Linguistics universals and second language acq..PPT

Shu-ing Shyu Ch 10 Linguistic Universal and SLA Introduction Two approaches toward the study of the language Externalized (E) approach Internalized (I) approach Linguistic universals Typological universals (Greenberg 1966; Hawkins 1983; Comrie 1984; Croft 1990) Universal Grammar (Chomsky) Interlanguage Theory: Another perspective Adjemian (1976): interlanguages are ‘natural language’, subject to all the same constraints ? rule governed ‘the grammatical nature of a learner’s IL’ rather than ‘strategies’ (1976: 306) Interlanguage Structural Conformity Hypothesis (Eckman 1991: 24) “The universal generalization that hold for the primary languages also hold for interlanguages.” 11 adult Asians learning English ? final stop + stop fricative + stop (1991: 24) Typological universals and SLA-1 Absolute universals (implicational universals) E.g. If a lg has a noun before a demonstrative, then it has a N before a RC (Hawkins 1983: 84). If a lg is SOV, then if the adjective precedes the N, then the genitive precedes the N.’ ? in one direction only Universal tendencies (non-implicational universals) Exceptions? How many can be tolerated? Typological universals and SLA-2 Implicational Universals: NP Accessibility Hierarchy (NPAH) Subj DO IO oblique genitive object of comparative (Comrie Keenan (1979)) See table 10.1 (Jones 1991) The grammatical function of the relative clauses in the matrix clause has various degree of difficulity. 2. Markedness as relative phenomenon. Implicational universals presuppose a markedness relationship. If a lg has property X also has property Y ? Y is unmarked in relation to X. Typological universals and SLA-3 Evidence to determine the level of markedness of specific linguistic features: Structure: Behavior: grammatical versatility (gender pronoun, active vs. passive) Frequency: Typologically motivated studies of SLA-1 Qs: What influence do typological universals have on the order of acquisition of grammatical features? What effect d