1887
image of The universal topic prominence stage hypothesis and L1 transfer
  • ISSN 1879-9264
  • E-ISSN 1879-9272
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes

    The universal topic prominence stage hypothesis and L1 transfer

    A study of L2 Korean written narratives by L1 English and L1 Chinese speakers

  • Author(s): EunHee Lee 1
  • View Affiliations Hide Affiliations
    Affiliations: 1: University at Buffalo
  • Source: Linguistic Approaches to Bilingualism
    Available online: 29 May 2018
  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1075/lab.17061.lee
    • Received : 18 Aug 2017
    • Accepted : 23 Apr 2018
    • Version of Record published : 29 May 2018

Abstract

This paper tests the universal Topic Prominence (TP) stage hypothesis and L1 transfer hypothesis by analyzing attested TP features, namely zero pronouns, bare (i.e., article-less) nouns, and post-nominal topic marking found in Korean written narratives collected from L2 Korean (TP language) speakers whose L1 is English (SP language) and Mandarin Chinese (TP language), respectively. The results showed that L2 Korean speakers used zero pronouns as frequently as L1 Korean speakers did from the early stage of their acquisition, whereas the use of the topic marking lagged behind, regardless of their L1 backgrounds. We explain the results by appealing to the universal acquisition path based on pragmatic-lexical-morphosyntactic cline: while the concept of the topic is (arguably) universal, its morphological marking is influenced by L1 as well as learning experience.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/lab.17061.lee
2018-05-29
2019-12-07
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Ahn, H. & Herschensohn, J.
    (2013) Anglophone acquisition of case particles in L2 Korean. Proceedings of the 12th Generative Approaches to Second Language Acquisition Conference (GASLA 2013), J. Cabrelli Amaro et al. , (Eds.), (pp.1–10). Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Proceedings Project.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Andersen, R.
    (1983) Transfer to somewhere. In S. Gass & L. Selinker (Eds.), Language transfer in language learning. (pp.177–201). New York: Newbery House.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Bardovi-Harlig, K.
    (2014) One functional approach to SLA. The concept oriented approach. In B. VanPatten & J. Williams (Eds.), Theories in second language acquisition: An introduction (pp.54–74). London: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Brennan, S. , Friedman, M. & Pollard, C.
    (1987) A centering approach to pronouns. InProceedings of the 25th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics, 155–162. Stanford.10.3115/981175.981197
    https://doi.org/10.3115/981175.981197 [Google Scholar]
  5. Brown, G. & Yule, G.
    (1983) Teaching the spoken language: an approach based on the analysis of conversational English. London: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Chierchia, G.
    (1998) Reference to kinds across language. Natural Language Semantics, 6, 339–405.10.1023/A:1008324218506
    https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1008324218506 [Google Scholar]
  7. Choi, J. & Lee, M.
    (1999) Focus. In Kang et al. (Eds.), Formal semantics and the description of Korean. (pp.157–205). Seoul: Hanshin (in Korean).
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Chomsky, N.
    (1995) The minimalist program. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. (2005) Three factors in language design. Linguistic Inquiry, 36, 1–22.10.1162/0024389052993655
    https://doi.org/10.1162/0024389052993655 [Google Scholar]
  10. Ellis, N. C.
    (2006) Selective attention and transfer phenomena in L2 acquisition: contingency, cue competition, salience, interference, overshadowing, blocking, and perceptual learning. Applied Linguistics, 27, 164–194.10.1093/applin/aml015
    https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/aml015 [Google Scholar]
  11. Erteschik-Shir, N.
    (1997) The dynamics of focus structure. Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  12. (2007) Information structure: the syntax-discourse interface. Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. Fuller, J. W. , & Gundel, J. K.
    (1987) Topic-prominence in interlanguage. Language Learning, 37, 1–17.10.1111/j.1467‑1770.1968.tb01310.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-1770.1968.tb01310.x [Google Scholar]
  14. Givón, T.
    (1983) Topic continuity in discourse: a quantitative cross-language study. (Ed.). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.10.1075/tsl.3
    https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.3 [Google Scholar]
  15. Green, C.
    (1996) The origins and effects of topic-prominence in Chinese-English interlanguage. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, 34, 119–135.
    [Google Scholar]
  16. Grosz, B. , Joshi, A. & Weinstein, S.
    (1995) Centering: A framework for modelling the local coherence of discourse. Computational Linguistics, 21, 203–224.
    [Google Scholar]
  17. Gundel, J. , Hedeberg, N. , & Zacharski, R.
    (1993) Cognitive status and the form of referring expressions in discourse. Language, 69, 274–307.10.2307/416535
    https://doi.org/10.2307/416535 [Google Scholar]
  18. Han, C. H.
    (1998) Asymmetry in the interpretation of -(n)un in Korean. In N. Akatsuka , H. Hoji , I. Shoichi , S. Sohn , & S. Strauss . (Eds.) Japanese/Korean Linguistics, 7 (pp.1–15). Stanford, CA: CSLI.
    [Google Scholar]
  19. Han, N. -R.
    (2006) Korean zero pronouns: analysis and resolution. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Pennsylvania.
    [Google Scholar]
  20. Heim, I.
    (1982) The semantics of definite and indefinite noun phrases. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Massachusetts, Amherst.
    [Google Scholar]
  21. Heubner, T.
    (1983) A longitudinal analysis of the acquisition of English. Ann Arbor, MI: Koronma.
    [Google Scholar]
  22. Hopper, P.
    (1979) Aspect and foregrounding in discourse. In G. Talmy (Ed.), Syntax and semantics: discourse and syntax (pp.213–241). New York: Academic Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  23. Jarvis, S.
    (2000) Methodological rigor in the study of transfer: Identifying L1 influence in the interlanguage lexiconLanguage Learning, 50, 245–309.10.1111/0023‑8333.00118
    https://doi.org/10.1111/0023-8333.00118 [Google Scholar]
  24. Jenks, P.
    (2015) Two kinds of definites in numeral classifier languages. Proceedings of SALT25, 103–124.10.3765/salt.v25i0.3057
    https://doi.org/10.3765/salt.v25i0.3057 [Google Scholar]
  25. Jin, H. G.
    (1994) Topic-prominence and subject-prominence in L2 acquisition: evidence of English-to-Chinese typological transfer. Language Learning, 44, 101–122.
    [Google Scholar]
  26. Jung, E. H.
    (2004) Topic and subject prominence in interlanguage development. Language Learning, 54, 713–738.10.1111/j.1467‑9922.2004.00284.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9922.2004.00284.x [Google Scholar]
  27. Kang, B. M.
    (1994) Plurality and other semantic aspects of common nouns in Korean. Journal of East Asian Linguistics, 3, 1–24.10.1007/BF01733148
    https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01733148 [Google Scholar]
  28. Kellerman, E.
    (1995) Crosslinguistic influence: transfer to nowhere?Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 15, 125–150.10.1017/S0267190500002658
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0267190500002658 [Google Scholar]
  29. Kim, Y.
    (1990) The syntax and semantics of Korean case: the interaction between lexical and syntactic levels of representation. Ph.D. dissertation, Harvard University.
  30. (2000) Subject and object drop in the acquisition of Korean: a cross- linguistic comparison. Journal of East Asian Linguistics, 9, 325–351.10.1023/A:1008304903779
    https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1008304903779 [Google Scholar]
  31. Kuno, S.
    (1973) The structure of the Japanese language. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  32. Kuroda, S. Y.
    (1972) The categorical and the thetic judgment. Foundations of Language, 9, 153–85.
    [Google Scholar]
  33. Kwon, Song-Nim & Anne Zribi-Hertz
    (2007) Differential function marking, case, and information structure: Evidence from Korean. Language84, 258–299.10.1353/lan.0.0005
    https://doi.org/10.1353/lan.0.0005 [Google Scholar]
  34. Lardiere, D.
    (2009) Some thoughts on the contrastive analysis of features in second language acquisition. Second Language Research, 25, 173–227.10.1177/0267658308100283
    https://doi.org/10.1177/0267658308100283 [Google Scholar]
  35. Lee, C. M.
    (2007) Contrastive (predicate) topic, intonation, and scalar meanings. In C. Lee , C. M. Gordon , & D. Bűring (Eds.). Topic and focus: cross-linguistic perspectives on meaning and intonation (pp.151–175). Amsterdam: Elsevier.10.1007/978‑1‑4020‑4796‑1_9
    https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-4796-1_9 [Google Scholar]
  36. Lee, E. H. & Zaslansky, M.
    (2015) Nominal reference in Korean heritage language discourse. Heritage Language Journal, 12, 132–158.
    [Google Scholar]
  37. Lee, H. J.
    (2010) Explaining variation in Korean case ellipsis: economy versus iconic- ity. Journal of East Asian Linguistics, 19, 291–318.10.1007/s10831‑010‑9064‑x
    https://doi.org/10.1007/s10831-010-9064-x [Google Scholar]
  38. Lee, I. -H. & Lee, M.
    (2000) Anaphora resolution and discourse structure: a controlled information packaging approach. Language and Information, 4, 67–82.
    [Google Scholar]
  39. Lee, S. H. & Byron, D.
    (2004) Semantic resolution of zero and pronoun anaphors in Korean. InProceedings of the Discourse Anaphora and Reference Resolution Conference (DAARC2004), 103–108.
    [Google Scholar]
  40. Lee, S-H. , Byron, D.K. & Jang, S.B.
    (2005) Why is zero marking important in Korean?. In R. Dale , K.-F. Wong , J. Su & O.Y. Kwong (Eds.), International Joint Conference on Natural Language Processing (IJCNLP 2005), LNAI3651 (pp.588–599). Berlin, Heidelberg, Germany: Springer-Verlag.
    [Google Scholar]
  41. Li, S. & Yang, L.
    (2014) A discourse perspective of topic-prominence in Chinese EFL learners’ interlanguage. International Journal of Applied Linguistics & English Literature, 3, 190–197.10.7575/aiac.ijalel.v.3n.4p.190
    https://doi.org/10.7575/aiac.ijalel.v.3n.4p.190 [Google Scholar]
  42. Li, C. & Thompson, S.
    (1976) Subject and topic: a new typology of language. In C. Li (Ed.), Subject and topic (pp.458–489). New York: Academic Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  43. Luk, Z. P. & Shirai, Y.
    (2009) Is the acquisition order of grammatical morphemes impervious to L1 knowledge? Evidence from the acquisition of plural -s, articles, and possessive ’s. Language Learning, 59, 721–754.10.1111/j.1467‑9922.2009.00524.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9922.2009.00524.x [Google Scholar]
  44. Nakahama, Y.
    (2003) Development of reference management in L2 Japanese: silent film retelling task. Studies in Language and Culture, 25, 127–146.
    [Google Scholar]
  45. (2009) Cross-linguistic influence on referent introduction and tracking in Japanese as a second language. The Modern Language Journal, 93, 241–260.10.1111/j.1540‑4781.2009.00859.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4781.2009.00859.x [Google Scholar]
  46. No, Y. -K.
    (1991) A Centering approach to the *[CASE] [TOPIC] restriction in Korean. Linguistics, 29, 65–668.10.1515/ling.1991.29.4.653
    https://doi.org/10.1515/ling.1991.29.4.653 [Google Scholar]
  47. Oh, S. -Y.
    2010 Invoking categories through co-present person reference: The case of Korean conversation. Journal of Pragmatics, 42, 1219–1242.10.1016/j.pragma.2009.09.019
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2009.09.019 [Google Scholar]
  48. Paul, W. and Whitman, J.
    (2015) Topic Prominence. InThe Blackwell Companion to Syntax, 2nd Edition; Martin Everaert and Henk van Riemsdijk (Eds.), Chapter 117.
    [Google Scholar]
  49. Polio, C.
    (1995) Acquiring nothing? The use of zero pronouns by nonnative speakers of Chinese and the implication for the acquisition of nominal reference. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 17, 353–377.
    [Google Scholar]
  50. Reinhart, T.
    (1984) Principles of gestalt perception in the temporal organization of narrative texts. Linguistics, 22, 779–809.
    [Google Scholar]
  51. Rizzi, L.
    (1997) The fine structure of the left periphery. In: Haegeman, L. (Eds), Elements of grammar (pp.281–337). Springer, Dordrecht: Kluwer International Handbooks of Linguistics.10.1007/978‑94‑011‑5420‑8_7
    https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-011-5420-8_7 [Google Scholar]
  52. Roh, J. E. & Lee, J. H.
    (2003) An empirical study for centering zero pronoun in Korean based on Cost-based Centering model. Proceedings of Australian Language Technology Association, 90–97.
    [Google Scholar]
  53. Rutherford, W.
    (1983) Language typology and language transfer. In S. Gass & L. Selinker (Eds.). Language transfer in language learning (pp.358–470). Rowley, MA: Newbury House.
    [Google Scholar]
  54. Russell, B.
    (1905) On denoting. Mind, 14, 479–493.10.1093/mind/XIV.4.479
    https://doi.org/10.1093/mind/XIV.4.479 [Google Scholar]
  55. Schachter, J. & Rutherford, W.
    (1979) Discourse functions and language transfer. Working Papers on Bilingualism, 19, 1–12.
    [Google Scholar]
  56. Shi, D.
    (2000) Topic and topic-comment constructions in Mandarin Chinese. Language, 76, 383–408.10.1353/lan.2000.0070
    https://doi.org/10.1353/lan.2000.0070 [Google Scholar]
  57. Shibatani, M.
    (1990) The languages of Japan. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  58. Slabakova, R.
    (2006) Is there a critical period for the acquisition of semantics. Second Language Research, 22, 302–338.10.1191/0267658306sr270oa
    https://doi.org/10.1191/0267658306sr270oa [Google Scholar]
  59. (2013) What is easy and what is hard in second language acquisition: A generative perspective. InContemporary approaches to second language acquisition, María del Pilar García Mayo , M. Junkal Gutierrez-Mangado & María Martínez Adrián (Eds.), (pp.5–28). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.10.1075/aals.9.04ch1
    https://doi.org/10.1075/aals.9.04ch1 [Google Scholar]
  60. Suh, K. H.
    (2002) An interactional account of the Korean demonstrative ku in conversation. Language and Linguistics, 29, 137–157.
    [Google Scholar]
  61. Tao, L.
    (1996) Topic discontinuity and zero anaphora: cognitive strategies in discourse processing. In B. Fox (Ed). Studies in anaphora (pp.486–514). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.10.1075/tsl.33.15tao
    https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.33.15tao [Google Scholar]
  62. Tomlin, R. , & Pu, M.
    (1991) The management of reference in Mandarin discourse. Cognitive Linguistics, 2, 65–93.10.1515/cogl.1991.2.1.65
    https://doi.org/10.1515/cogl.1991.2.1.65 [Google Scholar]
  63. Walker, M. , Iida, M. & Cote, S.
    (1994) Japanese discourse and the process of centering. Computational Linguistics, 20, 193–232.
    [Google Scholar]
  64. Yip, V. , & Matthews, S.
    (1995) I-interlanguage and typology: the case of topic- prominence. In E. Lynn , L. Selinker & M. Sharwood Smith (Eds.), The current state of interlanguage (pp.17–30). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.10.1075/z.73.03yip
    https://doi.org/10.1075/z.73.03yip [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1075/lab.17061.lee
Loading
/content/journals/10.1075/lab.17061.lee
Loading

Data & Media loading...

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was successful
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error