DOCUMENT RESUME ED 396 537 FL 023 880 AUTHOR Goodell, Melissa, Ed..; Choi, Dong-Ik, Ed. TITLE Kansas Working Papers in Linguistics. Volume 21. INSTITUTION Kansas Univ., Lawrence. Linguistics Graduate Student Association. REPORT NO ISSN-1043-3805 PUB DATE 96 NOTE 301p.; For individual articles, see FL 023 881-889. AVAILABLE FROM LGSA, Linguistics Department, 427 Blake Hall, University of Kansas, Lawrence, KS 66045. PUB TYPE Collected Works Serials (022) JOURNAL CIT Kansas Working Papers in Linguistics; v21 1996 EDRS PRICE MFOI/PC13 Plus Postage. DESCRIPTORS American Indians; *Cherokee; Higher Education; *Japanese; *Korean; Language Maintenance; Linguistic Theory; Mayan Languages; Morphology (Languages); *Quiche; *Second Language Learning; *Spanish; Structural Grammar; Syntax; Uncommonly Taught Languages; Verbs IDENTIFIERS *Endangered Languages; Politeness; Universal Grammar ABSTRACT This collection of papers by the graduate students and faculty in linguistics at the University of Kansas offers summaries of works in progress dealing with general linguistics and studies in Native American languages. General linguistics papers include: "Resetting Bounding Nodes in Acquiring Spanish" (Ramiro Cebreiros); "Syntax of Demonstrative Adjectives in Japanese: A Preliminary Study" (Minoru Fukuda); "Judgments of Politeness in L2 Acquisition" (Yoko Harada); "A-bar Dependency, Wh-Scrambling in Korean, and Referential Hierarchy" (Gunsoo Lee); "K'iche' Maya Verbs of Breaking and Cutting" (Clifton Pye); "An NP-Movement Account of Tough Constructions" (Michael Reider); and "English Verb-Particle Constructions: Two Types, Two Structures" (Ed Zoerner). Native American language papers include "Cherokee Stories of the Supernatural" (Janine Scancarelli) and "Endangered Languages Data Summary" (Akira Y. Yamamoto). (Contains chapter references.) (NAV) ********************************************************************** Reproductions supplied by EDRS are the best that can be made * from the original document. *********************************************************************** gAnsAs Workin5 Papersin PERMISSION TO REPRODUCEAND DISSEMINATE THIS MATERIAL Linguistics HAS BEEN GRANTED BY Volume21, 1996 _5V\--...^..ue_\ TO THE EDUCATIONAL RESOURCES INFORMATION CENTER (ERIC) U.S. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION office or EduCabonal Reaeareh and Irnpnyeement EDUCATIONAL RESOURCES INFORMATION CENTER (ERIC) Verhis document has been reproduced as received from the person or organization originating it. O Minor changes have been made to improve reproduction quality. Points of view or opinions stated in this document do not necessarily represent official OERI position or policy. 2 BEST COPY AVAILABLE Kansas Working Papers in Linguistics (KWPL) is a regular publication of the Linguistics Graduate Student Association, Department of Linguistics, University of Kansas, Lawrence, Kansas, 66045 Aim: Kansas Working Papers in Linguistics is intended as a forum for the presentation, in print, of the latest original research by the faculty and students of the Department of Linguistics and other related departments at the University of Kansas. Papers contributed by persons not associated with the University of Kansas are also welcomed. The papers published in KWPL may not be reproduced without written permission from the Linguistics Graduate Student Association. Calls for papers usually end in February of each year. Check yearly Call for Papers for exact date. Please send manuscripts, requests for individual orders, and inquiries to: Editors, KWPL LGSA, Linguistics Department 427 Blake Hall University of Kansas Lawrence, Kansas 66045 E-mail: [email protected] The price list for previously published volumes is available upon request. Postage is paid for requests from the United States and Canada. For orders outside the United States and Canada, please add US$3.00 per volume to help defray the costs of postage. A cumulative index may be found in Volume 16 and is available upon request. All institutions with a similar publication are encouraged to request a reciprocal agreement. Standing orders for Number 1, Number 2 (SNAL) or both are welcomed. The editors would like to express their sincere appreciation to the faculty and staff of the Department of Linguistics for their assistance and encouragement. We would also like to thank the Graduate Student Council for their continuing support and Supath Kookiattikoon formany valuable contributions during his internship with KWPL. Cover design by David Andrew Toshraah Nokose Skeeter, witha minor botanical alteration by Karen Ohnesorge. 1 Kansas Working Papers in Linguistics Volume 21 1996 Par t I: General Linguistics Resetting Bounding Nodes in Acquiring Spanish Ramiro Cebreiros 1 Syntax of Demonstrative Adjectives in Japanese: A Preliminary Study Minoru Fukuda 21 Judgments of Politeness in L2 Acquisition Yoko Harada 39 A-bar Dependency, Wh-Scrambling in Korean, and Referential Hierarchy Gunsoo Lee 57 K'iche' Maya Verbs of Breaking and Cutting CliftonPye 87 An NP-Movement Account of Tough Constructions Michael Reider 99 English Verb-Particle Constructions: Two Types, Two Structures Ed Zoerner 123 Part II: Studies in Native American languages Cherokee Stories of the Supernatural JanineScancarelli 143 Endangered Languages Data Swnmary Akira Y. Yamamoto 159 Kansas Working Papers in Linguistics edited by Melissa Goodell Dong-lk Choi Volume 21 1996 Partial funding for this journal is provided by the Graduate Student Council through the Student Activity Fee. ISSN 1043-3805 © Linguistics Graduate Student Association University of Kansas, 1996 r, t.1 Part I:General Linguistics RESETTING BOUNDING NODES IN ACQUIRING SPANISH Ramiro Cebreiros University af Kansas Abstract: This paper addresses the issue of whether L2 learners can reset parameters, by testing English speakers learning Spanish on their ability to reset the bounding node parameter. The bounding nodes are :IF and NP in English, CP and NP in Spanish. Subjects were given a grammaticality judgment task in Spanish that included wh-island and complex NP structures. Results show that they rejected most of the wh-structures (62.5%).This suggests that they are still transferring the bounding nodes from English.However, they rejected the complex NP structures at a higher rate (96%) suggesting that they are beginning to reset the bounding node parameter. This paper presents an experiment that tested the parametric difference between English and Spanish regarding bounding nodes. Bounding nodes in Spanish are CP and NP (Torrego 1984). In English, in contrast, IP and NP are the bounding nodes (Chomsky 1973). The purpose of the experiment was to test whether L2 Spanish learners whose Ll is English are able to reset this parameter. Results show that English speakers have not reset the parameter, they are still transferring the bounding nodes value from English. The resetting of this parameter is difficult due to the fact that these structures are uncommon in Spanish, resulting in lack of enough positive evidence. The paper describes the parametric difference between English and Spanish in more detail in section 2, which also discusses previous studies of this difference in second language acquisition. Section 3 describes the experiment, section 4 presents the results and section 5 discusses the results and the problems that were encountered in the experiment. Kansas Working Papers in Linguistics, Volume 21, 1996, pp. 1-19 2 2. The Parametric Difference Being Tested Subjacency and Bounding Nodes in Spanish and English According to the linguistic theory of Universal Grammar first elaborated in Chomsky 1981, all languages consist of principles and parameters. Principles are the invariant linguistic features that all languages have in common. However, linked to these principles is a limited set of variables, and languages may differ in the values they choose; these variant values are called parameters. Languages which have syntactic movement are subject to the subjacency constrain, which prevents a constituent from crossing more than one bounding node in a single step (Chomsky 1973: 271): 'No rule can move an item from position Y to position X in the structure .113.. Ia Y . X where Y a and a, 13 are cyclic categories, unless some constant term of the structural description of the rule holds of a phrase in 13 that is subjacent to X.' However, they may differ in terms of what the bounding nodes are. while the bounding nodes in English are IP and NP (Chomsky 1973), in Spanish, they are CP and NP (Torrego 1984: 114): The configurations presented are the possible derivations for long Wh Movement allowed by Subjacency in Spanish: a. s' [[wh-phrasei]1 1.s' [eiis I.s' [e+s [ b. s' Rwh-phraseilfs [ s' 1e4s s [ .ei BM In English (la) and (lb) are grammatical because the 'wh- element' only crosses one bounding node. Although in (lb) it might seem that the 'wh-element' crosses two Ws, this is not the case. In the first step it crosses the lower IP and moves to [Spec, CP] leaving a tracet and, from here, it moves to the second [Spec, CP], so that it only crosses one bounding node in each movement. (1) a. [cpWhati did hp the boy throw tin? b. [cp Whatj did hp the boy [cp tj that [p lives next door]] throw tj]r (2a) and (2b) are ungrammatical because the 'wh-element' crosses two bounding nodes at a time. In (2a) it cannot move to the first CP because this position is already filled. In (2b) the wh-phrase moves in two steps. In the first one it crosses only one bounding node (the lower IP) and,in the second step, it crosses two bounding nodes (NP and the IP above it). (2) a. *kp What bookj don't hp you know [cp if rip Pepe has read ti b. * [cp Whatj didn't hp you know [Np the book [cp that hp they gave you tj 1111? The Spanish sentences in (3), equivalent to those in (1), are grammatical for the same reasons as in English. (3) a. z[cP Quéi tin5v el niiio tv b. go, Quéi lip tin5v el niiio [cp ti que rip vive en la casa de al lada tvti]1? In Spanish, however, (4a), the equivalent sentence to the ungrammatical (2a), is grammatical because IP is not a bounding node in this language, so the 'wh-element' can move across two Ws in a single step.