An Asymmetry in the Spoken Production of Number Agreement in Second Language English: Adjacency or Locality?
Abstract
In English, subject-verb agreement is deemed to be ‘local’ if the controller (i.e., the subject) and the target (i.e., the main verb) are adjacent, but ‘non-local’ if these items are separated by one or more terminal nodes. Previous research indicates that second language English learners whose first languages lack subject-verb agreement tend to supply inflection for this functional category less accurately in non-adjacent than adjacent contexts in spoken production. This asymmetry could be driven by either adjacency or locality, since, for subject-verb agreement at least, these two properties are aligned with each other. Phrase-internal agreement, by contrast, is local regardless of whether the controller (i.e., a determiner or quantifier) and the target (i.e., a noun) are adjacent or non-adjacent; hence, for this type of agreement, adjacency and locality are not aligned with each other. In the present study, we gave a sentence-construction task to 64 native speakers of Vietnamese, a language without inflection for number agreement. Suppliance of inflection was lower in non-adjacent than adjacent contexts phrase-internally, and therefore within the local domain itself. We concluded that what gave rise to the asymmetries in inflectional production in our study, and, by extension, also in previous research on subject-verb agreement, was not the distinction between local and non-local domains, but rather the one between adjacent and non-adjacent contexts for agreement. In so doing, we present a more parsimonious analysis of asymmetries in the spoken production of agreement inflection than the one currently available.
Keywords
Full Text:
PDFReferences
Austin, G., Chang, H., Kim, N., & Daly, E. (2022.) Prosodic transfer across constructions and domains in L2 inflectional morphology. Linguistic Approaches to Bilingualism, 12(5), 651–680. https://doi.org/10.1075/lab.19076.aus
Austin, G., Pongpairoj, N., & Trenkic, D. (2015). Structural competition in second language production: Towards a constraint-satisfaction model. Language Learning, 65(3), 689–722. https://doi.org/10.1111/lang.12108
Bürkner P.-C. (2018) Advanced Bayesian multilevel modeling with the R package brms. The R Journal, 10(1), 395–411. https://doi.org/10.32614/RJ-2018-017
Cardinaletti, A., & Giusti, G. (2005). The syntax of quantified phrases and quantitative clitics. In M. Everaert & H. van Riemsdik (Eds.) The Blackwell companion to syntax (pp. 23–93). Blackwells.
Carpenter, B., Gelman, A., Hoffman, M. D., Lee, D., Goodrich, B., Betancourt, M., Brubaker, M., Guo, J., Li, P., & Riddell, A. (2017). Stan: A probabilistic programming language. Journal of Statistical Software, 76(1). https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v076.i01
Cheng, Y., Rothman, J., & Cunnings, I. (2022). Determiner-number specification and non-local agreement computation in L1 and L2 processing. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research.| https://doi.org/10.1007/s10936-022-09864-w
Cho, J. (2017). English determiner-noun agreement processing and effects of dependency length for Korean EFL learners. SNU Working Papers in English Linguistics and Language, 15, 1–26. Retrieved August 16, 2022, from https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/English-determinernoun-agreement-processing-andofCho/01a9b2fa0b7a4ffc5c2f3fb97bfb5e613c e982d0
Cho, J., Song, M. & Lee, S. A. (2018). A morphological processing of determiner-noun agreement by Korean learners of English: An ERP study. Korean Journal of Applied Linguistics, 34(3), 141–168. http://doi.org/10.17154/kjal.2018.9.34.3.141
Danon, G. (2012). Two structures for numeral-noun constructions. Lingua, 122(12), 1282–1307. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.lingua.2012.07.003
Davies, M. (2018) The iWeb corpus. Retrieved August 16, 2022, from https://www.english-corpora.org/iWeb/
Gabry, J., Simpson, D., Vehtari, A., Betancourt, M., & Gelman, A. (2019). Visualization in bayesian workflow. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series A (Statistics in Society), 182(2), 389–402. https://doi.org/10.1111/rssa.12378
Garcia, G. D. (2020). Language transfer and positional bias in English stress. Second Language Research, 36(1), 1–30. https://doi.org/10.1177/0267658319882457
Gelman, A., Carlin, J. B., Stern, H. S., Dunson, D. B., Vehtari, A., & Rubin, D. B. (2014). Bayesian data analysis (3rd ed.). Chapman and Hall/CRC.
Goad, H., & White, L. (2004). Ultimate attainment of L2 inflection: Effects of L1 prosodic structure. In S. Foster-Cohen, M. Sharwood Smith, A. Sorace & M. Ota (Eds.), EUROSLA Yearbook 4 (pp. 119–145). John Benjamins.
Goad, H., White, L., & Steele, J. (2003). Missing inflection in L2 acquisition: Defective syntax or L1-constrained prosodic representations? Canadian Journal of Linguistics, 48, 243–263. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0008413100000669
Hawkins, R., & Casillas, G. (2008). Explaining frequency of verb morphology in early L2 speech. Lingua, 118, 595–612. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lingua.2007.01.009
Hung, B. P. (2017). Vietnamese students learning the semantics of English prepositions. GEMA Online® Journal of Language Studies, 17(4), 146–158. http://doi.org/10.17576/gema-2017-1704-10
IELTS. (n.d.). IELTS speaking band descriptors [PDF file]. Retrieved August 16, 2022, from https://www.ielts.org/-/media/pdfs/speaking-band-descriptors.ashx?la=en
Kruschke, J. (2015). Doing Bayesian data analysis: A tutorial with R, JAGS, and Stan (2nd ed.). Academic Press.
Kurz, A. S. (2021). Applied longitudinal data analysis in brms and the tidyverse (version 0.0.2). Retrieved August 16, 2022, from https://bookdown.org/content/4253/
Lardiere, D. (1998). Dissociating syntax from morphology in a divergent L2 end-state grammar. Second Language Research, 14(4), 359–375. https://doi.org/10.1191/026765898672500216
Ma, Y., & Zou, Y. (2018). Three elements that affect the realisation of subject-verb agreement in the speech production of L2 speakers of English with L1 Chinese. Chinese Journal of Applied Linguistics, 41(3), 376–395. https://doi.org/10.1515/cjal-2018-0028
McCarthy, C. (2008). Morphological variability in the comprehension of agreement: An argument for representation over computation. Second Language Research, 24, 459–486. http://doi.org/10.1177/0267658308095737
Nalborczyk, L., Batailler, C., Loevenbruck, H., Vilain, A., & Bürkner, P.-C. (2019). An introduction to bayesian multilevel models using brms: A case study of gender effects on vowel variability in standard Indonesian. Journal of Speech, Language and Hearing Research, 62(5), 1225–1242. https://doi.org/10.1044/2018_JSLHR-S-18-0006
Nghi, T. T., Nguyen, T. T., & Tran, H. P. (2021). An investigation into factors affecting the use of English prepositions by Vietnamese learners of English. International Journal of Higher Education, 10(1), 24–40. https://doi.org/10.5430/ijhe.v10n1p24
Nguyen, T. Q. (2018). English article choices by Vietnamese EFL learners. VNU Journal of Foreign Studies, 34(2), 74–89. https://doi.org/10.25073/2525-2445/vnufs.4248
Nicenboim, B., & Vasishth, S. (2016). Statistical methods for linguistic research: Foundational Ideas - Part II. Language and Linguistics Compass, 10(11), 591–613. https://doi.org/10.1111/lnc3.12207
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. http://doi.org/10.1191/ 026765800677556046
R Core Team. (2020). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. Retrieved August 16, 2022, from http://www.R-project.org/
Tsimpli, I. M., & Dimitrakopoulou, M. (2007). The interpretability hypothesis: Evidence from wh-interrogatives in second language acquisition. Second Language Research, 23, 215–242. http://doi.org/10.1177/0267658307076546
Tuniyan, E. (2013). An investigation of optional subject-verb agreement marking in low and high intermediate adult L2 speakers of English: Partial support for the Contextual Complexity Hypothesis. Essex Graduate Student Papers in Language and Linguistics On-line, 14, 88–121. Retrieved August 16, 2022, from https://nottingham.academia.edu/ElinaTuniyan
Vasishth, S., Nicenboim, B., Beckman, M. E., Li, F., & Kong, E. J. (2018). Bayesian data analysis in the phonetic sciences: A tutorial introduction. Journal of Phonetics, 71, 141–161. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wocn.2018.07.008
Vehtari, A., Gelman, A., & Gabry, J. (2017). Practical Bayesian model evaluation using leave-one-out cross-validation and WAIC. Statistical Computing, 27(5), 1413–1432. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1507.04544
Wen, Z., Miyao, M., Takeda, A., Chu, W., & Schwartz, B. D. (2010). Proficiency effects and distance effects in nonnative processing of English number agreement. In K. Franich, K. M. Iserman, & L. L. Keil (Eds.), Proceedings of the 34th Boston University Conference on Language Development (pp. 445–456). Cascadilla Press.
Young, R. (1988). Variation in the interlanguage hypothesis. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 10, 281–302. http://www.jstor.org/stable/44488187
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.17576/gema-2023-2301-01
Refbacks
- There are currently no refbacks.
eISSN : 2550-2131
ISSN : 1675-8021