><li>d. Ich sprechen die meine Firma (Italian L1—early ) </li></ul><ul><li>I speak-inf the my firm Ich spreche mit meiner Firma </li></ul><ul><li>‘ I speak (to/at) my firm.’ </li></ul><ul><li>e. Vielleicht Schule essen (Italian L1—later) </li></ul><ul><li>maybe school eat-inf Vielleicht isst sie/er in der Schule </li></ul>
  16. 16. <ul><li>1- VP level </li></ul><ul><li>a. Transfer of L1 headedness </li></ul><ul><li>b. Bare VP projection </li></ul><ul><li>2- Gradual development of Functional Phrase </li></ul><ul><li>a. head-initial FP projection </li></ul><ul><li>b. head-initial AgrP projection </li></ul>
  17. 17. <ul><li>a. Transfer of L1 headedness </li></ul><ul><li>L2 learners transfer theirL1 VP headedness </li></ul><ul><li>e.g. Korean/ Turkish produce head-final-VP </li></ul>
  18. 18. <ul><li>Cross-sectional: 6 Korean, 6 Spanish, 11 Turkish. Longitudinal: 1 Spanish, 4 Italian. </li></ul><ul><li>In at least the early part of the VP stage, speakers seem to produce sentences in which the headedness matches their L1 and not German . </li></ul>L1 L1 head head-final VPs in L2 Korean/Turkish final 98 Italian/Spanish (I) initial 19 Italian/Spanish (II) initial 64
  19. 19. <ul><li>lack of : </li></ul><ul><ul><li>verb raising (INFL and/or CP) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>auxiliaries and modals (generated in INFL) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>an agreement paradigm (INFL) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>complementizers (CP) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>wh -movement (CP) </li></ul></ul><ul><li>No embedded clauses </li></ul><ul><li>No wh -questions </li></ul><ul><li>No yes-no questions </li></ul>
  20. 20. <ul><li>1- Modals and auxiliaries </li></ul><ul><li>2- Optional Verb raising </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Note: the TL TP is head-final, however. </li></ul></ul><ul><li>3- Lack of Agreement </li></ul><ul><li>4- Lack of Complementizers (CP) </li></ul><ul><li>5- Lack of wh-movement </li></ul>
  21. 21. <ul><ul><li>1- verb raising frequent </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>2- auxiliaries and modals common </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>3- agreement paradigm acquired </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>4- some embedded clauses with complementizers </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>5-complex wh-questions attested . </li></ul></ul>
  22. 22. <ul><li>1- transfer: parameters are properties of the functional heads </li></ul><ul><li>If all you transfer from the L1 is the VP, you don’t expect that parameters pertaining to higher projections would transfer from the L1. For example, if having wh -movement is a property of C, we wouldn’t expect (if V&YS are right) that having wh -movement would </li></ul><ul><li>transfer from L1 to the IL. </li></ul><ul><li>2-L2A is acquired by “building up” the syntactic tree </li></ul><ul><li>3- information about the VP is borrowed wholesale from the L1 </li></ul>
  23. 23. <ul><li>1- presence of FCs in the initial state (Haznedar, 1997; Vainikka and Young-Scholten, 1994, 1996; Grondin and White, 1996; Lakshmanan, 1993/94) </li></ul><ul><li>2- Development doesn’t follow the predicted progression (Gavruseva and Lardiere, 1996) </li></ul><ul><li>3- L1 transfer of FCs (Haznedar, 1997; Trahey and White, 1993) </li></ul>
  24. 24. <ul><li>a. Initial state : - lack of functional categories - transfer of L1 lexical categories </li></ul><ul><li>b. Development: - full UG-inventory available - gradual emergence of FCs: lexical stage > FP stage > IP stage > CP stage - no L1 transfer of FCs </li></ul><ul><li>c. End state: Convergence is possible given enough exposure to the L2 </li></ul>
  25. 25. <ul><li>Questions? </li></ul><ul><li>Comments? </li></ul>

×