This paper investigates the occurrence of null objects in a stable nonnative variety of English spoken in Nepal. Previous studies of zero anaphora with second language learners have assumed that advanced learners of English will acquire the native target norms, which highly constrain null object occurrences. This paper shows that in the construction of text speakers of Nepali English may omit both direct and indirect objects in contexts where native speakers may not. Pragmatic principles govern these occurrences although they differ for the two types of objects. Null direct objects are part of discourse topic chains and their referents are recoverable within the text, even across speakers. Null indirect objects, on the other hand, refer primarily to discourse participants and do not generally need textual coreferents. The resultant discourse organization for this variety of English is one that requires greater addressee participation than native English discourse. The paper shows that when learners are confronted with input from two typologically distinct discourse traditions they may develop a third framework that utilizes compatible features for each.

In their paper on Universal Grammar, language acquisition, and neurobiology, Eubank and Gregg (1995) attack current attempts to specify the neurobiological correlates of language acquisition. While these authors address a large variety of topics, they make two major assertions that call for brief discussion.

First, they believe that some neurobiological accounts of language acquisition must be rejected because the authors of these accounts “give no evidence of knowing what it is that needs to be explained” (p. 53). Eubank and Gregg argue that only a language acquisition theory rooted in Government and Binding theory can be the basis of a neurobiological account of language acquisition. Government and Binding theory must be chosen because, according to these authors, it is the only welldeveloped theory of linguistic competence. To put it in a nutshell, “It is [language] acquisition theory that sets the problems for neurobiology to solve” (p. 53), and acquisition theory must conform to the Government and Binding approach. This master-and-slave view of the relationship between linguistics and biology is hard to accept, especially if one considers what Eubank and Gregg have to say about the master: Like most generative linguists, they do not hesitate to emphasize that the only well-developed linguistic theory is "not complete, of course, not yet correct in all or even most of its details, and perhaps not even in some of its fundamentals" (p. 51). It is inadequate to postulate that such a potentially insufficient construct must necessarily form the basis of biological research. This strategy may be unproductive, especially if theory-internal assumptions turn out to be wrong.

This study replicates, in the aural mode, Leow's (1993) study on the effects of simplification, type of linguistic item, and second/foreign language experience on learners' intake of linguistic items contained in written input. Aural simplified/unsimplified input with either the present perfect or present subjunctive form was made available to learners at two levels of language experience. Statistical analyses performed on the raw scores of a pre- and posttest multiple-choice recognition assessment task revealed significant main effects for type of linguistic item, language experience, and task and a significant interaction between language experience and task. While results corroborate those found in the written mode for the effects of simplification and language experience on adult learners' intake, the same did not hold true for type of linguistic item, underscoring the need for research to consider seriously the role of modality while addressing cognitive processes in SLA.

A number of studies on the acquisition of tense and aspect by learners of a second language point to the hypothesis that narrative structure influences the distribution of tense/aspect forms in interlanguage. However, the studies have reported conflicting profiles of tense/aspect use. This study suggests that much of the variation that has been previously reported stems from the level of proficiency of the learners. This crosssectional study examines 37 written and oral narrative pairs produced in a film retell task by adult learners of English as a second language. The analysis approaches the texts from two perspectives, from the perspective of acquisition, taking narrative structure (specifically grounding) as an environment for acquisition of tense/aspect, and from the perspective of the narrative itself, characterizing the foreground and background by the tense/aspect forms used. The study finds a developmental pattern in the distribution of tense/aspect morphology with respect to narrative structure. These results permit the assimilation of earlier findings into a developmental sequence in the acquisition of the tense/aspect system.