Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-b6zl4 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-13T07:47:07.029Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Interpretation of English Reflexive Pronouns by Non-Native Speakers

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  07 November 2008

Margaret Thomas
Margaret Thomas
Affiliation:
Harvard University
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Ninety-six second language learners of English responded to a 30-item multiple-choice questionnaire requiring them to identify the antecedent of a reflexive pronoun. Their judgments differ from those of a native-speaker control group in that they do not require that a reflexive take a clause mate antecedent, but both groups share a preference for subject over non-subject antecedents. The second language learners do not seem to transfer first language (L1) grammar into the second language (L2), nor do they recapitulate the course of L1 acquisition. An extension of Wexler and Manzini's (1987) parameter-setting model of L1 acquisition to L2 data may account for some of these results, but the high incidence of long-distance binding of reflexives remains problematic: these second language learners have set the governing category parameter too widely without positive evidence.

Type
Articles
Information
Studies in Second Language Acquisition , Volume 11 , Issue 3 , September 1989 , pp. 281 - 303
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1989

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Baker, C. L. (1979). Syntactic theory and the projection problem. Linguistic Inquiry, 10, 533–581.Google Scholar
Berwick, R. (1985). The acquisition of syntactic knowledge. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chomsky, N. (1977). On WH-movement. In Cullicover, P. W., Wasow, T., & Akmajian, A. (Eds.), Formal syntax (pp. 71–132). New York: Academic.Google Scholar
Chomsky, N. (1980). On binding. Linguistic Inquiry, 11, 1–46.Google Scholar
Chomsky, N. (1981). Lectures on government and binding. Dordrecht, the Netherlands: Foris.Google Scholar
D'Introno, F. (1979). Spanish reflexives and the specified subject condition. In Lantolf, J. P., Frank, F. Wattman, & Guitart, J. M. (Eds.), Colloquium on Spanish and Luso-Brazilian linguistics (pp. 59–80). Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.Google Scholar
Dulay, H., & Burt, M. K. (1974). Natural sequence in child second language acquisition. Language Learning, 24, 37–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Finer, D., & Broselow, E. I. (1985). Second language acquisition of reflexive binding. Proceedings of the North Eastern Linguistic Society, 16, 154–168.Google Scholar
Flynn, S. (1987). A parameter-setting model of L2 acquisition. Boston: D. Reidel.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jackendoff, R. S. (1972). Semantic interpretation in generative grammar. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Jakubowicz, C. (1984). On markedness and binding principles. Proceedings of the North Eastern Linguistic Society, 14, 154–182.Google Scholar
Kuno, S. (1972). Pronominalization, reflexivization and direct discourse. Linguistic Inquiry, 3, 161–195.Google Scholar
Lado, R. (1957). Linguistics across cultures. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.Google Scholar
Lees, R. B., & Klima, E. S. (1963). Rules for English pronominalization. Language, 39, 17–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Phinney, M. (1987). The pro-drop parameter in second language acquisition. In Roeper, T. & Williams, E. (Eds.), Parameter setting (pp. 221–238). Boston: D. Reidel.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Postal, P. (1971). Cross-over phenomenon. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.Google Scholar
Read, C., & Chou Hare, V. (1979). Children's interpretations of reflexive pronouns in English. In Eckman, F. & Hastings, A. (Eds.), Studies in first and second language acquisition (pp. 98–116). Rowley, MA: Newbury House.Google Scholar
Roeper, T., & Williams, E. (Eds.). (1987). Parameter setting. Boston: D. Reidel.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Safir, K. (1987). Comments on Wexler and Manzini. In Roeper, T. & Williams, E. (Eds.), Parameter setting (pp. 77–89). Boston: D. Reidel.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Solan, L. (1987). Parameter-setting and the development of pronouns and reflexives. In Roeper, T. & Williams, E. (Eds.), Parameter setting (pp. 189–210). Boston: D. Reidel.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wang, J., & Stillings, J. T. (1983). Chinese reflexives. Proceedings of the Harbin Conference on Generative Grammar (pp. 100–109). Harbin, Hei Long Jiang Province, PRC.Google Scholar
Wexler, K., & Manzini, M. R. (1987). Parameters and learnability in binding theory. In Roeper, T. & Williams, E. (Eds.), Parameter setting (pp. 41–76). Boston: D. Reidel.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
White, L. (1985). The “pro-drop” parameter in adult second language acquisition. Language Learning, 35, 47–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yang, D.-W.. (1983). The extended binding theory of anaphors. Language Research, 19, 169–192.Google Scholar