Turkish EFL Learners’ Acquisition of Psych Verbs and Unaccusative Verbs: A Replication Study on Underpassivization and Overpassivization
Abstract
The processability account anticipates that learners will make more underpassivization errors than overpassivization errors since passivization entails more processing. Although one study on psych-verbs and a few on unaccusatives examined Turkish L2 learners’ acquisition, no research compared a single set of learners’ acquisitions of these verbs together from a processing point of view. In this regard, the current study aims to investigate whether the processing complexity of passivization influences acquisition of psych and unaccusative verbs. It also questions whether general accuracy levels in Grammaticality Judgement Task (GJT) and degree of familiarity with target verbs are related to their level of accuracy with individual psych and unaccusative verbs. 33 undergraduate-level university students performed on the GJT and a Word Familiarity Rating Task (WFRT). The GJT included 38 items with 12 sentences for psych-verbs, 12 sentences for unaccusative-verbs, 12 sentences for distracters and 2 sentences for examples. The WFRT was a survey questioning familiarity with 6 psych and 6 unaccusative verbs. To analyse the data, a set of nonparametric tests and descriptive statistics were used. The results revealed that learners performed mor
The processability account anticipates that learners will make more underpassivization errors than overpassivization errors since passivization entails more processing. Although one study on psych-verbs and a few on unaccusatives examined Turkish L2 learners’ acquisition, no research compared a single set of learners’ acquisitions of these verbs together from a processing point of view. In this regard, the current study aims to investigate whether the processing complexity of passivization influences acquisition of psych and unaccusative verbs. It also questions whether general accuracy levels in Grammaticality Judgement Task (GJT) and degree of familiarity with target verbs are related to their level of accuracy with individual psych and unaccusative verbs. 33 undergraduate-level university students performed on the GJT and a Word Familiarity Rating Task (WFRT). The GJT included 38 items with 12 sentences for psych-verbs, 12 sentences for unaccusative-verbs, 12 sentences for distracters and 2 sentences for examples. The WFRT was a survey questioning familiarity with 6 psych and 6 unaccusative verbs. To analyse the data, a set of nonparametric tests and descriptive statistics were used. The results revealed that learners performed more accurately on unaccusatives than on psych-verbs. They did more underpassivization errors by accepting ungrammatical active constructions of psych verbs. Their performances on psych and unaccusative verbs went parallel with their general accuracy levels in GJT while their degree of familiarity with and accuracy level for two verbs do not correlate with each other.The results suggest that such factors as processability and L1 transfer seem to impact the acquisition.
Keywords:Second language acquisition; psych verbs; unaccusative verbs; underpassivization; overpassivization.
e accurately on unaccusatives than on psych-verbs. They did more underpassivization errors by accepting ungrammatical active constructions of psych verbs. Their performances on psych and unaccusative verbs went parallel with their general accuracy levels in GJT while their degree of familiarity with and accuracy level for two verbs do not correlate with each other.The results suggest that such factors as processability and L1 transfer seem to impact the acquisition.
Keywords:Second language acquisition; psych verbs; unaccusative verbs; underpassivization; overpassivization.
Keywords
second language acquisition; psych verbs; unaccusative verbs; underpassivization; overpassivization
References
Browne, C., Culligan, B., & Phillips, J. (2013). The New General Service List. Retrieved from: http://www.newgeneralservicelist.org
Hahn, Hye-ryeong, (2011). Korean EFL learners’ underpassivization and overpassivization: Psych verbs and unaccusatives. Foreign Language Education Research, 14, 54–76.
Kawaguchi, S. (2013). The relationship between lexical and syntactic development in English as a second language (pp. 92–106). In A. F. Mattsson & C. Norrby (Eds.), Language acquisition and use in multilingual contexts: Theory and practice. Media-Tryck, Lund University.
Kurtoğlu, Ö. (2010). (Over)passivization errors of Turkish learners of English as a foreign language. Journal of Linguistics and Literature, 7(1), 29–53.
Kurtoğlu, Ö. (2006). A study on the passivisation errors of Turkish learners of English as a foreign language (Master’s Thesis). Retrieved from Council of Higher Education Thesis Center (205789) https://tez.yok.gov.tr/UlusalTezMerkezi/tezSorguSonucYeni.jsp
Levin, B. (1993). English verb classes: A preliminary investigation. University of Chicago Press.
Montrul, S. (2001). First-language-constrained variability in the second-language acquisition of argument-structure-changing morphology with causative verbs. Second Language Research, 17(2), 144–194.
Nation, I. S. P. (2012). The BNC/COCA word family lists. Retrieved on September, 2018 from: https://www.victoria.ac.nz/lals/about/staff/paul-nation#vocab-lists
Pienemann, M. (2005). An introduction to processiblity theory. In M. Pienemann (Ed.,), Crosslinguistic aspects of processibilty theory (pp. 1–60). John Benjamins.
Pienemann, M., D Biase, B., & Kawaguchi, S. (2005). Extending processiblity theory. In M. Pienemann (Ed.), Cross-linguistic aspects of processiblity theory (pp. 199–251). John Benjamins.
The English Vocabulary Profile (n.d.). Retrieved from: http://www.englishprofile.org/
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
The Copyright Holders of the submitted texts are the Authors. The Reader is granted the rights to use the material available in the TAPSLA websites and pdf documents under the provisions of the Creative Commons 4.0 International License: Attribution - Share Alike (CC BY-SA 4.0). The user is free to copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format, and to remix, transform, and build upon the material for any purpose, even commercially.
1. License
The University of Silesia Press provides immediate open access to journal’s content under the Creative Commons BY-SA 4.0 license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/). Authors who publish with this journal retain all copyrights and agree to the terms of the above-mentioned CC BY-SA 4.0 license.
2. Author’s Warranties
The author warrants that the article is original, written by stated author/s, has not been published before, contains no unlawful statements, does not infringe the rights of others, is subject to copyright that is vested exclusively in the author and free of any third party rights, and that any necessary written permissions to quote from other sources have been obtained by the author/s.
If the article contains illustrative material (drawings, photos, graphs, maps), the author declares that the said works are of his authorship, they do not infringe the rights of the third party (including personal rights, i.a. the authorization to reproduce physical likeness) and the author holds exclusive proprietary copyrights. The author publishes the above works as part of the article under the licence "Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International".
ATTENTION! When the legal situation of the illustrative material has not been determined and the necessary consent has not been granted by the proprietary copyrights holders, the submitted material will not be accepted for editorial process. At the same time the author takes full responsibility for providing false data (this also regards covering the costs incurred by the University of Silesia Press and financial claims of the third party).
3. User Rights
Under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license, the users are free to share (copy, distribute and transmit the contribution) and adapt (remix, transform, and build upon the material) the article for any purpose, provided they attribute the contribution in the manner specified by the author or licensor.
4. Co-Authorship
If the article was prepared jointly with other authors, the signatory of this form warrants that he/she has been authorized by all co-authors to sign this agreement on their behalf, and agrees to inform his/her co-authors of the terms of this agreement.
I hereby declare that in the event of withdrawal of the text from the publishing process or submitting it to another publisher without agreement from the editorial office, I agree to cover all costs incurred by the University of Silesia in connection with my application.
