Cover not available

Article published In: Corpus Linguistics and Second Language Studies
Edited by Dilin Liu, Xiaofei Lu and Isaiah WonHo Yoo
[Journal of Second Language Studies 7:2] 2024
► pp. 198–226

Get fulltext from our e-platform
JBE logo with link
PDF logo with download linkDownload PDF
EPUB logo with download linkDownload EPUB
authorization required

How do constructions with modal verbs develop in second language learners of English?

 | Georgia State University, United States
Published online: 12 August 2024
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/jsls.00029.rom
Abstract
The study reported on in this paper uses data from a large, pseudolongitudinal corpus of second language (L2) learner writing to investigate how L2 knowledge of verb-argument constructions (VACs) develops from low-beginner to upper-intermediate proficiency levels. The focus is on learners from two L1 backgrounds (L1 German and L1 Spanish) and on a subset of VACs that contain modal auxiliaries in combination with lexical verbs (e.g., subject-modal-verb, as in I can cook). For each VAC, L1, and proficiency level, frequency lists of verbs were created and compared across datasets. Reference data on the same constructions was extracted from a corpus of L1 writing. Results suggest that modal VACs become more frequent, less predictable, more productive, and more aligned with L1 production as learner proficiency increases. The findings of this study help to expand our understanding of the processes that underlie L2 construction acquisition.
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Modal verb constructions and second language acquisition
  • 3.Data and methods
  • 4.Results and discussion
    • 4.1Distribution of high-frequency modal constructions in learner production across levels
    • 4.2Verbs in modal constructions in learner production across levels
    • 4.3Modal constructions in learner production and L1 usage
    • 4.4Modal constructions in learner production across L1s
  • 5.Conclusion and outlook
  • Acknowledgments
  • Notes
  • References
References (78)
References
Alexopoulou, T., Geertzen, J., Korhonen, A., & Meurers, D. (2015). Exploring big educational learner corpora for SLA research: Perspectives on relative clauses. International Journal of Learner Corpus Research, 1(1), 96–129. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ambridge, B., & Lieven, E. (2015). A constructivist account of child language acquisition. In B. MacWhinney & W. O’Grady (Eds.), The Handbook of Language Emergence (pp. 478–510). Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bardovi-Harlig, K. (2002). A new starting point? Investigating formulaic use and input in future expressions. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 241, 189–198. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Behrens, H. (2009). Usage-based and emergentist approaches to language acquisition. Linguistics, 47(2), 383–411. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bergs, A. (2010). Expression of futurity in contemporary English: A construction grammar perspective. English Language and Linguistics, 14(2), 217–238. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Biber, D., Johansson, S., Leech, G., Conrad, S., & Finegan, E. (1999). Longman Grammar of Spoken and Written English. London: Longman.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Boogaart, R. (2009). Semantics and pragmatics in construction grammar: The case of modal verbs. In A. Bergs & G. Diewald (Eds.), Contexts and constructions (pp. 213–241). Amsterdam: Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bybee, J. (2010). Language, Usage and Cognition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cappelle, B., & Depraetere, I. (2016). Short-circuited interpretations of modal verb constructions. Some evidence from The Simpsons. Constructions and Frames, 8(1), 7–39. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Celce-Murcia, M., & Larsen-Freeman, D. (1999). The Grammar Book: An ESL/EFL Teacher’s Course (2nd ed.). Boston, MA: Heinle & Heinle.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Chen, H. (2010). Contrastive learner corpus analysis of epistemic modality and interlanguage pragmatic competence in L2 writing. Arizona Working Papers in SLA & Teaching, 171, 27–51.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Chen, D., & Manning, C. D. (2014). A fast and accurate dependency parser using neural networks. In Proceedings of the 2014 Conference on Empirical Methods on Natural Language Processing (EMNLP) (pp. 740–750). Retrieved from [URL].
Council of Europe. (2001). Common European Framework of Reference for Languages: Learning, teaching, assessment. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Davies, M. (2008–). The Corpus of Contemporary American English (COCA): 560 million words, 1990-present. Available online at [URL]
de Marneffe, M.-C., & Manning, C. D. (2008). Stanford typed dependencies manual (revised for the Stanford Parser v. 3.5.2 in April 2015). Retrieved from [URL]
Deshors, S. (2014). Constructing meaning in L2 discourse: The case of modal verbs and sequential dependencies. In D. Glynn & M. Sjölin (Eds.), Subjectivity and Epistemicity. Corpus, discourse and literary approaches to stance (pp. 329–348). MediaTryck Lund, Sweden.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Díez-Bedmar, M. B. (2012). The use of the Common European Framework of Reference for Languages to evaluate compositions in the English exam section of the university admissions examination. Revista de Educación, 3571, 55–79.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Diessel, H. (2004). The development of complex sentence constructions in English: A usage-based approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ellis, N. C. (2003). Constructions, chunking, and connectionism: The emergence of second language structure. In C. J. Doughty & M. H. Long (Eds.), The Handbook of Second Language Acquisition (pp. 63–103). Malden, MA: Blackwell. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ellis, N. C., & Cadierno, T. (2009). Constructing a second language. Annual Review of Cognitive Linguistics, 71 (Special section), 111–290. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ellis, N. C., & Ferreira-Junior, F. (2009). Constructions and their acquisition: Islands and the distinctiveness of their occupancy. Annual Review of Cognitive Linguistics, 71, 188–221. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ellis, N. C., & Larsen-Freeman, D. (2009). Language emergence: Implications for applied linguistics – Introduction to the special issue. Applied Linguistics, 27(4), 558–589. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ellis, N. C., & O’Donnell, M. B. (2014). Construction learning as category learning: A cognitive analysis. In T. Herbst, H. J. Schmid, & S. Faulhaber (Eds.), Constructions Collocations Patterns. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton, 71–97. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ellis, N. C., Römer, U., & O’Donnell, M. B. (2016). Usage-based Approaches to Language Acquisition and Processing: Cognitive and Corpus Investigations of Construction Grammar (Language Learning Monograph Series). Malden, MA: Wiley.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Elturki, E. and Salsbury, T. (2016). A cross-sectional investigation of the development of modality in English language learners’ writing: A corpus-driven study. Issues in Applied Linguistics 20. [URL].
Eskildsen, S. W. (2009). Constructing another language: Usage-based linguistics in second language acquisition. Applied Linguistics, 30(3), 335–357. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2012). L2 negation constructions at work. Language Learning, 62(2), 335–372. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2014). What’s new? A usage-based classroom study of linguistic routines and creativity in L2 learning. International Review of Applied Linguistics, 52(1), 1–30. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2017). The emergence of creativity in L2 English: A usage-based case study. In N. Bell (Ed.). Multiple Perspectives on Language Play (pp. 281–316). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Eskildsen, S. W., & Cadierno, T. (2007). Are recurring multi-word expressions really syntactic freezes? Second language acquisition from the perspective of usage-based linguistics. In M. Nenonen & Niemi, S. (Eds.). Collocations and Idioms 1. Papers from the First Nordic Conference on Syntactic Freezes (Vol. 411). Joensuu, Finland: Joensuu University Press, 86–99.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Eskildsen, S. W., Cadierno, T., & Li, P. (2015). On the development of motion constructions in four learners of L2 English. In T. Cadierno & S. W. Eskildsen (Eds.), Usage-Based Perspectives on Second Language Learning (pp. 207–232). Berlin: Walter de Gruyter. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gablasova, D., Brezina, V., & McEnery, T. (2019). The Trinity Lancaster Corpus: Development, description and application. International Journal of Learner Corpus Research, 5(2), 126–158.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Geertzen, J., Alexopoulou, T., & Korhonen, A. (2013). Automatic linguistic annotation of large scale L2 databases: The EF-Cambridge Open Language Database (EFCAMDAT). Proceedings of the 31st Second Language Research Forum (SLRF). Carnegie Mellon University: Cascadilla Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Goldberg, A. E. (1995). Constructions. A Construction Grammar Approach to Argument Structure. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2003). Constructions: A new theoretical approach to language. Trends in Cognitive Science, 71, 219–224. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2006). Constructions at Work. The Nature of Generalization in Language. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2019). Explain Me This. Creativity, Competition, and the Partial Productivity of Constructions. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Goldberg, A. E., Casenhiser, D. M., & Sethuraman, N. (2004). Learning argument structure generalizations. Cognitive Linguistics, 151, 289–316. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Goldberg, A. E. & van der Auwera, J. (2012). This is to count as a construction. Folia Linguistica, 46(1), 109–132. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hall, C. J., Joyce, J., & Robson, C. (2017). Investigating the lexico-grammatical resources of a non-native user of English: The case of can and could in email requests. Applied Linguistics Review, 8(1), 35–59. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hawkins, J. A., & Buttery, P. (2010). Criterial features in learner corpora: Theory and illustrations. English Profile Journal, 1(1), 1–23. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hinkel, E. (1995). The Use of Modal Verbs as a Reflection of Cultural Values. TESOL Quarterly, 29(2), 325–343. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Khushik, G. A., & Huhta, A. (2019). Investigating syntactic complexity in EFL learners’ writing across Common European Framework of Reference levels A1, A2, and B1. Applied Linguistics, 1–28.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kumar, U., Kumar, V., & Kapur, J. N. (1986). Normalized measures of entropy. International Journal of General Systems, 12(1), 55–69. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kyle, K. (2016). Measuring Syntactic Development in L2 Writing: Fine Grained Indices of Syntactic Complexity and Usage-Based Indices of Syntactic Sophistication. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Georgia State University, USA.
Kyle, K., & Crossley, S. (2017). Assessing syntactic sophistication in L2 writing: A usage-based approach. Language Testing, 34(4), 513–535. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lahuerta Martínez, A. C. (2018). Analysis of syntactic complexity in secondary education EFL writers at different proficiency levels. Assessing Writing, 351, 1–11. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Li, P., Eskildsen, S. W., & Cadierno, T. (2014). Tracing an L2 learner’s motion constructions over time: A usage-based classroom investigation. The Modern Language Journal, 981, 612–628.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lieven, E., Pine, J. M., & Baldwin, G. (1997). Lexically-based learning and early grammatical development. Journal of Child Language, 24(1), 187–219. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lu, X. (2011). A corpus-based evaluation of syntactic complexity measures as indices of college-level ESL writers’ language development. TESOL Quarterly, 45(1), 36–62. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lyngfelt, B. (2018). Introduction: Constructions and Constructicography. In B. Lyngfelt, L. Borin, K. Ohara, & T. Timponi Torren (Eds.), Constructicography: Constructicon Development across Languages (pp. 1–18). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Murakami, A. (2013). L1 Influence and Individual Variation in the L2 Accuracy Development of Grammatical Morphemes: Insights from Learner Corpora. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Cambridge, UK.
Ninio, A. (1999). Pathbreaking verbs in syntactic development and the question of prototypical transitivity. Journal of Child Language, 261, 619–653. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2006). Language and the Learning Curve. A New Theory of Syntactic Development. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Nisioi, S. (2015). Feature analysis for native language identification. In A. Gelbukh (Ed.), Computational Linguistics and Intelligent Text Processing. CICLing 2015. Cham: Springer. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
R Development Core Team. (2021). R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. Vienna, Austria: R Foundation for Statistical Computing.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Roehr-Brackin, K. (2014). Explicit knowledge and processes from a usage-based perspective: The developmental trajectory of an instructed L2 learner. Language Learning, 64(4), 771–808. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Römer, U. & Garner, J. R. (2019). The development of verb constructions in spoken learner English: Tracing effects of usage and proficiency. International Journal of Learner Corpus Research 5(2), 207–230. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2022). What can corpus linguistics tell us about second language acquisition? In A. O’Keeffe & M. McCarthy (Eds.), The Routledge Handbook of Corpus Linguistics (2nd edition). London: Routledge. 328–340. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Römer, U., O’Donnell, M. B., & Ellis, N. C. (2014). Second language learner knowledge of verb-argument constructions: Effects of language transfer and typology. The Modern Language Journal, 98(4), 952–975. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Römer, U., Roberson, A., O’Donnell, M. B., & Ellis, N. C. (2014). Linking learner corpus and experimental data in studying second language learners’ knowledge of verb-argument constructions. ICAME Journal, 381, 59–79. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Römer, U., Skalicky, S., & Ellis, N. C. (2020). Verb-argument constructions in advanced L2 English learner production: Insights from corpora and verbal fluency tasks. Corpus Linguistics and Linguistic Theory, 16(2), 303–331.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Römer, U. & Yilmaz, S. (2019). Effects of L2 usage and L1 transfer on Turkish learners’ production of English verb-argument constructions. Vigo International Journal of Applied Linguistics 161, 107–133. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Savage, C., Lieven, E., Theakston, A., & Tomasello, M. (2003). Testing the abstractness of children’s linguistic representations: Lexical and structural priming of syntactic constructions in young children. Developmental Science, 6(5), 557–567. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Tan, Y. & Römer, U. (2022). Using phrase-frames to trace the language development of L1 Chinese learners of English. System, 1081, Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Tomasello, M. (1992). First Verbs. A Case Study of Early Grammatical Development of Cognition and Action. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2003). Constructing a Language. A Usage-based Theory of Language Acquisition. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Tono, Y., & Díez-Bedmar, M. B. (2014). Focus on learner writing at the beginning and intermediate stages: The ICCI corpus. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics, 19(2), 163–177. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Torres-Martínez, S. (2019). Taming English modals: How a construction grammar approach helps to understand modal verbs. English Today, 35(2), 50–57. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Trousdale, G., & Hoffmann, T. (Eds.). (2013). Oxford Handbook of Construction Grammar. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Tyler, A. E., Mueller, C. M., & Ho, V. (2010). Applying cognitive linguistics to instructed L2 learning. AILA Review, 231, 30–49. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Tyler, A. E., & Ortega, L. (2018). Usage-inspired L2 instruction: An emergent, researched pedagogy. In Tyler, A. E., L. Ortega, M. Uno, & H. I. Park (Eds.), Usage-Inspired L2 Instruction: Researched Pedagogy (pp. 3–26). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Yang, X. (2018). A corpus-based study of modal verbs in Chinese learners’ academic writing. English Language Teaching, 11(2), 122–130. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Zipf, G. K. (1935). The Psycho-biology of Language. An introduction to dynamic philology. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cited by (1)

Cited by one other publication

Xiong, Ying & Shiyu Wu
2025. Do large language models learn like humans: Interleaved and spaced practice in morphological learning. Acta Psychologica 260 ► pp. 105518 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 13 november 2025. 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.

Mobile Menu Logo with link to supplementary files background Layer 1 prag Twitter_Logo_Blue