Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-dh8gc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-18T04:30:35.518Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

WHAT’S IN THE TEXTBOOK AND WHAT’S IN THE MIND

Polarity Item “Any” in Learner English

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  09 May 2017

Heather Marsden ,
Melinda Whong  and
Kook-Hee Gil
Heather Marsden*
Affiliation:
University of York
Melinda Whong
Affiliation:
University of Leeds
Kook-Hee Gil
Affiliation:
University of Sheffield
*
*Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Heather Marsden, Department of Language and Linguistic Science, University of York. E-mail: heather.marsden@york.ac.uk
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This paper presents an experimental study of the rarely explored question of how input through instruction interacts with L2 acquisition at the level of modular linguistic knowledge. The investigation focuses on L2 knowledge of the English polarity item any, whose properties are only partially covered by typical language-teaching materials. We investigate Najdi-Saudi Arabic-speaking learners’ knowledge of the distribution of any in contexts that are taught, contexts that are not taught but may be observable in the input, and contexts that are neither taught nor observable. We further test whether conscious awareness of instructed rules about any correlates with performance. Our findings suggest a role for instruction and for internal, UG-constrained acquisition, and that these two paths interact. We explore our findings in terms of Sharwood Smith and Truscott’s (2014a, 2014b) framework of modular online growth and use of language, in which cognitive development is driven by processing.

Type
Research Article
Information
Studies in Second Language Acquisition , Volume 40 , Issue 1 , March 2018 , pp. 91 - 118
Open Practices
Open materials
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2017 

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.)

Footnotes

The experiment in this article earned an Open Materials badge for transparent practices. The materials are available at https://www.iris-database.org/iris/app/home/detail?id=york:931376.

†

Melinda Whong is now at the Language Centre, University of Leeds.

References

REFERENCES

Artusi, A., Manin, G. J., & McCallum, A. (2008). Engage, Level 3. Oxford, UK, and New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Bennati, E. (2007). Object clitic climbing in adult L2 Italian: Some experimental evidence from L1 English and L1 Spanish near-native speakers. Nanzan Linguistics: Special Issue, 3, 1–21.Google Scholar
Biber, D., Johansson, S., Leech, G., Conrad, S., Finegan, E., & Quirk, R. (1999). Longman grammar of spoken and written English. Harlow, UK: Pearson Education.Google Scholar
Bowles, M. A. (2011). Measuring implicit and explicit linguistic knowledge. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 33, 247–271.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chierchia, G. (2013). Logic in grammar: Polarity, free choice, and intervention. Oxford, UK, and New York: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dayal, V. (2005). The universal force of free choice any . Linguistic Variation Yearbook , 4, 5–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dekydtspotter, L., & Hathorn, H. (2005). Quelque chose... de remarquable in English–French acquisition: Mandatory, informationally encapsulated computations in second language interpretation. Second Language Research, 21, 291–323.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Doughty, C. (2003). Instructed SLA: Constraints compensation and enhancement. In Doughty, C. & Long, M. (Eds.), The handbook of second language acquisition (pp. 256–310). Oxford, UK: Blackwell.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ellis, N. C. (2005). At the interface: Dynamic interactions of explicit and implicit language knowledge. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 27, 305–352.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Giannakidou, A. (1998). Polarity sensitivity as (non)veridical dependency. Amsterdam, The Netherlands, and Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Giannakidou, A. (2001). The meaning of free choice. Linguistics and Philosophy, 24, 659–735.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gil, K. H., & Marsden, H. (2013). Existential quantifiers in second language acquisition: A feature reassembly account. Linguistic Approaches to Bilingualism, 3, 117–149.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hawkins, R., & Franceschina, F. (2004). Explaining the acquisition and non-acquisition of determiner-noun gender concord in French and Spanish. In Prévost, P. & Paradis, J. (Eds.), The acquisition of French in different contexts (pp. 175–205). Amsterdam, The Netherlands, and Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Horn, L. R. (2000). Pick a theory (not just any theory). In Horn, L. R. & Kato, Y. (Eds.), Negation and polarity (pp. 147–192). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Horn, L. R. (2005). Airport ’86 revisited: Toward a unified indefinite any. In Carlson, G. & Pelletier, F. J. (Eds.), Reference and generality: The Partee effect (pp. 179–205). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Hughes, J., & Jones, C. (2011). Practical grammar, level 2. Andover, UK: Heinle CENGAGE Learning.Google Scholar
Ionin, T., Zubizarreta, M. L., & Maldonado, S. B. (2008). Sources of linguistic knowledge in the second language acquisition of English articles, Lingua, 118, 554–576.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ionin, T., & Zyzik, E. (2014). Judgment and interpretation tasks in second language research. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 34, 37–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jonz, J. (1990). Another turn in the conversation: What does cloze measure? TESOL Quarterly, 24, 61–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kanno, K. (1998). The stability of UG principles in second-language acquisition: Evidence from Japanese. Linguistics, 36, 1125–1146.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Klima, E. S. (1964). Negation in English. In Fodor, Jerry A. & Katz, Jerrold J. (Eds.), The structure of language, volume 3 (pp. 246–323). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
Lardiere, D. (2009). Some thoughts on the contrastive analysis of features in second language acquisition. Second Language Research, 25, 173–227.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Larson-Hall, J. (2010). A guide to doing statistics in second language research using SPSS. New York, NY, and Abingdon, UK: Routledge.Google Scholar
Loewen, S. (2009). Grammaticality judgment tests and the measurement of implicit and explicit L2 knowledge. In Ellis, R., Loewen, S., Elder, C., Erlam, R., Philp, J., & Reinders, H. (Eds.), Implicit and explicit knowledge in second language learning, testing, and teaching (pp. 94–112). Bristol, UK: Multilingual Matters.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lee, Y.–S. (1993). Licensing and semantics of any revisited. Proceedings of NELS, 23, 287–301.Google Scholar
Lin, J. (2015). Acquiring negative polarity items. Utrecht, The Netherlands: LOT.Google Scholar
Long, M. H. (1983). Native speaker/non-native speaker conversation and the negotiation of comprehensible input. Applied Linguistics, 4, 126–141.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Long, M. H. (1996). The role of the linguistic environment in second language acquisition. In Ritchie, W. C. & Bhatia, T. K. (Eds.), Handbook of second language acquisition (pp. 413–468). New York, NY: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Mackey, A. & Goo, J. (2007). Interaction research in SLA: A meta-analysis and research synthesis. In Mackey, A. (Ed.), Conversational interaction in second language acquisition: A series of empirical studies (pp. 407–452). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Marsden, H. (2008). Pair-list readings in Korean-Japanese, Chinese-Japanese and English Japanese interlanguage. Second Language Research, 24, 189–226.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Marsden, H. (2009). Distributive quantifier scope in English-Japanese and Korean-Japanese interlanguage. Language Acquisition, 16, 135–177.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Montrul, S., Foote, R., & Perpiñan, S. (2008). Gender agreement in adult second language learners and Spanish heritage speakers: The effects of age and context of acquisition. Language Learning, 58, 503–553.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Naunton, J., & Tulip, M. (2005). ProFile pre-intermediate. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Norris, J., & Ortega, L. (2000). Effectiveness of L2 instruction: A research synthesis and quantitative meta-analysis. Language Learning, 50, 417–528.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Norris, J., & Ortega, L. (2001). Does type of instruction make a difference? Substantive findings from a meta-analytic review. In Ellis, R. (Ed.), Form-focused instruction and second language learning (pp. 157–213). New York, NY: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Oller, J. W. (1979). Language tests at school: A pragmatic approach. London, UK: Longman.Google Scholar
Plonsky, L. (2013). Study quality in SLA: An assessment of designs, analyses, and reporting practices in quantitative L2 research. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 35, 655–687.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Riley, D., & Hughes, J. (2010). Practical grammar, level 1. Andover, UK: Heinle CENGAGE Learning.Google Scholar
Rothman, J. (2008). Aspect selection in adult L2 Spanish and the competing systems hypothesis when pedagogical and linguistic rules conflict. Languages in Contrast, 8, 74–106.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Santoro, M. (2007). Second language acquisition of Italian accusative and dative clitics. Second Language Research, 23, 37–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schütze, C. T., & Sprouse, J. (2014). Judgment data. In Podseva, R. J. & Sharma, D. (Eds.), Research methods in linguistics (pp. 27–50). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schwartz, B. (1993). On explicit and negative data effecting and affecting competence and linguistic behavior. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 15, 147–163.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schwartz, B. D., & Gubala-Ryzak, M. (1992). Learnability and grammar reorganization in L2A: Against negative evidence causing the unlearning of verb movement. Second Language Research, 8, 1–38.Google Scholar
Sharwood Smith, M., & Truscott, J. (2014a). Explaining input enhancement: A MOGUL perspective. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, 52, 253–281.Google Scholar
Sharwood Smith, M., & Truscott, J. (2014b). The multilingual mind: A modular processing perspective. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Slabakova, R. (2000). L1 transfer revisited: The L2 acquisition of telicity marking in English by Spanish and Bulgarian native speakers. Linguistics, 38, 739–770.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Slabakova, R. (2002). The compounding parameter in Second Language Acquisition. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 24, 507–540.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Slabakova, R., & Rothman, J. (2012). Clitic-doubled left dislocation and focus fronting in L2 Spanish: A case of successful acquisition at the syntax-discourse interface. Second Language Research, 28, 319–343.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Snape, N., & Kupisch, T. (2010). Ultimate attainment of second language articles: A case study of an endstate second language Turkish-English speaker. Second Language Research, 26, 527–548.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Snyder, W. (1995). Language acquisition and the language variation: The role of morphology (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
Soars, J., & Soars, L. (2012). New headway pre-intermediate fourth edition. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Soltan, U. (2014). On the distribution and licensing of polarity-sensitive items in Egyptian Arabic. In Farwaneh, S. & Ouali, H. (Eds.), Perspectives on Arabic Linguistics XXIV–XXV: Papers from the annual symposia on Arabic linguistics. Texas, 2010 and Arizona, 2011 (pp. 181–206). Amsterdam, The Netherlands, and Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Szabolcsi, A. (2004). Positive polarity—negative polarity. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory, 22, 409–452.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tilbury, A., Clementson, T., Hendra, L. A., & Rea, D. (2010). English unlimited, B1 pre-intermediate coursebook. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Trahey, M., & White, L. (1993). Positive evidence and preemption in the second language classroom. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 15, 181–204.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tremblay, A., & Garrison, M. D. (2008). Cloze tests: A tool for proficiency assessment in research on L2 French. In Prior, M. T., Watanabe, Y., & Lee, S. (Eds.), Selected proceedings of the 2008 second language research forum (pp. 73–88). Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Proceedings Project.Google Scholar
Truscott, J., & Sharwood Smith, M. S. (2004). Acquisition by processing: A modular perspective on language development. Bilingualism Language and Cognition, 7, 1–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tubau, S. (2008). Negative concord in English and Romance: Syntax-morphology interface conditions on the expression of negation. Utrecht, The Netherlands: LOT.Google Scholar
Werner, P., Nelson, J., & Spaventa, M. (1993). Interactions access: A communicative grammar. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill International Editions.Google Scholar
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.Google Scholar
White, L. (1991b). The verb-movement parameter in second language acquisition. Language Acquisition, 1, 337–360.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
White, L. (1992). Long and short verb movement in second language acquisition. Canadian Journal of Linguistics, 37, 273–286.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
White, L., Valenzuela, E., Kozlowska-Macgregor, M., & Leung, Y. K. I. (2004). Gender and number agreement in nonnative Spanish. Applied Psycholinguistics, 25, 105–133.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Whong, M., Gil, K.-H., & Marsden, H. (2013). Universal Grammar and the second language classroom. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Whong, M., Gil, K.-H., & Marsden, H. (2014). Beyond paradigm: The “what” and the “how” of classroom research. Second Language Research, 30, 551–568.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Whong-Barr, M. (2005). Morphology, derivational syntax and second language acquisition of resultatives (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Durham University, Durham, UK. Retrieved from http://etheses.dur.ac.uk/2783/.Google Scholar
Zwarts, F. (1995). Nonveridical contexts. Linguistic Analysis, 25, 286–312.Google Scholar