Article published in:
Second Language Acquisition of Turkish
Edited by Ayşe Gürel
[Language Acquisition and Language Disorders 59] 2016
► pp. 135163
References

References

Anderson, C.
2004The Structure and Real-time Comprehension of Quantifier Scope Ambiguity. PhD dissertation, Northwestern University.
Aoun, J. & Li, Y.A.
1989Scope and constituency. Linguistic Inquiry 20(2): 141–172.Google Scholar
1993Syntax of Scope. Cambridge MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
Aygen-Tosun, G.
1999Specificity and subject-object positions/scope interactions in Turkish. Presented in Proceedings of the Conference on Turkic Linguistics at Manchester University, Dil ve Edebiyat Dergisi/Journal of Linguistics and Literature 4(2): 9–34 2007.Google Scholar
Bardel, C. & Falk, Y.
2007The role of the second language in third language acquisition: The case of Germanic syntax. Second Language Research 23: 459–484. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Beghelli, F. & Stowell, T.
1997Distributivity and negation: The syntax of each and every. In Ways of Scope Taking, A.Szabolcsi (ed.), 71–107. Dordrecht: Kluwer. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Cenoz, J.
2003The successive effect of bilingualism on third language acquisition. A review. International Journal of Bilingualism 7: 71–87. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Chu, C.-Y., Gabriele, A., & Minai, U.
2014Acquisition of quantifier scope interpretation by Chinese-speaking learners of English. In Selected Proceedings of the 5th Conference on Generative Approaches to Language Acquisition North America (GALANA 2012) , C.-Y.Chu, C. E.Coughlin, B.L.Prego, U.Minai & A.Tremblay. (eds), 157–168. Somerville MA: Cascadilla Proceedings Project.
Chung, E.S.E.
2013Sources of difficulty in L2 scope judgments. Second Language Research 29(3): 285–310. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Clahsen, H. & Muysken, P.
1989The UG paradox in L2 acquisition. Second Language Research 5: 1–29. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Čulinović, D.
2013Development of scopal ambiguities in L1-Japanese interlanguage English. In Proceedings of the 12th Generative Approaches to Second Language Acquisition Conference (GASLA 2013) , J.Cabrelli Amaro, T.Judy & D.Pascual y Cabo (eds), 22–31. Somerville MA: Cascadilla Proceedings Project.
De Angelis, G.
2007Third or Additional Language Acquisition. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
De Angelis, G. & Selinker, L.
2001Interlanguage transfer and competing linguistic systems in the multilingual mind. In Cross-linguistic Influence in Third Language Acquisition: Psycholinguistic Perspectives, J.Cenoz, B.Hufeisen & U.Jessner (eds), 42–58. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
Dekydtspotter, L., Sprouse, R.A. & Swanson, K.A.
2001Reflexes of mental architecture in second language acquisition: The interpretation of combien extractions in English–French interlanguage. Language Acquisition 9: 175–227. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Dewaele, J.
1998Lexical Inventions: French Interlanguage as L2 versus L3. Applied Linguistics 19(4): 471–490. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Epstein, S., Flynn, S. & Martohardjono, R.
1998The strong continuity hypothesis: Some evidence concerning functional categories in adult L2 acquisition. In The Generative Study of Second Language Acquisition, S.Flynn, G.Martohardjono & W.O’Neil (eds), 61–77. Mahwah NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Falk, Y. & Bardel, C.
2011Object pronouns in German L3 syntax: Evidence for the L2 status factor. Second Language Research 27(1): 59–82. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Flynn, S., Foley, C. & Vinnitskaya, I.
2004The cumulative-enhancement model for language acquisition: Comparing adults’ and children’s patterns of development in first, second and third language acquisition of relative clauses. The International Journal of Multilingualism 1: 3–16. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Fodor, J.D. & Sag, I.A.
1982Referential and quantificational indefinites. Linguistics and Philosophy 5(3): 355–398. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Göksel, A.
1998Linearity, focus and the postverbal position in Turkish. In The Mainz Meeting Proceedings of the Seventh International Conference on Turkish Linguistics , L.Johanson (ed.), 85–106. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz.
Greenhouse, S.W. & Geisser, S.
1959On methods in the analysis of profile data. Psychometrika 24: 95–112. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Grosjean, F.
2001The bilingual’s language modes. In One Mind, Two Languages: Bilingual Language Processing, J.Nicol (ed.), 1–22. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Hammarberg, B. & Williams, S.
1993A study of third language acquisition. In Problem, Process, Product in Language Learning, B.Hammarberg (ed.), 60–70. Stockholm: Stockholm University, Dept. of Linguistics.Google Scholar
Han, C., Storoshenko, D.R. & Sakurai, Y.
2009An experimental investigation into scope rigidity in Japanese. In Current Issues in Unity And Diversity of Languages: Collection of the Papers Selected from the 18th International Congress of Linguistics, The Linguistic Society of Korea (eds). Seoul: Hanshin.Google Scholar
Hoji, H.
1985Logical form Constraints and Configurational Structures in Japanese. PhD dissertation, University of Washington.
Ionin, T.
2010The scope of indefinites: An experimental investigation. Natural Language Semantics 18(3): 295–350. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Ionin, T., Luchkina, T. & Stoops, A.
2014Quantifier scope and scrambling in the second language acquisition of Russian. In Selected Proceedings of the 5th Conference on Generative Approaches to Language Acquisition North America (GALANA 2012) , C.-Y.Chu, C. E.Coughlin, B.L.Prego, U.Minai & A.Tremblay (eds), 169–180. Somerville MA: Cascadilla Proceedings Project.
Ioup, G.
1975Some universals for quantifier scope. In Syntax and Semantics, Vol. 4, J.Kimball (ed.), 37–58. New York NY: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Jiménez-Fernández, Á. L.
2010Discourse-agreement features, phrasal C and the edge: A minimalist approach, Diacrítica – Language Sciences Series 24(1): 25–49.Google Scholar
Jiménez-Fernández, Á. L., & Miyagawa, S.
2014A feature-inheritance approach to root phenomena and parametric variation. Lingua 145: 276–302. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Kelepir, M.
2001Topics in Turkish Syntax: Clausal Structure and Scope. PhD dissertation, MIT.
Kratzer, A.
1998Scope or pseudo-scope: Are there wide scope indefinites? In Events in Grammar, S.Rothstein (ed.), 163–196. Dordrecht: Kluwer. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Kuno, S.
1973The Structure of the Japanese Language. Cambridge MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
Kural, M.
1992Properties of scrambling in Turkish. Ms, UCLA.
Kuroda, S.-Y.
1970Japanese Syntax and Semantics. Dordrecht: Kluwer.Google Scholar
Kurtzman, H.S. & MacDonald, M.C.
1993Resolution of quantifier scope ambiguities. Cognition 48: 243–279. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Lee,S.
2009Interpreting Ambiguity in First and Second Language Processing: Universal Quantifiers and Negation. PhD dissertation, University of Hawaii.
Lee, T.H., Yip, V. & WangC.
1999Inverse scope in Chinese-English interlanguage. Lingua Posnaniensis 41: 39–56.Google Scholar
LeungY.-KI.
(ed.)2009Third Language Acquisition and Universal Grammar. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
Mahajan, A.K.
1990The A/A-bar Distinction and Movement Theory. PhD dissertation, MIT.
Marsden, H.
2004Quantifier Scope in Non-native Japanese: A Comparative Interlanguage Study of Chinese, English, and Korean-speaking Learners. PhD dissertation, University of Durham.
2008Pair-list readings in Korean-Japanese, Chinese-Japanese and English-Japanese interlanguage. Second Language Research 24(2): 189–226. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2009Distributive quantifier scope in English-Japanese and Korean-Japanese interlanguage. Language Acquisition 16: 135–177. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
May, R.
1977The Grammar of Quantification. PhD dissertation, MIT.
Miyagawa, S.
2001EPP, scrambling, and wh-in-situ. In Ken Hale: A Life in Language, 
M.Kenstowicz (ed.), 293–338. Cambridge MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
2003A-movement scrambling and options without optionality. In Word Order and Scrambling, S.Karimi (ed.), 177-200. Malden MA: Blackwell. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2005On the EPP, In Perspectives on Phases [MIT Working Papers in Linguistics 49], N.Richards & M.McGinnis (eds), 201–236. Cambridge MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
Miyamoto, Y. & Takata, Y.
1998Rigidity effects and the strong weak wh features in SLA. In Proceedings of the 22nd Annual Boston University Conference on Language Development , Vol. 2, A.Greenhill, M.Hughes, H.Littlefield & H.Walsh (eds), 511–522. Somerville MA: Cascadilla Press.
Miyamoto, Y. & Yamane, M.
1996L2 rigidity: The scope principle in adult L2 grammar. In Proceedings of the 20th Annual Boston University Conference on Language Development, Vol. 2, A.Stringfellow, D.Cahana-Amitay, E.Hughes & A.Zukowski (eds), 494–505. Somerville MA: Cascadilla Press.
Murphy, S.
2003Second language transfer during third language acquisition. Working Papers in TESOL & Applied Linguistics 3(2): 1–21. http://​tesol​-dev​.journals​.cdrs​.columbia​.edu​/wp​-content​/uploads​/sites​/12​/2015​/05​/1​.-Murphy​-2003​.pdfGoogle Scholar
O’Grady, W.
2007The syntax of quantification in SLA: An emergentist approach. In Proceedings of the 8th Generative Approaches to Second Language Acquisition Conference (GASLA 2006): The Banff Conference , M.G.O’Brien, C.Shea, & J.Archibald (eds), 98–113. Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Proceedings Project.
Özçelik, Ö.
2009L2 acquisition of scope: Testing the Full Transfer Full Access Hypothesis. In Proceedings of the 10 the Generative Approaches to Second Language Acquisition Conference (GASLA 2009) , M.Bowles, T.Ionin, S.Montrul, & A.Tremblay (eds), 168–179. Somerville MA: Cascadilla Proceedings Project.
Öztürk, B.
2005Case, Referentiality and Phrase Structure [Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today 77]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Reinhart, T.
1997Quantifier scope: How labor is divided between QR and choice functions. Linguistics and Philosophy 20: 335–397. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Rothman, J.
2011L3 syntactic transfer selectivity and typological determinacy: The Typological Primacy Model. Second Language Research 27(1): 107–127. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Saito, M.
1992Long distance scrambling in Japanese. Journal of East Asian Linguistics 1: 69–118. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Sano, T.
2004Scope relations of QP’s and scrambling in the acquisition of Japanese. In Proceedings of the GALA 2003 Conference on Language Acquisition, J.van Kampen & S.Baauw (eds), 421– 431. Utrecht: LOT.
Schwartz, B.D. & Sprouse, R.
1994Word 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 Disorderes 8], T.Hoekstra & B.D.Schwartz (eds), 317–368. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Siewierska, A.
2013Verbal person marking. In The World Atlas of Language Structures Online, S. M.Dryer & M.Haspelmath (eds). Leipzig: Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology. http://​wals​.info​/chapter​/102 (15 January 2015).Google Scholar
Singleton, D.
1987Mother and other tongue influence on learner French: A case study. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 9: 327–346. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Sorace, A.
1996The use of acceptability judgments in second language acquisition research. In Handbook of second language acquisition, W.C.Ritchie & T.K.Bhatia (eds), 375–409. San Diego CA: Academic Press.Google Scholar
2011Pinning down the concept of “interface” in bilingualism. Linguistic Approaches to Bilingualism 1: 1–33. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Tada, H.
1992Nominative objects in Japanese. Journal of Japanese Linguistics 14: 91–108.Google Scholar
Tunstall, S.
1998The Interpretation of Quantifiers: Semantics and Processing. PhD dissertation, University of Massachusets.
Wang, T.
2013Cross-linguistic influence in third language acquisition: Factors influencing interlanguage transfer. Teachers College, Columbia University Working Papers in TESOL & Applied Linguistics 13(2): 99–114.Google Scholar
Webelhuth, G.
1989Syntactic Saturation Phenomena and the Germanic Languages. PhD dissertation, University of Massachusetts at Amherst.
White, L.
2011Second language acquisition at the interfaces. Lingua 121(4): 577–590. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Williams, S. & Hammarberg, B.
1998Language switches in L3 production: Implications for a polyglot speaking model. Applied Linguistics 19: 295–333. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Zidani-Eroğlu, L.
1997Indefinite Noun Phrases in Turkish. PhD dissertation, University of Wisconsin-Madison.