The Acquisition and Interpretation of English Telicity by Korean Speakers
The Acquisition and Interpretation of English Telicity by Korean Speakers.
1
조회
0
다운로드
13
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
This paper examines Korean speakers' knowledge of telicity in English and, precisely, whether they are aware that entire predicates pertain to telicity computation and that the semantic contribution of elements attached under VP to telicity depends on their endpoint specification. These questions are explored by Korean speakers' telicity interpretation of three constructions: (i) an activity plus a locative PP, (ii) an activity plus a goal PP, and (iii) an activity plus a direct object. They contrast in terms of telicity: the first construction is atelic while the other two are telic. The results show that Korean learners are largely able to differentiate the telic from the atelic interpretation. Interestingly, intermediate learners recognized the telic reading of the third construction but not of the second one. It is argued that this discrepancy is best explained by L1-transfer. Unlike the third construction, which involves matched semantics and syntax, the second construction is associated with matched semantics but with mismatched syntax between Korean and English−viz. the difference in the syntactic representations of the construction.
Abstract
This paper examines Korean speakers' knowledge of telicity in English and, precisely, whether they are aware that entire predicates pertain to telicity computation and that the semantic contribution of elements attached under VP to telicity depends on their endpoint specification. These questions are explored by Korean speakers' telicity interpretation of three constructions: (i) an activity plus a locative PP, (ii) an activity plus a goal PP, and (iii) an activity plus a direct object. They contrast in terms of telicity: the first construction is atelic while the other two are telic. The results show that Korean learners are largely able to differentiate the telic from the atelic interpretation. Interestingly, intermediate learners recognized the telic reading of the third construction but not of the second one. It is argued that this discrepancy is best explained by L1-transfer. Unlike the third construction, which involves matched semantics and syntax, the second construction is associated with matched semantics but with mismatched syntax between Korean and English−viz. the difference in the syntactic representations of the construction.
참고문헌 (30)
- Chae, H.-R., "A Definition and Classification of Locomotion verbs", Studies in Modern Grammar, 15, pp.79~100 (1999)
- Chung, S., "Language Typology and Syntactic Description, vol. 3", pp.202~258 (1985), Cambridge University Press
- Comrie, B., "Aspect" (1976), Cambridge University Press
- Dowty, D., "Word Meaning and Montague Grammar" (1979), Kluwer
- Dowty, D., "Thematic Proto-roles and Argument Selection", Language, 67(3), pp.547~619 (1991)
- Ionin, T., "Sources of Linguistic Knowledge in the Second Language Acquisition of English Articles", Lingua, 118, pp.554~576 (2008)
- Ionin, T., "Article Semantics in L2-acquisition: The Role of Specificity", Language Acquisition, 12(1), pp.3~69 (2004)
- Jo, M., "A study on Two Aspects of Aspect in Korean" (2007), Hanshin Publishing Company
- Krifka, M., "Lexical matter", pp.29~53 (1991), Stanford University Press
- Lee, C., "To Where Modern Linguistics Goes" (1999), Hanshin Publishing Company
- Montrul, S., "Transitivity Alternations in Second Language Acquisition: A Crosslinguistic Study of English, Spanish, and Turkish", doctor, pp.1997
- Rothstein, S., "Structuring Events: A Study in the Semantics of Lexical Aspect" (2004), Blackwell
- Slabakova, R., "The Parameter of Aspect in Second Language Acquisition", Second Language Research, 15, pp.283~317 (1999)
- Slabakova, R., "L1 Transfer Revisited: The L1 Acquisition of Telicity Marking in English by Spanish and Bulgarian Native Speakers", Linguistics, 38(4), pp.739~770 (2000)
- Slabakova, R., "Telicity in the Second Language" (2001), John Benjamins
- Smith, C. S., "The Parameter of Aspect" (1992), Kluwer
- Sprouse, J., "A Test of the Cognitive Assumptions of Magnitude Estimation: Commutativity Does Not Hold for Acceptability Judgments", Language, 87, pp.274~288 (2011)
- Talmy, L., "Language Typology and Syntactic Description III: Grammatical Categories and the Lexicon", pp.57~149 (1985), Cambridge University Press
- Tenny, C., "Aspectual Roles and the Syntax-Semantics Interface" (1994), Kluwer
- van Hout, A., "Events as Grammatical Objects", pp.239~281 (2000), CSLI Publications
- Vendler, Z., "Verbs and Times", Philosophical Review, 56, pp.143~160 (1957)
- Vendler, Z., "Linguistics in Philosophy" (1967), Cornell University Press
- Verkuyl, H., "On the Compositional Nature of the Aspects" (1972), Kluwer
- Verkuyl, H, "Aspectual Classes and Aspectual Composition", Linguistics and Philosophy, 12, pp.39~94 (1989)
- Verkuyl, H., "A Theory of Aspectuality" (1991), Cambridge University Press
- Wagner, L, "Aspectual Bootstrapping in Language Acquisition: Telicity and Transitivity", Language Learning and Development, 2(1), pp.51~76 (2006)
- Wagner, L., "Individuation of objects and events: a developmental study", Cognition, 90, pp.163~191 (2003)
- Weskott, T., "On the Informativity of Different Measures of Linguistic Acceptability", Language, 87, pp.249~273 (2011)
- Whong-Barr, M., "Morphological and Syntactic Transfer in Child L2 Acquisition of the English Dative Alternation", Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 24, pp.579~616 (2002)
- Zubizarreta, M-L., "On the Syntactic Composition of Manner and Motion" (2007), MIT Press