The causative/inchoative morphology in L2 Turkish under the Feature Reassembly Approach
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.
References (57)
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](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Bailey, N., Madden, C. & Krashen, S. 1974. Is there a “natural sequence” in adult second language learning? Language Learning 24: 235–243. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Beard, R. 1995. Lexeme-morpheme Based Morphology. Albany NY: SUNY Press.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Berman, R. 1993. Marking of verb transitivity by Hebrew-speaking children. Journal of Child Language 20: 642–669. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Brown, J.D. 1980. Relative merits of four methods for scoring cloze tests. Modern Language Journal 64: 311–317. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
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. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Chomsky, N. 1995. The Minimalist Program. Cambridge MA: The MIT Press.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
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. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
DeKeyser, R. 1997. Beyond explicit rule learning: Automatized second language morphosyntax. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 19: 195–221. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Dressler, W. 2012. On the acquisition of inflectional morphology. Morphology 22: 1–8. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Dowty, D. 1979. Word Meaning and Montague Grammar. Dordrecht: Reidel. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
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. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Grimshaw, J. 1990. Argument Structure. Cambridge MA: The MIT Press.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Haegeman, L. 1985. The Get passive and Burzio’s generalization. Lingua 66: 53–67. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
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](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
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](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
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. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Jiang, N. 2002. Form-meaning mapping in vocabulary acquisition in a second language. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 24: 617–637. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Kornfilt, J. 1997. Turkish. London: Routledge.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Lardiere, D. 2009. Some thoughts on a contrastive analysis of features in second language acquisition. Second Language Research 25: 173–227. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Lardiere, D. 2007. Ultimate Attainment in Second Language Acquisition: A Case Study. Mahwah NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Lardiere, D. & Schwartz, B.D. 1997. Feature-marking in the L2 development of deverbal compounds. Journal of Linguistics 33: 327–353. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Legate, A.J. & Yang, C. 2007. Mophosyntactic learning and the development of Tense. Language Acquisition 14: 315–344. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Levin, B. 1993. English Verb Classes and Alternations. Chicago IL: Chicago University Press.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Levin, B. & Rappaport Hovav, M. 1995. Unaccusativity at the Syntax-semantics Interface.
Cambridge MA: The MIT Press.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Marantz, A. 1984. On the Nature of Grammatical Relations. Cambridge MA: The MIT Press.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Marantz, A. 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](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Montrul, S. 1999a. Causative errors with unaccusative verbs in L2 Spanish. Second Language Research 15: 191–219. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Montrul, S. 1999b. Se o no se: Transitive and intransitive verbs in L2 Spanish. Spanish Applied Linguistics 3: 145–194.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Montrul, S. 2000a. Transitivity alternations in second language acquisition: Toward a modular view of transfer. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 22: 229–274. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Montrul, S. 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.
Montrul, S. 2001a. First-language-constrained variability in the second-language acquisition of argument-structure-changing morphology with causative verbs. Second Language Research 17: 144–194. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Montrul, S. 2001b. Causatives and transitivity in L2 English. Language Learning 51: 51–106. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
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](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
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](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Pesetsky, D. 1995. Zero Syntax. Experiencers and Cascades. Cambridge MA: The MIT Press.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Ramchand, G. 2013. Argument structure and argument structure alternations. In The Cambridge Handbook of Generative Syntax, M. den Dikken (ed.), 265–321. Cambridge: CUP. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Reinhart, T. 2002. The theta system – an overview. Theoretical Linguistics 28: 229–290.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Schwartz, B. & Sprouse, R. 1996. L2 cognitive states and the Full Transfer/Full Access Model. Second Language Research 12: 40–72. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Slabakova, R. 2008. Meaning in the Second Language. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
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](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Toth, P. 2000. The interaction of instruction and learner-internal factors in the acquisition of L2 morphosyntax. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 22: 169–208. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Toth, P. 2008. Teacher- and learner-led discourse in task-based grammar instruction: Providing procedural assistance for L2 morphosyntactic development. Language Learning 58: 237–283. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Toth, P. 2011. Social and cognitive factors in making teacher-led classroom discourse relevant for second language development. The Modern Language Journal 95: 1–25. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Underhill, R. 1976. Turkish Grammar. Cambridge MA: The MIT Press.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Verkuyl, H. 1993. A Theory of Aspectuality. Cambrige: CUP. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
VanPatten, B. 1996. Input Processing and Grammar Instruction in Second Language Acquisition. Norwood NJ: Ablex.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
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. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
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. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Cited by (1)
Cited by one other publication
Gonzalez, Becky
2023.
A lexical semantic approach to the L2 acquisition of Spanish psych verbs.
Second Language Research 39:3
► pp. 731 ff.
![DOI logo](//benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 25 july 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers.
Any errors therein should be reported to them.