University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Dominant language influence in acquisition and attrition of the Chinese reflexive ziji By Chinese-English bilinguals

(USC Thesis Other)

Dominant language influence in acquisition and attrition of the Chinese reflexive ziji By Chinese-English bilinguals

PDF

Download

Open document

Flip pages

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content DOMINANT LANGUAGE INFLUENCE IN ACQUISITION AND ATTRITION OF THE CHINESE REFLEXIVE ZIJI BY CHINESE-ENGLISH BILINGUALS by Chien-Hui Yu ________________________________________________________________________ A Thesis Presented to the FACULTY OF THE USC GRADUATE SCHOOL UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree MASTER OF ARTS (EAST ASIAN LANGUAGES AND CULTURES) May 2011 Copyright 2011 Chien-Hui Yu ii TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF TABLES iv ABSTRACT v CHAPTER I. INTRODUCTION 1 1.1 The Nature and Statement of the Problem 1 1.2 The Purpose of the Study 3 1.3 Theoretical Framework and Background 6 1.4 Significance of the Study 7 CHAPTER II. ISSUES AND REIVEW OF RELATED LITERATURE 8 2.1 Introduction 8 2.2 The Syntax of Chinese Anaphora: Reflexive Ziji 12 2.3 Chinese Reflexive Ziji in the Field of Second Language Acquisition 18 2.4 Emerging Issues and Need for Future Research 21 CHAPTER III. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY 23 3.1 Introduction 23 3.2 The Hypotheses 23 3.3 Subjects 26 3.4 Experiment Methods 28 3.5 Experiment Procedure 31 CHAPTER IV. PROSSIBLE RESULTS 33 CHAPTER V. CONCLUSION 36 iii BIBLIOGRAPHY 39 APPENDIX. LANGUAGE BACKGROUND QUESTIONNAIRE 44 iv LIST OF TABLES Table 1. The Form of Basic Information of the Experimental Groups 27 Table 2. The Form of Mean Accuracy Scores on the Chinese Proficiency Test 27 v ABSTRACT This study investigates how English, as the dominant language of Chinese heritage speakers, influences their minor language, Chinese, in the binding domain of the Chinese reflexive ziji. There are five different experimental groups: heritage learners, early bilinguals, late bilinguals, Chinese L2 learners and Chinese monolinguals. The Truth Value Judgment Task with stories (Crain and Thornton, 1998) is used to examine the structural differences in the binding domain between Chinese and English in this experiment. According to my research and analyses, several experimental possibilities can be imagined regarding how the dominant language, English, influences in acquisition and attrition of the Chinese reflexive ziji. First, participants cannot access language-specific properties. Early bilinguals, heritage learners and Chinese L2 learners perform lower accuracy when the Chinese reflexive ziji stands outside the binding domain of English. This result corresponds to the conclusion made by Kim, Montrul, and Yoon (2005) in the experiment of binding interpretations between Korean heritage speakers and adult L2 learners of Korean. Second, it is likely that L1 attrition does not exist among the experimental participants. Only Chinese L2 learners have a lower score in the test because they learn Chinese as a second language after the critical period. 1 Third, L1 attrition seems to exist 1 Kim, Montrul, and Yoon (2009: 1) proposed that Korean immigrants (attriters) did not differ from Korean controls, while simultaneous bilinguals (incomplete learners) and late L2 learners of Korean showed behavior different from Korean control when two languages were different in their binding properties. However, in the proposal second, I hypothesized that early bilinguals and late bilinguals will not show L1 attrition in the test, either. This is the difference between two experiments. vi in this experiment. Heritage learners, early bilinguals and late bilinguals show low accuracy in the test. The possible factor is the operation of L1 attrition Based on the possibilities of this experiment, several issues need to be widely addressed in future researches. First, how does the dominant language influence learners to acquire the language-specific properties such as sub-commanding? Second, what role does the minority language play in the process of language-specific property acquisition? 1 CHAPTER I. INTRODUCTION 1.1 The Nature and Statement of the Problem In researches of second language acquisition, the interaction between language acquisition and language attrition is always an important point. The characteristics of various kinds of bilinguals affect the process and the result of language acquisition. There are four types of English-Chinese bilinguals tested in this experiment: Chinese heritage speakers 2 , early bilingual, late bilingual and Chinese L2 learners. Chinese monolinguals are categorized as the control group. In this study, how English, the dominant language, influences acquisition and attrition of the Chinese reflexive ziji will be studied. According to Gürel (2004: 27), language attrition/ language loss is a multi- dimensional circumstance, which has been studied from various aspects: sociolinguistics, psycholinguistics, neurolinguistics and language acquisition. Language attrition may refer to the loss of any language or part of a language by an individual or a speech community (Freed, 1982, cited in Gürel, 2004). In addition, language attrition is generally defined with respect to the language that is lost and the environment in which it is lost (Els, 1986, cited in Gürel, 2004). Silva-Corválan (1994) proposed that L1 attrition is considered as loss of features of L1 after L1 has been acquired entirely and remained under the stable situation for a period. In general, language attrition is regarded as a process and a result of the acquisition of another language. When people immigrate to 2 A heritage speaker is a bilingual “raised in a home where a non-English language is spoken, who speaks or merely understands the heritage language, and who is to some degree bilingual in English and the heritage language” (Valdés 2000, p.1). 2 other countries, they start to use the language of that country. Gradually, they spend less time using their native language and have a stronger tendency to use the language broadly used in the immigrant country. This is not the pathological loss of L1. However, language attrition does not necessarily happen uniformly among all immigrants or bilinguals. The possible factors of L1 attrition may involve the frequency of L1 use, the word-frequency of L1 lexicon and the differences and similarities of language structures between L1 and L2. The past studies related to language attrition have shown that in second language acquisition, the properties of the dominant L2, which differ from L1, would affect acquisition and attrition of properties of L1 on diverse aspects (Bouba, Filiaci, Heycock, Sorace and Tsimpli, 2002; Gürel, 2002; schmid, 2002; Tsimpli, Sorace, Heycock and Filiaci 2004). In this paper, I investigate whether L1 attrition really occurs among the four subject groups including Chinese heritage speakers, early bilinguals, late bilinguals, and Chinese L2 learners. The definition of heritage learners is that heritage language is typically acquired before a dominant language, however, is not completely acquired due to individual's switch to that dominant language. This incompletely acquired version of a home language, then, is what is known as a heritage language (Polinsky & Kagan, 2007: 4). However, early bilinguals have a different language-development track. Early bilinguals are defined as children acquire L2 before the critical period. In this paper, Chinese children acquiring English before the critical period, the age of thirteen. They were born in Taiwan or China and were sent to the United States as young foreign students when 3 they were elementary school students. L2, English, gradually becomes their dominant language since they live in the L2 country. It is likely that early bilingual’s knowledge of L1 turns out to be incomplete when they become adults because of the asymmetric development between L1 and L2. Take the early-bilingual group in this experiment as an example: early bilinguals’ Chinese is not fully developed before learning English, and their knowledge of L1 may become incomplete since they live in the English dominant environment. As a result, early bilingual can be regarded as “incomplete L1 learners” (Polinsky 1997). The main distinction between early bilingual and late bilingual is the age of language acquisition. Early bilingual acquired L2 before the critical period and late bilingual learned L2 after the age of thirteen. In this paper, early bilinguals acquire English as L2 before the age of thirteen and continue learning it. Late bilinguals acquire English as L2 in Taiwan/ China after the critical period and then move to the United States when they are adults. It is important to investigate how the grammar of the weaker language is influenced by properties of the dominant language and how the dominant language affects acquisition and attrition of the minor language. 1.2 The purpose of the Study The purpose of this study is to investigate how the dominant language, English, has impact on the weaker language, Chinese, in the different types of Chinese-English bilinguals: Chinese heritage learners, Chinese-English early bilinguals, Chinese-English 4 late bilinguals, and English-speaking learners of Chinese studying Chinese in Taiwan or China. In Chinese, reflexive expressions like ziji ‘self’ and the combination of pronouns+ ziji like taziji ‘himself/ herself,’ niziji ‘yourself,’ etc. are anaphors. They cannot independently appear in a sentence without a linguistic antecedent for their references. The referential expressions (Wangwu, nawei xiaojie ‘that girl,’ etc.) do not require antecedents for establishing their reference. Moreover, personal pronouns (ta ‘he/ she’) can be used without the existence of an antecedent, whereas the felicitous use of ziji requires an antecedent. The study of the Chinese reflexive ziji has been addressed in the field of formal linguistics. Progovac (1992) cited that the movement is not necessary in the structure of long-distance reflexive ziji. This topic has also been discoursed in other fields such as functional discourse grammar. Pollard and Xue (1998) proposed that the distinction between syntactic use of reflexives and nonsyntactic use of reflexives is related to their antecedents: syntactic binding and discourse coreference. The issue of how a dominant language influences in acquisition and attrition of a minor language has been given attention in the previous studies in the areas of foreign/ second language acquisition, language and cognitive processes or experimental psycholinguistics. In this study, I examine the process of the Chinese reflexive ziji acquisition among different types of groups, and to identify whether L1 attrition really happens in the acquisition of the Chinese reflexive ziji. Another topic of this study is to see whether 5 language transfer happens from binding interpretations of English to Chinese in potential cases of L1 attrition. To achieve this goal, the study tests the five groups of subjects on their knowledge of Chinese ziji under the local binding, long-distance binding and sub- command structures by using the Truth Value Judgment Task with stories (Crain and Thornton, 1998). Subjects’ interpretations of the Chinese reflexive ziji in the stories and the subsequent sentences would be observed. As a result, researchers can understand whether or not language transfer happens among the four subject groups (heritage learners, early, late bilinguals and Chinese L2 learners) and whether L1 attrition exists. In addition, how the dominant language influences the acquisition of the Chinese reflexive ziji would be monitored at the same time. Lastly, the study provides some suggestions for further studies in the acquisition of the Chinese reflexive ziji. <Research questions> The following questions led to this study: 1. What differences exist in the acquisition of the Chinese reflexive ziji among the five groups? 2. How does the dominant language, English, influence the minor language, Chinese, in the binding interpretations of the Chinese reflexive ziji? Which group’s performance would be influenced by the effect of language transfer from English? 3. Does the effect of L1 attrition exist? What are the possible factors contributing to L1 attrition in the process of Chinese binding acquisition? 4. Does any correlation exist among the experimental results of the five groups? 6 1.3 Theoretical Framework and Background For the purpose of language acquisition and attrition investigation, this study examines L1 attrition effects among the five experimental groups. To account for the behavior of ziji, the notion of the binding theory must be expanded and the proposal of movement must be involved. Chomsky’s (1981) binding theory requires an anaphor to be bound in its governing category. However, the Binding Theory does not cover the whole properties of ziji. (The details will be discussed in Section 2.1). In the following example 1, although the direct object Lisi c-commands ziji, it cannot function as a binder of ziji (Tang, 1989: 99): (1) Zhangsan i song Lisi j yizhang ziji i/*j de xianpian. Zhangsan give Lisi one-CL self DE picture Zhangsan i gave Lisi j a picture of himself i/*j . Furthermore, Huang and Liu (2001) argued that there are two different uses of the bare reflexive ziji. First, ziji may be a syntactic anaphor subject to Condition A of the Binding Theory. Second, ziji may be a logophor. Chinese LD reflexives are not true anaphoric expression in the notion of Binding Theory, but a special type of anaphoric pronoun referring to the matrix subject as the role of “speaker” of the embedded clause (Huang, 1984). (The further discussion is in Section 2.2). This paper adopts the analysis by Huang and Liu (2001) and classifies the long- distance binding ziji as an instance of to the category of pragmatical logophor. When ziji is in local binding, it is bound in the same Governing Category as English anaphors. 7 1.4 Significance of the Study It is hoped that this research will help researchers in the field of language acquisition to further understand how Chinese-English bilinguals acquire the Chinese reflexive ziji under the influence of the dominant language English. In addition, the study also investigates whether L1 attrition exists among the four experimental groups except Chinese monolinguals. Moreover, the study identifies subjects’ interpretations of different types of sentences with ziji. It is helpful for researchers to understand the difficulties bilinguals encounter in the comprehension of the Chinese reflexive ziji. Therefore, the result of this study provides a direction for future studies in Chinese anaphors and the field of second language acquisition. 8 CHAPTER II. ISSUES AND REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE 2.1 Introduction This literature review will examine the essential issues surrounding the syntax of Chinese anaphora ziji within the field of language acquisition. The objectives of the review of literature are listed as follow: i) Investigate the probable proposals explaining the structure of Chinese anaphora ziji under the situations of the long-distance and local binding. ii) Probe the development of the researches relevant to the acquisition of the Chinese reflexive ziji. The following properties constitute the basic notions of Chinese reflexives: local and LD antecedents, subject-orientation, monomorphemicity, sub-commanding, and blocking. The properties of local and LD antecedents, sub-commanding and subject- orientation will be discussed in this section, and the properties of monomorphemicity and blocking effect will be separately illustrated in Section 2.2. The essential theory related to anaphora should be described before the formal discussion of the Chinese reflexive ziji in the field of second language acquisition. The location and expression of an antecedent is governed by structural principles; the most prominent principles are represented by Chomsky (1981; 1986)-the Binding Theory (BT). The notion of the Binding Theory involves three principles: 9 Principle A. An anaphor is bound in its local domain. Principle B. A pronominal is free in its local domain. Principle C. An R-expression is free. Based on the Binding Theory, Manzini and Wexler (1987) developed a theory of parameter resetting. They considered that UG provides the setting in (2a) to (2e) for the governing category parameter. The outline describes as follow: (2) γ is a governing category for α iff γ is the minimal category which contains α and has: a. a subject; or b. an INFL; or c. a Tense; or d. a referential Tense; or e. a root Tense Allow long-distance antecedents Based on Thomas (1991), English reflexives must be bound within the minimal category that contains a c-commanding antecedent and a subject and would be associated with the above setting of the governing category like example 3: (3) Peter i thinks that Paul j criticizes himself *i/j . In example 3, only the local antecedent, Paul, not Peter, can bind himself, since Peter is outside the local domain and does not c-command the reflexive. The situation is different in the reflexives of Chinese. English does not allow long-distance binding 10 reflexives, whereas Chinese can have local or long-distance binding reflexives as well 3 . Take Chinese reflexive ziji as an example, (4) Peter i renwei Paul j piping ziji i/j . Peter think Paul criticize himself ‘Peter i thinks that Paul j criticizes himself i/j .’ In example 4, both of the matrix subject Peter and the embedded subject Paul can be the antecedent of Chinese reflexive ziji. This shows that the root tense clause is the governing category for ziji. However, the Binding Theory as given in Chomsky (1981; 1986) does not account for cross-linguistic variations. One of the obvious differences between English and Chinese is that English reflexives are only bound by local antecedents; Chinese reflexive ziji can have long-distance antecedents or local antecedents as well. Sub-commanding Another difference is that ziji can be bound by a sub- command antecedent, whereas antecedents of anaphors in English have to c-command the anaphors. According to the remark of the definition of sub-command by Tang (1989), (5) B sub-commands A iff a. B c-commands A, or b. (i) B is contained in an NP that c-commands A or that sub-commands A, and (ii) any argument containing B is in subject position. 3 In Chinese, the long-distance reflexive ziji requires a local antecedent if a non-third person NP (i.e. first or second person) in used as a subject for one of the clauses while a third person subject is found in another clause. 11 Take example (6) as the explanation of Principle (5). Example (6) is ungrammatical in English since Mary does not c-command herself and there is no sub- command allowed, whereas Chinese allows the situation of sub-command happening. (6) *Mary i ’s pride hurt herself i . The Chinese bare anaphor ziji can be bound to a sub-command antecedent like example (7a) and (7b), (7) a. Mary i de aoman hai-le ziji i . DE arrogance hurt-Perf self ‘Mary’s arrogance hurt herself.’ b. Peter bushi de yanlun gei ziji dailai-le henduo mafan. false DE statement to self bring-Perf many trouble ‘Peter’s false statement brought many troubles to himself.’ Subject-orientation Another difference between English and Chinese is that Chinese is subject orientation with regard to simplex anaphors, not complex anaphors. In other words, the Chinese reflexive ziji only refers to an antecedent in a subject position, but English reflexives can refer to a subject NP or an object NP. Please see the example (8), (8) Zhangsan i song (gei) Wangwu j yi-zhang ziji i/*j -de xiangpian. Zhangsan give to Wangwu one-CL self’s picture ‘Zhangsan i gives Wangwu j a picture of himself i/*j .’ 12 When talking about the syntax of Chinese reflexives, the theory of parameter resetting is always mentioned. However, the theory of parameter resetting is still controversial because researchers doubt if the governing categories can be parameterized (Manzini and Wexler, 1987). In the theoretically linguistic discussion of properties of reflexives, three proposals attract more attention than others and will be discussed in the next section. 2.2 The Syntax of Chinese Anaphora: Reflexive Ziji There are three proposals in the discussion of Chinese anaphora including the Move-to-INFL approach, the relativized SUBJECT approach and the discourse- functional approach. The first and second approach treat ziji as a normal anaphor, but try to adjust the domain of the governing category of binding that primitively applied to English anaphors. By contrast, the third proposal takes ziji as a logophor in some instances and as a syntactic anaphor in other instances. According to Huang (1984), the Chinese LD reflexives are the logophoric uses referring to the matrix subject as the “speaker” of the embedded clause. The first proposal is the Move-to-INFL analysis (or called the movement of anaphors at LF) proposed by Pica (1987), Battistella (1989), Cole et al. (1990), Huang and Tang (1991) and Cole and Sung (1994). The second approach is the relativized SUBJECT approach by Progovac (1992; 1993). On the other hand, Huang (1984) analyzed ziji from the aspect of function and recognized some instances of reflexive binding ziji as instances of syntactic anaphors and others as instances of logophoricity. 13 Monomorphemicity In the first approach- the Move-to-INFL analysis, Pica (1987), Battistella (1989), Cole et al. (1990), Huang and Tang (1991) and Cole and Sung (1994) disagreed with the claim of parameter resetting made by Manzini and Wexler (1987). Rather, they proposed that the difference between the morphological properties of polymorphemic reflexives (e.g., English reflexive himself and Chinese taziji) and monomorphemic reflexives (e.g., ziji in Chinese) is the crucial point of the governing categories and the disputation of binding domain. See the example (9): (9) Zhangsan i renwei [Lisi j hen ziji i/j /taziji *i/j ]. Zhangsan think Lisi hate self / himself ‘Zhangsan i thinks that Lisi j hates himself j /him i .’ In example (9), ziji can refer to the local antecedent Lisi or the LD antecedent Zhangsan, whereas taziji only refers to the local antecedent Lisi. Under this approach, monomorphemic (X 0 ) reflexives have to move to INFL at LF by successive cyclic head-to-head movement since they have no feature of person, number and gender. The only way to get licensed is by movement- raise out of VP into the INFL in the same clause. As long as a X 0 reflexive moves to INFL, it is only c- commanded by the subject NP. This could be used to explain why non-subject antecedents cannot bind monomorphemic reflexives. Moreover, this phenomenon also implies that mono-morphemic reflexives can take a long-distance antecedent because of the movement at LF. Take the Chinese reflexive ziji as an example. 14 (10) Zhangsan i renwei Lisi j zhidao Wangwu k taoyan ziji. (10’) Zhangsan i ziji-INFL renwei [Lisi j t’’-INFL zhidao [Wangwu k t’-INFL taoyan t]] The example (10) shows the original location of ziji. In the sentence (10’), ziji has moved from the object position of the embedded clause to the INFL of its own clause and then to the INFL of the intermediate clause, and finally to the INFL of the matrix clause. This is also the reason why ziji can have the subject of the matrix clause, Zhangsan, or the subject of the intermediate clause Lisi as the possible long-distance antecedent. Because the subject NP c-commands the reflexive at LF, but non-subject NPs do not do so after X 0 is raised into INFL. Therefore, in the Move-to-INFL analysis, the subject orientation and the long-distance binding are regarded as the characteristics of the movement of anaphora ziji at LF. However, according to the relativized SUBJECT approach by Progovac (1992; 1993), no movement is necessary at LF. In this approach, long-distance anaphors are assigned typically monomorphemic (X 0 ) reflexives and local anaphors are poly- morphemic (XP) reflexives. The English reflexives himself/ herself and the Chinese reflexive taziji are XP reflexives, whereas the Chinese reflexive ziji is X 0 reflexives. Long-distance binding is reflexive-specific rather than language-specific. Progovac (1992) cited that the subject for an XP reflexive is a clausal subject [NP IP] or a subject of a noun phrase [NP NP], and subject for a X 0 reflexive is Agreement (AGR). Although the East Asian languages like Chinese and Japanese do not have morphological AGR in sentences, those languages still have the syntactic AGR. When a X 0 reflexive is bound by a local AGR that is co-indexed with the AGR in a higher clause 15 under the anaphoric level, it can have a long-distance antecedent. The relativized SUBJECT approach is especially used to describe the phenomenon of the long-distance binding of X 0 reflexives. The reason is that only the governing category for X 0 reflexives is defined by a head. For XP reflexives, the governing category is defined by an XP (Hermon, 1994: 93). In brief, despite the difference that exists in the above two proposals, they share a common perspective: a monomorphemic reflexive, ziji, can be bound by a long-distance antecedent, but polymorphemic reflexives cannot, like taziji. The third proposal tries to interpret the characteristic of ziji from the aspect of the functions of ziji in discourses. Huang and Liu (2001) argued that ziji seems to be a syntactic anaphor in some contexts but a pragmatic logophor in others. This statement has already been made by Reinhart and Reuland (1993), Pollard and Sag for English and Xue, Pollard and Sag (1994) for Mandarin. Regarding the characteristics of the pragmatic logophor, Kuno (1972) provided the explanation about the formation of logophor ziji. Based on Kuno’s “direct discourse complementation” analysis, ziji identifies the identity of the subject in the matrix clause. When it can be directly interpreted into wo “I” in the direct discourse representation of a sentence where it exists, the LD anaphor ziji is regarded as logophor. The LD reflexive ziji as a logophor is basically speaker-oriented and bound by the subject of the matrix clause. This statement provides a direct explanation of LD reflexive ziji. The following sentences are used to explain how ziji is engaged in the role as a logophor in the Chinese discourse, example (11) and its interpretation (12): 16 (11) Zhangsan i renwei Lisi changchang piping ziji i . Zhangsan think Lisi often criticize self ‘Zhangsan thinks that Lisi often criticizes himself.’ (12) Zhangsan i renwei, “Lisi chaochao piping wo.” Zhangsan think, Lisi often criticize me ‘Zhangsan thinks, “Lisi often criticizes me.”’ Ziji can be directly interpreted as Wo in sentence (11) like the representation of (12) and bound by the antecedent Zhangsan, the subject of the matrix clause. 4 Sells (1987) further gave a classification of logophoric event to catalogue three roles of the antecedent of a logophor: Source, Self and Pivot. 5 Huang and Liu (2001) claimed that there is a hierarchy among the three primitive notions associated with logophoricity: Source is the most fundamental, then Self, while Pivot is the least. In sentence (13a), Zhangsan is the SOURCE antecedent of ziji. In (13b), Lisi is the internal SELF whose mental state is being reported. In (13c), the event is understood from the perspective of Wangwu and regarded as the PVIOT. (13) a. Zhangsan i shuo Lisi changchang piping ziji i . Zhangsan think Lisi often criticize self ‘Zhangsan thinks that Lisi often criticized himself.’ 4 Based on Huang, Li and Li (2009: 342), the logophoric reflexive is not the result of reflexivizing Zhangsan on identity with its own matriz subject, but the result of converting from the speaking-referring wo “me” in the underlying direct discourse. 5 In Sells (1987), three primitive roles of the antecedent of a logophor are described in detail: SOURCE= the agent of the communication; SELF= one whose mental state or attitude of the content of the proposition describes, and PIVOT= one with respect to whose (space-time) location the content of the proposition is evaluated. In addition, three original roles of the antecedent of a logophor also formed a implicational hierarchy- certain logophoric roles have been claimed to be more canonical than otehrs: SOURCE> SELF> PIVOT (Sells, 1987, cited in Kim, Montrul and Yoon 2009). 17 b. Ziji i de xiaohai mei de jiang de xiaoxi, shi Lisi i hen shangxin. Self’s child not get prize DE news make Lisi very sad ‘The news that his i child did not win the prize made Lisi i very sad.’ c. Dang Wangwu i hui dao jia shi, mama zhengzai kan ziji i de When Wangwu return to home moment, mother is look at self’s chengjidan. grade report. ‘When Wangwu i returned to home, his i mother was looking at his i grade report.’ Blocking effect Huang and Liu (2001) used the Governing Category as the dividing line to distinguish the two uses of ziji: the syntactic anaphor exhibits Binding Condition A (BCA) effects (e.g. locality but no blocking), and the logophor exhibits logophoricity effects (e.g. blocking). Huang and Liu indicated that the blocking effect 6 provides a natural explanation in logophoric uses. According to Huang (1984), the blocking effect is the logophoric reading of ziji: long-distance binding may be blocked by certain local potential antecedents with φ-features distinct from those of the remote antecedent. One condition is that blocking effects may be triggered by non-subjects which, in general, are not potential antecedents of ziji (Xue et al., 1994). 6 Huang and Liu (2001: 22) explained the conditions of “blocking effect:” a. A person asymmetry exists such that a first/second-person pronoun may block a third-person LD antecedent, but not the other way round. b. LD ziji may be blocked by non-subjects which are not potential antecedents. c. A deictically identified third-person NP does induce blocking. d. In cases with multiple occurrences of ziji, some third-person NPs may induce blocking effects. e. Plural NPs behave differently than singular NPs both as potential antecedents and as blockers. 18 (14) Zhangsan i gaosu wo j Lisi k hen ziji *i/*j/k . Zhangsan tell me Lisi hate self ‘Zhangsan i told me j that Lisi k hated self *i/*j/k .’ Throughout the discussions by Huang and Liu (2001), the differences between the syntactic anaphor ziji and the pragmatic logophor ziji are clarified. Huang and Liu’s conclusion also implies that it is insufficient to treat ziji simply as an anaphor because the properties of ziji cannot be covered thoroughly. 2.3 Chinese Reflexive Ziji in the Field of Second Language Acquisition This section will review the discussion of the Chinese reflexive ziji in the field of second language acquisition. The first topic is to discuss whether binding properties in L1 and L2 grammar are formed in the same way by UG. The second topic is the phenomena of L1 effect and interference in the acquisition of ziji. The third topic is the influence of the language proficiency level in language acquisition: does learners’ L2 proficiency level affect the learning process of the Chinese reflexive ziji? The formation of L2 by UG-constrained or formed randomly Chomsky (1995: 169) noted: “The theory of a particular language is its grammar. The theory of language and the expressions they generate is Universal Grammar (UG).” UG is the initial state of language. The theory based on UG assumes that language consists of a series of abstract principles that characterize core grammar of all nature languages in the world. “UG is part of an innate biologically endowed language faculty (White 1989).” It places limitations on grammars, constraining their form (i.e. syntactic, semantic, phonological), 19 as well as how they operate the computational system, principles that the grammar is subject to (White, 1991: 1). UG has been extensively discussed in the field of second language acquisition (SLA). However, whether second language learners can access UG is still controversial. One claim is that the starting point of language acquisition is UG (Epstein, Flynn, and Martohardjono, 1996, 1998; Flynn 1996; Flynn and Martohardjono 1994). L2 learners would acquire language along the same path as L1 speakers, even if the differences exist between L1 speakers and L2 learners. This claim is called full access to UG without language transfer. In general, it is accepted that adult L2 learners cannot fully access UG and achieve the native-like level in second language learning due to the critical period hypothesis. As long as adult learners acquire second language after the critical period (around the age of 13-15), they can hardly achieve the proficient level. In the past, researchers conducted experiments to test whether L1 transfer exists in the process of second language acquisition and whether interlanguage grammars are UG-constrained (Proposed by Schwartz and Sprouse, 1996). Both Dugarova (2007) and Chen (2007) conducted experiments to investigate whether the acquisition of the Chinese reflexive ziji by Russian, English and French speakers are constrained by UG. They provided evidence that L1 transfer exists and interlanguage grammars are indeed UG-constrained. L1 effect and interference L1 effect and interference also influence the research of language acquisition. White et al. (1996) conducted experiments and suggested that no significant L1 effects exist. The subjects (four French, two English, two Korean and five Chinese) in this experiment allowed zibun to take any antecedent including long- 20 distance objects, which is prohibited in the parameter of UG. Their L1 did not really influence the experimental result according to the data provided by White et al (1996). Yuan (1998) further investigated how L2 learners acquired the Chinese reflexive ziji in the finite and nonfinite clauses. Yuan’s findings go against the statements by Thomas (1995) and White et al. (1996), who found that no L1 effect existed in language acquisition of reflexives. In fact, according to Yuan (1998), it is much easier for Japanese speakers of Chinese to acquire LD binding of ziji since the similar structure occurs in the Japanese reflexive zibun. L1 interference also exists in Yuan’s experiment. L1 interference decelerates the acquisition of long-distance binding of ziji by English speakers. English speakers have to recognize the differences between the English reflexives himself and the Chinese reflexive ziji and then extend the binding domain from the narrower English reflexive domain to the broader Chinese binding domain. It is worth further studying if L1 really plays an important role in language acquisition of the Chinese reflexive ziji, and to what extent L1 affects the acquisition of ziji when subjects are under different levels in their L1 such as heritage learners, early bilinguals and late bilinguals. L2 proficiency level influences the process of language acquisition Thomas (1995) conducted an experiment to investigate whether L2 learners of Japanese know that morphologically simple anaphor zibun has the property of subject orientation. He found that the participants at high-proficiency level were able to bind zibun by long-distance subject antecedents and the low-proficiency participants were unable to do it. Ying (1999) thought that the conclusion made by Thomas (1995) did not cover the issues: 21 access to UG and L1 effect. Ying argued that L1 effect exists and English-speaking learners of Chinese reset the narrower parameter setting of reflexives in English onto a wider parameter setting of ziji in Chinese. In addition, when encountering the sentences with the non-typical structures in English, English-speaking learners of Chinese resorted to options of UG I think that there are some questions in Ying’s experiment. First, when the subjects in her experiment faced the typical English structures in Chinese, did they apply UG or their L1 to answer questions in the experiment? Second, Ying did not distinguish the experimental result between the intermediate and advanced English-speaking learners of Chinese. As we know, the language proficiency level potentially affects the way subjects perform in the experiment. After reviewing the paper by Ying (1999), an important question may arise: If L2 learners are at the different first-language proficiency levels, does this factor influence language attrition and acquisition in the process of the Chinese reflexive ziji acquisition? 2.4 Emerging Issues and need for further research The literature review revealed that research on anaphors is a complex and changing issue. The function of ziji in the field of Chinese syntax and second language acquisition is still worth studying. The review of literature reveals the importance of investigating more potential proposals of Chinese reflexive ziji in the fields of language acquisition. 22 To arrive at a deeper understanding of the procedure of language comprehension of the Chinese reflexive ziji acquisition, researchers have to examine second-language learners’ response to the Chinese sentences within reflexive ziji. It is necessary to know to what extent a dominant language transfer and first language loss exist among different bilingual groups. The next stage of this research will enumerate the section of research method to be used including the hypothesis for this experiment, subject selection, the experimental methodology and the experimental procedure. 23 CHAPTER III. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY 3.1 Introduction The past studies have been conducted by qualitative and quantitative research to identify the influential factors that affect the acquisition of ziji. It is also important to investigate whether L2 learners can reset the parameter for long-distance binding in Chinese reflexive ziji. The influences of a dominant language and L1 attrition effect are two essential issues that would be studied in this research. This chapter includes descriptions of the following components: (1) the hypotheses for this research, (2) the methodology for the design of the study, (3) the participants, and (4) data sources and experimental procedures. 3.2 The Hypotheses This paper will present an empirical study of acquisition and attrition of the Chinese reflexive ziji by heritage learners, early bilinguals, late bilinguals, Chinese L2 learners and Chinese monolinguals. The questions to be discussed in this study are: 1) In the acquisition of the Chinese reflexive ziji, how does dominant language, English, influence Chinese in the binding domain of Chinese anaphors? In other words, are heritage learners, early bilinguals and Chinese L2 learners influenced by the dominant language when they are in the process of anaphors acquisition? 24 2) Assuming that late bilinguals are in advantageous positions in the cquisition of the Chinese reflexive ziji since their Chinese is completely developed in contrast to early bilinguals and Chinese L2 learners, does any difference exist between early bilinguals and Chinese L2 learners in the process of the Chinese reflexive ziji acquisition? 3) Is there L1 attrition in the process of acquisition of the Chinese reflexive ziji among four experimental groups? According to Kim, Montrul and Yoon (2009), there is no significant L1 attrition when early bilinguals acquire the Korean reflexive caki. Based on the above questions, the following hypotheses are made. First, I hypothesize that heritage learners, early bilinguals and Chinese L2 learners will have more difficulties in answering questions with ziji in the long-distance binding. All groups accept the properties of ziji in the test of local binding. However, heritage learners, early bilinguals and Chinese L2 learners will have more difficulties in answering questions with ziji in the long-distance binding. The result of the Truth Value Judgment Task (Crain and Thornton, 1998) will show that heritage learners, early bilinguals and Chinese L2 learners are affected by their dominant language, English, especially in the structures of sub-command and the long-distance binding, which are at variance with the usage of English. They will show the lower degree of acceptance when 25 ziji is located outside the domain of the governing category in English. They would also experience language loss, but not in English. 7 Second, I hypothesize that the effect of L1 attrition really exists among heritage learners and early bilinguals in the result of the Truth Value Judgment Task. This result is different from the result investigated by Kim, Montrul and Yoon (2009). They examined the first generation of Korean immigrants lives in the United Stated, and concluded that the Korean immigrants show no effect of L1 attrition. Further, they listed the possible factor: the intervention of sociolinguistic factor. 8 Therefore, heritage learners are chosen in this experiment are the second generation of the Chinese immigrants who lives in the United States. They acquire Chinese as their family language, but most of the time they communicate in the dominant language, English, outside the domain of their living communities. The factor of language preference appeared in Kim, Montrul and Yoon’s (2009) experiment could be avoided in this study by changing the grouping from the first-generation immigrants to the second-generation heritage learners. 7 It is reasonable to conjecture that when early bilinguals and Chinese L2 learners find that there are some differences between English and Chinese, they have to spend more time than Japanese and Korean learners acquiring ziji by starting to access UG and resetting their linguistic parameter of reflexive for ziji since ziji allows the long-distance binding and has the subject orientation, whereas English reflexives only allow local binding and not only the subject but also the object could be an antecedent of an English reflexive. In other words, early bilinguals and Chinese L2 learners may locate the narrower setting of reflexives in English onto a wider setting of the Chinese reflexive ziji. 8 Kim, Montrul and Yoon (2009: 10) stated, “we suspect that there are some sociolinguistic reasons, related to use of Korean and availability of Korean, for why this group does not exhibit a pronounced degree of L1 attrition. Korean first generation immigrants tend to live in closely knit communities (especially around churches) even in an L2- speaking environment and are willing to use their L1 if there is a choice between speaking L1 and L2.” The above situation Kim, Montrul and Yoon described is similar to the Chinese first generation. Churches are especially a nice place for the first generation to communicate in their first language. 26 3.3 Subjects The subjects who participated in this experiment are the five groups- four experimental groups and one control group. The experimental groups are Chinese heritage learners, early bilinguals, late bilinguals, Chinese L2 learners and Chinese monolinguals. The first group is heritage learners. They are the children of the Chinese immigrants born in the United States. They speak Chinese inside their family communities and speak English, the dominant language, outside the communities. There are 15 adult speakers in this group. The second group is early bilinguals who acquire English as L2 before the critical period. They were born in Taiwan or China and were sent to the United States as young foreign students when they were elementary school students and live in the United States currently. There are 20 adult speakers in this group. The third group is the late bilingual group which is composed of 20 adult learners. Bilinguals in this group acquire English as L2 after the critical period in Taiwan or China and live in the United States currently. Chinese L2 learners belong to the forth group; this group consists of 20 adult English-speaking L2 learners of Chinese living in Taiwan or China now. There is a control group of native Chinese monolingual speakers who live in Taiwan and there are 25 adults in this group. Before starting the experiment, the basic information of the five experimental groups will be listed like Table 1 including their possible mean age, range of age, mean age of English onset and the length of residence in the U.S. / Taiwan. The reason to provide the basic information is to give readers a basic idea about the anticipated subjects’ language background. 27 Table 1. The Form of Basic Information of the Experimental Groups Mean Age Range of Age Mean age of English onset (Possible) Length of residence in the U.S. Chinese Monolinguals Heritage Learners Early bilinguals (Incomplete L1 acquisition group) Late bilinguals Chinese L2 learners (Incomplete L2 acquisition group) Length of residence in Taiwan or China All groups have to take a Chinese proficiency test including the multiple-choice task, questions answering, listening and speaking tests to examine the subjects’ competence of Chinese grammar. The mean accuracy scores on the Chinese proficiency test will be shown like Table 2: Table 2. The Form of Mean Accuracy Scores on the Chinese Proficiency Test Number Mean Standard Deviation Chinese Monolinguals 25 Heritage Learners 15 Early bilinguals (Incomplete L1 acquisition group) 20 Late Bilinguals 20 Chinese L2 learners (Incomplete L2 acquisition group) 20 28 3.4 Experiment Methods The Truth Value Judgment Task (Crain and Thornton, 1998) is applied in this experiment. This experiment material is used to examine the scope of binding theory among the four experimental groups and one control group. The Truth Value Judgment Task provides sufficient contexts for participants to make judgment. 9 Subjects’ disagreement will not be due to the limitation of the methodology or the misunderstanding of questions. In the past, many researchers used a multiple-choice task or picture-identification task to examine; however, such experimental materials cannot reflect the full picture of learners’ language competence because experimental materials cannot provide sufficient contents for subjects to do the judgment. Most of time participants make judgment rely on their language competence. Only the preferred interpretation of an anaphor in a given context was observed. The Truth Value Judgment Task is designed to test whether participants can understand the meaning of the context and then make a correct judgment in the following comment sentences. The item pool includes sentences with ziji (target items) and distractor sentences (non-target sentences). The design of distractor sentences includes ziji, but questions are not related to the binding domain of ziji. Participants read the 9 Based on the statement made by Kim, Montrul and Yoon (2009: 8), “the truth values judgment task typically investigates ‘interpretation’ rather than ‘grammaticality.’ In a truth value judgment task, we expect four types of responses: 1.Grammatical and acceptable interpretation; 2.Grammatical but not acceptable interpretation; 3.Ungrammatical but acceptable interpretation; 4.Ungrammatical and not acceptable interpretation. Response 1 will fall into the category ‘True’; while response 4 falls into the category ‘False’”. When the situation 3 happens, the researchers of the experiments have to clarify and exclude any possible confused sentences. And the safe way to conduct such an experiment is to do a pilot study before the beginning of the formal experiment. 29 stories in English and then answer the questions written in Chinese; they have to decide for the subsequent comment whether it is written in a natural way that followed the context of the story by circling either “True” or “False” shown at the end of the question sentences. Chinese monolinguals read both the stories and questions in Chinese. The Truth Value Judgment Task with stories in this experiment composed of 30 target items (sentences) and 30 non-target items (sentences)- five target sentences and five non-target sentences for each sentence type. There are six types of sentence in this experiment. Six types of sentences would follow the corresponding stories and would be assembled randomly. In this experiment, total 60 short stories are displayed. Each sentence type involves 10 stories. Every story is followed by either a target sentence or a non-target sentence. The six sentence types and the corresponding true-or-false questions written in Chinese are listed in the subsequent content. The model of the six sentence types is adopted from Kim, Montrul, and Yoon, J. (2005, 2009). Types 1 to 3 belong to the governing category of non-violation of local binding. Thus Types 1 to 3 are acceptable in the binding domain of English and Chinese. Types 4 and 5 violate the principle of the governing category and have the tendency of long-distance binding. Type 6 is the condition of sub-commanding in Chinese, and this is not allowed in English. 30 (15) a. Type 1: NP…V…[ziji] Zhangsan piping le ziji. Zhangsan criticize-LE self “Zhangsan criticized himself.” b. Type 2: NP…V…[ziji…] Argument Zhangsan piping le ziji-de pengyou. Zhangsan criticize-LE self-DE friend “Zhangsan criticized his own friend.” c. Type 3: NP…V…[ziji…] Adjunct Zhangsan mai le yi ben shu gei ziji-de jiejie. Zhangsan buy-LE one-CL book to self-DE sister “Zhangsan bought a book to his own sister.” d. Type 4: NP…V…[ S ziji…V] Zhangsan gaosu Lisi [ziji bi Wangwu congming.] Zhangsan tell-PAST Lisi [self than Wangwu smart “Zhangsan told Lisi that he(self) is smarter than Wangwu.” e. Type 5: NP…V…[ S [ ziji…] NP(Argument) …V] Zhangsan cong Lisi nar zhidao ziji de jiejie cu le chehuo. Zhangsan from Lisi there hear-PAST self-DE sister have-le car accident “Zhangsan heard from Lisi that self’s (his) sister had a car accident.” f. Type 6: [N [NP [-animate] ]]…V…ziji Zhangsan de aoman hai le ziji. Zhangsan-DE arrogance hurt-LE self “Zhangsan’s arrogance hurt himself.” 31 3.5 Experiment Procedure First of all, all participants have to fill out the self-evaluation questionnaire and take the Chinese proficiency test If someone has unusual performance (too high or too low) in the result of the preliminary test compared to other subjects in the same group, he is interviewed individually and then is asked to re-take the Chinese proficiency test but another test booklet with different test items. The Truth Value Judgment Task with stories After the basic investigation, participants take the Truth Value Judgment Task with stories. Participants are asked to use computers to take the task. If subjects are unfamiliar with the operation of computer, they are allowed to take paper-and-pencil test. The purpose of adopting the computer- based test is to control the testing period. They have one hour to finish the whole test and the time reminder would not appear on the screen until the final five-minute countdown. 10 Subjects are asked to read a short story written in English and then make judgment in the following comment sentence written in Chinese located by the end of the story and on the same page. 11 Subjects have to judge if the comment is a true description of the previous story. If a participant judges a comment sentence as true, the participant accepts the interpretation of that sentence and agrees with the binding in that sentence. On the other hand, if a subject does not accept the target sentence, he/ she must disagree 10 Participants are allowed to extend the testing period to one and half hour if they cannot finish the whole test in time since this is the test of learners’ understanding and interpretation rather than a speed test. 11 The control group (Chinese monolinguals) is given the Chinese stories and the comment sentences are also written in Chinese. 32 with the probable binding shown in that sentence. The following example (16) is used to illustrate the test item: (16) a. Sentence type 3 (Target sentence) Story: Today is Amy’s birthday. However, her sister cannot come to participate in her birthday party. And Amy’s friend Peter sent a present to Amy, which is prepared by Amy’s sister. Question: Amy cong Peter nar shou dao ziji de jiejie Amy from Peter there receive-PAST self-DE sister gei de liwu. give-PAST-DE present. “Amy received the present sent by self’s (her own) sister from Peter.” True False (16) b. Sentence type 1 (non-target sentence) Story: Bella invited Emily to her housewarming party. She pointed out a female standing next to the door and told that is her aunt. Question: Bella xiang Emily zhanshi ziji. Bella toward Emily show-PAST herself. “Bella showed Emily herself.” True False 33 CHAPTER IV. POSSIBLE RESULTS Throughout the formulation of the theoretical frame of the Chinese reflexive ziji and the illustration of the hypotheses and the experimental methodology, several logically possible outcomes of the Truth Value Judgment Task in this study could be enumerated: First, the possible result is that participants cannot access language-specific properties. All groups in that case will show no differences in the questions of sentence type 1 to 3 since the language property of sentence types 1 to 3 are shared by English and Chinese learners; whereas, heritage learners, early bilinguals (incomplete L1 learners) and Chinese L2 learners will perform less acceptance in the tasks of sentence types 4 to 6. Speakers cannot fully access language-specific properties such as the long-distance binding and sub-commanding. They will be unable to reset the language parameter when encountering troubles in sentence interpretations, which are outside the language domain of English. The dominant language, English, strongly influences learners in the process of the Chinese reflexive ziji acquisition. On the other hand, the performance of all sentence types between late bilinguals and monolinguals will be much alike. Although late bilinguals live in the L2 dominant environment, they do not suffer from L1 attrition. The possible reason is that their language proficiency level of English is comparatively low; their L1, Chinese, still solidly controls the process of language acquisition. Second, another possible outcome of the experiment is that L1 attrition effect will not exist in this experiment. It is possible that only Chinese L2 learners will get a lower score in sentence types 4, 5 and 6. Heritage learners, early bilinguals and late bilinguals 34 will perform better in the questions of sentence types 4 to 6 than Chinese L2 learners since they acquired Chinese before the age of thirteen. Based on the critical period hypothesis, people can successfully acquire second language before the critical period; it is possible that they can achieve native-like level. However, Chinese L2 learners acquire Chinese as a second language after the critical period. It is more difficult for them to achieve near-native proficiency in Chinese. They must face more problems in the acquisition of ziji. It is reasonable to claim that L1 attrition effect will not exist in this experiment. Heritage learners and early bilinguals still maintain their language competence in Chinese and perform no worse than late bilinguals and monolinguals. Last, L1 attrition effect will exist among the experimental participants. No significant differences will show on the results of sentence types 1 to 3; all groups will perform indistinguishably. In the test of sentence types 4 to 6, early bilinguals and heritage learners will have lower scores. What is surprising is that late bilinguals also get the lower score in the sentence types 4 to 6 when comparing the result to monolinguals’. Late bilinguals will still perform better than early bilinguals and Chinese L2 learners. The possible factor will be the operation of L1 attrition. Late bilinguals live in the English dominant country for a period of time. English seems gradually dominate the process of language acquisition because of the frequency of language contact. It is worth investigating that L1 attrition effect may also happen to Chinese L2 learners. They live in China or Taiwan at least three years and their language system may gradually affect by Chinese because of the daily contact. It is likely that they 35 perform even better than early bilinguals in the sentence types 4 to 6. However, it is necessary to conduct further experiments related to learners’ proficiency levels to confirm this possibility. 36 CHAPTER V. CONCLUSION The Chinese reflexive ziji in the recent literature has been broadly studied in the field of second language acquisition and formal linguistics. Manzini and Wexler (1987) developed a theory of parameter resetting to identify the binding domain of the Chinese reflexive. Although the concepts and theories of the Move-to-INFL analysis and the relativized SUBJECT approach are different, both approaches treated ziji as a monomorphemic reflexive and claimed that it can be bound by LD antecedents. However, Huang and Liu (2001) adopted the “mixed approach” by Reinhart and Reuland (1993) and Pollard and Sag (1992). They analyzed ziji from two perspectives: ziji is a syntactic anaphor or a logophor. According to Huang and Liu, the Governing Category (GC) is the dividing line to divide ziji into two identities. The syntactic anaphor ziji exhibits BCA effects, and the logophor ziji exhibits logophoricity effect. L1 attrition has been described and substantiated in the literature for decades, but how it happens and how it influences language acquisition are still worth further examining. In this study, I investigate how a dominant language affects Chinese-English bilinguals in the acquisition of the Chinese reflexive ziji, and how language attrition occurs. This research focuses on the acquisition of the Chinese reflexive ziji among Chinese-English bilinguals with various language-development backgrounds. The possible outcomes of the Truth Value Judgment Task are listed as below. To investigate the differences of the acquisition of ziji among various bilingual groups, I plan to test learners’ understanding and interpretation of the Chinese reflexive ziji by the Truth Value Judgment Task with stories. There are five experimental groups 37 in this study: heritage learners, early bilinguals (incomplete L1 learners), late bilinguals, Chinese L2 learners (incomplete L2 learners) and Chinese monolinguals. The goal of this study is to examine whether L1 attrition exists, and which groups perform L1 attrition in the experimental results. Several possible outcomes of the Truth Value Judgment Task can be anticipated based on the experimental design of this study. First, subjects cannot access language- specific properties. The performances of all groups will not differ from one another when Chinese sentences show binding properties allowed in Chinese and English (UG principle). However, early bilinguals, heritage learners and Chinese L2 learners will perform less acceptance in the questions of the Truth Value Judgment Task when the Chinese reflexive ziji is bound outside the binding domain of English, though it is bound within the Chinese Governing Category (GC). This result with GC differences seems to represent that parametric differences in UG could be influenced by cross-linguistic transfer. 12 Second, L1 attrition effect will not exist in this experiment. Only Chinese L2 learners will get a lower score in sentence types 4, 5 and 6. Heritage learners, early bilinguals and late bilinguals will perform better in questions of the sentence types 4 to 6 than Chinese L2 learners since they acquired Chinese before the age of ten. Third, the effect of L1 attrition will exist among the experimental participants. In the test of 12 Kim, Montrul, and Yoon (2005) had the same result when they conducted experiment of binding interpretations between Korean heritage speakers and adult L2 learners of Korean. 38 sentence types 4 to 6, early bilinguals, heritage learners, and late bilinguals will have lower scores. The possible factor seems to be the operation of L1 attrition. The discussion of this experiment offers possible explanations for the development of language attrition and acquisition in Chinese reflexives. Future experiments will need to expand the application of language acquisition and attrition investigation to various types of language groups and apply different types of experimental methodologies to studies such as the on-line method: the eye-tracking technique. 39 BIBLIOGRAPHY Battistella, E. (1989). Chinese reflexivization: a movement to INFL approach. Linguistics, 27 (6), 987-1012. Bouba, M., Filiaci, F., Heycock, C., Sorace, A., & Tsimpli, T. (2002). Syntactic attrition in Italian and Greek near-native speaker of English. Paper presented at the First International Conference on Language Attrition, Amsterdam. Chen, D. (2007). Chinese reflexive ziji in second language acquisition. University of Pennsylvania Working Papers in Linguistics,10, 37-52. Chen, H.-Y. (2009). Logophoricity and ziji. Proceedings of the 21 th North American Conference on Chinese Linguistics (NACCL-21), 2, 464-481. Cho, J.M. (2006). The Effect of UG in the L2 Acquisition of Long-Distance Binding. Studies in Generative Grammar, 16 (2), 193-209. Chomsky, N. (1980). On binding. Linguistic Inquiry, 11 (1), 1-46. Chomsky, N. (1981). Lectures in government and binding. Dordrecht: Foris. Chomsky, N. (1986). Knowledge of language: Its nature, origin, and use. New York: Praeger. Chomsky, N. (1995). The Minimalist Program. Cambridge, Mass: The MIT Press. Cole, P., Hermon G., & Lee, C.H. (2001). Grammatical and Discourse Conditions on Long Distance Reflexives in Two Chinese Dialects. In Cole, P., Hermon G., and Hunag, C.-T.J., Syntax and Semantics: Long Distance Reflexives, New York: Academic Press. Cole, P., Hermon, G., & Sung, L.M. (1990) Principles and parameters of long-distance reflexives. Linguistic Inquiry, 21, 1-22. Cole, P. & Sung, L.M. (1994). Head movement and long-distance reflexives. Linguistic Inquiry, 25, 355-406. Cole, P. & Wang, C. (1996). Antecedents and blockers of long-distance reflexives: The case of Chinese ziji. Linguistic Inquiry, 27 (3), 357-390. Crain, S. & Thornton, R. (1998). Investigations in universal grammar: A guide to experiments in the acquisition of syntax and semantics. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. 40 De Houwer, A. (1996). Bilingual language acquisition. The Handbook of Child Language, 219-250. Dugarova, E. (2007). Acquisition of the Chinese reflexive ‘ziji’ by Russian and English speakers. The fifth Cambridge Postgraduate Conference in Language Research. Epstein, S.D., Flynn, S., & Martohardjono, G. (1996). Second language acquisition: Theoretical and experimental issues in contemporary research. Behavioral and Brain Science, 19 (4), 677-714. Epstein, S.D., Flynn, S., & Martohardjono, G. (1998). The strong continuity hypothesis: some evidence concerning functional categories in adult L2 acquisition. In S. Flynn, G. Martohardjono and W. O’Neil (Eds), The Generative Study of Second Language Acquisition (pp. 61–77). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Flynn S. (1996). A parameter-setting approach to second language acquisition. In W. Ritchie and T. Bhatia (Eds), Handbook of language acquisition (pp. 121–158). San Diago: Academic Press. Flynn S., & Martohardjono, G. (1994). Mapping from the initial state to the final state: the separation of universal principles and language specific principles. In B. Lust, M. Suñer and J. Whitman (Eds), Syntactic theory and first language acquisition: cross- linguistic perspectives. Vol. 1: Heads, projections and learnability (pp. 319–335). Hillsdate, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Gürel, A. (2002). Linguistic characteristics of second language acquisition and first language attrition: Turkish overt versus null pronouns. Ph.D. dissertation, McGill University. Gürel, A. (2004). Selectivity in L2-induced attrition: A psycholinguistic account. Journal of Neurolinguistics, 17(1), 53-78. Gass, S.M. & Selinker, L. (2009). Second Language Acquisition: An introductory course. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Hermon, G. (1994). Long-distance reflexives in UG: Theoretical approaches and predictions for acquisition. In Syntactic theory andfirst language acquisition: Cross- linguistic perspectives. Vol. 2, Binding, dependencies, and learnability, ed. Barbara Lust, Gabriella Hermon, and Jaklin Komfilt, 91-112. Hillsdale, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum Huang, C.T.J. (1984). On the distribution and reference of empty pronouns. Linguistic Inquiry, 15 (4), 531-574. 41 Huang, C.T.J., Li, Y.A. & Li, Y. (2009). The syntax of Chinese. Cambridge University Press. Huang, C.T.J. & Liu, C.-S. L. (2001). Logophoricity, attitudes, and ziji at the interface. In Cole et al. (eds.), pp. 141-195. Huang, C.T.J. & Tang, C.C.J. (1991). The local nature of the long-distance reflexive in Chinese. Long-Distance Anaphora, Cambridge University Press, 263-282. Huang, Y.Y., Yang, S.Y., Gao,L.Q., & Cui, X.L. (2005). The Acquisition of Chinese Reflexive' Ziji' by English and Japanese Speakers. Chinese Language Learnin, 5, 49-65. Kim, J.-H., & Montrul, S. (2004). Binding Interpretations in Korean Heritage Speakers. Proceedings of the 28th Boston University Conference on language Development. pp 306-317. Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press. Kim, J. -H., & Montrul, S. (2004). Second Language Influence on First Language Attrition: Interpretation of Korean Binding system. Harvard Studies in Korean Lingusitics X. Hanshin Publishing Company, Korea. 86-98. Kim, J.-H., Montrul, S., & Yoon, J. (2005). Binding Interpretation by Korean Heritage Speakers and adult L2 Learners of Korean. Online supplement to the Proceedings of the 29th Boston University Conference on Language Development. Kim, J.-H., Montrul, S., & Yoon, J. (2009). Dominant Language Influence in Acquisition and Attrition of Binding: Interpretation of the Korean Reflexive Caki. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 1-12. Kuno, S. (1972). Functional perspective: A case study from Japanese and English. Linguistic Inquiry, 3 (3), 269-320. Manzini, R. M. & Wexler, K. (1987). Parameters, Binding Theory, and learnability. Linguistic Inquiry, 18 (3), 413-444. Montrul, S. (2005). Second language acquisition and first language loss in adult early bilinguals: Exploring some differences and similarities. Second Language Research, 21 (3), 199-249. Pan, H. (1998). Closeness, Prominence, and Binding Theory. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory, 16, 771-815. Pavlenko, A. (2000). L2 influence on L1 in late bilingualism. Issues in Applied Linguistics, 11 (2), 175-205. 42 Pica, P. (1987). On the nature of the reflexivization cycle. Proceedings of the North East Linguistic Society, 17 (2), 483-500. Polinsky, M. & Kagan, O. (2007). Heritage languages: In the “wild” and in the classroom. Language and Linguistics Compass, 1 (5), 368-395. Pollard, C. & Ivan A. Sag. (1992). Anaphors in English and the Scope of Binding Theory. Linguistic Inquiry, 23, 261-303. Pollard, C. & Xue, P. (1998). Chinese reflexive ziji: Syntactic reflexives vs. nonsyntactic reflexives. Journal of East Asian Linguistics, 7 (4), 287-318. Progovac, L. (1992). Relativized SUBJECT: Long-distance reflexives without movement. Linguistic Inquiry, 23, 671-680. Progovac, L. (1993). Long-distance reflexives: Movement-to-INFL versus relativized SUBJECT. Linguistic Inquiry, 24 (4), 755-772. Reinhart, T. & Reuland, E. (1993). Reflexivity. Linguistic Inquiry, 24 (4), 657-720. Schmid, M.S. (2002). First language attrition, use and maintenance: The case of German Jews in anglophone countries. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Schmid, M.S. (2004). First language attrition: The methodology revised. International Journal of Bilingualism, 8 (3), 239-255. Schmid, M.S. (2007). The role of L1 use for L1 attrition. Language attrition: Theoretical perspectives, 135-153. Schwartz, B. D., & Sprouse, R. A. (1996). L2 cognitive states and the full transfer/full access model. Second Language Research, 12 (1), 40-72. Sells, P. (1987). Aspects of logophoricity. Linguistic Inquiry, 18 (3), 445-479. Silva-Corvalán, C. (1994). Language contact and change. Oxford: Oxford University press. Sung, L.-M. (1991). Non-C-Commanding Antecedents of Bound Anaphora and Feature Percolation in Governing and Binding Theory. The Proceedings of the Ninth West Coast Conference on Formal Linguistics. Stanford Linguistic Association, 523-534. Tang, C.-C. J. (1989). Chinese reflexives. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory, 7 (1), 93-121. 43 Thomas, M. (1991). Universal Grammar and the interpretation of reflexives in a second language. Language, 67 (2), 211-239. Thomas, M. Acquisition of the Japanese reflexive zibun and movement of anaphors in Logical Form. Second Language Research, 11 (3), 206-234. Tsimpli, I., Sorace, A., Heycock, C., & Filiaei, F. (2004). First language attrition and syntactic subjects: A study of Greek and Italian near-native speakers of English. International Journal of Bilingualism, 8, 257-277. Valdés, G. (2000). Spanish for native speakers: AATSP professional development series handbook for teachers K-16, 1. New York: Harcourt College Publishers. White, L. (1989). Universal Grammar and second language acquisition. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. White, L. (1991). Universal Grammar in Second Language Acquisition: The nature of Interlanguage representation. Second Language Research Forum 1998, 1-13. White, L., Bruhn-Garavito, J., Kawasaki, T., Pater, J., & Prévost, P. (1997). The research gave the subject a test about himself: Problems of ambiguity and preference in the investigation of reflexive binding. Language Learning, 47 (1), 145-172. White, L., Hirakawa, M., & Kawasaki, T. (1996). Effect of instruction on second language acquisition of the Japanese long-distance reflexive zibun. Canadian Journal of Linguistic/ Revue Canadian de linguistique, 41 (3), 235-254. Xue, Ping, Pollard Carl J. and Ivan A. Sag (1994). A New Perspective on Chinese Reflexive Ziji. In Proceedings of the 13th West Coast Conference on Formal Linguistics: 432-447, CSLI Publications, Stanford University. Yang, D.-W. (1983). The extended binding theory of anaphors. Theoretical Linguistics Research, 1, 195-218. Ying, H.G. (1999). Access to UG and language transfer: a study of L2 learners' interpretation of reconstruction in Chinese. Second Language Research, 15 (1), 41-72. Yuan, B. (1998). Interpretation of binding and orientation of the Chinese reflexive ziji by English and Japanese speakers. Second Language Acquisition, 14 (4), 324-340. Zhong, H. (2003). Verb Restraint Function to Ziji Long-distance Binding [J]. Chinese Language Learning, 4, 9-12. 44 APPENDIX. LANGUAGE BACKGROUND QUESTIONNAIRE I agree to participate in this study: Name (Please print): ______________________________________________________ Signature: _______________________________________________________________ Date: ___________________________________________________________________ I. PERSONAL INFORMATION Telephone Number: _______________________________________________________ E-mail Address: __________________________________________________________ Sex: Male Female Date of Birth (MMDDYY) : ____________________________________________________ Place of Birth: City _____________________; Country: __________________________ Occupation: _____________________________________________________________ Highest Level of Education: Secondary ___________ College/ Professional ___________ University ____________ II. LINGUISTIC INFORMATION Mother Tongue: __________________________________________________________ Language of Education: a. Primary School: ________________________________________________ b. Secondary School: ______________________________________________ c. High School: ___________________________________________________ d. University: ____________________________________________________ e. Other (Graduate School): _________________________________________ Do you read or speak Chinese (Mandarin)? ____________________________________ How often do you use Chinese (Mandarin)? ____________________________________ Where do you generally use Chinese (Mandarin)? Home: ____Work: ____ Social: _____ In what language do you communicate with your parents/ Children: _________________ (PAGE 1) 45 III. SECOND LANGUAGE Age and place of first expose to English: ______________________________________ How old were you when you first moved to the United States? _____________________ How long have you been living in the United States? _____________________________ Have you lived in any English-speaking countries other than US/ Canada? ____________ Which countries are these? Country (1) ________________; Age of arrival: __________; Length of stay: _________ Country (2) ________________; Age of arrival: __________; Length of stay: _________ (PAGE 2) (The above form “Language Background Questionnaire” is adopted from Gürel, A., 2004 and then modified in order to apply in this experiment appropriately.)

Abstract (if available)

Abstract This study investigates how English, as the dominant language of Chinese heritage speakers, influences their minor language, Chinese, in the binding domain of the Chinese reflexive ziji. There are five different experimental groups: heritage learners, early bilinguals, late bilinguals, Chinese L2 learners and Chinese monolinguals. The Truth Value Judgment Task with stories (Crain and Thornton, 1998) is used to examine the structural differences in the binding domain between Chinese and English in this experiment.

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

The negation-numerical NP interaction

PDF

The syntax of cleft constructions in Japanese: A base-generation analysis

PDF

Direct objects in Persian

PDF

Syntactic and non-syntactic factors in reflexive pronoun resolution in Mandarin Chinese

PDF

Knowledge and use of evidentials in L1 and L2 Korean

PDF

A comparative study of motivational orientation of elementary school English learners in a dual language immersion program and a transitional bilingual education program

PDF

The use of culturally relevant authentic materials and L1 in supporting second language literacy

Asset Metadata

Creator Yu, Chien-Hui (author)

Core Title Dominant language influence in acquisition and attrition of the Chinese reflexive ziji By Chinese-English bilinguals

School College of Letters, Arts and Sciences

Degree Master of Arts

Degree Program East Asian Languages and Cultures

Publication Date 04/12/2011

Defense Date 03/29/2011

Publisher University of Southern California (original), University of Southern California. Libraries (digital)

Tag Chinese reflexive,language attrition,logophoricity,OAI-PMH Harvest,second language acquisition,ziji

Language English

Contributor Electronically uploaded by the author (provenance)

Advisor Li, Audrey (committee chair), Hoji, Hajime (committee member), Simpson, Andrew (committee member)

Creator Email chien.yu827@gmail.com,chienhuy@usc.edu

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-m3737

Unique identifier UC1276316

Identifier etd-YU-4392 (filename),usctheses-m40 (legacy collection record id),usctheses-c127-441415 (legacy record id),usctheses-m3737 (legacy record id)

Legacy Identifier etd-YU-4392.pdf

Dmrecord 441415

Document Type Thesis

Rights Yu, Chien-Hui

Type texts

Source University of Southern California (contributing entity), University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses (collection)

Repository Name Libraries, University of Southern California

Repository Location Los Angeles, California

Repository Email cisadmin@lib.usc.edu