Crosslinguistic influence on L2 implicature computation for determiners
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.
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
References (55)
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.
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.
Ahn, D., & Davidson, K. (2018). Where
pointing matters: English and Korean demonstratives. Proceedings of the North East Linguistic
Society (NELS), Vol. 481.
Aissen, J. (2003). Differential
object marking: Iconicity vs. economy. Natural Language and Linguistic
Theory, 211, 435–483.
Ariel, M. (1988). Referring
and accessibility. Journal of
Linguistics, 241, 65–87.
Ariel, M. (1990). Accessing
noun-phrase antecedents. London, UK: Routledge, Croom Helm.
Ariel, M. (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.
Bardovi-Harlig, K. (2013). Developing
L2 pragmatics. Language
Learning, 631, 68–86.
Bardovi-Harlig, K. (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.
Bates, D., Maechler, M., Bolker, B., & Walker, S. (2015). Fitting
linear mixed-effects models using lme4. Journal of Statistical
Software, 67(1), 1–48.
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.
Chang, C. (2003). A
study of the determiner phrase of Spanish, English and Korean. Unpublished doctoral
dissertation. University of Texas at Austin, USA.
Chang, S. (1984). Cisiwa coung [Reference and anaphora, written in
Korean]. Hangul, 1861, 115–149.
Chang, S. J. (2009). Nominal
structure and interpretation: On the syntax of the Korean Determiner Phrase. Unpublished
doctoral dissertation, University of Georgia, USA.
Cho, H. (1999). Interpretation
and function of the Korean demonstrative ku
. Studies in Modern
Grammar, 181, 71–90.
Cho, J. (2017). The
acquisition of different types of definite noun phrases in L2-English. International Journal of
Bilingualism, 21(3), 367–382.
Crawley, M. (2007). The
R book. Chichester, England: Wiley.
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.
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.
Ebert, K. (1971). Zwei formen des bestimmten artikels. In D. Wunderlich (Ed.), Probleme and fortsschritte der transformationsgrammatik (pp. 159–74). Munich: Max Hueber.
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.
Gundel, J. K., Hedberg, N., & Zacharski, R. (1993). Cognitive
status and the form of referring expressions in
discourse. Language, 69(2), 274–307.
Hawkins, J. A. (1978). Definiteness
and indefiniteness. London, UK: Croom Helm.
Hawkins, J. A. (1991). On
(in)definite articles: implicatures and (un) grammaticality prediction. Journal of
Linguistics, 27(2), 405–442.
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.
Horn, L. (1972). On
the semantic properties of the logical operators in English. Unpublished doctoral
dissertation. University of California Los Angeles, USA.
Ionin, T., Ko, H., & Wexler, K. (2004). Article
semantics in L2 acquisition: The role of specificity. Language
Acquisition, 12(1), 3–69.
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.
Isard, S. D. (1975). Changing
the context In E. Keenan (Ed.), Formal
semantics of natural
language (pp. 287–296). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
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.
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.
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.
Levinson, S. (2000). Presumptive
meanings. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
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.
Maclaran, R. (1982). The
semantics and pragmatics of the English demonstratives. Unpublished doctoral
dissertation. Cornell University, USA.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Roberts, C. (2003). Uniqueness
in definite noun phrases. Linguistics and
Philosophy, 261, 287–350.
Robertson, D. (2000). Variability
in the use of the English article system by Chinese learners of English. Second Language
Research, 16(2), 135–172.
Schwarz, F. (2009). Two
types of definites in natural language. Unpublished doctoral
dissertation. University of Massachusettes Amherst, USA.
Schwarz, F. (2013). Two
kinds of definites cross-linguistically. Language and Linguistics
Compass, 7(10), 534–559.
Slabakova, R. (2010). Scalar
implicatures in second language
acquisition. Lingua, 120(10), 2444–2462.
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.
Sorace, A. (2003). Near-nativeness. In C. Doughty & M. Long (Eds), The
handbook of second language
acquisition (pp. 130–151). Cambridge, MA: Wiley-Blackwell.
Sorace, A., & Filiaci, F. (2006). Anaphora
resolution in near-native speakers of Italian. Second Language
Research, 22(3), 339–368.
Spinner, P., & Gass, S. (2019). Using
judgments in second language research. New York, NY: Routledge.
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.
Taguchi, N., & Roever, C. (2017). Second
language pragmatics. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
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.
Cited by (2)
Cited by two other publications
Kim, Min-Joo
2023.
Anaphoric definiteness marking in Korean: focusing on subject definites.
Journal of East Asian Linguistics 32:3
► pp. 373 ff.
Chen, Lijuan, Yiyi Lu & Xiaodong Xu
2022.
Understanding Temporal Relations in Mandarin Chinese: An ERP Investigation.
Brain Sciences 12:4
► pp. 474 ff.
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 5 july 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers.
Any errors therein should be reported to them.