Cover not available
Part of
Structures, Strategies and Beyond: Studies in honour of Adriana Belletti
Edited by Elisa Di Domenico, Cornelia Hamann and Simona Matteini
[Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today 223] 2015
► pp. 237–256

Transferring strategies and the nature of transfer

I concentrate here on Adriana Belletti’s finding (2007, 2009a in particular) that different languages adopt different (but with a constrained variational pattern) strategies to answer the same question concerning the identification of the subject, and that answering strategies of the first language are characteristically transferred to a second language (Belletti & Leonini 2004; Belletti, Bennati & Sorace 2007). I outline a model in which transfer is an option occurring in the derivation when a formal property of a lexical item is not acquired. I assume that the acquisition of a lexical item functional structure and of its sound- meaning pair (Borer 2005) are dissociated, the latter preceding the former. I finally argue that transfer of strategies in L2 Italian is due to specific properties of pro not (yet) acquired.
Keywords: Answering strategies, functional structure, properties of pro., second language acquisition, transfer
Published online: 27 August 2015
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/la.223.11did
References (54)
References
Belletti, Adriana. 2001. Inversion as focalization. In Inversion in Romance and the Theory of Universal Grammar, Aafke Hulk & Jean-Yves Pollock (eds), 60–90. Oxford: OUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2004. Aspects of the low IP area. In The Structure of CP and IP. The Cartography of Syntactic Structures, Vol. 2, Luigi Rizzi (ed.), 16–51. Oxford: OUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2005a. Answering with a cleft. The role of the null subject parameter and the vP periphery. In Proceedings of the XXX Incontro di Grammatica Generativa, Laura Brugé, Giuliana Giusti, Nicola Munaro, Walter Schweikert & Giuseppina Turano (eds), 63–82. Venezia: Cafoscarina.Google Scholar
. 2005b. Extended doubling and the vP periphery. Probus 17(1): 1–35. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2007. Answering strategies. A view from acquisition. In Romance Languages and Linguistic Theory 2005 [Current Issues in Linguistic Theory 291], Sergio Baauw, Frank Drijkonigen & Manuela Pinto (eds), 19–38. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2009a. Answering strategies. New information subjects and the nature of clefts. In Structures and Strategies, Chapter 10, Adriana Belletti.London: Routledge.Google Scholar
. 2009b. Pronouns at the edge of the clause. In Structures and Strategies, Chapter 11, Adriana Belletti.London: Routledge.Google Scholar
. 2012. Revisting the CP of clefts. In Discourse and Grammar. From Sentence Types to Lexical Categories [Studies in Generative Grammar 112], Ede Zimmermann & Günther Grewendorf (eds), 91–114. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2013. On fin: Italian che, Japanese no, and the selective properties of the copula in clefts. In Deep Insights, Broad Perspectives. Essays in Honor of Mamoru Saito, Yoichi Miyamoto, Daiko Takahashi, Hideki Maki, Masao Ochi,Koji Sugisaki & Asako Uchibori (eds), 41–55. Tokyo: Kaitakusha.Google Scholar
. 2015. The focus map of clefts: Extraposition and Predication. In Beyond Functional Sequence, Ur Shlonsky (ed.), 42–59. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
Belletti, Adriana, Bennati, Elisa & Sorace, Antonella. 2007. Theoretical and developmental issues in the syntax of subjects: Evidence from near-native Italian. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 25: 657–689. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Belletti, Adriana & Leonini, Chiara. 2004. Subject inversion in L2 Italian. In Eurosla Yearbook 4, Susan Forster Cohen, Michael Sharwood Smith, Antonella Sorace & Mitsuhiko Ota (eds), 95–118. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bennati, Elisa & Di Domenico, Elisa. 2008. Individual and task- related differences in the L2 acquisition of English ‘s- Genitive Constructions by native speakers of Italian, Poster presented at the XVIII Colóquio de Gramática Generativa, Lisboa, April 17–19.
Bloomfield, Leonard. 1945. About foreign language teaching. The Yale Review 34: 625–641. Reprinted in A Leonard Bloomfield Anthology, Charles F. Hockett (ed.), 1970, 297–309. Chicago IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Borer, Hagit. 1984. Parametric Syntax: Case studies in Semitic and Romance languages. Dordrecht: Foris. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2005. In Name Only. Structuring Sense, Vol.1. Oxford: OUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Calabrese, Andrea. 1986. Pronomina. In Papers in Theoretical Linguistics, Naoki Fukui, Tova R. Rapoport & Elizabeth Sagey (eds), 1–46. Cambridge MA: MITWPL.Google Scholar
Carminati, Maria Nella. 2002. The Processing of Italian Subject Pronouns. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Massachussetts at Amherst.
Chomsky, Noam. 1981. Lectures on Government and Binding. Dordrecht: Foris. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cruschina, Silvio. 2012. Discourse-Releted Features and Functional Projections. Oxford/New York: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
de Villiers, Jill. 1996. Defining the open and closed program for acquisition: The case of wh-questions. In Towards a Genetics of Language, Mabel Rice (ed.), 145–184. Hillsdale NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Di Domenico, Elisa. 2012. Focus and Focus positions: The case of Perugino. In Enjoy Linguistics! Papers offered to Luigi Rizzi on the occasion of his 60th birthday, Valentina Bianchi & Cristiano Chesi (eds), 117–133. Siena: CISCL Press.Google Scholar
. 2013. Setting parameters in L2A: On the English ‘s morpheme. In Proceedings of the 12th Generative Approaches to Second Language Acquisition (GASLA 2013), Jennifer Cabrelli-Amaro, Tiffany Judy & Diego Pascual y Cabo (eds), 32–38. Sommerville CA: Cascadilla Press.Google Scholar
Doca, George.1979. A psycholinguistic approach to linguistic interference. International Journal of Psycholinguistics 6(1): 5–25.Google Scholar
Dulay, Heidy & Burt, Marina.1974. You can’t learn without goofing. An analysis of children’s second language ‘errors’. In Error Analysis: Perspectives on Second Language Acquisition, Jack Richards (ed.), 95–123. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Falk, Ylva & Bardel, Camilla. 2010. The study of the role of the background languages in third language acquisition. The state of the art. International Review of Applied Linguistics48:185–219. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Genevska – Hanke, Dobrinka. 2012. New information focus and null subjects in Bulgarian: An empirical study. Talk delivered at CISCL, University of Siena.
Hamann, Cornelia & Belletti, Adriana. 2006. Developmental patterns in the acquisition of complement clitics pronouns. Comparing different acquisition modes with some emphasis on French. Rivista di Grammatica Generativa 31: 213–219.Google Scholar
Hamann, Cornelia, Penner, Zvi & Lindner, Katrin. 1998. German impaired grammar: The clause structure revisited. Language Acquisition 7: 193–245. DOI logo
Haugen, Einar. 1953. The Norwegian Language in America. Philadelphia PA: University of Pennsylvania Press.Google Scholar
Hermans, Dirk, Bongaerts, Theo, de Bot, Kees & Schreuder, Robert 1998. Producing words in a foreign language: Can speakers prevent interference from their first language? Bilingualism: Language and Cognition 1: 213–219. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hulk, Aafke & Müller, Natasha. 2000. Crosslinguistic influence at the interface between syntax and pragmatics. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition 3: 227–244. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hyams, Nina. 1996. The underspecification of functional categories in early grammar. In Generative Perspectives in Language Acquisition [Language Acquisition and Language Disorders 14],Harald Clahsen (ed.), 91–128. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ionin, Tania & Zubizarreta, Maria Luisa. 2010. Introduction to the special issue: Selective First Language Influence and Retreat from Negative Transfer. Second Language Research 26(3): 283–291. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kotz, Sonja. 2009. ERP and fMRI evidence on L2 syntactic processing. Brain and Language 109: 68–74. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lardiere, Donna. 2008. Feature assembly in second language acquisition. In The Role of Formal Features in Second Language Acquisition, Juana Liceras, Helmut Zobl & Helen Goodluck (eds), 106–140. New York NY: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Montrul, Sylvina. 2011. Multiple interfaces and incomplete acquisition. Lingua 121: 591–604. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Penner, Zvi & Roeper, Thomas. 1998. Trigger theory and the acquisition of complement idioms. In Essays in Language Acquisition: Festschrift in Honour of Jürgen Weissenborn, Norbert Dittmar & Zvi Penner (eds), 77–111. Bern: Peter Lang. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Richards, Jack. (ed). 1974. Error Analysis: Perspectives on Second Language Acquisition. London: Longman. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rizzi, Luigi. 1997. The fine structure of the left periphery. In Elements of Grammar, Liliane Haegeman (ed.), 281–337. Dordrecht: Kluwer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2005. On some properties of subjects and topics. In Proceedings of the XXX Incontro di Grammatica Generativa, Laura Brugé, Giuliana Giusti, Nicola Munaro, Walter Schweikert & Giuseppina Turano (eds), 203–224. Venezia: Cafoscarina.Google Scholar
. 2006. On the form of chains: Criterial positions and ECP effects. In Wh- Movement: Moving on, Lisa Cheng & Norbert Corver (eds), 97–133. Cambridge MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
. 2011. On the elements of syntactic variation. In StiL (Studies in Linguistics – CISCL Working Papers in Linguistics) Vol. 4, Emilio Servidio & Vincenzo Moscati (eds), 242–264. Cambridge MA: MITWPL.Google Scholar
Roeper, Thomas. 1996. The role of merger theory and formal features in acquisition. In Generative Perspectives in Language Acquisition [Language Acquisition and Language Disorders 14], Harald Clahsen (ed.), 415–450. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Schwartz, Bonnie & Sprouse, Rex. 1996. L2 cognitive states and the Full Transfer/Full Access model. Second Language Research 12(1): 40–72. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sheldon, Amy. 1974. The role of parallel function in the acquisition of relative clauses in English. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behaviour 13: 272–281. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sorace, Antonella. 2011. Pinning down the concept of ‘interface’ in bilingualism. Linguistic Approaches to Bilingualism 1: 1–33. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sorace, Antonella & Filiaci, Francesca. 2006. Anaphora resolution in near-native speakers of Italian. Second Language Research 22: 339–368. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Soriano, Olga. 1989. Strong pronouns in null-subject languages and the Avoid Pronoun Principle. MIT Working Papers in Linguistics 11: 228–240.Google Scholar
Sweet, Henry. 1899[1964]. The Practical Study of Languages. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
Tsimpli, Ianthi, Sorace, Antonella, Heycock, Caroline & Filiaci, Francesca. 2004. First language attrition and syntactic subjects: A study of Greek and Italian near-native speakers of English. International Journal of Bilingualism 8: 257–277. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Weinreich, Uriel. 1952. Languages in Contact. New York NY: Publications of the Linguistic Circle of New York.Google Scholar
Wexler, Ken. 1994. Finiteness and head movement in early child grammar. In Verb Movement, David Lightfoot & Norbert Hornstein (eds), 305–350. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
White, Lydia. 2000. Second language acquisition: From initial to final state. In Second Language Acquisition and Linguistic Theory, John Archibald (ed.), 130–155. London: Blackwell. DOI logoGoogle Scholar