Cover not available

In:Second Language Acquisition of Turkish
Edited by Ayşe Gürel
[Language Acquisition and Language Disorders 59] 2016
► pp. 135–163

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

Someone judges every sentence

Third language acquisition of quantifier scope in Turkish

 | Ankara University
 | Ankara University
Published online: 25 May 2016
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/lald.59.06ay
This study investigates the interpretation of distributive readings of universal quantifiers in third language (L3) Turkish by native Japanese speakers whose second language is English. The findings show that L3 speakers allow the subject-­wide interpretation in both SOV and OSV sentences, suggesting no cross-linguistic transfer. Native Turkish speakers, on the other hand, prefer surface scope readings over inverse scope readings in both SOV and OSV sentences. These findings suggest that there is no first or second language transfer in the acquisition of quantifier scope in L3 Turkish as evidenced by a clear preference for the subject-wide interpretation due to merging of the subject DP into the SpecTP position.
References (69)
References
Anderson, C. 2004. The Structure and Real-time Comprehension of Quantifier Scope Ambiguity. PhD dissertation, Northwestern University.
Aoun, J. & Li, Y.A. 1989. Scope and constituency. Linguistic Inquiry 20(2): 141–172.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1993. Syntax of Scope. Cambridge MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Aygen-Tosun, G. 1999. Specificity and subject-object positions/scope interactions in Turkish. Presented in Proceedings of the Conference on Turkic Linguistics at Manchester University, Dil ve Edebiyat Dergisi/Journal of Linguistics and Literature 4(2): 9–34, 2007.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bardel, C. & Falk, Y. 2007. The role of the second language in third language acquisition: The case of Germanic syntax. Second Language Research 23: 459–484. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Beghelli, F. & Stowell, T. 1997. Distributivity and negation: The syntax of each and every. In Ways of Scope Taking, A. Szabolcsi (ed.), 71–107. Dordrecht: Kluwer. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cenoz, J. 2003. The successive effect of bilingualism on third language acquisition. A review. International Journal of Bilingualism 7: 71–87. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Chu, C.-Y., Gabriele, A., & Minai, U. 2014. Acquisition of quantifier scope interpretation by Chinese-speaking learners of English. In Selected Proceedings of the 5th Conference on Generative Approaches to Language Acquisition North America (GALANA 2012) , C.-Y. Chu, C. E. Coughlin, B.L. Prego, U. Minai & A. Tremblay. (eds), 157–168. Somerville MA: Cascadilla Proceedings Project.
Chung, E.S.E. 2013. Sources of difficulty in L2 scope judgments. Second Language Research 29(3): 285–310. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Clahsen, H. & Muysken, P. 1989. The UG paradox in L2 acquisition. Second Language Research 5: 1–29. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Čulinović, D. 2013. Development of scopal ambiguities in L1-Japanese interlanguage English. In Proceedings of the 12th Generative Approaches to Second Language Acquisition Conference (GASLA 2013) , J. Cabrelli Amaro, T. Judy & D. Pascual y Cabo (eds), 22–31. Somerville MA: Cascadilla Proceedings Project.
De Angelis, G. 2007. Third or Additional Language Acquisition. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
De Angelis, G. & Selinker, L. 2001. Interlanguage transfer and competing linguistic systems in the multilingual mind. In Cross-linguistic Influence in Third Language Acquisition: Psycholinguistic Perspectives, J. Cenoz, B. Hufeisen & U. Jessner (eds), 42–58. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Dekydtspotter, L., Sprouse, R.A. & Swanson, K.A. 2001. Reflexes of mental architecture in second language acquisition: The interpretation of combien extractions in English–French interlanguage. Language Acquisition 9: 175–227. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Dewaele, J. 1998. Lexical Inventions: French Interlanguage as L2 versus L3. Applied Linguistics 19(4): 471–490. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Epstein, S., Flynn, S. & Martohardjono, R. 1998. The strong continuity hypothesis: Some evidence concerning functional categories in adult L2 acquisition. In The Generative Study of Second Language Acquisition, S. Flynn, G. Martohardjono & W. O’Neil (eds), 61–77. Mahwah NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Falk, Y. & Bardel, C. 2011. Object pronouns in German L3 syntax: Evidence for the L2 status factor. Second Language Research 27(1): 59–82. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Flynn, S., Foley, C. & Vinnitskaya, I. 2004. The cumulative-enhancement model for language acquisition: Comparing adults’ and children’s patterns of development in first, second and third language acquisition of relative clauses. The International Journal of Multilingualism 1: 3–16. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Fodor, J.D. & Sag, I.A. 1982. Referential and quantificational indefinites. Linguistics and Philosophy 5(3): 355–398. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Göksel, A. 1998. Linearity, focus and the postverbal position in Turkish. In The Mainz Meeting Proceedings of the Seventh International Conference on Turkish Linguistics , L. Johanson (ed.), 85–106. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz.
Greenhouse, S.W. & Geisser, S. 1959. On methods in the analysis of profile data. Psychometrika 24: 95–112. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Grosjean, F. 2001. The bilingual’s language modes. In One Mind, Two Languages: Bilingual Language Processing, J. Nicol (ed.), 1–22. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hammarberg, B. & Williams, S. 1993. A study of third language acquisition. In Problem, Process, Product in Language Learning, B. Hammarberg (ed.), 60–70. Stockholm: Stockholm University, Dept. of Linguistics.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Han, C., Storoshenko, D.R. & Sakurai, Y. 2009. An experimental investigation into scope rigidity in Japanese. In Current Issues in Unity And Diversity of Languages: Collection of the Papers Selected from the 18th International Congress of Linguistics, The Linguistic Society of Korea (eds). Seoul: Hanshin.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hoji, H. 1985. Logical form Constraints and Configurational Structures in Japanese. PhD dissertation, University of Washington.
Ionin, T. 2010. The scope of indefinites: An experimental investigation. Natural Language Semantics 18(3): 295–350. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ionin, T., Luchkina, T. & Stoops, A., 2014. Quantifier scope and scrambling in the second language acquisition of Russian. In Selected Proceedings of the 5th Conference on Generative Approaches to Language Acquisition North America (GALANA 2012) , C.-Y. Chu, C. E. Coughlin, B.L. Prego, U. Minai & A. Tremblay (eds), 169–180. Somerville MA: Cascadilla Proceedings Project.
Ioup, G. 1975. Some universals for quantifier scope. In Syntax and Semantics, Vol. 4, J. Kimball (ed.), 37–58. New York NY: Academic Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Jiménez-Fernández, Á. L. 2010. Discourse-agreement features, phrasal C and the edge: A minimalist approach, Diacrítica – Language Sciences Series 24(1): 25–49.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Jiménez-Fernández, Á. L., & Miyagawa, S. 2014. A feature-inheritance approach to root phenomena and parametric variation. Lingua 145: 276–302. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kelepir, M. 2001. Topics in Turkish Syntax: Clausal Structure and Scope. PhD dissertation, MIT.
Kratzer, A. 1998. Scope or pseudo-scope: Are there wide scope indefinites? In Events in Grammar, S. Rothstein (ed.), 163–196. Dordrecht: Kluwer. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kuno, S. 1973. The Structure of the Japanese Language. Cambridge MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kural, M. 1992. Properties of scrambling in Turkish. Ms, UCLA.
Kuroda, S.-Y. 1970. Japanese Syntax and Semantics. Dordrecht: Kluwer.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kurtzman, H.S. & MacDonald, M.C. 1993. Resolution of quantifier scope ambiguities. Cognition 48: 243–279. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lee, S. 2009. Interpreting Ambiguity in First and Second Language Processing: Universal Quantifiers and Negation. PhD dissertation, University of Hawaii.
Lee, T.H., Yip, V. & Wang C. 1999. Inverse scope in Chinese-English interlanguage. Lingua Posnaniensis 41: 39–56.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Leung Y.-KI. (ed.)2009. Third Language Acquisition and Universal Grammar. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mahajan, A.K. 1990. The A/A-bar Distinction and Movement Theory. PhD dissertation, MIT.
Marsden, H. 2004. Quantifier Scope in Non-native Japanese: A Comparative Interlanguage Study of Chinese, English, and Korean-speaking Learners. PhD dissertation, University of Durham.
. 2008. Pair-list readings in Korean-Japanese, Chinese-Japanese and English-Japanese interlanguage. Second Language Research 24(2): 189–226. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2009. Distributive quantifier scope in English-Japanese and Korean-Japanese interlanguage. Language Acquisition 16: 135–177. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
May, R. 1977. The Grammar of Quantification. PhD dissertation, MIT.
Miyagawa, S. 2001. EPP, scrambling, and wh-in-situ. In Ken Hale: A Life in Language, 
M. Kenstowicz (ed.), 293–338. Cambridge MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2003. A-movement scrambling and options without optionality. In Word Order and Scrambling, S. Karimi (ed.), 177-200. Malden MA: Blackwell. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2005. On the EPP, In Perspectives on Phases [MIT Working Papers in Linguistics 49], N. Richards & M. McGinnis (eds), 201–236. Cambridge MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Miyamoto, Y. & Takata, Y. 1998. Rigidity effects and the strong weak wh features in SLA. In Proceedings of the 22nd Annual Boston University Conference on Language Development , Vol. 2, A. Greenhill, M. Hughes, H. Littlefield & H. Walsh (eds), 511–522. Somerville MA: Cascadilla Press.
Miyamoto, Y. & Yamane, M. 1996. L2 rigidity: The scope principle in adult L2 grammar. In Proceedings of the 20th Annual Boston University Conference on Language Development, Vol. 2, A. Stringfellow, D. Cahana-Amitay, E. Hughes & A. Zukowski (eds), 494–505. Somerville MA: Cascadilla Press.
Murphy, S. 2003Second language transfer during third language acquisition. Working Papers in TESOL & Applied Linguistics 3(2): 1–21. <[URL]>Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
O’Grady, W. 2007. The syntax of quantification in SLA: An emergentist approach. In Proceedings of the 8th Generative Approaches to Second Language Acquisition Conference (GASLA 2006): The Banff Conference , M.G. O’Brien, C. Shea, & J. Archibald (eds), 98–113. Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Proceedings Project.
Özçelik, Ö. 2009. L2 acquisition of scope: Testing the Full Transfer Full Access Hypothesis. In Proceedings of the 10 the Generative Approaches to Second Language Acquisition Conference (GASLA 2009) , M. Bowles, T. Ionin, S. Montrul, & A. Tremblay (eds), 168–179. Somerville MA: Cascadilla Proceedings Project.
Öztürk, B. 2005. Case, Referentiality and Phrase Structure [Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today 77]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Reinhart, T. 1997Quantifier scope: How labor is divided between QR and choice functions. Linguistics and Philosophy 20: 335–397. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Rothman, J. 2011. L3 syntactic transfer selectivity and typological determinacy: The Typological Primacy Model. Second Language Research 27(1): 107–127. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Saito, M. 1992. Long distance scrambling in Japanese. Journal of East Asian Linguistics 1: 69–118. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Sano, T. 2004. Scope relations of QP’s and scrambling in the acquisition of Japanese. In Proceedings of the GALA 2003 Conference on Language Acquisition, J. van Kampen & S. Baauw (eds), 421– 431. Utrecht: LOT.
Schwartz, B.D. & Sprouse, R. 1994. Word order and nominative case in nonnative language acquisition: a longitudinal study of (L1 Turkish) German interlanguage. In Language Acquisition Studies in Generative Grammar [Language Acquisition and Language Disorderes 8], T. Hoekstra & B.D. Schwartz (eds), 317–368. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Siewierska, A. 2013. Verbal person marking. In The World Atlas of Language Structures Online, S. M. Dryer & M. Haspelmath (eds). Leipzig: Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology. <[URL]> (15 January 2015).Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Singleton, D. 1987. Mother and other tongue influence on learner French: A case study. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 9: 327–346. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Sorace, A. 1996. The use of acceptability judgments in second language acquisition research. In Handbook of second language acquisition, W.C. Ritchie & T.K. Bhatia (eds), 375–409. San Diego CA: Academic Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Tada, H. 1992. Nominative objects in Japanese. Journal of Japanese Linguistics 14: 91–108.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Tunstall, S. 1998. The Interpretation of Quantifiers: Semantics and Processing. PhD dissertation, University of Massachusets.
Wang, T. 2013. Cross-linguistic influence in third language acquisition: Factors influencing interlanguage transfer. Teachers College, Columbia University Working Papers in TESOL & Applied Linguistics 13(2): 99–114.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Webelhuth, G. 1989. Syntactic Saturation Phenomena and the Germanic Languages. PhD dissertation, University of Massachusetts at Amherst.
White, L. 2011. Second language acquisition at the interfaces. Lingua 121(4): 577–590. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Williams, S. & Hammarberg, B. 1998. Language switches in L3 production: Implications for a polyglot speaking model. Applied Linguistics 19: 295–333. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Zidani-Eroğlu, L. 1997. Indefinite Noun Phrases in Turkish. PhD dissertation, University of Wisconsin-Madison.
Mobile Menu Logo with link to supplementary files background Layer 1 prag Twitter_Logo_Blue