Incomplete Acquisition: The Burden of Aspectual Morphology

Anna MikhaylovaAnna Mikhaylova

University of South CarolinaUniversity of South Carolina

44thth Heritage Language Research Institute Heritage Language Research Institute

University of Hawai’i, ManoaUniversity of Hawai’i, Manoa

June 24, 2010June 24, 2010

2

Language Acquisition ContinuumLanguage Acquisition Continuum

► both L2 and HL acquisition are cases of both L2 and HL acquisition are cases of potentially incomplete L 1 acquisition potentially incomplete L 1 acquisition (Polinsky (Polinsky 1997; Montrul 2002)1997; Montrul 2002)

HOWEVER, the two groups may converge in HOWEVER, the two groups may converge in some linguistic behaviors and differ in some linguistic behaviors and differ in othersothers

L2L2 L1L1 HLHL

3

Research QuestionResearch Question

Do Do HLHL speakersspeakers have advantage have advantage over over L2 learnersL2 learners of the same of the same

proficiency in their knowledge proficiency in their knowledge of Russian Aspect?of Russian Aspect?

4

Features of Heritage GrammarsFeatures of Heritage Grammars

In the worst case scenario, problems across In the worst case scenario, problems across the board…the board…

► DISCOURSE PRAGMATICS DISCOURSE PRAGMATICS (Kagan 2006; Polinsky 2007; (Kagan 2006; Polinsky 2007; Dubinina 2010)Dubinina 2010)

► LEXICON LEXICON (Polinsky 2007, Montrul 2009)(Polinsky 2007, Montrul 2009)

► MORPHO-SYNTAXMORPHO-SYNTAX►gender agreementgender agreement (Montrul, Foote, & Perpiñán 2008; Polinsky 2006) (Montrul, Foote, & Perpiñán 2008; Polinsky 2006) ►case/number markingcase/number marking (Polinsky 2010)(Polinsky 2010) ►differential object markingdifferential object marking(Montrul & Bowles 2008)(Montrul & Bowles 2008)►tense/tense/aspectaspect/mood/mood (Montrul 2002, 2007; Pereltsvaig 2004; Polinsky 1997, 2008)(Montrul 2002, 2007; Pereltsvaig 2004; Polinsky 1997, 2008)

5

Features of Heritage GrammarsFeatures of Heritage Grammars

Polinsky (2009) Polinsky (2009)

“ “Heritage speakers don’t sweat the Heritage speakers don’t sweat the small stuff and pay dearly for that: small stuff and pay dearly for that: they have a relatively poor control of they have a relatively poor control of morphology, which cascades and morphology, which cascades and escalates into a series of greater escalates into a series of greater apparent deficits”apparent deficits”

6

Lexicalization of HL AspectLexicalization of HL Aspect

Polinsky (2008):Polinsky (2008):

Loss of aspectual pairs in Russian HLLoss of aspectual pairs in Russian HL ►one form is retained for both meanings

On pisalOn pisal pispisjjmo mo oror On On nanapisalpisal

pispisjjmomo He write.IMPF letter He write.IMPF letter He write.PERF He write.PERF

letter letter He was writing a letterHe was writing a letter He wrote a He wrote a

letter letter

7

Lexicalization of HL AspectLexicalization of HL Aspect

HL:HL: Polinsky (2008); Pereltsvaig (2004)Polinsky (2008); Pereltsvaig (2004) LowLow proficiencyproficiency HLHL speakers fail to use speakers fail to use

“perfective” prefixes and “imperfective” suffixes “perfective” prefixes and “imperfective” suffixes to form aspectual pairs, which are believed to to form aspectual pairs, which are believed to reflect a contrast in grammatical aspect. reflect a contrast in grammatical aspect.

Low proficiency HL Low proficiency HL speakers retain one form speakers retain one form for both Imperfective and Perfective meaningsfor both Imperfective and Perfective meanings

loss of morphology leads to loss of morphology leads to representational deficit in HL speakersrepresentational deficit in HL speakers

8

Problems in L2 AspectProblems in L2 Aspect

L2 : L2 : Slabakova (2005); Nossalik (2008)Slabakova (2005); Nossalik (2008) IntermediateIntermediate & & advancedadvanced L2L2 learners learners

know syntax and semantics of aspect know syntax and semantics of aspect marking but have trouble mapping it to marking but have trouble mapping it to correct morphological form.correct morphological form.

morphology is the problem for L2 morphology is the problem for L2 learnerslearners

9

Aspect – clarification of termsAspect – clarification of terms

Perfective/Imperfective interpretation is Perfective/Imperfective interpretation is compositional: compositional:

► LEXICAL ASPECT LEXICAL ASPECT (situation aspect/ VP aspect/ Aktionsart) (situation aspect/ VP aspect/ Aktionsart)

property of predicatesproperty of predicates► Vendler’s types of predicatesVendler’s types of predicates► TELICITYTELICITY

► GRAMMATICAL ASPECTGRAMMATICAL ASPECT(viewpoint aspect / IP aspect, sentential aspect)(viewpoint aspect / IP aspect, sentential aspect)

property of whole sentencesproperty of whole sentences► BOUNDEDNESSBOUNDEDNESS

► telicity & boundedness interact telicity & boundedness interact

10

Semantics of AspectSemantics of Aspect

TELICITYTELICITY - encodes presence/absence - encodes presence/absence of an inherent of an inherent endpointendpoint in in predicatespredicates language-specific ways of marking differ! language-specific ways of marking differ!

““HeHe wrote books/fictionwrote books/fiction..”” [ [--telic]telic]

““HeHe wrote a book/that letterwrote a book/that letter..”” [ [++telic]telic]

11

Types of Predicates Types of Predicates

ACTIVITYACTIVITY => [ => [αα telictelic] in the lexicon ] in the lexicon ‘‘to write to write musicmusic’ ’ non-quantized object makes the predicate non-quantized object makes the predicate [[-- telic] telic]

ACCOMPLISHMENTACCOMPLISHMENT [ [αα telictelic] in the lexicon] in the lexicon‘‘to write to write a song/ that musica song/ that music’ ’ quantized object makes the predicate quantized object makes the predicate

[[++ telic] telic]

► the telicity value of [the telicity value of [αα telic] verbs can be calculated via telic] verbs can be calculated via different language-specific mechanisms: different language-specific mechanisms: Object-marking (Object-marking (EnglishEnglish direct objects direct objects)) Verb-marking (Verb-marking (RussianRussian derivational prefixes derivational prefixes))

STATESTATE => [ => [- - telictelic] in the lexicon] in the lexicon‘‘to love music’ to love music’ ACHIEVEMENTACHIEVEMENT => [ => [+ + telictelic] in the lexicon] in the lexicon‘‘to recognize a tune’ to recognize a tune’

12

Semantics of Aspect cont.Semantics of Aspect cont.

BOUNDEDNESSBOUNDEDNESS indicates that the event described indicates that the event described by the whole by the whole sentencesentence has reached its endpoint. has reached its endpoint.

““He He wrote a book.wrote a book.” ” [+telic, +bounded][+telic, +bounded]““He He was writwas writinging a book. a book.” ” [+telic, -bounded][+telic, -bounded]

The boundedness value is calculated relying on inflectional The boundedness value is calculated relying on inflectional morphologymorphology Verb-marking (Verb-marking (English English -ing-ing)) Verb-marking (Verb-marking (Russian Russian suffixessuffixes))

Calculation of telicity is crucial to and precedes Calculation of telicity is crucial to and precedes the calculation of boundedness!the calculation of boundedness!

13

Parametric DifferencesParametric Differences

► In In EnglishEnglish, , telicitytelicity is marked on the object is marked on the object

► (cardinal object(cardinal object telic interpretation) telic interpretation)

boundednessboundedness is marked by verbal morphology is marked by verbal morphology

► In In RussianRussian, , both aspectual features are overtly marked on both aspectual features are overtly marked on

the verb, but by different morphemes: the verb, but by different morphemes: ►telicitytelicity by prefixes by prefixes ►boundednessboundedness by suffixes by suffixes

14

Research QuestionResearch Question

Does Does telicitytelicity or or boundednessboundedness present a greater difficulty for present a greater difficulty for

incomplete acquirers? incomplete acquirers?

15

Morphology and Aspectual PairsMorphology and Aspectual Pairs

ImperfectiveImperfective PerfectivePerfective

SUFFIXSUFFIX dadavavattjj to.give.IMPFto.give.IMPF

datdatj j

to.give.PERFto.give.PERF

PREFIXPREFIX pisatpisatjj write.IMPF write.IMPF

nanapisatpisatjj

write.PERF write.PERF

PREFIX + PREFIX + SUFFIXSUFFIX

dodopispisyvyvaattjj

finish.writing.IMPFfinish.writing.IMPF

dodopisapisattj j

finish.writing.PERF finish.writing.PERF

!!! the same verb stem can participate in multiple pairs!!!! the same verb stem can participate in multiple pairs!

pisatpisatj j vsvs dodopisapisattj j vs vs dodopispisyvyvaattjj

write.IMPF finish.writing.PERF finish.writing.IMPFwrite.IMPF finish.writing.PERF finish.writing.IMPF

16

Morphological mechanismsMorphological mechanisms

At least 18 PERFECTIVIZING PREFIXES: At least 18 PERFECTIVIZING PREFIXES: v-(vo), vz- (vs, vzo), vy-, do-, za-, iz-(is, izo), na-, nad-(nado), o- (ob ,obo), ot-(oto), pere-, po-, v-(vo), vz- (vs, vzo), vy-, do-, za-, iz-(is, izo), na-, nad-(nado), o- (ob ,obo), ot-(oto), pere-, po-,

pod-(podo), pri-, pro-, raz-(ras, razo), s- (so),pod-(podo), pri-, pro-, raz-(ras, razo), s- (so), && u-u-

pisatpisatj j vsvs nanapisapisattjj vsvs pereperepisapisattj j vsvs ETCETC.. to.write.IMPF to.write.PERF to.rewrite.PERFto.write.IMPF to.write.PERF to.rewrite.PERF

!!! !!! Prefixation results in perfective interpretation only if the Prefixation results in perfective interpretation only if the verb does not undergo further suffixation.verb does not undergo further suffixation.

1 productive IMPERFECTIVIZING SUFFIX 1 productive IMPERFECTIVIZING SUFFIX (with allomorphs):(with allomorphs):--(y)(y)va-va- vstatvstatjj vsvs vstavstavavattjj to.get.up.PERF to.get.up.IMPFto.get.up.PERF to.get.up.IMPF

!!! !!! Suffixation consistently leads to imperfective interpretationSuffixation consistently leads to imperfective interpretation!!! !!! Imperfective subsumes ongoing & habitual interpretationsImperfective subsumes ongoing & habitual interpretations

17

What Needs to be What Needs to be LearnedLearned

► prefixedprefixed verbs are [ verbs are [++telictelic ] ] 18+ polysemantic prefixes 18+ polysemantic prefixes each individual verb with its subset of each individual verb with its subset of

prefixesprefixes

► suffixedsuffixed verbs are [ verbs are [ --boundedbounded ] ]► suffixedsuffixed verbs are [ verbs are [++telictelic ] ]

-(-(yy))vava-- can attach only to telic verbscan attach only to telic verbs

► which verbs are telic which verbs are telic

18

Research QuestionResearch Question

Which morphological reflexes Which morphological reflexes ((prefixationprefixation, , suffixationsuffixation, or , or

bothboth) pose a greater difficulty?) pose a greater difficulty?

19

Research QuestionsResearch Questions

► Do HL speakers have advantage over L2 Do HL speakers have advantage over L2 learners in their aspectual knowledge?learners in their aspectual knowledge?

► Does Does telicitytelicity or or boundednessboundedness present a present a greater difficulty for incomplete acquirers? greater difficulty for incomplete acquirers?

► Which morphological reflexes (Which morphological reflexes (prefixationprefixation, , suffixationsuffixation, or , or bothboth) pose a greater ) pose a greater difficulty?difficulty?

20

TaskTask

Similar to Slabakova (2005):Similar to Slabakova (2005):SEMANTIC INTERPRETATIONSEMANTIC INTERPRETATION – testing implicit knowledge– testing implicit knowledge

ability to interpret the aspectual forms and arrive at ability to interpret the aspectual forms and arrive at correct semantic entailments relying solely on verbal correct semantic entailments relying solely on verbal morphologymorphology

Which of the sentences below is a logical continuation of Which of the sentences below is a logical continuation of the initial sentence?the initial sentence?

Valja Valja pročitalapročitala ( (etot)etot) detektiv… detektiv…Valya read.PAST.PERF (this) detective.storyValya read.PAST.PERF (this) detective.storyValya read (this) detective story…Valya read (this) detective story…

a)a) … … and she didn’t like the ending.and she didn’t like the ending.b)b) … … and she wanted to find out the ending. and she wanted to find out the ending.

c)c) …….both variants are possible.both variants are possible

21

Condition 1Condition 1

Pairs based on TELICITYPairs based on TELICITY activity-accomplishmentactivity-accomplishment verbs verbs

[[αα telic] in the lexicon => telic] in the lexicon => telicitytelicity AND AND boundednessboundedness to calculate to calculate

► BAREBARE (non-affixed) [-telic, -bounded] activity = (non-affixed) [-telic, -bounded] activity = ImperfImperf. . interpretationinterpretation

On On pisalpisal pis pisjjmo.mo.‘‘He was writing a letter.’He was writing a letter.’

► *PREFIXED*PREFIXED [+telic,+bounded] accomplishment = [+telic,+bounded] accomplishment = PerfPerf. . interpretationinterpretation

On On dodopisalpisal pis pisjjmo.mo.‘‘He wrote/finished a letter.’He wrote/finished a letter.’

22

Condition 2Condition 2

Pairs based on BOUNDEDNESSPairs based on BOUNDEDNESS accomplishmentaccomplishment verbs verbs

[[αα telic] in the lexicon => telic] in the lexicon => telicitytelicity AND AND boundednessboundedness to calculate to calculate

► *PREFIXED*PREFIXED [+telic,+bounded] accomplishment = [+telic,+bounded] accomplishment = PerfPerf. . interpretationinterpretation

On On dodopisalpisal pis pisjjmo.mo.‘‘He wrote/finished a letter.’He wrote/finished a letter.’

► PREFIXED & SUFFIXEDPREFIXED & SUFFIXED telic/unbounded accomplishment = telic/unbounded accomplishment = Imperf.Imperf.

On On dodopispisyvayvall pis pisjjmo.mo.‘‘He was finishing writing a letter.’He was finishing writing a letter.’

23

Condition 3Condition 3

Pairs based on BOUNDEDNESSPairs based on BOUNDEDNESS achievementachievement verbs verbs

[[++telic] in the lexicon => only telic] in the lexicon => only boundednessboundedness to calculate to calculate

► BAREBARE (non-affixed) telic/bounded achievement = (non-affixed) telic/bounded achievement = Perf.Perf. InterpretationInterpretation

On On zakazalzakazal obed obed..‘‘He ordered dinner.’He ordered dinner.’

► SUFFIXEDSUFFIXED telic/unbounded achievement = telic/unbounded achievement = Imperf.Imperf. interpretationinterpretation

On On zakazzakazyvayvall obed obed..‘‘He was ordering dinner.’He was ordering dinner.’

24

MaterialsMaterials

30 target items 30 target items ►3 conditions (10 items per condition)3 conditions (10 items per condition)

30 fillers30 fillers► verbs from the textbook verbs from the textbook Golosa, Volumes 1-2Golosa, Volumes 1-2► suffixation controlled for phonological transparencysuffixation controlled for phonological transparency► activity-accomplishment verbs that allow both prefixation activity-accomplishment verbs that allow both prefixation

and suffixationand suffixation

PROFICIENCY MEASURE - Slabakova’s (2005) cloze PROFICIENCY MEASURE - Slabakova’s (2005) cloze test test

LINGUISTIC BACKGROUND QUESTIONNAIRELINGUISTIC BACKGROUND QUESTIONNAIRE

25

ParticipantsParticipants

► L1L1 (control group) (control group) - 30 monolingual native speakers - 30 monolingual native speakers of Russian, mean age 21of Russian, mean age 21( ( university studentsuniversity students in Ryazan, in Ryazan, Russia)Russia)

► HLHL - 22 high proficiency heritage speakers of - 22 high proficiency heritage speakers of Russian, English dominant, mean age 22Russian, English dominant, mean age 22

► L2L2 – 13 high proficiency foreign language learners – 13 high proficiency foreign language learners of Russian, English dominant, mean age 30of Russian, English dominant, mean age 30

The vast majority of the participants for both test groups were The vast majority of the participants for both test groups were students of U of South Carolina, Brandeis University, College students of U of South Carolina, Brandeis University, College of Charleston, SUNY at Albany, and Harvard Universityof Charleston, SUNY at Albany, and Harvard University

26

Results: HIGH PROFICIENCYResults: HIGH PROFICIENCYProficiency vs AspectProficiency vs Aspect

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

L1 avg 96 83

HL avg 96 74

L2 avg 87 64

Proficiency Measure Target Items Total

27

Results: Results: HIGH PROFICIENCYHIGH PROFICIENCY group differences by condition totals group differences by condition totals

morphology challengemorphology challenge

0

20

40

60

80

100

L1 83 84 84

HL 74 70 79

L2 69 51 72

COND#1:Telicity- activity/accompl.

COND#2:Boundedness - accompl.

COND#3:Boundedness - achievem.

28

Results: HIGH PROFICIENCY Results: HIGH PROFICIENCY Condition differences by groupCondition differences by group

morphology disadvantage for L2morphology disadvantage for L2

0

20

40

60

80

100

COND#1 83 74 69

COND#2 84 70 51

COND#3 84 79 72

L1 HL L2

29

Results: Results: HIGH PROFICIENCY HIGH PROFICIENCY a closer look by morphological patterna closer look by morphological pattern

[+telic,+bounded] advantage for L1, but not HL or L2[+telic,+bounded] advantage for L1, but not HL or L2

0

20

40

60

80

100

BARE[-telic] 75 74 74

BARE[+telic] 87 90 85

SUFFIX 80 69 58

PREFIX 91 75 65

PREF-SUFF 79 67 41

L1 HL L2

30

Zooming in: unaffixed verbsZooming in: unaffixed verbs[+telic, +bounded] advantage[+telic, +bounded] advantage

no significant differences between groupsno significant differences between groups

0

20

40

60

80

100

BARE[-telic] 75 74 74

BARE[+telic] 87 90 85

L1 HL L2

31

Zooming in: affixed verbsZooming in: affixed verbs [+telic, +bounded] advantage[+telic, +bounded] advantage

0

20

40

60

80

100

SUFFIX 80 69 58

PREFIX 91 75 65

PREF-SUFF 79 67 41

L1 HL L2

32

Zooming in: achievement verbsZooming in: achievement verbs[+telic, +bounded] advantage for all[+telic, +bounded] advantage for all

overtovert morphology disadvantage for L2morphology disadvantage for L2

0

20

40

60

80

100

BARE[+telic] 87 90 85

SUFFIX 80 69 58

L1 HL L2

33

Zooming in: activity-Zooming in: activity-accomplishmentsaccomplishments

[+telic, +bounded] advantage only for L1[+telic, +bounded] advantage only for L1 overtovert morphology disadvantage for L2morphology disadvantage for L2

0

50

100

BARE[-telic] 75 74 74

PREFIX 91 75 65

PREF-SUFF 79 67 41

L1 HL L2

34

ResultsResults

► Do HL speakers have advantage over L2 Do HL speakers have advantage over L2 learners in their aspectual knowledge?learners in their aspectual knowledge? YES, in some contrastsYES, in some contrasts

► Does Does telicitytelicity or or boundednessboundedness present a present a greater difficulty for incomplete acquirers? greater difficulty for incomplete acquirers? BOUNDEDNESS, especially for L2BOUNDEDNESS, especially for L2

► Which morphological reflexes (Which morphological reflexes (prefixationprefixation, , suffixationsuffixation, or , or bothboth) pose a greater ) pose a greater difficulty?difficulty? PREFIXATION+SUFFIXATION, especially for L2PREFIXATION+SUFFIXATION, especially for L2

35

What about What about non-highnon-high proficiency HL proficiency HL and L2 learners? and L2 learners?

► Mid HLMid HL - 5 heritage speakers, mean age 22 - 5 heritage speakers, mean age 22 Proficiency score lower than L1 rangeProficiency score lower than L1 range

► Mid L2Mid L2 – 33 foreign language learners, mean age 22 – 33 foreign language learners, mean age 22

Proficiency score within Mid HL rangeProficiency score within Mid HL range

► Low L2Low L2 – 10 foreign language learners , mean age – 10 foreign language learners , mean age 22 22 Proficiency score lower than Mid Proficiency score lower than Mid HL rangeHL range

36

What about What about non-highnon-high proficiency HL proficiency HL and L2 learners? and L2 learners?

0

20

40

60

80

100

L1 96 83

HL mid 53 52

L2 mid 55 49

L2 low 33 51

Proficiency Measure Target total %

37

Results: Results: NON-HIGHNON-HIGH proficiency proficiency Condition #2 disadvantage remains for all Condition #2 disadvantage remains for all

0

20

40

60

80

100

COND#1 Telicity-activity/accompl.

60 52 53

COND#2 Boundedness -accompl.

36 37 26

COND#3 Boundedness -achievem.

60 58 52

HL mid L2 mid L2 low

38

Results: Results: NON-HIGHNON-HIGH proficiency proficiency a closer look by morphological patterna closer look by morphological pattern

HL are different from L2HL are different from L2

0

20

40

60

80

100

BARE[-telic] 48 52 54

PREFIX*** 61 42 51

PREF-SUFF 17 45 44

BARE[+telic] 72 52 47

SUFFIX 48 63 56

HL mid L2 mid L2 low

39

Results: Results: NON-HIGHNON-HIGH proficiency proficiency HLHL advantage in [+telic, +bounded] is only advantage in [+telic, +bounded] is only

partial partial !!!!!! HL disadvantage in PREF-SUFF HL disadvantage in PREF-SUFF

0

20

40

60

80

100

HL mid 48 61 17 72 48

L2 mid 52 42 45 52 63

L2 low 54 51 44 47 56

BARE[-telic] PREFIX*** PREF-SUFF BARE[+telic] SUFFIX

40

DiscussionDiscussion

► [+telic/+bounded] [+telic/+bounded] prefixedprefixed verbs are least verbs are least ambiguousambiguous

► [-bounded] [-bounded] bare and suffixedbare and suffixed verbs subsume verbs subsume habitual and ongoing meanings habitual and ongoing meanings

► ACTIVITY-ACCOMPLISHMENT ACTIVITY-ACCOMPLISHMENT verbs are structurally more complex than achievementsverbs are structurally more complex than achievements

(Slabakova 2001, 2005) (Slabakova 2001, 2005)

► prefixed-suffixed accomplishmentprefixed-suffixed accomplishment verbs are less verbs are less frequent than other verbsfrequent than other verbs

POTENTIAL DIFFERENCES IN PROCESSING COSTSPOTENTIAL DIFFERENCES IN PROCESSING COSTS

41

DiscussionDiscussion

► Parallel with L2 acquisition researchParallel with L2 acquisition research(Bardovi-Harlig, 2005)(Bardovi-Harlig, 2005)

Perfective achievement verbs in several languages are Perfective achievement verbs in several languages are acquired earliestacquired earliest

Imperfective is on average acquired laterImperfective is on average acquired later► Parallel with L1 acquisition of Russian aspectual Parallel with L1 acquisition of Russian aspectual

morphologymorphology((Polinsky, 2007Polinsky, 2007):):

verbs with distinct prefixes are acquired early;verbs with distinct prefixes are acquired early; imperfectivizing suffixes (e.g., -imperfectivizing suffixes (e.g., -yvayva-) are acquired -) are acquired

later and productive -later and productive -yvayva- is over-marked up until - is over-marked up until age 3. age 3.

((Kazanina, 2005Kazanina, 2005):): Children have trouble processing the Imperfective Children have trouble processing the Imperfective

42

ConclusionConclusion

► HL and L2 learners’ high accuracy in the proficiency HL and L2 learners’ high accuracy in the proficiency measure is no guarantee for equally high proficiency measure is no guarantee for equally high proficiency in aspectual interpretationsin aspectual interpretations

► Some aspectual contrasts (Some aspectual contrasts (boundednessboundedness) pose a ) pose a greater difficulty than others (greater difficulty than others (telicitytelicity)) especially in more complex activity-accomplishment verbsespecially in more complex activity-accomplishment verbs

► Morphology is the “bottleneck” of L2 acquisition Morphology is the “bottleneck” of L2 acquisition (Slabakova 2008) (Slabakova 2008) and perhaps for HL acquisition as and perhaps for HL acquisition as well… well… (Polinsky 2010) (Polinsky 2010) PREFIXED-SUFFIXED forms are the most challenging PREFIXED-SUFFIXED forms are the most challenging

► There is some advantage in early bilingualism vs There is some advantage in early bilingualism vs late bilingualism, but it is not categoricallate bilingualism, but it is not categorical (Montrul 2008)(Montrul 2008)

43

Implications for pedagogyImplications for pedagogy

► To improve aspectual knowledge:To improve aspectual knowledge: explicit instruction on the morphological mechanisms and explicit instruction on the morphological mechanisms and

the semantic interaction of telicity and boundednessthe semantic interaction of telicity and boundedness balancing comprehension and production tasks, especially balancing comprehension and production tasks, especially

during initial instructionduring initial instruction encouraging HL-L2 interactionencouraging HL-L2 interaction

► What about HL vs L2 learners?What about HL vs L2 learners? Even high proficiency fluent HL learners do not converge Even high proficiency fluent HL learners do not converge

with native speakers and can benefit from instruction!with native speakers and can benefit from instruction! Since HL and L2 learners converge in some but not all Since HL and L2 learners converge in some but not all

ways => individualized instruction, if they are in the same ways => individualized instruction, if they are in the same classroomclassroom

Thank you!Thank you!

45

Directions for further researchDirections for further research

► Interpretation and judgment of contrasts Interpretation and judgment of contrasts that are contextually disambiguatedthat are contextually disambiguated

► Comparing with production data Comparing with production data ► Controlling iterative vs ongoing imperfectiveControlling iterative vs ongoing imperfective► Looking into tense-aspect pragmatics Looking into tense-aspect pragmatics ► Testing effects of (explicit) instructionTesting effects of (explicit) instruction► Comparing with other lexico-grammatical Comparing with other lexico-grammatical

phenomenaphenomena► Controlling potential forgetters vs. Controlling potential forgetters vs.

incomplete acquirersincomplete acquirers

46

Stop-making-sense Task Stop-making-sense Task not discussed herenot discussed here

the effects of transfer and processing the effects of transfer and processing To test for transfer (in the mechanism of telicity marking), To test for transfer (in the mechanism of telicity marking),

this task manipulates the form of the object: (1) this task manipulates the form of the object: (1) countable countable and singularand singular; (2) ; (2) mass or bare plural nounmass or bare plural noun; and ; and modified by modified by overt pronoun or quantifier.overt pronoun or quantifier.

the key aspectual contrasts:the key aspectual contrasts: Knowledge of (Knowledge of (aa))telicity telicity of the predicate is tested via of the predicate is tested via

compatibility with adverbials like compatibility with adverbials like in X time/for X timein X time/for X time. . Only Only telic predicatestelic predicates would be semantically incompatible would be semantically incompatible with the adverbial with the adverbial for X timefor X time..

Knowledge of (Knowledge of (unun))boundednessboundedness of the event is tested via of the event is tested via compatibility with compatibility with all X time periodall X time period type of modifier. type of modifier. Only bounded events would be semantically incompatible Only bounded events would be semantically incompatible with the adverbial with the adverbial all X time periodall X time period..

47

Sample ItemsSample Items

TELICITYTELICITYDva mesjaca Vladimir Dva mesjaca Vladimir chitalchital moi politicheskie stat moi politicheskie statjji.i.Dva mesjaca Vladimir Dva mesjaca Vladimir chitalchital politicheskie stat politicheskie statjji.i.

‘‘For 2 months, Vladimir was reading (my) political articles.’For 2 months, Vladimir was reading (my) political articles.’

** Dva mesjaca Vladimir Dva mesjaca Vladimir proprochitalchital politicheskie stat politicheskie statjji.i.

** Dva mesjaca Vladimir Dva mesjaca Vladimir proprochitalchital moi politicheskie stat moi politicheskie statjji.i. ‘‘For 2 months, Vladimir read.through (my) political articles.’For 2 months, Vladimir read.through (my) political articles.’

BOUNDEDNESSBOUNDEDNESSVsVsjjo utro Marina o utro Marina domdomyvayvalala pol v svoej bol pol v svoej boljjshoj kvartire.shoj kvartire.

‘‘All morning, Marina was finishing.washing the floor in her large All morning, Marina was finishing.washing the floor in her large apartment.’apartment.’

**VsVsjjo utro Marina o utro Marina domyladomyla pol v svoej bol pol v svoej boljjshoj kvartire.shoj kvartire. ‘‘All morning, Marina finished.washing the floor in her large All morning, Marina finished.washing the floor in her large

apartment.’apartment.’

48

Proficiency vs Proficiency vs EntailmentsTask EntailmentsTask

46 50

4

0

20

40

60

80

100

PM=Target (%) PM>Target(%) PM<Target(%)

49

Proficiency vs EntailmentsTask Proficiency vs EntailmentsTask cont.cont.

0.00

20.00

40.00

60.00

80.00

100.00

PM=Target(%) 63.00 39.00

PM>Target(%) 37.00 56.00

PM<Target(%) 0.00 5.00

HL L2

50

Gaps Yet to BridgeGaps Yet to Bridge► No study comparing L2 and HL RussianNo study comparing L2 and HL Russian► No study looking into both lexical and grammatical aspectNo study looking into both lexical and grammatical aspect

► Mainly production for low proficiency HLMainly production for low proficiency HL► Comprehension, interpretation for low-intermediate to high Comprehension, interpretation for low-intermediate to high

L2L2

► Hard to tell if HL problems are in performance or Hard to tell if HL problems are in performance or competencecompetence

► Hard to tell if HL have trouble with knowledge of telicity, Hard to tell if HL have trouble with knowledge of telicity, boundedness, or bothboundedness, or both

► Telicity and boundedness were tested by different methodsTelicity and boundedness were tested by different methods► L2 and HL speakers were tested by different methodsL2 and HL speakers were tested by different methods

My study uses the same methodology to compare HL My study uses the same methodology to compare HL and L2 speakers in their comprehension of both and L2 speakers in their comprehension of both telicity and boundedness.telicity and boundedness.