Article published In: Linguistic Approaches to Bilingualism
Vol. 3:1 (2013) ► pp.26–47
Child second language acquisition from a generative perspective
Published online: 25 February 2013
https://doi.org/10.1075/lab.3.1.02haz
https://doi.org/10.1075/lab.3.1.02haz
This chapter reviews current work on child second language acquisition from a generative perspective. The primary goal is to identify characteristics of child L2 acquisition in relation to child first language (L1) acquisition and adult second language (L2) acquisition and to discuss its contribution to these sister fields both in typical and atypical domains. The chapter is organized into three sections, covering L1 influence in child L2 acquisition, the acquisition of functional architecture in child L2 acquisition, and the issue of morphological variability. Also included in the last section are the relatively new and fast developing areas of research in atypical child L2 acquisition research.
Article outline
- 1.Introduction
- 2.Background on L1 and L2 acquisition
- 3.L1 influence in child L2 acquisition
- 4.Functional categories
- 5.The morpho-syntax interface: Morphological variability
- 6.Typical vs. atypical child L2 acquisition
- 7.Conclusion
- Acknowledgements
- Notes
References
References (86)
Andersen, R. (1983). Transfer to somewhere. In S. Gass & L. Selinker (Eds.), Language transfer in language learning (pp. 177–201). Rowley, MA: Newbury House.
. (1988). On the separation of derivation from morphology: Toward a lexeme/morpheme-based morphology. Quaderni di Semantica, 91, 3–59.
Bedore, L., & Leonard, L. (1998). Specific language impairment and grammatical morphology: A discriminant function analysis. Journal of Speech, Language and Hearing Research, 411, 1185–1192.
Blom, E. (2008). Testing the domain-by-age model: Inflection and placement of Dutch verbs. In B. Haznedar & E. Gavruseva (Eds.), Current trends in child second language acquisition: A generative perspective (pp. 271–300). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Chondrogianni, V. (2008). Comparing child and adult L2 acquisition of the Greek DP: Effects of age and construction. In B. Haznedar & E. Gavruseva (Eds.), Current trends in child second language acquisition: A generative perspective (pp. 97–142). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Clahsen, H., & Muysken, P. (1986). The availability of Universal Grammar to adult and child learners — A study of the acquisition of German word-order. Second Language Research, 21, 93–119.
Clahsen, H., Eisenbeiss, S., & Vainikka, A. (1994). The seeds of structure. In T. Hoekstra & B.D. Schwartz (Eds.), Language acquisition studies in generative grammar (pp. 85–118). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Conti-Ramsden, G. (2003). Processing and linguistic markers in young children with specific language impairment. Journal of Speech, Language and Hearing Research, 461, 1029–1037.
DeKeyser, R., & Larson-Hall, J. (2005). What does the critical period really mean? In J.F. Kroll & A.M.B. De Groot (Eds.), Handbook of bilingualism: Psycholinguistic approaches (pp. 88–108). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Dulay, H.C., & Burt, M.K. (1974). Natural sequences in child second language strategies. Language Learning, 241, 37–53.
Eubank, L. (1993/94). On the transfer of parametric values in L2 development. Language Acquisition, 31, 183–208.
. (1996). Negation in early German-English interlanguage: More valueless features in the L2 initial state. Second Language Research, 12(1), 73–106.
Felix, S. (1991). The accessibility of Universal Grammar in second language acquisition. In L. Eubank (Ed.), Point-counterpoint: Universal Grammar in the second language (pp. 89–104). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Gavruseva, E. (2002). Is there primacy of aspect in child L2 English? Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 51, 109–130.
. (2004).Root infinitives in child second language English: An aspectual features account. Second Language Research, 20(4), 335–371.
Gavruseva, L., & Lardiere, D. (1996). The emergence of extended phrase structure in child L2 acquisition. In A. Stringfellow, D. Cahana-Amitay, E. Hughes, & A. Zukowski (Eds.), Proceedings of the 20th Annual Boston University Conference on Language Development, 201 (pp. 225–236). Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press.
Geçkin, V., & Haznedar, B. (2008). The morphology/syntax interface in child L2 acquisition: Evidence from verbal morphology. In B. Haznedar & E. Gavruseva (Eds.), Current trends in child second language acquisition: A generative perspective (pp. 237–267). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Grondin, N., & White, L. (1996). Functional categories in child L2 acquisition of French. Language Acquisition, 11, 1–34.
Grüter, T. (2005). Comprehension and production of French object clitics by child second language learners and children with specific language impairment. Applied Psycholinguistics, 261, 363–392.
Håkansson, G. (2001). Tense morphology and verb-second in Swedish L1 children, L2 children and children with SLI. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 41, 85–99.
Halle, M., & Marantz, A. (1993). Distributed morphology and the pieces of inflection. In K. Hale & S.J. Keyser (Eds.), The view from building 201 (pp. 111–176). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Haznedar, B. (1997). L2 acquisition by a Turkish-speaking child: Evidence for L1 influence. In E. Hughes, M. Hughes, & A. Greenhill (Eds.), Proceedings of the 21st Boston University Conference on Language Development, 211 (pp. 245–256). Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press.
. (2001). The acquisition of the IP system in child L2 acquisition. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 231, 1–39.
. (2003). The status of functional categories in child second language acquisition: Evidence from the acquisition of CP. Second Language Research, 191, 1–41.
Haznedar, B., & Schwartz, B.D. (1997). Are there optional infinitives in child L2 acquisition? In E. Hughes, M. Hughes, & A. Greenhill (Eds.), Proceedings of the 21st Boston University Conference on Language Development, 211 (pp. 257–268). Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press.
Herschensohn, J. (2000). The second time around: Minimalism and L2 acquisition. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Hulk, A., & Müller, N. (2000). Bilingual first language acquisition at the interface between syntax and pragmatics. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 31, 227–244.
Hyams, N. (1992). The genesis of clausal structure. In J. Meisel (Ed.), The acquisition of verb placement: Functional categories and V2 phenomena in language acquisition (pp. 372–400). Dordrecht: Kluwer.
Hyltenstam, K., & Abrahamson, N. (2003). Maturational constraints in SLA. In C.J. Doughty & M. Long (Eds.), The handbook of second language acquisition (pp. 539–588). Oxford: Blackwell.
Ionin, T. (2008). Progressive aspect in child L2-English. In B. Haznedar & E. Gavruseva (Eds.), Current trends in child second language acquisition: A generative perspective (pp. 17–53). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Ionin, T., & Wexler, K. (2002). Why is ‘is’ easier than ‘-s’?: Acquisition of tense/agreement morphology by child second language learners of English. Second Language Research, 181, 95–136.
Jia, G. (2003). The acquisition of the English plural morpheme by native Mandarin Chinesespeaking children. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 461, 1297–1311.
Jia, G., & Fuse, A. (2007). Acquisition of English grammatical morphology by nativeMandarinspeaking children and adolescents: Age-related differences. Journal of Speech, Language and Hearing Research, 501, 1280–1299.
Lakshmanan, U. (1991). Morphological uniformity and null subjects in child second language acquisition. In L. Eubank (Ed.), Point-counterpoint: Universal Grammar in the second language acquisition (pp. 305–338). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
. (1993/94). The boy for the cookie — Some evidence for the non-violation of the case filter in child second language acquisition. Language Acquisition, 31, 51–97.
. (1994). Universal grammar in child L2 acquisition: Morphological uniformity and null subjects. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
. (2009). Child second language acquisition. In W. Ritchie & T. Bhatia (Eds.), The new handbook of second language acquisition (pp. 377–399). Sheffield, UK: Emerald Publishers.
Lakshmanan, U., & Selinker, L. (1994). The status of CP and the tensed complementizer that in the developing L2 grammars of English. Second Language Research, 101, 25–48.
Lardiere, D. (1998a). Case and tense in the ‘fossilized’ steady state. Second Language Research, 141, 1–26.
. (1998b). Dissociating syntax from morphology in a divergent L2 end-state grammar. Second Language Research, 141, 359–375.
Marinis, T., & Chondrogianni, V. (2010). Production of tense marking in successive bilingual children: When do they converge with their monolingual peers? International Journal of Speech-Language Pathology, 121, 19–28.
Meisel, J.M. (1997). The acquisition of the syntax of negation in French and German: Contrasting first and second language development. Second Language Research, 131, 227–263.
. (2008). Child second language acquisition or successive first language acquisition. In B. Haznedar & E. Gavruseva (Eds.), Current trends in child second language acquisition (pp. 55–82). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Mobaraki, M., Vainikka, A., & Young-Scholten, M. (2008). The status of subjects in early child L2 English. In B. Haznedar & E. Gavruseva (Eds.), Current trends in child second language acquisition: A generative perspective (pp. 209–236). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Orgassa, A., & Weerman, F. (2008). Dutch gender in specific language impairment and second language acquisition. Second Language Research, 241, 333–364.
Paradis, J. (2004). On the relevance of specific language impairment to understanding the role of transfer in second language acquisition. Applied Psycholinguistics, 251, 67–82.
. (2005). Grammatical morphology in children learning English as a second language: Implications of similarities with specific language impairment. Language, Speech and Hearing Services in the Schools, 361, 172–187.
. (2008). Tense as a clinical marker in English L2 acquisition with language delay/impairment. In E. Gavruseva & B. Haznedar (Eds.), Current trends in child second language acquisition: A generative perspective (pp. 337–356). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Paradis, J., & Crago, M. (2000). Tense and temporality: A comparison between children learning a second language and children with SLI. Journal of Speech, Language and Hearing Research, 431, 834–848.
. (2004). Comparing L2 and SLI grammars in French: Focus on DP. In P. Prévost & J. Paradis (Eds.), The acquisition of French in different contexts: Focus on functional categories (pp. 89–108). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Paradis, J., Rice, M., Crago, M., & Marquis, J. (2008). The acquisition of tense in English: Distinguishing child L2 from L1 and SLI. Applied Psycholinguistics, 291, 1–34.
Poeppel, D., & Wexler, K. (1993). The full competence hypothesis of clause structure in early German. Language, 691, 1–33.
Prévost, P. (1997). Truncation and root infinitives in second language acquisition of French. In E. Hughes, M. Hughes, & A. Greenhill (Eds.), Proceedings of the 21th Annual Boston University Conference on Language Development, 211 (pp. 453–464). Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press.
. (2008). Truncation in child L2 acquisition: Evidence from verbless utterances. In B. Haznedar & E. Gavruseva (Eds.), Current trends in child second language acquisition: A generative perspective (pp. 177–207). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Prévost, P., & White, L. (2000). Missing surface inflection or impairment in second language? Evidence from tense and agreement. Second Language Research, 161, 103–133.
Rice, M.L., & Wexler, K. (1996). Toward tense as a clinical marker of specific language impairment. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 391, 1236–1257.
Rice, M.L., Wexler, K., & Cleave, P. (1995). Specific language impairment as a period of Extended Optional Infinitive. Journal of Speech, Language and Hearing Research, 381, 850–863.
Rizzi, L. (1993/94). Some notes on linguistic theory and language development: The case of root infinitives. Language Acquisition, 31, 371–393.
. (1994). Early null subjects and root null subjects. In T. Hoekstra & B.D. Schwartz (Eds.), Language acquisition studies in generative grammar (pp. 151–176). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Schwartz, B.D. (1992). Testing between UG-based and problem-solving models of SLA: Developmental sequence data. Language Acquisition, 21, 1–19.
. (2003). Child L2 acquisition: Paving the way. In B. Beachley, A. Brown, & F. Conlin (Eds.), Proceedings of the 27th Boston University Conference on Language Development, 271 (pp. 26–50). Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press.
Schwartz, B.D., & Eubank, L. (1996). Introduction: What is the ‘L2 initial state?’ Second Language Research, 121, 1–5.
Schwartz, B.D., & Sprouse, R. (1996). L2 cognitive states and the Full Transfer/Full Access model. Second Language Research, 121, 40–72.
Serratrice, L., Sorace, A., & Paoli, S. (2004). Crosslinguistic influence at the syntax-pragmatic interface: Subjects and objects in English-Italian bilingual and monolingual acquisition. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 71, 183–205.
Sorace, A., & Serratrice, L. (2009). Internal and external interfaces in bilingual language development: Revisiting the processing versus representation distinction. The International Journal of Bilingualism, 131, 195–210.
Unsworth, S. (2005). Child L2, adult L2, child L1: Differences and similarities. A study on the acquisition of direct object scrambling in Dutch. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Utrecht, The Netherlands, LOT.
. (2008). Comparing child L2 development with adult L2 development: How to measure L2 proficiency. In B. Haznedar & E. Gavruseva (Eds.), Current trends in child second language acquisition: A generative perspective (pp. 301–333). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Vainikka, A. (1993/94). Case in the development of English syntax. Language Acquisition, 31, 257–325.
Vainikka, A., & Young-Scholten, M. (1994). Direct access to X-bar theory: Evidence from Korean and Turkish adults learning German. In T. Hoekstra & B.D. Schwartz (Eds.), Language acquisition studies in Generative Grammar (pp. 265–316). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
. (2006). The roots of syntax and how they grow. Organic grammar, the basic variety and processibility theory. In S. Unsworth, A. Sorace, T. Parodi, & M. Young-Scholten (Eds.), Paths of development in L1 and L2 acquisition (pp. 77–106). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
. (2007). Minimalism vs. Organic Syntax. In S. Karimi, V. Samiian, & W.K. Wilkins (Eds.), Phrasal and clausal architecture (pp. 319–338). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Wexler, K. (1994). Optional Infinitives, head movement and the economy of derivations. In D. Lightfoot & N. Hornstein (Eds.), Verb movement (pp. 305–350). Cambridge University Press: Cambridge.
White, L. (2003). Second language acquisition and Universal Grammar. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
. (2009). Grammatical theory: Interfaces and L2 knowledge. In W. Ritchie & T. Bhatia (Eds.), The new handbook of second language acquisition (pp. 49–68). Sheffield: Emerald Publishers.
Cited by (13)
Cited by 13 other publications
Haznedar, Belma
Bayram, Fatih, Grazia Di Pisa, Jason Rothman & Roumyana Slabakova
Sadiq, Raghad Baker, Nadire Cavus & Dogan Ibrahim
Fleta Guillén, M. Teresa
Sherkina-Lieber, Marina
2020. A classification of receptive bilinguals. Linguistic Approaches to Bilingualism 10:3 ► pp. 412 ff.
Bayram, Fatih, Jason Rothman, Michael Iverson, Tanja Kupisch, David Miller, Eloi Puig-Mayenco & Marit Westergaard
Rothman, Jason, Jorge González Alonso & Eloi Puig-Mayenco
Puig-Mayenco, Eloi, Ian Cunnings, Fatih Bayram, David Miller, Susagna Tubau & Jason Rothman
Rothman, Jason & Roumyana Slabakova
Alonso, Jorge González, Jason Rothman, Denny Berndt, Tammer Castro & Marit Westergaard
ROTHMAN, JASON, DREW LONG, MICHAEL IVERSON, TIFFANY JUDY, ANNE LINGWALL & TUSHAR CHAKRAVARTY
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.
