Showing papers on "Universal grammar published in 1988"

Language: Its Structure and Use

Abstract: 1. Languages and Linguistics. What Do You Think? How Many Languages Are There in the World? Does the United States Have an Official Language? What Is Human Language? Signs: Arbitrary and Non-arbitrary. Languages as Patterned Structures: Grammatical Competence. Speech as Patterned Language Use: Communicative Competence. Modes of Linguistic Communication. Do Only Humans Have Language? Can Chimpanzees Learn a Human Language? The Origin of Human Languages: Babel to Babble. What Is Linguistics? Computers and Linguistics. Summary. What Do You Think? REVISITED. Exercises. Other Resources. Part 1: LANGUAGE STRUCTURES. 2. Words and Their Parts: Lexicon and Morphology. What Do You Think? Introduction: Words Seem Tangible. What Does It Mean to Know a Word? Lexical Categories. Morphemes: Word Parts with Meaning or Function. How Are Morphemes Organized Within Words? How Does a Language Increase Its Vocabulary? What Types of Morphological Systems Do Languages Have? Variant Pronunciations of a Morpheme: Allomorphy. Summary. What Do You Think? REVISITED. Exercises. Other Resources. 3. The Sounds of Languages: Phonetics. What Do You Think? Sounds and Spellings: Not the Same Thing. Phonetics: The Study of Sounds. Describing Consonant Sounds. Kinds of Consonant Sounds. Vowel Sounds. Summary. What Do You Think? REVISITED. Exercises. Other Resources. 4. Sound Systems of Language: Phonology. What Do You Think? Introduction: Sounds in the Mind. Phonological Rules and Their Structure. Syllables and Syllable Structure. Stress. Syllables and Stress in Phonological Processes. Morphology and Phonology Interaction: Allomorphy. From Lexical Entries to Surface Realizations: What the Brain Knows. Summary. What Do You Think? REVISITED. Exercises. Other Resources. 5. The Structure and Function of Phrases and Sentences: Syntax. What Do You Think? Introduction. Constituency. Major Constituents of Sentences: Noun Phrases and Verb Phrases. Phrase-Structure Expansions. Grammatical Relations: Subject, Direct Object, and Others. Surface Structures and Underlying Structures. Types of Syntactic Operations. Functions of Syntactic Operations. Recursion and Novel Sentences. Summary. What Do You Think? REVISITED. Exercises. Other Resources. 6. The Study of Meaning: Semantics. What Do You Think? Introduction. Linguistic, Social, and Affective Meaning. Word, Sentence, and Utterance Meaning. Lexical Semantics. Function Words and Categories of Meaning. Semantic Roles and Sentence Meaning. Semantic Roles and Grammatical Relations. Summary. What Do You Think? REVISITED. Exercises. Other Resources. 7. Language Universals and Language Typology. What Do You Think? Similarity and Diversity Across Languages. Phonological Universals. Syntactic and Morphological Universals. Types of Language Universals. Explanations for Language Universals. Language Universals, Universal Grammar, and Language Acquisition. Summary. What Do You Think? REVISITED. Exercises. Other Resources. Part 2: LANGUAGE USE. 8. Information Structure and Pragmatics. What Do You Think? Introduction: Encoding Information Structure. Categories of Information Structure. Information Structure: Intonation, Morphology, Syntax. The Relationship of Sentences to Discourse: Pragmatics. Summary. What Do You Think? REVISITED. Exercises. Other Resources. 9. Speech Acts and Conversation. What Do You Think? Language in Use. Sentence Structure and the Function of Utterances. Speech Acts. The Cooperative Principle. Violations of the Cooperative Principle. Politeness. Speech Events. The Organization of Conversation. Cross-Cultural Communication. Summary. What Do You Think? REVISITED. Exercises. Other Resources. 10. Language Variation Across Situations of Use: Registers and Styles. What Do You Think? Introduction. Language Varies Within a Speech Community. Speech Situations. Registers in Monolingual Societies. Similarities and Differences Between Spoken and Written Registers. Two Registers Compared. Summary. What Do You Think? REVISITED. Exercises. Other Resources. 11. Language Variation Among Social Groups: Dialects. What Do You Think? Language or Dialect: Which Do You Speak? How Do Languages Diverge and Merge? National Varieties of English. Regional Varieties of American English. The Atlas of North American English. Ethnic Varieties of American English. Ethnic Varieties and Social Identification. Socioeconomic Status Varieties: English, French, and Spanish. The Language Varieties of Women and Men. Why Do Stigmatized Varieties Persist? Summary. What Do You Think? REVISITED. Exercises. Other Resources. Part 3: LANGUAGE CHANGE, LANGUAGE DEVELOPMENT, AND LANGUAGE ACQUISITION. 12. Language Change Over Time: Historical Linguistics. What Do You Think? Do Living Languages Always Change? Language Families and the Indo-European Family. How to Reconstruct the Linguistic Past. What Are the Language Families of the World? .Languages in Contact. Summary. What Do You Think? REVISITED. Exercises. Other Resources. 13. Historical Development in English. What Do You Think? Old English: 700-1100. Companions of Angels: A Narrative in Old English. Middle English: 1100-1500. Where Men and Women Go All Naked: A Middle English Travel Fable. Modern English: 1500-Present. Summary. What Do You Think? REVISITED. Exercises. Other Resources. 14. Acquiring First and Second Languages. What Do You Think? Introduction. Acquiring a First Language. How Do Researchers Study Language Acquisition? Acquiring a Second Language. Summary. What Do You Think? REVISITED. Exercises. Other Resources. Glossary. Index. Index of Languages. Index of Internet Sites, Films, and Videos. Credits.

Aspects of underspecification theory

Abstract: An evaluation metric in Universal Grammar provides a means of selecting between possible grammars for a particular language. The evaluation metric as conceived in Chomsky & Halle (1968; henceforth SPE) prefers the grammar in which only the idiosyncratic properties are lexically listed and predictable properties are derived. The essence of underspecification theory is to supply such predictable distinctive features or feature specifications by rule. Viewed in this way, the general idea of underspecification has always been a part of any theory of phonology that includes such an evaluation metric.

Explaining Language Universals

Abstract: Part 1 Introduction: explaining language universals, John A.Hawkins. Part 2 Innateness and Learnability: the innateness hypothesis, Teun Hoekstra and Jan G.Kooij language acquisitions - schemas replace universal grammar, Michael A.Arbib and Jane C.Hill the "no negative evidence" problem - how do children avoid constructing an overly general grammar?, Melissa Bowerman. Max-Planck Institut fur Psycholinguistik, Nijmegen). Part 3 Semantic and Pragmatic Explanations: on semantics and the binding theory, Edward L.Keenan concessive connecitves and concessive sentences - cross-linguistic regularities and pragmatic principles, Ekkehard Konig a discourse approach to the cross-linguistic category "adjective", Sandra A.Thompson coreference and conjunction reduction in grammar and discourse, Bernard Comrie. Part 4 Cognitive, Perceptual and processing explanations: language, perception and the world, Michael Lee parameterizing the language processing system - left-vs. right-branching within and across languages, Lyn Frazier and Keith Rayner psycholinguistic factors in morphological asymmetry, John A.Hawkins, and Anne Cutler. Part 5 the diachronic dimension: integrating diachronic and processing principles in explaining the suffixing preference, Christopher J.Hall the diachronic dimension in explanation, Joan L.Bybee.

The accessibility of Universal Grammar in adult language learning

Abstract: This paper investigates whether Universal Grammar (UG) is accessible to adult language learners. If adult acquirers have consistent access to intuitions of grammaticality in cases where the relevant constraints are underdetermined by the native language, this suggests that Universal Grammar continues to function in adult acquisition.Advanced Korean adult acquirers of English were given a test of grammaticality judgements on English wh-movement sentences, where the relevant constraints are thought to derive from principles of UG. Since Korean does not have syntactic wh-movement, correct intuitions cannot derive from native language transfer. Analysis of the results and comparison with native speaker results suggests a complex picture of the function of UG in adult language acquisition; however, clear UG effects were found.

Island Effects in Second Language Acquisition

Abstract: A major underlying assumption of generative grammar is that the first language learner comes to the acquisition task equipped with innate, specifically linguistic, knowledge, or Universal Grammar (UG). Much work has been done in trying to characterize precisely what properties of language fall within UG, and therefore do not have to be learned. Recent work assumes that many principles of UG are parameterized; that is, that they vary somewhat from language to language in their effects. The assumption of an innate language component to the mind is motivated by arguments concerning the “poverty of the stimulus,” the fact that the linguistic competence of the adult is too complex to be projected by the child from the input data alone, or from the data interacting with nonlinguistic cognitive principles, given certain short-comings in that input (Baker and McCarthy, 1981; Hornstein and Lightfoot, 1981). This projection problem can be overcome if the child is assumed to be predisposed to deal with language input in quite restricted ways, with UG providing limitations on possible grammars.

Categorial Grammars as Theories of Language

Abstract: In recent years, there has been a growing interest in categorial grammar as a framework for formulating empirical theories about natural language. This conference bears witness to that revival of interest. How well does this framework fare when used in this way? And how well do particular theories in what we might call the family of categorial theories fare when they are put up against the test of natural language description and explanation? I say ‘family’ of theories, for there have been a number of different developments, all of which take off from the fundamental idea of a categorial grammar as it was first introduced by Ajdukiewicz and later modified and studied by Bar-Hillel, Curry, and Lambek. In this paper I would like to discuss these questions, considering a number of different hypotheses that have been put forward within the broad framework that we may call ‘extended categorial grammar’ and making a few comparisons with other theories. In my remarks, I will take as a general framework the program and set of assumptions that have been called ‘extended Montague grammar’ and in particular a slightly modified version of Montague’s ‘Universal Grammar’ (UG: Paper 7 in Montague, 1974). From this point of view, the syntax of a language is looked at as a kind of algebra. Then, the empirical problem of categorial grammar can be seen as part of a general program that tries to answer these questions: (A) What is the set of primitive and derived categories that we need to describe and explain natural languages in their syntax and semantics (and phonology, etc.)? (B) What are the operations that we need to describe and explain natural languages (in the syntax, semantics, phonology, morphology, etc.)? (C) What are the relations that we need in order to hook up with each other the various categories and operations mentioned or alluded to in (A) and (B)?

Language, Speech, and Mind: Studies in Honour of Victoria A. Fromkin

Abstract: Part I: Phonetic and Phonological Studies 1. Creak as a Sociophonetic Marker Caroline G. Henton, Davis and Anthony Bladon, 2. On Feature Copying: Parameters of Tone Rules Larry M. Hyman and Douglas Pulleyblank, 3. Phonological Features for Places of Articulation Peter Ladefoged and Ian Maddieson, 4. Phonetic Universals in Consonant Systems Bjorn Lindblom, and Ian Maddieson Part II: Clinical and Neurolinguistic Studies 5. Abnormal Language Acquisition and Grammar: Evidence for the Modularity of Language Susan Curtis, 6. The Neuroanatomical Correlates of Aphasia and the Understanding of the Nearal Substrates of Language Antonio R. Damasio and Hanna Damasio, 7. The Long-Term Linguistic Consequences of Traumatic Head-Injury in Children: A Review John H. V. Gilbert, 8. The Neurolinguistic Substrate for Sign Language Edward S. Klima, and Ursula Bellugi, 9. Functional Levels in Normal, Intensified and Aphasic Speech John C. Marshall and Freda Newcombe, 10. William Elder (1864-1931): Diagram Maker and Experimentalist Harry A. Whitaker, 11. The Independence of Language: Evidence from a Retarded Hyperlinguistic Individual Jeni Yamada, Part III: Other Psycholinguistic and Linguistic Studies 12. The Perfect Speech Error Anne Cutler, 13. Free Reading and the development of Literacy Stephen D. Krashen, 14. The Scarcity of Speech Errors in Hindi Manjari Ohala, and John J. Ohala, 15. Empiricism and Universal Grammar in Chomsky's Work Sven Ohman, 16. Linguistics and Computer Speech Recognition Robert D. Rodman, 17. What's in a Name: Inferences from Tip-of-the-Tongue Phenomena Paul Schachter, 18. A Relevance-Theoretic Account of Conditions Neil Smith, and Amahl Smith,.

Nature of Development in L2 Acquisition and Implications for Theories of Language Acquisition in General

Abstract: The systematic and controlled study of adult second language (L2) acquisition within a Universal Grammar (UG) framework is important for both linguists and psychologists. Its study may not only inform us about adult L2 acquisition, a major feat of human learning which is little understood, but it may also inform us about the nature of first language (L1) acquisition and about the nature of the hypothesized language faculty. Results of this work may also yield new insights concerning the interaction of the language component with other domains of human cognition. This is all possible because the study of adult L2 acquisition, in contrast to the study of L1 acquisition, involves learners who have already reached mature states both in terms of their L1s and overall cognition. This means that patterns of development that emerge in adult language learning cannot be attributed to a lack of access to a full set of language principles nor can they be attributed to deficits in general cognitive development. Thus, if we find commonalities in patterns between L1 and L2 acquisition, these similarities could be argued to follow from a set of commonly shared language principles and they would also suggest that the essential language faculty argued to characterize L1 acquisition also holds in adult L2 acquisition. Stated in another way, comparable patterns in L1 and L2 acquistion could be argued to follow from properties that hold of the language learning faculty itself as an independent domain of human cognition.

On language: Rhetorica, phonologica, syntactica : a festschrift for Robert P. Stockwell from his friends and colleagues

Abstract: Robert Stockwell: the student and teacher, Archibald A. Hill Robert Stockwell: the scholar as teacher, Robert Ochsner Robert Stockwell and the building of the UCLA Linguistics Department, Paul Schachter. Part 1 Rhetorica correctness of norms of language, Renate Bartsch written and spoken language in South Asia, William Bright Chaucer, Livy and Bersuire: the Roman materials in 'The Physician's Tale', William H Brown Jr how relevant is 'External Evidence' for a theory of grammar?, Victoria A. Fromkin Chaucer and the pun-hunters: some points of caution, Archibald A. Hill two cheers for prescriptivism, Michael B. Kac Middle English, Sherman M. Kuhn creoles, triggers, and universal grammar, David Lightfoot the rise and fall of the vernacular, Ronald K.S. Macaulay hypercorrection and the Creole Continuum:-s and -d in Liberian English, John Victor Singler is internal semantic-pragmatic reconstruction possible?, Elizabeth Closs Traugott notes on Black and Red American English, Wolfgang Viereck. Part 2 Phonologica Old English Ablaut again: the essentially concrete character of dependency phonology, John M. Anderson the late Old English type leinten 'Lent', Klaus Dietz prophetic Alif and canonical form in Egyptian, Carelton T. Hodge pro-Burmese as a test of reconstruction, Robert B. Jones redefining the scope of phonology, Peter Ladefoged the 'Akzentumsprung' of Old English, Roger Lass from Latin to romance: the vowel system, Carlos Otero the rule dependence of syllable structure, Theo Vennemann Part 3 Syntactica objects (direct and not-so direct) in English and elsewhere, Stephen R. Anderson a note on the definition and description of true anacolutha, Nils Erik Enkvist on the principle of 'Weight' in English, Peter Erdmann tale of two passives: internal reconstruction in Ute, Talmy Givon the unity English/German contrasts: inferring a typological parameter, John A. Hawkins the group genitive and type 24 languages, Fred W. Householder transitivity: intransitivisation vs. causativisation - some typological considerations concerning verbs of action, Yoshihiko Ikegami minor movement rules, Frederick J. Newmeyer on the basicness of certain types of passives: some evidence from child acquisition, Suzanne Romaine non-restrictive relative clauses, James Peter Thorne on the subject of bare imperatives in English, Arnold M. Zwicky.

L2 Learnability: Delimiting the Domain of Core Grammar as Distinct from the Marked Periphery

Abstract: This paper focuses on questions related to issues of learnability in second language acquisition. Specifically, in this paper I attempt to clarify the relationship between a theory of grammar and the mechanisms that are responsible for the development of second language (L2) competence. Within that relationship, the specific though very general mechanism that I am concerned with is the status of core and peripheral constructions in the interlanguage (IL) data of adult native speakers of English learning Spanish. One basic assumption that I make is that determining that status may help to delimit the domain of core grammar as distinct from the marked periphery. Such a delimitation is one of the problems faced by researchers working on Universal Grammar (UG).

Natural Language Motivations for Extending Categorial Grammar

Abstract: The purpose of this paper is to present a variety of linguistically significant generalizations that can naturally be represented within a specific version of categorial grammar we propose below. These generalizations are given in Sections 2–4. Section 1 introduces the specific form of categorial grammar we use, and Section 5 concludes with a tentative suggestion for a formal universal of natural language based on the empirically motivated work of the preceding sections.

Typological and Parametric Views of Universals in Second Language Acquisition

Abstract: The purpose of this chapter is to compare and discuss two approaches to using linguistic universais in the explanation of second-language acquisition (SLA) and, where possible, to pose questions and raise issues in this area. I will refer to the first approach as the “typological approach.” which is exemplified in work by Gass (1979), Hyltenstam (1984). as well as some of my own work (Eckman, 1977, 1984), and will call the second framework the “Universal Grammar approach” which is exemplified in work by Flynn (1985), Mazurkewich (1984), White (1985), as well as others. First, I will attempt to characterize each of the approaches with respect to SLA, arguing that both are similar in that they share some of the same fundamental assumptions. Next, I will try to differentiate the two approaches; finally, I will discuss some of the argument types that have been used to support the claims of each approach.

Universal Grammar in Second Language Acquisition: Promises and Problems in Critically Relating Theory and Empirical Studies

Abstract: The two papers, one by Haegeman and one by Felix, in this volume, both represent a subtle new approach to a Universal Grammar (UG)-determined model of second language (L2) acquisition, one wherein L2 learning is viewed as involving the resetting of parameters and the application of universal principles of UG. triggered by positive evidence. On this view, L2 learning is considered to be at least partially similar to first language (L1) acquisition, and the UG model of the initial state is viewed as a constant property of biological competence. The emphasis throughout is on adult L2 acquisition.

How Is Language Possible?: Philosophical Reflections on the Evolution of Language and Knowledge

Abstract: Book jacket: The meaning of a word is not an abstract idea for which the word stands, nor is it the uses to which the word can be out, nor the linguistic rules governing the word's use. The meaning of a word is a set of theories. How can different individuals learn the same language, of potentially infinite complexity, if each possesses only finite evidence, which moreover, does not completely coincide with the evidence possessed by other individuals? The answer is that their understanding of language is approximate. Individuals never really understand a different, distinct language, which is largely similar to the languages understood by the other individuals. In this revolutionary study of the philosophical problems of language, J.N. Hattiangadi offers a new approach which simultaneously solves several venerable conundrums in the origin and development of language and thought. His argument includes acute criticisms of the later Wittgenstein's theory of language use, Quine's approach to subjunctive conditionals, Kripke's analysis of proper names, and Chomsky's conjecture of an innate universal grammar.

Linguistic Theory: Generative Grammar

Abstract: The study of generative grammar over the past thirty years represents a return, following a century or so of concern with other matters, to a fundamental question of linguistic science—namely, that which has sometimes been called “Plato’s problem” (cf. Chomsky, 1986), or the problem of “the poverty of the stimulus.” The question is this: how come people know as much as they do about their native languages when the observable evidence for this knowledge is so impoverished—when it is, in fact, in an extraordinarily large number of important and interesting cases, utterly, and for principled reasons, lacking from the observable data base, however rich this may be in grammatical utterances and illuminating context?

Universal Grammar in Language Acquisition

Abstract: Progress in linguistic theory during the past 20 years has made it increasingly clear that language acquisition must be viewed as an essentially deductive process in which the child analyzes the input data s/he is exposed to on the basis of an innately specified set of restrictive principles — technically known as Universal Grammar — which narrowly constrain the kinds of hypotheses a child will consider vis-a-vis a given set of data (cf. Chomsky 1980, 1981, 1986; Hornstein and Lightfoot 1981; White 1982; Felix 1987). As a consequence, there is a growing interest in the question of how exactly principles of Universal Grammar interact with the child’s linguistic experience during the course of language acquisition (see e.g., Pinker 1984; Hyams 1986; Lust 1986b; Roeper and Williams 1987 among others for some more recent proposals). It appears that there are currently at least two competing views about the nature of this interaction. One of these views which I shall call “perceptionism” holds that the task of Universal Grammar (UG) is essentially restricted to constraining the types of intermediate grammars that the child will construct, while the developmental process itself is essentially data-driven, i.e., driven by the child’s (changing) perception of the external evidence. The other view which may be termed “maturationism” claims that UG is both responsible for the types of (intermediate) grammars that in principle may emerge and at the same time for the specific nature of the developmental process. Under the maturationist view language acquisition is therefore seen as a process that is driven primarily by internal, i.e., biologically determined maturational mechanisms.

Second Language Acquisition: A Biolinguistic Perspective

Abstract: It has frequently been argued that linguistic theory can provide insight into problems of second language acquisition (Flynn, Mazurkewich. Travis. White, and others in this volume). For example, Travis notes that plausible assumptions about theoretical syntax, viz.. Verb placement taken in conjunction with the elegant experimental studies of Clahsen and Muysken (1983) and Clahsen (this volume) help reveal mechanisms of second language (L2) learning in German. Moreover, it has been claimed that information from the study of grammatical disorders can also potentially support such studies; e.g., word order data from agrammatics, also discussed in Travis. I would like to discuss another example from German that may help to investigate the first question and give several examples of other types of agrammatic disorders that have not to my knowledge been studied within a universal grammar framework, but that may be helpful in studying these problems.

Kinds of Markedness

Abstract: Markedness. under one conception or the other, has been a part of linguistics since the 1930s, when it was introduced by Troubetzkoy into phonological theory. The notion that it is involved in some intimate way with language acquisition can be traced back to Jakobson (1941), who, relating it primarily to phonology, developed a theory by which unmarked elements exhibit a “first in, last out” order in first language acquisition and aphasia, respectively. In recent work, this linkage has once more assumed importance, but with attention focused primarily on syntax, and informed by a quite different theory of acquisition linked to the Chomskian concept of Universal Grammar (UG). This renewed concern received expression in the 1979 volume reflecting the proceedings of the GLOW Conference in Pisa. The Theory of Markedness in Generative Grammar (Beletti, Brandi and Rizzi, 1979) and particularly in the paper by Noam Chomsky entitled “Markedness and Core Grammar,” as well as in subsequent work by Chomsky and others. More recently, there have been initial, probing attempts to extend the connection to second language (L2) as well, as exemplified in varying degrees by the papers in this section, and by papers by some of the contributors and others (see bibliography).A wide range of definitions of markedness have been expressed or implied in all of this work, and they have not always been either self-evident or unvaryingly clear.1

Universal Grammar in Language Acquisition in Linguistic Theory and external evidence.

Abstract: L'auteur montre que l'acquisition et le developpement du langage chez l'enfant violent les principes de la grammaire universelle

Linguistic Theory, Neurolinguistics and Second Language Acquisition

Abstract: Several papers within this volume have raised the question of whether the adult second language learner has access to the principles and parameters of universal grammar (UG). Flynn, Mazurkewich, and White all suggest that the principles involved in first language acquisition are indeed at work in second language learning. Clahsen, on the other hand, argues that adults learners resort to other learning strategies in an effort to systematize the data of the second language. In this paper I suggest that a very different type of evidence may be brought to bear on this issue. The claim is that agrammatic speech of a Broca’s aphasic who has learned a second language as an adult may help tease apart the relevant issues. The paper is intended not so much as an answer to the question of the rule of UG in second language acquisition as much as a justification for a possible line of inquiry.

Language, Intelligence, and Rule-Governed Behavior

Abstract: One of the odder phenomena of the past thirty years is that Chomsky’s transformational, i. e., “generative” linguistic theory denies the major premises of modern biological thought but nonetheless claims to have a biological basis. Chomsky and his adherents claim to hold a nativist biological position. Generative grammar supposedly reflects the species-specific neural constraints of the human brain. Chomsky (1980a), for example, claims that human beings all have a “universal grammar” that derives from a neural mechanism, a “fixed nucleus,” that he places in the left, dominant hemisphere of the brain. Given this strong biological claim, one would expect that linguists were working in a biological framework, where the properties of the human brain would constrain linguistic theories concerning the ontogenetic development language, the relationship between language and cognition, and the evolution of language. We might expect linguists to take account of the findings of neuroanatomy, developmental and comparative psychology, and evolutionary biology. However, it is clear these biological data are irrelevant to linguists because present linguistic theories are, at best, disjoint from any actual characteristics of the human brain, human biology or human evolution.

Meta-Function Propositional Approach to the Interpretation of Natural Languages

Abstract: A language is a system of arbitrary vocal signs as well as mental signs by means of which a group of people communicate their wills one another. This implies that a system of Korean language is subjected to be not the same as that of English. It goes the same with any language of the world. Supposing that a man of Korean mother tongue met any English expression, could he correspond the componental units of the English to those of Korean one to one base. He will find some he could and others he could not. He will discover some similarity. e.g. 'Door opened easily.' is an English sentence. If he interprets it syntactically, he will get Korean: `muni swipke yeureutta.' This case the 'door' is interpreted as an action actor, agent. It is an action goal, and not an agent. This tells us that the interpretation is wrong. Of course this is not normal sentence. English has bunch of these expressions. Especially man of highly well cultured and trained use all kinds of mysterious arts of expressions. Meta-function propositional approach is a new arts of interpretaton. This new arts of interpretation suggests a cue to solve those mysteries. How? According to what conventional rules? Depending upon what hypothesis? And what could be self-consistent processes? Do the conventional rules satisfy simplicity condition of science? Are the rules testable or provable? Are they exhaustive? When the conventional rules could be applied to one language, if they could not be applied to some others, then it is not feasible to claim that the conventional rules are universal grammar of human brain works.

Neurolinguistics and Parameter Setting

Abstract: Among researchers in second language learning and acquisition theory, it is clear there is a broad range of positions on the question as to whether Universal Grammar (UG), and in particular the use of parameterization, is used in second language acquisition, or whether it is used only in first language acquisition. In this volume, several different methods of study are proposed to decide between the two positions. Travis has suggested that we look at the potentially differentiated patterns of language breakdown in the bilingual aphasic. Jenkins has proposed that we look for similar patterns in the dyslexic child, ideally via a twin study. Flynn has presented data from groups of English learners whose native languages (Chinese, Japanese, or Spanish) either shared or did not the parameter in question. Clahsen has provided contrastive data for L1 and L2 learners of the same language, German. Naturally we expect such different methods of study to provide converging evidence to answer our question. To the extent that they do not, it is worth considering how we may account for the apparent discrepancies.

Tweede-Taalverwerving en Universele Grammatica

Abstract: Among researchers in SLA there is currently a debate on wheter or not L2 learners may have access to Universal Grammar. Clahsen & Muysken (1986), for example, claim that this should not be the case. This is because the interlanguage system of L2 learners should contain rules which do not belong to "a possible rule system". Felix (1987), Flynn (1984, 1985) and White (1987), however, claim that the interlanguage system of L2 learners consists of "instantiations of possible rules". Furthermore, L2 learners should possess linguistic knowledge that cannot be related to general learning principles, nor to linguistic knowledge of L1. In the present article evidence from a study by White (1987) with respect to the so-called "logical problem of language acquisition" and from studies by Flynn (1984, 1985) regarding the so-called "logical problem of language development" is examined critically. With regard to the acquisition of the thai-trace effect in L2 English by native speakers of Dutch it can be shown that it is not necessary to assume that L2 learners should have access to Universal Grammar. Similarly, it can be shown that evidence that is interpreted in favour of the resetting of the head-parameters in the L2 English of native speakers of Japanese and Chinese can also be explained alternatively. Methodologically it appears to be problematical to find empirical evidence for the use of Universal Grammar by adult learners of a second language.

Pidginization as Language Acquisition

Abstract: Traditionally, researchers in the field of pidgin and creole languages have expounded the simplification theory, one which views a pidgin development as being a simplified version of the colonizer’s language. Research by Coelho (1880), Robert Hall (1966), Naro (1971 and elsewhere), and Bickerton (1977), for instance, cite the lack of number and gender marking, and a noninflected verbal system, among other examples, as evidence supporting the simplification hypothesis. The absence of these “marked features” is often used as a kind of yardstick to substantiate the notion that pidgin is a reduced, “hybridized and unstable linguistic system.”