Utterance Structure

Klein, Wolfgang; Perdue, Clive

doi:10.1075/sibil.5

Cited by 238 publications

(23 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Bailey et al 1974;Dulay and Burt 1974;and Cook 1993 for references to stages of acquisition; cf. also the discussion of stages in Klein and Perdue 1993). The 4-M model can make principled predictions about accuracy.…”

Section: Evidence For the 4-m Model From Sla Datamentioning

confidence: 99%

Four types of morpheme: evidence from aphasia, code switching, and second-language acquisition

Myers‐Scotton¹,

Jake²

2000

Linguistics

207

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper presents empirical evidence supporting a new model of morpheme classification called the 4-M model. This model emphasizes the notion that lemmas underlying different types of morphemes become salient at different levels of production. This explains their different distributions. While the 4-M model classifies morphemes, it is primarily a model of how morphemes are accessed. The argument is that particular instantiations of morphemes are classified as a consequence of the mechanisms that activate them. The evidence considered comes from studies of code switching, Broca's aphasia, and second-language acquisition. One finding that the 4-M model captures is that not all functional elements pattern alike. Some are conceptually activated at the level of the mental lexicon along with their contentmorpheme heads. Two other types of functional element are structurally assigned and do not become salient until later in the production process. These differences explain their different distributions in the data considered.

show abstract

Section: Evidence For the 4-m Model From Sla Datamentioning

confidence: 99%

Four types of morpheme: evidence from aphasia, code switching, and second-language acquisition

Myers‐Scotton¹,

Jake²

2000

Linguistics

207

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Aitchison (1996; Aitchison & Agnihotri, 1985) points out the tendency of adult language learners to overregularize morphological as well as syntactic patterns. For example, one adult learner of German described by Klein and Perdue (1993) always used eine as the indefinite article (when he used an article with indefinites), despite the fact that German has multiple indefinite article forms that vary by gender of the noun (as does Italian, his native language). This can be seen as a reduction or regularization of variation (even though the variation in German is predictable).…”

Section: Linguistic Variation and Accompanying Change By Learnersmentioning

confidence: 99%

Getting it right by getting it wrong: When learners change languages

Kam

Newport

2009

Cognitive Psychology

294

218

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

When natural language input contains grammatical forms that are used probabilistically and inconsistently, learners will sometimes reproduce the inconsistencies; but sometimes they will instead regularize the use of these forms, introducing consistency in the language that was not present in the input. In this paper we ask what produces such regularization. We conducted three artificial language experiments, varying the use of determiners in the types of inconsistency with which they are used, and also comparing adult and child learners. In Experiment 1 we presented adult learners with scattered inconsistency – the use of multiple determiners varying in frequency in the same context – and found that adults will reproduce these inconsistencies at low levels of scatter, but at very high levels of scatter will regularize the determiner system, producing the most frequent determiner form almost all the time. In Experiment 2 we showed that this is not merely the result of frequency: when determiners are used with low frequencies but in consistent contexts, adults will learn all of the determiners veridically. In Experiment 3 we compared adult and child learners, finding that children will almost always regularize inconsistent forms, whereas adult learners will only regularize the most complex inconsistencies. Taken together, these results suggest that regularization processes in natural language learning, such as those seen in the acquisition of language from non-native speakers or in the formation of young languages, may depend crucially on the nature of language learning by young children.

show abstract

“…(The acquisition metric in this research was emergence and systematic use, rather than suppliance in obligatory contexts.) By the conclusion of the 2.5‐year study, it was still not a productive feature of many participants' interlanguages, which were described as “basic varieties” (Klein & Perdue, 1993, p. 27), an elaboration of Schumann's (1987) concept of basilang 4…”

Section: What Is a Difficult Construction?mentioning

confidence: 99%

Some Input on the Easy/Difficult Grammar Question: An Empirical Study

Collins

Trofimovich

White

et al. 2009

The Modern Language Journal

138

101

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The purpose of this study was to determine whether it is possible to distinguish between "difficult" and "easy" constructions for second language (L2) learners by examining characteristics of the structures as they occur in aural input. In a multidimensional analysis of 3 English structures with different acquisition profiles-the simple past, possessive determiners his/her , and the progressive aspect-we examined the phonological, morphosyntactic, and lexicosemantic characteristics of the forms as they occurred in a 110,000-word corpus of instructional talk to L2 learners. We analyzed the type/token distributions of the forms, their lexical properties, and their perceptual salience. Our findings revealed key input factors that distinguished between the early-acquired progressive, on the one hand, and the later-acquired past and his/her determiners, on the other hand. These results lend support to theoretical accounts of the input-acquisition relationship and also generate hypotheses for manipulating instructional input to increase the salience of opaque constructions. WHAT CONTRIBUTES TO MAKINGA LINguistic structure easy or difficult to acquire? More The Modern Language Journal, 93, iii, (2009) 0026-7902/09/336-353 $1.50/0 C 2009 The Modern Language Journalspecifically, what can a close examination of the spoken input to which learners are exposed tell us about this easy/difficult conundrum? To address this issue, we took a multidimensional approach to the analysis of a 110,000-word corpus of teacher talk to second language (L2) learners, in contexts where the classroom constituted the

show abstract

Utterance Structure

Cited by 238 publications

References 0 publications

Four types of morpheme: evidence from aphasia, code switching, and second-language acquisition

Four types of morpheme: evidence from aphasia, code switching, and second-language acquisition

Getting it right by getting it wrong: When learners change languages

Some Input on the Easy/Difficult Grammar Question: An Empirical Study

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About