Interpretation of Chinese overt and null embedded arguments by English-speaking learners

• Published in: Second language research Vol. 28; no. 2; pp. 169 - 190
• Main Author: Zhao, Lucy Xia
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: London, England SAGE Publications Ltd 01.04.2012; SAGE Publications; Sage Publications Ltd
• Subjects: Attrition (Research Studies); Bilingualism; China; Chinese; Chinese languages; Cloze Procedure; Developmental Delays; English; English as a second language learning; English language learners; Evidence; Failure; Foreign Countries; Form Classes (Languages); Grammar; Grammar Lexicon Relationship; Hypotheses; Judgment; Language; Language acquisition; Language Processing; Language Research; Linguistic Theory; Linguistics; Mathematical Applications; Native Language; Native languages; Optionality (Grammar); Pictorial Stimuli; Pronouns; Second language acquisition; Second Language Learning; Semantics; Studies; Study Abroad; Syntactic Processing; Syntactics; Syntax; Syntax Discourse Relationship; Syntax Semantics Relationship; Task Analysis; Thinking Skills; Transfer of Training; China; United Kingdom > UK; interfaces; crosslinguistic influence; overt pronoun; interpretation; null element; L2 Chinese
• ISSN: 0267-6583; 1477-0326
• DOI: 10.1177/0267658312437629

It has been proposed that external interfaces are vulnerable to residue optionality, whereas pure syntax and internal interfaces are acquirable in second language (L2) acquisition (Sorace, 2005, 2011; Sorace and Filiaci, 2006). The proposal was tested in this article through the interpretation of overt and null embedded arguments in L2 Chinese grammars. The article identifies two types of null elements in Chinese: Øziji and Øtopic. Øziji is a purely syntactic category, whereas Øtopic is a syntax-discourse interface category. Being a D-pronoun, ta 'he/him' can refer to either the matrix subject or a discourse entity in the embedded argument position. Its interpretation involves lexicon-syntax and syntax-semantics internal interfaces. Results from a picture judgment task showed that external interfaces were acquired as well as pure syntax and internal interfaces, which supports the claims of Ivanov, 2009; Iverson et al., 2008; Kraš, 2008; Rothman, 2007, 2009; Slabakova and Ivanov, 2011. In addition, Øtopic was acquired at different states in different sentence positions. This supports the claim that interface categories should not be considered holistically (Yuan, 2010). The article further speculates that cross-linguistic influence and the nature of the possible positive evidence may have contributed to the difference here in terms of representation and/or processing.