L2 acquisition of Bulgarian clitic doubling: A test case for the Interface Hypothesis

Ivanov, Ivan

doi:10.1177/0267658312452066

Cited by 48 publications

(57 citation statements)

References 28 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The acquisition of Ø topic provides further evidence to the claim that some aspects at the syntax-discourse external interface are acquirable (Ivanov 2012;Iverson et al 2008;Kraš 2008;Rothman 2007Rothman , 2009Slabakova et al 2012;Slabakova and Ivanov 2011;Zhao 2008Zhao , 2012a. The current study supports the proposals of White (2011) andYuan (2010) that interface vulnerability may not be domain-wide in that Ø topic at the syntax-discourse interface is acquired in comparison with some syntax-discourse properties that have proved to be vulnerable to ultimate fossilisation as discussed in Sorace and Filiaci (2006), among others.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 82%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Ultimate attainment of anaphora resolution in L2 Chinese

Zhao

2014

Second Language Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The current study tests the Interface Hypothesis through forward and backward anaphora in complex sentences with temporal subordinate clauses in highly proficient English-speaking learners' L2 Chinese. Forward anaphora is involved when the overt pronoun ta 'he/she' or a null element appears in the subject position of the main clause, whereas backward anaphora is involved when it is in the subject position of the temporal clause, because the main clause always follows the temporal clause in Chinese. Specifically, the article tests the syntactic and discourse constraints in the interpretation and representation of ta and the null element in complex sentences. Ta is constrained by the syntactic cyclic-c-command condition. Thus it is possible for ta refer to the other sentential subject in forward anaphora, but not in backward anaphora in Chinese. Unlike English, Chinese allows a null element in subject positions of finite subordinate and main clauses. It is proposed in the article that the null element in these positions is a Ø topic , a syntax-discourse interface category. Results from an acceptability judgement task and a picture judgment task indicate that Øtopic at the external interface has been acquired, whereas the cyclic-c-command condition within narrow

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 82%

“…Ivanov (2012) shows that advanced English-speaking learners have acquired the pragmatic meaning of clitic doubling in Bulgarian. Iverson et al (2008) report that advanced L2 learners of Spanish have acquired the discourse-dependent distinction between the indicative and subjunctive complements with epistemic predicates.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 95%

Ultimate attainment of anaphora resolution in L2 Chinese

Zhao

2014

Second Language Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Subsequent research has documented similar asymmetries with respect to other linguistic phenomena (Belletti & Leonini, 2004;Lozano, 2006;Valenzuela, 2006). However, other empirical studies have either failed to detect any apparent signs of instability in domains predicted by the Interface Hypothesis to be vulnerable or suggested that such interface-related difficulties are not pervasive (Donaldson, 2011(Donaldson, , 2012Ivanov, 2012;Iverson, Kempchinsky, & Rothman, 2008;Leal Méndez, Rothman, & Slabakova, in press;Slabakova & Ivanov, 2011;Slabakova, Kempchinsky, & Rothman, 2012). Researchers have also challenged some aspects of the hypothesis on theoretical grounds, including the imprecise formulation of the proposal, difficulty of distinguishing interface-related phenomena from noninterface-related phenomena (and, by the same token, external interfaces from internal interfaces), difficulty of positioning the hypothesis within specific theoretical models of language architecture, and potentially an overly "restrictive" focus of the proposal, originally formulated only for some bilingual populations and not others (Domínguez, 2013;Montrul, 2011;Rothman, 2009;Rothman & Slabakova, 2011;White, 2011).…”

Section: Interfaces: the Integration Problemmentioning

confidence: 95%

Between syntax and discourse

Laleko

Polinsky

2016

LAB

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article examines the knowledge of topic and subject particles in heritage speakers and L2 learners of Japanese and Korean. We assume that topic marking is mediated at the syntaxinformation structure interface, while subject marking pertains to narrow syntax. In comparing phenomena mediated at different levels of linguistic organization, we provide evidence for the hypothesis that information structure-level phenomena present greater challenges for bilingual speakers than those mediated within syntax. While these results may be interpreted as evidence of generalized interface-related deficits, we show that such a global explanation is not supported.Instead, a more nuanced account is developed, based on the recognition of different types of topic (anaphoric, generic, and contrastive) and different types of subject (descriptive and exhaustive). Under the proposed account, the non-native speakers' deficits follow from three unrelated effects: the status of topic as an interface category, structural complexity, and the memory demands necessary for its interpretation in context. Introduction Interfaces: The integration problem1 This project was supported in part by grants from Center for Advanced Study of Language (CASL) at the University of Maryland and from NSF (SMA-1429961) to the second author. Any opinions, findings, conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the authors. We would like to thank Sun-Hee Bae, Miwako Hisagi, Kenneth Mai, Hiroki Nomoto, Aika Taguchi, and three anonymous reviewers for helpful comments on this paper. All errors are our responsibility. 2Heritage language and second language (L2) acquisition represent two distinct pathways to adult bilingualism. They differ along a number of dimensions, including the specific circumstances of language exposure and the nature of competence deficits across different language modules. As early bilinguals, heritage speakers begin the acquisition of a socially non-dominant language in a family setting, and in this respect, their experience with the target language compares to that of early L1 learners, at least at the outset of the language acquisition process. The main difference is that heritage speakers' L1 language acquisition is subsequently interrupted by exposure to another language. Adult L2 learners, on the other hand, are late bilinguals whose exposure to the non-dominant language typically takes place in an instructed setting.Despite these differences in acquisition scenarios, both groups of speakers similarly fall short of exhibiting complete mastery of the target language. Even at the highest levels of proficiency, both populations remain in a state of near-native attainment, deviating from target native grammars represented by the monolingual baseline. In particular, early and late bilinguals (heritage speakers and L2 learners alike) have been reported to display deficits in the domain of inflectional morphology and narrow syntax, and both groups also seem to have difficulties with discourse-level phenome...

show abstract

“…Arregui 2003, Contreras 1976, Casiellez-Suárez 2004, Suñer 2006, Zubizarreta, 1998 and tested in empirical studies using native and non-native populations in multiple languages (e.g. Donaldson 2011, Ivanov 2012, Valenzuela 2006, CLRD has been only occasionally discussed in the formal literature (Cecchetto 1999, López, 2009, Villalba 2011). In addition, there has been a scarcity of empirical studies involving this structure (but see Slabakova et al 2011, for L2 acquisition).…”

Section: Spanishmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Rare Structure at the Syntax-Discourse Interface: Heritage and Spanish-Dominant Native Speakers Weigh In

Leal

Rothman

Slabakova

2014

Language Acquisition

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract:The present study examines knowledge of the discourse-appropriateness of Clitic Right Dislocation (CLRD) in a population of Heritage (HS) and Spanish-dominant Native Speakers in order to test the predictions of the Interface Hypothesis (IH; Sorace 2011). The IH predicts that speakers in language contact situations will experience difficulties with integrating information involving the interface of syntax and discourse modules. CLRD relates a dislocated constituent to a discourse antecedent, requiring integration of syntax and pragmatics. Results from an acceptability judgment task did not support the predictions of the IH. No statistical differences between the HSs' performance and that of L1-dominant native speakers were evidenced when participants were presented with an offline task. Thus, our study did not find any evidence of "incomplete acquisition" (Montrul 2008) as it pertains to this specific linguistic structure.

show abstract

L2 acquisition of Bulgarian clitic doubling: A test case for the Interface Hypothesis

Cited by 48 publications

References 28 publications

Ultimate attainment of anaphora resolution in L2 Chinese

Ultimate attainment of anaphora resolution in L2 Chinese

Between syntax and discourse

A Rare Structure at the Syntax-Discourse Interface: Heritage and Spanish-Dominant Native Speakers Weigh In

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About