Article published In: Linguistic Approaches to Bilingualism
Vol. 2:1 (2012) ► pp.54–89
Restrictions on definiteness in second language acquisition
Affirmative and negative existentials in the L2 English of Turkish and Russian speakers
Published online: 10 February 2012
https://doi.org/10.1075/lab.2.1.03whi
https://doi.org/10.1075/lab.2.1.03whi
In this paper we investigate whether learners of L2 English show knowledge of the Definiteness Effect (Milsark, G.L. (1977).
Toward an explanation of certain peculiarities of the existential construction in English. Linguistic Analysis, 31, 1–29.), which restricts definite expressions from appearing in the existential there-insertion construction. There are crosslinguistic differences in how restrictions on definiteness play out. In English, definite expressions may not occur in either affirmative or negative existentials (e.g. There is a/*the mouse in my soup; There isn’t a/*the mouse in my soup). In Turkish and Russian, affirmative existentials observe a restriction similar to English, whereas negative existentials do not. We report on a series of experiments conducted with learners of English whose L1s are Turkish and Russian, of intermediate and advanced proficiency. Native speakers also took the test in English, Turkish, and Russian. The task involved acceptability judgments. Subjects were presented with short contexts, each followed by a sentence to be judged as natural/unnatural. Test items included affirmative and negative existentials, as well as items testing apparent exceptions to definiteness restrictions. Results show that both intermediate and advanced L2ers respond like English native speakers, crucially rejecting definites in negative existentials. A comparison with the groups taking the test in Russian and Turkish confirms that judgments in the L2 are quite different from the L1, suggesting that transfer cannot provide the explanation for learner success.
Keywords: Definiteness Effect, existentials, Turkish, Russian
Article outline
- i.Introduction
- 2.The definiteness effect in English
- 3.Cross-linguistic differences in the Definiteness Effect
- 4.Previous research on the DE in L2 and some open questions
- 5.Experiments
- 5.1Task
- 5.2Sentence types: English version
- 5.3Sentence types: Turkish and Russian versions
- 5.4Data analysis (all experiments)
- 5.5Experiment 1: Turkish-speaking L2ers
- 5.5.1Subjects
- 5.5.2Results
- 5.6Experiment 2: Russian-speaking L2ers
- 5.6.1Subjects
- 5.6.2Results
- 5.7Interim summary: L2 groups
- 5.8Experiments 3 and 4
- 5.8.1Subjects
- 5.8.2Results
- 5.9Comparison
- 6.Discussion
- Notes
References
References (46)
Abbott, B. (1993). A pragmatic account of the definiteness effect in existential sentences. Journal of Pragmatics, 191, 39–55.
Babby, L.H. (1980). Existential Sentences and Negation in Russian. Ann Arbor, Michigan: Karoma Publishers.
Barwise, J., & Cooper, R. (1981). Generalized quantifiers and natural language. Linguistics and Philosophy, 41, 159–220.
Beaver, D., Francz, I., & Levinson, D. (2005). Bad subject: (Non-)canonicality and NP distribution in existentials. In E. Georgala & J. Howell (Eds.), Proceedings of SALT XV (pp. 19–43). Ithaca, NY: CLC Publications.
Belikova, A., Hagstrom, P., Kupisch, T., Özçelik, Ö., & White, L. (2010). Definiteness in positive and negative existentials in the L2 English of Russian speakers. In J. Costa, A. Castro, M. Lobo, & F. Pratas (Eds.), Proceedings of GALA 2009 (pp. 28–38). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.
Borschev, V., & Partee, B.H. (1998). Formal and lexical semantics and the genitive in negated existential sentences in Russian. In ž. Bošković, S. Franks, & W. Snyder (Eds.),
Formal Approaches to Slavic Linguistics 6: The Connecticut Meeting 1997 (pp. 75–96). Ann Arbor: Michigan Slavic Publications.
Drury, J., White, E., White, L., & Steinhauer, K. (2009). Brain potentials and the processing of (in)definiteness in late learners of English. Poster presented at the Cognitive Neuroscience Society, San Francisco, March 2009.
Garcia-Mayo, M., & Hawkins, R. (Eds). (2009). Second language acquisition of articles: Empirical findings and theoretical implications. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Goad, H., & White, L. (2009). Prosodic transfer and determiners in Turkish-English interlanguage. In N. Snape, Y.k. I. Leung, & M. Sharwood Smith (Eds.), Representational deficits in L2 acquisition (pp. 1–26). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Heim, I. (1982). The semantics of definite and indefinite noun phrases. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Massachusetts, Amherst.
Huebner, T. (1985). System and variability in interlanguage syntax. Language Learning, 351, 141–163.
Ionin, T., Ko, H., & Wexler, K. (2004). Article semantics in L2 acquisition: The role of specificity. Language Acquisition, 121, 3–69.
Jung, H. (2011). The syntax of the be-possessive: Parametric variation and surface diversities. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Keenan, E. (1987). A semantic definition of ‘indefinite NP’. In E.J. Reuland & A.G.B ter Meulen (Eds.), The representation of (in)definiteness (pp. 43–70), Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Kelepir, M. (2001). Topics in Turkish syntax: Clausal structure and scope. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
King, E., Steinhauer, K., & White, L. (2006). The definiteness effect in L2 acquisition: What can event-related brain potentials tell us? Paper presented at Generative Approaches to Second Language Acquisition 8, Banff, April 2006.
Kondrashova, N. (1996). The syntax of existential quantification. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Wisconsin, Madison.
Lardiere, D. (2004). Knowledge of definiteness despite variable article omission in second language acquisition. In A. Brugos, L. Micciulla, & C.E. Smith (Eds.), Proceedings of the 28th Annual Boston University Conference on Language Development (pp. 328–339). Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press.
Larson, R. (1985). On the syntax of disjunction scope. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory, 31. 264–317.
Leonetti, M. (2008). Definiteness effects and the role of the coda in existential constructions. In A. Klinge & H. Hoeg-Muller (Eds.), Essays on nominal determination: From morphology to discourse management (pp. 131–162). Amsterdam: Benjamins.
McNally, L. (1998). Existential sentences without existential quantification. Linguistics and Philosophy, 211, 353–392.
2011. Existential sentences. In C. Maienborn, K. von Heusinger, & P. Portner (Eds.), Semantics: An international handbook of natural language meaning, Vol. II1. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter Press.
Milsark, G.L. (1977).
Toward an explanation of certain peculiarities of the existential construction in English. Linguistic Analysis, 31, 1–29.
Özçelik, Ö., & Nagai, M. (2011). Multiple subject positions: A case of perfect match between syntax and prosody. In M. Byram & B. Tomaszewicz (Eds.), Proceedings of the 28th West Coast Conference for Formal Linguistics (WCCFL 28) (pp. 303–312). Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press.
Padučeva, E. (2000). Definiteness effect: The case of Russian. In K. von Heusinger (Ed.), Reference and anaphoric relations (pp. 133–146). Dordrecht: Kluwer.
Partee, B.H., & Borschev, V. (2002). Genitive of negation and scope of negation in Russian existential sentences. In J. Toman (Ed.), Formal Approaches to Slavic Linguistics: The Ann Arbor Meeting 2001 (FASL 10) (pp. 181–200). Ann Arbor: Michigan Slavic Publications.
(2007). Existential sentences, BE, and the genitive of negation in Russian. In I. Comorovski & K. von Heusinger (Eds.), Existence: Semantics and Syntax (pp. 147–190). Dordrecht: Springer.
Robertson, D. (2000). Variability in the use of the English article system by Chinese learners of English. Second Language Research, 161, 135–172.
Safir, K. (1987). What explains the definiteness effect? In E.J. Reuland & A.G.B. ter Meulen (Eds.), The representation of (in)definiteness (pp. 71–97). Cambridge, MA: M.I.T. Press.
Thomas, M. (1989). The acquisition of English articles by first- and second-language learners. Applied Psycholinguistics, 101, 335–355.
Trenkic, D. (2007). Variability in L2 article production: Beyond the representational deficit vs. processing constraints debate. Second Language Research, 231, 289–327.
Tsimpli, I-M., & Mastropavlou, M. (2007). Feature interpretability in L2 acquisition and SLI: Greek clitics and determiners. In J. Liceras, H. Zobl, & H. Goodluck (Eds.), The role of formal features in second language acquisition (pp. 142–183). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
White, L. (2003). Fossilization in steady state L2 grammars: Persistent problems with inflectional morphology. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 61, 129–141.
(2008a). Some puzzling features of L2 features. In J. Liceras, H. Zobl, & H. Goodluck (Eds.), The role of features in second language acquisition (pp. 301–326). Lawrence Erlbaum.
(2008b). Definiteness effects in the L2 English of Mandarin and Turkish speakers. In H. Chan, H. Jacob, & E. Kapia (Eds.), Proceedings of the 32nd Annual Boston University Conference on Language Development (pp. 550–561). Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press.
White, L., Belikova, A., Hagstrom, P., Kupisch, T., & Özçelik, Ö. (2009). Restrictions on definiteness in L2 English. In J. Chandlee, M. Franchini, S. Lord, & G.M. Rheiner (Eds.), Proceedings of the 33rd Annual Boston University Conference on Language Development (pp. 622–633). Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press.
. (2011). (2011). There aren’t many difficulties with definiteness: Negative existentials in the L2 English of Turkish and Russian speakers. In M. Pirvulescu, M.C. Cuervo, A.T. Pérez-Leroux, J. Steele, & N. Strik (Eds.), Selected Proceedings of the 4th Conference on Generative Approaches to Language Acquisition North America (GALANA 2010) (pp. 266–276). Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Proceedings Project.
Cited by (11)
Cited by 11 other publications
Yarar, Emine
Ionin, Tania & Chung-yu Chen
2024. There isn’t a problem with indefinites in existential constructions in L2-English. In Current Perspectives on Generative SLA – Processing, Influence, and Interfaces [Language Acquisition and Language Disorders, 70], ► pp. 290 ff.
Lena, Ludovica
Jiang, Shan & Huiping Zhang
Ionin, Tania
Ionin, Tania
Zeng, Li & Dongfan Hua
2019. Syntax/semantics interface and interpretation of Chinese NP1NP2V construction by Japanese speakers. In Interfaces in grammar [Language Faculty and Beyond, 15], ► pp. 341 ff.
Kupisch, Tanja, Alyona Belikova, Öner Özçelik, Ilse Stangen & Lydia White
2017. Restrictions on definiteness in the grammars of German-Turkish heritage speakers. Linguistic Approaches to Bilingualism 7:1 ► pp. 1 ff.
Perpiñán, Silvia
Perpiñán, Silvia
2015. The locative paradigm in the L2 Spanish of Catalan native speakers. In The Acquisition of Spanish in Understudied Language Pairings [Issues in Hispanic and Lusophone Linguistics, 3], ► pp. 105 ff.
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 24 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.
