Cover not available
Article published In:
Journal of Second Language Studies
Vol. 5:1 (2022) ► pp.86–113

Crosslinguistic influence on L2 implicature computation for determiners

ORCID logo | University of Wisconsin Madison | University of Wisconsin Madison

This paper explores the extent to which L1-Korean L2-English speakers’ L1 influences the computation of conversational implicatures for the definite and demonstrative determiners the and that in English. Both the and that denote unique referents, but that carries implication of contrast (Roberts, 2002). Following Submaxim 2 of the Gricean Quantity Maxim, using that instead of unmarked the implicates that the referent is being implicitly contrasted with other members of the same noun. Korean has no equivalent for the and the demonstrative ku ‘that’ is situated on the semantic scale between the and that. This partial overlap could influence L1-Korean L2-English speakers’ implicature computation even though ku also carries implication of contrast. Acceptability judgment data indicate that unlike native speakers, L2 speakers did not show sensitivity to infelicitous use of that, indicating difficulty computing implicatures. Results are discussed in terms of crosslinguistic influence at the semantics-pragmatics interface in L2 acquisition.

Keywords: crosslinguistic influence, conversational implicature, uniqueness, definite and demonstrative determiners, semantics-pragmatics interface, implication of contrast
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.An implicature-based analysis of the definite and demonstrative determiners
  • 3.Two functions of Korean ku ‘that’: Anaphoric determiner and demonstrative determiner
  • 4.The study
    • 4.1Research questions, predictions, and experimental design
    • 4.2Participants and procedures
  • 5.Results
  • 6.General discussion and conclusions
  • Acknowledgments
  • Notes
  • References
Published online: 6 May 2021
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/jsls.20004.cho
References
Agebjörn, A.
(2021) Swedish noun-phrase structure in Russian-speaking learners: An explorative study of L1 influence and input-frequency effects. Journal of the European Second Language Association, 5(1), 16–29. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ahn, D.
(2017) Definite and demonstrative descriptions: A micro-typology. In M. Yoshitaka Erlewine (Ed.), Proceedings of Generative Linguistics in the Old World (GLOW) in Asia 2017, 11, 33–48.Google Scholar
Ahn, D., & Davidson, K.
(2018) Where pointing matters: English and Korean demonstratives. Proceedings of the North East Linguistic Society (NELS), Vol. 481.Google Scholar
Aissen, J.
(2003) Differential object marking: Iconicity vs. economy. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory, 211, 435–483. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ariel, M.
(1988) Referring and accessibility. Journal of Linguistics, 241, 65–87. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(1990) Accessing noun-phrase antecedents. London, UK: Routledge, Croom Helm.Google Scholar
(2001) Accessibility theory: An overview. In T. Sanders, J. Schilperoord, & W. Spooren (Eds.), Text representation, linguistic and psycholinguistic aspects (pp. 29–87). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bardovi-Harlig, K.
(2013) Developing L2 pragmatics. Language Learning, 631, 68–86. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2017) Acquisition of L2 pragmatics. In S. Lowewn & M. Sato (Eds.), The Routledge handbook of instructed second language acquisition (pp. 224–245). New York, NY: Routledge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bates, D., Maechler, M., Bolker, B., & Walker, S.
(2015) Fitting linear mixed-effects models using lme4. Journal of Statistical Software, 67(1), 1–48. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Belletti, A., Bennati, E., & Sorace, A.
(2007) Theoretical and developmental issues in the syntax of subjects: Evidence from near-native Italian. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory, 251, 657–689. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Chang, C.
(2003) A study of the determiner phrase of Spanish, English and Korean. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. University of Texas at Austin, USA.Google Scholar
Chang, S.
(1984) Cisiwa coung [Reference and anaphora, written in Korean]. Hangul, 1861, 115–149.Google Scholar
Chang, S. J.
(2009) Nominal structure and interpretation: On the syntax of the Korean Determiner Phrase. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Georgia, USA.Google Scholar
Cho, H.
(1999) Interpretation and function of the Korean demonstrative ku . Studies in Modern Grammar, 181, 71–90.Google Scholar
Cho, J.
(2017) The acquisition of different types of definite noun phrases in L2-English. International Journal of Bilingualism, 21(3), 367–382. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Chung, Siaw-Fong
(2020) Direct (dis)agreement verbs: Agree/disagree in native speaker and learner data. Journal of Second Language Studies, 3(1), 111-140. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Crawley, M.
(2007) The R book. Chichester, England: Wiley. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
de Hoop, H.
(2003) On the interpretation of stressed pronouns. In M. Weisgerber (Ed.), Proceedings of Sinn und Bedeutung 7 (pp. 159–172). Konstanz, Germany: University of Konstanz.Google Scholar
Dupuy, L., Stateva, P., Andreetta, S., Cheylus, A., Déprez, V., van der Henst, J., Jayez, J., Stepanov, R., & Reboul, A.
(2019) Pragmatic abilities in bilinguals: The case of scalar implicatures. Linguistic Approaches to Bilingualism, 9(2), 314–340. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ebert, K.
(1971) Zwei formen des bestimmten artikels. In D. Wunderlich (Ed.), Probleme and fortsschritte der transformationsgrammatik (pp. 159–74). Munich: Max Hueber.Google Scholar
Grice, P.
(1975) Logic and conversation. In P. Cole & J. L. Morgan (Eds.), Studies in syntax: Vol 3: Speech acts (pp. 41–58). New York, NY: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Gundel, J. K., Hedberg, N., & Zacharski, R.
(1993) Cognitive status and the form of referring expressions in discourse. Language, 69(2), 274–307. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hawkins, J. A.
(1978) Definiteness and indefiniteness. London, UK: Croom Helm.Google Scholar
(1991) On (in)definite articles: implicatures and (un) grammaticality prediction. Journal of Linguistics, 27(2), 405–442. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hopp, H.
(2009) The syntax-discourse interface in near-native L2 acquisition: Off-line and on-line performance. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 12(4), 463–483. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Horn, L.
(1972) On the semantic properties of the logical operators in English. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. University of California Los Angeles, USA.Google Scholar
Ionin, T., Ko, H., & Wexler, K.
(2004) Article semantics in L2 acquisition: The role of specificity. Language Acquisition, 12(1), 3–69. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ionin, T., Baek, S., Kim, E., Ko, H., & Wexler, K.
(2012) That’s not so different from the: Definite and demonstrative descriptions in second language acquisition. Second Language Research, 28(1), 69–101. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Isard, S. D.
(1975) Changing the context In E. Keenan (Ed.), Formal semantics of natural language (pp. 287–296). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kameyama, M.
(1999) Stressed and unstressed pronouns: Complementary preferences. In P. Bosch & R. van der Sandt (Eds.), Focus: Linguistic, cognitive, and computational perspectives (pp. 306–321). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Kehler, A., & Ward, G.
(2006) Referring expressions and conversational implicature. In B. Birner & G. Ward (Eds.), Drawing the boundaries of meaning: Neo-Gricean studies in pragmatics and semantics in honor of Laurence R. Horn (pp. 177–193). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kuznetsova, A., Bruun Brockhoff, P., & Haubo Bojesen Christensen, R.
(2016) lmerTest: Tests in linear mixed effects models. R package version 2.0–33. Retrieved from [URL]
Levinson, S.
(1983) Pragmatics. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2000) Presumptive meanings. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Liu, D., & Gleason, J. L.
(2002) Acquisition of the article the by non-native speakers of English: An analysis of four non-generic uses. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 24(1), 1–26. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Maclaran, R.
(1982) The semantics and pragmatics of the English demonstratives. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. Cornell University, USA.Google Scholar
Miller, D., Giancaspro, D., Iverson, M., Rothman, J., & Slabakova, R.
(2016) Not just algunos, but indeed unos L2ers can acquire scalar implicatures in L2 Spanish. In A. de la Fuente, E. Valenzuela, & C. Martínez Sanz (Eds) Language acquisition beyond parameters. Studies in honour of Juana M. Liceras (pp. 125–145). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Nakatani, C.
(1993) Accenting on pronouns and proper names in spontaneous narrative. In D. House & P. Touati (Eds.), Proceedings of the European speech communication association workshop on prosody (pp. 164–167). Lund, Sweden: ESCA.Google Scholar
Plonsky, L., Marsden, E., Crowther, D., Gass, S. M., & Spinner, P.
(2020) A methodological synthesis and meta-analysis of judgment tasks in second language research. Second Language Research, 36(4), 583–621. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Roberts, C.
(2002) Demonstratives as definites. In K. van Deemter & R. Kibble (Eds.) Information sharing: Reference and presupposition in language generation and interpretation (pp. 89–196). Standford, CA: CSLI Press.Google Scholar
(2003) Uniqueness in definite noun phrases. Linguistics and Philosophy, 261, 287–350. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Robertson, D.
(2000) Variability in the use of the English article system by Chinese learners of English. Second Language Research, 16(2), 135–172. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Schwarz, F.
(2009) Two types of definites in natural language. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. University of Massachusettes Amherst, USA.Google Scholar
(2013) Two kinds of definites cross-linguistically. Language and Linguistics Compass, 7(10), 534–559. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Slabakova, R.
(2010) Scalar implicatures in second language acquisition. Lingua, 120(10), 2444–2462. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Snape, N.
(2008) Resetting the Nominal Mapping Parameter in L2 English: Definite article use and the count-mass distinction. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 11(1), 63–79. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Snape, N., & Hosoi, H.
(2018) Acquisition of scalar implicatures: Evidence from adult Japanese L2 learners of English. Linguistic Approaches to Bilingualism, 8(2), 163–192. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sorace, A.
(2003) Near-nativeness. In C. Doughty & M. Long (Eds), The handbook of second language acquisition (pp. 130–151). Cambridge, MA: Wiley-Blackwell. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2011) Pinning down the concept of “interface” in bilingualism. Linguistic Approaches to Bilingualism, 1(1), 1–33. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sorace, A., & Filiaci, F.
(2006) Anaphora resolution in near-native speakers of Italian. Second Language Research, 22(3), 339–368. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Spinner, P., & Gass, S.
(2019) Using judgments in second language research. New York, NY: Routledge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sprouse, J., Caponigro, I., Greco, C., & Cecchetto, C.
(2016) Experimental syntax and the variation of island effects in English and Italian. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory, 34(1), 307–344. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Taguchi, N., & Roever, C.
(2017) Second language pragmatics. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Wike, E. L., & Church, J.
(1976) Comments on Clark’s “The language-as-fixed-effect fallacy.” Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 151, 249–255. DOI logoGoogle Scholar