1 / 1

Background

Referential subjects and anaphora resolution in Farsi learners of L2 English Tiffany Judy and Aazamosadat Feizmohammadpour University of Florida. Farsi: overt & null. English: overt. Full Transfer/Full Access: parsing failures promote grammatical restructuring. Proficiency Test

booker
Download Presentation

Background

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Referential subjects and anaphora resolution in Farsi learners of L2 EnglishTiffany Judy and Aazamosadat FeizmohammadpourUniversity of Florida Farsi: overt & null English: overt Full Transfer/Full Access: parsing failures promote grammatical restructuring Proficiency Test Michigan English Proficiency Task (modified) Task 1: Grammaticality Judgment/Correction Task Expletive: *They say that is best to ask your doctor before taking medicine. Referential: *According to them, plays field hockey. Task 2: Context-Matching Interpretation Task DP: Lindsayithinks that shei/j is the best wedding photographer. WH: Whoi thinks that shei/j is the most creative person here? Subset Principle: children start with the most restricted grammar (the subset) and expand this grammar only in light of parsing failures Research Questions & Predictions Background Previous Research Methodology Participants Conclusions Results Overt Pronoun Constraint: A bound variable interpretation of an overt pronoun is prohibited if pro is available in the same position Subset/Superset relationship Subset → Superset Evidence of convergence (Liceras 1989; Kanno1997; Al-Kasey & Perez-Leroux 1998; Perez-Leroux & Glass 1997, 1999; Lozano 2002; Gürel2003; Rothman &Iverson 2007a,b; Rothman 2009) Superset→Subset Evidence of divergence (White 1986; Phinney1987; Judy & Rothman 2010; Judy 2011) GJCT: all groups distinguish between overt and null subjects in referential and expletive subject contexts (p = 0.000) No statistically significant differences between the groups for the 4 token types CMIT:Significantly more bound interpretations obtained for DP tokens than WH tokens across all groups No statistically significant differences obtained between the groups regarding the number of bound interpretations in either context (1) Can the NSP be reset in the direction of Farsi→ English? (Superset→ Subset) (2) Can the Subset/Superset Principle explain the results? According to the developmental and ultimate attainment predictions of the FT/FA and considering the Subset Principle, evidence suggesting an underlying null-subject grammar (i.e. no NSP resetting) is predicted due to the absence of parsing failures. GJCT Convergence on the syntax of subjects in English CMIT Higher percentage bound reading with DP than with WH tokens ~40% of L2 speakers categorically interpreted WH tokens as disjoint Judy (2011) Similar findings, but better performance on ungrammatical expletives L1 Farsi, L2 English: 39 Beginner:13 Intermediate:13Native English: 16 Advanced:13

More Related