Article published in:Second Language Acquisition of Turkish
Edited by Ayşe Gürel
[Language Acquisition and Language Disorders 59] 2016
► pp. 19–48
Acquisition of L2 Turkish prosody
The effects of purely phonological and phonosyntactic issues
This paper investigates second language acquisition of lower-level (i.e. word-level) and higher-level prosody in Turkish to address the role of Universal Grammar (UG) via two different studies. The results of the first study demonstrate that lower-level prosody presents particular challenges for English-speaking learners, as the task for them involves expunging a prosodic constituent from the grammar, which is hypothesized to be impossible. Higher-level prosody, on the other hand, was found to be relatively easy to acquire, despite not being taught in Turkish language classes in a comprehensive and linguistically correct manner. Although learners were not native-like in their performance on lower-level prosody, their representations were UG-constrained. Thus, it is concluded that learners have access to UG for prosody at both levels.
Keywords: L2 phonology, prosody, stress, Turkish, Universal Grammar
Published online: 25 May 2016
2007 Global foreign accent and the effectiveness of a prosody-oriented approach in EFL classrooms. In Proceedings of the 31st Annual Boston University Conference on Language Development , H. Caunt-Nulton, S. Kulatilake & I. Woo (eds), 46–57. Somerville MA: Cascadilla Press.
2008 Explicit instruction vs. linguistic competence in adult L2-acquisition. In Proceedings of the 32nd Annual Boston University Conference on Language Development , H. Chan, E. Kapia & H. Jacob (eds), 48–59. Somerville MA: Cascadilla Press.
2013 Getting L2 Reflexive and Reciprocal Verbs Right. PhD dissertation, McGill University.
Boersma, P. & Weenink, D.
2011 Praat: Doing Phonetics by Computer [Computer program]. Version 5.2.27, retrieved March 2011 from http://www.praat.org/
Clahsen, H. & Hong, U.
Dresher, E. & Kaye, J.
1983 Discourse Pragmatics and Word Order in Turkish. PhD dissertation, University of Minnesota.
1994 On the Acquisition of Prosodic Structure. PhD dissertation, HIL dissertations 6, Leiden University. The Hague: HAG.
Flynn, S. & Martohardjono, G.
1994 Mapping from the initial state to the final state: the separation of universal principles and language-specific principles. In Syntactic Theory and First Language Acquisition: Crosslinguistic Perspectives, Vol. 1: Heads, Projections and Learnability, B. Lust, M. Suner & J. Whitman (eds), 319–335. Hillsdale NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
To appear. Phonological processes in child speech. In The Oxford Handbook of Developmental Linguistics, J. Lidz, W. Snyder & J. Pater (eds) Oxford OUP
Goad, H. & Prévost, A.E.
2011 A test case for markedness: The acquisition of Québec French stress. Ms, McGill University.
Goad, H. & White, L.
Goad, H., White, L. & Steele, J.
Hawkins, R. & Chan, C.Y.
1981 A Metrical Theory of Stress Rules. PhD dissertation, MIT. (Distributed by Indiana University Linguistics Club).
Hualde, J.I., Elordieta, G., Gamind, I. & Smiljanic, R.
Inkelas, S. & Orgun, C.O.
2011 Phonetic realization of focus with no on-focus pitch-range expansion in Turkish. In Proceedings of the 17th International Congress of Phonetic Sciences (ICPhs 17) , W.-S. Lee & E. Zee (eds), 140–143.
İpek, C. & Zubizarreta, M.L.
2014 Nuclear stress as an abstract rhythmic notion: Evidence from Turkish. Paper presented at the 10th Workshop on Altaic Formal Linguistics , MIT, Cambridge MA.
Jun, S.-A. & Fougeron, C.
Kabak, B. & Vogel, I.
2011 Topics at the PF Interface in Turkish. PhD dissertation, Harvard University.
1994 Information Packaging in Turkish. MA thesis, University of Edinburgh.
1987 Stress in Turkish: Is it determined phonologically or morphologically? In Studies on Modern Turkish: Proceedings of the Third Conference on Turkish Linguistics , H. E. Boeschoten & L.T. Verhoeven (eds). Tilburg: Tilburg University Press.
McCarthy, J. & Prince, A.
1986 Prosodic morphology. Ms, Brandeis University and University of Massachusetts, Amherst.
2011 Redefining the Prosodic Hierarchy. Paper presented at Phonology in the 21st Century: In Honour of Glyne Piggott , McGill University, Montréal.
2013 Exceptions in stress assignment: Feet in input. In Proceedings of 40th Annual Meeting of the North East Linguistic Society (NELS 40) , S. Kan, C. Moore-Cantwell & R. Staubs (eds). Amherst MA: GLSA.
To appear. The Foot is not an obligatory constituent of the Prosodic Hierarchy: “stress” in Turkish, French and child English. The Linguistic Review [forthcoming 2017].
Özçelik, Ö & Nagai, M.
Özçelik, Ö. & Nagai, M.
2011 Multiple subject positions: A case of perfect match between syntax and prosody. In Proceedings of the 28th West Coast Conference for Formal Linguistics (WCCFL 28) , M.Byram & B. Tomaszewicz (eds), 303–312. Somerville MA: Cascadilla Press.
2012 Notes on focus projection in Turkish. In Proceedings of the 15th International Conference on Turkish Linguistics , É. Kincses-Nagy & M. Biacsi (eds), 141–154. Szeged: Studia Uralo-Altaica.
Peterson, G. & Lehiste, I.
Schwartz, B. & Sprouse, R.
1994 Word order and nominative case in nonnative language acquisition: A longitudinal study of (L1 Turkish) German interlanguage. In Language Acquisition Studies in Generative Grammar [Language Acquisition and Language Disorders 8], T. Hoekstra & B.D. Schwartz (eds), 317–368. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Schwartz, B. & Sprouse,B.
2007 Bridging the Gap between Theoretical Linguistics and Psycholinguistics in L2 Phonology: The Acquisition and Processing of Word Stress by French Canadian L2 learners of English. PhD dissertation, University of Hawai’i.
Trofimovich, P. & Baker, W.
Tsimpli, I.M. & Sorace, A.
Cited by other publications
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 28 december 2020. 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.