Cover not available
Part of
Language Learning, Discourse and Cognition: Studies in the tradition of Andrea Tyler
Edited by Lucy Pickering and Vyvyan Evans
[Human Cognitive Processing 64] 2018
► pp. 213–247

Chapter 9
What is happened? Your amazon.com order has shipped

Overpassivization and unaccusativity as L2 construction learning

It is well known that many L2 users overpassivize unaccusatives. The same L2 users may also be reluctant to accept constructions with unaccusative meanings. We examined the responses from 56 L2 users of English on a scaled grammaticality judgment task. We predicted that performance would be negatively affected in the presence of a conceptualizable agent in the discourse scene that biases an external causation construal and with low-frequency verbs and alternating verbs. We found clear effects for frequency and alternation in the hypothesized direction. However, there was no evidence for an independent contribution of the conceptualization bias condition. Our study supports the claim that learners build their L2 grammars by abstracting not only the statistical properties but also the complex, polysemous meanings of the constructions they experience in usage.

Keywords: Frequency, cognitive-effects, L2 constructions
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Overpassivation and unaccusativity
    • 2.1Unaccusatives as types of predicates
    • 2.2Event construal of causation in unaccusative constructions
  • 2.3L2 learning of unaccusatives as construction learning
  • 3.Method
    • 3.1Participants
    • 3.2Corpus-based selection of target verbs
    • 3.3Scaled acceptability judgment task
    • 3.4Procedure
    • 3.5Analyses
  • 4.Results
  • 5.Discussion
    • 5.1Why did the availability of a conceptualizable agent make only a subtle difference?
    • 5.2The importance of considering crosslinguistic influence
    • 5.3Frequency is key to L2 learning, but is no panacea
    • 5.4In defense of the centrality of discourse meaning in constructional learning
  • 6.Conclusion
  • Note
  • References
Published online: 20 December 2018
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/hcp.64.10ort
References
Abdi, H.
(2007) The Bonferroni and Šidák corrections for multiple comparisons. In N. J. Salkind (Ed.), Encyclopedia of measurement and statistics (pp. 103–107). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
Alexiadou, A., & Doron, E.
(2012) The syntactic construction of two non-active Voices: Passive and middle. Journal of Linguistics, 48, 1–34. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ambridge, B.
(2015) Island constraints and overgeneralization in language acquisition. Cognitive Linguistics, 26, 361–370. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ambridge, B., Bidgood, A., Pine, J. M., Rowland, C. F., & Freudenthal, D.
(2015) Is passive syntax semantically constrained? Evidence from adult grammaticality judgment and comprehension studies. Cognitive science. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ambridge, B., & Brandt, S.
(2013) Lisa filled water into the cup: The roles of entrenchment, pre-emption and verb semantics in German speakers’ L2 acquisition of English locatives. Zeitschrift für Anglistik und Amerikanistik: A Quarterly of Language, Literature and Culture, 61, 245–263. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ambridge, B., Kidd, E., Rowland, C. F., & Theakston, A. L.
(2015) The ubiquity of frequency effects in first language acquisition. Journal of Child Language, 42, 239–273. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ambridge, B., & Lieven, E. V. M.
(2011) Child language acquisition: Contrasting theoretical approaches. New York: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ambridge, B., Pine, J. M., Rowland, C. F., Jones, R. L., & Clark, V.
(2009) A semantics-based approach to the “No Negative Evidence” problem. Cognitive Science, 33, 1301–1316. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ambridge, B., Pine, J., Rowland, C., & Young, C.
(2008) The effect of verb semantic class and verb frequency (entrenchment) on children’s and adults’ graded judgments of argument-structure overgeneralization errors. Cognition, 106, 87–129 DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Armon-Lotem, S., Haman, E., Jensen de Lopez, K., Smoczynska, M., Yatsushiro, K., Szczerbinski, M., & Kamandulytė-Merfeldienė, L.
(2016) A large-scale crosslinguistic investigation of the acquisition of passive. Language Acquisition, 23, 27–56. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Balcom, P.
(1997) Why is this happened? Passive morphology and unaccusativity. Second Language Research, 13, 1–9. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bard, E., Robertson, B., & Sorace, A.
(1996) Magnitude estimation of linguistic acceptability. Language, 72, 32–68. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Behrens, H., & Pfänder, S.
(2016) Experience counts: Frequency effects in language. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bowerman, M.
(1974) Learning the structure of causative verbs: A study in the relationship of cognitive, semantic, and syntactic development. Papers and Reports on Child Language Development, 8, 142–178.Google Scholar
British National Corpus
(2007) BNC XML Edition, Version 3. Distributed by Oxford University computing services on behalf of the BNC Consortium. URL: [URL]
Brooks, P. J., Tomasello, M., Dodson, K., & Lewis, L. B.
(1999) Young children’s overgeneralizations with fixed transitivity verbs. Child Development, 70, 1325–1337. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bybee, J.
(2006) From usage to grammar: The mind’s response to repetition. Language, 82, 711–733. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cadierno, T. & Eskildsen, S. W.
(2015) (Eds.), Usage-based perspectives on second language learning. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Clahsen, H.
(2006) Dual-mechanism morphology. In K. Brown (Ed.), Encyclopedia of language and linguistics (Vol. 4: Morphology, pp. 1–5). Oxford, UK: Elsevier. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
de Marneffe, M. C., Grimm, S., Arnon, I., Kirby, S., & and Bresnan, J.
(2012) A statistical model of the grammatical choices in child production of dative sentences. Language and Cognitive Processes, 27, 25–61. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ellis, N. C.
(2002) Frequency effects in language processing. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 24, 143–88.Google Scholar
(2015) Cognitive and social aspects of learning from usage. In T. Cadierno & S. W. Eskildsen (Eds.), Usage-based perspectives on second language learning (pp. 49–74). Berlin: Walter de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2016) Online processing of Verb-Argument Constructions: Lexical decision and meaningfulness. Language and Cognition, 8, 391–420.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ellis, N. C., O’Donnell, M. B., & Römer, U.
(2013) Usage-based language: Investigating the latent structures that underpin acquisition. Language Learning, 63(Supplement 1: Currents in Language Learning), 25–51. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ellis, N. C., & Ferreira-Junior, F.
(2009) Constructions and their acquisition: Islands and the distinctiveness of their occupancy. Annual Review of Cognitive Linguistics, 7, 188–221. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ellis, N. C., Römer, U., O’Donnell, M. B.
(2016) Usage-based approaches to language acquisition and processing: Cognitive and corpus investigations of construction grammar. Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar
Gao, Y.
(2016) Investigating the impact of L1 morphology and semantics on L2 acquisition of English detransitivized constructions by Chinese and Korean learners. In L. Yu & T. Odlin (Eds.), New perspectives on transfer in second language learning (pp. 124–144). Bristol, UK: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
Goldberg, A. E.
(2005) Argument realization: The role of constructions, lexical semantics and discourse factors. In J. O. Östman & M. Fried (Eds.), Construction grammars: Cognitive grounding and theoretical extensions (pp. 17–43). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2016) Partial productivity of linguistic constructions: Dynamic categorization and statistical preemption. Language and Cognition, 8, 369–390. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gordon, P., & Chafetz, J.
(1990) Verb-based versus class-based accounts of actionality effects in children’s comprehension of passives. Cognition, 36, 227–254. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gries, S. Th., & Ellis, N. C.
(2015) Statistical measures for usage-based linguistics. Currents in Language Learning, 2, 228–255. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Han, Z.
(2000) Persistence of the implicit influence of NL: The case of the pseudo-passive. Applied Linguistics, 21, 78–105. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2006) Fossilization: Can grammaticality judgment be a reliable source of evidence? In Z. Han & T. Odlin (Eds.), Studies of fossilization in second language acquisition (pp. 56–82). Clevedon, UK: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
Hirakawa, M.
(2001) L2 acquisition of Japanese unaccusative verbs. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 23(2), 221–245. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hopper, P., & Thompson, S. A.
(1980) Transitivity in grammar and discourse. Language, 56, 251–299. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hubbard, P. L.
(1994) Non-transformational theories of grammar: Implications for language teaching. In T. Odlin (Ed.), Perspectives on pedagogical grammar (pp. 49–71). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ju, M.
(2000) Overpassivization errors by second language learners: The effect of conceptualizable agents in discourse. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 22, 85–111. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Juff, A.
(2001) Discussion: Verb classes, event structure, and second language learners’ knowledge of semantics-syntax correspondences. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 23, 305–313. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kellerman, E.
(1979) Transfer and non-transfer: Where we are now. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 2, 37–57. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kondo, T.
(2005) Overpassivization in second language acquisition. IRAL - International Review of Applied Linguistics, 43, 129–161. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kucera, H., & Francis, W. N.
(1967) Computational analysis of present-day American English. Providence, RI: Brown University Press.Google Scholar
Langacker, R. W.
(2008) Cognitive grammar: A basic introduction. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Levin, B., & Rappaport Hovav, M.
(1995) Unaccusativity: At the syntax-lexical semantics interface. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Lieven, E.
(2016) Usage-based approaches to language development: Where do we go from here? Language and Cognition, 8, 346–368. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
MacWhinney, B.
(2000) The CHILDES project: Tools for analyzing talk (3rd. Ed.). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum AssociatesGoogle Scholar
(2015) Multidimensional SLA. In T. Cadierno & S. W. Eskildsen (Eds.), Usage-based perspectives on second language learning (pp. 19–48). Berlin: Walter de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Montrul, S. A.
(2001) Causatives and transitivity in L2 English. Language Learning, 51, 51–106. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2005) On knowledge and development of unaccusativity in Spanish L2 acquisition. Linguistics, 43, 1153–1190. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Nagano, T.
(2015) Acquisition of English verb transitivity by native speakers of Japanese. Linguistic Approaches to Bilingualism, 5, 322–355. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ortega, L., Tyler, A., Park, H. I., & Uno, M.
(Eds.) (2016) The usage-based study of language learning and multilingualism. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.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, 10, 293–324. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2001) The unaccusative trap in second language acquisition. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 23, 279–304. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Paolillo, J. C.
(2000) Asymmetries in Universal Grammar: The role of methods and statistics. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 22, 209–228. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Perek, F., & Goldberg, A. E.
(2015) Generalizing beyond the input: The functions of the constructions matter. Journal of Memory and Language, 84, 108–127. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Perlmutter, D.
(1978) Impersonal passives and the unaccusative hypothesis (BLS No. 4). University of California at Berkeley, Berkeley Linguistics Society. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ranta, L., & Meckelborg, A.
(2013) How much exposure to English do international graduate students really get? Measuring language use in a naturalistic setting. Canadian Modern Language Review, 69, 1–33. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Reppen, R., Ide, N., & Suderman, K.
(2005) American national corpus (ANC) second release. Philadelphia: Linguistic Data Consortium.Google Scholar
Robenalt, C., & Goldberg, A. E.
(2016) Nonnative speakers do not take competing alternative expressions into account the way native speakers do. Language Learning, 66, 60–93. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sorace, A.
(1993) Incomplete vs. divergent representations of unaccusativity in non-native grammars of Italian. Second Language Research, 9, 22–47. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(1995) Acquiring argument structures in a second language: The unaccusative/unergative distinction. In L. Eubank, L. Selinker, and M. Sharwood Smith (Eds.), The current state of interlanguage (pp. 153–175). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sorace, A. and Shomura, Y.
(2001) Lexical constraints on the acquisition of split intransitivity: Evidence from L2 Japanese. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 23, 247–278. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sprouse, J.
(2011) A test of the cognitive assumptions of magnitude estimation: Commutativity does not hold for acceptability judgments. Language, 8, 274–288. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Theakston, A. L.
(2004) The role of entrenchment in children’s and adults’ performance on grammaticality judgment tasks. Cognitive Development, 19, 15–34. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Theakston, A. L., Maslen, R., Lieven, E. V. M., & Tomasello, M.
(2012) The acquisition of the active transitive construction in English: A detailed case study. Cognitive Linguistics, 23, 91–128. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Tomasello, M.
(2003) Constructing a language: A usage-based theory of language acquisition. Harvard, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Tomlin, R. S.
(1983) On the interaction of syntactic subject, thematic information, and agent in English. Journal of Pragmatics, 7, 411–432. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Tyler, A.
(2012) Cognitive linguistics and second language learning: Theoretical basics and experimental evidence. Routledge DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Tyler, A., & Evans, V.
(2001) Reconsidering prepositional polysemy networks: The case of over. Language, 77, 724–765. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Van Valin, R. D.
(1990) Semantic parameters of split intransitivity. Language, 66, 221–260. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Yip, V.
(1995) Interlanguage and learnability: From Chinese to English. Amsterdam: Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Zobl, H.
(1989) Canonical structures and ergativity. In S. M. Gass & J. Schachter (Eds.), Linguistic perspectives on second language acquisition (pp. 203–221). New York: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Zyzik, E.
(2006) Transitivity alternations and sequence learning: Insights from L2 Spanish production data. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 28, 449–485. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2014) Causative verbs in the grammar of Spanish heritage speakers. Linguistic Approaches to Bilingualism, 4, 1–33. DOI logoGoogle Scholar