Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home

TESTING THE FUNDAMENTAL DIFFERENCE HYPOTHESIS: L2 Adult, L2 Child, and L1 Child Comparisons in the Acquisition of Korean Wh-Constructions with Negative Polarity Items

  • Hyang Suk Song (a1) and Bonnie D. Schwartz (a2)

Abstract

The fundamental difference hypothesis (FDH; Bley-Vroman, 1989, 1990) contends that the nature of language in natives is fundamentally different from the nature of language in adult nonnatives. This study tests the FDH in two ways: (a) via second language (L2) poverty-of-the-stimulus (POS) problems (e.g., Schwartz & Sprouse, 2000) and (b) via a comparison between adult and child L2 learners, whose first language (L1) is the same, in terms of their developmental route (e.g., Schwartz, 1992, 2003). The phenomena under investigation are Korean wh-constructions with negative polarity items (NPIs). Korean has subject (S)-object (O)-verb (V) as its canonical word order and it is also a wh-in-situ language, but scrambling of the object to presubject position (i.e., movement that results in OSV word order) is generally optional; however, in the context of negative questions with a NPI subject (e.g., amwuto “anyone”), (a) object wh-phrases must scramble on the wh-question reading and (b) the nonscrambled order has a yes/no-question reading. These properties of Korean wh-constructions with NPIs constitute POS problems for nonnatives whose L1 is English (as well as for native Korean-acquiring children). L1-English adult L2 learners (n = 15) and L1-English child L2 learners (n = 10), independently assessed for Korean proficiency, as well as L1-Korean children (n = 23) and L1-Korean adults (n = 15) completed an elicited-production task, an acceptability-judgment task, and an interpretation-verification task. The results show that (a) high-proficiency (adult and child) L2 learners performed like the native adult controls on all three tasks, thereby demonstrating L2 POS effects; and (b) adult and child L2 learners follow the same (inferred) route to convergence, a route differing from—yet subsuming—the L1-child route. Both sets of results lead us to conclude that, contra the FDH, the nature of language is fundamentally similar in natives and (adult or child) nonnatives.

Copyright

Corresponding author

*Address correspondence to: Hyang Suk Song, Department of Linguistics, McGill University, 1085 Dr Penfield Avenue, Montréal, Québec H3A 1A7, Canada; e-mail: hyangsuk.song@mail.mcgill.ca; or Bonnie D. Schwartz, Department of Second Language Studies, University of Hawai‘i, 1890 East-West Rd., Honolulu, HI 96822; e-mail: bds@hawaii.edu.

References

Hide All
Aoun, J., & Li, Y. A. (1993). Syntax of scope. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Beck, S. (1996). Quantified structures as barriers for LF movement. Natural Language Semantics, 4, 156.
Beck, S. (2006). Intervention effects follow focus interpretation. Natural Language Semantics, 14, 156.
Beck, S., & Kim, S.-S. (1997). On wh- and operator scope in Korean. Journal of East Asian Languages, 6, 339384.
Bley-Vroman, R. (1989). What is the logical problem of foreign language learning? In Gass, S. M. & Schachter, J. (Eds.), Linguistic perspectives on second language acquisition (pp. 4168). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Bley-Vroman, R. (1990). The logical problem of foreign language learning. Linguistic Analysis, 20, 349.
Cheng, L. L.-S. (1997). On the typology of wh-questions. New York: Garland.
Cho, S. W. (1981). The acquisition of word order in Korean. Unpublished master’s thesis, University of Calgary, Canada.
Choi, Y.-S. (2007). Intervention effect in Korean wh-questions: Indefinite and beyond. Lingua, 117, 20552076.
Chung, G. (1994). Case and its acquisition in Korean. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Texas at Austin.
Clahsen, H., & 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, 93119.
Clahsen, H., & Muysken, P. (1989). The UG paradox in L2 acquisition. Second Language Research, 5, 129.
Dekydtspotter, L., Sprouse, R. A., & Thyre, R. (1999/2000). Quantification at a distance in English-French interlanguage: Domain specificity and second-language acquisition. Language Acquisition, 8, 265320.
Ha, S. (2008). The existential reading of WH-words and their scope relations. In Adams, N., Cooper, A., Parrill, F., & Wier, T. (Eds.), Proceedings from the 40th Annual Meeting of the Chicago Linguistic Society (Vol. 1, pp. 8395). Chicago: Chicago Linguistic Society.
Hoji, H. (1985). Logical form constraints and configurational structures in Japanese. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Washington, Seattle.
Hopp, H. (2005). Constraining second language word order optionality: Scrambling in advanced English-German and Japanese-German interlanguage. Second Language Research, 21, 3472.
Hunt, K. W. (1970). Syntactic maturity in school children and adults. Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development, 35, 163.
Iwashita, N. (2006). Syntactic complexity measures and their relations to oral proficiency in Japanese as a foreign language. Language Assessment Quarterly, 3, 151169.
Johnson, J., & Newport, E. (1989). Critical period effects in second language learning: The influence of maturational state on the acquisition of English as a second language. Cognitive Psychology, 21, 6099.
Johnson, J., & Newport, E. (1991). Critical period effects on universal properties: The status of subjacency in the acquisition of a second language. Cognition, 39, 215258.
Kanno, K. (1998). The stability of UG principles in second language acquisition: Evidence from Japanese. Linguistics, 36, 11251146.
Kim, S., O’Grady, W., & Cho, S. (1995). The acquisition of case and word order in Korean: A note on the role of context. Language Research, 31, 687696.
Kim, S.-S. (2002). Intervention effects are focus effects. In David, J. S. (Ed.), Proceedings of Japanese-Korean linguistics (Vol. 8, pp. 615628). Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications.
Lakshmanan, U. (1995). Child second language acquisition. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 17, 301329.
Lalleman, J. (1986). Dutch language proficiency of Turkish children born in the Netherlands. Dordrecht: Foris.
Marsden, H. (2003). Inverse scope in L2 Japanese. In Beachly, B., Brown, A., & Conlin, F. (Eds.), Proceedings of the 27th Annual Boston University Conference on Language Development (Vol. 2, pp. 496507). Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press.
Miyagawa, S. (2003). A-movement scrambling and options without optionality. In Karimi, S. (Ed.), Word order and scrambling (pp. 177200). Oxford: Blackwell.
Nishigauchi, T. (1990). Quantification in the theory of grammar. Dordrecht: Kluwer.
Ortega, L. (2003). Syntactic complexity measures and their relationship to L2 proficiency: A research synthesis of college-level L2 writing. Applied Linguistics, 4, 492518.
Pesetsky, D. (2000). Phrasal movement and its kin. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Schwartz, B. D. (1987). The modular basis of second language acquisition. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Southern California, Los Angeles.
Schwartz, B. D. (1990). Un-motivating the motivation for the fundamental difference hypothesis. In Burmeister, H. & Rounds, P. (Eds.), Variability in second language acquisition (pp. 667684). Eugene: University of Oregon.
Schwartz, B. D. (1992). Testing between UG-based and problem-solving models of L2A: Developmental sequence data. Language Acquisition, 2, 119.
Schwartz, B. D. (2003). Child L2 acquisition: Paving the way. In Beachly, B., Brown, A., & Conlin, F. (Eds.), Proceedings of the 27th Annual Boston University Conference on Language Development (Vol. 1, pp. 2650). Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press.
Schwartz, B. D. (2004). Why child L2 acquisition? In van Kampen, J. & Baauw, S. (Eds.), Proceedings of Generative Approaches to Language Acquisition 2003 (Vol. 1, pp. 4766). Utrecht, The Netherlands: LOT.
Schwartz, B. D., & Sprouse, R. A. (1996). L2 cognitive states and the full transfer/full access model. Second Language Research, 12, 4072.
Schwartz, B. D., & Sprouse, R. A. (2000). When syntactic theories evolve: Consequences for L2 acquisition research. In Archibald, J. (Ed.), Second language acquisition and linguistic theory (pp. 156186). Oxford: Blackwell.
Sells, P. (2001). Negative polarity licensing and interpretations. In Kuno, S., Lee, I., Whitman, J., Maling, J., Kang, Y., & Kim, Y. (Eds.), Harvard studies in Korean linguistics (Vol. 9, pp. 322). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Slabakova, R. (2001). Telicity in the second language. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
Song, H. S. (2007). L2 knowledge of the intervention effect in English-speaking learners of Korean. In Bamman, D., Magnitskaia, T., & Zaller, C. (Eds.), Proceedings of the 30th Annual Boston University Conference on Language Development supplement. Retrieved March 17, 2007, from http://www.bu.edu/linguistics/APPLIED/BUCLD/supp31.html.
Song, H. S. (2008). On the L2 acquisition of Korean wh-constructions with negative polarity items: Adult L2, child L2, and child L1 development. Unpublished master’s thesis, University of Hawai‘i.
Song, H. S., & Schwartz, B. D. (2008, November). On the acquisition of Korean wh-constructions with negative polarity items. Paper presented at the 18th Japanese/Korean Linguistics Conference (JK18), City University of New York (CUNY).
Tanaka, H. (2003). Remarks on Beck’s effects: Linearity in syntax. Linguistic Inquiry, 34, 314323.
Tomioka, S. (2007). Pragmatics of LF intervention effects: Japanese and Korean wh-interrogatives. Journal of Pragmatics, 39, 15701590.
Unsworth, S. (2005). Child L2, adult L2, child L1: Differences and similarities—A study on the acquisition of direct object scrambling in Dutch. Utrecht, The Netherlands: LOT.
Whong-Barr, M., & Schwartz, B. D. (2002). Morphological and syntactic transfer in child L2 acquisition of the English dative alternation. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 24, 579616.

Metrics

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 0
Total number of PDF views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between <date>. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

Usage data cannot currently be displayed