Second Language Research

This study investigates the second language (L2) acquisition of restrictive relative clauses (RRCs) in Chinese by two groups of learners speaking typologically different first languages (L1s): English and Korean. English RRCs, unlike those of Chinese, are head-initial whereas Korean RRCs, like those of Chinese, are head-final. The difference could be predicted to hinder English learners' acquisition of L2 RRCs but facilitate it for Korean learners. This prediction was not confirmed in this study, in fact the reverse was observed, and our data show contrasting patterns of acquisition between the two groups of learners. The English learners distinguished between target-like RRCs and non-target-like RRCs earlier than the Korean learners. A corresponding difference was observed for acquisition of resumptive pronouns. It is argued that where the L1 and the L2 share salient properties (such as head direction) restructuring of less salient features encoded in functional categories takes longer and may be persistently problematic. We suggest that the fact that Korean is more similar to Chinese (perhaps superficially, same head direction) leads learners not to restructure quickly, while the surface dissimilarity of English and Chinese gives rise to rapid restructuring in L2 grammars of learners.

This article addresses the debate on the causes of variability in production of second language functional morphology. It reports a study on article production by first language (L1) Serbian / second language (L2) English learners and compares their behaviour to that of a Turkish learner of English, reported in Goad and White (2004). In particular, it focuses on the tendency of these learners to omit articles more in adjectivally pre-modified (Art + Adj + N) than in non-modified contexts (Art + N). The asymmetry is found in both spoken and written production. The article argues that the pattern of results is not consistent with models assuming target-like syntax: the Missing Surface Inflection Hypothesis cannot predict the asymmetry at all, and the Prosodic Transfer Hypothesis cannot extend its explanatory power to spoken production of L1 Serbian/L2 English learners, or to written production in general. An alternative account, with broader empirical coverage, is proposed, on which L2 learners whose L1s do not grammaticalize definiteness misanalyse English articles as nominal modifiers, and treat them in production as such. The model goes beyond the representational deficit vs. processing constraints debate, in that it suggests that variability is caused by processing limitations, but precisely because the production of misanalysed elements cannot be (directly) syntactically motivated, and has to rely on general cognition instead.

In this article, an empirical study of how Chinese wh-questions are mentally represented in Japanese speakers' grammars of Chinese as a second language (L2) is reported. Both Chinese and Japanese are generally considered wh-in-situ languages in which a wh-word is allowed to remain in its base-generated position, and both languages use question particles to mark questions. It is assumed that C⁰ in wh-questions is essentially ambiguous and unvalued and that unvalued C⁰ must be valued. In Chinese, the wh-particle ne values C⁰ with [+Q, +wh] features, which licenses the wh-word in situ. As a result, no wh-movement is necessary and Subjacency becomes irrelevant. Japanese also employs question particles, such as ka or no. However, they are `defective' in the sense that they can only value the ambiguous C⁰ as [+Q] and they are unable to specify the question as to whether it is [+yes/no] or [+wh]. To value C⁰ as a head with [+wh], a wh-operator in a wh -word inside the sentence has to raise overtly to C⁰. The results of an acceptability judgement task show that although the Japanese speakers respond in a broadly target-like way, the lexical morphological feature [+wh] of the particle ne in their L2 Chinese lexicons is permanently deficient, which leads to variability in their intuitions about Chinese wh-questions. A lexical morphological feature deficit account for the results is proposed, and it is suggested that the lexical morphology—syntax interface can be a source of variability in L2 acquisition.

Three new textbooks in second language acquisition (SLA) differ in their aims. Saville-Troike (2006) offers a concise introductory text with an interdisciplinary approach. De Bot, Lowie and Verspoor (2005) provide a more comprehensive and more advanced introductory text with excerpts from the scholarly literature. Sanz (2005) presents an edited volume representing research in various subfields within an information-processing approach to SLA. All three offer valuable material for instructors to draw on, and they complement one another in interesting ways.