Chapter 13
Acquisition of Differential Object Marking in Korean
The present chapter investigated whether Differential Object
Marking (DOM) in Korean can be subject to the same generalizations made for
acquisition of DOM in other languages – the early target-like use of DOM by
monolingual children in contrast to variability and incomplete knowledge of
second language (L2) and heritage language (HL) learners. The main findings
of the two studies reported in this chapter largely correspond to such
generalizations, although there were important differences. While native
Korean children and HL learners showed notable similarities with native
adult controls, L2 learners integrated relevant factors in a divergent
manner. Such findings indicate that early exposure to aural naturalistic
input plays a key role in the acquisition of the Korean DOM system.
Article outline
- Introduction
- A multi-factor system of Korean DOM
- Study 1: L1 acquisition
- Study 2: Bilingual acquisition
- Method
- Results
- Written forced choice task
- Oral picture description task
- Discussion
-
Notes
-
References
References (43)
References
Ahn, H.-D., & Cho, S. (2007). Subject-object
asymmetries of morphological case
realization. Language and
Information, 11(1), 53–76. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Aissen, J. (2003). Differential
Object Marking: Iconicity vs.
economy. Natural Language and
Linguistic
Theory, 21, 435–483. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Argus, R. (2008). Psühholingvistiline
katse eesti keele objekti käändevahelduse omandamise uurimise
meetodina [Psycholinguistic experiments as a method for the research of the
acquisition of object case alternation in
Estonian]. Emakeele Seltsi
Aastaraamat, 5, 22–43.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Argus, R. (2015). On
the acquisition of Differential Object Marking in
Estonian. Revue Roumaine de
Linguistique, 60, 403–420.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Belletti, A., Bennati, E., & Sorace, A. (2007). Theoretical
and developmental issues in the syntax of subjects: Evidence from
near-native Italians. Natural
Language and Linguistic
Theory, 25, 657–689. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Bossong, G. (1985). Empirische
Universalienforschung. Differentielle Objektmarkierung in der
neuiranischen Sprachen [Empirical universal research: Differential Object Marking in New
Iranian
languages). Tubingen: Narr.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Bowles, M., & Montrul, S. (2009). Instructed
L2 acquisition of Differential Object Marking in
Spanish. In H. Campos & D. Lardiere (Eds.), Little
words. Their history, phonology, syntax, semantics, pragmatics and
acquisition (pp. 199–210). Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Cho, S-W. (1981). The
acquisition of word order in
Korean (Unpublished doctoral
dissertation). University of Calgary.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Chung, E.S. (2013). Sources
of difficulty in L2 scope
judgments. Second Language
Research, 29(3), 285–310. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Chung, E.-S. (2015a). Challenging
a single-factor analysis of case drop in
Korean. Language and
Information, 19, 1–18. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Chung, E.-S. (2015b). The
acquisition of case drop in child
Korean. Language and
Linguistics, 68, 117–148.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Chung, E. S. (2018). Second
and heritage language acquisition of Korean case
drop. Bilingualism: Language and
Cognition, 21(1), 63–79. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Chung, E. S. & Lee, E-K. (2017). Morpho-syntactic
processing of Korean case marking and case
drop. Linguistic
Research, 34(2), 191–204. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Chung, G-H. (1994). Case
and its acquisition in Korean (Unpublished
doctoral dissertation). University at Texas at Austin.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Dabašinskienė, I. (2015). Growing
knowledge in Differential Object Marking: The view from L1
Lithuanian. Revue Roumaine de
Linguistique, 60, 369–382.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Guijarro-Fuentes, P. (2012). The
acquisition of interpretable features in L2 Spanish: Personal
a
. Bilingualism,
Language and
Cognition, 15(4), 701–720. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Hržica, G., Palmović, M., Kovačević, M., Voeikova, M., Ivanova, K., & Galkina, E. (2015). Animacy
and case in the acquisition of Differential Object Marking in
Croatian and Russian. Revue Roumaine
de
Linguistique, 60(4), 351–368.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Ketrez, F. N. (2008) Cardinal reading in children’s indefinites. Is it really wide scope? In C. Boeckx and S. Ulutaş (Eds.), Proceedings of the 4th Workshop on Altaic in Formal Linguistics. MIT Working Papers in Linguistics 56. 127-134.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Ketrez, F. N. (2015). Incomplete
acquisition of the Turkish Differential Object
Marking. Revue Roumaine de
Linguistique, 60, 421–430.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Kim, T. (2008). Subject
and object markings in conversational
Korean (Unpublished doctoral
dissertation). State University of New York at Buffalo.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Kim, Y-J. (1997). The
acquisition of
Korean. In D. I. Slobin (Ed.), The
crosslinguistic study of language
acquisition (Vol.4, pp. 335–443). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Ko, E.-S. (2000). A
discourse analysis of the realization of objects in
Korean. Japanese/Korean
Linguistics, 9, 195–208.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Kwon, S.-N., & Zribi-Hertz, A. (2008). Differential
function marking, case, and information structure: Evidence from
Korean
Language. Language, 84(2), 258–299. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Lee, D.-Y. (2002). The
function of the zero particle with special reference to spoken
Japanese. Journal of
Pragmatics, 34, 645–682. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Lee, H. (2006a). Iconicity
and variation in the choice of object forms in
Korean. Language
Research, 42, 323–355.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Lee, H. (2006b). Parallel
optimization in case systems: evidence from case ellipsis in
Korean. Journal of East Asian
Linguistics, 15, 69–96. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Lee, H. (2010). Explaining
variation in Korean case ellipsis: Economy versus
iconicity. Journal of East Asian
Linguistics, 19, 291–318. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Lee, H. (2011a). Contrastive
focus, usage probability and gradients in Korean case
ellipsis. Discourse and
Cognition, 18, 219–244. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Lee, H. (2011b). Gradients
in Korean case ellipsis: An experimental
investigation. Lingua, 121, 20–34. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Lee, S.-B. (2006). A
pragmatic analysis of accusative case marker
deletion. Discourse and
Cognition, 13(3), 69–89.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Martoccio, A. M. (2012). The
acquisition of Differential Object Marking in L2 Spanish
learners (Unpublished doctoral
dissertation). University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Montrul, S. (2004). Subject
and object expression in Spanish heritage speakers: A case of
morphosyntactic
convergence. Bilingualism: Language
and
Cognition, 7(2), 125–142. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Montrul, S., & Bowles, M. (2009). Back
to basics: Incomplete knowledge of Differential Object Marking in
Spanish heritage
speakers. Bilingualism: Language and
Cognition, 12(3), 363–383. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Montrul, S., Bhatt, R., & Girju, R. (2015). Differential
Object Marking in Spanish, Hindi and Romanian as heritage
languages. Language, 91(3), 1–47. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Montrul, S., & Sánchez-Walker, N. (2013). Differential
Object Marking in child and adult Spanish heritage
speakers. Language
Acquisition, 20, 109–132. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Rodríguez-Mondoñedo, M. (2008). The
acquisition of Differential Object Marking in
Spanish. Probus, 20(1), 111–145. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Sorace, A., & Filiaci, F. (2006). Anaphora
resolution in near-native speakers of
Italian. Second Language
Research, 22, 339–368. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Uziel-Karl, S. (2015). The
development of Differential Object Marking in child
Hebrew. Revue Roumaine de
Linguistique, 60(4), 339–350.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Cited by (1)
Cited by one other publication
Coskun Kunduz, Aylin & Silvina Montrul
2022.
Sources of variability in the acquisition of Differential Object Marking by Turkish heritage language children in the United States.
Bilingualism: Language and Cognition 25:4
► pp. 603 ff.
![DOI logo](//benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 28 june 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.