Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-xtgtn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-20T15:29:47.841Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

THE ROLE OF IS IN THE ACQUISITION OF FINITENESS BY ADULT TURKISH LEARNERS OF DUTCH

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 March 2009

Ineke van de Craats
Ineke van de Craats*
Affiliation:
Radboud University Nijmegen
*
*Address correspondence to: Ineke van de Craats, Department of Linguistics, Radboud University Nijmegen, PO Box 9103, 6500 HD Nijmegen, The Netherlands; e-mail: I.v.d.Craats@let.ru.nl.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This article deals with the interlanguage of adult second language (L2) learners acquiring finiteness. Due to the inaccessibility of bound inflectional morphology, learners use free morphology to mark a syntactic relationship as well as person and number features separately from the thematic verb, expressed by a pattern like the man is go. Results from longitudinally collected production data of Turkish learners of Dutch are reported and present evidence for the claim that (a) verb movement and production of inflectional morphology develop separately in various developmental steps and (b) finite forms in nonfinite contexts (and vice versa) are by-products of this development. Moreover, all is-patterns in different Germanic languages can be explained by the application of minimalist theory of verb movement and recent views on morphology. Is-patterns that correspond neither to the first language nor to the L2—a poverty-of-the-stimulus problem—turn out to be possible in other languages of the world and are constrained by Universal Grammar.

Type
Research Article
Information
Studies in Second Language Acquisition , Volume 31 , Issue 1 , March 2009 , pp. 59 - 92
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2009

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

Barbiers, S . (2006, July). Er zijn grenzen aan wat je kunt zeggen [There are limits to what one can say]. Inaugural lecture, Utrecht University, The Netherlands.Google Scholar
Bley-Vroman, R., & Chaudron, C. (1994). Elicited imitation as a measure of second language competence. In Tarone, E., Gass, S. M., & Cohen, A. D. (Eds.), Research methodology in second language acquisition (pp. 245–261). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Blom, E . (2003). From root infinitives to finite sentence . Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Utrecht University, The Netherlands.Google Scholar
Briggs, R. (1978). De Sneeuwman [The Snowman]. Bussum: Van Holkema & Warendorf.Google Scholar
Chomsky, N . (1995). The Minimalist Program. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Clahsen, H . (1988). Parameterized grammatical theory and language acquisition: A study of the acquisition of verb placement and inflection by children and adults. In Flynn, S., Martohardjono, G., & O’Neil, W. (Eds.), The generative study of second language acquisition (pp. 33–54). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Clahsen, H., & Muysken, P. (1986). The availability of Universal Grammar to adult and child learners. Second Language Research, 2, 93–119.Google Scholar
Clahsen, H., & Muysken, P. (1989). The UG paradox in L2 acquisition. Second Language Research, 5, 1–29.Google Scholar
Chaplin, C. (Producer/Writer/Director). (1936). Modern times [Motion picture]. United States: United Artists.Google Scholar
Council of Europe . (2001). A common European framework of reference for languages: Learning, teaching, assessment. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Den Besten, H . (1989). Studies in West Germanic syntax. Amsterdam: Rodopi.Google Scholar
Fanselow, G., & Cavar, D. (2002). Distributed deletion. In Alexiadou, A. (Ed.), Theoretical approaches to universals (pp. 65–97). Amsterdam: Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fleta, M. T . (2003). Is-insertion in L2 grammars of English: A step forward between developmental stages? In Liceras, J. M., Zobl, H., & Goodluck, H. (Eds.), Proceedings of the 6th Generative Approaches to Second Language Acquisition Conference (pp. 85–96). Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press.Google Scholar
Haberzettl, S . (2003). “Tinkering” with chunks: Form-oriented strategies and idiosyncratic utterance patterns without functional implications in the IL of Turkish speaking children learning German. In Dimroth, C. & Starren, M. (Eds.), Information structure and the dynamics of language acquisition (pp. 45–63). Amsterdam: Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Halle, M., & Marantz, A. (1993). Distributed morphology and the pieces of inflection. In Hale, K. & Keyser, S. J. (Eds.), The view from building 20 (pp. 111–176). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Harrell, R. S . (1962). A short reference grammar of Moroccan Arabic. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.Google Scholar
Hawkins, R . (2001). Second language syntax. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Haznedar, B., & Schwartz, B. D. (1997). Are there optional infinitives in child L2 acquisition? In Hughes, E., Hughes, M., & Greenhill, A. (Eds.), Proceedings of the 21st Annual Boston University Conference on Language Development (pp. 257–268). Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press.Google Scholar
Huebner, T . (1989). Establishing point of view: The development of coding mechanisms in a second language for the expression of cognitive and perceptual organization. Linguistics, 27, 111–143.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Huebner, T., Carroll, M., & Perdue, C. (1992). The acquisition of English. In Klein, W. & Perdue, C. (Eds.), Utterance structure: Developing grammars again (pp. 61–121). Amsterdam: Benjamins.Google Scholar
Jansen, B., Lalleman, J. A., & Muysken, P. (1981). The alternation hypothesis: Acquisition of Dutch word order by Turkish and Moroccan foreign workers. Language Learning, 31, 315–336.Google Scholar
Jennings, C. (Producer), Thijssen, W. (Producer), & Dudok de Wit, M. (Writer/Director). (2000). Father and daughter [Motion picture]. The Netherlands: CinéTé Filmproductie BV.Google Scholar
Jolink, A . (2005). Finite linking in normally developing Dutch children and children with specific language impairment. Zeitschrift für Literaturwissenschaft und Linguistik, 35, 61–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Klein, W., & Perdue, C. (Eds.). (1992). Utterance structure: Developing grammars again. Amsterdam: Benjamins.Google Scholar
Kornfilt, J . (1997). Turkish. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Lardiere, D . (1998a). Case and tense in the “fossilized” steady state. Second Language Research, 14, 1–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lardiere, D . (1998b). Dissociating syntax from morphology in a divergent end-state grammar. Second Language Research, 14, 359–375.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lardiere, D . (2000). Mapping features to forms in second language acquisition. In Archibald, J. (Ed.), Second language acquisition and linguistic theory (pp. 102–129). Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Meisel, J. M . (1991). Principles of Universal Grammar and strategies of language learning: Some similarities and differences between first and second language acquisition. In Eubank, L. (Ed.), Point counterpoint: Universal Grammar in the second language (pp. 231–276). Amsterdam: Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Meisel, J. M . (1997). The acquisition of the syntax of negation in French and German: Contrasting first and second language acquisition. Second Language Research, 13, 227–263.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nunes, J . (2005). Linearization of chains and sideward movement. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Ouhalla, J . (1991). Functional categories and parametric variation. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Perdue, C . (1993). Adult language acquisition: Cross-linguistic perspectives. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Prévost, P., & White, L. (2000). Missing surface inflection or impairment in second language acquisition? Evidence from tense and agreement. Second Language Research, 16, 103–133.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Radford, A . (1990). Syntactic theory and the acquisition of English syntax. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Roeper, T . (1992). From the initial state to V2: Acquisition principles in action. In Meisel, J. M. (Ed.), The acquisition of verb placement (pp. 333–370). Dordrecht: Kluwer.Google Scholar
Roeper, T . (1999). Universal bilingualism. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 2, 169–186.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Starren, M . (2001). The second time: The acquisition of temporality in Dutch and French as a second language . Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Tilburg University, The Netherlands.Google Scholar
Starren, M., & van Hout, R. (1997). Do temporal adverbials shape morpho-syntactic tense and aspect marking? In Sorace, A., Heycock, C., & Shillock, R. (Eds.), Proceedings of Generative Approaches to Language Acquisition ’97 Conference on Language Acquisition (pp. 456–461). Edinburgh: University of Edinburgh.Google Scholar
Tomasello, M . (2000). First steps towards a usage-based theory of language acquisition. Cognitive Linguistics, 11, 61–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Underhill, R . (1976). Turkish grammar. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Vainikka, A., & Young-Scholten, M. (1998). Morphosyntactic triggers in adult SLA. In Beck, M.-L. (Ed.), Morphology and its interfaces in second language knowledge (pp. 89–113). Amsterdam: Benjamins.Google Scholar
Zobl, H . (2002). Multiple subject constructions in Japanese and the development of Agr in L2 English. In Foster-Cohen, S., Ruthenberg, T., & Poschen, M. L. (Eds.), Eurosla yearbook (Vol. 2, pp. 29–47). Amsterdam: Benjamins.Google Scholar