![]() ![]() In this study, the L2 acquisition of English third person-s in different settings is examined. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2012 APA, all rights reserved) View full-text Processing limitations, rather than a defective grammar, explain very young children's absent subjects. A performance-deficit hypothesis would predict that children below MLU 3 would omit more subjects from long sentences than short ones, and that the high-MLU children would not show a length effect. ![]() A competence-deficit hypothesis would predict that children below MLU 3 would differentially omit expletive subjects and subjects preceded by a discourse topic more often than children above MLU 3. Nineteen young children (age range = 1 year 10 months to 2 years 8 months Mean Length of Utterance range = 1.28 to 4.93) repeated sentences that varied in length, structure. ![]() Other studies indicated that the child has abstracted the general rule that pluralization involves lengthening the singular form, and that he uses numbers as substitutes for the standard allomorphs of plurality.Įlicited imitation was used to determine whether young children's inconsistent production of sentence subjects was due to limitations in their knowledge of English or in their ability to access and use that knowledge. The frequency and dependability of /z/ as a marker of plurality helped explain its low error rate in Recognition tasks. In Recognition tasks, however, the child, required to match pictures with names, made fewer errors with /z/ than with either /s/ or /iz/. The greater difficulty with the /iz/ marker was attributed to its infrequency in the child's language, and to the plural-sounding endings of singular nouns which take this allomorph. Children made more errors with syllables requiring the addition or deletion of the /iz/ allomorph than with syllables requiring either /s/ or /z/. In Production tasks, the child was told the name for a single animal and required to produce the plural form, or vice versa. ![]() Productive and receptive control of pluralization rules was investigated by asking 6-year-old children to give nonsense names to cartoon animals. Why do some phenomena belong to different stages in different languages? Why are important types of variation under-represented? Is teaching as constrained as proposed in PT? However, the book also raises a critical eye to the literature which, after almost twenty years of evolution, requires explanation, clarification and, in some cases, extension. It discusses the typological issues facing PT and its contribution to an understanding of variation and cognitive constraints on pedagogy. This book lays out PT’s predictions and research on the development of diverse target languages – particularly English and Scandinavian languages – by learners of various categories. PT is an influential account of second language processing which hypothesizes that, due to the architecture of language processing, learners acquire second languages in developmental stages. This book aims to help researchers and teachers interested in language processing and Processability Theory (PT) to understand this theory and its applications. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |