Existential quantifiers in second language acquisition

Abstract

Lardiere’s (2005, 2008, 2009) Feature Reassembly Hypothesis proposes that L2 acquisition involves reconfiguring the sets of lexical features that occur in the native language into feature bundles appropriate to the L2. This paper applies the Feature Reassembly Hypothesis to findings from recent research into the L2 acquisition of existential quantifiers. It firstly provides a feature-based, crosslinguistic account of polarity itemanyin English, and its equivalents —wh-existentials — in Chinese, Korean and Japanese. We then test predictions built on the Feature Reassembly Hypothesis, about how learners map target existential quantifiers in the L2 input onto feature sets from their L1, and how they then reassemble these feature sets to better match the target. The findings, which are largely compatible with the predictions, show that research that focuses on the specific processes of first mapping and then feature reassembly promises to lead to a more explanatory account of development in L2 acquisition.

What’s in the Textbook and What’s in the Mind

“…Rather, the important point is to observe that the complexity of the distribution of any is determined by its relationship with a semantic licensor. This means that the abstract representation of any must include a semantic feature that enters into the relationship with the licensor, along the lines of the N(egative) P(olarity) I(tem) feature proposed by Szabolsci (2004), the polarity feature employed by Tubau (2008) or the nonveridical feature proposed by Gil and Marsden (2013). Such a feature (or set of features) is assumed to be part of the innate inventory of UG.…”

The Acquisition of Definiteness and Specificity in English: A Case Study with Saudi-Arabic Learners of English Using an Online Task

“…The findings of Lardiere's study suggested that feature reassembly is essential in the acquisition of definiteness in Russian, and learners of Russian were similarly able to acquire new features. Other studies that support the Feature Reassembly hypothesis include Gil and Marsden (2013), Gil, Marsden and Whong (2011) and Herschensohn and Arteaga (2015).…”

‘Almost people’: A Learner Corpus Account of L2 Use and Misuse of Non-numerical Quantification

“…Thus, it is suggested that L2 learners are slower and less accurate than L1 speakers when processing quantificational scope in the L2 (Clahsen and Felser, 2006;Slabakova, 2010). Gil and Marsden (2013) suggest that this difficulty can be sourced to two concerns -first, L2 learners must map form to L2 function, then second, L2 learners must then reassemble the feature bundles associated with their L1-conceptual forms into features that are appropriate in the L2. In the examples of Korean and Mandarin from Matthews and Yip (2013:325/327), the quantifier precedes the negative marker, leading to an incremental reading (in English) where the 'cookie' is first quantified with all, before leading to the preferred reading 'none' when the negative marker is encountered.…”

“…'some cookies'). Numerous (non-corpus based) studies have investigated the production, interpretation and acquisition of the semantic and pragmatic scope of non-numerical quantifiers (henceforth NNQs, following Smith, 2009) in L1 (Cummins and Katsos, 2013;Cummins, Sauerland and Solt, 2012) and L2 production (Lee, Yip and Wang, 1999;Lee, 2009;Slabakova, 2010;Matthews and Yip, 2013;Gil and Marsden, 2013). The logic and inferential processes underlying quantificational expressions lie at the heart of the syntax/semantic/pragmatic interface, where research has shown that second language (L2) acquisition is troublesome (e.g.…”