References (22)
ART, F.,& SCHILS, E. (1995). Relative clauses, the accessibility hierarchy and the contrastive analysis hypothesis. International Review of Applied Linguistics, 331,47–63.Google Scholar
BARDOVI-HARLlG, K. (1987). Markedness and salience in second-language acquisition. Language Learning, 371,385–470.Google Scholar
BERENT, G. (1994). The subset principle in second language acquisition. In Cohen, A., S. Gass and E. Tarone (Eds.), Research methodology in secondlanguage acquisition. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 17–40Google Scholar
ECKMAN, F., BELL, L., & NELSON, D. (1988). On the generalization of relative clause instruction in the acquisition of English as a second language. Applied Linguistics, 91, 1–20.Google Scholar
GASS, S. (1979). Language transfer and universal grammatical relations. Language Learning, 291, 327–344.Google Scholar
(1980). An investigation of systematic transfer in adult second language learners. In R. C. Scarcella & S. D. Krashen (Eds.), Research in second language acquisition. Rowley, MA: Newbury House, 132–141.Google Scholar
Gass, S. (1982). From theory to practice. In M. Hines & W. Rutherford (Eds.), On TESOL '81. Washington, D.C.: TESOL, 129–139.Google Scholar
GOODLUCK, H., & STOJANOVIC, D. (1996). The structure and acquisition of relative clauses in Serbo-Croatian. Language Acquisition, 51, 285–315.Google Scholar
HAMILTON, R. L. (1994). Is implicational generalization unidirectional and maximal? Evidence from relativization instruction in a second language. Language Learning, 441, 123–157.Google Scholar
(1995). The Noun Phrase Accessibility Hierarchy in SLA: Determining the basis for its developmental effects. In F.R. Eckman, D. Highland, P.W. Lee, J. Mileham, & R.R. Weber (Eds.), Second language acquisition: Theory and pedagogy. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 101–114.Google Scholar
ITO, A (1995). An investigation of the influential factors on the difficulty of the unit 'whose + NP.' Annals of Educational Research, 431, 671-72. Google Scholar
ITO, A. (2001). Japanese EFL learners' sensitivity to configurational distinction in English relativization. Review of Applied Linguistics, 131 & 1321, 11–33.Google Scholar
KEENAN, E. (1975). Variation in universal grammar. In E. Fasold & R. Shuy (Eds.), Analyzing variation in language. Washington, D.C.: Georgetown University Press, 136–149.Google Scholar
KEENAN, E., & COMRIE, B. (1977). Noun Phrase Accessibility and universal grammar. Linguistic Inquiry, 81, 63–99.Google Scholar
MATSUNAMI, Y., Y. IKEGAMI., & K. IMAI. (Eds.). (1983). Taishukan dictionary for English studies. Tokyo: Taishukan Shoten.Google Scholar
MAZURKEWICH, I. (1984). The acquisition of the dative alteration by second language learners and linguistic theory. Language Learning, 341, 91–109.Google Scholar
OHBA, H. (1995). The learning order of English relative clauses by Japanese senior high school students in an instruction-only environment. Journal of Health Sciences University of Hokkaido, 211, 19–35.Google Scholar
PARK, S., & LEE, S. (2001). Corpus analysis of preposition stranding and piedpiping: Does frequency-based input theory account for the L2 acquisition order of PS and PP? Proceeding of the Third Annual Conference of the Japanese Society for Language Sciences, 103–108.Google Scholar
PINKER, S. (1989). Learnability and cognition: The acquisition of argument structure. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
SADIGHI, F. (1994). The acquisition of English relative clauses by Chinese, Japanese and Korean adult native speakers. International Review of Applied Linguistics, 321, 141–153.Google Scholar
WHITE, L. (1987). Markedness and second language acquisition. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 91, 261–285.Google Scholar
WOLFE-QUINTERO, K. (1992). Learnability and the acquisition of extraction in relative clauses and wh-questions. Studies in Second LanguageAcquisition, 141, 39–70.Google Scholar