Grs LX 700 Language Acquisition and Linguistic Theory Week Transfer and the “initial state” for L2A. And other things

Vainikka & Young-Scholten

• V&YS claim that L2 phrase structure initially has no functional projections, and so as a consequence the only information that can be transferred from L1 at the initial state is that information associated with lexical categories (specifically, headedness). No parameters tied to functional projections (e.g., V->T) are transferred.

V&YS—headedness transfer

• Cross-sectional: 6 Korean, 6 Spanish, 11 Turkish. Longitudinal: 1 Spanish, 4 Italian.

• In the VP stage, speakers seem to produce sentences in which the headedness matches their L1 and not German.

V&YS—headedness transfer

Predictions

• Different parts of the tree have different properties associated with them, and we want to think about what we would predict we’d see (if Vainikka & Young-Scholten are right) at the various stages.

Predictions

• T/Agr (=INFL):

• Modals and auxiliaries appear there
• Verbs, when they raise, raise to there.
• Subject agreement is controlled there

• C

• Complementizers (that, if) appear there
• Wh-questions involve movement to CP

Predictions

• So, if there is just a VP, we expect to find:

• No evidence of verb raising.
• No consistent agreement with the subject.
• No modals or auxiliaries.
• No complementizers.
• No complex sentences (embedded sentences)
• No wh-movement.

V&YS L2A—VP stage

• At the VP stage, we find lack of

• verb raising (INFL and/or CP)
• auxiliaries and modals (generated in INFL)
• an agreement paradigm (INFL)
• complementizers (CP)
• wh-movement (CP)

V&YS L2A—VP stage

• At the VP stage, we find lack of

• verb raising (INFL and/or CP)
• auxiliaries and modals (generated in INFL)
• an agreement paradigm (INFL)
• complementizers (CP)
• wh-movement (CP)

• Antonio (Sp): 7 of 9 sentences with temporal adverbs show adverb–verb order (no raising); 9 of 10 with negation showed neg–verb order.

• Turkish/Korean (visible) verb-raising only 14%.

V&YS L2A—VP stage

• At the VP stage, we find lack of

• verb raising (INFL and/or CP)
• auxiliaries and modals (generated in INFL)
• an agreement paradigm (INFL)
• complementizers (CP)
• wh-movement (CP)

• No embedded clauses with complementizers.

• No wh-questions with a fronted wh-phrase (at least, not that requires a CP analysis).

• No yes-no questions with a fronted verb.

V&YS L2A—TP stage

• After the VP stage, L2 learners move to a single functional projection, which appears to be TP.

• Modals and auxiliaries can start there.

• Verb raising can take place to there.

• Note: the TL TP is head-final, however.

• Agreement seems still to be lacking (TP only, and not yet AgrP is acquired).

V&YS L2A—TP stage

• Characteristics of the TP stage:

• optional verb raising (to T)
• some auxiliaries and modals (to T)
• lack of an agreement paradigm (not up to AgrP yet)
• lack of complementizers (CP)
• lack of wh-movement (CP)

V&YS L2A—AgrP stage

• After the TP stage, there seems to be an AgrP stage (where AgrP is head-initial—different from the eventual L2 grammar, where AgrP should be head-final)

• Properties of the AgrP stage:

• verb raising frequent
• auxiliaries and modals common
• agreement paradigm acquired
• some embedded clauses with complementizers
• complex wh-questions attested.

V&YS L2A—AgrP

• Properties of the AgrP stage:

• verb raising frequent
• auxiliaries and modals common
• agreement paradigm acquired
• some embedded clauses with complementizers
• complex wh-questions attested

• Turkish/Korean speakers raising the verb 76% of the time.

• CP structure? Seems to be “on its way in”, but V&YS don’t really have much to say about this.

Vainikka & Young-Scholten

• Summary of the proposed stages

Stages

• So, L2’ers go through VP, TP, AgrP, (CP) stages…

• An important point about this is that this does not mean that a L2 learner at a given point in time is necessarily in exactly one stage, producing exactly one kind of structure.

• (My response on V&YS’s behalf to an objection raised by Epstein et al. 1996; V&YS’s endorsement should not be inferred.)
•