The Handbook of East Asian Psycholinguistics: Volume 3, Korean

This page intentionally left blank

The Handbook of East Asian Psycholinguistics

A large body of knowledge has accumulated in recent years on the cognitive processes and brain mechanisms underlying language. Much of this knowledge has come from studies of Indo-European languages, in particular English. Korean, a language of growing interest to linguists, differs significantly from most Indo-European languages in its grammar, its lexicon, and its written and spoken forms – features which have profound implications for the learning, representation and processing of language. This handbook, the third in a threevolume series on East Asian psycholinguistics, presents a state-of-the-art discussion of the psycholinguistic study of Korean. With contributions by over sixty leading scholars, it covers topics in first and second language acquisition, language processing and reading, language disorders in children and adults, and the relationships between language, brain, culture, and cognition. It will be invaluable to all scholars and students interested in the Korean language, as well as cognitive psychologists, linguists, and neuroscientists. p i n g l i is Professor of Psychology, Linguistics, Information Sciences and Technology at Pennsylvania State University. His main research interests are in the area of psycholinguistics and cognitive science. He specializes in language acquisition, bilingual language processing, crosslinguistic studies and neural network modeling.

The Handbook of East Asian Psycholinguistics Volume III Korean Edited by

Chungmin Lee Greg Simpson and Youngjin Kim General Editor

Ping Li

CAMBRIDGE UNIVERSITY PRESS

Cambridge, New York, Melbourne, Madrid, Cape Town, Singapore, São Paulo, Delhi, Dubai, Tokyo Cambridge University Press The Edinburgh Building, Cambridge CB2 8RU, UK Published in the United States of America by Cambridge University Press, New York www.cambridge.org Information on this title: www.cambridge.org/9780521833356 © Cambridge University Press 2009 This publication is in copyright. Subject to statutory exception and to the provision of relevant collective licensing agreements, no reproduction of any part may take place without the written permission of Cambridge University Press. First published in print format 2009

ISBN-13

978-0-511-59646-9

eBook (NetLibrary)

ISBN-13

978-0-521-83335-6

Hardback

Cambridge University Press has no responsibility for the persistence or accuracy of urls for external or third-party internet websites referred to in this publication, and does not guarantee that any content on such websites is, or will remain, accurate or appropriate. This book was published with financial assistance from the Korea Foundation.

Contents

List of figures List of tables List of contributors Preface Introduction: Advances in Korean psycholinguistics c h un g m i n le e, g re g s i m p s o n a n d yo u n gj i n k i m Part I 1

page ix xii xv xix 1

Language acquisition

Acquisition of the subject and topic nominals and markers in the spontaneous speech of young children in Korean c hu n g m i n l e e a n d s o ok w h a n c h o

23

The acquisition of argument structure and transitivity in Korean: a discourse-functional approach p a t ri ci a m . c l an c y

34

3

Acquisition of case markers and grammatical functions g y e o n g he e n o

50

4

Do Korean children acquire verbs earlier than nouns? y o u- ky u n g c h a ng - s o ng a n d s o ye o ng p ae

63

5

The acquisition of the placement of the verb in the clause structure of Korean c hu n g - h y e h a n, j e f f re y li d z an d j u l i en m u s o li no

72

6

Learning locative verb syntax: a crosslinguistic experimental study m e e s oo k k i m

93

7

Language-specific spatial semantics and cognition: developmental patterns in English and Korean soonja choi

107

2

v

vi

Contents

8

Acquisition of negation in Korean j ud y y oo - k y u ng b a e k a nd k e n n e t h w e xl e r

127

9

The acquisition of Korean numeral classifiers k w e e- oc k le e a n d s u n - y ou n g le e

137

10

Acquisition of Korean reflexive anaphora s o ok w h a n c h o

150

11

The Korean relative clause: issues of processing and acquisition j o n g s u p ju n

160

12

The accessibility hierarchy in Korean: head-external and head-internal relative clauses s o ok e u n c h o a n d w i l l i a m o’ gr a d y

168

13

Development of functional categories in child Korean h o h an

175

14

The acquisition of modality c h u ng m i n le e

187

15

The syntax of overmarking and kes in child Korean j oh n w h i t ma n

221

16

Events in passive development y o u n gj oo l e e a nd k w e e - o c k l e e

231

17

Universal quantification in child grammar h y e - k yu n g ka n g

244

18

Acquisition of prosody in Korean y o u n go n c h o i a nd r e i k o m a zu k a

255

19

Korean as a heritage language t e rr y kit - f on g a u a n d ja ne t s a e o h

268

20

Maturational effects on L2 acquisition dami lee

276

21

L2 acquisition of English articles by Korean speakers h e ej eo n g ko , ta n i a i on i n a nd k en n e th w e xl e r

286

22

The acquisition of wanna contraction by adult Korean learners of English s o o- ok k w e on

305

Phonological abilities of Korean–English bilinguals g r a c e h. y e n i - k o m s h i a n

318

23

Contents

24

vii

Parameters on languages in contact: an altered view of codeswitching k e u m s i l k i m y oo n

331

25

Influence of socio-psychological categories in bilingual interaction m . a g n e s k an g

344

26

Ontological concept versus shape in word learning from a crosslinguistic point of view h y eo n j i n le e

351

Notes on Korean Sign Language s e- e u n j ha n g

361

27

Part II

Language Processing

28

Visual processing of Hangul, the Korean script c ha n g h o p ar k

379

29

English vowel spaces produced and perceived by Americans and Koreans b yu n g g on y a ng

390

30

Morphological representation and processing of Sino-Korean words k w a n go h y i

398

31

The role of phonology in word recognition of Korean Hangul and Hanja j e u n g- ry e ul ch o

409

32

Lexical and sublexical processes in Korean word recognition g re g b. s i m p s o n an d h ye w o n ka n g

418

33

Prosody in sentence processing s un - a h j u n

423

34

Korean sentence processing youngjin kim and kwangill choi

433

35

Sentence processing and memory representation in Korean j a e - h o l e e a n d s u ng - i l k i m

442

36

Understanding complex sentences: memory constraints and informational structure y o on h y o un g l e e a n d p e t e r c . g o r do n

454

ERP studies of Korean language processing: word-order effects k y un g s o o n s h i n a n d ju n s o o k w o n

463

37

viii

Contents

38

Inferences during discourse comprehension in Korean s o yo u n g k i m s uh , ju ng - m o l ee a nd j a e - h o l e e

474

39

Morpho-syntactic processing in Korean aphasics y u m i h w an g , k i c h u n n a m an d m y un g - y o on k a ng

484

40

Morpho-syntactic processing of Korean-speaking adults with Broca’s aphasia m i n a h w a ng

494

41

Comprehension deficits in Korean agrammatic aphasia m i s e on l e e

504

42

Developmental reading disorders in Korean j e e s u n k i m a n d c h r i s d a vi s

517

43

Individual differences in Korean language processing: context-dependent processing of skilled readers in word ambiguity resolution b y e o n g - t ae k le e a n d m ye o ng - ha n z oh

44

A computational model of lexical and morphological processing in Korean h e u i s e o k l i m an d k i ch u n na m

References Name index Subject index

528

538

547 621 633

Figures

2.1 A multi-level, discourse-functional model of argument structure page 39 2.2 Argument structure realizations for transitive clauses 43 2.3 New information in S, A and O roles 45 5.1 Screen shot of a scenario in the truth value judgment task 79 5.2 Mean percentage acceptances in subject condition: adults 84 5.3 Mean percentage acceptances in object condition: adults 84 5.4 Number of participants accepting neg>∀ in object condition: adults 85 5.5 Mean percentage acceptances in object condition: children 90 7.1 Relations of support, attachment, and containment 110 7.2 Crosscutting categories in Korean and English 111 7.3 Classification of spatial actions in English and Korean 2-year-olds 114 7.4 Comprehension of IN (English) and KKITA (Korean) by 18- to 23-month-olds 116 7.5 Test pairs: tight-fit containment vs. loose-fit containment 119 7.6 Tight IN vs. loose IN relations in infant data 120 7.7 Tight IN vs. loose IN relations: adult speakers of English and Korean 122 11.1 The dog that t hit the bear 164 11.2 The dog that the bear hit t 165 12.1 Sample picture from the picture selection task 172 12.2 Sample picture from Cho’s truth-value judgment task 173 18.1 Pitch track for the sentence in (3a) 260 18.2 Pitch track for the sentence in (3b) 261 18.3 Pitch track for the sentence in (4a) 263 18.4 Pitch track for the sentence in (4b) 264 18.5 Voice onset time and pause duration for fast and slow utterances 265 26.1 Stimuli used in Soja, Carey and Spelke (1991) 352 ix

x

26.2 26.3 26.4 28.1 28.2 28.3 28.4 28.5 29.1 29.2

30.1 30.2 30.3 30.4 30.5 30.6 33.1 35.1 35.2 35.3 35.4 37.1 37.2

38.1 38.2 40.1 40.2

List of figures

Stimuli used in Imai and Gentner (1997) Stimuli used in Lee and Lee (1999) Stimuli used in Lee (2002) The Hangul alphabet and some examples of Hangul syllables Examples of the six syllable block types and their relative usage (calculated from the data of Kim and Kang, 1997) Clustering pattern of syllables (Kim, 1982) Stimulus displays used in Park (2006) Examples of Hangul fonts. 1. Gothic, 2. Myungjo, 3. Saemmul. Superimposed F1/F2 (in mel) vowel spaces of American English and Korean male speakers normalized The center formant frequency values and the acceptable ranges of each individual of the American and Korean male and female groups Mean lexical decision times (LDTs) for morphologically related, orthographically related, and control pairs at long lags. Mean LDTs to targets at short lags (SOA = 300). Positional effects of critical morphemes (SOA = 400) Mean LDTs (ms) for semantically, morphologically, and orthographically related pairs (SOA = 200) Mean LDTs as a function of reading performance (SOA = 300) A mental lexicon model for the representation and processing of Sino-Korean words Intonational structure of English The interaction effect between semantic role and syntactic position The priming effect of syntactic, semantic, and mention-order factors in time course The interaction effect between time course and order of mention in clause recency The interaction effect between semantic bias and order of mention in complex sentences Grand-averaged ERPs for the critical word Topographic map of N400 and P600 components at the frontal area on the FCz site with grand-averaged ERPs for each condition Time course of gender cue effect in probe recognition time Effects of causal relatedness and probability on cued recall (Kim, 2000) The percentage of first noun choice for aphasic adults and normal adults according to the conditions of three cues Response accuracy of the sentence–picture matching task

355 356 357 380 380 382 385 388 394

396 402 403 404 404 405 407 426 447 448 450 452 469

470 476 479 497 499

List of figures

40.3 Mean performance accuracy in Experiment 1 (left) and in Experiment 2 (right) in Son and Hwang (2005) 41.1 Agrammatic comprehension of Korean isomorphic and non-isomorphic constructions (Lee, 2000) 43.1 Interference as a function of reading skill and SOA in the biased context condition 43.2 Mean choice reaction time as a function of reading skill and the number of meanings per target word 44.1 Structures of a 26-element array and a linked list 44.2 Data structure of a node of an FB-trie 44.3 Indexing algorithm of an FB-trie

xi

500 514 534 535 543 544 545

Tables

1.1 2.1 3.1 4.1 4.2 5.1 5.2 5.3 5.4 6.1 6.2 6.3 6.4 6.5 8.1 9.1 9.2 9.3 9.4 9.5 9.6 xii

The children: age and frequency of visits page 27 Proportional frequencies of transitive clause surface structures 42 Number of correct responses in comprehension task 59 Studies of Korean noun and verb acquisition 65 Number of nouns and verbs produced by Korean children 68 Design of experiment with adults 81 Mean percentage acceptances by condition: adults 84 Design of experiment with children 89 Mean percentage acceptances by condition for object QPs: children 90 Proportion of Figure-frames used by subjects for Group 1 (“Pour”-class) 100 Proportion of Figure-frames used by subjects for Group 2 (“Paint”-class) 101 Proportion of Figure-frames used by subjects for Group 3 (“Pile”-class) 101 Proportion of Figure-frames used by subjects for Group 4 (“Fill”-class) 102 Proportion of Figure-frames used by subjects (“cover” and “decorate” only) 102 NEG placement errors 133 Total number of subjects and mean age by group 141 The classifiers and object items used in the elicited-production test 142 Mean percentage of all children’s responses containing the correct structure for classifiers 144 Mean percentage of incorrect use of kay and the correct classifiers (CCL) by group 145 Mean percentage of children’s correct responses: animacy and inanimacy 146 Mean percentage of children’s correct responses: animacy and shape 146

List of tables

9.7 Mean percentage of children’s correct responses: shape and function 9.8 Mean percentage of children’s correct responses on tay function-specific classifier 9.9 Mean percentage of children’s correct responses of humanspecific classifiers 11.1 Mean scores by question type and age 12.1 Mean scores (out of 5) on Cho’s picture selection task 12.2 Mean scores (out of 5) on Cho’s truth-value judgment task 13.1 Acquisition order of some functional morphemes 13.2 Production of the honorific marker 13.3 Development of mood markers 13.4 Acquisition of functional elements in Korean 14.1 Periods of data samples (from the onset of PAST marking) 14.2 Distribution of aspectual classes with PAST marking 14.3 Distribution of telic (achievement + accomplishment) verbs (token frequencies) 16.1 Subjects in the picture-aided comprehension task 16.2 Comprehension of long passives 16.3 Comprehension of long and short passives 16.4 Comprehension of causative predicates 17.1 Right answers (adult-like answers) 17.2 Percentage of children’s non-adult-like responses 17.3 Error rates in the constructions with a floated quantifier and those with a quantifying noun phrase 20.1 Means of correct responses for reflexives and pronouns 20.2 Means, SDs, and percentages of reflexives and pronouns 21.1 Article grouping by a) definiteness and b) specificity 21.2 Predictions for article choice in L2-English 21.3 Results of the L1-Korean participants (N = 39) 21.4 Results of the L1-Russian participants (N = 26) 21.5 Effects of definiteness and specificity: results of repeated-measures ANOVAs 21.6 Predictions for article choice in L2-English when partitivity effects are considered 21.7 The effects of partitivity (mean%) 21.8 The effects of partitivity and specificity (mean%) 22.1 Contraction patterns in OEQ and SEQ in terms of obeying the constraint 22.2 Classification of four categories based on the contraction pattern 22.3 Native speaker distribution in the elicited-production test 22.4 L2 distribution in the elicited-production test

xiii

147 147 147 164 172 173 176 181 182 186 215 215 216 238 239 240 242 248 249 250 280 283 291 292 294 294 295 299 302 303 310 312 313 313

xiv

List of tables

22.5 Native speaker distribution in the GJT 22.6 L2 distribution in the GJT 23.1 Group descriptions and labels, English and Korean pronunciation ratings expressed in z-scores (standard deviation), and language differences within each group 23.2 Pronunciation scores, background characteristics, and self ratings of language use and pronunciation abilities for three types of bilingual groups (standard deviations). 26.1 Percentage of shape responses from English, Japanese, and Korean 30.1 The prime–target relations of Sino-Korean word stimuli in Yi and Yi (1999) 35.1 Examples of experimental materials (Kim et al., 2004) 35.2 Examples of experimental materials in Lee et al.’s (2002) study 37.1 Examples of stimulus sentences for the four experimental conditions 40.1 Examples of sentences used in Son & Hwang (2005) 44.1 The capacities of MRDs simulating Korean lexical recognition 44.2 Experimental results of the correlation between frequency and human reaction time and between the length and human reaction time in Eojeol recognition

313 314

320

324 354 401 446 451 466 500 544

545

Contributors

terry kit-fong au Department of Psychology, University of Hong Kong judy yoo-kyung baek Department of Practical English, Korea Cyber University, South Korea you-kyung chang-song Hansol Educational Research Center, South Korea jeung-ryeul cho Division of Social Science, Kyungnam University, South Korea sookeun cho Department of Practical Foreign Language, Korea Digital University, South Korea sook whan cho Department of English Language and Literature, Sogang University, South Korea kwangill choi Department of Psychology, Ajou University, South Korea soonja choi Department of Linguistics and Asian/Middle Eastern Languages, San Diego State University youngon choi Department of Psychology, Skidmore College, USA patricia m. clancy Department of Linguistics, University of California, Santa Barbara chris davis MARCS Auditory Laboratories, The University of Western Sydney, Australia peter c. gordon Department of Psychology, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill chung-hye han Department of Linguistics, Simon Fraser University, Canada ho han Department of English Language and Literature, Ajou University, South Korea xv

xvi

List of contributors

mina hwang Department of Special Education, Dankook University, South Korea yu mi hwang Department of Linguistics, Korea University, South Korea tania ionin Department of Linguistics, University of Illinois at UrbanaChampaign se-eun jhang Department of English Language and Literature, Korea Maritime University, South Korea jong sup jun Department of Linguistics and Cognitive Science, Hankuk University of Foreign Studies, South Korea sun-ah jun Department of Linguistics, UCLA hye-kyung kang Department of English Language and Culture, Open Cyber University, South Korea hyewon kang Department of Psychology, Sung Kyun Kwan University, South Korea m. agnes kang School of English, The University of Hong Kong jeesun kim MARCS Auditory Laboratories, University of Western Sydney, Australia meesook kim Department of English Language and Literature, Sangji University, South Korea myung-yoon kang Department of Linguistics, Korea University, South Korea sung-il kim Department of Education, Korea University, South Korea youngjin kim Department of Psychology, Ajou University, South Korea heejeong ko Department of Linguistics, Seoul National University, South Korea soo-ok kweon Humanities and Social Sciences, Pohang University of Science and Technology, South Korea jun soo kwon Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Seoul National University, South Korea byeong-taek lee Institute of Psychological Science, Seoul National University, South Korea chungmin lee Department of Linguistics and Cognitive Science Program, Seoul National University, South Korea

List of contributors

xvii

dami lee Department of English Language and Culture, Hanyang University, South Korea hyeonjin lee Department of Early Childhood Education, Yeungnam University, South Korea jae-ho lee Department of Psychology, Keimyung University, South Korea jung-mo lee Department of Psychology, Sungkunkwan University, South Korea kwee-ock lee Department of Human Ecology, Kyungsung University, South Korea miseon lee Department of English Language and Literature, Hanyang University, South Korea sun-young lee School of Languages, Literatures and Cultures, University of Maryland at College Park yoonhyoung lee Department of Psychology, Catholic University of Daegu, South Korea youngjoo lee Department of English Language and Literature, Seoul Women’s University, South Korea jeffrey lidz Department of Linguistics, University of Maryland heuiseok lim Department of Computer Science Education, Korea University, South Korea reiko mazuka Department of Psychology, Duke University, USA julien musolino Department of Psychology, Rutgers University, USA kichun nam Department of Psychology, Korea University, South Korea gyeonghee no Department of English Education, Seoul National University of Education william o’grady Department of Linguistics, University of Hawaii janet sae oh Psychology Department, California State University, Northridge soyeong pae Division of Speech Pathology and Audiology, Hallym University, South Korea changho park Department of Mass Communications and Psychology, Chonbuk National University, South Korea

xviii

List of contributors

kyung soon shin Interdisciplinary Program in Cognitive Science, Seoul National University, South Korea soyoung kim suh Department of Psychology, Lake Forest College, USA greg b. simpson Department of Psychology, University of Kansas kenneth wexler Department of Brain and Cognitive Sciences and Department of Linguistics and Philosophy, Massachusetts Institute of Technology john whitman Department of Linguistics, Cornell University byunggon yang English Department, Pusan National University, South Korea grace h. yeni-komshian Department of Hearing and Speech Sciences, University of Maryland at College Park kwangoh yi Department of Psychology, Yeungnam University, South Korea keumsil kim yoon Department of Languages and Cultures, William Paterson University, USA myeong-han zoh Department of Psychology, Seoul National University, South Korea

Preface

This is the third and last volume of the three-companion-volume series on East Asian psycholinguistics. East Asian here includes Chinese, Japanese and Korean, the languages that have received increasing interest in psycholinguistic research beyond the Indo-European languages. The three languages reveal extremely interesting typological characteristics; Japanese and Korean are strikingly similar in structure and various other respects, although they show surprisingly important and subtle differences. Chinese, on the other hand, contrasts more sharply with Japanese and Korean in typological patterns, although the three share certain areal commonalities such as the use of numeral classifiers. Korean and Japanese are similar grammatically, but not lexically and phonologically. Because of many commonalities in grammar, the two languages are often compared and contrasted linguistically and psycholinguistically (see Japanese/Korean Linguistics 1 to 15, CSLI, among others). Korean is generally hypothesized to belong to the Altaic language family, which encompasses Manchu-Tungusic, Mongolian, and Turkic languages. Japanese is also often believed to be an Altaic language, whereas Chinese belongs to the Sino-Tibetan language family. Korean and Japanese are thus distinct from Chinese genetically and typologically. However, the two languages have a vast amount of culturally borrowed Sino-Korean and Sino-Japanese lexical items, respectively, even adopting Chinese characters minimally in Korean and vastly in Japanese in their writing systems. Therefore, the idea of the trio in companion volumes is crucial for comparative studies, not only among the three but also between the three and other languages including English. The editing of this Korean volume took somewhat longer than the Chinese and Japanese volumes but we are glad to be finished, with a time lag that has allowed us to reflect some last-minute, up-to-date developments in the field of Korean psycholinguistics. The study of Korean acquisition started about three decades ago, followed by research on processing; neurological studies appeared most recently and have now become popular. Theoretical and experimental advances in psycholinguistics have been made largely on the basis of the linguistic revolution and cognitive revolution led by xix

xx

Preface

Chomsky’s generative paradigm since mid-1950 and the study of English in that paradigm. But the diversity- and usage-based functionalist trend and the connectionist model have also contributed to the advancement of the field in their own ways. Psycholinguistic studies of Korean as well as of Chinese and Japanese reflect diverse developments in theory and practice, and contribute to broadening the horizon of perspectives, demonstrating both universals and specifics of the Korean, Japanese and Chinese languages and of human language in general. We did our best to include all the currently available representative research in Korean psycholinguistics, grouping them roughly into two sections: Language Acquisition and Language Processing, which include brain mechanisms and neurological processes. We hope that this book, together with the previous Chinese and Japanese companion volumes, will contribute to a greater understanding of the basic concepts and issues in psycholinguistic research on the East Asian languages and in the study of the human mind. We would like to express our deep gratitude to Ping Li, the general editor of the trio companion volumes, for undertaking and orchestrating the entire project and for inviting two of the Korean volume editors to the University of Richmond to initiate the volume. At the same time, we are grateful to the individual authors for their contributions, internal reviews and patient style consolidation, and particularly to Pat Clancy for making comments on some of the papers and to her and Ping Li for reading the drafts of Preface and Introduction and making helpful comments. We thank Jeff Holliday, an OSU graduate student, for his keen native English intuition at the final stage of editing and DaeYoung Sohn, an SNU graduate student, for his labor of style consolidation. We also thank Helen Barton of Cambridge University Press for her constant assistance throughout the long years and Joanna Garbutt of the Press for her administrative help. CHUNGMIN LEE GREG SIMPSON YOUNGJIN KIM

Introduction: Advances in Korean psycholinguistics Chungmin Lee, Greg Simpson and Youngjin Kim

The basics of Korean This chapter briefly introduces some characteristics of the Korean language and its writing system and gives an overview of the chapters treated in this volume on Korean psycholinguistics. Korean has the eleventh largest group of speakers in the world, approximately 73 million. Its dialects are mutually intelligible except for the Jeju (Cheyjwu) Island dialect, which retains old forms but is becoming endangered. Korean has an SOV (subject-object-verb) head-final feature like Japanese and unlike Chinese or English. Sentence types such as declarative, interrogative, imperative and promissive are distinguished by means of markers that appear at the end. Nominals take case markers or postpositions after them and verb stems take tense, modal, speech level, and S-type markers linearly in that order after them agglutinatively. It is similar to Japanese in this respect. Honorification is a pragmatically motivated syntactic agreement phenomenon to show the speaker’s respect for the subject. Speech levels mark the speaker’s various attitudes toward the hearer including (non-)politeness. Honorification in Korean is a little more grammatical than in Japanese. The three East-Asian languages are topic-prominent, with object deletion via topicality unlike prodrop languages such as Romance languages, although Korean and Japanese have subject or nominative markers as well as topic markers, unlike Chinese. Korean and Japanese have SOV in both matrix and embedded Ss unlike German. Korean and Japanese have a null argument in a relative clause, which is coreferential with the head noun on the right hand side of the clause. Korean has a pre-nominal modifying relator -nun (varied by tense) between the nonfinite verbal element and the head noun, but Japanese lacks such a relator. The Japanese relative clause ending is finite in form, creating a garden path at least in the written language (C. Lee, 1989). However, such a pre-nominal relative clause ending must have a different intonation from its matrix clause ending and Japanese psycholinguists have begun to pay attention to such prosodic differences (Nakyama and Lewis, 2001). 1

2

Chungmin Lee, Greg Simpson and Youngjin Kim

Apart from its syntactic characteristics, Korean is an abundant source of generative phonological study. Its sound patterns of combination and rich alternation are revealing for generative and subsequently optimality-theoretical investigations. Those theoretically plausible but perceptually difficult sound changes, as in kwuk (soup) + mul (water) => [kuŋmul], syllable-final neutralizations, and contractions in Korean position the language as one of the most difficult languages to understand and learn. Intonation and other prosodic features are closely interwoven with topic-focus information structure and other dynamic meaning aspects in contexts. Korean uniquely has several thousands of sound symbolic lexical items of the native stock. These use contrasts in vowels and consonants. Bright vowels (a, ε, o) depict brightness and dark vowels (e, u, ə) darkness, as in pollok (protruded and round – small scale) vs. pwullwuk (protruded and round – large scale). Plain, aspirate and tense consonants connote slowness, crispness, and tightness/swiftness, respectively, as in ping-ping, phing-phing, and ppingpping (round and round – slowly, crisply, and swiftly), respectively. The contrasts in vowels and consonants are often adroitly combined to maximize the effect of vividness-vitality and expressiveness of sound symbolic expressions in daily conversations and literary works, which defy appropriate translation (see Sohn [1999] for examples, S.-C. Chang [1996] for a basic introduction to Korean, and C. Lee, H. Chae and J. Yoon [in preparation] for a full reference grammar of Korean). Hangul, the Korean alphabet, has fourteen consonant and ten vowel (twenty-four in total) single letters and Korean adopts a morphophonemic (underlying phonological) spelling system. Although analyzed CVCs are grouped in syllables, Hangul is crucially different from the Japanese syllabary system, where a syllable composed of CV phonetically is one letter and not analyzed into C and V. Chinese used to have a separate ideographic system but the current simplified system is said to be not so ideographic. Before Hangul, Korean had developed a system of borrowing Chinese characters to represent Korean glossograms (meaning) and phonograms (sound) from the Three Kingdom Period and later Japanese developed its phonograms out of Chinese characters for its current syllabary. Hangul was invented in 1443 by King Sejong and is regarded as a unique distinctive ‘feature’-based writing system (Sampson, 1985). Hangul and texts written in it have served as rich sources of perceptual and readability experiments. For romanizing Korean, there are three widely used systems: McCune-Reischauer, Yale, and the Ministry of Culture and Tourism system based on the previous Ministry of Education system from 2000. Linguists consistently use the Yale romanization system and we adopt this system for all acquisition and some processing papers in this book.

Introduction

3

Part I Language acquisition The first part of the acquisition section treats first language acquisition and the second part, second language acquisition. The first seventeen chapters are concerned with the acquisition of syntactic, semantic and pragmatic structures of Korean as a first language. The eighteenth chapter treats prosody acquisition and the chapters from 19 to 25 are about the acquisition of Korean as a second language, the acquisition of English as a second language by Koreans, and bilingual interaction. The last two chapters, somewhat different in orientation, are about ontological concept versus shape in word learning and Korean sign language. The first three chapters focus on argument structure and argument markers. The first chapter is particularly about topic focus information structure as well. The second one concentrates on transitivity in a discourse-functional approach. The third chapter explores acquisition of structural case markers, nominative and accusative. The first chapter by C. Lee and S. W. Cho examines the acquisition of the topic marker -(n)un and the subject (nominative) marker -i/-ka in Korean. The authors are concerned with how Korean children use or drop these markers on noun phrases, as well as how they produce or omit the entire topic/subject phrases over time. They show the developmental sequence of the stages: null topic/subject → bare nominal topic/subject → marker-marked topic/subject. It is argued that Korean involves both pragmatic and grammatical constraints on the emergence of null and overt topic and subject nominals and markers. Once these markers emerge, the developmental sequences for the functions of the topic and subject markers appear to be: contrastive topic → global/thematic topic and focus subject → neutral subject. These two sequences are surprising in terms of markedness because they proceed from ‘marked’ to ‘unmarked’, unlike the sequence null → bare → marked for the marking and use of topic and subject noun phrases. Chapter 2 by P. Clancy presents an overview of recent research and issues in the acquisition of Korean argument structure and transitivity, emphasizing a discourse-functional theoretical approach. First, prior research from various theoretical perspectives is outlined, focusing on the nature and developmental origins of grammatical categories, the frequency and centrality of verbs, and the acquisition of a generalized transitive construction in Korean and other languages. Next, based on data from two Korean children and their caregivers, a discoursefunctional model of argument structure is proposed, in which transitivity is understood as a multi-level phenomenon, with discourse (the discourse factors motivating use of particular surface forms to encode arguments) and lexicon (verb meaning and use) serving to shape the clause-level grammar of argument structure. To master transitivity, it is claimed, Korean children must acquire a set of

4

Chungmin Lee, Greg Simpson and Youngjin Kim

argument structure realizations (ASRs) appropriate to particular types of discourse contexts. Special attention is given to the most common transitive ASR featuring at least one overt argument. This ASR, which reflects Preferred Argument Structure (Du Bois, 1987), usually consists of an elliptical, first or second person, human A argument (subject) that encodes given information and a lexical, third person, inanimate O argument (direct object) that may encode new information. Korean children, it is proposed, never experience a discourse-free transitive construction; instead, they acquire transitive ASRs along with the semantic and discourse-pragmatic patterns that motivate them. The chapter closes with a number of suggestions for future research. Chapter 3 by G. No shows how children acquire the Korean case-marking system by examining their systematic utterances from longitudinal and experimental data. First, she considers the developmental sequence in the acquisition of case particles, focusing on the opposition of nominative and accusative case particles. Second, she investigates principles that guide children to bootstrap what the case particles indicate. She explores what strategies children employ to learn the case-marking system in production and comprehension. Third, she examines from the experimental data how a child indicates grammatical functions of each noun phrase in the early stages of language development, especially in cases where case particles and word order show a contradiction for grammatical roles. Finally, she accounts for the mechanisms for acquiring grammatical functions and describes their developmental changes. It is suggested that Korean children rely on word order prior to case particles for grammatical functions, not because of the fixed word order strategy, but because of the input to which they are exposed. The next three chapters from 4 to 6 discuss verbs: a “verb bias” in verbs vs. nouns in acquisition, placement of the verb, and locative verbs. Chapter 7 on semantics and cognition is also about verbs, at least in the Korean data. Chapter 4 by Y.-K. Chang-Song and S. Pae examines whether the perceptual saliency of verbs in the Korean language leads to a “verb bias” in early Korean acquisition. Careful comparisons of seven studies suggest that the criterion for verbs, data-gathering methods and small sample size used in the studies seem to be responsible for the conflicting results. In particular, when the number of total words children produced was very small and the criteria for verbs differed, the noun versus verb ratio changed significantly. However, if the actual numbers of nouns and verbs each child acquired from different studies were counted, the results supported a noun bias. Korean children actually acquired more nouns than verbs even though the noun versus verb ratio varied depending on the studies. Chapter 5 by C. Han, J. Lidz and J. Musolino argues in a generative approach that in a head final language, the placement of the verb in the clause structure is hard to detect since there is no evidence from the string to distinguish a verbraising analysis from a non-verb-raising analysis. This is so both for children

Introduction

5

acquiring the language and for linguists developing an analysis of it. If the language has a clitic-like negation that associates with the verb in syntax, then scope facts concerning negation and a quantified object NP could provide evidence regarding the height of the verb. Even so, such facts are rare, especially in the input to children, and so we might be led to expect that not all speakers exposed to a head-final language acquire the same grammar as far as verb-raising is concerned. In this paper, we present evidence supporting this expectation. Using experimental data concerning the scope of quantified NPs and negation in Korean, obtained from both adults and 4-year-old children, we show that there are two populations of Korean speakers: one with verb-raising and one without. The results from this work are consistent with recent proposals in diachronic syntax and language acquisition literature that even given the restricted hypothesis space determined by Universal Grammar, insufficient input can lead to distinct grammars in a single population. Chapter 6 by M. Kim focuses on locative verbs such as “pour”, “fill”, and “load” to re-examine the problem of argument structure learnability in the light of crosslinguistic variation, drawing on elicited production studies with adult and child (aged 36–48 months) speakers of Korean and English, and a typological study of fifteen languages. She found that children’s syntactic errors are more restricted than previously thought, and are confined to the areas of greatest crosslinguistic variation, which is rather constrained. Her conclusion is that the existence of crosslinguistic variation in syntax– emantics mappings does not seem to pose a more serious learnability problem than the standard problem, since learning strategies based on universal syntax–semantics mappings and group-specific mappings can help children learn the syntax of locative verbs. Chapter 7 by S. Choi reviews crosslinguistic differences in semantic categorization in adult grammars with a focus on the spatial semantics in Korean and English. The chapter then examines when and how children acquire the spatial semantic system of their native language and the way language and spatial cognition interact. Studies have shown that children acquire the language-specific spatial semantics from the single-word period. The author’s recent data suggest that preverbal infants start out with a large repertoire of spatial categories. Taken together, studies suggest that at the beginning infants are sensitive to a number of features (including those not relevant for their native language), but as they become fluent speakers the language they have learned selectively channels their attention to linguistically relevant features. In this way, there is a dynamic interaction between language and cognition from a very early age. In chapters from 8 to 17, specific areas of morpho-syntactic constructions are treated, such as negation, numeral classifiers, anaphora, relative clauses, functional categories, the ‘functional’ element kes, “one” before a relative head noun, passives, and universal quantifiers.

6

Chungmin Lee, Greg Simpson and Youngjin Kim

Chapter 8 by J. Y.-K. Baek and K. Wexler investigates a word-order error found in Korean-speaking children’s productions of the so-called short-form negation within the generative framework of language acquisition. A brief review is provided of several previous syntactic accounts of the negative constructions in Korean, which is followed by a new analysis of the wordorder error based on the lack of A-movement in the child grammar. A few more recent approaches to this classic problem are also included toward the end of this chapter. Chapter 9 by K.-O. Lee and S.-Y. Lee investigates children’s acquisition of numeral classifiers in Korean. The results of the two experiments show that Korean children’s use of specific numeral classifiers did not reach 50 percent accuracy even by age 7. Even in the condition where the specific classifiers were prompted by the experimenter, children’s use of them did not reach 50 percent accuracy before age 4. Korean children’s acquisition of numeral classifiers showed similar tendencies to Chinese, Thai and Japanese children in that the syntactic structure of the numeral classifier was learned before its semantic structure. Korean children also learned general classifiers earlier than specific ones. However, the acquisition order of animate → shape → function proposed by the numeral classifier accessibility hierarchy was not found in Korean children’s acquisition of numeral classifiers, providing counter-evidence to the universal constraint in children’s acquisition of numeral classifiers. Chapter 10 by S. W. Cho examines Korean-speaking children’s knowledge of the principles governing the antecedent possibilities for the reflexive pronoun caki (“himself/herself ”). It is noted that none of the previous views solely based on the subset principle, the priority condition, or logophoricity, are fully satisfactory to explain the distribution and acquisition of Korean reflexive anaphora. Evidence suggests that children are sensitive to locality, logophoricity, and the relational hierarchy in interpreting the antecedent possibilities for the reflexive pronoun. It is proposed that a unified account of Korean anaphora takes into consideration the effects of not just sentence-internal constraints, but also the semantic and pragmatic roles of the reflexive and the predicates co-occurring with it. Chapter 11 by J. S. Jun claims that language learners encounter relative clauses all the time, regardless of their stage of language development. If they have not fully acquired the grammar of relative clauses, they tend to make guesses about the meaning of a sentence with relative clauses. For this reason, children’s processing of relative clauses provides useful criteria to decide what developmental stage they are at. This chapter presents an overview of research questions and representative studies on the processing and acquisition issues of the Korean relative clause. In particular, the author tries to account for various experimental data on Korean subject vs. object relatives in terms of strategic understanding based on the word order and animacy.

Introduction

7

Chapter 12 by Sookeun Cho and W. O’Grady provides a critical study of the status of head-internal relative clauses in early development, compared with that of the head-external relative clause. Both naturalistic speech and experimental work involving elicited production and comprehension tasks are employed. The authors examine whether the internal form is easier and more frequent and find that there is a greater preference for subject relative clauses than for object relative clauses regarding the grammatical relation of the relativized element. English, French and Japanese cases are also reported. In Chapter 13 by H. Han, young children’s speech is observed across languages that lack functional morphemes such as case particles, inflections, pronouns, and pre-/post-positions. As each functional morpheme constitutes a functional category that heads a functional projection, the lack of functional morphemes is argued to reflect the lack of functional projections. Young children’s syntax is argued to be deficient in this sense, and furthermore it is a controversial issue whether syntactic “principles” (UG principles in generative grammar) work from the beginning or not. Most of the discussions on this issue have dealt with child English. In this chapter, Han introduces the development of functional morphemes in child Korean, which is an agglutinative language and thus shows a different developmental pattern. The child Korean data reveal that early child Korean utterances lack functional morphemes, and functional morphemes appear in a certain order. He argues that the lack of functional morphemes does not mean the lack of functional categories and projections, and supports the strong version of continuity hypothesis. He concludes that the whole picture of the development of functional morphemes should be considered under a processing account. Chapter 14 by C. Lee on modality is mainly concerned with how mood/ modal elements, along with temporal/aspectual and other functional elements, are acquired early in Korean, unlike in Indo-European languages (Radford, 1990), where all inflectional elements are acquired rather late, after age 2. Children acquiring Korean, a verb-final language, are sensitive to sentential endings encoding a variety of moods, sentence types, modal differences, and even politeness. This study, based on longitudinal diary notes, investigates interesting aspects of cognitive and linguistic development illuminated by the data. Moods as sentential types seem to be established before subtle subjective elements of modality are fully acquired. Chapter 15 by J. Whitman discusses overmarking in early child Korean involving the ‘functional’ element kes “one, thing that” before a relative head noun, noted since Y. Kim (1987). He argues this pattern is on a par with auxiliary overmarking in early child English and genitive and pronominal no in Japanese: the common feature of overmarking is that it involves functional elements, although Y. Kim sees kes as ‘nominal.’ Based on natural speech corpora Whitman argues that the functional category which is overmarked – that is,

8

Chungmin Lee, Greg Simpson and Youngjin Kim

spelled out overtly where adult grammar has a silent category – in child Korean is the category Determiner. Chapter 16 by Y. Lee and K.-O. Lee notes some peculiar properties of children’s passives in various languages, such as an asymmetry between actional passives and non-actional passives. These peculiarities have been accounted for under the hypothesis that children’s early passives are adjectival, and as such exhibit properties of adjectival passives in adult grammar (see Borer and Wexler, 1987, among others). Under this hypothesis, a new prediction follows, namely that children’s comprehension of passive predicates will vary depending upon the event structures of predicates. If a predicate has a target state in its event structure, it makes a good adjectival passive, and children will comprehend the predicate more easily. By contrast, if a predicate lacks a target state, it does not make a good adjectival passive, and children will comprehend the predicate less easily. This paper tests and confirms this prediction in Korean children’s passives. In a picture-aided comprehension task with 67 Korean children ranging from 3:10–8:8, the authors found a contrast due to the event structures of the predicates. The result shows that children are sensitive to the event structures of passive predicates, and thus provides additional support for the adjectival passive hypothesis. Chapter 17 by H.-K. Kang investigates Korean children’s spreading errors in universal quantifiers. Young children tend to give interpretations to universal quantifiers different from those used by adults. In response to the English question Is every bear holding a honey-pot? where three bears are holding a honey-pot each, and there is a fourth, unheld, honey-pot, children, unlike adults, respond negatively because one honey-pot is not held. Syntactically, they spread the scope of the universal quantifier every to the remote argument honey-pot in the sentence as well as to the argument bear in its own maximal projection. To see whether quantifier spreading is also found in Korean, Kang carried out an experiment on 62 Korean monolingual children, ranging in age from 4.5 to 7.5 with a mean age of 5.8, with universal quantifiers modun and floated quantifiers modu (every) and kakkak (each). The results showed that quantifier spreading is a general phenomenon found in a certain young age group crosslinguistically, perhaps universally. The phenomenon has been analyzed in two different ways, structurally and cognitively, the latter by considering different error rates in different age groups. Y. Choi and R. Mazuka’s Chapter 18, unlike the previous ones, is unique in discussing prosody acquisition. Until recently, such studies have been done mainly with infants learning English, where it has been shown that infants become sensitive to clausal boundaries by 6 months of age (Hirsh-Pasek et al., 1987) and to phrasal units by 9 months (Jusczyk et al., 1992). In this chapter the authors describe a recent experimental study in which they found evidence that Korean children (3 to 5 years) are indeed sensitive to prosodic phrasal

Introduction

9

boundaries and are capable of using the prosodic boundary information in segmenting input speech correctly. They can detect a critical prosodic unit in learning Korean accentual phrases (AP), using physical properties associated with the prosodic structure and they can also use these units to process the input speech. Also, it appears that children come to produce these prosodic units increasingly reliably with age in their speech. Chapters from 19 to 25 represent studies on second-language acquisition, either on L1-Korean learners of L2-English, Korean English bilinguals, or codeswitching. The UG-based approach is predominant among those from a Linguistics background. The authors in these chapters try to evaluate theoretical linguistic claims in generative grammar via acquisition and/or psycholinguistic data in such chapters as 1, 3, 5, 6, 8, 9, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 20, 21, 22 and 23. In general, they successfully show how generative principles work in Korean acquisition and Koreans’ L2 learning, but most of them also find it necessary to explore specific parametric variations in acquiring Korean and in Koreans’ L2 learning. Chapter 19 by T. K. Au and J. S. Oh claims that heritage languages are quickly lost in predominantly monolingual environments such as the United States. Heritage cultures are also lost. At a broader level, the nation loses valuable linguistic resources much needed for bridging cultures within the nation and across nations. This chapter examines the acquisition, maintenance/loss, and reacquisition of Korean as a heritage language in the US. Many children in immigrant families shift quite rapidly from their heritage language to the majority language once they enter school. It is therefore crucial to understand what predicts heritage language development/loss during this time window. The authors review the research literature on relevant family characteristics and report some findings on family characteristics that may predict heritage language development/loss in Korean-speaking children. The chapter also touches on adult heritage language learners. They report on how childhood language experience as well as other factors such cultural identity and participation, learning motivation, and heritage language use during the school years may play a role when adults learn or relearn their heritage language. Chapter 20 by D. Lee examines the critical/sensitive period hypothesis in the context of L2 acquisition. It claims that there exist multiple sensitive periods with rather long onsets and closures. The claim is based on the findings of two experiments regarding L2 acquisition of English reflexives and pronouns by L1 Korean speakers. Chapter 21 by H. Ko, T. Ionin, and K. Wexler investigates how L2-learners whose L1s lack articles acquire the semantics of articles, with special focus on article use by L1-Korean learners of L2-English. Based on their experimental studies, they argue that article choice in L2-acquisition reflects systematic access to universal semantic features: definiteness, specificity, and partitivity.

10

Chungmin Lee, Greg Simpson and Youngjin Kim

It is shown that L2-learners associate the with [+specific] and [+partitive] features, which results in non-random error patterns: overuse of the with specific indefinites and partitive indefinites. Our findings provide further evidence that L2 learners’ errors are traceable to parameter settings that are not necessarily instantiated in their L1 or L2 – but which are available through UG. The chapter also presents evidence that the interlanguage grammar of L2learners has important parallels to that of child L1-learners in the domain of article semantics, supporting our conclusion that L2-acquisition, like L1acquisition, is guided by UG. Chapter 22 by S.-O. Kweon’s begins with an overview of studies on a UG approach to second-language acquisition (SLA), some of which argue and support the hypothesis that UG will constrain the L2 acquisition process, while others are against it. Based on production and grammaticality judgment tasks, her own study of want to to wanna contraction with advanced adult Korean learners of English goes against the hypothesis. Another such contraction is the auxiliary copula contraction. Both are blocked when there is an intervening trace between them. In Chapter 23 by G. H. Yeni-Komshian, a series of studies is reviewed on the phonological abilities of a group of native Koreans who had emigrated to the US at different ages, ranging from 2 to 23 years. As found before, earlier acquisition of English is associated with better pronunciation than later acquisition. There was a linear relationship between age of L2 acquisition and pronunciation proficiency. In contrast, overall Korean pronunciation ratings for the same group of participants indicated markedly lower levels of proficiency among those who had come to the USA at ages 2–7 years than those who had emigrated at an older age, of 12 years, who showed levels as high as monolingual Koreans living in Korea. The discussion focuses on two models of language acquisition, the critical or sensitive period hypothesis and a position that highlights the effects of interference between L1 and L2. The findings do not support any one position fully; they tend to be more consistent with the view that deviations from native pronunciation result from interactions between the languages of bilinguals rather than with the view of a maturationally defined critical period of language learning. The findings showed that for native Koreans who learned English as a second language, segmental phonemes in verbs were pronounced more accurately than in nouns. This effect was more pronounced in late than in early L2 learners. The results of this study provide a first demonstration of a link between pronunciation and the lexicon. Chapter 24 by K. K. Yoon is concerned with the creative, yet constrained nature of bilingual speech. Codeswitching, the use of more than one language within a single sentence or across sentences, is a highly sophisticated process, subject to linguistic description, and also understandable in social and psychological terms. Yoon tries to account for morpho-syntactic switching patterns and

Introduction

11

examines typologically similar language pairs (e.g. French/English, Spanish/ English) and different language pairs (e.g. Korean/English, Japanese/English). Switch patterns show similarities, associated with language-specific features and differences, and with dominance. She suggests some predictable parametric variation and proposes an integrated perspective for bilingual codeswitching. Chapter 25 by Agnes Kang addresses the influence of socio-psychological categories on the codeswitching behavior of Korean–English bilingual speakers. Not only research on structural constraints on (Korean–English) codeswitching but also attention to the social factors involved in bilingual interaction have shed light on such psycholinguistic phenomena as the conceptualization of meaning and interpretation of speech. In a detailed analysis of bilingual data, Kang shows how the socio-psychological categories of relative age and status in Korean interaction become contextualized (Gumperz, 1982b, 1992) as relevant categories in Korean–English interaction. Observable actions that are mediated through interaction provide evidence for how the switch is produced and interpreted by speakers. This particular codeswitching strategy points to how Korean social categories are conceptualized in Korean–English bilingual discourse and suggests a means of observing the relationship between linguistic codes, cognitive processes, and socio-psychological categories. Chapter 26 by H. Lee examines the role of the ontological concept versus shape in word learning from the crosslinguistic view. It focuses on discussing Korean data (Lee & Lee, 1999; Lee, 2002; K. Park, 2001), along with data from English (Imai & Gentner, 1997; Soja, Carey & Spelke, 1991) and Japanese (Imai & Gentner, 1997). The results suggest that several factors such as the shape similarity, the ontological concept, and perceptual complexity may interact in inferring the meanings of Korean words. These also indicate that the inference of Korean word meaning respects not only language universals but also language specificity. The language difference might be explained as a lexical effect as suggested in Imai and Gentner (1997). The last chapter in this part by S.-E. Jhang offers some observations on Korean Sign Language (KSL). It starts with a history of sign language in Korea. Next, it gives a brief review of distinguished research on linguistic properties of KSL (S. Kim, 1983; Suk, 1989; Hwang, 1994; Jang, 1995; Ch. Kim, 1998; Jhang, 1997, 1999a, 1999b; Hong, 2001). Third, it gives a short review of recent research on the debate of a mode of communication with regard to the acquisition of sign language (Hwang, 1994; Ahn, 1997; Na & Kang, 2001; Jun, 2001a; Won, 2002). Then, a series of recent studies is reviewed on the relationship between Korean literacy and a mode of communication such as oralism (Chun, 1998), Korean Standard Sign Language (K. Jung, 2002), or KSL (Choi & Ahn, 2003; Jhang, 2004). Finally, he points to directions for future research on KSL in the light of a bilingual-bicultural approach, based on KSL as a primary language and Korean as a second language.

12

Chungmin Lee, Greg Simpson and Youngjin Kim

As noted in the overview above of the generative endeavor, there was a strong need to explore specific parameters to capture language-particular phenomena in various languages including Korean. This required crosslinguistic investigations, either generative or typological, to compare the findings on Korean acquisition or processing with the findings on other languages. This kind of effort is especially visible in Chapters 4, 6, 7, 9, 16, 17, 18, 24, 26, and 27. This is one remarkable aspect of the unique contribution of the Korean psycholinguistics volume. Another type of theme notable in this Korean volume is the effect of various subfields of linguistics such as semantics, pragmatics, discourse, prosody, and interfaces such as cognition, sociocultural factors, sign language mode, etc. on syntactic structure and/or on language acquisition/loss or processing. That theme would fit Chapters 1 (semantics/pragmatics), 2 (semantics/pragmatics, discourse), 7 (cognition) 10 (semantics/pragmatics), 18 (prosody) 19 (sociolinguistics), 23 (cognitive, i.e. interference from L1), 25 (socio-psychological) and 27 (sign language mode). This theme sometimes stands in distinction or opposition to a generative theory-based approach, but some chapters such as Chapter 1 clearly include both. All in all, generative or typological/functional principles as well as languagespecific parameters/patterns are supported or identified uniquely by the findings on Korean acquisition and processing. All the issues raised and resolved here will enrich our understanding of language and mind. Part II Language processing As is evident by the publication of this book and its companion volumes, there is increasing interest in expanding psycholinguistic research beyond the IndoEuropean languages. For many years, researchers, particularly those focusing on English, worked under the assumption that processes underlying language production and comprehension were universal. Under such an assumption, the particular language studied is immaterial. However, once that assumption is questioned, the study of a variety of languages becomes more than merely interesting, but truly necessary for the advancement of the field. The search for universals in language processing is a worthy pursuit, but such universals should be discovered and confirmed, not assumed. The only way to discover and confirm a language process as universal is to test that process in a variety of languages. It is often the case that two or more languages will present themselves as differing in some aspect that is potentially related to processing differences. It is critical, then, that researchers be exposed to the principal characteristics of languages that may present an opportunity for testing the universality of one or more processes. It is our hope that the chapters presented herein provide an appropriate introduction to existing research on Korean to

Introduction

13

assist researchers in their pursuit of a complete understanding of language processes and their universal or specific characteristics. Four of the papers in this section are directly concerned with characteristics of the Korean writing system. The Korean alphabet, Hangul, is unique both in its character and its history. It has evolved only minimally from the original form of its development in the mid-fifteenth century. It was designed with clear reference to Korean phonology, so that the representation of speech by writing is not arbitrary. However, Korea’s historical and cultural ties to China are recognized in the large number of Sino-Korean loan words surviving today, and in the influence of the syllabic nature of the Chinese logography on Hangul. In fact, the influence goes deeper, as the use of Chinese writing (called Hanja in Korea) continues today, though it is far less prevalent than Hangul, and continues to decline. Indeed, the use of two scripts has become an important research topic in its own right. Details of the characteristics of the Hangul alphabet, in terms of its letters and the syllabic structure of its printing, are introduced by C. Park’s chapter (28). Though Hangul is fundamentally an alphabet, it is printed in syllable blocks, rather than linearly. This printing convention raises the possibility of the syllable as a processing unit in its own right. Park reviews research showing that syllables fall into several clusters according to their visual similarity (as determined from confusion matrices derived from brief visual presentations). This characteristic, along with the ability to identify several syllable “types” (e.g. based on the presence or absence of a final consonant), allows tests of the syllable as a processing unit. Park reviews evidence supporting and contradicting the idea of syllable-level processing, and suggests that the entire set of results may best be explained by a dual-process approach, with one pathway processing the syllable as a whole, and another that processes the syllable letter by letter (or at least by body and coda). The very transparent nature of Hangul orthography has generated considerable interest among scholars of language processing, and word recognition and reading in particular. The transparency of Hangul (i.e. the very regular and consistent relationship between a word’s spelling and its pronunciation) suggests its suitability for examining the way phonology and orthography are related in word recognition. Specifically, a number of researchers have questioned whether readers of transparent (or “shallow”) orthographies (others include Spanish, Italian, and Serbo-Croatian) rely more heavily on the sound system of the language when processing it visually (Baluch & Besner, 1991; Frost, Katz and Bentin, 1987; Tabossi & Laghi, 1992). Hangul may be even more appropriate for these questions, because of several characteristics that make it unique even among these other shallow orthographies. Specifically, letters that represent related phonemes are visually similar. In addition, consonants are derived from five prototypical shapes (see Park’s Chapter 28) that were created to mimic the shape of the vocal tract when pronouncing them. These features, paired with the syllable-block printing,

14

Chungmin Lee, Greg Simpson and Youngjin Kim

suggest that Hangul may provide for rapid access to phonological information to a degree not seen in any other language. Interest in the relationship between orthography and phonology is especially apparent in the papers by J.-R. Cho and by G. Simpson and H. Kang. In Chapter 31 Cho reviews a body of research showing that Korean readers process visually presented Hangul words with reference to phonological information in naming and semantic categorization tasks. She, like some other authors, interprets these results in terms of a dual-route approach to word recognition. According to this view, words may be processed by recognition of the whole form or by conversion of written elements into their phonological equivalents. Hangul, with the ready accessibility of phonological information, is more likely to be processed via the latter path than is a less transparent system such as English. She also discusses whether the use of phonological information is obligatory in processing Hangul, or whether it is under the control of the reader, according to characteristics of the stimuli and task. She gives consideration to another issue as well, that of phonological processing in Hanja, and shows that such processing is more likely among readers whose proficiency at reading Hanja is low. Presumably, direct visual processing of Hanja comes with greater familiarity, and until such familiarity is achieved, Hanja is processed with reference to Hangul, and those effects seen in Hangul processing are replicated in Hanja. Finally, Cho discusses the phenomenon, which can only be studied in an extremely small number of languages, of script switching. She summarizes her own research (Cho & Chen, 2005) on naming and categorization under conditions in which script does or does not change from trial to trial, and concludes that use of phonological information is at least partly task dependent, with naming being more sensitive to phonological processing of written words. Simpson and Kang’s chapter (32) similarly reviews literature concerned with the role of phonology in visual word recognition. They review work from their laboratory concerned, like that reviewed by Cho, with lexical and sublexical contributions to Hangul word recognition. Using frequency effects for Hangul stimuli embedded in lists consisting exclusively of Hangul or mostly of Hanja words, they conclude that Korean readers rely on phonological information to a large degree in processing Hangul, but that such processing is under the control of the reader, according to the overall construction of the stimulus materials. Like Park, Simpson and Kang also discuss syllable-level processing of Hangul. Summarizing research in which they independently varied syllable and word frequency, they provide evidence that the syllable is an independent unit of processing. Yi in Chapter 30 considers a very different aspect of word recognition. Specifically, he notes that a large number of Korean words are of Chinese origin, and were originally written in Chinese characters. Consequently, it is not uncommon for two Hangul words to be orthographically related but not morphologically

Introduction

15

related (i.e. the first syllables are spelled the same but are morphologically unrelated). Of course, other pairs of words may be morphologically related. This affords a very interesting condition for separating morphological processing from other levels. Yi describes the work of his lab on morphological and orthographic priming of Sino-Korean words written in Hangul. He and his colleagues have found intriguing differences between the processing of Korean morphology and that of other languages reported in the literature. Unlike what is usually seen in English, for example, Korean readers do not show morphological facilitation at short lags (number of items intervening between prime and target), although there is robust orthographic inhibition, a result more common to a variety of languages. In addition, in a study separating morphological and semantic priming, Yi reports much stronger semantic priming. This leads him to propose a model for Korean morphological processing that is quite different from those proposed previously, one in which there is a morphological level of processing that resides above the lexical level, and contains strong inhibitory links between words sharing a syllable in common. Unlike the papers just discussed, those by B. Yang and S.-A. Jun do not concern processing of written Korean. In Chapter 29, Yang uses differences in acoustic characteristics between Korean and English to explore models of the relationship between speech perception and production. After reviewing current views of this relationship, Yang shows that differences in production of vowel sounds between Korean and English speakers do not predict differences in vowel perception. These results appear to favor the auditory theory over the motor theory of speech perception, by which perception occurs with reference to a speaker’s knowledge of how a speech segment is produced. Jun in Chapter 33 introduces a discussion of prosody, the intonation contour of phrases and sentences. This, as she points out, has not had as much attention from researchers (in any language) as other aspects of psycholinguistic processing have. Jun introduces fundamental characteristics of Korean and English prosody, and the similarities and differences between the two. In each language, prosodic features serve to eliminate ambiguity occurring at other levels (e.g. syntax). In both languages, processing is easier when a prosodic boundary matches the syntactic boundary in a sentence. In other cases, however, the languages differ in prosodic function. Jun cites the example of English using accent to resolve WH-word ambiguity, which Korean signals by word order. This is clearly an area that is ripe for further exploration. Five of the papers in the second section are concerned with characteristics of the Korean sentence and discourse comprehension. Korean is head final, left branching, has subject-object-verb word order, permits scrambling, and allows phonologically null arguments and adjuncts due to topicality as a topic-prominent language. Typologically, Korean is classified as an agglutinative language with a rich morphology. Thus, some grammatical functions

16

Chungmin Lee, Greg Simpson and Youngjin Kim

represented structurally in English are actually represented by way of case markers. Other grammatical functions represented syntactically in English are represented by a change in verbal morphology in Korean. Passive, causative, and mood marking are such instances. Y. Kim and K. Choi’s chapter (34) reviews the literature about Korean sentence processing studies in the framework of the universality hypothesis. They confirm that the basic parsing strategies such as minimal attachment, minimal chain, and locality can be applied to Korean sentence processing and argue that those parsing strategies might be universal. They also review recent experiments about processing of Korean topic-marked structure, and discuss the notion that the semantic/pragmatic information of the topic marker might be activated immediately and integrated at the final verb. The Korean topic-marked structure shows interesting information structure categories of contrastive topic and focus. This too will be a research area for further examination. Gernsbacher (1990) proposed a general cognitive framework to explain the process and representation of skilled language comprehension, called the “structure building framework” (hereafter SBF). The most important principle of the SBF is the advantage of ‘first mention’, which has been supported by many empirical findings. According to SBF, the advantage of first mention should be observed in single sentences, between sentences, in multi clauses, and discourse. However, in Chapter 35 J.-H. Lee and S. Kim review the literature against the SBF predictions by using various Korean sentence structures. The most prominent features of Korean were the case marker, the order of the relative clause, free word order, canonical SOV, and the ellipsis of sentence components. These Korean linguistic constraints influence differential cognitive processing and memory representation of the sentence. Although the advantage of first mention was found in a single sentence, the effect could not override the recency effect in a complex sentence. Rather, the recency effect and the semantic bias effect were more dominant in processing complex sentences in Korean. The comprehension of complex sentences has played a central role in developing theories of how language is situated within cognition more generally. Two broad cognitive factors have been identified in the comprehension of complex sentences, one involving the interaction of language comprehension with memory and the second involving how information is packaged in a cooperative exchange. Based on these memory constraints and information structure, in Chapter 36 Y. Lee and P. Gordon review recent investigations that measured online comprehension of Korean sentences. They show that these two factors (memory constraints and informational structure) contribute separately to the understanding of Korean language. They also argue that the ways in which memory constrains comprehension of Korean sentences is fundamentally similar to how memory constrains comprehension of English sentences. It

Introduction

17

is less clear whether information structure has similar consequences on sentence processing in Korean and other languages. K. S. Shin and J. S. Kwon’s chapter (37) reviews studies in event-related potentials (ERPs) of English and Korean language processing, and provides findings about the effects of semantic and syntactic incongruence during the comprehension of visually presented sentences. They found that the semantically incongruent condition was shown to elicit an N400 response, distributed in the right fronto-central region, as in semantic studies administered with IndoEuropean (IE) languages. In syntactically incongruent conditions, the P600 is followed by the N400 component, but no early left anterior negativity (ELAN) was detected which was caused by the structure difference. Based on these findings, they argue that, firstly, semantic processing in Korean is similar to IE languages. The N400 component was evidently shown over the brain in semantically incongruent conditions. Secondly, the syntactically incongruent condition elicited N400 and P600 components, without the early left anterior negativity (ELAN) component. This result suggests that different word order brings about different processing in the cerebral mechanism. That is, the different word order evokes different syntactic processing. Lastly, doubly incongruent conditions explicitly showed the N400 and P600 components with much faster latency and higher amplitude compared with the syntactically incongruent condition in all aspects. In comparison to the semantically incongruent condition, no difference was found in the N400 component in doubly incongruent conditions. These results suggest that syntactic integration is influenced by semantic processing. However, semantic structure is independent of syntactic context. Based on the framework that comprehending discourse is a process of coherence building inference and is guided by automatic spreading activation and strategic integrative processes, S. S. Kim, J.-M. Lee, and J.-H. Lee’s chapter (38) reviews Korean studies on inference processing. In pronoun inference, gender cues guide a strong automatic spreading activation process between the pronoun and antecedent in an early stage, followed by the process of employing contextual information, such as the focus, to facilitate antecedent assignment. In causal and contrast inference, causal inference occurs automatically when the strength of cause–result connection is strong enough. When the connection strength is weak or the connection is of a contrastive relation, the inference occurs strategically, resulting in integrative processing of higher abstraction. Finally, in elaborative inference, inferences employ both massive spreading activation and integrative processing. One of the future tasks of Korean researchers could be elaborating and integrating this framework with the models proposed by western counterparts. The final six papers in this part are concerned with applied aspects of Korean psycholinguistics such as disorders, individual differences, and computational

18

Chungmin Lee, Greg Simpson and Youngjin Kim

implementation. Y. M. Hwang, K. Nam, and M.-Y. Kang’s chapter (39) presents several studies on morpho-syntactic processing in Korean aphasics. It consists of four main sections: (a) case marker as a grammatical morpheme, (b) morphemic ambiguity resolution, (c) agrammatism and functional category, and (d) pronouns. In the first section, evidence that shows double dissociation in the performance of the nominative case markers and the accusative case markers is presented. The double dissociation in processing nominative cases and accusative cases based on aphasic data indicates that the different case postpositions involve different processing. The processing pattern of morphemic ambiguity resolution in aphasics is presented in the second section. It is likely that Koreans prefer to decompose an ambiguous morpheme segment like ‘noun + ka’ into ‘noun + postposition’ rather than ‘noun + affix’, if other conditions are equal. In the third section, several studies on agrammatism in Korean are presented, based on functional category deficits. Aphasic experiments on Korean speakers were conducted in terms of two big issues concerning agrammatism: the degree of impairment and the hierarchy between impaired categories and intact categories. The final section concerns anaphoric, deictic, and mixed pronouns. In several studies, the results imply that the three kinds of pronouns are stored and processed differently. M. Hwang reviews studies on morpho-syntactic processing of Korean adults and children with language impairments in Chapter 40. She focuses on two particular populations, adults with Broca’s aphasia and children with specific language impairments (SLI). Even with clear differences in their diagnostic definitions, both populations are characterized by pronounced deficits in morpho-syntactic processing of language. Such characteristics were mostly reported in studies on English speakers. Recently, crosslinguistic variations of language breakdowns of the two populations have been noted. Hwang mainly reviews work from her laboratory exhibiting language-specific characteristics in Korean-speaking individuals with language impairments. From the production and comprehension performances of the SLI, Hwang concludes that, although Korean-speaking individuals with language impairments are vulnerable to process morpho-syntactic aspects of language as reported in studies on English speakers, the degree of such vulnerability does not seem to be as great as for English speakers. She also suggests that, in order to understand the nature of their language breakdowns, other related factors should be considered, including the severity of the language impairment, informativeness and/or perceptibility of certain grammatical morphemes, and the processing load of language tasks. M. Lee’s chapter (41) also reviews literature about comprehension deficits in Korean agrammatic aphasia. It is motivated by a linguistic theory, i.e. the isomorphic mapping hypothesis (IMH), which maintains that agrammatic aphasics encounter processing difficulty when the order of sentential NPs is

Introduction

19

not isomorphically aligned with the structure of the corresponding event. Isomorphism is important for the syntax–semantics mapping because listeners presumably must construct a representation corresponding to the real-world event denoted by the sentence as they process its syntactic structure. As for the sentence comprehension deficits, the findings in the literature suggest that nonisomorphic constructions (e.g. theme-agent, goal-theme, and theme-instrument orders) are affected, regardless of whether there is a trace, both in Korean and in English. These findings reveal the effects of a preference for isomorphism, supporting the processing accounts for comprehension deficits in agrammatism, rather than the competence accounts. In particular, the IMH, a processing account, claims that agrammatics have difficulty establishing a non-isomorphic mapping between a syntactic structure and the corresponding event in the real world. It therefore provides a principled explanation for the word-order preferences associated with agrammatic aphasia. J. Kim and C. Davis’s chapter considers some prominent features of the semisyllabic Korean writing system (Hangul) and suggests how these might give rise to a distinct profile of reading disorder. They begin with a brief review of possible causes of developmental reading disorder and provide a short description of some significant features of the Hangul writing system in terms of why these may promote differences between Korean and English poor readers. They then review data from a recent study of good and poor developing Korean readers. The outcomes of this study are discussed in terms of two key findings that characterize Korean poor readers: the specific nature of their phonological awareness problems and the lack of problems in processing dynamic visual stimuli. In explaining these results, they suggest that although the transparency of grapheme to phoneme mapping in Korean may assist in the development of intact phonological representations, problems may still occur in putting these representations to use. In accounting for why relatively few Hangul readers have visual processing problems, they propose that Hangul’s straightforwardness of alphabetic depiction and constraint on letter ordering and placement, make it less likely that minor visual processing problems would lead to reading difficulties. While there are many studies on individual differences in English, for example, correlational studies between reading span and reading skill, few researchers have focused on individual differences in Korean language comprehension. B.-T. Lee and M.-Y. Zoh’s chapter reviews studies that use a Korean version of the reading span task and provides new findings about individual differences in word ambiguity resolution. They found that where sentence contexts are biased to the dominant meaning of the final word, skilled readers spent more time choosing the target word with the appropriate meaning and showed more interference. This seems contradictory to the assumption that the general performance of skilled readers is always faster and more accurate

20

Chungmin Lee, Greg Simpson and Youngjin Kim

than less skilled readers. They argue that individual differences may be caused not by working memory capacity or the suppression mechanism constrained by it, but by the differential characteristics of readers. H. Lim and K. Nam’s chapter (44) introduces characteristics of Korean lexical processing and its computational model. They explain many experimental results on the mental representation of Korean Eojeol, a basic spacing unit that consists of lexical morphemes and grammatical morphemes. They propose a new representation model in which the combination of the root or stem with the pre-ending affix representations are stored in the full form but the connective and mood-ending affixes are stored in the decomposition form. The model does not agree with any models previously proposed; full-list model, decomposition model, or hybrid model. The reasons for the peculiar model are explained by memory overflow and ambiguity resolution problems in Korean Eojeol (‘phrase’) recognition. Lim and Nam also propose a computational model which realizes their assertions about the Korean mental lexicon. All of these papers, beyond simply cataloging similarities and differences across languages, discuss issues active throughout psycholinguistics. At the heart of each is a major theoretical issue: phonology and morphology in word recognition, the relationship between speech production and perception, prosodic processing and its relation to syntax and semantics, syntactic and semantic processes in sentence and discourse understanding, and language deficits. The characteristics of any language are ultimately of less interest than understanding the processes that underlie all language processing.

Part I

Language acquisition

1

Acquisition of the subject and topic nominals and markers in the spontaneous speech of young children in Korean Chungmin Lee and Sook Whan Cho*

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to examine the acquisition of the topic marker –(n) un and the subject (nominative) marker –i/-ka in Korean.1 We will be concerned, in particular, with the way in which these case markers are produced over time, considering children’s spontaneous speech as well as experimental data at several developmental time points. In this inquiry, we will be interested to find out how Korean children use or drop these markers on noun phrases, as well as how they produce or omit the entire topic/subject phrases over time, based on the pragmatic and syntactic properties governing them.2 We show the following developmental sequence of the stages: null topic/subject → bare nominal topic/subject → marked topic/subject. Once these markers emerge, the developmental sequences for the functions of the topic and subject markers are: contrastive topic → global/thematic topic and focus subject → neutral subject. The latter two sequences are surprising in terms of markedness because they proceed from ‘marked’ to ‘unmarked’, unlike the sequence null → bare → marked for the use and marking of topic and subject noun phrases.

* We thank Pat Clancy for making very helpful comments on the final draft of this joint paper. 1 We take the Korean topic to be a sentence-level category marked by the affix –un/-nun and typically located in the initial position of an utterance, which is given or assumed to be given or easily elicited from the discourse or context. It is non-contrastive and non-focal. When it is anaphoric, it can be null. The same marker, typically with a high tone, functions as a contrastive topic, which, since it is contrastive, is focal as well as topical, as clarified recently (C. Lee, 2006). The position of a contrastive topic can be the initial or middle position of a sentence. 2 Korean examples in this paper are transliterated on the basis of the Yale Romanization System in Martin and Lee (1969: 575). Hyphens are used to indicate morpheme boundaries.

23

24

Chungmin Lee and Sook Whan Cho

Korean Word order and case markers As is well-known in the literature, Korean word order is, in general, regarded as fairly flexible; the preferred word order is either the SOV pattern, or a combination of SOV and OSV structures. Word order can vary for a variety of reasons, including topicality, focus, and emphasis, among others. The relatively free word order of Korean is facilitated by case markers that indicate the grammatical functions of the nouns used in a sentence. Korean is a discourse-prominent language, like Chinese and Japanese. Hence, sentences do not always require an overt subject or object when these elements are predictable from the discourse context. Korean differs in this respect from a pro-drop language such as Italian, in which object drop is impossible. Likewise, case markers can also be omitted optionally or pragmatically when recoverable from the context. Pragmatic constraint Korean is a discourse-prominent language and, therefore, nominals can drop for pragmatic reasons, if predictable in the immediate environment, as outlined in (1). (1)

Pragmatic constraint: Drop nominals if predictable in the immediate discourse environment.

Overtly contrastive topic-marked nominals, on the other hand, often encode focal or contrastive information. As discussed in detail in C. Lee (2001), noncontrastive topics in Korean, and sometimes even contrastive topics, typically take sentence-initial position when the noun phrase conveys information that is shared by the speaker and the listener (e.g. discourse topic, physically present objects, implicitly understood facts, etc.); non-contrastive topics often occur at the end of an utterance. Consider sentence (2) for an illustration. (2) a.

b.

Hankuk-uy kaul-un tanpwung-i coh-a. Korean-of fall-TOP colored.leaves-NOM nice-DEC ‘As for Korean autumn, fallen leaves are nice.’ Tanpwung-i coh-a, ku-cuum-ey-nun. leaves-NOM nice-DEC that-around-TIME-TOP ‘Around that time, fallen leaves are nice.’

The noun phrase ‘hankuk-uy kaul-un’ in (2a) is new information being introduced as a topic and is produced in sentence-initial position. It is hearernew but is in the domain of common knowledge; the hearer cannot challenge it. The topical phrase ‘ku-cuum-ey-NUN’ contains the anaphoric expression ‘ku-cuum’ (‘that-time’), indicating that the speaker assumes that the listener

Acquisition of subject and topic nominals

25

knows what it may refer to. The shared information is sometimes placed in sentence-final position, as can be seen in (2b), where it is like an anti-topic in English, e.g. Shei is a real angel, my sisteri (Lambrecht 1994). Morpho-syntactic constraint In addition to the pragmatic constraint in (1), the referents of null nominals can be predicted from morphemes such as the plural marker –tul, the honorific marker –si, and modals. These morphemes are required to agree with plurality, honorificity, and person/number of the topic/subject, and hence can provide information about the referent of the topic/subject, if it is missing, as exemplified in (3). (3) a.

b.

Ø ppali-tul ttwi-ess-ta. fast-PL run-PAST-DEC ‘(People) ran fast.’ Ø o-si-ess-ta. come-HON-PAST-DEC ‘(Someone respected) came.’

The grammatical morphemes -tul and -si encode plurality and honorificity, respectively, on the missing nominal in the subject position; the semantic content of its referent is recoverable in accordance with the morpho-syntactic constraint in (4) below. (4)

Morpho-syntactic constraint: Drop nominals if predictable from the verbal affixes in the same clause.

This constraint, however, is semantically or pragmatically motivated. A plural marker on a manner adverb may be a syntactic copy from the topic (from subject) or subject indicating its semantic plurality. Furthermore, an honorific marker on the verb, which shows the speaker’s respect for the topic (from subject) or subject referent, is crucially pragmatic. The constraints that a respected subject referent cannot be the speaker him/herself and that one does not show both a lack of respect (e.g. by using the speech level –ta in (3b) and respect (e.g. by using the honorific –si) for the same person at the same time (pragmatic contradiction) are again surely pragmatic. The referent of the subject in (3b) can therefore be either second or third person, if we assume that the subject honorific marker –si in (3b) shows such agreement; the failure to honor the hearer, however, which is conveyed by the use of –ta at the end, excludes the second person, leaving reference to a third person as the only possibility. Other verbal affixes, such as modal morphemes, can also help in recovering the content of a null subject, as illustrated in (5).

26

Chungmin Lee and Sook Whan Cho

(5)

John:

Swunii-nun mwe ha-ni? Swuni-TOP what do-INTERROGATIVE ‘What is Swuni doing?’ Mary: Øi no-n-tay. play-PRESENT-REPORTATIVE ‘(Swuni) is reported to be playing.’

The reportative -tay requires that the topic (from subject) co-occurring in the same local sentence be a third person noun phrase; first and second person noun phrases are not allowed due to subject-modal agreement, as in (6) below. The referent of the null subject in (5) can be recovered with the help of the morphosyntactic constraint in (4). (6)

Subject-modal agreement: The subject nominal and the modal affixed on the verb co-occurring in the same minimal clause must agree in person (and number).

This constraint again is pragmatically motivated; the reportative -tay comes from the complex underlying structure of ‘is SAID to play’ and the subject of the verb SAY, i.e. the source of the report, is epistemically constrained not to be identical to the speaker = subject or the hearer of the entire utterance (C. Lee, 1990). Methodology The children The Korean data used for the purpose of this paper consist of tape-recorded speech samples from eight children, as follows.3 Data During each visit caregiver–child pairs were audio-taped for an hour by a fluent speaker of Korean.4 The visits were spaced approximately one or two weeks apart (see Table 1.1) and the caregivers were asked to do whatever they would normally do at that time of day. In transcribing and coding the data, this study largely adopts the system developed in MacWhinney (1995).5 3

4

5

JK’s data were collected and transcribed by Seung-Bok Lee, JW’s by Hae-Rhee Kim. We would like to thank the investigators and their subjects. CK’s data were collected and transcribed by Chungmin Lee, AL’s, AN’s, and PL’s by Sook Whan Cho. We would like to thank our subjects. JK was 0:1 when he began to be observed and tape-recorded while interacting with his mother, grandmother, and nanny. His mother was a developmental psychologist and took notes about details concerning JK’s verbal and non-verbal behavior during each session of taping. MLU was not calculated in the present study, since the transcripts are in the Korean alphabet, making it impossible to use CLAN (MacWhinney, 1995) to compute MLU.

Acquisition of subject and topic nominals

27

Table 1.1. The children: age and frequency of visits Name

Age

Frequency of visits

AL AN C HS JK CK JW PL Y

2:2–2:9 2:10–3:5 2:0–2:2 1:8–2:11 0:1–3:0 1:3–3:11 2:0–3:3 2:7–3:2 1:3–3:11

bi-weekly bi-weekly weekly weekly weekly and bi-weekly every day in principle bi-weekly bi-weekly every day in principle

Results Development of pragmatic constraints Topic-marked nominals and topic markers Topic recoverability has been noted in numerous studies for decades. Gruber (1967: 39, 64–5), for example, once argued that a topic–comment pattern is likely to underlie the subject–predicate structure. Along similar lines, Givón (1979: 294–5) noted that at the very start of language development, communication is “exclusively about the immediate environment,” which is “largely predictable.” Givón goes on to argue that early child discourse is characterized by the gradual learning of strategies for making the topic obvious to others (1979: 300). More recently, Clancy (1993) reported that Korean-speaking subjects (aged 1:8–2:1 and 1:10–2:3) used overt subjects in queries about physically visible, or newly introduced information, while dropping them in referring to highly predictable information. These previous studies suggest that development reflects sensitivity to topicality. Topic prominence seems to be supported by Korean child data. Korean children have previously been observed to be initially motivated by the universal topic–comment relation and to drop nominals that refer to old, topical information (e.g. S. W. Cho, 1994, 2001). In her study of four children (1:10–2:2, 2:0–2:2, 2:3–2.6, 3:0–3:4), Cho (1994) found that the majority of missing topics/subjects (91%, 159/174 utterances) expressed old information while overt topics/subjects referred to newly introduced information (87%, 204/ 292 utterances). This result clearly demonstrates Korean children’s sensitivity to the function of old vs. newly introduced information in association with the production of arguments. As discussed above, the topic marker –nun in Korean can also refer to a contrastive focal entity as well as to old, given information. Interestingly

28

Chungmin Lee and Sook Whan Cho

enough, younger Korean children have been observed to overtly produce the topic marker in encoding contrastive information.6 C. Lee (2001) reports that among marked nominals contrastive topics are acquired at the earliest phase of development. Younger children would start out, for example, by producing an utterance like (7). (7)

Emma, ike-nun chamwey-ya? mom this-TOP (contrastive) melon-DEC ‘Mom, is this a melon (as contrasted with a picture of a chair next to it.)?’ (CK 2:0.10)

It was also observed that the contrastive topic marker (CT) began to be produced at around 1:7 in an extraordinarily early case, as illustrated in (8). A thematic topic use of the marker –nun is exemplified in (8’a) for a newly introduced referent (not discourse-old) and another exclusive, contrastive focus use readily follows in (8’b) below to exclude the fish from the contrastive set created in the context {fish, CK}, which comes via the alternative question ‘Is the fish 2 years old or is CK 2 years old?’ (see C. Lee 2003): (8)

Appa hweysa, emma-nun yeki iss-ney. Dad company Mom-CT here is-DEC (to my surprise) ‘Dad (is at his) company, Mom is here (to my surprise).’ (Y)

(8’) a.

[Pointing to a fish] I sayngsen-un myet sal-i-ya? this fish-TOP how many years be-old-DEC ‘How old is this fish?’ (Mom: twu sal ‘Two years’)

b.

Anya. Chwunkyu-ka twu sal-i-ya no CK-NOM two years-be-DEC ‘No, I (= CK) am two years old.’ (C 1:7.8 Lee’s 1986 diary)

Furthermore, it was also noted with surprise that the focal additive marker -to (‘-also’) as in (9a) and the focused nominative marker -ka also begin to emerge at around the same stage, as demonstrated in (9b) and (9d). (9) a.

6

Chos-pwul, ikes-to chos-pwul Candlelight this-too candlelight ‘A candlelight, this, too, a candlelight.’ (Y 1:6.23)

This contrastive usage of the topic marker -nun in Korean is locally ‘focal’ as well as topical and a few syntacticians label it ‘contrastive focus.’ Contrastive focus is a sharply distinct independent phenomenon, as shown in C. Lee (2003). For the sake of theoretical consistency and convenience, we will adopt the term ‘contrastive topic’ throughout this paper.

Acquisition of subject and topic nominals

b.

29

Nay-ka ha-kkey. I-NOM do-PROMISE (intentional) ‘I will do it (i.e. Me, not you).’ (Y 1:9.4)

Subjects and nominative markers As is well known in the literature, at around two years of age children across languages typically produce short utterances in which they frequently drop the subject noun phrase.7 None of the subjects in this study produced overt topics/subjects (with no markers) until around 1:7. JK, for example, was observed to start using topics/subjects productively at 1:7.16, although they were frequently associated with just a few referents such as his caretakers (appa ‘daddy,’ emma ‘mommy’) or physically present objects expressed by a demonstrative (e.g. i-ke ‘this,’ ce-ke ‘that’). An analysis of JK’s and JW’s speech collected at 1:8, 2:0, 2:4, 2:8 and 3:0 indicates that they produced overt topics/subjects with a higher rate as they got older, JK from 13% to 37%–53%, and JW from 28% to 32%–52%. It was observed, overall, that the frequency of overt subjects in the speech of our subjects did not increase with age. AL and AN, for example, produced a subject overtly 65%–81% of the time at 2:3–2:6 and 56%–66% on average at 3:0–3:4. This rate of overt topics/subjects in AL and AN is higher than the rate of overt topics/subjects observed in Clancy’s subjects H (1:11–2:9) and W (2:0–2:7), which gradually increased over time from 38.8% up to 51.2% of the time (Clancy, 1984). This developmental trend was not observed in our subjects, although an increase would seem to be expected. Note that AL, for example, produced an overt topic/subject consistently more than 65% of the time at 2:3–2:6. It was observed in Zoh (1982c) and Kim (2000) that the subject marker was produced at around 1:8–2:0, earlier by a month than the topic marker. But the topic marker was produced one month earlier in S. Kim’s (1990) data, and was also a little earlier (Y 1:7) in the data reported in C. Lee (2001). One of our subjects, AL (2:2–2:9), however, produced no nominative or topic markers in her spontaneous speech, although she was able to imitate ones that appeared in her mother’s speech. There were twenty instances of imitations in her recorded speech, five of which involved case markers. She imitated an accusative marker twice and nominative markers three times. Regarding the issue of how early topic and nominative markers are acquired and which is acquired first, there seems to be individual variation.

7

Although it is not so clear what the grammatical status of missing and overt arguments at the early stage is, and it is far more likely to be a topic, we are, for the sake of discussion and convenience, going to tentatively employ the terms subject or topic/subject and object to refer to overt and null (implicit) nominals in pre- and post-verbal position.

30

Chungmin Lee and Sook Whan Cho

Both PL (2:7–3:2) and AN (2:10–3:6) were observed to use the nominative marker from the beginning of the study. Out of a total of 345 multi-word utterances containing a subject, PL produced nominative markers, some of which were not correctly used, 107 times (31%). Ninety-eight occurrences involved only spontaneous marker usage, excluding imitated markers (98/ 345=28.4%, 98/107=91.6%). Out of a total of 670 multi-word utterances containing a subject, AN produced the nominative marker 238 times (35.5%), of which 218 uses were spontaneous (218/670=32.5%, 218/238=91.6%). An overall examination of four children (B 1:10–2:2, C 2:0–2:2, AL 2:3–2:6, AN 3:0–3:4) indicates that the production of overt and null topics/subjects largely conforms to the pragmatic condition that old information is likely to be omitted while newly introduced information is required to be given in speech. On the whole, these children produced overt topics/subjects in conveying newly introduced information (70% of overt topics/subjects were new, 30% old), while largely dropping topics/subjects in encoding old information (91%). Sensitivity to topicality was also discovered in the speech of JK (2:0–3:0) and JW (2:0–3:0), who expressed old referents more frequently with null topics/ subjects than with overt topics/subjects (67%–90% vs. 10%–33% in JK’s speech and 58%–84% vs. 16%–42% in JW’s). (For details on these figures, see Cho, 1994, 2001.) As shown earlier in (9b), as well as in (9d) below, the exclusive focus use, a marked use, of the nominative marker is earlier in development than its neutral (or even unaccusative) subject use, as in (9c) below: (9) c. Papo-i-ya, appa fool-be-DEC dad ‘You are a fool, Dad.’ (SK 1:7.21 Lee, 1993) d. Appa-ka papo-i-ya dad-NOM fool-be-DEC ‘Dad, YOU are a fool.’ (SK 1:11.10 in Lee, 1993) e. Emma, an pi-ka w-a mom not rain-NOM come-DEC ‘Mommy, it is not raining.’ (C 2:1.4 in Lee, 1993) In (9c), the bare nominal appa ‘Dad’ is a typical use of a nominal as a topic, the predicate being an individual level one, requiring a thematic topic. A kinship term applied to the hearer is equivalent to the second person in Korean. Three months later, in (9d), an exclusive or contrastive focus use of the nominative marker –ka is mobilized to exclude the alternatives, e.g. the speaker SK herself, from the contrastive set, and is equivalent to ‘YOU are a fool, NOT ME.’ If she had used the NOM marker in the topic sense, it would have been an error; -nun must be used for that purpose, and would not have fitted the context. If she had used the NOM marker in the neutral sense, that would also have been an error;

Acquisition of subject and topic nominals

31

the individual level predicate requires a topic and the only possible context for a neutral NOM-marked individual-level predicate sentence is a complex sentence in which (9d) is embedded, e.g. na-nun appa-ka papo-i-ra-nun kes-ul kkaytalass-ta ‘I realized that Dad was/is a fool’ (see C. Lee, 1996).

Development of morpho-syntactic constraints At around 2:0, Korean children begin to produce modal suffixes incorrectly, as exemplified in (10). (10) a. *Na kki. (stem kki- ‘insert’ not possible without TENSE-DEC) I put ‘I (will) put (something) (somewhere).’ (AL 2:2) b. *Mas-iss-ni-ta. (Mas-iss-ni?) taste-exist-QUE-DEC ‘Is (something) tasty?’ (B 1:10) c. *Mary-ka ha-l-lay. (-ul-lay not possible with third person) Mary-NOM do-GLOSS?-DEC (intention) ‘Mary will do (it).’ (P 2:6) Sentence (10a) involves an under-generalization in which a declarative mood (e.g. -e, -lay, etc.) is absent. In (10b), the child over-generalized the modal suffix by erroneously using both the interrogative (‘-ni’) and the declarative suffix (‘-ta’). In (10c), the third person subject (‘Mary’) co-occurs with the first person modal suffix (‘-ul-ay’), violating subject-mood agreement (see C. Lee, 1993 for further examples). As briefly mentioned earlier, a subject can optionally drop in Korean in cases where its person (e.g. first (‘I’), third (‘Mary’)) is predictable from the modals affixed on the verb in the same clause. This suggests that subject drop in Korean may be motivated by a grammatical condition such as subject–modal agreement. In this section we are concerned particularly with whether or not the production of null topics/subjects by Korean children relates to changes in their marking of verb modality. We examined two children, JK (2:0–3:0) and JW (2:0–3:0), to investigate whether they were likely to omit topics/subjects in contexts where the verbs contain a person-specific modal suffix at age 2:0 and thereafter. It was found that the frequency of person-specific modals in null topic/subject utterances in the speech of both JK and JW increased over the first three time points from 2:0 to 2:8 (from 14% to 39%) and then decreased somewhat (to 28%) from 2:8 to 3:0. It was also observed that both children began to use personspecific modals encoding intention, request, and proposal more frequently at age 2:8 than at earlier time points (3% vs. 18%–30% in JK and 5%–12% vs. 19% in JW). Moreover, it was discovered that the rate of person-sensitive suffixes was,

32

Chungmin Lee and Sook Whan Cho

on the whole, higher in null subject utterances than in overt subject utterances across time points in the speech of both children (29% vs. 14%). The chi-square statistic was computed for each child to determine whether the frequencies of person-neutral and person-specific modal suffixes were the same regardless of the type of utterance they occurred in (with overt or null topics/subjects). It was found that the frequencies of verb modality were likely to be related to the type of topics/ subjects for JK (Χ2 = 7.58, df = 1, p < .01) and JW (Χ2 = 36.92, df = 1, p < .001). Summary and conclusions We have seen in this paper that Korean children start acquiring the topic marker –(n)un conveying contrastive meaning and the subject marker –ka conveying focus at around 20 months of age. The rare occurrences of the thematic/topical use of these topic markers in the children’s spontaneous speech are likely to be related to the observation that children are extremely sensitive to topicality as seen earlier, correctly and easily dropping nominals that convey old information from the earliest phase on. The most unmarked topic, realized as a null topic with no nominal and no marker, is acquired earliest, as is probably the case in all languages. Then, bare nominals with no markers are acquired to draw attention to the referents that the child has in mind. These bare nominals still function as topics/subjects, which must be why the thematic/topical use of –nun is acquired somewhat late. If a topic marker or subject/nominative marker is to be used, it must be distinct from the bare nominals in function; children are sensitive to the markers’ marked functions, i.e. the contrastive topic function for the topic marker and the exclusive focus function for the nominative marker. This phenomenon must fit an optimality-theoretic account. Given children’s precocious awareness of topicality, it would not be unreasonable to conclude that Korean children are learning to understand and produce both topical and focal or contrastive functions of the topic markers and both the focus and neutral uses of the subject marker before age 2:0. In our data there is also support for the possibility that 2-year-old Korean children gradually become sensitive to the connection between modal suffixes and the subjects that agree with them. As reported in C. Lee (1993), modality markers generally appear right after two years of age, whereas basic moods or sentence types occur earlier. The primacy of mood over modality is evident and the imperative (request) is earliest. The relation between the imperative mood and various deontic modal markers explains erroneous uses of mixed modality and misapplication of modality to the wrong person in early child Korean. One important feature of the acquisition of modal suffixes in younger children seems to be early production of imperative, request, and desiderative modal suffixes, in particular, with sensitivity to subject–modal agreement emerging gradually at later time points.

Acquisition of subject and topic nominals

33

In conclusion, we can speculate that, along the lines suggested in Rispoli (1995: 345), pragmatics and speech act morphemes are possible sources of information for construction of the relation between the meaning of predicates (e.g. pushing, being affected, etc.) and the discourse-pragmatic and morphosyntactic rules encoded by a subject (e.g. agent, patient, etc.). As seen throughout this paper, Korean involves both pragmatic and grammatical constraints on dropping nominals. Since children begin by talking about various real-life scenes primarily socio-pragmatically (Rispoli, 1991b; Tomasello and Brooks, 1999; Snow, 1999), we propose that the effects of language typology are both pragmatic and grammatical (though pragmatically motivated, as in modal– subject agreement), and that the role of pragmatics must be explored in the emergence of topic and subject nominals and markers.

2

The acquisition of argument structure and transitivity in Korean: a discourse-functional approach Patricia M. Clancy

Introduction The acquisition of argument structure and transitivity has been a major area of research in first language acquisition. Argument structure is generally analyzed in terms of the semantic and syntactic relations that hold between a verb and its core arguments at the lexical and clausal levels. At the lexical level, a transitive verb can be defined empirically as one that is usually used with two core arguments, prototypically an agent acting upon a patient. At the clausal level, the grammar of transitivity encompasses the devices (e.g. word order, casemarking and verbal affixes) that are involved in treating the two core arguments as belonging to particular grammatical categories, such as subject and object. While most linguistic analyses of argument structure and transitivity have focused on the levels of lexicon and clause, my work on the acquisition of Korean is based on the assumption that a full understanding of argument structure requires consideration of an additional level, namely, discourse. The discourse-functional approach that I have pursued draws upon almost three decades of functionally and typologically oriented research on grammar that uses discourse data – transcriptions of audio- or video-taped interactions of language use – as the basis for analyzing grammatical systems and formulating grammatical theory (e.g. Chafe, 1994; Du Bois, 1987, Givón, 1979). The most basic assumption of this approach is that the structure of grammars is shaped by the communicative pressures and cognitive limitations involved in language use. It then follows that in order to describe grammatical systems accurately and to explain why they are organized as they are, we must analyze “live grammar”, that is, grammar as it is actually used in discourse. This approach leads to a somewhat different view of what transitivity involves, and consequently, of what the acquisition of transitivity entails. In this chapter, I will first review some of the theoretical approaches and research questions in acquisition research on transitivity and argument 34

Acquisition of argument structure and transitivity

35

structure. Next, I will introduce the particular discourse-functional model of argument structure that I have used in my research on Korean argument structure, and some of the basic empirical findings (Clancy 1993, 1995, 1996, 1997, 2000, 2003). Finally, I will compare this approach with previous research, concluding with potential directions for future work on the acquisition of argument structure and transitivity. Prior research: theoretical approaches and research questions One of the most important lines of acquisition research involving transitivity and argument structure has emphasized the nature and developmental origins of grammatical categories like subject. In nativist approaches based on formal syntactic theory, subject and object have generally been assumed to be universal, innate, and essentially adult-like from the outset (Bloom, 1970; McNeill, 1970). In addition, innate links between semantic roles and grammatical categories, e.g. between agent and subject, have also been postulated (Pinker 1984, 1987). Rather than assuming pre-existing innate grammatical categories, a more cognitively oriented approach has viewed the child as starting out with semantic categories having a potential conceptual basis, e.g. agent, from which more abstract adult-like syntactic categories are eventually constructed (Bowerman, 1973; Schlesinger, 1982). Slobin (1981, 1985), for example, proposed that children initially attempt to map grammatical functors such as casemarkers onto key components of the “prototypical manipulative activity” scene, e.g. agent and patient. A different approach, the “competition model” of Bates and MacWhinney (1987, 1989), emphasizes discourse-pragmatic factors and the role of the input in addition to semantics; a grammatical category like subject is viewed as a “coalition of many-to-many mappings” between form (e.g. casemarkers, word order, agreement morphology) and function (e.g. transitive agent, discourse topic, locus of speaker’s perspective) that is acquired through “a lifetime of distributional analysis” (1987: 168). Continuing research in this controversial area reflects a shift away from the earlier emphasis on higher-level categories such as agent or subject. Studies of children learning English have failed to find earlier acquisition of the argument structure of verbs with prototypical agent–patient semantics compared to other transitive verbs (Bowerman, 1990; Lieven et al., 1997). Acquisition researchers have become increasingly concerned with the implications of typological differences (Slobin, 1997, 2001; van Valin, 1992); in ergative languages, for example, intransitive subjects and transitive objects belong to the same grammatical category despite their semantic differences, yet such languages are not more difficult to acquire (Pye, 1990; Schieffelin, 1985). Finally, attention has returned to lower-level, lexically based categories (Braine, 1976). Lieven et al.

36

Patricia M. Clancy

(1997) and Pine and Lieven (1993), for example, have found that the majority of early word combinations in English are either frozen phrases or lexically specific frames consisting of a particular word in a fixed position with a slot for other words, rather than combinations of two higher-level categories, such as agent and patient, or subject and direct object. Meanwhile, beginning in the mid-1980s, researchers increasingly directed their attention to verbs and verb classes as the central organizers of argument structure. This focus on verbs has inspired a large body of research on the acquisition of transitivity. The questions addressed include: how children acquire verb meaning, especially the distinction between transitive and intransitive verbs (de León, 1999; Naigles, 1990; Rispoli, 1987, 1989); whether intransitive or transitive verbs are acquired first (Theakston et al., 1992; Valian, 1991); whether semantically “light” verbs are acquired before more specific ones (Brown, 1998; Ninio, 1999); why errors in transitivity occur and how children recover from such errors (Bowerman, 1982; Braine & Brooks 1995; Brooks & Tomasello, 1999; Brooks & Zizak, 2002; Pinker, 1989). A number of researchers have proposed that children begin to acquire argument structure conservatively, using a particular verb only with the argument structure heard in caregiver speech (Braine et al., 1990; Tomasello & Brooks, 1998). According to Tomasello’s (1992) Verb Island Hypothesis, the grammars of children under three years of age are organized entirely around individual verbs with open nominal slots; argument structure is acquired on a verb-by-verb basis, relying on verb-specific argument roles, e.g. ‘hitter’ and ‘hittee’. While accepting early lexical specificity in the acquisition of argument structure, Pine et al. (1998) have pointed out that high-frequency elements other than verbs, e.g. casemarked pronouns in English, may also serve as early “islands” of organization for emerging argument structure. When do children generalize from individual transitive verbs to a transitive argument structure? The advent of Construction Grammar (Fillmore, 1988; Goldberg, 1995, 1998) and its application to acquisition (Tomasello, 1998; Tomasello & Brooks, 1999) has focused attention on transitivity as involving the acquisition of a general transitive construction that exists independently of particular verbs. While production data suggest early mastery of transitivity, experimental data point in a different direction. In production, for example, Ninio (1999) has found that 2-year-olds acquiring English and Hebrew generalize transitive structures – first VO and then (separately) SVO – from a single “pathbreaking” verb to a rapidly accelerating range of different transitive verbs. Experimental findings, on the other hand, indicate that English-speaking children under three years of age not only have difficulty extending the transitive construction to invented verbs (Tomasello & Brooks, 1998) but even use ungrammatical word orders, e.g. VSO, with invented verbs (Akhtar, 1999).

Acquisition of argument structure and transitivity

37

The acquisition of transitivity in Korean has been investigated with observational as well as experimental data. Korean is primarily an SOV language with nominative–accusative casemarking; the first argument of transitive and intransitive verbs is marked as one grammatical category (nominative), while the second argument of transitive verbs is marked as a distinct category (accusative). Korean children use both transitive and intransitive verbs from early on (S. Choi, 1998a). When both arguments of transitive verbs are expressed overtly, SOV word order is used early and quite consistently (S. W. Cho, 1981; S. Choi, 1998b; Y.-J. Kim, 1997). On the other hand, casemarking is a less consistent cue to transitivity in adult speech and is acquired later; nominative casemarking is acquired before accusative, again reflecting adult frequency (Chung, 1994; Y.-J. Kim, 1997). The mastery of word order before casemarking and of nominative before accusative casemarkers is consistent with Rispoli’s (1991a) proposal that grammatical relations are acquired in piecemeal or “mosaic” fashion, a view that is supported by Berman’s (1994) findings on the gradual acquisition of the different devices encoding transitivity in Hebrew. Compared with English, the early acquisition of argument structure in Korean is more clearly organized around verbs. First of all, verbs are used more frequently in Korean to encode the types of events and states that very young children talk about, cf. English allgone vs. the Korean verb epsta ‘not exist’. Korean children have a larger proportion of verbs in their early lexicons than children acquiring English (S. Choi, 1998b; Kim, McGregor and Thompson, 2000), and many have a rapid increase in verb acquisition before experiencing a “noun spurt”, a pattern that is not found in English (S. Choi & Gopnik, 1995; Gopnik & Choi, 1995). These findings can be attributed to the greater frequency and salience of verbs in the speech addressed to Korean children; the verb is in sentence-final position in Korean, and core arguments are often elliptical, producing many utterances consisting only of a verb. An interesting cultural pattern is that Korean mothers use more verbs in active play than American mothers, who rely more on labeling (S. Choi, 2000; Kim et al., 2000). Furthermore, verbs are organized as a distinct morphological category, with productive use of several suffixes across verbs, before two years of age (Choi, 1998b). It is not surprising, then, that Korean children begin the acquisition of argument structure by producing verbs with no overt arguments (Y.-J. Kim, 2000). Apparently, compared with children acquiring English, Korean children face a simpler task in identifying verbs as such and recognizing their central role in argument structure. On the other hand, the pervasive ellipsis of nominal arguments in Korean presents the learner with difficulties not encountered by children acquiring English. In English, we can schematize the structure of a transitive clause as A Verbt O; following Du Bois (1987), I will call the single core argument of

38

Patricia M. Clancy

intransitive verbs S, and the first and second argument of transitive verbs A and O, respectively. The corresponding structure in Korean grammar is A-nom O-acc Vt. In English, when a transitive verb is used in adult speech, both A and O arguments are usually expressed overtly; thus the sentence ate is ungrammatical in English. In Korean, however, the corresponding sentence mekesse ‘(I) ate (it)’ is fully grammatical, as long as it is clear who ate what in the discourse context. This raises the question posed by Rispoli (1987, 1989): How do children acquiring languages which permit pervasive nominal ellipsis acquire the difference between intransitive and transitive verbs? This problem, I believe, constitutes an important motivation for taking a discourse-based approach to the analysis and acquisition of argument structure. In languages like Korean, the core arguments of a verb are expressed overtly only in particular discourse contexts; the full transitive construction will only be found when speakers have reason to mention both A and O overtly. In such languages, the discourse-level task of using appropriate referential forms in context is inextricably linked to argument structure and its acquisition, since children will only be exposed to the full transitive construction in a limited set of discourse contexts. In my research on Korean acquisition, I have therefore found it useful to work with a model of argument structure that incorporates discourse in a fundamental way (Clancy, 2000), which I will present after briefly describing my data. A discourse-based approach Subjects and methodology The database for my analyses of Korean argument structure consists of thirteen transcripts of caregiver–child interaction for each of two girls, Hyenswu (H) and Wenceng (W), who were audio-taped every two weeks in their homes interacting with their mothers (HM and WM, respectively) and a Korean research assistant. The children were recorded for one year, beginning when Wenceng was 1 year, 8 months old (1:8) and Hyenswu 1:10 years old. Their families belonged to a close-knit community of Korean graduate students in Providence, Rhode Island, and planned to return to Korea upon completion of the fathers’ degrees. Activities during the recording sessions typically included drawing and coloring, reading from storybooks, eating snacks, and playing with Lego, puzzles, toys, and dolls. All children’s utterances with an overt or easily recoverable verb were coded in a computerized Paradox database; for each mother, 1,050 such utterances were coded, 350 from each third of the year. The core arguments of these verbs were coded for their surface form, as well as for several properties, both semantic (e.g. agent) and discourse-pragmatic (e.g. prior mention).

Acquisition of argument structure and transitivity

39

A discourse-functional model of argument structure The model of argument structure that I have employed is multi-level, since transitivity is a phenomenon that encompasses discourse (the discourse factors motivating use of particular forms to encode arguments), verbs (their lexical meanings, as defined, in part, by the arguments with which they co-occur), and clause-level grammar (the morpho-syntactic devices, such as word order and casemarking, used to encode the semantic and syntactic relationships between arguments and verbs). This multi-level, discourse-functional model, which is based on Du Bois (1987, 2002), is schematized in Figure 2.1. In this model, the clause-level grammar of argument structure is viewed as a crucial point of intersection between the lexicon and discourse (Du Bois, 2003). Whenever speakers talk about actions, events, states and their participants, the discourse task of referring to arguments intersects with the lexical task of selecting verbs. In the model in Figure 2.1, the lexical and discourse-level patterns that are created by this intersection feed into the clause-level grammar of argument structure, which includes morpho-syntactic devices, such as word order and casemarking. The highest level of linguistic organization in the model is discourse. Referring is seen as a discourse-level phenomenon. Speakers are motivated to use ellipsis or particular overt forms to encode arguments by discourse factors, e.g. introducing a new referent with an explicit lexical mention but encoding a recently mentioned referent with a pronoun or ellipsis (Chafe, 1987; Clancy, 1980; Givón, 1986). In Korean acquisition, overt mention of core arguments is associated not only with newness, but also with contrast, absence from the speech context, and answers to questions (Clancy, 1996, 1997). The discourse factors motivating overt mention are critical, since in Korean, only core arguments that are realized with overt forms will be available to the clause-level grammatical devices of word-order and casemarking. The lowest level of linguistic organization in the model in Figure 2.1 is the lexicon. In discourse, speakers select verbs whose semantic content is

Discourse: Arguments ↓ Grammar: Argument Structure ↑ Lexicon: Verbs

Figure 2.1. A multi-level, discourse-functional model of argument structure

40

Patricia M. Clancy

appropriate for the actions, events, and states that they wish to talk about. Among the most frequent verbs for all speakers in my data are: (transitive) pota ‘see’, mekta ‘eat’, and cwuta ‘give’; (intransitive) ita ‘be’, issta ‘exist’, kata ‘go’, and ota ‘come’; and hata ‘do’, used both transitively and intransitively. A variety of verbs having more specific semantic content is also common, with more variable frequency across speakers, including: (transitive) ppayta ‘pull out/take apart’, nehta ‘insert’, kulita ‘draw’; and (intransitive) cata ‘sleep’. Given their content, individual verbs tend to be used for a particular set of functions, e.g. mekta ‘eat’ to request food or issta ‘exist’ to call attention to objects. These correlations between the semantic content of verbs and the discourse functions of utterances are especially obvious in caregiver–child interaction, and produce high-frequency patterns in the types of overt arguments that are available to participate in the clause-level grammar of transitivity. The intersection of lexicon (verbs) and discourse (arguments) The model in Figure 2.1 can be illustrated by the following examples, which show the children’s most frequent uses of transitive verbs. These discourse functions create particular patterns in argument structure, i.e. in the way that the lexicon of transitive verbs intersects with referents in discourse that serve as arguments. For both children, one of the most frequent functions of transitive clauses is to request adult assistance in performing an action on an object, as in (1). (1)

Hyenswu (2:0) is playing with Lego, and trying to take a toy driver out of a car. i-ke ppay cw-e.1 this-thing take.out give-ie2 ‘Take this out (for me).’

This use of transitive verbs results in a high frequency in the children’s discourse of elliptical second person human agents in the A role (subject of transitive verb), with third person inanimate patients in the O role (object of transitive verb). Another common pattern is for the child to seek adult assistance in obtaining a type of object, often with the verb cwuta ‘give’, as in (2). (2)

1 2

Hyenswu (1:10) has brought her mother into the kitchen to the refrigerator. wuywu cw-e. milk give-ie ‘Give (me some) milk.’

The verb cwuta ‘give’ here is a benefactive auxiliary rather than a main verb. Abbreviations, following H. S. Lee (1991): attr attributive, conn connective, ie informal ending, prop propositive.

Acquisition of argument structure and transitivity

41

This usage also features elliptical A arguments, while producing a high frequency of non-referential, lexical O arguments, since the child needs to be explicit in her mention of the desired item, which is frequently being mentioned for the first time. The child herself may also appear as the (elliptical) agent, as in (3). (3)

Wenceng (2:0) has been playing; she knows there’s cake in the kitchen. Ppang mek-ul ke-ya. bread eat-attr (irrealis) thing-be.ie ‘(I’)ll eat (some) cake (lit. bread).’

Transitive verbs that do not involve agents acting on objects nevertheless frequently exhibit the same patterns, e.g. when the child and/or caregiver (elliptical A) focus attention on a new object (lexical O), as in (4). (4)

Wenceng (1:9) is looking at pictures in a book and notices a butterfly. napi hanpen po-ca. butterfly once look.at-prop ‘Let’s look at the butterfly.’

As the above examples illustrate, transitive verbs afford particular opportunities for the use and acquisition of specific types of arguments in the A and O roles. Taken together, consistencies in usage across a number of transitive verbs result in certain clear patterns. Semantically, the A argument is most frequently an agent who acts on an inanimate O argument in one of the following ways: moving it, changing its state, transferring it to another person, or making physical contact with it. Such actions fit the broadly conceptualized agent– patient relation described by Slobin (1985) as involving “prototypical manipulative activity.” Other common types of actions on objects include consuming food/drink, turning lights and appliances on and off, and creating new objects by drawing or building them. The A argument is almost always referential and human, frequently refers to the speaker or addressee, is rarely new information, and is usually elliptical. The high frequency of imperatives with transitive verbs also ensures a high rate of A ellipsis. The O argument is almost always third person, usually an inanimate object, and is sometimes new or non-referential. The O role can also be occupied by complements or by non-referential NPs in collocation with the verb, e.g. pap mekta ‘eat rice’, meaning ‘to have a meal’. Taken together, these uses of transitive verbs ensure that O arguments are much more likely to be realized with overt deictic pronouns or lexical noun phrases than A arguments. Based on data from a different pair of Korean children, S. Choi (1999) has found the same differentiation between A and O in terms of semantic role (agents acting on inanimate objects), person (first/second person A vs. third person O), and referential form (elliptical A, overt O). Thus the two core argument roles of transitive verbs, A and O, are associated in discourse with very different semantic and discourse-pragmatic properties,

42

Patricia M. Clancy

and are encoded with different referential forms. As Du Bois (1987: 841) has proposed, there is a “lexical conspiracy” such that A and O are maximally differentiated from one another, not only in their semantic roles but also in their discourse-pragmatic functions. These differences provide children with ample basis for distinguishing between the first and second argument of transitive verbs, even without any of the grammatical markers of transitivity, such as word order and casemarking. Furthermore, the patterns of intersection between verbs and their arguments found in discourse are crucial for the clause-level grammar of argument structure in Korean, since they produce the referents that will be available to participate in casemarking and word order – but only when realized overtly. Transitive argument structure realizations The discourse functions for which speakers use transitive verbs are responsible for the surface structure of transitive clauses in the data. First, it is important to note that transitive clauses in these interactions rarely have two overt, casemarked arguments. Table 2.1 presents the frequency of unembedded transitive clauses with an overt verb in the data, as well as the percentage of transitive clauses having two overt arguments and casemarking on two overt arguments.3 As Table 2.1 shows, although close to half of all clauses in the data are transitive, few exhibit the form of the full transitive construction (verb with two overt arguments), and even fewer have casemarking on two overt arguments. How, then, do the speakers encode transitive clauses? Figure 2.2 presents the four most frequent patterns for surface expression of the verb and its core arguments. I will call each such pattern an argument structure realization. Table 2.1. Proportional frequencies of transitive clause surface structures Transitive Clauses

Clauses with Overt Arguments AOV

Clauses with Overt, Casemarked Arguments A-nom O-acc V

Speaker

N (% of all clauses)

N (% of transitive clauses)

N (% of transitive clauses)

H H’s mother W W’s mother

995 (45.9%) 380 (44.1%) 1022 (42.7%) 377 (44.8%)

165 (16.6%) 49 (12.9%) 202 (19.8%) 85 (22.5%)

0 2 (0.5%) 22 (2.2%) 2 (0.5%)

3

Verbs usually analyzed as transitive, e.g. pota ‘see’, were coded as intransitive, e.g. pocima! ‘don’t look!’, in accordance with native speaker judgments. Clauses with the verb hata ‘do’ were treated as intransitive when native speaker judgments of transitivity were inconsistent.

Acquisition of argument structure and transitivity

43 26

__

N

33 33

V 23 25

__

__

28

V

22 20 22 4

__ d-pro V

11 3 1 10

__ comp V

5 12 0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

%

H

HM

W

WM

Figure 2.2. Argument structure realizations for transitive clauses

As Figure 2.2 shows, speakers typically use a limited set of the possible realizations for the two core arguments of transitive verbs. (In Figure 2.2, those realizations comprising at least 10% of all transitive argument structure realizations for one or more speakers are presented in A O V order; N = lexical noun phrases, comp = object complements, d-pro = deictic pronouns such as ike ‘this’, and __ = ellipsis.) As we see in Figure 2.2, there is no one argument structure realization that comprises a majority of transitive clauses. As the initial blank slots in Figure 2.2 represent, the most striking pattern in the data is that the A argument is elliptical; none of the four most frequent argument structure realizations has an overt A. The second most frequent realization for all speakers consists solely of a verb, as in the following example: (5)

Hyenswu (2:0) wants the research assistant to open the door of her toy refrigerator. yel-e cw-e open-conn give-ie ‘Open (it for me).’

The other three patterns in Figure 2.2 exhibit various realizations of the O argument; the most common is a lexical noun phrase, as in Examples (2–4) above. There are differences between the mothers and children, arising from the

44

Patricia M. Clancy

children’s developmental level and different role in dialogue. The children, especially Hyenswu, rely more heavily on deictic pronouns to encode O arguments, as we have seen in Example (1), while their mothers have a higher proportion of object complements in the O role, as in Example (6). (6)

Her mother is trying to get Wenceng (1:8) to count. Wenceng-a hana hay pw-a.4 Wenceng-voc one do.conn see-ie ‘Wenceng, try saying “one”.’

The basic pattern illustrated in these examples – an elliptical A with an overt O – has also been documented by Y.-J. Kim (1997) and S. Choi (1998b) in other children acquiring transitivity in Korean. These findings on the surface structure of transitivity in Korean raise a number of questions. First of all, there is the question that Rispoli (1987) has raised for Japanese: How do children distinguish between transitive and intransitive clauses? Word order will be helpful only when A and O are both overt, but as Table 2.1 shows, this cue is available in only 13–23% of the transitive clauses in the mothers’ speech. Furthermore, the three most frequent argument structure realizations for transitive verbs – one lexical argument and a verb, a verb alone, and one deictic pronoun and a verb – are also the most common realizations for intransitive clauses. As Rispoli notes, casemarking would distinguish between transitive and intransitive verbs only if accusative case were to be used on an overt O argument. However, as in Japanese, the rate of accusative casemarking on overt O arguments (other than object complements, which do not take casemarking) in Korean is extremely low (HM 4.7%, WM 10.3%). Since there are few grammatical cues for children to use in differentiating between transitive and intransitive verbs, it seems plausible that they would rely on the convergence of semantic and discourse-pragmatic properties that create the most frequent patterns of argument structure realization. In the discourse-functional approach that I have taken, to acquire transitivity in Korean means to learn the various argument structure realizations of transitive clauses that are found in adult talk, and to use them in discourse in adult-like fashion. This leads to another question. As Figure 2.2 reveals, the children are, in fact, using the same transitive argument structure realizations as adults. Moreover, although minor differences are apparent, the frequency of each pattern is remarkably consistent across the four speakers, and shows very little developmental change. Presumably, children do not match adult usage by targeting a particular frequency for each pattern. How, then, do they approximate adult usage of transitive argument structure realizations? A discourse-functional approach, which emphasizes the potential discourse motivations for formal structures, 4

The verb pota ‘see’ here is an auxiliary rather than a main verb.

Acquisition of argument structure and transitivity

45

invites us to seek the answers in an analysis of how transitive argument structure realizations are used in discourse. My proposal, then, is that the mastery of argument structure realizations depends crucially on acquisition of the discourselevel knowledge that enables children to match referential forms with discourse contexts and verbs with interactive functions in discourse. Preferred Argument Structure As shown in Figure 2.2, the A argument of transitive verbs is usually not mentioned overtly, in contrast with the O argument. A crucial factor in explaining this contrast has to do with the relationship between information flow and the argument roles A, O, and S. In 1987, Du Bois discovered that in Sakapultek, an ergative Mayan language, the A argument is rarely lexical, while S and O arguments are much more likely to be lexical. This, Du Bois proposed, is because there is a correlation between argument role and new information, such that the referent of A almost never introduces a new referent into discourse, while S and O arguments more frequently do. Du Bois (1987, 2003) called this set of formal and discourse-functional patterns Preferred Argument Structure. In subsequent research, Preferred Argument Structure has proved to be extremely robust across typologically different languages and a variety of discourse genres (Du Bois et al., 2003). In my Korean data, both mothers and children exhibit Preferred Argument Structure (Clancy, 1993, 2003); similar findings have been made for children acquiring other languages, including Italian (Bentivoglio, 1990), Inuktitut (Allen & Schröder, 2003), and Tzotzil (de León, 1999). Figure 2.3 presents the information flow 40 35

33

35 30 23

25 % 20 15

20

19 15

15

14

10 5

2

4

3

1

0 S

A H

HM

O W

Figure 2.3. New information in S, A and O roles

WM

46

Patricia M. Clancy

patterns underlying the set of argument structure realizations in Figure 2.2, giving the percentage of S, A, and O arguments that encoded new information in my Korean data. In Figure 2.3, we see that there is a very low rate of new referents in the A role, compared with S and O. This accounts in large measure for the tendency for A arguments to be elliptical, as shown in Figure 2.2, while O arguments, which are more likely to be new, are realized by overt deictic pronouns or lexical noun phrases. This formal pattern reflects the fact that the lexical semantics of transitive verbs is organized to put humans in the A role and inanimates in the O role. This organization of the lexicon is consistent with a discourse-level pressure: humans are likely to be repeatedly mentioned or “tracked” in discourse, while inanimates rarely are. In narratives, it is the human protagonists that are tracked throughout the story; in conversations such as the present mother–child interactions, it is the activities and states of people, especially the conversational participants, that are of primary interest. As we have seen in Examples (1–5), the argument structure of transitive verbs in my Korean data is a very direct mirror of the participation structure of the interactions. The A role encodes the main participants, i.e. the children and their caregivers, and the O role specifies the objects on which they act (or elaborates on the action itself in collocational or complement O’s). From a perceptual perspective, we can think of the A role as providing the stable “ground”, which can be left implicit, while the O role accommodates the more rapidly changing “figures”, which call for explicit mention (Clancy, 2003). Thus, consistent with the model in Figure 2.1, transitivity is simultaneously a lexical-semantic and discourse-level phenomenon, and not merely a matter of clause-level grammar. Discussion and future directions Although research on the acquisition of transitivity and argument structure has made considerable progress, many fundamental questions remain to be answered. Crosslinguistic research is essential to address such issues as the relative frequency and order of acquisition of intransitive vs. transitive argument structure. The role of semantically “light” verbs, such as do and make, as compared to semantically more specific verbs, such as Korean kkita ‘insert (tight fit)’, may well vary across languages, depending not only on the nature of the verb lexicon but also on the type and frequency of activities that are culturally available for very young children, such as playing with toys and reading books. Social class differences in ways of speaking and interacting with children may produce differences in the acquisition of transitivity even among children acquiring the same language (Budwig & Narasimhan, 2001). The social implications of using transitive vs. intransitive argument structure,

Acquisition of argument structure and transitivity

47

e.g. the attribution of praise/blame implicit in encoding an agent, may also affect the course of acquisition across languages and social groups (Bamberg, 1996; Duranti, 1994). Crosslinguistic research is also necessary to shed light on the acquisition of a generalized transitive construction. How quickly children generalize morphosyntactic devices across verbs is likely to depend on both the language-specific complexity of those devices and how easy it is to identify verbs as such. Verb Island phenomena may be more limited in languages with highly inflected verbs, as S. Choi (1999) has suggested for Korean and de León (1999) for Tzeltal. The frequency of argument ellipsis is clearly another crucial factor. In light of the different argument structure realizations for transitivity found in Korean, the question arises: Does the full transitive construction have special cognitive status in languages with pervasive argument ellipsis? Or is it just one – and a rare one at that – among several transitive argument structure realizations? Does it take children longer to acquire the full transitive construction in languages like Korean than in languages in which it is realized more frequently in discourse? In languages with frequent argument ellipsis, acquiring transitive argument structure even for individual verbs requires abstraction across a set of discourse-sensitive argument structure realizations. How and when children learning such languages acquire the argument structure of individual transitive verbs, as well as a generalized transitive construction, are interesting questions for further longitudinal and experimental research. Further research is also necessary to discover whether the mechanisms postulated on the basis of English data for children’s acquisition of transitive verbs, and for their recovery from transitivity errors, are operative in Korean and other languages. As acquisition theory becomes increasingly sensitive to the implications of typological differences, we can anticipate new developments in our understanding of the nature and origins of grammatical categories. While considerable research has been done on the word order and casemarking systems that mark grammatical categories, there is remarkably little consensus on the underlying principles accounting for the findings. One reason may be that typological differences in the grammatical alignment of the arguments of transitive and intransitive verbs necessarily produce differences in the semantic and discourse-pragmatic correlates of grammatical categories across languages. How does the discourse-functional approach that I have outlined in this chapter compare with other research on the acquisition of transitivity and argument structure? One important consequence of a discourse-based approach to argument structure is that it expands our notion of transitivity to include speakers’ unconscious knowledge of formal/functional patterns such as Preferred Argument Structure. A transitive clause with two lexical arguments is fully grammatical; it is only in the light of a discourse-based approach that we recognize how rarely it is actually used. The newness of a referent is presumably

48

Patricia M. Clancy

assessed by speakers and hearers “on-line” in producing and processing discourse; apparently, the typical surface form and information status of arguments are not available to “off-line” introspection. A discourse-based approach to transitivity also has consequences for our understanding of the potential role of semantics in the acquisition of argument structure. As we have seen, the frequency of different semantic types of argument is quite different in A and O roles. The most frequent A argument is a human agent who acts upon an inanimate O argument. This pattern arises from the ordinary activities of these caregivers and children, which emphasize manipulation of toys. The clear semantic differentiation of A and O arguments provides the child with an obvious meaning-based “hook” into argument structure based on the high frequency of A acting on O in adult–child discourse, with no need to invoke innate syntactic knowledge or privileged cognitive salience of notions such as agent and patient. A discourse-based approach assumes that the high frequency of this semantic pattern in adult speech to young children is sufficient to account for an early association of the A role with human agents and the O role with inanimate patients in acquisition. Furthermore, in contrast with a nativist or cognitivist approach, a discourse-based approach has the advantage of allowing more room for individual differences; for example, one of the two Korean children in my data for the first few months used nominative casemarking almost exclusively on human agents and actors, while the other showed greater flexibility (Clancy, 1995). What are the implications of a discourse-functional approach for the acquisition of a transitive construction? Clearly, in order to sound like a native speaker of Korean, one must not use the full transitive construction too often; instead, what children must learn is how to use the set of “incomplete” argument structure realizations appropriately in discourse. Perhaps the most important point to be made is that there is, in the experience of Korean children, no such thing as a discourse-free transitive construction. Each instantiation of transitivity in Korean depends on discourse context, which governs the surface form of A and O arguments. Thus the acquisition of transitivity in Korean interacts with acquisition of the discourse-based referential system, which is responsible for the set of transitive argument structure realizations. With respect to the multi-level discourse-functional approach outlined here, we can ask what kinds of mental representations underlie Korean children’s acquisition of the relationships between the lexical semantics of verbs, reference in discourse, and clause-level generalizations about argument structure. What kinds of knowledge, for example, are responsible for the acquisition of Preferred Argument Structure patterns (Clancy, 2003)? How general are the semantic and discourse-pragmatic patterns underlying transitivity that have been examined here across children and languages? Much further research is

Acquisition of argument structure and transitivity

49

necessary to develop the model of argument structure that I have proposed here, specifying and evaluating its predictions, and assessing how general its application may be. In this paper, I hope to have shown that a discoursefunctional approach in general, and the proposed model of argument structure in particular, can expand our understanding of transitivity, shedding light on the nature of transitivity and its acquisition in Korean, and perhaps in other languages as well.

3

Acquisition of case markers and grammatical functions GyeongHee No*

Abstract This chapter will show how Korean children acquire the grammatical functions of case markers, by examining their systematic utterances from longitudinal and experimental data. First, we will consider the developmental sequence in the acquisition of case markers, focusing on the opposition of nominative and accusative case. Second, we will investigate what strategies children employ to learn the case-marking system in production and comprehension. Third, we will examine from the experimental data how a child indicates grammatical functions of each noun phrase in the early stages of language development, especially where case markers and word order show a contradiction for grammatical roles. Finally, we will account for the mechanisms for acquiring grammatical functions and describe their developmental changes. It will be suggested that Korean children rely on word order prior to case markers for grammatical functions, not because of the fixed word order strategy, but because of the input to which they are exposed. Background Languages make use of various devices to indicate grammatical relations of linguistic elements. Some languages rely on word order while others on inflection or case markers to identify grammatical functions of nouns. It is the task of children to determine which device the language they learn employs. Slobin (1966) claimed the primacy of word order as a language acquisition principle: Russian children used fixed word order even though the input language exhibits a range of word orders. In a later study, however, Slobin and Bever (1982) proposed that children construct a canonical sentence schema as a preliminary organizing structure for language behavior, based on the results from the crosslinguistic study of English, Italian, Serbo-Croatian, and Turkish, where the * The data and proposals in this chapter are based on the author’s Ph.D. dissertation, GyeongHee No Chung (1994).

50

Acquisition of case markers and grammatical functions

51

children developed distinct word-order and inflectional strategies appropriate to the regularities of their language. Korean is typologically an SOV language with relative freedom of word order. The degree of freedom in word order depends on the speech style: In formal speech, the predominant order is SOV, while all the possible combinations are acceptable in informal speech. Grammatical relations are typically represented by postpositional case markers. In a transitive sentence, the subject is marked with the nominative case ka, and the object with the accusative case lul, as in (1)1. (1)

Mary-ka sakwa-lul mek-ess-ta. Mary-NOM apple-ACC eat-PAST-DECL ‘Mary ate an apple.’

Several studies (S. W. Cho, 1981; Y.-J. Kim, 1997; M. H. Zoh, 1982a) have observed that Korean-speaking young children tend to use the canonical word order, SOV. This is very interesting when we consider that Korean allows various orders and the grammatical functions are indicated by case markers, not by the word order. If Korean children use a word-order schema to identify grammatical functions and thus the case markers do not bear any grammatical functions, it raises the question of how they get to learn the case markers and their functions. What kinds of strategies do Korean children develop to learn the case-marking system and its grammatical functions? How do they learn the opposition of nominative and accusative case markers? Studies indicate that Korean children acquire the case-marking system at a relatively late stage. Even though they begin to produce the nominative and accusative case markers between 1:8 and 3:00 (S. W. Cho, 1981; Y.-J. Kim, 1997; E.-K. Lee, 1999; I. Lee, 1986; M. H. Zoh, 1982c), there is evidence indicating that children do not comprehend their functions until the age of four (S. W. Cho, 1981; S. Kim, O’Grady & Cho, 1995; S. Pae, 1997). This contrasts with Turkish children who acquire the grammatical functions of case markers before the age of two in sentence comprehension (AksuKoç & Slobin, 1985; Slobin & Bever, 1982). Slobin (1985) proposed that Turkish children acquire the case-marking system easily and early because the form is highly available due to obligatory marking, and the form conveys a single function. The late acquisition of the case-marking system in Korean children may be hindered by the complicated case-marking system of the language. Korean exhibits a number of complexities which may make the acquisition of the case-marking system difficult for a learner. First, case markers are optional, and thus they can be dropped as in (2). The dropped case markers are indicated in parentheses. 1

The following abbreviations are used in this chapter: ACC: Accusative; COMIT: Comitative; DAT: Dative; DECL: Declarative; GEN: Genitive; IMP: Imperative; NOM: Nominative; PAST: Past; Q: Question; TOP: Topic.

52

GyeongHee No

(2) a. b. c.

Mary-ka sakwa-φ mek-ess-ta. (Accusative) Mary-φ sakwa-lul mek-ess-ta. (Nominative) Mary-φ sakwa-φ mek-ess-ta. (Nominative and Accusative)

Second, any arguments may be omitted if the arguments can be recovered from the discourse context. Once the arguments are omitted, the case markers attached to the arguments should be elided, as in (3). (3) a. b. c.

Mary-ka mek-ess-ta. (SV) Sakwa-lul mek-ess-ta. (OV) Mek-ess-ta. (V)

Third, there is no one-to-one correspondence between case markers and grammatical functions. The nominative case, which typically marks the subject, also marks the object in psychological or existential verb constructions. In (4), the theme arguments are marked with the nominative case, regardless of their grammatical functions. (4) a.

b.

Kepwuki-nun thokki-ka coh-ta. turtle-TOP rabbit-NOM like-DECL ‘The turtle likes the rabbit.’ Wuenswungi-nun kkoli-ka iss-ta. monkey-TOP tail-NOM be-DECL ‘A monkey has a tail.’

Fourth, the nominative case has two allomorphs (i.e., ka and i): ka is attached to nouns ending with vowels while i to those ending with consonants, as in (5). (5) a.

b.

Namwu-ka pwulu-ta. tree-NOM green-DECL ‘The tree is green.’ Hanul-i pwulu-ta. sky-NOM blue-DECL ‘The sky is blue.’

These complicated factors may have some effect on the late acquisition of the case-marking system. In the following, we will investigate how Korean children bootstrap the case-marking system and how they learn the grammatical functions of case markers, by examining children’s systematic errors in case marking from longitudinal data as well as experimental data. Developmental sequence of case markers This section will examine a fine-grained developmental sequence of case marking based on longitudinal data from three children, Hyuck (H, 1:0–3:0),

Acquisition of case markers and grammatical functions

53

Minjae (MJ, 1:10–2:9), and Suhkyung (SK, 1:11–2:4). The data sources for H and MJ include daily diary notes and bi-weekly audio-tapes which were collected by the researcher in naturalistic observations. The data sources for SK are diary notes only recorded by her father, a linguist, and thus these data will be used to decide the developmental sequence, but not to report frequencies of the use of case markers. The developmental order of case markers is consistent across the three children in that the nominative marker ka is acquired earlier than the accusative marker lul, although the onset time of producing the case markers varies depending on individual children. The children began to produce the nominative ka between 1:7–2:0. About one to five months later, they started to supply the accusative marker lul. This is in accord with the previous studies (S. W. Cho, 1981; Y.-J. Kim, 1997; E.-K. Lee, 1999; M. H. Zoh, 1982a). The three children were consistent in adhering to the acquisition order of semantic particles, too. Semantic case particles such as locative ey, dative hantey, delimiter to ‘also’, and comitative hako ‘with’ emerged in a very similar order. The locative marker ey first appeared in production along with the nominative marker ka. One or two months later, the delimiter to and the dative hantey emerged, and the topic marker nun appeared even later. In the following, we will focus on how the children acquired the opposition between nominative and accusative case markers. The children began to produce the nominative marker ka one month after the onset of two-word combinations. In the next stage, the children overextended the nominative ka to any noun phrase. A few months later, the children limited the nominative ka to the first NP and the accusative lul to the second NP of a sentence. Finally, the children learned the adult casemarking system with occasional errors. The developmental sequence is summarized in (6). (6)

Developmental sequence of grammatical case markers Stage 1: Nominative ka only is produced for subjects in the two-word stage. Stage 2: Nominative ka is overextended to any noun phrase. Stage 3: Nominative ka is assigned to the first NP and accusative lul to the second NP in a sentence. Stage 4: Adult-like case system is acquired with occasional errors.

Let us consider some examples of each stage: Here ‘stage’ means gradual changes rather than discrete steps with sharp boundaries. At the two-word stage, the children produced the nominative marker ka for the subject of a sentence, but not for the object, as in (7). They never produced the accusative lul, and no errors were observed on case marking.

54

GyeongHee No

(7) a.

Emma-ka hay-cwu-e. mommy-NOM do-give-IMP ‘Do (it for me), mommy.’ (H, 1:7) Emma-ka nwun. mommy-NOM eye ‘Mommy (closed her) eyes.’ (SK, 1:11) Minjae-ka mwusew-e. Minjae-NOM be scared-DECL ‘Minjae is scared.’ (MJ, 2:0)

b.

c.

At this stage, the children used the nominative ka with much lower frequency than their caregivers. From the audio-tape recordings, H and MJ used the nominative ka in 21% and 25% of the possible contexts, while their mothers used it in 78% and 61%. In the second stage, the nominative marker ka is produced in two ways. First, it is overtly used in subjects as in (8a, b), and second, it is overextended to nonsubject NPs: to accusative as in (8c), to dative as in (8d), to genitive as in (8e), and to comitative as in (8f). The case marker within square brackets represents the correct form in the adult system. (8) a.

b.

c.

d.

e.

Mother:

Kicha ka-ess-e? train go-PAST-Q ‘Did the train pass by?’ Child: Kicha-ka ka-ess-e. train-NOM go-PAST-Q ‘The train passed by.’ (H, 1:9) Mother: Minjae haypo-a. Minjae do-IMP ‘Minjae, do (this).’ Child: Minjae-ka haypo-a? Minjae-NOM do-Q ‘Minjae do (this)? (MJ, 2:3) Mother: Cwussu masi-ess-e? Juice drink-PAST-Q ‘Did (you) drink juice?’ Child: Cwussu-ka [lul] masi-ess-e. juice-NOM [ACC] drink-PAST-DECL ‘(I) drank juice.’ (H, 1:9) Emma-ka appa-ka [hantey] yepo. mommy-NOM daddy-NOM [DAT] honey ‘Mommy (calls) daddy honey.’ (SK, 2:1) Hyucki-ka [uy] emma-ci. Hyuck-NOM [GEN] mommy-DECL ‘(It) is Hyuck’s mommy.’ (H, 1:10)

Acquisition of case markers and grammatical functions

f.

55

(Looking at two frogs in a book, one big and the other small) Appa kaykwuli-ka hyunga kaykwuli-ka [hako] nonunke-ya. daddy frog-NOM brother frog-NOM [COMIT] play-DECL ‘Daddy frog is playing with the brother frog.’ (MJ, 2:4)

At this stage the children showed a very rapid increase in the use of the nominative marker ka. H and MJ used it in 86% and 70% of the possible contexts, compared with their mothers who used it in 82% and 80% of contexts, respectively. The children’s tendency to produce case markers overtly seems to cause overextension of the nominative ka to other nonsubject NPs. In Stage 3, the children first produced the accusative marker lul four or five months after the onset of the nominative ka, using it much less than their mothers did: they used it in 8% of the possible contexts while their mothers used it in 27%. They used ka for subject and lul for object, as in (9). (9) a.

b.

Khwukhimonste-ka kitha-lul mek-e. Cookie Monster-NOM guitar-ACC eat-DECL ‘Cookie Monster is eating a guitar.’ (H, 1:11) Acessi-ka namwu-lul tenci-ess-e. man-NOM wooden block-ACC throw-PAST-DECL ‘A man threw a wooden block.’ (MJ, 2:6)

These examples seem to show that the children have acquired the adult system of case marking. However, some interesting errors were produced with stative verbs, as shown in (10): (10) a. Hyucki-ka mintuley-lul[ka] iss-e. Hyuck-NOM dandelion-ACC[NOM] be-DECL ‘Hyuck has a dandelion.’ (H, 2:1) b. Minjae-nun emma-lul[ka] miw-e. Minjae-TOP mommy-ACC[NOM] dislike-DECL ‘Minjae does not like mommy.’ (MJ, 2:6) At this stage, the children strictly restricted the use of lul to the second NP. They used it with the object NP if and only if the object occurred at the second position in a sentence with an overt subject. They used the nominative ka for a linearly first NP regardless of its grammatical role, if it occurred at the beginning of the sentence, as in (11). (11)

(with a throwing motion) Kongi-ka tenci-e. ball-NOM throw-DECL ‘(Somebody) throws a ball.’

56

GyeongHee No

(A minute later) Acci-ka kongi-lul tenci-e. man-NOM ball-ACC throw-DECL ‘The man throws a ball.’ (H, 1:11) The children seem to attach the nominative ka to the first NP and the accusative lul to the second NP, regardless of the functions of the NPs. I will term this phenomenon ‘a positional strategy’: Attach ka to the first NP and lul to the second NP. If it is the case that the children rely on the positional strategy, they will not use lul for an object which appears at the beginning of a sentence. As expected, the following types of sentences were not observed at this stage. (12)

Not observed: a. Cwuss-lul masi-e. juice-ACC drink-DECL ‘(Somebody) is drinking juice.’ b. Kong-lul Hyucki-ka tenci-e. ball-ACC Hyuck-NOM throw-DECL ‘Hyuck throws a ball.’

The sentences in (12) show OV or OSV word order. No utterances were observed where the children used lul for objects which appeared at the beginning of a sentence. The children seemed to produce the nominative and accusative markers as an ordered pair. That is, the accusative marker lul could only appear after the nominative marker ka: lul could not precede ka. The case markers at this stage did not seem to be related to grammatical functions. Even though they had acquired the accusative marker, the children failed to figure out the grammatical functions of NPs where the case markers were the only clue to identifying those functions, as in (13). (13)

Child:

Ppangppangi tha-ess-e. car ride-PAST-DECL ‘(?) rode a car.’ Mother: Nwu-ka? who-NOM ‘Who?’ Child: Ppangppangi tha-ess-e. car ride-PAST-DECL ‘(?) rode a car.’ Mother: Nwu-ka? who-NOM ‘Who?’ Child: (murmuring)

Acquisition of case markers and grammatical functions

Mother:

Child:

57

Nwu-ka ppangppangi tha-ess-nayko? who-NOM car ride-PAST-Q ‘I asked, who rode a car?’ Khwukhimonste-ka. Cookie Monster-NOM ‘Cookie Monster.’ (H, 1:11)

The child placed a toy cookie monster in a car and produced the first sentence above. When the mother asked the question ‘who rode in the car?’ by using only the case marker ka, the child did not understand the question. He could answer the question only when the mother provided the theme argument ppangppangi overtly with the wh-word nwu (who). In Stage 4, the children put the accusative marker lul only on the objects of non-stative transitive verbs, regardless of the positions of NPs in a sentence, as in (14). (14) a. Kong-lul tenci-e. (pause) Hyucki-ka kong-lul tenci-e. ball-ACC throw-DECL Hyuck-NOM ball-ACC throw-DECL ‘(?) throws a ball. Hyuck throws a ball.’ (H, 2:2) b. Mwul-lul Hyucki-ka mek-e. water-ACC Hyuck-NOM eat-DECL ‘Hyuck is eating water.’ (H, 2:3) At this point the children appeared to understand the grammatical functions of the case markers. The child H could answer the mother’s question based just on the information from the case markers, as in (15). (15)

Child:

(showing a small scratch to mommy) Ttayli-ess-e. hit-PAST-DECL ‘(Somebody) hit (someone).’ Mother: Nwu-ka? who-NOM ‘Who?’ Child: Seymi-ka. Sam-NOM ‘Sam.’ Mother: Nwukwu-lul? who-ACC ‘Whom?’ Child: Hyucki-lul. Hyuck-ACC ‘Hyuck.’ (H, 2:3)

58

GyeongHee No

At this stage, the children produced the nominative marker with a frequency similar to the adults’ usage, while they used the accusative marker less than their mothers did. One interesting phenomenon is that some errors persisted even after they acquired parts of the adult system. H overextended the accusative marker to other contexts such as the instrumental lo. In sum, Korean children seem to acquire the contrast between nominative and accusative case based on the position of an NP in the sentence, regardless of its grammatical function. This implies that case markers in early child Korean do not carry grammatical functions but are used as positional fillers. Acquisition of grammatical functions We have seen that the case markers the children produce during Stages 1, 2, and 3 do not carry any grammatical information. One immediate question to be raised is how the children identify the grammatical role of an NP. Crucial contexts where grammatical functions play an important role come from situations where either noun can be either subject or object, as in reversible sentences (e.g. Big Bird tickles Cookie Monster). How do the children represent subject or object in these situations? One possibility is that the children use word order to indicate grammatical functions. This possibility is plausible when we consider that the mothers of the two children (H and MJ) predominantly used the canonical SOV word order in reversible sentences. If children use the word order strategy prior to case markers for grammatical functions, we predict that young children will wrongly rely on the word order cue when a sentence shows a contradiction between the word order cue and the case marker cue. This prediction was tested with 24 children in a comprehension test. The four groups of children (Group A: from 2:8 to 3:0, Group B: from 3:3 to 3:5, Group C: from 3:7–3:10, Group D: 4:1–4:6) were asked to act out with toys what they heard. They were told three types of reversible sentences, as in (16). (16) a. Type A Ayongi-ka mengmengi-lul mwul-ess-ta. kitty-NOM doggy-ACC bite-PAST-DECL ‘The kitty bit the doggy.’ b. Type B Mengmengi-lul ayongi-ka mwul-ess-ta. doggy-ACC kitty-NOM bite-PAST-DECL ‘The kitty bit the doggy.’ c. Type C Mengmengi ayongi-ka mwul-ess-ta. Doggy kitty-NOM bite-PAST-DECL ‘The kitty bit the doggy.’

Acquisition of case markers and grammatical functions

59

Table 3.1. Number of correct responses in comprehension task

Group A (2:8–3:0) Group B (3:3–3:5) Group C (3:7–3:10) Group D (4:1–4:6) Total

Type A

Type B

Type C

12 (67%) 15 (83%) 18 (100%) 18 (100%) 88%

6 (33%) 9 (50%) 13 (72%) 14 (78%) 58%

6 (33%) 5 (28%) 6 (33%) 11 (61%) 39%

The sentence in (16a) is a typical or “canonical” sentence, since it has SOV word order and the first noun is marked with nominative and the second noun with accusative. In this typical sentence, both word order and case markers indicate that the first noun is subject. In (16b) the two types of cues lead to contrary interpretations: word order indicates that the first noun is the subject, while case markers indicate that the second noun is the subject. The sentence in (16c) also involves contradictory information from the word order and casemarking cues, but differs from (16b) in that the canonical order of ka before lul is not infringed. The prediction was that the younger the children, the more likely they would be to rely on word order in a sentence which shows a conflict between the word order cue and the case-marking cue. Responses were scored correct if the agent was chosen based on adult Korean case marking. Table 3.1 shows the number (percentage) of correct responses out of a total of 18 responses for each sentence type by age group. The responses were analyzed through a two-way Age × Sentence type ANOVA, with subjects nested within age and the within-subject factor being the sentence type. The age effect was significant at p < .01: the older children performed better than the younger children. Sentence type was also significant at p < .01: the children performed highest with the canonical sentence, Type A, and they did better with Type B than Type C. Remembering that the errors indicate the responses where the children relied on the word order cue for grammatical functions, we can infer that the younger children (Groups A and B) applied the word-order strategy in comprehension, while the oldest children (Group D) relied on case marking. The middle group (Group C) used the word-order strategy along with case marking. The tendency to use the word-order cue was blocked when a sentence showed the violation of ka-lul ordering: The children relied on the wordorder cue less with Type B than with Type C, possibly due to the fact that Type B violated the ka-lul ordering. These results support the hypothesis that the younger the children, the more they relied on word order. From the experimental results, we now can infer the following developmental stages in the acquisition of grammatical functions.

60

GyeongHee No

(17)

Three steps in the acquisition of grammatical functions Stage 1 → Stage 2 → Stage 3 word order → word order case markers → case markers

The developmental sequence in (17) shows the transition from word order to case markers. First they rely only on word order, and then they use the word order along with case markers, and finally they move to the case markers, as Korean adults do. Discussion We have considered that in identifying grammatical functions younger children rely on word order rather than case markers. One question we face here is why the children used word order rather than case markers in a language such as Korean which marks grammatical functions by case markers. Slobin’s (1966) proposal that children use a fixed word order at very early stages of language development has been disproved with Turkish children who use case inflection as a clue to grammatical function from a very early stage of their development (Slobin & Bever, 1982). The question of why Korean children rely on word order may be answered by the Competition Model of MacWhinney and his colleagues (Bates & MacWhinney, 1982, 1987; MacWhinney, Pleh & Bates, 1985; McDonald, 1984). The Competition Model is a functional approach which allows statistical properties of the input to play a major role in determining the order of acquisition as well as the nature of the final state. This model makes a series of strong claims about the control of sentence processing. One of the most important claims of the theory is about “cue validity”, which is claimed to be the major determinant of order of acquisition. MacWhinney, Pleh, and Bates (1985) have analyzed cue validity into two components: cue availability (i.e. how often is this piece of information offered during a decision-making process?), and cue reliability (i.e. how often does the cue lead to a correct conclusion when it is used?). Cues are high in availability if they are available when you need them, and are high in reliability if they are never misleading or ambiguous. The overall cue validity is defined as the product of availability times reliability. Thus, cues are high in validity if they are high in both availability and reliability. Now, let us consider the cue validity of word order and case markers in Korean. Assuming that the word order cue is reliable if the first noun phrase that appears is the subject in a sentence and that the case-marking cue is reliable if ka indicates subject, it turns out that word order is higher in cue validity than the case marker ka. A sample analysis of the speech of H’s and MJ’s mothers by the Competition Model showed that the cue validity of word order was .72 on

Acquisition of case markers and grammatical functions

61

the average, whereas that of the nominative marker ka was .32. Word order was higher in cue validity than the case marker ka. The Korean children might note what is constant and what is variable from the input. Considering the high percentage of case markers omitted and the semantic inconsistency of the nominative ka, the case markers could not be a constant cue for grammatical role. To sum up, the Korean children relied on word order prior to case markers for grammatical functions, not because of the fixed word-order strategy, but because of the input to which they are exposed. The input-oriented account also offers a plausible explanation of why the children overused the nominative case marker for other contexts such as accusative, genitive, dative, and comitative, but not vice versa. As discussed earlier, the nominative case marker has a higher availability due to higher input frequency than the accusative marker: the mothers of H and MJ produced the nominative case marker an average of 80% of the time, compared to 25% of the time for the accusative marker. On top of that, the nominative marker has a wider range of uses than the accusative marker: the nominative case is used for subject as well as object or theme arguments of existential and psychological verbs. The children overused the nominative marker for the other cases possibly due to the higher input availability. This input-oriented account seems to hold across languages. If it is the case, we predict that Japanese children, whose native language has a very similar structure in case marking to Korean, would also show the same pattern of casemarking errors as Korean children do. In Japanese, the nominative marker ga marks the subjects of transitive and intransitive verbs as well as the objects of stative predicates, whereas the accusative marker o is limited to the objects of transitive verbs. As the input-driven account would predict, Japanese children systematically overgeneralized the nominative case marker ga for the accusative case marker o (Clancy, 1985; Morikawa, 1989). Further supporting evidence for the input-based view comes from English data. A great number of studies have unequivocally reported that English-speaking children overgeneralize the accusative case for the nominative as well as genitive at some points of language development, as illustrated in (18), but not vice versa (Bellugi, 1971; Chiat, 1981; Radford, 1990; Rispoli, 1994). (18) a. Accusative pronouns used for subjects (Radford, 1990) Her do that. (1:8) Him gone. (1:8) Me have biscuit. (1:10) b. Accusative pronouns used for genitives (Radford, 1990) Me eye (1:8) Me dad (2:0) On him head (2:2)

62

GyeongHee No

In English, the accusative case is used for direct objects, complements of propositions, topics, and for pronouns used in isolation, whereas the nominative case is employed only for subjects. Following Tanz (1974) and O’Grady (1997), I propose that English learners overuse the accusative case because the accusative case in English has a wider range of use than the nominative case and the genitive case.

4

Do Korean children acquire verbs earlier than nouns? You-kyung Chang-Song and Soyeong Pae*

Introduction How do children learn the early words? Do linguistic differences influence early lexical development? The Korean language has been the focus of particular interest in answering this question. Unlike English, Korean is a SOV language in which verbs are more likely to occur in the perceptually salient final position of an utterance. In addition, Korean allows for nominal ellipsis, so that the subject of a sentence can be left out. As a result, verbs are perceptually and structurally more salient in Korean language input to children. Do these differences in Korean input make a difference in the pattern of noun and verb acquisition of Korean children? Noun bias Theoretical claims for the noun bias Gentner (1982) has claimed that the semantic structures underlying verbs and other predicates are more complex and open-ended than those of nouns. According to Gentner, nouns are learned before verbs because their semantic structures are less complex than those of verbs. Moreover, children have a conceptual predisposition early on to treat words as mapping onto objects. More recently, the constraints view has also endorsed the noun bias claim. According to Markman (1989), children assume that a novel word applied to an object is likely to refer to the whole object, rather than its parts, its substance, or to its actions and changes of states (the “whole object constraint”). Therefore, the whole object constraint would favor the noun bias in early lexical development. Another constraint also favors the noun bias. The taxonomic constraint helps children to assume that a new word applied to an object can be extended primarily to objects of the same kind rather than to objects of causal or thematic * This chapter is based on Chang-Song & Pae (2003).

63

64

You-kyung Chang-Song and Soyeong Pae

relations (Markman & Hutchinson, 1984). Put together, the complexity of the semantic structure of the noun/verb and cognitive constraints guide children to learn nouns before verbs in all languages, because the nouns have relatively simpler semantic structures than verbs and the cognitive constraints (i.e. wholeobject constraints, taxonomic constraints) favor nouns. Theoretical claims against the noun bias On the other hand, Gopnik and Choi (1990) and Choi and Gopnik (1995) have proposed that nouns are not always learned before verbs. They emphasized the role of linguistic input in early lexical development. Furthermore, they suggest that the noun bias might be a result of two methodological artifacts: (1) most studies favoring the noun bias have been based on English, and (2) many studies for the noun bias have collected data in a limited context such as book reading or from parental checklists. The basic thrust of their claim is that, without those methodological artifacts, early lexical development is language-specific rather than language-universal. Therefore, verb saliency in the Korean language may facilitate the acquisition of verbs more than (or as much as) acquisition of nouns. Several studies have compared Korean and English input and/or the noun/ verb acquisition of Korean children (Au, Dapretto & Song, 1994; Chang-Song, 1997; Chang-Song, 2004; Choi & Gopnik, 1995; Gopnik & Choi, 1990; Lee & Chang-Song, 1999; Pae, 1993). When recording parental input, Au, Dapretto, and Song (1994), and Lee and Chang-Song (1999) found that Korean parents were more likely to end an utterance with a verb than a noun, whereas Englishspeaking parents were more likely to end an utterance with a noun than a verb. Similarly, Choi and Gopnik (1995), and Choi (2000) found that Korean parents used more action terms (that is, verbs) than object labels. Given these differences in parental input, do Korean children acquire more verbs than nouns? The answer to this question is debatable. A series of studies (Au, Dapretto & Song, 1994; Chang-Song, 1997; ChangSong, 2004; Lee & Chang-Song, 1999; Pae, 1993) found that, regardless of linguistic differences, Korean children produced more nouns than verbs. However, another line of studies (Choi & Gopnik, 1995; Gopnik & Choi, 1990) found different results, namely that Korean-speaking children produced closer to equal numbers of nouns and verbs. In a study based on nine Koreanspeaking children, Choi and Gopnik found that the majority of these children have a period of rapid vocabulary growth that could be best classified as a “verb spurt” rather than a noun spurt. After Choi and Gopnik’s results were reported, it seemed that the Korean language was treated as a verb-precocious language (Owens, 2005). However, Choi and Gopnik’s results could be interpreted in two ways. First, Korean

Noun bias in Korean

65

children acquire more verbs than English-speaking children, but they still have more nouns than verbs. In this case, Korean data still support the noun bias claim. Secondly, Korean children learn verbs very rapidly (i.e. verb spurt) from an early age, so that they almost have equal (or more) numbers of verbs and nouns. In this case, the results could be interpreted as against the noun bias. In the present paper, we have re-examined these studies of Korean children and focused on the proportions of nouns and verbs in early Korean acquisition. The comparisons were performed in terms of the data gathering method, criteria for verbs, and results of the studies. Studies of noun and verb acquisition in Korean Seven studies were selected, five of which support the noun bias (Au, Dapretto & Song, 1994; Chang-Song, 1997; Chang-Song, 2004; Lee & Chang-Song, 1999; Pae, 1993) and two of which are against the noun bias (Choi & Gopnik, 1995; Kim, McGregor & Thomson, 2000). Out of the seven studies, the results of two (Chang-Song, 2004; Pae, 1993) were reported separately because their results were gathered as group data. Participants of the studies A total of 682 children were included in the seven studies. Except for thirteen children from the two studies (Au, Dapretto & Song, 1994; Choi & Gopnik, 1995), all of the children were living in Korea at the time. The children’s ages ranged from 8 months to 23 months (See Table 4.1). Table 4.1. Studies of Korean noun and verb acquisition Authors

Number of Age subjects (in months) Data-collecting method

Au, Dapretto & Song (1994)

4

15–25

Choi & Gopnik (1995)

9

14–22

Kim, McGregor & Thomson (2000) Lee & Chang-Song (1999)

8

18–21

3

18–23

5 563 90

18–22 8–17 12–23

Chang-Song (1997) Chang-Song (2004) Pae (1993)

Dapretto & Bjork’s checklist spontaneous speech (natural situation) Early language questionnaire, spontaneous speech (play with doll) Diaries, MCDI-K, Choi & Gopnik’s checklist Spontaneous speech (play, reading eating context) MCDI-K MCDI-K MCDI-K, spontaneous speech

66

You-kyung Chang-Song and Soyeong Pae

Data collection method: parental questionnaire versus a word-checklist At a glance, a major methodological difference between the two lines of studies lies in the use of a word checklist. The studies that support the verb spurt (Choi & Gopnik, 1995; Kim et al., 2000) used a parental questionnaire as the main data collection method. These studies used the Early Language Questionnaire that was developed by Gopnik and Choi (1990) and followed the same coding criterion. Instead of listing words, the Early Language Questionnaire provides prompts about the particular types of context in which children are likely to produce words and asks the parents to provide the words that the child has produced. On the other hand, most studies that support the noun bias have used the Korean words adapted from the MacArthur Communicative Development Inventories (MCDI-K) (see Pae, 1993). The MCDI-K words consist of a total of 567 words, of which 245 words are common nouns and 107 are verbs. The parents are asked to check the words their children have in their vocabularies on the checklist. Due to this difference, it is possible that there may be more words reported with the MCDI-K than with the Early Language Questionnaire, since retrieving words from memory is much more difficult than recognizing the words from a pre-provided checklist. In fact, the number of words reported from studies of the two methods is rather different. From the studies using MCDI-K (Chang-Song, 1997; ChangSong, 2004), 11 to 298 words were reported during the 18- to 22-month period and 0 to 263 words from 8 to 17 months. However, when considering only nouns and verbs, the maximum number of words was 210 from one 22-monthold. When using the Early Language Questionnaire (Gopnik & Choi, 1995; Kim et al., 2000), 15 to 189 words were reported for nine Korean children aged 14 to 24 months. When only nouns and verbs were considered, the maximum number for the sum of nouns and verbs was 152 words from one 22-month-old. This rather big difference in the total number of nouns and verbs reported using the two methods may be responsible for the conflicting results. Criterion for verbs In addition to the total number for nouns and verbs, the criterion for verbs was also different. Following Choi and Gopnik (1995), studies that do not support the noun bias have categorized verbs rather broadly. In addition to verbs, which refer to actions, non-action verbs such as attention-getting verbs (e.g. look!), mental verbs (e.g. think), and static verbs (e.g. have, like) were also counted

Noun bias in Korean

67

as verbs. In particular, words such as yeppu-ta (‘is pretty’), epsta (‘not exist’), twayssta (‘done’), mantha (‘be a lot’), ttokkatta (‘be same’) were also categorized as stative/adjectival verbs. On the other hand, other studies supporting the noun bias (Au, Dapretto & Song, 1994; Chang-Song, 1997; Lee & Chang-Song, 1999; Pae, 1993) used a relatively strict criterion for verbs. Most of the stative/adjectival verbs in Choi and Gopnik’s study were categorized as either predicates or a category for amount (e.g. mantha, ttokkatta, epsta) in the MCDI-K words. By this criterion, several stative/adjectival verbs in Choi and Gopnik’s study should have been counted as adjectives, not as verbs. As a result, there were more verbs reported (131) in Choi and Gopnik’s 1995 study than in the MCDI-K study (107 verbs). Individual differences in styles of language learning It is well known that there are large individual differences in the rate of language development (Bloom, Lightbrown & Hood, 1975; Miller & Chapman, 1981). Some children produce little or no meaningful speech before 16 months of age, whereas others produce more than 100 words at or before 16 months. It is also well documented that children are characterized differently in their style of language learning (Bates, Dale & Thal, 1994). Some children produce a high proportion of names for common objects from the very beginning of meaningful speech. Others produce a high proportion of “non-nominals” that include proper names, routine words, and other words that serve a specific social purpose (e.g. the word “up” to be picked up, “more” for a request). Due to the fact that in most studies, except Chang-Song (2004) and Pae (1993), which administered MCDI-K to a group of infants, only a small number of children were included for the data collection, the individual differences of each child may have influenced the results. Number of total words in production Interestingly, the studies using the MCDI-K and a large number of children showed a developmental pattern in the composition of words (Bates et al., 1994; Chang-Song, 2004; Pae, 1993). When children produce fewer than 100 words in total, the verbs comprise less than 10% of the total words, regardless of language. As the total number of words in production increases, the verbs begin to comprise more than 10% of total words. When children produce more than 400 words in total, the verbs then comprise more than 20%. Thus, even in the same child, the proportion of nouns and verbs may differ according to the size of the total vocabulary (s)he might have.

68

You-kyung Chang-Song and Soyeong Pae

Proportions of nouns and verbs Among the seven studies, individual data of twenty-four children were available from four studies (Au et al., 1994; Lee & Chang-Song, 1999; Choi & Gopnik, 1995; Kim et al., 2000). The number of nouns and verbs produced by each Korean child from the four studies is presented in Table 4.2. The results are rather straightforward. Although the noun versus verb ratio may vary, Korean

Table 4.2. Number of nouns and verbs produced by Korean children Child* 1 2

3 4 5

6

7

8 9 10

11

Age (in months)

Number of nouns

Number of verbs

Number of other words

Total number of words

Noun:verb ratio

15 19 19 20 23 24 25 17 22 22 24 18 19 20 21 23 19 21 22 23 18 19 21 22 18 20 21 15 16 17 22 23 24 26

17 34 3 4 11 14 21 39 87 68 110 20 114 120 383 315 39 66 192 144 44 82 153 171 22 24 36 12 18 29 94 23 30 59

4 7 1 1 3 8 8 10 53 16 62 1 2 15 22 62 5 7 20 21 5 2 6 5 23 18 24 14 15 17 58 21 34 56

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 32 53 237 226 38 108 217 217 11 43 18 26 11 16 20 13 14 16 37 14 19 28

21 41 4 5 14 22 29 49 140 84 172 29 148 188 642 603 82 181 429 382 60 127 177 202 56 58 80 39 47 62 189 58 83 143

4.3:1 4.9:1 3:1 4:1 3.7:1 1.8:1 2.6:1 3.9:1 1.6:1 4.3:1 1.8:1 20:1 57:1 8:1 17.4:1 5.1:1 7.8:1 9.4:1 9.6:1 6.9:1 8.8:1 41:1 25.5:1 34.2:1 1:1 1.3:1 1.5:1 0.9:1 1.2:1 1.7:1 1.6:1 1.1:1 0.9:1 1.1:1

Noun bias in Korean

69

Table 4.2. (cont.)

Child* 12

13

14

15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 Average ratio

Age (in months) 18 19 23 19 20 22 24 17 18 23 21 22 23 18 22 21 22 22 21 18 18

Number of nouns 23 34 51 22 28 43 74 12 29 51 18 33 51 21 21 22 25 29 22 29 31

Number of verbs 18 18 49 15 31 38 73 17 23 50 4 9 50 19 16 14 14 15 11 10 11

Number of other words 9 13 24 12 15 17 32 11 11 20 12 15 20 14 11 14 11 15 14 11 6

Total number of words

Noun:verb ratio

50 65 124 49 74 98 178 40 63 121 34 57 121 54 48 50 50 59 47 50 48

1.3:1 1.9:1 1:1 1.5:1 0.9:1 1.1:1 1:1 0.7:1 1.3:1 1:1 4.5:1 3.7:1 1:1 1.1:1 1.3:1 1.6:1 1.8:1 1.9:1 2:1 2.9:1 2.8:1 2.9:1

Child 1–4 from Au et al. (1994) Child 5–7 from Lee and Chang-Song (1999) Child 8–16 from Choi & Gopnik (1995) Child 17–24 from Kim et al. (2000)

children in all the listed studies produced more nouns than verbs. The average ratio of noun to verb was 2.9:1. The nouns and verbs consist of 53.3% and 18.4%, respectively, of the total words the children produced. Even when the children from Choi and Gopnik’s study and Kim et al.’s study were considered, children actually produced 10% more nouns (44.3%) than verbs (34.2%). A total of seventeen children from those two studies were observed thirty-one times. Only five children produced more verbs than nouns once. That is, most Korean children did produce more nouns than verbs. The mean percentages of nouns versus verbs were 49.2% versus 27.1% in Kim et al.’s study and 43.2% versus 35.7% in Choi and Gopnik’s study. That is, there were always more nouns than verbs produced even in those studies, except for the session around the verb spurt period in which the average percentage between nouns and verbs was 38% versus 39%. In summary, even in the studies

70

You-kyung Chang-Song and Soyeong Pae

that did not support the noun bias, the children actually produced more nouns than verbs, except for a few sessions. Similarly, in the studies that utilized MCDI-K words and reported group data (Chang-Song, 2004; Pae, 1993), the average percentage of verbs produced was less than 10%. As the total number of words increased from less than 50 words to more than 400 words, the children’s use of verbs increased from 3% to 20%. For example, in Chang-Song’s study, the percentage of verbs was 4.2% and that of nouns was 27%. Discussion Although many studies have examined the noun/verb acquisition of Korean children, the results have not been consistent. While some studies (Au, Dapretto & Song, 1994; Chang-Song, 1997; Chang-Song, 2004; Lee & Chang-Song, 1999; Pae, 1993) found that, regardless of linguistic differences, Korean children produced more nouns than verbs, another line of studies (Choi & Gopnik, 1995; Kim et al. 2000) reported rather different results: Korean children learned closer to an equal number of verbs and nouns. Furthermore, when the acquisition rate of nouns and verbs was compared in terms of noun spurt and verb spurt in the latter studies, more Korean children showed verb spurts than English-speaking children. However, when we look into these studies carefully, several clues to apparent puzzles can be found. Most importantly, when we compare the number of nouns that children learned to that of verbs, the results support the noun bias. Korean children actually acquired more nouns than verbs even though the noun versus verb ratio varies depending on which study and which child. Moreover, the difference between the findings of the two lines of studies is understandable in light of the fact that they used different research methods. One must also take into account individual differences in language acquisition. First, different methods seem to be responsible for different results. And the criterion for verbs used in different studies seems to be critical. When the number of total words the children produced was very small and the criteria for verbs differed, the noun versus verb ratio could change significantly. Secondly, individual differences in the rate and style of language acquisition might play an important role. It is possible that more “nominal” children were included in the studies for the noun bias and more “non-nominal” children were involved in the other studies. Because most studies included small numbers of children, individual differences among children could have a significant effect. Concerning this point, the results from Chang-Song (2004) and Pae (1993), which included a large number of children, were consistent with the noun bias claim for 1-year-old Korean children. In summary, when we look carefully into the production data, it is evident that Korean children actually learned more nouns than verbs, supporting the

Noun bias in Korean

71

noun bias claim in early word acquisition. While Korean children, as compared to English-speaking children, might learn more verbs, both Korean- and Englishspeaking children learned more nouns than verbs. Recently, several studies with “older” normal and/or hearing-impaired children have made an interesting point regarding the noun bias issue. When 3- to 7-year-old children were asked to name nouns and verbs, most children, except 3- and 7-year-olds, were significantly more successful in producing nouns than in producing verbs (Lee & Pae, 2003). More interestingly, while some hearingimpaired Korean children were reported to produce more nouns than verbs (Park & Pae, 2003), other hearing-impaired Korean children understood more new verbs than new nouns (Jung & Pae, 2004). It seems that the end-of-sentence position of Korean verbs helps hearing-impaired children to clearly hear and comprehend them. Thus, it is possible that the verb saliency in Korean input may selectively influence word learning for some Korean children later in their word acquisition.

5

The acquisition of the placement of the verb in the clause structure of Korean Chung-hye Han, Jeffrey Lidz and Julien Musolino*

Introduction The argument of the poverty of the stimulus has maintained a central place in the development of Generative Grammar at least since Chomsky (1965). The argument runs like this: there is a piece of grammatical knowledge G that can be attributed to adult speakers of a language. Examination of the input shows that the ambient language (i.e. the language of the community that the first language learner is exposed to) does not uniquely determine G. That is, the primary linguistic data that the child is exposed to is compatible with a range of hypotheses that includes (but does not require) G. Given that adults know G and that G represents only one point in a range of hypotheses compatible with experience, it follows that G must be determined innately. In other words, all of the other hypotheses compatible with the primary linguistic data are excluded a priori. Learners acquire G because it is the unique point of intersection between the primary linguistic data and the innate hypothesis space. In this paper, we present a novel consequence of the poverty of the stimulus. We will consider a case in which the learner’s innate hypothesis space arguably provides at least two hypotheses that are compatible with the primary linguistic data. In this case, experience does not determine which of these is the correct grammar. Consequently, some learners acquire one grammar and others acquire * Previous versions of this work have been presented at the 38th Chicago Linguistic Society Regional Meeting, the 13th Japanese/Korean Linguistics Conference, the LSA Workshop on UG Principles and Input Data at Michigan State University, East Lansing, in 2003, the University of Calgary Linguistics Colloquium in 2003, the University of British Columbia Linguistics Colloquium in 2004, and the Construction of Meaning Workshop at Stanford University in 2005. We have benefited from the critical comments and questions at various stages from these audiences. Thanks also to Mee-Sook Kim for assistance with stimulus design and data collection in the initial stage of this work. For helping us recruit participants, we thank Chungmin Lee and Eun-Jung Yoo at Seoul National University, Chang-Bong Lee and Jae-ah Jeon at Catholic University, Hyunoo Lee at Inha University, and Jae-Woong Choe at Korea University. The work reported here has previously been published in Linguistic Inquiry 38.1 (2007). This work was supported by SSHRC Standard Research Grant #410–2003–0544 to Han and NSF grant BCS-0418309 to Lidz.

72

Acquisition of verb placement in the clause

73

the other. In short, even given a restricted and innately determined hypothesis space, experience is sometimes insufficient for grammar transmission from one generation of speakers to the next. In particular, we will examine the position of the verb in the clause structure of Korean. Traditionally, differences in verb placement with respect to adverbs have been used to argue for or against verb-raising to inflection (infl) for a given language (Emonds, 1978; Pollock, 1989). For example, ‘verb-adverb’ order is taken to be evidence for verb-raising in French (see (1)), and ‘adverb-verb’ order is taken to be evidence for infl-lowering in English (see (2)). (1) a. b.

(2) a. b.

French: * Jean souvent embrasse Marie. (*S Adv V O) Jean often kisses Marie Jean embrasse souvent Marie. (S V Adv O) Jean kisses often Marie ‘Jean often kisses Marie.’ English: John often kisses Mary (S Adv V O) *John kisses often Mary (*S V Adv O)

However, in a head-final language like Korean the string order between the verb and such diagnostic elements is uninformative, as the verb will occur to the right of these elements whether it raises or not (see (3)). (3)

Yuri-ka cacwu Toli-lul ttayli-n-ta. Yuri-nom often Toli-acc hit-pres-decl ‘Yuri often hits Toli.’

We thus need to resort to arguments other than those relying on the string order between the verb and a diagnostic element to settle the matter. Indeed, syntacticians examining Korean have made arguments in both directions with some claiming that there is no verb-raising (J. Yoon, 1994; H. Han & Park, 1994; M.-K. Park, 1998) and others claiming that verb-raising does occur (D.-I. Cho, 1994; Y.-S. Choi, 1999; Koizumi, 2000; Otani & Whitman, 1991; K. Park, 1992; E.-Y. Yi, 1994). Both camps have used data pertaining to a wide range of phenomena including coordination, scrambling, null objects, and NPI licensing. But Han, Lidz and Musolino (2007), and C.-H. Han (2007) show that all of the data that have been used to argue for or against verb-raising have no bearing on the issue because all of the data intended to support a verbraising analysis are compatible with a non-verb-raising analysis and vice-versa. One potential source of information which would be more instructive concerns the syntax of negation. Because Korean has a clitic-like negation that associates with the verb in syntax, scope facts concerning negation and a quantified object NP could provide evidence regarding the height of the verb.

74

Chung-hye Han, Jeffrey Lidz and Julien Musolino

Even so, such facts are rare, especially in the input to children, and so we might be led to expect that not all speakers exposed to a head-final language acquire the same grammar as far as verb-raising is concerned. Indeed, we present evidence from Korean here to support this expectation. Using data obtained from psycholinguistic experimentation, we show that there are two populations of Korean speakers: one with verb-raising and one without. This paper is organized as follows. In the following section, we motivate scope of negation and quantified argument NPs as a test for the placement of the verb in the clause structure. It will, however, be pointed out that while the evidence from scope interactions could be informative regarding the possibility of verb-raising in Korean, the extant literature on this topic is plagued by contradictory conclusions, giving one the impression that Korean syntacticians cannot agree on what the facts are. Since only facts involving negation and quantified NPs hold the promise of settling the issue of whether Korean is a verb-raising language, it becomes crucial that the relevant facts be determined as precisely as possible. In order to achieve this goal, we conducted two psycholinguistic experiments using the Truth Value Judgment Task (Crain & Thornton, 1998), a technique devised to elicit reliable interpretive judgments. After presenting our findings in the third section, we discuss their implications regarding the availability of verb-raising in Korean in the final section. Evidence from the scope of negation Korean has two types of negation: long negation in a postverbal position followed by the light verb ha (‘do’), as in (4), and short negation in a preverbal position, as in (5). (4)

(5)

Toli-ka ttena-ci ani ha-yess-ta Toli-nom leave-ci neg do-pst-decl ‘Toli didn’t leave.’ Toli-ka an ttena-ss-ta Toli-nom neg leave-pst-decl ‘Toli didn’t leave.’

These two types of negation occupy distinct syntactic positions, as they can both occur in a sentence, as in (6). (6)

Toli-ka maykcwu-lul an masi-ci ani ha-yess-ta Toli-nom beer-acc neg drink-ci neg do-pst-decl ‘Toli didn’t not drink beer.’ (Toli drank beer)

Three background facts about Korean – frozen scope, object-raising, and the clitic status of negation – motivate scope interaction between negation and argument quantifier phrases (QPs) as a diagnostic for the placement of the verb

Acquisition of verb placement in the clause

75

in the clause structure of Korean. First, it has been widely observed that in Korean, as in Japanese, argument QPs exhibit frozen scope. That is, in a sentence with canonical SOV word order as in (7a), with subject and object QPs, the only reading available is the one in which the subject scopes over the object. The inverse scope is possible only if the object scrambles over the subject, as in (7b) (K.-W. Sohn, 1995; S.-H. Ahn, 1990; Joo, 1989; Hagstrom, 2000). (7) a.

b.

Nwukwunka-ka motun salam-ul piphanhay-ss-ta. someone-nom every person-acc criticize-pst-decl ‘Someone criticized every person.’ (some>every, *every>some) [Motun salam-ul]i nwukwunka-ka ti piphanhay-ss-ta. every person- acc someone-nom criticize-pst-decl ‘Someone criticized every person.’ (some>every, every>some)

Second, the object NP raises out of VP, as it must precede VP-adjoined adverbs such as cal (‘well’), as in (8) (Hagstrom, 2000, 2002).1 (8) a.

b.

Toli-ka maykcwu-lul cal masi-n-ta. (S O Adv V) Toli-nom beer-acc well drink-pres-decl ‘Toli drinks beer well.’ * Toli-ka cal maykcwu-lul masi-n-ta. (*S Adv O V) Toli-nom well beer-acc drink-pres-decl ‘Toli drinks beer well.’

Third, short negation has the morpho-syntactic status of a clitic (Y.-S. Choi, 1999; H. Han & Park, 1994), as in many Romance languages (Cinque, 1999), and is treated as a unit with the verb in overt syntax. It must occur immediately before the verb as in (9). (9) a.

b.

1

Toli-ka maykcwu-lul cal an mas-in-ta (S O Adv Neg V) Toli-nom beer-acc well neg drink-pres-decl ‘Toli doesn’t drink beer well.’ * Toli-ka maykcwu-lul an cal mas-in-ta (*S O Neg Adv V) Toli-nom beer-acc neg well drink-pres-decl ‘Toli doesn’t drink beer well.’

Adverbs such as cal are not clitics on the verb. For example, cal can be modified by or conjoined with another adverb, as in (i). (i) a. b.

Toli-ka maykcwu-lul acwu cal masi-n-ta. Toli-nom beer-acc very well drink-pres-decl ‘Toli drinks beer very well.’ Toli-ka maykcwu-lul cal kuliko cacwu masi-n-ta. Toli-nom beer-acc well and often drink-pres-decl ‘Toli drinks beer well and often.’

76

Chung-hye Han, Jeffrey Lidz and Julien Musolino

Taken together, this suggests that scope facts in sentences containing both short negation and a quantified object NP could provide a clear test for the height of the verb. Given the scope-freezing effect, the scope of an argument QP will be determined by its surface position, without recourse to quantifier raising (QR) or reconstruction. This then means that it is the position of negation in the clause structure that determines the relative scope of negation and an argument QP. Finally, given that objects obligatorily raise out of the VP and that short negation forms a unit with the verb, the relative scope of negation and an object QP tells us whether the verb raises. If the verb raises, then negation (cliticized to the verb) occurs in a position higher than an object QP and therefore takes scope over this QP. On the other hand, if the verb remains in VP, then negation also remains in VP and the object QP takes scope over negation. In order to make these predictions more precise, we postulate the clause structure for Korean shown in (10). Long negation heads its own projection NegP (10a), and short negation is adjoined to VP (10b).2 The fact that a sentence can contain both short and long negation (6) supports two different positions for the two types of negation (A.-R. Kim, 2002). And the fact that ha, which is similar to English do, is required with long negation (4) supports the assumption that long negation is a head that projects a phrase of its own and blocks the verb from coming together with inflections (H.-D. Ahn, 1991; D.-I. Cho, 1994; E.-Y. Yi, 1994). The subject NP is higher up in [Spec,IP]. The object NP originates within VP but moves to a functional projection external to VP, presumably for case reasons. We will refer to this functional projection as FP, for lack of a better term. We can think of this FP as serving a similar syntactic function as the target position of object shift seen in many 2

In sentences with long negation, the main verb is inflected with –ci, as can be seen in (4). One of the main views on –ci is that it is a nominalizer that introduces a new clause (Hagstrom, 2002, and reference therein). Under this view, a sentence with long negation would be a complex clause, with –ci heading an embedded clause. But this analysis does not mesh well with how NPI licensing works in Korean. NPIs in Korean are licensed by negation in the same clause (Choe, 1988). If –ci is a nominalizer that introduces a new clause, then an NPI in the object position should not be licensed by long negation, as an object would belong to a different clause from long negation. But this is not true, as can be seen in (i). (i)

Toli-ka [amwu kesto mek-ci] ani ha-yess-ta. Toli-nom any thing eat-ci neg do-pst-decl ‘Toli didn’t eat anything.’

In contrast, an NPI in a truly nominalized clause cannot be licensed by negation in the higher clause. (ii)

*Toli-ka [amwu kesto mek-ki-lul] an wonha-n-ta. Toli-nom any thing eat-nmz-acc neg want-pres-decl ‘Toli does not want to eat anything.’

In light of this fact, we treat –ci as an inflection on the verb selected by long negation, similar to the way perfect have in English selects for a participle form of the following verb.

Acquisition of verb placement in the clause

77

Germanic languages (see Jonas & Bobaljik, 1996). Moreover, assuming that short negation undergoes cliticization onto the verb in overt syntax, as in Neg-cliticization in Romance languages proposed in Cinque (1999), if the verb undergoes raising, then short negation would end up high in the clause structure with the verb, as represented in (10c). (10)

(a)

IP

NPsubj

I’ FP

I F’

NPobj NegP VP NP t

(b)

F Neg long.neg

V

IP

NPsubj

I’ FP

I F’

NPobj VP sh.neg

F VP NP V t

(c)

IP

NPsubj

I’ FP

I F’

NPobj

sh.neg+ V + F + I

VP t

F t VP NP t

V t

78

Chung-hye Han, Jeffrey Lidz and Julien Musolino

With the structures in (10), the following predictions clearly emerge: (11)

Predictions: a. Subject QPs will scope over neg, independent of negation type. b. In the case of short negation, i) if there is verb-raising, then neg+V will occur in IP and neg will scope over object QPs; ii) if there is no verb-raising, then neg+V will occur inside VP and object QPs will scope over neg.

Although the predictions are clear, we cannot draw any conclusions regarding verb-raising based on what is reported in the extant literature, because the scope judgments reported in the literature for sentences containing negation and argument QPs often conflict with each other (C.-H. Cho, 1975; Song, 1982; J.-H. Suh, 1989; H.-H. Park, 1998; Y.-K. Baek, 1997; J.-B. Kim, 2000; Hagstrom, 2000). Why do Korean linguists seem unable to agree on these facts? One possibility is that the disagreement arises from a methodological problem. Perhaps some speakers are better able than others to imagine the contexts that make certain readings available. Or, perhaps, some speakers are influenced by their knowledge of logic or of other languages in making grammaticality judgments. A third possibility is that the variability found among speakers is not noise in the collection method but rather reflects a genuine fact about Korean speakers. In particular, it is possible that different speakers have different grammars with respect to verb-raising, leading in turn to different scope judgments. In the next section, we address this issue by controlling the context of presentation so as to yield what we believe are judgments that clearly illustrate people’s grammars. Experimental investigations We obtained scope judgments from speakers of Korean using the Truth Value Judgment Task (TVJT) (Crain & Thornton, 1998). As this method reduces the role of performance factors in accessing speakers’ intuitions and holds the discourse context constant (Crain & Thornton, 1998), experimentation using this method should provide data that accurately reflects the grammars of the speakers. The TVJT involves two experimenters. One experimenter acts out short scenarios in front of the participant using small toys and props. The other experimenter plays the role of a puppet (e.g. Mickey Mouse) who watches the scenario alongside the participant. At the end of the story, the puppet makes a statement about what he thinks happened in the story. The participant’s task is to determine whether the puppet told the truth or not. For instance, to test how speakers of English would interpret a negative sentence with a quantified subject such as Every horse didn’t jump over the fence, an experimenter enacts a scenario, using three toy horses and a toy fence,

Acquisition of verb placement in the clause

79

Figure 5.1. Screen shot of a scenario in the truth value judgment task

in which two of the horses jump over the fence, but one horse does not. In this situation, notice that Every horse didn’t jump over the fence is true on the interpretation where negation takes scope over the subject QP (i.e., not>every) but false if the subject QP is interpreted outside the scope of negation (i.e., every>not). A detailed context for this scenario is given in (12), and a screen shot of the resulting scenario is given in Figure 5.1. (12)

Example context:

One day three horses were playing in the field and they decided to jump over some stuff. There was a house and a fence in the yard. They decided that the house was too high to jump over and so they decided to try jumping over the fence. Two of them were very excited about jumping over the fence but the third wasn’t sure whether he could. The first one jumped over the fence. “Hey, that was fun”, he said. “You try it”. Then the second horse also jumped over the fence. The third one came up to the fence and considered jumping but he said that he had hurt his foot the day before and so decided not to jump. Another experimenter holds a Mickey Mouse puppet, acting as if he is watching the enacted scenario. Mickey, who is asked to describe what happened, then makes the following statement: (13)

Puppet statement: “Hmm. That was an interesting story about horses playing in the field. I can tell you something about the story. Every horse didn’t jump over the fence. Am I right?”

80

Chung-hye Han, Jeffrey Lidz and Julien Musolino

The participant’s task is to determine whether Mickey’s statement is true or false. If the participant judges the statement to be true, then we can conclude that the grammar makes available to him or her the reading on which negation scopes over the quantified NP. If the participant judges the statement to be false, then we can conclude that only the narrow scope reading of negation is available to him or her, and thus that the grammar does not generate the other reading. An important part of the reasoning behind this method is that participants will always assent when the test sentence uttered by the experimenter is true under at least one interpretation (Crain & Thornton, 1998). In other words, the method relies on listeners giving speakers the benefit of the doubt. Hence, if anything that the speaker says is true, then participants respond by saying that the speaker did in fact speak truthfully. Thus, when we present sentences that are true on one reading but false on another and the participants reject the statement as false, we conclude that the other reading is not available. The TVJT method provides rich discourse contexts, eliminating the role of performance factors and controlling for discourse factors in participants’ responses. The method has been shown to work in several languages (Lidz & Musolino, 2002; Papafragou & Musolino, 2003; inter alia), and to work with both adults and children as young as 4 years old (Crain & McKee, 1985; Crain & Thornton, 1998; Lidz & Musolino, 2002). Our experiments were designed for three purposes: (i) to determine experimentally what the facts are concerning adult Korean speakers’ scope judgments on sentences containing negation and quantified argument NPs; (ii) to determine whether Korean has verb-raising; (iii) to test predictions regarding children’s grammar made on the basis of the data we obtained from adults. To pursue these goals, we conducted two experiments, one with adults and the other with 4-year-old children. Experiment 1 Participants We tested 160 adult speakers of Korean, all undergraduate or graduate students at universities in Seoul, Korea. Experimental design For adults, we tested three factors with two levels each: scope (neg>∀ vs. ∀>neg) × negation (long vs. short) × grammatical function (subject QP vs. object QP). The experiment was thus divided into eight different conditions, each condition testing for the neg>∀ or ∀>neg reading in sentences containing long or short negation, and either a subject QP or an object QP. Twenty participants were assigned to each condition. The design is summarized in Table 5.1. Since the puppet’s statements on critical trials are potentially ambiguous, we chose to treat the scope condition as a between-participants factor, instead of a

Acquisition of verb placement in the clause

81

Table 5.1. Design of experiment with adults Grammatical function

Scope

Short negation

Long negation

Subject QP

Neg>∀ ∀>neg Neg>∀ ∀>neg

n = 20 n = 20 n = 20 n = 20

n = 20 n = 20 n = 20 n = 20

Object QP

2×2×2 design: Negation type (short vs. long) × QP position (subj. vs. obj.) × Scope (neg>∀ vs. ∀>neg)

within-participants factor, in order to avoid potential contaminating effects between the two possible readings. That is, once participants become aware of one of the possible interpretations for these statements, they may find it difficult to later assign a different interpretation to a similar statement. In other words, the initial interpretation that participants assign to statements containing a QP and negation may influence the way they interpret subsequent statements containing the same elements. Materials We constructed two versions of each scenario, one version testing the neg>∀ reading and the other version testing the ∀>neg reading. There were four different types of test sentences for each reading: (i) subject QP and long negation as in (14a), (ii) subject QP and short negation as in (14b), (iii) object QP and long negation as in (15a), and (iv) object QP and short negation as in (15b).3 (14)

3

Subject QPs: a. Motun mal-i wulthali-lul nem-ci ani ha-yess-ta. Every horse-nom fence-acc jump.over-ci neg do-pst-decl ‘Every horse didn’t jump over the fence.’ (long negation) b. Motun mal-i wulthali-lul an nem-ess-ta. Every horse-nom fence-acc neg jump.over-pst-decl ‘Every horse didn’t jump over the fence.’ (short negation)

For many Korean speakers, a more natural way of expressing universal quantification is to use post-nominal quantifiers like ta or motwu. The problem with these quantifiers for the present purposes is that syntactically they are floating adverbial quantifiers and do not form a constituent with the nouns they modify. For instance, an adverb can intervene between a post-nominal quantifier and the noun it modifies, as in (i). This means that the quantifier can stay low within VP, below negation, and so the neg>all reading, if available, could not be attributed to verbraising. For this reason, we chose to use pre-nominal quantifiers in our test sentences, which are in constituent with the nouns they modify. (i)

Khwukhi monste-ka khwukhi-lul tahaynghito ta an mek-ess-ta. Cookie Monster-nom cookie-acc fortunately all neg eat-pst-decl‘ ‘Cookie monster didn’t eat every cookie fortunately.’

82

(15)

Chung-hye Han, Jeffrey Lidz and Julien Musolino

Object QPs: a. Khwukhi monste-ka motun khwukhi-lul mek-ci ani ha-yess-ta. Cookie Monster-nom every cookie-acc eat-ci neg do-pst-decl ‘Cookie monster didn’t eat every cookie.’ (long negation) b. Khwukhi monste-ka motun khwukhi-lul an mek-ess-ta. Cookie Monster-nom every cookie-acc neg eat-pst-decl ‘Cookie monster didn’t eat every cookie.’ (short negation)

In the scenario that tests the neg>∀ reading on the basis of (14a) and (14b), three horses are playing together. Two horses jump over the fence, but the third one doesn’t. At the end of the story, Mickey Mouse says in Korean “I know what happened” and states either (14a) or (14b), depending on what condition is being tested. In the scenario that tests the ∀>neg reading, none of the horses jumps over the fence. Mickey Mouse then describes the situation using either (14a) or (14b).4 In the scenario that tests the neg>∀ reading on the basis of (15a) and (15b), Cookie Monster is given three cookies but only eats two of them (i.e. not all of them). Mickey Mouse then describes the situation using (15a) or (15b) depending on the condition. In the scenario that tests the ∀>neg reading, Cookie Monster eats none of the cookies, and then Mickey Mouse describes the situation using (15a) or (15b). Each participant was given four test trials. In addition, participants were given four filler trials as in (16): two testing their comprehension of negation, and two testing their comprehension of quantified NPs. (16)

4

Fillers a. Khokkili-ka namwu wi-ey ollaka-ci ani ha-yess-ta. elephant-nom wood top-at climb-ci neg do-pst-decl The elephant didn’t climb up the tree.’ b. Wonswungi-ka namwu wi-ey an ollaka-ss-ta. Monkey-nom wood top-at neg climb-pst-decl ‘The monkey didn’t climb up the tree.’ c. Motun pelley-ka namwu-eyse tteleci-ess-ta. Every bug-nom tree-from fall-pst-decl ‘Every bug fell from the tree.’

The experimenter was instructed to say the test sentence in a way that made it true, thus controlling for any potentially contaminating effects of prosody. For adult participants, all the test sentences were presented in pre-recorded video clips, as a further measure to keep the effects of intonation, if any, constant. In light of the findings reported in McMahon, Lidz and Pierrehumbert (2004), however, we do not think it likely that the results obtained from our experiments were influenced by any prosodic factors. They show that in English, speakers do not reliably produce intonational or prosodic cues to scopal interpretation in the kinds of sentences similar in form to our test sentences, suggesting that intonation is not a factor in guiding either children’s or adults’ behavior in tasks similar to the ones in our experiments.

Acquisition of verb placement in the clause

83

d. Smuf-ka motun ppang-ul mek-ess-ta. Smurf-nom every bread-acc eat-pst-decl ‘Smurf ate every loaf of bread.’ The purpose of the filler trials is to separately control for participants’ knowledge of the meaning of negation and universally quantified NPs, the two linguistic elements involved in the meaning of the test sentences. Filler sentences containing long negation were given to participants in the short negation condition, and those containing short negation were given to participants in the long negation condition. By using the opposite negation form in the filler items and the test items, we add some variability to the materials, thereby making it harder for the participants to guess the purpose of the experiment. Similarly, filler sentences containing subject QPs were given to participants in object QP condition, and those containing object QPs were given to participants in subject QP condition. As with negation, inclusion of quantifiers with the opposite grammatical function from the test items in the fillers helped mask the purpose of the experiment. We set up the scenarios for the filler trials such that the correct answer for the filler statements was ‘true’ in subject QP – short neg – neg>∀ and object QP – short neg – neg>∀ conditions. This was because we expected that participants in these conditions were likely to say that the actual test items were false. Thus, including these fillers ensured that participants would not think that the only possible answer in the experiment is ‘false.’ The fillers in the other six conditions were designed to give the answer ‘false.’ Procedure Adult participants were shown a video-taped version of the scenarios described above. They were first introduced to the task with two practice trials, one in which Mickey Mouse’s statement was true and one in which it was false. They then were shown four test trials and four filler trials in pseudo-random order. They were given a score sheet and were instructed to indicate, for each story, whether Mickey Mouse spoke truthfully. They were asked to provide a brief justification for their answers. Adult participants were tested in groups of 10 to 20 in classrooms. Results For each condition, our dependent measure was the proportion of ‘yes’ responses to Mickey’s statements. These data are given in Table 5.2 and shown graphically in Figures 5.2 and 5.3. The proportion of ‘yes’ responses was entered into an analysis of variance (ANOVA), which revealed the following effects. First, we found a main effect of interpretation (F(1,152)= 267.44, p < .0001). That is, independent of negation type or grammatical function, speakers were more likely to accept the ∀>neg reading than the neg>∀ reading. Second, we

84

Chung-hye Han, Jeffrey Lidz and Julien Musolino

Table 5.2. Mean percentage acceptances by condition: adults Grammatical function

Scope

Short negation

Long negation

Subject QP

neg>∀ ∀>neg neg>∀ ∀>neg

4% 100% 37% 98%

19% 100% 46% 98%

Object QP

100 80 60 40 20 0 Short neg neg>every

Long neg every>neg

Figure 5.2. Mean percentage acceptances in subject condition: adults

100 80 60 40 20 0 Short neg

neg>every

Long neg

every>neg

Figure 5.3. Mean percentage acceptances in object condition: adults

found a main effect of grammatical function (F(1,152)= 11.64, p < .0008) and an interaction between interpretation and grammatical function (F(1,152) = 13.91, p < .0003). That is, independent of negation type, speakers were significantly more likely to accept the neg>∀ reading on an object QP

Acquisition of verb placement in the clause

85

Number of participants

10 8 6 4 2 0 0

25 50 75 Percentage acceptance Short neg

100

Long neg

Figure 5.4. Number of participants accepting neg>∀ in object condition: adults

than on a subject QP. Importantly, whereas the acceptance rate on the neg>∀ reading was higher in the object condition than in the subject condition, over 50% of the participants still did not accept this interpretation in the object condition.5 This last result is of particular interest. Figure 5.4 divides the participants into groups based on their rate of acceptance of the sentences presented in the neg>∀ context in the object condition. What we see there is that most participants either accepted all of these items or rejected all of them, generally giving the same answer on all trials. This indicates that our population is divided into two groups: those that accept wide scope negation relative to an object QP and those that do not. Discussion (17)

5

Recall our predictions stated in (11), repeated here as (17).

Predictions: a. Subject QPs will scope over neg, independent of negation type. b. With short negation, i) if there is verb-raising, then neg+V will occur in IP and neg will scope over object QPs; ii) if there is no verb-raising, then neg+V will occur inside VP and object QPs will scope over neg.

Participants were near perfect on filler items, indicating that they had no difficulty with the task or with negation or universal quantification in isolation.

86

Chung-hye Han, Jeffrey Lidz and Julien Musolino

Prediction (17a) is borne out by our findings. Participants uniformly accepted the ∀>neg reading for subject QPs, independent of negation type. Importantly, our data indicate that any variability found among Korean linguists regarding the interpretation of subject QPs with respect to negation must represent an artifact of data collection. Our participants rarely accepted the neg>∀ interpretation for subject QPs and always accepted the ∀>neg interpretation. Furthermore, these data lend support to the reasoning by which we established our predictions. We showed that, given three basic facts (frozen scope, obligatory object-raising, and the clitic status of negation), both a verb-raising and an infl-lowering grammar would predict that the subject obligatorily takes scope over negation. The fact that this prediction was borne out indicates that our use of scope interactions between the quantificational NPs and negation is appropriate for examining the height of the verb. Prediction (17b), however, is the crucial piece of the puzzle as it would tease apart the difference between a verb-raising and a non-verb-raising grammar. What we found was that only about half of our participants accepted the neg>∀ interpretation in which short negation takes scope over the object QP. Furthermore, this split was also found in the neg>∀ interpretation with long negation and an object QP. The bimodal distribution in acceptance rates of the reading for object QPs shows that there is a split in the population: a little less than half the people allow negation to scope over an object QP, regardless of negation type. In this case, we can conclude that the literature on Korean scope judgments for object QPs reflects real variability in the population of Korean speakers. The scope judgments that we elicited within rich discourse contexts showed the same kind of disagreement as is attested in the literature. The split in the population strongly suggests one thing: there is a split in the grammar. That is, half of the population has acquired an infl-lowering grammar and the other half has acquired a verb-raising grammar. The population that has acquired an infl-lowering grammar does not generate the neg>∀ reading on an object QP because their grammar only generates the structure in which the object c-commands negation, as represented by Grammar A in (18). In Grammar A, sentences with short negation have cliticization of short negation and infl-lowering to V, as in (18a), and sentences with long negation have cliticization of long negation and infl-lowering to ha in F, as in (18b). But the population that has acquired a verb-raising grammar generates the neg>∀ reading for an object QP because their grammar generates the structure in which negation c-commands the object, as represented by Grammar B in (19). In Grammar

Acquisition of verb placement in the clause

87

B, sentences with short negation have cliticization of short negation to V and verb-raising to infl, as in (19a), and sentences with long negation have cliticization of long negation to ha in F and raising of ha to infl, as in (19b). (18)

Grammar A (infl-lowering grammar): a) infl lowers to V; short neg cliticizes to V; object scopes over short neg. (a)

IP I’

NPsubj FP NPobj

I F’

VP

F

sh.neg

VP NP t

V

b) infl lowers to ha; long neg cliticizes to ha; object scopes over long neg. IP NPsubj

I’ FP

I F’

NPobj NegP VP NP t

Neg long.neg V

F ha

88

Chung-hye Han, Jeffrey Lidz and Julien Musolino

(19)

Grammar B (verb-raising grammar): a) Short neg cliticizes to V; V raises to infl; short neg scopes over object. IP NPsubj

I’ FP

I F’

NPobj

sh.neg+ V + F + I

VP

F t VP

t NP t

V t

b) Long neg cliticizes to ha; ha raises to infl; long neg scopes over object. IP NPsubj

I’ I

FP F’

NPobj NegP VP NP t

long.neg + F+ I F ha

Neg t V

Finally, if our two-grammar hypothesis is correct, then it predicts that we should find the same split in the population among children acquiring Korean. If the split in the population derives from the fact that speakers are rarely exposed to sentences involving negation and an object QP in situations that make it clear which interpretation is intended, then we should expect to find roughly the same split in the population from generation to generation, with some speakers choosing verb-raising and others infl-lowering. As the following subsection shows in detail, our results from 4-year-old children verify this prediction. Just

Acquisition of verb placement in the clause

89

Table 5.3. Design of experiment with children Grammatical function

Scope

Short negation

Long negation

Object QP

neg>∀ ∀>neg

n = 15 n = 15

n = 15 n = 15

2×2 design: Negation type (short vs. long) × Scope (neg>∀ vs. ∀>neg)

like adults, children accepted the neg>∀ reading only about half the time. And crucially, just like the adult data, the child data shows a bimodal distribution of acceptances of the neg>∀ reading. Experiment 2 Participants We tested 60 4-year-old Korean children between the ages of 4:0 and 4:11 (mean: 4:5), recruited from preschools in Korea. We chose 4-year-olds because children at this age are old enough to have mastered both negation forms (H.-H. Park, 1998), and have been shown crosslinguistically to be able to handle the demands of the task (Musolino, Crain & Thornton, 2000 for English; Lidz & Musolino, 2002 for English & Kannada). Experimental design We tested two factors with two levels each: scope (neg>∀ vs. ∀>neg) × negation (long vs. short). All the tests were done on sentences with object QPs. Because the object conditions are the ones that are potentially informative about the height of the verb, we tested only these. The experiment was thus divided into four different conditions, each condition testing for the neg>∀ or the ∀>neg reading in sentences containing an object QP, and long or short negation. Fifteen children were randomly assigned to each condition. The design is summarized in Table 5.3. Materials The test materials were identical to those in experiment 1 with the exception that the subject QP condition was excluded from the design. Procedure Children were tested individually in a quiet room away from the class and all the scenarios were acted out in front of them by an experimenter using small toys and props. As with adults, children were introduced to the task with two practice trials followed by four test and four filler trials in pseudo-random order. The children’s responses were recorded on a score sheet by the experimenter. The experimenter also asked the children why they answered that Mickey was right or wrong, and recorded their responses.

90

Chung-hye Han, Jeffrey Lidz and Julien Musolino

Table 5.4. Mean percentage acceptances by condition for object QPs: children Scope

Short negation

Long negation

neg>∀ ∀>neg

37% 82%

33% 87%

100 80 60 40 20 0 Short neg neg>every

Long neg every>neg

Figure 5.5. Mean percentage acceptances in object condition: children

Results The mean percentages of acceptances by condition for object QPs are summarized in Table 5.4, and the graphical representation is given in Figure 5.5. Just like adults, children were more likely to accept the ∀>neg reading than the neg>∀ reading, regardless of negation type (F(1, 56)= 20.09, p < .0001). In the ∀>neg condition, children accepted 82% with short negation and 87% with long negation, whereas in the neg>∀ condition, their acceptance rates were 37% and 33%, respectively. Thus, similar to adults, between one-third and one-half of the children accepted the neg>∀ reading with object QPs.6,7 Also like adults, the children’s scores were bimodally distributed. That is, each child generally gave the same answer on all trials. Thus the 37% acceptance rate for the neg>∀ reading in short negation derives from 37% of the 6

7

Note that the ∀>neg reading entails the neg>∀ reading. Thus, the fact that nearly 100% of our participants accepted the ∀>neg reading in the object condition follows from the fact that this reading is consistent with either grammar. Those speakers with an infl-lowering grammar will generate the ∀>neg reading only. Those with a verb-raising grammar will say that the puppet spoke truthfully in the ∀>neg conditions because these contexts are consistent with the neg>∀ interpretation generated by their grammars. Like adults, child participants were near perfect on filler items, indicating that they had no difficulty with the task or with negation or universal quantification in isolation.

Acquisition of verb placement in the clause

91

children accepting the neg>∀ reading and not from each child accepting it 37% of the time. That is, in short negation, nine children never accepted the neg>∀ reading, one child accepted it 50% of the time and five children always accepted it. This finding supports our hypothesis that there are two grammars of Korean active in the population of Korean speakers: one grammar with verb-raising and one without. General discussion The results of our experiments with adults and children on scope interactions between negation and quantified NPs suggest that there are two grammars of verb-raising active in the population of Korean speakers. We have argued that the existence of two populations follows from the poverty of the stimulus. Even though the range of possible verb-raising grammars is restricted by Universal Grammar (UG), the data that learners of Korean are exposed to is equally consistent with either of two grammars. Given that there is no basis on which to make a choice between a verb-raising grammar and an infl-lowering grammar, Korean learners must choose at random. This results in roughly half the population acquiring one grammar and roughly half acquiring the other. This conclusion supports claims from the diachronic syntax literature (Kroch, 1989) that even given the restricted hypothesis space determined by UG, insufficient input can lead to distinct grammars in a single population. The general model under consideration here is one in which all language acquisition involves grammar competition (Kroch, 1989; C. Yang, 2002; Roeper, 1999; 2002; cf. Chomsky, 1981, 1986a). Under this approach, learners consider multiple grammars simultaneously, with language acquisition representing the exclusion of alternatives and the settling on a single grammar. It is important to observe that the two-grammar result in Korean is not a direct consequence of the SOV nature of the language alone. It is possible for an SOV language to be unambiguously verb-raising or infl-lowering. It is also not the case that children learning any SOV language will be bimodally distributed in their responses in a TVJT examining the scope of an object QP with respect to negation. For example, Lidz and Musolino (2002) examined the scope of object quantifiers with respect to negation in English (SVO) and Kannada (SOV). Whereas adults in both languages allow either scope, children in both languages display a strong preference for the surface scope (neg>∀) reading. Although Kannada is an SOV language, we do not find any evidence of a split in the population with respect to verb-raising. This result may derive from the fact that relevant cues are available to the learners. For instance, Kannada verbs typically inflect for tense and agreement, but fail to do so in the presence of negation. This observation by itself may be a sufficient cue for learners to determine that Kannada has a verb-raising grammar and that raising is blocked by negation.

92

Chung-hye Han, Jeffrey Lidz and Julien Musolino

Although it is true that verb-raising may be harder to detect in SOV languages than in other languages, it is not the case that no cues exist. Rather, a host of other unrelated properties make verb-raising especially hard to detect in Korean. Consequently, we find that learners are unable to determine the ‘correct’ grammar and hence choose essentially at random from two possible options, both of which are fully consistent with the language data they are exposed to. This last point brings up an important question about the nature of the parameters that allow for the kind of variability that we have observed here. Do all parameters allow for this kind of indeterminacy or are some parameters special? In our view, there is nothing special about the verb-raising parameter per se that leads to our observed split in the population. Rather, it is the relation between the parameter settings and strings of words in the language that is responsible for this variation. It is only when two parameter settings are equally compatible with the observed sentences that this kind of variability is expected to arise. Hence, we do not expect to find a subpopulation of English speakers, for example, with a no-movement setting of the wh-movement parameter. This is because there is lots of positive evidence that would lead them to the right setting. It is only when two settings of a parameter predict nearly identical strings that we expect to find multiple grammars competing in a population. In other words, the smaller the set of sentences predicted by one setting but not the other, the greater the likelihood for multiple grammars within a population. This is because as the area of non-overlap between the two grammars shrinks, it becomes less likely that a learner will be exposed to sentences in that area. The set of sentences that distinguishes a verb-raising grammar from an infllowering grammar in Korean is arguably very small. Consequently, even learners with the highly restricted hypothesis space provided by UG may have difficulty setting that parameter on the basis of positive evidence. In this situation, we expect, and indeed we find, that learners choose a parameter setting seemingly at random.

6

Learning locative verb syntax: a crosslinguistic experimental study Meesook Kim*

Introduction It has been widely observed that learning verb meanings and their associated syntactic possibilities provides a general problem in language acquisition (Baker, 1979; Gleitman, 1990; Gold, 1967; Pinker, 1984, 1989, 1994; Randall, 1987, 1992, etc.). In learning a verb’s meaning, children need to identify what events in the world the verb refers to. In learning a verb’s syntactic possibilities, children need to reach a level where they can generalize beyond the verb-structure pairings in the input, but without overgeneralizing. Furthermore, if individual verbs can appear in various syntactic structures, then learning the syntax and semantics of these verbs is made much harder for the children because they have to figure out which verbs can occur with which of the syntactic frames. Locative verbs like pour, fill, and load, which have received considerable attention in the areas of syntax and semantics, have provided an example of these kinds of learnability problems because they show various syntactic possibilities (Anderson, 1971; Brinkmann, 1997; Dowty, 1991; Gropen, Pinker, Hollander & Goldberg, 1991a,b; Jackendoff, 1996; Levin, 1993; Pesetsky, 1995; Pinker, 1984, 1989; Rappaport & Levin, 1988). (1) a. (2) a. (3) a.

Ted poured milk into his glass. b. * Ted poured his glass with milk. *Ted filled milk into his glass. b. Ted filled his glass with milk. Ted sprayed paint onto the garage. b. Ted sprayed the garage with paint.

Baker (1979) was the first to point out that the acquisition of syntactic structure alternations for locative verbs poses a learnability problem. Baker claimed that children simply learn the possible syntactic information in which a verb may appear only if they have actually observed the verb with that structure in the input. Nevertheless, there is clear evidence that children are * I would like to thank Colin Phillips and Barbara Landau for their collaboration on this research. This research is part of the author’s doctoral dissertation.

93

94

Meesook Kim

liberal and productive, not conservative, in producing verbs in syntactic structures. For instance, English-speaking children have been found to produce ungrammatical sentences like “She filled the water into the glass” in both spontaneous speech and in elicited production tasks (Bowerman, 1982; Gropen et al., 1991a,b). Randall (1987, 1992) has proposed a syntactic account to solve the learnability problem of how children figure out which verbs allow alternation and which verbs do not. She suggests that the main property distinguishing alternating from non-alternating verbs involves the verb’s basic argument structure: alternating verbs take two obligatory postverbal arguments, whereas non-alternating verbs take only one. Although many different solutions to this learnability problem have been suggested, most of them rely on the assumption that children are aided by the existence of reliable syntax–semantics mappings, which cause verbs with similar meanings to have similar syntactic possibilities (Gleitman, 1990; Grimshaw, 1981; Gropen et al., 1991a,b; Landau & Gleitman, 1985; H. Lee, 1993; Levin, 1993; Pinker, 1989; Rappaport & Levin, 1985, 1988). For example, Pinker and his collaborators carried out their own experiments in order to show how universal linking rules could help children learn verb meanings and their associated syntactic frames successfully (Gropen et al., 1991a,b). Nevertheless, there are remaining problems in their work. First, Pinker and his collaborators have not extended the universal linking rules to a crosslinguistic perspective. Based on a crosslinguistic study, we need to know what children can and cannot successfully learn about the syntax of locative verbs by using crosslinguistic consistent syntax–semantics correspondences. Second, Gropen et al. (1991a) carried out experiments to explain why English-speaking children overgeneralize Figure-frame syntax to Ground verbs like fill and cover, and produce ungrammatical sentences like “She filled the water into the glass.” By using two manner-of-motion verbs like pour and dump and two change-of-state verbs like fill and empty, they concluded that children mistakenly think that fill has a manner-of-motion meaning like pour, instead of an end state of fullness, which leads to their syntactic errors. M. Kim carried out an experiment with two versions of the “filling” event: one which could be interpreted as “filling” caused in a “pouring”-manner, and another which still involved “filling”, but not in a “pouring”-manner. Furthermore, Kim also included a large set of locative verbs in her experiment to find out whether children and adults treat other verbs in the same class alike (M. Kim, 1999). This paper starts by investigating the syntax and semantics of locative verbs in English and Korean, and re-examines the problem of argument structure learnability raised by crosslinguistic variation, drawing on elicited production

Learning locative verb syntax

95

studies with adult and child speakers of Korean and English. Therefore, this paper allows us to find out what children can and cannot learn by using consistent crosslinguistic syntax–semantics correspondences. Syntax–semantics correspondences for locative verbs in English and Korean Locative verbs are defined here as those verbs involving a relationship between a moving object, which is commonly known as “the Figure”, and a location, which is commonly known as “the Ground”. Although locative verbs all show this semantic similarity, they fall into at least four different syntactic subclasses based on their syntactic possibilities (Pinker, 1989), as repeated here: Non-alternating Figure verbs in English: (4) a. b.

Ted poured waterFigure into his glassGround. Figure-frame *Ted poured his glassGround with waterFigure. *Ground-frame

Non-alternating Ground verbs in English: (5) a. b.

*Ted filled waterFigure into his glassGround. *Figure-frame Ted filled his glassGround with waterFigure. Ground-frame

Figure-alternating verbs in English: (6) a. b.

Ted piled books (on the tableoptional). Figure-frame Ted piled the table with books. Ground-frame

Ground-alternating verbs in English: (7) a. b.

Ted stuffed feathers into the pillow. Figure-frame Ted stuffed the pillow (with feathersoptional). Ground-frame

For example, verbs like pour and spill only allow the Figure-frame, in which the Figure object is encoded as the direct object, and the Ground object is encoded as the indirect object PP, as in (4). In contrast, verbs like fill and cover only allow the “Ground-frame”, in which the Ground object is encoded as the direct object, and the Figure object is encoded as PP, as in (5). In addition to the Figure and Ground Non-alternating classes, Alternating verbs are divided into two subclasses, the Figure-alternating verbs in (6) and the Ground-alternating verbs in (7), based on which argument is obligatory in both syntactic frames (see Pinker, 1989). That is, the Figure-alternating verb pile only allows the omission of the Ground argument, as in (6a), whereas the Ground-alternating verb stuff only allows the omission of the Figure argument, as in (7b). Given the fact that locative verbs show different syntactic possibilities, an important question is how children succeed in learning the syntax and semantics

96

Meesook Kim

of locative verbs without overgeneralizing. As a possible learning mechanism, it is widely assumed that there are consistent correspondences between verb meanings and verb syntax, and that knowledge of these correspondences may provide important help to the learner (Gleitman, 1990; Grimshaw, 1981; Gropen et al., 1991a,b; Landau & Gleitman, 1985; Pinker, 1989). For example, verbs with the same syntax as pour, such as drip and dribble, have semantic properties in common with pour in that they all describe a particular manner of motion of a moving object, and they are Non-alternating Figure verbs. Similarly, verbs with the same syntax as fill, such as cover, decorate, and soak, all describe a change of state of the Ground object, and they are Non-alternating Ground verbs. Thus, we have an example of a reliable syntax–semantics correspondence. If children know about correspondences like these, then it could be easier to learn the syntax and semantics of locative verbs. Despite consistent syntax–semantics mappings in English, it has been reported that there is crosslinguistic variation in these mappings (Brinkmann, 1997 for German; Fukui, Miyagawa & Tenny, 1985 for Japanese; Juffs, 1996 for Chinese; H. Lee, 1993, M. Kim & Landau, 1997 and C. Lee, Nam & Kang, 1998 for Korean).1 For example, change-of-state verbs like fill are Nonalternating Ground verbs in English, but the Korean counterparts of this class are syntactic Alternators, which allow both Figure- and Ground-frames, as shown in (8). This suggests that the connection between change-of-state meanings and Non-alternating Ground frame syntax might not be universal. And if it is not universal, then it is much less clear how it could be useful to children. (8) a.

b.

Yumi-ka mwul-ul khep-ey chaewu-ess-ta. Nom water-Acc cup-Loc fill-past-Decl ‘*Yumi filled water into the glass.’ Figure-frame Yumi-ka khep-ul mwul-lo chaewu-ess-ta. Nom cup-Acc water-with fill-past-Decl ‘Yumi filled the glass with water.’ Ground-frame

To take another example, one of the subclasses of Alternating locative verbs in English, the class that includes verbs like pile or spray, has Korean counterparts which are consistently Non-alternating Figure verbs, as in (9). 1

Following the previous experiment by Gropen et al. (1991a), H. Lee examined how Koreanspeaking children understand locative verbs, focusing on pour and fill. Unlike English-speaking children, Korean children showed no problem in understanding the end-state meaning of the verb fill. She also concluded that the semantic difference of locative verbs led to the syntactic difference crosslinguistically. In contrast, Kim claims that crosslinguistic variation of locative verb structure is not due to the differences in verbs’ meanings across languages. See H. Lee (1993, 2000) and M. Kim (1999) for more detailed discussion of this issue.

Learning locative verb syntax

(9) a.

b.

97

Yumi-ka chaek-ul chaeksang-ey ssa-ass-ta. Nom book-Acc table-Loc pile-past-Decl ‘Yumi piled the books on the table.’ Figure-frame *Yumi-ka chaeksang-ul chaek-elo ssa-ass-ta. Nom table-Acc book-with pile-past-Decl ‘Yumi piled the table with the books.’ Ground-frame

The two remaining classes of locative verbs in English, the Non-alternating Figure verbs and the second subclass of Alternating verbs, are syntactically identical in English and Korean, as shown in (10) and (11). (10) a. Yumi-ka mwul-ul khep-ey pwu-ess-ta. Nom water-Acc glass-Loc pour-past-Decl ‘Yumi poured water into the glass.’ Figure-frame b. *Yumi-ka khep-ul mwul-lo pwu-ess-ta. Nom glass-Acc water-with pour-past-Decl ‘*Yumi poured the glass with water.’ *Ground-frame (11) a. Yumi-ka peinte-lul pyek-ey chilha-yess-ta. Nom oilpaint-Acc wall-Loc paint-past-Decl ‘Yumi painted oilpaint onto the wall.’ Figure-frame b. Yumi-ka pyek-ul peinte-lo chilha-yess-ta. Nom wall-Acc oilpaint-with paint-past-Decl ‘Yumi painted the wall with the oilpaint.’ Ground-frame The existence of crosslinguistic differences in the syntax of locative verbs undermines learning strategies based on universal mappings between syntax and semantics. The problem is to show how children can use syntax–semantics correspondences despite the problem of crosslinguistic variation. Furthermore, this problem is independent of the Pinker (1989, 1994) and Gleitman (1990) controversy. It challenges an assumption which both approaches (Pinker’s semantic bootstrapping vs. Gleitman’s syntactic bootstrapping) share. In addition, it has been widely reported that English-speaking children overgeneralize Figure-frame syntax to Ground verbs like fill and cover, and produce ungrammatical sentences like “She filled the water into the glass” (Bowerman, 1982; Gropen et al., 1991a,b). Why do children overgeneralize in these cases? The first possibility is that children’s Figure-frame errors result from the greater perceptual salience of moving objects compared to stationary Ground objects (Gentner, 1978; Gropen et al., 1991a,b). This could bias children to encode the Figure object as the direct object, even when this is ungrammatical. A variant of this idea is the suggestion by Gropen et al. (1991a,b), that the salience of the Figure object may cause learners to semantically misanalyze Ground verbs. A manner of motion that is characteristic of a verb, such as the

98

Meesook Kim

pouring that often co-occurs with a filling event, may be treated as an essential property of the semantics of the verb, with the result that the Figure frame is predicted to be possible. For example, the verb fill might be taken to mean “fillby-pouring”, which has the manner-of-motion meaning required to license Figure frames. The second possibility, which is proposed by Bowerman (1982, 1990), is that children’s Figure-frame overgeneration errors are due to the fact that Figureframes might outnumber Ground-frames in the parental input (but cf. Gropen et al., 1991a). If children conclude that Figure-frames are the dominant syntactic pattern for expressing English locative verbs in parental speech, then they may generalize this pattern to all locative verbs. Therefore, frequency effects may lead to children’s well-known syntactic errors with “fill”-type verbs. I call this the Input-Frequency Hypothesis. The third possibility is that learners of English think that their language has the properties of Korean, in which verbs like fill allow Figure-frame syntax. This could be because the Korean pattern is an unmarked pattern, or we could think of it as a mis-set parameter. To address these questions, M. Kim (1999) examined spontaneous descriptions of locative events produced by Korean- and English-speaking children and adults. The experiment allowed us to assess 3–4-year-olds’ knowledge of the syntax of locative verbs, while also testing to see if we could find independent support for any of these different accounts of syntactic errors with locative verbs. Experiment Method M. Kim (1999) carried out an elicited production task of 14 locative verbs from 60 participants, including 30 speakers each of English and Korean. Within each language group three different age groups participated: ten 3-year-olds, ten adult native speakers, and ten mothers of 2-year-olds who were asked to describe the scenes to their children. The 14 locative verbs are divided into four subclasses of locative verbs, as shown in (12). The classes are based on the results of an earlier grammaticality study in Kim and Landau (1997). (12)

Subclasses of locative verbs Group 1 ( “pour”-class verbs): Figure verbs in both English and Korean (pour ‘pwus-ta’, spill ‘ssot-ta’, hang ‘kel-ta’, and stick ‘pwuchi-ta’) Group 2 ( “paint”-class verbs): Alternators in both English and Korean (paint ‘chilha-ta’, wrap ‘kam-ta’, stuff ‘chaewu-ta’, and spread ‘palu-ta’)

Learning locative verb syntax

99

Group 3 ( “pile”-class verbs): Alternators in English but Figure verbs in Korean (spray ‘ppuli-ta’, pile ‘ssah-ta’, and load ‘sit-ta’) Group 4 ( “fill”-class verbs): Ground verbs in English but Alternators in Korean (fill ‘chaewu-ta’, cover ‘tep-ta’, and decorate ‘changsikha-ta’) This is a broader class of verbs as compared to the one used in Gropen et al.’s (1991a) study. For instance, Gropen et al. used two Figure verbs pour and dump and two Ground verbs fill and empty. There are two main reasons for using this larger set of verbs. First, this experiment allowed us to examine whether children and adults treat all verbs in the same class alike. Second, including a number of Alternating verbs allowed us to find out what syntactic choices speakers make when their native language grammar gives them an option for syntactic frames. Before testing their knowledge of locative verbs, the experimenter introduced participants to two sample video-clips depicting sample actions of dropping and shaking, in order to familiarize the participants with the procedures. One clip showed a woman dropping a pen on a sheet of paper, and the other showed a hand shaking a can of soda. The experimenter would say “Look at the movie: there is a woman, a piece of paper, and a pen. She is dropping … Can you tell me what she did? She dropped ___”. If participants failed to produce a full sentence with a PP argument like “she dropped the pen on a piece of paper”, the experimenter encouraged them to use it, like “she dropped the pen ___”. Participants were shown a series of video-taped events, one at a time. After watching each video-clip, they were asked to describe the event using a specific verb that was provided to them. However, this method was not enough to elicit complete sentences with Figure and Ground arguments from children. In a pilot study, children often omitted one or more of the arguments, which was compatible with the pragmatics of the situation. More specifically, the pilot study I conducted showed that the ten English-speaking children omitted the PP argument 73% of the time, and the three Korean-speaking children omitted the PP argument 82% of the time. The problem with the omission of a PP argument is that children may not have an option to choose for syntactic frames of Alternating verbs. Therefore, in order for children to produce complete sentences with Figure and Ground arguments, before showing each video-clip to them, a contrasting event was acted out using the same verb but different objects. For example, when the video-clip showed juice being poured into a glass, the experimenter first acted out an event in which water was poured into a bowl. In addition, two different scenes for each of the verbs were included: one in which the Ground object was completely filled or covered, and another in which it was only partially affected by the action. This manipulation was included

100

Meesook Kim

because it has often been pointed out that the Ground-frame is associated with a “holistic interpretation” of how the Ground object is affected (Anderson, 1971; Gropen et al., 1991a,b; Pinker, 1989). However, it turned out that this manipulation had no effect on any of the results. Finally, in contrast with the experiments by Gropen et al. (1991a), two versions of the “filling” event were included: one which could be interpreted as “filling” caused by “pouring”manner, and another which still involved “filling”, but not caused by “pouring”-manner. Results In all of the results, the performance of children was compared to the group of mothers, and the group of adults was ignored, although this group performed almost identically to the mothers. A two-way ANOVA analysis of variance on the proportion of Figure-frame responses revealed no significant difference between adults and mothers (F (1,36) = .56, p = .11), and no significant interaction between age group (adults and mothers) and language (F (1,36) = 1.59, p = .07). Table 6.1 shows the results from the first group of verbs, which included pour, spill, hang, and stick. These are semantically manner-of-motion verbs, and syntactically Non-alternating Figure verbs in both languages. Mothers performed as expected, and children in both languages responded in a targetlike manner, using only Figure-frames. A two-way analysis of variance on the proportion of Figure-frame responses showed no reliable effect of age (F (1.36) = 2.25, p = .14) or language (F (1,36) = 2.25, p = .14), and no significant interaction between age and language (F (1,36) = 2.25, p = .14). The second group of verbs, which included paint, wrap, stuff, and spread, is important because it consists of verbs which are Alternators in both English and Korean. The fact that both languages allow a choice gives us an opportunity to look for independent evidence for a Figure-frame bias. Table 6.2 shows that children do indeed use more Figure-frames than mothers with this class of verbs. However, it is important to notice that this effect is relatively small, in the 10–20% range. This is an effect that we will see again. There is also an effect of language, with Korean speakers overall producing more Figure-

Table 6.1. Proportion of Figure-frames used by subjects for Group 1 (“Pour”-class)

Mother Child

English

Korean

1 0.98

1 1

Learning locative verb syntax

101

Table 6.2. Proportion of Figure-frames used by subjects for Group 2 (“Paint”-class)

Mother Child

English

Korean

0.59 0.74

0.71 0.84

Table 6.3. Proportion of Figure-frames used by subjects for Group 3 (“Pile”-class)

Mother Child

English

Korean

0.7 0.9

1 1

frames. A two-way analysis of variance on the proportion of Figure-frame responses showed a reliable effect of age (F (1,36) = 11.11, p < .01) and language (F (1,36) = 7.44, p < .01), but no significant interaction between age and language (F (1,36) = .09, p = .76). Table 6.3 shows the results for the third group of verbs, which included pile, load, and spray. These are Alternators in English but only allow Figure-frames in Korean. The Korean subjects use Figure-frames 100% of the time, as Korean grammar requires. This matches the result shown in Table 6.1. The results for the English subjects parallel this result in Table 6.3: Mothers and children mostly use Figure-frames, but children use Figure-frames about 20% more often than the mothers. A two-way analysis of variance on the proportion of Figure-frame responses showed a reliable effect of age (F (1,36) = 7.35, p < .01) and language (F (1,36) = 18.15, p < .01). Note that the effect of age is just due to the English group. Moreover, there was a reliable interaction between age and language (F (1,36) = 7.35, p < .01). However, since Korean speakers were at the ceiling in their use of Figure-frames, we cannot make too much of this interaction. Finally, the fourth group of verbs is the “fill”-class. The verbs in this class included fill, cover, and decorate. These verbs only allow Ground-frames in English but are Alternators in Korean. The results for Korean shown in Table 6.4 are not surprising. Both the Korean mothers and the Korean children treat these verbs as Alternators, but the children produce Figure-frames about 20% more often than the mothers. So again we see a small Figure-frame bias in the children, within the bounds of what the target language allows. The Englishspeaking mothers used no Figure-frames at all with these verbs, as we would

102

Meesook Kim

Table 6.4. Proportion of Figure-frames used by subjects for Group 4 (“Fill”-class)

Mother Child

English

Korean

0 0.56

0.57 0.78

Table 6.5. Proportion of Figure-frames used by subjects (“cover” and “decorate” only)

Mother Child

English

Korean

0 0.2

0.53 0.55

expect from the grammar of English. In light of this, the fact that Englishspeaking children produced Figure-frames at a rate of over 50% is quite striking. Not only is this the first time in these results that we have seen anybody speaking ungrammatically; the difference between children and adults is much larger than in any of our other verb groups. A two-way analysis of variance on the proportion of Figure-frame responses showed significant effects of age (F (1,36) = 38.43, p < .01), language (F (1,36) = 41.89, p < .01), and an interaction between age and language (F (1,36) = 7.8, p < .01). In fact, Table 6.4 is somewhat misleading, because it masks important differences among the verbs that we used. If we just look at the verbs cover and decorate, as shown in Table 6.5, we find that the English-speaking children only produce ungrammatical Figure-frames about 20% of the time. This is much more like the child–adult differences that we have seen a number of times already. In contrast, the ten English-speaking children in this study used fill with a Figureframe almost 100% of the time. In fact, this effect was found in both types of scene involving fill – both the version involving pouring of juice, and the version involving loading of toys. This indicates that the use of a “pouring” manner is not necessary to elicit Figure-frame errors with fill in children. Therefore, it does not seem that English-speaking children’s overgeneralization errors are due to the incorrect semantic representation for fill (i.e. fill means “fill-by-pouring”). Summary of findings The results of the experiment can be summarized as follows. First, the experiment in M. Kim (1999) replicated the finding that English-speaking children

Learning locative verb syntax

103

make errors with Ground verbs like fill, but they do not make errors with Figure verbs like pour. Second, in both English and Korean, independent evidence was found that children use more Figure-frames than adults. Although this confirms the suggestion of a Figure-frame bias, the results also allow us to rule out this bias as the source of children’s well-known syntactic errors with fill. The Figure-frame bias is a consistent but small effect. What the English-speaking children did with fill was vastly different from this. Third, data were obtained to evaluate the suggestion that fill errors are an overgeneralization error, caused by the global frequency distribution of Figureframes in the input. The proportions of Figure-frames used by mothers and children with the seven Alternating verbs that were used in each language show that there is a good correlation between the performance of mothers and that of children, even on individual verbs (r2 = 0.47; F(1,12) = 10.52, p < .01). If children are so similar to adults on a verb-by-verb basis, then it does not seem very likely that their high percentage of errors with fill can be explained in terms of how they match global input frequencies. Of course, an alternative explanation might be that children are biased by more local input frequencies, e.g. based on individual semantic classes of verbs, but this would fail to account for overgeneralizations with verbs like fill. Fourth, it does not seem likely that English-speaking children have mistakenly adopted a Korean-style syntax for locative verbs. The children in both languages overwhelmingly conform to what the grammar of the target language allows, and in most cases they closely track the behavior of mothers speaking the same language. Finally, the ungrammatical sentences produced by English-speaking children are overwhelmingly due to the single verb fill, suggesting that their syntactic knowledge of Ground verbs is not uniformly incorrect. Therefore, any account of children’s fill errors is going to need to be one which does not automatically generalize to all other Ground verbs in English, such as cover and decorate. Discussion So far we have seen what 3–4-year-old speakers of English and Korean know about locative verb syntax. By age 3–4, children learning both English and Korean performed like mothers speaking their target languages, and their errors with the syntax of locative verbs are extremely restricted. Although Englishspeaking children still make syntactic errors with the verb fill, and both Englishspeaking and Korean-speaking children show a small Figure bias with Alternators, they have basically figured out the syntactic possibilities for the different classes of locative verbs by age 3–4. This finding leads to the question

104

Meesook Kim

of how they do this, especially in light of the potential problems raised by crosslinguistic differences. One possible learning mechanism is to take advantage of consistent crosslinguistic syntax–semantics correspondences for locative verbs. In order to find out how broad the crosslinguistic diversity is, M. Kim (1999) investigated a wider range of languages beyond English and Korean. What she found from a survey of thirteen languages is that across languages, some syntax–semantics correspondences appear to be universal, some correspondences appear to apply only within one of the two broad language groups, and some correspondences appear to be subject to idiosyncratic language-by-language variation. First, the one generalization that seems to hold across all of the languages that we have looked at is that manner-of-motion verbs allow the Figure-frame. Second, two syntax–semantics correspondences depend on which broad language group the language belongs to. Interestingly, the survey of thirteen languages showed that languages fall into two basic classes. One class of languages, which includes Korean, Japanese, Chinese, Thai, Turkish, Hindi, and Luganda, has a very simple pattern for locative verbs. All locative verbs allow Figure-frames. And verbs which have change-of-state as a primary meaning component typically allow Ground-frames too. These languages never have Non-alternating Ground verbs. The second class of languages, which includes English, French, Spanish, Singapore Malay, Hebrew, and Najdi Arabic, shows that basic change-of-state verbs always allow the Ground-frame. Of course, these group-specific correspondences are not much use if the children do not know which group their language belongs to. Fortunately, the two groups of languages may be distinguishable based on a simple morphological property, namely complex predicates. M. Kim (1999) found that all of the Korean-type languages, and none of the English-type languages, allow complex predicates to be constructed by combining verbs, which is known as V-V compounding or verb serialization. Such verb forms are common in adult speech, and are also common in the speech of children below age 3 in Korean. It was also found that the distribution of a number of other properties of these languages, such as causative constructions suggested in Juffs (1996), lexical parameters suggested in Talmy (1985), word order and pro-drop, appeared not to correlate with their syntax for locative verbs. An important question, then, is why verb compounding/serialization should correlate with locative verb syntax. A possible answer is that the semantic packaging of predicate meanings that is needed in order to use Ground verbs with Figure-frames involves exactly the same kind of process seen overtly in serial verb constructions. The generalization is that in serializing languages, all Ground verbs also allow Figure-frames. Creating a Figure-frame based on a Ground verb depends on a property of verb-serializing systems, such as

Learning locative verb syntax

105

argument sharing. One possibility is that the formation of Figure-frame syntax with a Ground verb has the semantics of complex verb formation: the predicates (X affects Y) and (Y affects Z) are combined, and an argument is shared between the predicates, as is characteristic of verb serialization, as in (13): (13)

* John decorated the lights on the tree. [John affects the lights] + [the lights decorated the tree]

In any case, if children can determine at an early age whether or not their language allows verbal complex predicates – and at least for Korean we know that there is plenty of evidence in the input – then they might be able to use this information to determine which broad language group their target language is in. It is widely reported that Korean-speaking children produce complex predicates at quite a young age (Choi & Bowerman, 1991; Y. Kim, 1995; M. Kim & Phillips, 1998). The experiment also shows that the 3–4-year-olds already know whether they are speaking an English-style language or a Koreanstyle language. Finally, there are syntax–semantics correspondences that seem to vary on a language-by-language basis. The classes of verbs which are syntactic Alternators in English show much broader syntactic variation across languages than the classes which are Non-alternators in English. As Pinker (1989) and Levin (1993) have shown for English, this probably involves idiosyncratic semantic properties which can affect syntactic possibilities in some languages but not others. An example from English is that verbs of ballistic motion such as spray and sprinkle are Alternators, whereas related non-ballistic verbs such as pour and dribble only allow the Figure-frame. This affects some languages but not others: For example, spray is an Alternator in Chinese and Thai, but is a Non-alternating Figure verb in Korean. An interesting finding is that fill is one of the most syntactically variable verbs across languages. In English it is a Ground verb, in Korean it is an Alternator, in Thai it is a Figure verb, and in Singapore Malay it is an Alternator. In contrast, cover and decorate show much less variation across languages. Therefore, it is perhaps not so surprising that the English-speaking children in our experiment are making errors in an area where there is greatest crosslinguistic diversity. Fill is a verb which is affected by an idiosyncratic rule in some languages but not others. What the children in our experiment have not yet learned is that fill is not affected by one of these idiosyncratic rules in English. Conclusions and further research It is argued in this paper that by age 3–4, children’s errors with the syntax of locative verbs are extremely restricted, and that this is consistent with what they can and cannot learn by using consistent crosslinguistic syntax–semantics

106

Meesook Kim

correspondences. Syntactic generalizations based on universal correspondences are mastered, as are syntactic generalizations based on correspondences which hold across broad classes of languages. Errors are confined to areas where syntax–semantics correspondences are most variable and idiosyncratic across languages. However, some remaining questions are left to be addressed in further work. First, it was concluded in this paper that children’s syntactic errors with the verb fill are due to language-specific idiosyncrasies. The question is how children learn these language-specific idiosyncrasies. How do children recover from their errors? This is an important question that needs to be addressed in further work. Second, this paper made a generalization that, in a given language, all locative verbs always allow Figure-frames only if the language allows V-V compounding or verb serialization. Nevertheless, considerable work is still needed to explain why these two properties go together.

7

Language-specific spatial semantics and cognition: developmental patterns in English and Korean Soonja Choi *

Introduction What is the relation between the way we talk and the way we think about the world? More specifically, does the language we speak influence the way we think, or does universal cognition guide the way we talk about the world? Or, perhaps, language and cognition are two independent entities, and thus do not affect each other. These are classic questions that have preoccupied the minds of psychologists and linguists for quite some time. Until the early 1990s, the predominant view – influenced by Chomsky’s universal grammar (1965) – was that human languages share a significant number of universal properties and that these properties are shaped by universal cognition. In the last few years, however, with evidence of extensive and significant differences across languages particularly in the semantic domain of space, the debate on language and cognition has been re-kindled and has become, once again, a central issue in psychology, linguistics and cognitive science. In this debate, the Korean spatial semantic system, being very different from much-researched languages like English, has become an intriguing testing ground for evaluating differing theories. In this chapter, I present an overview of the contrasting theories that have been presented so far on the relation between language and cognition. Then, I review some of the recent crosslinguistic studies that have been conducted, including my own, in the domain of space comparing learners/speakers of English and Korean. Theories of language and thought Over the past few decades, predominant theories about the relation between language and cognition have shifted from one extreme to another. Through the * This research was supported by National Science Foundation (BCS-0091493) and National Institute of Health (1R03HD43831-01).

107

108

Soonja Choi

1950s, behaviorism in the field of psychology and the Whorfian hypothesis in linguistics led to an emphasis on the role of language and other environmental factors in shaping the way people conceptualize the world. In particular, Whorf (1956) stressed that there are remarkable differences in the ways languages encode various aspects of the world (e.g. time and space), and argued that language must influence the way we perceive and conceptualize our experiences of the world. Starting in the mid-1960s, however, largely influenced by Chomsky’s (1965) theory of innate predispositions for language, researchers shifted their focus to the discovery of shared or universal features across languages. Evidence in favor of the nativist position came largely from syntax, but increasingly also from semantics. For example, Berlin and Kay’s work (1969) on basic color terms showed significant uniformity in color naming across languages, and further work in this domain tied this uniformity to the physiology of color perception. In the domain of space, researchers found universal semantic features that relate to dimensional (e.g. high, wide) and locative terms (e.g. on, in) (Bierwisch, 1967; Miller & Johnson-Laird, 1976; H. Clark, 1973). Findings like these led to the hypothesis that the human cognitive/ perceptual apparatus is highly constrained, and that this apparatus both universally constrains language structure and guides or even determines language acquisition (e.g. E. Clark, 1973a; Slobin, 1985). In developmental psycholinguistics, proposals about the cognitive bases for language acquisition were largely derived from Piagetian theory of universal conceptual development in infancy (see Piaget, 1954). According to Piaget, a critical foundation for language learning is laid during the first year of life (i.e. the sensorimotor period), as infants develop a set of basic concepts such as object permanence, agency and causality. In this view, when young children begin to acquire words, they map them directly onto the concepts they have already established prelinguistically (Slobin, 1973; E. Clark, 1973b). We can call this view the ‘cognitive deterministic’ view. (Notice that in this view, language-specific input plays only a minimal role in early semantic development. We will come back to this point later.) Much of the data supporting the ‘cognitive deterministic’ view came from the domain of space. H. Clark (1973) suggested that our perception of space is highly constrained by properties of the human body and of the physical world. For example, we human beings stand in an upright position and our environment is constrained by gravity. Clark proposed that across languages, spatial terms reflect these constraints. For example, all languages have words that denote verticality (e.g. up, down, high, low). He also proposed that children’s early acquisition of spatial terms is determined by the universally shared perceptual understanding of space. The cognitive deterministic view was supported by a number of studies. For instance, studies have shown that

Language-specific spatial semantics

109

English learners indeed produce spatial particles like up and down from very early on (i.e. the single-word stage) (Bloom 1973). Crosslinguistic data showed that children learning different languages acquire spatial morphemes in a consistent order. In particular, Johnston and Slobin (1979) found that across languages, terms for containment and support − such as in and on in English – are acquired early, followed by terms for occlusion (e.g. under). This consistent order was interpreted as reflecting primarily the sequence in which the relevant concepts emerge in nonlinguistic development. E. Clark (1973b) has shown that, at an early stage, children use their nonlinguistic knowledge to understand linguistic terms, particularly when they have not yet fully acquired the semantic meanings of the spatial terms. These data all converged on the view that children first develop spatial concepts nonlinguistically, and then map spatial morphemes directly onto these concepts. Starting in the early 1990s, however, this cognitive deterministic claim has been extensively re-examined and challenged. Major challenges come from two types of data: (1) crosslinguistic studies of spatial semantics in adult grammars, and (2) the development of spatial semantics in young children. First, in adult grammars, studies have shown that languages differ significantly in the way they categorize spatial relations, and in particular in the way they select semantically relevant aspects of a spatial scene (Levinson, 1996; Talmy, 1985). Second, recent studies have shown that, contrary to the cognitive deterministic claim, children understand spatial terms in language-specific ways virtually from the beginning of language acquisition (Bowerman, 1996; S. Choi, 1997; Choi & Bowerman, 1991; Choi et al., 1999). Taken together, these findings suggest that there is much flexibility in early spatial cognition and that children attend to linguistic input from early on to home in on languagespecific meanings. In the next section, crosslinguistic data on spatial semantics are reviewed in more detail, particularly with respect to containment and support. Crosslinguistic differences in spatial semantics of containment and support Spatial words in different languages vary widely and significantly in meaning. Let’s take seemingly simple terms like in and on in English. The two terms, in and on, express notions of containment and support, respectively. Since these notions seem to be so basic for expressing space, in previous crosslinguistic studies, the relevant spatial morphemes in different languages were assumed to have essentially the same meanings (e.g. Johnston & Slobin 1979). Since the meanings were tacitly understood to be constant, the goals of these studies were to examine the order of acquisition of the morphemes and the interaction between the formal properties of those morphemes and the timing of their acquisition.

110

Soonja Choi

Recent studies, however, have demonstrated that the above assumption is not correct: languages differ strikingly in the way they semantically classify various types of containment and support relations (Bowerman, 1996; Bowerman & Pederson, 1992; P. Brown, 1994). For example, P. Brown (1994) showed that in Tzeltal, a Mayan language spoken in Southeastern Mexico, there is no allpurpose containment word comparable to in in English. Rather, in Tzeltal, the containment relation is divided up in many different ways. Different spatial terms are used depending on the type of container (i.e. the ‘Ground’) as well as the type of contained object (i.e. the ‘Figure’). For example, the word pachal- is used for an object (e.g. an apple) in a bowl-shaped container whereas waxal- is used for an object in a cylindrical container. Bowerman (1996) analyzed crosslinguistic differences regarding various spatial configurations involving contact, support, and containment. Bowerman illustrated the differences with three examples (Figure 7.1): (a) cup on table, (b) handle on cupboard door, and (c) apple in bowl. In many languages, relationships involving support by a horizontal surface are treated similarly to those involving support by a vertical surface, whereas relationships involving containment are treated differently. In English, for example, both (a) and (b) are routinely called on whereas (c) is called in. Although this system seems quite reasonable, not all languages follow it. In Finnish, for example, situations like (b) are grouped linguistically with those like (c) (both are encoded with the inessive case ending -ssa), and for (a) a different case ending (the adessive case ending -lla) is needed. Bowerman (1996) suggests that in this system, attachment to an external surface such as (b) can be seen as “similar to prototypical containment, and different from horizontal support, based on the feature of ‘intimacy’ or ‘incorporation’ between Figure and Ground objects” (p. 393). In still a third pattern, in Dutch, all three situations are treated as distinct, so different morphemes are assigned to them. Thus, (b) is considered to be similar neither to (a) (op in Dutch) nor (c) (in in Dutch), as it is characterized with a third spatial morpheme aan, that is somewhat specialized to relations of hanging and other types of attachment. And in a fourth pattern, displayed by Spanish, it is quite unnecessary to differentiate among (a), (b), and (c). A single preposition en can be applied to all of them.

Figure 7.1. Relations of (a) support, (b) attachment, and (c) containment are categorized differently in different languages (adapted from Bowerman, 1996): English: [a+b] / [c]; Finnish: [a] / [b+c]; Dutch: [a] / [b] / [c]; Spanish: [a+b+c]

Language-specific spatial semantics

111

The categories of IN and ON in English, and KKITA in Korean Korean presents yet another system of dividing up the relations of containment and support (Choi & Bowerman, 1991). Let’s compare Korean with English. As Figure 7.2 shows, English basically divides up spatial relations into two categories: in for containment and on for support. The word in in English expresses the notion of containment, as it is used for putting books or toys loosely IN a large container as well as for putting books tightly IN book covers and putting puzzle pieces tightly INTO their slots. Notice that in is used regardless of whether the fit between the two objects is tight or loose. The containment category of in contrasts with on in English. On is used when the Figure is supported by the Ground by means of gravity, attachment or encirclement. Thus, on is used for putting rings tightly ON poles, putting a Lego® piece ONTO another piece, as well as for putting a cup loosely on a table. And again, the category of on does not care about whether the relation is tight or loose. On is also used for putting clothes on all parts of the body. Korean divides up the spatial domain of containment and support differently. In Korean, there are no semantic categories comparable to English in and on when describing causal events. First, in Korean, dynamic causal events involving spatial relation are expressed by verbs. Spatial verbs (e.g. kkita ‘fit/interlock tightly’, nehta ‘put loosely in a container’) in Korean express Motion plus Path, somewhat comparable to a verb plus a Path particle (e.g. put in) in English. Semantic analyses of these verbs reveal some important differences between English and Korean (Choi & Bowerman, 1991). The category of kkita (‘fit/ interlock tightly’) is a case in point. Kkita is a spatial verb that refers to tight fit

KOREAN: KKITA button a button snap a snap

ENGLISH: put in

books in bag cigarette in mouth toys in box apple in bowl bottle in refrigerator flowers in vase

books in cover finger in ring pen into its top hand in glove piece in puzzle thread into beads

Lego piece onto Lego stack ring on finger tight-fitting ring on pole top on pen glove on bracelet on

ENGLISH: put on

cup on table magnet on refrigerator loose-fitting ring on pole hat on shoes on coat on

Put two Lego pieces together Put two Pop-beads together

Figure 7.2. Crosscutting categories in Korean and English: Korean KKITA ‘fit tightly/interlock in a three-dimensional way’ vs. English put in and put on

112

Soonja Choi

regardless of containment or support: It refers to a spatial event involving a causal action where the Figure object ends up in a tight-fitting or interlocking relation in a three-dimensional way with the Ground object. As shown in Figure 7.2, putting books IN book covers, putting puzzle pieces tightly INTO slots, putting rings tightly ON poles and putting Lego pieces ON each other are all good instances of kkita. In fact, kkita is used regardless of whether it involves containment, encirclement, support or attachment as long as there is a tight-fit interlocking relation. (As Kawachi [2002] demonstrates, the feature of ‘friction’ caused by tight fit is important for kkita.) When the relation does not involve a tight fit, kkita cannot be used. Instead, other spatial words are used. For example, for causal actions involving loose containment (e.g. putting toys in a box) the path verb nehta (‘put loosely in a container’) is used, and for those involving loose support (e.g. putting a cup on a table) the verb nohta (‘put loosely on surface’) is used. (The category of nehta also includes loose encirclement such as putting rings loosely on thin poles. On the other hand, the category of nohta excludes two-dimensional attachment, such as putting a magnet on the refrigerator, for which the verb pwuthita is used.) This analysis shows that the underlying principles of the two semantic systems concerning caused motions are strikingly different: In the Korean system, degree of fit is critical in spatial categorization, whereas in English, it is not. The multitude of crosslinguistic semantic differences poses interesting questions for developmental psycholinguists. In particular, when and how do children acquire the language-specific spatial meanings of their language? If the cognitive deterministic view is correct, then we would see children initially rely on a universally shared set of nonlinguistic concepts to acquire word meanings. This means that, regardless of the particular language they are learning, children would first assign the same kinds of spatial meanings to early spatial words. Only later, when they have received and processed a sufficient amount of linguistic input, would children begin to diverge in the direction of the semantic structure of the target language (e.g. Slobin, 1985). However, there is another possibility. Given the magnitude of crosslinguistic differences, young infants may be cognitively flexible and ready to acquire language-specific semantics from very early on. More specifically, building on their preverbal understanding of many different features of spatial relations, infants may be sensitive to linguistic input from early on, and their initial semantic organization – i.e. the categories of meanings they associate with words – may be relatively easily influenced by classification schemes introduced by the linguistic input. There is growing evidence that infants are cognitively quite sophisticated in the spatial domain. Virtually from the beginning of life, infants explore space, using spatial movements and manipulations of objects (Spelke, 1990; Piaget & Inhelder, 1967). With significant advances in research design in recent years, studies of infant cognition have shown that infants learn a great

Language-specific spatial semantics

113

deal about spatial relations during the first year of life, long before they begin to talk. For example, by 5 to 8 months of age, infants know that containers with bottoms can contain things but those without bottoms cannot (Baillargeon, 1995; see also Aguiar & Baillargeon, 1998). At 8.5 months of age, infants also understand that for an object to be contained, it needs to be smaller in width than the opening of the container. Infants can also distinguish between situations in which an object will be supported or will fall (Needham & Baillargeon, 1993), and can calculate how much support is needed for an object to be adequately supported by another (Baillargeon & Hanko-Summers, 1990). These studies have amply demonstrated that processing spatial information starts well before language begins, particularly in relation to containment and support. (Notice, however, that these studies only show what infants expect in containment and support situations but do not show how they classify these spatial relations.) How does such extensive preverbal spatial cognition prepare infants to learn language-specific semantic categories of space? Do infants know more about spatial categories than we have assumed? And when do children begin to learn language-specific semantics? Researchers have recently begun to answer these questions. And over the last ten years, my colleagues and I have been asking these questions in our research: when and how do children learning English and Korean acquire language-specific spatial semantics? When do children acquire language-specific spatial categorization? Spatial categorization in early production Choi and Bowerman (1991) examined children’s early spatial words produced in naturalistic settings. In an analysis of longitudinal data from two children learning English and four children learning Korean (from 14 to 21 months of age), we found that language-specific meanings were in place as early as 17 months of age: as soon as the children used spatial words productively for both familiar and novel situations, learners of English distinguished systematically between actions involving containment vs. support, regardless of degree of fit. For example, our two young English learners used in both for putting a ball in a box (loose containment) and for putting earplugs in ears (tight containment). In contrast, the Korean children used the word kkita for actions that resulted in a tight-fit relation regardless of containment or support. They used kkita for putting a videocassette into its matching box cover (tight-fit containment) as well as for putting one Lego piece on another (tight-fit support). Although longitudinal data give us valuable information, they come from just a few children. For a more systematic comparison between the two languages,

114

Soonja Choi

Bowerman and Choi (1994) conducted an elicited production study with a standardized set of objects. We tested thirty children (ten in each of three age groups: 2:0–2:5, 2:6–2:11 and 3:0–3:5) as well as ten adults for each language. In a naturalistic setting, we elicited spatial words from the participants with a standardized set of objects that can be used to perform various types of tight-fit or loose-fit joining actions: attachment (e.g. put one Lego brick on another), encirclement (e.g. put ring on pole), support (e.g. put cup on table), and containment (e.g. put puzzle piece in slot or toys in bag). Using a doll, we also elicited words used when putting on and taking off clothes. The procedure was for the experimenter to show the Figure and Ground objects one pair at a time (e.g. a ring and a pole) and ask the child what to do. The results were clear: from the youngest group up, the children classified the actions significantly more like adult speakers of their own language than like same-age children learning the other language. Figure 7.3 shows the classification patterns of the children in the youngest age group (2:0–2:5) for a subset of the stimuli. The young English learners categorized these stimuli into two categories (indicated by the two circles with dashed lines) much like adults: in for containment and on for support regardless of degree of fit. In included tightfit containment, like putting a piece in a jigsaw puzzle, as well as loose-fit containment, like putting toys in a suitcase. On included putting a ring on a pole whether it was tight or loose. On was also used for putting clothes on different parts of the body. ‘KKITA’ ‘O

N’

Button a button Join Popbeads

Put towel on hook

Join Legos Join magnetic train cars

Hook train cars together ‘IN

Put tight ring on pole Join Bristle blocks

’

Put piece in puzzle

Put pillowcase on pillow

Put doll in bath

Put loose ring on pole

Put cassette in case

Put cars in box Put toys in suitcase

‘NEHTA’

Figure 7.3. Classification of spatial actions in English and Korean 2-year-olds

Language-specific spatial semantics

115

Korean 2-year-olds categorized the actions quite differently from English learners of the same age. (The Korean children’s categories are indicated by the two rectangles with solid lines.) First, the Korean 2-year-olds used the verb kkita for tight-fit relations regardless of containment (putting a piece in a puzzle) or support (putting a ring on a pole). In contrast, they used the verb nehta to refer to loose containment and encirclement relations, such as putting Lego in a bag and putting big rings loosely on a thin pole, and nohta for putting things loosely on a surface. Moreover, they used specific clothing verbs for specific parts of the body (e.g. ssuta for covering the head, sinta for putting shoes on the feet). The children in both languages made errors. But the errors reflected their grasp of language-specific principles. For example, the English learners used on for putting Bristle blocks together: They understood that on is used for attachment and surface contact, but overextended its use to instances when two objects are joined in a symmetric way, for which adult speakers would use together. For the Korean learners, overextension involved the verb kkita (‘tight fit/interlock in a threedimensional way’): They used kkita not only for instances of three-dimensional attachment (e.g. such as putting one Lego block onto another), but also for instances of two-dimensional attachment (e.g. putting a band-aid on an arm). For the latter type of attachment, Korean adults use a different verb, pwuthita (‘attach something on a flat surface’). Apparently, our young Korean learners understand the tight-fit feature of the verb kkita but have not yet learned that its use is restricted to three-dimensional interlocking relations. (For more discussion on children’s errors, see Bowerman, 1996; Bowerman & Choi, 2001; S. Choi, 1997.) In summary, our elicited production study has shown that 2-year-old Koreanand English-speaking children already classify many spatial actions in a language-specific way. Quantitative assessment of the data using a cultural consensus analysis model shows that the children in the youngest age group were in fact significantly more similar to adults of their own language than to same-age children of the other language. Spatial categorization in early comprehension Our elicitation data demonstrate that by age 2, children already use highly language-specific categories and are sensitive to language-specific principles of categorization. But perhaps language-specific categories are already being formed even earlier (i.e. during the comprehension period). In fact, our spontaneous speech data suggest that children use spatial words in language-specific ways as early as 17 months of age, but the sample size of the data is too small to be generalized further. To investigate children’s comprehension of language-specific terms in children younger than 2 years of age, we used the ‘preferential looking paradigm’ devised by Golinkoff et al. (1987) and Naigles (1990). In this design, the child

116

Soonja Choi

sits on the mother’s lap and simply watches video scenes while listening to an audio input coming from the speaker. The child’s eye gaze is recorded during the experiment for off-line coding that measures duration of eye gaze at particular scenes. The expectation is that the child’s eye gaze will naturally be directed to the scene that matches what they hear. We tested children between 18 and 23 months on two spatial terms: in in English and kkita in Korean. Children viewed a pair of dynamic scenes simultaneously while listening to sentences either with or without the target word. The target word was embedded in short sentences, such as ‘Where’s she putting it IN?’ in English, and ‘Eti-ey KKI-e?’ (Where-Loc kki-Sentence ending suffix?) in Korean. (The sentences without the target word were simply ‘Look, what is she doing?’ in English, and ‘ike pwa, i salam-i mwe hay?’ (this look, this person-Subject what-do?) in Korean.) In each trial, the two scenes were shown side-by-side simultaneously on two monitors (one on each monitor), first without the target word (i.e. control trial) and then with the target word (i.e. test trial). One scene matched the target word while the other did not. For example, in one pair, one scene showed someone placing a book loosely on top of another book, and the other scene showed someone placing a book tightly into its box cover (see Fig. 7.4). For

Figure 7.4. Comprehension of IN (English) and KKITA (Korean) by 18– to 23–month–olds (preferential looking experiment)

Language-specific spatial semantics

117

the Books pair, putting a book in its cover would be the matching scene for both in in English and kkita in Korean, since the relation depicts both containment (criterion for English in) and tight fit (criterion for Korean kkita). But in another pair, the two features were split on two scenes: one scene showed someone putting rings loosely in a basket, and the other scene showed someone putting rings tightly on poles. In the case of the Rings pair, putting rings in would be the matching scene for the particle in in English (but not for Korean kkita). However, putting rings on would be the matching scene for kkita in Korean (but not for English in). We measured children’s attention, namely, duration of eye gaze, to each of the scenes when they heard the target word as opposed to when they did not hear it. Our data showed language-specificity: The presence of the target word systematically led the children to gaze at the scenes that were appropriate for the target language (Choi et al., 1999). That is, when English learners heard the word in (in comparison with when they did not hear it), they looked longer at the scenes that depicted containment relations regardless of whether these scenes involved tight fit (e.g. books IN covers) or loose fit (e.g. rings IN baskets). In contrast, when Korean learners heard their target word kkita, they looked longer at the scenes that depicted tight-fit relations regardless of whether the scenes involved containment (e.g. books IN covers) or not (e.g. rings ON poles). These results suggest that by as early as 18 months of age, children learning English and Korean understand spatial terms according to the semantic principles of the target language. How do children acquire language-specific categorization so early? Preverbal spatial cognition Our findings of early acquisition of language-specific semantics provide evidence for two important points. First, the findings indicate that children pay close attention to linguistic input from very early on – much earlier than the cognitive determinism view would predict – and construct spatial semantic categories accordingly. Second, given the fact that preverbal infants develop significant understanding about what to expect in everyday spatial situations (e.g. Aguiar & Baillargeon, 1998), it is reasonable to hypothesize that preverbal infants also develop sensitivities to different types of spatial categories, and that in this way, infants are preverbally ready to acquire the specific semantics of the target languages. But what are these categories? Which kinds of perceptibly different situations will be treated as similar, and which ones as different? Specifically, what language-relevant aspects of containment and support are preverbal infants sensitive to?

118

Soonja Choi

One possibility is that infants make a larger set of distinctions among spatial relations than is needed for the language they are learning (Mandler, 1992). For example, in relation to the categories of in, on and kkita, perhaps preverbal infants have not only developed concepts of containment and support (the relevant distinction in English), but also concepts of tight and loose fitting (the relevant distinction in Korean), so that when infants hear the word kkita they are just as prepared to form the appropriate semantic category for the term kkita as they are for the terms in and on. If preverbal infants can categorize tight vs. loose fit containments as well as containment vs. support relations, it would suggest that there is a preverbal cognitive basis for learning language-specific spatial semantics. On the other hand, if preverbal infants cannot distinguish between the two categories, it would suggest that children construct languagespecific spatial categories by actively attending to the linguistic input. In a recent study we tested this hypothesis with one kind of distinction: tight-fit containment vs. loose-fit containment (S. Choi, 2002, McDonough et al., 2003). Korean distinguishes the two types of containment semantically, using kkita for tight-fit IN and nehta for loose-fit IN. (Notice that tight-fit IN is only a subset of the kkita category. The full-fledged meaning of kkita encompasses both tight-fit IN and tight-fit ON categories (see Figure 7.2).) But in English, the two types of containment form a single semantic category, as they are both routinely denoted by the same spatial particle in. (English has words like ‘tight’ and ‘loose’ but these words are not used systematically to refer to tight fit in spatial relations.) We first tested twenty-four preverbal infants (9, 11, and 14 months of age) raised in monolingual English environments. In testing the distinction between tight- and loose-fit containment, data from these children are crucial because English does not distinguish between the two relations semantically in a systematic way. If preverbal infants exposed to English make such a distinction, we can conclude that the distinction is part of a universal nonlinguistic capacity that is developed preverbally, and not an effect of the ambient language. In this study, we used a modified version of the preferential looking paradigm. The basic method was to first familiarize infants with one type of spatial relation (either a tight-IN or a loose-IN relation) with several different scenes, and then, during the test trials, to present them with two scenes, one depicting the same relation that they were familiarized with, and the other depicting a novel relation. We familiarized infants using a wide variety of objects that are not only perceptually dissimilar but also drawn from different object classes. Perceptual qualities such as the size, color, shape, and texture of the objects changed from scene to scene. For example, for familiarization with the tight-IN relation we showed six distinct dynamic scenes, such as putting nesting cups tightly in one another, putting keys in locks, putting books in matching book covers. All relations were filmed as dynamic actions performed by a person. If infants

Language-specific spatial semantics

119

Figure 7.5. Test pairs: tight–fit containment vs. loose–fit containment

abstract and understand a common relation among these events during the familiarization period, they will show a systematic preference for one type of relation over the other during the test trials. (Use of this behavior as a measurement of infant categorization has been well established in the field of infant cognition, e.g. Aguiar & Baillargeon, 1998, Quinn, 1994.) The six scenes were presented in three pairs, such that on any given trial, two familiarization scenes appeared side by side simultaneously. Each pair was shown twice to increase the degree of familiarization. Immediately following the familiarization trials, the children saw two test pairs, one after the other. Each test pair showed one tight-IN relation and one loose-IN relation, as shown in Figure 7.5. For those children familiarized with the tight-IN relation, the loose-IN test scenes would be the novel scenes, and for those familiarized with the loose-IN relation, the tight-IN test scenes would be the novel scenes. Throughout the experiment we played music (with no words) on the audio. If infants show a systematic difference during these test trials in the time spent looking at the familiar versus the novel relation, this would suggest to us that they are able to distinguish between the two relations. Figure 7.6 shows the results. There was a systematic looking preference for the familiar relation during the test trials: Regardless of the relation with which they had been familiarized, infants in all three age groups looked significantly longer at the familiar relation than the novel relation. That is, the infants who were familiarized with the tightIN relation looked longer at the tight-IN test scenes (than at the loose-IN test scenes), and those who were familiarized with the loose-IN relation looked longer at the loose-IN test scenes (than at the tight-IN test scenes). What the data suggest is that infants in monolingual English environments can make a distinction between tight-fit and loose-fit containment relations. That is, they show an ability to differentiate between these two categories, which are not systematically distinguished in the semantics of their target language.

Soonja Choi Looking time (in seconds)

120

5 4 3 2 1 0 Infants: English Familiar

Infants: Korean Novel

Figure 7.6. Tight IN vs. loose IN relations in infant data (preverbal infants raised in English–speaking and infants raised in Korean–speaking homes)

We conducted the same test on infants being exposed to Korean (four infants in each age group). Recall that in Korean, tight-fit and loose-fit containment relations are semantically distinguished. As expected, Korean infants also distinguished the two types of relation by looking significantly longer at the familiar relation than at the novel relation during the test trials (see Figure 6). (The only difference between the two language groups was that, overall, the Korean infants attended longer to the scenes (both scenes taken together) than the infants being raised in English environments. But regardless of language environment, both groups looked longer at the familiar than at the novel scenes.) From these results, we concluded that during the preverbal stage, regardless of linguistic environment, infants between 9 and 14 months of age can distinguish between tight-fit and loose-fit containment. Recently, Spelke and Hespos (2002) have found that even 5-month-old infants (being raised in English environments) can make the distinction between tight-fit IN and loose-fit IN. Using real objects (but with a single pair of objects), these authors first showed 5-month-old infants an action that involved either a tight-IN or a loose-IN relation a number of times until the infants were habituated (i.e. until their time looking at the action decreased significantly, presumably because the infants got bored with it). Then, they presented two new events simultaneously: a tight-IN and a loose-IN relation. Infants looked longer at the novel relation than at the relation to which they were habituated. (The novelty effect was probably due to the habituation technique. In Choi (2002) and McDonough et al. (2003), we used a familiarization technique, which resulted in a familiarity effect.) These studies suggest that at the preverbal stage infants can make a distinction between tight and loose containment relations, a distinction that is not realized semantically in all languages. This suggests when young children begin

Language-specific spatial semantics

121

to learn the semantics of their language, they need to sort out whether or not this distinction is relevant in the target language. This process seems rapid, as young children learning English use the spatial word in appropriately, collapsing tightIN and loose-IN situations into one semantic category, from as early as 17 months of age (Choi et al., 1999). The recent findings presented here suggest that the cognitive deterministic view is too simplistic: although young children develop an extensive set of spatial concepts, they do not simply map word meanings onto preverbal cognitive concepts directly in a one-to-one fashion. They need to reorganize their spatial concepts for the purpose of learning the semantic system of their language. Nonlinguistic sensitivity to spatial categories in adults The results from the preverbal infants lead to the following question: do language-specific semantics, once acquired, influence speakers’ nonlinguistic sensitivities to spatial relations in any way? More generally, does language influence thought, or is thought independent of language? In the domain of spatial semantics, the question is whether adults maintain the same set of nonlinguistic sensitivities that they developed early in life, or whether they come to channel their attention primarily to those distinctions encoded in their language as they become fluent speakers. To answer this question, we conducted the same nonlinguistic preferential looking test with adult speakers of English and Korean (McDonough et al., 2003). The results were striking: unlike preverbal infants, adult speakers of English made no distinction between tight-fit and loose-fit relations in their looking behavior. In contrast, Korean adults clearly distinguished between the two relations (see Fig. 7.7): The Korean adults looked significantly longer at the familiar test scenes than at the novel test scenes. In fact, the looking behavior of our Korean adults was quite like that of our preverbal infants. The crosslinguistic difference in adult looking patterns can be explained by the spatial semantics of the two languages: English does not systematically distinguish between the two relations whereas Korean does. Thus, adult English speakers, who do not need to make the distinction when they talk about spatial relations, have lost their sensitivity to it. In contrast, Korean adult speakers, who must encode the distinction in their language, have maintained the sensitivity. With adult speakers, we also conducted an ‘oddity’ test on tight- vs. loose-fit containment relations. After the adult participants finished the looking task, they were shown a subset of the stimuli they had just seen on the video: three exemplars of the familiar relation and one of the novel relation. The experimenter demonstrated the actions with real objects, and asked the participant to choose the one that did not belong with the other three: For example, for those who were in the tight-in familiarization condition for the looking task, both

Soonja Choi Looking time (in seconds)

122

5 4 3 2 1 0 English

Korean Familiar

Novel

Figure 7.7. Tight IN vs. loose IN relations: adult speakers of English and Korean

English and Korean adults would be shown a book put into its cover (familiar relation), Lego-man put into a Lego car (familiar relation), nesting cup put in another (familiar relation), and a sponge letter put in a large bowl (novel relation). In the case of English, only 38% (12 out of 32 participants) made the ‘correct’ selection (i.e. selection based on the tight-fit feature). In their verbal justifications, most participants said that their selection was based on the color or texture of the objects (e.g. ‘This one is made out of a different material than the others’). The Korean adult speakers were again different from the English speakers: 80% (16 of the 20 Korean speakers) made the correct choice on the oddity task. Furthermore, the most typical explanation (16 out of 20) that the Korean adults gave was difference in tightness of fit. In summary, adult English speakers did not show any systematic difference between tight-fit IN and loose-fit IN in their preferential looking behavior. Moreover, in the oddity task, their choice was not based on tightness of fit. In contrast, adult Korean speakers showed a systematic difference between tightfit IN and loose-fit IN in their preferential looking behavior. In addition, their choice was predominantly based on tightness of fit in an oddity task. These differential behaviors in nonverbal tasks correspond to the semantic differences between the two languages, suggesting that language influences nonlinguistic cognition in the relevant domain. Discussion In recent years, extensive crosslinguistic data have raised challenging new issues about how children acquire language-specific semantics and how semantics interacts with nonlinguistic cognition. Korean has been a test case for the debate especially in the domain of spatial semantics, since it categorizes dynamic spatial relations in an interestingly different way to English.

Language-specific spatial semantics

123

Studies on the acquisition of language-specific spatial semantics suggest that children acquire language-specific semantic categories of space from as early as 17–18 months of age. These data have shown that children are sensitive to language-specific input from virtually the beginning of language acquisition. This early acquisition of language-specific spatial semantics has raised two issues on the relationship between language and cognition: (1) the nature of the preverbal cognitive readiness for space that allows early acquisition of spatial semantics and (2) the consequences of language-specific semantics for nonlinguistic cognition in adult speakers. Several possible hypotheses can be made about the nature of preverbal cognition for space and the extent to which linguistic input is needed for the acquisition of spatial semantics. Different hypotheses can be made in terms of the degree to which preverbal spatial categories are specific and fine-grained. One hypothesis is that during the preverbal stage infants develop spatial concepts at a rather general level without clear category boundaries, perhaps with some sensitivity to ‘gradients’ of similarities and differences in spatial relations (Bowerman & Choi, 2001, 2003). For example, preverbal notions of containment and support may be broad and general, encompassing both tightand loose-fit relations as well as other possible sub-types of the two relations (e.g. vertical vs. horizontal support) that may be semantically distinguished in languages of the world. In this case, children would need to attend to the linguistic input and actively construct semantic categories at a detailed level that correspond to the adult system in the target language. They would do this by observing the various situations in which adults use a word and abstracting the feature that is common to those situations. However, an alternative is that children’s preverbal nonlinguistic spatial concepts consist of well-defined discrete components (or ‘semantic primitives’) (Landau & Jackendoff, 1993). Furthermore, this repertoire may be quite extensive, including not only notions of containment and support corresponding to English in and on, but also a notion of tight or interlocking fit corresponding to Korean kkita, as well as concepts corresponding to the categories of earlylearned spatial words in other languages (Mandler, 1992, 1996; see Bloom, 2000: 250–4, for discussion). Under this scenario, the child’s task would be to construct a concept by selecting, from among the concepts already available to them, the ones that adult speakers of the target language seem to use. It should be noted that the two hypotheses are not necessarily mutually exclusive (see below). Our preverbal data on the distinction between two types of containment favor the latter hypothesis: we found that preverbal infants could categorize spatial relations based on the tight-fit feature within the containment relation. Recall that the distinction between tight- and loose-fit containment is not made in the English spatial prepositional system. This suggests that preverbal infants

124

Soonja Choi

develop a larger set of spatial concepts than is needed for the language they are learning. Their task, then, is to identify which concepts are relevant in the target language and to package them according to the language-specific categorization. For example, English children collapse the categories of tight- and loose-fit containment relations into a single category, whereas Korean children maintain the distinction and also put the tight-fit containment category together with the tight-fit support category. This type of conceptual readiness with many ingredients already established during the preverbal stage would certainly facilitate early acquisition of the semantics of the spatial terms. But we have just begun to answer the ‘how’ question. At present, spatial semantic development has been investigated in too few languages and in too few categories to establish just how extensive or how constrained the list of preverbal notions may be. Moreover, the categories we tested – the contrast between tight-fit and loose-fit containment relations − are not lexicalized in either Korean or English as full-fledged semantic categories, but as subsets of these categories. In particular, ‘tight containment’ is only a subset of the category kkita in Korean (see Fig. 2 above), as kkita not only refers to placing something tightly ‘in’, but also to placing something tightly ‘on’, ‘around’, and ‘together’. We do not yet know how this full-fledged semantic category of kkita is formed: do infants develop a nonlinguistic category of tight fit that can be directly mapped to the meaning of kkita, or do they need to package several preverbal categories to establish the meaning of tight fit? In order to properly test these possibilities, we need to examine whether preverbal infants can distinguish between tight- and loose-fit relations within the support relation (i.e. tight-fit vs. loose-fit support) as they do for the containment relation. Further, more crucially, we also need to test whether infants can form a kkita-like category that refers to tight fit across both containment and support relations. There is already some evidence that preverbal infants’ sensitivity to support and tight-fit is somewhat different from their sensitivity to the containment relation. First, our preliminary results on the contrast between tight- vs. loosefit support (using the same preferential looking design as the one we used for the containment relation) show that 9-month-old preverbal infants in English environments are not sensitive to the distinction between the two categories. Second, Casasola & Cohen (2002) have recently examined infants’ sensitivity to categories of containment (English in), support (English on, encompassing both support by gravity, as in “put the cup on the table” and surface attachment, as in “put this Lego block on that one”), and the tight fit category associated with Korean kkita. They tested whether these infants were sensitive to changes in relationship (e.g. from ‘containment’ to ‘support’) as well as to changes in the object categories (i.e. familiar vs. novel objects used for the spatial actions). The authors found that prelinguistic infants are sensitive to the category of

Language-specific spatial semantics

125

‘containment’ events (i.e. they distinguish them from other types of relationships), but not to the categories of ‘support’ and ‘tight-fit’ events. Since this study involved not only spatial relations but also object categories, the task may have been too complex for preverbal infants. Further studies using other techniques may still reveal such sensitivities. But for the moment – as also noted by Casasola and Cohen (2002) – this outcome leaves open the possibility that ‘support’ and ‘tight-fit’ categories are constructed as children learn the meaning of English on or Korean kkita. Our studies and the studies by Casasola and Cohen (2002), taken together, suggest that the two hypotheses (and other possible hypotheses) sketched above may co-exist in the acquisition of language-specific categories of space. More specifically, the following kinds of developmental sequences may occur: during the preverbal stage, infants notice a number of different properties in spatial situations. Some of these properties may take a relatively abstract form and quickly develop into coherent categories. (The property of tight-fit containment seems to be one such case.) Other properties may not be fully conceptualized as categories or embedded in specific contexts (e.g. ‘attachment of one Lego to another’ might be seen as different from ‘attachment of cap onto pen’), so that infants need linguistic input to recognize the group of spatial situations that form a coherent semantic category. (The various categories of ‘support’ may work this way.) In cases like this, an important stimulus would be hearing the same word used for different situations. As the child encounters successive uses of the word, she works out what it is that the different uses have in common. Sometimes she may already have a suitable concept in her cognitive toolkit, but has simply not noticed that it is applicable to certain situations. In other cases, there may be no existing concept that does the job, and the child has to construct a new concept to account for the distribution of the word. This type of close interaction between linguistic input and cognition leads to the second issue on the relationship between language and thought: does the native language mastered in early years affect the way that adult speakers categorize and organize the world? Recall that our adult data showed crosslinguistic differences (unlike our preverbal data, which did not show such differences): whereas Korean adult speakers could categorize spatial relations based on the tight-fit feature, English adult speakers could not. When we take our preverbal and adult studies together, the results suggest that the difference between tight and loose containment is salient during the preverbal stage, but becomes less salient as speakers learn and use a semantic system that does not distinguish the two relations. (This has a remarkable similarity to the wellestablished finding that preverbal infants initially can make a large number of phonetic contrasts but lose sensitivity to those contrasts that the ambient language does not use to distinguish meaning (Kuhl et al., 1992; Werker & Lalonde, 1988).) In this way, language may permeate the nonverbal cognitive

126

Soonja Choi

system as the learner becomes a fluent speaker. That is, nonlinguistic sensitivities that are linguistically relevant are maintained at a high degree of standing readiness (see also Slobin, 2003) whereas those not needed for the ambient language may diminish over time (although presumably they do not always do so (see below)). Our adult data are in line with results from recent studies on adult speakers (e.g. Levinson, 1996) showing that the same representational systems that underlie linguistic tasks are also used for performance on nonverbal tasks. For example, Levinson (1996) showed that the choice of a frame of reference in linguistic coding – e.g. use of an absolute (east/west/south/north) or relative (left/right/front/ back) frame of reference in describing the location of one object in relation to another – correlates with preference for the same frame of reference in nonlinguistic coding on nonverbal tasks, such as memory and inference tasks. These data, along with ours, suggest that there is a greater interaction between language and spatial cognition than was previously thought. However, we need to be cautious here and not jump to hasty conclusions about the direction of influence between language and thought. In fact, some recent studies have found that the influence of language on thought is not ubiquitous. In Li and Gleitman (2002), English-speaking adults, who primarily use a relative frame of spatial reference in their linguistic system, nevertheless use an absolute frame of reference in certain contexts. Genneri et al. (2002) have studied the way that speakers of English and Spanish categorize Motion events, e.g. whether motions with the same Path (e.g. walk IN, run IN) appear more similar than those with the same Manner (e.g. WALK in, WALK out) . (In English, the main verb expresses Manner of motion, whereas in Spanish, it expresses Path of motion.) The authors found that nonlinguistic categorization of Motion events was not influenced by the language-specific lexicalization pattern, unless the participants were asked to describe the motions in their language just prior to the nonverbal categorization task. (See also Malt et al., 1999) Clearly, more studies need to be done in order to understand the relation between language and cognition in detail. In particular, more crosslinguistic studies involving very different languages, such as Korean and English, are needed. However, one thing is becoming clear from recent studies of spatial concepts: the relation between language and cognition is not a one-way street, as previous views have suggested. The ‘cognitive deterministic’ view suggests that cognition affects language, while the Whorfian view suggests the reverse. Rather, language and cognition interact bi-directionally in a dynamic and complex way from virtually the beginning of language acquisition.

8

Acquisition of negation in Korean Judy Yoo-Kyung Baek and Kenneth Wexler

Introduction This chapter is concerned with a long-standing problem in the acquisition of Korean, namely, a word-order error in which children mistakenly place the grammatical object after negation, whereas the adult language produces the opposite order. (1) a.

b.

Child data #kkoch-i an nolay pwulle1 flower-Nom NEG song sing ‘The flower does not sing a song’ (Cho & Hong, 1988 [2:2–6]) Adult grammar kkoch-i nolay an pwulle flower-Nom song NEG sing ‘The flower does not sing a song’

Given the generative framework of language acquisition which assumes that children have learned the correct parameter settings for basic grammatical properties and thus know the parameters that are responsible for basic word order, it is quite surprising that this negation placement error persists in many children. In an attempt to provide an account for this puzzling situation, many quite distinct alternatives have been proposed for the syntax and acquisition of negation in Korean. This chapter will provide a brief review of some previous syntactic accounts of negation constructions in Korean and yet another analysis of the classic word-order error. Two forms of negation in Korean It is well known that there are two kinds of negation constructions in adult Korean: (a) the pre-verbal or short-form negation and (b) post-verbal or long-form negation. The pre-verbal negation involves the NEG morpheme an or mos immediately 1

The “#” mark indicates a construction that is attested in child utterances but is ungrammatical/ unacceptable in adult speech.

127

128

Judy Yoo-Kyung Baek and Kenneth Wexler

preceding the verb, while in the post-verbal negation, a verb is followed by a complementizer –ci, which, in turn, is followed by the NEG element anh. (2) a.

b.

(3) a.

b.

nae-ka (hakkyo-e) an ka-n-ta I-Nom (school-to) NEG go-Pres-Decl ‘I do not go (to school).’ nae-ka kyelan-ul an mek-nun-ta I-Nom egg-Acc NEG eat-Pres-Decl ‘I do not eat an egg.’ nae-ka (hakkyo-e) ka-ci anh-nun-ta I-Nom (school-to) go-Compl [NEG+do]-Pres-Decl ‘I do not go (to school).’ nae-ka kyelan-ul mek-ci anh-nun-ta I-Nom egg-Acc eat-Compl [NEG+do]-Pres-Decl ‘I do not eat an egg.’

The NEG element anh in a post-verbal or long-form negation seems to be derived from the complex of [an (NEG) + ha (do)], which never surfaces without the deletion of the vowel /a/ in ha (do). Instead, we find another longform negation with the negative adverb ani followed by the light verb ha, which does appear on the surface without vowel deletion and never occurs as *anih. (4) a.

b.

(5) a.

b.

nae-ka kyelan-ul I-Nom egg-Acc ‘I do not eat an egg.’ *nae-ka kyelan-ul I-Nom egg-Acc ‘I do not eat an egg.’

mek-ci eat-Compl

anh-nun-ta [NEG+do]-Pres-Decl

mek-ci eat-Compl

an-ha-n-ta [NEG+do]-Pres-Decl

*nae-ka kyelan-ul mek-ci anih-nun-ta I-Nom egg-Acc eat-Compl [NEG+do]-Pres-Decl ‘I do not eat an egg.’ nae-ka kyelan-ul mek-ci ani ha-n-ta I-Nom egg-Acc eat-Compl NEG do-Pres-Decl ‘I do not eat an egg.’

There have been two major syntactic accounts concerning the status and placement of the NEG morpheme an in the pre-verbal negation2 in Korean. One account assumes that the Korean pre-verbal NEG element an is an adverb which 2

The long-form negation is known to be delayed in the process of acquisition in the sense that children around the age of 2 and 3, who exhibit the word-order error involving the short-form negation an, do not yet produce the relevant post-verbal negation construction. As the data in this chapter deals with the error made by children around the age of 2–3, who cannot yet produce the long-form negation, we will not address the syntactic nature of post-verbal negation here.

Acquisition of negation

129

is right-adjoined to VP (K. Park, 1990 among others). Basically after his proposal, Y.-J. Kim (1997) has suggested the following simplified structure as a base-generated representation of the Korean short-form negation construction. (6) a.

b.

nae-ka kyelan-ul an mek-nun-ta I-Nom egg-Acc NEG eat-Pres-Decl ‘I do not eat at egg.’ [IP nae-ka [I’ [VP [VP keylan-ul mek] an ] nun ]

In this structure, the main verb mek (eat) should be raised and adjoined to INFL to merge with the inflectional affixes. The NEG morpheme an is an independent lexical item and does not raise and merge with the verb and inflectional affixes. The NEG morpheme an is thus placed between the trace of the raised verb and the amalgam of the verb and the verbal inflections formed by the verb raising. An alternative syntactic view is based on the idea originally proposed in Kayne (1989), who has claimed that there are two kinds of NEG elements in English: (a) ‘non-emphatic (or regular)’ not and (b) the ‘emphatic’ not. The ‘non-emphatic’ not is a bound morpheme that needs lexical items to attach itself to and is the head of a functional phrase NegP. Its affixal nature is satisfied by obeying the surface adjacency requirement that it should be placed immediately after the auxiliary. The ‘emphatic’ not, on the other hand, carries stress, conveys contrastive or emphatic meaning and need not satisfy the adjacency requirement. (7) a. b.

John was probably NOT/*not talking to Bill. (Kayne, 1989) When he was nervous, he can’t NOT smoke. (Zwicky & Pullum, 1983)

S.-H. Ahn (1990) proposes a parallel analysis of Korean negation in which there are two kinds of NEG morpheme an in Korean: the non-emphatic an, which is an affixal head of NegP, and the emphatic an, which is an adverb. Since the NEG morpheme an in the analysis provided in Ahn (1990) occurs to the right of the verb, the verb should undergo overt raising and adjoin to a higher inflectional head as in the account proposed in Park (1990); otherwise, we will end up with an incorrect word order of *[OBJ V an]. Of note here is that the NEG morpheme an in short-form negation is an adverb in Park (1990), which does not interfere with the process of the overt raising of the main verb. In contrast, an is an affixal head of NegP in Ahn (1990), which does count as an intervening head-governor for the trace of the raised main verb in the classic sense of Rizzi (1990) and therefore should be stipulated to be somehow transparent to the raising of the main verb. (8) a.

b.

nae-ka kyelan-ul an mek-nun-ta I-Nom egg-Acc NEG eat-Pres-Decl ‘I do not eat an egg.’ [IP [I’ [NegP [VP nae-ka [V’ keylan-ul mek] ] an ] nun ] ]

130

Judy Yoo-Kyung Baek and Kenneth Wexler

Given (a) that Park’s (1990) analysis of an as an adverb right-adjoined to VP seems to be highly stipulative since adjunction is always to the left in Korean, a strictly head-final language; and (b) that Ahn’s (1990) analysis also needs some ad hoc analysis to make the affixal head of an invisible to the raising of the main verb, we propose that the NEG morpheme an in the short-form negation occupies the specifier position of NegP like ne in French and that the head of NegP is a phonologically null verb to which the main verb adjoins in the course of its raising to Tense in the overt syntax. (9) a.

b.

nae-ka kyelan-ul an mek-nun-ta I-Nom egg-Acc NEG eat-Pres-Decl ‘I do not eat an egg.’ [TP nae-kaj [T’[AgrOP keylan-uli [Agr’[NegP an [Neg’ [VP tj [V’ ti mek]] NEG ]] nun ]]]]

Under the clause structure assumed above, the subject is base-generated in the specifier of VP and raises into the specifier of TP in the overt syntax, and the object also overtly moves into the specifier of AgrOP from its base position, which is the sister of V. The present analysis has some theoretical advantages over the analyses given in Ahn (1990) and Park (1990). First, no problematic issue arises in the traditional sense of proper government of the trace of the main verb, which raises and adjoins to Tense via NEG and AgrO since the NEG morpheme an is not a head intervening between the verb and its next higher head (i.e. NEG) under the current analysis. Recall that an account made in line with Ahn (1990), which assumes that an is the head of NegP, has to stipulate that an is a special kind of head that is transparent to headgovernment. The present analysis can also do without the stipulation made in Park (1990), which claims that an is exceptional in the directionality of adjunction; it exceptionally adjoins to the right of the VP while adjunction in general is to the left in Korean. However, the analysis of the NEG morpheme as the affixal head of NegP in Ahn (1990) seems to be on the right track insofar as there does exist a NEG element that is the head of NegP. The claim here, however, differs from Ahn (1990) in the sense that the affixal head of NegP is not an in short-form negation but anh in long-form negation, which is a verbal head derived from the complex of [an (NEG) + ha (do)] and takes as its complement a CP headed by the complementizer –ci. NEG placement error: data It has long been observed that Korean-speaking children can produce the preverbal or short-form negation as early as 1:7 but do not produce the post-verbal

Acquisition of negation

131

or long-form negation until much later (around 3:3) in the course of acquisition (Kim, 1992). The late emergence of the long-form negation seems to be quite plausible given that it is not only ‘long’ in its surface structure but more ‘complex’ in its base-generated structure, which requires the mastery of the syntax of embedding. As we have already seen in the previous section, the NEG morpheme an or mos is placed immediately before the verb and thus follows a direct object or an adverb in the adult grammar. Children, however, sometimes produce utterances in which the NEG morpheme precedes both the object (or the adverb) and the verb. Given below are some examples of the NEG placement error taken from Cho & Hong (1988)3 and Kim (1990). (10) a. Hyengcun-I an ca Hyengcun-Nom NEG sleep ‘Hyengcun does not sleep.’ b. na an ttayly-e I NEG hit-Decl ‘I do not hit (him).’ c. Rubin-un an nappun aki-y-a Rubi-Top NEG bad baby-be-Decl ‘Rubin is not a bad baby.’ (11) a. #na an pap mek-e I NEG rice/meal eat-Decl ‘I’m not gonna eat.’ b. #kkoch-I an nolay pwul-le flower-Nom NEG song sing-Decl ‘The flowers do not sing a song.’ c. #an maama mantul-e NEG meal make-decl ‘(I) do not make meals.’

3

The age and mean length of utterance (=MLU) for each subject in Cho & Hong (1988) is given below.

H J M S

AGE

MLU

2:4 2:2 2:6 3:10

1.58 2.23 3.65 5.53

132

Judy Yoo-Kyung Baek and Kenneth Wexler

d. #an wuywu ssot-ass-e NEG milk spill-Past-Decl ‘(I) did not spill milk.’ (12) a. #an cal hay NEG well do ‘(I) do not do well.’ b. #an manhi kuly-ess-e NEG much draw-Past-Decl ‘(I) did not draw much.’ (13) a. #an Gemko ka NEG go ‘(I) do not go to Gemco.’ b. #an yekise hay NEG here do ‘(I) do not do (that) here.’ The utterances in (10) illustrate a structure in which the NEG morpheme an is placed between the subject and the verb as is the case in the adult grammar. Cho & Hong (1988) reported that children always placed an after the subject (of unergative and transitive verbs) if there was one, both in active and passive constructions. The examples in (11) shows the error pattern in which the NEG morpheme an is incorrectly placed before an object. The utterances shown in (12) and (13) illustrate the incorrect placement of an in relation to adverbial elements such as manner (=12) or place (=13) adverbs. Both Cho & Hong (1988) and Kim (1990) noticed an apparent optionality in children’s misplacement of the NEG morpheme an; the same child who made an error of placing an in front of the object also produced grammatical negative sentences with an immediately preceding the verb. In terms of actual frequencies, however, they made contradictory claims with regard to the percentage correct in children’s production of the short-form negation. Cho & Hong (1988) reported that children between the age of 2 and 4 “predominantly” produced ungrammatical negative utterances, while Kim (1990) indicated that the percentage of correct, adult-like negative utterances is much higher than that of ungrammatical ones. Baek & Wexler (2000) provided an actual count of grammatical and ungrammatical negative utterances taken from the transcripts of natural production data obtained from a Korean child JK (2:0–2:11). As summarized in Table 8.1, the frequency of correct negative utterances in JK’s transcripts was much higher than that of incorrect ones although there were a significant number of ungrammatical negative sentences in which the object intervenes between an and the main verb.

Acquisition of negation

133

Table 8.1. NEG placement errors (JK 2:0–2:11) Word order

Count

Percentage

Obj NEG V #NEG Obj V Total

62 26 88

70.4% 29.6%

Some previous analyses VP negation or mis-setting of adjunction parameter Based on the fact that the NEG morpheme an is always placed after the subject (of unergative and transitive verbs) but before the elements that are conventionally regarded as a part of the VP, Cho & Hong (1988) argue that Korean is a configurational language, which has VP as one of the syntactic constituents and that the rule for negation in the child grammar is to simply put the NEG morpheme in front of the whole VP. Kim (1990) provides a more elaborate analysis of children’s errors of NEG placement, following the proposal of H.-H. Park (1998). Assuming that the NEG morpheme an is an adverb adjoined to the right of a VP in the adult grammar, Kim (1990) proposes that the NEG morpheme may be adjoined either to the right or to the left of VP in the child grammar. This assumption can provide an account for the optionality of the error since it claims that the direction of adjunction is not set in the child grammar and that the left adjunction and right adjunction is seen as a free variation. (14)

[IP na [VP an [VP pap mek] ] -e ]

Kim (1990)’s analysis of the NEG misplacement as a free variation between the right and left adjunction of the NEG morpheme an seems quite plausible in terms of syntactic consideration since the error is the result of mis-setting one parameter, the parameter for the direction of adjunction. It seems, however, somewhat problematic in terms of grammatical development from the viewpoint of language learners. Given that there is no negative evidence for the left adjunction of an, the question is what triggers the child to ever reset the parameter so that left adjunction of the NEG morpheme is no longer a grammatical option in the child grammar. According to Wexler (1995), learners consider changing their parameter values only when an input sentence cannot be syntactically processed. If the so-called Greediness Constraint is on the right track, there is no reason for a child to adopt the left adjunction only parameter since he/she can process negative sentences without adopting a new value for the adjunction direction parameter.

134

Judy Yoo-Kyung Baek and Kenneth Wexler

Yet another attempt to account for the misplacement of NEG in the child grammar might come from the incorporation of the noun head into the verb, in the sense of Baker (1988). We seem to have at least one piece of evidence to rule out such a possibility, which is repeated below: (15)

Rubin-un an nappun aki-y-a Rubin-Top NEG bad baby-be-Decl ‘Rubin is not a bad baby.’ (=10c)

As we can see from the above child utterance, the NEG morpheme an still precedes the object even when the object is not a bare noun head but a full determiner phrase (DP), which cannot be subject to incorporation between heads. Lack of object raising in the child grammar: delay of A-chain In line with Chomsky (1995) and the multiple-specifiers theory, Baek (1997) put forth a new account of the NEG placement error, which assumed that the NEG morpheme an is in the specifier position of NegP and is thus basegenerated to the left of VP. (16)

[NegP an [Neg’ [VP SUBJ [V’ OBJ V]]]]

According to Baek (1997), if children at the age of 2–3 do not yet have object raising in their grammar, the object would stay in-situ, i.e. within the VP, which would yield the incorrect surface word order with an preceding both the object and the verb. Baek (1997) further elaborates that a supporting piece of evidence for her claim comes from negative sentences with an unaccusative verb. Under the assumption that the surface subject of an unaccusative verb originates from the underlying complement position of the VP, the lack of object raising predicts that the surface subject of an accusative verb would stay within the VP and hence come after the NEG morpheme an, which precedes the VP as a whole. We do often find children’s utterances where the subject of an unaccusative verb is preceded by an. The following examples are taken from Y.-J. Kim (1997): (17) a. #an ippal ssek-e NEG tooth rot-Decl ‘(I) won’t have a cavity in my teeth.’ b. #an kol na-ss-e NEG anger occur-Past-Decl ‘Aren’t (you) angry?’ c. #an him tul-e NEG strength take-Decl ‘(It) isn’t strenuous.’

Acquisition of negation

135

Interestingly, children never produce negative utterances in which an precedes an agentive subject. For example, Kim (1997) reported that she never found the kind of error illustrated in (18). (18) a. *an emma ca NEG Mommy sleep ‘Mommy does not sleep.’ b. *an tokki pap NEG rabbit rice/meal ‘The rabbit’s not eating.’

mek-e eat-Decl

However, the analysis of no object raising in the child grammar runs into a problem when one considers subject raising in the child grammar, as has been noticed in Baek (1997). If children do not put the NEG morpheme in front of the agentive subject, it must be the case that the subject is raised out of VP into a position higher than the specifier of NegP, which seems to suggest that the child grammar at this stage has access to subject raising although it lacks the grammatical option of object raising. The question then might arise how children can draw a distinction between subject raising and object raising given that both operations have the nature of A-movement triggered by the checking of the case feature against the [+D] feature in AgrS and AgrO respectively. If the child grammar at a certain stage allows subject raising, then it must be the case that it also allows object raising. Baek (1997) explored a possible solution to this puzzling situation, which assumes that the agentive subject is generated in the specifier position of a functional projection that occurs higher than both NegP and VP. (19)

[TrP SUBJ [Tr’ [NegP an [Neg’ [VP OBJ V]]]]]

If the subject is base-generated above NegP, as in the structure illustrated in (19), the surface subject (of unergative and transitive verbs) will always appear left of the NEG morpheme an even though both subject and object raising are not yet available in the child grammar, which can be accounted for as the lack of A-movement in the child grammar. (20) a. na an pap mek-e I NEG rice eat-Decl ‘I do not eat rice.’ b. [TrP SUBJ [Tr’ [NegP an [Neg’ [VP OBJ V]]]]] Concluding remarks In this chapter, we have focused on a long-standing puzzle in the acquisition of Korean – the placement of the direct object before the negative morpheme an in

136

Judy Yoo-Kyung Baek and Kenneth Wexler

short-form negation. Many diverse attempts have been made to provide an account for this puzzling word-order error, only a few of which have been introduced in this chapter. For those readers who are interested in more radical approaches to syntax and acquisition, we will briefly mention a couple of works which do not rely on the major assumptions made in this chapter: (a) an is in the specifier of NegP; and (b) the child has a smaller language in that the child grammar lacks some options present in the adult grammar. Based on Kayne’s (1994) Linear Correspondence Axiom, according to which all languages are underlyingly left-headed, Whitman (2000) has sketched an analysis of NEG misplacement, in which an is the head of NegP. Baek (2000) and Baek and Wexler (2000) also developed an analysis of the error of an misplacement from the perspective of the Optional Infinitive Stage (Wexler 1992, 1994, 1996, 1998) and the Unique Checking Constraint (Wexler 1998), which assumed that NEG misplacement results from an additional constraint in the child grammar, which ceases to operate at a later stage in the process of language acquisition due to linguistic maturation in the sense of Borer and Wexler (1987).

9

The acquisition of Korean numeral classifiers Kwee-Ock Lee and Sun-Young Lee

Introduction One of the most remarkable aspects of the Korean language which differentiates it from English is that Korean noun phrases, when quantified, obligatorily require classifiers (CL), exemplified by (1): (1)

Haksayng sey-myeng- i iss-ta. student three-CL-NOM be-DEC. ‘There are three students.’ [Noun-Quantifier-Classifier]

Since the characteristics and criteria of Korean classifiers have not been precisely defined, the total number of Korean classifiers is not clear. There are about 290 classifiers which have been identified. Some of them appear to be productively used, but some are not (Im, 1991a, b). Classifiers pose an interesting question for first-language acquisition since they require knowledge of both syntax and semantics. Syntactically, they reflect functional heads of quantifier phrases, whose order and position are fixed. The typical word order of a Korean quantifier noun phrase is [Noun-QuantifierClassifier], as in (1) (Im, 1991a,b; see also Sohn, 1999 and C. Lee, 2000). There are some other structures of the Korean quantifier noun phrase, but we will not discuss them here. Semantically, classifiers reflect a language-specific agreement system in semantic features between the head noun and the classifier. Although categorization of features of the Korean classifiers has not been defined clearly yet, features of the Korean classifier system can be organized according to Adams and Conklin’s (1973) three basic features of animacy, shape, and function. Also, the Korean classifier system consists of several other specific features, such as honorific and event. The agreement system in semantic features between the noun and the classifier is well developed in Korean. The use of each classifier in Korean is more restricted compared with other languages containing classifiers, such as Chinese, Japanese, and Thai. In Korean, a specific classifier is assigned to a specific noun whose semantic feature agrees with it. For example, the noun 137

138

Kwee-Ock Lee and Sun-Young Lee

student should be used with the specific classifier myeng which refers to humans. It cannot be used with anything else. Similarly, the classifier mali can only be used for nouns referring to an animal. In Thai, the classifier tua can be used either for animate or inanimate nouns. However, there is one exception; the kay classifier, which is considered a neutralizer (Yu, 1989) or a general classifier in Korean. Kay can be used with inanimate nouns referring to small and countable objects. Also, it can be used for those nouns to which other specific classifiers are assigned. For example, kay can be substituted for al for medicine. Since the classifiers require knowledge of syntax and semantics, some critical questions have been raised regarding the acquisition of classifiers: i) Are these classifiers acquired late in development, and what is the course of their development? ii) What is children’s initial hypothesis regarding the classifiers? iii) What is of primary importance in the development of classifiers? iv) Which type of knowledge is acquired first, syntactic or semantic? To date, the acquisition of classifiers has been studied in various languages such as Chinese (Erbaugh, 1986; Fang, 1985; Hu, 1993; Ken & Harrison, 1986; Ken 1991), Japanese (Sanches, 1977; Matsumoto, 1985a, 1985b, 1987; Uchida & Imai, 1996; Yamamoto, 2000), and Thai (Gandour et al., 1984; Tuaycharoen, 1984; Carpenter, 1991). The findings from these studies reveal some similarities in children’s acquisition of numeral classifiers crosslinguistically, as well as language-specific characteristics. Developmental facts Syntax and semantics As mentioned above, acquisition of numeral classifiers involves acquisition of the syntactic structure of the numeral classifier phrase and the agreement of semantic features between the noun and the classifier. There seems to be a great gap in the development of the two aspects of the numeral classifier system. Many studies report that children’s syntactic knowledge of the numeral classifier phrase develops very early compared to their semantic knowledge of it, and they rarely make mistakes in the word order of a numeral, a classifier and a noun. Carpenter (1987) found no syntactic errors in Thai children (post-numeral position of the classifiers). Sanches (1977) reported that Japanese children acquired syntactic knowledge of the classifier at the age of 2. Early development of syntax of the classifier was also found in Chinese children by Hu (1993). In his production study, Chinese children filled in the place of the numeral classifier phrase (i.e. syntactic knowledge of the numeral classifier phrase) by using a general classifier, -gè (i.e. lacking semantic knowledge). In contrast, children’s semantic knowledge of the numeral classifier seems to develop very late and gradually. Carpenter (1987, 1991) found that her youngest subjects, aged 2;9, showed only 19 percent accuracy in her production test with

Acquisition of Korean numeral classifiers

139

Thai children, and that even her oldest subjects, aged 9;0, showed 93 percent accuracy in the same test. Uchida and Imai (1996) also found late development of numeral classifiers in Japanese children. Only four classifiers were produced before age 4 (-tsu for an inanimate general classifier, -ko for a small 3D object, and -ri/-nin for a non-human being) in their production study (i.e. counting the objects in the pictures). Even though Japanese children start producing numeral expressions early, at around one-and-a-half years of age (Matsumoto 1985a), even older children (aged 6) could not show adult-like use of the classifier system (Uchida and Imai, 1996). Similar to this, Fang (1985) found that only four classifiers were used at age 4 by Chinese children, followed by six classifiers at age 5, and eight classifiers at age 6. In another study on Chinese children’s acquisition of classifiers by Erbaugh (1986), which was the only longitudinal study on the acquisition of classifiers, the subject never used specific classifiers before age 2;6, replacing them with the general classifier, -gè. General and specific In the development of children’s conceptual knowledge of classifiers, there seems to be a universal order among different classifiers, from general to specific. Matsumoto (1985a) suggests a ‘top-down’ acquisition order of classifiers by Japanese children; children acquire the most general terms, and move to more restricted terms later. Uchida and Imai (1996) also found an acquisition order with Japanese children, from unmarked classifiers to more specific animal classifiers, shape-specific, and functional classifiers. More specifically, Yamamoto’s comprehension test showed that Japanese children acquired the numeral classifiers in the order, -ri (for human beings) at age 3, -hiki (for animals) at age 4, and -tsu (for inanimate objects) at age 6. The hardest classifiers were functional classifiers such as -dai for machines, vehicles and furniture, -soo for boats, and -ki for airplanes. A similar tendency was also found in Chinese children by Erbaugh (1986) (i.e. overuse of the general classifier, -gè) as well as in Thai children by Gandour et al. (1984). Gandour et al. argue that semantically heavy classifiers (bearing relatively more semantic features than others, thereby restricting their usage) are difficult for children. This similar acquisition order of classifiers across different languages reflects Adams and Conklin’s (1973) three basic features of animacy, shape, and function, and conforms to Craig’s (1986) implicational scale of semantic features. The Numeral Classifier Accessibility Hierarchy (NCAH) represents the hierarchy of markedness for classifiers across languages (i.e. from the least to the most marked in the order of animate human, animate nonhuman, shape, and function). It is considered that the least marked (i.e. the most common) classifiers are easier to acquire than the most marked (i.e. the least common) classifiers (Comrie, 1984). The results of the studies reviewed here seem to show that children’s acquisition order follows the order of NCAH.

140

Kwee-Ock Lee and Sun-Young Lee

However, idiosyncratic patterns are also found in children’s acquisition of classifiers crosslinguistically. For example, in Thai, children’s typical errors in the acquisition of classifiers include using repeaters (i.e. repeating a part or all of a head noun as its own classifier) (Gandour et al., 1984; Carpenter, 1987). Gandour et al. (1984) ascribe this type of error to the “lack of isomorphism between the semantics of some classifiers and cognitive categorization,” stating that acquisition of the classifiers is like that of individual nouns in Thai. On the other hand, Carpenter (1987) pointed out that children’s overuse of repeaters is possibly related to the extensive use of repeaters in the Thai classifier system. Japanese children need to learn two different series of classifiers: native series and Sino-Japanese (Uchida & Imai, 1996). In addition, children also have to acquire the phonological processes involving the numeral classifier structures. The detailed description of the phenomena involving these aspects will not be discussed here, but these aspects of Japanese classifiers seem to add difficulty to Japanese children’s acquisition of the classifier system. Comprehension and production The difference between comprehension and production in children’s acquisition of numeral classifiers has been studied by Yamamoto (2000). She found that Japanese children comprehended -ri for human being at age 3 but did not produce it until age 5. More interestingly, children produced -tsu, but not -hiki at age 5, which they could comprehend at age 6 and at age 4, respectively, in her comprehension test. She also found that the acquisition gap between general and specific classifiers was larger in production than in comprehension. Yamamoto (2000) ascribes the discrepancy to the complexity of meanings and frequency distribution in input, arguing that production is more affected than comprehension by these two factors. This will be discussed further in the following section. Influential factors Multiple factors have been suggested to influence children’s acquisition of numeral classifiers (e.g. semantic complexity, the frequency in input, availability of related salient categories, the existence of semantically similar items, and acquisition and use of formally related items)(Adams & Conklin, 1973; E. Clark, 1977; Gordon, 1985, 1988; Craig, 1986; Matsumoto, 1987; Carpenter, 1987, 1991). Fang’s (1985) comprehension study of four shape-specific classifiers found that acquisition of numeral classifiers was closely related to cognitive development in Chinese children. On the other hand, Uchida and Imai (1996) found that Japanese children acquired the numeral classifiers with high frequency of input first. Thai children’s late acquisition of semantically heavy classifiers (configurational classifiers) was explained by the semantic complexity of the classifiers (Gandour et al., 1984). Thai children have to choose

Acquisition of Korean numeral classifiers

141

classifiers by combining two or more characteristics of the classifiers after defining perceptible characteristics (e.g. shape, texture, or consistency) as well as functional characteristics (e.g. tool). Yamamoto’s (2000) study even argues that children’s different ability in numeral classifiers can be influenced by different factors. In her discussion of the discrepancy between comprehension and production of numeral classifiers, she argues that children’s production of numeral classifiers is more affected than their comprehension by complexity of meanings and frequency distribution in the input. Consequently, it seems that children’s acquisition of numeral classifiers is influenced by the interaction of multiple factors. Acquisition of Korean classifiers has been studied by K.-O. Lee (1997a,b) with Korean children, and D. Lee and K.-O. Lee (2002) with Korean–English bilingual children. In this paper, we discuss the results of K.-O. Lee (1997a) in detail in order to examine some critical questions for the acquisition of Korean numeral classifiers by Korean children related to the issues mentioned above. More specifically, we attempt to answer the following questions: i) When do Korean children acquire the numeral classifiers? ii) How do Korean children acquire the numeral classifiers? iii) Can we find any developmental patterns in the acquisition of Korean classifiers? iv) Is the development of numeral classifiers in Korean similar to or different from that in other languages? The study Subjects A total of 105 children aged from 2 to 7 participated in this study. All the children were recruited from either a preschool or an elementary school located in Busan, Korea. People in this area speak Korean with their own accent, often called Kyoungsang dialect, but it is not considered very different from standard Korean with respect to its grammar. The total number of subjects and mean age by group is presented in Table 9.1.

Table 9.1. Total number of subjects and mean age by group Age group

1

2

3

4

5

6

Age range Mean N

2;1–2;11 2;8 16

3;1–3;11 3;6 16

4;2–4;11 4;8 16

5;2–5;09 5;6 18

6;0–6;11 6;4 19

7;0–7;09 7;2 20

142

Kwee-Ock Lee and Sun-Young Lee

Experimental design A picture-aided elicited production task was conducted for the study. A total of 19 classifiers were chosen as target items: including three for a pre-training test and 16 for the main test. Each classifier was tested with two different objects in the main test, but the classifiers in the pre-training test were tested with only one object. Target classifiers for this study were selected based on their familiarity to the children within their natural speech samples. Some major categories and subcategories of nouns were also included. Thirty-two items were divided into two groups according to animacy: [+animate] and [-animate]. The classifiers with the feature, [-animate] were subcategorized into three types with three features: such as [+neutral], [+shape] and [+function] as presented in Table 9.2. The feature [+neutral] characterizes the classifiers used for small- and mediumsized countable objects regardless of their shape or function. The feature [+shape] characterizes the classifiers restricted to particular shapes of the objects. The feature [+function] characterizes the classifiers restricted to particular functions of the objects. Pictures of the 32 items were drawn on separate pieces of white-colored, half-a-letter-sized paper and each was covered by a transparent envelope. Table 9.2. The classifiers and object items used in the elicited-production test (see also Yu, 1989; Chay, 1990) Category

Classifier

Description

Example

[+animate]

myeng pwun mali i) [+neutral] (general) kay

human honorific human animal

man, sister grandfather, teacher dog, fish

small and medium sized countable objects

balloon, nail

round, small thin, flat small, grain long, handle blossoming fruit or flower

peanut, medicine paper, blanket rice, nut toothbrush, pencil flower, grape

bottle pair, hand, foot pair bound reading and writing material box, small cup vehicle or mechanical device

cola, beer shoe, sock suit, spoon set book, notebook cigarette, matches coffee, water bike, piano

[-animate]

ii) [+shape] al cang thol calwu songi iii) [+function] byeng kyellay bel kwen kap can tay

Acquisition of Korean numeral classifiers

143

The elicited-production test consisted of two tests. Test 1 included a question without any classifier and was conducted with all children in the experiment. Test 2 included repeating the question with a correct classifier when the child did not respond with a proper classifier. Test 1 was our initial experimental design, but children’s responses were unexpectedly low in the pilot study, so we modified the task by adding an additional question. The reason for repeating the question was that although younger children had knowledge of classifiers, their performance might not be competent enough to express what they know without an adult’s prompting. This assumption was based on the findings from spontaneous natural speech samples. When the child produced incorrect classifiers to her mother, the mother would sometimes repeat the question to her child with the correct classifier. The child seemed to use the correct classifier only when she understood the difference between correct and incorrect classifiers. Procedure The experiment was conducted with children individually in a quiet classroom in the school that the children were attending. Each child was given a picture book with 32 pages of pictures, each page of which contained a picture of one or two pieces of the objects corresponding to the target classifiers which were familiar to the child. First, each child was trained with the practice battery containing three pictures of different objects. During the pre-training, children’s answers were corrected by the experimenter. Two experimenters conducted the test with each child. One of the experimenters told the child “We’re going to play a short game today. We have a book containing beautiful pictures. Look at this picture. Do you know what this picture is? Can you tell her (pointing to the other experimenter) how many there are of these (without using the appropriate classifier to refer to the head noun). I’ll give you a candy when you finish all of these.” When the child had no response or did not respond with a correct classifier, he or she was given one more question containing a correct classifier by the experimenter. The protocol to elicit the classifiers was as follows: Experimenter: [pointing to an apple in the picture] Do you know what this is? Child: An apple. Experimenter: Can you tell her [pointing to the other experimenter] how many apples there are? Child: Three (without a classifier). Experimenter: How many apples? (with an appropriate classifier). Child: Three-CL (with/without an appropriate classifier).

The experiment lasted from twenty minutes to about half an hour depending on the age of the child.

144

Kwee-Ock Lee and Sun-Young Lee

Scoring and analyses Children’s responses were scored for each classifier and for each item as their responses included either correct or incorrect classifiers: 0 for an incorrect use, 1 for a correct use. Therefore, the possible scores for each classifier ranged from 0 to 2. Mean percentages of children’s correct responses by categorization of semantic features of classifiers within each age group were tested against chance level by using the Standard t-test. Results and discussion First, from a very early age, children understood that classifiers were needed for the expression of the quantified noun phrase. Table 9.3 presents the mean percentage of all children’s responses on the 32 target items. As seen in Table 9.3, more than one-half of the youngest group responded with the correct structure of classifiers containing either kay or the specific classifier. Children aged 4, 5, 6, and 7 produced the correct structure in over 90% of their responses, although children’s correct response rate was low on Test 1. All of the children’s responses containing classifiers were produced with correct word order for the noun phrase. Second, the earliest response pattern was to respond to all nouns in the same way. Some children chose one classifier kay and used it for all or most experimental items, showing no apparent semantic basis for their choice. The mean percentage of incorrect use of kay or the correct classifier (CCL) is presented in Table 9.4. As seen in Table 9.4, the incorrect use of /kay/ increased in 3-year-olds and then decreased in 4-year-olds, while correct use of specific classifiers increased with age. Children’s response rates and CCL were lower in Test 1 than Test 2, but the overall trend was the same. Except for the use of kay, Korean children rarely made errors in the use of specific classifiers with an incorrect noun referent. This early response pattern can be found also in the children’s spontaneous natural speech samples, which are presented in (2). Table 9.3. Mean percentage of all children’s responses containing the correct structure for classifiers Age

2

3

4

5

6

7

Test 1 Test 2

51 50

66 72

69 93

63 91

67 93

72 96

Acquisition of Korean numeral classifiers

145

Table 9.4. Mean percentage of incorrect use of kay and the correct classifiers (CCL) by group Test 1 Age /kay/ CCL*

Test 2

2

3

4

5

6

43 6

57 10

54 15

44 18

40 29

7

2

3

4

5

6

7

32 32 40 17

40 31

28 65

15 76

5 87

2 93

* Responses on the items for the kay classifier (i.e. balloons, nails, toothbrushes, and pencils) are considered correct in this analysis.

(2) a)

b)

c)

d)

e)

Examples of incorrect use of the kay classifier from spontaneous natural speech (K.-O. Lee, 1997b) ‘thaige twu-kay-ya.’ (Soyeon 3;01) tiger two-CL-dc. ’There are two tigers.’ ‘namca twu-kay’ (Soyeon 3;03) man two-CL ‘Two men.’ ‘wuri cip-ey mwul han-kay pakke ep-ta’ (Youngmin 3;11) our house-LOC water one-CL only no DC. ‘We only have one cup of water.’ ‘cacenkeo han-kay iss-ta.’ (Hayin 3;05) Bike one-CL have. ‘We have a bike.’ ‘yaongi twu-kay-ta.’ (Haein 3;05) Cat two-CL DC. ‘There are two cats.’

As seen in (2), the kay classifier was used with various nouns whose semantic features are not only inanimate, such as bike and water, but also those whose features are animate, such as man and cat. Moreover, Korean children never made errors in the use of specific classifiers with an incorrect noun referent in their spontaneous speech samples such as ‘yaongi twu myeng’ (two cats +[animate human classifier]) or ‘namca twu mali’ (two men +[animal classifier]). Third, children didn’t show any preference for animate or inanimate classifiers, as shown in Table 9.5. As shown in Test 2 of Table 9.5, inanimate classifiers were preferred by children up to 4-years-olds, while the 5- and 6-year-olds performed better with animate classifiers. Finally, 7-year-olds performed at the same level on both animate and inanimate classifiers. In Test 1, children performed well with inanimate classifiers, but they acquired skill with animate classifiers only at age 7. Only data from Test 2, showing that

146

Kwee-Ock Lee and Sun-Young Lee

Table 9.5. Mean percentage of children’s correct responses: animacy and inanimacy Test 1

Test 2

Age

2*

3*

4*

5**

6

7

Animate Inanimate

0 24

2 28

8 31

18 28

32 40

45 43

2*** 17 34

3

4

5

6

7

30 49

66 70

81 76

89 88

93 93

Items for calwu in shape were excluded because kay can be substituted. * two tailed t-test p < 0.000 ** two tailed t-test p < 0.04 *** two tailed t-test t = 3.66, p < 0.002

Table 9.6. Mean percentage of children’s correct responses: animacy and shape Test 1

Test 2

Age

2

3

4

5

6

7

2

3

4

5*

6

7

Animate Shape**

0 3

2 3

8 7

18 9

32 23

45 38

17 12

30 22

66 63

81 71

89 87

93 93

* two tailed t-test t = 2.68, p < 0.016 ** Items for calwu in shape were excluded because kay can be substituted

2-year-olds performed better with inanimate classifiers than with animate classifiers were statistically significant. Data from Test 1 indicated that 2–5-year-old children performed significantly better with inanimate classifiers than with animate classifiers. Data from both tests provide strong evidence of the early acquisition of inanimate classifiers. This is because the Korean classifier system has only one general classifier, kay, which is overwhelmingly preferred by children. In addition, kay is included in the inanimate category. Fourth, children didn’t show any preference for animacy or shape as shown in Table 9.6. In comparison between animacy and shape, children performed better on animacy, but the results were not statistically significant except for the group of 5-year-olds. Fifth, the same results can be found in the comparison between shape and function, which show significant difference in the group of 3-year-olds with function classifiers, as shown in Table 9.7. In order to examine whether children performed differently in the use of noun referents when using the same classifier but with items with different features, children’s performance on the items of the tay function classifier was analyzed. The function classifier tay includes both vehicles and mechanical devices.

Acquisition of Korean numeral classifiers

147

Table 9.7. Mean percentage of children’s correct responses: shape and function Test 1

Test 2

Age

2

3

4

5

6

7

2

3**

4

5

6

7

Shape Function*

3 2

3 5

7 8

9 10

23 23

38 34

12 12

22 28

63 58

71 77

87 88

93 96

* Items for calwu in shape were excluded because kay can be substituted ** two tailed t-test t = 2.33, p < 0.034

Table 9.8. Mean percentage of children’s correct responses on tay, function-specific classifier Test 1

Test 2

Age

2

3

4

5

6

7

2

3

4

5

6

7

‘bike’ ‘piano’

6 0

0 0

0 0

6 0

16 11

30 15

19 6

19 25

50 63

78 72

79 84

95 95

Table 9.9. Mean percentage of children’s correct responses of human-specific classifiers Test 1

Test 2

Age

2

3

4*

5*

6*

7*

2

3

4*

5

6

7

myeng (human) pwun (honorific human)

0 0

3 0

13 3

22 9

42 16

58 18

13 13

32 35

72 47

86 81

87 87

95 90

This study used ‘bike’ with movement and ‘piano’ with no movement for the comparison. As shown in Table 9.8, there seems to be no consistent difference between ‘bike’ and ‘piano’ throughout the age groups in children’s performance. None of the scores between ‘bike’ and ‘piano’ in Table 9.8 were statistically significant. Sixth, Table 9.9 shows that children up to 3-year-olds didn’t differentiate features of difficulty of the practical use of the classifiers which belong to the same category. For example, no difference in the children’s responses was recorded between myeng for ordinary human and pwun for honorific human, as seen in Table 9.9. Older children demonstrated some preference for myeng unless they were prompted by the experimenter.

148

Kwee-Ock Lee and Sun-Young Lee

These results show that children are acquiring semantic features of classifiers by age 7, but they are not acquiring semantic features based on the type of things such as animacy, shape, or movement. To summarize, the results of the study of the acquisition of Korean numeral classifiers provide evidence that: i) Fundamental syntactic knowledge is intact early. ii) An early abstract form of classification, which serves a syntactic and a general semantic function, appears early. iii) Semantic specification in the classifier system develops gradually. Conclusions Korean children show a tendency similar to that of Chinese, Thai, and Japanese children in the acquisition of numeral classifiers. First, the syntactic structure of the numeral classifier is learned before its semantic structure. Semantic knowledge of the numeral classifier develops very gradually, as it does in Chinese, Thai, and Japanese children. Korean children’s correct use of specific numeral classifiers did not reach 50% accuracy even at age 7, unless the children were encouraged by the experimenter (Test 1). Even in the condition in which specific classifiers were prompted by the experimenter (Test 2), children’s correct use of the specific classifiers did not reach 50% accuracy before age 4. Korean children also show a tendency to replace the specific numeral classifiers with a general classifier, kay like Chinese children’s overuse of -gè. In addition, Korean children’s semantic knowledge of the numeral classifiers develops categorically. Our study showed that the classifiers that belong to the same category (e.g. animacy, shape, or function) developed synchronically, as in Carpenter (1991). However, Korean children’s acquisition of the numeral classifiers did not show the general tendency to follow the Numeral Classifier Accessibility Hierarchy (i.e. animacy → shape → function). Our study did not show children’s preference for animate over shape, or shape over function. Moreover, our data showed that Korean children learned inanimate classifiers earlier than animate classifiers. This was explained by their overuse of the general classifier kay which is used for inanimate objects. The same tendency was also reported by Lee and Lee (2002), which found that Korean–English bilingual children did not follow the NCAH in their acquisition of Korean numeral classifiers. We have mentioned idiosyncratic phenomena of the target language reflected in children’s acquisition of classifiers in the previous studies, such as Thai children’s overuse of repeaters (Gandour et al., 1984; Carpenter, 1987). Carpenter suggested that Thai children’s overuse of repeaters is related to the extensive use of repeaters in the Thai classifier system. It is possible that our results are similarly influenced by input factors. Such influence of input factors in the acquisition of numeral classifiers has also been proposed in the studies on

Acquisition of Korean numeral classifiers

149

the acquisition of Japanese (Uchida & Imai, 1996; Yamamoto, 2000). For example, Uchida and Imai showed that Japanese children acquired those numeral classifiers with high frequency of input first. In order to investigate this possibility in Korean children’s acquisition of numeral classifiers, we need further research that will include corpus analysis of the use of Korean numeral classifiers, such as frequency counts. In conclusion, our study on the Korean children’s acquisition of numeral classifiers provides some evidence for a general tendency of the development of numeral classifiers (i.e. syntax → semantics; general → specific). Meanwhile, it also provides counter evidence for the universal constraint of the Numeral Classifier Accessibility Hierarchy in children’s acquisition of numeral classifiers.

10

Acquisition of Korean reflexive anaphora Sook Whan Cho

Introduction This study is concerned with Korean-speaking children’s knowledge of the principles governing the antecedent possibilities for the reflexive pronoun caki (himself/herself). For the purpose of this article, I will examine the distribution and acquisition of the reflexive from various perspectives associated with sentence-internal as well as semantic and discourse-pragmatic constraints. In particular, this paper will focus on the theoretical implications of the Subset Principle (Wexler & Manzini, 1987), logophoricity (Kuno, 1986; Sells, 1987; S. W. Cho, 1992), and grammatical relations (Keenan & Comrie, 1977; S. W. Cho, 1985, 2004) for the distribution and acquisition of the reflexive pronoun caki. The Subset Principle It is assumed in the Subset Principle (Berwick, 1985; Wexler and Manzini, 1987) that a child begins by hypothesizing the grammar that generates the smallest language compatible with the data without ending up with an overly general grammar. Given the Subset Principle, no learnability problem to correct overgeneralization should arise since no negative data would be required. Korean allows both local and long-distance binding of the reflexive pronoun as demonstrated in (1) below. (1)

[S2 John-ii [S1 Mary-kaj caki-luli, j kalikhye-ss-ta S1]-ko John-NOM Mary-NOM self-GEN point to-PAST-DEC-COMP malhay-ss-ta S2]. DEC-COMP say-PAST-DEC ‘[S2 Johni said that [S1 Maryj pointed to selfi,j S1] S2].’

The reflexive pronoun in (1) can be interpreted with the help of either the ‘long-distance’ subject in the matrix clause S2, John, or the embedded ‘local’ subject in S1, Mary. It is predicted that local binding is a subset of and is hence acquired earlier than long-distance binding. This prediction is borne out by 150

Acquisition of reflexive anaphora

151

H. Lee and Wexler (1987) and H. Lee (1990). It is reported in Lee and Wexler (1987), for example, that children prefer taking the local antecedent to the long-distance antecedent, increasingly from 65% at 3:7 to almost the 100% level at 4:7 and up to 6:6.1 It was also discovered in Lee (1990) that the rate for choosing the local antecedent increased at 5:6 while gradually reducing to 40% at 7:6. The Korean reflexive pronoun caki has been examined in a number of studies within binding theory (Chomsky, 1981) in recent years and there are two major views on the syntactic nature of the reflexive. Some studies have argued that caki is a long-distance anaphor (e.g. Yang, 1989; Kang, 1988; Provogovac, 1993; Y.-S. Kim, 1999) while others have treated the reflexive as a logophoric pronoun (e.g. Cole & Sung, 1994; S. W. Cho, 1996, 1999), or a pronominal (e.g. Cole, Hermon & Sung, 1990). These two views obviously conflict with each other, and the locality of caki remains unsettled in the literature. Moreover, it has been pointed out in the acquisition literature that the empirical status of the Subset Principle was rather unstable. The results from children speaking Chinese and Icelandic, for example, were not consistent. Chien and Wexler (1987) found that Chinese-speaking children and adults both preferred the local antecedent for ‘ziji’ to the long-distance antecedent, while, as reported in Hyams and Sigurjonsdottir (1990), Icelandic children strongly prefer the long-distance antecedent. Findings on Korean-speaking children are conflicting as well. S. W. Cho (1989) found that local binding was preferred rather by older children (5:10–6:6) more frequently than younger children (4:0–5:5), and this result is in sharp contrast with Lee’s (1990) study. These findings from Chinese, Icelandic, and Korean do not support the prediction of the Subset Principle. Importantly, another problem lies in the observation that the reflexive caki seems to be only locally bound in a syntactically extremely limited condition associated with psych predicates (e.g. pikwanha-ta (despair of), kippukeyha-ta (please), mwusepkey-ha-ta (fear)), in particular, and would most likely be interpreted long-distance or exophorically otherwise. Apparently, local binding of the reflexive would not occur consistently in the absence of psych predicates, as exemplified in (2).2 (2) a.

1 2

John-ii caki-lul??i piphanhay-ss-ta. John-NOM self-ACC criticize-PAST-DEC ‘Johni criticized selfi.’

Korean reflexive caki refers to a singular, third-person noun phrase and is neutral in gender. For W.-H. Kim (1994, 144), sentence (2a) is ill-formed. I take sentence (2b) to be unacceptable in the sense that the proposition of the sentence would normally be expressed as in a sentence like “John-i caki-uy phal-ul ttayli-/ssis-ess-ta” (‘John hit/washed self’s arm’).

152

Sook Whan Cho

b.

c.

John-ii caki-lul??i/*i ttayli-ess-ta. John-NOM self-ACC hit-PAST-DEC ‘Johni hit self??i/*i.’ caki-luli pikwanhay-ss-ta. John-ii John-NOM self-ACC despair of-PAST-DEC ‘Johni despaired of selfi.’

Note in (2c) that the reflexive can be interpreted in association with the subject noun phrase John of the psychological verb pikwanhay-ss-ta (despaired of), but, as seen in the contrast between (2a) and (2b), local binding is not always granted in the non-psychological contexts. Notice that the reflexive can be marginally coreferential with the subject of piphanhay-ss-ta (criticized), but never with that of the action verb ttayli-ess-ta (hit). The contrast just observed in structures like (2b) and (2c) seems to suggest that the reflexive may only occur with a certain type of verb subcategorized for an argument associated with psychologicality or reflexivity of the predicates (Lidz, 2001). According to Lidz, the reflexive interpretation can only be obtained in the syntactically reflexive sentence. For Lidz, predicates like ttayli-ta (hit), for example, are not lexically reflexive and cannot subcategorize for an argument that conveys a body part of an individual, hence the ungrammaticality of (2b).3 This view is further strengthened by the observation that Korean is also one of those languages in which the reflexive pronoun is sensitive to another type of logophoric verb, including reporting verbs (e.g. malha-ta (say), sayngkakha-ta (think)) and an evidential morpheme (e.g. tay, -tela).4 As these expressions literally indicate, they occur with the noun phrases associated with the speaker’s source for the information, either explicit or implicit, being reported in the utterance. (For other languages, see Speas, 2003.) The impact of logophoricity on the distribution and the acquisition of the reflexive caki is discussed in further detail in the next section. Logophoricity As pointed out in Kuno (1986), logophoricity seems to have an effect on determining the interpretation of caki, as seen in (3). (3)

3

4

malhay-ss-ta. John-ii Bill-eykeyj caki-kai, *j am-i-la-ko John-NOM Bill-DAT self-NOM cancer-be-DEC-COMP say-PAST-DEC ‘Johni told Billj that selfi, *j had a cancer.’ (Kuno, 1986, 139)

In S. W. Cho (2003), I propose that verbs like ssis-ta (wash) are fully reflexive, representing a body part of an individual, and are best realized as a zero form referred to as a cakiz. This view is also based on Lidz (2001). I borrowed the term “evidential” from Speas (2003).

Acquisition of reflexive anaphora

153

In (3) John is the subject of the logophoric verb malha-ta (say), i.e. the source of information, and, as predicted in line with Kuno (1986), the reflexive is most likely to be coreferential with it. The effect of logophoricity, however, appears to be weakened when a proposition is stated in an indirect narrative discourse containing the evidential morphemes (i.e. the reporting suffixes) mentioned above. Consider example (4) in this regard. (4)

John-ii Bill-eykeyj caki-kai, ?j am-i-la-ko malhay-ss-ta-tela. John-NOM Bill-DAT self-NOM cancer-be-DEC-COMP sayPAST-DEC-REPORT ‘It was reported (by someone unknown) that Johni told Billj that selfi, ?j had cancer.’

The main proposition of the whole sentence in (4), i.e. the fact that John told Bill about his having cancer, is narrated by someone other than John or Bill, as marked by the reporting suffix -tela. The original source of the proposition is anonymous or ‘faceless,’ and either noun phrase or someone else is qualified to become the antecedent. This example suggests that the impact of the narrator ’s focus of empathy on the logophoric subject John weakens when no definite source is provided, as outlined in (5). (5)

Facelessness and empathy: It is easier for the narrator to empathize with any discourse participant(s) involved implicitly or explicitly in an indirect discourse where the original source is faceless.

The role of logophoric predicates has frequently been a focus of attention in anaphora for more than a couple of decades, but its acquisitional issues have seldom been addressed in the literature. One of a few exceptions to be considered here comes from Lee’s (1990) study, although this was conducted strictly within the Government-Binding framework (Chomsky, 1981) and was not meant to address the acquisition of logophoricity. One of Lee’s experiments involved an investigation of the interpretation of the reflexive caki embedded in a complex structure ending in a logophoric reporting verb, sayngkakha-ta (think) or an evidential reporting suffix -tay (be reported), as illustrated in (6) and (7). (6)

Grand Papa-kai [Pinoccio-kaj caki-luli, j kaliki-ess-ta]- ko sayngkakhay-ss-ta. Grand Papa-NOM Pinoccio-NOM self-ACC point to-PAST-DECCOMP think-PAST-DEC ‘Grand Papai thought that [Pinnoccioj pointed to selfi, j].’ (Lee, 1990: 139)

154

Sook Whan Cho

(7)

Koyangi-kai malha-ki-lul, Mary-kaj caki-luli,j manci-ess- ta-ko kulay-ss-tay. cat-NOM say-COMP-ACC Mary-NOM self-ACC touchPAST-DEC-COMP say-PAST-REPORT ‘It was reported, as far as the cati was concerned, that Maryj touched selfi, j. (Lee, 1990: 187)

The interpretations of the reflexive pronoun in the sentence types in (6) and (7) were examined in two separate experiments in a truth-value judgment task and an act-out task, which I will call the Logophoric Verb Task and Logophoric Suffix Task, respectively. Ninety children aged in range from 4:1–8:0 and fifteen adults participated in each of these experiments. Interestingly enough, the findings of these two tasks were very different. In the Logophoric Verb Task, older children (6:6–8:0), in particular, largely preferred the long-distance binding to the local binding at the rate of 60%–90%. A developmental pattern was observed in that the rate of long-distance binding increased with age. The preference for the long-distance binding was also observed in the adults (100% vs. 74%). In the Logophoric Suffix Task, on the other hand, the local binding interpretation was preferred dominantly by the children (4:1–6:1) at the rate of 82%–100% while the adults responded to long-distance binding positively at a higher rate than local binding (60% vs. 40%). In this task no development was observed to have occurred in the children’s interpretation. Notice that the children employed in the Logophoric Suffix Task were younger by two years than those in the Logophoric Verb Task (i.e. 6:0–8:0 vs. 4:1–6:1). In an attempt to determine the impact of age, Cho (1992) conducted a study to examine how older children at 6:0–12:0 would interpret the reflexive in the Logophoric Suffix constructions in a question–answer task, using pictures. It was found that local binding was preferred in younger children aged 6:0–8:0 (60%–64%), but the rate gradually reduced to 38% for older children aged 10:0–12:0. No dominant reading for the long-distance binding, however, was detected in older children in that they only preferred it 53% of the time. It is speculated that the sharp contrast seen in the two studies above may indicate not only children’s sensitivity to logophoricity, but also a cognitive strategy involving the recency effect. Recall that, as noted earlier in (5), the original source of the information expressed in the logophoric suffix -tay is ‘faceless,’ so the reflexive is allowed to refer liberally to any discourse participants. It may then well be that, faced with multiple competing candidates for an antecedent, children become dependent upon a strategy of opting for the local antecedent because they are able to remember what has been mentioned most recently relatively better than other possible antecedents . If this reasoning is on the right track, then children’s preference for local binding may largely reflect their sensitivity to both logophoricity and the recency effect.

Acquisition of reflexive anaphora

155

Aside from logophoricity and cognitive strategy, on the other hand, the reflexive caki has constantly attracted attention to the question of whether or not it must obligatorily be coreferential with a c-commanding subject noun phrase, i.e. a subject within or outside the minimal clause containing it, but with no other noun phrases. Apparently, this subject-antecedent condition has been well documented by a number of analyses since the beginning of the theory of transformational-generative syntax in the 1970s (e.g. D. Yang, 1973), and the Subset Principle is heavily based on this condition. It has, however, been challenged by alternative views proposed from the perspective associated with lexical-functional grammar (Cho, 1985) and pragmatics (C. Lee, 1973; Cho, 1985). Among these other analyses is the view that caki is sensitive to the hierarchy of grammatical relations, as we shall see shortly below. Relational hierarchy S. W. Cho (1985: 26–27) provides an account employing a hierarchy as in (8), proposing the ‘Priority Condition’ that the reflexive take the highest noun phrase as an antecedent in the hierarchy, as outlined in (9) below.5 (8)

Relational Hierarchy: subject/topic> direct/indirect object > other noun phrases.

(9)

Priority Condition: Choose the highest eligible noun phrase as the antecedent. The Priority Condition seems to be supported by examples like (10) below.

(10)

Swuni-uyj nonmwun-eytayhay caki-uyi, *j chinkwuYengi-kai Yengi-NOM Swuni-GEN paper-about self-GEN friendeykey malhay-ss-ta. DAT say-PAST-DEC ‘Yengii said, about Swuni’sj paper, to self’si, *j friend.’

Note in (9) that Yengi is the matrix subject and Swuni is an oblique. It is predicted by the Priority Condition that the degree of the speaker’s empathy with the subject Yengi is stronger as it is higher than the oblique in the hierarchy (8), and the subject is given the priority to be the antecedent.6 5

6

As discussed in detail in S. W. Cho (2004), the Priority Condition in (9) needs to be substantiated by additional principles in order for Korean reflexive anaphora to be fully accounted for. These other principles/conditions are left out in this article due to limitations in space and scope. For further details, see S. W. Cho (2004). W.-C. Kim (1976: 92) previously proposed that the reflexive cannot be higher in the hierarchy like (i) than its antecedent. S. W. Cho (1985), however, challenged this hierarchy on the grounds that sentence (ii) is ambiguous on the intended interpretation of the reflexive pronoun, and both objects must be posited in the same level of the hierarchy.

156

Sook Whan Cho

As is well known, it was also found that the hierarchy of grammatical relations has a role to play in the interpretation of English reflexive pronouns, as in (11) (Kuno, 1986: 211). (11)

Surface Structure Empathy Hierarchy: It is easier for the speaker to empathize with the referent of the subject than with the referents of other noun phrases in the sentence.

The empathic nature of the reflexive manifested in the spirit of the relational hierarchy seems to be further strengthened by evidence in which the referent of the lower position in the hierarchy becomes qualified to be the most potential binder in the absence of the higher candidates in it, e.g. subject/topic noun phrase. Observe (12): (12)

Na-nun Pipian-eykeyi caki-kai kkayttulin yulichang-kwa I-TOP Vivian-DAT self-NOM broke window-CONNECTIVE kukes-ul pyensanghay-cwu-n chengnyen-eykwanhayse the thing-ACC repair-BEN-PRES youth-about iyakihay-ss-ta. Tell-PAST-DEC ‘I told Viviani about the window that selfi broke and the young man who repaired it.’ (cited in Kang, 1998 (Kim & Kang’s (1997), example 1360))

In (12), the only potential antecedent of caki is the indirect object Pipian (Vivian) because the reflexive can only refer to a third person noun phrase and it is the only third person noun phrase available in it, and coreference is acceptable. The Korean-speaking children’s sensitivity to the Priority Condition was examined in S. W. Cho (1985) with a focus on the three components of the hierarchy, namely, subject > direct object > genitive. Sixty children ranging in age from 4:1 to 11:7 were tested in a question–answer comprehension task on a set of all forward anaphora constructions, as in (13): (13) a. SO Type: subject > object Tom-ii Mary-lulj caki-uyi, *j cip-eyse mil-ess-ta. ‘Tomi pushed Maryj at self’si, *j home.’ b. OG Type: object > genitive tongsayng-ul]j caki-uy*i, j cip-eyse mil-ess-ta. Nay-ka [[iai-uy]i I-NOM this child-GEN brother-ACC self-GEN home-LOC pushPAST-DEC I pushed the [[child’s]i brother]j at self’s*i, j home.’ (i) subject > direct object > indirect object. (ii) Na-nun Tom-uli John-eykeyj caki-uyi, j samwusil-eyse sokayhay-ss-ta. ‘I introduced Tomi to Johnj in self’si, j office.’

Acquisition of reflexive anaphora

157

c. SG Type: subject > genitive Tom-ii John-uyj pang-eyse caki-uyi, *j Tom-NOM John-GEN room-LOC self-GEN moca-lul manci-ess-ta. hat-ACC touch-PAST-DEC ‘Tomi touched, in John’sj room, self ’si, *j hat.’ In addition to the three types of sentences in (13), three other types of test sentences (OS, GO, GS types) were created by having the relative order of the two third-person noun phrases varied so that the sentence-initial noun phrase was not always the antecedent in the three patterns of sentences. In this experiment it was found that the status of the subject with respect to the object or genitive developed earlier than the relationship of the object to the genitive. Sensitivity to grammatical relations did not, however, seem to emerge clearly until around age 7:0. Younger children (4:6–7:1) seemed to believe that the nominative-marked noun phrase was an agent. Significantly, however, word order and semantic information played no direct role in the older children’s (9:1–11:2) interpretation of the reflexive. Older children, in particular, largely succeeded in interpreting the reflexive pronoun, regardless of the semantic role or relative linear position of its antecedent. Some of the children aged around 7:1 were also observed to behave like the older children. It was therefore concluded that at least the successful children in the 7:1–11:2 age group were probably developing the grammatical mechanisms found in adults. These results seem to indicate that children find it easier to link the reflexive pronoun with a subject than with any other noun phrase. Previously, comparable findings have been obtained in Otsu (1981) and Suzuki (1985). Otsu, for example, examined the performance of sixty English-speaking children at 3:1–7:1 on structures like (14) in an act-out task. (14)

The elephanti near the hippoj tickled himselfi, *j.

In this study, it was found that from age 4:0, children showed a strong tendency (71%–83% of the time) to choose subject noun phrases as antecedents. Moreover, Suzuki (1985) tested sixty Japanese-speaking children on SO types of Japanese (e.g. Tomi pushed Johnj in self’si, *j room) using an act-out task. She reports that even the youngest group (age 4:0) correctly chose subjects over objects as antecedent 76% of the time. Older children succeeded 81%–100% of the time. These findings clearly point to children’s early sensitivity to the role of the subject in the interpretation of reflexives. The accounts employing the relational hierarchy, however, are challenged by a set of counter-examples, as demonstrated in an earlier example (2b) repeated below as (15) and a pair of additional examples in (16).

158

Sook Whan Cho

(15) a. Swuni-kai caki-lul??i piphanhay-ss-ta. Swuni-NOM self-ACC criticize-PAST-DEC ‘Swunii criticized self??i.’ b. Swuni-kai caki-lul*i ssis-ess-ta. Swuni-NOM self-ACC wash-PAST-DEC ‘Swunii washed self*i.’ (16) a. Swuni-uyi pan-eyse-nun, caki-kai ceyil khu-ta(-tela). Swuni-GEN class-LOC-TOP self-NOM most big-DEC(-REPORT) ‘In Swuni’si class, selfi is the tallest (as reported).’7 b. Caki-ka*i Swuni-uyi pan-eyse-nun, ceyil khu-ta(-tela). self-NOM Swuni-GEN class-LOC-TOP most big-DEC(-REPORT) ‘Self*i, in Swuni’si class, is the tallest (as reported).’ Note that (15a) and (15b) are structurally identical except for the verbs piphanhay-ss-ta (criticized) and ssis-ess-ta (washed), respectively. Sentences in (16a) and (16b) are also alike in their basic structure, except for the order of the subject caki-ka (self) and the locative phrase Swuni-uy pan-eyse-nun (in Swuni’s class): sentence (16a) begins with the locative phrase followed by the subject while the order is switched in (16b). Besides these structural similarities, the grammatical relations denoted by the reflexive caki and its potential antecedent Swuni each hold the same in each pair. In both structures of (15), the antecedent is a subject and the reflexive is an object; likewise, the antecedent and the reflexive are a genitive and a subject noun phrase in both (16a) and (16b). Very importantly, it is to be noted that each pair of these patterns in (15) and (16) stand in sharp contrast in grammaticality on the intended interpretation of the reflexive pronoun, despite similarities in the syntactic frame and in the grammatical relation of the potential antecedent and the reflexive. Based on the relational hierarchy alone, it would be predicted that the antecedent possibilities should hold constant in each pair. This prediction, however, is not borne out, as seen in the contrast in grammaticality in (15) and (16). The discrepancies in grammaticality just noted remain to be explored further in future studies. Conclusion In this article we have seen that there is evidence suggesting children’s sensitivity to locality, logophoricity, and the relational hierarchy in interpreting the antecedent possibilities for the reflexive pronoun caki. On the other hand, we have also noted that none of the previous views such as the Subset Principle, the 7

Some speakers of Korean find sentence (16) better in the reporting style containing the evidential morpheme -tela, and I added it as an option.

Acquisition of reflexive anaphora

159

Priority Condition, or logophoricity are fully satisfactory in explaining the distribution and acquisition of Korean reflexive anaphora. As discussed above, the interpretation of the reflexive pronoun seems to vary at varying degrees in accordance with the reflexivity or logophoricity of the predicates involved, in particular. It is proposed that future studies on the distribution and acquisition of Korean anaphora investigate the effects of not just sentenceinternal constraints, but also the semantic and pragmatic roles of the reflexive and the predicates co-occurring with it, so that a unified account may be developed further.

11

The Korean relative clause: issues of processing and acquisition Jong Sup Jun*

Introduction Relative clauses (=RCs) have received special attention in the psycholinguistics literature thanks to their implications for language development and processing. For one thing, the complex nature of subordination with RCs provides useful criteria to decide what developmental stage a language learner lies in (cf. Brown, 1973; Radford, 1990). For another, when language learners have not fully acquired the target grammar of RCs and are forced to figure out the meaning of a complex sentence with an RC, they tend to make conjectures about its meaning. Controlled experiments can reveal some of the principles concerning the children’s guesses in terms of processing strategies. This article aims to present an overview of research questions and representative studies on the processing and acquisition issues of the Korean RCs, and to suggest a direction for future research. Processing issues are highly correlated with developmental issues, since different age groups process RCs differently depending upon their stage of language development. In this regard, scholars have raised such interesting questions of processing and acquisition as follows: (1) a.

b.

Representative research questions Is the processing of the Korean RC that precedes the modified noun in word order different from the processing of RCs in languages like English, where the RC in question follows the modified noun? How do Korean learners process RCs depending upon their stage of language development?

* I thank Shanley Allen, Ray Jackendoff, Dawn MacLaughlin, Joan Maling, William O’Grady, Edgar Zurif, Sookeun Cho, Sook Whan Cho, Chungmin Lee, Kwee-Ock Lee, and Sunyoung Lee for helpful comments and discussion. The usual disclaimers apply. This article was supported by Hankuk University of Foreign Studies Research Fund of 2009.

160

Acquisition and processing of Korean relative clauses

c.

161

Do monolingual Korean speakers process RCs differently from bilingual Korean speakers? Is there any qualitative/quantitative difference in the acquisition of the target grammar between monolingual and bilingual Korean speakers?

This article is organized as follows. The next section summarizes earlier works on the processing of RCs. The third section discusses the limitations of earlier studies, and suggests that we should tease apart RC-internal factors from RC-external factors to overcome the problems. The fourth section briefly summarizes Jun and Lee’s (2004) finding about the Korean RC after factoring out RC-external factors, and the final section discusses the processing and acquisition issues from a broader perspective of monolingualism and bilingualism. Earlier works on the processing of relative clauses In most earlier works, RCs are studied with respect to the main clause function and the embedded clause function of a head noun whose maximal projection governs the RC in question. The main clause and the embedded clause functions of the head noun classify RCs into four subtypes: the head noun functions as the subject of both the main and the embedded clauses (SS); the head noun functions as the subject of the main clause and as the object of the embedded clause (SO); the head noun functions as the object of the main clause and as the subject of the embedded clause (OS); and the head noun functions as the object of both the main and the embedded clauses (OO). See the sentences in (2) for illustrative data. (2) a. b. c. d.

SS: The bear that t pushed the dog chased the cat SO: The bear that the dog pushed t chased the cat OS: The bear chased the cat that t pushed the dog OO: The bear chased the cat that the dog pushed t

Many processing strategies have been found in both children and adults in the psycholinguistics literature. They include factors due to syntactic configuration, factors due to semantic/pragmatic processing, and factors due to language learners’ sloppy grammar. Factors due to syntactic configuration Sheldon’s (1974) parallel function hypothesis emphasizes the grammatical function of the head noun in both main and embedded clauses. RCs are easier to understand when the main clause function of the head noun of an NP is the same as, i.e. parallel with, the embedded clause function of the head noun than

162

Jong Sup Jun

when the two functions are different. Thus, SS and OO type RCs are easier than SO and OS sentences, since the main and embedded clause functions are parallel in SS and OO sentences. Many subsequent studies confirm the prediction that SS and OO are easier; but experimental data are not consistent in the literature concerning the relative difficulty of SS, OO, and OS. Keenan and Comrie (1977) focus on the grammatical function inside an RC. According to their noun phrase accessibility hierarchy, subject relatives are easier than object relatives due to the implication hierarchy of grammatical functions; i.e. subject > direct object > indirect object > prepositional object > possessive NP > object of a comparative particle. The accessibility hierarchy predicts that subject relatives are easier to process than object relatives, which is confirmed in many studies (De Villiers et al., 1979; Harada et al., 1976; Y.-J. Kim, 1987; K.-O. Lee, 1990; S. Cho, 1999). Contradicting data are also available in O’Grady et al. (1996), Jun (2001), Jun and Lee (2004), and K.-O. Lee, Jun, and Park (2004): both bilingual and monolingual children in these studies find object relatives easier than subject relatives. Slobin and Bever (1982) propose that children resort to the basic word order, or canonical schema, of a language for sentence interpretation. In SVO and SOV languages, the linearly first NP is canonically understood as the subject of a sentence. O’Grady et al. (1996) and Jun (2001) adopt the canonical word order or the agent-first strategy to explain why their subjects do better for object relatives than for subject relatives in Korean. RCs precede the head noun in Korean; and hence the linearly first NP in an RC with a subject gap is marked accusative, whereas the linearly first NP in an RC with an object gap is marked nominative (see the data in (3) on the next page). When children assign the subject/actor role to the linearly first NP following the word order strategy, they make correct responses only to object relatives. Factors due to semantic/pragmatic processing MacWhinney (1982) suggests that we want to maintain the perspective of active agents in sentence processing. It is easier to maintain the perspective of the subject, since subjects generally correspond to active agents. This explains why children find subject relatives easier than object relatives in English; it also predicts that SO is hard to understand, since there is a perspective shift in SO sentences; i.e. from the subject to the object trace, and then to the subject again. Factors due to language learners’ sloppy grammar Some studies make direct use of language learners’ sloppy grammar to account for their poor performance with particular structures. Tavakolian’s (1981) conjoined clause analysis draws our attention to children’s tendency to analyze a

Acquisition and processing of Korean relative clauses

163

subordinate clause as a conjoined clause. According to her proposal, children analyze The rabbit that pushed the dog chased the cat as The rabbit pushed the dog and chased the cat. This makes a prediction that SS sentences are the easiest, and that OO and OS sentences are the most difficult. Teasing apart RC-internal factors from RC-external factors One problem with previous approaches is that they do not tease apart RCinternal clues from RC-external ones, so that it is not clear how a language user processes RCs when the main clause function does not matter. In other words, how do language users process the bear that t pushed the dog instead of (2a) The bear that t pushed the dog chased the cat? Sheldon’s (1974) parallel function hypothesis, for instance, does not make any prediction about a simple subject relative like the bear that t pushed the dog and a simple object relative like the bear that the dog pushed t. Subsequent studies have focused on RC-internal clues like the word order and the animacy of the argument NPs inside the RCs, but their experimental designs did not explicitly take RCs away from possible influences of RC-external clues like the main clause function. In an experiment with children, it is not easy to entirely exclude RC-external clues. One possible solution is to place the RC in a main clause with an intransitive verb, or what is better, a copula verb. To this end, Jun and Lee (2004) adopted a picture-cued comprehension paradigm (cf. Brown, 1971), where a child is asked to pick out one of the two pictures after hearing a wh-question with a copula verb like What’s the bear that t pushed the dog?. A brief summary of their findings is given in the following section. Monolingual children’s strategic processing of the Korean relative clause Jun and Lee (2004) tested fifty-nine Korean monolingual children aged from 2;08 to 6;07 in Seoul, Korea. In their experiment, an experimenter asks a child a wh-question in Korean. Each question is in the format of What is X?, where X is an NP with either a subject RC or an object RC. Two pictures are presented to each child. The child’s job is to pick out the picture which correctly describes the X in What is X?. Experimental sentences include subject relatives and object relatives, as shown in (3). (3) a.

Subject RC (=SRel): [t komtoli-lul ttayli-n] kangaci-ka mues-ilkka? bear-ACC hit-COMP dog-NOM what-be ‘What is the dog that hit the bear?’

164

Jong Sup Jun

b.

Object RC (=ORel): [komtoli-ka t ttayli-n] kangaci-ka mues-ilkka? bear-NOM hit-COMP dog-NOM what-be ‘What is the dog that the bear hit?’

For (3a) and (3b), Figures 11.1 and 11.2 are presented at the same time. For each question, the score of 1 is given to a correct response, and 0 to an incorrect response. Table 11.1 summarizes the mean scores by question type and age. The result in Table 11.1 is surprising, in that children do better for object relatives than for subject relatives contra Keenan and Comrie’s (1977) accessibility hierarchy and numerous other studies that confirm the hierarchy. Jun and Lee discuss their results in terms of the combined effects of morphology, word order, and animacy. Korean children acquire the nominative ending earlier than the accusative ending (Y.-J. Kim, 1987, 1997), and learn the morpho-syntactic Table 11.1. Mean scores by question type and age (SDs in parentheses)

SRel ORel

Age 3

Age 4

Age 5

Age 6

.49 (.26) .72 (.23)

.61 (.25) .70 (.20)

.79 (.20) .75 (.20)

.82 (.25) .96 (.08)

Figure 11.1. The dog that t hit the bear

Acquisition and processing of Korean relative clauses

165

Figure 11.2. The dog that the bear hit t

mapping between the nominative ending and the subject/actor role. When children have not fully acquired the target grammar of RCs, they resort first to the word order strategy, and then to the animacy strategy. In Table 11.1, children perform above chance level (i.e. > .5) for ORel even at age 3, whereas they make guesses at chance level (i.e. = .5) for SRel up to age 4. This is confirmed by one-sample t-tests with the test value of .5: for SRel, t(16) = -.141, p = .890 at age 3, and t(15) = 1.842, p = .085 at age 4. Repeated measures ANOVA with the within-subject factor of SRel and ORel reveals very significant within-subject and between-subject effects (F(1, 55) = 7.399, p =.009 for within; and F(3, 55) = 1122.355, p = .000 for between). Children’s above-chance level performance for ORel can be explained by the combined effects of morphology and the word order strategy. Since the linearly first NP is marked nominative, it must bear the subject/actor role. Since children have not fully acquired the target grammar of RCs, they assign the subject/actor role to the linearly first NP following the word order strategy. The result is the abovechance level performance for ORel sentences. In SRel sentences, however, the linearly first NP is not marked nominative. Because the word order strategy assigns the subject/actor role to the linearly first NP against the morpho-syntactic fact, children resort to the animacy strategy instead of the word order strategy, according to which they assign the subject/ actor role to an animate NP. When confronted with two animate NPs, however, children cannot use the animacy strategy, either, therefore performing at chance

166

Jong Sup Jun

level. The interaction among morphology, word order, and animacy can be further tested by omitting morphological endings from the NPs in test sentences; Jun and Lee’s (2004) experimental design did not include such cases, so it remains as a question for future research. Quantitative differences in the processing of relative clauses between monolingual and bilingual speakers How do bilingual Korean speakers process RCs? Is there any qualitative/ quantitative difference in learning the RC structure between monolingual and bilingual speakers? To answer these questions, Lee, Jun, and Park (2004) adopted Jun and Lee’s picture-cued comprehension design controlling for RC-external factors with 86 Korean monolingual and 189 Korean–Chinese bilingual speakers at all age groups. Lee, Jun, and Park’s study is interesting in three respects: first, they tested adolescents and adults as well as children; second, they tested both monolingual and bilingual speakers; and finally, they included SOV/OSV distinctions of simple sentences as test sentences to further test the prediction made by Jun and Lee’s (2004) heuristics-based analyses. Their findings are summarized, as follows. First, they confirmed Jun and Lee’s finding that Korean monolingual children do better for object relatives than for subject relatives. In their data, monolingual children showed improved performance for object relatives at ages 3, 4, and 5 as predicted by the heuristicsbased analyses. Second, Korean–Chinese bilingual children also do better for object relatives than for subject relatives at age 5. Interestingly, however, bilingual children at ages 3 and 4 perform at chance level for both subject and object relatives. The chance level performance suggests that language development is generally slower for bilinguals than for monolinguals and that Korean–Chinese bilingual children at ages 3 and 4 do not even make use of the default principle when they are confronted with complex sentences. Third, monolingual Korean speakers show improved performance for subject RCs at age 10, whereas Korean–Chinese bilingual speakers do not show improved performance at age 10. Furthermore, monolingual adult Koreans make perfect responses to both subject and object RCs, whereas bilingual adult speakers never reach the same level of perfection. These results suggest that bilingual language development is not only slower than monolingual language development, but in fact never reaches the desired level of the target grammar. In this sense, Lee, Jun, and Park argue that there is a quantitative difference between monolingual and bilingual language developments. Finally, both monolingual and bilingual Korean speakers do better for simple sentences with SOV word order (e.g. holangi-ka komtoli-lul milesseyo ‘The tiger pushed the bear’) than with OSV scrambled counterparts (e.g. komtoli-lul

Acquisition and processing of Korean relative clauses

167

holangi-ka milesseyo), which is consistent with the prediction made by the word order strategy. Conclusion In this article, I have reviewed research questions and representative studies on the processing and acquisition issues of the Korean RC. One potential problem is that we have contradicting data in the literature; some studies report better performance for subject relatives, while others report speakers’ preference for object relatives. Jun and Lee (2004) and Lee, Jun, and Park (2004) attribute the data problem to different experimental designs; e.g. the act-out task vs. the picture-cued comprehension paradigm. See their papers for details. There is more to come in the future on the processing and acquisition issues of the Korean RC, because the complex nature of the data calls for a more sophisticated explanation based on numerous factors (cf. Clancy, Lee and Zoh, 1986).

12

The accessibility hierarchy in Korean: head-external and head-internal relative clauses Sookeun Cho and William O’Grady Introduction

Korean allows two types of relative clauses. The first and most common type consists of a head-external relative clause such as (1), in which the clausal modifier contains a gap corresponding to the noun ai ‘child’, whose reference it helps restrict. (1)

[ _ sakwa-lul mek-un] ai apple-Ac eat-Rel child ‘the child who ate the apple’

A less common type involves a head-internal relative clause, whose logical head (khemphyuthe ‘computer’ in the example below) occurs clause-internally; see Jhang (1994: 10) for extensive discussion. (2)

John-i [khemphyuthe-ka kocangna-n] kes-ul kochi-ess-ta. John-Nom computer-Nom out of order-Rel Comp-Ac repair-Pst-Decl ‘John repaired the computer that was out of order.’

The two patterns differ in terms of the range of positions that can be relativized. Whereas head-external relatives permit relativization of both arguments and adjuncts, the head-internal structure permits relativization of only subjects and direct objects. See S. Cho (1999) for discussion. There are two basic approaches to the study of language acquisition, and both have been exploited in the investigation of Korean relative clauses. The first approach draws on the longitudinal study of naturalistic speech, making use of samples collected over a period of several months or longer. The second draws on the use of experimental techniques to investigate particular aspects of language acquisition, usually in groups of children at different levels of development. Naturalistic studies There have been two major longitudinal studies of Korean relative clauses. The first, by Y.-J. Kim (1987), draws on extensive samples of spontaneous speech data from three children: Wenceng (1:8–2:9), Ciman (1:10–3:5), and Poram 168

The accessibility hierarchy: relative clauses

169

(1:6–2:6). (The first two children were audio-taped for an hour every two weeks; it is unclear how frequently the speech of the third child was sampled.) The second major longitudinal study, conducted by K.-O. Lee (1991), makes use of speech samples (each at least one hour long) from thirty-six children, ranging in age from 1:4 to 3:9. Taken together, these studies suggest the following developmental profile for Korean relative clauses for children aged one-and-a-half to three (K.-O. Lee, 1991: 148).1 (3) a.

b.

c.

d.

Relative clause with a zero head (not permitted in adult Korean): [cacenke tha-nun] bicycle ride-Rel ‘(the doll) riding a bicycle’ Head-internal relative clauses: [Piano tangtang ha-nun] ke sa cwuya keyssta. piano dingdong do-Rel Comp buy give ‘(I) have to buy for (her) the one that (you) do ding-dong piano.’ Head-external relative clauses with ke(s) + a lexical head: [kuriko appa ssu-nun] ke ankyeng-un … and dad wear-Rel Comp glasses-Top ‘and the glasses that Daddy wears …’ Head-external relative clauses with a lexical head: [appaka yo ankyeng sacwu-l] ton-i epstakoyo … daddy-Nom glasses buy give-Rel monkey-Nom not have because … ‘There isn’t money for Daddy to buy me the glasses.’

Lee reports that relative clauses headed by kes were more productive than those with a lexical head (78.61% vs. 21.39%) (p. 138), and that about 10% of the kes patterns were head-internal relative clauses (p. 164). As in Kim (1987)’s study, relative clauses headed by kes plus a lexical noun (e.g. (3c)) are taken to constitute an intermediate structure, halfway between relative clauses headed by kes and relative clauses headed by a lexical noun. They appeared in the speech of nine of the thirty-six children studied. Lee also reported that 50% of the gaps in clauses headed by kes were object gaps, while 33% were subject gaps. However, in lexically headed relative clauses, subject gaps were significantly more common than any other type of gap (73% of all patterns). Experimental studies A pioneering experimental study of the acquisition of Korean relative clauses was carried out by Clancy, Lee & Zoh (1986), who made use of an act-out task 1

The status of ke(s) in these examples is in dispute. It is sometimes treated as a complementizer and sometimes as a noun meaning ‘thing’ (see Whitman et al., 1991 versus Y.-J. Kim, 1993).

170

Sookeun Cho and William O’Grady

to investigate processing strategies employed by thirty Korean-speaking children ranging in age from 6:3 to 7:3. Eight sentence types were investigated – the four patterns exemplified below and their OSV variants. (4) a.

b.

c.

d.

The SS pattern (subject head, subject gap): [_oli-lul nemettuli-n] thokki-ka talamcwi-lul ccochaka-ss-ta. duck-Acc knock.down-Rel rabbit-Nom squirrel-Acc chase-Pst-Decl ‘The rabbit that knocked down the duck chased the squirrel.’ The SO pattern (subject head; object gap): [Thokki-ka _ nemettuli-n] oli-ka talamcwi-lul ccochaka-ss-ta. rabbit-Nom knock.down-Rel duck-Nom squirrel-Acc chase-Pst-Decl ‘The duck that the rabbit knocked down chased the squirrel.’ The OS pattern (object head; subject head): [Talamcwi-ka [_ thokki-lul nemettuli-n] oli-lul ccochaka-ss-ta. Squirrel-Nom rabbit-Acc knock.down-Rel duck-Acc chase-Pst-Decl ‘The squirrel chased the duck that knocked down the rabbit.’ The OO pattern (object head; object head): [Talamcwi-ka [oli-ka _ nemettuli-n] thokki-lul ccochaka-ss-ta. squirrel-Nom duck-Nom knock.down-Rel rabbit-Acc chase-Pst-Decl ‘The squirrel chased the rabbit that the duck knocked down.’

Clancy et al.’s results reflect the complex interaction of at least two wellknown processing strategies. The first of these, the Canonical Sentence Strategy (e.g. Bever, 1970), favors clauses that follow the SOV order. Its effects can be seen, among other places, in the single most common error in Clancy et al.’s study – the misinterpretation of the NP-Nom NP-Acc Verb sequence at the beginning of the OS pattern in (4c) as a clause with the meaning ‘The squirrel knocked down the rabbit’ (46.7% of all responses). A second strategy, the Parallel Function Strategy (e.g. Sheldon, 1974), favors patterns in which the gap inside the relative clause and the head that it modifies bear the same grammatical relation (as in the SS and OO patterns). The apparent effects of this strategy can be seen in children’s superior performance on the SS patterns (78.25% correct), compared to the SO patterns (68.25% correct). Clancy et al.’s study was an important contribution to the literature on the acquisition of Korean, but like many early studies on the acquisition of relative clauses in other languages it suffered from methodological problems. These include the complexity of the test items, the fact that only subject and object relative clauses were investigated, the unnaturalness of requiring subjects to act out both the meaning of the main clause and the meaning of the relative clause (which is normally presupposed), and – of necessity, given the complexity of the task – the exclusion of younger children from the study.

The accessibility hierarchy: relative clauses

171

S. Cho (1999) sought to extend and refine Clancy et al.’s work by including a broader spectrum of children (ten 4-year-olds, eleven 5-year-olds, ten 6-yearolds, and nine 7-year-olds), by examining a broader range of relative clause structures, and by employing simpler matrix clauses. Examples (5–7) below show the sentence types in Cho’s study (five tokens of each type)2 (5) a.

b.

(6) a.

b.

(7) a.

b.

Subject gap in transitive relative clause [ _ thokki-lul anacwu-nun] oli-ka iss-e. rabbit-Ac hug-Rel duck-Nom be-Pres-Decl ‘Here is a duck that is hugging a rabbit.’ Direct object gap in transitive relative clause [Koyangi-ka _ ttayli-nun] kay-ka iss-e. cat-Nom hit-Rec dog-Nom be-Af ‘Here is a dog that a cat is hitting.’ Subject gap in an intransitive relative clause [ _ koyangi-eykey malha-nun] twayci-ka iss-e. cat-Dat talk-Rel pig-Nom be-Af ‘Here is a pig that is talking to a cat.’ Dative gap in an intransitive relative clause [Kom-i _ ppoppoha-nun] so-ka iss-e. bear-Nom kiss-Rel cow-Nom be-Af ‘Here is a cow that a bear is kissing.’ Subject gap in locative relative clause [ _ saca twiey se-iss-nun] kay-ka iss-e. lion-behind stand-Prog-Rel dog-Nom be-Af ‘Here is a dog that is standing behind a lion.’ Oblique gap in locative relative clause [Kom-i _ aphey se-iss-nun] holangi-ka iss-e. bear-Nom front stand-Prog-Rel tiger-Nom be-Af ‘Here is a tiger in front of which a bear is standing.’

As they heard each test sentence, the children were shown a pair of pictures and were asked to point out the picture that matched the sentence produced by the experimenter. Figure 12.1 contains a sample picture for the transitive relative clause in (5a). Table 12.1 summarizes Cho’s results. A repeated two-way ANOVA revealed a significant effect for age and for sentence type, with the scores for relative clauses containing subject gaps

2

Cho’s study also included direct object and dative relative clauses built around three-argument verbs. Due to limitations on space, we will not attempt to discuss these here.

172

Sookeun Cho and William O’Grady

Table 12.1. Mean scores (out of 5) on Cho’s picture selection task

Subj. gap in trans. clause (5a) Obj. gap in trans. clause (5b) Subj. gap in intrans. clause (6a) Dative gap in intrans. clause (6b) Subj. gap in locative clause (7a) Oblique gap in locative clause (7b)

(a)

4-yr-olds

5-yr-olds

6-yr-olds

7-yr-olds

3.67 2.78 3.44 3.00 3.11 2.22

3.91 3.18 3.64 3.36 3.45 2.54

4.50 4.20 4.70 4.50 4.60 3.40

4.89 4.00 4.78 4.33 4.44 3.00

(b)

Figure 12.1. Sample picture from the picture selection task

significantly higher than for those containing direct object, dative, or oblique gaps; scores for relative clauses containing an oblique gap were lowest of all. Cho also sought to investigate the comprehension of head-internal relative clauses. Working with thirty-seven children (seven 4-year-olds, ten 5-year-olds, ten 6-year-olds and ten 7-year-olds), he used a truth-value judgment task to assess their ability to understand patterns such as the following (five tokens of each): (8) a.

b.

Subject head in SO pattern Ai-ka [thokki-ka kay-lul ttayli-nun] kes-ul manci-e. boy-Nom rabbit-Nom dog-Ac hit-Rel Comp-Ac touch-Decl ‘A boy touches a rabbit that hits a dog.’ Object head in SO pattern Ai-ka [kom-i saca-lul mi-nun] kes-ul manci-e. boy-Nom bear-Nom lion-Ac push-Rel Comp-Ac touch-Decl ‘A boy touches a lion that a bear pushes.’

The accessibility hierarchy: relative clauses

173

Table 12.2. Mean scores (out of 5) on Cho’s truth-value judgment task 4-yr-olds 5-yr-olds 6-yr-olds 7-yr-olds Subject head in subject-object pattern (8a) 4.86 Object head in subject-object pattern (8b) 4.43

4.70 4.40

4.90 4.60

4.90 4.60

Figure 12.2. Sample picture from Cho’s truth-value judgment task

Figure 12.2 illustrates a sample picture used for sentence (8a). The child’s task was simply to indicate whether the sentence was a truthful description of the picture, which it invariably was. Table 12.2 summarizes Cho’s results. (A control group of five adult native speakers responded correctly to all ten test items.) As can be seen here, the children had little difficulty with either type of headinternal relative clause, although they did perform significantly better on patterns with a subject head than on those with a direct object head. Conclusion Overall, research on the acquisition of Korean relative clauses appears to support two major findings that have also been reported for European languages, including English, French, and Spanish (see O’Grady, 1997: 174ff for a review). First, there is an early preference for subject relative clauses, as evidenced both by Lee’s findings with regard to the emergence of lexically headed relative clauses in spontaneous speech and by the results of Cho’s experimental studies. Second, there is a tendency for relative clauses containing

174

Sookeun Cho and William O’Grady

a gap that is lower on the relational hierarchy (subject > direct object > indirect object > oblique) to be more difficult for children to comprehend. Signs of a tendency in this direction can be seen in Cho’s experimental work, summarized above, as well as in the apparent absence of oblique relatives in reports of early spontaneous speech. Future work will no doubt yield results that extend and refine these early conclusions in various ways.

13

Development of functional categories in child Korean Ho Han

Overview No matter what language they learn, children produce sentences with a telegraphic nature at the early stage of language acquisition. Children’s telegraphic speech is characterized by the absence of functional morphemes that convey little lexico-semantic meaning and perform relevant syntactic functions, heading functional projections. Specifically, I-elements are modals and inflectional elements such as agreement markers (Agr) and tense morphemes (T).1 An overt C-element is a complementizer, and the position of C sometimes holds a Whfeature licensing a Wh-phrase in its specifier position. D-elements are demonstratives, determiners, and pronouns. The development of functional morphemes has been extensively studied for English and other Indo-European languages. In English, at the beginning of the multi-word stage, generally prior to the age of 24 months, children begin to produce utterances like those in (1) (Radford, 1990: 2). (1)

Man drive truck. Baby doll ride truck. Open can.

Such examples of early child utterances are taken to be evidence of the late development of functional elements, as noted by many researchers (Brown and Fraser, 1963; Brown and Bellugi, 1964; Bloom, 1970; R. Brown, 1973). In particular, Brown (1973) reported that functional morphemes develop in a certain order in child English after age two, as shown in Table 13.1. Such a telegraphic nature has been discussed mainly with respect to the development of syntactic structures relevant to functional elements. Under

1

Generative grammar has posited various functional categories since Pollock’s (1989) proposal of the Split INFL Hypothesis, in which Agr and T are identified with their own maximal projections, AgrP and TP, respectively.

175

176

Ho Han

Table 13.1. Acquisition order of some functional morphemes (Goodluck, 1991: 56) Age of mastery (years:months) Morphemes

Adam

Sarah

Eve

Present progressive -ing Plural marker –s Possessive marker -‘s Past regular –ed Third person singular -s

2;6 2;6 3;2 3;6 3;6

2;10 2;3 2;10 4;10 4;0

1;9 1;11 1;11 1;11 2;3

the framework of generative grammar, Lebeaux (1988), Radford (1990), Guilfoyle and Noonan (1992), and Platzack (1990, 1992) took the lack of functional morphemes in young children’s speech as evidence for the absence of the functional (syntactic) categories C, I, D, etc., and, consequently, the absence of the functional projections CP, IP, DP, etc., prior to age two. In particular, Radford (1990) proposed the Small Clause Hypothesis, that young children’s utterances are VP small clauses, and functional categories mature in parallel after age two. This view raised much controversy and many researchers provided counter-evidence from other languages, e.g. Demuth (1992, 1994) for Sesotho, Hyams (1992) and Guasti (1992) for Italian, Meisel and Müller (1992) for German, and H. Han (1997) for Korean. And, recently, Wexler’s (1994) Optional Infinitive Hypothesis and Rizzi’s (2000) truncation approach presented new interpretations of children’s telegraphic utterances. This article discusses the development of functional categories in child Korean, which I explored in Han (1997), under the framework of a version of generative grammar. This paper will show that functional morphemes in an agglutinative language like Korean develop earlier than those in child English, and a developmental order exists among functional morphemes. I will discuss why such differences are observed between child English and child Korean, arguing that functional categories are not absent in early child language but rather they are underspecified due to the nature of the target elements. Approach The functional elements of Korean are different from those of English in many respects. I refer to my work in Han (1997) on the main characteristics of functional morphemes in Korean and the analysis of the acquisition data from various sources.

Development of functional categories

177

Functional elements in Korean Word order Korean is an SOV language with a relatively rich system of grammatical markers, including case markers2 and tense/aspect markers. The use of case markers means that word order is quite free, particularly in informal speech. A typical Korean sentence with the standard word order is given in (2).3 (2)

John-i Mira-lul cohaha-si-ess-ta John-Nom Mira-Acc like-Hon-Past-Decl ‘John liked Mira.’

Structural Case is realized by morphological case markers, which are functional morphemes, as shown in (2). Following is the list of morphological case markers: (3)

Nominative case marker: -ka after a vowel, -i after a consonant Accusative case marker: -lul after a vowel, -ul after a consonant Genitive case marker: -uy Dative case marker: -eykey4

Korean allows deletion of case markers, particularly in informal speech: (4)

sensayngnim-(i) Tori-(lul) cohaha-si-ess-ta teacher-Nom Tori-Acc like-Hon-Past-Decl ‘The teacher liked Tori.’

In adult speech, deletion of the accusative Case marker is much more frequent than deletion of the nominative Case marker. Deletion of both case markers usually occurs in sentences with the standard SOV order, while in sentences with the non-standard word orders deletion of both markers is not allowed unless selectional restriction, subcategorization, or subject–verb agreement (honorification) can clearly represent the subjecthood or objecthood of an argument.

2 3

4

In this paper I will use the term ‘Case’ for structural case and ‘case’ for morphological case. The following abbreviations are used for Korean sentences: Case markers: Nom=Nominative, Dat=Dative, Acc=Accusative Tense markers: Pres=Present, Prog=Present Progressive, Past=Past, Fut=Future Mood markers: Assert=Assertion, Decl=Declarative, Indc=Indicative, Req=Request, Q=Interrogative, Sur=Surprise, Vol=Volition Other markers: Comp=Complementizer, Neg=Negative, Hon=Honorific, PL=Plural, Dem=Demonstrative, Top=Topic marker, Nm=Nominalizer, ?=undecided. It is controversial whether -eykey is a case marker or a postposition. See Urushibara (1991).

178

Ho Han

Verb inflections Verbs inflect for agreement, tense/aspect, and mood in Korean. As for agreement inflection, there is only one overt agreement marker, the honorific marker -si-. This marker is attached to a verb stem when the subject of a sentence is older, or in a higher position in the social hierarchy than the speaker.5 The agreement marker is followed by tense/aspect markers, which are listed in (5). (5)

Present: Ø Present progressive: -(nu)nPast (perfective): -essFuture: -ul-kes-ior -ul-llay Fut-thing-be or Fut-Volition ‘It will be the case that… ’ or ‘I/you will..’

Mood markers follow tense/aspect markers, closing off the verb complex. They serve to express various sentential types as C. Lee (1993) mentioned: (6)

-e: Request, Assertion, Interrogative -ta: Declarative -ca: Propositive -ni/-nya: Interrogative -kuwna: Exclamatory -lkkeya: Presumption -lteyya: Intention -eya toy: Obligation

-ney: Surprise -ci: Supposition -ntey: Inconclusive -lkkey: Promise -llay: Volition -yo: Politeness -tay: Quotation

The interpretation of a sentence with the mood marker -e depends on context and intonation, as it can express one of three different moods. Unlike case markers, inflectional morphemes attached to a verb cannot be deleted: a verb stem cannot stand alone. There is one apparent exception to this. That is, since the present tense in Korean is not represented by an overt morpheme, the tense/aspect marker position is empty for present tense verbs. However, a mood marker always appears in the final position inside the verb complex in a root clause. An exception is the nominalized verb complex that does not allow mood markers. Verb inflectional markers are taken as functional elements. Each verb inflectional element is assumed to head its own functional projection. For instance, on the surface, the verb complex in (4) contains the honorific marker -si- heading Agr(eement)P, the past/perfective marker -ess- heading T(ense)/Asp(ect)P, and

5

Honorific agreement is sometimes ‘violated’ when the addresser consciously tries to express his/ her disrespect to the subject of the sentence. I will not consider such pragmatic force overruling syntactic well-formedness.

Development of functional categories

179

the mood marker -ta heading M(ood)P.6 The key question is at what age Korean children begin to produce those verbal inflectional morphemes.7 Complementizers and demonstratives In Korean complex sentences, as in English, embedded clauses are introduced by a complementizer (Ahn and Yoon, 1989). (7a) is a complement clause and (7b) a relative clause. (7) a.

b.

Mira-nun [[Tori-ka ecey ttena-ess-ta ]-ko ] mit-ess-ta. Mira-Top Tori-Nom yesterday leave-Past-Decl-Comp believe-Past-Decl ‘Mira believed that Tori left yesterday.’ [[Mira-ka sa]-n] cha-ka] salaci-ess-ta. Mira-Nom buy-Comp(Past) car-Nom disappear-Past-Decl ‘The car which Mira bought disappeared.’

Complementizers in relative clauses like -n in (7b) represent the tense/aspect of the relative clause verbs. In English, determiners, demonstratives, and pronouns constitute the functional category D (Abney, 1987). Korean does not have determiners paralleling English (in)definite articles but does have demonstratives and pronouns, which are listed in (8) and (9), respectively. (8)

(9)

Demonstratives: i ‘this’; ku ‘that’; ce ‘that over there’ Pronouns: na: First Person Singular wuli(tul): First Person Plural ne: Second Person Singular nehi(tul): Second Person Plural ku: Third Person Singular Masculine kunye: Third Person Singular Feminine kutul: Third Person Plural

English genitive nominals are argued to take the position of the spec of the determiner phrase (DP) (Abney, 1987). Consequently, occurrence of a genitive 6

7

Han (1997) took the Principles-and-Parameters approach for the theoretical framework to account for functional categories, where he follows Pollock’s (1989) proposal of verb movement. An alternative account we can follow is the minimalist approach which assumes that the syntactic features of functional elements are checked off at LF covertly. A syntactic negation marker might be a functional element heading NegP, but in Korean, which has two types of negation, preverbal and postverbal, it is controversial whether the negative marker an ‘not’ occurs inside NegP or is an adverb. Therefore, I do not account for negation in this study.

180

Ho Han

nominal signals DP. Korean also has genitive nominals with the genitive case marker -uy, which parallels the English genitive nominal. So, Yoon (1990) conjectured that Korean genitive nominals occur in the spec of DP. Besides the above overt DP signifiers, Yoon (1990) proposed covert D, as in (10): eme-nim (10) a. sensayng-nim-uy teacher-Hon-Gen mother-Hon ‘the teacher’s mother’ emeni-tul b. ai-tul-uy child-PL-Gen mother-PL ‘the children’s mothers’ (a distributive reading) Yoon noted that inside a nominal phrase, there are agreement phenomena in the form of honorification and plurality, and thus there must be D specified with Agr features. Based on the agreement phenomena, he posited a DP structure in Korean. So far, we have discussed some characteristics of the structure of Korean with regard to functional elements. The next section examines acquisition data from child Korean to investigate the developmental pattern of those functional elements, assuming that children’s productive use of functional elements at a certain stage reflects the existence and activation of functional categories in their grammar. Child Korean data Sources of data The language acquisition data of child Korean that Han (1997) referred to come from several sources. Hahn’s (1981) dissertation on the development of negation in child Korean presents a set of naturalistic data collected from her son, Y, from age 1;6 to 3;8 by means of tape-recording.8 The main data in Y.-J. Kim’s (1997) study on the overall developmental pattern of child Korean were collected from five children; P (1;7–3;3), C (1;10–3;5), W (1;8–2;8), H (1;10–2;10), and J (2;0–2;11). The subject children’s speech was tape-recorded twice a month. Chung’s (1994) dissertation on the acquisition of case particles in Korean also presents numerous speech samples from her diary notes and audio-tapes. The subject children in her study are H (1;0–3;0) and M (1;10–2;9). Chung (1994) referred to C. Lee’s (1993) data collected from three children, two girls, S-K (1;11–2;4) and Y-J (1;1–2;8), and a boy C-K (1;0–2;4). C. Lee (1993) used these data for his study of the acquisition of mood markers. Our data also includes the ones from S.-C. Kim’s (1995) study of the acquisition of Wh-questions, in which the subjects are a girl, E-P (1;0–3;0) and a boy, C-W (1;0–3;0). 8

Although her data were analyzed for the acquisition of negation, they can also be used to study the acquisition of functional elements.

Development of functional categories

181

Table 13.2. Production of the honorific marker Children

Imitation

Voluntary production

P C J W

1;11

2;0 2;2 2;2 1;10

Acquisition of verb inflections Emergence of Agr elements There is an overt Agr element -si- in Korean, which manifests subject–verb agreement in honorification. Y.-J. Kim (1997) reported that her child subjects showed the developmental pattern of the honorific marker presented in Table 13.2. These data suggest that Korean children begin to voluntarily produce the honorific marker, the head of AgrP, at or after age two. Notice that in child Korean the honorific marker occurred in a very narrow range of verbs, such as cu- ‘give’ and ha- ‘do’, which are often used in requesting acts. So, the use of the honorific marker around age two to three does not appear to be productive. Sociolinguistic competence relevant to honorification develops after age two: the honorific marker, which is the only overt Agr element in Korean, appears after age two. Emergence of T/Asp elements The morpheme -(e)ss- marking past tense or perfective is a functional element, heading T/AspP. Children’s production of -(e)ss- would reflect the existence of the functional category T/Asp in their grammar. See the following data from C. Lee (1993): (S-K, 1;11) (11) a. ppay-ss-e take out-Past-Decl ‘(I) took (it) out.’ o-ass-ta (Y-J, 1;2) b. emma Mommy come-Past-Decl ‘Mommy has come.’ ppalkayci-ess-ney (Y-J, 1;11) c. pol-i cheek-Nom turn red-Past-Sur ‘The cheek has turned red.’ d. emma, pappa ta mek-ess-e? (Y-J, 1;10) Mommy meal all eat-Past-Q ‘Mommy, are you finished with your meal?’

182

Ho Han

The data in (11) show that Korean children produce the past tense/perfective morpheme -(e)ss- before age two, and this is confirmed by Chung’s (1994) data as follows: mengmengi (H, 1;8) (12) a. ka-ess-ta go-Past-Decl doggy ‘The doggy went away.’ ccicci peli-ess-e (H, 1;9) b. dirt throw away-Past-Decl ‘(I) threw away dirt.’ The data thus illustrate acquisition of -(e)ss- prior to age two in appropriate contexts with several verbs. This entails that the T/Asp system is acquired before age two. According to the data, Korean children under age two produce the present tense form of verbs earlier than the past tense form of verbs. Korean children tend to produce a verb form referring to an ongoing event in the present before a verb form describing a past (completed) event. This developmental gap is not surprising at all in that the earliest child speech is characterized as a ‘here-andnow’ style. Emergence of M elements C. Lee (1993) presented empirical evidence showing that young Korean children produce mood markers before age two. He collected the data from his two children, a girl, S-K and a boy, C-K, and the data was compared to the data from another girl, Y-J, collected by a relative. Only the data from S-K and C-K are used in this study, since there are not many speech samples from Y-J. Their speech was recorded in Lee’s diary notes beginning at the stage of babbling. Mood markers appearing before and around age two are listed in Table 13.3.

Table 13.3. Development of mood markers Mood markers

S-K

C-K

-e (Request) -e (Assertion) -ta (Declarative) -ca (Propositive) -kuwna (Exclamatory) -ney (Surprise) -e (Interrogative)

1;2 1;4 1;4 1;11 1;11 2;1 2;0

1;0 1;4 1;4 1;8 1;11 1;9 1;9

Development of functional categories

183

Based on these data, C. Lee suggested that the functional category M exists in early child Korean.9 Another crucial point is that Korean-speaking children produce few bare verb stems prior to age two; verbs always come with a mood marker. Although verb forms that look like bare verb stems are sometimes produced, they are actually not bare verb stems but the product of phonological processes. For instance, on the surface, the verb ka- ‘to go’ appears not to have the mood marker. But when the verb ka- [ka] takes the mood marker -e, vowel change and contraction occur, yielding [ka:]. Even at the one-word stage (around 1;0), children produce verbs with a mood marker, as seen in (13). (13)

ibo-Ø-a (C-K, 1;0) look at this-Pres-Req ‘Look at this.’

Acquisition of C-elements A functional category C heading CP occurs in embedded clauses and relative clauses in Korean. The available Korean data do not contain any complex sentences with embedded clauses. That is, embedded clauses introduced by a complementizer do not appear to be produced prior to age two in child Korean. In addition to embedded complement clauses, relative clauses are characterized by the occurrence of a complementizer. An extensive study on the development of relative clauses in child Korean can be found in Y.-J. Kim (1990, 1997), Lee, Lust, and Whitman (1990), and Whitman, Lee, and Lust (1991). The data reported in their studies indicate that Korean children begin to produce relative clauses around age two. Thus, the acquisition of relative clauses around age two might be argued to reflect the absence of a functional category C prior to age two.10 Acquisition of D-elements The available data indicate that children do not produce demonstratives, pronouns, or the genitive case marker prior to 9

10

Note that not all mood markers are acquired at once, as seen in Table 13.3. In particular, the mood marker -e appears quite early. See Han (1997) for two possible explanations of the early occurrences of -e. However, Whitman, Lee, and Lust argued that certain errors occurring in the course of the acquisition of relative clauses in Korean constitute evidence that CP develops before age two. Their argument is based on the occurrence of kes ‘the thing’ which is regarded as a complementizer, as in the example in Lee, Lust, and Whitman (1990: 329). Wuli cip-ey iss-nun-ke We house-at be-Pres-? ‘[It is] the fish that is at our house.’

koki fish

But see Y.-J. Kim (1997) for an argument that kes is not a complementizer but just an element constituting an adpositive construction.

184

Ho Han

age two. This pattern is confirmed by O’Grady’s (1993) study, which reports that Korean children begin to produce demonstratives sometime between 2:1 and 2:9. Consider the data in (14) from O’Grady (1993). (14) a. ce alay naylye-ka-se, kkem kaci-ko wa (N, 2;1) that below down-go-and gum bring-and-come ‘Go down there and get chewing gum and come back.’ b. i cip (J, 2;3) This house Demonstratives are used more productively after age 3;0, as seen in (15). (15) a. i sayngcwi /i changko this mouse /this barn b. ce mentey sicang-eyse that far way market-at ‘at that far away market.’ c. amwu yaki-to an hal-ke-ya any story-even not do-Fut-Decl ‘I will not tell (you) any story.’ O’Grady concluded that a moderate use of demonstratives is achieved after age two in Korean. The honorific marker and number agreement morphemes inside DP are also not found in early child Korean. Therefore, unlike verb inflections, D-elements and DP signifiers appear to be absent in child Korean, prior to age two. In this section, we have seen child Korean data on the development of functional morphemes. Unlike early child English, early child Korean includes some functional morphemes prior to age two, and a developmental order is observed among C-, I-, and D-elements. We turn to why child English and child Korean differ and why such developmental order obtains. Discussion: crosslinguistic difference in the development of functional categories Many pieces of evidence were presented above that inflectional markers, including tense/aspect markers and mood markers, occur in child Korean prior to age two. The child Korean data thus indicate that the Small Clause Hypothesis cannot be maintained for the acquisition of Korean verb inflections. Among verb inflections, the honorific marker -si-, an Agr element, does not appear in the obligatory context, prior to age two. At first look, the missing Agr element seems to support the Small Clause Hypothesis: The agreement element

Development of functional categories

185

does not occur before age two in child Korean, so it could be said that there is no functional category Agr in early child Korean. However, Han (1997) argues that the absence of the honorific marker does not imply the absence of Agr and AgrP in early child Korean, for the following reason. The knowledge of honorification is not purely syntactic, even though the relevant marker performs a morpho-syntactic function as an overt head of AgrP. Rather, for an appropriate command of honorification, the addresser has to be sensitive to sociolinguistic variables, i.e. the social status of the addressee and the subject of a sentence. This sensitivity is not part of grammatical competence but part of sociolinguistic competence, which is considered to develop along with the development of the speaker’s knowledge of social context. Thus, the late occurrence of the honorific marker might not be because of the absence of the functional category Agr in early child Korean, but because children’s knowledge of social context takes time to mature. Is there any other way to detect whether AgrP is present? One way is to examine children’s production of nominative case markers, following the assumption that Case is realized by case morphology.11 The pattern of acquisition of nominative case markers by Korean children would show that early child Korean does not lack the Agr system. In fact, the data from existing studies reveal that Korean children produce nominative Case markers before age two. Y.-J. Kim’s (1997) child subjects began to produce the nominative Case marker -ka between 1;8 and 2;0. Chung (1994) reported that her subjects started to produce -ka between 1:7 and 2:0. Productive use of the nominative Case marker by Korean children before age two supports the claim that they have acquired a Case system which is possibly involved with Spec-Head agreement inside AgrP.12 Among I-inflection elements, mood markers are the first group of elements in the development order, which occur very early around the age of 1;2. Han (1997) argues that early occurrence of mood markers is due to morphological obligatoriness. Since every verb requires a mood marker and a verb cannot stand alone in Korean, Korean children seem to recognize and process mood markers from the earliest stage. Children’s sensitivity to a morphological wellformedness condition, the ban on stranded stems (bound morphemes), is the key factor in the early occurrence of verb inflections. 11 12

I adopt the view from a version of generative grammar that Structural Case assignment relies on Agr features through Spec-Head agreement. Consider whether the occurrence of the nominative case marker before age two results from rote memorization of the noun+case morpheme pattern. If so, the occurrence of the nominative case marker presumably would be restricted to a narrow range of nouns, which children would memorize with case markers as amalgams. But Korean children before age two attach the nominative case marker to a wide range of nouns, as reported by Chung (1994). This suggests that the use of the nominative case marker is productive in early child Korean.

186

Ho Han

Table 13.4. Acquisition of functional elements in Korean Functional system: elements or signifiers

Starting age of productive use

Causes of early (E) or late (L) acquisition

Agr-system: the honorific marker

2;2

(L) Complex sociolinguistic knowledge

T/Asp-system: the past tense/aspect 1;8 marker M-system: mood markers 1;2 (E) Morphological obligatoriness D-system: (plural and honorific) Not observed in the (L) Complex sociolinguistic agreement; genitive case marker available data (probably knowledge; complex after 4;0–5;0) semantics; low input frequency C-system: complementizers in 2;5 (L) Complex semantics and/or relative clauses; topic pragmatics constructions

C-elements and D-elements both develop late, after age two, in child Korean. However, as Demuth (1994) argued, the absence of C-elements does not imply the absence of CP: what you cannot see is not always what does not exist. In addition, the late acquisition of D-elements in Korean also has nothing to do with their categorical status, but rather with their semantic complexity (abstractness). In conclusion, the developmental order of functional elements in Korean is determined by such factors as the ban on stranded bare verb stems, semantic/ pragmatic complexity, sociolinguistic knowledge, and the here-and-now style of speech, as summarized in Table 13.4. Adopting the nativist’s view and particularly supporting the Continuity Hypothesis, Han (1997) argues that functional categories are available from the onset but are underspecified, and their activation by triggering input is influenced by their phonological, morpho-syntactic, semantic, and pragmatic properties in Korean. The development order is explained in terms of the development of processing capacity. The order comes to the surface as children develop their cognitive capacity for handling the phonological, morphosyntactic, semantic, and pragmatic aspects of the functional elements.

14

The acquisition of modality Chungmin Lee*

Introduction Researchers have been interested in the question of when different mood and modal elements are acquired in early childhood in different languages. This interest has stimulated discussion of theoretical issues regarding pragmatic, semantic and syntactic processes in different developmental stages of child language. This chapter is mainly concerned with how early mood/modal elements, along with temporal/aspectual and other functional elements, are acquired in Korean. Other related investigations include S. Choi’s (1995) study of epistemic modals in cognitive development and H. Han’s research (in this volume) on functional categories in generative grammar. All inflectional elements, including modals, are acquired rather late – after 2 years of age – in Indo-European languages including English (Radford, 1990). However, in the acquisition of Korean, a verb-final language, sentential endings encoding a variety of moods, sentence types, modal differences, and even politeness are acquired much earlier. This study will investigate in what order these mood/modality indicators are acquired and what aspects of cognitive and linguistic development the data illuminate. Whether functional categories or projections, as elements of universal grammar, can be found in child grammar is also an interesting theoretical question to consider. This study is based on my longitudinal diary notes on my own children (SK=Suh-Kyung, daughter, and CK=Choon-Kyu, son) from the babbling stage to over 10 years of age. These notes will be regularly compared with diary notes

* This is a revised version of my previous papers: C. Lee (1993) and the slightly revised version C. Lee (1995). Some of the ideas in this paper were presented at the Fifth International Congress for the Study of Child Language (C. Lee, 1990). I express my gratitude to the audience of the Congress, including Melissa Bowerman, Ayhan Aksu-Koç, Thomas Bever, Dan Slobin, and to the audience of the Harvard ISOKL, including Sung-Ock Shin Sohn, Barbara Lust, Joan Maling, John B. Whitman, William O’Grady, Ken Wexler and Susumo Kuno, for their comments and reactions. I am deeply grateful to Pat Clancy for her helpful suggestions for revisions and comments on the final draft. I also thank Choon-Kyu, now a graduate student in cognitive psychology, whose child utterances are in the paper, for finding a few errors in the draft. My thanks also go to other subjects, Suhkyung, Yoonjung and Hyuki, and their mothers.

187

188

Chungmin Lee

from a female child relative (YJ=Yoon-Jung) and an additional male child (H=Hyuki, a colleague’s son) for tense/aspect. In the next section an overview of the development of modal and other functional elements in Korean will be presented. Following that, the emergence and stages in the development of mood/modality indicators and their types are observed and discussed in contrast with Indo-European data as appropriate. In the third section, constraints on the order of emergence of moods/modals are treated, as well as the acquisition of negative expressions including negative polarity items, metalinguistic negation and its scope behavior, and the development of tense/aspect. In the final section, concluding remarks are presented. In the data for this study most mood/modality indicators are acquired from age 1:0 to 2:6. The sentential ending -e with request force occurs for the first time one year after birth in one child and one year and three months after birth in another (i-b-a ‘Look here’ and cwu e1-b-a ‘Gimme,’). Next, the assertive -e appears at the age of 1:4 or 1:10. Right after that a frozen expression ending with the declarative -ta occurs; the declarative -ta form becomes productive at 1:9. Request seems to be the first illocutionary act that a child acquires as a means of satisfying his/her needs. Next, declarative -e (assertion) and -ta (declaration) appear, followed by the propositive -ca (‘let’s’) (1:9–11) and, finally, the information-seeking, interrogative -e? (1:11–2:0). During the latter part of this period in which the four major types of sentences and their corresponding typical illocutionary acts in Korean are acquired, modalityrelated endings such as -ul-kkey (promise), -ul-kkeya (volition or presumption, ‘will’), -ci ma (‘don’t’), etc. appear. Misuse of person-deictic orientation is frequent, however, as when the child applies a marker of the speaker’s volition to the addressee, for instance. At 1:11, the exclamatory sentential ending -kwuna occurs, and at 1:9 or 2:1 the surprise ending -ney of unexpected immediate perception appears, as the child develops the ability to express perception and cognition. During the period from 1:0 to 2:6, about 16 mood/modality indicators are found. The act of quoting someone’s utterance occurs rather early, raising the question of how complementizers develop. Direct quotations and the quotative sentential ending -tay occur first; the complement clause (quotative) complementizer -ko is found much later. Contrary to this, the prenominal relative clause complementizer/ nominal -ke ‘thing’ or -tey ‘place’ appears and then disappears as the child’s grammar develops into a more mature grammar. Negation begins to be used with requests to form a negative request (i.e. prohibition) but for some time the correct lexicalized form is employed along 1

The final ending -e varies depending on the preceding verb stem vowel: if the verb stem vowel is a dark vowel (e, wu, u ) the ending remains -e (a dark vowel), but if the stem vowel is a bright vowel (a, o) the ending changes to a bright vowel, -a, by vowel harmony. The expression i-b-a ‘Look here’ is a form derived from i ‘this’, po- ‘look’, -a ‘ending’ in the following series: i b-a ← i bw-a ← i po-a.

Acquisition of modality

189

with erroneous forms of negative imperatives (as in an ka! ‘Not go!’ = erroneous, ha-ci ma! ‘Do not do!’ = grammatical). The verb ha-ta (‘do’) is used as an independent heavy verb (pro-verb of any action) very early and then as a light verb (together with a predicate nominal, as in ssawum ha-ci ma ‘Don’t do a fight’) as well. The interactional, social aspect of the child’s cognitive development is manifested in the emergence of the polite sentential ending -yo. This marker of the speaker’s politeness to the addressee occurs as early as 2:0. On the other hand, the subject honorification marker -si-, which shows the speaker’s respect for the subject referent, occurs at 2:3 in telephone play but does not appear in actual use until very late. In one precocious child, it occurs in a quotation about her grandfather at 2:8 and in talk about her uncle at 2:9. In this particular child, the politeness marker -yo occurs at 1:7. The interactional politeness marker addressed to the hearer is more basic and far earlier than the subject honorification marker, which comes right after the verb stem, and is part of the grammatical system (e.g. CK 5:0.18 appa kippe-ha-shi-ra-ku ‘so that Dad rejoices,’ CK 5:4.18 imo-hako halmeni o-shi-n nal-i-ess-e ‘It was on the day Auntie and Grandma came’). The subject honorification marker typically shows up after 3:0, largely as a result of nursery school education. The past tense marker occurs at around 1:4; it is noteworthy that children’s initial predominant use of the past tense marker is with telic or achievement/ accomplishment verbs in Korean, as in other languages. Tense and aspect are more closely interrelated in child grammar than in adult grammar. How mood/modality indicators emerge According to Radford (1990), early child English has a lexical category system but does not have a system of functional categories and their grammatical features until around 1:8–1:11. Observe: (1) (2) (3) (4) (5)

Mommy fit refrigerator (Clair 2:0–2:1l, no modal), as a reaction to ‘Mommy won’t fit in the refrigerator’ Want [teddy drink] (Daniel 1:7) (no infinitival to) Mummy do it (no inflection) Man no got here (no do-support, pre-predicate Neg) Daddy gone (Lack of copula be, progressive be, perfective have)

The inflectional system, as a system of functional categories, includes the above lacking elements; other systems of functional categories include the determiner system and the complementizer system. In Korean, however, there are morpho-syntactic categories of mood that distinguish sentential types such as declarative, interrogative, imperative and propositive. Even within the declarative type there are different sentential

190

Chungmin Lee

endings showing different epistemic modalities. Consequently, we need a semantic/pragmatic analysis of the relevant illocutionary acts represented by these mood and modality categories in Korean. Although I would prefer to treat -ul-kkey [promise] as a promise (mood or sentential type) marker in the mood category in adult grammar, I will tentatively place it in modalities in child grammar for reasons to be explained shortly. Order of acquisition of mood/modality and politeness endings For each of the categories in (6), including moods, modalities, speech level/ reported speech, and tense/aspect/negation/agreement, I introduce the approximate order in which forms in that category are acquired. (6) a.

b.

c. d.

Moods: -e [request], -e [assertion], -ta [declarative], -ca[propositive], -e (-ni) [interrogative], -kwuna [exclamatory], -ney [surprise] Modalities: -ci [supposition], -nun-te [inconclusive], -ul-kkey [promise], -ul-lay [volition], -ul-kke-ya [presumption], -ul-they-ya [intention], -an tway [forbidding], -eya tway [obligation], -mot [not able], -an tway [not done, not possible, not V-ed], -ul swu iss [be able to], -na pa [conjecture, it seems] Speech level: -yo [politeness], Reported speech: -tay [quotation] Tense: -ess- [past], Aspect: -e iss [perfective], Negation: an [negative], Agreement: -shi- [subject honorification]

The originally informal, nonpolite speech level ending -e is very common, with one and the same form being used for the different major illocutionary act types of request, assertion and interrogative; however, I have differentiated between these illocutionary act types. All the ending elements in (6b) and -tay in (6c)) belong to the same informal, nonpolite speech level as -e in (6a) but they manifest different modal aspects warranting separate treatment. Endings involving mood The sentential endings in (6a) represent the basic sentence (also, illocutionary act) types or moods and they are acquired earlier than other endings. Among the sentential endings, -ta (declarative) and -ca (propositive) can appear as embedded complement clause endings in adult grammar; -kwuna is an exclamatory sentence ending that cannot appear in embedded complement clauses (-nunya is used as the interrogative complement clause ending but is no longer used as an interrogative main clause ending). The sentential ending of surprise, -ney, is not treated properly in existing grammars but is a very important sentential ending in daily conversation.

Acquisition of modality

191

The ending -e has usually been treated as a hybrid outside the regular honorific system in Korean grammar (called panmal ‘half speech’) but it has become one of the most productively used endings. It is notable, first of all, that the same ending is used for the three illocutionary acts of request, assertion and interrogative, and that these are acquired in early child Korean. The request ending -e Here I will consider how the earliest of the sentential endings, -e of request, emerges. (7)

SK [request -e] 1:2.28 Cwe-pw-a. ‘Gimme.’ [-a is a variant of -e] 1:4.6 Emma, ili w-a. ‘Mommy, come here.’

(8)

CK [request -e] 1:0.4 I pw-a. ‘Look here.’ [pointing to imitation flowers on the wall] 1:2.5 Ili w-a. ‘Come here.’ 1:9.25 Appa k-a! ‘Daddy, go!’ Appa kho c-a! ‘Daddy, sleep!’

At the age of one, in the one-word utterance stage, the earliest request utterances ending with -e appear before other ending forms occur. In YJ’s data, the request utterance ppalli wu-a ‘Come quickly’ occurs at 1:1 and, interestingly, at about 11 months the declarative type of utterance such as aphu-ta ’painful’, a tte ‘Oh, hot’, coh-ta ‘Nice’ occur (in YJ’s speech, the canonical declarative sentential ending -ta occurs slightly earlier than other endings and more frequently than in the speech of SK and CK; this might reflect the influence of the Kyongsang dialect). In YJ’s data, the greetings pappai ‘bye-bye’ and annyeng ‘bye-bye’ occur at 1:0. It is natural to expect that the illocutionary act type of request will be the earliest of all illocutionary acts, since the child needs, above all, to get what he/she desires. For example, the utterance epupa ‘up we go,’ used by SK at 0:5, is originally a caregiver’s request to the child. The child then uses the same form to make his/her own request. SK’s first words, such as mamma ‘food’, pappa ‘rice’, emma ‘Mommy’, all nouns, were used to get what she desired, in other words, to make a request. The noun mamma, which has the original meaning of boiled rice, was used to include boiled rice, side dishes, fruit, cookies, milk and almost all kinds of food. The child’s categories are normally broader than the adult’s. Producing these nouns is a way of asking for these things. SK’s later requests (at 1:2) were made by uttering na com ‘Me please’ or ike com ‘This, please’ [pointing at something], and subsequently yak com ‘Medicine, please.’ The discourse marker of request, com ‘please’ (originally from ‘a little’), is employed together with a dative pronoun or direct object noun preceded by a verb stem, without any request sentential ending. Uttering emma is also used to call Mom(my), to draw her attention. Of course, nouns are first used for referring to things; requests related to things are made on the basis of this function of nouns.

192

Chungmin Lee

The imperative ending -era The canonical ending for imperative sentences, -era, which is similar to the imperative complement clause ending -ura-, occurs occasionally in the parent’s speech addressed to the child. Children, however, rarely use this form; only one child, YJ, influenced by the Kyongsang dialect, uses this form in the utterance ikes cwe-yo sse-la ‘Write, give this’’ at 1:4.29, addressed inappropriately to his mother (YJ also utters papmu-la ‘Eat’ in Kyongsang dialect at 1:1). Notably, the child does not use imperative sentences such as ili o-ne-la! or ili o-n! (both ‘Come here’), which have imperative endings used uniquely by adults when unidirectionally addressing a child or a baby, respectively. Children in this instance do not seem to repeat the parent’s speech exactly, contra the input theory. The assertion ending -e After the -e ending of request, the -e ending of assertion appears, at approximately1:4. Observe the data. (9)

SK [assertion -e] 1:4.23 Papo-y-a. ‘(You) are a fool.’ [when Dad was reading the newspaper, not paying attention to her] 1:7.21 Papo-y-a, appa. ‘(You are) a fool, Dad.’ 1:8.2 Mac-e. ‘Right.’ [pointing at the moon, uttering ‘tal,’ nodding] 1:8.18 Aph-e. ‘Painful.’ 1:10.3 Ep-e cw-e. ‘Carrying on the back.’ [looking at a picture in which a rooster carries an apple on his back] 1:10.25 An-y-a. ‘No.’ 1:11.7 Ppay-ss-e. ‘Took out.’ 1:11.10 Appa-ka papo-y-a. ‘Daddy is a fool.’ 2:0.4 Moll-a. ‘(I) don’t know.’ 2:0.4 Nay kke-y-a. ‘(It’s) mine.’ 2:0.19 Emma cap-ess-e. ‘Caught Mommy.’ [after catching her, running] 2:2.20 acwumma sa-cwess-e. ‘Aunt bought (it for me).’

(10)

CK [assertion -e] 1:1.24 Aphw-u, ‘Painful.’ 1:4.16 A tt-e. (< Ttukewe) ‘Ah, hot.’ 1:4.24 Aphe, aphe. ‘Painful, painful’ [wet diaper] 1:6.23 Appa yo ay tt-e. ‘(I) said ‘Daddy bye-bye.’ 1:7. 4 Inne wuett-e. ‘Doll cried.’

On the other hand, YJ produced the utterances A! Shyennay ‘Oh, cool’ ( ‘Is it tasty?’ 1:7.14 (Appa, ike mwe?) ‘Daddy, what’s this?’ 1:9.8 Thipi an na-o-ci-an-a? ‘(The) TV is not turned on, is it?’

(22)

(23)

The interrogative mood indicator -e? has a distinctly rising intonation, different from request -e and assertion -e, so it is clearly distinguished from both. This interrogative ending begins to occur at 1:9 in CK, at 1:2 in YJ, and in general, at about 1:6. Surprisingly, even rhetorical questions are witnessed quite early, as in (22) and (23). It is possible for certain interrogative utterances other than interrogative sentences, to occur with no verbal endings, as in YJ (23). YJ’s directional PP (pang-ey?) and the verbal nominal (kongpwu?) are examples of this. The input form for the latter example is the verbal noun kongpwu ‘study’ plus an inflected form of the light verb ha-ta. Still, the child can isolate the verbal noun for her utterance. How does she know that it can be isolated and is an important form to be employed for her question utterance? The verbal nominal kongpwu is more lexical than the light verb ha-ta, which is more functional, and the child has employed the former in this case. Certain interrogative sentences with endings other than -e? are also witnessed. Such examples as mwe ha-no? (imitation) ‘What are you doing?’

Acquisition of modality

199

(Kyensang dialect), al-ass-ci? ‘Got it?’ (1:2), mamma-hay-kka? ‘Shall I eat?’, mac-ci? ‘Right?’, eti iss-ci? ‘Where is it?’ (1:4) occur in YJ. The -ci supposition modality form is also employed in declaratives, as will be explained in the next section. The earliest occurrences of this interrogative -ci? ending in YJ may only be frozen expressions, imitation-like, and not stabilized, productive forms. Questions with -ci sound more mitigated than questions with -e, because -ci shows the speaker’s affirmatively-biased supposition regarding the proposition in the question. -Ci is basically an agreement-seeking or tag-question-like question ending. A wh-word question with -ci does not show ‘shared knowledge’ but a mitigating attitude of ‘we should know.’ Another important interrogative sentential ending, -ni(?), is also found. This ending is employed when the child addresses a baby, a younger child or an intimate peer. It is frequently used by the parent addressing a child, but not vice versa. And the child seems to grasp the social relations involved in the use of this ending. For instance, SK’s utterance ne way wu-ni? ‘Why are you crying?’ at 2:0.4 occurs when she is looking at a picture in which a rooster asks an apple the same question; she was playing the rooster’s role. An animal, doll or any other inanimate being like an apple is apparently felt by the child to be a social inferior. YJ’s early utterances with the same question ending are either such cases or simple repetition/verbal play. For example, looking at a pigeon, YJ says: say-ya, ne mue ha-no? ili wu-a nol-ca, hakkyo kongpu-ha-ni? ‘Birds, what are you doing? Come here and let’s play. Are you doing school study?’ (1:7.7). On another occasion, she says (1:8): Ne pap mek-ess-ni? mas iss-ni? ‘Are you eating? Is it tasty?’ Her parents and grandparents usually ask her questions with this ending. Initially, the child also addresses her parents with this ending, e.g. mwe mek-ni? (1:7.12), and she may have been corrected. In early child Korean, the Kyongsang dialect-influenced child shows far more cases of the -ni(?) question ending. In comparison with -ni(?), the -e? question ending shows more consideration of the addressee, and is not simply an impolite speech-level ending. In the literature on honorification and speech levels, this point has not been detected. This is why the -e form of question, assertion or request is so prevalent in the child’s and even the adolescent’s speech addressed to their parents, particularly their mothers. The canonical question ending -nunya? occurs only in embedded complement clauses; it has become archaic and no longer occurs in the matrix clause. As a result, it does not appear in either child or adult Korean. It occurs only in an old children’s song entitled santhokki ‘mountain rabbit,’ which goes thokki-ya, eti-lul ka-nunya? ‘Rabbit, where are you going?’ SK, now 12 years old, rightly says that the -nunya? question sounds like the speech of the noble class. The speaker-volitional question ending -l-kka? consists of the volition marker -l/-ul and the question marker -kka?. Volition modality can be dealt with readily. This question ending of speaker-volition occurs in YJ as early as 1:5.18, as

200

Chungmin Lee

exemplified by cu-kka? (←cwu-l-kka?) ‘Shall I give?’ SK says: ike siu-kka? ‘Shall I wear this?’ (2:2.0) and ike meku-kka? ‘Shall I eat this?’ (2:2.11). There are still other question endings, such as -na? and -nunya?, to be considered. The -na? ending occasionally occurs in child language, e.g. ike eti iss-na? ‘Where is this, I wonder?’ (SK: 2:2.5), emma-ka way acikto an o-sina? ‘Why is Mommy not coming, I wonder?’ (YJ: 2:7.26). The -na? question is rather self-directed or speaker-internal and, as a result, mitigative as a question. The -nya? question can be used among close friends; it does not show up in early child Korean, but begins to appear in later childhood. Thus far, we have seen sentential endings involving the moods requestpropositive, declarative-assertive (indicative), interrogative, and exclamatorysurprise, as listed in (6a). These seven mood endings are acquired early and are stable in form and meaning. Endings involving modality The endings listed in (6b) above basically involve modality. Let us consider in turn the supposition -ci ending and the inconclusive -(u)ntey ending, as well as the speaker’s mind-binding or mind-constraining endings such as -ul-kkey, -ullay, -ul-theyya, the deontic modality ending -eya tway, and the planning/schedule/presumption modality ending -ul kkeya. At the same time, the phenomena of mixed modality, misapplication and overextension will be considered. The supposition -ci ending and the inconclusive -(u)n-tey ending The ending representing the modality of supposition, -ci, occurs at around 2:0. In the case of SK, she repeatedly said, imo-(i)-ci ‘It’s Mommy’s sister, supposedly’ (2:0.15), after she heard Mommy saying ‘What’s ‘heysena?’ ‘It’s “Mommy’s sister,” supposedly, You should call her “Aunt” or “Mommy’s sister”.’ (A child should not call an adult by the first name + vocative, as SK had done.) Then, when she was given a doll, she said, khu-ci ‘It’s big, supposedly,’ inappropriately. The speaker’s assumption with -ci is ‘I suppose/presume p with a fair amount of certainty and you won’t object to it’ (this assumption of agreement is also maintained in a question with -ci), and in this case SK has not established that kind of background yet. When her father didn’t understand, she said khu-ta loudly with the declarative ending. On another occasion when her father asked her, ‘Did you go to the park yesterday?’ she said, mul pu-ass-ci ’I saw water (there), supposedly’ (2:2.19). When her father was wearing a necktie, she said, appa hakkyo ka-ci ‘Daddy, you are going to school, supposedly’ (2:2.19). The last two uses of -ci are not quite appropriate yet either, but her usage was improving, insofar as it reflected the speaker’s fairly certain affirmation and her assumption that the hearer would agree.

Acquisition of modality

201

CK starts out with question -ci? in utterances like appa eti-ss-e? uung, appa eti-ss-ci? ‘Where is Daddy? Huh, where is Daddy? (we should know)’ [fumbling in Daddy’s purse for something] (2:0.28). Question -ci? in wh-questions makes the question more interpersonal and mitigative, giving the impression that the speaker is making a proposal seeking an answer that s/he needs, or that the speaker should know the answer and the hearer can help. Another example of -ci with CK is indicative: ‘yepo’ mueya? ‘emma’ kulayya-ci ‘What’s yepo? I should say emma (2:1.0) [When Daddy was talking to Mommy, approaching her, CK uttered this, after saying yepo ‘hey’]. Here, -ci is attached to the preceding deontic modality marker -eya [biconditional] and -ci adds the meaning ‘I suppose.’ CK’s use of -ci in both cases is appropriate and has been stabilized in this usage. YJ repeats Mommy’s utterance al-ass-ci? ’You should understand’ as early as 1:1.20. Next, tep-ci? ‘Hot, isn’t it?’ (1:2.20) occurs. This type of yes/no question with -ci? is an agreement-seeking question. The speaker already has some supposition regarding the proposition. Similarly, YJ says caymi iss-ci-yo? at 1:5.12 and emma talkyal mek-ess-ci? at 1:6.24. The yes/no question -ci? has a slightly rising and sustained intonation at the end, different from other straight question endings, which have purely rising intonation. In general, the question -ci? precedes the indicative -ci in acquisition. The inconclusive ending -ntey also occurs at around 2 years of age. For example, CK says appa kke-ntey!? ‘It’s Daddy’s, though’ [when given a ballpoint pen he asked for and a piece of Daddy’s letter paper, he was still wondering although his Mommy said it was OK]. SK says cengmal yeppu-ney! ‘(It is) Really pretty-ney’ [looking at her hat]. This ending -(u)ntey used to be a continuative ending followed by an additional sentence but now it is used as the final ending of a sentence as well, as in YJ’s: eti ka-nun ken-tey? ‘Where are you going, though?’ [After saying, ‘When will you leave, Mommy?’ and hearing her reply ‘A little later’]. Deontic modality (volition/commitment) markers Let us consider these markers with example utterances. Observe the following: (24)

-ul-kkey ‘I’ll,’ ‘promise’ SK 2:0.5 An hal-kkey. ‘I won’t do (it).’ [with ‘ha-ci-ma’] ‘I promise not to do (it).’ CK 2:0.28 Emma, Choon-kyu ha-kkey. ‘I’ll do (it), Mommy.’ [when Mommy tried to take her hand on the stairs] YJ 1:6.13 Hana-man cwu-kkey. ‘I’ll give you just one.’ 1:7.26 Mwul tte-o-kkey. ‘I’ll scoop and bring water (for you).’ 1:10.28 Nay-ka kac-ta-nol-kkey. ‘I’ll bring (it) and put (it) here.’

202

Chungmin Lee

(25)

-ul-kkeya ‘be gonna,’ ‘will,’ ‘shall’ SK 2:0.9 Appa emma kal-kkeya. ‘Daddy (and) Mommy will go.’ 2:0.19 Emma kathi appa kathi. ‘With Mommy, with Daddy, halmeni kal-kkeya–ka-ca. (we/I)’ll go to Grandma’s.’ CK 2:0.26 Emma, senphwungki. ‘Mommy, the fan is finished. kkuna-ss-e, tto hal-kkeya. I’m gonna turn it on.’ 2:2.4 Collil-kkeya. ‘I’m gonna go to bed.’ YJ 1:7.1 Anc-u-lkkeya. ‘I’m gonna sit.’ 1:8.26 Caymi eps-ta. Thipi kku-kka? ‘No fun. Shall I turn off (the) TV? An cal-kkeya? Aren’t (you) gonna sleep?’ 1:9.4 An kal-kkeya. ‘I’m not gonna go.’ Yak an mek-u-lkkeya. ‘I’m not gonna take medicine.’ 1:11.5 Manhwa po-lkkeya. ‘I’m gonna watch a cartoon.’

SK’s early utterances using -ul-kkey seem to be applied to the addressee as well as speaker, in the sense of forbidding, i.e. controlling the addressee’s volition or will. As a result, it is used interchangeably with ha-ci ma ‘Don’t do’. The other children’s use is limited to the speaker’s will to undertake an act in the immediate context; it has the force of the speaker’s firm intent. It has some interactive flavor, but is not necessarily limited to the context of promising in the earliest uses. Later, it narrows down to promises, with the future act being believed by the speaker to be in the interest of the addressee. Another promise marker, -ma, is typically addressed to a child by an adult; due to the unidirectionality constraint, i.e. adult-to-child but not child-to-adult, it is never used by children. This is an example showing that the input hypothesis may not be a good explanation in this particular case and perhaps in general. On the other hand, -ul-kkeya is not interactive. The speaker’s attitude to his act is somewhat detached. As a result, this form has developed a future-like meaning, weakening its deontic force; when it is applied to the third person it naturally takes on the epistemic sense of presumption. Most early uses of this form by children are limited to the first person’s act independent of the addressee’s interest. For the first person, this represents planning (cf. Gee & Salvasir, 1985); for the third person, it represents a schedule or presumption based on evidence. Wells’s (1979, 1985) investigations of modal verbs in English show that within ‘agent-oriented’ modality (Gerhardt, 1991), verbs of ability/inability, i.e. can/can’t, occur at 2:3, intention, i.e. will, appears at 2:6, and other ordinary and epistemic modals are found starting at 3:3 and are established by 5:0. Shatz and Wilcox’s (1991) limited data show somewhat earlier acquisition of modal verbs of intention, volition/rejection, and inability/ability starting at 1:10; the children in their study used can or will (or quasi-modals such as gonna, wanna) for desires at 2:0 and more generally by 2:6. Most agent-oriented modals such as gonna and want are used in the affirmative; can, will, and gonna are used with

Acquisition of modality

203

the first person. Negative modals such as can’t and won’t express constraints on action or unwillingness to act at the time of speech. After this, epistemic modals of certainty/uncertainty are slowly acquired, proceeding from certainty to uncertainty with the third person in denoting events. Typically, 2-year-olds learning Turkish acquire the evidential past form (-miş) in pretend situations (Stepany, 1986). Modals with complement clauses occur at around 3:6 in English. Explicit but artificial experimental conditions are difficult for children and in the data 4-year-olds are much better than 3-year-olds at understanding tasks involving different epistemic modal markers (Hirst and Weil, 1982; S. Choi 2006). In the experiments of Bassano et al. (1992), epistemic modals of certainty (je sais que, je suis sûr) are understood at 4:0 but those expressing uncertainty (je ne suis pas sûr; je crois) were not fully understood until 8:0. Coates’s (1988) data show that metalinguistic analysis (classification) of the modal system of markers in English, a high level semantic abstraction, is achieved even later. Next, let us consider the -ul-lay ending and the -ul-theyya ending, both of which are strictly limited to the first person. Take a look at the following data: (26)

-ul-lay ‘I’ll’ SK 2:3.13 Kkung-e-pe-lye. Naka-l-lay. ‘Hang on, I’ll go out.’ [preparing to go out with Daddy, meaning ‘Let’s go out’] CK 2:2.9 Emma, amwukes-twu mek-ul-lay. ‘Mommy, I’ll eat anything.’ [pulling at the fridge] 2:3.28 Choon-kyu chamoy mek-ko cal-lay-yo. ‘I’ll go to bed after eating melons.’ YJ 1:11.18 Kwukmin hakkyo ka-llay. ‘I’ll go to elementary school.’ 2:0.3 Emma ike mek-u-llay-yo. ‘Mommy, I’ll eat this.’

(27)

-ul-theyya ‘I intend to’ SK 2:4.25 Sathang mek-u-lltheyya, na-nun. ‘I intend to eat cookies.’ YJ 2:6.6 Yoon-chong-ika ta mantu-lthey-nikka, ‘I intend to make it all, ne-nun kunyang po-kwu-man iss-e. so you just watch.’

Both forms express the speaker’s will, but the -ul-lay ending, as in (26), is amiable and child-like and gives the impression of seeking the addressee’s approval, whereas the -ul-theya form, as in (27), shows the speaker’s determination independent of the addressee’s opinion and rarely occurs in child Korean. The former can be used in the interrogative mood to ask about the addressee’s will more frequently than the latter, but even the question form of the -ul-lay ending does not show up in early child Korean. As questions, the -ul-lay form is also more interpersonal than the -ul-theya form. The -ul-lay ending in the declarative mood is likely to be addressed to the adult by the child but not the other way around, and the same ending in the interrogative mood is more likely to be addressed to the child by an older person but not the other way around, which seems to be a natural tendency.

204

Chungmin Lee

Now, let me turn to the last of the modality markers, the deontic modal marker -eya tway. Let us first take a look at the data and consider its features. (28)

-eya tway ‘must’ SK 3:2.11 Ppal-aya tway. ‘( ) must wash ( ).’ [carrying Daddy’s shirts to the washing place] CK 2:2.21 Onul nwuna yuchiwen ka-ya tway. ‘Today, Sister must go to kindergarten.’ YJ 2:2.12 Mwul-hako kathi mek-e-ya tway-yo. ‘(I) must eat (it) with water.’

This explicitly deontic modal comes from the meaning ‘OK only if …’ and is implicationally related to forbidding with -myen an-tway (not OK if …), and permission with -to tway (OK even if …) (C. Lee, 1980). The frozen expression of prohibition an tway is frequently used by parents and occurs much earlier than the positive deontic modal -eya tway (which lacks a counterpart in Japanese), as shown in the following data (29a). (29) a. an tway ‘must not; forbidden’ YJ 1:4.18 An tway. ‘Must not.’ 1:6.1 Son ssis-ess-e An-tway. ‘(I) washed my hands Must not.’ 2:0.15 Chokholeys mek-u-myen an tway-yo. Ippal ssek-u-nikka-yo. Chocolate eat-U-if not OK-POL tooth decay-because-POL ‘(I) must not eat chocolate.’ ‘It is not OK if I eat chocolate, because of tooth decay.’ b. an tway ‘not done, not possible, not V-ed’ (inability, failure after trial) 2:0.27 [Trying to open the cupboard glass door.] Appa, ike hay cwu-sey-yo. Mwun an tway. dad this do for me-POL door not done ‘Dad, do this for me. The door is not opening.’ 2:1.17 Tay-ss-e, tay-ss-e. Kkuth-na-ss-e ‘Done, done. Finished.’ The frozen form an tway occurs rather early and then the productive complete form -myen an tway occurs at 2:0 in YJ. It is interesting to notice that the input usually occurs directed to the second person but the above data show that the child uses the form directed to the first person, which means that the child is aware of its deontic sense, having gone beyond the stage of using the expression in its frozen form and meaning. The negation of the agent-oriented ability sense of tway ‘can be done’ occurs in an tway in (29b), rather later. Its positive form now (in (29b)) also has the analytic ability sense of ‘I could do it,’ ‘It could be done,’ rather than the meaning of ‘I am satisfied,’ ‘OK,’ that it has in its very early occurrences, when it is presumably an unanalyzed chunk, tay-ss-ta, at 1:4 in (11) and (12).

Acquisition of modality

205

The very common ability negation modal mot ‘not able to’ and another ability/circumstantial possibility modal construction -ul swu i-ss- ‘there is a way of V-ing,’ ‘can’ occur rather late at around or after age two. (30)

mot ‘not able to’ CK 2:6.13 Mo hay, mok kki-e (trying to insert blocks in Logo) can’t do can’t insert ‘(I) can’t do (it). (I) can’t insert (it).’ SK 2:6.9 Cal mot tway-ss-e. Halmeni cenhwa ha-nikka ttan cip naw-ass-e well not done grandma phone make-as wrong house came out ‘Not well done (as desired). When I made a call to grandma, the wrong house came out (= answered).’

(31) a. -ul swu i-ss- ‘there is a way of V-ing,’ ‘can’ CK 2:0.28 Emma, cwunkyu ha-kkey ha-l swu iss-e Mom CK do-will do-can ‘Mom, CK will do it. Can do it.’ 2:3.4 Cwunkyu oll-a ka-l swu iss-e [When Mom tried to embrace him] CK up go can ‘CK can go up.’ (should be nay-ry-e ka-l swu iss-e ‘can go down’) b. -ul cwul al- ‘know how to’ CK 3:6.29 [To the question ‘CK yenge ha-l cwul al-ci?’ (Can you speak English?)] Ccokkum hay-yo ‘I speak a little.’ CK 7:3.5 Ha-l cwul -ul moru-myense ettekhey ha-nya? do-FUT way-ACC not know-and how do-Q ‘How do you do (it), not knowing how to do (it)?’ c. -nun cwul al- ‘know that …’ [epistemic] CK 6:3.16 Cangnong-ey iss-nun cwul -un a-nun-tey eti? cabinet -in is-REL COMP-TOP know-Inconclusive where ‘I know that it is in the cabinet but – where (in the cabinet)?’ d. ic-e peri- ‘forget’ [epistemic] CK 3.11.29 [Answering ‘Samik aphatu a-ni?’ (Do you know Samik’s apartment?)] Ani, molla, ic-e peri-ess-e ‘No, I don’t know, I forgot. (about the apartment where he lived in Korea)

206

Chungmin Lee

e. -na pa ‘it seems,’ ‘might’ [epistemic] CK 2:3.1 Tto ca-na pa (Seeing Dad drowsing again) again sleep-it seems ‘It appears Daddy is sleeping again.’ CK 2:6.15 Aphu-e. Nwuna-ka ttayri-ess-na-pa (a little after being hit by Sister) painful sister-NOM hit-PAST-might ‘Painful. It seems Sister hit me.’ (‘It seems that I have a pain because Sister hit me’?) f. sayngkak na ‘it occurs (to me)’ [epistemic] CK 3:7.14 [When Mom asked if he saw him throwing a ball not well] An po-ass-nun-tey-twu kurekhey sayngkak-na (Lit.) ‘Although I didn’t see it, it occurs so (to me).’ (Pointing to the side of his head with a finger) CK 3:7.17 Ke sayngkak-i nathana-ss-e that thought-NOM show up-PAST-DEC ‘That idea occurred (to me).’ CK 4:7.29 (blinking his eyes, when he was reminded that he fell off the bed at a relative’s in Irvine). Ku sayngkak na that thought show up ‘That idea occurs (to me).’ (= I remember that) g. -n kes kath-ay ‘it seems like’ [epistemic] CK 4:7.17 (After CK’s ‘Who brought this?’ and Dad’s ‘I don’t know’) Emma-i-n kes kath-ay Cwunkywu-nun emma-i-n kes kath-ay Mom-be-CMPL-seem like CK-TOP Mom-beCMPL-seem like ‘It seems like Mom (did). It seems like Mom (did) to CK (me).’ Just like the regular short-form sentential negation an, mot takes preverbal position and denotes the agent’s ability (or comparative inferiority), as in (30 CK). But in (30 SK), mot is used in the circumstantial sense with a non-agent (event) null subject. The frozen construction -ul swu i-ss-, on the other hand, takes post-verbal position and denotes either (stage-level) ability, as in (31), or circumstantial possibility. The individual-level ability (procedural knowledge) construction -ul cwul al- [know how to] (31b) and a similar construction of epistemic state (factive knowledge/non-factive knowledge (= belief)) -nun cwul al- ‘know that …’ (31c) are acquired quite late, although children understand them earlier. If the latter co-occurs with an ACC-marked complement clause it

Acquisition of modality

207

is factive, but if it co-occurs with a directional (-uro)-marked complement it is non-factive. The epistemic verb ic-e peri- ‘forget’ appears in CK’s speech at the end of age 3. There is also a form that combines deontic modality and epistemic modality, as follows: (32)

SK 2:4.25 Mwun tat-a-keyss-ta. ( ¬) d. 3:5.19 Ha-l-kke-ya. I ket ta haku-se. Kongpwu ta an kkutna-ss-e do-will this thing all do-after study all not finished ‘I’ll do it, after I do all this. Study is not all finished.’ (¬> ∀) 3:10.21 Kun-tey ta an ku-ray-ss-e. Han kay-man ku-ray-ss-e. but all not so said one CL-only so said ‘But all didn’t say so. Only one did.’ (¬> ∀ ) (Said in response to ‘People praised you.’) 4:0 Kun-tey ta al-ci-nun anh-e. (To ‘CK knows a lot of English.’) but all know-CI-CT-not [long-form negation] ‘But I don’t know all.’ (¬> ∀) e. 4:7.25 Amwu ket -to ani-ya, Cwunkywu-ya (To ‘Then, what are you?) anything-even not-be (After Dad’s ‘My rabbit’ and CK’s ‘I’m not.’) ‘I’m not anything. (I am) Cwunkywu.’ (NPI) f. 5:4.15 Ssot-un key ani-ra mwut-ess-e pour-REL CMPL not-CNCT touch-PAST-DEC ‘I didn’t pour (the water), it touched (my clothes).’ 4:7.24 Shin-nun key mwe-ya, kki-nun ke-ci wear-REL CMPL what-be-q insert- REL CMPL-CI ‘What’s ‘shin-’ (wear <shoes>)? it is ‘kki-‘ (wear ).’2

2

Korean has different specialized ‘wear’ verbs for different body parts: shin- is for shoes on feet and kki- ‘insert’ is for gloves on hands.

Acquisition of modality

213

2:5.21 Shilh-e. Ccokkum-man an mek-ul-kke-ya (To ‘Eat only a little.’) no a little-only not eat-will (akka mek-ess-nun-tey) ‘I won’t eat only a little.’ (‘I just ate’ in the sense of ‘I won’t eat at all.’) 2:9.3 Kuman kalpi cwu-ci ma (When Mom was cutting ribs) stop rib give-don’t ‘Don’t give me ribs any more.’ (Error for Kuman cwu-e ‘Stop giving’) YJ’s very early negative utterances (1:3.20) are cases of negative volition, even though their endings are in the declarative -e form. Deontic negation more often precedes epistemic negation in acquisition, although certain of YJ’s other very early negative utterances, e.g. Eps-ney ‘allgone, absent’, An po-i-ney ‘not seen, invisible’ at 1:2.4 in (17) occur with the surprise ending -ney, based on epistemic perception. CK’s utterance in (40CKb) shows that the negative morpheme appears in the initial position of a sentence when it is an unaccusative construction (pi-ka o-ta ‘It’s raining’), typically analyzed as having a VPinternal argument, not a VP-external argument or a subject. Children learn unaccusativity this early (see also Snyder, 2002). S. Choi (1988) classified negation into several types in English, French and Korean. SK’s Ani-ya in (40SKc) with an independently occurring ani is used to deny the previous proposition. Its equivalent in English and French is No and Non, respectively. Rejection is expressed by Shilh-e from ‘dislike’ in Korean (40CKa), cf. Je veux pas ‘I don’t want’ in French. Epistemically, negative knowledge is expressed by Molla [← mot ‘not able’ + al-a ‘know’] ‘(I) don’t know’ in (40SKd), cf. je sais pas in French. SK’s play with denial appears as ‘I’m not Daddy’s daughter’ in (40SKe). In (40CKa,b), both the long-form negative imperative and the incorrect short-form negative imperative are shown. In (CKc), the universal quantifier has wide scope over negation (with possible ambiguity) but in (CKd) the scope is reversed and negation has wide scope over the universal quantifier. My claim is that children also show prosodic distinctions reflecting such scope differences in short-form negation and ∀ scope interactions: ∀> ¬ with a stressed ∀ and a falling ¬; ¬>∀ with CT (Contrastive Topic)-intonation on ∀, affecting ¬. Children may be more sensitive to prosody than adults. Current experimental skills can hardly capture these subtle distinctions (see Han & Lee, 2007). It is significant to observe that the first long-form negation (non-imperative) witnessed is CT-marked, as in Ta al-ci-nun anh-e (40CKd). CT generates scalar implicatures of ‘But q’ and renders its associated quantifier (∀ here) narrow scope (C. Lee, 2006). CK’s first NPI in the predicative nominal position shows up as late as 4 years old, but NPIs occur some time earlier in

214

Chungmin Lee

H’s speech. (40CKf) includes instances of metalinguistic negation (here, corrections) with ani-ra and those without it (the last one shows how the literal utterance is negated). It is difficult for CK to change chhokkum-man ‘only a little’ to chhokkum-to ‘even a little’ in the negative environment. A negative word, kuman ‘not any more, stop’, is erroneously used with negation in (40CKf). Reported speech marker -tay and pre-relative head pro-nominals kes and tey The nature of the ending -tay, which marks reported speech or hearsay as an evidential marker, originating from a quotation or complement clause with a verb of saying, and the pre-relative head pro-nominals kes and tey, and possible relations between the S-final marker and the latter must be analyzed appropriately. The ending -tay originally comes from a complex S: [x -ka [y -ka -ta]-ko ha-y] ‘x says that y Pred,’ where the COMP -ko deletes first, then h- deletes phonologically, with identical vowels a in -ta and a from ha- merging (C. Lee, 1990) (in parallel, for imperative S: -ray from -ra-ko ha-y; propositive S: -cay from -ca-ko ha-y). Children may not be as analytic as adults initially but they know the subject-person and conceptual constraints on -tay. The pre-relative head element kes is also interesting in that it shows the dual nature of the complementizer/nominal functional category, which is used together with the relative head noun for some period in childhood and then abandoned (see Whitman in this volume). Although kes has been argued to be definite, and its use by children in the limited acquisition data may happen to be definite, it can be either definite or indefinite, just like a relative head N without a pre-head element. Kes has an underspecified pro-head-nominal nature. If the head N is a Theme entity, the pro-head-nominal is kes but if it is a Location entity, the pro-head-nominal is tey ‘place,’ which has not been observed in the literature. It is witnessed in CK’s utterances, as follows: (41)

Cwunkywu ecekkey ka po-n tey hakkyo/? (to Dad’s reply, ‘UCLA’) CK yesterday go try-REL place school (CK 2:6.26) ‘The school [‘place which’ = where] CK visited yesterday?’

(42)

Hoik-i ka -nun tey phakhu? (to SK’s reply, ‘Overland Park’) (CK 2:8.16) H go-REL place school ‘The park where H goes?’

At the same stage, CK uses tey as a relative head noun referring to a specific place name, as in Mwusun pyengwon? CK ka-ss-ten tey? ‘What hospital? The place where CK went?’ (CK 3:3.16). He also uses kes as a relative head noun, as

Acquisition of modality

215

in Unhey cip-eyse mek-ess-ten ke(s) ‘The thing (we) ate at Unhey’s’ (CK 3:3.15). Later, kes and tey disappear from the pre-head position of more specific head nouns. Tense/aspect As for tense/aspect, the present tense marker -nun, covering the temporal range of narrow and extended speech time including the present progressive, rarely occurs in child Korean because most sentences end in -e, the half-speech (no full ending) informal non-polite form, and -e cannot occur with the overt present tense marker -nun. Before -e, the present tense marker is a null form, as in present predicative adjectivals. With the declarative ending -ta, however, -nun must show up; it occurs as early as around eleven months in ca-n-ta ‘(He) sleeps/is sleeping’ (YJ). The past tense marker, on the other hand, occurs at around 1:4, and it is remarkable that the past tense marker in children’s speech occurs predominantly with telic or Achievement/Accomplishment verbs in Korean, as in other languages. Tense and aspect are more closely interrelated in child grammar than in adult grammar (C. Lee 1997). See Tables 14.1, 14.2, 14.3. The telicity-biased tendency is even greater than in other languages (cf. Gökmen and Lee, 2002). Observe telic verb utterances with the PAST tense in perfective interpretation:

Table 14.1. Periods of data samples (from the onset of PAST marking) Child

Period (years:months.days)

CK SK H

1:4.15–2:0.00 1:2–1:7–2:4.18 1:7.06–1:9.05

Table 14.2. Distribution of aspectual classes with PAST marking (raw token freqs in parentheses) Child

Achievement

Accomplishment

Activity

State

Total

H CK SK

58.2% (64) 51.7% (31) 49.3% (36)

39.1% (43) 45% (27) 45.2% (33)

1.8% (2) 0.3% (2) .5% (4)

0.9% (1) 0% (0) 0% (0)

100% (110) 100% (58) 100% (73)

216

Chungmin Lee

Table 14.3. Distribution of telic (achievement + accomplishment) verbs (token frequencies)

(43)

Child

Distribution

CK SK H

96.7% (31 + 27 = 58) 94.5% (36 + 33 = 69) 97.3% (64 + 43 = 107)

Verb types used with PAST (-ess-) H ppangppangi chac -ess -e ‘(I) found the car.’ mal -ess -e ‘dried’ tal ttu -ess -e ‘The moon rose.’ ccic -ess -e-yo ‘(I) tore (it).’ tat -ess -e -yo ‘(I) closed (it).’ anc -ess -e ‘(I) sat.’ ka-cie w-ass-e ‘(I) took (it) and came.’ big bird chum chu -ess-e ‘Big bird danced.’ [activity] CK tay -ss -ta ‘Done,’ ‘Became,’ ‘(I) succeeded.’ ppung-ppung hay -ss -e ‘(I) made air,’ ‘(I) did ‘ppung-ppung.’ tter-e -ci -ess -e ‘(It) fell down.’ Innye ur -ess -e ‘The doll cried.’ [activity] senphungki kkut-na-ess-e ‘The fan is finished/off.’ [perfective aspect verb] SK ppay -ss -e ‘(I) squeezed (took) (it) out.’ emma cap -ass -e ‘(I) caught Mommy.’ son ppi -ess -e ‘(I) had my wrist sprained.’ [‘son’ Nom/Acc] ta nwu -ess -e ‘(I) finished making water.’ ta mek -ess -e ‘(I) ate (it) up.’ [completion adverb added, making the verb perfective] epse -ci -ess -ney ‘(It) disappeared.’ kkamccak nol -ass -ney ‘(I) am surprised.’ yuri kkay-ci-ess-e ‘(The) glass has been broken.’ ar -ass -e ‘(I) came to know it,’ ‘I realized it.’ [cognitive achievement]

Now observe the emergence of grammatical aspects: (44)

Onset of complex progressive/perfective form CK 2:1 ca-ku iss -e ‘(is) sleeping’ [progressive] [activity] [Intransitive V] (after Mommy asked, ‘Why don’t you drink your milk?’)

Acquisition of modality

217

2:3.02 cwunkywu-ka uyca anc -a iss-e NOM chair sit -CONN be -End ‘Choon-Kyu is seated (on a car seat).’ H 1:9 pihayngki tha -ku iss -ci anc-a tha -ku iss -ci [perfective] [activity] [Vt] airplane ride Prog End sit ride Prog End ‘(He) is riding an airplane, sitting and riding it.’ (responding to Mommy’s question, ‘What is Grover doing now?’) H Other complex forms: noh-a twu-ess-e ‘put it down,’ ‘left it down’ [locomotive V+aspect AUX] ol -i -e noh -ass -e ‘put it up,’ ‘lift and left it ‘ [manner V+locomotive V] cf. ol -i -ess -e ‘lifted’ [activity] [manner V] khokkiri noh -ko w-ass -e ‘put down the elephant and came’ ka-ci-e w-ass-e ‘took and came (brought)’ [manner V+locomotive V] ol -a ka -ass-e ‘went up’ [manner V+locomotive V] Historically, V-e iss- → V-ess- → diverges to perfective (result continuation) V-e iss- and progressive (process=dynamicity continuation) V-ko iss-; these two grammatical aspect forms are acquired at around two years of age. With the form -ko iss- for result salient transitive verbs, ambiguity arises, e.g. moca -rul ssu -ko iss -ta ‘putting on/wearing a hat.’ (45)

Change of state verbs with imperfective marking with no PAST, meaning mostly perfective, witnessed in a few cases in early stages: CK neme-ci-e ‘in the result state of falling down’ (after she fell down) kkwuki-e-ci-e ‘wrinkled’ (after she wrinkled a picture) ankyeng kki-e ‘wearing glasses’ (looking at a celebrity named Payk Nampong wearing glasses on TV) [Particularly for change of state verbs with the morpheme ‘-ci’] H noh-ko ‘putting down’(right after putting down a toy) pappa mek-ko ‘eating a meal’

(46)

Non-past/imperfective/present marking [during the same period] CK a ttu- e ‘oh, hot’ [psych] aphu-e, aphu-e ‘it hurts, it hurts’ [psych] (namu) iss -ta ‘there is (a tree)’ [existential] pikhi-e-yo ‘step aside!’ [imperative] [accomplishment] mu-i-a? mu-i-a? ‘what is it? what is it?’ [wh-question] [copula]

218

Chungmin Lee

appa ka-a ‘Daddy go away,’ ‘Daddy leave’ [imperative] [accomplishment] kho-ca ‘is sleeping’ (concerning his sister) [activity] Non-past tokens are almost four times more frequent (224 tokens) than past occurrences in CK’s speech. (47)

Insisting on using simple past marking despite Mom’s repeated input of present perfect form: H: anc-ass-e ‘sat’ (looking at a picture in which he is seated) Mommy: ‘Say ‘anc-a iss-e,’ ‘anc-a iss-e” H: anc-ass-e Mommy: ‘anc-a iss-e’ H: anc-ass-e Mommy: ‘nwu -e iss-e’ (Be lying) H: nwu -ess -e Mommy: ‘kkay -e iss-e’ (Be awake) H: kkay-u iss-e Mommy: ‘anc-a iss-e’ H: anc-ass-e

The mother tried to correct the child’s error several times but the child kept using the same past form (presumably in the perfective meaning), rather than imitating Mom’s grammatical aspect perfect form. The input theory cannot explain this kind of phenomenon. We frequently encounter similar stories on negative concord in English and so on. Furthermore, the input ratio of 60%, which Shirai and Andersen (1995) show, is not enough to account for the consistently high telic verb ratio of more than 90% in all the studies examined, including the present one. We can show the general aspectual structure of event/eventuality schematically as follows: (48) Schematic aspectual structure of event CAUSE→BECOME (COME TO) MOTION→PROCESS→ CHANGE-of-STATE /LOCATION →RESULT STATE Children are universally sensitive to events with clear end-points; such events are well represented by telic (achievement or accomplishment) verbs, and telicity (having aspectual end-points) is well marked by perfective past. That is why past tense-marked verbs tend to be predominantly telic in child language crosslinguistically. Consider the issue of the acquisition of N/V in this connection, with N generally being acquired earlier than V; the category of N is more delimited and stable – see the related chapter by Pae and Song (in this

Acquisition of modality

219

volume), noting that children who speak V-final languages are more sensitive to V forms. Children have less (agentive) control over an entire situation than adults and therefore perceive the salient change of state/location sub-events aspectually; at one stage even the object (Theme/Patient) is assigned nominative rather than accusative case by Korean children (see No’s chapter for data) as if in an ergative verb system. Consider ergative languages in which the parameter of ergative case marking has been chosen. Ergative/unaccusative verbs in different languages, such as ‘sink’ and ‘break’ in English, show some such residual tendency. Multi-nominative marking is performed as if all incoming argument variables are assigned subject functions, or as if the nominative case is realized as the subject of an embedded abstract underlying inchoative clause for an accomplishment clause with vP (e.g. appa-ka pihaynggi-ka mantul-ess-e ‘Dad made an airplane’, H). This competence must be universal and somewhat biologically conditioned (see Bickerton, 1989). Conclusion In child and colloquial Korean, various epistemic meanings are differentiated by different sentence endings even within the category of declarative mood, and there are different mood endings corresponding to different sentence types. The primacy of mood over modality in the order of acquisition is evident and the imperative (request) mood precedes others. The relatedness between the imperative mood and various deontic modal markers explains mixed modality and misapplication to the wrong person in early child Korean. These modality markers are generally acquired around 2 years of age, whereas the basic moods or sentence types appear a little earlier. It is natural to expect requests to be the earliest of all types of illocutionary act, since the child wants, above all, to get what he/she desires. For example, the baby talk epwupa ‘up we go’, used by SK at 0:5, is originally a caregiver’s request to the child. The child then uses the same form to make his/her own request. SK’s first words, such as mamma ‘food’, pappa ‘rice’, emma ‘Mommy’, all nouns, were used to get what she desired, in other words, to make a request. Next, the child acquires the imperative mood, followed by an elaboration of explicit deontic modals right after 2. The age of 2 is an important period, as suggested by neuroscience. An imperative sentence uttered as a request already involves volition/desire, as indicated above. Therefore, when the child is in the course of acquiring deontic modal elements after 2, he/she reveals mixed modality, misapplication of the speaker’s volition to the wrong grammatical (mainly second) person, and overextension. In English, functional categories of inflection occur rather late, compared with the early development of complex sentence ending inflections in Korean.

220

Chungmin Lee

To explain this kind of variation in acquisition, it appears that attunement theory (partial development at birth in constructionism) is more useful than universal theory. The controversy over whether deontic or epistemic modality is earlier arises from a failure to distinguish between mood and modality (cf. S. Choi, 1991). Choi argues that Korean children make ‘epistemic’ before ‘deontic’ distinctions, contra those who suggested the reverse (Stepany, 1986; Aksu-Koç, 1988). It is true that Korean shows subtle distinctions among declarative type endings such as -e and -ta. The exclamatory mood marker -kwuna and the surprise mood marker -ney are, I would say, separate types of mood distinct from declarative. If we include these two in the declarative type, as Choi apparently decides to do, then her argument may stand, but the equivalents of Indo-European modal auxiliaries, etc. seem to have clearer certainty/uncertainty epistemological interpretations. In any case, imperative mood inherently involves volition or deontic modality. Deontic and some epistemic modal elements are acquired rather late, near or after 2, whereas moods as sentence types are acquired well before 2 in Korean. This is a subtle matter and we need further investigation to resolve all the issues. We have also discussed aspects of negation and tense/ aspect. We can discern a certain order of development or distinct stages in the acquisition of modal and other functional elements (categories/projections) in childhood, but there are variations among children and different languages. In this sense, it is not easy to conclude that certain things must be earlier than other things and ‘continuity’ is not easy to abandon completely. The negative imperative (=prohibition) has a long form with V-ci, acquired quite early together with the incorrect short-form negation imperative ‘An V!’ But the non-imperative longform negation V-ci anh- is acquired very late. This suggests that a prohibition speech act is more urgent; the negative imperative (=prohibition) morpheme malwith V-ci must be acquired earlier than the general non-imperative long-form negation V-ci anh-, which is functionally equivalent to the (non-imperative) short-form negation an V that children already freely use (see Han and Lee, 2007). The marked construction of prohibition has a certain lexical nature, although pragmatic need as well as semantic/syntactic structure still facilitates its acquisition.

15

The syntax of overmarking and kes in child Korean John Whitman

Overmarking Overmarking errors occur in early child syntax when the child adds an element that is absent in well-formed adult speech. The examples below are from English (1–2), Japanese (3), and Korean (4): (1)

Jenny did left with Daddy. (R 2:4; Mayer, Erreich & Valian, 1978: 2)

(2) (3)

Whose is that is? (E 1:10–2:6; Hurford, 1975) [gohan tabeteru no butasan]np rice is eating no piggy ‘the the piggy that is eating rice’ (Nagisa 3:2; Murasugi, 1991: 14)

(4)

Acessi otopai tha-nun ke soli ya. man motorbike ride-adnom KES sound is It’s the sound of a man riding a motorbike.’ (Polam 2:3; Y-J. Kim, 1987: 20)

In English (1) tense is marked both on auxiliary do and the lexical verb. In (2), is occurs in two positions. In (3), the functional element no is realized in a relative clause, even though adult Japanese has no overt functional morpheme in this position. In (4), the ‘bound noun’ kes is likewise realized in a relative clause, even though no morpheme appears in this position in adult Korean. The pattern in (4) was first noticed by Kim (1987) and studied extensively by K.-O. Lee (1991; see also Lee, Lust & Whitman, 1991). Overmarking errors are interesting from the standpoint of the controversy over the status of functional or closed-class elements in early grammar (Radford, 1990; Whitman, Lee & Lust, 1991, and much subsequent literature). Overmarking indicates that functional categories are present in the grammar of the child who produces them: overmarking does not occur with lexical categories; that is, children do not produce overmarking errors such as (5): (5) a. b.

*Jenny Jenny left. *Jenny left left. 221

222

John Whitman

Furthermore, since the overmarking patterns do not occur in caregiver speech, the child’s basis for producing these patterns must come from some source other than the input. Most interesting, though, is the fact that overmarking errors are not random. The positions corresponding to did in (1), is in (2) no in (3), and ke (= adult kes) in (4) correspond to overt function words or morphemes in many languages, and, more abstractly, to positions occupied by functional categories in many theories of grammatical competence. But not all functional categories are subject to overmarking. In the earliest work on overmarking in the 1970s, researchers noticed that certain types of overmarking errors do not occur. For example, Maratsos and Kuczaj (1978) report that overmarking errors such as (6) do not occur: (6)

*He did could go. (Maratsos & Kuczaj, 1978: 343):

The contrast between (1) and the non-occurring (6) is crucial. Since Emonds (1976), modals and auxiliary do in English have been generally supposed to be generated in the same functional category position, analyzed as INFL or TENSE in generative frameworks. On this view, (1) has the following structure: (7)

Jenny [infl [PAST]] [vp [v left [PAST]] with Daddy].

In (1 = 7), overmarking results from realizing the feature [PAST] both in INFL and on the lexical verb. Both of these positions are independently motivated in the grammar; the ‘error’ in the child output consists in realizing the [PAST] feature twice. In (6), in contrast, the grammar does not provide separate positions for did and could; and overmarkings like (6) do not occur. This shows that overmarking does not result from simple doubling of functional words or morphemes, or insertion of functional morphemes in random positions in a ‘non-adult’ grammar. The following generalization characterizes the contexts where overmarking occurs: (8)

Overmarking results from giving phonetic expression to a feature or category present, but not phonetically expressed, in the adult grammar.

In (1), the tense feature [PAST] is generated in INFL but expressed only on the lexical verb in adult grammar. Overmarking results from realizing it in both places. In (2), the verb be is generated in VP and moved to the left of the subject. Adult grammar gives phonetic expression or ‘spells out’ only the moved verb; overmarking results from spelling out the verb in the position where it originates and in the position it is moved to. I will show in this paper that overmarking in (3) and (4) is quite similar to (1 and 2): it results from spelling out a functional category present, but not phonetically realized in this particular position in adult Korean and Japanese.

Overmarking and kes in child Korean

223

Kes in child Korean In Korean traditional grammar, kes is classified as a ‘bound noun’ or a ‘formal noun’ (hyŏngshik ch’eŏn or kkol imjassi; see Hyŏn-bae Choe, 1971: 158–60). It cannot appear alone: (9) a.

b.

*(Ney) kkes i-ta. (my) KES be-dec ‘(It) is mine.’ Na nun *(ku) kes ul po-ass-ta. I top (that) KES acc see-past-dec I saw that.’

Kes has no independent reference. In Korean–English dictionaries, it is conventionally glossed as ‘a one, the one’ (Martin, Lee & Chang, 1967: 103), and ‘the fact that’ (ibid.) when the category preceding it is a clause: (10)

Ipkwu ka tathici anhnun kes ul hwakinha-n-ta. Entrance nom closed not fact acc make.certain-pres-dec ‘(Pro) makes certain of the fact that the entrance is not closed.’

Kes is common in early child Korean. It occurs frequently in the Jiwon corpus in the CHILDES database (CHILDES, 2005) and in the extensive natural speech data collected by K.-O. Lee (1991): (11)

Yeki appa kke. (Jiwon 2:0) here daddy KES ‘Here’s Daddy’s.’

(12)

Masiss-nun ke (SP 1:11; Lee 1991) tasty-adnom KES ‘A tasty one.’

(13) a. Mother: I ke nwukwu kke ya? This KES who KES Q ‘Whose is this?’ b. Jiwon: Hammeni kke. (Jiwon 2:0) Grandma KES ‘Grandma’s.’ The above examples show that children master the salient aspects of the phonology, morphology, and syntax of kes very early. In colloquial Korean, kes is normally pronounced /ke/ [kə], /key/ [ke] before the nominative particle i. Following possessor NPs, the initial consonant of kes is reinforced /kk/ [k’], as in (11) and (13b), but the initial consonant is realized as a plain unaspirated /k/ (usually realized as voiced [g]) after the final vowel of the

224

John Whitman

demonstrative as in (13b). Kes is preceded by the adnominal form of verbs and adjectives, as in (12). Kes following a subordinate clause is reported in early child speech by Young-Joo Kim (1987, 1989, 1997) and K.-O. Lee (1991). (14)

[[Mok-ey ke-nun] ke] ya? (SP 1:11; Lee, 1991) neck-on hang-pres KES be Q ‘Is it what you hang on your neck?’

Young-Joo Kim first reported the occurrence of kes in two non-adultlike patterns in early child Korean (Kim, 1987). The first involves kes occurring between the relative clause and the head noun it modifies, as in (4). (15–16) are additional examples from Lee (1991). The parenthesized star (*) indicates that the relevant pattern is ill-formed in adult Korean. (15)

[[swume iss-nun] (*)ke] maykhu (JB 3:4 Lee, 1991) hiding is-adnom KES microphone ‘the microphone that is hiding’

(16)

Kuliko [[[appa ssu-nun (*)ke] ankyeng] un… (SK 3:10 Lee, 1991) and papa wear- adnom KES glasses topic ‘And as for the glasses that papa wears…’

The second pattern involves kes occurring between an adjective and the noun it modifies: (17)

[[[Yele-n] (*)ke] cha] tha-ko ka-n-ta. (SK 2:1 Lee, 1991) this.like-adnom KES car ride-ing go-pres-dec ‘(Y)ou ride in the car like this.’

(18)

[[[Tta-n] (*)ke] chayk] Tongswu cwe-la. (HM 2:3 Lee, 1991) different-adnom KES book Dongsoo give-imp ‘Give me the other book, Dongsoo.’

Lee, Lust & Whitman (1990), Whitman, Lee, and Lust (1991), and Lee (1991) argue that data like (15–18) falsify the claim that functional categories are absent in early child Korean. Based on examples like (14), where kes heads a free relative, they hypothesize that kes is acquired early as complementizer, that is, a functional category introducing a subordinate clause in child Korean. They argue that kes is realized as an overt complementizer in relative clauses like 16, which they assign the structure in (19). (19)

Kuliko [np [cp [ip appa ssu-nun] ke] ankyeng] un… (SK 3:8 Lee, 1991) then papa wear-adnom KES glasses top ‘And the glasses that papa wears…’

Overmarking and kes in child Korean

225

Since adult Korean does not realize an overt complementizer in relative clauses, this analysis makes (4) and (15–18) clear cases of overmarking, in the sense of (8).1 The syntactic status of kes Young-Joo Kim (1993, 1997) produces two convincing arguments against the analysis of kes as a complementizer in examples like (4) and (15–18). First, Kim points out that while kes does not have independent reference, it shares this property with English one, which can appear as a pronominal head in a close paraphrase of (14): (20)

Is it the one you hang on your neck?

Second, and most crucially, Kim points out that the overmarked kes pattern occurs in a number of contexts where it cannot plausibly be analyzed as a complementizer. We have already seen examples of this type in (17–18), where kes appears between an adjectival modifier and the noun it modifies. In order to maintain the claim that kes is a complementizer in these examples, prenominal adjectival modifiers would have to be analyzed as relative clauses. Such an analysis would be unattractive enough, but Kim provides further data showing that the relative clause analysis is completely untenable. Examples like (21), where kes is preceded by a demonstrative, and (22), where kes is preceded by a nominal possessor, cannot possibly be analyzed as complex NPs. Both of these patterns are unacceptable in adult Korean. (21)

(22)

[I (*)ke pihayngki] nun? (J 2:6 Kim, 1993: 33) This KES airplane top ‘What about this airplane?’ I ke [enni (*)ke pang-eyse hay-ss-e. (H 2:3 Kim, 1993: 33) this KES sister KES room-in do-past-dec ‘I did this one in sister’s room.’

The next question is, if overmarked kes is not a complementizer, what is it? Kim (1987) took the position that kes is a nominal head. Kim (1993) maintains this analysis, but in discussing examples like (14), specifically the analogy with English one as in (20), she characterizes kes as a ‘pronominal head’ (1993: 32). The difference between ‘nominal head’ and ‘pronominal head’ may seem to be slight, but in fact it is crucial to understanding the status of kes. First, let us consider the consequences of analyzing overmarked kes as a garden variety noun. Lee, Lust, and Whitman (1991) point out that this analysis is 1

This analysis is closely modeled on the analysis of Japanese no in (3), which Murasugi (1991) argues is also a complementizer, unrealized in adult relative clauses.

226

John Whitman

problematic in early child Korean examples like (23–24) below, where kes heads an internally headed relative clause. Internally headed relative clauses are a pattern where the semantic head of the relative clause appears internal to the relative clause itself. Unlike the examples of kes overmarking, the internally headed relative clauses in (23–24) are structurally possible patterns in adult Korean as well.2 (23)

[[emma ka panci kki-nun] ke] (JP 3:0 Lee, 1991) mama nom ring wear-adnom KES ‘the ring that mama wears–’

(24)

Emma [[pap mek-ul] kes] cwe. (JB 3:4 Lee, 1991) Mama rice eat-adnom KES give ‘Mama, give me the rice that I am going to eat.’

If kes were a lexical noun and the structural head of the relative clauses in (23–24), it would bind the internal head (‘ring’ in (23), ‘rice’ in (24)), resulting in what is known as a Condition C violation (Chomsky, 1981), a situation where the antecedent for a pronoun appears lower in the structure than the pronoun itself. Kim (1993: 32) responds to this objection by appealing to the analysis of internally headed relative clauses in Watanabe (1992). According to this analysis, internally headed relative clauses are derived by movement of an ‘invisible’ or unpronounced wh-operator, on a par with wh-in-situ questions. Kim suggests that since the internal head is not bound in the domain of this operator, it does not violate Condition C on the formulation of Chomsky (1986b). There are two problems with this analysis. First, Shimoyama (1999) shows convincingly that internally headed relative clauses do not involve operator movement at any level of representation. Second, even under Watanabe’s (1992) analysis, the extracted item is not the internal head, but an operator moved from the specifier of the internal head. The trace or variable occupies this specifier position, and the internal head remains free to be bound by an external head with the same reference. The result would still be a Condition C violation, and this is why, not just in child and adult Korean, but across languages, ‘double-headed’ relative clauses, with both internal and external coreferent heads, simply do not occur. But this is precisely the structure entailed by Kim’s nominal head analysis of kes. The second issue has to do with the internal structure of examples like (15–18) if the projection headed by kes is analyzed as an NP. Kim (1993) argues that this is a structure of nominal apposition. Kim correctly points out that some of the data in Lee (1991) do appear to involve an appositive structure: 2

Although internally headed relative clauses occur in adult Korean (M.-J.Kim, 2004), there appear to be significant differences from the pattern in early child Korean. Adult Korean internally headed relative clauses tend to be indefinite, but the early child Korean examples in Lee (1991), like (23–24), are primarily definite.

Overmarking and kes in child Korean

(25)

227

[Paywu-nun kes] [ku kes] epse-yo. (EK 3:5 Lee, 1991) learn-adnom KES that KES not.exist-pol ‘I don’t have that one, the one (I) learned.’

The property of an appositive structure is that neither component restricts the denotation of the other; either component by itself suffices to compose an appropriate utterance in the discourse context. This is the case in (26): (26) a. [Paywu-nun kes] epse-yo. ‘I don’t have the one (I) learned.’ b. [Ku kes] epse-yo. ‘I don’t have that one.’ But it is not the case in many other examples of overmarked kes, including the examples in (15–18). In these examples, the material before kes clearly serves to restrict the denotation of the head noun. Consider the following example in Kim (1993): (27)

Mother: Nwukwu mul ankyeng i-ya? Who water goggle be-q ‘Whose swimming goggles are (these)?’ Child: Nay (*)ke mul ankyeng. (C 2:0 Kim, 1993: 33) My KES water goggle ‘My swimming goggles.’

In contrast to (26), it is not the case that either component of the child’s answer by itself suffices as a felicitous answer: (28)

Mother: Nwukwu mul ankyeng i-ya? Who water goggles be-q ‘Whose swimming goggles are (these)?” Child: a. Nay ke ‘Mine’ b. # Mul ankyeng. ‘swimming goggles’

In the child’s answer, the first part, [nay ke] ‘mine’, is clearly being used to restrict the denotation of the second part, mul ankyeng ‘swimming goggles’. The second part by itself would be an inadequate answer. It might be argued that the child has not yet learned what constitutes an adequate answer to a question like (27), but this would clearly be wrong: (27) is a perfectly natural exchange except for the child’s non-adult use of kes; it is natural because nay kes ‘mine’ serves as a restrictive modifier of the nominal head of the expression. Let us now turn to the second alternative analysis of kes noted above, as a pronominal element. As we noted there, ‘nominal’ and pronominal’ seem to

228

John Whitman

have been used almost interchangeably in the discussion of this overmarking pattern, but they entail very different analyses. The pronoun as determiner analysis Since Postal (1969) it has been widely argued that pronouns and determiners belong to the same category. This line of thinking is further developed by Elbourne (2001), who argues for a close relationship between the English determiners the and a and the pronouns it and one. On this view, for example, the and it are both instances of the same lexical item, belonging to the category D(eterminer); the surfaces when overt material follows the determiner, otherwise it: (29) a. Robin bought [dp the [np book]]. b. Robin bought [dp it [np e]]. Under the pronoun-as-determiner analysis, simple pronouns such as it in (29b) are instances of NP ellipsis (Jackendoff, 1971). M.-J. Kim (2004) applies the pronoun-as-determiner approach to analyze kes in adult Korean internally headed relative clauses as an e-type pronoun: (30) Chelswu nun [dp [totwuk I tomangka-nun] kes] ul cap-ass-ta. Chelswu top thief nom flee-adnom KES acc catch-past-dec ‘Chelswu caught a/the thief who was running away.’ In (30), kes heads the determiner phrase containing the internally headed relative clause. It is not a maximal projection, and thus does not bear a referential index, obviating the problem with condition C discussed above. The pronoun-as-determiner analysis of kes also extends naturally to NP ellipsis contexts such as (31), which are well-formed in both child and adult Korean, and represent the first productions of kes in early child Korean: (31)

[dp appa [d’ [ke [np e]]]] (=10) papa KES ‘papa’s’

The same analysis extends to kes preceded by an adjectival modifier or demonstrative in adult and child Korean: (32) a. [dp khu-n [d’ [kes [np e]]]] big-adnom KES ‘a/the big one’ b. [dp i [d’ [kes [np e]]]] this KES ‘this one’

Overmarking and kes in child Korean

229

We are now in a position to explain the precise status of non-adult patterns such as (4) and (15–18). Kes in the NP ellipsis pattern of (31) is acquired very early (as is the corresponding pattern in English; see Cazden, 1968). But children learning Korean must learn that a determiner is realized overtly in Korean only when the following NP is empty. Before learning this language-particular feature of Korean, children may allow the overmarked kes pattern with the structure in (33). (33)

[ke [np cha]]]] (=17) [dp Yele-n [d’ this .like-adnom KES car ‘a/ the car like this.’

The kes overmarking pattern is exactly comparable to early child English patterns like (34a) , where the child uses a determiner form which is restricted in the adult grammar to contexts followed by an empty NP (34b). (34) a. Doggie bit me [dp mine [np boot]]. (Adam Stage II; Brown, 1973: 337) b. This is [dp mine [np e]]]

Conclusion This paper described a pattern of overmarking in early child Korean involving the functional element kes. I argued that kes in the pattern under discussion is best analyzed as a member of the category D(eterminer) in adult and child Korean. In adult Korean, kes is restricted to contexts where it is not followed by an overt NP (like mine and yours in English. Before learning this languageparticular feature of Korean, children may produce the overmarking pattern in (4), (15–18), and (21–22). Understood this way, kes overmarking falls within the definition in (8): it results from giving phonetic form to a category (D) that is not phonetically realized in the specific context by adult speakers. Kes overmarking is thus an instance of expression of a functional category in child grammar where it is absent in adult grammar, supporting the view that children have early knowledge of the syntax of functional categories. Two issues remain to be addressed. The first is the relation between determiner kes and complementizer kes, as in (10). Crosslinguistically it is common for the same lexical item to serve as determiner and complementizer, as with English that or German das/dass. Kes exemplifies the same pattern. The second issue is the semantics of kes. Kes is semantically vacuous in comparison to determiners such as the and a in English. In part this is a consequence of the language-particular fact that kes is bound: it must co-occur with overt material to its left in the specifier of the determiner phrase; this material specifies the referential properties of the entire nominal expression.

230

John Whitman

In this respect kes is comparable to English possessive ’s, also analyzed by Abney (1987) as a determiner. However, it is possible that kes in early child Korean is not as semantically transparent as in the adult grammar. It is noteworthy that in all of the examples of overmarked kes such as (4, 15–18, 21–22), the nominal expression containing kes is glossed as definite. Although this must remain a topic for future research, it would be worthwhile to investigate the possibility that overmarked kes is used by the child not just to express a functional category that is silent in the adult grammar, but to express that category, a determiner, as a marker of definiteness.

16

Events in passive development Youngjoo Lee and Kwee-Ock Lee

Introduction Children’s difficulty with passives is well known in various languages (Maratsos et al., 1985, Gordon & Chafetz, 1990, and Fox & Grodzinsky, 1998 for English; Pierce, 1992 for Spanish; Sano, 2000 for Japanese; Bartke, 2004 for German; Terzi & Wexler, 2002 for Greek, among others), but the source of difficulty is still an open question. There are two competing accounts for the late development of passives, proposed for English but extendable to other languages. One is Borer and Wexler’s (1987) A-chain Maturation Hypothesis, which says children cannot handle A-chains (i.e. movement from object to subject positions) until a certain age of maturation. Due to this inability, children adopt an alternative structure that does not involve an A-chain, namely that of adjectival passives. The other is Fox and Grodzinsky’s (1998) Theta Transmission Account. They claim that children’s difficulty has nothing to do with A-chains, but with theta transmission. Children cannot transmit the external theta-role to the by-phrase in passives, and they come to interpret the by-phrase by default Agent assignment. One question arising from the above discussion is what the two hypotheses predict for languages whose passive formation does not involve an A-chain or theta transmission; in other words, for languages like Korean. If children have difficulty either with A-chains or with theta transmission, it is predicted that passives in languages that have neither should be easier to acquire than passives in languages that have both. This prediction seems to be borne out since it has long been reported that passives develop earlier in Korean than in English (Zoh, 1982a). But this conclusion is based upon natural production data, and cannot answer specific questions that we are interested in. For example, we would like to know whether Korean also has the well-known contrast between actional and non-actional passives; whether all passives are easy to the same degree, or there is variation among passive predicates; if some passives are easy but others are not, what factor determines the easiness of some? This paper investigates Korean children’s passives with these questions in mind, and provides a new insight on this issue, namely that event-structural properties of passive predicates play an important role in children’s comprehension of passives. 231

232

Youngjoo Lee and Kwee-Ock Lee

We conducted a picture-aided comprehension task with sixty-seven kindergarteners, and found that children perform well on passive predicates that have a target/ result state in their event structure, but poorly on passive predicates that lack a target/result state. In other words, children are good at passives of accomplishment predicates, but less good at passives of activity and state predicates. This result resembles the correlation between event structure and acquisition of the tenseaspect system attested in many languages (Antinucci & Miller, 1976 and Shirai & Andersen, 1995 for English; Gökmen and Lee, 2002 for Turkish and Korean; Li & Bowerman, 1998 for Chinese; Stoll, 1998 for Russian). In early speech, past-tense markers tend to occur with telic predicates (i.e. predicates whose event structure implies an inherent end-point) and present-tense markers with atelic predicates (i.e. predicates whose event structure lacks an inherent end-point). Accomplishments and achievements are telic predicates, and activity and states are atelic predicates. Whatever the source of this correlation might be, our result adds to the role of events in linguistic development. Development of passives Earlier studies on children’s passives report some peculiar properties. First, children before age 4–5 produce and comprehend actional passives (e.g. catch) better than non-actional passives (e.g. see) (Maratsos et al., 1985). Second, short passives (passives lacking the by-phrase) are produced and comprehended better than long passives (Horgan, 1978). Third, children’s passives often report after-the-fact observations about states (Horgan, 1978). Borer and Wexler (1987) argue that these peculiar properties are accounted for under their A-chain Maturation Hypothesis. The idea is that children cannot compute A-chains,1 and so they cannot produce and comprehend passives until they reach a certain point of maturation. (1) a. b.

[The door]i was closed ti. The door was [ADJ closed].

The structure given in (1a) is ungrammatical for children because it has an illegitimate A-chain. So the only option available for children is the structure in (1b), namely that of adjectival passives that does not involve an A-chain (Levin and Rappaport, 1986). Borer and Wexler thus argue that apparent passives in children’s utterances are instances of adjectival passives. This hypothesis easily explains the peculiarities of children’s passives noted above. First, non-actional predicates do not make good adjectives (e.g. The doll 1

This statement is revised later given the VP-internal subject hypothesis. Borer and Wexler (1992) assume that children can deal with some A-chains, but not all, since children have no problem with moving the subject from its theta position to a surface position where it precedes an auxiliary, as in I will go.

Passive development

233

remained uncombed vs.*The doll remained unseen), and this is why children are poor at passives of non-actional predicates. Second, adjectival passives do not allow the by-phrase, due to the complete elimination of the subject theta role. It follows from this property that children are good at short passives, but poor at long passives. Thirdly, children’s passives refer to a state because that is what adjectives do. Rather recently, however, Fox and Grodzinsky (1998) made a proposal against the A-chain Maturation Hypothesis on the basis of their experiment. They found out that children have problems with non-actional passives only when the by-phrase is present. That is, children have no problem with sentences like (2a) through (2c), but have difficulty only with sentences like (2d). (2) a. b. c. d.

John is pushed. OK John is pushed by Mary. OK John is seen. OK John is seen by Mary. Not OK

Given that both long and short passives involve an A-chain, they argue, children’s poor performance on long passives of non-actional verbs is not to be attributed to an A-chain. If it were the presence of an A-chain that causes difficulty, there should be no difference between long and short passives of non-actional predicates. They conclude that the difficulty must lie in the by-phrase in non-actional passives. Specifically, they argue that children have difficulty in transmitting the external theta role to the by-phrase. With actional predicates, the preposition by itself can assign an affector role (agent, instrument, possessor, etc.) to the following determiner phrase as in a book by John, but with non-actional predicates, the affector role is not compatible with the theta role assigned by the predicate, namely experiencer. This semantic mismatch explains the poor performance on long passives of non-actional phrases. The Korean passive and predictions The syntax of the Korean passive One distinct property of Korean passives is that the surface subject in passive sentences is not a derived subject.2 In other words, the subject does not undergo movement from a VP-internal position, as in English verbal passives. This contrasting behavior is clearly seen in the interpretation of purpose clauses.

2

There are two types of verbal passive in Korean, namely HI passive and CI passive. In this paper, we focus on the HI passive that contains passive morphemes such as -i-, -hi-, -li-, -ki-, and leave aside the CI passive, given that the latter rarely occurs in colloquial speech let alone children’s natural production data.

234

Youngjoo Lee and Kwee-Ock Lee

(3) a. b.

*The boat sank to make a point. The boat was sunk to make a point.

When the predicate is unaccusative, as in (3a), there is no external argument that can control PRO in the purpose clause, thus the sentence is ungrammatical. By contrast, when the predicate is passive, there is an implicit external argument that can control PRO. So in (3b) the person who wanted to make a point sank the boat (Manzini, 1983). With this background, we look at a Korean passive sentence given in (4). (4)

Mary-ka John-ul kwuha-lyeko kyungchal-hanthey cap-hi-ess-ta. Mary-Nom John-Acc save-to police-Dat catch-Pass-Past ‘Mary got (herself) caught by the police in order to save John.’

In (4), Mary got herself caught with the intention of saving John. In other words, it is not the apparent Agent (the police) but Mary who wanted to save John. This contrast between Korean and English leads to the conclusion that the surface subject in Korean is not a derived subject, but receives a theta role (Affectee or Experiencer) from the passive predicate, similar to adjectival passives in English (J.-E. Lee, 2003; S. D. Park, 2005). Event structures of passive predicates We now turn to event-structural properties of passive predicates, which will play a crucial role in the subsequent discussion. Although there may be a uniform structure, not all passive predicates in Korean have the same event structure. There are some subclasses among passive predicates. Vendler (1967) establishes four aspectual classes, as exemplified in (5). (5) a. b. c. d.

John was happy. [state] John ran for three hours. [activity] John built a house. [accomplishment] John arrived at home. [achievement]

Predicates in each category behave differently with respect to diagnostics such as compatibility with the progress form (-ing) or certain time adverbials, thus confirm the classification. These aspectual classes are mapped onto different event structures, assuming process and state to be basic events (Pustejovsky, 1995). Activity predicates have a process, and state predicates have a state in their event structures. Accomplishment and achievement predicates have two sub-events, a process and a (result) state, but differ from each other with respect to which of the two sub-events is headed, or semantically prominent. A process is headed in accomplishment predicates, whereas a state is headed in achievement predicates.

Passive development

235

Nam (2004) provides a comprehensive discussion of diagnostics for aspectual classification of Korean predicates, based on which we classify passive predicates and their event structures into three sub-categories. We will show that the aspectual properties of passive predicates vary with the aspectual properties of their active counterparts. Specifically, passive predicates of accomplishment predicates, passive predicates of activity predicates, and passive predicates of state/psychological predicates are all distinguished from one another.3 The following is the list of verbs we are focusing on in this paper. (6)

In the Active Voice a. Accomplishment: an- ‘hug,’ cap- ‘catch’ b. Activity: cha- ‘kick,’ ccoch- ‘chase’ c. State/Psychological: po- ‘see,’ tut- ‘hear’

(7)

In the Passive Voice a. Passives of accomplishment predicates: an-ki- ‘be hugged,’ cah-hi‘be caught’ b. Passives of activity predicates: cha-i- ‘be kicked,’ ccoch-ki- ‘be chased’ c. Passives of state predicates: ‘po-i-’ ‘be seen,’ tul-li- ‘be heard’

The first criterion that distinguishes the passive predicates from one another is compatibility with -ko iss-, which expresses continuation of a process, similar to the English progressive. (8)

Mary-ka cha-an-eyse ca-ko iss-ta. Mary-Nom car-inside-in sleep-KO be-Decl ‘Mary is sleeping in the car.’

Applied to the passive predicates, we see that only passive predicates of activity predicates are compatible with this aspectual marker. (9) a. b. c. d. e. f.

*an-ki-ko iss-ta: be being hugged. *cap-hi-ko iss-ta: be being caught. cha-i-ko iss-ta: be being kicked. ccock-ki-ko iss-ta: be being chased. *po-i-ko iss-ta: be being seen. *tul-li-ko iss-ta: be being heard.

This means that only the passives of activity predicates have a process in their event structure. Our next criterion that further distinguishes passive predicates is 3

Passive predicates of achievement predicates are missing since they are not passivizable to begin with, as discussed in Y.-S. Kim (2001).

236

Youngjoo Lee and Kwee-Ock Lee

compatibility with -e/a iss-, which expresses the continuation of a result state, as shown in (10). (10)

Elum-I nok-a iss-ta. ice-Nom melt-A be-Decl ‘The ice has melted and is in the state of being melted.’

A test with passive predicates shows that passives of accomplishment predicates are compatible with this aspectual marker, but passives of activity and state predicates are not: (11) a. b. c. d. e. f.

an-ki-e iss-ta: be in the state of being hugged. cap-hi-e iss-ta: be in the state of being caught. *cha-i-e iss-ta: be in the state of being kicked. *ccock-ki-e iss-ta: be in the state of being chased. *po-i-e iss-ta: be in the state of being seen. *tul-li-e iss-ta: be in the state of being heard.

This diagnostic tells us that only the passives of accomplishment predicates have a result state in their event structure. To summarize the results from the two tests, we have the following classification. (12)

Event structures of passive predicates: a. Passives of accomplishment predicates have a result state but no process. b. Passives of activity predicates have a process but no result state. c. Passives of state predicates have neither a process nor a result state.

It will be shown in the next section how this classification is relevant in children’s acquisition of passive predicates.

Predictions on development With the background in the previous sections, let us go back to the acquisition issue, and look at Korean passives from the perspective of the theories of passive development. At first glance, both the A-chain Maturation Hypothesis and the Theta Transmission Account do not seem directly relevant in predicting Korean children’s passive development. Korean passives do not have an A-movement comparable to English passives, and accordingly there is no need for theta transmission, at least in case of the HI passive. Given this, one might conclude that Korean children will have no difficulty with passive predicates from the beginning. Although this is partially true given the early appearance of passive predicates in natural production data (Zoh, 1982a), it is not entirely true.

Passive development

237

An experimental study reports that Korean children do not fully acquire passive sentences until age 7 (Ha, 2000)4. This paper hypothesizes that Korean children take the adjectival strategy in comprehending verbal passives (Borer & Wexler, 1987; Hirsch & Wexler, 2004), which may be natural given that Korean passives are like adjectival passives in their structure. This hypothesis leads us to a very specific prediction, namely that children’s passives will be sensitive to the event structures of passive predicates. If a predicate has a result state in its event structure (accomplishment predicates), children will perform well on its passive counterpart. By contrast, if a predicate does not have a result state (activity or state predicates), children will perform poorly on its passive version. Why does this prediction arise? It is due to a correlation between the event structures of predicates and the possibility of a predicate being interpreted as an adjective. If a predicate that has a result state is passivized, the passive predicate can easily become an adjective describing the result state (Kratzer, 2000; Embick, 2004). Activity and state predicates only have a process but no result state, thus it is difficult to give them an adjectival interpretation without the aid of the context. More specifically, we predict that Korean children’s performance will be better on passives of accomplishment predicates than on passives of activity and state predicates. Note that the distinction is not made between actional and non-actional predicates. Passives of activity predicates are predicted to be difficult although they are actional predicates.5 Next we turn to a prediction regarding short and long passives, and what we can expect from Korean. Since there is no need for theta transmission, we expect there to be no contrast between short and long passives for that reason. That is, if there is any contrast between short and long passives, it must be attributed to some other factor than to theta transmission. Let us first see that the apparent agent phrase (the dative-marked phrase, henceforth hanthey-phrase) can be interpreted based on a variety of theta roles that the dative postposition expresses in active sentences. (13) a. Mary-ka John-hanthey sakwa-lul cwuessta. Mary-Nom John-Dat apple-Acc gave ‘Mary gave an apple to John.’ (Goal) b. Mary-ka John-hanthey sakwa-lul patassta. Mary-Nom John-Dat apple-Acc received ‘Mary received an apple from John.’ (Source) 4 5

Ha (2000) focuses on which allomorphs are easier than others in children’s passive development. Note that we are not denying a contrast between actional and non-actional predicates reported in previous works. If we compare accomplishment and state predicates, we will just have the same prediction and result. The point is that there should be a ternary distinction based on event structures.

238

Youngjoo Lee and Kwee-Ock Lee

c. Ne na-hanthey cwuknunta. You I-Dat die ‘I will kill you (literally, you will die by me).’ d. Na-hanthey kohyang-i kulipta. I-Dat hometown-Nom miss ‘I miss my hometown.’ (Experiencer)

(Agent)

Crucially, hanthey can assign Agent and Experiencer theta roles in active sentences, which can be extended to interpret the hanthey-phrase in passive sentences. This means that children have the tools for interpreting the hantheyphrase in passive sentences, whether they have acquired the semantics of passive predicates or not. Thus there should be no difficulty that is related to how to interpret the hanthey-phrase in long passives. The experiment Subjects and task A total of sixty-seven monolingual children participated in a picture-aided comprehension task. Information about subjects is summarized in the Table16.1. The task was rather simple. After a sentence was read to a child, the child was asked to pick a picture out of three pictures given in a booklet. For example, for the target sentence Thokki-ka toayci-hanthey caphiesseyo ‘The rabbit was caught by the pig,’ the child was presented with three pictures: in one the rabbit is caught by the pig, in another the pig is caught by the rabbit, and in the third, an animal other than a pig is caught by the rabbit. If the child understood the passive sentence, she would select the first picture. Before the task, the children were familiarized with the animal characters (monkey, pig, bear, rabbit, and cat), and tested with two practice items (active actional sentences) which helped the children understand the task. If a child failed in this pre-test, she was disqualified and did not participate in the real test. We tested the six verbs discussed in the previous section (cap- ‘catch,’ an- ‘hug,’ cha ‘kick,’ cchoch‘chase,’ po ‘see,’ and tul- ‘hear’). For each verb, active, long passive, and short Table 16.1. Subjects in the picture-aided comprehension task Age group

Age range

Mean age

Number of subjects

4-year-olds 5-year-olds 6-year-olds 7-year-olds

3:10–4:11 5:0–5:11 6:0–6:11 7:1–8:8

4:5 5:6 6:4 7:7

16 18 16 17

Passive development

239

Table 16.2. Comprehension of long passives Accomplishment

Activity

State

Age group

Active

Passive

Active

Passive

Active

Passive

Age 4 Age 5 Age 6 Age 7 Average

62.5% 88.6% 84.4% 97.1% 83.6%

72.0% 77.8% 75.0% 91.2% 79.1%

62.6% 88.9% 93.8% 100.0% 86.6%

43.8% 63.9% 78.2% 79.4% 66.4%

68.8% 72.3% 78.2% 88.3% 76.9%

37.6% 44.5% 71.9% 88.3% 60.5%

passive forms were tested. We also tested long and short causative sentences using three verbs mek- ‘eat,’ ip- ‘wear (clothes),’ and sin- ‘wear (shoes)’ to see if there is any difference between passives and causatives. In Korean, passives and causatives share the same morphology. Results and discussion The results show that our prediction is borne out and thus event structure matters in passive development. We find a three-way contrast among passive predicates, as summarized in Table 16.2.6 Table 16.2 shows that there is a contrast due to the aspectual properties of passive predicates, but there is no such contrast in active predicates. Children’s performance on passives is best on accomplishment predicates, and worst on state predicates, and activity predicates come in between the two. By contrast, children’s performance on actives is more or less similar across predicate categories. It is interesting to see that for the youngest group, performance on passives of activity predicates is more similar to performance on passives of state predicates than to performance on passives of accomplishment predicates, although both accomplishment and activity predicates are actional predicates. Note also that children are very good at passives of accomplishment predicates very early on. It seems that once a passive predicate can be interpreted as an adjective, the predicate does not cause any difficulty for children. Pairedsamples T-tests showed that the difference between passives of accomplishment and passives of activity is statistically significant at age 4 (t(15) = 2.334, p = .034). The difference between passives of accomplishment and passives of state was significant at age 4 (t(15) = 3.905, p = .001) and age 5 (t(17) = 3.367, p = .004). The difference between passives of activity and passives of state was nonsignificant at all age groups. In active predicates, there was no significant 6

Note that the categories (accomplishment, activity, and state) refer to aspectual properties of active predicates.

240

Youngjoo Lee and Kwee-Ock Lee

Table 16.3. Comprehension of long and short passives Accomplishment

Activity

State

Age group

Long passive

Short passive

Long passive

Short passive

Long passive

Short passive

Age 4 Age 5 Age 6 Age 7 Average

72.0% 77.8% 75.0% 91.2% 79.1%

59.4% 66.7% 87.6% 94.1% 77.6%

43.8% 63.9% 78.2% 79.4% 66.4%

40.7% 69.5% 84.4% 88.2% 70.9%

37.6% 44.5% 71.9% 88.3% 60.5%

59.4% 61.1% 75.0% 91.2% 71.6%

difference between any predicate categories at any age group, except between actives of activity predicates and actives of state predicates at age 7 (t(16) = 2.219, p = .041). The fact that children’s performance on passives is sensitive to event structures, and more specifically to the presence of a result state, supports the hypothesis that children take the adjectival strategy in interpreting passive sentences, and further shows that the adjectival strategy can be taken irrespective of the existence of A-movement in the language. Next we turn to short passives, and see if there is any effect due to deletion of the hanthey-phrase. In short passives, we have to see two things. One is whether there is a contrast among predicate categories (accomplishment, activity, and state). The other is whether there is any difference between long and short passives in each predicate category. For ease of comparison, the results from long passives are repeated for each predicate category. The results, summarized in Table 16.3, show that the contrast due to the aspectual properties of predicates is not well represented in short passives. Performance on short passives of accomplishment might be slightly better than performance on short passives of activity and state predicates, but no contrast is significant except the difference between short passives of accomplishment predicates and short passives of state predicates at age 6 (t(15) = 2.236, p = .041). How should this result be understood? It seems to be an effect due to the shortening of passives. There is a change due to the deletion of the hanthey-phrase, although it is not significant. At ages 4 and 5, performance on short passives of accomplishment predicates is worse than performance on long passives of accomplishment, whereas performance on short passives of state predicates is better than performance on long passives of state. Thanks to this change, the contrast between short passives of accomplishment and short passives of state is not as clear as the contrast between long passives of accomplishment and long passives of state. In other words, performance on short passives has become similar across predicate categories.

Passive development

241

The question is then why shortening has different effects (worsening and improvement) on different predicate categories. We speculate that the answer lies in the argument structure. It has been noted in the literature that the dative hanthey-phrase sometimes functions as a goal argument in examples like the following (Y.-S. Kim, 2001; Son, 2005, among others). 14 a.

b.

Mary-ka Inho-hanthey cap-hi-ess-ta. Mary-Nom Inho-Dat catch-Pass-Past-Decl ‘Mary got (herself) caught by Inho.’ Mary-ka Inho-hanthey an-ki-ess-ta. Mary-Nom Inho-Dat hug-Pass-Past-Decl ‘Mary got (herself) hugged by Inho.’

In (14), the hanthey-phrase expresses the final location Mary ends up in (for example, Mary can be in Inho’s arms in both cases), although it can be as Agent at the same time. Since they are optional, Y.-S. Kim (2001) classifies these hanthey-phrases as a default argument, following Pustejovsky (1995). The Goal interpretation of the hanthey-phrase is not true of all passive predicates, as can be seen in the sentences in (15). Here the hanthey-phrase cannot be interpreted as a Goal argument. (15) a. Mary-ka Inho-hanthey Mary-Nom Inho-Dat ‘Mary was kicked by Inho.’ b. Mary-ka Inho-hanthey Mary-Nom Inho-Dat ‘Mary was chased by Inho.’

cha-i-ess-ta. kick-Pass-Past-Decl ccoch-ki-ess-ta. chase-Pass-Past-Decl

Back to the experimental result, the two accomplishment predicates used in our experiment happen to allow the dative hanthey-phrase to be a Goal argument. When the hanthey-phrase is missing in short passives of accomplishment predicates, children’s performance worsens since the Goal argument is missing. But the effect is not significant because the Goal argument is only a default argument, something that does not need to be overt. Older children seem to understand that default arguments are allowed to be covert, since at ages 6 and 7 performance on short passives of accomplishment is better than performance on long passives of accomplishment. In activity and state predicates, performance on short passives is better than performance on long passives, because in these cases the hantheyphrase is not even a default argument. The absence of the hanthey-phrase might have lessened the processing load, which has led to the improvement. Support for this position comes from children’s comprehension of causatives. As mentioned earlier, causatives and passives in Korean share the same morphology.

242

Youngjoo Lee and Kwee-Ock Lee

Table 16.4. Comprehension of causative predicates

(16)

Age group

Long causatives

Short causatives

Age 4 Age 5 Age 6 Age 7 Average

66.7% 85.2% 79.2% 98.0% 82.6%

54.2% 62.8% 58.4% 76.5% 63.2%

Mary-ka John-hanthey os-ul ip-hi-ess-ta. Mary-Nom John-Dat clothes-Acc wear-Caus-Past-Decl ‘Mary caused John to wear clothes.’

Note that the cause argument is marked by the same dative marker hanthey. We tested long and short causatives with three verbs mek- ‘eat,’ ip- ‘wear (clothes),’ sin- ‘wear (shoes),’ and found that children’s performance worsens when the causee argument is missing. In Table 16.4 we can see a clear difference between long causatives and short causatives at all age groups. Paired-sample T-tests show that the difference is statistically significant at age 5 (t(17) = 2.608, p = .018) and age 7 (t(16) = 2.524, p = .023). When a real argument like causee is missing, children’s performance worsens, and this is similar to the pattern we found in short passives of accomplishment predicates. This suggests that the hanthey-phrase is an argument in passives of accomplishment, whereas it is not in passives of activity and state predicates. Before closing this section, we would like to point out that our results do not by themselves provide support either for the A-chain Maturation Hypothesis (Borer & Wexler, 1987) or for the Theta Transmission Account (Fox & Grodzinsky, 1998). As mentioned in the beginning, the Korean passive does not involve an A-chain comparable to that of the English passive, and so what we tested is not about whether children can handle A-chains or not. We only hypothesized that children employ the adjectival passive strategy. For the same reason, our result cannot do justice to the Theta Transmission Account. Interpretation of the hanthey-phrase does not require the mechanism of theta transmission, as Fox and Grodzinsky assumed for the by-phrase in English. We showed that the hanthey-phrase can be interpreted irrespective of theta transmission. Conclusion This study showed that the event structure of predicates plays an important role in the development of passives. We predicted and confirmed a contrast among

Passive development

243

passive predicates that is due to the presence of a result state in their event structures. If a predicate has a result state, its passive counterpart is easily acquired, whereas if a predicate lacks a result state, its passive counterpart is less easily acquired. Given this, the binary distinction (actional vs. non-actional) seems insufficient, since there is a distinction among actional predicates, specifically between passive predicates based on accomplishment predicates and passive predicates based on activity predicates. Children performed well on passives of accomplishment predicates since they make good adjectives (due to a result state in their event structure), whereas they performed poorly on passives of activity and state predicates since they do not make good adjectives (due to the lack of the result state). This result is reminiscent of the strong correlation between event structure and tense-aspect in acquisition. As briefly mentioned in the beginning, children tend to restrict the use of past marking to telic predicates, and also tend to restrict the use of present tense markers to atelic predicates. Although the source of this correlation is still under debate (innate knowledge, cognitive constraints, or input), the results of our experiment confirm again that children are sensitive to events with clear end-points, and suggest that events play an important role in language development.

17

Universal quantification in child grammar Hye-Kyung Kang

Abstract It is argued that quantifier spreading is a general phenomenon which is found in a certain young age group crosslinguistically. The occurrence of these errors can be analyzed in two different ways, linguistically and cognitively. The experimental data which indicate that children are sensitive to positional and structural cues of the syntax of quantifiers support a linguistic interpretation of the phenomenon. On the other hand, it can be counted as a clearly cognitive phenomenon because the visual input, the picture, plays a key role in the children’s conceptual representation. The functional category of determiner phrase (DP) seems not to be completely developed at this stage and thus the D-element is freely detached from the category which it belongs to and raised to the highest position to range over all arguments available in the picture and the sentence. Children’s universal quantification is unique. This uniqueness comes from the difference between their interpretation and adults’ interpretation on constructions with universal quantifiers. For example, to the English question Is every bear holding a honey-pot? with the given context (three bears are each holding a honey-pot, and there is a fourth, unheld, honey-pot), children, unlike adults, tend to give a negative response. They insist on saying “no” because one honey-pot is left out, not being held by a bear. They demand one-to-one correspondence between the agent ‘bear’ and the object ‘honey-pot’. In adult grammar, the quantifier every modifies only its complement ‘bear’: the scope of the quantifier is limited within the domain of the DP ‘every bear’. Syntactically, it is explained that DP is the maximal projection of the D head every, so that it cannot be over-projected outside the phrase. However, children seem not to be influenced by this grammatical regulation. They interpret the quantifier as modifying both arguments ‘bear’ and ‘honey-pot’ in the sentence Every bear is holding a honey-pot. There is a long tradition of study of this behavior of children. In their pioneering work, Inhelder and Piaget (1958, 1964) first observed the phenomenon in their experiments on the development of children’s logical competence 244

Universal quantification in child grammar

245

through their comprehension of universal quantifiers, especially all. In their study, children speaking French were shown an array of shapes in which three blue circles, a blue square, a blue circle and a red square were displayed in that order, and asked Are all the circles blue? They responded “no,” pointing to a square which was also blue as the reason for their negative response. Inhelder and Piaget explained this error as being due to young children’s inability to understand the notion of class, that is, that one category (circles) can be part of another larger category (blue things). Donaldson and Lloyd (1974) carried out their own experiment on the phenomenon on English-speaking children between the ages of three and five years and made observations similar to those of Inhelder and Piaget (1964). They tried to explain the phenomenon in terms of spatial relations, restricting it to the concepts of ‘spatiality’ or ‘canonicity’. Freeman et al. (1982) tried to account for it in terms of pragmatic (discourse) analysis factors, suggesting that the phenomenon is a result of the influence of different ‘topic-setting cues’ so that children’s behavior with quantification is understandable from the discourse point of view. On the other hand, Roeper and Matthei (1974), and Philip and Aurelio (1991) tried to explain the same phenomenon from a purely linguistic point of view. Roeper and Matthei suggested that quantifiers initially have an adverbial character, that is, children detach quantifiers from the nouns they belong to and apply them freely to the other NPs in the sentence. Philip and Aurelio adopted Roeper and Matthei’s idea: every behaves syntactically like a sentential adverb, and developed it into the Adverbial Quantifier Hypothesis. The adverbial every, like the adverb always, unselectively binds arguments available in the sentence. The general framework of this unselective binding originated with Lewis (1975), who observed that adverbs of quantification such as always, usually, and seldom can have scope over several indefinite NPs at the same time. Philip (1995) carried out a more systematic analysis of children’s universal quantification. He postulated representations that children assign to sentences with universal quantifiers by introducing the Event Quantification Hypothesis in which children interpret universal quantifiers as quantifying over entire events rather than individual objects, in line with the Davidsonian (Davidson, 1967) thesis that natural language semantics is not limited to quantification over individual objects but also includes quantification over individual minimal events or situations. To children, unlike adults, the domain of quantification consists of all minimal events which include the agent and the goal (or object) involved in the event. Philip argues that determiners are misanalyzed as adverbial quantifiers. As is well known, adverbial quantifiers typically bind events or situations. Misconstruing a determiner as an adverbial quantifier entails that the quantificational element in question winds up binding events or situations, as is standard for quantificational adverbs.

246

Hye-Kyung Kang

Previous research has reported that the phenomenon occurs in children acquiring French (Inhelder and Piaget, 1958, 1964), English (Donaldson and Lloyd, 1974; Philip, 1995), Dutch (Philip and Verrips, 1994), Chinese (T. Lee, 1986; 1991), Japanese (Philip, 1995), and, more recently, Korean (Kang, 2000) as well. The assertion is that this phenomenon is universally found. The main part of this paper will introduce Korean children’s understanding of universal quantifiers, and discuss the results in terms of both linguistic and cognitive points of view. Korean children’s interpretation of universal quantifiers Korean has universal quantifiers with functions similar to those of the English quantifiers. It contains strong and weak quantifiers with semantic properties as in English, and most quantifiers in Korean can be floated in a sentence like adverbials, just as all or each can in English. The Korean equivalents of the English quantifiers every, each and all are modun, kakkak-uy and modun N-tul, respectively (-tul is the plural marker in Korean, but both expressions with and without the plural marker are acceptable). When the quantifiers modun and kakkak-uy are floated in the sentence, they take the forms modwu and kakkak respectively: forms which function as adverbials, and are generally placed next to the NP which they modify. Kang (2000) carried out an experiment on Korean children’s universal quantification. Sixty-two Korean monolingual children, ranging in age from 4.5 to 7.5 with a mean age of 5.8, were individually interviewed. Korean quantifiers used in the test sentences were modun (every), kakkak-uy (each), and modun N-tul (all). Further, the floated quantifiers modwu (every/all) and kakkak (each) were also included. The effect of varying the relative order of quantifiers was examined: a quantifier in subject position; in object position; or floated in a sentence. The test sentences used in Kang (2000) were as follows: Test sentences Group 1 (in case of right spreading1): 1.

modun kom-i kkultong-ul tulgo isseoyo? every bear-NOM honeypot-ACC hold PRED-Q Is every bear holding a honey-pot?

2.

kakkak-uy kom-i kkultong-ul tulgo isseoyo? each bear-NOM honeypot-ACC hold PRED-Q Is each bear holding a honey-pot?

1

The phenomenon of right spreading (or forward spreading) could be predicted from the order of the universal quantifiers every, each and all in the subject position and a+noun in object position.

Universal quantification in child grammar

3.

247

modun komtul-i kkultong-ul tulgo isseoyo? all bear-Pl-NOM honeypot-ACC hold PRED-Q Are all the bears holding a honey-pot? Group 2 (in case of left spreading2):

4.

kom-i modun kkultong-ul tulgo isseoyo? bear-NOM every honeypot-ACC hold PRED-Q Is a bear holding every honey-pot?

5.

kom-i kakkak-uy kkultong-ul tulgo isseoyo? bear-NOM each honeypot-ACC hold PRED-Q Is a bear holding each honey-pot?

6.

kom-i modun kkultongtul-ul tulgo isseoyo? bear-NOM all honeypot-Pl-ACC hold PRED-Q Is a bear holding all the honey-pots? Group 3 (in case of floated quantifiers):

7.

kom-i modwu kkultong-ul tulgo isseoyo? bear-NOM every honeypot-ACC hold PRED-Q Is every bear holding a honey-pot?

8.

kom-i kakkak kkultong-ul tulgo isseoyo? bear-NOM each honeypot-ACC hold PRED-Q Is a bear each holding a honey-pot?

9.

kom-i kkultong-ul modwu tulgo isseoyo? bear-NOM honeypot-ACC every hold PRED-Q Is a bear holding every honey-pot?

The sentences in Group 1 have quantifiers in the subject position; those in Group 2 in the object position. The use of the former was to find whether children spread the scope of universal quantifiers modun, kakkak-uy and modun N-tul to the direct object N kkultong as well as to the subject N kom which they belong to, which is called ‘right spreading,’ whereas the purpose of the latter was to see if they spread the scope to the left to modify the subject N kom as well as their own object N kkultong, which is called ‘left spreading.’ The sentences in Group 3 include ‘floated quantifiers.’ The floated quantifier modwu in Sentence 7 modifies the subject N kom in adult grammar, and so does kakkak in Sentence 8. On the other hand, the quantifier modwu in Sentence 9 modifies the object N kkultong. The effect of varying the relative order of quantified NPs and indefinite NPs in simple sentences, that is, right and left spreading, was investigated. Further, based on the 2

The phenomenon of left spreading (or backward spreading) could be predicted from the order of a+noun in subject position and universal quantifiers in object position.

248

Hye-Kyung Kang

fact that in Korean most quantifiers can be floated in a sentence, the question of whether children give the same kind of interpretation to two different types: [NP floated-Q] and [Q+NP] was investigated. These sentences were tested in six different contexts: Contexts Context 1:

Context 2:

Context 3:

Context 4:

Context 5:

Context 6:

Extra object and extra different agent condition There are three bears holding a honey-pot each, an extra honey-pot not being held, and a piglet alone. Different agent condition Three bears are holding a honey-pot each, and a piglet is also holding a honey-pot. Many-to-one condition There are three bears, among which just one bear is holding all three honey-pots and the other two are not, just standing, and a piglet alone. Extra agent condition There are four bears, among them three bears are holding a honeypot each, and a bear alone without a honey-pot. Different object condition There are four bears, in which three bears are holding a honey-pot each and one bear is holding a bunch of flowers. Many-to-one and extra object conditions There are three bears, among them just one bear is holding three honey-pots and the other two are not, just standing, a piglet, and an extra honey-pot not being held.

Results Table 17.1 shows the correct (adult-like) response expected for each sentence in each context. Sentences 1, 2 and 3 are the cases of right spreading, whereas Table 17.1. Right answers (adult-like answers) Sentence No. Context No.

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

1 2 3 4 5 6

yes yes no no no no

yes yes no no no no

yes yes no no no no

no no yes yes yes no

no no yes yes yes no

no no yes yes yes no

yes yes no no no no

yes yes no no no no

no no yes yes yes no

Universal quantification in child grammar

249

Table 17.2. Percentages of non-adult-like responses by children Sentence No. Group 1

Group 2

Group 3

Contexts

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

1 2 3 4 5 6

35 39 21 21 25 10

40 35 15 21 37 37

53 45 12 35 40 6

42 53 47 80 84 16

56 57 70 63 70 19

37 63 70 79 70 35

50 75 33 33 25 40

40 33 8 25 78 67

78 33 78 100 56 11

4, 5 and 6 are the cases of left spreading. Sentences 7, 8 and 9 have floated quantifiers: modwu (every/all) on Sentence 7 and kakkak (each) on Sentence 8 quantify the subject N kom (bear), whereas modwu on Sentence 9 quantifies the object N kkultong (honey-pot). Contexts 1 and 2 yield the positive response ‘yes’ as the right answer, whereas Contexts 3 to 6 yield the negative response ‘no’ as the right answer to sentences 1, 2, 3, 7 and 8. On the other hand, Contexts 3, 4 and 5 yield ‘yes’ as the right answer, whereas Contexts 1, 2 and 6 give the negative response ‘no’ as the right answer to Sentences 4, 5, 6 and 9. In Table 17.2 the Contexts 1 and 2 in Group 1 represent evidence of right spreading of quantifiers by children. There is no significant difference in the result between Contexts 1 and 2 here, so the figures from the contexts are taken together to arrive at the main concern of the study. For example, 35 per cent for Context 1 and 39 per cent for Context 2 in the case of modun (every), are collapsed into an average 37 percent, which is evidence of right-spreading errors. Likewise, 38 percent in the case of kakkak-uy; and 49 percent in the case of modun N-tul are evidence of right-spreading errors. On average, 41 percent right-spreading errors are found in the sentences of Group 1. The interesting point is that the errors are found consistently in those contexts which have negative responses as their right answers. In the case of modun N-tul, high rates of errors are found in Contexts 4 and 5: 35 percent and 40 percent, and in the case of kakkak-uy, 37 percent errors are found in both Contexts 5 and 6. On average, 24 percent of the answers are “yes” to Sentences 1, 2 and 3 with Contexts 3, 4, 5 and 6, which should yield the negative response “no” as their right answers. These figures can be regarded as evidence of under-exhaustive search in the sense of Freeman and Stedmon (1986). Korean children show higher under-exhaustive search than English children, who show only 10 percent on average. This is also observed in Kang (2000).

250

Hye-Kyung Kang

Very high rates of left-spreading errors are found in the sentences of Group 2. As shown in Table 17.2, on average 70 percent spreading errors are found: 70 percent [(47+80+84)/3] for modun; 68 percent [(70+63+70)/3] for kakkakuy; and 73 percent [(70+79+70)/3] for modun N-tul. That is, the majority of Korean children involved in this task spread the scope of quantifiers to the subject N, kom, as well as the object N they belong to, kkultong. Most of the children involved in the experiment draw attention to kom who is not holding a honey-pot in Context 4, and kom who is holding a bunch of flowers instead of kkultong in Context 5, without regard to the change of the quantifiers in the object position. Moreover, even in the case of Contexts 1, 2 and 6, which have the negative response “no” as the right answer, high rates of erroneous spreading of the quantifiers are observed. An average of 42 percent errors is found: 37 percent [(42+53+16)/3] for modun; 44 percent [(56+57+19)/3] for kakkak-uy; and 45 percent [(37+63+35)/3] for modun N-tul. Korean children tend to spread the scope of quantifiers to both arguments in the sentence without much relation to context. No significant difference was found between the constructions with floated quantifiers and those with quantified NPs. In the case where floated quantifiers quantify the subject NP (the case of the sentences 7 and 8 of Group 3 to Contexts 1 and 2), 49 percent [(50+75+40+33)/4] spreading errors were found. In comparison with the error rate 41 percent from the sentences 1, 2 and 3 which have the quantified NP, modun/kakkak-uy/modun kom(tul), in the subject position, this figure is higher, but not significantly (p=0.75). Further, in the case where floated quantifiers quantify the object NP (the case of the sentence 9 to Contexts 3, 4 and 5), a much higher error rate, 78 percent, was found. Similarly, compared with the error rate 70 percent from sentences 4, 5 and 6, the figure 78 percent is higher than in the case of the quantified NPs, but not significantly (p=0.21). The pattern of error rates between the sentences with floated quantifiers and those with quantified NPs are similar in both right and left spreading, as shown in Table 17.3. That is, Korean children did not make a big difference in their judgement of sentences where there was a change in the position of universal quantifiers. Whether the quantifiers are floated or modifying the noun phrase in front of it, the children still give the same exhaustive interpretation to them, quantifying both arguments in the sentence. Table 17.3. Error rates in the constructions with a floated quantifier and those with a quantifying noun phrase Variations and the sentences involved in brackets

Right spreading (1,2,3) vs. (7,8)

Left spreading (4,5,6) vs. (9)

Q-NP vs. Floated Q

41/49 p=0.75

70/78 p=0.21

Universal quantification in child grammar

251

In conclusion, the majority of Korean children involved in Kang’s (2000) experiment showed a high rate of quantifier spreading both ways, right and left. The overall average rate of spreading is 58 percent: 41 percent right spreading (Sentences 1, 2 and 3); and 71 percent left spreading (Sentences 4, 5 and 6). A very highly significant difference was found between right and left spreading (p .05). Many fall into categories I and IV. Grammaticality Judgment Test (GJT) Native speakers In Table 22.5 all speakers except one person (nearly 100%) fell into category II. This clear distribution in the ‘correctly differential’ category confirms that the experimental design is sensitive to test the linguistic theory.

Table 22.3. Native speaker distribution in the elicited-production test (N=39) (adapted from Kweon, 2001) category I (conservative) 8 (20.51%) category II (correctly differential) 21 (53.85%) category III (backward) 0 (0%) category IV (overgeneralization) 10 (25.64%)

Table 22.4. L2 distribution in the elicited-production test (N =104) (adapted from Kweon, 2001) category I (conservative) 43 (41.3%) category II (correctly differential) 16 (15.4%) category III (backward) 9 (8.7 %) category IV (overgeneralization) 36 (34.6 %)

Table 22.5. Native speaker distribution in the GJT (N =37) (adapted from Kweon, 2001) category I (conservative) 0 (0%) category III (backward) 0 (0%)

category II (correctly differential) 36 (97.30%) category IV (overgeneralization) 1 (2.70%)

314

Soo-Ok Kweon

Table 22.6. L2 distribution in the GJT (N=98) (adapted from Kweon, 2001) category I (conservative) 8 (8.16%) category II (correctly differential) 34 (34.69%) category III (backward) 14 (14.29%) category IV (overgeneralization) 42 (42.86%)

L2 learners Table 22.6 shows that non-native speakers also distinguished between SEQ and OEQ. Compare categories II and III. More people fell into category II than in category III, but the difference was not significant (z = 0.1681, 2-tail, p > .05). However, the greatest number of people fell into category IV. General discussion The overall results of the native speakers conform well to the theoretical predictions. In particular, the grammaticality judgment results confirm the linguistic theory better than do the elicited-production test results. Almost 100 percent of the native speakers were correctly differential, which suggests that the grammar of native speakers permits contraction in OEQ constructions but not in SEQ constructions. It can be said that native speakers are consistent with the UG-based account. In the elicited-production test, native speakers mostly fell into the correctly differential category and none fell into category III, which conforms to the prediction of the linguistics literature. Some of the participants did not distinguish between OEQ and SEQ with respect to contraction, falling into categories I and IV. We are less concerned about the participants in the conservative group (category I), because contraction is, after all, optional. Thus, speakers who fell into category IV, who used contraction without any distinction between environments, will be the focus of our attention. According to the linguistics literature supporting the empty-category account outlined here, ‘liberal dialect’ speakers should not exist at all. Why is it, then, that some native speakers produce the contraction in the impossible environment in contrast to their correct distinction in the grammaticality judgment test? Regarding the existence of the liberal dialect, Pullum (1997) proposed that there are three groups of native speakers regarding the wanna contraction. The first group is governed by the syntactically constrained rule, contracting want to to wanna in the environment where the trace theory of movement rules is satisfied by the syntactic rule. The second group is governed by a low-level phonetic/phonological rule which applies regardless of the syntactic constraints. It is this second group of speakers that falls into category IV. The third group applies both syntactic and phonological rules. Pullum claimed that

Acquisition of wanna contraction

315

there are some native speakers who blindly apply the contraction and said, ‘I claim that liberal dialect speakers are those who permit the phonological rule reducing want to to wanna to apply phrasally. I suspect…. that it applies within an intonational phrase in the sense of Selkirk (1984)’ (p. 85). That the liberal dialect was observed among native speakers in the elicitedproduction test, but not in the grammaticality judgment test, confirms Pullum’s account. In the production test, the phonological rule applied at the intonational phrasal level. According to Pullum’s account, the native speakers in category IV must have been parsing want to in a single intonational phrase, as illustrated in (3), where the phonological reduction is insensitive to the trace: (3)

{Who do you want t to eat the pizza for dinner?} {Who do you want t to eat the pizza}{for dinner?} {Who do you want t to eat}{the pizza for dinner?} → Who do you wanna eat the pizza for dinner?

In the comprehension test, however, where the phonological production was not involved, syntactic constraints overrode the phonological rule. In general, we can say that native speakers are sensitive to the syntactic constraints on the wanna contraction, but a certain number of native speakers, insensitive to the syntaxfocused constraints, rely only on a purely phonological rule (the second group in Pullum’s account), falling into category IV. In summary, native speakers do have knowledge of the constraints on the wanna contraction, consistent with the UG explanation, and the people in category IV provide evidence for the liberal dialect among native speakers as suggested in the published linguistic literature. Learners show a rather different picture from native speakers. To consider the grammaticality judgment test results first, while nearly 100 percent of the native speakers were correctly differential, the majority of learners did not distinguish between OEQ and SEQ, falling into the liberal category. Some learners distinguished between different types of wh-questions, but the number in correctly differential and backward categories was not significantly different. A striking difference between native speakers and L2 learners was that there were no native speakers in the backward category, while there were some L2 learners. On the other hand, in the elicited-production test, the distinction between native speakers and learners is murkier than in the grammaticality judgment test. Native speakers and learners did not distinguish between OEQ and SEQ, though the proportion of learners in categories I and IV is higher than that of native speakers. In the distinguishing categories (II and III), the proportion of native speakers in category II was higher than that of learners. Not surprisingly, no native speakers were in the backward category, though some learners were. The negligible existence of backward learners provides evidence that learners’ grammar is not a completely ‘wild’ grammar, since the L2 input is the restricting source for building the learners’ interlanguage grammar.

316

Soo-Ok Kweon

Based on the L2 learner distribution, we can posit three questions. 1) Why are there many who never contract? 2) Why are there many who always contract? 3) Why are there some who are correctly differential? It is possible that there are two kinds of learners. One group is not aware of the structural difference between OEQ and SEQ, thus, contraction may occur in all conditions (liberal) or not at all (conservative) in their production, depending on which pattern they prefer. This group can be referred to as ‘insensitive.’ The other group differentiates the structural differences with respect to the contraction possibility. Learners in this group can be referred to as ‘sensitive.’ To put it differently, learners whose behavior patterns fit questions 1) and 2) can be identified as ‘insensitive’ speakers, while learners who correspond to question 3) can be called ‘sensitive’ speakers. At this time, it is not necessary to worry about the learners who fit the first question, and the existence of learners (especially in the grammaticality judgment test) who fit the second question can provide evidence for the assumption that the underlying system of learners may not have the same source as that of native speakers (cf. Kweon, 2000). It is problematic that only a small proportion of learners (rather than all) were correctly differential, considering the operation of UG or the presence of positive evidence from the available input. It is possible to explain the existence of correctly differential learners in terms of learner variability (cf. Bley-Vroman and Kweon, 2002 for more explanation of this idea). One may hear a contracted version of OEQ structures in the input, but no contracted version of SEQ structures, because they do not occur in English. Depending heavily on their exposure to the L2 input, learners might produce and comprehend contraction in OEQ structures, rather than explicitly avoiding contraction in SEQ structures, mainly because they have never heard of it. It has been argued that learners’ ability to recognize patterns plays a crucial role in SLA (Bley-Vroman, 1996, 1997). Non-parameter-setting accounts, such as the Fundamental Difference Hypothesis (Bley-Vroman, 1990) propose that the central cognitive system (a system different from the language module) accumulates structural patterns noticed by learners, from which it infers possible/impossible patterns in L2. This view implies that there will be individual variation to a degree in noticing structures in the input. Some learners may be more sensitive, hence, more successful in noticing the structural difference than others. This assumption, based on learner variability, indicates that some learners are correctly differential and others are not with respect to the wanna contraction. In addition to the wide individual variability expected, Bley-Vroman’s (1996) conservative pattern accumulation theory predicts that the interlanguage representations of learners can become ‘arbitrarily close to weak equivalence’ with the L2, but native grammars are never achieved.

Acquisition of wanna contraction

317

It is also possible to incorporate some of the insight of lexicalization accounts suggested by Bolinger (1980, 1981) and Pullum (1997). It is conceivable that wanna is perceived as an independent word and becomes lexicalized in the learners’ grammar (possibly in the native speakers’ grammar as well). Maybe the correctly differential learners have simply noticed that wanna behaves like an auxiliary, occurring only with bare-infinitive VPs (the subcategorization rule of a lexicalized wanna will be WANNA: __ V). Learners who subcategorize wanna as an auxiliary that takes a bare VP cannot create a subject extractionquestion with wanna. Thus, they may reject *Who do you wanna see the doctor? just because they reject * I wanna Mary see the doctor. The subcategorization of wanna as an auxiliary leads one eventually to contract in OEQ, but not contract in SEQ, which shows the convergent results as might be derived by UG. Conclusion The central goal of the current study was to investigate whether native English speakers and adult L2 learners will distinguish between the two types of whquestions, OEQ and SEQ, with respect to constraints on the wanna contraction. Using two experimental methods, the results show that native speakers do have knowledge of the constraints on wanna contraction, consistent with the UG explanation. Learners show a picture that is different from that of native speakers, suggesting that their knowledge is much less certain than that of native speakers, so the representations of learners may become close to the native grammar, but not identical to it.

23

Phonological abilities of Korean–English bilinguals Grace H. Yeni-Komshian*

Introduction The information reviewed in this paper is about Korean-English bilinguals; specifically it is about native Koreans who emigrated to the US at different ages. The findings to be reported are colored by the fact that at the time of testing for the main study the participants were long-term residents of the US living in communities in and around the Washington, DC area. The participants lived with their families and spoke Korean at home and Korean was their only language during their preschool years; however, the language environment outside their homes was predominantly English. In studying bilingualism and evaluating the achievement of bilingual individuals it is important to recognize the linguistic make-up of the country of residence. Studies carried out in other linguistic environments may very well produce different results from those reported here. Theories of first (L1) and second (L2) language acquisition invariably get embroiled in the issue of the Critical or Sensitive Period Hypothesis (CPH). Advocates of the CPH use age of learning as the primary index of the individuals’ neural maturational state and do not worry much about the effects of experiential factors that co-vary with age. The majority of studies of L2 pronunciation carried out in the US with immigrant populations show an age of learning effect that favors early L2 learners (Asher & Garcia, 1969; Fathman, 1975; Oyama, 1976; Tahta, Wood & Lowenthal, 1981b; Patkowski, 1990, 1994; Flege, Munro & MacKay, 1995; Flege, Yeni-Komshian & Liu, 1999; Yeni-Komshian, Flege & Liu, 2000; see also research reviewed by Scovel, 1988; Long, 1990; Harley & Wang, 1997, and Birdsong, 1999). The age effect seen in these studies does not necessarily support or refute the CPH because it is often confounded with variables that have an impact on language learning (Bialystok, 1997; Bialystok & Hakuta, 1994, 1999; Bialystok & Miller, 1999; * Funding for this work was in part provided by the National Institute for Deafness and other Communicative Disorders (DC02892).

318

Phonological abilities of Korean–English bilinguals

319

Flege, 1999). In most L2 studies with immigrants, years of schooling in the birth country, years of schooling in the host country, and years of residence in the host country are common confounding variables. In this paper research pertinent to the CPH and its opposing views (Flege, 1999) will not be discussed, instead the reader is referred to recent publications (Flege, Yeni-Komshian & Liu, 1999; Yeni-Komshian, Flege & Liu, 2000) that have dealt with this subject matter. This paper will concentrate on factors that lead to achievement in both L1 and L2 and on methodological issues when pertinent. In testing the phonological abilities in L2 learners, researchers have used a variety of measures ranging from global to specific aspects of pronunciation. Much of the work presented in this paper will be based on global measures of pronunciation proficiency. The techniques used involve rating scales and a specific adaptation of information obtained from transcriptions. General description of the main study This study was extensive in scope. It included a large sample of Korean–English bilinguals who were carefully selected on the basis of a number of variables. The participants were 240 Korean–English bilinguals who had emigrated to the US between the ages of 1 and 23. They all had Korean as their first language (L1) and learned English as their second language (L2). They were selected on the basis of their age of arrival (AOA) in the US. At the time this study was designed, AOA was viewed as an index of age of L2 learning. AOA was used to classify participants into groups to examine L1 as well as L2 pronunciation in bilinguals who had lived in the US for at least eight consecutive years. As will be seen below, our analysis indicated that AOA is not a one-dimensional measure of age of L2 learning; AOA was very closely related to other variables such as years of schooling in the US as well as in Korea. This project was the first large-scale study in which pronunciation proficiency in both L1 and L2 was evaluated directly. The reader is directed to several publications for details about this work (Flege, Yeni-Komshian & Liu, 1999; Yeni-Komshian, Flege & Liu, 2000; Yeni-Komshian, Robbins & Flege, 2001). The 240 Korean bilingual (KB) participants were placed into one of 10 subgroups consisting of 12 males and 12 females. Each group had approximately a two-year AOA range. See the first two left-hand columns of Table 23.1. For example, the 24 participants in group KB3 had an AOA range of 1–3 years and an average AOA of about 3 years. The selection criteria included the following additional specifications for the KB participants: that they spoke only Korean and English, had resided in the US for at least eight consecutive years prior to testing, had completed high school in either Korea or the US, and reported having no hearing or speech problems. To be accepted as a bilingual, the participants had to demonstrate a working knowledge of both of

320

Grace H. Yeni-Komshian

Table 23.1. Group descriptions and labels, English and Korean pronunciation ratings expressed in z-scores (standard deviation), and language differences within each group AOA range Group label YSK

Language Korean pronunciation English pronunciation differences

1–3 4–5 6–7 8–9 10–11 12–13 14–15 16–17 18–19 21–23

−1.359 (.67) −1.216 (.70) −1.093 (.67) .047 (.68) .323 (.57) .631 (.47 ) .685 (.48 ) .576 (.50) .767 (.43) .640 (.45)

KB3 KB5 KB7 KB9 KB11 KB13 KB15 KB17 KB19 KB21

0.5 (0.7) 2.3 (0.9) 4.4 (0.8) 6.2 (0.9) 8.1 (0.7) 10.0 (0.9) 11.6 (1.0) 13.4 (1.9)

1.196 (.39) 1.129 (.30) .864 (.47) .571 (.54) .179 (.60) −.196 (.65) −.770 (.53) −.776 (.47) −.997 (.54) −1.201 (.53)

E>K E>K E>K E>K K=E K>E K>E K>E K>E K>E

AOA = Age of arrival in years; KB3 … KB21 = Korean bilingual groups, the number next to each KB group is the average AOA for that group; YSK = years of schooling in Korea

their languages. They had to be able to produce words and sentences in both Korean and English. Twenty-six Korean Americans were not included in the main study because they did not meet our minimal requirements for performance on the Korean tasks. All the participants had emigrated with their families and resided in the greater Washington, DC area. At the time of testing, almost all were university students (average Junior year). They were living with their families and reported speaking Korean at home (mostly the Seoul dialect). The participants in the ten KB groups were young adults (ages 21–34 years), did not differ significantly in their educational attainment in US schools, and had lived in the US for an average of thirteen years (range 8–25). In many of the analyses the bilinguals were compared to two groups of monolinguals, twenty-four Koreans (university students in Seoul) and twenty-four English (university students in the US). As stated earlier, a primary variable was AOA and analyses showed that AOA was significantly correlated with a number of background factors. There were three factors, however, that correlated very highly with AOA. These were the age at which the participants reported they could first speak English comfortably (r (238) = 0.96), the years of study in Korean schools (r (238) = 0.97), and the years of schooling in the US (r (238) = −.92). These correlations were too high to be corrected with co-variance analysis. Although AOA was used as the representative of these variables, it should be viewed as a multifaceted factor (for further explanations see Yeni-Komshian et al., 2000). It is very important for the reader to understand that AOA is not simply an index of

Phonological abilities of Korean–English bilinguals

321

how old the participants were when they came to the US or the age at which they felt comfortable speaking English; AOA is also an index of the number of years of schooling in Korea, which was highly negatively correlated with the number of years of schooling in the US. The participants were interviewed individually by Korean–English bilingual testers and were asked questions concerning their schooling and language experience in Korea and the US. They also rated their own abilities in their two languages, provided information about their language use in Korean and in English, and responded to questions about their motivation to learn their two languages. Following this, they participated in tests designed to elicit words and sentences in English and Korean. Five sentences from each language produced by each participant were selected to develop the material for the pronunciation rating tests. The procedures used to obtain pronunciation ratings for Korean and English were very similar. Native monolingual listeners in each language were instructed in using a computer-driven system in which they selected a number on a 9-point rating scale that best reflected their judgment regarding how each sentence was pronounced. The endpoint labels of the Korean scale were: ‘very good pronunciation’ (number 9) and ‘very poor pronunciation’ (number 1); and the endpoints of the English scale were ‘no accent’ (number 9) and ‘very strong accent’ (number 1). Literal translations of endpoints were not used, because the word ‘accent’ also means ‘dialect’ in Korean. The Korean listeners were informed that the vast majority of the participants spoke the Seoul dialect and that there were few who spoke other dialects. The written and oral instructions for the Korean listeners emphasized the point that their task was to rate pronunciation in terms of any native speaker of Korean and not to judge the sentences on the basis of regional dialects. The English listeners understood that ‘no accent’ was a rating given to those who sounded native in English. Korean pronunciation There was a significant correlation (r (238) = .74) between Korean pronunciation ratings and AOA indicating that the older the participants were when they emigrated to the US the better was their Korean pronunciation. The linear correlation between AOA and Korean pronunciation accounted for 54% of the variance, and polynomial regression analyses revealed a significant second order (quadratic) function which increased the variance explained by 9% up to 63%. The non-linearity was at about an AOA of 12–13 years and continued to the oldest AOA group and the Korean monolingual group. Group comparisons indicated that the lowest pronunciation ratings were given to the three KB groups representing the youngest immigrants (KB3, KB5 & KB7). These three groups (AOA 1–7) had significantly lower ratings

322

Grace H. Yeni-Komshian

than all other groups. At the other end of the AOA range the results showed that four of the KB groups (AOA 12–23) were given pronunciation ratings that were not significantly different from monolingual Koreans. The pronunciation ratings of the remaining three KB groups (KB9, KB11 & KB17) were lower than the monolingual Koreans and partially overlapped with the older AOA groups. The analysis also indicated no significant gender or interaction effects. To summarize, the Korean pronunciation of the majority of immigrants who came to the US at age 12 or later was rated at the same level as Korean monolinguals residing in Seoul. Thus, for these relatively older immigrants, their pronunciation in Korean was rated native-like, and years of residence in the US did not alter their Korean pronunciation. In contrast, the younger immigrants (AOA 1–11) were rated significantly lower than the Korean monolinguals and the lowest scores were mostly for those whose AOA ranged from 1 to 7 years. Other analyses showed that increased use of Korean contributed significantly to improved pronunciation; however, the amount of English use and years of residence in the US had no effect on Korean pronunciation. English pronunciation The correlation between AOA and English pronunciation was also significant (r (238) = −.85) revealing the expected finding that the younger the participants were when they emigrated to the US the better was their English pronunciation. The linear correlation between AOA and pronunciation accounted for 73% of the variance and polynomial regression analysis indicated a significant third order (cubic) function accounting for an additional 2% of the variance (75%). The areas of non-linearity were at the beginning (AOA 1–5) and at the end (AOA 14–23) of the AOA distribution. Group comparisons indicated that all bilingual KB groups were significantly different from the monolingual English group. That is, even the participants in the youngest AOA group, who got the highest pronunciation ratings, were statistically distinguishable from the monolingual English group. Only 17 out of the 240 bilinguals (7%) were rated within the range of scores given to English monolinguals. These 17 bilinguals had AOAs between 1 and 8 years. Multiple group comparisons reveal that the pronunciation scores of the ten KB groups drop with increasing AOA and tend to cluster into several groups. The participants in the youngest two KB groups (AOA 1–5) had higher pronunciation scores (closer to native English) than the next two KB groups (AOA 6–9); they in turn were better than the next two KB groups (AOA 10–13). The last set of four KB groups (AOA 14–23) did not differ from each other and had significantly lower pronunciation scores than all the other groups.

Phonological abilities of Korean–English bilinguals

323

The results also showed a gender effect, but the interaction was not significant. The significant gender effect indicated that overall, females had better English pronunciation than males. This finding is similar to what has been reported in some other L2 studies (e.g. Asher and Garcia, 1969; Tahta et al., 1981b). To summarize, the bilinguals who had emigrated to the US at a very young age (AOA 1–5) had relatively high pronunciation rating scores in English, but as a group they were distinguishable from monolingual English speakers. With increasing AOA (6–13) there was a steady reduction in English pronunciation scores, indicating heavier foreign accents. The rate at which accents became stronger was diminished for those whose AOA was more than about 14 years. In addition to AOA effects, frequent use of English and more total years of schooling were associated with increased proficiency in English pronunciation, and increased use of Korean tended to lower it; however, length of residence in the host country had no effect. Relative pronunciation proficiency in Korean and English In this section results based on a comparison between the participants’ pronunciation in their two languages are presented. To allow for direct comparison the Korean and English pronunciation scores were transformed to z-scores. The average z-scores for the 10 KB groups for Korean and English are shown in Table 23.1. Negative numbers indicate below-groupaverage scores and positive numbers reflect above-group-average scores. The correlation between Korean and English pronunciation was negative (r (238) = −.65) and highly significant. This indicated that for most KB participants L1 and L2 pronunciation scores were inversely related. This general picture is supported by the finding that in nine out of the ten KB groups differences in pronunciation scores for the two languages were significant. The only group that did not show a significant difference in pronunciation was KB11 (AOA 10–11). The ratings for this group of participants were about half a standard deviation above average in both of their languages. Analysis of language differences indicated that for the youngest four KB groups (AOA 1–9), English pronunciation scores were significantly higher than Korean scores. The reverse pattern, Korean significantly better than English, was seen in the oldest five AOA groups (AOA 12–23). Note that they (AOA 12–23) were the participants whose Korean pronunciation was at the same level as Korean monolinguals. In summary, in nine out of ten KB groups, pronunciation was better in either L1 or in L2 and it was equal only in the KB11 group (AOA 10–11). There was a negative relationship between L1 and L2 pronunciation scores.

324

Grace H. Yeni-Komshian

Table 23.2. Pronunciation scores, background characteristics and self ratings of language use and pronunciation abilities for three types of bilingual groups (standard deviations)

Korean pron English pron AOA ASEC YSK YSU LOR Korean use English use Korean abil English abil

(1) Korean-dominant

(2) English-dominant

(3) Balanced

Group differences

0.73 (0.39) −0.90 (0.49) 16.94 (3.49) 19.14 (4.26) 9.73 (3.10) 6.67 (2.74) 12.72 (4.51) 3.72 (0.58) 3.52 (0.62) 4.54 (0.72) 3.14 (0.85)

−1.12 (0.66) 1.02 (0.40) 5.89 (2.53) 7.43 (2.17) 0.66 (1.23) 14.87 (1.79) 17.28 (3.60) 2.50 (0.54) 4.45 (0.42) 2.64 (1.03) 4.68 (0.52)

0.65 (0.37) 0.55 (0.41) 11.10 (3.35) 12.10 (3.31) 4.57 (2.81) 11.57 (3.02) 13.95 (4.15) 3.17 (0.60) 3.89 (0.62) 4.06 (0.86) 4.11 (0.75)

1=3>2 2>3>1 1>3>2 1>3>2 1>3>2 2>3>1 2>3=1 1>3=2 2>3=1 1>3>2 2>3>1

Korean pron = Korean pronunciation in z-scores; English pron = English pronunciation in z-scores; AOA = Age of Arrival; ASEC = age of speaking English comfortably; YSK = years of schooling in Korea; YSU = years of schooling in the US; LOR = years of residence in the US; Korean use = based on average of Korean-use questions; English use = based on average of English-use questions; Korean abil = self rating of Korean pronunciation ability; English abil = self rating of English pronunciation ability.

Patterns of relative proficiency in L1 and L2 The z-scores in L1 and L2 pronunciation were used to assign the 240 participants to one of four groups on the basis of their relative proficiency in L1 and L2 pronunciation. The groups with the largest number of cases (n = 104; 43%) consisted of participants who scored below the mean in English and above the mean in Korean. For ease of communication they will be referred to as the Korean-dominant group. The next group in terms of size (n = 83; 35%) had the opposite pattern, they were above the mean in English and below the mean in Korean. They will be referred to as the Englishdominant group. Next, in size (n = 37; 15%) were the participants who were above the mean in both Korean and in English. They will be referred to as the balanced group. Finally, a small number (n = 16; 7%) of participants scored below the mean in both Korean and in English, they may be inherently poor language learners and will not be discussed further (for more details see YeniKomshian et al., 2000). A summary of the characteristics of these three groups of participants is shown in Table 23.2 and the pattern of group differences is shown in the right hand column. An interesting finding regarding Korean pronunciation proficiency is that the balanced group was at the same level as the Korean-dominant

Phonological abilities of Korean–English bilinguals

325

group. The rest of the differences in the pronunciation scores were expected because of the selection procedure used to form these three groups. Looking at the background information about these three groups of participants, it can be seen that the Korean-dominant group was about 17 years old when they came to the US, and reported that they were 19 years old when they first began to speak English comfortably; they had completed 10 years of schooling in Korea and seven years of schooling in the US. They had resided in the US for about 13 years; they reported using Korean more frequently than the other groups and their level of English use was at the same level as the balanced group. Using a 5-point self rating scale of pronunciation abilities in Korean and in English, they rated themselves as being better in Korean than in English. The profile of the English-dominant group was quite different, and as the pattern of group differences shows, they were significantly different from the Korean-dominant group on all the variables listed in Table 23.2. In contrast to the Korean-dominant group, participants in the English-dominant group were about 6 years old when they came to the US, were about 7 years old when they first felt comfortable speaking English, had hardly had any schooling in Korea, and had 15 years of schooling in the US. They had resided in the US for about 17 years. Their reported use of English was the highest among the groups and their reported use of Korean was the lowest. They rated themselves as much better in English than in Korean pronunciation. The pattern of group differences consistently shows that the balanced group was in the middle between the two extremes set by the Korean-dominant and English-dominant groups. The background characteristics of the balanced group showed that they were about 11 years old when they emigrated to the US, and by the age of 12 years they felt comfortable speaking English. They had 5 years of schooling in Korea and 12 years of schooling in the US. They had resided in the US for about 14 years. They reported intermediate use of both Korean and English in their daily activities, and rated themselves as being equally good in Korean and English pronunciation. The three groups did not differ in their views regarding the importance of learning Korean and English or their motivation to learn both languages. The responses of all participants showed high motivation and indicated that they thought it was very important for them to learn both languages. Conclusions derived from the main study Very good English pronunciation was associated with young immigrants who had a lot of years of schooling in the US, used English a lot, and had very little schooling in Korea; however, the price for this was low proficiency in Korean pronunciation. Very good Korean pronunciation was associated with older

326

Grace H. Yeni-Komshian

immigrants who had a lot of schooling in Korea and some schooling in the US; however, their English pronunciation was accented. Above-average pronunciation in both Korean and in English was associated with AOAs that ranged mostly between 8 and 14 years (average 11 years). This gave the participants some important years of schooling in Korea and at the same time they were young enough when they came to the US to benefit maximally from the years they spent in US schools. Their linguistic skills were such that their pronunciation in Korean was not different from the Korean-dominant group and they were proficient enough in English to spend considerable time speaking English in their daily activities. The findings from the main study also reveal that, at least for this group of participants, it is highly unlikely that a bilingual would pass for native in both languages. At this point it is important to distinguish between being fluent in both languages (e.g. the participants in the balanced group) and sounding native in both languages. In our sample of 240 bilinguals there was only one participant (female, AOA = 5) whose pronunciation scores were within the range of scores for both the Korean and English monolinguals. Length of residence (LOR) effects on English pronunciation In the main study described above, the number of years of residence in the US showed minimal effects on pronunciation proficiency. Since all participants had resided in the US for at least eight years prior to testing, it was argued that years of residence would not have a big impact past eight years. In a separate study, the effect of LOR over a span of the first eight years of residence in the US was examined. There were forty participants in this study, three native Korean groups and one monolingual English control group. There were ten participants (five males and five females) in each group. At the time of testing all participants were university students and were on average 26 years old. The participants in the native Korean groups had come to the US as adults; their AOA ranged from 16 to 39 years (mean = 26, sd = 6.9). They were students who had passed the English language requirements for admission. Their proficiency in Korean was very high and English was their weaker second language. These participants were placed into three LOR groups: The 1-year LOR group had resided in the US for an average of 15 months (range: 11–19 months); the 4-year LOR group had resided for an average of 49 months (range: 46–53 months); and the 8-year LOR group had resided for an average of 103 months (range 90–109 months). The participants in the three LOR groups reported that they began to learn English in Korea at about age 12. Their years of schooling in Korea ranged from 11 to 15 years, with the 8-year LOR group having significantly fewer years of

Phonological abilities of Korean–English bilinguals

327

schooling in Korea than the other two groups. In addition, the AOA of the 1-year group (AOA = 26, sd = 7) was significantly higher than the AOA of the 8-year group (AOA = 17, sd = 2); the average AOAs of the 4-year group did not differ from the other two LOR groups, it was 23 (sd = 9) years. That is, the age of emigration to the US of the participants in the 1-year group was significantly higher than those in the 8-year group, and the participants in the 4-year group were in the middle. The subjects in this LOR study were administered the same tests used in the main study described above. The material used for pronunciation ratings in this study were six English sentences which were digitized and stored in forty blocks, one for each participant. The order in which the six sentences appeared within each block was random. In addition, four separate randomizations of the forty blocks were prepared creating four different forms of the listening task. There were eight native English listeners who were similar in age and educational attainment to the native Korean participants. The task of the listeners was different from that used in the main study described above. Rather than rating one sentence at a time, the listeners listened to the six sentences before they made their judgment on the rating scale. They used an 11-point scale; the endpoint labels of the scale were ‘native’ (number 10) and ‘extremely accented’ (zero). The listeners were encouraged to use the whole scale and were administered all the tests in one session. They indicated their responses on prepared answer sheets. The first run was used as a means of introducing the raters to the full range of accents that were being judged. Analysis of the remaining three runs indicated that all the LOR groups had pronunciation ratings that were significantly lower than the native English controls. The analysis also showed that the 8-year LOR group had significantly higher scores (closer to native-like) than the 1-year and 4-year LOR groups. The 1-year and 4-year LOR groups did not differ from each other. These findings were not changed with additional analyses that co-varied on AOA. The pronunciation mean and standard deviation for the 1-year LOR group was 3.94 (sd = 0.59), for the 4-year LOR it was 4.53 (sd = 1.49), and for the 8-year LOR it was 6.02 (sd = 3.88). The group mean for the English controls was 9.90 (sd = 0.09). The effect of individual differences, as revealed by the standard deviations, suggests that the participants in the 1-year LOR group were uniformly rated as having a heavy accent. The range of pronunciation proficiency widened as LOR increased revealing greater individual differences in pronunciation ability over time. These results indicate that during the first four years of residency in the US, although English pronunciation improves it does not change significantly. It is with an additional four years of residence that the improvement in pronunciation reaches significance. This rate of improvement might appear slow to some, but it should be recalled that the participants were adults when they

328

Grace H. Yeni-Komshian

emigrated to the US. Thus the findings are relevant to a group of individuals who are usually described as late L2 learners. It is very likely that early L2 learners would show significant improvements in pronunciation with fewer years of residence in the US. Word class differences and English pronunciation accuracy A third study examined English pronunciation at the segmental level. In this study effects of word class (nouns versus verbs) and age of L2 learning were examined (Yeni-Komshian, Robbins & Flege, 2001). The participants in this study were a sub-set of the large group described in Table 23.1 above. The 192 participants in groups KB7 to KB21 were included in the study. The other 48 participants (KB3 and KB5) were not included because the English sentences they produced did not have segmental errors. Information concerning mispronounced phonetic segments was gathered from transcriptions of the twenty-one English sentences produced by each participant. Four native speakers of American English who were trained in phonetics transcribed the sentences. The transcribers were provided with a sheet that listed the 21 sentences which consisted of 168 words (67 function words and 101 content words). They were instructed to mark on each word the phonetic segment that they perceived was produced differently from native American English pronunciation. The sentences of each participant were transcribed independently by two transcribers. Extracting reliable information from transcriptions is problematic to say the least. Given this large corpus of data (168 words produced by 192 participants) a decision was made to limit the analysis to the initial consonants and the following vowels of the content words in the corpus. The information from the transcriptions was further adapted and simplified in that a record was kept if the initial consonants and vowels were produced correctly (acceptable as native productions of English) or in error (deviating from native pronunciation). The method used for reliability estimation was to examine whether the initial consonant and the following vowel of each word were marked as correct or in error by the two transcribers. Word-by-word comparisons were made of the 168 words for each participant and a record was made to indicate whether the two transcribers agreed in their markings. The level of agreement between the two transcribers for each of the eight KB groups was 90% or better. For initial consonant segments, agreement across the KB groups ranged from 92% to 98%, and for the following vowel segments, agreement ranged from 90% to 100%. The transcription of one member in the pair of transcribers was selected randomly for further analysis. Two word lists were prepared that contained nouns and verbs which were matched for frequency of occurrence in English. One list was matched for initial

Phonological abilities of Korean–English bilinguals

329

consonants and the other list was matched for the following vowel. (See Appendix 2 in Yeni-Komshian, et al., 2001 for details.) The findings showed that segmental phonemes in verbs were pronounced more accurately than in nouns. This effect was stronger in vowel than in consonant pronunciation. Better pronunciation in verbs than in nouns was significant for KB groups 13 to 21 (AOA = 12–23); for the younger AOA groups this difference was not significant. The results of this study provide a first demonstration of a link between pronunciation accuracy and the lexicon. These same participants were also more likely to detect grammatical errors when the error was in a verb construction (third person singular) than in a noun construction (plural). The interpretation of these findings focuses on the structure of Korean, where the verb is prominent. Developmental studies of maternal input have shown that Korean-speaking mothers used more verbs than nouns in speaking to their children and talked more about action than English-speaking mothers (S. Choi & Gopnik, 1995), or they provided a balanced treatment of nouns and verbs in speech addressed to their children (S. Choi, 2000). This difference in maternal input has been associated with differences in the early vocabulary of English- and Korean-speaking children. Korean-speaking children acquire verbs earlier than English-speaking children, and they appear to have a verb spurt about a month before their first noun spurt (S. Choi, 1998a). It is possible to extend this finding to suggest that Korean-speaking children devote more attention to verbs than nouns (whereas English-speaking children focus more on nouns than verbs). We hypothesize that at an early stage of language development, when word class categories are established, the structure of the input language influences the hierarchy of accessibility. If this is true, then native Korean speakers would establish, from an early age, a mental lexicon in which verbs are stored differently from nouns and are more accessible than nouns. This mental set would then be carried over and strengthened into adulthood and would later influence the way in which an L2 is learned. For Korean speakers learning English as an L2 , it would mean that their mental set would lead them to focus more on verbs than nouns, which would result in better phonological and morpho-syntactic control over verbs than nouns. It is hoped that future research will replicate these preliminary findings relating pronunciation with word-class distinctions. Directions for future research One very interesting question to investigate is whether Korean American children whose first language is Korean experience L1 improvement, L1 attrition, or just do not develop past levels appropriate for preschoolers. First it is

330

Grace H. Yeni-Komshian

important to compare whether L1 acquisition in Korea is different from L1 acquisition of Korean American preschoolers living in the US. Such a study would cover the course of L1 development during the first four to five years of life in monolingual children in Korea and the US. Following this, it would be very important to conduct a longitudinal study of the Korean American children as they get immersed in an English-speaking environment in US schools. This approach would answer the question of whether Korean American children are undergoing L1 improvement, L1 attrition, or L1 fossilization. This type of study can of course be done in all aspects of language (phonology, lexicon, syntax) to find out if certain aspects of language are more resistant to interference from L2 (English).

24

Parameters on languages in contact: an altered view of codeswitching Keumsil Kim Yoon

Introduction It has been widely observed that when bilinguals converse with each other, they consciously or subconsciously engage in codeswitching, defined here broadly as an alternation of two languages within the same sentence/utterance or across sentences. It is a highly sophisticated process, capable of linguistic description, and also understandable in social and psychological terms. For several decades, this phenomenon has been extensively studied from diverse linguistic perspectives. Micro-sociolinguistic studies have investigated the social function of switching by examining the whole conversation in one context (e.g. Scotton & Ury, 1977), and by viewing switches of all types that occur within a conversation as ways of realizing various conversational strategies (e.g. Gumperz, 1982a). Macro-level studies have analyzed switches as whole discourses in relation to societal motivations and demographic variables (e.g. Poplack, 1988), and dynamics of community intergroup relations (e.g. Wei, 1994). Morpho-syntactic studies (e.g. Mahootian & Santorini, 1996) have sought universal rules which govern switching within a single sentence. From a psycholinguistic perspective, considerable investigation has been undertaken and has focused on the following issues and questions: the adaptation by a bilingual of a language as a ‘base’ language into which another language is brought (Joshi, 1985); the ways in which switching patterns are associated with language dominance (Notier, 1989); how soon and how well the listener can tell that a language switch has taken place (Grojean and Soares, 1986; Grojean, 1988); what psycholinguistic factors constrain the auditory recognition of codeswitched words, and how the various factors interact in the recognition process (Li, 1996); the ways in which the language system of a bilingual is organized into two subsets, and how these two subsets are activated selectively or simultaneously (Grojean, 1997); the extent to which the bilingual switching pattern is similar to the processing units of monolinguals (Azuma, 1996); whether the codeswitching of young children obeys the same structural 331

332

Keumsil Kim Yoon

constraints as that of bilingual adults (Paradis, Nicoladis & Genesee, 2000). Moreover, with respect to aphasia, researchers have investigated the similarities and differences in the codeswitching behavior of aphasic and neurologically normal bilingual speakers to determine the level of dual language dependence (Munoz, Marquardt & Copeland, 1999). All of these divergent studies have offered a rich characterization of codeswitching (CS), and made clear that the main reason for CS is not a lack of sufficient language proficiency, as assumed by some people, and that the selection of words in CS is not random. Furthermore, CS research has enhanced our understanding of societal patterns, conversational intricacies, and language processing and acquisition. The goal of this paper is to provide a more conceivable characterization of intrasentential codeswitching (defined as switching within a single sentence/ utterance) from a psycholinguistic perspective. It addresses a recurrent issue in the conceptualization of the interplay of rules from two languages in CS production. Morpho-syntactic properties of Korean–English CS will be examined in the light of frequently cited theoretical constructs in CS studies. The paper will then tackle two related questions: (i) are there ‘language-specific features’ that could easily trigger codeswitching? (ii) does ‘language dominance’ play a role in determining points of switching? Morpho-syntactic properties In the 1970s, researchers (Gumperz & Hernandez-Chavez, 1975; Pfaff, 1979) began to acknowledge that switching takes place often even within single sentences, and questioned where in a sentence a speaker can change languages. Much work was directed toward finding evidence of non-arbitrariness in the morpho-syntactic aspect of CS, and tried to identify the rules which govern switching at particular junctures. A number of theoretical constructs on the predictability of switching points have been proposed. The constructs which have received most attention in the field are (i) the equivalence constraint (Poplack, 1980; Sankoff & Poplack, 1981), (ii) the free morpheme constraint (Poplack, 1980; Sankoff & Poplack, 1981), (iii) the matrix language approach (Joshi, 1985; Myers-Scotton, 1993), and (iv) the government approach (Belazi, Rubin & Toribio, 1994; Di Sciullo, Muysken & Singh, 1986; Mahootian & Santorini, 1996). The following section of this paper will make use of each construct to reexamine morpho-syntactic properties of Korean–English CS which were discussed in previous studies. Three studies (J.-E. Park, 1990; J.-O. Choi, 1991; K. K. Yoon, 1992) are chosen for re-examination because each deals with a rich corpus and, more importantly, represents a different group of bilinguals. While the subjects of the three studies were fluent bilinguals, they were different in terms

Languages in contact: codeswitching

333

of age and speech community. Park’s subjects were college students in the age range of 21–33 years who came to the US after they acquired the Korean language; the length of US stay varied from 4–15 years. Choi’s subjects were young children of immigrants aged 5–7 at the beginning of data collection, and 7–9 years at the end. Yoon’s subjects were professional immigrants between the ages of 40 and 55 who had lived in the US more than 15 years; most of them had graduate study or professional training in the US. Although this paper focuses on these three studies, two other studies on Korean–English languages in contact (Yoon, 1996; Shin, 2002) will be referred to as needed. The equivalence constraint (EC) CS researchers have noticed that fluent bilinguals do not codeswitch at random, but subconsciously follow certain rules and constraints, which do not violate the syntax of either language. For example, in English the adjective always precedes the noun, whereas in French, it always follows the noun. Thus the word order in English for noun phrases would be Article-Adjective-Noun (e.g. an American novel) whereas the French order would be Article-NounAdjective (e.g. un roman americain). It would be possible for a bilingual to codeswitch and say ‘J’ai lu an American novel’ (I’ve read an American novel) but not ‘J’ai lu an American roman’ since the latter would violate the French word order (Grojean, 1982). Sankoff and Poplack (1981), studying Spanish–English codeswitching among the Puerto Ricans in New York City, defined this as the ‘equivalence constraint (EC),’ which states that ‘the order of sentence constituents immediately adjacent to and on both sides of the switch points must be grammatical with respect to both languages involved simultaneously’ (p. 5). An example taken from Poplack (1980) will clarify this constraint as in (1); the straight line (|) indicates the permissible switching points, and X means non-permissible points due to distinct word order. CS is a speaker’s actual utterance. (1)

English: I | told him | that | so that |he |would bring it |fast. :| X |: | : |:| X | : Spanish.(Yo)| le dije | eso | pa’ que |(el) | la trajera | ligero CS I told him that PA’QUE LA TRAJERA LIGERO

The EC predicts that codeswitches will tend to occur at points where the combined elements from the two languages will not violate a syntactic rule of either language. However, numerous studies of typologically distinct languages (e.g. Berk-Seligson, 1986; Joshi, 1985; Nishimura, 1986) have questioned this assumption. Berk-Seligson (1986) argues that the constraint’s claim to universal validity is ‘largely a function of the coincidental relative similarity in the syntactic structure of Spanish and English’ (p. 313).

334

Keumsil Kim Yoon

Considering the distinct typological structures of the languages involved, one must question the extent to which the EC holds in Korean–English codeswitching. According to Park’s data (1990), switching of the type indicated in (1) rarely occurs. His data show a high frequency of small-size switching, mostly single word categories. J.-O. Choi (1991) argues against the EC by illustrating both small- and largesize switches in which the EC does not hold. He suggests that the EC may be tolerated in structures where the word order of the two languages is parallel in some colloquial forms, as in (2) (2)

Eng: Everybody listened? (p. 883) Kor: MOTWU TULESSE CS: Everybody TULESSEMOTWU listened?

Yoon (1992) also reports a high rate of violation of the EC. Yet, her data from conversations between spouses display switches in which the constraint operates, as in (3). She notes, however, the infrequency of the phenomenon among acquaintances. (3)

Helen-I MULEPO-MYEN, tell her the truth. (p. 448) (sm) ask if (if Helen asks, tell her the truth.) The free morpheme constraint (FMC)

Sankoff & Poplack (1981) postulated another linguistic constraint, namely the free morpheme constraint (FMC ), which predicts that codes may be switched after any constituent in discourse provided that such a constituent is not a bound morpheme unless one of the morphemes has been phonologically integrated into the language of the other. Thus, one cannot have eatiendo (eating) because the stem (eat) is in English phonology and the affix (-iendo) is in Spanish phonology. The universal validity of this FMC has not been challenged as much as the EC. Although some researchers (e.g. Boeschoten & Verhoeven, 1987) have questioned its universal validity, many (e.g. Berk-Seligson, 1986; Joshi, 1985) confirm the scarcity of occurrence of word-internal switching. In regard to Korean–English switching, divergent findings have been reported. Park (1990) argues that support of the FMC depends on the type of bound morphemes. He points out that there are two types of bound morphemes in Korean: (i) derivational infixes and suffixes expressing the notions of Tense, Aspect, Mood, Honorifics, etc., and (ii) case markers and postpositional particles. Of these two types, Park (1990) writes, ‘only the second type of Korean bound morphemes were observed to combine with English free morphemes (…), and not a single instance (…) of the first type of Korean bound morphemes

Languages in contact: codeswitching

335

with English free morphemes’ (p. 195). Examples of the second type are presented in (4) and (5). (4)

Problem-I EPKETUNYO. (p. 196) (sm) not present ({I} don’t have any problems.)

(5)

Each other-EYKE. (p. 196) (dm) (to each other)

Choi’s (1991) data exhibit a large number of counter-examples to the FMC, specifically by the addition of the English inflectional morpheme -ing to a Korean verb as in (6). Other kinds of inflectional morphemes used with Korean content words are past tense -d as in (7), plural -s as in (8), possessive -’s as in (9). (6)

Why are you CEKE-ing? (p. 884) write-ing (Why are you writing it down?)

(7)

ENNI CAPE-d it. (p. 886) Sister catch (Sister caught it.)

(8)

MOKI-s everywhere (… ) (p. 885) Mosquito (Mosquitoes are everywhere.)

(9)

There’s KWISOK in ENNI’s ear. (p. 885) earwax sister (There’s earwax in sister’s ear.)

Yoon (1992) also challenges the FMC. The counter-examples she provides include a large number of English adjectives combined with a Korean bound morpheme to form an adverb, as in (10). The attached Korean bound morpheme -HAKEY, a derived form of a helping verb HATA (do), switches the preceding English adjective into a Korean form of an adverb. The English ‘official’ is not phonologically integrated into Korean; [f], a labio-dental sound which the Korean language does not have, is pronounced correctly. (10)

Official-HAKEY PALPHYO ANHAYSSE (p. 439) ly announce not ({they} didn’t announce {it} officially.)

336

Keumsil Kim Yoon

The matrix language (ML) approach While challenging the universal validity of the equivalence constraint, studies of languages less similar to each other (Berk-Seligson 1986; Joshi, 1985; Nishimura, 1986) show that intrasentential CS takes place in a sentence environment of one language or another. That is, if two languages differ syntactically from each other, one language is assigned to CS; the guest elements obey the placement rules of the host language. A refined version of this view is the Matrix Language Frame Model proposed by Myers-Scotton (1993). The matrix language (ML) is the language which sets the relevant grammatical frame in mixed constituents; the grammatical frame is defined as morpheme order and system morphemes which include inflections and most function words. Central to the model is the claim that although both languages are in operation during CS production, they do not participate equally. The language from which words or phrases enter the ML is referred to as the embedded language. The ML assignment is discussed in detail by Park (1990). He argues that in most cases of Korean–English CS, the ML could be determined by constituent order difference criteria. Many areas of structural conflict between Korean and English are considered to be factors affecting ML assignment. An interesting demonstration of the ML assignment, he argues, lies in topicalized structure. Consider the following examples. (11)

NA-UY SINANG SAYNGHWAL-UN it has a long history. (p. 84) I (gm) religion life (tm) (Talking about my religious life, it has a long story.

(12)

KU KALTUNG-UN begins long time ago. (p. 88) the conflict (tm) (Talking about the conflict, {the conflict} begins long time ago)

Sentences (11) and (12) differ in the presence/absence of the topicalized element (it) in the comment clause. In (11), the Korean noun phrase ends with the Korean topic marker -UN, and is followed by a full English clause. In other words, even though the Korean topic marker -UN is attached to the topicalized noun, its co-referential pronoun (it) is present in the comment clause. Thus, Park considers that (11) was generated from the English left-dislocation process, which means English is assigned to the sentence. On the other hand, in (12) the topicalized Korean nominal does not have the co-referential pronoun in the English clause. Therefore, Park argues that Korean is assigned to the sentence since Korean topic sentences permit no co-referential elements in the comment clause. Choi (1991) and Yoon (1992) also maintain that the concept of ML assignment is applicable to a large number of patterns. One of the recurrent types of

Languages in contact: codeswitching

337

switches displayed in support of language assignment is found in predicate structure in which a Korean helping/operating verb (e.g. HATA {do}) is combined with an English word/phrase as in (13–15). (13)

(14)

(15)

Horse-KA unicorn turn to-HAY. (Choi, p. 896) (sm) hata (inflected: plain form) (The horse turns into a unicorn) Catch up cold- HAMYEN (…) (Park, p. 136) hata (inflected: conditional conj., plain form) (If {you} catch up cold) ACWU nervous-HAYYO. (Yoon, p. 440) very hata (inflected: polite form) (He) is very nervous. The government approach: head directionality

Given that the distinction between the matrix and embedded languages is not always clear, various versions of the government approach (Belazi, Rubin & Toribio, 1994; Di Sciullo, Muysken & Singh, 1986; Mahootian & Santorini, 1996) have been presented in an attempt to formulate constraints on switching without considering the distinction. A recent version of the government approach is the concept of head directionality proposed by Nishimura & Yoon (1998), which draws upon the examination of two sets of data of CS between head-final and head-initial languages (Japanese–English/Korean–English). Their data reveal that a common word order is not required for intrasentential CS to occur, and that, moreover, the head determines the placement of its complement, not the reverse. In other words, CS is free as long as the head direction is respected. The following examples illustrate this principle. (16) (17) (18)

She spends her own money. (p. 124) I haven’t met HANKWUK YUHAKSAYNGTUL. (p. 124) Korean students studying abroad WULI, two more tests CHYEYATOYYO. (p. 125) We have to take

In a VP, if the verb is a transitive English verb, it may be followed by an NP, either in English as in (16) or Korean as in (17). Likewise, if the verb is Korean, it may be preceded by an English NP as in (18). Parallel behavior is observed in PP and its complement. An English P can take its complement NP in Korean to the right as in (19). A Korean P can take its complement NP in English to its left as in (20). (19)

I feel sorry for HALMENI. (p. 125) grandma

338

Keumsil Kim Yoon

(20)

Kennedy Airport-EY KASSESSEYO. (p. 125) to went

A similar phenomenon occurs in different situations. For example, in INFL and its complement, an English tensed verb takes a Korean subject NP to the left as in (21). In Modal/negative and its complement, English Modal/negative takes its complement in Korean as in (22a and 22b). In Complementizer and its complement, an English complementizer takes its Korean complement to the right as in 23a, and a Korean complementizer takes its Korean complement to the left as in 23b. In PP adjunct to its head, a Korean PP adjunct can occur with an English verb postverbally as in (24a), and an English PP adjunct occurs with a Korean verb preverbally as in (24b). (21) (22a) (22b) (23a) (23b) (24a) (24b)

ISANGHAN NAMCA KA followed me. (p. 126) (A) strange guy May I SICAKHAY? (p. 127) begin Don’t TAMPAY PHYE. (p. 127) cigarette smoke I realized that NAY HANKWUKMAL ACIK YAKHANKE. (p. 127) my Korean still weak I am out of town ILA MALHASEYYO. (p. 128) tell (him) He will take a picture CIPEY OTAKA. (p. 128) home on the way In three days KKUTHNALKKEYAYO. (p. 128) (they) will finish (it)

Although the earlier studies (Park, 1990; Choi, 1991; Yoon, 1992) did not discuss the government approach, it is observed that the head directionality is applicable to a large number of the examples illustrated in their studies. The high degree of its applicability lies in its fluid construct inasmuch as its principle is less restrictive than the linguistic constraints and the matrix language frame model discussed earlier. Discussion The previous section has shown that the morpho-syntactic properties of Korean–English codeswitching are multifaceted, and that the three groups studied demonstrate similarities and differences in switching patterns. This section will relate such switching patterns to two issues: (i) language-specific

Languages in contact: codeswitching

339

features and (ii) language dominance, as raised earlier. Due to space constraints, we will discuss only one aspect of each question here. Language-specific features There is a specific type of CS phenomenon that occurs in all three Korean–English studies: the attachment of an inflected Korean functional morpheme, especially -HATA (do) to an English content word/phrase, as shown in (13–15). The functional morphemes of this kind that Park (1990) calls ‘predicate makers’ and Yoon (1992) names ‘operating verbs’ include -HATA (do), -TOYTA (become), -SIKITA (make a person do), and -ITA (be). Park (1990) and Yoon (1992) show a large number of switches of this type. Park reports that the verbal predicates, which constitute 12.3% of his corpus and the adjectival phrases, which constitute 11.3% of the corpus, occurred with the predicate maker -HATA. Similarly, Yoon reports that 30% of her corpus consisted of English lexical words which were followed by one of the Korean operating verbs, most frequently -HATA. It is worth noting here that the operating verb is inflected to indicate various functions (e.g. tense, aspect, mood, honorifics). This type of switching, which I will term ‘HATAswitching’ for convenience, is also frequently illustrated in Choi’s data, though with no report of its occurrence rate. Furthermore, this -HATA phenomenon is observed in other studies on Korean–English switching (Yoon, 1996; Shin, 2002). On the basis of the significant number of occurrences of HATA-switching in all the previous studies, this paper posits that Korean operating verbs, especially -HATA, are distinctive features that easily trigger codeswitching. Here, one may raise a question as to whether HATA-switching is similar to what has been observed in Indic language speech. Appel and Muysken (1987) observed that Hindi speakers use kare with English elements, in which kare (do) serves as the helping verb, as in ‘train kare’ ‘to train.’ They view HATAswitching as a strategy of ‘neutrality’ that serves to nativize a switched word; this process is also referred to as ‘relexification’, a linguistic process by which the vocabulary of a language is replaced by that of another language, while its grammatical structure is maintained. However, given that the level of bilingual proficiency and the speech community of ‘kare-switcher’ is unknown, and that the morphological inflection of its process is not discussed, it is premature to assume that HATA-switching is the same as kare-switching. Other researchers may view the HATA-switching as a sign of lexical loss or a ‘crutching’ (Zentella, 1997) in which speakers switch to cover gaps in their knowledge. However, it should be noted that HATA-switching is manifested in all of the data collected from the three groups, who are different in terms of age and speech community. Furthermore, it is manifested not only with nouns, but also with verbs and adjectives. Also very interestingly, it is manifested not only

340

Keumsil Kim Yoon

with a single word, but also with multiple words, as shown in (13–14). Considering these kinds of manifestations, this paper regards ‘operating verbs’ (particularly -HATA) as a distinctive linguistic feature represented in Korean bilinguals’ internal lexicon. Language dominance Traditionally, the issue of the relationship between language dominance and codeswitching has been dealt with by comparing two bilingual groups differing with regard to dominance (Notier, 1989; Peterson, 1988). As expected, differences in switching patterns have been reported. Furthermore, a constraint was postulated: Peterson (1988) argues that in word-internal CS, grammatical morphemes of the dominant language may co-occur with lexical morphemes of either language, whereas grammatical morphemes of the non-dominant language may co-occur only with lexical morphemes of the same language. The concept of language dominance in these studies is similar to that of the aforementioned matrix language. Defining the ML as the language projecting the morpho-syntactic frame for the bilingual sentence, the ML is usually perceived as the dominant language of the bilingual speakers. That is, although they are competent bilinguals, one language may be more dominantly represented in their minds, and thus their metalinguistic awareness of the structural conflict between two languages may lead them to hold onto the language with which they feel grammatically more comfortable. However, from the matrix language perspective, the concept of language dominance does not seem to be in operation in the Korean–English CS studies discussed here because the ML changes not only within the same group of bilinguals, but also within the same speaker. Note that in sentences (11) and (12), produced by the same bilingual, the ML of the sentence (11) is English while that of (12) is Korean. This observation raises a question about language dominance and its role in determining switching patterns. One way of addressing this question is to examine differences in switching patterns among these three groups. A most salient difference between Choi’s data and Park/Yoon’s data lies in the presence or absence of a particular type of counter-example of the free morpheme constraint; that is, the attachment of Korean content words to English functional morphemes as in (6–9). This type of switching is observed in Choi’s data, but not in Park’s and Yoon’s studies. How do we account for such a difference? What makes Choi’s subjects produce this particular type of switching as well as the aforementioned HATA-switching? Two related interpretations can be given here. First, the presence of switches with English inflectional morphemes in Choi’s data can be viewed as a developmental switching pattern. It has been suggested that children’s usage of two languages does not differ greatly from that of adults

Languages in contact: codeswitching

341

(Lindholm & Padilla, 1978). However, it appears that children make more switches that are unacceptable to bilingual speakers than do adult codeswitchers (Malakoff & Hakuta, 1991). A review of data collected from adult secondgeneration fluent bilinguals (ages 18–28) for another CS study by Yoon (1996) reveals that the switches with -ing (6) and -d (7) are totally absent, but switches with plural -s (8) and possessive -’s (9) are present, yet rare (especially with plural -s). A similar interpretation for the difference in presence/absence of the type (6–9) can be made from the perspective of the order of acquisition of the two languages (i.e. simultaneous acquisition vs. consecutive acquisition). Although all the subjects of Choi (1991), Park (1990) and Yoon (1992) are balanced bilinguals in the sense that they possess similarly high proficiency in both languages, and use them both in everyday contexts, they acquired the two languages in a different order. Choi’s subjects were young children who were 5- and 7-year olds when Choi began a two-year period of data collection. Born in Korea, they were 1- and 3-year-olds when they moved to the US, and were raised in a Korean–English bilingual environment. On the other hand, Park’s and Yoon’s subjects were adults who acquired Korean first in Korea. Given the differing language acquisition order, one may draw some sort of natural, yet contrastively emerging parallel between the child and adult subjects. The switching pattern in question here is the combination of a content morpheme of one language and a functional morpheme of the other language. However, there is a difference in its combination between child and adult bilinguals. In young children’s bilingual speech, the combination is manifested in two ways: (i) an English content word with a Korean functional morpheme as shown in (13), and (ii) a Korean content word with an English functional morpheme as in (6–9). This two-way combination implies that the young children have a tendency to rely on both Korean and English grammatical structures, and this twofold reliance could be seen as testifying to the simultaneous acquisition of two languages. In contrast, the adults’ data display only one-way combination: an English content word with a Korean functional morpheme. This one-way combination suggests that the adult subjects of the two studies tend to resort to Korean for grammatical structures even when using mainly English in a clause, as in (14); this phenomenon could be deemed to attest to the consecutive acquisition of two languages (Korean first, and English later). This contrastive parallel suggests that the research area in language dominance and codeswitching should be extended to include the issue of the type of bilingual acquisition (simultaneous vs. consecutive acquisition). This extension is a significant move towards understanding how two languages function independently and interdependently, a convoluted research area in both neuro- and psycholinguistics.

342

Keumsil Kim Yoon

Future directions This study is concerned with the creative, yet constrained, nature of bilingual speech. It has attempted to reposition the notion of intrasentential codeswitching. The analysis presented here is unassuming but promising in that it forces us to consider the development of a theoretically fluid parametric construct to account for various types of switches; parameters will identify the loci of possible variation in switching boundaries and specify the range of this variation. The central idea of this construct is that all boundaries are constrained by a set of principles which can be given morpho-syntactic interpretations selected from a restricted set of options. The theoretically fluid construct this paper envisions is a two-dimensional one: syntactic parameterization and morphological parameterization. Although a detailed elaboration is beyond the scope of this paper, the construct can be briefly sketched. Syntactic parameters are to be set around a government approach which is most applicable to Korean–English switching. At the current stage of CS research, the most applicable approach that the paper considers is head directionality. The head plays a pivotal role, imposing the syntactic requirements and thereby determining the phrase structure position; as long as its directionality is maintained, complements and adjuncts are free. The concept of this principle is more comprehensive, and thus more widely applicable than the other theoretical constructs that were discussed above. As for morphological parameterization, this paper proposes a syntactically integrated construct that I tentatively call ‘HDB lexical productivity’ (i.e. head directionality-based lexical productivity). This construct can be described as follows: word-internal codeswitching is possible provided that the functional morpheme of the word is integrated into the head directionality, that it does not entail phonological integration, and that it is productive in the sense that it occurs with all members of some large class of lexical content morphemes. This HDB lexical productivity allows bilingual speakers to take advantage of a larger vocabulary from the two languages, playing on subtle differences between them in connotative, denotative, or sociolinguistic meaning. Furthermore, it allows them to benefit from the linguistic richness of Korean functional morphemes, especially operating verbs that carry sociopragmatic functions through inflection. Note that any form of talk by speakers of Korean reflects an adherence to a norm that is not only socially prescribed, but also linguistically encoded. Therefore, a Korean operating verb attached to an English content word must be inflected in such a way that it reflects the speaker’s relationship with the addressee. For example, the inflected form -HAY in (13) indicates that this utterance is addressed to a person of equal or lower social

Languages in contact: codeswitching

343

status, or someone who is socially close, and -HAYYO in (15) is to a person of higher social status or someone who is socially distant. The two-dimensional construct may appear parallel with the linguistic constraints (i.e. the EC and the FMC), given that it touches upon both syntactic and morphological aspects of intrasentential codeswitching. However, they are fundamentally different in nature and focus. The proposed construct is focused on the creative aspect of CS, whereas the linguistic constraints are concerned with its restrictive aspect; it allows for variation in a broad-spectrum fashion, including language development and social relationship. More important, the analysis of CS in light of the two-dimensional construct will enrich research on the psycholinguistic reality of the bilingual’s social mind. The psycholinguistics of languages in contact is still in its infancy in comparison with the linguistics and sociolinguistics of codeswitching (Grojean, 1997). Yet, the paper closes with the hope that future studies will further establish the parameter settings in languages in contact and investigate how bilingual speakers have access to this two-dimensional principle, as well as which parameter settings they apply in a particular bilingual speech event. It is hoped that these future studies will lead to an account of how codeswitching processing takes place so spontaneously and naturally, despite the intricate differences between two language systems.

25

Influence of socio-psychological categories in bilingual interaction M. Agnes Kang

Abstract This paper addresses the influence of socio-psychological categories on the codeswitching behavior of Korean–English bilingual speakers. While some research has been done on structural constraints on codeswitching, including on Korean–English codeswitching (e.g. J.-E. Park, 1990; J.-O. Choi, 1991; K. K. Yoon 1992), attention to the social factors involved in bilingual interaction has also shed light on such psycholinguistic phenomena as the conceptualization of meaning and interpretation of speech. In this vein, the present discussion surveys the research in codeswitching in conversation (Auer, 1998; Li, 1995, among others) to show how discourse-based studies of codeswitching can provide insights into psycholinguistic issues of interaction. Gumperz’s (1982a, 1992) concept of contextualization involves the use of various contextualization cues that serve as strategies for the expression and interpretation of verbal activities. Among these various cues (e.g. prosodic, gestural, and kinesic cues), codeswitching is identified as another such cue that serves to make relevant certain aspects of the context of interaction. In a detailed analysis of bilingual data, I show how the socio-psychological categories of relative age and status in Korean interaction become contextualized as relevant categories in Korean–English interaction. Observable actions that are mediated through interaction provide evidence for how the switch is produced and interpreted by speakers. This particular codeswitching strategy points to how Korean social categories are conceptualized in Korean–English bilingual discourse and suggests a means of observing the relationship between linguistic codes, cognitive processes, and socio-psychological categories. Introduction Research has clearly shown that social relationships are grammaticized and lexicalized in the Korean language. According to Koo (1992: 27), Korean requires speakers to encode their relationships to their addressees using 344

Influence of socio-psychological categories

345

lexically, morphologically, and grammatically distinct honorific forms. Because of this vertical hierarchy of relationships, it is absolutely imperative to know what another person’s status is in relation to one’s own. This necessity of knowing one’s age in relation to others’ ages leads to related social behaviors as well. For instance, it is not uncommon for a stranger to ask a person’s age. Ervin-Tripp et al. (1995: 63) attribute this kind of practice to the hierarchical structure of Korean and Japanese society: This [hierarchical] system explains why the first thing that Japanese businessmen do is exchange name cards. By exchanging cards, both parties can gauge the relationship between them in terms of relative rank, locating each other within the hierarchy of their society, and why, in a similar society, Koreans who meet must also first exchange information to identify their relative age and status.

Relative status must first be known in order for a conversation to be conducted with the assurance that the correct demeanor and linguistic forms are adopted by each participant with respect to the other participants. One would naturally expect to find evidence of the importance of social hierarchy in the interactions of Korean speakers. What is interesting, however, is that traces of these same social hierarchies can be found in bilingual discourse. Korean Americans engaging in talk with one another, whether speaking Korean, English, or a mixture of both, can use linguistic means of evoking socio-psychological categories of relative status. In the use of first and second person pronouns, for example, one must choose between plain and humble forms in referring to oneself or to one’s interlocutor. Kinship terms in Korean can be used as a nominal substitute for second person reference (Park, 1990; Koo, 1992; G.-J. Choi, 1997), examples of which were found in the Korean American data discussed here. Because Korean lacks a second person pronoun of deference, a nominal substitute from titles and kinship terms is used instead. This substitution is a show of deference to the addressee, a strategy that may motivate the use of Korean in bilingual interactions. By switching to Korean, speakers are able to display sensitivity to social hierarchies where such sensitivities may not be required by the grammar of English. The excerpt discussed below illustrates how the socio-psychological categories of relative age and status become contextualized in bilingual interaction. It comes from videotape data collected during fieldwork with a Korean community center (which I will call the KAC, for Korean American Center) in the northern California Bay area. The KAC consists of staff members who range in degree of bilingualism, from monolingual English speakers with only a passive understanding of Korean, to fluent bilinguals. The next section gives an overview of approaches to codeswitching with a particular focus on interactional approaches, which is then followed by a detailed analysis of Korean–English bilingual interaction.

346

M. Agnes Kang

Approaches to codeswitching The practice of codeswitching has been examined from a variety of perspectives. While some codeswitching studies have attempted to define the grammatical constraints on bilingual discourse (e.g. Weinrich, 1953; Poplack, 1980), other studies focus on the situated occurrences of codeswitching (e.g. Heller, 1988; Milroy and Muysken, 1995) to show how the use of more than one language becomes an integral part of the discourse of a community. Another useful approach to bilingual codeswitching and interaction has focused on the sequential organization of talk using the methodology of Conversation Analysis (e.g. Auer, 1984, 1998; Li, 1995; Li and Milroy, 1995). The focus of this approach has been to show that the choice of code does interactional work that occurs within sequential actions having particular consequences for the way participants interact. The sequential organization of talk implies that participants must be oriented to one another in such a way that they are able to display the relevance of their talk to one another. The application of this approach to bilingual codeswitching was pioneered by Auer (1984). In his discussion, Auer states that codeswitching must be treated as a conversational event, one embedded in the surrounding conversational context. He uses a conversation analytic methodology that focuses on ‘members’ procedures to arrive at local interpretations of language alternation’ (1984: 3; original italics). Recent research in the area of codeswitching has grappled with the problems of attributing motivations to codeswitching. Acknowledging the difficulty in assigning intention and meaning to instances of codeswitching, scholars have looked to Gumperz’s approach to contextualization as a theoretical framework for interpreting meanings in the linguistic practices of bilingual communities. Contextualization can be defined as the activities that make relevant any aspect of context that is responsible for the interpretation of an utterance in its locus of occurrence (Auer, 1992: 4). This framework recognizes that contexts are not given and constant within an interaction, but rather, participants themselves work to create contexts in which their utterances must be interpreted. Contextualization, then, implies the creation of a jointly constructed context on the part of participants that leads to observable effects in interaction. Codeswitching as a contextualization cue Gumperz’s concept of contextualization involves the use of various cues that serve as strategies for the expression and interpretation of verbal activities. Along with various other cues (e.g. prosodic, gestural, and kinesic cues), codeswitching is identified as a cue that serves to make relevant certain

Influence of socio-psychological categories

347

aspects of the context of interaction. Auer (1984: 18) describes codeswitching as: one of these cues which, for instance, can signal that one topic is terminated and another one about to begin. Generally, it is one way of contextualizing verbal activities, that is, of informing co-participants about the ever-relevant question ‘what are we doing now?’– even though its contribution to answering it may be restricted to the information ‘something different than before’. Switching is, in this sense, very similar to other contextualization strategies such as lowering or heightening of pitch level, change of posture–change of speed of utterance delivery–and some others.

Switching codes gives participants a resource for communicating that some social action is being accomplished in a way that allows all participants to interpret one another’s actions. The act of codeswitching, then, may not have meaning in and of itself; it has a non-referential character. Instead, the use and interpretation of this cue rely on the process of conversational inferencing. While Gumperz’s work (1982a, 1992) stems from interactional sociolinguistic perspectives on discourse, the production and interpretation of contextualization cues suggests a socio-psychological component of codeswitching behavior. The concept of conversational inferencing, in particular, suggests the intimate link between psychological processes and social interaction in the co-construction of shared context. Codeswitching and kinship terms in the KAC meetings In the following excerpt, the staff are discussing Jin’s practice presentation, which he has just finished. Among the KAC staff, Sam, Jin, and Hyun are the members who report their native language as Korean. Jin, in particular, often used kinship terms for older staff members, Sam (hyeng) and Hyun (nwuna). While the lexical meaning of these terms is associated with kinship relations, according to Sohn (1981: 441), these terms ‘have now acquired daily usage among non-kin people, frequently even among strangers’. Because Jin’s presentation overlapped with things Sam and Hyun included in their presentations, the staff try to come up with ideas as to how to present the information. The solution they come up with is using a chart that summarizes the common information in the three presentations. Excerpt 1 233 SAM: 234

235

HYUN:

Okay. So I think ~Sam should do the chart. (Sam facetiously refers to self)

NEG Well/No, (indicating that Sam does not necessarily have to do the chart himself)

348

M. Agnes Kang

236

237

238 239

JIN: HYUN:

240 241

JIN: HYUN:

242 243

JIN: HYUN:

244

JIN:

245

HYUN:

246

JIN:

247 248 249

HYUN: JIN: HYUN:

250

251

kule-n ke-n ani-chiman, like.that-ATTR thing-TOP NEG-CONCESS It’s not like that (I didn’t mean that), but, eccaysstun, anyway anyway I mean, wuli-ka ta, 1.PL-SUB all We all, I think it that will [be effective]. [Yey]. yes [When you uh], [kule-chi]. like.that-COMM Right. hyeng-i, older.brother-SUB (When) you, [ku taum-ey han-pen-] – that after-LOC one-turn After that, once, [church-based] system yayki ha-l ttay, church-based system talk do-ATTR time when you talk about the church-based system, Mm. you can incorporate those. ku cekedo han, at.least one kyohoy nay-ey han pallwunthie-ka nawa-se, church inside-LOC one volunteer-SUB emerge-PRECED There will be at least one volunteer from one church, ceki training-ul pat-kwu, training-OBJ receive-CONN (who) will receive the training,

Hyun has suggested making a chart to use as a visual aid before the start of Excerpt 1. Jin expresses his approval in line 240 (in English) and tries to convince Sam (in Korean) by stating that Sam will be able to use the chart in

Influence of socio-psychological categories

349

his own presentation. The formulation of the opinion, however, takes several tries and false starts (lines 242, 244–5). Jin uses false starts and structural hedges to ‘soften’ his verbal actions and attend to the constraints of social hierarchy while engaged in the activity of offering advice to Sam. The awkwardness of giving advice to the director of the group, who is also older than Jin, is negotiated through codeswitching and the use of hyeng to indicate that Jin is showing respect for Sam’s relative status. The codeswitching in this excerpt, which is embedded in the social action of offering a suggestion, serves to contextualize the social hierarchy made relevant in this interaction. While making his case, Jin uses the kinship term hyeng as a second person pronoun of deference to Sam in line 244, who is older and, as director, has a higher status than Jin. Jin evokes the kinship/peer relationship and the Korean social hierarchies associated with this relationship as a means of negotiating the interaction. By switching to Korean to address Sam, Jin enlists the kind of cooperation one may expect from one’s older brother/peer and charges Sam with the responsibilities of an older sibling/peer to a younger sibling/peer. Jin not only mitigates the act of making a suggestion to someone of higher authority by using hyeng, but he also introduces the close relationship between them as a reason why Sam should take his advice. Because of the intimate connotations of the term hyeng, the use of it here contextualizes the discussion not as a formal one, but one among peers who share a close social relationship. In fact, Jin returns to English in line 248, just as he finishes his suggestion, and where, if said in Korean, he would be obligated to choose a speech level in which to finish making his suggestion. This is also the point at which the most delicacy would be required (while making his actual suggestion), which would probably require more signs of deference in his choice of sentence-final endings. Relative status and social hierarchy among participants is also marked in Korean by sentence-final particles, which distinguish different levels of deference on the part of the speaker towards the addressee. According to Wang (1990: 26), the morphological variants of the sentence-concluding endings occupy the most important positions in Korean addressee honorifics, not only because they are more systematically distributed than the other elements, but also because they tend to be less elliptical in an actual utterance than the other elements.

By switching to English, he is able not only to elide the sentence endings, but avoid the decisions altogether. He is able to make a direct statement regarding his opinion while at the same time using the term hyeng to show deference to Sam and perhaps convince Sam that he should respond in the way of a good hyeng, who indulges the request of a younger sibling or peer. This is not to say that Jin has any aversion to making suggestions or disagreeing with Sam. What this excerpt does illustrate, however, is that the use of Korean at opportune times to introduce (or avoid) Korean social hierarchies in a bilingual

350

M. Agnes Kang

interaction may allow participants to use Korean norms of social interaction in bilingual talk. It also illustrates that participants may negotiate a potential conflict differently in Korean from a European American conflict among friends, for example, in which age and status may be less relevant. Jin’s lower status in relation to Sam is always present, but the explicit evocation of that relationship can be used strategically to highlight this aspect of their relationship. Discussion This chapter has attempted to illustrate how the socio-psychological categories of relative age and status influence the codeswitching behavior of Korean–English bilingual speakers. The grammatical features of Korean offer the speaker particular linguistic mechanisms for the production and interpretation of speech that take into account the conceptual categories that are deemed relevant to social interaction. The notion of social hierarchy, for example, pervades Korean culture to the extent that conceptualizing the individual without a collective is difficult to do. One’s relation to another is just as, if not more, important than who one is as an individual. According to Hwang (1990: 42): Korean society has traditionally been one in which peoples’ relative positions in various hierarchical social dimensions are highly recognized, and its members are identified more readily by their relative positions in the social structure than by their individuality.

These forces manifest themselves in social relations as well. One does not exist alone, but rather depends upon, and is seen in relation to, others. The maintenance of this kind of socio-psychological categorization may be particularly difficult for someone raised with the equally evocative social ideologies of individualism, freedom, and equality. The linguistic behavior of bilingual speakers, in this case, Korean–American speakers, demonstrates how socio-psychological categories become linguistically relevant to the context of interaction. One could state that the grammar and usage of Korean prevails on the speaker to take into consideration certain relevant social relationships and categories that in turn influence the production and interpretation of codeswitching behavior. For them, the use (or avoidance) of Korean in a bilingual context provides a resource for negotiating potential conflict by instantiating (or eliding) hierarchical relationships in interaction. The interdisciplinary aspects of bilingual interaction have yet to be fully examined. The proposition that socio-psychological motivations may influence codeswitching behavior raises the following questions: 1) What other socio-psychological categories in Korean may influence bilingual interaction and in what ways? 2) How are these socio-psychological categories conceptualized by speakers? and 3) How do they become manifest in interaction through the use of language? Future research may suggest ways in which the linguistic, cognitive, and social aspects of codeswitching behavior intersect and influence one another.

26

Ontological concept versus shape in word learning from a crosslinguistic point of view Hyeonjin Lee

Introduction Children have learned over 14,000 words by age 6. It is estimated that children acquire about nine new words a day from the age of 18 months to 6 years (Carey, 1978). How do they acquire so many words at such a rapid rate? If children’s acquisition of words involves an inductive process, i.e. unbiased hypothesis testing, then, their fast learning at an earlier stage is difficult to explain. Consider an example of a child learning a new word. A mother points to a rabbit and says ‘rabbit’ to her child. There seem unlimited possibilities that the child might guess the word is intended to describe. It could refer to the whole object (the rabbit), a part of the object (long ears, a tail, red eyes, a leg, etc.), the substance the object is made of (fur, bones, flesh, etc.), some property of the object (furry, white, dirty, etc.), and so on. In spite of an infinite set of possibilities about the novel word’s meaning, the child rapidly and successfully connects the novel word to its meaning. This is the well-known inductive problem that Quine (1960) has posed. As a solution for this problem, many proposals have assumed that children might be equipped with certain implicit biases or constraints that narrow down the possibilities when ascribing meaning to a novel word (E. Clark, 1987; Landau, Smith & Jones, 1988; Markman, 1994; Soja, Carey & Spelke, 1991). For example, Markman (1994) proposed the whole object assumption, taxonomic assumption, and mutual exclusivity assumption as a constraint on word learning. As an alternative proposal to word-learning constraints, Clark (1993) argued that word learning is supported by pragmatic principles such as the principle of conventionality and contrast. Landau, Smith and Jones (1988) proposed that children show shape bias in inferring the meaning of words. Soja, Carey and Spelke (1991) suggested the influence of prior nonlinguistic cognition, i.e. ontological concept, on word learning. They suggested that the ontological difference between solid objects and non-solid substance would guide the inference of word meaning in a different way. This paper is especially concerned with the role of the ontological concept versus shape in word learning. 351

352

Hyeonjin Lee

Ontology versus shape in word learning The issue was first raised by Soja, Carey and Spelke (1991), who attempted to evaluate the Quinean view. Quine (1960) argued that children do not have an ontological distinction between objects and non-solid substances at the earliest stage of language acquisition. Rather, ontological categories such as objects and substances emerge as a consequence of mass/count syntax. Quine further implied that the ontological concept is a cultural construction. Before a young child has mastered this cultural construction, each of the child’s words refers to ‘a history of sporadic encounters, a scattered portion of what goes on’ (Quine, 1960: 92). Thus, the child might do the same for an object like ‘apple’ as for the mass terms, before getting the concept of ‘divided reference.’ This means that ‘apple’ refers to a portion of apple experience as ‘water’ refers to a portion of water experience in the child’s mind. The question then arises as to how the child with no ontological commitments computes the meaning of new words. According to Quine (1960), the child would count salient properties of the perceptual experience to infer it. This conjecture was endorsed by E. Clark (1973a), Landau, Smith and Jones (1988), and other psychologists. For example, Landau, Smith and Jones (1988) suggested that perceptual similarity, i.e. shape, is important in determining the extension of a novel word. However, the Quinean view was challenged by Soja, Carey and Spelke (1991). They attempted to teach 2- and 2.5-year-olds a novel word that labeled either a solid object or a non-solid substance in their experiments. They chose 2- and 2.5-year-olds as subjects since 2-year-olds do not seem to have any knowledge of count/mass syntax while 2.5-year-olds seem to be in the process of mastering it (Gordon, 1982). The children were then asked to select one of two choices given to them. One of the choices was a solid object or non-solid substance of the same type as the original, but made out of a different material. The other was three or four pieces of the original material (Figure 26.1). The result indicated that 2- and 2.5-year-old children projected the novel word to new objects by respecting the shape of the original referent in the solid object trial (around 90%). In contrast, they respected material of the original referent to

Figure 26.1. Stimuli used in Soja, Carey and Spelke (1991)

Ontological concept versus shape in word learning

353

project new words in the non-solid substance trial (around 30%). These findings led Soja et al. (1991) to conclude that pre-existing ontological concepts guide young children’s projection of word meanings prior to the child’s mastery of count/mass syntax. Crosslinguistic evidence of ontology versus shape in word learning In order to confirm that children do not have knowledge of count/mass syntax, Soja et al. (1991) attempted to test the children’s count/mass syntax in two ways. First, they assessed children’s productive competence about count/mass syntax by obtaining speech production samples from the children who participated in their experiment. Their data indicated that many children had little productive control of the count/mass distinction and there was no correlation between productive control and word learning. So they concluded that count/ mass syntax was not developed for the subjects in their experiments. However, this may be criticized in that the children’s production data did not evaluate their syntactic knowledge very well (Carey, 1994). It may not guarantee the children’s ignorance of count/mass syntax, since the children may have better comprehension than production of the quantifiers. Second, children’s knowledge of count/mass syntax was assessed by presenting new words for objects and for substances under a neutral syntax condition and an informative syntax condition. The neutral syntax condition used ‘my’, ‘the’ and ‘this’ which could not give any clue to the ontological status, while the informative syntax condition used the determiners and quantifiers such as ‘a’, ‘another’ and ‘some’, which could distinguish the ontological status of the solid object from that of the non-solid substance. If children comprehend the syntactic distinction, then performance would be facilitated in the informative syntax condition, but not in the neutral syntax condition. The results indicated that there was no effect of the syntactic context. This was counted as evidence that the children did not use syntactic knowledge in inferring the meaning of new words. In order to strengthen the claim that children infer the meaning of objects based on pre-existing ontological distinctions, it is necessary to have empirical evidence from other languages that do not have the count/mass syntax. There have been several studies to evaluate the universal use of ontology in inferring word meanings in Korean and Japanese. Note that Korean and Japanese share some syntactic properties in the sense of lacking the count/mass syntax. In English, solid objects should be marked by count nouns (e.g. animal, dog, pen, etc.), while non-solid substances by mass nouns (e.g. water, gel, etc.). The count nouns should be distinguished from the mass nouns in terms of grammatical form. Count nouns must be preceded by ‘a’ or ‘another’ (e.g. a dog or another pen) and they can be pluralized (e.g. dogs, pens) and modified by quantifiers such as ‘many’ or

354

Hyeonjin Lee

numerals such as ‘one’, ‘two’, ‘three’ and so on (e.g. many dogs or two pencils). By contrast, mass nouns need not be preceded by an indefinite determiner ‘a’ and cannot be pluralized. But they can be modified by the quantifiers such as ‘some’, ‘much’, and ‘more’ (e.g. some money). However, unlike English, Korean as well as Japanese has no mass/count syntactic distinction. An indefinite determiner should precede neither count nouns nor mass nouns. The same type of quantifiers can modify both count and mass nouns. Plural expressions of count nouns as well as mass nouns are grammatically perfect without a plural morpheme. If Quine (1960) were correct, Korean- and Japanese-speaking children would infer the meaning of new words on the basis of perceptual similarity like shape rather than the ontological concept, since they would never have been exposed to such concepts. In contrast, if Soja et al. (1991) were correct, then Korean and Japanese children would infer the meaning of new words in a different way, depending upon whether they refer to solid objects or non-solid substances even at the earliest stage of language acquisition. In this section, we will discuss crosslinguistic data from the three languages, with a focus on results by Soja et al. (1991) and Imai and Gentner (1997) for English, Imai and Gentner (1997) for Japanese, and K. Park (2001), H. Lee and K.-H. Lee (1999), and H. Lee (2002) for Korean. The results are summarized in Table 26.1.1 English, Japanese, and Korean data As mentioned, Soja et al. (1991) provided evidence for the universal use of the ontological concept at early stages of word learning in English. Imai and

Table 26.1. Percentage of shape responses from English, Japanese, and Korean

English (2yr) English (2yr) Japanese (2yr) Korean (2yr) Korean (3yr) Korean (3yr) English (4yr) Japanese (4yr) Korean (5yr) Korean (5yr)

1

References

Complex object

Simple object

Complex substance

Simple substance

Soja et al. (1991) Imai & Gentner (1997) Imai & Gentner (1997) Park (2001) Lee & Lee (1999) Lee (2002) Imai & Gentner (1997) Imai & Gentner (1997) Lee & Lee (1999) Lee (2002)

93% 84.5% 86% 83% 84% 96% 97% 79% 84% 53%

89% 71.5% 51% 60% 78% 91% 91% 56% 71% 60%

32%

24% 43.5% 32% 31% 60% 71% 44% 9% 66% 51%

62% 89%

67% 56%

The complex substance trial was not included in Imai & Gentner (1997) and Park (2001).

Ontological concept versus shape in word learning

355

Figure 26.2. Stimuli used in Imai and Gentner (1997)

Gentner (1997) extended Soja et al.’s study to test whether the ontological knowledge could be universally used in early word learning in English and Japanese. They used three types of trials such as complex object trials, simple object trials, and substance trials (Figure 26.2). They found not only the universal use of the ontological concept but also language-specific effects on word learning. First, children in both languages committed the ontological concepts in such a way that they tended to respond to shape in complex solid object trials (84.5% [2yr] and 97% [4yr]-English; 86% [2yr] and 79% [4yr]-Japanese) and to material in nonsolid substance trials (56.5% [2yr] and 56% [4yr]-English, 68% [2yr] and 91% [4yr]-Japanese). However, they also found language-specific influences on early word learning, especially in simple object trials and substance trials. The Japanese-speaking children responded to shape in the simple object trial and the substance trial (51% [2yr] and 56% [4yr]-simple object; 32% [2yr] and 9% [4yr]-substance) much less than the English-speaking children did (71.5% [2yr)] and 91% [4yr]-simple object; 43.5% [2yr] and 44% [4yr]-substance). In other words, Japanese children showed a material bias rather than a shape bias in these trials. Imai and Gentner (1997) attempted to ascribe this difference to the lexical effect that Lucy (1992) proposed. Lucy predicted that children who speak classifier languages would pay attention to material rather than shape. According to Imai and Gentner (1997), Japanese is a classifier language, thus Japanese-speaking children showed a material bias because of the lexical structure of their language. Unlike Japanese, Korean studies provided rather inconsistent conclusions with respect to the universal role of ontological concept in Korean word learning (H. Lee, 1995, 2000, 2002; H. Lee & K.-H. Lee, 1999; Park, 2001). We will focus on discussing the data from three studies, Lee (2002), Lee and Lee (1999), and Park (2001), which were all carried out recently. Park tried to replicate Imai and

356

Hyeonjin Lee

Figure 26.3. Stimuli used in Lee and Lee (1999)

Gentner by using the same methodological procedures used in their 1997 study. His results indicated that 2-year-old children showed a shape bias for complex objects (83%). The proportion of shape responses slightly diminished in the simple object trial (60%), but it was still higher in the simple object trial than in the simple substance trial (31%). Park (2001) concluded that shape and its complexity rather than ontological concept might be crucial to inferring the meaning of words in Korean. In other words, Park’s interpretation contradicted the universal use of ontological concept. It seems, however, more likely to raise a different interpretation on his data. It is noticeable that the response pattern in Park (2001) is very similar to that of the Japanese response in Imai and Gentner (1997); the shape response was more frequent in the object trial (83%) and in the substance trial (31%). We thus suggest that Park’s data could be reinterpreted as evidence that the ontological concept plays a role, along with language-specific effects in Korean word learning. If we could reinterpret Park’s data, then there would be no inconsistency among Korean studies. Lee and Lee (1999) investigated how intention and stimulus complexity interact with ontological concepts such as solid objects and non-solid substances in Korean word learning. They used 3- and 5-year-old subjects and four types of stimuli: complex-shaped objects, simple-shaped objects, complex-shaped substance, and simple-shaped substance (Figure 26.3). They distinguished the intentional condition from the accidental condition in their experiments. (This paper will only discuss the data from the intentional condition, since its procedure is the same as that of other studies.) Their results indicated that Korean children showed more shape preference for solid objects than for non-solid substances, although they gave more shape responses for non-solid substance than English-speaking children did. They concluded that shape similarity might play a major role in Korean word learning, but the ontological concept was still respected as a universal constraint on word learning. Besides, the complexity of the stimulus also had an influence on inferring the meaning of words.

Ontological concept versus shape in word learning

357

Object Trial

Substance Trial

Object Trial

Substance Trial

Standard Stimulus

Standard Stimulus

Standard Stimulus

Standard Stimulus

Test Stimuli

Test Stimuli

Test Stimuli

Test Stimuli

Figure 26.4. Stimuli used in Lee (2002)

The results in Lee and Lee (1999) were straightforwardly replicated in Lee (2002), which tested the role of ontological concept, shape bias, stimulus complexity and whole object bias in Korean word learning. The experiments used 3- and 5-year-olds as subjects and four different types of stimuli: complexshaped objects, simple-shaped objects, complex-shaped substance and simpleshaped substance. The first test stimulus was similar to the standard in shape but was made of different material, while the second stimulus was similar to the standard in material makeup but formed a different shape. Both were single intact objects. The third and fourth stimuli consisted of several chunks. The third was similar to the standard in shape but made of a different material and the fourth was similar to the standard in material makeup but formed a different shape (Figure 26.4). The results were summarized as follows: first, although Korean-speaking children responded to the same-shaped stimuli at a high percentage level in the non-solid substance as well as the solid object trials, they showed a stronger shape bias in the solid object trial than in the non-solid substance trial. This means that shape similarity is crucial in inferring the meaning of a word in Korean, but the ontological concept is still respected, as in Lee and Lee (1999). Second, Korean-speaking children generalized a novel word to stimuli that formed the same shape as the standard, i.e. in the first and the third stimuli, they preferred the single intact stimuli to the stimuli of pieces. This means that the inference of a word’s meaning is a rather complex process in such a way that whole object bias might interact with shape bias as well as with ontological concept in Korean. Summing up, Korean studies have suggested that several factors such as shape similarity, ontological concept, and perceptual complexity might interact

358

Hyeonjin Lee

in inferring the meaning of a word. It implies that the inference of word meaning respects not only language universality but also language specificity. We will discuss this further in the next section. Crosslinguistic discussion of English, Japanese, and Korean We suggest a modified version of Imai and Gentner (1997) to crosslinguistically approach the data from English, Japanese and Korean. To explain the language difference between English and Japanese, Imai and Gentner (1997) adopted Lucy’s analysis of how classifiers in Yucatec Mayan partition word meanings. Lucy (1992) classified entities as animate beings, concrete objects and substance, and proposed that the likelihood of individuation depends on what kind of entity is being referred to. Lexical nouns for animate beings (human and animals), concrete objects and substance might be ordered in terms of individuation; animate entities are most likely individuated, concrete objects are in the middle, and substances are least likely individuated. Lucy (1992) suggested that the individuation is closely related to the possibility of pluralization and necessity of unitization (use of classifier). Thus, entities that are more likely to be individuated will have a higher possibility of pluralization, and, in general, the division made with respect to pluralization corresponds to the one made with respect to whether a noun needs a classifier. As for the lexical structure, Imai and Gentner (1997) proposed that English nouns marked as animate entities or concrete objects can be pluralized when there is more than one individual, whereas substances cannot be pluralized. Some mass nouns for substance need classifiers to be quantified. By contrast, Japanese is different from English in the sense of pluralization. Japanese nouns marked as humans can be optionally pluralized, but nouns marked as animals, concrete objects, and substances need not be pluralized. Japanese is a classifier language in such a way that every noun needs a classifier to be quantified. According to Imai and Gentner (1997), the difference of the lexical structure led these two languages to have different divisions in terms of individuation. English has a criterion that divides between {humans, animals, concrete objects} and {substances}, whereas Japanese has a criterion that divides between {humans} and {animals, concrete objects, substances}. Imai and Gentner (1997) suggested that this lexical difference might affect the inference of word meanings so as to induce the language specificity; English shows a shape bias, whereas Japanese shows a material bias. It is noticeable that the Korean data in Table 26.1 have some similarities as well as differences, when compared with English and Japanese. We first discuss the data with emphasis on 2-year-old children. The results show a pattern similar to those of Japanese. First, children universally responded to the shape in the object trials more frequently than in the substance trial across the three

Ontological concept versus shape in word learning

359

languages. This may be evidence for the universal use of ontological distinction between solid objects and non-solid substance in inferring the meaning of new words. That both Japanese and Korean children show this pattern would be strong evidence for the pre-existing ontological concept in word learning. Second, shape preference is influenced by perceptual complexity in such a way that it is much stronger in the complex object condition than in the simple object condition. However, as Imai and Gentner (1997) noted, there is also some language-specific effect. As for the simple objects, English-speaking children responded to shape at a high percentage level, but Japanese- and Koreanspeaking children responded at a chance level. This difference could be explained by the lexical effect that was proposed in Imai and Gentner (1997). It is, however, noticeable that the older Korean children showed a response pattern similar to that of the English-speaking children rather than that of Japanese-speaking children; the Korean-speaking as well as the Englishspeaking children responded to shape in the object and substance trials more than the Japanese-speaking children did. How could we incorporate the discrepancy between the older and younger children in Korean crosslinguistically? We suggest that the discrepancy between the age groups in Korean might be attributed to some language-specific property. As for the lexical structure, like Japanese, Korean is a classifier language. Korean uses a variety of classifiers to express quantification of nouns. There are, however, a number of language-specific properties in Korean which are different from Japanese. First, the possibility of pluralization is different from that of Japanese. It is apparent that Korean nouns marked as animate entities (i.e. human and animal) can be optionally pluralized, but nouns marked as substance cannot be pluralized. However, it is marginally acceptable to attach the plural morpheme -tul to concrete objects in Korean. It seems more grammatically acceptable not to use the plural marker -tul when there are more than one concrete object. It is, however, true that it cannot be grammatically incorrect. Second, nouns marked as humans are exceptionally allowed to be pluralized without a classifier, although every noun in Korean needs a classifier to be quantified. We thus assume that these grammatical aspects might be closely related to the inference of word meaning in Korean; the more apparent the division is with respect to pluralization, the earlier children will use it. According to this assumption, we hypothesize children’s development of individuation as follows. First, for individuation, Korean children would have a criterion that divides between {human} and {animal, concrete object, substance} at the youngest stage of language development, since nouns marked as human in Korean are most apparent in terms of pluralization. In the second stage, they would extend the criterion to one that divides between {human, animal} and {concrete object, substance}. Finally the criterion of individuation would be extended to {human, animal, concrete object} and {substance}.

360

Hyeonjin Lee

This prediction could in general be fulfilled in the Korean data. If we assume that these developmental stages exist with respect to individuation, we could predict that children at the first and second stage (i.e. 2-year-olds) show a response pattern similar to that of Japanese children, since their division corresponds to that of the Japanese language pattern. This property of lexical structure may lead them to respond to the material more frequently than the English-speaking children did in the simple object trial and the substance trials. On the other hand, if the division is extended to include {human, animal, concrete object} as being individuated at a later stage, then children would be more likely to show a response pattern similar to the English-speaking children. This is exactly what happened in the older children; the Korean children older than 3 years showed a shape bias rather than a material bias.2 In conclusion, the ontological concept is universally used in inferring the meaning of Korean words, as it is in other languages such as English and Japanese. Furthermore, perceptual complexity enhanced the proportion of shape responses in Korean, as in English and Japanese. However, the younger Korean children showed a material bias, as in Japanese, whereas the older Korean children showed a shape bias, as in English. This response pattern might be attributed to the lexical structure of the Korean language.

2

It is, however, noted that 5-year-old Korean children in Lee (2002) showed no preference across the four different types of trials. We do not have a clear explanation for their exceptional response pattern at this moment. We will put this data aside in the discussion, since this is an exceptional case. Besides this, most data showed that the proportion of shape response was relatively high.

27

Notes on Korean Sign Language Se-Eun Jhang*

Abstract The current circumstances of deaf education in Korea are very similar to those in the USA of the 1970s, when the study of American Sign Language (ASL) as a first language was in its infancy. A very brief sketch of the historical shifts in the mode of communication in classrooms for deaf children in North America reveals that it followed a course of oral-only options before 1960, through the Total Communication model in the early 1960s, to the ASL-English bilingualbicultural approaches in the late 1970s and early 1980s. Given the long-standing controversy between the current approach and other approaches, it is worth making a survey of the historical shifts in the mode of communication handling of Korean deaf children in the classroom. The purpose of this paper is to offer an overview of Korean Sign Language (KSL). The first part starts with a history of sign language in Korea and ends with a review of recent studies on the relationship between Korean literacy and modes of communication such as oralism, Korean Standard Sign Language, and KSL. Second, I present a short review of recent research on the debate about modes of communication with regard to the acquisition of sign language. Third, I give a brief review of distinguished research on the linguistic properties of KSL, followed by a brief outline of the remarkable research on KSL translation systems. Finally, I point to some directions for future research on KSL in the light of a bilingual-bicultural approach, based on KSL as a primary language and Korean as a second language. Introduction The education of deaf children all over the world has a history of barriers to language, learning, and communication, because the use of signed language as their native language has been viewed as obstructing the learning of a spoken *

This paper is a revised and extended version of Jhang (2006). I would like to thank Chungmin Lee and an anonymous reviewer for their valuable comments, suggestions, and references. Without them, the current paper would contain more errors and shortcomings. Of course, all the remaining errors are mine.

361

362

Se-Eun Jhang

language. This statement has been applied to the education of Korean deaf children. The current circumstances of deaf education in Korea are very similar to those in the USA of the 1970s, when the study of American Sign Language (henceforth ASL) as a first language was in its infancy. Many educators of deaf children in Korea still have a biased view of their pupils as flawed and somehow incomplete children, who must be made to look and act like hearing children. Moreover, most hearing people have also viewed deaf children as ‘handicapped’, as opposed to ‘normal hearing’ children. Fortunately, within the last decade, a movement of the deaf culture has been advocating that deaf children should be thought of as a linguistic minority in Korea, whose linguistic and cultural rights should be respected. Nonetheless, most schools for deaf children still adhere to oralism and very few schools are moving from oralism to the use of Signed Korean, in the form of Total Communication programs, in which signing and speech are used simultaneously. Although the Total Communication model (defined as SEE-1, SEE-2, Cued Speech, Manually Coded English, or Signed English), which was put forth in the USA in the early 1960s, was not as successful as it was intended to be, Signed Korean, which can be called invented Korean-based signing or Manually Coded Korean, has been used to foster the development of speech and spoken Korean. Therefore, many educators have paid little attention to the use of Korean Sign Language, (henceforth KSL), the first and natural language of Korean deaf children, as an instructional tool to teach reading skills of spoken languages such as Korean or English. This is because KSL has not been accepted as a part of the philosophy of Total Communication. In other words, KSL has been considered an obstacle to the learning of Korean literacy, and thus not regarded appropriate for classroom use. As a result, most deaf and hard-ofhearing students have great difficulty reading and writing Korean and their reading ability stands at the second or third grade levels when graduating from high school (J. Y. Park, 1989; Choi & Ahn, 2003), as was the case in the USA in the 1970s (Fruchter, Wilbur & Fraser, 1984). As an alternative to the Total Communication method, bilingual-bicultural educational research conducted in North America in the 1970s and reported in the late 1970s and early 1980s, suggested that there may be threshold levels of linguistic competence which deaf children must attain in their home language in order to avoid negative influences in academic functions in the school language (Christensen, 1993). As suggested in Litchfield (2002), greater ASL proficiency contributes positively to deaf children’s development of written English. Thus, the fundamental idea behind bilingual approaches is that there is a strong and positive relation between the knowledge of sign language and reading skills. A very brief sketch of the historical shifts in the mode of communication in classrooms for deaf children in North America reveals that it followed a course of oral-only options before 1960, through the Total Communication

Korean Sign Language

363

model in the early 1960s, to the ASL-English bilingual-bicultural approaches in the late 1970s and early 1980s. Given the long-standing controversy between the current approach and other approaches, it is worth making a survey of the historical shifts in the mode of communication handling of Korean deaf children in the classroom. The purpose of this paper is to offer an overview of Korean Sign Language (KSL). The first part starts with a history of sign language in Korea and ends with a review of recent studies on the relationship between Korean literacy and modes of communication such as oralism (Chun, 1998), Korean Standard Sign Language (K. S. Jung, 2002), and KSL (Choi & Ahn, 2003; Jhang, 2004). Second, it continues to give a short review of recent research into modes of communication with regard to the acquisition of the sign language (D. S. Hwang, 1994; S. W. Ahn, 1997; Jun, 2001a; Na & Kang, 2001; Won, 2002). Third, it gives a brief review of distinguished research on the linguistic properties of KSL (S. K. Kim, 1983; Suk, 1989; Hwang, 1994; J. K. Jang, 1995; C. K. Kim, 1998; Jhang, 1997; 1999a; 1999b; Hong, 2001), along with the remarkable research on KSL translation systems (H.-S. Kim, 1996; Bien et al., 2000; J.-B. Kim, 2002; D.-J. Kim et al., 2002; J. Park & D. Lee, 2005). Finally, I point to some directions for future research on KSL in the light of a bilingualbicultural approach, based on KSL as a primary language and Korean as a second language. A history of sign language in Korea There are some published sources that include a detailed history of sign language in Korea (C. K. Kim, 1998; 1999; Choi & Ahn, 2003). According to A Handbook of Hearing Impaired, published in 1991 by the Korean Welfare Association of the Hearing-Impaired, deaf and hard-of-hearing people had regular deaf education at the blind and dumb school of Pyengyang. In 1909 they were first instructed by Mrs. Rossetta Sherwood Hall, a medical missionary. The Life-Saving Institute under the Japanese Government-General of Chosun was established in 1912 immediately after the colonization of Chosun in 1910. In 1947, after the Independence of Korea in 1945, Korean finger-spelling was created by Baek-Won Yoon, the first principal of a national blind and dumb school in Seoul. Oralism or lip-reading had been permitted in classrooms before the advent of Signed Korean, (or Korean Standard Sign Language, Manually Coded Korean), including finger-spelling, and signing was officially allowed to be used for the first time in classrooms in 1983, as a therapeutic education activity of the third deaf education curriculum. Signed Korean was used in conjunction with oralism, or lip-reading, in order to meet an essential aim of the fourth deaf education curriculum in 1989, which stipulated ‘open use of

364

Se-Eun Jhang

communication modes.’ At that time, signed language as a mode of communication was still considered as an auxiliary to spoken language. The statistics from the Ministry of Education of 2000 show that there were nineteen hearing-impaired schools, composed of elementary, middle and high schools. The total number of students was 2,457. There were no deaf schools that employed any kind of signed language at the preschool and kindergarten level. Although there are a number of ASL and other signed language research studies that demonstrate the effectiveness of using signs as compared to oralism, most of the hearing-impaired elementary schools have persisted with oralism in the lower grades rather than signed language for a number of reasons. Kwon (2001) suggests three reasons to consider in this matter: first, parents of deaf and hard-of-hearing children strongly refuse requests to use signing during the early ages. Second, it is hard to get early education taught by early education centers. Third, it is hard to get teachers to sign fluent signed language. From the upper grades, signed language has been employed together with oralism in classrooms. All the hearing-impaired elementary, middle and high schools permitting signed language have adhered to Signed Korean, because they hold a (biased) view that Korean literacy can be improved by such a sign system where signs are artificially invented to conform to Korean grammar. The Korean Welfare Association of Hearing Impaired and other related organizations have also been focusing on the widespread use of Signed Korean as an artificial sign language, rather than KSL as a natural sign language. Since 1990, the Ministry of Education of the Korean government has also paid much attention to some standardization of signed language which could help communication between deaf and hearing people, and even among deaf people, due to the dialectal variations of signs. Advocates for the standardization of signs conducted their research sponsored by the government and published in Hangul-style Standard Sign Language (S. K. Kim, 1991) and Korean Standard Sign Language (S. K. Kim, 1993), known as Korean Standard Sign Language (henceforth KSDSL), as noted by Jun (2001a). Owing to the lack of fundamental linguistic knowledge and scientific research about KSL as a fully fledged natural language, however, Korean deaf education may be plunged into even worse confusion after the debate about whether to use KSL or KSDSL in the classroom. This concern comes from the fact that a large government project on KSDSL lasted a full six years from 2000 to 2006. This project had three major tasks: (i) standardization of signs (ii) sign translation of foreign sign languages (iii) sign narration in classroom use. Furthermore, a more serious problem is that KSDSL may have negative effects upon deaf children’s cognitive development and learning in general, because they are deprived of chances to learn KSL as their first language, as pointed out by J. S. Jun (2001a). Now, let us discuss social issues concerning the debate on the language of instruction in the classroom with regard to Korean literacy. Whether to use a

Korean Sign Language

365

signed language or a spoken language as the primary language of instruction has been a long-standing issue in the education of deaf and hard-of-hearing learners. As cited in Bailes (2001), a signed language has been considered an obstacle to the learning of the literacy of the spoken language of the community, thus is deemed inappropriate for classroom use (for ASL, Barnum, 1984; Kuntze, 1998). As quoted in Hoffmeister (2000), in the early 1970s, many previously oral-only programs for American deaf children changed their educational practice and began to introduce signs into schools. This change was due to a number of research studies that demonstrated the efficacy of using signs, as compared to oral-only communication. It was not until the late 1980s that the change from oralism to signed language began at deaf schools in Korea. Chun (1998) is concerned with the development of literal vocabulary abilities, trying to set up an effective teaching method for developing the lexical abilities of deaf students. It is interesting to note two results her study achieved: first, lower grade students of middle and high schools achieved better results than higher grade students when literal vocabulary was taught in parallel with signed language. This means that the learning of vocabulary at an earlier age has a significant effect on the development of vocabulary of deaf students. Second, it is interesting to point out that lower grade students of elementary schools obtain literal vocabulary ability at a comparatively high level. This outcome may be the result of the parallel use of both signed language and oralism. Signed Korean, not KSL, was used in conjunction with oralism or lip-reading, because signed language was thought of as a secondary tool of spoken language and because many people blindly believed that Korean literacy could be improved by such a sign system where signs are artificially invented to conform to Korean grammar. A series of current studies have debated the issue about the relationship between Korean literacy and choice of communication mode between Signed Korean and KSL. Jung (2002) conducted a study with twenty first-year middle school students in Seoul over a ten-month period and demonstrates that the use of Korean Standard Sign Language does not have any effect on the improvement of Korean literacy, contrary to the expectations of advocators for Signed Korean. This result is consistent with that of previous research studies where the use of an artificial language did not help deaf children acquire a spoken language. Choi and Ahn (2003) show that, for deaf and hard-of-hearing middle and high school students, their KSL ability, not their moving up to a higher grade, has a significant effect on reading comprehension. Thus, the study points out that they are inclined to use KSL for reading: the higher their KSL ability, the higher their reading score. It is noted that this result is consistent with the claim that there is a strong relation between ASL ability and English literacy, which has been advocated by several ASL scholars (Hoffmeister, 2000; Padden

366

Se-Eun Jhang

Ramsey, 2000; Strong & Prinz, 2000) who contributed to the book entitled Language Acquisition By Eye (Chamberlain et al., 2000). Thus, this study suggests that KSL works efficiently in learning Korean literacy. Most recently, Jhang (2004) examines the relationship between non-verbal intelligence and Korean language performance in deaf and hard-of-hearing children as well as in normally hearing children and provides evidence for the mapping between sign language and reading ability. This mapping is suggested from two small samples of nine Korean deaf children and nine normal-hearing children, as a control group, between the ages of seven and ten in the second and third grades in elementary schools. Evidence comes from the fact that deaf children from deaf parents seem to do better than those from hearing parents at reading and writing and in overall academic achievement, as indicated by extensive prior research for American deaf children. According to the main findings produced by his study, the general cognitive ability of deaf children was not really different from that of hearing children. Thus there was no significant relationship between intelligence and language performance, contrary to Watson et al. (1982). In addition, KSL was the key to explaining academic differences between deaf children from deaf and hearing families, as reported in research on ASL. Therefore, his study shows that the view that use of sign language could interfere with development of reading ability is biased. A brief review of the debate about mode of communication with regard to the acquisition of sign language Now, let us continue to take a look at the social issues concerning the debate about the mode of communication with regard to the acquisition of sign language. Hwang (1994) is the first to attempt to explore the processing of sign language development of deaf and hard-of-hearing children who began to learn signed language after entering elementary school. He points out that moving up to a higher grade brought about the development of syntactic structures of signed language, where more various and more complicated constructions were used, and thus the length of signed language sentences was increasing. However, he indicates that the development of signed sentence length was very tardy, compared with that of spoken sentence length by hearing children of the same age. This may result from late exposure to signing, and thus he emphasizes the importance of the input necessary to acquire signed language in a typical language acquisition situation. On the same line, Ahn (1997) tries to account for why Signed Korean has failed to help deaf and hard-of-hearing children learn Korean, by reviewing ASL studies conducted by Slobin (1977), Supalla (1990, 1991), and others. He suggests that Signed Korean has provided children with improper and inappropriate input, because it is not a natural sign language. He then concludes that

Korean Sign Language

367

Signed Korean containing a partial auditory mode cannot be used as a language tool for acquiring Korean for deaf and hard-of-hearing children who cannot access oral language systems. Na and Kang (2001) also point out the importance of exposure to a natural sign language at an early age through a literature survey of recent ASL research on bilingual and bicultural approaches to a natural sign language education. Furthermore, they then suggest that their study should be instructive to Korean deaf education. Jun (2001a) claims that standard sign language for Signed Korean is not a sign language but a manually coded spoken Korean. Hence, he points out that deaf children learning standard sign language for Signed Korean may have problems in their cognitive development because they are deprived of chances to learn KSL, a fully fledged natural sign language, as their first language. As quoted in Martin (2001), we need to contemplate the pronouncements of the Linguistic Society of America in March of 1996, proclaiming that any linguistic minority has a human right to use the language of its preference in all areas of life. Won (2002) supports a bilingual approach to the education of deaf children to enable them to improve the literacy of a spoken language as their second language, with the help of a natural signed language as their first language. She illustrates the results of research on ASL, especially the acquisition of ASL in Luetke-Stahlman (1998) and Goodhart (1984). Hence she points out that this bilingual approach involving KSL as a natural signed language should be the most appropriate language for improving Korean literacy in deaf education. In fact, there is no real study regarding the processing of KSL acquisition at the early stages of development for deaf children, even though there are a lot of reports and theses on the processing of sign language in Korea. This result comes from the fact that KSL has never been allowed to be used in the preschool or the kindergarten for deaf children, and Signed Korean has been used in the upper grades of the elementary school. A brief review of distinguished research on the linguistic properties of KSL The first research on KSL cheremes (= primes or phonemes) was conducted by S. K. Kim (1983). He observed 29 cheremes in handshape, 23 in location, 36 in movement, and 20 in orientation as manual signs. Suk (1989) reclassified manual signs into 44 handshape primes, 40 location primes, 49 movement primes, and 12 orientation primes. The system of Suk (1989) had more primes in the first three parameters and fewer primes in the last parameter than that of Kim (1983). This difference may arise from the dialects of signs and

368

Se-Eun Jhang

the confusion between cheremes and allochers (subprimes or allophones). Unfortunately, succeeding research on the structural description of KSL signs has not been carried out in great detail so that we still do not agree on the number of each major parameter. Nonetheless, it can be appreciated that Kim (1983) and Suk (1989) were the first to investigate the internal organization of signs. In particular, Suk (1989) deserves to be recognized for a distinctive attempt at structural descriptions of the basic lexical units and morpho-syntactic properties of KSL. His work helped many special educators write their papers or graduateschool theses in special education departments in Korea (Hwang, 1994). In particular, his constraints on one-handed versus two-handed signs and double handshape signs (handshape-changing signs) was able to yield a series of phonological research studies, like Jhang (1997; 1999a). Readers can refer to Jhang (1997) for a detailed discussion about KSL reduplication. Jhang (1999a) discusses phonological structures of KSL, presenting the data of minimal pairs that one-handed and two-handed signs show and the data of prosodic structure of the signs, namely the syllable and mora. With regard to the syntactic structures of KSL, Suk (1989) notices that although the basic order of KSL sentences is Subject-Object-Verb (SOV), like Korean, all kinds of word order are possible by means of topicalization, along with non-manual signals. Hwang (1994) also presents varieties of word order which are not allowed in Korean. However, their sentence data for grammatical judgments of signed language seems to be Pidgin Sign Korean so that their generalization cannot put confidence in grammaticality. It is worth mentioning that etymological research of KSL was conducted by Jang (1995) based on a language family stemming from phonology, and Kim (1998) based on Korea’s cultural background, judging that linguistic research of KSL has just started. Furthermore, Hong (2001) presented a paper titled ‘An empirical survey on animal classifiers in KSL,’ which focuses on semantic classifiers and limb classifiers describing the movements of animals, at the Conference on Sign Linguistics, Deaf Education and Deaf Culture in Asia in Hong Kong in December 2001. Her data was gathered from eight deaf informants signing in KSL. This overseas presentation will stir up future research on the linguistic properties of KSL. Now, let us briefly discuss some aspects of the syntactic structures and constraints of KSL. When we take a close look at KSL sentences, we note that not all kinds of word order are allowed, as seen in (1)–(4): (1)

SOV IX IX dog cat chase ‘The dog chased the cat.’

Korean Sign Language

(2)

(3)

(4)

369

OSV a. IX IX cat dog chase b. IX cat dog chase c. * IX cat dog chase d. * cat dog chase OVS a. * cat chase dog b. <mwuek> cat chase what dog a. * dog chase cat b. * chase dog cat c. * chase cat dog

(SVO) (VSO) (VOS)

In the above examples, the symbol < > stands for a Korean sign, following Suk’s (1989) notation. IX means an index used for pointing signs or gender marking with respect to movement toward different target points in the indexic plane. Interestingly, KSL does not have case markers, tense markers and ending markers, unlike Korean. As in (1), many researchers assume that SOV is a basic word order of KSL, like Korean (Suk, 1989; D. Hwang, 1994; Jhang, 1999b; 2008). Although there is some variability on OSV word order, as in (2a–d) where the object ‘cat’ is fronted in the initial position, (2a) and (2b) where the object occurs with its index are grammatical, whereas (2c) and (2d), where it does not, are ungrammatical. In KSL, the first NP of the two consecutive NPs employs a genitive case, or it is coordinated with the second NP. Hence, (2c) and (2d) can be interpreted as ‘X chased the cat’s dog’ or ‘X chased the cat and the dog.’ In (3) and (4) where a verb does not occur in the final position, all the examples except (3b) are ungrammatical. In (3b), <mwuek> ‘what’ or ‘who’ occurs just before the subject without any non-manual signs. The sign <mwuek> ‘what’ is different from the sign used in wh-questions carrying some non-manual signals. The only difference between the two signs is in the palm orientation parameter (inward/outward palm orientation with the index finger pointing down/ up respectively). The sign <mwuek> ‘what’ in (3b) seems to function as a focus. It is interesting to mention that the word order OSV is only allowed in a construction with agreeing verbs like ‘chase’, ‘give’,

370

Se-Eun Jhang

‘scold’, etc., where a pronominal expression can be used in a certain space called a locus. As pointed out by Jhang (1999b), therefore, the word order changing of KSL is much more restricted than that of ASL, because the former is realized in terms of subject–object agreement on the verb, whereas the latter is realized in terms of non-manual signals on the topicalized elements. Refer to Jhang (2008) for a list of KSL verbs and a more detailed discussion of three different verb types such as inflecting verbs, spatial verbs and plain verbs. Now, let us briefly take a look at some aspects of wh-questions in KSL and some arguments provided by the two current conflicting analyses of the rightward and leftward wh-movement. Jhang (1999b) mentions that KSL has eight types of wh-question formation, as in (5). wh (5) (a) <mwuek> <sata> Chelsoo what buy wh (b) <sata> <mwuek> Chelsoo buy what wh (c) <sata> <mwuek> Chelsoo buy what wh (d) <mwuek> <sata> <mwuek> what Chelsoo buy what wh (e) <mwuek> <sata> what Chelsoo buy wh (f) <mwuek> <mwuek> <sata> what Chelsoo what buy wh (g) <mwuek> <sata> <mwuek> Chelsoo what buy what wh (h) <mwuek> <mwuek> <sata> <mwuek> what Chelsoo what buy what ‘What did Chelsoo buy?’ Note that the line above the KSL glosses means that a non-manual wh-question marker is used during the signs. This marker is indicated by a particular facial expression with furrowed brows, slightly forward body

Korean Sign Language

371

position, and the head tilted back, just like the non-manual characteristics of the ASL wh-question marker. Although the basic word order of KSL (SOV) is different from that of ASL (SVO), the two languages show similar syntactic behaviors in wh-questions. In both ASL and KSL, a non-manual wh-marking functions as a grammatical marker, and wh-words are in situ, as in (5a), or they optionally appear in sentence-final position, as in (5b–c). In addition, the two languages have the distribution of non-manual syntactic wh-marking in common. When manual wh-material is available in sentence-final position, the spread of wh-marking over the rest of the sentence is optional, as in (5c); otherwise, spread is obligatory, as in (5b). Finally, they also allow for a wh-double construction, as in (5d), where a wh-object appears at both the beginning and the end. However, KSL involves three other types of the wh-question formation, as in (5f–h), which ASL does not. These types show that a double wh-element is found either sentence initially, as in (5f), or at the end of the sentence, as in (5g), or both initially and at the end of the sentence, as in (5h), when a twin wh-element is in situ. Here, it is interesting to note that the judgment of grammaticality is different in the ASL wh-question formation like (5e), where a wh-object appears at the beginning, but it is consistent in KSL. That is, in ASL, those who are in favor of a leftward wh-movement analysis accept a sentence like (5e) as grammatical, whereas those who are in favor of a rightward wh-movement analysis treat it as ungrammatical. However, in KSL, a sentence like (5e) is perfectly accepted as grammatical. Hence, the KSL wh-question formation with sentence-initial wh-objects, as in (5e), proves to be a piece of evidence in favor of leftward wh-movement. Then he provides another piece of evidence in favor of leftward whmovement: the focus function of right-peripheral wh-material in wh-doubles sentences, as in (6). (6) a.

b.

wh <ecey> who car yesterday Chelsoo fix who wh * <ecey> who car yesterday Chelsoo fix who car ‘Whose car did Chelsoo fix yesterday?’

In (6a), when the final double is a single word (a head, Xo), the sentence is grammatical. In (6b), when it is a phrase, it is ungrammatical. As proposed in Petronio and Lillo-Martin (1997), the leftward wh-movement analysis accounts for the focus or emphasis function of the double construction. Under this analysis, the final double is base-generated in the head of a [+F] CP, because a phrase does not occur in a head position. Hence, the leftward wh-movement

372

Se-Eun Jhang

analysis also accounts for the contrastiveness of grammaticality in sentences of KSL like (6a) and (6b). In contrast, Jhang (1999b) also provides two pieces of evidence from KSL in favor of rightward wh-movement analysis. A piece of evidence comes from the left-dislocation of wh-words in sentences containing agreeing verbs which make use of referential space to leave pronominal referents in the original place. Another piece of evidence comes from the extraction of a wh-word from within an embedded clause, as in (7). (7) a.

b. c.

wh [[[[ ti<sata> ]IP2 ti ]CP2 ]IP1<mwuek>i ]CP1 Chelsoo buy you know what wh [[[[ ti <sata>]IP2 ti ]CP2 ]IP1 <mwuek>i]CP1 wh wh *[[[[ ti<sata> ]IP2ti ]CP2 ]IP1 <mwuek>i ]CP1 ‘*What do you know Chelsoo bought?’

The generalization about the distribution of non-manual syntactic wh-marking observed in simple sentences, as noticed in (7a–c), extends to apply to the extraction of a wh-word within an embedded clause, because it predicts the sentences of (7a–b) to be grammatical and the sentence of (7c) to be ungrammatical. As the contrastiveness of grammaticality between (7a–b) and (7c) shows, the rightward wh-movement analysis seems to meet the generalization about the distribution of non-manual syntactic wh-marking. Translation systems for Korean Sign Language Now, let us briefly discuss translation systems for Korean Sign Language. There are two kinds of translation system which help deaf and hard-of-hearing people communicate with hearing people based on sign language: a sign language generation system and a sign language recognition system. A team at the Korea Advanced Institute of Science and Technology (KAIST) invented ‘the Automated Generation System for Hangul Standard Sign Language’ in Professor Bien’s office in 1995 and presented their paper in 1996. They developed the same system for use with personal computers in 2000 and then reported the result in a paper titled ‘Development of Korean Sign Language translation system for the education of hearing-impaired people’ in the same year (Bien et al., 2000) The following year they developed a Korean Sign Language generation system using a TV caption signal, introducing the algorithm for Hangul morpheme analysis. These days they continue developing a Korean Sign Language Avatar which will show animation

Korean Sign Language

373

including non-manual signals as if the native speakers of KSL were communicating with each other. On the other hand, KAIST’s team and other researchers and technicians have also been interested in the design and implementation of a Korean text-to-sign language translation system in terms of both gesture recognition and from an empirical linguistic point of view. The research of the former has been conducted by a few technicians. For instance, J.-B. Kim (2002) dealt with the gesture segmentation problem in continuous sign language and the gesture word matching problem using expensive glove-based devices. More recently J. Park and D. Lee (2005) proposed vision-based recognition for KSL, which is inexpensive and adequate for recognizing elaborate finger spelling. From the linguistic point of view, Kwon, Woo and Min (2000) adopted the direct method for machine translation, which uses morphological analysis and dictionary search. They suggested that their proposed system could help deaf and impaired students improve Korean literacy when it plays a role as part of spoken and signed language translation development. Directions for future research Why do most deaf children read poorly, while a very small minority of deaf children can learn to read fluently? A lot of ASL research over the past twenty years suggests that a plausible solution to this problem can be found in bilingual-bicultural approaches to deaf education as an alternative method to Total Communication programs. It is noticeable that, in KSL research, there has been growing recognition of this approach during the last few years. However, parents, teachers, and educational administrators are still obstinate about oral-only instruction without sign language in classrooms at lower grades of elementary schools and tolerate the use of Signed Korean in classrooms in upper grades only. These modes of communication in classrooms have resulted in a dishearteningly limited improvement in deaf students’ literacy skills over the past few decades, because many deaf students graduating from high schools are still reading at levels comparable to hearing students who are nine to ten years younger. J. Y. Park (1989) notes that the median reading level of deaf elementary school students in the sixth grade was about the same as the 2.4 grade of hearing elementary schools. Choi and Ahn (2003) also show a similar result since deaf elementary school students were at the median reading level of about a 1.6 grade average, deaf middle school students were at a 2.6 grade average, and deaf high school students were at a 2.7 grade average of hearing elementary schools. Moreover, many people have a misconception about the cognitive factors that account for how deaf children learn, or fail to learn, to read. Thus, we need to consider another question regarding whether or not the general cognitive ability

374

Se-Eun Jhang

of deaf children is really different from that of hearing children. A myth that both hearing and deaf people believe is that deaf children do not develop the ability to apply their nonlinguistic cognitive skills to linguistic tasks. Jhang (2004) has shown that this myth is untrue in that there is no clear relationship between intelligence and language performance. It is hoped that the current research studies on KSL will help in the understanding of the bilingual approach to Korean literacy because many people have wrongly recognized KSL as retarding the development of learning Korean. Thus, I think that there will be a number of more lively discussions on the bilingual-bicultural approach to deaf education in Korea, focusing on a hypothesis that signed language as the first language correlates to the development of literacy of the spoken language of the community. As pointed out by Liddell and Johnson (1992), however, we have to consider that the acquisition of a spoken language for deaf children is more a matter of learning than of acquisition. Because deaf children do not have full sensory access to spoken languages, it is not available at an appropriate time or in an appropriate form for them to undertake an ordinary and natural course of language acquisition. So they view deaf education as an education for bilingualism, rather than viewing it as an education through bilingualism. Therefore, further research will be required to take a bilingual and bicultural approach based on KSL as the primary language and Korean as a second language. This idea can be extended to trilingual education to use KSL as a communication ‘bridge’ between two spoken languages, Korean and English (Christensen, 2000). From the perspective of bilingual approaches for deaf learners, Korean deaf education will also need an intensive KSL immersion program as proposed in Christensen (2000), Liddell and Johnson (1992), Paul and Quigley (1990), and others, who suggest that ASL-using deaf students be educated in a bilingual minority-language immersion program, just as bilingual education has been applied to hearing minority-language students. As proposed in Christensen (1993), a critical component in a successful bilingual and bicultural educational program is the availability of teachers who are bilingual and bicultural. Bilingual teachers can use KSL for discussion, explanation, and story-telling, with Korean used for reading and writing, in a bilingual classroom. This function should be used in a college or university containing deaf education programs. These successful programs can bring forth a boom in both KSL learning for hearing people and tests for interpreters so that Pidgin Sign Korean will no longer spread. After all, a number of deaf linguists could be taught so that they could analyze KSL with their native intuition. If any standardization of signed language is needed, a group of deaf linguists should participate in the project.

Korean Sign Language

375

Summary I have offered an overview of KSL. The first section presented a history of sign language in Korea. It was shown that most educators and educational administrators have paid much attention to KSDSL because they believe, without any evidence, that it will improve Korean literacy. Half of the first section covered the debate about the language of instruction in the classroom with regard to Korean literacy and modes of communication such as oralism, Signed Korean, or KSL. We first saw that the change from oralism to Signed Korean began in the late 1980s. It was interesting to note that very recent research has showed that greater KSL proficiency contributed positively to the improvement in literacy skills of Korean deaf students. The second section gave a short review of recent research on the mode of communication with regard to the acquisition of sign language. Here it was mentioned that there was now a preliminary study regarding the processing of KSL acquisition for deaf children at the early stages. The third section gave a brief review of distinguished research on some of the linguistic properties of KSL. The first part of this section was concerned with the investigation of the internal organization of signs and morpho-syntactic properties on the basis of research on the linguistic properties of KSL. In particular, it focused on word order and wh-questions in KSL, including some arguments provided by the two current disputing analyses of the leftward and rightward wh-movement. In the fourth section, we briefly discussed translation systems for Korean Sign Language invented and developed by a team at KAIST. Finally, I have presented five directions for further research on KSL: (i) a bilingual and bicultural approach based on KSL as the primary language and Korean as a second language; (ii) an intensive KSL immersion program just like bilingual education for hearing minority-language students; (iii) the training of teachers who are bilingual and bicultural; (iv) both KSL learning for hearing people and tests for interpreters; and (v) the bringing up of deaf linguists for KSL analysis and research.

Part II

Language processing

28

Visual processing of Hangul, the Korean script ChangHo Park

Background The Korean alphabet and syllables are referred to as Hangul (or Hangeul) in the Republic of Korea (S.), and registered as Jeongeum at ISO. Taylor and Taylor (1983) called Hangul an alphabetic syllabary, because of its dual characteristics of alphabetic script and syllabic script. For example, all of the Hangul syllable blocks (i.e. ‘kulca’ or ‘gulja’ in Korean) should be composed of twenty-four visually distinct letters (fourteen consonants and ten vowels), while Hangul words are usually written and spoken in units of syllable blocks like Hanja (Chinese characters). Before discussing the visual processing of Hangul, we need to understand these dual aspects of Hangul. (Although some terms imply phonemic aspects, this discussion focuses on the visual aspects of Hangul.) There are fourteen simple Hangul consonant letters including the five visually prototypic consonants ( ┐, ∟, ⊏, ⋏, and ㅇ) and the others derived from them by adding one to three strokes. These consonant letters can be combined with each other to form another five double consonants and eleven complex consonant letters. The ten simple Hangul vowel letters are derived by combining only three different strokes (
, –, and |). The first of these strokes, the small dot ‘
’, no longer used by itself, is transformed into a short vertical or a short horizontal bar, when added to a long horizontal or a long vertical bar, respectively. These ten simple vowel letters are combined with each other to form eleven compound vowel letters. In total, Hangul contains fifty-one different letter clusters, including twenty-four simple letters (the Korean alphabet), and among them thirty are consonants and twenty-one are vowels (see Figure 28.1). Some Hangul letters are highly similar to one another, having the basic form in common. Every Hangul syllable block has a structure consisting of either C1 + V, or C1 + V + C2, where C1 refers to the initial consonant letters (or initials), V the medial vowel letters (or medials), and C2 the final consonant letters (or finals). There are nineteen initials, twenty-one medials, and twenty-seven finals. Theoretically, it is possible to derive 11,172 Hangul syllable blocks, which is obtained from the product of 19 × 21 × {27 + 1 (null final)}. However, it was reported as of 1997 that, in practice, Koreans use at most 2,305 of all the 379

380

ChangHo Park

Initial consonants:

ㄱ ㄴ ㄷ ㄹ ㅁ ㅂ ㅅ ㅇ ㅈ ㅊ ㅋ ㅌ ㅍ ㅎ (simple) ㄲ ㄸ ㅃㅆ ㅉ

Medial vowels:

ㅏ ㅑ ㅓ ㅕ ㅗ ㅛ ㅜ ㅠ ㅡ ㅣ (simple) ㅐㅒㅔㅖㅘㅚㅙㅝㅟㅞㅢ

Final consonants:

ㄱㄴㄷㄹㅁㅂㅅㅇㅈㅊㅋㅌㅍㅎ ㄲ ㅆ ㄱㅅ, ㄴㅈ, ㄴㅎ, ㄹㄱ, ㄹㅁ, ㄹㅂ, ㄹㅅ, ㄹㅌ, ㄹㅍ, ㄹㅎ, ㅂㅅ.

Construction method: ㄱ(initial) + ㅏ(medial) + [ㅇ(final)] ⇒ 가, 강 ㄱ(initial) + ㅗ(medial) + [ㅇ(final)] ⇒ 고, 공 ㄱ(initial) + ㅘ(medial) + [ㅇ(final)] ⇒ 과, 광 Example of syllable(s): 새, 오, 뭐, 참, 컫, 뚫, 틈, 퓟, 봤, 한글(Hangul), 이중적(dual)

Figure 28.1. The Hangul alphabet and some examples of Hangul syllables. Sixteen of the initial and final consonants are identical. The final consonant letters in a syllable block, if any, are placed at the bottom

1. 가 (35.3%)

2. 고 (14.0%)

3. 과 (4.7%)

4. 강 (27.4%)

5. 공 (16.9%)

6. 광 (1.6%)

Figure 28.2. Examples of the six syllable block types and their relative usage. 1 & 4: vertical vowel types, with or without finals. 2 & 5: horizontal vowel types, with or without finals. 3 & 6: types of both horizontal and vertical vowel, with or without finals. Relative usages calculated from the data of H. Kim and Kang (1997)

possible syllable blocks and 99 percent of the time, they use only 808 syllable blocks (H. Kim & Kang, 1997). Some syllable blocks make words by themselves, while others are used as parts of words or morphemes. Syllable blocks consisting of words, or functional words attached to words, are concatenated to form a string. As seen in Figure 28.1, the position of the vowel letters (medials) is not consistent in Hangul syllable blocks. The long vertical bar of a vowel letter is placed on the right-hand of the initials, while the long horizontal bar is below the initials. Therefore, the initials and finals can be distinguished by the position of the medials. This characteristic has led some researchers (e.g. I. K. Kang & Lee, 1969; J. K. Lee, Namkung & Kim, 1981) to classify the spatial arrangement patterns of the letters into several distinct types (later settled as six syllable block types; see Figure 28.2). The position of the medial and the presence (or absence) of the final make different syllable block types. Syllable blocks of type 1 and 4 are most frequently used. However, considering the small numbers of type 1, 2 and 3, these types have higher proportions of usage per syllable block. Irrespective of the syllable block type, most syllable blocks have more or less

Visual processing of Hangul

381

the same overall size. But the exact shape of the same letters varies slightly with the syllable block type and their positions in a syllable block. As summarised briefly above, Hangul letters can be classified according to their basic configuration, and Hangul syllable blocks can be classified according to their type likewise. From this, one could reasonably infer that some letters or syllable blocks belonging to the same group will be easily confused with one another. So there have been several studies that focused on the question of how Hangul letters or syllable blocks could be grouped by similarity. These studies are reviewed below. Because a relatively small number (about 2,305) of syllable blocks are commonly used in Hangul (compare this with the vast number of Chinese characters), it is possible to learn and identify each syllable block as a whole. On the other hand, if one learns the twenty-four simple letters (or fifty-one letter clusters), one can identify all the Hangul syllable blocks. Many researchers have sought to find out whether Koreans perceive the Hangul syllables as a whole or not, and if they are analysed in perceptual processing, what is the processing unit? Research topics E. Lee and Zoh (1968) first measured the perceptual identification threshold of Hangul syllables and found that the number of letters and syllable blocks were very important factors for nonsense syllable blocks, but not for meaningful syllable blocks. Since syllable blocks seem to play a unique role in Hangul word processing (Simpson & Kang, 2004) and visual aspects carry more weight in the perception of Hangul than in other languages (T.-J. Park, 1997), a number of studies have focused on the visual processing of Hangul syllable blocks. Similarity structure among letters and syllable blocks As mentioned above, some consonant letters are very similar to each other, as are some vowel letters. J.-O. Kim (1982) asked participants to report the identity of a syllable block exposed briefly at threshold. The syllable blocks used as stimuli were made by combining each of the fourteen simple consonant letters with the vowel letter, ‘ㅏ’, and by combining the consonant letter, ‘ㅇ’ (having null sound value), with each of the ten basic vowel letters. His visual confusion matrix and perceptual distance diagram (see Figure 28.3) showed that the syllable blocks of the horizontal vowel types could be clustered into one group, and those of the vertical vowel types could be clustered into another group. Considering reciprocal distances between syllable blocks, the latter group could be divided into several subgroups: {이, 아, 야, 어, 여}, {나, 다, 타}, {마, 바, 파}, {가, 카, 사, 자, 차}, and a couple of individual syllable

382

ChangHo Park

Figure 28.3. Clustering pattern of syllables (J.-O. Kim, 1982). The line length represents the perceptual distance (d) and the arrowheads represent the direction of confusion. Only those d’s under 33 are shown, and the dotted line represents d = 33.3. Some links with d = 25 are not shown: 파 → 라, 이 → 마, and 야→마

blocks. You can see that those syllable blocks with common features are highly similar to one another. M.-S. Kim and Chung (1989) constructed confusion matrices of the letters according to the two- or three-letter positions in all the syllable block types. They found that the clustering pattern of the initials varied with the syllable block type, while that of the finals was rather consistent. They concluded that the configuration of the Hangul syllable blocks had an effect on the perceptual distinctiveness of the initials, but not on that of the finals. For most of the vowel letters, they found that each was clustered together with another having just one stroke more or less (e.g. ㅏ and ㅑ, ㅗ and ㅛ, ㅝ and ㅟ, etc.) rather

Visual processing of Hangul

383

consistently, whereas it was difficult to find higher order structures among the vowel letters across the syllable block types. Some syllable blocks belonging to the same type seem very similar to one another, with one or two distinctive features playing a crucial role in their accurate identification. On the other hand, similar letters having the basic form in common become dissimilar in the context of a specific syllable block. So one can scarcely exclude the factor of the syllable block type or global properties in issues involving the perceptual processing of Hangul. Psychological reality of syllable block types There are several justifications for reaching the conclusion that the syllable block type (see Figure 28.2) plays an important role in the perception of Hangul. First, the presence (46%) or absence (54%) of final consonant letters can imply different levels of processing load. Second, the orientation of the longer bar(s) of medial vowel letters can have considerable impact on the perceptual organisation of syllable blocks. If all the syllable blocks are perceived each as a whole, their type may not have legitimate status in Hangul perception. The syllable block type is likely to be correlated with visual complexity and the number of letters, so we should be cautious in drawing conclusions. In M.-S. Kim and Chung’s (1989) study, as the syllable block type changed, the clustering pattern of the letters changed also. M.-H. Kim and Lee (1992) reported that the participants were able to tell the type of syllable blocks before they could identify them. Negative response times in the same–different matching task for all the pairs of syllable blocks of the six types were longest when a syllable block was compared to another of the same type, which indicated that the syllable block type was automatically processed (K. Yi, 1993). Similarly, K.-J. Cho and Han (1996) found that the detection time of a target syllable was shorter with distractors of different syllable block types than with distractors of the same type, and that the finals were helpful in distinguishing a target from distractors. In a study of letter perception at threshold, J.-K. Kim (1994) reported that the proximity and similarity between the letters were important factors in the grouping of letters of syllable block type 4, and that the masking effect also varied with the syllable block type. He argued that the grouping effect was larger in type 4 than in type 5 (see Figure 28.2), which was supported by C. Park’s (2001) study where Garner interference was observed between the first consonants and the medial vowels in type 4, but not in type 5. (Garner interference refers to the performance decrease due to variation of distractors, e.g. Vs, irrelevant to and independent of targets, or C1s, and indicates a kind of holistic processing. See Pomerantz, 1983.) The perceptual organisation of letters can vary with the syllable block type. The letters in type 1 and 2 can be processed integrally, while all the finals in

384

ChangHo Park

types 4, 5 and 6 are not likely to be processed together with their initials and finals. However, one cannot exclude the possibility that, regardless of the type, a number of syllable blocks could be processed holistically with practice. Basic processing unit of syllable blocks Hangul syllable blocks have the dual aspects of being a whole syllable while at the same time being an aggregate of several letters, and they can be treated holistically or analytically. Studies on similarity structure indicate that the configural aspects of Hangul syllable blocks exert considerable influence on syllable perception. However, it is possible that analytic processing is involved in the processing of syllable blocks. In M.-S. Kim and Chung’s (1989) study the clustering pattern of the finals was not affected by the syllable block type. Does this indicate that the finals are processed independently of the first two clusters of letters? Or, indeed, is there any internal processing unit in Hangul syllable blocks? A number of studies have focused on this issue. Some studies have supported the holistic processing model of Hangul syllable blocks. For example, Choi (1986) asked subjects to perform a lexical decision task on syllable block strings (most Hangul words are made of one to four syllable blocks), and found that the response time was influenced by the number of syllable blocks, but not by the presence (or absence) of final consonant letter clusters. This result was partially supported by the study of J.-S. Lee and Kim (1989). Using a letter- or syllable-search task, they found that the syllable block was the processing unit in the case of Hangul words containing two or three syllable blocks. However, there was another study whose findings were diametrically opposite, indicating that syllable blocks could be processed letter by letter. Do (1992) asked subjects to search for target letters in a display of visually simple syllable blocks without any final letter, and found that the search slope of the whole target (syllable block) was the sum of the search slopes of its two component targets, and that those distractors having a consonant letter in common had more impact on the target search time. Based on Treisman’s feature integration theory, he concluded that syllable blocks were processed in letter units and that the initials were processed before the medials. As regards the primacy of processing among letters, there has been some evidence put forward that the initials are processed faster or recognised better than letters in other positions (M.-S. Kim & Chung, 1989; Y.-A. Lee, 1984; C. Park, 2001). However, this does not necessarily imply letter-by-letter processing. Other studies have suggested that the basic processing unit of Hangul syllable blocks is the cluster of initial consonant letters and medial vowel letters, that is, the ‘syllable body’. Y.-A. Lee (1984) studied grouping of letters in a Hangul syllable block using Garner-type card-sorting tasks (Garner, 1978). She found

Visual processing of Hangul

385

that the syllable body had emergent features which facilitated card sorting and were difficult to ignore. J.-S. Lee and Kim (1989) also found that in searching for single-syllable block words, the syllable body was the basic processing unit. With Garner-type attention tasks between every pair of initials, medials and finals of syllable block type 4 and 5 (see Figure 28.2), C. Park (2001) showed that it was easy to give selective attention to the final consonants apart from the medials but not from the initial consonants, and that the initials and the medials were hard to attend to selectively at least in syllable block type 4. For poor performance in condensation tasks, however, one could hardly regard syllable body as an entire whole, though it was tied up relatively more strongly than the other pairs. C. Park (1996) measured the detection accuracy of initial and final target letters in syllable blocks exposed briefly at threshold and examined whether the perception of post-cued target letter was interfered with by another adjacent letter of the same identity, where this kind of interference was called the negative repetition effect (NRE; Kwak, Kim & Park, 1993). When displayed letters did not consist of a syllable block with a medial missing or replaced by invalid stimuli, NRE was observed and this was interpreted as indicating that initials and finals were separately processed and competed against each other on the way. In contrast, when they were presented as parts of a syllable block, NRE was no longer observed in detection of all the initial targets and some of the final targets. Obviously the context of syllable blocks had an influence on the processing of letters. C. Park (2006) sampled usable syllable blocks with varying frequencies and unusable (derivable but normally not used) syllable blocks, and manipulated grouping by stimulus intensity between initials and medials in syllable bodies (Exp. 1) and between syllable bodies and finals (Exp. 2) (see Figure 28.4). Participants were able to judge usableness of syllable blocks faster when the two parts were of the same intensity in both experiments, and this effect was not influenced by the frequency factor. Type 4 syllable blocks

Initials versus Medials

Syllable Bodies versus Finals

Syllable block type 4 Syllable block type 5

Figure 28.4. Stimulus displays used in C. Park (2006). On the left side initials and medials were either of the same intensity or not, with constant finals of strong intensity (Exp. 1), as were syllable bodies and finals on the right side (Exp. 2). Stronger letters had double the thickness of weaker letters

386

ChangHo Park

produced shorter response times than type 5. Considering previous studies up to that point, C. Park (2006) argued that the processing unit might be ‘syllable body + δ’ between the level of syllable body and the level of syllable block. The ‘δ’ indicates partial information about finals and configurational or emergent features of syllable blocks available in some cases but not always. Neither hypothesis has been consistently supported by the experimental results, even with a relatively small subset of Hangul syllables. The variety of contexts that exist, both in reality and in experiment, makes it hard to draw a general conclusion. Nevertheless, the most promising candidate for the basic and dominant processing unit seems to be the syllable body. The majority of studies (Y.-A. Lee, 1984; J.-S. Lee & Kim, 1989; C. Park, 1996, 2001, 2006; K. Yi, 1993, 1995) have obtained either strong or weak evidence for this. However, it is possible that there is not a definite unit, but a kind of flexible unit depending on task demand or, alternatively, that there might be multiple processing modes or routes. Besides there could be many modulation factors, including the presence (or absence) of the finals or the syllable block type, the frequencies of different linguistic units, such as letter, syllable body, and word (Nam et al., 1997; Simpson & Kang, 2004; K. Yi, 1993), the number of letters and syllable blocks (J.-S. Lee & Kim, 1989; Nam et al., 1997; K. Park, 1993) or visual complexity (Taylor & Taylor, 1983), ease of pronunciation, meaningfulness (M.-S. Kim & Chung, 1989; E. Lee & Zoh, 1968; K. Park, 1993), etc. Auditory tasks, such as phoneme detection and phoneme substitution, require more analytical processing than visual tasks. K. Yi (1993) found that the frequency of the syllable bodies had a significant effect on the pronunciation of the syllable blocks, independently of the syllable block frequency. Other studies with auditory tasks have indicated that spoken Hangul has a syllable structure consisting of a syllable body plus a coda (H.-J. Kim & Cho, 2001; K. Yi, 1995, 1998). Influence of the usableness or meaningfulness of syllable blocks An interesting finding of E. Lee and Zoh (1968) was that the number of letters and syllable blocks had no effect on the identification threshold of meaningful syllables. Though they did not compare the thresholds of letter-level identification, their result showed that the meaningfulness or wordness could influence the perceptual organisation of the letters or letter processing in a syllable. In Hangul, a single syllable block is either usable, as a word or as part of a word, or practically unusable in actual communication and printed matter. In M.-S. Kim and Chung’s (1989) study, usable syllable blocks showed higher accuracy of detection than unusable ones, and their thresholds of identification were rather consistent, in spite of the variation of the syllable block types.

Visual processing of Hangul

387

However, K.-J. Cho and Han (1996) failed to find any usableness effect of syllable blocks. One would expect that the word superiority effect (WSE) would be helpful in studying the influence of meaning or wordness in letter strings. The WSE refers to the effect that a target letter is better identified in a word than in a non-word or as a single letter. Unlike much research on the WSE in English (Massaro, 1979; McClelland & Rumelhart, 1981; Paap, Newsome, McDonald & Schvaneveldt, 1982, etc.), the WSE in Hangul has not been much treated by Korean researchers. When one examines Hangul word structure, one finds that Hangul words usually consist of one to four syllable blocks, and each of them is also an organised cluster of letters (see Figures 28.1 and 28.2). Therefore syllable block units can modify the relation between a word of multi-syllable blocks and its component letters, whose influence will become complicated increasingly as other factors change. J.-K. Kim and Kim (1990) introduced the Reicher-Wheeler paradigm (Reicher, 1969) to the study of Hangul and found that the WSE decreased as the number of letters in a word increased from four to six. Greater WSE was found with letters of earlier position (K. Park, 1995). The WSE was rarely found at the position of the finals; indeed, at the position of the second final (e.g. ㄱ in the 표적 display) the converse of the WSE, namely the word inferiority effect (WIE), was observed (J.-O. Kim & Kim, 1990). (However, Jung and Park [2006] and S. Park and Jung [2007] found WSE just at that second final position with a modified task.) J.-O. Kim and Kim (1992) found that the WSE was reversed when the size of the attention window was not adjusted and smaller than needed by presenting target words having a larger number of syllable blocks in the succeeding experimental block than in the preceding one, and that a syllable block was better identified when presented alone than when presented as part of a two- or three-syllable-block word. (However, K. Park [1995] was not able to obtain consistent WSE or WIE in the syllable block detection task.) Generally, Hangul letters in a syllable block, of type 4 specially, were also better detected than a single letter (J.-K. Kim, 1994). However, the effect was reversed or no longer observed when the visual angle of syllable blocks was rather small, and when a target letter was different from the other adjacent letters in color, font, or exact shape, and when the space between letters was increased (J.-K. Kim, 1994; J.-O. Kim & Kim, 1992). Many questions have still to be answered concerning letter/syllable processing in Hangul words, and specifically with regard to the word superiority or inferiority effect. To resolve this issue, it will be necessary to perform largescale experiments, in which a variety of perceptual, cognitive, and linguistic variables are manipulated and controlled. However, the studies performed so far indicate clearly that Hangul letter/syllable processing has unique characteristics different from English. Specifically, the WIE found in Hangul would be hard to

388

ChangHo Park

Figure 28.5. Examples of Hangul fonts. 1. Gothic, 2. Myungjo, 3. Saemmul

explain by the interactive activation model that was employed in the case of English words (e.g. McClelland & Rumelhart, 1981). Fonts and visual transformation The two kinds of fonts commonly used in Korean books, magazines, and on computer monitors are Gothic and Myungjo (Figure 28.5). Gothic fonts having no serifs are usually used for titles or for highlighting phrases, while Myungjo fonts are used for the main text. J.-O. Kim (1982) found that Gothic fonts showed on average 10 percent better accuracy of identification than Myungjo fonts. Furthermore, higher sensitivity (d’) was found for some pairs of Gothic syllable blocks than for their counterparts. H. Kim and Chung (1992) found that syllable blocks in Myungjo font showed higher accuracy of identification than those in Saemmul font having descenders for the finals. J. Yi and Jin (1998) reported that for reading text Myungjo fonts were preferred over Gothic fonts, either in a rectangular envelope or in an irregular envelope like the Saemmul font (see Figure 28.5). This is probably because Myungjo fonts are used most frequently and widely. Based on the above results, it can be concluded that Gothic fonts are superior to Myungjo fonts when a few syllables are concerned, whereas the reverse is true concerning more syllables or text. In relation to visual transformation, Y.-A. Lee (1990) found that the latency of the “same” response increased in the same–different matching task as the two vowel letters differed more and more in size. K.-Y. Cho and Jin (1991) found that the mental rotation time of Hangul syllables increased as the rotation angle rose to the maximum of 180 degrees, and that the number of letters had an effect in the rotation of single syllable blocks, while the number of syllable blocks did so with strings of two or three syllable blocks. Concluding remarks In this review, it has been demonstrated that Hangul has unique characteristics and needs to be treated differently from other language scripts, and that it is very important to consider the influence of various visual and cognitive factors in understanding Hangul letter and syllable processing. Moreover, we also need to pay more attention to pronunciation aspects (e.g. alliterations or rhymes: K. Yi [1995], orthographic depth: Y. Lee [1998]). It is possible for phonemic information to have more effect in the visual processing of syllables than might be expected (Y. Kim & Lee, 2004; Y. Kwon, Park, Lim & Nam, 2007).

Visual processing of Hangul

389

Further studies are needed in the areas of Hangul handwriting perception, developmental aspects (H.-J. Kim & Cho, 2001; S.-O. Kim & Jo, 2003; O.-S. Kwon, Yoon & Lee, 2001) and disorders of Hangul perception, foreigners’ perception and learning of Hangul, Koreans’ perception of Hanja (Chinese characters) in relation to Hangul and vice versa (J.-R. Cho & Chen, 1998; H. Kang & Simpson, 2001; T.-J. Park, 1990), etc.

29

English vowel spaces produced and perceived by Americans and Koreans Byunggon Yang

Abstract The aim of this paper is to examine English vowel spaces produced and perceived by Americans and Koreans, and to observe any similarities and differences among them in light of perceptual contrast in order to lead to further research on appropriate auditory scales. The paper will review speaker variation focused on non-linguistic factors, normalization methods, and then move on to competing theories of speech production and perception. Finally, the paper illustrates how Americans and Koreans perceive the synthesized English vowels followed by a discussion on the production data of B. Yang (1996). Speaker variation Speech signals vary greatly between and within speakers. In real life, a speaker does not produce a word in physically the same way on two occasions or in two different contexts. Furthermore, no two speakers will produce a word in exactly the same way articulatorily or acoustically. Therefore, the phonetic measurements of vowels from two different speaker or language populations may include too much speaker variation, which often leads to invalid inference. Traunmüller (1988) divided the source of speaker variation into two factors: (1) linguistic factors such as dialectal, sociolectal differences and (2) nonlinguistic factors such as physical anatomy, age, gender, and the emotional state of the speaker. Speakers also adapt their speech output depending on the listener or the environment (Lindblom & Engstrand, 1989). According to the acoustic theory of speech production (Fant, 1970), speech sounds can be analyzed as a product of the vocal cord vibrations as a source and the vocal tract resonance as a filter. Acoustically f0 or fundamental frequency represents the vocal fold vibrations. Since the speed of the vocal fold vibrations is inversely proportional to its length and mass, f0 of females with shorter and smaller vocal folds is higher than that of males. The average vibration of males’ f0 amounts to 120 Hz while that of females is around 220 Hz (Fant, 1956). In addition, 390

Bilingual production and perception of vowel spaces

391

speakers can increase the f0 values by stretching the cords. Boothroyd (1986) reported that f0 varies from 70 Hz to 200 Hz in men. In women, the low and high values of the range are almost twice those of men. The filter accounts for the formation of acoustic ‘formants’ or spectral energy peaks. In the vowel spectrum, the first prominent spectral peak is called the first formant (F1), and the second (F2), and so on. Each formant is determined by the position of such articulators as the lips, the jaw, and the tongue. The formant frequencies are considered to be the major acoustic correlates of vowel quality. Generally, F1 tends to increase if the jaw and tongue move down while F2 does so if the tongue moves forward. Formant values are inversely related to the overall length of speaker’s vocal tract. Since males usually have longer vocal tracts than females, male formant values are generally lower than those of females. Chiba and Kajiyama (1941) estimated overall vocal tract length, assigning the relative numbers of 1.0 to males, 0.87 to females, 0.80 to a nine-year-old boy, and 0.70 to an eight-year-old girl. These physiological differences in vocal folds and vocal tracts lead to various acoustic outputs among speakers. This speaker variation causes many problems in determining the acoustic correlates of the vowel qualities of a language. Also, it makes it impossible to compare two sets of phonetic measurements of vowels from two different speaker or language populations. Normalization methods The goal of factoring out these non-linguistic factors is to establish a ‘pure,’ linguistically relevant acoustic specification of the vowel qualities of any given language. This procedure has been called ‘normalization’ (Fant, 1968), which makes the acoustic vowel chart a valuable tool for clearly representing the linguistic aspects of vowels. Various proposals for normalizing vowel qualities have been explored, which can be divided into articulatory-based approaches (Nordstroem & Lindblom, 1975; Fant, 1975) and auditory-based ones (Miller, Engebretson, Maynard & Vremula, 1980, 1989; Miller, 1989; Syrdal & Gopal, 1986). Articulatory-based proposals attempt to adjust the observed data to a reference vocal tract by adjusting the ratio of the vocal tract. Nordstroem & Lindblom (1975) proposed a uniform scaling based on an estimate of the length of the speaker’s vocal tract. According to their claim, all observed speaker-dependent formant frequency differences can be attributed to vocal tract length. Since overall vocal tract length variations affect all formant frequency values by the same scale factor, normalization is achieved by multiplying all formants by the same scale factor. The scale factor is estimated by finding the ratio of the average F3 values of open vowels whose F1 is greater than 600 Hz of the observed data to that of the reference data. Fant (1975) observed that female speakers have proportionately

392

Byunggon Yang

shorter pharynges and argued that the scaling of formant values must be nonuniform. In other words, it must consider not only differences in overall vocal tract length between male and female speakers but also the complex formantcavity relationships. Therefore, he recommended that both vowel- and formantspecific scale factors be applied. Fant’s method requires a table of universal scale factors derived from an exhaustive study of world languages, which may not be feasible in the near future. On the other hand, auditory-based procedures for speaker normalization have been proposed by Miller (1989), and Syrdal and Gopal (1986). Normalization is achieved simply by a transformation of acoustic values into one of the major auditory scales: logarithmic scale, mel scale vs. the Bark or critical-band-rate scale. The critical-band-rate scale was proposed on the basis of several psychoacoustical studies, and is defined as “that bandwidth at which subjective responses rather abruptly change” (Scharf, 1970: 159). Syrdal and Gopal (1986) claimed that through the application of the Bark-difference approach speaker variation can be reduced greatly. However, Miller (1989: 2120) adhered to the use of the logarithmic scaling as “fundamental to hearing” in his AuditoryPerceptual theory. Appropriate auditory scales may be obtained from research reflecting theories of speech perception. Theories of speech perception Most studies of human speech seem to focus too much on vocal production neglecting perceptual aspects and the interaction between speaker and listener. Nooteboom (1983: 183) criticized those articulatory and acoustic phonetic studies claiming that speech is ‘goal-oriented behavior, directed by a speaker at a particular listener or audience.’ In other words, speech production presupposes the listener. Thus, it may be meaningful to review some theories of speech perception to balance those of speech production. Theories of individual speech perception can generally be divided into two main groups. One group claims that speech perception relies on the speech production mechanism (Moore, 1982). The motor theory of speech perception posits that listeners decode the speech input by referring to their own articulatory movements, thus it is generally hypothesized that there is a close link between speech production and perception. If this hypothesis is correct, it is reasonable to assume that subjects with different vowel articulation should exhibit differences in vowel perception (Fox, 1982). Bell-Berti et al. (1979) reported that the differences in production strategies of two different groups of subjects corresponded to differences in perception in the identification task of synthetic vowels. However, Paliwal, Lindsay and Ainsworth (1983) rejected the hypothesis that a listener refers to his own articulation for the perception of vowel sounds after observing no isomorphism between the production and

Bilingual production and perception of vowel spaces

393

perception data. They found that the formant frequency values of the eleven English vowels produced by native speakers of British English were not significantly different from the perceived ones. The second group considers speech perception as independent of speech production. The auditory theory of speech perception posits that the listener need not know how the speaker produces speech. According to this hypothesis, we might expect there to be no difference in the perception of native and nonnative speakers. Waldman, Singh and Hayden (1978) found no significant relationship between articulation and discrimination when the same stimulus items were presented to children with articulation disorders, controlling for both age and sex of the subjects. There are two competing theories that consider both the speaker and listener in the speech event. In an attempt to provide a phonetic basis for distinctive features, Stevens (1989) proposed the Quantal Theory (QT). He noted that there is a nonlinear relationship between articulatory and acoustic parameters. He experimented with a uniform tube with a single constriction. When the place of this constriction systematically varies along the tube, the acoustic output shows unstable regions where small changes in an articulatory parameter lead to large changes in acoustic output. Also, there are acoustically stable regions where relatively large articulatory changes lead to small acoustic changes. He claimed that the stable regions bounded by unstable regions may facilitate the perception of speech sounds for the listener because phonetic features are almost invariant within those stable regions. For the speaker, the stable regions make speech production easier with less effort. Acoustic stability implies reduced need for articulatory precision since gestures produced within the stable regions sound roughly the same. As an alternative view, Lindblom and co-workers proposed the Theory of Adaptive Dispersion (TAD) to account for the content of phonetic inventories (Lindblom & Maddieson, 1984; Lindblom & Engstrand, 1989). They drew attention to the adaptive gesture of speech production and the phenomena of hypo- and hyper-speech (Lindblom, 1990). They assumed that speakers control not the acoustic invariance of speech sounds, but sufficient perceptual contrast. The speaker thus monitors a trade-off between articulatory economy and perceptual distinctiveness. Speakers tend to raise their vocal effort and speak more precisely in a noisy environment, which invokes a hyper-speech style. Under other quiet and favorable communicative conditions, they tend to adopt a relaxed hypo-speech mode. Their speech tends to vary along the hypo- and hyperdimension. Nooteboom (1983: 193) suggested that the production of words depends partly on the ‘speaker’s internalized model of the perceptual and interpretative processes in the listener.’ In other words, a speaker continuously shapes his production in relation to the process of perception. In assessing both the QT and TAD, Diehl (1989) compared them in terms of the predictive accuracy of vowels and consonants of major world languages. The point vowels [i, a, u] were

394

Byunggon Yang

well predicted in both theories. But, for languages with larger inventories, both tended to predict too many high vowels and underestimated the occurrence of the mid-central vowels. The QT was the poorer predictor: too many high vowels were predicted. The unstressed central vowel schwa was not predicted because it does not meet the quantal requirements. Both theories carry implications for the production and perception of vowel quality by different gender and language groups because they may provide an explanation for various acoustic outputs of different speakers. We will examine both production and perception data of English vowels by B. Yang (1996, 2002) in light of perceptual contrast. Vowel production by Koreans and Americans Yang (1996) examined non-linguistic differences among forty Korean and American male and female speakers, that interfere with crosslinguistic comparison: fundamental frequency, vocal tract length, and the ratio of front to back cavity estimated from their acoustic formant frequency values. He noted clear gender and language differences in those parameters obtained at a proportional time point of English and Korean words in an /h(V)d/ context. Figure 29.1 shows the frequencies of F1 and F2 for these American and Korean speakers after applying a uniform scaling method to the data and converting the

Figure 29.1. Superimposed F1/F2 (in mel) vowel spaces of American English and Korean male speakers normalized. Phonetic symbols are given near the formant position

Bilingual production and perception of vowel spaces

395

frequency scale to a perceptual dimension, mel, in order to approximate the perceptual distances among the vowels. For clarity, only those vowels cornering on the general vowel space are plotted and connected peripherally. In Figure 29.1, the Korean vowel space forms a wedge shape with [i, a, u] at the corners whereas the American English vowel space appears rectangular with [i, u, æ, a] at the corners. Those shapes can be explained in terms of sufficient perceptual contrast. Since the Korean vowel inventory has more high tense vowels than that of American English (Korean /i, ɨ, u/ vs. English /i, u/), the F2 value for Korean /u/ was pushed down to lower values to secure sufficient perceptual distance (Lindblom & Engstrand, 1989; Lindblom, 1990). The American English vowel [u] can have a higher F2 without crowding into the vowel space but if Korean [u] does the same, it may be confused with the adjacent vowel [ɨ]. For low vowels, American [a] and [æ] took extreme F2 values to avoid perceptual confusion. American [a] and Korean [a] would be considered almost two different vowels in terms of acoustical formant frequency. The distance between American vowel pairs [i]-[e] and [u]-[o] is greater than that of the Korean equivalents to maintain perceptual contrast. Interestingly, the American lax vowels were pushed “inside” the American vowel space to maximize perceptual contrast to adjacent vowels. However, some vowels may not show such contrast, partly because there are a limited number of stable regions for vowel production within each vowel space of the two languages as suggested by the QT. Yang (1996) conducted t-tests on the American English and Korean data after speaker normalization and transformation of the acoustical scale into mel. He found statistically significant differences in both F1 and F2 of the vowels produced by male and female groups (p < 0.05). However, he observed considerable similarities in phonetic quality among those vowels for which significant differences in formant frequencies were found. This statistical difference can be verified by investigating the ranges of formant frequencies within which people hear the same sound quality. The next section will examine the acceptable range by which we may predict whether the two sounds will be perceived as the same or different in vowel quality. Vowel perception by Koreans and Americans Yang (2002) conducted a perceptual experiment to resolve some controversial issues in speech perception in the previous section. Four groups (twenty-seven American and Korean male and female speakers) participated in the AX discrimination procedure in which the listener’s task was to judge whether the following signal X was the same as the preceding signal A or not. Then, he obtained the highest and lowest formant boundary of the same vowel quality. An acceptable range refers to the width of each boundary. The stimuli set included 312 synthesized vowels of average formant values of nine

396

Byunggon Yang 12

The acceptable ranges (Bark)

10

F1 F2 F3

8

6

4

2

0

2

4

6 8 10 12 14 The center formant frequency (Bark)

16

18

Figure 29.2. The center formant frequency values and the acceptable ranges of each individual of the American and Korean male and female groups. The units are in Bark

monophthongs produced by ten American English speakers (Yang, 1996). One of the first three formant values was modified up or down while the others were held constant. The subjects judged whether the model followed by a synthesized vowel with a modified formant value sounded the same or different. By comparing the production and perception data, he found that the subjects with different articulation had perceived the synthesis model the same. Results of the analysis of variance with the four different groups revealed nonsignificant main effects of the first three formant ranges. Thus, he concluded that perception was done independently of their own vowel productions, supporting the second group of speech perception theories. He also pointed out that even though there was a strong correlation between the production and perception data, it may be wrong to claim the link because it should be attributed to the original link between the formant frequencies of synthesis model vowels and the perceived center formant frequency. Various model stimuli may lead to a weak correlation. In addition, he observed that the ranges of the same vowel quality vary depending on the formant frequency values but appear similar among the language or gender groups. Figure 29.2 plots the individual ranges of the four groups together.

Bilingual production and perception of vowel spaces

397

Figure 29.2 illustrates that the acceptable ranges become wider as the formant frequency increases. Generally, the lower formant values have narrower acceptable ranges and the higher formants have wider acceptable ranges. This reflects a high resolution in the lower frequency range, while there is a coarse resolution in the higher frequency range as shown in the human auditory scale, known as Bark (Scharf, 1970; Zwicker & Terhardt, 1980). The Bark scale may not be equal to the current perceptual range because the stimuli in both experiments were different. In this experiment the vowel-like stimuli were used to reflect the complex interactions among the amplitude of the adjacent formants. The Bark scale was derived from a psycho-acoustical experiment using pure sinusoids masked by white noise. Since the transformation of the acoustical scale into an auditory one normalizes non-linguistic differences, the author suggests that this kind of scale from vowel-like stimuli may help refine the auditory scale, and this could be immediately applicable to speech recognition. Further rigorous methods of deriving the subtle human auditory scale from vowel-like stimuli independent of the subject’s native language are also desirable. Concluding remarks This paper reviewed speaker variation, normalization methods, and competing theories of speech production and perception and examined the acoustical vowel space and perceptual ranges of Americans and Koreans. Normalization is necessary in order to resolve non-linguistic differences and compare formant values of vowels produced by people with various vocal tract sizes. Normalization can be pursued not only through an articulatory-based approach but also through an auditory-based one, since speech communication is made through frequent interactions of both production and perception activities of the speaker and listener at the same time. In addition, an appropriate auditory scale or metalinguistic knowledge along with the formant data may be necessary in automatic recognition of speech data collected from various language groups.

30

Morphological representation and processing of Sino-Korean words Kwangoh Yi

Abstract Sino-Korean words are Chinese words that have been borrowed into the Korean language over a long period of history. Currently representing over 70 percent of the entire Korean vocabulary, Sino-Korean words are typically two syllables in length and morphologically compound in structure. Behavioral studies have shown that although morphologically related Sino-Korean primes neither facilitate nor inhibit the processing of a target Sino-Korean word, orthographically related Sino-Korean primes tend to inhibit the recognition of a target word. Such findings are inconsistent with existing models for English and Chinese. Based on these Korean research findings, it is proposed that a level of morphological representations exists between word-form and semantic representation, and that there are strong inhibitory connections between word-form representations that share a given syllable in a particular word position. A number of related issues are also discussed, such as the representation of morphology within the mental lexicon, individual differences in terms of reading proficiency, semantic versus morphological relatedness, and the position of critical constituents. Introduction The Korean alphabet, or Hangul, consists of fourteen consonant and ten vowel letters. While each letter of Hangul represents a phoneme, it is more accurate to characterize the present Korean writing system as being morphophonemic in nature, rather than purely phonemic. In order to correctly spell a Korean word, it is necessary to consider both its phonological and morphological characteristics. According to spelling regulations publicized by the Korean government in 1948, the Korean language should be written with Hangul in order to both precisely transcribe the pronunciation of words and to clarify their meanings. These regulations are the product of a long struggle by the Korean people to develop effective orthographic uses of their essentially phonemic script. When Hangul was first invented by King Sejong, great emphasis was placed on 398

Morphological representation of Sino-Korean words

399

accurately spelling a word according to its sound. However, as time passed, it gradually became evident that a system of spelling based solely on pronunciation was not completely effective. Accordingly, a movement emerged calling for a system of spelling that reflects both the phonological and morphological characteristics of words. Thus, modern Korean orthography may be seen as striking a compromise between the need to represent both phonology and morphology. In this sense, modern Korean orthography is very similar to English orthography. Although Hangul is an alphabetic script, Hangul letters are not arranged linearly from left to right, as in English, for example. Rather, the arrangement is more complex involving both left-to-right and top-to-bottom directions in order to form character-like syllabic blocks. The block arrangement of Hangul letters serves to make the syllable particularly salient, and so the syllable is easy to identify in Korean texts. Reflecting this, the Hangul writing system has sometimes been referred to as an alphabetic syllabary (Taylor, 1980). Given the fact that the syllable typically corresponds to a morpheme, and that, as already noted, spelling conventions also emphasize the morphology of words, the morpheme is also a very salient unit in Korean orthography. Thus, it would seem that orthographic and morphological processing are both fundamental to the recognition of Korean words. It should, however, be noted that the correspondence between the syllable and the morpheme varies according to word type. The correspondence is especially high in the case of Sino-Korean vocabulary, compared to native Korean and Western loanwords. Sino-Korean words (hereafter abbreviated as S-K) are mostly compound words, composed of two or more constituent morphemes. Assimilated into the Korean language from Chinese over a long period of history, S-K words presently represent over 70 percent of all Korean words. Each syllable of an S-K word was traditionally represented orthographically by a Chinese character, and in terms of its meaning and pronunciation, the syllables still correspond to the original Chinese meanings and pronunciations. Due to the huge numbers of S-K words in Korean, clearly essential tasks for researchers of Korean word recognition are to understand how S-K words are represented in the Korean mental lexicon and how they are processed in visual and spoken word recognition. The remainder of this paper will discuss some important findings concerning the morphological representation and processing of S-K words, and will draw some crosslinguistic comparisons with other languages, such as English, Chinese, and Japanese. As a little background to the discussions, the next section continues by briefly summarizing some studies of morphological processing. The Chinese and Japanese studies mentioned are of particular relevance, because many S-K compound words are also common to those languages.

400

Kwangoh Yi

Morphological priming in languages other than Korean Researchers investigating word recognition have focused on the morpheme as an important sub-lexical unit. For instance, a number of studies employing the priming paradigm have reported morphological facilitation and orthographic inhibition. Morphological facilitation refers to the robust finding that lexical decision responses to a target word are faster when it has been preceded by a morphologically related word compared to when preceded by an unrelated word. In contrast, orthographic inhibition refers to the finding that responses are delayed when the prime and target share an identical string of letters relative to when there is no orthographic overlap. Stolz and Feldman (1995) have reported both morphological facilitation and orthographic inhibition for English. In their experiment, they manipulated the lag – in terms of the number of intervening items – between a prime and a target. In the short-lag condition, the target immediately followed the prime with no intervening items, but in the long-lag condition, on average ten unrelated words were presented between the prime and its target. Consistent with their hypothesis that orthographic overlap would not influence responses in the long-lag condition, Stolz and Feldman found no orthographic effects for any prime– target pairs, but they did observe significant morphological priming for both opaque and transparent prime–target pairs. However, in the short-lag condition, both morphological facilitation and orthographic inhibition were observed. The fact that orthographic pairs (e.g., market–mark) only inhibited each other in the short-lag condition implies that orthographic activation is short-lived. In addition to studies in European languages, like English, there has also been research into the morphological processing of Asian languages, such as Chinese and Japanese, where morphemes have been shown to play a significant role in the processing of compound words. The results from Chinese studies are especially interesting. Most studies have shown facilitation when a prime and target share a morpheme. In addition, facilitatory effects, somewhat weaker than morphological facilitation, have also been reported for homographic– homophonic pairs which are not morphologically related (Zhou, MarslenWilson, Taft and Shu, 1999). It should be noted that orthographic facilitation, not orthographic inhibition like English, is found in Chinese. In the case of Japanese, Hirose (1992) has also reported morphological facilitation in a constituent-morpheme priming study, although the effects interacted with the position of the critical morpheme within the compound word target. Because the priming effects were greater when the morpheme prime appeared in word-initial position within the target words, Hirose suggested that kanji compound words are arranged according to the initial kanji character. However, the results from more recent studies by Joyce (1999, 2002) clearly challenge this interpretation. Contrasting a number of word-formation

Morphological representation of Sino-Korean words

401

principles, or morphological structures for compound words, Joyce observed morphological facilitation in all morphological structure conditions from both constituent prime conditions, and in the majority of cases at a very similar level. Thus, while the Chinese and Japanese studies have also yielded considerable evidence of morphological facilitation, which is consistent with English studies, they have failed to provide any evidence of orthographic or phonological inhibition. In that respect, they differ from the English data. Experiments in Korean The role of morphology within the recognition of Korean words has been an important issue for researchers who emphasize the language-dependent nature of lexical processing. For example, the series of studies by Jung and Yi (2004), Yi (1999a, 1999b), and Yi and Yi (1999) have explored the representation and processing of S-K words composed from two constituent morphemes. Yi and Yi (1999) first addressed representational issues in a lexical decision experiment employing a long-lag presentation similar to that used in Stolz and Feldman (1995). Taking the target stimulus “pan-hang” (meaning resistance) as an example, Table 30.1 illustrates the three kinds of prime–target relations in their experiment. The first type of prime was a morphologically related word sharing a constituent morpheme with the target word in the word-initial position (i.e.“panchik” meaning violation). The second type of prime was an orthographically related word sharing a syllable in the word-initial position (i.e. “pan-jang” meaning captain). The third type was a neutral prime, or control, that was both morphologically and orthographically unrelated to the target (i.e. “kong-kai” meaning open). In the long-lag condition, the results were similar to those reported by Stolz and Feldman. As shown in Figure 30.1, morphological facilitation was found, but orthographic inhibition was not observed. This result is consistent with the view that lexical entries for S-K words can be contacted through the activation of their constituent morphemes. In sharp contrast, however, a very different pattern of results was produced in the short-lag condition, which included four stimulus onset asynchronicity (SOA) conditions of 60, 200, 300, and 1,000 msec. Although Table 30.1. The prime–target relations of Sino-Korean word stimuli in Yi and Yi (1999)

Prime Target

Morphological (MORPH)

Orthographic (ORTHO)

Control (CON)

반칙{反則} “pan-chik” violation

반장{班長} “pan-jang” captain

공개{公開} “kong-kai” open

반항{反抗} “pan-hang” resistance

402

Kwangoh Yi 650

649 648

RT (ms)

645

640 637 635

630

MORPH

ORTHO

CON

PRIME –TARGET RELATIONS

Figure 30.1. Mean lexical decision times (LDTs) for morphologically related, orthographically related, and control pairs at long lags

there was orthographic inhibition in the orthographically related condition, morphological facilitation was not observed in the morphologically related prime condition, as shown in Figure 30.2. This pattern of results was identical across the various SOA conditions from the shortest of 60 msec to the longest of 1 sec. This lack of morphological facilitation is particularly remarkable because such results have not been reported for any other language before. How can this lack of morphological facilitation for morphologically related words be explained? Do these results compel us to believe that morphology does not have a role in lexical retrieval? Perhaps not. If we accept that morphologically related words facilitate each other and that orthographically related words inhibit each other, then one possible interpretation of these results is that these two forms of priming acted to effectively cancel each other out. That is, the morphological facilitation for the morphologically related words is negated by orthographic inhibition. This interpretation would be consistent with the results of a study by Jung and Yi (2004) that investigated the effects of morpheme position with S-K words. It has been claimed that word-initial morphemes play a more pivotal role than word-final morphemes for English compounds (Taft & Forster, 1976). The basic suggestion is that the organization of lexical entries is based on their word-initial constituents. A similar proposal was made by Hirose (1992) concerning Japanese two-kanji compound words, although as already noted, the results from Joyce (1999) of generally similar

Morphological representation of Sino-Korean words

403

750 738

RT (ms)

730

710

705 700

690

670 MORPH

ORTHO

CON

PRIME –TARGET RELATIONS

Figure 30.2. Mean LDTs to targets at short lags (SOA = 300)

levels of morphological facilitation from both word-initial and word-final constituent morphemes are clearly not compatible with the notion of an advantage for word-initial morphemes. As shown in Figure 30.3, the results from Jung and Yi’s study suggest that morphological facilitation and orthographic inhibition interact with the position of the critical constituents. Morphological priming was greater when the shared morpheme was in different positions than when it was in the same position. However, orthographic inhibition was stronger when the shared constituent was in the same position in the primes and targets – either word-initial for both or word-final for both. Another issue for research concerned with the effects of morphological relatedness that is frequently noted is the possible confounding effect of semantic priming. In order to tease apart semantic priming and morphological priming a number of studies have included a semantically related condition to compare with the morphologically related condition. For example, Zhou et al. (1999), using Chinese compound words, reported even greater levels of morphological facilitation compared to semantic facilitation. However, Yi (1999) ran an experiment with S-K compounds and found that the level of morphological facilitation was considerably lower than the level of semantic facilitation, as shown in Figure 30.4. This pattern of results for S-K words is very different from that reported by Zhou and Marslen-Wilson. Yi’s results would suggest that inter-lexical connections are stronger than morpho-lexical connections in the S-K lexical system.

404

Kwangoh Yi 40

PRIMING EFFECT (ms)

30 20

20

20 1

0 –8

–20

–17 –27

–40

Initial–Initial

–30

Initial–Final

Final–Initial

Final–Final

PRIME–TARGET RELATIONS Morph

Ortho

Figure 30.3. Positional effects of critical morphemes (SOA = 400) 700 688

RT (ms)

680

658

660

648 640

620

600

613

SEM

MORPH ORTHO PRIME –TARGET RELATIONS

CON

Figure 30.4. Mean LDTs (ms) for semantically, morphologically, and orthographically related pairs (SOA = 200)

Another fascinating – albeit extremely elusive – issue for word recognition research is individual differences in terms of reading performance. Of particular relevance in this context are the results reported by Yi (1999), which are clearly supportive of the notion that the morphological representation and

Morphological representation of Sino-Korean words 900

405

864 831

813

RT (ms)

800

700 617 600

500

591

MORPH

603

ORTHO CON PRIME –TARGET RELATIONS Skilled readers

Poor readers

Figure 30.5. Mean LDTs as a function of reading performance (SOA = 300)

processing of S-K words varies as a function of individual reading skill. By categorizing participants into skilled and poor readers according to mean lexical decision reaction times, Yi discovered that the patterns of priming for the two groups differed across a range of SOA conditions, as shown in Figure 30.5. The main characteristic in the priming pattern for the skilled readers was that morphological facilitation was relatively large for morphologically related words, but the levels of orthographic inhibition were very low, failing to reach statistical significance. In contrast, the poor readers were only found to show orthographic inhibition for the orthographically related pairs. No morphological facilitation for morphologically related words was observed with the poor readers.

Morphological level representations in a mental lexicon model As briefly reviewed in the previous section, the findings from the experimental studies investigating the lexical processing of S-K words would seem to indicate that S-K morphemes are represented in the mental lexicon, but that morphological activation is not an obligatory stage or route in accessing the lexical entries of S-K words. This is clearly at odds with general notions of morphological involvement in the organization of the mental lexicon that posit a level of morphological representation between the orthographic and lexical levels and thus regard morphological activation as an intermediate and mandatory stage.

406

Kwangoh Yi

Most models of morphological representation and processing that have been proposed for East Asian languages take for granted the existence of three levels of representations; character, morpheme, and word. These layers of representation are usually organized hierarchically with character representations at the lowest level and lexical representations at the highest level, positing a layer of morphological representations between these, which is seen as being logically necessary in order to account for morphological facilitation between morphologically related words at short lags. However, the assumption that the layer of morpheme representation is sublexical is not consistent with the experimental results reviewed above. Morphological facilitation was not observed for S-K compound words sharing a common morpheme at short lags. Rather, it would seem that the morphological representations of S-K words cannot be activated prior to the activation of whole word representation because the mapping between characters and morphemes would be too diffuse. The orthographic syllables of S-K words can usually be mapped onto tens of morphemes. However, an alternative arrangement of representational layers also seems feasible; one in which morpheme representations exist above whole-word representations. Since such an arrangement would imply that morphological facilitation arises due to the activation of shared morpheme units following whole-word unit activation, it would clearly be more consistent with the reviewed Korean results. According to this supralexical perspective, when primes and targets share a common morpheme, then morphological activation due to the presentation of the prime will facilitate the processing of the target word via the excitatory connections between the relevant morphemic representations and the appropriate whole-word representations (Giraudo & Grainger, 2000). General discussion In summary, the results reviewed here from a series of Korean studies challenge some of the underlying assumptions in models of morphological representation and processing based on other languages. Although S-K words are compounds, consisting of two or more morphemes, the results provide little evidence of morphological facilitation for S-K words across a variety of SOAs. Such a finding may be explained by assuming that orthographic inhibition is due to inhibitory connections between whole-word units at the same level, while morphological facilitation arises from the connections between units at both the morphemic and lexical levels. Moreover, assuming that orthographic inhibition and morphological facilitation operate to cancel each other out in the case of morphologically related pairs, because no morphological facilitation occurs for orthographically related pairs, only orthographic inhibition is observed. The Korean data also suggest that positional effects are stronger when the shared constituent is purely orthographic in nature compared to the weaker priming for

Morphological representation of Sino-Korean words

407

MORPHOLOGICAL LEVEL LEXICAL LEVEL

/mi/

/in/ /yong/

ORTHOGRAPHIC LEVEL

PHONOLOGICAL LEVEL

Figure 30.6. A mental lexicon model for the representation and processing of Sino-Korean words

shared morpheme constituents. The fact that words sharing a constituent at either word-initial or word-final position strongly inhibit each other implies that this is an important characteristic relating to the arrangement of lexical-level units. Assuming that competition is stronger between lexical units that share a syllable in the same position, inhibition will be stronger between primes and targets that share a constituent at either the word-initial or the word-final positions compared to when the common morpheme is in a different position. Interestingly, greater levels of morphological facilitation and lower levels of orthographic inhibition were observed with skilled readers compared to poor readers, where a reversed pattern of priming was seen. This suggests that while lexical processing relies primarily on the activation of lexical units in the case of poor readers, the activation of sublexical units, such as morphemes, is more important for skilled readers. Figure 30.6 presents a mental lexicon model for the representation and processing of S-K words. The first major feature of the model is the positioning of the layer of morphological representations above the layer of lexical units. The second important feature is the greater weighting of inhibition connections between lexical-level representations that have the same syllable in the same position. Individual differences in terms of lexical processing for S-K words can

408

Kwangoh Yi

be accounted for by the connection weights between whole-word units and morpheme units. Exposure to more S-K words, or Chinese characters, would help to establish and strengthen the links between words and their constituent morphemes. Naturally, there are still many other issues that need to be addressed in investigating the morphological representation and processing of S-K words, such as the effects of Hanja proficiency, for example, on the processing of S-K words, which is likely to have serious theoretical and practical implications. The results from cross-psycholinguistic studies using Chinese, Japanese and other Asian languages are expected to shed light on such questions.

31

The role of phonology in word recognition of Korean Hangul and Hanja Jeung-Ryeul Cho

Orthographies in the world are substantially diverse in the way they represent phonology. In shallow orthographies such as Italian, Serbo-Croatian, and Korean Hangul the relationship between orthography and phonology is relatively regular. However, the relationship between print and sound is arbitrary and opaque in deep orthographies, including logographic Chinese, English and Hebrew. Written Korean uses both an alphabetic script, Hangul, and a logographic script, Hanja. Since Hangul and Hanja represent linguistic information in different forms, they provide an excellent opportunity to test whether universal or script-specific processes are utilized in word recognition of different scripts. This chapter first reviews dual-route models of the role of phonology in visual word recognition, and then a brief description of Hangul and Hanja follows. Finally, empirical evidence will be presented to demonstrate different uses of phonology in the word recognition of Hangul and Hanja. Two pathways in word recognition There has been an ongoing question as to whether word recognition is based on the visual analysis of the input or mediated by phonology (Seidenberg, 1985). Dual-route models assume two possible pathways to the processing of a printed word (Coltheart, 1980; Coltheart, Rastle, Perry, Langdon & Ziegler, 2001). One is a direct lexical path, where access to meaning proceeds directly from orthography. The lexical route activates phonological information by matching orthographic input stimulus to a known word stored in an internal lexicon. The other is a phonologically mediated pathway, which goes from orthography to phonology, and then from phonology to meaning. This path is sublexical in the sense that the phonological code is assembled on the basis of grapheme–phoneme correspondence rules. Whether the sublexical phonology or the lexical path plays a dominant role in the processing of a printed word can be determined by various factors such as word frequency (Jared & Seidenberg, 1991; Seidenberg, 1985), orthography (e.g. Frost, Katz & Bentin, 1987) and reading proficiency (J.-R. Cho & Chen, 1999; Doctor & Coltheart, 1980; Rusted, 1989; Kang & Simpson, 1996). 409

410

Jeung-Ryeul Cho

Characteristics of Hangul and Hanja Written Korean uses two distinctively different scripts: Hangul and Hanja (see Taylor and Taylor, 1995). Hangul is an alphabet and has twenty-four symbols, each representing a phoneme of the Korean language. In Hangul, grapheme– phoneme correspondence is relatively regular. Although Hangul is an alphabet it is written like a syllabary in which two or more letters are clustered into a syllabic block. Hangul is fundamentally a phonetic script, so that a syllable block can be pronounced by analyzing it into its constituent phonemes. Hanja, however, is a logographic script in which the relationship between orthography and phonology is arbitrary. Hanja consists of a large set of characters originally borrowed from Chinese. Hanja characters directly encode and represent morphemes, which are basic units in meaning. Hanja characters typically have the same shape as the original Chinese characters and have similar meanings. In terms of phonology, Hanja characters approximate the sounds of the corresponding Chinese characters, but without the tones. Korean grammatical morphemes can only be written in Hangul, so it is possible to write exclusively in Hangul but not in Hanja. For many centuries before the Hangul alphabet was invented in the fifteenth century, Koreans used logographic characters borrowed from the Chinese. In spite of the invention of Hangul, Hanja characters are still used by Koreans. The use of Hanja in Korea has decreased in the past several decades and Hangul is now far more frequently used. Children begin to learn about 1,800 Hanja characters in secondary school for educational purposes. Hanja may be used for the purpose of emphasis, much like using italics or bold type in English; it is also used to differentiate homophones of Hangul because each meaning of a Hangul homophone maps onto a different Hanja character in the case of Chinese loan-words. Previous research making a direct comparison between languages differing in orthographic depth has tended to show a relationship between the phonological transparency of orthography and the use of phonology in word recognition (Frost, Katz & Bentin, 1987; Tabossi & Laghi, 1992). Korean is an ideal language to examine the relationship between orthographic depth and the use of different pathways in word recognition because the two scripts of Hangul and Hanja are clearly different in orthographic depth. Alphabetic Hangul words, which encode phonology directly and unambiguously, are assumed to employ a sublexical route. Thus, phonology presumably plays a major role in the processing of printed Hangul words. However, a lexical route is expected to be involved in the recognition of logographic Hanja, which directly represents meaning but not phonology. Different word recognition processes of Hangul and Hanja This section reviews empirical findings on the issue of whether Hangul and Hanja words are processed directly by a lexical route or mediated by a

Word recognition of Hangul and Hanja

411

sublexical route. In particular, the effects of word frequency and homophones and semantic priming are examined in the tasks of naming, categorization, and lexical decision-making, respectively. Frequency effects in naming tasks Word frequency effects have been considered as ‘markers’ of the use of lexical or sublexical information (Frost, Katz & Bentin, 1987; Simpson & Kang, 1994; Tabossi & Laghi, 1992). Word frequency is one of the lexical variables that can be defined at the level of a word. Another example is semantic relatedness in priming tasks. The size of the word frequency effect depends on the degree to which stimuli are processed lexically. Under the lexical route, it is assumed that the stored representation of a high-frequency word is found more easily than that of a low-frequency word. A large difference in naming times is expected between high- and low-frequency words in the lexical route. If a pronunciation is assembled in the sublexical route, however, diminished frequency effects are expected, as rules for translating graphemes to phonemes should apply equally to common and rare words. Readers of languages represented by a regular grapheme–phoneme correspondence are more likely to use phonology in their visual word recognition. On the other hand, readers of deeper orthographies, such as Chinese and English, have a tendency to show large semantic priming and word-frequency effects. Thus it is expected that Hanja readers will show larger word-frequency effects than do Hangul readers. Simpson and Kang (1994) tested native Korean speakers on naming words printed either in Hangul or in Hanja. A first group received twenty percent Hanja and eighty percent Hangul, and for a second group these proportions were reversed. Hangul words showed much faster naming responses in the first group (that included eighty percent Hangul) than in the second (which contained 20 percent Hangul). Naming latencies of the words printed in Hanja, on the other hand, were not affected by their proportion in the stimulus set. In the second experiment, they compared naming latencies for high- and low-frequency Hangul words embedded in a list of additional Hangul words, Hanja words, or Hangul non-words. Only in the context of Hanja words were high-frequency Hangul words named faster than low-frequency Hangul words. However, Hangul frequency did not affect naming time in the context of Hangul non-words and Hangul words. The data suggested that Korean readers favored a phonological route when filler words (a context) were printed in Hangul non-words and Hangul words. But when most of the words were printed in the logographic Hanja, Korean readers favored the use of a direct lexical route. The results support a dual-route model in the sense that recognition of Hangul words employs a phonologically mediated route, but Hanja recognition employs direct access to meaning.

412

Jeung-Ryeul Cho

Likewise, Nam (1995a) found great reliance on phonological information in the recognition of Hangul. He found that naming of Hanja words was affected far more by stimulus familiarity, word length and semantic relatedness than was the naming of Hangul. Homophony effects in semantic categorization tasks Homophony effects van Orden and his colleagues (e.g. van Orden, 1987; van Orden, Johnston & Hale, 1988) used a semantic categorization task to examine whether phonological mediation is necessary for visual processing of printed words in English. In this task, subjects were given a category name and had to decide whether a subsequently presented target was a member of the category. The main manipulation in their studies was to present to the subjects a target word (e.g. rows) which was a homophone of a real exemplar (e.g. rose) of the category (in this case, flower). The results showed a strong homophony effect. That is, subjects made more errors and spent longer times on homophone foils than on spelling controls (e.g. robs when the category is flower). A significant homophony effect was still found even when the orthographic similarity was low between homophone foils and corresponding category exemplars (van Orden, 1987; Experiment 1). A similar pattern was also observed when immediate backward pattern masking was introduced to control for possible confounding from orthographic information (van Orden, 1987; Experiment 2). These results suggest that phonology plays a crucial role in the semantic processing of written English. Chinese and Japanese studies Note that phonology and orthography of printed words in languages using an alphabetic script are closely related, whereas a similar confounding is absent in those using a logographic script. Logographic Chinese and Japanese Kanji have been adopted to examine the role of phonology in the semantic categorization task used in van Orden’s (1987) study. For instance, Chen, Flores d’Arcais and Cheung (1995) tested the role of phonology in the semantic processing of Chinese. They found highly reliable effects of orthographic similarity but not homophonic effects. In the orthographic similarity effects, subjects made more errors and produced longer response times on orthographically similar foils than on the corresponding controls. These results indicate that phonology is not crucial in the semantic processing of Chinese characters. Similarly, Wydell, Patterson, and Humphreys (1993) tested the use of phonology in Japanese Kanji word recognition also using a semantic categorization task. Japanese Kanji words are formed by logographic characters originally borrowed from the Chinese. Using two-character Kanji words as stimuli, Wydell et al. found homophony effects with visually similar homophonic foils, but not with visually dissimilar homophonic foils. In addition, a stronger

Word recognition of Hangul and Hanja

413

effect was found with the visually similar homophones than with the visually dissimilar non-homophones. Similar findings have also been reported by Sakuma, Sasanuma, Tatsumi and Masaki (1998). These results were interpreted as indicating that both orthography and phonology contribute to meaning activation in processing multi-character Kanji words. Note that the Chinese and Japanese studies reviewed above are different in the number of characters used as stimuli. The Chinese study done by Chen et al. (1995) used single-character words, whereas the Japanese studies used twocharacter words. Using multi-character words as stimuli can activate additional morphological processing (e.g. Wu, Chou & Liu, 1994), which might explain why the Chinese and Japanese studies noted above do not totally agree on the role of phonology in the semantic processing of logographic characters. Korean studies Cho and Chen (1999) examined the role of phonology in semantic processing of Hangul and Hanja using the semantic categorization task. Strong homophony effects were found in Hangul when using non-word homophone foils as targets. That is, false positive errors to pseudohomophone foils significantly exceed the false positive errors to non-word controls. This result suggests that phonology plays a crucial role in the semantic processing of Hangul. In the case of Hanja, markedly different results were found depending on Hanja reading proficiency: less-skilled Hanja readers showed substantial homophony effects, as in Hangul. That is, these subjects produced more false positive categorization errors on homophone foils, as well as on visually similar foils, than on their corresponding controls. However, skilled Hanja readers produced reliable orthographic similarity effects, but not homophonic effects. These results indicate that phonology plays a prominent role in the semantic processing of logographic Hanja for less-skilled readers, but not for skilled readers. Taken together, these results suggest that access to the meaning of Hangul words proceeds from orthography to phonology, and then from phonology to meaning, whereas a direct path from orthography to meaning is used in semantic processing of Hanja for skilled readers of the script. Overall, the results indicate that both language proficiency and script difference can affect the pattern of semantic processing of written language. Adopting a primed lexical decision task, T.-J. Park (1990) provided evidence for phonological recoding in the reading of Hanja words. In his study, all targets were written in Hangul, while primes were in Hanja. Each Hanja prime was homophonic, but visually and semantically dissimilar, to the corresponding Hangul target. He found that homophonic Hanja primes facilitated lexical decision of Hangul targets relative to the non-homophonic controls, indicating that phonology was activated during the processing of Hanja words. His results are in line with those of less-skilled readers observed in Cho and Chen (1999). It is noted that Korean readers vary considerably in their Hanja proficiency.

414

Jeung-Ryeul Cho

Language proficiency is indeed a variable which might affect the role of phonology in the processing of written language. For example, Doctor and Coltheart (1980) tested primary school children in a task requiring comprehension of sentence meaning. In their study, meaningless sentences that are meaningful when phonologically recoded (e.g. ‘He ran threw the street’) produced more false positive errors than did control sentences. The researchers concluded that very young readers rely extensively on phonological recoding when reading for meaning; as they grow older, reliance on visual encoding becomes progressively more important. Similarly, Kang and Simpson (1996) found a reliable semantic priming effect for sixth-graders but not for second-graders. However, younger children tended to show greater phonological priming effects than did older ones. Their results support dual-route models in the sense that less-skilled readers or young children are likely to show strong reliance on phonology in reading a script. Flexible use of phonology in the recognition of Hangul words Simpson and Kang (1994) provide evidence that Korean readers are flexible in using either an assembly or direct lexical route to process Hangul words. In their second experiment reviewed above, frequency effects of Hangul target words diminished across the three filler conditions, with a large frequency effect in the list of Hanja words, a small effect in Hangul word fillers, but no effect at all in the Hangul pseudo-word list. Thus it is suggested that Korean readers have some conscious control over the use of phonology as a function of the kinds of stimuli they are seeing. When Hanja dominates the list, subjects are biased toward utilizing a direct lexical route. This lexical processing transfers to the naming of Hangul words as well, thus resulting in a substantial frequency effect. When the list has all Hangul words or non-words, however, a sublexical assembly route is preferred and phonology may become highly reliable and efficient, thus diminishing the frequency effect. In a subsequent study, Kang and Simpson (2001) further tested whether the flexibility shown by Korean readers may be achieved even on a trial-by-trial basis or on whole-list characteristics. In the first experiment, the order of the stimuli was controlled so that a critical high- or low-frequency Hangul word was preceded by a predetermined sequence of Hangul and Hanja words. When preceded by one or two Hanja filler words, the critical Hangul stimuli showed a frequency effect. This effect disappeared, however, when two preceding filler stimuli were Hangul words. In their second experiment, an 80 percent-Hanja list was used, as in Simpson and Kang (1994). However, in this experiment, one group of subjects was cued on each trial to expect a Hangul or Hanja stimulus. A second group was not given such a cue. The latter group produced frequency effects for Hangul words as found in the similar Hanja filler condition of

Word recognition of Hangul and Hanja

415

Simpson and Kang (1994), whereas this effect was not observed in the cued condition. They concluded that Korean readers were able to adjust processing very rapidly and had some degree of conscious control over this adjustment. The flexible use of phonology in Hangul word recognition may indicate that the use of sublexical grapheme–phoneme conversion rules is not obligatory in Hangul word recognition (Simpson and Kang, 2001, chap. 8). For example, a number of Korean studies have indicated that phonology may not always be crucial in Hangul word recognition. For example, K.-S. Park (1993) reported frequency effects in the naming of Hangul words (see also similar results in Lee, 1995). In another study, K.-S. Park (1997) showed more orthographically than phonologically based false positive responses in a phrase verification task. In subsequent priming experiments, Park obtained only weak phonological priming effects when a target word was primed by a homophone or pseudohomophone to the target. Korean readers may be able to adjust processing of Hangul depending on the characteristics of stimuli or procedures. There is also some research showing that English readers do possess the ability to adjust processing in accordance with properties of the stimulus list. For example, Monsell, Patterson, Graham, Hughes, and Milroy (1992) compared naming time in pure lists of non-words or exception words with that in mixed lists combining the two stimulus types. They found that exception words and non-words were each named faster in pure lists than in mixed lists. Further, more regularization errors (e.g. pint pronounced as if it rhymed with hint) were made in the mixed list. These results are consistent with students’ ability to adjust processing to execute assembled phonology when the stimulus list contains non-words. Script-switching effects in Hangul and Hanja The focus of previous studies on word processing in Korean was either on phonological activation (e.g. Simpson & Kang, 2001; Simpson & Kang, 1994) or on semantic access (Cho & Chen, 1999). But little has been done on both issues. Cho and Chen (2005) further examined whether access to semantic knowledge and phonology differ in reading Hangul and Hanja words. Thus, this study used both naming (in Experiment 1) and semantic categorization (in Experiment 2) to index an access to phonology or an access to meaning. Moreover, to investigate whether similar strategies were used in processing the two scripts, both word frequency and context (presence or absence of scriptswitching) were manipulated. Cho and Chen (2005) further employed a script-switching paradigm which was previously used in Shafiullah and Monsell (1999) to study the cost of switching between two scripts in Japanese (e.g. logographic Kanji words and their phonetic Hiragana transcriptions). They found that a change of

416

Jeung-Ryeul Cho

script produced reliable interference on subjects’ naming and categorization performance and argued that decoding the two scripts relied on different processing resources. Adopting the experimental procedures used in Shafiullah and Monsell (1999), Cho and Chen (2005) set out to examine naming or categorizing Hangul and Hanja words in either a pure (non-switch) or mixed (switch) context. In mixed conditions, Hangul and Hanja words were presented alternately in every other trial. In pure conditions, only Hanja or Hangul words were presented. The difference between the first (switch) and second (non-switch) trials immediately after a change of script in the mixed conditions would be used to reflect the impact of script-switching on naming and categorization. Presumably, if different processing mechanisms and resources were used in reading the two scripts, a measurable cost due to scriptswitching should be found. For Hangul words, significant word frequency effects appeared in categorization, whereas no frequency effect was found in naming. These results suggest that different strategies are used in accessing semantic knowledge and phonology with Hangul words. Specifically, a sublexical assembly route appears to be dominant in the naming of Hangul words. This is similar to the findings of earlier research on naming in Hangul (see, e.g. Kang & Simpson, 2001; Simpson & Kang, 1994). In terms of access to the meaning of Hangul words, on the other hand, both lexical and assembly routes seem to be used. This suggestion is based on the demonstration of a relatively small but reliable effect of word frequency in the categorization experiment of the recent study (Cho & Chen, 2005) and insignificant frequency effects found in Cho and Chen (1999). Processing strategies during visual word recognition may be ‘task dependent’ (e.g. Shen & Forster, 1999). In the case of Hanja words, however, clear and strong word frequency effects were consistently found in both naming and categorization. This indicates that visual word recognition in logographic Hanja relies primarily on the use of a lexical route. Another issue in this study was whether a change of script would produce reliable costs in processing Hangul and Hanja. In the naming task of Experiment 1, Cho and Chen (2005) found that transient but reliable interference due to a change of script appeared in naming Hangul words, whereas no such effect was found in naming Hanja words. In the case of the semantic categorization task of Experiment 2, however, robust effects of script-switching were only observed in categorization of Hanja words, but not of Hangul words. The asymmetric switching cost was also observed in bilingual literature (e.g. Meuter & Allport, 1999). In other words, the script-switching cost in the naming task was larger when switching from the weaker Hanja script to the dominant Hangul script than when switching from Hangul to Hanja. However, a different picture was seen when semantic categorization was used rather than naming: a reversed asymmetry of language-switching costs was found in the semantic

Word recognition of Hangul and Hanja

417

categorization in which the script-switching cost was larger when switching to the weaker script Hanja from the dominant script Hangul. Thus, it is suggested that task demand might affect the pattern of language-switching cost. It would be interesting to examine different processing strategies further in the recognition of Hangul and Hanja words adopting a Stroop task or bilingual study paradigms such as script-switching. Conclusion This chapter has reviewed research findings on how meaning and phonology have been processed in word recognition of the two distinctive scripts in Korean, namely alphabetic Hangul and logographic Hanja. The processing strategies utilized in the recognition of Hangul and Hanja words can be explained by dual-route models. Dual-route models basically propose two possible pathways of lexical and sublexical routes in the processing of a printed word (Coltheart, 1980; Coltheart et al., 2001). In the case of the lexical route, phonology is retrieved from an internal lexicon, whereas in the sublexical route phonological code is assembled on the basis of grapheme–phoneme correspondence rules. Different processing strategies are used in the recognition of Korean words written in the two scripts of Hangul and Hanja (Cho & Chen, 1999; Nam, 1995a; Simpson & Kang, 1994). Alphabetic Hangul words, which encode phonological information directly and unambiguously, are likely to employ a sublexical route. Thus, phonology presumably plays a major role in the processing of printed Hangul words. However, a lexical route is preferred in the recognition of Hanja words, which directly represent meaning but not phonology. In addition, Korean readers are flexible in using either a sublexical assembly route or a direct lexical route to process Hangul words, though the assembly strategy is favored (Cho & Chen, 2005; Kang & Simpson, 2001; Simpson & Kang, 1994). Thus, Korean readers appear to have some conscious control over their word processing strategies to meet the demands and properties of stimuli, script, and task.

32

Lexical and sublexical processes in Korean word recognition Greg B. Simpson and Hyewon Kang

The purpose of writing is to represent speech. In writing, a unit of print represents a unit of the speech stream. Writing systems differ, however, in how they define ‘unit of the speech stream’ for the purpose of writing. In a logography such as Chinese, the unit of speech represented by a character is the morpheme. A syllabary, such as the Kana scripts of Japanese, represents each syllable with a single character. A large majority of the world’s languages today use an alphabetic system, in which each character (or combination of characters) represents a single phoneme. Alphabetic systems also vary in the consistency of the mapping between print and sound. In ‘shallow’ orthographies (such as Spanish, Italian, or, in the present case, Korean), there is close correspondence between written characters and the phonemes they represent. In a ‘deep’ orthography such as English, this correspondence is compromised. For example, the letter c may be pronounced either as /k/, as in cat, or /s/, as in circle. A number of studies have examined the degree to which a reader’s knowledge of the sound system affects the processing of printed words. Because of the many inconsistencies found in English in the relation between spelling and pronunciation, it is perhaps not surprising that it has been the focus of so much of the research in this area. Much of this research has investigated issues concerned with word regularity. A regular word is one that may be pronounced correctly by a straightforward application of the rules governing the conversion of letters (or graphemes) to phonemes (e.g. mint). An irregular word is one that contains at least one violation or exception to these rules (e.g. pint). Many studies have shown (at least within low-frequency words) that regular words are named more rapidly than are irregular words (e.g. Cortese, Simpson & Woolsey, 1997). This effect has frequently been interpreted in terms of a dual-route approach to visual word recognition (e.g. Coltheart, Rastle, Perry, Langdon & Ziegler, 2001). In such a model, the word recognition system consists of two pathways: a lexical route that achieves a pronunciation by matching the input stimulus to a known word stored in an internal lexicon, and a sublexical path that constructs a pronunciation through the application of a set of rules that convert graphemes into the phonemes that they represent. Among low-frequency items, regular words 418

Korean word recognition

419

have an advantage because both pathways yield a correct pronunciation. For irregular words, however, the lexical process retrieves the correct pronunciation, whereas sublexical processes build a pronunciation that is not correct (e.g. constructing a pronunciation of pint that rhymes with mint). The competing representations must be resolved before a response can be made, slowing naming of these irregular words. High-frequency irregular words (such as have) do not suffer this disadvantage, because the correct lexical representation is achieved so rapidly that the slower sublexical process does not interfere. However, a number of studies have suggested that in shallow-orthography languages, such as Persian (Baluch & Besner, 1991), Italian (Tabossi & Laghi, 1992), and Serbo-Croatian (Frost, Katz & Bentin, 1987), readers rely more on sublexical information for word recognition than do those reading a deeper orthography, such as English. We have conducted several studies in Korean that suggest that these readers’ processing is strongly influenced by the consistency of the mapping between spelling and sound in the Korean writing system. The Korean writing system The Korean alphabet, Hangul, exhibits a very regular and predictable relationship between a word’s spelling and its pronunciation. In addition, letters that represent related phonemes (e.g. the /n/ and /d/ phonemes) are also similar visually (∟ and ⊏, respectively). Finally, the alphabetic characters are printed in syllable blocks, so that an entire syllable is accessible in a single character space. However, in addition to Hangul, Chinese characters, called Hanza in Korean, continue to be used. Although most writing is done in Hangul, the two scripts may be mixed, and a single word may be written in Hangul in one context, and in Hanza in another. As a logography, there is no sublexical (or subsyllabic) correspondence between writing and pronunciation in Hanza. Therefore, whereas one can use sublexical information in Hangul to construct a pronunciation of a word, this is not possible in Hanza. With this very clear split between the characteristics of the two scripts, Korean is ideal for testing the role that orthography plays in lexically and sublexically based word recognition. Sublexical processing in Hangul In order to examine the use of lexical and sublexical information in processing Hangul and Hanza, we have searched for a ‘marker,’ or performance characteristic that reveals the underlying process. That is, if a manipulated stimulus variable is closely associated with one of the pathways, then an effect of that variable is taken as evidence for use of that route. The variable that we have chosen is word frequency. Frequency is a variable that is defined at the level of the word, and has been used in the past to identify word recognition routes

420

Greg B. Simpson and Hyewon Kang

(Frost et al., 1987). A lexical variable such as frequency should not affect processing if the sublexical path is used, as that route employs grapheme– phoneme conversion rules that operate in the same way regardless of the frequency of the whole word. Consequently, if the sublexical path dominates processing, we would anticipate diminished effects of a lexical variable such as word frequency. Simpson and Kang (1994) combined a word-frequency manipulation with a list-context variable. High- and low-frequency Hangul words were embedded in lists consisting either of a large number of Hanza words, additional Hangul words, or Hangul pseudo-words. The effect of the frequency of the critical Hangul target words diminished across these three conditions, with a very large frequency effect for Hangul in the presence of Hanza words, and no effect at all in the Hangul pseudo-word condition. With Hangul word fillers, the frequency effect was nonsignificant, but larger than in the presence of pseudowords. These results suggest, first, that Korean readers may rely on sublexical information in processing Hangul to a degree not usually seen in readers of deeper orthographies (see also Cho & Chen, 1999; Nam, 1995b). In addition, it appears that Korean readers can exert some control over processing routes as a function of the kinds of stimuli they are seeing. When Hanza logograms dominate the list, subjects are biased toward lexical processing, and this processing transfers to the recognition of Hangul words as well, resulting in a substantial frequency effect. When all stimuli are Hangul, however, the use of sublexical information may become highly reliable and efficient, and this path contributes to or dominates processing, eliminating the frequency effect. We have found that the flexibility shown by Korean readers may be achieved even on a trial-by-trial basis, and does not rely solely on whole-list characteristics (Kang & Simpson, 2001). In one experiment, the order of the stimuli was controlled so that a critical high- or low-frequency Hangul word was preceded by a predetermined sequence of Hangul or Hanza words. When preceded by one or two Hanza filler words, the critical Hangul stimuli showed a frequency effect. This effect disappeared, however, when two preceding filler stimuli were Hangul words. In a second experiment, an 80-percent-Hanza list was used, as in Simpson and Kang (1994). In this case, however, one group of subjects was cued on each trial to expect a Hangul or Hanza stimulus on that trial. A second group was not given such a cue. The latter condition replicated the frequency effect for Hangul words shown by Simpson and Kang with a similar Hanzadominated list, whereas this effect was not present in the cued group. We concluded from these experiments that Korean readers were able to adjust processing very rapidly, and had some degree of conscious control over this adjustment. Crosslinguistic studies are critical for an understanding of the universality of a psycholinguistic phenomenon. It might be that the flexibility shown by

Korean word recognition

421

Korean readers is peculiar to that language. The characteristics of Hangul and Hanza may be unique in the way that they highlight the split between lexical and sublexical processing, although there is some research showing that English readers do possess the ability to adjust processing in accordance with properties of the stimulus list (Decker, Simpson, Yates & Locker, 2003; Monsell, Patterson, Graham, Hughes & Milroy, 1992; but see Kinoshita & Lupker, 2002 for an alternative explanation). Syllable-level processing of Hangul The Hangul word-frequency effect found by Simpson and Kang (1994) raised another issue peculiar to the Hangul alphabet: its syllable-block printing convention. As noted above, the alphabetic letters of Hangul are not printed linearly, but rather clustered into syllable-sized units. Syllables contain at least two, and as many as four, graphemic elements (i.e. single letters representing individual phonemes). Because of this printing convention, the Hangul syllable might serve as a processing unit in its own right. Evidence for the syllable as a factor in Hangul word processing has been shown both in experiments examining the word-superiority effect (J.-O. Kim & Kim, 1992; K. Park, 1995), and in word naming (Nam, Seo, Choi, Lee, Kim & Lee, 1997). Nam et al. examined effects of word length (i.e. number of letters or number of syllables) under both immediate- and delayed-naming conditions. Number-of-syllable effects were obtained in the immediate-naming condition, suggesting that the syllable is operative at a very early, pre-articulatory stage of word recognition. We have recently completed a series of simple experiments testing the role of the syllable in Hangul word recognition (Simpson & Kang, 2004). We created three types of one-syllable Hangul stimuli. The first was a set of syllables that had independent morphemic status (i.e. one-syllable words). We refer to these as ‘free’ syllables, as they can meaningfully stand by themselves. Second, a set of ‘bound’ syllables consisted of those that are seen in Hangul text, but only as parts of other words (similar to bound-morpheme affixes commonly seen in English). Finally, we created a set of Hangul pseudo-syllables, stimuli that consisted of legal (i.e. pronounceable) graphemic sequences that nevertheless do not appear in any extant Hangul word. In the first experiment of this series, we compared naming times for free and bound syllables, controlled for syllablelevel frequency. That is, these stimuli differed only in terms of their lexical status. The results showed a negligible (8 ms) difference between naming times for free and bound syllables, contradicting the very common naming disadvantage for non-words seen in English. In a second experiment, we investigated the effect of word frequency, with syllable frequency controlled, and found only a 12 ms advantage for high-frequency words. This result suggests that the residual word-frequency difference seen with Hangul word fillers in Simpson

422

Greg B. Simpson and Hyewon Kang

and Kang (1994) may have been due to differences in the frequency of the syllables that the words comprised. If the syllable is a processing unit in Hangul, then a word-level variable such as frequency would not be expected to have a large effect. In order to confirm that the syllable enjoys an independent status as a processing unit in Hangul that is separate from both lexical and subsyllabic (i.e. graphemic) processes, we conducted two further experiments. In the first (Simpson & Kang, 2004, Experiment 3), we compared naming times for bound syllables and pseudo-syllables, controlled for the subsyllabic variables of bigram frequency, number of graphemes per syllable, and initial phoneme. In the final experiment (Experiment 4), we compared high- and low-frequency bound syllables. The results of both experiments confirmed an independent role for the syllable. Bound syllables were named significantly faster than were pseudosyllables and high-frequency bound syllables were named more rapidly than their low-frequency counterparts. Taken together, these experiments suggested that the syllable can be an independent processing unit in Hangul word recognition. The degree to which this characteristic may generalize to other languages remains to be seen. A small number of studies have investigated syllable processing in English (Prinzmetal, Treiman & Rho, 1986) and other languages, such as French (Cutler, Mehler, Norris & Segui, 1986) and Spanish (Carreiras, Alvarez & de Vega, 1993). Because languages differ both in the clarity of syllabification in speech, and (with Hangul being a prime example) in their written form, considerably more work will be needed to test the generality of syllable-based processing in word recognition. Summary and conclusions We have suggested that crosslinguistic analyses are critical to a complete understanding of word-recognition processes. The ultimate goal of research in this area is to gain an understanding of the architecture of the word-recognition system. One component of this goal is the identification of those processes that are universal among readers of any language and orthography, and those that vary with characteristics of the language. Underlying all of our work is the question of how phonological information is used in word recognition, and how it interacts with other components of the word-recognition system. We hope that our research helps to guide future work by suggesting some aspects of word recognition worthy of such direct crosslinguistic comparison.

33

Prosody in sentence processing Sun-Ah Jun

Introduction Prosody refers to a grouping within an utterance and the prominence relations between the members within the group. Groupings within an utterance, called prosodic units, are hierarchically organized so that a prosodic unit can include one or more smaller prosodic units. Since the grouping and the prominence relations between the members are often marked by intonation, the terms ‘intonation’ and ‘prosody’ are often used interchangeably. Intonation, though traditionally defined as the global changes in pitch over the course of a sentence or a phrase, has an internal structure. Some pitch events mark the boundaries of groupings, either small or large, while others mark the prominent members within a group. In this way, an intonation contour marks a hierarchy of groupings and reflects the metrical structure of the group. The pitch events marking the internal structure of intonation can be represented by two distinct pitch levels, High (H) or Low (L) and their combinations (e.g. HL for falling and LH for rising). This view of intonation is known as an autosegmental-metrical model of intonation or intonational phonology, started in the late 1970s and early 1980s through the seminal works of Bruce (1977) on Swedish intonation and Pierrehumbert and her colleagues on English intonation (e.g. Pierrehumbert, 1980; Beckman & Pierrehumbert 1986; Liberman & Pierrehumbert, 1986; Pierrehumbert & Hirschberg, 1990). This model of intonation has been applied to Japanese (Pierrehumbert & Beckman, 1988) and Korean (Jun, 1993), and has been expanded to many other languages including German (Grice & Benzmüller, 1995) and Greek (Arvaniti & Baltazani, 2005; see S.-A. Jun, 2005 for a similar analysis of eight other languages).1 As a phonological model, this model specifies only distinctive tonal events which are specific to each language or a dialect. Nondistinctive, and thus predictable, tones are not specified. Syllables with no tonal 1

For most of these languages, a prosodic transcription system known as ToBI (Tones and Break Indices) has been developed based on the intonational phonology (i.e. tones) of each language and the prosodic groupings defined by the degree of juncture between words (i.e. break indices) (see Jun, 2005, Chapter 2 for the history and the principles of ToBI).

423

424

Sun-Ah Jun

target receive their pitch values from interpolation between surrounding target tones (see Pierrehumbert & Beckman, 1988 for the analysis of Japanese phrasal tones in an unaccented accentual phrase). The categorical nature of this model made it possible for linguists to study the role of intonation in linguistics and to compare intonation across languages. Using the model of intonational phonology, we can analyze the intonation contour delivering different semantic and pragmatic meanings of a sentence and find out which prosodic feature is responsible for the different meanings. We can also manipulate these prosodic features in investigating the role of prosody in sentence processing and other areas of linguistics. Measurements of acoustic features (fundamental frequency (f0) for pitch, duration, and intensity for amplitude) without knowing the category or structure of intonation can be misleading because the same phonetic value may be obtained from different phonological entities. For example, the high f0 of a syllable may indicate the prominence of the syllable or the boundary location of a phrase (S.-A. Jun, 2003a). Describing the prosodic structure based on auditory impressions alone can also be misleading because providing objective criteria for such impressions is not easy; in addition the perception of acoustic features may be influenced by the researcher’s native language. Now, due to easy access to high-speed computers with large memory and speech analysis software, more researchers are attempting an instrumental investigation of speech material. The organization of this paper is as follows. In the next section, I will present the intonation systems of Korean and English and describe the similarities and differences between these two languages. A clear comparison of the intonation systems of these two languages is possible because they are analyzed within the same theoretical framework. In the third section, I will discuss the role of prosody in sentence processing, focusing on the similarities and differences between the two languages. Then, I will conclude the paper by suggesting directions for future research. Intonation of Korean and English Intonation of Korean The intonational phonology of Korean proposed in S.-A. Jun (1993, 1998) and the Korean ToBI (Tones and Break Indices) model, and the transcription system of intonation and phrasing reported in S.-A. Jun (2000)2 posit two prosodic units above the word: an Intonation Phrase (IP) and an Accentual Phrase (AP). An IP can have one or more APs which can in turn have one or more words. An 2

The manual of Korean-ToBI conventions and associated sound files are accessible in www. linguistics.ucla.edu/people/jun/sun-ah.htm.

Prosody in sentence processing

425

IP is defined by phrase-final lengthening and a boundary tone (e.g. L%, H%, LH%, HL%, LHL%, HLH%, LHLH%) realized on the last syllable of the phrase. It is optionally followed by a pause. An AP is defined by a phrasal tone (LHLHa or HHLHa) marking the beginning and the end of the phrase (in Korean ToBI, the AP final tone is transcribed with a diacritic ‘a’ (e.g. Ha), reflecting the function of the AP boundary marker). An AP has no phrase-final lengthening and is not followed by a pause. The end of an AP is marked by a rising tone (LHa), realized on the last two syllables of the phrase (L on the penult and Ha on the final syllable). The beginning of an AP is marked by either a rising tone (LH) or a high plateau (HH) on the two phrase-initial syllables. The tone on the phrase-initial syllable is H when the syllable begins with a tense or aspirated consonant, /h/ or /s/; and L otherwise. The H tones on the AP-initial syllables (the first two Hs in HHLHa) are realized much higher than the H tone after an L tone (the first H in LHLHa), as discussed in Lee (1999). These tone patterns are fully realized when an AP has four or more syllables. However, when an AP has three or fewer syllables, the two medial tones (HL) may be undershot. For L-initial APs, this results in a simple rise (LHa), an early rise (LHHa), or a late rise (LLHa) pattern. For H-initial APs, the result is a high plateau (HHa) or a fall-rise (HLHa) pattern. The AP final tone is in general High, but is sometimes (11%; data from S. Kim, 2004) realized as Low before an H-initial AP or before an IP-final AP with a L% boundary tone (see below), resulting in a falling pattern (HLa, HLLa, or HHLa), a low plateau (LLa), or a rise-fall (LHLa) AP pattern. The tones marking an AP are phrasal tones and are not linked to words within a phrase. Thus, the tonal shape of a word changes depending on its location within an AP. For the same reason, a word-initial segment affects the AP initial tone only when the word comes at the beginning of an AP, but not when it comes in the middle of an AP. In general, an AP contains three to four syllables, and when it has more than six syllables forming two words, it splits into two APs (Jun, 2003b; S. Kim, 2004). Thus the most common AP contains only one word (Schafer & Jun, 2000, 2002; S. Kim, 2004). When a word is contrastively focused, AP boundaries are often deleted between words after focus. When this post-focal dephrasing occurs, an AP can contain multiple words. However, the degree of juncture before the focused word is larger than a default AP boundary and smaller than a default IP boundary. The pitch range of the focused phrase is much larger than that of a default AP, and the phonetic realization of the initial segment of the focused phrase is stronger than that of a default AP, reflecting the hierarchy of prosodic units based on the degree of phrase-initial strengthening (Jun, 1993, Fougeron & Keating, 1997, T. Cho & Keating, 2001). Because of this, and based on data from sentence processing (Jun and Kim, 2004), S.-A. Jun (2004) revised the earlier model and proposed a prosodic unit between an IP and an AP, called an Intermediate Phrase (ip).

426

Sun-Ah Jun

An ip in general contains two or three APs, and is defined by either a higher AP-final boundary tone or by a pitch reset between APs, or both. It shows a small degree of phrase-final lengthening. It has been found that the edge of a syntactically heavy constituent such as a small clause or a heavy XP (e.g. NP, VP) is often marked by an ip boundary, and a large clause boundary is more often marked by an IP boundary. APs within an ip show a downstep-like relationship. That is, the f0 peak of an AP is lowered compared to that of the preceding AP, and the downstep chain is broken (i.e. pitch is reset) at the beginning of a new ip. Note that this downstep is observed only when all the APs within an ip begin with the same type of tone, either H or L, as triggered by the segment type. Further research is needed to define a more general cue to the presence of ip boundaries. Intonation of English The intonational phonology of English proposed in Beckman and Pierrehumbert (1986) and the English ToBI transcription system summarized in Beckman and Ayers-Elam (1994) posits two prosodic units above the word: An Intonation Phrase (IP) and an Intermediate Phrase (ip). An IP is the highest prosodic unit defined by intonation and can contain one or more Intermediate Phrases. The intonation structure of English is shown in Figure 33.1. An IP is marked by a boundary tone (L% or H%; T% in Figure 33.1; T meaning some tone, L or H), realized on the phrase-final syllable, and an optional High tone at the beginning (%H), realized on the phrase-initial syllable. It is also marked by phrase-final lengthening and is optionally followed by a pause. An ip must contain at least one pitch accent (T*), a pitch excursion realized on a prominent, stressed syllable, and is marked by a phrase accent (T-), which is realized on the syllables between the last pitch-accented word and the end of the ip. There are five pitch accent types proposed in English ToBI: L*, H*, L*+H, L+H*, H+!H* (plus versions with down-stepped High tones: !H*, L+!H*,

IP ip

(ip)

(W)

W

σσσ .. σσ (%H) (T*)

T*

T–

W σσ..σ T*

T–

T%

Figure 33.1. Intonational structure of English (adapted from Beckman & Pierrehumbert, 1986)

Prosody in sentence processing

427

L*+!H).3 Any of the five pitch accents can come at the beginning of an ip, although the three variants with down-stepped H (!H*, L+!H*, L*+!H) cannot. The starred tone is realized on the stressed syllable of a word, σ in (Figure 33.1), and the tone preceding or following the starred tone (L in L+H* or H in L*+H) is realized immediately preceding or following the stressed syllable. Therefore, the f0 peak of an L+H* accent is realized earlier than the f0 peak of an L*+H accent. Pitch accents are associated with the stressed syllables of the semantically and pragmatically prominent words in a sentence, and the type of pitch accent conveys the informational status of the pitch-accented item in the discourse (Pierrehumbert & Hirschberg, 1990). Though every word has stress, not every word receives pitch accent. Whether a word receives pitch accent or not is determined postlexically based on the meaning of the utterance. This is different from pitch accent in Tokyo Japanese, where there is only one type of pitch accent (H*+L) and pitch accentedness is a lexical property. Since not every word in English receives pitch accent, words without pitch accent are not specified with a tone, and their pitch values are determined by rule-governed interpolation between the tonal targets of surrounding words. In English, the last pitch accent of an ip is the most prominent pitch accent within that ip, and is called the nuclear pitch accent (NPA). That is, the ip is the domain headed by the NPA. An ip is also the domain of the NPA derived from focus. When a word is contrastively focused, the word receives an NPA and any pitch accent that might have appeared on a postfocus word in the neutral production of the utterance is deleted, this is known as deaccenting. The words preceding the focused word also show signs of reduced prominence. They either lose their pitch accents or are produced in a reduced pitch range. The focused word is produced with an expanded pitch range, higher amplitude, and longer duration. It may also be separated from surrounding material by a pause before and/or after. Finally, an ip is the domain of downstep. That is, pitch range is reset across ip boundaries. Similarities The prosodic systems of Korean and English are similar in a few respects. Both languages have at least two prosodic units above the word, and these are marked 3

There were six pitch accent types in Beckman & Pierrehumbert (1986): L*, H*, L+H*, L*+H, H+L*, H*+L. But H+L* became H+!H* in ToBI to reflect the mid-level f0 value of L* in H+L*. H*+L was merged to H* because the downstep trigger (i.e. +L) was no longer needed by adding an explicit downstep marker (!) before a High tone.

428

Sun-Ah Jun

by intonation. The IP in both languages is marked similarly, by phrase-final lengthening, an obligatory boundary tone, and an optional pause after. Though the number of boundary tones is far fewer in English, some sentence types are marked by the same boundary tones in the two languages. For example, yes/no questions are marked by a high boundary tone while declaratives and imperatives are marked by a low boundary tone. Though the Korean AP is a prosodic unit larger than a word, its function of marking new/old information is similar to that of the English pitch accent. In Korean, a word with new information comes at the beginning of an AP and a word with old information tends to come in later in an AP (Kang, 1996). In English, a word with new information receives pitch accent and a word with old information tends not to receive pitch accent. The realization of focus is also similar in both languages. Pitch range is expanded during the focused word and reduced after focus. In Korean, AP boundaries tend to be deleted after focus (dephrasing), and in English, pitch accent tends to be deleted after focus (deaccenting). The domain of dephrasing or deaccenting is an Intermediate Phrase in both languages (assuming the revised model of Korean intonation in Jun, 2004). Differences One of the biggest differences between English and Korean prosody is that English is a lexical stress language and Korean is not. In English, the prominence of a word is cued by pitch accent which is associated with the stressed syllable of the prominent word. In Korean, the prominence of a word is achieved by placing the word at the beginning of a phrase. Thus, English is known as a ‘head’ prominence language and Korean an ‘edge’ prominence language (Jun, 2005, Ch. 16). Though the Intonation Phrase is defined similarly in English and Korean, the smaller phrases are not. The ip in English has phrase-final lengthening, though not as much as the IP. The ip or AP in Korean has no substantial phrase-final lengthening. The ip in English is marked by a phrase accent whose realization is not localized on the phrase-final syllable, but covers any syllables between the last pitch-accented word and the end of the phrase. However, it is not clear if there is any tone specific to an ip in Korean when it is defined only by pitch reset. The AP in Korean is defined by phrasal tones marking both the beginning and the end of the phrase. Having two tones (H or L) at the beginning of an AP depending on the phrase-initial segment type is unique to Korean intonation. Since most words form an AP by themselves in Korean (Schafer & Jun, 2002; S. Kim, 2004), the association of a tone with a word-initial segment is perceptually very salient (T. Cho, 1996; M.-R. Kim et al., 2002).

Prosody in sentence processing

429

Finally, the pragmatic meaning of a sentence is delivered by the IP boundary tone realized on the phrase final syllable in Korean but by the whole intonation contour (from the combined meaning of pitch accent, phrase accent, and boundary tone) in English. For example, one of the functions delivered by a LHL% boundary tone in Korean is annoyance or irritation. In English, this meaning is achieved by a sequence of L* pitch accent, H* pitch accent, and L-L% boundary tones. The role of prosody in sentence processing Given the similarities and differences in the prosody of English and Korean, there are similarities and differences in the way prosody influences sentence processing in the two languages. For many spoken sentences in each language, prosodic structure helps to resolve ambiguity at other levels of linguistic analysis. For example, the English sentence in (1) can mean either (a) or (b) depending on the prosodic phrasing of the utterance: a prosodic boundary comes after the girl in (1a), but before the girl in (1b). Similarly, the Korean sentence in (2) means (2a) if a prosodic boundary comes between Soyengi ‘Soyeng-NOM’ and pap ‘a meal’ but means (2b) if there is no boundary there. (1)

The hostess greeted the girl with a smile (Lehiste, 1973) a. The hostess greeted the girl // with a smile → The hostess smiled b. The hostess greeted // the girl with a smile → The girl smiled

(2)

Soyengi pap mekessni? ‘Soyeng-Nom a meal eat-interrogative ending’ a. Soyengi // pap // mekessni ‘Soyoung, did you eat your meal?’ b. Soyengi pap // mekessni ‘(Did you) eat Soyoung’s meal?’

As shown in (1) and (2) above, an intended syntactic and semantic structure in each language is cued by the prosodic phrasing of the sentence. Accordingly, it has been found that when the boundary of a prosodic unit comes at a place corresponding to a syntactic/semantic group, native speakers of each language take less time in processing the sentence/phrase compared to the case where the prosodic boundary does not match the syntactic/semantic boundary (e.g. Warren et al., 1995; Schafer, 1997; Kjelgaard & Speer, 1999; Speer et al., 1999; Schafer et al., 2000 for English; Schafer & Jun, 2000, 2002; Kang & Speer, 2003; H.-S. Kim, 2004, for Korean). For example, in a crossmodal naming task where subjects complete a sentence after hearing a sentence fragment and seeing a target word (the word immediately following the sentence fragment) on a computer screen, Kjelgaard and Speer (1999) found that, when the target word is is, English speakers complete the sentence fragment shown in (3) much faster, i.e. process faster, when an Intonation Phrase boundary comes after the verb leaves than after the noun the house.

430

(3)

Sun-Ah Jun

When Roger leaves the house

Similarly, in a cross-modal naming task, Schafer and Jun (2000, 2002) found that native speakers of Korean process a noun phrase (Adjective+NP1 +NP2; e.g. hyenmyenghan akiuy appa ‘wise baby’s daddy’) faster when the accentual phrasing of the noun phrase and the semantic/pragmatic meaning of the phrase (e.g. wise // baby’s daddy) match than when they do not (e.g. wise baby’s // daddy). This study shows that Korean speakers are sensitive to the existence of an AP boundary in sentence processing even though, unlike the Intonation Phrase (or the Intermediate Phrase) in English, the Korean AP has no consistent final lengthening. As found in H.-S. Kim and Lee (2004), prosodic phrases realized with strong acoustic cues such as an Intonation Phrase exert more influence on sentence parsing than those marked by weaker acoustic cues. Thus, the English ip and IP, whose boundaries are marked by phrase-final lengthening in addition to the tonal cues, behave similarly in sentence processing, but the Korean AP and IP do not: only the IP is marked by phrase-final lengthening, and IPs have stronger influence than APs on sentence processing. Schafer and Jun’s finding that prosodic phrasing in Korean disambiguates a syntactically ambiguous string has been confirmed by more recent studies in which the domain of ambiguity was larger. Kang and Speer (2003) showed that a globally ambiguous sentence like (4) is disambiguated by prosodic phrasing. Two possible meanings are shown in (4a) and (4b). (4)

Cinwen-ika ywupaytangha-n sancang-ul kongkyekhaysse. ‘Cinwen-NOM got.exiled-REL villa-ACC attacked’ a. ‘Cinwen attacked the mountain villa where (pro) got exiled.’ b. ‘(pro) attacked the mountain villa where Cinwen got exiled.’

When there was no Intonation Phrase boundary after the subject NP Cinwenika (thus the subject NP and the following verb formed one prosodic unit), speakers overwhelmingly chose the subject NP (82.6%) as the subject of the verb ywupaytanghan (got.exiled), thus interpreting the sentence as (4b). H.-S. Kim (2004) also showed the role of prosodic phrasing in disambiguation of a larger phrase. She investigated whether a temporarily ambiguous string shown in (5), nanun kkochul coahanun mincieykey, is produced differently depending on the two different structures/meanings of the sentence, (5a) and (5b), and whether speakers use prosody to disambiguate between the different interpretations. In (5a), the second word, kkochul ‘a flower-ACC’, is the object of the relative clause; in (5b) the second word is the object of the main clause. Kim found that the ambiguous string is disambiguated by prosodic phrasing: an IP break after ‘I-top’ and an AP break after ‘a flower’ for (6a), and an AP break after ‘I-top’ and an IP break after ‘a flower’ for (6b). Subjects processed the

Prosody in sentence processing

431

sentence significantly faster when the prosodic phrasing matched the intended meaning of the structure than when it did not. (5)

nanun kkochul coahanun mincieykey (cangmilul) b cwuessta4 ‘I-top flower-ACC like-rel Minci-DAT a rose gave’ a. SR reading: I gave the rose [to Minci who likes flowers] b. SOR reading: I gave [the flowers] [to Minci whom ei like]

Thus, English and Korean speakers are similar in manipulating prosodic phrasing to deliver the intended meaning and structure of a sentence and in paying attention to prosodic phrasing cues in processing the different meanings. On the other hand, English and Korean differ in the relation between prosodic features and the meaning in the case of focused wh-pronouns. Schafer et al. (2000) found that when a wh-word is focused (nuclear pitch accented), as in (6a), the wh-word is interpreted as an embedded question; the absence of pitch accent on the wh-word, as in (6b), biased listeners to a relative clause reading. (6) a. b.

I asked the pretty little girl WHO is cold I asked the pretty little girl who is COLD

The same meaning as (6a) is achieved in Korean by placing the wh-word at the beginning of an Accentual Phrase and erasing the Accentual Phrase boundary after the wh-word, as shown in (7a). If the AP boundary after the wh-word is maintained as in (7b), the wh-word is interpreted as an indefinite pronoun as described in Jun & Oh (1996). The meaning of (6b) cannot be conveyed in Korean without changing word order and structure. (7)

nanun yeyppun sonyeeykey nuka chwupnyako mulessta. ‘I-TOP pretty little girl who cold asked’ a. {nanun} {yeyppun} {sonyeeykey} {nuka chwupnyako} {mulessta}. → ‘I asked the pretty little girl WHO is cold’ b. {nanun} {yeyppun} {sonyeeykey} {nuka} {chwupnyako} {mulessta}. → ‘I asked the pretty little girl if there is anyone who is cold’ Future research

Studies examining the role of prosody in sentence processing are relatively new in the field of psycholinguistics. To better understand the mechanism of auditory sentence processing both in general and specifically in Korean, the prosody of more syntactic structures and more varied pragmatic conditions should be

4

The word ‘cangmilul’ is not included for the meaning of (5b).

432

Sun-Ah Jun

examined using a range of methodologies. Further, we need to refine the intonational model of Korean to describe the prosodic phrasing and the tonal patterns of utterances in production experiments and to allow us to manipulate prosodic features for processing experiments. This would also help us to pursue syntax–prosody interface studies (e.g. Jun, 1998). Studies on auditory sentence processing have investigated the effect of prosody on processing by adult native speakers of Korean. A natural extension of this is to investigate the acquisition of Korean prosody by children (as well as by second-language learners) and to study how prosody guides parsing of word and sentence boundaries in Korean (see Jun & Oh, 2000; Y. Choi, 2003; S. Kim 2004; cf. Jusczyk, Cutler & Redanz, 1993; Jusczyk, 1999). Most studies on first-language acquisition have focused on the areas of morphosyntax and phonology; prosody is rarely the focus of such studies. It is known that children acquire intonation before they acquire words (Lewis, 1951; Crystal, 1979). Acquiring a different boundary tone for a different sentence type (e.g. L tone for a declarative or H tone for an interrogative) can be easily observed (e.g. Jun, 2006), but careful study is needed to investigate the pragmatic meaning of different boundary tones (e.g. M.-J. Park, 2003) and the acquisition of prosodic phrasing (e.g. Y. Choi, 2003; Y. Choi & Mazuka, 2003, this volume). In sum, prosody plays an important role in the area of psycholinguistics as well as other sub-areas of linguistics, and analyzing intonation in the framework of intonational phonology provides a useful tool for comparing prosodic features across languages. It can also help experimenters to manipulate the prosodic features of a language in their experimental design and materials. Further research is needed to explore both the processing of prosody and the role of prosody in processing.

34

Korean sentence processing Youngjin Kim and Kwangill Choi

One of the most important issues in the study of language processing concerns the universality of sentence processing strategies across different languages (e.g. Hillert, 1998; de Vincenzi, 2000). As all researchers agree, if the goal of psycholinguistics is to study the human sentence processor and not the sentence processing mechanisms of a specific language, the test of universality is not an option but a necessary condition for evaluating various models of sentence processing. Crosslinguistic comparisons of sentence processing can be attempted from two different perspectives. One is the universality hypothesis. It argues that there are universal processing strategies that apply to all languages, because processing strategies are independent of specific languages and are based on cognitive universals. The strategies or principles that could be considered as being universal are minimal attachment and late closure (Frazier, 1987;) as well as the minimal chain principle (de Vincenzi, 1991). These principles are assumed to operate in all languages, with only the ‘vocabulary,’ i.e. lexical items and specific grammar, differing across languages. Another reason to do crosslinguistic studies might be the expectation that different languages show different processing strategies, under an assumption that parsing strategies are a reflection of language-specific characteristics and a by-product of exposure to a given language. Some processing strategies may not be universal but are instead language specific or parameterized (e.g. Mazuka, 1998). So, there is no need, at least in principle, to test the same strategy in different languages. From this perspective, first of all we should try to find important grammatical aspects or structures that are unique to a language and then examine their sentence processing implications. For example, in English, word order is most typically used for the basic syntactic function of indicating ‘who did what to whom.’ In Korean, on the other hand, case markers on words indicate the syntactic function, and word order is used mostly for highlighting and backgrounding information semantically or pragmatically. Therefore, the role of word order information in syntactic parsing procedures may be different from language to language. Our job may be to combine all the findings from studies of different structures of 433

434

Youngjin Kim and Kwangill Choi

different languages, and to abstract some commonality of sentence comprehension processes. In this review, we will first briefly discuss the grammatical characteristics of the Korean language, and then describe major findings of Korean syntactic processing based on the first perspective. The characteristics of Korean Korean is head-final, left-branching, has subject-object-verb word order, permits scrambling, and allows phonological null arguments and adjuncts. Typologically, Korean is classified as an agglutinative language with a rich morphology (S. Suh, 1994). Thus, some grammatical functions represented structurally in English are actually represented by way of case markers. Other grammatical functions represented syntactically in English are represented by a change in verbal morphology in Korean. Passive, causative, and mood marking are such instances. Furthermore, the morphological particles not only have various syntactic functions, but also have complex semantic and pragmatic functions in discourse. For example, delimitative particles (delimiters), which are enclitic to the NP, like case markers and postpositions, do not specify the grammatical role of the NP. Rather, they carry semantic implications necessary for the interpretation of the NP or the sentence. Therefore, an interesting question is what the roles of these morphological elements are in sentence parsing. Parsing strategies Incremental processing There is a lot of empirical evidence suggesting that incrementality is one of the basic properties of the human language processor. It argues that the sentence processor operates in such a way as to maximize the interpretation and comprehension of the sentences at each stage of processing (Crocker, 1996). However, some theorists (e.g. Pritchett, 1991) argue that in head-final languages such as Korean and Japanese the attachment of each phrase is delayed until a head, such as a verb, is available. In order to examine the argument, Koh (1997) compared the following structures by tracking eye movements. (1)

Dative structures Emeni-ka yeyppun maknayttal-eykey samcon-i sachwu-n cha-lul mwulleycuessta. Mother-NOM pretty youngest daughter-DAT uncle-NOM buy+give-REL car-ACC handed-down.

Korean sentence processing

435

(Mother handed down to the pretty youngest daughter the car which uncle bought (for her)). Transitive structures Emeni-ka yeyppun maknayttal-eykey samcon-I sachu-n cha-lul coahayssta. Mother-NOM pretty youngest daughter-DAT uncle-NOM buy+give-REL car-ACC liked. (Mother liked the car which uncle bought for the pretty youngest daughter.)

(2)

These two sentences are identical except for the final verbs. Therefore, if there is some delay until the final verb, we cannot expect any differences in the ambiguous regions. However, the results showed that total reading times were faster and regressive eye-movements fewer in the dative conditions than the transitive conditions. These data may not be compatible with the lexically based delay model. Jang (1999) reported almost the same results using a self-paced word-by-word reading task. Minimal attachment Frazier (1979) and Frazier and Rayner (1982) proposed a serial parsing model (i.e. the garden-path model) in which a structural decision at an ambiguous point is made based on the principle of minimal attachment, the intuition behind which is shared by many other parsing models. Frazier (1987) also reported that constituent structure processes of Dutch and English are identical, despite the presence of head-final phrases in Dutch. So, it is an interesting question whether Korean sentences that have local ambiguities follow the same minimal attachment processes. For example: (3)

Bob-ka Mary-lul manna-n … -NOM –ACC met-REL or COMP

(4) a.

Bob-ka Mary-lul manna-n Jack-lul ttaraessta. -NOM -ACC met-REL -ACC hit-IND (Bob hit Jack who met Mary.) Bob-ka Mary-lul manna-n sagun-I allyeciessta. -NOM -ACC met-COMP fact-NOM was known-IND (The fact that Bob met Mary was known.)

b.

The string N-N-V in (3) is ambiguous, i.e. the second noun and the verb can constitute an embedded relative clause like in (4a), or it can be parsed as two arguments of the verb and constitute a complex noun phrase like in (4b). It depends on the disambiguating head noun that follows the verb. Thinking of the

436

Youngjin Kim and Kwangill Choi

left-to-right parsing of (3), the first analysis can be called ‘separate clause analysis’ and the second analysis can be called ‘co-argument analysis’ (Y. Kim, 1999). The co-argument analysis is simpler than that of the separate clause analysis in terms of the number of nodes postulated at Mary. Hence, the garden-path model with the minimal attachment principle predicts that the first three words will be parsed as a single clause. Recently Y. Kim (2004) compared these two structures by tracking eye movements. There were no differences in the ambiguous region (i.e. until the third word) between the two structures. However, there were significant differences between the structures in disambiguating the fourth word. Although mean first-pass times did not show any differences, second-pass reading times and rereading times showed significant differences between them. That is, participants spent more time reading the disambiguating region (i.e. the fourth word) for structures like (4a) compared to structures like (4b). These findings showed that Korean constituent structuring processes follow the minimal attachment principle. Late closure Another basic parsing strategy is the late closure principle (Frazier, 1979). It refers to the process of trying to attach new parts of a sentence to the phrase or clause that is currently being processed. It accounts for the preference pattern in the following. (5)

Someone shot the servant of the actress who was on the balcony.

According to this strategy, readers prefer to attach the relative clause to the closest NP (the actress, which is called low attachment) rather than to the distant one (the servant, which is called high attachment). There are too many crosslinguistic studies on the universality issue of the late closure principle to discuss them here (for a review, see Clifton, 2000), so we are going to examine only Japanese and Korean data. Kamide and Mitchell (1997) reported that, in an off-line questionnaire study, there was significant high attachment preference in the Japanese versions of sentences like (5). However, in a self-paced on-line reading experiment that used sentences biased toward low or high attachment, they found attachment shift effects. That is, Japanese readers preferred high attachment in initial parsing (i.e. in the noun phrase region), but preferred low attachment in final parsing (i.e. in the final verb region). These findings could be interpreted as indicating that attachment processes may not be deterministic. Korean and Japanese share grammatical characteristics such as word order and the position of the relative clause in a sentence. However, there is a significant difference in the construction of the relative clause, which may

Korean sentence processing

437

be related to issues of the attachment process. In Korean, verbs in the relative clause are unambiguously marked by suffixes: -nun is attached for the present tense, -un/n for the past tense, and -ul/l for the future tense. This means that there is a clear distinction between the embedded relative verbs and the main verbs, which is absent in Japanese. In addition to this characteristic of Korean, eight different types of the relative clause construction are possible, depending on the attachment site of the relative clause, the function of the head noun in the relative clause, and the word order of the main clause (c.f. Clancy, Lee & Zoh, 1986). Therefore, whether all these aspects of grammatical structure are related to the preference for relative clause attachment is an interesting question. K. Choi (2001) and K. Choi and Kim (2002) performed several questionnaire studies and on-line experiments. The results can be summarized as follows. First, when using Korean versions of the sentence structures adapted from Kamide and Mitchell (1997), we obtained similar results. That is, there was a preference for high attachment in the questionnaire study. However, attachment shift effects were not strong in on-line experiments. Only subject analysis (F1) was significant and item analysis (F2) failed to reach a significant level. There are two important points about the relative clause structures that Kamide and Mitchell (1997) used. The sentences used in their questionnaire study were center-embedded relative clauses, and were of the ‘be-verb (or locative verb)’ type such as ‘who is on the balcony.’ However, the sentences used in their on-line experiment were left-branching relative clauses. This might account for the different results. In order to control this possibility, we systematically manipulated three factors and made eight conditions: the attachment site of the relative clause (i.e. center-embedding vs. leftbranching), the function of the head noun in the relative clause (i.e. subject vs. object), and the word order of the main clause (i.e. canonical vs. scrambled). We also used only transitive verbs (e.g. ‘hit’) when constructing the sentences. In contrast to previous studies, the results of the two questionnaire studies showed an overall preference for low attachment, although there were differences between conditions. The low attachment preferences were especially strong in the center-embedding structures compared to the left-branching structures. In addition, the left-branching structures in which the head functioned as an object did not show any clear preference. This means that the three factors that we manipulated interacted to determine off-line attachment preferences. However, the two on-line experiments we performed with the same eight conditions showed strong low attachment effects. That is, the sentence structures biased to the low attachment showed fast reading times and did not show any attachment shift effects. Taken together, these experiments suggested that ‘locality’ (Gibson, 1998) could be a basic and universal parsing strategy.

438

Youngjin Kim and Kwangill Choi

Minimal chain Although word order is relatively free in Korean, there is a strong preference for the canonical word order, i.e. word order in which scrambling has not been applied. This is accounted for by the minimal chain principle (de Vincenzi, 1991), which is considered to be another universal principle of sentence processing. We do not have any experimental Korean data that provide support for this principle. However Suh (1994) provided judgment data. For example: (6)

a.

b.

John -i Mary -eykey Bill -i ku pimil-ul phoklohayssta-ko malhayssta. -NOM -DAT -NOM secret-ACC revealed-COMP said/told John –i Mary -eykey [Bill -i ku pimil-ul phoklohayssta-ko] malhayssta. -NOM –DAT –NOM secret-ACC revealed-COMP said/told (John told Mary that Bill revealed the secret.) John –i [Mary -eykey Bill -i ku pimil-ul phoklohayssta-ko] malhayssta. -NOM -DAT -NOM secret-ACC revealed-COMP said/told (John said that Bill revealed the secret to Mary.)

The structure (6) is associated with two interpretations due to the possibility of scrambling. The noun phrase ‘Mary-eykey’ is the goal argument of the matrix verb (‘malhayssta’) in the reading of (6a), and the goal argument of the embedded verb (‘phoklohayssta’) in the reading of (6b). That is, the structure of (6b) is scrambled. Suh (1994) reported that nineteen out of twenty subjects chose (6a) as an immediately available reading for (6) and argued that it is evidence for the minimal chain principle. Processing of Korean topic marker Case particles and postpositions, which are attached to the nominal, signal grammatical roles of NPs in a Korean sentence. Delimiters, which are also attached to the nominal, do not specify the grammatical role of NPs. Rather, they provide the semantic and pragmatic implications necessary for the interpretation of the NPs or the sentence. In Korean, we can manipulate a sentence syntactically or semantically just by changing the case particle or delimiter of an NP without changing the linear order of the sentence. Hence, this property of Korean provides an interesting arena within which to test various models that predict an absence or presence of interaction effects of various sources of information in sentence processing.

Korean sentence processing

439

Y. Kim (1999) reported effects of a delimiter or a topic marker -nun on Korean sentence parsing. He compared examples like (7) that bear the nominative case marker -ka (which becomes -i after a consonant), with examples like (8) that have the topic marker -nun. The two sentences are exactly the same except for the markers attached to the first NPs. (7)

(8)

Bob-ka Mary-lul manna-n -NOM –ACC met-REL (Bob hit Jack who met Mary.) Bob-nun Mary-lul manna-n -TOP -ACC met-REL (Bob hit Jack who met Mary.)

Jack-lul ttaraessta. –ACC hit-IND Jack-lul ttaraessta. -ACC hit-IND

Using a self-paced word-by-word reading task, Y. Kim (1999) found no difference in reading times between the two conditions until the third word (i.e. the ambiguous region), and found significantly shorter reading times at the fourth word (i.e. the disambiguation location) in (8) than in (7). We interpreted these effects as an indication that reparsing of the topic-marked structure was facilitated. Nevertheless, it is still possible that the topic marker could affect initial parsing procedures in addition to reparsing procedures. If we use a more sensitive measure like eye tracking, could we find the initial parsing effect of the topic marker? By tracking eye movement of the two structures, Y. Kim (2004) found no difference in first-pass times and second-pass times at the fourth word. Only re-reading times showed a significant difference at the fourth word. That is, the topic-marked structure showed shorter re-reading times than the nominative-marked structure. The participants showed significantly lower regression probabilities in the ambiguous second word of the topic-marked conditions compared to the nominative-marked conditions. Based on these results, Kim (2004) argued that topic information might be used in reparsing processes. In ordinary conversations and texts, these two particles are used interchangeably, so it is very difficult to say when to use -ka and when to use the alternative nun instead. However, there may be distributional or grammatical differences between the two particles. Hong (1985) examined the distribution of the use of the subject marker in written and spoken data, and he found that -nun is used more in written language and -ka/i is used more in spoken style. He also found that new information favors -ka while old and inferable factors favor -nun. The subject of the main clause favors -nun and the subject of the subordinate and relative clause favors -ka. Koh (in press) carried out three questionnaire studies and an on-line experiment to examine the use of grammatical constraints and processing strategies of topic noun phrases in Korean. The results of the questionnaire studies showed that a topic phrase is not analyzed as a constituent of the relative clause. The results of the on-line reading task also showed that the

440

Youngjin Kim and Kwangill Choi

main verb was read faster when a topic noun phrase was the subject in the main clause than when it was an object. Koh explained these results by ‘higher-clause subject strategy of the topic marked NPs’ (Nagai, 1995). Another interesting issue concerning the topic marker is that it may provide semantic or pragmatic implications necessary for the interpretation of the NP or the sentence. A lot of Korean linguistic work has centered on this issue (e.g. Han, 1998; C. Lee, 2003). In spite of huge differences in the theoretical analysis of the semantic or pragmatic functions of topic-marked noun phrases, linguists agree that the main function of the topic-marked noun phrase is ‘contrast.’ For example: (9)

John-I Mary-nun coahanta. -NOM –TOP like-IND (John likes Mary, (but not others).)

The sentence in (9) has -nun marked on the object. Han (1998) argued that this sentence presupposes that there are other people besides Mary in the discourse domain and implies that John dislikes everybody in that group apart from Mary. To examine the psychological reality of these arguments, Y. Kim and Youn (2004) compared self-paced word-by-word reading times of topicmarked sentences like (9) under the two different contexts (i.e. consistent and inconsistent). In the consistent-context condition, a sentence that mentions other people besides Mary precedes sentence (9), which is compatible with the presupposition function of the topic marker. A sentence that mentions only Mary precedes the topic sentence in the inconsistent conditions. They found reading times of the (embedded) verbs (i.e. coahanta) were longer under the inconsistent condition than under the consistent condition (Experiment 1). These results were replicated in the second experiment. However, in addition to these findings, reading times of the topic-marked NPs were longer under the consistent conditions than those under the inconsistent condition. Based on these findings, Kim and Youn (2004) suggested that semantic/pragmatic processing of topic-marked NPs might be initiated at the topic-marked noun phrase, and that information might be integrated at the end of the sentences (i.e. the verb in Korean). Summary and conclusion One of the most important issues in the study of language processing concerns the universality of sentence processing strategies across different languages. We have reviewed Korean sentence processing studies in the framework of the universality hypothesis. We confirmed that basic parsing strategies such as minimal attachment, minimal chain, and locality may be applied to Korean sentence processing. Therefore we can conclude that those parsing strategies

Korean sentence processing

441

might be universal. We have also reviewed recent experiments concerning the processing of Korean topic-marked structures, and have suggested that the semantic/pragmatic information of the topic marker might be activated immediately and integrated at the final verb. More work is needed to evaluate the universal and language-specific aspects of Korean sentencing processing.

35

Sentence processing and memory representation in Korean Jae-Ho Lee and Sung-il Kim*

Introduction When readers comprehend a sentence, they construct coherent mental models in memory. The mental models of sentences include various components: semantic roles, syntactic positions, pragmatic order, and so on. These components influence each other in order to construct a mental model of a sentence. One of the most important questions in the field of the psychology of language is how these components contribute to the representation and processing of a sentence. Gernsbacher (1990) proposed a general cognitive framework to explain the process and representation of skilled language comprehension, called the Structure Building Framework (hereafter SBF). The SBF has three component processes: laying the foundation, mapping, and shifting. These processes operate with the incoming language information to build a mental model of a sentence. Gernsbacher claimed that these processing mechanisms could be applied to any information beyond language. The most important principle of laying the foundation is the advantage of ‘first mention’. This effect was obtained consistently in English using several variations of sentences. Based on the laying of the foundation, the activation of incoming information transmits a processing signal to enhance or suppress previous information. The processes develop a mental model by mapping and shifting for coherence between new and old information. The SBF has been supported by many empirical findings (see Gernsbacher, 1997). The important question is whether the advantage of first mention is a universal phenomenon across languages or is applicable only to specific languages. S. Kim and J.-H. Lee (1995, 1997, 2004) have conducted a series of studies to investigate the linguistic differences in the effect of first mention between Korean and English. Korean has two characteristics that are distinctive from English. * This work was supported by the Korea Research Foundation Grant funded by the Korean Government (KRF-2007–327-H00020). We thank Soyoung Kim Suh for many helpful discussions and comments on a draft of this article.

442

Sentence processing and representation

443

First, Korean has a case-marker syntax. The case marker (particle) at the end of a noun indicates the case of that noun. In Korean, case markers play a critical role in determining the syntactic and semantic role of each constituent of a sentence, regardless of word order. Second, Korean has an SOV canonical order unlike English which has an SVO order. Because Korean has case markers, each word can be relatively freely positioned in a sentence without changing the meaning of the sentence. In English, however, since the SVO word order is strict, changing the order critically influences the meaning of a sentence. This paper focuses on the question of whether or not language structure influences the cognitive processing and representation of a sentence. The constraints of sentence representation The coherent mental representation of sentences comprises different components, and these different components vary in their memory accessibility. By measuring and comparing the accessibility of each component in a sentence, how a sentence is processed and represented can be understood. What factors affect the accessibility of the different components of a mental representation of a sentence? McKoon, Ratcliff, Ward, and Sproat (1993) have demonstrated that syntactic position affects the accessibility of components in an English sentence. (1) (2)

His demanding boss is critical. His critical boss is demanding.

When participants were asked whether the word demanding occurred in the set of sentences they read, they responded considerably faster if they read sentence (2) than if they read sentence (1). The lexical item, demanding, plays a different syntactic role in the two sentences: In sentence (1), demanding is a modifier; in sentence (2), it is a predicate. Thus, the syntactic position appears to affect the accessibility of the sentence components. Semantic factors, such as the semantic role (e.g. whether the entity is the semantic agent who causes the action or the semantic patient who receives the action) might also affect the accessibility of the sentence components. Agents are more likely to be animate than inanimate (Clark, 1965). They are also likely to be more active and attract more attention than semantic patients (Zubin, 1979). Agents tend to match the speaker or listener’s perspective (MacWhinney, 1977). Many pragmatic factors might also affect the accessibility of the components in a sentence (see also Green, 1989). What has been most widely investigated is the order of mention. First-mentioned entities appear to have a privileged status in many aspects of sentence and text representation. For example, initial sentences take longer to read than subsequent sentences (e.g. Haberlandt & Graesser, 1990)

444

Jae-Ho Lee and Sung-il Kim

and initial words take longer to read than later-occurring words (e.g. Aaronson & Ferres, 1983; Chang, 1980; Givón, 1986; von Eckardt & Potter, 1985). In the case of spoken English, speakers usually put the important constituent like the focus, topic, or theme of the sentence first, and listeners are assumed to construct a representation of the sentence based on the shared pragmatic knowledge of language use (Birch & Garnsey, 1995; Green, 1989). The advantage of first mention Gernsbacher and Hargreaves (1988) presented the following sentences to participants and then measured recognition latencies for the probe word, Tina. (3) (4)

Tina beat Lisa in the state tennis match. Lisa beat Tina in the state tennis match.

The participants’ probe recognition latencies to Tina were faster after reading sentence (3) than after reading sentence (4). These data suggest that different components of a sentence are represented with different degrees of accessibility. Gernsbacher’s (1990) SBF attempts to account for this privilege of primacy. According to the SBF, the first-mentioned information is more accessible because it forms the foundation for the representation and serves as a cornerstone to enable the integration (mapping) of further information. The phenomenon of the greater accessibility of first-mention information has been termed as the advantage of first mention, and has been empirically tested by Gernsbacher and her colleagues (see Gernsbacher, 1997). However, the advantage of first mention is typically confounded with syntactic position and semantic role in English. For example, in sentence (3) Tina is not only the first-mentioned character, but she is also the subject of the sentence (syntactic position), as well as the agent of the action (semantic role). In contrast, in sentence (4) Tina is now the second-mentioned character, and she is also the object of the sentence, as well as the patient of the action (semantic role). The faster probe recognition time for Tina after the participants had read sentence (3) versus sentence (4) might be due to the order of mention, syntactic position (subject versus object position), semantic role (agent versus patient role) or an interaction among these three factors. In order to dissociate the effect of syntactic position from that of semantic role, Gernsbacher and Hargreaves (1988) manipulated the voice of a sentence to be either active or passive. They found the effect of first mention in the passive voice sentence, which suggests that the order of mention is a critical factor for determining the relative accessibility of components in a sentence. However, in their study, the order of mention was confounded with the syntactic position; the first-mention characters were always the syntactic subjects.

Sentence processing and representation

445

To separate the advantage of first mention from the advantage of syntactic subject, Gernsbacher and Hargreaves (1988) removed one of the characters from its main clause and placed it as the object of a prepositional phrase. These prepositional phrases were presented as in sentences (5) and (6). (5) (6)

Because of Tina, Lisa was evicted from the apartment. Because of Lisa, Tina was evicted from the apartment.

Recognition latencies for the probe name Tina were faster after the participants read sentence (5) than after having read sentence (6); thus, no advantage was found for the syntactic subject. Carreiras, Gernsbacher, and Villa (1995) replicated one of Gernsbacher and Hargreaves’ (1988) experiments using Spanish. Spanish differs from English in its flexibility of word order. The results demonstrated that the advantage of first mention was present in Spanish as well. Thus, the advantage of first mention occurred even when the first-mentioned character was a syntactic object and there was indeed no reliable effect of syntactic position on relative accessibility. Temporal contributions of syntactic, semantic and pragmatic factors In Korean, the case markers (particles) at the end of a noun indicate the case of the noun; therefore, word order is relatively flexible. Because the object of a sentence can be placed before the subject in Korean, it is possible to dissociate the syntactic position from the order of mention through the use of inversion, which is impossible in English. To further investigate the advantage of first mention crosslinguistically, S. Kim and Lee (1995) conducted two experiments using Korean. At a short interval between the offset of the sentence-final word and the probe word (Interstimulus interval [ISI] 255 ms), they found effects of both syntactic position and the order of mention. The subject of a sentence was accessed more easily than the object (28 ms), and the first-mentioned character was accessed more easily than the second-mentioned character (28 ms). This data suggest that syntactic and pragmatic factors affect the relative accessibility of the components of a sentence representation immediately. However, when the interval between the offset of the sentence-final word and the probe word was extended to 1540 ms, the effect of syntactic position was no longer observed, whereas the effect of the order of mention was found to be stronger (47 ms). Unfortunately, in Kim and Lee’s (1995) study, the syntactic position was confounded with the semantic role; the syntactic subjects were always semantic agents, and the syntactic objects were always the semantic patients. Kim, Lee, and Gernsbacher (2004) solved the problem of confounding syntactic position with the semantic role by manipulating the voice of a

446

Jae-Ho Lee and Sung-il Kim

Table 35.1. Examples of experimental materials (Kim et al., 2004) Kukjang-eseo Hansu-nun Junho-lul kkojipe-ss-ta. ‘theater-loc’ ‘Hansu-subj’ ‘Junho-dir obj’ ‘pinched’ (At the theater Hansu pinched Junho.) Subject Agent Second: Kukjang-eseo Junho-lul Hansu-nun kkojipe-ss-ta. ‘theater-loc’ ‘Junho-dir obj’ ‘Hansu-subj’ ‘pinched’ (At the theater Hansu pinched Junho.) Subject Patient First: Kukjang-eseo Hansu-nun Junho-eykey kkojiphye-ss-ta. ‘theater-loc’‘Hansu-subj’ ‘Junho-indir obj’ ‘was pinched’ (At the theater Hansu was pinched by Junho.) Subject Patient Second: Kukjang-eseo Junho-eykey Hansu-nun kkojiphye-ss-ta. ‘theater-loc’ ‘Junho-indir obj’ ‘Hansu-subj’ ‘was pinched’ (At the theater Hansu was pinched by Junho.) Object Agent First: Kukjang-eseo Hansu-eykey Junho-nun kkojiphye-ss-ta. ‘theater-loc’ ‘Hansu-indir obj’ ‘Junho-subj’ ‘was pinched’ (At the theater Junho was pinched by Hansu.) Object Agent Second: Kukjang-eseo Junho-nun Hansu-eykey kkojiphye-ss-ta. ‘theater-loc’ ‘Junho-subj’ ‘Hansu-indir obj’ ‘was pinched’ (At the theater Junho was pinched by Hansu.) Object Patient First: Kukjang-eseo Hansu-lul Junho-nun kkojipe-ss-ta. ‘theater-loc’ ‘Hansu-dir obj’ ‘Junho-subj’ ‘pinched’ (At the theater Junho pinched Hansu.) Object Patient Second: Kukjang-eseo Junho-nun Hansu-lul kkojipe-ss-ta. ‘theater-loc’ ‘Junho-subj’ ‘Hansu-obj’ ‘pinched’ (At the theater Junho pinched Hansu.) Probe word: ‘Hansu’ -eseo: locative particle (postposition) kukjang: theater -nun: subjective case particle kkojipta: pinch -lul: direct objective case particle -hye: passive morpheme -eykey: indirect objective case particle -ss-ta: past tense-declarative suffixes Subject Agent First:

sentence. In Korean, it is possible to make the voice of a sentence passive by using the passive form of the verb without changing the word order or the sentence meaning. Therefore, Korean is an ideal language for factorial manipulation of the three factors: syntactic position, semantic role, and order of mention. In addition, Kim et al. (2004) controlled RSVP (rapid serial visual presentation) rate (250 ms and 500 ms) and ISI (immediate, 500 ms, 1000 ms) in order to examine the relative contributions of the syntactic, the semantic, and the pragmatic factors, as well as to chart the time course of these influences. These variables informed the locus of the mention-order effect in Korean (see Table 35.1). In six experiments, participants performed a probe recognition task after reading each of a series of sentences. The results showed that the order of mention strongly influenced the accessibility between ISI 500 ms and 1000 ms regardless of the RSVP rate. But the

Sentence processing and representation

447

970

Response Time (ms)

960

950

940

930

920 Agent

Patient Semantic Factor

Syntactic Factor Subject

Object

Figure 35.1. The interaction effect between semantic role and syntactic position

advantage of first mention was not observed at ISI 0 ms and the interaction effects between the syntactic position and semantic role were observed only in the subject analysis. The interaction between syntactic position and semantic role was as follows: the reaction time to the probe word was faster in the condition of either ‘semantic agent and syntactic subject’ or ‘semantic patient and syntactic object’ than either ‘semantic agent and syntactic object’ or ‘semantic patient and syntactic subject’ (see Figure 35.1). The interaction effects between syntactic position and semantic role J.-H. Lee, Lee, Kim, and Park (2002) conducted experiments at shorter ISI (i.e. 150 ms) and RSVP rates of 250 and 500 ms using the materials presented in Table 35.1. The advantage of first mention was observed at ISI 150 ms, regardless of the RSVP rate and an interaction effect between syntactic position and semantic role was found as well (see Figure 35.2). A series of studies provided the locus and duration of the mention-order effects in Korean. The first-mention effect was observed at an ISI of 150 ms (Lee et al., 2002), 255 ms (Kim & Lee, 1995), 500–1000 ms (Kim & Lee, 1997; Kim et al., 2004), and

448

Jae-Ho Lee and Sung-il Kim 80

Priming Effect (ms)

60

40

20

0

–20 Immediate

150ms 500ms 1000ms Inter – stimulus Interval

Factors Semantic

Syntactic

Mention order

Figure 35.2. The priming effect of syntactic, semantic and mention-order factors in time course

1540 ms (Kim & Lee, 1995). These results confirmed Gernsbacher ’s (1990) suggestion that the advantage of first mention was a relatively long-lived characteristic in the representation of a sentence. In addition to the effects of the order of mention, they also observed effects of syntactic position and semantic role. Although this interaction was observed in other experiments as well, the pattern was different. For example, Kim and Lee (1995) observed the main effects of syntactic position and order of mention simultaneously at ISI of 255 ms. Kim and Lee (1997) found an interaction between syntactic position and semantic role at ISI 500 ms, and Lee et al. (2002) also found a three-way interaction among syntactic position, semantic role, and order of mention at an ISI of 150 ms (see Figure 35.1). Although these results seem to be in contrast to the advantage of first mention, the effects were observed in relatively short ISI conditions. The interaction between the syntactic position and the semantic role can be explained by a relationship among the sentence components (Kim & Lee, 1995, Kim & Lee, 1997; Kim et al., 2004). There is a possibility that this interaction occurred because of the sentence voice. Although the sentence components can be positioned flexibly in Korean, the typical order is SOV. When the sentence is in active voice, sentence subject and object (syntactic position) are compatible

Sentence processing and representation

449

with each other as an agent and patient (semantic role). This relationship between the syntactic and semantic constraints might contribute to the verb’s causal direction between NP1 and NP2 (see McDonald & MacWhinney, 1995). For example, in the active voice, the direction of the cause and the consequence was from NP1 to NP2, but in the passive voice, it was from NP2 to NP1. The different ways of satisfying those constraints may influence the memory accessibility of sentence components. But it should be noted that this difference did not influence the advantage of first mention in a single sentence (see Lee et al., 2002). The effect of clause recency According to the SBF, the advantage of first mention could be extended into inter-clause and inter-sentence representations (Gernsbacher, 1990). Gernsbacher et al. (1989) measured the accessibility of the sentence in twoclause sentences, such as sentences (7) and (8) below. (7) (8)

Tina gathered the kindling, and Lisa set up the tent. Lisa gathered the kindling, and Tina set up the tent.

At an immediate test interval (ISI 0 ms), where the probe word was presented with the last word of the sentence in sequence, Gernsbacher et al. (1989) observed an advantage of clause recency: the second character was more accessible than the first-mentioned character. At a very brief test interval (ISI 150 ms), the two characters were equally accessible. However, at longer test intervals (ISI 1400 ms and 2000 ms), the first-mentioned characters were considerably more accessible than the second-mentioned characters. Gernsbacher et al. (1989) explained the clause recency effect by suggesting that comprehenders had greatest access to the information that was represented in the substructure that they were currently developing. After comprehenders had finished building their mental substructures, the information from the first component began to become more accessible. The diminished accessibility of the most recent component was coupled with the increased accessibility of the first component. Lee et al. (2002) compared the first-mention effect with the recency effect at various ISIs. They presented (9) or (10) and tested probe recognition at ISIs of 150 ms and 1500 ms. (9)

(10)

Kukjang-eseo Hansu-nun popcorn-ul mukko, sangjum-eseo Junhonun cola-lul satta. (At the theater Hansu-subj popcorn-obj ate, at the market Junho-subj a cola –obj bought.) Sangjum-eseo Junho-nun cola-lul sago, Kukjang-eseo Hansu-nun popcorn-ul mukda. (At the market Junho-subj cola-obj bought, at the theater Hansu-subj a popcorn-obj ate.)

450

Jae-Ho Lee and Sung-il Kim 1200

Response Time (ms)

1150

1000

1050

1000 950

900 150ms 1500ms Inter–stimulus Interval Mention order First

Second

Figure 35.3. The interaction effect between time course and order of mention in clause recency

Participants read the sentence with the RSVP procedure and were asked to recognize the probe word. The results indicated that recency effects were observed at both ISIs. A recency effect was found with the priming effect of 155 ms at ISI of 150 ms and 94 ms at ISI of 1500 ms (see Figure 35.3). These findings were inconsistent with Gernsbacher ’s SBF, and instead are consistent with the results of Chang (1980) and von Eckardt and Potter (1985). Semantic-bias effect Lee et al. (2002) investigated the recency effect further. They argued that the recency effect was not just due to the order of mention, but was related to interclause coherence as well. They constructed two types of materials: in one condition, each of the clauses had its own subjecthood, in the other condition, relative clauses had a semantic bias to recent clauses (see Table 35.2). These manipulations were made to compare the recency effect with the semantic bias effect in the inter-clause sentences. According to the SBF (Gernsbacher, 1990, 1997), interactions between clause recency and mention order were expected across the time course. The results showed that the response to the first information was slower than to the second information in the complex sentence,

Sentence processing and representation

451

Table 35.2. Examples of experimental materials in Lee et al.’s (2002) study Semantic bias, First (object in relative clause): Bus an-eseo Hansu-lul buchookhan Junho-nun sonsugun-ul kkeonassta. In the bus Hansu-obj gave his arms Junho-subj a handkerchief-obj took out (In the bus, Junho who gave his arms to Hansu took a handkerchief out.) Semantic bias, Second (subject in main clause & subject in relative clause): Bus an-eseo Junho-lul buchookhan Hansu-nun sonsugun-ul kkeonassta. In the bus Junho-obj gave his arms Hansu-subj a handkerchief-obj took out. (In the bus, Hansu who gave his arms to Junho took a handkerchief out.) No semantic bias, First (subject in relative clause): Bus an-eseo Hansu-ga buchookhan Junho-nun sonsugun-ul kkeonassta. In the bus Hansu-subj gave his arms Junho-subj a handkerchief-obj took out. (In the bus, Junho whom Hansu gave his arms to took a handkerchief out.) No semantic bias, Second (subject in main clause & object in relative clause): Bus an-eseo Junho-ga buchookhan Hansu-nun sonsugun-ul kkeonassta. In the bus Junho-subj gave his arms Hansu-aux a handkerchief-obj took out. (In the bus, Hansu whom Junho gave his arms to took a handkerchief out.) Probe word: Hansu -ga: subjective case particle in relative clause -nun: auxiliary particle in main clause

but that the semantic bias effect was more robust than the first-mention effect (see Figure 35.4). These findings suggested that the more complex the clause was, the more the semantic bias or focus was important in constructing coherent mental models in Korean. When sentences are constructed, a complex event can be expressed using different connectives which signal the relation between the clauses. These connectives include causal, temporal, additive, and adversative relations. The use of connectives, except the causal connectives, are identical in both Korean and English. For the causal connectives, however, there is a difference in the order of the cause and the effect. In English, the effect usually precedes the cause, but this is not the case in Korean. These differences in clause order imply that important pragmatic information does not always appear in the first clause in Korean. The verb in a sentence is the most important component in representing sentence meaning. In Korean, the canonical word order of SOV implies that the final meaning of a sentence can be constructed in the verb. This principle is applied to mental models of inter-clause or inter-sentence relations. The case marker signals only the syntactic and the semantic cues. Although nouns with a case marker are influenced by the advantage of the mention order, the integrated meaning of a sentence is constructed by the verb in the final position of the sentence. In SOV languages, the important information can be positioned in a

452

Jae-Ho Lee and Sung-il Kim 1200

Response Time (ms)

1150

1000

1050

1000 950

900 Bias

No bias

Semantic bias Mention order First

Second

Figure 35.4. The interaction effect between semantic bias and order of mention in complex sentences

sentence final component. This pragmatic principle of Korean differs from SVO languages like English or Spanish. Summary and conclusions The summary of previous findings on the advantage of first mention in Korean is as follows: 1. The advantage of first mention clearly occurred in simple sentences. 2. The interaction between syntactic position and semantic role was found in simple sentences. 3. As the clause and sentence became more complex, a clause recency effect was found. 4. As the clause and sentence became more complex, semantic bias had more powerful effects on sentence representation. According to the SBF, the advantage of first mention should be observed in single sentences, between sentences, in multi clauses, and discourse. However, evidence against the SBF prediction was found in Korean. The most prominent features of Korean were the case marker, the order of the relative clause, free word order, canonical SOV, and the ellipsis of the sentence component. These

Sentence processing and representation

453

Korean linguistic constraints result in differential cognitive processing and memory representation of the sentence (Lee, 1993; Suh, Lee & Jang, 1997). Although the advantage of first mention was found in a single sentence, the effect could not override the recency effect in a complex sentence. Rather the recency effect and the semantic bias effect were more dominant in processing complex sentences in Korean.

36

Understanding complex sentences: memory constraints and informational structure Yoonhyoung Lee and Peter C. Gordon

A small but growing body of research on sentence processing during the comprehension of Korean sentences has begun to contribute important evidence about general principles in sentence processing and aspects of sentence processing that distinguish Korean from the languages that historically have been the primary focus of psycholinguistic research (e.g. Y. Kim, 1999; Lee, Lee & Gordon, 2007). This research complements studies of Korean using more traditional linguistic methods (e.g. I. Lee & Ramsey, 2000; Kang, 2001) as well as complementing the larger body of psycholinguistic research on Korean which has focused on word-level processes (e.g. Simpson & Kang, 1994; 2004, Nam, Kim, Moon & Seo, 1998). Research on Korean has contributed to the understanding of sentence processing in three important ways: 1) examining whether principles of sentence processing established using other languages can be extended to Korean in a valid way, 2) examining the processing of types of ambiguity or complexity that are present in Korean but not in previously studied languages, and 3) examining the mechanisms of sentence processing by taking advantage of dissociations between different types of information that are more clearly present in Korean than in previously studied languages. Below, we briefly discuss research in each of these types that we have contributed to before providing a more extensive discussion of how recent research on the processing of Korean sentences provides insight into the nature of the memory processes underlying complex sentences and the manner in which sentence processing is guided by informational structure. A central debate in sentence processing research is whether parsing can be initiated with information other than grammatical structure, with some researchers (e.g. Clifton, Traxler, Mohamed, Williams, Morris & Rayner, 2003) arguing that semantic information has no effect on initial sentence parsing and is used only for re-analysis, while other researchers (e.g. MacDonald, Pearlmutter & Seidenberg, 1994; Tanenhaus & Trueswell, 1995) view grammatical structure as just one of multiple constraints on sentence interpretation. To understand the time course over which syntactic and semantic information contribute to sentence comprehension in Korean, we have used eye tracking during reading to 454

Memory and information

455

test the influence of the animacy of initial NPs of locally ambiguous, gardenpath sentences and unambiguous complement-clause sentences. We found that during the reading of Korean both semantic information about animacy and syntactic information were used as soon as they became relevant. These results fit best with the constraint-based model from English. In addition to exhibiting the local grammatical ambiguities that have been the focus of garden-pathing research in other languages, Korean has a morphological ambiguity that is not present in languages that have been the primary object of psycholinguistic research. This ambiguity occurs when the final syllable in a group can either be a case marker or part of a word. For example, when chungchika is used as a subject the final syllable (ka) is a case marker, but when it is used as a premodifier it is part of the word. The subject interpretation, where the final syllable is a case marker, is the more frequent of the two forms (Nam, Kim, Moon & Seo, 1998). We used eye tracking during the reading of Korean to determine how this ambiguity is resolved. The results showed that comprehension was slowed by the ambiguity when the ambiguity was ultimately resolved to both the infrequent and frequent forms. This indicates that frequency was not used to give a default interpretation to the sequence and that instead interpretation was delayed until the morphological ambiguity was resolved by information in the subsequent words. As we will discuss below, a great deal of research on English has used the difference between object-extracted relative clauses (RCs) and subjectextracted RCs to study the way in which memory constrains language processing. Because RCs in English follow the head that they modify, they interrupt the flow of the sentence, which has been taken to create the need to store the beginning parts of the sentence in memory while the RC is being processed. While object-extracted RCs appear to place a greater demand on memory than do subject-extracted RCs, this may not be the only difference between the two types of RCs which contributes to processing difficulty. This possibility has been examined in Chinese (Hsiao & Gibson, 2003) where RCs are premodifiers that do not interrupt the flow of the sentence. However, interpretation of the results is difficult because of different degrees of local ambiguity in Chinese object-extracted and subject-extracted RCs (Hsiao & Gibson, 2003; Yang, Gordon, Hendrick & Wu, 2001; Hsu, Hurewitz & Phillips, 2006). Korean RCs also appear before the head that they modify but they do not contain the ambiguities that are present in Chinese RCs. Using eye tracking during reading we1 have found that subject-extracted RCs are understood faster and more accurately than object-extracted RCs. These results show that memory 1

This work has been done in collaboration with Nayoung Kwon and has built on her research using self-paced reading and ERPs to examine comprehension of different types of RCs in Korean (e.g. Kwon, Polinsky & Kluender, 2004).

456

Yoonhyoung Lee and Peter C. Gordon

processes are not the sole source of the object–subject difference in understanding RCs. Instead semantic differences between these types of extraction may also contribute to the difference. Sentence complexity, memory constraints and informational structure The most notable feature of sentence comprehension is how easily people go about attaching a meaningful interpretation to a series of words that are processed one at a time. The ease with which this is done shows that language comprehension is a highly developed skill but the usual smooth operation of that skill provides little information about how it works. In order to obtain such information, psycholinguists have examined understanding of two types of difficult-to-understand sentences, those that are ambiguous and those where the string of words is unambiguous but still difficult to understand. Garden-path sentences provide a key instance where ambiguity in a string of words causes measurable disruption of sentence comprehension in a way that is diagnostic of the underlying mechanisms. Difficulties in understanding unambiguous complex sentences, which are the focus of this chapter, do not arise from how information is interpreted but rather must arise from some other limitation in cognitive ability, particularly one related to memory. Investigations of whether and how memory constrains language comprehension have been prominent since the beginnings of contemporary psycholinguistics. Miller and Chomsky (1963) drew attention to the fact that an English sentence like (1), which is doubly center-embedded, is nearly impossible to understand even though it is grammatically well formed. (1)

The salmon that the man that the dog chased smoked tasted bad.

The difficulty experienced in understanding this type of sentence and related constructions have yielded a set of findings that have been used to test various theories of how language processing makes use of memory resources (e.g. Caplan & Waters, 1999; Gibson, 1998; Gordon, Hendrick & Johnson, 2001; Just & Varma, 2002; Warren & Gibson, 2002). Recent work has exploited an observation first made by Bever (1974) of how the difficulty in understanding doubly center-embedded sentences is influenced by the type of noun phrases (NPs) in the sentence. Bever’s classic example is shown in (2). (2)

The reporter everyone I met trusts said that the president won’t resign.

This sentence is easy to understand even though its structure is identical to that of 1. Analyses of this contrast have focused on the nature of memory and its possible interaction with the typical information status of different types of NPs.

Memory and information

457

An influential model by Gibson, which has been evaluated and modified in work by Gibson and Warren (Gibson, 1998; Warren & Gibson, 2002), describes the difficulty in understanding doubly center-embedded sentences as emerging from the need to integrate elements of a sentence (e.g. fillers and gaps) that are not contiguous. The distance over which such integration between non-contiguous elements must take place determines the difficulty in processing. That distance is defined by the number of intervening discourse referents that must be held in memory. Further, the memory demands of representing discourse referents depends on their referential accessibility or information status (Warren & Gibson, 2002). This idea builds on the strong relationship between types of noun phrases and their presumed accessibility in discourse. Pronouns refer to discourse referents that are highly accessible while definite descriptions refer to discourse referents that typically are not accessible and must be retrieved from long-term memory using the information specified by the description. Other types of noun phrases (e.g. proper names) fall between pronouns and descriptions in terms of accessibility. This model quite naturally explains the ease of understanding (2) where the centermost NP in the doubly center-embedded structure is the highly accessible pronoun ‘I’. Warren and Gibson (2002) presented a variety of data supporting the model, including ratings of sentences with double center embeddings and comparisons of reading times for sentences with object-extracted and subjectextracted relative clauses, a contrast that allows a controlled comparison of sentences with longer-distance and shorter-distance integration. In addition, corpus analyses of English (Fox & Thompson, 1990; Gordon & Hendrick, 2005) show that pronouns occur with very high frequency as the centermost NP in sentences with object-extracted RCs, a finding consistent with the idea that such sentences are easy to process. An alternative model of how memory influences the understanding of complex sentences has been developed around the view that a general feature of memory retrieval – its susceptibility to interference – places an important cognitive constraint on language comprehension. The impetus for this view came from reading-time studies by Gordon, Hendrick and Johnson (2001) which examined how the types of NPs within an RC affected the difference in ease of understanding between object-extracted RCs and subject-extracted RCs as shown in (3) and (4) which show alternative types of NPs (descriptions, pronouns or proper names) in parentheses. (3) (4)

The lawyer that (the banker/you/Joe) irritated filed a hefty lawsuit. The lawyer that irritated (the banker/you/Joe) filed a hefty lawsuit.

As discussed above, sentences with object-extracted RCs are typically more difficult to understand than sentences with subject-extracted RCs. This very robust effect was obtained when the sentence contained two descriptions

458

Yoonhyoung Lee and Peter C. Gordon

(the lawyer and the banker in the examples) but not when it contained a description and a pronoun or a description and a proper name. The finding that the object–subject difference was eliminated when a pronoun appeared in the RC confirms a prediction of the Gibson (1998) model since the pronoun is associated with highly accessible information. The finding that this difference was also eliminated by a proper name is more surprising from the perspective of an approach based on information accessibility. While names can be considered as somewhat more accessible than descriptions (Warren & Gibson, 2002), they would not be expected to have an effect on processing difficulty that was as strong as that of pronouns. Gordon et al. (2001) hypothesized that the effects on sentence complexity of both pronouns and proper names, as compared to descriptions, could be due to the similarity of the head NP (a description in all instances) and the embedded NP. During the processing of a sentence with an object-extracted RC (such as (3)) two NPs are encountered before a verb occurs. These NPs must be held in memory and when the verb is encountered the correct NP must be retrieved. The susceptibility of memory retrieval to similarity-based interference offers an explanation of why the retrieval is more difficult when the two NPs being remembered are similar (two descriptions) rather than dissimilar (a description and either a pronoun or name). For this mechanism difficulty in processing is a product of the relationship between the two critical NPs in the sentence, not just of the characteristics of the embedded NP. Gordon et al. (2001) tested this idea by examining cleft sentences which allow different types of NPs to occur in both head and embedded positions. Examples of the stimuli are shown in (5) and (6). (5) (6)

It was (the lawyer/Bob) that (the banker/Joe) irritated. It was (the lawyer/Bob) that irritated (the banker/Joe).

The difference in the ease of understanding cleft sentences with object extractions (e.g. (5)) as compared to subject extractions (e.g. (6)) was greater when the two critical NPs were of the same type (two descriptions or two names) than when they were of a different type (a name and a description or a description and a name). This pattern confirmed a crucial prediction of the similarity-based interference model of the memory-based difficulty experienced in processing complex sentences. Subsequent research has provided support for the role of similarity-based interference in sentence processing using a variety of methods: self-paced reading in English (Gordon, Hendrick & Johnson, 2004; Warren & Gibson, 2005) and in Dutch (Kaan & Vasic, 2004), eye tracking during the reading of English (Gordon, Hendrick, Johnson & Lee, 2006), and load tasks which manipulated the similarity of a list of words that had to be remembered as a sentence was being processed (Gordon, Hendrick & Levine, 2002; van Dyke & McElree, 2006).

Memory and information

459

Memory and information structure in the comprehension of Korean Complex sentences are a naturally occurring phenomenon so there is no reason why the difficulty that people have with them should stem from a single cause. Indeed the accessibility account of Gibson and Warren and the memory interference account of Gordon, Hendrick and colleagues are not mutually exclusive; it is possible that each provides a valid account of a factor that contributes to the difficulty in understanding complex sentences. Further, it is possible that the informational status of NPs may influence sentence processing through mechanisms other than reducing memory demands. In Lee et al. (2007) we measured eye movements during the reading of complex sentences in Korean in order to study the nature of the memory processes used in language comprehension and to examine how the information status (or accessibility) of NPs influences comprehension. The structure of Korean offers distinct advantages over English for separating out factors related to memory and information status. Further, it provides the opportunity for more refined tests of whether similarity effects are due to memory retrieval as claimed by the Gordon and Hendrick model. These advantages derive from the headfinal structure of Korean which means that there are many circumstances where multiple NPs must be understood and stored in memory before a verb occurs. In addition, Korean orthography makes it easy to use eye tracking methodology to study how different types of NPs affect reading comprehension because it is easy to match the length of different types of NPs (descriptions, names and pronouns) and because descriptions do not require an article. The length and number of words in an NP have a strong effect on the eye movement measures that are used to study reading comprehension. While the primary goal in Lee et al. (2007) was to examine memory processes and referential accessibility during language comprehension, the paper also reported basic results on eye movements during the reading of Korean sentences because it was one of the first large-scale efforts where eye movements were recorded during the reading of Korean. Lee et al. found that the major features of eye movements during the reading of Korean matched those seen in alphabetic and idiographic languages once differences in the horizontal compactness of the different writing systems was taken into consideration. Lee et al. (2007) examined memory processes and referential accessibility using two types of complex Korean sentences: center-embedded complement clauses and object-extracted RCs. The first and second experiments tested how and when the similarity and accessibility of the critical NPs affected comprehension of sentences with a center-embedded complement clause, with the first experiment varying whether the matrix subject NP and the embedded subject

460

Yoonhyoung Lee and Peter C. Gordon

NP were pronouns or descriptions (as shown below) and the second experiment varying whether they were proper names or descriptions. (7)

(8)

(9)

(10)

Matched (Pronoun–Pronoun) Kutul-i wuli-ka silhum-ul haysstako malhayssta. 3.pl-nom 1.pl-nom experiment-acc ran said ‘They said that we ran experiments.’ Matched (Description–Description) Uysa-ka haksayng-I silhum-ul haysstako malhayssta. doctor-nom student-nom experiment-acc ran said ‘The doctor said that the student ran experiments.’ Non-matched (Pronoun–Description) Kutul-I haksayng-I silhum-ul haysstako 3.pl-nom student-nom experiment-acc ran ‘They said that the student ran experiments.’

malhayssta. said

Non-matched (Description–Pronoun) Uysa-ka wuli-ka silhum-ul haysstako doctor-nom 1.pl-nom experiment-acc ran ‘The doctor said that we ran experiments.’

malhayssta. said

The results of the first experiment showed effects of both similarity-based interference and of the referential accessibility of the NPs. Effects of similaritybased interference were not observed on first-pass measures of the reading of the critical NPs but were observed in a measure of later processing (re-reading). In particular, the amount of time spent re-reading the critical NPs after reading had progressed to the sentence-final verbs was greater when the critical NPs were the same type (both descriptions or both names) than when they were different types (description–name or name–description). This finding is consistent with the thesis developed by Gordon, Hendrick and colleagues that similarity-based interference is a retrieval phenomenon that occurs when determining the arguments for verbal predicates. Retrieval interference is observed at the end of sentences in Korean because that is where the verbs are in Korean and it is observed in the middle of sentences in English because that is where the verbs are in English. Effects of the referential status of NPs on the reading of the Korean sentences were observed both in first-pass measures of early processing and in measures of later processing. For the matrix subject NP, reading measures showed faster processing for pronouns than descriptions. This finding is not surprising and is at least partially attributable to inherent characteristics of the different types of NPs; pronouns have much higher lexical frequency than descriptions and word frequency has a strong effect on lexical processing. For the embedded subject NP this pattern was reversed: pronouns led to slower processing than names.

Memory and information

461

This finding is surprising in two respects: it reverses the usual effect of word frequency and it is inconsistent with the account of Gibson and Warren which predicts that because pronouns have greater referential accessibility than descriptions, integration of sentential elements should be easier when they are made over intervening pronouns than over intervening descriptions. Before turning to our interpretation of this surprising result, we briefly discuss the other findings of Lee et al. (2007). As mentioned above, the second experiment in Lee et al. (2007) followed the same design as the first except that it used names and descriptions rather than pronouns and descriptions. The overall pattern of results was similar to the first experiment with the exception that the effects of referential accessibility were somewhat weaker, a finding that is attributable to the lesser difference in referential accessibility for the name–description distinction studied in the second experiment as compared to the pronoun–description distinction studied in the first experiment. The third experiment examined the effects of NP type on the processing of Korean sentences with object-modifying object-extracted relative clauses. Like the embedded complements, these sentences begin with two nominative NPs. With respect to similarity-based interference the results were the same as those observed with the embedded complements, in that later processing of the critical NPs (re-reading after the verbs) was more difficult when the two NPs were the same type as compared to when they were different types. In addition, early measures showed effects of referential accessibility that were similar to those found for the embedded complements: easier processing was observed when the first NP had greater accessibility and also when the second NP had lesser accessibility. However, this pattern of effects for referential accessibility was reversed in measures that showed processing after information had been encountered indicating that the sentence contained an RC. This reversal is consistent with the head-modifying function of RCs, because information within the embedded RC is presumed to be more known than information in the clause containing the head that it modifies (Fox & Thompson, 1990; Gordon & Hendrick, 2005). The results of Lee et al. (2007) support a model, like that developed by Gordon, Hendrick and colleagues (Gordon et al. 2001, 2002, 2004, 2006), where memory constraints on processing complex sentences arise because of similarity-based interference; this interference occurs when information must be retrieved from early in a sentence so that it can be integrated with information that occurs later in a sentence. The results of Lee et al. (2007) also show systematic effects of the referential accessibility of NPs on the ease of sentence processing, though these results are not what would have been expected according to models in which referential accessibility affects memory load as a sentence is being processed. Instead, the results show that ease of processing is affected by how different types of NPs are aligned with different syntactic positions.

462

Yoonhyoung Lee and Peter C. Gordon

As discussed by Aissen (2003) and others, languages show a tendency to have unmarked elements co-occur with other unmarked elements and also for marked elements to co-occur. For NPs, pronouns are unmarked as compared to descriptions in terms, for example, of their high frequency and referential accessibility. For syntactic positions, subjects are unmarked as compared to objects and matrix subjects are unmarked as compared to embedded subjects. These characterizations in terms of markedness are consistent with the observation across many languages that pronouns have a strong tendency to occur in subject position while more marked types of NPs (e.g. descriptions) have a greater tendency to appear in object position or as embedded subjects. In Lee et al. (2007) comprehension was easier when unmarked NP types occurred in unmarked syntactic positions and when marked NP types occurred in marked syntactic positions. This shows that markedness alignment can influence ease of sentence comprehension in Korean and that this effect begins early in comprehension. Some evidence (Kaan, 2001) exists that this also occurs in Dutch, which like Korean is a head-final language. In contrast, research so far on English (Gordon et al., 2006) has not provided evidence that alignment of the markedness values of NPs and syntactic positions affects the ease of sentence comprehension. While it is possible that research on English has not yet examined the circumstances that allow effects of markedness alignment to be observed, it is also possible that the differences observed in how markedness alignment affects the comprehension of Korean and English may in the future shed light on differences in processing strategies for head-final and non headfinal languages.

37

ERP studies of Korean language processing: word-order effects Kyung Soon Shin and Jun Soo Kwon*

Abstract We investigated Korean language processing based on event-related potentials (ERPs) under congruent and incongruent conditions with semantic, syntactic, and combined errors. Fifteen participants were presented with visual stimuli consisting of 180 sentences ending in expected words (the congruent condition), 60 under the semantic condition, 60 under the syntactic condition, and 60 under the combined condition. The semantically incongruent condition was shown to elicit an N400 response, distributed in the right frontocentral region, as in semantic studies administered with Indo-European (IE) languages. The syntactically incongruent condition elicited P600 followed by N400 components but no early left-anterior negativity (ELAN) was detected, reflecting structural differences in Korean and IE languages. The doubly incongruent combined condition evoked N400 and P600 components with faster latency and higher amplitude compared to the syntactic conditions. The differences suggest that syntactic integration is influenced by semantic processing, but also that the semantic structure is independent of the syntactic context in the absence of semantic anomalies. Introduction Event-related brain potentials (ERPs) have been widely used to investigate the neurophysiological mechanisms of human language. ERP studies of language processes have indicated three main language-associated ERP components: the * This work was supported by a grant 01-PJ8-PG3–21302–0002 from the Korea Health 21 R&D Project funded by the Ministry of Health and Welfare of Republic of Korea. Some remarks supplied in this article were modified from ‘Different word order evokes different syntactic processing in Korean language processing by ERP study’ published in Journal of Cognitive Science (2005) 6, 151–69, which was reviewed by Prof. Merrill Garrett and Dr. Hyeonjeong Jeong. We thank them for helpful comments and discussion. We also thank Prof. Chungmin Lee for helpful comments on this article.

463

464

Kyung Soon Shin and Jun Soo Kwon

N400, early left-anterior negativity (ELAN) /left-anterior negativity (LAN), and P600 components (Hagoort et al., 1993; Kutas & Hillyard, 1980; Osterhout, 1994). Kutas and Hillyard (1980) presented visual sentence stimuli with unexpected or incongruent endings and found a negative peak around 400 ms, observing that N400 is an “electrophysiological marker of the ‘reprocessing’ of semantically incongruent information.” Numerous reports, including magnetoencephalography studies (Kwon et al., 2005; Maess et al., 2006) have replicated and extended the findings of Kutas and Hillyard (1980) to other modalities and paradigms (Hahne & Friederici, 2002; Osterhout et al., 1997). Such studies have suggested that the N400 amplitude is a general index of the ease or difficulty of retrieving stored conceptual knowledge associated with a word, which is dependent on both the stored representation itself, and the retrieval cues provided by the preceding context (Kutas & Federmeier, 2000). Recently, the frontotemporal networks, consistently implicated in the pathophysiology of schizophrenia, have been indicated as a functional site of N400 generation (Baumgaertner et al., 2002; Copland et al., 2003; Kuperberg et al., 2003; van Petten & Luka, 2006). The ELAN/LAN components are observed over the left anterior electrode sites between 100 and 250 ms after stimulus onset. Studies of language processing have found the ELAN component in the processing of syntactically inappropriate sentences (Friederici, 1995; Hahne & Friederici, 1999; Neville et al., 1991), and some researchers have reported various latencies of ELAN/LAN elicitation, including time windows of 125 ms, between 300 and 400 ms, and 550 ms (Neville et al., 1991; Rösler et al., 1993). In the case of later negative activation for a syntactically incongruent sentence, the component might be regarded as the N400 component of a semantically anomalous sentence. With respect to this finding, Rösler et al. (1993) reported that syntactically incongruent sentences produce difficulty in lexical or semantic processing, causing a negative–positive composite under the syntactically incongruent condition. The P600 component was elicited when syntactically inappropriate sentences were presented in response to a host of morpho-syntactic and syntactic violations. The result has been replicated in many other studies of semantic processing (Friederici, 2002; Münte et al., 1993; Neville et al., 1991). Numerous studies have also examined the process of integrating semantic and syntactic information in the brain (Ainsworth-Darnell et al., 1997; Friederici et al., 1999; Hahne & Friederici, 2002; Osterhout & Nicol, 1999). Ainsworth-Darnell et al. (1997) reported an N400 component for semantically incongruent words and a P600 component for syntactically incongruent words. Moreover, doubly incongruent words elicited both N400 and P600 components. Osterhout and Nicol (1999) reported that both N400 and P600 components were found under a doubly incongruent condition with smaller N400 and P600 peaks.

ERP studies of word-order effects in Korean

465

A subsequent experiment by Friederici et al. (1999) showed N400 and P600 with ELAN components under each condition. However, doubly incongruent conditions elicited the same pattern of ERPs as the syntactic violation, evoking no N400 component. Hahne and Friederici (2002) replicated this previous study using auditory stimuli and obtained the same results as found for visual stimuli The goal of the present study was to investigate the neural activities associated with Korean language processing to expand our understanding of semantic and syntactic processing and the compositional processing of natural language. An additional aim was to determine whether a different syntactic structure would lead to different syntactic processing. To answer these questions, we studied the compositional processing of semantic and syntactic processes. Experiment Participants Fifteen undergraduate and graduate students (7 males and 8 females) with a mean age of 24 years participated in the study. None of the subjects had previous experience with ERP experiments or a history of medical, neurological, or psychiatric disorders. All subjects were native speakers of Korean and had normal or corrected-to-normal vision and were right-handed (Annett, 1970). Written informed consent was obtained following a complete description of the intended study. All subjects were paid for their participation. The present study was approved by the institutional review board of Seoul National University Hospital.

Materials The study materials included 180 transitive verbs and other words selected from the 30 to 70 percentile cumulative frequency range in “The Frequency of Modern Korean Vocabulary”, compiled by the Institute of Language and Information Studies (1998). Using a four-word pattern of subject–adverb– object–verb, 360 sentences were constructed, with the active voice used for clarity and to indicate violation (Table 37.1). Four different types of sentences were presented: congruent condition (congruent), semantically incongruent condition (semantic error), syntactically incongruent condition (syntactic error), and both semantically and syntactically incongruent conditions (combined error). The stimuli sentences consisted of 180 correct sentences, 60 semantically incongruent sentences, 60 syntactically incongruent sentences and 60 doubly incongruent sentences.

466

Kyung Soon Shin and Jun Soo Kwon

Table 37.1. Examples of stimulus sentences for the four experimental conditions Types

Subject

Adverb

Completely correct condition Semantically anomalous condition Syntactically anomalous condition Doubly anomalous condition

Ku-nun oceney he-TOP in the morning He watched the movie in the morning. ku-nun ecey he-TOP yesterday *He ate a pair of shoes yesterday. ku-nun pulkkun he-TOP firmly *He let us clench his fist firmly. ku-nun coyonghi he-TOP quietly *He will turn his mouth quietly.

Object

Verb

yenghwa-lul the movie-ACC

po-ass-ta watch-PST-DEC

sinpa-lul mak-ess-ta a pair of shoes-ACC eat-PST-DEC cwume-kul his fist-ACC

cwip-si-ta clench-PRES-EXH

ip-ul his mouth-ACC

nem-ki-ma turn-PROM

TOP – topic marker; ACC – accusative case marker; PST – past tense morpheme; PRES – present tense morpheme; DEC – declarative; EXH – exhortative; PROM – promissive

Correctness judging task Participants were asked to judge whether sentences made sense by pressing one of two mouse buttons. Response fingers were counterbalanced across subjects. The stimuli were presented in foveal vision on a computer monitor with exposure duration of 300 ms, set to a vertical visual angle of 2.29° and horizontal visual angle of 3.43°; an interstimulus interval of 600 ms was used and a 2100 ms interval followed the last word of the sentence. Prior to the experimental session, all participants trained on a block of stimulus sentences to ensure that they completely understood the task. ERP recordings Electroencephalographic (EEG) activities were collected using a 128-channel Quik-cap system (Neuroscan, El Paso, TX, USA) in an electrically shielded and noise-attenuated room. For each subject, 128 scalp sites were recorded, and all of the scalp electrodes were referenced to linked electrodes placed on the left and right mastoids. Horizontal and vertical eye movements were monitored by an electro-oculogram (EOG) channel, expressed as a differential recording between two electrodes placed at the outer canthi of the left and right eyes, and a vertical EOG (vEOG). Impedance of scalp electrodes was maintained at 5 kΩ or less. During the experiment, the EEG was continuously recorded with a sampling rate of 1000 Hz. After completion of data collection, the EEG was

ERP studies of word-order effects in Korean

467

segmented into 1500 ms epochs, including a 100 ms pre-stimulus baseline. The baseline was corrected separately for each channel according to the peak amplitude of the EEG over the 100 ms period that preceded stimulus onset. Those EEG epochs that contained amplitudes exceeding ± 100μV at any EEG or EOG channel were automatically excluded from the averaging. The averaged waveforms of ERPs were digitally filtered with a band-pass between 1 and 15 Hz. Statistical analysis For every subject, statistical analyses were executed on the peak amplitude of 21 electrode sites (Fz, F3, F4, F7, F8, FCz, Cz, C3, C4, T7, T8, CPz, Pz, P3, P4, P7, P8, POz, Oz, O1, and O2) within ELAN (100–200 ms), N400 (300–500 ms), and P600 (500–700 ms) time windows determined by visually inspecting individual and grand-averaged waveforms. The amplitude and latency of each interval in three time windows were calculated and analyzed using mixeddesign and repeated-measures analysis of variance (ANOVA), with electrode sites (21 sites) and sentence conditions (congruent, semantic error, syntactic error, and combined error) as within-subject factors. Huynh–Feldt corrections for multiple comparisons were applied when appropriate, and the corrected p value was reported. Reaction time and hit rates were also subjected to repeatedmeasures, and mixed-design ANOVA. Results Behavioral findings The hit rates for each correct, semantically incongruent, syntactically incongruent, and doubly incongruent condition were 95.9% (S.D. = 2.0), 97% (S.D. = 2.8), 95.9% (S.D. = 2.3), and 99% (S.D. = 1.5), respectively. A one-way ANOVA performed on the reaction time data revealed significant main effects of the sentence type [F(3,42) = 13.960, P < 0.001]. The result indicated that the mean reaction time for the doubly anomalous condition (Mean = 932 ms, S.D. = 195.1) was the shortest among the conditions. Mean reaction times were 1032.6 ms (S.D. = 174.7) under the correct condition, 1055 ms (S.D. = 235.9) under the semantic condition, and 1044 ms (S.D. = 198.5) under the syntactic condition. Event-related potential data The semantically and syntactically incongruent sentences showed significant differences compared to the correct sentences (Figure 37.1A, B). In contrast to

468

Kyung Soon Shin and Jun Soo Kwon

previous language-processing studies, the N400 component was elicited under the doubly incongruent condition (Figure 37.1C). No ELAN component was seen in the ERP data of the syntactically and the doubly incongruent sentence processing in this experiment. As expected, correct sentences extracted smaller N400 and P600 components than any of the incongruent conditions. The semantically incongruent condition elicited larger amplitude than the correct sentences at around 400 ms. The syntactically incongruent sentences showed the N400 and P600 components, but no ELAN component was detected. Under the doubly incongruent condition, the P600 and N400 but no ELAN components were found, as under the syntactic condition, but with higher amplitude and faster latency in the same time windows. Visual inspection Grand-averaged waveforms under the semantically incongruent condition clearly elicited the N400 component beginning around 300 ms and lasting up to 500 ms (Figure 37.1A). The semantically incongruent sentences elicited the most activation in the right frontal lobe (Figure 37.2A). The early time window (100–200 ms) under the syntactic condition revealed neither a main effect nor an interaction of conditions with the N400 component followed by P600. However, unlike findings from language-processing studies, the ELAN component was not detected under the syntactically incongruent condition. Activation in the frontocentral region was observed during syntactic processing, as shown in Figure 37.2B. The doubly incongruent condition had two different

ERP studies of word-order effects in Korean

469

Figure 37.1. Grand-averaged ERPs for the critical word. A: correct condition (solid line) vs. semantically incongruent condition (dotted line). B: correct condition vs. syntactically incongruent condition. C: correct condition vs. doubly incongruent condition

time windows (300–500 and 500–700 ms) in which significant ERP components were detected. Both the N400 and P600 components were found under the doubly incongruent sentence condition without the ELAN component. The doubly incongruent condition showed nearly the same pattern but with noticeably higher amplitude and faster latency compared to the syntactically incongruent condition. The three-dimensional topographic map shows that activation

470

Kyung Soon Shin and Jun Soo Kwon

Figure 37.2. Topographic map of N400 and P600 components at the frontal area on the FCz site with grand-averaged ERPs for each condition. A: semantically anomalous condition elicited the N400 component and peaked at 401 ms. B: syntactically anomalous condition evoked N400 and P600 components and activated at 420 ms and 586 ms, respectively. C: doubly anomalous condition peaked at 403 ms and 532 ms for each N400 and P600 component

was detected in the frontocentral region in the case of the P600 component (Figure 37.2C). The N400 component was distributed over the right frontal lobe, as under the semantic condition. Statistical analysis ANOVA on the mean amplitude between 300 and 500 ms revealed main effects of sentence conditions [F(3,42) = 35.293, P < 0.001], electrode sites [F(20,280) = 11.158, P < 0.001], and reliable interaction between sentence conditions and electrode sites [F(60,840) = 2.535, P < 0.015]. No main effect in the 300–500 ms latency time interval was observed under the sentence condition. No significant interaction between sentence conditions and electrode sites was detected.

ERP studies of word-order effects in Korean

471

The most negative N400 amplitude was shown at Fz and the least negative amplitude was a T7 under semantically incongruent conditions. Within the 500–700 ms range, main effects were found for sentence conditions [F(3,42) = 7.024, P < 0.002], electrode sites [F(20,280) = 10.243, P < 0.001], and the interaction between sentence conditions and electrode sites [F(60,840) = 2.568, P < 0.01] was significant with respect to latency in the 500–700 ms time window and some trend in the main effect of the sentence condition was found. The main effect for electrode sites [F(20,280) = 2.608, P < 0.01] was significant with respect to latency in the 500–700 ms time window and some trend on the main effect of the sentence condition was found [F(3,42) = 2.661, P = 0.06]. No significant interaction of sentence conditions and electrode sites was observed. The most positive P600 amplitude was found at Fz, and the least positive amplitude occurred at P7 under the syntactically incongruent condition. Discussion In this experiment, we examined the processing of Korean, which has both similarities and dissimilarities to IE languages, based on the electrophysiological method of ERPs. Our aim was to detect the relationship between semantic and syntactic processing and each process. Results of this experiment provide several important pieces of information on features of ERP components elicited by Korean sentence stimuli. Many past studies have reported that the N400 component is a neurophysiological index of semantically incongruent conditions, which clearly evoke the N400 component, distributed over the centro-parietal lobe with a 400 ms time window (Kutas & Hillyard, 1980; Kutas & van Petten, 1994; Osterhout & Holcomb, 1995). However, the present findings showed frontal lobe activation under the semantically anomalous condition. A short presentation of stimuli can cause activation over the frontocentral region during semantic and syntactic processing. Presenting words over long durations may increase the loading of working memory, which may activate a posterior rather than an anterior distribution. In addition, the orthographic characteristics may affect the topographic map, activating the right hemisphere more. Takazawa and colleagues (2002) reported that the right hemisphere was predominantly activated in semantic and syntactic processing of Japanese. The orthographical structure of Korean requires right-dominant visual processing; because the right hemisphere is specialized for spatial and holistic processing (K. H. Kim et al., 2004), language-related activation in the right hemisphere was observed compared to the left hemisphere. Researchers have pointed to P600 as one of the language-specific ERP components associated with aspects of structural reanalysis, repair, and recall

472

Kyung Soon Shin and Jun Soo Kwon

of ungrammatical sentences (Friederici & Mecklinger, 1996; Hagoort et al., 1993). The P600 has been found for anomalies of phrase structure, verb subcategorization, constituent movement, agreement, case (Osterhout et al., 1997), subjacency, and specificity (Neville et al., 1991). However, unlike the previous studies, the N400 component was observed in the syntactically incongruent condition in this study. The different word order of Korean as compared to IE languages may have elicited the N400 component. Korean has a subject– object–verb order; since the object is processed prior to the verb, it is difficult to know how many and what types of arguments are required for the verb in a sentence. Reprocessing of a sentence is required until the necessary components are given. Another explanation is that the meaning of the sentence is processed after the sentence structure has been built to check the grammaticality, which generates the negative potentials around 400 ms. Morphologically, Korean is an agglutinative language in which words are made up of a linear sequence of distinct morphemes and each component of meaning is represented by its own morpheme. When a word is inflected, a word stem and an ending are distinctively divided. A verb comes at the end of the sentence in the Korean language; the last word can be divided into a word stem and an ending that is separated into a prefinal ending and a final ending. Korean has many types of final endings, including imperative, exclamatory, exhortative, promissive and declarative. The errors in syntactically and doubly anomalous sentences were explicitly generated by mismatching the final ending with the subject of the sentence. When the syntactic anomaly was detected, a semantic reprocessing was conducted, with the appropriate information of “Person”, eliciting the N400 component. The syntactic negative shift was revealed as ELAN/LAN with a time window of 100 to 250 ms from stimulus onset. Rösler and colleagues (1993) showed that the LAN component had a maximum peak at between 400 and 700 ms and was distributed in the left anterior. This syntactic negative shift could be confused with the N400 component due to their similar time range. However, the LAN with a 400 ms negative component had a different scalp distribution compared to the N400 for semantically anomalous sentences. This LAN component was distributed in the left anterior, differing from the N400 distribution under the semantic condition, which was spread over the centro-parietal (Kutas & van Petten, 1994) and right central region in this present study. Friederici (2002) reported that ELAN was correlated with rapidly detectable word category errors, while LAN was correlated with morpho-syntactic errors. The neurocognitive model of auditory sentence parsing by Friederici (2002) showed that the ELAN component was connected with syntactic structure building. Previous studies have detected the ELAN component under the syntactically anomalous condition (Friederici, 1995; Neville et al., 1991). However, word order may cause the absence of the ELAN component. The ELAN component

ERP studies of word-order effects in Korean

473

was probably not seen in the syntactically incongruent condition in this study because the sentence building was not physically completed until the final word appeared. Under the doubly anomalous condition, both N400 and P600 components were detected in this experiment, supporting the findings of Osterhout and Nicol (1999), Ainsworth-Darnell et al. (1997), and Hagoort et al. (1993). In the present study, the N400 and P600 components under the doubly anomalous condition shared the components of P600 under the syntactically anomalous condition and N400 under the semantically anomalous condition with the same time windows. Ainsworth-Darnell et al. (1997) also proposed the co-occurrence of N400 and P600 components in support of a dual-processing hypothesis that suggested two separate routes for semantic and syntactic processes. These results show that two processors work in the brain and elicited two potentials independently. The results of the present study suggest several conclusions. First, the semantic processing of Korean is similar to that of IE languages. The N400 component was evident over the brain under semantically incongruent conditions. Second, the syntactically incongruent condition elicited N400 and P600 components and but not the ELAN component. The results suggest that the different word order of Korean as compared to IE languages leads to different syntactic processing in the cerebral mechanism. The output feature of the brain mechanism varies according to the word order. That is, the different word order evokes different syntactic processing. Third, the doubly incongruent condition explicitly showed the N400 and P600 components with much faster latency and higher amplitude compared to the syntactically incongruent condition in all aspects. In comparison to the semantically incongruent condition, no difference was found in the N400 component under the doubly incongruent condition. The results suggest that syntactic integration is influenced by semantic processing, but also that semantic structure is independent of the syntactic context.

38

Inferences during discourse comprehension in Korean Soyoung Kim Suh, Jung-Mo Lee and Jae-Ho Lee

Introduction In the field of discourse comprehension, it is assumed that the goal of reading is to build a coherent representation. To do that, readers need to recognize the relations between the parts of the discourse and piece them together. Readers may have to fill in the information implied in the text and even elaborate on what is mentioned. All these processes that ‘go beyond’ the information given in the text are called inference (Graesser, Singer & Trabasso, 1994; Schank & Abelson, 1977). In recent decades, numerous studies in the field of discourse comprehension have been conducted around the problem of inference. What inferences occur, when they occur and how they affect the memory of the discourse have been the main issues in this field. In this chapter, we review studies conducted in Korean on inferences during reading and their effects on memory. While many interesting findings have been reported from the studies conducted in Korean, a large proportion of them are consistent with the findings from studies in English. Inference in discourse comprehension seems to be a process which is less affected by the structure and characteristics of a specific language than are earlier processes such as speech perception, word recognition, or sentence parsing. More abstract and higher levels of cognition, universal to humans, appear to be involved in inference. Still, there are many novel findings that have not been observed in comparable studies in English. Whether these findings are specific to Korean or not needs to be explored further. In the rest of the chapter, the studies on inferences in Korean are reviewed under three themes: anaphoric, causal and elaborative inference. Anaphoric inference While there are many kinds of anaphora, such as pronoun, noun phrase, proper name and zero anaphora, research on anaphoric inference in Korean has been focused mainly on pronoun resolution. Other forms of anaphora have been studied only sporadically (J.-M. Lee & Lee, 1993; Yoo & Lee, 1989). 474

Inferences during discourse comprehension

475

What factors contribute to pronoun resolution and how they interact on-line are the main issues in Korean as well as in English. There are two competing views. The modular view is that the resolution of a pronoun is mainly determined by the syntactic cues of the pronoun in a bottom-up fashion (see Frederiksen, 1981; Swinney, 1991). According to this view, upon encountering a pronoun, the antecedent is reactivated based on the syntactic cues provided by the pronoun. The syntactic constraints of a pronoun are usually sufficient to assign a correct antecedent. A second view, the interactive approach, claims that the syntactic cues interact with other contextual cues to assign an antecedent even when the syntactic cues are unambiguous. Contextual cues guide the assignment of the antecedent in a top-down fashion especially when the syntactic cues are ambiguous (see Garrod & Sanford, 1990; Gernsbacher, 1989). A series of studies have explored this issue using Korean texts. Among the syntactic cues of Korean pronouns, such as number, person, gender, and register, the effects of the gender cue have been the most frequently studied. For example, Bang (1990) and J.-H. Lee (2004) conducted a reading-time and probe-recognition experiment to learn how the constraint of gender cue affects pronoun resolution. The participants read passages such as those shown in (1)–(3) in Korean. They either read the sentences (1)–(2)–(3) where the pronoun ‘he’ is unambiguous because there is only one male antecedent, or (1’)–(2)–(3) where the pronoun is ambiguous. Right after the participants finished reading the target sentence, they performed a recognition task to a probe word. (1) (1’) (2) (3)

A policeman found a drunken actress in a car. (Unambiguous condition) A policeman found a drunken actor in a car. (Ambiguous condition) The car was covered with mud He asked for a driver’s license. (Target sentence) Probe: POLICEMAN

The two studies found that the reading time of the target sentence was faster in the unambiguous condition than in the ambiguous condition. The response time to the probe was also faster in the unambiguous condition. These studies show that when there is more than one antecedent constrained by a gender cue, processing of the sentence is more difficult. These effects due to the gender cue were confirmed in English as well (Corbett & Chang, 1983; MacDonald & MacWhinney, 1990). Having confirmed the effects of the gender cue, later studies explored the interaction between gender cues and a contextual factor after the pronoun was presented. J.-H. Lee (1993) investigated how the gender cue and the case of an antecedent (whether the antecedent is a subject or an object in the sentence it belongs to) interact with each other in the time course of pronoun resolution. It has been found that a subject or an agent mentioned first in a sentence usually becomes the focus in the given context (Gernsbacher, 1989). Thus, Lee

476

Soyoung Kim Suh, Jung-Mo Lee and Jae-Ho Lee

Response Time (ms)

At Unambiguous Condition

At Ambiguous Condition

960

960

940

940

920

920

900

900

880

880

860

860

840

840

820

820

800 Immediate

250ms

500ms

1000ms

800 Immediate

ISI

250ms

500ms

1000ms

ISI Antecedent

Non-Antecedent

Figure 38.1. Time course of gender cue effect in probe recognition time (from Lee, 1993, Exp 4a)

assumed that the case of the antecedent provides a differential pragmatic context at the time the pronoun is being read (Kim, Lee & Gernsbacher, 2004). In this study, two kinds of passages were used in which the antecedent of the pronoun was either a subject as in the above passage (1)–(3), or an object as in (4)–(6). (4) (4’) (5) (6)

A policeman found a drunken actress in a car. (Unambiguous condition) A policeman found a drunken actor in a car. (Ambiguous condition) The car was covered with mud. She/He stepped out of the car. (Target sentence) Probe: ACTRESS/ACTOR

The participants read the sentences one phrase (a word followed by a particle indicating the case) at a time in Korean in an RSVP (rapid serial visual presentation) mode. Right after the participants read the pronoun ‘he’, or ‘she’ in (3) or (6), they were presented with a recognition probe at ISI (interstimulus interval) 0, 250, 500, and 1000 ms. In the results, the effects of the gender cue showed different patterns in the two conditions during the time course of pronoun resolution. As shown in Figure 38.1, in the unambiguous condition, the difference between the antecedent and non-antecedent in the level of activation is larger at the shorter ISIs, gradually decreasing in longer ones. In the ambiguous condition, however, the difference was larger in the longer ISI’s than in the shorter ones. This study shows that only the syntactic cues are used to determine the antecedent in the early stages of Korean pronoun resolution. Based on these results, the modular view is supported, suggesting that unambiguous syntactic cues are sufficient to reactivate the antecedent and also inhibit the non-antecedent.

Inferences during discourse comprehension

477

However, the interactive view may not be rejected just based on these findings. In the sentences used in the above studies, the second sentence was neutral in the sense that it did not provide any focus on either antecedent, reducing the possible effect of the case in the first sentence. The interactive view of Sanford and Garrod (1994) assumes that a focus is usually established by previous sentences before a pronoun is presented, and the role of the pronoun is mainly to confirm the focus of the previous context. Since the focus may not have been clearly given in the sentences used in the above studies, the effect of the context should still be explored further. Recently, J.-M. Lee and Lee (2004) found an interesting interaction between case and gender difference. The response time was faster when the pronoun was female than when it was male, regardless of case. Case had an effect only on male pronouns, with faster responses when the antecedent was a subject than when it was an object. This can be interpreted as a marking effect in the sense that female role names in Korean are more conspicuous. This may be because Korean readers regard male antecedents as the default. In fact, the pronoun referring to the third person male in Korean (corresponding to ‘he’ in English) used to refer to both male and female up to several decades ago. Studies in social cognition in Korea also have provided consistent findings in terms of the marking effect of females (Lee & Bang, 2003). Several studies in English have explored the issue of gender stereotyping in pronoun resolution and reported that the resolution was faster when the gender of the pronoun and the stereotyped role name are congruent, but differences between female and male were not observed in their studies (Banaji & Hardin, 1996; Garnham, Oakhill & Reynolds, 2002). Causal inference Many studies on causal inference in Korean have reported findings that are consistent with those in English, confirming the importance of causal inferences in a coherent representation of discourse (H.-C. Lee, 1984; J.-M. Lee & Choi, 1986; Do, 1994). Several studies are worth mentioning because they provide novel findings that have not been observed in English. These studies concern the effects of causal inferences on understanding and memory of discourse rather than the issue of on-line occurrence of causal inferences during reading. Effects of causal inference and predictability on memory S. Kim (1998, 2000) and T.-J. Park, Lee and Kim (2003) explored the nature of causal inference and its effect on memory of discourse. Keenan, Baillet and Brown (1984) and Myers, Shinjo and Duffy (1987) reported a U-shaped

478

Soyoung Kim Suh, Jung-Mo Lee and Jae-Ho Lee

relationship between the degree of causal relationships and the amount of cued recall. That is, the probability of recall of one of the sentences given the other sentence as a recall cue increased up to a certain point but decreased when the causal relation varied from the weak to the strong. They interpreted the results as reflecting the effects of elaboration, claiming that the intermediate level of causal relationship requires elaboration to integrate the sentences, which leads to higher levels of recall. Kim and her colleagues suspected that there might be something other than elaboration in the characterization of causal relationship. They guessed it might be predictability. While sentence pairs (7) and (8) are different in terms of the amount of elaboration required for integration, sentence pairs (8) and (9) are different not in terms of elaboration but in terms of how frequent or predictable the event of the second sentence is as a response to the event of the first sentence. (7) (8) (9)

Susan felt her baby’s forehead with her hand. She took her baby to a hospital right away. Susan’s baby was violently ill with fever. She took her baby to the hospital right away. Susan’s baby was violently ill with fever. Susan wiped her baby with a wet towel.

Participants rated sentence pairs (7) and (8) as different in the degree of causal relationship but not pairs (8) and (9). But in a predictability rating, pair (8) was rated as more predictable than (9). In order to investigate the effects of predictability along with elaboration on recall, Kim (1998; 2000) used antecedent events to vary the degree of elaboration (as Keenan et al., 1984 and Myers et al., 1987), and two resulting events to vary the predictability, creating six pairs of sentences for one theme. While Keenan et al. (1984) and Myers et al. (1987) found the same U-shaped pattern in recall of either of the sentence pairs, Kim (1998; 2000) found that the pattern of recall was different depending on which sentence was recalled. As shown in Figure 38.2, recall of the first sentence was greater for low predictability but recall of the second sentence was greater for high predictability. When the probability of recall was collapsed over two levels of predictability, the results matched those of Keenan et al. (1984) and Myers et al. (1987). Why predictability leads to such recall patterns is not currently known. Kim (2000) once hypothesized that the participants integrated the high predictability sentences in a forward direction but reversed the direction in the low predictability sentences. According to her, when the recall cue is the second sentence, the recall of the first sentence should be easier because the direction of retrieval is the same as the direction of encoding. This hypothesis was not confirmed in a probe recognition study but was partially supported in response errors (Park, Lee & Kim, 2003).

Inferences during discourse comprehension EXP. 2 : Recall of 2nd Sentence .8

.7

.7 Probability

Probability

EXP. 1 : Recall of 1st Sentence .8

.6 .5 .4 Level 1

Predictability High

Level 2 Causal Relatedness

Low

Level 3

479

.6 .5 .4 Level 1

Predictability High

Level 2 Causal Relatedness

Low

Level 3

Figure 38.2. Effects of causal relatedness and probability on cued recall (from Kim, 2000)

Processing of contrast information Most research on causal inferences has been about the integration of causally consistent information. That is, the information presented in discourse can be easily integrated based on our world knowledge. Sometimes, however, a reader is presented with contrast information in discourse. Contrast information is present in a text when two parts of the text are in opposition to each other (Ford, 2000) or ‘the assertion rendered by the second clause is’ in opposition ‘to an assumption that either may be read off, or must be inferred from, previous information’ (Brausse, 1998). Comparing the processing and memory of additive, causative, and adversative (Halliday & Hassan, 1976) information in texts, J.-M. Lee (1979) proposed that the presence of contrast information in a text entails a representation at a higher abstraction level of coherence. In a series of studies, J.-M. Lee and his colleagues (for a review, see Lee & Lee, 2005) conducted experiments on the nature of processing contrast information in text comprehension and its effect on recall. They proposed a threestep processing model of contrast information processing: 1) the process of finding the nature or levels of mismatch between the current input information and the mental model or the situation model already formed based on the previous information given in the text, 2) the process of resolving the mismatch through activating new additional relevant knowledge structures and generating a series of elaborative inferences, and 3) the process of integrating all the relevant information into a coherent and higher abstraction level representation of the discourse. They predicted that these additional processing stages would entail longer processing times at the time of encoding, and that in the final representation the contrast itself would be stored as a higher abstraction level (macro-) proposition that would serve as an effective higher-level retrieval cue

480

Soyoung Kim Suh, Jung-Mo Lee and Jae-Ho Lee

and shorten the retrieval time for the contrast information as well as the text itself. In experiments presenting short texts as shown in (10)–(13) in Korean, sentence by sentence, Lee and Choi (1986) showed that the target sentence was recalled better when cued by a theme word or by the immediately preceding sentence if the target sentence carried information that contrasted to the meaning given in the previous sentences. Since the contrast conjunctives were not given explicitly, the participants had to infer the conjunctives implicitly. This excludes the problem of lexical semantic interpretation of contrast effects (Lang, 2000). This confirms similar results obtained from previous research employing English-speaking participants and English text materials (J.-M. Lee, 1979). (10) (11) (12) (13) (13’)

A stiff harness was fastened to a horse. The horse didn’t like the harness. The horse bit the harness into pieces. The rancher put a new harness on the horse. (Non-contrast target sentence) The rancher put a stiffer harness on the horse. (Contrast target sentence)

Using 15-sentence script texts in Korean and employing a sentence-bysentence reading task, Lee et al. further investigated the processing time of contrast information in texts, manipulating the following variables: whether the contrast information is at the macro-proposition or micro-proposition level, whether the mismatch of the contrast information with the information given in the previous sentence gets resolved or not by the immediately following sentence (Lee & Lee, 1989), and whether the text is characterized by linear or hierarchical story structure (Cho & Lee, 1992). A clear and consistent finding obtained across the studies was that it took significantly longer to encode the contrast target sentences than the non-contrast ones, yet contrast sentences were recalled in greater amounts and recognized faster (Lee & Choi, 1986; Cho & Lee, 1992; Lee & Lee, 1989). In non-contrast texts, macro- and micro-sentences were encoded in almost the same amount of time and yet the primed recognition latency for macro-sentences was longer than for micro-sentences, while in contrast texts macro-sentences took longer to be encoded but were recognized in almost the same amount of time as microsentences. Also, macro-contrast sentences were recognized faster than macronon-contrast sentences. When the sentence (S+1) immediately following the target sentence did (Resolution: RS) or did not (Non-resolution: NR) carry the information that explained, elaborated, or resolved the contrast, the contrast target sentences were recalled more than twice as well, and recognized faster in the RS condition than in the NR condition (Lee & Lee, 1989), while the reading time for the (S+1) sentences was not significantly different between the two

Inferences during discourse comprehension

481

conditions. Cho and Lee (1992) further found that the presence of contrast information had a greater effect on reading and recognition time in texts with hierarchical story structure than in ones with linear structure. The general results of this series of studies show that contrast in a text entails longer encoding time but shorter recognition latency and that this effect is stronger with macro-level contrast. The results can be interpreted as indicating that contrast information in a text can be represented as a macro-proposition, and that it makes the text representation more coherent at a higher abstraction level. It seems we need a more comprehensive concept of coherence in discourse comprehension that encompasses contrast information processing as an upper-level-coherence construction device (Lee & Lee, 2005). Effect of causal connectives Whether and how the causal connectives affect the integration of sentences was investigated by Jeon, Lee and Lee (2001). It is well known that the reading time of the second sentence is faster in a pair of causally related sentences than in a pair of unrelated sentences. Jeon et al. (2001) also found faster reading time for the second sentence with a causal connective than without one. However, when the reading time for each phrase was analyzed, an interesting pattern emerged. The reading time of the last phrase of the second sentence was longer in the connective condition than in the no-connective condition. This finding was interpreted as due to the characteristics of Korean where the verb comes last in a sentence. Readers are likely to postpone the final integration until the verb appears. The results from the recognition experiments showed a more complicated pattern. The response time to the recognition probe from the first sentence was faster in the connective condition than in the no-connective condition at the end of the second sentence. The response time, on the other hand, was faster in the no-connective condition right after the first phrase of the second sentence. These results suggest that the presence of a connective leads readers to employ different integration processes. When there is a connective, they already know the logical relationship between the first and second sentence and wait until the whole sentence is provided before they integrate the two sentences. When there is no connective, however, readers try to integrate the two sentences from the beginning of the second sentence, keeping the content of the first sentence activated. Elaborative inference An inference is called elaborative if it is not required for coherence of a discourse. Inference on instrument, instantiation, emotion, and predicting likely events are regarded as elaborative inference.

482

Soyoung Kim Suh, Jung-Mo Lee and Jae-Ho Lee

Studies in English have often reported contradictory claims about whether on-line elaborative inference occurs, depending on the material or tasks used. Several studies in Korean also reported different findings depending on the tasks used (Lee, Lee, Kim & Lee, 1997; Yoo & Lee, 1989). In an experiment where the participants read one of four sentences as shown in (14)–(17) and responded to the target word referring to the instrument, Lee et al. (1997) observed evidence for on-line inference of the instrument in a lexical decision task but not in a naming task. (14) (15) (16) (17)

The fashion model wiped herself with a towel after taking a shower. The fashion model wiped herself after taking a shower. The fashion model wiped herself with a shirt after taking a shower. The fashion model wiped the bathtub after taking a shower. Target word: TOWEL

Consistent with research reported by Lucas, Tanenhaus and Carlson (1990), Lee et al. (1997) interpreted the positive evidence in the lexical decision task as indicating that instrument inference is more likely to be represented at the level of a situation model rather than at the lexical level. Their interpretation was supported in Kim, Lee, Lee and Lee (1998) with a picture-naming task. Unlike in the previous naming task with words, positive evidence for on-line inference was found. Similar results were found in studies on predictive inference. J.-H. Lee and Lee (1999) found positive evidence for on-line predictive inference in a lexical decision task and a reading time task but not in a naming task. Again, they claimed that the naming task is not sensitive to inferences represented in a situation model. The clear contrasts between the findings from the naming task and those from other priming tasks such as recognition or lexical decision in Korean may stem from the orthographic characteristics of the Korean alphabet. The Korean alphabet has a systematic and regular correspondence with pronunciation, which may reduce the necessity for the participants to access the lexicon when presented with a target word. That is, naming the target word based on the orthographic regularities without accessing the lexicon is more likely in Korean participants. Conclusion A very brief survey of Korean research on inference in discourse comprehension was described. Experimental results on pronoun resolution processes showed that the effects of first mention, gender cues, and their interaction with contextual factors are somewhat different from those in English. Also, features that have not been explicitly investigated in English, such as the

Inferences during discourse comprehension

483

predictability of discourse and processing of contrast information, revealed some results that have new implications for inference in discourse comprehension. Research on Korean causal connectives produced results that support the general findings in English, and yet suggest an additional feature specific to Korean, where the verb comes last in a sentence. Korean research on inference in discourse comprehension was influenced by M. A. Gernsbacher, W. Kintsch, and T. Trabasso. Research on anaphoric inference was conducted in line with Gernsbacher’s studies, some research on causal inference was done mainly by Kim (now Suh) in line with Trabasso’s studies, and other research was influenced by Kintsch’s line of investigation. In addition, there is another framework that has been the starting point of much of the Korean research. This is Jung-Mo Lee’s ‘Elaborative Coherence Framework’ (Lee, 1979; Lee, 1981; Lee & Lee, 2005). Based on experiments employing referential ties and different types of sentential connections (additive, causal and contrastive), Lee proposed a framework of coherence of spreading and integrative elaboration. The framework contends that comprehending discourse is a process of coherence building that entails representations of increasingly higher abstraction. Two important processes guide the coherence-building inference: automatic spreading activation and strategic integrative processes. Lee’s framework could be compared to other discourse processing models, such as the Focus Model (Sanford & Garrod, 1981), the Construction-Integration Model (Kintsch, 1988), the Structure Building Framework (Gernsbacher, 1990), the Constructionist Theory (Graesser, Singer & Trabasso, 1994), the Resonance Model (Myers, O’Brien, Albrecht & Mason, 1994), and the Event Indexing Model (Zwaan, Langston & Graesser, 1995). Many of the results of Korean studies on inference processing could be interpreted in this framework of elaborative coherence of two interactive and parallel processes. In pronoun inference, gender cues guide a strong automatic spreading activation process between the pronoun and antecedent in an early stage, followed by the process of employing contextual information, such as the focus, to facilitate antecedent assignment. In causal and contrast inference, causal inference occurs automatically when the strength of the cause–result connection is strong enough. When the connection strength is weak or the connection is of a contrastive relation, the inference occurs strategically, resulting in integrative processing of higher abstraction. Finally, in elaborative inference, inferences employ both massive spreading activation and integrative processing. One of the future tasks of Korean researchers could be elaborating and integrating this framework with the models proposed by Western counterparts.

39

Morpho-syntactic processing in Korean aphasics Yu Mi Hwang, Kichun Nam and Myung-Yoon Kang*

Abstract Korean is highly productive as an agglutinative language which has rich verbal and nominal inflections. This chapter, which deals with various aspects of Korean morphology, such as nominal cases, prefinal endings, and final endings, will shed great light on the complex morpho-syntactic structure of Korean. It will review some research in morpho-syntactic processing by Korean aphasic patients. We will present some studies of morpho-syntactic processing such as case marker processing, morphemic ambiguity resolution, agrammatism, and questions relating to pronouns. Understanding the proposed experiments of aphasic data will give us insights concerning the determination of the ‘cognitive architecture’ of language. Introduction Neurolinguistics, as the study of the neurobiology of language, is concerned with the brain mechanism which permits us to understand and to produce language. Studying speakers whose language is impaired, along with their modes of acquisition and use of language, provides a window through which the structure and processing of language may be considered. Aphasic research has been an important area of neurolinguistics and is primarily devoted to an attempt to understand the relationship between the brain and language. The fact that damage to some parts of the brain results in language loss, but damage to other parts of the brain leaves language more or less intact, supports the view of the structured brain with separate faculties. Current studies on aphasic research were mostly conducted with IndoEuropean languages. Findings obtained by studies on these languages do not confirm whether the phenomena or results are universal or language-specific ones. It is necessary, therefore, to look at and compare the results of neurolinguistics in a number of languages. Studies on Korean aphasic research will be *

This work was supported by the Korean Research Foundation (KRF; No. KRF-2007-313H00018).

484

Morpho-syntactic processing in Korean aphasics

485

important in building better theories on language representation and in investigating questions concerning its possible linkage to neural representations. The Korean language has some morpho-syntactic characteristics as follows. First, Korean is an agglutinative language with rich verbal inflections connected in a long chain of particles or suffixes. The affixes attach to a verbal stem in a fixed order: honorification, tense, aspect, and verbal-endings. Second, Korean is an SOV language. That is, it is a predicate-final language with the basic word order of Subject-Object-Predicate. In normal speech, the predicate (verb or adjective) comes at the end of a clause. The third aspect is that Korean particles (equivalent to English prepositions) are postpositions, including case markers and other groups of markers that affix to nominals. Finally, Korean is one of the few languages that represent subject honorification by a verbal marker. This chapter presents some studies on morpho-syntactic processing in Korean aphasics. It consists of four main sections: the case marker as a grammatical morpheme, morphemic ambiguity resolution, agrammatism and functional category, and pronouns and discourse. In the first section, we present evidence that shows double dissociation in the performance of nominative and accusative case markers. It derives from some performance differences observed in sentence production and sentence comprehension tasks. The processing pattern of morphemic ambiguity resolution in aphasics will be discussed in the second section. In this section, two experimental results in aphasics which were obtained by self-paced reading tasks and primed lexical decision tasks are compared with normal data. In the third section, several studies on agrammatism in Korean are presented, based on functional category deficits. Aphasic experiments on Korean speakers were conducted in terms of two big issues concerning agrammatism: degree of impairment and the hierarchy between impaired categories and intact categories. The final section will deal with the topic of pronouns and discourse, in which a study of differences between deixis and anaphora in Korean aphasics is reviewed. Case marker as a grammatical morpheme A Korean case marker, a kind of particle, is a postpositional functional word that indicates the syntactic relation of the co-occurring elements with other constituents of a sentence. Several studies have focused on the processing of nominative case markers ‘ka’ and ‘i’ and accusative case markers ‘ul’ and ‘lul’ in aphasic patients (S. Kim, 1997; C. Lee, 1997; Nam, Yim, Jung, Kim & Pyun, 2001). The competing issues in Korean case processing are whether there is a clear dissociation between nominative and accusative case and how performance is different depending on the type of aphasia. Kim (1997) reported that four aphasic patients showed superior performance with nominative cases to that with accusative ones. She analyzed spontaneous

486

Yu Mi Hwang, Kichun Nam and Myung-Yoon Kang

speech data collected from two types of narratives and examined the experimental data from a sentence completion task. The result of her first experiment showed that participants omitted 11 percent of nominative markers and 15 percent of accusative markers. Omissions of case markers are generally possible in normal speech in Korean, so she focused on substitution errors in the second experiment, which dealt solely with substitution errors. She found that 2 percent of the nominatives were incorrect and 11 percent of the accusatives were incorrect. Both types of substitution errors occurred: nominative for accusative and accusative for nominative. H.-W. Lee (1999) investigated inflection errors in Korean Broca’s aphasics and focused on the ‘order of difficulties’. Two experiments were carried out to obtain production data from Korean agrammatic patients. The result of his first experiment showed that tense markers were the most difficult, followed by accusative markers, with nominative markers the least difficult. In his second experiment, the question was about whether there was any degree of performance difficulty concerning the order of homonymous inflectional endings. The result of this experiment showed that the order difference was affected more by the grammatical function rather than by the phonological structure. Nam, Yim, Jung, Kim and Pyun (2001) investigated the dissociation of sentence production and comprehension through two experiments. The experiments included a sentence–picture matching task and a sentence completion task, in order to examine how aphasics are affected by agrammatism in comprehending and producing the nominative and accusative case markers. The sentence–picture matching task was to measure the comprehension performance of semantically reversible sentences. Semantically reversible sentences are those sentences whose correct meaning cannot be understood without a proper understanding of the nominative and accusative case postpositions. The results of the sentence–picture task showed that the agrammatic Broca’s patient was able to achieve perfect comprehension of the semantically reversible sentences. Two sentence completion tasks were used to evaluate the production processing of the case postpositions and morphological inflections: in these tasks, the patient showed 50 percent accuracy in producing the correct case postpositions. The dissociation between comprehending and producing the nominative and accusative case postpositions found in two experiments implied that two distinct syntactic processes are involved in comprehending and producing the case markers. It was also found in those tasks that the participants showed better performance in producing the correct nominative case postposition than in processing the accusative case postpositions. These findings of Nam et al. (2001) are different from the earlier studies in which participants performed better on instances of accusative cases (Kim, 1997; Lee, 1999). In conclusion, these three experimental studies supported the double dissociation in processing nominative cases and accusative cases: that is, there are

Morpho-syntactic processing in Korean aphasics

487

reasons to believe that different case postpositions involve different processing. For a possible answer to the phenomenon, Nam et al. (2001) proposed a hypothesis based on Chomskyan linguistics: the assignment of accusative cases is an instance of the government relation while that of nominative cases occurs by syntactic agreement.1 Morphemic ambiguity resolution A morpheme is called ambiguous when it has two meanings simultaneously. For example, the Korean morpheme ‘ka’ is used in two different ways: as a nominative case particle and as an affix which means ‘person’. The issues in this topic are how normal subjects process this ambiguous morpheme and whether patients with brain damage process it in a similar way. Kim, Kim, Pyun and Nam’s (2000) investigation was concerned with the question of resolving syntactic ambiguity in normal persons and aphasics. The material used for research was a syntactically ambiguous sentence. An example was ‘cengchika’ which has two ambiguous meanings: ‘cengchi (politics)-ka (nominative particle)’and ‘cengchika (politician)’. In this experiment, the reading time for resolving this ambiguity in the self-paced reading task was measured. In the case of normal persons, the results showed that there was no difference between ambiguous sentences and unambiguous ones when a phrase like ‘cengchika’ was used as a subject in the sentence, i.e. in the case where the particle ‘ka’ was used as a nominative marker. However, a significant difference was found when the phrase was non-subject, often embedded in a noun phrase and was analyzed as ‘noun+affix’, meaning ‘politician’: in the last case, the participants took longer to parse that word, i.e. longer reading time at the point of ambiguity resolution. These findings suggest that Koreans tend to preferentially analyze an ambiguous segment like ‘cengchika’ as a subject (politics + nominative case particle) in the sentence, other conditions being equal. Kim et al. pointed out from these findings that a frequency effect is involved in these instances, namely that people interpret ambiguous words like ‘noun + ka’ more frequently as ‘noun + nominative case’ than as ‘noun + affix’. For three aphasic patients, it was also found that they had no difficulty in processing morpho-syntactic information as normal subjects do. However, all of the aphasic subjects took more time than the normal subjects in analyzing the whole sentence. Furthermore, one patient, a Wernicke’s aphasic, took 1

We are aware that, in the Minimalist program, the accusative case is also taken care of by the Agree relation. Then, in order to account for the asymmetry observed in the experiments of the test, we might have to resort to the Lasnik & Saito’s (1984) assumption that the complements are properly governed, while the subjects are not.

488

Yu Mi Hwang, Kichun Nam and Myung-Yoon Kang

considerably more time in reading the last segment of the sentence. This might be due to an obvious difficulty in integrating the information of the whole sentence. Jung, Pyun, Kim and Nam (2002) examined the processing characteristics of Korean morphemically ambiguous words. Two experiments with primed lexical decision tasks were conducted. In the first, the prime words were inflected verbs composed of stems and suffixes like ‘mekul’ (mek (Chinese ink stick) + ul (accusative case marker) or mekul ‘eating’) with each stem having two meanings of different syntactic categories (verb and noun). In their second experiment the prime words were the same as in their first experiment, except for the suffixes. The stems still possessed ambiguous meanings but co-occurred with the suffixes, which constrained the meaning of the stems in such a way as to resolve the ambiguity of the stems, an example being ‘cwie’ (cwi (stem of meaning ‘grasp’, or noun of meaning ‘mouse’ + e (ending). That is, the affixation turned the meaning of the stem, previously ambiguous, into a non-ambiguous one. For a normal person, the result of the first experiment showed that facilitatory priming effects on target words associated with both the verb and noun meanings occurred in the short SOA (stimulus onset asynchrony) (150 ms) condition. In the long SOA (750 ms) condition, however, priming effects associated with verb meanings disappeared while the noun meanings were retained. In their second experiment, facilitatory priming effects on target words associated only with the prime word stems of the verb meaning were observed in the short SOA condition, to the exclusion of the meaning of the same stem as a noun. In the long SOA condition, however, priming effects associated with both the meanings of the stem, including the one putatively disambiguated by the following suffix, i.e. the meaning of the stem as noun, reappeared. The results of aphasic persons were as follows. Anomic patient S showed patterns parallel to the normal persons in the short SOA in the first experiment. In the long SOA, however, the patient showed inhibitory priming effects on target words associated with both nouns and verbs. Another anomic patient B and global aphasic patient P showed comparatively different patterns in both the short SOA and long SOA conditions. In the short SOA, they showed facilitatory priming effects on target words associated only with the prime word stems of the verb meaning. In the long SOA, patient B showed inhibitory priming effects on target words associated with both meanings, and the data of patient P were not available. In their second experiment, while patients S and P showed the same patterns as normal data in short SOA conditions, they showed comparatively different patterns in the long SOA condition. For anomic patient P, he showed the same patterns as normal data in both SOA conditions. These findings suggest that the processing of ambiguous morphemes and the activation of the ambiguous meanings were quite different for the normal persons and certain types of aphasics.

Morpho-syntactic processing in Korean aphasics

489

Agrammatism and functional category Aphasic patients, and agrammatics in particular, have a language deficit in functional categories involving omission and substitution of functional elements. Some studies have investigated the processing of Korean functional categories in agrammatic aphasics. There have been two big issues concerning these impairments. One is the degree of impairment among functional categories, which can range from equal impairment to selective impairment. Another issue is the hierarchy between impaired categories and intact categories. On the issue of the degree of impairment, earlier studies on agrammatism stated that all functional categories are impaired to the same degree. However, based on crosslinguistic data, recent works support the view of selective impairment in which not all functional categories may be equally impaired. On the issue of the hierarchy between functional categories, the tree-pruning hypothesis and Hagiwara’s hypothesis were suggested. The tree-pruning hypothesis (TPH), proposed by Friedmann (1994; Friedmann & Grodzinsky, 1997), was the first attempt to account for this dissociation among functional elements. According to TPH, whenever a node is impaired the tree cannot be constructed any higher, and consequently, all functional nodes above it will become impaired. TPH proposes that agrammatics produce trees that are intact up to the tense node and are pruned from this node up. This is based on the findings that tense but not agreement is impaired in the speech of Hebrewspeaking aphasic patients. From the same perspective, Hagiwara (1995) has argued that the site of the deficit is not uniformly restricted to the tense node (T) in all agrammatic sentence structures, but rather varies in accordance with the degree of the severity of impairment. According to Hagiwara, a patient who can handle the elements in the complementizer node (C) should always perform well on the elements in the T node. She reported that Japanese aphasics who performed badly on the elements in T also performed badly in C. Friedmann and Grodzinky (1997) suggested, moreover, a severity metric for agrammatism through some experiments involving agreement, tense and complementizers. The severity metric focuses on the syntactic location of the defective node in a phrase marker: the lower it is, the greater number of impaired functional categories there may be, and hence the more severe the impairment. Thus, mild agrammatism impairs high nodes only (i.e. CP). A more severe form will implicate T and C, while the most severe form will include all functional heads: C, T and Agr. They also conducted these experiments using the same functional categories in both production and comprehension. There was no modality dissociation between production and comprehension. Hwang, Moon, Park and Nam (2000) investigated the agrammatic comprehension of aphasics in Korean sentence processing. In their study, three

490

Yu Mi Hwang, Kichun Nam and Myung-Yoon Kang

functional categories were selected: complementizer, tense, and honorific prefinal ending ‘-si-’ as an agreement. Two of the three experiments employed a sentence completion task with multiple choices. The third experiment employed biclausal sentences which were designed to verify competence involving complementizers. All of the three experiments were conducted to solve two main problems: 1) Is agrammatism a global impairment of functional category, or a selective one? 2) Are the TPH and severity metric for agrammatism in Korean aphasics acceptable? The results of the three experiments showed selectivity of the impairments, which showed that not all grammatical morphemes are impaired equally in agrammatism. Two aphasic patients S and C showed normal processes in functional inflections AgrP and TP, but they had difficulty in processing the CP. The third aphasic patient P had a deficit in the TP and CP, but not in AgrP. And the fourth aphasic patient Y had a deficit in all the categories, AgrP, TP, and CP. The severity of agrammatism can be ordered in the following way: aphasic patients Y, P, S and C. These results appear to support the TPH and severity metric for agrammatism. Halliwell (2000) investigated some general characteristics of agrammatic production in Korean. Using the methodology found in Menn and Obler (1990), Halliwell analyzed two Korean agrammatic speakers’ speech by using four narratives. In these experiments, the participants showed a tendency to substitute verbal inflections, omit nominal morphemes, and produce many morphological errors, while leaving lexical choices intact. This result showed that the impairment is at the syntactic level and not at phonological or morphological levels of representation. In addition, spontaneous speech data from two aphasics showed that verb-final elements were intact, while tense and other elements in C, such as complementizers and attributive particles, were impaired. This result is against the TPH, in which, as discussed above, it was claimed that once T is impaired then C must also be impaired due to the superiority of the C position in the syntactic hierarchy. Some syntactic theories posit the position of the verb-final element not as C but as Mood (M). The Mood phrase is considered to be above TP but lower than CP. According to Halliwell (2000), regardless of whether the verb-final element is called C or M, it is higher in the structure than the tense position T. This, therefore, indicates that a syntactically higher functional category may fare better than the syntactically lower one, i.e. that an intact functional category may be located above the impaired one (i.e. T) or intervene between two impaired categories. This shows that the hierarchical model cannot be an adequate explanation. While the Korean data does support the notion that impairment is not the same across all grammatical morphemes in the same language, the data demonstrates that the TPH cannot account for which morphemes are to be impaired by reference to hierarchy.

Morpho-syntactic processing in Korean aphasics

491

Lee (2002) reported the dissociation among functional categories in Korean agrammatism and investigated TPH and Hagiwara’s hypotheses. Two experiments were conducted using a truth-value judgment task, a picture selection task, a verbal response task, and an act-out task in order to investigate a Korean agrammatic patient’s intactness and loss of three functional categories – Mood, Tense, and Complementizer. The results showed that dissociations among functional categories preserve the higher node while leaving the lower node impaired both in production and comprehension. There were dissociations in production between M and T in matrix sentences and between C and M in embedded clauses. In matrix sentences, the participant showed 88% correctness of M and 61% of T. In embedded sentences, 95% correctness of C and 35% of M were observed. Other dissociations were found among members of the same category M according to their linear position in the clause. Mood markers in matrix sentences were intact but mood markers in embedded clauses were impaired. These results conflicted with TPH and Hagiwara’s hypothesis, suggesting that functional elements located nearer to the end of the clause are better preserved in Korean agrammatic patients. Also, parallel patterns of impairment were found in comprehension of the three functional morphemes, indicating that there was no evident modality dissociation between production and comprehension. Pronouns and discourse Pronouns are grammatical categories which refer to previous nouns or noun phrases. They can be divided into several classes depending on the kind of referents and functions. Traditionally, they are subclassified into personal, reflexive, reciprocal, interrogative indefinites, and demonstrative pronouns based on the kind of and the characteristics of referents. Functional pronouns, however, can also be reclassified according to two contexts. The first can be referred to as their anaphoric function and the second as their deictic function. The anaphoric function of a pronoun is one in which it is used instead of a noun or noun phrase and depends on linguistic expressions, i.e. its antecedents. In that case, the pronoun is co-indexed with its antecedents in the linguistic context. The deictic function, on the other hand, is one in which a pronoun is used in discourse situations where it is understood by the situational context rather than by its linguistic antecedents. Kim, Hwang, Moon and Nam (1999) investigated the processing of personal pronouns (first and second person pronouns) and demonstrative pronouns (i-, ku-, ce-) in anomia and Wernicke’s aphasia. The result of the study, in which grammatical judgment tasks and sentence completion tasks were conducted, showed that the anomic had more demonstrative pronoun errors than personal pronoun errors, while the Wernicke’s aphasic had more personal pronoun errors than demonstrative ones. In the case of the anomic, he showed

492

Yu Mi Hwang, Kichun Nam and Myung-Yoon Kang

overall errors in all demonstratives ‘i-’, ‘ku-’ and ‘ce-’ but the Wernicke’s aphasic showed a deep problem only with ‘ku-’. These findings seem to be related to the conditions of their diseases. Anomic patients generally have difficulty in naming objects, so they also have similar difficulty in processing the demonstrative pronouns which refer to objects. Wernicke’s aphasics, on the other hand, have difficulty comprehending discourse situations and choosing the right pronouns even if they can understand the discourse context. In conclusion, these results imply that there is some possibility of different processing mechanisms between the first/second person pronouns and the demonstrative pronouns. The third pronoun ‘ku’, however, can be used in two functional roles (i.e. deictic and anaphoric), and hence was problematic for both types of aphasia. Hwang’s (2000) study concerned the deictic and anaphoric function of the personal and demonstrative pronouns. For personal pronouns, the first person pronoun ‘na’ and the second person pronoun ‘ne’ were selected for the deictic ones; and the third personal pronoun ‘ku’, for the anaphoric one. Between this polarity of the anaphoric and deictic use of pronouns is situated the third personal reflexive pronoun ‘caki’. For the purpose of the experiment, the demonstrative pronouns, ‘i-’ and ‘ce-’ were selected as deictic ones and ‘ku’ as both anaphoric and deictic. Three experiments were conducted with two Broca’s aphasics, two anomics, one apraxic and one right-brain-damaged person. The results of the first experiment showed that the six subjects performed deictic personal pronouns ‘na’ and ‘ne’ comparatively well. In the second experiment, aphasic patients showed a tendency to perform better on the third reflexive ‘caki’ than on the anaphoric third pronoun ‘ku’. The third experiment was designed to investigate the performance by those aphasics on the deictic demonstratives ‘i-’, ‘ku-’ and ‘ce-’ and the anaphoric demonstrative ‘ku-’. The results showed that deictic demonstrative pronouns were performed better than the anaphoric demonstrative ‘ku’. Aphasics performed best on the processing of deictic pronouns, with mixed pronouns between deictic and anaphoric second, and anaphoric pronouns worst. These three experiments showed that aphasics remarkably preserved the deictic function but were severely impaired in the anaphoric function. In conclusion, these results indicate that the brain damage of aphasics made their linguistic processes difficult but spared the nonlinguistic processes to a certain degree. These observations appear to substantiate the growing evidence that pronouns can be processed independently from deictic and anaphoric forms. Discussion The purpose of this chapter has been to review the progress that has been made with respect to research in morpho-syntactic processing by Korean

Morpho-syntactic processing in Korean aphasics

493

aphasic patients in the last decade. The guiding assumption for the proposed experiments was that aphasic data could be helpful in determining the cognitive architecture of language. The conclusions deriving from this point of view, which are defended above, may be summarized briefly as follows. First, the double dissociation in processing nominative and accusative cases based on aphasic data indicates that the different case postpositions involve different processing. Second, it is likely that Koreans tend to preferentially analyze an ambiguous segment like ‘noun + ka’ in the sentence rather than ‘noun + affix’, other conditions being equal. A third topic was on agrammatism and functional category, in which we found there are some inconsistent results in this study. Some of the inconsistency is perhaps due to the particular characteristics of these experiments and the tasks and materials involved. Finally, the experimental data on pronouns and discourse showed that aphasics’ performance was poor on the anaphoric pronouns, less poor on mixed pronouns and best on the deictic pronouns. This result implies that brain damage may be the cause of impaired performance by the aphasics in linguistic processes (i.e. anaphoric function), but it would leave the nonlinguistic processes (i.e. deictic function) intact.

40

Morpho-syntactic processing of Korean-speaking adults with Broca’s aphasia Mina Hwang

Abstract In this chapter, studies on morpho-syntactic processing of Korean-speaking adults with Broca’s aphasia are reviewed. In the production of grammatical morphemes, the aphasic adults could produce certain grammatical morphemes as correctly as normal adult subjects. In the comprehension of simple sentences, as with normal adults, the aphasic adults relied more on case-marker cues than on animacy or word-order cues, although they did not utilize case markers as extensively as normal adults. In comprehending sentences with relative clauses, the aphasic patients’ performance patterns varied depending on the severity of their language deficits; while the moderate aphasic patients appeared to rely on word order, the mild aphasic patients showed evidence of their abilities to process case markers. It was also noted that the aphasic adults’ sentence comprehension was greatly affected by the processing load of the tasks. The importance of the specificity of languages, the patients’ severity of aphasia and the processing load of tasks in research on aphasia are discussed. Introduction Individuals who suffer from aphasia experience breakdowns in language processing. The relative degree of impairment across the different aspects of language processing varies between patients. Patients with Broca’s aphasia are known to have pronounced deficits in morpho-syntactic processing. Their speech production is often characterized by a marked reduction in phrase length and syntactic complexity with omissions of inflections and grammatical function words, giving the patient’s speech a “telegraphic look.” (Goodglass, 1993). They also exhibit impaired comprehension for syntactically complex structures, especially sentences of non-canonical order, such as reversible passive sentences and sentences with object relatives (Grodzinsky, 1989; see Grodzinsky, Piñango, Zurif & Drai, 1999, for a review). The term “agrammatism” is often 494

Morpho-syntactic processing in Broca’s aphasia

495

used for patients with Broca’s aphasia, reflecting their selective difficulties in processing grammatical structure. Korean is a useful language to explore the nature of morpho-syntactic impairments of adults with Broca’s aphasia. Until recently, most studies on aphasia dealt with speakers of Indo-European languages, especially English. Unlike English, Korean has a complex system of grammatical morphemes and permits free movement and/or omission of the constituents of a sentence. These characteristics of Korean allow us to investigate the processing of various grammatical morphemes and syntactic structures of different word orders. The purpose of the present paper is to introduce research on morpho-syntactic processing of Korean-speaking adults with Broca’s aphasia. The review will focus on the data from group studies where performance by aphasic adults was compared with that of appropriate control groups. Some language-specific characteristics of Korean aphasic adults’ language processing will be discussed along with the influence of some other factors, such as the severity of aphasia and the processing load of a task, on their language performances. Production data The telegraphic nature of the speech in Broca’s aphasia is found primarily from English-speaking individuals. Speech production data from aphasic speakers of other languages, especially richly inflected languages, revealed a wide range of cross-linguistic variation in their degree of grammatical errors. For example, the speech of Turkish Broca’s patients was not telegraphic (Slobin, 1991), and Italian-speaking aphasic individuals showed relative preservation of inflected articles compared to their English counterparts (Bates, Friederici, & Wulfeck, 1987a). Ahn, Hwang, Park and Kim (2002) provided a general picture of grammatical morpheme production in Korean speakers with Broca’s aphasia. Ten adults with Broca’s aphasia and ten normal elderly adults produced a familiar folktale and performed a “given/new picture description task.” From the connected speech sample, the frequencies of nominal particles and predicated inflections were separately obtained. For the frequency measures, the mean number of nominal suffixes or particles attached to each substantive (including nouns, pronouns, and numerals) and the mean number of predicate inflections attached to each predicate (including verbs and adjectives) were calculated. The aphasic adults did not differ from the normal adults in the frequencies of grammatical morpheme production. However, they produced significantly fewer types of grammatical morphemes than the normal adults, both in nominal suffixes and in predicate inflections. In the picture description task, production of five types of case markers was examined. The aphasic adults produced nominative and accusative case markers with mean accuracies of 91% and 95%, respectively.

496

Mina Hwang

For adverbial case markers, their mean accuracies of dative, locative and instrumental were 50%, 80%, and 56%, respectively. Among their errors, 73% were substitutions, whereas the other 27% were omissions. The Korean aphasic speakers’ tendency to substitute rather than to omit case markers was also observed in other studies with fewer subjects (Halliwell, 2000; S. Kim, 1997; Nam, Yim, Jung, Kim & Pyun, 2001). Such substitutions can function, at least, to mark the places where grammatical morphemes ought to be. The aphasic adults’ performances in Ahn et al. (2002) are slightly better than the results of the previous studies, probably due to differences in the tasks applied. In order to elicit production of case markers, S. Kim (1997) and Nam et al. (2001) asked aphasic speakers to fill in the blanked positions of case markers after reading a sentence. Thus, the task required reading and figuring out the “missing” particles based on the available information in a written sentence. In Ahn et al. (2002), the subjects generated the particles as they produced sentences describing pictures. In addition, the repetition of the same sentence structures following the paradigm of a given/new task might have reduced their load in constructing new syntactic structures. Comprehension data Comprehension of simple N-N-V sentences Based on the competition model, Bates and her colleagues have explored the cross-linguistic differences of strengths of cues in sentence comprehension in diverse populations of children and adults, including aphasic speakers. In their comprehension task, also called a “Who did it” task, participants’ interpretation of the thematic relation of a simple active sentence was examined using their “act out” performance. The sentences were generated by factorial combination of word order, morphology, semantics, contrastive stress, and/or topicalization. This factorial design permits an assessment of cue strength by determining which cues “win” in various competing and converging combinations of information (see Bates, Devescovi & Wulfeck, 2001 for a review). Across languages, grammatical morphemes appeared to be selectively vulnerable in aphasia (Bates, Friederici & Wulfeck, 1987b; MacWhinney, Osmán-Sági & Slobin, 1991; Smith & Mimica, 1984). More importantly, the degree of impairment is directly correlated with strength of morphology in the premorbid language. In Bates et al. (1987b), Italian aphasic adults still made more use of morphology than German aphasic adults, who in turn made more use of this information than English speakers with aphasia. Turkish speakers and Hungarian speakers with Broca’s aphasia showed a pattern that resembled the pattern of normal adults where case markers stood as the strongest cue (MacWhinney et al., 1991).

Morpho-syntactic processing in Broca’s aphasia (a)

(b)

80 60 40 20

C0

C1

C2

Case Aphasic

Percent Choice First Noun

Percent Choice First Noun

Percent Choice First Noun

(c) 100

100

100

0

497

80 60 40 20 0

60 40 20 0

AA

AI

IA

Animacy Normal

80

Aphasic

NNV

NVN

VNN

Word Order Normal

Aphasic

Normal

Figure 40.1. The percentage of first noun choice for aphasic adults and normal adults according to the conditions of three cues (redrawn from Hwang [2002])

In Hwang (2002), ten Korean-speaking adults with Broca’s aphasia and fifteen normal young adults performed the “Who did it?” task. Experimental sentences were generated by factorial combination of word order [noun-nounverb (NNV), noun-verb-noun (NVN), verb-noun-noun (VNN)], case marker [nominative case marker on the first noun and accusative on the second (C1), accusative on the first noun and nominative on the second (C2), and no case markers on either noun (C0)], and animacy of the nouns [animate-inanimate (AI), inanimate-animate (IA), animate-animate (AA)]. An example sentence of the NVN-C2-AI condition is as follows. For each type of sentence the percentage of choices of the first noun as the agent was calculated. (1)

Tokki-lul rabbit-ACC

cha-ss-da kick-PAST-DECL

sige-ka clock-NOM

As shown in Figure 40.1, for the normal adults, the first noun choice rate varied greatly according to the changes of case markers, but not as greatly in changes of animacy or word order. Compared to the normal adults, the aphasic adults showed significant difficulties utilizing case-marker cues in sentence interpretation. However, the degree of changes in performance according to animacy and word-order cues did not significantly differ in either group. In other words, the Korean speakers with Broca’s aphasia were selectively vulnerable to morphology, while their processing of animacy and word order appeared to be spared. However, the aphasic adults relied most on case-marker cues, as the normal adults did. The relative strengths of the three cues were similar in the two groups. For sentence interpretation, both groups relied primarily on the case-marker cue, followed by the animacy cue which in turn was followed by the word-order cue.

498

Mina Hwang

Comprehension of complex sentences: relative clauses and passive sentences In many studies, agrammatical adults exhibited difficulty in comprehending reversible passive sentences and object relative clauses. However, the degree of such deficits varied across studies; some reported performances at or below chance level, others reported above chance level. (Beretta, Piñango, Patterson & Harford, 1999; Berndt, Mitchum & Wayland, 1997; Berndt, Mitchum & Haendiges, 1996; Grodzinsky, Piñango, Zurif & Drai, 1999). Given such variation of deficits in agrammatism, several accounts of different natures have been suggested. Some accounts, such as the Trace Deletion Hypothesis (TDH), propose a selective syntactic deficit. In the TDH, deletion of trace of a moved noun phrase (NP) forces aphasic adults to “guess” the thematic function of the NP, leading them to perform at chance level in comprehension of those sentences (Grodzinsky, 1989, 1995a). Other researchers assumed a complete loss of syntax in agrammatism, and proposed that sentence comprehension is achieved by linear assignment of thematic roles (Caplan & Futter, 1986). Yet others attributed aphasic adults’ deficits to a limitation of capacity and proposed variations of performance depending on the resources required for language processing (Caplan, Baker & Dehaut, 1985; Miyake, Carpenter & Just, 1994). In M. Hwang and Kim (2004), relative clause comprehension was investigated in Korean adults with aphasia of different levels of severity. Researchers have recognized that the selection or grouping criteria of aphasic patients could affect the results of studies (Bedecker & Caramazza, 1986; Berndt & Caramazza, 1999; Caplan, 1995). The severity of aphasia is one factor that can influence the performance patterns of aphasic adults even when their diagnostic types are the same. Hwang and Kim (2004) divided adults with Broca’s aphasia into two groups based on their auditory comprehension composite scores of the KoreanWestern Aphasia Battery (H. Kim & Na, 2001). The participants included six patients with mild comprehension deficits, nine patients with moderate comprehension deficits, and nine normal elderly adults. Unlike in English, a relative clause in Korean precedes the head noun and the thematic relation in a relative clause is determined by case markers rather than word order. The sentence in (2) is an example with a subject relative clause used by Hwang and Kim (2004), and (3) has an object relative clause. (2)

Toggi-lul ddari-n gangaji-ka hayansak-ida. (rabbit-ACC bit-REL puppy-NOM white-DECL) The puppy that bit the rabbit is white.

(3)

Toggi-ka ddari-n gangaji-ka (rabbit-NOM bit-REL puppy-NOM The rabbit that the puppy bit is white.

hayansak-ida. white-DECL)

Morpho-syntactic processing in Broca’s aphasia

499

percent correct

100 80 60 40 20 0 moderate aphasic

mild aphasic

normal

group

subject relative

object relative

Figure 40.2. Response accuracy of the sentence–picture matching task (redrawn from Hwang and Kim [2004])

A nominative marker “-ka” is attached to the head noun “kangaci (puppy)” in both sentences due to its function as a subject in the main clause. In the relative clauses, “kangaci (puppy)” is the agent in the subject relative clause, whereas it is the patient in the object relative clause. Thus, in the subject relative clause, the functions of the head noun in the main clause and relative clause are the same, i.e. parallel, whereas they are different in the object relative clause. On the other hand, the word order is canonical in the object relative clause, but not in the subject relative clause. Figure 40.2 shows the accuracy of responses in the sentence-picture matching task of Hwang and Kim (2004). The moderate aphasic group performed significantly worse than the mild aphasic group, who in turn performed worse than the normal group. More interestingly, a significant interaction between group and relative clause type was noted. The moderate aphasic group comprehended object relative clauses significantly better than subject relative clauses, which indicated their reliance on word order for sentence comprehension. The mild aphasic group comprehended subject relative clauses better, which indicated that they were able to process case markers. Korean speakers’ superior performance on subject relative clause comprehension over object relative was found in studies with normal adults and children (Clancy, Lee, & Zoh, 1986; Kim, 1985). Son and Hwang (2005) conducted two experiments on passive sentence comprehension with varying lengths and word orders. Korean passive sentences are made by attaching a dative case marker “-hanthey, -eykey” (corresponding to the preposition “by” in English) to the agent, a nominative marker (i.e. -i, -ka) to the patient, and by inserting one of the verb inflections representing passiveness (i.e. -i, -hi, -li, -ki). In the first experiment, both active and passive sentences were varied by the order of the two NPs. In half of the sentences, agent preceded patient, and in the other half, patient preceded agent. In the second experiment,

500

Mina Hwang

Table 40.1 Examples of sentences used in Son & Hwang (2005) Full sentences (Experiment 1) Active (The rabbit kicks the duck.) Agent first tokki-ga ori-lul cha-da. rabbit-NOM duck-ACC kick-DECL Patient first

ori-lul tokki-ga cha-da. duck-ACC rabbit-NOM kick-DECL

Passive ori-ga cha-i-da. duck-NOM kick-PASS-DECL tokki-hante cha-i-da. Rabbit-DAT(by) kick-PASS-DECL

100

100

80

80 percent correct

percent correct

Short sentences (Experiment 2) Active Agent tokki-ga cha-da. rabbit-NOM kick-DECL Patient ori-lul cha-da. duck-ACC kick-DECL

Passive (The duck is kicked by the rabbit.) ori-ga tokki-hante cha-i-da. duck-NOM rabbit-DAT(by) kick-PASSDECL tokki-hante ori-ga cha-i-da. Rabbit-DAT(by) duck-NOM kickPASS-DECL

60 40 20 0

60 40 20

agent patient first first active sentence

aphasic

agent patient first first passive sentence

normal

0

agent

patient

active

sentence

aphasic

agent

patient

passive

sentence

normal

Figure 40.3. Mean performance accuracy in Experiment 1 (left) and in Experiment 2 (right) in Son and Hwang (2005)

short sentences were made by deleting the second NP from each of the sentences in the first experiment. Thus, half of the sentences contained only agents, and the other half only patients. The example sentences used in both experiments are shown in Table 40.1. Twelve adults with Broca’s aphasia and twelve normal elderly adults performed a sentence-picture matching task in both experiments. Figure 40.3 shows the results of the two experiments. In Experiment 1, the aphasic group made significantly more errors than the normal adults. Both groups performed better when agent preceded patient

Morpho-syntactic processing in Broca’s aphasia

501

regardless of the voice of a sentence, and such a tendency was greater in the aphasic patients than in the normal adults. No significant differences in comprehension were noted between the active and passive sentences in both groups. In Experiment 2, although the aphasic adults made significantly more errors than the normal group, their mean performance accuracies were over 80 percent across the four types of sentences. An ANOVA on data from both experiments revealed that the aphasic adults’ sentence comprehension performances were significantly improved when the sentences were shortened. Korean aphasic adults’ erroneous performances for sentences involving movements of NPs, i.e. subject relative clauses and patient-first active/passive sentences, support the TDH, but only partially. The mild aphasic adults in Hwang and Kim (2004) comprehended subject relative clauses better than object relative clauses. In addition, according to TDH, aphasic adults should perform at chance level for the patient-first sentences, which was not true in the first experiment of H. M. Son and Hwang (2005). Of note, a previous study on three Korean adults with Broca’s aphasia reported chance-level performances for patient-first active sentences as well as passive sentences of two different word orders (Beretta, Schmitt, Halliwell, Munn, Cuetos & Kim, 2001). A study on Hebrew-speaking agrammatic adults also revealed chancelevel performances for patient-first active sentences (Friedmann & Shapiro, 2003). On the other hand, Dutch-speaking adults with Broca’s aphasia preformed remarkably well in comprehending passive sentences of different word orders, with the error rates around 10 percent (Friederici & Graetz, 1987). Lukatela, Shankweiler and Crain (1995) also found that Croatian speakers comprehended object relative clauses at above chance level. The aphasic adults’ improved comprehension of short sentences found in Son and Hwang (2005) is in line with the capacity limitation account. Improvement of comprehension for truncated sentences was also noted in Spanish speaking aphasics (Beretta et al., 1999), but not in English-speaking aphasics (Berndt, et al., 1997). Deleting an NP from an English sentence would not facilitate aphasic adults’ comprehension because word-order information is not available anymore. However, in languages like Korean where case markers determine the thematic functions, shortening of sentences results in decreasing the number of grammatical morphemes to be analyzed. Thus, the aphasic speakers, who are selectively vulnerable to morphology, can assign more resources to a small number of morphemes. Discussion Although the tasks of the studies reviewed in this chapter required different language performance, a common finding was that Korean adults with Broca’s aphasia were able to process grammatical aspects of language. During

502

Mina Hwang

spontaneous speech, Korean aphasic adults did not omit grammatical morphemes more than normal adults. Like normal adults, they relied more on case-marker cues than on animacy or word-order cues during sentence interpretation. When their language impairments were mild, they showed evidence of processing case markers in relative clauses. They could comprehend passive sentences with an accuracy of more than chance level, and, when the sentences were shortened, their mean performance accuracy was over 80 percent. It is true that the Korean aphasic adults still exhibited impaired morpho-syntactic skills. The types of grammatical morphemes were limited in their spontaneous speech, and, in a more obligatory context, they produced more erroneous case markers than in the normal adults. The degree of use of case-marker information in simple sentence comprehension was limited compared to young, normal adults. Their interpretation of complex sentences was still less accurate than that of normal adults. However, as observed in the data of aphasic adults who speak richly inflected languages, the Korean speakers with Broca’s aphasia processed morpho-syntactic aspects of language at least better than what might be expected based on the data from English aphasics. It is apparent that the Korean aphasic adults do not exhibit problems in all aspects of morpho-syntactic processing. What factors determine such variations in the Korean aphasic adults’ language performance? Three possible variables can be suggested from the findings reviewed in this chapter; specific characteristics of the Korean morpho-syntactic system as a language-related variable, the severity of aphasia as a person-related variable, and the processing load of a language task as a task-related variable. Even though patients with Broca’s aphasia are supposed to have pronounced deficits in morpho-syntactic processing, the Korean Broca’s aphasics relied most on case-marker cues during sentence interpretation; in M. Hwang (2002), there was clear evidence of language-specific processing by the Korean aphasic adults. However, only two types of case markers, i.e. nominatives and accusatives, were included in the sentences. In Ahn et al. (2002), where the production of various types of grammatical morphemes was examined, the Korean aphasic patients did not produce all kinds of grammatical morphemes at the same level of accuracy. Among the case markers elicited in the picture-description task, aphasic adults produced nominatives and accusatives at over 90 percent mean accuracy, whereas adverbial case markers were as low as 50 percent mean accuracy. One possible explanation for the discrepancy of aphasic adults’ production across case markers is that the specific nature of brain damage is responsible for this. However, that explanation is not very likely because such discrepancies have been found in other populations. It was reported that Koreanspeaking children with specific language impairments produced nominative case markers as accurately as normal children with matched language-ages (Hwang, 2003), whereas they showed significant deficits in producing adverbial case

Morpho-syntactic processing in Broca’s aphasia

503

markers (Hwang, 2003; J. M. Lee & Hwang, 2001). A similar pattern of errors in producing grammatical morphemes was also noted in Korean-speaking children with Down’s syndrome (M. Kim, 2003). It is noteworthy that nominative case markers are acquired earlier than some adverbial case markers in normally developing Korean children (S. Kim, 1997; Y.-J. Kim, 1997), and that the locative case marker “-ey”, which was produced with a mean accuracy of 80 percent by the aphasic patients in Ahn et al. (2002), is one of the first case markers to emerge in normal children’s production (S. Kim, 1997; Zoh, 1982b). It is more likely that the different levels of deficits across grammatical morphemes in Korean aphasic adults’ production reflect the characteristics of the grammatical morphemes themselves. It is beyond the scope of this chapter to figure out what causes the production of some grammatical morphemes to be more affected by brain damage than others. In exploring the factors related to Korean aphasic adults’ selective difficulty in certain grammatical morphemes, some language-specific aspects of grammatical morphemes such as perceptibility, ease of production, informativeness and occurrence frequencies may be included. Hwang & Kim (2004) showed that the severity of aphasia could affect the patients’ language performance dramatically, as the group with mild aphasia and that with moderate aphasia showed opposite performance patterns; the mild aphasic group correctly comprehended subject relative clauses better than object relative clauses whereas the moderate aphasic group comprehended object relative clauses better. Son & Hwang (2005) noted that aphasic patients’ performances improved markedly when the processing load of the task was reduced by shortening the length of the sentences. The differences in the severity of the patients’ aphasia and the load of tasks across studies may be responsible for the inconsistency of results even when similar language processing is investigated. More importantly, the severity of aphasia and the processing load of a language task may interact with the specificity of a particular language under investigation. As noted earlier, unlike the findings by Son & Hwang (2005), truncating passive sentences did not improve English aphasics’ comprehension. In order to understand the mechanism of language breakdowns in aphasia, the three variables, i.e. the specificity of a language, the patients’ severity of aphasia, and the processing load of a task should be carefully controlled when conducting research.

41

Comprehension deficits in Korean agrammatic aphasia Miseon Lee

Introduction One of the goals of linguistic research is to understand how language functions in the brain. Although it is rarely possible to observe the brain directly, fortunately there are clues as to the nature of the neurological mechanisms underlying language. A particularly useful source of such clues comes from the patterns of linguistic deficits observed in brain-damaged aphasic patients. Among the many forms of aphasia that can occur, one of the most informative from the point of view of linguistic research is ‘agrammatism’ in non-fluent Broca’s aphasia, which is generally taken to involve deficits in morphological and syntactic levels of processing (cf. Caplan, 1991). Findings from research on agrammatism are of importance in that they can provide evidence for established linguistic theories, in addition to providing valuable clues about both the nature of the syntactic disorder itself and the neurological mechanisms underlying language. This research can also advance therapies to help rehabilitate aphasic patients. Because of its importance, researchers have extensively studied agrammatism in Indo-European languages such as English and German since the late 1970s. The most widely investigated hypotheses in this research attribute agrammatism either to the loss of syntactic knowledge or to damage to cognitive resources, which in turn compromises the ability to process intact knowledge. The properties of individual languages may modify the manifestations of the same aphasic syndromes. For example, difficulty with inflections, which is a defining symptom of agrammatism, is manifested as omission errors in English but as substitution errors in Korean (Halliwell, 2000; Y.-J. Kim, 1999; M. Lee, 2000, 2003). For this reason, crosslinguistic comparisons in typologically and structurally diverse languages are essential for making valid generalizations about agrammatism. In this regard, the study of agrammatism in Korean is full of promise because Korean is very different from Indo-European languages both typologically and structurally. Much aphasia research has been done in Korean in the last decade, mostly focused on lexical deficits and general 504

Comprehension deficits in Korean agrammatic aphasia

505

symptoms. Although there is little work on syntactic aspects of agrammatic aphasia in Korean, this research has already added to valuable information about the general picture of agrammatism. Our discussion begins by defining characteristics of agrammatic production and comprehension. The next sections review various accounts of agrammatic comprehension deficits from two very different approaches: processing accounts, which consider agrammatism to be a disorder in processing intact syntactic knowledge, and competence accounts, which seek to explain agrammatic deficits in terms of impaired representations. Speech production and comprehension in agrammatism Agrammatic aphasia is characterized by slow, effortful and non-fluent speech with awkward articulation and frequent pauses. It is usually accompanied by a marked reduction in phrase length and syntactic complexity. These general characteristics are also seen in Korean-speaking agrammatic patients (Halliwell, 2000; Kim, 1999). The following language sample was produced by a 50-year-old man diagnosed with Broca’s aphasia and exhibiting many of the agrammatic characteristics noted in the literature. (1)

San-ey ka-p-nita. Pwupwu uh … pwupwu-ka kangaci uh kangaci-lul talaka-p-nita. Pwupwu-ka talk-ul uh … talk-ul … ani-p-nita. Kay-lul uh pwupwu-ka uh pwupwu-ka talk-ul kay-lul mek-sup-nita. Pwupwuka nath-ul uh nath-ul mek-ess-sup … Talk-ul mek-esssu … Uh uh pwu uh pwupwu-ka talk-ul ta uh … talk-ul mek … mek-ess-su … mek … mek … uh mek … Talk-ul mek-ul tey-lul mek-ess-sup-nita. mountain-to go-AddHon-DECL. couple couple-NOM puppy puppy-ACC chase-AddHon-DECL. couple-NOM chicken-ACC be.not-AddHon-DECL. dog-ACC couple-NOM chicken-ACC dog-ACC eat-AddHon-DECL couple-NOM (unclear)-ACC eat-PST-AddHon. chicken-ACC eat-PST-AddHon. couple-NOM chicken-ACC eat-PSTAddHon. chicken-ACC eat-REL place-ACC eat-PST-AddHon-DECL.1

One of the prototypical characteristics of agrammatic speech observed across languages involves the apparently selective loss of vocabulary items. Agrammatic speech tends to omit or substitute grammatical morphology or closed-class morphology (i.e. function words and inflections), but appears to retain content words or open-class vocabulary. However, within-category variation is also apparent. Within open-class vocabulary, it has been frequently noted that agrammatic aphasics encounter more difficulty naming verbs than 1

AddHon = Addressee Honorific; DECL = Declarative; NOM = Nominative; ACC = Accusative; PST = Past tense; REL = Relativizer

506

Miseon Lee

nouns (Berndt et al., 1997; Kim & Thompson, 2000; Miceli et al., 1984; Zingeser & Berndt, 1990; see Hyun, 2003 and S. R. Kim, 2002 for Korean). Studies examining verb deficits in detail have further shown that not all verbs are equally impaired. For example, in an action naming task, K.-Y. Kim (2006) found that intransitives such as nalaka-ta ‘fly’ as in Say-ka nalaka-ta ‘The bird is flying’ were easier for her six Korean-speaking Broca’s aphasic subjects to produce than transitives such as kuli-ta ‘draw’ as in Ai-ka kulim-ul kuli-ta ‘The child is drawing a picture’, which in turn are easier than verbs with three arguments such as kel-ta ‘hang’ as in Yeca-ka os-ul oskeli-ey kel-ta ‘The woman is hanging clothes on a hanger.’ The same result has been reported for other languages (e.g. Kemmerer & Tranel, 2000, Kim & Thompson, 2000, Thompson et al., 1997 for English; Kiss, 2000 for Hungarian; Luzzatti et al., 2002 for Italian; De Bleser & Kauschke, 2003 for German). Thompson and her colleagues (1997) explain this result as the effect of the number of arguments associated with the verb. Variation within closed-class vocabulary has also been the subject of extensive research on agrammatic speech. In earlier years, closed-class words were thought to be impaired as a whole. However, more recent studies have shown that they are selectively impaired. For instance, it has often been found that tense is impaired while agreement is intact in agrammatic speech (e.g. Friedmann, 1994; Friedmann & Grodzinsky, 1997; Miceli et al., 1989). Studies of Korean agrammatic speech have also reported that not all function words are equally impaired. One of the most frequently observed examples of this selective impairment is the contrast between the nominative case marker -ka/i and the accusative -lul/ul (S. Kim, 1997; H.-W. Lee, 1999; Nam et al., 1999). Interestingly, Nam and his colleagues reported that accusative markers were more severely impaired than nominative markers while Kim (1997) and Lee (1999) found the opposite pattern. Another example of the selective impairment of function words is the dissociation among various verbal inflections such as sentence enders (e.g. -yo, -ta), tense inflections (e.g. -(a/e)ss) and complementizers (e.g. -ko ‘that’ ), which can be differentially impaired (Hwang, Moon, Jung & Nam, 2000; Hwang, Moon, Park & Nam, 2000; Hwang, Nam & Kang, 2000; M. Lee, 2000, 2003). With these defining characteristics, agrammatism had long been considered a production disorder, in which comprehension is relatively spared (see De Bleser 1987, for a review). However, Caramazza and Zurif’s (1976) experimental study brought to light the existence of a comprehension deficit in agrammatism. They found that agrammatics performed poorly on the comprehension of semantically reversible sentences such as The girl that the boy is pushing is blond. Since Caramazza and Zurif’s seminal study, a number of studies have found a highly selective impairment in agrammatic comprehension (e.g. Caplan, 1983; Caplan, Baker & Dehaut, 1985; Caplan & Futter, 1986;

Comprehension deficits in Korean agrammatic aphasia

507

Caplan & Hildebrandt, 1988; Grodzinsky, 1986; Hickok & Avrutin, 1995; Kolk & van Grunsven, 1985; M. Lee, 2000; O’Grady & Lee, 2001, 2005; Schwartz, Saffran & Marin, 1980). A typical example is seen in the contrast between intact actives and disrupted passives. Beretta and his colleagues (2001) and Son (2004) also found in sentence–picture matching tasks that Korean agrammatics had difficulty with syntactic passives such as Kyengchal-i kilin-eykey cha-i-n-ta ‘The policeman is kicked by the giraffe’ while performing well on actives such as Kyengchal-i kilin-ul cha-n-ta ‘The policeman kicks the giraffe’. However, these findings do not mean that an agrammatic patient always has parallel deficits in production and comprehension. Rather, many studies have shown modality dissociations between comprehension and production deficits. That is, some agrammatics have problems with production but not with comprehension (e.g. Friedmann & Grodzinsky, 1997; Kolk, van Grunsven & Keyser, 1985; Miceli et al., 1983; Nam et al., 2001; Nespoulous et al., 1988), and others have impaired comprehension and spared production (e.g. Bates, Friederici & Wulfeck, 1987a; Caplan, 1985). Further, dissociations have been observed in other linguistic tasks: as first noted by Linebarger, Schwartz and Saffran (1983), agrammatics who have impairments in both comprehension and production can show surprisingly spared grammaticality judgments. Even when agrammatics have problems both in production and in comprehension, the impaired structures are often different (e.g. Bastiaanse et al., 1996). Yet several studies have found a modality dissociation by testing both production and comprehension of the same grammatical morphemes (e.g. Friedmann & Grodzinsky, 1997). For example, Nam et al. (1999) reported that a Korean agrammatic patient showed normal comprehension but impaired production of nominative case markers in experimental tasks. The following sections will discuss major theories of agrammatic comprehension deficits in detail and then explore evidence for the theories from Korean and English. A brief concluding section follows. Theories of agrammatic comprehension A typical pattern of agrammatic comprehension deficits is seen in the contrast between intact canonical word order patterns (e.g. actives, subject relatives, subject clefts) and disrupted non-canonical word order structures (e.g. passives, object relatives, object clefts, tough movement). Double object patterns are also found to be more difficult than the prepositional dative sentences (e.g. Caplan et al., 1985; Caplan & Futter, 1986; Heilman & Scholes, 1976; Hickok, 1992; Kolk & Weijts, 1996). Examples are shown in (2). (2) a. b.

Passive: The lion was kicked by the cheetah. Object relative: The lion that the cheetah kicked is small.

508

Miseon Lee

c. d. e.

Object cleft: It was the lion that the cheetah kicked. Tough movement: The lion was easy for the cheetah to kick. Double object: The cheetah gave the lion a ball.

Work over the past three decades has yielded various grammar-oriented hypotheses concerning the nature of this selective impairment in agrammatic comprehension. They can be roughly divided into two classes – those that posit a defect in the interpretive processes that operate on intact syntactic representations (i.e. processing accounts) and those that posit a deficit in syntactic representations (i.e. competence accounts). Processing accounts Computational limitation accounts Computational limitations are frequently proposed as the source of agrammatic comprehension. These include limited working memory capacity (Miyake, Carpenter & Just, 1994), limited parsing workspace (Caplan & Hildebrandt, 1988), and temporal limitations on parsing (Friederici & Frazier, 1992; Haarmann & Kolk, 1991a, b). Such accounts argue that agrammatic aphasics have intact syntactic representation, as shown by the fact that grammaticality judgments are generally good. Instead, it is assumed that the increased working memory and parsing workspace which is required for syntactic analysis of syntactically complex structures and/or noncanonical word order is unavailable (Caplan & Hildebrandt, 1988; Hickok & Avrutin, 1995; Just & Carpenter, 1992; Miyake et al., 1994). Kolk and his colleagues (Haarmann & Kolk, 1991a, b; Kolk & Heeschen, 1992; Kolk & van Grunsven, 1985) attribute agrammatic comprehension deficits to a parsing disorder in temporal synchrony: the greater the syntactic complexity, the more disturbed the co-activation of syntactic information, either due to slow activation or to the rapid decay of the information. Supporting evidence for this idea comes from Haarmann and Kolk’s (1994) experimental study, which found that agrammatics were sensitive to the ungrammaticality of conjoined sentences (e.g. The baker greets the customers and asks the boy to not make so much noise), but not to that of center-embedded sentences (e.g. The baker who greets the customers asks the boy to not make so much noise). Haarmann and Kolk concluded that this result was due to pathologically fast decay of syntactic information. For Korean, H. M. Son (2004) reports a correlation between the number of arguments and sentence comprehension. Given that Korean allows subjectand object-drop, long sentences with two arguments (e.g. wenswungi-ka olilul cha-ta ‘The monkey kicks the duck’) and short sentences with one argument (e.g. wenswungi-ka cha-ta, or oli-lul cha-ta) are both appropriate for a situation in which a monkey kicks a duck. Normal listeners have no difficulty

Comprehension deficits in Korean agrammatic aphasia

509

distinguishing between an agent and a theme, but the twelve Broca’s aphasics in Son’s picture-selection task performed significantly better on short sentences than on long sentences. This result can be interpreted as evidence that more arguments increase the processing load. The Mapping Hypothesis (MH) The Mapping Hypothesis attributes the comprehension deficits in agrammatism to mapping syntactic representations onto semantic ones (Linebarger et al., 1983; Linebarger, 1995; Schwartz et al., 1987). The mapping is claimed to be particularly difficult where the syntactic relationship between the verb and its noun arguments is not evident from the surface structure, as in reversible passive sentences (Schwartz et al., 1987). Thus, according to this hypothesis, agrammatics only use heuristics based on word order, assigning an agent role to the first NP and a theme role to the second. Since this linear strategy does not work for non-canonical patterns such as passives and object relatives, agrammatics end up with incorrect interpretations for such patterns, as shown in (3). (3) a. b.

[The lion]NP1 was chased by [the cheetah]NP2 agent theme ← Canonical mapping [The lion]NP1 that [the cheetah]NP2 chased was running. agent theme ← Canonical mapping

Linebarger and her colleagues argue that comprehension deficits lie only in mapping, not in parsing or in the syntactic representation itself. Their argument is supported by the findings that agrammatics perform well on a grammaticality judgment task (Linebarger et al., 1983), but poorly on sentence–picture matching tasks (Schwartz et al., 1980). These findings show that agrammatics can parse intact syntactic representations, but they cannot reliably interpret them. The supporting evidence for the MH comes from the contrast between agrammatics’ good performance on actives, subject relatives and subject clefts and their poor performance on passives, object relatives and object clefts. The NPs in the former constructions are in the canonical order and thus are assigned correct theta-roles by the linear strategy. On the other hand, in the latter, the order of NPs does not match the default order of theta-roles (i.e. agent + theme + goal) (cf. Caplan & Hildebrandt, 1988; Caramazza & Zurif, 1976; Grodzinsky, 1986, 1995a, b; Hickok & Avrutin, 1995; Kolk & van Grunsven, 1985; Schwartz et al., 1980, 1987). In Korean, too, Broca’s aphasics tend to interpret a NNV sequence as SOV, not as OSV, when the NPs are not specified for case (J. H. Kim, 2002). Proposals of this type have also been put forward by Caplan et al. (1985), Caplan and Futter (1986), St. John and Gernsbacher (1998), and Dick et al. (2001), among others. Although these proposals successfully account for the observed dissociation among a variety of syntactic constructions, they have

510

Miseon Lee

problems explaining not only good performance on lexical passives in English but also crosslinguistic data (see below for Korean data). Competence accounts The Trace-Deletion Hypothesis (TDH) Grodzinsky (1986, 2000) attributes a significant portion of the comprehension deficits in agrammatism to the loss of syntactic traces. This view draws upon the crosslinguistic observation that agrammatics are sensitive to the structures derived by transformational movement, such as passives, relatives, and clefts. Grodzinsky proposes the Trace-Deletion Hypothesis summarized in (4). (4) a. b.

The Trace-Deletion Hypothesis Traces are deleted from the syntactic representations of Broca’s aphasics. Phrasal constituents with no thematic role are assigned one by a default linear strategy (NP1 = Agent).

In the absence of traces, for example, two agents are identified in a passive sentence as in (5) – the sentence-initial NP because of the default linear strategy and the sentence-final NP by the usual grammatical mechanisms. The resulting ‘thematic competition’, Grodzinsky suggests, accounts for the chance-level performance often observed on these patterns. (5)

The lioni was chased ti by the cheetah. theme agent ← Normal interpretation agent agent ← Agrammatic interpretation

The TDH makes an important contribution to a general picture of the comprehension deficits associated with agrammatism, but it is not without problems. One difficulty, among others, is that there are syntactic structures which contain no trace but are severely impaired in agrammatic comprehension. English locative sentences (e.g. The lion is running behind the cheetah), for example, are impaired even though their NPs are base-generated (Kolk & van Grunsven, 1985; Schwartz et al., 1980). Another piece of counterevidence comes from the spared comprehension of Korean structures which are formed via movement (see below for details). The TDH incorrectly predicts that these structures should be intact. The Double-Dependency Hypothesis (DDH) The Double-Dependency Hypothesis (Mauner, Fromkin & Cornell, 1993) also concerns traces. Unlike the TDH, however, it maintains that traces survive, but that their relationships to their antecedents are disrupted.

Comprehension deficits in Korean agrammatic aphasia

(6)

511

The Double-Dependency Hypothesis (DDH) The dependency between a referential NP and its trace is disrupted in syntactic chains.

When there is only one antecedent-trace dependency as shown in (7a), the syntactic representation will be incomplete but still unambiguously interpretable. When there are two or more such dependencies as in (7b), on the other hand, the representation becomes semantically ambiguous and interpretive difficulties arise because of the ambiguous co-indexation between an NP and its antecedent. (7) a. b.

[The lion]i is t i chasing the cheetah. [The lion]i was chase+[en]j ti by [the cheetah]j.

Beretta and his colleagues (2001) report that three Korean and two Spanish agrammatics performed at chance level on scrambled actives (e.g. Korean: saca-lul kay-ka mwul-eyo ‘The lion, the dog is biting’), passives (e.g. saca-ka kay-eykey mwul-li-eyo ‘The lion is bitten by the dog’), and scrambled passives (e.g. kay-eykey saca-ka mwul-li-eyo ‘By the dog, the lion is bitten’) while performing above chance on simple actives. Based on the assumption that the three impaired structures contain two or more dependencies as exemplified in (8), they concluded that these results support the DDH. (8)

Passives kyengchal-ii kilin-eykeyj ti cha-i-taj. police-NOM giraffe-by kick-PASS-DECL The policeman is kicked by the giraffe.

A problem with this hypothesis concerns the impaired comprehension of English locative sentences (e.g. The lion is running behind the cheetah) (Kolk & van Grunsven, 1985; Schwartz et al., 1980) and Korean instrumental sentences (e.g. Ai-ka patak-ul piscalwu-lo ssul-ess-ta ‘The child swept the floor with a broom’) (M. Lee, 2000). Since these two structures contain only one antecedent-trace dependency under the VP-internal subject hypothesis, agrammatic aphasics should be able to interpret them correctly – contrary to fact. Sentence comprehension patterns in Korean agrammatism The theories of agrammatic comprehension discussed in the previous section successfully explain the comprehension patterns observed in English agrammatism. However, data from Korean calls into question the adequacy of the theories, as pointed out earlier. In this section, we first consider a version of the mapping hypothesis, which is based on the relationship between structures and their corresponding events. We then explore the experimental data from

512

Miseon Lee

studies of Korean scrambling and relative patterns and English locative and instrumental patterns. The Isomorphic Mapping Hypothesis (IMH) The Isomorphic Mapping Hypothesis (O’Grady & Lee, 2001), a version of the MH, maintains that agrammatic aphasics encounter processing difficulty when the order of sentential NPs is not isomorphically aligned with the structure of the corresponding event. Isomorphism is important for the syntax–semantics mapping because listeners presumably must construct a representation corresponding to the real-world event denoted by the sentence as they process its syntactic structure. (9)

The Isomorphic Mapping Hypothesis A non-isomorphic mapping between syntactic representations and the corresponding event increases processing difficulty.

In a typical transitive active sentence as in (10), the agent–theme order is isomorphic with the corresponding event, where an action originates with the agent and is directed toward the theme (e.g. Croft, 1991; Langacker, 1995; Pinker, 1989; Ritter & Rosen, 2004; Talmy, 1988; van Voorst, 1988). (10)

The cheetah kicked the lion ← agent–theme order agent acts on theme ← corresponding event

The agent–theme order thus presents an event’s participants in a conceptually advantageous manner, with the initiator of the action being mentioned before the entity to which the action is directed, and accordingly facilitates the comprehension process (Dik, 1989). In contrast, passive sentences as in (11) are nonisomorphic with the corresponding event, since the order of NPs does not reflect the event’s development. (11)

The lion was kicked by the cheetah ← theme–agent order agent acts on theme ← corresponding event

Since the non-isomorphic patterns manifest a non-canonical word order in English with trace-antecedent dependencies, however, it is not possible to choose between the IMH and other accounts based only on English data. Crucially, though, there are various pairs of constructions in Korean for which the predictions of the different theories can be teased apart. Such contrasts are discussed in the next section. Experimental data from Korean agrammatic comprehension Korean is basically an SOV language. However, it permits considerable variation in word order because the case-marking system provides enough information to

Comprehension deficits in Korean agrammatic aphasia

513

convey basic grammatical relations. Due to this characteristic of relatively free ordering of constituents, both non-isomorphic and isomorphic structures are to be found in Korean, using the same lexical items and thematic roles. The datives (goal–theme order), lexical passives (theme–agent), and instrumentals (theme– instrumental) in (12) are examples of non-isomorphic structures while their counterparts in (13) are isomorphic.2 (12)

Non-isomorphic structures (canonical word order) a. Datives: goal–theme order Ai-ka kay-eykey tol-ul tenci-ess-ta. child-NOM dog-DAT stone-ACC throw-PST-DECL ‘The child threw a stone to the dog.’ [order of NPs: agent + goal + theme] [corresponding event: agent → theme → goal] b. Lexical passives: theme–agent order Kay-ka ai-eykey mac-ass-ta. dog-NOM child-DAT be.hit-PST-DECL ‘The dog was hit by the child.’ [order of NPs: theme + agent] [corresponding event: agent → theme] c. Instrumentals: theme–instrumental order Ai-ka patak-ul piscalwu-lo ssul-ess-ta. child-NOM floor-ACC broom-INST sweep-PST-DECL ‘The child swept the floor with a broom.’ [order of NPs: agent + theme + instrumental] [corresponding event: agent → instrumental → theme]

(13)

Isomorphic structures (scrambled word order) a. Dative: theme–goal order Ai-ka tol-ul kay-eykey tenci-ess-ta. child-NOM stone-ACC dog-DAT throw-PST-DECL ‘The child threw a stone to the dog.’ [order of NPs: agent + theme + goal] [corresponding event: agent → theme → goal] b. Lexical passives: agent–theme order Ai-eykey kay-ka mac-ass-ta. child-DAT dog-NOM be.hit-PST-DECL

2

The agent–goal–theme pattern in (12a) represents the neutral or unmarked order (Sohn, 1996: 86), and it is commonly assumed that the theme–goal order in (13a) is derived from it via movement (see O’Grady & Lee, 2001; and Takano, 1998, for details).

514

Miseon Lee 100

% correct

80

60

40

20

0 TG

AT Isomorphic

IT

GT

TA

TI

Non-isomorphic

Figure 41.1. Agrammatic comprehension of Korean isomorphic and nonisomorphic constructions (from M. Lee, 2000)3

‘The dog was hit by the child.’ [order of NPs: agent + theme] [corresponding event: agent → theme] c. Instrumentals: instrumental–theme order Ai-ka piscalwu-lo patak-ul ssul-ess-ta. child-NOM broom-INST floor-ACC sweep-PST-DECL ‘The child swept the floor with a broom.’ [order of NPs: agent + instrumental + theme] [corresponding event: agent → instrumental → theme] Lee (2000) and O’Grady and Lee (2001, 2005) found in a series of act-out tasks that agrammatics were better at interpreting the scrambled but isomorphic structures in (13) than they were at comprehending the syntactically more basic and more frequent but non-isomorphic structures in (12). Figure 41.1 summarizes these findings. Using a picture-selection task, Son (2004) also found that fourteen Broca’s aphasic speakers performed better on the agent–theme order (i.e. isomorphic structures) than on the theme–agent order (i.e. non-isomorphic ones). That is, the aphasics successfully understood canonical actives (e.g. wenswungi-ka 3

TG = Theme–Goal order; AT = Agent–Theme order; IT = Instrumental–Theme order; GT = Goal–Theme order; TA = Theme–Agent order; TI = Theme–Instrumental order.

Comprehension deficits in Korean agrammatic aphasia

515

thokki-lul cha-ta ‘The monkey kicks the rabbit’) and scrambled syntactic passives (e.g. oli-hanthey thokki-ka mwul-li-ta ‘The rabbit is bit by the duck’) while having difficulty comprehending scrambled actives (e.g. thokki-lul wenswungi-ka cha-ta ‘The monkey kicks the rabbit’) and canonical passives (e.g. thokki-ka oli-hanthey mwul-li-ta ‘The rabbit is bit by the duck’). Comprehension patterns for relative clauses present another piece of supporting evidence for the IMH. Since a relative clause precedes the head NP in Korean, subject relatives are non-isomorphic and object relatives are isomorphic, as shown in (14). The IMH thus predicts object relatives are easier for agrammatics to interpret than subject relatives. (14) a. Subject relatives (non-isomorphic structure) [corresponding event: agent acts on theme] iss-nun] kanhosai [ti sonyen-ul mil-ko boy-ACC push-COMP be-REL nurse ‘The nurse who is pushing the boy’ b. Object relatives (isomorphic structure) [corresponding event: agent acts on theme] iss-nun] sonyeni [Kanhosa-ka ti mil-ko nurse-NOM push-COMP be-REL boy ‘The boy who the nurse is pushing’ In fact, Y. J. Kim (2002) reports that six Korean individuals with moderate Broca’s aphasia performed significantly better on object relatives than on subject relatives. Experimental data from English agrammatic comprehension Further evidence for the IMH comes from English. Previous studies of English agrammatic comprehension have shown that subject-raising constructions are well understood while comprehension of tough movement and double object patterns are disturbed (Caplan et al., 1985; Caplan & Futter, 1986; Heilman & Scholes, 1976; Schwartz et al., 1987). As briefly discussed earlier, other comprehension theories fail to account for these findings. The IMH, on the other hand, explains these constructions, given that subject-raising patterns are isomorphic while tough movement and double object patterns are both non-isomorphic, as shown in (15). (15) a. Subject-raising (isomorphic structure) The cheetah was likely to kick the lion. [corresponding event: agent acts on theme] b. Tough movement (non-isomorphic structure) The lion was easy for the cheetah to kick. [corresponding event: agent acts on theme]

516

Miseon Lee

c. Double object (non-isomorphic structure) The bear gave the frog the rabbit. [corresponding event: agent acts on theme moving it to goal] The isomorphism effect has also been found in English-speaking agrammatics’ poor comprehension of non-isomorphic instrumental sentences as in (16a), as compared to their normal comprehension of isomorphic topicalized instrumentals as in (16b) and locatives as in (16c) (O’Grady & Lee, 2005). (16) a. Canonical instrumental sentences (non-isomorphic structure) Tap the crayon with the pencil. [corresponding event: agent uses instrument to tap theme] b. Topicalized instrumental sentences (isomorphic structure) With the pencil, tap the crayon. [corresponding event: agent uses instrument to tap theme] c. Canonical locative sentences (isomorphic structure) Put the crayon on the pencil. [corresponding event: agent acts on theme placing it on location] Given the lack of syntactic traces in (16a) and (16c), these results favor the IMH while calling the competence accounts into question. The Mapping Hypothesis also incorrectly predicts poor performance on the topicalized instrumental sentences in (16b), since according to the MH, the linear strategy assigns a theme to the first NP, the pencil, and an instrument to the second, the crayon, based only on word order. Summary There is relatively little work on agrammatic aphasia in Korean. However, research on Korean agrammatism has been accumulating data regarding syntactic deficits, confirming that most, if not all, characteristics noted in the literature for speakers of other languages are also found in Korean patients. As for the sentence comprehension deficits, the findings in the literature suggest that non-isomorphic constructions (e.g. theme–agent, goal–theme, and theme–instrument orders) are affected, regardless of whether there is a trace, both in Korean and in English. These findings reveal the effects of a preference for isomorphism, supporting the processing accounts for comprehension deficits in agrammatism, rather than the competence accounts. In particular, the IMH, a processing account, claims that agrammatics have difficulty establishing a nonisomorphic mapping between a syntactic structure and the corresponding event in the real world. It therefore provides a principled explanation for the word-order preferences associated with agrammatic aphasia.

42

Developmental reading disorders in Korean Jeesun Kim and Chris Davis

Abstract In this article we consider some prominent features of the semi-syllabic Korean writing system (Hangul) and suggest how these might give rise to a distinct profile of reading disorder in dyslexic readers. We begin with a brief review of possible causes of developmental reading disorders and provide a short description of some significant features of the Hangul writing system in terms of why these may promote differences in the profile of Korean and English poor readers. We then review data from a recent study of good and poor developing Korean readers. The outcomes of this study are discussed in terms of the key findings that characterize Korean poor readers: the specific nature of their phonological awareness problems despite the lack of problems in processing dynamic visual stimuli. In explaining these results, we suggest that although the transparency of grapheme-to-phoneme mapping in Korean may assist in the development of intact phonological representations, problems may still occur in putting these representations to use. In accounting for why relatively few Hangul readers had visual processing problems, we propose that the straightforwardness of alphabetic depiction in Hangul and the constraint on letter ordering and placement, make it less likely that minor visual processing problems would lead to reading difficulties. Introduction Dyslexia, or specific reading disability, traditionally has been defined as the failure to acquire reading proficiency despite an average level of non-verbal intelligence, a supportive learning environment and no apparent physical, emotional or behavioral problems. Rather than simply outlining exclusion criteria, more recent definitions of dyslexia (e.g. Tallal, 2000) have proposed specific attributes that characterize the disorder. A common theme of these more explicit definitions is the proposal that dyslexics experience difficulty in word decoding due to failure of phonological processing systems to adequately represent the component structure of words. There is a continuing debate about the exact cause 517

518

Jeesun Kim and Chris Davis

of this deficit, specifically, about whether the problem arises due to low-level sensory deficits or whether it occurs at a more abstract level of representation. In this chapter, we argue for an approach that goes beyond identification of a single primary disorder. We suggest that a more sophisticated account will acknowledge that reading depends upon multiple processes with interactions between the biological, cognitive and behavioral processing domains (see Frith, 1999 for a discussion of these levels). In outlining this approach we will specify the properties likely to underpin skilled reading and relate these to recent proposals concerning deficits. We will then go on to consider how such deficits might interact with processes in reading to give rise to different behavioral manifestations across language. Finally, we will present some illustrative data from Korean and English good and poor readers that demonstrate the utility of this approach for providing a fuller characterization of reading disorders. Problem readers: types of processing difficulty Reading is an intricate, multifaceted process that demands the rapid integration of information at multiple levels of processing. Not only does the development of skilled reading build on a substantial level of competence in spoken language but it also relies on the development of other processing domains (i.e. the ability to rapidly discriminate among visual stimuli, to remember letter order and maintain attention). To this end, skilled reading reflects the performance of a developed system that coordinates multi-sensory processes with selfmonitoring at sensory and cognitive levels. The precise nature of the core deficit that characterizes poor readers in English is currently of considerable debate. For instance, Snowling (2000) argues that there is now a large body of evidence for a primarily phonological deficit and that this cannot be explained in terms of impairments in low-level auditory mechanisms but reflects higher-level language weaknesses. Others disagree, arguing that the problem lies with the functioning of more sensorybased processes (Talcott & Witton, 2002). In the following we will outline these views and provide a description of the types of tasks that have been used to obtain supporting data. Sensory processing deficits A straightforward account of dyslexia proposes that higher-level linguistic processing is compromised by perceptual processing problems (termed the ‘sensory-linguistic’ approach by Talcott & Witton, 2002). There are many different proposals concerning the types of sensory deficit that might give rise to dyslexia; for present purposes we will review those concerning the visual and auditory processing domains.

Developmental reading disorders

519

The proposal that a visual processing deficit underlies dyslexia has been most vigorously advanced by Lovegrove and colleagues. In essence, the claim is that dyslexics have a faulty visual transient system (signified by an impaired ability to process rapidly changing visual stimuli; for a review see Lovegrove, 1996). It was argued that this impairment results in reading problems due to inadequate inhibition of visual persistence by the transient system. The study by Burr, Morrone and Ross (1994) has essentially undermined this theory by showing that in saccadic suppression it is the transient system that inhibits transient rather than sustained activity. There are, however, alternative mechanisms for dyslexics’ poor reading that can plausibly be linked to inadequate transient functioning. These accounts are usually expressed in terms of deficits in what has been presumed to be the physiological correlate of the transient system (magnocellular function) and tend to be more physiological than cognitive (e.g. unsteady binocular control, Stein & Fowler, 1981). Talcott and Witton (2002) have suggested that the best evidence for visual processing problems comes from tasks that engage more central visual processes such as detecting coherent motion (assessed using Random Dot Kinematic (RDK) displays). It has also been suggested that deficits in auditory processing may play a role in dyslexia (e.g. Tallal, 1980; Farmer & Klein, 1995). Under this view, difficulties in processing rapid or briefly presented stimuli lead to inadequate perception of the acoustic properties of speech. This failure to adequately process speech is thought to restrict phonemic analysis and thus impair a reader’s ability to use phonological analysis to constrain and supplement orthographic processing (Tallal, 2000). Evidence consistent with an auditory processing deficit account of dyslexia comes from a wide range of tasks, e.g. auditory detection (McCroskey & Kidder, 1980; Haggerty & Stamm, 1978); same–different tone matching (Tallal, 1980); determining the order of two rapidly presented tones (Tallal, 1980). Stein and Walsh (1997) have suggested that these deficits are caused by abnormalities in an auditory magnocellular channel analogous to that found in vision. However, the auditory deficit account has been the subject of considerable criticism. For example, it has been argued that some of the tasks that have shown differential performance by poor and normal readers are confounded by response demands (e.g. Marshall, Snowling & Bailey, 2001). Another problem with the auditory processing deficit view is that many studies have found that such deficits typically affect less than a third of dyslexic children (Adlard & Hazan, 1998; Manis, McBride-Chang, Seidenberg, Keating, Doi, Munson & Peterson, 1997; Rosen & Manganari, 2001; Reed, 1989; Tallal, 1980; Wright, Lombardino, King, Puranik, Leonard & Merzenich, 1997). One recent suggestion as to why this may be the case is that there may be different sub-types of reading deficit (see Borsting, Ridder, Dudeck, Kelly, Matsui & Motoyama, 1996; Au & Lovegrove, 2001).

520

Jeesun Kim and Chris Davis

Higher level problems Most current hypotheses about the basis of dyslexia assume some kind of deficit in the representation, storage and processing of information about speech (see, for example, Liberman, 1996; Lundberg, 1989; Pratt & Brady, 1988; Snowling, 2000; Vellutino & Scanlon, 1987). This deficit is primarily indicated by a lack of ability to decode unfamiliar written words and a lack of awareness of the phonemic segments of spoken words (Rack, Snowling & Olson, 1992; Schulte-Korne, Deimel, Bartling & Remschmidt, 1998). Although the precise aetiology of the phonological disorder is unclear, it does not appear to be necessarily due to low-level perceptual problems since there are cases where phonological disorders exist without sensory ones (e.g. Bishop, Carlyon, Deeks & Bishop, 1999; see also Marshall et al., 2001; Nittrouer, 1999). When might processing problems lead to reading problems? Having outlined some potential causes of dyslexia at the sensory and cognitive levels we will now consider factors that may explain how such problems may be expressed in behaviour. The importance of this level of analysis can best be demonstrated using crosslinguistic comparisons. Transparency The phonological transparency or degree of regularity in grapheme-to-phoneme (G-P) mappings of a writing system has long been considered to play a substantial role in both learning to read and in the process of reading itself (e.g. Cossu, Shankweiler, Liberman, Katz & Tola, 1988). In order to highlight those aspects of reading development for which the degree of phonological transparency might play a role, we present a schematic account of the functional demands of reading and of the processes that may develop to meet these. A thumbnail description of the process of reading is that it involves establishing a mapping between a printed linguistic form and an appropriate sound and meaning. Broadly then, the development of reading is essentially a process of learning how the writing system encodes the language. This process is likely to be based upon segmented phonological representations developed through speech perception and the acquisition of a sizeable verbal lexicon (see Walley, Metsala & Garlock, 2003). Although exposure to print might lead to the establishment of an initially small idiosyncratic sight vocabulary, this style of processing becomes superseded in favor of alphabetic processing. That is, as reading skills increase, holistic representations become restructured and children develop appropriately segmented phonological and orthographic representations. This in turn allows for a richer system of orthographic–phonological

Developmental reading disorders

521

links that may include morphologically based groupings (a process that has been described as going from smaller units to bigger ones by Duncan, Seymour & Hill, 2000). On this view, skilled reading involves, among other things, the development of processes that map orthography to phonology at several ‘grain sizes’. A reason why the development of orthographic and phonological mappings should be emphasized is that proficiency at this process enables the utilization of a self-learning scheme that can, given the appropriate type of script, generalize to written words that have not been previously encountered (see Share, 1995). That is, by understanding the principles of an alphabet, a child can use their existing knowledge of the sounds of words to derive clear hypotheses about how a word should be written. For example, in the case of a regular writing system in which the mapping of phonology to orthography is transparent, maximal consistency in deriving one code from the other can be achieved by developing orthographic–phonological links at the grapheme– phoneme level. However, in the case of an irregular system, a larger grain size may also be required to achieve a more consistent mapping. Indeed, an irregular writing system like English may require the development of several different processing strategies, which take as their input different-sized letter groupings (see Treiman, Mullennix, Bijeljac-Babic & Richmond-Welty, 1995). The development of orthographic and phonological mappings is likely to be impaired when a child has phonological processing problems. Script format The notion that the structural properties of a script might influence reading processes is a research issue that received attention in the past but has fallen out of current favor (see DeStefano, 1978; Gibson & Levin, 1975). This research program was largely interested in quantifying and describing attributes of English orthography that might be involved in visual discrimination. This approach focused on the bottom-up aspects of reading and its concern about the discriminability of words has parallels with recent work on the development of speech perception. This latter work has shown that variations in the familiarity of individual lexical items and their phonological similarity relations are associated with advances in speech representation and provide a basis for the development of phonological awareness (Charles-Luce & Luce, 1995; Garlock, Walley & Metsala, 2001; Jusczyk, 1993). More specific to the written domain, the work of Castles, Davis and Letcher (1999) has also shown that the number of words a target word looks like has an effect on the way that it is processed. Consideration of the competitor environment in the development of visual recognition raises the question of its association with poor reading abilities. One approach to this question has been pursued by Stein and

522

Jeesun Kim and Chris Davis

colleagues (see Stein, 2001 for a review). This work assesses the potential for anomalous visual processing to inhibit reading development and draws on the results of a number of functional imaging studies that suggest that at least some dyslexics have reduced activation of visual areas in response to moving visual targets (Demb, Boynton, Best & Heeger, 1998; Eden, van Meter, Rumsey, Maisog, Woods & Zeffiro, 1996). In essence, the idea is that some poor readers have a compromised motion detection system and so have problems with processes important for reading (problems with stabilizing eye movements, directing visual attention and with visual search). Stein (2001) speculates that children with such problems cannot reliably work out the order of letters or lay down reliable memories of the common spelling patterns that govern their orthography. In summary then, reading involves an initial process of visual discrimination that is enhanced and constrained by orthographic, phonological and morphological analyses made on the basis of knowledge of the language and writing systems. As a way of organizing aspects of this chapter we point out those instances where a language system provides some scaffolding for learning. In the following, we outline the different levels over which the Korean orthographic system might make a difference in learning and processing and thus modulate the expression of reading problems. Although for convenience we have dealt with each of these separately, it must be remembered that they all contribute to a system of writing. Some features of Korean Korean Hangul consists of twenty-four basic letters (fourteen basic consonants and ten basic vowels) with each letter formed very simply and distinctly. In what follows we focus upon aspects of visual format and on factors that may affect the learning of print-to-sound correspondences. Learning how letters map to sounds There are a number of features of Hangul that would make letter-to-sound mapping easy to learn and would also make letter recognition a relatively simple task. The Hangul alphabet is largely unique in that the consonantal letters were designed to partially indicate the shapes of the articulators, i.e. a featural writing system (see Sampson, 1985; Kim-Renaud, 1997). Hangul consonants are divided into five classes corresponding roughly to articulation (bilabial, apical, sibilant, velar and laryngeal). These classes are represented by stylised depictions of the articulations involved. For instance, the symbols for /n/ or /t/ show the tongue-tip raised to touch the front of the palate, whereas the symbol for /k/ indicates that the back of the tongue touches the rear of the palate. Each

Developmental reading disorders

523

letter is visually distinctive and is composed of one to four strokes (i.e. mostly straight lines, vertical or horizontal and one circle character). The construction of these characters typically is related to the complexity of the sound represented (e.g. a line is added for aspiration, also complex vowels are often composites of the simple vowel characters). Consistency of letters and sound mapping Hangul is a regular alphabet with reliable grapheme–phoneme mappings. Compared to an irregular language, regular languages provide several properties that may make learning to read relatively straightforward. For instance, unambiguous grapheme–phoneme mappings assist in the development of robust phonological representations that are linked to orthographic representations. These rich links between phonological and orthographic representations may further reduce the cognitive demands of reading since written word recognition receives both orthographic and phonological support. Number of sounds and their ordering Developing readers may also capitalize on another feature of Korean that differs from English. In comparison to English, Korean has a more restricted phonological inventory. In Korean there are no clusters at the beginning of the syllable and limited cases of clusters used as last consonants. There is also a constraint on the ordering of vowels and consonants and on which consonants can be syllable final. Syllabic structure and representation Learning to read appears to be greatly aided by an understanding of how a language’s phonology and orthography relate. For instance, compared to English, Korean has more consistency in the timing of each syllable (see Pak, 1998 on a comparison of Korean and English). What is more, Hangul alphabetic characters are grouped into square blocks that represent syllables, with each block separated and a larger space between words. The distinctiveness of the syllable in both the spoken and written forms offers the beginning-reader an opportunity to form a link between them. Korean and English poor readers The above review of the properties of spoken Korean and Hangul point to a number of salient differences compared with English. In the following section we outline the key results of comparisons of Korean and English good and poor

524

Jeesun Kim and Chris Davis

readers on a range of perceptual- and language-processing tasks (Kim & Davis, 2004). The Korean and English poor readers were selected on the basis of scoring 1.5 SD below the population on a standardized reading test but having normal nonverbal IQ scores. The control groups of Korean and English readers were selected based on having average scores for the reading and nonverbal tests. A continuous performance task was also administered to assess inattentiveness (see Beale, Mathew, Oliver & Corballis, 1987). Performance on this task measures sustained attention by requiring children to respond selectively to 10 percent of approximately 240 successively presented line drawings. There were no differences in error rates between the good and poor Korean or English readers. However, both Korean and English poor readers were slower in making their responses. Sensory-level processing The association of the operation of more basic sensory processing mechanisms with poor reading was assessed using tasks that required the detection of dynamic visual and auditory stimuli (e.g. stimuli that require the perception of a dimension that changes in time). Two tasks of visual processing were conducted: an RDK task (see Pammer & Wheatley, 2001) and the Ternus task (Davis, Castles, McAnally & Gray, 2001). The RDK task measures apparent motion thresholds by briefly displaying some randomly distributed illuminated dots in one set of locations and then in new positions. The Ternus task measures a reader’s ability to efficiently group moving visual stimuli. In neither task did Korean poor readers perform differently from the good readers. However, English poor readers showed both elevated RDK and Ternus thresholds compared to the good readers. This suggests that the English poor readers had problems in effectively processing dynamic visual stimuli. Two types of auditory processing task were also tested: a same–different tone judgment (Tallal, 1980) and an auditory streaming task (Helenius, Uutela & Hari, 1999). The same–different task required children to make a same or different judgment about the pitch of two tones. The auditory streaming task measured the threshold of auditory stream segregation (Bregman, 1990). Unlike the results of the visual tasks, both of the auditory tasks showed worse performance for poor readers compared to good readers. That is, in the same–different task, Korean poor readers made more errors than the good readers did (but only for inter-stimulus intervals (ISIs) < 60 ms). On the streaming task, the poor readers showed elevated change thresholds (the ISI when a streaming auditory percept changed to a discontinuous one; however, this was only the case for about half of the poor readers). The English data revealed a different pattern.

Developmental reading disorders

525

Although the poor readers made more errors in the same–different task than the good readers, this was the case for all ISIs tested (a result similar to that of Bishop et al., 1999). As with the Korean data, English good and poor readers showed differences in the auditory streaming test but once again, this was only for a proportion of the group. Phonological tasks Two types of phonological tasks were tested: word and non-word pronunciation and an odd-one-out task. Once again, the Korean and English good and poor readers showed slightly different patterns of performance. In the naming task, the only difference between Korean good and poor readers was for naming nonwords (almost no errors were made by either group in reading words). The error difference was particularly clear for non-existent-syllable non-words (non-words constructed from pronounceable syllables that do not appear in any words). On the other hand, English poor readers were worse at reading words as well as nonwords. Performance on the odd-one-out task was similar for both Korean and English readers with the poor readers making significantly more errors. Performance across tasks For the good and poor Korean readers, the number of errors made in the same–different tone matching task (for ISIs freq(y)

LDT(x) in the above definitions means reaction time in the lexical decision task. Freq(x) and len(x) are functions computing frequency and length of word x. The above definition of the word-length effect means that humans recognize word x faster than word y even though the frequency of the word x is greater than or equal to that of word y. The word-frequency effect means that humans recognize word x faster than word y when frequency of word x is greater than that of word y. Inspiration from machine readable dictionaries It is very important to find out how the mental lexicon is organized and how a lexical item is accessed in order to understand human lexical processing. It is also very important to make a human-oriented efficient machine-readable dictionary (MRD) for natural language processing. Efficient memory structure and fast accessibility are ultimate goals in building an MRD. There have been many structures proposed to make efficient MRDs such as B-tree structure, hashing, and trie (Horowitz, Sahni & Freed, 1992). We can guess some principles of the mental lexicon through investigation of the previous MRDs’ structures and their operating algorithms. A B-tree is an m-way search tree to which we can easily make modification through insertion or deletion of an item, in which maximal search time increases proportionally to the total number of items in the dictionary. In hashing, we store items in a fixed-size table called a hash table. An arithmetic function f, which is called a hashing function, is used to determine the address of an item when inserting and searching for the item. If we use a perfect hashing function, we can get information about an item by direct access, regardless of the total number of items in the dictionary. However, we must construct a new hashing table whenever a new item is inserted or deleted.

Computational model of lexical processing

a

b

c

d

e

…

y

543

z

A node of array type

a

c

u

z

A node of linked list type Figure 44.1. Structures of a 26-element array and a linked list

A trie is a structure for storing strings, in which there is one node for every common prefix. The strings are stored in extra leaf nodes. The origin of the name is from the middle section of the word ‘reTRIEval,’ and this origin hints at its usage. The trie data structure is based on two principles: a fixed set of indices and hierarchical indexing. The first requirement is usually met by indexing dictionary items alphabetically. For example, at the top level we have a 26-element array or a linked list which we shall call a node. Each of the node’s elements may point to another 26-element node, and so on. Figure 44.1 represents structures of a 26-element array and a linked list. One of the advantages of the trie data structure is that its search time depends on only the length of an item, not on the number of stored items. Another advantage is that we can easily get a set of words with the same prefix, which is not so easy in the other dictionary structures presented above. As discussed in the previous section, the unit of the Korean mental lexicon is assumed to be the full-form word and it is possible to store full-form words in the previous MRD structures. However, it is hard to simulate frequency and length effects by using a conventional hashing or B-tree index structure. In the trie structure, although the frequency effect is hard to simulate, we can simulate the length effect due to the principle of hierarchical indexing. Table 44.1 shows the capacities of the different MRDs with the characteristics of the Korean mental lexicon and lexical recognition. Frequency-based trie model Our goal in modeling the Korean mental lexicon is to build a model which can simulate or reflect phenomena induced from Korean lexical recognition: full-form representation, the length effect, and the frequency effect. The trie

544

HeuiSeok Lim and Kichun Nam

Table 44.1. The capacities of MRDs simulating Korean lexical recognition Capacities

B-tree

Hashing

Trie

Full-form representation Length effect Frequency effect

○ X X

○ X X

○ ○ X

typedef struct node { char ch; int freq; struct node *next; struct node *child; short int isfinal; } nodetype;

Figure 44.2. Data structure of a node of an FB-trie

structure appears to be the most promising for this; if we make some modifications to reflect the frequency effect, the trie structure can satisfy our requirements. We propose a frequency-based trie (FB-trie) to make the simple trie structure reflect the frequency effect. The proposed FB-trie is a modified trie structure which can satisfy the following requirements. 1) The full form of a Korean word is stored in the trie. 2) The structure of a node is a linked list structure. 3) The alphabet in a node is a set of Korean phonemes. 4) The alphabet elements in a node are sorted in descending order of frequency. Whereas in the general trie structure the alphabets in a node are sorted alphabetically, the fourth requirement is needed to model the frequency effect, which means more frequent words are accessed faster by visiting minimal elements and nodes. We tried to model language proficiency by adjusting the size of the corpus in indexing; larger for the proficiency of an adult or an expert and smaller for that of an infant or novice. The data structure for a node and an indexing algorithm of FB-trie are presented in Figure 44.2 and Figure 44.3, respectively. In Figure 44.2, ‘ch’ is a variable to store a phoneme and ‘freq’ is a variable to store the frequency of the phoneme. The variable ‘next’ points to the next element in a node in which the current element exists and the variable ‘child’

Computational model of lexical processing

545

Table 44.2. Experimental results of the correlation between frequency and human reaction time and between length and human reaction time in Eojeol recognition

Human Trie1 Trie2 FB-trie1 FB-trie2

Corr. of Frequency

Corr. of Length

− 0.222 − 0.03258 − 0.06674 − 0.15169 − 0.21718

0.227 0.58241 0.497034 0.460327 0.337082

1) Get a set of unique Eojeols in a corpus and count the frequency of each unique Eojeol. 2) For each unique Eojeol 2.1) Convert the Eojeol into sequences of phonemes 2.2) Insert the sequences of phonemes into a trie. Increase freq of each phoneme by frequency of the current word. 3) Traverse all nodes of the trie made in step 2) and sort phoneme elements of each node by descending order of frequency of the phoneme. 4) Output the trie made in step 3)

Figure 44.3. Indexing algorithm of an FB-trie

points to the hierarchically next node. The variable ‘isfinal’ is a flag to indicate whether a node is a final node of a word or not. Experimental results of the proposed FB-trie We constructed two FB-tries with two training corpora of about 12 million Eojeols and 7 million Eojeols, respectively. We also made two tries with both training corpora for the purpose of comparison with FB-tries. Table 44.2 shows the experimental results of the correlation between frequency and human reaction time and between length and human reaction time in Eojeol recognition. In Table 44.2, Trie1 and Trie2 represent tries trained with a corpus of 7 million Eojeols and a corpus of 12 million Eojeols, respectively. Similarly, FBtrie1 and FB-trie2 represent FB-tries trained with a 7 million-Eojeol corpus and 12 million-Eojeol corpus. The human results in the first row are taken from Nam et al. (1997). The results are very promising in that correlations of frequency and length with human reaction times are higher with the larger training corpus than with

546

HeuiSeok Lim and Kichun Nam

the smaller. We aimed to model language ability or proficiency with the size of the training corpus. Correlations of the frequency of Trie1 and Trie2 are very small while those of FB-trie1 and FB-trie2 are relatively large and very similar to those of human recognition. The reason for the high correlation of the length of Trie1 and Trie2 is due to an inherent characteristic of the trie indexing structure which means that it required more time to retrieve a longer string. We can see that this characteristic is alleviated in the FB-tries, resulting in a higher correlation with human Eojeol recognition. Conclusion In this chapter, we introduced some aspects of Korean lexical and morphological processing and a computational model of the human mental lexicon. The proposed model is based on a trie composed of nodes of a linked list type, with elements in each node sorted by frequency of phonemes in a corpus. We showed with some experimental results that the model reflects frequency and length effects, which are important in Korean Eojeol recognition. In addition, we found some interesting phenomena when simulating an FB-trie. First, Eojeols with a high-frequency neighborhood of syllables are likely to be accessed faster than those with less frequent ones. Second, the difference between the frequencies of phonemes at the boundary between morphemes is very high and prominent. We guessed that this would be a clue to acquiring a morpheme based on many experiences with Eojeols of that morpheme. We are preparing a subsequent study on building a computational model which can encompass neighborhood effects and morpheme acquisition.

References

Aaronson, Doris and Ferres, Steven 1983. Lexical categories and reading tasks. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 9, 675–99. Abney, Steven 1987. The English noun phrase in its sentential aspect. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, MIT. Adams, Karen and Conklin, N. F. 1973. Toward a theory of natural classification. Paper from the ninth regional meeting of the Chicago Linguistic Society, 1–10. Adlard, Alan and Hazan, Valerie 1998. Speech perception abilities in children with specific reading difficulties (dyslexia). Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 51, 153–77. Aguiar Andréa and Baillargeon, Renée 1998. Eight-and-a-half-month-old infants’ reasoning about containment events. Child Development, 16, 636–53. Ahn, Hee-Don 1991. Light verbs, VP-movement, negation and clausal architecture of Korean and English. Doctoral dissertation, University of Wisconsin, Madison. Ahn, Hee-Don and Yoon, Hang-Jin 1989. Functional categories in Korean. In Harvard Studies in Korean Linguistics III (pp. 79–88). Department of Linguistics, Harvard University. Ahn, Seong-Woo 1997. Is manually coded Korean language? [in Korean]. Communication Disorders, 20, 49–65. Ahn, Sung-Ho 1990. Korean quantification and Universal Grammar. Doctoral dissertation, University of Connecticut. Ahn, Tae Sun, Hwang, Mina, Park, Chang Il and Kim, Duk Yong 2002. Production of grammatical morphemes in adults with Broca’s aphasia [in Korean]. In Proceedings of the Annual Conference of Korean Academy of Speech-Language Pathology and Audiology in 2002 (pp. 162–9). Ainsworth-Darnell, Kim, Shulman, Harvey and Boland, Julie 1997. Dissociating brain responses to syntactic and semantic anomalies: evidence from event-related brain potentials. Journal of Memory and Language, 38, 112–30. Aissen, Judith 2003. Differential object marking: iconicity vs. economy. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory, 21, 435–83. Akatsuka, Noriko (ed.) 1995. Japanese/Korean Linguistics 4. Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications. Akatsuka, Noriko, Hoji, Hajime, Iwasaki, Shoichi, Sohn, Sung-Ock and Strauss, Susan (eds.) 1998. Japanese/Korean Linguistics 7. Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications. Akatsuka, Noriko, Iwasaki, Shoichi and Strauss, Susan (eds.) 1996. Japanese/Korean Linguistics 5. Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications. 547

548

References

Akatsuka, Noriko, Strauss, Susan and Comrie, Bernand (eds.) 2002. Japanese/Korean Linguistics 10. Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications. Akhtar, Nameera 1999. Acquiring basic word order: Evidence for data-driven learning of syntactic structure. Journal of Child Language, 26, 339–56. Aksu-Koç, Ayhan 1988. The Acquisition of Aspect and Modality: the Case of Past Reference in Turkish. Cambridge University Press. Aksu-Koç, Ayhan A. and Slobin, Dan I. 1985. The acquisition of Turkish. In Slobin, Dan I. (ed.), The Crosslinguistic Study of Language Acquisition (vol. II: The Data). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. 1986. A psychological account of the development and use of evidentials in Turkish. In Chafe, Wallace L. and Nichols, Johanna (eds.) Evidentiality: the Linguistic Coding of Epistemology. Norwood, NJ: Ablex. Allen, Shanley E. M. and Schröder, Heike 2003. Preferred argument structure in early Inuktitut spontaneous speech data. In Du Bois, Kumpf and Ashby (eds.) Preferred Argument Structure: Grammar as Architecture for Function. Anderson, Steven 1971. On the role of deep structure in semantic interpretation. Foundations of Language, 6, 197–219. Annett, Marian 1970. Classification of hand preference by association analysis. British Journal of Psychology, 61, 303–21. Antinucci, Francesco and Miller, Ruth 1976. How children talk about what happened. Journal of Child Language, 3, 167–89. Appel, Renè and Muysken, Peter 1987. Language Contact and Bilingualism. London: Edward Arnold. Arvaniti, Amalia and Baltazani, Mary 2005. Intonational analysis and prosodic annotation of Greek spoken corpora. In Jun, Sun-Ah (ed.), Prosodic Typology: the Phonology of Intonation and Phrasing. London/New York: Oxford University Press. Ås, Arvid 1962. The recovery of forgotten language knowledge through hypnotic age regression: a case report. American Journal of Clinical Hypnosis, 5, 24–9. Asher, James and Garcia, Ramiro 1969. The optimal age to learn a foreign language. Modern Language Journal, 53, 334–41. Au, Agnes and Lovegrove, Bill 2001. Temporal processing ability in above average and average readers. Perception and Psychophysics, 63, 148–55. Au, Terry Kit-fong 2007. Salvaging heritage languages. In Brinton, Donna and Kagan, Olga (eds.), Heritage Language Acquisition: a New Field Emerging (pp. 337–51). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Au, Terry Kit-fong, Dapretto, Mirella and Song, You-kyung 1994. Input vs. constraints: early word acquisition in Korean and English. Journal of Memory and Language, 33, 567–82. Au, Terry Kit-fong, Knightly, Leah M., Jun, Sun-Ah and Oh, Janet Sae 2002. Overhearing a language during childhood. Psychological Science, 13, 238–43. Au, Terry Kit-fong and Romo, Laura 1997. Does childhood language experience help adult learners? In Chen, Hsuan-chih (ed.), The Cognitive Processing of Chinese and Related Asian Languages (pp. 417–41). Hong Kong: Chinese University Press. Auer, Peter 1984. Bilingual Conversation. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.

References

549

1992. Introduction: John Gumperz’ approach to contextualization. In Auer, Peter and di Luzio, Aldo (eds.), The Contextualization of Language (pp. 1–38). Amsterdam/ Philadelphia: John Benjamins. (ed.) 1998. Code-switching in Conversation: Language, Interaction and Identity. London/New York: Routledge. Azuma, Shoji 1996. Speech production units among bilinguals. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 25 (3), 397–416. Baddeley, Alan D. 1986. Working Memory. Oxford University Press. Baek, Judy Yoo-Kyung 1997. Negation and object shift in early child Korean. In The Interpretive Tract, MIT Working Papers in Linguistics (vol. 25, pp. 73–86). Cambridge, MA: MITWPL. 2000. Acquisition of negation in Korean: object constructions in the optional infinitive stage. Language Research, 36, 181–203. Baek, Judy Yoo-Kyung and Wexler, Kenneth 2000. The role of the unique checking constraint in the syntax and acquisition of Korean negation. Unpublished manuscript. Bailes, Cynthia N. 2001. Integrative ASL-English language arts: bridging paths to literacy. Sign Language Studies, 1, 147–74. Baillargeon, Renée 1995. A model of physical reasoning in infancy. In Rovee-Collier, Carolyn and Lipsett, Lewis P. (eds.), Advances in Infancy Research (vol. 9, pp. 305–71). Norwood, NJ: Ablex. Baillargeon, Renée and Hanko-Summers, Stephanie 1990. Is the top object adequately supported by the bottom object? Young infants’ understanding of support relations. Cognitive Development, 5, 29–53. Baker, Carl 1979. Syntactic theory and the projection problem. Linguistic Theory, 10, 533–81. Baker, Mark 1988. Incorporation. University of Chicago Press. Baluch, Bahman and Besner, Derek 1991. Visual word recognition: evidence for strategic control of lexical and nonlexical routines in oral reading. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 17, 644–52. Bamberg, Michael 1996. Emotion talk(s): the role of perspective in the construction of emotions. In Niemeier, Susanne and Dirven, René (eds.), The Language of Emotions (pp. 209–25). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Banaji, Mahzarin R. and Hardin, Curtis D. 1996. Automatic stereotyping. Psychological Science, 7, 136–41. Bang, Hee-Jeong 1990. The contextual effects on reference resolution during text comprehension [in Korean]. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Ewha Woman’s University, Korea. Barnum, Martha 1984. In support of bilingual/bicultural education for deaf children. American Annals of the Deaf, 129, 404–48. Bartke, Susanne 2004. Passives in German children with Williams Syndrome. In Bartke, Susanne and Siegmueller, Julia (eds.), Williams Syndrome Across Languages (pp. 345–70). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Bassano, Dominique, Hickmann, Maya and Champaud, Christian 1992. Epistemic modality in French children’s discourse: “to be sure” or “not to be sure”? Journal of Child Language, 19, 389–414.

550

References

Bastiaanse, Roelien, Jonker, Roel, Quak, Christine and Put, Maria Varela 1996. The production of finite and nonfinite verb forms in agrammatism. Brain and Language, 55, 1–11. Bates, Elizabeth, Dale, Philip S. and Thal, Donna 1994. Individual differences and their implications for theories of language development. In Fletcher, Paul and MacWhinney, Brian (eds.), Handbook of Child Language (pp. 96–151). Oxford: Basil Blackwell. Bates, Elizabeth, Devescovi, Antonella and Wulfeck, Beverly 2001. Psycholinguistics: a cross-language perspective. Annual Review of Psychology, 52, 369–96. Bates, Elizabeth, Friederici, Angela D. and Wulfeck, Beverly 1987a. Grammatical morphology in aphasia: evidence from three languages. Cortex, 23, 545–74. 1987b. Comprehension in aphasia: a crosslinguistic study. Brain and Language, 32, 19–67. Bates, Elizabeth and MacWhinney, Brian 1982. Functionalist approaches to grammar. In Wanner, Eric and Gleitman, Lia R. (eds.), Language Acquisition: the State of Art. New York: Cambridge University Press. 1987. Competition, variation, and language learning. In MacWhinney, Brian (ed.), Mechanisms of Language Acquisition (pp. 157–93). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. 1989. Functionalism and the competition model. In MacWhinney, Brian and Bates, Elizabeth (eds.), The Crosslinguistic Study of Sentence Processing (pp. 3–73). Cambridge University Press. Bates, Elizabeth, Marchman, Virginia, Thal, Donna, Fenson, Larry, Dale, Philip, Reznick, Steven J., Reilly, Judy and Hartung, Jeff 1994. Developmental and stylistic variation in the composition of early vocabulary. Journal of Child Language, 21 (1), 85–124. Baumgaertner, Annette, Weiller, Cornelius and Büchel, Christian 2002. Event-related fMRI reveals cortical sites involved in contextual sentence integration. Neuroimage, 16, 736–45. Beale, Ian L., Mathew, Peter J., Oliver, Simon and Corballis, Michael. C. 1987. Performance of disabled and normal readers on the continuous performance test. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 15, 229–38. Beckman, Mary E. and Ayers-Elam, Gayle 1997. Guidelines for ToBI Labelling. Online MS and accompanying files. Available at www.ling.ohio-state.edu/research/phonetics/E_ToBI/. Beckman, Mary E. and Pierrehumbert, Janet B. 1986. Intonational structure in Japanese and English. Phonology Yearbook, 3, 255–309. Bedecker, William and Caramazza, Alfonso 1986. A final brief in the case against agrammatism: the role of theory in the selection data. Cognition, 24, 277–82. Belazi, Hedi, Rubin, Edward and Toribio, Jacquiline 1994. Code-switching and X-bar theory: the functional head constraint. Linguistic Inquiry, 25 (2), 221–37. Bell-Berti, Fredericka, Raphael, Lawrence J., Pisoni, David B. and Sawusch, James R. 1979. Some relationships between articulation and perception. Phonetica, 36 (6), 373–83. Bellugi, Ursula 1971. Simplification in children’s language. In Huxley, Renira and Ingram, Elisabeth (eds.), Language Acquisition: Models and Methods. New York: Academic Press.

References

551

Bentivoglio, Paola 1990. The late acquisition of preferred argument structure in Venezuelan spoken Spanish. In Carol, Bernard (ed.), Proceedings of the XVIth International Congress of Linguists. Amsterdam: Elsevier. Beretta, Alan, Piñango, Maria, Patterson, Janet and Harford, Cardyn 1999. Recruiting comparative crosslinguistic evidence to address competing accounts of agrammatic aphasia. Brain and Language, 67, 149–68. Beretta, Alan, Schmitt, Cristina, Halliwell, John, Munn, Alan, Cuetos, Fernando and Kim, Sujung 2001. The effects of scrambling on Spanish and Korean agrammatic interpretation: why linear models fail and structural models survive. Brain and Language, 79, 407–25. Berk-Seligson, Susan 1986. Linguistic constraints on intrasentential code-switching: a study of Spanish/Hebrew bilingualism. Language in Society, 15, 313–48. Berlin, Brent and Kay, Paul 1969. Basic Color Terms: Their Universality and Evolution. Berkeley: University of California Press. Berman, Ruth 1994. Developmental perspectives on transitivity: a confluence of cues. In Levy, Yonata (ed.), Other Children, Other Languages: Issues in the Theory of Language Acquisition. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Berndt, Rita Sloan and Caramazza, Alfonso 1999. How regular is sentence comprehension in Broca’s aphasia? It depends on how you select the patients. Brain and Language, 67, 242–7. Berndt, Rita Sloan, Mitchum, Charlotte C. and Haendiges, Anne N. 1996. Comprehension of reversible sentences in “agrammatism”: a meta-analysis. Cognition, 58, 289–308. Berndt, Rita Sloan, Mitchum, Charlotte C., Haendiges, Anne N. and Sandson, Jennifer 1997. Verb retrieval in aphasia: 1. characterizing single word impairments. Brain and Language, 56, 68–106. Berndt, Rita Sloan, Mitchum, Charlotte C. and Wayland, Sarah 1997. Patterns of sentence comprehension in aphasia: a consideration of three hypotheses. Brain and Language, 60, 197–221. Berwick, Robert C. 1985. The Acquisition of Syntactic Knowledge. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Bever, Thomas G. 1970. The cognitive basis for linguistic structures. In Hayes, John R. (ed.), Cognition and the Development of Language (pp. 274–353). New York: Wiley. 1974. The ascent of the specious, or there’s a lot we don’t know about mirrors. In Cohen, David. (ed.), Explaining Linguistic Phenomena (pp. 173–200). Washington: Hemisphere. Bialystok, Ellen 1997. The structure of age: in search of barriers to second language acquisition. Second Language Research, 13, 116–37. Bialystok, Ellen and Hakuta, Kenji 1994. In Other Words: the Science and Psychology of Second-Language Acquisition. New York: Basic Books. 1999. Confounded age: linguistic and cognitive factors in age differences for second language acquisition. In Birdsong, David (ed.), Second Language Acquisition and the Critical Period Hypothesis (pp. 161–81). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Bialystok, Ellen and Miller, Barry 1999. The problem of age in second-language acquisition: influence from language, structure, and task. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 2 (2), 127–45.

552

References

Bickerton, Derek 1989. The child, the bioprogram and the input data: a commentary on Cziko. First Language, 9 (25), 33–7. Bien, Zeungnam, Jang, Won, Kim, Jung-Bae, Kim, Dae-Jin and Cho, Sung Sik 2000. Development of sign language translation system for the education of hearing impaired people [in Korean]. In A Report of Korea Advanced Institute of Science and Technology (KAIST). Bierwisch, Manfred 1967. Some semantic universals of German adjectivals. Foundations of Language, 5, 153–84. Birch, Stacy L. and Garnsey, Susan M. 1995. The effect of focus on memory for words in the sentences. Journal of Memory and Language, 34, 232–67. Birdsong, David (ed.) 1999. Second Language Acquisition and the Critical Period Hypothesis. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Bishop, Dorothy V. M., Carlyon, Robert P., Deeks, John M. and Bishop, Sonia J. 1999. Auditory temporal processing impairment: neither necessary nor sufficient for causing language impairment in children. Journal of Speech, Language and Hearing Research, 42, 1295–1310. Bjork, Elizabeth L. and Bjork, Robert A. 1996. Continuing influences of to-be-forgotten information. Consciousness and Cognition: An International Journal, 5, 176–96. Bjork, Robert A. and Bjork, Elizabeth L. 1992. A new theory of disuse and an old theory of stimulus fluctuation. In Healy, Alive F., Kosslyn, Stephen M. and Shiffrin, Richard M. (eds.), From Learning Processes to Cognitive Processes: Essays in Honor of William K. Estes (vol. II, pp. 35–67). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum. Bley-Vroman, Robert 1990. The logical problem of foreign language learning. Linguistic Analysis, 20 (1–2), 3–49. 1996. Conservative pattern accumulation in foreign language learning. Paper presented at the EUROSLA 6 Conference. 1997. Features and patterns in foreign language learning. Paper presented at Second Language Research Forum, Michigan State University. Bley-Vroman, Robert, Felix, Sascha and Ioup, Georgia 1988. The accessibility of Universal Grammar in adult language learning. Second Language Research, 4 (1), 1–32. Bley-Vroman, Robert and Kweon, Soo-Ok 2002. Acquisition of the constraints on wanna-contraction by advanced second language learners: Universal Grammar and imperfect knowledge. (www.sls.hawaii.edu/bley-vroman/). Bloom, Lois 1970. Language Development: Form and Function in Emerging Grammars. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. 1973. One Word at a Time. The Hague: Mouton. Bloom, Lois, Lightbrown, Patsy and Hood, Lois 1975. Structure and variation in child language. Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development, 40 (Serial No. 160). Bloom, Paul 2000, How Children Learn the Meanings of Words, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Boeschoten, Hendrik and Verhoeven, Ludo 1987. Language-mixing in children’s speech: Dutch language use in Turkish discourse. Language Learning, 37, 191–215. Bolinger, Dwight 1980. Language, the Loaded Weapon. London: Longman.

References

553

1981. Consonance, dissonance, and grammaticality: the case of wanna. Language and Communication, 1, 189–206. Bongaerts, Theo, van Summeren, Chantal, Planken, Brigitte and Schils, Erik 1997. Age and ultimate attainment in the pronunciation of a foreign language. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 19, 447–65. Boothroyd, Arthur 1986. Speech Acoustics and Perception. Austin: Pro-Ed. Borer, Hagit and Wexler, Kenneth 1987. The maturation of syntax. In Roeper, Thomas and Williams, Edwin (eds.), Parameter Setting (pp. 123–72). Dordrecht: Reidel. 1992. Bi-unique relations and the maturation of grammatical principles. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory, 10, 147–89. Borsting, Eric, Ridder, William H., Dudeck, Kisten, Kelley, Carol, Matsui, Lisa and Motoyama, Janice 1996. The presence of magnocellular dyslexia depends on the type of dyslexia. Vision Research, 36, 1047–53. Bortolini, U., Caselli, M. and Leonard, L. 1997. Grammatical deficits in Italian-speaking children with specific language impairment. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 41, 1185–92. Bowerman, Melissa 1973. Early Syntactic Development: a Crosslinguistic Study, With Special Reference to Finnish. Cambridge University Press. 1982. Reorganizational processes in lexical and syntactical development. In Wanner, Eric and Gleitman, Lila R. (eds.), Language Acquisition: the State of the Art (pp. 319–46). Cambridge University Press. 1990. Mapping thematic roles onto syntactic functions: are children helped by innate linking rules? Linguistics, 28, 1253–89. 1996. Learning how to structure space for language: a crosslinguistic perspective. In Bloom, Paul, Peterson, Mary, Nadel, Lynn and Garrett, Merrill F. (eds.), Language and Space (pp. 385–486). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Bowerman, Melissa and Choi, Soonja 1994. Linguistic and nonlinguistic determinants of spatial semantic development: a crosslinguistic study of English, Korean, and Dutch. Presented at the Boston University Conference on Language Development, Boston, MA. 2001. Shaping meanings for language: universal and language-specific in the acquisition of spatial semantic categories. In Bowerman, Melissa and Levinson, Steven C. (eds.), Language Acquisition and Conceptual Development (pp. 475–511). Cambridge University Press. 2003. Space under construction: language-specific spatial categorization in first language acquisition. In Gentner, Dedre and Glodin-Meadow, Susan (eds.), Language in Mind: Advances in the Study of Language and Thought (pp. 387–428). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Bowerman, Melissa and Pederson, Eric 1992. Crosslinguistic perspectives on topological spatial relationships. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Anthropological Association, San Francisco, CA. Boysson-Bardies, Benedict 1999. How Language Comes to Children. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Boysson-Bardies, Benedict, Sagart, Laurent and Durand, Catherine 1984. Discernible differences in the babbling of infants according to target language. Journal of Child Language, 11, 1–15.

554

References

Bradley, Diane 1980. Lexical representation of derivational relation. In Aronoff, Mark and Kean, Mary-Louise (eds.), Juncture (pp. 37–55). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Braine, Martin D. S. 1976. Children’s first word combinations. Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development, 41 (1, Serial No. 164). Braine, Martin D. S., Brody, Ruth E., Fisch, Shalom M., Weisberger, Mara J. and Blum, Monica 1990. Can children use a verb without exposure to its argument structure? Journal of Child Language, 17, 313–42. Braine, Martin D. S. and Brooks, Patricia J. 1995. Verb argument structure and the problem of avoiding an overgeneral grammar. In Tomasello, Michael and Merriman, William E. (eds.), Beyond Names for Things: Young Children’s Acquisition of Verbs (pp. 331–52). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Brausse, Ursula 1998. Was ist Asverstivitaet? aber oder und? [in German]. Deutsche Sprache, 26, 138–59. Quoted in Ewald Lang 2000. Bregman, Alan S. 1990. Auditory Scene Analysis: the Perceptual Organization of Sounds. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Brinkmann, Ursula 1997. The Locative Alternation in German: Its Structure and Acquisition (Language Acquisition and Language Disorder 15). Amsterdam/ Philadelphia: John Benjamin. Brooks, Patricia J. and Braine, Martin 1996. What do children know about the universal quantifiers all and each? Cognition, 60, 235–68. Brooks, Patricia J. and Tomasello, Michael 1999. How children constrain their argument structure constructions. Language, 75, 720–38. Brooks, Patricia J. and Zizak, Otto 2002. Does preemption help children learn verb transitivity? Journal of Child Language, 29, 759–81. Broselow, Ellen and Finer, Daniel 1991. Parameter setting in second language phonology and syntax. Second Language Research, 7, 35–59. Brown, H. Douglas 1971. Children’s comprehension of relativized English sentences. Child Development, 42, 1923–36. Brown, Penelope 1994. The INs and ONs of Tzeltal locative expressions: the semantics of static descriptions of location. Linguistics, 32, 743–90. 1998. Early Tzeltal verbs: Argument structure and argument representation. In Clark, Eve (ed.), The Proceedings of the Twenty-ninth Annual Child Language Research Forum (pp. 129–40). Stanford University: CSLI Publications. Brown, Roger 1973. A First Language: the Early Stage. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Brown, Roger and Bellugi, Ursula 1964. Three processes in the child’s acquisition of syntax. In Lenneberg, Eric (ed.), New Directions in the Study of Language (pp. 131–61). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Brown, Roger and Fraser, Colin 1963. The acquisition of syntax. In Cofer, Charles N. and Musgrave, Barbara S. (eds.), Verbal Behavior and Learning: Problems and Processes (pp. 158–97). New York: McGraw-Hill. Bruce, Gösta 1977. Swedish Word Accents in Sentence Perspective. Lund University Press. Bucci, Wilma 1978. The interpretation of universal affirmative propositions: a developmental study. Cognition, 6, 55–77. Budwig, Nancy and Narasimhan, Bhuvana 2001. Input variation and the development of argument structure: an examination of Hindi-speaking caregiver-child

References

555

discourse. Paper presented at the Society for Research in Child Development, Minneapolis, MA. Burr, David C., Morrone, M. Concetta and Ross, John 1994. Selective suppression of the magnocellular visual pathway during saccadic eye movements. Nature, 371, 511–13. Butterworth, Brian 1983. Lexical Representation. In Butterworth, Brian (ed.), Language Production (vol. II, pp. 257–94). San Diego, CA: Academic Press. Caplan, David 1983. A note on the “word-order problem” in agrammatism. Brain and Language, 20, 155–65. 1985. Syntactic and semantic structures in agrammatism. In Kean, Mary-Louise (ed.), Agrammatism (pp. 125–52). New York: Academic Press. 1991. Agrammatism is a theoretically coherent aphasic category. Brain and Language, 40, 274–81. 1995. Issues arising in contemporary studies of disorders of syntactic processing in sentence comprehension in agrammatic patients. Brain and Language, 50, 325–38. Caplan, David, Baker, Catherine and Dehaut, François 1985. Syntactic determinants of sentence comprehension in aphasia. Cognition, 21, 117–75. Caplan, David and Futter, Christine 1986. Assignment of thematic roles to nouns in sentence comprehension by an agrammatic patient. Brain and Language, 27, 117–34. Caplan, David and Hildebrandt, Nancy 1988. Disorders of Syntactic Comprehension. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Caplan, David and Waters, Gloria S. 1999. Verbal working memory and sentence comprehension. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 22, 77–94. Caramazza, Alfonso, Laudanna, Alessandro and Romani, Cristina 1988. Lexical access and inflectional morphology. Cognition, 28, 207–332. Caramazza, Alfonso and Zurif, Edgar B. 1976. Dissociation of algorithmic and heuristic processes in language comprehension: evidence from aphasia. Brain and Language, 3, 572–82. Carey, Susan 1978. The child as word learner. In Halle, Morris, Bresnan, Joan and Miller, George A. (eds.), Linguistic Theory and Psychological Reality (pp. 264–93). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. 1994. Does learning a language require the child to reconceptualize the world? Lingua, 92, 143–67. Carpenter, Kathie 1987. How children learn to classify nouns in Thai. Doctoral dissertation, Stanford University. 1991. Later rather than sooner: extra-linguistic categories in the acquisition of Thai Classifiers. Journal of Child Language, 18, 93–113. Carreiras, Manuel, Alvarez, Carlos and de Vega, Manuel 1993. Syllable frequency and visual word recognition in Spanish. Journal of Memory and Language, 32, 766–80. Carreiras, Manuel, Gernsbacher, Morton A. and Villa, Victor 1995. The advantage of first-mention in Spanish. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 2, 124–9. Casasola, Marianella and Cohen, Leslie 2002. Infant categorization of containment, support and tight-fit spatial relationships. Developmental Science, 5, 247–64. Caselli, Maria Cristina, Bates, Elizabeth, Casadio, Paola, Fenson, Judi, Fenson, Larry, Sanderl, Lisa and Weir, Judy 1995. A crosslinguistic study of early lexical development. Cognitive Development, 10, 159–99.

556

References

Castles, Anne, Davis, Chris and Letcher, Tessa 1999. Neighbourhood effects in masked form-priming in children and adults. Language and Cognitive Processes, 14, 201–24. Cazden, Courtney 1968. The acquisition of noun and verb inflections. Child Development, 39, 433–48. Chafe, Wallace L. 1987. Cognitive constraints on information flow. In Tomlin, Russell S. (ed.), Coherence and Grounding in Discourse. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 1994. Discourse, Consciousness, and Time: the Flow and Displacement of Conscious Experience in Speaking and Writing. University of Chicago Press. Chamberlain, Charlene, Morford, Jill P. and Mayberry, Rachel I. (eds.), 2000. Language Acquisition By Eye. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Chang, Frederick R. 1980. Active memory process in visual sentence comprehension: clause effects and pronominal reference. Memory and Cognition, 8, 58–64. Chang, Sok-Chin 1996. Korean (London Oriental and African Language Library vol. 4). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Chang, Suk-Jin 1977. Korean reflexive pronoun caki and its referential NP’s point of view [in Korean]. Language Research, 13 (1), 35–48. Chang-Song, You-kyung 1997. Early word acquisition in Korean: evidence for constraints View (I) [in Korean]. Korean Journal of Human Development, 4 (1), 76–86. 2004. Early lexical development of Korean infants: 8~17 months [in Korean]. Korean Journal of Psychology, 23 (1), 77–99. Chang-Song, You-kyung and Pae, Soyeong 2003. Noun versus verb bias revisited. Korean Journal of Speech Sciences, 10, 131–41. Charles-Luce, Jan and Luce, Paul A. 1995. An examination of similarity neighbourhoods in young children’s receptive vocabularies. Journal of Child Language, 22, 727–35. Chay, Wan 1990. Functions and meanings of Korean classifiers [in Korean]. Cintanhakpo, 70. Chen, Chunhui, Zhou, Xinlin, Chen, Chuansheng, Dong, Qi, Zang, Yufeng, Qiao, Sibing, Yang, Tao and Gong, Qiyong 2007. The neural basis of processing anomalous information. Neuroreport, 18, 747–51. Chen, Hsuan-Chih, Flores d’Arcais, Giovanni B. and Cheung, Sim-Ling 1995. Orthographic and phonological activation in recognizing Chinese characters. Psychological Research, 58, 144–53. Chiat, Shulamuth 1981. Context-specificity and generalization in the acquisition of pronominal distinctions. Journal of Child Language, 8, 75–91. Chiba, Tsutomu and Kajiyama, Masato 1941. The Vowel – Its Nature and Structure. Tokyo: Kaiseikan. Chien, Yu-Chin and Wexler, Kenneth 1987. A comparison between Chinese-speaking and English-speaking children’s acquisition of reflexives and pronouns. Paper presented at the 12th Annual Boston University Conference on Language Development. CHILDES 2005. Jiwon corpus accessible in zip format at http://childes.psy.cmu.edu/ data/EastAsian/Korean/. Cho, Choon-Hak 1975. The scope of negation in Korean. In The Korean Language: Its Structure and Social Projection. The Center for Korean Studies, University of Hawaii.

References

557

Cho, Dong-In 1994. Functional projections and verb movement. In Kim-Renaud, Young-Key (ed.), Theoretical Issues in Korean Linguistics (pp. 233–54). Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications. Cho, Jeung-Ryeul and Chen, Hsuan-Chih 1998. Phonology and orthography in recognizing Hanja in skilled and less-skilled readers [in Korean]. Korean Journal of Experimental and Cognitive Psychology, 10, 17–35. 1999. Orthographic and phonological activation in the semantic processing of Korean Hanja and Hangul. Language and Cognitive Processes, 14 (5/6), 481–502. 2005. Semantic and phonological processing in reading Korean Hangul and Hanja words. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 34, 401–14. Cho, Kyung-Hee and Lee, Jung-Mo 1992. The processing characteristics of contrast information embedded in different story structures and in different abstraction level [in Korean]. Korean Journal of Experimental and Cognitive Psychology, 4, 76–92. Cho, Kyung-Ja and Han, Kwang-Hee 1996. The effect of syllable type and familiarity on Hangul recognition processing [in Korean]. In Proceedings of Spring Conference of the Korean Society for Cognitive Science (pp. 179–89). Cho, Kyu-Young and Jin, Young-Sun 1991. The effect of length and visual angle in reading rotated Korean words [in Korean]. Korean Journal of Experimental and Cognitive Psychology, 3, 63–75. Cho, Sookeun 1999. The acquisition of relative clauses: experimental studies on Korean. Doctoral dissertation, University of Hawaii at Manoa. Cho, Sook Whan 1981. The acquisition of word order in Korean. Master’s thesis, University of Calgary. 1985. Issues in the structure and acquisition of Korean anaphora. An unpublished doctoral dissertation submitted to the University of Alberta. Edmonton, Alberta. 1989. Parameter, subset principle, and the acquisition of the Korean reflexive pronoun. In Proceedings for the Cognitive Science Conference (pp. 296–301). Seoul, Korea. 1991. Null subjects in complements and adjuncts in Korean. In Lee, Chungmin and Whitman, John B. (eds.), Korean Syntax and Semantics: ‘91 LSA Linguistic Institute Workshop. Seoul, Korea: Thae-Hak-Sa. 1992. The syntax and acquisition of ‘kyay’ (‘s/he’) and ‘caki’(‘self’) [in Korean]. Studies in Generative Grammar, 2, 361–92. 1994. Null arguments and mood categories. In Kim-Renaud, Young-Key (ed.), Theoretical Issues in Korean Linguistics (pp. 443–62). Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications. 1996. Caki (‘self’) as a nominal anaphor and a free pronoun in Korean. Paper presented at the annual convention organized by the Linguistic Society of America (LSA – 1996). 1999. Caki as a Jekyll and Hyde. In Harvard Studies in Korean Linguistics VIII (pp. 252–65). 2001. Subjectless sentences spoken by young children in Korean. Qualifying paper. Harvard University. 2002. Lexical and semantic idiosyncracies of the predicates and caki (‘self’) in Korean. Ene-wa Cengpo Sahoy (Language and Information Society), 1, 1–20.

558

References

2004. Syntax, Pragmatics, and Acquisition of Korean Reflexive Anaphora. Seoul, Korea: Sogang University Press. Cho, Taehong 1996. Vowel correlates to consonant phonation: an acoustic-perceptual study of Korean obstruents. M.A. thesis, University of Texas at Arlington. Cho, Taehong and Keating, Patricia 2001. Articulatory strengthening at the onset of prosodic domains in Korean. Journal of Phonetics, 28, 155–90. Cho, Young-Mee Yu 1987. Phrasal phonology of Korean. In Kuno, Susumu, Lee, Ik-Hwan, Whitman, John, Bak, Sung-Yun and Kang, Young-Se (eds.), Harvard Studies in Korean Linguistics III. Seoul, Korea: Hanshin. Cho, Young-Mee Yu and Hong, Ki-Sun 1988. Evidence for the VP constituent from child Korean. In Papers and Reports on Child Language Development 27. Stanford, CA: Department of Linguistics, Stanford University. Choe, Hyŏn-bae 1971. Uri Malbon. Seoul, Korea: Chŏngŭm-sa (originally published in 1937). Choe, Hyun-Sook 1988. Restructuring parameters and complex predicates: a transformational approach. Doctoral dissertation, MIT. Choi, Gwon-Jin 1997. Viewpoint shifting in Korean and Bulgarian: the use of kinship terms. Pragmatics, 7 (3), 389–95. Choi, Jae-Oh 1991. Korean-English code switching: switch-alpha and linguistic constraints. Linguistics, 29, 877–902. Choi, Kwangill 2001. Ambiguity of relative clause in Korean. Unpublished Master’s thesis, Ajou University. Choi, Kwangill and Kim, Youngjin 2002. Ambiguity of relative clause attachment in Korean. The Korean Journal of Experimental and Cognitive Psychology, 14, 187–204. Choi, Sang-bae and Ahn, Seong-Woo 2003. Analysis of relationship between Korean Sign Language ability and reading ability [in Korean]. Journal of Special Education, 10, 151–68. Choi, Soonja 1988. Caregiver input in English and Korean: use of nouns and verbs in book-reading and toy-play contexts. Journal of Child Language, 27, 69–96. 1991. Early acquisition of epistemic meanings in Korean: a study of sentenceending suffixes in the spontaneous speech of three children. First Language, 11, 93–119. (ed.) 1993. Japanese/Korean Linguistics 3. Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications. 1995. The development of epistemic sentence-ending modal forms and functions in Korean children. In Bybee, Joan and Fleischman, Suzanne (eds.), Modality in Grammar and Discourse. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: Benjamins. 1997. Language-specific input and early semantic development: evidence from children learning Korean. In Slobin, Dan I. (ed.), The Crosslinguistic Study of Language Acquisition (vol. 5: Expanding the Contexts, pp. 41–133). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. 1998a. Acquisition of Korean. In Leonard, Laurence (ed.), Language Acquisition in North America: Cross Cultural and Crosslinguistic perspectives (pp. 281–336). San Diego, CA: Singular. 1998b. Verbs in early lexical and syntactic development in Korean. Linguistics, 36, 755–80.

References

559

1999. Early development of verb structures and caregiver input in Korean: two case studies. International Journal of Bilingualism, 3, 241–65. 2000. Caregiver input in English and Korean: use of nouns and verbs in book-reading and toy-play contexts. Journal of Child Language, 27, 69–96. 2002. Language-specific influences on early semantic and cognitive development. presented at the International Congress for the Study of Child Language (IASCL), Madison, WI. 2006. Acquisition of modality. In Frawley, William (ed.), The Expression of Modality. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. Choi, Soonja and Bowerman, Melissa 1991. Learning to express motion events in English and Korean: the influence of language-specific lexicalization patterns. Cognition, 41, 83–121. Choi, Soonja and Gopnik, Alison 1995. Early acquisition of verbs in Korean: a crosslinguistic study. Journal of Child Language, 22, 497–529. Choi, Soonja, McDonough, Laraine, Bowerman, Melissa and Mandler, Jean 1999. Early sensitivity to language-specific spatial categories in English and Korean. Cognitive Development, 14, 241–68. Choi, Yang-Gyu 1986. The influence of the number of syllables on recognition of Korean words [in Korean]. Master’s thesis, Pusan National University. Choi, Youngon 2003. Preschool aged children’s use of prosody in sentence processing: the case of Korean children. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Duke University. Choi, Youngon and Mazuka, Reiko 2001. Are prosodic units universally important to children in their early language acquisition? Korean children’s detection and use of language-specific prosodic units. Journal of Cognitive Science, 2 (2), 171–93. 2003. Young children’s use of prosody in sentence parsing. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 32, 197–217. Choi, Young-Sik 1999. Negation, its scope and NPI licensing in Korean. In Daly, Rebecca and Riehl, Anastasia (eds.), Proceedings of ESCOL (pp. 25–36). Cornell University. Chomsky, Noam 1965. Aspects of the Theory of Syntax. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. 1977. On Wh-Movement. In Culicover, Peter, Wasow, Thomas and Akmajian, Adrian (eds.), Formal Syntax (pp. 71–132). New York: Academic Press. 1980a. On binding. Linguistic Inquiry, 11, 1–46. 1980b. Rules and Representations. New York: Columbia University Press. 1981. Lectures on Government and Binding. Dordrecht: Foris. 1986a. Barriers. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. 1986b. Knowledge of Language: Its Nature, Origin, and Use. New York: Praeger. 1995. The Minimalist Program. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Chomsky, Noam and Lasnik, Howard 1977. Filters and control. Linguistic Inquiry, 8, 425–504. 1978. A remark on contraction. Linguistic Inquiry, 9, 268–74. Christensen, Kathee M. 1993. A multicultural approach to education of children who are deaf. In Christensen, Kathee M. and Delgado, Gilbert L. (eds.), Multicultural Issues in Deafness (pp. 17–27). White Plains, NY: Longman.

560

References

2000. Emerging literacy in bilingual/multicultural education of children who are deaf: a communication-based perspective. In Christensen, Kathee M. (ed.), Deaf Plus: a Multicultural Perspective (pp. 41–58). San Diego, CA: Dawn Sign Press. Chun, Nan-hee 1998. The study for development of literal vocabulary ability in deaf students [in Korean]. M.A. thesis, Kong-Ju National University. Chung, Daeho and Park, Hong-Keun 1997. NPIs outside of negation scope. In Sohn, HoMin and Haig, John (eds.), Japanese/Korean Linguistics 6 (pp. 415–35). Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications. Chung, GyeongHee No 1994. Acquisition of Case marking in Korean. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Texas, Austin. Cinque, Guglielmo 1999. Adverbs and Functional Heads: a Crosslinguistic Perspective. Oxford University Press. Clancy, Patricia M. 1980. Referential choice in English and Japanese narrative discourse. In Chafe, Wallace L. (ed.), The Pear Stories: Cognitive, Cultural, and Linguistic Aspects of Narrative Production (pp. 127–202). Norwood, NJ: Ablex. 1984. The acquisition of subjects in Korean. Paper presented at the Ninth Annual University Conference on Language Development. Boston, USA. 1985. The acquisition of Japanese. In Slobin, Dan I. (ed.), The Crosslinguistic Study of Language Acquisition (vol. I: The Data).Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. (ed.) 1993. Japanese/Korean Linguistics 2. Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications. 1993. Preferred argument structure in Korean acquisition. In Clark, Eve (ed.), The Proceedings of the Twenty-fifth Annual Child Language Research Forum (pp. 307–14). Stanford University: CSLI Publications. 1995. Subject and object in Korean acquisition: surface expression and casemarking. In Kuno, Susumu, Whitman, John, Kang, Young-Se, Lee, Ik-Hwan, Maling, Joan and Kim, Young-Joo (eds.), Harvard Studies in Korean Linguistics VI (pp. 3–17). Seoul, Korea: Hanshin Publishing Co. 1996. Referential strategies and the co-construction of argument structure in Korean acquisition. In Fox, Barbara (ed.), Studies in Anaphora (pp. 33–68). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 1997. Discourse motivations for referential choice in Korean acquisition. In Sohn, Homin and Haig, John (eds.), Japanese/Korean Linguistics 6 (pp. 639–59). Stanford University: CSLI Publications. 2000. Transitivity in Korean acquisition: discourse-functional foundations. In Clark, Eve (ed.), The Proceedings of the 13th Annual Child Language Research Forum. Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications. (ed.) 2002. Japanese/Korean Linguistics 11. Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications. 2003. The lexicon in interaction: developmental origins of preferred argument structure in Korean. In Du Bois, John W., Kumpf, Lorraine and Ashby, William (eds.), Preferred Argument Structure: Grammar as Architecture for Function (pp. 81–108). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Clancy, Patricia M., Lee, Hyeonjin and Zoh, Myeong-Han 1986. Processing strategies in the acquisition of relative clauses: universal principles and language-specific realizations. Cognition, 24, 225–62. Clark, Eve V. 1973a. What’s in a word? On the child’s acquisition of semantics in his first language. In Moore, Timothy (ed.), Cognitive Development and the Acquisition of Language (pp. 65–110). New York: Academic Press.

References

561

1973b. Non-linguistic strategies and the acquisition of word meanings. Cognition, 2, 161–82. 1977. Universal categories: on the semantics of classifiers and children’s early word meaning. In Juilland, Alphonse (ed.), Linguistic Studies Offered to Joseph Greenberg (pp. 449–62). Sarratoga, CA: Anma Libri and Co. 1987. The principle of contrast: a constraint on language acquisition. In MacWhinney, Brian (ed.), Mechanisms of Language Acquisition: the 20th Annual Carnegie Symposium on Cognition. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. 1993. The Lexicon in Acquisition. Cambridge University Press. Clark, Herbert H. 1965. Some structural properties of simple active and passive clauses. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 4, 365–70. 1973. Space, time, semantics, and the child. In Moore, Timothy E. (ed.), Cognitive Development and the Acquisition of Language (pp. 27–63). New York: Academic Press. Clifton, Charles, Jr. 2000. Evaluating models of human sentence processing. In Crocker, Matthew W., Pickering, Martin and Clifton, Charles (eds.), Architecture and Mechanisms for Language Processing (pp. 31–55). Cambridge University Press. Clifton, Charles, Jr., Traxler, Matthew J., Mohamed, Mohamed Taha, Williams, Rihana, S., Morris, Robin, K. and Rayner, Keith, E. 2003. The use of thematic role information in parsing: syntactic processing autonomy revisited. Journal of Memory and Language, 49, 317–34. Clumeck, Harold 1980. The acquisition of tone. In Yeni-Komshian, Grace H., Kavanagh, James F. and Ferguson, Charles A. (eds.), Child Phonology (vol. I: Production). New York: Academic Press. Coates, Jennifer 1988. The acquisition of the meanings of modality in children aged eight and twelve. Journal of Child Language, 15, 425–34. Cole, Pascale, Segui, Juan and Taft, Marcus 1997. Words and morphemes as units for lexical access. Journal of Memory and Language, 37, 312–30. Cole, Peter, Hermon, Gabriella and Sung, Li-May 1990. Principles and parameters of long-distance reflexives. Linguistic Inquiry, 21, 1–22. Cole, Peter and Sung, Li-May 1994. Head movement and long-distance reflexives. Linguistic Inquiry, 25, 355–406. Coltheart, Max 1980. Reading phonological recoding and deep dyslexia. In Coltheart, Max, Patterson, Karalyn and Marshal, John, C. (eds.), Deep Dyslexia (pp. 197–226). London: Routledge and Kegan Paul. Coltheart, Max, Rastle, Kathleen, Perry, Conrad, Langdon, Robin and Ziegler, Johannes 2001. DRC: a dual route cascade model of visual word recognition and reading aloud. Psychological Review, 108, 204–56. Comrie, Bernard 1984. Form and function in explaining language universals. In Butterworth, Brian, Comrie, Bernard, and Dahl, Osten (eds.), Explanations for Language Universals (pp. 87–103). The Hague: Mouton. Conway, Andrew R. A. and Engle, Randy W. 1994. Working memory and retrieval: a resource-dependent inhibition model. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 123, 354–73. Copland, David, de Zubicaray, Greig, McMahon, Katie, Wilson, Stephen, Eastburn, Matt and Chenery, Helen 2003. Brain activity during automatic semantic

562

References

priming revealed by event-related functional magnetic resonance imaging. Neuroimage, 20, 302–10. Corbett, Albert T. and Chang, Frederick R. 1983. Pronoun disambiguation: accessing potential antecedent. Memory and Cognition, 16, 283–98. Cortese, Michael, Simpson, Greg and Woolsey, Steph 1997. Effects of association and imageability on phonological mapping. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 4, 226–31. Cosky, Michael J. 1976. The role of letter recognition in word recognition. Memory and Cognition, 4, 204–14. Cossu, Giuseppe, Shankweiler, Donald, Liberman, Isabelle, Katz, Leonard and Tola, Giuseppe 1988. Awareness of phonological segments and reading ability in Italian children, Applied Psycholinguistics, 9, 1–16. Craig, Colette G. 1986. Jacaltec noun classifiers: a study in language and culture. In Craig, Colette G. (ed.), Noun Classes and Categorization: Proceedings of a Symposium on Categorization and Noun Classification (pp. 264–94). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Crain, Stephen and McKee, Cecile 1985. The acquisition of structural restrictions on anaphora. In Proceedings of NELS 16. Crain, Stephen and Thornton, Rosalind 1998. Investigations in Universal Grammar: a Guide to Research in Acquisition of Syntax and Semantics. Cambridge: MIT Press. Crain, Stephen, Thornton, Rosalind, Boster, Carole, Conway, Laura, Lillo-Martin, Diane and Woodams, Elaine 1996. Quantification without qualification. Language Acquisition, 5 (2), 83–153. Crocker, Matthew W. 1996. Computational Psycholinguistics. Dordrecht: Kluwer. Croft, William 1991. Syntactic Categories and Grammatical Relations. University of Chicago Press. Crystal, David 1979. Prosodic development. In Fletcher, Paul and Garman, Michael (eds.), Language Acquisition. Cambridge University Press. Cutler, Anne and Butterfield, Sally 1992. Rhythmic cues to speech segmentation: evidence from juncture misperception. Journal of Memory and Language, 31, 218–36. Cutler, Anne, Mehler, Jacques, Norris, Dennis and Segui, Juan 1986. The syllable’s differing role in the segmentation of French and English. Journal of Memory and Language, 25, 385–400. Daneman, Meredyth and Carpenter, Patricia A. 1980. Individual differences in working memory and reading. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 19, 450–66. Daneman, Meredyth and Green, Ian. 1986. Individual differences in comprehending and producing words in context. Journal of Memory and Language, 25, 1–18. Davidson, Donald 1967. The logical form of action sentences. In Rescher, Nicholas (ed.), The Logic of Decision and Action. University of Pittsburgh Press. Davis, Chris, Castles, Anne, McAnally, Ken and Gray, Jacquie 2001. Lapses of concentration and dyslexic performance on the Ternus Task. Cognition, 81, B21–B31. De Bleser, Ria 1987. From agrammatism to paragrammatism: German aphasiological traditions and grammatical disturbances. Cognitive Neuropsychology, 4, 187–256. De Bleser, Ria and Kauschke, Christina 2003. Acquisition and loss of nouns and verbs: parallel or divergent patterns? Journal of Neurolinguistics, 16, 213–29.

References

563

DeCasper, Anthony J., Lecanuet, Jean-Pierre and Busnel, Marie-Claire 1994. Fetal reactions to recurrent maternal speech. Infant Behavior and Development, 17 (2), 159–64. DeCasper, Anthony J. and Spence, Melanie J. 1986. Prenatal maternal speech influences newborn’s perception of speech sounds. Infant Behavior and Development, 9, 133–50. Decker, Greg, Simpson, Greg, Yates, Mark and Locker, Lawrence, Jr. 2003. Flexible use of lexical and phonological information in word recognition. Journal of Research in Reading, 26, 280–6. DeKeyser, Robert 2000. The robustness of critical period effects in second language acquisition. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 22, 499–534. Demb, Jonathan B., Boynton, Geoffrey M., Best, Mary and Heeger, David J. 1998 Psychophysical evidence for a magnocellular pathway deficit in dyslexia. Vision Research, 38, 1555–9. Demuth, Katherine 1992. Accessing functional categories in Sesotho: interactions at the morpho-syntax interface. In Meisel, Jurgen M. (ed.), The Acquisition of Verb Placement: Functional Categories and V2 Phenomena in Language Acquisition (pp. 83–107). Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic. 1994. On the “underspecification” of functional categories in early grammars. In Lust, Barbara, Suñer, Magarita and Whitman, John (eds.), Syntactic Theory and First Language Acquisition: Crosslinguistic Perspectives (vol. I: Heads, Projections and Learnability, pp. 119–34). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. 1996. Prosodic structure of early words. In Morgan, James L. and Demuth, Katherine (eds.), Signal to Syntax: Bootstrapping from Speech to Grammar in Early Acquisition (pp. 171–84). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. de León, Lourdes 1999. Verbs in Tzotzil (Mayan) early syntactic development. International Journal of Bilingualism, 3, 219–39. DeStefano, Johanna S. 1978. Language, the Learner and the School. New York: John Wiley and Sons. De Swart, Henriette 1991. Adverbs of quantification: a generalized quantifier approach. Doctoral dissertation, University of Groningen. Deutsch, Avital, Frost, Ram and Forster, Kenneth 1998. Verbs and nouns are organized and accessed differently in the mental lexicon: evidence from Hebrew. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 24, 1238–55. De Villiers, Jill G., Tager-Flusberg, Helen B., Hakuta, Kenji and Cohen, Michael 1979. Children’s comprehension of relative clauses. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 8, 499–518. De Vincenzi, Marica 1991. Syntactic Parsing Strategies in Italian. Dordrecht: Kluwer. 2000. Crosslinguistic psycholinguistics. In Crocker, Matthew W., Pickering, Martin, and Clifton, Charles (eds.), Architectures and Mechanisms for Language Processing (pp. 282–300). Cambridge University Press. Dick, Frederic, Bates, Elizabeth, Wulfeck, Beverly, Utman, Jennifer, Dronkers, Nina and Gernsbacher, Morton A. 2001. Language deficits, localization, and grammar: evidence for a distributive model of language breakdown in aphasic patients and neurologically intact individuals. Psychological Review, 108, 759–88.

564

References

Diehl, Randy L. 1989. Remarks on Stevens’ quantal theory of speech. Journal of Phonetics, 17, 71–8. Diesing, Molly 1992. Indefinites. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Dik, Simon C. 1989. The Theory of Functional Grammar, Part I: the Structure of the Clause. Functional Grammar Series 9. Dordrecht: Foris. Di Sciullo, Anna Mari, Muysken, Peter and Singh, Ravendra 1986. Government and code-switching. Journal of Linguistics, 22, 1–24. Do, Kyung Soo 1992. Integration process of consonants and vowels in Korean letter perception [in Korean]. Korean Journal of Experimental and Cognitive Psychology, 4, 1–15. 1994. Representation of causal information in reading: causality, causal field, and multiple cause [in Korean]. Korean Journal of Experimental and Cognitive Psychology, 6, 164–77. Doctor, Estelle A. and Coltheart, Max 1980. Children’s use of phonological encoding when reading for meaning. Memory and Cognition, 8, 195–209. Doetjes, Jenny, Neeleman, Ad and van de Koot, Hans 1998. Degree expressions and the autonomy of syntax. UCL Working Papers, 10, 323–67. Donaldson, Margaret 1978. Children’s Minds. London: Fontana Press. Donaldson, Margaret and Lloyd, Peter 1974. Sentences and situations: children’s judgments of match and mismatch. In Bresson, Francois (ed.), Current Problems in Psycholinguistics. Paris: Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique. Dowty, David 1991. Thematic proto-roles and argument selection. Language, 67, 547–619. Drozd, Kenneth 1998. Children’s weak interpretations of universally quantified questions. In Bowerman, Melissa and Levinson, Stephen (eds.), Conceptual Development and Language Acquisition. Cambridge University Press. Drozd, Kenneth and Philip, William 1992. Event quantification in preschoolers’ comprehension of negation. In Clark, Eve (ed.), Child Language Research Forum (vol. 24). Stanford, CA: CLRF. Du Bois, John W. 1987. The discourse basis of ergativity. Language, 63, 805–55. 2002. Discourse and grammar. In Tomasello, Michael, (ed.), The New Psychology of Language: Cognitive and Functional Approaches to Language (vol. II). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. 2003. Argument structure: grammar in use. In Du Bois, Kumpf and Ashby (eds.), Preferred Argument Structure: Grammar as Architecture for Function (pp. 12–60). Du Bois, John W., Kumpf, Lorraine and Ashby, William (eds.) 2003. Preferred Argument Structure: Grammar as Architecture for Function. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Duffy, Susan A., Morris, Robin K. and Rayner, Keith 1988. Lexical ambiguity and fixation times in reading. Journal of Memory and Language, 27, 429–46. Duncan, Lynne G., Seymour, Philip K. H. and Hill, Shirley 2000. A small-to-large unit progression in metaphonological awareness and reading? The Quarterly Journal Of Experimental Psychology, 53a, 1081–104. Duranti, Alessandro 1994. From Grammar to Politics: Linguistic Anthropology in a Western Samoan Village. Los Angeles and Berkeley: University of California Press.

References

565

van Dyke, Julie A. and McElree, Brian 2006. Retrieval interference in sentence comprehension. Journal of Memory and Language, 55, 157–66. Ebbinghaus, Hermann 1964. Memory: a Contribution to Experimental Psychology (Ruger & Bussenius, translators; original work published 1885), New York: Dover. Echols, Catharine H. 1996. A role for stress in early speech segmentation. In Morgan, James L. and Demuth, Katherine (eds.), Signal to Syntax: Bootstrapping from Speech to Grammar in Early Acquisition (pp. 151–70). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Echols, Catherine H., Crowhurst, Meagan J. and Childers, Jane B. 1997. The perception of rhythmic units in speech by infants and adults. Journal of Memory and Language, 36, 202–25. von Eckardt, Barbara and Potter, Mary C. 1985. Clause and the semantic representation of words. Memory and Cognition, 13, 371–76. Eden, Guinevere, F., van Meter, John W., Rumsey, Judith M., Maisog, José M., Woods, Roger P. and Zeffiro, Thomas A. 1996. Abnormal processing of visual motion in dyslexia revealed by functional brain imaging. Nature, 382, 66–9. Eimas, Peter, Siqueland, Einar R., Jusczyk, Peter W. and Vigorito, James 1971. Speech perception in infants. Science, 171, 303–6. Elbourne, Paul 2001. E-type anaphora as NP deletion. Natural Language Semantics, 9, 241–88. Embick, David 2004. On the structure of resultative participles in English. Linguistic Inquiry, 35, 355–92. Emonds, Joseph 1976. A Transformational Approach to English Syntax. New York: Academic Press. 1978. The verbal complex V’-V in French. Linguistic Inquiry, 9, 151–75. Emslie, Hazel C. and Stevenson, Rosemary I. 1981. Pre-school children’s use of the articles in definite and indefinite referring expressions. Journal of Child Language, 8, 313–28. Enç, Mürvet 1991. The semantics of specificity. Linguistic Inquiry, 22, 1–25. Epstein, Samuel, Flynn, Suzanne and Martohardjono, Gita 1996. Second language acquisition: theoretical and experimental issues in contemporary research. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 19, 677–758. Erbaugh, S. Mary 1984. Scissors, paper, stone: perceptual foundations of noun classifier system. In Papers and Reports on Child Language Development (vol. 23, pp. 41–9). 1986. Taking stock: the development of Chinese noun classifiers historically and in young children. In Craig, Colette G. (ed.), Typological Studies in Language: Noun Classes and Categorization (vol. 7, pp. 399–436). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Ervin-Tripp, Susan, Nakamura, Kei and Guo, Jiansheng. 1995. Shifting face from Asia to Europe. In Shibatani, Masayoshi and Thompson, Sandra (eds.), Essays in Semantics and Pragmatics: In Honor of Charles J. Fillmore (pp. 43–72). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Eubank, Lynn 1993/1994. On the transfer of parametric values in L2 development. Language Acquisition, 3, 183–208.

566

References

Fang, Fuxi 1985. An experiment of the use of classifier by 4–6 year olds. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 17 (4), 384–92. Fant, Gunnar 1956. On the predictability of formant levels and spectrum envelopes from formant frequencies. In Halle, Morris, Lunt, Horace and MacLean, Hugh (eds.), For Roman Jakobson (pp. 109–20). The Hague: Mouton. 1968. Analysis and synthesis of speech processes. In Malmberg, Bertil (eds.), Manual of Phonetics (pp. 243–53). Amsterdam: North Holland. 1970. Acoustical Theory of Speech Production. The Hague: Mouton. 1975. Vocal tract wall effects, losses, and resonance bandwidths. STL-QPSR, 2 (3), 1–19. Farmer, Mary E. and Klein, Raymond M. 1995. The evidence for a temporal processing deficit linked to dyslexia: a review. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 2, 460–93. Fathman, Ann 1975. The relationship between age and second language learning ability. Language Learning, 25, 245–53. Feigenbaum, E. A. and Simon, H. A. 1984. EPAM-like models of recognition and learning. Cognitive Science, 8, 305–36. Fernald, Anne 1985. Four-month-old infants prefer to listen to motherese. Infant Behavior and Development, 8, 181–95. Fillmore, Charles 1988. The mechanisms of “Construction Grammar.” Berkeley Linguistics Society, 17, 35–55. Fillmore, Lily Wong 2000. The loss of family languages by immigrant children: should educators be concerned? Theory into Practice, 39, 203–10. Finer, Daniel 1991. Binding parameters in second language acquisition. In Eubank, Lynn (ed.), Point Counterpoint: Universal Grammar in Second Language Acquisition (pp. 351–73). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Finer, Daniel and Broselow, Ellen 1986. Second language acquisition of reflexivebinding. In Berman, Stephen, Choe, Jae-Woong and McDonough, Joyce (eds.), Proceedings of the 16th Meeting of the North East Linguistic Society (pp. 154–68). Amherst, MA: University Of Massachusetts, Graduate Linguistics Student Association. Flege, James E. 1987. A critical period for learning to pronounce foreign languages? Applied Linguistics, 8, 162–77. 1999. Age of learning and second language speech. In Birdsong, David (ed.), Second Language Acquisition and the Critical Period Hypothesis (pp. 101–32). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. Flege, James E., Bohn, Ocke-Schwen and Jang, Sunyoung 1997. Effects of experience on non-native speakers’ production and perception of English vowels. Journal of Phonetics, 25, 437–70. Flege, James E. and Liu, Serena 2001. Effect of experience in L2 acquisition. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 23, 527–52. Flege, James E., Munro, Murray J. and MacKay, Ian R. A. 1995. Factors affecting strength of perceived foreign accent in a second language. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 97 (5), 3125–34. Flege, James E., Yeni-Komshian, Grace H. and Liu, Serena 1999. Age constraints on second-language acquisition. Journal of Memory and Language, 41, 78–104.

References

567

Flynn, Suzanne 1983. A study of the effects of principal branching direction in second language acquisition: the generalization of a parameter of universal grammar from first to second language acquisition. Doctoral dissertation, Cornell University. 1987. A Parameter-setting Model of L2 Acquisition. Dordrecht: Reidel. Flynn, Suzanne and Foley, Claire 2004. On the developmental primacy of free relatives. In Csirmaz, Aniko, Gualmini, Andrea and Nevins, Andrew (eds.), Plato’s Problem: Papers on Language Acquisition, MIT Working Papers in Linguistics 48 (pp. 59–69). Cambridge, MA: Department of Linguistics, MIT. Fodor, Janet and Sag, Ivan 1982. Referential and quantificational indefinites. Linguistics and Philosophy, 5, 355–98. Ford, Cecilia E. 2000. The treatment of contrasts in interaction. In Couper-Kuhlen, Elizabeth and Kortmann, Bernd (eds.). Cause-Condition-Concession-Contrast: Cognitive and Discourse Perspective. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. Forster, Kenneth I. 1976. Accessing the mental lexicon. In Wales, Roger J. and Walker, Edward (eds.), New Approaches to Language Mechanisms (pp. 257–87). Amsterdam: North Holland. Forster, Kenneth I. and Chamber, Susan M. 1973. Lexical access and naming time. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 12, 627–35. Fougeron, Cecile and Keating, Patricia 1997. Articulatory strengthening at edges of prosodic domains. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 101, 3728–40. Fox, Barbara A. and Thompson, Sandra A. 1990. A discourse explanation of the grammar of relative clauses in English conversation. Language, 66, 297–316. Fox, Danny and Grodzinsky, Yosef 1998. Children’s passive: a view from the by-phrase. Linguistic Inquiry, 29, 311–32. Fox, Robert A. 1982. Individual variation in the perception of vowels: implications for a perception-production link. Phonetica, 39, 1–22. Frazier, Lyn 1979. On Comprehending Sentences: Syntactic Parsing Strategies. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Linguistics Club. 1987. Syntactic processing: evidence from Dutch. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory, 5, 519–59. Frazier, Lyn and Rayner, Keith 1982. Making and correcting errors during sentence comprehension: eye movements in the analysis of structurally ambiguous sentences. Cognitive Psychology, 14, 178–210. Frederiksen, John R. 1981. Sources of process interaction in reading. In Lesgold, Alan M. and Perfetti, Charles A. (eds.), Interactive Processes in Reading (pp. 361–86). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Freeman, Norman, Sinha, Chris and Stedmon, Jacqueline 1982. All the cars-which cars? from word meaning to discourse analysis. In Beveridge, Michael (ed.), Children Thinking Through Language. London: Edward Arnold. Freeman, Norman and Stedmon, Jacqueline 1986. How children deal with natural language quantification. In Kurez, I., Shugar, G. W. and Danks, J. H. (eds.), Knowledge and Language. North Holland: Elsevier. Friederici, Angela D. 1995. The time course of syntactic activation during language processing: a model based on neuropsychological and neurophysiological data. Brain and Language, 50, 259–81.

568

References

2002. Towards a neural basis of auditory sentence processing. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 6, 78–84. Friederici, Angela D. and Frazier, Lyn 1992. Thematic analysis in agrammatic comprehension: syntactic structures and task demands. Brain and Language, 42, 1–29. Friederici, Angela D. and Graetz, Patty A. M. 1987. Processing passive sentences in aphasia: deficits and strategies. Brain and Language, 30, 93–105. Friederici, Angela D. and Mecklinger, Axel 1996. Syntactic parsing as revealed by brain responses: first-pass and second-pass parsing processes. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 25, 157–76. Friederici, Angela D., Steinhauer, Karsten and Frisch, Stefan 1999. Lexical integration: sequential effects of syntactic and semantic information. Memory and Cognition, 27, 438–53. Friedmann, Naama 1994. Morphology in agrammatism: a dissociation between tense and agreement. Master’s Thesis, Tel Aviv University. Friedmann, Naama and Grodzinsky, Yosef 1997. Tense and agreement in agrammatic production: pruning the syntactic tree. Brain and Language, 56, 397–425. Friedmann, Naama and Shapiro, Lewis P. 2003. Agrammatic comprehension of simple active sentences with moved constituents: Hebrew OSV and OVS structures. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 46, 288–97. Frith, Uta 1999. Paradoxes in the definition of dyslexia. Dyslexia, 5, 192–214. Fromm, Erica 1970. Age regression with unexpected reappearance of a repressed childhood language. International Journal of Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis, 18, 79–88. Frost, Ram, Katz, Leonard and Bentin, Shlomo 1987. Strategies for visual word recognition and orthographical depth: a multilingual comparison. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 13, 104–15. Fruchter, Arlene, Wilbur, Ronnie B. and Fraser, Brian 1984. Comprehension of idioms by hearing-impaired students. Volta Review, 86, 7–18. Fukui, Naoki, Miyagawa, Shigeru and Tenny, Carol 1985. Verb Classes in English and Japanese: a Case Study in the Interaction of Syntax, Morphology and Semantics (Lexicon Project Working Papers vol. 3). Cambridge, MA: MIT Center for Cognitive Science. Gandour, Jack, Petty, Soranee H., Dardarananda, Rochana, Dechongkit, Sumalee and Mukngoen, Sunne 1984. Acquisition of numeral classifiers in Thai. Linguistics, 22, 455–79. Garlock, Victoria M., Walley, Amanda C. and Metsala, Jamie L. 2001. Age-ofacquisition, word frequency, and neighborhood density effects on spoken word recognition by children and adults. Journal of Memory and Language, 45, 468–92. Garner, Wendell R. 1978. Selective attention to attributes and to stimuli. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 107, 287–308. Garnham, Alan, Oakhill, Jane and Reynolds, David 2002. Are inferences from stereotyped role name to characters’ gender made elaboratively? Memory and Cognition, 30, 439–46. Garrod, Simon and Sanford, Anthony 1990. Referential processes in reading: focusing on roles and individuals. In Balota, David A., Flores d’Arcais, Giovanni B. and Rayner, Keith (eds.), Comprehension Processes in Reading (pp. 465–86). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

References

569

Gee, Julie and Salvasir, Iskender 1985. On the use of ‘will’ and ‘gonna’: toward a description of activity-types for child language. Discourse Processes, 8, 143–75. Genesee, Fred 1988. Neuropsychology and acquisition of second language learning. In Beebe, Leslie M. (ed.), Issues in Second Language Acquisition (pp. 81–112). Cambridge, MA: Newbury House. Genneri, Silvia, Sloman, Steven, Malt, Barbara and Fitch, W. Tecumseh 2002. Motion events in language and cognition. Cognition, 83, 49–79. Gentner, Dedre 1978. On relational meaning: the acquisition of verb meaning. Child Development, 49, 988–98. 1982. Why are nouns learned before verbs: Linguistic relativity versus natural partitioning. In Kuczaj, Stan A. II (ed.), Language Development (vol. II: Language, Thought and Culture). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum. Gerhardt, Julie 1991. The meanings and use of modals hafta, needta and wanna in children’s speech. Journal of Pragmatics, 16, 531–90. Gerken, LouAnn 1991. The metrical basis for children’s subjectless sentences. Journal of Memory and Language, 30, 431–51. 1996. Prosodic structure in young children’s language production. Language, 72 (4), 683–712. Gerken, LouAnn, Landau, Barbara and Remez, Robert E. 1990. Function morphemes in young children’s speech perception and production. Developmental Psychology, 26 (2), 204–16. Gernsbacher, Morton A. 1989. Mechanisms that improve referential access. Cognition, 32, 99–156. 1990. Language comprehension as structure building. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. 1997. Two decades of structure building. Discourse Processes, 23, 265–304. Gernsbacher, Morton A. and Hargreaves, David 1988. Accessing sentence participants: the advantage of first mention. Journal of Memory and Language, 27, 699–717. Gernsbacher, Morton A., Hargreaves, David and Beeman, Mark 1989. Building and accessing clausal representations: the advantage of first mention versus the advantage of clause recency. Journal of Memory and Language, 28, 735–55. Gernsbacher, Morton A., Varner, Kathleen R. and Faust, Mark E. 1990. Investigating differences in general comprehension skill. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 16, 430–45. Gibson, Edward 1998. Linguistic complexity: locality of syntactic dependence. Cognition, 68, 1–76. Gibson, Eleanor J. and Levin, Harry 1975. The Psychology of Reading. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Giraudo, Hélène and Grainger, Jonathan 2000. Effects of prime word frequency and cumulative root frequency in masked morphological priming. Language and Cognitive Processes, 15, 421–44. Giusti, Giuliana 1997. The categorial status of determiners. In Haegeman, Lilian (ed.), The New Comparative Syntax (pp. 95–123). London: Longman. Givón, Talmy 1979. On Understanding Grammar. New York: Academic Press. 1986. The Pragmatics of Word Order: Predictability, Importance, and Attention. Amsterdam: Benjamins.

570

References

Gleitman, Lila 1990. The structural sources of verb meaning. Language Acquisition, 1, 3–55. Gold, Mark 1967. Language identification in the limit. Information and Control, 10, 447–74. Goldberg, Adele 1995. Constructions: a Construction Grammar Approach to Argument Structure. University of Chicago Press. 1998. Patterns of experience in patterns of language. In Tomasello, Michael (ed.), The New Psychology of Language: Cognitive and Functional Approaches to Language Structure (pp. 203–19). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Golinkoff, Roberta M., Hirsh-Pasek, Kathryn, Cauley, Kathleen and Gordon, Laura 1987. The eyes have it: lexical and syntactic comprehension in a new paradigm. Journal of Child Language, 14, 23–45. Goodglass, Harold 1993. Understanding Aphasia. San Diego, CA: Academic Press. Goodhart, Wendy 1984. Morphological complexity, ASL, and the acquisition of sign language in deaf children. Doctoral dissertation, Boston University. Goodluck, Helen 1991. Language Acquisition: a Linguistic Introduction. Oxford: Blackwell. Gopnik, Alison 2001. Theories, language, and culture: Whorf without wincing. In Bowerman, Melissa and Levinson, Stephen C. (eds.), Language Acquisition and Conceptual Development. New York: Cambridge University Press. Gopnik, Alison and Choi, Soonja 1990. Do linguistic differences lead to cognitive differences?: a crosslinguistic study of semantic and cognitive development. First Language, 10, 199–215. 1995. Names, relational words, and cognitive development in English and Korean speakers: nouns are not always learned before verbs. In Tomasello, Michael and Merriman William E. (eds.), Beyond Names for Things: Young Children’s Acquisition of Verbs (pp. 63–80). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Gordon, Peter C. 1982. The acquisition of syntactic categories: the case of the count/ mass distinction. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA. 1985. Evaluating the semantic categories hypothesis: the case of the count/mass distinction. Cognition, 29, 31–54. 1988. Count/mass category acquisition: distributional distinction in children’s speech. Journal of Child Language, 15, 109–28. Gordon, Peter C. and Chafetz, Jill 1990. Verb-based versus class-based accounts of actionality effects in children’s comprehension of passives. Cognition, 36, 227–54. Gordon, Peter C. and Hendrick, Randall 2005. Relativization, ergativity, and corpus frequency. Linguistic Inquiry, 36, 456–63. Gordon, Peter C., Hendrick, Randall and Johnson, Marcus 2001. Memory interference during language processing. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition, 27, 1411–23. 2004. Effects of noun phrase type on sentence complexity. Journal of Memory and Language, 51, 97–114. Gordon, Peter, C., Hendrick, Randall, Johnson, Marcus and Lee, Yoonhyoung 2006. Similarity-based interference during language comprehension: evidence from eye tracking during reading. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition, 32, 1304–21.

References

571

Gordon, Peter C., Hendrick, Randall and Levine, William H. 2002. Memory-load interference in syntactic processing. Psychological Science, 13, 425–30. Gökmen, Seda and Lee, Chungmin 2002. Aspects of the acquisition of (past) tense and (telic) aspect in Turkish and Korean. Language Research, 38, 1317–47. Graesser, Arthur C., Singer, Murray and Trabasso, Tom 1994. Constructing inferences during narrative text comprehension. Psychological Review, 101, 371–95. Green, Georgia H. 1989. Pragmatics and Natural Language Understanding. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Grice, Martine and Benzmüller, Ralf 1995. Transcription of German intonation using ToBI-tones – the Saarbrücken system. Phonus, 1, 33–51. Grimshaw, Jane 1981. Form, function, and the language acquisition device. In Baker, Carl L. and McCarthy, John J. (eds.), The Logical Problem of Language Acquisition. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Grodzinsky, Yosef 1986. Language deficits and the theory of syntax. Brain and Language, 27, 135–59. 1989. Agrammatic comprehension of relative clauses. Brain and Language, 37, 480–99. 1995a. A restrictive theory of trace deletion in agrammatism. Brain and Language, 50, 27–50. 1995b. Trace deletion, theta-roles, and cognitive strategies. Brain and Language, 51, 469–97. 2000. The neurology of syntax: language use without Broca’s area. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 23, 1–71. Grodzinsky, Yosef, Piñango, Maria M., Zurif, Edgar and Drai, Dan 1999. The critical role of group studies in neuropsychology: comprehension regularities in Broca’s aphasia. Brain and Language, 67, 134–47. Grojean, François 1982. Life with Two Languages: An Introduction to Bilingualism. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. 1988. Exploring the recognition of guest words in bilingual speech. Language and Cognitive Processes, 3, 233–74. 1997. Processing mixed language: issues, findings, and models. In de Groot, Annette and Kroll, Judith (eds.), Tutorials in Bilingualism: Psycholinguistic Perspectives (pp. 225–54). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Grojean, François and Soares, Carlos 1986. Processing mixed language: some preliminary findings. In Vaid, Jyotsna (ed.), Language Processing in Bilinguals: Psycholinguistic and Neuropsychological Perspective (pp. 123–43). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Gropen, Jess, Pinker, Steven, Hollander, Michelle and Goldberg, Richard 1991a. Syntax and semantics in the acquisition of locative verbs. Journal of Child Language, 18, 115–51. 1991b. Affectedness and direct object: the role of lexical semantics in the acquisition of verb argument structure. Cognition, 41, 153–95. Gruber, Jeffrey S. 1967. Topicalization in child language. Foundations of Language, 3, 37–65. Guasti, Maria Teresa 1992. Verb syntax in Italian child grammar. In Geneva Generative Papers (vol. 1, pp. 145–62).

572

References

Guilfoyle, Eithne and Noonan, Máire 1992. Functional categories and language acquisition. Canadian Journal of Linguistics, 37, 241–71. Gumperz, John J. 1982a. Conversational code-switching. In Gumperz, John J. (ed.), Discourse Strategies (pp. 59–99). Cambridge University Press. 1982b. Discourse Strategies. Cambridge University Press. 1992. Contextualization revisited. In Auer, Peter and di Luzio, Aldo (eds.), The contextualization of language (pp. 39–53). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Gumperz, John J. and Hernandez-Chavez, Eduardo 1975. Cognitive aspects of bilingual communication. In Hernandez-Chavez, Eduardo, Cohen, Andrew and Beltramo, Anthony (eds.), El lenguaje de los Chicanos. Arlington, VA: Center for Applied Linguistics. Ha, Eun Jin 2000. The development of comprehension and production of causative and passive sentences of 4–9 year old normal children [in Korean]. Master’s thesis, Ewha Womens University, Korea. Haarmann, Henk J. and Kolk, Herman H. 1991a. A computer model of the temporal course of agrammatic sentence understanding: the effects of variation in severity and sentence complexity. Cognitive Science, 15, 49–87. 1991b. Syntactic priming in Broca’s aphasics: evidence for slow activation. Aphasiology, 5, 247–63. 1994. On-line sensitivity to subject-verb agreement violations in Broca’s aphasics: the role of syntactic complexity and time. Brain and Language, 46, 493–516. Haberlandt, Karl and Graesser, Arthur C. 1990. Integration and buffering of new information. In Graesser, Arthur C. and Bower, Gordon H. (eds.), The Psychology of Learning and Motivation (vol. 25, pp. 71–87). New York: Academic Press. Haggerty, Rita and Stamm, John S. 1978. Dichotic auditory fusion levels in children with learning disabilities. Neuropsychologia, 12, 349–60. Hagiwara, Hiroko 1995. The breakdown of functional categories and the economy of derivation. Brain and Language, 50, 92–116. Hagoort, Peter, Brown, Colin and Groothusen, Jolanda 1993. The syntactic positive shift (SPS) as an ERP measure of syntactic processing. Language and Cognitive Processes, 8, 439–83. Hagstrom, Paul 2000. Phrasal movement in Korean negation. In Proceedings of SCIL 9 (pp. 127–42). Cambridge: MITWPL. 2002. Implications of child error for the syntax of negation in Korean. Journal of East Asian Linguistics, 11, 211–42. Hahn, Kyung-Ja Park 1981. The development of negation in one Korean child. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Hawaii, Manoa. Hahne, Anja and Friederici, Angela D. 1999. Electrophysiological evidence for two steps in syntactic analysis: early automatic and late controlled processes. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 11, 194–205. 2002. Differential task effects on semantic and syntactic processes as revealed by ERPs. Cognitive Brain Research, 13, 339–56. Hajime, Hoji 1990. Japanese/Korean Linguistics 1. Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications. Hakuta, Kenji 1994. Distinguishing among proficiency, choice, and attitudes in questions about language for bilinguals. In Lamberty, Gontran and Coll, Cynthia G. (eds.), Puerto Rican Women and Children: Issues in Health, Growth, and Development (pp. 191–209). New York: Plenum Press.

References

573

Hakuta, Kenji and D’Andrea, Daniel 1992. Some properties of bilingual maintenance and loss in Mexican background high-school students. Applied Linguistics, 13, 72–99. Halliday, Michael A. K. and Hassan, Ruqaiya 1976. Cohesion in English. London: Longman. Halliwell, John F. 2000. Korean agrammatic production. Aphasiology, 14, 1187–1203. Han, Chung-hye 1998. Asymmetry in the interpretation of –(n)un in Korean. In Akatsuka, Noriko, Hoji, Hajime, Iwasaki, Shoichi, Sohn, Sung-Ock and Strauss, Susan (eds.), Japanese/Korean Linguistics 7 (pp. 1–15). Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications. 2007. In search of evidence for the placement of the verb in Korean and Japanese. In McGloin, Naomi H. (ed.), Japanese/Korean Linguistics 15. Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications. Han, Chung-hye and Lee, Chungmin 2007. On negative imperatives in Korean. Linguistic Inquiry, 38 (2). Han, Chung-hye, Lidz, Jeffrey and Musolino, Julien 2007. V-raising and grammar competition in Korean: evidence from negation and quantifier scope. Linguistic Inquiry, 38, 1–47. Han, Ho 1997. Development of functional categories in child Korean. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of South Carolina, Columbia. Han, Ho and Park, Myung-Kwan 1994. The syntax of negation in Korean and its development in child language. In Proceedings of ESCOL ‘94 (pp. 152–62). Harada, S. I., Uyeno, Tazuko, Hayashibe, Hideo and Yamada, Hiroshi 1976. On the development of perceptual strategies in children: a case study on the Japanese child’s comprehension of the relative clause constructions. Annual Bulletin of the Research Institute Logopedics Phoniatrics, 10, 199–224. University of Tokyo. Harley, Birgit and Wang, Wenxia 1997. The critical period hypothesis: where are we now? In de Groot, Annette M.B. and Kroll, Judith F. (eds.) Tutorials in Bilingualism: Psycholinguistic Perspectives (pp. 19–61). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. Hawkins, Roger and Yet-hung Chan, Cecilia 1997. The partial availability of Universal Grammar in second language acquisition: the failed functional features hypothesis. Second Language Research, 13 (3), 187–226. Heidorn, George E. 2000. Intelligence writing assistance. In Dale, Robert, Moisl, Hermann and Somers, Harold (eds.), A Handbook of Natural Language Processing: Techniques and Applications for the Processing of Language as Text (pp. 181–207). New York: Marcel Dekker. Heilman, Kenneth M. and Scholes, Robert J. 1976. The nature of comprehension errors in Broca’s, conduction and Wernicke’s aphasics. Cortex, 12, 258–65. Heim, Irene 1991. Articles and definiteness, published in German as “Artikel und Definitheit.” In v. Stechow, Arnim and Wunderlich, Dieter (eds.), Semantics: An International Handbook of Contemporary Research. Berlin: de Gruyter. Helenius, Päivi, Uutela, Kimmo and Hari, Riitta 1999. Auditory stream segregation in dyslexic adults. Brain, 122, 907–13. Heller, Monica (ed.) 1988. Codeswitching: Anthropological and Sociolinguistic Perspectives. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.

574

References

Henderson, Leslie, Wallis, Julie and Knight, Denise 1984. Morphemic structure and lexical access. In Bouma, Herman and Bouwhuis, Don G. (eds.), Attention and Performance X (pp. 211–24). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum. Hickok, Gregory S. 1992. Agrammatic Comprehension and the Trace-Deletion Hypothesis. MIT Occasional Paper 45. Hickok, Gregory S. and Avrutin, Sergey 1995. Comprehension of wh-questions by two agrammatic Broca’s aphasics. Brain and Language, 51, 10–26. Hillert, Dieter 1998. From Alexander to Wilhelm Von Humboldt: a crosslinguistic perspective. In Hillert, Dieter (ed.), Syntax and Semantics (vol. 31, pp. 1–31.). New York: Academic Press. Hinton, Leanne 1999. Involuntary language loss among immigrants: Asian American linguistic autobiographies. ERIC Digest (www.eric.ed.gov). Hirose, Hitoshi 1992. An investigation of the recognition process for jukugo by use of priming paradigms [in Japanese]. Japanese Journal of Psychology, 63, 303–9. Hirsch, Christopher and Wexler, Kenneth 2004. Children’s passives and their resulting interpretation. Paper presented at Generative Approaches to Language Acquisition North America (GALANA). University of Hawaii at Manoa. December, 2004. Hirsh-Pasek, Kathy, Kemler Nelson, Deborah G., Jusczyk, Peter W., Wright-Cassidy, Kimberly, Druss, B. and Kennedy, Lori 1987. Clauses are perceptual units for young infants. Cognition, 26, 269–86. Hirst, William and Weil, Joyce 1982. Acquisition of epistemic and deontic meaning of modals. Journal of Child Language, 9, 659–66. Hoekstra, Teun and Jordens, Peter 1994. From adjunct to head. In Hoekstra, Teun and Schwartz, Bonnie (eds.), Language Acquisition Studies in Generative Grammar (pp. 119–49). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: Benjamins. Hoffmeister, Robert J. 2000. A piece of the puzzle: ASL and reading comprehension in deaf children. In Chamberlain, Morford and Mayberry, Language Acquisition By Eye (pp. 131–41). Hogaboam, Thomas W. and Perfetti, Charles A. 1975. Lexical ambiguity and sentence comprehension. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 14, 265–74. Hong, Ki-Sun 1987. Consciousness condition on the Korean reflexive. In Proceedings of the Nineteenth Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society (pp. 161–69). University of California, Berkeley. Hong, Sung Eun 2001. An empirical survey on animal classifiers in Korean Sign Language. A paper presented at Conference on Sign Linguistics Deaf Education and Deaf Culture in Asia, Hong Kong, 17th–19th December 2001. Hong, Yunsook 1985. A quantitative analysis of KA/I and (N)UN as subject markers in spoken and written Korean. In Proceedings of the 1985 Harvard Workshop on Korean Linguistics (pp. 145–53). Horgan, Dianne 1978. The development of the full passive. Journal of Child Language, 5, 65–80. Horowitz, Ellis, Sahni, Sartaj and Anderson-Freed, Susan 1992. Fundamentals of Data Structures in C. New York: W. H. Freeman & Co. Hsiao, Fanny and Gibson, Edward 2003. Processing relative clauses in Chinese. Cognition, 90, 3–27.

References

575

Hsu, Chun-chieh N., Hurewitz, Felicia and Phillips, Colin 2006. Contextual and syntactic cues for head-final relative clauses in Chinese. In Proceedings of CUNY 2006 Conference. Hu, Quian 1993. The acquisition of Chinese classifiers by young Mandarin speaking children. Doctoral dissertation, Boston University. Hudson, Mutsuko Endo, Sells, Peter and Jun, Sun-Ah (eds.) 2008. Japanese/Korean Linguistics 13. Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications. Hurford, James 1975. A child and the English question formation rule. Journal of Child Language, 2, 299–301. Hwang, Do-Soon 1994. The syntactic structure and development of the sign language by Korean deaf students [in Korean]. Doctoral dissertation, Dankook University, Korea. Hwang, Juck-Ryoon 1990. “Deference” versus “politeness” in Korean speech. International Journal of the Sociology of Language, 82, 41–55. Hwang, Mina 2002. Sentence comprehension of Korean-speaking adults with Broca’s aphasia [in Korean]. Korean Journal of Communication Disorders, 7, 64–84. 2003. The production of grammatical morphemes of Korean children with developmental language impairment [in Korean]. Korean Journal of Speech Sciences, 10, 47–64. Hwang, Mina and Kim, Yoon-Ju 2004. Comprehension of relative clauses in Koreanspeaking adults with Broca’s aphasia. Poster presented at the annual convention of the American Speech-Language-Hearing Association, Philadelphia, PA. Hwang, Yu Mi 2000. Difference between deixis and anaphora shown in aphasics [in Korean]. Master’s thesis, Korea University, Seoul, Korea. Hwang, Yu Mi, Kim, Dong-Hwee and Nam, Kichun 2003. The structure and processing of the Korean functional category in Aphasics [in Korean]. Journal of Speech and Hearing Disorders, 12, 197–216. Hwang, Yu Mi, Kwon, Youan, Lim, HeuiSeok and Nam, Kichun 2002. A model of Korean morphological passive processing [in Korean]. In Proceedings of the 16th KSCS Annual Spring Conference (pp. 137–41). Hwang, Yu Mi, Moon, Youngsun, Jung, Jaebum and Nam, Kichun 2000. Characteristics of processing semifinal verbal inflections in Korean [in Korean]. In Proceedings of the Winter Conference of the Korean Society of Experimental and Cognitive Psychology (pp. 29–40). Hwang, Yu Mi, Moon, Youngsun, Park, Hye-Sung and Nam, Kichun 2000. Characteristics of processing functional categories in Korean [in Korean]. In Proceedings of the Spring Conference on Korean Cognitive Science (pp. 273–78). Hwang, Yu Mi, Nam, Kichun and Kang, Myung-Yoon 2000. The structure and processing of the Korean functional category [in Korean]. In Proceedings of the Conference of the Korean Society of Communication Disorders (pp. 137–42). 2001. The research of deictic pronoun and anaphoric pronoun in aphasic case [in Korean]. Korean Journal of Communication Disorders, 6 (1), 131–59. Hyams, Nina 1992. The genesis of clausal structure. In Meisel, Jurgen M. (ed.), The Acquisition of Verb Placement: Functional Categories and V2 Phenomena in Language Acquisition (pp. 371–400). Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic.

576

References

Hyams, Nina and Sigurjonsdottir, Sigridur 1990. The development of “long distance anaphora”: a crosslinguistic comparison with special reference to Icelandic. Journal of Developmental Linguistics. Hyun, Jung Moon 2003. Retrieval of nouns and verbs in Broca’s and Wernicke’s aphasia [in Korean]. Master’s thesis, Yonsei University, Korea. Im, Hong-Bin 1991a. On the discrimination standard of Korean classifiers [in Korean]. In Lee Swunhwun Sensayng Hoykap Kinyem Nonchong. Korea: Sekceng Leeswunhwun sensayng hoykap kinyem nonchong kanhayng wiwenhoy. 1991b. On the characteristics of Korean classifiers: New understanding and development of Korean studies [in Korean]. In Kim Wancong Sensayng Hoykap Kinyem Nonchong. Seoul National University Tayhakwen Kwuke Yenkwuhoy Phyen. Imai, Mutsumi and Gentner, Dedre 1997. A crosslinguistic study of early word meaning: universal ontology and linguistic influence. Cognition, 62, 169–200. Imbens-Bailey, Alison L. 1996. Ancestral language acquisition: implications for aspects of ethnic identity among Armenian American children and adolescents. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 15, 422–43. 2001. Language background and ethnic identity: a study of bilingual and English-only speaking children of Armenian descent. In Olshtain, Elite and Horenczyk, Gabriel (eds.), Language, Identity, and Immigration (pp. 255–69). Hebrew University Magnes Press. Ingram, David 1989. First Language Acquisition. Cambridge University Press. Inhelder, Barbel and Piaget, Jean 1958. The Growth of Logical Thinking from Childhood to Adolescence. New York: Basic Books. 1964. The Early Growth of Logic in the Child. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul. Institute of Language and Information Studies 1998. Frequency Analysis of Korean Usage (Publication No. CLID-WP-98–02–28). Seoul, Korea: Yonsei University. Ionin, Tania 2003. Article semantics in second language acquisition. Doctoral dissertation, Cambridge, MA: MIT. 2006. This is definitely specific: specificity and definiteness in article systems. Natural Language Semantics, 14, 175–234. Ionin, Tania, Ko, Heejeong and Wexler, Kenneth 2003. Specificity as a grammatical notion: evidence from L2-English use. In Garding, Gina and Tsujimura, Mimu, Proceedings of West Coast Conference on Formal Linguistics 22 (pp. 245–58). Somerville: Cascadilla Press. 2004. Article semantics in L2-acquisition: the role of specificity. Language Acquisition, 12, 3–69. 2007. The role of semantic features in the acquisition of English articles by Russian and Korean speakers. In Liceras, Juana M. et al. (eds.), The Role of Formal Features in Second Language Acquisition, Second language research acquisition series (Theoretical and Methodological Issues). New York and London: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Ionin, Tania, Zubizarreta, Maria Luisa and Maldonado, Salvador Bautista, 2008. Sources of linguistic knowledge in the second language acquisition of English articles. Lingua, 118, 554–76. Ioup, George 1975. Some universals for quantifier scope. Syntax and Semantics, 4, 37–58.

References

577

Jackendoff, Ray 1971. Gapping and related rules. Linguistic Inquiry, 2, 21–35. 1996. The proper treatment of measuring out, telicity, and quantification in English. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory, 14, 305–54. Jaeggli, Osvaldo 1980. Remarks on to contraction. Linguistic Inquiry, 11, 239–46. Jang, Jindeok 1999. Ambiguity resolution processes of Korean datives. Unpublished Master’s thesis, Ajou University. Jang, Jin-Kwon 1995. The etymological meanings of Korean Sign Language [in Korean]. Master’s thesis, Dankook University. Jared, Debra and Seidenberg, Mark S. 1991. Does word identification proceed from spelling to sound to meaning? Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 120, 358–94. Javella, R. and Meijers, G. 1983. Recognizing morphemes in spoken words: some evidence for a stem-organized mental lexicon. In Flores D’Arcais, Giovanni B. and Jarvella, R. (eds.), The Processing of Language Understanding (pp. 81–112). New York: Wiley. Jeon, Moongee, Lee, Jung-Mo and Lee, Jae-Ho 2001. Processing of connectives in discourse with causal or additive connections [in Korean]. Korean Journal of Experimental and Cognitive Psychology, 13, 287–306. Jhang, Se-Eun 1994. Headed nominalizations in Korean: relative clauses, clefts and comparatives. Doctoral dissertation, Simon Fraser University. 1997. Sign language and reduplication [in Korean]. Eoneohag: Journal of the Linguistic Society of Korea, 21, 263–87. 1999a. Study on phonological structure of Korean Sign Language [in Korean]. Journal of Language Sciences, 6, 81–109. 1999b. Wh-questions in American Sign Language and Korean Sign Language [in Korean]. Linguistics, 7, 297–319. 2000. A recent research trend and its linguistic approach to American Sign Language and Korean Sign Language [in Korean]. Paykyang Inmun Noncip, 5, 5–47. Korea: Humanities Center, Shilla University. 2004. The mapping between Korean Sign Language and reading ability: evidence from Korean deaf children. The Linguistic Association of Korean Journal, 12 (3), 225–38. 2006. An overview of Korean sign language. The New Korean Journal of English Language and Literature, 48, 237–56. 2008. Verb types and numeral classifiers in Korean Sign Language [in Korean]. Journal of Language Sciences, 15 (3), 101–35. Jia, Xiangdong, Brooks, Patricia and Braine, Martin 1995. A study of Chinese children’s comprehension of universal quantifiers. In Clark, Eve (ed.), Child Language Research Forum (vol. 27). Stanford, CA: CLRF. Jo, Hey-young 2001. “Heritage” language learning and ethnic identity: Korean Americans’ struggle with language authorities. Language, Culture and Curriculum, 14, 26–41. Johnson, Jacqueline and Newport, Elissa 1989. Critical period effects in second language learning: the influence of maturational state on the English as a second language. Cognitive Psychology, 21, 60–99. 1991. Critical period effects on universal properties of language: the status of subjacency in the acquisition of a second language. Cognition, 39, 215–58.

578

References

Johnston, Judith and Slobin, Dan I. 1979. The development of locative expressions in English, Italian, Serbo-Croatian, and Turkish. Journal of Child Language, 16, 531–47. Jonas, Dianne and Bobaljik, Jonathan 1996. Subject positions and the roles of TP. Linguistic Inquiry, 27 (2), 195–236. Joo, Yanghee 1989. A crosslinguistic approach to quantification in syntax. Doctoral dissertation, University of Wisconsin, Madison. Jordens, Peter 1988. The acquisition of word order in Dutch and German as L1 and L2. Second Language Research, 4, 41–65. Joshi, Arvind 1985. Processing of sentences with intrasentential code-switching. In Dawty, David, Karttunen, Lauri and Zwicky Arnold (eds.), Natural Language Parsing: Psychological, Computational and Theoretical Perspectives (pp. 190–205). Cambridge University Press. Joyce, Terry 1999. Lexical access and the mental lexicon for two-kanji compound word: a priming paradigm study. In Proceedings of the Joint Conference of the 2nd International Conference on Cognitive Science and the 17th Annual Meeting of the Japanese Cognitive Science Society (pp. 511–14). 2002. Constituent-morpheme priming: implications from the morphology of twokanji compound words. Japanese Psychological Research, 44, 79–90. Juffs, Alan 1996. Learnability and the Lexicon: Theories and Second Language Acquisition Research (Language Acquisition and Language Disorders, 12). Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamin. Jun, Jong Sup 2001a. Korean “standard sign language” is not a sign language. Journal of Cognitive Science, 2, 211–30. 2001b. The agent-first strategy and the development of language: cases of learning two languages simultaneously. In Kuno, Susumu et al. (eds.), Harvard Studies in Korean Linguistics IX (pp. 46–55). Hanshin Publishing Company, Korea, and Harvard University. Jun, Jong Sup and Lee, Chungmin 2004. Children’s strategic processing of Korean relative clauses. Language Research, 40 (2), 465–88. Jun, M. G., Lee, J-M. and Lee, J-H. 2001. Processing of connectives in discourse with causal or additive connections. [In Korean]. Korean Journal of Experimental and Cognitive Psychology, 13, 287–306. Jun, Sun-Ah 1993. The Phonetics and Phonology of Korean Prosody. Doctoral dissertation, The Ohio State University. [Published in 1996 by New York: Garland.] 1995. A phonetic study of stress in Korean. Paper presented at the 130th meeting of the Acoustical Society of America, St. Louis, MO. 1998. The accentual phrase in the Korean prosodic hierarchy. Phonology, 15 (2), 189–226. 2000. K-ToBI (Korean ToBI) labelling conventions – Version 3. Journal of Speech Sciences, 7 (1), 143–69. [Version 3.1 in UCLA Working Papers in Phonetics 99, 149–73. URL: www.linguistics.ucla.edu/people/jun/ktobi/K-tobi.html]. 2003a. Prosodic phrasing and attachment preferences. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 32 (2), 219–49. 2003b. The effect of phrase length and speech rate on prosodic phrasing. In The Proceedings of the International Congress of Phonetic Sciences. Barcelona, Spain. 2004. Intonational phonology of Korean revisited. A talk presented at the JapaneseKorean Linguistics conference, Tucson, AZ [The paper appeared in Japanese–Korean Linguistics 14. Stanford: CSLI. 2006.]

References

579

(ed.) 2005. Prosodic Typology: the Phonology of Intonation and Phrasing. Oxford University Press. 2006. Phonological development of Korean: a case study. In Kuno, Susumu, Lee, Ik-Hhan, Whitman, John, Maling, Joan, Kang, Young-Se., Sells, Peter and Sohn, Hyang-Sook (eds.), Harvard Studies in Korean Linguistics XI (pp.17–33). Korea: Hanshin Publishing Company. Jun, Sun-Ah and Kim, Sahyang 2004. Default phrasing and attachment preference in Korean. In The Proceedings of the International Conference on Spoken Language Processing. Jeju, Korea. Jun, Sun-Ah and Oh, Mira 1996. A prosodic analysis of three types of wh-phrases in Korean. Language and Speech, 39 (1), 37–61. 2000. Acquisition of 2nd language intonation. In Proceedings of International Conference on Spoken Language Processing (vol. 4, pp. 76–9). Beijing, China. Jung, Jaebum, Kim, Mira, Kim, Taehoon, Chae, Sookyung and Nam, Kichun 1999. Morphological processing in Broca’s aphasia [in Korean]. In Proceedings of the 13th KSCS Annual Spring Conference (pp. 15–21). Jung, Jaebum, Lim, HeuiSeok and Nam, Kichun 2003. Morphological representations of Korean compound nouns [in Korean]. Journal of Speech and Hearing Disorders, 12, 77–95. Jung, Jae-Bum, Pyun, Sung-Bom, Kim, Tae-Hoon and Nam, Kichun 2002. The processing and representations of ambiguous morphemes in Korean words: centered in aphasics [in Korean]. In The Proceedings of Conference of Korean Society of Cognitive Science (pp. 151–6). Jung, Jingab and Yi, Kwangoh 2004. Morphological representation and processing of Korean words [in Korean]. In Proceedings of the Annual Conference of Korean Society for Experimental Psychology (pp. 89–95). Jung, Jongmin and Pae, Soyeong 2004. The fast mapping abilities of Korean hearing impaired children [in Korean]. Korean Journal of Communication Disorders, 9 (2), 49–64. Jung, Kyung Soon 2002. Effects on the use of case markers, ending markers, and vocabulary of Korean deaf students in the application of standard sign language for signed Korean [in Korean]. In A Report of Research on Field Special Education for Deaf and Hard of Hearing People. General Association of Special Education of Korea. Jung, Woo Hyun and Park, SooJin 2006. Word and coding-unit superiority effect in the perception of Korean letters [in Korean]. Korean Journal of Experimental Psychology, 18, 139–56. Jusczyk, Peter W. 1993. From general to language-specific capacities: the WRAPSA model of how speech perception develops. Journal of Phonetics, 21, 3–28. 1997. The Discovery of Spoken Language. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. 1999. How infants begin to extract words from speech. Trends in Cognitive Science, 3, 323–28. Jusczyk, Peter W. and Aslin, Richard N. 1995. Infants’ detection of the sound patterns of words in fluent speech. Cognitive Psychology, 29, 1–23. Jusczyk, Peter W., Cutler, Anne and Redanz, Nancy J. 1993. Infants’ sensitivity to predominant stress patterns in English. Child Development, 64, 675–87.

580

References

Jusczyk, Peter W., Friederici, Angela D., Wessels, Jeanine M. I., Svenkerud, Vigdis Y. and Jusczyk, Ann M. 1993. Infants’ sensitivity to the sound patterns of native language words. Journal of Memory and Language, 32, 402–20. Jusczyk, Peter W., Pisoni, David B.. and Mullennix, John 1992. Some consequences of stimulus variability on speech processing by 2-month-old infants. Cognition, 43 (3), 253–91. Just, Marcel A. and Carpenter, Patricia A. 1992. A capacity theory of comprehension: individual differences in working memory. Psychological Review, 99, 122–49. Just, Marcel A. and Varma, Sashank 2002. A hybrid architecture for working memory: reply to MacDonald and Christiansen 2002. Psychological Review, 109, 55–65. Kaan, Edith 2001. Effects of NP type on the resolution of word-order ambiguities. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 30, 529–47. Kaan, Edith and Vasic, Nada 2004. Cross-serial dependencies in Dutch: testing the influence of NP type on processing load. Memory and Cognition, 32, 175–84 Kamide, Yuki and Mitchell, Don C. 1997. Relative clause attachment: nondeterminism in Japanese parsing. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 26, 247–54. van Kampen, Jacqueline 1997. First steps in wh-movement. Doctoral dissertation, Utrecht University. Kaneko, Yumina 1996. Knowledge of the English article system in second language learning: to ‘the’ or not to ‘the’. Undergraduate thesis, Smith College. Kang, Beom-Mo 1998. Mwunpep-kwa ene sayong (Grammar and language use). Kwukehak (Korean Linguistics), 31, 165–204. 2001. The grammar and use of Korean reflexives. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics, 6, 134–50. Kang, Hye-Kyung 2000. Aspects of the acquisition of quantification: experimental studies of English and Korean children. Doctoral dissertation, University College London. 2001. Quantifier spreading: linguistic and pragmatic considerations. Lingua, 111, 591–627. Kang, Hyewon and Simpson, Greg B. 1996. Development of semantic and phonological priming in a shallow orthography. Developmental Psychology, 32, 860–6. 2001. Local strategic control of information in visual word recognition. Memory and Cognition, 29, 648–55. Kang, Hyun-Seok 1996. Acoustic and intonational correlates of the informational status of referring expressions in Seoul Korean. Language and Speech, 39 (4), 307–40. Kang, In Ku and Lee, Hang Sei 1969. A method of Korean character pattern extraction [in Korean]. Journal of Korea Institute of Electronics Engineers, 9 (2), 1–5. Kang, Soyoung and Speer, Shari R. 2003. Prosodic disambiguation of syntactic clause boundaries in Korean. A paper presented at WCCFL XXII. San Diego, CA. Karins, Krisjanis and Nagy, Naomi 1993. Non-categorical perception of a ‘categorical’ rule. Unpublished manuscript, University of Pennsylvania. Karmiloff-Smith, Annette. 1979. A Functional Approach to Child Language. Cambridge University Press. Katz, Leonard and Frost, Ram 1992. The reading process is different for different orthographies: the orthographic depth hypothesis. In Frost, Ram and Katz, Leonard (eds.), Orthography, Phonology, Morphology, and Meaning (pp. 67–84). Amsterdam: Elsevier North Holland Press.

References

581

Kawachi, Kazuhiro 2002. Do Korean putting verbs categorize space in terms of the looseness vs. tightness distinction? Unpublished manuscript. Kayne, Richard 1989 Facets of Romance past participle agreement. In Benica, Paola (ed.), Dialect Variation on the Theory of Grammar (pp. 85–103). Dordrecht: Foris Publications. 1994. The Antisymmetry of Syntax. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Kean, Mary-Louise 1988. The relation between linguistic theory and second language acquisition. In Pankhurst, James, Sharewood-Smith, Mike and van Buren, Paul (eds.), Learnability and Second Languages (pp. 61–70). Dordrecht: Foris Publications. Keenan, Edward and Comrie, Bernard 1977. Noun phrase accessibility and universal grammar. Linguistic Inquiry, 8, 63–99. Keenan, Janice M., Baillet, Susan D. and Brown, Polly 1984. The effects of causal cohesion on comprehension and memory. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal behavior, 23, 115–26. Kemmerer, David and Tranel, Daniel 2000. Verb retrieval in brain-damaged subjects: 1. analysis of stimulus, lexical, and conceptual factors. Brain and Language, 73, 347–92. Ken, Loke Kit 1991. A semantic analysis of young children’s use of Mandarin shape classifiers. In Kwan-Terry, Anna (ed.), Child Language Development in Singapore and Malaysia (pp. 98–116). Singapore University Press. Ken, Loke Kit and Harrison, Godfrey 1986. Young children’s use of Chinese (Cantonese and Mandarin) sortal classifiers. In Kao, Henry S. R. and Hoosain, Rumjahn (eds.), Linguistics, Psychology, and the Chinese Language (pp. 125–46). Hong Kong: Center of Asian Studies, University of Hong Kong. Kiefer, Markus and Spitzer, Manfred 2000. Time course of conscious and unconscious semantic brain activation. Neuroreport, 11, 2401–7. Kim, Ae-Ryung 2002. Two positions of Korean negation. In Japanese/Korean Linguistics 10 (pp. 587–600). Stanford, CA: CLSI. Kim, Bok-Lim 1996. Korean families. In McGoldrick, Monica, Giordano, Joe and Pearce, John W. (eds.), Ethnicity and Family Therapy, 2nd edn. (pp. 281–94). New York: Guilford Press. Kim, Chil Kwan 1998. A study on etymology of Korean Sign Language [in Korean]. Incheon, Korea: Sungdong School. 1999. Practice and Theories for Instruction of Sign Language [in Korean]. Incheon, Korea: Sungdong School. Kim, Dae-Jin, Kim, Jung-Bae, Jang, Won and Bien, Zeungnam 2002. Development of Korean Sign Language generation system using TV caption signal [in Korean]. Journal of IEEK (CI), 39 (4), 32–44. Kim, Eunjoo 1997. The sensitive period for second-language acquisition: a reaction time study of maturational effects on the acquisition of L2 lexico-semantic and syntactic systems. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Illinois, UrbanaChampaign. Kim, Hee-Seob 1996. Korean signed language as a natural language: a phonological analysis [in Korean]. Journal of Language Science, 3, 25–42. Kim, Hee-Sun 2004. The use of multiple sources of information in Korean sentence processing. Doctoral dissertation, Stanford University, CA.

582

References

Kim, Hee-Sun and Lee, Hyuck-Joon 2004. The role of prosody in Korean sentence processing. Paper presented at the Japanese-Korean Linguistics Conference 14, Tucson, Arizona. Kim, Heung-gyu and Kang, Beom-mo 1997. Frequency Analysis of Hangul Usage [in Korean]. Korean Cultural Research Center, Korea University. Kim, Hoyoung and Chung, Chan-Sup 1992. The effect of Meungzo and Saemmul fonts on Hangul recognition [in Korean]. Korean Journal of Experimental and Cognitive Psychology, 4, 25–35. Kim, Hyanghee and Na, Duk L. 2001. Paradise Korean Western Aphasia Battery [in Korean]. Seoul, Korea: Paradise. Kim, Hyun-Ja and Cho, Jeung-Ryeul 2001. Phonological awareness, visual perception and reading of Hangul in preschool children [in Korean]. Korean Journal of Psychology: Development, 14, 15–28. Kim, Jae-Kap 1994. Perception of letters in the context of a Korean Hangul syllable [in Korean], Doctoral dissertation, Seoul National University, Korea. Kim, Jae-Kap and Kim, Jung-Oh 1990. Letter perception in two-syllable Korean words: Comparison of an interactive activation model to an elementary perceiver and memorizer model (I) [in Korean]. In Proceedings of Spring Conference of the Korean Society for Cognitive Science (pp. 28–34). Kim, Jeesun and Davis, Chris 2004. Characteristics of poor readers of Korean Hangul: auditory, visual and phonological processing. Reading and Writing, 17, 153–85. Kim, Jong-Bok 2000. The Grammar of Negation: a Constraint-based Approach. Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications. Kim, Jong-Sung, Jang, Won and Bien, Zeungnam 1996. A dynamic gesture recognition system for the Korean Sign Language (KSL). IEEE Transactions on System, Man, and Cybernetics, 26, 354–59. Kim, Jung-Bae 2002. A study on the continuous hand gesture recognitions system for the Korean Sign Language. Doctoral dissertation, Korea Advanced Institute of Science and Technology. Kim, Jung Ha 2002. Effects of canonical word order to Korean sentence comprehension in Broca’s aphasic patients [in Korean]. Master’s thesis, Yonsei University. Kim, Jung-Oh 1982. Factors affecting visual information processing of Korean syllables, perceptual grouping of syllables, and perceptual learning [in Korean]. Language Research, 18, 285–302. Kim, Jung-Oh and Kim, Jae-Kap 1990. Letter perception in two-syllable Korean words: comparison of an interactive activation model to an elementary perceiver and memorizer model (II) [in Korean]. In Proceedings of Conference on Hangul and Korean Language Information Processing (pp. 235–46). 1992. Syllabic processing and letter perception in Korean word recognition [in Korean]. Korean Journal of Experimental and Cognitive Psychology, 4, 36–51. Kim, Karl, Relkin, Norman, Lee, Kyong-Min and Hirsch, Joy 1997. Distinct cortical areas associated with native and second languages. Nature, 388, 171–4. Kim, Ka-Young 2006. Verb production and argument structures in aphasics [in Korean]. Master’s thesis, Yonsei University.

References

583

Kim, Ka-Young, Hwang, Yu Mi, Moon, Young Sun and Nam, Kichun 1999. Anaphoric resolution in anomia and Wernicke aphasia [in Korean]. In The Proceedings of Hangul and Korean information processing (pp. 455–61). Kim, Ka-Young, Cho, H.-S. and Kim, D.-H. 2000. A study of aphasic processing of verb argument structures and semantic information. Proceedings of the Conference of the Korean Society of Communication Disorders, November, 2000, 366–9. Kim, Kyung Hwan, Yoon, Hyo Woon and Park, Hyun Wook 2004. Spatiotemporal brain activation pattern during word/picture perception by native Koreans. Neuroreport, 15, 1099–103. Kim, Meesook 1999. A crosslinguistic perspective on the acquisition of locative verbs. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Delaware. Kim, Meesook and Landau, Barbara 1997. The structure and acquisition of locative verbs in Korean and English. In Kuno, Susumu et al. (eds.), Harvard Studies in Korean Linguistics VII (pp. 33–46). Kim, Meesook, Landau, Barbara and Philips, Colin 1999. Crosslinguistic differences in children’s syntax for locative verbs. In Proceedings of the 23rd Annual Boston University Conference on Language Development (pp. 430–41). Kim, Meesook and Phillips, Colin 1998. Complex verb constructions in child Korean: overt markers of covert functional structure. In Proceedings of the 22nd Annual Boston University Conference on Language Development (pp. 430–41). Kim, Mi-Hyun and Lee, Mahn-Young 1992. Recognition of global character type in initial phase of Hangul character identification [in Korean]. Korean Journal of Experimental and Cognitive Psychology, 4, 16–24. Kim, Mikyong and Thompson, Cynthia K. 2000. Patterns of comprehension and production of nouns and verbs in agrammatism: implications for lexical organization. Brain and Language, 74, 1–25. Kim, Mikyung, McGregor, Karla K. and Thompson, Cynthia K. 2000. Early lexical development in English-and Korean-speaking children: language-general and language-specific patterns. Journal of Child Language, 27, 225–54. Kim, Min-Joo 2004. Event structure and the internally-headed relative clause construction in Korean and Japanese. Doctoral dissertation, University of Massachusetts, Amherst. Kim, Min-Shik and Chung, Chan-Sup 1989. The effect of letter form and meaningfulness of syllable on Hangul recognition [in Korean]. Korean Journal of Cognitive Science, 1, 27–75. Kim, Mi-Ryong, Beddor, Patrice. S. and Horrocks, Julie 2002. The contribution of consonantal and vocalic information to the perception of Korean initial stops. Journal of Phonetics, 30, 77–100. Kim, Mi Sook 2003. The production of grammatical morphemes of Korean children with and without Down’s syndrome [in Korean]. Unpublished master’s thesis, Dankook University, Seoul, Korea. Kim, Ryonhee 1995. The effect of Age-of –L2 onset on ultimate L2 production: the English /i-I/ distinction made by Korean speakers. English Teaching, 50 (2), 257–279. Kim, Sahyang 1997. Case-marking errors in Korean agrammatic speech [in Korean]. Master’s thesis, Hong-Ik University, Seoul, Korea.

584

References

2004. The role of prosodic phrasing in Korean word segmentation. Doctoral dissertation, UCLA. Kim, Seong-Chan 1995. The acquisition of wh-questions in English and Korean. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Hawaii, Manoa. Kim, Seongchan, O’Grady, William and Cho, Sookeun 1995. The acquisition of case and word order in Korean: a comparative study of monolinguals and bilinguals. Bilingual Research, 12 (1), 127–39. Kim, Seung Kuk 1983. A psychological study of Korean sign language [in Korean]. Doctoral dissertation, Sungkyunkwan University, Korea. 1991. Hangul-Style Standard Sign Language [in Korean]. Seoul, Korea: Department of Education. 1993. Korean Standard Sign Language [in Korean]. Seoul, Korea: Ohsung Publishing Company. 1994. A Study of Korean Sign Language [in Korean]. Seoul, Korea: Ohsung Publishing Company. Kim, Soojung 2000. Accentual effects on phonological rules in Korean. Doctoral dissertation, The University of North Carolina at Chapel-Hill. Kim, Soo-Ryun 2002. Comparison between noun and verb production of Broca’s aphasic patients in a naming task and a narrative task [in Korean]. Master’s thesis, Yonsei University, Korea. Kim, Soo Young 1990. The acquisition of Korean morphology: a case study. Ms, Purdue University. Kim, Soyoung 1998. The effects of causal relationship on recall of discourse. Psychological Science, 7, 47–63. 2000. The effects of causal relationship and predictability on recall [in Korean]. Korean Journal of Experimental and Cognitive Psychology, 12, 57–76. Kim, Sue Young 1997. The early acquisition of Korean morphology: a case study. Korean Journal of Communication Disorders, 2, 89–118. Kim, Sung-il and Lee, Jae-Ho 1995. The effect of syntactic and pragmatic constraints on sentential representation and memory accessibility [In Korean]. Korean Journal of Cognitive Science, 6, 97–116. 1997. The time course of syntactic, semantic, and pragmatic effects on the memory accessibility in sentence comprehension. In Proceedings of the Nineteenth Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society (p. 970). Kim, Sung-il, Lee, Jae-Ho and Gernsbacher, Morton A. 2004. The advantage of first mention in Korean: the temporal contributions of syntactic, semantic, and pragmatic factors. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 33, 475–91. Kim, Sung-il, Lee, Jae-Ho, Lee, Jung-Mo and Lee, Kun-Hyo 1998. Does instrument inference occur on-line during reading? In Proceedings of Eighth Society for Text and Discourse. Wisconsin, USA. Kim, Sun-Ok and Jo, Hea-Soog 2003. The relationship between phonological awareness and reading ability in young children [in Korean]. Korean Journal of Psychology, 22, 19–43. Kim, Wha-Chun 1976. The theory of anaphora in Korean syntax. Doctoral dissertation, Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Kim, Won-Ho 1994. Grammatical Relations and Anaphora in Korean. Seoul, Korea: Hanshin Publishing Company.

References

585

Kim, Yeonhee and Lee, Chang Hwan 2004. The role of phonological information in Korean monosyllabic word processing [in Korean]. Korean Journal of Cognitive Science, 15, 35–41. Kim, Yong-Suk 1999. On the long-distance anaphora of reflexives: a minimalist approach. In A Festschrift for Hong-Bae Lee (pp. 145–88). Seoul, Korea: Hanshin Publishing Company. Kim, Yoon-Joo 2002. Relative clause sentence comprehension of Broca’s aphasics [in Korean]. Master’s thesis, Yonsei University, Korea. Kim, Yoon-Shin 2001. The lexical-semantic structure of derived predicates: with reference to causativization and passivization [in Korean]. Doctoral dissertation, Seoul National University, Korea. Kim, Young Gon 1992. The role of attitudes and motivation in learning a heritage language: a study of Korean language maintenance in Toronto. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Toronto. Kim, Youngjin 1985. Local processing loads in relative-clause sentence comprehension process [in Korean]. Korean Journal of Psychology, 5, 8–26. 1999. The effects of case marking information on Korean sentence processing. Language and Cognitive Processes, 14, 687–714. 2004. Resolving grammatical marking ambiguities of Korean: an eye-tracking study. Korean Journal of Cognitive Science, 15, 49–59. Kim, Youngjin and Youn, Yim 2004. Comprehension processes of Korean topicmarked noun phrases. The Korean Journal of Experimental Psychology, 16, 483–99. Kim, Young-Joo 1987. The acquisition of relative clauses in English and Korean: development in spontaneous production. Doctoral dissertation, Harvard University. 1989. Theoretical implications of complement structure acquisition in Korean. Journal of Child Language, 573–98. 1990. The syntax and semantics of Korean case: the interaction between lexical and syntactic levels of representation. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Harvard University. 1993. Developmental errors in the production of Korean and Japanese complex NPs and their implications for the theory of language acquisition. In Kuno, Susumu et al. (eds.), Harvard Studies in Korean Linguistics V (pp. 26–40). Seoul, Korea: Hanshin Publishing Company. 1997. The acquisition of Korean. In Slobin, Dan I. (ed.), The Crosslinguistic Study of Language Acquisition (vol. 4: the Data, pp. 335–443). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. 1999. Production of verbal inflections in Broca’s aphasia [in Korean]. In A Festschrift in Honor of Professor Seunghwan Lee (pp. 455–75). Seoul, Korea: Hankuk Muwnwhasa. 2000. Subject/object drop in the acquisition of Korean: a crosslinguistic comparison. Journal of East Asian Languages, 9, 325–51. Kim, Youngju 1995. Verb lexicalization patterns in Korean and some issues of language acquisition. Language Research, 31, 501–43. Kim, Yunjeong, Kim, Soo-Jung, Jung, Jae-Bum, Pyun, Sung-Bom and Nam, Kichun 2000. Characteristics of resolving syntactic ambiguity in normal and aphasics [in Korean]. Korean Journal of Communication Disorders, 5 (1), 102–18.

586

References

Kim-Renaud, Young-Key (ed.) 1997. The Korean Alphabet: Its History and Structure. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press. King, Jonathan and Just, Marcel A. 1991. Individual differences in syntactic processing. Journal of Memory and Language, 30, 580–602. Kinoshita, Sachiko and Lupker, Stephen 2002. Effects of filler type in naming: change in time criterion or attentional control of pathways? Memory and Cognition, 30, 1277–87. Kintsch, Walter 1988. The role of knowledge in discourse comprehension: a construction-integration model. Psychological Review, 95, 163–82. 1998. Comprehension: a Paradigm for Cognition. NY: Cambridge University Press. Kirk, Lorraine 1973. An analysis of speech imitations by Ga children. Anthropological Linguistics, 15, 267–75. Kiss, Katalin 2000. Effects of verb complexity on agrammatic aphasics’ sentence production. In Bastiaanse, Roelien and Grodzinsky, Yosef (eds.), Grammatical Disorders in Aphasia: a Neurolinguistic Perspective (pp. 123–51). London: Whurr. Kjelgaard, Margaret M. and Speer, Shari R. 1999. Prosodic facilitation and interference in the resolution of temporary syntactic closure ambiguity. Journal of Memory and Language, 40, 153–94. Ko, Heejeong, Ionin, Tania and Wexler, Kenneth 2006. Adult L2-learners lack the Maximality presupposition, too! In Deen, K. U. et al. (eds.), The Proceedings of the Inaugural Conference on Generative Approaches to Language Acquisition – North America, Honolulu, HI (pp. 171–82). University of Connecticut Occasional Papers in Linguistics 4. 2009. Parallels between L1 and L2 acquisition in article semantics: the role of presuppositionality. Manuscript, Seoul National University, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign and MIT. Ko, Heejeong, Perovic, Alex, Ionin, Tania and Wexler, Kenneth 2008. Semantic universals and variation in L2 article choice. In Proceedings of GASLA 9 (pp. 118–29). Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press. Koh, Sungryong 1997. The resolution of the dative NP ambiguity in Korean. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 26, 265–73. in press. Grammatical constraints and processing strategy of topic noun phrases in Korean. The Korean Journal of Experimental and Cognitive Psychology. Koizumi, Masatoshi 2000. String vacuous overt verb-raising. Journal of East Asian Linguistics, 9, 227–85. Kolk, Herman H. and Heeschen, Claus 1992. Agrammatism, paragrammatism and the management of language. Language and Cognitive Process, 7, 89–129. Kolk, Herman H. and van Grunsven, Marianne J. F. 1985. Agrammatism as variable phenomenon. Cognitive Neuropsychology, 2, 347–84. Kolk, Herman H., van Grunsven, Marianne J. F. and Keyser, Antoine 1985. On parallelism between production and comprehension in agrammatism. In Kean, MaryLouise (ed.), Agrammatism (pp. 165–206). New York: Academic Press. Kolk, Herman H. and Weijts, Marion 1996. Judgments of semantic anomaly in agrammatic patients: argument movement, syntactic complexity, and the use of heuristics. Brain and Language, 54, 86–135. Koo, John 1992. The term of address ‘you’ in South Korea today. Korea Journal, 32(1), 27–42.

References

587

Krashen, Stephen D. 1996. Under Attack: the Case Against Bilingual Education. Culver City, CA: Language Education Associates. Kratzer, Angelika 2000. Building statives. In Proceedings of the Twenty-Sixth Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistic Society (pp. 385–99). Berkeley Linguistic Society. Kroch, Anthony 1989. Reflexes of grammar in patterns of language change. Language Variation and Change, 1, 199–244. Kuhl, Patricia K., Williams, Karen A., Lacerda, Francisco, Stevens, Kenneth N. and Lindblom, Björn 1992. Linguistic experience alters phonetic perception in infants by 6 months of age. Science, 255, 606–8. Kuno, Susumu 1986. Functional Syntax. University of Chicago Press. Kuntze, Marlon 1998. Literacy and deaf children: the language question. Topics in Language Disorders, 18 (4), 1–15. Kuperberg, Gina, Sitnikova, Tatiana, Caplan, David and Holcomb, Phillip 2003. Electrophysiological distinctions in processing conceptual relationships within simple sentences. Cognitive Brain Research, 17, 117–29. Kutas, Marta and Federmeier, Kara 2000. Electrophysiology reveals semantic memory use in language comprehension. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 4, 463–70. Kutas, Marta and Hillyard, Steven 1980. Reading senseless sentences: brain potentials reflect semantic incongruity. Science, 207, 203–5. Kutas, Marta and van Petten, Cyma 1994. Psycholinguistics electrified: event-related brain potential investigations. In Gernsbacher, Morton A. (ed.), Handbook of Psycholinguistics (pp. 83–143). San Diego, CA: Academic Press Kwak, Ho-Wan, Kim, Jung-Oh and Park, Min-Kyu 1993. Time courses of the negative and positive repetition effects, Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 19, 814–29. Kweon, Soo-Ok 2000. The acquisition of English contraction phenomena by advanced Korean learners of English: experimental studies on wanna-contraction and auxiliary contraction. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Hawaii at Manoa. 2001. The acquisition of contraction constraint by non-native speakers of English. English Teaching, 56 (3), 89–109. Kwon, Hyukchan, Kuriki, Shinya, Kim, Jin Mok, Lee, Yong Ho, Kim, Kiwoong and Nam, Kichun 2005. MEG study on neural activities associated with syntactic and semantic violations in spoken Korean sentences. Neuroscience Research, 51, 349–57. Kwon, Kyung-Hyuk, Woo, Yo-Seop and Min, Hong-Ki 2000. Design and implementation of a Korean text to sign language translation system. Journal of Information Processing System, 7, 756–65. Kwon, Nayoung, Polinsky, Maria and Kluender, Robert 2004. Processing of relative clause sentences in Korean. In Proceedings of AMLaP 2004 Conference. Kwon, Oh-Seek, Yoon, Hye-kyung and Lee, Do-Hun 2001. The theory of Hangul acquisition and its application [in Korean]. Korean Journal of Psychology, 20, 211–27. Kwon, Soon-Woo 2001. The qualitative research on processing in the sign language acquisition for hearing impaired students [in Korean]. MA thesis, Taegu University, Korea. Kwon, Youan, Hwang, Yumi, Lim, HeuiSeok and Nam, Kichun 2002. A model of Korean connective ending processing [in Korean]. In Proceedings of Korea Brain Society Conference (pp. 87–8).

588

References

Kwon, Youan, Park, Kinam, Lim, Heuiseok and Nam, Kichun 2007. The phonological syllable plays a role in lexical access in Korean visual word recognition, In Third International Conference on Natural Computation (vol. V, IEEE, pp. 536–44). Ladd, D. Robert 1996. Intonational Phonology. Cambridge University Press. Ladefoged, Peter 1993. A Course in Phonetics, 3rd edn. Orlando, FL: Harcourt Brace College Publishers. Lakoff, George 1970. Global rules. Language, 46, 627–39. Lambrecht, Knud 1994 Information Structure and Sentence Form: Topic, Focus and Mental Representations of Discourse Referents. Cambridge University Press. Landau, Barbara and Gleitman, Lila 1985. Language and Experience: Evidence from the Blind Child. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Landau, Barbara and Jackendoff, Ray 1993. “What” and “where” in spatial language and spatial cognition. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 16, 217–38. Landau, Barbara, Smith, Linda B. and Jones, Susan S. 1988. The importance of shape in early lexical learning. Cognitive Development, 3, 299–321. Lang, Ewald 2000. Adversative connectors on distinct levels of discourse: a re-examination of Eve Sweeter’s three-level approach. In Couper-Kuhlen, Elizabeth and Kortmann, Bernd (eds.), Cause-Condition-Concession-Contrast: Cognitive and Discourse Perspective. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. Langacker, Ronald W. 1995. Raising and transparency. Language, 71, 1–62. Lasnik, Howard and Saito, Mamoru 1984. On the nature of proper government. Linguistic Inquiry, 15, 235–89. Lebeaux, David 1988. Language acquisition and the form of the grammar. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Massachusetts, Amherst. Lecanuet, Jean-Pierre and Garanier-Deferre, Carolyn. 1993. Speech stimuli in the fetal environment. In de Boysson-Bardies, Benedicte et al. (eds.), Developmental Neurocognition: Speech and Face Processing in the First Year of Life (pp. 237–48). Netherlands: Kluwer Academic. Leck, K. J., Weekes, B. S. and Chen, M.-J. 1995. Visual and phonological pathways to the lexicon: evidence from Chinese readers. Memory and Cognition, 23, 468–76. Lee, Byeong-Taek 1995. Individual differences in working memory capacity and comprehension [in Korean]. Master’s thesis, Seoul National University, Korea. 2002a. Individual differences in lexical ambiguity resolution: context-dependent processing of skilled readers [in Korean]. Doctoral dissertation, Seoul National University, Korea. 2002b. Reliability of the reading span test [in Korean]. Psychological Science, 11, 15–33. Lee, Byeong-Taek, Kim, Kyong-Joong and Zoh, Myeong-han 1996. Working memory and language: comprehension individual differences in reading span and language processing [in Korean]. Korean Journal of Experimental and Cognitive Psychology, 8, 59–85. Lee, Byeong-Taek, Lee, Kyoung-Min, Kim, Jung-Oh and Hong, Chai-Song 2002. Suppression and recognition reading span test [in Korean]. Korean Journal of Cognitive Science, 13, 91–102. Lee, Chungmin 1973. Abstract syntax of Korean with reference to English. Doctoral dissertation submitted to Indiana University.

References

589

1982–1990. Children’s (SK and CK) acquisition diary [in Korean]. Unpublished manuscript. 1989. Syntactic ambiguities in Korean [in Korean]. In Proceedings of the Conference of Hangul and Korean Processing (pp. 282–97). 1990. Pragmatic and metapragmatic aspect of language acquisition in Korean. Paper presented at the Fifth International Congress for the Study of Child Language, Budapest. 1991. Speech act terms and mood indicators [in Korean]. Acta Linguistica, 39, 127–41. 1993. The acquisition of mood indicators in Korean. In Kuno, Susumu et al. (eds.), Harvard Studies in Korean Linguistics V (pp. 41–61). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University. 1995. The development of mood and modality in Korean. In Fava, Elisabetta (ed.), Speech Acts and Linguistic Research (pp. 71–88). Papers of the 1994 LSA Workshop July 1994, Padova. 1996. Generic sentences are topic constructions. In Fretheim, Thorstein and Gundel, Jeannette K. (eds.), Reference and Referent Accessibility. Amsterdam/ Philadelphia: John Benjamins. 1997. The acquisition of tense-aspect-modality in Korean. Presented at the Workshop on First Language Acquisition of East Asian Languages, Linguistic Society of America Linguistic Institute, Cornell University. 1999. Aspects of aspect in Korean psych-predicates: implications for psychepredicates in general. In Abraham, Werner and Kulikov, Leonid (eds.), Tenseaspect, Transitivity and Causativity (pp. 223–52). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. 2000. Numeral classifiers, (in-)definites and incremental theme in Korean. In Lee, Chungmin and Whitman, John (eds.), Korean Syntax and Semantics: LSA Institute Workshop, Santa Cruz, ’91. Seoul, Korea: Thaehaksa. 2001. Acquisition of topic and subject markers in Korean. In Nakayama, Mineharu (ed.), Issues in East Asian Language Acquisition (Kurosio Linguistics Workshop Series vol. 7, pp. 41–66). Tokyo, Japan: Kurosio Publishers. 2003. Contrastive topic and/or contrastive focus. In McClure, William (ed.), Japanese/Korean Linguistics 12 (pp. 352–64). Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications. 2006. Contrastive topic/focus and polarity in discourse. In Turner, Ken and von Heusinger, Klaus (eds.), Where Semantics Meets Pragmatics: CRiSPI 15. (pp. 381–420). Oxford: Elsevier. Lee, Chungmin, Chae, Hee-Rahk and Yoon, James Hye-Suk in preparation. A Reference Grammar of Korean. Cambridge University Press. Lee, Chungmin, Nam, Seungho and Kang, Beom-Mo 1998. Lexical semantic structure for predicates in Korean. In Boas, Johan and Buitelaar, Paul (eds.), Proceedings of ESSLLI-98 (pp. 1–15). Lee, Dami 1996. The critical period hypothesis and the acquisition of English pronouns by Korean speakers. English Teaching, 51, 83–96. Lee, Dami and Lee, Kwee-Ock 2002. The acquisition of Korean numeral classifiers by English/Korean bilingual children. Korean Education, 13 (1), 265–78. Lee, Dami and Schachter, Jacqueline 1997. Sensitive period effects in binding theory. Language Acquisition, 6, 333–62.

590

References

Lee, Euichol and Zoh, Myeong-han 1968. Analysis of factors operative in organization of a word [in Korean]. Korean Journal of Psychology, 1, 5–13. Lee, Eun-Kyung 1999. A study on the development of case morphemes in normal children aged from two to four years who live in Taegu. Master’s thesis, Taegu University, Korea. Lee, H.-W. 1999. A study of inflectional errors in Broca’s aphasia. M.A. thesis, Hankuk University of Foreign Studies. Lee, Ha-Won 1999. Errors in Broca’s aphasiacs’ use of inflections: with reference to Korean and English [in Korean]. MA thesis, Hankuk University of Foreign Studies. Lee, Hae-Wook and Pae, Soyeong 2003. Korean children’s noun and verb naming abilities [in Korean]. Dutch as a Second Language, 13, 257–79. Lee, Heung-Cheol 1984. The effect of the functional role and the presentation order in causal related sentences on causal reading time and primed reaction time [in Korean]. Unpublished master’s thesis, Korea University, Korea. Lee, Hyeonjin 1990. Logical relations in the child’s grammar: relative scope, bound variables, and long distance binding in Korean. A dissertation submitted to the University of California at Irvine. 1993. Syntax and semantics of locative verbs and language acquisition. In Kuno, Susumu et al. (eds.), Harvard Studies in Korean Linguistics V (pp. 62–75). 1995. The role of ontological categories and syntactic cues in inferences about word meanings. Korean Journal of Psychology: Developmental, 8 (1), 95–106. 2000. The meaning of locative verbs in Korean and language acquisition. In Cho, S. et al. (eds.), How do Human Acquire Language? (pp. 71–94). Daewoohaksulchongseo (Daewoo Academic Series): Acanet. 2002. Korean word learning: ontological concept, whole object constraint, shape similarity, and shape complexity [in Korean]. The Korean Journal of Developmental Psychology, 15 (4), 77–92. Lee, Hyeonjin and Lee, Kyung-Hwa 1999. Ontological concept, intention, and stimulus complexity in Korean word learning. Poster presented at the Biennial Meetings of the Society for Research in Child Development, Albuquerque, New Mexico. Lee, Hyeonjin and Wexler, Kenneth 1987. The acquisition of reflexives and pronouns in Korean: from a crosslinguistic perspective. Paper presented at the 12th Annual Boston University Conference on Language Development. Lee, Hyo Sang 1985. Consciously known but unassimilated information: a pragmatic analysis of the epistemic modal suffix “-kun” in Korean. Paper Presented at the First Pacific Linguistics Conference at the University of Oregon. 1991. Tense, aspect and modality: a discourse-pragmatic analysis of verbal affixes in Korean from a typological perspective. Doctoral dissertation, University of California at Los Angeles. Lee, Hyuck-Joon 1999. Tonal realization and implementation of the accentual phrase in Seoul Korean. Master’s thesis, UCLA. Lee, Ik-Hwan 1978. Pronominal anaphora in Korean. Language Research, 14 (1), 63–98. Lee, Iksop and Ramsey, S. Robert 2000. The Korean Language. Albany: State University of New York Press. Lee, Insup 1986. Language Development in Children [in Korean]. Seoul, Korea: Keymoonsa. Lee, Jae-Ho & Lee, M-Y. 1990. Pronoun type and referential resolution [in Korean]. Proceedings of the second Hangul and Korean Information Processing. Seoul, Korea.

References

591

Lee, Jae-Ho 1993. On-line processing of pronoun resolution in reading [in Korean]. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Korea University, Korea. 2004. The role of syntactic cues in pronoun referential resolution: the effects of number cue and gender cue [in Korean]. Korean Journal of Cognitive Science, 15, 25–33. Lee, Jae-Ho and Bang, Hee-Jeong 2003. Implicit representation of gender stereotype: priming effects of attribute typicality and gender congruency [in Korean]. Korean Journal of Cognitive Science, 14, 37–48. Lee, Jae-Ho and Lee, Jung-Mo 1999. On-line generation of elaborative inference: predictive inference [in Korean]. Korean Journal of Experimental and Cognitive Psychology, 11, 261–76. Lee, Jae-Ho, Lee, Jung-Mo, Kim, Sung-il and Park, Tae-Jin 2002. Memory representation of mention order in Korean: interactive effects for first-mention, recency, and semantic-bias [in Korean]. The Korean Journal of Experimental and Cognitive Psychology, 14, 409–27. Lee, Jeong Mee and Hwang, Mina 2001. The production of grammatical morphemes of children with SLI in sentence repetition [in Korean]. In Proceedings of the Annual Conference of Korean Academy of Speech-Language Pathology and Audiology in 2001 (pp. 225–31). Lee, Jong-Goo and Lee, Jung-Mo 1989. Effects of script hierarchy, presence of unexpected information, and its resolution on comprehension and memory [in Korean]. Korean Journal of Experimental and Cognitive Psychology, 1, 97–105. Lee, Joo Keun, Namkung, Jae Chan and Kim, Young Kun 1981. A study on the partial separation for subpatterns and recognition of the Hangeul patterns [in Korean]. Journal of Korea Institute of Electronics Engineers, 18, 1–8. Lee, Joon-Suk and Kim, Kyung-Lin 1989. The processing unit in Korean words [in Korean]. Korean Journal of Cognitive Science, 1, 221–39. Lee, Ju-Eun 2003. A sketch of the structure of passive constructions in Korean: a light predicate-based analysis. In Iverson, Gregory K. and Ahn, Sang-Cheol (eds.), Explorations in Korean Language and Linguistics (pp. 347–59). Seoul, Korea: Hankook. Lee, Jung-Mo 1979. Deeper processing: spreading elaboration and integrative elaboration. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Queen’s University, Canada. 1981. Coreference, coherence and memory of discourse [in Korean]. Paper presented at SICOL-81 (Seoul International Conference on Linguistics). Lee, Jung-Mo and Choi, Sang-Sup 1986. Processing of causally related sentences: primed recognition and deeper processing [in Korean]. Korean Journal of Psychology, 5, 116–27. Lee, J-M., Choi, S. S., Lee, J-G. & Cho, K. H. 2000. Representation and processing of contrast information in discourse comprehension. Proceedings of the Tenth Annual Meeting of the Society for Text and Discourse. Lyon, France. Lee, Jung-Mo and Lee, Jae-Ho 2004. Discourse comprehension: the effects of antecedent’s lexical property on pronoun referential resolution [in Korean]. Korean Journal of Experimental Psychology, 16, 151–68. 2005. Contrastive information processing in discourse comprehension. Korean Journal of Cognitive Science, 16, 1–24. Lee, Jung-Mo, Lee, Jae-Ho, Kim, Sung-il and Lee, Kun-Hyo 1997. Does instrument inference occur on-line during reading? [in Korean]. Korean Journal of Experimental Psychology, 9, 75–97.

592

References

Lee, Jung-Mo and Lee, Kun-Hyo 1993. Anaphoric resolution for general-term antecedents [in Korean]. Korean Journal of Experimental and Cognitive Psychology, 5, 188–204. Lee, Kwee-Ock 1990. On the first language acquisition of relative clauses in Korean: The universal structure of COMP. Doctoral dissertation, Cornell University. 1991. On The First Language Acquisition of Relative Clauses in Korean: the Universal Structure of Comp. Seoul, Korea: Hanshin. 1997a. The role of semantic and syntax knowledge on children’s language development: a study of acquisition of Korean classifiers [in Korean]. Adonghakhoyci (Korean Journal of Child Studies), 18 (1), 73–85. 1997b. Overextension of Korean classifiers in children’s language acquisition: a naturalistic data analysis [in Korean]. Kyungsungtay Nonmwuncip, 18 (1), 33–47. Lee, Kwee-Ock, Jun, Jong Sup and Park, Hye-Won 2004. Quantitative differences in the processing of relative clauses between monolingual and bilingual speakers. Discourse and Cognition, 11 (1), 215–35. Lee, Kwee-Ock, Lust, Barbara C. and Whitman, John 1990. On functional categories in Korean: a study of the first language acquisition of Korean relative clauses. International Conference of Korean Linguistics, 7, 312–33. 1991. On the acquisition of functional categories in Korean: a study of the first language acquisition of Korean relative clauses. In Baek, Eun-Jin (ed.) Papers from the Seventh International Conference on Korean Linguistics. Seoul, Korea: Hanshin. Lee, Miseon 2000. On agrammatic deficits in English and Korean. Doctoral dissertation, University of Hawaii. 2003. Dissociation among functional categories in Korean agrammatism. Brain and Language, 84, 170–88. Lee, Seok-Joo and Lee, Joo-Haeng 1994. Introduction to Korean Language [In Korean]. Seoul, Korea: Taehan Textbook Publisher. Lee, Seungbok and Chang-Song, You-kyung 1999. Linguistic input and cognitive constraints in the lexical acquisition [in Korean]. Korean Journal of Psychology: Developmental, 12 (2), 49–65. Lee, Sunhwa 2001. Individual differences in predictive inferences during discourse comprehension: active process and passive process [in Korean]. Master’s thesis, Seoul National University, Korea. Lee, Thomas 1986. Studies on quantification in Chinese. Doctoral dissertation, University of California. 1991. Linearity as a scope principle for Chinese: the evidence from first language acquisition. In Napoli, Donna J. and Kegl, Judy A. (eds.), Bridges between Psychology and Linguistics. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Lee, Yang 1995. A test of the orthographic depth hypothesis in recognition of Korean written words [in Korean]. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Seoul National University, Korea. 1998. The influences of orthographic depth and processing resource in word recognition [in Korean]. Korean Journal of Experimental and Cognitive Psychology, 10, 1–16. Lee, Yoonhyoung, Lee, Hanjung and Gordon, Peter C. 2007. Linguistic complexity and information structure in Korean: evidence from eye-tracking during reading. Cognition, 104, 495–534.

References

593

Lee, Young-Ai 1984. Visual organization of Korean letters [in Korean]. Korean Journal of Psychology, 4, 153–70. 1990. Effects of visual transformations on the processing of Korean letters [in Korean]. Korean Journal of Cognitive Science, 2, 221–59. Lehiste, Ilse 1970. Suprasegmentals. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. 1973. Phonetic disambiguation of syntactic ambiguity. Glossa, 7, 107–22. Levin, Beth 1993. English Verb Classes and Alternations. University of Chicago Press. Levin, Beth and Rappaport, Malka 1986. The formation of adjectival passives. Linguistic Inquiry, 17, 623–61. Levinson, Stephen C. 1996. Frames of reference and Molyneux’s question: crosslinguistic evidence. In Bloom, Paul, Peterson, Mary, Nadel, Lynn and Garrett, Merrill F. (eds.), Language and Space (pp. 109–69). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Lewis, David 1975. Adverbs of quantification. In Keenan, Edward L. (ed.), Formal Semantics of Natural Language. Cambridge University Press. Lewis, Morris M. 1951. Infant Speech, a Study of the Beginning of Language. New York: Humanities Press. Li, Charles N. and Thompson, Sandar A. 1977. The acquisition of tone in Mandarinspeaking children. Journal of Child Language, 4, 185–99. Li, Peggy and Gleitman, Lila 2002. Turning the tables: language and spatial reasoning. Cognition, 83, 265–94. Li, Ping 1996. Spoken word recognition of code-switched words by Chinese-English bilinguals. Journal of Memory and Language, 35, 757–74. Li, Ping and Bowerman, Melissa 1998. The acquisition of lexical and grammatical aspect in Chinese. First Language, 18, 311–50. Li, Wei 1995. Code-switching, preference marking and politeness in bilingual crossgenerational talk: examples from a Chinese community in Britain. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development, 16 (3), 197–214. Li, Wei and Milroy, Lesley 1995. Conversational code-switching in a Chinese community in Britain: a sequential analysis. Journal of Pragmatics, 23, 281–99. Li, Yafei 1990. On V-V compounds in Chinese. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory, 8, 177–208. Liberman, Alvin M. 1996. Speech: a Special Code. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Liberman, Alvin M. and Pierrehumbert, Janet B. 1986. Intonational invariance under changes in pitch range and length. In Aronoff, Mark and Oehrle, Richard (eds.), Language Sound Structure (pp. 157–233). Liddell, Scott K. and Johnson, Robert E. 1992. Toward theoretically sound practices in deaf education. In Bilingual Considerations in the Education of Deaf Students: ASL and English (pp. 8–34). Washington, DC: Gallaudet University. Lidz, Jeffrey 2000. The morphosemantics of object case in Kannada. In Proceedings of WCCFL 18. Cascadilla Press. 2001. Condition R. Linguistic Inquiry, 32, 123–40. 2006. The grammar of accusative case in Kannada. Language, 82, 1–23. Lidz, Jeffrey and Musolino, Julien 2002. Children’s command of quantification. Cognition, 84, 113–54. Lieven, Elena, Pine, Julian M. and Baldwin, Gillian 1997. Lexically-based learning and early grammatical development. Journal of Child Language, 24, 187–219.

594

References

Lightfoot, David 1976. Trace theory and twice-moved NPs. Linguistic Inquiry, 7, 559–82. 1977. On traces and conditions on rules. In Culicover, Peter, Wasow, Thomas and Akmajian, Adrian (eds.), Formal Syntax (pp. 207–37). New York: Academic Press. 1980. Trace theory and explanation. In Moravsik, Edith A. and Wirth, Jessica R. (eds.), Syntax and Semantics 13 (pp. 137–66). New York: Academic Press. Lindblom, Björn 1990. Explaining phonetic variation: a sketch of the H-H theory. In Hardcastle, William J. and Marchal, Alain (eds.), Speech Production and Speech Modeling (pp. 403–39). Dordrecht: Kluwer. Lindblom, Björn and Engstrand, Olle 1989. In what sense is speech quantal? Journal of Phonetics, 17, 107–21. Lindblom, Björn and Maddieson, Ian 1984. Phonetic universals in consonant systems. In Hyman, Larry M. and Li, Charles N. (eds.), Language, Speech and Mind (pp. 62–78). London: Routledge. Lindholm, Kathryn and Padilla, Amado M. 1978. Child bilingualism: report on language mixing switching and translation. Linguistics, 211, 23–44. Linebarger, Marcia C. 1995. Agrammatism as evidence about grammar. Brain and Language, 50, 52–91. Linebarger, Marcia C., Schwartz, Myrna F. and Saffran, Eleanor M. 1983. Sensitivity to grammatical structure in so-called agrammatic aphasics. Cognition, 13, 361–92. Litchfield, Sharon K. 2002. The relationship of ASL proficiency to the written literacy skills of children who are deaf. Doctoral dissertation, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. Liu, Ying and Peng, Dan-ling 1997. Meaning access of Chinese compounds and its time course. In Chen, Hsuan-Chih (ed.), Cognitive Processing of Chinese and Related Asian Languages (pp. 219–32). Hong Kong: Chinese University Press. Long, Debra L., Seely, Mark R. and Oppy, Brian J. 1999. The strategic nature of less skilled readers’ suppression problems. Discourse Processes, 27, 281–302. Long, Michael H. 1990. Maturational constraints on language development. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 12, 251–85. Lopez, David 1990. Maturational constraints on language learning. Cognitive Science, 14, 11–28. Lopez, David 1996. Language: diversity and assimilation. In Waldinger, Roger and Bozorgmehr, Mehdi (eds.), Ethnic Los Angeles (pp. 139–63). New York: Russell Sage Foundation. Lovegrove, William J. 1996. Dyslexia and a transient/magnocellular pathway deficit: the current situation and future directions. Australian Journal of Psychology, 48, 167–71. Lucas, Margery M., Tanenhaus, Michael K. and Carlson, Greg N. 1990. Levels of representation in the interpretation of anaphoric reference and instrument inference. Memory and Cognition, 18, 611–31. Lucy, John A. 1992. Grammatical Categories and Cognition: a Case Study of the Linguistic Relativity Hypothesis. Cambridge University Press. Luetke-Stahlman, Barbara 1998. Language Issues in Deaf Education. Hillsboro, OR: Butte. Lukatela, Katarina, Shankweiler, Donald and Crain, Stephen 1995. Syntactic processing in agrammatic aphasia by speakers of a Slavic language. Brain and Language, 49, 50–76.

References

595

Lundberg, Ingvar 1989. Lack of phonological awareness: a critical factor in developmental dyslexia. In von Euler, Curt, Lundberg, Ingvar and Lennerstrand, Gunnar (eds.), Brain and Reading (pp. 221–32). London: Macmillan. Luzzatti, Claudio, Raggi, Rossella, Zonca, Giusy, Pistarini, Caterina, Contardi, Antonella and Pinna, Gian-Domenico 2002. Verb-noun double dissociation in aphasic lexical impairments: the role of word frequency and imageability. Brain and Language, 81, 432–44. MacDonald, Maryellen C., Just, Marcel A. and Carpenter, Patricia A. 1992. Working memory constraints on the processing of syntactic ambiguity. Cognitive Psychology, 24, 56–98. MacDonald, Maryellen C. and MacWhinney, Brian 1990. Measuring inhibition and facilitation from pronouns. Journal of Memory and Language, 27, 469–92. MacDonald, Maryellen C., Perlmutter, Neal J. and Seidenberg, Mark S. 1994. The lexical nature of syntactic ambiguity resolution. Psychological Review, 101, 676–703. MacWhinney, Brian 1977. Starting points. Language, 53, 152–68. MacWhinney, Brian 1982. Basic syntactic processes. In Kuczaj, Stan (ed.), Language Acquisition: Syntax and Semantics. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. 1995. The CHILDES Project: Tools for Analyzing Talk. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. MacWhinney, Brian, Osmán-Sági, Judit and Slobin, Dan I. 1991. Sentence comprehension in aphasia in two clear case-marking languages. Brain and Language, 41, 234–49. MacWhinney, Brian, Pleh, Csaba and Bates, Elizabeth 1985. Case-marking and the development of sentence comprehension. Cognitive Psychology, 55, 178–209. Maess, Burkhard, Hermann, Christoph, Hahne, Anja, Nakamura, Akinori and Friederici, Angela D. 2006. Localizing the distributed language network responsible for the N400 measured by MEG during auditory sentence processing. Brain Research, 22, 163–72. Mahootian, Shahrzad and Santorini, Beatrice 1996. Code-switching and the complement/adjunct distinction. Linguistic Inquiry, 27 (3), 464–79. Malakoff, Marguerite and Hakuta, Kenji 1991. Translation skill and metalinguistic awareness in bilinguals. In Bialystok, Ellen (ed.), Language Processing in Bilingual Children (pp. 141–66). Cambridge University Press Malt, Barbara, Sloman, Steven, Genneri, Silvia, Shi, Meiyi and Wang, Yuan 1999. Knowing versus naming: similarity and the linguistic categorization of artifacts. Journal of Memory and Language, 40, 230–62. Mandel, Denise R., Jusczyk, Peter W., and Kemler Nelson, D. 1994. Does sentential prosody help infants organize and remember speech information? Cognition, 53, 155–80. Mandler, Jean 1992. How to build a baby: II. conceptual primitives. Psychological Review, 99, 587–604. 1996. Preverbal representation and language. In Bloom, Paul, Peterson, Mary, Nadel, Lynn and Garrett, Merrill F. (eds.), Language and Space (pp. 365–84). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Manis, Franklin R., McBride-Chang, Catherine, Seidenberg, Mark S., Keating, Patricia, Doi, Lisa M., Munson, Benjamin and Peterson, Alan 1997. Are speech perception

596

References

deficits associated with developmental dyslexia? Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 66, 211–35. Manzini, Maria R. 1983. On control and control theory. Linguistic Inquiry, 14, 421–46. Maratsos, Michael P. 1974. Preschool children’s use of definite and indefinite articles. Child Development, 45 (2), 446–55. 1976. The Use of Definite and Indefinite Reference in Young Children. Cambridge University Press. Maratsos, Michael P., Fox, Danny, Becker, Judith and Chalkey, Mary 1985. Semantic restrictions on children’s passives. Cognition, 19, 167–91. Maratsos, Michael P. and Kuczaj, Stan 1978. Against the transformationalist account: a simpler analysis of auxiliary overmarkings. Journal of Child Language, 5, 337–45. Markman, Ellen M. 1989. Categorization and Naming in Children. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. 1994. Constraints of word meaning in early language acquisition. In Gleitman, Lila and Landau, Barbara (eds.), The Acquisition of the Lexicon. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Markman, Ellen M. and Hutchinson, Jean E. 1984. Children’s sensitivity to constraints on word meaning: taxonomic vs. thematic relations. Cognitive Psychology, 16, 1–27. Marschark, Marc, Lang, Harry G. and Albertini, John A. 2002. Educating Deaf Students: From Research to Practice. Oxford University Press. Marshall, Catherine M., Snowling, Margaret J. and Bailey, Peter J. 2001. Rapid auditory processing and phonological ability in normal readers and readers with dyslexia. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 44, 925–40. Marslen-Wilson, William 1989. Access and integration: projecting sound onto meaning. In Marslen-Wilson, William (ed.), Lexical Representation and Process (pp. 3–24). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Marslen-Wilson, William, Tyler, L. Komisarjevsky, Waksler, Rachel and Older, Lianne 1994. Morphology and meaning in the English mental lexicon. Psychological Review, 101 (1), 3–33. Martin, David S. 2001. The English-only movement and sign language for deaf learners: an instructive parallel. Sign Language Studies, 1, 115–24. Martin, Samuel E. and Lee, Young Sook C. 1969. Beginning Korean. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press. Martin, Samuel E., Lee, Yang-Ha and Chang, Sung-Un. 1967. A Korean-English Dictionary. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press. Massaro, Dominic W. 1979. Letter information and orthographic context in word perception. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 5, 595–609. Matsumoto, Yo 1985a. Japanese numeral classifiers: their structure and acquisition. Master’s thesis. Sophia University. 1985b. Acquisition of some Japanese numeral classifiers: the search for convention. Papers and Reports in Child Language Development, 24, 79–86. 1987. Order of acquisition in the lexicon: implications from Japanese numeral classifiers. In Nelson, Keith E. and van Kleek, Anne (eds.), Children’s Language (vol. 6, pp. 229–60). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Matthewson, Lisa, Bryant, Timothy and Roeper, Thomas 2001. A Salish stage in the acquisition of English determiners: unfamiliar “definites.” In The Proceedings of

References

597

SULA: the Semantics of Under-Represented Languages in the Americas. University Of Massachusetts Occasional Papers In Linguistics 25. Mauner, Gail, Fromkin, Victoria A. and Cornell, Thomas L. 1993. Comprehension and acceptability judgments in agrammatism: disruptions in the syntax of referential dependency. Brain and Language, 45, 340–70. Maxfield, Thomas and Plunkett, Bernadette 1991. University of Massachusetts Occasional Papers: Papers on the Acquisition of WH. Amherst: GLSA. Mayer, Judith, Erreich, Anne and Valian, Virginia 1978. Transformations, basic operations, and language acquisition. Cognition, 6, 1–13. Mazuka, Reiko 1998. The Development of Language Processing Strategies: a Crosslinguistic Study Between Japanese and English. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. McClelland, James L. and Rumelhart, David E. 1981. An interactive activation model of context effects in letter perception: part 1. an account of basic findings. Psychological Review, 88, 375–407. McClure, William (ed.) 2003. Japanese/Korean Linguistics 12. Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications. McCroskey, Robert L. and Kidder, Herman C. 1980. Auditory fusion among learning disabled, reading disabled, and normal children. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 13, 69–76. McDonald, Janet 1984. Semantic and syntactic processing cues used by first and second language learners of English, Dutch, and German. Doctoral dissertation, CarnegieMellon University. McDonald, Janet L. and MacWhinney, Brian 1995. The time course of anaphoric resolution: effects of implicit verb causality and gender. Journal of Memory and Language, 34, 543–66. McDonough, Laraine, Choi, Soonja and Mandler, Jean 2003. Understanding spatial relations: flexible infants, lexical adults. Cognitive Psychology, 46, 229–59. McGloin, Naomi and Mori, Junki (eds.) 2006. Japanese/Korean Linguistics 15. Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications. McKoon, Gail, Ratcliff, Roger, Ward, Gregory and Sproat, Richard 1993. Syntactic prominence on discourse processes. Journal of Memory and Language, 32, 593–607. McKoon, Gail, Ward, Gregory, Ratcliff, Roger and Sproat, Richard 1993. Morphosyntactic and pragmatic factors affecting the accessibility of discourse entity. Journal of Memory and Language, 32, 56–75. McMahon, Erin Leddon, Lidz, Jeffrey and Pierrehumbert, Janet 2004. Suprasegmental cues to meaning in child-directed speech. Talk given at 17th CUNY Sentence Processing Conference. McNeill, David 1970. The Acquisition of Language: the Study of Developmental Psycholinguistics. New York: Academic Press. Mehler, Jaques, Jusczyk, Peter, W. Lambertz, Ghislane, Halsted, Nilofar, Bertoncini, Josiane and Amiel-Tison, Claudine 1988. A precursor of language acquisition in young infants. Cognition, 29, 143–78. Meisel, Jurgen M. and Müller, Natascha 1992. Finiteness and verb placement in early child grammars: evidence from simultaneous acquisition of French and German in bilinguals. In Meisel, Jurgen M. (ed.), The Acquisition of Verb Placement:

598

References

Functional Categories and V2 Phenomena in Language Acquisition (pp. 109–38). Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic. Menn, Lise and Obler, Loraine K. 1990. Methodology: data collection, presentation, and guide to interpretation. In Menn, Lise and Obler, Loraine K. (eds.), Agrammatic Aphasia: a Cross-language Narrative Sourcebook (pp. 13–30). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Merrill, Edward C., Sperber, Richard D. and McCauley, Charley 1981. Differences in semantic encoding as a function of reading comprehension skill. Memory and Cognition, 9, 618–24. Meuter, Renata F. I. and Allport, Alan 1999. Bilingual language switching in naming: asymmetrical costs of language selection. Journal of Memory and Language, 40, 25–40. Miceli, Gabriele, Mazzuchi, Anna, Menn, Lise and Goodglass, Harold 1983. Contrasting cases of Italian agrammatic aphasia without comprehension disorder. Brain and Language, 19, 65–97. Miceli, Gabriele, Silveri, Maria Caterina, Romani, Cristina and Caramazza, Alfonso 1989. Variation in the pattern of omissions and substitutions of grammatical morphemes in the spontaneous speech of so-called agrammatic patients. Brain and Language, 36, 447–92. Miceli, Gabriele, Silveri, Maria Caterina, Villa, Giampiero and Caramazza, Alfonso 1984. On the basis for the agrammatic’s difficulty in producing main verbs. Cortex, 20, 207–20. Miller, George A. and Chomsky, Noam 1963. Finitary models of language users. In Luce, R. Duncan, Bush, Robert R. and Galanter, Eugene (eds.), Handbook of Mathematical Psychology (vol. II). New York: Wiley. Miller, George A. and Johnson-Laird, Philip N. 1976, Language and Perception. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Miller, James D. 1989. Auditory-perceptual interpretation of the vowel. JASA, 85 (5), 2114–34. Miller, James D., Engebretson, A. Maynard and Vemula, N. Rao 1980. Vowel normalization: differences between vowels spoken by children, women, and men. JASA Supplement, 1 (68), S33. Miller, Jon F. and Chapman, Robin 1981. The relation between age and mean length of utterances in morphemes. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 24, 154–61. Milroy, Lesley and Muysken, Pieter 1995. One Speaker, Two Languages: CrossDisciplinary Perspectives on Code-switching. Cambridge University Press. Miyake, Akira, Carpenter, Patricia A. and Just, Marcel Adam 1994. A capacity approach to syntactic comprehension disorders: making normal adults perform like aphasic patients. Cognitive Neuropsychology, 11, 671–717. Miyake, Akira, Just, Marcel A. and Carpenter, Patricia A. 1994. Working memory constraints on the resolution of lexical ambiguity: maintaining multiple interpretations in neutral contexts. Journal of Memory and Language, 33, 176–202. Monsell, Stephen, Patterson, Karalyn, Graham, Andrew, Hughes, Claire and Milroy, Robert 1992. Lexical and sublexical translation of spelling to sound: strategic anticipation of lexical status. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 18, 452–67.

References

599

Moon, Christine, Panneton-Cooper, Robin and Fifer, William P. 1993. Two-dayolds prefer their native language. Infant Behavior and Development, 16, 495–500. Moore, Brian C. J. 1982. An Introduction to the Psychology of Hearing. London: Academic Press. Morikawa, Hiromi 1989. Acquisition of case-marking and predicate-argument structures in Japanese: a longitudinal study of language acquisition mechanisms. Doctoral dissertation, University of Kansas. Mosel, Ulrike and Hovdhaugen, Even 1992. Samoan Reference Grammar. Oslo: Scandinavian University Press. Munich, Edward, Flynn, Suzanne and Martohardjono, Gita 1994. Elicited imitation and grammaticality judgment tasks: what they measure and how they relate to each other. In Tarone, Elaine E., Gass, Susan M. and Cohen, Andrew D. (eds.), Research Methodology in Second Language Acquisition (pp. 227–44). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Munoz, Maria, Marquardt, Thomas P. and Copeland, Gary 1999. A comparison of codeswitching patterns of aphasic and neurologically damaged normal bilingual speakers of English and Spanish. Brain and Language, 66 (2), 249–74. Murasugi, Keiko 1991. Noun phrases in Japanese and English: a study in syntax, learnability and acquisition. Doctoral dissertation, University of Connecticut. Musolino, Julien, Crain, Stephen and Thornton, Rosalind 2000. Navigating negative quantificational space. Linguistics, 38, 1–32. Münte, Thomas, Heinze, Hans-Jochen and Mangun, George 1993. Dissociation of brain activity related to syntactic and semantic aspects of language. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 5, 335–44. Myers, Jerome L., O’Brien, Edward J., Albrecht, Jason E. and Mason, Robert A. 1994. Maintaining global coherence during reading. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 20, 876–86. Myers, Jerome L., Shinjo, Makiko and Duffy, Susan A. 1987. Degree of causal relatedness and memory. Journal of Memory and Language, 26, 253–65. Myers-Scotton, Carol 1993. Social Motivations for Code-switching. Oxford University Press. Na, Woon Hwan and Kang, Yun Ju 2001. Effects of sign language on the linguistic acquisition of deaf children [in Korean]. Journal of Special Education and Rehabilitation Science, 40, 95–107. Nagai, Noriko 1995. Constraints on topics and their gaps: from a parsing perspective. In Mazuka, Reiko and Nagai, Noriko (eds.), Japanese Sentence Processing (pp. 77–104). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Naigles, Letitia 1990. Children use syntax to learn verb meanings. Journal of Child Language, 17, 357–74. Nakayama, Mineharu and Lewis, Richard L. 2001. Similarity inference and scrambling in Japanese. Journal of Cognitive Science, 1, 39–53. Nakayama, Mineharu and Quinn, Charles J., Jr. (eds.) 2001. Japanese/Korean Linguistics 9. Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications. Nam, Kichun 1995a. Korean word recognition: comparison of Hangul and Hanja word recognition [in Korean]. Paper presented at the Conference on the Korean Experimental and Cognitive Psychological Association.

600

References

1995b. Korean word recognition: are different orthographies recognized differently? Paper presented at the Seventh International Conference on the Cognitive Processing of Chinese and other Asian Languages, Hong Kong. Nam, Kichun, Kim, Taehoon, Moon, Seongsil and Seo, Changwon 1998. Processing of the syntactic ambiguous resolution in Korean [in Korean]. Korean Journal of Language and Information, 2, 5–25. Nam, Kichun, Seo, Kwangjun and Choi, Keysun 1997. The word length effect on Hangul word recognition. Korean Journal of Experimental and Cognitive Psychology, 9, 1–18. Nam, Kichun, Seo, Kwangjun, Choi, Keysun, Lee, Kyungin, Kim, Taehoon and Lee, Mahn-Young 1997. The word length effect on Hangul word recognition [in Korean]. Korean Journal of Experimental and Cognitive Psychology, 9, 1–18. Nam, Kichun, Yim, Changguk, Jung, Jaebum, Kim, Donghuy and Pyun, Sungbum 1999. Agrammatism in Broca’s aphasia: dissociation of sentence production and comprehension [in Korean]. Korean Journal of Psychology, 18, 49–64. Nam, Seungho 2004. Event structure and aspectual character of Korean predicates [in Korean]. The Journal of Humanities, 52, 75–124. Seoul National University. Nazzi, Tierry, Bertoncini, Joisane and Mehler, Jacques 1998. Language discrimination by newborns: towards an understanding of the role of rhythm. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 24, 756–66. Nazzi, Tierry, Jusczyk, Peter W. and Johnson, Elizabeth K. 2000. Language discrimination by English-learning 5-month-olds: effects of rhythm and familiarity. Journal of Memory and Language, 43, 1–19. Needham, Amy and Baillargeon, Renée 1993. Intuitions about support in 4.5-month-old infants. Cognition, 47, 121–48. Nespoulous, Jean-Luc, Dordain, Monique, Perron, Cécile, Ska, Bernadette, Bub, Daniel N., Mehler, Jacques, Caplan, David and Lecours, Andre R. 1988. Agrammatism in sentence production without comprehension deficits: reduced availability of syntactic structures and/or of grammatical morphemes? a case study. Brain and Language, 33, 273–95. Neville, Helen, Nicol, Janet, Barss, Andrew, Forster, Kenneth and Garrett, Merrill 1991. Syntactically based sentence processing classes: evidence from event-related brain potentials. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 3, 151–65. Newport, Elissa L. 1990. Maturational constraints on language learning. Cognitive Science, 14, 11–28. Newsome, Mary R. and Jusczyk, Peter W. 1994. Do infants use stress as a cue in segmenting fluent speech? In Proceedings of the Annual Boston University Conference on Language Development (vol. 19 (2), pp. 415–26). Sommerville, MA: Cascadilla Press. Ninio, Anat 1999. Pathbreaking verbs in syntactic development and the question of prototypical transitivity. Journal of Child Language, 26, 619–53. Nishimura, Miwa 1986. Intrasentential code-switching: the case of language assignment. In Vaid, Jyotnsa, (ed.) Language Processing in Bilinguals: Psycholinguistic and Neuropsychological Perspective (pp. 123–43). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

References

601

Nishimura, Miwa and Yoon, Keumsil Kim 1998. Head directionality and intrasentential code-switching: a study of Japanese Canadian and Korean Americans’ bilingual speech. In Silva, David (ed.). Japanese/Korean Linguistics 8 (pp. 121–30). Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications. Nittrouer, Susan 1999. Do temporal processing deficits cause phonological processing problems? Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 42, 925–42. Nooteboom, Sieb G. 1983. Is speech production controlled by speech perception? In van den Broecke, Marcel, van Heuven, Vincent and Zonneveld, Wim (eds.), Sound Structures: Studies for Antonie Cohen (pp. 183–94). Dordrecht: Foris Publications. Nordstroem, P. E. and Lindblom, Björn 1975. A normalization procedure for vowel formant data. Paper 212 at the International Congress of Phonetic Sciences in Leeds. Notier, Jacomine 1989. Dutch and Moroccan Arabic in Contact: Code-switching among Moroccans in the Netherlands. Doctoral dissertation, University of Amsterdam. O’Grady, William 1980. Interpretative rules and to adjunction. In Jensen, John T. (ed.), NELS X, Cahiers Linguistiques d’Ottawa. University of Ottawa. 1993. Functional categories and maturation: data from Korean. In Harvard Studies in Korean Linguistics V (pp. 96–111). 1997. Syntactic Development. The University of Chicago Press. O’Grady, William, Cho, Sookeun, Song, Min Sun and Lee, Miseon 1996. The acquisition of relative clauses by Korean-English bilinguals. Unpublished manuscript, Linguistics Department, University of Hawaii at Manoa. O’Grady, William and Lee, Miseon 2001. The isomorphic mapping hypothesis: evidence from Korean. Brain and Cognition, 46, 226–30. 2005. A mapping theory of agrammatic comprehension deficits. Brain and Language, 92, 91–100. O’Grady, William, Nakamura, Michiko and Ito, Yasuko (2008). Want-to contraction in second language acquisition: an emergentist approach. Lingua, 118 (4), 478–98. Oh, Janet Sae, Au, Terry Kit-fong and Jun, Sun-Ah 2002. Benefits of childhood language experience for adult L2-learners’ phonology. In Skarabela, Barbora, Fish, Sarah and Do, Anna H.-J. (eds.), Proceedings of the 26th Annual Boston University Conference on Language Development (vol. 2, pp. 464–72). Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press. Oh, Janet Sae, Jun, Sun-Ah, Knightly, Leah M. and Au, Terry Kit-fong 2003. Holding on to childhood language memory. Cognition, 86, B53–B64. van Orden, Guy C. 1987. A ROWS is a ROSE: spelling, sound and reading. Memory and Cognition, 15, 181–98. van Orden, Guy C., Johnston, James C. and Hale, Benita L. 1988. Word identification in reading proceeds from spelling to sounds to meaning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 14, 371–85. Osaka, Mariko and Osaka, Naoyuki 1994. Capacity related to reading measurement with the Japanese version of reading span test. Japanese Journal of Psychology, 65, 339–45. Osterhout, Lee 1994. Event-related brain potentials as tools for comprehending language comprehension. In Clifton, Charles, Frazier, Lyn and Rayner, Keith (eds.), Perspectives on Sentence Processing (pp. 15–44). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Osterhout, Lee and Holcomb, Phillip 1995. Event-related potentials and language comprehension. In Rugg, Michael D. and Coles, Michael G. H. (eds.)

602

References

Electrophysiology of Mind: Event-related Brain Potentials and Cognition (pp. 175–215). Oxford University Press. Osterhout, Lee, McLaughlin, Judith and Bersick, Michael 1997. Event-related brain potentials and human language. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 1, 203–9. Osterhout, Lee and Nicol, Janet 1999. On the distinctiveness, independence, and time course of the brain responses to syntactic and semantic anomalies. Language and Cognitive Processes, 14, 283–317. Otani, Kazuyo and Whitman, John 1991. V-raising and VP-ellipsis. Linguistic Inquiry, 22, 345–58. Otsu, Yukio 1981. Universal grammar and syntactic development in children. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. MIT. Owens, Robert E. 2005. Language Development: an Introduction. 6th edn. Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon. Oyama, Susan 1976. A sensitive period for the acquisition of a non-native phonological system. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 5, 261–85. 1978. The sensitive period and comprehension of speech. Working Papers in Bilingualism, 16, 1–16. 1979. The concept of the sensitive period in developmental studies. Merrill Palmer Quarterly, 25, 83–103. Paap, Kenneth R., Newsome, Sandra L., McDonald, James E. and Schvaneveldt, Roger W. 1982. An activation and verification model for letter and word recognition. Psychological Review, 89, 573–94. Padden, Carol and Ramsey, Claire 2000. American Sign Language and reading ability in deaf children. In Chamberlain, Morford and Mayberry, Language Acquisition By Eye (pp. 165–89). Pae, Soyeong 1993. Early vocabulary in Korean: are nouns easier to learn than verbs? Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Kansas. 1997. A study on the acquisition of grammatical morphemes by Korean children. Korean Journal of Communication Disorders, 2, 27–42. Pak, Young-soo 1998. English sounds and the degree of their acquiring difficulty. Studies in Modern Grammar, 13, 79–106. Paliwal, Kuldip K., Lindsay, D. and Ainsworth, W. A. 1983. Correlation between production and perception of English vowels. Journal of Phonetics, 11, 77–83. Pallier, Christophe, Dehaene, Stanislas, Poline, Jean-Baptiste, LeBihan, Denis, Argenti, Anne-Marie, Dupoux, Emmanuel and Mehler, Jacques 2003. Brain imaging of language plasticity in adopted adults: can a second language replace the first? Cerebral Cortex, 13, 155–61. Palmer, Frank R. 1986. Mood and Modality. Cambridge University Press. Pammer, Kristen and Wheatley, Christopher 2001. Isolating the M(y)-cell response in dyslexia using the spatial frequency doubling illusion. Vision Research, 41, 2139–47. Papafragou, Anna and Musolino, Julien 2003. Scalar implicatures: experiments at the semantics-pragmatics interface. Cognition, 86, 253–82. Paradis, Johanne, Nicoladis, Elena and Genesee, Fred 2000. Early emergence of structural constraints on code-mixing: evidence from French-English bilingual children. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition (Special Issue: Syntactic Aspects of Bilingual Acquisition), 3 (3), 245–61.

References

603

Park, ChangHo 1996. Processing unit of Hangul syllable: a repetition effect study [in Korean]. Korean Journal of Experimental and Cognitive Psychology, 8, 189–206. 2001. A study of processing unit of Hangul syllable using attention tasks [in Korean]. Korean Journal of Experimental and Cognitive Psychology, 13, 213–33. 2006. The influence of perceptual grouping of letters on the perception of Hangul syllable blocks: using syllable usableness judgment task [in Korean]. Korean Journal of Experimental Psychology, 18, 173–85. Park, Hee-Heon 1998. Acquisition of negation in Korean. Korean Linguistics: Journal of the International Circle of Korean Linguistics, 9, 111–31. Park, HyeJin and Pae, Soyeong 2003. Early expressive vocabulary development of Korean children with hearing impairment [in Korean]. Korean Journal of Communicative Disorders, 8 (1), 66–81. Park, Jun and Lee, Dae-hyun 2005. Vision-based finger recognition for Korean Sign Language. Journal of Korea Multimedia Society, 8, 768–75. 1990. Korean/English intrasentential code-switching: matrix language assignment and linguistic constraints. Doctoral dissertation, University of Illinois at UrbanaChampaign. Park, Jun-Eon 1990. Korean/English intrasentential code-switching: matrix language assignment and linguistic constraints. Dissertation Abstracts International, 51 (6), 2004A. [International Standard Serial No.: 0419–4209 (Part A); 0419–4217 (Part B); 1042–7279 (Part C)]. Park, Ju Yeol 1989. A study on reading ability of hearing-impaired children [in Korean]. Master’s thesis, Dankook University, Korea. Park, Kabyong 1990. Impersonal passives and the unaccusative hypothesis. In Baek, Eung-J. (ed.), Papers from the Seventh International Conference on Korean Linguistics (pp. 387–98). Canada: University of Toronto Press. 1992. Light verb constructions in Korean and Japanese. Doctoral dissertation, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. Park, Kwonsaeng 1993. Mental code involved in Hangul word processing [in Korean]. Korean Journal of Experimental and Cognitive Psychology, 5, 40–55. 1995. Visual processes involved in Hangul word recognition [in Korean]. Korean Journal of Experimental and Cognitive Psychology, 7, 61–78. 1997. The role of phonology in access to semantic information [in Korean]. Korean Journal of Experimental and Cognitive Psychology, 9, 131–52. 2001. Perception, knowledge, and young Korean children’s word-learning. Journal of Cognitive Science, 2, 13–22. Park, Mae-Ran 1990. Conflict avoidance in social interaction: a sociolinguistic comparison of the Korean and Japanese honorific systems. In Hoji, Hajime (ed.), Japanese/ Korean Linguistics 1 (pp. 111–28). Stanford, CA: Center for the Study of Language and Information. Park, Mee-Jeong 2003. The meaning of Korean prosodic boundary tones. Doctoral dissertation, UCLA. Park, Myung-Kwan 1998. Negation and the placement of verb in Korean. Language Research, 34, 709–36. Park, Sang Doh 2005. Parameters of passive constructions in English and Korean. Doctoral dissertation, Ithaca: Cornell University.

604

References

Park, SooJin and Jung, Woo Hyun 2007. Word superiority effect based on the Hangul font types [in Korean]. Korean Journal of Cognitive Science, 18, 15–34. Park, Tae-Jin 1990. Phonological encoding when reading Chinese-character-words in Korean [in Korean]. Korean Journal of Experimental and Cognitive Psychology, 2, 90–102. 1997. Form-specific representation: hemispheric asymmetry in Korean orthographic priming [in Korean]. Korean Journal of Experimental and Cognitive Psychology, 9, 153–65. Park, Tae-Jin, Lee, Jae-Ho and Kim, Soyoung 2003. The effect of predictability for on-line causal inference [in Korean]. Korean Journal of Experimental Psychology, 15. 39–58. Patkowski, Mark S. 1980. The sensitive period for the acquisition of syntax in a second language. Language Learning, 30, 449–72. 1990. Age and accent in a second language: a reply to James Emil Flege. Applied Linguistics, 11, 73–89. 1994. The critical age hypothesis and interlanguage phonology. In Yavas, Mehmet (ed.) First and Second Language Phonology (pp. 205–21). San Diego, CA: Singular Publishing Group. Paul, Peter V. and Quigley, Stephen P. 1990. Education and Deafness. New York: Longman. Penfield, Wilder 1959. Speech and Brain Mechanisms. Princeton University Press. 1963. The Second Career, with Other Essays and Addresses. Boston, MA: Little Brown. Pesetsky, David 1995. Zero Syntax: Experiencers and Cascades. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Peterson, Jennifer 1988. Word-internal code-switching constraints in a bilingual child’s grammar. Linguistics, 26, 479–93. Petronio, Karen and Lillo-Martin, Diane 1997. Wh-movement and the position of the Spec-CP: evidence from American Sign Language. Language, 73, 18–57. van Petten, Cyma 1995. Words and sentences: Event-related brain potential measures. Psychophysiology, 32, 511–25. van Petten, Cyma and Luka, Barbara 2006. Neural localization of semantic context effects in electromagnetic and hemodynamic studies. Brain and Language, 97, 279–93. Pfaff, Carol 1979. Constraint on language mixing: intrasentential code-switching and borrowing in Spanish/English. Language, 55, 291–318. Philip, William 1991. Quantification over events in early universal quantification. Paper presented at the 16th Annual Boston University Conference on Language Development, Boston, MA. 1992. Event quantification and the symmetrical interpretation of universal quantifiers in child language. In von Fintel, Kai and Rullman, Hotze. (eds.), University of Massachusetts Occasional Papers in Linguistics: Semantics Issues. Amherst, MA: GLSA. 1995. Event quantification in the acquisition of universal quantification. Doctoral dissertation, University of Massachusetts at Amherst. Amherst, MA: GLSA. Philip, William and Aurelio, Sabina 1991. Quantifier spreading: pilot study of preschoolers’ every. In Maxfield, Thomas and Plunkett, Bernadette (eds.), University

References

605

of Massachusetts Occasional Papers: Papers in the Acquisition of WH (pp. 267–82). Amherst, MA: GLSA. Philip, William and Takahashi, Mari 1991. Quantifier spreading in the acquisition of every. In Maxfield, Thomas and Plunkett, Bernadette (eds.), University of Massachusetts Occasional Papers: Papers in the Acquisition of WH (pp. 283–301). Amherst, MA: GLSA. Philip, William and Verrips, Maaike 1994. Dutch preschoolers’ elke. Paper presented at the 19th Annual Boston University Conference on Language Development, Boston. Phinney, Jean S., Romero, Irma, Nava, Monica and Huang, Dan 2001. The role of language, parents, and peers in ethnic identity among adolescents in immigrant families. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 30, 135–53. Piaget, Jean 1954. The Construction of Reality in the Child. New York: Basic Books. 1955. The Language and Thought of the Child. Cleveland, OH: Meridian Books, The World Publishing Co. Piaget, Jean and Inhelder, Barbara 1967. The Child’s Conception of Space. New York: W. W. Norton. Pierce, Amy E. 1992. The acquisition of passives in Spanish and the question of A-chain maturation. Language Acquisition, 2, 55–81. Pierrehumbert, Janet B. 1980. The phonetics and phonology of English intonation. Doctoral dissertation, MIT. Pierrehumbert, Janet B. and Beckman, Mary E. 1988. Japanese Tone Structure. Cambridge, MA. MIT Press. Pierrehumbert, Janet B. and Hirschberg, Julia 1990. The meaning of intonational contours in the interpretation of discourse. In Cohen, Philip, Morgan, Jerry and Pollack, Martha (eds.), Intentions in Communication. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Pine, Julian M. and Lieven, Elena 1993. Reanalyzing rote-learned phrases: individual differences in the transition to multiword speech. Journal of Child Language, 20, 551–71. Pine, Julian M., Lieven, Elena and Rowland, Caroline 1998. Comparing different models of the English verb category. Linguistics, 36, 807–30. Pinker, Steven 1984. Language Learnability and Language Development. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. 1987. The bootstrapping problem in language acquisition. In MacWhinney, Brian (ed.), Mechanisms of Language Acquisition (pp. 399–441). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. 1989. Learnability and Cognition: the Acquisition of Argument Structure. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. 1994. How could a child use verb syntax to learn verb semantics? In Gleitman, Lila and Landau, Barbara (eds.), The Acquisition of the Lexicon (pp. 377–410). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Platzack, Christer 1990. A grammar without functional categories: a syntactic study of early Swedish child language. Nordic Journal of Linguistics, 13, 107–26. 1992. Functional categories and early Swedish. In Meisel, Jurgen M. (ed.), The Acquisition of Verb Placement: Functional Categories and V2 Phenomena in Language Acquisition (pp. 63–82). Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.

606

References

Pollock, Jean-Yves 1989. Verb-movement, universal grammar and the structure of IP. Linguistic Inquiry, 20, 365–424. Pomerantz, James R. 1983. Global and local precedence: selective attention in form and motion perception. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 112, 516–40. Poplack, Shana 1980. Sometimes I’ll start a sentence in Spanish y termino en espanol: toward a typology of code-switching. Linguistics, 18, 581–618. 1988. Contrasting patterns in code-switching in two communities. In Heller, Monica (ed.), Codeswitching: Anthropological and Sociolinguistic Perspectives (pp. 215–44). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. Postal, Paul 1969. On so-called pronouns in English. In Reibel, David and Schane, Stanford (eds.) Modern Studies in English (pp. 201–23). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall. Postal, Paul and Pullum, Geoffrey K. 1978. Traces and the description of English complementizer contraction. Linguistic Inquiry, 9, 1–29. 1982. The contraction debate. Linguistic Inquiry, 13, 122–38. 1986. Misgovernment. Linguistic Inquiry, 17, 104–10. Pratt, Anne C. and Brady, Susan 1988. Relation of phonological awareness to reading disability in children and adults. Journal of Educational Psychology, 80, 319–23. Prinzmetal, William, Treiman, Rebecca and Rho, Susan 1986. How to see a reading unit. Journal of Memory and Language, 25, 461–75. Pritchett, Bradley Lo 1991. Head position and parsing ambiguity. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 20, 251–70. Progovac, Ljiljana 1993. Long-distance reflexives: movement-to-Infl versus relativized SUBJECT. Linguistic Inquiry, 24, 755–72. Pullum, Geoffrey K. 1997. The morphological nature of English to-contraction. Language, 73, 79–102. Pullum, Geoffrey K. and Postal, Paul 1979. On an inadequate defense of trace theory. Linguistic Inquiry, 10, 689–706. Pustejovsky, James 1995. The Generative Lexicon. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Pye, Clifton 1990. The acquisition of ergative languages. Linguistics, 28, 1291–330. Quine, Willard van Orman 1960. Word and Object. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Quinn, Paul C. 1994. The categorization of above and below spatial relations by young infants. Child Development, 65, 58–69. Rack, John P., Snowling, Margaret J. and Olson, Richard 1992. The nonword reading deficit in developmental dyslexia: a review. Reading Research Quarterly, 27, 29–53. Radford, Andrew 1990. Syntactic Theory and the Acquisition of English Syntax. Oxford: Blackwell. Rakic, Pasko, Bourgeois, Jean-Pierre, Eckenhoff, Maryellen F., Zecevic, Nada and Goldman-Rakic, Patricia S. 1986. Isochronic overproduction of synapses in diverse regions of the primate cerebral cortex. Science, 232, 232–5. Ramus, Franck, Nespor, Marina and Mehler, Jacques 1999. Correlates of linguistic rhythm in the speech signal. Cognition, 73, 265–92. Randall, Janet 1987. Indirect Positive Evidence: Overturning Overgeneralizations in Language Acquisition. Bloomington, Indiana: Indiana University Linguistics Club.

References

607

1992. The catapult hypothesis: an approach to unlearning. In Weissenborn, Jürgen, Goodluck, Helen and Roeper, Thomas (eds.), Theoretical Issues in Language Acquisition: Continuity and Change in Development. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Rappaport, Malka and Levin, Beth 1985. A case study in lexical analysis: the locative alternation. Unpublished manuscript, MIT Center for Cognitive Science. 1988. What to do with theta-roles. In Winkins, Wendy (ed.), Syntax and Semantics 21: Thematic Relations (pp. 7–36). San Diego, CA: Academic Press. Reed, Mark A. 1989. Speech perception and the discrimination of brief auditory cues in reading disabled children. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 48, 270–92. Reicher, Gerald M. 1969. Perceptual recognition as a function of meaningfulness of stimulus material. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 81, 275–80. Rispoli, Matthew 1987. The acquisition of the transitive and intransitive action verb categories in Japanese. First Language, 8, 183–200. 1989. Encounters with Japanese verbs: caregiver sentences and the categorization of transitive and intransitive action verbs. First Language, 9, 57–80. 1991a. The mosaic acquisition of grammatical relations. Journal of Child Language, 18, 517–51. 1991b. The acquisition of verb subcategorization in a functionalist framework. First Language, 11, 41–63. 1994. Pronoun case overextentions and paradigm building. Journal of Child Language, 21, 157–72. 1995. Missing arguments and the acquisition of predicate meanings. In Tomasello, Michael and Merriman, William E. (eds.), Beyond Names for Things: Young Children’s Acquisition of Verbs (pp. 331–52). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Ritter, Elizabeth and Rosen, Sara T. 2004. Delimiting events in syntax. In Butt, Miriam and Geuder, Wilhelm (eds.), The Projection of Arguments: Lexical and Syntactic Constraints (pp. 135–64). Stanford, CA: Center for the Study of Language and Information. Rizzi, Luigi 1990. Relativized Minimality. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. 2000. Remarks on early null subjects. In Friedemann, Marc-Ariel and Rizzi, Luigi (eds.), The Acquisition of Syntax. Essex: Pearson Education Limited. Roeper, Thomas 1999. Universal bilingualism. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 2, 169–86. 2002. Multiple grammars, feature-attraction, pied-piping, and the question: is AGR inside TP? Unpublished manuscript, University of Massachusetts, Amherst. Roeper, Thomas and de Villiers, Jill 1991. The emergence of bound variable structures. In Maxfield, Thomas and Plunkett, Bernadette (eds.), University of Massachusetts Occasional Papers: Papers in the Acquisition of WH (pp. 225–65). Amherst, MA: GLSA. Roeper, Thomas and Matthei, Edward 1974. On the acquisition of all and some. In Proceedings of the Stanford Child Language Conference. Rosen, S. and Manganari, E. 2001. Is there a relationship between speech and nonspeech auditory processing in children with dyslexia? Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 40, 720–36. Rotenberg, Joel 1978. The syntax of phonology. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, MIT.

608

References

Rösler, Frank, Pütz, Peter, Friederici, Angela D. and Hahne, Anja 1993. Event-related brain potentials while encountering semantic and syntactic violations. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 5, 345–62. Rusted, Jennifer 1989. Developmental differences in the influence of orthographic and phonological information in visual word recognition. British Journal of Developmental Psychology, 7, 73–87. St. John, Mark F. and Gernsbacher, Morton Ann 1998. Learning and losing syntax: practice makes perfect and frequency builds fortitude. In Healy, Alice F. and Bourne, Lyle E., Jr. (eds.), Foreign Language Learning: Psycholinguistic Studies on Training and Retention (pp. 231–55). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Saito, Mamoru and Murasugi, Keiko 1990. N’-deletion in Japanese: a preliminary study. In Hoji, Hajime (ed.), Japanese/Korean Linguistics 1. Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications. Sakuma, Naoko, Sasanuma, Sumiko, Tatsumi, Itaru F. and Masaki, Shinobu 1998. Orthography and phonology in reading Japanese Kanji words: evidence from the semantic decision task with homophones. Memory and Cognition, 26, 75–87. Sampson, Geoffrey 1985. Writing systems: a linguistic introduction. London: Hutchinson. Sanches, Mary 1977. Language acquisition and language change: Japanese numeral classifiers. In Sanches, Mary and Blount, Ben (eds.), Socio-cultural Dimensions of Language Change. New York: Academic Press. Sanford, Anthony J. and Garrod, Simon C. 1981. Understanding Written Language: Explorations of Comprehension Beyond the Sentence. Chichester, UK: John Wiley and Sons. 1994. Selective processing in text understanding. In Gernsbacher, Morton A. (ed.), Handbook of Psycholinguistics (pp. 699–720). New York: Academic Press. Sankoff, David and Poplack, Shana 1981. A formal grammar of code-switching. Papers in Linguistics: International Journal of Human Communication, 14 (1), 1–45. Sano, Tetsuya 2000. Issues on the unaccusatives and passives in the acquisition of Japanese. In Proceedings of the Tokyo Conference on Psycholinguistics (vol. 1, pp. 1–21). Schachter, Jacqueline 1990. On the issue of completeness in second language acquisition. Second Language Research, 6, 94–124. 1996. Maturation and universal grammar. In Ritchie, William C. and Bhatia, Tej K. (eds.), Handbook of Second Language Acquisition (pp. 159–93). San Diego, CA: Academic Press. Schaeffer, Jeannette and Matthewson, Lisa 2005. Grammar and pragmatics in the acquisition of article system. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory, 23 (1), 53–101. Schafer, Amy J. 1997. Prosodic parsing: the role of prosody in sentence comprehension. Doctoral dissertation, University of Massachusetts. Schafer, Amy J., Carlson, Katy, Clifton, Charles, and Frazier, Lyn 2000. Focus and the interpretation of pitch accent: disambiguating embedded questions. Language and Speech, 43 (1), 75–105. Schafer, Amy J. and Jun, Sun-Ah 2000. Prosody in spoken language processing. Journal of the Acoustical Society of Korea, 19, No.1(s), 7–10.

References

609

2002. Effects of accentual phrasing on adjective interpretation in Korean. In Nakayama, Mineharu (ed.), East Asian Language Processing (pp. 223–55). Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications. Schafer, Amy J., Speer, Shari R., Warren, Paul and White, S. David 2000. Intonational disambiguation in sentence production and comprehension. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 29, 169–82. Schafer, Robin and de Villiers, Jill 2000. Imagining articles: what a and the can tell us about the emergence of DP. In Howell, S. Catherine, Fish, Sarah A. and Keith-Lucas, Thea (eds.), Proceedings of the 24th BUCLD. Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press. Schank, Roger C. and Abelson, Robert P. 1977. Scripts, Plans, Goals and Understanding. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Scharf, Bertram 1970. Critical bands, In Tobias, Jerry V. (ed.), Foundations of Modern Auditory Theory (vol. I, pp. 157–202). New York: Academic Press Schieffelin, Bambi 1985. The acquisition of Kaluli. In Slobin, Dan I. (ed.), The Crosslinguistic Study of Language Acquisition (pp. 525–93). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Schlesinger, Itzchak N. 1982. Steps to Language. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Schulte-Korne, Gerd, Deimel, Wolfgang, Bartling, Jürgen and Remschmidt, Helmut 1998. Auditory processing and dyslexia: evidence for a specific speech processing deficit. Neuroreport, 9, 337–40. Schwartz, Bonnie D. 2003. Child L2-acquisition: paving the way. In Beachley, Barbara, Brown, Amanda and Conlin, Frances (eds.), Proceedings of the 27th BUCLD (pp. 26–50). Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press. Schwartz, Bonnie D. and Sprouse, Rex A. 1994. Word order and nominative case in nonnative language acquisition: a longitudinal study of (L1 Turkish) German interlanguage. In Hoekstra, Teun and Schwartz, Bonnie D. (eds.), Language Acquisition Studies in Generative Grammar: Papers in Honor of Kenneth Wexler from the 1991 GLOW Workshops (pp. 317–68). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 1996. L2 cognitive states and the full transfer/full access model. Second Language Research, 12, 40–72. Schwartz, Myrna F., Linebarger, Marcia C., Saffran, Eleanor M. and Pate, Debra S. 1987. Syntactic transparency and sentence interpretation in aphasia. Language and Cognitive Processes, 2, 85–113. Schwartz, Myrna F., Saffran, Eleanor M. and Marin, Oscar S. 1980. The word order problem in agrammatism: comprehension. Brain and Language, 10, 249–62. Scotton, Carol Myers and Ury, William 1977. Bilingual strategies: the social function of code-switching. International Journal of the Sociology of Language, 13, 5–20. Scovel, Thomas 1988. A Time to Speak: a Psycholinguistic Inquiry into the Critical Period for Human Speech. New York: Newbury House/Harper & Row. Seidenberg, Mark S. 1985. The time course of phonological code activation in two writing systems. Cognition, 19, 1–30. Seliger, Herbert 1978. Implications of a multiple critical periods hypothesis for second language learning. In Ritchie, William C. (ed.), Second Language Acquisition Research (pp. 11–20). New York: Academic Press. Selkirk, Elisabeth 1984. Phonology and Syntax. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. 1986. On derived domains in sentence phonology. Phonology Yearbook, 3, 371–405. Sells, Peter 1987. Aspects of logophoricity. Linguistic Inquiry, 18, 445–79.

610

References

Shafiullah, Mohammed and Monsell, Stephen 1999. The cost of switching between Kanji and Kana while reading Japanese. Language and Cognitive Processes, 14 (5/6), 567–607. Share, David 1995. Phonological reading and self-teaching: sine qua non of reading acquisition. Cognition, 55, 151–218. Shatz, Marilyn and Wilcox, Sharon 1991. Constraints on the acquisition of English modals. In Gelman, Susan and Byrnes, James (eds.), Perspectives on Language and Thought: Interrelations in Development (pp. 319–53). Cambridge University Press. Sheldon, Andrew 1974. On the role of parallel function in the acquisition of relative clauses in English. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 13, 272–81. Shen, Di and Forster, Kenneth I. 1999. Masked phonological priming in reading Chinese words depends on the task. Language and Cognitive Processes, 14 (5/6), 429–59. Shim, Jinyoung 1994. The sensitive period for second-language acquisition: an experimental study of age-effects on Universal Grammar and language transfer. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign. Shimoyama, Junko 1999. Internally headed relative clauses in Japanese and E-type anaphora. Journal of East Asian Linguistics, 8, 147–82. Shin, Sarah 2002. Differentiating language contact phenomena: evidence from KoreanEnglish bilingual children. Applied Psycholinguistics, 23, 337–60. 2003. The role of parents’ knowledge about bilingualism in the transmission of heritage languages. Heritage Language Journal, 1, 17–19. Shin, Sarah and Milroy, Lesley 1999. Bilingual language acquisition by Korean school children in New York City. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 2, 147–67. Shirai, Yasuhiro and Andersen, Roger W. 1995. The acquisition of tense-aspect morphology: a prototype account. Language, 71, 743–62. Silva, David James (ed.) 1998. Japanese/Korean Linguistics 8. Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications. Simpson, Greg B. 1994. Context and the processing of ambiguous words. In Gernsbacher, Morton A. (ed.), Handbook of Psycholinguistics (pp. 359–74). San Diego, CA: Academic Press. Simpson, Greg B. and Kang, Hyewon 1994. The flexible use of phonological information in word recognition in Korean. Journal of Memory and Language, 33, 319–31. 2004. Syllable processing in alphabetic Korean. Reading and Writing: an Interdisciplinary Journal, 17, 137–51. Slobin, Dan I. 1966. The acquisition of Russian as a native language. In Smith, Frank and Miller, George (eds.), The Genesis of Language: a Psycholinguistic Approach. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. 1973. Cognitive prerequisites for the development of grammar. In Ferguson, Charles A. and Slobin, Dan I. (eds.), Studies of Child Language Development (pp. 175–208). New York: Holt. 1977. Language change in childhood and history. In McNamara, John T. (ed.), Language Learning and Thought. New York: Academic Press. 1981. The origins of grammatical encodings of events. In Deutsch, Werner (ed.), The Child’s Construction of Language (pp. 185–200). New York: Academic Press.

References

611

1985. Crosslinguistic evidence for the language-making capacity. In Slobin, Dan I. (ed.), The Crosslinguistic Study of Language Acquisition. Vol. II: Theoretical Issues. (pp. 1157–6). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. 1991. Aphasia in Turkish: speech production in Broca’s and Wernicke’s patients. Brain and Language, 41, 149–64. 1997. The origins of grammaticizable notions: beyond the individual mind. In Slobin, Dan I. (ed.), The Crosslinguistic Study of Language Acquisition. Vol. V: Expanding the Contexts (pp. 265–323). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. 2001. Form-function relations: how do children find out what they are? In Bowerman, Melissa and Levinson, Stephen C. (eds.), Language Acquisition and Conceptual Development (pp. 406–49). Cambridge University Press. 2003. Language and thought online: consequences of linguistic relativity. In Gentner, Dedre and Glodin-Meadow, Susan (eds.), Language in Mind: Advances in the Study of Language and Thought (pp. 157–92). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Slobin, Dan I. and Bever, Thomas G. 1982. Children use canonical sentence schemas: a crosslinguistic study of word order and inflections. Cognition, 12, 229–56. Smith, Neil 2004. Chomsky: Ideas and Ideals. 2nd edn. Cambridge University Press. 2005. Language, Frogs and Savants: More Linguistic Problems, Puzzles and Polemics. Oxford: Blackwell. Smith, Stanley D. and Mimica, Ivo 1984. Agrammatism in a case-inflected language: comprehension of agent-object relations. Brain and Language, 21, 274–90. Snow, Catherine 1999. Social perspectives on the emergence of language. In MacWhinney, Brian (ed.), The Emergence of Language (pp. 250–76). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Snow, Catherine and Hoefnagel-Hohle, Marian 1978. The critical period for language acquisition: evidence from second language learning. Child Development, 49, 1114–28. Snowling, Margaret, J. 2000. Dyslexia. Oxford: Blackwell. Snyder, William 2002. Parameters: the view from child language. In Otsu, Yukio (ed.), Proceedings of the Third Tokyo Conference on Psycholinguistics. Tokyo: Hituzi Shobo. Snyder, William, Hyams, Nina and Crisma, Paola 1995. Romance auxiliary selection with reflexive clitics: evidence for early knowledge of unaccusativity. In Clark, Eve (ed.) The Proceedings of the 26th Annual Child Language Research Forum. Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications. Sohn, Ho-Min 1981. Power and solidarity in the Korean language. Papers in Linguistics: International Journal of Human Communication, 14 (3), 431–52. 1996. The Korean Language. New York: Cambridge University Press. (ed.) 1997. Japanese/Korean Linguistics 6. Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications. 1999. The Korean Language, 2nd edn. Cambridge University Press. Sohn, Keun-Won 1995. Negative polarity items, scope and economy. Doctoral dissertation, University of Connecticut. Soja, Nancy N., Carey, Susan and Spelke, Elizabeth 1991. Ontological categories guide young children’s inductions of word meaning: object terms and substance terms. Cognition, 38, 179–211. Son, Hye Min 2004. Comprehension of reversible passive sentences in Korean-speaking adults with Broca’s aphasia [in Korean]. Master’s thesis, Dankook University, Korea.

612

References

Son, Hye Min and Hwang, Mina 2005. Comprehension of passive sentences in Koreanspeaking adults with Broca’s aphasia. Poster presented at the Annual Convention of the American Speech-Language-Hearing Association, San Diego, CA. Son, Minjeong 2005. Atypical argument structure of HI passive in Korean. In Proceedings of 29th Penn Linguistic Colloquium. Song, Seok Choong 1982. On interpreting the scope of negation in Korean. Language Research, 18 (1), 197–215. Speas, Margaret 2003. Evidentiality, logophoricity and the syntactic representation of pragmatic features. Lingua, 114 (3), 255–76. Speer, Shari R., Warren, Paul, Schafer, Amy J., White, S. David, and Kneale, Jenny 1999. Situational constraints on the prosodic resolution of syntactic ambiguity. Proceedings of the 14th International Congress of Phonetic Sciences (pp. 1301–4). San Francisco, August 1–7, 1999. Spelke, Elizabeth 1990. Principles of object perception. Cognitive Science, 14, 29–56. Spelke, Elizabeth and Hespos, Susan 2002. Conceptual development in infancy: the case of containment. In Stein, Nancy, Bauer, Patricia and Rabinowitz, Mitchell (eds.), Representation, Memory, and Development: Essays in Honor of Jean Mandler (pp. 223–46). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Stanners, Robert F., Neiser, James J., Hernon, William P. and Hall, Roger 1979. Memory representation for morphologically related words. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 18, 399–412. Stanovich, Keith E. and West, Richard F. 1981. The effect of sentence context on ongoing word recognition: tests of a two-process theory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 7, 658–72. Stein, John 2001. The sensory basis of reading problems. Developmental Neuropsychology, 20, 509–34. Stein, John and Fowler, Sarah 1981. Visual dyslexia. Trends in Neurosciences, 4, 77–80. Stein, John and Walsh, Vincent 1997. To see but not to read; the magnocellular theory of dyslexia. Trends in Neurosciences, 20, 147–52. Stemberger, Joseph and MacWhinney, Brian 1986. Frequency and the lexical storage of regularly inflected forms. Memory and Cognition, 14, 17–26. Stepany, Ursula 1986. Modality. In Fletcher, Paul and Garman, Michael (eds.), Language Acquisition. Cambridge University Press. Stevens, Kenneth N. 1989. On the quantal nature of speech. Journal of Phonetics, 17, 3–45. 1998. Acoustic Phonetics. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Stoll, Sabine 1998. The role of Aktionsart in the acquisition of Russian aspect. First Language, 18, 351–76. Stolz, Jennifer A. and Feldman, Laurie B. 1995. The role of orthographic and semantic transparency of the base morpheme in morphological processing. In Feldman, Laurie B. (ed.), Morphological Aspects of Language Processing (pp. 183–95). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Strong, Michael and Prinz, Philip 2000. Is American Sign Language skill related to English literacy? In Chamberlain, Morford and Mayberry, Language Acquisition By Eye (pp. 131–41). Suh, Chang-Won, Lee, Jae-Ho and Jang, Yoon-Hee. 1997. Integrative inference processing between explicit text information and implicit knowledge: pronoun resolution

References

613

and script knowledge [in Korean]. The Korean Journal of Experimental and Cognitive Psychology, 9, 139–65. Suk, Dong Il 1989. Linguistic analysis of Korean sign language [in Korean]. Doctoral dissertation, Taegu University, Korea. Suh, Jin-Hee 1989. Scope interaction in negation. In Harvard Studies in Korean Linguistics III (pp. 527–36). Department of Linguistics, Harvard University. Suh, Sungki 1994. The syntax of Korean and its implications for parsing theory. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Maryland. Supalla, Samuel J. 1990. Segmentation of manually coded English: problems in the mapping of English in the visual/gestual mode. Doctoral dissertation, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. 1991. Manually coded English: the modality question in signed language development. In Siple, Patricia and Fischer, Susan D. (eds.), Theoretical Issues in Sign Language Research (pp. 85–109). The University of Chicago Press. Suzuki, Yoshiko 1985. The acquisition of Japanese pronouns. Unpublished MA thesis. University of Calgary. Swinney, David A. 1979. Lexical access during sentence comprehension: (re)consideration of context effects. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 18, 645–60. 1991. The resolution of indeterminacy during language comprehension: perspectives on modularity in lexical, structural and pragmatic processing. In Simpson, Greg (ed.), Understanding Word and Sentence (pp. 367–86). Amsterdam: Elsevier North Holland Press. Syrdal, Ann K. and Gopal, H. S. 1986. A perceptual model of vowel recognition based on the auditory representation of American English vowels. JASA, 79 (4), 1086–100. Tabossi, Patrizia 1988. Accessing lexical ambiguity in different types of sentential contexts. Journal of Memory and Language, 27, 324–40. Tabossi, Patrizia and Laghi, Linda 1992. Semantic priming in the pronunciation of words in two writing systems: Italian and English. Memory and Cognition, 20, 303–13. Taft, Marcus 1981. Prefixed stripping revisited. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 20, 289–97. 1991. Reading and the Mental Lexicon. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. 1992. The body of the boss: subsyllabic units in the lexical processing of polysyllabic words. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 18, 1004–14. 1994. Interactive-activation as a framework for understanding morphological processing. Language and Cognitive Processes, 9, 271–94. Taft, Marcus and Forster, Kenneth I. 1975. Lexical storage and retrieval of prefixed words. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 14, 638–47. 1976. Lexical storage and retrieval of polymorphemic and polysyllabic words. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 15, 607–20. Taft, Marcus and Zhu, X. 1995. The representation of bound morphemes in the lexicon: a Chinese study. In Feldman, Laurie (ed.), Morphological Aspects of Language Processing. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Tahta, S., Wood, M. and Lowenthal, K. 1981a. Age changes in the ability to replicate foreign pronunciation and intonation. Language and Speech, 24 (4), 363–72. 1981b. Foreign accents: Factors relating to transfer of accent from the first language to a second language. Language and Speech, 24 (3) 265–72.

614

References

Takano, Yuji 1998. Object shift and scrambling. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory, 16, 817–89. Takazawa, Satoru, Takahashi, Nobuaki, Nakagome, Kazayuki, Kanno, Osamu, Hagiwara, Hiroko, Nakajima, Heizo, Itoh, Kenji and Koshida, Ichiro 2002. Early components of event-related potentials related to semantic and syntactic processes in the Japanese language. Brain Topography, 14, 169–77. Talcott, Joel, B. and Witton, Caroline 2002. A sensory to linguistic approach to the development of normal and dysfunctional reading skills. In Witruk, Evelin, Friederici, Angela D. and Lachmann, Thomas (eds.), Basic Functions of Language, Reading, and Reading Disability (pp. 213–40). Boston: Kluwer. Tallal, Paula 1980. Auditory temporal perception, phonics and the reading disabilities in children. Brain and Language, 9, 182–98. 2000. Experimental studies of language learning impairments: from research to remediation. In Bishop, Dorothy V. M. and Leonard, Lawrence B. (eds.), Speech and Language Impairments in Children: Causes, Characteristics, Intervention and Outcome (pp. 131–55). Hove, UK: Psychology Press. Talmy, Leonard 1985. Lexicalization patterns: semantic structure in lexical forms. In Shopen, Timothy (ed.), Language Typology and Syntactic Description (vol. 3: Grammatical Categories and the Lexicon, pp. 57–149). Cambridge University Press. 1988. Force dynamics in language and cognition. Cognitive Science, 12, 49–100. Tanenhaus, Michael K. and Trueswell, John C. 1995. Sentence comprehension. In Miller, Joanne L. and Eimas, Peter D. (eds.) Handbook of Perception and Cognition: Speech, Language, and Communication (vol. XI, pp. 217–62). San Diego, CA: Academic Press. Tanz, Christine 1974. Cognitive principles underlying children’s errors in pronominal case-marking. Journal of Child Language, 1, 271–6. Tardif, Twila, Gelman, Susan A. and Xu, Fan 1999. Putting the ‘Noun Bias’ in context: a comparison of English and Mandarin. Child Development, 70, 620–35. Tavakolian, Susan 1981. The conjoined-clause analysis of relative clauses. In Tavakolian, Susan, (ed.), Language Acquisition and Linguistic Theory. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Taylor, Donald M. 1987. Social psychological barriers to effective childhood bilingualism. In Homel, Peter, Palij, Michael and Aaronson, Doris (eds.), Childhood Bilingualism: Aspects of Linguistic, Cognitive, and Social Development (pp. 183–95). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Taylor, Insup 1980. The Korean writing system: an alphabet? A syllabary? A logography? In Kolers, Paul, Wrolstad, Merald E. and Bouma, Herman (eds.), Processing of Visual Language (vol. II, pp. 67–82). New York: Plenum Press. Taylor, Insup and Taylor, M. Martin 1983. Alphabetic syllabary: Korean Hangul. In Taylor, Insup and Taylor, M. Martin (eds.), The Psychology of Reading (pp. 77–91). New York, Academic Press. Taylor, Insup and Taylor, M. Martin 1995. Writing and Literacy in Chinese, Korean, and Japanese. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Tees, Richard C. and Werker, Janet F. 1984. Perceptual flexibility: maintenance or recovery of the ability to discriminate non-native speech sounds. Canadian Journal of Psychology, 34, 579–90.

References

615

Terzi, Arhonto and Wexler, Kenneth 2002. A-chains and S-homophones in children’s grammar: evidence from Greek passives. In Proceedings of NELS 32. Theakston, Anna, Lieven, Elena, Pine, Julian and Rowland, Caroline 1992. The role of performance limitations in the acquisition of verb-argument structure: an alternative account. Journal of Child Language, 28, 127–52. Thomas, Margaret 1989. The acquisition of English articles by first- and secondlanguage learners. Applied Psycholinguistics, 10, 335–55. Thompson, Cynthia K., Lange, K. L., Schneider, Sandra L. and Shapiro, Lewis P. 1997. Agrammatic and non-brain-damaged subjects’ verb and verb argument structure production. Aphasiology, 11, 473–90. Tomasello, Michael 1992. First Verbs: a Case Study of Early Grammatical Development. Cambridge University Press. 1998. The return of constructions. Journal of Child Language, 25, 431–42. Tomasello, Michael and Brooks, Patricia 1998. Young children’s earliest transitive and intransitive constructions. Cognitive Linguistics, 9, 379–95. 1999. Early syntactic development. In Barrett, Martyn (ed.), The Development of Language. Hove, UK: Psychology Press. Traunmüller, Hartmut 1988. Paralinguistic variation and invariance in the characteristic frequencies of vowels. Phonetica, 45, 1–29. Treiman, Rebecca, Mullennix, John, Bijeljac-Babic, Ranka and Richmond-Welty, Ellen D. 1995. The special role of rimes in the description, use, and acquisition of English orthography. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 124, 107–36. Tse, Lucy 2001. Heritage language literacy: a study of US biliterates. Language, Culture, and Curriculum, 14, 256–68. Tseng, Vivian and Fuligni Andrew J. 2000. Parent-adolescent language use and relationships among immigrant families with East Asian, Filipino, and Latin American backgrounds. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 62, 465–76. Tuaycharoen, Pintip 1984. Developmental strategies in the acquisition of numeral classifiers in Thai. In Selected Papers from the International Symposium on Language and Linguistics at Chiang Mai University (pp. 203–22). Chiang Mai, Thailand. Turner, Marilyn L. and Engle, Randall W. 1989. Is working memory capacity task dependent? Journal of Memory and Language, 28, 127–54. Uchida, Nobuko and Imai, Mutsumi 1996. A study on the acquisition of numeral classifiers among young children: the development of human-animal categories and generation of the rule of classifiers applying. Japanese Journal of Educational Psychology, 44 (2), 126–35. Unsworth, Sharon 2004. Child L1, child L2, and adult L2 acquisition: differences and similarities. In Brugos, Alejna, Micciulla, Linnea and Smith, Christine E. (eds.), Proceedings of the 28th BUCLD (pp. 633–44). Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press. 2005. Child L2, adult L2, child L1: differences and similarities: a study on the acquisition of direct object scrambling in Dutch. Doctoral dissertation, Utrecht University. Uriagereka, Juan 1998. Rhyme and Reason: an Introduction to Minimalist Syntax. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Urushibara, Saeko 1991. Ey/eykey: a postposition or a case marker. In Harvard Studies in Korean Linguistics IV (pp. 421–32).

616

References

US Bureau of the Census 2000. URL: www.census.gov. Vainikka, Anne and Young-Scholten, Martha 1996. Gradual development of L2 phrase structure. Second Language Research, 12 (1), 7–39. Valian, Virginia 1991. Syntactic subjects in the early speech of American and Italian children. Cognition, 40, 21–81. van Valin, Robert D. Jr. 1992. An overview of ergative phenomena and their implications for language acquisition. In Slobin, Dan I. (ed.), The Crosslinguistic Study of Language Acquisition (vol. III, pp. 15–38). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Vance, Timothy J. and Jones, Kimberly (eds.) 2006. Japanese/Korean Linguistics 14. Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications. Vellutino, Frank. R. and Scanlon, Donna M. 1987. Phonological coding, phonological awareness, and reading ability: evidence from a longitudinal and experimental study. Merrill-Palmer Quarterly, 33, 321–63. Veltman, Calvin 1983. Language Shift in the United States. New York: Mouton. Venditti, Jeniffer J., Jun, Sun-Ah and Beckman, Mary E. 1996. Prosodic cues to syntactic and other linguistic structures in Japanese, Korean, and English. In Morgan, James L. and Demuth, Katherine (eds.), Signal to Syntax: Bootstrapping from Speech to Grammar in Early Acquisition, (pp. 287–311). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Vendler, Zeno 1967. Linguistics in Philosophy. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press. Vihman, Marilyn M. 1996. Phonological Development: the Origins of Language in the Child. Cambridge, MA: Blackwell. Vihman, Marilyn M., DePaolis, Rory A. and Davis, Barbara L. 1998. Is there a ‘Trochaic Bias’ in early word learning? Evidence from infant production in English and French. Child Development, 69 (4), 935–49. van Voorst, Jan 1988. Event Structure. Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins. Waldman, Fern Rogow, Singh, Sadanand and Hayden, Mary Ellen 1978. A comparison of speech-sound production and discrimination in children with functional articulation disorders. Language and Speech, 21, 205–20. Walley, Amanda C., Metsala, Jamie L. and Garlock, Victoria M. 2003. Spoken vocabulary growth: its role in the development of phoneme awareness and early reading ability. Reading and Writing, 16, 5–20. Wang, Hahn-Sok 1990. Toward a description of the organization of Korean speech levels. International Journal of the Sociology of Language, 82, 25–39. Warden, David A. 1974. An experimental investigation into the child’s developing use of definite and indefinite referential speech. Doctoral dissertation, University of London. 1976. The influence of contexts on children’s use of identifying expressions and references. British Journal of Psychology, 67 (1), 101–12. Warren, Paul, Grabe, Esther and Nolan, Francis 1995. Prosody, phonology and parsing in closure ambiguities. Language and Cognitive Processes, 10, 457–86. Warren, Tessa and Gibson, Edward 2002. The influence of referential processing on sentence complexity. Cognition, 85, 79–112. 2005. Effects of NP type in reading cleft sentences in English. Language and Cognitive Processes, 20, 751–67. Watanabe, Akira 1992. Subjacency and s-structure movement of wh-in-situ. Journal of East Asian Linguistics, 1, 255–91.

References

617

Watson, Betty U., Sullivan, Patricia M., Moeller, Mary P. and Jensen, Janet K. 1982. Nonverbal intelligence and English language ability in deaf children. Journal of Speech and Hearing Disorders, 47, 199–204. Wei, Li 1994. Three Generations, Two Languages, One Family. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters. Weinrich, Uriel 1953. Languages in Contact. The Hague: Mouton. Wells, Gordon 1979. Learning and using the auxiliary verb in English. In Lee, V. (ed.), Language Development (pp. 250–70). London: Croom Helm. Wells, Gordon 1985. Language Development in the Pre-School Years. Cambridge University Press. Werker, Janet and Lalonde, Chris E. 1988. Cross-language speech perception: initial capabilities and developmental change. Developmental Psychology, 24, 672–83. Wexler, Kenneth 1992. Optional infinitives, head movement and the theory of derivation in child grammar. In Occasional Papers (vol. 45). Cambridge, MA: Center for Cognitive Science, MIT. 1994. Optional infinitives, head movement, and the economy of derivations. In Lightfoot, David and Hornstein, Norbert (eds.), Verb Movement (pp. 305–50). Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press. 1995. Feature-interpretability and optionality in early child grammar. Paper presented at the Workshop on Optionality. University of Utrecht, The Netherlands. 1996. The development of inflection in biologically based theory of language acquisition. In Rice, Mabel L. (ed.), Toward a Genetics of Language. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. 1998. Very early parameter setting and the unique checking constraint: a new explanation of the optional infinitive stage. Lingua, 106, 23–79. 2003. Maximal trouble. Paper presented at the CUNY Human Sentence Processing Conference, MIT. [Published as ‘Maximal trouble: cues don’t explain learning’, in Gibson, Edward and Perlmutter, Neal (eds.), The Processing and Acquisition of Reference. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.] Wexler, Kenneth and Manzini, Rita M. 1987. Parameters and learnability in binding theory. In Roeper, Thomas and Williams, Edwin (eds.), Parameter Setting. Dordrecht: D. Reidel. Whaley, C. P. 1978. Word-nonword classification time. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 17, 143–54. White, Lydia and Genesee, Fred 1996. How native is near native? The issue of ultimate attainment in adult second language acquisition. Second Language Research, 12, 233–65. Whitman, John B. 2000. Right dislocation in English and Japanese. In Takami, Ken-ichi, Kamio, Akio, and Whitman, John (eds.), Syntactic and Functional Explorations: A Festschrift for Susumu Kuno (pp. 445–70). Tokyo: Kuroshio Press. Whitman, John B., Lee, Kwee-Ock and Lust, Barbara 1991. Continuity of the principles of universal grammar in first language acquisition: the issue of functional categories. In NELS 21 (pp. 383–97). Amherst: GSLA. Whorf, Benjamin L. 1956. Language, Thought, and Reality: Selected Writings of Benjamin Lee Whorf (edited by Carroll, John B.). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Wilbur, Ronnie B. 2000. The use of ASL to support the development of English and literacy. Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education, 5, 81–104.

618

References

Williams, Lee 1980. Phonetic variation as a function of second-language learning. In YeniKomshian, Grace H., Kavanagh, James F. and Ferguson, Charles A. (eds.), Child Phonology (vol. II: Perception, pp. 185–215). New York: Academic Press. Winsler, Adam, Díaz, Rafael, Espinosa, Linda and Rodríguez, James 1999. When learning a second language does not mean losing the first: bilingual language development in low-income, Spanish-speaking children attending bilingual preschool. Child Development, 70, 349–62. Won, Seong-Ok 2002. Sign language acquisition and language education in deaf children [in Korean]. Journal of Special Education and Rehabilitation Science, 41, 77–100. Wright, Beverley A., Lombardino, Linda J., King, Wayne M., Puranik, Cyncia S., Leonard, Christina M. and Merzenich, Michael M. 1997. Deficits in auditory temporal and spectral resolution in language-impaired children. Nature, 387, 176–8. Wu, J. T., Chou, T. L. and Liu, I. M. 1994. The locus of the character/word frequency effect. In Chang, H. W., Huang, J. T., Hue, C. W. and Tzeng, O. J. L. (eds.), Advances in the Study of Chinese Language Processing, Vol. I, pp. 31–58. Teipei: Department of Psychology, National Taiwan University. Wydell, Taeko N., Patterson, Karalyn E. and Humphreys, Glyn W. 1993. Phonologically mediated access to meaning for Kanji: is a rows still a rose in Japanese Kanji? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 19, 491–514. Yamamoto, Kasumi 2000. The acquisition of Japanese numeral classifiers. Doctoral dissertation, Cornell University. Yamamoto, Kasumi and Keil, Frank 1996. The acquisition of Japanese numeral classifiers. In Proceedings of the 20th Annual Boston University Conference on Language Development V2. Yang, Byunggon 1996. A comparative study of American English and Korean vowels produced by male and female speakers. Journal of Phonetics, 24, 245–61. 2002. Perception of English vowels by American and Korean speakers. In Proceedings of the 1st International Conference on Speech Sciences (pp. 306–9), Seoul, Korea. Yang, Charles 2002. Knowledge and Learning in Natural Language. New York: Oxford University Press. Yang, Chinlung L., Gordon, Peter C., Hendrick, Randal and Wu, J. T. 2001. Crosslinguistic evidence on the processing of sentences with relative clauses. In Proceedings of CUNY 2001 Conference. Yang, Dong-Whee 1973. Topicalization and relativization in Korean. Doctoral dissertation, Indiana University. 1989. Korean Anaphora [in Korean]. Seoul, Korea: Hankwuk Yenkwuwon. Yeni-Komshian, Grace H., Flege, James E. and Liu, Serena 2000. Pronunciation proficiency in the first and second languages of Korean-English bilinguals. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 3 (2), 131–49. Yeni-Komshian, Grace H., Robbins, Medina and Flege, James E. 2001. Effects of word class differences on L2 pronunciation accuracy. Applied Psycholinguistics, 22, 283–99. Yi, Eun-Young 1994. NegP in Korean. In Grabois, Howard, Parkinson, David and Yeager, Debora (eds.), Cornell Working Papers in Linguistics 12 (pp. 193–208). Ithaca, NY: Cornell University, CLC Publications.

References

619

Yi, Joonsuk and Jin, Youngsun 1998. Relative importance of factors affecting text preference (I) [in Korean]. Korean Journal of Cognitive Science, 9, 63–70. Yi, Kwangoh 1993. On the role of frequency and internal structure in the processing kulca (syllable) [in Korean]. Korean Journal of Experimental and Cognitive Psychology, 5, 26–39. 1995. The internal structure of Kulca and its relation to syllable in Korean [in Korean]. Korean Journal of Experimental and Cognitive Psychology, 7, 57–69. 1998. The internal structure of Korean syllables: rhyme or body? [in Korean]. Korean Journal of Experimental and Cognitive Psychology, 10, 67–83. 1999a. Representation and processing of Hanja compound words [in Korean]. In Proceedings of the Annual Conference of Korean Society for Cognitive Science (pp. 73–9). 1999b. Morphological processing in Korean word recognition [in Korean]. In Proceedings of the Annual Conference of Korean Society for Experimental and Cognitive Psychology (pp. 35–42). 2003a. The effects of word type on word recognition in Korean [in Korean]. Korean Journal of Experimental and Cognitive Psychology, 15, 479–98. 2003b. The effect of Hanja proficiency on lexical processing of Korean [in Korean]. Journal of the Sungkok Academic and Cultural Foundation, 34, 459–508. Yi, Kwangoh and Yi, Insen 1999. Morphological processing in Korean word recognition [in Korean]. Korean Journal of Experimental and Cognitive Psychology, 11, 77–91. Yoo, Chang-Hwa and Lee, Jung-Mo 1989. Effects of the specific and general term referencing on instrument inference [in Korean]. The Korean Journal of Psychology, 8, 1–16. Yoon, James Hye-Suk 1994. Korean verbal inflection and checking theory. In The Morphology-Syntax Connection, MIT Working Papers in Linguistics (vol. 22, pp. 251–70). Cambridge, MA: MITWPL. Yoon, Jong-Yurl 1990. Korean syntax and generalized X’-theory. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Texas, Austin. Yoon, Keumsil Kim 1992. New perspective in intrasentential code-switching: a study of Korean-English switching. Applied Psycholinguistics, 13, 433–49. 1996. A case study of fluent Korean-English bilingual speakers: group membership and code choices. Journal of Pragmatics, 25, 396–405. Yu, Dong-Jun 1989. Korean classifiers and numeralization [in Korean]. KwukeKwukmwunhak (The Korean Language and Literature), 89. Kwuke-kwukmwunhakhoy (The Society of Korean Language and Literature). Yum, June-Ock 1987. Korean philosophy and communication. In Kincaid, Larry D. (ed.), Communication Theory: Eastern and Western Perspectives (pp. 71–86). San Diego, CA: Academic Press. Zentella, Ana Celia 1997. Growing Up Bilingual. Malden, MA: Blackwell. Zheler, Annette M. and Brewer, William F. 1982. Sequence and principles in article system use: an examination of a, the, and null acquisition. Child Development, 53, 1268–74. Zhou, Xiaolin, Marslen-Wilson, William, Taft, Marcus and Shu, Hwa 1999. Morphology, orthography, and phonology in reading Chinese compound words. Language and Cognitive Processes, 14, 525–65. Zingeser, Louise B. and Berndt, Rita S. 1990. Retrieval of nouns and verbs in agrammatism and anomia. Brain and Language, 39, 14–32.

620

References

Zoh, Myeong-han 1982a. A Study on Language Acquisition by Korean Children: Acquisition Model [in Korean]. Seoul: Seoul National University Press. 1982b. Language Acquisition of Korean Children: a Strategy Model [in Korean]. Seoul: Seoul National University Press. 1982c. Research on Korean Children’s Language Strategies: Strategy Patterns [in Korean]. Seoul: Seoul National University Press. Zoh, Myeong-han and Ahn, Jeung-Chan 2006. Active inferential processing during comprehension in less skilled readers. Korean Journal of Cognitive Science, 17, 75–102. Zubin, David A. 1979. Discourse function of morphology: the focus system in German. In Givón, Talmy, (ed.), Syntax and Semantics: Discourse and Syntax (vol. 12, pp. 469–504). New York: Academic Press. Zwaan, Rolf A., Langston, Mark C., and Graesser, Arthur C. 1995. The construction of situation models in narrative comprehension: An event-indexing model. Psychological Science, 6, 292–7. Zwicker, Eberhard and Terhardt, Ernst 1980. Analytical expressions for critical-band rate and critical bandwidth as a function of frequency. JASA, 68, 1523–5. Zwicky, Arnold and Pullum, Geoffrey 1983. Cliticization vs. inflection: English N’T. Language, 59, 502–13.

Name Index

Aaronson, D., 444 Abelson, R., 474 Abney, S., 179, 230 Adams, A., 139 Adams, K., 137, 140 Adlard, A., 519 Aguiar, A., 113, 117, 119 Ahn, H.-D., 76, 179, 211 Ahn, J.-C., 529 Ahn, S.-H., 75, 129, 130 Ahn, S.-W., 11, 362, 363, 365, 366, 373 Ahn, T. S., 495, 496, 502, 503 Ainsworth, W., 392 Ainsworth-Darnell, K., 464, 473 Aissen, J., 462 Akhtar, N., 36 Aksu-Koç, A., 51, 220 Albrecht, J., 483 Allen, S., 45 Allport, A., 416 Alvarez, C., 422 Andersen, R., 218, 232 Anderson, S., 93, 100 Annett, M., 465 Antinucci, F., 232 Appel, R., 339 Ås, A., 273 Asher, J., 318, 323 Aslin, R., 257 Au, A., 519 Au, K., 65 Au, T., 64, 65, 67, 68, 70 Au, T. K., 269, 273, 274, 275 Auer, P., 344, 346, 347 Aurelio, S., 245 Avrutin, S., 507, 508, 509 Ayers, G., 426 Azuma, S., 331 Baddeley, A., 528 Baek, J. Y.-K., 132, 134, 135, 136

Baek, Y.-K., 78 Bailes, C., 365 Bailey, P., 519 Baillargeon, R., 113, 117, 119 Baillet, S., 477 Baker, C., 93, 498, 506 Baker, M., 134 Baluch, B., 419 Bamberg, M., 47 Banaji, M., 477 Bang, H.-J., 475, 477 Barnum, M., 365 Bartke, S., 231 Bartling, J., 520 Bassano, D., 203 Bastiaanse, R., 507 Bates, E., 35, 60, 67, 495, 496, 507 Baumgaertner, A., 464 Beale, I., 524 Beckman, M., 256, 258, 423, 424, 426 Bedecker, W., 498 Belazi, H., 332, 337 Bell-Berti, F., 392 Bellugi, U., 61, 175 Bentin, S., 409, 411, 419 Bentivoglio, P., 45 Benzmüller, R., 423 Beretta, A., 498, 501, 507, 511 Berk-Seligson, S., 333, 334, 336 Berlin, B., 108 Berman, R., 37 Berndt, R., 498, 501, 506 Bertoncini, J., 256 Besner, D., 419 Best, M., 522 Bever, T., 50, 51, 60, 162, 170, 456 Bialystok, E., 269, 273, 278, 318 Bickerton, D., 219 Bien, Z.-N., 363 Bierwisch, M., 108 Bijeljac-Babic, R., 521

621

622

Name Index

Birch, S., 444 Birdsong, D., 318 Bishop, D., 520, 525 Bishop, S., 520 Bjork, E., 273, 274 Bjork, R., 273, 274 Bley-Vroman, R., 309, 316 Bloom, L., 35, 67, 109, 175 Bloom, P., 123 Bobaljik, J., 77 Boeschoten, H., 334 Bolinger, D., 317 Bongaerts, T., 277 Boothroyd, A., 391 Borer, H., 8, 136, 231, 232, 237, 242 Borsting, E., 519 Bourgeois, J.-P., 273 Bowerman, M., 35, 36, 94, 97, 98, 105, 109, 110, 111, 113, 115, 123, 232 Boynton, G., 522 Boysson-Bardies, B., 256, 257 Bradley, D., 539 Brady, S., 520 Braine, M., 35, 36 Brausse, U., 479 Bregman, A., 524 Brewer, W., 296 Brinkmann, U., 93, 96 Brooks, P., 33, 36 Broselow, E., 287 Brown, D., 163 Brown, P., 36, 110, 477 Brown, R., 160, 175, 296 Bruce, G., 423 Bryant, T., 296, 297 Budwig, N., 46 Burr, D., 519 Busnel, M.-C., 256 Butterfield, S., 256 Butterworth, B., 539 Caplan, D., 456, 498, 504, 506, 507, 508, 509, 515 Caramazza, A., 498, 506, 509, 539 Carey, S., 11, 351, 352, 353 Carlson, G., 482 Carlson, K., 431 Carlyon, R., 520 Carpenter, J., 140 Carpenter, K., 138, 140, 148 Carpenter, P., 498, 508, 528, 529 Carreiras, M., 422, 445 Casasola, M., 124, 125 Castles, A., 521, 524 Cazden, C., 229

Chae, S.-K., 540 Chafe, W., 34, 39 Chafetz, J., 231 Chan, C., 309 Chang, F., 444, 450, 475 Chang, S.-J., 155 Chang, S.-U., 223 Chang-Song, Y.-K., 64, 65, 66, 67, 68, 70 Chapman, R., 67 Charles-Luce, J., 521 Chen, C.-H., 413 Chen, H.-C., 389, 409, 412, 413, 415, 416, 417, 420 Chen, M., 412 Cheung, S.-L., 412 Chiat, S., 61 Chiba, T., 391 Chien, Y.-C., 151 Cho, C.-H., 78 Cho, D.-I., 73, 76 Cho, H.-S., 506 Cho, J.-R., 386, 389, 409, 413, 415, 416, 417, 420 Cho, K.-H., 479, 480, 481 Cho, K.-J., 383, 387 Cho, K.-Y., 388 Cho, S. W., 27, 30, 37, 51, 53, 150, 151, 154, 155, 156 Cho, S.-K., 51, 162, 168, 171 Cho, T.-H., 425, 428 Cho, Y.-M., 260 Cho, Y.-M. Y., 127, 131, 132, 133 Choe, H.-B., 223 Choi, C.-O., 432 Choi, G.-J., 109, 115, 345 Choi, J.-O., 195, 220, 332, 334, 335, 336, 338, 341, 344 Choi, K.-G., 437 Choi, K.-S., 421 Choi, S.-B., 11, 362, 363, 365, 373 Choi, S.-J., 37, 41, 44, 47, 64, 65, 66, 67, 68, 70, 105, 109, 111, 113, 114, 115, 117, 118, 120, 121, 123, 187, 193, 203, 329 Choi, S.-S., 477, 479, 480 Choi, Y., 259, 260 Choi, Y.-G., 384 Choi, Y.-O., 432 Choi, Y.-S., 73, 75 Chomsky, N., 72, 91, 107, 108, 134, 151, 153, 226, 276, 286, 306, 456 Chou, T., 413 Christensen, K., 362, 374 Chun, N.-H., 11, 363, 365 Chung, C.-S., 382, 383, 384, 386, 388 Chung, G.-H., 37, 180, 182, 185

Name Index Cinque, G., 75, 77 Clancy, P., 27, 29, 35, 38, 39, 45, 46, 48, 61, 167, 169, 437, 499 Clark, E., 108, 109, 140, 351, 352 Clark, H., 108, 443 Clifton, C., 431, 436, 454 Clumeck, H., 257 Coates, J., 203 Cohen, L., 124, 125 Cole, P., 151, 540 Coltheart, M., 409, 414, 417, 418 Comrie, B., 139, 150, 162 Conklin, N., 137, 139, 140 Conway, A., 529 Copeland, G., 332 Copland, D., 464 Corballis, M., 524 Corbett, A., 475 Cornell, T., 510 Cortese, A., 418 Cossu, G., 520 Crain, S., 74, 78, 80, 253, 306, 308, 310, 501 Croft, W., 512 Croker, M., 434 Crystal, D., 432 Cuetos, F., 501 Cutler, A., 256, 422, 432 D’Andrea, D., 270 Dale, P., 67 Daneman, M., 528, 529 Dapretto, M., 64, 65, 67, 70 Davidsonian, D., 245 Davis, B., 256 Davis, C., 521, 524 De Bleser, R., 506 de León, L., 36, 45, 47 de Vega, M., 422 de Villiers, J., 162, 296 De Vincenzi, M., 433, 438 DeCasper, A., 256 Decker, G., 421 Deeks, J., 520 Dehaut, F., 498, 506 Deimel, W., 520 DeKeyser, R., 276, 278 Demb, J., 522 Demuth, K., 176, 186, 257 DePaolis, R., 256 DeStafano, J., 521 Deutsch, A., 540 Devescovi, A., 496 Di Sciullo, A., 332, 337 Díaz, R., 271 Dick, F., 509

623 Diehl, R., 393 Diesing, M., 296 Dik, S., 512 Do, K. S., 384 Do, K.-S., 477 Doctor, E., 409, 414 Doetjes, J., 252 Doi, L., 519 Donaldson, M., 245, 246 Dowty, D., 93 Drai, D., 494, 498 Druss, B., 257 Du Bois, J., 4, 34, 37, 39, 42, 45 Dudeck, K., 519 Duffy, S., 477, 533 Duncan, L., 521 Durand, C., 257 Duranti, A., 47 Ebbinghaus, H., 274 Echols, C., 257 Eckenhoff, M., 273 Eden, G., 522 Eimas, P., 256 Elbourne, P., 228 Embick, D., 237 Emslie, H., 296 Enç, M., 296 Engle, R., 529 Engstrand, O., 393, 395 Epstein, S., 306, 307 Erbaugh, M., 138, 139 Erreich, A., 221 Ervin-Tripp, S., 345 Espinosa, L., 271 Eubank, L, 307 Fang, F., 138, 139, 140 Fant, G., 390, 391 Farmer, M., 519 Fathman, A., 318 Faust, M., 531 Feigenbaum, E., 387 Feldman, L., 400, 401 Felix, S., 309 Fernald, A., 256 Ferres, S., 444 Fillmore, C., 36 Fillmore, L., 268 Finer, D., 287 Flege, J., 273, 276, 277, 279, 318, 319, 328 Flores d’Arcais, G., 412 Flynn, S., 287, 309 Fodor, J., 288 Foley, C., 287

624

Name Index

Ford, C., 479 Forster, K., 402, 416 Foster, K., 539, 540 Fougeron, C., 425 Fowler, S., 519 Fox, B., 457, 461 Fox, D., 231, 233, 242 Fox, R., 392 Fraser, B., 362 Fraser, C., 175 Frazier, L., 431, 433, 435, 436, 508 Fredriksen, J., 475 Freeman, N., 245, 249 Friederici, A., 256, 464, 465, 472, 495, 496, 501, 507, 508 Friedmann, N., 489, 501, 506, 507 Frith, U., 518 Fromkin, F., 510 Fromm, E., 273 Frost, R., 409, 410, 411, 419, 420, 540 Fruchter, A., 362 Fukui, N., 96 Fuligni A., 272 Futter, C., 498, 506, 507, 509, 515 Gandour, J., 138, 139, 140, 148 Garcia, R., 318, 323 Garlock, V., 520, 521 Garner, W., 384 Garnham, A., 477 Garnsey, S., 444 Garrod, S., 475, 477, 483 Gee, J., 202 Genesee, F., 276, 279, 332 Genneri, S., 126 Gentner, D., 11, 63, 97, 354, 355, 356, 358, 359 Gerhardt, J., 202 Gerken, L., 257 Gernsbacher, M., 16, 442, 444, 445, 449, 450, 475, 483, 509, 531, 532, 536 Gibson, E., 437, 455, 456, 457, 458, 521 Giraudo, H., 406 Giusti, G., 252 Givón, T., 27, 34, 39, 444 Gleitman, L., 93, 94, 96, 97, 126 Gökmen, S., 232 Gold, M., 93 Goldberg, A., 36 Goldberg, R., 93 Goldman-Rakic, P., 273 Golinkoff, R., 115 Goodglass, H., 494, 507 Goodhart, W., 367 Goodluck, H., 176 Gopal, H., 391, 392

Gopnik, A., 37, 64, 65, 66, 67, 68, 70 Gopnik, L., 329 Gordon, P., 140, 231, 352, 454, 455, 456, 457, 458, 461, 462 Graesser, A., 443, 474, 483 Graetz, P., 501 Graham, A., 415, 421 Grainger, J., 406 Granier-Deferre, C., 256 Gray, J., 524 Green, G., 443, 444 Green, I., 528 Grice, M., 423 Grimshaw, G., 94 Grimshaw, L., 96 Grodzinsky, Y., 231, 233, 242, 489, 494, 498, 506, 507, 509, 510 Grojean, F., 331, 333 Gropen, J., 93, 94, 96, 97, 98, 99, 100 Gruber, J., 27 Guasti, M., 176 Guilfoyle, E., 176 Gumperz, J., 331, 332, 344, 347 Ha, E. J., 237 Haarmann, H., 508 Haberlandt, K., 443 Haendiges, A., 506 Haggerty, R., 519 Hagiwara, H., 489 Hagoort, P., 464, 472, 473 Hagstrom, P., 75, 78 Hahn, K.-J., 180 Hahne, A., 464, 465 Hakuta, K., 269, 270, 271, 273, 318, 341 Hale, B., 412 Halliday, M., 479 Halliwell, J., 490, 496, 501, 504, 505 Han, C.-H., 73, 213, 220, 440 Han, H., 73, 75, 176, 180, 185, 186 Han, K.-H., 383, 387 Hanko-Summers, S., 113 Harada, S., 162 Hardin, C., 477 Harford, C., 498 Hargreaves, D., 444, 445 Hari, R., 524 Harley, B., 318 Harrison, G., 138 Hassan, R., 479 Hawkins, R., 309 Hayden, M., 393 Hazan, V., 519 Heeger, D., 522 Heeschen, C., 508

Name Index Heilman, K., 507, 515 Heim, I., 288, 297 Heindiges, A., 498 Helenius, P., 524 Heller, M., 346 Henderson, L., 539 Hendrick, R., 455, 456, 457, 458, 461 Hermon, G., 151 Hernandez-Chavez, E., 332 Hespos, S., 120 Hickok, G., 507, 508, 509 Hildebrandt, N., 507, 508, 509 Hill, S., 521 Hillert, D., 433 Hillyard, S., 464, 471 Hinton, L., 270 Hirose, H., 400, 402 Hirsch, C., 237 Hirschberg, J., 423, 427 Hirsh-Pasek, K., 8, 257 Hirst, W., 203 Hoefnagel-Hohle, M., 278 Hoekstra, T., 252 Hoffmeister, R., 365 Hogaboam, T., 531 Holcomb, P., 471 Hollander, M., 93 Hong, C.-S., 529 Hong, K.-S., 127, 131, 132, 133 Hong, S. E., 11, 363, 368 Hong, Y.-S., 439 Hood, L., 67 Horgan, D., 232 Hovdhaugen, E., 289 Hsiao, F., 455 Hsu, C.-C., 455 Hu, Q., 138 Huang, D., 270 Hughes, C., 415, 421 Humphreys, G., 412 Hurewitz, F., 455 Hurford, J., 221 Hutchinson, J., 64 Hwang, D.-S., 11, 363, 366, 368 Hwang, J.-R., 350 Hwang, M., 495, 498, 499, 500, 501, 502, 503 Hwang, Y. M., 489, 491, 492, 506, 540 Hyams, N., 151, 176 Hyun, J. M., 506 Im, H.-B., 137 Imai, M., 11, 138, 139, 140, 149, 354, 355, 356, 358, 359 Imbens-Bailey, A., 270 Inhelder, B., 112, 244, 245, 246

625 Ionin, K., 288 Ionin, T., 287, 288, 289, 291, 292, 293, 295, 299, 304 Ioup, G., 309 Jackendoff, R., 93, 123, 228 Jang, J.-D., 435 Jang, J.-K., 11, 363, 368 Jang, Y.-H., 453 Jared, D., 409 Javella, R., 539 Jeaggli, O., 306 Jhang, S.-E., 11, 168, 363, 366, 368, 369, 370, 372, 374 Jin, Y., 388 Jo, H.-S., 389 Jo, H.-Y., 269, 273 Johnson, J., 276, 278 Johnson, M., 456, 457, 458 Johnson, R., 374 Johnson-Laird, P., 108 Johnston, J., 109, 412 Jonas, D., 77 Jones, S., 351, 352 Jonker, J., 507 Joo, Y.-H., 75 Jordens, P., 252, 287 Joshi, A., 331, 332, 333, 334, 336 Joyce, T., 400, 402 Juffs, A., 96, 104 Jun, J. S., 161, 162, 163, 166, 167, 363, 364, 367 Jun, M.-G., 481 Jun, S.-A., 11, 256, 258, 259, 263, 269, 275, 423, 424, 425, 428, 429, 430, 431, 432 Jung, J., 496 Jung, J.-B., 485, 486, 488, 506, 540, 541 Jung, J.-G., 401, 402, 403 Jung, J.-M., 71 Jung, K. S., 11, 363, 365 Jusczyk, P., 8, 256, 257, 432, 521 Just, M. A., 456, 498, 508, 528, 536 Kaan, E., 458, 462 Kajiyama, M., 391 Kamide, Y., 436, 437 Kaneko, Y., 304 Kang, B., 96, 151, 156, 380, 454 Kang, H.-K., 246, 249, 251, 411 Kang, H.-S., 428 Kang, H.-W., 381, 386, 389, 409, 411, 414, 415, 416, 417, 420, 421, 422 Kang, I. K., 380 Kang, M.-Y., 506 Kang, S.-Y., 429, 430

626

Name Index

Kang, Y. J., 11, 363, 367 Karins, N., 306 Karmiloff-Smith, A., 296, 297 Katz, L., 409, 411, 419, 520 Kauschke, C., 506 Kawachi, K., 112 Kay, P., 108 Kayne, R., 129, 136 Kean, M.-L., 276 Keating, P., 425, 519 Keenan, E., 150, 162 Keenan, J., 477, 478 Kelly, C., 519 Kemler Nelson, D., 257 Kemmerer, D., 506 Ken, L. K., 138 Kennedy, L., 257 Keyser, A., 507 Kidder, H., 519 Kim, S.-I., 445 Kim, A.-R., 76 Kim, B.-L., 363 Kim, C. K., 11, 151, 363, 368 Kim, C.-K., 94, 98, 102, 104 Kim, D. Y., 495 Kim, D., 496 Kim, D.-H., 506, 540 Kim, D.-J., 363 Kim, D.-W., 485, 486 Kim, E.-J., 29, 37, 44, 51, 53, 129, 134, 135, 276 Kim, H., 498 Kim, H.-G., 380, 381 Kim, H.-H., 498 Kim, H.-J., 386, 389 Kim, H.-S., 228, 429, 430 Kim, H.-Seob, 270 Kim, J. H., 509 Kim, J.-B., 37, 78, 258, 363, 373 Kim, J.-K., 383, 387, 421 Kim, J.-O., 381, 382, 385, 387, 388, 421, 529 Kim, J.-S., 524 Kim, K., 285 Kim, K. H., 471 Kim, K.-J., 529 Kim, K.-L., 384, 385, 386 Kim, K.-Y., 491, 506 Kim, M., 503, 506 Kim, M.-H., 383 Kim, M.-K., 37, 65, 66, 68, 70 Kim, M.-R., 428, 540 Kim, M.-S., 96, 98, 105, 382, 383, 384, 386 Kim, R.-H., 105 Kim, S. H., 485, 486 Kim, S. K., 11, 225, 226, 227, 363, 364, 367, 368

Kim, S. R., 506 Kim, S., 496, 501, 503 Kim, S.-C., 51, 180 Kim, S.-H., 425, 428, 432, 485, 496, 506 Kim, S.-I., 442, 445, 446, 447, 448, 482 Kim, S.-J., 487 Kim, S.-O., 389 Kim, S.-Y., 477, 478, 479 Kim, T.-H., 421, 454, 455, 488, 540 Kim, Y., 503 Kim, Y.-H., 388 Kim, Y. G., 131, 270 Kim, Y. K., 380 Kim, Y.-J., 7, 131, 132, 133, 162, 164, 168, 169, 180, 181, 183, 185, 224, 225, 436, 437, 439, 440, 454, 487, 498, 499, 501, 503, 504, 505, 515 Kim, Y.-S., 241 Kim-Renaud, Y.-K., 522 King, J., 528, 536 King, W., 519 Kinoshita, S., 421 Kintsch, W., 483, 533 Kirk, L., 257 Kiss, K., 506 Kjelgaard, M., 429 Klein, R., 519 Knight, D., 539 Knightly, L., 269, 275 Ko, H., 287, 288, 292, 295, 298, 299, 300, 304 Koh, S.-R., 434 Koizumi, M., 73 Kolk, H., 507, 508, 509, 510, 511 Koo, J., 344, 345 Krashen, S., 268 Kratzer, A., 237 Kroch, A., 91 Kuczaj, S., 222 Kuhl, P., 125 Kuno, S., 150, 152, 153, 156 Kuntze, M., 365 Kuperberg, G., 464 Kutas, M., 464, 471, 472 Kwak, H.-W., 385 Kweon, S.-O., 278, 316 Kwon, H.-C., 464 Kwon, K.-H., 373 Kwon, O.-S., 389 Kwon, S.-W., 364 Kwon, Y.-A., 388, 540 Lacerda, F., 125 Ladefoged, P., 255, 256 Laghi, L., 410, 411, 419

Name Index Lakoff, G., 305 Lalonde, C., 125 Lambrecht, K., 25 Landau, B., 94, 96, 98, 123, 257, 351, 352 Lang, E., 480 Langacker, R., 512 Langdon, R., 409, 418 Lange, K., 506 Langston, M., 483 Lasnik, H., 306 Laudanna, A., 539 Lebeaux, D., 176 LeCanuet, J.-P., 256 Leck, K., 412 Lee, B.-T., 355, 529, 532, 533, 535, 536 Lee, C., 96 Lee, C. H., 388 Lee, C.-M., 1, 24, 26, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 151, 153, 154, 155, 161, 162, 163, 166, 167, 169, 193, 213, 214, 215, 220, 221, 223, 224, 226, 232, 440, 485 Lee, D.-H., 363, 373, 389 Lee, D.-M., 141, 148, 276, 279, 281 Lee, E.-C., 381, 386 Lee, E.-K., 51, 53 Lee, H., 499 Lee, H. S., 380 Lee, H.-C., 477 Lee, H.-J., 11, 151, 167, 169, 354, 355, 356, 357, 425, 430, 437, 454 Lee, H.-W., 71, 486, 506 Lee, I.-S., 51, 454 Lee, J.-E., 234 Lee, J.-G., 479, 480 Lee, J.-H., 94, 96, 178, 180, 181, 182, 442, 445, 447, 448, 449, 450, 451, 453, 475, 476, 477, 478, 481, 482 Lee, J. K., 380 Lee, J.-M., 447, 474, 475, 477, 479, 480, 481, 482, 483, 503 Lee, J.-S., 384, 385, 386 Lee, Joo-H., 258 Lee, K.-H., 11, 354, 355, 356, 357, 474, 482 Lee, K.-I., 421 Lee, K.-M., 529 Lee, K.-O., 141, 145, 148, 162, 166, 167, 183, 221, 224, 225 Lee, M.-S., 137, 491, 504, 507, 511, 512, 514, 516 Lee, M.-Y., 383, 421 Lee, S.-B., 64, 65, 67, 68, 70 Lee, S.-H., 529, 537 Lee, S.-J., 258 Lee, T., 246 Lee, Y., 388, 415

627 Lee, Y.-A., 384, 386, 388 Lee, Y.-H., 223, 454, 458, 459, 461, 462 Lehiste, I., 255, 429 Lenneberg, E., 276, 277 Leonard, C., 519 Letcher, T., 521 Levin, B., 93, 94, 105, 232 Levin, H., 521 Levine, W., 458 Levinson, S., 109, 126 Lewis, D., 245 Lewis, M., 432 Lewis, R., 1 Li, C., 257 Li, P., 126, 232, 331 Li, W., 344, 346 Liberman, A., 520 Liberman, I., 520 Liberman, M., 423 Liddell, S., 374 Lidz, J., 73, 80, 89, 91, 152 Lieven, E., 35, 36 Lightbown, P., 67 Lightfoot, D., 306 Lillo-Martin, D., 371 Lim, C.-G., 506 Lim, H.-S., 388, 540, 541 Lindblom, B., 125, 391, 393, 395 Lindholm, K., 341 Lindsay, D., 392 Linebarger, M., 507, 509 Litchfield, S., 362 Liu, I., 413 Liu, S., 273, 276, 279, 318, 319 Lloyd, P., 245, 246 Locker, L., 421 Lombardino, L., 519 Long, D., 531, 536 Long, M., 318 Lopez, D., 269 Lovegrove, W., 519 Lucas, M., 482 Luce, P., 521 Lucy, J., 355, 358 Luetke-Stahlman, B., 367 Lukatela, K., 501 Lundberg, I., 520 Lupker, S., 421 Lust, B., 183, 221, 224, 225 Luzzatti, C., 506 MacDonald, M., 454, 475, 528 MacKay, I., 318 MacWhinney, B., 26, 35, 60, 162, 443, 449, 475, 496, 540

628

Name Index

Maddieson, I., 393 Maess, B., 464 Mahootian, S., 331, 332, 337 Maisog, J., 522 Malakoff, M., 341 Malt, B., 126 Mandler, J., 109, 118, 123 Manganari, E., 519 Manis, F., 519 Manzini, M., 234 Manzini, R., 150 Maratsos, M., 222, 231, 232, 288, 296, 297, 303 Marin, O., 507 Markman, E., 63, 64, 351 Marquardt, T., 332 Marshall, C., 519, 520 Marslen-Wilson, W., 400, 403, 533, 536, 540 Martin, D., 367 Martin, S., 223 Martohardjono, G., 309 Masaki, S., 413 Mason, R., 483 Massaro, D., 387 Mathew, P., 524 Matsui, L., 519 Matsumoto, Y., 138, 139, 140 Matthei, E., 245 Matthewson, L., 296, 297, 304 Mauner, G., 510 Mayer, J., 221 Mazuka, R., 259, 260, 432, 433 Mazzuchi, A., 507 McAnally, K., 524 McBride-Chang, C., 519 McCauley, C., 532 McClelland, J., 387, 388 McCroskey, R., 519 McDonald, J., 60, 387, 449 McDonough, L., 109, 118, 120, 121 McElree, B., 458 McGregor, K., 65 McKee, C., 80 McKoon, G., 443 McNeill, D., 35 Mecklinger, A., 472 Mehler, J., 256, 422 Meijers, G., 539 Menn, L., 490, 507 Merrill, E., 532, 535 Merzenich, M., 519 Metsala, J., 520, 521 Meuter, R., 416 Miceli, G., 506, 507 Miller, B., 318

Miller, G., 108, 456 Miller, H., 392 Miller, J., 67, 391, 392 Miller, R., 232 Milroy, L., 269, 346 Milroy, R., 415, 421 Mimica, I., 496 Min, H.-K., 373 Mitchell, D., 436, 437 Mitchum, C., 498, 506 Miyagawa, S., 96 Miyake, A., 498, 508, 528 Mohamed, M., 454 Monsell, S., 415, 416, 421 Moon, C., 256 Moon, S.-S., 454, 455 Moon, Y. S., 489, 491, 506 Moore, B., 392 Morikawa, H., 61 Morris, R., 454, 533 Morrone, C., 519 Mosel, U., 289 Motoyama, J., 519 Mullennix, J., 521 Munich, E., 309 Munn, A., 501 Munoz, M., 332 Munro, M., 318 Munson, B., 519 Münte, T., 464 Murasugi, K., 221 Musolino, J., 73, 80, 89, 91 Muysken, P., 332, 337, 346 Myers, J., 477, 478, 483 Myers-Scotton, C., 332, 336 Mysken, P., 339 Na, D. L., 498 Na, W. H., 11, 363, 367 Nagai, N., 440 Nagy, N., 306 Naigles, L., 36, 115 Nakyama, M., 1 Nam, K.-C., 386, 388, 412, 420, 421, 454, 455, 485, 486, 487, 488, 489, 491, 496, 506, 507, 540, 541 Nam, S., 96 Nam, S.-H., 235 Namkung, J. C., 380 Narasimhan, B., 46 Nava, M., 270 Nazzi, T., 256 Needham, A., 113 Nespor, M., 256 Nespoulous, J.-L., 507

Name Index Neville, H., 464, 472, 473 Neville, N., 472 Newport, E., 269, 273, 276, 278 Newsome, M., 257 Newsome, S., 386 Nicol, J., 464, 473 Nicoladis, E., 332 Ninio, A., 36 Nishimura, M., 333, 336, 337 Nittrouer, S., 520 Noonan, M., 176 Nooteboom, P., 392 Nooteboom, S., 393 Nordstroem, P., 391 Norris, D., 422 Notier, J., 331, 340 O’Brien, E., 483 O’Grady, W., 51, 62, 162, 173, 184, 306, 311, 507, 512, 514, 516 Oakhill, J., 477 Obler, L., 490 Oh, J. S., 269, 273, 274, 275 Oh, M.-R., 259, 431, 432 Older, L., 540 Oliver, S., 524 Olson, R., 520 Oppy, B., 531 Osaka, M., 528 Osaka, N., 528 Osmάn-Sάgi, J., 496 Osterhout, L., 464, 471, 472, 473 Otani, K., 73 Owens, R., 64 Oyama, S., 273, 276, 277, 318 Paap, K., 387 Padden, C., 365 Padilla, A., 341 Pae, S.-Y., 51, 64, 65, 66, 67, 70, 71 Pak, Y.-S., 523 Paliwal, K., 392 Pallier, C., 273 Pammer, K., 524 Papafragou, A., 80 Paradis, J., 332 Park, C. I., 495 Park, C.-H., 11, 354, 355, 356, 383, 384, 385, 386 Park, H.-H., 78, 89 Park, H.-J., 71 Park, H.-S., 489, 506 Park, H.-W., 162, 166, 167 Park, J., 363, 373 Park, J. Y., 362, 373

629 Park, J.-E., 129, 130, 133, 332, 334, 336, 338, 339, 341, 344, 345 Park, K.-B., 73 Park, K.-S., 386, 387, 415, 421 Park, M.-J., 432 Park, M.-K., 73, 75, 385 Park, S., 387 Park, S.-D., 234 Park, T.-J., 381, 389, 413, 447, 477, 478 Patkowski, M., 277, 278, 318 Patterson, J., 498 Patterson, K., 412, 415, 421 Paul, P., 374 Pearlmutter, N., 454 Pederson, E., 110 Penfield, W., 273, 277 Perfetti, C., 531 Perovic, A., 304 Perry, C., 409 Perry, K., 418 Pesetsky, D., 93 Peterson, A., 519 Peterson, J., 340 Petronio, K., 371 Pfaff, C., 332 Philip, W., 245, 246 Phillips, C., 105, 455 Phinney, J., 270 Piaget, J., 108, 112, 244, 245, 246, 297 Pierce, A., 231 Pierrehumbert, J., 256, 423, 424, 426, 427 Piñango, M., 494, 498 Pine, J., 36 Pinker, S., 35, 36, 93–97, 100, 105, 512 Platzack, C., 176 Pleh, C., 60 Pollock, J.-Y., 73 Pomerantz, J., 383 Poplack, S., 331, 332, 333, 334, 346 Postal, P., 228, 311 Potter, M., 450 Pratt, A., 520 Prinz, P., 366 Prinzmetal, W., 422 Pritchett, B., 434 Provogovac, L., 151 Pullum, G., 129, 311, 314, 317 Puranik, C., 519 Pustejovsky, J., 234, 241 Put, M., 507 Pye, C., 35 Pyun, S.-B., 485, 486, 487, 488, 496, 506

630

Name Index

Quak, C., 507 Quigley, S., 374 Quine, W., 351, 352, 354 Quinn, P., 119 Rack, J., 520 Radford, A., 7, 61, 160, 175, 176, 187, 189, 221 Rakic, P., 273 Ramsey, C., 365 Ramsey, R., 454 Ramus, F., 256 Randall, J., 93, 94 Rappaport, M., 93, 94, 232 Rastle, K., 409, 418 Ratcliff, R., 443 Rayner, K., 435, 454, 533 Redanz, L., 432 Reed, M., 519 Reicher, G., 387 Remez, R., 257 Remschmidt, H., 520 Reynolds, D., 477 Rho, S., 422 Richmond-Welty, E., 521 Ridder, W., 519 Rispoli, M., 33, 36, 37, 38, 44, 61 Ritter, E., 512 Rizzi, L., 129, 176 Robbins, M., 319, 328 Rodríguez, J., 271 Roeper, T., 91, 245, 296, 297 Romani, C., 539 Romero, I., 270 Romo, L., 273 Rosen, S., 512, 519 Rosler, F., 464, 472 Ross, J., 519 Rotenberg, J., 306 Rumelhart, D., 387, 388 Rumsey, J., 522 Rusted, J., 409 Saffran, E., 507 Sag, I., 288 Sagart, L., 257 Sakuma, N., 413 Salvasir, I., 202 Sampson, G., 2, 522 Sanches, M., 138 Sandson, J., 506 Sanford, A., 475, 477, 483 Sankoff, D., 332, 333, 334 Sano, T., 231 Santorini, B., 331, 332, 337 Sasanuma, S., 413

Scanlon, D., 520 Schachter, J., 276, 277, 281 Schaeffer, J., 296, 297, 304 Schafer, A., 425, 428, 429, 430, 431 Schafer, R., 296 Schank, R., 474 Scharf, B., 392, 397 Schieffelin, B., 35 Schlesinger, I., 35 Schmitt, C., 501 Schneider, S., 506 Scholes, R., 507, 515 Schröder, H., 45 Schulte-Korne, G., 520 Schwartz, B., 286, 287, 307 Schwartz, M., 507, 509, 510, 511, 515 Scotton, C., 331 Scovel, T., 318 Seely, M., 531 Segui, J., 422, 540 Seidenberg, M., 409, 454, 519 Seliger, H., 276, 277 Selkirk, E., 255, 256, 315 Sells, P., 150 Seo, C.-W., 454, 455 Seo, K.-J., 421 Seymour, P., 521 Shafiullah, M., 415, 416 Shankweiler, D., 501, 520 Shapiro, L. P., 501 Share, D., 521 Shatz, M., 202 Sheldon, A., 161, 163, 170 Shen, D., 416 Shim, J.-Y., 276, 278 Shimoyama, J., 226 Shin, S., 269, 271, 333, 339 Shinjo, M., 477 Shirai, Y., 218, 232 Sigurjonsdottir, S., 151 Silveri, M., 506 Simon, H., 387 Simpson, G., 381, 386, 389, 409, 411, 414, 415, 416, 417, 418, 420, 421, 454, 531 Sing, S., 393 Singer, M., 474, 483 Singh, R., 332, 337 Siqueland, E., 256 Slobin, D., 35, 41, 50, 51, 60, 108, 109, 112, 126, 162, 366, 495, 496 Smith, L., 351, 352 Smith, S., 496 Snow, C., 33, 278 Snowling, M., 518, 519, 520 Soares, C., 331

Name Index Sohn, H.-M., 2, 137, 347, 513 Sohn, K.-W., 75 Soja, N., 11, 351, 352, 353, 354 Son, H. M., 496, 499, 500, 501, 503, 507, 508, 514 Son, M.-J., 241 Song, S.-C., 78 Song, Y.-K., 64, 65, 67, 70 Speas, M., 152 Speer, S., 429, 430 Spelke, E., 11, 112, 120, 351, 352 Spence, M., 256 Sperber, R., 532 Sproat, R., 443 Sprouse, R., 286, 287, 307 St. John, M., 509 Stamm, J., 519 Stanovich, K., 536 Stedmon, J., 249 Stein, J., 519, 522 Stemberger, J., 540 Stepany, U., 203, 220 Stevens, K., 125, 393 Stevenson, R., 296 Stoll, S., 232 Stolz, J., 400, 401 Strong, M., 366 Suh, C.-W., 453 Suh, J.-H., 78 Suh, S.-K., 434, 438 Suk, D. I., 11, 363, 367, 368, 369 Sung, L.-M., 151 Supalla, S., 366 Svenkerud, V., 256 Swinney, D., 475, 530 Syrdal, A., 391, 392 Tabossi, P., 410, 411, 419, 530 Taft, M., 402, 539, 540 Takazawa, S., 471 Talcott, J., 518, 519, 526 Tallal, P., 517, 519, 524 Talmy, L., 104, 109, 512 Tanenhaus, M., 454, 482 Tanz, C., 62 Tatsumi, I., 413 Tavakolian, S., 162 Taylor, D., 269 Taylor, I., 379, 386, 399, 410 Taylor, M., 379, 386, 410 Tees, R., 273, 274 Tenny, C., 96 Terhardt, E., 397 Terzi, A., 231 Thal, D., 67

631 Theakston, E., 36 Thomas, M., 287 Thompson, C., 506 Thompson, S., 257, 457, 461 Thomson, C., 65 Thornton, R., 74, 78, 80, 306, 308, 310 Tola, G., 520 Tomasello, M., 33, 36 Toribio, J., 332, 337 Trabasso, T., 474, 483 Tranel, D., 506 Traunmueller, H., 390 Traxler, M., 454 Treiman, R., 422, 521 Trueswell, J., 454 Tse, L., 270 Tseng, V., 272 Tuaycharoen, P., 138 Tyler, K., 540 Uchida, N., 138, 139, 140, 149 Unsworth, S., 287, 298 Uriagereka, J., 306 Ury, W., 331 Uutela, K., 524 Vainikka, A., 307 Valian, V., 36, 221 van Dyke, J., 458 van Grunsven, M., 507, 508, 509, 510, 511 van Kampen, J., 252 Van Meter, J., 522 Van Orden, G., 412 van Petten, C., 464, 471, 472 Van Valin, R., 35 Van Voorst, J., 512 Varma, S., 456 Varner, K., 531 Vasic, N., 458 Vellutino, F., 520 Veltman, C., 268 Venditti, J., 258 Vendler, Z., 234 Verhoeven, L., 334 Verrips, M., 246 Vigorito, J., 256 Vihman, M., 256, 257 Villa, G., 506 Villa, V., 445 von Eckardt, B., 450 Waksler, R., 540 Waldman, F., 393 Walley, A., 520, 521

632

Name Index

Wallis, J., 539 Walsh, V., 519 Wang, H.-S., 349 Wang, W., 318 Ward, G., 443 Warden, D., 296, 297 Warren, P., 429 Warren, T., 456, 457, 458 Watanabe, A., 226 Waters, G., 456 Watson, B., 366 Wayland, S., 498 Weekes, B., 412 Wei, L., 331 Weijts, M., 507 Weil, J., 203 Weinrich, U., 346 Well, G., 202 Werker, J., 125, 273, 274 Wessels, J., 256 West, R., 536 Wexler, K., 8, 132, 133, 136, 150, 151, 176, 231, 232, 237, 242, 287, 288, 292, 295, 297, 303, 304 Wheatley, C., 524 White, L., 276 Whitman, J., 73, 136, 183, 221, 224, 225 Whorf, B., 108 Wilbur, R., 362 Wilcox, S., 202 Williams, K., 125 Williams, L., 273 Williams, R., 454 Winsler, A., 271 Witton, C., 518, 519, 526 Won, S.-O., 11, 363, 367 Woo, Y.-S., 373 Woods, R., 522 Woolsey, S., 418 Wright, B., 519 Wright-Cassidy, K., 257 Wu, J., 413 Wu, J. T., 455

Wulfeck, B., 495, 496, 507 Wydell, T., 412 Yamamoto, K., 138, 140, 141, 149 Yang, B.-G., 91, 390, 394, 395, 396 Yang, C.-L., 455 Yang, D.-W., 151, 155 Yates, M., 421 Yeni-Komshian, G., 273, 276, 279, 318, 319, 320, 324, 328, 329 Yi, E.-Y., 73, 76 Yi, I.-S., 401 Yi, J.-S., 388 Yi, K.-O., 383, 386, 388, 401, 402, 403, 404, 407 Yim, C., 496 Yim, C.-G., 485, 486 Yoo, C.-H., 474, 482 Yoon, H.-J., 179, 211 Yoon, J., 73 Yoon, J.-Y., 180 Yoon, K.-S., 332, 333, 334, 335, 336, 337, 338, 339, 341, 344 Yoon, H., 389 Youn, Y., 440 Young-Scholten, M., 307 Yu, D.-J., 138 Zecevic, N., 273 Zeffiro, T., 522 Zentella, A., 339 Zheler, A., 296 Zhou, X., 400, 403 Zhu, X., 539 Ziegler, J., 409, 418 Zingerser, L., 506 Zizak, O., 36 Zoh, M.-H., 29, 51, 53, 167, 169, 231, 236, 381, 386, 437, 499, 503, 529 Zubin, D., 443 Zurif, E., 494, 498, 506, 509 Zwaan, R., 483 Zwicker, E., 397 Zwicky, A., 129

Subject Index

accentual phrase, 256, 258–259, 260, 261, 263, 264, 266, 424–426 acceptable ranges, 397 accidental condition, 356 A-chain, 231, 232, 233, 236, 242 acquisition, 34–49, 137 acquisition of classifiers, 138 acquisition of Korean relative clauses, 173 acquisition of prosody, 255, 432 acquisition of relative clauses, 170 acquistion of sign language, 368 acquistion of the reflexive, 150 active sentence, 496, 497, 499, 501 adjunction parameter, 133 adult grammar, 222 age of arrival AOA, 321, 322 agent (thematic role), 508–516 agent-first strategy 162 agglutinative language, 7, 15, 176, 472 agrammatic aphasia in Korean, 505, 516 agrammatic comprehension, 505, 506, 507–509, 510, 511, 512, 515 agrammatic production, 505 agrammatic speech, 506 agrammatism, 485, 486, 489, 490, 491, 493, 494, 498, 504–505, 506, 509, 510, 511, 516 allomorph, 52 alphabetic syllabary, 379 alternating verb, 94, 95, 97, 99, 103 AP, 263 aphasics, 484 ‘aphasic adults’ comprehension of N-N-V sentences, 496–497 of passive sentences, 499–501 of relative clauses, 498–499 argument structure, 3, 5, 39–40, 94, 241, 539, 541 article, 286

Bark scale, 397 bilingual Korean-English bilingual, 318 bilingual discourse, 344, 345, 346 bilingual-bicultural approach, 361, 363 binding principle, 279, 284 bound morphemes, 334 bound noun, 223 boundary tone, 258–259, 424–429, 432 Broca’s aphasics, 494, 504, 505, 509, 510, 515 canonical mapping, 509 canonical word order, 507, 508, 513 capacity limitation, 498, 501 caregiver speech, 222 case, 178 case markers, 23, 29, 443, 445, 451, 452, 485, 486, 488, 497–498 accusative, 51, 53, 61 comitative, 53 delimiter, 53 locative, 53 nominative, 51, 53 categorization task, 412 causality connectives, 481 contrast information, 479 relatedness, 479 change-of-state, 94, 96, 104 characteristics of agrammatic speech, 477–481 child grammar 134 child Korean, 221 CHILDES, 223 childhood language memory, 274 childhood speakers, 274 Chinese, 412 Chinese loan words, 410 closed class elements, 221

633

634

Subject Index

code-switching, 341–343, 344–350 intrasentential codeswitching, 332, 342–343 Korean English, 332–343, 344 social factors, 344 structural constraint, 344 competence accounts, 505, 508, 516 Competition Model, 60, 496 complementizer, 179, 183, 224 complex sentence, 454 condition C, 226 conscious control, 414, 415, 417 consonants, 255, 264, 266, 379 context dependency, 536 context-dependent processing, 528 contextualization cue, 344, 346 contraction, 305–308, 309–317 contrast principle, 351 conventionality principle, 351 conversational inferencing, 347 count noun, 353 criterion for verbs, 66 Critical or Sensitive Period Hypothesis (CPH), 318 Critical Period Hypothesis, 276 cross-linguistic variation, 94, 96, 97, 496 cross-model naming task, 429, 430 cue validity, 60 cues for anaphoric inferences causal, 477–481 contextual, 475 gender, 475–477 interactive view, 477 modular view, 475 pragmatic, 476 syntactic, 475–477 cultural practices, 269 D-element, 183–184 decomposition representation, 539 deference, 345, 349 delay of A-chain 134 demonstrative, 179, 183, 228 determiner, 228 Determiner Phrase (DP), 184, 288 developmental order of case markers, 53, 59 direct lexical route, 411 discourse comprehension, 474 discourse-functional approach to argument structure, 34–49 dissociation among functional categories, 491 dissociation of sentence production and comprehension, 486

double object patterns, 507, 515 Double-Dependency Hypothesis (DDH), 24–25 doubly centered embedded sentence, 457 drop, 24–25 dual-route model, 409 dyslexia auditory processing deficit, 519 definition, 517 higher level problems, 520 sensory processing deficits, 518 visual processing deficit, 519 early grammar, 221 early left anterior negativity (ELAN), 17, 463–473 edge vs. head prominence, 428 elaboration hypothesis, 530 elaborative coherence framework, 483 electroencephalogram (EEG), 465, 466 electro-oculogram (EOG), 466 equivalence constraint, 333–334, 343 error pattern, 286 event-related potentials (ERP), 463, 465–472 event structure, 232, 234, 235, 236, 237, 239, 240, 242, 243 facelessness and empathy, 153 FB-trie, 544, 545 fetal heart rate monitoring, 256 finals, 379 flexibility, 414 Fluctuation Hypothesis, 291 focus, 28 focus realization, 428 font, 388 Gothic font, 388 Myungjo fonts, 388 Saemmul font, 388 free morpheme constraint, 335, 343 frequency effect, 411, 542, 543 full-list representation, 539 function word, 505, 506 functional category, 175, 221, 244, 251, 485, 489, 490, 493 functional morpheme, 175 functional projection, 175 fundamental frequency, 255, 261, 390, 394, 424 garden-path, 435, 436 Garner interference, 383

Subject Index genitive case marker, 177, 180, 183 nominal, 179 global measures of pronunciation proficiency, 319 government approach, 337 grammar competition, 91 grammatical functions, 50–52, 55–58, 59–60 grammatical morpheme, 485, 490, 495–496 grapheme-phoneme correspondence, 417 grouping, 385 gulja, 379 hashing, 542, 543 Head Directionality, 342 head-final language, 73, 74 head-turn preference procedure, 256 heritage language acquisition, 273 heritage language maintenance, 269 heritage languages, 268 heuristics based on word order, 509 high-amplitude sucking procedure, 256 holistic processing, 384 homophone, 410, 411, 412, 413, 415 homophony effects, 412 honorific marker, 178, 181 honorification, 177, 180 honorificity, 25 human auditory scale, 397 hybrid representation, 539 implication hierarchy of grammatical functions, 162 incremental processing, 434 individual differences, 67, 398, 404, 407 individual/collective, 350 individuation, 358 Indo-European (IE) language, 17, 463, 471, 472, 473 inductive problem, 351 inferences during discourse comprehension anaphoric, 474–477 elaborative, 482 informational structure, 456 initials, 379 input-oriented account, 59–60 instrumental, 511–516 intentional condition, 356 interaction between the syntactic position and the semantic role, 447 internally-headed relative clause, 226 intonation, 255, 257, 423 autosegmental-metrical model, 423 English intonation, 426–427 Korean intonation, 424–426

635 intonational phonology, 423 intonational phrase, 256, 258–259, 263, 266, 315 ISI, 445–450 isomorphic, 512–517 Isomorphic Mapping Hypothesis (IMH), 512, 515–516 Japanese Kanji, 412 Jeongeum, 379 kes, 221 Korean agrammatism, 511, 516 Korean numeral classifier, 137 Korean orthography, 399 Korean sentence, 538 Korean Sign Language (KSL), 361–375 linguistic properties, 361, 368, 373 translation systems, 363, 375 Korean stop consonants, 274 Korean ToBI, 424–425 Korean writing system, 522 Korean-English bilinguals, 279 kulca, 379 L1-transfer, 287 L2-acquisition, 286 partitivity in the L2-acquisition, 295 specificity in the L2-acquisition, 288 language alteration, 347 language and cognition, 107, 123 language and thought, 107, 125, 126 language attrition, 269 language dominance, 340–341 language proficiency, 413, 414 language specific effect, 356 language universal, 358 language-specific feature, 339 language-specific semantics, 112, 113, 117, 121, 122, 123 late closure, 433, 436 lateralization, 258 learnability problem, 93, 94 left anterior negativity (LAN), 26, 464, 472, 473, 574, 586 length effect, 542, 543 Length of Residence (LOR) effects, 323, 326–328 lenis stop voicing, 258 letter-sound mapping, 522 lexical access, 540, 541 lexical decision task, 413 lexical decision, 400, 401, 402, 405 lexical development, 63 lexical passive, 399–408, 510

636

Subject Index

lexical route, 409, 410, 411, 414, 416, 417 linear strategy, 93–103, 516 locally-ambiguous, 455 locative, 93–103, 510, 511, 516 logographic script, 409 logophoricity, 152–155 long passive, 232, 233, 237, 238, 240, 241 low-pass filter, 256 manner-of-motion, 94, 98, 100 Mapping Hypothesis (MH), 257–258, 509, 516 mass noun, 353 mass/count syntax, 352 material bias, 355 matrix language approach, 336–337 MCDI-K, 66 medials, 379 mel scale, 392 memory constraint, 461 memory process, 454, 455, 459 memory representation, 453 memory retrieval, 457 mental lexicon, 399, 400, 405, 539–543 metrical foot, 257–258 minimal attachment, 433, 435, 436, 440 minimal chain principle, 433, 438, 440 modal endings deontic, 208 exclamatory, 197 illocutionary, 190 inconclusive, 200 mixed, 208 negation, 209, 211 politeness, 190 reported, 214 supposition, 200 surprise, 196 tense/aspect, 215 modality, 187, 190 modality dissociations, 507 mode of communication, 361, 362, 363, 364, 366, 375 monolingual, 161 mood marker, 178, 179, 180, 182, 184 mora-timed, 256 morphemes, 399–408 morphemic ambiguity resolution, 485, 487 morphological ambiguity, 455 morphological facilitation, 400, 403, 406, 407 morphological obligatoriness, 185, 186 morphological priming, 400, 402, 403 morphological processing, 399, 400, 405, 502 morphological representation, 398, 399, 404, 406, 408

morpho-syntactic processing, 485, 492, 494 mutual exclusivity assumption, 351 N400, x, 17, 463, 464, 467, 468, 471, 472, 473, 595 naming task, 411 NEG placement error, 130 negation, 72–74 emphatic not in English, 129 non-emphatic (or regular) not in English, 129 long-form negation in Korean, 127 short-form negation in Korean, 127 negative repetition effect (NRE), 385 non-canonical word order, 507–508, 512 non-isomorphic, 512–516 normalization, 391 noun acquisition in Korean, 65 noun bias, 63 null subject, 25 object cleft, 508, 509 object raising, 134–135 object relative, 258–259, 498–499, 507, 512–516 obstruent tensification, 258–259 onset of immersion, 271 ontological concept, 351, 353 ontological distinction, 352 order of acquisition of modality, 190 orthographic consistency, 523 orthographic facilitation, 400 orthographic inhibition, 400, 402, 406, 407 orthographic similarity effects, 411, 412 orthographic, phonological grain sizes, 521 orthography, 418–419 overextension, 55 overmarking, 221 P600, 17, 463, 464, 465, 467, 468, 470, 471, 472, 473 parameter setting, 10 parent-child relationship, 271 parsing 436, 454 passive sentence, 498–501, 507, 509–510, 513 perceived center formant frequency, 396 perceptual organisation, 383 perceptual similarity, 352 phonological awareness in Korean, 526 phonological inventory, 523 phonological phrase, 256 phonological processing, 422 phonological rule, 258, 261–263

Subject Index phonological transparency, 520 phonologically mediated route, 411 phonology, 275, 409 pitch accent, 426–427, 431 pluralization, 358 positional filler, 58 positional strategy, 56 poverty of the stimulus, 72, 91 pragmatic constraint, 24 pragmatic order, 442 pragmatic principle, 351 predictability effects on memory, 474, 477–478 preferred argument structure, 45 problem readers, 518 processing accounts, 19, 505, 508, 516 processing load, 502, 503 processing units, 381, 384, 386 production of grammatical morphemes, 495–496 processing of Korean topic marker, 437 pronoun, 179, 491 prosodic hierarchy, 256 prosodic phrase, 258–262 prosodic phrasing, 260–263, 429, 430, 431, 432 prosodic word, 256 prosody, 255, 258, 423 in sentence processing, 424, 429, 431 quantifier, 244, 252, 253, 254 floated quantifier, 246, 247 universal quantifier, 244, 245, 246, 247, 250–253 quantifier scope, 91 quantifier spreading, 244, 251 left spreading, 247 right spreading, 246, 247 reacquisition, 269 of Korean, 274 reading and script, 521 reading span task, 529 referential accessibility, 457, 459, 460, 461, 462 reflexive anaphora, 150 Korean reflexive pronoun caki, 150 relative age, 344, 345, 350 relative clause, 160, 168–169, 171–173, 179, 183, 186, 224, 435, 436, 437, 439, 498–499 head-internal relative clause, 168, 169 Korean relative clause, 168 processing of the Korean relative clause, 163

637 relative status, 344, 345, 349 result state, 218, 232, 236, 237, 240, 243 reversible sentences, 58, 498 rhythmic regularities, 255 right hemisphere, 471, 473 RSVP, 446, 447, 450, 476 scrambled actives, 511, 515 scrambled passives, 511, 515 scrambled word order, 513 script-switching cost, 417 script-switching effects, 415 selection hypothesis, 532 selective impairment, 398–408 semantic-bias effect, 450 semantic categorization task, 412 semantic facilitation, 403 semantic processing, 412, 413 semantic relatedness, 411 semantic roles, 35, 42 sensitive period hypothesis, 276 sensory-level processing, 524 sentence complexity, 456, 458 sentence comprehension, 508, 511 sentence comprehension deficits, 516 sentence-final particle, 349 sentence processing, 427, 464, 468 sentence-picture matching task, 486, 499–500 severity of aphasia, 498, 502, 503 shallow orthography, 409 shape bias, 351 short passive, 232, 233, 238, 240, 241, 242, 499–501 similarity structure, 381 Sino-Korean words, 398–408 sloppy grammar, 162 Small Clause Hypothesis, 176 social hierarchy, 345, 349, 350 spatial categories, 112, 113, 118, 121, 123 spatial categorization, 115 spatial cognition, 109, 113 adult, 122 preverbal, 117–121, 123 speaker variation, 390 specificity of Korean, 495, 502 speech rate, 263–266 stative verbs, 55 stimulus complexity, 357 strategic processing, 163 strategy, 417 stress-timed language, 263–266 structure building framework, 16, 442, 483 subject relative, 498–499, 509, 515

638

Subject Index

subject-modal agreement, 26 subject-object agreement on the verb, 372 sublexical hypothesis, 406 sublexical route, 410, 411, 417 Subset Principle, 150, 256 suppression hypothesis, 530 supralexical hypothesis, 406 suprasegmental cues, 255 Surface Structure Empathy Hierarchy, 156 syllabic structure, 523 syllable, 398, 399, 401, 406, 407 syllable block type 4 and 5, 385 syllable blocks, 379, 381, 385 configuration of the Hangul syllable blocks, 382, 384 meaningfulness of syllable blocks, 386 syllable block types, 380 usable syllable blocks, 386 syllable body, 384, 385, 386 coda, 386 syllable processing, 422 syllable-timed language, 256 syntactic complexity, 505, 508 syntactic error, 94, 98, 103, 106 syntactic position, x, 74, 442, 443, 444, 445, 447, 448, 452, 462 syntactic traces, 510, 516 systematic errors, 52 taxonomic assumption, 351 taxonomic constraint, 63 telegraphic speech, 175, 495 tense morphemes, 175, 181 thematic role, 496, 498, 510, 513 thematic topic, 28 theme (thematic role), 509–510, 512–516 Theory of Adaptive Dispersion, 393 theta-transmission, 242 tonal pattern, 259 topic marker, 53, 438, 439, 440, 441 topic prominence, 27 Trace-Deletion Hypothesis (TDH), 498, 501, 510 transitivity, 256–257 trie, 543 trochaic foot, 256–257 truth value judgment task, 74, 78, 173, 281, 253 types of words, 399

U.S. Bureau of the Census, 268 UG-access in L2-acquisition, 268 uniform scaling, 391 Universal Grammar (UG), 286–288, 305–307, 315 universal semantic feature, 286 definiteness, 286, 288 partitivity, 286 specificity, 286 universality hypothesis, 433 usableness, 385 verb acquisition in Korean, 65 verb inflection, 178, 181, 184 verb meaning, 93, 94, 96 verb saliency, 64 verb-precocious, 64 verb-raising, 72–74, 78, 85–89, 91–92 visual transformation, 388 vocal tract length, 391 voice onset time, 261, 264, 266 vowel letters, 379 vowel perception, 395 vowel production, 394 vowel space, Korean and English, 395 V-V compounding/serialization, 104, 106 Wernicke aphasics, 487 wh-left dislocation, 372 whole object assumption, 351 whole object constraint, 63 wh-word and prosody, 50–51 windows of opportunity hypothesis, 276 word ambiguity resolution, 530, 531 word inferiority effect (WIE), 387 word order, 34, 35, 36, 37, 39, 42, 44, 47, 50–51, 57–60, 127, 129, 134, 136, 433, 434, 436, 437, 438, 496, 497, 498 canonical sentence, 50, 58–60 error, 127 fixed word order, 50–51, 62 word recognition, 399, 400, 401, 404, 405, 409, 410, 418–422 direct lexical path, 409 dual-route model, 409 phonologically mediated pathway, 409 word recognition process, 410 word superiority effect (WSE), 387 working memory, 471 written elicitation task, 293