Article published in:
Second Language Acquisition of Turkish
Edited by Ayşe Gürel
[Language Acquisition and Language Disorders 59] 2016
► pp. 107–133

The causative/inchoative morphology in L2 Turkish under the Feature Reassembly Approach

| University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
According to the Feature Reassembly Hypothesis (Lardiere 2009), L2 learners must acquire, reassembly, or reconfigure features into lexical items in the L2 from the way represented and bundled in their L1. This study extends this approach to the acquisition of two classes of causative verbs – change of state verbs with agentive subjects (kırmak-break) and psychological change of state verbs with experiencer objects (korkutmak-frighten) in L2 Turkish by L1 speakers of English, Spanish and Japanese. The results of a picture judgment task with transitive and intransitive sentences manipulating overt/non-overt morphology on the verbs showed that the L2 learners’ judgments were constrained by the morphological patterns of the learners’ L1s, experiencing different degrees of difficulty with the lexical realization of those features.
Keywords: causative morphology, Feature Reassembly Hypothesis, Turkish
Published online: 25 May 2016
https://doi.org/10.1075/lald.59.05mon
References

References

Aksu-Koç, A. & Slobin, D.
1985 The acquisition of Turkish. In The Crosslinguistic Study of Language Acquisition, D. Slobin (ed.), 839–878. Hillsdale NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Allen, S.
1996 Aspects of Argument Structure in Inuktitut [Language Acquisition and Language Disorders 13]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Bailey, N., Madden, C. & Krashen, S.
1974 Is there a “natural sequence” in adult second language learning? Language Learning 24: 235–243. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Beard, R.
1995 Lexeme-morpheme Based Morphology. Albany NY: SUNY Press.Google Scholar
Berman, R.
1993 Marking of verb transitivity by Hebrew-speaking children. Journal of Child Language 20: 642–669. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Brown, J.D.
1980 Relative merits of four methods for scoring cloze tests. Modern Language Journal 64: 311–317. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Chen, D.
1996 L2 Acquisition of English Psych Predicates by French and Chinese Native Speakers. PhD dissertation, McGill University, Montréal.
Chierchia, G.
2004 A semantics for unaccusatives and its syntactic consequences. In The Unaccusativity Puzzle: Explorations of the Syntax-Lexicon Interface, A. Alexiadou, E. Anagnostopoulou, & M. Everaert (eds), 22–59. Oxford: OUP. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Chomsky, N.
1995 The Minimalist Program. Cambridge MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
Clahsen, H. Blakhair, L., Schutter, J. S. & Cunnings, I.
2013 The time course of morphological processing in a second language. Second Language Research 29: 7–31. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
DeKeyser, R.
1997 Beyond explicit rule learning: Automatized second language morphosyntax. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 19: 195–221. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Dressler, W.
2012 On the acquisition of inflectional morphology. Morphology 22: 1–8. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Dowty, D.
1979 Word Meaning and Montague Grammar. Dordrecht: Reidel. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Friedline, B.
2011 Challenges in the Second Language Acquisition of Derivational Morphology. From Theory to Practice. PhD dissertation, University of Pittsburgh.
Göksel, A. & Kerslake, C.
2005 Turkish: A Comprehensive Grammar. London: Routledge. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Grimshaw, J.
1990 Argument Structure. Cambridge MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
Haegeman, L.
1985 The Get passive and Burzio’s generalization. Lingua 66: 53–67. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Halle, M. & Marantz, A.
1993 Distributed morphology. In The View from Building 20. Essays in Linguistics in Honor of Sylvain Bromberger, K. Hale & S. Keyser (eds), 111–176. Cambridge MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
Harley, H. & Noyer, R.
2000 Formal versus encyclopedic properties of vocabulary: Evidence from nominalizations. In The Lexicon-encyclopedia Interface, B. Peters (ed.), 349–374. 
Amsterdam: Elsevier.Google Scholar
Haspelmath, M.
1993 More on the typology of inchoative/causative verb alternations. In Causatives and Transitivity [Studies in Lanuage Companion Series 23], B. Comrie & 
M. Polinsky (eds), 87–120. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Hirakawa, M.
1995 L2 acquisition of English unaccusative constructions. In Proceedings of the 19th Boston University Conference on Language Development, D. MacLaughlin & S. McEwen (eds), 291–302. Sommerville MA: Cascadilla Press.
Hwang, S.H. & Lardiere, D.
2013 Plural marking in L2 Korean: A feature-based approach. Second Language Research 29: 57–86. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Jiang, N.
2002 Form-meaning mapping in vocabulary acquisition in a second language. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 24: 617–637. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Juffs, A.
1996 Learnability and the Lexicon: Theories and Second Language Acquisition Research [Language Acquisition and Language Disorder 12]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Kornfilt, J.
1997 Turkish. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Lardiere, D.
2009 Some thoughts on a contrastive analysis of features in second language acquisition. Second Language Research 25: 173–227. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2007 Ultimate Attainment in Second Language Acquisition: A Case Study. Mahwah NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Lardiere, D. & Schwartz, B.D.
1997 Feature-marking in the L2 development of deverbal compounds. Journal of Linguistics 33: 327–353. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Legate, A.J. & Yang, C.
2007 Mophosyntactic learning and the development of Tense. Language Acquisition 14: 315–344. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Levin, B.
1993 English Verb Classes and Alternations. Chicago IL: Chicago University Press.Google Scholar
Levin, B. & Rappaport Hovav, M.
1995 Unaccusativity at the Syntax-semantics Interface. 
Cambridge MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
Marantz, A.
1984 On the Nature of Grammatical Relations. Cambridge MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
1997 No escape from syntax: Don’t try morphological analysis in the privacy of your own lexicon. University of Pennsylvania Working Papers in Linguistics 4: 201–225.Google Scholar
Montrul, S.
1999a Causative errors with unaccusative verbs in L2 Spanish. Second Language Research 15: 191–219. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
1999b Se o no se: Transitive and intransitive verbs in L2 Spanish. Spanish Applied Linguistics 3: 145–194.Google Scholar
2000a Transitivity alternations in second language acquisition: Toward a modular view of transfer. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 22: 229–274. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2000b Causative psych verbs in Spanish L2 acquisition. In Spanish Applied Linguistics at the Turn of the Millennium: Papers from the 1999 Conference on the L1 & L2 Acquisition of Spanish and Portuguese , R. Leow & C. Sanz (eds), 97–118. Sommerville MA: Cascadilla Press.
2001a First-language-constrained variability in the second-language acquisition of argument-structure-changing morphology with causative verbs. Second Language Research 17: 144–194. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2001b Causatives and transitivity in L2 English. Language Learning 51: 51–106. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Morales, A.
2014 Production and Comprehension of Verb Agreement Morphology in Spanish and English Child L2 Learners: Evidence for the Effects of Morphological Structure. PhD dissertation, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.
Morikawa, H.
1991 Acquisition of causatives in Japanese. Papers and Reports on Child Language Development 30: 80–87.Google Scholar
Oshita, H.
2000 What is happened may not be what appears to be happening: a corpus study of ‘passive’ unaccusatives in L2 English. Second Language Research 16: 293–324.Google Scholar
Pesetsky, D.
1995 Zero Syntax. Experiencers and Cascades. Cambridge MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
Ramchand, G.
2013 Argument structure and argument structure alternations. In The Cambridge Handbook of Generative Syntax, M. den Dikken (ed.), 265–321. Cambridge: CUP. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Reinhart, T.
2002 The theta system – an overview. Theoretical Linguistics 28: 229–290.Google Scholar
Schwartz, B. & Sprouse, R.
1996 L2 cognitive states and the Full Transfer/Full Access Model. Second Language Research 12: 40–72. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Slabakova, R.
2008 Meaning in the Second Language. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Toth, P.
1999 Preemption in instructed learners of Spanish as a foreign language: Acquiring a rule for se . Spanish Applied Linguistics 3: 195–246.Google Scholar
2000 The interaction of instruction and learner-internal factors in the acquisition of L2 morphosyntax. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 22: 169–208. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2008 Teacher- and learner-led discourse in task-based grammar instruction: Providing procedural assistance for L2 morphosyntactic development. Language Learning 58: 237–283. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2011 Social and cognitive factors in making teacher-led classroom discourse relevant for second language development. The Modern Language Journal 95: 1–25. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Underhill, R.
1976 Turkish Grammar. Cambridge MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
Verkuyl, H.
1993 A Theory of Aspectuality. Cambrige: CUP. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
VanPatten, B.
1996 Input Processing and Grammar Instruction in Second Language Acquisition. Norwood NJ: Ablex.Google Scholar
Volpe, J.
2005 Japanese Morphology and its Theoretical Consequences. Derivational Morphology in Distributed Morphology. PhD dissertation, State University of New York, Stony Brook.
White, L., Montrul, S., Hirakawa, M., Chen, D., Bruhn-Garavito, J. & Brown, C.
1998 L2 psych verbs and the T/SM restriction: The status of a zero causative morpheme. In Morphology and its Interfaces in Second Language Knowledge [Language Acquisition and Language Disorders 19], M. Beck (ed.), 257–282. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Zobl, H.
1989 Canonical typological structure and ergativity in English L2 acquisition. In Linguistic Perspectives on Second Language Acquisition, S. Gass & J. Schachter (eds), 203–221. Cambridge: CUP. CrossrefGoogle Scholar