Second language grammar and secondary predication Item Type text; Dissertation-Reproduction (electronic) Authors Shi, Enchao Publisher The University of Arizona. Rights Copyright © is held by the author. Digital access to this material is made possible by the University Libraries, University of Arizona. Further transmission, reproduction or presentation (such as public display or performance) of protected items is prohibited except with permission of the author. Download date 11/10/2021 04:23:49 Link to Item http://hdl.handle.net/10150/289919 SECOND LANGUAGE GRAMMAR AND SECONDARY PREDICATION by Enchao Shi Copyright ® Enchao Shi 2003 A Dissertation Submitted to the Faculty of the INTERDISCIPLINARY Ph.D. PROGRAM IN SECOND LANGUAGE ACQUISITION AND TEACHING In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements For the Degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY In the Graduate College THE UNIVERSITY OF ARIZONA 2003 UMI Number: 3090037 Copyright 2003 by Shi, Enchao All rights reserved. UMI UMI Microform 3090037 Copyright 2003 by ProQuest Information and Learning Company. All rights reserved. This microform edition is protected against unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code. ProQuest Information and Learning Company 300 North Zeeb Road P.O. Box 1346 Ann Arbor, Ml 48106-1346 2 THE UNIVERSITY OF ARIZONA GRADUATE COLLEGE As members of the Final Examination Committee, we certify that we have read the dissertation prepared by Enchao Shi entitled SECOND LANGUAGE GRAMMAR AND SECONDARY PREDICATION and recommend that it be accepted as fulfilling the dissertation requirement for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy. Douglas Adamson, Andrew Barss ^ £ I-ATT Date ^ ^^ J-" O3 Rudolph C. Troike Date 'fCOOcs^ tlca^ , (^ • ^J Feng-Hsi Liu Date Final approval and acceptance of this dissertation is contingent upon the candidate's submission of the final copy of the dissertation to the Graduate College. I hereby certify that I have read this dissertation prepared under my direction and recommend that it be accepted as fulfilling the dissertation requirement. Dissertation Directors: Douglas Adamson, Andrew Barss Date 3 STATEMENT BY AUTHOR This dissertation has been submitted in partial fulfillment of requirements for an advanced degree at The University of Arizona and is deposited in the University Library to be made available to borrowers under rules of the Library. Brief quotations firom this dissertation are allowable without special permission, provided that accurate acknowledgment of source is made. Requests for permission for extended quotation from or reproduction of this manuscript in whole or in part may be granted by the copyright holder. SIGNED: 4 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Completion of this dissertation represents invaluable help and contribution of many people, without which this project would not have obtained its present form. I would therefore like to express my gratitude and appreciation to them. First, I'd like to thank my Committee Directors, Andrew Barss and Douglas Adamson. Andrew Barss has been truly an inspiration throughout my academic training at the University of Arizona. The very idea centering the study presented in the dissertation was first developed whiling I was taking his Syntax and Semantics class. His urging me to read about philosophical debates on language and language development turned out to be the most important gmdance in the formation of the theory of L2 grammar spelled out in the dissertation. Furthermore, his emphasis on me reading the linguistics litemature persistently is absolutely valuable and essential. I am also very thankful to Douglas Adamson for reading the drafts and providing detailed editorial suggestions and corrections. His study on dative alternation in L2 acquisition sparked my first interest in lexical semantics-based approach to SLA. That he encouraged me to take courses in theoretical linguistics when I was first enrolled in the program turned out to be an invaluable piece of advice. I'd also like to thank the other committee members, Rudolph C. Troike and Feng-Hsi Liu. Rudolph C. Troike has been an inspiring mentor almost from the very beginning. His generous advicing and encouraging was the valuable force behind the completion of the project. Co-teaching English 406 (Modem English Grammar) with him was the most invaluable teaching experience I have ever had for my career development. His allowing me to use his office gave me the opportunity to perase books from his bookshelves, and I enjoyed it tremendously. I'd also like to thank Feng-Hsi Liu for her generous advice and guidance on Chinese linguistics. There are many other people who provided important guidance in my academic development. Susan H. Foster-Cohen is one of them, who was the first urging me to study theoretical linguistics. I am very grateful to her. Dermot F. Murphy and Michael J. Connelly were my mentors at St. Mary's College, UK. During this dissertation study I also benefited from the help of other linguists, and I'd like to express my gratitude to them as well, including Patrick Bolger, Adele E. Goldberg, Beth Levin, Lisa L-S Cheng, Heidi Harley, C.-T James Huang, Jya-Lin Hwang, Cecile McKee, Susan Rothstein, Tova R. Rapoport, and Ninna Zhang. Shaun O'Connor and Robert M. Selby extended their indispensable help to me for which I am very thankful. I'd also like to thank my colleagues at California State Unviersity, Northridge for their kind support and encouragement, including Martha Alzamora, RosaMaria Chacon, Donald Hall, Sharon Klein, Evelyn McClave, Janaki Bowerman, Rei Noguchi, Robert Noreen, Maijorie Seagoe, and George Uba. I am also deeply indebted to the subjects who voluntarily took part in the experiments, without which this project would be out of the question. I'd also like to thank the Graudate Studies at CSUN for providing me with the Faculty Development Grant. I finally would like to thank my parents, Shugu Shi and Xiangyou Wu, and my wife. Bin Lu, whose unwavering support and believing in me to achieve my goal are saturated in every word written in this dissertation. For my wife, Bin Lu. 6 TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF FIGURES 8 LIST OF FIGURES - Continued 9 LIST OF TABLES 10 LIST OF TABLES - Continued 11 ABBREVIATIONS 12 ABBREVIATIONS - Continued 13 ABBREVIATIONS - Continued 14 ABSTRACT 15 CHAPTER 1 19 EsJTRODUCTION: GENERATIVE GRAMMAR AND GENERATIVE 19 L2 INQUIRY 19 1.1 Preview 19 1.2 The Current Study: Goals and Questions 26 1.3 Bases of the Generative Inquiries in Language 41 1.4 Criteria for Evaluating a Theory of Lj Grammar 52 CHAPTER 2 57 THEORETICAL BACKGROUND: THE MINIMALIST FRAMEWORK 57 2.1 Minimalist Assumptions 57 2.2 The Minimalist Syntax 60 2.3 The Minimalist Lexicon: Its Components and Relation to Sjmtax 68 2.3.1 Theories of the LEX 76 2.3.2 The Lexical Semantics Model 78 2.3.3 Lexical Relational Structure: The 1-Syntax Model Ill 2.3.4 Crosslinguistic Variations in Lexical Representation 138 2.3.5 S-Selection in Lexical Representation 157 2.3.6 Distributed Morphology: A Hybrid Theory of Morphology 163 CHAPTER 3 189 THEORIES OF SECOND LANGUAGE GRAMMAR 189 3.1 Accessibility of UG in L2 Acquisition 201 3.1.1 Direct Access Model 203 3.1.2 No Access Model 211 3.1.3 Indirect Access Model 221 3.2 Hypotheses on the Initial State in L2 Acquisition 225 3.2.1 The Weak Continuity Hypothesis 227 3.2.2 The Full Transfer/Full Access Model 232 3.2.3 Feature-based Account 238 3.3 Semantics-Syntax Interface-based Studies in SLA 242 3.3.1 The Dative Shift Alternation 250 3.3.2 The SubjExp-ObjExp Alternation 257 3.3.3 The Inchoative-causative Alternation 264 3.4 Li Transfer 282 3.4.1 Traditional Views 285 3.4.2 UG-based Li Transfer Accounts 289 3.4.3 Other Theories of Li Transfer 293 3.4.4 The Most Recent Theories of L; Transfer 297 3.5 Li Influence and L2 Grammar 302 3.5.1 Arguments against Transfer of L; Grammar 304 3.5.2 Li Transfer: A Component of the Performance Systems 312 3.5.3 L2 Grammar 332 7 CHAPTER 4 339 SECONDARY PREDICATION: RESULTATIVES AND DEPICTIVES 339 4.1 Paradigms of Resultatives and Depictives 340 4. L1 Resultatives 344 4.L2 Depictives 351 4.2 Theories of Resultatives 360 4.2.1 Syntactic Accounts 361 4.2.2 Aspectual Accounts 371 4.2.3 Semantic Accounts 380 4.2.4 Morphological Accounts 391 4.2.5 Resultatives in Mandarin 394 4.2.6 A DM-based Derivational Approach to Resultatives in English and Mandarin 429 4.3 Theories of Depictives 439 4.3.1 Halliday's Account 439 4.3.2 Jackendoffs LCS Account 443 4.3.3 Rapoport's LRS Account 447 4.3.4 Rothstein's Aspectual Account 456 4.3.5 A DM-based Analysis of Depictives 460 4.3.6 Depictives in Mandarin 466 CHAPTER 5 472 EXPERIMENT; Lz KNOWLEDGE OF RESULTATIVES AND DEPICTIVES 472 5.1 Research Questions and Hypotheses 476 5.2 Subjects 482 5.3 Resultatives and Depictives under Analysis 487 5.4 Experiments 503 5.4.1 The Guided Production (GP) Test 505 5.4.2 The Clause-combining (CC) Test 507 5.4.3 The Grammaticality Judgment (GJ) Test 508 5.4.4 The Interpretation Test (IT) 510 5.5 Procedure 511 5.6 Results 511 5.6.1 The Causative Test 513 5.6.2 The GP Test 516 5.6.3 The Canonical Resultative Construction on the GP Test 528 5.6.4 The CC Task 530 5.6.5 The GJ Test 538 5.6.6 The IT Test 547 5.6.7 Discussion 555 CHAPTER 6 627 CONCLUSION 627 APPENDIX A 630 Questionaire 630 APPENDIX B 632 EXERCISE I (Part I): Read Short Descriptions and Answer the Questions 632 APPENDIX C 644 EXERCISE I (Part II): Combine Two Clauses into One 644 APPENDIX D 652 Exercise II (Part I); Determine If the Sentences Are Possible English Sentences 652 APPENDIX E 660 Exercise II (Part II): Determine