On the Relationship between Linear Proximity and Subject Verb Agreement Mismatch in Korean L2 Learners of English: An ERP Study
0
조회
0
다운로드
3
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
This paper claims that not only linear proximity but also other various factors including structural and semantic composition of the subject NP can affect the subject-verb agreement (SVA) mismatch in L2 learning of English. Based on the previous researches on both experimental and theoretical studies on language, this paper proposes that what is genuinely responsible for the SVA mismatch due to proximity is actually a reflection of the multiple activation of potential subject NPs. This multiple activation is claimed to be the source of confusion, of which the notion has been found to be true on the side of previous experimental studies. This paper conducted two ERP experiments to see whether proficient Korean L2 learners of English also experience the same confusion in the case of SVA mismatch as L1. One is to see whether a more proximate NP also exerts an influence on agreement in L2 setting as has been known to be the case in L1. The other is to see whether L2 speakers take into consideration for agreement the semantic or pragmatic closeness between the head noun and the relevant potential NP. Through Experiment 1, it was found that proficient Korean L2 learners of English showed a LAN as well as a late P600 effect, which evidences that L2 learners are also experiencing the confusion due to the multiple activation of potential subject NPs. Experiment 2, however, gave no clue of outright semantic influence on the SVA mismatch, but a marginal P600 was found when they met a false form of the verb be. This means that semantic/pragmatic factors do not exert an influence on determining the agreement verb form, but some process of syntactic reanalysis may be in operation in L2 learning.
Abstract
This paper claims that not only linear proximity but also other various factors including structural and semantic composition of the subject NP can affect the subject-verb agreement (SVA) mismatch in L2 learning of English. Based on the previous researches on both experimental and theoretical studies on language, this paper proposes that what is genuinely responsible for the SVA mismatch due to proximity is actually a reflection of the multiple activation of potential subject NPs. This multiple activation is claimed to be the source of confusion, of which the notion has been found to be true on the side of previous experimental studies. This paper conducted two ERP experiments to see whether proficient Korean L2 learners of English also experience the same confusion in the case of SVA mismatch as L1. One is to see whether a more proximate NP also exerts an influence on agreement in L2 setting as has been known to be the case in L1. The other is to see whether L2 speakers take into consideration for agreement the semantic or pragmatic closeness between the head noun and the relevant potential NP. Through Experiment 1, it was found that proficient Korean L2 learners of English showed a LAN as well as a late P600 effect, which evidences that L2 learners are also experiencing the confusion due to the multiple activation of potential subject NPs. Experiment 2, however, gave no clue of outright semantic influence on the SVA mismatch, but a marginal P600 was found when they met a false form of the verb be. This means that semantic/pragmatic factors do not exert an influence on determining the agreement verb form, but some process of syntactic reanalysis may be in operation in L2 learning.
참고문헌 (34)
- Abels, Klaus, "Phase, cyclicity, and stranding", Handout given at the EPP Workshop (2003), MIT
- Bock, Kathryn, "Regulating mental energy: Performance units in language production", Journal of Memory and Language, 31, pp.99~127 (1992)
- Bock, Kathryn, "Reaching agreement", Natural Language and Linguist Theory, 29, pp.1033~1069 (2011)
- Bock, Kathryn, "Broken agreement", Cognitive Psychology, 23, pp.45~93 (1991)
- Chen, Lang, "ERP signatures of subject-verb agreement in L2 learning", Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 10(2), pp.161~174 (2007)
- Chomsky, Noam, "Minimalist inquries: The framework. In Stpe by step: Essays on minimalist syntax in honor of Howard Lasnik", pp.89~115 (2000), MIT Press
- Chomsky, Noam, "Derivation by phase, In Ken Hale: A life in language", pp.1~52 (2001), MIT Press
- Clahsen, Harald, "Continuity and shallow structures in language processing", Applied Psycholinguistics, 27, pp.107~126 (2006)
- Franck, Julie, "Attraction in sentence production: The role of syntactic structure", Language and Cognitive Processes, 17(4), pp.371~404 (2002)
- Grohmann, Kleanthes K., "Prolific Domains. On the Anti-Locality of Movement Dependencies" (2003), John Benjamins
- Hagoort, Peter, "The syntactic positive shift (SPS) as an ERP measure of syntactic processing", Language and Cognitive Processes, 8, pp.439~483 (1993)
- Hagoort, Peter, "Intergration of word meaning and world knowledge in language comprehension", Science, 16, pp.438~441 (2004)
- Hahne, Anja, "Processing a second language: Late learners' comprehension mechanisms as revealed by event-related brain potentials", Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 4, pp.123~141 (2001)
- Hiraiwa, Ken., "Multiple agree and the defective intervention constraint in Japanese", MITWPL, 10, pp.67~80 (2001), Department of Linguistics and Philosophy, MIT
- Horvath, Julia., "Pied-piping. In The Blackwell companion to syntax Vol. III", pp.569~630 (2006), Blackwell
- Kaan, Edith, "The P600 as an index of syntactic integration difficulty", Language and Cognitive Processes, 15(2), pp.159~201 (2000)
- Kimball, John, "I think, you think, he think", Linguistic Inquiry, 2, pp.241~246 (1971)
- Koopman, Hilda, "The position of subjects", Lingua, 85, pp.211~258 (1991)
- Koopman. Hilda, "Verbal Complexes" (2000), MIT Press
- Kutas, Marta, "Electrophysiology reveals semantic memory use in language comprehension", Trends in Cognitive Science, 4(12), pp.463~470 (1980)
- Kutas, Marta, "Brain potentials during reading reflect word expectancy and semantic association", Nature, 307, pp.161~163 (1984)
- Neville, Helen, "Syntactically based sentence processing classes: Evidence from event-related brain potentials", Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 3, pp.151~165 (1991)
- Nomura, Masashi., "Nominative Case and AGREE(ment)" (2006), MITWPL, Department of Linguistics and Philosophy, MIT
- Ojima, Shiro, "An ERP study of second language learning after childhood: effects of proficiency", Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 17, pp.1212~1228 (2005)
- Osterhout, Lee, "Event-related potentials elicited by failure to agree", Journal of Memory and Language, 34, pp.739~773 (1995)
- Osterhout, Lee, "Event-related brain potentials elicited by syntactic anomaly", Journal of Memory and Language, 31(6), pp.785~806 (1992)
- Rossi, Sonja, "The impact of proficiency on syntactic second-language processing of German and Italian: evidence from event-related potentials", Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 18, pp.2030~2048 (2006)
- Schütze, Carlson., "INFL in child and adult language: Case, agreement and licensing", 박사, pp.1997
- Solomon, Eric S., "Semantic intergration and syntactic planning in language production", Cognitive Psychology, 49, pp.1~46 (2004)
- Vigliocco, Gabriella, "Separating hierarchical relations and word order in language production: Is proximity concord syntactic or linear?", Cognition, 68, pp.13~29 (1998)
- Wagers, Matthew W., "Agreement attraction in comprehension: Representations and processes", Journal of Memory and Language, 61, pp.206~237 (2009)
- Webelhuth, Gert, "Syntactic saturation phenomena in the modern Germanic languages", 박사, pp.1989
- Weber-Fox, "Maturational constraints on functional specializations for language processing: ERP and behavioral evidence in bilingual speakers", Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 8, pp.231~256 (1996)
- Yoon, Jeong-Me., "Syntactic cyclic movement, feature percolation, and a typological approach to cross-linguistic variation in pied-piping", Studies in Generative Grammar, 11, pp.167~215 (2001)